The Red Cloud chief., 1877-11-08
That Pc rifed Man.
wen hnoWn Professor xamina.t,r...
ically and Pronounce =, . -.


1t was the privilege of the writer :,
see and examine quite carefully the ia.
nous "Petrified Man" from Colorad,
Whlle ne Was on exhibition in vo,,,
city.
AS some OF your readers NAV hay.
some curiosity toknow how it appeared
70 one somewhat fam liar with "petrif
catlons,' the following is offered: TIL.
prehistoric man" may have been cor
rectiy represented, but he was most cp,
fanny not petrified. This was ouite
eVldent. almost at a glance, from its ful1
heshed form. No parts were shrunken
lhere Was no coliapslng of the abdomen
or Shrinking of the eyes. These noints
could not be explained by any thick i'll
cruscallon supporting the surface. Thu
apparent lncrustation covering it was
H. an appearance. else it would have
cleared of at some point, or would have
SHOWN Itself when parts were broken
on But many other points NAV be
any n Of which Is sutfi.
Gent 10 prove the statement above. The
poly Is composed of a dark colored fos.
slliferous limestone. This is shown
10y fragments from the interior kindly
SHOWN by the exhibitor, as well AS by
traces upon the surface. One of the
fragments showed a portion of D
emily "A cOnchifer shell, containing crvs.
tails OF calcile. Such a cluster OF crys-
laiS, probably due to the presence OF
another shell, produces in the right fore
arm a flaw in the stone, which from its
shape suggests the direction of strtifica-
tlon- Looking further, with such an
Idea III mind, i've seams are found near.
y parallel with one another: one tbro'
The neck and shoulder, two across the
BODY and left arm above the elbow
another across the hips. and the fifth
across the legs below the knees. These
seams are a demonstration of the strat-
Iiled character of the stone. A petri-
faction might break, but not TINS in
places parallel 20 one another and Ont
ting right through dissimilsr parts.
whether connected or not.
Another Very conclusive point is the
tact That whenever separate members
lie one upon another, the angle between
The surface IS not acute in a single in.
stanca. but invariably the arms ARC
bound 10 the body where they res. un,n
L. n the legs are bound together
where they touch 10y a mass of STONE
III Idct, there are no acute angles in the
surface, no burrows, except such %
might have been made 10y a blunt in
about half AZ inch wide at the
point The pits upon the surface were
Clearly formed by a similar instrument
the direction OF the blow in manyc asas
being clearly shown.
But enough 20 prove il is NOT a p.tri.
faction.
The next question is whether i, &c
very ancient. Can il be the work of
some prehistoric artist? It is clear j,
is cut ID represent a reclining figure. II
eNAS L l
could not lave been supported in an
upright position. The general symme.
ny OF parts seems to have been care.
Iuiiy studied and patiently worked ont
Inc lett forearm, however, is an inch
longer than the right. The fingers are
apparently disproportionate in length
70 another. In forming the second
nhger OF the right hand the artist All.
parently accidentally broke it eff equal
IN length to the third, then tried to imi.
a . a bent joint and got il too near the
END The rough surface was used an
parently TO excuse any attempt at nice
~ of detail.
III position OF the left leg seems 10
nave been chosen TO more easily exhinit
the caudal appendage. The general
form IS clearly intended 10 represent
@nat or al Indian. The feet. however,
nave the Slmian character of a short
ened and laterally-placed great toe.
when. IN connec ion with the long neck
and short chin, are simply monstrous.
Huxley, or any other intelligent CON-
parative anatOmist would at once pro-
nouncet the combination of such charac-
tiers absurd and wholly inconsistent
WIN the harmonieS of nature. II could
not, therefore, have been made to ren-
resent any form that ever had life. And
1t embodies ideas wholly foreign to n
which have been found in American
antiquities; il is difficult TO believe il
the work of any ancient hand, while on
the contrary the Simian feet and tail
HAy strongly point to the only remain
ing conclusion. that It is the wsrk of a
recent workman who has learned Jus.
enough Of evolutionary views to misin.
terpret OF ~csricature them. This Pueb-
10 '~petrifaction" can only merit the
title, therefore, because it is made out
'af stone-not made into stone. 1t is a
worthy successor Of the Cardiff giant.
May lis glcry be brief and the planners
of the fraud meet their deserts.
J. E. TODD.
Tabor College. October Is, 1877.