NO. 10 NEBRASKA ARCHEOLOGY STRONG 209 



side of the Missouri River. These contained burned human bones, 

 but the mounds themselves, of which 200 can be seen from one place 

 near Crescent City, are reported to be entirely of natural origin. 

 Proudfit (1881) speaks of numerous mounds in southwestern Iowa 

 along the Missouri River which contain human skeletal material and 

 artifacts but show no soil differentiation when excavated. Proudfit 

 evidently considers them to be of artificial origin. Blackman also ex- 

 amined a " mound " containing a post-Caucasian burial 5 feet deep 

 (1907 a). He concludes that this was originally merely a burial 3 feet 

 deep and that the 2 feet of sand had since been deposited on the 

 blufif here. So far as reported, Blackman's data on prehistoric burial 

 mounds is generally negative as regards the artificial origin of the 

 mounds themselves. 



Fowke mentions several burial mounds in northeastern Kansas 

 and southeastern Nebraska (1922). He points out that the sandy 

 loess soil of certain of these is identical with the surrounding soil but 

 believes that at least certain of the mounds were artificially built up. 

 The same conclusion is reached in regard to the artificial nature of the 

 small burial mounds on Long's Hill. In this regard the following 

 statement is significant (Fowke, 1922, pp. 158, 159) : 



The objection made to this theory [that the deepest bones from Long's Hill 

 were in dug pits] is that the earth thrown out of the hole was unmixed, pre- 

 senting throughout the appearance and consistency of loess as it occurs where 

 exposed in ravines or on slopes in the vicinity. It is contended that if any 

 previous excavation had been made here and filled up afterwards the mixed 

 earth would be easily distinguished from that which was not removed, and that 

 the line of demarcation would be easily discernible. 



As a rule this is true; but when dry loose earth of homogeneous consistency 

 is thrown out of a pit and then thrown in again without becoming mixed with 

 any other, it is sometimes impossible to distinguish it at a later excavation. 

 This is especially true of earth free from vegetable mold, as the soil in overflow 

 lands which have been built up mainly from floods carrying uniform soil sedi- 

 ment. The line of demarcation between the dug and the undug earth in such 

 conditions may become indistinguishable except when a vertical face is made 



which shall show a clear section of both in contact It is beyond question 



that any soil, humus, or other discolored matter thrown into an excavation with 

 ordinary soil or subsoil will be apparent for an indefinite time afterward. But 

 on some of these high points and ridges there is even now not a trace of soil. 

 Frost and wind have worn bare spots where nothing grows or has grown for 

 a long time. As this region was a prairie devoid of even brush when the whites 

 settled here [sic], it is evident that such slight protection as grass or weeds 

 afford would not be sufficient to hold the earth in place in winter, and when 

 the ground is once swept bare such humble forms of growth may not get a 

 foothold in future. 



Later in the same work, referring to the puzzling " house mounds " 

 of southeastern Missouri, he speaks of mounds without any evidences 



