258 DAVENPORT ACADF.MY OF NATURAL SCIENCES. 



Putnam gave an interesting account of discoveries made in a group of 

 mounds in Hamilton County, Ohio, and his conckisions were subse- 

 quently reported in Science, as follows : 



"These relics seem to show a more complex ^social life, more abundant and 

 varied artistic products, and a higher status altogether, than can be deemed con- 

 sistent with the views of those who hold that these Mound-builders were merely the 

 ancestors of our present Indians, and in the same state of culture."* 



An abstract of another paper by Prof. Putnam, presented before the 

 American Association for the Advancement of Science at its recent 

 meeting in Philadelphia, was also published in Science, wherein an 

 account is given of his explorations of a group of mounds in Madison- 

 ville, Ohio, and it is stated that, "as a result, one of the most remark- 

 able series of objects ever discovered in America had been obtained:" 



"Among the objects taken from the largest mound of the group were the follow- 

 ing, some of them never found before in mounds: .Shell-beads, disks, and rings, 

 which were obtained in thousands; cones cut from alligator teeth; ornaments cut 

 from plates of buffalo horn, mica, and native copper, and even gold and meteoric 

 iron; pearls, most of them pierced and injured by heat (not less than fifty thousand 

 were found); small stone dishes, beautifully carved to represent some animal form; 

 and last, and perhaps most important, terra-cotta figurines of exceedingly artistic 

 form, and strangely Egyptian in character." t 



A peculiar interest attaches to these statements of Prof. Putnam, not 

 only on account of his acknowledged ability as an archaeologist, but 

 because he formerly entertained the opinion that the Mound-builders 

 were merely the ancestors of our present Indians, and now, through 

 these discoveries, he has been compelled to reconsider the (juestion, 

 and apparently to reverse his conclusions. 



The citations we have made are far from exhaustive, but are suffi- 

 ciently extensive to fairly represent in clear contrast the conflicting 

 theories entertained by these contending archaeologists. 



The l)aveni)ort Academy, though eagerly engaged in arch;t;ological 

 work, has ado])ted no theories with reference to the Mound-builders, 

 and takes no part in this controversy. It is considered that deductions 

 so important should have a broader basis of fact ; and hence decision 

 ujion this interesting (juestion has been- postponed u'hile awaiting 

 further discoveries. Its conservative position is well stated by its late 

 Corresponding Secretary, Joseph Duncan Putnam, in a letter to Rev. 

 Dr. Peet, of the Antiquarian, bearing date October loth, 1878: 



* Science for September 26th, 1S84. 

 ^Scieiin- for October 3d, 1SS4. 



