﻿496 
  ANNUAL 
  REPORT 
  SMITHSONIAN 
  INSTITUTION, 
  192'7 
  

  

  in 
  fact, 
  receive 
  much 
  attention 
  until 
  the 
  republication 
  of 
  tlie 
  volume 
  

   in 
  which 
  it 
  appeared 
  in 
  the 
  year 
  1909, 
  after 
  the 
  revival 
  of 
  the 
  old 
  

   society. 
  

  

  Thus 
  the 
  " 
  Mound 
  Builder 
  theory 
  " 
  continued 
  to 
  flourish. 
  It 
  was 
  

   accepted 
  and 
  defended 
  for 
  a 
  century 
  afterwards 
  by 
  the 
  greater 
  num- 
  

   ber 
  of 
  antiquarians 
  who 
  touched 
  upon 
  the 
  problem, 
  continuing, 
  in- 
  

   deed, 
  until 
  the 
  intensive 
  work 
  in 
  the 
  mound 
  area 
  undertaken 
  by 
  

   Cyrus 
  Thomas 
  in 
  the 
  eighties 
  at 
  the 
  instance 
  of 
  Maj. 
  J. 
  W. 
  Powell, 
  

   founder 
  of 
  the 
  Bureau 
  of 
  American 
  Ethnology. 
  The 
  conclusion 
  

   reached 
  by 
  Thomas 
  — 
  contrary 
  to 
  the 
  preconceptions 
  with 
  which 
  he 
  

   had 
  started 
  — 
  was 
  that 
  there 
  was 
  no 
  separate 
  race 
  of 
  Mound 
  Builders 
  

   and 
  no 
  reason 
  for 
  regarding 
  the 
  people 
  who 
  had 
  built 
  the 
  mounds 
  as 
  

   other 
  than 
  American 
  Indians. 
  

  

  The 
  above 
  is 
  now, 
  as 
  is 
  well 
  known, 
  the 
  belief 
  of 
  practically 
  all 
  

   American 
  archeologists, 
  but 
  a 
  problem, 
  or 
  rather 
  a 
  set 
  of 
  problems, 
  

   remains, 
  namely, 
  to 
  establish 
  a 
  definite 
  linkage 
  of 
  prehistoric 
  mounds 
  

   with 
  historic 
  tribes. 
  

  

  Certain 
  facts 
  bearing 
  upon 
  this 
  question 
  are 
  now 
  generally 
  ad- 
  

   mitted 
  by 
  students. 
  One 
  is 
  that 
  the 
  Indians 
  of 
  the 
  Algonquian 
  

   linguistic 
  family 
  plaj'^ed 
  a 
  very 
  minor 
  part 
  in 
  the 
  construction 
  of 
  

   mounds. 
  This 
  is 
  because 
  the 
  customs 
  of 
  these 
  people 
  did 
  not 
  involve 
  

   complex 
  mortuary 
  or 
  ceremonial 
  structures, 
  because 
  the 
  remains 
  in 
  

   the 
  Mississippi 
  Valley 
  attributable 
  to 
  them 
  are 
  slight 
  and 
  superfi- 
  

   cial, 
  and 
  because 
  it 
  is 
  clear 
  that 
  their 
  occupancy 
  of 
  areas 
  where 
  

   mounds 
  occur 
  abundantly 
  is 
  relatively 
  modern. 
  They 
  were 
  a 
  

   northern 
  people 
  v/hose 
  ancient 
  home 
  appears 
  to 
  have 
  been 
  about 
  

   the 
  Great 
  Lakes 
  and 
  northward. 
  

  

  The 
  Iroquoian 
  peoples, 
  most 
  of 
  whom 
  lived 
  in 
  historic 
  times 
  around 
  

   Lakes 
  Ontario 
  and 
  Erie, 
  and 
  in 
  the 
  St. 
  Lawrence 
  and 
  Susquehanna 
  

   Valleys, 
  probably 
  moved 
  into 
  these 
  territories 
  in 
  relatively 
  late 
  

   times, 
  displacing 
  Algonquian 
  peoples. 
  Traces 
  of 
  stockades 
  similar 
  

   in 
  type 
  to 
  those 
  Imown 
  -to 
  have 
  been 
  occupied 
  by 
  Iroquois, 
  extending 
  

   southwestward 
  from 
  their 
  lands 
  to 
  the 
  lower 
  Mississippi, 
  are 
  noted 
  

   by 
  certain 
  archeologists, 
  who 
  believe 
  that 
  these 
  works 
  mark 
  their 
  line 
  

   of 
  immigration, 
  but 
  the 
  only 
  Iroquoian 
  people 
  to 
  whom 
  any 
  of 
  the 
  

   more 
  imposing 
  " 
  ceremonial 
  " 
  mounds 
  have 
  been 
  attributed 
  are 
  the 
  

   Cherokee. 
  According 
  to 
  Mooney, 
  some 
  of 
  these 
  Indians 
  in 
  his 
  time 
  

   retained 
  definite 
  memories 
  of 
  the 
  construction 
  of 
  mounds 
  for 
  their 
  

   town 
  houses, 
  and, 
  in 
  fact, 
  certain 
  Cherokee 
  town 
  houses 
  are 
  Imown 
  

   to 
  have 
  been 
  built 
  upon 
  artificial 
  mounds, 
  whether 
  or 
  not 
  the 
  Cher- 
  

   okee 
  themselves 
  were 
  responsible 
  for 
  them. 
  

  

  It 
  is, 
  however, 
  the 
  remaining 
  groups 
  of 
  Indians, 
  those 
  of 
  the 
  

   Siouan, 
  Muskhogean, 
  and 
  Uchean 
  linguistic 
  stocks 
  and 
  some 
  smaller 
  

   bodies 
  — 
  the 
  languages 
  of 
  all 
  of 
  whom 
  show 
  significant 
  structural 
  

   similarities 
  — 
  with 
  which 
  the 
  mounds 
  nnist 
  be 
  most 
  closely 
  connected. 
  

  

  