BUREAU OF ETITNOLOrxY. 11 



from a cave deposit in Teiinesseo, wliero Mie burial had taken place in 

 historic times, certainly not over a hundred years ago, textile fabrics 

 and matting quite well preserved. The mat, which is made of cane, has 

 a broad colored snbmarginal stripe, is almost entire, is well preserved, 

 and is made precisely as the fragments found in monnds are made. The 

 piece of textile fabric, nearly two feet square ami well preserved, was 

 in an unfinished state when buried, and was formed in the woven ])or- 

 tion by a stitch supposed to be peculiar to the mound builders, the 

 pattern of which is presented by the imi)ressions on many pieces of 

 typical mound pottery. Nor will the reader be disposed to doubt the 

 opinion expressed as to the recency of the burial when we add that 

 with these relics were the bones of a dog from which the skin had not 

 all decayed. With the cloth and matting were also the bone imple- 

 ments used in weaving. 



The collection of chipped flint implements, stone axes, discoidal 

 stones, gorgets, &c., is large. Among the stone articles are parts of two 

 well made stone images which must have been nearly half life size. 

 Bone implements, shells, &c., are in fair proportion. Large iinmberN 

 of shell bejids have been discovered in almost every section and a few 

 pearls have also been obtained, but the assistants of the Bureau have 

 not been so fortunate as to discover anything like the immense number 

 of the latter reported from an Ohio mound. 



Judging by all the data so far obtained by the Bureau, together with 

 that from other workers in the same field, the following eoiuthisions ap- 

 pear to be fully justified : 



First. That the mound-builders of the area designated consisted of a 

 number of tribes or peoples bearing about the same relation to one 

 another and occupying about the same culture status as the Indian 

 tribes inhabiting the country when first visited by Euro})eans. This is 

 proven not only by the differences in the form of the works of the dif- 

 ferent districts and in the modes of their construction, in the methods 

 of burial, and in the form and ornamentation of the minor vestiges of 

 art, but also by the numerous evidences everywhere seen of tribal war- 

 fare and the means of defense adopted. 



Second. That the archaeological districts, as determined by the inves- 

 tigations of the mounds and other ancient works and remains, eonform 

 to a certain extent to the localities of the tribes or grou})s of cognate 

 tribes of Indians at the time of the discovery. It is true that there are 

 evidences of migrations and changes and that the rule holds good only 

 in a general sense; yet the agreements in this respect are sullicient to 

 justify the use of the facts as data in arriving at a conclusion regarding 

 the origin of these works. 



Third. That nothing trustworthy has been discovered to justify the 

 theory that the mound builders belonged to a highly civilized race or 

 that they were a people who had attained a higher culture status than 



