CnAPTER I. 



THE IIISTORIGAL EVIDENCE. 



Space will not permit any review here of the various theories in re- 

 gard to the builders, or of the olyjections made to the theory lliat tliey 

 were Indians, or of the historical evidence addncible in support of this 

 theory. Simple declaration on these points must suffice. 



The historical evidence is clear and undisputed that when the regio)i 

 in which the mounds api)ear was discovered b^' Europeans it was iidiab- 

 ited by Indians only. Of their previous history nothing is known ex- 

 cept what is furnished by vague and uncertain traditions or inferred 

 from the study of their languages and customs. On the other hand 

 tliere is no historical or other evidence that any other race or people 

 than the Indians ever occupied this region, or any part of it, previons 

 to its discovery by Europeans at the close of the fifteenth century. 



We enter the discussion, therefore, with at least a presumi)tion in 

 favor of the conclusion that these works were built by the Indians — 

 a presumption which has not received the consideration it deserves ; 

 indeed, it is so strong that it can be overcome only by showing that 

 those mounds, or the specimens of art found in them, which were un- 

 questionably the work of the builders, indicate an advancement in skill 

 and knowledge entirely beyond that reached bj' the Indians previous 

 to contact with Europeans. But all the genuine discoveries so far made 

 in the explorations of the mounds tend to disprove this view. 



If it can be shown that tribes occupying the mound region at the 

 time they were first visited by Europeans used mounds, and in some 

 cases built them, it will be a fair inference that all these structures are 

 due to the same race until the contrary is proved. 



The objection urged by many that the Indian has always been a rest- 

 less nomad, spurning the restraints of agriculture, has been effectually 

 answered, especially by Mr. Lucieu Carr.' History also bears us out 

 in the assertion that at the time of the discovery nine tenths of the 

 tribes in the mound district had fixed seats and local habitations, de- 

 pending to a great extent for sustenance upon the cultivation of the 

 soil. So far as the southern districts, now comprising the Gulf States, 

 are concerned, it goes further and asserts over and over again that the 

 tribes of that section were mound-builders when first encountered by 

 the whites. To verify this assertion it is only necessary to read the 

 ' Moumls of the Mississippi Valley Historically Cousidered. 



