XVI FOREWORD 



present work. Then, too, tlie earlier ethnic and linguistic studies that 

 were made during the late 19th and early 20th centuries proved to be of 

 little value in correlating the historic Indian groups with the area 

 under question (Miller, 1957) . 



The sustained vigor and dominance of the Eastern Siouan hypo- 

 thesis, despite its lack of corroboration, caused me to shift my course 

 of inquiry temporarily toward the origin of this myth — how it came 

 to be foisted upon the scientific world and why it became accepted 

 so wholeheartedly as to require so much activity in an attempt to 

 dispel its falsity. So completely has this theory been ingrained and 

 accepted that it persists as the truth in current literature because of 

 usage by well-known proponents, because its real source has never 

 been exposed and its implications critically examined, and because it 

 is still being taken as the truth by those wlio have not bothered to 

 check the validity of the various sources. Theories such as this are 

 long lived and do not fade away even though they have been disproved. 



Earlier the area of the John H. Kerr Dam and Eeservoir was en- 

 compassed within the Siouan sphere of influence by such workers as 

 Hale (1883), Mooney (1894), Swanton (1922, 1946, 1952), Buslinell 

 (1922, 1927), and Griffin (1945). In view of later research, the 

 writer (Miller, 1957) was unable to endorse and embrace this tenet, 

 and this probably also holds true for the rest of the Eastern Siouan 

 premise. 



This section of southern Virginia and northern North Carolina, 

 an important one, forms a connecting link between the North and 

 South. With the exception of an archeological reconnaissance con- 

 ducted by Joffre Coe, of the University of North Carolina, studies 

 made on Occaneeclii Island and at the Staunton Elver State Park by 

 Charles W. Porter and H. Summerfield Day, and later by Jean C. 

 Harrington, of the National Park Service, together with a survey by 

 Clifford Evans (1955) for the University of Virginia, no systematic 

 archeological investigations have been carried on in this area. Con- 

 sequently, the archeological complexes of the region have never been 

 fully defined or understood. 



