61:) 8 MOUND EXPLORATIONS. 



an attempt to sustain it,' but subsequently this able lexicographer 

 entirely abandoned this position and attributed these works to the 

 aboriginal Indians. Capt. Heart, in reply to the inquiries addressed 

 to him by Dr. Barton, gives his opinion that the works could not have 

 been constructed by De Soto and his followers, but belonged to au age 

 preceding the discovery of America by Columbus; that they were not 

 due to the Indians or their predecessors, but to a people not altogether 

 in an uncultivated state, as tJiey must have been under the subordina- 

 tion of law and a well governed police.- 



This is probably the first clear and distinct expression of a view 

 which has subsequently obtained the assent of so many of the leading 

 writers on American archeology. 



About the commencement of the nineteenth century two new and 

 important characters appear on the stage of American archeology. 

 These are Bishop Madison, of Virginia, and Rev. Thaddeus M. Harris, 

 of Massachusetts. " These two gentlemen," as remarked by Dr. Haven, ^ 

 • * * "are among the first who, uniting opportunities of personal 

 observation to the advantage of scientific culture, imparted to the pub- 

 lic their inq^ressions of western antiquities. They represent the two 

 classes of observers whose opposite views still divide the sentiment of 

 the country; one class seeing no evidence of art beyond what might be 

 expected of existing tribes, with the simple difference of a more numer- 

 ous population and consequently better defined and more permanent 

 habitations; the others finding proofs of skill and refinement, to be 

 explained, as they believe, only on the supposition that a superior native 

 race, or more probably a peoi)le of foreign and higher civilization once 

 occupied the soil." 



Bishop Madison was the representative of the first class. Dr. Harris 

 represented that section of the second class maintaining the opinion 

 that the mound-builders were Toltecs, who, after residing for a time in 

 this region, moved south into Mexico. 



As the princii>al theories which are held at the present day on this 

 subject are substantially set forth in these authorities, it is unnecessary 

 to follow up tbc history of the controversy except so far as is required 

 in order to notice the various modifications of the two leading views. 



Those holding the opinion that the Indians were not the authors of 

 these works, although agreeing on this point, and hence included in one 

 class, differ widely among themselves as to the people to whom they are 

 to be ascribed; one section, of which Dr. Harris may be considered the 

 pioneer, holding that they were built by the Toltecs, who occupied the 

 Mississippi valley i>revious to their appearance in the vale of Anahuac* 



' American Magazine Dec 1787, Jan. and Feb., 1788, Am. Museum. Also referred to by Haven, 



Smithson. Contri., vol. viir, pp. 24, K. 



» Tnins. Am. Phil. Soc. vol. Ill, 1793, pp. 217-218. 



s Archeology of the United States. Smithson. Contri. vol. viii, p. 31. 



■* In iilludiug bore and elsewhere to tile Toltecs, wo do not intend to assort thereby a beliet in the 

 reality of such a people, nor do wo wish to be understood by this note as denyini^ their existence, as 

 tiiis is a question that does not enter into the present discu.ssion. 



