THOMAS. 1 INSCRIBED TABLETS. 639 



w itli Fij;-. 8, p. 1)2, Proceedings, Veil. ii. both purporting to be tigures 

 of nioiiud .i. Cook lariu group, in wliicli tliese relics were found. The 

 former, it is true, was made when only the southern part of the mound 

 containing the grave, or pit, «, had been examined. It shows neither 

 the layers of shells nor the int in which the skeletons were found, and 

 only one skeleton is indicated in the supplemental plan. As the com- 

 plete exploration of this part was made in 1874, these facts must have 

 been known at that time, and Mr. (lass, the explorer, was at hand to 

 refer to at any time; yet, here is a figure presented to the public, which 

 is evidently to a large extent, if not wholly, imaginary, but still pur- 

 porting to be given to a scale. ."Moreover, attention appears to have 

 been called at the time to the possibility of error, as Dr. Fanpiharsou 

 says:' " Of this [mound 3] the liev. Mr. (lass (the explorer) says ' the 

 outer and inner arrangements were quite similar to the first.'' But his 

 further description shows that it was not, no layers of stones or of 

 shells being mentioned."' The italics are his own. In the subsequent 

 description of the whole mound, by Gass, the portion relating to the 

 south half is based entirely on the first exploration made in 1874. and 

 uot only are the shell-beds and tlie pits mentioned, hut he goes on to 

 say: 



The fact that the Ijottoiu (it this grave sloped uiiward ami outward, in all direc- 

 tious, eontiruied our opinion that all the contents of this mound had been discovered, 

 and a farther search would be useless. Messrs. Fanjuharson, Tiffany, and Pratt, to 

 whom full permission was given to prosecute a further research, concurred in this 

 opinion, and did not thiuli it advisable to avail themselves of the opportunity. The 

 work on this mound was therefore discontinued. ^ 



Notwithstanding all these facts, a figure is presented in the Proceed- 

 ings vol. I, PI. II, purporting to represent a section of this mound, 

 which is erroneous in every particular, in fact is purely imaginary. 

 What are we to infer from this in regard to the figures of other mounds, 

 on the same plate ? As a rule, the illustrations by the Academy appear 

 to be not only correct, but very well done; but we feel constrained 

 to exi)ress a fear that those on Pis. ii and ill of Vol. i have been made 

 without proper care. We feel it a duty to express this fear, because, 

 relying upon their correctness, not having carefully studied their his- 

 tory, we copied them into a preceding work and based conclusions on 

 what they show. 



The description by Mr. Gass leaves the impression that the layers of 

 shells over the two graves Avere undisturbed, though he does not posi- 

 tively assert this to l)e the case. Xevertheless, the following facts 

 which he mentions are somewhat difficult to account for on this suppo- 

 sition. Scattered through the soil above the first layer of shells over 

 grave B, in which the tablets were found, were a number of human 

 bcuies, but no entire skeleton, wliile in the corresjioiuling position over 

 A were two entire skeletons. Stones were also found here, correspond- 



1 Proc. Davenport Acad. Xat. Sci., Vol. i, p. 119. * Op. cit., p. 95a. 



