TiiuMAs.] SIMILARITY IN BURIAL CUSTOMS. G73 



mouud-builders and Indians. The proof tliat it was followed to con- 

 siderable extent by the former in varions sections, is evident from the 

 following facts: 



The confused masses of human bones frequently found in mounds, 

 which show by their relation to each other that they iiuist have been 

 gathered together after the flesh had been removed, as this condition 

 could not possibly have been assumed by decay if the bodies had been 

 buried in their natural state. Instances of this kind are so numerous 

 and well known that it is scarcely necessary to produce any evidence 

 in regard to them. The well-known example referred to by Jeflfersou 

 in his Notes on Virginia' is in point. Concerning this he says: "Appear- 

 ances certainly indicate that it [the barrow] has derived both origin 

 and growth from the accustomary collection of bones and deposition of 

 them together." 



See notices of similar deposits as follows : In "Wisconsin, mentioned 

 by Mr. Armstrong'; in Florida, mentioned by James Bell ■' and Mr. 

 Walker^; in Cass county, Illinois, mentioned by Mr. Snyder;"' in 

 Georgia, by Jones." 



Similar deposits are mentioned, by the explorers of the Bureau of 

 Ethnology, as being found in Wisconsin, Illinois, northeastern Missouri, 

 North Carolina, and Arkansas. 



Another proof of this custom was observed by the Bureau assistants, 

 Mr. Middleton and Col. Norris, in Wisconsin, Illinois, and northeast 

 Missouri. In numerous mounds the skeletons Avere found closely 

 packed side by side immediately beneath a layer of hard, mortar-like 

 substiince. The fact that this mortar had completely filled the iiiter- 

 stices, and in many cases the skulls, showed that it had been x^laced 

 over them while in a plastic condition, and as it must soon have hard- 

 ened and assumed the condition in which it was found, it is evident 

 the skeletons had been buried after the removal of the Hesh. 



As another evidence, we may mention the fact that the bones of full- 

 grown individuals are sometimes found in stone graves (some of these 

 graves in mounds) wlii(;h are so small that the body of an adult could 

 not by any possible means have been pressed into them. Instances of 

 this kind have o<'curred in southern Illinois, ]\[issouri, and Tennessee. 

 In some cases the bones of a full-grown individual have been found iu 

 graves of this kind less than 2 feet long and scarcely a toot wide. In 

 some instances, where the tomb has not been disturbed, the parts of 

 the skeleton are so displaced as to make it evident they were deposited 

 after the tlesh was removed. The "bundled" skeletons so common iu 

 the northern mounds are all cases in point, as there can be no question 

 that the bones had been arranged after the flesh had been removed 

 or rotted away. 



' 4th Americin edition, 1801, p. 146. «Il>iil.. 1879, p. 398. 



"Smithson. Rep., IWil, p. 337. sibirt., 1881, p. 563. 



' Iliid., 1«81, \i. 63C.. 6 Antiq. Southern Indians, p. 193. 



12 ETH 43 



