ABORIGINAL SITES ON TENNESSEE RIVER. 181 
A few refusals were based on the fact that former diggers (doubtless treasure- 
seekers, traders, or irresponsible natives) had not conformed to their agreements, 
but had decamped, leaving excavations unfilled and fields in disorder, behavior 
for which we (and one could not otherwise expect) had to suffer. 
We believe the refusal of some of the owners to permit us to dig was not based 
on the firm belief in the presenee of buried treasure in the mounds and sites, 
which prevails all over the South (and probably everywhere else where aboriginal 
remains exist), but on an exaggerated idea of the value of Indian objects. Our 
offer to hand over to owners all treasure unearthed by us on their properties 
has elsewhere been to some extent an inducement! to grant permission to explore, 
and doubtless had similar influence on Tennessee river, since most of them thus 
were having done gratis by others what for years they had been thinking of doing 
themselves at considerable cost. 
Seldom has faith been more misplaced than is that of the class of owners in 
question in the value of the contents of their mounds and sites. The presence 
of traders in Indian artifacts along the river and the receipt of circulars from 
traders in large cities is likely, of course, to foster an exaggerated belief in the 
value of aboriginal relics. In point of fact, however, dealers on Tennessee 
river seldom obtain anything other than surface finds, *Injun spikes," “аге- 
heads" (arrowheads), and celts, in addition to what some of them at least are 
seeking, namely, broken masses of flint, rejects and fragmentary points, from 
all of which counterfeits of Indian relics and freaks of the fakirs’ faney can be 
manufactured. 
These owners are still further influenced by the exaggerated tales current 
among the inhabitants along the river as to the prices obtained for Indian relies. 
One person recounted in all seriousness to us how a man having dug in a site 
(where we found nothing of any consequence) had obtained curiosities which he 
had sold for an immense sum. The fact that this individual had died poor shortly 
afterward did not seem to shake the person’s belief in his story. 
Although in the case of Tennessee river it has been our intention to enumerate 
all sites? and mounds (of course, investigating them when possible), it is highly 
probable, owing to the great number along the stream, that many escaped the 
search of our agents, supplemented later by our own. 
The names of owners of all mounds, whether permission to investigate has 
been accorded or not, have been introduced into this report more clearly to 
establish the identity of the mounds and also for the reason that a forthcoming 
publication by the Bureau of American Ethnology, which will draw to a con- 
siderable extent upon our work, will, when possible, include the names of owners. 
When, in our report, the withholding of permission to dig has been noted, this 
1 Some owners, of course, permit investigation through interest in science and with no belief in 
buried treasure. | ; 
2 Some small dwelling-sites, evident through superficial debris, when investigated and found prob- 
ably to be without burials, have not been noted. 
