REPORT UF THE DIRECTOR I918 28S 



objects that Indians at the time of the discovery made, or were able 

 to make. 



3 Many true mounds of considerable size are not very old but 

 contain in inclusive deposits objects acquired after the coming of 

 the Europeans. 



4 Early explorers saw mounds in the course of erection. They 

 have preserved accounts taken from the Indians explaining why and 

 how the mounds were erected. 



5 The mounds were not all erected by the same tribe, but by 

 different tribes according to locality. 



6 The links connecting the Indians with the Mound Builders are 

 so firmly established by historic and archeologic evidence that 

 archeologists now know them to have been one and the same people. 



7 All these conclusions with others are sustained by the explora- 

 tions conducted by trained observers employed by scientific institu- 

 tions. The best summary of results is contained in the Twelfth 

 Annual Report of the Bureau of Ethnology, a department of the 

 Smithsonian Institution. 



The earth works of aboriginal origin in New York are broadly 

 divisible into two classes: first, walled and trenched inclosures- 

 second, mounds. 



With very few exceptions all the fortifications or walled inclosures 

 in New York may be ascribed to the later Algonkian or Iroquoian 

 tribes. These earth works outline retreats or strongholds, and the 

 earthen walls Were the bases for stockades. In no sense are these 

 banks and earth walls to be regarded as mounds. None of them 

 was erected by Mound Builders unless we include the Iroquoian 

 tribes as mound building Indians, since the Iroquois did occasionally 

 build low mounds. 



In New York the mound builder culture is not always coincident 

 with the presence of mounds. Scattered reHcs of this culture in 

 the form of monitor pipes, gorgets, banner stones, stone tubes and 

 even isolated burials and stone graves indicate their one-time 

 presence or cultural influence of the " mound building " Indians. 



For the purposes of our analysis it is our intention to treat the 

 mounds of New York as one phase of an ethnic culture. We are 

 enabled by this method to treat other evidences of that culture 

 without necessarily confining our descriptions and facts to an imme- 

 diate association with mounds, though we take oru datum from them. 



It is not easy to define the boundaries of this culture because the 

 implements and ornaments that it produced in many respects are 

 similar to some of those made by both the Algonkian and Iroquoian 



