THE ST. JOHN'S RIVER, FLORIDA. 207 



under the hypothesis that such articles were wanting among them, and that the 

 makers of the mounds lived at a period when such objects were unobtainable, a 

 period prior to or bordering on the Conquest. 



To one who has carefully read the reports of the two investigations of the 

 great mound at Mt. Royal, and noted the hundreds of objects discovered therein, 

 seemingly the product of aboriginal art, and the absence of so much as one bead 

 of glass or one implement of iron in the great mass of sand moved by us, the 

 conviction must be assured that a people so comparatively rich, and so devoted to 

 its dead, would surely have possessed and taken pride in interring with the departed 

 the many objects of gift and of barter, which Indians always acquire in intercourse 

 with Europeans, had the mound been in process of construction in post-Columbian 

 times. 



In this connection it may be well to notice a suggestion made by Professor 

 Holmes in his able and interesting paper on the earthenware of the St. John's (page 

 109), published with the first part of this report, that the practice of perforating 

 the base of mortuary pottery arose in post-Columbian times, through a desire to 

 render less attractive to the Spaniards the contents of the mounds. 



In the preparation of his paper, Professor Holmes labored under a certain dis- 

 advantage in that, through our absence in Florida, he was unable to have clearly 

 set before him certain points in relation to depth and association of objects discov- 

 ered in the mounds, and it was with no small wonder, upon reading his paper, we 

 became aware how clearly in nearly every respect, from our somewhat imperfect 

 communications, he had grasped the subject. 



However, such a hypothesis relating to the base perforation of mortuary pot- 

 tery, involving as it does so late an origin for the mounds, since this pottery is found 

 upon the base of many of them, seems to us entirely untenable. In the first place, 

 no European objects have been found in association with pottery of this class. And, 

 secondly, it is hardly to be supposed that aborigines interring only rude and com- 

 paratively useless earthenware through fear of subsequent loss by pillage should 

 place in immediate association unbroken ornaments of copper, entire implements of 

 polished stone, pearls, and other possessions dearest to the native heart. 



We are then of the opinion that the manufacture of flimsy forms and mutila- 

 tion prior or subsequent to baking was practised in pre-Columbian times in deference 

 to some religious rite or established custom, and not at a later period through fear 

 of plunder by the Whites. 



While we are not in a position to make a positive statement, it is our firm 

 conviction that at least all the larger mounds of Florida are of pre-Columbian origin. 

 It is but recently that thorough mound investigation has been practised, and it is 

 to be regretted that too frequently conclusions have been drawn by strangers to the 

 mounds, whence the material was derived, and who were, therefore, not in a position 

 to consider the situation from every point of view. 



To box the contents of a mound, the superficial with the base deposits, and to 

 label the whole "From a mound, Florida," is worse than useless — it is misleading — 



26 JOURN. A. N. S. PHILA., VOL. X. 



