1919] BARRETT AND HAWKES, KRATZ CREEK MOUNDS. 11 



effigy forms. Certain of them are quite incorrect. To obtain the 

 best result it is, therefore, highly important to enter this field of 

 investigation with no preconceived ideas, but to allow the excava- 

 tion itself to tell its own story. 



While too general an application should not be made of our find- 

 ings in the Kratz Creek work there are certain facts which appear 

 to be so fundamental that they may be profitably applied to other 

 mound groups in the state. These are : 



1. The mounds of a large group are usually arranged in some 

 definite order, often with reference to the nearest water course or 

 some other physiographic feature. This has been repeatedly shown 

 in mound surveys in various parts of the state. 



2. Although mounds may differ widely in construction they are 

 usually not "heaped up" at random on the surface of the ground, 

 but are most often built with a systematic plan. In certain cases 

 at least, a definite, careful stratification is present. Such stratifica- 

 tion of mounds is shown by the work of various Wisconsin investi- 

 gators, though it has been often overlooked. 



3. The form of a mound does not necessarily indicate its use. 

 Effigy mounds as well as conicals were used for burial purposes, as 

 shown especially in the present work. Similar uses of effigy 

 mounds have been previously reported. 



4. Elaborate ceremonial procedure attended the construction of 

 mounds as well as the disposition of the dead contained in them. 

 This is shown by the frequent occurrence of fire strata and sacred 

 earths, and by evidences of unburned offerings in the mounds of this 

 group. This fact was recognized by the pioneer Wisconsin arche- 

 ologist, Dr. I. A. Lapham 4 , who was the first to survey and describe 

 Wisconsin mounds. 



4 In speaking of the earthworks at Aztalan, he says: "From the oft repeated indications 

 of fire at various depths, we could draw no other conclusion than that this was a mound 

 of 'sacrifice', and that at each repetition of the ceremony an addition was made to the 

 height of the mound." — Antiquities of Wisconsin, p. 48, Washington, 1855. 



