.>...;. JiVyi-Y r 
 
 HOUNDS 
 
v f&cZ?***> VV TOA V s+\ 
 
 fcS^ 
 
 
 ^/^jr^/i-^. Cr ./\ , *~ zj 
 
 <<> /& %L?y 
 
 mJ>&mi 
 
 m^^^^^W 
 
 ^^$*^J^4^ 
 
 \ xov 
 
 VO^t Mi\ : 
 
w^^jj 
 
 
 ^P^MM 
 
 -m^^m 
 
 rZ^tey^XsW 
 
 
 vS^r^ 
 
 r< Tifcp Vl^Xjt^ 
 >-^X-^^%wv - -iL. f s^/^V^ " 
 
 ^>-^n^Y J&S-/-; 
 
 s -^-xr^^C^ 
 
 ^$pS3 
 
 7xL^^^7}t4 J 
 
[Reprinted from the AMERICAN ANTHROPOLOGIST, Vol. 5, No. I, Jan. -March, 1903.] 
 
 SHEET-COPPER FROM THE MOUNDS IS NOT NECES 
 SARILY OF EUROPEAN ORIGIN 1 
 
 BY CLARENCE B. MOORE 
 *\ 
 
 (WITH DISCUSSION BY J. D. McGuiRE, F. W. PUTNAM, 
 AND GEORGE A. DORSEY) 
 
 INTRODUCTION 
 
 Some years ago I included in the Second Part of my " Certain 
 Sand Mounds of the St. Johns river, Florida," which appeared in 
 the Journal of the Academy of Natural Sciences of Philadelphia, a 
 paper on objects of copper found in aboriginal mounds. In this paper, 
 where the matter is gone into much more fully than I have space to 
 devote to it here, it was shown by many analyses that much of the 
 copper of the mounds, including sheet-copper, was native copper, 
 and much purer than copper which is recovered from ores by smelt 
 ing and especially from the arsenical, sulphide ores of Europe, which, 
 treated by the earlier smelting processes, produced a very impure 
 article indeed. From this, then, it was evident that objects made 
 from this pure copper were made by the aborigines from native 
 copper, and not from copper furnished by the whites, since, as we 
 have said, all European copper obtained by smelting was very im 
 pure and in Europe there is no supply of native copper sufficient for 
 commercial purposes. 
 
 In view of this, the conclusion that the aborigines were making 
 and using objects of copper, including sheet-copper, before the 
 coming of the whites, seemed hard to avoid, and, in point of fact, it 
 was almost universally accepted. Of the two persons who, in pri- 
 
 1 This paper (which was read before a meeting of Section H of the American Associ 
 ation for the Advancement of Science, held at Washington, December 30, 1902) has been 
 submitted to Dr H. F. Keller, Professor of Chemistry at the Central High School, Phil 
 adelphia, and long a specialist in analyses of copper, who writes that he has " not been 
 able to detect any statement in regard to either composition or extraction of copper which 
 would seem to require revision or correction." Prof. James Douglas, the authority on 
 copper, President of the Copper Queen Mining Co. of Arizona, writes, "I have read 
 with interest your paper, and thoroughly agree with all you say." 
 
 27 
 
28 AMERICAN ANTHROPOLOGIST [N. s., 5, 1903 
 
 vate letters, wrote in opposition to the conclusion arrived at, one 
 frankly admitted his inability to draw conclusions from analyses, 
 while the other, by stating that copper ore and native copper were 
 practically the same because the difference between them was only 
 a chemical one, indicated a lack of ability to form intelligent opposi 
 tion. 
 
 The matter of the pre-Columbian use of copper, including sheet- 
 copper, would have been considered as settled without further dis 
 cussion had it not been that Mr J. D. McGuire, in his interesting 
 and exhaustive memoir, u Pipes and Smoking Customs of the 
 American Aborigines" (page 523 et a/.), 1 seemed to regard copper 
 in use among the aborigines to be necessarily of European proven 
 ance. This opinion, in a publication under government auspices, 
 may be considered to reopen the question, especially as Mr Mc 
 Guire (page 479), in quoting some of my reports on southern 
 mounds, inadvertently makes it appear that copper met with by me 
 was found under circumstances indicating its provenance from Euro 
 pean sources. 
 
 Mr McGuire says : 
 
 " Mr Clarence B. Moore found at Fairview, Camden county, Georgia, 
 a foot below the surface in a mound, a deposit of calcined human bones 
 beneath a local layer of oyster shells, and associated with the bones 
 was a sheet-copper ornament with repousse decorations. 2 He refers 
 also to four rings found on the finger of a skeleton at Madisonville, 
 Ohio, by Professor Putnam, which were made from bands of sheet-copper. 
 Besides finding a copper finger-ring in a mound near Woodbine, Georgia, 
 and also a portion of a disc of copper in a mound in Mclntosh county, 
 Georgia, which was carbonated through, Mr Moore also found an eight- 
 inch copper celt in a mound north of Creighton island, Georgia. 3 
 
 "Such objects are said to be usually found near the surface, and 
 polychrome and other glass beads were found in the mounds at a depth 
 of two feet with human remains on or near the surface. * 
 
 I shall now explain more fully the cases cited by Mr McGuire. 
 
 1 Report of the U. S. National Museum for 1897. 
 
 2 Certain Aboriginal Mounds of the Georgia Coast, Journal of the Academy of Nat 
 ural Sciences of Philadelphia, xi, p. 10, 1897. 
 
 3 Idem, pp. 13, 14, 25, 41, Philadelphia, 1897. 
 * Idem, pp. 14, 23, 66, Philadelphia, 1897. 
 
MOORE] SHEET-COPPER f<ROM Till : MOUNDS 29 
 
 The mound at Fairview, where sheet-copper was found one foot 
 below the surface, was but two feet eight inches high. No object 
 distinctly of European manufacture was present in this mound. 
 
 The mound at Woodbine was four feet nine inches high. With 
 the exception of buttons with a recent, intrusive burial, and a single 
 glass bead " on or just beneath the surface, at a considerable dis 
 tance from any burial," nothing unquestionably of European pro 
 venance was present in this mound. Associated with human 
 remains, each a foot and a half from the surface, were ornaments 
 of sheet-copper. Two feet from the surface, in place on a finger- 
 bone, was a ring wrought from a band of sheet-copper. 
 
 The mound at the northern end of Creighton island was a sort 
 of cemetery extending over 100 feet by 1 16 feet. The maximum 
 height was about three feet, and certain interments, in pits, were 
 three feet deeper still. Though two hundred and twenty skeletons 
 were met with, no object of European make was found. The cop 
 per chisel the only copper found here lay with a burial in a pit 
 nearly six feet from the surface. 
 
 It will be seen by these details that the instances cited do not 
 prove a European provenance for the copper found, and, in addition, 
 I may say that among the many scores of mounds I have de 
 molished, I have met with a number of large mounds where copper, 
 including sheet-copper, associated only with objects purely aborig 
 inal, lay from bottom to top, so that it would seem hardly fair to 
 say that copper is usually met with near the surface of mounds. 
 
 I shall now try to prove my contention that copper met with in 
 the mounds is not necessarily of European origin, and, as sheet-cop 
 per would seem to be more difficult for the aborigines to produce 
 than other objects of copper, I shall bring forward proofs in relation 
 to sheet-copper mainly, for if it can be shown that much of the 
 sheet-copper of the mounds is native copper and consequently of 
 aboriginal make, the origin of other objects of native copper may be 
 taken for granted. 
 
 ASSOCIATION 
 
 I have written elsewhere that objects in mounds, like persons, 
 are known by the company they keep, and the more mounds one 
 opens the more one becomes convinced of this fact. 
 
30 AMERICAN ANTHROPOLOGIST [N. s., 5, 1903 
 
 When one opens a mound which was made after contact of its 
 makers with the white man, one is likely to realize that fact by the 
 nature of many of the objects found in that mound. Lead, glass, 
 earthenware with a glaze, pewter, iron (except meteoric iron), and 
 brass are distinctly of European provenance and are found in 
 abundance in mounds whose makers have had an opportunity to 
 acquire them from the whites ; and here it may be said that much 
 of the so-called copper from post-Columbian mounds is in reality 
 brass most, if not all, of the so-called copper kettles are brass, 
 and much so-called sheet-copper is brass, though, of course, some 
 sheet-copper was furnished the aborigines by white men, but this 
 copper, by its component parts as shown by analysis, is just as 
 distinctly European as the other articles in the list given above. 
 
 On the other hand, when one demolishes a mound of any size, 
 and, after the exercise of the utmost care, among many objects met 
 with finds nothing of European provenance, it would seem safe 
 to infer that the mound was completed before intercourse with 
 Europeans began. 
 
 Among the great number of mounds I have leveled in the 
 south, there have been a considerable number in which sheet-copper 
 has been associated with objects of aboriginal make, from the 
 bottom to the top, and these mounds have yielded nothing dis 
 tinctly European. Among mounds of this class I may cite the 
 great SliiLWfe mound, near the mouth of St Johns river, Florida ; 
 the famous mound known as Mt Royal, Florida ; and the large 
 mound on Tick island, near St Johns river, in the same state, full 
 accounts of which have appeared in my reports published by the 
 Academy of Natural Sciences of Philadelphia. Does it seem pos 
 sible that the aborigines, trading with whites, should obtain from 
 them sheet-copper only, or that, obtaining articles of different kinds, 
 they should select only sheet-copper to put into these mounds and 
 carefully exclude all other foreign articles ? 
 
 RESULTS OF ANALYSES 
 
 Before giving results of analyses of copper, it may be well to 
 remind those who have not made a speciality of this subject that, 
 in copper analyses, a difference of a unit or two, as in the case of 
 
MOORE] SHEET-COPPER FROM THE MOUNDS 31 
 
 the barometer, amounts to a great deal. Copper, for instance, con 
 taining two percent of impurities is a very impure article indeed. 
 
 Results of analyses of native copper, which results coincide 
 with analyses of most of the copper from the mounds, differ as 
 greatly from analyses of copper furnished to the aborigines by the 
 whites, smelted from the arsenical, sulphide ores found in Europe, 
 as day does from night. 
 
 Here is the result of an analysis of sheet-copper from Mt Royal, 
 made by A. R. Ledoux, M.S., Ph.D.: 
 
 Copper 99-^5 percent. 
 
 Silver trace. 
 
 Iron trace. 
 
 Sheet-copper from the Grant mound, according to the analysis 
 of Ledoux & Co., showed : 
 
 Copper 99.730 percent. 
 
 Iron 00.034 " 
 
 Silver 00.023 " 
 
 In a mound near Piketon, Pike county, Ohio, Mr Gerard Fowke 
 found a certain quantity of sheet-copper which was 99.9130 per 
 cent pure. 
 
 Now let us consider analyses of copper unquestionably obtained 
 from the whites by aborigines. 
 
 I am indebted to David Boyle, Esq., of the Ontario Arche- 
 ological Museum, for a fragment of copper taken by him from a 
 grave of the Tobacco Hurons, with articles of European origin, 
 which yielded to analysis : 
 
 Copper 98.970 percent. 
 
 Impurities present were silver, iron, arsenic, antimony, nickel, 
 cobalt, and lead. 
 
 Lead was used in former smelting processes in Europe, but is 
 not found in native copper. This presence of lead in European 
 copper until recent times, and the absence of lead from native 
 copper, are practically another final test ; for if it is shown that 
 much of the copper of the mounds does not contain lead, it is 
 evident that this copper is native copper, to which Europeans did 
 not have access at that time. 
 
32 AMERICAN ANTHROPOLOGIST [N. s., 5, 1903 
 
 It must be borne in mind, however, in testing copper for the 
 presence of lead, that sulphuric acid itself often contains lead, and 
 that before making important analyses the sulphuric acid to be used 
 must itself be tested, without regard for the statement of the manu 
 facturer. This point cannot be too strongly emphasized. 
 
 Copper rivets from an Iroquois brass kettle, Fleming, N. Y., 
 showed copper 97.03 percent, and as impurities, lead, silver, iron, 
 cobalt, nickel, arsenic, antimony, and bismuth. 
 
 A sheet-copper ornament found by me near Montgomery, Ala., 
 in a mound which contained many articles of European origin, an 
 alyzed by Dr H. F. Keller, yielded: copper 97.425 percent and 
 ponderable quantities of lead, silver, bismuth, antimony, arsenic, iron, 
 and nickel. 
 
 Here we see the great list of impurities which appear in copper 
 admittedly smelted from the arsenical, sulphide ores of Europe, and 
 this was the only kind of copper Europeans possessed in those 
 days. 
 
 Although at the present time, in Europe, copper is smelted by 
 improved processes to yield a high percentage of the pure metal, 
 yet ponderable quantities of many impurities still remain in it. 
 Analyses of modern German (Mansfeld) copper give 99.2 percent 
 to 99.5 percent of the pure metal and ponderable quantities of silver, 
 gold, arsenic, antimony, bismuth, lead, iron, cobalt, nickel, sulphur, 
 and oxygen. 
 
 In conclusion, then, I make the following offer to those who 
 continue to maintain that all the sheet-copper from aboriginal 
 mounds is of European origin, or to cite the presence of sheet- 
 copper with objects in mounds irrespective of the degree of purity 
 of the copper, as a proof of the European origin of these objects. 
 I will furnish sheet-copper from aboriginal mounds in Ohio and in 
 Florida, in which mounds no object distinctly of European make was 
 met with, and will name an expert to analyze the copper in conjunc 
 tion with an expert named by the other side, that this matter may be 
 settled, if it is not settled already. 
 
 I doubt not that those who have carefully followed this paper will 
 agree with me that the results of analysis will show a copper not 
 only far purer than any that can have been smelted from the 
 
MOORE] SHEET-COPPER FROM THE MOUNDS 33 
 
 arsenical, sulphide ores of Europe by the imperfect processes of the 
 fifteenth, sixteenth, seventeenth, and eighteenth centuries, but will 
 give, moreover, a far shorter list of impurities than copper that is 
 smelted in Europe even at the present day. 
 
 DISCUSSION BY JOSEPH D. McGUIRE 
 
 The paper just read is apparently due largely to my suggestion 
 that the sheet-copper found by Mr Moore in the sand mounds of 
 Florida owed its origin to European influences. The two volumes 
 issued by him illustrative of two winters labor in Florida are works 
 any one could well be proud of; the illustrations are most excellent, 
 and from them we are able to judge fairly well what the objects 
 themselves are, and what their ornamentation, whether that of a 
 period of savagery or of civilization. 
 
 I have been invited by Mr Moore to give my views on the 
 subject, and I do so with great pleasure, as it is one of more than 
 ordinary interest to archeology and to archeologists. 
 
 The articles found by Mr Moore consist largely of objects of 
 extremely thin sheet-copper, embossed and ornamented commonly 
 by repousse work of dots, lines, or curves, and of certain pieces 
 thinly overlaying objects of wood, etc. The thinness of this sheet- 
 copper may be judged from the specimen I now present, which was 
 sent to me by Mr Moore some years since. 
 
 It will not be questioned that the metal found is of wonderful 
 uniformity if it belongs to a pre-Columbian period and owes its ori 
 gin to a people living in a pure age of stone and of savagery. Its 
 thinness cannot be compared with anything found elsewhere in the 
 Americas, unless it be with certain objects found in the mounds of 
 Ohio. The technical skill necessary to produce such material is of 
 no mean order, and we are not accustomed to place the primitive 
 Floridian in the human family above the average in culture of the 
 American Indian as he was first found by Europeans. Had there 
 been a people producing such objects at the advent of the whites, 
 can it be questioned that such a fact would have been referred to by 
 early writers who have recorded everything with which they came 
 in contact worthy of notice ? The absence of such reference, 
 
34 AMERICAN ANTHROPOLOGIST [N. s., 5, 1903 
 
 however, is merely negative and proves nothing, but it is testimony 
 bearing on the subject and consequently is worthy of consideration. 
 
 I shall first discuss the subject from a technological standpoint, 
 being able in that respect to advance something more than theory 
 alone, having experimented some years since in the U. S. National 
 Museum for two or three months in hammering copper, both cold 
 and hot, with stone implements chiefly, but also with a metal ham 
 mer on an anvil. 
 
 The crude metal is primarily in the condition it comes from the 
 mine ; that is, in the nugget or in the sheet as found in the fissure 
 of the rock. There is some evidence of prehistoric melting of 
 metals among the more highly developed people of South America 
 and Central America, but none referring to such methods being 
 practised by the aborigines of the United States. If I am correct, 
 we must treat the subject as work performed by means of some 
 process of blows or pressure, the sheet by blows of a stone hammer 
 upon a piece of metal lying on a hard surface. Among the finds in 
 the Florida mounds I observe no reference to implements with or 
 upon with such sheets could be made at all approaching those found 
 by Mr Moore. 
 
 Experimenting with copper from the mines of the Lake Superior 
 region, I found, in each instance of many made upon nuggets of 
 varying sizes, that almost from the very beginning of the hammer 
 ing process the metal began to crumble and continued to do so 
 whether it was hammered cold or hot. After experimenting with 
 stone tools, those of steel were resorted to with results little if any 
 better, so far as producing sheet-copper was concerned. With a 
 sheet of native Virginia copper much better results were obtained 
 with stone tools, and the process was entirely successful to the point 
 corresponding to that referred to by one of the early writers who 
 spoke of the natives having metal which could easily be bent between 
 the fingers. By using an anvil and a steel hammer, naturally much 
 better results could be obtained. 
 
 A second suggestion contradictory to the belief that these objects 
 were of native conception, is the embossed work on most of the 
 objects to which reference is made in Mr Moore s publications. 
 The magnificent object over ten inches broad here shown from the 
 
MOORE] SHEET-COPPER FROM THE MOUNDS 35 
 
 Mt Royal mound, from an esthetic point of view suggests European 
 influence and is far superior to any object of admittedly pre-Colum 
 bian origin. The typical repousse work suggests a familiarity with 
 characteristic metal-work of Europe not consistent with savage 
 methods or culture. 
 
 From Peru, throughout the Gold Coast, through Central Amer 
 ica, and throughout eastern United States as far north as Canada, 
 every early traveler refers to metal being possessed by the natives, 
 and that metal copper, though it is contended that no single refer 
 ence to really primitive metal refers to embossed work such as Mr 
 Moore presents in his publication. 
 
 The pipes from Tick island and Grant mound do not by their 
 form suggest great antiquity to the writer, although next to the 
 straight tube they are in the writer s estimation one of the oldest 
 of pipe forms. 
 
 A canine tooth found at Tick island, according to Cope, was not 
 wolf, nor coyote, but dog, and this was found in the shell base. 
 That the mounds varied in age Mr Moore does not question, but 
 his argument that not finding European objects in a mound is evi 
 dence of their being pre-Columbian cannot be admitted as a scien 
 tific fact. 
 
 The age of objects of copper in America, especially if from the 
 mounds, wherever situated, is by no means so universally accepted 
 as Mr Moore s paper suggests to be the case. 
 
 The allusion in my publication on pipes l questioning the Amer 
 ican origin of copper in the mounds, relates to pipes of the " mound 
 type" being usually associated with objects of copper and therefore 
 showing European influences. This assertion I desire to reiterate. 
 But the " mound pipe" as my publication shows, owes its origin, in 
 the writer s opinion, to the metal file, and the " mound pipe" is not 
 found in Florida. 
 
 If through inadvertance, as suggested, I have made it appear to 
 others that Mr Moore has in any way been misquoted, no one can 
 regret it more than I do ; but reading over the paragraph carefully, 
 I do not see that Mr Moore is quoted as other than the discoverer 
 of the objects referred to. 
 
 1 U. S. Nat. Mus. Rept., 1897, p. 523, etc. 
 
36 AMERICAN ANTHROPOLOGIST [N. s., 5, 1903 
 
 The writer believes that the American Indian was an apt pupil, 
 possessed of rude implements of copper at the advent of the whites. 
 He learned in Florida in 1518, and subsequent to the destruction 
 of the Narvaez expedition, much of the use of metal ; he learned 
 more from the De Soto expedition in I 540 ; he traded with Raleigh s 
 expedition in 1584-85; and Captain John Smith repeatedly refers 
 to trading copper with Powhatan, who was no exception to the 
 Indian who was always eager to possess the shining kettles of 
 the European. 
 
 It may not be amiss to suggest that the repousse work appears 
 in European armor of the sixteenth, seventeenth, and eighteenth cen 
 turies, and that possession of metal by the natives was greatly added 
 to by trade with the whites, by wrecks, and later by mining. 
 
 MR MOORE S REPLY TO MR McGuiRE 
 
 Mr McGuire s reply to my paper on aboriginal copper, which 
 was read before Section H at the last meeting of the A. A. A. S., 
 has courteously been submitted to me. 
 
 It should be a matter of congratulation to archeologists that 
 one so well known as Mr McGuire has come forward to state his 
 grounds of disbelief in sheet-copper of purely aboriginal origin, since 
 arguments on both sides, when presented together in the Anthro 
 pologist, must greatly add to a clear understanding of the matter. 
 It must be a subject of regret to all, however, that to the chemical 
 side of my paper, where assertions pro and con are capable of exact 
 determination, Mr McGuire makes no reply whatever. 
 
 I shall now take up, in order, the points advanced by Mr Mc 
 Guire in his reply to that part of my paper which he has answered. 
 
 It is impossible to judge of the original evenness and thickness 
 of the sheet-copper found in mounds, especially in Florida mounds, 
 which are of sand and allow free access of water, thus facilitating 
 the formation of the oxide and of the carbonate which, in the course 
 of time, considerably impairs the original volume of the sheet- 
 copper. Indeed, at times, in these mounds, there remains of an 
 ornament but a minute fragment, sometimes only a stain on a bone. 
 
 The sheet-copper found by me and by others in mounds is not 
 of uniform thickness, and incidentally it may be said that no two 
 
MOORE] 
 
 SHEET-COPPER FROM THE MOULDS 
 
 37 
 
 ornaments from the mounds are exactly alike. Sheet-copper orna 
 ments with repousse decoration have been found by me, not alone in 
 Florida, but in Georgia and in Alabama. Moreover, sheet-copper 
 ornaments and ornaments overlaid with sheet-copper have been 
 found in Tennessee, while the deposits of copper found on the Hope- 
 well altars and in other mounds of Ohio are too well known to need 
 extended reference here. 
 
 The presence of embossed ornaments is not unrecorded by early 
 historians as Mr McGuire would have us believe. We have but to 
 turn to the plates of Le Moyne, an eye-witness, in De Bry s Florida, 
 particularly plates xn, xm, xiv, xvi, and xvm, three of which are 
 reproduced in this paper, to see depicted on aborigines the very type 
 of embossed ornaments which I have taken in numbers from the 
 Grant mound near the mouth of St Johns river, which must have 
 been within a short distance of where the ill-fated French Hugue 
 nots built Fort Caroline in I 564, 
 and near where, says Laudon- 
 niere, lived the chief " Satour- 
 ioua, our nearest neighbor, and 
 on whose ground we built our 
 fort." (See plates vin to x 
 herein.) 
 
 It is believed that the point 
 visited when the expedition from 
 Fort Caroline sailed up the river 
 May (St Johns) was near the 
 northern extremity of Lake 
 George, since this is the only 
 lake on the river filling the con 
 ditions of the description. If 
 such is the case, the headquar 
 ters of the great chief Outina 
 
 FIG. I. Ornament of sheet-copper from the 
 Mt Royal mound. (Actual size.) 
 
 must have been near Mt Royal, where I found numbers of embossed 
 ornaments of sheet-copper, including one, a representation of which 
 we give (figure i), closely resembling those shown by Le Moyne on 
 chief Outina. While Le Moyne was not always exact as to details 
 in his drawings, yet there are many novelties which he portrays with 
 
38 AMERICAN ANTHROPOLOGIST [N. s., 5, 1903 
 
 comparative fidelity, including scalps, shell drinking-cups, shell beads, 
 ear-plugs, ceremonial fans, serrated spear-heads, a wooden mace as 
 found by Mr Gushing at Marco, a method of attaching ornaments by 
 running a cord or sinew through the center and knotting on the out 
 side, etc. Is it not certain, then, that copper ornaments the exact type 
 of those found by me in mounds of St Johns river, situated on the 
 very spots visited by the Huguenots with whom Le Moyne was, 
 must have been seen by him on the aborigines, as portrayed by him? 
 
 There are slabs of stone and abundance of hammer-stones and 
 pebble-hammers in the Florida mounds, which would have served 
 well for the manufacture of sheet-copper. I am not prepared to 
 demonstrate, however, that copper ornaments found in Florida 
 were made there, though I do not see why they should not have 
 been. 
 
 I do not see for what purpose Mr McGuire has referred to his 
 ill-success with Lake Superior copper, which, as the reader is aware, 
 is native copper. Is it to show that " Lake" copper is not malle 
 able, and, therefore, that sheet-copper ornaments could not have 
 been made from it ? It is too well known that very much of the 
 copper from Lake Superior is malleable to call for further discussion. 
 
 As to embossed work showing European influence, as Mr Mc 
 Guire states, it can be said in opposition that embossed work is 
 shown in De Bry and that it is extremely unlikely that in a com 
 paratively short time objects made by, or with the aid of, Narvaez 
 or De Soto s men could have been widely spread throughout Florida. 
 
 As to the breast-plate from Mt Royal (figure i), I would say 
 that to many archeologists it does not of necessity suggest Euro 
 pean influence and is not believed to be far superior to any object 
 of pre-Columbian origin. 
 
 It is contended by Mr McGuire that no single reference by 
 early travelers to really primitive metal refers to embossed work 
 such as is shown in my publications. It would be hard to prove 
 just what style of copper is referred to by early travelers in certain 
 cases. They did not always go into minute details, sometimes 
 speaking of "a vessel of wood," "a vessel of clay," etc., and em 
 bossed work might not be deemed worthy of especial description. 
 We have seen, however, how, when it became necessary for Le 
 
MOORE] SHEET-COPPER FROM THE MOUNDS 39 
 
 Moyne, the artist who accompanied the Huguenots to Florida and 
 was with them at Fort Caroline, to show xvhat he had seen, em 
 bossed ornaments were faithfully portrayed. 
 
 The pipes from Tick island and the Grant mound do not sug 
 gest great antiquity to Mr McGuire. It seems hardly fair for Mr 
 McGuire here to cite the presence of certain pipes in these mounds 
 in order to show a comparatively recent origin for the copper found 
 with them, and then in his work on pipes to instance the presence 
 of copper to show a late origin for pipes. 
 
 I freely admit that the remains of a dog were found by me in 
 the base of the Tick island mound and that they were contemporary 
 with the mound. Surely Mr McGuire does not cite this to show 
 European intercourse with the makers of the mound. The exis 
 tence of the aboriginal dog is admitted. Cabega de Vaca, one of 
 Narvaez men (1527 and later), who spent some time in north 
 west Florida, repeatedly refers to numbers of dogs. White men 
 could not have distributed these animals through Florida at this 
 early period. 1 
 
 It is true that not finding European objects in a mound is not 
 absolute proof that the mound is pre-Columbian, but it is a strong 
 argument to that effect, and when a number of large mounds in a 
 district, as is the case in Florida, or all the mounds in a district, as 
 in the Scioto valley (whence came the famous Hopewell deposit of 
 sheet-copper ornaments), show no object of European provenance, 
 then the evidence seems very strong indeed. Of course the dis 
 tinctly intrusive burial, which so often has European articles with 
 it, must not be cited as proof of the post-Columbian origin of a 
 mound. Incidentally I may say that in the great Grant mound, 
 in Mt Royal, in the Tick island mound, and in other large mounds 
 of Florida, no intrusive burial was met with. 
 
 Mr McGuire believes "the age of objects of copper in America, 
 especially if from the mounds, wherever situated, is by no means so 
 universally accepted as Mr Moore s paper suggests to be the case." 
 
 1 The dog had been domesticated and was used as a beast of burden also by the 
 Apache Indians of the plains of Texas at least as early as 1541. For references to dogs 
 seen by members of Coronado s expedition, see Winship, " Coronado Expedition," in 
 Fourteenth Report, Bureau of Ethnology, passim. EDITOR. 
 
40 AMERICAN ANTHROPOLOGIST [N. s., 5, 1903 
 
 To this I would reply that, judging from letters received by me 
 when my original paper on aboriginal copper was published, I do 
 not think Mr McGuire could then have found a corporal s guard 
 among the archeologists of America to say it was their belief that 
 sheet-copper from the mounds is, of necessity, of European origin, 
 and it is my belief that Mr McGuire now would be unable to name 
 any archeologist of note in the United States who shares his views 
 as to copper. I trust Mr McGuire, whom I esteem most highly 
 personally, will pardon me when I say that I have undertaken to 
 show what I believe to be the weakness of his position as to cop 
 per, not because I consider his opinion of much avail as against 
 that of the archeologists of the United States, but for the reason 
 that archeologists of Europe, having seen Mr McGuire s views as 
 to aboriginal copper in a Government publication, might suppose 
 these views met with endorsement in this country, which is cer 
 tainly not the case. Mr McGuire has kindly consented to write a 
 few lines in sur-rebuttal of this reply of mine. I would esteem it 
 a favor were he to name, for the benefit of the archeologists of 
 Europe, such American archeologists as share his views. 
 
 By stating that the mound pipe has not been found in Florida, 
 it seems to me Mr McGuire weakens his argument as to Florida 
 copper, from his standpoint. Truth compels me to say, however, 
 that I have found " monitor" pipes in Florida mounds, though not 
 in the mounds of the peninsular part of the state. 1 
 
 I would say, however, that many archeologists disagree with Mr 
 McGuire as to the presence of file marks on mound pipes and believe 
 that there are no marks on them but could have been made with 
 tools of stone. 
 
 I did not assert in my paper that Mr McGuire had not given me 
 due credit as discoverer of the copper objects in the Georgia mounds, 
 but I did think that Mr McGuire, inadvertently, had described the 
 objects discovered by me in a way to make them appear of European 
 origin. 
 
 As to the copper which Mr McGuire says was acquired by the 
 Indians by trading and by shipwreck, I can only repeat that much 
 
 1 Certain Aboriginal Remains of the Nortfiwtst Florida Coasf, part n, pages 225, 
 238, 256, fig. 213. 
 
MOORE] SHEET-COPPER FROM THE MOUNDS 41 
 
 of what has been called sheet-copper, found with late burials, is in 
 reality sheet-brass, and as to this I can speak from personal experi 
 ence, often repeated, and that the so-called copper kettles I have 
 seen have been brass kettles and that such sheet-copper as could 
 have been procured by trading or by shipwreck would, of necessity, 
 be European copper and that European copper is as different from 
 native copper as night is from day and that analysis has shown the 
 copper from mounds in Florida, in Ohio, and elsewhere in which no 
 object distinctly of European provenance has been found, to be 
 native copper. 
 
 In conclusion I would say there is no one whose conversion to 
 our way of thinking as to aboriginal copper would be more wel 
 come than that of one who has given so much attention to the sub 
 ject as has Mr McGuire, and it would seem as though this con 
 summation might be realized, for Mr McGuire, step by step, is 
 abandoning his original position, as what follows will clearly show. 
 
 In his interesting memoir on pipes, Mr McGuire says (page 
 523) : " His reference from a naturalist s standpoint naturally ignores 
 the technological consideration of the subject, as well as the con 
 temporaneity of metal in the mounds, especially copper." 
 
 Here Mr McGuire cites the presence of copper, just copper, as 
 a proof of modern origin. 
 
 Continuing, he says, "also the many asserted discoveries of 
 objects of undeniably European manufacture, such as an implement 
 of copper." 
 
 Here it is copper wrought into implements, at which Mr Mc 
 Guire draws the line. 
 
 Mr McGuire now admits in his answer to my paper that rude 
 implements of copper were in the possession of the aborigines be 
 fore white contact ; he thus abandons his former position as to the 
 metal copper and implements of copper. 
 
 Now we come to the next step. In a late writing Mr McGuire 
 cities the presence of s/ieet-coppcr with a pipe as an evidence of its 
 European origin. Here we have the line drawn at sheet- copper. 
 
 But now Mr McGuire, in his reply to my paper, admits that he 
 has made from native metal a copper that will bend backward and 
 forward, and cites an early writer to show that copper of this de- 
 
42 AMERICAN ANTHROPOLOGIST [N. s., 5, 1903 
 
 scription, which practically was sheet-copper, was found by the 
 whites in the possession of the aborigines ; so here Mr McGuire 
 goes still another step farther, to rude sheet-copper in pre-Colum 
 bian times. 
 
 Finally, in his reply to my paper, the line seems to be drawn at 
 thin and uniformly made sheet-copper, embossed ; so Mr McGuire 
 seems to be gradually abandoning his contention and to be coming 
 toward us step by step. Let us hope that his next step will be to 
 throw overboard what is left of his theory as to copper and join the 
 camp of those who, relying on proofs, historical, technological, 
 chemical, and of association, believe in the purely aboriginal 
 origin of most of the mound copper. 
 
 MR McGuiRE s CONCLUDING REMARKS 
 
 The opinion originally expressed, that the discovery of sheet- 
 copper among aboriginal remains, wherever found, is suggestive of 
 European influence, is not weakened in the slightest by Mr Moore s 
 reply to my criticism of his paper, as I shall endeavor to explain, 
 following the order of his remarks. 
 
 It cannot justly be a matter for regret to archeologists that I 
 make no reply to the "chemical side of the paper" when I admit 
 my inability to do so from a chemical standpoint, and would conse 
 quently not be excusable were I to attempt to argue a subject upon 
 which I knew I was incapable of intelligently expressing my views. 
 
 I do not hesitate, however, to venture the assertion that the 
 formation of carbonate and oxides has not impaired the original 
 evenness and thinness of Mr Moore s copper finds to a degree suffi 
 cient to prevent our seeing enough to form a fair estimate of the 
 original appearance of these interesting objects, the technique of 
 which is so indicative of an art peculiarly un-American, as is shown 
 in Mr Moore s figure I. There is an evenness about it and a 
 regularity suggestive of the handiwork of a skilled metal-worker, 
 and if that worker was an Indian the white man must have taught 
 him the use of the tools. That the Indian in certain localities was 
 an apt pupil in metal work is related by more than one historian of 
 Mexico and Peru, who early observed that in working metal the 
 Indian quickly surpassed his Spanish teacher in skill. 
 
MOORE] SHEET-COPPER FROM THE MOUNDS 43 
 
 The repousse work, consisting of dots, lines, and curves (includ 
 ing circles) impressed on thin sheet-copper, as shown by Mr 
 Moore s discoveries, means infinitely more than the mere hammer 
 ing down of a nugget, for evenness had to be maintained through 
 out, and when attained it was requisite that it be continued through 
 out the whole process of creating the repousse decoration or effect. 
 
 The amount of copper found by Mr Moore in his excavations 
 indicates a source of supply more abundant than can be imagined to 
 have been furnished by aboriginal trade, regardless of whether the 
 supply came from Lake Superior or from Virginia, though such 
 supply could have been furnished by the whites, with whom w<e 
 know the Indians, from the very beginning, and from the St Law 
 rence to the Rio Grande, traded for copper. 
 
 Le Moyne, the artist and author of the De Bry plates, was in 
 Florida with the expedition of Rene Laudonniere, about 1565. The 
 plates referred to are in De Bry s Brevis Narratio which constitutes 
 part 2 of the Collectiones Perigrinatiomim, published in Frank-fort - 
 on-the-Main in 1591. Of this work Joseph Sabin, in his Diction 
 ary of Books Relating to America, says: "It is true that numerous 
 plates were added to these texts, but they had been made for the 
 most part after fanciful designs, adapted, some well, some ill." Mr 
 Moore, in apology, however, himself suggests Le Moyne s want of 
 exactness as to details. But admitting, for the sake of the argu 
 ment, Mr Moore s contention that Le Moyne did see these objects, 
 I would call attention to plate 42, one of the series in this same 
 volume, which represents an Indian standing over a French prisoner 
 in the act of killing him with an axe, the axe having an eye to it and 
 a helve in the eye. Therefore, to follow Mr Moore s line of argu 
 ment, we should believe that the natives possessed such axes prior 
 to the arrival of the whites, although we have Laudonniere s asser 
 tion that he compensated the natives who sent him presents, with 
 axes, knives, glass beads, and mirrors. 
 
 The plates represent, let us admit, metal plates ; they hang on 
 the breasts of the natives and from their girdles, and in the fore 
 ground of one illustration are represented quite a pile of them. In 
 De Bry s plate 12 a native sorcerer is represented as kneeling in 
 U Ottigny s shield, which is of the exact type of the metal plates 
 
44 AMERICAN ANTHROPOLOGIST [N. s., 5, 1903 
 
 figured. Let us go one step further in this interesting inspection. 
 Laudonniere records that these natives told him that their women 
 danced with plates of gold hanging from their girdles, the greater 
 part of which came from the Spanish ships wrecked fifteen years 
 before (or about 1550), and that numerous ships were wrecked in 
 the straits. In the legends describing the forty-t\vo plates of De 
 Bry s second volume, there is not a word of reference to copper 
 ornaments, an omission which would appear very singular were one 
 to suppose Le Moyne s figures accurate. 
 
 Hariot, in 1585, referring to the Raleigh expedition, describes 
 conditions more accurately when he refers to receiving twenty-six 
 deer-skins in exchange for a copper kettle, which the Indian im 
 mediately knocked a hole in and suspended from his neck as an 
 ornament ; and this occurred on the Carolina coast, presumably 
 nearer the source of aboriginal copper supply than was Florida. 
 At this time Ralph Lane wrote from Roanoke to the Company in 
 England that they could do no better than to send over copper 
 articles of all kinds with which to trade, quaintly expressing his 
 views that " copper caryeth all so it be red." 
 
 I agree with Mr Moore that copper ornaments found in Florida 
 could have been made there as well as anywhere ; but that signifies 
 nothing, for the plates, if made in Florida, must have been fash 
 ioned through white influence, as shown in every line, and by their 
 evenness and their curves. My reference to working nugget cop 
 per from the Lake Superior region was given for the purpose of 
 recording my own experience to show that / could not work it, 
 although the specimens were sent to me as the most ductile they 
 had in the region. But I did work a piece of fissure copper, from 
 Virginia, to such thinness that I could bend it with the hand. 
 
 Regarding the embossed work figured in De Bry s illustrations, 
 I submit there is no more reason to attribute it to savage origin 
 than there is to so attribute the eyed axe above referred to. 
 
 Narvaez was in Florida in 1528; twelve years later De Soto 
 passed through the country ; both lost men there, and the numerous 
 Spanish wrecks on the coast must have thrown many men into the 
 hands of the natives up to the time of Laudonniere, from whom 
 the natives could have learned the art of copper working. Le 
 
MOORE] SHEET-COPPER FROM THE MOUNDS 45 
 
 Moyne, if he saw the plates, recorded also seeing the eyed axe. If 
 seeing the plates made them aboriginal, what prevents the same 
 argument from applying to the axe ? 
 
 Having made an exhaustive study of aboriginal American pipes, 
 or perhaps I should say primitive pipes, there can surely be no 
 objection to my drawing deductions from personal experience, espe 
 cially where it is confined strictly to a line along which I am sup 
 posed to be able to form them intelligently. 
 
 I do not deny the existence of dogs in Florida before the coining 
 of the whites, nor do I admit it. I would say, however, that the 
 want of references to dogs in the literature of the region indicates 
 the probable absence of that animal, though the Coronado expedi 
 tion found dogs in the west in 1541 used as pack-animals, while 
 Cabe^a de Vaca refers to dogs hundreds of miles west of where Mr 
 Moore s discovery of a dog bone was made. 
 
 I do assert that the presence of dog bones in mounds is sug 
 gestive of European intercourse, and the same argument applies in 
 the case of the finding of the bones of the great auk in a Florida 
 shell-heap, which gave rise to much discussion as to how they got 
 there. My suggestion that they may have been brought as sea 
 stores by early voyagers was not received as worthy of considera 
 tion, but when so distinguished an osteologist as F. A. Lucas rec 
 ognizes from the same shell-heap " the humerus of a typical dachs 
 hund," l the suggestion I first made becomes almost a certainty, for 
 the dog bone came from the same part of the heap as did the bones 
 of the great auk. 
 
 I see no reason why I should not reiterate my remark " that 
 the age of copper objects in mounds is by no means so universally 
 accepted as Mr Moore suggests." In this category I include also 
 the finds in the Hopewell deposit as a matter of course. I claim 
 that sheet-copper is suggestive of European influence and have 
 difficulty in believing Mr Moore serious in asking of me the name 
 of "any archeologist of note who shares my views as to copper." 
 I have asserted that there were such, and reassert it now. I may 
 go even further and say that I can name one archeologist of inter 
 national reputation who agrees with me that the thin sheet-copper 
 
 1 Science, February 20, 1903. 
 
46 AMERICAN ANTHROPOLOGIS r r [N. s., 5, 1903 
 
 with repousse work on it owes its origin to European influence, but 
 I have no right to bring others into a controversy for which Mr 
 Moore and presumably others hold me alone responsible, a position 
 which I am perfectly willing to defend. I can only feel grateful to Mr 
 Moore for his personal opinion expressed of me individually, even 
 though he does not consider my opinion of "much avail" on the 
 copper question. But let us keep to the text and argue our sub 
 ject to archeologists, who form our jury. 
 
 In such papers as I have written for publication by our National 
 Museum I have never thought for an instant that any one could 
 suppose what I have said should be considered to have official sig 
 nificance, for my work was solely that of a volunteer who had made 
 a study which was regarded as of sufficient value for publication 
 by the Museum and which would be accepted by students as the 
 author s opinion and entirely on its own merits. 
 
 Pipes of all forms in the United States, except the tubular pipe, 
 as I have shown in my paper, belong in contiguous areas. To this 
 I know of no exception. Both the mound type of pipe and the 
 monitor pipe I have asserted to be of comparatively recent origin, 
 for the reason that in places on certain of them are observed a num 
 ber of flat surfaces or facets, and in or on these facets appear series 
 of three, four, and five (commonly the latter), straight lines, par 
 allel and equidistant. These facets / can intimate only with a file. 
 I cannot reproduce them with any stone tool, and could only be con 
 vinced to the contrary by some one actually reproducing the mark 
 ing or something slightly resembling it. I have explained my views 
 on this subject to many archeologists, and assert that, up to the 
 present, from no one have I heard a suggestion indicating a method 
 by which the work could be imitated. When it is shown to be due 
 to an Indian method of work I will be glad to accept the proof, for 
 no good will be gained by maintaining a contrary course. Those 
 pipes, considered artistically, are indicative in every line of Euro 
 pean technique. 
 
 Mr Moore s assertion that the copper which I suggest was 
 acquired by the Indians through trade and by shipwreck was sheet- 
 brass as he can assert " from personal experience, often repeated," 
 brings into the controversy the assertions of Hariot, Smith, and 
 
MOORE] SHEET-COPPER FROM THE MOUNDS 47 
 
 others that the Indians so traded, and further, examples of copper 
 kettles in the National Museum, of European make, worked into 
 ornaments, are too numerous to admit of doubt as to their existence. 
 
 For Mr Moore s kind wishes for my conversion " to our way 
 of thinking," I feel very grateful, and join freely in his wish, for 
 its accomplishment is but a prerequisite to conviction of error, and 
 when Mr Moore or any other person maintaining a similar belief 
 offers suitable proof to overcome my scepticism on this subject, I 
 will gladly proclaim my conversion. 
 
 I have never denied the possession of copper by the aboriginal 
 Americans ; on the contrary, I believe that practically all early voy 
 agers, from the Cabots and Verazzano to Cartier and Smith, refer 
 to the use of it, one writer saying they had it of a thinness allow 
 ing of its being bent between the fingers. 
 
 Every step of Mr Moore s argument in his reply to my re 
 marks only emphasizes what I have contended from the beginning, 
 and have never abandoned, that sheet-copper found in the mounds, 
 or elsewhere, is strongly suggestive of European influence, conse 
 quently I fail to see what has been " thrown overboard"; but, to 
 quote Mr Moore s words, " relying on proofs, historical, technolog 
 ical, and of association," there is not a particle of valid evidence to 
 sustain the contention of Mr Moore as to the aboriginal origin of 
 most sheet-copper. On the contrary the natives did possess and 
 work copper rudely and as a malleable stone. But when copper 
 is found in thin sheets and those sheets are embossed and orna 
 mented with repousse work ; and when spear-heads are furnished 
 with sockets, and the sockets are furnished with nail holes, we may 
 safely assert that white influences are proven. 
 
 Of the excellence of Mr Moore s work all American archeol- 
 ogists are proud, and its appreciation is neither enhanced nor less 
 ened by the age of his finds. I even admit that the opinion of a 
 majority of archeologists is adverse to my own on the subject of the 
 origin of mound copper ; nevertheless I maintain the correctness of 
 my views. An auk bone in one place and with a dachshund ac 
 companiment, a glass bead in another, a crucifix in another, a fer 
 rule in another, medals in different localities, finger rings, curved 
 base mound pipes, and even molded pipes with their artistic finish, 
 
4$ AMERICA A 7 AA T THROPOLOGIST [N. s., 5, 1903 
 
 are all straws pointing in the single direction toward the first set 
 tlers, French, Dutch, and English, with their knowledge of artistic 
 treatment and mechanical skill. 
 
 The case is not unlike that of the paleolith. A few years ago 
 all believed it indicative of a low stage of culture in America and 
 elsewhere. A few of us, after experiment, recognized in the paleo 
 lith a mere reject, the shape of which could not be improved. At 
 first this was considered, like the case under discussion, heterodox; 
 but a few were convinced in time, after thorough investigation, of 
 the proper position of the so-called paleolith. There are yet those 
 in America who place their faith in the paleolithic period, but they 
 are gradually lessening in number. Our European contemporaries 
 will, in time, be convinced of their error we feel sure. For myself, 
 the thin sheet-copper, considered from any point of view, with its 
 repousse work has even less to stand upon and will in time be 
 placed in the position to which it belongs, and that certainly post- 
 Columbian. 
 
 Since concluding my remarks above I have re-read Dr Cyrus 
 Thomas paper on " Mound Explorations " in the Twelfth Report 
 of the Bureau of Ethnology. Referring to certain well-known 
 plates from the Etowah mounds, in which the repousse work is 
 prominent, Dr Thomas says (page 308) : " That they were not made 
 by an aboriginal artisan of Central America or Mexico of ante- 
 Columbian times, I think is probable, if not from the designs them 
 selves, from the apparent evidence that the work was done in part 
 with hard metallic tools." Again (page 711): "What is here 
 affirmed, and what, it is believed, can be successfully maintained by 
 reference to and inspection of the articles, is, that many of them, 
 found in the mounds as well as ancient graves, have been made from 
 sheets of copper so uniform and even as to forbid the belief that 
 they were hammered out with the rude implements possessed by 
 the mound-builders of pre-Columbian times." Dr Thomas suggests 
 that a careful chemical and microscopical examination might settle 
 the point. I have submitted these quoted remarks to Dr Thomas, 
 who says he is of the same opinion still. I submit that Dr Thomas 
 name will satisfy Mr Moore s request and be an answer upon which 
 both American and European archeologists may ponder. 
 
MR. MOORE S REPLY TO MR. McGUIRE S 
 CLOSING REMARKS. 
 
 (The following was written after the appearance of the sympo 
 sium as to aboriginal copper, which appeared in the "American 
 Anthropologist," January-March, 1903.) 
 
 There are certain points in Mr. McGuire s interesting closing 
 remarks in the " Anthropologist " that seem to need comment and 
 explanation. 
 
 Mr. McGuire says : The amount of copper found by Mr. 
 Moore in his excavations indicates a source of supply more abund 
 ant than can be imagined to have been furnished by aboriginal 
 trade, regardless of whether the supply came from Lake Superior or 
 from Virginia, though such supply could have been furnished by 
 the whites, with whom we know the Indians, from the very begin 
 ning, and from the St. Lawrence to the Rio Grande, traded for 
 copper. 
 
 The amount of copper found by me is, in reality, very limited, 
 and especially so, considering the twelve years I have given to 
 mound work and the many scores of mounds I have demolished. 
 If Mr. McGuire makes this assertion as to copper, what can he say 
 as to the vast numbers of polished celts which have been taken 
 from Florida mounds ? These celts are wrought from rocks not 
 found in Florida and come from northern Georgia or farther away. 
 In bulk and weight they exceed the copper a thousand fold, and yet 
 they reached Florida through aboriginal trade. 
 
 By this assertion of Mr. McGuire that the copper found by me 
 in Florida indicates a source of supply more abundant than can be 
 imagined to have been furnished by aboriginal trade, he shuts him 
 self out from alleging that the aborigines, taught by Europeans, 
 made these sheet-copper ornaments from native copper in their pos 
 session. The reader will please bear this point in mind. The copper 
 must be European, according to Mr. McGuire, yet by chemical 
 analysis copper from the mounds in which, except superficially, no 
 artifacts surely of European provenance are found, is shown to be 
 native copper not obtainable in Europe, and this native copper is 
 the material of which practically all the ornaments found by me in 
 
ii Mr. Moore s Reply to 
 
 Florida, Georgia and Alabama are made, and native copper is the 
 material of the ornaments from the Turner and the Hopewell mounds 
 of Ohio, and the Htowah mounds of Georgia, and the stone graves of 
 Tennessee, as well as of the solid implements of Wisconsin and of 
 Canada, and of the copper objects of other districts in the United 
 States, which are found unassociated with European artifacts. 
 
 Should Mr. McGuire, however, shift his position, as the careful 
 reader will recall he has done more than once since first he wrote 
 about copper, and say that the aborigines did not depend on Euro 
 pean copper and brass, but under tuition of the whites, used native 
 copper which was among them, he would strengthen his position to 
 a certain extent, but would still find himself face to face with the 
 testimony of the mounds, which is practically conclusive. 
 
 Of Le Moyne s plates from De Bry, cited by me, Mr. McGuire 
 says: "The plates referred to are in De Bry s Brews Narratio, 
 which constitutes Part 2 of the Collectiones Perigrinationum, pub 
 lished in Frankfort-on-the-Main in 1591. Of this work Joseph 
 Sabin, in his Dictionary of Books Relating to America, says : It is 
 true that numerous plates were added to these texts, but they had 
 been made for the most part after fanciful designs, adapted, some 
 well, some ill. " 
 
 If the reader will now kindly consult Mr. McGuire s exhaustive 
 memoir on Pipes and Smoking Customs of the American Aborigi 
 nes," Report of the National Musuem, 1897, pages 414 and 415, the 
 reader will be interested to see the following statement by Mr. 
 McGuire : Fig. 45 is one of the earliest representations of the 
 American pipe, showing a separate stem, drawn after an illustration 
 of De Bry, in Brevis Narratio. 8 The woman is represented as furn 
 ishing the man with leaves from a bowl or basket of the period of 
 L,audonniere s visit to that part of the territory then called Florida, 
 which covered an indefinite geographical area." With this, is a 
 representation of an Indian smoking in the presence of a woman, 
 taken from De Bry . Below this representation is, "Fig. 45. FLORI- 
 DIAN SMOKING. After De Bry. Brevis Narratio" 
 
 Mr. McGuire, in his own publication, omits all reference to "fan 
 ciful designs" and the like. Mr. McGuire, who is a lawyer, and 
 hence accustomed to special pleading, here makes use of it, uncon 
 sciously, no doubt, but, nevertheless, it is a little hard for one who 
 
 " 3 Brevis Narratio, Book II, plate xx, Frankfort, 1591, published by Jacob 
 Le Moyne." \sic.~\ 
 
Mr. McGuire*s Closing Remarks. in 
 
 is conducting a scientific discussion with Mr. McGuire, to have him 
 make use of a witness on one occasion to demonstrate something he 
 wishes to demonstrate and then, afterward, to impeach the relia 
 bility of this very witness in order to try to discredit something else 
 that it suits Mr. McGuire to discredit. 
 
 I wish to point out here, since I am on the subject of special 
 pleading, that in his "closing remarks," Mr. McGuire, misquotes 
 me. Mr. McGuire says: "but, to quote Mr. Moore s words, re 
 lying on proofs, historical, technological and of association * * *." 
 
 My words were, as may be seen on page 42 in these papers, 
 " relying on proofs historical, technological, chemical and of asso 
 ciation." 
 
 Mr. McGuire suppresses the word "chemical." While Mr. 
 McGuire may not wish to take up the chemical issue with me, it 
 seems hardly fair to eliminate the word from a quotation taken 
 from me. 
 
 As the reader is aware, Theodore De Bry published a great 
 number of "Voyages," divided into "Greater" and " I^esser." 
 Sabin s criticism is a general statement and is, no doubt, exact in 
 regard to the plates of most of these works. In the case of Part II 
 of the Voyages, which describes a Huguenot expedition to the 
 St. John s river, Florida, the illustrations were furnished by I^e 
 Moyne, an artist and an eye-witness, and presumably the plates are 
 much more reliable than those in other publications by De Bry. 
 The reader will kindly bear this in mind and not reject as valueless 
 the plates from De Bry, reproduced in my paper, and the drawing 
 " after DeBry " given by Mr. McGuire in his memoir on pipes. 
 
 It is sure that the drawings made by Le Moyne must have been 
 accurate in many respects, especially as to the ornaments worn by 
 the aborigines, for how otherwise could his drawings coincide so 
 exactly with the copper plates found by me in the mounds where 
 the aborigines used to live ? 
 
 Mr. McGuire says : "I would call attention to plate 42, one of 
 the series in this same volume, which represents an Indian standing 
 over a French prisoner [?] in the act of killing him with an axe, the 
 axe having an eye to it and a helve in the eye. Therefore, to follow 
 Mr. Moore s line of argument, we should believe that the natives 
 possessed such axes prior to the arrival of the whites, although 
 we have L,audonniere s assertion that he compensated the natives 
 who sent him presents, with axes, knives, glass beads, and mirrors." 
 
iv Mr. Moore s Reply to 
 
 I think Mr. McGuire is in error in attributing to me the line of 
 argument that he does. I do not assert that everything shown in 
 L,e Moyne s plates was worn or carried by the aborigines. Europ 
 eans, sailing vessels, wheel-lock guns, steel swords, helved axes, are 
 shown in these plates, but I do not maintain that all these things 
 were of aboriginal origin. Plate XLJI, cited by Mr. McGuire, shows 
 a French soldier (not a prisoner, by the way), who has gone in a 
 dug-out with two Indians, on a journey, carrying his effects with 
 him. The axe seized by the savage to slay him with belonged, of 
 course, to the Frenchman. Nowhere in the plates are the abo 
 rigines show r n possessed of these axes ; on the other hand, in Plate 
 IX, a Frenchman is using this kind of axe to chop down a tree. 
 
 European axes are found with intrusive burials in the mounds, 
 but never have I come across them at any depth from the surface. 
 
 It is well known that while the expeditions of Narvaez and of De 
 Soto were unsuccessful in their quest for the precious metals, plates 
 of gold and of silver were seen on the aborigines along the St. Johns 
 river by the French who came in 1562-4, about a score of years later 
 than De Soto. Now, the presence of these metals, probably obtained 
 from the wrecks of vessels, might prove confusing to some when con 
 sidering the origin of the ornaments of metal which the testimony of 
 the mounds and the pictures of Le Moyne show to have been worn 
 by the aborigines along the St. Johns. It would be a mistake to at 
 tribute the provenance of the silver and gold and that of the copper 
 to a common source. 
 
 While, doubtless, the Huguenots saw a limited amount of gold 
 and of silver on the savages, the amount reported was undoubtedly 
 * an exaggeration of the facts, common to the European mind in that 
 age. Probably everything that glittered was gold to the French 
 men. Masses of lead sulphide, at the present time so frequently 
 found in the mounds, were doubtless sometimes taken for silver, and 
 burnished copper for gold, as occurred in the case amusingly told by 
 Bernal Diaz of the six hundred polished copper axes bartered for by 
 the Spaniards in the mistaken notion that they were of gold. 
 
 If the precious metals ever became abundant among the 
 aborigines in Florida, it is hard to account for their comparative 
 absence from post- Columbian mounds and superficial burials in 
 that State, since iron, glass, lead, brass, etc., are met with in them 
 in plenty. 
 
 Among the many scores of mounds I have dug down in Florida, 
 
Mr. Me Quire s Closing Remarks. v 
 
 I have met with gold but once, 1 and that superficially. Silver I 
 have encountered several times, always in low mounds or near the 
 surface of larger ones. I exclude from this category, however, sheet- 
 copper coated with silver, which I have found under circumstances, 
 in my opinion, showing it to be of pre-Columbian deposit. 
 
 To my first investigation of the Grant Mound, I devoted six days 
 with sixteen men to dig. The next season I demolished the mound 
 with forty-three men digging thirty days. 
 
 To my two investigations of Mt. Royal, I gave thirty-nine days 
 with an average of twenty-six men. 
 
 In neither of these mounds, which were at, or near, the homes 
 of Saturioua and Outina, respectively, was gold or silver met with by 
 me, or, as I have before stated, was any object surely of European 
 origin, found. 
 
 It would seem likely, then, that most of the metal ornaments seen 
 on the savages by the French were of copper. If such ornaments of 
 silver and of gold as were seen got into the mounds situate at the 
 places where the chiefs lived, it was probably about the period of 
 discontinuance of these monnds as burial places and the ornaments, 
 buried superficially, were ploughed away, in the case of the Mt. 
 Royal Mound, at least, which had been under cultivation before we 
 dug it ; or, likely enough, the mounds in question were no longer 
 in use w r hen the Frenchmen came. 
 
 At all events, the ornaments figured by Le Moyne, of whatever 
 metal or metals they may have been, were of the same type as the 
 copper ones found from the bottom to the top of the mounds situate 
 where the chiefs described by the Frenchmen were, and must have 
 been patterned after these ornaments of copper, and these ornaments 
 of copper were pre-Columbian, for it is surely inconceivable that 
 ornaments of this type could have had time to spread over the Penin 
 sula and, after that again, mounds of the kind I have described could 
 have been built from the base up, all within the thirty odd years 
 that intervened between the landing of Narvaez and the coming of 
 the French. Besides, these ornaments are of native copper, which 
 the Europeans did not have, and no object of European provenance 
 was found with them. 
 
 Mr. McGuire says : " having made an exhaustive study of abo- 
 
 1 In this connection the reader is referred to a paper by my good friend, the 
 late Andrew E. Douglass, "Description of a Gold Ornament from Florida." 
 American Antiquarian, January, 1890. 
 
vi Mr. Moore* s Reply to 
 
 riginal American pipes, or perhaps I should say, primitive pipes, 
 there can surely be no objection to my drawing deductions from 
 personal experience, especially where it is confined strictly to a line 
 along which I am supposed to be able to form them intelligently." 
 
 No one can object to an intelligent deduction. The point criti 
 cised w r as that Mr. McGuire, in his memoir on pipes, quoted the 
 presence of copper with pipes as a proof of their modern origin, and 
 then, in his reply to my paper, cited the presence of pipes in a 
 mound with copper to show that the copper was European. This 
 is circular ratiocination. 
 
 Mr. McGuire s opinions as to pipes are shared by few, if any. 
 There are those who think that as Mr. McGuire, by his own show 
 ing, failed so utterly in his experiments with copper, he may not 
 have been more successful in his efforts as to pipes. 
 
 As to what Mr. McGuire says in reference to mound pipes, that 
 there are on some of them flat surfaces, or facets, and that on these 
 facets appear series of straight lines parallel and equidistant, and 
 that he can imitate these lines with a file only, and cannot reproduce 
 them with any stone tool, it can only be said that while Mr. McGuire 
 has, for a considerable period, looked into such matters, he may, 
 nevertheless, be mistaken. There may be archaeologists who accept 
 Mr. McGuire conclusions, but a careful search has failed to locate 
 them. Mr. McGuire s statement as to pipes may have passed unchal 
 lenged in print for a time for the same reason that his statements 
 that copper, that a tool of copper, that sheet-copper, showed Euro 
 pean influence, remained unnoticed for a period, because no one had 
 the time or energy to take the matter up, or because some did not 
 take the matter seriously in view of the overwhelming proofs of 
 association connected with mound pipes and of association and 
 analysis connected with copper. 
 
 After a period, Mr. Fowke, 1 a man of wide field experience, 
 which counts for so much, and of museum experience, too, went on 
 record as follows: ("Archaeological History of Ohio," pg. 588) 
 "Unless it bears at the same time other indications of modern work, 
 there are no scratches at all resembling the mark of a file on any so- 
 called Indian relic in the [National] Museum, which may not be pro 
 duced with a piece of hard, gritty sand-stone. Besides, exactly 
 similar marks occur in parts of the specimen which cannot be reached 
 with either the round or the flat face of a file. 
 
 1 Mr. Gerard Fowke, the author of "Stone Art," Thirteenth Annual Re 
 port, Bureau of Ethnology, Washington, D. C. 
 
Mr. McGuire*s Closing Remarks. vii 
 
 Mr. McGuire says: "Mr. Moore s .assertion that the copper 
 which I suggest was acquired by the Indians through trade and by 
 shipwreck was sheet-brass as he can assert from personal experi 
 ence, often repeated, brings into the controversy the assertions of 
 Hariot, Smith and others that the Indians so traded, and further, 
 examples of copper kettles in the National Museum, of European 
 make, worked into ornaments, are too numerous to admit of doubt 
 as to their existence." 
 
 Mr. McGuire, in quoting me, leaves out the word " much." I 
 said, " I can only repeat that much of what has been called sheet- 
 copper, found with late burials, is, in reality, sheet-brass, and as 
 to this I can speak from personal experience often repeated." * * * 
 I again assert this. I believe that some early writers wrote loosely 
 when speaking of copper and failed to distinguish between copper 
 and brass, just as certain writers at the present time, including Mr. 
 McGuire and Doctor Thomas, fail to distinguish between copper and 
 brass, and call Indian kettles " copper kettles," while in fact, prac 
 tically all of them are of brass. In some foreign tongues little dis 
 tinction is made between copper and brass. The Italian rame means 
 either. In some French dictionaries the word cuivre is given as the 
 equivalent of copper or of brass. Translations of early chronicles 
 may be at fault at times. Some early writers, however, distinguish 
 between copper and brass, including Underbill, to whom reference 
 will be made later. 
 
 Wood, in his "New England Prospect," published in 1634, 
 states that the Indians obtained brass from the English for their 
 ornaments and arrowheads. 
 
 I have found sheet-brass in the mounds, with intrusive burials, 
 ten times as often as I have found European sheet-copper. Brass 
 is cheaper than copper, and it is only natural to suppose that those 
 providing themselves with material for gift or for barter would, as a 
 rule, select the less expensive. 
 
 Mr. Willoughby, writing from the Peabody Museum, Cam 
 bridge Mass., says, "by far the greater number of metal objects 
 from the New England graves are of brass. 
 
 Mr. David Boyle says, "Similarly, we have in our collection 
 [Provincial Museum, Toronto] small beads which w r ere called in a 
 familiar way copper beads, but which are really made from small 
 strips of the disused brass kettles." 
 
 But why multiply authorities ? It is evident that my conten- 
 
viii Mr. Moore s Reply to 
 
 tion is established that much of the so-called .sheet-copper is brass. 
 Mr. McGuire, himself, as we shall see later, confounds sheet-brass 
 with sheet-copper. Now, whoever saw embossed or engraved work 
 on brass similar to that found on copper in the larger mounds ? 
 
 Mr. McGuire joins issue with me as to whether the so-called 
 copper kettles are of copper or of brass. Let us settle that matter, 
 right here. 
 
 Ten years ago, when I caused a great number of analyses of 
 copper to be made, I vainly sought for a copper kettle found with 
 an aboriginal burial. 
 
 The Academy of Natural Sciences of Philadelphia has but one 
 Indian kettle. It is brass. 
 
 Mr. David Boyle, Superintendent of the Provincial Musuem, 
 Toronto, Ontario, than whom no greater authority exists on these 
 matters, writes: "There can be no doubt at all that most, if not 
 all of these pots, are brass. Any difference I can see is merely one 
 of degree in brassiness. 
 
 William M. Beauchamp, S.T.D., whose work is too well known 
 to call for reference here, has written an exhaustive memoir entitled 
 "Metallic Implements of the New York Indians." 1 One of the 
 parts into which the book is divided has for title, " Brass Kettles." 
 We read how La Salle wanted 2000 pounds of brass kettles at Fort 
 Frontenac. 
 
 All the kettles figured in this memoir are of brass. Copper 
 kettles are not even mentioned in the index, though allusions to 
 kettles of brass are abundant. 
 
 Mr. C. C. Willoughby writes that, excluding stored collections, 
 as to which he does not wish to make positive statements, there are 
 in the Peabody Museum four Indian kettles, one from Michigan, 
 one from New York, two from Rhode Island. All are of brass. Mr. 
 Willoughby cites Underhill s narrative of the Pequot War wherein 
 it is told how the Indians broke up their brass kettles to make 
 their arrow-points." 
 
 A careful examination has shown that there is but one copper 
 kettle in the National Museum ; the rest are brass, though Dr. 
 Cyrus Thomas in his Report on Mound Explorations, Twelfth 
 Annual Report of the Bureau of Ethnology, speaks only of copper 
 kettles being there. 
 
 1 New York State Museum, Bulletin 55, Archaeology, 7, published by the 
 University of the State of New York. 
 
Mr. McGuire*s Closing Remarks. ix 
 
 As to the " examples of copper kettles in the National Museum 
 of European make, worked into ornaments," as to the number of 
 which Mr. McGuire speaks, it can only be said that a careful search 
 made in the National Museum, where every facility was offered by 
 the authorities of the Museum, and an official of the Museum was 
 present, failed to show any of the ornaments of which Mr. McGuire 
 speaks, though beads of sheet-brass and cones of sheet-brass are 
 there. Such copper ornaments as were seen gave no evidence what 
 ever of having been made from kettles. This assertion of Mr. McGuire 
 is simply a mere statement made by him. Presumably, Mr. 
 McGuire has taken for sheet-copper the sheet-brass ornaments 
 in the Museum, and thus himself affords a proof of my contention. 
 
 Finally, as a proof of sincerity on my part, I now make this 
 offer to Mr. McGuire. I will allow Mr. McGuire to name a com 
 mittee of three experts who shall take testimony as to whether the 
 vast majority of Indian kettles are not of brass, the loser in the de 
 cision to make a printed acknowledgment that he has been arguing 
 about a subject of which he knew nothing. 
 
 Mr. McGuire speaks of numbers of objects found in the mounds, 
 which objects I admit are undoubtedly of European origin, such as 
 glass, medals, crucifixes, etc., etc. During my investigations, I 
 have found superficially or in smaller mounds many scores of objects 
 of European provenance even combs. Until quite recently mound 
 investigation has not been carried on so carefully as it should have 
 been, and the fact was not recognized that it was just as important 
 to state in records of mound work exactly w r hat part of the mound 
 the object came from as it was to describe the object itself. Too 
 frequently all objects met with in a mound have been boxed together 
 and labelled simply as coming from a mound in such or such a 
 locality, and frequently, unfortunately, erroneous deductions have 
 been drawn therefrom by " desk-workers." 
 
 Inexperienced mound workers, also, may report most curious 
 associations of objects, for it is not for every one to distinguish the 
 intrusive burial or the pit dug and filled in by recent explorers, or 
 by seekers after treasure. These remarks apply to shell-heaps 
 equally as well as to mounds. Of course, the existence of some 
 post-Columbian mounds and shell-heaps is admitted, but one swal 
 low does not make a Spring, nor can one auk make post-Columbian 
 a whole series of mounds and shell-heaps. 
 
 In my answer to Mr. McGuire I requested him to give the 
 
x Mr. Maoris Reply to 
 
 names of such American archaeologists as shared his belief as to 
 aboriginal copper. My paper, read at Washington, had for title, 
 Sheet-copper from the Mounds is not necessarily of European 
 Origin." Mr. McGuire took the opposite side ; that is, that sheet- 
 copper from the mounds is necessarily of European origin, and he 
 has gone on record as to sheet-copper and even copper in general. 1 
 Therefore, those who share Mr. McGuire s opinion believe sheet- 
 copper to be, of necessity, of European origin. 
 
 Mr. McGuire has named Doctor Cyrus Thomas, as an endorser of 
 his views, and says : "I submit that Dr. Thomas name will satisfy 
 Mr. Moore s request and be an answer upon which both American 
 and European archaeologists may ponder. 
 
 They surely will, for Dr. Cyrus Thomas, whom Mr. McGuire 
 cites, says, page 711 of the "Annual Report of the Bureau of Ethno 
 logy, 1 890-91 , " as a matter of course no one denies that the mound- 
 builders made implements and ornaments of native copper and fre 
 quently hammered this copper into thin sheets with the rude imple 
 ments of which they were possessed." 
 
 Though these words immediately precede the quotation from Dr. 
 Thomas given by Mr. McGuire, yet Mr. McGuire did not think it 
 necessary to include them. 
 
 I marvel greatly that Mr. McGuire has not named the others 
 whom he says share his belief as to copper. Mr. McGuire explains 
 that he does not wish to involve them in a controversy. The present 
 discussion as to copper, carried on with the best feeling on both sides, 
 must inure to the benefit of science, and those who fear, or are 
 ashamed, to assert their views in the matter must be faint-hearted 
 supporters indeed. Gladly will I publish, at Mr. McGuire s request, 
 a list of those archaeologists who do not share his opinions as to copper. 
 These gentlemen are in no wise timid as to putting their view r s on 
 record. 
 
 It is true Doctor Thomas does not believe in the aboriginal 
 origin of the Etowah plates, because he thinks he has distinguished 
 on them marks of European tools, which, parenthetically I may say, 
 others, including many of his co-workers in the Bureau, have failed 
 
 1 "The contemporaneity of metal in the mounds, especially copper" * * *. 
 McGuire [to show a modern origin for certain pipes], 
 
 " Objects of undeniably European manufacture such as an implement of 
 copper" * * *. McGuire. 
 
 "The sheet copper," * * * [to prove European provenance]. McGuire. 
 
Mr. McGuire s Closing Remarks. xi 
 
 to see, and in his memoir, to which I have already made reference, 
 in speaking of thin and evenly made .sheets of copper, says (p. 711): 
 "A careful chemical and microscopical examination of the various 
 specimens might possibly settle the point ; however, as this has not 
 been done, we must, for the present, rely upon inspection." 
 
 When my investigation of mound copper, viewed from a chemical 
 standpoint, with very many analyses, appeared, after this suggestion 
 from Doctor Thomas, in the second part of my Certain Sand Mounds 
 of the St. Johns river, Florida," (The Journal of the Academy of 
 Natural Sciences of Philadelphia), I sent a copy to Doctor Thomas, 
 with whom I had had considerable pleasant correspondence before. 
 
 Doctor Thomas replied in a very kind way as to ni}^ book, but 
 stated he did not feel competent to judge of the chemical evidence 
 presented. 
 
 Under date of January u, 1895, I w r rote Doctor Thomas, offer 
 ing to have made any tests he would suggest. I suggested that the 
 chemists of the Geological Survey might take the matter up and 
 closed my letter with, " I am also willing to appoint a representative, 
 an expert on the analysis of copper, to conduct an analysis with a 
 representative of the Survey, and each side may see the others method 
 of work and upon what tests his conclusions are based. We are all 
 anxious to get at the truth, and the sooner we can do so the better." 
 
 I received no reply to this letter, although Doctor Thomas had 
 been the first to suggest a chemical investigation. 
 
 In spite of the fact that Doctor Thomas had twice gone on re 
 cord in print 1 as to his belief that the Etowah plates showed European 
 influence, nevertheless, one would expect him, after the suggestion 
 made by him, to accept my offer, if his want of knowledge of chemistry 
 did not permit him to judge of the work that had already been done. 
 
 Incidentally, it may be said that Dr. Roland Steiner, the \vell- 
 known archaeologist, who conducted the investigation of the Etowah 
 mounds, disbelieves in the theory of a European origin for the copper 
 found there. In the smaller of the two large mounds at Etowah, Dr. 
 Steiner found an axe made of three pieces of copper beaten together. 
 This axe is now in the National Museum as is also an implement 
 with a square point, found in the mound by Dr. Steiner, which he 
 believes was the very tool with which the repousse work on the 
 copper plates may have been done. 
 
 1 " Twelfth Annual Report of the Bureau of Ethnology," and " The Story 
 of a Mound." 
 
xii Mr. Moore*s Reply to 
 
 It is also interesting to know that sheet-copper "from Grave A, 
 Little Etowah mound, Georgia," furnished me by the late Thomas 
 Wilson, Esq., while connected with the National Museum, proved, 
 upon analysis, 1 to be pure native copper. 
 
 Prof. W. H. Holmes recently furnished five specimens of copper 
 from the United States National Museum for analysis by Prof. Harry 
 F. Keller, Ph.D. 
 
 One of these, marked " No. 170,803, Fragment of thin sheet- 
 copper, showing repousse work. Mound C, Etowah Group, Barton 
 Co., Ga.," gave as metallic impurities silver and iron only, which 
 impurities are to be looked for in all native copper. 
 
 Incidentally, the results of the other analyses are given here. 
 
 "No. 83,445, Fragment of spool-shaped ornament, Gunthers- 
 ville, Marshall Co., Ala.," showed silver and iron as metallic im 
 purities and " a faint trace of arsenic." 
 
 Here again we have native copper. 
 
 The other three specimens of copper were sent as being un 
 doubtedly of European provenance. 
 
 "No. 59,609, Fragments of cylindrical copper beads, Indian 
 grave, Eastport, Me." The impurities were silver, lead, antimony, 
 arsenic, iron, nickel. 
 
 " No. 22,060, Piece of copper, Casco Bay, Me.," yielded as im 
 purities silver, lead, antimon} r , arsenic, bismuth, iron, nickel. 
 
 "No. 13,519, Fragment of sheet-copper, Indian Grave, Harps- 
 well, Me." Metallic impurities were as follows : silver, lead, anti 
 mony, arsenic, bismuth, iron, nickel. 
 
 The percentages of lead, antimony and arsenic present in the 
 three specimens of copper of European provenance were strikingly 
 heavy. 
 
 There is another matter of which I wish to speak. 
 
 Since preparing my paper for the "Anthropologist," I have 
 spent over three months in Florida, constantly engaged in mound 
 work. 
 
 I met with metal in but two mounds, excluding one small bit 
 of copper. 
 
 In a large mound near the great shell-heap on the Crystal river, 
 Citrus county, I found human remains in 226 places, and these 
 burials represented a far larger number of skeletons than the figures 
 
 1 Given in my Part II, "Certain Sand Mounds of the St. Johns River, 
 Florida." 
 
Mr. McGuire>s Closing Remarks. xiii 
 
 given, as bones sometimes lay in masses. There were also great 
 numbers of objects including earthenware vessels, tobacco pipes, 
 pendants of stone and of shell, shell cups, etc., hundreds in all. 
 Among the pendants were twelve hammered out of native copper, 
 all patterned after pendants of stone or of shell, present in the 
 mound. There were also in the mound several ornaments of sheet- 
 copper and three pairs of embossed ear-plugs of sheet-copper, some 
 overlaid with sheet-silver. In the entire mound was no object dis 
 tinctly of European make. 
 
 A fragment of a fluted ornament of sheet-copper from the Crys 
 tal river mound was submitted to Dr. Harry F. Keller, Ph.D., for 
 analysis. Doctor Keller reported the ornament to be certainly 
 made from the native metal : a very searching qualitative analysis 
 of the cleaned specimen gave only silver and iron as metallic impuri 
 ties and demonstrated the entire absence of lead, arsenic, antimony 
 and zinc." 
 
 The other mound in which objects of metal were present was 
 near the Chipola river, a tributary of the Apalachicola river, in 
 northwest Florida. 
 
 In this mound, which was about 5 feet high, glass was present, 
 even coming from a grave below the base, so that the mound was 
 distinctly post- Columbian. In the grave referred to were two metal 
 discs, one with two perforations for suspension, the other with a 
 single one. There was in the mound, in addition, another disc and 
 fragments of a fourth. These discs, tested by Professor Keller, 
 proved to be brass. The discs bore no ornamentation, being simply 
 circular sheets of metal. 
 
 It would hardly be possible better to illustrate my contention 
 as to copper and as to the association of objects in the mounds than 
 has been done by the results afforded by the investigation of these 
 two mounds, which will be fully described in a memoir to be pub 
 lished by the Academy of Natural Sciences of Philadelphia, at which 
 institution is all the copper discovered by me in the southern United 
 States. 
 
 So far as I can see, this question as to aboriginal copper is about 
 as follows : 
 
 i . As to the results of chemical analysis, seemingly so conclu 
 sive, Mr. McGuire has nothing to say. The reader will kindly bear 
 in mind, however, that ignorance as to chemical tests on the part of 
 Mr. McGuire does not eliminate chemistry from the discussion ; the 
 
xiv Mr. Maoris Reply to 
 
 only factor Mr. McGuire s want of knowledge as to this subject can 
 eliminate is Mr. McGuire himself. 
 
 2. That Mr. McGuire ignores these most valuable proofs of 
 association ; that is, that sheet-copper and sheet-copper embossed 
 are found in very many mounds which contain no objects distinctly 
 of European provenance. 
 
 3. That Mr. McGuire places his sole reliance, outside his per 
 sonal opinion, on the allegation that certain early chroniclers fail to 
 mention embossed sheet-copper. We have the testimony of De Bry 
 that such copper must have existed among the early aborigines. Mr. 
 McGuire, however, attempts to discredit DeBry, whose testimony 
 Mr. McGuire was ready enough to make use of in his own publi 
 cation. As to Hariot, Smith and others, in whose writings reference 
 is not made to embossed sheet-copper, it can be said that these men 
 were probably not cultivated to a point to attach importance to 
 whether shining plates of copper were embossed or not, and hence 
 did not refer to embossed work. Moreover, this testimony of omis 
 sion is negative testimony. Should Mr. McGuire remind us that 
 the non- disco very in many mounds of objects surely of European 
 provenance, also is negative testimony, the answer would be that it is 
 negative testimony of a very different sort. It is not admitted that 
 early writers, rough-and-ready-men, went into each and every detail 
 of aboriginal decoration in copper. On the other hand, it is admit 
 ted that the aborigines buried with their dead the belongings of the 
 deceased. Mounds containing no objects of European provenance 
 and post- Columbian mounds and graves which contain impure cop 
 per, brass, iron, glass, lead, etc., prove this by positive testimony. 
 Therefore, where, in great numbers of mounds in whole districts of 
 country 110 objects surely of European provenance are found, the 
 fact that such objects were not possessed by the makers of these 
 mounds is generally admitted to be almost conclusive. 
 
 Under any circumstances, the best negative testimony, which 
 Mr. McGuire s is not, is a poor weapon with which to combat posi 
 tive testimony. Mr. McGuire s inferior negative testimony is op 
 posed by far stronger negative testimony from the mounds, and this 
 negative testimony from the mounds is, in addition, clinched by the 
 results of chemical analysis, which is positive testimony, indeed. 
 
 4. That Mr. McGuire abandons his former contention as to 
 copper in general, and even as to sheet-copper, which now is only 
 "suggestive" of European provenance, and makes a final stand 
 
Mr. Me Glare s Closing Remarks. xv 
 
 that evenly made ornaments of sheet-copper, embossed, certainly 
 show white influence. 
 
 It comes down then, practically, to a question of Mr. McGuire s 
 personal opinion. 
 
 In estimating the value of the opinion of any one, it is well to 
 consider the means by which this opinion was reached. Was it 
 attained through experiment? If so, is the record of the experi 
 menter such as to inspire confidence in his judgment ? Mr. McGuire 
 himself, in these papers, has told us how signally he failed in his 
 attempts to hammer out native copper. This failure, in connection 
 with Mr. Willoughby s experience, is not of a character to inspire 
 us with confidence in Mr. McGuire. 
 
 We should consider also the mental bent of the person whose 
 opinion is advanced. Has he shown in the past a tendency to bring 
 forward startling and untenable theories ? If so, he is likely to do 
 so again. Mr. McGuire s belief in the European origin of tobacco- 
 pipes is well known. In addition, he is the author of "On the 
 Evolution of the Art of Working in Stone," x in which it is con 
 tended that implements of polished stone came into use before imple- 
 ments of chipped stone were used. This theory created a sensation, 
 but it is unsupported by facts. Are not Mr. McGuire s theories of 
 copper on a like basis ? 
 
 To put matters to a test, and as a proof of sincerity on my part, 
 I will make this offer to Mr. McGuire : 
 
 Mr. McGuire may name two well-known experts in chemistry, 
 and I will name one. These gentlemen may make extended analy 
 ses of early European copper, of native copper, and of sheet-copper 
 ornaments found other than superficially in mounds in which no 
 objects of distinctly European provenance have been met with. 
 
 If it is decided by this board that embossed copper from the 
 mounds is not native copper and is copper the result of early smelt 
 ing processes in Europe, I have lost, and the expenses of the com 
 mission will be borne by those who believe in the aboriginal origin of 
 such mound copper. 
 
 But as Mr. McGuire and Doctor Thomas have allowed to go 
 unnoticed all offers as to chemical tests of copper, made by me to 
 them in the past, I will go still farther. I will agree to any reason 
 able set of chemical experiments suggested by Mr. McGuire or by 
 Doctor Thomas, who, I suppose, might be called Mr. McGuire s 
 1 "American Anthropologist," Vol. VI, July, 1893, p. 307, et seq. 
 
xvi Mr. Moore s Reply to Mr. McGuire^s Closing Remarks. 
 
 semi-endorser. The want of chemical knowledge on the part of 
 these gentlemen may not serve them as an excuse for the non-accept 
 ance of my offer. There are in Washington, chemists who, though 
 not, of necessity, endorsing the views of Mr. McGuire and Doctor 
 Thomas as to copper, know these gentlemen and think highly of 
 them personally, and must regret to see them, as I regret it, at the 
 losing end of a position to which the description given to a contest 
 between Romans and barbarians so aptly applied, i. e., " where one 
 side strikes and the other stands and bleeds." These chemists, 
 surely, will frame, at the request of Mr. McGuire and Doctor 
 Thomas who was, himself, the very first person to suggest that 
 chemical tests as to copper be made, a series of accurately worded 
 suggestions for chemical tests, the results of which must satisfy, 
 save those who will not see, all who desire additional tests, if there 
 be any such. 
 
 If, however, no chemical tests of copper are proposed by Mr. 
 McGuire and Doctor Thomas, and these gentlemen continue a Par 
 thian method in science, where one shoots off statements and then 
 flees from a demonstration of facts, then these gentlemen must be 
 relegated to the class represented by the worthy old lady in the 
 story who said she had what was a great deal better than evidence, 
 and that was her own opinion. 
 
MOORE] SHEET-COPPER FROM THE MOUNDS 49 
 
 GENERAL DISCUSSION 
 
 REMARKS BY F. W. PUTNAM (PRESENTED IN HIS ABSENCE BY 
 ROLAND B. DIXON). 
 
 There is exhibited in the Peabody Museum of Harvard University 
 a large collection of objects obtained from an altar in the great mound of 
 the Turner group in Ohio. This mound was unquestionably of very con 
 siderable antiquity and of the thousands of ornaments found on the 
 altar, not one is in any way suggestive of contact with white people. In 
 the collection there are several natural nuggets of native copper, others 
 partly flattened by hammering, and several hammered into sheets of vary 
 ing thickness. The copper ornaments were evidently made by hammer 
 ing and cutting the copper into the desired shapes. This lot of copper 
 illustrates the method of working the native copper by hammering. The 
 experiments that have been made in the Museum show that native copper 
 can be thus hammered with stones. Not only does this lot of specimens 
 prove the hammering of native copper, but with these copper objects 
 there were found also pieces of meteoric iron, native silver, and a few 
 bits of native gold that had been made into ornaments by first ham 
 mering the metals into thin sheets. One large piece of meteoric iron was 
 evidently in its natural form, and another small piece had been flattened 
 by hammering. Experiments have proved that this iron can be ham 
 mered with a stone. Celts of copper and of meteoric iron, made by ham 
 mering, have been found in other prehistoric mounds and are exhibited 
 in the Museum. The question of making ornaments and implements of 
 native copper by hammering, I had considered as settled twenty years 
 ago, at the time my observations on the subject were first published. 
 Moreover, Mr Moore s research relating to the analyses of various copper 
 objects found in the mounds is conclusive as to the origin of the copper. 
 
 REMARKS BY GEORGE A. DORSEY 
 
 I have been familiar with the Hopewell copper for many years 
 have worked over it a great deal, have done something myself in regard 
 to hammering copper with primitive tools. While still a student at 
 Cambridge I satisfied myself that all the copper from the Hopewell 
 mounds was of Indian origin, an opinion which I still hold. 
 
 AM. ANTH., N. S., 5 4. 
 
ARE THE HOPEWELL COPPER OBJECTS PREHIS 
 TORIC? 
 
 BY WARREN K. MOOREHEAD 
 
 At the Washington meeting of the American Anthropological 
 Association, held conjointly with that of Section H of the American 
 Association for the Advancement of Science, I read a brief paper on 
 the Hopewell copper objects, and it is now my wish to present a 
 more extended communication on the subject. 
 
 Mr Clarence B. Moore, whose valuable work in southeastern 
 United States is so favorably known to all who are interested in 
 American archeology, has recently called my attention to two sen 
 tences in my review of Mr Fowke s Archceological History of Ohio, 
 published in the American Anthropologist (volume iv, No. 3), which 
 might be regarded by some as evidence that European objects were 
 found in the Hopewell mounds of Ohio. If any one so construes 
 these sentences, he gives to them an interpretation exactly the oppo 
 site of that which I wish to convey. 
 
 When the land on which the Hopewell group of mounds is 
 situated was cleared, about the year 1800, it was covered with a 
 heavy forest growth of oak, walnut, etc., but on the upper one of 
 the two terraces of the enclosure the growth was largely of oak. 
 Evidence based on the age of timber is very unsatisfactory, and one 
 cannot say with certainty whether the largest trees growing from 
 the mounds were two hundred or four hundred years of age. The 
 fields have been cultivated for many years, and the height of each 
 tumulus has been reduced and the diameter greatly extended. Our 
 best evidence as to the antiquity of the mounds, therefore, is 
 obtained from the excavations. These evidences are : 
 
 First. Five or six of the mounds contain peculiarly shaped 
 altars of burnt clay. These are confined to southern Ohio and are 
 not mentioned by the earliest travelers who witnessed the southern 
 Indians building mounds. The altars here referred to are those of 
 the type described by Squier and Davis and in my own writings, 
 
 5 
 
MOOREHEAD] HOPE WELL COPPER OBJECTS 51 
 
 and not those formed of blocks of wood, squares of stone, and simi 
 lar structures. 
 
 Second. The presence of chalcedony from Flint Ridge. So far 
 as can be ascertained the Flint Ridge material was not used in his 
 toric times. 
 
 Tliird. Substances not native to Ohio. In reviewing Mr Fowke s 
 book I used the term foreign" in allusion to objects found outside 
 of Ohio ; if I had been writing on the United States in general, I 
 should not have employed the word, for in matters of such impor 
 tance as the antiquity of the Hopewell group, one cannot be too 
 careful in the use of explanatory terms. In no other mounds have 
 so many different substances been found. Without going into detail 
 I may mention as having been unearthed during the Hopewell exca 
 vations, copper, mica, obsidian, galena, a fossil, sea-shells, sharks 
 teeth, and Tennessee flint. Cannel coal, Flint Ridge material, and 
 graphite slate were also found, but these cannot be considered to 
 have come from a distance exceeding eighty or a hundred miles. 
 Excepting the copper, these materials in themselves, whether 
 obtained by barter or by travel, might not be evidences of antiquity, 
 but the copper alone is sufficient to prove the pre-Columbian origin 
 of the Hopewell group. The careful analysis made by Mr Moore 
 and published some years ago in his "As to Copper from the 
 Mounds of the St. Johns River, Florida," showed that copper not 
 only from other mounds but that from the Hopewell group con 
 tained a higher percentage of pure copper than the European com 
 mercial copper of two centuries or more ago. This cannot be gain 
 said. The presence of half-hammered nuggets in the Hopewell 
 effigy mound was, to my mind, conclusive evidence. These nuggets 
 do not present the smooth surface of copper beaten with an iron 
 hammer, nor are the forms regular. They have undoubtedly been 
 rudely shaped with stone hammers, showing a process but begun. 
 In June last I visited Wisconsin and was astonished at the amount 
 of drift-copper occurring on the suiface between Two Rivers and 
 Princeton, a distance of about one hundred miles. I obtained a 
 hundred and thirty-eight pounds of specimens of varying sizes, some 
 of which have been partly worked by man. The hammered pieces 
 were larger than those found in the Hopewell group. None of 
 
52 AMERICAN ANTHROPOLOGIST [N. s., 5, 1903 
 
 them was cut from European commercial bars ; all are from the 
 drift or were mined in the Superior- Michigan region. 
 
 Can the advocate of the modern origin of all our mound-groups, 
 in which the highest culture is in evidence, claim that French, 
 Spanish, English, Dutch, or American traders obtained metal carry 
 ing a higher percentage of copper than the European copper of the 
 times in which they lived, worked some of it into such strange sym 
 bols as the swastika and many cosmic figures and combinations, or 
 into thin sheets ; made immense copper axes (one of which weighed 
 nearly thirty-eight pounds), and long bar-shaped objects of solid 
 copper weighing from ten to thirty pounds, such as has been found 
 in Wisconsin ; and after doing this skilful work have hammered 
 with stones some ill-shaped nuggets and traded these masses of 
 varying forms, representing many stages of workmanship, to the 
 natives to be placed by them in the mounds ? Is there any field 
 evidence of such a contention ? Can we logically conceive of an 
 illiterate trader (for not one in a dozen of the early traders could 
 either read or write) knowing aught concerning the swastika or the 
 cosmic symbols ? It is well known that traders did carry brass, 
 beads, kettles, and the like into the Indian country ; but imagine a 
 trader visiting the Hopewell group with sixty-eight copper axes in 
 his possession, ranging from four ounces to thirty-eight pounds in 
 weight ! And there is no European or American axe of white 
 man s make of the peculiar form of the Hopewell specimens. 
 
 The designs in sheet-copper are so intricate that up to the pres 
 ent no one has been able to correctly interpret them. Professor 
 Putnam and Mr Willoughby have published a paper on these 
 strange designs which, up to the present time, is the only attempt at 
 explanation that has been made. 1 To assert that any of the objects 
 found during the Hopewell explorations are of European origin, or 
 that the art products of these mounds were inspired by a knowledge 
 of the white man s methods, is to assume a position, it appears to 
 me, directly contrary to that which the facts warrant. 
 
 There is another strong argument in favor of the pre-Columbian 
 origin of the copper objects from the Ohio mounds. La Salle s 
 chroniclers are silent in regard to the Lower Scioto region, and it is 
 
 1 "Symbolism in Ancient American Art," Proceedings of the A. A. A. S., 1896. 
 
MOOREHEAD] HOPE WELL COPPER OBJECTS 53 
 
 not probable that any explorer or trader visited the Ohio valley prior 
 to LaSalle s time. If the villages of this section had been occupied 
 by the Indians in 1669, when La Salle conversed with the Shawnee 
 prisoner, he surely would have mentioned them. 
 
 Let us consider the field evidence again. An inspection of the 
 village sites on the Scioto and its tributaries, where the Shawnees 
 lived for so long, reveals very little village refuse. Save at Frank 
 fort (in Ross county, six miles from Hopewell), there are no 
 mounds or other works near the village sites. Now, curiously 
 enough, the Frankfort site (Chillicothe-on-Paint l ) was to the east, 
 and extended over the edge of a fortification of pre-Columbian char 
 acter. There were four mounds in or near the enclosure, and it is 
 well known that the Shawnees did not use them, and in these 
 mounds we found the usual Lower Scioto copper objects, etc., 
 when we opened them in 1888 and 1889. 
 
 The Shawnees buried their dead in trenches and graves in the 
 eastern part of the town, and as these graves have frequently been 
 opened, an excellent opportunity has been afforded of contrasting 
 the modern with the pre-Columbian mortuary accompaniments. In 
 these trenches and graves glass beads, brass kettles, and iron knives 
 have been found with the human remains ; in the mounds there 
 were two small altars, pyrula shells, pipes, etc.; but in the graves 
 no pyrula shells, no monitor pipes, no copper, no slate ornaments 
 were found. 
 
 On the known historic sites in southern Ohio so little is found 
 that, were it not for our records of Logan, or Tecumseh, or Corn 
 stalk, we would be inclined to conclude that roving hunters incapa 
 ble of producing men of ability lived there. The great Illinois 
 sites mentioned by La Salle are covered with the usual village 
 debris of bone, shell, stone, and clay, but not in such quantity as at 
 Madisonville, at Two Rivers (Wisconsin), or at Highbys and other 
 points on the Scioto. These Scioto sites not only display evidence 
 of long occupancy by a few people or of a large population for a 
 limited period, but they are surrounded by or are in combination 
 with great enclosures or mound-groups. In them the art is not 
 
 iQiillicothe means "Place of residence." There were several towns bearing the 
 name Old, Upper, Lower, etc. 
 
54 AMERICAN ANTHROPOLOGIST [N. s., 5, 1903 
 
 confined to the scanty scrapers, rude hammers, and knives or axes 
 of the Shawnee and Illinois sites. On the contrary, the art is the 
 best found east of the Pueblo country. If these tribes were living 
 when Sir John Hawkins men passed through the middle of the 
 continent, about the year 1570, on their way from Nicaragua to 
 Cape Breton, supposing that the sailors traversed the Ohio valley, 
 they would have left us a glimpse of these Scioto sites. But the 
 book on their wanderings is, of course, silent on the subject. It 
 mentions the Iroquois, but that is about the only tribe we can rec 
 ognize with certainty 
 
 Dr Cyrus Thomas has said that the Shawnees came to Ohio in 
 times of antiquity. I do not believe he has determined the date of 
 this move if he has, I court correction. That their village was 
 alongside one of the earth enclosures, yet totally distinct from it ; 
 that the art products of the two are quite dissimilar one being 
 crude, the other more advanced, are further evidences, to my 
 mind, of the pre-Columbian origin of the mound-groups and their 
 contents in Ohio, Kentucky, and Indiana. 
 
AMERICAN ANTHROPOLOGIST 
 
 5., VOL. 5, PL. XI 
 
 PRIMITIVE COPPER WORKING 
 
 a, Part of a copper ear-ornament from a mound of the Hopevvell group, 
 Ohio, b, Modern copy of the above made by primitive processes. 
 
PRIMITIVE METAL WORKING 
 BY CHARLES C. WILLOUGHBY 
 
 Apropos of the discussion at the recent meeting of the Amer 
 ican Association at Washington of the sheet-copper objects from the 
 mounds, a brief account of an experiment in native copper working 
 with primitive tools, made by the writer in 1894, may not be with 
 out interest. Only two trials were made to form sheets from native 
 copper, both of which were successful. The first sheet produced 
 was from a nugget from an altar of an Ohio mound, the second 
 was from native copper from the Lake Superior region. But one 
 attempt was made to form an ornament from a sheet of copper thus 
 produced, the result of which is shown in b of the accompanying 
 plate xi. The upper figure (a) of the same plate represents half 
 of an ear-ornament from an extensive deposit of copper objects in a 
 mound of the Hopewell group, Ohio. Although larger and more 
 elaborate ornaments were found, this object was chosen for repro 
 duction because its construction from a nugget of native copper in 
 volved all the various processes necessary for making any object 
 of metal from these mounds hammering, annealing, grinding, 
 cutting, embossing, perforating, and polishing. 
 
 The experiment was carried out upon a sea-beach strewn with 
 water-worn stones of all sizes. Placing upon a smooth stone a 
 piece of native copper from the Lake Superior region, and using 
 an oval water-worn stone as a hammer, the copper was carefully 
 beaten. A few blows sufficed to show the tendency of the copper to 
 crack along the edges as it expanded. This tendency was over 
 come by annealing. It was only by careful hammering and repeated 
 annealing that the mass was formed into a thin sheet. When the 
 sheet had attained the required size it was ground to a uniform thick 
 ness between two flat stones, the work being hastened by the addi 
 tion of fine sand. 
 
 The sheet was cut into circular form by incising partly through 
 the copper with sharp flints and breaking off the superfluous metal. 
 
 55 
 
56 AMERICAN ANTHROPOLOGIST [N. s., 5, 1903 
 
 The rough edges were then ground smooth on stones. As the four 
 disks forming the pair of ornaments which served as a pattern were 
 remarkably alike in size and contour, and appeared to have been 
 made over the same mold, a modern form of the required shape 
 was constructed from a piece of driftwood by charring and scraping 
 and cutting with sharp flints. Over this form the copper disk was 
 molded by light hammering and by pressure, the burnishing and 
 pressing tool being made from a splinter broken from a beef-bone 
 found on the beach. During the pressing and embossing process it 
 was necessaiy to anneal the copper several times in a small fire 
 kindled upon the sand. The perforations were made by using a 
 rudely chipped flint as a drill and reamer. The ornament was pol 
 ished with fine sand, and afterward with wood ashes. 
 
 The remarkable objects wrought from copper, silver, and mete 
 oric iron from the Turner and Liberty groups, Ohio, on exhibition 
 in the Peabody Museum at Cambridge, and those from the Hope- 
 well group in the Field Columbian Museum at Chicago, should be 
 carefully studied by all students interested in primitive metal work 
 ing. These collections include nuggets of meteoric iron, 1 copper, 
 and silver, most of them hammered to a greater or lesser degree. 
 Among the finished implements and ornaments are celts and small 
 cutting tools of copper and meteoric iron ; head, breast, and other 
 personal ornaments of copper, meteoric iron, and silver, and spool- 
 shaped ear-ornaments of copper, some of which are overlaid with 
 thin sheets of meteoric iron or silver. Symmetrical hemispheres ol 
 clay from half an inch to two inches in diameter were very neatly 
 covered with thin sheets of meteoric iron, copper, or silver, the plate 
 of metal on the flat side of the ornament having two perforations 
 for attachment. Many symbolic designs cut from thin copper are 
 also in the collections, 2 and to a student of the higher symbolism of 
 the American Indian these designs are of themselves sufficient proof 
 of the native origin of the objects. 
 
 A dozen or more small sheets of gold hammered from small 
 
 1 For notices of meteoric iron from the Ohio mounds, with drawings and analyses, 
 also for a brief account of the objects from the Turner group, see Professor Putnam s 
 notes in Peabody Museum Reports, vol. in. 
 
 2 See Proceedings of the American Association for the Advancement of Science for 
 P. 302. 
 
WILLOUGHBY] PRIMITIVE METAL IVOR KING 57 
 
 nuggets, but otherwise unworked, were taken from one of the altars 
 of the Turner group and may be seen at the Peabody Museum. 
 With this fact in mind, one should not too hastily question the state 
 ments of early writers that gold objects have been taken from the 
 Ohio mounds. The more important evidences tending to show that 
 the sheet-metal objects noted above are of prehistoric origin, may 
 be summed up as follows : 
 
 1. The extensive prehistoric mines where native copper and sil 
 ver were obtained. 
 
 2. The occurrences in the mounds of native copper and silver in 
 nuggets, both worked and in their natural state, in company with 
 ornaments from thin sheets of the same metals. 
 
 3. The ornaments from the Turner, Hopewell, and Liberty 
 groups are strictly of native design. 
 
 4. The motifs of the symbolic forms expressed in the designs of 
 many of the objects are the same as those occurring in objects of 
 bone, shell, and stone throughout a large portion of America. 
 
 5. The simple art of forming sheets of copper, silver, and gold 
 (as well as the more advanced arts of metallurgy) was known and 
 practised by the cultured tribes of the Peruvian region in prehistoric 
 times. It is not probable that any archeologist will claim that the 
 thin sheets from which many of the prehistoric Peruvian ornaments 
 were cut, large though some of them were, were rolled by machi 
 nery, or that any processes other than those of hammering, anneal 
 ing, grinding, embossing, and perforating were followed in their 
 construction. 
 
 6. Practical demonstrations have shown that any of the metal 
 objects from the above mounds could have been made by processes 
 known to the Indians at the time of their first contact with whites. 1 
 
 7. There is no evidence whatever of the European origin of the 
 sheet-copper from the Turner, Liberty, or Hopewell groups, or that 
 the mounds themselves are of post-Columbian date. 
 
 1 That the Indians of the low grade of culture of the northern Athapascans under 
 stood the art of annealing is shown by a passage in Hearne s narrative of his journey to 
 Coppermine river in 1771. Writing of the native copper of that region, he says : " By 
 the help of fire, and two stones, they can beat it out to any shape they wish." Samuel 
 Hearne, A Journey to the Northern Ocean, p. 175. 
 
AN INITIAL FINE OF 25 CENTS 
 
 WILL BE ASSESSED FOR FAILURE TO RETURN 
 THIS BOOK ON THE DATE DUE. THE PENALTY 
 WILL INCREASE TO SO CENTS ON THE FOURTH 
 DAY AND TO $1.OO ON THE SEVENTH DAY 
 
 
 
 
 .MAR 2 ?9e 
 
 : 
 
 
 
 L 
 
 
 
 APfi 24 193s 
 
 
 
 JAN 16 ^44 
 
 vi-ti* AM- 
 
 
 "j 
 
 ^ 
 
 
 C" |Vl <" ^ J^r^M 
 
 L 
 
 plwfWM 
 
 1 
 
 i 
 
 
 
 jypR13l?6tff 
 
 
 ^ nr 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 3 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 , 
 ^ 
 
 
 
 - 
 
 
 
 >\V, 4 
 
 I 
 
 
 
 
f^^km&^^^^^&M 9^^^ 
 
 ^^&Wd^V.h ^^fe^AO^XM^ Sfc 
 
 r^V^<4<fa^AVO< sr 
 
 1 ^^W%>Y^>^c 
 /p-^3^>4 ^fM^ -V^? 
 
 ^-*! 
 
 <? ^Sv^C >r y (Cf 
 
 
 s.