DISCUSSION AND CORRESPONDENCE 293
He has attempted too much in the comparatively short time at his disposal and the result has been a failure. There is one bright spot however to lighten up the background, and this lies in the excellence of the illustrations. One plate (NO. vn) however requires explanation: here it is described as " Wapisiana women weaving a hammock" though the author has published the identical picture in a previous work (Phila- delphia Museum Journal) where it is represented as showing Maopidian females. Which is correct?
WALTER E. ROTH
GEORGETOWN,
BRITISH GUIANA
ARE THERE EVIDENCES OF AN IROQUOIAN MIGRATION WEST OF LAKE
ERIE?
IN the issue- of the American Anthropologist for September, 1919 Mr. Langford described a village site on the Kankakee. river in Illinois and called attention to the fact that its culture differed radically from that of other nearby sites.
Briefly summarized the site consisted of a deep deposit of black refuse earth which contained animal bones in large quantity and numerous artifacts made of stone and clay. Chert arrowpoints were abundant, it being estimated that fifteen hundred had been taken from the site. With a very few exceptions, which Mr. Langford considered intrusions, these points were all tiny, keen triangles without tangs or notches. Potsherds were very abundant. The fragments showed that the entire vessels were round bottomed, with constricted necks and narrow collars. Amongst the decorations on the fragments were notches on the rims, and a chevron arrangement of impressed lines. Amongst the bones of various food animals there were found numerous artifacts made from bone and antler. No European articles were disclosed, nor articles made of polished slate, such as the "butter-fly stones."
Mr. Langford called my attention to the peculiarities of this site after reading my article in the issue of the American Anthropologist for December, 1916, "The Characteristics of Iroquoian Village Sites of Western New York." He was struck with the similarity between the characteristics of Iroquoian culture and that of the Kankakee site. In his article he spoke of these resemblances and expressed his opinion that the deposit "represents an early stage of Iroquoian progress east- ward." . . .
There is no doubt that he is entirely right in considering this site of Iroquoian origin. In my article I had noted as certain constants of
�� �
