SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES


 1. Cartographical information obtained since the preceding pages
were put into type renders it practically certain that Chigilousa"
(referred to on page 37) is a misreading by Margry of "Ougilousa."
This establishes the identity of the tribe with the Okelousa (treated
on page 32) and furnishes an additional argument for classifying
that tribe as Muskhogean, besides lending strength to a similar classi-
fication of the Washa and the Chawasha.a
 2. It is now evident to the writer that the so-called temples of
the Natchez and other lower Mississippi tribes were only variants of
the bone-houses, or ossuaries, of the Chitimacha and the Choctaw.
Adair describes a Choctaw ossuary surmounted by a bird,b which at
once suggests the birds upon the Natchez and the Taensa temples.
With them should also be categorized the temple of Talimeco re-
ferred to in the De Soto narratives.
 3. The relationship of Natchez to the Muskhogean tongues, assumed
in the present bulletin, was accepted as the result of a comparison of
the Natchez vocabularies collected by Gallatin, Brinton, Pike, and
Gatschet with numerous Muskhogean vocabularies both published
and unpublished. Since then the writer has been able to obtain a
number of texts in the Natchez language and final judgment on its
exact relation to the recognized Muskhogean dialects can not be
given until a thorough study of these has been made. Some unex-
pected resemblances to Chitimacha have developed from a prelimi-
nary examination, but in general it may be said that the writer's
opinion that Natchez is the result of a mixture between a Muskhogean
and a non-Milskhogean people appears to be strongly confirmed. It
is believed that a careful analysis of this tongue will throw im-
portant light upon the question of the origin of new languages.
 aSee maps of Franquelin, 1864; Van Loon, 1705; Mortier, 1710.
 b Adair, History of the American Indians, London, 1775, page 184.