The items now reported upon are presented in three principal divisions. The first relates to the publication made; the second, to the work prosecuted in the field; and the third, to the office work, which largely consists of the preparation for publication of the results of field work, with the corrections and additions obtained from the literature relating to the subjects discussed and by correspondence. PUBLICATION. The only publication actually issued during the year was the Fourth Animal Report of the Bureau of Ethnology to the Smithsonian Institution, 1882-’83. It is an imperial octavo volume of lxiii + 532 pages, illustrated by 83 plates, of which 11 are colored, and 564 figures in the text. The official report of the Director, occupying 39 pages (pp. xxv-lxiii), is accompanied by the following papers: Pictographs of the North American Indians, a preliminary paper, by Garrick Mallery; pp. 3-256, Pls. I-LXXXIII, Figs. 1-209. Pottery of the Ancient Pueblos, by William H. Holmes; pp. 257-360, Figs. 210-360. Ancient Pottery of the Mississippi Valley, by William H. Holmes; pp. 361-436, Figs. 361-463. Origin and Development of Form and Ornament in Ceramic Art, by William H. Holmes; pp. 437-465, Figs. 464-489. A Study of Pueblo Pottery, as illustrative of Zuñi culture growth, by Frank Hamilton Cushing; pp. 467-521, Figs. 490-564. FIELD WORK. The field work of the year is divided into (1) mound explorations and (2) general field studies, embracing those relating to social customs, institutions, linguistics, pictography, and other divisions of anthropology. MOUND EXPLORATIONS. WORK OF PROF. CYRUS THOMAS. The work of exploring the mounds of the eastern United States was, as in previous years, under the charge of Prof. Cyrus Thomas. Although Prof. Thomas and his assistants have devoted a large portion of the year to the study of the collections made in the division of mound exploration and to the preparation of a report of its operations for the last five years, yet some field work of importance has been done. Prof. Thomas in person examined the more important ancient works of New York and Ohio. He gave special attention to the latter, with a view of determining where new and more accurate descriptions, surveys, and illustrations were necessary. It was found requisite to undertake a careful resurvey and description of a number of the well known works in Ohio. This reexamination was the more necessary in view of the light shed on the origin and use of these monuments by the explorations which had been carried on in West Virginia, western North Carolina, and eastern Tennessee.