I have attempted to identify this "Dr. Ward, of Indiana;" but no such person is known in the early medical annals of that State. There is, however, an old and well-known Kentucky family of that name, who, about 1820, resided, and still do reside, in the neighborhood of Cynthiana. One of these, in 1824-25, was a friend of Rafinesque, invited him to his house, and shared his archaeological tastes, as Rafinesque mentions in his autobiography.[254] It was there, no doubt, that he copied the signs and the original text of the Walam Olum. My efforts to learn further about the originals from living members of the family have been unsuccessful. From a note in Rafinesque's handwriting, on the title page of his MS. of 1833, it would appear that he had at least seen the wooden tablets. This note reads:-- "This Mpt & the wooden original was (_sic_) procured in 1822 in Kentucky--but was inexplicable till a deep study of the Linapi enabled me to translate them with explanations. (Dr. Ward.)" The name of Dr. Ward added in brackets is, I judge, merely a note, and is not intended to imply that the sentence is a quotation. _Was it a Forgery?_ The crucial question arises: Was the WALAM OLUM a forgery by Rafinesque? It is necessary to ask and to answer this question, though it seems, at first sight, an insult to the memory of the man to do so. No one has ever felt it requisite to propound such an inquiry about the pieces of the celebrated Mexican collection of the Chevalier Boturini, who, as an antiquary, was scarcely less visionary than Rafinesque. But, unquestionably, an air of distrust and doubt shadowed Rafinesque's scientific reputation during his life, and he was not admitted on a favorable footing to the learned circles of the city where he spent the last fifteen years of his life. His articles were declined a hearing in its societies; and the learned linguist, Mr. Peter Stephen Duponceau, whose specialty was the Delaware language, wholly and deliberately ignored everything by the author of "The American Nations." Why was this? Rafinesque was poor, eccentric, negligent of his person, full of impractical schemes and extravagant theories, and manufactured and sold in a small way a secret nostrum which he called "pulmel," for the cure of consumption. All these were traits calculated to lower him in the respect of the citizens of Philadelphia, and the consequence was, that although a member of some scientific societies, he seems to have taken no part in their proceedings, and was looked upon as an undesirable acquaintance, and as a sort of scientific outcast.