> [!quote] [Did the so-called mound builders of the United States have a lingua franca? Do we know what cultural traits or archaeological traits they shared between the various locations in which we have history of their dwellings and how closely related they were? : AskHistorians](https://reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/upueap/did_the_socalled_mound_builders_of_the_united) by paquime-fan (non-flaired user) via [[rAskHistorians|AskHistorians]] on 2022-05-15 > > Mississippian peoples were broadly connected by their dependence on maize agriculture, hierarchical patterns of political organization, and a common set of cultural symbols known as the Southeastern Ceremonial Complex, but they share very few to none of these traits with the Adena, Hopewell, or other earlier moundbuilders. Not all mounds were for the same purposes, as well - during the Mississippian era, you see the rise of platform mounds which held temples or houses of powerful people on their summit, while during Adena times conical-style burial mounds were most dominant, and I barely touched on the wonderful effigy mounds of the American Midwest. To be frank, moundbuilders is something of a misnomer, because a mound is not just a mound. It can be a tomb, a symbol, a gathering place, a way of establishing hierarchy - all very different purposes.