Hence, there is no question that Adair was fully cognizant of Judeo-Christian conceptions of purity and pollution when he described the beliefs and behavior of Southeastern Indians.
Subsequent Euro-American observers also used the concept of purity and pollution to describe Southeastern Indians.
Hence, it would seem that several observers from the early 1700s until the early 1800s perceived something in Southeastern Indian belief and behavior that they described as purity and pollution.
James Mooney and John Swanton occasionally mentioned purity and pollution, though such concerns were rather marginal to their particular interests in Southeastern Indian beliefs and behavior, and both of them had read Adair's work closely.
110) In this book, Swanton did not use terms like purity and pollution to describe Cherokee traditions.
119) In The Southeastern Indians, Hudson's interpretation of purity and pollution clearly resembles that of Douglas.
Tracing the use of purity and pollution and related terms in these accounts reveals that Hudson was not alone in his use of this discourse to interpret Cherokee religious traditions.
Similarly, because Douglas's work has been so influential in the study of this theoretical area, a criticism of Hudson's Southeastern Indians actually challenges an important academic conception of purity and pollution as well.