CHAPTER I.

Historical evidence

CHAPTER II.

Similarity of the arts and customs of the mound-builders to

those of Indians

Architecture

Tribal divisions

Similarity in burial customs

Removal of the flesh before burial

Burial beneath or in dwellings

Burial in a sitting or squatting posture

The use of fire in burial ceremonies

Similarity of the stone implements and ornaments of various

tribes

Mound and Indian pottery

CHAPTER III.

Stone graves and what they teach

CHAPTER IV.

The Cherokees as mound-builders

CHAPTER V.

The Cherokees and the Tallegwi

INTRODUCTION.

No other ancient works of the United States have become so widely

known or have excited so much interest as those of Ohio. This is

due in part to their remarkable character but in a much greater

degree to the "Ancient Monuments of the Mississippi Valley," by

Messrs. Squier and Davis, in which these monuments are described

and figured.

The constantly recurring question, "Who constructed these works?"

has brought before the public a number of widely different

theories, though the one which has been most generally accepted is

that they originated with a people long since extinct or driven

from the country, who had attained a culture status much in

advance of that reached by the aborigines inhabiting the country

at the time of its discovery by Europeans.

The opinion advanced in this paper, in support of which evidence

will be presented, is that the ancient works of the State are due

to Indians of several different tribes, and that some at least of

the typical works, were built by the ancestors of the modern

Cherokees. The discussion will be limited chiefly to the latter

proposition, as the limits of the paper will not permit a full

presentation of all the data which might be brought forward in

support of the theory, and the line of argument will be

substantially as follows:

FIRST. A brief statement of the reasons for believing that the

Indians were the authors of all the ancient monuments of the

Mississippi Valley and Gulf States; consequently the Ohio mounds

must have been built by Indians.

SECOND. Evidence that the Cherokees were mound builders after

reaching their historic seats in East Tennessee and western North

Carolina. This and the preceding positions are strengthened by the

introduction of evidence showing that the Shawnees were the

authors of a certain type of stone graves, and of mounds and other

works connected therewith.

THIRD. A tracing of the Cherokees, by the mound testimony and by

tradition, back to Ohio.

FOURTH. Reasons for believing that the Cherokees were the Tallegwi

of tradition and the authors of some of the typical works of Ohio.

CHAPTER I.

THE HISTORICAL EVIDENCE.

Space will not permit any review here of the various theories in

regard to the builders, or of the objections made to the theory

that they were Indians, or of the historical evidence adducible in

support of this theory. Simple declaration on these points must

suffice.

The historical evidence is clear and undisputed that when the

region in which the mounds appear was discovered by Europeans it

was inhabited by Indians only. Of their previous history nothing

is known except what is furnished by vague and uncertain

traditions or inferred from the study of their languages and

customs. On the other hand there is no historical or other

evidence that any other race or people than the Indians ever

occupied this region, or any part of it, previous to its discovery

by Europeans at the close of the fifteenth century.

We enter the discussion, therefore, with at least a presumption in

favor of the conclusion that these works were built by the

Indians--a presumption which has not received the consideration

it deserves; indeed, it is so strong that it can be overcome only

by showing that those mounds, or the specimens of art found in

them, which were unquestionably the work of the builders, indicate

an advancement in skill and knowledge entirely beyond that reached

by the Indians previous to contact with Europeans. But all the

genuine discoveries so far made in the explorations of the mounds

tend to disprove this view.

If it can be shown that tribes occupying the mound region at the

time they were first visited by Europeans used mounds, and in some

cases built them, it will be a fair inference that all these

structures are due to the same race until the contrary is proved.

The objection urged by many that the Indian has always been a

restless nomad, spurning the restraints of agriculture, has been

effectually answered, especially by Mr. Lucien Carr. [Footnote:

Mounds of the Mississippi Valley Historically Considered.] History

also bears us out in the assertion that at the time of the

discovery nine tenths of the tribes in the mound district had

fixed seats and local habitations, depending to a great extent for

sustenance upon the cultivation of the soil. So far as the

southern districts, now comprising the Gulf States, are concerned,

it goes further and asserts over and over again that the tribes of

that section were mound-builders when first encountered by the

whites. To verify this assertion it is only necessary to read the

chronicles of De Soto's expedition and the writings of the pioneer

travelers and French missionaries to that section. This evidence

proves conclusively not only that this had been a custom, but that

it was continued into the eighteenth century.

Such statements as the following, attested by various

contemporaneous authors, should suffice on this point:

The caciques of this country make a custom of raising near their

dwellings very high hills, on which they sometimes build their

houses. [Footnote: Biedma, Hist. Coll. La. vol. 2, p. 105.]

The Indians try to place their villages on elevated sites, but

inasmuch as in Florida there are not many sites of this kind where

they can conveniently build, they erect elevations themselves in

the following manner, etc. [Footnote: Garcilasso de la Vega, Hist.

Fla., ed. 1723, p. 69. ]

The chief's house stood near the beach upon a very high mount made

by hand for defense. [Footnote: Gentlemen of Elvas. Bradford Club

series, vol. 5, p. 23.]

The last, which was on Tampa Bay, was most likely near Phillippi's

Point, where tradition fixes De Soto's landing place, and where a

number of mounds and shell heaps have been found. One of these,

opened by Mr. S. T. Walker,[Footnote: Smithsonian Report, 1879

(1880), pp. 392-422.] was found to consist of three layers. In the

lower were "no ornaments and but little pottery, but in the middle

and top layers, especially the latter, nearly every cranium was

encircled by strings of colored beads, brass and copper ornaments;

trinkets, etc. Among other curious objects were a pair of scissors

and a fragment of looking-glass."

An earlier exploration is thus described: "The governor [De Soto]

opened a large temple in the woods, in which were buried the

chiefs of the country, and took from it a quantity of pearls which

were spoiled by being buried in the ground." [Footnote: Biedma.

Hist. Coll. La., vol. 2, p. 101.]

Another chronicler says: "This house stood on a high mound

(cerro), similar to others we have already mentioned. Round about

it was a roadway sufficiently broad for six men to walk abreast."

[Footnote: Garcilasso de la Vega, Hist. Fla., ed. 1723, p. 139.]

(There are good reasons for believing this to be the Etowah mound

near Cartersville, Ga.) [Footnote: Thomas, Mag. Am. Hist., May,

1884, pp. 405, 406.]

The town of Talise is described as being strong in the extreme,

inclosed by timber and earth. [Footnote: Garcilasso, Hist. Fla.,

p. 144.]

Herrera speaks of "a town of 400 houses, and a large square, where

the cacique's house stood upon a mound made by art." [Footnote:

Hist. Am., Stoven's transl., vol. 6, p. 5.]

Father Gravier [Footnote: Shea's Early French Voyages, pp. 126,

136.] speaks of mounds of the Akansea and "Tounika" villages.

M. La Harpe says "the cabins of the Yasous, Courois, Offogoula,

and Ouspie [along the Yazoo about 1700] are dispersed over the

country upon mounds of earth made with their own hands, from which

it is inferred that these nations are very ancient and were

formerly very numerous, although at the present time they hardly

number two hundred and fifty persons." [Footnote: Lu Rarpe, Hist.

Coll. La., part 3, p. 106, New York, 1851.] (This seems to imply

that there were numerous mounds unoccupied.) "In one of the

Natches villages," says Dumont, "the house of the chief was placed

on a mound." [Footnote: Mem. Hist. La., vol. 2, p. 109.]

Another writer says: "When the chief [of the Natchez] dies they

demolish his cabin and then raise a new mound on which they build

the cabin of him who is to replace him in this dignity."

[Footnote: La Petit, Hist. Coll. La., vol. 3, pp. 141, 142, note.

Also Lettres edifiantes et curioses, vol. 1, pp. 260, 261. See Du

Pratz. Histoire Louisiane, 1738, vol. 3, p. 16.]

According to Bartram, in the Cherokee town of Stico the council-

house was on a mound, as also at Cowe. [Footnote: Bartram's

Travels, pp. 345, 367.]

The same writer says [Footnote: Ibid., p. 516.] the Choctaws

raised mounds over their dead in case of communal burials.

It is apparent from Jefferson's language [Footnote: Notes on

Virginia. 4th Am ed., 1801, pp. 142-147.] that the burial mounds

of Virginia were of Indian origin.

These references, which might be indefinitely multiplied, are

sufficient to bear out the assertion that history testifies that

the southern tribes were accustomed to build mounds.

It is a matter of surprise that so little is to be found regarding

the mounds in the older records of the Northern States. There is

but one statement in the Jesuit Relations and no mention in the

writings of the Recollects, so far has been found, and yet one of

the missionaries must have passed a good portion of the winter of

1700 in the very midst of the Cahokia group. Colden notes that "a

round hill was sometimes raised over the grave in which a corpse

had been deposited." [Footnote: Hist. Five Nations, introd., vol.

1, London, 1755, p. 16.] Carver noticed ancient earthworks on the

Mississippi near Lake Pepin, but knew nothing of their origin.

[Footnote: Travels, ed. 1796, Phila., p. 36; ed. 1779, London, p.

57.] Heckewelder observed some of these works near Detroit, which

he was informed had been built by the Indians. An account of them

was published in a Philadelphia periodical in 1780 or 1790. This

description was afterwards given briefly in his "History of the

Manners and Customs of the Indian Nations."

These older records mention facts which afford a reasonable

explanation of some of the ancient monuments found in the northern

section of the country; as for example the communal or tribal

burials, where the bones and remains of all the dead of a village,

region, or tribe, who had died since the last general burial

(usually a period of eight to ten years) were collected and

deposited in one common grave. This method, which was followed by

some southern tribes, has been described by Bartram, [Footnote:

Travels (1791), p.516.] Dumont, [Footnote: Memoires Hist. La.,

vol. 1, p. 246.] Romans, [Footnote: Nat. and Civil Hist. Fla., pp.

88-90.] and others, but most fully by Jean deo Brebeuf. [Footnote:

In his account "Des ceremonies qu'ils [les Hurons] gardent en leur

sepulture et de leur deuil," and "De la Feste solemnelle des

morts."--Jesuit Relations for 1636, pp. 129-139. See translation

in Thomas's "Burial Mounds of the Northern Section of the United

States," Fifth Annual Rept. Bur. Ethnol., p. 110. See also

Lafitau, "Moeurs des Sauvages," vol. 2, pp. 447-455.]

It is a well-attested fact that northern as well as southern

Indians were accustomed to erect palisades around their villages

for defense against attack.

Some evidences of mound building by northern Indians may be found

in the works of comparatively modern writers. Lewis C. Beck

[Footnote: Gazetteer of the States of Ill. and Mo., p. 308.]

affirms that "one of the largest mounds in this country has been

thrown upon this stream [the Osage] within the last thirty or

forty years by the Osages, near the great Osage village, in honor

of one of their deceased chiefs." It is probable this is the mound

referred to by Major Sibley, [Footnote: Featherstoubaugh, Excur.

through Slave States, p. 70.] who says an Osage Indian informed

him that a chief of his tribe having died while all the men were

off on a hunt, he was buried in the usual manner, with his

weapons, etc., and a small mound was raised over him. When the

hunters returned this mound was enlarged at intervals, every man

carrying materials, and so the work went on for a long time, and

the mound, when finished, was dressed off to a conical form at the

top. The old Indian further said he had been informed, and

believed, that all the mounds had a similar origin.

Lewis and Clarke mention not only the erection of a mound over a

modern chief, but also numerous earthworks, including mounds,

which were known to be the work of contemporaneous Indians.

[Footnote: Travels, Dublin ed., 1817, pp. 30, 31, 55, 67, 115,

117, 122-125, etc.]

L. V. Bierce [Footnote: Historical Reminiscences of Summit County,

Ohio, p. 128.] states that when Nicksaw, an old Wyandotte Indian

of Summit County, was killed, "the Indians buried him on the

ground where he fell, and according to their custom raised a mound

over him to commemorate the place and circumstances of his death.

His grave is yet to be seen."

Another writer says: "It is related by intelligent Indian traders

that a custom once prevailed among certain tribes, on the burial

of a chief or brave of distinction, to consider his grave as

entitled to the tribute of a portion of earth from each passer-by,

which the traveler sedulously carried with him on his journey.

Hence the first grave formed a nucleus around which, in the

accumulation of the accustomed tributes thus paid, a mound was

soon formed." [Footnote: Smith's History of Wisconsin, vol. 3,

1834, p. 245.]

The same author says [Footnote: Ibid., p. 262.] the tumulus at the

Great Butte des Morts (Great Hill of the Dead) was raised over the

bones of Outagami (Fox Indian) warriors slain in battle with the

French in 1706.

According to a Winnebago tradition, mounds in certain localities

in Wisconsin were built by that tribe, and others by the Sacs and

Foxes.[Footnote: Wis. Hist. Soc., Rept. I, pp. 88, 89.]

There is another Indian tradition, apparently founded on fact,

that the Essex mounds in Clinton County, Mich., are the burying

places of those killed in a battle between the Chippewas and

Pottawatomies, which occurred not many generations ago. [Footnote:

Smithsonian Report, part 1, 1884, p. 848.]

The Problem of the Ohio Mounds · 第 1 / 5 章