CHAPTER III.

STONE GRAVES AND WHAT THEY TEACH.

In order to state clearly the argument based upon these works it

is necessary to present a brief explanation.

There are several forms and varieties of stone graves or cists

found in the mound area, some being of cobble stones, others of

slabs; some round, others polygonal; some dome-shaped, others

square, and others box shaped, or parallelograms. Reference is

made at present only to the last mentioned--the box shaped type,

made of stone slabs. If the evidence shows that this variety is

found only in certain districts, pertains to a certain class of

works, and is usually accompanied by certain types of art, we are

warranted in using it as an ethnic characteristic, or as

indicating the presence of particular tribes. If it can be shown

that graves of this form are found in mounds attributed to the so-

called mound-builders, and that certain tribes of Indians of

historic times were also accustomed to bury in them, we are

warranted in assuming that there was a continuity of custom from

the mound-building age to historic times, or that graves found in

the mounds are probably attributable to the same people (or allied

tribes) found using them at a later date. This conclusion will be

strengthened by finding that certain peculiar types of art are

limited to the regions where these graves exist, and are found

almost exclusively in connection with them.

These graves, as is well known, are formed of rough and unhewn

slabs or flat pieces of stone, thus: First, in a pit some 2 or 3

feet deep and of the desired dimensions, dug for the purpose, a

layer of stone is placed to form the floor; next, similar pieces

are set on edge to form the sides and ends, over which other slabs

are laid flat, forming the covering, the whole when finished

making a rude, box-shaped coffin or sepulcher. Sometimes one or

more of the six faces are wanting; occasionally the bottom

consists of a layer of water-worn bowlders; sometimes the top is

not a single layer of slabs, but other pieces are laid over the

joints, and sometimes they are placed shingle-fashion. These

graves vary in length from 14 inches to 8 feet, and in width from

9 inches to 3 feet.

It is not an unusual thing to find a mound containing a number of

those cists arranged in two, three, or more tiers. As a general

rule, those not in mounds are near the surface of the ground, and

in some instances even projecting above it. It is probable that no

one who has examined them has failed to note their strong

resemblance to the European mode of burial. Even Dr. Joseph Jones,

who attributes them to some "ancient race," was forcibly reminded

of this resemblance, as he remarks:

In looking at the rude stone coffins of Tennessee, I have again

and again been impressed with the idea that in some former age

this ancient race must have come in contact with Europeans and

derived this mode of burial from them. [Footnote: Aboriginal

Remains of Tennessee, pp. 34,35]

The presence of stone graves of the type under consideration in

the vicinity of the site of some of the "over hill towns" of the

Cherokees on the Little Tennessee River, presented a difficulty in

the way of the theory here advanced, as it is well known that the

Cherokees and Shawnees were inveterate enemies from time

immemorial. But by referring to Schoolcraft's History of the

Indians the following statement solves the riddle and confirms the

theory:

A discontented portion of the Shawnee tribe from Virginia broke

off from the nation, which removed to the Scioto country, in Ohio,

about the year 1730, and formed a town known by the name of

Lulbegrud, in what in now Clark County [Kentucky], about 30 miles

east of this place [Lexington]. This tribe left this country about

1730 and went to East Tennessee, to the Cherokee Nation.

[Footnote: Vol. 1, p. 301.]

Some years ago Mr. George E. Sellers discovered near the salt

spring in Gallatin County, Ill., on the Saline River, fragments of

clay vessels of unusually large size, which excited much interest

in the minds of antiquarians, not only because of the size of the

vessels indicated by the fragments, but because they appeared to

have been used by some prehistoric people in the manufacture of

salt and because they bore impressions made by some textile

fabric. In the same immediate locality were also discovered a

number of box-shaped stone graves. That the latter were the work

of the people who made the pottery Mr. Sellers demonstrated by

finding that many of the graves were lined at the bottom with

fragments of these large clay "salt pans." [Footnote: Popular

Science Monthly, vol. II, 1877, pp. 573-584.]

Mention of this pottery had been made long previously by J. M.

Peck in his "Gazetteer of Illinois." [Footnote: 1834, p. 52.]

He remarks that "about the Gallatin and Big Muddy Salines large

fragments of earthenware are very frequently found under the

surface of the earth. They appear to have been portions of large

kettles used, probably, by the natives for obtaining salt."

The settlement of the Shawnees at Shawneetown, on the Ohio River,

in Gallatin County, in comparatively modern times, is attested not

only by history but by the name by which the town is still known.

There is evidence on record that there was an older Shawneetown

located at the very point where this "salt-kettle" pottery and

these stone graves were found. This is mentioned in the American

State Papers [Footnote: Public Lands, Class VIII, vol.2, p. 103,

Gales and Seaton ed.] in the report relating to the famous claim

of the Illinois and Wabash Land Companies. The deed presented was

dated July 20, 1773, and recorded at Kaskaskia, September 2, 1773.

In this mention is made of the "ancient Shawnee town" on Saline

Creek, the exact locality of the stone graves and suit-kettle

pottery. The modern Indian village at Shawneetown on the Ohio

River had not then come into existence, and was but in its prime

in 1806, when visited by Thomas Ashe. [Footnote: Travels in

America, 1808, p. 265.]

As proof that the people of this tribe were in the habit of making

salt the following evidence is presented: Collins, in his "History

of Kentucky", [Footnote: Vol. 2, p. 55.] gives an account of the

capture and adventures of Mrs. Mary Ingals, the first white woman

known to have visited Kentucky. In this narrative occurs the

following statement:

The first white woman in Kentucky was Mrs. Mary Ingals, nee

Draper, who, in 1756 with her two little boys, her sister-in-law,

Mrs. Draper, and others was taken prisoner by the Shawnee Indians,

from her home on the top of the great Allegheny ridge, is now

Montgomery County, W. Va. The captives were taken down the

Kanawha, to the salt region, and, after a few days spent in making

salt, to the Indian village at the mouth of Scioto River.

By the treaty of Fort Wayne, June 7, 1803, between the Delawares,

Shawnees, and other tribes and the United States, it was agreed

that in consideration of the relinquishment of title to "the great

salt spring upon the Saline Creek, which falls into the Ohio below

the mouth of the Wabash, with a quantity of laud surrounding it,

not exceeding 4 miles square," the United States should deliver

"yearly, and every year for the use of said Indians, a quantity of

salt not exceeding 150 bushels." [Footnote: Treaties of United

States with Indian tribes, p. 97.]

Another very significant fact in this connection is that the

fragments of large earthen vessels similar in character to those

found in Gallatin County, Ill., have also been found in connection

with the stone graves of the Cumberland Valley, and, furthermore,

the impressions made by the textile fabrics show the same stitches

as do the former. Another place where pottery of the same kind has

been found is about the salt-lick near Saint Genevieve, Mo., a

section inhabited for a time by Shawnees and Delawares. [Footnote:

C.C. Royce in American Antiquarian, vol. 3, 1881, pp. 188, 189.]

Stone graves have been found in Washington County, Md. [Footnote:

Smithsonian Report for 1882 (1884), p. 797.] History informs us

that there were two Shawnee settlements in this region, one in the

adjoining county of Maryland (Allegany), and another in the

neighborhood of Winchester, Va. [Footnote: C. C. Royce in American

Antiquarian, vol. 3, 1881, p. 186. Virginia State Papers, 1. p.

63.]

Mr. W. M. Taylor [Footnote: Smithsonian Report for 1877, p. 307.

Mentions only known instance of mound with Delaware Village.]

mentions some stone graves of the type under consideration as

found on the Mahoning River, in Pennsylvania. An important item in

this connection is that these graves were in a mound. He describes

the mound as 35 feet in diameter and 5 feet high, having on one

side a projection 35 feet long of the same height as the mound.

Near by a cache was discovered containing twenty one iron

implements, such as axes, hatchets, tomahawks, hoes, and wedges.

He adds the significant statement that near the mound once stood

the Indian (Delaware) village of Kush-kush-kee.

Graves of the same type have been discovered in Lee County, Va.

[Footnote: Eleventh Report of the Peabody Museum, 1878, p. 208.]

Others have been found in a mound on the Tennessee side, near the

southern boundary of Scott County, Va. Allusion has already been

made to the occasional presence of the Shawnees in this region. In

the map of North America by John Senex, Chaonanon villages are

indicated in this particular section.

The presence of these graves in any part of Ohio can easily be

accounted for on the theory advanced, by the well-known fact that

both Shawnees and Delawares were located at various points in the

region, and during the wars in which they were engaged were moving

about from place to place; but the mention of a few coincidences

may not be out of place.

In the American Antiquarian for July, 1881, is the description of

one of these cists found in a mound in the eastern part of

Montgomery County. Mr. Royce, in the article already referred to,

states that there was a Shawnee village 3 miles north of Xenia, in

the adjoining county, on Mad River, which flows into the Miami a

short distance above the location of the mound.

Stone graves have been found in great numbers at various points

along the Ohio from Portsmouth to Ripley, a region known to have

been occupied at various times by the Shawnees.

Similar graves have been discovered in Ashland County. [Footnote:

Smithsonian Report for 1877, pp. 261-267.] These, as will be seen

by reference to the same report (page 504), are precisely in the

locality of the former Delaware villages.

The evidence is deemed sufficient to show that the Shawnees and

Delawares were accustomed to bury in stone graves of the type

under consideration, and to indicate that the graves found south

of the Ohio are to be attributed to the former tribe and those

north to both tribes.

As graves of this kind are common over the west side of southern

Illinois, from the month of the Illinois to the junction of the

Ohio and Mississippi Rivers, attention is called to some evidence

bearing on their origin.

Hunter, who traveled in the West, says that some of the Indians he

met with during his captivity buried their dead in graves of this

kind.

According to a statement made by Dr. Rau to Mr. C. C. Jones, and

repeated to me personally, "it is a fact well remembered by many

persons in this neighborhood [Monroe County, III.] that the

Indians who inhabited this region during the early part of the

present century (probably Kickapoos) buried their dead in stone

coffins." [Footnote: Antiquities So. Indians, p. 220.]

Dr. Shoemaker, who resided on a farm near Columbia, in 1861,

showed Dr. Rau, in one of his fields, the empty stone grave of an

Indian who had been killed by one of his own tribe and interred

there within the memory of some of the farmers of Monroe County.

An old lady in Jackson County informed one of the Bureau

assistants that she had seen an Indian buried in a grave of this

kind.

It is doubtful whether Dr. Rau is correct in ascribing these

graves to the Kickapoos, as their most southern locality appears

to have been in the region of Sangamon County. [Footnote:

Reynolds's Hist. Illinois, p. 20.] It is more probable they were

made by the Kaskaskias, Tamaroas, and Cahokias. Be this as it may,

it is evident that they are due to some of the tribes of this

section known as Illinois Indians, pertaining to the same branch

of the Algonquin family as the Shawnees and Delawares.

That the stone graves of southern Illinois were made by the same

people who built those of the Cumberland Valley, or closely allied

tribes, is indicated not only by the character of the graves but

by other very close and even remarkable resemblances in the

construction and contents as well as in the form and size of the

mounds; the presence of hut-rings in both localities, and the

arrangement of the groups.

Taking all the corroborating facts together there are reasonable

grounds for concluding that graves of the type now under

consideration, although found in widely-separated localities, are

attributable to the Shawnee Indians and their congeners, the

Delawares and Illinois, and that those south of the Ohio are due

entirely to the first named tribe. That they are the works of

Indians must be admitted by all who are willing to be convinced by

evidence.

The fact that in most cases (except when due to the Delawares, who

are not known to have been mound-builders) the graves are

connected with mounds, and in many instances are in mounds,

sometimes in two, three, and even four tiers deep, proves beyond a

doubt that the authors of these graves were mound-builders.

The importance and bearing of this evidence does not stop with

what has been stated, for it is so interlocked with other facts

relating to the works of the "veritable mound-builders" as to

leave no hiatus into which the theory of a lost race or a "Toltec

occupation" can possibly be thrust. It forms an unbroken chain

connecting the mound-builders and historical Indians which no

sophistry or reasoning can break. Not only are these graves found

in mounds of considerable size, but they are also connected with

one of the most noted groups in the United States, namely, the one

on Colonel Tumlin's place, near Cartersville, Ga., known as the

Etowah mounds, of which a full description will be found in the

Fifth Annual Report of the Bureau of Ethnology.

In the smallest of the three large mounds of this group were found

stone graves of precisely the type attributable, when found south

of the Ohio, to the Shawnees. They were not in a situation where

they could be ascribed to intrusive burials, but in the bottom

layer of a comparatively large mound with a thick and undisturbed

layer of hard-packed clay above them. It is also worthy of notice

that the locality is intermediate between the principal seat of

the Shawnees in the Cumberland Valley, and their extreme eastern

outposts in northeastern Georgia, where both tradition and stone

graves indicate their settlement. The tradition regarding this

settlement has been given elsewhere. [Footnote: Am. Antiq, vol. 7,

1885, p. 133]

In these graves were found the remarkable figured copper plates

and certain engraved shells, of which mention has been made by Mr.

W. H. Holmes [Footnote: Science, vol. 3, 1884, pp. 436-438.] and

by myself [Footnote: Ibid., pp. 779-785.] in Science. It is a

singular corroboration of the theory here advanced that the only

other similar copper plates were found at Lebanon, Tenn., by Prof.

F. W. Putnam; in a stone grave in a mound at Mill Creek, southern

Illinois, by Mr. Earle; in a stone grave in Jackson County, Ill.,

by Mr. Thing; in a mound of Madison County, Ill., by Mr. H. R.

Howland; and in a small mound at Peoria, Ill., by Maj. J. W.

Powell. All, except the specimens found by Professor Putnam and

Mr. Howland, were secured by the Bureau of Ethnology, and are now

in the National Museum.

There can be but little doubt that the specimens obtained from

simple stone graves by Professor Putnam and Mr. Thing are to be

attributed to Indian burials, but surely not to Indian

manufacture.

We have, therefore, two unbroken chains connecting the Indians of

historic times with the "veritable mound builders," and the facts

which form the links of these chains throw some additional light

on the history of that mysterious people, the Shawnees.

It may be stated here that in the report relating to the claim of

the Wabash Land Company [Footnote: American State Papers, Land

Affairs, Appendix, p. 20.] is a statement giving a list of

articles furnished the Indians, among which we notice nine ear

wheels. These we suppose to be the same as the spool shaped ear

ornaments found in stone graves and elsewhere.

The engraved shells also form a link which not only connects the

mound-builders with historic times but corroborates the view

advanced in regard to the Shawnees, and indicates also that the

Cherokees were mound-builders. But before introducing this we will

give the reasons for believing that the mounds of eastern

Tennessee and western North Carolina are due to the last-named

tribe.

The Problem of the Ohio Mounds · 第 3 / 5 章