Transcriber's Note:
This paper is a part of the Fifth Annual Report of the Bureau of
Ethnology to the Secretary of the Smithsonian Institution, 1883-1884,
Government Printing Office, Washington, 1887, pages 3-120. The index
has been extracted from the volume index.
Minor printing errors have been corrected in this version and are listed
below.
p72: Inserted the first word of the sentence beginning "A section of
this bed...."
p73: "thichness" changed to "thickness"
p78: "victoms" changed to "victims"
p88: "throughot" changed to "throughout"
p114: "quelqu'vn" changed to "quelqu'un"
Footnote [29]: "Smithonian" changed to "Smithsonian"
Footnote [45]: "Vol," changed to "Vol."
The oe ligature has been represented in this version by [oe], e.g.
M[oe]urs. In the supplemental note (page 112), a character appearing to
be an o with a u above it is used. This has been transcribed as [uo].
SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION--BUREAU OF ETHNOLOGY.
BURIAL MOUNDS
OF THE
NORTHERN SECTIONS OF THE UNITED STATES.
BY
PROF. CYRUS THOMAS.
CONTENTS.
Page.
Introductory 9
Burial mounds of the Wisconsin district 14
Burial mounds of the Illinois or Upper Mississippi district 24
The Ohio district 45
The Appalachian district 61
The Cherokees probably mound-builders 87
Concluding remarks 108
Supplemental note 110
ILLUSTRATIONS.
Page.
PLATE I. Group of earthworks, Allamakee County, Iowa. 26
II. Enlarged figure and section of earthwork A, Pl. I. 30
III. Group of mounds and vertical section of bluff,
East Dubuque, Illinois. 36
IV. A mound. (From DeBry). 40
V. Plat of ancient works, Kanawha County,
West Virginia. 54
VI. Enlarged plan of part of the works shown in Plate V. 58
FIG. 1. Section of mound near Racine, Wisconsin.
(After Lapham). 14
2. Section of burial mound. Vernon County, Wisconsin. 15
3. Earthen pot from Wisconsin burial mound. 16
4. Section of burial mound. Crawford County, Wisconsin. 17
5. Section of burial mound. Crawford County, Wisconsin. 18
6. Section of burial mound. Vernon County, Wisconsin. 20
7. Section of burial mound. Davenport, Iowa. 24
8. Section of mound showing stone vault. Iowa. 31
9. Plat of Indian burying ground. Wapello County, Iowa. 33
10. Section of mound 4. East Dubuque, Illinois. 36
11. Section of mound 16 (Plate III), showing vault. 37
12. Plan of vault, mound 16 (Plate III). 37
13. Pipe from Illinois mound. (From Smithsonian Report,
1884). 38
14. Pipe from Illinois mound. (From Smithsonian Report,
1884). 38
15. Pipe from Illinois mound. (From Smithsonian Report,
1884). 38
16. Group of mounds. Brown County, Illinois. 40
17. Form of the larger mounds of the preceding group. 41
18. Groups of mounds. Clarke County, Missouri. 43
19. Ohio burial mound. (After Squier and Davis). 46
20. Wooden vault of Ohio mound. (After Squier and Davis). 46
21. Copper gorget from mound. Kanawha County,
West Virginia. 52
22. Pipe from mound. Kanawha County, West Virginia. 53
23. Pipe from Ohio mound. 53
24. Mound with so-called "altar." Kanawha County,
West Virginia. 57
25. T. F. Nelson mound. Caldwell County. North Carolina. 62
26. T. F. Nelson triangle. Caldwell County,
North Carolina. 63
27. Engraved shell gorget. Caldwell County, North Carolina. 64
28. Cylindrical copper bead. Caldwell County,
North Carolina. 65
29. Bracelet of copper and shell beads. Caldwell County,
North Carolina. 65
30. Iron implement. Caldwell County, North Carolina. 65
31. Iron implement. Caldwell County, North Carolina. 66
32. W. D. Jones mound. Caldwell County, North Carolina. 67
33. Plan of the R. T. Lenoir burial pit, Caldwell County,
North Carolina. 69
34. Fire-bed. Wilkes County, North Carolina. 72
35. Section of mound. Henderson County, North Carolina. 74
36. Section of mound. Henderson County, North Carolina. 75
37. Plan of burials in mound. Sullivan County, Tennessee. 76
38. Pipe from mound. Sullivan County, Tennessee. 76
39. Large mound of Etowah group. Bartow County, Georgia. 96
40. Vertical section of small mound, same group. 97
41. Plan of burials in same mound. 98
42. Copper plate from Etowah mound. Georgia. 100
43. Copper plate from Etowah mound. Georgia. 101
44. Copper badge from Etowah mound. Georgia. 102
45. Copper badge from Etowah mound. Georgia. 103
46. Engraved shell from Etowah mound. Georgia. 103
47. Engraved shell from Etowah mound. Georgia. 104
48. Copper plate from Illinois mound. 105
49. Copper plate from Indian grave. Illinois. 106
BURIAL MOUNDS OF THE NORTHERN SECTIONS OF THE UNITED STATES.
BY CYRUS THOMAS, PH.D.
INTRODUCTORY.
All the works of the mound-builders of our country are exceedingly
interesting to the antiquarian and are valuable as illustrating the
habits, customs, and condition of the people by whom they were formed,
but the sepulchral tumuli surpass all others in importance in this
respect. Although usually simple in form and conveying thereby no
indications of the characteristics of the people by whom they were
erected, yet when explored they reveal to us, by their internal
structure and contents, more in regard to the habits, beliefs, and art
of their authors than can be learned from all their other works
combined. From them we are enabled to learn some traits of ethnical
character. The gifts to, or property of, their dead deposited in these
sepulchers illustrate their arts and customs and cast some rays of light
into their homes and daily life, and the regard for their dead indicated
by the remaining evidences of their modes of burial and sepulchral rites
affords some glimpses of their religious beliefs and superstitions. The
larger and more imposing works, as the pyramidal mounds, the enclosures,
canals, etc., furnish indications of their character, condition,
strength, and culture-status as a people or tribe, but the burial mounds
and their contents, besides the evidences they furnish in regard to the
religious belief and art of the builders, tell us something of
individual traits, something of their social life, their tastes, their
personal regard for each other, and even something of the diseases to
which they were subject. What is still more important, the modes of
burial and vestiges of art found with the dead furnish us undoubted
evidences of tribal distinctions among the authors of these works, and,
together with the differences in external form, enable us to determine
in a general way the respective areas occupied by the different tribes
or peoples during the mound-building age.
Judging by all the data so far obtained relating to the form, internal
structure, and contents of these works, much of which has not yet been
published, we are perhaps warranted in concluding that the following
districts or areas were occupied by different peoples or tribes. As a
matter of course we can only designate these areas in general terms.
(1) The _Wisconsin district_, or area of the emblematic or effigy
mounds. This embraces the southern half of Wisconsin, a small portion of
the northern part of Illinois, and the extreme northeast corner of
Iowa. The effigy or animal mounds form the distinguishing feature of the
works of this district, but aside from these there are other features
sufficient to separate the works of this section from those further
south.
(2) The _Illinois_ or _Upper Mississippi district_, embracing eastern
Iowa, northeastern Missouri, and northern and central Illinois, as far
south as the mouth of the Illinois River.
In this region the works are mostly simple conical tumuli of small or
moderate size, found on the uplands, ridges, and bluffs as well as on
the bottoms, and were evidently intended chiefly as depositories of the
dead. They are further characterized by internal rude stone and wooden
vaults or layers; by the scarcity of pottery vessels, the frequent
occurrence of pipes, the presence of copper axes, and often a hard,
mortar-like layer over the primary or original burial. The skeletons
found are usually extended, though frequently in a sitting or squatting
posture.
Walls and enclosures are of rare occurrence in this region.
(3) The _Ohio district_, including the State of Ohio, the western part
of West Virginia, and the eastern portion of Indiana. Although the works
of this region present some features which are common to those of the
Gulf section, there are several peculiar characteristics which warrant
us in designating it as a distinct district. Among other of these
peculiar features we notice the great circles and squares of the
enclosures, the long parallel lines of earthen walls, the so-called
"altar mounds," or mounds containing structures chiefly of clay to which
the name "altar" has been applied; the numerous carved stone pipes; the
character of the pottery and the methods of burial.
(4) The _New York district_, confined chiefly to the northern and
western parts of the State of New York, but including also the lake
region of the central portion.
As the antiquities of this district have been shown by Squier to be
chiefly due to the Indian tribes occupying that section at the time of
its discovery by the Europeans, it is unnecessary to note the
distinguishing characteristics. The works are chiefly enclosing walls,
remains of palisades, and burial mounds.
(5) The _Appalachian district_, including western North Carolina,
eastern Tennessee, southwestern Virginia, and part of southeastern
Kentucky.
The characteristics which appear to warrant us in concluding that the
works of this region pertain to a different people from those in the
other districts, at the same time seem to show some relation to those of
the Ohio district. Such are the numerous stone pipes, the altar-like
structures found in some of the mounds, and the presence of mica plates
with the skeletons. But the peculiar features are the mode of burial,
the absence of pottery, and the numerous polished celts and engraved
shells found in the mounds.
Although it is probable that there are at least three districts in the
southern portion of the United States, they appear to pass from one into
the other by such slight changes in the character of the works as to
render it exceedingly difficult to fix the boundaries between them. I
therefore mention the following, provisionally, as being those indicated
by the data so far obtained.
(6) The _Middle Mississippi area_ or _Tennessee district_, including
southeast Missouri, northern Arkansas, middle and western Tennessee,
southern and western Kentucky, and southern Illinois. The works of the
Wabash valley possibly belong also to this district, but the data
obtained in regard to them are not sufficient to decide this point
satisfactorily. This district, like the others of the south, is
distinguished from the northern section by its larger mounds, many of
which are pyramidal and truncated and often terraced, and which were,
beyond question, used as domiciliary mounds. Here we also meet with
repeated examples of enclosures though essentially different from those
of Ohio; also ditches and canals. From the Lower Mississippi and Gulf
districts, with which, as we have said, it is closely allied, it is
distinguished chiefly by the presence of the box-shaped stone cists or
coffins, by the small circular house-sites or hut-rings, and by the
character of the pottery. This is pre-eminently the pottery region, the
typical forms being the long-necked, gourd-shaped vase and the
image-vessels. In this district the carved stone pipes are much less
common than in the Illinois, Ohio, and Appalachian districts.
(7) The _Lower Mississippi district_, including the southern half of
Arkansas, Louisiana, and Mississippi. There are no marked
characteristics by which to distinguish it from the Middle district; in
fact as we move southward along the Mississippi from the mouth of the
Illinois river, the works and their contents indicate a succession of
tribes differing but slightly in habits, customs, and modes of life, the
river generally forming one natural boundary between them, but the other
boundaries being arbitrary. For example, the Cahokia region appears to
have been the home of a tribe from which at one time a colony pushed
northward and settled for a while in Brown and Pike Counties, Illinois.
The extreme southeastern counties of Missouri were probably the seat of
another populous tribe which extended its borders into the western part
of southern Illinois and slightly into northeast Arkansas, and closely
resembled in customs and art the ancient people who occupied that part
of the Cumberland valley in middle Tennessee. This subsection is
principally distinguished by the presence of the small circular
house-sites, which are slightly basin-shaped, with a low ring of earth
around them. As we move farther southward into Arkansas the house-sites
change into low circular mounds, usually from 1 to 3 feet in height, and
in nearly every instance containing a layer of clay (often burned) and
ashes.
These small mounds, which are clearly shown to have been house-sites,
were also burial places. It appears to have been a very common custom in
this section to bury the dead in the floor, burn the dwelling over them,
and cover the whole with dirt, the last operation often taking place
while the embers were yet smouldering. Burial in graves was also
practiced to a considerable extent. As we approach the Arkansas River,
moving southward and from thence into Louisiana, the pottery shows a
decided improvement in character and ornamentation.
(8) The _Gulf district_, including the Gulf States east of the
Mississippi. The works of this section appear to be closely allied to
those of the Lower Mississippi district, as here we also find the large
flat-topped pyramidal mounds, enclosing walls, and surrounding ditches
and canals.
The chief differences are to be found in the forms and ornamentation of
the pottery and modes of burial.
As we approach the Mississippi River the distinguishing features
gradually disappear, although there appears to be a distinct subdistrict
in the northern part of Mississippi, and as we enter the Florida
peninsula a change is observed which appears to indicate a different
people, but the data so far obtained are not sufficient to enable us to
outline the subdistricts.
This districting is to be regarded as a working hypothesis rather than
as a settled conclusion which will stand the test of future
investigations. It is more than likely that other subdivisions will be
found necessary, and that the boundaries of some of the districts given
will have to be more or less modified; still, I believe the arrangement
will be found substantially correct.
As a very general and almost universal rule, mounds of the class under
consideration are more or less conical in form, and are common to all
sections where earthworks are known to exist, in fact they form almost
the only ancient remains of some localities. Often they are isolated,
with no other monuments near them, but more frequently they occur in
groups or are associated with other works. Squier and Davis say "they
are generally of considerable size, varying from 6 to 80 feet in height,
but having an average of from 15 to 25 feet."[1]
This is probably true in regard to the mounds explored by these
archaeologists in Ohio, but is erroneous if applied generally; as very
many, evidently used and intended as burying places only, are but two or
three feet high, and so far as the more recent examinations made in
other sections--especially the explorations carried on under the Bureau
of Ethnology--have shown, tumuli of this character are usually from 3 to
10 feet high, though some, it is true, are of much larger dimensions;
but these are the exceptions and not the rule.[2]
As the authors just alluded to are so frequently referred to by writers,
and their statements in reference to the works explored by them are
taken as of general application, I will venture to correct another
statement made by them in regard to mounds of this character. They
assert that "these mounds invariably cover a single skeleton (in very
rare instances more than one, as in the case of the Grave Creek mound),
which, at the time of its interment, was enveloped in bark or coarse
matting or enclosed in a rude sarcophagus of timber, the traces, in some
instances the very casts, of which remain. Occasionally the chamber of
the dead is built of stone rudely laid up, without cement of any
kind."[3]
I have investigated but few of the ancient works of Ohio personally, or
through the assistants of the Bureau, hence I can only speak in regard
to them from what has been published and from communications received,
but judging from these, Messrs. Squier and Davis, while no doubt
correctly describing the mounds explored by them, have been too hasty in
drawing general conclusions.
That burial mounds in the northern sections very frequently cover but a
single skeleton is true, but that this, even in this section, is
universally true or that it is the general rule is a mistake, as will
appear from what is shown hereafter. Nor will it apply as a rule to
those of the southern sections.
To illustrate the character and construction of these mounds, and modes
of burial in them, I will introduce here brief descriptions of the
leading types found in the different northern districts heretofore
mentioned, confining myself chiefly to the explorations made by the
Bureau assistants.
BURIAL MOUNDS OF THE WISCONSIN DISTRICT.
Following the order of the geographical districts heretofore given, we
commence with the Wisconsin section, or region of the effigy mounds.
As a general rule the burial mounds in this area are comparatively
small, seldom exceeding 10 feet in height and generally ranging from 3
to 6 feet. In all cases these belong to that class of works usually
denominated "simple conical tumuli."
Of the methods of construction and modes of burial there appear to be
some two or three types, though not so different as necessarily to
indicate different tribes or peoples. One of these is well represented
in the following extract from Dr. I. A. Lapham's work describing some
mounds opened by Dr. Hoy, near Racine:
We excavated fourteen of the mounds, some with the greatest
possible care. They are all sepulchral, of a uniform
construction as represented in Fig. 1 [our Fig. 1.] Most of
them contained more than one skeleton; in one instance we found
no less than seven. We could detect no appearance of
stratification, each mound having been built at one time and
not by successive additions. During the investigations we
obtained sufficient evidence to warrant me in the following
conclusions. The bodies were regularly buried in a sitting or
partly kneeling posture facing the east, with the legs placed
under them. They were covered with a bark or log roofing over
which the mound was built.[4]
[Illustration: FIG. 1.--Section of mound near Racine, Wisconsin.]
In these a basin-shaped excavation some 2 or 3 feet deep was first made
in the soil in which the bodies were deposited, as shown in Fig. 1.
Mr. Middleton, one of the Bureau assistants, in 1883, opened quite a
number of small burial mounds in Crawford and Vernon counties, belonging
to the same type as those just described; some with the excavation in
the original soil in which the skeletons were deposited, though in
others there were no such excavations, the skeletons being deposited on
the original surface or at various depths in the mounds. I give here
descriptions of a few of them from his notes:
[Illustration: FIG. 2.--Section of burial mound, Vernon County,
Wisconsin.]
The one numbered 16, of the Courtois group, is about 20 feet in
diameter, and at present scarcely more than 1 foot high, the ground
having been in cultivation for several years and the mound considerably
lowered by the plow. A vertical section is given in Fig. 2, _a a_,
indicating the natural surface of the ground, _b_ the part of the mound
removed, and _c_ the original circular excavation in the natural soil to
the depth of 2 feet.
Four skeletons were found in this excavation, two side by side near the
center, with heads south, faces up, one near the north margin with head
west, and the other on the south side with head east, all stretched at
full length.
In another mound of the same group with a similar excavation nothing
save a single skull was found. In another of exactly the same kind some
of the skeletons were folded, while others were extended at full length.
In all these cases, and in a majority of the small burial mounds opened
in this western part of the State, there was no stratification; still
there were found some exceptions to this rule.
Vestiges of art were comparatively rare in them, yet here and there were
found an arrow-point, a chipped flint scraper or celt--in some instances
remarkably fine specimens--a few large copper gorgets, evidently
hammered from native copper, copper beads, etc. Very few vessels of
pottery were obtained from them, but one was discovered, shown in Fig.
3, which I believe is of the finest quality of this ware so far obtained
from the mounds of the United States. There were intrusive burials in a
few of these mounds, but these have been wholly omitted from
consideration in the descriptions given.
In a few instances the mounds seem to have been built solely for the
purpose of covering a confused mass of human bones gathered together
after the flesh had disappeared or had been removed. Similar mounds are
described by Mr. Thomas Armstrong as found near Ripon, Fond du Lac
County. Speaking of these, Mr. Armstrong says:
As to how these bones came to be placed in these mounds, we can
of course only conjecture; but from their want of arrangement,
from the lack of ornaments and implements, and from their
having been placed on the original surface, we are inclined to
believe that the dry bones were gathered together--those in the
large mounds first and those in the smaller ones
afterwards--and placed in loose piles on the ground and the
earth heaped over them until the mounds were formed.[5]
There can be no doubt that the bones in this case were gathered up from
other temporary burial places or depositories, as was the custom of
several tribes of Indians.
[Illustration: FIG. 3.--Earthen pot from Wisconsin mound.]
A number of burial mounds opened by Mr. W. G. Anderson, near Madison,
were found to be of the same general type as those mentioned by Mr.
Middleton. These he describes as being very low and poorly made. Eight
were opened, all having been built in the same way, with only one layer
of black earth, so hard as to make the work of excavation exceedingly
laborious. These were circular, and about 4 feet high. Skeletons were
found as near as 12 or 13 inches to the surface, but badly decayed.
There were no sarcophagi or coffins, and in all cases the heads pointed
towards the west.[6]
In some instances the mound contained a circular stone wall, within
which a pit had been dug to the depth of 2 or 3 feet in the original
soil, as, for example, the one near Waukesha, described by Dr.
Lapham.[7]
A mound in Crawford County, opened by Colonel Norris, one of the Bureau
assistants, in 1882, shows a similar vault or pit, but differs from the
preceding in being distinctly stratified and wanting the stone wall. The
construction of this tumulus and the mode of burial in it were as
follows:
[Illustration: FIG. 4.--Section of burial mound, Crawford County,
Wisconsin.]
Proceeding from the top downwards, there was first a layer of soil and
sand about 1 foot thick; next, nearly 2 feet in depth of calcined human
bones, without order, mingled with which were charcoal, ashes, and a
reddish-brown mortar-like substance, burned as hard as pavement brick.
This layer is numbered 4 in the annexed cut (Fig. 4), which represents a
vertical section of the mound. Immediately below this was a layer about
1 foot thick (No. 3) of clay or mortar mixed with sand, burned to a
brick-red color. Below this, in the space marked 2 in the cut, were
found the bones of fifteen or twenty individuals, in a confused heap,
without order or arrangement. Mingled with these were fire-brands,
charcoal, and ashes. The bones were charred, some of them to charcoal,
and some were glazed with melted sand. The mass appears to have been
first covered with soft clay-mortar, which ran into and filled the
spaces, and the burning to have been done afterwards by means of brush
or wood heaped on the top, as among the bones were lumps of hard burned
clay.
The bottom of this layer corresponded with the original surface of the
ground, but the excavation being continued, a circular vault or pit, 6
feet in diameter, was found extending downwards, with perpendicular
sides, to the depth of nearly 3 feet. The bottom of this pit was covered
to the depth of an inch with fine chocolate-colored dust. Although the
filling of this pit was chiefly sand, there was a cavity at the bottom a
foot high in the center, over which the sand filling was arched as shown
in the figure.
It is evident that the skeletons in this mound were buried after the
flesh had been removed, as we can on no other supposition explain the
fact that the clay or mortar had filled the interstices between the
bones, and that in some cases it had even penetrated into the skulls.
Another mound, opened by Colonel Norris in the same neighborhood,
presented some peculiarities worthy of notice, although not sufficient
to mark it as belonging to a distinct type.
[Illustration: FIG. 5.--Section of burial mound, Crawford County,
Wisconsin.]
According to his report, the southern portion had previously been
explored by Judge Branson, who found at the base some six or eight
skeletons lying stretched out horizontally, and covered by a dry,
light-colored mortar which must have been spread over them while in a
soft condition, as it had run between the bones and encased them, and in
some cases, as in the mound just described, filled the skulls. As only
the southern portion had been opened he removed the remainder. The dried
mortar-like substance was very hard and difficult to dig through, but
the pick soon struck some rough, flat limestone rocks which proved to be
parts of a rude wall about 3 feet high and 8 feet long, built on the
natural surface of the ground. In the opposite side of the mound, 12
feet distant from and parallel with it, was another similar wall.
Between them and on the natural surface of the ground, side by side,
were a number of skeletons lying flat and lengthwise and parallel with
the walls. A vertical section of this mound is shown in Fig. 5. The
little circles at the bottom between the walls indicate the heads of the
skeletons; No. 4, the layer of mortar over the bones; 3, a layer of hard
clay mixed with ashes; 2, a layer of clay; and 1, the top covering of
sand and soil about 18 inches thick. Before being disturbed this mound
was 35 feet in diameter and 6 feet high.
As it is evident that the burials in this case were made at one time,
and as the mortar-like substance had run into the interstices, it is
more than probable that the skeletons were deposited after the flesh had
been removed.
The following description of a mound with a single original and several
intrusive burials is also taken from Colonel Norris' notes of work in
Crawford County:
One large mound of this group, 70 feet in diameter and 10 feet high,
still unexplored, was opened. It had been considerably defaced,
especially on the west side. According to tradition it was a noted
burial place with the Indians, which was certainly confirmed by the
result. The surface or top layer was composed of sand and alluvial earth
to the depth of some 3 or 4 feet. Scattered through this in almost every
part of the mound were human skeletons in various stages of decay and in
different positions, but mostly stretched horizontally on the back.
Scattered among the remains were numerous fragments of blankets,
clothing and human hair, 1 copper kettle of modern pattern, 3 copper
bracelets (hammered from native copper), 1 silver locket, 10 silver
bracelets (one having the name "Montreal," and another the letters "A B"
stamped on it), 2 silver earrings, 6 silver brooches, 1 copper
finger-ring, 1 double silver cross, 1 knife-handle, and 1 battered
bullet. In fact the top layer to the depth of 3 or 4 feet seemed to be
packed as full of skeletons and relics as possible.
Carrying the trench down to the original surface of the ground, he found
at the bottom, near the center, a single skeleton of an adult in the
last stages of decay. With it were the following articles: 2 stone
scrapers, a small stone drill, fragments of river shells, and pieces of
a mammoth tusk. The earth below the upper layer was mixed with clay and
ashes, evidently different from the surrounding soil.
Several mounds opened by him in Grant County contained charred human
bones, and one or two covered confused masses of bones, being similar in
this respect to some of those heretofore mentioned.
A mound which he opened in Sheboygan County, containing a single
skeleton, is described as about 50 feet in diameter and 5 feet high.
After passing through 18 inches of surface soil, the central mass,
composed of earth mingled with charcoal, ashes, and loose stones, was
reached. Near the center of this mass, and at the bottom of the mound, a
large human skeleton was discovered, apparently holding between the
hands and knees a large clay vase. Immediately over this skeleton was an
irregular layer of flat bowlders.
Another mound of this group, about the same size as the preceding, was
found literally filled with skeletons to the depth of 2-1/2 feet,
evidently intrusive burials, as they were accompanied with iron
implements, silver ornaments, etc. Beneath these was a layer of rounded
drift bowlders aggregating several wagon loads. Below these and in a
shallow excavation in the natural surface of the ground were some forty
or more skeletons in a sitting or squatting posture, disposed in circles
around and facing the central space, which was occupied by an unusually
large shell (_Busycon perversum_).
It is worthy of notice in this connection that there are no effigy
mounds, so far as known, in the immediate section where the two works
just mentioned are situated, but there is near by, one small oval
enclosure about 50 feet in diameter.
In studying the burial mounds of the district now under consideration,
of which the foregoing may be considered as types, there appears to be
no marked distinction between the intrusive burials of modern Indians
and the original burials for which the mounds were constructed. In both
we observe from one to many skeletons in a place; in both we find them
stretched out horizontally and also folded; in both we sometimes notice
evidences of fire and partially-consumed bones; in both we find
instances where the mortar-like covering has been used, and in both we
meet occasionally with those confused masses of bones which seem to have
been gathered from graves or other temporary burial places into these
mounds as common depositories. Moreover the transition from one to the
other is so gradual as to leave us nothing save the position in the
mound and the presence of vestiges of civilized art to distinguish the
former from the latter.
[Illustration: FIG. 6.--Section of burial mound, Vernon County,
Wisconsin.]
A large portion of these mounds, as has already been stated, are
unstratified, and each was probably thrown up and completed at one time;
yet skeletons are found at various depths in some of these, as, for
example, one opened by Mr. Middleton, in Vernon County, a vertical
section of which is shown in Fig. 6, _a a_ indicating the original
surface of the ground and the stars the positions of the skeletons, some
of which were stretched out at full length while others were folded. The
heads were towards different points of the compass and the bones of all
were so much decayed that none could be preserved. Several instances of
this kind were observed, in some cases those skeletons near the surface
or top of the mound indicating burial after contact with the whites.
It is apparent, therefore, that although some of the burial mounds of
this district must be attributed to the so-called mound-builders, others
were certainly built by the Indians found inhabiting it at the advent of
the whites. There can scarcely be a doubt that some of the small
unstratified tumuli described are the work of the Indians. If this is
conceded there would seem to be no halting place short of attributing
all of this class in this district to the same race.
Dr. Hoy's statement that in some cases there was evidence that the
bodies had been "covered with a bark or log roofing," is in exact accord
with a well-known burial custom of some of the tribes of the Northwest.
According to Mr. M. B. Kent, the Sacs and Foxes, who formerly resided in
the region now under consideration, buried the body "in a grave made
about 2-1/2 feet deep, which was laid always with the head towards the
east, the burial taking place as soon after death as possible. The grave
was prepared by putting bark in the bottom of it before the corpse was
deposited, a plank covering made and secured some distance above the
body."
Another method followed by the same people, according to Mr. J. W.
Spencer[8], was to make a shallow hole in the ground, setting the body
in it up to the waist, so that most of the body was above the ground. A
trench was then dug about the grave, in which pickets were planted. But
the usual method was to place split pieces of wood about three feet long
over the body, meeting at the top in the form of a roof, on which dirt
was thrown to keep them in place.
According to Potherie[9], the Iroquois were accustomed to cover the
bodies, after being deposited in the "fosse," with bark of trees, on
which they cast earth and stones.
According to Schoolcraft[10], the Mohawks of New York--
make a large round hole in which the body can be placed upright
or upon its haunches: which after the body is placed in it is
covered with timber to support the earth which they lay over,
and thereby keep the body from being pressed. They then raise
the earth in a round hill over it.[11]
The burial customs of northern tribes, known to have occupied portions
of the effigy mound district, agree so exactly with what we see in the
sepulchral tumuli of this district as to justify the conclusion reached
by Dr. Lapham, after a long and careful personal study of them, that
they are to be attributed to Indians. Some he was rather inclined to
ascribe to tribes which had migrated, had been driven off by other
tribes, or been incorporated into them previous to the advent of the
white race. But he maintained that the subsequent tribes or those found
occupying the country "continued the practice of mound-building so far
as to erect a circular or conical tumulus over their dead." And he adds
significantly, "This practice appears to be a remnant of ancient customs
that connects the mound-builders with the present tribes."[12]
The evidence in regard to these unstratified mounds appears to lead
directly to the conclusion that they are all the work of the Indians
found occupying the country at the time it was first visited by whites
or of their ancestors. If it is conceded that the small unstratified
tumuli are in part the work of these aborigines, there would seem to be
no escape from the conclusion that all the burial mounds of this
district are to be ascribed to them; for, although there are some two or
three types of burial and burial mounds, the gradation from one to the
other is so complete as to leave no marked line of distinction, and Dr.
Lapham is fully justified in asserting that the evidence connects the
mound-builders with the modern Indians. The stratified mounds in which
the hard clay or mortar covering over the remains is found, and which we
shall again meet with in the adjoining district, may be the work of
different tribes from those which constructed the small unstratified
tumuli, but the distinctions between the two classes are not such as to
justify the belief that they are to be attributed to a different race or
to a people occupying a higher or widely different culture-status.
Having reached this conclusion it is impossible for us to halt here; we
are compelled to take one step farther in the same direction and ascribe
the singular structures known as "effigy mounds" to the same people. The
two classes of work are too intimately connected to admit of the
supposition that the effigy mounds were built by one race or people, and
the conical tumuli by another. We might as well assume that the
enclosures of Ohio were the work of one people, but the mounds
accompanying them of another.
That works of different tribes or nations may frequently be found
intermingled on areas over which successive waves of population have
passed is admitted, but that one part of what is clearly a system is to
be attributed to one people and the other part to another people is a
hypothesis unworthy of serious consideration. The only possible
explanations of the origin, object, or meaning of these singular
structures are based, whether confessedly so or not, on the theory that
they are of Indian origin. Remove the Indian element from the problem
and we are left without even the shadow of an hypothesis.
The fact that the effigy mounds were not used as places of sepulture,
and that no cemeteries save the burial mounds are found in connection
with them, is almost conclusive proof that the two, as a rule, must be
attributed to the same people, that they belong to one system. If this
conclusion is considered legitimate, it will lend much aid to the study
of these works. It is true it is not new, but it has been generally
ignored, and hence could not aid in working out results.
The following extract from Dr. Lapham's "Antiquities of Wisconsin" will
not be considered inappropriate at this point:[13]
The ancient works in Wisconsin are mostly at the very places
selected by the present Indians for their abodes, thus
indicating that the habits, wants, modes of subsistence, &c.,
of their builders were essentially the same.
If the present tribes have no traditions running back as far as
the time of Allouez and Marquette, or even to the more recent
time of Jonathan Carver, it is not strange that none should
exist in regard to the mounds, which must be of much earlier
date.
It is by considerations of this nature that we are led to the
conclusion that the mound-builders of Wisconsin were none
others than the ancestors of the present tribes of Indians.
There is some evidence of a greater prevalence than at present
of prairie or cultivated land in this State at no very remote
age. The largest trees are probably not more than five hundred
years old, and large tracts of land are now covered with
forests of young trees where there are no traces of an
antecedent growth. Every year the high winds prostrate great
numbers of trees and frequent storms pass through the forest,
throwing down nearly everything before them. Trees are left
with a portion of the roots still in the ground, so as to keep
them alive for several years after their prostration. These
"wind-falls" are of frequent occurrence in the depths of the
forests and occasion much difficulty in making the public
surveys. The straight lines of the sections frequently
encounter them.
The amount of earth adhering to the roots of a tree when
prostrated by the wind is, under favorable circumstances, very
considerable, and upon their decay forms an oblong mound of
greater or less magnitude, and a slight depression is left
where the tree stood. These little hillocks are often by the
inexperienced mistaken for Indian graves. From the paucity of
these little "tree-mounds" we infer that no very great
antiquity can be assigned to the dense forests of Wisconsin;
for, during a long period of time, with no material change of
climate, we would expect to find great numbers of these little
monuments of ancient storms scattered everywhere over the
ground.
Whether the greater extent of treeless country in former times
was owing to natural or artificial causes it is now difficult
to determine, but the great extent of ancient works within the
depths of the present forests would seem to indicate that the
country was at least kept free from trees by the agency of man.
Many of these tree-mounds were observed on and about the
ancient works.
Another curious circumstance that may be noticed by inspection
of the figures of mounds accompanying this work is the gradual
transition, as it were, or change of one form into another.
Examples can be found of all forms, from a true circle through
the oval and elongated oval to the oblong mounds and long
ridges. Again, there is a succession of mounds, from the simple
ridge of considerable size at one end and gradually diminishing
to a point at the other, through the intermediate forms, having
one, two, three, or four projections to the "turtle-form." In
this way, also, we may trace a gradual development (so to
speak) of nearly all the more complicated forms.
It is not pretended to assert that this was the order in which
the mounds were erected; or that the aborigines gradually
acquired the art by successive essays or lessons. Indeed, we
are led to believe that the more complicated forms are the most
ancient.
The relative ages of the different works in Wisconsin, so far
as they can be ascertained from the facts now before us, are
probably about as follows:
First and oldest. The animal forms, and the great works at
Aztalan.
Second. The conical mounds built for sepulchral purposes, which
come down to a very recent period.
Third. The indications of garden-beds planted in regular
geometrical figures or straight lines.
Fourth. The plantations of the present tribes, who plant
without system or regularity.
Thus the taste for regular forms and arrangements, and the
habits of construction with earthy materials seems to have been
gradually lost, until all traces of them disappear in our
modern degenerate red men.
The animal-shaped mounds and accompanying oblongs and ridges,
constituting the first of the above series, are composed of
whitish clay or of the subsoil of the country.
The mounds of the second series, or burial mounds, are usually
composed of black mould or loam, promiscuously intermixed with
the lighter-colored subsoil.
BURIAL MOUNDS OF THE ILLINOIS OR UPPER MISSISSIPPI DISTRICT.
This district, as heretofore stated, includes eastern Iowa, northeastern
Missouri, and northern and central Illinois as far south as the mouth of
the Illinois River.
Although we are justified in concluding that this area was occupied
during the mound-building age by tribes different from those residing
in the Wisconsin district, yet the distinguishing characteristics are
more apparent in the forms of the works than in the modes of burial and
internal construction of the burial mounds. We shall see by the
illustrations hereafter given that at least one of the types found in
one district is common in the other. But this is to be expected and is
readily explained by the supposition that the tribes which have occupied
these regions moved back and forth, thus one after another coming upon
the same area. The absence of evidence of such movements would indicate
that the mound-building period was of comparatively short duration, a
theory which I believe has not been adopted by any authority, but to
which I shall have occasion again to refer. One class of the burial
mounds of this district is well represented in a group, explored by the
members of the Davenport Academy of Natural Sciences, on the Cook farm,
near Davenport, Iowa. The mounds of this group are situated on the
immediate bank of the Mississippi at a height not exceeding 8 to 12 feet
above high-water mark; they are conical in form and of comparatively
small size, varying in height from 3 to 8 feet. Nine of them were
opened, of which we notice the following:
[Illustration: FIG. 7.--Section of burial mound, Davenport, Iowa. [From
the Proceedings of the Davenport Academy of Sciences.]]
In No. 1 the layers from above down were, first, a foot of earth; then a
layer of stones 1-1/2 feet thick; then a layer of shells 2 inches thick;
next a foot of earth, and lastly a second layer of shells 4 inches
thick. Immediately under this, at the depth of 5 feet, were found five
skeletons stretched horizontally on the original surface of the ground,
parallel to each other, three with heads toward the east and two with
heads west. With them were found one sea-shell (_Busycon perversum_),
two copper axes, to which fragments of cloth were attached, one copper
awl, an arrow-head, and two stone pipes, one representing a frog.
Mound No. 2, though similar in form and external appearance to the
preceding, presented a quite different arrangement internally, as is
evident from the vertical section shown in Fig. 7. Here there were no
layers of shells, but two distinct layers of stones. At the depth of 5
feet eight skulls (five only are shown in the figure), with some
fragments of bones were unearthed; these were lying in a semicircle of 5
feet diameter, each surrounded by a circle of small stones (shown at _a_
in the figure). From the position of the skulls and bones it was evident
these bodies had been buried in a sitting posture. The articles found
accompanying the skeletons were two copper axes, two small hemispheres
of copper and _one of silver_, a bear's tooth, and an arrow-head.
No. 3, though the largest of the group, was apparently unstratified, the
original burial consisting of the bones of two adults and one infant, at
the original surface of the ground, under a thin layer of ashes, and
surrounded by a single circle of small red stones. With these were found
copper axes, copper beads, two carved stone pipes (one in the form of a
ground-hog), animal teeth, etc. Near the surface of the mound were two
well-preserved skeletons, with evidences of an "oakwood" covering over
them and accompanied by glass beads, a fire steel, clay pipe, and silver
ear-ring--evidently an intrusive burial.
No. 4 was found similar in construction and in all other respects to No.
3, except that at the feet of the skeletons was a round heap of stones,
3 feet high, neatly laid up, and that in the earth where the skeletons
lay could be distinctly seen traces of cloth or some woven material, in
which they had probably been enveloped.
No. 5 was similar to No. 2, except in the following respects: The
skeletons (probably two) were in a confused heap at the bottom under a
6-inch layer of hard clay (probably similar to what Colonel Norris calls
"mortar"). Near these, but outside of the clay layer, was a stone heap
similar to that in No. 4. "On this lay two very strong thigh bones and
three ribs placed diagonally across each other. There were also a few
bones leaning against the heap at one side. The stones were partly
burned to lime, and all of them showed more or less marks of fire, while
the bones in the mound showed not the slightest trace of it."
Four or five feet south of the stone heap was a large quantity of human
bones in complete confusion. The relics were broken pots, arrow-heads, a
stone pipe, etc.
Nos. 7, 8, and 9 were similar to No. 1, varying only in minor
details.[14]
My object in noticing the construction of so many mounds in a single
group and the modes of burial in them, is to call attention to the
differences in detail where there can be no doubt that they were built
by one tribe and probably by one clan, as the size of the group
indicates a comparatively limited population. In these nine mounds we
notice the following differences: some are stratified, others not; in
some the skeletons are placed horizontally on the ground, in others they
are in a sitting posture, while in others they are dismembered and in
confused heaps; in some there are altar-like[15] structures of stone
which are wanting in others; in some the skeletons are covered with a
hard clay or mortar coating which is wanting in most of them, and
lastly, we see in one or two, evidences of the use of fire in the burial
ceremonies, though not found in the others.