Serpent Mound Discovered Within Chicago's City Limits

Serpent Mound Discovered Within Chicago's City Limits

The Serpent Mound is located in Thatcher Woods outside of Chicago, Illinois.  The Serpent is believed to have been constructed by the Winnebago Sioux Indians that were part of the Hopewell mound builders that constructed burial and effigy mounds in Ohio, Indiana and Illinois.

Osage Hopewell Star Chart. The Key to the Hopewell Earthworks in the Ohio Valley.

Osage Hopewell Star Chart.  The Key to the Hopewell Earthworks in the Ohio Valley.

    None of the younger Osage men knew about these matters and the author was urged not to speak to them on this subject. He observed that several of the elder men, members of the secret order in which these traditions are preserved, had parts of the accompanying symbolic chart (Fig. 389) tattooed on their throats and chests. This chart is a facsimile of one that was drawn for the author by Hada-ɔüʇse. At the top we see a tree near a river. 

This is evidence of the importance of the sun and stars of the Dakota Sioux tribes who once resided in the Ohio Valley and built many of the earthworks aligned to different stars and solar events of the equinoxes and solstices. 

Smaller, Oto Sioux Earthen Circle Discovered at the Strawtown, Indiana Works

Smaller, Oto Sioux Earthen Circle Discovered at the Strawtown, Indiana Works

History of Hamilton County, Indiana 1915

The Fort and Mound

The main work is a circle about three hundred feet in diameter, thrown up in the center, but apparently level and surrounded by a ditch that Mr. Parker says was about six feet deep when he first saw it. Fifty yards to the south of the large circle is a lesser circle about fifty feet in diameter and now almost obliterated

IPFW archaeologists determined that this Hopewell earthen circle was affiliated with the Oto Sioux. Additional Oto Sioux burial mounds and earthworks have been identified at the Mann Site in Pozsey County, Indiana. More on the Oto Sioux

History of Hamilton County, Indiana 1915

The Fort and Mound

The main work is a circle about three hundred feet in diameter, thrown up in the center, but apparently level and surrounded by a ditch that Mr. Parker says was about six feet deep when he first saw it. Fifty yards to the south of the large circle is a lesser circle about fifty feet in diameter and now almost obliterated.

South of the large circle this earthwork was discovered.  It is believed that these embankments are the smaller 50 foot diameter circle.

Historian, George Catlin Places the Mandan Sioux at the Serpent Mound in Ohio in Ancient Times

Historian, George Catlin Places the Mandan Sioux at the Serpent Mound in Ohio in Ancient Times

The Dakota Sioux not only built mounds for their dead, but also constructed Serpent Mounds in Ohio, Illinois, Wisconsin and Minnesota. 

“Prehistoric America,” Vol. II. Stephen Peet, 1892 

    “It is well known that Catlin, the celebrated painter maintained that the Mandan’s, who were a branch of the Dakotas, originally were located in Ohio, the very region in which the great serpent is found, but that they migrated from that region, passing down the Ohio River, and up the Missouri, and that they became nearly extinct by the time they reached the headwaters of the Missouri.  I think there may be a pretty fair deduction drawn, that they formerly occupied the lower part of the Missouri, and even the Ohio and Muskinghum, and have gradually made their way up the Missouri to where they are now.”

Indiana Archaeologists Determine Hopewell Earthwork at Strawtown, Indiana is Oneoto Sioux

Indiana Archaeologists Determine Hopewell Earthwork at Strawtown, Indiana is Oneoto Sioux

The Srawtown henge is discernable from the circular elevated platform seen on the left encircled by a ditch with the outer wall also still visible. Despite being plowed for years what may be a gateway is evident on the southeast section. Traces of additional embankments were discovered several hundred yards south of the earthwork. The Strawtown earthwork is located on the high ground overlooking the White River as it bends to the south.

The larger size of this henge is comparable to others found at the Highbank Works at Chillicothe, Ohio and Yorktown, Indiana. The henges around Piqua Ohio also include a work 300 feet in diameter along with a spoked burial. A spoked burial was also discovered in Madison County Indiana near the works at Mounds State Park. IPFW archaeologist excavated parts of the earthwork and concluded that the artifacts they found were culturally affiliated with the Oneoto Sioux. Strawtown is the anchor to Indiana’s magical 50 miles that reveals by going back upriver to the east the circular henges at Mounds State Park, the henge in Delaware county, the large mound at Windsor and the Winchester works.  

Indiana Department of Geology and Natural History (Fourteenth Annual Report), 1884

But Strawtown has an antiquity evidently higher than the days of the Delaware Indians. The mound builders have left their footprints in this vicinity by the numerous relics of the Stone Age that have been picked up by the present inhabitants. A little west of the present village there is a burial mound about six feet high; it has been plowed over for a number of years, so that not only its height has been reduced, but its base rendered so indistinct that its diameter can not be accurately measured; it is, however, between seventy and eighty feet. It was opened in 1882 by Judge Overman, of Tipton, and four skeletons were found lying on the original surface of the ground, with their heads together and their feet directed to the cardinal points of the compass.

This type of 'spoked burial' is found throughout the Ohio Valley associated with both the Adena and Hopewell.

At a distance of 150 yards southeast of this mound is a circular embankment, now about three feet high, and twelve feet on the base.  The diameter of the circle, measured from the bottom of the ditch on each side, is 315 feet. There is a doubt as to what period this work should be referred. A tradition among the “old settlers” claims that the remains of palisades that once formed a stockade, were standing on the embankment when the early immigrants settled here. This tradition is strengthened by the fact that in 1810 a stockade was built by the Delaware Indians somewhere near this spot, as a protection against their Miami neighbors north of White River. Moreover, it was not the custom of the mound builders to make a ditch on the outside of their embankments. On the other hand, the regularity of the work, and the perfect form of the circle, is hardly compatible with the idea that this is the work of modern savages. It is possible that the circle dates back to the period of the mound builders, and that the Delaware’s took advantage of it to build their stockade on, and made the ditch to strengthen their palisades. The ditch was been filled, and the embankment reduced much by cultivation.

Ancient Iroquois Burial Mound Located North of Fort Wayne, Indiana

This single mound located on the IPFW campus was originally built on a projecting upland formed at the confluence of Breckenridge creek and the St. Joseph River. A dam has flooded this area, leaving this mound partially submerged for most of the year. Photo is from, "The Nephilim Chronicles: A Travel Guide to the Ancient Ruins in the Ohio Valley.

The History of Allen County, Indiana, 1888:

“Prehistoric Remains” by R. S. Robertson

Still further down the river, on the east side, at the mouth of Breckenridge Creek, is a single mound, which has not been opened except a slight excavation in its side, which developed the customary lumps of charcoal. This point is about four miles north of Ft. Wayne, and is the most southerly point in the county at which mounds and earthworks are known to exist.

Ancient Stone Graves Around Frankin, Tennessee

Ancient Stone Graves Around Franklin, Tennessee

Numerous stone graves are found within and around an extensive earthwork, which appears to have surrounded a considerable Indian town. One large mound, pyramidal in shape and two hundred and thirty feet in diameter, together with a chain of small conical mounds, is found within the ancient fortification. Several of the smaller mounds contain numerous stone graves; some are also scattered about at the base of several of the larger mounds. An extensive burying-ground is also situated on the slope of the hill overlooking the mounds and earthwork. One of the most extensive and remarkable collections of stone graves is on the west fork of Big Harpeth, six and a half miles from Franklin, at a place called Old-Town, the property of Mr. Thomas Brown. Extensive graveyards are also found at various localities along the banks of the Harpeth River down to its junction with the Cumberland. These graves, although justly considered as rude fabrics, nevertheless exhibit considerable skill in their construction, and are standing memorials of the regard in which this ancient race held the memory of the dead.

Prehistoric Stone Cairns Near Arlington, Missouri

STONE CAIRNS AT SUGAR TREE CAMP , 

PLATE 13 a, Cairn six miles north of Arlington, Mo

Six miles north of Arlington is a clubhouse known as Sugar Tree Camp. A short distance from the building is a high vertical cliff rising almost directly from the Gasconade. The top of this cliff, near the front, is of solid rock, almost bare of timber or brush, and in a row along it close to the edge are seven cairns, all now so defaced that any attempt at investigation is useless. The smallest, at one end of the row, is of the common circular form, about 12 feet in diameter. Three others seem to be of the same type; but their appearance may be due to their destruction. One is shown in plate [41]13, a. The other three are walled vaults. The largest, at the other end of the row, was built up like a foundation wall of sandstone slabs. It is rectangular in form, measuring on the outside 16 by 28 feet. All the walls are more or less destroyed; the small portion of one remaining is shown in plate 13, b. Two "walled-up graves" reported on the first ridge north of Sugar Tree Camp, and one reported on the first ridge south, never existed. There is a small cairn on a high peak half a mile east of the camp.

PLATE 13 b, Walled grave six miles north of Arlington, Mo.
a Front b Profile.

Jefferson County, New York - Mound Builders Necropolis

Jefferson County, New York - Mound Builders Necropolis

A large mound is near a shanty in the sugar camp, toward Ruff's 

creek. This is 40 feet across and 3 feet high. A good deal of dig- 
ging has been done there, but seemingly without results. A smaller 
one is near the shanty. This ended the explorations on that side of 
the lake. The oldest inhabitant knew of nothing taken from mounds 
south of the La Farge mansion. In all 54 mounds were observed, 
and 6 obliterated ones reported, or 60 in all. Other unobserved or 
obliterated mounds might much increase this number, but it is not 
likely to reach the higher estimates made for the whole territory. 

At the north end of the lake is one spot deserving of a few words, 

and yet probably not connected with the general subject. In the edge 
of the swamp at the northeast angle of the lake, is an immense mass 
of rock which can be reached by a boat. In some of the depressions 
of this rock are many small flint chips, showing that it was a favorite 
spot for arrow makers. What weapons the makers of these mounds 
used is uncertain, but it is probable that the visitors to Squaw island, 
as some call it, were of another people. The spot commands a view 
of nearly the entire lake. 

Is this a hut circle or a Sun Temple or henge that is found in numbers in the Ohio

 Valley? The earthwork has an outer wall and interior ditch like a henge.  The 

Iroquois didn't construct round dwellings.

In his report on Mound Explorations, Prof. Cyrus Thomas 

described some mounds of this class closely connected with larger 
mounds in the Welch group, Brown county, Illinois. The group 
" consists of six mounds, and a number of small saucer-shaped basins 
surrounded by low, earthen ridges, doubtless the sites of ancient 
dwellings or wigwams." Thomas, p.u8. He adds that " the dwell- 
ing sites vary considerably in size, some being as much as 70 feet 
in diameter, and some of them 3 feet deep in the center after 50 
years of cultivation." In describing those on the Big Mary river, 
111., he adds something on their situation and origin : 

These are situated upon a flat topped ridge, about 30 feet higher 
than the creek bottoms. They are low, with the usual depression in 
the center, but the outlines are rather indistinct. Mr Gault of Sparta, 
who has long resided here, states that when he first moved to this 
section, the Indians lived in houses or wigwams which, when de- 
cayed, left such remains as these. They hollowed out a shallow cir- 
cular cavity in the surface soil, then, standing poles around the 
margin of this basin, brought them together at the top, and having 
covered them with bark or other material in other words having 
constructed wigwams of the usual circular form covered them in 
whole or in part, specially the lower portion with earth. He also 
said that after a camp was abandoned and the wood rotted away, it 
left these rings of earth. Thomas, p. 141 

Archaeology Map of the Mound Builders Works in Ohio

Archaeology Map of The Mound Builders Works in Ohio

Coming down to a smaller scope of territory, can it be shown that in the case of any one state the early Indian mound builders occupied the portions most heavily populated today? It has been said that, in Ohio, four counties contain evidence of having been the scenes of special activity on the part of the earliest inhabitants: Butler, Licking, Ross, and Franklin. These are interior counties (at a distance from the Ohio and Lake Erie) and, of the remaining sixty-three interior counties in the state, only seven exceeded these four in population in 1880—when the cities had not so largely robbed the country districts of their population as now. Thus the aborigines seem to have been busiest where we have been busiest in the last half of the nineteenth century.

                 Map showing the location of the mound builders works in ohio

Over 200 Burial Mound and Earthwork Sites Photographed and Directions Listed

Distribution and Population of the The Mound Building Indians

DISTRIBUTION and POPULATION OF THE MOUND-BUILDING INDIANS

The Indian mounds of these first Americans of which we know are found between Oregon and the Wyoming valley, in Pennsylvania, and Onondaga county in New York; they extend from Manitoba in Canada to the Gulf of Mexico.

The great seat of empire was in the drainage area of the Mississippi river; on this river and its tributaries were the heaviest mound-building populations. Few mounds are found east of the Alleghany mountains.

In the Catalogue of Prehistoric Works East of the Rocky Mountains, issued by the Bureau of Ethnology of the Smithsonian Institution,  the geographical extent and density of the Indian mounds in central North America is brought out state by state with striking suggestiveness. While the layman is[] warned that these maps “present some features which are calculated to mislead,” and that the maps indicate “to some extent the more thoroughly explored areas rather than the true proportion of the ancient works in the different sections,” still some conclusions have already been reached which future exploitation will never weaken.

It is not expected that future investigation will change the verdict that the heaviest mound-building population found its seat near the Mississippi and Ohio rivers. “There is little doubt,” writes Dr. Thomas, “that when Mississippi, Alabama, and Georgia have been thoroughly explored many localities will be added to those indicated ... but it is not likely that the number will be found to equal those in the area drained by the Ohio and its affluents or in the immediate valley of the Mississippi.”

This fact, that the heaviest populations of the mound-building Indians seem to have been near the Mississippi and Ohio is, of course, shown by the archæological maps. In a rough way, subject to the limitations previously mentioned, it can be found that the following fourteen states contain evidences of having held the heaviest ancient populations:

Ohio, Wisconsin, Tennessee, Illinois, Florida, New York, Kentucky, Indiana,

Michigan, Georgia and Arkansas, Missouri and  North Carolina, Minnesota, Iowa, Pennsylvania.

Now, by our last census the states which contain the largest population today are:

New York, Pennsylvania, Illinois, Ohio, Texas, Missouri, Massachusetts,

Indiana, Michigan, Iowa, Georgia, Kentucky, Wisconsin, Tennessee.

Thus of the fourteen most thickly populated states today perhaps twelve give fair evidence of having been most thickly popug ]lated in prehistoric times. As a general rule (but one growing less reliable every day) the heaviest population has always been found in the best agricultural regions; the states having the largest number of fertile acres have had, as a rule, the largest populations—or did have until the cities grew as they have in the past generation.

The Mound Builders Origins of Native American, Shawnee, Cherokee, Creek and Choctaw

The Mound BuildersOrigins of Native Americans

Origins of many Native American Indian tribes like the Choctaw, Creeks, Shawnee and Cherokee can be traced back to the mound builders.

REMOVAL OF THE FLESH BEFORE BURIAL.—This practice appears to have been followed quite generally by both Indians and mound-builders.

That it was followed to a considerable extent by the mound builders of various sections is shown by the following evidence:

The confused masses of human bones frequently found in mounds show by their relation to each other that they must have been gathered together after the flesh had been removed, as this condition could not possibly have been assumed after burial in their natural state. Instances of this kind are so numerous and well known that it is scarcely necessary to present any evidence in support of the statement. The well-known instance referred to by Jefferson in his "Notes on Virginia" [Footnote: Fourth Am. ed., 1801, p. 143; p. 146, in 8th ed.] is one in point. "The appearance," he tells us, "certainly indicates that it [the barrow] has derived both origin and growth from the customary collections of bones and deposition of them together."

Notices of similar deposits have been observed as follows: In Wisconsin, by Mr. Armstrong; [Footnote: Smithsonian Rept., 1879, p. 337] in Florida, by James Bell [Footnote: Smithsonian Rept., 1881, p. 636.] and Mr. Walker; [Footnote: Smithsonian Rept., 1879, p. 398] in Cass County, Ill., by Mr. Snyder; [Footnote: Smithsonian Rept., 1881, p. 573.] in Georgia, by C. C. Jones. [Footnote: Antiq. So. Inds., p. 193.] Similar deposits have also been found by the assistants of the Bureau of Ethnology in Wisconsin, Illinois, northern Missouri, North Carolina, New York, and Arkansas.

Another proof of this custom was observed by Mr. J. D. Middleton and Colonel Morris in Wisconsin, northeastern Missouri, and Illinois. In numerous mounds the skeletons were found packed closely side by side, immediately beneath a layer of hard, mortar- like substance. The fact that this mortar had completely filled the interstices, and in many cases the skulls also, showed that it had been placed over them while in a plastic state, and as it must soon have hardened and assumed the condition in which it was found, it is evident the skeletons had been buried after the flesh was removed.

As additional evidence we may mention the fact that in stone graves, so small that the body of a full-grown individual could not by any possible means be pressed into them, the bones of adult individuals are sometimes found. Instances of this kind have occurred in Tennessee, Missouri, and southern Illinois.

From personal examination I conclude that most of the folded skeletons found in mounds were buried after the flesh had been removed, as the folding, to the extent noticed, could not possibly have been done with the flesh on them, and the positions in most cases were such that they could not have been assumed in consequence of the decay of the flesh and settling of the mound.

The partial calcining of the bones in vaults and under layers of clay where the evidence shows that the fire was applied to the outside of the vault or above the clay layer, can be accounted for only on the supposition that the flesh had been removed before burial.

Other proofs that this custom prevailed among the mound builders in various sections of the country might be adduced.

That it was the custom of a number of Indian tribes, when first encountered by the whites, and even down to a comparatively modern date, to remove the flesh before final burial by suspending on scaffolds, depositing in charnel-houses, by temporary burial, or otherwise, is well known to all students of Indian habits and customs.

Heckewelder says, "The Nanticokes had the singular custom of removing the bones from the old burial place to a place of deposit in the country they now dwell in." [Footnote: Hist. Manners and Customs Ind. Nations, p. 75.]

The account by Breboeuf of the communal burial among the Hurons heretofore referred to is well known. [Footnote: Jesuit Relations for 1636. Transl. in Fifth Ann. Rept. Bur. Ethnol., p. 110.] The same custom is alluded to by Lafitau. [Footnote: Moeurs des Sauvages, vol. 2, pp. 420-435.] Bartram observed it among the Choctaws. [Footnote: Travels, p. 516.] It is also mentioned by Bossu, [Footnote: Travels through Louisiana, p. 298.] by Adair,[Footnote: Hist. Am. Indians, p. 183.] by Barnard Romans,[Footnote: Nat. Hist. Florida, p. 90.] and others.

Burial beneath or in dwellings.—The evidence brought to light by the investigations of the Bureau of Ethnology, regarding a custom among the mound-builders of Arkansas and Mississippi, of burying in or under their dwellings, has been given, in part, in an article published in the Magazine of American History. [Footnote: February, 1884.] It is a well-attested historical fact that such was also the custom of the southern Indian tribes. Bartram affirms it to have been in vogue among the Muscogulgees or Creeks,[Footnote: Travels, p. 505.] and Barnard Romans says it was also practiced by the Chickasaws.[Footnote: Nat. Hist. Florida, p. 71] C C. Jones says that the Indians of Georgia "often interred beneath the floor of the cabin, and then burnt the hut of the deceased over his head;"[Footnote: Antiq. So. Indians, p. 203.] which furnishes a complete explanation of the fact observed by the Bureau explorers, mentioned in the article before alluded to.

Burial in a sitting or squatting posture.—It was a very common practice among the mound-builders to bury their dead in a sitting or squatting posture. The examples of this kind are too numerous and too well known to require repetition. I may add that the yet unpublished reports of the Bureau show that this custom prevailed to a certain extent in Wisconsin, Iowa, Illinois, North Carolina, Missouri, Ohio, and West Virginia. Instances have also been observed elsewhere. [Footnote: Jones's Antiq. So. Indians (Georgia and Florida). pp. 183-185.] That the same custom was followed by several of the Indian tribes is attested by the following authorities: Bossu, [Footnote: Travels, vol. 1, p. 251.] Lawson, [Footnote: Hist. Carolina, p. 182.] Bartram, [Footnote: Travels, p. 515.] and Adair.[Footnote: Hist. Am. Indians, p. 182.]

The use of fire in burial ceremonies.—Another observance in which the burial customs of mound-builders corresponded with those of Indians was the use of fire in funeral ceremonies. The evidences of this custom are so common in mounds as to lead to the supposition that the mound-builders were in the habit of offering human sacrifices to their deities. Although charred and even almost wholly consumed human bones are often found, showing that bodies or skeletons were sometimes burned, it does not necessarily follow that they were offered as sacrifices. Moreover, judging from all the data in our possession, the weight of evidence seems to be decidedly against such conclusion.

Among the Indians fire appears to have been connected with the mortuary ceremonies in several ways. One use of it was to burn the flesh and softer portions of the body when removed from the bones. [Footnote: Barnard Romans, Nat. Hist. Florida, p. 90.] Breboeuf also mentions its use in connection with the communal burial of the Hurons. [Footnote: Jesuit Relations for 1636, p. 135.] According to M. B. Kent [Footnote: Yarrow's Mort. Customs N. A. Indians, 1st Ann. Rept. Bur. Ethnology (1881), P. 95.] it was the ancient custom of the Sacs and Foxes to burn a portion of the food of the burial feast to furnish subsistence for the spirit on its journey.

Pickett says [Footnote: Hist. Alabama, 3d ed., vol. 1, p. 140.] the Choctaws were in the habit of killing and cutting up their prisoners of war, after which the parts were burned. He adds further, in reference to their burial ceremonies: [Footnote: Ibid., p. 142] "From all we have heard and read of the Choctaws, we are satisfied that it was their custom to take from the bone- house the skeletons, with which they repaired in funeral procession to the suburbs of the town, where they placed them on the ground in one heap, together with the property of the dead, such as pots, bows, arrows, ornaments, curiously-shaped stones for dressing deer skins, and a variety of other things. Over this heap they first threw charcoal and ashes, probably to preserve the bones, and the next operation was to cover all with earth. This left a mound several feet high." This furnishes a complete explanation of the fact that uncharred human bones are frequently found in Southern mounds imbedded in charcoal and ashes.

Similarity of their stone implements and ornaments.—In addition to the special points of resemblance between the works of the two peoples, of which a few only have been mentioned, we are warranted in asserting that in all respects, so far as we can trace them correctly, there are to be found strong resemblances between the habits, customs, and arts of the mound-builders and those of the Indians previous to their change by contact with Europeans. Both made use of stone implements, and so precisely similar are the articles of this class that it is impossible to distinguish those made by the one people from those made by the other. So true is this that our best and most experienced archaeologists make no attempt to separate them, except where the conditions under which they are found furnish evidence for discrimination. Instead of burdening these pages with proofs of these statements by reference to particular finds and authorities, I call attention to the work of Dr. C. C. Abbott on the handiwork in stone, bone, and clay of the native races of the northern Atlantic sea board of America, entitled "Primitive Industry." As the area embraced in this work, as remarked by its author, "does not include any territory known to have been permanently occupied by the so-called mound- builders," the articles found here must be ascribed to the Indians unless, as suggested by Dr. Abbott, some of a more primitive type found in the Trenton gravel are to be attributed to an earlier and still ruder people. Examining those of the first class, which are ascribed to the Indians, we observe almost every type of stone articles found in the mounds and mound area; not only the rudely chipped scrapers, hoes, celts, knives, and spear and arrow heads, but also the polished or ground celts, axes, hammers, and chisels, or gouges.

Here we also find drills, awls, and perforators, slick stones and dressers, pipes of various forms and finish, discoidal stones and net sinkers, butterflys tones and other supposed ceremonial objects, masks or face figures and bird-shaped stones, gorgets, totems, pendants, trinkets, etc. Nor does the resemblance stop with types, but it is carried down to specific forms and finish, leaving absolutely no possible line of demarkation between these and the similar articles attributed to the mound-builders. So persistently true is this that had we stone articles alone to judge by, it is probable we should be forced to the conclusion, as held by some writers, that the former inhabitants of that portion of the United States east of the Rocky Mountains pertained to one nation, unless possibly the prevalence of certain types in particular sections should afford some data for tribal districting.

This strong similarity of the stone articles of the Atlantic coast to those of the mound area was noticed as early as 1820 by Caleb Atwater, who, knowing that the former were Indian manufactures, attributed the latter also to the same people although he held that the mounds were the work of the ancestors of the civilized nations of Mexico and Central America.

Mound and Indian Pottery.—The pottery of the mound-builders has often been referred to as proof of a higher culture status, and of an advance in art beyond that reached by the Indians. The vase with a bird figure found by Squier and Davis in an Ohio mound is presented in most works on American archaeology as an evidence of the advanced stage of the ceramic art among the mound-builders; but Dr. Rau, who examined the collection of these authors, says:

Having seen the best specimens of "mound" pottery obtained during the survey of Messrs. Squier and Davis, I do not hesitate to assert that the clay vessels fabricated at the Cahokia Creek were in every respect equal to those exhumed from the mounds of the Mississippi Valley, and Dr. Davis himself, who examined my specimens from the first-named locality, expressed the same opinion. [Footnote: Smithsonian Rept., 1866, p. 349.]

The Cahokia pottery which he found along the creek of that name (Madison County, Ill.) he ascribes to Indians, and believes it to be of comparatively recent origin.

Most of the mound pottery is mixed with pulverized shells, which is also true of most Indian pottery. [Footnote: Dumont, Mem. Hist. La., vol. 2, 1753, p. 271; Adair, Hist. Am. Indians, p. 424; Loskiel, Gesell. der Miss., p. 70, etc.] Du Pratz says that "the Natchez Indians make pots of an extraordinary size, cruses with a medium-sized opening, jars, bottles with long necks holding two pints, and pots or cruses for holding bear's oil;" [Footnote: Hist. La., p. 79.] also that they colored them a beautiful red by using ocher, which becomes red after burning.

As is well known, the bottle-shaped vase with a long neck is the typical form of clay vessels found in the mounds of Arkansas and southeastern Missouri, and is also common in the mounds and stone graves of middle Tennessee. Those colored or ornamented with red are often found in the mounds of the former sections. It is worthy of notice in this connection that the two localities—near Saint Genevieve, Mo., and near Shawneetown, Ill.—where so many fragments of large clay vessels used in making salt have been found, were occupied for a considerable time by the Shawnee Indians. As will hereafter be shown, there are reasons for believing this pottery was made by the Shawnees.

The statement so often made that the mound pottery, especially that of Ohio, far excels that of the Indians is not justified by the facts.

Much more evidence of like tenor might be presented here, as, for example, the numerous instances in which articles of European manufacture have been found in mounds where their presence could not be attributed to intrusive burials, but the limits of the paper will not admit of this. I turn, therefore, to the problem before us, viz, "Who were the authors of the typical works of Ohio?"

As before stated, the answer is, "These works are attributable in part at least to the ancestors of the modern Cherokees."

As a connecting link between what has been given and the direct evidence that the Cherokees were mound-builders, and as having an important bearing upon both questions, the evidence derived from the box-shaped stone graves is introduced at this point.

Etowah Indian Mounds

Etowah Indian Mound Group

A work of unusual interest occurs on the Etowah River, Georgia. This cut gives us a plan of the work. We notice, first of all, the moat or ditch by which they fortified their position. The ditch is still from five to twenty-five feet deep, and from twenty to seventy-five feet wide. It connects directly with the river at one end, but stops short at the other. It surrounds nearly fifty acres of land. At two points we notice reservoirs, each about an acre in size, and an average depth of not less than twenty feet. At its upper end is an artificial pond. This ditch, with its reservoirs and pond, is no slight work. The large mound seen in the center of the space is one of the largest of the temple mounds. Its shape is sufficiently shown in the cut. The height of the mound is sixty-five feet. We call especial attention to the series of terraces leading up the south side of the mound. Graded ways afford means of access from one terrace to the other. A pathway is also seen on the eastern side.

To this group of works an interest attaches similar to that of the group of works mentioned in Louisiana. We are not certain but that we catch a glimpse of it while it was yet an inhabited Indian town. This is contained in the brief accounts we have of the wanderings of the unfortunate De Soto and his command. One of the chroniclers of this expedition La Vega, describes one of the towns where the weary Spaniards rested, and which we are sure was somewhere in Northern Georgia, in such terms, mentioning the graded way leading to the top, that Prof. Thomas, who has spent some time in this investigation, thinks his description can apply only to the mound under consideration.

Photo of the Etowah Platform Mound

 Whether this conclusion will be allowed to stand, remains to be seen. But, if true, then the darkness which rests upon this aboriginal structure lifts for a moment and we see around it a populous Indian town, able to send five hundred warriors to battle. The Spaniards marched on to sufferings and death, and darkness again closed around the Etowah Mound. When the Europeans next beheld it around it was the silent wilderness; the warriors had departed; the trees of the forest overspread it.

Strange figurine found at the Etowah Mound