Ancient Monuments of the Mississippi Valley Smithsonian Contributions to Knowledge, Vol. I.

[Illustration: I. Ancient Works, Marietta, Ohio.]

Smithsonian Contributions To Knowledge.

Vol. I.

[Illustration]

EVERY MAN IS A VALUABLE MEMBER OF SOCIETY, WHO, BY HIS OBSERVATIONS, RESEARCHES, AND EXPERIMENTS, PROCURES KNOWLEDGE FOR MEN.—SMITHSON.

City Of Washington: Published By The Smithsonian Institution. MDCCCXLVIII.

PRINTED BY EDWARD O. JENKINS, 114 Nassau street, New York.

FROM THE SMITHSONIAN CONTRIBUTIONS TO KNOWLEDGE. ANCIENT MONUMENTS OF THE MISSISSIPPI VALLEY.

By E. G. Squier, A.M., And E. H. Davis, M.D.

[Illustration]

EVERY MAN IS A VALUABLE MEMBER OF SOCIETY, WHO, BY HIS OBSERVATIONS, RESEARCHES, AND EXPERIMENTS, PROCURES KNOWLEDGE FOR MEN.—SMITHSON.

Published For The Authors.

NEW-YORK: BARTLETT & WELFORD, 7 ASTOR HOUSE. CINCINNATI: J. A. & U. P. JAMES, WALNUT STREET.

MDCCCXLVIII.

PRINTED BY EDWARD O. JENKINS, 114 Nassau street, New York.

Advertisement.

This volume is intended to form the first of a series of volumes, consisting of original memoirs on different branches of knowledge published at the expense, and under the direction of the Smithsonian Institution. The publication of this series forms part of a general plan adopted for carrying into effect the benevolent intentions of JAMES SMITHSON, Esq., of England. This gentleman left his property in trust to the United States of America, to found at Washington an institution which should bear his own name, and have for its objects “the «increase» and «diffusion» of knowledge among men.” This trust was accepted by the Government of the United States, and an Act of Congress was passed August 10th, 1846, constituting the President and the other principal executive officers of the general government, the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, the Mayor of Washington, and such other persons as they might elect honorary members, an establishment under the name of the “SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION, FOR THE INCREASE AND DIFFUSION OF KNOWLEDGE AMONG MEN.” The members and honorary members of this establishment are to hold stated and special meetings for the supervision of the affairs of the Institution, and for the advice and instruction of a Board of Regents, to whom the financial and other affairs are entrusted.

The Board of Regents consists of three members ex officio of the establishment, namely, the Vice President of the United States, the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, and the Mayor of Washington, together with twelve other members, three of whom are appointed by the Senate from its own body, three by the House of Representatives from its members, and six citizens appointed by a joint resolution of both houses. To this board is given the power of electing a Secretary and other officers, for conducting the active operations of the Institution.

To carry into effect the purposes of the testator, the plan of organization should evidently embrace two objects,—one, the increase of knowledge by the addition of new truths to the existing stock; the other, the diffusion of knowledge thus increased, among men. No restriction is made in favor of any kind of knowledge, and hence each branch is entitled to and should receive a share of attention.

The Act of Congress, establishing the Institution, directs, as a part of the plan of organization, the formation of a Library, a Museum, and a Gallery of Art, together with provisions for physical research and popular lectures, while it leaves to the Regents the power of adopting such other parts of an organization as they may deem best suited to promote the objects of the bequest.

After much deliberation, the Regents resolved to divide the annual income, thirty thousand nine hundred and fifty dollars, into two equal parts,—one part to be devoted to the increase and diffusion of knowledge by means of original research and publications,—the other half of the income to be applied in accordance with the requirements of the Act of Congress, to the gradual formation of a Library, a Museum, and a Gallery of Art.

The following are the details of the two parts of the general plan of organization provisionally adopted at the meeting of the Regents, Dec. 8th, 1847.

Details Of The First Part Of The Plan.

I. TO INCREASE KNOWLEDGE.—«It is proposed to stimulate research, by offering rewards, consisting of money, medals, etc., for original memoirs on all subjects of investigation.»

1. The memoirs thus obtained to be published in a series of volumes, in a quarto form, and entitled “Smithsonian Contributions to Knowledge.”

2. No memoir, on subjects of physical science, to be accepted for publication, which does not furnish a positive addition to human knowledge, resting on original research; and all unverified speculations to be rejected.

3. Each memoir presented to the Institution to be submitted for examination to a commission of persons of reputation for learning in the branch to which the memoir pertains; and to be accepted for publication only in case the report of this commission is favorable.

4. The commission to be chosen by the officers of the Institution, and the name of the author, as far as practicable, concealed, unless a favorable decision be made.

5. The volumes of the memoirs to be exchanged for the Transactions of literary and scientific societies, and copies to be given to all the colleges, and principal libraries, in this country. One part of the remaining copies may be offered for sale; and the other carefully preserved, to form complete sets of the work, to supply the demand from new institutions.

6. An abstract, or popular account, of the contents of these memoirs to be given to the public through the annual report of the Regents to Congress.

II. TO INCREASE KNOWLEDGE.—«It is also proposed to appropriate a portion of the income, annually, to special objects of research, under the direction of suitable persons.»

1. The objects, and the amount appropriated, to be recommended by counsellors of the Institution.

2. Appropriations in different years to different objects; so that in course of time, each branch of knowledge may receive a share.

3. The results obtained from these appropriations to be published, with the memoirs before mentioned, in the volumes of the Smithsonian Contributions to Knowledge.

4. Examples of objects for which appropriations may be made:

(1.) System of extended meteorological observations for solving the problem of American storms.

(2.) Explorations in descriptive natural history, and geological, magnetical, and topographical surveys, to collect materials for the formation of a Physical Atlas of the United States.

(3.) Solution of experimental problems, such as a new determination of the weight of the earth, of the velocity of electricity, and of light; chemical analyses of soils and plants; collection and publication of articles of science, accumulated in the offices of Government.

(4.) Institution of statistical inquiries with reference to physical, moral, and political subjects.

(5.) Historical researches, and accurate surveys of places celebrated in American history.

(6.) Ethnological researches, particularly with reference to the different races of men in North America; also explorations, and accurate surveys, of the mounds and other remains of the ancient people of our country.

I. TO DIFFUSE KNOWLEDGE.—«It is proposed to publish a series of reports, giving an account of the new discoveries in science, and of the changes made from year to year in all branches of knowledge not strictly professional.»

1. Some of these reports may be published annually, others at longer intervals, as the income of the Institution or the changes in the branches of knowledge may indicate.

2. The reports are to be prepared by collaborators, eminent in the different branches of knowledge.

3. Each collaborator to be furnished with the journals and publications, domestic and foreign, necessary to the compilation of his report; to be paid a certain sum for his labors, and to be named on the title-page of the report.

4. The reports to be published in separate parts, so that persons interested in a particular branch, can procure the parts relating to it without purchasing the whole.

5. These reports may be presented to Congress, for partial distribution, the remaining copies to be given to literary and scientific institutions, and sold to individuals for a moderate price.

«The following are some of the subjects which may be embraced in the reports:»

I. Physical Class.

1. Physics, including astronomy, natural philosophy, chemistry, and meteorology.

2. Natural history, including botany, zoology, geology, &c.

3. Agriculture.

4. Application of science to arts.

II. Moral And Political Class.

5. Ethnology, including particular history, comparative philology, antiquities, &c.

6. Statistics and political economy.

7. Mental and moral philosophy.

8. A survey of the political events of the world; penal reform, &c.

III. Literature And The Fine Arts.

9. Modern literature.

10. The fine arts, and their application to the useful arts.

11. Bibliography.

12. Obituary notices of distinguished individuals.

II. TO DIFFUSE KNOWLEDGE.—«It is proposed to publish occasionally separate treatises on subjects of general interest.»

1. These treatises may occasionally consist of valuable memoirs translated from foreign languages, or of articles prepared under the direction of the Institution, or procured by offering premiums for the best exposition of a given subject.

2. The treatises to be submitted to a commission of competent judges, previous to their publication.

Details Of The Second Part Of The Plan Of Organization.

This part contemplates the formation of a Library, a Museum, and a Gallery of Art.

1. To carry out the plan before described, a library will be required, consisting, 1st, of a complete collection of the transactions and proceedings of all the learned societies in the world; 2d, of the more important current periodical publications, and other works necessary in preparing the periodical reports.

2. The Institution should make special collections, particularly of objects to verify its own publications. Also a collection of instruments of research in all branches of experimental science.

3. With reference to the collection of books, other than those mentioned above, catalogues of all the different libraries in the United States should be procured, in order that the valuable books first purchased may be such as are not to be found elsewhere in the United States.

4. Also catalogues of memoirs, and of books in foreign libraries, and other materials, should be collected for rendering the Institution a centre of bibliographical knowledge, whence the student may be directed to any work which he may require.

5. It is believed that the collections in natural history will increase by donation as rapidly as the income of the Institution can make provisions for their reception, and, therefore, it will seldom be necessary to purchase any articles of this kind.

6. Attempts should be made to procure for the gallery of art casts of the most celebrated articles of ancient and modern sculpture.

7. The arts may be encouraged by providing a room, free of expense, for the exhibition of the objects of the Art-Union and other similar societies.

8. A small appropriation should annually be made for models of antiquities, such as those of the remains of ancient temples, &c.

9. For the present, or until the building is fully completed, only one permanent assistant to the Secretary will be required, to act as librarian.

10. The Secretary and his assistants, during the session of Congress, will be required to illustrate new discoveries in science, and to exhibit new objects of art; distinguished individuals should also be invited to give lectures on subjects of general interest.

11. When the building is completed, and when, in accordance with the Act of Congress, the charge of the National Museum is given to the Smithsonian Institution, other assistants will be required.

* * * * *

The first memoir of the proper character presented after the adoption of the foregoing plan of organization, was the one which occupies the present volume. It was submitted in accordance with the rule adopted, to a commission of examination, consisting of a committee of the members of the American Ethnological Society, and on the favorable report of this committee and the responsibility of the Society, the memoir was accepted for publication. The following is the correspondence which took place on the occasion.

Correspondence, Etc.

CHILLICOTHE, OHIO, «May» 15, 1847.

DEAR SIR:—It is proposed in the recognized plan of organization of the Smithsonian Institution, of which you are the executive officer, to publish, under the title of “«Smithsonian Contributions to Knowledge»,” such original papers and memoirs “as shall constitute valuable additions to the sum of human knowledge.” Under the belief that it falls legitimately within the scope of the above plan, the undersigned herewith submit for acceptance and publication, subject to the prescribed rules of the Institution, a MS. memoir entitled “ANCIENT MONUMENTS OF THE MISSISSIPPI VALLEY, «comprising the results of Extensive Original Surveys and Explorations:» by E. G. SQUIER and E. H. DAVIS.” The extent of these investigations, and their general character, are sufficiently indicated in the prefatory remarks to the volume.

With high consideration, we are truly yours, E. G. SQUIER, “JOSEPH HENRY, Esq., Secretary Smithsonian Institution. E. H. DAVIS.”

* * * * *

«Princeton», June 2, 1847.

“DEAR SIR:—I am authorized by the Regents of the Smithsonian Institution, to publish, in the numbers of the ‘«Smithsonian Contributions to Knowledge»,’ any memoir which may be presented for this purpose, provided, that, on a careful examination by a commission of competent judges, the memoir shall be found to be a new and interesting addition to knowledge, resting on original research. The accompanying memoir, entitled ‘ANCIENT MONUMENTS OF THE MISSISSIPPI VALLEY,’ etc. etc., having been presented for publication, I beg leave to refer the same, through you, to the American Ethnological Society, with the request that a committee of the members may be appointed to examine and report on the character of the work, with reference to the particulars above mentioned. If the report of the committee be favorable, the memoir, without further consideration, will be accepted for publication; full confidence being placed in the ability of the committee to judge of the article, and in their caution in making up their opinion.

“I have the honor to be, very respectfully, “Your ob’t servant, JOSEPH HENRY, “Secretary Smithsonian Inst. “Hon. ALBERT GALLATIN, President American Ethnological Society.”

* * * * *

“«New York», June 12, 1847.

“DEAR SIR:—I have the honor to enclose a copy of the proceedings and resolutions of the New York Ethnological Society, upon the MS. work on American Antiquities, by Messrs. E. G. Squier and E. H. Davis, submitted with your letter of the 2d instant.

“I approve entirely of the resolutions and recommendations of the Society. The publication of Mr. C. Atwater, in the first volume of the Transactions of the American Antiquarian Society of Worcester, which appeared twenty years ago, is as yet, so far as I know, the only general account of the antiquarian remains of the West, which is entitled to any credit. Yet, many mistakes have been discovered in it, and it is very incomplete, and in no degree to be compared to the extensive researches of the gentlemen above mentioned. What has particularly recommended their labors to me is their love of truth.

“Such are the combined effects of the fondness for the marvellous, of the illusions of the imagination, of credulity, thirst of notoriety and lack of discrimination, that, in many specific statements, and in almost all the general accounts of our Western antiquities, which I have seen, the most vague and fabulous reports (independent of most groundless theories), and even flagrant impositions, are so mixed with true accounts, as to render it almost impossible, even for the American reader, to make the proper discrimination, or arrive at a correct estimate of their extent or character.

“Whatever may be the intrinsic value of the remains of former times which are found in the United States, it is necessary that they should at least be correctly described, and that existing gross errors should be corrected; and I repeat my conviction that, though ardent, Messrs. Squier and Davis are animated by that thorough love of truth, which renders their researches worthy of entire confidence.

“Late Ethnological researches have thrown such light on the History of Man, that it is unnecessary to dwell on their general utility. With respect to those which relate to the Indians of the United States, I am ready to acknowledge, the field is comparatively barren, and the results hitherto attained neither satisfactory nor refreshing. Still, with proper caution, important information may be acquired, on what man, insulated, and without intercourse with other nations, can, by his solitary efforts, accomplish. In order, however, to attain these results, considerations, foreign to the immediate object of this letter, are required, which may hereafter be made the subject of another communication.

“I have the honor to be, &c. “ALBERT GALLATIN. “Professor J. HENRY, Secretary Smithsonian Institution.”

* * * * *

“At a regular meeting of the American Ethnological Society, held at the house of Hon. ALBERT GALLATIN, on the evening of the 4th of June, the President laid before the members a communication from Professor J. HENRY, Secretary of the Smithsonian Institution; transmitting for the examination and opinion of the Society, a MS. work on the Ancient Monuments of the Mississippi Valley. On motion, the letter and accompanying MS. were referred to a committee, consisting of EDWARD ROBINSON, D.D., JOHN R. BARTLETT, Professor W. W. TURNER, SAMUEL G. MORTON, M.D., and Hon. GEORGE P. MARSH, to report upon the same. At a subsequent meeting of this Society, the committee submitted the following Report and Resolutions, which were unanimously accepted and adopted:—

“Report.

“The Committee of the American Ethnological Society, to which was referred the communication of the Secretary of the Smithsonian Institution, transmitting a manuscript work entitled ‘ANCIENT MONUMENTS OF THE MISSISSIPPI VALLEY; «comprising the Results of Extensive Original Surveys and Explorations», by E. G. SQUIER and E. H. DAVIS,’ beg leave to report that—

“They have examined the work in question, and regard it not only as a new and interesting, but an eminently valuable addition to our stock of knowledge on a subject little understood, but in which is felt a deep and constantly increasing interest, both in our country and abroad. In their judgment the work is worthy of the subject, and highly creditable to the authors. Its chief features are, a scientific arrangement, simplicity and directness of statement, and legitimate deduction of facts, while there is no attempt at mere speculation or theory. If published, it will be an enduring monument to connect the names of the investigators in honorable and lasting remembrance with the great subject of American Archæology.

“The existence and progress of these investigations were made known to the Society by correspondence, early in the year 1846; and in June of that year, specimens of the relics recovered, accompanied by numerous maps and plans of ancient Earthworks and Sectional Views of the Mounds from which the remains were taken, were laid before the Society by Mr. Squier in person. These excited deep interest and surprise in all who saw them; and the Society immediately took measures to encourage further investigation, and secure the publication, under its own auspices, of the important results already obtained. A few months later, the chairman of the present committee, being in Ohio, was enabled, through the kindness of Messrs. Squier and Davis, to visit several of the more important monuments in the immediate vicinity of Chillicothe; and among these ‘Mound City,’ so called, from which very many of the minor relics and specimens were procured. He was struck with the accuracy of the plans and drawings as well as of the accounts which had been laid before the Society; and bears full testimony to the fidelity and integrity with which the process of investigation and delineation has been conducted.

“During the last and present season the researches of these gentlemen have been actively prosecuted and widely extended, and the above work, largely illustrated, comprising the results, has been prepared. These results are so numerous and important, and consequently such is the extent and magnitude of the work itself, as to put its publication beyond any means which the Society can command. Under these circumstances, your Committee learn with pleasure that preliminary arrangements have been made for its publication by the Smithsonian Institution, among its ‘Contributions to Knowledge.’ It can only be a matter of sincere gratification to this Society, to see that which it cannot itself accomplish for the history and antiquities of our country, taken up and carried out under such favorable auspices; and they cannot but rejoice that an opportunity is thus afforded to that noble institution of opening its high career, by fostering scientific research into the interesting problems connected with the Ante-Columbian history and Ancient Monuments of our own country.

“In view of these facts, your Committee would recommend the adoption of the following resolutions by the Society:—

“Resolved, That this Society regard the researches of Messrs. Squier and Davis, as of very great importance in American Archæology, and as casting much light upon our Aboriginal Antiquities, especially upon the character and habits of the earliest races which had their seat in the Mississippi Valley.

“Resolved, That we regard the work prepared upon this subject, as one of great general interest, and as worthy to be adopted for publication by the Smithsonian Institution, both as resting on original researches, and as affording remarkable illustrations of the history of the American Continent.

“Your Committee would also append to this Report, the accompanying letters from Samuel G. Morton, M.D., of Philadelphia, and Hon. George P. Marsh, of Vermont, both members of this Society, and joint members of this Committee.

“All of which is respectfully submitted.

«Committee.» EDWARD ROBINSON, JOHN R. BARTLETT, W. W. TURNER,

“«New York», June, 1847.”

* * * * *

“«New- York.» June 9th, 1847.

“I have examined, with much interest and attention, the manuscripts, drawings, and ancient remains in the possession of Mr. E. G. Squier, and am happy to say that my previous impressions concerning the value of the researches of that gentleman and his associate, are fully confirmed. It is fortunate for the cause of American Archæology, that the systematic attempt at its elucidation should have been conceived and executed in so truly philosophical a spirit; and, rich as this age already is in antiquarian lore, it has, I think, received few more important contributions than that which the enlightened and generous zeal of these two private gentlemen is about to confer upon it. The Smithsonian Collection could not begin with a more appropriate or creditable essay; and I hope that every facility may be afforded to the investigators, in bringing before the public the results of their honorable labors, in as suitable a form and with as little delay as possible.

(Signed) GEO. P. MARSH.”

* * * * *

“«Philadelphia», June 8, 1847

“As a Member of the Committee of the American Ethnological Society, appointed to report on the Memoir on American Archæology, by Messrs. E. G. Squier and E. H. Davis, I have great pleasure in saying, that after a careful and repeated inspection of the materials in the hands of those gentlemen, I am convinced they constitute by far the most important contribution to the Archæology of the United States, that has ever been offered to the public. The number and accuracy of their plans, sketches, &c., have both interested and surprised me; and it is gratifying to learn that the preliminary arrangements have been made for their publication under the honorable auspices of the Smithsonian Institution.

(Signed) “«Samuel George Morton.»”

To ensure accuracy in the present volume, the plates and engravings have been prepared under the supervision of Mr. E. G. SQUIER, who has also had the general direction of the press. The sheets as they were printed, were also examined by Professor W. W. TURNER, of New York, and Mr. F. A. TEALL. The wood engravings were executed by Messrs. ORR & RICHARDSON, and Mr. J. W. ORR, from drawings on the blocks, chiefly by WM. WADE and Mr. HAMILTON BROWN. The Lithographic engraving was executed by Messrs. SARONY & MAJOR, and the printing by Mr. E. O. JENKINS.

Officers Of The Smithsonian Institution.

THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES, «Ex officio» PRESIDING OFFICER OF THE INSTITUTION.

THE VICE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES, «Ex officio» SECOND PRESIDING OFFICER.

George M. Dallas, Chancellor Of The Institution.

Joseph Henry, Secretary Of The Institution.

Charles C. Jewett, Assistant Secretary, Acting As Librarian.

Executive Committee. William W. Seaton, Alexander D. Bache, James A. Pearce.

Regents.

GEORGE M. DALLAS, «Vice President of the United States». ROGER B. TANEY, «Chief Justice of the United States». WILLIAM W. SEATON, «Mayor of the City of Washington».

JAMES A. PEARCE, «Member of the Senate of the United States». SIDNEY BREESE, «Member of the Senate of the United States». JEFFERSON DAVIS, «Member of the Senate of the United States».

HENRY W. HILLIARD, «Member of the House of Representatives». GEORGE P. MARSH, «Member of the House of Representatives». ROBERT MCCLELLAND, «Member of the House of Representatives».

RUFUS CHOATE, «Citizen of Massachusetts». GIDEON HAWLEY, «Citizen of New York». WILLIAM C. PRESTON, «Citizen of South Carolina». RICHARD RUSH, «Citizen of Pennsylvania». ALEXANDER D. BACHE, «Mem. of Nat. Inst., Washington». JOSEPH G. TOTTEN, «Mem. of Nat. Inst., Washington».

Members Ex Officio Of The Institution.

JAMES K. POLK, «President of the United States». GEORGE M. DALLAS, «Vice President of the United States». JAMES BUCHANAN, «Secretary of State of the United States». ROBERT J. WALKER, «Secretary of the Treasury of the United States». WILLIAM L. MARCY, «Secretary of War of the United States». JOHN Y. MASON, «Secretary of the Navy of the United States». CAVE JOHNSON, «Post Master General of the United States». ISAAC TOUCEY, «Attorney General of the United States». ROGER B. TANEY, «Chief Justice of the United States». EDMUND BURKE, «Commissioner of Patents of the United States». WILLIAM W. SEATON, «Mayor of the City of Washington».

Honorary Members Of The Institution.

[No Honorary Members have yet been elected.]

Ancient Monuments Of The Mississippi Valley:

Comprising The Results Of Extensive Original Surveys And Explorations.

By E. G. Squier, A.M., And E. H. Davis, M.D.

Accepted For Publication By The Smithsonian Institution. June 1847.

To Hon. Albert Gallatin, Statesman And Philosopher,

In Acknowledgment Of His Patriotic Services And Scientific Achievements,

This work is respectfully DEDICATED.

Contents.

CONTENTS, … xviii

LIST OF PLATES, … xx

LIST OF WOOD ENGRAVINGS, … xv

CHAPTER I.—GENERAL OBSERVATIONS ON THE ANCIENT MONUMENTS OF THE MISSISSIPPI VALLEY, … 1–8

Chapter II.—Earthworks; Enclosures; Works Of Defence, … 8–47

Chapter III.—Sacred Enclosures, … 47–104

Chapter IV.—Monuments Of The Southern States, … 104–124

Chapter V.—Monuments Of The North-West, … 124–139

Chapter VI.—Earthworks; The Mounds; Mounds Of Sacrifice, … 139–161

Chapter VII.—Mounds Of Sepulture, … 161–173

Chapter VIII.—Temple Mounds, … 173–178

Chapter IX.—Anomalous Mounds; Mounds Of Observation; Stone Heaps, … 178–186

CHAPTER X.—REMAINS OF ART FOUND IN THE MOUNDS; POTTERY AND ARTICLES OF CLAY, … 186–196

Chapter XI.—Implements Of Metal, … 196–204

Chapter XII.—Ornaments Of Metal, … 204–210

Chapter XIII.—Implements Of Stone, Etc., … 210–231

Chapter XIV.—Ornaments Of Stone, Bone, Etc., … 231–242

Chapter XV.—Sculptures From The Mounds, … 242–278

Chapter XVI.—Metals Fossils, Minerals, Etc., Of The Mounds, … 279–288

Chapter XVII.—Crania From The Mounds, … 288–293

Chapter XVIII.—Sculptured Or Inscribed Rocks, … 293–301

Chapter XIX.—Concluding Observations, … 301–306 #/

List Of Plates.

TITLES Facing page

I. View of ancient works at Marietta, ---- II. Map of a section of 12 miles of Scioto valley, 3 III. Map of a section of 6 miles of Miami valley, 4 No. 2. Map of 6 miles of Paint creek valley, 4 IV. Stone work near Bourneville, Ross co., Ohio, 11 V. Fort Hill, Highland county, Ohio, 14 VI. Fortified Hill, Butler county, Ohio, 16 VII. Fort Ancient, Warren county, Ohio, 18 VIII. Ancient work, Butler county, Ohio, 21 No. 2. Ancient work, Butler county, Ohio, 22 No. 3. Ancient work near Piqua, Miami co., Ohio, 23 No. 4. Ancient work near Dayton, Montgomery county, Ohio, 23 IX. Fortified Hill near Granville, Licking co., Ohio, 24 No. 2. Fortified Hill at the mouth of Great Miami river, 25 No. 3. Ancient work near Lexington, Kentucky, 26 X. Ancient work, Ross county, Ohio, 26 XI. Ancient work, Butler county, Ohio, 29 No. 2. Ancient work, Butler county, Ohio, 29 No. 3. Ancient work, Butler county, Ohio, 30 XII. Stone work on Duck river, Tennessee, 31 No. 2. Ancient work, Preble county, Ohio, 33 No. 3. Ancient work, Greene county, Ohio, 33 No. 4. Ancient work, Ross county, Ohio, 34 XIII. Ancient work, Bourbon county, Kentucky, 35 No. 2. Colerain works, Butler county, Ohio, 35 XIV. Ancient work, Pickaway county, Ohio, 36 No. 2. Ancient Work, Franklin county, Ohio, 36 No. 3. Ancient work, Fayette county, Kentucky, 36 No. 4. Ancient work, Fayette county, Kentucky, 36 XV. Ancient work, Huron county, Ohio, 37 No. 2. Ancient work, Ashtabula county, Ohio, 38 No. 3. Ancient work, Cuyahoga county, Ohio, 38 No. 4. Ancient work, Lorain county, Ohio, 39 No. 5. Ancient work, Lorain county, Ohio, 39 No. 6. Ancient work, Cuyahoga county, Ohio, 40 No. 7. Ancient work Cuyahoga county Ohio 40 No. 8. Ancient work Wood county Ohio 40 XVI. High Bank works Ross county Ohio 50 XVII. Hopeton works Ross county Ohio 51 XVIII. Cedar Bank works Ross county Ohio 52 XIX. Mound City Ross county Ohio 54 XX. Ancient work Ross county Ohio 56 XXI. Ancient work Ross county Ohio 57 No. 2. Ancient work Ross county, Ohio 57 No. 3. Ancient work Ross county Ohio 58 No. 4. Ancient work Ross county Ohio 59 XXII. Junction Group Ross county Ohio 60 No. 2. Blackwater Group Ross county, Ohio 61 XXIII. Dunlap’s works Ross county Ohio 63 No. 2. Ancient work Athens county Ohio 64 XXIV. Ancient work Pike county Ohio 66 XXV. Newark works Licking county Ohio, 67 XXVI. Marietta works Washington county Ohio 73 XXVII. Portsmouth works, Scioto county Ohio 77 XXVIII. Portsmouth works Group A 78 No. 2. Portsmouth works Group B 80 No. 3. Portsmouth works Group C 81 XXIX. Ancient works Montgomery county, Ohio 82 No. 2. Ancient works, Scioto county, Ohio, 83 No. 3. Ancient works Franklin county, Ohio, 84 XXX. Ancient works, Butler county Ohio 85 No. 2. Ancient works Butler county Ohio 85 No. 3. Ancient works Ross county Ohio 86 No. 4. Stone work Ross county, Ohio 87 XXXI. Graded way, Pike county, Ohio, 88 No. 2. Ancient work, Butler county, Ohio, 90 No. 3. Ancient work Butler county Ohio 90 No. 4. Ancient work Butler county Ohio, 90 XXXII. Ancient work, Butler county Ohio 91 No. 2. Ancient work Washington county Ohio 92 No. 3. Ancient work Ross county Ohio 92 No. 4. Ancient work Ross county Ohio 92 No. 5. Ancient work Ross county Ohio 92 No. 6. Ancient work Montgomery co Kentucky, 93 XXXIII. Ancient work Montgomery co Kentucky, 93 No. 2. Ancient work Randolph county, Indiana 94 XXXIV. Ancient work, Clermont county, Ohio, 94 No. 2. Ancient work Clermont county, Ohio 95 No. 3. Ancient work, Greene county Ohio 95 No. 4. Ancient work Greene county, Ohio 95 XXXV. Great Serpent, Adams county Ohio 96 XXXVI. The Cross Pickaway county, Ohio 97 No. 2. The Alligator, Licking county Ohio 98 No. 3. Ancient work, Fairfield county Ohio 100 No. 4. Map of section of Newark valley, 101 XXXVII. Ancient work Wateree District S. C. 105 XXXVIII. Ancient works on Etowah river, Alabama 108 ---- Ancient works on Tennessee river, Alabama 109 No. 2. Ancient works, Chickasaw surveys, Miss. 110 No. 3. Ancient works, Lafayette county, Miss. 111 No. 4. Ancient works, Prairie Jefferson, Louisiana. 113 XXXIX. Ancient work, Madison parish, Louisiana. 115        Ancient work, Bolivar county, Mississippi. 116 XL. Ancient works, Dade county, Wisconsin. 126 XLI. Ancient works, Dade county, Wisconsin. 127 No. 2. Ancient works, Dade county, Wisconsin. 127 XLII. Ancient works, Dade county, Wisconsin. 128 No. 2. Ancient works, Richland county, Wisconsin. 128 XLIII. Ancient works, Grant county, Wisconsin. 129        Nos. 2 to 13, various localities. 130 XLIV. Ancient work on Rock river, Wisconsin. 131        Nos. 2 to 8, various localities. 132 XLV. View of great mound at Marietta. 138 XLVI. Pottery from the mounds. 139 XLVII. Crania from the mounds. 288 XLVIII. Crania from the mounds. 288

LITHOGRAPHERS.—Sarony & Major, 117 Fulton street, New York.

WOOD ENGRAVERS.—Orr & Richardson, 90 Fulton street, New York.

PRINTER.—Edward O. Jenkins, 114 Nassau street, New York.

Plates Supplemental Data.

“Date of survey.” Surveyors Delineators.

I. ----        Charles Sullivan, II. 1847        E. G. Squier, III. 1840        James McBride, No. 2. 1847        E. G. Squier, IV. 1847 E. G. Squier and E. H. Davis. E. G. Squier, V. 1846 E. G. Squier and E. H. Davis. E. G. Squier, VI. 1836 James McBride. James McBride. VII. 1842 John Locke, M.D. John Locke. VIII. 1840 James McBride and J. W. Erwin, James McBride, No. 2. 1840 James McBride J. W. Erwin, James McBride, No. 3. 1846 James McBride, James McBride, No. 4. 1846 James McBride and Sam. Forrer, James McBride, IX. 1847 E. G. Squier and E. H. Davis, E. G. Squier. No. 2. ---- No. 3. 1818 C. S. Rafinesque, C. S. Rafinesque. X. 1845 E. G. Squier and E. H. Davis, E. G. Squier, XI. 1836 James McBride and J. W. Erwin, J. W. Erwin, No. 2. 1832 James McBride, James McBride. No. 3. 1840 James McBride and J. W. Erwin, James McBride, XII. ---- C. S. Rafinesque, C. S. Rafinesque, No. 2. 1846 James McBride. James McBride, No. 3. 1846 S. T. Oweins and L. K. Dille, S. T. Oweins, No. 4. 1846 P. N. White, P. N. White, XIII. 1820 C. S. Rafinesque, C. S. Rafinesque, No. 2. 1836 James McBride and J. W. Erwin, James McBride, XIV. ---- Charles Whittlesey, Charles Whittlesey, No. 2. ---- Charles Whittlesey, Charles Whittlesey, No. 3. 1820 C. S. Rafinesque. C. S. Rafinesque, No. 4. 1820 C. S. Rafinesque. C. S. Rafinesque. XV. ---- Charles Whittlesey, Charles Whittlesey, No. 2. ---- Charles Whittlesey, Charles Whittlesey, No. 3. ---- Charles Whittlesey, Charles Whittlesey, No. 4. ---- Charles Whittlesey, Charles Whittlesey, No. 5. ---- Charles Whittlesey, Charles Whittlesey, No. 6. ---- Charles Whittlesey, Charles Whittlesey, No. 7. ---- Charles Whittlesey Charles Whittlesey No. 8. ---- Charles Whittlesey Charles Whittlesey XVI. 1846 E. G. Squier and E. H. Davis E. G. Squier XVII. 1845 E. G. Squier and E. H. Davis E. G. Squier XVIII. 1846 E. G. Squier and E. H. Davis E. G. Squier XIX. 1846 E. G. Squier and E. H. Davis E. G. Squier XX. 1846 E. G. Squier and E. H. Davis E. G. Squier XXI. 1847 E. G. Squier E. G. Squier No. 2. 1847 E. G. Squier and E. H. Davis E. G. Squier No. 3. 1846 E. G. Squier and E. H. Davis E. G. Squier No. 4. 1846 E. G. Squier and E. H. Davis E. G. Squier XXII. 1845 E. G. Squier and E. H. Davis E. G. Squier No. 2. 1847 E. G. Squier and E. H. Davis E. G. Squier XXIII. 1846 E. G. Squier and E. H. Davis E. G. Squier No. 2. 1836 S. P. Hildreth S. P. Hildreth, XXIV. 1847 E. G. Squier and E. H. Davis E. G. Squier, XXV. 1836 C Whittlesey E. G. S. and E. H. D. XXVI. 1837 C Whittlesey and E. G. Squier Charles Whittlesey, XXVII. 1847        E. G. Squier, XXVIII. 1846 E. G. Squier and D Morton E. G. Squier, No. 2. 1847 E. G. Squier and E. H. Davis, E. G. Squier, No. 3. 1846 E. G. Squier and E. H. Davis, E. G. Squier, XXIX. ---- James McBride James McBride, No. 2. ---- Charles Whittlesey, Charles Whittlesey, No. 3. 1823 Charles Whittlesey, Charles Whittlesey, XXX. 1840 James McBride, James McBride, No. 2. 1847 James McBride and J. W. Erwin, James McBride, No. 3. 1845 E. G. Squier and E. H. Davis E. G. Squier, No. 4. 1847 E. G. Squier and E. H. Davis E. G. Squier, XXXI. 1846 E. G. Squier and E. H. Davis E. G. Squier, No. 2. ---- James McBride and J. W. Erwin J. W. Erwin No. 3. ---- James McBride and J. W. Erwin J. W. Erwin No. 4. 1842 James McBride and J. W. Erwin James McBride XXXII. ---- James McBride and J. W. Erwin James McBride No. 2. 1846 No. 3. 1846 E. G. Squier and E. H. Davis E. G. Squier, No. 4. 1846 E. G. Squier and E. H. Davis E. G. Squier, No. 5. 1847 E. G. Squier and E. H. Davis E. G. Squier, No. 6. 1818 C. S. Rafinesque C. S. Rafinesque, XXXIII. 1818 C. S. Rafinesque C. S. Rafinesque, No. 2. 1847 James McBride, James McBride, XXXIV. 1847 E. H. Davis, E. H. Davis, No. 2. ---- Gen Lytle, Gen Lytle, No. 3. 1846 S. Kyle and L. K. Dillo No. 4. 1846 S. Kyle and L. K. Dillo XXXV. 1846 E. G. Squier and E. H. Davis E. G. Squier XXXVI. 1847 E. G. Squier and E. H. Davis E. G. Squier No. 2. 1847 E. G. Squier and E. H. Davis E. G. Squier No. 3. 1847 E. G. Squier and E. H. Davis E. G. Squier No. 4. 1847        E. G. Squier XXXVII. ---- William Blanding William Blanding XXXVIII. ---- C. S. Rafinesque. C. S. Rafinesque. ---- ---- No. 2. 1846 R. Morris. R. Morris. No. 3. 1846 R. Morris. R. Morris. No. 4. ---- C. G. Forshey. C. G. Forshey. XXXIX. ---- James Hough. James Hough.        ---- James Hough. James Hough. XL. ---- R. C. Taylor. R. C. Taylor. XLI. ---- R. C. Taylor and John Locke. No. 2. ---- John Locke. John Locke. XLII. ---- John Locke. John Locke. No. 2. ---- S. Taylor. S. Taylor. XLIII. ---- S. Taylor. S. Taylor.        ---- S. Taylor. S. Taylor. XLIV. ----        ---- S. Taylor. S. Taylor. XLV. 1847        C. Sullivan. XLVI. ----        E. G. Squier. XLVII. ----        J. French. XLVIII. ----        J. French.

List Of Wood Engravings.

Fig. Page.

1. View of Great Mound at Miamisburgh, Ohio, 3 2. Section, exhibiting Septaria, 13 3. Group of Mounds within an enclosure, 27 4. Plan of Ancient Work, Lorain county, Ohio, 39 5. Plan of Ancient Work, Lorain county, Ohio, 39 6. Plan of Ancient Work, Cuyahoga county, Ohio, 40 7. Plan of Ancient Work, Cuyahoga county, Ohio, 40 8. Plan of Ancient Work, Wood county, Ohio, 40 9. Circle and truncated Pyramid, 53 10. Plan of Ancient Work, at Circleville, Ohio, 60 11. Plan of Sacred Enclosure, Pike county, Ohio, 66 12. Bird-shaped Mound, Newark, Ohio, 68 13. View of Gateway of Octagon, Newark, Ohio, 69 14. Truncated Mound covering gateway, 69 15. Crown-work of Circle, 69 16. View of “Observatory” at Newark, 70 17. “Elevated Squares” at Marietta, Ohio, 74 18. Plan of Ancient Work, Parkersburgh, Virginia, 77 19. Circle and Mound, Greenup county, Kentucky, 82 20. Graded Way, Piketon, Ohio, 88 21. Plan of Ancient Work in Alabama, 109 22. Plan of Ancient Work in Bolivar county, Mississippi, 116 23. Public Square of the Muscogulges, 121 24. Mound at Mount Royal, Florida, 122 25. Plan of Mound and Parallels, 122 26. Plan of Works in Wisconsin, 133 27. Group illustrating the forms of the Mounds, 139 28. Hill Mounds, 141 29. Section of Sacrificial Mound, 144 30. Structure of Mounds, 144 31. Section of Sacrificial Mound, 147 32. Plan of Altar, 147 33. Section of Sacrificial Mound, 148 34. Section of Sacrificial Mound, 149 35. Section of Altar, 150 36. Section of Altar, 150 37. Section of Sacrificial Mound, 152 38. Plan of Altar, 152 39. Section of Sacrificial Mound, 153 40. Position of recent deposits, 153 41. Section of Sacrificial Mound, 154 42. Plan of Excavation, etc. 154 43. Section of Sacrificial Mound, 155 44. Section of Sacrificial Mound, 156 45. Section of Sacrificial Mound, 156 46. Section of a Stratified Mound, 158 47. Section of a Mound, 159 48. View of Elliptical Mound, 160 49. Group of Sepulchral Mounds, 161 50. Section of Sepulchral Mound, 162 51. Plan of Sepulchral Chamber, 162 52. Section of Sepulchral Mound, 164 53. Position of Skeleton, 164 54. Section of Sepulchral Mound, 165 55. Section of Grave creek Mound, 169 56. View of Grave creek Mound, 169 57. Plans of groups of Mounds, 170 58. Mounds of Oregon, 171 59. Terraced Mound, 173 60. Plan of Cahokia Mound, 174 61. Lozenge-shaped Mound, 175 62. Section of a truncated Mound, 176 63. Plan of an Ancient octagonal Terrace, 176 64. Plan of an Ancient rectangular Terrace, 176 65. Plan of Temple Mound with graded ascent, 177 66. Group of Sepulchral Mounds, 177 67. Plan and Section of Anomalous Mound, 178 68. Ancient Pipe from the Mounds, 179 69. Section of Anomalous Mound, 180 70. Conical Mound, 185 71. Ancient Pottery, three figures, 191 72. Ancient Pottery, three figures, 192 73. Ancient Earthen Vessel, 192 74. Ancient Earthen Vessel, 192 75. Ancient Terra Cotta, 193 76. Terra Cotta from the Mounds, 194 77. Terra Cotta from the Mounds, 194 78. Terra Cotta from the Mounds, 194 79. Terra Cotta from the Mounds, 194 80. Terra Cotta from the Mounds, 194 81. Copper Axe from the Mounds, 197 82. Earthen Pipes, two figures, 197 83. Adjustment of Ancient Axes, 198 84. Copper Axe from the Mounds, 199 85. Copper Gravers from the Mounds, five figures, 200 86. Copper Spear-head and Knife, 201 87. Ancient Copper Implements, five figures, 201 88. Copper Bracelets from the Mounds, 204 89. Copper Gorgets from the Mounds, 205 90. Copper Ornament from the Mounds, 206 91. Copper Ornament from the Mounds, 206 92. Ancient Work-block of stone, 206 93. Copper Beads from the Mounds, 207 94. Copper Fibulæ from the Mounds, 207 95. Copper Bands, etc., 207 96. Silver Beads from the Mounds, 207 97. Silver Cross, 208 98. An article of Lead, 209 99. Flint Spear-heads, three figures, 211 100. Quartz Spear-head, 211 101. Ancient Mexican «mahquahuitl», 211 102. Sword of Pacific Islanders, 211 103. Arrow-heads, nine figures, 212 104. Hornstone Disks, three figures, 214 105. Flint Knives, three figures, 215 106. Hematite Cutting Implements, 215 107. Slate Cutting Implements, 216 108. Ancient Stone Axe, 216 109. Ancient Stone Axe, four figures, 217 110. Stone Axe from Mounds, 217 111. Stone Hand-axe, 218 112. Ancient Stone-axe, four figures, 218 113. Ancient Scandinavian Axes, two figures, 218 114. Ancient ornamented Axes, six figures, 218 115. Ancient ornamented Axe, 219 116. Ancient Club-head of Stone, 219 117. Ancient Club-head of Stone, 219 118. Pestles of Stone, two figures, 220 119. Implements of Bone, three figures. 220 120. Ancient Bone Awls, 220 121. Discoidal Stones, six figures, 221 122. Tubes of Stone, two figures, 224 123. Ornamented Stone Tube, 225 124. Stone Tube, 226 125. Stone Tubes, 227 126. Ancient Mound Pipe, 227 127. Granite Pipe, 228 128. Modern Indian Pipes, 230 129. Beads of Shell, 232 130. Beads of Shell, three figures, 233 131. Pendants, eight figures, 234 132. Pendants of Stone, 235 133. Stone Gorgets, two figures, 236 134. Stone Gorget, 237 135. Stone Gorget, 237 136. Stone Gorgets, seventeen figures, 237 137. Section of Gorget, 238 138. Stone Ornaments, 239 139. Prismatic Tube, 240 140. Articles of Stone, 240 141. Mica Ornaments, 240 142. Sculptured head from the Mounds, two views, 244 143. Sculptured head from the Mounds, two views, 244 144. Sculptured head from the Mounds, two views, 245 145. Sculptured head from the Mounds, two views, 245 146. Ancient Sculpture, 247 147. Sculptured Pipe, 247 148. Sculptured Pipe, 248 149. Sculptured Pipe, 249 150. Mask of Stone, 250 151. Mask of Stone, 251 152. Mask of Stone, 251 153. Sculpture of the Manitus, 251 154. Sculpture of the Manitus, 252 155. Sculpture of the Beaver, 256 156. Sculpture of the Otter, 256 157. Sculpture of the Otter, 256 158. Sculpture of the Panther, 256 159. Sculpture of the Panther, 256 160. Sculpture of the Panther, 256 161. Sculptured head of Elk, 257 162. Sculptured Head, 258 163. Sculptured Head, 258 164. Sculpture of tufted Heron, 259 165. Sculpture of Eagle, 259 166. Sculpture of Hawk, 261 167. Sculpture of Swallow, 261 168. Sculpture of Summer Duck, 261 169. Sculpture of Toucan? 261 170. Sculpture of Grouse, 261 171. Sculpture of Turkey Buzzard? 261 172. Sculpture of Paroquet, 263 173. Sculpture of Bird 263 174. Sculpture of Bird 263 175. Sculpture of Bird 263 176. Sculpture of Bird 263 177. Sculpture of Bird 264 178. Sculpture of Toucan, 266 179. Sculpture of unknown Bird, 267 180. Heads of Eagles, 267 181. Head of Raven? 267 182. Sculpture of unknown Bird, 267 183. Sculpture of Toad, 269 184. Sculpture of Toad, 269 185. Sculpture of Frog, 269 186. Sculpture of Rattlesnake, 269 187. Sculptured head of Goose, 269 188. Sculptured Death’s Head, 269 189. Sculptured Head of Bear? 271 190. Sculptured Head of Wolf? 271 191. Sculptured Head of unknown animal, 271 192. Sculptured Head of unknown animal, 271 193. Sculptured Head of unknown animal, 271 194. Front View of Tablet found at Cincinnati, 275 195. Reverse of same, 275 196. Carving of Rattlesnake, coiled, 276 197. Shark’s Teeth, fossil, 282 198. Marine Shell, pyrula perversa, 283 199. Section of Hill Mound, 289 200. Inscribed Rock on Guyandotte river, Va., 294 201. Inscribed Rock on Guyandotte river, Va., 295 202. Inscribed Rock on Guyandotte river, Va., 295 203. Inscribed Rock on Guyandotte river, Va., 296 204. Inscribed Rock on Guyandotte river, Va., 296 205. Inscribed Rock on Guyandotte river, Va., 297 206. Inscribed Rock on Ohio river, 298 207. Site of Sculptured Rocks of the Guyandotte 299

Preface.

The fact of the existence, within the valley of the Mississippi river and its tributaries, of many ancient monuments of human labor and skill, seems to have escaped the notice of the adventurers who first made known to the world the extent and fertility of that vast region. Except some incidental allusions by La Vega, and the Portuguese chronicler of De Soto’s unfortunate expedition, to structures bearing some analogy to those of the West, (and which seem to have been occupied, if they were not built, by the Indians of Florida,) we find no mention made of these monuments by any of the earlier explorers. No sooner, however, had trade been opened with the Indians beyond the Alleghanies, and the valley of the Mississippi begun to attract the attention of the rival nations that laid claim to this division of the continent, than the less prominent features of the country became subjects of observation and remark. Then, for the first time, we find these ancient monuments distinctly alluded to. It was not however until some time afterwards, when settlements had been established at various prominent points within the valley, and the tide of emigration began to flow thitherward, that any special attention was directed to them. Carver in 1776, and Hearte and others in 1791, were among the earliest of these observers at the North. Their accounts, however, served scarcely to make known the existence of these remains, and failed to convey any clear idea of their extent or character. But as the country became better known and more densely populated, notices of their existence became more numerous, and some detailed accounts of particular groups were presented to the world, in the form of incidental notices in books of travel and local gazetteers, or in contributions to the pages of periodicals, and to the transactions of learned societies. HARRIS, in his “«Tour into the Territory north-west of the Ohio»,” published in 1805, noticed at considerable length the ancient remains at Marietta on the Ohio river; and H. H. BRACKENRIDGE, one of the most accurate of the early explorers of the West, in his “«Views of Louisiana»,” published in 1814, and in a paper in the first volume of the new series of the Transactions of the “American Philosophical Society,” presented accounts of ancient remains at various points, together with some general remarks upon our antiquities, distinguished for their comprehensiveness and sound philosophical spirit. Bishop MADISON of Virginia, in 1803, addressed to Dr. Barton, then Vice President of the American Philosophical Society, a communication of considerable length “upon the supposed fortifications of the western country,” which was published in the sixth volume of the old series of the Transactions of that institution. It contains some interesting facts relative to the ancient remains found within the valley of the great Kenhawa river, in Virginia, and is principally devoted to combating the popular notion that «all» the ancient earthworks were of defensive origin. BARTRAM, in his animated Journal of Travels in Florida, published in 1779, makes frequent mention of the ancient remains which fell under his notice. His accounts have been amply confirmed by later observations, and they may be regarded as presenting a very accurate view of their general character. Previous to Bartram’s expedition, Adair, in his “Account of the American Indians,” published in 1775, mentioned the existence of these remains, but gave no details respecting them.

In 1817, DE WITT CLINTON, whose active mind neglected no department of inquiry, read a paper before the “Literary and Philosophical Society of New York,” (an institution no longer existing,) upon the “Antiquities of the western part of New York,” which was subsequently published in a pamphlet form. It gave a connected view of these antiquities so far as then known, and indicated their character with such clearness, as to identify them at once as belonging to that imposing class of remains found in the valley of the Mississippi. MCCAULEY, in his “«History of New York»,” published at a later period, (1829,) added considerably to the number of facts presented by Mr. CLINTON.

Among the earliest and more important contributions to the general stock of information respecting the western monuments, is the chapter entitled “Antiquities,” contained in “«The Natural and Statistical View of Cincinnati and the Miami country»,” by DANIEL DRAKE, M.D., published in 1815. It not only embraces many facts, but is free from the tendency towards exaggeration which has been the prevailing fault of most that has been written upon the subject of American Antiquities. In connection with what was published by Mr. BRACKENRIDGE, and at a subsequent date by the late President HARRISON, (Address before the Historical Society of Ohio, 1832,) it presents a better view of the ancient remains of the region north of the Ohio, than can be obtained from any other source,—Mr. ATWATER’S Memoir, in the Transactions of the American Antiquarian Society, alone excepted.

It would be impossible, as it is unnecessary, particularly to point out all that has been published upon this subject, chiefly consisting, as it does, of detached and incidental observations. In addition to the several authorities above named, we may mention LEWIS and CLARKE, Major LONG, Dr. EDWIN JAMES, HENRY R. SCHOOLCRAFT, TIMOTHY FLINT, HUGH WILLIAMSON, Dr. BARTON, Rev. JOSEPH DODDRIDGE, President JEFFERSON, Dr. LEWIS C. BECK, Dr. S. P. HILDRETH, KEATING, HAYWOOD, HOWE, NUTTALL, LATROBE, ROCHEFAUCAULT, SHORT, COLLINS, DICKESON, BROWN, FEATHERSTONHAUGH, Professors GERARD TROOST, JOHN LOCKE, and C. G. FORSHEY, R. C. and S. TAYLOR, Prince MAXIMILIAN, Prof. RAFINESQUE, CHARLES WHITTLESEY, etc., etc., as among those who have contributed to the general stock of information upon this subject.

The first attempt towards a general account of the ancient monuments of the West, was made by Mr. CALEB ATWATER, who deserves the credit of being the pioneer in this department. His Memoir, constituting 150 octavo pages, was published in the first volume of the “Archæologia Americana,” in 1819. It contains plans and descriptions of a considerable number of ancient works,—embracing the imposing structures at Marietta, Newark, Portsmouth, Circleville, etc., etc.,—with accounts of a variety of ancient remains found in the mounds. It gives a better conception of the number, magnitude, and more obvious characteristics of the monuments treated of, than was before possessed, and for a time appeared to have satisfied public inquiry. It contains many errors, for which however we can find a ready apology in the unsettled state of the country, and the attendant difficulties of investigation at the time it was written,—errors which, under present advantages of research, would be inexcusable.

The facts presented by the earlier of the authorities above named, have been collected by various authors, either in support of a favorite hypothesis, or with a view of conveying to the world some conception of the antiquities of our country. These compilations, however, have proved eminently unsatisfactory, not less from the vague nature of the original accounts, than from the circumstance that they were in most instances mixed up with the crudest speculations and the wildest conjectures. Even when this was not the case, the fact that the original observations were made in a disconnected and casual manner, served still further to confuse the mind of the student and render generalization impossible. It was under an impression of existing deficiencies in these respects,—the paucity of facts, and the loose manner in which most of them had been presented,—that the investigations recorded in this memoir were commenced and prosecuted. At the outset, as indispensable to independent judgment, all preconceived notions were abandoned, and the work of research commenced «de novo», as if nothing had been known or said concerning the remains to which attention was directed. It was concluded that if these monuments were capable of reflecting any certain light upon the grand archæological questions connected with the primitive history of the American Continent, the origin, migrations and early state of the American race, that then they should be more carefully and minutely, and above all, more systematically investigated.

The locality chosen for the commencement of operations, is a section of the Scioto river and Paint creek valleys, of which the city of Chillicothe is the centre, and which possesses a deserved celebrity for its beauty, unexampled fertility, and the great number, size, and variety of its ancient remains. Situated in the middle of southern Ohio, and possessing a mild and salubrious climate, this seems to have been one of the centres of ancient population; and, probably, no other equal portion of the Mississippi basin furnishes so rich and interesting a field for the antiquarian. A glance at the “«Map of a Section of Twelve Miles of the Scioto Valley, with its Ancient Monuments»,” Plate II, will fully illustrate this remark.

The plan of operations was agreed upon, and the field-work commenced, early in the spring of 1845. Subsequently, the plan was greatly extended, and the investigations were carried on, over Ohio and the adjacent States, with slight interruption, up to the summer of 1847.

The body of this memoir will indicate with sufficient clearness, the mode in which these investigations were conducted, and the extent to which they were prosecuted. It is perhaps enough here to say, that the surveys of ancient works were, for the most part, made by the authors in person, and that the excavations of mounds, etc., were all of them conducted under their personal direction and supervision. Care was exercised to note down, on the spot, every fact which it was thought might be of value, in the solution of the problems of the origin and purposes of the remains under notice; and particular attention was bestowed in observing the dependencies of the position, structure, and contents of the various works in respect to each other and the general features of the country. Indeed, no exertion was spared to ensure entire accuracy, and the compass, line, and rule were alone relied upon, in all matters where an approximate estimate might lead to erroneous conclusions.

The ancient enclosures and groups of works personally examined or surveyed, are upwards of one hundred in number. Some of these had before been noticed, but most are now for the first time presented to the world. About two hundred mounds, of all forms and sizes, and occupying every variety of position, have also been excavated. Several thousand remains of ancient art were collected in the course of these investigations, chiefly from the mounds themselves. These constitute a cabinet, as valuable in its extent, as it is interesting in the great variety and singular character of the illustrations which it furnishes of the condition of the minor arts, and the connections and communications of the people by whom these monuments were erected.

The prosecution of these researches naturally led to an acquaintance and correspondence with a large number of gentlemen in various parts of the Union, who felt interested in them, or who had devoted attention to the same subject. All of these have kindly rendered their services in cases where they could prove of value, or have freely contributed the results of their own labors to complete the design of the authors, in presenting as full and comprehensive a view of the ancient monuments of our country, as private means and limited facilities would allow.

First among these, it will not be invidious to name JAMES MCBRIDE, Esq., of Hamilton, Butler county, Ohio, whose valuable contributions constitute an important feature in the memoir herewith presented. This gentleman, residing for a long time in the centre of the fertile valley of the Great Miami river, amidst the numerous evidences of ancient population with which that valley abounds, has devoted a large proportion of his time to their attentive examination. Personally, and with the assistance of J. W. ERWIN, Esq., resident engineer on the Miami canal, he has made numerous surveys of ancient enclosures and groups of works in that valley, distinguished for their minute fidelity. He also, without however resorting very extensively to direct excavations, has collected an interesting cabinet of aboriginal relics. Anxious to contribute his share to whatever might elucidate the subject of American Archæology, Mr. MCBRIDE, with a generous liberality, placed in the hands of the authors his notes, plans, and drawings, without restriction, to be used as they deemed proper. This tender was accepted in the same spirit it was made, and the materials thus furnished have been freely used in the succeeding pages, where they rank second to none in interest and value.

Among the most zealous investigators in the field of American antiquarian research, is CHARLES WHITTLESEY, Esq., of Cleveland, formerly Topographic Engineer of Ohio. His surveys and observations, carried on for many years and over a wide field, have been both numerous and accurate, and are among the most valuable, in all respects, of any hitherto made. Although Mr. Whittlesey, in conjunction with JOSEPH SULLIVANT, Esq., of Columbus, Ohio, originally contemplated a joint work, in which the results of his investigations should be embodied, he has nevertheless, with a liberality which will be not less appreciated by the public than by the authors, contributed to this memoir about twenty plans of ancient works, which, with the accompanying explanations and general observations, will be found embodied in the following pages. Relating principally to the aboriginal monuments of northern Ohio, (as do those of Mr. McBride to the remains of western Ohio,) they contribute much to the interest and completeness of this memoir. It is to be hoped the public may yet be put in possession of the entire results of Mr. Whittlesey’s labor, which could not fail of adding greatly to our stock of knowledge on this interesting subject.

Acknowledgment is also due to Rev. R. MORRIS, of Mount Sylvan, Lafayette county, Mississippi, for valuable facts relating to the monuments of the South. Although but recently commenced, Mr. Morris’s investigations have been prosecuted in a manner which gives promise of important results.

It will be observed that several plans and notices of ancient works are presented in the succeeding chapters, upon the authority of the late Prof. C. S. RAFINESQUE. This gentleman, while living, devoted considerable attention to the antiquities of the Mississippi valley, and published several brief papers relating to them. His notes and plans, for the most part brief, crude, and imperfect, at his death found their way into the possession of BRANTZ MAYER, Esq., of Baltimore, late Secretary of the American Legation to Mexico. This gentleman placed them in the hands of the authors, with liberty to make use of the information which they contained. They, however, have chosen to avail themselves of this permission, only so far as to adopt Prof. Rafinesque’s plans, etc., in cases where they have either been able to verify them in person, or to assure themselves by collateral evidence of their accuracy in all essential particulars. His notes are principally important, as indicating the localities of many interesting monuments, rather than as conveying any satisfactory information concerning them.

To SAMUEL GEORGE MORTON, M.D., of Philadelphia, the eminent author of “«Crania Americana»,” is acknowledgment especially due, not only for the warm interest manifested in these investigations from their commencement, but for the use of valuable manuscripts relating to our antiquities,—the collections of many years of laborious research in collateral departments. Among these is the brief account of the ancient remains on the Wateree river in South Carolina, by Dr. WILLIAM BLANDING; and also the highly important account of the monuments of the States bordering the Gulf of Mexico, by WILLIAM BARTRAM, the first naturalist who penetrated the dense tropical forests of Florida. The history of the MSS. from which the latter account was taken, is unknown. It found its way by accident into the hands of its present possessor. It consists of answers to a series of questions, by a second person, (probably Dr. Barton,) relating to the history, religion, manners, institutions, etc., of the tribes which composed the Creek confederacy, and is undoubtedly the most complete and accurate account of those Indians in existence.

Dr. S. P. HILDRETH, of Marietta, and Prof. JOHN LOCKE, of Cincinnati, both of whom have devoted much attention to our antiquities, and whose observations upon the subject are distinguished for their accuracy, are also entitled to honorable mention for facts contributed, and assistance rendered. So also, for surveys of ancient works, drawings and descriptions of ancient relics, and facts of various kinds, is acknowledgment due to J. DILLE, Esq., of Newark, Ohio; S. T. OWEINS and W. B. FAIRCHILD, Esqs., of Xenia, Ohio; Col. B. L. C. WAILES, of Washington, Mississippi; J. H. BLAKE, Esq., of Boston; THOMAS REYNOLDS, M.D., of Brockville, Canada West; ARIUS NYE, Esq., and CHARLES SULLIVAN, Marietta, Ohio; HENRY HOWE, R. BUCHANAN, JOSEPH CLARKE, ERASMUS GEST, jr., and U. P. JAMES, Esqs., of Cincinnati; J. E. WHARTON, Esq., of Wheeling, Virginia; DANIEL MORTON, Esq., of New York; L. K. DILLE, M.D., of Cedarville, Ohio; CHARLES O. TRACY, of Portsmouth, Ohio; Prof. W. W. MATHER, Jackson, Ohio; Rev. W. B. STEVENS, Athens, Georgia; Hon. T. H. CLINGMAN, North Carolina; ASHEL AYLESWORTH, Granville, Ohio; P. N. WHITE, Esq., Circleville, Ohio; C. J. ORTON, Lower Sandusky, Ohio; Lieut. JOHN H. ALLEN, now of Easton, Md.; T. B. HUNT, Esq., of New Haven; WM. F. CLEMSON, Esq., of Chillicothe, Ohio; and JOSEPH SULLIVANT, Esq., Columbus, Ohio.

And while rendering these acknowledgments, it is but proper to express the obligations which the authors of these investigations feel themselves under to gentlemen in the various Atlantic cities, who, if they have not been able to add to the number of facts here presented, have nevertheless by their thorough appreciation of the subject, friendly encouragement, and disinterested aid, extended in various ways, facilitated this new attempt towards the elucidation of the antiquities of our own country. To the learned and venerable President of the American Ethnological Society, Hon. ALBERT GALLATIN, the closing years of whose long, active, and useful life have been closely and successfully devoted to researches in the wide field of American Ethnological Science, are our grateful acknowledgments especially due. His assistance and enlightened approbation have had a controlling influence in sustaining and carrying on these investigations. To JOHN R. BARTLETT, Esq., of New York, Foreign Corresponding Secretary of the Ethnological Society, distinguished for his zeal and energy in organizing and promoting historical and ethnological research, we cannot sufficiently express our obligations. His assistance, in a variety of ways, has been of value, especially in directing public attention to the importance of a subject, the extent and bearings of which were but imperfectly understood.

Hon. GEO. P. MARSH, of Burlington, Vermont, whose disinterested exertions have mainly contributed to the appearance of this memoir in its present form, has kindly examined the following chapters and given them the benefit of his sound and critical judgment. To Prof. EDWARD ROBINSON, D.D., and to Prof. W. W. TURNER, both of New York, and both officers of the American Ethnological Society, are we also indebted. The gentleman last named has supervised the memoir, and his suggestions have been deferred to with a readiness implying a confidence in his critical abilities, which is shared alike by the authors and by the public.

To Professors B. SILLIMAN and B. SILLIMAN, jr., of New Haven; Prof. JEFFRIES WYMAN, of Boston; Prof. LEWIS AGASSIZ, of Cambridge; S. F. HAVENS, Esq., Librarian of the American Antiquarian Society, Worcester; and to numerous other gentlemen in various parts of the Union, and particularly to GEO. R. GLIDDON, Esq., whose lectures and publications upon the subject of Egyptian Archæology have given a new and powerful impulse to cognate researches in America, and invested them with a popular interest indispensable to their successful prosecution,—to all of these are the warmest thanks of the investigators due.

It will not be improper here to mention, that the literary part of the present work, the responsible task of arranging and embodying for publication the original MSS. and other materials jointly got together in the course of these investigations, has devolved mostly upon the gentleman whose name stands first upon the title-page, who has also prepared the plans, drawings, and other illustrations. The other gentleman has been engaged for a number of years in researches connected with our ancient monuments, and in collecting relics of aboriginal art; and it is due to him to say, that the investigations here recorded, so far as they involve inquiries in natural science, have principally been made by him. He has also sustained the larger proportion of the expenses attending these explorations, and devoted considerable time to the restoration and arrangement of the relics recovered from the mounds.

Before concluding these prefatory remarks,—already extended beyond the original design,—we may be permitted to say that it has been a constant aim in the preparation of this memoir, to present facts in a clear and concise form, with such simple deductions and generalizations alone, as may follow from their careful consideration. With no hypothesis to combat or sustain, and with a desire only to arrive at truth, whatever its bearings upon received theories and current prejudices, everything like mere speculation has been avoided. Analogies, apparently capable of reflecting light upon many important questions connected with an enlarged view of the subject, have seldom been more than indicated. Their full consideration, as also that of the relations which the ancient monuments of the Mississippi valley bear to those of other portions of America and the world, has not been attempted here. To such an undertaking, involving long and careful research, as also a more comprehensive view of the monuments of the central parts of the continent, this memoir is only preliminary. It yet remains to be seen whether all the ancient monuments of the Mississippi valley were constructed upon similar principles; whether they denote a common origin, and whether they were probably contemporaneous or otherwise in their erection. It remains to be settled whether the singular and anomalous structures of Wisconsin and the North-west are part of the same grand system of defensive, religious, and sepulchral monuments found in the valley of the Ohio, and the more imposing, if not more regular remains which abound in the Southern States. The work of investigation has been just commenced; its future progress may, and no doubt will, result in new and perhaps more important disclosures than any hitherto made.

The importance of a complete and speedy examination of the whole field, cannot be over-estimated. The operations of the elements, the shifting channels of the streams, the levelling hand of public improvement, and most efficient of all, the slow but constant encroachments of agriculture, are fast destroying these monuments of ancient labor, breaking in upon their symmetry and obliterating their outlines. Thousands have already disappeared, or retain but slight and doubtful traces of their former proportions. Such an examination is, however, too great an undertaking for private enterprise to attempt. It must be left to local explorers, to learned associations, or to the Government. And if this memoir shall succeed in directing that attention to the subject which it merits, and thereby in some manner secure the thorough investigation of these monuments, that result will prove an ample recompense for labors performed in a field of absorbing interest, and one which holds out abundant attractions to the Antiquary and Archæologist.

CHILLICOTHE, OHIO, «June», 1847.

[p001]

Ancient Monuments. Chapter I. General Observations.

The ancient monuments of the Western United States consist, for the most part, of elevations and embankments of earth and stone, erected with great labor and manifest design. In connection with these, more or less intimate, are found various minor relics of art, consisting of ornaments and implements of many kinds, some of them composed of metal, but most of stone.

These remains are spread over a vast extent of country. They are found on the sources of the Alleghany, in the western part of the State of New-York, on the east; and extend thence westwardly along the southern shore of Lake Erie, and through Michigan and Wisconsin, to Iowa and the Nebraska territory, on the west.[1] We have no record of their occurrence above the great lakes. Carver mentions some on the shores of Lake Pepin, and some are said to occur near Lake Travers, under the 46th parallel of latitude. Lewis and Clarke saw them on the Missouri river, one thousand miles above its junction with the Mississippi; and they have been observed on the Kanzas and Platte, and on other remote western rivers. They are found all over the intermediate country, and spread over the valley of the Mississippi to the Gulf of Mexico. They line the shores of the Gulf from Texas to Florida, and extend, in diminished numbers, into South Carolina. They occur in great numbers in Ohio, Indiana, Illinois, Wisconsin, Missouri, Arkansas, Kentucky, Tennessee, Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama, Georgia, Florida, and Texas. They are found, in less numbers, in the western portions of New-York, Pennsylvania, Virginia, and North and South Carolina; as also in Michigan, Iowa, and in the Mexican territory beyond the Rio Grande del Norte. In short, [p002] they occupy the entire basin of the Mississippi and its tributaries, as also the fertile plains along the Gulf.

It is a fact but recently made known, that there are an abundance of small mounds, or tumuli, in the territory of Oregon. We are not informed, however, whether there are any enclosures, or other works of like character with those usually accompanying the mounds of the Mississippi valley, nor whether the mounds of Oregon are generally disseminated over that territory.[2] That they are of frequent occurrence upon the river Gila, in California, and also upon the tributaries of the Colorado of the West, is also a fact but recently ascertained. Whether these mounds possess features identifying them with those of the Mississippi valley, or indicating a common origin, remains to be decided.

It is not to be understood that these works are dispersed equally over the area above indicated. They are mainly confined to the valleys of the rivers and large streams, and seldom occur very far back from them. Occasional works are found in the hill or broken country; but they are not frequent, and are always of small size.

Although possessing throughout certain general points of resemblance, going to establish a kindred origin, these works, nevertheless, resolve themselves into three grand geographical divisions, which present, in many respects, striking contrasts, yet so gradually merge into each other, that it is impossible to determine where one series terminates and the other begins. In the region bordering the upper lakes, to a certain extent in Michigan, Iowa, and Missouri, but particularly in Wisconsin, we find a succession of remains, entirely singular in their form, and presenting but slight analogy to any others of which we have an account, in any portion of the globe. The larger proportion of these are structures of earth, bearing the forms of beasts, birds, reptiles, and even of men; they are frequently of gigantic dimensions, constituting huge «basso-relievos» upon the face of the country. They are very numerous, and in most cases occur in long and apparently dependent ranges. In connection with them, are found many conical mounds and occasional short lines of embankment, in rare instances forming enclosures. These animal effigies are mainly confined to Wisconsin, and extend across that territory from Fond du Lac, in a south-western direction, ascending the Fox river, and following the general course of Rock and Wisconsin rivers to the Mississippi. They may be much more extensively disseminated; but it is here only that they have been observed in considerable numbers. In Michigan, as also in Iowa and Missouri, similar elevations, of more or less regular outline, are said to occur. They are represented as [p003] dispersed in ranges, like the buildings of a modern city, and covering sometimes an area of many acres.

[Illustration: II. Map of a section of twelve miles of the Scioto Valley with its ancient monuments.]

Further to the southward, in the region watered by the Ohio and its tributaries, we find ancient works of greater magnitude and more manifest design. Among them are a few animal-shaped structures; but they seem to have been erected on different principles and for a different purpose from those just noticed. Here we find numberless mounds, most of them conical but many pyramidal in form, and often of great dimensions. The pyramidal structures are always truncated, sometimes terraced, and generally have graded ascents to their summits. They bear a close resemblance to the Teocallis of Mexico; and the known uses of the latter are suggestive of the probable purposes to which they were applied. Accompanying these, and in some instances sustaining an intimate relation to them, are numerous enclosures of earth and stone, frequently of vast size, and often of regular outline. These are by far the most imposing class of our aboriginal remains, and impress us most sensibly with the numbers and power of the people who built them. The purposes of many of these are quite obvious; and investigation has served to settle, pretty clearly, the character of most of the other works occurring in connection with them.

Proceeding still further southwards, we find, in the States bordering on the Gulf of Mexico, the mounds increasing in size and regularity of form, if not in numbers. Conical mounds become comparatively rare, and the Teocalli-shaped structures become larger and more numerous, and assume certain dependencies in respect to each other, not before observed. The enclosures, on the other hand, diminish in size and numbers; and lose many of the characteristic features of those of a higher latitude, though still sustaining towards them a strong general resemblance. Here, for the first time, we find traces of bricks in the mounds and in the walls of enclosures.

The peculiarities of these several divisions will be more particularly pointed out in the progress of this work; when the points of resemblance and difference will become more apparent. The succeeding observations relate more especially to the remains included in the central geographical section above indicated, where the investigations recorded in this volume were principally carried on, and which, in the extent, variety, and interesting nature of its ancient monuments, affords by far the richest and most important field for archæological research and inquiry.

The number of these ancient remains is well calculated to excite surprise, and has been adduced in support of the hypothesis that they are most, if not all of them, natural formations, “the results of diluvial action,” modified perhaps in some instances, but never erected by man. Of course no such suggestion was ever made by individuals who had enjoyed the opportunity of seeing and investigating them. Simple structures of earth could not possibly bear more palpable evidences of an artificial origin, than do most of the western monuments. The evidences in support of this assertion, derived from the form, structure, position, and contents of these remains, will sufficiently appear in the progress of this work.

PLATE II, «exhibiting a section of twelve miles of the Scioto valley, with its ancient» [p004] «monuments», will serve to give some general conception of the number of these remains. The enclosures are here indicated by dark lines, the mounds by simple dots. Within the section represented, it will be observed that there are not less than «ten» groups of large works, accompanied by a great number of mounds, of various sizes. Within the enclosure designated by the letter E are embraced twenty-four mounds. The enclosures D, H, I, K, have each about two and a half miles of embankment; and H and K enclose but little less than one hundred acres each. It is proper to observe, to prevent misconception, that there are few sections of country of equal extent which embrace so large a number of ancient works. The fertile valley of the Scioto river was a favorite resort of the ancient people, and was one of the seats of their densest population. The various works indicated in these maps, will be described at length in the subsequent pages. An enlarged plan of the enclosure designated by the letter A is given on Plate XXIII; B, on Plate XVIII; C, Plate XVIII; D, Plate XVII; E and F, Plate XIX; G, Plate XXII; H, Plate XXI; I, Plate XVI; K, Plate XX.

PLATE III, No. 1, «exhibits a section of six miles of the Valley of Paint Creek», a tributary of the Scioto river. The village of Bourneville is ten miles west of Chillicothe. Within this limit are embraced three works of extraordinary size, besides several smaller ones. The works, designated by the letters A and B, have each upwards of two miles of heavy embankment, and contain not far from one hundred acres. The stone work C has an area of one hundred and forty acres, enclosed within a wall upwards of two and a fourth miles long. Enlarged plans of the various works here indicated are given in the following pages. A and B, Plate XXI; C, Plate IV; D and E, Plate XXX.

Plate III, No. 2, «presents a section of six miles of the Great Miami valley», included principally within the limits of Butler county, Ohio. Not less than seven enclosures, of considerable size, occur within these bounds. The work indicated by the letter G contains ninety-five acres. An enlarged plan of the work marked A, is given on Plate VI; of B, on Plate XI; C and F, on Plate XXX; D, Plate XXXI; and G, on Plate XIII.

Not far from one hundred enclosures of various sizes, and five hundred mounds, are found in Ross county, Ohio. The number of tumuli in the State may be safely estimated at ten thousand, and the number of enclosures at one thousand or fifteen hundred. Many of them are small, but cannot be omitted in an enumeration. They are scarcely less numerous on the Kenhawas in Virginia, than on the Scioto and Miamis; and are abundant on the White river and Wabash, as also upon the Kentucky, Cumberland, Tennessee, and the numerous other tributaries of the Ohio and Mississippi.

[Illustration: III. Map exhibiting a section of six miles of the Great Miami Valley, with its ancient monuments.

No. 2. Map exhibiting a section of six miles of the Paint Creek Valley, with its ancient monuments.]

Nor is their magnitude less a matter of remark than their great number. Lines of embankment, varying in height from five to thirty feet, and enclosing areas of from one to fifty acres, are common; while enclosures of one or two hundred acres area are far from infrequent. Occasional works are found enclosing as many as [p005] four hundred acres.[3] The magnitude of the area enclosed is not, however, always a correct index of the amount of labor expended in the erection of these works. A fortified hill in Highland county, Ohio, has one mile and five-eighths of heavy embankment; yet it encloses an area of only about forty acres. A similar work on the Little Miami river, in Warren county, Ohio, has upwards of four miles of embankment, yet encloses little more than one hundred acres. The group of works at the mouth of the Scioto river has an aggregate of at least twenty miles of embankment; yet the entire amount of land embraced within the walls does not probably much exceed two hundred acres.

The mounds are of all dimensions, from those of but a few feet in height and a few yards in diameter, to those which, like the celebrated structure at the mouth of Grave Creek in Virginia, rise to the height of seventy feet, and measure one thousand feet in circumference at the base. The great mound in the vicinity of Miamisburgh, Montgomery county, Ohio, is sixty-eight feet in perpendicular height, and eight hundred and fifty-two in circumference at the base, containing 311,353 cubic feet.

[Illustration: Fig. 1. Great Mound at Miamisburgh, Ohio.

From a sketch by Henry Howe, Esq.]

The truncated pyramid at Cahokia, Illinois, has an altitude of ninety feet, and is upwards of two thousand feet in circumference at the base. It has a level summit of several acres area. The great mound at Selserstown, Mississippi, is computed to cover six acres of ground. Mounds of these extraordinary dimensions are most common at the south, though there are some of great size at the north. The usual dimensions are, however, considerably less than in the examples here given. The greater number range from six to thirty feet in perpendicular height, by forty to one hundred feet diameter at the base.[4] [p006]

All the above-mentioned constructions are composed of earth or stone; though a combination of these materials in the same work is by no means rare. When there are no ditches interior or exterior to the embankments, «pits» or “dug holes,” from which the earth for their formation was taken, are generally visible near by. These are sometimes very broad and deep, and occasionally quite symmetrical in shape.[5] In the vicinity of large mounds such excavations are common. The earth and stone composing these works are sometimes foreign to the locality which they occupy, and must have been brought from considerable distances.

A large, perhaps the larger, portion of these enclosures are regular in outline, the square and the circle predominating. Some are parallelograms, some ellipses, others polygons, regular or irregular. The regular works are almost invariably erected on level river-terraces, great care having evidently been taken to select those least broken. The irregular works are those which partake most of the character of defences, and are usually made to conform to the nature of the ground upon which they are situated,—running along the brows of hills, or cutting off the approaches to strong natural positions. The square and the circle often occur in combination, frequently communicating with each other or with irregular works directly, or by avenues consisting of parallel lines of embankment. Detached parallels are numerous. The mounds are usually simple cones in form; but they are sometimes truncated, and occasionally terraced, with graded or winding ascents to their summits. Some are elliptical, others pear-shaped, and others squares or parallelograms, with flanking terraces. Besides these, there are others already alluded to, most common in the extreme north-west, which assume the forms of animals and reptiles. Another variety of remains are the causeways or “roads,” and the graded descents to rivers and streams, or from one terrace to another. These several classes of works will be described at length, under appropriate heads.

As already remarked, these remains occur mainly in the valleys of the Western rivers and streams. The alluvial terraces, or “river-bottoms,” as they are popularly termed, were the favorite sites of the builders. The principal monuments are found where these “bottoms” are most extended, and where the soil is most fertile and easy of cultivation. At the junction of streams, where the valleys are usually broadest and most favorable for their erection, some of the largest and most singular remains are found. The works at Marietta; at the junction of the Muskingum with the Ohio; at the mouth of Grave Creek; at Portsmouth, the mouth of the Scioto; and at the mouth of the Great Miami, are instances in point. Occasional works are found on the hill tops, overlooking the valleys, or at a little distance from them; but these are manifestly, in most instances, works of defence or last resort, or in some way connected with warlike purposes. And it is worthy of remark, that the sites selected for settlements, towns, and cities, by the invading Europeans, are often those which were the especial favorites of the mound-builders, and the seats of their heaviest population. Marietta, Newark, Portsmouth, Chillicothe, [p007] Circleville, and Cincinnati, in Ohio; Frankfort in Kentucky; and St. Louis in Missouri, may be mentioned in confirmation of this remark. The centres of population are now, where they were at the period when the mysterious race of the mounds flourished.[6]

The aboriginal monuments of the Mississippi valley, the general character of which has been thus briefly and imperfectly indicated, fall within two general divisions, namely, CONSTRUCTIONS OF EARTH OR STONE, comprising «Enclosures, Mounds, etc.»; and MINOR VESTIGES OF ART, including the «Implements, Ornaments, Sculptures, etc.» of the ancient people.

The Earth and Stone Works resolve themselves into two classes, viz: ENCLOSURES, bounded by embankments, circumvallations, or walls; and simple tumuli, or MOUNDS.[7] They constitute, together, a single system of works; but, for reasons which will satisfactorily appear, it is preferred to classify them as above. These grand classes resolve themselves into other subordinate divisions: ENCLOSURES FOR DEFENCE, SACRED AND MISCELLANEOUS ENCLOSURES; MOUNDS OF SACRIFICE, TEMPLE MOUNDS, MOUNDS OF SEPULTURE, etc.

Footnotes:

[1] Some ancient works, probably belonging to the same system with those of the Mississippi valley, and erected by the same people, occur upon the Susquehanna river, as far down as the Valley of Wyoming, in Pennsylvania. The mound-builders seem to have skirted the southern border of Lake Erie, and spread themselves, in diminished numbers, over the western part of the State of New-York, along the shores of Lake Ontario to the St. Lawrence river. They penetrated into the interior, eastward, as far as the county of Onondaga, where some slight vestiges of their works still exist. These seem to have been their limits at the north-east.

[2] The only reference we have to the mounds of Oregon is contained in a paragraph in the Narrative of the United States Exploring Expedition, vol. iv. p. 313:

“We soon reached the Bute Prairies, which are extensive, and covered with tumuli, or small mounds, at regular distances asunder. As far as I can learn, there is no tradition among the natives concerning them. They are conical mounds, thirty feet in diameter, about six or seven feet above the level, and «many thousands in number». Being anxious to ascertain if they contained any relics, I subsequently visited these prairies, and opened three of the mounds, but found nothing in them but a pavement of round stones.”

[3] Lewis and Clarke describe one on the Missouri river which they estimated to contain not far from six hundred acres.—«Travels», p. 47.

[4] “We have seen mounds which would require the labor of a thousand men employed upon our canals, with all their mechanical aids, and the improved implements of their labor, for months. We have more than once hesitated, in view of one of these prodigious mounds, whether it were not really a natural hill. But they are uniformly so placed, in reference to the adjacent country, and their conformation is so unique and similar, that no eye hesitates long in referring them to the class of artificial erections.”—«Flint’s Geography», p. 131.

[5] These are the “«wells»” of Mr. Atwater and other writers on American antiquities. It is barely possible that a few were really wells, or «secondarily» designed for reservoirs.

[6] “The most dense ancient population existed in precisely the places where the most crowded future population will exist in ages to come. The appearance of a series of mounds generally indicates the contiguity of rich and level lands, easy communications, fish, game, and the most favorable adjacent positions.”—«Flint.»

“The most numerous, as well as the most considerable of these remains are found precisely in any part of the country where the traces of a numerous population might be looked for.”—«Brackenridge.»

[7] The term «Mound» is used in this work in a technical sense, as synonymous with «Tumulus» or «Barrow», and in contradistinction to embankment, wall, &c.

[p008]

Chapter II. Earthworks—Enclosures.

The Enclosures, or, as they are familiarly called throughout the West, “Forts,” constitute a very important and interesting class of remains. Their dimensions, and the popular opinion as to their purposes, attract to them more particularly the attention of observers. As a consequence, most that has been written upon our antiquities relates to them. A considerable number have been surveyed and described by different individuals, at different times; but no systematic examination of a sufficient number to justify any general conclusion as to their origin and purposes has heretofore been attempted. We have therefore had presented as many different hypotheses as there have been individual explorers; one maintaining that all the enclosures were intended for defence, while another persists that none could possibly have been designed for any such purpose. Investigation has shown, however, that while certain works possess features demonstrating incontestibly a military origin, others were connected with the superstitions of the builders, or designed for other purposes not readily apparent in our present state of knowledge concerning them.

It has already been remarked that the square and the circle, separate or in combination, were favorite figures with the mound-builders; and a large proportion of their works in the Scioto valley, and in Ohio generally, are of these forms. Most of the circular works are small, varying from two hundred and fifty to three hundred feet in diameter, while others are a mile or more in circuit. Some stand isolated, but most in connection with one or more mounds, of greater or less dimensions, or in connection with other more complicated works. Wherever the circles occur, if there be a fosse, or ditch, it is almost invariably «interior» to the parapet. Instances are frequent where no ditch is discernible, and where it is evident that the earth composing the embankment was brought from a distance, or taken up evenly from the surface. In the square and in the irregular works, if there be a fosse at all, it is «exterior» to the embankment; except in the case of fortified hills, where the earth, for the best of reasons, is usually thrown from the interior. These facts are not without their importance in determining the character and purpose of these remains. Another fact, bearing directly upon the degree of knowledge possessed by the builders, is, that many, if not most, of the circular works are «perfect circles», and that many of the rectangular works are «accurate squares». This fact has been demonstrated, in numerous instances, by careful admeasurements; and has been remarked in cases where the works embrace an area of many acres, and where the embankments, or circumvallations, are a mile and upwards in extent. [p009]

To facilitate description, and to bring something like system out of the disordered materials before us, the enclosures are, to as great a degree as practicable, divided into classes; that is to say, such as are esteemed to be works of defence are placed together, while those which are regarded as sacred, or of a doubtful character, come under another division.

Works Of Defence.

Those works which are incontestibly defensive usually occupy strong natural positions; and to understand fully their character, their capability for defence, and the nature of their entrenchments, it is necessary to notice briefly the predominant features of the country in which they occur. The valley of the Mississippi river, from the Alleghanies to the ranges of the Rocky Mountains, is a vast sedimentary basin, and owes its general aspect to the powerful agency of water. Its rivers have worn their valleys deep into a vast original plain; leaving, in their gradual subsidence, broad terraces, which mark the eras of their history. The edges of the table-lands, bordering on the valleys, are cut by a thousand ravines, presenting bluff headlands and high hills with level summits, sometimes connected by narrow isthmuses with the original table, but occasionally entirely detached. The sides of these elevations are generally steep, and difficult of access; in some cases precipitous and absolutely inaccessible. The natural strength of such positions, and their susceptibility of defence, would certainly suggest them as the citadels of a people having hostile neighbors, or pressed by invaders. Accordingly we are not surprised at finding these heights occupied by strong and complicated works, the design of which is no less indicated by their position than by their construction. But in such cases, it is always to be observed, that they have been chosen with great care, and that they possess peculiar strength, and have a special adaptation for the purposes to which they were applied. They occupy the highest points of land, and are never commanded from neighboring positions. While rugged and steep on most sides, they have one or more points of comparatively easy approach, in the protection of which the utmost skill of the builders seems to have been exhausted. They are guarded by double, overlapping walls, or a series of them, having sometimes an accompanying mound, designed perhaps for a look-out, and corresponding to the barbican in the system of defence of the Britons of the middle era. The usual defence is a simple embankment, thrown up along and a little below the brow of the hill, varying in height and solidity, as the declivity is more or less steep and difficult of access.

Other defensive works occupy the peninsulas created by the rivers and large [p010] streams, or cut off the headlands formed by their junction with each other. In such cases a fosse and wall are thrown across the isthmus, or diagonally from the bank of one stream to the bank of the other. In some, the wall is double, and extends along the bank of the stream some distance inwardly, as if designed to prevent an enemy from turning the flanks of the defence.

To understand clearly the nature of the works last mentioned, it should be remembered that the banks of the western rivers are always steep, and where these works are located, invariably high. The banks of the various terraces are also steep, and vary from ten to thirty and more feet in height. The rivers are constantly shifting their channels; and they frequently cut their way through all the intermediate up to the earliest-formed, or highest terrace, presenting bold banks, inaccessibly steep, and from sixty to one hundred feet high. At such points, from which the river has, in some instances, receded to the distance of half a mile or more, works of this description are oftenest found.

And it is a fact of much importance, and worthy of special note, that within the scope of a pretty extended observation, no work of any kind has been found occupying the first, or latest-formed terrace. This terrace alone, except at periods of extraordinary freshets, is subject to overflow.[8] The formation of each terrace constitutes a sort of semi-geological era in the history of the valley; and the fact that none of the ancient works occur upon the lowest or latest-formed of these, while they are found indiscriminately upon all the others, bears directly upon the question of their antiquity.

In addition to the several descriptions of defensive works above enumerated, there are others presenting peculiar features, which will be sufficiently noticed in the plans and explanations that follow. These plans are all drawn from actual and minute, and in most instances personal survey, and are presented, unless otherwise specially noted, on a uniform scale of five hundred feet to the inch. When there are interesting features too minute to be satisfactorily indicated on so small a scale, enlarged plans have been adopted. This is the case with the very first plan presented. Sections and supplementary plans are given, whenever it is supposed they may illustrate the description, or assist the comprehension of the reader. To shorten the text, the admeasurements are often placed upon the plans, and the “Field Books” of survey wholly omitted. The greatest care has, in all cases, been taken to secure perfect fidelity in all essential particulars. In the sectional maps, in order to show something of the character as well as the positions of the works, it has been found necessary to exaggerate them beyond their proportionate size. Some of the minor features of a few works are also slightly exaggerated, but in no case where it would be apt to lead to misapprehension or wrong conceptions of their character. [p011]

[Illustration: IV. Ancient Stone Work near the village of Bourneville, Ross Co. Ohio, 12 miles west of Chillicothe.]

Plate IV.[9] Stone Work, Near Bourneville, Ross County, Ohio.

This work occupies the summit of a lofty, detached hill, twelve miles westward from the city of Chillicothe, near the village of Bourneville. The hill is not far from four hundred feet in perpendicular height; and is remarkable, even among the steep hills of the West, for the general abruptness of its sides, which at some points are absolutely inaccessible. It is the advance point of a range of hills, situated between the narrow valleys of two small creeks; and projects midway into the broad valley of Paint creek, so as to constitute its most prominent natural feature. It is a conspicuous object from every point of view. Its summit is a wide and fertile plain, with occasional considerable depressions, some of which contain water during the entire year.

The defences consist of a wall of stone which is carried around the hill, a little below the brow; but at some places it rises, so as to cut off the narrow spurs, and extends across the neck that connects the hill with the range beyond. It should not be understood by the term «wall», that, at this time, anything like a wall of stones regularly laid up exists; on the contrary, where the line is best preserved, there is little evidence that the stones were laid one upon the other so as to present vertical faces, much less that they were cemented in place. At a few points, however, more particularly at the isthmus D, there are some indications of arrangement in the stones, tending to the belief that the wall here may have been regularly faced on the exterior. The appearance of the line, for the most part, is just what might be expected from the «falling outwards» of a wall of stones placed, as this was, upon the declivity of a hill. Upon the western, or steepest face of the hill, the range of stones covers a space varying from thirty to fifty feet in width, closely resembling the “«protection walls»” carried along the embankments of rail-roads and canals, where exposed to the action of rivers or large streams. But for the amount of stones, it might be taken for a natural feature,—the «debris» of the out-cropping sand strata. Such, certainly, is the first impression which it produces upon the visitor; an impression, however, which is speedily corrected upon reaching the points where the supposed line of «debris», rising upon the spurs, forms curved gateways, and then resumes its course as before.

Upon the eastern face of the hill, where the declivity is least abrupt, the wall is heavier and more distinct than upon the west, resembling a long stone-heap of fifteen or twenty feet base, and from three to four feet in height. Where it crosses the isthmus it is heaviest; and although stones enough have been removed from it, [p012] at that point, to build a stout division wall between the lands of two proprietors, their removal is not discoverable. This isthmus is seven hundred feet wide, and the wall is carried in a right line across it, at its narrowest point. Here are three gateways opening upon the continuous terrace beyond. These are formed by the curving inward of the ends of the wall for forty or fifty feet, leaving narrow pass-ways between, not exceeding eight feet in width. At the other points, A and C of the plan, where there are jutting ridges, are similar gateways. It is at these points that the hill is most easy of access. At A is a modern roadway; at C is a pathway leading down into the valley of “Black Run.” At B appears to have been a similar gateway, which for some reason was closed up; a like feature may be observed in the line D. At the gateways, the amount of stones is more than quadruple the quantity at other points, constituting broad, mound-shaped heaps. They also exhibit the marks of intense heat, which has in some instances vitrified their surfaces, and fused them together. Light, porous scoriæ are abundant in the centres of some of these piles. Indeed, strong traces of fire are visible at many places on the line of the wall, particularly at F, the point commanding the broadest extent of country. Here are two or three small mounds of stone, which seem burned throughout. Nothing is more certain than that powerful fires have been maintained, for considerable periods, at numerous prominent points on the hill; for what purposes, unless as alarm signals, it is impossible to conjecture.[10]

It will be observed that the wall is interrupted for some distance at E, where the hill is precipitous and inaccessible. There are, as has already been remarked, several depressions upon the hill which contain constant supplies of water. One of them covers about two acres, and furnishes a supply estimated by the proprietor as adequate to the wants of a thousand head of cattle. Water is obtained in abundance at the depth of twenty feet.

The area enclosed within this singular work is something over one hundred and forty acres, and the line of the wall measures upwards of «two and a quarter miles» in length. Most of the wall, and a large portion of the area, are still covered with a heavy primitive forest. Trees of the largest size grow on the line, twisting their roots among the stones, some of which are firmly imbedded in their trunks.

That this work was designed for defence, will hardly admit of doubt; the fact is sufficiently established, not less by the natural strength of the position, than by the character of the defences. Of the original construction of the wall, now so completely in ruins, we can of course form no very clear conception. It is possible that it was once regularly laid up; but it seems that, if such were ever the case, some satisfactory evidence of the fact would still be discoverable. We must consider, however, that it is situated upon a yielding and disintegrating declivity; and that successive forests, in their growth and prostration, aided by the action of the elements, in the long period which must certainly have elapsed since its [p013] construction, would have been adequate to the total demolition of structures more solid and enduring than we are justified in supposing any of the stone works of the ancient people to have been. The stones are of all sizes, and sufficiently abundant to have originally formed walls eight feet high, by perhaps an equal base. At some points, substantial fence-lines have been built from them, without sensibly diminishing their numbers. It can readily be perceived that, upon a steep declivity, such as this hill presents, so large an amount of stones, even though simply heaped together, must have proved an almost insurmountable impediment in the way of an assailant, especially if they were crowned by palisades.

In the magnitude of the area enclosed, this work exceeds any hill-work now known in the country; although the wall is considerably less in length than that of “Fort Ancient,” on the Little Miami river. It evinces great labor, and bears the impress of a numerous people. The valley in which it is situated was a favorite one with the race of the mounds; and the hill overlooks a number of extensive groups of ancient works, the bearings of which are indicated by arrows on the plan.

Paint creek washes the base of the hill upon the left, and has for some distance worn away the argillaceous slate rock, so as to leave a mural front of from fifty to seventy-five feet in height. It has also uncovered a range of «septaria», occurring near the base of the slate stratum; a number of which, of large size, are to be seen in the bed of the creek, at «a». These, most unaccountably, have been mistaken for works of art,—“stone covers” for deep wells sunk in the rock. This notion has been gravely advanced in print; and the humble septaria, promoted to a high standing amongst the antiquities of America, now figure prominently in every work of speculations on the subject. The reason for sinking wells in the bed of a creek, was probably never very obvious to any mind. The supposed “wells” are simple casts of huge septaria, which have been dislodged from their beds; the cyclopean “covers” are septaria which have resisted the disintegrating action of the water, and still retain their places. Parallel ranges of these singular natural productions run through the slate strata of this region: they are of an oblate-spheroidal figure, some of them measuring from nine to twelve feet in circumference. They frequently have apertures or hollows in their middle, with radiating fissures, filled with crystalline spar or sulphate of baryta. These fissures sometimes extend beyond them, in the slate rock, constituting the “good joints” mentioned by some writers. The slate layers are not interrupted by these productions, but are bent or wrapped around them. The following cut illustrates their character. A is a vertical section: «a» exhibiting the water, «b» the rock. At «c» the septarium has disintegrated, or has been removed, and its cavity or bed is filled with pebbles. At «d» the nodule still remains. B exhibits the appearance presented by «d» from above.

[Illustration: Fig. 2.]

A stone work, somewhat similar in character to that here described, exists near the town of Somerset, Perry county, Ohio. It is described by Mr. Atwater in the Archæologia Americana, vol. i. p. 131. [p014]

Still another, of small size and irregular outline, is situated on Beaver creek, a branch of the Great Kenhawa, in Fayette county, Virginia, of which an account was published by Mr. I. Craig of Pittsburgh, in the “American Pioneer,” vol. i. p. 199.

Plate V. “Fort Hill,” Highland County, Ohio.[11]

This work occurs in the southern part of Highland county, Ohio; and is distant about thirty miles from Chillicothe, and twelve from Hillsborough. It is universally known as “Fort Hill,” though no better entitled to the name than many others of similar character. The defences occupy the summit of a hill, which is elevated five hundred feet above the bed of Brush creek at its base, and eight hundred feet above the Ohio river at Cincinnati. Unlike the hills around it, this one stands detached and isolated, and forms a conspicuous object from every approach. Its sides are steep and precipitous; and, except at one or two points, if not absolutely inaccessible, extremely difficult of ascent. The points most easy of access are at the southern and northern angles, and may be reached on horseback. The top of the hill is level, and has an area of not far from fifty acres, which is covered with a heavy primitive forest of gigantic trees. One of these, a chestnut, standing on the embankment near the point indicated by the letter «e», measures «twenty-one feet» in circumference; another, an oak, which also stood on the wall, at the point «f», though now fallen and much decayed, still measures «twenty-three feet» in circumference. All around are scattered the trunks of immense trees, in every stage of decay; the entire forest presenting an appearance of the highest antiquity.

[Illustration: V. Fort Hill, Highland Co. Ohio.]

Thus much for its natural features. Running along the edge of the hill is an embankment of mingled earth and stone, interrupted at intervals by gateways. Interior to this is a ditch, from which the material composing the wall was taken. The length of the wall is eight thousand two hundred and twenty-four feet, or something over a mile and a half. In height, measuring from the bottom of the ditch, it varies from six to ten feet, though at some places it rises to the height of fifteen feet. Its average base is thirty-five or forty feet. It is thrown up somewhat below the brow of the hill, the level of the terrace being generally about even with the top of the wall; but in some places it rises considerably above, as shown in the sections. The outer slope of the wall is more abrupt than that of the hill; the earth and stones from the ditch, sliding down fifty or a hundred feet, have formed a [p015] declivity for that distance, so steep as to be difficult of ascent, even with the aid which the trees and bushes afford. The ditch has an average width of not far from fifty feet; and, in many places, is dug through the sandstone layer upon which the soil of the terrace rests.[12] At the point A, the rock is quarried out, leaving a mural front about twenty feet high. The inner declivity of the ditch appears to have been terraced. It descends abruptly from the level for a few feet, then declines gently for some distance, and again dips suddenly, as it approaches the wall. The vertical section «a b» exhibits this feature.

There are «thirty-three» gateways or openings in the wall, most of them very narrow, not exceeding fifteen or twenty feet in width at the top: only eleven of these have corresponding causeways across the ditch. They occur at irregular intervals; and some of them appear to have been rather designed to let off the water which might otherwise accumulate in the ditch, than to serve as places of egress or ingress. Indeed, most of them cannot be supposed to have been used for the last named purposes, inasmuch as they occur upon the very steepest points of the hill, and where approach is almost impossible. At the northern and southern spurs or angles of the hill, the gateways are widest, and the parapet curves slightly outwards. The ditch is interrupted at these points.

There are three depressions or ponds within the enclosure; the largest of these, «g», has a well-defined artificial embankment on its lower side, which has recently been cut through, and the water principally drawn off. When full, the water must have covered very nearly an acre. Bog-clumps are growing around its edges, and it is free from trees. It does not seem to have any perennial sources of supply. There are several other small circular depressions, a number of which occur together at the bluff A; there are also traces of other excavations, not clearly defined, at various points on the hill.

An inspection of the plan of the work, shows that it is naturally divided into three parts; that at A being, in many respects, the most remarkable. It is connected with the main body of the work by a narrow ridge but one hundred feet wide, and terminates at a bold, bluff ledge, the top of which is thirty feet above the bottom of the trench, and twenty feet above the wall. This bluff is two hundred feet wide. It is altogether the most prominent point of the hill, and commands a wide extent of country. Here are strong traces of the action of fire on the rocks and stones; though whether remote or recent, it is not easy to determine. The connection between the two principal divisions of the work is also narrow, being barely two hundred and fifty feet in width.

Such are the more striking features of this interesting work. Considered in a military point of view, as a work of defence, it is well chosen, well guarded, and, with an adequate force, impregnable to any mode of attack practised by a rude, or semi-civilized people. As a natural stronghold, it has few equals; and the [p016] degree of skill displayed and the amount of labor expended in constructing its artificial defences, challenge our admiration, and excite our surprise. With all the facilities and numerous mechanical appliances of the present day, the construction of a work of this magnitude would be no insignificant undertaking. And when we reflect how comparatively rude, at the best, must have been the means at the command of the people who raised this monument, we are prepared to estimate the value which they placed upon the objects sought in its erection, and also to form some conclusion respecting the number and character of the people themselves.

It is quite unnecessary to recapitulate the features which give to this the character of a military work; for they are too obvious to escape attention. The angles of the hill form natural bastions, enfilading the wall. The position of the wall, the structure of the ditch, the peculiarities of the gateways where ascent is practicable, the greater height of the wall where the declivity of the hill is least abrupt, the reservoirs of water, the look-out or citadel, all go to sustain the conclusion.

The evidence of antiquity afforded by the aspect of the forest, is worthy of more than a passing notice. Actual examination showed the existence of not far from «two hundred» annual rings or layers to the foot, in the large chestnut-tree already mentioned, now standing upon the entrenchments. This would give nearly «six hundred years» as the age of the tree. If to this we add the probable period intervening from the time of the building of the work to its abandonment, and the subsequent period up to its invasion by the forest, we are led irresistibly to the conclusion, that it has an antiquity of at least «one thousand years».[13] But when we notice, all around us, the crumbling trunks of trees half hidden in the accumulating soil, we are induced to fix upon an antiquity still more remote.

It is worthy of note, that this work is in a broken country, with no other remains, except perhaps a few small, scattered mounds, in its vicinity. The nearest monuments of magnitude are in the Paint creek valley, sixteen miles distant, from which it is separated by elevated ridges. Lower down, on Brush creek, towards its junction with the Ohio, are some works; but none of importance occur within twelve miles in that direction.

[Illustration: VI. Fortified Hill, Butler Co. Ohio, 3 Mile S. W. of the town of Hamilton.]

Plate VI. Fortified Hill, Butler County, Ohio.

This fine work is situated in Butler county, Ohio, on the west side of the Great Miami river, three miles below the town of Hamilton. The plan is from a [p017] survey by JAMES MCBRIDE, Esq., and the description is made up from his notes. The hill, the summit of which it occupies, is about a half mile distant from the present bed of the river, and is not far from two hundred and fifty feet high, being considerably more elevated than any other in the vicinity. It is surrounded at all points, except a narrow space at the north, by deep ravines, presenting steep and almost inaccessible declivities. The descent towards the north is gradual; and from that direction, the hill is easy of access. It is covered with a primitive forest of oak, hickory, and locust, of the same character with the surrounding forests.

Skirting the brow of the hill, and generally conforming to its outline, is a wall of mingled earth and stone, having an average height of five feet by thirty-five feet base. It has no accompanying ditch; the earth composing it, which is a stiff clay, having been for the most part taken up from the surface, without leaving any marked excavation. There are a number of “dug holes,” however, at various points, from which it is evident a portion of the material was obtained. The wall is interrupted by four gateways or passages, each twenty feet wide; one opening to the north, on the approach above mentioned, and the others occurring where the spurs of the hill are cut off by the parapet, and where the declivity is least abrupt. They are all, with one exception, protected by inner lines of embankment, of a most singular and intricate description. These are accurately delineated in the plan, which will best explain their character. It will be observed that the northern gateway, in addition to its inner maze of walls, has an exterior work of a crescent shape, the ends of which approach to within a few feet of the brow of the hill.

The excavations are uniformly near the gateways, or within the lines covering them. None of them are more than sixty feet over, nor have they any considerable depth. Nevertheless, they all, with the exception of the one nearest to gateway S, contain water for the greater portion, if not the whole of the year. A pole may be thrust eight or ten feet into the soft mud, at the bottom of those at E.

At S and W, terminating the parapet, are two mounds, each eight feet high, composed of stones thrown loosely together. Thirty rods distant from gateway N, and exterior to the work, is a mound ten feet high, on which trees of the largest size are growing. It was partially excavated a number of years ago, and a quantity of stones taken out, all of which seemed to have undergone the action of fire.

The ground in the interior of this work gradually rises, as indicated in the section, to the height of twenty-six feet above the base of the wall, and overlooks the entire adjacent country.

In the vicinity of this work, are a number of others occupying the valley; no less than six of large size occur within a distance of six miles down the river. [See Plate III. No. 2. This work is marked A on the map.]

The character of this structure is too obvious to admit of doubt. The position which it occupies is naturally strong, and no mean degree of skill is employed in its artificial defences. Every avenue is strongly guarded. The principal approach, the only point easy of access, or capable of successful assault, is rendered doubly secure. A mound, used perhaps as an alarm post, is placed at about one-fourth of the distance down the ascent; a crescent wall crosses the isthmus, leaving but [p018] narrow passages between its ends and the steeps on either hand. Next comes the principal wall of the enclosure. In event of an attack, even though both these defences were carried, there still remains a series of walls so complicated as inevitably to distract and bewilder the assailants, thus giving a marked advantage to the defenders. This advantage may have been much greater than we, in our ignorance of the military system of this ancient people, can understand. But, from the manifest judgment with which their defensive positions were chosen, as well as from the character of their entrenchments, so far as we comprehend them, it is safe to conclude that all parts of this work were the best calculated to secure the objects proposed by the builders, under the modes of attack and defence then practised.

The coincidences between the guarded entrances of this and similar works throughout the West, and those of the Mexican defences, is singularly striking. The wall on the eastern side of the Tlascalan territories, mentioned by Cortez and Bernal Diaz, was six miles long, having a single entrance thirty feet wide, which was formed in the manner represented in the supplementary plan A. The ends of the wall overlapped each other, in the form of semicircles, having a common centre.[14]

Plate VII. “Fort Ancient,” Warren County, Ohio.[15]

[Illustration: VII. Fort Ancient, East Bank of the Little Miami River, 33 miles above Cincinnati.]

One of the most extensive, if not the most extensive, work of this class, in the entire West, occurs on the banks of the Little Miami river, about thirty-five miles north-east from Cincinnati, in Warren county, Ohio. It has not far from four miles of embankment, for the most part very heavy, rising, at the more accessible points, to the height of eighteen and twenty feet. The accompanying map is from a faithful survey, made by Prof. LOCKE, of Cincinnati, and published by him amongst the papers of the American Association of Geologists and Naturalists, in [p019] 1843. One or two slight additions have been made to his map, to indicate features which may be of some importance in a consideration of the work and its character. The description of Prof. Locke, accompanying the map, though brief, and written with a view to certain geological questions, may not be omitted in this connection.

“This work occupies a terrace on the left bank of the river, and two hundred and thirty feet above its waters. The place is naturally a strong one, being a peninsula, defended by two ravines, which, originating on the east side near to each other, diverging and sweeping around, enter the Miami, the one above, the other below the work. The Miami itself, with its precipitous bank of two hundred feet, defends the western side. The ravines are occupied by small streams. Quite around this peninsula, on the very verge of the ravines, has been raised an embankment of unusual height and perfection. Meandering around the spurs, and re-entering to pass the heads of the gullies, it is so winding in its course that it required one hundred and ninety-six stations to complete its survey. The whole circuit of the work is between four and five miles. The number of cubic yards of excavation may be approximately estimated at six hundred and twenty-eight thousand eight hundred. The embankment stands in many places twenty feet in perpendicular height; and although composed of a tough, diluvial clay, without stone, except in a few places, its outward slope is from thirty-five to forty-three degrees. This work presents no continuous ditch; but the earth for its construction has been dug from convenient pits, which are still quite deep, or filled with mud and water. Although I brought over a party of a dozen active young engineers, and we had encamped upon the ground to expedite our labors, we were still two days in completing our survey, which, with good instruments, was conducted with all possible accuracy. The work approaches nowhere within many feet of the river; but its embankment is, in several places, carried down into ravines from fifty to one hundred feet deep, and at an angle of thirty degrees, crossing a streamlet at the bottom, which, by showers, must often swell to a powerful torrent. But in all instances the embankment may be traced to within three to eight feet of the stream. Hence it appears, that although these little streams have cut their channels through fifty to one hundred feet of thin, horizontal layers of blue limestone, interstratified with indurated clay marl, not more than three feet of that excavation has been done since the construction of the earthworks. If the first portion of the denudation was not more rapid than the last, a period of at least thirty to fifty thousand years would be required for the present point of its progress. But the quantity of material removed from such a ravine is as the square of its depth, which would render the last part of its denudation much slower, in vertical descent, than the first part. That our streams have not yet reached their ultimate level, a point beyond which they cease to act upon their beds, is evident from the vast quantity of solid material transported annually by our rivers, to be added to the great delta of the Mississippi. Finally, I am astonished to see a work, simply of earth, after braving the storms of thousands of years, still so entire and well marked. Several circumstances have contributed to this. The clay of which it is built is not easily penetrated by water. The bank has been, and is still, mostly covered by a forest [p020] of beech trees, which have woven a strong web of their roots over its steep sides; and a fine bed of moss («Polytrichum») serves still further to afford protection.”

Upon the steep slope of the hill, at the point where it approaches nearest to the river, are distinctly traceable three parallel terraces, which were not represented in the original map, but which are indicated here. It is not impossible that they are natural, and were formed by successive «slips» or slides of earth, a feature not uncommon at the West. They nevertheless, from their great regularity, appear to be artificial, and are so regarded by most persons. A very fine view of the valley, in both directions, is commanded from them; though, perhaps, no better than may be obtained from the brow of the hill along which the embankment runs. It has been suggested that they were designed as stations, from which to annoy an enemy passing in boats or canoes along the river. This feature is illustrated in the section «r s».

From a point near the two large mounds on the neck of the peninsula, start off two parallel walls, which continue for about thirteen hundred and fifty feet, when they diverge suddenly, but soon close around a small mound. As this outwork is in cultivated grounds, it has been so much obliterated as to escape ordinary observation, and is now traceable with difficulty. These parallels are shown in the Supplementary Plan A. They are almost identical, in all their dimensions, with similar parallels attached to ancient works in the Scioto valley.

It is a feature no less worthy of remark in this than in other works of the same class, and one which bears directly upon the question of their design, that at all the more accessible points, the defences are of the greatest solidity and strength. Across the isthmus connecting this singular peninsula with the table land, the wall is nearly double the height that it possesses at those points where the conformation of the ground assisted the builders in securing their position. The average height of the embankment is between nine and ten feet; but, at the place mentioned, it is no less than «twenty». At the spur where the State road ascends the hill, and where the declivity is most gentle, the embankment is also increased in height and solidity, being at this time not less than fourteen feet high by sixty feet base.

There are over seventy gateways or interruptions in the embankment, at irregular intervals along its line. For reasons heretofore given, it is difficult to believe they were all designed as places of ingress or egress. We can only account for their number, upon the hypothesis that they are places once occupied by block-houses or bastions composed of timber, and which have long since decayed. These openings appear to have been originally about ten or fifteen feet in width.

[Illustration: VIII. Ancient Works:

Nos. 1–2. Butler Co. Ohio.

No. 3. Miami Co. Ohio.

No. 4. Montgomery Co. Ohio.]

This work, it will be seen, consists of two grand divisions, the passage between which is long and narrow. Across this neck is carried a wall of the ordinary dimensions, as if to prevent the further progress of an enemy, in the event of either of the principal divisions being carried,—a feature which, while it goes to establish the military origin of the work, at the same time evinces the skill and foresight of the builders. This foresight is further shown, in so managing the excavations necessary for the erection of the walls, as to form numerous large reservoirs; sufficient, in [p021] connection with the springs originating within the work, to supply with water any population which might here make a final stand before an invader. Even in the absence of these sources, surrounded as the work is on every hand by streams, it would be easy, in face of the most formidable investment, to procure an adequate supply.

At numerous points in the line of embankment, and where from position they would yield the most effective support, are found large quantities of stones. These are water-worn, and seem, for the most part, to have been taken from the river. If so, an incredible amount of labor has been expended in transporting them to the places which they now occupy,—especially will it appear incredible, when we reflect that all of them were doubtless transported by human hands.

A review of this magnificent monument cannot fail to impress us with admiration of the skill which selected, and the industry which secured this position. Under a military system, such as we feel warranted in ascribing to the people by whom this work was constructed, it must have been impregnable. In every point of view, it is certainly one of the most interesting remains of antiquity which the continent affords.

PLATE VIII. No. 1. [From the Surveys and Notes of JAMES MCBRIDE.]

This work occurs on the bank of the Great Miami river, four miles above the town of Hamilton, in Butler county, Ohio, and is one of the most interesting hill-works known. It corresponds in all essential particulars with those of the same class already described. It occupies the summit of a promontory cut from the table lands bordering the Miami river, which upon three sides presents high and steep natural banks, rendered more secure for purposes of defence by artificial embankments thrown up along their brows. The remaining side is defended by a wall and ditch, and it is from this side only that the work is easy of approach. The walls are low, measuring at this time but about four feet in height. The area enclosed is level, subsiding somewhat towards the north, so as to form a sort of natural terrace along the river. Previous to the construction of the Miami canal, this terrace was eight or ten rods wide, having a perpendicular bank next the river, some fifty or more feet high. Upon this terrace are situated several small mounds. The point indicated by «c» in the plan is the most elevated within the enclosure. The ground here was intermixed with large stones, most of which were removed in building the canal. Among them, it is said, were found several human skeletons, and also a variety of carved stone implements.

The most interesting feature in connection with this work is the entrance on the south, of which the enlarged plan can alone afford a fair conception. The ends [p022] of the wall curve inwardly as they approach each other, upon a radius of seventy-five feet, forming a true circle, interrupted only by the gateways. Within the space thus formed, is a small circle one hundred feet in diameter; outside of which and covering the gateway is a mound, «e», forty feet in diameter and five feet high. The passage between the mound and the embankment, and between the walls of the circles, is now about six feet wide. The gateway or opening «d» is twenty feet wide. This singular entrance, it will be remarked, strongly resembles the gateways belonging to a work already described («Plate VI.»), although much more regular in its construction.

The ditches, «f f», which accompany the wall on the south, subside into the ravines upon either side. These ravines are not far from sixty feet deep, and have precipitous sides, rendering ascent almost impossible. The mound «h» is three feet high.

The area of the work is seventeen acres; the whole of which is yet covered with a dense primitive forest. The valley beyond the river is broad, and in it are many traces of a remote population, of which this work was probably the fortress or place of last resort, during turbulent periods.

PLATE VIII. No. 2.

This work is situated six miles south-west of the town of Hamilton, in Butler county, Ohio. It has no very remarkable features, although possessing the general characteristics of this class of works. It consists of a simple embankment of earth carried around the brow of a high, detached hill, overlooking a wide and beautiful section of the Miami valley. The side of the hill on the north, towards the river, is very abrupt, and rises to the height of one hundred and twenty feet above the valley. The remaining sides are steep, though comparatively easy of ascent. The walls are scarcely four feet high, and seem to have been much reduced by time. There are six gateways, two of which open upon natural bastions or look-outs, and the remaining four towards copious springs, as shown in the plan. The ground within the walls rises gradually to the centre, from which an extended view of the valley and surrounding country may be obtained. There are two mounds of earth placed near together on the highest point within the enclosure, measuring respectively ten feet in height.

South-east of the work, and nine hundred feet distant, is an eminence A, about fifty feet higher than the one occupied by the above mentioned work,—being much the highest point in the neighborhood. The area on the top is, however, inconsiderable. There are some traces of ancient occupation here, though they are far from being distinct or considerable. [p023]

PLATE VIII. No. 3.

The enclosure here represented is situated on the left bank of the Great Miami river, two and a half miles above the town of Piqua, Miami county, Ohio, upon the farm of Col. John Johnston, a prominent actor in the early history of Ohio. It occupies the third terrace, which here forms a bluff peninsula, bounded on three sides by streams. The banks of the terrace vary from fifty to seventy-five feet in height. The embankment is carried along the boundaries of the peninsula, enclosing an oval-shaped area of about eighteen acres. It is composed of earth intermixed with large quantities of stone, and is unaccompanied by a ditch. The stones that enter into the composition of the rampart are water-worn, and must have been brought from the bed of the river; which, according to Dr. Drake, for two miles opposite this work, does not at present afford a stone of ten pounds weight. A mound, five feet high and surrounded by a ditch, occurs within the work. There is also another, exterior to the walls, upon the second terrace, towards the river. This is classed as a defensive work, for very obvious reasons.[16]

Below this entrenchment, and on the present site of the town of Piqua, a group of works formerly existed, consisting of circles, ellipses, etc. These have been described at length, by Major Long.[17] There are also various small works on the opposite bank of the Miami. Indeed, the whole valley is here covered with traces of a former dense population.

PLATE VIII. No. 4.[18]

This work resembles one already described, No. 2 of this Plate. It is situated on the bank of the Great Miami river, three miles below Dayton, Montgomery county, Ohio. The side of the hill towards the river is very steep, rising to the [p024] height of one hundred and sixty feet. The remaining sides are less abrupt. Upon the south is the principal gateway, and here the declivity is gentle. This gateway is covered upon the interior by a ditch, «c c», twenty feet wide, and seven hundred feet long. At «d d d» are dug holes, from which it is apparent a portion of the earth composing the embankments was taken. At «b» is a natural depression forty feet deep, and covering not far from one and a