Burial Mounds of the Northern Sections of the United States Part 9

Beads were also found on the neck of this, but much smaller and finer than on those of the others, as well as a large amount of paint. The bones would indicate a person of forty years of age.

The top of the skull had been moved by the plow.

There was no appearance of hair discovered; besides, the princ.i.p.al bones were almost entirely decomposed, and crumbled when handled.

A complete exploration of this mound, the dimensions of which are not given, would possibly have shown that the skeletons were arranged somewhat in a circle. The doctor does not state whether there was a pit.

[Ill.u.s.tration: FIG. 35.--Section of mound, Henderson County, North Carolina.]

Some mounds in Henderson County, opened in 1884 by Mr. J. W. Emmert, who was temporarily employed by the Bureau, present some peculiarities worthy of notice. One of these, situated on the farm of Mrs. Rebecca Conner, and perfectly circular, was found to be 44 feet in diameter and 6 feet high; a number of small trees were growing on it. The annexed cut (Fig. 35) shows a vertical section of it, the dark central triangle representing a conical ma.s.s of charcoal and ashes. The conical ma.s.s measured 16 feet in diameter at the base and 5 feet high, the top reaching within 1 foot of the top of the mound. The outer portion consisted of charcoal, evidently the remains of pine poles, which had been placed in several layers, sloping toward the apex. The inner portion consisted of ashes and coals mixed with earth, in which were found some burnt human (?) bones, and some accompanying articles, among which were two stones with holes drilled through them. The fragments of bones and the specimens were at the base, in the center.

A mound on the farm of Mr. J. B. Alexander, 2 miles above the one just described, was examined by Mr. Emmert, and found to cover a pit similar to those explored in Caldwell County.

This mound was situated on an elevated level, about a quarter of a mile from the creek, in an old field which had been plowed over for sixty years. It was 2 feet high when he explored it, but the old people stated to him that it was formerly 10 feet high, and had a "tail" or ridge running away from it 200 feet long; but the only indication of this that Mr. Emmert could see was a strip of clay running off where it was stated to have been. It runs in the direction of the creek bottom, where any quant.i.ty of broken pottery may be picked up. The mound, which was 30 feet in diameter and composed wholly of red clay, was entirely removed to the original surface of the ground. Nothing was found in it, but after reaching the surface he discovered a circular pit 12 feet in diameter, which had been dug to the depth of 4 feet in the solid red clay. This he found to be filled full of ashes and charcoal, but failed to find any bones or specimens in it.

Although Mr. Emmert failed to find any evidence that this was a burial mound, its similarity with those of Caldwell County will, I think, justify us in concluding it was constructed for this purpose.

[Ill.u.s.tration: FIG. 36.--Section of mound, Henderson County, North Carolina.]

Another mound on the same farm as the one last mentioned, a cross-section of which is shown in Fig. 36, is of the common type, examples of which are found in most of the districts: diameter 52 feet and height 9 feet; the upper layer, No. 1, red clay, about 4 feet thick, No. 2, a thin layer of charcoal, about 3 inches thick; the lower stratum or central core, No. 3, dark-colored earth. In this lower layer were found five skeletons, on the natural surface and at the points indicated by the dots, which crumbled to pieces as soon as exposed to the air.

With one were sixteen large, rudely made, white flint arrow-heads, so nearly alike as to make it apparent they were the work of one individual, and with another a small pipe and some arrow-heads.

Pa.s.sing westward over the mountains into East Tennessee, we find some variations in the modes of burial, but not so widely different from those east of the range as to justify the belief that the authors of the works of the two localities were different peoples or belonged to different tribes.

A burial mound opened by Mr. Emmert in the valley of the Holston, Sullivan County, described by him as mound No. 1, on the north side of the river, was found to be 22 feet in diameter and 4 feet high. It was composed of red clay and sand. Digging down to the level of the surrounding ground, there was found a pile of rock in the center, which proved to be a burial vault built of water-worn bowlders, over a sitting skeleton. It was 3-1/2 feet in diameter at the base and 3 feet high. On the head of the skeleton was a slender, square copper spindle about 11 inches long and a quarter of an inch thick in the middle. It has evidently been hammered out with a stone hammer. Under the lower jaw were two small copper drills or awls, with portions of the deer-horn handles still attached. About the shoulders, one on each side, were two polished stones, with holes in them. Near the head was a small pile of flint chips, and at the knees a flint scalping knife. The bones were so badly decayed that but few of them could be secured.

Mound No. 2 was on the south side of the river, opposite No. 1 and about the same distance from the river. It was 38 feet in diameter and 5 feet high, and on the top was a pine stump 14 inches in diameter.

Mr. Emmert, in opening it, commenced at the edge to cut a ditch 4 feet wide through it, but soon reached a wall 3 feet high, built of "river rock." He then worked around this, finding it to be an almost perfect circle, 14 feet in diameter, inside of which were found, on throwing out the dirt, twelve stone graves or vaults, built of the same kind of stones, each containing a sitting skeleton, as shown in Fig. 37. One of these graves or vaults was exactly in the center, the other eleven being placed in a circle around it, and about equally s.p.a.ced, as shown in the diagram.

[Ill.u.s.tration: FIG. 37.--Mound on Holston River, Sullivan County, Tennessee.]

[Ill.u.s.tration: FIG. 38.--Pipe from mound, Sullivan County, Tennessee.]

In the center grave he found sh.e.l.l beads around the neck of the skeleton, and near the mouth the pipe shown in Fig. 38.

The bottom of the area within the circular wall was covered to the depth of about 3 inches with charcoal, and the graves were built on this layer. Both of these mounds were on the bench or upper bottom, and about three-fourths of a mile from the river.

Mr. Emmert says he learned that there was a tradition of the neighborhood that the Indians once fought a great battle at this place, and that one party buried some of their dead in mound No. 2, and the other party buried their dead on the opposite side of the river, where there is a large pile or mound of "river rock."

He opened one of the rock mounds occurring in this region half a mile from the river and near the foot of the mountain. A large tree had grown up through it, the stump of which was yet standing, or the mound had been built around it. After removing the rock and digging up the stump, he found, at the depth of 4 feet and directly under the stump, two stone axes, a large number of arrow-heads, two polished celts, and some pieces of mica.

Another mound on the Holston River, 2 miles above the two heretofore described, was examined. This was 60 feet in diameter and 4-1/2 feet high. The original surface of the earth had been first covered over about 3 inches thick with charcoal, then the bodies or skeletons laid on it, and each walled up separately with river rock. These were then covered with black earth, over which was cast a layer of sand about the same thickness, the remainder being top soil.

Mr. Emmert, who opened this, commenced cutting a ditch 4 feet wide, proceeding until he struck the bed of charcoal; then followed around the outer edge of it, finally removing all the dirt inside the circle. One side of the circle had six skeletons in it, all walled up, as before stated, separately, but so thoroughly decayed that only one skull could be saved.

The other side of the mound had nothing in it except a fine pipe which he found on the bed of coals, some 10 or 12 feet from the nearest skeleton; some beautiful arrow-heads, sh.e.l.l beads, a polished celt, and two small stones with holes in them were also discovered.

In addition to the foregoing descriptions from the reports of my a.s.sistants, I present the following, from accounts of earlier explorations in this region:

A burial mound situated on the left bank of the Tennessee River, about 1 mile from Chattanooga, was opened by Mr. M. O. Read in 1865. This was oval in form and flat on top, the diameters of the base 158 and 120 feet, and those of the top 82 and 44 feet; height, 19 feet. Mr. Read says:[40]

For the purpose of examination, a tunnel was excavated into the mound from the east, a little one side of the center and on a level with the natural surface of the ground. When the point directly under the outer edge of the top of the mound was reached, holes were found containing fragments of rotted wood showing that stakes or palisades had been erected here when the mound was commenced. The sound of the pick indicating a cavity or different material below, the excavation was carried downward about 2 feet, when two skeletons were uncovered, fragments of which preserved are marked No. 1. The bones were packed in a small s.p.a.ce, as though the bodies were crowded down, without much regard to position of hands, into a pit not exceeding 3 feet in length. One of the skulls is of especial interest, as possibly indicating that the remains are those of victims immolated in some sacrificial or burial rites.

The side was crushed in, as if with a club. I have connected together the pieces of the upper jaw so that they retain the position in which they were found, a position which cannot with probability be supposed to be the result of the settling of the earth around it, if unbroken when buried. The bones of the bodies, although so friable that they could not be preserved, were entire, in positions indicating that the bodies had not been dismembered and forbidding the supposition that they were the remains of a cannibal feast.

The excavation was carried forward as indicated on the plat and on a level with the location of the skeletons first found. It became evident at once that the material of which the mound was constructed was taken from the immediate neighborhood, it being composed of the same alluvial soil, full of the sh.e.l.ls found on the surface, but in a much better state of preservation; but no arrow-heads, chippings of flints, or fragments of pottery now covering the surface were found. These would have been abundant if the mound had been erected subsequent to the manufacture of the pottery and arrow-heads at that place. Single fragments of pottery were found, but these were painted and of much better quality than those found on the surface.

The mound was composed of alternate layers of earth and ashes, showing that a surface of the size of the top, when finished, was kept substantially level, and raised only 2 to 3 feet at a time, when fires were kindled, which must have been large or continued for a long time, as the amount of the ashes and charcoal abundantly indicates.

Near the center of the mound rows of stake-holes were found, as far as followed, marking two sides of a rectangular parallelogram, which continued would have formed an enclosure around the center. In some of these were the remains of the wood and bark, not enough to show the marks of tools, if any had been used. They penetrated the natural surface of the ground to the depth of about 2 feet.

Here and at about the same level as at No. 1 were found the skeletons of which the skull bones and other parts are marked No. 2. They were apparently the remains of a youngish woman and two children, all so far decomposed that only the parts sent could be preserved. The larger skeleton was in such a position as a person would take on kneeling down, then sitting upon the feet; the hands were brought to the head and the body doubled down upon the knees. The head was toward the south. The remains of the children were found at the right side of this body, the bones mingled together.

About 2 feet directly under these the skeleton of which the skull is marked No. 3 was found, in a similar position, it is said (I was not present when it was taken out), with the one above it.

I attempt no description and indulge in no speculations in regard to these remains, as I have decided to forward them to you for the examination of those who can compare them with other skulls and are better qualified to make a proper use of them. They are unquestionably of the age of the mound-builders.

We are reminded, by the remains of upright timbers found here, of the wooden vaults of the Grave Creek and other mounds of West Virginia, but in the form of the mound we have an indication that it belongs to the southern cla.s.s of ancient works.

Rev. E. O. Dunning mentions[41] a stone-grave mound which he examined in the valley of the Little Tennessee. Speaking of this mound he remarks:

I did not expect to find rock graves in a mound of earth, but after clearing away rubbish and penetrating 6 feet below the top, near the center the workman struck a slab of slate, which proved to be part of the covering of a stone tomb. It was much like those scattered over the "river bottom"--more nicely constructed, however, and fitted with more care, being arched over the top, at an acute angle, with pieces of slate 3 inches thick. Owing to its situation, raised above the level of the river and covered with sand to the depth of 6 feet, its contents were better preserved than those of the graves just mentioned. At the head of it I took out a vessel of fine red clay and pulverized mussel sh.e.l.ls a foot in diameter, gourd-shaped, and having a handle and spout 6 inches long, and holding about a quart. It was preserved nearly whole.

Artificial fire had been kindled in the tomb, but it had been smothered by the throwing in of sand before all the contents were consumed. Besides some entire bones of the human skeleton, flint arrow-heads and a large number of flint and stone beads were removed. The beads could be traced along the lines of the legs and arms, as if they had been attached to the garment in which the dead was buried. Further excavations disclosed two more of these stone sepulchers, the first 3 feet below the one described, the other 2 feet from it, in the same plane. They contained only fragments of bones, charcoal, and ashes.

The mound, which was conical in shape, must have been 15 feet high and 50 feet in diameter. Successive floods had impaired its original dimensions. The last carried away a section on the west side, exposing a tomb and some valuable relics, which have not been preserved. Among them were large sh.e.l.ls, pyrulas, probably, judging from the description, from the Gulf of Mexico. In connection with marine sh.e.l.ls, images in stone were found in this tomb. The mound was composed of sand-loam taken from the bank of the river, and raised upon a foundation of water-washed rocks 4 feet high, from the bed of the stream hard by. There had been extensive burnings throughout this mound, at various depths, indicated by layers of charcoal, ashes, and burned clay, simply in honor of the dead, or to consume their effects or mortal parts, or for human sacrifices to their manes.

Speaking of stone graves in the immediate vicinity as explanatory of those in the mound, he says:

They are built of slabs of slate, nicely fitted together, about 3 inches thick, 4 feet long, and 2 broad, enclosing receptacles not of uniform s.p.a.ce, generally 5 feet long, 4 feet high, and 2 broad, covered with flat pieces, resting upon the upright slabs and conforming to the rounded corners of the tomb.

As one of the princ.i.p.al objects in view in exploring and studying the mounds of our country is to ascertain, if possible, by what people or tribes they were built, a brief discussion of the question so far as it relates to the district now under consideration will be in place. My reasons for touching upon the topic in this connection, and limiting the discussion to the antiquities of the one district, are as follows:

First. The characteristics of the works of this section are so well marked as to leave little, if any, doubt on the mind of any one who will study them carefully that they are work of one people, probably of a single tribe.

Second. Because in this instance I think the evidence points with at least reasonable certainty to the particular tribe by which they were erected.

Third. Whether our second reason prove to be correct or not, we find data here which appear to form connecting links between the prehistoric and the historic times, and hence call for some discussion in regard to the authors.

Fourth. The statement of the result of our explorations of these works (especially the burial mounds) will, as I conceive, be incomplete without some intimation of the bearing they have had on my own mind in reference to their authors.h.i.+p. This it is true will apply with equal force to the works of other districts. I have already briefly stated my conclusions in this respect regarding the antiquities of Wisconsin, but have refrained from entering at length upon the question as to the Ohio and West Virginia works, as I confess and have already intimated that these present more difficulties in the way of explanation than most of the other sections.

It may be thought premature to speculate in this direction, and some of our ablest scientific journals appear to deprecate any such attempts until more data have been obtained and the materials already collected are more thoroughly digested. I admit that, as a very general and almost universal rule, such a course is the proper one in respect to scientific investigations, but must dissent from its application in this instance, for the following reasons:

The thought that a mighty nation once occupied the great valley of the Mississippi, with its frontier settlements resting on the lake sh.o.r.es and Gulf coasts, nestling in the valleys of the Appalachian Range and skirting the broad plains of the West, a nation with its systems of government and religion, its chief ruler, its great central city, and all the necessary accompaniments, but which has disappeared before the inroads of savage hordes, leaving behind it no evidences of its existence, its glory, power, and extent save these silent forest-covered remains, has something so fascinating and attractive in it, that when once it has taken possession of the mind, it warps and biases all its conclusions.[42]

So strong, in fact, is the hold which this theory (in the broad sense, including also the Toltec and Aztec theories) has taken of the minds of both American and European archaeologists, that it not only biases their conclusions, but also molds and modifies their nomenclature, and is thrust into their speculations and even into their descriptions as though no longer a simple theory but a conceded fact. Hence it is necessary, before a fair and unbiased discussion of the data can be had, to call attention to the fact that there is another side to the question.

Unless some protest is presented or some expression of opinion is made on this point in my paper, the facts I give will be viewed through the medium of this "lost race" theory. This I desire, if possible, to prevent, and whether the "Indian theory" proves to be correct or not, I wish to obtain for it at least a fair consideration. I believe the latter theory to be the correct one, as the facts so far ascertained appear to point in that direction, but I am not wedded to it; on the contrary, I am willing to follow the facts wherever they lead.

Although additional data will hereafter be obtained and many new and important facts be brought to light, yet, as I believe, sufficient evidence has been collected (though much of it remains unpublished) to indicate what will be the final result so far as this general question is concerned.