Part 10
Were all the mounds and other ancient works found in that part of the United States east of the Rocky Mountains (except such as are manifestly the work of Europeans of post-Columbian times) built by the Indians found in possession of this region at the time of its discovery and their ancestors, or are they in part to be attributed to other more civilized races or peoples, as the Aztecs, Toltecs, Pueblo tribes, or some lost race of which we possess no historical mention? I say in part, as it has long been conceded, that some of these works are to be attributed to the Indians.
If it can be shown that some of the mounds and other works of all the different types and classes found in the Mississippi Valley and Gulf States were built by Indians, or even that they were built by people in the same stage of culture and art and having the same customs and habits as the Indians of this region in the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries, we shall be justified in concluding that the rest are the work of the same race and of the same tribes, or those, closely allied in habits, customs, art, and culture. That here and there a single mound-building tribe may have become extinct or absorbed into other tribes in pre-Columbian times, as has been the fate of some since the discovery of the continent, does not alter the case, unless it be claimed that such tribes belonged to different "American stocks" and had reached a higher degree of culture than those found in this part of the continent at the time of the arrival of the Europeans.
No one believes that we will ever be able to ascertain the history of the construction of each mound and earthwork; the utmost to be hoped is that we may be able to determine with satisfactory certainty that such and such works were built by such and such tribes.
But one step in the investigation is to reach the general conclusion as to whether all classes of these remains in the region designated may justly be attributed to the Indians, or whether there are some types which must be ascribed to a different race, to a people that had attained a higher position in the scale of civilization than the Indians. This it is possible to accomplish, without being able to determine conclusively what tribe erected any particular work.
Nevertheless the conclusion will be strengthened by every proof that the works of certain sections are to be ascribed to certain tribes or stocks. It is for this reason that I propose to discuss somewhat briefly the question of the probable authorship of the works in the Appalachian district.
THE CHEROKEES PROBABLY MOUND-BUILDERS.
In 1876, Prof. Lucien Carr, assistant curator of the Peabody Museum, opened a mound in Lee County, Virginia, in which he made certain discoveries which, with the form of the mound and the historical data, led him to the conclusion that it was the work of the Cherokees.
This monument, as he informs us, was a truncated oval, the level space on the top measuring 40 feet in length by 15 in width.
At the distance of 8 feet from the brow of the mound, on the slope, there were found buried in the earth the decaying stumps of a series of cedar posts, which I was informed by Mr. Ely [the owner] at one time completely encircled it. He also told me that at every plowing he struck more or less of these posts, and, on digging for them, some six or seven were found at different places, and in such order as showed that they had been placed in the earth at regular intervals and according to a definite plan. On the top, in the line of the greatest diameter and near the center of the mound, another and a larger post or column, also of cedar, was found.[52]
Quoting Bartram's description (given below) of the council house of the Cherokees in the town of Cowe, he concludes, and I think correctly, that this mound was the site of a similar building.
Bartram's description is as follows:[53]
The Council or Town House is a large rotunda, capable of accommodating several hundred people. It stands on the top of an ancient artificial mount of earth of about 20 feet perpendicular and the rotunda on the top of it, being above 30 feet more, gives the whole fabric an elevation of about 60 feet from the common surface of the ground. But it may be proper to observe that this mount on which the rotunda stands is of a much ancienter date than the building, and perhaps was raised for another purpose. The Cherokees themselves are as ignorant as we are by what people or for what purpose these artificial hills were raised. * * *
The rotunda is constructed after the following manner: They first fix in the ground a circular range of posts or trunks of trees, about 6 feet high, at equal distances, which are notched at top to receive into them, from one to another, a range of beams or wall plates. Within this is another circular order of very large and strong pillars, above 12 feet high, notched in like manner at top to receive another range of wall plates, and within this is yet another or third range of stronger and higher pillars, but fewer in number, and standing at a greater distance from each other; and, lastly, in the center stands a very strong pillar, which forms the pinnacle of the building, and to which the rafters center at top; these rafters are strengthened and bound together by cross-beams and laths, which sustain the roof or covering, which is a layer of bark neatly placed and tight enough to exclude the rain, and sometimes they cast a thin superficies of earth over all.
There is but one large door, which serves at the same time to admit light from without and the smoke to escape when a fire is kindled; but as there is but a small fire kept, sufficient to give light at night, and that fed with dry, small, sound wood, divested of its bark, there is but little smoke; all around the inside of the building, betwixt the second range of pillars and the wall, is a range of cabins or sophas consisting of two or three steps, one above or behind the other, in theatrical order, where the assembly sit or lean down; these sophas are covered with mats or carpets very curiously made with thin splits of ash or oak woven or platted together; near the great pillar in the center the fire is kindled for light, near which the musicians seat themselves, and around about this the performers exhibit their dances and other shows at public festivals, which happen almost every night throughout the year.
From indications, not necessary to be mentioned here, Professor Carr argues that the mound could not have been intended for burial purposes, but was evidently erected for the foundation of a building of some kind.
In a subsequent paper,[54] "Mounds of the Mississippi Valley," he not only adheres to the theory advanced in the tenth report of the Peabody Museum, but gives additional reasons for believing it to be true.
Although guided by very dim and feeble rays of light I am nevertheless inclined to believe that Professor Carr has succeeded in entering the pathway that is to lead to a correct solution of the problem in this case. As is apparent from what has been given in this paper regarding the burial mounds of this district, much additional data bearing on the point have been obtained since Professor Carr's explorations were made, on which he bases his conclusions.
The Cherokee tribe has long been a puzzling factor to students of ethnology and North American languages. Whether to be considered an abnormal offshoot from one of the well-known Indian stocks or families of North America, or the remnant of some undetermined or almost extinct family which has merged into another, appear to be questions yet unsettled; but they are questions which do not trouble us in the present inquiry; on the contrary, their ethnic isolation and tribal characteristics are aids in the investigation.
That the internal arrangement of the mounds, modes of burial, and vestiges of art of this district present sufficient peculiarities to distinguish them from the mounds, modes of burial, and vestiges of art of all the other districts, as I have already stated, will be conceded by any one who will carefully study them and make the comparison. If, therefore, it be admitted, as stated, that the Cherokees are a somewhat peculiar people, an abnormal tribe, we have in this a coincidence worthy of note, if strengthened by corroborating testimony.
As the mounds and other remains to be referred to are located in the northwest part of North Carolina and the northern part of East Tennessee, the first point to be established is that the Cherokees did actually, at some time, occupy this region.
In the first place, it is well known that they claimed all that portion of the country east of Clinch River to and including the northwest part of North Carolina, at least to the Yadkin, a claim which was conceded by the whites and acted on officially by State and national authority and denied by no Indian tribe.
Haywood expressly states that[55]--
the Cherokees were firmly established on the Tennessee River or Hogohega [the Holston] before the year 1650, and had dominion over all the country on the east side of the Alleghany Mountains, which includes the headwaters of the Yadkin, Catawba, Broad River, and the headwaters of the Savannah--
a statement borne out by the fact that, as late as 1756, when the English built Fort Dobbs on the Yadkin, not far from Salisbury, they first obtained the privilege of doing so by treaty with Attacullaculla, the Cherokee chief.[56]
Haywood asserts,[57] upon what authority is not known, that--
before the year 1690 the Cherokees, who were once settled on the Appomattox River, in the neighborhood of Monticello, left their former abodes and came to the west. The Powhatans are said by their descendants to have been once a part of this nation. The probability is that migration took place about, or soon after, the year 1632, when the Virginians suddenly and unexpectedly fell upon the Indians, killing all they could find, cutting up and destroying their crops, and causing great numbers to perish by famine. They came to New River and made a temporary settlement, and also on the head of the Holston.
That they formerly had settlements on New River (Upper Kanawha) and on the Holston is, as I believe, true, but that they came from the vicinity of Monticello and the Appomattox River, were connected with the Powhatans, or first appeared in Tennessee in 1632, cannot be believed. First, because Jefferson makes no mention of their occupancy of this part of Virginia; on the contrary, he locates them in the "western part of North Carolina." Secondly, because John Lederer, who visited this region in 1669-'70, speaking of the Indians of the "Apalatean Mountains," doubtless the Cherokees, as he was at that time somewhere in western North Carolina, says: "The Indians of these parts are none of those which the English removed from Virginia; these were far more rude and barbarous, feeding only upon raw flesh and fish, until these taught them to sow corn and showed them the use of it."[58] Thirdly, because it is evident that they were located in substantially the same territory when De Soto passed through the northern part of Georgia, as it is now admitted that the "Chelaques" or "Achalaques" mentioned by the chroniclers of his ill-starred expedition were the Cherokees. That they extended their territory a considerable distance farther southward after the time of the Adelantado's visit can be easily demonstrated, but it is unnecessary for me to present the proof of this assertion at this time, as I presume it will be admitted.
Their traditions in regard to their migrations are uncertain and somewhat conflicting, still there are a few items to be gleaned from them, which, I think, may be relied upon as pointing in the proper direction. The first is, the positive statement that they formerly had a settlement, or were settled on or near the Nolichucky; the second is, that they were driven from some more northern section by their enemies; and third, their constant and persistent claim that, of right, the country about the headwaters of the Holston and eastward into North Carolina belonged to them.
From all the light, therefore, that I can obtain on this subject, I am satisfied the Cherokees had at some time in the past moved southward from a more northern location than that which they were found occupying when first encountered by the whites. This corresponds with one of their traditions given by Haywood, that they formerly dwelt on the Ohio and built the mounds there. That they did at one time actually occupy the section in which the mounds we allude to are situated cannot be doubted.
Turning now to the mounds of East Tennessee and North Carolina, to which allusion has been made, let us see what testimony they furnish on the point now under discussion.
The particular works to which we refer are those located in Caldwell County, North Carolina, and Sullivan County, East Tennessee, descriptions of which have been given.
Although we cannot say positively that no other tribe occupied this particular section between 1540 and 1690, still the evidence and indications leading to that conclusion are so strong as to justify us in assuming it. We find their frontiers on the borders of Georgia in 1540; we can trace back their settlements on the Hiawassee to a period preceding 1652. We have evidence that the settlements on the Little Tennessee were still older, and that even these were made subsequent to those on the Nolichucky. We have their own tradition, as given by Lederer, that they migrated to this region about the close of the thirteenth century from a more northern section; and, finally, their uniform and persistent statement, from the time first encountered by Europeans, that when they came to this region they found it uninhabited, with the exception of a Creek settlement on the lower Hiawassee. This clearly indicates a movement southward, a fact of much importance in the study of this somewhat abnormal tribe.
If, therefore, we can show that these mounds, or any of the typical ones, were constructed since the discovery of America, we have good reason to believe that they are to be attributed to the Cherokees, notwithstanding their statement to Bartram that they did not build the one at Cowe.
At the bottom of one of the largest mounds found in this region, the T. F. Nelson triangle heretofore described, and by the side of the skeleton of the principal personage interred in it, as shown by the arrangement of the bodies of those buried with him, and by the ornaments and implements found with him, were discovered three pieces of iron. That one of the pieces, at least, is part of an implement of European manufacture, I think no one who examines it will doubt (see Fig. 31). It appears to be part of a sword blade or the blade of a large knife. Another of the pieces is apparently a large awl or punch, a part of the deer-horn handle yet remaining attached to it. A chemical examination made by Professor Clarke, chemist of the United States Geological Survey, shows that these were not made of meteoric iron.
That these cannot be attributed to an intrusive burial is evident from the following facts: _First_, they were found at the very bottom of the pit, which had been dug before depositing the bodies; _second_, they were found with engraved shells, celts, and other relics of this character; and _third_, they were deposited with the principal personage who had been buried in the mound.
In the same mound and under the same circumstances some large copper beads or cylinders were also found. A careful examination of these specimens shows, as I think very clearly, that the copper plate of which they were made was not manufactured by any means at the command of the Indians or the more civilized races of Mexico or Central America, as it is as smooth and even as any rolled copper; moreover, the beads appear to have been cut into the proper shape by some metallic instrument. If this supposition be correct (and I believe an inspection of the specimens will satisfy any one that it is), it certainly indicates contact with civilized people. If so, then we have positive proof that this mound was made subsequent to the discovery of America by Columbus and in all probability after the date of De Soto's expedition in 1540.
As I have shown that the Cherokees alone inhabited this particular section from the time of De Soto's expedition until it was settled by the whites, it follows that if the mound was built subsequent to that date it must have been by the Cherokees. The nearest neighbors of this tribe on the east, at the time the whites came in contact with them, were the Tuscaroras. We learn from John Lederer, who visited them in 1670, on his return from the Cherokee country, that they were in the habit of "decking themselves very fine with pieces of bright copper in their hair and ears and about their neck, which, upon festival occasions, they use as an extraordinary bravery."[59] While it is well known that these two tribes were brought into contact with each other through being constantly at war, until the latter removed to the north and joined the Five Nations, it is more likely that these articles of European workmanship were obtained chiefly from the Spaniards, who, as is now known, worked the gold mines in northern Georgia at an early date. We learn from Barcia's "Ensayo Cronologico"[60] that Tristan de Luna, who, in 1559, went in search of the mines of "Coza" (the name by which the region of northern Georgia was then known), succeeded in reaching the region sought, and even heard, while there, of the negro Robles, who was left behind by De Soto. When John Lederer reached the borders of Georgia the Spaniards were then at work at these mines, which fact, as he informs us, checked his further advance, as he feared he might be made a captive by them. As further and conclusive evidence of this, we have only to state that the remains of their cabins in the vicinity of the mines were found in 1834 with trees from 2 to 3 feet in diameter growing over them. The old shafts were discovered in which they worked, as also some of the machinery they used.[61] Be this supposition correct or not, if the articles we have mentioned were of European workmanship, or if the material was obtained of civilized people, we must take for granted, until evidence to the contrary is produced, that the mound in which they were found was built after the commencement of the sixteenth century, hence by Indians, and in all probability by the Cherokees.
Our next argument is the discovery in the ancient works of this region of evidences that the habits and customs of the builders were similar to those of the Cherokees and some of the immediately surrounding tribes.
I have already alluded to the evidence found in the mound opened by Professor Carr, that it had once supported a building similar to the council house observed by Bartram on a mound at the old Cherokee town, Cowe. Both were on mounds, both were circular, both were built on posts set in the ground at equal distances from each other, and each had a central pillar.
As confirming this statement of Bartram, we are informed in Ramsey's Annals of Tennessee[62] that when Colonel Christian marched against the Cherokee towns, in 1776, he found in the center of each "a circular tower rudely built and covered with dirt, 30 feet in diameter, and about 20 feet high. This tower was used as a council house and as a place for celebrating the green-corn dance and other national ceremonials." Lawson, who traveled through North Carolina in 1700, says:[63] "They [the Indians] oftentimes make of this shell [alluding to a certain large sea shell] a sort of gorge, which they wear about their neck in a string, so it hangs on their collar, whereon is sometimes engraven a cross or some odd sort of figure which comes next in their fancy." Beverly, speaking of the Indians of Virginia, says:[64] "Of this shell they also make round tablets of about 4 inches in diameter, which they polish as smooth as the other, and sometimes they etch or grave thereon circles, stars, a half-moon, or any other figure, suitable to their fancy."
Now it so happens that, in the same mound in which the iron specimens before alluded to were found, and in other mounds in the same section, the Bureau assistants discovered shell ornaments precisely of the character described by these old writers. Some of them were smooth and without any devices engraved on them, but with holes for inserting the strings by which they were to be held in position; others were engraved with figures which would readily be taken for stars and half-moons, and one among the number had a cross engraved on it. The testimony in this case that these relics were the work of the Indians found in possession of the country at the time of the discovery is, therefore, too strong to be put aside by mere conjectures or inferences. If the work of the Indians, then they must have been used by the Cherokees and buried with their dead. The engraved figures are strangely uniform, indicating some common origin, but the attempt to trace this is foreign to our present purpose. In these mounds were found a large number of nicely carved soapstone pipes, usually with the stem made in connection with the bowl, though some were without this addition, consisting only of the bowl, with a hole for the insertion of a cane or wooden stem.
By turning to Adair's "History of the North American Indians,"[65] we find the following statement:
They [the Indians] make beautiful stone pipes, and the Cherokees the best of any of the Indians, for their mountainous country contains many different sorts and colors of soils proper for such uses. They easily form them with their tomahawks, and afterwards finish them in any desired form with their knives, the pipes being of a very soft quality till they are smoked with and used with the fire, when they become quite hard. They are often a full span long, and the bowls are about half as long again as those of our English pipes. The fore part of each commonly runs out, with a sharp peak two or three fingers broad and a quarter of an inch thick.
Not only were pipes made of soapstone found in these mounds, but two or three were obtained precisely of the form mentioned by Adair, with the fore part running out in front of the bowl; and another of the same form has been found in a mound on the Kanawha, which is at least suggestive. Jones says:[66]