Burial Mounds of the Northern Sections of the United States.
by Cyrus Thomas.
INTRODUCTORY.
All the works of the mound-builders of our country are exceedingly interesting to the antiquarian and are valuable as ill.u.s.trating the habits, customs, and condition of the people by whom they were formed, but the sepulchral tumuli surpa.s.s all others in importance in this respect. Although usually simple in form and conveying thereby no indications of the characteristics of the people by whom they were erected, yet when explored they reveal to us, by their internal structure and contents, more in regard to the habits, beliefs, and art of their authors than can be learned from all their other works combined. From them we are enabled to learn some traits of ethnical character. The gifts to, or property of, their dead deposited in these sepulchers ill.u.s.trate their arts and customs and cast some rays of light into their homes and daily life, and the regard for their dead indicated by the remaining evidences of their modes of burial and sepulchral rites affords some glimpses of their religious beliefs and superst.i.tions. The larger and more imposing works, as the pyramidal mounds, the enclosures, ca.n.a.ls, etc., furnish indications of their character, condition, strength, and culture-status as a people or tribe, but the burial mounds and their contents, besides the evidences they furnish in regard to the religious belief and art of the builders, tell us something of individual traits, something of their social life, their tastes, their personal regard for each other, and even something of the diseases to which they were subject. What is still more important, the modes of burial and vestiges of art found with the dead furnish us undoubted evidences of tribal distinctions among the authors of these works, and, together with the differences in external form, enable us to determine in a general way the respective areas occupied by the different tribes or peoples during the mound-building age.
Judging by all the data so far obtained relating to the form, internal structure, and contents of these works, much of which has not yet been published, we are perhaps warranted in concluding that the following districts or areas were occupied by different peoples or tribes. As a matter of course we can only designate these areas in general terms.
(1) The _Wisconsin district_, or area of the emblematic or effigy mounds. This embraces the southern half of Wisconsin, a small portion of the northern part of Illinois, and the extreme northeast corner of Iowa. The effigy or animal mounds form the distinguishing feature of the works of this district, but aside from these there are other features sufficient to separate the works of this section from those further south.
(2) The _Illinois_ or _Upper Mississippi district_, embracing eastern Iowa, northeastern Missouri, and northern and central Illinois, as far south as the mouth of the Illinois River.
In this region the works are mostly simple conical tumuli of small or moderate size, found on the uplands, ridges, and bluffs as well as on the bottoms, and were evidently intended chiefly as depositories of the dead. They are further characterized by internal rude stone and wooden vaults or layers; by the scarcity of pottery vessels, the frequent occurrence of pipes, the presence of copper axes, and often a hard, mortar-like layer over the primary or original burial. The skeletons found are usually extended, though frequently in a sitting or squatting posture.
Walls and enclosures are of rare occurrence in this region.
(3) The _Ohio district_, including the State of Ohio, the western part of West Virginia, and the eastern portion of Indiana. Although the works of this region present some features which are common to those of the Gulf section, there are several peculiar characteristics which warrant us in designating it as a distinct district. Among other of these peculiar features we notice the great circles and squares of the enclosures, the long parallel lines of earthen walls, the so-called "altar mounds," or mounds containing structures chiefly of clay to which the name "altar" has been applied; the numerous carved stone pipes; the character of the pottery and the methods of burial.
(4) The _New York district_, confined chiefly to the northern and western parts of the State of New York, but including also the lake region of the central portion.
As the antiquities of this district have been shown by Squier to be chiefly due to the Indian tribes occupying that section at the time of its discovery by the Europeans, it is unnecessary to note the distinguishing characteristics. The works are chiefly enclosing walls, remains of palisades, and burial mounds.
(5) The _Appalachian district_, including western North Carolina, eastern Tennessee, southwestern Virginia, and part of southeastern Kentucky.
The characteristics which appear to warrant us in concluding that the works of this region pertain to a different people from those in the other districts, at the same time seem to show some relation to those of the Ohio district. Such are the numerous stone pipes, the altar-like structures found in some of the mounds, and the presence of mica plates with the skeletons. But the peculiar features are the mode of burial, the absence of pottery, and the numerous polished celts and engraved sh.e.l.ls found in the mounds.
Although it is probable that there are at least three districts in the southern portion of the United States, they appear to pa.s.s from one into the other by such slight changes in the character of the works as to render it exceedingly difficult to fix the boundaries between them. I therefore mention the following, provisionally, as being those indicated by the data so far obtained.
(6) The _Middle Mississippi area_ or _Tennessee district_, including southeast Missouri, northern Arkansas, middle and western Tennessee, southern and western Kentucky, and southern Illinois. The works of the Wabash valley possibly belong also to this district, but the data obtained in regard to them are not sufficient to decide this point satisfactorily. This district, like the others of the south, is distinguished from the northern section by its larger mounds, many of which are pyramidal and truncated and often terraced, and which were, beyond question, used as domiciliary mounds. Here we also meet with repeated examples of enclosures though essentially different from those of Ohio; also ditches and ca.n.a.ls. From the Lower Mississippi and Gulf districts, with which, as we have said, it is closely allied, it is distinguished chiefly by the presence of the box-shaped stone cists or coffins, by the small circular house-sites or hut-rings, and by the character of the pottery. This is pre-eminently the pottery region, the typical forms being the long-necked, gourd-shaped vase and the image-vessels. In this district the carved stone pipes are much less common than in the Illinois, Ohio, and Appalachian districts.
(7) The _Lower Mississippi district_, including the southern half of Arkansas, Louisiana, and Mississippi. There are no marked characteristics by which to distinguish it from the Middle district; in fact as we move southward along the Mississippi from the mouth of the Illinois river, the works and their contents indicate a succession of tribes differing but slightly in habits, customs, and modes of life, the river generally forming one natural boundary between them, but the other boundaries being arbitrary. For example, the Cahokia region appears to have been the home of a tribe from which at one time a colony pushed northward and settled for a while in Brown and Pike Counties, Illinois.
The extreme southeastern counties of Missouri were probably the seat of another populous tribe which extended its borders into the western part of southern Illinois and slightly into northeast Arkansas, and closely resembled in customs and art the ancient people who occupied that part of the c.u.mberland valley in middle Tennessee. This subsection is princ.i.p.ally distinguished by the presence of the small circular house-sites, which are slightly basin-shaped, with a low ring of earth around them. As we move farther southward into Arkansas the house-sites change into low circular mounds, usually from 1 to 3 feet in height, and in nearly every instance containing a layer of clay (often burned) and ashes.
These small mounds, which are clearly shown to have been house-sites, were also burial places. It appears to have been a very common custom in this section to bury the dead in the floor, burn the dwelling over them, and cover the whole with dirt, the last operation often taking place while the embers were yet smouldering. Burial in graves was also practiced to a considerable extent. As we approach the Arkansas River, moving southward and from thence into Louisiana, the pottery shows a decided improvement in character and ornamentation.
(8) The _Gulf district_, including the Gulf States east of the Mississippi. The works of this section appear to be closely allied to those of the Lower Mississippi district, as here we also find the large flat-topped pyramidal mounds, enclosing walls, and surrounding ditches and ca.n.a.ls.
The chief differences are to be found in the forms and ornamentation of the pottery and modes of burial.
As we approach the Mississippi River the distinguishing features gradually disappear, although there appears to be a distinct subdistrict in the northern part of Mississippi, and as we enter the Florida peninsula a change is observed which appears to indicate a different people, but the data so far obtained are not sufficient to enable us to outline the subdistricts.
This districting is to be regarded as a working hypothesis rather than as a settled conclusion which will stand the test of future investigations. It is more than likely that other subdivisions will be found necessary, and that the boundaries of some of the districts given will have to be more or less modified; still, I believe the arrangement will be found substantially correct.
As a very general and almost universal rule, mounds of the cla.s.s under consideration are more or less conical in form, and are common to all sections where earthworks are known to exist, in fact they form almost the only ancient remains of some localities. Often they are isolated, with no other monuments near them, but more frequently they occur in groups or are a.s.sociated with other works. Squier and Davis say "they are generally of considerable size, varying from 6 to 80 feet in height, but having an average of from 15 to 25 feet."[1]
This is probably true in regard to the mounds explored by these archaeologists in Ohio, but is erroneous if applied generally; as very many, evidently used and intended as burying places only, are but two or three feet high, and so far as the more recent examinations made in other sections--especially the explorations carried on under the Bureau of Ethnology--have shown, tumuli of this character are usually from 3 to 10 feet high, though some, it is true, are of much larger dimensions; but these are the exceptions and not the rule.[2]
As the authors just alluded to are so frequently referred to by writers, and their statements in reference to the works explored by them are taken as of general application, I will venture to correct another statement made by them in regard to mounds of this character. They a.s.sert that "these mounds invariably cover a single skeleton (in very rare instances more than one, as in the case of the Grave Creek mound), which, at the time of its interment, was enveloped in bark or coa.r.s.e matting or enclosed in a rude sarcophagus of timber, the traces, in some instances the very casts, of which remain. Occasionally the chamber of the dead is built of stone rudely laid up, without cement of any kind."[3]
I have investigated but few of the ancient works of Ohio personally, or through the a.s.sistants of the Bureau, hence I can only speak in regard to them from what has been published and from communications received, but judging from these, Messrs. Squier and Davis, while no doubt correctly describing the mounds explored by them, have been too hasty in drawing general conclusions.
That burial mounds in the northern sections very frequently cover but a single skeleton is true, but that this, even in this section, is universally true or that it is the general rule is a mistake, as will appear from what is shown hereafter. Nor will it apply as a rule to those of the southern sections.
To ill.u.s.trate the character and construction of these mounds, and modes of burial in them, I will introduce here brief descriptions of the leading types found in the different northern districts heretofore mentioned, confining myself chiefly to the explorations made by the Bureau a.s.sistants.
BURIAL MOUNDS OF THE WISCONSIN DISTRICT.
Following the order of the geographical districts heretofore given, we commence with the Wisconsin section, or region of the effigy mounds.
As a general rule the burial mounds in this area are comparatively small, seldom exceeding 10 feet in height and generally ranging from 3 to 6 feet. In all cases these belong to that cla.s.s of works usually denominated "simple conical tumuli."
Of the methods of construction and modes of burial there appear to be some two or three types, though not so different as necessarily to indicate different tribes or peoples. One of these is well represented in the following extract from Dr. I. A. Lapham"s work describing some mounds opened by Dr. Hoy, near Racine:
We excavated fourteen of the mounds, some with the greatest possible care. They are all sepulchral, of a uniform construction as represented in Fig. 1 [our Fig. 1.] Most of them contained more than one skeleton; in one instance we found no less than seven. We could detect no appearance of stratification, each mound having been built at one time and not by successive additions. During the investigations we obtained sufficient evidence to warrant me in the following conclusions. The bodies were regularly buried in a sitting or partly kneeling posture facing the east, with the legs placed under them. They were covered with a bark or log roofing over which the mound was built.[4]
[Ill.u.s.tration: FIG. 1.--Section of mound near Racine, Wisconsin.]
In these a basin-shaped excavation some 2 or 3 feet deep was first made in the soil in which the bodies were deposited, as shown in Fig. 1.
Mr. Middleton, one of the Bureau a.s.sistants, in 1883, opened quite a number of small burial mounds in Crawford and Vernon counties, belonging to the same type as those just described; some with the excavation in the original soil in which the skeletons were deposited, though in others there were no such excavations, the skeletons being deposited on the original surface or at various depths in the mounds. I give here descriptions of a few of them from his notes:
[Ill.u.s.tration: FIG. 2.--Section of burial mound, Vernon County, Wisconsin.]
The one numbered 16, of the Courtois group, is about 20 feet in diameter, and at present scarcely more than 1 foot high, the ground having been in cultivation for several years and the mound considerably lowered by the plow. A vertical section is given in Fig. 2, _a a_, indicating the natural surface of the ground, _b_ the part of the mound removed, and _c_ the original circular excavation in the natural soil to the depth of 2 feet.
Four skeletons were found in this excavation, two side by side near the center, with heads south, faces up, one near the north margin with head west, and the other on the south side with head east, all stretched at full length.
In another mound of the same group with a similar excavation nothing save a single skull was found. In another of exactly the same kind some of the skeletons were folded, while others were extended at full length.
In all these cases, and in a majority of the small burial mounds opened in this western part of the State, there was no stratification; still there were found some exceptions to this rule.
Vestiges of art were comparatively rare in them, yet here and there were found an arrow-point, a chipped flint sc.r.a.per or celt--in some instances remarkably fine specimens--a few large copper gorgets, evidently hammered from native copper, copper beads, etc. Very few vessels of pottery were obtained from them, but one was discovered, shown in Fig.
3, which I believe is of the finest quality of this ware so far obtained from the mounds of the United States. There were intrusive burials in a few of these mounds, but these have been wholly omitted from consideration in the descriptions given.
In a few instances the mounds seem to have been built solely for the purpose of covering a confused ma.s.s of human bones gathered together after the flesh had disappeared or had been removed. Similar mounds are described by Mr. Thomas Armstrong as found near Ripon, Fond du Lac County. Speaking of these, Mr. Armstrong says:
As to how these bones came to be placed in these mounds, we can of course only conjecture; but from their want of arrangement, from the lack of ornaments and implements, and from their having been placed on the original surface, we are inclined to believe that the dry bones were gathered together--those in the large mounds first and those in the smaller ones afterwards--and placed in loose piles on the ground and the earth heaped over them until the mounds were formed.[5]
There can be no doubt that the bones in this case were gathered up from other temporary burial places or depositories, as was the custom of several tribes of Indians.
[Ill.u.s.tration: FIG. 3.--Earthen pot from Wisconsin mound.]