Chapter V: Part 5

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]

It has been more than hinted by at least one person whose
statement is entitled to every belief, that among the Cherokees
dwelling in the mountains there existed certain artists whose
professed occupation was the manufacture of stone pipes, which
were by them transported to the coast and there bartered away
for articles of use and ornament foreign to and highly esteemed
among the members of their own tribe.

This not only strengthens our conclusion, drawn from the presence of such pipes in the mounds alluded to, but may also assist in explaining the presence of the copper ornaments in them. The writer last quoted says:[67]

Copper implements are rarely found in Georgia. The present [a
copper ax] is the finest specimen which, after no mean search,
has rewarded our investigations. Native copper exists in
portions of Cherokee Georgia, Tennessee, North Carolina, and
Alabama, but it is generally found in combination with sulphur
and not in malleable form. We are not aware of any locality
among those enumerated whence the Indians could have secured
that metal either in quantity or purity sufficient to have
enabled them to manufacture this implement.

Adair says:[68]

From the time we supplied them with our European ornaments they
have used brass and silver ear-rings and finger-rings; the
young warriors now frequently fasten bell-buttons or pieces of
tinkling brass to their moccasins.

From these facts I am inclined to believe that most of the copper used by them was obtained directly or indirectly from the whites, and hence subsequent to the discovery of America. But should this supposition be erroneous, the fact still remains that the Cherokees were in the habit of using just such ornaments as we find in these mounds.

As showing that the Europeans began to trade copper to the Indians at a very early day, I call attention to a statement made by Beverly in his "History of Virginia."[69] Speaking of a settlement made at Powhatan, six miles below the falls of James River, in 1609, he says it was "bought of Powhatan for a certain quantity of copper."

By reference to Smith's History and the narratives of the early explorers we find that the amount of sheet copper traded to the Indians and taken by them from wrecks was quite large.

But we are not yet through with the items under this class of testimony.

Haywood, in his "Natural and Aboriginal History of Tennessee,"[70] says:

Mr. Brown, a Scotchman, came into the Cherokee Nation, in the
year 1761 and settled on the Hiawassee River or near it. He saw
on the Hiawassee and Tennessee the remains of old forts, about
which were axes, guns, hoes, and other metallic utensils. The
Indians at that time told him that the French had formerly been
there and built these forts.

I am fully aware that this author indulges in some extravagant speculations; still, so far as I have tested his original statements I have generally found them correct. During the year 1883 one of the assistants of the Bureau was sent to this particular region, which is too limited to allow the question of locality to be raised. An overflow and a change in the channel of the river brought to light the remains of old habitations and numerous relics of the people who formerly dwelt there. Moreover, this was in the precise locality where tradition located a Cherokee town. Digging was resorted to in order to complete what the water had begun.

Now let me mention some of the things obtained here:

Ten discoidal stones, precisely like those from the mounds of Caldwell County, North Carolina.

Nine strings of glass beads.

A large number of shell beads exactly like those from the mounds.

A number of flint arrow-points.

One soapstone pipe.

Some pieces of smooth sheet-copper.

Three conical copper ear-pendants.

Three buttons of modern type.

One small brass gouge.

Fragments of iron articles belonging to a bridle.

One bronze sleigh-bell.

One stone awl or drill.

Fragment of a soapstone pot.

One soapstone gorget.

Several polished stone celts of the same pattern as those found in the North Carolina mounds.

Grooved stone axes.

A piece of sheet lead.

This admixture of articles of civilized and savage life confirms the statement made by Haywood, at least so far as regards the early presence of white people in this section. It follows from what has been presented that the Indians must have been Cherokees, and the fact that the implements and ornaments of aboriginal manufacture found here are throughout precisely like those found in the mounds before mentioned affords a very strong proof that they were built by the Cherokees.

It is worthy of notice that close by the side of this washout stands a mound. Permission to open it has not yet been obtained.

Returning to our mounds, we note that a large number of stones, evidently used for cracking nuts, were found in and about them; some charred acorns, or nuts of some kind, were also found in them. We have only to refer to Adair and other early writers to see how well the indications agree with the customs of the Cherokees.

According to the Cherokee tradition, they found a settlement of Creeks on the Lower Hiawassee, when they reached that region, and drove them away. Ramsay expresses the opinion in his Annals of Tennessee, on what authority is not known, that this was a Uchee settlement. Hence the southern boundary of their possessions, at this early date, which must have been before the time of De Soto's expedition, was about the present northern boundary of Georgia. That their borders, at the time of De Soto's march, extended into northeastern Georgia is proved by the chroniclers of his expedition, but that they did not reach as far south as Bartow County can be shown from one somewhat singular circumstance, which, at the same time, will furnish strong reasons for believing that the authors of the works immediately south of this boundary could not have built the mounds we have been considering.

It will be admitted, I presume, by every one, that the people over whom the famous cacique of Cutifachiqui reigned could not have been Cherokees; yet her territory included Xuala, probably in Nacoochee valley, and extended westward well toward Guaxule on the headwaters of the Coosa, but that the latter was not within the territory of her tribe is expressly stated by Garcilasso de la Vega. I think it may be safely assumed that her people were Creeks; and, if so, that the people of Guaxule, who, as we judge from the chroniclers of De Soto's expedition, were mound-builders, belonged to another distinct tribe.

Garcilasso, who is our authority in reference to the first point now to be considered, says:

La casa estava en un cerro alto, como de otras semejantes hemos
dicho. Tenia toda ella al derredor un paseadero que podian
pasearse por el seis hombres juntos.[71] The house was on a
high hill (mound) similar to others we have already mentioned.
It had all round about it a roadway on which six men could walk
abreast.

This language is peculiar, and, so far as I am aware, can apply to no other mound in Georgia than the large one near Cartersville. The words "similar to others we have mentioned," are evidently intended to signify that it was artificial, and this is conceded by all who have noted the passage. The word "alto" (high), in the mouth of the explorers, indicates something more elevated than the ordinary mounds. The roadway or passageway (paseadero) "round about it" is peculiar, and is the only mention of the kind by either of the three chroniclers. How is it to be explained?

As Garcilasso wrote from information and not from personal observation he often failed to catch from his informants a correct notion of the things described to him; this is frequently apparent in his work where there is no reason to attribute it to his vivid imagination. In this case it is clear he understood there was a terrace running entirely around the mound, or possibly a roadway around the top outside of a rampart or stockade.

But as neither conclusion could have been correct, as no such terrace has been found in any part of this region, and a walk around the summit would have thwarted the very design they had in view in building the mound, what was it Garcilasso's informants saw? C. C. Jones says "a terrace," but it is scarcely possible that any terrace at the end or side of a southern mound, forming an apron-like extension (which is the only form found there), could have been so described as to convey the idea of a roadway, as the mode of estimating the width shows clearly was intended.

The broad way winding around and up the side of the Etowah mound (Fig. 39) appears to answer the description better than any other in Georgia. It is a large mound, high, and one that would doubtless attract the attention of the Spanish soldiers; its dimensions indicate that the tribe by which it was built was strong in numbers and might easily send forth five hundred warriors to greet the Spaniards. The locality is also within the limits of De Soto's route as given by the best authorities; and lastly, there is no other mound within the possible limits of his route which will in any respect answer the description. As Garcillasso must have learned of this mound from his informants, and has described it according to the impression conveyed to his mind, we are justified in accepting it as a statement of fact. I am, therefore, satisfied that the work alluded to is none other than the Etowah mound near Cartersville, Georgia, and that here we can point to the spot where the unfortunate Adelantado rested his weary limbs and where the embassadors of the noted cacique of Cutifachiqui delivered their final message.

Recently the smallest of the three large mounds of this group was opened and carefully explored by Mr. Rogan, one of the Bureau assistants. As the result will be of much interest to archæologists aside from the question now under discussion, although belonging to the southern type of burial mounds not discussed in this paper, I will venture to give a description of its construction and contents as a means of comparison and as also bearing somewhat on the immediate question under discussion. This mound is the one marked _c_ in Jones's plate;[72] also _c_ in Colonel Whittlesey's figure 2.[73] A vertical section of it is given in Fig. 40. The measurements, as ascertained by Mr. Rogan, are as follows: Average diameter at the base, 120 feet; diameter of the level top, 60 feet; height above the original surface of the ground, 16 feet. The form is more nearly that of a truncated cone than represented in the figures alluded to.

The construction was found, by very thorough excavation, to be as follows: the entire surrounding slope (No. 4, Fig. 40) was of hard, tough red clay, which could not have been obtained nearer than half a mile; the cylindrical core, 60 feet in diameter and extending down to the original surface of the ground, was composed of three horizontal layers; the bottom layer (No. 1) 10 feet thick, of rich, dark, and rather loose loam; the next (No. 2) 4 feet thick, of hard, beaten (or tramped) clay, so tough and hard that it was difficult to penetrate it even with a pick; and the uppermost (No. 3) of sand and surface soil between 1 and 2 feet thick. A trench was dug from opposite sides to the central core; and when the arrangement was ascertained, this central portion was carefully explored to the original surface of the ground.

Nothing was found in the layer of clay (No. 2) except a rude clay pipe, some small shell beads, a piece of mica, and a chunkee stone. The burials were all in the lower layer (No. 1), of dark rich loam, and chiefly in stone cists or coffins of the usual box-shape, formed of stone slabs, and distributed horizontally, as shown in Fig. 41, which is a plan of this lower bed.

According to Mr. Rogan's field-notes, the form and contents of these graves and the mode of burial in them were as follows:

Grave _a_, Fig. 41.--A stone sepulcher, 2-1/2 feet wide, 8 feet long, and 2 feet deep, formed by placing steatite slabs on edge at the sides and ends, and others across the top. The bottom consisted simply of earth hardened by fire. It contained the remains of a single skeleton, lying on its back, with the head east. The frame was heavy and about 7 feet long. The head was resting on a thin copper plate, ornamented with stamped figures; but the skull was crushed and the plate injured by fallen slabs. Under the copper were the remains of a skin of some kind; and under this, coarse matting, probably of split cane. The skin and matting were both so rotten that they could be secured only in fragments. At the left of the feet were two clay vessels, one a water-bottle, and the other a very small vase. On the right of the feet were some mussel and sea shells; and immediately under the feet two conch-shells (_Busycon perversum_), partially filled with small shell beads. Around each ankle was a strand of similar beads. The bones and most of the shells were so far decomposed that they could not be saved.

Grave _b_.--A stone sepulcher, 4-1/4 feet long, 2 feet wide, and 1-1/2 feet deep, differing from _a_ only in size and the fact that the bottom was covered with stone slabs. The skeleton was extended on the back, head east. On the forehead was a thin plate of copper, the only article found.

Grave _c_.--A stone sepulcher, 3-1/2 feet long, 1-1/2 feet wide, and 1-1/2 deep; the bottom being formed of burnt earth. Although extending east and west, as shown in the figure, the bones had probably been interred without regard to order and disconnected, the head being found in the northeast corner with face to the wall and the remaining portion of the skeleton in a promiscuous heap. Yet there was no indication of disturbance after burial as the coffin was intact. Between some of the bones was found a thin plate of copper that had been formed by uniting and riveting together smaller sections. Some of the bones found in this grave were saved.

Grave _d_.--A small sepulcher, 1-1/2 feet square by 1 foot deep, contained the remains of an infant, also a few small shell beads. The slabs forming the sides and bottom of this grave bore very distinct marks of fire.

Grave _e_.--Simply a headstone and footstone, with the skeleton of a very small child between them; head east. On the wrists were some very small shell beads. The earth on the north and south sides had been hardened in order to form the walls.

Grave _f_.--Stone sepulcher, 6 feet long, 3 feet wide, and 1-1/2 feet deep, with stone in the bottom; skeleton with the head north. There was a lot of copper about the head, which, together with the skeleton, was wrapped in a skin. The head rested on a large conch-shell (_Busycon perversum_), and this on the remains of a coarse mat. Shell beads were found around the neck, each wrist, and ankle. On the right was a small cup, and on the breast an engraved shell. The copper had preserved a portion of the hair, which was saved; portions of the skin and matting were also secured.

Immediately under _b_ was another stone grave or coffin, 3 feet long, 1-1/2 feet wide, and as deep, extending north and south. The head of the skeleton was toward the north, but the feet were doubled back under the frame in order to get it in the allotted space. The only things found with this skeleton were some beads around the neck.

At _g_ the remains of a child were found without any stones about them. Some shell beads were around the neck and wrists and an engraved shell on the breast.

Grave _h_.--A stone sepulcher, 1-1/2 feet square and 1 foot deep, stone slabs on the four sides and top; the bottom consisted simply of earth hardened by fire. This contained only a trace of bones and presented indications of at least partial cremation, as all around the slabs, outside and inside, was a solid mass of charcoal and the earth was burned to the depth of a foot.

Grave _i_.--A stone sepulcher, 4-1/2 feet long, 1-1/2 feet wide, and as deep, the bottom earth; contained the remains of a skeleton resting on the back, head north, and feet doubled back so as to come within the coffin. On the breast was a thin plate of copper, five inches square, with a hole through the center. Around the wrists were beads, and about the neck rather more than a quart of the same.

At _j_ were the remains of a small child, without stone surroundings; under the head was a piece of copper, and about the neck and wrists were shell beads.

These graves were not all on the same level; the top of some being but two feet below the clay bed (No. 2), while others were from two to three feet lower.

All the articles obtained in this mound were forwarded at once to the Bureau of Ethnology and are now in the National Museum. Examining them somewhat carefully since their reception, I find there are really more copper plates among them than Mr. Rogan supposed, the number and description being as follows:

1. A human figure with wings, represented in Fig. 42. This is 13 inches long and 9 inches wide. A portion of the lower part, as shown by the figure, is wanting, probably some 3 or 4 inches. There is a break across the middle, but not sufficient to interfere with tracing out the design. A crown piece to the head ornament is also wanting.

2. Also a human figure, shown in Fig. 43. Length, 16 inches; width, 7-1/2 inches.

3. Figure of a bird; this is imperfect, as part of the head and the outer margin of the wings are wanting. Length, 13-1/2 inches; width 7-1/2 inches. This plate shows indubitable evidence of having been formed of smaller pieces welded together, as the overlapping portions can be easily traced. It has also undergone repairs: a fracture commencing on the left margin and running irregularly half-way across the body has been mended by placing a strip of copper along it on the under side and riveting it to the main plate; a small piece has also been riveted to the head and the head to the body; several other pieces are attached in the same way. The rivets are small and the work is neatly done.

4. An ornament or badge of some kind, shown in Fig. 44. The two crescent-shaped pieces are entirely plain, except some slightly impressed lines on the portion connecting them with the central stem. This central stem, throughout its entire length and to the width of six-tenths of an inch, is raised, and cross strips are placed at various points along the under side for the purpose of inserting a slip of bone, a part of which yet remains in it, and is seen in the figure at the break immediately below the point where the oblique strips meet. This specimen presents, as I believe, indubitable evidence that the workmen who formed it made use of metallic tools, as the cutting in this case could not possibly have been done with anything except a metallic implement. A single glance at it is sufficient to satisfy any one of the truth of this assertion. Length of the stem, 9 inches; width across the crescents, 7-1/2 inches.

5. Part of an ornament similar to No. 4. These plates, especially No. 4, appear to be enlarged patterns of that seen behind the head of Fig. 43.

6. An ornament or badge, shown in Fig. 45, which Mr. Rogan, when he found it under the head of the skeleton in grave _a_, was inclined to consider a crown. It is imperfect, a narrow strip across the middle and a portion of the tip being missing. As shown in the figure, it measures around the outer border 19 inches and across the broad end 3-1/2 inches. The six holes at the larger end, in which the remains of strings can be detected, indicate that when in use it was attached to some portion of the dress or fastened on a staff.

7. A fragment from the larger end of a piece similar to the preceding. Attached to this is a piece of cloth.

In addition to the foregoing, there are a number of small fragments probably broken from these plates, but, so far, I have been unable to fit them to their proper places.

These plates and the ones mentioned below are very thin, and as even and smooth (except as interrupted by the figures) as tin plate. The figures are all stamped, the lines and indentations being very sharp and regular.

An examination of what Mr. Rogan calls a skin shows beyond question that it is animal matter. The matting he speaks of appears to be made of split canes.

The shell represented in Fig. 46 is the one obtained in grave _g_. The one shown in Fig. 47 is that found in grave _f_.

I shall at present simply call attention to one or two facts which appear to bear upon the age and distribution of these singular specimens of art.

First. We notice the fact alluded to by Mr. Holmes,[74] which is apparent to every one who inspects his accurately drawn figures, that in all their leading features the designs themselves are suggestive of Mexican or Central American work. Yet a close inspection brings to light one or two features which are anomalies in Mexican or Central American designs; as, for example, in Figs. 42 and 43, where the wings are represented as _rising from the back of the shoulders_, a fact alluded to by Mr. Holmes.[75] Although we can find numerous figures of winged individuals in Mexican designs (they are unknown in Central American), they always carry with them the idea that the individual is partly or completely clothed in the skin of the bird. This is partially carried out in our copper plate, as we see by the bird-bill over the head, the eye being that of the bird and not of the man. But when we come to the wings we at once see that the artist had in mind the _angel figure_, with wings arising from the _back of the shoulders_, an idea wholly foreign to Mexican art. It is further worthy of note in regard to these two plates that there is a combination of Central American and Mexican designs: the graceful limbs, and the ornaments of the arms, legs, waist, and top of the head are Central American, and the rest, with the exception possibly of what is carried in the right hand, are Mexican.

That these plates are not the work of the Indians found inhabiting the southern sections of the United States, or of their direct ancestors, I freely concede. That they were not made by an aboriginal artisan of Central America or Mexico of ante-Columbian times, I think is evident, if not from the designs themselves, certainly from the indisputable evidence that the work was done with hard metallic tools.

Second. Plates like those of this collection have only been found, so far as I can ascertain, in northern Georgia and northern and southern Illinois. The bird figure represented in Fig. 48 was obtained by Major Powell, the director of the United States Geological Survey, from a mound near Peoria, Illinois. Another was obtained in Jackson County, Illinois, by Mr. Thing, from an ordinary stone grave. From another similar grave, at the same place, he also obtained the plate represented in Fig. 49. Fragments of a similar plate were obtained by Mr. Earle from a stone grave in a mound in Alexander County, Illinois. All these specimens were received by the Bureau of Ethnology and deposited in the National Museum.

The box-form stone cists and the figures on the copper plates and engraved shells differ so widely from the stone vaults and vestiges of art found in the North Carolina and East Tennessee mounds as to forbid the belief that the works of the two regions were constructed by one and the same people. The stone cists and to some extent the construction of the mound appear to connect the authors with the mound-builders and authors of the stone graves of the Cumberland Valley and Southern Illinois, and several other facts, which we cannot now stop to present, seem to strengthen this suggestion.

The presence of these stone cists in this mound of northern Georgia, when coupled with the fact that similar stone graves are found in Habersham County, indicate a Shawnee or closely allied element where we should expect to find only Creeks or some branch of the Chahta-Muscogee family. This is a puzzle by no means easy of solution, but one which the scope of our paper does not require us to discuss. Still, we may add, that if our conclusions in regard to this group be correct, we must believe that the large mound was built before De Soto reached that region while the one explored was built afterwards. Some facts brought to light by the recent discovery of a cemetery within the area inclosed by the ditch, which I have for some years believed would be found, and for which I caused search to be made, appear to sustain these conclusions, and to indicate that two different peoples have occupied this site and have had a hand in constructing or adding to these works.

Whatever may be our conclusion in reference to these questions, I think it will be conceded that the builders of these Etowah mounds belonged to different tribes from those who erected the East Tennessee and North Carolina works, and hence, if we are right in regard to the latter, the Etowah mounds were not built by the Cherokees. The important bearing which this conclusion has upon the question under discussion, as the reader will see, is that the mounds immediately outside of the territory occupied by the Cherokees were built by a different people from those who erected the works in that territory. Thus we see that, judging by the mounds alone, immediately upon passing outside the Cherokee country we encounter a different type of works. This fact, therefore, when taken in connection with the other evidence adduced, becomes strongly corroborative of the view that the Cherokees were the authors of the works in their territory.

CONCLUDING REMARKS.

The results of our examination of the burial mounds of the northern districts may be briefly summed up as follows:

First. That different sections were occupied by different mound-building tribes, which, though belonging to much the same stage in the scale of civilization, differed in most instances in habits and customs to a sufficient extent to mark, by their modes of burial, construction of their mounds, and their works of art, the boundaries of the respective areas occupied.

Second. That each tribe adopted several different modes of burial depending, in all probability, to some extent upon the social condition, position, and occupation of the deceased.

Third. That the custom of removing the flesh before the final burial prevailed very extensively among the mound-builders of the northern sections. The bones of the common people being often gathered together and cast in promiscuous heaps, over which mounds were built.

Fourth. That usually some kind of religious or superstitious ceremony was performed at the burial, in which fire played a prominent part. That, notwithstanding the very common belief to the contrary, there is no evidence whatever that human sacrifice was practiced.

Fifth. That there is nothing found in the mode of constructing these mounds, nor in the vestiges of art they contain, to indicate that their builders had reached a higher culture-status than that attained by some of the Indian tribes found occupying the country at the time of the first arrival of Europeans.

Sixth. That the custom of erecting mounds over the dead continued to be practiced in several localities in post-Columbian times.

Seventh. That the character and condition of the ancient monuments, and the relative uniformity in the culture status of the different tribes shown by the works and the remains of art found in them, indicate that the mound-building age could not have continued in this part of the continent longer than a thousand years, and hence that its commencement probably does not antedate the fifth or sixth century.

Nothing has been found connected with them to sustain or justify the opinion, so frequently advanced, of their great antiquity. The calculations based upon the supposed age of trees found growing on some of them is fast giving way before recent investigations made in regard to the growth of forests, as it has been ascertained that the rings of trees are not a sure indication of age.

Quatrefages may not be correct in fixing the date of the appearance of the "Red skins" in the "basin of the Missouri" in the eighth or ninth century,[76] but nothing has been found in connection with the ancient works of this country, supposing the Indians to have been their authors, to prove that he has greatly erred in his calculation. Other races or peoples may have preceded the mound-builders in this region, but better proof of this is required than that based on the differences between the supposed palæolithic and neolithic implements of New Jersey and other sections, as every type discovered can be duplicated a hundred times in the surface finds from different parts of the country.

Eighth. That all the mounds which have been examined and carefully studied are to be attributed to the indigenous tribes found inhabiting this region and their ancestors.

SUPPLEMENTAL NOTE.[77]

BURIAL CEREMONIES OF THE HURONS.[78]

Our savages are not savages as regards the duties which nature herself requires us to render to the dead. They do not yield in this respect to several nations much more civilized. You would say that all their labor and efforts were for scarcely anything but to amass means of honoring the dead. They have nothing too valuable for this purpose; they devote to this use the robes, the hatchets, and the shell beads in such quantities, that you would think to see them, on these occasions, that they were considered of no great value, and yet they are all the riches of the country; you may often see them in midwinter almost entirely naked, while they have good and fine robes in their chests, which they are keeping in reserve for the dead; this is, indeed, their point of honor. It is on this occasion especially that they wish to appear magnificent. But I speak here only of their peculiar funerals.

These good people are not like many Christians, who cannot suffer death to be spoken of, and who, in a mortal sickness, hesitate to break the news to the sick one for fear of hastening his death. Here, when the recovery of any one is despaired of, not only do they not hesitate to tell him that his end is near, but they even prepare in his presence all that is necessary for the burial; they often show him the shroud, the hose, the shoes, and the girdle which he is to wear; frequently they are enshrouded, after their custom, before they have expired, and they hold a feast of farewell to their friends, during which they sing, sometimes without showing any apprehension of death, which they regard very indifferently, considering it only as a change to a life very little different from this. As soon as the dying man has drawn his last breath, they arrange the body in the same position that is to be preserved in the tomb; they do not lay it out horizontally, as is our custom, but crouched, like a ball (en peloton), "quasi en la mesme posture que les enfants sont an ventre de la mere." Until this time they restrain their mourning. After having performed these duties, all in the cabin begin to utter sighs, groans, and lamentations; the children cry _Aistan_, if it is their father, and the mother _Aien, Aien_, "My son, my son." No one seeing them thus weeping and mourning would think that they were only ceremonial lamentations; they blend their voices all in one accord and in a lugubrious tone, until some one in authority calls for peace; at once they cease and the captain hastens to announce through all the cabins that such a one is dead. Upon the arrival of the friends they resume their mourning. Frequently some one of more importance will begin to speak and will console the mother and the children, now extolling the deceased, praising his patience, his kindness, his liberality, his magnificence, and, if he was a warrior, his great courage; now saying, "What do you wish? there is no longer any remedy; it was necessary for him to die; we are all subject to death;" and then, "He lingered a very long time," &c. It is true that on this occasion they do not lack for conversation; I am sometimes surprised to see them discourse a long time on this subject, and bring up, with much discretion, all considerations that may afford any consolation to the friends of the deceased.