Ohio History Journal

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4


Editorialana.                         261


plained. Indeed the annotations themselves have a value second only to

the text which they explain. They constitute a compendium of informa-

tion that evidences the faithfulness and enthusiasm with which Mr. Con-

nelley has performed his work. We cite only one instance especially

interesting to Ohio readers. It is Mr. Connelley's note on the meaning

of the word "Ohio."   He says: "Ohio is derived from     the Iroquois.

The original is variously spoken in the different dialects. In Wyandot

it is Ohezhu; in Mohawk and Cayuga it is oheyo; in Onondaga and

Tuscarora it is Oheye; in Oneida it is Ohe; in Seneca it is very nearly

the same as in Wyandot. Darlington, in his Christopher Gist's Journals,

p. 94, and Morgan in his League of the Iroquois, say this means 'fair,'

'beautiful,' and that the Iroquois called the Ohio the Beautiful River.

The French so called it (La Belle Riviere), but there is no evidence

that they secured the name from any Indian original. The word does

not mean 'fair,' neither does it mean 'beautiful.' It means great. The

Iroquois, therefore, called the Ohio the Great River. The Wyandots

call it Ohezhu Yandawaye--Great River. And in the various dialects

of the Iroquois it is so called without exception. They give the stream

that name from it source to the Gulf of Mexico; with them it is the

main stream and has but one name. When I became acquainted with

the Wyandots they told me of hunting trips to the 'Sunken Lands' on

the Ohio. 'But,' I replied, 'there are no sunken lands on the Ohio.'

'Yes,' they said, 'plenty on Ohio; plenty by New Madrid.' 'But New

Madrid is on the Mississippi,' I insisted. 'We call him Ohio-all along,

Ohio; not call him Mississippi any place.' The Iroquois must have had

at some time a name for the Mississippi above the mouth of the Ohio,

but those I have met do not remember it."




[One of the most interesting and noted mounds of the West is the one

located at Moundsville, W. Va. It was recently reported that the proprietor

had offered it for sale to any historical society and that in default of a purchaser

he would destroy it, in order to have the use of the grounds for agricultural

purposes. It appears, however, that the West Virginia legislature laudably came

to the rescue and secured the property for preservation. The following interesting

history of this mound and its explorations is from the pen of Mr. Wills De Haas.

The article appeared in a late number of The Philadelphia Ledger. We repro-

duce it in full with an accompanying cut of the famous ancient tablet found in

the mound.-EDITOR.]

The Legislature of West Virginia at its late session did a praise-

worthy act in purchasing the great mound at Moundsville, one of the

largest and most interesting prehistoric tumuli in central North America.

This important mound has long interested scholars and antiquarians, and

has also provoked controversy. A description and a statement of the

controversy may not be uninteresting at this time. The tumulus is a

typical structure of the Mound period--conical, symmetrical and 70 feet