Ohio History Journal

  • 1
  •  
  • 2
  •  
  • 3
  •  
  • 4
  •  
  • 5
  •  
  • 6
  •  
  • 7
  •  
  • 8
  •  
  • 9
  •  
  • 10
  •  
  • 11
  •  
  • 12
  •  
  • 13
  •  
  • 14
  •  
  • 15
  •  
  • 16
  •  
  • 17
  •  
  • 18
  •  
  • 19
  •  
  • 20
  •  
  • 21
  •  
  • 22
  •  
  • 23
  •  
  • 24
  •  
  • 25
  •  
  • 26
  •  
  • 27
  •  
  • 28
  •  
  • 29
  •  
  • 30
  •  
  • 31
  •  
  • 32
  •  
  • 33
  •  
  • 34
  •  
  • 35
  •  
  • 36
  •  
  • 37
  •  
  • 38
  •  
  • 39
  •  
  • 40
  •  
  • 41
  •  
  • 42
  •  
  • 43
  •  
  • 44
  •  
  • 45
  •  
  • 46
  •  
  • 47
  •  
  • 48
  •  
  • 49
  •  
  • 50
  •  
  • 51
  •  
  • 52
  •  
  • 53
  •  
  • 54
  •  
  • 55
  •  
  • 56
  •  
  • 57
  •  
  • 58
  •  
  • 59
  •  
  • 60
  •  
  • 61
  •  
  • 62
  •  
  • 63
  •  
  • 64
  •  
  • 65
  •  
  • 66
  •  
  • 67
  •  
  • 68
  •  
  • 69
  •  
  • 70
  •  
  • 71
  •  
  • 72
  •  
  • 73
  •  
  • 74
  •  
  • 75
  •  
  • 76
  •  
  • 77
  •  
  • 78
  •  
  • 79
  •  
  • 80
  •  
  • 81
  •  
  • 82
  •  
  • 83
  •  
  • 84
  •  

LEADEN PLATE AT THE MOUTH OF THE MUSKINGUM

LEADEN PLATE AT THE MOUTH OF THE MUSKINGUM

 

In the October QUARTERLY were published cuts of the

leaden plate prepared for deposit at the mouth of the Conewango

and the one buried at the mouth of the Kanawha.

On the following pages are illustrations of the remnant of

the plate buried at the mouth of the Muskingum and what was

probably its entire text. This plate was considerably multilated.

A portion of the lead was cut away for bullets before the signifi-

cance and importance of this relic were realized. We are under

obligation to the American Antiquarian Society for a very satis-

factory photograph of this remnant from which has been pro-

duced the illustration on the following page.

The plates which have been found thus far show that an

effort was made to include identical text on each with the excep-

tion of the date and the name of the river at the mouth of which

the plate was buried. No two of the plates, however, could have

been made from the same mold, as they contain respectively

nineteen, twenty-one and eighteen lines of varying length. A

separate mold must have been used in casting each and space

was left to engrave the date and the name of the river, at the

confluence of which with the Ohio, each plate was buried. Some

writers have ventured the opinion that the inscription, with the

exception above noted, was stamped upon the plates.

The full text of the inscription on the plate buried at the

mouth of the Muskingum is not given in either of the Journals,

but from the official statement, the text of the inscriptions on

the other plates and the assertion of Celoron that "the inscription

is always the same" (page 371) the writer has undertaken to

supply, with the aid of the fragment left, the full inscription of

this plate. The result is found on page 479. It cannot vary

materially from the original and is believed to be practically

identical with it.

A comparison of the texts of these plates shows some varia-

tions and slight inaccuracies in orthography. The artist, Paul

(477)