WHO WERE THE MOUND
BUILDERS?
J. P. MACLEAN, PH. D.
An ancient and unknown race of people
possessing a well-
developed type of civilization, once
inhabited the valleys of the
Ohio and Mississippi. This race has left
no written history,
but the testimony of its existence and
advancement in the arts
and sciences is attested in the
stupendous structures, consisting
of mounds, walled enclosures and
domestic implements, which
have long attracted the attention of
observers, scientists and the
public generally.
The origin of this race, known as the
Mound-Builders, is
still an unsolved problem. The evidences
of its origin have
either been obliterated, or else so
carefully concealed as to es-
cape the closest scrutiny. The
ethnologist has been intensely
interested as to the type of mankind
that constructed the re-
mains. Many are the theories that have
been propounded; but
certain testimonies exist which enable
us to arrive at plausible
conclusions. It may be considered that
the first and most im-
portant step in this consideration has
been definitely settled.
It was in the year 1833 that Dr. Samuel
George Morton
published his monumental work,
"Crania Americana," in which
he identified the crania of the
Mound-Builders with that of the
American family. Adopting the
classification as given by Buf-
fon, the American family is
characterized by "a brown complex-
ion, long, black, lank hair, and
deficient beard. The eyes are
black and deep-set, the brow low, the
cheek bones high, the
nose large and the lips turned and
compressed. The skull is
small, wide between the parietal
protuberances, prominent at the
vertex, and flat on the occiput."
This family is divided into
two grand classes, the American family
and the Toltecan family.
Morton's investigations rested upon the
crania. It is possible
that Morton did not have before him a
sufficient number of un-
questionable Mound crania. However, his
results do not rest
upon inconclusive evidence. Take the
skull found near Chilli-
(91)
92 Ohio Arch. and Hist. Society Publications.
cothe, discovered by Squier and Davis in
a mound, reposing in a
deposit of buried earth, as an evidence.
Dr. Morton declared
that its characteristic features
resembled the Toltecan. Nott and
Gliddon state that it is exceedingly
characteristic of our Amer-
ican races, although more particularly
of the Toltecan. Accord-
ing to both Doctors Morton and Nott, the
peculiarities of this
consist of the "forehead, low,
narrow and receding; flattened
occiput; a perpendicular line drawn
through the external meatus
of the ear divides the brain into two
unequal parts, of which the
posterior is much the smaller. Viewed
from above, the anterior
part of the brain is narrow, and the
posterior and middle portion,
over the organs of caution,
secretiveness, destructiveness, etc.,
very broad, thus lending much support to
phrenology; vertex
prominent."
The celebrated Dr. John C. Warren
pronounced the Mound
and Peruvian crania to be alike. This
would agree essentially
with Morton for the Peruvian is a fair
representative of the Tol-
tecan type.
Aside from this science of craniology a
strong showing may
be produced from that class of
structures known as "temple
mounds." These are large, truncated
mounds with graded ways
leading to their summits, the most noted
of which is the great
Cahokia mound, about nine miles from
East St. Louis, Illinois.
This mound has four terraces. The temple
mounds are more
numerous in Kentucky than in Ohio. The
farther south, the
greater is the number. Their development
from north to south
gradually passes over to the higher
structures of Mexico, and
bears a striking resemblance to the
Mexican Teocallis, which
early suggested the name
"temple," by which they are almost
universally designated.
The ancient Mexicans and Mayas were much
given to ser-
pent worship, or at least the serpent
was a common symbol in
their religious rites. What relation the
great serpent mound of
Adams County, Ohio, has to the symbolism
of the Mexicans and
Central Americans may, of itself, have
no significance, but when
considered with other phases, it must be
a very strong link in the
chain of evidence.
Who Were the Mound Builders? 93
At this juncture, it should be noted
that the American fam-
ily is represented by all types of
civilization, from the wild, or
savage tribes to that people who
constructed the wonderful
houses and temples of stone in Yucatan
and Chiapas. The ruins
of the temple at Palenque must ever
remain as one of the won-
ders of the world. If the ancient Mayas
had not passed the
semi-barbarous state, they certainly
were encroaching upon the
dividing line.
The wild tribes did not erect the
squares and temples at
Marietta, Ohio, nor the squares,
circulars, octagons, parallelo-
grams, parallel lines of walls, etc., so
characteristic of the mound-
building race. The North American Indian
has no habits of
progressive industry. He is restless,
revengeful, fond of war,
and reactionary. There is not one
scintilla of evidence that the
Indians built these mounds. Their own
testimony is against it.
To say the least, they were incapable of
the task.
Indian traditions, like all others
cannot be relied on. In
them there may be germs of truth, but
not sufficient to be re-
lied on as historic evidence. There is a
tradition that, many
centuries ago, the Lenni-Lenape swept in
a flood of migration
from the far west, but on reaching the
valleys east of the Miss-
issippi, they were confronted by a
well-intrenched people pos-
sessing a mighty civilization. These
people they dominated the
Allegewi. The progress of the
Lenni-Lenape was arrested, and
they were driven back, but not
discouraged. At the same time,
the Iroquois were trying to effect a
passage in a more northerly
direction. The two migratory peoples now
entered into a military
league, and proclaimed a war of
extermination against the Al-
legewi. The strongholds of the latter
were reduced, the lands des-
olated, and the people forced to become
wanderers upon the
shores of the streams they had attempted
to defend. Another
tradition affirms that the primitive
inhabitants of Kentucky per-
ished in a war of extermination, waged
against them by the
Indians, and that the last great battle
was fought at the falls of
the Ohio, where the remnant was driven
upon a small island
below the rapids and "the whole of
them cut to pieces." The
Indian chief, Tobacco, informed General
George Rogers Clark of
a tradition in which it was stated that
there was a battle at Sandy
94 Ohio Arch. and Hist. Society Publications.
Island, that decided the fall of the
ancient inhabitants. The In-
dian chief, Cornplanter, affirmed that
Ohio, Kentucky and Ten-
nessee had once been inhabited by a
white people, who were
familiar with arts, of which the Indians
knew nothing, and that,
after a series of battles with the
Indians, they were exterminated.
He also declared that the old
burial-places were the graves of
an unknown people; that the old forts
had not been built by the
Indians, but belonged to "a very
long ago" people, who were of
a white complexion, and skilled in arts.
It is possible that the Indians had such
traditions. It is
also possible that the tradition was
formed to suit the occasion.
These ancient remains had awakened great
interest in the minds
of the early explorers, and the Indians,
desiring to give such
answers as would suit the interlocutor,
devised a satisfactory
answer. Admitting the genuineness of the
traditions, but little
can be extracted therefrom. The Indians
were almost con-
stantly on the warpath, and were of a
more or less migratory
nature, and it is not improbable that
they engaged in some strug-
gles that made a lasting impression on
their minds.
The Indians did have a superstition
relative to Kentucky.
One Indian expressed great astonishment
that white people could
live in a country which had been the
scene of such conflicts as
had taken place there. An old Sac, in 1800, said that
Kentucky
was filled with the ghosts of its
slaughtered inhabitants, and
wondered how the white man could make it
his home.
That these early people were affirmed to
be white, would
only indicate that they were not as dark
as the narrator. Ken-
tucky was the battle-ground between the
northern and southern
Indians; but one great fact is always
overlooked by the repeat-
ers of these traditions: The strongest
military works are north
of the Ohio, the best known of which is
Fort Ancient, in War-
ren County, where we have over four
miles of walls, varying
from five to twenty feet in height. The
forts in Ross, High-
land, Warren and Butler counties, Ohio,
indicate that the
Mound-Builders were disturbed by
powerful foes, for structures
on points of land suitable for defensive
purposes would not be
erected unless there was a destructive
assailant.
Who Were the Mound Builders? 95
There is no proof that the people were
assailed at every set-
tlement. The sacred enclosures at
Marietta were not protected
by military works. Such evidence as we
have, judging from the
remains alone, indicate that the
invasion was from the north,
and the people, step by step, retreated
southward. And yet, the
Indians have no traditions of violence
with a primitive people
in the valleys of the rivers of southern
Ohio, unless that of the
Lenni-Lenape be so construed.
Having referred this shadowy race of the
mounds to the
Toltecan family, it may be worth a
passing notice to explain this
term. Relying on Doctor Morton's
"Crania Americana," this
group embraces the civilized nations of
Mexico, Peru and Bo-
gata, extending from the Rio Gila,
thirty-third degree north lat-
itude, along the western margin of the
continent, to the fron-
tier of Chili; but in North America this
people was spread from
ocean to ocean, through Mexico, Yucatan,
Guatamala, Nica-
ragua, etc. From this it is not to be
inferred that all the peo-
ple embraced in this region were
Toltecan, because a very large
proportion of the inhabitants were of
other tribes, both exotic
and indigenous.
At the time of the discovery the people
were divided into
two distinct classes, constituting
nobles and plebeians. There ap-
pears to have been as much objection to
the amalgamation of
these two classes as ever existed in any
aristocratic court of
Europe. The advent of the Spaniards
reduced both classes to
one and imposed an equal servitude on
all alike.
The Toltecan family had a powerful
priesthood, which,
practically, was the governing power.
The great structures of
Mexico and the Central American states
were built under the
direction of the priests. Only a
powerful government, among a
semi-civilized people, could effect such
monuments.
The temple mounds and geometrical works
of the Ohio
would indicate a government of the
priesthood. When the vast
amount of labor required, by primitive
methods, is considered,
it must be apparent that the ancient
priesthood of the Ohio Val-
ley was absolute and despotic. Such a condition, uncurbed,
must enervate the nation, and a less civilized
people must fall a
prey, or be driven from their homes.
96 Ohio Arch. and Hist. Society Publications.
The problem of the mounds must, of necessity, remain an interesting one, because of the uncertainty surrounding it. To this must be added the unfortunate fact that whoever pries into this question must needs project a theory, however unsupported it may be by facts. The evidences as to who the Mound-Build- ers were must rest upon the crania and the character of the mon- uments. Much labor has been bestowed upon the mound problem. Ohio is the most prolific in the remains of this people. The Ohio State Archaeological and Historical Society, is doing good service in placing information before the people, as well as in- vestigating the remains. It owns both Fort Ancient and the Serpent Mound now made free to the public. |
|