Archaeological Map of OhioClick here for larger image sizeArchaeological Map of Ohio[Showing interior location of remains]
Click here for larger image size
[Showing interior location of remains]
It has been noted that a considerable portion of archæological remains in Ohio, Indiana, Michigan, and Wisconsin are inland—or away from the largest river valleys. The lands on the lesser streams were occupied in some instances for the entire distance to the springs. For instance, in Ohio and Kentucky we find only a fraction of the ancient works on the shores of the Ohio river—either mounds or forts. In Ohio the largest collections are found in the interior counties mentioned, as is the case in Kentucky, at a distance varying from fifty to one hundred and fifty miles from the great water highway which flows by these states on the north or on the south.
As with these states, so with the counties within them—the mound-building people seem to have been scattered widely. Anarchæological map of Butler county, Ohio, shows that the remains are found everywhere quite without reference to the largest streams. In this county there are more works in Oxford township in the far corner of the county than in Hanover township, which lies between Oxford and the Miami river. Today there are six hundred more inhabitants in Oxford township (exclusive of the population of Oxford village) than in Hanover township. There are more remains in Reily township, which is separated from the Miami by Ross township, than in Madison township, which is bounded by the Miami and is drained by a larger stream than any in Reily. St. Clair township contains several works in the western portion, on the branches of the Miami river, and almost none at all in the eastern portion which is bounded by that river itself.
Crawford county, Wisconsin, has also been mapped. Though bounded on the south and west by the Wisconsin and Mississippi rivers, fifty per cent of the ancient works are at a distance from those streams.
Archaeologic Map of Illinois and IndianaClick here for larger image sizeArchaeologic Map of Illinois and Indiana[Showing interior location of remains]
Click here for larger image size
[Showing interior location of remains]
The large proportion of remains in Kentucky are in the western portion of the state situated along the watershed between the Ohio and Tennessee valleys. In Indiana the great majority of works are in the eastern tier of counties where there are no streams of importance.
This makes up a sum of testimony that enables one to say that in some instances at least the mound-building peoples were largely a rural people; in some noticeable instances their works are found more profusely on the smaller streams than on larger ones. In this they differed in no wise from the red-men who were found living in these regions mentioned when the whites first came to visit them, and we might have held to our original line of reasoning to reach this same conclusion. It might have been shown that the red-men in Ohio and some of the neighboring states lived more on the smaller streams than on the larger ones, and then made the deduction that the mound-building people did the same.
For this was true. The three centers of Indian population in Ohio were on thesmaller streams. The Delawares made their headquarters on the upper Muskingum; the Wyandots had their villages on the Sandusky river and bay; the Shawanese were on the Scioto, and the Miamis on the rivers that have borne their name. The well-known Indian settlements on the Ohio and on Lake Erie can almost be counted on the fingers of one hand, while the towns at Coshocton, Chillicothe, Piqua, Fremont, and Dresden were of national importance during the era of conquest. Referring to the location of the Indians of Ohio an early pioneer casually writes: “Their habitations were at the heads of the principal streams.”[7]There was almost no exception to the rule.
The explanation of this may be found partly in the great floods which were, doubtless, more menacing near the larger streams. While the floods rise perhaps faster today, it is doubtful if they reach the height that they did in earlier days. Then, at flood-tide, a thousand forest swamps, licks, pools, and lagoons which do not exist today added their waters to the river tides. GeneralButler, who was on the lower Ohio just after the Revolution, was advised by a friendly Indian chief to locate Fort Finney high up from the Ohio in order to be clear of high water. Under the date of October 24, 1785, he wrote in hisJournal: “Capt. George, who had lived below the mouth of this river [Miami] assured me that all the bank from the river for five miles did absolutely overflow, and that he had to remove to the hill at least five miles back, which determined me to take the present situation.”[8]
Under such circumstances as these it is not surprising that the Indians preferred the little rivers to the larger ones. The smaller streams amid their hills did not rise so high, and when they did rise safe camping spots could be found on high ground not far removed.
What was true of these Indians was probably true of any antecedent race.
Assuming, then, that the mound-building people lived (in these states more particularly noticed) on the lesser “inland”streams where the later Indians were found, there is no question but that they moved about the country more or less as the Indians themselves did. Although the former people were more nearly a stationary people, yet we know that they hunted, and it is not reasonable to believe that they did not have commercial intercourse. In fact, from the contents of their mounds, we know they did. We also know that the various tribes made war upon one another, or at least were made war upon by some enemy.
All this necessitated highways of travel. Any one who has studied the West during Indian occupancy does not need to be asked to remember that travel in the earliest days in the interior was by land as well as by water. Those making long journeys at propitious seasons, such as the Iroquois who went southward in war parties, the Moravians being transferred to Ohio from Pennsylvania, pioneers en route down the Ohio river to Kentucky, the Wyandots on their memorable hegira to the Detroit river, used the waterways. But the main mode of travel for explorers, war parties, pioneerarmies and missionaries seems to have been by the paths which threaded the forests.[9]
Of the hundreds of Indian forays into Virginia and Kentucky there is perhaps not one, even those moving down the Scioto and up the Licking, that used water transportation. In their hunting trips the canoe was useless except for transporting game and peltry to the nearest posts, and this was done often on the little Indian ponies.
For long months the lesser streams were ice-bound in the winter; in the summer, for equally long periods, they must have been nearly dry, as in the present era of slack-water navigation the larger of them are frequently very low. Even travel onthe Ohio in low-water months was exasperatingly slow. One pilgrim to Ohio spent ninety days en route from Killingly, Connecticut, to Marietta, Ohio—thirty-one of them being spent in getting from Williamsport, Pennsylvania, down the Monongahela and Ohio to Marietta! The journey from Connecticut in a cart drawn by oxen to the Monongahela took but twice the time needed to come down the rivers to Marietta on a “Kentucky” flatboat![10]With high-water, and going down stream, a hundred miles a day could be covered.[11]
That the first pioneers into the interior of Ohio, Kentucky, and Indiana preferred land routes to water is plain to the most casual reader of the history of the pioneer period. Such great entrepots as Wellsburg, Ohio, Limestone, Kentucky, and Madison, Indiana (all on the Ohio), attest the fact that the travel to the interior was by land routes and not by the smaller rivers.
And so, throughout historic times, one rule has held true in the region now undersurvey: that the lesser streams have never been used to any large degree as routes of travel by the white race, or by the red race before them. It is thus reasonable to believe that the earliest people, who so largely inhabited the interior valleys, found land travel more sure and expeditious than water travel on the little streams. A great many mound-building people lived by these smaller streams where so many of their works now stand. That they had ways of getting about the country goes without saying. In some instances the earth and stone with which they worked was brought from a distance. This could not have been accomplished by any means by water. We know they fought great battles; it is exceedingly doubtful and all against the lesson taught in times that are historic, that these armies traveled water routes. True, there were watch “towers” along the river banks, and the rivers of real size were undoubtedly the routes of armies—but it has been the opinion of some archæologists that their enemies came from the north. There are no rivers flowing from the interior of Ohio, for instance, to Lake Erie thatare even now when dammed of a size sufficient to warrant us the belief that great armies passed over them.[12]We cannot imagine a hostile army of power great enough to have necessitated the building of such a work as Fort Ancient ever coming to it on the little river on which it stands.
Speaking of the mound-building Indians, MacLean remarks: “In order to warn the settlements [of mound-builders], where such a band should approach, it was found necessary to have ... signal stations. Judging by the primitive methods employed, these wars must have continued for ages. If the settlements along the two Miamis and Scioto were overrun at the same time before they had become weakened, it would have required such an army as only a civilized or semi-civilized nation could send into the field. It is plausible to assume that a predatory warfare was carried on at first, and on account of this the many fortifications were gradually built.During a warfare such as this, the regular parties of miners would go to the mines, for the roads could be kept open, even should an enemy cross the well-beaten paths.”[13]Here a scholar of reputation gives the strongest kind of evidence in a belief that overland routes of travel were in existence and were employed in prehistoric times—by incidentally referring to them while discussing another question. It is difficult to think of any possible alternative. The verdict of history is all against another.
Assuming, then, that overland routes of travel were used by this earliest of American races of which we have any real knowledge, it is to the purpose of our study to consider where such routes were laid.
The one law which has governed land travel throughout history is the law of least resistance, or least elevation. “An easy trail to high ground” is a colloquial expression common in the Far West, but there has been a time when it was as common to Pennsylvania and Ohio as it is common today along the great stretches of thePlatte. The watersheds have been the highways and highestways of the world’s travel. The farther back we go in our history, the more conclusive does the evidence become that the first ways were the highestways. Our first roads were ridge roads and their day is not altogether past in many parts of the land. These first roads were “run,” or built, along the general alignment of the first pioneer roads, which, in turn, were nothing more than “blazed” paths of the Indian and buffalo. A single glance at one of the maps of the Central West of Revolutionary times, for instance, will show how closely the first routes clung to the heights of the watersheds. And for good reason: here the ground suffered least from erosion; here the forests were thinnest; here a pathway would be swept clear of snow in winter and of leaves in summer by the swift, clean brooms of the winds. For the Indians, too, the high lands were points of vantage both in hunting and in times of war.
In every state there were strategic heights of land, generally running westward; in Ohio, for example, the strategic watershedwas that between the heads of the lake rivers and the heads of those flowing southward into the Ohio. Across this divide ran the Great Trail toward Detroit and the lake country. In western Virginia a strategic watershed was that formed between the heads of streams flowing northward into the Ohio and southward into the Kanawha. And in a remarkable degree the strategic points of a century and a half ago are the strategic points today, a fact attested by the courses of the more important trunk railway lines. The steady rise and importance of such a city as Akron, Ohio, is due to a strategic situation at the junction of both an important portage path and of a great watershed highway.
With all these facts in mind it is not presumptuous then to inquire whether the mound-building Indians did not find the high lands and mark out on them these first highways of America.
In examining the standard work on the exploration of the American mounds, theTwelfth Annual Report of the Bureau of Ethnologyof the Smithsonian Institution, by Dr. Cyrus Thomas, it is plain that the mound-building Indians were well acquainted with the watersheds and high lands in the regions which they occupied. As a general rule it can be said that they cultivated the lowlands and built their forts and mounds upon the adjacent heights; but, so widespread are their works over the counties which they occupied, that it seems evident that they were at least well acquainted with all the surrounding territory. Whatever may have been the significance of their works, it is reasonable to believe that they were erected to be seen and visited; it is sane to believe that theywere erected near the highways traveled, as has been the case with all other races of history. It is now in point to show that their mounds and effigies were not only on high ground, but often on the ranges of hills.
Examining Crawford county, Wisconsin, we find the mound-builders’ works “on the main road from Prairie du Chien to Eastman,” which “follows chiefly the old trail along the crest of the divide between the drainage of the Kickapoo and Mississippi rivers.... The group is, in fact, a series or chain of low, small, circular tumuli extending in a nearly straight line northwest and southeast, connected together by embankments.... They are on the top of the ridge.”[14]
“About 2 miles from Eastman, ... just east of the Black River Road, ... are three effigy mounds and one long mound.... They are situated in a little strip of woods near the crest, but on the western slope of the watershed and near the head of a coulee or ravine.”[15]
“In the same section ... are the remains of two bird-shaped mounds, both on top of the watershed.”[16]
“The next group surveyed ... are on the crest of the ridge heretofore mentioned and on both sides of the Black River Road.”[17]
“Mound No. 23 ... is also in the form of a bird with outstretched wings. It lies ... on top of the ridge, with the head lying crosswise of the highest point.”[18]
“Mound No. 24 is close to the right or east, on the high part of the ridge, extending in the same direction as 23.”[19]
“Northward of this group some 400 yards, there is a mound in the form of a quadruped, probably a fox, ... partly in the woods and partly in the field on the west side of the road. It is built on the crest of the ridge with the head to the south.”[20]
“About a mile southward of Hazen Corners ... is a group.... They are all situated on the northern slope of the ridge not far from the top.”[21]
“... A small group ... situated west of the Black River Road, ... on the top of the ridge in the woods. The ridge slopes from them to the east and west.”[22]
“Some 10 or 12 miles southwest of the battle-field of Belmont [Missouri] is one of the peculiar sand ridges of this swampy region, called Pin Hook ridge. This extends 5 or 6 miles north and south, and is less than a mile in width.... There is abundant evidence here that the entire ridge was long inhabited by a somewhat agricultural people, with stationary houses, who constructed numerous and high mounds, which are now the only place of refuge for the present inhabitants and their stock from the frequent overflows of the Mississippi.”[23]
“These ... are situated on the county road from Cairo, Illinois.... They are the highest ground in that immediate section” (Missouri).[24]
Crowley’s Ridge, running through Green, Craighead, Poinsett, and St. Francis counties (Arkansas) forms the divide between the waters of White and St. Francis rivers, and terminates in Phillips county just below the city of Helena. Most of the bottom lands are overflowed during high water. There are some evidences of archæological remains throughout the length of this ridge.[25]
“The works ... one mile northeast of Dublin [Franklin county, Ohio] ... are on a nearly level area of the higher lands of the section.”[26]
“The group shown ... is on a high hill near the Arnheim pike, Brown county [Ohio].”[27]
“On nearly every prominent hill in theneighborhood of Ripley [Brown county, Ohio] are stone graves.”[28]
“Just east of Col. Metham’s residence, on a high point overlooking the valley ... was a mound.”[29]
“... A group ... located 2 miles southwest of the village of Brownsville [Licking county, Ohio] and half a mile south of the National Road, on a high hill, from which the surrounding country is in view for several miles.”[30]
In theCatalogue of Prehistoric Worksissued by the Bureau of Ethnology almost every page gives proof that the mound-builders were occupants of the highlands. Some quotations will be in place:
“Inclosures, hut-rings, and mounds on a sandy ridge between the Mississippi River and Old Town Lake at the point where they make their nearest approach to each other, and near the ancient outlet of Old Town Lake” (Phillips county, Arkansas).[31]
“... Remains of an Indian fort on the summit of a precipitous ridge near Lake Simcoe.”[32]
“Stone cairn ... on ridge between Anawaka and Sweetwater creeks” (Douglass county, Georgia).[33]
“Stone cairn on a ridge” (Habersham county, Georgia).[34]
“Stone mound on a ridge” (Hancock county, Georgia).[35]
“Deposit ... on a ridge half a mile south of Clear Creek” (Cass county, Illinois).[36]
“Mounds on the spur of a ridge, midway between the Welsh group [Brown county] and Chambersburg, in the extreme northeastern part of the county” (Pike county, Illinois).[37]
“Group of mounds on a ridge in Skillet Fork bottom” (Wayne county, Illinois).[38]
“Mounds on several high hills” (Franklin county, Indiana).[39]
“Four mounds on top of a ridge near Sparksville” (Jackson county, Indiana).[40]
“Stone enclosure known as Fort Ridge” (Caldwell county, Kentucky).[41]
“Indian mounds ... on ‘Indian Hill’” (Hancock county, Kentucky).[42]
“A group of circular mounds scattered along a ridge between Fox river and Sugar Creek” (Clark county, Missouri).[43]
“Two parallel embankments stretching across a hog-back between two ravines” (Livingston county, New York).[44]
“Embankments on Ridge road ... along the edge of the bluff overlooking the Ridge road” (Niagara county, New York).[45]
“Cairns on ridges” (Caldwell county, North Carolina).[46]
“Stone cairns ... on trail crossing ridge between Tuckasegee river and Alarka Creek” (Swain county, North Carolina).[47]
Flint Ridge in Coshocton and Licking counties, Ohio, contained stone and earth mounds and quarries; “Indian trail from Grave Creek mound, West Virginia, to the lakes, passing over Flint Ridge.”[48]
Early Highways on the Watersheds of OhioClick here for larger image sizeEarly Highways on the Watersheds of Ohio
Click here for larger image size
Some of these remains are undoubtedly of no later age than the Indians whom the first whites knew; many of them are of far earlier times. It is now held by the most prominent archæologists that there are works of the mound-building Indians which do not date back far from the time Columbus discovered America. Thus any work which gives evidence of having been in existence five hundred years may belong to the mound-building era. And throughout all these five hundred years there is hardly a time when there is not evidence of Indian occupation. So the line between the mound-building Indians and the laterIndians, among whom the building of mounds was a lost art, is exceedingly hard to draw.
These quotations give some evidence that the builders of our earliest archæological works were well acquainted with the high grounds. It is not apparent now that in any signal instance there exists evidence of a reliable character that any watershed was a highway; all we are seeking to show now is the very general fact that these people lived and moved and had their being often far inland on the heads of the little streams which never in historic times have served the purpose of navigation, and that here many of their works are found on the high grounds where it is sure all previous races have made their roads.
Now, it has been suggested already that lines of land travel have varied little since the time the buffalo and Indian marked out the best general courses across the continent. Mr. Benton said that the buffalo blazed the way for the railroad to the Pacific. In a general way this has been the rule throughout our history; the first routes chosen have often proved the best the tripodcould find. Now it would be significant if it could be proved that there are numerous archæological remains along these strategic lines of travel. This, probably, cannot be shown. There is, however, strong evidence that is worthy of consideration. Many of the early routes of travel converged on certain well-worn, strategic gaps in our mountain ranges. It is interesting to notice how many archæological remains are found at these points. A few quotations from theCatalogue of Prehistoric Workswill be in point:
“Stone cairns in Rabun Gap” (Rabun county, Georgia).[49]
“Pictographs on large bowlders in Track Rock Gap” (Union county, Georgia).[50]
“Ancient fire-bed and refuse heap at Buffalo Gap (bones and pottery found here)” (Union county, Illinois).[51]
“Mound near Cumberland Gap” (Bell county, Kentucky).[52]
“Cairn at Indian Grave Gap on Green Mountain ... in the trail” (Caldwell county, North Carolina).[53]
“Mound ... said to be ... toward Grandmother Gap” (Caldwell county, North Carolina).[54]
“Mound ... one mile southwest of Paint Gap post-office.... Cairn at Indian Grave Gap, in Walnut Mountain ... on south side of road from Marshall to Burnsville” (Madison county, North Carolina).[55]
“Cairn at Boone’s Gap on Boone’s Fork of Warriors Creek” (Wilkes county, North Carolina).[56]
“Cairns at Indian Grave Gap” (Blount county, Tennessee).[57]
“Cairns in the gap on the state line at Slick Rock trail” (Monroe county, Tennessee).[58]
“Mound 500 feet long, 250 feet wide, and 40 feet high ... 2¼ miles west of Rockfish Gap Tunnel” (Augusta county, Virginia).[59]
Some of these cairns do not, in all probability, date back to the mound-building era, but the mounds and other archæological works probably do, giving the best reasons for believing that the earliest of Americans found the strategic paths of least resistance across our great divides.
But not only in the mountain passes have our tripods placed their stern stamp of approval upon the ingenuity of the earliest pathfinders of America. In a host of instances our highways and railroads follow for many miles the general line of the routes of the buffalo and Indian on the high ground. This is particularly true of our roads of secondary importance, county roads, which in hundreds of instances follow the alignment of a pioneer road which was laid out on an Indian trail.
No one can examine the maps and diagrams of the archæological works of central North America with this truth in mindwithout noticing how largely these works are found near to some present-day thoroughfare. This is of significance. While it is true that works near such highways are perhaps more quickly discovered and easily approached, it is at the same time doubtful if any of importance have been ignored because they are at a distance from highways of approach. The relation of these works to neighboring roads has also been accidentally emphasized by the necessity of describing their position, which is often most easily done by a reference to adjacent roads. For all this due allowance must be made. At the same time this does not explain the fact that a significant fraction of these works lie along the general alignment of our present routes of travel and are in numerous instances touched by them. It need hardly be added that these roads were laid out with as much reference to the stars above them as to the ancient works near which they accidentally pass.
The following instances have a bearing on the question:
Two miles from Madison, Wisconsin, a line of mounds is found beside a highwayto the city. The road passes through one of the group and the remainder follow the road on high ground almost parallel with it.[60]
The road from Prairie du Chien (Wisconsin) to Eastman is paralleled by a long line of works. As previously noted (p. 69) this road follows the alignment of an old Indian trail.[61]
There are mounds on both sides of the Black River road near Hazen Corners, Wisconsin.[62]
In the archæological map of Hazen Corners, Wisconsin, the works bear a significant relation to the junction of the three roads which meet there. Supposing the roads to be the prehistoric route of travel, it is seen that all the mounds lie just beside them, many even touching them, but in only one instance does a mound cross any of the three present roads. True, the roads may have destroyed some of the works, but of the effigy mounds, at least,it is sure that the figures are complete, or nearly so.[63]
It is to be noticed with reference to the effigy mounds that, to a person standing on the present highway the figures are “right side up.” In the case of the animal figures, if the road runs to the left of a figure that figure is found to be lying on its right side; if the road runs on the right the figure is found to be lying on its left side; the feet are toward the road. In the case of birds, either the head or the tail is toward the present highway.[64]
A line of mounds lies on high ground on the northeast bank of the Mississippi river, near Battle Island, Vernon county, Wisconsin. The road to De Soto is on the same bank and lies parallel with them throughout their length.[65]
A remarkable line of mounds and effigies lies near Cassville, Grant county, Wisconsin. A road runs exactly parallel with them. The mounds lie on the west and the effigieson the east. The animals lie in a correct position to be viewed from the road.[66]
Between the Round Pond mounds (Union county, Illinois), which are so near together that “one appears partially to overlap the other,” runs a roadway.[67]
A roadway cuts through the ancient works on the Boulware place, Clark county, Missouri; the alignment of the road and the series of works is nearly the same.[68]
The Rich Woods works, Stoddard county, Missouri, lie on a long, sandy ridge; “the general course is almost directly north and south.” The road to Dexter runs near them, touching one, in the same north and south direction the entire length.[69]
The Knapp mounds, Pulaski county, Arkansas, “the most interesting group in the state,” are surrounded by a wall of earth. A roadway passes through the entire semicircle formed by this surrounding wall,and passes between or at the base of the mounds contained within it.[70]
A road runs through the entire length of the ancient stone work near Bourneville, Ross county, Ohio.[71]
A state road (Lebanon to Chillicothe) crosses over Fort Ancient. At the spot where this road ascends to the fort, the embankments of the latter are found to be increased in height and solidity, showing that this point was most easy of ascent—probably the very spot where the ancient road was made.[72]
A road passes through the entire length of the North Fork works (Ross county, Ohio).[73]
A road passes through the entire length of ancient work, Ross county, Ohio.[74]
Two roads cut ancient work in Fayette county, Kentucky.[75]
Ancient work is cut in two by road from Chillicothe to Richmondale, Liberty township, Ross county, Ohio.[76]
The state road passes through the great Graded Way in Pike county, Ohio, one of the most famous works in the United States. It is surely significant that a modern road should pass so near the very track which evidently was a highway in prehistoric times.[77]
Such are the conspicuous examples of ancient works that are now found to be on the alignment of modern routes of travel. In two singularly significant instances—in the Graded Way in Pike county, Ohio, and at Fort Ancient, Warren county, Ohio—there is no doubt that the modern road passes over the very track of the road used by the mound-builders. These two famous works, with the exception of the Serpent Mound probably the most famous in all the Central West, are near no stream of water which is not frozen in the winter and nearly dry in the summer. There can beno reasonable doubt that their builders used the routes on the watersheds.
As was said at the beginning, it does not seem wise to attempt to speculate on the probable routes by which these early tribes found their way to and fro between their works within the interior of the country. That they did so pass it seems difficult to doubt. That those early ways were along the watersheds, higher or lower, we may well believe, since for the races that have occupied the land since their time these watersheds have been the routes of travel—and will be until aërial navigation is assured.
That these earliest Americans had roads of one description or another, there is sufficient evidence. About their great works there were graded ways of ascent, up which the materials used in construction were hauled or borne. Now and then we find mention of some sort of roads which may seem to have been of a less local nature, but so far as highways of war and commerce are concerned there is no evidence which can be admitted into this treatise.
It will not be of disadvantage, however,to give a brief catalogue of such roads and ways as seem of most importance in theCatalogue of Prehistoric Workspreviously quoted:
Manitoba, Dominion of Canada: “Calf Mountain” (Tête de Bœuf), a mound 95 feet in diameter and 15 feet high, with a graded roadway 2 feet high, running southwest from it 154 feet; about 60 miles north of Pembina.[78]
Jefferson County, Georgia: Remains of large cemeteries and a broad trail leading to Old Town, 8 miles from Louisville, on the eastern side of the Ogeechee.[79]
Lowndes County, Georgia: Ruins of an “old town” within a few miles of Troupville, “with roads discernible, which are wide and straight.”[80]
Fayette County, Indiana: Camping grounds and traces of old trails in Secs. 34 and 36, T. 13 N., R. 13 E.[81]
Franklin County, Indiana: Traces of camp sites and old trails are observable onSec. 31, T. 10 N., R. 1 W.; Sec. 33, T. 10 N., R. 2 W.; Sec. 10, T. 12 N., R. 13 E.[82]
Union County, Indiana: Traces of camp sites and old trails are observable on Secs. 8 and 11, T. 11 N., R. 2 W.; Secs. 34 and 36, T. 13 N., R. 13 E.; and Sec. 7, T. 14 N., R. 14 E.[83]
Madison County, Louisiana: Group of earthworks, consisting of seven large and regular mounds and an elevated roadway, half a mile in length, on the right bank of Walnut Bayou, 7 miles from the Mississippi river.[84]
Baltimore County, Massachusetts: Old Indian trail in same county, leading from the rocks of Deer Creek (Hartford county) to an ancient settlement near Sweet Air.[85]
Licking County, Ohio: Work on Colton’s place on Newark and Flint Ridge road—a conical hill which has had a roadway “cut entirely around it; the dirt is thrown up the hill, leaving a level trackwith a wall on the upper side.” Two miles and a half northeast of Amsterdam.
West Virginia: Indian trail from Grave Creek mound to the lakes, passing over Flint Ridge.[86]
Pike County, Ohio: Ancient works at Piketon, consisting of parallel walls, graded way and mounds.[87]
It is not, however, on this slight evidence of local roadways that one would wish to base belief that the early Indians opened the first land highways in America. It is possible that they had great, graded roads near their towns and no roads elsewhere, but it is hardly conceivable.
We have seen that the mound-building Indians occupied, in many instances, the heads of the lesser streams, and the argument in favor of their having opened thefirst land highways has been based on this interior situation which, unless the lesson of history in this case tends to false reasoning, necessitated landward routes of travel.
There is, fortunately, one last piece of evidence which will more than make up for any lack of conclusiveness which may be laid to the charge of the preceding arguments.
A few descriptions of the local roadways of the mound-building Indians have been cited; reasons for believing that they used the watersheds, to a greater or less degree, as highways for passage from one part of the country to another, have been described. Let us look at the matter of their migrations.
That these people did migrate there is no doubt among archæologists. The many kinds of archælogical remains now found indicate that they were divided into many different tribes, and the great distances between works of similar character show that the various tribes labored at divers times in divers places. “The longest stretch where those apparently the works of one people are found on one bank [of the Mississippi river] is from Dubuque, Iowa, to the mouth of Des Moines river. As wemove up and down [the Mississippi] we find repeated changes from one type to another.”[88]
The direction from which these mound-builders entered the regions where their works are found, and their migrations within this region, must be decided by a careful study of the varying character of the mounds and a classification of them.
This work has not been done, save in the most general way possible, though one highly important conclusion has been definitely reached. It is that the generally received opinion heretofore held by archæologists that the lines of migration were along the principal water-courses is not found to be correct, and that these lines of migration wereacrossthe larger water-courses, such as the Mississippi, rather thanup and downthem.[89]
“One somewhat singular feature is found in the lines of former occupancy indicated by the archæological remains. The chief one is that reaching from New Yorkthrough Ohio along the Ohio river and onward in the same direction to the northeastern corner of Texas; another follows the Mississippi river; another extends from the region of the Wabash to the headwaters of the Savannah river, and another across southern Michigan and southern Wisconsin. The inference, however, which might be drawn from this fact—that these lines indicate routes of migration—is not to be taken for granted. It is shown by the explorations of the Bureau, and a careful study of the different types of mounds and other works, that the generally received opinion that the lines of migration of the authors of these works were always along the principal water-courses, cannot be accepted as entirely correct. Although the banks of the Mississippi are lined with prehistoric monuments from Lake Pepin to the mouth of Red river, showing that this was a favorite section for the ancient inhabitants, the study of these remains does not give support to the theory that this great water highway was a line of migration during the mound-building period, except for short distances. It was, no doubt, ahighway for traffic and war parties, but the movements of tribes were across it rather than up and down it. This is not asserted as a mere theory or simple deduction, but as a fact proved by the mounds themselves, whatever may be the theory in regard to their origin or uses.”[90]
It is for future scholarship to point out to us the origin, movements, and destiny of this earliest race after a careful comparative study of the remains which contain all we know of them. But may we not believe that the great watersheds were to them what they have been for every other race which has occupied this land? We submit: the greater watersheds should be carefully considered in connection with the study and classification of the various kinds of prehistoric remains with a view to solving the question of the movements of the mound-building Indians in America. The purpose of the first part of this monograph has been accomplished by pointing out some reasons for the belief that these early people opened the first landward passage-ways of the continent on these watersheds. These may be summed up as follows:
(1). The mound-building Indians, like the later Indians, were partial to interior locations; some of their greatest forts and most remarkable mounds are found beside our smaller streams.
(2). These works are scattered widely over such regions; if there was any communication it must have been on the watersheds, land travel here always having been most expeditious and practicable through all historic times.
(3). They were acquainted with some of our most famous mountain passes, showing that they were not ignorant of the law of least resistance; and, to a marked degree, their works are found beside, and in general alignment with, our modern roads—which to a great degree followed the ancient routes of the Indians which so invariably obeyed this law.
(4). The comparative study of the mound-building Indians’ works proves that the migrations of that race did not follow even the larger streams by which they labored most extensively.
When the first Europeans visited the Central West two sorts of land thoroughfares were found by which the forests could be threaded: paths of the aborigines and paths of the great game animals such as the buffalo. These paths were familiarly known for half a century as Indian Roads and Buffalo Roads. That these two kinds of thoroughfares were easily distinguishable one from the other and that both were ways of common passage through the land will be made plain later.
Many varying theories regarding the coming of the buffalo into the central and eastern portions of this continent have been devised, but of one thing we are sure, namely that, among all the relics exhumed from the mounds of the pre-Columbianmound-building Indians, very few bones of the buffalo have been found. Bones of other animals are frequently, even commonly, brought to light, but the remarkable fact remains that almost no buffalo bones are discovered. Considering that the buffalo was the most useful animal possible to aboriginal tribes like those in prehistoric America, there is but one conclusion to be reached, and that is that the mound-building Indians had but little acquaintance with the buffalo.
For this reason it has seemed altogether best to treat the routes of the mound-building Indians first, and the routes of the great game animals, which were known as Buffalo Roads, second—on the theory that the buffalo came into the Central West sometime between the mound-building era and the arrival of the first European explorers.[91]
The range of the buffalo or bison in the United States formerly extended from Great Slave Lake on the north to the northeastern provinces of Mexico on the south—from 62° latitude to 25°. Its westward range extended beyond the Rocky mountains and embraced quite a large area, remains having recently been discovered as far west as the Blue mountains in Oregon; farther south, herds roamed over the region occupied by the Great Salt Lake basin and grazed westward as far as the Sierra Nevada mountains. East of the Rocky mountains the feeding-grounds embraced all the area drained by the Ohio river and its tributaries, extending southward beyond the Rio Grande and northward to the Great Lakes as far as the eastern extremity of Lake Erie. The southeastern range probably did not extend beyond the Tennesseeriver, and only in the upper portions of North and South Carolina did it extend beyond the Alleghanies.
The habitat of the buffalo included feeding-grounds, stamping-grounds, wallows and licks. Their feeding-grounds embraced the meadow valleys where the choicest grazing was to be found.[92]The habit of keeping together in immense herds while feeding soon exhausted the food in any single locality and rendered a slow, constant movement necessary. A herd so immense that it remained in the sight of a traveler for days required a vast area of feeding-ground to sustain it during a season.
When a herd rested to ruminate the buffaloes arranged themselves in a peculiar, characteristic manner—the young always in the center with the mothers, the males forming a compact circle around them. By such a conformation were the “stamping-grounds” made—each animal crowding and pushing from the outside of the herd, where flies and insects were more troublesome, toward the center.
A peculiar custom of the buffalo was “wallowing.” In the pools of water the old fathers of the herd lowered themselves on one knee, and with the aid of their horns, soon had an excavation into which the water trickled, forming a cool, muddy bath. From his ablutions each arose, coated with mud, allowing the patient successor to take his turn. Each entered the “wallow,” threw himself flat upon his back, and, by means of his feet and horns, violently forced himself around until he was completely immersed. After many buffaloes had thus immersed themselves and, by adhesion, had carried away each his share of the sticky mass, a hole two feet deep and often twenty feet in diameter was left, and, even to this day, marks the spot of a buffalo wallow. The “delectable laver of mud” soon dried upon the buffalo and left him encased in an impenetrable armor secure from the attacks of insects.
While the actions of a herd of buffaloes were very similar to those of a herd of cattle, yet very dissimilar to the habit of domestic cattle was their propensity to roll upon the ground. Though a bulky, ungracefulanimal in appearance, the buffalo rolled himself completely over, apparently with more ease than a horse. A buffalo, by rolling over in this manner, often dusted himself in what was known as a “dry wallow.”
The buffaloes’ licks, which afforded salt, that mineral so necessary to their health, were the foci of all their roads, the favorite spots about which the herds gyrated and between which they were continually passing. So important were these considered when white men first entered the West that every lick was carefully included in all the maps of the first geographers. Filson’s map of Kentucky, for instance, made during the Revolutionary period, contains a large number of circles with dots about them which were the signs of “Salt Springs & Licks,” all of them being connected, by trails, “some cleared, others not.”
The saline materials of these licks are derived from imprisoned sea-water which has been stored away in the strata below the action of surface waters. When these rocks lie nearer the surface than the line of drainage, the saline materials are leachedaway. The saline materials increase with the depth until the level is reached where we find the water saturated with the ingredients of old sea-water. The displacement of these imprisoned waters is induced by the sinking of surface water through the vertical interstices of soil and rock, and the natural tendency of the water to restore the hydrostatic balance. This action is much more likely to occur when the rocks above the drainage are limestone or shale with an underlying bed of rock composed of sandstone or other rock through which water may permeate. That such a pressure exists and that some such process is at work is shown by the waters rising ten feet or more above the surface when enclosed in a pipe.
The endurance and speed of the buffalo far exceeded that possessed by domesticated cattle. With a good start a swift horse could only with difficulty overtake a herd of buffaloes. Their gait was an awkward, lumbering gallop, and the speed which they attained was much greater than it appeared to be. When running at full speed, rough ground and an occasionaltumble were taken in a matter-of-fact way and seemed scarcely to retard the progress of the herd. If a ravine intersected its trail, the herd dashed down the vertical, rocky sides and on up the opposite slope, resuming its onward rush as if no obstacle had appeared.
The extensive courses of the buffaloes necessitated the crossing of large streams. This often caused a loss of many of the old and young members of the herds, especially if the stream was swift or swollen. Often, after having successfully battled their way entirely across the stream, a bluff or a miry landing-place beyond proved disastrous. Buffalo herds boldly crossed rivers on the ice. Large numbers have been known to be drowned, when crowding too closely together, by the breaking of the ice beneath their weight. Herds have even been known to cross upon floating ice, when they fell an easy prey to the Indians, and many were drowned.
The following incident is related by Colonel Dodge: “Late in the summer of 1867 a herd of probably four thousand buffaloes attempted to cross the South Platte nearPlum Creek. The river was rapidly subsiding, being nowhere over a foot or two in depth, and the channels in the bed were filled or filling with loose quicksand. The buffaloes in front were hopelessly stuck. Those immediately behind, urged on by the horns and pressure of those yet further in the rear, trampled over their struggling companions to be themselves engulfed in the devouring sand. This was continued until the bed of the river, nearly half a mile broad, was covered with dead or dying buffaloes. Only a comparative few actually crossed the river, and these were soon driven back by hunters. It was estimated that considerably more than half the herd, or over two thousand buffaloes, paid for this attempt with their lives.”[93]