Stark County, Illinois - Chapter 2: Aboriginal Ixiiabitants, 1916

MOUND BUILDERS - I'lKST NOTICE OF MOUNDS IN THE UNITED STATES - CHAKACTER AND STRUCTURE OF THE MOUNDS EARLY INVESTIGATIONS AND THEORIES WORK OF THE BUREAU OF ETHNOLOGY DISTRICTS IN THE UNITED STATES WHO WERE THE MOUND BUILDERSMORE THEORIES - RELICS IN THE COUNTY OF STARK - ADAMS AND SHALLENBERGER's A\'(niK.

Yov nearly a ccntui-y and a half after the first white settlements were made along the Atlantic coast, in what is now the United States, the general belief was that the Indian tribes found here by the first Europeans were the t)riginal inhabitants of the country. Then evidences were discovered in the interior of the continent that led archaeologists to believe that the great valleys of the Ohio and ^Mississippi rivers had once been occupied by a peculiar race of people entirely separate and distinct from the Indian. These evidences were found in the numerous mounds and earthworks, fragments of pottery, stone implements, weapons, etc. A report issued by the United States Bureau of Ethnology says :

"During a period beginning some time after the close of the Ic« Age and ending with the coming of the \\'hite man - or only a few years before - the central part of North ^Vmerica was inhabited by a people who had emerged to some extent from the darkness of savagery, had acquired certain domestic arts, and practiced some well defined lines of industry. The location and boundaries inhabited by them are fairly well marked by tlie mounds and earthworks they erected."

The center of this ancient civilization - if such it may be called - seems to have been in the present State of Ohio, where the mounds and relics are more mmierous than in any other part of the country, though Illinois was well Avithin the confines of the domain once occu- ])ied by this peculiar race, to which the name of "IMound Builders" has been given by archaeologists, and various theories have been ad-

It may be interesting to the reader to know something of these theories regarding tiie 31onnd RniUlers, as well as something of the character of the works they constructed, ^lost of the monnds are of conical form, varying in height, and when opened they have nsnally been fomid to contain human skeletons. For this reason they have lieeii designated by ai'chaeologists as bui'ial mounds. Next to the burial mound comes the truncated pyi'amid - that is, a mound scjuare or lectangular at the base and tlattened at the top. ^lounds ol' this class ai'c nearly always higher than the highest of the burial mounds and u})on the top of several such mounds charcoal has been found. The greater heigiit and the charcoal gave rise to the theory that they were used as lookout or signal stations, upon the top of ^vhich signal Mres had once been lighted.

In some sections of the country can still be seen well defined lines of earthworks, sometimes in the foi-m of a scjuare, but more often of oval or circular shape, bearing every indication of having been erected as ])laces of defense against hostile invaders. Still another class of works, less numerous and widely separated, consists of one large mound surrounded by an embankment, outside of which are a number of smaller mounds. In such groups the smaller mounds are nearly always devoid of human bones or other relics, and even the larger mound within the end)ankment yields l)ut few relics. The absence of skeletons, implements, weapons, etc., and the arrangement of the mounds in works of this nature have led anticiuarians to form the theory that they were centers of sacrifice or religious ceremonies of some character.

Xot for years after the mounds were first noticed was anv svstematic investigation of the origin made. The earliest persons to examine the mounds were Squier and Davis, who, about 18.)(), published a work entitled "Ancient JNIonuments of the Mississippi Valley." Between the years 184.5 and 1848 these two archaeologists, working together, explored over two hundred mounds and other earthworks, the description of which was published by the Smithsonian Institution. Following them came Baldwin, INIcLcan and a number f others, ])ractica]ly all of whom held to the theory that the Mound Builders belonged to a scjnirate and distinct race and that many of the relics were of great antiquity.

from which region they gradually moved toward the southwest into ^Mexico and Central America, where the white man found their descendants in the Aztec Indians. Otliers, with arguments equally plausible, contended that the people who left these interesting relics oriuinated in the Soutii and slowly made their way northward to the country about the Great Lakes, where they were met and driven back by hostile tribes. Upon only one phase of the subject were these early authors in accord, and that was that the JNIound Builders constituted a very ancient and extinct race. This theory was sustained by the fact that the Indian tribes with whom the first white men came in contact had no traditions relating to the mounds or tlie people who built them, while the claim of great antiquity was supported by the i-reat trees, often several feet in diameter, that were found growing upon the mounds and earthworks.

Shortly after the United States Bureau of Ethnology was established it undertook the work of making an exhaustive and scientific investigation of the mounds and other relics left by the Mound Builders. Cyrus Thomas, who had charge of this branch of ethnological research, in his analysis and comi)ilation of the information collected, has divided the region once inhabited by the JNIound Builders into eight districts, each of mIucIi is marked by certain features not common to the others. In making this division ^Nlr. Thunuis evidently did not adhere to any of the theories advanced as to the origin or first location of the ancient people, as he begins in the northwestern part of the country and proceeds toward the south and east. His districts are as follows :

1. The Dakota District, which includes North and South Dakota. INIinnesota, the northwest corner of Iowa and the State of Wisconsin. In this district the chief objects of interest to the archaeologists are the beautiful efiigy mounds, constructed in the form of some bird or animal. Wisconsin is especially rich in mounds of this class. Near the Town of Prairieville is a mound resembling a turtle, fifty-six feet in length, and not far from the Town of Blue INIounds is a mound 120 feet long representing a man lying on. his back. Some writers are of the opinion that the effigy mounds were made to represent the totem of some tribe or clan, and others think they are the images of some living creature that Avas an object of veneration.

2. The Huron-Iroquois District takes its name from the country comprising the district, which was once inhabited by the Huron and Iroquois Indians. This district includes the lower peninsula of INIichigan. the southern part of Canada, a strij) across the northern part of

Ohio ami the greater portion of the State of ]S'ew York. Xear Toledo and Sandusky, Ohio, a few well defined fortifications have been observed, but by far the greater i)art of the relics are the small burial mounds and tiie "hut rings," small circular embankments, whicii are supposed to have been the foundations of ancient dwellings.

3. The Illinois District embraces the middle and eastern portions of Iowa, Northeastern INlissouri, Northern Illinois and the western half of Indiana. That part of Illinois lying within this district includes about two-thirds oJ" the state. Stark County lies within this district, in whicli the l)urial mounds are cjuite numerous and a few fortifications have been found, but they are greatly inferior, both in size and the manner of construction, to those of the Ohio District. In the southern part of the district several mounds of the truncated pyramid variety have been found, the great mound near Cahokia being one of the finest examples of this class known to students of American archaeology.

4. The Ohio District takes in all of the State of Ohio, except the strip across the northern ])art. which is included in District No. 2, the eastern half of Indiana and the southwestern part of West Virginia. Here the Mound Builder evidently flourished in all his glory. Burial mounds ai-e larger and more numerous than in any other part of the country, many of them having a diameter of one lumdi'cd feet or more and rising to the height of sixty or eighty feet. JNIore than ten thcnisand mounds have been explored in the State of Ohio alone. The (irave Creek Mound, in West Virginia, is one of the largest lookout or signal mounds yet discovered. The earthworks of this district sur])ass those of all the others. The "(ireat Seriient." a fortification in tile I'orm of a snake, is situated on a blufi' in ^Vdams County, Ohio. It is nearly fourteen iiundred feet long and is one of the best preserved and most ])erfect specimens of the Mound Builders' fortifications. Its site has recently been pin-chased by the state in order that the ancient fort may be kept intact. Near Anderson, Indiana, is a circular fortification, with a lookout mound inside the embankment. A peculiar feature of tliis woi-k is a subterranean ])assage leading to the ^Vhite River, some three hundred feet distant, indicating that the work had been constructed with a view to obtaining a snp])lv of water in the event of a siege.

.5. The Appalachian District takes its name from the mountains included within its borders. It embraces East Tennessee, the southwestern part of Virginia. "Western North Carolina and Northern (ieorgia. Throughout this district abundant evide?ices have been found to show that the inliabitants were in many respects different from those of the other districts. The mounds are differently constructed; stone graves are numerous; copper awls, needles, knives and othei' utensils have been found; tobacco pipes made of clay and baked, and some pipes carved fioni a pecidiar kind of stone are among the relics found here.

6. The Tennessee District, which adjoins the Appalachian on the west, includes the southern third of Illinois, nearly all the State of Kentucky, a small jjortion of Xorthern Alabama. Middle and Western Tennessee and the central part of Georgia. The distinguishing feature of this district is its pottery, a long-necked water jar of graceful outline being especially abundant. Fragments of pottery indicated that they were part of vessels from three to four feet in diameter and capable of holding several gallons. Several forts have been noted, a few of which are connected with nearby streams by subterranean passages, and some of the mounds have yielded up stone images, believed by archaeologists to have been objects of worship.

7. The Arkansas District includes the State of Arkansas, the northern part of Louisiana and the southeast corner of ]Missouri. Burial mounds here are small and few in number, ^'illage sites have been located by means of the hut rings and pottery has been found in abundance.

8. The Gulf District includes the country bordering on the Gulf of JNIexico. In this district are a number of fine tnmcated pyramids, some of them built in terraces; skeletons buried in bark coffins have been unearthed and other skeletons have been foimd in caves; the entire district is rich in pottery, and a peculiarity of this region is the large numlier of polished stone implements and weapons of obsidian.

Going back to the theories regarding the origin and age of the ]Mound Builders, it is worthy of note that in more recent years archasologists are inclined to doubt the idea of great anticjuity. or that the IMound Builders differed materially in racial characteristics from the IVorth American Indian. Those who have made extensive research among the mounds, or a careful and systematic study of the relics in connection with the work of the United States Bureau of Ktlmolouv, are practically a unit in the belief that the Indians found here l)y the first white men are the descendants of the ]Mound Buildei-s. but that the traditions of the latter have been lost. Even some of the earliest writers on the subject expressed the opinion that the Aztecs were (lesceiuhmts of the ancient tribes who once inhabited the interior of Xortli ^Vnierica.

That the tlieory of threat age is erroneous, to some extent at least, becomes apparent \\ iuii it is known that the early French and Spanish explorers in the soullic rn \)nvt of what is now the I'^nited States, discovered that among the Natchez Indians the house of the chief was always built ujjou an artificial mound. Mention of this fact is seen in a numbci' of the early French archives, and as eminent an authority as I'ierre Margry says: "When a chief dies they demolish his cabin and then raise a new mound, on which they build the cabin of the chief who is to replace the one deceased in this dignity, for the chief never Iddges in the house of his predecessor."

How long this custom had prevailed among the southern Indians no one knows. l)ut it may account for the large number of small mounds throughout the region once inhabited by the Natchez and their ancestors. It has also been learned that the Yamasee Indians of Georgia built mounds over the warriors slain in l)attle. and Charlevoix found amony- the Canadian tribes some who built earthworks similar in many respects to those described by Thomas in the Iluron-lnxiuois District.

Early investigators found in many of the small mounds burnt or baked clay and charcoal, for which they were at a loss to account. Snbst(|uent research has disclosed the fact that among certain tribes. |)artieularly those of the lower M ississi])])i country, the family hut was built u])on an artificial mound in many instances. This has led Jirintoii to advance the theory that the house was constructed of ])oles and the cracks l)etween the ]K)les filled with clay. When the head of the familv died, the body was buried under the center of the hut. which was then burned. i\s it is now known that this custom was followed for prrha])s many generations. Ri-inton"s theory would account I'or the binnt clay and charcoal, as well as for the large number of small mounds, each contaim'ng a single human skeleton.

^Vnother evidence that there is some relationship bL'tweeii the Mound Builders and the Indians of more recent times is found in tiie jiotterv made by some of the southwestern tribes, which is very similar in both texture and design to the ])ottery found in ancient mounds. Among the cliff dwellers archicologists have fomid wea]Jons and utensils almost exactly like some of those found in the mounds, and some have even gone so far as to assert that the cliff dwellers are but the remnant of the once numerous and widely distriliuted Mound Builders.

In the light of these discoveries, it is not surprising tliat ethnologists are discarding the theory of a separate race and great age and advancing in its stead one of a vastly different nature, viz: That the Mound Builder was nothing more than the ancestor, more or less remote, of the North American Indian. The new theory, however, has not decreased the interest in the ^Moiind Buildeivs and their works. Says Thomas: "The hoj)e of idtinuitely solving the great problem is perhaps as lively today as in former years. But, with the vast increase of knowledge in recent years, a modification of the hope has taken ace.

Nearly every county in the State of Illinois contains some evidence of having been inhabited by INIound Builders. Stark County is no exception. ^Slany of the mounds in the state have been completely obliterated by the plow and many others show only slight traces of their former outlines. Flint spear and arrow heads, stone axes, hvmian bones and a few specimens of pottery have all been found within the limits of Stark County. Formerly the spear and arrow heads were so numerous as to excite but little interest or comment. The most noted mound anywhere near Stark County is probably the one described by W. H. Adams, of Rochester, Peoria County, in a communication to the Smithsonian Institution in 188.5. ^Ir. Adams says:

"(On the north side of the Spoon River, eighty rods west of the east line and twenty rods south of the north line of section 12. townshi]) 11, range 4, east of the fourth principal meridian, is a round mound about thirty feet in diameter, called by those in the neighborhood 'the hogback.' On the highest ])art of this hogback, at the surface, is some evidence of fire. The e^'idenees of a former fire increase very rapidly. At a depth of twelve to sixteen inches I found five skeletons, nearly all the liones of which were calcined i)y fire, and many of them entirely consumed. One of the skulls lay to the north, one to the northwest, one to the southwest, one to the south and one to the northeast. With the bones were fragments of sandstone burned red. At or near each skull, and nearly on a line between the point of the shoulder and the ear. was a water-worn pebble, except in one instance, and that was an angular ])iece of flint. The pebliles had not been acted upon by the fire, so that they were evidently placed there after the intense heat of the fire had subsided. From the appearance of the earth one would be strongly inclined to believe that the fire in this instance luul hccn one of unusual intensity. From the position ol" the skulls to each other, the feet of one body would reach to his neit^lihor's head, if laid at full length. One of the skulls was rather thinner than those we usually tind in other mounds. Some of the teeth belonged to a person of great age; others of the teeth were very small, but 1 cannot say tliat they belonged to an infant. The skulls were in fragments, the largest piece obtained being about two inches square. On another hogback, east of the one described, commencing on section 12, township 11, range 4 east, extending across the northwest coi'ner of section 7. township 11, range 5 east, and also some distance on section (>. township 11, are thirteen common round mounds, varying in height from eighteen inches to tive feet. As far as examined these are burial mounds and in one I found nineteen skeletons. This one was forty-tive feet in diameter and five feet high. The bones wei'C' ill a fair state of preservation. I opened four or five of this group and in each were found pieces of trap rock from one and onehalf to two inches square; pieces oi' burned sand rock, small waterworn pebbles, and in the largest mound a very small fragment of red pottery."

Although the mounds thus described by jSIr. Adams are not within the limits of Stark County they are situated near its southwest corner. The first "hogback" mentioned by him is a little southeast of the Village of Ftherley, Knox County, and the thirteen burial mounds .ihiiost touch the southwest corner of Stark. All are near enough to sustain the belief that the ^lound Huilder was once an inhabitant of the county. Mr. Adams and T. jM. Shalleiiberger gave considerable attention to the archieology of the Spoon River \'^alley, and after the Indians Mere removed from the country these two men visited all the old cam])ing grounds and villages of the red men, leveling numerous small mounds in search of historic relics. Few were found, however, exce])t arrow and spear heads, such as those above referred to, and some I'ragmentary .skeletons. It is doubtful whether the skeletons found on the old village sites were those of Mound Builders or the bones of Indians buried there in comparatively recent years.

There is a sort of grim pathos in the reflection that where the Avhite people of Stark County now live in peace and prosperity there once dwelt a people of widely different manners and customs: that in the march of time they ])assed out of existence, leaving only here and there the mounds and other relics to mark their ])lace of residence. After the Mound Builder came the Indian, who in turn retired before the superior civili/,atii)ii of the wliite man, and there is also a pathos in the refleetion that 2,000 years hence another race may indulge in as much speculation over the relics left hy the present occupants of the country as our scientists have indulged in over the mounds and earthwoi'ks of America's aboriginal inhabitants.