Light-house Mound, Fernandina, Nassau County
The Light-house[8] mound, in a shell field and in the neighborhood of others, about 150 yards south of the light-house, probably one mile east of the town of Fernandina, was kindly placed at our disposal by Mr. E. D. Lukenbill of the Fernandina Development Company. Our thanks are tendered for numerous courtesies also to Mr. H. L. Linville, port warden of Fernandina.
Fig. 6.—Section of mound northeast of Suarez Bluff.
The height of the mound, which was totally demolished by us, was 12 feet; the diameter of its base, 75 feet. It presented a very symmetrical appearance when stripped of the dense growth of vegetation which covered it, the ascent at some points being at an angle of 44°. Excavations 3 to 4 feet deep to the west and northwest of the base showed whence the material was derived. There had been some previous investigation on the immediate summit.
COMPOSITION OF MOUND
Structurally the mound was of considerable interest, the strata well defined. Immediately in a central position was a cone of white sand, surrounded and surmounted by the regular strata of the mound.
The stratification of the mound from the top downward, a little north of the center, was as follows:
2 feet 6 inches—dirty brown sand.
1 foot—dark sand with oyster shells.
1 foot—pink sand mingled with oyster shells and with white sand.
5 feet 8 inches—yellow sand.
7 inches—dark sand and oyster shells.
2 feet—light sand to yellow sand of the base.
At various points in the mound were pockets of sand artificially colored with Hematite.
The distance between the summit of the mound at the center to the yellow sand at the base, where charcoal and human remains were wanting, was 15 feet.
HUMAN REMAINS
Exclusive of loose bits of bone, doubtless thrown from the previous excavation, seventy-four skeletons, all seemingly in anatomical order, were met with, and one deposit of charred and calcined human remains. We are, of course, unable to estimate the number of skeletons thrown out or carried away prior to our visit. The first interment was encountered 10 feet in from the southwestern margin of the base. With very few exceptions no art relics lay with human remains, and if we except a stone hatchet found with a skeleton 8 feet from the surface and some beads of shell with another interment, no art relics were associated with burials in the body or on the base of the mound.
In no previous mound work have we found so great a percentage of pathological specimens as in this mound, and, as has not been the case in other mounds, entire skeletons seemed affected, and not one or possibly two bones belonging to a skeleton. The pathological conditions were so marked and cranial nodes so apparent that, in view of the fact that no objects positively indicating White contact were discovered in the mound, though the utmost care was exercised by a trained corps of assistants, we are compelled to regard the bones with the greatest interest since evidence of contact with the whites being wanting we must look upon these bones as of pre-Columbian origin. We may state here that all bones preserved by us came from depths in the mound which insure their derivation from original burials. These bones, found 8 to 12 feet from the surface, and lying beneath numerous undisturbed layers are as unmistakably of an early origin as any yet described and much more reliable than most.
Dr. Washington Matthews, whose memoir on the human bones of the Hemenway collection is so well known, has kindly consented to study and to report upon these bones from the Light-house mound.
Perforation of the humerus
| Left | Right | ||
| Male | Perforated | 3 | 3 |
| Not Perforated | 7 | 14 | |
| Female | Perforated | 6 | 4 |
| Not Perforated | 2 | 3 | |
| Uncertain | Perforated | 3 | 4 |
| Not Perforated | 2 | 3 |
CANINE REMAINS
Professor Wyman, as we have stated in a former paper, found no remains of dog during his researches among the shell heaps of the St. Johns river. In point of fact no practical work was done among the sand mounds by this pioneer of the archæology of Florida.
In a shell-heap near the bank of the Econlockhatchee creek, Orange County, we discovered a canine lower jaw which Professor Cope minutely examined, giving his results, with figures, in the American Naturalist.[9]
Professor Cope concluded that the jaw under examination belonged to an unknown kind.
A canine jaw from another shell-heap examined subsequently, presented features with which Professor Cope was unfamiliar.
On the base of the large sand mound at Tick Island, Volusia County,[10] the skeleton of a dog was found by us, the skull and certain other bones of which, forwarded to Professor Cope, were passed upon as follows by that eminent authority: “The bones you send are those of a dog but of what species I am not sure. It is no wolf or coyote but differs from ordinary breeds of domestic dogs. Nevertheless, it may be some form domesticated by the Indians, with which I am not familiar.”
Fifteen feet from the surface of the Light-house mound, or 3 feet below the level of the surrounding territory, was discovered the skeleton of a dog.
The cranium has been submitted to Dr. C. Hart Merriam, who was, unfortunately, unable to spare time for an exhaustive examination, being about to leave town for the summer. According to Dr. Merriam the skull is not that of a coyote, nor does it belong to any type of domestic dog with which he is familiar.
Professor Cope is of opinion, after an examination of the skull, that it belongs to neither wolf nor coyote, but is probably that of a domestic dog, though by no means of necessity one obtained from Europeans.
There are, however, according to Professor Cope, certain domestic dogs whose crania cannot be distinguished from those of wolves.
Professor Cope also made an examination of a canine skull from the great shell deposit at Damariscotta, Maine, in which no articles of European origin have ever been met with at a depth greater than a few inches from the surface. The Damariscotta skull, according to Professor Cope, strongly resembles that from the Light-house mound.
Professor Putnam, who has made a careful study of the skull from the Light-house mound, writes as follows:
“I have lately secured for comparison several dog skulls, among which is that of a mongrel greyhound. This skull resembles that of the coyote more than it does the gray wolf. It differs from the coyote, however, in being slightly more convex. In the coyote the frontals are flatter than in the gray wolf.
“I have a skull of an Irish setter which agrees with that of a gray wolf, except that it is slightly higher over the orbits, and there is more of a concavity along the union of the frontal bones. The jaws are also shorter, but the teeth are of about the same size.
“I have the skull of an English collie which differs from the gray wolf in the same way as does the setter’s skull; that is, the frontal bones are slightly more concave in the center and a little higher. The jaws are proportionately shorter than the jaws of the setter, and of course shorter than those of the wolf, and the molar teeth are proportionately smaller.
“The skull of the collie agrees in size and height and convexity of the frontals with the nearly perfect skull I have from the Damariscotta shell-heap; it also agrees with the teeth with the exception that in my Damariscotta skull the second and third molars are slightly stouter and approach more nearly to the corresponding teeth of the setter.
“Thus, I should say that the Damariscotta shell-heap skull is very close to the English collie, and also very close to the gray wolf. This Damariscotta skull was found very low down in the great shell-heap, and it is unquestionably of prehistoric time, probably centuries before any white man reached this continent. There is, therefore, no possibility of its being a domestic dog brought over by the Whites. The close affinities, in its shape, with the setter, and thus with the gray wolf, lead me to regard it as a domestic dog of the people whose refuse formed that ancient shell-heap; probably a domesticated gray wolf, unless there was some now extinct species of the genus Canis from which this dog was derived, the only prominent difference being in the shorter jaws of the dog.
“I have also three skulls from the ‘ash-pits’ of the ancient cemetery near Madisonville, Ohio. In the contents of about 1,500 of these ash-pits, which we have carefully examined, not a sign of White contact was found; and they are unquestionably of prehistoric time. These three skulls from the ash-pits are slightly smaller than the Damariscotta skull, but agree with it in every other particular.
“I have examined two skulls (in the American Museum of Natural History) found with an Indian skeleton on Staten Island, New York. This burial-place is also of unquestionably prehistoric time. These two dog skulls are of about the same size as those from the Madisonville cemetery, and are of the same character.
“I have two skulls of dogs from the Lake Dwellings, at St. Aubin and Neufchatel, Switzerland, which agree in size with the three above-mentioned from the ash-pits at Madisonville, but differ from them in having the frontals slightly flatter and in having the interparietal crest nearly obliterated. A fourth skull from the Madisonville ash-pits, smaller than the other three, agrees with these Swiss Lake skulls in the latter character.
“I cannot distinguish any important difference between the dog skull you found in the Florida mound and those from the Madisonville ash-pits.
“Thus your Florida skull, while it agrees very closely with the English collie, also agrees, as well, with the other dog skulls which are of unquestionably prehistoric time. The condition of the bones indicates considerable antiquity and unless objects belonging to the Whites were found associated with the bones of the dog, or the bones themselves were found near the surface, and you have evidence that they belong to an intrusive burial, I should have no hesitation whatever in considering your Florida skull as that of a domestic dog of the people who built the mound.”
Three varieties of dog are found with the dead in the Necropolis of Ancon, Peru, one of which strongly resembles the collie.[11]
EARTHENWARE
Sherds were infrequently met with, the majority being undecorated, though several from marginal parts of the mound bore cord-marked and stamped decorations. One bowl of about one pint capacity, with incised marginal decoration, lay apparently unassociated on the base. It unfortunately received a blow from a spade.
STONE
In all, eight stone hatchets, or “celts,” were met with, as a rule, in caved sand and probably from upper strata. One lay with a skeleton 3 feet from the surface. With it were two large barrel-shaped beads of shell.
No arrow heads, whole or fragmentary, were met with, nor were any fragments of chert, so numerous in many mounds, apparently present in this one.
SHELL
Loose in the sand, separately, were two fine large marine shells (Fasciolaria), while at various depths were several heavy conchs (Fulgur carica) worn and chipped down at the beak and with a round or oblong perforation opposite the aperture in the body-whorl between the shoulder and suture.
It has been customary to regard such shells as having served as war clubs. We have elsewhere pointed out that in the great majority of cases they must have been put to other uses, and give here some of our reasons:
1. The beak shows wear as by constant use.
2. The margin of the perforation is frequently smoothed as by continued motion against a handle, which would not be so in the case of a club.
3. Some specimens are entirely too small to have been of any avail as weapons of offense.
4. The hole is usually so placed that the handle would not be at right angles to the shell as would be the case with a war club.
5. The perforation is frequently too small to admit a handle of sufficient size to deliver a heavy blow without danger of breaking.
Moreover, Mr. Frank Hamilton Cushing, who has recently explored certain shell deposits of the southwestern coast of Florida, and who was fortunate enough to find a number of these implements with handles in place, informs us that in his opinion our position in this matter is the correct one.
These perforated Fulgurs were probably in use as picks, hoes, chisels, and the like.
With a skeleton were three gouges of shell, and a similar implement was found loose in the sand.
A drinking cup of shell (Fulgur perversum) lay loose in the sand.
Two shell pins were met with separately, and so far as could be determined, unassociated, though, in our opinion, they must have rolled from the neighborhood of some skeleton.
Three feet from the surface, with human remains and a bone implement, was a marine shell (Murex spinicostata).[12]
MISCELLANEOUS
A bone piercing implement, with a length of 6.5 inches, closely resembling the one to which reference has been made, was taken from a different portion of the mound.
A canine tooth of a large carnivore lay loose in the sand.
COPPER
Two very minute fragments of sheet copper, found separately, showed the former presence of this metal in the mound.
REMARKS
As we have stated, nothing that was necessarily the product of Europeans came from the Light-house mound, and when a mound of this size, containing so many skeletons, shows no contact with the Whites, it is justly regarded by archæologists as having a pre-Columbian origin.