PLATE XI. No. 3.

Among the works remarkable as possessing double walls, is the one here presented. It is situated on the Great Miami river, four miles south-west of the town of Hamilton, Butler county, Ohio. The plan obviates the necessity of a detailed description. The outer line of defence consists of a simple embankment five feet high, with an exterior ditch four feet deep. It has a single gateway fifteen feet wide. There are apparent gateways at a a, but the ditch only is interrupted.

Interior to this line of embankment, is another of less dimensions, having also but one opening. At b is a large broad mound, over which, and somewhat below the summit on the outer side, the inner line of embankment is carried. The ditch also continues uninterruptedly over the mound, which is thirty feet high. From its summit, a view of the entire work and surrounding country is commanded. Another mound, ten feet high, occurs at the point indicated in the plan. It is composed of stone and gravel, apparently taken from the river, and probably belongs to the class of mounds denominated “sacrificial,”—the characteristics of p031 which are explained in another chapter. At c, the outer wall appears to have formerly extended down to a lower level; but it has been much obliterated by the washing of the bank. The natural banks, on the side towards the river and next to Big Run, are inaccessibly steep, and between sixty and seventy feet high.

The area, embraced within the exterior lines, is a trifle less than eighteen acres. The defensive character of this work can hardly be doubted. It has been suggested that the large mound, over which the inner wall is carried, was designed as a look-out, or alarm post. This may not have been its primary, but it is not impossible that such was its secondary purpose.

PLATE XII. No. 1. STONE WORK, ON DUCK RIVER, TENNESSEE.[23]

This work is situated in Franklin county, Tennessee, at the junction of the east and west branches of Duck river, and near the main road from Nashville to Winchester.

“It includes an area of about thirty-two acres. The walls are composed of stones of various sizes, collected from the surface of the surrounding country, and rudely thrown together; there is no appearance of their having been united by cement, nor do they exhibit any marks of the hammer. The wall on the south is covered with a layer of earth from one to two feet deep, and is about sixteen feet in thickness at the base, about five feet at the top, and from eight to ten feet high.

“At the northern extremity, near the front wall, are two conical mounds of stone, designated by M, M, in the plan. Each of these mounds is about six feet high, and ten feet in diameter at the base; originally they may have been of somewhat greater altitude, and being on the exterior of the wall, may have been intended as watch towers. In the rear of the mounds is the northern wall, extending to a high bank on either branch of Duck river, and opposite to a waterfall on each, of ten or twelve feet in height. In the northern wall is an entrance or gateway, and in the rear of the gateway are what appear to be the remains of two stone buildings p032 (exaggerated in the plan), one about sixteen feet square, the other about ten feet; the stones are rough and unhewn. Stretching south, the walls are continued on both sides until they reach the points a a, at a bold limestone bluff, which forms a good natural defence. South of the bluff the walls are continued of the same height and thickness, until they reach the angles of the wall fronting the south, which wall also extends from the bank of one river to the other, and has a gateway nearly opposite to that in the northern wall. At the points a a, it is supposed by many who have examined this work, there were formerly excavated passages leading to each branch of Duck river, with steps cut in the rock. There does not, however, appear to be sufficient evidence to sustain this conclusion. The ascent or descent is not very difficult; the steps appear to be formed by the projection of the rock strata; and it was no doubt by these passages that the occupants of the work gained access to the river, and were supplied with water.

“Near the base of the wall on the south side is a ditch, from sixteen to twenty feet wide, and six or eight deep. A short distance farther from the southern wall is another and much more extensive ditch or excavation. In some places it is seventy or eighty feet wide, and from twenty-five to thirty feet deep. The earth from these ditches was probably removed to cover the walls of the fort, or employed in the erection of the neighboring mounds, while the ditches themselves constituted an additional means of defence.

“About three quarters of a mile north of this work is a mound of an oblong form, about twenty-five feet high, one hundred feet long, and twenty broad. On the north-west, about half a mile distant, is another mound of similar form, twenty feet high, eighty long, and sixty wide. These mounds are constructed with the same regularity that distinguishes all the other works of similar character. On both these mounds, trees are growing as large as any in the surrounding forests.

“This work differs in its form, and in the material used in its construction, from all others in the vicinity; but it does not exhibit greater evidence of skill. The difference in form was probably owing to its location; it having evidently been made to conform in all respects to the nature of the ground. Stones were employed because they could be readily procured. Although the hammer had nothing to do with the preparation of the materials, it was nevertheless a work of great labor, and the place of location was selected with a military eye.”

Numerous other defensive works are represented to exist in Tennessee; but very few of them have been surveyed and described. In Bedford county there is a stone work of considerable size, the walls of which are said to be from sixteen to twenty feet wide at the base, and four to five feet wide on the top. Other works adjoin it. It is generally believed to have been erected by De Soto; but in 1819 an oak-tree standing on the wall was cut down, which exhibited three hundred and fifty-seven annual layers, and must consequently have been seventy-eight years old when De Soto landed in Florida.[24]

A stone work, less in size, but of the same general character, occurs in Larue p033 county, Kentucky. It is situated on one of the bluffs of the Rolling Fork of Salt river, where the creek makes a sharp bend. A plan of it is published in Collins’s History of Kentucky, p. 398. An account of another, of much the same character, in Allen county, is published in the same work, p. 167.