The inference that human sacrifices were made here, and the remains afterwards thus collected and deposited, or that a system of burial of this extraordinary character was practised in certain cases, seems to follow legitimately from the facts and circumstances here presented.[103]
That the stratified mounds are not burial places seems sufficiently well established by the fact that the greater number have no traces of human remains upon or around the altars. The suggestion that the various relics found upon these altars were the personal effects of deceased chiefs or priests, thus deposited in accordance with the practice common amongst rude people, of consigning the property of the dead to the tomb with them, is controverted by the fact that p160 the deposits are generally homogeneous. That is to say, instead of finding a large variety of relics, ornaments, weapons, and other articles, such as go to make up the possessions of a barbarian dignitary, we find upon one altar pipes only, upon another a simple mass of galena, while the next one has a quantity of pottery, or a collection of spear heads, or else is destitute of remains except perhaps a thin layer of carbonaceous material. Such could not possibly be the case upon the above hypothesis, for the spear, the arrows, the pipe, and the other implements and personal ornaments of the dead, would then be found in connection with each other. Besides the negative evidence here afforded in support of our classification, it is sustained by the circumstance that these mounds are almost invariably found within enclosures, which, for a variety of concurring reasons, we are induced to believe were sacred in their origin, and devoted primarily, if not exclusively, to religious purposes. The circumstance of stratification, exhibiting as it does an extraordinary care and attention, can hardly be supposed to result from any but superstitious notions. It certainly has no exact analogy in any of the monuments of the globe, of which we possess a knowledge, and its significance is beyond rational conjecture. Why these altars, some of which, as we have already seen, had been used for considerable periods, were finally heaped over, is an embarrassing question, and one to which it is impossible to suggest a satisfactory answer. That all were not covered by mounds is quite certain. The “brick hearths,” of which mention has occasionally been made by writers upon our antiquities, were doubtless none other than uncovered altars. Nothing is more likely than that, even though designed to be subsequently covered, some were left exposed by the builders, and afterwards hidden by natural accumulations, to be again exposed by the invading plough or the recession of the banks of streams. The indentations occasioned by the growth of roots over their surfaces, or the cracks resulting from other causes, would naturally suggest the notion of rude brick hearths. One of these “hearths” was discovered some years since near the town of Marietta in Ohio. It was surrounded by a low bank, of about one hundred feet in circumference, which seemed to have been the ground plan or commencement of a mound.
Fig. 48.—Elliptical mound.
- FOOTNOTES TO CHAPTER VI.
- [99] It is not assumed to say that all the mounds occurring within enclosures are altar or sacrificial mounds. On the contrary, some are found which, to say the least, are anomalous; while others were clearly the sites of structures, or temple mounds.
- [100] Some of the mounds on the lower Mississippi, as we have already seen in the chapter on the aboriginal monuments of the Southern States, are horizontally stratified, exhibiting numerous layers, from base to summit. These mounds differ in form from the conical structures here referred to, and were perhaps constructed for a different purpose. Some are represented as composed of layers of earth, two or three feet thick, each one of which is surmounted by a burned surface, which has been mistaken for a rude brick pavement. Others are composed of alternate layers of earth and human remains. The origin of the latter is doubtless to be found in the annual bone burials of the Cherokees and other southern Indians, of which accounts are given by Bartram and the early writers.
- [101] In the construction of the Ohio canal, a mound was partially excavated, in which were found a dial-plate and other articles of European origin. The circumstances are detailed in a private letter from WILLIAM H. PRICE, Esq., of Chillicothe, late member of the Board of Public Works of Ohio, under whose direction the mound was removed:
- “In the year 1827, during the excavation of a part of the Ohio canal in the township of Benton, Cuyahoga county, a short distance north of the mouth of Brandywine creek, it became necessary to remove part of a small mound, so situated in the valley of a small rivulet as, at first, to induce doubts as to its being artificial. However, in the process of excavation, the remains of one or more human skeletons were found, also a gun barrel, and perhaps some of the mountings of the stock. In relation to the last I am not positive, but distinctly remember a circular brass plate or disc perhaps one sixteenth of an inch in thickness, with (I think) raised letters and figures on one side, which exhibited a French calendar, so arranged as to serve for a century. I may mistake the duration for which it was intended, but give the above as my decided impression. I do not recollect the date, but think it was near the middle of the seventeenth century,—say 1640 or thereabouts.”
- Several silver crosses, a number of small bags of vermilion, and other relics, were discovered not long since by Mr. C. A. VAUGHN, of Cincinnati, in some mounds excavated by that gentleman in the vicinity of Beardstown, Ill. They were found with skeletons, a few feet below the surface.
- [102] The skull of this skeleton, which is singularly large and massive, is now in the possession of Samuel G. Morton, M.D., of Philadelphia. It is of the same conformation with those of the recent Indians which surround it in his extensive collection.
- [103] Amongst the Mexicans, burial by fire was generally practised. Clavigero mentions a fact, in connection with their funeral rites, which may serve to elucidate the point here raised, viz that burial in the vicinity of some altar or temple, or in the sacred places where sacrifices were made, was often sought by the Mexicans:
- “There was no fixed place for burials. Many ordered their ashes to be buried near some temple or altar, some in the fields, and others in their sacred places in the mountains where sacrifices used to be made. The ashes of the kings and lords were, for the most part, deposited in the towers of the temples, especially those of the greater temple.”—Clavigero, American Edition, vol ii. p. 108; Acosta in Purchas, vol. iii. p. 1029.
p161
CHAPTER VII. MOUNDS OF SEPULTURE.
Fig. 49.—Group of sepulchral mounds.
Mounds of this class are very numerous. They are generally of considerable size, varying from six to eighty feet in height, but having an average altitude of from fifteen to twenty or twenty-five feet. They stand without the walls of enclosures, at a distance more or less remote from them. Many are isolated, with no other monuments near them; but they frequently occur in groups, sometimes in close connection with each other, and exhibiting a dependence which was probably not without its meaning. They are destitute of altars, nor do they possess that regularity which characterizes the “temple mounds.” Their usual form is that of a simple cone; sometimes they are elliptical or pear-shaped.