What motive induced the people to expend so much labor on this mound? It is not probable that this was a burial mound, though it may ultimately prove to be so. The most probable supposition is that the mound was erected so as to secure an elevated site, perhaps for purpose of defense, as on these platforms there was abundant room for a large village, and an elevation or height has always been an important factor in defenses. In this connection, Prof. Putnam has called our attention to a fact which indicates that a very long time was occupied in the construction of the mound, and further, that a numerous population had utilized its platforms as house sites—that is, that “everywhere in the gullies, and over the broken surface of the mounds, mixed with the earth of which it is composed, are quantities of broken vessels of clay, flint chips, arrow-heads, charcoal, bones of animals, etc., apparently the refuse of a numerous people.” The majority of writers, however, think that this elevated site, obtained as the result of so much labor, was utilized for important public buildings, presumedly the temple of their gods, and no one can help noticing the similarity between this structure and those raised by the ancient Mexicans for both religious purposes and town sites.
Mr. Foster thinks that “upon this platform was reared a capacious temple, within whose walls the high-priests gathered from different quarters at stated seasons, celebrated their mystic rites, while the swarming multitudes below looked up with mute adoration.”35 Mr. Breckenridge, whose writings we have already referred to, at the time of his first visit, “everywhere observed a great number of small elevations of earth, to the height of a few feet, at regular distances apart, which appeared to observe some order: near them pieces of flint and fragments of earthen vessels.” From this he concludes that here was a populous town, and that this mound was a temple site. It is doubtful whether we shall ever pierce the veil that lies between us and this aboriginal structure. The pyramids of the Old World have yielded up their secret, and we behold in them the tombs of Egypt’s kings. But this earthen pyramid on the western prairie is more involved in mystery, and we do not know even its builders. If the result of religious zeal, we may be sure that a religion which exacted from its votaries the erection of such a stupendous piece of work was one of great power.
As before remarked, “temple mounds” increase in numbers and importance as we go south. In Kentucky they are more frequent than in the States north of the Ohio River, and in Tennessee and Mississippi they are still more abundant.36 We also learn that they are often surrounded, or nearly so, with moats or ditches, as if to fortify their location. Our next cut illustrates such an arrangement—a circular wall of earth four feet high and two thousand three hundred feet in circumference, incloses four mounds, two of which are temple mounds. According to the late Prof. Forshey, temple mounds abound in Louisiana. He described a group situated in Catahoola County, in which the principal mound has a base of more than an acre, a height of forty-two feet, and the upper platform an area of nearly one-third of an acre. The smaller mounds are arranged around this larger one. This group is defended by an embankment. From this point for a distance of twenty miles along the river, are scattered similar groups of mounds; in all cases the smaller ones arranged around the larger one, which is presumably the site of a temple.
A digression right here may not be devoid of interest. We are not sure but that the dim, uncertain light of history falls on the origin of this group of mounds. When the French first commenced their settlement in the lower Mississippi Valley, the Natchez Indians was the most powerful tribe in all that section. In the course of time, wars ensued between them and the French, and in the year 1730 they fled into Upper Louisiana, and settled at the place where these mounds are now found. But the French followed them a year or so afterwards, and nearly exterminated. them. Some of our scholars think that they erected these mounds.37 The historian of that epoch simply says they had “built a fort there.” It is however questioned whether they had time to build works of such magnitude. But they were both a mound-building and a mound-using people, and we are not prepared to say how long it would take them to do the work, until we know the number engaged, methods employed, and other considerations.38 If they did not build these works, they doubtless cleared them of trees and utilized them; and this place was therefore the scene of the final downfall of the Natchez—a people we have every reason to regard as intimately connected with the prehistoric mound-building tribes.
The largest temple mound in the South is near Seltzertown, Mississippi. Its base covers about six acres, and it rises forty feet. This slope was ascended by means of a graded way. The summit platform has an extent of nearly four acres. On this platform three other mounds had been reared—one at each end, and a third in the center. Recent investigation by the Bureau of Ethnology have shown that the base of this mound is a natural formation. Lumps of sun-dried, or partially burnt clay, used as plastering on the houses of the Mound Builders, gave rise to a sensational account of a wall of sun-dried bricks two feet thick, supporting the mound on the northern side.39 The famous Messier Mound, in Georgia, is said to reach a height of ninety-five feet. But a large part of this elevation is a natural eminence; the artificial part is only a little over fifty feet.
A work of unusual interest occurs on the Etowah River, Georgia. This cut gives us a plan of the work. We notice, first of all, the moat or ditch by which they fortified their position. The ditch is still from five to twenty-five feet deep, and from twenty to seventy-five feet wide. It connects directly with the river at one end, but stops short at the other. It surrounds nearly fifty acres of land. At two points we notice reservoirs, each about an acre in size, and an average depth of not less than twenty feet. At its upper end is an artificial pond. This ditch, with its reservoirs and pond, is no slight work. The large mound seen in the center of the space is one of the largest of the temple mounds. Its shape is sufficiently shown in the cut. The height of the mound is sixty-five feet. We call especial attention to the series of terraces leading up the south side of the mound. Graded ways afford means of access from one terrace to the other. A pathway is also seen on the eastern side.