The Problem of the Ohio Mounds

nt based upon these works it is nece

ains to a certain class of works, and is usually accompanied by certain types of art, we are warranted in using it as an ethnic characteristic, or as indicating the presence of particular tribes. If it can be shown that graves of this form are found in mounds attributed to the so- called mound-builders, and that certain tribes of Indians of historic times were also accustomed to bury in them, we are warranted in a

set on edge to form the sides and ends, over which other slabs are laid flat, forming the covering, the whole when finished making a rude, box-shaped coffin or sepulcher. Sometimes one or more of the six faces are wanting; occasionally the bottom consists of a

r the surface of the ground, and in some instances even projecting above it. It is probable that no one who has examined them has failed to note their strong resem

the idea that in some former age this ancient race must have come in contact with Europeans an

e Tennessee River, presented a difficulty in the way of the theory here advanced, as it is well known that the Cherokees and Shawnees were inveterate e

the year 1730, and formed a town known by the name of Lulbegrud, in what in now Clark County [Kentucky], about 30 miles east of this pl

indicated by the fragments, but because they appeared to have been used by some prehistoric people in the manufacture of salt and because they bore impressions made by some textile fabric. In the same immediate locality were also discovered a number of box-shaped stone

ery had been made lo

er of Illinois." [Fo

nware are very frequently found under the surface of the earth. They appear to have

e stone graves were found. This is mentioned in the American State Papers [Footnote: Public Lands, Class VIII, vol.2, p. 103, Gales and Seaton ed.] in the report relating to the famous claim of the Illinois and Wabash Land Companies. The deed presented was dated July 20, 1773, and recorded at Kaskaskia, September 2, 1773. In thi

s, in his "History of Kentucky", [Footnote: Vol. 2, p. 55.] gives an account of the capture and adventures of Mrs.

ers was taken prisoner by the Shawnee Indians, from her home on the top of the great Allegheny ridge, is now Montgomery County, W. Va. The captive

"the great salt spring upon the Saline Creek, which falls into the Ohio below the mouth of the Wabash, with a quantity of laud surrounding it, not exceeding 4 miles square," the United

th the stone graves of the Cumberland Valley, and, furthermore, the impressions made by the textile fabrics show the same stitches as do the former. Another place where pottery of the same kind h

that there were two Shawnee settlements in this region, one in the adjoining county of Maryland (Allegany), and another in the nei

vania. An important item in this connection is that these graves were in a mound. He describes the mound as 35 feet in diameter and 5 feet high, having on one side a projection 35 feet long of the same height as the mound. Near

een found in a mound on the Tennessee side, near the southern boundary of Scott County, Va. Allusion has already been made to the occasional p

n fact that both Shawnees and Delawares were located at various points in the region, and during the wars in which th

f Montgomery County. Mr. Royce, in the article already referred to, states that there was a Shawnee village 3 miles north o

oints along the Ohio from Portsmouth to Ripley, a region k

eport for 1877, pp. 261-267.] These, as will be seen by reference to the same r

o bury in stone graves of the type under consideration, and to indicate that the graves fou

d are common over the

nth of the Illinois t

Rivers, attention is

on their

me of the Indians he met with during his capti

y many persons in this neighborhood [Monroe County, III.] that the Indians who inhabited this region during the early part

Indian who had been killed by one of his own tribe and interred there within the memory of some of the farmers of Monroe County

County. [Footnote: Reynolds's Hist. Illinois, p. 20.] It is more probable they were made by the Kaskaskias, Tamaroas, and Cahokias. Be this as it may, it is evident

es, is indicated not only by the character of the graves but by other very close and even remarkable resemblances in the construction an

d in widely-separated localities, are attributable to the Shawnee Indians and their congeners, the Delawares and Illinois, and that those south of the

lders) the graves are connected with mounds, and in many instances are in mounds, sometimes in two, thr

tec occupation" can possibly be thrust. It forms an unbroken chain connecting the mound-builders and historical Indians which no sophistry or reasoning can break. Not only are these graves found in mounds of considerable size, but they are also connec

but in the bottom layer of a comparatively large mound with a thick and undisturbed layer of hard-packed clay above them. It is also worthy of notice that the locality is intermediate between the principal seat of the Shawnees in the Cumberlan

corroboration of the theory here advanced that the only other similar copper plates were found at Lebanon, Tenn., by Prof. F. W. Putnam; in a stone grave in a mound at Mill Creek, southern Illinois, by Mr. Earle; in a stone grave in Jackson County, Ill., by Mr. Thi

imple stone graves by Professor Putnam and Mr. Thing are to be a

h the "veritable mound builders," and the facts which form the links of these chains

rs, Land Affairs, Appendix, p. 20.] is a statement giving a list of articles furnished the Indians, among which we notic

vanced in regard to the Shawnees, and indicates also that the Cherokees were mound-builders. But before introducing this we will