Burial Mounds of the Northern Sections of the United States — John Shaqi
Burial Mounds of the Northern Sections of the United StatesThomas, Cyrus
History
Burial Mounds of the Northern Sections of the United States
Thomas, Cyrus
Indians of North America -- Funeral customs and rites; Mounds -- United States; Wyandot Indians
This districting is to be regarded as a working hypothesis rather than
as a settled conclusion which will stand the test of future
investigations. It is more than likely that other subdivisions will be
found necessary, and that the boundaries of some of the districts given
will have to be more or less modified; still, I believe the arrangement
will be found substantially correct.
As a very general and almost universal rule, mounds of the class under
consideration are more or less conical in form, and are common to all
sections where earthworks are known to exist, in fact they form almost
the only ancient remains of some localities. Often they are isolated,
with no other monuments near them, but more frequently they occur in
groups or are associated with other works. Squier and Davis say "they
are generally of considerable size, varying from 6 to 80 feet in height,
but having an average of from 15 to 25 feet."[1]
This is probably true in regard to the mounds explored by these
archaeologists in Ohio, but is erroneous if applied generally; as very
many, evidently used and intended as burying places only, are but two or
three feet high, and so far as the more recent examinations made in
other sections--especially the explorations carried on under the Bureau
of Ethnology--have shown, tumuli of this character are usually from 3 to
10 feet high, though some, it is true, are of much larger dimensions;
but these are the exceptions and not the rule.[2]
As the authors just alluded to are so frequently referred to by writers,
and their statements in reference to the works explored by them are
taken as of general application, I will venture to correct another
statement made by them in regard to mounds of this character. They
assert that "these mounds invariably cover a single skeleton (in very
rare instances more than one, as in the case of the Grave Creek mound),
which, at the time of its interment, was enveloped in bark or coarse
matting or enclosed in a rude sarcophagus of timber, the traces, in some
instances the very casts, of which remain. Occasionally the chamber of
the dead is built of stone rudely laid up, without cement of any
kind."[3]
I have investigated but few of the ancient works of Ohio personally, or
through the assistants of the Bureau, hence I can only speak in regard
to them from what has been published and from communications received,
but judging from these, Messrs. Squier and Davis, while no doubt
correctly describing the mounds explored by them, have been too hasty in
drawing general conclusions.
That burial mounds in the northern sections very frequently cover but a
single skeleton is true, but that this, even in this section, is
universally true or that it is the general rule is a mistake, as will
appear from what is shown hereafter. Nor will it apply as a rule to
those of the southern sections.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account