Paths of the Mound-Building Indians and Great Game AnimalsHulbert, Archer Butler
History
Paths of the Mound-Building Indians and Great Game Animals
Hulbert, Archer Butler
American bison; Indian trails -- United States; Mound-builders
This makes up a sum of testimony that enables one to say that in some
instances at least the mound-building peoples were largely a rural
people; in some noticeable instances their works are found more
profusely on the smaller streams than on larger ones. In this they
differed in no wise from the red-men who were found living in these
regions mentioned when the whites first came to visit them, and we might
have held to our original line of reasoning to reach this same
conclusion. It might have been shown that the red-men in Ohio and some
of the neighboring states lived more on the smaller streams than on the
larger ones, and then made the deduction that the mound-building people
did the same.
For this was true. The three centers of Indian population in Ohio were
on the smaller streams. The Delawares made their headquarters on the
upper Muskingum; the Wyandots had their villages on the Sandusky river
and bay; the Shawanese were on the Scioto, and the Miamis on the rivers
that have borne their name. The well-known Indian settlements on the
Ohio and on Lake Erie can almost be counted on the fingers of one hand,
while the towns at Coshocton, Chillicothe, Piqua, Fremont, and Dresden
were of national importance during the era of conquest. Referring to the
location of the Indians of Ohio an early pioneer casually writes: "Their
habitations were at the heads of the principal streams."[7] There was
almost no exception to the rule.
The explanation of this may be found partly in the great floods which
were, doubtless, more menacing near the larger streams. While the floods
rise perhaps faster today, it is doubtful if they reach the height that
they did in earlier days. Then, at flood-tide, a thousand forest swamps,
licks, pools, and lagoons which do not exist today added their waters to
the river tides. General Butler, who was on the lower Ohio just after
the Revolution, was advised by a friendly Indian chief to locate Fort
Finney high up from the Ohio in order to be clear of high water. Under
the date of October 24, 1785, he wrote in his _Journal_: "Capt. George,
who had lived below the mouth of this river [Miami] assured me that all
the bank from the river for five miles did absolutely overflow, and that
he had to remove to the hill at least five miles back, which determined
me to take the present situation."[8]
Under such circumstances as these it is not surprising that the Indians
preferred the little rivers to the larger ones. The smaller streams amid
their hills did not rise so high, and when they did rise safe camping
spots could be found on high ground not far removed.
What was true of these Indians was probably true of any antecedent race.
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