The North Americans of Antiquity: Their origin, migrations, and type of civilization consideredShort, John T. (John Thomas)
History
The North Americans of Antiquity: Their origin, migrations, and type of civilization considered
Short, John T. (John Thomas)
Indians -- Origin; Indians of Mexico -- Antiquities; Indians of North America -- Antiquities
Dana continues: “He says that one arrow-head lay ‘immediately under
the femur or thigh-bone,’ and he further states in his later article
of 1857, that ‘he carefully thought to investigate the point as to
its having been brought thither after the deposit of the bone’ and
decided against it. The observation and conclusion would have been more
satisfactory had the author been a better observer.” “The descriptions
of the deposits in Gasconade County containing the remains of an
animal the principal part of which was consumed by fire is a still
more unsatisfactory basis for a safe conclusion as to age. But in the
article of 1857, he says that the layer of ashes, etc., ‘was covered
by strata or alluvial deposits consisting of clay, sand and soil,
from eight to nine feet thick, _forming the bottom of the Bourbeuse
(River) in general_,’ which seems to make it almost certain that the
beds were of quite recent origin.”[131] Mr. Dana considers Dr. Koch’s
evidence as “_very doubtful_.”[132] Dr. Foster has figured a fossil
which, for a better name, he has designated as a “stone hatchet,” from
the modified drift of Jersey County, Illinois.[133] He is positive as
to the position in which it was found, but has doubt as to its human
origin. The probabilities are that its peculiar shape is due to its
exposure to atmospheric agents. He remarks, however: “On the whole, I
will not positively assert that this specimen is of human workmanship,
but I affirm that if it had been recovered from a plowed field I should
have unhesitatingly said it was an Indian hatchet.” In the _Proceedings
of the Philadelphia Academy of Sciences_ for July, 1859, Dr. Holmes
describes the occurrence of fragments of pottery in close proximity
with the bones of the mastodon and megatherium, on the Ashley River in
South Carolina. The case, however, has not been considered authentic
by scientific men. Dr. Holmes is possibly mistaken.[134] Col. Charles
Whittlesey, in 1838, saw at Portsmouth, Ohio, on the Ohio River,
remains of ancient fire-places situated eighteen to twenty feet above
low water and about fifteen feet below the surface. He states, “at low
water and thence up to a height of twelve or fifteen feet is a bed of
sand and transported gravel, containing pebbles of quartz, granite,
sandstone and limestone, derived partly from the adjacent Carboniferous
and Devonian rocks and partly from the northern drift, the upper part
much the coarsest. On this is a layer of blue quicksand from one to
five feet thick, in which is a timber-bed including large numbers of
the trunks, branches, stumps and leaves of trees, such as are now
growing on the Ohio, principally birch, black-ash, oak and hickory.
Over the dirt-bed is the usually loamy yellow clay of the valley,
fifteen to thirty feet thick, on which are very extensive works of the
Mound-builders. In and near the bottom of this undisturbed homogeneous
river-loam I saw two places where fire had been built on a circular
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.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account