A research paper by James Hutchison Continued from page 3.

Categories of Amerindian Literature         Westernization of Amerindian culture evidences itself in many ways. One of these becomes apparent in the method applied to the classification of Amerindian literature. While the standard categories used might work for Western Literature (and I have my doubts they always works there either), they will not work for all forms of Amerindian Literature. Thus, the basic question is what defines literature as Amerindian or otherwise? This logical question will likely remain a topic of no little debate for some time, or so it should.         The current consensus in determining what qualifies as Amerindian literature includes both works by Amerindians and about Amerindians. Personally I prefer this approach, at least as a step in the right direction, but it does have a few problems.         One of these is that of style. If the writing is written by an Amerindian in the Western tradition is it still Amerindian literature? If so, then should we not categorize all literature this way? As soon as we do the category of Western literature is dissolved. American literature is written by peoples of many cultures as is British. What then is Western? This line of logic quickly becomes complex. Another crucial factor in all this is defining an Amerindian.         Defining an Amerindian is no simple task. Is a person an Amerindian because they simply carry a B. I. A. card that authenticates their genealogical ancestry? If yes, then we must include those people that have gained such a card through conspirital means. This is usually done through a friend on a tribal council who has authority to approve applications for these cards arbitrarily. Although the applicant may have not one ounce of Amerindian blood, they carry a card that legally makes them an Amerindian. There is a counter to this argument that likewise must be considered.         On the other end of the spectrum there are people who can not prove any Amerindian heritage, and may have none, but are intimately familiar with Amerindian ways. They write like an Amerindian, but may not be an Amerindian. Added to these are two more factors.         The first is the Amerindian who was raised in the Western tradition. This person may have no clue what it is to be an Amerindian culturally, but they can get a card and write in a clearly Western style. The second is the traditional Amerindian who may or may not carry a card, but is truly an Amerindian author yet may also write in a clearly Western style. But then what of the romance novels that feature Amerindians? What of the Amerindian author who, although writes as a Westerner, is recognized as a great Amerindian author?         The list goes on and can become quite pedantic and irresolvable. Therefor, there is only one logical ledger by which to judge literature and that is by style, content and authorship. After all, is it not style that distinguishes poetry from a novel? Was Robert Burns an Englishman? Should he be listed in English literature as an English author? I think he would argue that there is a great difference betwixt the English and Scots and might take great offense at being categorized as an Englishman.         Authorship is important for economic reasons as it is now illegal to sell something as being made by an Amerindian if it is not. This is one of the reasons many cling to their card rather than their culture. With this understood and set aside, style and content can then be used sensibly. Admittedly these factors also are burdened with grey areas, but fewer than that of the former. Therefore, the guidelines of style and content alone can suffice.         One of the most popular areas, and that which is most often found in print, is that of Amerindian oral tradition. These stories are often considered fictitious and of little or no historical value. This is because Western academia values empirical history whereas Amerindians value the context and meaning of the history over chronological and empirical accuracy. This fact is proven beyond doubt in the work itself. As an example, consider the book Black Elk Speaks.         In this work, on pages 1-5, Black Elk relates a cursory story of how the Sioux received the gift of the sacred pipe. If this story were printed separate it would fall under the auspices of fiction, or at best, folklore. At the end he comments, “This they tell, and whether it happened so or not I do not know; but if you think about it, you can see that it is true.”(Neihardt, 5) It is clear that to Black Elk, as to many Amerindians including myself, the actual event is not as important as what was gained by the teaching of the story. This type of literature should be moved from the category of fiction and the sub-category of mythology to a new category of contextual legend. This indicating that the story probably has some relation to an actual event, but has been fantasized based on the Amerindian values afore mentioned. Another type of story that would fit into this category is that of complete fiction. This kind of story is represented by Louise Erdrich’s Tracks. This story is completely fiction, but the characters and character of the story have symbolic meaning that holds critical context for the Amerindian. For example; just prior to an encounter with a bear during the birth of a child the narrator says: But it wasn’t until the afternoon of that second day that the stillness finally broke, and then, it was as if the Manitous all through the woods spoke through Fluer, loose, arguing. I recognized them. Turtle’s quavering scratch, the Eagle’s high shriek, Loon’s crazy bitterness, Otter, the howl of Wolf, Bear’s low rasp. Perhaps the bear heard Fluer calling and answered.(Erdrich, 59) Then, after the bear had been shot, the teller of the tale continues, “It barreled past me, crashed through the brush into the woods, and was not seen after. It left no trail either, so it could have been a spirit bear.”(Erdrich, 60)         It is significant that the bear is often associated with the guarding of spirits, and a birth is an appropriate setting for such an appearance. A comprehensive list of analogy is far beyond the scope of this paper. Suffice it to say that the book is replete with symbolism of this kind. In short, this story too meets the prescribed determinate in that it is the context and teaching that is the priority, the story serving as the conveyance.         A second form of Amerindian literature should be placed in a separate category of historical oral tradition. This is because there is little or no fantasy involved, but rather the account is considered a non-legendary account of the peoples past. Although symbolisms may be present in this type of account, they are limited to the same association as any descriptive name or term. Secondly, the emphasis is on the accounting of the event rather than context, much as Western history, but is a non-written record. A prime example of this form is demonstrated in the Lenape migration account.         In this account the Lenape migrated South, along the Mississippi River until they came to the confluence of the Ohio River. There they ran into the fortified towns of a people, who through a series of events, became hostile toward the Lenape. In the mean time the Lenape say they became allied with the Iroquois, but that failed too. The Lenape wound up trapped on the Western bank of the Mississippi, but some managed to escape to the East where, after slipping between their two new foes, they established themselves along the Hudson River as the Alagonquin peoples. The remainder were likewise split into two groups who sired Western and Mid-Western groups (Hitakonanu’laxk, 4-10).         The above example is confirmed by the oral traditions of the Iraquois who also recount the coming of the Lenape and tell of their struggle with the Lenape. The only difference being that the confluence where the event took place was the Missouri and Mississippi Rivers(Rogers, 43). The settlements encountered were those of the Cherokee (Mooney, 14). Based on preliminary research I have done, this would date the event between 1200 to 1400 A. D. and at the Cahokia site.         In my own experience I have heard a story told by Eastern Cherokee tribal elders of a time when “The People Who Sang Up the Sun” came to live with them. This story was also repeated by a Cherokee at the Koster site in Illinois in 1981 (Odyssey, 1981). Is it just coincidence that the Natchez refugees, who were of the Mississippian Platform Mound culture, had been living with the Cherokee in the latter quarter of the 18th century (Hudson, 122)? Without citing further evidence it is clear the Lenape account is an actual event and thus justifies it’s place as historical oral tradition.         Another area that needs attention is that literature about Amerindians. The fact is most literature of this nature is not written by Amerindians. These are considered ethnological literature and should be viewed as such. However, there are works of this nature written by Amerindians that would be another form of Amerindian literature. Whatever the case, works of this nature should always be read keeping in mind the author. Is the author describing another people or their own? This is not to say these works are removed from the study of Amerindian literature. On the contrary, they should be included as they will help the student of the material better understand the nuances of the cultures from which the literature they study comes. This is crucial to understanding the literature itself.         Based on my experiences as a student, being an instructor at East Central College where I teach Amerindian philosophy and history, coupled with field research I have conducted for the Missouri Historical Society, it is safe to say that the Western perception of the Amerindian is largely a romanticized fiction. This can only be corrected if, when studying the Amerindian, it is understood who they are beyond the simplistic and misleading name. Treatment of the literature by many members of academia and most authors who critique it indicate this is not the case. One only need look at the back or inside cover of Tracks to see this. After finally recognizing Amerindian literature, the critiques have forced a western context onto a decidedly non-western literature. Barry O’Connell supports my thesis when he writes of Columbus: The difficulties begin in Columbus’s misnomer for the many diverse peoples of the Americas. His was no simple mistake. His misnaming assumed and articulated a profound set of needs, projections, and ideologies Europeans recurrently brought to the Americas and with which, in fact, they constructed an insistent version of the realities they needed the Americans to be. Collecting Native American cultures-material and verbal artifacts, lifeways, belief systems-began with the first European foragers and conquistadors [sic] in the fifteenth century. The many kinds of collecting are not only inseparable from European acts of conquest, they also remain integral to the process by which Europeans and Euro-Americans construct their own identities.(O’Connell, 18)         If these works could finally be recognized for what they are meant by their writers to be, then perhaps students, some of whom will be future teachers, will begin to associate a new and more accurate identity to the Amerindian. An important step should begin in the library where the works are cataloged and classified and continue into the classroom. It takes only a few minutes to make the Western student aware that a very different world has been entered when studying Amerindian literature. Woodhenge         Woodhenge is a popular attraction at the Cahokia mounds site and is treated as an enigma. There is much speculation on just what it was used for. However, structures such as Woodhenge were in wide use well into historic times as this drawing by John Wythe (White) from 1585 shows: Clearly circles like woodhenge were still in use in 1585. ************ADD ESSAY ON WOODHENGE******************************Wythes accounts as to use. Mound Burials         Most of us have been given the general inpression, if we have been exposed to them at all, that the “Mound-Builders” were a people who ceased to exist long ago. That the culture of these groups is, for the most part, hidden in the mists of time. However, this just is not so. Mound burials were fully observed by Euro explorers and later, by settlers as this next drawing plainly indicates: Note the palisade around the town and the burning hut in the rear. Cahochezian Settlements         In the years 1538 through 1543 Hernando (or Fernando) De Soto trekked through what is now the southern states of the U.S. The narratives of his travels are invaluable to the research of the Cahochez Empire. They record many encounters with this people and shed much light on their culture (Vega, The Florida of the Inca. xxi).         Garcilasso, a chronicler of the De Soto expedition, records a typical Mound City the De Soto expedition encountered as follows; The town and the houses of the cacique Ossachile are like those of other caciques in Florida. .... The Indians try to place their villages on elevated sites; but inasmuch as in Florida there are not many sites of this kind where they can conveniently build, they erect elevations themselves in the following manner: They select the spot and Carry there a quantity of earth, which they form into a kind of platform two or three pikes in height, the summit of which is large enough to give room for twelve, fifteen, or twenty houses, to lodge the cacique and his attendants. At the foot of this elevation they mark out a square place, according to the size of the village, around which the leading men have their houses. ... To ascend the elevation they have a straight passageway from bottom to top, 15 or 20 feet wide. Here steps are made by massive beams, and others are planted firmly in the ground to serve as walls. On all other sides of the platform sides are cut steep. (Vega, Histori de la Florida, 69)         In this account alone, recorded by Vega, we see described almost any Mound City in North America utilizing the platform type mound as seen at the Cahokia site of the Mississippian period.         Reading historical records like those left by Garcilasso, it also becomes apparent the Cahochez Culture was not just a series of villages, but an organized empire with frontier as well as capitol cities. Herrera's account of the De Soto expedition, although taken from Garcilasso's writings, are of value because it is likely he had access to writings since lost as well as those from the De Soto expedition. He records frontier or satellite towns as well as a capitol city in the province of Guachacoya having been built on the hillocks along the "great river."(Thomas 650) Pallisades         The palisades at the Cahokia site have been the subject of extensive debate for some time now. These constructions were adobe plastered walls that were built of large logs, set in the earth forming what resembled a medieval castle wall, complete with square battle towers facing outward. This type of construction was not unique, but rather common among both the historical, and prehistoric mound culture's ( Vega, Varner, 436 -437 ). Some scientists have adopted the theory that these walls were a form of class separation used to designate a boundary between the commoners and the elite of the city. Another currently popular theory is one that explains the walls as a defense against anarchical revolt within the central or greater city (Pfieffer 130 - 131). These models are plausible, and should be compared with historical evidence as well as physical. It does seem to this writer that the walls were for defensive purposes as indicated by Vega, and were designed to protect the inner city and it's official complex.         The size of the enclosure and platform mound was based on the size of the cacique's household and his attendants, as noted previously by Garcilasso. It would make sense to protect the leaders of the community during an attack, as we would today. The walls would also provide a place of defense for the entire village by giving the people a place to in which to fall back during an attack.         According to primary sources used by Cyrus Thomas, the purpose of these palisades were to serve as fortified defenses to protect the villages and cities which they enclosed and were typical of the Amerindian culture that inhabited the United Sates from the east coast west to the Mississippi Valley, and from Florida to as far north as the Great Lakes Region (Thomas 648-654). In this extent of the country there are about twenty-five cities and villages, some of which are not enclosed or protected, but the others are fortified with strong palisades of wood in three rows, interlaced together and redoubled inside with large and strong pieces of bark to the height of 8 or 9 feet. Beneath, there are large trees placed lengthwise on strong, short forks of tree trunks. Then on top of these are palisades there are galleries or watch towers which they furnish with stones in time of war, to cast upon the enemy, and also water with which to extinguish the fire if applied to their palisades. (Sargard 79)         Thomas cites another historical source known as the Gentleman of Elvas as writing; The wall, as well of that [town] as of others which afterwards we saw, was of great posts thrust deep into the ground and very rough, and many long rails as big as one's arm laid across between them, and the wall was about the height of a lance, and it was daubed within and without with clay and had loop-holes. (Vega, History de la Florida 153)         The writings left by these early explorers describe the very same type of fortification used at the Cahokia site and its function. The Cahochez probably employed the adobe covering to render the wall fire-resistant (Thomas 649).         In these two historical accounts alone, there is an obvious hint as to who lived within the enclosed portion of the village as well as who occupied the summit of the mound. The adobe walls like those found at the Cahokia site of the Mississippian period, are described in detail and the mound culture being a cohesive empire is well-mentioned. It should be noted however, that when a castle was built, or a U.S. Army fort, the purpose was to give a defensive work to which the local populous could " fall back " as well as defending the governing center of the local. This is cited to be the case with the Amerindian too as is noted by Vega, Mason, et al.         Many modern archaeologist have written articles and books speculating on such things as to the use of the palisades typical in mound cities, yet it can be seen that the palisades did indeed served as a defensive barrier for an Empire at war. That the upper class lived within these walls is proven to be true by the historical record as well although the purpose is not defined. There is no mention of anarchy being a problem to the Cahochez Empire, but rather the opposite is indicated by Dr. Iseminger in his lecture. Iseminger points out many times the evidence of a well-coordinated and controlled economy that would require the cooperation of the entire Empire (Crossroads). The state of almost constant war by a well-organized empire is verified not only by the historical record, but by the Amerindian oral histories as well ( Vega, Varner, 436 - 437 ).         It has been noted in Amerindian legends that the Iraquois and their allies were a problem on the Mississippian's north frontier. Cave drawings clearly depict the "Birdman" of the Cahochez empire whose image has also been found at the Cahokia site. Dr. Iseminger has noted in several of his lectures the fact that this "Birdman" is remembered by the Iraquois as well as the Huron as a sort of "Goliath," or foe of many numbers being quite fierce in battle. The northern peoples were continually fighting this Empire from the south which had built frontier towns in their country and demanded tribute. The existence of this culture in the south as well as its existence as an empire made up of providence's is mentioned many times by Garcilaso Vega in Florida of the Inca, the following quote being one example: The town of Xuala lay at the foot of a mountain on the bank of a river,... and it was this river that marked the boundary of Cofachiqui. ... for this town likewise belonged to the Senora of Cofachiqui. (Vega. 323) Eventually, this culture was defeated by an Iraquoian army and forced south from whence the culture had come. As Dr. Iseminger indicates, the existence of the cave drawing showing the distinct "Birdman" of the Cahochez Empire considered in light of the known legends of the Huron and Iraquois it would be difficult to dismiss the story or account as mere myth. (Crossroads).         John Mason was a participant of the Pequot War of 1637, and was asked by the General Court of Connecticut to write an account of the event. He wrote this account in 1656 and reprinted it in 1736 with forwards and "explanatory" notes added by the Reverend Mr. Thomas Prince. The history provides many accounts of fortifications being used by the Native Americans as well as accounts of how and why the war was fought (Mason i).         The Amerindian fortifications Miles Standish, John Mason, and their brigades encountered were a common fixture of the Native villages in the area as recorded in Mason's own accounts. As they approached the village of the Sachem (chief) of the Naragansett, Mason was informed by the Sachem that the force he had brought was too weak to fight the Pequot, expressing a fear that Mason would stir up trouble he could not control, and thus bring retaliation by the Pequot on the Narrangansett. Mason ignored the sachem and marched towards the Pequot anyway. The following account records the event: On the Wednesday morning, we marched from thence to a place called Nayantick, it being about eighteen or twenty miles distant, where another of those Narrangansett Sachems lived in a fort; it being a "frontier" to the Pequots. they carried very proudly towards us; not permitting any of us to come into their fort. We beholding their carriage and the falsehood of Indians, and fearing least they might discover us to the enemy, especially they having many times some of their near relations among their greatest foes; we therefore caused a strong guard to be set about their fort, giving charge that no Indian should be suffered to pass in or out. (Mason 4 - 5)         It should be noted that the fort Mason's men had camped around in traditional siege fashion was at least formidable enough to make them wait for reinforcements that arrived the following morning. Another very important aspect of this passage in Masons record is the mention of a Pequot frontier (Mason 5). The existence of strong forts is further substantiated by the quote, " ...and being informed by the Indians that the enemy had two forts almost impregnable; but we were not at all discouraged."(Mason 6) The forts of the Pequots are mentioned again and again in Mason's accounts of the war, firmly establishing the purpose of village enclosures in the New England areas. On only one occasion is a village without a fort, and it appeared to be a temporary camp (Mason 15).         It is true that this event occurred 200 years after the Cahochez Empire had declined, but it is evidence. When considered together with the de Soto records that were only seperated from the Cahokia date of 1450 A. D. by 80 years, it is apparent that not only do the records demonstrate a high percentage of similarity to the archaeological record, but decidedly proove their value over baseless conjecture. Considering the fact that the records show a similar use over a span of at least 130 years a reasonable assumption would be that if the palisades were used in this manner during this significant span of historic times a similar use would be practiced in previous times as well, as is confirmed by the Amerindian oral records previously mentioned. There is also the archaeological evidence that the construction of palisades remained constant from prehistoric times well into the 19th century. Consider the drawing below by John Wythe (White) in 1585.         Although the peoples of the north that built the fortified towns mentioned by Mason were not all builders of the platform type mound, they were mound builders. The explanation for this is also alluded to in an historical account previously mentioned as the need for a defensive hill in the area was provided for naturally. Historical records of platform mound builders using palisades exist as well, and are mentioned by Vega.         When De Soto arrived at a town in the province of Guaxule, Garcilaso writes: The chief who was also called Guaxule, came out with 500 men to meet him and took him in the village [pueblo] in which were 300 houses, and lodged him in his own. This house stood on a high mound [cerro] similar to others we have already mentioned. Round about was an adobe palisade and a road sufficiently broad for six men to walk abreast. (Vega. History de la Florida, 139)         The preceding passages conclusively prove mound cultures survived into historic times, and were cited by Thomas. Thomas also used these and many other records to demonstrate the use of platform mounds, mass burials and other facets of the Cahochez Empires that were, and in some respects still are, the subject of needless conjecture. To settle these points, as Thomas pointed out, was a vital issue in dispelling the myths that surrounded the Cahochez Empire in his day. Photography and Amerindian Costume Add PHOTO HISTORY These few examples indicate that in some cases, the amnesia that plagued American Archaeology in the 18th and 19th centuries is once again rearing its ugly head. Thomas proved the Amerindian to be the creator of the great Cahochez Empire, and that the Cahochez Empire existed well into historical times. More importantly, however, was his demonstration that history must be married to American archaeology. Thomas' application of history to American archaeology becomes indispensable as well as the massive amounts of archaeological information he provided. In light of this fact, much of the research being done in this field today is redundant and lacks evidence of the application of historical research. Sadly, it seems the significant advancements made by Thomas in this regard have been lost and American archaeology has reverted back to the mire of conjecture from which Thomas had rescued it over one hundred years ago. Appendix A Although Vega was neither an ethnologist nor an anthropologist, his assemblage of data and records are of extreme value and should be kept in mind by any scientist or researcher when studying the Mound Cultures of the Mississippi Valley. The time between De Soto's expedition and the late 18th century, although well-documented historically, is relatively void of any formal study of Amerindians until the time of Thomas Jefferson. This period does, however, produce such records as John Mason's account of the Pequot Wars wherein he describes many times the fortified towns and methods of warfare of the Amerindians. However, it is with Thomas Jefferson that scientific study began. Thomas Jefferson was accused by Benjamin Henry Latrobe as having "fished all he knew of architecture from old French books" and as a result having no real experiance. This statement was untrue, as Jefferson had much practical experience in the building trade, however, it did correctly describe Jefferson's method of learning when it came to archaeology and the study of Amerindian civilizations (Kennedy 134). Jefferson, in his Notes on Virginia, Query XI, describes the surrounding lands and their various Amerindian occupants. He writes, "I know of no such thing existing as an Indian monument; for I would not honor with that name arrow points, stone hatchets, stone pipes, and half-shapen images. Of labor on the large scale, I think there is no remain as respectable as would be a common ditch for the draining of lands; unless indeed it would be the barrows, of which many are to be found all over this country." Clearly Jefferson was incognizant of the large mounds of the Mississippi Valley, and the account of the De Soto expedition when he wrote this, yet his writing was considered authoritative at the time. Jefferson's one instance of practical archaeology occurred along the Rivanna River where he dug into a burial mound out of curiosity as a youth (Koch 220-221). Jefferson made no effort to survey the architecture of the American West, yet he managed to write a colorful description of the Ohio River, a river that he had never seen. He wrote of the villas of the Veneto as his architectural bible, yet although he spent two weeks studying rice agriculture less than a day's journey from the villas, he never visited them. This was Jefferson's way, and becomes evident in his works on the study of the Amerindian. The bulk of Jefferson's knowledge on Amerindians was gleaned from books, letters, and magazines, most of which were of questionable reliability. However, Jefferson did ultimately accept the Amerindian as the builders of the great earth works of the Ohio and Mississippi Valleys, but because of his learning method the process took him 25 years. In 1789, Jefferson was in France as minister to the Bourbon Court, replacing Benjamin Franklin. Ezra Stiles, president of Yale College, wrote him a letter containing another letter from Samuel Holden Parsons that contained some drawings of earth works in Ohio. Parsons had pressed Benjamin Franklin for an opinion on the works, but Franklin could not believe they were the works of Amerindians and his opinion was considered authoritative. However, Jefferson showed immense interest in these reports (Jefferson, Paper #9 476-478). Jefferson's first encounter with the earth works of the Hopewell came from the accounts of Circleville and Hopeton by the Reverend David Jones, in 1774. In 1780 Jefferson had a copy of Carver's Travel's in which some of the earth works were described as "octagonal." This is what drew Jefferson's attention as he was attracted to any architecture of this shape (Kennedy 134-135). By the late 1780's many learned people in the United States and Paris knew of great earth works in the Ohio and Mississippi and the era of speculation was in full swing. By 1790, Jefferson was beginning to change his mind on the origins of the mounds in despite the opinions of Franklin and others. He had begun to acknowledge the Amerindian as ever so slightly above noble savagery but held to his idea that though, "the Indians on the waters of the Ohio... might indeed make entrenchment’s of earth," they were and always had been, "in the hunter state."(Jefferson, Paper #10 316, and Paper #12 159) Charles Thompson, in April of 1789, then supplied Jefferson with more information on the "antiquities found in the Western country." Jefferson responded from Paris with a letter recommending "that persons go tither...make very exact descriptions of what they see of that kind, without forming any theories. The moment a person forms a theory, his imagination sees in every object only the tracts which favor that theory. It is too early to form theories on those antiquities." (Jefferson, Paper #10 316, and Paper #12 159) Throughout the 1790's, a large number of expressive visitors of the West returned with reports in regard to the scale of the ancient Amerindian achievements. Many of them, such as David Rittenhouse, Benjamin Barton, and William Bartram, had published works by the early 1790's. These works, as well as five others published by 1807, are known to have been used by Jefferson. It should be noted that Barton's work contained very precise descriptions and measurements of the earth works in Ohio that indicated a working knowledge of geometry possessed by the Amerindian, and it viciously attacked Jefferson's racial prejudices. It is at this time the first attempt to credit the Amerindian with the civilization these works indicated appears, however, Jefferson made great efforts to have these publications subdued. In 1809 drawings and maps of the Ohio earth works were again published in a magazine called The Port Folio. The magazine was notorious for its attacks against Jefferson's racial prejudices and Jefferson made every attempt to have this magazine suppressed as well. This undoubtedly had an effect on the attitudes of the scientific community that viewed Jefferson as an Amerindian authority. They mistook his opposition of the magazine to indicate his rejection of the Amerindian as Mound - Builders. In 1799, Jefferson read Sargent's report to the Philosophical Society on the Ohio mounds and began referring to them as "monuments," indicating that he was beginning to realize the Amerindians were the builders of these works. This was a complete change from his opinions expressed in his Notes on Virginia (Kennedy 134-137). Jeffersons map of the Mississippi Basin, arranged and devided in the geometric order Jefferson adored, was published in 1803. It contained the entire basin to the Rockies and had moved the Mississippi River from the Western edge of the American page to the center. He was now referring to the Mississippi River as The American Nile, and to its mounds as Pyramids. Whether Jefferson was recognizing the Amerindian as the author of the civilizations in the Mississippi basin or was simply trying to prove America was not inferior to the old world is unclear. However, an understanding of Jefferson would indicate the latter (Kennedy 152-170). Jefferson was president at this time, and too busy to be in the field doing his own research. He instead assembled a group of men to do the field work for him. This group included, but was not limited to: James Wilkinson, the corrupted and self-centered amateur archaeologist who served as Commander of the Armies of the United States; Andrew Jackson and Judge Overton, both of whom viewed the Amerindians as sub-human and their artifacts as "interesting trinkets;" George Clark, and George Morgan who had served the Continental Congress as the Chief Indian Agent. Jefferson obtained funding for their work from congress and encouraged the group to learn archaeology and publish their findings (Kennedy 152-170). By 1806, Jefferson had at least four brigades of troops and scientist in the field with orders to probe the Spanish defenses as well as collect as much data as possible on the "Natural History" of the West and the Lewis and Clark expedition was organized specifically for these purposes (Kennedy 152-170). The Lewis and Clark expedition made its base camp at the confluence of the Missouri and Mississippi Rivers. While camped there to conduct training exercises for the expedition, they discovered another group of mounds near those explored by Clark's brother, now called Cahokia Mounds. From the description of these mounds it may be assumed that they were likely part of the Cahokia Complex and probably burial mounds, but it is not certain that they were. These mounds have since been destroyed to lay in three Railroad beds. Lewis and Clark ran across many earth works during their expedition but, to their disappointment, none compared with those at the Cahokia site of the Mississippian period (Osgood 16-17). While "exploring" the Missouri River they stopped to visit Daniel Boone who they knew was familiar with many of the Amerindian Oral Histories. Lewis and Clark were finding indications that the area had once held a large population and it seems likely Lewis and Clark had hoped Boone could shed some light on their discoveries and the reason for the builders disappearance (Kennedy 175-177). That Boone was also familiar with the "Dark and Bloody Ground" is common knowledge. What is not common knowledge, however, is the reason for the area being called so. The lands referred to by this name were not called "Dark and Bloody" because of the hostile inhabitants of the area as is commonly thought. On the contrary, the area was sparsely populated, and in many cases avoided by Amerindians because it had been the scene of what came to be known as the "Great Dying." Sometime between 1500 and 1700 the Amerindian population of the area had died off. Most Anthropologists believe that the diseases the European explorers had proceeded them and caused this event (Walters 281). Whatever the case, Boone knew the stories and it is likely Lewis and Clark had hoped he could explain the mysteries of their findings (Kennedy 175-177). When Lewis and Clark arrived at the Boone home, they found its master away, and so were left to postulate their own theories and ideas regarding the mounds and earth-works they were encountering. Clark was familiar with his brother's study of the Cahokia site as well as the mounds across the river in St. Louis, and he mistakenly assumed that the earth works they were finding along the Missouri River were of the same nature. The information they gathered was forwarded to Jefferson who added it to his ever-expanding library. This information also led him closer to his conclusion that the Amerindians were indeed the builders of the mounds (Kennedy 175-177). Another man that should be mentioned as one of particular note, although not in Jefferson's expeditionary force, was Henry Brackenridge known to fame as an American Novelist. Brackenridge was a man of many diversified experiences and talents. As a boy of eight, he had been left at a military encampment near the mounds of Cincinnati to improve is command of military English. He was then moved to New Madrid to study Spanish, and finally to Ste. Genevieve. While there he learned French as well as the culinary arts (Brackenridge 11, 12, 40-59). His playmates, while at Ste. Genevieve, were mostly Kickapoo children and, unlike his father, Brackenridge found them to be not only agreeable friends, but human beings of the highest order. That his contact with the Kickapoo and their traditions had an affect on him is evident in his later works. After his stay at Ste. Genevieve, he came into the company of James Wilkenson and Colonel Power (Brackenridge 11, 12, 40-59). During his time with Wilkenson and Power he served as a playmate for Power's children on his luxurious barge and studied law. Part of his studies required him to read and write from "Jones on Bailments." As a reward for copying this work in perfect penmanship, he was allowed to read Potter's Antiquities. This work, coupled with Brackenridge's previous experiences sparked an interest in archaeology that was noted by William Clark and led Brackenridge to produce Sketches of the Antiquities of the Mississippi basin. This work, along with some of his others were supplied to Jefferson in the hope that the "Sage of Montecello," a descriptive name Jefferson was known by, would read and use them (Brackenridge 11, 12, 40-59). In 1811 Brackenridge left St. Louis for Natchez, Baton Rouge, and New Orleans. In New Orleans he wrote a new legal code designed to bring French law into conformity with the English legal system. This code became known as "The Brackenridge Code," and is still in use today. His first book, "Views of Louisiana," was published in 1811. This was followed by "A Journal of a Voyage up the Missouri River." Some of this later work was popularized by Washington Irving with Brackenridge as a hero. This added to Brackenridge's growing popularity as a novelist and writer, as well as making him celebrity (Kennedy 178-181). The extent of Brackenridge's work is beyond the confines of this paper. Suffice it to say that, although Brackenridge could not convince himself that the Amerindians had built the mounds, he compiled the most extensive and accurate survey on the mound-cultures of the Mississippi Basin in existence until the advent of Cyrus Thomas. In 1813 Jefferson received Brackenridge's accounts of his work. Brackenridge had sent some of his work to Jefferson in the hopes that the "Sage of Montecello" would find them of use. In these works he accounted for the ability of the Mississippi Basin to support large settlements of populations as well as correctly identifying the earth-works of Ohio as ceremonial rather than defensive (Kennedy 183). That Brackenridge, like Jefferson, was exasperated with the attitude of Europeans toward the antiquities America possessed becomes clear as he writes: Who will pretend to speak with certainty as to the antiquity of America - of the races of men that flourished and disappeared - of the thousand revolutions, like other parts of the globe, it has undergone? The philosophers of Europe, with a narrowness and selfishness of mind, have endeavored to depreciate every thing which relates to it. They have called it the New World, as though its formation was posterior to the rest of the habitable globe. (Brackenridge 28) Clearly it was evident that the America, like the “old” world had a rich history reaching far into the past. Jefferson was keeping track of the publications now becoming quite frequent and in 1805 a publication was produced by Thadius Harris in "The Journal," that expounded on the geometry of the Ohio works. Jefferson was obsessed with geometry and considered it the mark of high civilization. It is apparent that he briefly entertained the idea that the geometric works were those of some unknown peoples from Britain since they resembled the earthworks of that region, but he quickly dismissed the idea in favor of Amerindian builders. Whether this turnaround was due in part to Jefferson's attempt to convince the European mind that America was not substandard, and that America too had an ancient civilization, or that he had made a scientific decision is unclear. Whatever the reason, this became an important turning point in the history of American archaeology. Jefferson wrote a letter to The American Antiquatarian Society, in 1812, expressing his delight in their publication of the first volume of "Transactions" saying, "I find it truly pleasing to hope that, by their exertions, the monuments of the character and condition of the people who preceded us in the occupation of this great country will be rescued from oblivion before they will have entirely disappeared." This publication, written by Caleb Atwater, also drew positive responses from Dewitt Clinton and John Marshal and seems to have had an effect, along with the findings of Jefferson's own teams, on Jefferson's final design of what became his beloved estate known as "Polar Forest." This estate not only displayed Jefferson's love for geometry in its buildings, but also boasted a series of replica mounds, indicating Jefferson's acknowledgment of Amerindian achievement (Kennedy 137-142). Alas, all the efforts of Jefferson and those he utilized in establishing the builders of the mounds quickly went into obscurity. It is evident that both the public and the scientific community adopted a kind of amnesia where the Amerindian was concerned. The knowledge and scientific study that proved the Amerindians to be the builders of the mounds were quickly replaced by romanticized theories riding a renewed wave of American Evangelism (Jefferson to Cooper, Writings #15, 14). This new surge of Evangelism and Old Testament furor was a thorn in Jefferson's side. The movement renewed the romantic notions of lost tribes from Israel and threw a curtain over Jeffersons research. After his death, many of the artifacts he had collected were destroyed as "Pagan Idols" by factions of this movement. Even the Smithsonian was reluctant to recognize many of the artifacts as the work of Amerindians (Kennedy 220-224). Appendix B Cyrus Thomas was born July 27, 1825 in Kingsport, Tennessee Thomas received his primary education at the village school in Kingsport. He attended the academy at Jonesborough Tennessee where he studied law, medicine, theology, and natural history (Dictionary of American 426). Thomas then occupied several teaching and official positions with the state of Tennessee and Illinois before finding his talents as an anthropologist. His expertise as a scientist had already been demonstrated in his prolific and well-paying career as an entomologist during which he published at least 38 scientific papers. During the Civil War Thomas had served the Union Army Medical Corps as a research scientist. He was part of a large team that had been directed to collect Amerindian weapons and bones to study the wounds these weapons created for the purpose of designing treatments. Then, in 1882, he joined the Bureau of Ethnology to serve in the area of Mound research wherein he had already completed some previous work (Smithsonian Archives).

Continue to Sources Cited Page.

We appreciate your comments and suggestions. Please E-MAIL us.