The circular, square, and octagonal earthworks of Ohio / by Cyrus Thomas.

  • Thomas, Cyrus, 1825-1910.
Date:
1889
Catalogue details

Licence: Public Domain Mark

Credit: The circular, square, and octagonal earthworks of Ohio / by Cyrus Thomas. Source: Wellcome Collection.

    56/62 (page 32)
    This mound is situated upon the edge of the first general bottom from Paint Creek, which, though protected by a huge levee, is annually inundated. In overflow times the smaller circle of the adjoining in¬ closure is almost entirely submerged, and the summit of the mound is the only land visible above a broad expanse of water. Around the mound, upon all sides, particularly to the east, are traces of former In¬ dian occupation. Numerous fragments of pottery, similar in texture fabrication, and ornamental features to those found in the mound, be¬ strew the plowed ground. These were intermingled with the valves of mussel shells, pitted stoues, shell disks, human bones, arrow-heads, pieces of perforated stone gorgets, and innumerable quantities of chipped flint. Specimens of all were collected and forwarded to AVasli- ington with the relics taken from the mound. REMARKS. As it is not our intention to attempt at this time a full discussion of the questions raised by the data presented in the preceding pages, we shall limit our remarks chiefly to suggestions. The close approximation to geometrical regularity in the Observatory and High Bank circles, and the Newark, Liberty Township, and Baum squares is to be admitted beyond further question. The approach to regularity in the octagons at Newark and High Bank, though deserv¬ ing notice, is not so close as in the square and circular inclosures men¬ tioned. The first question which presents itself in view of these facts is, How are we to reconcile them with the theory that the works were built by Indians ? As befoie stated, we shall not attempt at this time a thorough dis¬ cussion of this and other questions which arise in reference to these ancient works ; nevertheless we may as well suggest some thoughts and note some facts which may aid in solving the problems. A caieful study of these works and of all the data bearing upon the questions regarding them, will satisfy auy one, not biased by a precon¬ ceived theory, that their characteristics are essentially aboriginal. In other words, there is nothing in them or connected with them contra¬ dictory to the theory of their Indian origin, except it be the single fact that a few of them approach very nearly to true geometrical figures. That it was a custom among the Indians north and south to build circular inclosures and forts, is fully attested by history- it is also known that some of the Indian forts in the northern section were po- gonal, especially those built by Iroquois tribes. There is, therefore, nothing in the form or arrangement that is inconsistent with Indian ideas and usages. On the other hand, there is nothing in their form or construction consistent with the idea that their conception is due to Euiopean influence. There are, however, indications relating to indi¬ vidual works which forbid this idea. I will mention but one of these.