Native Americans, Archaeologists, and the Mounds

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

I wrote this book at the specific behest of elders of the Native American community of Ohio. Many of them have been engaged for decades in the preservation of the Ohio valley mounds, as well as in the effort to repatriate and rebury the human remains and grave goods seized from the earthwork cemeteries of their ancestors. Countless hours and selfless dedication have marked their labor, which has often been lonely, unrewarded, and even unremarked by the larger Euroamerican culture, which, until quite recently, has lain unaware of the pain that the desecration of sacred sites causes Native Americans. In the process of writing Native Americans, Archaeologists, and the Mounds, I have been a guest in the homes of these elders and a companion in their rambles through mound country, showered alternately with information and kindness. I am honored to be one of their company. Most particularly and gratefully, I thank Grandmother Barbara Crandell, Head Mother of the Ohio Cherokee and founder of the Native American Alliance of Ohio (NAAO), whose open door and even more open heart have made this work a joy. Especially, I appredicate her permission to quote. Likewise, I fondly thank Jean McCoard, an elder of the Tallige Fire and a member of NAAO, whose farmfiil of dogs, hogs, and llamas always gladdens my heart. In addition, as one crazed researcher to another, I take my hat off to Gail Zion, who, although not Native herself, has been a careful, even driven, researcher for NAAO and who generously shared her knowledge with me. A very hearty thank you goes to Ward Churchill, who doggedly read every page of this work in manuscript (not an easy task!) and who provided constructive feedback along with specific articles and invaluable citations. Ward, I appreciate the thoroughness of your readings and the fearlessness of your

viii NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

analyses. I look forward to being able to return the favor. I also thank Marilou Awiakta, whose own struggles to preserve her Cherokee ancestors' mounds in Tennessee gave her sound appreciation of the issue in the Ohio Valley. She graciously read the galleys of this book, offering her observations and encouragement. It is always a pleasure to communicate with Thomas McElwain, who continually delights and surprises me with, not only his insights and linguistic information, but also the zany humor with which he handles western insouciance. I thank him for granting me permission to cite his infonnation in these pages. In addition, I thank linguist Jordan Lachler, who supplied me with information and graciously granted me permission to quote him. Even in the best planned books, there are always some unexpected questions that arise, which leave one looking, fiat-footed, for pertinent infonnation. In this instance, it was DNA science. I heartily acknowledge the pointers given me in this area by Dr. Alan Goodman, who quickly and cordially responded to my inquiries to him following his testimony before the 17 November 2001, hearings of the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA) Review Committee. I greatly appreciate his leads on sources and the articles he sent my way. As any researcher who has used them knows, trails through government documents can be fraught with rue, dead-ending here, doubling back there, and everywhere, raining confusion. The difficulty of locating the right document is only exacerbated when that document was indicted in the nineteenth century. Without a Sherpa guide, climbing over the mountains of jumbled, yellowing paper is nearly impossible. It was my luck to find such an able guide in George Kline, the Documents Specialist for the Toledo-Lucas County Public Library, which, although a local library, contains a superb collection of nineteenthcentury government documents. I also thank the Buckeye Lake Beacon and, especially, its editor and publisher, Charles Prince, who graciously granted me permission to use a Buckeye Lake Beacon photograph for my frontispiece and who, moreoever, hung in there with me when production specs looked to overturn the entire enterprise. Finally, as always, I am indebted to my excellent editor, Heidi Bums, whose eagle-eyed editing helps me produce consistently fine books.

FIGURES

Figure 1.1. The Linnaean Chart of Humanity

22

Figure 1.2. The Blumenbachian Order of Human Degeneracy

24

Figure 2.1. Engraving by De Bry after a painting by Jacques Le Moyne

57

Figure 2.2. The Grave Creek Stone

82

Figure 2.3. Erasmus Gest's Rendering of the Cincinnati Tablet

84

Figure 2.4. The Great Serpent Mound

94

Figure 2.5. The Alligator Mound

95

Figure 2.6. Mound City

97

Figure 2.7. The Newark Earthworks

100

Figure 3.1. Detail of a Map of Extant Mound Sites in 1891

138

Figure 4.1. The Two-by-Four Logic of Humanity

177

Figure 4.2. The Earthworks at Seal Township, in Pike County, Ohio

198

Figure 4.3. Circle Motifs of Sky and Earth

206

xii NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

Figure 4.4. Semicircle Motif in the Blackwater Group in Ross County, Ohio

210

Figure 4.5. Concentric Circle Motif in the Portsmouth Group in Kentucky

211

Figure 4.6. The U-Mediated Circle Square Motif, Paint Creek Earthwork, near Chillicothe, Ohio Figure 4.7. The Two-by-Four of Sky-Earth/Fire-Water

213 214

Figure 4.8. The So-called "Eagle Mound," Detail of the Great Circle at Newark, Ohio

229

Figure 5.1. Sales Receipt from the Do Drop Inn Antique Store

242

Figure 5.2. Lancaster City Police Property Tag

243

FOREWORD:

iNDiGENiST SCHOLARSHIP AT

ITS FINEST

The deepest racist avatar is to think that an error about earlier societies is politically or theoretically less serious than a misinterpretation of our own world. Just as a people that oppresses another cannot be free, so a culture that is mistaken about another must also be mistaken about itself. —Jean Bauddllard The Mirror of Production

BARBARA MANN'S DECOLONIZATION OF NATIVE NORTH AMERICAN HISTORY

From the onset of Europe's invasion of America during the early sixteenth century, the invaders and their posterity have assigned themselves the monopolistic prerogative of describing, and thus defining, both the hemisphere and the peoples indigenous to it. Although this inequitable and imbalanced process of "representing Others" has all along been justified by the presumptively allencompassing superiority of European intellectual tradition in understanding the true nature and meaning of things,' one need only consider the implications of Juan Ponce de Leon's leading a military expedition into the swamps of" La Florida" in 1513, looking in all seriousness for a mythical "fountain of youth" —or Francisco Vazquez de Coronado's repeated forays into what became New Mexico of subsequent decades, searching for the equally mythic Seven Cities of Antilia—to appreciate how very far such eurosupremacist self-assessments have often been from reality.^ In this sense, it is essential to remember that Christopher Columbus, the "Great Navigator" himself, was half the globe away from where he thought he was when he first washed up on a New World beach in 1492 and that, until the late seventeenth century, perhaps later, much of the territory the Columbian

xiv NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

"discovery" had opened up to the ravages of European conquest was depicted by prominent cartographers, among other Old World scholars, as being infested with all manner of fabulous monsters.' Human residents of the invaded geography fared no better than the flora, the fauna, or the geography itself. Beginning with Columbus' s D/ano, European "documents" are sprinkled with allusions to peoples with one eye, bald heads, or dog faces, and to an island inhabited only by women, referred to as "Amazons."" All pretensions to the contrary notwithstanding, Europeans "brought to the New World overheated imaginations, fired by the popular literature of their day—romantic novels posing as history. Literate and illiterate alike knew the stories contained in these widely circulated romances Manifestly works of fiction, these [fantasies had come] to be regarded as fact by their ordinary readers or listeners."' In effect, Europe was a culture immersed in "an epistemology where the fantastic and the real [could] not be isolated, [there being] no grounds for discriminating between the real and the fantastic. Fables (made up stories) are ostensibly opposed to history (real events), but the same fantastic entities appear in both genres," a cross-pollination rendering Europe's canons of science in many respects indistinguishable from some of its more imaginative modes of fiction.* Ultimately, the vaunted empiricism purportedly divorcing fact from phantasm, and thus elevating European perceptions above all others, was consistently inverted by the extent to which "skepticism remained subordinate to the will to believe" in convenient untruth, manifested by even the most leamed proponents of what came shortly to be known as "the scientific method."' Indeed, it would soon be routinely asserted that employment of The Method had "scientifically proven" many of Europe's more ridiculous characterizations of Others to be "in truth" correct. Witness, by way of illustration, the extraordinary persistence as an "established fact" of the notion that cannibalism provided a regular source of protein in the diets of many native societies.* Similar situations prevail with regard to such commonplaces as the idea that scalping was a practice invented by Native Americans and that Mesoamerican peoples like the Aztecs engaged in wholesale human sacrifice.' It is not that indigenous people did not have better and more accurate understandings of themselves and the world around them than those embodied in the bilge so often peddled by Europe, nor that they did not attempt to impart what they knew. In situations where Native interpretations of reality confiicted with those embraced by Europeans, however, the former were invariably and quite arbitrarily discounted as views holding sway only in "primitive," "igno-

FOREWORD XV

rant," and "superstitious" societies, worthy of neither currency nor consideration in the vastly more "enlightened" west.'" Descriptions of the Native character such as that offered by Samuel Purchas in 1625 had become standard fare long before he permed his opinion that Natives were a bad people, having little of humanitie but shape, ignorant of Civilitie, of Arts, of Religion; more brutish than the beasts they hunt, more wild and unmanley then that unmanned countrey, which they range rather then inhabite; captivated also to Santans tyranny in foolish pieties, made impieties, wicked idlenesse, busie and bloudy wickednesse [spellings and punctuation as in the original]. "

Thus were "aborigines" definitionally consigned to a realm not only beyond the boundaries of such eurocentric niceties as "science" and "civilization," but also outside the domain even of history.'^ Having thereby released itself from the obligation of acknowledging the least prospect of validity attending any world view but its own and unfettered by anything resembling bona fide epistemological constraints in large sectors of its intellectual endeavor, the European academy was free to "explain" Native peoples in whatever manner it desired (i.e., in ways best serving the perceived interests of its sponsors at any given moment).'' Whatever image was concocted in accordance with this recipe, moreover, was meant not only for dissemination among Europeans for purposes of legitimating their drive to subordinate and dispossess Others, but also to be imposed as a self-concept upon the dispossessed and subordinated —that is to say, colonized—Others themselves.'"• As Albert Memmi has observed, "The history which is taught [the colonized] is not his own."" In order for the colonizer to be a complete master, it is not enough for him to be so in actual fact, but he must also believe in its legitimacy. In order for this legitimacy to be complete, it is not enough for the colonized to be a slave, he must [be indoctrinated to] accept his role."

Through such conditioning, an appearance of "confirmation of native sources" was constructed vis-a-vis a range of eurosupremacist contentions otherwise xinsupported by a shred of evidence (or contradicted by such evidence as existed)." Plainly, we are confronted here with an aspect of what Antonio Gramsci termed "hegemony" (i.e., a unified description, either overtly or covertly political, of events and phenomena designed to rationalize the subjugation by one group of others, ultimately making the relationship seem right, natural, and, most of all, inevitable).'* Alternately, to put a more recent terminological gloss on the matter, one can readily discern the crafting of a Lyotardian "grand" or "master" narrative of a sort devolving upon the imagined virtue and

xvi NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

necessity of "human progress."" Irrespective of the semantics involved, genuine scientific inquiry and discourse have had precious little to do with the formation of European/euroderivative Truth where Others are concerned. Still less has the project of building such an interpretive edifice been harnessed to the hallowed ideal of achieving "justice" in any discemable

The More Things "Change" . . . It would be at best an error to suggest that the kinds of egregious nonsense remarked above have abated since the days of Columbus and Coronado. True, the sorts of willful fallacy by which the Other is rendered by "responsible" scholars have become somewhat more sophisticated—an entire discipline, anthropology (the term encompasses subsets like archaeology and paleontology), emerged during the nineteenth century to accommodate precisely this task—in keeping with the evolution of both the technologies and the vernaculars of science,^' as well as the shift in rhetorical emphasis needed by a culture making the transition from a prolonged period of conquest and expansion into one in which consolidation and attempts to perfect an already existing structure of oppression were/are the order of the day.^^ Fundamentally, however, things have remained far more the same than not over the past 500 years, at least in the connections at issue. As Robert Berkhofer has shown in his insightful study. The White Man's Indian, the fictions through which Europeans originally misrepresented Native Americans had coagulated into coherent tropes and stereotypes long before anthropology made its formal appearance." For their part, those devoted to pursuing the "science of man" have been corroborating those misrepresentations ever since, regularly informing all who will listen that their proof is now "conclusive." Here, it should be remembered that among the "truths" thus posited during the 1800s were that human intelligence is determined by "cranial capacity," and that Caucasians are innately smarter than Indians and other nonEuropeans because they are endowed with larger cranial cavities than other "races," a sorry subject examined here in lethal detail by Barbara Mann in chapter 1 }^ It was of course later shown that Samuel Morton, the researcher with whom this orthodoxy is most closely associated, faked his results to obtain the desired outcomes,^' but no matter: the handy theory of a racially defined "hierarchy of intellect" continues to be accorded credibility, forming the core of Richard Hermstein and Charles Murray's immensely popular tome, The Bell Curve, as recently as 1994.^* Along the same line, which Mann likewise dissects, it was considered an

FOREWORD xvii

established anthropological fact during the early twentieth century that, in keeping with biblical chronologies, the Americas "could not" have been inhabited by humans for more than 3,000 years." William Henry Holmes and his protege. Ales Hrdlicka, successive heads of the Smithsonian Institution's American Bureau of Ethnology, presided over enforcement of this "scientific" orthodoxy, ridiculing and often using their influence to "block publication of opposing viewpoints," marginalizing those who differed from The question of early man in America became virtually taboo, and no anthropologist, or for that matter geologist or paleontologist, desirous of a successful career would tempt the fate of ostracism by intimating that he had discovered indications of a respectable antiquity for the Indian."

It was not until the mid-1930s, after successive discoveries at sites near the New Mexico towns of Folsom and Clovis had left the sheer falsity of sanctioned "scientific truth" exposed for all to see, that the official "threshold for the arrival of man in this hemisphere" was finally rolled back to the 12,000 to 15,000-year range.^" And there it has stayed. While current linguistic and genetic data—as well as the discovery of truly ancient sites such as those as the Old Crow/Bluefish Cave Complex, in the Yukon; Monte Verde, in Chile; and Valsequillo, in Mexico—indicate, rather conclusively that people have resided throughout the "New World" for at least forty millennia,'' anthropological orthodoxy, enforced by a "Clovis Mafia" exhibiting much the same behavior that once marked the Holmes/HrdliSka Smithsonian regime, continues to decree a "maximum" of fifteen.'^ The reason for this latest round of recalcitrance is not especially mysterious. To admit that the western hemisphere was endowed with a human population at least 40,000 years ago would be to obliterate the most central and cherished of all the tenets giving shape to Americanist anthropology: the Truth that American Indians arrived here by traversing a "land bridge" believed to have joined Siberia and Alaska during the last ice.age." The problem is that the conditions under which such a "Bering Strait migration" might have been possible did not exist much further back in time than 15,000 years.'"* Since conceding older site datings would require a whole new explanation of how people came to be here, scholars, in order to be considered "reputable," simply deny the validity—sometimes, the very existence—of inconvenient evidence, purging heretics when- and wherever necessary to protect the interpretive status quo." Like Holmes's and Hrdli6ka's insistence upon the "shallow dating" of human occupancy in America, the origins of the Beringian migration hypothe-

xviii NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

sis are telling. As Barbara Mann documents, it was conceived in 1590 by a Franciscan priest named Acosta who was endeavoring to reconcile Christianity's Old World origin story with the existence of a huge and unaccoimted for population in the New.'* Two centuries later, Thomas Jefferson secularized Acosta's theological musings in a transparently political effort to undermine the aboriginal title to their homelands, acknowledged by the Law of Nations as vested in America's indigenous peoples." As Vine Deloria, Jr., has put it, the idea was to show not only that Native Americans, like the European invaders and their descendants, come from somewhere else, but also that "they'd barely unpacked before Columbus came knocking on the door."'* With things framed in this fashion, of course, it would be difficult to argue that Euroamericans are appreciably less entitled to territories possessed by Natives than the Natives, themselves. Prompted by this decidedly unscientific incentive, the "detached, neutral, and objective scientists" of America's anthropological establishment have for nearly two hundred years done quite literally everything in their power to concretize the popular illusion that the Jeffersonian hypothesis has been confirmed. Not only has countervailing evidence been consistently discounted and suppressed, its proponents treated like modem-day Galileos, but all manner of spurious material has been deployed in bolstering the case. Although examples are legion, among the most blatant was the reliance by "experts" for more than a century upon the so-called Walam Olum, a rather flagrant hoax (examined in detail by Mann) perpetrated in 1836 by a would-be celebrity named Constantine Samuel Rafinesque, merely because it met the evidentiary needs of orthodoxy." The "Red Score," as the forgery is also called, purports to be "an ancient hieroglyphic document, painted and engraved on wooden tablets . . . by early Lenape (Delaware) Indians" and chronicling, among other things, that people's passage across the Bering Strait land bridge at a point somewhere around 1500 B.C.E."*" Despite the fact that questions had been raised from the outset by Rafinesque's "translation" of the record's Lenape, a team of eminent archaeologists, ethnologists, linguists, and historians pronounced the fraud "authentic" in 1954."' As recently as 1987, C. A. Weslager, a reputed specialist on the Lenape, went on record asserting the tract's legitimacy and reeled off a list of distinguished colleagues who agreed with him."^ Unsurprisingly, given these circumstances, a new edition of this "oldest Native American history" was released in 1989.'" As Barbara Mann concludes in her chapter 3 dissection of the Walam Olum, the hoax succeeded for so long because it played so entirely into Euroamerican preconceptions of Native "prehistory."

FOREWORD xix

Needless to say, a "scientific culture" demonstrating such sustained willingness to play cozy with a sham of this magnitude might be expected to have entertained—or generated—others. Here, again, the record is abundant. To get the drift, one need only cast a sidelong glance at the UCLA anthropology department's 1969 award of a Ph.D. to Carlos Castaneda on the basis of a dissertation already published as The Teachings of Don Juan and "field work," which might be best described as a pellucid fabrication.'''* Although the newly ordained doctor of anthropology's magic smoking mushrooms and desertdwelling jaguars were phantasms infesting the earlier discussed sixteenthcentury texts, he found no shortage of supporters in the broader "scholarly community.'"" Indeed, his work fit quite neatly within a then-emergent "phenomenological" genre of the social sciences, in which researchers felt free to invent such data as might be necessary to affirm what they intuitively "knew to be true" about Others."* Most of the travesties produced within the field which brought us not only the Walatn Olum and Castaneda but Piltdown Man as well,"^ are of a less sensational but far more insidious sort. A striking illustration is to be found in the systematic and prolonged manipulation of available evidence by historians like John Gorham Palfrey and anthropological luminaries like James Mooney and Alfred Kroeber to create a "low count" estimate of the preinvasion population of Native North America.''* While the resulting composite figure of one million enshrined as Truth by the Smithsonian for most of the last century was only about one-fifteenth of the probable total—and about a third of what the Smithsonian itself now concedes—it went far towards entrenching the selfabsolving perspective among Euroamericans that, since most of the continent was "vacant" at the point their forbearers arrived, there was "no harm done" by taking it.'" Concomitantly, uncomfortable implications concerning the historical genocide of indigenous inhabitants were minimized to the point of disappearance.'" The supposed paucity of population north of the Rio Grande has been routinely used, moreover, to underpin assertions that Native American societies were incapable of achieving any degree of cultural attainment, consisting instead of a thin scattering of "Stone Age hunter-gatherers drifting nomadically across the landscape, at the bare margins of subsistence," millennium after millennium, until Europeans came along to bestow "a better way of life" upon them (Indians, today, so the story goes, are privileged to watch TV, drive pickup trucks, and visit shopping malls, "just like everybody else.")" In other words, the victims ultimately benefited from their victimization, irrespective of

XX NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

what might have been done to them, and should be accordingly grateful to their victimizers.'^ To be sure, such contrivances, designed to anchor a general denigration of the continent's indigenous cultures, are regularly augmented by more particularized fare: the academy's neurotic obsession with cannibalogy remains as vibrant—and as vacuous—today as it was when the hallucination of "Caribs" was conjured up more than five centuries ago;'^ scalpology remains very much in vogue, despite clear indication of its European origins;'''feminist writers of various stripes have entered a litany of mostly preposterous complaints conceming the "sexism" they imagine as having been "inherent" to traditional societies;" while other "reputable" studies have lately advanced the thesis that Natives were "the first environmental pillagers" in America, guilty of eradicating every kind of creature from the woolly mammoth to the buffalo, strewing trails of litter in the wake of their wanderings and mindlessly denuding the land of vegetation, as well." Coupled to the literature disparaging all things Native is another designed more explicitly to take the invader society off the hook of its misdeeds, both past and present. Salient in this respect has been the concoction of a theory of "virgin soil epidemics," a bizarre and tremendously popular form of victim blaming in which—on the basis of no empirical evidence at all—the catastrophic rates of disease-induced death suffered by Native Americans in the course of the European "settlement" are attributed not to such well documented resorts to bacteriological extermination as that undertaken by Jeffrey Amherst in 1763, but rather to a putative immunological deficiency on the part of those who perished." In what may perhaps be the most cynical twist of all, anthropologists such as James Clifton have also taken to arguing, largely on the basis of their own discipline's abysmal record of distortion, that Euroamerica hold no obligation to Native Americans, since Natives were "invented" by Europeans in the first place and have, therefore, never "really" existed at all.'* The Struggle to Rectify the Record Although, despite the best efforts of Euroamerican missionaries and other "educators," indigenous peoples were by and large able to sustain their own way of knowing, it was only in the late 1960s that the Native voice began to make an appearance within the realm of oppositional discourse. For the most part, it was not the older people who had preserved the knowledge but, instead, a younger cast of characters, well versed in both their own traditions and the relevant eurocentric disciplines, who, against the backdrop of unraveling socio-

FOREWORD xxi

cultural consensus marking the U.S. settler society during the Vietnam era, sought and achieved resonance with a broad, largely non-Native audience.'' While the roster of those involved in bringing about this "American Indian Renaissance" eventually ran into the thousands, counting participants engaged in endeavors ranging from botany to the fine arts, those who numbered among the key figures at the outset were relatively few and invariably politicized to a high degree. The more important included Cherokee anthropologist Robert K. Thomas,*" Ponca student activist Clyde Warrior, and, most prominently. Vine Deloria, Jr., a Standing Rock Sioux trained in both theology and law, who was then heading the National Congress of American Indians.*' In 1969, with a group calling itself Indians of All Tribes commanding national attention through its occupation of Alcatraz Island, and just as the American Indian Movement (AIM) was emerging, however briefiy, as a force to be reckoned with, Deloria's first book, Custer Diedfor Your Sins, hit like a bombshell." Laced with a biting but deadly serious humor throughout, Custer leveled a particularly devastating critique at the minions of anthropology, the reverberations of which continue to be felt within the discipline to this day.*' Over the next several years, as AIM's spectacularly confrontational style of asserting Indian rights kept the public gaze riveted on such matters, Deloria followed up with a rapid-fire series of political tracts, including We Talk, You Listen and the potent Behind the Trail of Broken Treaties, an edited volume entitled Of Utmost Good Faith, and God Is Red, his first book-length theoretical assault upon eurosupremacist, theological/philosophical conceits.*" He has since produced books and articles at a prolific rate, always building upon the foundation established in his early work.*' The boldness and sheer power of Deloria's counterhegemonic articulations taken together with AIM's unfiinchingly in-your-face pattern of action, both delivered at a time in which its elites were genuinely concerned that the U.S. might figuratively come apart at the seams,** set the country's "Indianist" establishment back on its heels. This, in turn, served to foster a sense of empowerment among other scholars, both Native and not, leading many to make an open break with the dictates of orthodoxy, at least on the topic of American Indians.*' All told, it would be more than a decade before what has been called "the reconstruction of imperial ideology" could be seriously attempted in this quarter,** and even then the old order could never be completed restored. The "liberated" period unleashed a veritable avalanche of material "revising" the conventional portrait of Native North America and, collaterally, that of the

xxii NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

European/Euroamerican performance on this continent. Researchers like Henry Dobyns and Cherokee demographer Russell Thornton reworked prevailing estimates of preinvasion population size, placing them for the first time on an actual scientific footing and demonstrating that the continent was inhabited by as many as 18.5 million people in 1492.*' Others, like David Stannard and I, have used such data to bring the concept of genocide to bear in interpreting the history and contemporary substance of the ongoing "encounter between Old World and New."™ Still others, notably the late Warren Lowes, provided a radically different perspective on the level of preinvasion cultural attainment than was embodied in the previously dominant "hunter-gatherer" stereotype," while Bruce Johansen, Yamasee historian Donald Grinde, Jr., and others revealed the extent to which the already existing democracy of the Haudenosaunee (the Iroquois League or Six Nations Confederacy) infiuenced the framers of the U.S. Constitution.'^ Proceeding along a different but related axis, Lumbee legal scholar Robert A. Williams, Jr., produced a truly magisterial work. The American Indian in Western Legal Thought, laying bare the origins, temper, and implications of the racist bias against indigenous peoples with which European jurisprudence— often masquerading as "international" law—has been infected since its inception." Working from many of the same premises, others, like Cherokee activist/ aesthetician Jimmie Durham, the Cheyenne-descended historian Roxarme Dunbar Ortiz, and the late Choctaw novelist/critic Louis Owens, have followed Bob Thomas's lead in depicting the Native North American circumstance in terms of colonialism,''' thereby linking it to the global current of anticolonialist struggle and analysis exemplified by Memmi, Frantz Fanon, and Amilcar Cabral." Here, the commonality of the work of those mentioned to that of Chicanos like Rodolfo Acuiia, latino "Third Worlders" like Eduardo Galeano, and Native Hawaiian activist/intellectuals like Haunani-Kay Trask should be clear.'* At another level, the entire project of what has sometimes been designated "indigenist scholarship"" may be seen to parallel and, in certain respects, connect with those undertaken by Afrocentrists like Chancellor Williams and George James,'* the so-called subaltern study group in South Asia," Arabists like Talal Asad, Edward Said, and Keith Whitelaw,*''as well as related efforts undertaken by sometimes unclassifiable scholars like Martin Bemal.*' There are even a few, self-professed "postmodernists" like Peter McLaren,*^ and reluctant "postcolonialists" like Anne McClintock,*^ who, notwithstanding the inappropriateness of the labels with which they are saddled, have constructively

FOREWORD

xxiii

engaged themselves in these loosely collective efforts to use the excavation/ recovery of stolen or suppressed nonwestem legacies as an instrument with which to puncture the hyperinflated balloon of eurocentric pretension.*" There have been counterattacks, to be sure, commencing in earnest during the mid-1980s, after the hegemonist establishment had recovered its equilibrium to a considerable extent. Among the more vicious have been those on Dobyns, Thornton, and other indigenist demographers, most notably by David Henige, erstwhile bibliographer of Africana at the University of Wisconsin library.*' Grinde, Johansen, and others writing on the Haudenosaunee role in the founding of the American republic have also undergone prolonged attacks by an aggregation of professional "Iroquoianists" who have—^typically without troubling to examine the evidence cited by the authors—vociferously denounced their findings as "impossible," their research as "shoddy."*^ Stannard, too, has been assailed, taken to task in the pages of the New York Review of Books, by no less eminent an historian than J. H. Elliot, for an alleged "indiscriminate use" of such "politically loaded" words as "racism" and "genocide," although it is clear from his remarks that Elliot never bothered to acquaint himself with the definition of the latter word.*^ For his part, Deloria has been disparaged as a "creationist," among other epithets, after laying siege to the Bering Strait hypothesis and similar "scientific" claptrap in his 1995 hook. Red Earth, White Lies.^^ The desire of the eurosupremacist old guard to reassert the full measure of its accustomed primacy, marginalizing and eventually repealing the insurrectionary scholarship of the past thirty years, could not be more obvious. In this, however, the hegemonists may well be fighting a losing battle. Having long since achieved the critical mass requisite to its survival, the indigenist intellectual insurgency instigated by Deloria and his colleagues has by now reached a certain maturity and carries with it its own momentum.*' Its epistemological contours have been in large part described, its analytical paradigms refined, its "decolonizing methodologies" honed to a fine edge.'" At this juncture, a third generation of what Seneca social philosopher John Mohawk once called the "American Indian intelligentsia" has come into its own, having taken up the conceptual tools forged by its predecessors and employed them in ways hitherto overlooked or unattempted, simultaneously fieshing out the body of what has come before and opening up entirely new lines of inquiry.

Native Americans, Archaeologists, and the Mounds One of the more substantive contributors among the newcomers has been the

xxiv NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

Seneca-descended scholar, Barbara Alice Mann, whose superb in-depth study, Iroquoian Women: The Gantowisas, published in 2000, quickly claimed its rightful status both as the definitive treatment of its subject matter and as an exemplar of autochthonous historiography. Actually, as Mann herself has insisted, these two attainments should be considered inseparable; it was her scrupulous reliance upon the information and interpretive modes lodged within the specific context/tradition she depicts that allowed her not only to identify and debunk a welter of anthropological and eurofeminist fallacies concerning the gantowisas (i.e., the Iroquoian woman acting in her official capacities), but, in correcting them, to enucleate a far more accurate historical analysis than any previously produced on the topic." The same integrity of method has been enunciated elsewhere in Mann's published writings, most strongly in her Debating Democracy, coauthored with Johansen and Grinde in 1998,'^ and is equally apparent in the pair of books she has edited.'^ The present volume. Native Americans, Archaeologists, and the Mounds, is a tour de force surpassing even Iroquoian Women in its breadth and significance. Displaying conversance with an astonishingly broad range of traditional understandings as well as the relevant corpus of eurocentrist literature ("scientific" and otherwise), Mann compellingly demonstrates, time after time, that the former are vastly more consistent with available evidence than are the latter. She is thus able not only to reconstruct the reality of Mound-Builder culture in the Ohio River valley far more coherently and convincingly than have past researchers, but to offer the beginnings of an overall history of the interactivity of these ill-perceived and oft-ignored people with their more familiar modem descendants to both the north and the south (i.e., the Haudenosaunee, Cherokee, Lenape, Shawnee, and others).'" In the course of her exposition, the author takes up several of the themes touched upon in the second section of this foreword, elaborating them in far greater detail and releasing thereby something closer to the full aroma of the fecal absurdity with which the perpetually triumphalist purveyors of eurosupremacist dogma have habitually larded themselves. Along the way, she chronicles how archaeologists, in particular, have long asserted and still seek to maintain control over the artifacts and skeletal remains interred in the mounds, mainly as a means of obscuring the contrived and often ludicrous nature of their own interpretive schemas.'^ In a sense, then, it would be fair to say that Native Americans, Archaeologists, and the Mounds serves as a complement to and, in some ways, an amplification/extension of Deloria's Red Earth, White Lies. There is, however, more to it than that.

FOREWORD XXV

With a flourish guaranteed to bring a smile to the lips of the now-aging AIMsters of the early 1970s, Mann devotes her epilogue to providing a sort of "minimanual" on how people indigenous to the Ohio River region might most effectively apply tried-and-tme activist techniques to the task of wresting the intellectual/spiritual/material heritage vested in the mounds away from, not only the scientian disinformationalists of mainstream anthropology, but also the golf course managers, strip-mall operators, real estate "developers," and other such predators who have increasingly overrun, desecrated, and too often destroyed them altogether. One can almost hear echoes of the Mohawk Warrior Society's pronouncements at Oka in 1990—the protracted confrontation there, after all, was in large part the result of local Euroamericans asserting their "right" to situate a golf course atop a Native burial ground—in much of what she has to say on this score.'* The author's structuring her book as she has enables her to accomplish several things. Apart from the importance of her already noted reclamation of indigenous history—^no small feat in itself—her emphatic placement of the mounds' significance in contemporary as well as historical context indicates the firmness of Mann's grounding in a genuinely Native conception of temporal unity (tying the integrity of the past to that of the future through the transitory medium of the present).'^ In this manner, she explicates the imperative underlying recent repatriation efforts (e.g., "Kennewick Man") in ways that transcend hackneyed appeals to "respect for ancestors" and the like, merging her own immediate preoccupation with the fate of the mounds into that of peoples elsewhere on the continent who aspire to protect or redeem their burial places, and thence with the wider struggle to present and (re)establish Native control over sacred geography of other sorts.'* From there, it is but the shortest of conceptual steps, steps most readers will likely be capable of making, to the questions of indigenous land rights more generally and, finally, the right to sovereignty itself. The thrust of such emic logic is at once inexorable and compelling. Had Mann stopped there, Native Americans, Archaeologists, and the Mounds would already have been guaranteed a secure niche as a milestone of its genre. Her decision to push further, then, indicates the firmness of her understanding that the purpose of scholarly activity is not just to interpret the world but to change it." By not simply advancing her criticque as a call to action, but instead fusing it in her epilogue to concrete manifestations of the action itself, she lifts the book out of the domain of mere academic endeavor and places it squarely within the realm of the praxical.'"" Correspondingly, she removes

xxvi NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

herself from the queues of institutional time-servers and petty paper-pushers espousing the need of "knowledge for knowledge's sake," taking a well earned place within the ranks of those rightly referred to in a Gramscian sense as "organic intellec-tuals.""" Barbara Mann's (re)presentations of Native North America are thus emblematic of indigenist scholarship at its very finest. In her unequivocal dedication to "reclaiming the indigenous voice and vision," as the Mi'kmaq educator Marie Battiste has put it,'°^ Mann strives for nothing less than a wholesale "decolonization of the mind," not only among the peoples indigenous to this continent and the world, but among our colonizers, as well.'°^ Through work such as hers, the seeds of liberation are planted. From these seeds can grow an incalculably better future for our coming generations, oppressed and oppressor alike. In her pursuit of these worthy goals, Barbara has much exceeded the portal of what is usually described as "success." Far more importantly, she has fulfilled her responsibilities as a human being. In her own Seneca tradition, no less than in that of my Cherokee people, to do so is the greatest of all possible attainments.

Ward Churchill Boulder, Colorado August, 2002

INTRODUCTION: ON RIDING THAT UNDEAD HORSE OF NATIVE DISCOURSE

It is very frustrating for those who do not come from a western perspective to talk to those who do, because Euroamericans impose rigid rules of discourse, from which no dispensation is allowed. First, all terms must be western terms. Second, any departure from western metanarratives is construed as a failure of comprehension on the part of the nonwestem speaker. Third, all "alien" ideas must be immediately restructured so as to fit into western preconceptions, even if it means destroying the content of the original idea. Finally, only western discourse formats are allowed.' Any refiisal to use the impatient, stripped-down mode of hasty data exchange that passes for discussion in the west is sure to bring down a hailstorm of criticism, as though academics really did have something better to do than get acquainted with the ways of the rest of the world. There is a fair amount of narcissism in this code, bred, I suspect, by the casual assumption that western culture constitutes the universal yardstick against which every other culture is properly measured and understood. Academia's pretense of multiculturalism aside, the fact remains that western scholars continue to make little or no effort to comprehend nonwestem thought. Consequently, wild misapprehensions of Others' work—fonned at first glance and then quickly spouted at the next academic conference—are routinely passed about as searing insight into it. This careless wisdom is then quoted by graduate students, the surest method of etching it into stone for ensuing generations. Meantime, the actual content of the Otherwork is missed entirely. Thus, for instance, William Wells Brown's Clotel, or the President's Daughter (1853) is gingerly avoided in literature classes, often without even exploring the titular reference to the long-standing oral tradition among African

2 NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

Americans of Thomas Jefferson's toying with his female slaves—^plural. Instead, the novel is bashed for its failure to observe Aristotelian principles of storytelling, such as keeping to a small cast of characters or presenting a "unified" plot, when, in fact, critics ought to trot to the library for the ten minutes it would take them to discover that Brown, an African American exslave, was simply spinning story cycles out from a lineage core, in the manner ofthe African griot, or oral traditionalist. The matriarch, Currer O, acts as the center. To her circle are attached the lineage circles of her daughters, Althesa and Clotel oOo, and attached to their circles are the story circles ofthe various people with whom they come into contact ^SoOc^fi, until the novel closes with the final lineage circle of Mary o, the daughter of Clotel, niece of Althesa, and granddaughter of Currer ^oOoO"**- There is shape to this novel, and a very traditionally African shape, but westem critics cannot see past Aristotle to the griot. Consequently, the novel languishes on the back shelves as a curiosity, noteworthy for having been written by a self-taught exslave, but no more. The failure to appreciate that people are speaking out of their own cultures literally dominates westem critiques, even when an "ethnic" work becomes acclaimed over time. For instance. Woman Warrior (1976) by Maxine Hong Kingston was clearly written as left-over history, a very old Chinese technique that takes whatever notes and tidbits are left unused after a formal history has been composed and lumps them together as a sort of literature stew. Similarly, Louise Erdrich was obviously going through her winter counts in constmcting her earliest trio of novels. Love Medicine (1984), The Beet Queen (1986), and Tracks (1988), that is, she was pulling together all ofthe individual stories of a community to create the group's common history, a technique of Plains peoples. So little do critics appreciate the nonwestem framework in play, however, that many remain bewildered by Tracks, the most Anishinabe of Erdrich's early novels. Rather than taking the fifteen minutes required to look up Anishinabe concepts of shamanic shape-shifling and wapano rituals, the better to understand Pauline Puyat, a central character, critics put her antics down to simple insanity. The upshot of one-shot criticism is that the acclaim now offered to Kingston and Erdrich by many westem critics borders on insult. They are racially patronizing these authors, not critically appreciating them. The same, effortless insularity also guides critiques of nonfiction works by nonwestem scholars, and woe betide any who step outside of the intellectual comfort zone ofthe West. They will be marginalized, derided, and trivialized by those safely inside the comfort zone. The price of an outsider's transition

INTRODUCTION 3

from the periphery to the core of westem academia is abandonment of her culture to assume a new, patently false consciousness that does not offer any challenge to the Euroamerican status quo. I cannot declare this loudly enough: Anyone who believes that the drive to "christianize and civilize the Indian" halted early in the twentieth century needs to spend a little time walking the hallowed halls of academia. The craze did not end; it just morphed. Today, it comes back as readers' comments that the language is too direct and should be toned down; that only westem scholars are trustworthy sources; that "genocide" is too strong a word to characterize governmental policies toward Native America; that, since the Indians lost to the cowboys, there is no point "beating a dead horse," that is, in detailing unsavory histories that embarrass Euroamericans. Sorry, but that horse ain't dead; he's just resting. He is, moreover, THE vehicle of Native discourse, which requires all elements ofthe discussion to be pulled into the common light for extensive examination. The four hooves ofthe horse are boldness, tradition, truth, and rooting, all essential elements of proper discourse. Native-style. First, bold language is a gesture of respect to one's listener, whereas mushmouthed, euphemistic discourse is evidence of a weak mind or, worse, deception. Consequently, it is the duty of a speaker to be clear and straightforward. Second, traditional knowledge and vantage points are essential if a Native explication is to be offered. Third, inaccurate descriptions result in ineffective analyses. Since tmth is necessary to accuracy, tmth must be told, even though it might not flatter some of the parties to the discussion. (Here, the westem propensity to confuse tmthtelling with deliberately hurtfiil affront must be filtered out.) Finally, rooting is indispensable to historical comprehension. Rooting is the practice of going back to the very beginning of an issue, to the place where it was conceived, watching its birth, and then tracing the twists and tums of its progress into the present. Typically, westemers have little patience with this process, preferring to start at some later, arbitrarily chosen midpoint, so that, whenever Natives attempt to follow the rooting method of development, they are bmsquely advised to "get to the point." This demand has been peevishly slung at greater speakers than I. When the immortal Muscogee speaker, Chitto Harjo, tumed up unexpectedly before the Congressional Select Committee hearings on Oklahoma statehood on 23 November 1906, to object to this new seizure of Indian Territory, he tried to root the issue for the Committee. "I am telling you now about what was done since 1492," he began, only to be cut off abruptly by the Chairman ofthe Select

4 NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

Committee, Senator Clarence D. Clark of Wyoming. "All this is unintelligible," Clark snapped, "and we cannot spend the afternoon in this way. We want you to condense everything. We cannot commence back with the time of the discovery of America," he huffed, in truly western disgust. Chitto Harjo persisted, however, explaining the Native concept of rooting to Clark. "I am going to make a foundation for what I have to say, for, of course, a thing has to have a root before it can grow."^ Like westerners before and after him, however, Clark obdurately refused to "waste" the time required to watch a thing grow from its root. This western unwillingness to spend time getting to know an issue is usually characterized by westerners as positive mediation, to "keep the discussion from spinning out of control." The consequence of this western taste for haste (and control) is that discussions are never allowed to mature. Because people hop in and, before their feet are even wet, out of an issue, they typically absorb little beyond its crudest outline, and even this is distorted by their flat refusal to linger long enough to appreciate the proportions of the matter at hand. In the attentiondeficit-disordered west, they who advocate getting a close look are thumped and dumped as irrelevant. As a result, westerners shoot from the lip, and then scratch their heads in dismay at the accidental casualties lining their wake. A sitting president can obliviously shout "Crusade!" at Islam, without the slightest appreciation of the intricate and painful historical associations that the word carries for Muslims. When the faux pas is pointed out, he can then chorus "hunh?" along with his fellow Americans. This arrogant oblivion needs to stop, and, if crashing face first into the running pony of Native discourse is the only way to stop it, then I regret the bruises but not the lesson. Western scholars must begin to look both ways before they cross the Other. Alertness can only benefit us all. I will say, there is this advantage to being a scholar: Unlike those on the front lines of life, I am not likely to be shot dead on the spot for failing to comply with irrational western demands. Therefore, in the following pages, I will ride that undead horse of Native discourse, being direct and unapologetic in my use of bold language and oral tradition. I will also tell the unvarnished truth, as the best way to hit upon credible conclusions. Most importantly, I will root my discussion, starting where the issue of Native Americans, archaeologists, and the mounds began, to trace its convoluted path into the present, where it is a living issue, whose breath is still warm and moist upon the earth.

1

The "Vulture Culture": Anthropology "Collects" Native America

Conventional wisdom has it that theory precedes action. I do not agree, at least, not as far as the history of colonialism goes, for there, action demonstrably preceded either theological or scientific storytelling. The Spaniards had killed millions before the Church entertained the theory that Natives were a lower, soulless species. The British settlers had spitefully desecrated many Native cemeteries before anthropology discovered the need to measure the unearthed bones. The point of theory in both instances was simply to form a buffer between deed and responsibility, preferably before remorse set in. For this purpose, it did not matter much which the storyteller was, theology or science, just so long as deed was wedged apart from conscience, so that the two might appear unconnected. To understand the "Vulture Culture"—i.e., the western obsession with Native American death—^readers must attain a twofold perspective on NativeEuropean relations.' On the one hand, they must notice the man behind the European curtain, amplifying its stories of conquest and colonialism, first through theology and then through science. On the other hand, they must watch the heart-stopping deeds of settlers as they raced from orchestrated massacre to governmental grave robbing. At that point, readers will see that anthropology and its subdisciplines, archaeology and ethnology, did not burst forth whole one day from the brain of science, as rumored; they gestated for centuries in the womb of earlier Christian narratives. Consequently, I hold that the history of anthropology begins on 12 October 1492, when Europe suddenly found itself unequivocably and irrevocably face to face with something its cultural story frames could neither explain nor accommodate. For the first two centuries, the Church gamely tried to design

6 NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

and articulate the stories of colonialism, but, by the eighteenth century, the scale of mayhem in the Americas outpaced even the invention of Christian thinkers, robbing the old theological story frames of much of their explanatory power. Abandoning colonialism in consequence was economically unthinkable, however, so Europeans flocked to the new storyteller, "science," which now shouldered the duty of rationalizing European behavior in the Americas. For this purpose, science found that it did not actually need new stories but only new diction, for the old stories of Christian theology—minus the morality —remained perfectly serviceable once they were outfitted in new garb, something suitable for rough going in a new land. Some will object that theology and science are bitter rivals, but, to Native eyes, the vaunted dispute between westem Church and westem science is no more than an intemecine power stmggle. The results for Native America will remain constant, regardless of which side triumphs, for Christianity and anthropology both serve the same master, Eurosupremacy. The appearance of rivalry between them has always been an optical illusion, another example of what the old Lenape dubbed "the scissors strategy," a European tactic the Lenape likened to the operation of a pair of scissors.^ The two sharp blades of Church and science sit opposite one another, looking for all the world as if they will destroy each other in closing. In fact, however, they only cut what comes between them—^Native America. The menacing blades are not enemies but collaborators, cooperating to attain the same goal. The actual distinction between Christianity and anthropology is in their consecutive eras: The Church held sway as the appointed storyteller from the fifteenth through the seventeenth centuries; science has held sway since. If anthropology reeks of respectability today, it is because the field performs the same valued service that Christianity once performed, justifying colonialism. Some will also claim "objectivity" for science, insisting that its purpose is to strip facts of their preexsting story. I answer that the notion of science as a pristine force, somehow standing outside of the political winds of westem culture, proceeds from the propaganda mill of science, itself, not from any observable facts of its history. In all its forms, but especially in anthropology, science was the primary vehicle of the colonial interface with race from the eighteenth century forward.^ It has, therefore, always been the handmaiden of colonialism, for archaeological theory followed the popular social constmcts of the westem middle classes rather than any thoughtfiil examination of evidence, as George Marcus and Michael Fischer argued in Anthropology as Cultural Critique (1986), in a theme picked up and demonstrated at length by

THE "VULTURE CULTURE" 7

Bruce G. Trigger throughout his History of Archaeological Thought (1989)." To serve colonialism, anthropology, ethnology, and archaeology did not shrink from criminality—murder, theft, and grave robbing. It is only because Euroamericans are routinely kept from the gory details of European invasion and all that it entailed for Native America that anthropology can maintain its halo of scholarship. Once known, its treatment of Native America induces nothing so much as a gag reflex. Its gruesome "collections" of human remains secreted away in academic institutions, public museums, and private hands are all ill-gotten gain, acquired in stomach-churning ways that call into question the very existence of anthropology. This is old news to Native Americans, but the mind-boggling facts of "collecting" are seldom imparted to the general public, which supplies the funding, students, and patrons of museums and universities. Indeed, even people working in museurns and universities often do not know what is tucked away in the nooks and crannies of their own institutions. Take, for instance, Douglas J. Preston, who worked for the American Museum of Natural History in New York City in the last quarter of the twentieth century. Preston was assigned to an office just one, thin wallboard removed from a hoard of South American miunmies, warehoused in tin and glass cases. He only found out who his grisly neighbors were on the day that an unbearable stench wafting down the hall drove him to inquire into what the anthropologists were up to next door. As it turned out, they were remothballing the mummies to ward off insects, allowing the vile smell of their work to drifl over into his office.' Preston was stunned to learn for the first time that his near neighbors were human remains, comprising a collection so vast that the Museum was pressed for storage area, even using office space for the purpose, with some remains jammed into cardboard boxes. No one was able to tell Preston the exact number of human remains held by the American Museum of Natural History, but, after studying the matter, he made an educated guess of 25,000. He likened the collection to a "secret," and it was just that, America's dirty little secret, stacked floor to ceiling in cardboard boxes lining the basements of all the country's major Museums.* In 1988, the American Association of Museums reported to Senate Select Committee of Indian Affairs that 43,306 Native American skeletal remains were being kept in one hundred sixty-three museums. The Smithsonian Institution, alone, was storing 18,600 human remains.' These figures were from museums reporting on themselves. Natives calculate the total bone holdings as being much higher. In 1976, Roger Finzel, counsel for American Indians

8 NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

Against Desecration, cited up to 600,000 remains, counting all those verified as being held in museums, laboratories, and universities.' His figure did not include private collections. In Ohio, alone, in 1995, the private Vietzen "museum" (in fact, a small shed behind the Vietzen home) literally boasted of holding one million "items," many of them human remains, looted from Native burials.' Although the pretense at museums and universities, then and now, was that remains of all human populations, not just Natives, were gathered for "study," the percentages tell a different story. Natives constitute less than 1% of the total American population, but 54.4% of the Smithsonian's 1988 collection was of Native remains.'" This is a typical statistic. As of 1988, in just in the Great Plains of the United States (the region between the Mississippi River and the Continental Divide of the Rockies), 52,540 individual skeletons, nearly all Native, were pulled from 5,124 cemeteries. This figure accounts for 45% ofthe current, "legitimate" bone loot in the United States, and underreports the number of disturbed graves, since only "clearly identified skeletons" made the cut." This figure does not begin to account for the tens of thousands of skeletons removed from their burials mounds east ofthe Mississippi or the perhaps hundreds of thousands pulled out of their graves over the course of two centuries by farmers, potsherders, looters, hobbyists, collectors, and other itinerant grave robbers. Disgraceful as it is, the raw bone count tells only half of the story. The other half is how the bones got into the collections in the first place: through unrestrained grave robbing. From the late eighteenth through the better part of the twentieth century, ripping Native remains out of cemeteries, or seizing them fresh from a battlefield, was considered science, not necrophilia, with settlers actively encouraged by the tenets of "race science" and the practices of archaeology to desecrate Native graves for the express purpose of proving Native Americans biologically inferior to Euroamericans. The suspicion and ire now harbored by most Natives toward most anthropologists—and, especially, toward archaeologists—derives rather directly from these nauseating facts of Euroamerican history, with Natives openly wondering whether a discipline conceived in colonialism and weaned on racism can ever grow up into anything more honorable. Pressed for explanations on their collections, their methods, and their theories, curators, physical anthropologists, and archaeologists typically stare into middle distance, mumbling about the claims of science or the need to keep samples on hand in case new research techniques arise. Squirming visibly at the mention of methods, they attempt to defend their forerunners by claiming that

THE "VULTURE CULTURE" 9

their theories and methods conformed with the standards of yesteryear and that it is noxious to judge the past by the standards of the present.'^ Although there is a gram of merit in the argument decrying ex post facto judgments, what is lost in the fracas is that, in their grave robbing if not in their racist theorizing, the original "collectors" most absolutely did not abide by the Christian European standards of their time but demonstrably outraged them. Grave robbing, not to mention murder and theft, have always been against Christian European law. A close look at the development of anthropology is like a close look at sausage-making, a sickening sight. There is less meat and more slime than one might readily imagine. Anthropology arose in a time when all that it took to be regarded as a scholar was to have been bom a man into the leisure classes and to have gotten a smattering of Greek and Latin grammar.'^ Not even intellect much mattered, for no special talent was required to root around in graveyards. Any "gentleman" was seen as prima facie qualified to dig up Native cemeteries, or rather, to hire it done, while those aspiring to be gentlemen often took up the hobby as a means of proving their qualifications for social advancement. Digging up "Injuns" became a favorite pastime of the antiquarians, those collectors of ghoulish "curiosities"—"freaks of nature"—which they kept in "cabinets" to be opened for light, after dinner entertainment to aid digestion. These were the ancestors of today's archaeologists. The weakness of the antiquarian claim to scholarship did not go unrecognized in the early nineteenth century. In fact, when the Swiss immigrant and anthropologist Albert Gallatin (1761-1849) founded the American Ethnological Society as its president in 1842, it was in an attempt to bring some sort of discipline to the discipline. He managed that, kind of, but the primary assumption of who was fitted to do research segued neatly from the antiquarians to the budding anthropologists. They continued to be leisure class, Christian Euroamericans, almost always men of considerable political infiuence and social standing.'" Thus, when Gallatin's Society became a bulwark of Smithsonian studies, it was not because the Society of American Ethnology was the ablest academy around, but because it was the most bourgeoise ethnological association around.'' If anthropology is something less than pure "science" (whatever that is), it is not even original in its seminal propositions, for science did not arise out of "progress." It was bom of political necessity. Although modem science does not like to admit it, to a staggering and ultimately comical degree, science relies upon preexisting Christian story frames that it pretends to have discarded, for.

10 NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

once the authority of the Church to prescribe the story frames of Europe had slipped, science mshed in to supply the deficiency with new frames for the old stories. Thus, most of today's anthropological theories can be traced directly back to the first Christian chroniclers, puzzling their heads over how to square up what the Bible had told them of Adam, Eve, and Noah with the contradictory evidence of what their own eyes had seen in Africa, Asia, and, especially, the Americas. Not the least of these old stories in new frames centered on the biblical explanations of human existence, including the stories of • genesis in the Garden of Eden, with humans and animals created separately; • the "Ladder of Creation," which arranged life in an ascending hierarchy with humans at the top; • the dispersal of Noah's sons, who then populated the rest ofthe world; and • the "ten lost tribes of Israel," descendants of Eden, lost in space. The stories of Eden and the Ladder of Creation resurfaced in the theory of devolution, or degeneracy, and the later theory of evolution, both leading to the competing "scientific" theories of monogenesis (one human creation) and polygenesis (multiple human creations). Meanwhile, the story of Noah's flood and his sons combined with the tale of the "lost tribes" to reappear as the "scientific" Bering Strait land bridge theory of first entry into the Americas. None of these stories started out as science, yet all were ultimately subsumed by anthropology, ethnology, and archaeology, usually, with very little amendment. Euroamericans swallowed them whole because, hinging as they did on familiar theological themes, they impersonated "common sense." When the Spaniards first arrived, they were not concemed with science. Their thinking was unabashedly Christian in content. Its goal was to overcome the shock that first contact had occasioned Christian theology, a blow that would ultimately undermine the death grip ofthe Church around the European throat. Although the feebleness ofthe Church did not become obvious imtil the eighteenth century, by the sixteenth century, just how the Americas came to have been populated was a buming question, for no such place was mentioned in any biblical account. Concluding that there was something amiss in biblical traditions was as yet unthinkable, so that biblical correlations had to be found—pronto. One biblical lynchpin was the where and when of Creation. The continued

THE "VULTURE CULTURE" 11

influence of Christian thought in westem science is nowhere more entirely obvious, yet more studiously ignored, than in the supposedly scientific theory of the recent peopling of the Americas. The 5,000-year date of the first entry of Natives into the Americas, fiercely pushed in the first half of the twentieth century and still found in some of the more benighted tomes of the later twentieth century, is really just a rehash of the old Ussher and Septuagint chronologies of the Church, which had conclusively dated the age of the earth at circa 6,000 years. In his ambitious Annals of the World (1658), James Ussher, the Englishappointed Archishop of Armagh, Ireland, began the dating game by using the Julian calendar to calculate the exact date of Creation, which he found to have occurred on Sunday, 23 October 4004 Before the Common Era (B.C.E.)'* The altemate Septuagint chronology, based on the Septuagint Bible (an often fractured Greek translation of the Hebrew Bible) finessed up a nearly identical earth age of 6,000 years. These rival Christian chronologies were THE reason that science originally insisted that Native Americans could not possibly have been in the "New World" for more than 6,000 years. Obviously, Natives could not have arrived in the Americas before the Christian god had created the earth. It was on this basis that early scientists first declared that Natives had not been in the Americas for more than 5,000 years, which left 1,000 years for wandering about Eurasia, first. Once the geologist George Lyell had argued convincingly for an immense age for the earth in Principles of Geology (1830-1833), the temporal cat was out of the Septuagint bag, so there was really no further scientific reason for pressing the 5,000 year limitation on Native occupation of the Americas. Nevertheless, in a feat of scholarly schizophrenia, nineteenth-century scientists accepted Lyell's lengthened time frame in every context but Native American antiquity, where they continued to insist that Natives had only just arrived, themselves—geologically speaking—^when Columbus showed up to claim the Americas for their most Christian majesties, Ferdinand and Isabella of Spain. This posture continued doggedly into the twentieth century. As Edwin Wilmsen noted in 1965, dissenting scholars were actively silenced on the issue. Indeed, between 1890 and 1925, "the very thought" that Native Americans had been in the Americas since the Pleistocene Era was "virtually taboo."" Thus, the short-tenure position derives not from the evidence at hand, which argues sharply for long tenure, but from the biases of westem scientists that were heavily conditioned by the old Bible-based theories of Ussher and his ilk. It was only after radiocarbon dating of the Folsom and Clovis points

12 NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

(arrowheads finally recognized as ancient in 1926 and 1932, respectively) that the date of Native habitation was gmdgingly pushed back to around 10,000 years.'* Although this new date marks a significant advance in westem thinking conceming the antiquity of Native populations, it is still shy ofthe tme mark by tens of thousands—and, perhaps, hundreds of thousands—of years. Scientists heatedly deny that their thinking is theologically conditioned, but the fact remains that they continue to downplay, deride, and dismiss serious evidence, such as habitation sites in North and South America going back to well before Europe was (officially) populated and stone tools from the Hueyatlaco archaeological site in Valsequillo, Mexico, discovered in 1959 and, in 1981, dated by a U.S. geological survey team at 250,000 years old." The enduring resistance of archaeologists to the deep antiquity of the Native presence in the Americas was (and is) emotional, anything but a disinterested position. The short and the long of it is this: The shorter the Native tenure in North America, the less heinous land seizure and genocide seem to the Euroamerican beneficiaries of historical crime. Antiquity was not the only conundrum for European theologians, who passed their solutions along to science. From the sixteenth century on, churchmen were bedeviled by the question of how Natives got into the Americas without any godly marching orders. Speculation on the matter has not changed much for westem scholars since Fray de Acosta first mused on it in 1590, in his Historia natural y moral de las Indias. As have all subsequent westem scholars, wittingly or not, Acosta used biblical accounts as his starting point. The nagging, and potentially heretical, question of separate human creations had already been voiced by Spanish polygenecists, a school that believed in one creation per race and held that Native Americans were not really human beings, ergo Native ignorance of Christianity did not pose any threat to the veracity of biblical history. This was the view favored by the Spanish until Bartoleme de Las Casas got into the act, challenging the early racists.^" Nevertheless, polygenesis continued to be a theologically acceptable position as late as the seventeenth century, when the Abbe Francesco Saverio Clavigero boldly announced in his History of Mexico (1607) that "The Americans do not derive their origin from any people now existing in the ancient world, or at least there is no grounds to affirm it."^' Acosta wrote in large measure to put this heresy-prone question to bed. In so doing, he made a lot of a priori assumptions, not the least of them being that the Christian scriptures were historically accurate and that his Christian god not

THE "VULTURE CULTURE" 13

only existed but also was necessarily everyone else's creator. Assuming fiirther that the Christian god would not have provided for two Noahs, Acosta decided, first, that Natives had to have traveled from Eurasia to the Americas and, second, that their passage had to have been either "por maropor tierra," ("by land or by sea")." Thus armed with a conclusion before he had considered the evidence, Acosta quickly rejected the possibility of sea voyages, on the plea that the ancestors of the Natives were categorically incapable of feats of navigation that were difficult even for superior Europeans armed with loadstones. Acosta then hit upon the happy proposition that "los hombres de las Indias fueron de Europa o de Asia" ("the people of the Americas came from Europe or from Asia") and had, perforce, arrived by foot." This postulation had the salutory effect of not contradicting Christian scriptures, which indicated that all humanity had descended from Adam through those who had survived the fiood of Noah. Pressed by this theological necessity, Acosta determined that "es necesidad buscar camino por donde hayan pasado del Viejo Mundo al Nuevo" ("it is necessary to look for the route by which they might have passed from the Old World into the New").^"* After much biblical reasoning, Acosta concluded that Asia and the Americas necessarily "sejuntan y continuan oalo menos se avencinan y allegan mucho" ("are connected and continuous or at least are in conformity and come very close together")." He justified his speculation on the grounds that much global territory had yet to be explored by Europeans but that it was certain that the land north of La Florida—^the Spanish term for all of the American southeast between the Atlantic Ocean and the Mississippi River—continued north for a long way, although to where, no one yet knew. Acosta did not, therefore, scruple to add that "toda la tierra se junta un continua en algunaparte" ("all of the land comes together as a contiguity at some point").^* His imaginary land bridge conjured up, Acosta next had Native Americans plodding across it on foot, little by little, spreading out until they became the many nations of the Americas." Of course, the one way sign on his fanciftil land bridge kept anyone already in the Americas from crossing over into Asia. This, then, is the origin of the theory of the land bridge at the Bering Strait. It began in theological necessity and, for all the overlay of scientific discourse on the matter since, has not progressed an iota off dead center since 1590, when it was first propounded. Because, as Bruce Trigger has observed, archeologists "seem to build more on what their predecessors concluded about the past than on the evidence on which these conclusions were based," the land bridge has

14 NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

transmuted from the desperate midrash of a sixteenth-century Spanish cleric into the scientific dogma of twenty-first century archaeologists.^' It is grimly amusing to watch modem scholars lauding Acosta's conjecture of a land bridge as "an astounding piece of work" that "very perceptively dealt with possible altemative hypotheses in a most scientific way," simply because Acosta was saying the same thing that they are saying today, discarding the now embarrassing Atlantean theories of American origins along the way.^' Had, however, the Atlantis theory of Native America prevailed during the nineteenth century, these same modem scientists would be lauding its first articulator as perceptive and eerily ahead of his time. As matters stand, however, Acosta's side carried the day, his theological argument informing all later speculation on the matter. Although scientists today really do not have a clue as to when, how, or by whom the Americas were first peopled, they talk determinedly as if they do, just like Acosta, spinning out fabulous stories of recent arrivals across mysterious land bridges.^" Most do not even know where the theory came from. When Vine Deloria, Jr., first looked into the question in the 1990s, he found that scholars "simply begin with the assumption that the Bering Strait migration doctrine was proved a long time ago and there is no need to plow familiar ground."^' At first, Deloria accepted the notion, too: Since these schotars were so confident of the validity of the land bridge doctrine I assumed that there was, somewhere in scholarly publications, a detailed article which cited evidence and arguments that proved, beyond a reasonable doubt, that Paleo-Indians had at one time crossed from Asia into the Westem Hemisphere. I was unable to find anything of this nature."

I have been similarly unable to tum up any such scholarship. Instead, what I found was that, once the Danish sea captain, Vitus Bering, had in 1728 stumbled across the strait named for him, philosophers took his "discovery" as the conclusive proof of Acosta's theory, not as the start of real investigation, evidence to be tested for its likelihood. By the time John Filson's popular Discovery and Settlement ofKentucke appeared in 1784, the theory was already taken for granted. Natives' being similar to "Tartars of the N. Eastem parts of Asia, together with a presumption, which has long possessed the leamed, that Asia and America were united, or at least separated only by a narrow sea, has inclined the more refiecting part of mankind to the opinion, that the tme origin of the Indians is from this quarter," Filson announced." The bandwagon in motion, altemate theories were trampled in the msh to embrace what was regarded as new confirmation of biblical history. Notably, it was not necessarily eighteenth- and nineteenth-century scientists who espoused the land bridge theory at first—they entertained theories of Atlantis, the "ten lost tribes," and

THE "VULTURE CULTURE"1 5

polygenesis. It was the Christian middle classes, relieved at this new proof of the infallibility of the Bible, who stampeded public thought across a Bering land bridge whose very existence had yet (and still has) to be demonstrated. In fact, the good early scientists were quite skeptical of theologically based thinking. In the eighteenth century, Benjamin Smith Barton, a trained scientist, a professor of medicine, natural history, and botany at the University of Pennsylvania, and a frequent contributor to the American Philosophical Society's joumals, began to think that the biblical account of creation might be a fantasy rather than a certainty. The multiplicity of species and their apparently vast migrations, if biblical history were true, gave him pause for thought. From his bird-watching perch in Pennsylvania, his lively mind began to question its Christian catechism by noting that some species of birds were utterly unique to America: This is an interesting fact, which does not favour the opinion of those writers who have imagined, that all animals and all vegetables were originally created in the old worid, from whence they have been spread over every portion of the earth: an opinion which ought never to have been advanced by philosophers; and which it is not likely will prevail among those naturalists who observe with attention, and deliver their sentiments without reserve or timidity.^^

Barton's training led him to other astute observations. In 1798, for instance, he argued for the absolute antiquity of Native America based on linguistic evidence, an argument resurfacing today.'^ Here, Barton was directly replying to Ussher's ridiculous creation date of 4004 B.C.E. and its preclusion of earlier arrivals.^* Even given his skepticism, however. Barton felt pressured to explain the Native presence in the Americas in terms of land bridges. His theory of great antiquity did not rule out an Asian migration to the Americas. Barton thus brought up the 1776 Kamchatka voyages of Captain James Cook, venturing that if the two continents of Asia and America be separated at all, it is only by a narrow streight [sic]. So that from this side also, inhabitants may have passed into America: and the resemblance between the Indians of America and the Eastem inhabitants of Asia would induce us to conjecture, that the fomier are the descendants of the latter, or the latter of the

It is worth noting that, unlike Acosta and most modem scholars. Barton did not assume that travel could only have happened in one direction. He left open the possibility that Asia had been peopled by Americans. Ultimately, even assuming an interchange of some livestock between Asia and North America, Barton concluded that two separate creations were required given the distinctions in fauna between the "Old" and "New" worlds.^*

16 NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

In 1837, another skeptic, Samuel Gardner Drake (1798-1875), a proponent of polygenesis, likewise questioned the recent arrival of Natives into the Americas but, this time, took direct aim at the weakness of the Bering Strait land bridge theory.^' In 1837, "crossing the sea at Kamschatka [sic], or the Straits of Tschutski, either upon the fields of ice or by canoes" struck Drake as a loopy idea. Not only was such a presumed passage "extremely difficult of comprehension," but there were animals in the Americas unknown in Europe or Asia. Moreoever, "it would be surrising indeed that one half of our planet should have remained without inhabitants during thousands of years, while the other half was peopled.""" He agreed that crossing from "the peninsula of Kamtschatka [sic]" was "the most rational way of getting inhabitants into America, if it must be allowed that it was peopled from the 'Old World,"' but he wondered why it was necessary to assume that, going on to describe how unlikely it was for the tropical species of the Americas to have entered via Siberia!"' More alert to the biblical origins of the land bridge theory than modem scholars, Drake openly quizzed the theological impetus behind it, noting that a Spanish manuscript acquired by a "Doctor Cabrera" favored shipwrecked Phoenicians as the explanation for Native Americans, not because it was very likely but because the peopling of the Americas was being forced into accord with Christian scriptures."^ The commonsense arguments behind Drake's dismissal of theological mminations on the peopling of the Americas still merit consideration. Lacking the common sense demanded by Drake, however, his contemporaries spun out astonishing fantasies on the questions of Native origins and antiquity. The antiquarian James H. McCulloh, a fervent joinedcontinent scholar, agreed with the Scottish historian, William Robertson, whose infiuential History ofAmerica {Mil) argued that Asians had spread to America across the Bering Strait."^ Joined continents was actually the "in" notion of 1829, when McCulloh wrote, with no limits on the land masses that could claim once to have been unified, including England, France, and Atlantis."" Conjoined continents were forged in hot pursuit of monogenesis, the argument that God's original creation had been adequate to people the whole earth. McCulloh's basic argument, echoed by other joined-land adherents, was that [flrom the present appearances of the earth, its islands, and other circumstances connected with them, we do not think it a hasty or rash declaration to say, that we believe, since the deluge, there was land of great extent in the Pacific, Indian, and Atlantic Oceans; no doubt much shattered and broke [51c], yet not to such a degree as to hinder men and animals from roaming through the extended parts. During this state of things, or whilst

THE "VULTURE CULTURE" 17

men and animals were traversing the world, this land was generally submerged; and though numbers of men and animals were doubtless destroyed, yet the new formed islands (fragments of this land,) preserved many; and thus early severed from the rest of the world, these fragments of the human family have remained through successive generations, until the spirit of navigation and modem enterpise once more united the links between them and their brother men/'

MuCulloh unabashedly accepted the biblical flood as fact, for "we must allow time for the animals of Noah's Ark, to increase to considerable numbers, and time to spread and migrate, to any great distances; for instance, to America.'"** Indeed, McCulloh did not hesitate to assign biblical dates to biblical events, which he mistook for history: Creation happened in 5425 B.C.E.; the "deluge," in 3169 B.C.E.; the dispersal from Babel, in 2623 B.C.E., and so forth."' The fact was that the western middle classes were not entirely ready to junk their Bible for the sake of modernity, so, by the late nineteenth century, social pressure in favor of old fashioned monogenesis had conferred the status of a natural fact upon the Bering Strait theory. Once polygenesis faded as the scientific position in the last quarter of the nineteenth century, everyone forgot that the land bridge had originally been invented in the service of monogenetic theology and began treating it as said natural fact, instead. In 1879, for instance, John T. Short stressed the theory as proven in his learned tome on the subject of the origins of Native Americans: "No one can consider the natural certainty of long continued communication between the two continents at Behring's Straits [sic] without being impressed with the truth that that narrow channel served probably as the first highway between the old world and the new, and vice versa. Just as everyone had ignored Barton when he made the same suggestion, no one took Short up on his hint that travel had happened in both directions. The point was, after all, to demonstrate how the Christian god had gotten humans into the Americas, not how he had peopled Asia with Asians. By way of proof that Natives had passed into the Americas from Asia, Short brought up a 1761 translation of a work that included a Chinese history written in 499 of the Common Era (C.E.) by Hoei-Shin, a Buddhist holy man. The work recounted sea voyages to a strange new land, far to the east, that Hoei-Shin called "Fusang.""' Short left unaddressed just how fourteen-hundred-year-old Chinese sea voyages proved foot travel over a nonexistent land bridge four thousand years earlier. Intellectual inertia took over soon after Short wrote, with contradictory evidence shunted aside, and the lack of any positive evidence politely ignored. A land bridge entry into the Americas was now considered to have been

18 NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

established as the route by which one of Noah's sons had entered the continental system. This, in turn, allowed the theory of the so-called "ten lost tribes of Israel" to blossom in pursuit of monogenesis, albeit going through a few permutations before adopting its final form. Originally, the Puritans had taken the role of the Chosen, if not quite Lost, People for themselves, as they came to New Canaan, otherwise known as North America.'" Under this fantasy. Native Americans became the children of the accursed Ham, who was banished for having held his father, Noah, up to ridicule.'' By the eighteenth century, however, the story of Ham was needed to justify American slavery, so Ham took a little turn in his peregrinations, winding up in Africa instead of the Americas. This left nineteenth-century scholars casting about once again to explain the origins of Native Americans, driving them back, once more, into the waiting arms of the sixteenth-century Spaniards. Spanish theoreticians had blithely cross-identified Native Americans as Jews, the descendants of the famed and mysterious "ten lost tribes of Israel." This view was well bruited about by various Spanish authors long before Anglo-Americans began toying with the notion. Its inception was common to both, however, since both groups used biblical accounts as their starting point of information. First suggested in 1585 by Diego Duran, the idea was popularized by both Acosta (who is not lauded for his prescience here) and Tomas de Torquemada, the first Grand Inquisitor of Spain." Failing Ham, nineteenth-century thinkers realized, in a surge of serendipity, that it had been the "lost tribes" that had crossed over the land bridge into the Americas! This theory was heavily championed by James Adair, the eighteenth-century trader who wrote the History of the American Indians (1775) in a fever to track the "lost tribes" to the American southeast, a purpose picked up and extended by the missionary, Elias Boudinot, in A Star in the West (1816). Like the Bering Strait theory of first entry, the fiilmination over the "lost tribes of Israel" was really invented to prop up monogenetic biblical history. Thus, it is not surprising to find the same people hailing the "ten lost tribes" as the ancestors of Native Americans also vigorously defending the Bering Strait crossing." Neither is it surprising to find Samuel Drake complaining that Adair "torture[d] every custom and usage" of the Natives "into a like one of the Jews, and almost every word in their language into a Hebrew one of the same meaning," a sour sentiment that gained ground along with the polygenecists as the nineteenth century wore on.'"* The mortifying connection between the land bridge theory and the ten-lost-

THE "VULTURE CULTURE"19

tribes theory is conveniently forgotten today, but it is not without significance. As Vine Deloria pointed out in 1995, scientific theories are connected at their bases, so that "a shift or collapse of a major scientific doctrine requires a significant adjustment of all subsidiary doctrines that relied on it for their validity."" The major doctrine that the Native inhabitants of the Americas were the "ten lost tribes of Israel" has since cmmbled under the weight of its own lunacy, but the theory devised specifically to make the Jewish American migration possible in the first place—the Bering land bridge theory—remains inexplicably in favor. Once science had conclusively inherited the explanatory chores that the Church had left behind, a noticeable shift occurred from biblical to "scientific" ways of discussing the colonial enterprise. Not the least of these shifts centered on race. Old Christendom had couched its blueprints for colonial power in terms of "spiritual" agendas, such as the pressing question of whether Natives had souls.'* The new discussion dispensed with spirit in favor of metrics. Whereas the Church had once doubted whether Natives were human based on soul, anthropology now doubted whether Natives were human based on body. Just as modem astronomers are chagrined to admit that their science grew out of astrology, modem anthropologists are loathe to acknowledge that their discipline grew out of "scientific" racism. The grotesque story frames at the base of anthropology and, especially, archaeology should give pause to their modem practitioners, but they are more likely to give rise to a determined silence. This is not because the historical sources are not there to demonstrate the central involvement of anthropology and its subdisciplines in creating the lurid "science" of race; it is because the political usefulness of racism is not yet over. As long as the descendants of the settlers continue to reap benefits from the historical seizure of land from the Natives and laborfi-omthe Africans, they have no incentive to acknowledge, frankly and openly, the crimes of their ancestors. Conscience becomes "postcolonial" only when there are no further prospects that colonial crime will pay. Colonial crime was paying handsomely in the eighteenth century, so westem philosophers hurried to "discover" the scientific bases of colonial "success." Race became the byword and the engine of explanation. As Loring Brace, an anthropologist at the University of Michigan, noted in 1994, the "traditional racial groupings" seemed conveniently to "exist at the end points of the old mercantile trade networks," lending an aura of legitimacy to colonialism just as colonial expansion kicked into high gear." By the mid-eighteenth century, the deep thinkers of Europe came to the riveting question with which the

20 NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

Church had earlier grappled, of whether humanity comprised one or several distinct species and whether, if distinct, the races necessarily existed on separate levels of advancement. Generally, two schools of thought arose on the subject of race, one, a French school, and the other, a German. They bounced off one another in a dialogue that pitted French environmentalism against German biological determinism as the scientific stories about race. The French school was headed up by Charles-Louis de Secondat, baron de La Brede et de Montesquieu (1689-1755), as articulated in L 'Esprit des his (1748), translated into English in 1750 as The Spirit of Laws. In this ambitious work, Montesquieu purported to find a direct causal relationship among geographical climate, personalities types, character formation, and general human merit. Briefiy, Montesquieu held that those living in southem climates were naturally given to sloth, promiscuity, irrationality, emotionalism, and dark skin tones, while those in northem climes were cool headed, logical, moral, rational, dispassionate, and light skinned. The high reputation of Montesquieu today rests on his more modem sounding assertions that "tout les hommes naissent egaux" ("all men are bom equal") and "que I'esclavage est contre la nature" ("that slavery is against nature"). Noble formulations both, they sound laudable enough, as long as they are kept safely out of context. In context, they mix fatally with his myth of climate, allowing Montesquieu to justify what he had just condemned. In his mind, hot climates made people lazy ("paresseux"), requiring them to be enslaved. Thus was Montesquieu able to reconcile his instinctive opposition to slavery and belief in natural human equality with the inescapable reality that France, and Europeans generally, were amassing great wealth by means of colonial oppression and slavery. Since most French colonies were in hot climates, Montesquieu's racial "law" of climate served France well.'* Montesquieu had, however, proposed race as a geographical mis/fortune, leaving open the door to racial redemption through relocation. Southemers needed only to move north to cure their mental and moral malaise. This made more northerly Europeans uncomfortable, especially given the racially relaxed sexuality prevalent in French colonies. They responded in two ways: first by noting, with a nasty chuckle, that France was to their south and then applying Montesquieu's ovra pejoratives against the French as "southem" peoples; and, second, by cleaving to an altemative theory coming out of Sweden and Germany. The primary problem with Montesquieu was that he allowed for the possibility of human mutability. This undercut colonialism, which was deeply invested in the proposition that the immutability of Africans and Natives

THE "VULTURE CULTURE" 21

justified both slavery and genocide, or "annihilation" as it was termed in the nineteenth century." The drawbacks of the French school were remedied by the German. Almost simultaneously with Montesquieu, Germanic scientists had been defining race as an "objective" fact, something biological, inherent, discrete, and immutable. This damaging Germanic notion of race was first put forth by the Swedish botanist Carl von Linne, better known today as Carolus Linnaeus (1707-1778). A decade after Montesquieu published his theory of climate, Linnaeus offered up his ovra taxonomic classification of humanity in Systema Naturae (1758). Basing his observations on the then-current "medical" theory of "the four humors," he parceled out the "races" according to those humors, or body fluids (from the Latin humor, meaning "moisture"). The humors theory held that one's behavior was mled by the preponderant type of fluid coursing through one's veins: blood, choler, phlegm, or melancholy. If blood prevailed, then one was sanguine; if choler, then anger; if phlegm, then sloth; and if melancholy, then sadness. Although two of the humors were already color coded—choler was "yellow bile" while melancholy was "black bile"—Linnaeus assigned his own, somewhat distinct, color scheme to the populations he connected to each humor. Hitchhiking on Montesquieu's assertion that geography shaped racial identity, Linnaeus noticed the neat match between the humors and the cardinal directions: There were four of each. These confiuences in tum seemed cmcial to his human classifications, for, according to Linnaeus, there were four directional colors of humanity, as well: red, yellow, black, and white. His problem, then, was how appropriately to mix and match his three elements—directions, humors, and human colors. His tidy solution was summed up succinctly by Stephen Jay Gould in his article "The Geographer of Race." Assuming America was west; Asia, east; Africa, south; and Europe, north. Native Americans tumed out to be '"rufus, cholericus, rectus' (red, choleric, upright)," whereas Asians were "'luridus, melancholicus, rigidus' (pale yellow, melancholy, stiff)," and Africans were '"niger, phlegmaticus, laxus' (black, phlegmatic, relaxed)." None of these debilities touched Europeans, who were uniformly, '"albus, sanguineus, torosus' (white, sanguine, muscular)."*" Neither did Linneaus hesitate to attach moral judgments to his human taxonomies. He was particularly instmctive on the comparison of Africans and Europeans, as Gould pointed out in The Mismeasure of Man (1981): Homo sapiens afer (the African black), he proclaimed, is "mled by caprice"; Homo

22 NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

sapiens europeaus is "ruled by customs." "Of African women, he wrote: feminis sine pudoris; mammae lactantes prolixae— Women without shame, breasts lactate profusely. The men, he added, are indolent and annoint themselves with grease."*' In Systema Naturae, Linnaeus placed the "American" type immediately after the "Wild Man" yet somewhat before "Troglodytes," describing Native Americans as "Copper-coloured, choleric, erect. Hair black, straight, thick; nostrils wide,yace harsh; beard scanty; obstinate, content free. Paints himself with fine red lines. Regulated by customs" (italics in the original).*^ Thus, despite having borrowed heavily from Montesquieu's notion of geographical types, Linnaeus managed to undercut Montesquieu's notion of race as a sociological construct. Instead, Linnaeus had posited race as innate, based on body fluids, an inherited and unchangeable characteristic. Moreover, he assigned comparative moral value to those fluids. It was his foregone conclusion that Europeans should fare the best in his moral hierarchy, as diagrammed in Figure I.I. There was one major problem with the Linnean layout of the races, however. As an African American student of mine pointed out during one class, his biological chart failed to place Africans at a sufficiently safe remove Figure 1.1 The Linnaean Chart of Humanity

North/White Europeans

West/Red Native Americans

South/Black Africans

East/Yellow Asians

Carolus Linnaeus cross-referenced the four directions with the "four humors," assigning the mix racial color codes to arrive at his hierarchy of humanity.

THE "VULTURE CULTURE" 23

from Europeans. Whereas Linnaeus had separated "yellow" Asians from "white" Europeans by "red" Native Americans, on the other side of the family tree, "black" Africans were taxonomically but one branch removed "white" Europeans, leaving "superior" Europeans just one step ahead of them, as it were. This was a problem that a young German scientist, Johann Friedrich Blumenbach (1752-1840), undertook to solve. Blumenbach's original attempt at sorting out humanity came in his 1775 doctoral dissertation, De Generis Humani Varietate Nativa (translated as "On the Natural Varieties of Humankind"). His first foray into essay departed so little from the outline originally supplied by Linnaeus that, today, it would be rejected as plagiarism, although the reason seemed to be hero worship rather than scholastic dishonesty. (Gould referred to Linnaeus as Blumenbach's "guru."*^) It took twenty years, but, as Blumenbach moved from fawning student to scholar in his own right, he dared to correct the master in his revised De Generis Humani Varietate Nativa (1795) by inventing a new race out of whole cloth, an intermediate people useful mainly as a racial wedge prying Africans and Europeans apart. They were the "Malay race and the men of the Southern Archipelago."" This was a race on which he elaborated in, Beytrdge zur Naturgescichte (1806), translated into English as "Contributions to Natural History."" The crux of Blumenbach's racial argument in 1795 was "degeneration," a sort of reverse evolution. Degeneration was not a new idea, flowing as it did from the old Christian theological construct, the "Ladder of Creation," but, as rejuvenated, it was to enjoy considerable sway in its new, scientific garb.** According to Blumenbachian science, the races existed in ascending order, with each downward degree of separation between them representing the level of degeneration from the pure European pinnacle, which Blumenbach dubbed "Caucasian." Although few people realize it today, the "Caucasian" type did not indicate the European, generally, but Blumenbach's personal pick of the European litter: the people living around the Caucacus Mountain range —roughly, Georgia, Russia—^whom Blumenbach regarded as the world's most beautiftil.*^ Blumenbach determined the degree of degeneration of a race based on skin color, "which although it sometimes deceives, still is a much more constant character" than other indicators and which allowed the percipient to ascertain on sight the amount of interracial mating that had gone on.** (Interracial reproduction necessarily led to degeneration.) Considering related identifiers of hair texture, stature, body shape, and "[a]bove all, the shape of the skull,"

24 NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

Blumenbach concluded that all but the round headed European ("Caucasian") race were degenerate.*' In order of degeneration, with Europeans standing at the head of the purity line, the other races radiated down in relentless devolution, as shown in Figure 1.2. Blumenbach also talked, and talked, about a problem impinging heavily on the antebellum American mind, racial mixing. This was a topic that endlessly fascinated racists, so it is hardly surprising that Blumenbach discussed it at length in both the 1775 and 1795 versions of his work. What is surprising was his consistent confiation of mterracial mating with interspecies mating; he indiscriminately called both, "hybridity." In 1775, Blumenbach glided easily from "jumars" (a fanciful cross between a bull and a mare) to the fantastic slur then current of human females of color being raped by "lascivious male apes."'" Terming such tales "dubious and fabulous" in his 1775 doctoral work, Blumenbach hastened to reassure his reader that "any idea of progeny resulting cannot be entertained for a moment, since those very travellers relate that the women perish miserably in the brutal embraces of their ravishers." Although announcing that he found ape-human mating a "disgusting theme," he nevertheless felt compelled to frame his ensuing dissertation on human diversity with the example of dark skinned women fornicating with randy apes." Although it was entirely off his subject in the 1795 version of his thesis—^he Figure 1.2. The Biumenbachian Order of Human Degeneracy

"Caucasian" (Perfection) Native American Asian

(Degeneration 1) (Degeneration 2)

Maiay \ African

Blumenbach solved the "problem" of Africans' proximity to Europeans by inventing the "Malay race," with which he wedged Africa and Europe apart.

THE "VULTURE CULTURE" 25

was supposedly investigating climate, diet, and lifestyle, those known "causes" of human "degeneracy"—Blumenbach was mysteriously drawn again into an examination of the "disgusting" topic of interspecies mating. As in the original 1775 work, the 1795 version ofDe Generis Humani Varietate Nativa moved into the riveting subject of human-animal mating via the topic of animal "hybridity," the product of interspecies mating. What follows, his verbose and twitchy disquisition on human-animal mating, forms a curious digression for the modem reader: Not indeed that horrid stories are wanting of the union of men with brutes, when either men have had to do with the females of the beasts (whether carried away by unbridled lust, or from some mad idea of continence, or because they expected some medicinal aid from this sort of crime), or when we are told that women have been made use of by male brutes (whether that has happened through any violent rape, or because women have solicited them in the madness of lust, or have prostituted themselves from religious superstition), still we have never known any instance related on good authority of any such connexion being fruitful, or that any hybrid has ever been produced from the horrid union of beast and '^

Unlike his 1775 treatise, the 1795 examination lacked the "dubious and fabulous" qualifier; he seemed to be more convinced than previously that human "hybridity" occurred and copiously cited a profusion of sources to attest to his point. His fixation on the topic of human "hybridity" was beginning to look pathological. It would be a mistake, however, to conclude that Blumenbach's frame of reference was idiosyncratic, arising from the fevered brow of a lone, mad scientist. Far from unique, Blumenbach's discussions mirrored and reinforced contemporary European and Euroamerican thoughts on race. Early nineteenthcentury Euroamericans saw European-Native and European-African intermating as identical with European-ape mating. Blumenbach's "hybridity" theory allowed Euroamericans to deny that Native Americans and Africans were even of the same species as themselves." Having invented a "Malay" race, determined that all non-European races were degenerate forms of the pure "Caucasian," and defined interracial mating as interspecies "hybridity," Blumenbach tossed in "craniometry" (comparative skull measurements) as evidence, a move that was to prove crucial for Native Americans from the nineteenth century on into the present. Blumenbach did not dream up craniometry. That dubious honor belonged to Pieter Camper (1722-1789), a Dutch anatomist, who had already proposed the ingenious idea of comparing the degree to which the lower jaw protruded from the rest of face as the measurement of human evolution. Camper's obvious conclusion was that

26 NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

the greater the jaw protrusion, the lower the specimen sat on the developmental scale, with apes at the bottom, but Africans, Native Americans, and Asians grouped perilously nearby. Camper believed that each race would present a distinctly shaped cranium that could be measured to determine its moral and intellectual capacity.''' Together, Blumenbach's degeneracy and Camper's craniometry dominated hifalutin thought by the turn of the nineteenth century, trickling down to the lay reader through popular writers, such as the influential Scottish Lord Henry Home Kames in his Sketches of the History of Man (1774) and the English physician, Charles White, who argued that the races were, indeed, separate species, in An Account of the Regular Gradations of Man (1799). White, in particular, became a favorite of Euroamerican conservatives, especially slaveholders, for having declared the African to have been the species sitting between Europeans and apes.'' If the Ladder of Creation is vigorously present in Blumenbach's measurable degeneracies, it is also obvious in the evolutionary theory of Charles Darwin (1809-1882). For modem political reasons, Darwin is usually left out of discussions of racist science, but he held a central place in its development that deserves unflinching review. Darwinian evolution hitchhiked on the Ladder of Creation, with a little twist. Whereas Blumenbach had looked down the Ladder, using it as a blueprint for degeneration (an old theological proposition coming out of the Christian "Fall"), Darwin looked up the Ladder, reversing the direction of change. That is, instead of losing ground, as under Blumenbach, species under Darwin gained ground, always rising to meet the challenge of environment in the ongoing battle to determine which critters were most fit to survive. Modem scientists may cavil all they like, contending that evolution has no goal, but, as originally set up in Origin of Species (1859) and, especially, in The Descent ofMan (1871), Darwinian evolution had an obvious goal, the same goal as Christian Creation: "Man, the wonder and glory of the Universe," as Darwin put it.'* Darwin was, moreover, part of the school that cheerfully applied his evolutionary principles socially as well as biologically, believing that, if biological organisms evolved, so did mental and cultural organisms, as he delineated at length in the Descent ofManJ^ Indeed, Darwin's cmel assertions, casually tossed into the brew, are frightening in their genocidal implications, as is this tidbit from chapter 5 o^ Descent of Man: With savages, the weak in body or mind are soon eliminated; and those that survive commonly exhibit a vigorous state of health. We civilised [s/c] men, on the other hand.

THE "VULTURE CULTURE" 27

do our utmost to check the process of elimination; we build asylums for the imbecile, the maimed, and the sick; we institute poor-laws; and our medical men exert their utmost skill to save the life of every one [sic] to the last moment. There is reason to believe that vaccination has preserved thousands, who from a weak constitution would formerly have succumbed to small-pox [sic]. Thus the weak members of civilised societies propagate their kind. No one who has attended to the breeding of domestic animals will doubt that this must be highly injurious to the race of man. It is surprising how soon a want of care, or care wrongly directed, leads to the degeneration of a domestic race; but excepting in the case of man hinself, hardly no one [51c] is so ignorant as to allow his worst animals to breed.'*

Such nonchalant racism inspired and then buttressed the "science" of eugenics, a homicidally racist fantasy invented by his cousin. Sir Francis Galton (1822-1911).™ As Bmce Trigger has noted, Darwin's airy "theorizing about human evolution gave an unprecedented measure of scientific respectability to racial interpretations of human behavior."*" Perhaps that is why his racist pronoucements are carefully excised from all the laudatory tomes interpreting Darwinian theories today. Now disguised as science, the Ladder of Creation also showed up in basic anthropological theory. The notion that humanity moved forward, lurching in lockstep through upward-bound stages was first articulated as secular history by an obscure Parisian doctor, Nicolas Mahudel, who hinted at it in his writings as early as 1725, when he proposed the existence of quasi-stages "en antiques, en anciennes, & en modemes" ("in antiquity, in olden times, and in modemity").*' In 1734, Mahudel refined that into the historical progression of stone, bronze, and iron ages,*^ an idea picked up and elaborated upon in 1758 by Antoine-Yves Goguet in The Origin of Laws, Arts, and Sciences, and Their Progress among the Most Ancient Nations. Go^QXxexiQxaiedMdihwd.QVssXSigQS of stone, bronze, and iron on the assumption that cultures could be judged in terms of their advancement or retardation based on their technical know-how in the use of each. Although modem recapitulations of this notion leave out a couple of Goguet's original stages (notably, brick and wood), the Stone Age-*Bronze Age^Iron Age schemata he set up continues to inform archaeological thinking to this day, despite the almost comically Eurocentric nature of Goguet's ascending list.*^ This notion of historical progress proved especially germinal in American archaeology, as it was touched off in the second half of the nineteenth century by John Lubbock (1834-1913), Charles Darwin's next-door neighbor in Kent, England.^" Lubbock helped make "stages-of-history" thinking all the rage in anthropology, placing humanity at separate, ascending mngs of cultural development—savagery-tbarbarism^ civilization—in an articulation that was

28 NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

to have disastrous results for Native America in the forced assimilation programs of the nineteenth and twentieth centuries.*' It was Lubbock, for instance, who formally divided Goguet's summary Stone Age into "an earlier Paleolitich or Archaeolithic (Old Stone Age) and a more recent Neolithic (New Stone Age)."** In his highly influential Pre-historic Times, as Illustrated by Ancient Remains, and the Manners and Customs of Modern Savages (1865), a tome endlessly cited by nineteenth-century scholars, Lubbock argued that Europe's own "pre-history" could be leamed by studying "primitives" of the modem day.*' This idea justified anthropology, ethnology, and archaeolgy as they rummaged around in "savage" cultures, tearing stories out of elders and bones out of graves, for no activity was deemed more noble than uncovering Europe's own past. Lest, however, the connection between "savages" and modems inspire some sort of respect for the former, Lubbock drew careful lines separating savagery from civilization. The languages of Natives lacked abstract words and were thus incapable of conveying abstract concepts, Lubbock thundered.** Natives were equally unable to grasp high motives, so that "mercy was with the North American Indians a mistake, and peace an evil," while the "Algonkin had no word for love."*' Indeed, the "deficiency of some North American languages in terms of endearment... may here be referred to again as an evidence of low mental, as well as moral, condition."''' "Savages" were slaves to their passions and incapable of long-range planning, for they had "the character of children with the passions and strength of men."" Toward the end of demonstrating the moral deficiencies of "primitives," Lubbock also documented their moral failings, alleging that they abused their children, euthanized their parents, ate their enemies, and sacrificed each other to the gods.'^ Through their "absence of religious conceptions," he found yet "another proof of extreme mental inferiority."'^ Having drubbed "savages," on the one hand, Lubbock did not fail to stroke the egos of his fellow Anglo Saxons on the other with the nineteenthcentury commonplace that "savages often regard the white men as beings of a superior order.'"'* To be sure, all of this was stock racism, repeated in many an elegant drawing room long before he wrote, but, like Blumenbach, Camper, White, Kames, and Darwin, Lubbock tumed these hateful slurs into respectable "science" with his painstakingly documented "studies." Seeking to emulate Lubbock by dredging up dead-bang proof of what they already knew, that the races were really different species at staggered stages of advancement, scientists began to build a theory to exclude the possibility that environment had anything to do with the natural apartheid of race. They hit

THE "VULTURE CULTURE" 29

upon skulls as the natural indicator least likely to be infiuenced by environmental forces, elevating craniometry as the perfect measurement of actual "racial capacities."'' Skulls thus became the hot ticket heading into the nineteeth century. Much junk science was promulgated in the name of craniometry, but the most damaging was the quacky sideshow of phrenology. Championed by the Austrian Franz Josef Gall and his German associate Johann G. Spurzheim in their various works published from 1808 to 1819, phrenology claimed to "read" the bumps on the human head to determine the inherent abilities of the individual examined.'* Phrenology also purported to descry the soft tissue of race—mentality, morality, and intellectuality. According to phrenology, it was possible to describe a representative skull of each race, even though it was simultaneously acknowledged that no one individual could stand as sample of her whole race. Through such circular reasoning, phrenology was seen as supplementing the hard science of craniometry, so that, together, they took the full measure of humanity. Phrenology seized the westem world by storm, becoming so popular that it attracted well placed followers. The ethnologist Henry Rowe Schoolcraft (1793-1864), for example, committed himself to the study and, in an 1838 letter confessed, "I take much interest in it, & hope to see the facts admitted to their proper standing in the science."" Schoolcraft was hardly alone in this opinion. Phrenology was generally regarded as the leading edge of anthropology, with the highest profiles in phrenology belonging to the most respected scientists in anatomy.'* Phrenology required a supply of skulls. It is not surprising, then, that what Robert Bieder has termed "a cottage industry on the frontier" arose to supply phrenologists with severed heads, all Native." Caleb Atwater's well known Description of the Antiquities Discovered (1815) had, for instance, included drawings of mound skulls that had been acquired by grave robbing.'"" In 1826, not seeing the contradiction of his own position, Henry Rowe Schoolcraft disapprovingly recorded a head-hunting incident in Sault St. Marie, Michigan, when one Robert McKain, a soldier who had the slimey reputation as a grave robber for hire, was observed dropping by Fort Brady's hospital toting a decapitated head rolled up in a handkerchief. Although McKain later declared that he, personally, had not taken this head (another soldier had), he acknowledged that the Fort's doctor, Lyman Foot, had "offered [him] a good price for bringing him three Indian heads" and even planned to help McKain dig up newly interred bodies. Other soldiers at Fort Brady, not quite as thrilled by this

30 NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

business as McKain and Foot, reported that they had observed lights in the infirmary windows late into the night, accompanied by "a most abominable stench" coming from the hospital. They supposed that the odor was the result "of boiling the Indian skulls" to remove the soft tissue from the bones, the accepted practice for rendering skulls."" In 1826, this was still condemned as noxious behavior. Within fifteen years, however, stealing heads had become a socially acceptable and, even, a laudable activity. The man who slid head hunting from the fringes of the macabre to the mainstream of science was a professor at Yale University, the anatomist and Philadelphia physician, Samuel Morton (1799-1851). Although almost entirely (and conveniently) forgotten today, Morton was the premiere anthropologist of nineteenth-century America. His Crania Americana (1839), an in-depth inquiry into the secrets of Native American skulls, hit the scientific scene like a bombshell. Upon his death in 1851, the New York Tribune rhapsodized that "probably no scientific man in America enjoyed a higher reputation among scholars throughout the world than Dr. Morton."'"^ This was not an overstatement on the Tribune's part, but the literal tmth. A devote of the theory that the races were unequal, with Europeans occupying the highest mng of science's very own Ladder of Creation, Morton had privately begun collecting skulls as early as 1823, sure that each race had its own distinctive shape. At the outset of his career, Morton listened to the siren song of phrenology, considering it important to craniometry, his special field.'"^ He made a point, therefore, of soliciting a renown Scottish phrenologist, George Combe, to provide the phrenological appendix Crania Americana. Morton was also a polygeneticist, believing that the various races of humanity—which he followed the Septuagint Bible in declaring only 6,000 years old—had been created separately, appearing at the moment of creation precisely as they appeared in his own antebellum period. Morton came to regard the Native American as a separate species, especially fitted to America.'"^ In Crania Americana, Morton was intent upon knocking down competing environmental and social theories of "race" in favor of biological determinism."" In pursuit of biodeterminism, he quoted both Linnaeus and Blumenbach, whose pseudoscientific descriptions of racial traits he copied.'"* In scientifically describing all the "races" (and they multiplied furiously under his pen), he recorded of "The American Race" that the "skull is small, wide between the parietal protuberances, prominent at the vertex, and flat on the occiput," a description that became downright archetypal in later anthropology. Moving

THE "VULTURE CULTURE" 31

from craniometry to phrenology in the next sentence, he informed the reader that, "In their mental character, the Americans are averse to cultivation, and slow in acquiring knowledge; restless, revengeful, and fond of war, and wholly destitute of maritime adventure.""" Seventy pages later, Morton clucked his tongue again over the irredeemability of Native Americans: Cautiousness and cunning are among the most prominent features in the character of these people. A studied vigilance marks every action. If an Indian speaks, it is in a slow and studied manner, and to avoid committing himself he often resorts to metaphorical phrases which have no precise meaning. If he seeks an enemy, it is through unfrequented paths, in the dead of night, and with every device for concealment and surprise. When he meets his victim, the same instinctive feeling governs all his movements. His motive is to destroy without being destroyed, and he avails himself of every subterfuge that can protect his own person while he seeks the life of his antagonist. It is by a refmement of cautious cunning that they have so often circumvented Europeans, and they pride themselves on this faculty more than on any other. Thus also when provoked they can mask their resentment under an unruffled exterior; but the mind which thus conceals its emotions, devises at the same moment a sleepless and bloody revenge."""

All of this huffing and puffing—^which did no more than repeat standing settler slurs as hard science—preceded the discussion of Morton's craniometric "evidence." Morton was confident that he had acquired the hard data to prove the superiority of Europeans to Native Americans. He demonstrated the truth of this proposition through Crania Americano's measurements of 256 skulls, 144 of which belonged to North and South American Natives and the rest of which belonged to Indo-Europeans. Morton's surefire method was to calculate "cranial capacity," or brain size, by filling each cranium with birdseed or buckshot and then weighing the resultant load. Anthropology's love affair with number crunching was on. Morton's prize data were his summary tables listing the mean Native cranial capacity as 82 cubic inches, as opposed to the glorious European mean of 87 cubic inches."*' As, however, Stephen J. Gould devastastingly showed in both his 1978 article, "Morton's Ranking of Races by Cranial Capacity," and his subsequent book. The Mismeasure ofMan, Morton actively fudged his figures. He arrived at his conclusion in a "patchwork of assumption and finagling" that manipulated his samples so as to omit the crania of "small-brained Hindus," which would have lowered his average "Caucasian" capacity. At the same time, he carefully mixed together the large headed Natives of North America with their more diminutive cousins in South America, so as to arrive at a lower, overall average for all Natives."" When Gould recalculated the means to correct for Morton's tweaking, he discovered that the "Caucasian mean" had slipped

32 NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

"to 84.45 cubic inches," while the Native mean had risen "to 83.79 cubic inches," a statistical difference that is "no difference worth mentioning."'" Moreover, Gould noted that Morton's sample included only three of the big headed Iroquois against a large number of smaller headed Peruvians."^ Had Morton reversed his sample, so that twenty-five percent of Natives had been Iroquoian and only two percent had been Inca, the "Caucasians" would have fared very poorly by comparison. Indeed, had Morton included only the Iroquois, the resultant Native cranial capacity of 91.5 cubic inches would have mopped up the fioor with his true European mean of 84.45 cubic inches."^ Clearly, such results would have undermined Morton's proposition of cranially superior Europeans. Instead of recognizing that craniometries, itself, was at fault—^which might, eventually, have led Morton to discard the craniometry as nonsense—^Morton massaged his results to ensure that "Caucasians" consistently measured up as the superior race. Morton's deception was not known in 1839, however, so that his unctuous conclusion of Native inferiority (drawn well before his computations began) was cheerfully repeated as scientifically proven: However much the benevolent mind may regret the inaptitude of the Indian for civilisation [sic], the affirmative of this question seems to be established beyond a doubt. His moral and physical nature are alike adopted to his position among the races of men, and it is as reasonable to expect the one to be changed as the other. The structure of his mind appears to be different from that of the white man, nor can the two harmonise [sic] in their social relations except on the most limited scale."''

Although Crania Americana did not specifically develop Morton's belief that the different races, as distinct species, were rightly kept apart, it could not help but have been apparent to his racist readers that here was incontrovertible proof that the races were distinct species."' The conclusion of the phrenologist who supplied Morton's appendix was more damning yet. Based on his reading of skull bumps, George Combe concluded that the "aspect of America" was even "more deplorable than that of Africa.""* Despite the elevating example of Euroamericans, "many of the natives of that continent remain, at the present time, the same, miserable, wandering, houseless and lawless savages as their ancestors were, when Columbus first set foot upon their soil.""' Alas, there was no tendency to improvement in the Native, as was conclusively shown in Combe's leamed phrenological computations, which measured such capacities as Amativeness, Philoprogenitiveness, Adhesiveness, Firmness, Veneration, Marvellousness, Secretiveness, Destructiveness, Combativeness and, even more reconditely.

THE "VULTURE CULTURE" 33

"Ideality to Ideality" and "Causality to Causality.""* Of course, the screaming hoot in all this is not the manipulation of data, however insidious, but the simple-minded thesis that sheer noggin size and shape unerringly reveal the mental and moral capacity of the noggin's owner. As puerile as such reasoning is, it held great sway among the nineteenth- and early twentieth-century intelligentsia of Europe and Euroamerica. This was not because there were no questions raised at the time concerning the reliability of boneheaded measurements. The naturalist James McCulloh, for one, scolded those "physiological naturalists" who claimed to have been able to classify humanity osteologically: "The numerous anomolies noted by them in the form of the scull [sic], alone is sufficient to set their classification aside."'" Nogginhood did not prevail because no one objected, but because anthropology was actively promoting westem political domination. In Crania Americana, Morton justified the dehumanization of exploited populations. As the official booster of exploitation, it is not suprising, therefore, to fmd Morton drifting into the company of that ardent advocate of the slave system. University of Louisisana professor Josiah C. Nott. The purely political nature of craniometry was displayed by Nott, who used Morton's work to justify slavery by performing "niggerology," his complementary research on Africans, patterned after Morton's on Natives.'^" It was not for nothing that, in its 1851 obituary for Morton, the Charleston Medical Journal, the most influential science journal in the South, lamented the death of the slave system's "benefactor" who had scientifically put Africans in their "true position as an inferior race.'"^' The debasement of Native populations based on Mortonian science became even more popular than the debasements of Africans based on "niggerology." Hitchhikers on craniometry included John P. Jeffries, who mingled Blumenbachian and Mortonian science to argue that Native Americans belonged to "two great families," one of Malay descent and the other "Mongolian."'" Another popular racist screed. The Inequality of Human Races (1854) by Joseph-Arthur, comte de Gobineau, followed Morton into various pronouncements on "Redskins" (the actual category listing in Gobineau's index). The "Redskins of the United States have withered at the touch of the Anglo-Saxon energy," Gobineau shouted. "The few who remain are growing less every day; and even those few are as uncivilized, and as incapable of civilization, as their forefathers.'"" Natives were a separate species, incapable of mingling with the superior Europeans, he cried, over and over.'^'' His irrefutable evidence for all this blither was Morton's craniometry.'"

34 NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

By midcentury, Morton's craniometry was held up as brilliant science, and scholars strove to delineate its inevitable discovery. This was why Samuel Haven, the librarian ofthe American Antiquarian Society in his 1856 study for the Smithsonian Institution, pulled up the eighteenth-century antecedents of Morton. Blumenbach and Camper, Haven noted, had first broached the methods of craniometry to determine human differences.'^* Later on, Darwin's honorable mention of Morton and his reliance on skull science bolstered Morton's reputation.'" The examples could multiply indefinitely, but the point is clear: Morton's craniometry ruled. By 1840, having learned ofthe exciting cutting edge science of craniometry, fashionable people jumped on the cranial bandwagon. Among the more damaging fads that Morton inspired was the Euroamerican desire to "help" science by looting Native graves for skulls. Although head hunting had been viewed as unsavory as late as 1826, when Schoolcraft documented McKain's skull-diggery, once Crania Americana had appeared, Morton found himself inundated with "offers from colleagues eager to send him Indian remains."'^* The mania spread, not only among Morton's colleagues, but among all antiquarian and museum enterprises, which, suddenly, found that they could not function another minute without skull collections numbering in the hundreds.'^' Some collectors even became so fastidious in their new hobby that they sniffed at all but the heads of famous chiefs.''" Morton started more than the crania craze. He also legitimized the commercial trade in human skulls. Unlike later anthropologists, Morton did not personally behead corpses or dig up graves. He depended upon the kindness of strangers in that regard, and he compensated them for their trouble. For instance, he purchased his "Huron" sample from a German tourist who had, himself, bought this "head of a chief" in Detroit, as Morton frankly acknowledged in Crania Americana.^^^ Redefined by Morton as scientific samples. Native skeletons and, especially. Native skulls stopped being viewed by Euroamericans as human remains plundered from their graves. They became, instead, items of trade. Morton's also started the tradition of using the recently deceased in his samples. For Crania Americana, his Oneida "warrior" had died in 1830, while his Cayuga skull came from Wyunta ("Tall Chief"), who died in 1834, only five years before Morton wrote.'^^ Morton actively preferred remains that came with a reliable provenance: names, ages, sexes, and personal history, which was thought to help in verifying phrenological pronouncements. As existing Mortonian correspondence confirms, however, several of his "field collectors"

THE "VULTURE CULTURE" 35

were frustrated by their inability to get past the grieving families ofthe recently deceased to their corpses. "It is a rather perilous business to procure Indians' skulls," sulked John Townsend, one of Morton's grave robbers, because the relatives "watch you very closely while you are wandering near their mausoleums," threatening bodily injury, should the graves be disturbed. Still, Townsend had reason for good cheer, since "an epidemic is raging among them which carries them off so fast that the cemeteries will soon lack watchers," which was "very convenient for [his] purposes."'" The U.S. government was also pleased to aid Morton in his scientific endeavors, and it is not accidental that, once the U.S. government got into the act, Morton's collection increased exponentially. In 1830, Morton only "owned" two skulls, but by 1851, the year of his death, he had amassed over 1,000 skulls, almost all Native American remains "housed" at the Academy of Natural Sciences in Philadelphia.''" The collaboration pleased both scientist and bureaucrat, for Morton's work was used to justify head hunting out West, which, in tum helped the "red man" vanish on manifestly destined schedule.'" The biggest boost to Morton's collection consequently came from the collusion of the U.S. Army. Realizing his men's easy access to newly dead Natives, Army Surgeon General William A. Hammond established the Army Medical Museum on 21 May 1862, to aid the cause of craniometry.'^* Although the Army Medical Museum theoretically collected the remains of all races, the fact is that, between 1865 to 1880, it was interested only in Native Americans.'" Whereas the Museum collected literally thousands of Native remains, its European and African collection was a mere line-up. According to Surgeon General J. K. Barnes in a 18 January 1873, letter to Representative John Cobum, Chairman ofthe Committee on Military Affairs ofthe House of Representatives, the Museum had amassed "many ancient crania from caves and tumuli [mounds], from Greenland and Alaska, to Florida and Arizona, and specimens from the majority ofthe existing tribes of Indians, and ofthe extinct [Native] races ofthe historic period." Against this vast collection, Bames noted, in passing, that the Museum had also pulled together " a sufficient series of skulls ofthe white and black races," by way of comparison."* Active collecting began in the Third Colorado Volunteer Cavalry Regiment under the leadership of a former Methodist minister. Colonel John Milton Chivington, who had declared it his Christian intention "to kill all Indians I may come across."'^' Unable to tum up any official renegades, Chivington and his crew, 900 strong, decided to settle for a massacre of innocents, 750 Cheyenne, Arapaho, and Kiowa people, largely women, all of whom were, at the time.

36 NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

settled under the express protection of the U.S. military on reservation land at Sand Creek, near Fort Lyon."" At dawn on the snowy morning of 28 November 1864, Chivington's militia swooped down on the unsuspecting villagers, ignoring their white flags, to murder and scalp them all in the most brutal ways imaginable.'"" In one instance, a group of thirty to forty shivering women and children tucked themselves under an embankment. When the militia homed in on them, they sent out a six-year-old girl waving a white flag to signal surrender. Within three paces, the child was cut down, and every one of the women soon after. All were scalped. The militia also mutiliated the corpses in frightful ways. One man had "cut out a woman's private parts and had them for exhibition on a stick."'"^ This was a common practice among the militiamen. Indeed, after the massacre, they paraded about with women's genitals stretched over their saddlehoms and hat brims.'"'^ The head count on the Chivington expedition is still a matter of debate, but up to 600 Natives were killed."" When the dust had settled, the militia set about beheading the fresh corpses, so that the all-important craniometric studies on them could begin.'"^ Such tactics as these had allowed the Army Medical Museum to have already collected 143 crania by 1868,'"* when the Museum set its sights on amassing not only a large but also a complete collection.'"^ Accordingly, on 1 September 1868, the Assistant U.S. Surgeon General notified all Army medical officers that, although it was interested in "exotic and normal and abnormal crania," it wanted the officers to focus their efforts on obtaining a large and complete "series of adult crania" representing all the major Native nations.'"* The memo clearly expected skeletons to be exhumed from their graves for this purpose, as it specified that, whenever skulls—especially mound skulls—were forwarded, officers were to take careful note of their location, sex, and age, as well as the sort of burial involved and artifacts accompanying the remains.'"' As a direct consequence of this memo, skeletons and, particularly, detached crania, began rolling in. Surgeons posted to westem forts certainly lost no time in complying with the new orders. Govemmentally commissioned headhunters were soon racing about, scrounging battlefields and planning massacres in quest of gory booty for the Army Medical Museum. A short four months after the 1868 memo was promulgated—i.e., hardly even time for the mail containing the directive to have arrived on the Plains from Washington—a massacre at Mulberry Creek was perpetrated, apparently for the sake of the six skulls thus reaped from fourteen Pawnees, who had left their reservation in Nebraska, in January 1869,

THE "VULTURE CULTURE" 37

heading south to trade with neighboring Native nations."" It was not for nothing that the term "redskins" was coined at this period in reference to the bloody condition of the corpses and heads, hauled into forts by the wagonload, to comply with the Assistant Surgeon General's directive.'" Some fort doctors went to great lengths to supply the Army Medical Museum with skulls. Consider the surgeon at Fort Harker, one B. E. Fryer, who went to the scene personally to behead the victims on 31 January 1869, the day after the Mulberry Creek massacre. Fryer was disappointed that day, securing only one head during the foray. As he griped in his transmittal report to the Medical Museuam, "the Indians lurked about their dead [and] watched them so closely" as to prevent his having taken more.'^^ However, determined scavenging missions conducted on and around that and other massacre sites allowed a triumphant Fryer to dispatch twenty-six skulls to Washington, D.C., on 11 March 1869.'" The preferred method of gathering remains was simply to scour the battlefield once the smoke had cleared, seizing likely "specimens."""* However, as Fryer's letter demonstrates, once the Natives realized what was afoot, they began taking precautions to ensure that their dead were not harvested for ghoulish purposes. At risk to their own lives, they carried their casualties from the field, burying them in unlikely places and posting guards at their cemeteries. Even so, they were not always successful in preventing grave robbing, for seizing bones out from under the watchful eye of grieving relatives developed a cachet among the soldiers. Many, like Fryer, boasted in their letters of transmittal to the Army Medical Museum of the life threatening dangers they had braved, usually alone, to turn up the valuable crania enclosed."' The better to avoid personal peril, grave robbers tiptoed into town whenever the villagers had gone hunting or fishing. Alternately, it became standard to rob graves during an epidemic, when, as Townsend had found decades before, the survivors were too debilitated by disease to stop the theft."* Starvation worked almost as well as disease to facilitate bone burglary. In 1891, George A. Dorsey sneaked into Blackfeet territory to open the graves of the Blackfeet who had died of government-initiated starvation over the winter of 1883-1884, ultimately harvesting thirty-five full skeletons for the Chicago Field Museum."^ The war crimes only worsened when a beautiful woman was involved. The urge to rape was replaced by the itch to dissect. In more than one instance, the grave of a lovely, recently deceased Native woman was secretly exhumed in search of its cranial prize, which was sent back to the Army Medical Museum with gleeful notes regarding the fine specimen thus forwarded."*

38 NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

Soldiers were paid head bounties for turning in usable specimens, which spurred much individual activity, for Army pay was low, making the bonus welcome. To the enlisted soldier also fell the even more gruesome task of "preparing" skulls and full skeletons for shipment east. Cleaning the bones was as simple, and as revolting, as boiling off the flesh and then soaking the osteological remains in lime for up to thirty-six hours. If, however, the brain, itself, was to have been preserved—a request occasionally made—there was the added ritual of soaking the organ in "Erlick's fiuid," a chemical preservative."' Even after going to all this trouble, soldiers were not assured of being paid, for they were not craniometers. What looked "usable" to them at the dusty fort might not make the grade with the expert curators of the Army Medical Museum. Moreover, pursuant to the Hammond memo, the provenance of skulls was highly valued, but it was not always recorded by functionally illiterate soldiers. Thus, should a skull arrive lacking name, age, sex, or national identity, or should it otherwise not fall within the preset and largely arbitrary parameters of the Museum, the curators typically tossed it out.'^° The method of disposal was never specified in the various Museum communiques, but, considering the complete lack of respect that the Army Medical Museum showed all its "specimens," the latrine out back was not an unlikely repository. The amount of damage that could be done by just one gung-ho fort surgeon aided by a handful of bounty hunting soldiers, boiling pot in tow, should not be underestimated. The Army Medical Museum's records showed "[a]t least 45 Army officers made collections ranging from a single specimen upwards."'*' Dr. W. H. Dall of the U.S. Coast Guard swiped 71 "specimens" from graves and battlegrounds, while an army surgeon, E. Swift, pulled up 59.'*^ Teamwork paid off for Drs. H. C. Yarrow and J. T. Rothrock who, along with H. W. Henshaw, dug up 93 skeletons from a Native Cemetery in Santa Barbara.'*^ Over the winter of 1869 alone, the peripatetic B. E. Fryer tracked down and decapitated 141 Pawnee corpses, deeds he proudly recorded for the Army Medical Museum.'*^ One Paul Schumaker outdid them all, however, stealing "at least 230" corpses.'*^ Indeed, something of an intramural competition arose among army surgeons to see who could collect the most skulls since promotion went to those with the most notches on their scalpel. Brevet Lieutenant Colonel George A. Otis, curator of the Army Medical Museum, praised the tenacity of "medical officers at remote posts" for their overwhelming "donations of Indian crania" to the collection.'** Because of the diligence of fort surgeons in supplying the Army Medical Museum with skulls, by 1878, Dr. Otis had examined 1,895 Native skulls.'*' Creating comparative

THE "VULTURE CULTURE" 39

racial studies was the stated purpose of the Army Medical Museum. Thus, Dr. Otis was intent upon determining the level of evolution at which the Native American belonged. As early as 1870—just eight years into the "collecting" campaign—Otis was able to announce, using craniometries, that Natives belonged even lower on the evolutionary Ladder of Creation than scientists previously believed.'** Wiping out the Redskins was, therefore, hardly a crime; they were not even human. The appropriately named Department of War, then in charge of the Bureau of Indian Affairs, also willingly filled requests from curators working in musuems other than the Army's own, as a gesture of professional courtesy. In January 1865, for example, Louis Agassiz (1807-1873), the Swiss-bom zoologist and polygenecist who founded Harvard's Museum of Comparative Zoology in 1849, contacted Secretary of War, Edwin Stanton, with a request for the corpses of any newly deceased Natives. He even included detailed instructions that the remains were to be sent to him "express in a box," adding that, should the weather not be cold enough to preserve them, they were to be packed in "a solution of Arsenate of soda," a preservative commonly used by grave robbers at the time.'*' Agassiz specified his need of "one or two handsome fellows" yet intact, along with two or three additional heads.'™ Tum about being no more than fair play, the Army Medical Museum swapped specimens with private museums and collectors. Dr. Otis arranged, for instance, for Joseph Henry, Secretary of the Smithsonian, to send him all the Smithsonian's Native remains in retum for all the Army Medical Museum's artifacts.'" With the end of the "Indian Wars" in the latter nineteenth century. Army operations in the West were seriously curtailed, sending the Army Medical Museum into a decline for lack of fresh samples. In 1893, the newly established Army Medical School sucked up much of the loose funding for the Museum, and, when the Spanish American War broke out in 1898, funding dried up altogether.'^^ Thus it was in 1898, twelve years after Geronimo surrendered, that the Museum tumed over 2,206 Native skulls to the National Museum of Natural History, part of the the Smithsonian.'^^ This was followed by several minor transmittals of artifacts and yet more remains, including a transfer of "115 boxes of bones" in 1899 and, in 1904, another transfer of 600 "skulls, pelves, and two Indian brains.""'* All the Army Medical Museum retained were "osteological specimens" deemed to have been "of pathological interest.""' The demise of the Army Medical Museum did not mean that the craniometric craze had faded or that no one was left to steal and decapitate

40 NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

Native corpses. It just meant that the chore had shifted from army soldiers and surgeons paid by the government, to anthropologists and archaeologists, paid by private and public museums and universities. Anthropologists and archeologists now vied for the status of best collector, just as Army surgeons once had done, spurring a second feeding frenzy, as hobbyists and scientists alike began ripping up mounds and new graves with little attention to anything other than seizing display trophies for their museums. Official necrophilia manifested itself in fraught competitions among prima donna anthropologists to see who could rack up the highest scores for their respective institutions. Personality cults decided as much as any scientific urge. In a snit after the prestigious Chicago Field Museum had refused to hire him as a curator, for instance, Franz Boas (1858-1942), the famed anthropologists and reputed "friend of the Indian," served Chicago right by collecting for the American Museum of Natural History in New York, starting an all-out turf war between it and the Chicago Field Museum over which institution had staked out rights to the Native remains of the Pacific Northwest."* The upshot of such professional jealousy destroyed entire Native communities. In 1899, for instance, field expeditions from the American Museum of Natural History, the Chicago Field Museum, the California Academy of Science, the University of Michigan, the University of Washington, the Peabody Museum of Harvard, and the Smithsonian Institution all converged simultaneously on the same, tiny Tlingit village in Alaska. As the American anthropologists screeched into town in a photo finish, they were indignant to discover that anthropologists from French and German museums had beaten them to the punch, already having carted off the most desirable bones and artifacts.'" To forestall such contretemps, the American national museums and universities entered into a gentlemen's agreement, parceling out geographical regions of the U.S. among themselves."* To stake a claim, curators commissioned field collectors who, by virtue of having rooted around in a gravesite, effectively claimed it for whatever museum or university was paying their freight. Big-name bone-hunters increased the prestige of a collection. Hence, Franz Boas's 1890 field trip to the Pacific Northwest was financed by the Smithsonian's Bureau of American Ethnology."' In 1894, Boas was still collecting for Bureau, but was also being supported by American Museum of Natural History and the United States National Museum."" The various national museums—the Smithsonian's Museum of Natural History, the Peabody at Harvard, the Field Museum of Natural History in

THE "VULTURE CULTURE" 41

Chicago, and the New York City American Museum of Natural History—were soon in a bidding war for skulls and skeletons, paying up to $5 a skull and $20 a skeleton, tidy sums at the tum of the twentieth century.'*' The Peabody thus wound up with 5,000 remains; the National Park Service, with 20,000 "specimens"; and the Smithsonian, with 18,500.'*^ Now suffering from an embarrassment of skeletal riches, museums tried to figure out what on earth they were supposed to do with them, fixing on the pseudoscience of "anthropometry"—^whole skeleton metrics, or craniometry on a skateboard—for the answer, measuring every conceivable part of the skeleton, not just the skull. The Smithsonian's Bureau of American Ethnology, founded by John Wesley Powell in 1879,'*' became deeply embroiled in anthropometry in 1902 after Samuel P. Langley, then secretary of the Smithsonian, came down hard on its little Bureau for being behindhand in applying anthropometry to its collections. Langley urged the creation of displays of bones and artifacts, not only to enlighten the general public but to help the govemment set appropriate policy toward Natives.'^'* The competitive spirit then abroad led some curators and archaeologists to treat "their" sites as if they were theme parks. In August 1898, the annual convention of the American Association for the Advancement of Science was held in Columbus, Ohio. The Ohio State Archaeological and Historical Society hosted a lawn party for over one hundred delegates of the Archaeological and Ethnological Section of the Association at "their" Fort Ancient mound, the Butler County Fort.'*' Speeches were made by "the most distinguished archaeologists of the country" at the picnic dinner laid in buffet on "tables spread within the great gateway of the Old Fort."'** The sacred earthworks thus trivialized, local farm boys felt as empowered as gentlemen to desecrate mound graves. After dinner, the exalted guests took a tum about the grounds, inspecting one mound three or four hundred feet to the north of the "fort." There, recounted Emilius Oviatt Randall, then head of the Ohio State Historical and Archaeological Society, the gentlemen were greeted by a couple of bareheaded, barefooted country boys who with youthful curiosity and energy had dug into the base of the tumulus [mound] and exhumed a skeleton, the bones of which lay heaped before the uncovered grave. The skull upon exposure had parted into fragments, the teeth falling into the cranium cavity. It was a comico-serio incident The settings of the scene were cheerless, but the boys gleefully poked with their muddy feet the disinterred human relics, clay-stained and decay-eaten."^

Of course, the assembled throng speculated that this skeleton must have belonged to "a great war chief" or a "silver-tongued orator.'"** Neither Randall,

42 NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

the other guests, nor the 1908 publisher of this anecdote—the Ohio State Archaelogical and Historical Society—displayed the slightest shock at what the boys had done. Instead, they considered it funny, an endearing case of precocious children emulating their elders. On the public relations side of museumology. Native remains became the hottest ticket in town, pulling in staggering numbers of paying visitors. Whenever a museum wanted to beef up its bottom line, it had but to trot out an "Exihibition of Primitives." To spice up attendance and profits at the World Fair of 1893, for instance, the archaeologist Warren K. Moorehead—still unaffectionately known to Ohio Natives as "Jughead" for his constant desecration of the mounds—was hired by the Peabody Museum and Harvard University to round up some ever popular Mound Builder bones.'*' Moorehead ripped up mounds, mostly in Ohio, literally carting off hundreds of Native remains to Chicago for display in the Fair's "Columbian Exposition." Thereafter, the Moorehead collection was subsumed into the general collection of the Chicago Field Museum of Natural History, founded as the Fair ended."" (Native remains were classified as belonging to "Natural History" and exhibitied along with mastodon and dinosaur bones, in accordance with polygenetic theory.) Moorehead forms a case in point conceming archaeology coming into the twentieth century, i.e., after it fancied itself an established and rigorous science. Moorehead had little or no formal training in archaeology, although he somehow wound up on the staff of the Smithsonian, going from there to the Phillips Academy at Andover, Massachusetts, where he was first a curator and then a director. For all his pretenses of scholarship (Moorehead wrote up all his digs for archaeology), his "collections" were anything but scientific. In 1982, modem archaeologists, after reviewing his collections, scholarship, and methods, acknowledged that they contained no useful information whatsoever.'" Things did not settle down with the tum of the twentieth century. In 1928, for instance, the American Museum of Natural History in New York underwrote an elite expedition of big game hunters to the Aleutian Islands, purportedly to bag walmses, but secretly in the hope that it would uncover more of the sorts of Aleutian mummies that had been spirited away to San Francisco in 1875. The expedition did, indeed, tum up a cache of mummies on a rock island used as a mausoleum by the local Natives. Promptly renaming the island "Fortress Rock," which made it seem more like a new discovery than an old

THE "VULTURE CULTURE" 43

cemetery, the expedition proceeded to steal mummies and artifacts for shipment back to its New York funding source.''^ One big difference between anthropology and antiquarianism was that science had freed its practitioners from the constraints of gentlemanly behavior. No longer confined to drawing room discourse, dependent upon the digging of others as Morton had been, anthropologists became intimately involved in everyday grave robbing. For example, Franz Boas personally harvested graves for bones to sell in the mighty business of financing his Native cultural studies. On the boneyard payroll of the Smithsonian, he dug up 100 complete skeletons, along with 200 skulls, collecting diligently until he had wracked up 179 samples just of Salish and Kwakiutl peoples."^ Boas kept a journal of his 1888 to 1894 field trip, financed by the Committee of the British Association for the Advancement of Science for the Study of the Northwestern Tribes of Canada. It contains astonishing passages on the quotidian concerns of craniometry and the prices he expected both to pay and receive for human remains, along with his frank admission that what he was doing was grave robbing. The diary entry of 6 June 1888, reads: In the morning I looked up a doctor who is supposed to be interested in Indians. He was willing to make measurements if I would give him the formulas. Unfortunately I have them only in German. In the evening I looked up a man from Cowitchin [Cowichan] who has a large collection of skulls. We have arranged to go there on Sunday to see them. Later, by appointment, Mr. Hastings, the photographer, came to show me a place where there are Indian skulls. We took a boat and went o u t . . . . We discovered that someone had stolen all the skulls, but we found a complete skeleton without a head. I hope to get another one either today or tomorrow... .It is most unpleasant work to steal bones from a grave, but what is the use, someone has to do it. I have carefully locked the skeleton into my trunk until I can pack it away. I hope to get a great deal of anthropological material here. Yesterday I wrote to the Museum in Washington [the United States National Museum] asking whether they would consider buying skulls this winter for $600; if they will, I shall collect assiduously. Without having such a connection I would not do it. . . . I dreamed of skulls and bones all last night. / dislike very much working with this stuff; i.e., collecting it, not having it. I shall of course defer all measurements on dead material until some time later." (Italics mine)'**

Bad dreams did not deflect Boas from his purpose, however. On 9 June 1888, he recorded that, the week before, he had been given access to a private collection near Quamichan owned by two brothers, James and William Sutton, who practiced "phrenologie" [sic] which Boas thought was "nonsense," although he continued to buy its sibling discipline, craniometry."^ Pressed for time. Boas was forced to spend the whole day measuring "frantically," but found the resultant craniometries quite "instructive." He lived in hope of being

44 NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

able to buy the Sutton collection for $700, but was awaiting approval of the expenditure from the National Museum in Washington."* Still waiting on 12 June 1888, he decided to take care of the remains already in hand: "So I measured and described the skulls which I had stolen and made arrangements with my photographer friend to return to the graveyard in order to obtain one or two additional skeletons" (italics mine). Their next jaunt bagged them only three headless corpses, leaving Boas speculating disconsolately that the heads were probably in the Cowichan collection. Boas also started boiling down his corposes that same afternoon. Having cleaned and packed his first skeleton. Boas was dismayed to discover how much room it required. He was determined to keep all his skeletons, however, for, besides "having scientific value," they were "worth money.""^ On 17 June he acquired three more nearly full corpses, leaving him in a whirlwind of activity that Friday, as he repacked the larger boxes he had acquired."' On 3 July 1888—the same day he made the rounds of all the Native cemeteries at Lytton, pulling up a few more bones—he got the go-ahead from the National Museum, allowing him to acquire the Sutton collection of seventyfive skulls. "* The Sutton brothers also offered to collect more for him, getting forty-eight additional complete skeletons, one headless skeleton, and seventyfour skulls, selling Boas the 123 individuals for grand total of SBOO.^*^ This grave robbing almost got the Suttons shot, for, stupidly, they had hired local Natives to guide them to the gravesites. The guides promptly sent word back to the elders about what the Suttons were doing, leading to a near riot by the Natives in and around Fort Rupert. With the local authorities now investigating the rash of grave robbings in the last month, the Suttons had to unload their booty as quickly as Boas had to get out of Dodge. They all escaped. All told, between the Suttons, himself, and his "field collectors," Boas skedaddled with 100 complete skeletons and 200 crania, which had cost him $1600, a large sum for the time. Since he was considerably over his allowed expenditure, he recuperated some of the loss by selling a portion of the haul to a private collector, Rudolph Virchow, in Berlin. He sold another 238 sets of remains to the Chicago Field Museum in 1894 and, apparently, three skulls to the Army Medical Museum for ten dollars.^"' Boas was hardly alone in his criminal behavior. One of the Smithsonian's most famous archaeologists, Ale§ Hrdlicka (1869-1943), has, perhaps, the most frightful track record of all. Heading up collecting expeditions for the American Museum of Natural History in 1899, he acquired hands-on experience in the field. In 1903, he became an assistant curator for the Smithsonian Institution,

THE "VULTURE CULTURE" 45

where, in 1910, he took over as head curator of physical anthropology, remaining there until his retirement in 1941. During his nearly forty years of iron-fisted control of American physical anthropology, he cemented "objective" racism into place, plundered Native graves, and enforced the ridiculously short tenure of 3,000-5,000 years for Natives in America. Neither his fervent racism nor his grating sexism can be denied, even by his admirers.^"^ Hrdlicka was, moreover, an unrepentant eugenicist, openly advocating on the eve of the Holocaust that the U.S. "institute as a regular and important part of its existence, periodical—say 50 year—anthropometric surveys of its population, to ascertain whether and how its human stock is progessing or regressing."^"^ Hrdlicka was a hard case, without any of the compunction about what he was doing that had made Boas flinch. Well into the twentieth century, he continued looting Native graves with breathtaking temerity. From 1931 to 1936, for instance, he led a team of Euroamerican grave robbers into Larsen Bay Village on Kodiak Island, Alaska.^"^ Hrdlidka was in Larsen Bay on only the thinnest pretense of permission from the local Natives. Lacking any plan of excavation, he failed to keep notes, instead hacking his way through anything between himself and the desired skeletal remains.^"' Despite HrdliCka's claim that he shied away from fresh graves in his collecting,^"* the tmth was chillingly different. During his four-year desecration of Larsen Bay, Alaska, he freely accepted gifts of new bones from a local Euroamerican enthusiast, a woman who, disturbingly enough, seemed to have been fiirting in bestowing her grisly treasures on him.^°' The Natives of the Yukon nicknamed Hrdlicka the "Skull Doctor," and it is not hard to see why. His idea of a joke was a droll plan to recover his medical expenses for treating an old pioneer of the Yukon by charging him "a dozen skulls, or a few skeletons," which, considering how Hrdlicka actually acquired his "specimens," becomes distressing.^"* During this expedition, HrdliCka managed to seize 756 skeletal "lots" representing 1,000 different individuals and 144 "lots" of funerary artifacts.^"* It was through such "scientific" endeavors as these that the Smithsonian wound up with ascension numbers as high as 225,292 on its skull collection.^'" Hrdlicka was a devote of physiometrics. In his Physical Anthropology of the Lenape or Delawares, and of the Eastem Indians in General (1916), for instance, he measured every conceivable bone from every possible angle in his "sample" of fifty-seven skeletons ripped from a Lenape burial mound along the Delaware River. Although his "findings" were presented as deep, hard-edged science, his pages are, in fact, quite empty of anything worthwhile, his fullsome tables indicating no more than how many males, females, and children were in

46 NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

the sample of fifty-seven skeletons, and how tall they were. His all-important cranial examinations focused on finding the anticipated racial distinctions between Lenape and Iroquoian skulls, for the undefined but obvious purpose of nailing down distinct racial "types." In particular, he sought to determine the level of Lenape intermixture with the "bracycephalic American type."^" Having irrevocably ripped open the graves of fifty-seven individuals to squirrel them away in the Smithsonian, Hrdlicka came to the startling conclusion that there was no observable difference between the Lenape and the Iroquois.^'^ None of his vaunted scholarship was the slightest bit more productive, or less racist, than this. The amount of damage to Native burials done by this one man alone is staggering. Seventy-five percent ofthe Smithsonian's "collection" of Native remains were "acquired" by Hrdlicka.^'' Two entire corridors ofthe Smithsonian are still "lined with gray-green drawers stacked 14 levels high and filled with human skeletal remains," courtesy of Hrdlicka.^''' This does not even count his remaining "collections" stored in various offices of the Smithsonian, including drawers that he specially designed for storing Native crania.^'' The worst travesty engineered by Hrdlicka was only brought to public attention in 1986, with the publication ofthe life's story of Minik, an Inuit boy.^'* Along with his father, Qisuk, and three other adults, Minik was picked up in Greenland by Admiral Robert E. Peary for the American Museum of Natural History, which was looking for "living exhibits." In 1898, all ofthe visitors but Minik, then a small child, died of tuberculosis. Without skipping a beat, Hrdlicka had the adult skeletons, including that of Qisuk, promptly soaked to soften the fiesh for easy boiling from the bone, thus rendering for the Museum a perfect set of Inuit skeletons. To cover up his ghoulish sidewinding, Hrdlicka had poor little Minik treated to a fake funeral for his father. In the interests of pacifying the grief-stricken child, the staff of the American Museum of Natural History dressed up a log as Qisuk and quickly got up a mock burial by night, to prevent prying reporters from asking embarrassing questions or tipping off Minik to the travesty that was occurring. When a reporter nonetheless discovered and challenged the cruel ruse, Franz Boas was among those happy enough to defend it, stating that he found "nothing particularly deserving severe criticism" in having staged the funeral for the bereaved little boy.^'^ In fact, Qisuk's bones became a regular display at the American Museum of Natural History, while his brain became the subject of a scholarly article by Hrdlicka that included two photos of Qisuk's preserved brain.^'* When, in 1907,

THE "VULTURE CULTURE" 47

Minik finally discovered through classmates and news articles that he had been looking at his own father's bones on museum display, he became severely traumatized.^" As an adult, Minik tumed from horror to a buming anger, fighting tirelessly to bring his father's and the others' bones home to his people, but he died of pneumonia, unsuccessful in his fight, on 29 October 1918.^^° Eamest Albert Hooton (1887-1954) is another case in point of the determined archaeological racism that carried through the first half of the twentieth century. Hooton worked principally for Harvard University but published works through the auspices of Yale and the Peabody Museum, as well. By the late 1930s, racist creeds were beginning to take a dip among younger, radical anthropologists as Nazism and Fascism graphically demonstrated the endpoint of eugenics, but Hooton held fast to the old ways. His snide, long-winded introduction to The American Criminal (1939) took to task any who would question the validity of anthropometries. He was confident that physical profiling would reveal criminal bents, using Karl Pearson's "biometrics," a "science" designed specifically to validate eugenics.^^' This same, crudely biometrical racism also informed Hooton's well regarded Up from the Ape (1931,1936). His pious disclaimers conceming the inadvisability of using racial markers to form moral opinions and his condemnation of using biometrics "as an excuse for the schemes of political domination" were but lip service belied by the rest of Up from the Ape, which argued that one could tell criminal types just by looking, as long as one took a measured look.^^^ Hooton's recurring goal was "to bring order into the chaos of racial classificatory schemes."^^^ It never occurred to him to question the necessity of racial classifications in the first place. Instead, Part V, "Heredity and Race," of Up from the Ape served up heaping plates of racial markers fixated on skin color, hair color, eye structure and color, hair, head and facial forms, eyes, noses, ears, lips, stature, and even sweat glands. Hooton's "racial history" included a section whimsically entitled, "The Noble Redskins."^^" Plate 9 shows a series comparing ape and human proportions, moving from the "Orang-Utan" to the chimpanzee and gorilla, culminating in the "Negro."^^' Plates 21 through 39 are a mug shot line-up of Hooton's crackpot racial types.^^* Frighteningly enough. Up from the Ape, the source of all this enlightenment, was widely used as a college anthropology textbook for over a decade. Hooton continued writing through the 1940s and influencing academic thought up until the 1960s. With such twentieth-century luminaries as Boas, HrdliCka, and Hooton pounding out race-ometrics at a frantic pace and tmsted museums from the Peabody to the Smithsonian putting the bones ofthe dead on display, it is small

48 NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

wonder that the average Joe accepted their necrophilia as "science" not fetishism. Amateur grave robbers felt authorized to get into the act, and obscure towns, unlikely to rake in tourist dollars unabetted, tumed to Native cemeteries to make a buck. In 1838, Abelard B. Tomlinson, proprietor and plunderer of the Grave Creek Mound in modem West Virginia, pioneered, so to speak, the "open air museum" concept by allowing tourists, for a fee, to walk down into the interior of the excavated mound, there to gaze upon the exposed skeletons of the dead.'" With the success of Grave Creek Mound, many Native cemeteries were opened to public view in the twentieth century, with skeletons purportedly lying exactly as they had been found but really rearranged by the Euroamerican proprietors of the land to make a better spectacle. This was the case at the Wickliffe site in Kentucky and the Salina site in Kansas. At Wickliff, 150 skeletons lay open to public view.^'* In 1936, just outside of Salina, Kansas, a grave-digging amateur unearthed a cemetery that was at least six hundred years old. The landowners at Salina proudly put the resultant "Indian Burial Pits" on display, charging visitors an admission fee to gaze upon the bones of one hundred forty-six ancestors of the Pawnee, Wichita, and Arikara peoples and regularly shellacking the bones by way of preserving them.^^' Dorfeuille's Museum in Cincinnati also catered to the tourist taste for the macabre, sprucing up its exhibits with a phrenological mndown on the characters of the deceased.^^" As touring America became commonplace with the advent of the family automobile, many more such sights opened up around the country. At the Dickson Mounds State Museum near Kampsville, Illinois, where 237 skeletons were on view thanks to a 1927 excavation,^^' the American Express Company joined with the Archaeology Department of Northwestem University of Illinois in 1975 to promote an open pit tourist attraction. The flyers invited tourists to view an actual archaeological dig in progress and gasp in delight as each new grave was uncovered before their wondering eyes. This was billed as an "educational" venture. Moreover, for a tax deductible $10 donation (over and above the admission fee) payable to the Foundation of Illinois Archaeology, tourists could help support the vital work of archaeology and receive, as a nifty bonus, a subscription to the publication. Early ManP^ In 1989, underpressure from Native American coalitions (but over the vociferous objections of local Euroamericans), the Illinois State Museum attempted to close the burial exhibit, but was preventedfrom doing so by Govemor Jim Thompson, whose decision

THE "VULTURE CULTURE" 49

was only reversed when Governor Jim Edgar took over in 1991. A resurrected museum, sans burial spectacle, opened in 1994."^ In another instance in the late twentieth century recounted by James RidingIn, hobbyists, playing scientist, ripped open Pawnee graves and mounted one skull on a stick on their car, trophy-like, hooting and hollering to all they passed, like drunken hunters with fresh kill strapped to the hood.""* Andrew Guilliford personally watched and photographed another travesty, when grave looters equipped with a bulldozer in a Mimbres Indian village next to the Gila National Forest in New Mexico "worked round the clock" to seize as much loot as they could the night before a new state law prohibiting their activities took effect. Their bulldozing utterly destroyed "priceless artifacts" along with Even in the late twentieth century, Euroamericans remained completely oblivious of the pain and outrage that their treatment of Native cemeteries caused Native Americans, In 1975, for instance, the organizers of an annual Rose Arts Festival held in Norwich, Connecticut, resisted the efforts of the local Mohegan-Pequot Nation to relocate the festival from its usual site, the so-called Chelsea Parade Ground, because it was situated immediately over a MoheganPequot cemetery. Chief John E. Hamilton said that his people had been protesting the festival for a long time but that its Euroamerican organizers refused to listen. Hamilton deplored the way that the festivities encouraged drinking, so that festival goers would "urinate on the grounds," i.e., directly onto the graves of his ancestors."* Similarly in 1975, archaeologists mindlessly glorified what amounted to grave robbing in Mohawk territory in Binghampton, New York. The act of potholing Native graves in the name of education was presented in local newspapers as a scientific project to help get a proposed local "Indian museum" off the dime.^" Also in 1975, an archaeological dig in a Native cemetery outside of Cincinnati, Ohio, ran a notice in the local newspapers asking for digging help—no experience necessary—and literally "hundreds of volunteers" tumed out to aid archaeologists in ransacking the graveyard."' Other Euroamericans seemed to feel that, as long as the statute of limitations on the crime of grave robbing had passed, owning human remains was perfectly natural. In 1975, an auction was announced of Native skeletal remains that were some two centuries old, having been unearthed by "developers" in the 1860s while they were digging levies around Sacramento. The current "owner" of the skulls and bones, an ophthalmologist. Dr. Theodore Holstein, had held the

50 NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

bones in a private museum for many years. Neither he nor any of the other Euroamericans involved in the planned auction felt the slightest discomfort at keeping, displaying, or selling the remains. They were bewildered when Califomia Natives led by Wayne Redhorse tumed out in protest, summarily halting the auction.^^' The auction of Native American bones was still on-going in 1999, when, in front of swom witnesses, "Grandmother" Barbara Crandell ofthe Native American Alliance of Qhio bought a Native American skull for $61.34 at an antique consignment shop in Lancaster, Ohio, specifically to prove to dismissive officials in Washington, D.C., that the trade in Native American remains had not been halted.^'*" It is, therefore, a serious error to end the story of anthropology's gmesome past with the cheery news of the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA) of 1990. Laced with loopholes large enough to accommodate a convoy of mack trucks, NAGPRA is nearly useless in defending many ofthe most important sites in America—indeed, in the world. The magnificent earthworks ofthe Ohio River Valley, comprising cemeteries and sacred lands thousands of years old, remain up for archaeological grabs, the stepchild of history due to yet more distortions and fantasies ceded into the record by old-time anthropology. It is to the special interface of Native and anthropologist in the Ohio Valley that I now tum.

2

The "Slaughter" of the Mounds: Settler Myths and Despoliations

The spectacular mounds of the Mississippi and Ohio river valleys formed the central mystery of nineteenth-century America.' Westering settlers stumbled across conical and platform mounds, some looming eighty feet in the air. When excavated, the mounds yielded pipes, pottery, and other highly artistic grave goods made from beaten copper, shells, and mica.^ More amazing yet were the myriad complexes of earthen mounds comprising graded highways leading out from geometrical circle-and-square earthworks, all platted across miles.^ There were, in addition, thousands of animal effigies, piled up in high relief—mounds in such shapes of nature as birds, badgers, bears' claws, and the astonishing Serpent Mound in Adams County, Ohio. By 1870, in Ohio alone, the settlers had counted up 10,000 mounds with 1,000-1,500 more earthwork "enclosures," or circle-square complexes.'' Although the figure cited in 1908 was still 12,000, by the time the Ohio State Archaeological and Historical Society got around to commissioning a "primer" on Ohio's mounds in 1951, that figure had dropped precipitously to 5,000, all told.^ Seven thousand known mounds had simply disappeared. Therein lies a sad tale of disappointed fantasies and failed stewardship. It is a complicated story with an aftermath long overdue for the telling. Even good works on the subject, such as Robert Silverberg's Mound Builders of Ancient America (1968) and Stephen Williams's Fantasic Archaeology

{199\),

come to a screeching halt before discussing the despoliation of the earthworks, as teamsters mined them for building stones, construction crews blasted highways directly through them, farmers levelled them for fields, and archaeologists razed them to ground zero in the name of racist science. In the worst abuse I know of, a country club tumed one of the recognized wonders of

52 NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

the ancient world, the circle-octagon earthwork at Newark, Ohio, into a members-only golf course, an act roughly equivalent to tuming Stonehenge into a bowling alley. Embarrassed by nineteenth- and twentieth-century excesses, modem commentators—especially archaeologists—downplay their earlier counterparts as "armchair scholars," pretending that they were unconnected with real archaeology by styling them "antiquarians," instead.*" What is absent from this revisionist history is, however, the recognition that these earlier authors, with all their zany theories in tow, were the "authorities" on the mounds. Far from sitting on the fringes of contemporary science, they embodied its expertise. Westem scholarship is often smug in its claim to hard-headed rationalism, but its objectivity is more rumored than real. Nothing demonstrates this fact more forcefully than a day trip through eighteenth-, nineteenth-, and twentiethcentury theories, seriously propounded, of the origin and identity of the Mound Builders. Indeed, had I set out to parody westem scholarship, I could not have devised a better satire than that provided by the Euroamerican imagination, as it led the country on a wild-goose chase through ancient Greece, Rome, Egypt, Scandinavia, Palestine, Scythia, China, Phoenicia, India, the Canary Islands, Malaysia, Japan, and Atlantis in quest of the "lost race" of American Mound Builders.^ Rather than shrink from a recital that does little credit to westem pretensions or play semantic hide-and-seek with the history of archaeology, this chapter forthrightly examines the myths and deeds of the self-appointed "experts" who struggled over what to make of and, ultimately, to do with, the mounds. Archaeological history on the mounds is usually slimmed down to its nineteenth-century component, with thinking grouped around the three major works on the mounds that, drafted from the opening to the closing of the nineteenth century, tracked Mound-Builder theory in erudite circles. These studies were penned by Caleb Atwater (1778-1867), who provided the first focused look at the mounds in 1820; Ephraim George Squier (1821-1888) and Dr. Edwin Hamilton Davis (1811-1888), who collaborated on a massive survey of the mounds for the Smithsonian Institution in 1848; and Cyrus Thomas (1825-1910), who produced his monumental reexamination of the mound question in 1894, also for the Smithsonian.^ Atwater, Squier, and Davis all accepted and—through their imprimatur of scholarship on the notion—helped foster the "lost race" myth of the Mound Builders, to wit, that some mysterious group other than Native Americans had built the mounds. It was lefl to Thomas

THE "SLAUGHTER" OF THE MOUNDS 53

to explode the fable by showing that the Mound Builders were indisputably Native American. It is, however, disingenuous to focus solely on these three studies, with the primary lens comfortably on Thomas. Tucked before, between, around, and after them were myriad permutations of the Mound-Builder myth, each supported by its own crackpot "evidence" and loopy champions. Furthennore, as Bruce Trigger emphasizes, archaeology has always been a political endeavor, erystalizing and ratifying the philosophies ofthe bourgeoisie, which recrafts its history as old positions become mortifying.^ In this instance, settlers and, therefore, archaeologists, had an enormous stake in denying any cultural credit to Native Americans, inspiring Euroamericans to dream up a doomed and, by the time the myth was done, white race of Mound Builders in ancient America. The myth was the only way, psychologically, to reconcile their ongoing genocide and land seizure—openly justified by the "savage" state of Native America—with the undeniable evidence of "civilization" presented by the math, astronomy, and artistry ofthe mounds. Indeed, the "discovery" ofthe mounds tossed leading-edge scholars onto tbe horns of an ugly dilemma. On the one hand, colonial "science" required Natives to be savages, of barely human intelligence, lacking in the ability to plan, organize, or even cooperate in the creation of social order, let alone perform amazing feats of engineering. According to this frame story. Natives could not have built the mounds. On the other hand, upon first encountering the breathtaking mounds of mid-America's major river valleys in the eighteenth century, the settlers—themselves often in the rudest condition of life—were purely awed. Letters flew east, heavily publicizing the settlers' amazement and thereby establishing the convention of marvelling at the mounds before Euroamericans had quite realized that Native Americans were the only logical candidates for having built them. Thus, westem scholarship had either to admit that the Natives were capable ofthe architectural wizardry ofthe mounds or to conjure up an altemative theory that "fit" the facts. Since it was psychically impossible for nineteenth-century Euroamericans to admire the very people they were murdering and displacing, the settlers set to pounding out altemative stories with energy and zeal. Characterizations ofthe Mound Builders typically lunged for the tingle in the spine. One depiction from 1880 by the archaeologist R. S. Robertson encapsulated all the features of the Mound-Builder myth. Robertson characterized the Mound Builders as "this mysterious race," moreover "a race now vanished from earth, leaving no other record of its existence.""* Although

54 NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

gone without a trace, scholars knew precisely (based on phrenology) that, albeit less evolved racially than the vaunted Anglo Saxon, the Mound Builders were nevertheless above the Natives, being a mild-mannered lot, as proven by their "low, flat and quickly receding forehead, not flattened by pressure [i.e., by Native cradle-boards], but by a law of nature."" Mound Builders were also presented as "agriculturalists, and little given to war except in defense of their homes.'"^ Such a gaggle of traits left them "unable by nature and education to cope with" the rousing climax of the Mound-Builder myth, the hair-raising invasion of the SAVAGE RED MAN. This "same savage race" of Native America that was still "incapable of civilization" in the nineteenth century swooped "down from the north" upon the Mound Builders and, being "sturdier and more warlike," locked the Mound Builders in a state of perpetual conflict.'^ The denouement of the myth cast the Mound Builders, now conquered and enslaved by the HEINOUS RED MAN, as "skilled workers for their masters," which allowed the children of savages to "grow up in a knowledge and use" of Mound-Builder arts.''' Since, however, bad blood would out, "[i]n time the characteristics of the conquering race would predominate, and the mixed race deteriorate," until all subsided into equal savagery.'^ In the first portion of the Mound-Builder myth, settlers assuaged their guilt over invasion by deftly turning the Native victims of European invasion into the perpetrators of land seizure and genocide against an earlier, unoffending "race" of mound-building farmers, so like their own "pioneers." This made genocide against Native America seem ever so much more defensible than had the Natives been truly innocent bystanders in European invasion. As a handy bonus, by propounding that the Natives had only just arrived in North America themselves, the myth implied that they had no greater claim to the land than did Euroamerican settlers."' The tragic ending to the myth echoed the fears of racist Euroamerica that it be "amalgamated," as the phrase then went, forced to mate with "lower" races until it fell from Anglo-Saxon heights into savage depths, the dire warning of racist science. As a settler psyehodrama addressing repressed guilt over invasion, land theft, murder, and slavery, the MoundBuilder myth could not have been more honed. Obviously, the not-so-hidden agenda of Mound-Builder theory was the flat reftisal to concede that Native North Americans had built the mounds. Over the course of the nineteenth century, this denial became pathological in its tenacity, lingering in the face of direct evidence that had always been present that woodland Natives had, indeed, built the mounds. The mounds were, for

THE "SLAUGHTER" OF THE MOUNDS 55

example, observed and documented as Native creations by the sixteenth-century Spanish conquistadores in the Southeast, as was recorded by Garcilaso de la Vega (1539-1616) in La Florida del Inca (1605). ("La Florida" was the Spanish designation for a vast territory extending from the Mississippi River east to the Atlantic Ocean and from the Gulf of Mexico north to the Ohio River.) Called "El Inca" by the Spanish, Vega was the son of an Inca "princess" and a Spanish father and had, himself, lived in the Americas. In getting up his history of Hemando de Soto in the American southeast from 1539 to 1543, Vega thus worked from personal knowledge as well as from the eyewitness account of the "Gentleman of Elvas," a conquistador accompanying Hemando de Soto, along with other Soto conquistadores. In his own recital, the Gentleman of Elvas had been perfunctory in his description of the town of Ucita (called "Hirriga" by Vega), merely saying, 'The chiefs house stood near the beach, upon a very high mount made by hand for defence; at the other end of the town was a temple, on the top of which perched a wooden fowl with guilded eyes."'^ The conquistador, Luis Hernandez de Biedma, said much the same in 1544, when he wrote that, "The caciques [chiefs] of this country make a custom of raising, near their dwellings, very high hills, on which they sometimes build their huts."'** In 1605, Vega used his additional sources to expand upon mound-building thus: Los indios de la Florida siempre procuraron poblar en alto, siquiera las casas de los caciques y senores cuando no podian iodo el pueblo. U porque toda la tierra es muy liana ypocas veces hallan silio alto que tenga las demos comodidades itliles y necesarias para poblar. lo hacen afuerz de sus brazos. que. amontonando grandisima cantidad de (ierra, la van pisando fuertemente, levantandola en forma de cerro de dosy ires picas en alto y encima hacen un llano capaz de diez o doce, quince o veinte casas. (The Indians of La Florida always manage to settle on high elevations, at least the houses of the chiefs and important people, when the whole town cannot. Since, however, all of the land is very flat, and elevated sites that have the other useful and necessary accommodations for settlement are seldom found, they make them through the force of their arms, heaping up huge quantities of soil, which they stomp down vigorously, raising it up in the form ofa hill two or three/jjcax in height [one/?ica equals fourteen feet] and, on top, they make a level spot large enough to hold ten or twelve, fifteen or twenty houses.)'''

The English also recorded Mound-Building activity in their earliest records. In 1612, for instance, William Strachey described a mound complex of the Powhatan; Their principall Temple, or place of superstition is at Vitamussack at Pamunky, nere vnto which towne within the woodes is a chief holie howse proper to Powhatan vpon the toppe

56 NATIVE AMERICANS. ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

of Ccrtaync red sandy hills, and yt is accompanied with 2. other 60. foote in length filled with Images of their kinges and devills, and tombes of their predicessors: this place they count so holie, as that none but the Priests and kings dare come therein. (Italics and spellings in the original)^"

Early French explorers likewise left records and, in the case of the sixteenthcentury explorer Jacques Le Moyne, a painting (later tumed into an engraving by De Bry) showing Natives encircling a fresh burial mound they had built, as shown in Figure 2.1.^' In addition, the explorer, Jean Baptiste, Benard de la Harpe (1683-1765), expressly stated in his Journal historique de I'etablissement des Frangais a la Louisiane that Natives along the Yazoo River lived in homes built "upon mounds of earth made with their own hands."^^ Another record exists of a surprise attack in 1706 by the French against the Outagamie ("Fox") of Wisconsin, in which "more than one thousand of their young men perished; and the great 'hill of the dead' was raised over their bones by the survivors."^^ Moreover, David Zeisberger (1721-1808) and John Heckewelder (17431823), the German-speaking Moravian missionaries who were among the first Europeans into the Ohio River valley, also left accounts of Natives as the Mound Builders. Between 1767 and 1780, Zeisberger lived just outside of Goschochking, the Lenape capital in Ohio, along the Muskingum River, where many mounds are located. From 1779 to 1780, he worked on a history of the Lenape, in which he described the mounds along the Muskingum as "embankments" that were "thrown up around a whole town. Here and there, furthermore, near the sites of such towns there are mounds, not natural, but made by the hand of man."^'' Zeisberger was very clear that it was the Natives who had used these structures. In his History (1819), Heckewelder went even farther, naming the Mound Builders (Alligewi) and giving detailed descriptions of them and their earthworks." Heckewelder had been adopted into the Turtle Clan of the Lenape in 1764 and lived among Iroquois League peoples from 1762 to 1810, becoming fluent in their languages and intimate with their culture. He had obviously leamed the ancient oral tradition of the joumey by the Lenape and Iroquois into the eastem woodlands, which contains this very recital. Euroamerican settlers likewise recorded the Native origin of the Mounds. General George Rogers Clark (1752-1818), who spent the American Revolution fighting the British in the Old Northwest, saw the mounds and made inquiries of his own. Local Natives assured him that the mounds "were the works of their forefathers." After many years' experience with both Natives

THE "SLAUGHTER" OF THE MOUNDS

57

n Ol

"o o c 0 0) "TO

O

c o c

o

cr o ro XI CF3

"c 'ro Q.

ro 0) CD

m 03 Q

o>x;

c *UJ -o . c

58 NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

and mounds, Clark stated (in a passage that is regularly yet quite erroneously attributed to Henry Rowe Schoolcraft): I think the world is lo blame to express such great anxiety to know who it was that built those numerous and formidable works, and what hath become of that people. They will find them in the Kaskaskias, Peorias, Kahokias (now extinct), Piankashaws, Chickasaws, Cherokees, and such old nations, who say they grew out of the ground where they now live, and that they were formerly as numerous as the trees in the woods; but affronting the Great Spirit, he made war among the nations, and they destroyed each other. This is their tradition, and I see no good reason why it should not be received as good history—at least as good as a great part of ours.'*

In June of 1845, the Canadian artist, Paul Kane {1809-1890), while traveling from Toronto west, sojourned at Chippewa town of Saugeen. There he recorded having inspected "the site of a former battleground between the Ojibbeways [sic], as usually pronounced, or Chippawas [sic], and the Mohawks. Of this, the mounds erected over the slain afford abundant evidence in the protrusion of the bones through the surface of the ground."^' I could continue these examples indefinitely, but my point is clear: The Mound-Builder myth was erected in direct contradiction of the evidence of the primary sources. This was not done merely by popular authors (as is oflen pretended by modem archaeologists) but by scholars in league with governmental officials, for it was the comfortable classes with the most to gain from Mound-Builder myth. Thus, each portion of the myth was worked out in elaborate detail by the leading archaeologists, anthropologists, and statesmen of the day. The primary points of mound "science" included: • Cranial and phrenological studies certifying the character of the Mound Builders and demonstrating that the Mound Builders and North American Natives were two distinct "races"; • Anthropology arguing from craniometric results that all populations in the Americas resulted from migration and that all culture in North America came through diffusion from a single source that was not NorthAmerican Native; • Anthropological studies showing that Mound Builders, not Natives, had been the agriculturalists of North America, so that the high populations necessary to agriculture had belonged to the "lost race" of Mound Builders, not to Native North America; and • U.S. statesmen using this "science" to announce that, having stolen Mound-Builder land by treachery and murder. Native Americans had no

THE "SLAUGHTER" OF THE MOUNDS 59

just claim to North America and, consequently, deserved whatever they got. From the late eighteenth through the early twentieth century, article after article and book after book,ft-omthe evanescent to the obscure, repeated this litany of astonishing propositions, each essay offering its own, idiosyncratic ftourish. Thus did legend arrogate the appearance of scholarship through sheer repetition in print, in a game of gossip, academic-style. In support of ancient apartheid, skull-gazers vied with one another to uncover the distinction between Mound-Builder and Native physiology, so as to place Mound Builders properly in their hierarchy of races. Before the wonders of craniometry had set in, some scholars ftoated the notion of Mound Builders as the fifth "race" that Blumenbach had added to the Linnean pantheon. In 1817, the peripatetic James McCulloh put this "Malaysian" theory before the public, albeit without much enthusiasm, leaving it to John Jeffries to develop the theme more thoughtfully in 1869.^** Once skulls came into their own as unerring markers of race, however, the Malaysian theory was quietly shelved in favor of an even more convoluted Central- and South-American connection, which was still passing for science in the mid-twentieth century. The Central-South theory was hatched as early as 1811, in a sketch by Henry Marie Brackenridge, followed by a book in 1814, in which Brackenridge held the Mound Builders to have been Toltecs who had decamped from North to Central America.^^ In 1836, the ethnologist Albert Gallatin followed up on this lead by opining that the Mound Builders were linked to the Central American Natives (known at the time to have been a "higher race" than North American Natives).^" In 1837, Dr. J. C. Warren of Boston, who had "for some time been a collector of crania from the mounds," presented evidence to the British Association for the Advancement of Science that Mound-Builder and Native American skulls differed."" The granddaddy of craniometry, Samuel Morton, then weighed in on the discussion in 1839, his cranial fame lending considerable authority to his conclusion that "the American nations," although of "one species" were "of two great Families, which resemble each other in physical but differ in intellectual character."" He conclusively identified the higher-order Mound Builders as belonging "to the Toltecan family," which he connected with Central and South America." Lesser scholars writing in Morton's wake tumed his Toltecs into Peruvians, a distinction that Morton, himself, had ftidged, and then posited them as a separate race from North American Natives, for they tended to hear "two

60 NATIVE AMERICANS. ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

families" louder than "one species" in their drive to juxtapose the "low race" of Natives against the "high race" of Mound Builders. This swirling compote of ideas was given a big boost in the 1840s hy the famed naturalist, Friedrich Wilhelm Heinrich Alexander, the Baron von Humholdt, who came down on the side of the Toltecs as the Mound Builders.^'' Following von Humboldt's formidable lead, a Dr. Crookshanks announced in 1843 that the Toltecs, having inhabited mound country "for over four centuries, were dispersed about eight hundred years ago in consequence of dearth [sic] and pestilence.""*^ In 1848, Squire and Davis also posited "a connection more or less intimate between the race of the mounds and the semi-civilized nations which formerly had their seats among the sierras of Mexico, upon the plains of Central America and Peru."^*' Succeeding generations of scholars seized upon the permission of the Smithsonian, as the funding source of the Squier-and-Davis study, to hold up as proven the theory of migrating Toltecs and Peruvians. In 1874, more confirmation of the Toltec-Peruvian theory surfaced in the form of a skull—one skull—drawn from a mound on the Detroit River, from which Jeffries Wyman, the curator of the Peahody Museum, drew far-reaching conclusions. The skull was remarkable for its low cranial capacity of "only fifty-six cubic inches," as opposed to the "average capacity" of Natives at "eighty-four cubic inches."^^ Since the previously observed "minimum" for Natives was hut "sixty-nine cubic inches," these measurements made the Detroit skull "less than sixty-seven per cent of that of the average Indian."'^ Wyman's opaque gobbledygook supported the Peruvian theory, for the low cranial capacities of the "Peruvians" had been established by Morton long before. Thus, to Wyman's racist contemporaries, the Detroit skull looked like the smoking-gun evidence that the Peruvians were, indeed, the latter-day descendants of the Mound Builders. Following up on Wyman in 1878, archaeologist William Stone found "a striking similarity" between Mound Builder remains he had helped unearth in New York and those "of the ancient Peruvians."^^ Stone summed up scholarship in his day by repeating the now-sacred catechism: "That they originally came from the South or Central America several thousand years ago and spread into the vallies [sic] of the Ohio and Mississippi, and after building mounds and cities were finally driven back hy another race to the country whence they had emigrated, is not now seriously questioned" (italics mine).'*'' Other diggers were, however, frustrated by the chore of sorting out Native from Mound-Builder skulls, leading archaeologist W. M. McGee to lament in 1878 the "difficulty of determining whether a skull from a mound belonged to

THE "SLAUGHTER" OF THE MOUNDS 61

a modem Indian or to an individual ofthe mysterious race which erected the Mounds.'"" Instead of realizing that his difficulty meant that craniometry was hokum science, McGee hit upon molars as the answer, having noticed that the molar ofthe modem Native was in the "intermediate stage" of molars "between that ofthe Mound-builder on the one hand and that ofthe Caucasian on the other.""^ To him, this meant that, evolutionarily speaking, modem Natives had caught up with and even passed the extinct (and, therefore, no longer evolving) Mound Builders, thus neatly proving both the theory of evolution and the inferiority of Native Americans. Still, McGee moaned that, despite "casual" observations by archaeologists about the relationship of molars and cranial capacity in establishing race, there had been "no critical discussion ofthe true significance of such relations" in categorizing the Mound Builders by race/^ As polygenesis peaked just before the Civil War, Morton's single-species, two-family speculation had transmuted so completely into the theory of two separate Native American species that no one remembered the original proposition any more. As articulated in 1854 by the arch racists, Josiah Nott and George Glidden, the two species of "American" humans became the "Toltecan Family" and the "Barbarous Tribes." This view directly supported the pet conceit that the "lost race" had been wiped out, or, at the very least, forced to migrate south, by the blood-thirsty ancestors of modem Natives."" Just where the "Barbarous Tribes" originated varied from scholar to scholar, but, as John Jeffries recorded, a leading theory held Natives "to be the descendants of the Magogites, the ancestors of the Scythians"—the most "savage" of the ancient races recorded by the ancient Greek historian, Herodotus—"and the Scythians, the ancestors ofthe Tartars, Mongols and Siberians."''^ From there, it was just a short, savage hike across the Bering Strait. Polygenesis might have outlived its usefulness vis-a-vis African slavery by 1881, but Native America was just swinging into forced assimilation, so polygenesis continued to guide Mound-Builder theory. In that year, John Wells Foster {1815-1873), variously the president ofthe American Association for the Advancement of Science and the president ofthe Chicago Academy of Sciences, concurred with Nott and Glidden. Based on his phrenological comparison of skulls, Foster concluded that North American Natives and Mound Builders were two distinct groups. The Mound Builders had been "doubtless neither eminent for great virtues nor great vices" but "a mild, inoffensive race, who would fall an easy prey to a crafty and cruel foe"—and who, incidentally, would have made great slaves.""^ They had the same skull development as the peoples ofthe civilizations of Mexico and Central America."' Citing George

62 NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

Armstrong Custer as an unimpeachable authority on Native America/** Foster contrasted the Mound Builder with the Native, who possessed a conformation of skull which clearly separates him from the pre-historic Mound-builder, and such a conformation must give rise to different mental traits.... His character, since first known to the white man has been signalized by treachery and cruelty. He repels all efforts to raise him from his degraded position: and while he has not the moral nature to adopt the virtues of civilization, his brutal instincts lead him to welcome its vices. He was never known voluntarily to engage in an enterprise requiring methodical labor; he dwells in temporary and movable habitations; he follows game in their migrations; he imposes the drudgery of life upon his squaw; he takes no need for the future. To suppose that such a race threw up the strong lines of circumvallation and the symmetrical mounds which crown so many of our river-terraces, is as preposterous, almost, as to suppose that they built the pyramids of Egypt.'''

Foster determined that the Mound Builders were not of European origin (a rival theory) but were a "race who, in times far remote, flourished in Brazil."^** As late as 1920—thirty years after Cyrus Thomas had shown cranial evidence was just so much hocus-pocus^'—archaeologist Earnest Hooton was still trying to sort out Mound-Builder from Native skulls. Puzzling over the head "deformities" of the Mound Builders and deciding that they were due to the "pressure of the occiput on a hard cradle board," he concluded that Mound Builders were naturally a long headed type (i.e., a "lower" race), putting them in company with Natives, because this would have made them more susceptible than naturally round headed types {i.e., "higher" races) to skull deformation. It would have been, Hooten decided, "the tendency" of those smart roundheaded babies "to rest the head on one side or other" instead of "on the back," as dumber, long headed babies would have done." Such meaty evidence inclined him to think that the Mound Builders were of South American extraction, i.e., he cleaved to the Peruvian theory." Since, by the mid-nineteenth century. Mound Builders had become indelibly cross-identified with Toltecs-cum-Peruvians, it next became necessary for science to explain why all the Peruvians seemed to live in Peru, not in the Ohio River valley. Migration was the watchword of the hour. The "fact" of two separate races, the Natives and the Mound Builders, seemed to require two separate migrations.The Bering Strait was still a good enough entry point for Native Americans (now often styled "Tartars" or "Mongolians"), but the magnificent Mound Builders required more spectacular routes. Some favored Peruvians moving southeast from the Pacific Northwest, whereas others believed they had pushed north from Central and South America. Directionality

THE "SLAUGHTER" OF THE WOUNDS 63

seemed randomly selected to suit the argument of the moment, but the chaos at the heart of migratory theory did not dampen enthusiasm for it. The archaeologist J. T. Short was among those eager to establish MoundBuilder migratory routes as fact. He used the upward evolution of MoundBuilder crania, as it was traced southeast from the Dakotas into the Ohio valley, to track Mound-Builder migration. One cranium from the Scioto Mound in Ohio served his purpose well by displaying "an internal capacity of 103 cubic inches" (the upper reaches of European cranial capacity was then at 109 cubic inches).'"* "The evidence of considerable development in the size of the cranium in this same race is clear," he cried, "and taken with other testimony, such as the great improvement in art and architecture, indicates probably a movement from north to south, and that the mound race was older in the former region [the Dakotas] than in the latter [Ohio]."" Squier and Davis were also attracted to the Tol tec-Peruvian theory through its emphasis on migration.^^ They let their diffusionist enthusiasm flow well to the South, musing that it was "not impossible that future investigations may show that the agriculture and civilization of the Mexicans, Central Americans, and Peruvians, had its origin among the builders of the ancient monuments on the banks of the great Mississippi river."" The clincher for them was agriculture. The Central and South Americans were known to have been largescale farmers, whereas settler myth denied the same status to the great agricultural nations of the woodlands. Consequently, the Mound Builders had to have derived from Central or South America and before that—who knew? Their sly reference to mound culture in terms of the Nile River valley hinted at sensational possibilities.^** Not the least of the migrationists was Lewis Henry Morgan (1818-1881), who took pains in 1875 and 1876 to demonstrate the essential sameness of the Aztecs and the Mound Builders on the argument that both were mired in the "Middle status of barbarism."*'' Since, for Morgan, migration served mainly to enable large-scale cultural diffusion, the backbone of his migration argument was that there was no pressing need to "look to [the] distant regions" of Yucatan, Chiapas, and Guatemala "for the original home of the MoundBuilders."^" New Mexico was far enough south for him, and sufficiently shy of the high-water mark of culture in Central America to match the lower culture of the Mound Builders in "the valley of the Ohio."^' He believed that New Mexicans diffused their culture "from the valley of the Rio Grande, or the San Juan, to the shores of the Gulf of Mexico and thence northward to the valley of the Ohio."" Because he felt that inclement weather north of the Ohio River had

64 NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

tumed back the Mound Builders, Morgan also distinguished between the earthworks of the Mound Builders and those "of the Indians in the Lower status of barbarism" lurking around the Ohio Valley, although his contemporaries did not generally join him in demoting the Ohio Mound Builders to near savagery." Morgan restricted his Mound Builder diffusion to a relatively small area, compared to the more numerous theories that diffused "Toltecan" culture far and wide based on little more than superficial similarities of building shapes. In 1843, S. P. Hildreth answered objections that Ohio and Central America were "too distant from each other" to be one nation by inferring that "there can be no reasonable objection" to the mounds' "being erected by a colony from Mexico, where the same works are found as in Central America. Neither is there any serious objection to their being the parent tribe of the Mexicans, driven away southerly by the more northen [sic] and warlike tribes."" Hildreth called upon Samuel Morton's latest ruminations on the subject for support.^' By 1881, the supposed similarities between the "once magnificent temples of Central America" and the so-called "temple mounds" in North America led the archaeologist R. S. Robertson to the assumption that one great, unified civilization had lorded it over "pre-historic man from Yucatan to the Northern lakes.""' As these convoluted fantasies make clear, cultural diffusion went hand in hand with migration theory for reasons that were transparently political: The primary effect of diffusion theory was to deny that North American Natives had the slightest spark of creativity of their own, needing to borrow every idea from more elevated others. So apt was the strategy that diffusion was still animating anthropological discussion as late as the mid-twentieth century, while, as noted in chapter 1, migration remains the centerpiece of westem science regarding Native America.^^ The "lost race" of Mound Builders was also useful in holding at bay two pesky challenges to official mythology. Westem savageology required Natives to have been hunters, not farmers, supporting tiny populations, thinly scattered across the landscape, whereas the evidence argued that an obviously huge North American population had engaged in massive agriculture, precontact.^^ As remarked by Squier and Davis, whoever had built the mounds had unquestionably been large-scale agriculturalists with the spare food and population to devote to earthworks.'^ Furthermore, the incredibly large number of cemeteries (most mounds were burial mounds) could not but indicate a vast Mound-Builder population.™ Lucidity might well have tumed dangerous for mythology at this point.

THE "SLAUGHTER" OF THE MOUNDS 65

General Clark had recorded, for instance, the tradition that Natives "were as numerous as the trees in the wood" before European invasion, while David Zeisberger noted that Natives had been "formerly, according to their own testimony, far more numerous than at the present time."" Clearly, the MoundBuilder myth was necessary to disqualify Native Americans from consideration as the large, settled, farming population of yore, an appraisal that would have upended all governmental policy towards them, based, as it was, on the stereotype of low-population, savage vagabonds. The low-population story conceming Native Americas is, by the way, still being pursued by many anthropologists and historians, although, under the scrutiny of honest researchers, this remnant of Mound-Builder delusion is finally beginning to droop.^^ Would that the same could be said regarding Native agriculture, but the shameful refusal to recognize that the woodlanders were large-scale farmers remains, with too many histories obstinately continuing to downplay the extent and sophistication of woodland agriculture." Finally, the Mound-Builder theory with all its accouterments was mighty handy for answering nineteenth-century critics of genocide and land seizure. The poor, murdered, white race of Mound Builders was guaranteed to raise a tear in the settler eye. Indeed, it had such a surefire impact on the voting public that President Andrew Jackson (1767-1845) used it as THE justification for "Removal," his genocidal policy of forcibly relocating eastem Natives west of the Mississippi, killing up to half in the starving, wintery, barefoot trek the Cherokees named "the Trail of Tears." In his Second Annual Message to Congress delivered on 6 December 1830—hypocritcally prefaced with the news that "no one" could "indulge a more friendly feeling" toward Natives than himself—Jackson characterized Removal as an amiable little plan to "place a dense and civilized population" of settlers "in large tracts of country now occupied by a few savage hunters."^" Sneering at conscience, he crowed over his victory against his critics, charging that [h]umanity has often wept over the fate of the aborigines of this country, and Philanthropy has long been busily employed in devising means to avert it, but its progress has never for a momenl been arrested, and one by one have many powerful tribes disappeared from the earth. To follow to the tomb the last of his race and to tread on the graves of extinct nations excite melancholy reflections. But true philanthropy reconciles the mind to these vicissitudes as it does to the extinction of one generation to make room for another.^'

Having established that going extinct was the only decent thing for Native America to do, Jackson clinched Removal policy by reminding Congress: In the monuments and fortresses of an unknown people, spread over the extensive regions ofthe West, we behold the memorials of a once powerful race, which was exterminated

66 NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

or has disappeared to make room for the existing savage tribes. Nor is there anything in this which, upon a comprehensive view ofthe general interests ofthe human race, is to be regretted. Philanthropy could not wish to see this continent restored to the condition in which it was found by our forefathers. What good man would prefer a country covered with forests and ranged by a few thousand savages to our extensive Republic, studded with cities, towns, and prosperous farms, embellished with all the improvements which art can devise or industry execute, occupied by more than 12,000,000 happy people, and filled with all the blessings ofliberty, civilization, and religion?'^

There was nothing new in this arrangement, Jackson argued, reiterating, "The tribes which occupied the countries now constituting the Eastem States were annihilated or have melted away to make room for the whites."^^ Ah, yes: Lowpopulation, savage hunters had murderously displaced the majestic Mound Builders; now it was their tum to die. Thus did the seventh President ofthe United States erect Removal on the back of settler myths, each more outrageous than the one preceding/^ Andrew Jackson was not the only president to make political hay ofthe "lost white race" theory ofthe Mound Builders. General and ninth President William Henry Harrison (1773-1841) also supported the notion. Seconding the Toltecan theory of the Mound Builders, he spewed forth Mound-Builder myth as irrefutable history in an 1839 address to the Historical and Philosophical Society of Ohio.^^ Perhaps because his hosts were Ohioans, Harrison located the exterminatory battle pitting heathen Redskin against enfeebled Mound Builder along the Ohio River.^^ Once more. Natives were presented as the genocidal maniacs ofthe drama, clearly deserving of whatever they got from the settlers by way of payback. Although nearly all promulgators of Mound-Builder myth derived from the elite classes, it is particularly important in terms of Jackson and Harrison to note the social status and political affinities ofthe supporters ofthe "lost race" theory ofthe Mound Builders. Jackson and Harrison were celebrated as furious "Indian-fighters" (a proud designation in antebellum America) and coasted into national office on the coattails of massacres promoted as great military victories, Jackson having crushed noncombatant Muscogees in the "Red Sticks War," and Harrison having defeated sleeping Shawnee women and old folks at the "Battle of Tippecanoe." It was Harrison who conceded that settlers "consider[ed] the murdering of Indians in the highest degree meritorious."*" It was such sentiments as these that elected presidents in the nineteenth century, from which office the incumbents were able to tum their frightful philosophies into federal policies. It is equally important to note that, before national consciousness crystalized around racism and political jingoism overwhelmed logic in the nineteenth century, scholars were perfectly amenable to the idea of North American Natives as the Mound Builders. Indeed, this was Thomas Jefferson's own

THE "SLAUGHTER" OF THE MOUNDS 67

conclusion, in consequence of his having ripped open a burial mound, as recorded in his Notes on the State of Virginia (1787).^^ In 1797, Benjamin Smith Barton likewise concluded that Native Americans were the direct descendants of the Mound Builders, although his initial conjectures in 1787 had fingered the Vikings as the Mound Builders." It was a personal trip to Ohio in 1794 that had changed Barton's mind, as he reported back to the American Philosophical Society in his "Observations and Conjectures conceming Certain Articles Which Were Taken out of an Ancient Tumulus." Although beguiled by the Central American theory, he argued cogently that the ravages of European invasion had thinned down once numerous ranks, dragging cultural development down in its wake, concluding that "some of the present races of North-American Indians are the descendants of nations much more populous and polished than themselves."^'* The mounds were unequivocally "the work of the ancestors of some of the present races of Indians."^* This was an argument that Barton developed in greater detail a year later in his New Views of the Origin of the Tribes and Nations of America (1798). Even into the first decades of the nineteenth century, there were scholars insisting that Natives had built the mounds. In 1829, Dr. James H. McCulloh, Jr., concluded in Appendix II to his Researches. Philosophical and Antiquarian. Goncerning the Aboriginal History of America that Mound Builders and Natives were one in the same.**^ Squier and Davis themselves, in the fmal paragraph of their work, conceded that the presence of "native copper from Lake Superior, mica from the Alleghanies, shells from the Gulf, and obsidian (perhaps porphyry) from Mexico" all seated "side by side in the same mounds" seemed "seriously to conflict with the hypothesis of a migration, either northward or southward," suggesting contemporary trade networks, instead.*^ Such views were, however, determinedly swept under the rug. Despite having hit upon the truth of trade networks, for instance. Squire and Davis remained so unwilling to relinquish their cherished "extinct race, whose name is lost to tradition itself" as to pin their hopes on future research that would explain away their evidence.**^ By 1830, any authors openly championing Natives as Mound Builders were simply silenced. Thus, in 1894, when Cyrus Thomas hunted, hopelessly at first, for precedents in the literature to bolster his own unpopular contention that Native Americans had built the mounds, he was taken aback by the long list of impressive scholars who had preceded him in this conclusion, including his own luminous contemporaries, Lucien Carr and Daniel Brinton, as well as his boss at the Smithsonian, John G. Powell.^^ As the list from Jefferson to Powell demonstrates, rational thought on the subject of Mound Builders was not impossible for Euroamericans in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries. It was, however, politically inexpedient and, therefore, quickly shunted aside by those intent upon denying Native

68 NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

Americans credit for anything that looked like "civilization" to Europeans. Moreoever, since Mound-Builder myth and Removal reality went hand in hand, it is not remarkable that, long about the time that Removal surfaced as a serious national debate, the Mound Builders transmuted from a "lost" Toltecan/ Peruvian "race" into a decidedly "lost white race." As Randall McGuire pointed out in 1994, this neat segue allowed settlers to "appropriat[e] the Indian past to legitimate the White Nation" they were building.^" The attempt to paint the Mound Builders "white" began before the tum of the nineteenth century and gathered steam with each succeeding decade, so that, by the 1840s, a whole cottage industry was in agitation, promulgating "white" Mound Builders in various guises. No theory was too ridiculous to gain adherents. Take, for instance, what happened to the evidence of Native moundbuilding in Spanish records: It was so dyslexically read as to puff the theory that the Spanish conquistadores had built the mounds! Between October 1787 and January 1788 none other than Noah Webster produced three very leamed letters on the subject. Although addressed to the president of Yale College, all were dutifully published in a public venue, by way of establishing the conquistadorial theory of mound-building. "The result of my enquiries," Webster solemnly intoned, "is a strong persuasion in my own mind, that the fortifications, remaining in that westem country, were erected by that Commader," Hemando de Soto.**' Having reconstructed what he mistook for Soto's route, Webster's last word on the subject was that Soto "threw up" the mounds "which are still to be traced in the Carolinas and Georgia, on the Ohio and the Mississippi."^^ Webster's contemporary, Benjamin Smith Barton, impatiently dismissed these absurd conjectures as cross-eyed, but it was ultimately Barton, not Webster, who was forgotten." In pursuit of "white" foremnners to Native America, the venerable "ten lost tribes of Israel," once a popular explanation of the Native presence in the Americas, mutated into a popular explanation ofthe "white" Mound Builders in the Americas. This spun out in many permutations, such as the twist proposed by John Jeffries in 1869: "In regard to the peopling of South America"—i.e., the Mound Builders' supposed base of operations—"the claim is that it was done by Joctan's [sic] posterity." (The Joktans were a south Arabian people supposed by biblical scholars to have been descended through Shem, son of Noah.) The irrefutable evidence ofthe Joktanian origin of South Americans was that a "province in Yucatan is called Jucton, and there being evidences of a different people than the Mongolians, inhabiting that country and also South America, it is assumed that the descendants of Shem peopled these several regions in the new world."^'' Jeffries's Joktans paled in comparison to yet another "ten-lost-tribes" theory, none other than the foundational story of The Church of Jesus Christ of the Latter-Day Saints. The L.D.S. hierarchy does not like to speak out loud about

THE "SLAUGHTER" OF THE MOUNDS 69

its involvement in "lost-tribes" sensationalism, but the trail of evidence leads straight from factured fables of Israelite Mound Builders to The Book of Mormon.^^ From his youth, Joseph Smith (1805-1844), founder of the Mormon religion, was a devote of Mound-Builder mythology, given to flights of fancy about it while still in his parents' house and eager "to write a history of the Moundbuilders."^^ Indeed, in her excellent biography of Smith, Fawn Brodie stated unequivocally that the "plan of Joseph's [Book of Mormon] was to come directly out of popular theory concerning the Moundbuilders."^^ The Book of Mormon features the two warring camps common to every Mound-Builder myth, which he named the "Nephites" and the "Lamanites." The Nephites were "a fair and delightsome people," being fanners and metalworkers, whereas the Lamanites were a veritable sink of racist stereotypes conceming Natives, "wild and ferocious, and a bloodthirsty people; fiill of idolatry and filthiness."^** Indeed, Smith made the original Lamanites so vicious that God tumed their skin red in punishment!'^ In preparing The Book of Mormon, Smith looks to have hitchhiked on the work of the Reverend Ethan Smith (no relation to Joseph) who, in View of the Hebrews (1823), promulgated the story of the "lost tribes of Israel" making their way to the Ohio valley, only to fall into separate, hostile camps that ultimately wiped each other out.'^ Indeed, 25,000 of the 275,000 words of The Book of Mormon are, according to Brodie, "chiefly those chapters from Isaiah mentioned in Ethan Smith's View of the Hebrews."^^^ Joseph Smith is also credibly accused of lifting material from a manuscript (ca. 1810) by Solomon Spaulding, who had proposed Christian Romans as the Mound Builders."^^ Smith is alleged to have revamped Spaulding's characters, so that lost Iraelites replaced Romans in the mound-building venture.'°^ As Silberberg noted, when Spaulding's own book was fmally published as the Manuscript Found in 1885, it was tantilizingly enough like Smith's Book of Mormon "to arouse suspicion," yet just unique enough "to deflect the charge of plagiarism."'"'* In addition to Spanish and Semitic Mound Builders, the "Hindoo" theory also enjoyed considerable press. ("Hindoos" were classed as "Aryans.") It first surfaced in Mound-Builder literature from 1811 to 1812 from the pen of Hugh Williamson,'*'^ Hindu Mound Builders were, however, most famously connected with Caleb Atwater, who conducted the first concentrated investigation of the mounds, propounding the Hindu connection in his "Description of the Antiquities Discovered in the State of Ohio and Other Westem States" (1820). Atwater had no archaeological or other scientific training, being, instead, the postmaster of Circleville, Ohio, a place named for its mound, one of the most celebrated sites in the entire Ohio valley.'"^ What Atwater had—all he had—was firsthand access to the mounds. Affecting to scom the writings of those who had never visited mounds and who could not, therefore, draw any useful conclusions conceming them.

70 NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

Atwater spun out some doozies of his own. Glomming onto the "Behring Strait" theory., he proposed that descendants of the children of Noah, af\er cooling their heels in India, had sailed across the strait, landed in the Pacific northwest, and eventually made it to the Midwest. Atwater even detected a line of mounds stretching across North America, starting from at the sons' landing site (which Atwater felt he could descry) and extending right into Ohio.'"' Atwater cross-identified these sons of Noah with the Hindus, thus creating the Hebrew Hindus, a lineal connection that no doubt comes as a suprise to both groups. Atwater's motive for inventing this blended family became clear when he demanded, "But were the ancestors of our North American Indians the authors of our works?" Such a notion was hardly worth a piffle! Indeed, "[h]ad not such an opinion been advanced by some great and good men in the United States," such as Jefferson and Barton, Atwater would not have bothered to refute the "frail" idea."*^ Atwater attributed the theory of Natives as Mound Builders to the Euroamerican desire to counter the French theory "that our climate was debilitating in its effects" by citing the mega-monuments of the mounds. Still, Atwater indignantly asked, "Were our writers so hardly pressed for arguments, that they were obliged to resort to another theory equally unfounded in truth?"'"^ No, no, Atwater fumed; skeletal evidence made it clear that the Mound Builders had been Hindu. By way of confirmation, he stormed, "I have examined more than fifty skulls found in tumuli, several of which I have before me.""° He considered them such potent proof as to publish illustrations of the skulls, anticipating the craniometry of Samuel Morton by nearly two decades. (Morton was, by the way, interested in Atwater's collection. In fact, he later obtained two Mound-Builder skulls directly from the Atwater family.''') Atwater did not write in a vaccum, nor did his ruminations sink into obscurity. In 1823, Judge John Haywood added a twist to Atwater's "Hindoos" in The Natural and Aboriginal History of Tennessee. Retaining Atwater's Hebrew Hindus, Haywood added Persians and pygmies to the migration!"^ Given such evidence, by the mid-nineteenth century, it was generally held that the "ten lost tribes of Israel" had actually wound up in parts of Asia Minor, including "Hindoostan.""^ This conveniently allowed Hindus to wend their way to the Ohio Valley to become Mound Builders, for, by then, land-bridge theorists had so far sunk the oceans prior to the biblical flood, that the Hindus were able to saunter across the bed of the Pacific at their leisure."'' As though the Hindu theory were not bug-eyed enough by itself, it spun out some even more preposterous corollaries. It was, for instance, the well known fact that "Hindoos" had domesticated elephants that led Dr. Frederick Larkin to the opinion in Ancient Man in America (1880) that the Mound Builders had "tamed" the mastodon (which Larkin dubbed "the American elephant") and "used him as a beast of burden.""^ Larkin thus resolved the thorny question of

THE "SLAUGHTER" OF THE MOUNDS 71

how they had managed to lug around vast quantities of mound-building dirt, as well as food and supplies for the work crews. Obviously, the theory of the "lost tribes of Israel" was being revamped to suit Mound-Builder mythology. By 1840, the retooling was complete. The "ten lost tribes" had transmuted so entirely into the "lost race" of Mound Builders that most theorists had simply forgotten the biblical origins of "lost race" speculation, let alone that it was originally intended to explain the Native presence in the Americas. Concomitantly, a dogged determination to present the "lost race" of Mound Builders as Euro-white, or nearly so, burgeoned. After 1830, authors were at pains to make at least one of the groups migrating into North America suitably European. Thus did John Jeffries argue in 1869 that, "Though the remarkable similarity of the families of the American race [i.e.. Natives] does exist, there is no doubt but peoples of the Caucasian, Mongolian and Malay races have also in very remote ages been inhabitants of America.""^ Given the predisposition to paint the Mound Builders in a very light hue, much talk was excited by the "discovery" of various light skinned, light eyed Natives, even though the portrait of Natives as uniformly dark had always been a racist illusion. First contact chronicles clearly noted the presence of all gradations of skin, hair, and eye color among Native North American populations, but, once racist science had decreed Europeans to be the world's only light skinned people. Natives had to become exclusively "copper-colored" with jet black hair and deep brown eyes. Consequently, for example, the consistent reports of the earliest French missionaries that the Iroquois were a white skinned people were junked."^ Similarly, when James McCulloh objected in 1829 to the terminology of "Copper Coloured Race" as "ill chosen" for leaving out the wide variation in actual skin color, he, too, was dismissed."** Only dark skinned "Injuns" would do, so that when the natural fact that the westem Mandans were found in the nineteenth century to have "had light hair and blue eyes," it was taken at once as confirmation of migratory Europeans, not as evidence of something amiss in racist biology."^ The scenario of the Mound Builders as a "lost" and, now, suitably "white" race struck down in its prime by invading ghouls was not a little abetted by popular science writers like Josiah Priest (ca. 1790-1851) who, in American Antiquities and Discoveries In the West {\S33), posited this tale in spades. He had Romans at Marietta, Ohio, and the "lost tribes" wandering so freely hither and yon that it was a wonder they did not bump into the the Egyptians in Kentucky or the freelancing Greeks, Welsh, Vikings, Hindus, and Tartars everywhere else.'^^ Priest's ridiculous book sold 22,000 copies in the first thirty months of release, making it a bonafide blockbuster at the time.'^' In a similarly suspect tome. Traditions ofDe-coo-dah and Antiquarian Researches (1858), William Pidgeon let loose with astounding claims of his own, all posited as proven fact. Pidgeon pushed the Greco-Roman theory but was not averse to

72 NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

letting Persians, Danes, Saxons, Belgians, Egyptians, Hindus, Phoenicians, and even central Africans in on the fun.'^^ Of the many electrifying theories that had ancient Anglo-like peoples plying American shores and then staggering a thousand miles inland to build the mounds before expiring without a trace, the only one that bore any likeness to reality was the one given the shortest shrift by nineteenth-century scholars: the Vikings of Vinland. It was well known from the old Icelandic epics, the Saga of the Greenlanders and the Saga of Eirik the Red, written up about 1070 by Adam of Bremen, that the Vikings had journeyed to "Vinland" in 1002 or 1003 C.E. There is no longer any question that the Vikings established a woebegone little colony on the bleak shoreline of Newfoundland, where its remains were "discovered" in 1961 at L'Anse aux Meadows (after local Natives literally took an anthropologist by the hand and walked him to the site). Some nineteenth-century sources, such as John Jeffries, did mention the Norse (usually dubbed "Danes") in passing. Indeed, De Witt Clinton, who served stints in the New York and U.S. Senates and was mayor of New York City, Govemor of New York, and promoter of the Erie Canal, sagely opined in 1820 that the mounds had been constructed by the Vikings.'" The Viking theory of Native origin got its foremost boost, however, from the pen of Henry Wadsworth Longfellow, whose unintentionally hilarious ballad, "The Skeleton in Armor" (1841), waxed maudlin over a Fall River, Massachusetts, skeleton found in 1831 wearing purportedly Viking headgear.'^''(It was not unusual for Mound-Builder corpses to be buried wearing their beaten copper breastplates and ornaments.'^^) Spine-chillingly, Longfellow's skeleton arose to address the reader: I am a Viking old! My deeds, though Manifold, No Skald in song has told. No Saga taught thee! Take heed, that in thy verse Thou dost the tale rehearse, Else dread a dead man's curse' For this I sought thee. '^*

As it turned out, the Viking auld had made off with the daughter young of a Prince, fleeing beyond his reach to America, for love's sake. "There lived we many years/Time dried the maiden's tears," he sang, till "Death closed her mild blue eyes." This sad, if predictable, course of events caused the Viking "In the forest here/Clad in my warlike gear" to fall "upon [his] spear."'^^ A silly romance, the poem may fall flatter than a misflipped pancake today, but it had all the right stuff to make middle-class hearts go pitty-pat in 1841—ripped

THE "SLAUGHTER" OF THE MOUNDS 73

bodices, dead men's curses, Viking ravishers, and pre-Columbian Europeans in America. Longfellow's best efforts notwithstanding, the story ofthe Vikings was not very popular in explaining the Mound Builders. I suspect that this was because the Anglo Saxons in control ofthe presses were still reacting traumatically to their own, long-standing propaganda against the Vikings as savages equal in supposed ferocity to those other savages, the Native Americans. Since Euroamericans were on the lookout for "civilized" candidates to fill the bill as the tragically lost Mound Builders, the Vikings simply did not qualify. Another theory that did prove quite popular had the Mound Builders as refugees from sunken Atlantis. Although modem scholars are loathe to admit it, Atlantean fantasies of Native American origins did not breed along the lunatic fringe but among respected thinkers. It was also one of the more venerable theories, having been afioat (even if the continent were not) since at least 1607, when the Spanish theologian, Gregorio Garcia, put it forward as one possible explanation ofthe origin of Native Americans.'^^ French and Euroameriean scholars entered the lists only in the late eighteenth century, well behind the Iberian curve. In 1817, James McCulloh brought it forward to the Euroamerican public in some detail. Recounting the Platonic stories of Atlantis, he prefaced his discussion with the remark that "many leamed men have defended the narration" so that the story had "gained considerably within the last forty or fif\y years."'^^ Atlantis thereafter massively resurfaced in the work ofthe French historian, the Abbe E. Charles Brasseur de Bourbourg (1814-1874), who ardently supported it on the evidence of Toltecan history, which recorded the story of a major fiood.'^^ Looking to linguistics, Bourbourg found proof in the "fact" that the words "Atlas" and "Atlantic" have no etymology in Indo-European languages, although the radicals a and atl in Nahuatal (a Tolteccan language) indicate "water," "man," and "top of the head."'^' Similarly, the roots Atlan and Atlaga meant, respectively, "on the border of," or "amid the water" and "to combat" or "to be in agony." Bourbourg also instanced the port city oi Atlan, present at arrival ofthe Spaniards.' Based on such coincidences of sound, Bourbourg built a Tower of Babel that scattered Atlantean survivors across the Americas, allowing such claims to spring up as this from William Stone, "that not only have all the civilizations ofthe Old World sprung from what is misnamed the New World, but that Egypt herself was settled by that people; in other words that the Moundbuilders [i.e., Atlantean refugees] were the original Egyptians."'" For his part, in reviewing

74 NATIVE AMERICANS. ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

Bourbourg's research, John Wells Foster offered as proof the well known if "primitive Dolicodephali of America," that is, the round heade(i forms of the "higher races," which he detected in the Caribs, Venezuelans, and Guianans, demonstrating that they were related to the Guanches of the Canary Islands as well as the "Moors, Tuaricks, Copts, etc." of northern Africa.'"''' (It was well known that the Guanches of the Canary Islands as well as many North Africans were survivors of Atlantis.) Reasoning only got murkier as the nineteenth century wore on. In 1878, William Stone offered a real Rube-Goldberg of an Egyptian/Atlantean/ MoundBuilder theory, which commenced with the assertion "that Central America was first settled by the Phcenicians.'"^^ Astonishingly, he was not alone in this conjecture. It was in evidence as early as 1843, when Dr. Crookshanks graced the American Pioneer with the points of origin and routes of the two races of America: The race "from Asia by Behring's straits [sicY was, of course. Native American. The more fascinating race of Mound Builders came "from Egypt and the Mediterranean generally, partly by way of the Pacific ocean [sic\ and principally by that of the straits [sic] of Gibraltar."'^^ However riveting migratory routes might have been, Stone ultimately centered on the most bewitching issue raised by Crookshanks. It became the titular question of his essay: "The Moundbuilders: Were They Egyptians; and Did They Ever Occupy the State of New York?" Having whetted the reader's appetite. Stone came to the clincher, a dig by William Parish of Seneca Falls, New York, on 5 May 1877, which netted artifacts that Stone conclusively if ridiculously identified as Eygptian, claiming that the tiny pipes from the mound were "almost an exact representation of the four stone giants in the great temple of Ibsamboul on the Nile, and the Colossi of Amenoph III (Memnon)." In addition, he decided that the figurines' similarities to "the Egyptian and Sphinxlike cast of features, so different from those of the North American Indian, must forcibly strike every observer.'"-'^ By the end of the essay, skulls spoke to Stone even more loudly than the Sphinx. The summer of 1877 at Ramsdill's Cave in New York, Horace Kelly dug up a female "skull imbedded in a peat-bed," which Stone wound up keeping on the desk before him while he wrote, as a talisman. In a train of thought that only grew more cryptic as it continued. Stone declared that the skull bore "a striking similarity to those [skulls] of ancient Peruvians," so that the woman must have been Atlantean via Egypt, for, just as Brasseur de Bourbourg had argued, mound-building refugees from Atlantis "at one time either occupied or visited certain sections of New York State."'^^ Ooookay.

THE "SLAUGHTER" OF THE MOUNDS 75

McCulloh, Bourbourg, and Stone notwithstanding, among Anglophones, the Atlantean origin of the Mound Builders ultimately became most closely identified with the writing of Ignatius Donnelly (1831-1901), possibly because he tinkered only minimally with standing Mound-Builder theory. In his highly influential Atlantis: The Antediluvian World (1882), Donnelly rekindled "scientific thoughf on Atlantis "in the Anglo-Saxon world," leading the eminent Prime Minister of Britain, William Edward Gladstone, to request that the British government outfit a sea expedition to "trace out the outline of Atlantis in the Atlantic."'" The Crown's cabinet shelved the project, but Donnelly's lively thesis proved irresistible to the westem imagination, athirst for lost things—tribes, races, WHOLE CONTINENTS—so that experts throughout the European world flocked to it.'''" Donnelly argued that Plato had been revealing history, not spinning fables, with his stories of the lost continent of Atlantis in Timaeus and Critias. People of that continent, located in the Atlantic, "first rose from a state of barbarism to civilization," voyaging west to the Americas and east to Europe, Africa, and the Mediterranean, carrying their technology with them. They became the "gods" of the Greeks, Hindus, Phoenicians, and Scandinavians, while their cosmologies informed those of Egypt and Peru and their wisdom seeded that of Europe and Central America. The "Aryan" race was indigenous to Atlantis, as was the "Semitic," and "possibly also . . . the Turanian races [i.e., Turks and Tartars]." When Atlantis sank into the sea, refugees rafted both east and west, conferring the story of the "deluge" worldwide.''*' Donnelly's Atlantean theory was, in other words, the ultimate in diffusionist fantasies, having the happy effect of explaining the mounds in terms of a higher if elusive culture that Europeans had long imagined and admired: Plato's Atlantis. Donnelly rested his theory heavily on the evidence of Squier and Davis, although they had really never done more than compare the Ohio-Mississippi River system to the Egyptian Nile as a cradle of civilization."*^ Nevertheless, the Mississippi River valley wound up in the running for the cradle of civilization as a result of Donnelly's speculations. As late as 1908, for instance, Emilius Oviatt Randall, head of the Ohio State Archaeological and Historical Society, reported that the "latest developments of science in the effort to locate the cradle of the human race, suggest, with much plausible argument, the shifting of humanity's nativity from the valley of the Euphrates to the valley of the Mississippi."'''^ Donnelly's theory prospered in an era whose liberal thinkers looked to cohere traditions worldwide into one metanarrative. It was in that period that

76 NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

theologians began claiming that all religions were animated by the same impulses {identifiabiy Christian), while anthropologists began insisting that all cultures were connected through diffusion (with the only original ideas noticeably European). In pursuit of his own Grand Unifying Theory, Donnelly perforce included the Mound Builders in his descendants of Atlantis. Based on the geometrical pattems and the measured perfection of their mounds in relation to one another as well as to the cardinal directions, Donnelly concluded, "The Mound Builders had attained a considerable degree of civilization."''" Donnelly also followed the common error of misidentifying many of the mounds as "fortifications," stretched "diagonally" from New York through the Ohio River Valley, a primary prop of the "warring races" portion of the Mound-Builder myth."*^ Donnelly's scenario is at its least original in his discussion of Natives, whose sole role was to swoop down from the north so fatally that, when gentle Mound Builder met Ferocious Savage, the conclusion was foregone. The Savages "drove them south or exterminated them," Donnelly announced.'"^ Finding that they could not hold their river valleys against the warlike savages from the north, the beleaguered Mound Builders "retreated southward toward Mexico," becoming, in fact, the Nahua people.'"^ Having cross-identified Mound Builders with Mexicans, Donnelly made a leap somewhat farther south, next identifying them with "the ancient Peruvians."'*^ All Donnelly really did with his Atlantean Mound Builders was to reiterate the standing settler fantasy, topping it off with a large dollop of Platonic glitter. The trouble with Hebrews, Hindus, Egyptians, and, possibly, Atlanteans was their tendency to color. Some settlers required more positively "white" Mound Builders, so "white Indians" were conjured up in the wildly popular theory of seafaring Welshmen, a twice-told tale. The original Welsh story, pamphleteered in 1583, was formalized as scholarship in Historie of Cambria (1584) by Caradoc of Llancarfan, a Welsh historian. It was then popularized among Anglophones by Richard Hakluyt in 1589."*^ In the 1580s, the story of the twelfh-century Welsh Prince Modoc sailing west into legend was simply a curiosity that dovetailed quaintly with the new "voyages of discovery" then underway, but, two centuries later, it was desperately needed to explain just how the Mound Builders came to have been European.'^" Johnny-on-the-spot with a theory here was Noah Webster. Fresh from posting his conquistadorial theory of the Mound Builders, Webster began flirting heavily with the Welsh in 1788. He argued from the similarity of English barrows and American mounds, as well as the custom, shared by Welsh

THE "SLAUGHTER" OF THE MOUNDS 77

and Native alike, of putting a stone atop a barrow in passing.'^' Meanwhile, Amos Stoddard, the Revolutionary War soldier, lawyer, and Govemor of the Territory of Missouri, 1804-1805, came down in favor of the Welsh origin of the Mound Builders in his well known Sketches, Historical and Descriptive, of Louisiana (1812).'" For his part, the linguist Henry Ker, who had been among "Mnacedens tribe of Indians, of Missouri" in 1810, claimed that they cherished up a book, mysteriously Welsh-like and brought to Missiouri by their ancestors.'" The Welsh tale was, however, most intimately connected with John Filson (1747-1788), the popularizer of the Daniel Boone and Kentucky myths. After the customary review of many of the more colorful theories of European and Mediterranean entry into the Americas before Columbus, all facilitated by "shipwreck"—Carthiginians received an honorable mention but the Vikings, only a bare mention—Filson hurried on in his Discovery and Settlement of Kentucke (1784) to his own, pet construction: the breathless tale of Modoc, Prince of Wales, True Discoverer of America, Builder of Mounds.'"* He retrofited Llancarfan's tale to meet modem needs, begining with the raw fable: In the year 1170, Modoc, son of Woen Gwynnedh, Prince of Wales, dissatisfied with the situation of affairs at home, left his country, as related by the Welsh historians, in quest of new settlements, and leaving Ireland to the North, proceeded West till he discovered a fertile country; where, leaving a colony, he returned, and persuading many of his countrymen to join him, put to sea with ten ships, and was never more heard of.'"

Greenland and Iceland were out of the question as possible destinations, for these Welsh refugees had to end up as the Mound Builders of the American heartland. Filson hardly invented the Mound-Building version of Modoc, which was widespread by the time he wrote. He merely coaxed it out of the woodwork and into the limelight. Most extant accounts of Welsh "Indians" appeared in "captivity narratives," themselves standard, formulaic fare that featured prisoners of this or that Native nation sustained through their ordeal only by their Christian faith. In the joyous climax, the "captive" retumed to the "civilization." The primary purpose of captivity narratives was to fan the flames of racial hatred against Natives, but, as the notion of "lost races" grew in popularity, the mysterious Mound Builders were tossed into the mix to pique readers' interest and, thereby, excite pamphlet sales. Using the captivity format, the volume of Welsh "Indians" swelled to bewildering proportions. In 1765, for instance, a Major Rogers published a History and Biography of the Indians of North America, containing an account of "White Indians" who

78 NATIVE AMERICANS. ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

lived somewhere west ofthe Mississippi River.''*' Unverifiably west remained a popular direction for Welsh settlement in March 1782 when one Captain Isaac Stuart ofthe South Carolina Provincial Cavalry related the Welsh details of his experiences as a captive in his youth in 1764. At that time, the only settlerfolk "50 miles westward of Fort Pitt," as Stuart claimed to have been when he was captured, were a handful Moravian missionaries; scattered trappers, mainly French; and a few mixed blood emissaries of the British and French crowns—nary a South Carolinian cavalryman in the bunch.'^^ Nevertheless, Stuart asserted that, two years into his adoption by an unnamed nation along the Wabash River, he was rented out to "a Spaniard" who had been "sent from Mexico on discoveries."'^^ This is another bit of specious information, since Spanish were then hanging onto the Florida Peninsula and Mexico with their toenails, while the Ohio drainage system, especially at the Wabash, was being contested by the French and English. Undaunted by these little factual glitches, Stuart recounted that, while a porter for the Spaniard, he met "another white man who was in the like situation, a native of Wales, and named John Davey" (italics in the original).'" Stuart claimed that the expedition travelled to the westward, crossing the Mississippi near Red River, up which we travelled upwards of 700 miles. Here we came to a nation of Indians remarkably white, and whose hair was of a reddish color, at least, mostly so. They lived on a small river which emptied itself into red River [sic], which they called the River Post; and in the morning, the day after our arrival, the Welshman informed me that he was determined to remain with the nation of Indians, given [sic] as a reason that he understood their language, it being very Uttle different from the Welsh. My curiosity was excited very much hy this information, and I went with my companion to the chief men ofthe town, who informed him, in a language that 1 had no knowledge of, and which had no affinity with that of any other Indian tongue that I ever heard, that the forefathers of this nation came from a foreign country, and landed on the east side ofthe Mississippi (described particularly the country now called West Florida); and that, on the Spaniards['] taking possession ofthe country, they fled to their then abode; and, as proof of what they advanced, they brought out rolls of parchment wrote [sic] with blue ink, at least it had a bluish cast. The characters I did not understand, and the Welshman being unacquainted with letter of any language, I was not able to know what the meaning ofthe writing was.'*"

Thus, Stuart, though literate, was unable to identify the mysterious writing, whereas Davey, though Welsh, was illiterate and, therefore, equally unable to identify the writing. Versions of the popular Welsh-speaking "white Indians" popped up everywhere in the popular press about this time, mimicking the Stuart formula: A young captive is carried to a distant locale, far to the (choose one: west, north, south) ofthe Mississippi River, where he [sic] meets a fellow captive

THE "SLAUGHTER" OF THE MOUNDS 79

who just happens to be a native speaker of Welsh. Together, the pair somehow enounter yet more distant peoples, with whom, astoundingly, the Welshman communicates perfectly. These mysterious people treasure up writing they cannot read, which is assumed to be Welsh, although the invariably illiterate Welshman cannot verify this. It is never the feckless Welshman who escapes but always his fearless sidekick who ultimately returns to the settlements with his strange tale. By the 1820s, these Welsh-cum-captivity tales were so well known to the settlers as to form the backbone of much fable. The fact that they always contained real-sounding names and actual places in their descriptions were thought to afford proof positive of their authenticity, whereas the fact that moveable type for printing books had not been invented until 1455—285 years after Modoc's departure—was politely ignored.'^' Al! of the accounts followed this formula. Take, for instance, the story recorded in the journal of Charles Beatty. Beatty, himself, did not meet the Welsh-speaking Natives. His account was, in fact, thirdhand. Beatty had it from a Benjamin Sutton, who had been the captive of different nations, and lived many years among them. When he was with the Choctaws, at the Mississippi River, he went to an Indian town, a very considerable distance from New Orleans, whose inhabitants were of different complexions, not so lawny as those of the other Indians, and who spoke Welsh, He saw a book among them, which he supposed was a Welsh Bible, which they carefully kept wrapped up in a skin, but they could not read it; and he heard some of those Indians afterwards, in the lower Shawanee [sic] town, speak Welsh with one Lewis, a Welshman, captive there. This Welsh tribe now live on the west side of the Mississippi, a great way above New Orleans, (Italics in the original)'"

These Welsh stories continued into the mid-nineteenth century. In 1842, Thomas S. Hinde declared to the readers ofthe American Pioneer, tbat "Some hunter, many years ago, informed me of a tombstone being found in the southem part of Indiana, with initials of a name, and 1186 engraved on it."'" As his first ''Proof" ofthe Welsh theory, Hinde recounted that, "[i]n 1799, six soldiers' skeletons were dug up near Jeffersonville; each skeleton had a breast plate of brass, cast, with the Welsh coat of arms, the MERMAID and HARP, with a Latin inscription, in substance, 'virtuous deeds meet their own reward"' (italics and small caps in original).'^ Such raconteurs' tall tales as these were the entire sum and substance ofthe Welsh theory. Laughably flimsy as they were, they sufficed to spur belief in the Welsh identity of the Mound Builders. First, the Welsh connection was politically correct because it certified as Mound Builders a people (the Welsh) who were considered suitably "below" Anglo Saxons in "civilization" yet

80 NATIVE AMERICANS. ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

"white" enough to bave been serviceably "above" the Native Americans, in the little slot of evolution reserved for Mound Builders. The fact that the Welsh were Celts and the Celts had built the ancient "barrows" (mounds and earthworks) of England was seen as telling proof, although no one quite explained why twelfth-century Welsh noblemen, who lived in castles, would suddenly have reverted to barrow-building. Instead, Welsh-mania cited the fact of mounds in both locales as conclusive. As Filson put it: There are several ancient remains in Kentucke [sic], which seem to prove, that this country was formerly inhabited by a nation farther advanced in the arts of life than the Indians. These are there [i.e., in Kentucky] usually attribed to the Welsh, who are supposed to have formerly inhabited there; but having been expelled by the natives, were forced to take refuge near the sources of the Missouri.... The burying-grounds . . . form another strong argument that this country was formerly inhabited by a people different from the present Indians. . . . it may perhaps be worthy of enquiry, whether these repositories of the dead do not bear a considerable resemblance to the ancient British remains, . , . The day is not far distant, when the farthest recesses of this continent will be explored, and the accounts of the Welsh established beyond the possibility of a doubt, or consigned to that oblivion which has already received so many suppositions founded on arguments as plausible as these.'"

The "farthest recesses" having been "explored" with no Welsh colonies coming to light, the Welsh story began to lose some of its luster. In 1837, Samuel Gardner Drake began asking harsh questions, noting sarcastically that Filson's sources were "never heard of after" he wrote.'^^ Similarly, even the convinced Welsh theorist, Thomas Hinde, conceded in 1842 that the story of "a Welshman and an Indian from far up the Missouri, speaking and conversing in the Welsh language," as recounted by Gilbert Imlay in his Topographical Description of the Western Territory of North America (1797) did not check out.'^^ Although the connection may not seem obvious to modem readers, at the time, the Welsh story was seen as being closely allied with the Roman story. This was based heavily upon a chance mention by the ancient historian, Plutarch, as cited in this typical reference from 1843: In the decline of the Roman empire, and when its scattered strength was being concentrated to resist the invasion of northern barbarians, Plutarch mentions that a Roman emperor speaks in a manifesto of calling to their aid "their armies and colonies now operating BEYOND THE GREAT SEAS." This could not allude to any of their colonies in Europe or Africa, from which they were divided by mere narrow strips of water. Britain, at that time, was on the extreme verge of their European possessions in the west. Did the Romans carry on colonies in this country, previously established by the Britons, and was Britain the point from which they started for this eountry? Many fragments of Roman armor have been found here. Some vessels built at that time were large enough to cross the ocean." (Italics and small capitals in the original)'*^

THE "SLAUGHTER" OF THE MOUNDS 81

Of course, this version needed some shoring up, since ancient Rome fell in 476, whereas Modoc did not set sail until 1170. Most readers were too blissfully ignorant of history to kick up a ruckus over the missing 694 years, but, for those scholars who knew both history and arithmetic, a superstructure involving Druidical Welshmen resolved the pesky issue of dates. The Druids, it seemed, carried on with civilization until the Welsh were able to dispatch Modoc west.'^^ Heading into mid-century, grand diffusionist theories of wandering Jews, Hindus, Egyptians, Romans, Atlanteans, Vikings, and Welshmen seemed ripe for something more than theoretical support. Some folks had even started wondering where the hard evidence was, so, around this time, a new element bubbled to the surface of Mound-Builder lore: Inscribed artifacts became all the rage. Literacy was essential to the European definition of "civilization," so mound-ravaging potsherders were on the look-out for anything resembling writing, and, sho' nuff, it was not long before they tumed several somethings up.''" There were, of course, Joseph Smith's inscribed golden tablets, whose whereabouts were revealed to him by the "angel Moroni" in 1823, but these were not generally available for inspection, having become mysteriously lost.'^' In any case, the Latter Day Saints were so reviled in this period that Smith's tablets were not likely to have been taken seriously by scholars. Besides, more exciting and accessible discoveries were tuming up, such as the find at Grave Creek in Marshall County, Virginia, just outside of Elizabethtown. There, on 9 June 1838, Abelard B. Tomlinson pulled "a small stone, bearing an alphabetical inscription" from the great mound.'^^ (See the representation of the Grave Creek stone in Figure 2.2.) There was an uproar, of course, with speculation running wild. Squier and Davis wisely dismissed this faux artifact.'"'^ Other reporters were not as scmpulous, however. In 1843, for instance, Robert E. H. Levering used the ogamic (Celtic) writing, alleged to have been incised into the stone, to trace through a network of increasingly tenuous connections linking the Grave Creek stone back to ancient Rome, via the medium of the Druids.'^'' Another contemporary announced that "Leamed men who have most carefully examined this inscription" were puzzled whether to categorize it as Etruscan, Thugga, Runic, Touarik, Celtic, Phoenician, or Celtiberian, having found partial similarities to all of the above writing systems.'" That the sheer plethora of possibilities smelled fishy seemed not to have dawned on these "leamed men," although Henry Rowe Schoolcraft—so bedazzled by the stone as to have tumed it over to the "leamed men" for scmtiny in the first place'"'^—was dissatisfied with their bewildering spectmm of provenances. Schoolcraft decided to take a crack at the stone himself, examining it at eager length in an 1845 article, in which he solemnly narrowed its inscription possibilities down to "Celtiberic and Anglo Saxon alone."'^' He fiatly ruled out a Native origin, for, he disingenuously claimed,

82 NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

Figure 2.2. The Grave Creek Stone. Bearing an alphabetic inscription, the Grave Creek Stone was pulled from a mound in Marshall County, Virginia, by Abelard B. Tomlinson on 9 June 1838. SOURCE: "Ancient American Relics," American Pioneer 2.5 (May 1843) 194. The Grave Creek Stone was later exposed as a fraud.

THE "SLAUGHTER" OF THE MOUNDS 83

the "Red Man himself used no alphabet, on any part ofthe continent, so far as we know."'^** The Grave Creek stone might have been a fake, but the Cincinnati Tablet was another matter. Discovered lying beneath a very old skeleton in a mound in the westem portion of Cincinnati in 1841, it is one of a dozen inscribed mound stones likely to have been genuine.'^* In their classic 1848 survey ofthe mounds, Squier and Davis described the Cincinnati Tablet as made of "finegrained, compact sandstone" measuring "five inches in length, three in breadth at the ends, two and six tenths at the middle" with a thickness of "about half an inch.'"*" Although doing their best to appear sober on the issue of inscriptions generally, Squier and Davis could not resist mentioning the purportedly "singular resemblance" of the Cincinnati Tablet to "the Egyptian cartouch" (italics in the original).'^' Erasmus Gest, who laid claim to the tablet, was also attracted to Egyptian explanations. In 1879, he supplied drawings of its front and back inscriptions that differed somewhat from the 1848 drawings that had appeared in Squier and Davis. Believing that his renderings were more exact and less cmde (he was correct there), Gest described the markings as "hieroglyphics" but disagreed with Squier and Davis that the grooves on the back ofthe tablet were mere tool marks.'^^ (For Gest's renderings, sec Figure 2.3.) The pragmatic John T. Short, for whom Gest prepared his drawings, suggested that the Cincinnati Tablet was both a calendar and a measurement scale used by the Mound Builders to lay out their earthworks.'^^ The imprimus of authenticity now spine-chillingly upon the Cincinnati Tablet, all sorts of "inscriptions" began tumbling out ofthe tumuli. Indeed, the "discovery" of inscmtable inscriptions became a craze among mid-nineteenthcentury mound mavens, with each new artifact conveniently supporting the Mound-Builder theory of its "discoverer." Even the credulous Squier and Davis backed away from the comucopia, quipping that "hardly a year passes unsignalized by the announcement ofthe discovery of tablets of stone or metal, bearing strange and mystical inscriptions,—generally reported to have a 'marked resemblance to the Chinese characters.'"'^" Their caution fell on deaf cars. In 1858, for instance, William Pidgeon, who cleaved to the Greek theory, backed the claims of a stone unearthed in Monte Video, Brazil, in 1827, taken from "a vault formed by masonry, in which were deposited two ancient swords, a helmet, and shield."'**^ Despite "the ravages of more than two thousand years," upon inspection, "Greek words were easily made out," the inscription purportedly stating (italics in the original):

84 NATIVE AMERICANS. ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

Figure 2.3. Erasmus Gest's Rendering of the Cincinnati Tablet. I make it a generai rule not to repro(juce grave goods. In this instance, however, I feel it is important to dispell the settler myth that Native North Americans had no form of writing. Note the similarity between this and the character script of the ancient Maya. SOURCE: J. T. Short. North Americans of Antiquity, 3rd ed. (1879; New York: Harper & Brothers, Publishers, 1882) front, 45; back, 46.

THE "SLAUGHTER" OF THE MOUNDS 85

During the Dominion of Alexander, the son of Philip. King of Madecon, in the sixty-third Olympiad. Ptolemaios^^^

Perhaps no one in North America much cared about the peopling of Brazil, for this finii did not stir up the same furor as the "brass" plates found in Kinderhook, Illinois, in 1843, which were alleged to have contained "ancient Chinese" characters.'^^ (In fact, the Mound Builders used beaten copper, which settlers regularly misidentified as bronze or gold.) The tablet craze increased as the century wore on. In 1874, hoaxers on a roll got up the Rockford Tablet, "found" in 1874 in a mound along the banks of the Rock River, then just south of Rockford, Illinois.'**^ This arti-fake, reminiscent of the Mexican Calendar stone, was wildly waved aloft by "Peruvian" theorists as the hard evidence conclusively proving the connection between the Mound Builders and the "semi-civilized" peoples of Central-South America. Alas, however, J. Moody of Mendota, Illinois, noticed an extraordinary resemblance between inscriptions in the Rockford Tablet and the engravings in Josiah Priest's American Antiquities. In 1879, the honorable Congres International des Americanistes of Luxembourg published Moody's findings that "Six [inscriptions] are nearly exact counterparts of that number of Lybian chararacters" in Priest's book, so that "the inference is almost irresistible that the engraver had a copy of Priest's American Antiquities before him while doing his work.'"'' Then there were the Davenport Tablets, two made of shale and one made of limestone, taken from two different mounds in the Cook Farm Group in Davenport, Iowa, in 1877 and accepted as genuine by the Davenport Academy of Natural Sciences.'™ One character, in particular, inspired considerable excitement for resembling an Arabic figure "8." In 1894, however, Cyrus Thomas demolished the tablets' claim to authenticity in ten, closely reasoned pages. Leaning heavily on the Academy's own account of the position and condition of the artifacts at their "discovery," Thomas demonstrated that they had to have been salted into the site by pranksters.''^' Of all the tablets mysteriously surfacing at this time, the most spectacular and, ultimately, the most infamous were the "Holy Stones" of Newark, Ohio. These were "discovered" separately, the first, on 29 June 1860, and the second, on 1 November 1860, on such a schedule that the second "discovery" conveniently undercut the criticisms levelled at the first.'^^ Briefly, David Wyrick, citizen of Newark, monogenecist and, therefore, an ardent advocate of the "lost tribes of Israel" theory of the Mound Builders, magically happened across the first stone while desecrating an adjacent circle on the east edge of the

86 NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

magnificent Octagon Mound of Newark.'^-' The small sandstone tablet was engraved with Hebrew characters. The remarkable stone was quickly conveyed to the famous archaeologist, Charles Whittlesey, who was just coincidentally visiting Wyrick's associate that same day. Whittlesey tentatively endorsed the stone as genuine. Serendipity mounted to new heights as John Winspeare McCarty, a reputedly brilliant scholar of Hebrew, was on the spot to translate the phrases. McCarty just happened to be the local Episcopal rector.''"' With this find, speculation tumbled to truly demented depths, as theories materialized out of thin air. Wyrick's "lost tribes of Israel" were, of course, front and center, but another hobbyist, William Cunningham, argued that Newark's "Holy Stone" was actually a Masonic Keystone, proving conclusively that the Ancient Free and Accepted Masons—i.e., the Freemasons—had built the mounds!'^^ It was clear that, should the "ten lost tribes" theory regroup on the high ground ofthe mounds, a better stone needed to appear, so, helpfully, one did: The "Decalogue Stone" was found lying in its own little cartouche by none other than Wyrick.'^^ The "Decalogue Stone" answered all criticisms. Skeptics of the first stone had pointed out that its written Hebrew was suspiciously modem, a form considerably different from the written Hebrew in use at the time the "tribes" presumably became "lost." The "Decalogue Stone" remedied this drawback by being inscribed in ancient-looking Hebrew. Unfortunately, its Hebrew was not very Hebraic, which was apparent at a glance to any genuine Hebrew scholar.'^^ They being in short supply in Newark, Ohio, in 1860, however, the "Decalogue Stone" continued to inspire commentary until Wyrick's death in 1864, when Whittlesey got a nasty surprise. Among Wyrick's possessions were "a Hebrew Bible," which screamed hoax to Whittlesey, along with "engraving tools, and some black rock.'"'^ Although prior to this find, Whittlesey had been inclined to authenticate the Newark "Holy Stones," the jarring discovery soured his outlook. At first, he remained relatively quiet, but, clearly aggrieved at having been played for a fool, in 1872, he embarked upon a career as a dedicated debunker, taking to task every inscribed mound artifact he could find.'^ The shrill tone of Mound-Builder debate, along with the chaotic content of inscribed arti-fakes, finally drove the Smithsonian Institution in search of order and calm. To put the question of Mound-Builder origins to rest, a flurry of reports on the Mounds was financed by Congress and commissioned by the Smithsonian throughout the 1880s.™ By the early 1890s, with nothing in particular yet upheld or dismissed, John Powell pressed his point man on the job, Cyrus Thomas, to crank out a definitive report. Long overdue, it finally appeared in 1894, and a bombshell it was, establishing authoritatively that Native Americans had indisputably built the mounds. This finding was a bit a of turnaround for Thomas, who had begun as a true believer ofthe "separate Moundbuilder race"^"" A careful and honest scholar.

THE "SLAUGHTER" OF THE MOUNDS 87

however, Thomas came to realize that the mounds had to have been the work of the direct ancestors of living Native Americans, as he argued in his fmal Report on the Mound Explorations of the Bureau of Ethnology {\S94).^°^ His forthright conclusions posed a serious challenge to entrenched theories of "lost races," while simultaneously upending the notion that cultures inevitably lurched forward through their preordained stages of history. Anticipating objections, Thomas prefaced his lengthy report with an "Outline of This Paper" that stated in the strongest and—unique for inquiries into the mounds—clearest language possible his conclusion in point 7 that the "links directly connecting the Indian and mound-builders are so numerous and well established that archeologists are justified in accepting the theory that they are one and the same people."^"^ Moreover, just to do away with the lingering objection that. Native or not, the Mound Builders were necessarily "extinct," Thomas stated in point 9: The evidence obtained appears to be sufficient to justify tfie conclusion tbat particular works, and the works of certain localities, are attributable to particular tribes known to history. . . . the proof is apparently conclusive that the Cherokees were mound-builders and that to them are to be attributed most of the mounds of eastem Tennessee and westem North Carolina; it also renders it probable that they were the authors of most of the ancient works of the Kanawha valley in West Virginia. There are also strong indications that the Tallegwi of tradition were Cherokees and the authors of some of the principal works of Ohio. The proof is equally conclusive that to the Shawnees arc to be attributed the box-shaped stone graves, and the mounds and other works directly connected with them, in the region south of the Ohio,... and possibly also some of the mounds and stone graves in the vicinity of Cincinnati. The stone graves in the valley of the Delaware and most of those in Ohio are attributable to the Delawares [Lenape].^**

Thomas was aware that nay-sayers would wiggle any which way to get off his formidable hook, so that in his "General Observations" at the conclusion of his survey, he sought to forestall the likely protest that, even had Natives built some of the mounds, it was still possible that a "lost race" had built the rest. In particular, he anticipated the argument that migrating Toltecs, Nahuatls, Mayas, or Incas had built the mounds, the favored view in 1894, demonstrating at length the grave error of assuming that Natives in the nineteenth century were a just reflection of precontact Natives. He quite rightly argued (just as Benjamin Smith Barton had argued one century before) that the European impression of Native cultures failed to take into account the pressures of invasion or the decimation visited upon them at the hands of the settlers. These factors had disrupted Native cultures which, precontact, had been entirely capable of building the mounds.^""^ Thomas also denounced the level of racist cant that had impaired scholarly vision for so long, noting that "[ejven the most intelligent writers on this

88 NATIVE AMERICANS. ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

subject commence or interlard their discussions" with anti-Native pejoratives, "thus virtually deciding the question" of whether Natives could have built the mounds "before, or without, properly discussing it."^"^ Acknowledging the "enchantment" factor inherent in Euroamerican Mound Builder fantasies, he nonetheless fingered the damage they wrought, having "virtually closed the door against a free and unbiased investigation" over the nineteenth century.^°' He also called scholars on their "lost race" diffusionism that assumed that all the mound systems were "the works of one people, one great nation," noting the wide assortment of mounds to be met with.^*'^ To him, the variety argued that separate cultures of Mound Builders had existed in various regions.™ All told, the work is an astounding production, given its time and place, and is deservedly celebrated today. It was not necessarily received with joy by Thomas's peers, however. Once Thomas had established that the Mound Builders were, indeed, the ancestors of living Native North Americans, scholarly interest in the subject was dropped like a hot potato. In fact, scholars writing in the wake of Thomas were at pains to demonstrate that the Mound Builders were savages, after all. Gerald Fowke, in his eminent 1902 survey of Mound-Builder literature, ridiculed earlier mound enthusiasts—"wonder-mongers," he called them—to bring discussion into line with the racist philosophies of the Jim Crow era in which he lived.^'° Sneering away all esteem for the Mound Builders, he quoted the irrefutable criteria set up by Lewis Henry Morgan to demonstrate that the Mound Builders of Ohio were actually low level barbarians. Whereas scholars had earlier dismissed Morgan's suggestion of retarded development among Ohio's Mound Builders, Fowke worked to establish their pitiful place in Morgan's schema, in the "Lower Status of Barbarism" (italics in the original):^" They had no alphabet. They knew nothing of the economic use of iron or any other metal. Copper, galena, hematite, they had in plenty; meteoric iron, gold, silver, in small amounts; all were treated as so many stones, to be rubbed, chipped or beaten into desired forms. They had no domestic animals or beasts of burden, for not one bone of such has ever been found. Cement or mortar was unknown. They could not dig a well. They never walled up a spring. They had no hand mills, not even so nide an implement as a mexican metate, though com must have been a staple article of food. They did, however, manufacture serviceable pottery, often of elegant design, though they knew nothing of the potter's wheel. Consequently, their place is in the "Lower status of barbarism"; well below the Pueblo Indian, and far below the Peruvian.^'^

To Morgan's criteria, Fowke added three of his own, the better to demote Mound Builders to savagery: the lack of "civilized" religion, which he inferred from their above-mentioned lower status of barbarism; a low population, which

THE "SLAUGHTER" OF THE MOUNDS 89

he took for granted; and a limited geographical base, which was bizarrely out of synch with the known distribution of mounds.^'^ Illogical as it was, Fowke's was the new party line of scholarship on the mounds. Before Natives were known to have been Mound Builders, authors freely attributed to them organized religion, dense populations, and a spread throughout the Ohio and Mississippi River Valleys. After Thomas had written, however, all thinking had to be readjusted to conform to racist stereotypes of Natives, who were well known to have had neither religion nor a sense of territory and to have but sparsely populated the continent. Therefore, all the earlier evidence of organized religion and high population centers across the vast central portion of the continent was jettisoned. It was in pursuit of revisionist archaeology that Fowke ridiculed all such thoughts, as he probed "the depths of this alleged civilization" (italics mine).^'" Fowke's reaction to Thomas's work was typical, repeated by several scholars, all now intent upon dashing down to the depths of lower barbarism the very culture they had once exalted to the skies of civilization. Similarly, the nanosecond that Cyrus Thomas undercut the "lost race" theory of the Mound Builders, popular interest in the mounds faded.^'* Thomas's findings cut too heavily against the racist grain of the country to excite gratitude. A profound lack of interest has dogged the study of mounds ever since, so that archaeologists are literally guessing when they discuss the "Adena" and "Hopewell" people, whom they still refuse to define in terms of the Cherokee, Lenape, Shawnee, and Iroquois. Few, outside of hard-core mound diggers—a group that has gotten very quiet since NAGPRA—even notice the mounds. At the same time, dating of the mounds has undergone wild fluctuations, as have cultural interpretations. Indeed, when Lynda Norene Shaffer and her colleagues at Tufts University undertook in the 1980s to prepare primers for survey courses on world history, rather than just the history of Europeans in the world, she found that "No one on the faculty at that time knew anything about North America north of the Rio Grande prior to 1492."^'^ The Thomas Revolution took a damaging toll not only on the scholarly perceptions of mounds but also on the mounds, themselves. If, before Thomas, settlers were remarkably cavalier about poking around in the mounds, ransacking them for stones, skulls, and artifacts, and using them as pastureland, after Thomas, mound desecration picked up in earnest, with not even the most spectacular of the sites spared heart-stopping violations, not infrequently initiated by archaeologists. As discussed in chapter 1, in the late nineteenth century, the mounds were seen as "prizes" in the general rush to stake out

90 NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

museum territory. Scholars vied with one another to tear them apart in search of crania, grave goods, and personal fame. Consider the fate of the grand Turner Group of earthworks in Hamilton County, Ohio. The completion of the Erie Canal in 1825 inspired their initial manhandling, as farmers rushed into Ohio, thinking only of leveling the mounds for cropland. By 1850, the mounds and embankments of the elevated circle of the Turner Group had been lowered by successive planting. There was, however, still enough left to attract archaeologists. They completed the demolition of the site for the sake of science in 1922.^'^ Such archaeological irresponsibility was so commonplace and so widespread that, in 1967, archaeologists Olaf H. Prufer and Douglas H. McKenzie noted that "earlier work, spanning more than a century of research" had been "almost entirely devoted to the 'slaughter' of burial mounds."^'^ It was in recognition of this fact that William D. Lipe argued in 1974 that archaeological sites were a "non-renewable resource" and that, should his colleagues continue razing sites at the reckless rate they were in the 1970s, practicing archaeologists would "see the death of productive field work in our regions in our own liftimes."^'' Before this new consciousness set in, however, destruction was Option One. From the beginning, the Shawnee and Lenape stone mounds, "once quite abundant on both sides of the Ohio River," tended to fare the worst.^^" Some of these stone mounds reached impressive proportions, with one at Aberdeen, Ohio, for instance, measuring thirty-four feet on the North-South axis, and thirty-seven feet on the East-West.^^' Early on, settlers plundered these burial mounds for construction material. A more subtle consideration entered the picture after Thomas wrote, however. Since building in stone was held by westerners to have been a "civilized" thing to do, tum-of-the-twentieth-century Euroamericans seemed in no mood to allow the evidence of Native stone work to stand. Destruction began occurring for reasons other than need. For instance, a magnificent stone mound just outside of Jasper, Ohio, constructed of stones weighing up to 150 pounds each was demolished by Fowke for his 1902 survey."^ Similarly, at the tum of twentieth century, a large stone cemetery at the center of Fort Ancient—a major Shawnee earthwork on the Little Miami River in Warren Country, Ohio—was plundered of "some three hundred graves," and "over a thousand wagon loads of stones were removed therefrom by excavators.""^ In one "group tomb" (ossuary), it "required the labor of three men for two days to displace the loose masonry of this crude mausoleum. Fragments of twenty skeletons were exhumed from this plural grave" in the process of looting the stones for buildings and the skeletons

THE "SLAUGHTER" OF THE MOUNDS 91

for museums.^^'' All this plunder was undertaken for no particular reason, other than academic curiosity and easy money from the sale of the stones. Not even the most spectacular stone mounds were spared the general slaughter. In 1829, James McCuHoh reported on "the ruins of several ancient stone buildings in Ross and Pickaway counties" in Ohio, one of which "was within a few miles of Chillicothe, near the Maysville road." It "appeared as measured by the eye, sixty feet long by thirty wide; the stones were generally large and rugged, without the least mark of the hammer or any other iron tool.'"^" This seems to have been Chillicothe's "Spruce Hill Fort," as noted by Squier and Davis in 1848."*^ Squier and Davis continued that, "[a]round the base had been laid, with some degree of regularity, a large quantity of flat stones, constituting a sort of wall for the better support of the earth. These stones must have been brought from the hills, which are here nearly half a mile distant.""'' In 1898, Emilius Oviatt Randall, "with a party of experts, personally inspected the remaining ruins," which they found seriously plundered, and, when Randall revisited the site in 1908, it "gave evidence of the fmal touches of a destructive hand.""" Randall blamed the "greed" of the "insatiable tiller of the soil" who tore down the wall to "mend his fences" and ploughed "level the mounds erected on the plain.""^ The wall had thus been "sadly depleted and displaced; the victim" not just of "the wear and tear of hoary time" but also "the spoliation by thrifty farmers, who repair their fences with the 'inestimable stones, unvalued jewels, all scattered' the summit and hillside about."^'** The plundering spirit of settler and scholar alike left some feeling pressured to document the mounds before they disappeared entirely. "The destruction of the plowshare will soon complete the demolition of all but such as we preserve," Isaac Smucker cautioned in 1873.^^' This was no small consideration, for farm-minded settlers had already significantly dented the mounds. One of the more interesting features of many Cherokee ("Hopewellian") mound complexes are the grand, highway-like structures that lead out, often great distances, to connect different earthworks. In 1848, there was, for instance, a long embankment in Piketon, Pike County, Ohio, on the Vanmeter farm. The complex consisted of a large, central mound connected to three smaller mounds at its base. A long highway mound called "the Graded Way" ran south from the complex. By the time Fowke came to write in 1902, the Graded Way had been "obliterated.""^ A similar fate awaited "a large and beautiful mound" that had the misfortune to have been located just where the settlers had decided to plat out the state

92 NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

capital building of Columbus, Ohio—or, perhaps the capital was platted there because the "resource" of the mound was nearby."^ However that may be, the mound was "demolished" so that workmen could cart off its clay to use in manufacturing the bricks they needed to build Ohio's first State House."" As with the Shawnee and Lenape stone mounds, this earthen mound had been packed with human skeletal remains, leading me to wonder at the settlers who, normally so credulous of ghost stories, did not scruple to use cemetery stones and clay to build their homes and offices. Some farmers sought the help of railroads and archaeologists in leveling their land for them. One "Adena" (eariy) mound with a circumference of 445 feet, a base diameter of ninety feet, and a height of twenty-six feet was situated one-and-a-half miles from northwestern Chillicothe."^ From its summit, Mound City—a spectacular accumulation of mounds—^ould be seen to the north, while the Chillicothe mound group was visible to the south."^ A General Worthington bought the mound in 1798, and his family preserved it intact until 1898, when Joseph Froehlick acquired it, intending to level it for farm land. Consequently, Froehlick sold its soil to the B & O Railroad to build its rail embankments but allowed an archaeological team to compete with teamsters in digging up the site."^ It is now demolished. In 1831, settlers in Licking County, Ohio, decided that the rainfall in this very deciduous area was insufficient and, therefore, determined to place a reservoir on the bed of an ancient lake. To build the "Licking Reservoir" between 1831 and 1832, they plundered the great sandstone mound located at Flint Ridge in Ohio, two miles from the tiny town of Thomville and one mile south of Jacksontown, another village. Encircled by an earthwork embankment topped with flat stones weighing between forty and sixty pounds each, the Flint Ridge mound originally stood fifty-five feet in the air, with a diameter at its base of 183 feet, making it the largest sandstone mound on record."^ Unimpressed, work crews quickly leveled its unique embankment, plundering its paving stones first, to allow easier access to the inner mound, whose stones were also enormous, weighing from twenty to forty pounds each. Just to "make the dam at the reservoir," according to J. P. McLean, "from ten to fifteen thousand wagon loads of stone were removed from" the mound (italics mine)."^ Afterwards, stones discarded by the teamsters as too small to bother with were plundered by local farmers, so that, by 1883-1884, when John W. Powell came to write it up in his fifth annual report for the Bureau of Ethnology, the Flint Ridge mound had been completely dismantled.^'"' In 1896, residual stones lay piled haphazardly about, in lots from twelve to five feet

THE "SLAUGHTER" OF THE MOUNDS 93

high, looted at will to build "the cellar walls in the neighborhood."^"" Once the destruction was irretrievable, the four thousand-acre reservoir tumed out to have been unnecessary after all, so, in 1894, the General Assembly of Ohio enacted legislation tuming the reservoir into a public park called Buckeye Lake.^"^ It now hosts the Buckeye Lake Yatcht Club. Ohio Natives have since rescued some of the Flint Ridge stones to use in creating the North American Indian Memorial Park, a reburial project I discuss in the epilogue of this book. Like the Columbus mound, the Flint Ridge stone mound had been a cemetery. In 1850, after the stones were removed, local farmers began digging around in the earthen mounds that had formed the base of the Flint Ridge mound, coming across "a great many human bones" buried with copper breastplate, copper rings, and shells.^''^ There is no record of what was done with the skeletal remains, but, given the propensity of potsherders to keep trophy skulls on their writing desks, one can imagine. The fate of the artifacts was also left unrecorded, but they were probably sold by the farmers to tourists for petty cash, as was commonplace at the time. Neither did the exquisite effigy mounds escape the general "slaughter." Some were mindlessly obliterated as roads and railroads were blasted right through them. Many more were simply ploughed over by farmers. The destruction was so utter that many archaeologists now deny that effigies other than the Great Serpent Mound and the so-called Alligator Mound ever existed in Ohio, although Ohio Natives can still name additional mounds and walk to their precise locations. Their contours are still faintly discernible, if one knows where to look. What is indisputable is that few effigies are left, and, of these, only the Serpent Mound has received much press. (See Figure 2.4 for the schematic of the Serpent Mound.) It was "saved" by a philanthropic effort headed up by Frederick W. Putnam in 1885, but the equally important Alligator Mound was basically left to whatever fate settler whim decided for it.^''* In 1848, Squier and Davis made special mention of the Alligator Mound, and an engraving in their work (see Figure 2.5) remains to guide discussion of it.^"^ The term "alligator" was an unfortunate reflection of settler fantasies about Mound Builders, who supposedly conducted human sacrifices there.^''^ Since the mound had a marsupial pouch (since destroyed), the effigy was more probably meant as an oppossum than an alligator, although some archaeologists argue for a "water panther," or mystical creature."^ Its nose pointing southwest, the stone-and-earthen effigy had been very carefully placed on a two-hundred foot hill, from which vantage point many other mound complexes could be

94 NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

Figure 2.4. The Great Serpent Mound. This grand effigy mound is located in Adams County, Ohio. SOURCE: Ephraim George Squier, and E. H. Davis, Ancient Monuments of the Mississippi Valley: Comprising the Results of Extensive Original Surveys and Explorations, Smithsonian Contributions to Knowledge, vol. 1 (1848; reprint. New York: Johnson Reprint Corporation, 1965) facing page 96.

THE "SLAUGHTER" OF THE MOUNDS 95

Figure 2.5. The Alligator Mound. This effigy mound stands in Licking County, Ohio, in the midst of Bryn Du Woods, an upscale housing development. SOURCE: Ephraim George Squier and E. H. Davis, Ancient Monuments of the Mississippi Valley: Comprising the Results of Extensive Original Surveys and Explorations, Smithsonian Contributions to Knowledge, vol. 1 (1848; reprint. New York: Johnson Reprint Corporation, 1965) facing page 98, no. 2.

96 NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

^ It was a hundred feet wide and two hundred feet long.^"^ Wben Squier and Davis saw the effigy, it still stood between four and six feet in height, the gradations deliberately sculped to replicate the curves of an animal's body."" Despite the rumored determination of the land's 1848 owner "to permit no further encroachment upon" the effigy than had already occurred through his mush-brained attempt to sink a quarry through its head, the effigy was found to have been more damaged yet by extensive ploughing when it was resurveyed in 1862.^^' By the time that Isaac Smucker came to document the mound in 1873, its length remained 250 feet from snout to tail tip, but its height had shrunk, especially in the central portions, by about a foot, which Smucker attributed to "the plough" and "the previous process of the clearing of the land."^" Ripped out tree roots had left gaping holes. When, in 1885, the Ohio State Archaeological and Historical Society fmally decided to save the Alligator Mound, its point man for the job lamented having watched "sheep, cattle, and horses . . . stamping flies" beneath a lone tree at its summit, predicting that their "busy hoofs [sic]" would soon obliterate whatever remained of the mound."^ The best efforts of miners, farmers, and herdsmen aside, the Alligator Mound was still somewhat intact—albeit battered, bruised, and missing its pouch—in the twentieth century, mostly through the preservation efforts of local authorities but partly through the halfhearted attention of the Ohio State Archaeological and Historical Society. From 1983 on, the Society photographed changes in the land, as it went from farmscape to an up-scale subdivision with an attached golf course."" Today, the effigy is preserved through the vigilance of modem Natives, who come to it to pray, a situation to which I will retum in the epilogue. Another wonder, which Squier and Davis had dubbed "Mound City" was also abominably abused. Located in Ross County, Ohio, along the Scioto River near Chillicothe, a group of twenty-four large burial mounds were surrounded by a square embankment, with a significant circle earthwork to the south and a smaller circle to the north."^ More mounds were scattered around and between this trio of embankments. (The full complex is shown in Figure 2.6.) Having endured the usual ploughing and pasturing. Mound City came under serious fire in 1917, as the United States entered World War I. On 8 June 1917, the govemment announced its selection of the Mound City "cantonment" as one of the sixteen sites chosen nationally for erecting a boot camp for training inductees. Farmers were reluctant to sell out for the eminent domain price of $15.00 an acre, so local businessmen, looking to tum Chillicothe into a boom town, sweetened the pot, coughing up an additional $5.00 per acre. Between

THE "SLAUGHTER" OF THE MOUNDS 97

Figure 2.6. Mound City. Located in Ross County, Ohio, near Chillicothe, the Mound City compiex included circles, squares, and smaller associated burial mounds. SOURCE: Ephraim George Squier and E. H. Davis, Ancient Monuments of the Mississippi Valley: Comprising the Results of Extensive Original Sutveys and Explorations, Smithsonian Contributions to Knowledge, vol. 1 (1848; reprint, New York: Johnson Reprint Corporation, 1965) facing page 54.

98 NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

1919 and 1921, the federal govemment managed to purchase all of the land encompassing Mound City. Even before the land was secured, however, Company D, the Ohio Engineers, showed up on 28 June 1917, to begin building what became known as Camp Sherman by first grading down its mounds. Ultimately, 3,600 men, all trampling the cemetery underfoot, were housed on the base, which consisted of 2,000 buildings."^ Four separate Divisions of the Army were located at Camp Sherman: the 83rd, 84th, 95th, and 96th Divisions."^ Mound City was soon overmn with railroad spurs to serve Army needs. A major industrial track ran along the westem edge, while two other tracks ran smack dab into Mound City, with myriad warehouse spurs scattered across the area, courtesy of the B&O Railroad. At the same time, wells were sunk along the Scioto River, which abutted the square earthwork of Mound City, to provide the camp with twenty million gallons of water daily. Similarly, septic tanks were sunk into Mound City pumping the sewage created by this large-scale operation onto the bones of the ancestors.^^** One of the associated Logan mounds was used as a rifle range.^" As World War I drew to a close, the Army tumed Camp Sherman into the U.S. Veterans' Bureau Training School, in operation from 1918 into the early 1920s. Thereafter, the camp went downhill, becoming a federal prison in the early 1930s. Ultimately, the prison closed and the land was cleared of its buildings. Being federally owned, it was tumed over to public use.^^ Someone had the bright idea of resurrecting the site as Mound City, The Tourist Attraction. In pursuit of this goal, the National Parks Service tried to rebuild Mound City, using the drawings made of the site by the Army Corp of Engineers prior to its dismantling of the mounds to build Camp Sherman. It was quickly discovered, however, that those schematics had been incompetently done, so that archaeologists were called in to figure out where the mounds had actually been. Working from older surveys and their own poking about, the archaeologists directed the reconstmction of the mounds and earthworks, resulting in the current park, an admission-charging operation called "Mound City."^^' The human skeletal remains extracted from the actual Mound City during all this mayhem are now kept in dusty cardboard boxes in museums around the world. Tuming Mound City into a military camp was at least subliminally suggested by the settler myth, intensely held, that the geometric earthworks had been military "forts," an inanity recognized asridiculousas early as 1794, when Anthony Wayne had actually tried to use poor, abused Fort Ancient as one. He

THE "SLAUGHTER" OF THE MOUNDS 99

found the archaic site iticonvenient at thirty-five feet high and thus had it taken down to twenty-seven feet high, "to serve as a watchtower."^" Later on, William Henry Harrison opined that, although three of the structures along the Ohio River might have been designed with military purposes in mind, the circles and squares "I am pursuaded [sic] ... were never intended for military defences [s/c]."^" The experience and conclusions of these two generals did not discourage the fort fantasy, however, for, in writing up the "remarkable stone work" covering 140 acres along Paint Creek in Ross County, Ohio, in 1879, J. T. Short noted that "in the centre [sic]. . . was an artificial lake, probably to supply water in case of a siege."^^ A complementary fantasy held that the earthworks had been stadiums for ancient Olympics and amusement parks, Mound-Builder style. In 1880, Dr. Larkin credited this brilliant insight to John Patterson Maclean, although, in 1873, Isaac Smucker, a local Ohio historian of the nineteenth century, had speculated that the geometrical earthwork "closures" were "dedicated to the practice of their national games and celebration of their national festivals."^^^ Indeed, the year before Smucker wrote, S. B. Wing, the president of the Licking County Agricultural Society, had managed to combine the "fort" and "park" themes, wondering whether the earthworks had been "the theatre of bloody conflicts between opposing armies, or whether they were devoted to some great religious rites or national festivals.""^ Such silly visions became widespread and long-lived. As late as 1908, in describing Fort Ancient's earthworks, Emilius Randall recorded that "a low earthen roadway elevation" had, along with similar structures elsewhere, "been more often than otherwise dubbed 'race courses.'"^^^ Like the "fort" theory, the amusement-park myth found expression in settler reality, notably in the breathtaking abuse of the great Newark Earthworks. The Newark complex is among the recognized wonders of the ancient world—on a par with Stonehenge and the pyramids of Egypt—and is written up with awe by archaeologists and historians worldwide.^^^ The entire complex covers 10.4 square kilometers of land.^^** The major earthworks included a large circle and a large, nearly perfect square, both freestanding, plus a unique circle-octagon complex, with smaller mounds, including effigies, around. These were once connected to Chillicothe, ninety kilometers to the southwest, by what archaeologist Bradley Lepper has denoted "The Great Hopewell Road," a wide, straight route between parallel earthworks.^™ (See Figure 2.7, the Squire-andDavis map of the Newark Complex as they saw it in 1848, before the major destructions.)

100 NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

11

}\*

'

/

1: •

ro

•

^

THE "SLAUGHTER" OF THE MOUNDS 101

A stone mound and a badger effigy (now effaced) stood on the edges of the complex. The stone mound was demolished in the 1830s to build the Licking Reservoir, as noted above. The remaining earthworks and mounds did not fare much better. By 1848, the Ohio Canal ran through the square and associated earthworks, demolishing a platform mound, while settlers made serious inroads into thirteen more burial mounds to build their houses.^'' The Ohio Railroad ran tracks through Newark from 1852 to 1855, completing the destruction of the thirteen cemetery mounds, as railroad construction crews ransacked them for their dirt."^ The disposition of the human remains and grave goods is unrecorded, but Bradley Lepper speculates that they were either plundered as "curiosities" or, perhaps, "shovelled" wholesale "into the railroad embankment."^^' Soon, nearly all but the great circle, tbe circle-octagon complex, and a portion of the Hopewell Road had been annihilated through the tender care of the settlers. The worst was yet to come. Fantasies of earthworks as Mound-Builder amusement parks and forts fueled settler action that tumed them into both. In 1850, the Great Circle became the Licking County Fairgrounds, hosting the Ohio State Fair in 1854. In 1861, it was tumed from a fairgrounds into "Camp John Sherman," a boot camp for Civil War soldiers, who used the earthworks for artillery practice. After the war, the Great Circle reverted to public use. Then, in 1896, it was redeveloped as "Idlewild Park," an amusement park boasting the world's second largest Ferris wheel, a shooting gallery, a billiard hall, a dance hall, a tourist hotel, a gambling casino, and an annual agricultural fair. A race track was built inside the circle and used for horse racing. "Buffalo Bill" Cody held a "Wild West Show" in the Circle."* All the time tbis madness was going forth, the Great Circle was known to have been a sacred site to the Mound Builders and tbeir latter-day descendants. It is worth inquiring how Christian Europeans would feel if Native Americans took over Vatican Square, tuming it into a theme park with a hotel, race track, shooting galley, casino, dance hall, billiard hal!, Ferris wheel, annual state fair, and occasional Wild West Show, with times out for the army to teach artillerymen how to judge range by using St. Peter's Basilica for target practice. Obviously, by the first quarter of the twentieth century, the Great Circle was in very sad shape. The fairs and amusements died down in 1925, and the Licking County Commissioners took over the deed to the Great Circle in 1927. In 1928, after members of the Ohio State Archaeological and Historical Society began excavating the so-called "Eagle" effigy mound in the center of the circle—sadly wom down but still perceivable—the Commissioners determined

102 NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

to tum the site over to the Society.^" This they did on 9 March 1933, the same year that the Civihan Conservation Corps undertook to "restore" the mound. By contract, the Great Circle was dubbed the "Moundbuilders State Memorial Park" and set aside "for all time as an archaeological and historical site which may be visited by the public."^^^ This did not stop archaeologists from digging at will, until Natives rather heavily put their collective foot down in 1992, in a confrontation that I detail in the epilogue. The rare circle-octagon portion of the Newark complex, considered a "fortification" in the nineteenth century, was subjected to the same cavalier treatment as the Great Circle. To celebrate the Fourth of July in 1836, the "Calliopean Society," a group of diggers affiliated with the Granville Literary and Theological Institution (now Denison University) decided to poke around in the Observatory Mound that lies at the far, southwestern end of the circleoctagon complex, exposing the stone pavement that lay beneath it.^^^ This was done to test a wild-eyed theory of Caleb Atwater's, to wit, that a "subterranean arch or passage" existed "as a point of egress to the river."^^^ No secret passageway was discovered. The complex continued to be ravaged at will by hobbyists, until 4 May 1891, when the Ohio General Assembly passed an act conveying the "premises" to the state of Ohio, "to be used and occupied by it as a permanent encampment ground for the national guard of Ohio, or the organized militia thereof."^'^ The complex underwent the rigors of artillery fire and the general bivouacing of 3,500 men. Between 1893 and 1896, the Guard attempted to "restore" the complex.^^" Its work was haphazard and uneven, however, leading archaeologist Gerald Fowke to complain in 1902 that "the State authorities have a little overdone the matter of restoration. Unless there is considerable reduction, from weathering, of that portion which has lately been built up, visitors in generations to come will infer that some parts were originally heavier than others, when such was not the case."^^' Not having been leveled as Mound City had been, the circle-octagon proved too cumbersome for a military camp. Consequently, in 1908, Ohio secured more suitable land for the National Guard, abandoning the complex and letting it go "to waste."^"^ Ever loath to let land lie fallow, the General Assembly sought a better use for it, adopting a Joint Resolution on 6 April 1908, to retum the complex to the board of trade of the City of Newark.^" The deed, signed on 2 April 1908 (even before the Resolution was adopted), curiously enough rededicated the land to the "the purpose of a Permanent State Encampment Ground."'''

THE "SLAUGHTER" OF THE MOUNDS 103

The site continued in limbo until 15 April 1910, when the Newark board of trade leased the complex to the Licking Country Club Company, with the proviso that it be kept "in as good order and condition" as it was when the deed was signed, the stated intention of the parties being "to preseve the earthworks and mounds" for the benefit of the public, which retained the right to visit the complex.^^' On 15 June 1911, the country club duly opened its nine-hole golf course, eventually expanding it into an eighteen-hole course called the Mound Builders Country Club.'^^ After some squabbling between the City of Newark and the County of Licking, the Common Pleas Court of Newark ordered the complex deeded over to the safekeeping of the Ohio State Archaeological and Historical Society.'^^ The Society continued leasing the complex to the Licking Country Club Company, and it remains an eighteen-hole golf course to this day. The country club has dug holes "on, around, and among the earthworks," while its sand traps and water mains have effectively obliterated many features of the original earth works. ^*'^ This use of a 2,000-year-old cemetery, from which fourteen human skeletons were exhumed in the early nineteenth century, was considered so charming that, in 1925, when the New York Times commissioned an article on it, the golf course was presented as "a monument honoring the memory" of the Mound Builders.^^^ Cyrus Thomas notwithstanding, the article perpetuated the myth of the Mound Builders as a "lost people" who "lived ages before the North American savages."^^ The jocular tone of the article suited the whimsical presentation of the Mound Builders as the first golfers on the site, speculating that they might have had "some similar game played with stone mallets and stone balls," accounting for the geometric layout of the complex.^^' "No doubt," chirped tbe author, "the original moundbuilders argued, cussed and tried to destroy each other over their game, just as golfers today arguify [sic], sputify, boast and alibi over their modem game.""' This presentation and the continuing use of the site as the Mound Builders Country Club is horrifying to Natives, for the circle-octagon complex was and is sacred ground, where Native Americans still go to pray. Theoretically, the golf course is also a public park, but its dual and mutually exclusive usage as golf course and prayer site is kicking up a ruckus today, a throbbing issue to which I retum in the epilogue. The deplorable record of the settlers in both "explaining" and exploiting the mounds is shattering to Native Americans. Such recitals as the foregoing leave Natives literally shaking, understandably hesitant to tmst the westem science, which dreamed up the ridiculous Mound-Builder myth, or westem statescraft.

104 NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

which put it to such lethal use. Natives are, moreover, frustrated by the way that westemers continue taking up all the room in discussions of the Mound Builders, spouting modem theories about them that look every bit as preposterous—to Natives, anyway—as their nineteenth- and twentieth-century antecedents. The living descendants of the Mound Builders cherish their own traditions on the matter of their ancestors, discussions that deserve to be better known, especially to those archaeologists and ethnographers presuming to discem the meaning of the mounds. To end the monopoly of westem scholarship on these quintessentially Native issues, it is to Native traditions of the mounds and their builders that I now tum.

3

"We Can Make a Waukauhoowaa": Native Traditions of the Mounds

It is bemusing to watch westem scholars looking in every direction but oral tradition for an explanation of mounds, their culture, history, and decline. Speaking only among themselves, archaeologists posit vague invasions; climate variations; social progress or regress; successful or failed cropping (apparently, either will do); disease; bow-and-arrow hunting; economic stmggle between haves and have-nots; "cultural fatigue"; and William Dancey's cockamamie, "Darwinian concept of evolution by natural selection"—-social darwinism!' Any of these (save Dancey's) might contain some tmth, but, as presented in the literature, each is isolated, its fragmentation giving no sense of the Native gestalt or its complexity. When tradition is put forward as a window to the past, what immediately surfaces is "Savagism," a subliminal insistence on negative stereotypes of Natives as largely ignorant of their own history and, therefore, untrustworthy bearers of their own culture. This dismissive attitude, authorized by academia, pervades westem culture. As Grandmother Barbara Crandell tartly observed in 2001, "When an archaeologist says something, the media never come and check it with us, but, whenever we Native people say something, they always mn and check it with the archaeologists."' This is Savagism in action. An ongoing task of Savagism has been to "explain" the mounds. The original, nineteenth-century thmst of Savagism was the assertion that Natives had no traditions of the mounds, did not know who had built them, and denied any connection with them. These assertions were patently absurd, for they flew in the face of long-standing traditions, widely known among the Shawnee, Iroquois, Lenape, and Cherokee, regarding the Ohio River valley mounds, their

106 NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

builders, and their history. A simple ignorance that these traditions existed did not completely account for their absence from westem mound literature; wishful thinking also entered into the matter. Mound Mania, U.S.A., dictated that there had been no Native interface with the mounds. Consequently, Native mound traditions were written out of existence. Fiddling with the record is easy for those who own the record. In the nineteenth century, myriad writers, scholarly as well as popular, created cardboard Indians who, naturally, could be made to say anything that their westem authors wanted them to say. Thus, it is not surprising that, as Mound Mania whipped to a frenzy, writers had their paper Chiefs denying any knowledge whatsoever of the mounds. When the Reverend Elias Comelius put his joumal into print in 1814, for instance, he included a passage conceming one spectacular mound of which, Comelius claimed, the Cherokee told him they had no tradition. "I then requested each to say what he supposed" was the origin of the mounds, generally. "Neither could tell; though all agreed in saying: 'They were never put up by our people.'"^ At least Comelius did not contradict himself. Others did. In a testament to the operation of dogma over evidence, westemers would record MoundBuilding traditions in one paragraph and, then, in their very next, deny that Natives had any traditions of Mound-Building. In 1824, for instance, Charles Christopher Trowbridge took down vivid Shawnee traditions of MoundBuilding. Notwithstanding the two impeccably Shawnee sources from whose lips he had just recorded those traditions (Cathecassa and Tenskwatawa), Trowbridge hastened to assure his readers that the Shawnee had "no tradition to offer" of Mound-Building!" James McCulloh did the same thing. In 1817, before Mound Mania was on a complete roll, he honestly recorded his surprise at discovering that local Natives retained numerous mound traditions, some of which he proceeded to record. McCulloh remarked that they contradicted the popular belief that Natives "were entirely ignorant of the erecters of these works," which had supposedly been put up in "an age anteriour [sic] to their earliest traditions."' In 1829, his own record notwithstanding, McCulloh acted as though he had never heard of the very traditions he had recorded twelve years earlier, instead conclusively denying that the Natives possessed any traditions conceming the Mound Builders!^ By 1829, so determined were the settlers to have Natives ignorant of the mounds and their builders that the reading public cheerfully ignored such inconsistencies. By the mid-nineteenth century, rather than place contradictory evidence of

"WE CAN MAKE A WAUKAUHOOWAA"

107

mound tradition in broad view, it came into vogue fiatly to deny that Natives knew—-OT even cared—about the mounds. Thus, in 1860, could the scholar, Thomas Campbell Walbridge, maintain that not only did the Massassagas have no traditions of the Mound Builders but also that they allowed the mounds to be "ransacked with impunity."^ Seven years later, O. C. Marsh flatly asserted that "both tradition and history are silent in regard to" the Mound Builders and that Natives kept "no tradition of this more ancient population"^ Within the decade, the no-tradition claim had mounted to the status of mantra, to be chanted as a matter of course. Isaac Smucker blithely reiterated it in 1873, casually affirming that "even the Red Man has no legend or tradition" of the mounds.^ The escalating claims of Native ignorance were not unconnected to what was transpiring nationally between I814and 1873, to wit, the settlers' seizure of the entire continent. It is not accidental that some of the strongest records of Native mound tradition were recorded well before Manifest Destiny became a national obsession.'" It was, for instance. General George Rogers Clark of Revolutionary-era fame who, in 1780, freely acknowledged Native traditions that the mounds "were the works of their forefathers."" Similarly, it was in 1782 that Thomas Jefferson recorded Native Americans as knowing the exact locations of burial mounds and going "half a dozen miles" out of their way to pay their respects to the mound dead.'^ Once Manifest Destiny revved up, however, it was politically inexpedient to bring up evidence—say, an interior full of lore-laden mounds—that tacitly supported the Native American claim to the land. Interestingly, by 1880, with tbe continent well nigh seized and Native claims no longer a threat to its confiscation, tradition was once more allowed to know .something about mounds, although what, was carefully hedged. Now, it was fashionable, not to make Natives say they had no traditions, but to say that they had no reliable traditions. Consequently, in 1880, Frederick Larkin, who claimed to have once conversed with the long dead Seneca Chief Blacksnake (ca. 1760-1859), quoted him posthumously as saying of the Mound Builders, "We have no reliable traditions with regard to them, though we have traditions reaching back for a long period of time" (italics mine).'-' Unreliability lingered on as the favorite theme of the west throughout the twentieth century, although the no-tradition claim continued to pop up.'" As John Patterson Maclean so awkwardly keynoted the unreliability doctrine in 1904, "Indian traditions, like all others cannot be relied on. In them there may be germs of tmth, but not sufficient to be relied on as historic evidence."'^ By

108 NATIVE AMERICANS. ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

the end of the century, scholars not only charged that tradition was unreliable, but took it upon themselves to explain why. In 1993, for instance, the archenemy of repatriation, archaeologist Clement Meighan, sneered at tradition as the put-up job of "New Age spiritual seekers" and "environmental extremists."'^ My pick as the poster child of the unreliability school is, however, archaeologist Jeffrey S. Dean, who, late in the twentieth century, waxed unintentionally hilarious on the subject, opining, "1 don't think the Hopi oral traditions are worth the paper they're written on."" To understand the seeming contradictions in the records, the reader requires not only a handle on Euroamerican political agendas, but also some sophistication conceming Native informational styles. Natives have a different take on knowledge than do westemers, for whom information is something to be shared instantly, upon the first application by any quester. By contrast. Native knowledge is actively withheld from those who have not eamed it. As James Mooney (1861-1921) recorded in 1900, Cherokee "sacred myths were not for every one [sic], but only those might hear who observed the proper form and ceremony."'* Knowledge is, furthermore, the rightful possession only of those to whom the spirits gave it, so that, in 1885, Daniel Brinton recorded his frustration at being unable to "obtain" a "long, probably mythical and historical chant," delivered annually by the Shawnee of the Quapaw Reservation in Indian Territory. "They say that to repeat it to a white man would bring disasters on their nation."'^ Similariy, in 1890, he lamented his inability to get ahold of "much medicine knowledge held secretly by the old men and women."'" Traditions were not (and still are not) told willy-nilly to any old stranger who walks up, demanding stories. This does not mean that traditions did not (or do not) exist, just that they were not (and are not) being shared with westemers. In fact, traditions are not even shared with other Natives who are outside the medicine circle. This was why, for example (before the assimilationist Francis La Flesche stole them), the traditional Omaha planned to bury the sacred artifacts of their deceased medicine people, who had not passed their knowledge along." The medicine could no longer be used correctly. In 1886, James Mooney described how information was kept close by shamans, who shared with other shamans only when it seemed that their store of lore was about equal, making the exchange worthwhile for both. "Thus when one shaman meets another who he thinks can probably give him some valuable information, he says to him, 'Let us sit down together.' This is understood by the other to mean, 'Let us tell each other our secrets.'"" Medicine people.

"WE CAN MAKE A WAUKAUHOOWAA"

109

Mooney said, "take good care that their sacred writings shall not fall into the hands of the laity or of their rivals in occult practices."" Finally, as the anthropologist Frank Speck warned in 1943, Native Americans are "decidedly sensitive," suffering "deeply under ridicule" of their "people's past beliefs and culture." Although refusing ever to "be ashamed" of their traditions, well knowing "their depths," Natives realize that westerners scom their keepings as the productions of "paganism." As a result. Natives stand "taciturn among strangers" who understand their "ancestral culture only superficially." They respond to the "pure curiosity" of researchers "with either silence or sarcasm."^" Although anthropologists know these things intellectually, in terms of practice, they are remarkably naive, treating written records, especially old ones, as full and clean accounts, untarnished by internecine rivalries, unblemished by political partisanship, unmarred by inept "collecting." Consider Blacksnake, who reportedly said that there were no reliable traditions of the Mound Builders. In his day, Blacksnake was the chief purveyor of the Gaiwi.yo {Code of Handsome Lake), a fact fraught with political minefields.^* The Gaiwi.yo was a spanking fresh code, dating back only to 1799. Its followers were intent upon abandoning their supposedly outdated "pagan" roots, which included traditions that did not honor the newly instated monotheism of their Longhouse religion.^^ The older religions, especially as practiced by the Mound Builders, honored the concept of multiple spirits working in concert, with the twinned spirits of Sky and Earth present at all ceremonies. The Gaiwi:yo sidestepped such traditions, labeling them "witchcraft." Thus, it was not that Seneca mound traditions did not exist or that Blacksnake did not know them but that he was not about to impart rival traditions, let alone tabu rival traditions, to a westem hobbyist. Etiquette also intmdes. Native peoples resent the abruptness of westemers. As John Heckewelder put it in 1819, "they are very much disgusted with the manner which they say some white people have of asking them questions on questions, without allowing them time to give a proper answer to any."" The Native response to intrusive and disrespectful questioning was, historically, to pull the ethnographer's leg by giving him an inane version of what he seemed to want to hear, allowing Natives both "an opportunity of diverting themselves" and a chance to "laugh at the same time at their being able to deceive a people who think themselves so superior to them in wisdom and knowledge." Leg-pulling remains a favorite diversion. In 1978, Thomas McEIwain, himself Iroquois, cautioned anthropologists that "Native Americans are often

110 NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

adverse to imparting information, and they might distort the facts they do give either out of humor or because they have not established a sufficiently close relationship with the researcher." McElwain reported having "personally seen cases of researchers receiving false information because they did not take the trouble to establish human relationships with the people they were studying." Strangers, he wamed, should not expect their cold, alienating forms to be filled out "accurately," particularly in view of the "vast sense of humor" among Natives who "delight in perpetrating tricks with a straight face."^^ Thus, pulling westem legs has always been a regular community activity, with straight-faced practical jokers trying out absurdities on gullible ethnographers, who 5^7/ do not grasp the Native tendency to have a little ftin with the facts. Consequently, some ofthe old jokes—"Mound Builders? Never heard of 'em!"—now stand in the academic literature as the real, Injun lowdown on the mounds.^** Between the Native reluctance to share information outside of the medicine circle and the twin tendency to shape-shift the facts when mdely pressured, much of what exists in the ethnographic record is questionable, at best. Another troublesome aspect of mound tradition needs to be spoken of aloud, although many are hoping that, if we all just ignore it, it will go away. The sticking point concems the persistent traditions describing the Mound Builders as "white." In 1817, for instance, a "Thomas Bodely" surfaced, quoting "Indians of different tribes, north west [sic] ofthe Ohio" as saying that they had understood from their old men, and that it had been a tradition among their several nations, that Kentucky had been settled by whites, and that they had been exterminated by war. They were of opinion [sic] that the old fortifications now to be seen in Kentucky and Ohio, were the productions of those white inhabitants, Wappaockanita, a Shawnee chief, near a hundred and twenty years old, living on the Anglase river [sic, Auglaise River], confirmed the above tradition,^'

James McCulloh, who recorded this, went on to cite several "old Indians" in conversation with this or that settler, variously affirming "that the westem country, and particularly Kentucky, had once been inhabited by white people, but that they were exterminated by the Indians," a tale reiterated by John Haywood." Chief Tobacco told George Rogers Clark that Sandy Island was the site ofthe conclusive battle pitting "white" against "red," adding that, "in the Indian language," Kentucky meant "the River of Blood"' (italics in the original)." Haywood recorded something the same, placing the final battle "at the falls of the Ohio," from whence "the Indians drove the aborigines into a small island below the rapids."^" In 1842, Thomas Hinde reiterated the tradition,

"WE CAN MAKE A WAUKAUHOOWAA"

111

saying, "The Mohawk Indians had a tradition among them, respecting the Welsh, and of their having been cut off by the Indians, at the falls of the Ohio" (italics in the original)." The litany continues. The Shawnee Chief, Wynepuehsika ("Cornstalk," ca. 1720-1777) told Alexander McKee (1735-1824), himself Shawnee, that "Ohio and Kentiicky had been once settled by white people; who were possessed of arts which the Indians did not know, and that after many sanguinary contests they were exterminated" (italics in the original).-*^ Wynepuehsika also told McKee that the Shawnee had not been acquainted with the original Mound Builders, for traditions of the war "had been handed down from a very long time ago, adding that Natives "who had travelled very far west and northwest, had found a nation of people who lived like Indians, although of a very different complexion" (italics in the original)." In 1904, John Patterson Maclean repeated many of these same traditions, but since, by then, the passion for Welsh, Hebrew, and Atlantean Mound Builders had abated, Maclean used these stories in their new capacity, as conclusive evidence that Native tradition was unreliable.^^ A century later, it is still tempting for those of us who know the history of Mound Mania to shy away from these traditions as either major leg-pullers or wild westem interpolations. They might have been something of both, but the traditions are there, from many sources, and some modem keepers (oral traditionalists) accept them at face value. Freeman Owle, for example, a North Carolina Cherokee who was "bom and reared on the Cherokee Indian Reservation," treats the tradition of "white people" as genuine.^** In a 1996 recital of Cherokee mound tradition, he stated that, "thousands of years" before the Vikings, the ancient Cherokee met "blond-headed and blue-eyed" peoples. Owle does not accept the tradition that the Cherokee "annihilated" these inhabitants of the Ohio valley, stating that they intermanied with them, instead."*** How are we to regard such traditions? Let's see what happens if we abandon racism as the touchstone of wisdom. It is only those conditioned to accept the tenets of racism who find the traditions of "white" Native Americans a shattering revelation requiring an explanation in shipwrecked Welshmen, wandering Jews, or fleeing Atlanteans (who were voted "white" on principle). In fact, the world is full of "white" people who are not European, and some of them are Native Americans. In 1798, Benjamin Smith Barton observed that "The Cheerake [sic] are of a lighter colour than the greater number of the North-American Indians that are known to me."*' Yes, they were (and are), as are the Iroquois, their close relatives, who are now, and who were at contact.

112 NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

light skinned people, as the first French missionaries and explorers never tired of recording/^ The fly in this ointment is that Native Americans did not traditionally refer to human physical appearance in terms of the color coding so dear to the racist heart. Colonial and later translators were in the habit of rendering Native terms for Euroamericans as "whites," but this reflected English, not Native language imperatives. The literal meanings of the Native words so translated did not reference skin color. Among the Ohio Iroquois, for example, the traditional and diplomatic word for the colonists was twatate'ke', meaning "our younger brothers," while the less respectful hdnyo 'o (male singular) and yenyo o (female singular) related them to iron/-* The Oneida used oslu.ni, meaning "axe-makers," while, in Tuscarora, the word was kriru.re', meaning "split cotton," a possible reference to slavery, a fate terrifying to the Tuscarora who had witnessed slavery in action.'" White, as a description of human flesh, was meaningless. When Natives did use colors as shorthand, it was in terms of the "black" (deep purple) and white colors of wampum standing for war/danger and peace/safety, respectively, a code recognized throughout the woodlands by Native and colonist alike."' Just as interestingly. Natives of the American southeast were wont to have paired towns, one "white," indicating its duties of peace and sanctuary, and the other, "red," indicating its duties of war."^ "White" people in these code systems meant the peacemakers or sanctuary givers. It is possible, then, that the traditions refer to white-wampum or white-town people. The main possibility is, however, that "white" Mound Builders are nineteenth-century hokum, since all of these traditions were minted in the "white" heat of Mound Mania. Consequently, the level of westem interpolation into basic traditional outlines is probably extreme, leaving it very probable that no mention of "white" people, meaning European-like people, ever existed in authentic Mound-Builder traditions. In view of the haphazard translations and not-so-hidden agendas of most chroniclers, it becomes quite likely that westem writers took real traditions of prolonged warfare in Mound-Builder times and tumed them into the HEATHEN SAVAGES ATTACK! theme so useful to the propaganda of Manifest Destiny. In this regard, it is worth noting that the primary role of "whites" in these accounts was to be "slaughtered" by the "savages," a three-hanky history used to whip up Removal sentiment.''^ Two final sticking points exist in mound tradition. The most authentic keepings of Mound-Builder times consistently relate that ravaging warfare fiared, and continued, over years and even centuries, among densely populated

"WE CAN MAKE A WAUKAUHOOWAA"

113

nations. Between 1767 and 1780, for instance, David Zeisberger recorded what the Ohio Lenape told him of Mound-Builder times, that "in those days, the natives carried on great wars with one another." This was possible because they were "formerly, according to their own testimony, far more numerous than at the present time." In these wars, some mounds were used as defensive stmctures."^ This account was echoed by George Henry Loskiel (1740-1814), who, in 1794, recorded that "According to the most authentic testimony of the oldest Indians, their wars were formerly carried on with much greater fury, and lasted much longer, than in the present times. Some were even hereditary."''^ Similarly, in the 1780s, the Natives told George Rogers Clark, that they had formerly been "as numerous as the trees in the wood," but they offended "the Great Spirit, and he made them kill one another." Clark added that the Kaskaskia chief. BAPTIST DUCOIGN," had given him a history of the Mississippian mounds near Kaskaskia River. He said that was the palace of his forefathers, when they covered the whole (country) and had large towns; that all those works we saw there, were the fortifications round the town, which must have been very considerable; that the smaller works we (saw) so far within the larger, comprehended the real palace; that the little mountain we there saw flung up with a basin on top, was a tower that contained part of the guard belonging to the prince, as from the top of that height, they could defend the king's house with their arrows, &c. (Italics, parentheses, symbols, and small capitals in the original)'"

The war mounds in Clark's and Zeisberger's accounts are well known in traditional lore. In 1916, Arthur C. Parker (1881-1955), a Seneca and a scholar, used both his traditional and bis archaeological knowledge to describe just how an Iroquoian war mound was built. He believed that most of the circular mounds in New York "were probably not erected in any sense as earthworks but simply as the base for a stockaded wall Tree trunks from fifteen to twenty feet high were trimmed off and planted from six inches to a foot deep in a shallow ditch in the top of the wall and the earth was packed in about them. The tops were further secured by being tied together with bark ropes and withes." Remains of these stmctures were found throughout New York and Ontario. "In some instance," Parker added, "they do not materially differ from the earth enclosures found throughout Ohio."^' Such structures were still being built in early contact times. The Europeans called them "palisades" and "castles," recognizing that they were military. Very clearly, then, tradition holds that some of the mounds were defensive structures erected in response to the mighty warfare that raged across the heavy population centers of the Ohio and Mississippi valleys. Two thomy issues surface if these traditions are accepted:

114 NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

• the presence of massive Native populations, precontact, and • Native cultures of all-out warfare. Westem scholars do not want to talk about either of them. Nineteenth- and twentieth-century Savagism required low populations for Native Americans, since high populations constituted part of the westem definition of civilization. In fact, westem scholars deliberately reported population statistics that they knew were drastically short of the mark to coincide with these biases." The sheer chauvinism of the "civilization" rationale having disintegrated, some westem scholars in the late twentieth century finally came to accept that the population of precontact North America was—exactly as tradition asserts—much higher than westemers had allowed to date." Nevertheless, there is still a profound reluctance to accept this now, because of what it implies. Especially once the guilty realization dawned, that genocide was How THE WEST WAS WON, the low-population lullaby had the soothing effect of keeping down the death toll in any analysis of colonialism. Forced to confront the issue today, scholars offer up Oops-Sorry History, dredging up faceless disease as the accidental agent of depopulation. Native Americans do not necessarily go along with Oops-Sorry innocence, for tradition was perfectly aware of the source of the new and frightening illnesses decimating Native America.^'' Moreover, both tradition and history show that Europeans deliberately spread disease.^^ Finally, the usual litany of the OopsSorry explanation—"smallpox, measles, typhoid, diphtheria, mumps"— relegates to the benign category of "other" the most ferocious of all the imported killers: the bubonic plague.^^ The Black Death was among the very first diseases loosed on American soil by the Spanish, with repeated outbreaks devastating the people, particularly the pandemic of 1540.^' The vast trading networks that spanned the North American continent helped spread this disease before the majority of settlers arrived.'^ When it is recalled what the bubonic plague did to Europe when it first hit that virgin territory in the fourteenth century, it becomes obvious why Mound-Building cultures along the Mississippi River collapsed suddenly in the late fifteenth century. Just as European feudalism crumbled under the massive population losses wrought by the bubonic plague, Native mound cultures of the Mississippi fell apart under the staggering depopulation occasioned by the same disease. As Oops-Sorry History comes under attack, the academy falls back on amnesia. Much of the studious inattention to mound cultures and tradition today

"WE CAN MAKE A WAUKAUHOOWAA"

115

reflects a westem academy in denial. It is easier, emotionally, for westemers to dismiss mound traditions of a densely populated and very active continent, precontact, than to face the level of human and cultural destruction that European invasion wrought. Westem squeamishness over population traditions complements the academic hesitation to touch traditions of all-consuming warfare. Sensitized modem scholars continue to downplay as unreliable the plethora of traditional evidence of ongoing wars anciently fought by Mound-Building nations in the Ohio Valley. In a sort of allergic reaction to the blatant Savagism of their predecessors, who used traditions of high-casualty warfare to villify and dispossess Native America, modem scholars now distressingly pretend that, precontact, it was always a beautiful day in the neighborhood. Updated Savagism prefers ancients who spent their time sighing wistfully over little birds, uttering deep thoughts about ecology, and devoting all their spare time to handicrafts. Resisting racism is a good thing^—unless the tactic chosen leads scholars into exactly the same error committed by the old Savagists: denying tradition when it does not say what is politically correct at the moment. The cure for Nasty Savagism is not Noble Savagism. The cure is to junk Savagism altogether. It is Savagism, purely and simply, that refuses to allow Native Americans the status, so freely granted to every other population in the world, of full, if sometimes conflicted, adulthood. There is something cloying, patronizing, and infuriatingly infantalizing about the au current refusal to recognize that the Mound Builders engaged in warfare, just like everyone else in the world. Willful blindness on this score does not atone for the Nasty Savagism of the past but simply perpetuates a new, smiley-faced Savagism. I understand the kindhearted urge that motivates Noble Savagism, i.e., heading racists off at the pass, but neutering tradition lest it inadvertently give quarter to racists is less effective—and less ethical—than simply ending the power of racism over westem thought. In this instance, it is important to recognize that the Ohio valley traditions all speak of ravaging warfare in Mound-Builder times. The war for the Ohio River valley is uniformly presented as earth-scorching. In 1800, the Sacs at St. Louis "expressed some astonishment that any person should live in Kentucky ;^they said the country had been the scene of much blood, and was filled with the manes of its butchered inhabitants."'^ The Iroquois, Lenape, and Cherokee all told similar mane-raising tales of warfare in mound country. There is no reason to disbelieve that such warfare occurred.

116 NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

In fact, there is good reason to believe it did, because war, per se, was not the point of the traditions. Keepings, such as that of the founding of the Iroquois League, make it clear that the good govemment of participatory democracy practiced among eastem woodlanders at contact was forged in the rugged fires of all-out war as the solution to continuous hostilities.^*^ If colonial generals were frustrated by the flaccidity of their Native allies in colonial times, by their determined lack of single-minded destruction, this was not because Natives had no concept of massed, sustained attack, but precisely because they did. They had adamantly rejected the hierarchical forms of Mound-Builder govemments that had once perpetuated it. Thus, removing warfare from mound tradition clouds the crucial point that Native revolutions consciously secured the blessings of domestic peace for all by overthrowing the earlier, oppressive systems that had encouraged war. As the foregoing makes obvious, a straightforward review of mound tradition can be ticklish, both politically and interpretively. So as to sidestep its many explosive ramifications, archaeologists tend to deal with mound tradition by the simple expedient of ignoring it. To facilitate their oblivion, they refuse to recognize living peoples as the descendants of Mound Builders, attempting instead to remove the topic from the Native sphere entirely by artfully slapping their own, non-Native names over mound cultures. Consequently, the terms "Adena" and "Hopewell," which archaeologists insist upon applying to the Ohio valley Mound Builders, are completely unconnected to any Native nation or tradition. For all their pseudoexotic sound, these terms are the pure fabrications of westem scholars. The word "Adena" was coined by an early Ohio settler, Thomas Worthington (1773-1827), to name his estate. Adena derives from the Greek for "sufficient," implying that Worthington had "sufficient grounds" in his manor, located in Ross County, Ohio, just northwest of Chillicothe, a prime Mound-Builder area. A spectacular mound stood on Worthington's Adena estate. First excavated by William C. Mills in 1902, it lent the name "Adena" to the culture it seemingly represented, especially as it was expanded upon in the work of archaeologist E. F. Greenman in 1932.^' Thereafter, archaeologists ubiquitously used this Greek term to denote a very Native culture. By the same token, potsherder Warren K. Moorehead took it upon himself to rename a site during his wildly destmctive "excavations" to supply the Columbian Exposition of the 1893 World's Fair with magnificent artifacts and skeletons. Already picked over by earlier trophy hunters since it was first reviewed as "Clarke's Works" by Squire and Davis in 1848, the site was

"WE CAN MAKE A WAUKAUHOOWAA"

117

rechristened by Moorehead, who gave it the surname of the landowner with whom he had struck his digger's deal. Thus were Clarke's Works transformed into the "Hopewell Site" in 1891." The continued use of the terms Adena and Hopewell in archaeological circles is rationalized on the argument that extreme caution is required, because, as Maureen Korp put it in 1990, "no one knows who the creators ofthe Adena, Hopewell, and Mississippian cultures really were or where they went." Having said as much, in the next paragraph, Korp identified their probable descendants as "Cherokee, Sioux, and the Algonkian groups."^^ Clearly, the people did not "go" anywhere, since their descendants are known, named, and still living in the vicinity. What is exhibited here is not caution, as advertised, but an end game on the part of westem scholars. They dare not acknowledge the living descendants of these Mound-Building cultures, for, the minute they do, the National Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA) kicks in, forcing the cessation of digging and the retum of stolen artifacts and human remains, a topic I examine closely in chapter 5 and the epilogue of this book. Native peoples are not nearly as chary as archaeologists about naming the Mound Builders or acknowledging their descendants. Tradition is very clear on who built mounds. Whenever this fact is brought up, it is countered with the archaeological excuse that Mound-Builder traditions are too scattered and fragmentary to draw into a coherent narrative. This flimsy allegation, which does not stand up to scrutiny, has been allowed to silence the telling of mound traditions, ultimately leaving the impression that none exist. When brave keepers have come forward, they typically have been mocked as minions ofthe New Age movement, a deep insult in traditional circles, as archaeologists well know. It is high time for the cultural bullying to cease and the traditions ofthe four nations most intimately involved with the earthworks of the Ohio valley—the Shawnee, the Iroquois, the Lenape, and the Cherokee—to be collated for review. When they even know ofthe Shawnee claim to have been Mound Builders, westem scholars wave it off, yet Shawnee tradition connects very plausibly with the "Fort Ancient" Mound-Building culmre along the Ohio River. Instead of listening to Shawnee tradition on the matter, however, westem scholars rush to construct their own pet theories based on westem archaeology and historical documents, creating a "prehistory" ofthe Shawnee that, as usually presented, is incoherent to the point of chaos. On the one hand, the Shawnee are held to have originated "somewhere in the eastem subarctic region of Canada" (allowing them to have made the requisite Bering Strait crossing) and to have

118 NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

taken up residence along the Ohio River." This account continues that the marauding Iroquois League of the seventeenth century shoved them out of beautiful Ohio, causing them to split into their then five clans and disperse, some west as far as Illinois and others south as far as Georgia, thereby accounting for the southern Shawnee." On the other, wildly contradictory, hand, the Shawnee are presented as immigrants from the Carolinas and Georgia, who moved north.^^ At this point, a little cultural knowledge is helpful. There were six original lineages of the Shawnee: the Thawegila; Chalakawtha {"Chillicothe"); Peckowe ("Piqua"); Kispogo; Maykojay; and the Shawano, a sixth, once powerful clan that died out soon after contact.^^ They did not necessarily travel together. In historical times, each of the clans "led a semiseparate existence," although they remained in "fairly close contact" with one another.^"* Some strayed to the north; others holed up in the south. Thus, it is not surprising that the earliest English and French historical records strongly connect the at-contact Shawnee with two major river systems: the Wabash-Ohio system in the north, and the Cumberland-Savannah system in the south. The Shawnee were clearly in the Ohio valley around the era of contact. The 1681 Franquelin Map, most probably drawn up in consultation with two Shawnee in Paris, shows the Shawnee along the Wabash and Ohio Rivers, on the westem rim of the 'Tort Ancient" culture.^' In historical times, the Chalakawtha and Peckowe clans are closely identified with Ohio locales— indeed, the modem southeastem Ohio cities of Chillicothe and Piqua are named for their old clan towns. John Haywood recorded that Shawnee had come up from the south to settle along the Ohio River.™ In the mid-twentienth century, archaeological evidence emerged that the Shawnee were the so-called "Fort Ancient" Mound Builders. The "Fort Ancient" culture fiourished from roughly 1400 to 1650 C.E. along both banks of the Ohio River from Indiana to West Virginia, where the Shawnee are shown on the Franquelin Map. The conclusion of archaeologist James B. Griffin that the Shawnee were the "Fort Ancient" people is practically inescapable, although numerous scholars continue to escape it.^' There is also strong evidence that the Shawnee were simultaneously located in the south. The most tenuous of that evidence involves the various narratives of the entrada of Hemando de Soto into the American southeast, which contain mention of the "Chalaque." These references are commonly taken to indicate the modem Cherokee, and they most probably do, but Jerry Clark argued in !977 that the similarity between the words "Chalakawtha" and "Chaiaque" is

"WE CAN MAKE A WAUKAUHOOWAA"

119

worth considering, especially since the Chalakawtha is the clan that most particulariy claims to have migrated north from the southeast.'^ Furthermore, the term "Cherokee" is not a self-identification, whereas Chalakawtha is. Accepting for the sake of argument that "Cherokee" came from the Muscogee term, chilokee, meaning "people of a different speech" (as opposed to the Choctaw word, choluk, chuluk, or chiluk, indicating a "pit" or a "cave"), Clark held that chilokee could have applied as plausibly to the language isolate that was the original Shawnee tongue as to the Iroquoian language of the Cherokee.'' Stronger historical evidence for Shawnee in the south came from the same 1681 Franquelin Map that had placed the Shawnee along the Wasbash and Ohio Rivers. It also showed them living along the "'Skipakicipi ou la riviere bleue" {"Skipakicipi or the Blue River"). Shkipakithithipi translates to "Blue River," which remains the Shawnee term for the Cumberland River.'"* The Cumberland River was strongly connected with the Shawnee in yet another map, the De Lisle Map map first published in Paris in 1718. It labeled the Cumberland River the "Riviere [sic] des anciens Chauanons ansl nomme par ce que les Chauanons y habitoient autrefois" ("River of the old Shawnee thus named because the Shawnee had formerly lived there").'** Other maps from the time likewise recorded the Cumberland as the Shawnee River.'^ These maps are supported by tradition, for, in 1772, the Cherokee chief Little Complanter, then ninety years of age, said that the Shawnee had left their more southerly lands between Georgia and South Carolina, headed for the Cumberland River, on a pass granted by the Cherokee." The old "Shawnee River," called the Shauwanoa wee Theqypee by the Shawnee, transmuted into the Savannah and the Cumberland Rivers under British settlement.'^ Importantly, the De Lisle Map also connected the Shawnee with the Savannah River, labeling it the ""Riviere [sic] des Chaouanons ou d'Ediscou'' ("River of the Shawnees or the Ediscou").'^ In 1710, the Englishman John Senex put the Shawnee at the headwaters of the Savannah River.*" In 1823, John Haywood unwittingly confiated the Cumberland and Savannah Rivers, recording that the Ohio Shawnee also "claimed the lands on the Cumberland, which was formerly called Sawanoe river [sic, Shawnee River], and by the French, Chauvanan [Chaouanons], the name by which tbey denominated the Shawanese [5/c]."^' Besides their Ohio-Wabash and Cumberland-Savannah homes, evidence connects the oldest Shawnee with the deepest south. In 1662, the French Jesuit and explorer. Father Jerome Lalemant, had the Shawnee in longstanding trade

120 NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

with the Spanish of La Florida, a connection reiterated by another Jesuit explorer, Father Jacques Marquette in 1674."^ There are indications that some Shawnee lived in Alabama prior to 1685." Cadwallader Colden recorded that four hundred and fifty Shawnees departed for "New Spain," i.e., La Florida of the Spaniards, in 1745, winding up along the headwaters of the Mobile River/" Then again, in 1792, after treaty shenanigans by the new U.S. govemment, another Shawnee band left Ohio in disgust, going down to New Orleans, and from there, on to Pensacola, Florida, asking the Spanish authorities to allow them to settle there at a place called Savannah's Town.^^ This group quickly linked up with the earlier immigants.^^ It should be noted that the fragmentary and disjointed accounts here come not from Shawnee tradition, as is alleged, but from the sheer muddle of westem records. Moreover, the great preponderance of them show the Shawnee in the south, with the oldest accounts pointing to the deepest south. Indeed, it is likely that, in migrating to Florida in the eighteenth century, the Shawnee were simply retuming to their first home. To start unscrambling the westem muddle, the distinctions beween people who traveled to a homeland and stayed put and those who traveled frequently, as a lifestyle, must be kept in mind. The Shawnee were famous among the more sedentary eastem nations for their wandering ways. In this, they were filling an old and honored role among North American Natives: that of itinerant idea broker. Regarded (then and now) as a very spiritual people, the Shawnee went about from group to group, spreading cultural concepts in their wake while, simultaneously, picking up new concepts from the next group they encountered. The Shawnee were the mass media of the woodlands. The Shawnee picked up not just new ideas but also new members as they went along, becoming a very mixed group, culturally. They may well be Algonkin speakers today simply by virtue of having incorporated so many Algonkin peoples during their travels. Importantly in this regard, Kokomthena, "Our Grandmother," First Woman, Star Woman, the Sky Creator of the Shawnee, speaks a non-Shawnee language, one understood only by children under four and select medicine people who once interacted with them.*^ This medicine language went extinct when the last of these old-time shamans died.^^ The existence of a secret, medicine language strongly suggests that there was an archaic Shawnee language, never recorded, that might—or might not—have been Algonkin. In fact, the very word Shawnee is a foreign term—Shawunogi —Algonkin for "southemer." Not a self-designation, it was applied to the Shawnee by others.*' Their original self-designation might well have been

"WE CAN MAKE A WAUKAUHOOWAA"

121

something else in the lost language of Kokomthena, for the oldest retained examples of the original language are two of her personal names, Sikalaapihsi and LiiOiikapihsi, both untranslatable using any known North American Native language (aside from their female suffixes, /liO-^" The old language was still viable in the late eighteenth century, for another unrecognizable Shawnee term, weshellequa, meaning "good manitou," was being spoken and understood between 1772 and 1773. David Jones took it down from the mouth of Shawnee Alexander McKee as "Coashellequaa."'' Significantly in this regard, Gaynwawpiahsika {Thomas Wildcat Alford, 1860-1938), a Shawnee traditionalist and medicine man, stated that the Maykojay clan of the old Shawnee had had the civic task of producing the "prophets" and medicine people. Ultimately losing its mesawmee, or sacred medicine bundle, the Maykojay line went extinct after 1877 or 1878.'^ Since this clan trained the shamans, it is not unlikely that the Maykojay extinction took the original, secret language down along with it. In any case, modem Shawnee is apparently unrelated to the old dialect, having been picked up in the course of long wanderings. Neither did the Shawnee start out along the Ohio River or the Shauwanoa wee Theeppee. Oral traditions have them sailing to North America from across water^but what water? Two startlingly different accounts survive. One recorded in the twentieth century boldly identified the water as the Bering Sea, but the oldest traditional accounts from the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries adamantly identified it as the water south and west of Florida. The ethnographer, Joab Spencer, presented the northerly account twice, once in 1908 and again in 1909, with the second recital leaving the suspicious impression that he, not the Shawnee, had supplied the northem latitudes of discussion. In 1908, Spencer attributed the water-crossing tradition he recounted to Charles Bluejacket, a Christian minister, who, between 1858 and 1860, purportedly told Spencer that the Shawnee had come to this continent from across "a narrow part of the ocean far to the north."" In repeating this same tradition in a 1909 article, however. Spencer merely reported that the Shawnees "in their joumeyings, came to a great water," adding authorially, without attributing the comment to Bluejacket, "It is understood that the great water here referred to was far to the north."^" The question is, understood by whom? Older records dispute that it was so understood by the Shawnee. The oldest Shawnee traditions, some recorded more than a century before Spencer wrote, uniformly locate the water-crossing southwest of Florida. In his New Views of the Origin of the Tribes and Nations of America (1798),

122 NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

Benjamin Smith Barton noted that the "Sawwannoo" (Shawnee) had come up "from the south."" In the appendix to this work, Barton ineluded the comment that Shawnee tradition, as given to him by John Heckewelder, claimed that the Shawnee had been "driven by the Spaniards from the borders of Mexico."^*" Heckewelder wrote, "I have no doubt... that the Shawnese formerly resided on the borders of Mexico. The late Col. Geo. Croghan, agent of Indian affairs, &c. told me, twenty-seven years ago, that the Shawnese onee lived beyond the Creek-nation [sic], and in Florida; that they had been driven about continually, until they at length came almost to nothing. Their being called by the Delawares Schawanno, denoteth their origin^ar to the South" (italics, abbreviations, and symbols in the original).^^ In his 1820 letter to Caleb Atwater, published in the first volume of the American Antiquarian society's Collections, the long time Indian Agent from Ohio, John Johnston, cited the Shawnee tradition that "They came here from West Florida, and the adjacent country," their forebearers having "crossed the sea" to arrive in Florida.''^ Johnston concluded that this reference might have been simply to "an arm of the sea."^ In an 1829 manuscript, George Bluejacket, son of the original Weyapiersenwah ("Blue Jacket," ca. 17541810), said that the people arrived "from the great salt water" where the sun "came out" of the "Kitch-e-ca-me," or lake, "in the morning," to hide in the forest "at night" —i.e., the Shawnee arrived from across an eastem ocean.'"*' In 1869, John Jeffries again recorded the Shawnee tradition of Florida, emphasizing that it "tended to show they were of foreign origin, and that their ancestors had crossed the sea" to arrive in North America.'°' In 1885, Daniel Brinton recorded a Shawnee seafaring tradition that, far from Spencer's "narrow part of the ocean," spoke of "crossing a wide water" (italics mine).'°^ Shawnee tradition, then, overwhelmingly rejects the Bering Strait migration to America, claiming instead a southeastern sea crossing, which suggests that the people had either braved the waters of the Gulf of Mexico or come from a Caribbean island to westem Florida, driven north by the Spanish invasion. However the trip had been made, it was terrifying, suggesting that the people spent time on the open seas. In 1869, Jeffries recorded that, "for a long time after the country was settled by Europeans," the Shawnee "kept up yearly sacrificies for their safe arrival in this country."'"^ The thanksgiving might have continued longer than Jeffries knew, for Brinton noted that, late in the nineteenth century, "a yearly sacrifice" continued to have been "offered up in memory of their safe arrival."The story of this joumey seems to have been the same "mythical and historical" tradition that Brinton despaired of being

"WE CAN MAKE A WAUKAUHOOWAA"

123

allowed to hear at the Quapaw Reservation in 1885."*^ There are various versions of the water-crossing tradition. In one version that seems quite old, the people crossed on the back of a turtle, a very spiritual reference in traditions that regard North America as Turtle Island. In another version, deadended by the ocean in their path, the desperate people encountered an unfamiliar spirit-being who invited them onto his small boat for passage from their troubled place to a bountiful land. Afraid at first, because the boat was tiny, the people demurred, until one, brave enough to try, stepped aboard. The boat immediately enlarged to accommodate him. More stepped in, and, again, it grew to size. Notwithstanding this sure evidence of spirit protection (growing and shrinking is a shape-shifting talent), some of the Shawnee refused to board, and the boat sailed without them to the distant shore.'^^ Yet another set of traditions, one recorded by Henry Rowe Schoolcraft in 1812 from the Shawnee in Missouri, and the other from the Ohio Shawnee by Johnston in 1819, bad the people mystically walking across the sea.'** Brinton reaffirmed the spiritual nature of the crossing when he recorded that the Shawnee had only "succeeded in this by their great control of magic arts, their occult power enabling them to walk over the water as if it had been land."' (Standing up in a raft while poling it along in the shallows is sometimes called "water-walking.") In his 1829 manuscript, George Bluejacket said that the Shawnee's original homeland had been "swallowed up in the great salt water by Watch-e-me-netoo," a very bad spirit. The people were saved, however, when Kokomthena bobbed to the surface, holding the tail of a panther, while a swan carried her husband to shore. Transportation by the Water Panther (an Earth Spirit) and the Swan (a Sky Spirit), two ancient emblems of the Shawnee, meant that the crossing had been sacredly powered—a consistent element of all versions.' The lengthiest water-crossing tradition was recorded in 1824 by Charles Trowbridge, who took it down from the Shawnee Chief, Cathecassa ("Black Hoof"). By the time Trowbridge wrote, the missionaries had already set to performing their sex change operation on the original female creator of the Shawnee, Kokomthena. Thus, Trowbridge set down the male spirit guide with whom the Shawnee interacted in this tradition as the "great Spirit." As the tradition progresses, however, it becomes eminently clear that this Shawnee Sky spirit was not the thinly veiled Christian god that the missionaries had forced on Natives as the "Great Spirit." The tradition drew a wide distinction between it and the Christian god. In fact, this Sky spirit was simply a vision guide.

124 NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

Cathecassa 's tradition opened in the place above, or Sky World, with the whole Shawnee nation questing for a communal vision. As the people watched, their spirit guide "opened the door of the skies" so that they might look down, there to espy Turtle Island, floating on the waters below.'^ Doors and the opening thereof were cmcial spiritual metaphors among the Shawnee, whose shamans were characterized as the Open Doors of Spirit—that is, they could cross the physical/spiritual border to bring new information into human consciousness.'"^ A Shawnee listener, then, knew that an event of monumental spiritual proportions had just transpired, as his ancestors gazed through the Open Door of Sky upon the great, swimming turtle below. Particularly since the Shawnee started out in Mexico or the Caribbean, this was a geographical revelation. Soon, twelve Shawnee, "the roots of 12 tribes"—i.e., the men and women of the original six lineages—had gathered to observe the great island under the sky. Their guide now opened another door, and, through it, they glimpsed a circumcised, naked, and hairless "white man seated upon the ground." He was the Christian god, "another spirit" over "whom or whose subjects" their guide had "no controul [sicy The spirit guide told the Shawnee that they would hardly have arrived upon "their Island" or gotten "comfortably situated," when "this great white spirit" would upend all of Grandmother's plans for them, ultimately whittling down their natural lifespan of two hundred years to something far more meager. Having been forewamed of what lay ahead, the twelve Shawnee climbed into a basket, which the spirit then lowered down onto Turtle Island. They set their faces north and walked."' Given these water-crossing traditions, it is not at all implausible to conclude that • the Shawnee quested for spiritual guidance in the wake of the first, genocidal depredations of the Spanish, who swept forth into Mexico and the Caribbean from the eastem ocean to overwhelm Native culture in the late fifteenth century, and • as a result of a sky guidance on what to do about the Spanish crisis, the majority of the nation picked up and skedaddled, via water, to the peninsula of Florida. The assertion of post-contact arrival in North America is further strengthened by Cathecassa's mention to both Trowbridge and Johnston that, in North America, old folks of his nation unearthed tree stumps that had been cut down using "edged tools."' '^ It was Europeans, not Natives, who were using edged.

"WE CAN MAKE A WAUKAUHOOWAA"

125

iron axes in the early sixteenth century, again suggesting the Spanish presence in La Florida. In his record, Jeffries also noted the Shawnee tradition "that Florida had been occupied by white people before they entered it.""^ Jeffries' report is confirmed by Cathecassa, who told both Johnston and Trowbridge that the country had been "visited by white people before the fiood.""'* The sensationalism that attached to these revelations in the mid-nineteenth century need not distract modem readers from the fact that the Spaniards had been prancing about Florida since 1513."' Neither should Cathecassa's mention of a flood be overinterpreted. The heavy-handed evangelism abroad when Trowbridge wrote certainly forcefit the biblical flood of Noah over every local tradition of a flood, but a bit more sophistication is required today. Many rivers in the American southeast flood spectacularly, and some of those inundations are "floods of the century," especially in the days before modem flood control practices. By calling up a shared trauma of the Shawnee past—the year that the Shauwanoa wee Theepee frighteningly overflowed its banks—Cathecassa simply meant that, before the Shawnee's arrival in their first homeland along the Savannah and Cumberland Rivers, they encountered the Spaniards in Florida. The Shawnee invasion of the southeast met with determined resistance from the original Native inhabitants there. Trowbridge's second source, "Shawnee Prophet," Tenskwatawa (1770-1837), expanded upon this conflict, recounting that the Shawnee repulsed attempts, "four times in succession," to drive them out, the mounting ferocity of the attacks requiring that some sort of safety measures be enacted. Deeply concemed, the Shawnee grandfathers met in council to decide what was to be done. One suggested that, by "piling up a parcel of old logs and covering them with earth, we can make a Waukauhoowaa, which will defend us securely from all outward attacks.""^ Clearly, the Shawnee grandfathers already knew what a Waukauhoowaa was. The word means "an Enclosure," but the old traditional designation for the military forts of the Shawnee, erected in accordance with the grandfathers' design, was Kaahta linee Waukauhoowaa, or Old Men's Forts."^ This was different in design and usage from a basic Waukauhoowaa. Acting quickly on the idea to fortify, the people "immediately sat [sic] themselves at work," carefully transplanting walnut, hickory, and beech trees so as to have a ready supply of nuts, should they come under siege and be unable to hunt, fish, or hoe for food. They also made certain of having fresh water in the event of an attack by enclosing a spring in the center of their fortification. From the security of this earthwork, the people dispatched small

126 NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

guerrilla bands, which attacked their enemies and then retreated swiftly to the safety of their Kaahta linee Waukauhoowaa. These actions only enraged their enemies, causing them to combine in a joint attack upon the Shawnee enclave, intent upon rooting out the invaders once and for all, but the attack was handily repelled. Ironically, so impressed were their enemies by the utility of the grandfathers' Kaahta linee Waukauhoowaa, that they began building fortresses using the Shawnee plan. As time wore on, both the Shawnee and other nations improved upon the original design."^ Despite having successfully defended their new homeland along the Shauwanoa wee Theeppee, Shawnee tradition states that the people left it not long before the arrival of "the Quakers" (the British), moving northwest to the Scioto River in mid-Ohio and down to the prairies around Chillicothe, in southcentral Ohio."' Since they already knew exactly where they were going, it is not unlikely that some clans of the Shawnee, probably the Chalakawtha and Peckowe, had already gone up to the Ohio valley long before, there to have been joined by their kinsfolk in the seventeenth century, as the Shauwanoa wee Th^ppee became untenable due to disease, slave catchers, and the intemecine pressures occasioned by European invasion. Some Shawnee were certainly present in Ohio in Mound-Builder times, for archaeology has established that the Shawnee "Fort Ancient" sites in Ohio traded with Cahokia, on the Upper Mississippi, probably transporting goods from as far east as the New York Iroquois.'^° Just as their kinsfolk had not been welcomed along the Shauwanoa wee Theeppee, Shawnee tradition states that those who went north had to push their way past stiff resistance to enter the already inhabited Ohio valley. At some point, they migrated to the headwaters of the Maumee River at modem-day Fort Wayne, Indiana, went from there over to Chicago, and then down to Cairo, Illinois, at the confluence of the Mississippi and Ohio Rivers, thus making the circuit of the lower midwest.'^' Their tradition of long struggle in the Ohio valley might well have been a recollection of the "Fort Ancient" period, which is considered to have ended in 1650. Tenskwatawa recalled no important moves after the people settled in the Ohio region.'^^ In addition to their log-and-earthen Kaahta linee Waukauhoowaa, Shawnee tradition has their ancestors building with stone, claiming that they reserved its use for the construction of tombs and sweat lodges.'" Thus, Shawnee spiritual rites and ceremonies occurred in and around their stone structures, as they laid their dead to rest or entered into communion with the Spirit of Fire in the sweat

"WE CAN MAKE A WAUKAUHOOWAA"

127

lodge, whereas their defenses were made of earth and logs, along the order of the fortified towns that modem archaeologists now call "palisaded villages." If the Shawnee distinguished between defensive and spiritual mounds, Cathecassa also analyzed the distinction between European forts and Native earthworks. Of the two, he said, "all the regular fortifications found throughout the country were constructed by" the Europeans, but those mounds "which were of irregular formation" were the "work of the Indians."'^'' Cathecassa was juxtaposing European bulwarks and Native earthworks in this comparison. Settlers in North America dug long ditches as military fortifications, piling the resultant dirt along the front rim of the ditch, thus creating a set of rolling hillocks and shallows, or what modem parlance styles "the trenches." What Cathecassa called the "regular" fortifications were those trenches dug by the Europeans, always laid out in linear rows, inside or outside a fort, whereas the Mound-Builder earthworks came in the shapes of animal effigies and in complexes of circle-square, half-moon, circles, or other "irregular" design, with relatively few of them defensive palisades. Thus, the traditions of the Shawnee conceming their travels and activities fit with the documentary record much better than the westem scenario of their migrating down from the subarctic north to sit a spell in Ohio before they sojoumed in the south. On the contrary, having crossed some portion of the Caribbean or bordering Atlantic to Florida to escape the Spanish, they encountered the industrious Mound Builders of the southeast. Always cultural sponges, they picked up the Mound-Building idea from their predecessors on Turtle Island—for tradition is clear that they knew what a Waukauhoowaa ^as before they constructed their Old Men's Fort at Shauwanoa wee Theqjpee. Those who moved to Ohio also built earth and stone mounds until the "Fort Ancient" period drew to a close around 1650, when the Beaver Wars drove the Shawnee into the arms of the Miami.'" If Shawnee mound tradition is terra incognita to westem scholars, Iroquoian mound tradition—that of the Mohawk, Oneida, Onondaga, Cayuga, Seneca, Tuscarora, Erie, and Wyandot—is fairly well known.This is largely because it was the Iroquois who held off European invasion of the American heartland for two hundred and fifty years, greatly annoying and, consequently, greatly fixating the settlers on them. In the interest of knowing their enemies, Euroamericans took down everything they could about the Iroquois. Unfortunately, much of it was fragmented or garbled and, some of it, deliberately phonied up. Land grabbers and speculators, for instance, made whole

128 NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

careers out of announcing that Ohio was "uninhabited" because an inhabited Ohio would have dented their efforts to seize the land for sale at inflated prices.'^' Another difficulty in discussing the Iroquois of Ohio is the lingering Savagism in westem circles that somehow concludes that any "primitive" people, once they have migrated to a certain place, must never move again. Wedded to simplicity, Savagism interprets complex Iroquoian traditions of going east and west and southeast as contradictory rather than consecutive. It is inconceivable to Savagism that a people might have started out far to the west, traveled east to the Atlantic coast, and then backtracked to central positions, as affording the best land they had seen, with some later moving south from there. No, by gum—no double-dipping allowed! Only one migration, in one direction, is permitted one people. Thus does Savagism, in cheerful contradiction of tradition, assign the Iroquois a starting point north of the St. Lawrence River (because that was where Jacques Cartier bumped into a few Iroquoian towns in 1535). From there, it gives marching orders for the Iroquois to proceed south to New York, from whence to send a few Seneca youths west to "colonize" Ohio during the Beaver Wars of the seventeenth century. Comfort for the northem scenario is sought in Chief David Cusick's "Sketches of Ancient History of the Six Nations" (1825) and Peter Dooyentate Clarke's Origin and Traditional History of the Wyandotts (1870). Cusick (Tuscarora) stated that the Iroquois "were created, and resided in the north regions" along the St. Lawrence.'^^ Dooyentate (Wyandot) did not honor Cusick's creation in situ but simply indicated that, from the time the Iroquois first met the French along the St. Lawrence, "back to an unknown period, the Iroquois and Wyandotts [sic] had always dwelt in the same region, where the abode and hunting grounds of each were conterminous."'^^ The rush to present a northem derivation originated in the fact that both Dooyentate and Cusick were "civilized and Christianized," with westem influences troubling their writings. For example, Cusick interpolated Christian theological concepts into his cosmology, while Dooyentate often bowed to patronizing westem attitudes towards Native peoples and their traditions.'^"^ In this instance, both men seem to have lopped off the forepart of tradition, the migration east from the far west, beginning instead with the traditions of the St. Lawrence, the better to conform to settler assumptions of a northem origin for the Iroquois. Cusick did not even acknowledge the existence of those longer traditions, but, by merely dating the residence on the St. Lawrence "back to an

"WE CAN MAKE A WAUKAUHOOWAA"

129

unknown period," Dooyentate tacitly conceded traditions of a prior existence in places other than the St. Lawrence valley. Interestingly, in his 1881 recital of tradition. Chief Elias Johnson reaffirmed the foreshortening. Although he basically followed Cusick, even to copying his wording at times, Johnson did not present Cusick's northem creation. Instead, he simply stated that the "earliest tradition that we [Tuscarora] have of the Iroquois" found them along the banks of the St. Lawrence River, where they were engaged in a war with the Stone Giants.'^" The reference to the Stone-Giant war dated this tradition to long after both creation and the first migrations. The traditions earliest recorded and, therefore, least trifled with by westem impositions hold that the men and women of the Iroquois originally came into their lands from the far west. As the Mohawk told Father Joseph Francois Lafitau in 1724, the Iroquois "are foreigners in the lands which they inhabit at present. They say that they came from afar from the direction of the west, that is to say, from Asia."'^' The allusion to Asia having been gratuitously supplied by Lafitau rather than his Mohawk interlocutors, it may be discarded as an interpolation. As to the rest, however, it accords perfectly with the choms of Iroquoian traditions that the people came/ram the west. The eighteenth-century Moravian missionaries uniformly agreed upon a westem origin for the Iroquois. One missionary, Christopher Pyrlaeus, recorded the Iroquoian tradition of coming east through Ohio, "[following the great basin of the lakes" until "they got to the shores of Ontario and the rushing waters of the St. Lawrence," to take up residence there—the point at which the Cusick, Dooyentate, and Johnson traditions begin.'^^ In 1819, another Moravian, John Heckewelder, likewise put down the traditions of the Iroquois originating in the far west and overcoming the Mound Builders of Ohio to settle "in the vicinity of the great lakes, and on their tributary streams."'" In 1870, Edmund de Schweinitz, a biographer of missionary David Zeisberger, recorded the same story of the "Aquanoschioni" (Iroquois), based on eighteenth-century Moravian joumals and papers.'^"* Non-Moravians encountered the same traditions. In 1811, the Congregationalist tumed Unitarian minister, John Thomton Kirkland (1770-1840), told De Witt Clinton that "All the cantons [nations of the League] have traditions, that their ancestors came originally from the west."'" Even after settling in the east, the west continued to hold spiritual allure for the Iroquois, whose youths regularly made vision quests to the "salt water west," that is, the Pacific Ocean.'-*^ They did not have to stop to ask for directions; they already knew the way.

130 NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

After the original migration east, the Iroquois took up residence on the southem shores of Lake Erie in Ohio, where fighting broke out between them and the Mound Builders farther south. Cusick said that the hostilities began in a benign enough way, through an embassy that the Iroquois had dispatched to establish relations with "the great Emperor who resided at the Golden City, a capital of the vast empire" to the south.'" William Beauchamp, who published Cusick's traditions in 1892, hinted that the "Emperor of the Golden City" in this tradition might have been "a Mexican monarch" with the Mound Builders of the Mississippi and Ohio valleys his subjects, but there is little to support such a contention.'^*' Attributing the North American mounds to Mexican ingenuity might have been popular with scholars when Beauchamp wrote, but it is a wholly discredited connection today. Beauchamp's imagination was led astray by the word "gold," which he took literally, not realizing that Natives might use the English word "gold" when they meant copper or any shiny, metallic-like substance, even mica. Shininess (an open door to spirit) was the point, not the substance, per se. Initiating contact was not, perhaps, the best idea the Iroquois ever had, for the Emperor of the south, newly awakened to the possibilities to his north, began to invade Iroquoian territory, building "many forts throughout his dominions" and spreading his infiuence almost as far north as Lake Erie, which "produced an excitement." Now apprehensive, the Iroquois "felt that they would soon be deprived of the country on the south side of the Great Lakes" and, therefore, "determined to defend their country against any infringement of foreign people." A century's worth of fraught warfare ensued, with the Iroquois ultimately victorious, specifically because they, alone, had mastered the ultimate weapon of their day: the bow and arrow. Northem Ohio remained Iroquoian land.'" The credit that this tradition gives to the bow and arrow only becomes all the more intriguing against archaeological evidence that, once bow and arrow appeared, it easily overcame the atlatl of the southem Ohio Mound Builders. Indeed, the culminating event can even be dated somewhat confidenfly to between 300 and 550 C.E.'''*' For his part, Cusick dated this conflict with the Mound Builders at "about two thousand two hundred years before the Columbus [sic] discovered the America [sic]" or around 700 B.C.E.''" Obviously, there is a ten- to twelve-hundred-year time gap. It is standard for scholars to shmg off Cusick's timeframes as bewildering and, ultimately, unreliable, strongly hinting that all of Cusick is unreliable, but the conventions of keeping should be considered. Westem history relies on

"WE CAN MAKE A WAUKAUHOOWAA"

131

specific, date-stamped events, recounted one by one, in crisp, enumerated distinction, with assessments of accuracy entirely dependent upon how precise the dates are. Oral tradition, however, often conflates a long series of related events that actually occurred over long spans of time, presenting them as though they had happened swiftly, in one shot, with a single event being emblematic ofthe whole. In tradition, dates do not matter; putting events into the right sequence do. Cusick meant that hostilities started early on and continued until the bow and arrow put an end to them. The Seneca also told Kirkland that, in coming east, the Iroquois had "first settled in the country of the Creeks."'''^ This "Creek" reference is quite interesting, for the Muscogee homeland in Alabama, Florida, Georgia, and South Carolina was far to the south ofthe historical Iroquois. Remarking in 1916 upon the tenacious traditions of a southeastem sojoum, Arthur Parker pointed to the unsual trees mentioned regularly in Second Epoch tradition as having "long sword-like leaves."''*^ Although the Jonehrahdesegowah, or "great long leaves," are today typically associated with the white pine insignia ofthe League, Cayuga Chief Waowawanaonk ("Dr. Peter Wilson," d. 1872) frankly identified them as "palm trees."""* Parker interpreted these "palm trees" as belonging to the American southeast.'''^ In 1922, in the Archaeological History of New York, Parker asserted that his archaeological investigations proved that the people had, indeed, come up from the west/southwest.''" He considered "the entire Pacific coast . . . a cradle land of various linguistic stocks of the continent."''*' Tradition is also clear that, having retnained in Ohio for a long time after the war with the southem Emperor, some ofthe people again began walking east, in response, Heckewelder said, to a population boom in Ohio resulting from peace and prosperity.'''*' The Mohawk told Lafitau that they wandered a long time under the leadership of a woman named Gaihonariosk, This woman led them all through the north of America. She made them go to the place where the city of Quebec is now situated but, finding the terrain too irregular and the country, perhaps, too disadvantageous because ofthe cold, she stopped at last at Agnie [Mohawk] where the climate seemed to her more temperate and the lands more suitable for cultivation. She then divided the lands for cultivation and thus founded a colony which has maintained itself ever since." (Brackets in the original translation)''*'

Although Gaihonariosk and her followers proceeded to eastem New York, some obviously stayed put in Quebec, while Dooyentate claimed that still others continued east until they hit "the mouth of the St. Lawrence, or somewhere along the [Atlantic] gulf coast." He was emphatic that this

132 NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

migration occurred in precontact times, "before they ever met with the French, or any European adventurers."'^^ Having reached the Atlantic shores, this faction tumed back, retracing its steps west to other parts of New York. Both Cusick and Chief Johnson carefully recounted where each of the original "Six Families" ultimately stopped off during this set of migrations. Of particular interest here were the Fifth (Seneca) and the Sixth (Tuscarora) Families. Cusick and Johnson had the "sixth family" travelling "towards the sunsetting" until they "touched the bank of a great lake, named Kau-ha-gwarah-ka, i.e., A Cap, now Erie."'^' The travelers apparently already knew the lay of the land, for it still belonged to the Erie ("Cat people"), who were westem Seneca, as both Cusick and Johnson made clear.'" It seems likely that the Erie had simply remained in Ohio when the others relieved the population boom by migrating east. There, they were reencountered by the Sixth Family on its retum trip west. The Erie country already inhabited by the Fifth Family, the Tuscarora traveled a "considerable distance and come [sic] to a large river which was named Ouau-we-yo-ka, i.e. a principal stream, now Mississippi."'" This reference to the Mississippi River has greatly troubled westemers, with many throwing up their hands when they reach it, claiming that this detail is just too fabulous to be credible.'" The difficulty disappears with a little cultural knowledge, however, for the Iroquois do not parse out America's geography the same way Euroamericans do. It is only Euroamericans who see the Ohio and Mississippi as separate rivers or claim that the Mississippi pours out of Lake Itasca in Minnesota, while the Ohio begins at the confluence ofthe Monogahela and Allegheny Rivers. To the Iroquois, what westemers call the "upper Mississippi" is actually a tributary to the Iroquoian Mississippi, which includes only the lower half of that river. By the same token, to the Irqouois, the Allegheny is actually the eastem portion of the Ohio River. In other words, where Euroamericans sort out three different rivers—the Allegheny, the Ohio, and the lower Mississippi—the Iroquois see only one, continuous river, the long, sinuous Allegheny-Ohio-Mississippi River.'" Thus, when Cusick stated that the Tuscaroras traveled southwest from the southem shore of Lake Erie to the Mississippi River, he meant that they came to what is now called the Ohio River, where it takes its northerly direction, forming the border of modem-day Ohio and West Virginia.'^^ They were then on the eastem shore. Impeded in their joumey by the wide and rushing waters, the people noticed a thick "grape vine lying across the river," which gave them an idea. Holding

"WE CAN MAKE A WAUKAUHOOWAA"

133

on to the vine, the people began to walk and float, steadying themselves against the current, hand over hand along the vine, thus crossing to the westem shore. Unfortunately, "while they were engaged" in crossing the natural bridge, the vine snapped from their weight, dragging half to the westem shore in Ohio while stranding the other half on the eastem shore. This accident forced the people "to dispense the joumey," with the separated clans going their own ways. Worse, the two main groups, now divided by the river, grew estranged, evolving into enemies.'" As Hlias Johnson described the aftermath ofthe disaster, those remaining east ofthe river were soon counseled by the sacred spirit ofthe kindly disposed Elder Twin, Tarachiawagon}^^ "He instructed those on the eastem bank [in] the art ofthe bow and arrows, to use for game and in time of danger. After giving them suitable instructions, he guided their footsteps in their joumeys, south and east, until they had crossed the Alleghany Mountains, and with some wanderings they finally reached the shores ofthe sea, on the coast which is now called the Carolinas."'^^ Once more, the mention of bow-and-arrow technology as new and connected with the Ohio River suggests a time frame circa 350-500 CE. In 1961, linguist Floyd Lounsbury calculated that the Tuscarora language split from the northem Iroquois dialects 1,900 to 2,400 years before, which would shove it back to just before the defeat ofthe Mound Builders, again, within the same ballpark as the inception of bow-and-arrow technology.'"' Those stranded in southem Ohio, "on account ofthe vine broke [sic]" were not so fortunate, being soon vilified, instead, as the "Ot-ne-yar-heh," "Kennonh-squah," or Stone Giants, those tall, armored, feared cannibals of Iroquoian tradition. In the course of the hard travels and travails that followed their abandonment by the main group, "the rules of humanity were forgotten." The Stone Giants stopped cooking their meat and eventually practiced cannibalism, showing a marked taste for small children. Stone Giants also reportedly hardened their skin by rolling on gravel. Although not particularly bright, they became formidable foes, inflicting severe population losses on the Iroquois before they were fmally beaten through a ruse perpetrated on behalf of the Iroquois by a sky spirit.'*'' Perhaps not recollecting that the Stone Giants were cannibals, Beauchamp opined that "The Stonish Giants suggest wandering parties of mail-clad Europeans."'" This does not seem very likely, however, even recalling the Vikings and the Spaniards. First, Europeans were not alone in using armor, for the Mound Builders had beaten copper breast plates. Second, Europeans were simply not tall enough to have qualified as giants, whereas the Iroquois have

134 NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

always been a tall people, and those stranded in Ohio "on account ofthe vine broke" most probably intermarried with left-over Mound Builders, another very tall people.'" Indeed, as the many skeletons pulled from their graves attest, the Ohio Mound Builders often reached extraordinary heights—some tneasured seven feet in length. It is tme that the disarticulation of skeletons (i.e., the bones falling apart from the joints as the soft tissue decays) can make the deceased appear to have been taller in death than s/he was in life, but disarticulation cannot account entirely for the size ofthe Mound Builders as consistently reported. It adds only an inch or two to height, whereas archaeologists who were familiar with the concept of disarticulation continually expressed surprise over the gigantic size ofthe Mound Builders. In 1879, for instance, J. T. Short made note of the extraordinary size of skeletons dug out ofthe Tennessee mounds. Several skeletons were six feet tall, while one was seven feet tall.'*"* In 1902, William Mills carefully noted the heights ofthe skeletons he yanked from the ground. A tall female (for Mills's day) stood at flve feet, seven-and-a-half inches; and several adult males, still tall by 1902 standards, ranged between five feet, eight inches and five feet, eleven inches.'^^ Cyms Thomas also recorded "graves inclosing skeletons of very large size" at the earthworks near Dublin in Franklin County, Ohio, and, on a dig in Coschocton County, Ohio, he marveled at "a stone-box grave containing a skeleton seven feet long."'^ By contrast, the Europeans, disarticulated or not, were shrimps, their knights often hovering below the five-foot mark, as evinced by their surviving armor. More importantly, no Iroquoian tradition of this period at all mentions Europeans, whereas there are traditions indicating that the Mound Builders were mixed up with the Stone Giants. For example, those recognized Giant-Busters, the Onondaga, kept the tradition of a Stone Giant who lived in the vicinity of present-day Cardiff, New York.'^^ His shamanic powers tumed him from a natural man into a glutton who "ate much, became a cannibal, and increased in size," growing "hard scales" for skin. Ultimately, the Onondaga trapped and killed this pesky shaman, whose predation had inflicted great damage on the Iroquois.'^^ The ability to grow and shrink was an otkon trait, i.e., one connecting this Stone Giant with wrinkled spirit power, while the scales connected the Giant with the Earth powers of the Homed Serpent. Both otkon and Serpenthood resonate wonderfully with traditions of Mound-Builder culture. Furthennore, the fact that the Onondaga were Homed Serpent-Busters as well as GiantBusters points heavily to ongoing Iroquoian hostilities with these remnants of

"WE CAN MAKE A WAUKAUHOOWAA"

135

the Mound Builders.""^ This tradition offers, by the way, a prime example of conventional story conflation, for it was to have been understood as more than one man's being killed in one place at one time. This tradition was really about the Onondaga's defeating the Iroquoian Stone Giants, who had thrown in with the remnants of the Ohio Mound Builders. There are also traditions that directly identify the Ohio Mound Builders as Cherokee. For instance, an Ohio Wyandot tradition recorded in 1915 showed the Iroquois overcoming the fearsome De''watayu'ru nq'. a term for the Cherokee glossed by C. M. Barbeau as "that—hole in the ground" or "cave—is a dweller.""" This gloss forms a very interesting confluence of meaning with the Choctaw word, choluk, chuluk, or chiluk for a "pit" or a "cave," which Mooney argued was the origin of the term "Cherokee."'^' Why the Cherokee were associated with pits was explained to Barbeau by the Wyandot, Allen Johnson, who said that the De^wata'^yu 'ru nq', or Ground-Dwellers, "used to have large underground earth houses, with a smoke-hole in the centre [sic]. Sometimes one could hardly detect the presence of such a house but for the smoke coming out through its top."'^^ These depictions accord very nicely with those of ancient Cherokee ground houses and mounds. In 1823, John Haywood described ruins of ground houses in Cherokee country as "made by setting up poles, and then digging out the dirt, and covering the poles with it. They were round, and generally about ten feet in diameter.'^^ The Wyandot tradition of the final battle with the De"wata"yu 'ru nq' opens simply: "They were at war." The great Iroquois chief, Say^tsu'wat, looked to put a conclusive end to the hostilities, which had continued without abatement "for a great number of years." Unfortunately, the Cherokee would, upon attack, retreat to their "holes under ground," where the Iroquois could not get at them. At this point, Sayptsu'wat "exerted all his powers and thought to himself, 'I must find a way to exterminate them all, these Cherokees.'" He sought to dream, so that the messengers of spirit might bring him the answer. "Now in the course of the night, it seemed to him that someone was walking about there. He remained silent. That was his way. The being that was thus walking stood by, saying, 'The thing you have in mind is as to how you should do to bring them out [of their underground dwellings]?'" (brackets in the original translation). The spirit was Haw^iii o', a Sky spirit who brought the lightning and thunder. '^^ "Now listen," he instructed Say^tsu'wat, "when day breaks, you must be waiting there by the rocky cavern."'^^ Accordingly, Sayptsu'wat deployed his troops to wait, as Hawenio' had directed, remaining there all day until sunset, when the "clouds rose in the sky.

136 NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

and loud rumblings resounded. Then they, the Thunderers, many times hit the projecting hill where the Ground-dwellers were hidden. The Thunder with many blows destroyed their fortress and drove its inhabitants out."''^ Thus, the lightning bolts of a violent thunderstorm (Sky medicine) continually hit the "projecting hill" of the Cherokee mound (Earth medicine), making their "fortress" more dangerous to the Cherokee than the Iroquois. The Mound Builders fled, leaving the Iroquois victorious. That the Iroquois drove the Mound Builders out of Ohio is widely accepted by archaeologists today, whether or not they know that the origin ofthe claim lies in tradition.'^^ I believe, however, that the driving was more complex than is commonly recognized. Since there are two, separate traditions ofthe Iroquois winning against the Mound Builders, first, against the Talligewi, during the original migration into Ohio and second, against the Ground-Dwellers, at a later period, I suspect that the first wave of fighting between the Mound Builders and the Iroquois reflected their interactions with the Talligewi ("Hopewell") people, whereas the second action was against their diehard remnants, the Stone Giants. Since the only real distinction between these peoples are the eras in which they lived, this means that the fighting continued for a long time, as tradition says. If the Iroquois fought Mound Builders, they also became Mound Builders themselves. In 1811, De Witt Clinton chronicled very clear Seneca traditions that the mounds "in their territory were raised by their ancestors in their wars with the westem Indians, three, four or five hundred years ago."'^^ Clinton scoffed at these claims, drawing on the settler myth that, before Euroamericans had expressed a fascination with the mounds, "the Indians ofthe present day did not pretend to know any thing [sic] about their origin."'^^ Based sheerly on racial stereotypes, he alleged that those lying Seneca, "who are renowned for their national vanity," made up their claims to have built mounds just to gamer attention (like, say, naughty children).'^'^ Clinton's smug defamation does not stand up to scrutiny, however. To begin with, Iroquoian tradition retains precise instructions for constructing a defensive mound. Cusick directed that, first, several trees be felled by fire, with the logs arranged at the building site, "according to the bigness ofthe fort." Next, the earth is to be "heaped on both sides." Cusick added that "A fort generally has two gates; one for passage, and the other to obtain water."'^' This accords well with Parker's traditional and archaeological account of Iroquoian mound design, while modem archaeologists often observe that Ohio mounds are always associated with nearby water sources.'^^ Moreover, Europeans watched the Iroquois build mounds long before

"WE CAN MAKE A WAUKAUHOOWAA"

137

Mound Mania seized the country—indeed, long before the U.S. was a country. In 1632, for example, the Dominican missionary, Gabriel Sagard, recorded having witnessed Feasts ofthe Dead, in which the Iroquois collected up and buried the bones of their deceased in one large ossuary mound. First, they covered the site with skins, "then with tree-bark, and at^er that they put back the earth on top, and big pieces of wood." Finally, they sunk "wooden posts into the ground all round the grave, and put a covering over it, which lasts as long as it can."'" Lafitau supported this description of ossuary building in 1724.'^" In bis 1747 history ofthe League, Cadwallader Colden recorded the same burial methods as Sagard and Lafitau, albeit for a solitary burial. Once the body was laid in the grave, it was "covered with Timber, to support the Earth which they lay over, and thereby keep the Body free from being pressed; they then raise the Earth in a round Hill over it."'^^ The historical Erie and Seneca, in particular, were renown for reburying their dead in such mounded ossuaries before moving their towns.'^^ Iroquois tradition states that Ohio mounds were memorials ofthe war against Cherokee in ancient times.'^^ A point often lost in westem discussions of the Iroquoian mounds is that they were not conflned to modem Iroquoia but encircled old Iroquoia, from Ontario through New York, across the northem half of Ohio, and up into the lower peninsula of Michigan. This spread of mounds fell squarely within boundaries claimed by Iroquoian tradition. If, in 1879, archaeologist S. L. Frey realized that the eastem New York mounds he "opened and examined" were Iroquoian and Arthur Parker devoted an entire, 739-page study to the mounds and earthworks of New York state, others ranged farther afleld."*^ In 1889, Cyms Thomas speciftcally identified the "works of Cuyahoga County and other sections of Northem Ohio bordering the lake" (Erie) as Iroquoian, most probably, Erie.'^' When Thomas drew up his 1891 maps showing the locations of the mounds then remaining, the spread across ancient Iroquoia—Ohio, westem Pennsylvania, New York, and Ontario—was still remarkably clear, as shown in a detail ofthe map in Figure 3.1. It is easy to ignore this fact today only because the New York and Ontario mounds were among the first destroyed by the settlers so that, by the midnineteenth century, many of the more easterly mounds were long gone, with their loss only beginning to be regretted.'** By 1860, for example, vandals had nearly destroyed a major Iroquoian mound complex on the Bay of Quinte, the very point from which the Peacemaker, founder ofthe Iroquois League, had set out with his message of peace to the southem Iroquois, around 1050 C.E.'^' If the New York and Ontario mounds were slaughtered, the Ohio mounds were

138 NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

Figure 3.1. Detail of a Map of Extant Mound Sites in 1891. They concentrate heavily in known Iroquoian areas. SOURCE: Cyrus Thomas, Catalogue of Prehistoric Works East of the Rocky Mountains (Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1891) 246.

"WE CAN MAKE A WAUKAUHOOWAA"

139

slighted, leaving westem scholars oblivious of Iroquoian Ohio. It was the twentieth century before archaeologists finally got around to giving any serious attention to the Iroquoian mounds of Ohio, with archaeologist Henry Shetrone grousing in 1920 that the Erie mounds had "received almost no attention," despite being as well defined as those of any other cultural group.' Not only were mound complexes extant across old Iroquoia, but there is intriguing evidence that the Iroquois, like more southerly Mound Builders, constmcted "highways." In 1811, De Witt Clinton recorded a raised road stretching seventy-eight miles from Genesee to the Niagara River, in an eastwest direction. "Its general altitude above the neighbouring [sic] land is thirty feet, and its width varies considerably: in some places, it is not more than forty yards. Its elevation about the level of lake Ontario is perhaps one hundred and sixty feet, to which it descends by a gradual slope; and its distance from that water is between six and ten miles." Clinton assumed that this was a natural "tumpike," and it might have been, but it was also commonplace for Native Americans to build long, wide, straight, raised highways connecting ceremonial centers, such as the 90-kilometer Great Hopewell Road in southem Ohio, identified by archaeologist Bradley Lepper.'^' This, too, was mistaken for a "natural" formation, until Lepper realized what he was looking at in aerial photographs. Great highways are mentioned in Iroquoian tradition. In the First Epoch of Time, for instance. Sky Woman sends her daughter, the Lynx, out daily, to walk upon "her uki road—one ofthe four great and shining roots radiating out from the sacred white pine that sat dead center of Turtle Island."'^'' The Second Epoch tradition of the founding of the League also discusses White-Root Roads: Roots have spread out from the Tree ofthe Great Peace, one to the north, one to the east, one to the south and one to the west. The name of these roots is The Great White Roots and their nature is Peace and Strength. If any Man or any nation outside the Five Nations shall obey the laws ofthe Great Peace and make known their disposition to the Lords [Chiefs] ofthe Confederacy, they may trace the Roots to the Tree and if their minds are clean and they are obedient and promise to obey the wishes ofthe Confederate Council, they shall be welcomed to take shelter beneath the Tree ofthe Long Leaves (brackets mine).'^'

Based on the traditions of Iroquoian culture and Mound-Building structures elsewhere, 1 believe that the White-Root Roads of Iroquoian tradition were a set of literal highways laid out to the cardinal directions from the core of Iroquoia. Although it is not normally considered in terms of Mound-Builder traditions,

140 NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

I am convinced that the tradition of the Second Epoch of Time, when the Iroquois League was founded, actually marked the collapse of Iroquoian mound culture. The Peacemaker, the Jigonsaseh (Head Clan Mother), and Ayonwantha worked to topple the strong-man rule of the power-mad shaman, Adodaroh, and his minions, replacing their older rule of spiritual and physical terrorism with participatory democracy through constitutional govemment.'^^ It was in precisely this period, the eleventh and twelfth centuries, that Iroquoian ceremonial mound building ground to a halt. Mounded ossuaries and planting mounds continued, but spirituality ever after was based entirely on individual conscience and not on public coercion. Freedom of religion became a basic Iroquoian right. Perhaps the most stunning Iroquoian tradition of the Ohio Mound Builders is one that the Iroquois share with the Lenape. It recounts their original, simultaneous migrations east, as they traveled together across the Mississippi, joining in common cause to fight their way past the Mound Builders to claim Ohio.'^' Although kept by both the Iroquois and the Lenape in many extant versions, this tradition of eastward migration is, today, most firmly associated in the scholarly mind with the Lenape. This is unfortunate, for the waters around the Lenape versions were greatly muddied in 1836 by a rascally raconteur, Constantine Samuel Rafmesque-Schmaltz (1783-1840), who sullied them with his publication of a hoax that he entitled the Walam Olum, purportedly meaning, "The Red Score" or "Painted Sticks." Rafinesque's Walam Olum consisted of a lengthy pseudo-tradition, showing the Lenape beginning in Asia (of course), migrating to North America, and then, over long spans of time, walking east. In crossing the Mississippi River, they encountered both the Iroquois and the Mound Builders, the latter of whom they drove out of the Ohio country. The walking continued all the way east, to where the Europeans first met the Lenape, along the mid-Atlantic shores. Rafinesque's Walam Olum also included hieroglyphs for each section, indicating the lines to be sung in the purportedly archaic Lenape that Rafmesque "transcribed." The history of the generations was recounted through the names of various chiefs, with the main events of the time related to each chief's tenure in office. Ever since the Walam Olum appeared, scholars have undertaken to discern its authenticity. In the nineteenth century, doubt centered on the frankly racist grounds that, since the Walam Olum argued the impossible—i.e., that Native Americans had built the Mounds—it had to have been an insidious fraud. Once Native authorship of the mounds was undeniable and social advances in the

"WE CAN MAKE A WAUKAUHOOWAA"

141

twentieth century had made racist disdain an unfashionable avenue of attack, the argument against the Walam Olum shifted to its linguistics. The archaic forms it employed were justly derided as half-baked. Nevertheless, the tradition had its ardent defenders in both centuries. In 1885, Daniel Garrison Brinton (1837-1899) came down in favor of the authenticity of the Walam Olum, not because he did not recognize its faulty linguistics but precisely because he did. To him, they argued against deliberate fraud and in favor of poor transcription.'^* In 1954, a prestigious assemblage of scholars reendorsed Brinton's conclusion of authenticity, providing a new translation in handsome edition.'^^ Why the fraud should have prospered until the end of the twentieth century is not so very mysterious when its subtleties are reviewed. Rafinesque was an intelligent and skillful hoaxer, who wrapped his deceit in several layers of seeming authentication, which take real work to unravel. Three main complexities gained the Walam Olum acceptance on its face. First, Rafinesque did not invent the concept of the pictograms that accompanied his "Red Score," although his particular pictograms are problematic. As he realized, the term Painted Sticks refen-ed to a very specific type of artifact in eastem Native America. Bark books and sticks painted with crude pictograms had been popular among christianized Natives since the seventeenth century, when missionaries introduced them in the service of catechism.^™ The Lenape, especially, had adapted a version of this missionary writing by the eighteenth century, often using it independently of catechismic purposes, to record tradition while rebutting westemization.^**' Indeed, picture writing might not have been invented by the missionaries at all but simply merged with the preexisting character writing of the Lenape. In 1672, John Lederer described Lenape symbols, replete with the very Native logic of their construction.^"^ These characters might well have been adapted from the characters of wampum writing, which were known and used throughout the east, long before contact.^**^ Whether indigenous or missionary, I believe that Rafinesque had seen bark books with hieroglyphs and incorporated them into his scheme for authenticity's sake. Second, attaching the names of past chiefs to eras is hardly Rafmesque's invention. The Iroquois, for example, recorded tradition by counting through the Adodaroh, or chairmen of the League, from its inception onwards, much as U.S. historians refer to presidential administrations to locate events by epoch. The Lenape also recorded their history according to their various chiefs, coming forward in time with an emphasis on accuracy about the life and times

142 NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

of each. As recorded by Loskiel in 1794, "They delight in describing their geneaologies, and are so well versed in them, that they mark every branch of the family, with the greatest precision. They also add the character of their forefathers; such an one [sic] was a wise and intelligent counsellor; a renowned chief; a might warrior, or a rich man, &c." (symbol in the original).^"^ Again, I believe that Rafinesque just copied what he knew to have been a common mode of Lenape records-keeping. The third reason that the Walam Olum bamboozled researchers until almost the twenty-first century is the least flattering to westem scholarship, to wit, that its recital dovetailed so very neatly with westem mythology conceming Native America. It recorded as Native tradition both Noah's flood and the Bering Strait "land bridge," two closely held tenets of westem thought in 1836, when the Walam Olum was published. Although Noah's flood has since fallen out of favor, the Bering land bridge still tops the list of westem mythology conceming Natives. In a feat of selective reading, twentieth-century scholars hopped lightly over the flood to land directly on Beringia, which saved them the necessity of further inquiry. Thus, neither the fractured linguistics, the genealogies, nor the bark book symbols raised pressing questions about the Walam Olum. The genius of Rafinesque's fraud was that he seeded plausibilities into them all by consciously hitchhiking on known cultural tidbits. More importantly, in content, he played to the weakness of westem scholarship, i.e., its tendency to believe rather than quiz its own myths, endlessly repeating them while viewing each repetition as ever mounting "evidence" for their tmth. Consequently, scholars simply overlooked the best reason for eyeing the Walam Olum askance—Rafinesque's own writing, both published and in manuscript. His papers would quickly have put the lie to his hoax, had they only been inspected at once. Two items, in particular, nail the fraud: Raflnesque's published Ancient History and his manuscript draft of the Walam Olum. In 1824, Rafinesque made a dry run through the Walam Olum in a work that was unabashedly styled hard history and for which he made no pretense of consulting Native sources. This hamm-scarum history, entitled Ancient History, or Annals ofKentucky, was brought out in small edition by Raflnesque, himself. Annals of Kentucky is a laugh-a-minute funride, as Rafinesque threw up trial balloons on various ideas, from which he would later select those that floated the best for codification in the Walam Olum. The thesis of Ancient History was that Native Americans did not trace their ancestry back to "the Adamites" ("few, if any, remains have been found that

"WE CAN MAKE A WAUKAUHOOWAA"

143

might be ascribed or traced to that previous existence of humankind"), but to the second eruption of humanity, "after Noah's flood."^"^ The Americas were populated in two waves, first, by "the Atalans and Cutans, who came easterly through the Atlantic ocean" and, second, by "the Iztacans and Oghuzians, who came westerly through the Pacific ocean.''^^' The Atalans were a nascent version of the Mound-Building Atlanteans whom Donnelly was to make famous. This early version of them allows us a front row seat at settler mythmongering, for it is possible to watch Rafinesque's 1824 Atlantean islands groups, such as the Canaries, coalesce over time into one large, mid-Atlantic island, Donnelly's 1882 Atlantis. Rafinesque's Atalans were already whiteish, however, and followed tbe well marked Atlantean trail west to the Ohio River valley, to become industrious Mound Builders.^^^ Rafinesque's Atalans were ancestral to his "Talegans," otherwise known as the Cherokee.^*^ Meantime, his Oghuzians, tromping doggedly across the "Behring Strait on the ice" down to Oregon, became the Lenape and the "Menguy"—i.e., Iroquois. Migrating east to Ohio, the combined forces of the Oghuzians defeated the Talegans and then, many years later, migrated all the way east to the Atlantic shores.^"" I cannot emphasize too heavily that encapsulated here, a full twelve years before Rafinesque's "discovery" of the Walam Olum, is the entire story as supposedly told to him later by Lenape informants. Notably, Annals of Kentucky appeared a mere four years after the wildly popular 1820 edition of Heckewelder's History, Manners, and Customs, which made the Lenape story of their dealings with the Mound Builders famous and which also supplied a vocabulary list, to which Rafinesque helped himself in composing the fractured linguistics of the Walam Olum. The final key to the fraud is even more conclusive—Rafinesque's manuscript of the Walam Olum—although, incredibly, even skeptical scholars skimmed past it until 1994. Instead of going to the source, they leaned on insinuation. In 1889, for instance, Cyms Thomas observed tartly that several eighteenth-century records of a Walam O/um-like story line had been independently recorded long before before Rafinesque wrote.^" In the mid1980s, Herbert C. Kraft thought the Walam Olum smelled fishy, while Stephen Williams suspected in 1991 that, using the preexisting sources, Rafinesque had hitchhiked on a real tradition to constmct the Walam Olum.^^^ By the last quarter of the twentieth century, it was the scholarly fashion to sniff at the Walam Olum, but it was not until 1994, when David M. Oestreicher undertook to scmtinize Rafinesque's papers, that scholars bothered with evidence over impression.^'^ Oestreicher's subsequent 1995 article reviewed Rafinesque's

144 NATIVE AMERICANS. ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

original draft of the Walam Olum, which included such telling proof of fraud as words deliberately massaged, conspicuously worked and reworked to incorporate Asian derivation, and hieroglyphs deliberately copied from Maya and Egyptian sources.^''* The possibility that the Walam Olum is authentic can no longer be honestly entertained. Unfortunately, scholars know little of the intricacies of the Walam Olum's history and seem unable, intellectually, to disentangle it from authentic Lenape tradition. I have found that it does not really matter whether the reference is actually to Rafmesque's Walam Olum or to one of the authentic oral keepings. So thoroughly have scholars been schooled to sneer at any mention of the issue that simply saying "Lenape" in the same breath as "Mound Builders" is sure to fire their autonomic synapses, resulting in this pat formula: "Lenape tradition = Walam Olum = Fraud." These subliminal associations are most unfortunate, for very reputable sources of the long walk of the Lenape were recorded in the eighteenth century, several before Rafinesque was even bom. To dismiss them as part of his fraud is illogical and emotional. Charles Beatty was among the first English speakers known to have recorded the Lenape migration traditions, published in his Journal of a Two Months Tour in 1768. According to Beatty's informant, a Benjamin Sutton who had been a Lenape adoptee for many years, the Lenape were uncertain how they came to have been in North America—so much for Rafinesque's interpolated Bering-Strait passage!^'^ Beatty also included the Lenape flood of which Rafinesque was to make so much. In Beatty's account, however, some of the quicker thinking Lenape escaped the rising waters in a large, dugout canoe, which sounds very much like the Native response to any mundane flood.^'^ If the Lenape could not account for coming to have been in North America, they could very well account for their history here. Beatty recorded that they had "formeriy lived far to the west."^'^ John Haywood, too, recorded the Lenape tradition of their migrating east "from the north or northwest," crossing the Mississippi River and creating river settlements as they went along.^'^ The Mississippi was, perhaps, the impassible river of yet another tradition recorded by Beatty, in which the Lenape of deep antiquity were once divided from their brethren by a river, during which "nine parts often" left the tenth part behind, to joumey forward to a new place.^'^ Haywood gave the new place as the Delaware River, "then called the Lenope Wehittuck " (italics in original).^^** There, they stopped. The original impetus behind the eastward trek was a family feud. According to this version of the tradition, again recorded by Beatty, while the Lenape still

"WE CAN MAKE A WAUKAUHOOWAA"

145

resided in the far west, a chief died, leaving the nation in the care of his two sons. When the brothers, as heads of rival political factions, fell to feuding, the second son "determined to depart, and seek some new habitation."^^' Acting on his decision, he and his followers scouted about "for the space of forty years," finally arriving at the Delaware River, an event that Sutton put at around 1397 C.E., as calculated by a wampum belt to which one black bead had been added each year since their arrival in their new home.^^^ Centuries later, after the arrival of the French, the chief in their old abode sent an embassy in search of his departed kin, ultimately fmding them "on the Oubache river" {sic; italics in the original).^" The ambassadors assured the French that a mission to their ancestral home would require seven years there and back, "for they lived a great way towards the sun-setting."^^'* The Mahicans, close relatives of the Lenape, retained nearly the same story of a far westem origin. The Mahican diplomat, "Hendrick" Aupaumut (1757-1830), told Benjamin Smith Barton that his people had migrated "from the west" and, "after crossing the Missisippi [sic], had uniformly kept at a considerable distance from the shores of the Atlantic." Such land-lubbers were they that they had never seen a river "ebbing and flowing" with the tide "until they came to the North or Hudson River, to which they gave the name of Mohunnuck, a name expressive of the phenomenon."^^^ The Mohegan, likewise closely related to the Lenape, kept a very similar tradition of a long migration "out of the northwest." No land-lubbers these, they left a "tide-water country," traversing swampy, snake-infested lands.^^^ "Then they said, one to another, 'This is like the Muhheakunnuck (tidal ocean) of our nativity.' Therefore, they stayed, becoming the 'Tide-water People.'""^ Of all the migration traditions, however, none were as vibrant or as detailed as those recorded by the eighteenth-century Moravian missionaries who knew the Lenape best, especially John Heckewelder (1743-1823), in his History, Manners, and Customs of the Indian Nations Who Once Inhabited Pennsylvania and the Neighboring States (1819). Heckewelder was deeply attuned to the traditions of the Lenape people, who had adopted him when he was nineteen and with whom he lived for the next forty-nine years."^ He was, therefore, intimately acquainted with the Lenape tradition of their trek from the west into the Ohio Valley, where they met the Mound Builders. Further Moravian sources exist, confirming Heckewelder's account. In the late 1860s, while poking about in the Moravian archives at Bethlehem, Pennsylvania, David Zeisberger's biographer, Edmund de Schweinitz, found eighteenthcentury manuscripts by various Moravian authors, all recounting the same

146 NATIVE AMERICANS. ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

migration tradition and some giving a few more details, as Schweinitz recorded in his Life and Times of David Zeisberger (1870). The Lenape, said Heckewelder, "resided many hundred years ago, in a very distant country in the westem part of the American continent." Deciding to migrate east, "they set out together in body," ultimately arriving at the "Namaesi Sipu," or "River of Fish," the Alleghany-Ohio-Mississippi River. At this point, they fell in with the Iroquois, also eastward bound and camped somewhat "higher up" along the Namaesi SipuP'^ As Schweinitz tells it, the Lenape were surprised but not nonplussed to encounter the Iroquois, "moving eastward," like themselves, "in search of new homes." The two peoples joined together at this point, in friendly alliance.^^" According to Heckewelder, the Lenape dispatched "spies" (scouts) ahead of the body of the people, "for the purpose of reconnoitering" the lay of the land ahead.^^' To their dismay, the scouts found that the Namaesi Sipu valley (the Ohio River valley) "was inhabited by a very powerftil nation" called the Talligeu or Talligewi, "who had many large towns built on the great rivers flowing through their land.""^ The people built amazing mound structures and were said to have had "giants among them."^" Taken aback, the Lenape courteously sent messengers of peace to the Talligewi, asking their permission to settle along the Ohio River. This request was instantly rebuffed, but the Talligewi did grant the Lenape permission to traverse their lands on their trek east in search of a permanent homeland. Accordingly, the Lenape began to cross the Namaesi Sipu in an eastwardly flow."** The Talligewi became alarmed at this point to see that they had grossly underestimated the size of the migrating mass. Instead of the few clans they had anticipated, "many thousands" began pouring across their border, causing the Talligewi to fall upon them in a "ftirious attack," killing many unsuspecting migrants in the river and "threatening them all with destruction, if they dared to persist in coming over to their side of the river." Outraged by the highhanded rescission of the safe conduct pass in an unannounced attack, the Lenape consulted among themselves on what was best to be done in the teeth of this crisis, whether to withdraw or to stand and fight."' Despite being "a powerful nation," themselves, they reluctantly agreed that the Talligewi were too strong to beat."^ At this point, the Iroquois, who had held back while the Lenape negotiated their original deal with the Mound Builders, offered to form a war alliance with the Lenape against the Talligewi, on the condition that the Iroquois be allowed their choice of the rich Ohio lands once the Talligewi were driven off Since

"WE CAN MAKE A WAUKAUHOOWAA"

147

their combined strength appeared equal to that of the Talligewi, the Lenape agreed, and the conflict was joined. A long struggle ensued, for the Talligewi were formidable enemies, fortifying themselves heavily, "especially on the rivers, and near lakes.""^ As Zeisberger recorded, the Talligewi used their mound heights to military advantage, always keeping "great blocks lying all about, in order that should the enemies attempt to storm the heights these might be rolled upon and among them so as to keep them off.""^ Many ruthless battles ensued before the Talligewi, "at last, flnding that their destmction was inevitable if they persisted in their obstinancy, abandoned the country to the conquerors," fleeing south. As previously agreed, the victors split the land between them, the Lenape settling along the river valleys in the south, while the Iroquois took the land below the lake in the northem portion of Ohio."' After centuries of peaceful coexistence, the Lenape grew sizably in population, so that scouts were dispatched yet farther east to see if good country were available there to accommodate the population explosion.^''^ Ultimately, the questers traveled all the way east to the Chesapeake Bay, and along the Delaware and Hudson Rivers, retuming to the Ohio valley with good news of the land to the east. Migrating east now in small groups, "so as not to be straitened for want of provisions by the way," the Lenape settled primarily upon the Lenapewihittuck, or Delaware River, radiating out from this capital along the Hudson, Potomac, and Susquehanna Rivers, thus forming their new homeland.^"" They called it "Dawn Land" or "Sunrise Land" not only because it was where the sun rose but also in recognition of their having been the first to migrate there from tbe far west.^"' In his recital of this migration tradition, Edmund de Schweinitz added that not all the Lenape had crossed either the Mississippi proper or the Ohio River, a claim that echoed Beatty's account. Schweinitz recorded that many stayed behind at each river crossing, ultimately splitting the Lenape into three divisions. By way of providing historical perspective, Schweinitz emphasized that "All these changes took place long before Europeans had settled on the continent. "^'*^ In a German manuscript by Heckewelder's fellow missionary, Christopher Pyrlaeus, Schweinitz found the further information that the Iroquois followed the Lenape east yet again, having "no sooner perceived that the Lenape had discovered a new hunting-grounds beyond the Alleghanies than they also moved eastward." This account accords with Iroquoian traditions of the resumed eastward trek under the Clan Mother, Gaihonariosk. Unfortunately,

148 NATIVE AMERICANS. ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

"the harmony which had subsisted between the two in their westem homes was marred in this new country."^'^ Thus began the rivalry between the Lenape and the Iroquois that westem historians have since tumed into the sole legacy ofthe two national histories. Although either scomed by or unknown to scholars, these ancient traditions were kept throughout the nineteenth and twentieth centuries and are still maintained by modem Lenape (and Iroquoian) peoples, as well as by the Mohegan. One important nineteenth-century version appeared in the notoriously unreliable Schoolcraft.^"^ A more reliable version appeared in the 1870 biography ofthe Moravian missionary, David Zeisberger. The author, Edmund de Schweinitz, used extant Moravian joumals and papers to piece together essentially the same tale of Lenape migrations as Heckewelder and the modem Keepers have. Due to its solid foundation and its rarity, Schweinitz's compilation is worth quoting in its entirety; Several centuries before the eye ofthe white man first beheld the primeval glories ofthe American continent the Lenni-Lenape lived in a country ofthe Far West. At a time which they do not pretend to determine, and for reasons of which they are ignorant, many of their fathers emigrated toward the east, and came as far as the Mississippi. Upon its banks were encamped the Aquanoschioni [Iroquois], moving eastward, like the Lenape, in search of new homes. The two nations, meeting thus unexpectedly, interchanged the courtesies of Indian life. Before them rolled the mighty riverof which their old men had told them when sitting in the lodges of their distant hunting-grounds, and beyond its deep waters lay an unknown country, amid whose hills and within whose valleys they hoped to find rich lands that would rejoice their hearts. But to reach these they had to traverse the territory ofthe Alligewi, or Allegans, a fierce and wariike people, with whom the Lenape entered into negotiations, obtaining permission to advance. Scarce a moiety of them, however, had crossed the river when the Alligewi, alarmed at the number ofthe strangers, treacherously attacked them. In a juncture so perilous, the Aquanoschioni, who had been watching the course of events, hastened to offer their assistance. An offensive alliance having been concluded between the two nations, they unitedly fell upon the Alligewi. Fierce battles ensued; much blood was shed; many heroic deeds were performed, until at last the Alligewi, exhausted and dismayed by a succession of defeats, fled with the women and children from the broad valley ofthe Ohio. The victors divided the hunting-grounds which they had gained. Around the Great Lakes, and on the banks of their tributary rivers, settled the Aquanoschioni; farther to the south the Lenape built their villages. Thus domiciliated [sic], the two nations, for a long period of time lived in amity and peace. In the course of years some adventurous hunters ofthe Delawares conceived the idea of exploring the country eastward. Pressing through forests where none of their nation had ever been, they reached the Alleghany Mountains, and, crossing these, came to the West Branch ofthe Susquehanna. Upton the bosom of this beautiful river they launched a bark-canoe, and followed its winding current between lofty hills and through rich lowlands, until their astonished eyes beheld the broad expanse of Chesapeake Bay gleaming like a sea of silver in the noonday sun. Leaving their canoe, they plunged into the fabled thickets of the Eastem Shore, and, speeding across the level plains of Delaware, stood on the bank of a second river rolling in silent majesty to the ocean. The

"WE CAN MAKE A WAUKAUHOOWAA"

149

farther they advanced the bolder they gew. Perhaps a third stream, deep and wide, like those which they had discovered, might yet be found; nor were they disappointed. Ere long they scaled the Highlands of the Hudson, and looked down from the rocky Palisades upon the sleeping waters of Tappan Sea. They had traversed a wide territory where the smoke of not a solitary wigwam was seen; where no war-whoop met their ear; where only the carols of birds and the crashing of the bushes under the feet of the startled deer and the heavy step of the bear trudging to his den, broke the solemn silence which nature kept. With wondering hearts the intrepid explorers hastened back to the council-fire of their nation and reported their discoveries. A part of the Lenape immediately emigrated to these new hunting-grounds, and spread their towns along the Hudson, Susquehanna, Potomac, and Delaware. Around the latter river they clustered thickly. It was the Lenapewihittuck, "the River of the Lenape." But not all the Lenape left the western country; nor had all of them crossed the Mississippi at the time of the original emigration. Hence, in this period of its history, the nation consisted of three bodies. The one still resided beyond, the other on this side of the Mississippi; and the largest division occupied the territory stretching from the four great eastem rivers to the Atlantic Ocean. All these changes took place long before Euopreans had settled on the continent."*

These traditions survived into the twentieth century. In 1930, Gladys Tantaquidgeon was told by her fellow Mohegan, the traditionalist Witapanoxwe ("Walks-with-daylight"), that the "older Mohegan believed that our ancestors 'came from the northwest,'" which Wi-tapanoxwe interpreted to mean the upper Hudson River area, although all other traditions indicate a place much farther west. Wi-tapanoxwe added that the migration "tradition was impressed upon the minds of their children. In the words of my great aunt, Emma Fielding Baker, 'Don't ever forget it.'"^"*^ The people did not forget it. In 1994, the eastem Lenape traditionalist, Hitakonanu 'laxk ("Tree Beard") published a version of the migration tradition that, although it had the people beginning in the "cold north" rather than the far west, retained the flood and a vision-inspired trek east, across the "Names Sipu (Fish River)—the Mississippi River." The people "followed it down, until coming close to where the Allegewi Sipu (Ohio River) empties into the Mississippi." Leaving the bulk of the people encamped there, "warriors" went ahead. Meantime, the people encountered the Iroquois, likewise moving east.^"** From this point forward, Hitakonanu laxk closely parallels the Moravianrecorded accounts of the Lenape's engaging with the "Allegewi" to drive them out.^'*^ When the people continued walking east later on, Hitakonanu 'laxk said some stayed on the other side of the Ohio River, because of the" hostile reception" the Cherokee were giving eastem walkers.^'" There is archaeolgical and linguistic evidence to support these Lenape traditions. Stone tools, clay pots, and such artifacts of the Lenape date their

150 NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

ancestors in the east to around 1000 B.C.E., while they developed the culture that the first Europeans saw around 1000 C.E."' That the Lenape were the first into the east is apparent in the deference that other nations accorded them by referring to them as the "Grandfather Nation.""^ The in-migrations of other peoples were, nevertheless, respected, for the Iroquois, Nanticoke, and Mahican, who had arrived simultaneously with the Lenape, were "Brother" nations to them, not grandchildren."^ In the report of his 1791 embassy to the "westem" nations during the war for the Old Northwest, the Mahicmi Aupaumut gave "a short sketch what fiiendship and connections, our forefathers, and we, have had with the westem tribes" that demonstrates the migration-based relationships were recognized by Native nations in the eighteenth century.^^"* The Lenape, "are our Grandfathers according to the ancient covenant" while, interestingly, the late-coming Shawnee were "our younger brothers" (as were the latest comers, the Europeans, by the way). Meantime, the Miami were "grandchildren" but the Wyandot, an Iroquoian people, were "our uncles," i.e., "brothers" of the Lenape."* European invasion and its disruption of traditional relationships —especially in its arrogant demand that all Natives use the term of "Great Father" to indicate the Europeans—did not alter traditional memory of migration-based relationships. In 1890, Daniel Brinton recorded that the "Lenape perfectly remember that they are the 'grandfather' of all the Algonkin tribes, and the fact is still recognized by the Chipeways [sic] and some others, whose orators employ the term numoh 'homus, 'my grandfather,' in their formal addresses to the Lenape.""^ It is also important, in terms of Native recognition of one another's history, that, when the Iroquois League moved the Lenape into Ohio in the mideighteenth century to protect them from genocide in the east, they resecured their old lands along the Muskingum River in Ohio from the Miami by reminding them of the Lenape tradition of having dwelt there in MoundBuilding times."^ The Miami, too, had migrated east from the far west and realized that people had been there before them."^ They bowed to the traditions of the people whom they knew as "grandfather nation" and to whom they were "grandchildren," allowing them to retum to their ancient homeland. Like the Iroquois, the Lenape kept traditions of the Talligewi Mound Builders as giants and cannibals. In 1956, a Lenape "informant" identified only as "FW" told ethnographer William Newcomb this origin story of the Mound Builders; A Party of women was out gatheringfirewoodwhen an eagleflewdown to them. They

"WE CAN MAKE A WAUKAUHOOWAA"

151

abused him by capturing him. He escaped, however and told the powers of his treatment at the hands of the women. Within ten days it snowed so much that the houses were covered up. The people soon had nothing to eat or to bum. They finally began to eat one another. The cannibals began to grow until they became vicious giants. It is these giants who are buried in the Indian

Very often. Mound Builders, as close to Earth spirits, are presented as inimical to Sky things. In this tradition, women (allied to Earth) showed disrespect to the spirits of Sky (eagle) and, as in the Wyandot tradition, were attacked by Sky elements for their wrong-doing. Also as among the Iroquois, the Giants of Lenape tradition lost their humanity due to exigent circumstances, devolving socially into cannibals while growing mystically through wrinkled spirit power into giants. Finally, again mirroring Iroquoian tradition, Lenape tradition maintained that, after the defeat of the Mound Builders, Giants endangered and harassed their people, requiring them to take defensive measures. One tradition shows a family baffling a Giant with a ruse: Once a family was crossing a creek when one of them saw the reflection of one of the giants in the water. The giant was standing on a mountain looking down at them. He had a long walking cane and started coming for them. The family crossed back over the creek because they knew that these giants were afraid of water. The giant came down to the creek and instead of putting his cane vertically in the water to measure its depth he measured it horizontally. After doing this he mistakenly assumed that it was over his head. Actually a nonnal sized person could wade this creek. The family moved away from where this giant ^**

Iroquoian traditions likewise show the Stone Giants to have been slow-witted, especially when it came to wading.^^' In Lenape tradition, the Giants were not defeated but died out. Like the Shawnee and the Iroquois, the Lenape had traditions of building mounds, themselves. In 1768, Charles Beatty recorded a tradition that "a long time ago, the people went to build a high place to reach up a great way; and that, while they were building it, they lost their language, and could not understand one another; that, while one, perhaps, called for a stick, another brought him a stone, &c. and that, from that time, they (the Indians) began to speak different languages" (italics, parentheses, and symbols in the original).^" There is a distinct fiavor of Babel in this tale, which might well have been supplied by Beatty's Christian informant, Sutton, or by Beatty, himself, yet the description of the Lenape's going "to build a high place to reach up a great way" can refer to nothing other than a mound. The language difficulty might well have reflected the problems in communicating among the three different

152 NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

peoples on the land, the Iroquois, the Lenape, and the remnants of the Talligewi. Interestingly, this same mound tradition was independently recorded by John Haywood in 1823. It had been passed along to an "old Indian on the Ohio" by an uncle who had died in 1728—forty years before Beatty wrote. It mentioned the building of a high place, the loss of language that happened there, and "the great confusion and misunderstanding which took place in consequence of it."^" Once more, for all the biblical overtones eagerly supplied by Haywood (an advocate of the "ten-lost-tribes" theory of Native America), the linguistic chaos might well have described the confusion of mound building by peoples speaking languages unintelligible to each other. Of course, the planting mounds ubiquitous among the agricultural peoples of the east had expression among the Lenape. Traveling about Lenape lands from 1654 to 1656, the Swedish naturalist, Peter Lindestrom, had occasion to witness what he called "com plantations" consisting of "square hills [so far apart] that one can conveniently walk between the hills" (brackets in translation).^^ In 1908, the Lenape explained how they had built such planting mounds. First they girdled trees so as to kill their tops. Next, they bumed surrounding brush. Finally, when nothing but the naked, topless trunks remained standing, the people piled the earth up around them, so that each mound was pinioned by a dead trunk.^^^ Even though these structures are regularly called "mounds" in anthropological literature, planting mounds are somehow never categorized as part of mound culture. The logic behind this exclusion escapes me, for planting mounds take care of Mother Earth as much as any other sort of mound. Zeisberger added the description of underground "dwellings" with "embankments," which he, personally, saw along the Muskingum River in the 1770s, "thrown up around a whole town." Moreover, he said, "near the sites of such towns there are mounds, not natural, but made by the hand of man.... At the top of these mounds there was a hollow place, to which the Indians brought their wives and children when the enemies approach and attacked them."^^^ Loskiel reiterated this description in 1794, saying. The ruins of former towns are still visible, and several mounds of earth show evident proofs that they were raised by men. They were hollow, having an opening at the top, by which the Indians let down their women and children, whenever an enemy approached, and placing themselves around, defended them vigorously. For this purpose they placed a number of stones and blocks on the top of the mound, which they rolled down against the assailants. On these occasions great numbers of both parties were killed, and generally buried together in one large hole, and covered with earth. These graves are still

"WE CAN MAKE A WAUKAUHOOWAA"

153

visible in many places, and their antiquity may be known by the large trees which grow upon them."'

It is unclear whether the Lenape were describing their own mounds here, or the gound houses of the Cherokee, but it is not impossible that they copied Cherokee techniques. The Lenape also began building mounded stone tombs, as did the Shawnee. Loskiel described such burials as beginning with a grave one to two feet deep, lined bottom and sides with flat stones. After the body was lain within, the people "covered the grave with the same kind of stone, laid as closely together as practicable, without cement, sometimes laying smaller stones over the joints or cracks to keep the earth from falling into the grave. Then they covered the grave with earth, not generally more than two or three feet high.""^ An insight into how the ancient Lenape regarded their embankment walls was supplied by the early missionary David Brainerd (1718-1747), who left an account of a superannuated shaman, haplessly hawking his outmoded cosmology in the 1740s. The shaman infomied Brainerd that "departed souls all went southward, and that the difference between the good and bad was this, that the former were admitted into a beautiful town with spiritual walls, or walls agreeable to the nature of souls," whereas "the latter would for ever [sic] hover round those walls, and in vain attempt to get in." Contemporary Lenape did not respond positively to this medicine man. Instead, he was a joke, "looked upon, and derided amongst most of the Indians as a precise zealot, that made a needless noise about religious matters."^^' Just what his fellow Lenape were deriding is not hard to discem. His information that Lenape "souls all went southward" was not exceptionable, for Adriaen van der Donck recorded as much in 1653.^™ In 1794, Loskiel likewise recorded that Sky spirits among the Lenape went "south of heaven, and that the bright track called the milky way, was the road to it."^^' Neither is the Milky Way Trail home to the stars controversial information, for it is ubiquitous in eastem lore. Thus, the intriguing point in Brainerd's recital was the ultimate destination of this shaman's Milky Way Trail: the "beautiftil town with spiritual walls'' (italics mine) into which only a select group gained entry. In my knoweldge of eastem spirituality, this concept is as unique for its walls as for its elitism. The ceremonial centers of the extant Ohio mounds, ringed around with "spiritual walls," might well have been seen by their creators as "agreeable to the naUire of souls." Just as absorbing as this old teaching is that the eighteenthcentury Lenape greeted it with a prolonged raspberry, clearly out of patience

154 NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

with antique mound belief. Perhaps, in olden times, too many folks had been left hovering miserably outside those ceremonial walls, attempting "in vain" to get in, to find any attraction in the notion that the same oppressive social system obtained against their disembodied spirits, south of the sky, as had against them in life. The hostility of the eighteenth-century Lenape toward this teaching hints at a sociopolitical revolution of the sort recalled in Iroquoian tradition, of an ancient priest system overthrown by a disgusted populace. If Iroquoian and Lenape keepings agree with one another, importantly, Cherokee migration tradition also dovetails perfectly with Iroquoian and Lenape keepings of Mound Builders driven south, out of Ohio, into those areas where the earliest Europeans encountered the Cherokee. The distinction among these sets of tradition is that the Iroquois and Lenape recall themselves as the drivers, whereas the Cherokee recall themselves as the driven. The earliest Europeans to encounter the Cherokee were, of course, the Spanish. The route of Hemando de Soto's entrada into "La Florida," the American southeast, from 1539 to 1542, has long been disputed, so that, as mentioned above, the Shawnee have been put forward as possible "Chelaques." Nevertheless, it seems almost certain that the Spanish chronicles were referring to first contact with the Cherokee. Rodrigo Ranjel, Soto's private secretaiy, recorded the encounter, noting in his joumal that, on 13 May 1540, two days' march from Cofitachequi, Soto "came to the territory of Chalaque," where "many Indian men and women began to come in peace with presents and gifts.""^ Another Soto conquistador, "The Gentleman of Elvas," stated that "the Govemor arrived at the province of Chalaque, the country poorest off for maize of any that was seen" in the southeast, "where the inhabitants subsisted on the roots of plants that they dig in the wilds, and on the animals they destroy there with their arrows."^'^ Interestingly, it is known that the Ohio Mound Builders used com only ceremonially, not as a staple.^^** Perhaps "Chelaque" country was maize-poor because com was still a ritual item to the immigrant Cherokee. In recreating Soto's route in 1997, based on the best written and archaeological evidence yet amassed, Charles Hudson placed the 1540 province of "Chelaque" between the French Broad River (which eventually combines with the Holston River to become the Tennessee River) and the Catawba River in North Carolina, so that Chelaque was immediately north of the South Carolina border and east of the Tennessee border.^^' This is pretty much where later French and English explorers first bumped into the Cherokee. Haywood reported that the Cherokee "were firmly established" on the

"WE CAN MAKE A WAUKAUHOOWAA"

155

Tennessee (or "Hogohege") River prior to 1650, elaiming "dominion over all the country on the east side of the Allegheny mountains, which includes the head waters of the Tadkin, Catawba, Broad river [sic], and the head waters of the Savannah. From thence westwardly, they set up a claim as far as the Ohio, and from thence to the head waters of the Catahouche and Alabama."^^^ The 1718 De Lisle Map's geography is iffy, but it placed the Cherokee in roughly these homelands. "Les Cheraqui" are shown on the map as living south of the Ohio River and west of the Appalachian Mountains, along the '''Riviere [sic] des Cafquinanbaux"" (italics in the original), probably a fuzzy rendering of the Cumberland River.^^^ Haywood also recorded that, early in the eighteenth century, the east side of the Aileghenies was called the "Cherakes mountains" (italics in the original).^'^ Cherokee tradition starts much farther back than any of these westem records, for, like the Iroquois and the Lenape, the Cheroke began way out west. It was even before they started eastward that the Iroquois and the Cherokee broke into separate peoples, for both sprang from the same roots.^^^ It is not merely linguistics but also old tradition that records the split.^***^ One Cherokee keeping recorded in 1816 held that they once lived within a three-days' joumey of the Iroquois and that "their languages were then intelligible to each other." The tradition was mum on just how and why the Iroquois and Cherokee went their separate ways, but did state that "with their separation arose a difference of language" until the languages became almost mutually unintelligible, an event that linguists put at 3,500 to 4,000 years ago.^^' Their separation was compounded by the Cherokee's early walk east, where they wound up in the Ohio valley well before the Iroquois or the Lenape, since their mound culture was thriving by the time the latter arrived. James Adair, Benjamin Smith Barton, and John Haywood recorded identical traditions of the original Cherokee migration east. In 1775, the trader Adair quoted the Cherokee as saying that they had "come to their present lands by the way of the west, from a far distant country."^^^ In the 1790s, William Bartram told Benjamin Smith Barton that the Cherokee "came from the west, or sunsetting."^^^ For his part, Haywood noted that a "lengthy" tradition giving "the history of their migrations," was, by 1823, "nearly lost," but enough remained for Haywood to know that it had described whole townsful of people "in many nights' encampment" traveling great di stances.^^"^ Elsewhere, he recorded what was probably more of the same tradition, that the Cherokee "came from the west, and exterminated the former inhabitants"—whereof is not specified, although Ohio is probable.^**' Barton recorded the same tradition, naming the

156 NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

original inhabitants as the "moon-eyed people," a ceremonial reference to those whom the archaeologists call the "Adena."^^^ The inception of "Adena" culture can be traced back to 2450 B.C.E.^^' I suggest that the Cherokee arrival in Ohio occurred around 200 B.C.E., when the "Adena" culture segued into the "Hopewell."^^* This confluence and continuation supports the contention of the modem Keeper, Freeman Owie, that the Cherokee intermarried with, they did not destroy, the Moon-Eyed People.^^^ By 550 C.E., the Iroquois and Lenape had driven the Cherokee south of Ohio—but not all of them. Depopulated, dispersed, and fallen from their cultural heights, holdout Cherokee continued as well as they could, acting the part of maddened avengers, doing whatever damage was still possible to their enemies in hit-and-mn raids. These diehards transmuted into the dreaded Stone Giants of Iroquois and Lenape lore. Interestingly, the Cherokee kept complementary traditions of the "Stone Shields," "Stone Coats," or "Stone Jackets," mainly by way of denying any connection with them. In 1883, the Cherokee William Eubanks described the Stone Coats as a man and a woman with sharp, pointed hands, a common "cannibal" trait. Like Hannibal Lecter, they were quite fond of human livers. Although "monsters," they "dressed like Cherokees, and spoke their language."^^ These similarities made it hard for the Cherokee to spot a Stone Coat among them and easy for their enemies to blame the Cherokee for StoneCoat misdeeds. Thus, although the historical Cherokee seemed anxious to disown and revile the ghoulish Stone Shields, these people who dressed Cherokee, spoke Cherokee, lived among the Cherokee, and attacked the enemies of the Cherokee were, in all probability, Cherokee. The attempt of the later Cherokee to distance themselves from the Stone Coats also suggests that a crucial split had occurred among the ancient Cherokee coming out of Ohio in Mound-Builder times. If the sixth-family Iroquois stranded in Ohio "on account of the vine broke" had perforce intermingled with the Stone Giants they found there, it was a fanatical minority of the Cherokee who took up that outlaw existence by choice. The Stone Coats, probably viewing themselves as the last defenders of their culture, tumed on their fellow Cherokee, ultimately regarding those who had accepted defeat as being as much the enemy as their Iroquois and Lenape invaders. The later Cherokee were clearly terrified of the Stone Jackets, regarding them with the same horrified fascination that modem Americans reserve for serial killers among them. One tradition of Ocasta, a particularly fearsome Stone Jacket, explained

"WE CAN MAKE A WAUKAUHOOWAA"

157

how the moniker. Stone Coat, arose. Witnessing a Cherokee man kill a deer using a bow and arrow, Ocasta became frightened, having seen that flint-tipped arrows were very deadly. He decided that he was out and about in dangerous territory, for his only medicine power—the ability to disappear—did not seem to work on the Cherokee. In defense against their bows and arrows, Ocasta collected up as many flint chips as he could find and made himself a Stone Now stone-clad, Ocasta went on the offensive, creating many wrinkled things in his travels from town to town, leaving devastation and illness behind. The Cherokee decided that enough was enough, however, and came up with a plan. All seven clan towns dispatched a moon-sick (menstruating) woman to the fray. Although the Earth power of the moon-sick women lying naked in his path did fell Ocasta long enough for one of those women to drive a basswood stake through his heart. Earth power alone was not enough to finish off Ocasta. The Sky-dispatching power of fire was required for that. As the people assembled to bum Ocasta, he agreed to reverse all the damage he had wrought by giving their medicine men his songs for successful hunting, war, and healing, ail Earth-linked endavors.^^^ In a parallel tradition, the very troublesome Stone Coat, iVwnj^nw W/(which literally translates to "Stone Clad"), was coming upon the Cherokee intending to eat them all. Again, seven moon-sick women stopped him in his tracks, although it was a medicine man who drove a sourwood stick through Nun'yunu wP^ heart, in this version. The people quickly gathered logs to build a bonfire around the Stone Coat, and, even "as the fire came close to him," he spilled the beans of all his medicine, giving away his healing arts and singing up the "songs for calling up the bear and the deer" and other prey.^" Many interesting clues inhere in these Cherokee Stone-Coat traditions, pointing to Talligewi end times and, specifically, to the priest class as the Stone Shields. Ocasta's fear reaction to the flint arrow tip suggests that bows and arrows were new technology, dating this tradition to between 300 and 550 CE. and placing him in the losing Mound-Builder camp. Moreover, death-casting links the Stone Coats to the Talligewi priests, who boasted of their ability to throw disease on any who crossed them and, conversely, to cure the diseases of those on whom they smiled. Ocasta spreads disease, while both he and Nunyunu Wrare privy to the healing arts—priestcraft. Finally, Ocasta has the medicine ability to disappear. Invisibility was another medicine power claimed by the old priesthood. Interestingly, his fellow Cherokee can see through it, so to speak; i.e., they are not fooled by the tricks of the priestly trade.

158 NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

Traditions of the aftermath of the crisis in the Ohio River valley are still maintained by the eastem Cherokee. In the spring of 1996, Freeman Owle retold a long tradition of his people that included their painful encounter with the Iroquois and Lenape in Ohio. He showed the Cherokee moving in response to the fighting, first to the Cumberland Mountains and then beyond, their second removal at the behest of the Iroquois, who told them that the Cumberland Mountains were "not far enough" away. Owle was very clear that the "Tsa-la-gi," or Cherokee, were the Ohio Mound Builders.^'''* As I have already shown, Iroquoian tradition agrees with Owle, also frankly cross-identifying the "Ground Dwellers" with the Cherokee, while both Iroquoian and Lenape traditions reiterate the claim that Cherokee were the people whom the archaeologists call the "Hopewell," giving the name of those tall, fearsome Mound Builders of Ohio as Talligewi—Owle's "Tsa-la-gi." In 1901, Mooney rendered the term linguistically as Tsa'lagi'oi Tsa'ragi, with the "Eastem or Lower dialect" Tsa ragi, that most familiar to English settlers, having transmuted into the modem term, "Cherokee."^^^ Traditions of post-Ohio migrations were recorded by various hands in the nineteenth century. The only Cherokee hand among them belonged to Teyoninhokarawen (ca. 1760-1831), or "John Norton," the son of a Cherokee father and a Scottish mother. His father having passed away while Teyoninhokarawen was a young boy, his mother remarried, this time a fellow Scott. They took the youth to Scotland, where he was given a westem education and apprenticed into the printing trade. Retuming to North America as an adult and seeking out his people, Teyoninhokarawen was formally adopted by the Mohawk and, thereafter, cordially received by both the Cherokee and the Iroquois. He heard many traditions firsthand, publishing them in The Journal of Major John Norton, 1816^^

In particular, he heard of the Cherokee sojoum in Tennessee, which occurred after they were driven from Ohio. While Teyoninhokarawen was near Kokeai ("Crow Town") in 1809, Selukuki Wohellengh, son of Attakullakulla, the Beloved Man of the Cherokees, told him that the "earliest traditions" spoke of the Cherokee as living along the Tennessee and Holston Rivers.^^^ Later on, at Chicamauga, Teyoninhokarawen spoke with Tekoghwelliska, also called "Mr. McDonald." A Deputy Agent to the Cherokees for King George III during the Revolutionary War, Tekoghwelliska married a Cherokee woman, had children by her, and stayed with the Cherokees for forty years, becoming fluent in their language.^^^ He repeated the "general received tradition, that their Ancestors came from the North East descending the Holston until they reached the

"WE CAN MAKE A WAUKAUHOOWAA"

159

country in which they were established at the arrival of tbe Europeans."^''^ A very similar tradition was told by Chief Charles R. Hicks, one of Haywood's important informants, a Moravian convert and the son of an Indian trader and a Cherokee mother.™ Hicks also insisted that the Cherokee had come "from the rising sun," or the east.^"' Ohio is northeast of Tennessee. In the westem part of the Carolinas between 1669 and 1670, John Lederer encountered the Natives of "Apalatean Mountains," i.e., the Cherokee, noting that their histories described them as having been "invited to sit down" in the Carolinas after having been "driven by an Enemy from the Northwest."^"^ Ohio is northwest of the Carolinas. Despite the obvious geography involved, these traditions have thoroughly confounded westem scholars, who have seen them as not only selfcontradictory but also as contradictory of the keepings of migration from the far west. It is not Cherokee tradition that is muddled, however, but Savagism's One-Migration-Per-Customer mindset that is simplistic. Cherokee tradition is consecutive and complex. The first set of traditions is talking about inmigration from the far west; the second set, about a forced flight from Ohio, undertaken in several waves. Fleeing in more than one group, going in more than one direction, the refugees wound up in Tennessee and the Carolinas. The flight was clearly a move precipitated by crisis, for it was guided by the Spirits. Hicks held that the Cherokee "were placed upon this land [Tennessee] by the divine orders of the four councils sent from above," i.e., spiritual messengers of the sacred four directions.^"^ Likewise, the invitation to "sit down" in the Carolinas had been issued "by an Oracle."^"^^ Thus, as it had been for tbe Shawnee in Florida, the Cherokee flight to Tennessee and the Carolinas had been facilitated by the Spirits in a time of communal desperation. The Carolina tradition adds that, once seated in their new home, the Cherokee taught the original inhabitants of Virginia how to plant and use com. Obviously, they had brought their ceremonial com witb them, so that it was, perhaps, their rituals of com that they passed along. Lederer furthermore included tbe traditional date of the Cherokee migration into the Carolinas as above "four hundred years" before he wrote (1670), placing their arrival at circa 1270 C.E.^*^^ In the nineteenth century, scholars had few qualms about recognizing the Cherokee as Ohio Mound Builders. In 1823, for instance, Haywood recorded that the Cherokee "came from the upper parts of Ohio, where they erected the mounds on Grave creek."^"^ In 1854, Joseph-Arthur, compte de Gobineau,

160 NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

noted in passing that the Cherokee "are supposed to be descended from the ancient Alleghany race to which the great mins found to the north of the Mississippi are attributed."^''^ From 1884 to 1894, Cyms Thomas campaigned vigorously to prove the point.^"* Over the course of the twentieth century, however, scholars became more coy. Today, they hem here and haw there, either dodging the issue or tucking the Cherokee into a longer list of mere possibilities, but there is no earthly reason to doubt that the Cherokee were the original "Hopewellian" Mound Builders of Ohio traditions or that they continued their mound culture in their new homeland. Cherokee tradition claims as much, stating that, upon arriving in the South, "they found no Indians, but great appearance of the country having been once inhabited" through the numerous mounds dotting the landscape.^**^ The Cherokee not only used these mounds as found but also constmcted more. Thus, contrary to the Reverend Elias Comelius's facile, 1814 claim that the Cherokee had no knowledge of the mounds, a tremendous amount of mound lore existed among the southeastem Cherokee. In 1887, James Mooney made a field trip to the East Cherokee reservation in North Carolina, where he half-cajoled, half-tricked AyiTini ("Swimmer"), an important medicine man, into revealing sacred mound knowledge.^'" Ayu"ini told him that two different peoples had practiced Mound Building, with the original builders being the Anintsi, whom Mooney identified as the Natchez people, while those picking up on the custom after them were the AniKituiiwag^-the Kitu'hwa^—or ancient Cherokee.*"' Mound location was pivotal. Townhouse mounds were quite deliberately located on river bottoms, which allowed easy access to water. The location had two effects. In fine weather, the bottom land provided a level plain to serve as ballfields and dance grounds. However, when flood season came, the people could scramble to the townhouse, mound top, for sanctuary.^'^ To build a burial mound, a sacred fire was first kindled at ground level, inside a circle of stones, "outside of which were deposited the bodies of seven prominent men," each representing one clan, exhumed from their temporary burials for ceremonial mound burial.''^ These skeletons were purposely buried along with scales (mica) from the Uktena, or Homed Serpent; an Ulunsu'tf stone, i.e., the forehead crystal of the Uktena; a feather taken from the right wing of a Tla'nuwa, or mystic eagle, sometimes called a thunderbird; and beads of seven colors, which seemed to accord with the seven clans: red, blue, black, white, yellow, purple, gray-blue.^''' As these were deposited, the shaman enchanted them with the curse of disease to pass into any enemy who might

"WE CAN MAKE A WAUKAUHOOWAA"

161

attack. Although an enemy force might be abie to wreak destruction on the town, disease would overcome the horde, preventing it from ever reaching home.'" The service complete, the people would next build the mound. It was the task ofthe women, always closest to Mother Earth, to carry basketsful of dirt, covering and then piling it about the sacred fire, the honored dead, and the bunal artifacts. An elder who died in 1865 had told Ayu"ini that the mound top was kept open by means of a "hollow cedar log" acting as a chimney to facilitate the eternal fire inside the mound. Earth was then piled around this central chimney-log, leaving an open shaft reaching to the bottom of the mound—an interesting echo ofthe Lenape contention that women and children were stuffed down the central hole of mounds during attacks. Pragmatic though some ofthe shaft's uses might have been, mystically speaking, fire was always at least smoldering at bottom. This was the source from which the town Firekeeper got each new year's fire, although it appears that the fire was kindled back to life for this ritual.^"* Cyrus Thomas was very excited when Mooney repeated these traditions to him, for Thomas knew that two logs were usually present in mound structures, connecting at the mound base, the one to conduct air, and the other, to hold fire.''' It was the permanent ehore of one man, the Firekeeper, to remain in the townhouse, tending and feeding the atsi'la galmkw'tiyu, "the honored or sacred fire," by jamming the long stalks of the ihydga, or the "fire-maker" weed (fieabane), down the long log shaft till they took flame from the sacred fire at ground level. An 1887 tradition held by the revered keeper, Tsiskwaya, stated that a fire ceremony transpired annually, during the Green Com festival, when last year's fires were extinguished and fresh fire was taken from the mound into each home, even as long traditions ofthe ancient migrations were recited.^'^ This ritual might have been performed in each town, although some traditions claim that all fire was taken from the great mounds at such places as Nikwasi and Kitu 'hwa for distribution throughout the nation."^ The mystical fire was still buming at the Kitu 'hwa Mound during tbe Civil War. Cherokee soldiers watched in awe as smoke rose from its top."'' In 1887, a woman, whom Mooney never got around to naming, told him: "There's fire at the bottom of that mound." Indeed, Mooney "found on investigation that the belief was general that the fires still existed and occasionally sent up columns of smoke above the tops ofthe mounds."^^' Mound culture had been run by a priesthood, the Ani-Kuta'ni, and many traditions exist of it. In 1809, Teyoninhokarawen heard that the order ofthe

162 NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

"Anikanos" (Ani-Kutahf) was founded "at a very distant period," not surprisingly, as the result of a Sky joumey. It seems that the people had been gathered in the townhouse, obviously for a ceremony, when a man entered and doused the sacred fire, a deed suggesting that this happened during a Green Com festival, when the Firekeeper ritually rekindled the new year's fires. The fire-dousing Sky quester then began chanting these words: "I have been to the Country above, and have now retumed from thence; with the commands of the Great Spirit whose abode is there." The quester's commands included a number of new "ceremonies, dances and purifications" to secure protection for the people. This fresh cosmology was so engaging, at least to those likely to wield its power, that many people flocked to join the quester/Firekeeper. The new priesthood he proposed grew to immense proportions, becoming the Ani'Kuta'nf.''' An 1826 letter by Charles Hicks contained essentially the same tradition. Hicks had the shamanic Sky quester entering a night ceremony, his entrance coinciding with the fires going out. Announcing that he had "come from above," the shaman took a prearranged seat, reciting his Sky message to the townsfolk. Unlike Teyoninhokarawen, who knew that the address included "ceremonies, dances and purifications," Hicks claimed that the content of the Sky message was unknown. After the speech, the town's fires were rekindled. Hicks added that the priesthood to which the shaman belonged was dreaded as a special conduit of Sky communications."^ In evaluating these keepings in 1984, Raymond Fogelson decided that extinguishing the fire had been a capital offense, the shaman seeking to shock the people into listening to him."" This is highly doubtful. Had he committed a first-degree felony during a sacred ceremony, the intmder would have been killed on the spot. The fact that he was, instead, led to a preexisting seat of honor and suffered to address the assembly indicated that a set ritual format was being followed. The shaman was well known to the people before this event, undoubtedly a Firekeeper empowered to quench last year's fire and rekindle this year's. The fire-dousing episode was not included for its shock value but because tradition frequently tosses in cultural tidbits that allow informed listeners to orient themselves to the setting of the tale, in this instance, Green Com time. The central point of this tradition was the social stratification that either resulted from the Sky vision or—more likely—was consolidated by it, since it is obvious that a powerful priesthood was already in control. In 1998, hitchhiking on interpretations of Maya culture, Bradley Lepper speculated that

"WE CAN MAKE A WAUKAUHOOWAA" 163

some of the spectacle of the later Ohio mounds was to "solidify" the social order they represented, and, given this tradition, his hunch does seem probable.-*" I suggest that this reasoning places the tradition of the founding of the Ani-Kutani in the Ohio period, as the so-called "Hopewell" culture flowered into its final excrescence of opulence before it fell, vanquished by the Iroquois and Lenape. Hicks claimed that the foundational vision legitimized three social divisions, being, in ascending order, the common people; the political leadership of the community; and the Ani-Kutahf, which Hicks translated as meaning "the Proud."-*^^ An independent 1835 letter from Johnson Pridget and Isaac Short Arrow stated that the Sky-appointed order of the ancient Cherokee was govemed by the head priest, who was an absolute mier in both civic and religious matters. He was surrounded by seven priestly counselors,"' Pridget and Short Arrow thus show the priesthood as having power over the civil authority through its council of eight, very likely drawn from the eight clans once in existence, counting the Ani-Kuta hi as a clan. Once established, the Ani -Kuta hi mled the Cherokee for centuries, maybe more than a millennium. Haywood recorded that the powerful priests "lived amongst their ancestors, and were deemed superior to others."^^** Given the inducements, the Ani-Kutahf eventually ossified into a cormpt, oppressive regime, apparently while the Cherokee were in the south. The demise of the Ani-Kuta hf happened some time afler contact, for it was the diseases brought by European invasion that first weakened the people's confidence in their social order. The claim to fame of the Ani-Kuta hf had been its ability to ward disease off the Cherokee while siccing it on their enemies, but the priests were seen to have no control whatsoever over the spread of bubonic plague, smallpox, chicken pox, and the whole comucopia of misery unleashed by the Spanish. The end of Cherokee mound culture was brought about by a revolution whose specific aim it was to depose the corrupt Ani'-Kutahf In 1823, John Haywood recorded that the priesthood was "extirpated long ago in consequence of the misconduct of one of the priests, who attempted to take the wife of a man who was the brother of the leading chief of the nation,""** Danie! Brinton gave much the same synopsis in 1868: From the remote times, the Cherokees have had one family set apart for the priestly office. This was when first known to the whites that of the Nicotani, but its members, pufTed up with pride, abused their birthright so shamefully, and prostituted it so flagrantly to their own advantage, that with savage justice they were massacred to the last man. Another was appointed in their place which to this day officiates in all religious rites.""

164 NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

This, in a nutshell, is the tradition of the revolution, but there is a lot more color to be applied to this dull sketch. Perhaps the most thorough source on the demise of the Ani-Kutahf was a Dr. D. J. MacGowan, who, in 1866, published accounts he scared up from Dr. J. B. Evans, a sojoumer among the Cherokee, and Coowescoowe {"John Ross," 1790-1866), the son of a Scottish father and a Cherokee mother who eventually rose to be chief of his people during the horrific era of Removal. In 1984, Fogelson theorized that Hicks was actually the main source of records on the Ani-Kutahf, having been the informant of both Haywood and Coowescoowe, the latter of whom became, in tum, MacGowan's source.^^' Hicks did speak with Haywood, but he was not Haywood's only informant, nor did Haywood specify who had given him the Ani -Kuta hf information. As for Coowescoowe, it is tme that Hicks did write him the 1827 letter reciting his tradition of the Ani-Kutahf, but Fogelson's theory assumes that everything Coowescoowe knew, he leamed from Hicks, a questionable and even insulting postulation. The theory supposes further that Hicks was the only contemporary source of information on the Ani -Kuta hf. If true, this would have been a most extraordinary circumstance, but it is not tme, for independent accounts came from Teyoninhokarawen, Evans, Pridget, and Short Arrow, all contemporaries of Hicks. I find it more likely that Hicks and Coowescoowe were simply swapping versions of a well known tradition, something Natives often do as a point of interest, to see how the folks over yonder tell the same story. All accounts agreed in describing an ancient, hereditary "form of priestcrafl" among the Cherokee that lasted, albeit in greatly weakened form, until the mideighteenth century. MacGowan gave the favored clan as "the family of the Nicotani"—Ani-Kuta h^-which was, by the end, an unapproachable caste from which the priesthood was exclusively drawn."^ In its old age, the AniKuta hf began abusing its authority and, thereby, the people, most grievously, spiritually terrorizing them into cooperating with the ever more outrageous impositions of its social order. Its priests were particularly addicted to helping themselves to any beautiful women who caught their fancy, whether or not the woman was willing. They stole wives from their husbands and daughters from their mothers. In this regard, one mound tradition of the earth's shaking violently in response to a marriage and an adoption ceremony might well have been an allegorical morality tale, censuring the Ani -Kuta hf for their womanizing ways. The tradition concems Tsul'ka lu', a regular player in Cherokee traditions. TsuVkalu 'was a slant-eyed giant, caretaker of the mountain game, whose main

"WE CAN MAKE A WAUKAUHOOWAA"

165

story concemed his mnning off with a wife whose relatives were hard-pressed to get her back again."^ He and his children were wont to leave footprints in rock as they scrambled off, usually hightailing it away from trouble that they had brought on themselves."" Tsul'kalu \ himself, was but one member of an entire "race" of giants who came from the far west of the continent."^ This particular tradition of Tsul'kalu', recorded in 1823, featured mounds "caused by the quaking of the earth, and great noise with it," events somehow connected to the fact that Tsul'kalu'\i2A "taken a wife of one of their town's people." At the birth of his first son, "this quaking of the earth and noise had commenced." The shaking occurred even as a sacred ceremony was in progress, the adoption of a number of people "into the family of Tuli-cula \Tsul'kalu'], who was an invisible person." In response to the tremblor, hasty young men set up "the alarm whoop," their rash action (i.e., threatening Mother Earth) causing a mound to rise up from "the quaking noise." In the face of this unsettling development, TsuVkalu' absconded with his wife and child, leaving tracks in the rocks as he fied."^ This tradition leaves the impression that the ancient Cherokee had witnessed a volcanic eruption, a sacred tum of events, in which Mother Earth, herself, tumed fiery Mound-Builder, presumably in a commentary on current events. Earthquakes were generally held to have been signs of cosmic displeasure or omens presaging momentous events to come. Thus, for instance, was the New Madrid earthquake of 1812 interpreted by the Kansas people as foretelling the arrival of Tecumseh, with his call for pan-Indian unity against Euroamerican invasion."^ Here, Mother Earth seemed to have been expressing displeasure with the Ani'-Kuta'nf and predicting its destmction. Whether the Ani'-Kuta'nf partook of the "invisibility" as well as the salaciousness of Tsul'kalu' is unknown, but I venture to suggest that invisibility was one of the mystical attributes the priesthood arTOgated unto itself ceremonially. Among the Iroquois, close relatives of the Cherokee, death is a man with an invisible face: S'hondowek'owa is not seen by his victims until they are already within his grasp (an interesting connection with the Stone Coats' invisibility)."^ Since the shamanic powers ofthe^n/'-A^ufaw/" centered heavily on burial rituals, their invisibility does not seem an unlikely linkage. Possibly, then, in this tradition, people were being inducted into the Ani'Kuta hf priesthood when the mmbling began. The abducted wife of this tradition is also salient, for it was the escalating violation of women that ultimately led the people to rise up in revolt against the Ani'-Kuta'nf As with most popular revolutions, the common people's

166 NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

grievances festered for a long time before they burst into the open. Much of the hesitation had to do with the abject, spiritual dread in which the people stood of the priesthood."^ At last, however, the /In/-A^wran/overstepped itself, pushing the populous past its fear and into action, when the priests conspired against a popular young couple from a politically powerful clan, probably a reference to the civil authorities that Hicks set as the second strata of society. The nubile wife, renown for her extraordinary beauty, was the object of the intrigue. Waiting until her young husband had left on a hunt, the Ani '-Kuta 'nf abducted and gang-raped the woman most bmtally.^''*' Enraged to discover his wife's plight upon his retum, the young man decided that matters had gone far enough. He raised a successful revolution, probably drawing upon the political strength of his powerful clan as well as the ire of the common folk. Under his direction, the .4ni-/rw/a«/was put down for good. In Teyoninhokarawen's version, the priests were "finally all put to death where ever [sic] they were found."^"" In 1826, Hicks said only that the affronted husband, aided by his brother, killed the priests directly responsible for the rape, which had the effect of having "annihilated" the priesthood."^ By contrast, James Adair recorded in 1775 that the Ani'-Kuta'nf was, instead, ravaged by a smallpox epidemic, an account confirmed by Haywood in 1823."^ Adair added that, their power broken, some of the priests killed themselves, out of disappointed vanity.^"^ The keeping that the Ani '-Kuta 'nf was destroyed by disease is very interesting because, among the old Cherokee, disease was a cosmic punishment meted out to the unrighteous while they lived.^**^ That those priests who survived the massacre were felled by smallpox is wonderfully ironic, particularly given their traditional claim to command disease. MacGowan concluded that, once the Ani'-Kuta'nf had been deposed, the Cherokee outlawed "hereditary privileges."^''^ In particular, religiosity was held at arm's length. Early in the nineteenth century, Teyoninhokarawen remarked to a companion that the Cherokee were much more lackadaisical about religious observance than were the Iroquois. This set his Cherokee interlocutor reminiscing about his boyhood, when more formal feasts were facilitated by medicine men making fiowery presentations in an archaic dialect, from which he could only catch one phrase: ''We are emigrating into a strange country, and now move our encampments" (italics in the original).^"' Another part of the move away from "hereditary privileges" was the abandonment of male domination. Cherokee women demanded and received empowerment to such a degree that, when the first intmding Spaniards arrived

" W E CAN MAKE A WAUKAUHOOWAA"

167

in Cherokee lands in the early sixteenth century, they found themselves dealing with female chiefs. Female leaders, and even warriors, among the Cherokee continued to astound Europeans well into the eighteenth century, and the War Women of the Cherokee remained justly famous into the nineteenth century.^'*^ The Cherokee also developed new medicine to treat the ill.^''^ Indeed, old Cherokee medicine generally fell into such disfavor that the Lenape were able to steal the medicine bundle of the Cherokee, a square, wooden box swaddled with buckskin."" This theft occurred around 1800, by which time, old Cherokee medicine must already have been sadly neglected, or the Lenape could never have gotten away with so bold a raid. By 1855, the Cherokee were reported as "becotning remiss in the performance of their ancestral rites," although they even then continued "their ancient custom of having one family of the tribe set apart for the priesthood.""' As Ayu''ini rather sadly told James Mooney in 1887, "All the old things are gone now and the Indians are different.""^ The Cherokee thus effected a sociopolitical move away from the spiritual oppression of a religious elite, a development not restricted to the Cherokee, for the Lenape seem also to have discarded it, while strong tradition shows the Iroquois resolving their own difficulties with shamanic tyranny by overthrowing it. This shift to democracy began, perhaps, with the founding of the Iroquois League in 1142, for Iroquoian tradition states that the Peacemaker, in setting up the Constitution of the Five Nations, sent invitations far and wide to others to join the new League, with the Cherokee and Lenape pointedly included."^ His messengers of peace would necessarily have taken with them the details of the structure and philosophy of the new League. In this regard, it is important to recognize that neither the Cherokee, the Lenape, nor the Iroquoian revolution stopped with the destruction of shamanic rule. Instead, all three peoples continued on a brighter path, devising a new form of government that, basically, cast off hierarchical, male-dominated, hereditary, priestly oppression in favor of a participatory form of civil government in which women played a large, powerful role, economics emphasized sharing, and religion was a matter of individual conscience. The Iroquois became justly famous for their brilliant Constitution, while the unsavory experience with the rigid rule of the ^iflZ-ATM/art/" apparently tumed the Cherokee into liberal freethinkers, stimulating their trademark openness to new ways of seeing, being, and doing.""* I suspect, therefore, that a much more encompassing political movement was afoot in the demise of Ohio valley mound culture than westem scholars realize and that, if such collapses as that of the Cliff Dwellers of the desert southwest

168 NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

are figured into the mix, it seems to have been continent-wide. Socially, politically, economically, and religiously. Native America advanced significantly between the sixth and twelfth centuries, shunning spiritual terrorism, throwing off class-based hierarchy, tuming away from war, organizing giftbased economies, and developing the mie of democratic law. The magnificence of mound culture might have died, but its old order was little missed.

4

Kokomthena, Singing in the Flames: Sky-Earth Logic in the Mounds

In the nearly one thousand archaeological works I read through researching this book, I can count on my ten fingers those that referred in any depth to Native traditions, and I am down to one hand in counting those that took tradition seriously as an interpretive guide to the mounds. Indeed, no concerted attempt to view the mounds in terms of tradition has been made since Daniel Brinton's Lenape and Their Legends (1885). Unfortunately, Brinton composed this work to support the authenticity of the Walam Olum, and his credulity on that score h£is since relegated Legends to the scrap heap of past daffiness, its wheat tossed out with its chaff. Brinton's aim might have been off, but his realization that meaning in the mounds cannot be descried without Native input was sound and should be pursued, if archaeologists are serious about understanding Mound culture. In one way, however, it is just as well that archaeologists have largely ignored tradition up till now, because those who have delved into it have tended to "Euro-form" it past recognition, i.e., force-fit Native concepts into artificial conformity with westem logical systems, at once inserting and disguising massive Euro-Christian interpolations, which then pass for Native content.' Euro-forming rests on a cavalier monoculturalism, which often goes unchallenged in the academy because of two ensconced caveats: 1. That Indians are to be seen (preferably, in regalia) but not heard, and 2. That all Indians look alike, leaving archaeologistsft-eeto mix and match quite foreign traditions with breath-taking impunity. The firm resistance of westem scholars to consulting the descendants of the

170 NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

Mound Builders on the subject of the mounds would he ftinny, if it were not so debilitating to theory. Ignoring Natives, Euroamerican scholars seek enlightenment instead from such archly westem thinkers as Joseph Campbell, Claude Levi-Strauss, Robert Hall, Mircea Eliade, Carl Jung, and Ake Hultkrantz, scholars who presume to explain "primitive" behavior. Because their ruminations are based on westem expectations of Savagery, however, all they tnanage to build are airy superstructures that, while they tnay feel exotic to westemers, nevertheless fail to represent anything approximating genuine Native logic. The resultant disinformation masquerades as the real low-down on Native conceptual styles. For example, in her 1990 attempt to grasp the meaning of "east" to the Mound Builders, rather than look to Native sources for direction (so to speak), Maureen Korp went straight to Claude Levi-Strauss, Mircea Eliade, Ake Hultkrantz, and Joseph Epes Brown.^ In the process, she did not quiz but fell in with blanket characterizations amounting to stereotypes, such as Brown's assertion that "myths may be told only after dark and normally in the winter season."-' Not only is this not tme for all groups, but it is also inaccurate even for those groups, such as the Iroquois, that do reserve the telling of some traditions—not properly characterized as "myths"—for the nonagricultural months. Worse, Brown's categories misstate Native perceptions of ceremonial time. Among the Iroquois, sacred things are told only in the moming, but moming is not synonymous with daylight, as it is for westemers. "Moming" mns from midnight to noon, and "aftemoon" runs from noon to midnight. Since ceremonial "moming" and "aftemoon" each have equal amounts of light and dark in them. Brown's adjective "dark" is meaningless, failing to comprehend the complex system of interactive, halved wholes common to eastem logical systems." At the same time, it erroneously props up westem oppositional thinking in its formulation of day = light/good vs. night = darki^ad. Thus, Brown's simplistic characterization of "myths" told "only after dark" did little more than Euro-form the issue. The fact is, westem logic precludes comprehension of Native logic. As Gladys Tantaquidgeon (Mohegan) pointed out in 1972, westem ways of knowing are so inimical to Native ways that, if allowed to organize Native knowledge, they will, instead, destroy it. In explaining the Mohegan tradition, "The Woods Dwarf," she argued that there is a reason that modem Mohegans no longer see the mystical Dwarfs, who were once so prominent in tradition: "The white man's ways are so far removed from the ways of the Indian that if

KOKOMTHENA, SINGING IN THE FLAMES 171

we adopt any of them we cannot expect to see many of the things which were commonly seen before we knew of his strange ways."* Instead, Euroamericans are apt to treat Dwarfs as an artifact of the "magical thinking" that westemers just assume Natives indulge, as befitting their primitiveness.^ This approach is worse than a blunder: It is a blinder. Ignoring tradition in discussions of the mounds necessarily leads to errors of emphasis, pattem, and interpretation by leaving westem logical methods as the only way of addressing this quintessentially Native subject. The result not only damages Native thought processes but also closes off access to their entryways. As anthropologist Jim Brown of Northwestem University acknowledged in 1997, no "advancement" in comprehending the Mounds will occur until Native traditions, limited to specific woodland nations, are consulted.' Native things must be known in Native ways, if anything like Native authenticity is to emerge. Natives could tell archaeologists a great deal about the mounds, if only archaeologists would let them, but westem academics flatly refuse to regard Natives as equals when they speak—even Natives with degrees to rival their own. In 1986, for instance, when the West Virginia "Mingo" and degreed anthropologist, Thomas McElwain, put forward a bona fide Native discussion of the Ohio valley mounds, it was met with deafening silence by his westem colleagues, while one prominent anthropologist, Ake Hultkrantz, pooh-poohed it to McElwain as the poorest thing he had ever published.^ Hushing Native scholars by means of the silent treatment, on the one hand, and personal derision, on the other, is a practice of long standing among westem academics, but it is a wretched reflection on their vaunted thirst for knowledge. Instead, it betrays the drive for hegemony rampant in westem academia, the implicit policy decision that westemers shall control the telling of everyone's tale. Even those few authors out there open to Native sources, are so on only a small, spotty basis, pulling out isolated tidbits now and then, as they seemed to reinforce (or mystify) an archaeological point. At large fault here is the westem schizophrenia of denying modem Natives' descent from the Mound Builders on the one hand while naming the living descendants of the Mound Builders on the other. This sleight-of-hand allows archaeologists, depending upon expedience, either to neglect or to raid any of several distinct cultures at will, stitching together a crazy quilt of ethnographic scraps to prop up this or that flight of academic fancy. No systematic knowledge of any culture or nexus of cultures is required for this purpose. It is, instead, acceptable for archaeologists to dip out a little Miami here, scoop up some Anishinabe there, and top it all off with a generous dollop of Cherokee over yonder.

172 NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

In 1979, for instance, Robert Hall pieced together iconography from what can only be described as EVERYWHERE—not just North America, but Central America and Eurasia, as well—to "explain" Ohio valley mound culture.' This mix-and-match approach was justified on the excuse that, as Hall put it in 1997, there is not much in "Hopewell" culture that "cannot be explained by the workings of processses known from eyewitness knowledge of historic North American Indian customs.'"" Although this would be tme in a perfect world, it is not yet feasible because, first, the mixing-matching ethic destroys the very cultural integrity that supports interpretation, and, second, the massive cormption inserted into the record by westem writers has yet to be excised from the sources. Before interpretations can be justly ventured, the dollop method of ethnographic inquiry must cease, after which considerable spade work remains to be done by knowledgeable Natives, not only to identify, test, and eradicate westem interpolations in the record, but also to elucidate the results in a Native way. Failing these preliminaries, Hall's tnethod cannot enlighten; it can only confuse. Apparently stung by just such Native criticism of his 1979 offering. Hall (who is of Mahican descent) went on in 1997 to justify his continued mixingand-matching by claiming that modem Natives were doing the same thing, themselves." I have met some of the Natives Hall is talking about. They are typically affiliated with the New Age movement and tend to have a very shaky command of their own traditions. Worse, most are so steeped in Euro-Christian premises that they unwittingly import them into whatever trailings of tradition they may know, accepting old missionary perversions (such as the ubiquitous "Great Spirit"), thus spreading debased versions of their culture as the genuine article. The upshot is that New Age Natives "civilize and christianize " themselves, even as they slap a supposedly Native seal of approval over the creaky artifacts of forced assimilation. Even more alarmingly, every New Age Native I have met (and not a few academics!) have bought into the notion that sheer physical descent from a Native forbearer guarantees cultural authenticity. Since this is not true—culture is leamed, not biologically inherited—the descent credential works to promote as experts on "the Indian" those who are thoroughly westemized themselves, mentally and culturally, having been educated in the Euroamerican mainstream and weaned on Christian precepts. Consequently, all New Age Natives do is exoticize westem thought, dressing Christian philosophy up in feathers. More insidiously, they bask in racism while they do it, for, in accepting that mentality and culture are passed along in the genes, they swallow whole the primary tenet

KOKOMTHENA, SINGING IN THE FLAMES 173

of eugenics. To present oneself as culturally knowledgable based solely on one's biological credentials is to endorse the most abject form of racism extant. To avoid these pitfalls: 1. Native logic must be understood on its own terms, as presented by Natives who are respected by their peers as culture-bearers. 2. Customs and traditions must be clearly identified by their nation of origin, cleared of westem interpolations, and brought to bear in cultural context. 3. Extrapolations from group to group must be made only when the groups are culturally related and/or when similar customs or philosophies are shown to have been shared on more than a superficial level. The first step for those who wish to follow this advice is to pull the infrastructure of westem thought into visibility. When people are used to their own ways of thinking, they honestly lose the ability to see the very deeply laid assumptions of their culture at work, shaping their perceptions. Instead, they call this veiled process "common sense," not realizing that the dictates of "common sense" are as culture-bound as styles of food or clothing. Even more trying is slipping into the logic of another culture. It can be a profoundly unsettling experience, pushing buttons most people do not even know they have, thereby raising intense levels of resistance to the felt threat to the constmcted self The defensive response is to write off the thinking of the Other as simplistic, when it is really just the novice's grasp of the subject that is simplistic, a humbling realization that few enjoy. It tends not to defuse defensiveness. Those westemers up for the challenge must start with the distinction between the base number of European thought and the base number of Native American thought. Europeans operate on metaphors of ONE: There is one god, one way, one truth; people have one soul, one life, one true love. Two of anything necessarily indicates rivalry. In the either-or universe thus projected, the two are assumed to be at odds, with one fraudulent, for there can be only one legitimate version of anything. Each version must, therefore, try to destroy—or, at least, to subjugate^its rival. The Manichean dichotomy of Good vs. Evil is a perfect expression of this oppositional logic of the West, calling upon the one heavenly god to be perpetually at war with the one hellish devil, that impostor so evilly intent upon supplanting his celestial rival.'^ Nothing in this logical system could be farther from the thinking of any eastem

174 NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

tradition, as the many recorded laments of early missionaries show. In 1632, for example, the Dominican missionary Gabriel Sagard moaned that converting the Iroquois was a monumental task because ofthe lack of any concepts in their culture corresponding to the Christian philosophical base. He could not explain "even the Pater noster," while heaven and hell were utterly foreign ideas.'' From 1647 to 1648, the Jesuits complained of the same problem, depressed that the "Infidels" were sneering at converted Canadian Iroquois, pointing out to them that their new god seemed not to be protecting them from missionary doses of "disease, poverty, misfortune, and death." The cant of future rewards for present suffering simply baffled said "Infidels," who could not "comprehend those expressions," understanding as little ofthe patois of Christianity as if the converts "spoke an unknown language"—as, indeed, they did." The story was the same for the Algonkins. Shawnee vision questers were puzzled by the seated, naked, circumcised god ofthe Europeans.'^ The early eighteenth-century missionary David Brainerd could not rightly say what the Lenape's "notions of God" were "in their Pagan state," but, as far as he could learn, "they had a notion of a plurality of invisible deities." Even worse, he groaned, it was "a notion pretty generally prevailing among them, that it was not the same God made them, who made us" (italics in the original).'^ If the lonely-only, hierarchical god of the Christians baffled egalitarian Natives, the idea of a devil constantly at odds with him was simply inconceivable. The Moravian missionaries, who arrived among the Lenape in the 1740s even as Brainerd was dying, were deeply perplexed by the Lenape's "want of proper expression in spiritual things"—i.e., Christian formulations— "of which they were totally ignorant."'^ As George Henry Loskiel reported in 1794, "They seem to have had no idea ofthe Devil, as the Prince of Darkness, before the Europeans came into the country" (italics in the original)."* It cannot, therefore, be too heavily emphasized that Christian monotheism and its battling dualities of good and evil, god and the devil, heaven and hell, the upper world and the underworld have no counterpart in traditional Native thought}'^ To the extent that the good-evil dichotomy appears in the early chronicles, it was supplied by the missionaries, so that, when archaeologists such as Maureen Korp mistake the eastem twinship principle for a westem duality and go on to conflate it with the good vs. evil dichotomy ofthe West, they are shoring up one ofthe worst missionary impositions, not illuminating Native thought.^" As they try out their various theories ofthe mounds, archaeologists would

KOKOMTHENA, SINGING IN THE FLAMES 1 7 5

do well to remember this: Christian formulations never clarify Native logic. Thus, for instance, in 1996, when William F. Romain interrogated the supposed "Fearful Symmetry" ofthe Mounds, using it to inquire, "Is God a Geometer?" he was wrongly attempting to elucidate Mound-Builder spirituality using eighteenth-century, monotheistic mysticism, a la William Blake in "The Tyger" (1794)^': Tyger! Tyger! buming bright In the forests ofthe night. What immortal hand or eye Could frame thy fearful symmetry?

"The Tyger" may have a spine-tingling impact on Christian Europeans, but its monotheistic and slightly ominous implications of "fearful symmetry" are just bewildering to eastem Natives, for whom panthers are respected medicine and forests are cherished protectors, both lacking the devilish hold that forests and wild animals have on the Christian imagination. Although Romain was correct that cosmic symbology is at work in the circle-square geometry replayed endlessly in the earthworks, he made a wildly unfounded leap in exploring it through the imagery of Manichean monotheism. Instead of competing, hostile polarities. Native thought sees paired, interdependent complements working in synch to re/create the whole of the universe through the balanced interaction of positive and negative charges. The positive and negative manitou are emphatically not to be confused with Christian good and evil, a formulation repulsive in its every implication to Native thought. In Iroquoian lore, for example, the otkon, or negative force, is called "wrinkled," and the uki, or positive force, "smooth." Wrinkled things are most often associated with Earth spirits, such as the Homed Serpent, the Turtle, or the Bear, whereas smooth things are most often associated with Sky spirits, such as the Great Eagle, the Thunderers, or the Sun. Either smooth or wrinkled forces can create either benefit or harm for humans, for there is no moral content involved, ]us\ a likely effect. Earth spirits may be associated with death, but they are also associated with healing herbs and reincamation. Sky spirits may be associated with lifesong, but they also cause tomados and kill improperly prepared vision questers. Importantly, no Elder Spirit is fixated on humanity, as are the Christian god and devil. In fact, humanity is entirely incidental to the cosmos. The best bet for humanity is to find out the direction of any spiritual flow and dip with it, not against it.

176 NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

Native cultures operate on these very different principles because they start from very different base numbers. West of the Mississippi River, base numbers tend to be four or six, while, east of the Mississippi, woodlands cultures have a base number of two, itself divided into two, resulting in a complex four. In the east, everything that exists, does so by halves, in a thought process I call "twoby-four logic." For instance, humanity expresses itself in the two halves of age and gender, with each half, itself, made up of two parts. Seen in terms of age, there are elders and youngers, whereas, seen in terms of gender, there are women and men, as illustrated in Figure 4.1, The Two-by-Four Logic of Humanity. Certain, necessary complements express one whole: Sky and Earth, Fire and Water, Eagle and Serpent, circle and square, cremation and interment, and so forth. These twinned pairs are, furthermore, connected to one another by webs of association, for Native thought spins through complex analogies to core meanings.^^ Each half carries with it a bevy of associations that intersect with its corresponding half in other compatible pairs, so that associations of the Sky/Earth complement also apply respectively to FireAVater, Eagle/Serpent, circle/square, cremation/interment, resuscitation/reincarnation, and so on. Westem thinkers typically try to reduce these necessary pairs to the solitary "line of thought" that westem logic demands. This process strips Native complexity down into the independent units most comfortable to westem ONEthinking, but, at the same time, it gouges half-concepts out of their analogical complexes, denuding them of their associations along the way. The Eagle thus wedged away from the Serpent for consideration as a free-standing unit still feels exotic to westemers, so that they do not realize how completely they have just violated Native logic. In 1916, the anthropologist and linguist Edward Sapir (1884-1939) set up two very likely criteria for measuring the antiquity of any belief or practice. The first was that frequent and conventionalized references would be made to it in the general lore. The second was that it would have a wide geographical spread." The two-by-four cosmology of Sky and Earth clearly meets both criteria. The plush depth and texture of the Sky/ Earth nexus enjoyed a multiplex of conventionalized references and was widespread across the eastem half of North America. There is every reason to believe that this logical system is so ancient as to have ordered eastem mound cultures, for the evidence of it is abundant, if only it is understood as such. I will begin with the most seminal of these halved wholes, the Sky/Earth nexus. Many other pairs are linked to it by webs of association, so that grasping

KOKOMTHENA, SINGING IN THE FLAMES 177

Figure 4.1 The Two-by-Four Logic of Humanity

Age Half

Gender Half

Elder

Women

Humanity \ Men

Younger

Humanity consists of two halves, Gender and Age, each, itself divided into two halves. The halves of Age are Elder and Younger, whereas the halves of Gender are Male and Female.

this complement seeds comprehension of the rest. From the outset, the reader must understand that Earth is not the equivalent of hell or an "underworld," a common archaeological interpolation, nor is Sky the counterpart of "heaven," a Christian idea. Furthermore, Sky is not blue. In the east. Sky means outer space, not the Earth's blue atmosphere. Especially in Iroquoian tradition, blue is Earth, the color of death, the color of permanent invisibility.^" Blue may not be quite as fatal to the Cherokee, but it bodes quite ill." Similarly, the Cherokee associate permanent invisibility with Earth medicine. Tsul'kalu', the SlantEyed Giant of the Cherokee, is, for instance, an "invisible person," who is associated with sexual lust and earthquakes, both Earth medicine. "Transparency" was the way that the Cherokee expressed the permanent invisibility of Earth medicine, especially as it applied to the Homed Serpent.

178 NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

Since almost everything relates back to Sky/Earth associations, it is crucial to grasp what naturally belongs to Sky and distinguish it from what naturally belongs to Earth. This may vary from culture to culture. The Great Hare was, for example, a very crucial figure at contact and, from his widespread fame among Algonkin and Iroquois alike, he was obviously important precontact, as well. Some Algonkin associate the Great Hare (sometimes called Michabo) with Sky, often through the primary metaphors ofthe Sun, the east, and Fire. Other Algonkin and all Iroquois associate the Hare with Earth, through his pranks, which often tum lethal.^^ In one tradition of the Algonkin Potomac people, recorded by William Strachey in 1610, for instance, the Great Hare lived at the end ofthe road leading to the rising sun." In Native logic, nothing could more obviously mark him as Sky than his easterly direction. On the other hand, not all Algonkin viewed the Great Hare exclusively as Sky. The Lenape regarded him as a wrinkled spirit, simultaneously half-wily and half-witted, a cosmic practical joker, the very picture ofthe Earth-based trickster for eastem Natives.^" Among the Cherokee, he is Tsistu, a decided "trickster and deceiver," a practical joker who enjoys making life miserable for his fellow creatures, always Earth traits.^' The Iroquois call him Quara, and he is decidedly otkon, the negatively charged medicine that can either kill or cure. These Earth traits allow him the oversight of all healing arts.^^ The Hare's reversal of orientation from Sky to Earth, depending upon the traditional base, forcefully demonstrates the danger of blithely universalizing the traditions of one culture to all others. In trying to parse out Sky and Earth references, researchers cannot expect just to pull up unmediated westem sources for enlightenment. Nothing in westem culture led chroniclers to anticipate Native logic, or to appreciate it, if they did stumble across it. Instead, they struggled to make sense of what Natives told them via concepts from their own Christian culture. The upshot was a puddle of poorly digested ideas, invariably presented in monotheistic terms, often including moralistic, culture-shocked judgments that failed to mirror the intent of the Native speaker. The content of old sources must, therefore, be puzzled out in the present, using Native precepts as guides. Many times, for instance. Natives attempted to explain to Europeans how Sky/Earth medicine interfaced in cosmic balance, but their traditions were so dreadfully Euro-formed in the process of being written down as to have been deprived of their original content. Take the 1616 attempt of an Algonkin people related to the Lenape to explain Sky and Earth to a Captain Argoll: "We have five gods in all; our chief god appears often unto us in the fomi of a mighty

KOKOMTHENA, SINGING IN THE FLAMES 179

great hare; the other four have no visible shape, but are indeed the four winds, which keep the four comers of the earth."" The westem chronicle of this exchange debilitatingly imposed "god" terminology on the discussion, with its monotheistic assumption that one of the "gods" had to have been mightier than all the others, thus leaving the people's words nearly unintelligible." What they were attempting to impart was, however, their reverence for the twinned medicine of Sky and Earth. The invisible Four Winds (the cardinal directions) were their pinions of Earth medicine, just as the Great Hare was their pinion of Sky medicine. They honored both halves. in the 1740s, the Lenape again tried to explain the same idea to the missionary David Brainerd, telling him that, "in ancient times, before the coming of the white people, some supposed there were four invisible powers who presided over the four comers of the earth. Others imagined the sun to be the only deity, and that all things were made by him."" Brainerd, too, garbled the message, assuming that the Four Winds of Earth and the Sun of Sky had to have been competing for top honors, consequently imposing monotheistic terms on his record. When the Lenape tried to correct his error, by explaining that it was the All-Spirit, the council of Elder Spirits of Sky and Earth, that animated life, Brainerd threw up his hands in bewilderment, styling it "a confused notion" and instantly likening it to the anima mundi of the "more leamed ancient heathens" of Europe.-*^ Once more, the determined ONE thinking of Christian culture stymied any hope of his grasping the intricate Sky/Earth halved whole of the woodland cosmos that the Lenape were trying to impart. It is important to see that Sky and Earth are in league, not in competition. Neither Sky nor Earth can permanently interfere with, deflect, or destroy the medicine of the other. This balance of Sky and Earth is shown, for instance, in the tradition of the major outbreak of sibling rivalry between the Sacred Twins, a tale that closes the First Epoch of Iroquoian time. The Elder Brother, Sapling, is Sky, and the Younger Brother, Flint, is Earth. (Notice the two-by-four pairing of Sky/Age and Earth/Youth.) In a rage, the brothers chase one another across the back of Turtle Island (North America), their foot-falls pushing down mountain passes and causing tremors. Flint skids in for a landing, wrinkling up the ground into the Grandfather Mountains (Alleghenies). Sapling trips and, in reaching down to steady himself with one hand, creates the finger lakes of New York. In the end, however, neither can kill the other. Sapling merely throws a mountain down atop Flint, trapping him in Earth to become Hanish 'heono", "He Who Dwells in the Earth."^' Both lived on.^^ A Potomac tradition, recorded in 1610, of a quarrel between the Great Hare

180 NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

(Sky) and the Four Winds (Earth) also taught the inability of either medicine to upend the other. The Four Winds, annoyed by the Hare's ability to create animals, killed and ate Deer, one of Hare's inventions. Undismayed, the Hare resuscitated Deer from scattered flir tufts, using "many powerful! wordes and charmes" (spelling in the original).^^ Resuscitation of that which has prematurely died is a Sky ability, which, in this instance, counteracted, but did not end, the Earth ability to kill. Because everything that exists comes by halves in eastem logic, it is just common sense to the Algonkin and the Iroquois, alike, that everyone has two indwelling spirits, one of Sky and one of Earth. Given how obvious this must be to anyone with even the slightest grasp of eastem logic, I am continually amazed to watch archaeologists move directly to Christian theology for their conceptual base in interpreting Mound views of death. In just this manner, for instance, Robert Hall casually appealed to Christian precepts by entitling his 1997 musings on Mound philosophy and ceremony, An Archaeology of the Soul—singular. As a window on Native thought, however, soul is opaque, for, as Thomas McElwain pointed out in 1986, it is asking for trouble to "assume Christian concepts of souls" apply to Native thought.*'^ They do not. Before I continue, there is a crippling misconception of the two-spirit that I need to head off at the pass, before it hopelessly warps comprehension. In the last two decades of the twentieth century, the term "two-spirit" was appropriated from the New Age movement by gay rights activists and proffered as Indian chic for "homosexual." Although west of the Mississippi there is a concept that homosexuals have two spirits, its traditional use was confmed to a few westem nations. It should not be falsely universalized to eastem nations. Bluntly, homosexuality has nothing whatsoever to do with the two-spirit philosophy of the east, which reflects the impersonal operation of Sky and Earth, not the personal operation of sexual identity. In the east, the two spirits are not about one's sexual orientation but, rather, about one's parentage: Everyone has two spirits, an Earth spirit from her mother and a Sky spirit from her father. A person bom with just one spirit was considered deformed, most likely to have been off-kilter, demented, criminal even. The Earth spirit comes out of the ground—not an underworld—whereas the Sky spirit comes from outer space—not heaven. The origin of the Earth spirit was what caused Natives descended from Mound-Building cultures to "say they grew out of the ground where they now live."^' It also inheres in the Iroquoian tradition, recorded in the eighteenth century, that "the Indians formerly lived under ground [sic], but hearing accidentally of a fine country above, they left

KOKOMTHENA, SINGING IN THE FLAMES 181

their subterranean habitations, and took possession of the surface.'**^ That is, the Earth spirits came to the surface, to live Native lives. When the Iroquois stated in 1755 that they "came out of the ground" at the southem fork of Sandy Creek (a Mound-rich area), they meant that their Earth spirits were one with the dirt of Mound country.""^ Just as the Earth spirits come out of Mother Earth, the Sky spirits come from the stars. The tradition of Sky People is widespread in the east, common to the Cherokee, Iroquois, and the Lenape, among others. The Cherokee, for instance, held that the Sky was inhabited by "a celestial race," knocking about in "a forest into which the highest mountains lifted their dark summits."^ This view of the mountains as the stairways to Sky World was shared by other nations. For instance, in guiding John Lederer to the Appalachian Mountains in the 1670s, the Lenape fell "prostrating themselves in Adoration" upon first spotting the range by the southem branch of Rappahanock River, crying out ''Okee paze" which Lederer translated as "God is nigh," but which really means "Sky medicine is close" (italics in the original).''' Mountains thus mediate Sky, something archaeologists should remember in considering the mounds. (The mountain counterpart is a cave, which mediates Earth.) In 1794, Loskiel fleshed out the Lenape tradition of Sky descent, noting that "the heavens are inhabited by men, and that the Indians descended from them to inhabit the earth: That a pregnant woman had been put away by her husband, and thrown down upon the earth, where she was delivered of twins, and thus by degrees the earth was peopled."*^ The Iroquoian people also marked their direct descent from the Sky People, travelers from the Pleiades. As Sky World hovered above this planet. Sky Woman fell to Earth through a hole in Sky World, bringing with her the Three Sisters of agriculture (com, beans, and squash), as well as the daughter in her womb. In Iroquoian lore, it was the Daughter who bore the Sacred Twins, after mating with an Earth spirit.'*^ Extraction from Earth, extraction from Sky: Rather than competing traditions, as is often assumed, these traditions stand as complements, the first tracing the roots of humanity's Earth spirit, and the second, the roots of its Sky spirit. The two spirits of eastem cosmology are hardly a secret, having been widely recorded in first-contact chronicles, with their implications analyzed by well known scholars since the nineteenth century. Daniel Brinton's 1868 discussion of two-spirit philosophy was followed in 1894 by that of J. N. B. Hewitt, who presented a very insightful address on the matter to the Sixth Annual Meeting of the American Folk-Lore Society."^ In 1939, John Reed Swanton puzzled over the two-spirit concept among the Muscogee, and then, in 1953, Ake Hultkrantz

182 NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

took a swing at the subject."^ In 1974, while editing a new translation of Lafitau on the Iroquois, William Fenton struggled with the two-spirit issue, though less successfully than Brinton or Hewitt because more determined to Euro-form the question.^** In 1986, Thomas McElwain highlighted two-spirit philosophy as the key to understanding mound burials, and I treated the matter of two-spirit cosmology at length in 2000." Thus, there is little excuse for archaeologists to write on in glorious oblivion of it, when they come to the question of why two forms of burial were used by Mound Builders. The cremation (Sky)/interment (Earth) implications should be too obvious to miss. The two spirits had very precise origins, functions, and pathways, which must be understood before a profound grasp of mound burials can be had. As a synopsis of the idea, Brinton got very close to accuracy in 1868, saying that "a man [sic] has two souls one of a vegetative character, which gives bodily life and remains with the corpse after death, until it is called to enter another body; another of more ethereal texture, which in life can depart from the body in sleep or trance, and wander over the world, and at death goes directly to the land of Spirits."" Although Brinton used the loaded word "soul" and was off in saying that only the Sky spirit departed—both spirits departed at death, just to different locations—he nevertheless displayed a solid grasp of the core idea. Although the two-spirit concept was shared by the Iroquois and the Algonkin, there were a few distinctions in their belief systems that should be remarked. In his letter of 16 July 1636, the Jesuit missionary, Jean de Brebeuf, described the two spirits of the Iroquois in discussing burial rites. A "Captain" at the Feast of the Dead told him "that many think we have two souls," which was "why they call the bones of the dead, Atisken, 'the souls'"—plural (italics in the original)." In 1724, the Jesuit Joseph Francois Lafitau recorded the names among the Iroquois for the two spirits, the gannigonr-ha and the erienta. The gannigonrha was the Earth Spirit, which hovered about the corpse for a year following death before travelling west. By contrast, the ethereal Sky Spirit, the erienta, followed the Milky Way Trial home to the stars, from which it had come. As was common, the Iroquoian Earth Spirit came from the mother, whereas the Sky Spirit came from the father. Lafitau added that the Iroquois were conscious of the interaction of these two spirits, carefully scmtinizing which spirit motivated which thoughts and actions. The terms, gannigonr-ha and erienta, he said, "occur often and it is not permitted to use them incorrectly."*'* Among the Lenape, the first spirit (Sky) took up residence in the heart, whereas the second spirit (Earth) lived in the blood. Upon death, the two spirits

KOKOMTHENA, SINGING IN THE FLAMES 183

went their separate ways. The Sky spirit lingered about the corpse for the eleven days immediately following death, taking off, south of Sky, on the twelfth day. For its part, the Earth spirit remained in the heart for eleven days following death, and, on the twelfh day, it departed for the land of the ancestors in the west. On this twelfth day, the Lenape Feast of the Dead offered it food; again, twelve lunar months after death, another feast was made for it.'^ In the southeast, the idea was slightly different. Among the Muscogee, for instance, the Sky spirit was called inu'tska, meaning "talent," "ability," or "genius," and it delivered messages to his human host in dreams. This spirit lived in a person's head and constituted the rational, thinking part. During life, it could leave the body in spirit travel, something Sky spirits commonly did in all nations. The Earth spirit was ih^yafiktca, literally meaning "entrails"—i.e., it lived in a person's gut. It was the seat of emotions, moral decisions, and personal passions. This spirit could not depart from a person until death, except among those medicine people who, by removing their intestines, could shapeshift their Earth spirits into ghost lights, homed owls, and other such Earth manifestations, to fly about in the dusk.'^ Either of the two spirits could cause mischief when not balanced by the presence of the other. For example, at death, the Lenape Earth spirit, in disturbed condition, was apt to move about as a ghost. If ritual were improperly performed or observance were botched, the blood of the deceased would congeal into a radiant ball and rise from the grave to float or roll about the earth as a moving orb, ominously seen at dusk." (Light was the proper province of Sky spirits, so that, when Earth medicine made light, it meant that perilous things were abroad.) The Lenape medicine man, Wi-tapanoxwe., added that passing ghosts might cohere into clouds, wafting down the highway and causing strokes in anyone who touched them. These ghosts were "felt as a slight wind."^^ As with the Algonkin, Iroquoian Earth Spirits that had not been properly sent on remained above ground to distress the people with their eerie, luminescent medicine. Between 1633 and 1634, for instance, the Jesuits recorded that the people had been set on nervous edge by a "great light," which reappeared over a series of nights, moving silently through the trees. One of the missionaries, mnning out of his hut for a better look, even watched the great light flash." Such bright Earth lights, often seen over the rooftops of shamans, were interpreted as omens of death.^° To neutralize the aftereffects of these lights, those who had viewed them had to wash out their eyes and scmb down their faces with Plantago major cmshed in water, taking special care that no child

184 NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

or invalid be allowed to see them until the ablution was accomplished.^' The Earth light might, otherwise, fix upon these innocents, playing tricks on them. For their part, the Shawnee were terrified of Earth spirits roaming about as ghosts and went to great lengths to ensure that they did not trouble the people. Charles Bluejacket recalled that "the ancient custom was to keep a fire buming for three nights at the head of the grave of one just dead. A small opening was made from the mouth of the dead to the surface by inserting a long rod through the newly filled grave, then withdrawing it. Provisions were also kept at the head of the grave for three nights," because it took that long for Shawnee Earth spirits to reach the land of the dead." Should relatives be lax in seeing to these ministrations, the Earth spirit would be impeded and angry, visiting various gruesome illnesses on its negligent kin." Even christianized Shawnee secretly attended to these duties. Bluejacket instanced the cautionary tale of the Whiteday family, a member of whom had converted, leading the rest to ignore deceased relatives, after the Christian custom. In consequence, the Whitedays came down collectively ill, until fright and the advice of the "heathen Shawnees" prompted them to quietly set aside "provisions in a secluded part of his house," thus resolving the problem.^ Disembodied Sky spirits might also prove troublesome, often while their human hosts still lived. There is a Seneca tradition in which a man's Sky spirit^never as solidly hinged to the human form as the Earth spirit^split off as he traveled along, to the astonishment of his wife. Walking home one day, the wife a little behind her husband, the pair came to an "oblong loop" in the path, which, after a short space, came back together again into one path, in mounting trepidation, the wife watched "her husband's body divide into two forms, one following the one path and the other the other trail. She was indeed greatly puzzled by this phenomenon, for she was at a loss to know which of the figures to follow as her busband." (Had she followed his Sky spirit, it would have led her unprepared into Sky, i.e., death.) As good fortune would have it, "she finally resolved to follow the one leading to the right," that is, his Earthspirit body. As the two paths reconverged, the woman saw her husband's two spirits reconverge, as well.^* At death, all eastem nations held that the two spirits separated, for they were not paired for longer than a lifetime. Among the Iroquois, the Earth spirit traveled the Rim of Sky west to Eskennanne, the Country of Ancestors, whereas the Sky spirit traversed the stars across the Milky Way Trail to reach "home," Tejennoniakoua., the Land Where Spirits Danced.^^ The Lenape held much the same belief Although their Sky spirits travelled more south than east

KOKOMTHENA, SINGING IN THE FLAMES 185

to find the Milky Way Trail, their burials did face east." In 1610, the Algonkin Potomac told William Strachey that, at death, the Sky spirit scaled the tree tops to scan the landscape for "a faire plaine broad pathe waye," the spirit road, well supplied with every good fruit. Following the highway, they ran "toward the rysing of the sun" (east), the abode of the Great Hare, for them, a Sky spirit who lived in the east.*"^ In 1612, Strachey went on to record the travel of Earth spirits released by the death of their hosts. At the fiineral, "when their bodies are layd in the Earth," the Earth spirit ("that which is within") the body "shall goe beyound the Mountaines and travell as far as where the Sun setts" (spellings in the original).*^^ In other words, this spirit went west ("where the Sun setts"), the common destination of properiy released Earth spirits. By now, the strong and separate directions of travel for disembodied Sky and Earth spirits should be clear. Sky Spirits were almost always associated with the east, entering Sky via that passage. Earth spirits were always associated with the west and, therefore, traveled west at death. Chaos empts when, unaware of the existence of two spirits following two distinct paths at death, Euroamerican scholars attempt to sort out the meaning of interments, some facing east, others west. Maureen Korp is among those puzzled by the difference in directions. Although she was close to something useful when she noticed the seeming eastwest motion of the stars and moon and connected their directionality to rebirth, her discussion was crude and haphazard, suffering from an acute lack of Native-based knowledge.'" Instead of consulting peoples descended from the Mound Builders on the traditions of the sacred directions of spirit travel and then cross-referencing particular traditions with particular archaeological sites, she flew by the seat of her pants, mixing and matching traditions, and then generalizing and interpolating like mad to craft some squirrelly "answers." This was sad, for Korp began well, correctly noting, for instance, that Iroquoian and Cherokee burials faced east. Unfortunately, she then tumed to the Anishinabe, or "Chippewa"—who are westem and Algonkin—promptly universalizing to people who are Iroquois the Anishinabe tradition of the dead traveling east.'' Next, appealing to Hultkrantz instead of Native sources, Korp labeled confused the reports of eighteenth-century chroniclers that the "land of the dead" lay east and west, in the Sky and in the Earth. To force her way out of what she regarded as a contradiction in the sources, Korp concluded that the Milky Way Trail to Sky World—one of the most ancient of Native ideas! —represented a christianization, to be discarded.'^ For her grandejinale, Korp decided that distorted memories of migration prompted eastward-facing burials.

186 NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

thus allowing the Iroquois to "go home" to from whence they came." Whew. Korp's first error, mixing-and-matching the cosmologies of disparate cultures, does serious harm to her inquiry. Consistency is key here: To understand Iroquoian burials, Iroquoian—not Anishinabe, and certainly not European—sources must be consulted. Her second error was to substitute racial stereotype for analysis. The contention that the poor, pudd'nheaded Iroquois could not tell the difference between their own migration and spiritual traditions is just insulting, for the elders keep historical and spiritual traditions carefully distinct. In any case, it is demonstrable that memories of migration would not clarify east-facing burials. As shown in chapter 3, the Iroquoian peoples migrated in from the west, so that "going home" as the rationale behind eastheaded interments makes no sense at all. Throughout all this, Korp missed the point that post-mortem travel was not necessarily the purpose of cemetery directionality, anyway, for Iroquoian, Cherokee, and Lenape prayer is always directed to the east—i.e., the corpses were praying.^'* The third error in Korp's discussion hinges on her unconscious insistence on the westem principle of ONE. Apparently, despite having consulted him, she missed Hultkrantz's work on the two-spirit sytem, leaving her to assume that people have but one "soul," and death, but one direction. These propositions seriously misled her, for, in the east, death has two directions, to accommodate the two spirits. Thus, records of two directional headings as east and west. Sky and Earth, are not confused but consistent with two-by-four thinking on the matter of death. Korp was correct, however, in hinting that reincarnation enters into the mound equation, for both Sky spirits and Earth spirits might retum to the living, in nonhaunting ways, each type of spirit having its own, proper way to revive. Earth spirits reincarnated by passing through the ground, up through the feet of passing women, and into their wombs, whereas Sky spirits resuscitated, usually by reentering left-over body parts or bones. During reincarnation, the original Sky/Earth pair did not necessarily retum together; new pairings came with each life. At this point, readers should actively disabuse themselves of every notion they have ever imbibed from popular culture regarding reincarnation.^' First, rebirth comes in two parts. Sky and Earth. There are two means of reappearing, reincamation (Earth) or resuscitation (Sky), based on the animating impulse. Second, reincamation and resuscitation are forms of shape-shifting. Third, there is no "karma" involved, i.e., reincamation is not cosmic "punishment." Finally, not everyone retums. Those spirits that do retum do so because the community

KOKOMTHENA, SiNGING IN THE FLAMES 187

has need of their great leadership or because someone living fervently urges the deceased to come back. Thus, it is community need or personal love calling spirits back—and most spirits are free to disregard the call. A few spirits are, however, so important that they have permanently incamated or resuscitated. For instance, in Iroqoian lore. Sky Woman resuscitated as Our Grandmother, the Moon, while her beloved daughter permanently incamated as Mother Earth.^^ By the same token, the Elder Twin (Sky) was a steady fixture. An Onondaga tradition had him perpetually resuscitated, growing from an infant to an old man, and then springing instantly into infancy once more, so vital was he to the smooth flow of reality." Flint was likewise permanent, although invisible, as befits a powerful Earth spirit.^^ (Note the intertwined pairings here of Female and Male, Earth and Sky, Elder and Younger.) Once more, archaeologists have little excuse for ignoring these phenomena, since the reincamation/resuscitation beliefs of eastem Natives were anything but secret, having been widely recorded in westem chronicles. In 1610, for instance, William Strachey noted that the Sky spirits, living east with the Hare, feasted there with their forbearers, doing "nothing but daunce and sing" (spelling in the original) till they aged and died, at which point they resuscitated into the physical worid.^' In 1612, Strachey also recorded the class-based reincamation of Earth spirits: Concerning the ymortality of the Sowie, they suppose that the Comon people shall not live after death, but they thinck that their Weroances [chiefs] and Priests indeed, whome they esleeme also, half Quioughcosoughes [manitou], when their bodies are layd in the Earth that that which is within shall goe beyound the Mountaines and travell as far as where the Sun setts into most pleasant feildes, growndes and pastures, where yt shall doe no labour, but stuck fynely with feathers, and paynted with oyle and Pocones [Virginia pokebeny or pokeweed, yielding a purplish dye] rest in all quiet and peace, and eate delicious fruicts, and haue all variety of delights and menyments till that waxe ould there as the body did on earth, and then yt shall dissolue and dye, and come into a womans womb againe, and so be a new bome vnto the world." (Spellings in the original; brackets mine)*"

In this example, a clear hierarchy existed for reincamation. The elite might reincamate, although common folk could not. For their part, the post-Mound-Builder Lenape, at least, drew no class distinctions but believed that, af^er a little rest and relaxation with the ancestors, their Earth spirit would reincamate into the physical world, coming back up through the ground, like com from seed hidden in the dirt.^' They deliberately made a hole in the coffin, therefore, allowing the Earth spirit of the deceased to come and go from its grave as it liked, until it found its next fleshly **^

188 NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

The Lenape centered extensive rites on reincamation. A main purpose of the initiatory vision quest of Lenape youths was, for instance, to see what their former lives had been, the better to understand why they had been called to their present life. Different Lenape assured the eighteenth-century missionary, John Heckewelder, that they had seen their previous lives, while one insisted that he had picked up spiritual knowledge disincamate, before his birth, a Sky divination. Furthermore, his Earth spirit had overheard his mother and the women conversing about him while he was yet in the womb and "could repeat correctly everything that they had said." Still others toid Heckewelder that they knew what the future incarnations of their Earth spirits would be.**^ Typically, a Lenape came back three or four times, thereafter "to die and never more to come into this country again."^'' It was also possible for the Lenape Sky spirit to die and then resuscitate in the same body. These little deaths often resulted in what would today be called near-death experiences and marked those who had "died" as medicine people (a common eastem theme). Various Lenape told an incredulous David Brainerd about their little deaths, one assuring the missionary that "he himself had once been dead four days." During this time, his Sky spirit "went to the place where the sun rises (imagining the earth to be plain,) and directly over that place, at a great height in the air, he was admitted into a great house, which he supposes was several miles in length, and saw many wonderful things," which, unfortunately, Brainerd found "too tedious as well as ridiculous to mention." In another instance, a woman told him that she had been "dead several days; that her soul went southward, and feasted and danced with the happy spirits; and that she found all things exactly agreeable to the Indian notions of a future state" (italics in the original).^^ The Iroquois entertained similar beliefs of reincamation and resuscitation. The Captain of the 1636 Feast of the Dead told Brebeuf that each of the two spirits were "divisible and material, and yet both reasonable; the one [Sky spirit] separates itself from the body at death, yet remains in the Cemetery until the feast of the Dead,—after which it either changes into a Turtledove"—birds were Sky-associated creatures—"or, according to the most common belief, it goes away at once to the village of souls" (brackets mine).^^ The Iroquoian Sky spirit resided in the mind, thus accounting for Haskota'hi^haks, The Brain Sucker, who must remove the minds of all erienta traveling to Sky World after the death of their human hosts.^^ By and large, enticing Sky spirits back to life was rough-going, as they much preferred to dance in the Sky, the women with Sky Woman on the Moon, and the men with Sapling, in the Sun.^^ However,

KOKOMTHENA, SINGING IN THE FLAMES 189

the Sky spirits of powerftil seers, such as Sganyadai.yoh (Handsome Lake), resuscitated to lead spiritual movements.**^ The "Captain" at the Feast of the Dead also told Brebeuf the fate of the Earth spirit. It is "bound to the body, and informs, so to speak, the corpse; it remains in the ditch of the dead [ossuary] after the feast, and never leaves it, unless some one [sic] bears it again as a child" (brackets mine)."*" The seat of the Iroquoian Earth spirit was the marrow of the bones, where it remained in the buried skeleton after death, awaiting rebirth.*" As did the Mound Builders, the Iroquois defleshed corpses for interment, so that only the marrowful skeleton was buried.'^ This strikes westemers with horror, but the skeletal remains of the deceased were objects of attachment to any Iroquois intent upon calling back a loved one. In 1636, Brebeuf watched a young woman anguishing over the bones of her father, which were to be laid in the ossuary. She "handled his bones, one after the other, with as much affection as if she would have desired to restore life to him."" In fact, the Earth spirits of the beloved deceased were encouraged to retum by just such tender regard, and any who died in infancy were pressed to hurry back. Grieving mothers would sometimes illicitly bury their babies under the roads so that, as other women passed by, the Earth spirits of their infants could travel through their feet, into their wombs for a speedy retum.** Because they came up out of the ground, reincamations were characterized as growing crops. "We Indians cannot die eternally," the old Lenape and Iroquois said, for "even Indian com, buried in the ground, is vivified and rises again."^* The Iroquois call those awaiting reincamation "the rising generations," graphically depicting them as happy little faces, smiling up from the ground.^*" The Iroquois held that people dead before their allotted time were properly resuscitated. The Seneca tell of brothers who "found great piles of bones," the skeletal remains of people killed by wrinkled shamans. To revive their lost relatives, the brothers gathered the bones up near "a great hickory tree." The pile complete, the lead brother, Hodadenon "pushed against the tree, crying out to the bones, 'Rise, my friends, or this tree will fall on you!' Instantlyft-omthe heap of bones living men sprang up."'^ As his adventures continued, Hodadenon located the bones of some friends, along with those of his beloved sister, standing atop a "raised platform," walking guard duty (a clear reference to the ossuary and raised platform of the Feast of the Dead). He did not immediately recognize her, for "she was a mere pouch of human skin for her bones and ftesh were wanting."'^ Hodadenon quickly gathered up the bones, including those of his skin-pouch sister, and placed them beneath "a very large

190 NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

hickory tree." Pushing on the tree trunk, he called out to them: "Ho! Friends and sister, arise, for the tree is about to fall on you now." They all sprang up alive in a ftash.^^ Sometimes, a humorous twist was added to the resuscitation theme, when the bone assembler failed to pay proper attention as he laid out skeletons for reanimation. In the Seneca tradition of the "Uncle and Nephew and the Hite Otters," the nervous nephew was all thumbs, inadvertently mixing up the leg bones of two different skeletons, one of a tall man and the other of a short man. Consequently, at the call to rise and run lest the tree cmsh them, these two unfortunate fellows each had one long and one short leg, which made them fail all over themselves as they tried to ftee. Improperly assembled, they could not be resuscitated and thus crumbled back to disarticulated bones.'™ The old Cherokee had a slightly different take on retuming to life. For them, no death was natural but always caused by Earth medicine plied by a shaman against a target."'' A life rudely intermpted by murder or accident could, however, continue through to its natural extent, through Sky resuscitation in the same body. Anything dead before its time would reanimate, up to seven times, through drops of blood left behind.'**^ Many traditions emphasized this, often in terms of hunting, basically to absolve hunters of the guilt of having killed by allowing their prey to spring back to life. The reanimation ritual for prey animals, set up by A 'wfUsdi', Little Deer, required hunters to beg the pardon of the animals they had killed. To ensure compliance with this rite, A 'wfUsdi' followed hunters about. Any who failed in the ritual was hunted down himself and rendered immobile with rheumatism.'"^ Human creatures could also revive from bloody parts, as did Wild Boy in the very sacred tradition of Selu and Kana 'ti, the Com Mother and her husband, the Lucky Hunter.'** If no foul play were involved, however, the Earth medicine of reincamation was the tasteful way to retum. For spirits to do this, their bodies had to have been rituaily interred, their marrow intact. A lack of marrow barred retum, as did not having been buried at all. Exposed bones were shunned by the living, for fear of the angry Earth ghost lingering around its remains. Thomas Wildcat Alford explained the disgrace and danger that attended unburied bones for the Shawnee, in his story of the Kickapoo, Say-kaw-quah ("Skunk"). A disreputable fellow, Say-kaw-quah transgressed a capital Euroamerican law, for which his own relatives were forced to kill him. Ashamed, they left his body to decompose in the open air on a hilltop. In 1868, his bleached bones were still there, his ghost presaging storms with a Kickapoo war whoop. When Wildcat was around nine, he and his brother went up the hill to view Say-kaw-quah'?,

KOKOMTHENA, SINGING IN THE FLAMES 191

bones, but, discovering what they had done, their mother was appalled and forbade them ever to visit that dead plaee again.'°^ Bone piles were also viewed askance by the Lenape, who were likewise wary of the danger their Earth ghosts posed. In 1972, Gladys Tantaquidgeon associated stacks of exposed bones with ghosts, both to be avoided. Witapanoxwe, the great Lenape herbalist, told her that, once as little boys, he and his brother had followed a ghost. Horrified by their recklessness, their mother warned them "never to follow a ghost like that as it would lead [them] astray and finally to a pile of bones" (brackets mine).'°* Harkening to a "ghost-whoop" was also dangerous, and anybody looking for the source of one was sure to dead end in a "stack of bones."'°' The implied threat in the bone piles was that of their potential reanimation as vampire skeletons. The vampire skeletons are unburied, marrowed bones that create havoc by feeding on that Earth element, blood. In 1938, the Seneca keeper Jesse Complanter recorded one very old tradition of such a cannibal ghost.'"^ A medicine man who dealt in wrinkled power lived alone in the forest. When he died, he asked to be "buried" in a walled off portion of his house, an accepted form of "burial" at that time. The shaman specifically willed the use of the rest of his forest hut to male hunters, but warned against any women or children entering it, as their presence would bring harm to the entire hunting party. Subsequently, many male hunting parties used the lodge in perfect security, until the day that one young husband, who had failed to hear of the prohibition, took his wife and little daughter hunting with him, sheltering them in the old medicine lodge. The husband and wife did notice the burial in the next room, but thought nothing of this then-common happenstance. To keep the child out of her mother's hair while she prepared dinner, the husband lay down with the toddler by the fire for a snooze. The wife thought she heard something stirring besides the spoon in her pot, so she looked about, only to see blood oozing from under her husband's head, even as she heard the bones of the dead shaman clacking their way back into his bark coffin. At that moment, she realized that she was dealing with a vampire skeleton. Quickly ascertaining that her child was still safe, having lain directly next to the protective fire (whose smooth. Sky power counteracted the wrinkled. Earth power of the shaman), the bereaved widow knew that she had to keep her wits about her to save herself and her child. Holding her grief in check, she pretended not to notice her dead husband as she tied the child to her back, casually announcing to him that she was going to the stream for water. Her ruse lulled the cannibal ghost into a false sense of

192 NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

security, for he believed at first that she would retum, allowing him to fmish his blood meal. Instead, she made a hair-raising dash for home, the toddler on her back. The moment the vampire skeleton realized her trick, he flew from the lodge, in hot pursuit. She foiled him by leaving bits of her and her daughter's clothing strewn behind them on branches, throwing the skeleton off their scent. Nearing home and close to naked, she let loose the distress call. As luck would have it, a bonfire dance was in progress. Hearing her cry, the assembled people rushed to her aid, the men standing between her and the vampire skeleton, who was running fast upon them. The men drove him off with the Sky medicine of torches blazing. Everyone having heard the young mother's horrific story, the chief ordered that, to prevent further outrages, the men should track her discarded clothes back to the shaman's lodge, there to bum it to the ground, cremating the skeleton in the process. Accordingly, they found the lodge and, piling thick logs about, set it afire. As the flames leapt high in the sky, the circle of men outside heard the vampire skeleton within, yelling that they would all be sorry if he managed to get out. Suddenly, there was a deafening BOOM !^—the sound of the vampire's "skull bursting open, like a thing exploded."'"' The men watched carefully to ensure that nothing escaped the flames, but "out of the fire came a big Jack Rabbit.""^ The men tried to trap and kill it, too, but the rabbit got away, being, in fact, the Earth power of the wrinkled shaman, shape-shifted into a Hare for ease of flight. The tradition closes with the ominous caution that the Great Hare is still out there. (The Hare is otkon, or Earth medicine, in Iroquoian tradition.) There is a lot going on in this tradition that helps illuminate ancient ideas regarding burial and cremation. There is no doubt of the antiquity of its ideas, for J. N. B. Hewitt found that the root of the words involving bones in Iroquoian dialects were immeasurably old, with uq-sken'-ne, a form of the word for "bone," so antique as to defy analysis. The related term, uq-sken '-ra 'ri\ which literally translates as "bumed bones," means "an animated skeleton."'" These words emphasize the content of the Vampire Skeleton tradition, i.e., the danger in exposed, marrowed bones and the neutralizing effect of fire. Three repetitions of anything in Iroquoian tradition signal that something pretty important is afoot, and three times in the Vampire Skeleton tradition, fire saves the day: The child is protected by the hearth, the men fend off the Vampire Skeleton using torches, and the people cleanse the Earth of his dire ghost by cremating his bones, with a particular emphasis on exploding his skull.

KOKOMTHENA, SINGING IN THE FLAMES 193

Obviously, the cremation of bones (whose marrow contained Earth spirits) was a Sky ritual to protect the people from the Earth danger of exposed bones letting loose their marrow ghosts. Such traditions of the two spirits, with their pointers on how each might run amok, give rather profound insight into the two-by-four twinship of Sky/Cremation-Earth/Interment, practiced by Ohio valley Mound-Building cultures. Because they tried to bring ONE-thinking to bear on the issue, however, westem scholars were perplexed from the first by these twin forms of burial. Not understanding the Native necessity of two, early scholars set the precedent of basing archaeological ruminations on racist theories of how "primitives" behaved. Many of their early speculations still chug along in the present. In his 1867 description of an Ohio burial mound, for example, O. C. Marsh decided that the "charred human bones found above" the interments made it "natural to conclude that in each of these cases a human victim was sacrificed as part of the funeral ceremonies, doubtless as a special tribute of respect to a person of distinction.""^ Popular nineteenth-century authors such as Frederick Larkin conjured up gory scenes to titillate their civilized readers: "Men, women and children were offered upon the altar and their hearts torn from their bleeding bodies by the priests of the bloody faith; all done in honor of or to appease the wrath of some avenging deity.""^ Such characterizations are still afloat, if a little less floridly. As recently as 1990, Maureen Korp bandied about the theory of human sacrifice to "propitiate the sun.""" Human sacrifice not being lurid enough to satisfy Lieutenant A. W. Vogeles, he cranked the sensationalism up another notch in 1879, noting for his readers' edification that the "incremations of human remains" found in Floridian mounds were actually culinary, "for the purpose of preparing food," as he deduced from the split, demarrowed bones. "We have then here the kitchen of a race of cannibals.""^ As with theories of human sacrifice, macabre allegations of cannibalism continue today. Out to put uppity Indians back in their place, certain modem archaeologists have formed themselves into a Cannibal Posse that waves aloft its demarrowed bones and charred bone chips, breathlessly announcing that cannibalism is the only possible explanation for them.'"' In their ghastly purpose, the Cannibal Posse seeks refuge in missionary charges that this or that Native group was cannibalistic, as well as in traditions of the Stone Giants as cannibals. When historical accusations are checked out, however, the evidence always fails to support the allegation, as with the sensational Jesuit charge that the evil Iroquois ate poor Father Jean de Brebeuf

194 NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

in 1649."^ When historical evidence fails, the Cannibal Posse attempts to tum tradition to account, since "cannibals" frequently appear in eastem keepings. The literalism with which westemers take traditions of Native cannibalism is perplexing, particularly in academics who are prompt to force allegorical symbolism over everything else. When the topic tums to the Stone Giants, however, these same abstract thinkers magically devolved into craven fundamentalists shoving anthropophagy down collegial throats. Perhaps the westem fascination with man-eating has something to do with the fact that the only documented cases of cannibalism have all been perpetrated by Europeans."^ Importantly to understanding, the charge of cannibalism was a common political slur among eastem Natives, flung at enemies with roughly the same elan that conservatives hurled the taunt, "Commie!" at an opponent during the 1950s. "Cannibal" was simply the worst thing that any Native could think of to call another. Significantly, the cannibals of tradition were always someone else over yonder, typically enemies of the people telling the tale.' '^ In addition, "eating" had the metaphorical meaning of taking someone or a group in through adoption. A weaker nation might thus be "eaten" (adopted) by a stronger nation. I make these points not to evade the Native traditions of cannibalism in the east, for they certainly exist.'^^ I moreover abhor the current trend among some Natives to hush up such traditions. Although I sympathize with their goal of check-mating academic racists who use the traditions irresponsibly, I believe that permanently neutering tradition to attain a temporary, political goal is damaging to the keepings and disrespectful to the ancestors. The cannibal traditions are not usefiil to the archaeology of the mounds, anyway, for they are all set after the fall of mound culture. There is no tradition whatsoever of cannibalism during Mound-Builder times. Demarrowed bones, charred chips, and broken skulls must, therefore, be otherwise understood. Plenty of altemative explanations exist. The first-phase Mound Builders ("Adena"), for instance, often disposed of previously cremated remains in middens, which were then recycled for use as Mound-Building material, thus explaining the casual presence of charred bone fragments in mound dirt.'^' There was no disrespect implied, for, post cremation, both spirits had taken their joumeys, so the ashes were simply ashes, which, along with the bone fragments, were properly buried in Mother Earth. In any case, zeroing in on fragments and ashes does not address the central question. Why some were interred but most were cremated has yet to be satisfactorily explained. The most common archaeological interpretation of the cremation/interment split focuses on the comparative social statuses presumed for the deceased. 122

KOKOMTHENA, SINGING IN THE FLAMES 195

At first, cremation was supposed to have been confmed to the social elite, but, when evidence of ubiquitous cremation tumed up in early and late MoundBuilder culture, that explanation was jettisoned.'" Then, those interred in logencased graves were held up as the happy elite, markedly set apart from the lower, cremated classes.'^"* In 1990, Maureen Korp imagined that cremation was "a holding action," presumably for the lower classes, to keep their remains handy until they could be interred with someone "really important or wealthy" enough to have merited a mound.'" Traditions of Mound cultures recounted in chapter 3 do give some quarter to the social-status reading—Earth spirits, in particular, were encouraged to reincamate, or not, depending upon whether their bones were cremated or interred—but the reductionism of streamlining Sky/Earth spirituality into little more than class bickering is simplistic. Social concems were in the mix, but they were tangential, serendipitous, even, not formative. Cremation and interment were primarily about sending off Sky and Earth spirits in a healthy way that allowed for the retum of select individuals while simultaneously protecting communities from errant specters. Westemers tend to miss the importance of ghosts to Natives because their own culture sneers at haunts, but eastem Natives worked hard to thwart spectral ramblings.'^*" Earth spirits were those most likely to become ghosts, so that the treatment of the corpse required a lot of thought. The primary method of stymieing an Earth ghost was cremation. First and obviously, the fewer the skeletons, the less the chance of hauntings. Second and less obviously, marrow, blood, and guts {where the Earth spirit lived) had to he elimated for perfect safety. Here, defleshing before cremation eliminated blood and guts, while fire destroyed marrow. Because only the marrow had to be destroyed, the Earth could confidently accept charred bones and fragments, helping to explain the partial cremations whose fiames were deliberately smothered before the consumation was complete.'" Finally, given ghostly reasoning, those who were invited to reincamate through interment, marrow intact, must have been very carefully selected for their importance to the community. Conversely, by destroying the skeleton, cremation also prevented those bumed from reincamating, which, in a class-based society, might be politically desirable to the elite. The cranium was the seat of the Sky spirit. It needed to be opened, so as not to trap the Sky spirit, thereby rendering it dangerous. Here, cremation was a nobrainer (so to speak), fire being the common medium by which anything —messages, prayers, spirits—were sent to Sky. In this regard, very old

196 NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

traditions, such as that ofthe Vampire Skeleton, show skulls being exploded in a white heat of spirit release. If interment rather than cremation were used, however, the brain had to be removed, as articulated by the Brain-Sucker tradition ofthe later Iroquois. In this instance, the skull had to be fractured. Such beliefs are, I think, linked to the bowls made from human crania that have been unearthed in the Ohio valley mounds. This use of human skulls seems ghastly to westemers, due to their own fraught relationship with skulls that fmds them hideous, on the one hand, yet uses them "scientifically," on the other. Despite—or, perhaps, perversely because of—their ghoulishncss to westemers, skulls were once desk decoration, while college boys used to make drinking cups of them (and rumor has it that some fratemities still do). These conflicted mindsets do not describe the Native interface with bones, however. Among the Iroquois, the deliberately defleshed bones of a well loved person were caressed, wept over, sung to. Thus, a skull bowl would not have been an object of horror, but of fondness. Furthermore, if made from the skull of a medicine person, a cranial bowl would have been very powerful. Historical Natives had and ritually used eerie bowls, although they were never well described for having been carefully kept from westem view. Among the Cherokee, for instance, a shaman filled such a bowl with water, dropped in a sacred stone, and then psychokinetically moved it about to commune with the spirits, especially the spirit of rain.'^^ Thus, the Sky spirit having been released when the skull was opened, it is possible that the Mound Builders lovingly formed the split cranium into an Earth medicine bowl. This seems only more likely in view of one Mound bowl, found to have contained human teeth, bored out so as to be strung, necklace-style, a very evocative act.'^' Teeth are Earth medicine with strong curative powers. The Lenape, for example, kept the tooth of a giant bear for curing wounds and injuries. A shaman mixed scrapings ofthe tooth in a medicine bowl of water and, singing the right songs, offered the mixture to the patient.'^" A final aspect of ghost-busting is connected to the many "killed" items, or deliberately broken artifacts, that have been found in the mounds.''' These must also be understood spiritually, in terms of Mother Earth, not materially. For Natives, She is a living, breathing entity. As the Lenape keeper Hitakonanu 'laxk put it, "All life arises from her and is nourished from her breast. She carries all life upon her. The rocks are her bones, tbe winds her breath, and the waters her life's blood."'^^ Vulnerable, She must be protected. The tooth-filled skull bowl, for example, might well have been to cure Mother Earth of whatever ailed her. More crucially, as Thomas McElwain noted in 1986, mound

KOKOMTHENA, SINGING IN THE FU^MES 197

items that had been "killed" were those most closely associated with the jiskch, or Earth ghosts, which linger in Mother Earth. McElwain inferred that their otkon ability to interfere with growing crops was what was actually being "killed."'" Burials, then, were not only managed so as to protect the human community but also to take care of Mother Earth.'^" As liable to haunting as humans. She needed protection from the Jiskeh as much as any ofthe rest, another reason for the high percentage of cremations. The centrality ofthe Sky/Earth twinship does not end with funerary rites. The earthworks are actually a form of earth writing, graphically inscribing the twinship principle into Mother Earth in floor plans best observed from Sky, above. The common emblems of the Sky/Earth unit were the circle O of the Sky and the square D ofthe Earth. (See a representative schematic in Figure 4.2, the Earthworks at Seal Township, in Pike County, Ohio. Ubiquitous throughout the Ohio valley, the O-D motif remained popular with tbe Shawnee and the Cherokee, postcontact. The historical Shawnee, for instance, used elliptical structures as summer houses, while their council house was a rectangle.'" The more common woodland pattem reversed this usage, however, so that, most often, the winter "hot" house was circular, whereas the breezy summer house was square or rectangular. Two-by-four logic obviously connected the O-D design with Sky and Earth, on the one hand, and with Winter and Summer, on the other. These associations seem to be very old, clearly going back to people of MoundBuilder vintage. In a 1973 "salvage" dig at the Normandy Reservoir in the upper Duck Valley of middle Tennessee, for instance, archaeologists found a winter hot house dated to between 200 C.E. to 500 C.E.'^^ In the same vicinity, archaeologists also uncovered even older round structures dating to between 200B.C.E. and200C.E.'" Since these stmctures continued into historical times, descriptions exist of them in use. In 1775, James Adair noted the distinction between the Cherokee hot houses and winter residences, one being ceremonial and the other, domestic.'^^ In 1761, Henry Timberlake described the Cherokee hot house, "covered over with earth," as resembling "a small mountain at a little distance," while, in 1791, William Bartram described it as "a little conical house, covered with dirt," an interesting pair of descriptions that coincide neatly with tbe traditional Iroquoian description of Cherokee "underground" dwellings.'" Digs at sites inhabited but recently confirm their descriptions. Excavations of the eighteenth-century Cherokee city of Chota yielded, for instance, side-by-side examples of rectangular and circular stmctures.""* A 1954 dig tumed up a

198 NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

Figure 4.2. The Earthworks at Seal Township, in Pike County, Ohio, showing the common O-D motif of Sky-Earth. SOURCE: Squier, Ephraim George, and E. H. Davis. Ancient Monuments of the Mississippi Valley: Comprising the Results of Extensive Original Sun/eys and Explorations. Smithsonian Contributions to Knowledge. Vol. 1. 1848. Reprint. New York: Johnson Reprint Corporation, 1965} facing page 66.

KOKOMTHENA, SiNGING IN THE FLAMES 199

rectangular stmcture, rounded at the comers, measuring one-hundred twenty feet long and sixty feet wide, situated just to the south of a circular stmcture."" In 1973, Charles Faulkner made a very interesting discovery in Tennessee "hot houses." Three ofthe hot houses, dated 200 to 500 C.E., were equipped with two hearths, each. At another site nearby, two "double-oven houses" were found, dated 400 to 500.'"^ This deliberate doubling of the hearth basins is clearly suggestive of twinned, intertwined spiritual funetions common to the east. Even more suggestively, the basins at the base of mounds are not necessarily circular, but, like summer and winter houses, altemate between circular or oval shapes and squares or rectangles. In 1922, for instance. Mounds 1 through 12 of the Tumer Group of earthworks in Hamilton County, southwestem Ohio, examined from 1882 to 1891, were documented to have contained circular and square basins, in various combinations, sometimes in a one-to-one ratio, as in Mound 2; sometimes with doubled circles and squares, as in Mound 4; other times all squares as in Mound 5; and yet, again, with multiple squares to one circle, as in Mound 6.'"*^ Clearly, the circle-square motif found writ large in the earthworks was writ small within the base of burial mounds, as a consistent element of conceptualization. It did not take twentieth-century scholars to see the thread connecting O-D motif of historical Natives to the same motif of the Mound Builders. As early as 1889, Cyms Thomas remarked upon the stunning confluence between the O-D design of Cherokee housing and the repeated O-D design of the earthworks, so it is puzzling that scholars have not pursued this avenue of inquiry more vigorously.''*^ Perhaps it comes too close to admitting that the Cherokee are the direct descendants ofthe Ohio valley Mound Builders. In a 1997 article that deserves the close attention of the archaeological community. Warren De Boer did resurrect Thomas's old point, that earthworks come in O-O pairs.''*' He also picked up on the two-by-four logic ofthe CireleAVinter-Square/Summer complements, sensing the halved wholes of eastem thought, although he unfortuantely presented them in a westem way, as "a repertoire of polarities," opposites yanking away from one another, rather than twins embracing each other.'"" De Boer might have missed the seminal linkage to Sky and Earth, and he might have cast his ethnological net too widely in this article, moving from Esmeraldas, Ecuador, to Chillicothe, Ohio, but he nevertheless displayed an awareness of Native logic that is refreshing to see in a westem scholar. In the particular instance of circles and squares, De Boer noted the commonplace that the first-phase Mound Builders focused on circles, with the

200 NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGiSTS, AND THE M O U N D S

square not introduced until the advent of the second-phase Mound-Builders ("Hopewell"). He suggested that the square was a "foreign intrusion," the "wild fluctuations" in design indicating that a major crisis was upon the Mound Builders of this era.'"' Oral tradition certainly supports such a contention. As shown in chapter 3, the second-phase mound culture coincided with the arrival of the Cherokee, who came into Ohio from the far west. In Ohio, they encountered the "moon-eyed people" (a reference to time-keeping), with whom they intermingled, through war, intermarriage, or, more likely, both, since both resolutions are traditionally recalled.'"^ Since the four cardinal directions are of great importance west of the Mississippi, I submit that the Cherokee brought with them the sacred Four, the number of Earth, to add to the circle of Sky, already kept by the Moon-Eyed People. The purpose of these earthworks, whether simple circles or circle-square complexes, has long been labeled "ceremonial" and pretty much left at that. Given the twinship principle, however, it only stands to reason that the O-D motif addresses the SkyAVinter-Earth/Summer node of associations that wonderfully link up with agriculture: The Sky tells Earth when to plant and when to harvest, presaging the seasonal shifts of Winter and Summer, thus allowing life to emerge from Earth reaching up to Sky, in a perfect two-by-four interaction, if ever one existed. Thus, as Thomas McElwain remarked in 1986, it is not incidental to the earthworks that the Mound Builders farmed.'''^ Since farming represents Earth medicine, it is also not surprising that from 1654 to 1656, Peter Lindestrom witnessed Lenape women planting their com in square mounds.'^" It is unclear how extensive Mound-Builder agriculture was, but traces of it had been known and reported since the end of the eighteenth century. Indeed, the "evident marks of ancient cultivated fields" formed a primary reason that early Euroamericans dubbed the Mound-Builder culture a "demi-civilization."'*' As the first settlers, farmers themselves, immediately realized, MoundBuilder crops were clearly intentional and tended. Starting at about 200 B.C.E., tropical flint com, which does not grow wild but must be cultivated, began popping up across the Ohio valley.'" More domesticated com of the type associated with second-phase Mound Builders was found near Athens, Ohio, in 1971. It dated to 280 B.C.E.'" Farming certainly supplied foodstuffs to the Mound Builders. In 1938, a pumpkin or squash rind was found in a fireplace in Pickaway county, Ohio, and, in 1950, it was carbon-dated to 1425 ± 250 years old (or 275 to 775 C.E.). Another pumpkin rind found in Clinton County, Ohio, was carbon-dated to even earlier

KOKOMTHENA, SINGING IN THE FLAMES 201

times, at 1590 ± 250 years (110 to 610 C.E.)'^" These, of course, were just the dates on those particular left-overs. Cropping was certainly going on before then, for ftill-fledged domestic crops do not just appear at the dinner table one year. Indeed, cropping might well have been going on for a millennium before that. Although most people automatically think of com as primary when Native farmers are mentioned, com does not seem to have been grown in the abundance required of a staple crop during Mound-Builder times.'" This finding has led some to theorize that it was raised but reserved for ceremonial purposes, harking back to the reincamation metaphor of the rebom growing like new com, out of the ground.'^*' Interestingly, com cropping was discontinued around the end of the second Mound-Building phase, circa 400 C.E., not reappearing in the northeast until about four hundred years later, when the Canadian Iroquois began using and spreading sacred word of it again to the peoples around the eastem Great Lakes, in conjunction with the rise of their new political system.'^^ Ceremonial or otherwise, however, crops must be planted at the right times, and it is well documented that historical Natives of the east timed their agriculture (Earth medicine) by the movements of the sun, moon, and stars (Sky medicine). The Iroquois kept close watch of the constellations, especially the Pleiades and the Corona Borealis, fixing Midwinter and Midsummer by them, while parsing the Sky into male and female halves, based on Polaris. They furthermore kept close track of the stars to signal planting and harvest times.'^^ The Lenape likewise knew the Sky, particularly orienting their travels by use of the polar star and counting time by the moon.'^^ Among the Cherokee, the Pleiades and the Milky Way were of crucial interest, with attention paid to constellations, including the Hyades, and comets, such as the reappearing Atsil Tluntuhi, or "Fire Panther."'"" Recurring comets were also of great interest to the Shawnee, the name of whose best-known chief, Tecumseh, means "Flying Panther," i.e., "Comet."'^' In addition to male and female halves of the Sky, Natives saw other "natural" pairs in the heavens, not the least of them being the twinned nature of Sky light, the Moon-Sun. Although the moon actually travels west to east, the earth's west-to-east spin makes the moon appear to travel east to west, like the sun. Thus, for instance, Iroquoian peoples noticed that both the sun and the moon rode what the Iroquois call "the Direction of the Sky," or the East-West axis.'" The Iroquois gendered the Moon-Sun pair as Female-Male, respectively, with the Iroquoian moon. Our Grandmother, and the Iroquoian sun, Our

202 NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

Brother.'" Their traditional names demonstrate their perception as pairs: Endeica Gda' hva, the Diurnal Orb of Light (Sun) and Soi' ka Gad' Icwa, the Noctural Orb of Light (Moon).'^' The Lenape maintained much the same, referring to the moon as Nipahuma, or "Grandmother who goes by night.'"" Since Sky light was connected with life, when the moon did not appear, the Lenape said that she was "dead," and, during the last three days preceding the new moon, they saw her as putting aside her vestments of light in preparation for the darkening event of her death. Those last three days, she was said to have been "naked." When she reappeared, she was interpreted as having been resuscitated.'^*' If the Lenape moon was female, the Lenape sun was male.'^' The Cherokee reversed the genders but replicated the Iroquoian idea of day and night lights in the female "day moon" (sun) complementing the male "night moon" (moon).'^** Although in colloquial Cherokee, the word for sun and moon is the same, Nunda—the Nunda that lives in the daytime and the Nmda that lives in the nighttime^—medicine people draw a technical distinction between the two, calling the Sun, Su'talidiha, or "Six-killer," the Moon, the untranslatable, Ge "yagu 'ga. '^^ Whether technical or colloquial, however, the two-by-four logic of two orbs happening by two genders remained, with both Sun (Grandmother) and Moon (Grandfather) revered as Sky medicine. The shamanistie terms Su'ta lidiha and Ge"ya gu'ga probably reach back into Mound-Builder times, along with other historically recorded customs of the old Cherokee. For instance, James Adair recorded in 1775, "They pay a great regard to the first appearance of every new moon," making "some joyful sounds" while reaching their hands out to him.'™ John Haywood witnessed much the same in 1823, saying that, "when the moon changed," the old Cherokee "held the palms of their hands forward and stroked them over the face," a likely continuation of the traditions of the Moon-Eyed People the Cherokee met in the Ohio valley.'^' When the moon did not appear, as recorded in 1736, the people did their best to aid his prompt resuscitation by running "wild, this way and that way, like lunatics, firing their guns, whooping and hallooing, beating kettles, ringing horse-bells, and making the most horrid noises that human beings possibly could."'^^ Interestingly, the Cherokee said that the Moon-Eyed People "could not see in the day-time," that is, they did not keep time by the sun.'" The Cherokee might well have picked up the science of lunar counts from the Moon-Eyed People. The Cherokee also kept close track of the seasons, which they counted to be four, using Sky medicine. In 1775, James Adair recorded, "They begin the

KOKOMTHENA, SINGING IN THE FLAMES 203

year, at the first appearance of the first new moon of the vemal aequinox."'^" The Shawnee, too, kept a close eye on the Sky. In 1936, Thomas Wildcat Alford recalled his Shawnee father and mother "reckoning by moons and the signs of nature," adding that, even with all his advantages of almanacs and calendars, he could not tell "more accurately the season" than had they. The Shawnee year was lunar: "Thirteen moons made a year, and dates were kept by the fulling or waning of the moon." Various types of communal work were regulated by "certain stages of the moon." The Sun was primarily watched to tell the portions of each day. For the Shawnee, "dawn, at sunrise, when the sun was high in the heavens," as well as "when the sun hung low in the sky, at dusk, or at the setting of the sun" were "significant hours to be observed." Perhaps the most sacred ceremony of the Shawnee, the Tak-u-wha Nag-a-way (Bread Dance) was a prayer dance held immediately before planting was begun in the Spring. It was carefully timed to fall after the full moon.'^^ Given the detailed knowledge of the Sun-Sky and the Moon-Sky in every eastem Nation claiming connection to the Mound Builders, and particulariy given the common emphasis on lunar and stellar time-keeping for agricultural reasons, I find the arehaeoastronomical explanation of at least some of the earthworks to be very persuasive. The theory of the earthworks as observatories was put forward in two successive articles, 1982 and 1984, by Ray Hively, a physicist, and Robert Horn, a philosopher.'" Their contentions are only strengthened when traditional lore and, especially, the two-by-four logic of Sky-Winter/O-D/Earth-Summer are tossed into the mix. I therefore confess my astonishment that grumpy archaeologists continue to apply the word "controversial" to Hively and Horn's perfectly reasonable portrait of a MoundBuilding culture capable of advanced geometrical and astronomical calculations.'^^ 1 smell turf war in the "controversy," for archaeologists are among the least forthcoming of westem scholars when thinkers outside their field proffer answers. The only thing archaeologists seem to like less than interioping scholars are sophisticated Native Americans, and the work of Hively and Hom confronts them with both. Nevertheless, new blood is a good hegemony blocker, while astronomically and mathematically astute Natives only look implausible to scholars who, secure in their belief that Natives were innumerate, spend their lives walled in by city lights whose glare shuts out star glow. They lack both the unimpeded view of the black sky and the leisure for star-gazing to realize how prominent and trackable Sky lights are in nature. By contrast, Natives had face time aplenty with physical reality, and a

204 NATIVE AMERICANS. ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

lifetime dedicated to Sky (or Earth) watching yields abundant knowledge. It is too facilely overlooked that Native Sky watchers were trained observers who underwent the lengthy and demanding education required of those destined for the medical profession, Native-style. A teenager was taken in and taught by skilled shamans for twenty years, or more, only being admitted to private practice around the age of thirty-five or forty. Because Native Americans originally lived to ages only recently reachieved in the West, this meant that the Moon-Eyed shaman had another forty, fif^, or even sixty years to accumulate more knowledge, to pass along in tum.'^' Over the course of millennia, the Mound Builders and their descendants certainly had the opportunity, drive, and skill to observe certain quirks of the moon—for instance, that twice a year, she stopped dead in her tracks for some days; that these standstills had constant points, north and south, that occurred in patterns repeated about once a generation; and that these moonrises and moonsets could be followed using sacred alignments. The Mound Builders also developed a standardized unit of measurement allowing for geometrical precision.'^^ It was these facts, written in the mounds, that Hively and Horn read in 1982, when they argued that the circle-octagon earthwork at Newark was laid out as an observatory, using principles of geometry. Despite the known emphasis in Native culture on stellar configurations, Hively and Horn decided to ignore the stars in their inquiry. Stellar configurations change significantly over hundreds of years, and the dating of the Newark earthworks is so sketchy as to make any selection of stellar configurations unreliable. This left Hively and Horn zeroing in on the moon, the sun, and the planets, whose configurations do not change perceptibly over the centuries.'^' Even excluding stellar configurations, however, Hively and Horn found evidence of some very dedicated Sky-watching among the Mound Builders. There are eight extreme points, four high and four low, that the moon achieves during the lunar cycle of 18.61 years. Hively and Horn concluded that a watcher on the ground at Newark would have been able to descry the eight extreme points of moonrise and moonset from vantage points within the complex.'*^ Chance was ruled out. Mathematically, Hively and Hom could not hit upon an "equilateral polygon" that "incorporate[d] the extreme lunar points more efficiently and accurately" than did the Newark octagon."*^ Furthermore, the famous distortion in the octagon was purposeful, skewed in such a way as to allow for the best lunar alignments.'^ In all, Hively and Hom showed precise alignments for seventeen lunar events, at least eight of them clearly deliberate, and went on to instance similar geoastronomical alignments at other second-

KOKOMTHENA, SiNGING IN THE FLAMES 2 0 5

Stage Mound Builder earthworks^fairly convincing proof of intention over accident in tbe alignments.'^^ ln 1984, Hiveiy and Hom came back with a second set of data, this time from an earthwork recognized as Newark's twin since 1889, the second and only other circle-octagon complex in existence, this one at High Bank, Ohio, near Chillcothe.'^* (There is a nineteenth-century map showing a third circleoctagon at Portsmouth, Ohio, but it has yet to be confirmed as authentic."*') The only important distinction between the Newark and High Bank earthworks is their orientation, with the axis of the High Bank's earthwork "rotated eastward by about 90°" in relation to that of Newark's.'"^ Otherwise, even the distortion of the octagon for the sake of best alignment is replicated.'*'^ Four major lunar events can be tracked over the 18.61-year lunar cycle using the High Bank octagon: the "two rise points and the corresponding set points for the northem maximum and the southem minimum standstills," making the Ohio Mound Builders only the second Native North American culture in a position to have tracked the standstills of the moon.'** In addition, both the summer and winter solstice rise and set points, again north and south, can be tracked.' (The solstices, or biannual standstills of the sun, were more easily and often noticed by ancient astronomers than the standstills of the moon.) These are pivotal findings, which, considered in light of two-by-four logic, must be correct. Of supreme significance is the enormous amount of pairing that is going on. First, the lunar events being tracked occur in twinned pairs (two rise points and two set points), themselves tied to two directions, north and south. Such exciting symmetry would have been taken as cosmic confirmation of two-by-four logic, especially because they would have been seen as complementing the seemingly east-to-west motion of the moon and the actual east-to-west motion of the sun. Second, to track these cosmic twinships, Newark and High Bank are, themselves, a pair, and the pairing seems to have been deliberate, since the two sites were apparently connected by what archaeologist Bradley Lepper has dubbed "Tbe Great Hopewell Road." This highway was composed of twinned embankments, which, he argues compellingly, ran the full ninety kilometers, or almost sixty miles, south from Newark to Chillicothe, home to a profusion of mounds and earthworks, not the least of them being the High Bank circle-octagon.'''^ The circle-square (or octagon) motif is not the only conventionalized design used by eastem Natives to refer to Sky and Earth. Individual circles were often described ceremonially on the ground. Semicircles and concentric circles were also popular. In the concentric motif, the Earth (North America) is stylized as

206 NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

a giant Turtle, swimming endlessly through the oceans, carrying the people on her back. The comers of Earth are the edges of the turtle's carapace, where her four fiippers emerge. She is surrounded by water, which meets the edges of Sky. As shown in the right-hand design in Figure 4.3, Circle Motifs of Sky and Earth, the customary motif of the swimming turtle was concentric circles. There was also a profile version of the turtle motif. The back of Turtle Earth has a rise to it—like, say, that of a mound. Thus, a second classic motif viewed Figure 4.3. Circle Motifs of Sky and Earth

Dome Motif

Concentric Motif

Sky Dome on Top

Water around

Earth Dome on Bottom

Turtle Inside

in the design on the left, the higher arch of the Sky was seen as roofing the lower arch of the Earth, with the edges of Sky curling into the water surrounding Turtle Island (North America). Paired semicircles resulted. Alternately, when viewed flat on, as on the right, the dome of the Sky was seen to surround the swimming Turtle of Earth, resulting in concentric circles.

KOKOMTHENA, SiNGtNG IN THE FLAMES 2 0 7

the gentle, upward thmst of Turtle's back from the side. In this design, the Sky was conceived of as a high, vaulted dome. Seen in profile. Sky arched high over that lesser dome, the back of the swimming Turtle. As shown in the left-hand design in Figure 4.3, paired semicircles resulted. All three motifs, the circlesquare, the semicircle, and the concentric circles, were widespread in the Ohio valley. These designs intrigued yet puzzled the early Europeans. In 1612, for instance, William Strachey recorded a conventionalized Sky circie when he described the "great reverance" of the Lenape for tbe Sun (Sky). They represented Sky by making "a rownd Circle on the grouwnd with Tobacco, into which they reverently enter and murmure certayne vnhallowed wordes with manie a deformed gesture" (spellings in the original).'^^ In 1672, John Lederer recorded something of the same. For "Counters," he said, the Lenape used "either Pebbles, or short scantlings of straw or reeds." Such counters, he said, "serve them in Religious Ceremonies: for they lay them orderly in a Circle when they prepare for Devotion or Sacrifice; and that performed, the Circie remains still; for it is Sacriledge to disturb or touch it: the disposition and sorting of the straws and reeds, shew what kinde of Rites have there been celebrated, as Invocation, Sacrifice, Burial, &c." (spellings, symbols, and capitalizations in the original).'^"^ In 1679, Jasper Donkers and Peter Sluyter were shown a combined concentric and half-circle motif. Donkers and Sluyter had asked a Munsee (one division of the Lenape) to envision the xo wek 'hikkan, or "ancient history," of his people. Having collected his thoughts in silence "for a while," the man took a piece of coal out of the fire where he sat, and began to write upon the floor. He first drew a circle, a little oval, to which he made four paws or feet, a head and a tail. "This," said he, "is a tortoise, lying in the water around it," and he moved his hand round the figure, continuing, "This was or is all water, and so at first was the world or the earth, when the tortoise gradually raised its round back up high, and the water ran off of it, and thus the earth became dry."'''

Thus, concentricity was shown, on the one hand, and the hump of the Turtle rising up under the dome of Sky, on the other. Tbe associations of the concentric designs were again spelled out in 1701, when an eastem Algonkin, probably Lenape, attempted to explain his cosmology to a visiting Quaker, John Richardson. Richardson and the Lenape conversed through an interpreter, a situation alone sufficient to ftizz up meanings, while Richardson insisted upon couching his questions in terms of his own culture's god, adding yet another layer of hindrance to the exchange. Stuck for

208 NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

words, the frustrated interpreter "had recourse to picture writing, and describing a number of circles, one inside the other, he pointed to the centre [sic] ofthe innermost and smallest one, and there, 'placed as he said, by way of representation, the Great Man.'""' The sacred point to the Lenape was not the European god figure or where it fit in (at the Earth position, by the way), but the concentricity ofthe circles. In 1994, the modem Lenape keeper, Hitakonanu'laxk, described the "multitude of worlds, inhabited by" the Manito 'wak, or Spirits. "All of these different worlds, or circles of being, are here altogether within and behind each other, occupying the same space, together making a whole." Hitakonanu'laxk compared these spiritual circles to "an onion, composed of its many layers, circles within circles making up the whole."'^^ Because they conceived of Sky and Earth as concentric semicircles, the Iroquois perceived the edges ofthe two as meeting at the four comers where Sky touched Earth. At those sacred points, usually east and west. Sky fluctuated, rising and falling, leaving rifts in time and space. Righteous vision questers—i.e., those who had seen to their communal duties and quest preparation—could tuck themselves into those irregularities, thus safely passing from Earth into Sky. Those who had failed in their ritual and communal obligations were, however, "cmshed by the impact of the sky at this passage.""^ In one typical Seneca tradition of ajoumey to Sky, three brothers went questing west, chasing the Sky, until they "came to a place where the sun goes under the sky's edge," i.e., the Pacific Ocean. In considering their next move, the brothers watched reckless Sky-seekers trying to slide under the "edge ofthe sky," without following the sun's road to Sky. These rash men were cmshed, not lifted up.''" These graphic motifs of Sky and Earth in circles, half-circle pairs and concentric circles are strong examples ofthe sort of conventionalized references in the general lore that Sapir was talking about, and the semicircles and concentric circles should jump off the page to anyone who has ever noted the common mound motifs of half-circles and concentric circles.^'"' (See Figures 4.4 and 4.5 for representative schematics using semi- and concentric circles.) They help in other regards, too, for instance, in illuminating the meaning of concentricity in the pavements so often found in conjunction with the circular walls ofthe earthworks.^"' Not only were such motifs laid out in the mounds, themselves, but also inside the mounds. In a 1953 dig at Fort Hill in the Scioto valley, for instance.

KOKOMTHENA, SINGING IN THE FLAMES 2 0 9

Raymond Baby found a double row of post holes yielding a concentric motif, buried inside a "circular enclosure measuring 174 feet in diameter." The inner circle of post holes altemated between "large and small molds spaced 1V2 feet apart."^"^ Such intemal inscriptions might well have been a Mound-Builder counterpart of Lederer's "scantlings of straw or reeds" that remained behind inside the mound to remind Mother Earth of what sort of ritual had taken place there. One might expect archaeologists to tum to such regular and welldocumented uses of circular motifs by eastem Natives for explanations of mound designs. One would be disappointed. Rather than look to traditional conventions of concentric and half circles, some scholars are all aglow over the supposed similarity to circle motifs in non-Native cultures, in particular, the Shilanagig, or ancient Celtic spiral (not circle) representating the female vulva. Robert Hall has been active in this cause, claiming that certain parts ofthe human body are spirit portals. The "nucleated circle and double concentric circle" are abstractions of these portals, he says, whose expressions are found in the "nucleated circles" ofthe first-stage Mound-Builders. Furthermore, he claims the second-stage Mound Builders used a "vulviform motif," represented as "a stylized rendering of features ofthe female genital area" to mean "a grave, cave opening, spring, or other kind of earth entrance." It is tme that eastem shamans regard mouths and eyes, nostrils and ears, penises and vulvas, anuses and urethras as portals of Earth medicine, and it is also tme that eastem Natives are no pmdes when it comes to discussing human genitalia, but concentricity is never how such medicine is expressed. Even if it were, the motif would have to signal a natural pair of portals, not one, the vulva, ripped from its context. It is only the westem fixation on female sexuality (and, arguably, the latent colonial tendency to cast the Other in terms of feminity) that gives Hall's argument any plausibility to his colleagues. Traditional Natives are outraged by the cavalier assumption that Celtic and Native American cultural ideas are interchangeable and may, therefore, be used to explain each other—another conceit of the New Age movement. For the record, there is absolutely no connection between European Celts and Native North Americans. Reckless conflation ofthe two debases the cultures of both. The rationale behind the urge to connect Celts and Natives is the racist assumption that they existed at the same, primitive stage of history and, therefore, mirrored one another's development. A culture-bound idea hatched in colonialism and appealing only to people who see history as a straight line.

210 NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

730 a IS -

.

A

^

"iii • -

^_' Raa,d

—

,.

immil*" _ . . .

r

Figure 4.4. Semicircle Motif in the Blackwater Group in Ross County, Ohio. SOURCE: Ephraim George Squier, and E. H. Davis, Ancient Monuments of the Mississippi Valley: Comprising the Results of Extensive Original Surveys and Explorations, Smithsonian Contributions to Knowledge, vol. 1 (1848; reprint. New York: Johnson Reprint Corporation, 1965) facing page 61.

KOKOMTHENA, SiNGING IN THE FLAMES 2 1 1

Figure 4.5. Concentric Circle Motif in the Portsmouth Group in Kentucky, across the Ohio River from Portsmouth, Ohio. SOURCE: Ephraim George Squier, and E. H. Davis, Ancient Monuments of the Mississippi Valley: Comprising the Results of Extensive Original Surveys and Explorations, Smithsonian Contributions to Knowledge, vol. 1 (1848; reprint. New York: Johnson Reprint Corporation, 1965) facing page 78.

212 NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

notched at intervals with benchmarks of "progress," stages-of-history anthropology is thoroughly discredited today and should certainly not be allowed to inform modem archaeological theories of the mounds.^*^ Another crucial complement of Sky-Earth twinship is Fire (Sky)-Water (Earth). This, too, was written on the land, through the transformation of the circle-square O-D into an assemblage of a circle and square mediated by a Usbape: O=>D. {See Figure 4.6 for representative schematics using the O^^D motif.) In 1979 and, subsequently, along with her colleague (Catharine Ruhl in 1989, N'omi Greber documented these innovations in the later mounds.^"' In 1997, Warren De Boer surmised that they represented a Sky-Water-Earth complex. ^^^ De Boer almost grasped the nexus, but, not knowing of the germinal SkyEarth twinship, instead made Water a third element of what he called a "tripartition."^"'' He was correct that Water entered significantly into the picture but was wrong in seeing it as an element between Sky and Earth, for it connected, it did not part. Sky and Earth. What he failed to factor in was the other half of Water: Fire. Together and respectively. Fire and Water complement the structure of Sky and Earth while mediating their medicine, as depicted in Figure 4.7, The Twoby-Four of Sky-Earth/Fire-Water. Sky and Earth are each so potent that they can erupt in explosive violence, should they interface improperly. The two safe methods ofjoining them are Water and Fire, which frequently work in collaboration, although medicine workers specialized in one or the other approach through a primary orientation to Sky or Earth. Typically, Sky medicine dealt with dreams, divination, and fire, whereas Earth medicine dealt with healing, herbs, and water. Lenape medicine people went, for example, into either second sight (Sky) or healing (Earth).^°^ Among the duties of their Earth shamans was rain-making, a form of earth-healing.^"^ By contrast, Lenape diviners literally became Fire. One Sky shaman told David Brainerd that, in trance, "he was all light, and not only light himself, but it was light all around him, so that he could see through men, and knew the thoughts of their hearts."^ "^ The Cherokee also sorted shamanic duties by Sky/Fire and HarthAVater. Divining is always a Sky talent in the east, and, for the Cherokee, Fire was an important element of it, with Sky shamans meditating by staring into fires.^" In Mound-Building times, the Ani-Kutdnf priesthood of the Cherokee, which had command of disease, was strongly associated with "fire."^'^ (Among the Cherokee, disease was cosmically visited upon the people.) Sky shamans

KOKOMTHENA, SINGING IN THE FLAMES 213

Figure 4.6. The U-Mediated Circle Square Motif at Paint Creek Earthwork, near Chillicothe, Ohio. SOURCE: Ephraim George Squier, and E. H. Davis, Ancient Monuments of the Mississippi Valley: Comprising the Results of Extensive Original Surveys and Explorations. Smithsonian Contributions to Knowledge, vol. 1 (1848; reprint, New York: Johnson Reprint Corporation, 1965) facing page 57.

214 NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

Figure 4.7. The Two-by-Four of Sky-Earth/Fire-Water

Sky # -

Earth

-•

(Mediated by)

ID Fire

Water

To temper the potentially explosive interface of Sky and Earth medicine, Fire and Water mediate the encounter. These two elements do not part but coordinate Sky and Earth.

frequently shape-shifted into owls to flit about, outside of time.^'^ Conversely, Earth shamans among the Cherokee prognosticated and, importantly, called forth rain, using serpents, lizards, and sacred stones in bowls of water.^'" In recording these separate sets of shamanic functions in 1823, John Haywood freely infused "evil" into flying medicine and set it apart from the "good" medicine of rain-making, but these were missionary, not Cherokee, distincIn Seneca tradition, shamans specializing in Earth medicine were held to enjoy considerable control over the waters.^'^ In the Iroquoian traditions of the Second Epoch of Time, for instance, the insane shaman Adodaroh (Earth) was able to fend off the unwanted river-crossing of the Peacemaker (Sky) two successive times by calling up tomado-force winds to whip the water into impassibility.^'^ In the Wyandot tradition of the origin of the snake clan (Earth), a young woman on her vision quest so completely connected with water as to

KOKOMTHENA. SINGING IN THE FLAMES 215

urinate a lake and then shape-shift into the Homed Serpent residing in it.^'^ By contrast, Iroquoian Fire-Sky medicine was heavily into dreams and visions. A main task of Sapling, a Sky spirit, was sending dreams to the Iroquois.^''' Visions likewise came from Sky, usually via Sky Messenger express. One quester recorded by the Jesuits "saw an aged man of rare beauty who came down from the Sky," a common description of a Sky messenger."" For their part, eastem peoples frequently sought to meet the spirit of Fire on vision quests. In a Lenape tradition, he was found to shine, "clothed with the day; yea, with the brightest day" the questor had ever beheld, "a day of many years, yea, of everlasting continuance."^^' A Seneca tradition described Fire's spirit in proper, paired fashion as simultaneously young and old: "youthful and his body was strong, but his hair was long and white. He was an old man" with a wise face.^^^ J. N. B. Hewitt etymo logically connected the Iroquoian Spirit of Fire to that of the Sun, a main emblem of Iroquoian Sky medicine."^ The Wyandot held that the Sun had fathered the Sacred Twins (who are East/Sapling and West/Flint), while Sun/Fire acted as the Iroquoian witness to human actions.^^'* Among the Iroquois, failing to light the new fire of the year, or simply muffing the way it was kindled, brought on "pestilence." Conversely, strong tobacco, scattered in the notches of properly lit logs, aided prayer, the thick smoke sending it up up to Sky.^'^ Early in the moming, before sunrise, when all sacred things are done, the keeper of the Gaiwi.yo ("Code of Handsome Lake") is to stand facing east, before the hearth of the longhouse, there to sing the Sun Song. The fireplace is the "altar" of the Longhouse Religion, and east, where sunfire rises, is the direction of prayer.^^*^ Fire so powerfully mediated Sky and Earth, that the Shawnee appointed two lineages to provide all their firekeepers/peacekeepers, people forbidden to make war. These shamans always carried the sacred fire with them on their travels and sometimes carried its message to other nations.^" The Anishinabe adoptee John Tanner (ca. 1780-1847) recorded the visit of one such Shawnee Messenger of Peace to his people, sent by the Prophet Tenskwatawa to spread the Shawnee tradition of fire: "Henceforth," the Messenger said, "the fire must never be suffered to go out in your lodge. Summer and winter, day and night, in the storm, or when it is calm, you must remember that the life in your body, and the fire in your lodge, are the same, and of the same date. If you suffer your fire to be extinguished, at that moment your life will be at its end.""* This Fire message was taken very seriously by the old Shawnee. Nancy Chouteau, a Shawnee bom in 1831 in Wapakoneta, Ohio {Tenskwatawa's first town).

216 NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

recalled that, annually at the appointed time, the Shawnee women created a huge bonfire, into which the men sang. If the people could hear Kokomthena, Grandmother, singing along in the flames, it was a sign that the world would not end that year. ^^^ The Lenape, too, paid homage to sunfire, "both at his early rysing and late sytting" (spellings in the original), as William Strachey recorded in \^\2?^'^ As in other nations, sunfire was an exemplar. The modem Lenape keeper Hitakonanu laxk described Nux Kishux (Grand/Father Sun) as the author of all "light, heat, love and life," the exemplar of generosity, itself, "always giving, but never ask[ing] for anything in retum. We should strive to be happy and cheerful, bright like the Sun."^^' Accordingly, the central Lenape festival honored "Grandfather, the Fire.""^ Nux Kishux had twelve celestial assistants, twelve being the Lenape number of the Sky (i.e., moons in a year). The ceremony assigned twelve human counterparts of the moon to tend the sacred fire, which transubstantiated into the sun."^ The Lenape sweat lodge also venerated healing firesong. In describing a ceremonial sweat in his 1779-1780 history, David Zeisberger noted that the twelve red-hot stones used were ceremoniously brought into the sweat lodge one by one, the medicine man pouring fresh water on each in succession, until it no longer "sang.""'' The most dedicated of all to fire were, perhaps, the Cherokee. Haywood recorded that the newly kindled fires each year replicated "the agenda of the great fire above.""^ Adair reported that the Cherokee paid "their religious devoir to Loak-Ishtohoollo-Aba, 'the great, beneficient, supreme, holy spirit of fire,' who resides (as they think) above the clouds, and on earth also with unpolluted people. He is with them the sole author of warmth, light, and of all animal and vegetable life.""^ Both Haywood and Adair Euro-formed the Cherokee Sun, Adair falsely making it male (the Cherokee Sun is female) and both presenting it as a singular godhead, when, in fact, Chotauneleeh, the name of Fire, translates plural, to "The Elder Fires Above.""^ Both men did, nevertheless, grasp that fire represented life, itself Fire also offered protection by detecting the presence of "witches," i.e., those shamans dealing with the booger, meaning dangerous Earth ghosts—and, interestingly, settlers— sheltering the people from the harm they wrought.^^** Sometimes, the Spirit of Fire shape-shifted into an owl for these purposes.^^^ Elderhood is also closely associated with fires in Cherokee tradition.^"" It was an elder—either Grandfather or Grandmother, depending on the variation —who first obtained fire from the animals for human use. In one version, Old Man brought fire to the people in his bare hands, only to catch fire and bum

KOKOMTHENA, SINGING IN THE FLAMES 217

completely, as he arrived home. Stirring in his ashes, the people found a lump of live coal, and thus secured his gift of fire.^'" Life-giving song also emerges from fire for the Cherokee. For instance, once the Cherokee had trapped Ocasta, the Stone Coat Messenger of Sky by weakening him with moon-sick women, he agreed to retum to Sky in a fire of basswood. During his tenure on earth, Ocasta had caused great grief through sickness, cursed hunting, and violent warfare. To undo the harm he had wrought, as he was being cremated, he gave the people his medicine songs to reverse the damage. Even as he was singing, the fires caused "his spirit to rise up" to Sky.'"' In another tradition, Niinyunu wi, a cannibal Stone Coat who lived on the mountain top and carried a lethal, shining wand (Sky traits), was so weakened by moon-sick women lying in his path that he collapsed, allowing a shaman to "drive seven sourwood [basswood] stakes through his body," thereby "pin[ing] him to the ground." That night, the people piled logs high over Niinyunu wi, lit a blaze, and stood watch over his cremation. As he was dying by fire, Nunyunuwisdxi% up all his medicine songs for the hunt and told the people how to cure disease. Gradually, his voice faded in the flames, until "the logs were a heap of white ashes and the voice was still."^"^ Once more, through the Earth medicine of menstmal women and basswood. Sky medicine run amok was halted while songs emerged from the roaring fire to reverse the damage so far wrought. Cherokee Firesong thus resonates with the singing hot rocks of the Lenape sweat lodge; Kokomthena, singing life to Shawnee Earth through the flames; and the Sun Singers of the Iroquois. The spiritual purpose of cremation should be considered in light of these traditions. Aside from quelling the problem of ghosts by consuming the dangerous marrow from which they spring. Fire protects the living from any booger that might be lurking about, seeking to cause trouble in ceremonial space. Importantly, flames release the all-important Firesong, reversing any damage the crematee might have done in Earth-life, thus renewing community. Fire moreover mediates the colors of death, which have so puzzled archaeologists. Generally speaking, both bodily and cremated remains were commonly smeared with red ochre, as were artifacts.^"" In some of the oldest mounds, burials were daubed with red, and sometimes, with green-tinted yellow ochre."^ Graphite, which was black, was also applied to crania of the interred, while white has also been found.^"^ The skull bowl found containing human teeth was "nearly filled with red ochre," indicating a very considered intention.^"^ At the northem basin of Mound 17 of the Tumer site, Shetrone

218 NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

found white mica, whereas, at the southem basin, he found red copper.^"^ At Mound 4, he found a homed serpent with white mica, topped with black cannel, while, at Mound 3, he found a raptor with red copper, capped with (white) 249

mica. Various archaeologists have offered up various "answers" to these "riddles." Shetrone, for instance, felt that white mica signaled "foreign," in contrast to the reddish copper, which meant "native."^^° Robert Hall suggested that red had to do with the "reincamation or resuscitation of the dead.""' Maureen Korp noted the preservative properties of ochre, calling red "the life-giving ritual colour.""^ With his stronger sense of the complexity of Native thought, Warren De Boer noted the complementarity of color coordination in Shetrone's North/white/ mica and South/red/copper basins as well as the artifactual balancing of serpent (Earth) and raptor (Sky).""* None of the archaeologists I have read, however, has gone past the vague sense that red was connected to life to look for insight in the complicated ceremonial associations of colors among eastem peoples. If they had, they would have found Fire-Sky to have been meaningfully indicated. For the Iroquois, the Direction of the Sky and its associations with the Sacred Twins—East/Sapling and West/Flint—is cmcial to color-coding. Red is dawn and also the color of strawberries, a sacred fmit created by Sapling."^ Black is the wrinkled color of dusk, and also the literal color of Flint, the twin and the quartz, whereas Sapling is associated with white, the smooth color of moming sun.^" Sometimes, however, the main colors of "False Faces," very sacred "masks" involved in healing ceremonies, flip-flop meanings, so that black goes East, and white, west."*^ As mentioned above, blue is the color of invisibility, danger, sickness, and death, usually associated with the North, while red can sometimes mean South."^ Note that, for the Iroquois, Sunfire East—the direction of prayer—is red or white. In 1886, Mooney parsed out Cherokee color codes as follow: East - red = success and/or triumph; North = blue = defeat and/or trouble; West = black = death; South = white ^ peace and/or happiness. He could not flgure out the meaning of brown, but decided it was "propitious," whereas yellow seemed to cany the same connotations as blue."^ (It is interesting, in this regard, to recall that many burial mounds were capped with yellow clay."') In addition, the Cherokee associate white with elderhood or great old age.^^ The Cherokee connections of red and white with Fire and Sky are strong. Ritually, for instanee, the Cherokee call Fire "Ancient White" or "Ancient Red," "Grandfather or Grandmother."^^' Tso.iunego, or tobacco as a prayer medium, is also

KOKOMTHENA, SINGING IN THE FLAMES 219

ceremonially referred to as the "White Ancient One."^" Once more, east is red, while prayer is white and red. Cherokee ritual clothing and ceremonies sheds further light on the Fire-Sky associations of white and red. In 1775, James Adair recorded the ceremonial usage of sacred white and red by a medicine man clothed in white buckskin, seated on a white bench "close to the supposed holiest," and adorned in white wampum "given him by the pope." His mocassins were white, and his shoulders, draped in a white buckskin shawl.^" Across the toe of his mocassin were "smear[ed] three inch red streaks," not of vermillion, a color of war, but of a different red "which is their fixed red symbol of holy things."^*^ Here, then, the color of peace and happiness was balanced by the color of success and triumph. The Cherokee tradition of Nun yunuwf, the cremated Stone Giant, is also helpful. All that remained of him after the bonfire was a "heap of white ashes." Raking through Niinyunu wfs ashes, the people found a "large lump" of wa 'di, or prayerful red paint, and a Ulunsu'ti ("transparent") crystal. The shaman conducting the cremation kept the sacred Utiinsu 'ti stone, a meditation device of Earth shamans, but used the red wd di to annoint the breasts and faces of the people, while they prayed. The wd d//paint, combined with prayer, allowed the supplicants to receive their hearts' desire. " These Native color codes of Fire/East/Sky should pull scholars up short. White and red are the colors of east and prayer. Thus, east-facing burials smeared with red indicate the prayerful repose of the dead. It is interesting to think that part of the work of red daub in Mound-Builder burials was to ensure that the spiritual wishes of the deceased were secured. Similarly, in being cremated, the corpses might bring the gift of Fire to their community, even as Old Man had brought the first fire, being consumed in the process. (Conversely, west and black are associated with the direction in which Earth spirits travel upon decease.) Like Fire, Water can powerfully facilitate spirit communication. The Cherokee frequently used water in protective ceremonies. At three days old, for instance, a newbom was dipped in water, a ritual to ensure life. If its parents lefl off the rite, the child was bound to die.^** In 1855, the Cherokee Jesse Chisolm described a medicine ceremony he had witnessed that was very reminiscent of one mentioned earlier, as recorded by James Adair in 1775. Chisolm watched a shaman take a "small black stone, or piece of metal," which had been kept since "very ancient times" for its messaging powers. Putting it in a "curiously

220 NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

wrought bowl," for which he also claimed "great antiquity," the shaman filled the bowl with water. Then, speaking a word that kinetically stirred the stone to and fro in the water, he proceeded to interpret the spiritual meaning of its movements.^^^ The Shawnee, too, received messages through the medium of water. During his puberty rites, Thomas Wildcat Alford was instrticted by his father, who was conducting his initiation, to perform various acts involving water. These included his jumping in a cold creek four times, and, on the fourth, closing his fist over something, a«_Kthing, on his way back up, so that his father might use the water gift to discern Wildcat's o-pah-wa-ka, or spiritual direction. The recovered item was thereafter to have been kept in his medicine bundle, as his special blessing. When Wildcat came up empty-handed, however, his father interpreted the void to mean that Wildcat was to gain his reputation through "worthy actions" rather than through water medicine.^^^ For their part, Lenape women might receive more than just a message via water. In the i650s, Peter Lindestrom recorded that "one of our savage women" had become pregnant simply "by going and drinking in a brook." (She gave birth to a bouncing baby boy.)^^^ In two important traditions, those of No-Face Husk Doll and the conversion of Ayonwantha from a cannibal into a bearer of the Great Law of Peace, water was the medium through which Sky messages passed to the Iroquois."" The Iroquoian use of water as a vision medium was so commonplace as to figure in spoofs on water visions, as in the Seneca tradition of a young vision quester who never quite got around to his vision, because the sight of his own, gorgeous face reflecting back up at him from the water diverted his attention from his original purpose."' Most nations of the east regard water as an open door into the spirit world, a crossing place. Among the Lenape, Misinkhdlikan, The Masked Being, The Guardian of the Forest—Bigfoot—is an invisible (i.e.. Earth) spirit who makes himself visible by passing through the spirit portal of water. He leaves huge footprints where he walks through."^ He was supposedly the only Lenape Earth spirit that made himself "concrete by human impersonation."^^^ The opening or closing of the water portal in the east served as a crucial safeguard to ceremonial space. The reflective surface of water mirrors the Sky, offering protection from errant Earth spirits. Consequently, among the Iroquois, water was pivotal to preventing wrinkled spirits from disrupting rituals or even causing serious harm to humans. Most particularly, X\\Q jiskeh (marrow ghosts) could not traverse water, and not even the ambulatory Vampire Skeletons could wade across cold ponds or streams.^^'' Anyone who wished, therefore, to elude

KOKOMTHENA, SiNGING IN THE FLAMES 2 2 1

Earth spirits out troublemaking could hole up on an island or any promontory hemmed by water.^" If the Earth spirits prone to becoming ghosts were unable to cross water, there were also widespread traditions in the east that the Sky spirits of the deceased necessarily crossed water before proceeding to the land of the dead. This water-crossing was a mere stream to the Sky spirit, but a rushing, forbidding deluge to Earth spirits, thus preventing Earth spirits from following Sky spirits on their joumey."^ Sometimes, a dog guarded the end of a frail, log bridge that the Sky spirit crossed to reach the land of the dead. Following the mistaken lead of Lafitau, Brinton interpreted the dog as a threat to incoming spirits, but, in this, both men were unduly influenced by the Greek myth of Cerbems, the junkyard dog that attacked Greek souls trying to cross the River Styx into Hades."^ Greek and Native traditions operate on entirely separate logical systems, however, so that any similarities are entirely accidental. The dog of Native tradition was not a threat but an aid, serving in the capacity assigned dogs by the Shawnee, who counted them among the witnesses for Kokomthena, the Shawnee Grandmother."*' The dog of Sky was watching to ensure that only Sky spirits crossed, for, in the east, dogs are Sky-associated. Crossing Water/Earth to interface with Fire/Sky is a standing theme in the east. In Cherokee tradition, the animals had to traverse water to obtain their first flre. In the days before anyone had flre, a lightning strike set a sycamore ablaze just as the animals were sitting down to a council. The sycamore stood on an island, so that any wishing to reach it had to pass over water. Seeing the fire and realizing that it would keep them warm in the winter, the animals decided to acquire some of it for themselves. One by one, various animals went forth to obtain the fire, with little success. Raven, the War Bird, went flrst, soaring over the water to the sycamore, but all he managed to do was singe his feathers, tuming him coal black. Next, Screech Owl went, flying across the water and into the tree, but, when he looked down, a blast of heat rose up, encircling his eyes with black soot. Much the same occurred when Hoot Owl flew to the tree, except that white soot ringed his eyes. Then, Snake went swimming to the sycamore, but he fell into the buming hollow of the tree, so that all he brought back was his blackened self, thereafter to be known as Black Snake. Finally came Water Spider, who ran, lightly skipping over the water to the tree. Spinning a small bowl of her silk, she aflxed it to her back and bravely put a buming coal inside to carry home to the council. The hot coal bumed through the bottom of the basket to leave a permanent black spot in the middle of her back, but she did obtain flre for the animals.^^" Note that the male (Sky)

222 NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

creatures could not capture fire; only the female (Earth) spirit could. These ritual and spiritual meanings of water must be recalled when looking at the location and design of the mounds and earthworks. It has long been noted that the earthworks occur in conjunction with water, with the water usually lying east of the mounds.^^' The connection between the eastem siting of mound water and the fact that east was direction of prayer should be obvious by now. Perhaps less obviously. Water protected and facilitated ritual space, for Earth ghosts could not cross water, whereas Sky spirits had to cross water. Thus, one major significance of water near mounds and earthwork was to keep dismptive spirits out of the arena of ritual, where they would degrade ceremony. A second major significance was that Water facilitated the departure of Sky spirits, speeding them across the log bridge to the Milky Way Trail, as they crossed water in pursuit of the Fire in the Sky. If Fire and Water are each powerful in their own right, the combined medicine of Fire and Water are invincible, as is showcased in the very sacred Cherokee creation tradition of the Com Mother, Selu, and her husband, Kana 'tl, the Lucky Hunter.^^^ The two lived happily with their young son, until the day that the lad harkened to the calls of I nage-utasuniiii^'We Who Grew up Wild"), a boy who came "out of the water" and, consequently, was possessed of considerable Earth medicine. Alarmed by the character of their son's new playmate, Selu and Kana ^'realized that the troublesome Wild Boy was actually the congealed blood of the game that Kana '?/'had brought back from the hunt and that Selu had discarded in the river—i.e.. Wild Boy was a resuscitated Earth being, conceived in water and conglomerated of the blood and guts of many different animals. Wild Boy and his Younger Brother, the son of Selu and Kana'ti, soon went their own way.^"*^ Crucially, under the leadership of Wild Boy, the pair tumed loose all the game that Kana'tiktpX in a mountain and killed Selu, ultimately driving Kana i/away through every sort of mischief ^^^ Convinced that Wild Boy and his own son must die, Kana i/raised an army of Wolves against them, but the boys mounted a, shall I say, spirited defense that won the day. Taking stock of the landscape, they saw that a sodden swamp lay nearby their home. To prepare their defenses, "they ran around the house in a wide circle until they had made a trail all around it," leaving only one opening, through which they expected the Wolves to attack. Next, they planted four large bundles of arrows "at four different points on the outside of the circle." The Wolves rushed into the circle, as anticipated, but quickly found themselves trapped by the reed walls of the circle, which rose up impenetrably around them, as the boys fired their arrows into the Wolves' midst from the

KOKOMTHENA, SiNGING IN THE FLAMES 2 2 3

four points. The boys then ran in a circle around the swamp, causing a trail of fire to alight at their feet, chasing just behind their heels. Wolves, fleeing the opening in the reed circie, proceeded through the opening into the swamp circle, soon to be trapped in the circle of flre in the swamp, there to perish.^"' In this tradition, something can be seen of the operation of circle medicine, as mediated by Fire and Water, but, flrst, the reader must dispense with the westem judgment that - EVIL - won the day. As frustrating and obnoxious a spirit as he seems by westem lights. Wild Boy was not the "villain," nor was Kana h' "the good guy," of the keeping. Kana tfand Selu had actually been in the wrong. Kana ?/did not pray over his dead prey. Worse, he kept all the game imprisoned in a mountain, a bad thing in the east, where game was tended in its natural habitat and allowed to mn free until it was needed.^**^ The release of Kana h~'s game animals was, therefore, justice not mischief. Neither did Selu properly dispose of game entrails, but simply tossed them out as offal. At one point. Wild Boy reproached Selu with her cmelty in having thus thrown him away in the river.^^^ Moreover, Selu did not grow her crops in Mother Earth, their natural womb, but conjured them out of her own entrails and armpits, which invited poisonous trouble. When the boys killed her, it was in selfdefense. At death, she told them how, correctly, to gamer crops.^^** Second, the reader should consider what the boys created: two adjacent circles c 0, both protecting those who made them, while the comers H laid outside the reed circle amounted sniper berths of the Four Winds. Entrances C0 were deliberately left in the circles (Sky) specifically to allow the "enemy" to race within, there to be trapped, in the flrst instance through the action of a quickly grown wall of reeds (quick, gigantic growth is Earth medicine), and in the second instance, by an encircling flre (Sky) springing forth from a swamp (Water/Earth). Thus, it was the combined action of Fire/Sky and Water/Earth in circular medicine that destroyed all but "two or three" Wolves, which "got away," giving rise to "all the wolves that are now in the world."^^^ Consequent of such logic, it is not odd to find Water and Fire closely connected with sacred ceremonies and beliefs. The Fire/Sky-Water/Earth complex was, for example, emphasized by the Cherokee in their purification rite in which the whole body was scraped down and then dipped in water (Earth) while facing the rising sun (Sky), to protect the seeker in hearing the heavy medicine to follow.^^ Among the Shawnee, Kokomthena, Grandmother, recognizes various "witnesses" to her powers. Water and Fire are primary witnesses, but her lead witness is tobacco, which passes safely through both flre

224 NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

and water.^^' (All eastem nations recognize the intensity of tobacco medicine.) For the Lenape, Sky and Earth met where the setting sun went beneath the sea, a very powerful Earth-Sky connection, mediated through the Fire of the sun and the Water of the ocean.^^^ The interaction of Fire and Water with Sky and Earth also informs the sweat lodge, a ceremonial practiced across North America. The sweat is a purification ritual (Sky). Sweats are also considered curative, healing events (Earth). Since women are bom pure (i.e., life-giving), they sweat less often than men, who have more frequent occasion to sully themselves by life-taking, in the hunt and in war.^" Because women are more attuned to water, and men, to fire, the two sweat separately, for mixed sweats are dangerous to the spiritual and physical health of both genders. In a sweat lodge, usually a small, circular hut, a medicine person ladles water over a circle of blazing hot stones, producing steam. The heat is stifting, but sweaters remain within the lodge for as long as they can stand it, often twenty-four hours, or more. The logic of the sweat is this: Because human beings are unable to pass through the cleansing Sky element of Fire, that Earth element. Water, passes through Fire for them, safely bringing its benefits to humanity. The machtuzin (meaning "to perspire") of the Lenape honored fire, but moisture acted as the catalyst, allowing sweaters to cross into Sky.^^ The steam of the sweat was not the only water involved in the ritual for the Iroquois. In the 1630s, the Domincan missionary Gabriel Sagard noted that, upon emerging from a sweat lodge, the Iroquois would rush to the nearest lake, pond, river, or snowbank and plunge in.^" In the Lenape tradition of their ftrst sweat, a man wished to live in the Sky, but, lacking wings, he found another way up. His method was to combine Fire and Water. Atop a boulder on a "bluff overlooking a creek," he built an enormous bonfire. When the rock was "almost red hot," he tumbled it down the hill, into the stream. The water instantly began to bubble up forming a mist of steam, into which the man walked, disappearing from view. After his sojoum in Sky, he retumed to Earth.^^ He had interacted with the "fountain of deity," or the Sky medicine that suffused all things.^^' The Cherokee sweat, the ds\ likewise involves both fire and water, for not only do people sit in the heat of the lodge, but they also jump into mountain waters.^^^ The purification rite required sweaters to start at the stream, scraping down their skin and dipping to the sun. Typically, the elders told sacred traditions while in their sweats, so that a young initiate, while tending the fire to keep hot rocks coming, might be privileged to eavesdrop on their keepings.^**

KOKOMTHENA, SINGING IN THE FLAMES 225

The Shawnee sweat was seen in the purest spiritual terms. Ordinarly people needed to mediate the Fire of white-hot rocks with the steam of Water, but powerful medicine people—including the entire Piqua nation of the Shawnee —could step directly into fire. This was because the Piqua nation was bom long ago, out of a huge bonfire the people had built. Once it had consumed all, crumbling to rubble, the people heard "a great puffing and blowing." Next, they saw a man rise up from the ashes. They called him Piqua, meaning "a man coming from the ashes."™ He was the progenitor of that nation. Sweating was obviously a central ritual, and one of an antiquity great enough to stretch back to Mound-Builder times, although its connection to the clay basins in the burial mounds long went unrecognized. Nineteenth-century archaeologists blithely dubbed these clay pits "altars," in keeping with their lurid stereotypes of Savagery, with some opining that they were the kitchens of cannibalism.^**' More sophisticated modem scholars coined the term "clay basin" for the hearths, so as not arbitrarily to assign uses not intended by their creators, but, nonetheless, archaeologists still largely assumed a function of cremation for the basins.^"^ The mounds of first-stage Mound Builders, who began the practice of total cremation, contained concave, clay basins hollowed out of the area's hardpan.^""* Their ash piles included remains, sometimes of more than one person, bumed stone artifacts, and, not infrequently, scrapings of the clay basin, itself'"^ The mounds of second-stage Mound Builders likewise contained clay basins carved into the floor of the mounds, but second-stage Mound Builders were not intent upon total cremation.^"^ Recently, it was realized that the basins were not actually crematory sites for second-stage Mound Builders at all, for they performed cremations on rectangular log scaffolds, very much as described in Cherokee and Shawnee tradition.^"^ These facts have left scholars scrambling for explanations. Originally, in 1945, William Webb and Charles Snow surmised that the clay basins had been household hearths that, only after the dwelling was abandoned, were used as mound bases.^"' Archaeologists now know, however, that sweat lodges were heavily connected with hot houses and that some of the clay basins at the base of burial mounds were the hearths of sweat lodges before the mounds were constructed over them.^*"^ As mentioned above, these mound clay basins tended to come in pairs, often in a circle-square O-D theme. I submit that the clay basins were the ceremonial sweats of the dead, for what is not possible in life becomes possible in death: The living might not be able to pass directly through fire to Sky, but fire can directly "sweat" the

226 NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

remains ofthe dead. Furthennore, I beheve that dead sweats were gendered. In 1926 at Mound 17 of the Tumer site, for instance, Henry Shetrone pulled up an internally intricate pair of rectangular fire basins, one in the northem hemisphere ofthe mound, and the second in the southem hemisphere.^"^ This brings to mind Heckewelder's male (Sky O) and female (Earth D) sweats, lying in "opposite directions." At other sites with paired O-U basins in one mound, gendered sweating is even more strongly suggested. A fmal, important articulation of Sky/Fire-EarthAVater is the pair of Eagle (Sky) and Serpent (Earth). In terms of tradition, the Eagle-Serpent unit is so utterly ancient that it permeates cultures from the Great Lakes down to Mexico. The Southwestem Uto-Aztecan peoples, who migrated to Mexico in 1168 C.E., for instance, took with them the Eagle-Serpent pair. As Gloria Anzaldiia explained in 1987, "Huitzilopochtli, the God of War, guided them to the place (that later became Mexico City) where an eagle with a writhing serpent in its beak perched on a cactus. The eagle symbolizes the spirit (as the sun, the father); the serpent symboilizes the soul (as the earth, the mother). Together, they symbolize the struggle between the spiritual/celestiai/male and the underworld/ earth/feminine."^'^ Although I cavil at terms like "soul," "stmggle," and "underworld"—they carry so much westem baggage as to obliterate truly Native conceptions—Anzaldiia accurately cited their Sky/MaleEarth/Female pairings. The Eagle and Serpent were no less emblematically central in the Ohio valley, their ancestral links with the far southwest, by the way, reinforcing Iroquois, Lenape, and Cherokee traditions of migrations east from far to the west.^" Typically, the eagle manifests as the Cloudland Eagle or the Thunderers, whereas the Serpent expresses heavily as the Homed Serpent. The great birds, generally, and eagles, specifically, are very important to all eastem nations. The Lenape, for instance, described them as the Seven Thunderers, whose primary purpose was to neutralize the Homed Serpent using lightning, the interaction of Thunderer and Serpent bringing rain. These Thunderers were usually represented as half-bird, half human.^'^ In the Shawnee tradition of their arrival in North America, Kokomthena'?, husband was pulled from the salt water by "a very big Wa-be-the," that is a "swan," which thus became one ofthe totems ofthe Shawnee.-"-* The Eagle is "of first rate importance" as a "witness" to Kokomthena, right up there with Fire and The Iroquois, too, have the Thunderers. Both Hfho"', a Sky spirit revered by the early Iroquois, and the later Hawenio\ He-Majestic Voice, make

KOKOMTHENA, SINGING IN THE FLAMES 227

thunder. A mighty frown from the gigantic face of the Thunderer brings on its loud claps, while he "winks his eyes and lightnings flash like arrows of fire." The Thunderers are also charged with keeping the otkon, or Earth medicine, of the Homed Serpent from mnning wild.^'^ There is also O's'ha'da'gea, the Cloudland or Golden Eagle, "head Chief of the birds," who lives above the clouds.^'^ He has a special affection for humanity and collects the dew on his feathers, between his shoulder-blades.^'^ The great birds. Loon and Heron (often given in westem texts as "Swan"), were instmmental in aiding Sky Woman when she fell through the hole in Sky World, ftying together so closely that their wings interlocked to form a giant feather bed on which she lay, until the council of animals had decided to save her life by creating dry land for her.-"^ The Great Eagle, who fties high and sees far, watches over the Iroquois League, to wam the people of any approaching danger.^'^ Together, Iroquoian and Lenape scouts interpreted the first European vessels they saw as Thunder Eagle medicine. According to tradition, even before the people saw the ships, they heard from their neighbors that there were hulking, winged beings with a "great, dark body" spotted both northeast and south of the mouth of the St. Lawrence River, cmising the "big waters," i.e., the ocean. Watchers of the two nations, characterized as the "coast guard" of their peoples, were duly dispatched to the north Atlantic coast, where they saw either Cartier's ships in the mid-1530s or, more likely, since the ships did not land, those of Basque fishermen in the 1480s."° To the Coast Guard, these ships appeared "like sea gulls," their white wings billowing in the wind. Lenape mnners, stopping at the first Iroquoian town along their route, "represented the ships as some great dark animals, with broad, white wings—spitting out fire! and uttering the voice of thunder."^^' This last might have been a reference to cannon shot. Among the Cherokee, the Eagle is the "great sacred bird," not the least because the tail feathers of the War Bird, or golden eagle, were white and black, relating to war and peace. Eagles might only be taken by professional eagle hunters, medicine people trained to know the proper prayers for the occasion. So volatile was the relationship between Homed Serpent and Eagle, that eagle hunters never killed them until fall, after all the snakes (little brothers of the Homed Serpent) had begun hibemating."^ A nonauthorized Cherokee once killed an eagle, bringing its body back to town for an Eagle Dance. In upon the dancers strode a stranger, telling tales of his own hunting exploits and ending each recital with a loud "///!" At every "///!," a rattler (ritual dancer) dropped dead. The stranger continued talking until all the rattlers were dead. Later, the

228 NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

people discovered that the stranger had been the brother of the dead eagle, come for justice.^" Sometimes, especially in rain-making. Great Thundering Eagles would swoop down, almost to ground and, by lightly touching off the earth, leave a footprint. Like the footprints of the Iroquoian Dwarfs with webbed duck feet, those of the Eagle were powerful medicine.^^" Thus, I suspect the pronged print in the center of the large circle in Newark, Ohio, is not an "eagle," as the effigy is now dubbed, but rather the footprint of a Thunder Eagle that dipped down from the clouds to touch upon the earth, perhaps in connection with rainmaking. (See Figure 4.8, for the so-called "Eagle Mound" detail of the Great Circle at Newark, Ohio.) The counterpart of the Thundering Eagle was the Homed Serpent, a creature of widespread fame in the east."^ Once more, before I continue, there is a confusion I must unravel. It concems the common archaeological use of the term "Water Panther" to discuss what really applies to the Homed Serpent in the Ohio valley earth works. "'^^ The Water Panther is a west-of-the-Mississippi phenomenon, not rightly applied to eastem tradition. It is tme that the oldest Shawnee traditions do speak of a panther that pulled Kokomthena from the ocean to dry land on his tale, but it does not figure much in other traditions.•*" It is also tme that there was a secondary version of the Homed Serpent as the White (not "Water") Panther among the Iroquois, but those Iroquois most likely to have kept the White Panther version were those most in contact with more westerly Algonkin nations, such as the Chippewa. When, for instance, the Wyandot chronicler Dooyentate included an account of the eighteenth-century "White Panther" sect as a sort of appendix to his 1870 History, he was clear that the cult was frowned upon by traditionals. Observance of the White Panther rites used coagulated blood chips of the White Panther, clearly Earth medicine, and was primarily confined to the "Prairie Turtle Clan" of the Wyandot at Detroit. By the early nineteenth century, traditionals had rooted out this foreign sect."^ By contrast to these little known traditions, the Shawnee, Iroquois, Lenape, and Cherokee all maintain lively traditions of snakes, generally, and of the Homed Serpent and his Water/Earth powers, in particular. For their part, the Shawnee held rattlesnakes in strong reverence as litfle versions of the Homed Serpent, a fact that once saved the life of Nicholas Ludwig, Count von Zinzendorf (1700-1760), who seeded the Moravian missions of North America. As Zinzendorf was visiting the Shawnee in the Wyoming Valley of Luzeme County, Pennsylvania, the settlers' vicious attacks on local Natives enraged the

KOKOMTHENA, SINGING IN THE FLAMES 229

Figure 4.8. "Eagle Mound"

This detail ofthe Great Circie at Newark, Ohio, most likely represents the footprint of the Thunderbird. SOURCE: Ephraim George Squier and E. H. Davis, Ancient Monuments ofthe Mississippi Valley: Comprising the Results of Extensive Original Sutveys and Explorations, Smithsonian Contributions to Knowledge, vol. 1 (1848; reprint, New York: Johnson Reprint Corporation, 1965) 68.

Shawnee to the point that they decided to retaliate, choosing the Count as their first target. Oblivious of what was happening around him, the Count sat huddled in his little hut beside a healthy fire, reading his Bible by its light. As the war party came in upon him, they watched a large rattlesnake crawl into the hut and wind its way over to the fire to curl up contentedly at the Count's feet. Seeing that he was favored by the spirit of Snake, the Shawnee made their apologies and left Zinzendorf unharmed."^ (Note the continuing Shawnee interpretation of Christianity as wrinkled Earth medicine.) Serpents were crucial to the Shawnee cosmology of Earth. In 1824,

230 NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

Tenskwatawa told Charles Trowbridge that the Shawnee offered prayers not only to the Sky but also to the "four serpents who occupy the four cardinal points^—to these their supplications are secretly made, accompanied by an offering of tobacco, thrown into thefire."^^'^That serpents were the medicine spirits holding down the four comers of Mother Earth for the old Shawnee is very interesting since other Ohio valley nations tended to characterize those spirits as the invisible Four Winds. The connection between Earth and the Homed Serpent could not be more clear. The imagery of the strong Earth medicine of snakes as pinions of the four comers of the earth was replicated in Shawnee council houses. In the 1840s, the Shawnee Council House in Johnson County, Kansas, was observed to have had four pillars, each carved with Earth medicine. In bas-relief on a pillar near one door was "the figure of a rattle-snake about five feet long, and on the other side the likeness of a snake without the rattle." The opposite pillars were turtles, also powerful Earth spirits. Polished metal formed the eyes."' (Shining things, generally, are portals to other reality.) The Homed Serpent strongly figured into Shawnee medicine. One day, long ago, the Elders found the "king" snake, or Homed Serpent, dead. They proceeded to cut up the carcase. His body was like that of a snake & he had the head, horns & neck of a large buck. His body was cut into small pieces and every thing connected with it, even to the excrement, was carefully preserved. The head, horns, flesh &c., was mixed with the heart & flesh of the animal found upon the sea shore, and forms the medicine which the witches use. It is still preseved and the flesh, tho' many thousand years old, is as fresh as if it had Just been killed. (Symbols and spellings in the

In this 1824 recital, the westem term "witches" was liberally applied to Earth shamans, whom missionaries cross-identified with satanists almost from the moment of their arrival in the Americas. The Shawnee saw matters a bit differently, however. They immediately cross-identified the kill-power of the Homed Serpent with that of the Europeans. In 1848, Charles Bluejacket recounted the precontact tradition that the Shawnee old men (meaning the elders and wise men in the far remote past) used to tell our people that a great serpent would come from the seas and destroy our people. When the first European vessel came in sight, the Indians saw the pennant, with its forked end darting and moving like the forked tongue of the serpent. "There," said they, "is the serpent our old men have been telling us ahout!" (Italics mine.) "^

The Lenape, too, retain strong traditions of the Homed Serpent, called

KOKOMTHENA, SINGING IN THE FLAMES 231

mexaxkuk in the Unami dialect and w'axkok in the Munsee, roughly rendered as "water monster."'^'' The Homed Serpent of the Lenape is a sex fiend with human-eating tendencies, living in a river grotto. Notwithstanding his unsavory habits, his medicine can be used for good or ill, and was treasured up."' The two premiere medicine bags ofthe Lenape, carried with them into the interior ofthe continent when European invasion pushed them out of their mid-Atlantic homeland contained scales of this great Homed Serpent—that is, mica sheets."^ Like the Shawnee, the Lenape held that snakes, generally, were in cosmic accord with the Homed Serpent, miniatures able to tap into his medicine. In the 1740s, for example, David Brainerd noted disapprovingly that he had seen a Lenape bum "fine tobacco for incense, in order to appease the anger of that invisible power which he supposed presided over rattle-snakes, because one of these animals was killed by another Indian near his house.""^ In 1794, George Loskiel recorded that the sloughed-off skins of rattlesnakes were carefully gathered up, since great curative powers inhered in them. Snake broth was held to cure tuberculosis."^ Lenape women were seen as being in special accord with the Earth medicine of snakes. In the 1650s, the chronicler Peter Lindestrom watched birthing mothers among the Lenape "tie around their waists a snake skin ofthe most poisonous kind of snakes,. . . which has such an effect that they do not know of the least pain in their child birth.""' Westemers are apt to interpret this snake/birth symbolism in terms ofthe snake/penis association of their own culture, but, to the Lenape, the snakeskin waistband represented the umbilical cord. The Iroquois, for instance, typically represented a woman's children-to-be as long tuber roots trailing between her legs."'''^ As with these tuber roots, snakes were long and lived underground, in close contact with Mother Earth. The figurative umbilicus was the "root" ofthe child in her mother's Earth. As did the Lenape, the Iroquois told wondrous tales ofthe Homed Serpent. Called various names, including Gas'hais'dowane", Doona'gaes, and Djo''di "gwado", his homs were said to have been like those of a buffalo.-''" A whistling monster, he was found under falls and in rivers. The better to sate his lust for nubile young women, he was capable of shape-shifting into a man.'**^ The Wyandot Onniont, or Great Homed Serpent, could power his way through any earthly thing, from trees and earth to solid rock, using his hom. His scales were powerful rainmakers.•'''•' David Cusick recounted that one of these great Serpents took up residence in Lake Ontario shortly after the conclusion ofthe Iroquoian war with the Emperor ofthe Golden City.^'" These Iroquoian Onniont

232 NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

oxAngont (whose morphemes connect with otkon or otgon, the power of Earth medicine) could sling sickness, death, and disorder upon the people, while even a smidgen of his fiesh was massively venomous.^""^ The Homed Serpent was crafty in preying upon humans, a favorite snack of his. The Seneca attribute the splintering ofthe Iroquoian language into several dialects to the Great Homed Serpent. To facilitate his plan to make a good meal of them all, the Serpent willed them not to understand each other's speech to prevent their discussing, and thus evading, his threat.^"^ All Iroquois were wary and frightened of him. As recently as 1911, the Wyandot in Lorette, Quebec, preserved the tradition of a Jesuit priest exorcising a Great Homed Serpent from their midst, chasing him out of Lake St. Joseph, through the streets of Lorette, and into into the woods.^''^ J. N. B. Hewitt noted that the Homed Serpent of so many Iroquoian traditions worked in human-beneficial as well as human-dangerous ways, a fact westemers are apt to forget, falling easily into the old missionary caricature of Earth medicine as evil. (Since Earth medicine is strongly female, this old slur is also deeply misogynistic.) Like other, cmcial spirits, the Serpent "never dies but forever renews its life. It is thus considered fitly symbolic of life."^'*^ In view of its life-giving properties, it is not surprising to find the Serpent closely connected with pregnant women, for they, too, renew life. By the same token, the value placed by Iroquoian female farmers upon snakes is related to women's ability to draw new life (crops) directly out of Mother Earth.^^^ Indeed, the Iroquoian association of women with the Earth power of snakes is so ancient as to be embedded in the oldest traditions, from the First Epoch of Time (Creation). One traditional name of Sky Woman, the progenitrix of life on Earth, is Ataensic, a word that includes the stem denoting the copperhead snake. Similarly, the term otkon or otgon, for wrinkled or Earth power, includes the same snake stem found in her name.^^** The Cherokee, too, revered snakes, cherishing a special devotion to the Earth medicine ofthe ada wehi, or Rattlesnake, a sort of little brother to the Homed Serpent.^" The Altamaha Cherokee performed an annual Snake Dance using poisonous reptiles. Everyone attending the Snake Dance drew a symbol on bark to represent his or her wishes for the new year. These were posted about the dance house. As the women dmmmed and sang, a medicine man made a processional around the house, carrying the snake in his bare hands in such a way that it was able to look at each and every pictograph. After the dance, the shaman tumed the snake loose in the woods, so that it might carry the wishes ofthe people to the Earth."^

KOKOMTHENA, SINGING IN THE FLAMES 233

The Cherokee call the Homed Serpent Uktena, The Keen-Eyed, he who lives in deep water and in mountain passes. In 1883, William Eubanks, then the Cherokee "senator at Tahlequah," said that Uktena abounded in "ancient times." They lay "glittering as the sun, and having two homs on the head. To see one of these snakes was certain death. They possessed such a power of fascination that whoever tried to make his escape, ran toward the snake and was devoured."^" Other traditions described Uktena as a huge snake, "as large around as a tree trunk, with homs on its head," his "scales glittering like sparks of fire." Uktena's medicine was so powerful that, even asleep, he could kill. Should a hunter chance just to see him asleep, the hunter's whole family would die. Even the discarded scales of the Uktena retained this potent "kill" power.^^"* A brilliant stone, called the Uliinsu'tf {mQm\n§, "The Transparent"), is blazed into Uktena's forehead. Envisioned as a sort of cosmic medicine pouch slung between its homs, the Ulunsu '^/encapsulated his profound access to Earth medicine. The shining Ulunsu 'tf enables anyone holding it to perform wonderful feats, so that obtaining the Ulunsu'tf earned immense mystical weight for the old Cherokee.^" There is a Cherokee tradition of a medicine man who was able to secure the Uliinsu'tf for the people. This man, named Agan-uni'tsf, did not start out Cherokee, but was adopted in from the Shawnee. (This fact had considerable significance for the tradition, as it was well known that all Shawnee were intrinsically heavy-duty shamans.) Questing far and wide for the Uktena, Aganuni'tsf u\t\mate\y discovered him, asleep on a lonely mountain. Preparing for the ordeal of seizing the Uliinsu'tf, the shaman ran to the base of the mountain, where he dug a deep ditch encircled by pine cones (Earth), which he lit on fire (Sky) to neutralize the Serpent's medicine. Retuming to Uktena, the shaman shot the sleeping serpent through the heart. Awakened by pain, Uktena reared up at Agan-uni is/and chased him down the mountain, but, quicker than his wounded prey, Agan-uni'tsfyxmped into the protective circle of fire, hiding in the trench inside. Severely wounded and, therefore, unable to pass through the circle of Sky to reach the shaman in Earth, Uktena bled to death, his great bulk rolling down the mountainside, taking trees and bmsh with it. Agan-uni'tsfihen called upon the great birds (Sky) to feast on the carcass. Just before he retumed home, he picked up the UlUnsii 'r/(Earth), which had been dropped by a scavenging crow (Sky). Thus did the precious Uldfisa 'tf pass into the possession of the Cherokee."^ The 1883 version of this tradition, told by William Eubank concluded, "On the spot where the snake had been killed, a lake formed, the water of which was black.""^ Ceremonially

234 NATIVE AMERICANS. ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

understood, then, water once more mediated a potentially dangerous spot. In another tradition of Homed-Serpent slaying, this one recorded by Henry Timberlake in 1765, obtaining the UlUnsii'tf shone as the point of the quest. "Many were the attempts made by the Indians," said Timberlake, "but all frustrated, till a fellow, more bold than the rest, cast himself in leather, impenetrable to the bite of the serpent" or his retinue of smaller snakes. The intrepid shaman of this tradition overtook the Homed Serpent while his guard was down, killing him and "tearing this jewel from his head." The shaman secreted his prize away from view, hiding it in a location disclosed only to two women.^^** James Adair also recorded a Serpent-slaying, UlUfisu h-grabbing tradition in 1775, so it was obviously one of the most important themes of the old Cherokee."^ As Timberlake indicated, the Ulunsu 'tfwere highly prized and very sacred. Brushing aside what he felt was the fabulous nature of tradition regarding their origin, Timberlake argued for the reality of such stones, for he had "seen many of great beauty" and "different colours," which he, like the other settlers, suspected were "of great value," so that their fingers itched to get a hold of them. Timberlake coveted one stone, in particular, "remarkable" to him "for its brilliancy and beauty."^*^^ (Scholars have since identified these stones as amethyst, hiddenite, mby, acquamarine, mtile quartz, and various crystals.^^') The Cherokee stoutly resisted trading their UlunsH 'tf, however. Although the women in Timberlake's recital were "offered large presents to betray it," they "steadfastly refused, lest some signal judgment or mischance should follow."^" Other Cherokee took equal pains to guard the UlunsH'tf from the avaricious settlers, for fear that "parting with them, or bringing them from home, would prejudice their health or affairs," that is, tuming the UlUfisii'tf mto items of commerce would negate the health and prosperity that Homed-Serpent medicine conferred.^" Adair quoted the Cherokee as saying that the UlUnsii'tf "stone would suffer a great decay . . . were it even seen by their own laity; but if by foreigners, it would be utterly despoiled of its divine communicative Homed-Serpent medicine interacted very powerfully with the countervailing medicine of the Thunderer. This was possible because lightning was generally seen as "the lightning serpent," shape-shifting Sky spirits snaking across the Sky to cause major Earth events.^" For instance, those nations that kept the Great Hare as a Sky being saw his lightning as shape-shifting into a snake-like pattem, thereby luring snakes southward with the last lightning of the fall.^'*'' Similarly, the Homed Serpent that visited so much disease and death upon the

KOKOMTHENA, SINGING IN THE FLAMES 235

Iroquois living around Lake Ontario after the defeat ofthe Emperor ofthe Golden City was eventually pied-pipered off with "the aid of thunder bolts." In 1637, the northeastem Algonkin told the Jesuit Jacques Buteux that thunder was a Sky spirit looking "to vomit up a great serpent he ha[d] swallowed."^^^ For their part, the Shawnee heard the Homed Serpent hissing in the sizzling sound of lightning.-'^'* Because the interaction of Thunderer and Serpent resulted in lightning, Homed-Serpent medicine was considered a rain maker, par excellence. In 1775, for instance, James Adair chronicled a rain-making ceremony among the Cherokee. "They have a transparent stone"—i.e., a fy/wniu'r/^"of supposed great power in assisting to bring down the rains, when it is put in a basin of water," he said.^™ Among the Lenape, calling forth the Homed Serpent, himself, from under the waters was likely to bring on tomados, so it was pmdent to use only a tidbit of him in rain-making, his mica scales being the most potent rain medicine. The number of scales exposed determined the level of rain invited. Just a few mica scales laid ceremonially atop a rock near a river were sufficient to ensure a good soaking ofthe women's com fields."' Medicine bags are often connected with Eagle, Serpent, prayer, and rainmaking. The rain-making UlUnsu Ustone in the forehead ofthe Homed Serpent was, for instance, a stylized version of his medicine bag, which he carried, dangling between his homs. The two most puissant medicine bags of the Lenape existed specifically to make rain. They were "decorated with zigzag lines of symbolic lightning" and contained "a finely divided shining substance resembling mica, which was, according to Indian belief, taken from the scales ofthe great mythical Homed Serpent."'^^ Community medicine bags were generally well guarded. The Shawnee, for example, kept their medicine bags out ofthe sight of non-Shawnee, for they were held to provide the "most sacred approach" to Kokomthena, Grandmother."^ These bags interfaced heavily with Sky, home of Kokomthena. Part ofthe new year's ceremony ofthe Shawnee, when the voice of Kokomthena was listened for in the fire, came at midnight, as tbe chief opened the sacred bag. Nancy Chouteau, the nineteenth-century Shawnee from Wapakoneta, Ohio, recalled that the "mysterious bundle" contained "some great long feathers." The singers dressed in them to address Kokomthena in the Fire, clearly Sky medicine."'' Iroquoian medicine bags hold various articles of Sky medicine, as well, including tobacco and pipes, along with other items that may spring to life, when required."^ Not infrequently, the item is a tiny dog effigy that grows

236 NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

swiftly into a mastiff, often to protect a young woman on a vision quest.™ Iroquoian bundles were most often associated with otkon (Earth) deeds, such as poisoning or will-tampering (love medicine), which settlers stereotyped as witchcraft. This bad reputation of bundles in the early nineteenth century was one reason that the Gaiwi.yo ("Code of Handsome Lake") banned "witch" bags containing poisons and love medicine.^" Iroquoian hunters used medicine bags extensively. In 1912, the Oklahoma Wyandot, John Kayrahoo, recounted that he had been an awkward failure at the hunt, until the day he slew a pregnant deer. Extracting the tiny fetus, washing it off, and putting it in his medicine bag, he carried it with him on subsequent hunts, all of which were successful."*^ Although incompetent hunters, themselves, the Dwarfs supplied kind hunters with strong items for their medicine bags, to aid them in finding prey, which they then shared with the always hungry Dwarfs."^ In addition to human beings, important Spirits carried medicine bags. Besides the Homed Serpent, whose bag was slung between his homs, Kokomthena of the Shawnee created numerous medicine bundles, which acted as her "witnesses."^^^ The Great Hare also had a medicine bag. In 1610, the Potomac River people told William Stratchey that the Great Hare kept the spirits of the human beings he had made in his medicine bag while he drove off the cannibals who were trying to dine on their bodies.^^' The interface of Sky/Eagle and Earth/Serpent, so clearly evinced in medicine bags, was ancient. It is not, therefore, suprising that medicine bundles are among the artifacts that have tumed up in sites dating back to Mound-Builder times.^**^ Indeed, the mounds are chockfull of artifacts related to Eagle and Serpent. Birds are always connected with the Eagle of Sky, as are tobacco pipes, whereas mica, flint, and quartz stones are always connected with the Homed Serpent of Earth. Retuming to Mound 17 of the Tumer site, then, Shetrone's northem basin contained many Sky artifacts, including a platform pipe featuring wild ducks in flight, and an eagle and a crow, among other bird effigies.^" In the southem basin, among many other Earth artifacts, were strips of mica and "a rare cup-shaped omament of crystal quartz."^^" The Cherokee said that they deliberately laid Uktena artifacts at the base of mounds. Most favored were an Ulunsuh" stone (crystal), Uktena scales (mica), and bits of Uktena's hom (flint).^^^ Exactly such artifacts are common fmds.^^^ The Homed Serpent, in particular, is so ancient and so widespread in the east as to have antedated the Eagle. Webb and Snow opined that the Homed Serpent had been bequeathed to second-stage Mound culture by first-stage

KOKOMTHENA, SINGING IN THE FLAMES 237

Mound Builders.^^^ This seems very likely, since the new idea that the Cherokee seem to have brought east was the square of Earth. Before then, circle and effigy symbology took center stage. Webb and Snow's contention of the deep antiquity of serpent symbology becomes only more intriguing once the Great Serpent Mound in Adams County, Ohio, is factored into the question. Dating back to circa 1000 B.C.E., the huge effigy is clearly a snake^but what is that on its head? Westem scholars have often speculated that it was an "egg" or the "sun" in the Serpent's "mouth," with some going on to interpret both as symbols of life.^^^ Eggs are not at all symbolic of life among eastem nations, however. In fact, turtle eggs buried with the dead were thought by the Iroquois to have been sure signs that wrinkled shamans had been at work.^^^ The sun explanation, based on vaguely referenced traditions of a snake once swallowing the sun is equally shaky, for the tradition is seldom identified by culture, and when it is, the swallowing animal turns out not to be a snake."" Simply plopping mangled tradition into the discussion as generically "Indian," leaving it shorn of the associational matrix peculiar to its nation of origin, is disingenuous and not very helpful. Conversely, the notion of important spirits carrying medicine bags is culturally specific to eastem groups. The UlUnsH'tf stone as the medicine bag of the Homed Serpent was very probably an idea that the Cherokee picked up in the east, perhaps from the Moon-Eyed people. The object as representing the medicine bundle of the Homed Serpent is, therefore, a likely candidate for the meaning of the oval, located smack in the middle of the Serpent's head. (The Homed Serpent does not always show his homs, by the way.) There is a related aspect of the Serpent Mound that also argues it to have been a Homed Serpent. Archaeologists have long noted that the first-stage Mound Builders constructed only circles, without the attached square. Notably, Mound-Building motifs only moved from the design of the circle O to that of circle-square O-D with the influx of the Cherokee into the Ohio valley. This does not necessarily mean, however, that Sky stood without an Earth complement before that time, for, prior to the introduction of the square of Earth, there were animal effigies, such as the Serpent Mound, built separately from the circles, to represent Earth medicine. Consequently, pre-Cherokee, the Serpent Mound of Earth stood counterpoint to the circle of Sky. There is strong evidence, recently put forward, that the Serpent Mound performed the ftinction of observatory for the Moon-Eyed People before the Cherokee arrived with their square and later octagon observatories. In 1987, Clark Hardman, Jr., and Marjorie H. Hardman put forward the theory of the

238 NATIVE AMERICANS. ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

Great Serpent Mound as an observatory.^^' Although their calculations tumed out to be off, their insight stood, as subsequent scholars took a crack at the issue. William F. Romain jumped into the debate with both feet, misconstruing and misapplying some traditions but achieving worthwhile insight when he identified the effigy as the Homed Serpent and the oval as an Vlunsu h"stone.^^^ Robert Fletcher and Terry Cameron brought up the rear, correcting the Hardmans' errors but also noting the essential accuracy of their hunch that the Serpent Mound was an observatory, for its summer solstice sunset alignment is, at least, undeniable.^" Other alignments no doubt exist, and I am betting that they will be moon alignments. Rather than the definitive, exhaustive, FINAL word on the subject, this treatment ofthe mounds in terms of tradition is intended as a primer, seeking to demonstrate how the halved wholes of eastem thought inhere in the logic of the mounds, particularly in the traditions ofthe descendants ofthe Ohio valley Mound Builders. By seeing the primary node of Sky-Earth through its associated nodes of Fire-Water and Eagle-Serpent, I hope to point scholars toward those paths most likely to end in tmly Native perceptions of mound culture. As these nodes spin out in their various design motifs—in either the literal designs of serpents, birds, and lightning or the abstract designs of circles and squares, concentric circles, and semicircles—it is possible to draw out traditional meanings in a coherent way. Artifacts such as flint, mica, crystal, birds, pipes, and medicine bags then link up naturally with larger cosmological frameworks, as do customs of cremation and interment, east-facing burials, red daub, water-mound placement, and sweats ofthe dead. I urge those who find this method intriguing to begin by discarding academia's determined monoculturalism and to continue by dismantling its artificial barriers to recognizing the living descendants ofthe Mound Builders. Next, I encourage scholars to forge respectful relationships with those descendants, that they may spend quality time in tradition—and among traditionals—listening as much as talking, absorbing instead of Euro-forming. Nothing will be lost in the process, but much stands to be gained, by all.

5

Blabbermouth Bones: NAGPRA, Remythologized Archaeology, and Documentary Genocide

When Public Law 101-601, the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA), was passed in 1990, Natives cheered while archaeologists cried in their beer. The law made it flatly illegal to traffic in Native American skulls and bones; prohibited digging up Native American graves on federal or "tribal" land; required inventories of all Native American remains and funerary objects held in federal agencies and museums; mandated bone-holders to consult with Natives conceming the disposition of remains and artifacts; and ordered the repatriation of human remains and grave goods to the Native groups from which they were stolen. A review committee was set up to ensure compliance.' For the first time in U.S. history, the govemment granted Native Americans the same legal rights over their ancestors' graves as all other groups enjoy.^ On its face, NAGPRA answered all the demands of Natives for the retum and reburial of skeletons and grave goods. With federally recognized groups, particularly those on westem reservations, the law can be made to work, albeit not without some kicking and screaming on the part of archaeologists. In vast areas of the east, however, and most particularly throughout the mound country of the Ohio valley, NAGPRA is elusive, uttering all the right words but only through the gaping holes in its toothless mouth. The failure of the law in the east rests on three glitches in its stmcture: 1. NAGPRA deals only with federal and Native lands; 2. NAGPRA allows archaeologists to identify Native cultural groups; and 3. NAGPRA considers only federally recognized Natives.

240

NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

In the first instance, NAGPRA applies only to federally owned or controlled lands or to so-called "tribal" land. It possesses no authority over privately owned or state lands. Since there is next to no federal or Native land east of the Mississippi, NAGPRA has neither halted nor controlled digging there. Second, remains are only to be retumed to "lineal descendants" or to groups that can show "by a preponderance of the evidence" that they have a strong "cultural relationship" with the deceased.' This makes a quagmire of NAGPRA in the east, because the official story of archaeology is that "no one knows who built the mounds." Archaeologists make heavy use of this escape clause to classiiy their Mound-Builder collections as "culturally unidentifiable." Why, they could not in conscience give the bones back to unenrolled eastem Natives, who are probably not descended from the Mound Builders, anyway. Heaven forfend that the remains should fall into the wrong hands—as though they were in the right hands now. Third and cmcially, although there are millions of eastem Natives, due to the shenanigans of the Dawes Era (1887-1907), few eastem Natives enjoy federal recognition. Indeed, eighteen states, all but two of them east of the Mississippi, lack any federally recognized Natives at all: Vermont, New Hampshire, Massachusetts, Rhode Island, Pennsylvania, New Jersey, Delaware, Maryland, Virginia, West Virginia, Ohio, Indiana, Illinois, Tennessee, South Carolina, Georgia, Missouri, and Arkansas. This does not mean that there are no Natives residing in these states. It just means that archaeologists do not have to talk to them, because govemmental "documentary genocide" supports the fiction that they do not exist."* As Grandmother Barbara Crandell, the Head Mother of the Ohio Cherokee, put it in 2000, "When the govemment killed Indian people on paper, they intended for us to stay dead. We have a hard time today convincing anybody we are still here."' These loopholes mount up to make enforcement of NAGPRA almost impossible in the east. The result is that archaeologists, collectors, dealers, and just plain hobbyists can dig, practically at will, through burial mounds and ceremonial sites, and eastem Natives cannot stop them. Buying and selling of grave goods continue apace, and the law does not halt the commerce. In Findlay, Ohio, from 1998 to 1999, for instance, the Old Bam Auction House held a series of six public auctions of known grave goods from the private collection of "Colonel" Raymond Vietzen, but the only legal action taken was against the Native American Alliance of Ohio (NAAO), which lawftilly picketed each auction.* Jan Sorgenfrei, owner of the Old Bam Auction House, received an injunction against NAAO and demanded that its head, Barbara

BLABBERMOUTH BONES

241

Crandell, personally pay his attorney fees and court costs, along with projected losses due to NAAO picketing.' Finding an attorney who would take the case was difficult in the small, conservative community of Findlay, although, once NAAO did secure representation, it won, in that Crandell was found not liable for any court costs or projected revenue losses. Nevertheless, the court left in place the injunction that allowed NAAO only six picketers in front of the auction house, and three across the street from it, at any given time. I was one of the picketers and can attest that armed guards were on duty, hovering over us at every auction. At the first picket, they outnumbered the picketers. It is also still possible to buy and sell Native American remains in the east. In 1998, the skull of an ancient ancestor, looted from a local Ohio mound, was displayed in a consignment shop, the Do [.sic] Drop Inn Antique Store, in Lancaster, Ohio. A friend of Crandell, Gail Zion, was out antiquing on 5 May 1998, when she spotted the skull, festooned in a Hallowe'en fright wig for "comic" effect. The lid of the styrofoam box, in which the skull lay, was clearly marked "Indian Artifact" in red, hand lettering. Zion entered the store and, disguising her horror upon spotting the skull in a glass display case, asked the shopkeeper whether this was a real skull. She was assured that it had been taken from a an old burial ground in the Lancaster area by the family of a local resident, who had decided to sell it. Although the shopkeeper admitted in a low voice that she knew she was not supposed to be selling the skull, she claimed to have been doing the family a favor. The asking price was $58.00. Exiting the shop, Zion called Crandell, who drove to Lancaster from her home in Thomville, Ohio, promptly the next moming. With Jean McCoard, elder of the Tallige Fire, and her son, Jordy, standing as witnesses, Crandell purchased the skull, which, with tax, came to $61.34. The shopkeeper labeled the receipt, "Indian Artife Skull." (See Figure 5.1 for a copy of the sales receipt.) The moment the transaction was completed, Crandell and McCoard called the Lancaster City Police Department, which sent Officer Debbie Blodgett to the store. The shopkeeper began to cry, as Crandell and McCoard demanded that she be arrested for a clear violation of the law—^NAGPRA aside, selling human remains is a felony in Ohio. Officer Blodgett did not arrest the shopkeeper, for reasons that remain obscure, but, at the insistence of Crandell and McCoard, did confiscate the skull and convey it to the property room of the Lancaster City Police Department. (See Figure 5.2. The Lancaster City Police Property Tag.)

242

NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

Figure 5.1. Sales Receipt from the Do Drop Inn Antique Store

This is a copy of the sales receipt for a human skull, which the shop owner labeled, "Indian Artife Skull." The date on the slip, 5/5/98 is incorrect. The sale occurred on 6 May 1998, as police records demonstrate.

More outraged by the sale than Officer Blodgett had been, the Lancaster City Prosecutor, Terre L. Vandervoort, tried to lock up the offender. With, however, the Federal Bureau of Investigation dragging its feet on the case (on the theory that this sale of human remains did not show criminal intent), she was unable to prosecute the crime before the shopkeeper had closed her store and fied the area. The unburied skull remained a matter of extreme concem to NAAO as it lay, exposed, in the Lancaster P.D. property room for the next three years. For traditional reasons, Crandell refused to touch or transport the skull herself.

BLABBERMOUTH BONES

243

Figure 5.2. Lancaster City Police Property Tag

RECBPT \

LANCASTER POLICE DEPARTMENT

PROPERTY TAG

•

HOW OmUNEO

.

'

EVIOENCE

. DESCRIPTKW OF PROPERTY

[M

D

SAFEKEEPINQ

ABANOONED

mOPERTY WILL BE OSPOSEO OF AFTER 30 I r f IF NOT EVlDENge UNLESS CHECKEO

-

TD OISPOSE OF SAID PROPERTY IN,ANY ' MANNER THEY DEEM APPROPRIATE-'

RECORD BUREAU ON DISPOSITION OF PROPERTY

;

This is a copy of the property tag put on the skull after the Lancaster City Police confiscated It from the Do Drop Inn Antique Shop. The date on the sales slip, 5/5/98, is incorrect. The date on the property tag, 5/6/98, is correct.

since, by now, its earth spirit was seriously disturbed. Nevertheless, it had to be reclaimed, for the P.D. was set to discard it as "unused evidence" three years later. Sharing Crandell's traditional concems, none of the members of NAAO wanted to be involved in fetching home the skull, yet, at the same time, we ardently wished it to be retumed to the earth, where it belonged. Finally, on June 6, 2001, the last day that the skull was to be kept by the Lancaster police evidence room. Grandma Crandell, Shawn Koons, Nastassia Haese, and I bravely drove to Lancaster to retrieve it. Waiting in a starkly

244

NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

white, cement block conference room at the police department, we were all palpably uneasy, and, when the skull was at last brought in, each of us let out a groan. Grandma Crandell averted her eyes and refused to look at it. The deputy, seeing our struggle, kindly put the lid over the skull, and, breathing deeply, Koons took the styrofoam box into his hands as Grandma Crandell signed the release form. All of us were shaking on the way back to the car. We transported the skull to a location that none of us will divulge, where we reinterred it with proper ceremony—for us. The position of the Native American Alliance of Ohio is that, since all the looted human remains (from the Ohio valley mounds, at least) were originally interred with the proper ceremony to send off their spirits, the requisite ceremonies upon reburiai are to protect those of us who have the cruel honor of redepositing them in Mother Earth. For my part, I was reluctant to touch even the styrofoam, because I know that unprotected contact with human remains brings on illness and subjects me to haunting. Morally, however, I could not allow Koons to take the entire burden of the task on himself Therefore, I helped him dig and bury. The cleansing ritual thereafter did protect me from haunts and death, although I did come down with a nasty sore throat during my drive back to Toledo that same evening. Westem archaeologists scoff at such debilitations as psychosomatic, but Natives know they are as real as it gets. The frustrations of eastem Natives in relation to the archaeological community can be summed up in a close look at something archaeologists like to deny: their cosy relationship with collectors, dealers, and spade-wielding hobbyists. Every eastem state has such people, and in no small number. Because of the shallow protection offered to eastem Natives by NAGPRA, these semi-, pseudo-, and, occasionally, psycho-archaeologists have been able to ply their trades, with little interference, into the twenty-first century. Indeed, until all but the last two decades, collectors, dealers, and hobbyists presented themselves as thorough-going archaeologists—and the archaeological establishment went along with the charade. The archaeological career of Raymond C. Vietzen (1907-1995) stands as a case in point, demonstrating the vexations of Native Americans on the unprotected grounds of the Ohio Valley mounds. As a bellwether of twentiethcentury archaeology, the career of Vietzen cannot be beaten. He epitomized the help-yourself attitude of westem science toward Native graveyards, the low standards in the field when the majority of human remains now in collections were dug up, and the heavily blurred lines between archaeology, collecting, and dealing. He also followed the archaeological pack politically, eagerly jumping

BLABBERMOUTH BONES

245

on the anti-NAGPRA bandwagon in the 1980s and and remythologizing his past in the 1990s, when grave robbing proved unpopular with the public. Just as revealing, though in another way, his many books richly show the part that fantasy plays in animating the impulses of archaeology. Today, trained archaeologists affect a distance from Vietzen, but the truth is that, throughout the majority of his career, professionals propped him up, helped him get published, supported his "museum," and even hired him to do their digging.* In reviewing the career of Vietzen, it is worth starting with what Bruce Trigger pointed out in his 1989 History of Archaeological Thought, that, up to the twentieth century, "few archaeologists were educated in the discipline."' In the Midwest, the training lag continued well into the twentieth century. This was certainly the case with Vietzen. Although he touted himself as an archaeologist, his references to his archaeological education were always quite vague. In 1993, he revealed that he "became an archaeologist in 1926," when he would have been but nineteen years old.'" He claimed to have "studied" (as opposed to studied with) William K. Moorehead, William C. Mills, and Henry T. Shetrone, adopting their philosophies and techniques." Indeed, his personal heros in archaeology were Warren K. Moorehead and William C. Mills.'^ Nineteenth-century potsherders both. Mills headed the Ohio State Museum, an arm of the Ohio Archaeological and Historical Society (now simply called the Ohio Historical Society), while Moorehead was personally responsible for the massive destruction of Ohio valley mounds to supply the 1893 Chicago World Fair with displays of Mound-Builder skeletons and relics. So inept was Moorehead, that none of his collection is deemed scientifically worthwhile today.'^ Such were Vietzen's models. Sensitive about his lack of formal training, Vietzen frequently obfuscated his credentials. In 1992, for instance, he stated that his education in art and archaeology had been completed in 1930—four years after his claimed start in archaeology. The names of his professors and institutions were curiously lacking.''' Other, stray references to his "advanced schooling" made it clear that he had never taken courses in archaeology. Instead, he took a four-year course in art, with an emphasis on mechanical drawing and finished renderings of architectural concepts. (He claimed to have "designed some buildings in New York City.")'^ Although he lauded his own "natural bom" artistic ability and rather salaciously recalled drawing classes, during which nude models "strolled around" on their breaks, chatting up the students, the examples of his published art work show hamfisted renderings that are light on technique.'* In fact, Vietzen's primary education was theological. His mother had wanted

246

NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

him to become a minister and missionary. In 1955-1956, he even went as a missionary attached to the Wesleyan Convent Mission on the Navajo reservation in New Mexico and Arizona.'^ His seminary education was of the fundamentalist variety, which caused him lifelong difficulty in reconciling archaeological ideas with his "theology training" without "ignoring something," for their time tables and perspectives were at violent odds.'* By 1995, however, in his eighty-eighth year, Vietzen inclined to the explanations of science over those of Christian fundamentalism, so that he admitted to no longer using biblical history as his touchstone "as much as I used to" (italics mine)." His obscurity about his archaeological training aside, Vietzen was quite clear as to how he actually earned his livelihood. In 1938, he became a GMC Truck dealer, relegating "archaeology" to his spare time on the plea that it paid very poorly.^" Elsewhere, he claimed that the Great Depression had forced him to become a "trader in order to exist."^' In fact, what he was doing in his off hours was "collecting"—i.e., digging up—grave goods and human remains for sale on the Indian relics circuit, where he also bought remains and artifacts.^^ He was a "trader" in the "antiquities" of mound loot. During World War II, Vietzen served in the U.S. Air Force, reaching the rank of Master Sargeant." He preferred to advertise another rank, however, although it was bestowed, not earned. In 1957, Govemor A. B. Chandler commissioned him a "Kentucky Colonel," and he assiduously used the title of "Colonel" in all his subsequent publications.^"* In 1957, Vietzen was also made an honorary citizen of Tennessee by Govemor Frank Clements." These two honors probably had more to do with Vietzen's spirited defense of the ideals of the Confederacy than with his archaeological endeavors. Vietzen even defended slavery.^* After World War II, Vietzen's archaeological career took off, sort of. In the mid-1940s, Vietzen worked briefiy for the Ohio State Museum, reporting to H. Holmes Ellis of the Archaeological Department. At the time, Henry C. Shetrone was the museum's Director, having succeeded William Mills at the post." It is likely that whatever formal training in archaeology that Vietzen had, he received during this period from these men. It is notable that, in his 1945 report on his excavations of Erie mounds, Vietzen included a strange section entitled "Field Technique," which did little more than recite, in twenty-six typset pages, the how-to of his archaeological catechism. The section contained such searing advice as, "Before attempting any archeological research work of any nature one should acquaint himself or herself with the fundamentals of the correct procedure to follow in regards to survey and field work."^* Apparently, he got

BLABBERMOUTH BONES

247

his lesson right, for, in 1949, he was invited to go on a dig at the Great Cahokia Mound Group near East St. Louis, Illinois, as a sort of adjunct, because a personal friend knew of his "interest in America's prehistory."^' In other words, Vietzen was an amateur digger but a professional collector and dealer. Willing fate to have been otherwise, he consistently did his best to blur the line between archaeology and dealing. In his 1992 offering. My Life and Philosophy as an Archaeologist, Author, Artist, Vietzen published a 1989 fan letter from a fellow hobbyist from San Antonio, Texas, who burbled: "You have done one hell of a good job educating enthusiasts like myself."^" Cleariy, neither man was an archaeologist, and the fan knew it, but Vietzen insisted on appropriating the title of archaeologist for himself, as well as his fan. It is one thing to expropriate undue credit for oneself; it is another to have professional help doing it. As an "avocational archaeologist," Vietzen had a lot of help in conflating collecting, dealing, and archaeology from the professional archaeologists ofthe Ohio Historical Society (OHS).^' They allowed him to work on their digs, and OHS helped him publish and disseminate his works.^^ In 1962, Charles E. Frohman of OHS even asked Vietzen for copies of his Ancient Man and Immortal Eries, records of his digs, in an effort to improve the teaching of Native American history." (This last was a frightening development as far as Ohio Natives are concerned, for Vietzen was a veritable font of misinformation on Native America.^") This was not the only professional help that Vietzen had in commingling trading with archaeology. In the late 1940s, Vietzen and his possee of hobbyists formed the Ohio Indian Relic Collectors' Society." In a 1946 report, written while he served as the Secretary ofthe Society, Vietzen specifically thanked the Ohio State Archaeological and Historical Society for the aid and comfort it had afforded the Relic Collectors' Society.^* In 1976, Vietzen revealed that Henry Shetrone, then Director ofthe Ohio State Museum, had guided and advised the group, with the museum allowing the organizing meeting of the Relic Collectors' Society to have been held in Shetrone's own office at the museum." The conflation was consummated when the Relic Collectors' Society decided to regroup as the Archaeological Society of Ohio. Once more, the Ohio State Museum allowed it to hold its foundational meeting in the Director's Room. This time, collectors-cum-"archaeologists" Dr. Gordon F. Meuser, LaDow Johnston, and Vietzen met with the then-museum Director, Dr. E. C. Zepp, a close friend of Vietzen's, and Vietzen's old boss, H. Holmes Ellis.'' Zepp and Ellis were present specifically to represent the museum. Although Ellis was not a founder ofthe earlier Relic Collectors' Society, he as well as

248

NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

Zepp became officers ofthe subsequent Archaeological Society.'' Among the collectors, the reader should not be misled by Dr. Meuser's honorific. It did not indicate a degree in archaeology. Instead, he was a country doctor who dabbled in artifacts. Meuser considered Vietzen his mentor. When allowed to help compile Ancient Ohioans (1946), for instance, he gushed to Vietzen that the book was "his bible on archaeology."^" Grandiloquent as the name Archaeological Society of Ohio may sound, Vietzen frankly acknowledged in 1974 that, for many ofthe members ofthe Archaeological Society, digging mound graves was "our 'Hobby."'^' Despite the fact that the diggers were self-admitted hobbyists, the intimate relationship between the Ohio State Museum and the Society emerged anew in the 1965 and 1966 excavations ofthe mound graves Vietzen called "the Riker site," in Tuscaroras County, Ohio. The Museum entrusted the entire venture to the Sugar Creek Valley chapter ofthe Archaeological Society. In his official report on the excavations (which did not appear until eight years later), Vietzen effervesced that "we enjoyed digging" at the Riker site."*^ Whether the ancestors were equally thrilled with the experience is open to question, expecially considering that, once the exacting effort of digging became tedious for the Sugar Creek Valley enthusiasts, they used a bulldozer to expedite their work."' In all, Vietzen tallied up seventy-seven burials that the Society bulldozed from the site."" The tardily published account of the dig did little more than continue the desecration. As Vietzen discovered in revisiting the site in 1994, relic looters had used his text as a handy guidebook to the precise location of salable bones and grave goods, thus reducing the site to a gravel pit."' Therein, Vietzen experienced a little ofthe proprietary shock that began shaking archaeology in the 1960s, causing the Society for American Archaeology (SAA) to censure relic collectors and traders in its 1961 code of ethics. The SAA was actually declaring a turf war against avocationists, not a moratorium on the desecration of Native American cemeteries, however. As the SAA saw it, the high crime of looting was the destruction of the "context" in which artifacts and bones rested."* Neither conservation ofthe mounds nor the right of Natives to their ancestors' graves was a blip on SAA's radar. By 1989, with NAGPRA looming on the horizon, the SAA rewrote its condemnation into Article II.7 of its by-laws, reframing the issue as one of concern over "commercialism in archaeolgy.""^ American Antiquity and Latin American Antiquity began refusing to publish articles on looted or illicitly traded materials, for archaeologists finally acknowleged in public what Vietzen

BLABBERMOUTH BONES

249

had experienced in private, that scholarship on looted artifacts actively fostered incidents of looting."* A related question tumed on ethics, to wit, whether it was morally acceptable for professional archaeologists to acquire and use traded relics, a practice archaeologist Christopher B. Donnan called the "salvage principle.""' In June, 1990, five months before NAGPRA was emplaced, Donnan had published an article in National Geographic using looted Moche artifacts.'" When he was quizzed and criticized shortly thereafter in both Science and Art and Antiquities, he jabbed back in a letter to Science, defending his choice to "salvage" illicit goods, claiming that, otherwise, crucial data would have been lost. "I can comfortably live with my choice," he declared defiantly." The sheer nastiness of Donnan's "salvage principle" should be graphically understood. Looters are neither careful nor sensitive. In 1987, for instance, pot hunters systematically looted Native graves at the Slack Farm in westem Kentucky, scattering human remains—jaw bones, femurs, fingers, teeth— among the potholes they left puckering the earth. In all, they removed at least 650 Mound Builder skeletons, having paid the "owner" of the old cemetery $10,000 for the privilege." (Obviously, they planned on recouping their investment handsomely on the black market.) By 1995, five years post-NAGPRA, the SAA was actively wringing its hands over the "crisis of looting and site vandalism" that had supposedly erupted." It even openly acknowledged the long-standing Native charge that archaeologists are indistinguishable from "'looters,' 'pothunters,' and traders in antiquities," people with whom archaeologists had once worked hand-inglove but whom they now presumed to rebuke.'" In fact, the grave gutting was no new crisis; it had been going on since the 1780s. What had happened, and all that had happened, was that, in the 1980s, archaeologists started to realize that it was impolitic any longer for them to countenance amateur grave diggers like Vietzen, upon whom they had once smiled. Consequently, Vietzen started receiving the cold shoulder from practicing archaeologists who used to regard him as a friend and, even, a colleague. In 1987, he complained about the way that snot-nosed young-bloods out to "discredit" the "old masters" were impeding the field of archaeology." By 1989, he was not only griping about the new cadre of archaeologists but also longing for the days when archaeologists and collectors were bound in polite cameraderie.'* Since all of Vietzen's works were profoundly self-referential, the thin veneer of generalization in these laments scarcely hid the personal complaint that he was being shut out of professional recognition by the new

250

NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

breed of elite archaeologists looking to disengage themselves from archaeology's disreputable past. Through Vietzen's books, it is also possible to trace the shifts in archaeological mythology, for Vietzen kept up with fashions in the field. In 1945, when racist catalogues were still in vogue, Vietzen liberally bestowed "complete cranial indices and measurements" on The Immortal Eries.^'' The "Craniology" section of that work used all the rubrics of racist skull-science, figuring racial types, including photos of representative skulls in the side and front views and supplying cranial capacities—"1350 c.c. to 1450 c.c."—replete with the accustomed table of "Cranial Measurements."'* In 1965, with racism under heavy attack, Vietzen retitled the cranial section of Indians ofthe Lake Erie Basin, "Pathology and Osteology."" By 1974, with racism on the run, he devoted only a notation in The Riker Site to the fact that he had personally and meticulously "examined and measured" the unearthed skulls. (They were "mesocephalic," showing a "cranial cavity of medium capacity.")^" By the time of his 1965 and 1974 offerings, Vietzen had obviously become aware that cranial capacities were passe. He therefore shied away from the overtly racist comparison values of his earlier works, glomming, instead, onto the new justification for bone science: compiling invaluable data on the diseases suffered by the poor, dead Mound Builders. Accordingly, he used the term "Pathology" in Indians ofthe Lake Erie Basin and, for The Riker Site, drew up bone comparison charts purportedly to discover diseases.*' Vietzen clearly saw that pathology was the new dodge for obftiscating the racism behind the archaeological urge to measure, but, unfortunately, he managed it in such a clumsy way as to expose the revisionist gears ticking. For instance, in his 1978 offering. From the Earth They Came, Vietzen detailed a skeleton of a twelve-year-old giri he had dug up on banks of Portage River, Ohio. Based on his inspection ofthe skeleton, he diagnosed the disease that had felled her: It was a "fever of some nature."" He left unexplored how archaeologists distinguished febrile from nonfebrile bones, but there was no doubt as to why another set of specimens suffered from arthritis. Vietzen had it on the authority of an unnamed "doctor"— Meuser?—that the arthritis among The Immortal Eries had been caused by the "lime in the drinking water."" Most archaeologists are considerably more suave in their presentation ofthe current rationale for bone-retention, that collections form a precious repository of medical knowledge about the Native past.*" Measurements of diet, disease, and exercise form the bulwark of this repository (a litany that comically mimicks the modem American obsession with diet, disease, and physical

BLABBERMOUTH BONES

251

fitness).*' Yes, indeed—those bones are a source of priceless data. Archaeologists have expended so many sage nods of the furrowed brow on this explication that that Crandell was moved to quip, "Why, to hear the archaeologists tell it, those bones are nothing but big blabbermouths!"** Natives contend that, if scientists simply must trace the evolution of diseases, then any old bones should do, yet, somehow, old settler cemeteries never seem to be raided for the purpose. In fact, when old settler cemeteries are unearthed during construction projects, officials rush to rebury the remains, despite all that those blabbermouth bones might have to say about the operation of disease on their populations. Over the nineteenth and twentieth centuries, for instance, municipal development led to the removal of numerous graves from a nineteenth-century church cemetery in dovratown Binghamton, New York. All remains were expeditiously reburied, with nary a peep from archaeologists about the need to box and study them, in pursuit of disease evolution.*^ In 1962, when Interstate 81 was being built north of Binghamton, engineers encountered an old pauper's cemetery sitting atop a precontact Native graveyard. During the 1971 phase of construction, the settler bones were expeditiously reburied, but the nine undoubted Native graves were boxed and "curated" by the State University of New York at Binghamton for the invaluable studies that archaeologists just had to perform on them. As of 1994, the remains had never been touched.** When pressed to prove their "need" for hundreds of thousands of MoundBuilder skeletons, archaeologists typically fall back on magical thinking, conjuring up the mysterious mantra, "DNA, DNA, DNA," while vaguely alluding to future marvels yet to be unveiled. This response looks resonable only to those in the maw of westem science, the same science that once eagerly filled Native skulls with birdseed, hot on the heels of cranial capacities. The power ofthe chant, "cranial capacity," having lost its cachet, the new chant is "D-N-A."*' A promised benefit dangled before Native eyes like a cat's pull-toy is the establishment of descent from ancient Natives, one of NAGPRA's avenues to repatriation. Actually, DNA is rather poor evidence of anything Native American. In the first place, the DNA of modem researchers easily contaminates samples because it has a tendency to "outcompete degraded and damaged" DNA from ancient sources. In addition to the acute problem of sample pollution, ancient Native populations had different genetic stmctures from modem Natives, which dashes population theories based on DNA. When samples come from proximate locales, no conclusions can be reached at all.™

252

NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

At the 17 November 2001, hearings of the NAGPRA Review Committee, Dr. Alan Goodman, a biological anthropologist from Hampshire College in Amherst, Massachusetts, testified to the frailty of DNA evidence in establishing cultural affiliations of ancient human remains. Having worked for twenty-five years on the problem of establishing ethnic identity through bones and teeth, Dr. Goodman flatly declared that DNA evidence was the "least useful of five types of data" commonly used: DNA, craniometries, paleopathology and lifestyle, hair, and teeth." In this opinion, Goodman is joined by Brett Lee Shelton, Jonathan Marks, and Fredericka Kaestle. Together, Dr. Marks, Professor of Anthropology at the University of North Carolina, and Dr. Shelton, Director of Policy and Research for the Indigenous People's Council on Biocolonialism, have documented the invalidity of DNA as any sort of test of Native identity. In fact, they point out that any attempt to establish genetic identities of Natives, living or dead, will necessarily fail, because the mitochondiral DNA used to do the testing is inherited from a person's mother, only. It will be identical to her mother's, her mother's mother's, her mother's mother's mother's, and so forth, necessarily excluding more heritage with every step back in time. Thus, the mtDNA of seven of a person's eight great-grandparents will be absent. In fact, thirty-one of thirty-two of a person's great-great-great grandparents could be Native American, but, because of the exclusive mode of mtDNA inheritance, she might test out as not Native." Consequently, DNA tests on old bones are next to useless for establishing lineal descent. One of the leading experts in this field, Kaestle agreed that DNA evidence "would add little to our scientific knowledge" conceming biological affiliations. At best, DNA evidence provides a summary overview of "general relationships," demonstrating only "more or less" matches of ancient and modem peoples." Kaestle held that current technology cannot illuminate the distribution of genetic markers in ancient and modem Native American populations. Especially when the specimen base is very old and very haphazard, as it is with the Mound Builders, the most that can be done is to say that one individual and presumably, his group, possessed a certain genetic marker. There is no way to know the frequency of that ancient marker or its comparisons to modem frequencies.'" DNA is, therefore, much ado about nothing. Imagining the claims of science to be irrefutable, however, and themselves to be among the scientists, amateur diggers in the east feel empowered to rifle around in the mounds. The damage that hobbyists, collectors, and traders do thereby cannot be overstated. Considering Vietzen, alone, it is clear that the

BLABBERMOUTH BONES

253

harm is inestimable. Already, by 1946, Vietzen boasted of the "considerable work" he had done "on the mounds and village sites of central and southem Ohio and those in many of the adjoining states."^' He was not exaggerating, as he had unquestionably looted hundreds of graves and held "thousands" of grave goods in consequence. At just the Engel-Eiden site (Black River Valley, Ohio), Vietzen estimated that he had unearthed at least seven hundred "graves of prehistoric Indians" and opined that this count was probably well shy of the mark, probably having mn up to one thousand graves.'* In 1945, Vietzen also claimed to have removed "over 200 Erie burials," an assertion he proudly repeated throughout The Immortal EriesP Elsewhere, he asserted that he had "removed close to a thousand burials in Northem Ohio."'* In 1976, long before he stopped digging, Vietzen tallied up his personal total as "thousands of prehistoric human skeletons" removed from their mound graves, destroying the mounds in the process." It is important to realize that, far from the only, Vietzen was simply the best published relic hunter plundering mounds in the Ohio valley. He counted among his friends "all the most prominent and best informed collectors" in Ohio, who had likewise "collected specimens and studied sites" all over the state, some following in their grandfathers' footsteps as grave robbers. Vietzen felt it was only "fitting and proper" to acknowledge their so-called work in his 1946 "archaeological publication," The Ancient Ohioans and Their Neighbors^ To grasp the magnitude of the problem just in Ohio, therefore, Vietzen's excavations should be multiplied a hundred-fold. Across the entire eastem U.S., the number of amateur and illicit digs mount up to the hundreds of thousands. The true number will never be known, for looters rip and run, fencing their booty to private collectors, under the trading table. As a "private collector," Vietzen carted off most of his loot to the Indian Ridge Museum. For all its high-sounding name, the museum was, in fact, a shack out back of his home, on his family farm on West Ridge Road in Elyria, Ohio. Vietzen constructed the "museum" from an old settler's cabin that he dismantled and transported, piecemeal, to his home in 1930." This ramshackle building was where he held the booty from his multifarious digs, including grave goods and human remains. The Engel-Eiden Site remains and grave goods were there, for instance, as were grave beads from a site near Oak Harbor, Ohio.*^ Here, he also housed the items that he traded throughout his life, for this building really warehoused the wholesale artifacts on which he spent up to $25,000 annually." Because NAGPRA does not apply to private

254

NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

collections, Vietzen was able to keep these human remains and grave goods in this hut. Private collectors have similar, though less publicized, stashes all over the east. Because the "museum" was so public, it made a tempting target for the more larcenous in the trading profession, so, in 1968, Vietzen disclosed his intention of shooting anyone who attempted to loot his store.^ His "collection" was not only a source of remark among competitors, however, especially as Natives mobilized after 1970 to counter the burgeoning trade in grave goods and remains. It is plain that many Natives began confronting Vietzen on his trade in their ancestors' bones, since he took every opportunity to answer their arguments in print, mainly by insisting that he was not a grave robber but a scientist.*' Thus, between rival traders and Native protesters, it is unclear who might have broken into the Indian Ridge Museum on 8 October 1994. Vietzen characterized the culprits as "vandals and thieves," but it is just as likely that the "stolen" grave goods were respectfully reburied as that they were tinloaded on the black market in Indian relics, as Vietzen assumed.** In addition to a storage facility, Vietzen also used the museum as a meeting hub. The original Indian Relic Collectors' Society met at Vietzen's "museum."*' On 20 July 1980, he also hosted the annual meeting of Ohio Archaeological Society there, attracting "about 500 persons," who drove in from Ohio, Georgia, Michigan, Pennsylvania, Kentucky, West Virginia, and Indiana. Although Vietzen insisted upon calling them "archaeologists," from his account of the artifacts bought and sold that day, they were dealers and collectors. ("Very few 'fakes' were offered for sale," Vietzen crowed of the sale's success.**) This was clearly a traders' convention. Nevertheless, the Ohio State Historical Museum was also involved in the affair, with Martha Potter Otto attending as its representative, even at this late date blurring the official line between dealers and archaeologists.*' Like everyone in the relics business from archaeologists to traders, Vietzen railed against the dawning of NAGPRA.'" In keeping with his colleagues, Vietzen strove to characterize Native demands for reburial and repatriation as hysterical attacks by ignorant Indians on the nobility of science. He minimized the extent of grave digging, on the one hand, and denigrated Native rights to the graves of their ancestors, on the other. Twenty-first century archaeologists like to gloss over this poor reflection on their charity, pretending that they never really resisted NAGPRA, but from 1980 up until 1995, such minimizing and mean-mouthing were common. The brutal truth is that the Society for American Archaeology roadblocked

BLABBERMOUTH BONES

255

repatriation and reburial at every step, making its dedicated, seven-year fight against NAGPRA the top priority of its Govemment Relations Board." The SAA even attempted to forestall federal legislation by emplacing its own repatriation policies, which, of course, favored museum collections over Native claims. Archaeologist Larry Zimmerman, who is friendly to Native causes, recorded that resistance to the legislation was so strong in archaeological circles that he doubted whether NAGPRA would ever pass.'^ At the inception of SAA's fight, many cabals poppped up to bolster its aims. In 1981, for instance, the prominent archaeologist Clement W. Meighan of UCLA founded the American Committee for the Preservation of Archaeological Collections (ACPAC). Its mission was to fight repatriation and reburial on the grounds that, somehow or another. Native remains were the cultural heritage of all Americans, rather than just the ancestors of their own descendants.'^ The absurd proposition that Native graves were part of the Euroamerican heritage and, therefore, the archaeologists' rightful playthings would never have been defended had the tables been tumed and, say, the Iroquois unilaterally declared all Presbyterian graveyards in New York to be part of their cultural heritage to be dug up at will. Panic stood at the base of SAA and ACPAC aims. In his 1989 article, "Skeletons in Our Museums' Closets," Douglas J. Preston recounted the recoil of ptire trepidation he encountered among archaeologists at the mere mention of repatriation. The cries of anguish were palpable, especially among those who feared that their livelihood was at stake.*^ Archaeologists cautiously speculated among themselves whether NAGPRA signaled the "death knell" of their profession.'' In public, however, they defensively circled their wagons against the perceived threat to their careers: Redskins on the Warpath.'* That is when anti-NAGPRA forces tumed seriously nasty, not seeing, or, perhaps, no longer caring about, the damage they did to their public image in the process, for the prospect of reburying remains and artifacts left a notable percentage of archaeologists literally frothing. In 1993, Meighan, a spokesman for the frothers, recited in mounting outrage the case of a 1991 agreement on the management of one site made between West Virginia's Department of Transportation (DOT) and the West Virginia Committee on Native American Archaeological and Burial Policies, an oversight group composed of both Native and non-Native citizens of West Virginia." The handling of this site became a favorite horror story of NAGPRA obstructionists. Among other nefarious things, the West Virginia DOT agreed that the Natives would control everything wrenched from the site, including not

256

NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

only any human remains and artifacts, but also all plant and animal remains and debris. No videotaping of skeletons was allowed, and all other footage needed the approval of the Committee. Native rules were followed conceming, for instance, menstruation, a powerful event that most Natives hold can wrinkle less powerful medicine nearby, so that menstruating archaeologists were not allowed near the bones or artifacts.'* Finally, all finds were required to be reburied after one year." Archaeologists flew into an rage over this tuming of the tables. A long exhale of anger was reserved for the Committee, itself. The mere fact that a committee was equally composed of Native and non-Native members—so that, for once. Native had an equal voice in the process—was constmed as complete capitulation to irrationality, with naysayers arguing that the only possible reason for the negotiated limitations on the archaeological dig was "political correctness."'"" Then, again, instead of understanding that, in acting as a Native prophylactic protecting less powerful (male) spirits from the profound action of female medicine, the menstrual rule displayed high regard for woman-power, westem feminists took pursed-mouth affront. The issue that raised the highest eyebrows was, however, the red flannel lovingly used to wrap up extracted bones. Oblivious of the cultural importance of the color red in eastem funerary rites and thickly missing that it is the act of sacredly enfolding the bones in a red covering, not the substance of the covering itself that matters, obstmctionists scoffed at the flannel—a "material unknown" to the Mound Builders, they blustered."" Their sneer showed little besides their rooted ignorance of Native customs, however, for the use of red flannel at traditional eastem burials is as old as contact. In the eighteenth century, for instance, John Heckewelder attended a Lenape clan mother's funeral at which he witnessed the people "thmst" a "small bag of vermilion paint, with some flannel to lay it on" into the coffin as the lid was closed.'"^ The red flannel had merely replaced the sorts of red materials used precontact. Contrary to the colonial stereotype of savages hopelessly locked in a primitve past. Natives are actually very quick to adopt new and improved methods, materials, and technologies. Those stuck in the past were the westem archaeologists. Obstmctionism lingered in their ranks, fed on the sour grapes regurgitated by the likes of Meighan, who fanned their fears by waming them of their impending and "politically driven extinction."'"^ Even years after NAGPRA was law, these diehards crafted snide, so-there arguments, increasingly desperate in their bittemess. They targeted three groups of "enemies:" Native Americans, the

BLABBERMOUTH BONES

257

American public, and, finally, even their own. The major bile was vented on the perennially favorite target. Native America. Here, it was alleged that repatriation and reburial of remains was a "sideshow," deflecting attention away from the tme plight of Natives, stumbling about, as they were, in their indigent, illiterate, alcoholic haze.'"^ Were tax-funded institutions to be robbed of their relic collections, just because Native agitators were about? Why, repatriation amounted to nothing less than giving away public assets, the gmmblers charged, as though Natives were not also taxpayers.'"' In 1993, Anita Sue Grossman alleged that the Native call to repatriate bones was no less than an anti-intellectual attack on the very essence of scholarship, tinder the enervating banner of minority rights. Maintaining that the demand for ancestral remains to be retumed was not only "fairly recent" but also entirely political, Grossman sought to send a collective shudder down the archaeological spine by quoting an attomey for the Three Affiliated Tribes of North Dakota as boasting that they were going to put physical anthropologists "out of business." Against her Injuns-on-the-Warpath imagery, Grossman juxtaposed innocently astonished archaeologists, piteously defending themselves as century-long "allies " of Native America.'"* Incredibly, Clement Meighan even went so far as to intimate that Natives had more financial and political clout than archaeologists, a patently ridiculous assertion.'"' Obviously, each of these "points" depends upon pejorative stereotypes for its effect, an effect that was, were truth told, entirely visceral. The racism underpinning the accusations is staggering: Drunken, ignorant, civilizationhating Indians massacring poor, innocent scholars, who were only ever Friends of the (treacherous) Red Man. Worse, the thieving Redskins were stealing defenseless archaeologists blind. That these appeals were convincing to a core group of archaeologists is a frightening measure of the white supremacy still quickening their discipline. The diehards next began attacking the American public, which had supported the claims of Native America over those of archaeology. In articles dramatically—and inflammatorily—entitled things such as "Digging the Grave of Archaeology," the sour-grapes brigade charged that it was neither humanity nor justice that had underpinned mainstream support for the repatriation movement, but "white guilt.'""* Why African Americans, Asian Americans, Semitic Americans, latino Americans, and nonwestem Americans, generally, should have been suffering from "white guilt" was left unaddressed. The rather disturbing assumption here, not the least because it is so intrinsic to the

258

NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

argument, is that people of color are not Americans, that the only real Americans are the descendants of European settlers. The anger at ordinary Americans was tied to archaeologists' ideological faith that NAGPRA could not pass, despite all the signals that it would. Consequently, when NAGPRA did pass, it came as a complete shock to them. They discovered, too late, that they had smugly overestimated their support among the public while vastly underestimating the public support for Native repatriation and reburial. Their surprise reflected their insularity, for, had they poked their heads out of their hidey-holes a bit more frequently, they might have noticed that, whenever Euroamericans knew of it, they had always been outraged by the "scientific" use of human remains. As early as 1788, for instance, when the the medical school of King's College in New York City began digging up newly interred corpses for study, an ugly, two-day riot ensued, with protesters aiming to do more than merely lecture the inmates of King's College on their ethics. The riot ultimately led to the New York Anatomy Acts of 1789, restricting the use of bodies for science, with the U.S. Congress passing similar legislation in 1790."" In the early twentieth century, the story of Minik, the little Inuit boy, aroused a massive outcry when the American public leamed that his father and three companions, who had died on a friendly visit to the United States in 1898, had been boiled down to bone for exhibit by the American Museum of Natural History. When the story was exposed by the press, irate letters poured in to the museum, all of them from outraged Euroamericans, not one of whom was suffering from "white guilt" (which had yet to have been invented). A simultaneous case of an Inuit girl from Alaska, similarly boiled down for her bones on behalf of the American Museum of Natural History, increased the ire. One furious attack on the Museum, again originating from the pen of a Euroamerican, quoted section 306 ofthe Penal Code, which expressly forebade the desecration visited upon the girl's body. The author frostily noted that the Code also required that, after dissection, a medical specimen was to be buried, decently and immediately."" The public outrage over the Minik story erupted anew in 1986, when Kenn Harper's book. Give Me My Father's Body, was published. This time, a movement arose, once more among Euroamericans, to accomplish what Minik had been unable to do by his death in 1918, i.e., repatriate the remains of his people. Finally, on 1 August 1993, the remains of Minik's father, Qisuk, along with those of his three Inuit companions, were retumed to and buried at Qaanaaq, Greenland.'" These examples show what Robert Bieder pointed out

BLABBERMOUTH BONES

259

in 1990, that Euroamericans tend to be every bit as offended by archaeological activity as Natives."^ Insular and arrogant to the end, however, archaeologists blithely ignored these clues to their ghoulish reputation, until the passage of NAGPRA forced upon them the realization of their lack of public support. As the reality of repatriation gained on them, the diehards ultimately began accusing other scholars of cud-chewing ignorance. Museum directors came under special attack for having been trained in art history or management, backgrounds that allegedly left them unequipped to understand the importance of hanging onto Native remains. Universities were portrayed as bastions of backwardness, in which befuddled cultural anthropologists had so lost their bearings as to have become dupes of Native America, inveigled into shouting down their beleaguered but unbowed colleagues in osteology.'" Any archaeologists who stepped outside the sanctioned circle of resistance to NAGPRA were apt to be slapped down pretty hard as exemplars of that "dissident group of archaeologists" favoring the reburial of remains."" For the high crime of arguing the possibility of "different and valid ways of knowing the past," for example, Larry Zimmerman was roundly denounced as a "malcontent" and accused of having gone Indian, which, apparently, is a bad thing.'" When Zimmerman brought up his concerns about the racist culture of archaeology, his points were not refuted; the all-purpose response of his peers was to shout derogatory names at him."* The scales loosed from his eyes, Zimmerman began to doubt the official story that ancient Natives had not cared about their dead and that, after the turmoil of the 1970s, they ceased to care again. He discovered that the truth was quite otherwise. Natives cared, had always cared, and had never retreated on this issue of caring for their dead. Instead, they had simply been ignored, silenced out of the discussion."' When he attempted to put the ethics of grave digging before the SAA in the 1980s, Zimmerman was met on the surface with smiles and seeming acceptance, but he later found that he had been egregiously patronized and double crossed—in other words, that his colleagues had treated him with the same faithless condescension that they typically reserved for Native Americans. Confronting his colleagues directly with the "contradictions between the ideals and reality of archaeology" proved even less productive, as his peers simply tumed vicious."* The experience was so traumatic, that Zimmerman considered leaving archaeology."' Had his colleagues succeeded in driving him out of the profession, their silencing campaign would have been complete, indeed. Those who are unfamiliar with academia would be flabbergasted to see how frequently silencing is wielded—it is, in fact, the Ultimate Weapon of the

260 NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

ivory-tower set. Whenever confronted with challenging data or analyses that, if given a fair hearing, would rearrange some cherished ideology, scholars typically plug up their ears with their forefingers, squeeze their eyes tightly shut, and yell, "I CAN'T HEAR YOU! I CAN'T HEAR YOU!" Then, presto, chango!—just like magic—^the troublesome voice with its imorthodox message is made to disappear. In this way. Natives have been regularly disappeared by archaeologists. In this same way, Zimmerman was almost silenced. At least Zimmerman was Euroamerican, which preserved him from the worst skepticism of his colleagues. In 2000, Joe Watkins, a Native American who is also an archaeologist, refused to dig up Native graves and soon found himself out of the professional loop for his conscience. The sidelining of his concerns had a long history. Watkins was a student in the 1960s. Specifically because of his race, his instructors refused to credit him as "an objective scientist.'"^" When archaeology first felt Native resistance, Watkins watched his "anthropology professors" publicly post, for the purpose of ridicule, articles from Native newspapers protesting the digging of their graveyards.'^' This abuse of power certainly signaled to their Euroamerican students that scornful dismissal of Native concerns was acceptable. In the 1970s, at the same time that Gerald Vizenor (Chippewa) was proposing that a "bone court" be established to deal with disputes over remains, Watkins was dismayed that archaeological policy statements were always skewed to favor Euroamerican conceptions, in blithe oblivion of the high spiritual importance that Native attach to ancestral remains.'^^ When he wrote a memo in 1980, suggesting that Native issues be confronted, not ducked, and that a sensitive system of respect and reburial be introduced, he never received an answer.'" Matters had not changed much by 1997, when Watkins made the mistake of listening respectfully to Natives' opinions at an American Indian Religious Freedom Act Task Force hearing in Oregon. He leamed of his error when archaeologists from the National Park Service "chided" him for hearing Natives out, indicating that, if archaeologists just laid low. Natives would not notice what they were doing.'^'' Such fiailing attacks on Natives, the public, and each other chagrinned and alienated more moderate archaeologists who, amenable to the shift in power dynamics brought about by NAGPRA, sought a smoother road.'^' In 1995, K. Anne Pybum and Richard R. Wilk argued that merely meeting the standards of the 1980s was inadequate, for, post-NAGPRA, a higher level of accountability was required.'^* An "accountability principle" was proposed for the SAA in the 1990s, under which archaeologists accepted responsibility for their behavior

BLABBERMOUTH BONES 261

toward the Native peoples studied.'" Some archaeologists even began to suggest that "no single person or group should have exclusive access to, or control" of archaeological "resources," i.e., collections of artifacts and human remains. Although far more accommodating than previous statements, these new tacks continued to posit archaeological superiority over Natives. It was still Natives, never archaeologists, who were "studied," relegating Natives to the permanent status of specimen. Archaeologists self-monitored accountability. Native skeletons and grave goods continued to be defmed as "resources." In particular, the call to cooperate in the control of "resources" continued quietly to assume that, somehow. Natives were under an obligation to "share" their cemeteries with archaeologists, an obligation not foisted on any other population in the United States. Natives acknowledged the baby steps that archaeologists were taking toward responsibility but, nevertheless, rejected these codes. Casting about, archaeologists hit upon another formulation that boded better response. The new cry was "partnership" between archaeologists and Natives.'^' Larry Zimmerman champions the partnership model, hoping that westemers can learn from other cognitive modes.''" Ricardo J. Elia similarly noted in 1995 that "archaeology is not an isolated research pursuit."'^' T. J. Ferguson hoped that, in light of these partnerships, signalling the new, more accommodating posture of archaeology. Natives were moving past the hard-line positions they took in the 1980s into a more "centrist position."'^^ Museums have literally lept on the partnership bandwagon, as the best method of ensuring their own future.'" This may all be well and good, but Natives are not necessarily persuaded that EVERYTHING IS DIFFERENT NOW—and some archaeologists agree. As Pybum and Wilk pointed out in 1994, for all its new social complexities, the field of archaeology has not "changed as much" as many practitioners like to think. As far as the "centers of power" of the discipline go, "it is still pretty much business as usual."'''' "Partnerships" that consist of one or two Natives hopelessly outnumbered on an advisory council are really just a sophisticated way of disregarding Native voices while seeming to legitimize Natives' concerns, Stacked panels allow archaeologists to outvote Natives at every tum —all democratically, of course. As Pybum and Wilk argue, if archaeology is to survive as a profession, scholars must enter into genuine collaboration, as opposed to lip-service partnership. Trust and mutual respect are indispensable to the relationship."'

262

NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

The skewed rules ofthe partnership game, although cynical, are not nearly as duplicitous as the mythology that has evolved in archaeological circles of late, transforming archaeologists into Friends of the Indian. Despite their having been, historically, as oblivious as an adolescent to their impact on Native America, a pretense surfaced post-NAGPRA that archaeologists had always been ethical and sensitive in their work, alert and responsive to Native concems. This false claim had been nascent in 1980, prompting Daniel Miller to chide fellow archaeologists on their profound insensitivity, which had caused the "blanket rejection" they were encountering to their work, worldwide.'^* In 1995, Pybum fleshed out several examples of archaeological insensitivity and irresponsibility. At one project in 1980, for instance, she recalled that the archaeologists picked a local person who was to pass on their largesse, including jobs at the dig. The local community held their point person in low esteem, however, counting him a scoundrel. Thus, the archaeologists had handed status to a scalawag, altering the natural balance of power in the community, and not for the better.'" In 1996, T. J. Ferguson openly admitted and regretted how little consideration had been given to the psychological and emotional impact of archaeology on the people whose pasts were being raided.'^' When revisionism nevertheless surfaced as the post-NAGPRA tactic, Larry Zimmerman dubbed it "remythologizing" the past. In the remythologized version ofthe relations between Natives and archaeologists, "there never really had been any problem," or, had one ever existed, it was all due to one, big ol' "misunderstanding."'^' Indeed, by 1997, there were those among archaeologists who had so completely rememorialized their motives and their deeds as to recast NAGPRA as a face-saving mechanism, allowing them to do what they had always known was right by Native America but had been prevented from doing by peer pressure.''"' Although Zimmerman finds the current remythologizing "ironic" and "somewhat self-delusive," others have a more direct term for it: "an outright lie.""" The process of remythologizing the archaeological past can be actively traced in Vietzen's books, where it looks considerably more raw and less heartwarming than Zimmerman would have his readers believe. Like his colleagues, in remythologizing his actions, Vietzen conveniently forgot the evidence of his own works, written before it was fashionable to deny misbehavior.'""^ In 1992, for instance, oblivious of his earlier boasts of having personally removed thousands of artifacts from graves, Vietzen falsely declared

BLABBERMOUTH BONES

263

that very few of his artifacts were actually grave goods but, instead, represented items seized from refuse pits."'*^ Burial mounds thus handily transformed into middens in his mind, Vietzen began to write loftily of his undying regard for Native American bones. In 1992, he insisted that he "respect[ed] these remains" and feared the wrath of God should he mistreat them."^ In 1994, he asserted that "I have loved and respected every skeleton of man I ever disturbed," adding that he had "handled" them all "gently" and always with "utmost respect" in preserving and studying them."" The graves were "sacred" to him.'"* He went so far as to claim that he had asked forgiveness for every skeleton he had ever disturbed in the name of science.'"^ In 1989, he even claimed that to "study" ancient graves and grave goods honored Native America.'"* These claims of respect were spectacular self-delusions, however, completely at odds with Vietzen's own published reports and reminiscences. For instance, in 1968, he recalled with a chuckle that, in his early days, he drove around from site to site in a car whose trunk was full of "Indian skeletons and relics" lumped together with "old guns, iron kettles and four Kentucky hams," as well as "digging equipment."'"' Vietzen frequently cast Indian skeletons in the role of comedian. In one moment of high comedy during the 1965-1966 Riker dig, for instance, one of the hobbyists, Charlie Voshall, "slyly" opined that, whereas Vietzen might have put one large skeleton down as a male, "with the mouth open like that it has to be female.""" In another incident, gleefully related in 1968, Vietzen lauded deviousness in pursuit of archaeological treasure and disregard for that treasure, once tinearthed. A grave to be dug up by two of Vietzen's cohorts lay below a peach tree. Since the work involved uprooting the tree, they doubted that the fanner, on whose land they were digging, would give his consent. Consequently, they "sneaked" onto the plot to excavate without the farmer's permission. Just as the daring duo had exhumed a "perfect skull," the farmer came by. To avoid being caught red-handed in the midst of illicit digging, one of the madcaps pitched the skull into the Huron River, smashing it to bits. As it tumed out, the farmer did not mind their uprooting his peach tree, after all, leaving Vietzen breezily to lament the loss of "the finest skull" on the site.'" In two recorded instances, one in 1945 and the other in 1949, Vietzen admitted that control of his excavations was so lax that idle onlookers managed to destroy human remains that he and his crews had dug up. In the first instance, at the Franks site in Brownhelm, Ohio, the diggers had pulled a skull out of its ancient grave and placed it in a box for storage. A woman hanging

264

NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

about out of curiosity heiped herseif to the box, stuck her finger through one eye socket of the skuli, and gave it a "quick flip" to examine its back. This had the effect of crumbiing the skull.'" The second incident mirrored the first, except that it was a local boy who manhandled the skull, mashing it to bits.'" Perhaps the most disturbing desecration came during a dig in Scotland, Indiana, recorded in 1968. Having subjected one skull to cleaning and so-called preserving, everyone assembled for dinner. The crew somehow included a compliment of teenage girls, who were teased, taunted, and dared to "kiss the skull." Most of them recoiled in horror at the suggestion, but one plucky gid, whom Vietzen characterized as "a cute little trick," pulled out her lipstick, applied a thick coat, and "implanted a perfect outline of her lips upon the frontal bone of the Indian skull." The jolly crew all agreed that here was one man who "would never kiss and tell."'^" While he was about the business of remythologizing, Vietzen also reconstituted his reputation in regards to the bony commerce of relic "collecting." Although he never denied regularly trolling flea markets, auctions, and collectors' meetings for artifacts, many of which were grave goods, he did emphasize his unwillingness to trade in bones. He first announced that it violated his "principals [sic]" in 1976, to explain his refusal to sell a "skull to young biker to mount as headlight holder."'" By 1992, he was fervently insisting that he had never trafficked in human remains."* In 1995, he related his stubborn refusal the year before to buy two Native skulls for the bargainbasement price of $75.00, once more due to his firm policy against bone commerce. (Instead, he photographed the remains. Notably, he did not tum the felon selling them in to the FBI, even though NAGPRA had outlawed the intentional sale of Native remains in 1990.)'" Here again, the evidence of his own books militates against the tmth of these claims. By his own account, Vietzen bought and sold human remains. For example, a letter dated 27 March 1949, reproduced in Sittin' on a Stump (1968), contained a negotiation between Vietzen and a buyer to purchase "some skulls" along with a water bowl, all for $50.00."* In another incident occurring in 1959 at an "archaeological meeting" in Wisconsin, Vietzen eyed the goods of a fellow collector who, out of the back of his station wagon, was selling a "large coffin like [sic] box containing mummies of a young male and a female holding a small child." The asking price for the whole kit-and-caboodle was $1,000. It was the price, not the fact of traffic in human remains, that gave Vietzen pause, so he offered $500 for the lot. The immediate counteroffer of $650 still striking Vietzen as too high, he

BLABBERMOUTH BONES

265

retreated to his own relic table to mull matters over. Although Vietzen did not quite trust the seller, who had confiicting stories of where he had gotten the remains, he decided to make a final, firm offer of $600. Just then, a cloudburst halted activity at the market. When the skies cleared, the station wagon was gone, so this sale was not consummated. It was, however, a chance storm, not principle, that had thwarted the purchase."' In a third example—^which, incredibly enough, Vietzen recounted in 1992, long after he had begun to deny such deeds—no sudden storm occurred to halt the sale. The transaction occurred once more at the annual "archaeological" (i.e., traders') convention in Wisconsin in the early 1940s. As a special favor, a collector fnend of Vietzen's, Nick Carter, offered Vietzen "something from the Custer battlefield.'"*" Vietzen hero-worshipped General George Armstrong Custer, to whom he gloried in being vaguely related. His books, while purportedly archaeological studies, contain myriad paens to and defenses of Custer, so that Carter could not have offered the relics to a more eager buyer.'*' Carter escorted Vietzen to his car, where he was storing the "partial Indian skeleton with a partly decomposed buckskin jacket with glass beads and other ornaments. The cranium had been exposed to the sunlight and it was bleached white." Much of the skeleton was missing, but Vietzen jumped at his chance to have the skeleton of an Indian who, he was confident, had "fought Custer." The text is clear that the two "agreed to [Carter's] terms" and that Vietzen made the "purchase." He carted the human remains off to the "Indian Ridge Museum," where they remained till his death in 1995.'*^ Vietzen was a little more cautious about admitting his bone-dealing on Mother's Day in 1990, just six months before NAGPRA became law. In recording a meeting with a small number of collectors in the Ohio River valley, he carefully couched it as a study session, during which he claimed to have inspected a "few broken long bones and a cranium from a burial" that one collector had brought along.'*^ What deep insights were gained from bandying the bones about was not revealed, but the reader was left with the suspicion that, this being a dealers' meeting, the bones were for sale. Unlike his coy lies about the bone trade,Vietzen was always more relaxed about admitting his traffic in grave goods. As late as 1991, he admitted to having bought a gorget taken from a stone grave in Tennessee, a purchase supposedly outlawed by NAGPRA in 1990.'*" Laid bare through Vietzen's fifty years ofjournalizing, remythologizing the archaeological past is exposed for the paltry art it is. Far from repairing relations between Natives and archaeologists, it exacerbates the rub. Remythol-

266

NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

ogizing a criminal past feels good only to the guilty party. It feels cynical and sidewinding to the victims and, interestingly, would never be allowed in prison rehabilitation programs. I therefore seriously question whether remythologizing the archaeological past is a "necessary step," as Zimmerman contends, for truth must be the first step in reconciliation.'*' The way for archaeologists to establish honest relations with Natives is for them to admit, without cavil, what their past behavior has been—and to apologize for it, with as much contrition as they can muster. Only after those who were injured by their misdeeds have agreed to forgive them will any basis exist for a sustainable relationship. Vietzen's books expose another unsavory fact that archaeologists would like to sidestep, the real stimulus behind the urge to dig up ancestral America. The official story in archaeology is that Native bones are amassed in the "pursuit of knowledge and truth for its own sake."'** Vietzen mimicked this pose, continually defending his collections by claiming that he held them in the strictest interests of scientific study and insisting that he never broke apart lots from one site.'*^ In critiquing archaeology in 1990, however, Robert Bieder confessed to suspicion of this "pure science" rationale, suggesting instead that the "pure joy" of unearthing skeletons and artifacts had always motivated the digging, with the claims of science or profit simply acting as the socially acceptable justification of the moment.'** There is a lot of evidence to support Bieder's hunch in the nineteenthcentury record, indicted before archaeologists became shy about conceding the numinous nature of their grave digging. For instance, between 1876 and 1878, in pursuit of his Atlantean fable, William Stone secured an Iroquoian skull from a peat bog at Ramsdill's Cove, about two miles north of the outlet of Lake Saratoga, in New York. Stone had an unabashedly magical view of the skull; it was his Atlantean muse. It "is now before me as I write," he announced, all aflutter.'*' Similarly, in 1860, Thomas Campbell Walbridge hung onto five crania extracted from a Canadian mound on the shores of the Bay of Quinte, not for any scientific purpose, but just for the thrill of having them.'™ In the twentieth century, archaeologists were still enticing readerly interest in archaeology by promoting not the science, but the rapture, of their work. In 1951, Henry Clyde Shetrone, a member of the Ohio State Archaeological and Historical Society and Director of the Ohio State Museum, enthused that, "No doubt every reader" of his Primer of Ohio Archaeology "would like to take part in the actual 'digging' of a mound." He included photos of skeletons unearthed at the Hopewell Mounds in Ross County, Ohio, to reinforce the tingle in that urge.'^'

BLABBERMOUTH BONES

267

For his voluble part, Vietzen supplied ample evidence that little-boy joy spurred grave digging. His many exuberant stories of the male bonding to be found in bones demonstrate that, when the spade was in his hand, science was the farthest thing from his mind. In 1974, he was plain that he and the Sugar Creek Valley branch of his Archaeological Society dug at the Riker site for enjoyment, not science.'^^ In a jeremiad he penned in 1981 against fiooding the relics market with fakes (because it infiated prices), Vietzen condemned commercialism for having "taken the joy"—as opposed to the science—"out of collecting.'"" Again, Vietzen might have been more obvious about his inducements than most, but he was not more motivated by them, as shown by the lackadaisical care archaeologists take of their prizes, once secured. The excitement of pulling things from the ground has always taken precedence over tedium of keeping records of what was removed, so that the state of archaeological data directly contradicts the claim that science motivates the digging. What records have been kept would disgrace a fifth-grader. Pre-NAGPRA, many govemmental agencies did not even know how many remains they had lying about. The inventory requirements of NAGPRA tumed up, for instance, a previously "missing" cache of remains in the possession of the U.S. Army Corp of Engineers that tumed out to be the largest single collection in the country. The bones had been pulled out of the ground during various engineering projects only to have been stashed and forgotten.'^" Reportage is clearly an afterthought. At the hasty highway constmction dig at Binghamton, New York, for instance, grave removals occurred during three phases of highway constmction, in 1962-1963,1969, and 1971-1972, but no report was ever filed on any ofthe removals. In fact, during the slap-dash grave dig at the 1971 constmction, archaeologists were called upon, not to record the dig, but to distinguish "white" from "Indian" graves, so that settler remains could be reinterred with dispatch, whereas Native remains could be boxed for curation.'^^ The tmth is that, until they were forced by the necessity ofthe NAGPRA inventory to systematize their modes of reporting data on human remains, archaeologists kept slipshod records with incompatible categories that were idiosyncratically based—hardly the foundation of scientific work. It was not until 1994 that some semblance of a professional manual was drafted on records-keeping, and then it was compiled only to meet the requirements of NAGPRA. Archaeologists typically excuse their negligence on the plea of "poorly ftinded" archaeology departments, but, again, the very fact of poor

268

NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

funding belies the claim that bone-keeping is vital research crammed to bursting with invaluable insights into the Native past."* If the failure to record is the first, then the failtire to study is the second dirty little secret of archaeological hoards. Assuming that scientists really do study their bone stashes every other week, as one anthropology professor at Berkeley insisted in 1993, then they must have a very slow learning curve, indeed.'" Such claims of regular study are, however, demonstrably bogus, another fact that the passage of NAGPRA forced to the fore. Ironically, by requiring inventories of remains, NAGPRA had archaeologists busily dusting off their collections just to see what they had. Most did not know. Pre-NAGPRA, only 30% of the bones held in institutions had ever been "studied.""* As of 1995, of the 20,947 skeletons inventoried as taken from the lower Mississippi Valley, archaeologists had not even bothered to determine the sex of 64%, while, in Missouri, 83.6% of the catalogued skeletons had never been studied in any way."' These statistics are commonplace across the United States, with the complete failure to follow through once bones are unearthed putting the lie to the claim that pure science spurs the digging. If shoddy records and nonexistent analyses are chagrinning, another aspect of boy-joy digging is downright discomfitting: the fantasy element of archaeology. From deeply jargonized texts to airy intellectualization, archaeologists take any number of pains to avoid facing it and do not respond well when it is brought up. In this regard, I believe that some of the professional distance that archaeologists began to affect from Vietzen around 1985 was not because he had failed to keep up with trends in the field, but because he had failed to hush up his motives for being in the field. Vietzen was gloriously naive about disclosing sentiments and impulses that younger, more self-aware archaeologists were savvy enough to keep to themselves. It was his unguarded tongue, always wagging with a childlike lack of inhibition, more than his status as an amateur or a trader, that drove elite archaeologists to shun Vietzen in his twilight years. He embarrassed them where it hurt, in their pretensions. First, as he aged, Vietzen came to feel ambivalence and, at times, outright remorse for having excavated Native graves. In old age, he openly rued having disturbed the dead and wondered whether he had been wrong in doing so.'*" Although insisting that they "all seem friendly and happy," Vietzen felt literally haunted by the spirits of those whom he had dug up and confessed to confusion and feelings of failure for it.'*' Disturbed spirits were always about him, speaking to him just below hearing, watching him, and populating his nightmares.'*^ When he revisisted the "Lost City" in Lewisburg, Kentucky,

BLABBERMOUTH BONES

269

which he had excavated in 1948, he "tumed away with tears in his eyes" to realize that all the magnificent mounds had been leveled by his hand.'*' Penitence for grave robbing is not a stance that modem archaeologists wish to encourage, so that, when one of their self-proclaimed own indulges in it, he repells his cohorts. Second, there is no denying that Vietzen's books grew stranger as he grew older, so that, by the 1980s, they began to include some astounding confabulations, not the least of them accommodating archaeological wish-fulfillment. Vietzen had always loved playing Indian, dressing up in feathered headdresses and beaded regalia to dance, powwow-style, with Native peoples. To facilitate the play, he began holding living museum exhibits at his Indian Ridge Museum.'^ At first, he justified these romantic extravaganzas with his clamorous claim of having been adopted by numerous Native groups, including the Seneca, Mohawk, Cherokee, Sioux, Chippewa, and Navajo.'*' By the last few decades of his life, however, Vietzen had moved well past his adoption rationale to convincing himself that he actually was an Indian, intellectually and spiritually.'** He toyed with the notion of reincamation from a Native existence.'*' Albeit awash with the Christian formulations animating the New Age movement, he professed an eager belief in the "Great Spirit."'** He communed with the spirits of the dead he had unearthed.'*' He had always had visions (in some instances, telling him where to dig), but, by the end, his dreams and visions began to ovenvhem his reality."" I suspect that, however subliminally, a similar element of YOU-WERE-THERENESS underlies most archaeological activity. Vietzen also exposed the extent to which sexual fantasy motivates archaeology in the Americas, including the titillation inherent in ripping supine and helpless skeletons from their beds and unclothing them of their grave goods. Most archaeologists assiduously disguise this aspect of their motivation, but Vietzen was remarkably unself-conscious about baring himself, so to speak. In the 1965 report on his excavation of Erie mounds, for instance, he included this bizarre passage: As I fondle a finger bone of a long dead Indian maiden, I wonder what she was like in life. Was she a ravishing copper skinned beauty, whose grace excelled that of the fawn, or was she puny and sickly thereby acounting for her premature death? Was she gentle and loving or was she cruel and wild tike the cougar who screams in the night? Was she proud and haughty as many of her race were apt to be?'"

Long-dead Indian Maidens occupied his thoughts a lot, and he frequently commented on the fetching attributes of female skeletons he exhumed. One

270

NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

"small and delicate" skull from the Riker site had belonged to a "young lady" who was "very attractive in life," he assured the reader."^ One from another dig did not fare so well in his estimation, however. Although the skull was "very pleasing in shape and the young woman must have been quite beautiful in life," he lamented that the "nasal opening" was too large, so that she must have sported a "protruding" proboscis.'" Vietzen even waxed lyrical in the cause of Dead Indian Maidens. In his poem entitled "A Vision of Loveliness"—^which, incredibly, he included in a 1989 history—he detailed an erotic fantasy of a presumably Dead Indian Maiden coming to him as he sat at the edge of a sweet wood. "As I feasted my eyes upon her loveliness," the poet sang, "thoughts of romancing/Came to me." The Indian Maiden did not share his urges, but her coyness did not keep Vietzen from describing her flowing black tresses or her curve-revealing smock of soft doeskin. Just as the poet's charms began weakening her resolve, the Indian Maiden faded from view.'** I highlight these weird passages not because they were unique to Vietzen but because I suspect that they are quietly common to archaeologists. The distinction between Vietzen and the rest lies in their respective levels of self-censorship, not in their raw urges. Vietzen typified yet another archaeological dodge. As NAGPRA offered a mounting challenge to their profession, archaeologists looked to keep eastem remains and grave goods by leaping on the proposition that no modem Natives have any link at all with the ancient Mound Builders."' In keeping with this tack, Vietzen zealously sought to debunk all ancient-modem connections, particularly insisting that modem Natives are in no way related to the Mound Builders, an argument he reiterated ad nauseam. "I feel very sorry for my brother Indians who think the ancient Indians of 2,000 to 10,000 B.C. were their grandparents," he sniffed in one representative passage, penned in 1994."^ (Native "thoughts often are ridiculous," Vietzen explained to his reader in 1995."') Fashionable as this argument is in archaeological circles today, like other archaeologists, Vietzen made it in contradiction of his own work. Forty-five years earlier, for instance, he had unabashedly acknowledged that the Erie Mound Builders were Iroquoian, and even traced their connection with the Seneca."' As late as 1984, Vietzen was still identifying ancient mound graves he had dug as Ottawa and Iroquoian and freely using the historical Iroquois to explain the mound-building Erie."' Again, in simultaneously naming and denying cultural inheritance, Vietzen was merely howling in unison with the archaeological pack. Prior to 1940,

BLABBERMOUTH BONES

271

archaeologists commonly identified the cultural groups of Mound Builders, but around 1944, it became chic for them to shy away from naming the living descendants of Mound Builders, a trend remarked upon by Erminie Voegelin.^"" The rationale at that time was that "tribes"—a slur term officially imposed on eastem nations in 1901^°'—moved around a lot, so that customs could not be reliably traced over time. Besides, the archaeological record was too spotty for conclusions, the theory went. Consequently, archaeologists began promulgating the breathtakingly false myth that the Lenape, Cherokee, Iroquois, and Shawnee were "all newcomers in a sense," having "come into the [Ohio Valley] country only a century or two earlier" than Europeans.^"^ Such assertions flew in the face of their own reports, like those of 1967 describing digs at the "Graham Village" of Ohio as Shawnee-linked. Carbon-dated back to 1180 and 1070 C.E., the sites showed continuous habitation from Mound-Builder times forward into Shawnee times.^"^ On the one hand, then, when it comes to identifications in public, archaeologists fervently deny any ancient-modem connections, whereas, on the other hand, when it comes to classifications in camera, they seem to know exactly to which groups ancient graves belong. Today, at least, such archaeological schizophrenia does not reflect foggy thinking so much as it exposes expediency. The result of denying MoundBuilder descent is that Mound-Builder remains and grave goods can be and are officially classifled as "unidentifiable." Having thus become unretumable, they continue gathering dust on institutional shelves. In other words, by pretending that eastem Natives are unconnected with the Mound Builders, archaeologists hope to hang onto their Mound-Builder collections. The number of "unidentifiables" is staggering. Reporting to the NAGPRA Committee Hearings, John Robbins ofthe National Park Service, the agency vested with preparing the database on unidentifiables, enumerated 35,641 individuals and 253,620 grave goods, as of 17 November 2001. Because the Park Service is far behind in its work, these numbers account for only about 40% of the items to be tallied up, meaning that the total number of "unidentiflable" individuals are expected to reach 89,103, and grave goods, 634,050. These statistics include only those federal inventories yet received. The NAGPRA Committee is having trouble forcing compliance in reporting from many federal agencies that hold bones, such as the Army Corp of Engineers. Furthermore, this database excludes collections under state jurisdiction as well as all private collections.^"^ The tme number of hoarded "unidentifiables" will probably never be disclosed.

272 NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

This ruse works only so long as archaeologists, alone, are allowed to set the rules of the identification game. Interestingly, NAGPRA does not limit evidence of cultural affinity to westem documentation, but, in Section 7(4), clearly lists "oral tradition" as well as "folklore" as two types of credible evidence in building a case for cultural ties. Aware of these provisions of law, archaeologists deny, ignore, or ridicule traditions of the mounds, leaving only the westem record as the touchstone of truth. Contempt for oral tradition, juxtaposed with sublime faith in westem sources, is carefully cultivated in academic circles. As one gentle presenter at a 2001 conference I attended put it to an audience including elders, "you people who think you're so traditional" would not know "diddly-squat" about Native history, were it not for the westem record.^"' Colonialism lives. QUESTION: If a tree fell in the forest, but no archaeologist ever dug it up, did the tree ever really fall? (ANSWER: NO.)

If a tree fell in the forest, and a Native oral tradition remains to recall the event, did the tree ever really exist? QUESTION:

(ANSWER: NO.)

The conceit that Natives would be drooling in their soup without the sagacity of scholars to guide them is particularly commonplace in the archaeological community. In 1992, Clement Meighan summed up the attitude by boldly claiming that "all" Native American history prior to 1492 "is the contribution of archaeology" (italics in original).^"* Tme to type, Vietzen echoed this slur, averring that modem Natives "know nothing of the prehistoric people and have no information except what archaeologists provide."^"' Elsewhere, he reasoned that, had Natives "left a written history we would not be searching their remains today" and that archaeology, alone, through repeated examination of the same, bony evidence, was able to supply the outlines of the past.^°* Even though Larry Zimmerman unmasked the "convenient selfdelusion" that only archaeologists are capable of "stewardship" of so-called prehistory (i.e., anything predating the European presence in America), their image of themselves as alone in holding the keys to the past has remained quite popular among scholars.^"* By way of tuming archaeology into the savior of Native history, Bmce Trigger even argued in 1980 that archaeology/rees Natives from an undue reliance on the westem record.^'" Larry Zimmerman hitchhiked on Trigger's clever but flawed assertion in 1994.^" The "freeing" argument is, however, as demeaning to Natives as the fiat assertion that they know nothing at all, for it

BLABBERMOUTH BONES

273

still assumes that Natives are, one way or another, slaves of westem versions of their past. In fact. Natives need neither westem history nor archaeology, for they depend upon oral tradition, which gives national histories in considerable detail. Because it tamishes westem pretensions by offering altematives, oral tradition grates on scholarly sensibilities. Consequently, whenever oral traditionalists demonstrate that they already know their past, they are typically met with fiat denials that they could possibly know any such thing.^'^ In 1989, for instance, Vietzen derided his "Sioux brothers" as sunk in fantasy when they described to him how ancient Guffey birdstones had been used, for, obviously, they could not know.^" Scholars generally laugh off Native tradition in this way, as second-rate.^'" Worse, "unpleasant or controversial" conclusions based on oral tradition invite dismissal as being "unrepresentative or polemical."^" Archaeologists label Natives everything from "militant" to "ignorant" when they refuse to accede to archaeological reconstmctions of their past.^'* To help in dismissing oral traditions, many scholars, including David Roberts in 1996, decided that the large changes in material culture over time had occasioned a parallel change in traditional memory, an updating of the old move-around-too-much rationale. When Roberts raised the issue with archaeologist Jeffrey S. Dean, Dean eagerly picked up the cue, insisting that Native culture had been so dismpted by invasion as to have lost all traditional integrity.^" Although very popular in archaeological circles for its political uses against Native claims, the proposition that, because they encountered Europeans, Natives promptly forgot who they were is possible only if Natives are set apart from every other culture in history, as somehow inferior to the rest. Scholars would not dare assert that Hindu culture was so dismpted by English colonialism as to have given up on Krishna, that the Jews were so undone by the Holocaust as to have forsaken Torah, or that the Thais were so flustered by Christian missionaries that they misplaced Buddha. No such proposition would be seriously proffered regarding any other culture in the world, yet, in America, and in America alone, we are to believe that Native Americans are so mentally feeble as to have lost all cultural integrity as a result of having come face to face with the Master Race. Despite the prima facie absurdity of these contentions, resistance to traditional evidence is so entrenched in archaeological circles that the 1961 code of ethics for American archaeology completely omitted oral tradition from consideration, even as it acknowledged the importance of "ancillary data" from geology, biology, and history.^'* The omission was not because no tradition-

274

NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

testing studies had yet been done. In fact, one of the authors of the code, Clement W. Meighan—later, a ferocious opponent of NAGPRA—had himself co-authored just such a study of Paiute tradition in 1959, arguing for "the view that traditions often had a basis in historical fact" and offering a way of comparing oral tradition to westem sources to identify the fact therein.^" The prejudice against oral tradition has been tested by many well known scholars who found that the doubt, not the tradition, stood on wobbly legs. As early as 1890, Daniel Brinton began to question the westem tmism that Native traditions were not to be tmsted. In cross-checking traditions ofthe Canadian Lenape, he confessed being "surprised to find how correctly the old men ofthe tribe had preserved and handed down reminiscences of their former homes along the Delaware River." In particular, the "flat marshy 'Neck,' south of Philadelphia, between the Delaware and Schuylkill rivers," was accurately pointed out to Brinton by Albert Seqaqknind Anthony, a Canadian Lenape, "as the spot where the tribe preferred to gather the mshes with which they manufactures [sic] mgs and mats." Anthony also "recognized various trees, not seen in Canada, by the descriptions he had heard of them." Anthony had never before lain eyes on eastem Pennsylvania; he was working exclusively from oral traditions of the place.^^" Many such accidental conflrmations exist in the nineteenth-century record. In the twentieth century, scholars undertook deliberate tests of the information in oral traditions and came, again, to supportive conclusions. In 1982, for example, Andrew Wiget demonstrated that Hopi oral tradition can be tested against other forms of evidence, including archaeology, astronomy, and written records, to decide upon its reliability. Using "four separate and unrelated" oral traditions ofthe 1680 Pueblo Revolt against Spanish mle, he concluded that oral tradition was "[v]ery accurate" in its relation ofthe causes and motivations for the revolt.^^' Not only was tradition quite precise as to the "specific details" ofthe revolt, it was also "[g]enerally accurate" regarding the actual sequence of events, right down to when the revolt was called and executed.^" This was, by the way, far more than Wiget was able to say for the written Spanish records ofthe same event.^^^ In 1995, archaeologist G. Michael Pratt located the 1794 battlefield of Fallen Timbers—exactly where Native oral tradition had always claimed it was, rather than where westem chronicles falsely stated it had been."" In 1997, Jerry L. Fields and I compared oral tradition with archaeological, astronomical, actuarial, and historical sources, in which we found it was entirely possible accurately to date events in oral tradition, in this particular instance, the

BLABBERMOUTH BONES

275

founding of the Iroquois League in 1142.^" In 2000, David Hurst Thomas recorded the accuracy of traditions of the Mohegan Nation of Connecticut, including not only the site of a cabin dating back to the 1690s, but also the name of the settler who had lived there. When archaeologists dug where the Mohegan directed, they found the habitation site.^^* These are hardly lonesome studies. In 2000, Roger Echo-Hawk made a survey of scholarly studies of oral tradition and found twenty-one, not including some of the above, in support of its validity.^" Notwithstanding the massive and mounting evidence that Native tradition is trustworthy, archaeologists sniff and wave the studies away, demanding westem sources, instead. Personally, I never cease to marvel at the touching faith that westem scholars thereby place in their "primary sources," as though spin-doctoring were some strange, new development, mutated into existence only in the degenerate days of the twenty-first century.^^* Echo-Hawk similarly finds it ironic that scholars reject the talking version of the same record they would cheerfully use if written down.^^' To their credit, some archaeologists are starting to question the notion that, in the event that tradition clashes with written sources, tradition must be wrong. In 1980, archaeologist Daniel Miller called the active use of oral tradition a "corrective" to incipient westemization of the data.''" Roger Echo-Hawk put his finger on the real problem of oral tradition as evidence: NAGPRA drags tradition into "a highly controversial political realm," so that attempts to use it are unlikely to be considered critically by archaeologists determined to hang onto their collections."' The upshot of emotionalism is that archaeologists put extra-NAGPRA restrictions on repatriation, demanding that Natives demonstrate relationships to their satisfaction, a condition that is, somehow, never met by oral tradition.^'' Presumably, Natives are to produce notarized depositions from the Mound Builders that the Cherokee, Iroquois, Lenape, and Shawnee are their great-great-grandchildren. Failing such documentation, museums and universities claim that there is no one to consult with regarding Mound-Builder remains. Thus, even now, in open defiance of NAGPRA, archaeologists are, defacto, granted the final say in what constitutes evidence of cultural affiliation. In 1995, Vietzen echoed another archaeological commonplace, that a supposed lack of respect shown for the dead by the Mound Builders of the past justifies archaeological desecrations of their graves in the present. Vietzen claimed that, oflen, corpses were "just disposed of in any way," with an "apparent disrespect" for the dead that made him "shudder."'" He super-

276

NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

ciliously admonished Native critics of archaeology, "You must not speak out unless you know what you are talking about"—and then proceeded to show the depths of his own ignorance by listing perfectly respectful modes of traditional burial as examples of his allegedly any-old-way disposals: ossuary burial, tree burial, medicine-lodge burial, and cremation.^^"* Although this grossly uninformed attempt to portray Natives as careless and uncaring about their dead has gained a certain cachet among archaeologists today, it is hardly a new strategy. Archaeologists have long put it about that Natives cared nothing for their graves. On 16 February 1905, for instance, the Director of the Bureau of Ethnology heatedly charged that southwestem Natives had ransacked ancient cliff-dweller ruins, beating out his people in the race for relics and remains. Even then, such a contention could not pass muster, however. Francis Leupp, head of the Bureau of Indian Affairs confessed his doubt that "the spoilation" could "justly be laid to the charge of Indians." Despite his entrenched racism, Leupp knew enough about Native culture to recognize, albeit grudgingly, that Native "respect for tradition and antiquity, or their superstition, or both, deters them from disturbing places of sepulture or prehistoric abodes.""' Anyone with actual information on the subject knows that, from the beginning of the westem record in America, all honest observers admitted the esteem and care that Natives lavished on graves and the horror in which they stood of desecration. One of the earliest chroniclers, Peter Lindestrom, made this perfectly clear between 1654 and 1656, in describing the anguish caused by grave-robbing Europeans: Some scoundrels go to the savages and help them to mourn, pretending to be very sorrowful and, lamenting and weeping mueh worse and more miserably than the savages, saying that the [deceased] also had been their good friend, which the savages think is well, that they get company. These scoundrels watching their time, steal away their money chest, so that the sorrow and lamentation for the savages become through this, deeper and greater. (Brackets in original)"'

The "money chest" was the cache of grave goods and wampum buried with the corpse. In the eighteenth century, John Heckewelder watched the Nanticokes carrying away ancestral bones when they were forced to move."^ In 1809, John Bradbury, a traveler and chronicler, noted the extreme protectiveness of Native Americans toward their cemeteries and the bones of their ancestors, something he annotated as characteristic of all Native Americans he had encountered."* Similarly, traveling the Columbia River in 1843, Thomas J. Famham

BLABBERMOUTH BONES

277

reluctantly relinquished a skull he had stolen from a cemetery, precisely because he was aware that any desecration of the dead was such a great sacrilege as to endanger the life of a grave robber like himself."' During Jacksonian Removal, one of the hardest realities facing eastem Natives was the realization that they had to leave behind the graves and bones of their ancestors. Their heartfelt anguish raised such sympathy among the general American public that President Andrew Jackson felt called upon to quell its pathos in his 6 December 1830, Second Annual Message to Congress. His method was to trivialize Native pain at forsaking their ancestral graves by contrasting it with the stalwart way in which the manly Anglo-Saxon had handled the same prospect: Doubtless it will be painful to leave the graves of their fathers; but what do they more than our ancestors did or than our children our now doing? To better their condition in an unknown land our forefathers left all that was dear in earthly objects. Our children by thousands yearly leave the land of their birth to seek new homes in distant region. Does Humanity weep at these painful separations from everything, animate and inanimate, with which the young heart has become entwined? Far from it. It is rather a source of joy.^^o

Having established that Anglo-Saxons would abandon their ancestors at the drop of a hat, Jackson labored on, reasoning with equal parts of hubris and racism: "And is it supposed that the wandering savage has a stronger attachment to his home than the settled, civilized Christian? Is it more afflicting to him to leave the graves of his fathers than it is to our brothers and children?"^"' Well, yes, it is, but, to this day, westem scholars are unable to grasp the Native view that the land is literally the dust and blood of their ancestors so that removing ancestral remains from the land damages both the quickened Earth and the reciprocal Sky. For Natives, being cut off from ancestral land is equivalent to being cut off from a living limb. Honor of the land is honor of the dead, so that the dead must remain connected with the earth, their earth. As early as 1775, James Adair recorded this attitude, noting the "intense love the Indians bear to their dead." This was why Natives so ardently defended and protected their ancestors' graves, regarding looters poking about for grave goods as having committed "the basest act of hostility" against their heritage.^"^ Curley, a Crow who had taken part in the Battle of Little Big Hom, challenged the right of the U.S. govemment to push the Crow off their ancestral grounds precisely by citing the importance of the very soil, itself, to Crow identity. The land and the ancestors were one: "The soil you see is not ordinary soil—it is the dust of the blood, the flesh and the bones of our ancestors."^"^

278

NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

Although the settlers taking the land had no such connection to or understanding of the soil, they would "have to dig down through the surface" before they could "find nature's earth, as the upper portion is Crow," he maintained. "The land as it is, is my blood and my dead."^"'* In Curley's day, honoring the ancestors still meant holding onto the land. The land having long since been confiscated by the U.S. goverment, honoring the ancestors today means restoring the Earth by retuming their bones to the ground from which they were ripped. This is why, in repatriation fights— especially in the east where traditional condolence councils mingled earth and ancestors—modem Natives very often cite the various treaties and their councils, which "buried the bones of whose who had fallen . . . so that their place might be no more known."^"' At the all-important Greenville Treaty of 1795, for instance. General Anthony Wayne made it a ceremonial point "to wipe the blood" from the bodies of deceased Natives, so that "no bloody traces will ever lead to the graves of your departed heroes."^"** In 1994, Jan Hammil and Robert Cruz argued that the treaties associated with such condolence councils carefully "gave away no property rights" to graves.^'" Archaeologists Lynne Goldstein and Keith Kintigh acknowledged in 1990 that, whereas, on the one hand, no traditions exist in which the ancestors gave permission for their bones to be extracted and studied, on the other hand, a comucopia of known traditions make it clear that they expected their descendants to take care of their graves.^''* Archaeologists and their apologists either cannot or will not grasp this philosophy, instead insisting that repatriation and reburiai are nothing but wizen-eyed power grabs by cynical city Indians.^"' Smithsonian author Curtis M. Hinsley argued in 1994, for example, that the repatriation controversy stems not from a sincere Native desire to reclaim and rebury the stolen bones of their ancestors, but from a covert power struggle between Natives and westem scholars, in which the ultimate prize is the right to determine who controls Native culture, tradition, and history.^'" This is an ardently archeocentric analysis of the issue that says considerably more about westem motives than about Native intent. In furtherance of their viewpoint, archaeologists insist upon calling Native graveyards "burial grounds" instead of "cemeteries." A burial ground sounds so much more violable than a cemetery or a graveyard, terms that evoke an automatic oblation of respect from westemers. This double standard did not exist in the earliest days of archaeology when the mounds were freely identified

BLABBERMOUTH BONES

279

as "cemeteries." In his 1820 description of the Circleville mound complex, for instance, Caleb Atwater noted one sixty-foot mound that "must have been the common cemetery, as it contains an immense number of human skeletons, of all sizes and ages.""' In 1879, the Madisonville mounds were well known to have been cemeteries, the word J. T. Short, another early archaeologist, consistently used to describe them."^ By 1879, however, the terminology was tuming, and on political pins, as typified by the archaeologist S. L. Frey, who spoke of an ancient "graveyard" in New York that had been broken through in highway constmction, the bones tossed under the road as part of its bed. Given the grisliness of this method of road constmction, Frey defiected revulsion with euphemism, terming the site an "Indian burying-ground" (italics mine)."^ By the twentieth century, the transition was nearly complete. The word cemetery was almost never used in reference to Native graveyards. Instead, some permutation of burial ground was almost always used. Even Hammil and Cmz referred to burial places rather than cemeteries."" It is essential that this word play cease and that Native cemeteries be once again spoken of as graveyards. Finally, Vietzen spouted perhaps the most politically handy cliche of archaeology, the denial of eastem Native identity. "Claimed Indian ancestry is often false and not dependable," he proclaimed in 1995, neatly encapsulating the primary roadblock to enforcement of NAGPRA in the Mound-Building east, where repatriation collapses into a tangled travesty."' NAGPRA is set up to revolve around the claims of enrolled peoples living on federal lands. In the west, where federal recognition of Native identity is common due to quirks of history and intemal colonization. Natives are beginning to achieve power parity with archaeologists. In the east, however, where settler-Native interaction was four complex centuries in the making and, furthermore, deliberately complicated by Removal and Dawes "tribal" enrollment, archaeologists continue to hold the whip hand. Few Natives in the east have recorded lineages or enjoy federal recognition. Consequently, after NAGPRA passed, many Natives edgily speculated that the Smithsonian planned on hanging onto 90% of its human remains, because Natives would only be able to demonstrate affilitation with about 10% of them. In 1997, Larry Zimmerman, who is more familiar with the stmggles of westem than of eastem Natives, reduced these worries to a "rumor" in "Indian country."^" This is not so much a mmor as a fact, however, once the topic tums east. Mound-Builder remains constitute a very large percentage of collections.

280

NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

not only at the Smithsonian, but also in the other major museums and universities that benefited from the nineteenth- and early twentieth-century Mound-Builder craze. Unenrolled, eastem Natives are practically powerless to force the disclosure, let alone the retum, of these remains and grave goods. Since NAGPRA is set up to accommodate federally recognized Natives, eastem Natives must find some federally recognized remnant of their peoples deposited far from their old homelands and convince their long-lost relatives to take up the issue of MoundBuilder repatriation. Faced with their own pressing concems, however, and removed in time and space, reservation Natives view the retum of MoundBuilder relics as a back-bumer issue. This farce is entirely enabled by the byzantine process that conferred recognition on—or, more precisely, denied recognition to—eastem Natives. It stemmed from no initiative of eastem Natives. Neither was it honored or sanctioned by them when it occurred. It was the getting up of the so-called Dawes Rolls between 1896 and 1907. Set up to manage the distribution of land under the infamous Dawes Act of 1887 (24 Stat. L., 388), the enrollment process was always intended to limit the number of Natives eligible to claim land. It was never intended as a summary census, let alone a determination of Indian identity, as records of the day make clear. Nevertheless, enrollment is today used as the touchstone of Indian "authenticity," not only by the federal govemment but also by many westem Natives. Unfortunately, this bias was inserted into NAGPRA, making the lack of recognition in the east the major stumbling block to repatriation and reburiai of Mound-Builder bones. Too few people have the slightest idea of where enrollment came from or how it works. It is a telling commentary on the amnesia so prevalent in American political history that, as Melissa L. Meyer discovered in 1999, "no one has explored in serious scholarly fashion" what enrollment actually meant or how the notion of blood quantums became attached to the process."' Eastem Natives speculate that this is because the process sheds so little credit on the American govemment as to undermine its credibility, for the enrollment system is racist at its heart and biased to its fingertips. In the east, particularly, it constitutes no less than documentary genocide, for eastem Natives are intentionally denied enrollment by the govemment. In Skull Wars (2000), David Hurst Thomas asserted that the social stages-ofhistory theory of Lewis Henry Morgan, as articulated in Ancient Society (1877), guided the Dawes Act of 1887."* Although Morgan's fiag was fiying high at the moment, he did not invent the stages-of-history theory; Ancient Society was

BLABBERMOUTH BONES

281

simply flopping about in the eugenic ether that bathed his age. More importantly, the quantum determinations that became central to tribal enrollment were promulgated by Francis Galton (1822-1911), in his jealous bid to invent a companion science to his cousin Charles Darwin's evolution. Although Galton did not coin the term eugenics until 1883, beginning in 1869 with his book, Hereditary Genius, and continuing through to 1909 with his fmal book. Essays in Eugenics, Galton diligently pounded out the technobabble of social darwinism.^'' None of the content was original to Galton. All he did was add obfuscation to the extant racist brew and shake. The notion that people physiologically inherited their mental, moral, and cultural traits and that, moreover, these could be quantified by halves, quarters, and eighths, had been around since the mid-eighteenth century. Colonial authorities routinely used it to defme, the better to control, mixed-race populations in the colonies. Thus, Galton hardly invented the blood quantum counts so dear to modem enrollment practices. All he did was update the diction from the "hybridity" and "degeneration" of the eighteenth-century lexicon to the more modem-sounding terminology of "quantums," thus wrapping the patina of scientific accuracy around racial drawing and quartering. To achieve this, Galton used the mystifying medium of arcane mathematical formulas.^*" For instance, after a hundred pages of silly statistics and needless jargon in Natural Inheritance (1889), Galton propounded that "the influence, pure and simple, of the Mid-Parent may be taken as V2, and that of the Mid-Grand-Parent as VA, and so on. Consequently the influence of the individual Parent would be 1/4, and of the individual Grand-Parent '/,6, and so on."^*' Mid-Parents and Grandparents were composite individuals made up (for no apparent reason) of the two parents and four grandparents, respectively.^*^ For all the wiggle room of nurture that Galton suggested with his fancifiil "mids" versus "individuals," in the end, the brilliant formula was ultimately to multiply each type of "mid" by two, so that each parent contributed one-half to a child; each grandparent, one-fourth; and each great-grandparent, one-eighth^"—just a fancy-pants way of arriving at the old planter formula of mulatto ('/z), quadroon QA), octoroon (Vs), and so forth. The purpose of all this mumbo-jumbo was to posit a theory on which to base better living through eugenics. Beginning in 1883, Galton argued forthrightly for an end to the "unreasonable" resistance among the daft public to "the gradual extinction of an inferior race."^*^ He was convinced that there was no real point in trying to uplift the uncivilized races, for, whenever "nature and

282 NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

nurture compete for supremacy on equal terms," it was a foregone conclusion that nature would win.^" Degeneration among those temporarily uplifted would wipe out any transient gains of "civilization," so that, even should individual couples, one from a HIGHER and one from a LOWER RACE, have comparable abilities on a personal level, "the difference between them will betray itself in their offspring. The children of the former will tend to regress; those of the latter will not."''* Galton also, timidly, accepted the notion of the inheritance of acquired characteristics but left them out of his calculations, not because they were not present, but because they were so subtle, he was not sure how to measure them.^*^ Consequently, he preferred to rely upon good, old-fashioned degeneration as the explanation for why the LOWER RACES reverted to the "earlier type," especially "under strained conditions."'** He even dredged up the old planter canard that "mixed types" (mulattos) were "infertile."'*^ These were the theories that, by the late nineteenth century, came to define the practice of quantum-counting in tribal enrollment. They are still in use today, for enrollees are still assigned blood quantums. It is significant that enrollment did not originally exist to determine blood quantums. At first, enrollment was just a haphazard head count to create the basis for divvying up the reservations into small, one-family plots of land. In fact, tribal enrollment was not even mentioned in the original Dawes Act of 1887, becoming an issue only later on under the McCumber Amendments, which were hatched to help bureaucrats maneuver around the entrenched resistance of traditional Natives to land allotment. The quantum consideration did not surface until 1896, after the eugenics craze had spread like wildfire across the "civilized" world. The talked-about aim of the Dawes Act was to destroy "tribal" culture by forcing matrilineal, communal, and egalitarian nations into the patrilineal, capitalistic, and hierarchical mold of the Euroamerican U.S. The hush-mouthed aim of Dawes was to pry Indian Territory out of Indian hands through complex land schemes. Each Native head-of-household was to be granted 160 acres of communal reservation lands, each orphan or single adult was to be given 80 acres, and each dependent child was to be given 40 acres. Lists of land-eligible Natives, called "the rolls," were to have been gotten up to manage land allotment. All unalloted land was declared "surplus" for distribution to Euroamerican interests. Since there was far more reservation land than individual Natives, Dawes directly delivered huge chunks of Native lands into Euroamerican hands, as "surplus."

BLABBERMOUTH BONES

283

Of course, it was quietly envisioned that Natives would not long retain the land they were allotted. Because Natives had no legal standing in a court of law, many could not read, and few understood finance, the "largesse" of Dawes allotment was really an invitation to con artists to steal the allotments as soon as they were made. Indeed, a bone-chilling criminal spree erupted immediately, as memorably documented by Angie Debo in 1940."" Between 1887 and 1930, Native lands declined from 150 million acres to fewer than 50 million acres.^^' Resistance to the Dawes Act exploded in Indian Territory almost immediately as it was passed. The most traditional elements of all nations simply refused to go along with allotment because it involved the destruction of their traditional ceremonies, laws, social relations, and communal rights. Therefore, longhairs actively evaded the rolls for allotment. They hid one another out, away from the official headhunters, misrepresented their identities when cornered, and otherwise refused to allow their or their children's names to be made "dead bugs on bark," as the phrase went in Ohio. If identified anyway, they refused their land allotments to the point of gathering up their certificates of allotment and dropping them off at the local post office, to be returned to Washington, D.C., unopened."^ As Rennard Strickland noted in 1980, the descendants of these traditional resisters are, today, denied federal recognition due to their ancestors' fierce rejection of Master Race imperatives."' Between 1887 and 1896, when the Dawes Commission came into being, the landed Native nations decided for themselves who was, or was not, a member of their community. Because the real traditionals wanted nothing to do with enrollment, the process was left up to the most assimilated elements of the westem nations. Internecine factional disputes roiled up within their councils, playing havoc with the rolls. The penalty for offending the cadre in power was sudden de-enrollment, so that who was on, and who was off, the rolls at any given moment fluctuated in keeping with who was on, or who was off, the council at the same moment. It was rumored that at least some of the politically disappeared might be reinstated, for a good-faith offering of $100—a hefty sum at the time."'' Thus, petty spite and bribery were bred by the U.S. demand that Natives use legalistic methods of determining Native identity for the sake of property ownership. Between the dedicated Native resistance to the Dawes Act and corrupt assimilationist councils, land allotment was not going well almost a decade after the Act was passed. Settlers and corporations itching to get a hold of the "surplus" Native land pressed Congress for action. Using the excuse that Native councils were hopelessly corrupting their rolls, on 10 June 1896, Congress

284

NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

passed 29 Stat. L., 321, empowering the Dawes Commission to take over the duties of enrollment from the Native councils. To handle the further problem of longhair resistance to accepting allotment, on 28 June 1896, the Curtis Act (30 Stat. L., 221) provided for enrollment and land distribution, whether or not the allottee was willing.^" The "Miscellaneous" section of the law creating the Dawes Commission authorized its members to "proceed at once to hear and determine the application of all persons who may apply to them for citizenship [enrollment] in any of said nations, and after such hearing they shall determine the right of such applicant to be so admitted and enrolled." Toward this end, the Commission enjoyed quasi-judicial powers to administer oaths, to issue process for and compel the attendance of witnesses, and to send for persons and papers, and all depositions and affidavits and other evidence in any form whatsoever heretofore taken where the witnesses giving such testimony are dead or now residing beyond the limits of said Territory, and to use every fair and reasonable means within their reach for the purpose of determining the rights of persons claiming citizenship, or to protect any said nations from fraud or wrong, and the rolls so prepared by them shall be hereafter held and considered to be true and correct rolls of persons entitled to the rights of citizenship in said tribes."'

Those whose claims were rejected would be allowed to appeal within sixty days, but court judgments on the appeals were fmal.^^' Riding a crest of euphoria. Congress decided that this little matter of enrollment should not take civilized men too long to put in order. Therefore, the Commissioners were given six months to "cause a complete roll of citizenship of each of said nations to be made up from their records." Once indicted, the Dawes Rolls were to be regarded as the sole authority for "citizenship"—^the original term for "tribal enrollment"—in any of the Native nations of the U.S.^'* The Congressional expectation that enrollment could be wrapped up by December 1896, proved chimerical, however. The Commission flailed about choatically for the next eleven years before washing its hands of the task, not because enrollment was complete, let alone, accurate, but because the Commission was tired of playing in the mud puddle it had created. In any case, by 1907, most of the desirable land had passed from Native into settler hands, which had been the whole, covert point of the Dawes Act in the first place. Thus, after 1907, any names added to the rolls simply added to the amount the federal govemment was liable to owe Native beneficiaries, providing a huge incentive for the govemment to discontinue enrollment. While in operation.

BLABBERMOUTH BONES

285

however, the peripatetic Dawes Commission tumed everything it touched into an impenetrable morass. The logic of the Dawes Commission resembled that of a chicken on speed. On the one hand, it declared the old national rolls to have been utterly corrupt and worthless. On the other hand, it required applicants to be on the earlier rolls of their nations if they wished to make their application through the Dawes Commission.^™ Under this spectacular catch 22, the Commission would not enroll any Native whose family was not already on another, earlier roll that it had just pronounced fraudulent.^*" The Commission also declared it "erroneous" to assume that the primary qualification for enrollment was actually to be an Indian. Unless applicants met all the Commission's bureaucratic stipulations, they would be denied status.^*' If, based on longhair resistance, the Commissioners had anticipated few applications for enrollment, they were sorely disappointed. From June to December of the first year, 7,300 applications fiowed in, overwhelming their clerical staff.^*^ Long after the Comission's six months were up, the fiood of applications did not appear to be abating. In 1898, for instance, two years past its deadline, the Commission was looking at 5,000 pending applications for enroUment.^*^ Dismayed, the Commission whined endlessly about its grueling workload, instancing the "elaborate system of records and indexes" it needed "to keep track of these numerous applications." The correspondence generated by this records-keeping system ran "into hundreds of thousands of letters."^*'' The bureaucratic apparatus of the Commission sorted out claimants as "Enrolled or identified," "Reftxsed or dismissed," or "Undetermined," which sounds something like a system. There was, however, no system discemible in its compilation of the various national rolls, which it simply tossed together piecemeal, as official determinations moved down from the bowels of the Department of the Interior, seat of the Bureau of Indian Affairs. Those who made it onto the Commission's rolls were listed by name, gender, and "degree of blood." The gender of applicants often threw departmental bureaucrats for a loop. They were wont to assume that anyone named David had to be male, whereas anyone named "Pearl" had to be female. This bore little relation, however, to the way Native families parceled out unfamiliar "white" names among themselves, so that the gender of many enrollees was erroneously stated on the rolls.^*' For their part, blood quantums were even more chaotically assigned than genders. Although the diction of Galtonian quantum-counting was in place by

286

NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

the time the Dawes Commission went to work, the specifics were a shell game that depended entirely upon the mood and disposition of whoever was deciding the merits of the application at hand. For instance, the leader of the Keetoowah, or Nighthawks, the traditional faction of the Cherokee, was Redbird Smith. When he was finally forced to apply for enrollment in 1905, he happened casually to mention that his mother's father might have been Dutch. This was enough to set off Dawes Commissioner Clifton R. Breckenridge, who decided on the spot that Redbird Smith—^well known to all factions as a "ftillblood" —was only a three-quarter blood.^** It is worth noting that Smith might have been pulling the Commission's leg about his Dutch ancestry, as he tricked it later on conceming his progeny. A strong opponent of enrollment who had successftilly evaded it for eight years, he appeared before the Commission only under duress and, once there, proved so uncooperative that the Commission threw him in jail for his smart mouth.^'' Dragged before the Commission the next day, he gave spotty, half-baked, and downright loopy answers to their badgering questions, so confounding the Commissioners that they were literally unable to tell how many children he had or to disentangle their "white" names from their Cherokee names. Deciding that it was Smith, not the Commission, who was "inextricably confused," Breckenridge declared, based on nothing in particular, that only one child existed. He chose—again, willy-nilly—^the name of that child.^** The job done by the Commission was capricious, at best, and unethical, at worst. By its own admission in 1906, the Commission knew that "many persons were manifestly entitled to be enrolled whose citizenship status was not a matter of record with the tribes, and many others were named upon the tribal rolls who were in no wise entitled to share in the distribution of their common property."^'' The Department of the Interior was constantly called upon to make judgment calls in such cases. Although sloppy, the calls tumed out to be "the pivot upon which the rights of hundreds" of other faceless claimants depended.^'" For instance, 256 cases of Choctaw and Chickasaw enrollment set precedents that ultimately decided the eligibility of 3,487 Choctaw and Chickasaw applicants, of whom only 161 were ultimately enrolled. The 161 included some Euroamericans.^" This ratio of applicant to enrollee was not uncommon. Unlike the 3,326 Choctaw and Chickasaw denied status, not all applicants were legitimate, for 160 acres of prime real estate came with enrollment. This proved too enticing for some scammers to resist. One hundred-sixty acres was a far better deal than the forty acres and a mule that the Freedmen (emancipated

BLABBERMOUTH BONES

287

slaves) had received through Reconstruction, so that, once Jim Crow had conclusively thrown African Americans back into virtual bondage in the South, Freedmen flocked to Indian Territory, using vague stories of an Indian greatgrandmother as their admission ticket to the land grab going on out there.^'^ These intruding Freedmen are not to be confused with the entirely legitimate African-Native claimants who also existed, as adoptees under old national rules of recognition. Those authentic African Natives had come to Indian Territory during Removal, being the spouses and off-spring of Native-African marriages, as well as some so-called "slaves," who were really proto-adoptees.^'^ These people were recognized in the Removal treaties, and counted as Natives to be removed, based on the insistence of the Native nations involved.^'"* Such African Natives were, however, a small percentage, only, of the Native nations. Among the Muscogee ("Creek"), for instance, at Removal, just 3.98% of the population were African Natives.^'' As long as Native councils were enrolling known community members, those adopted and intermarried Africans were fully integrated members of the nation and incorporated onto the rolls. Once the Dawes Commission got into the act, however, Freedmen were recklessly added to the rolls, often on fabricated evidence, so that the eru-ollment of Freedmen became a buming issue out in Indian Territory.^'* Resistance to the enrollment of Freedmen was not because Natives were racist, but because Freedmen were settlers invading Indian Territory, just as surely as Euroamericans were. The vast majority of these Freedmen had no ties of family, culture, history, or identity to the Native nations involved."' They simply wanted the land. The ranks of enrolled Freedmen swelled dramatically in consequence. The somewhat powerful Cherokee had the lowest percentage of interloping Freedmen, with a mere 11% of the African-Native aggregate being Freedmen in 1905."* Other Native Nations saw high jumps in their African percentages, however, something that could not have occurred by natural increase. In 1905, against 15,898 Choctaw "by blood" on the rolls, there were 4,966 Freedmen, or 24% of the population (not counting adopted Euroamericans)."' To retum to the Muscogee example, by 1905, there were 6,809 "Negroes" on the "Creek" rolls, accounting for 36.29% of the Muscogee population, a staggering increase over the 3.98% of the Muscogee population that African Natives had constituted at Removal.^"" Euroamerican scammers got into the enrollment mix, too. In 1895, for instance, the govemment documented some serious land-grabbing going on out in the Duluth, Minnesota, "land district," where it was clear that Euroamerican agents of lumber companies were fraudulently enrolling for the sake of the

288

NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

allotments. The agents did not want to set up family homesteads, "but to obtain the timber thereon for other speculative purposes."^"' An investigation ensued, but not much changed. There were other, more legitimate Euroamerican enrollees, whose existence stimulated a furor unmatched by the hushed-up scandal of lumber-agent allottees. Native nations had long honored the custom of adopting the foreign spouses of their citizens, were they African or European, i.e., they granted national citizenship upon marriage, much as modem American law does.^°^ Consequently, especially while Native councils were in charge of the rolls, Euroamerican spouses were admitted to them. Ignoring the ancient Native precept of inclusion, however, the BIA used its own racist tests of identity to zero in on adoptive spouses and their mixed-blood children. These people were targeted for special purging from the rolls. Mixed bloods, especially those whose mothers were Native, had always been traditionally recognized by Natives as Native, while adoptees of any race were traditionally considered 100% Native upon adoption, but the govemment disrupted these old laws with its westem impositions. Although the BIA reports often fingered "full bloods" as the parties insisting upon review, this is unlikely since what was being challenged were traditional laws. In fact, the govemment was quite eager to kick adoptees and their children off the rolls, for the fewer people on the rolls, the larger the land set aside for acquisition by Euroamericans. In this way, those who were Osage "by adoption" and the children of Osage women and their Euroamerican husbands came under close scmtiny.^"^ Although the Commissioners frowned upon the racial impurity of "whites" marrying Indians (although they seemed to care little about African-Native liaisons), the real mb involved cultural literacy. Euroamerican spouses, most frequently men, tended to be literate and able to fend off the forces of fraud and embezzlement that accompanied allotment. Importantly, they were legally allowed to appear in courts of law to defend their, their spouses', and their children's land claims, as Natives were not. Thus, intermarried couples were able to hang onto their land, thus thwarting the process of "booming," the lighthearted term for defrauding Natives of their allotments. Clearly, this would not do. The courts found two ways to attack the problem. First, Native women marrying settler men became "white" by fiat, losing their Native status. Second, those spouses who had been enrolled as adoptees were simply kicked off the The problems of intermarriage and adoption were recognized soon after the passage of the Dawes Act, resulting in an Act in Relation to Marriage between

BLABBERMOUTH BONES

289

White Men and Indian Women (25 Stat. L., 392), passed on 9 August 1888. It ordered that "no white man" was thereafter to "acquire any right to any tribal property, privilege, or interest whatever to which any member of such tribe is entitled," i.e., his adoption under Native law did not count. Just to nail down denial of status to the man and rescission of status to the woman, the Act further declared that, upon marriage "to any citizen of the United States," the woman, herself, became a citizen of the U.S., although she still retained rights to "tribal property."^*" Thus, she would necessarily bring Native property into the Euroamerican world, where it became male property under westem marriage law. Furthermore, becoming a U.S. citizen automatically knocked her off the rolls. She could not go home again, and neither could her children. Because of the horrendous cultural dislocation this law caused, it was challenged in 1892 and again in 1894, forcing the Department of the Interior to re-examine mlings based on it. The BIA resisted changes to the law, however, arguing that "an Indian woman by such marriage separates herself from her tribe and becomes identified with the people of the United States, and her children are citizens of the United States, in all respects, and in no respect can be deemed members of the tribe to which the mother belonged prior to her marriage." On 8 May 1894, the Department made its fmal mling: It "concurred" with the BIA's position. Indian women lost their status upon marriage to a settler.'"** This did not quiet the matter, however, for in the eugenic environment of tum-of-the-twentieth-century America, the offspring of mixed marriages were certain to be regarded as "degenerate Indians," not "civilized whites." It is interesting to note what happened when the claims of greed squared off against the claims of racism. Greed won. The children of Native-settler marriages were officially declared "white children."'"' On 3 March 1905, by decree of the Department of the Interior, they were not allowed to enroll.'"* The land they would have been allotted was thus freed up for Euroamerican seizure, while the children lost all legal right to their Native heritage. This injection of racist legalisms into the question of identity bred intemal jealousies and resentments among Natives that had never existed under traditional rules of inclusion. In one dispute over Osage enrollments that surfaced in Febmary, 1895, the Bureau of Indian Affairs reviewed allegations that "many persons by means of false testimony" had enrolled. Their illegitimacy was entirely in the eye of the beholder, however, for most of these claimants were really mixed-blood children claiming their heritage as Osage.'"* Thus, the govemment's quantum-counting manufactured exclusionist hostili-

290

NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

ties that had not existed before among Natives, but which continue to this day. The Dawes apparatus viewed any law that disrupted Native custom as a cause for celebration, so no one federal was particularly disturbed by the dislocation that the 1888 law caused intermarried couples. However, the 1888 law also worked against settler cupidity, especially in tandem with old treaty provisions allowing the enrollment of traditionally adopted Euroamerican spouses among the Cherokee, Choctaw, Chickasaw, Muscogee, and Seminole.^'" Thus, the enrollment of Euroamerican spouses remained a hot issue, stimulating lawsuits even after the Department of the Interior had mled. These cases pitted the Department of the Interior against the federal courts, and courts tended to side with the settlers. Consequently, in 1898, Judge Hosea Townsend, of the United States Court in Indian Territory, rendered his opinion that an adopted man (and the spouse was always assumed to have been male) could be enrolled, as long as he married according to Native rites and proceeded to "reside in the Choctaw or Chickasaw Nation."^" In this ruling, he was influenced by Section 21 of the Curtis Act of 28 June 1898, which stipulated that the the Dawes Commission was to enroll "such intermarried white persons as may be entitled to citizenship under Cherokee laws." Adoptive spouses were even assigned blood quanThe intermarriage quagmire deepened even as the Dawes Commission was drawing to a close, so that the U.S. Supreme Court was dragged into the issue, ruling in 1906 on a case questioning Cherokee spousal enrollment. The Court decided that any settlers who had married Cherokee spouses before 1 November 1875, were entitled to enrollment and allotment, whereas those who had intermarried after that date were entitled to nothing—unless they forked over $500 each to the "national treasury" of the Cherokee!^'' Many paid the extortion. Consequently, 2,582 Euroamerican were placed on the rolls of the "Five Civilized Tribes"—and those were just the settlers who had gone about enrolling in a legitimate fashion."'' Clearly, the Dawes enrollment process idled between corruption and lunacy, yet a puerile notion persists to this day that the Dawes rolls somehow stood as a census of all living Natives between 1896, when the Dawes Commission was set up, and 1907, when the Dawes rolls were closed. This wildly inaccurate supposition leads to the popular contention that anyone whose family was not recorded on the old rolls cannot be of Native descent and must, therefore, be an impostor, a "wannabe," to use the cmel slur of modem quantum counters. In fact, the rolls were not, and were never intended to be, a census.^" Their

BLABBERMOUTH BONES

291

purpose was to set up a list of Natives "entitled" to land allotment, as the U.S. govemment reckoned entitlement, with the clear intention of excluding as many Natives as possible from the rolls. Even those enrolled were promptly deenrolled upon accepting their allotment. Commissioner of the Bureau of Indian Affairs, Francis E. Leupp, made this strategy quite clear in his Annual Report to the Secretary of the Interior in 1905. Styling the process of allotment "emancipation" (because, once land was accepted, tribal enrollment was replaced with U.S. citizenship), Leupp praised its effect of slimming the rolls down until no official Indians were left. "Some one [sic] has styled this a policy of shrinkage," he crowed, because every Indian whose name is stricken from a tribal roll by virtue of his emancipation reduced the dimensions of our red-race problem by a fraction—very small, it may be, but not negligible. If we can thus gradually watch our body of dependent Indians shrink, even by one member at a time, we may congratulate ourselves that the fmal solution is indeed only a question of a few years.'"

Furthermore, because enrollment existed for the direct purpose of parcelling out land to eligible individuals. Natives living where there was no land to distribute—that is, all of the people east of the Mississippi—^were those most readily prevented from enrolling. Just to nail down the exclusion, the Dawes apparatus required anyone who was, or wanted to be, enrolled to be physically located in "Indian Territory."^'^ Such a legal requirement made life hard enough for west-of-the-Mississippi Natives serving in the U.S. armed forces, but it effectively shut out of the process all Natives residing east of the Mississippi. A historically ignorant attitude waves away eastem Natives as untraditional assimilants, but it was the most traditional elements in the east that reftised Removal. Remaining east was no fluke but an anguished, conscious decision that involved considerable personal danger. It was undertaken by those longhairs who, distmsting the "pen-and-ink witchcraft" of treaty-making, eluded mission-aries and Indian agents alike, braving death to hide out in the swamps and the hills.^'* They risked all to remain in the land of their ancestors, tending the graves of their grandparents, living in secret for generations. The govemment was typically oblivious of them and wildly imderestimated their numbers when it was forced to confront the fact of their existence. In this, it was aided by the fact that most holdouts were actively hiding and did not want to be found. Evading notice was a resistance tactic of long-standing in the east. It was documented early in the nineteenth century, when missionaries in Ohio solemnly averred that, according to their painstaking census of 1816, there were no more than 2,600 Natives of all nations living in Northwest Ohio.'" Then, in

292

NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

1817, ai least 7,000 traditionals unknown to the missionaries tumed out at the rapids of the Maumee River in northwest Ohio to witness the Treaty at the Foot of the Rapids, which seized the last comer of Ohio yet remaining to them.'^° Not only did this mean that there were at least 9,600 Natives in Northwest Ohio, alone, in 1817, it also meant that officials were unaware of the identities or whereabouts of fully 73% of them. Similarly, the 150 Ottawa shipped west from Northwest Ohio to Indian Territory during Ottawa Removal in 1837-1839 hardly accounted for all the Ottawa then in Northwest Ohio. It is recorded that another 500 defiantly moved to the Walpole Island Reserve, in Ontario, Canada, rather than go west.^^' Those Ottawa who hid out in the Great Black Swamp rather than go either west or to Walpole Island were never counted, but, given the percentages known to exist elsewhere, they problably numbered around 2,800. These statistics derive from only one, relatively uninhabited comer of Ohio.^^^ They must be multiplied many thousands-fold to grasp the sheer numbers of unrecorded Natives in the east and, consequently, the magnitude of the federal policy of excluding eastem people from recognition. At no point was the exclusion accidental. The govemment was aware of and alarmed by the considerable numbers of eastem Natives. As a result, it consistently raised the bar to their enrollment until their exclusion was conclusively codified in 1905. The original Dawes Act sought to prevent eastem Natives from allotment in Section 6 by declaring any who had "voluntarily taken up . . . residence separate and apart from any tribe of Indians therein" as well as "adopted the habits of civilized life" to be thereafter citizens of the United States rather than members of their own nations.^^^ In other words, without consulting the people involved, the U.S. unilaterally severed all cultural ties between eastem and westem counterparts, declaring eastemers devoid of Native heritage, an insult that continues to this day. In addition, the govemment heavily cultivated the fiction that no Natives remained east after Removal, anyway, a lie that is still commonly circulated today, even though it was publicly shattered as early as 1896 when the Mississippi Choctaw surfaced, forcing the Dawes Commission to confront directly the issue of eastem Natives. The Commission's initial reaction was to stick with the lie, denying them enrollment. The obvious unfaimess of this in the case of the Mississippi Choctaw—^who had hung onto the treaty empowering them to remain in Mississippi after Removal—^put the Commission in a sticky place. Congress ultimately saved Dawes's face by taking the matter out of the Commission's hands: The Curtis Act of 1898 directed the

BLABBERMOUTH BONES

293

Commission to enroll the Mississippi By 1898, the U.S. courts had also gotten into the act, theoretically resolving the conundrum of eastem Natives by giving them the option of moving west into Indian Territory. Should they agree to live west of the Mississippi and share the fate of their respective, captive nations, they would, again, be considered Natives.^^^ There were, of course, serious problems with this solution. Not only had most eastem Natives made a life for themselves and their families by 1898, leaving them with little incentive to leap into poverty, but also their original reason for staying east remained in place: It was their homeland. Furthermore, their right of retum was anj^hing but absolute, for the councils of the recognized Native govemments in the west retained the right to reject any such retumee, as they saw fit.^^^ Here was a clause ripe for abuse. Depending upon their current level of greed (and the councils were stacked with U.S.-friendly assimilationists), councils could make or break claimants, and the incentive was clearly to break them, for enrollment meant letting go of land. Thus, eastem applicants were rejected constantly by the councils, without the slightest reference to whether they were culturally members of their nations. Such was the case with the documented descendants of Malachai Watts, all undoubted Cherokee from Tennessee who had come to Indian Territory in compliance with the waiver for eastem families willing to relocate.'" After the Wattses had given up everything to move west, the Cherokee council summarily rejected their enrollment application without giving any reason."* As it later came out, the Cherokee Nation had categorically booted the Wattses out of Indian Territory as "intmders" on the technicality that the family had originated in Tennessee, not North Carolina.^^' The fact that Tennessee was a more ancient Cherokee homeland than North Carolina mattered not a whit. Neither did the fact that the original 1871 mling by the Chief Justice of the Cherokee Nation admitted the Watts family to the Cherokee rolls. The council was equally unmoved by the fact that the Wattses were culturally, historically, and biologically Cherokee."" Aghast, the Watts descendents appealed their rejection to federal courts, basing their case on their unquestionably Cherokee lineage."' The appeal went to Judge William D. Springer of Indian Territory. When Judge Springer went back to look up the 1871 recognition of Malachai Watts and his family, he found that, conveniently enough for the current council's contention, "all records of the same had disappeared, and that the proof shows that the office in which they had been stored had been used by witnesses, and

294

NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

prisoners under guard, and that the light boxes in which a number ofthe papers in said office had been kept had been broken and the papers badly scattered."^'^ Despite the obvious evidence tampering and regardless ofthe indisputable fact that the Cherokee Chief Justice had previously enrolled the Wattses, Springer "affirmed" the more recent ruling that the Watts family "be denied" enrollment."^ Rather desperately, the Watts family petitioned for a rehearing of its case, but, at the rehearing. Springer somehow evaded his own earlier conclusion that the Wattses had been properly enrolled in 1871, concluding, instead, that the family had never really been enrolled. He now claimed that "all" the Chief Justice ofthe Cherokee Nation had done in 1871 was "to refer the testimony to the Cherokee council for its action," a clear falsehood, but one unprovable given the mysteriously missing records.""* Reiterating the Dawes commonplace that the right of enrollment did "not depend upon the question of Cherokee blood' (italics mine). Springer decided, based on the actions of earlier courts, not to support the Watts family. He denied their re-appeal."' In yet another case, that of the undoubtedly Cherokee descendants of the Goo Chee, Doo Chee, Tuchee ("Ann Crews"), heritage was once more brushed aside as irrelevant to enrollment. In this case, as a result of having remained east after Removal, the Crews family did not appear on the touchstone Cherokee rolls of 1835, 1848, 1851, or 1852. These post-Removal rolls, filled with potholes themselves, of course failed to record any families that had remained east after Removal. Since the Dawes Commission began its work with these older national rolls. Commissioners did not see the Crews family name pop up. As was customary in such cases, the Crewses' petition for enrollment was flatly denied."* The same shenanigans obtained among the Muscogee ("Creek") Nation in Indian Territory. Under Section 295 of Muscogee law, anyone who remained east in the old homelands up to 1889 were "declared aliens, and not entitled to citizenship [enrollment] in the Muskogee Nation." Even more ferociously, section 296 ofthe same law stipulated that the "minor children and descendants of persons so debarred from citizenship and declared aliens are hereby also excluded from citizenship in the Muskogee Nation and from all the privileges thereof." As its coup degrdce, section 297 also barred the enrollment of anyone who, being of mixed ancestry with the Cherokee, Choctaw, Chickasaw, or Seminole, had previously applied for enrollment in one of those nations."^ Theoretically, this was to keep insidious interlopers from craftily seizing two or more allotments, but, in fact, it was simply used to bar legitimate eastem

BLABBERMOUTH BONES

295

claimants who had been rejected elsewhere. Once more, enrollment had nothing whatsoever to do with heritage, culture, or the eugenic test of "blood." The pattem that emerged from these denials, and which was even articulated in the judicial decisions, was one of deliberate exclusion of eastem Natives from enrollment because it meant handing over a share of land in Indian Territory."* In this goal, west-of-the-Mississippi Natives fully cooperated with the U.S. govemment to deny enrollment to their eastem relatives. Moreover, the U.S. courts upheld the portrait ofthe eastem holdouts, not as people heroically clinging to their old homelands, but as apathetic losers who had willfully "separated themselves" from their Indianness by living in the eastem states, rather than going to Indian Territory—as though Removal had been a picnic outing; as though reservations were the natural habitat of Native America."' This rationale was used in 1898 to deny recognition to all eastem Cherokee. The Eastem Band Cherokee still in North Carolina had sued the govemment to allow their enrollment.^'"' Once again, the lawsuit was decided by Judge William D. Springer, with depressingly predictable results. Springer framed the legal issue as a question of land ownership rights, not Native identity, showing the tme meaning of the Dawes Act.^"" He was quite open about the fact that enrollment of all Natives had never been the intention of the Dawes Commission and that the sheer fact of being Native in no way guaranteed that a person would be enrolled. He made it clear that "blood alone" was "not the test of citizenship in the Cherokee Nation," so that "those Cherokees, and their descendants, who have separated themselves" (by remaining east) from the westem Cherokee had "ceased to be citizens ofthe Cherokee Nation."'"^ Springer's decision labored to prove that all Natives remaining east ofthe Mississippi after Removal had lost every right to their culture and history.^"*^ He quoted a precedent used by the Supreme Court, which charged that the cultural heritage of eastem Natives had degenerated into "mere social organizations" lacking the integrity of the culture maintained in Oklahoma.^'*'' In addition. Springer used the precedent that, by having refused to go west with their kin, the Eastem Band Cherokee had "ceased to be a part ofthe Cherokee Nation." Instead, in keeping with U.S. law, they "became citizens and were subject to the laws ofthe State in which they resided."'"" Holding these precedents to be unimpeachable. Springer declared that, by refusing to go west, the Eastem Cherokee had "thereby dissolved their connection with what is now known as the Cherokee Nation. They became citizens of the States and subject to the laws of the States in which they

296

NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

^''* He emphasized that, by refusing to remove, they had "forfeited all their rights and privileges as citizens of the Cherokee Nation."^''^ Thus, in lethal slashes of the pen, made over the strenuous objections of the North Carolina Cherokee, Springer denied the cultural and historical identity of those who had, in fact, been such ardent defenders of their homeland and their ancestors as to refuse Removal. By the tum of the twentieth century, the massive land transfer from Native to Euroamerican hands was nearly complete, making the window-dressing of Dawes enrollment superfluous. Accordingly, unwilling to cope any longer with the "Indian Problem" it had created, the Dawes Commission threw in the towel and began giving each nation a cut-off date, after which no application for enrollment would be reviewed, regardless of the heritage or identity of the individual involved. Thus, for example, no Choctaw or Chickasaw who applied for enrollment after their cut-off date of 24 December 1902, was considered.^''* Other nations got a little longer, for a torrent of claims was still pouring in, forcing the foot-dragging Commission to continue until the msh of new petitions was stopped by official order on 2 June 1905.^'" As of that date, the Commission had on file 135,962 applications for enrollment. Of these, 89,295 were approved; 33,522 were rejected; and 13,155 were still in limbo. Since the rolls had officially closed, only those among the 13,155 still enjoyed any possibility of being added.''" By this time, blood quantums were seen as cmcial data. Although originally an afterthought and composed entirely of eugenic guesswork, the quantum counts on the rolls were decreed correct and final by the McCumber Amendments to the Five Tribes Act of 26 April 1906.'" Then, on 4 March 1907, ready or not, the doors of the Commission were summarily snapped shut.'" The Dawes enrollment era was over. Ultimately, once the Dawes dust had settled, the Commission was found to have enrolled more than 100,000 Natives, but to have rejected 200,000.'" This number of 300,000 represents only those who actually applied for enrollment. Hundreds of thousands of undoubted Natives, the majority of them living east of the Mississippi, never even made the attempt, as it would have outed them, exposing them to mortal danger from such entities as the Ku Klux Klan, which was becoming vimlous in its resurrection as American eugenics worked itself up to a fever pitch. Sadly, the loss of legal identity by governmental fiat did not end for eastem Natives in 1907 when the Dawes Commission fled the scene of its crime. In 1993, in The Eugenic Assault on America, J. David Smith documented the continuation of documentary genocide against eastem Natives. Under the racial

BLABBERMOUTH BONES

297

purity laws passed in the early part of the twentieth century, especially in the South, a dedicated effort was launched to obliterate official documents recording the Native American lineages of families and individuals. This was plausible on its face because the old census forms, lacking any column for "Native American," simply recorded Natives as "free coloreds," along with many exslaves.""* Interestingly, the ferocious one-drop mle of racism did not apply to Native Americans, who were pronounced "white" at less than '/,g blood quantum, and this was what worried the racists.'" Whipped to a frenzy by the propaganda of such organizations as the AngloSaxon Clubs of America, public officials began to fear that light-skinned African Americans were sneaking into the bosom of white America via the dastardly dodge of the "free colored" column, claiming that their original "color" had been red, not black, and that, having passed the one-sixteenth marker, they were now "white."''^ Cleaving to the fiction that only two races existed in the south after Removal, public officials sought to guard against such racial treachery by actively altering legal documents to prevent African Americans from thus "passing for white." At one illicit stroke, officials transformed whole lineages from Native to "Negro," in deliberate acts of documentary genocide. In one well documented instance, between 1924 and 1946, Dr. Walter A. Plecker, the State Registrar of Vital Statistics in the State of Virginia, managed personally to reclassify thousands of Native Americans ofVirginia as "Negro."'" The confusion and sheer racism surrounding Native American identity are hardly things of the past. Even today, enrolled Natives are assigned eugenic blood quantums, and, in many cases, incumbents are refused enrollment if those quantums dip too low. As in the Dawes era, there also remains a direct correlation between land bases and quantum demands. Those nations possessing reservation land require high quantums, however fictively derived, whereas nations lacking land bases have lax quantum requirements. The Hopi Nation with its large land base, for instance, requires 'A quantum, whereas the Eastem Band Cherokee look only for a 7,5 quantum. The Cherokee of Oklahoma have no quantum stipulations, but do require documented descent from someone on the fmal Dawes rolls.''* Ignorant of the process, most Americans buy the official story that "real Indians have cards" and that, failing a quantum card, the claimant must be a New Age impostor. Thus, the eugenic relic of quantum counting continues to hold sway in modem America—but only when it comes to Native Americans. No other population in the U.S. is expected to document its "blood quantums" (as tested

298

NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

exclusively against Christian European "blood") in order to be accepted for who they are. It would be interesting to watch what would happen should Jewish Americans be required to produce federal tribal enrollment cards listing their "quantums" of "Christian blood," classifying them as '/2, '/4, Ve, '/,g, Vjj, or '/54 Jewish, and casting aspersions on the legitimacy of those lacking cards or high enough quantums. I would like to see the pandemonium that would empt should Colin Powell be challenged to prove himself a mulatto, quadroon, or octoroon, and ridiculed as a wannabe for presuming to identify as African American, when his family name failed to appear on the Federal Negro Registration Roll compiled by the Jim Crow Commission in 1907. Notwithstanding the cormption of "tribal" enrollment, the exclusionism of the Dawes Era, or the outrages perpetrated against eastem Native identity in the name of eugenics, archaeologists continue to use the legal fiction that no Natives exist in the east when deciding whom they will, and will not, talk to under the NAGPRA requirement to consult with Native Americans. West ofthe Mississippi, where numerous "tribes" and federally recognized people exist, archaeologists must engage in genuine consultation. In the east, however, it is easy enough to get around this stipulation, due to the extensive documentary genocide practiced against eastem Natives from 1887 into the present. Documentary genocide is being challenged, but slowly. Unenrolled eastem Natives have become bolder in the last few decades, brushing aside the personal insults, catcalls, and snide dismissals to insist upon being recognized. This trend is shown in recent census data. According to the 1990 U.S. Census, there were two million Native Americans (including Aleuts and Eskimos) in the country. The number of Natives more than doubled to 4.1 million on the 2000 Census, not because of an unreported baby boom on the reservations, but because federally unrecognized Natives were allowed, for the first time, to claim their Native identity.^^' This new willingness of eastem Natives to claim their identity has caused some uneasiness and even resistance among quantum-counting Natives, usually from west ofthe Mississippi. This is partly due to the racist imperatives they intemalized over their long incarceration on reservations and the false history they leamed in govemment schools. Mostly, however, it is due to their fear that eastem Natives are after "their" benefits. They realize what mainstream Americans never knew, that enrollment is really a benefits determination, indicating how thinly the Indian pie is to be sliced.^^ Nothing could be farther from eastem intentions than to gobble up reservation benefits, however.^^' The plan is, instead, to challenge the lies that still orchestrate federal Indian policy.

BLABBERMOUTH BONES

299

especially in matters of repatriation and reburial. Eastem Natives are putting that plan into action. At the 19 November 2001 NAGPRA Committee Hearing in Cambridge, Massachusetts, Jean McCoard, of the Ohio Tallige Fire (Cherokee), put the conundmm facing nonfederally recognized people squarely before the Committee. Donna Roberts-Moody, of the Abenaki, followed up on McCoard's comments by insisting on the need for "some type of amendment" to current NAGPRA law "that includes nonfederally recognized people" in consultations over remains.^*^ The visibility of the issue is mounting and will only increase in the future, until full recognition of eastem rights is won. At that point, NAGPRA will begin to work as well east of the Mississippi as west, and the Mound-Builder bones will go back to the Ohio Valley earth, where they belong.

EPILOGUE: STRATEGIES FOR EASTERN NATIVE AMERICANS

For all the tooth-gnashing going on in archaeological circles over the sea changes heralded by NAGPRA, the price of NAGPRA—constant vigilance—is paid by the Native American community. Especially in the east, where the federal failure to recognize Natives allows many sly ways around NAGPRA, archaeologists, historical societies, and developers still operate pretty much at will, successfully pushing aside Native concems. To keep disregard for NAGPRA at bay, eastem Natives must work through self-initiated groups. Lacking the funding that federal recognition supplies, such groups are financed primarily by the dues of members who are often sacrificing personally to pay their organizational freight. None of these groups is well heeled. Consequently, in the Ohio Valley mound country, the advantage is all on the side of westem wealth and privilege, leaving eastem Natives scrambling, just to keep tabs on the constant infractions of the law, which, even when brought to light, are typically left unpunished. As in the flatly illegal public auctions of grave goods that took place in Findlay, Ohio, from 1998 to 1999, or the ghoulishly illicit sale of human remains that occurred on 6 May 1998 in Lancaster, Ohio, transgressors skip off, scot free, whereas Natives who tum the spotlight on violations are left footing the bill. In 1992, for example, archaeologists decided, seemingly on a whim, to dig through the Great Circle Mound, one ofthe earthworks remaining intact at the major ceremonial complex at Newark, Ohio. Professor DeeAnne Wymer of Bloomsburg University in Pennsylvania put in for a permit to dig a ten-foot trench into the wall of the Great Circle, as a sort of training mission for the sixteen students she brought with her.' Without consulting, or even notifying.

302 NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

Ohio Natives, the Ohio Historical Society quietly approved Wymer's permit, claiming that her request was in keeping with Ohio law.^ Shortly after the dig had begun on 18 July 1992, Grandmother Barbara Crandell went to the Great Circle Mound to pray, only to spot Wymer and her crew there with their earth-moving equipment. Crandell walked up to ask what they were doing. This was how the Native community found out about the dig.^ Not knowing who Crandell was, the archaeologists blithely informed her that they were digging the trench to preserve the mound. In 2001, Crandell was still fuming over this oxymoronic reply, demanding, "How does digging through an earthwork 'preserve' it?""* Outraged at this most recent desecration ofthe Great Circle, Crandell phoned the office ofthe American Indian Center in Columbus, Ohio, and then retumed immediately to the Great Circle, where she sat down in protest. Bright and early the next day, she retumed to the mound, once more sitting there in vigil till the evening, watching the archaeologists' every move. The following day, two people from the Columbus American Indian Center joined her at the mound. Together, the three sat silently eyeing the archaeologists. The watch began to unnerve the greenhom students. Natives judged it important to continue the vigils throughout the night, but, because of her advanced age, Crandell did not wish to remain at the mound alone, in the dark. Mark Welsh ofthe American Indian Center offered to camp out with her, and the two settled in for a long stay. Word spread among Ohio valley Natives that "Grandma was at the Circle," and other local Natives began tuming out, first in a trickle and then by droves, in campers, cars, and on foot, to pray at and for the Circle, all the while staring, staring, staring at the archaeologists. Westem Natives also filed in, setting up tipis.' One evening. Grandma Crandell counted 115 people in the prayer circle, including a number of Euroamericans who had begun tuming out in support ofthe Natives.* Although disturbed, angered, and discomfitted by the Native presence, the archaeologists did not curtail their activities but continued doggedly with their trench-making. Newspaper reporters began showing up, writing articles that touched off letters to editors, fulminating in various directions. The uneasiness of the confrontation left local law enforcement officials biting their nails, as they were dispatched to keep a keen eye on the seething cauldron. Local Natives suspect that FBI agents were also present, observing the protesters from a distance. (The blue govemment car tends to be a give-away.) What is incontrovertible is that the Govemor's office also took uneasy notice, sending a "mediator" to observe the tense action.' Crandell overheard one of his

EPILOGUE 303

entourage instructing the local police, "Whatever you do, don't touch that old woman."* The dig ended on 29 July 1992.' When word passed to the assembled Natives that the last day ofthe dig had arrived, people started packing up their ponies and, by late aftemoon, most were headed home, but the final indignity was yet to come. As the crowd thinned, the archaeologists decided to bury their eleven days' worth of garbage—McDonald's wrappers, plastic bottles, and all the gmbby debris of outdoor living—in the trench they had dug through the sacred mound. Because Crandell had decided to remain at the mound until the last archaeologist had left, she heard their plan and saw the bulldozer shoving garbage towards the trench. Very few Natives were still on site, but, undaunted by her solitary situation, Crandell took up her walking stick and somehow, on arthritic knees that were about to buckle, climbed ten feet down, to the very bottom ofthe trench. There, she sat, cross-legged, inside the mound, even as the bulldozer pushed the amassed garbage towards her head. One local archaeologist looked dovm on her, calmly observing that she had better leave, or she would get hurt. Crandell replied that he was the one likely to get hurt. "Are you threatening me?" he demanded. "No," she replied, smiling, "but, if I were you, I'd look over my shoulder," for she had just espied two rather large Lakota guardians rounding the crest behind him. At that moment, several ofthe student archaeologists noticed that Crandell was in the trench. Frantically waving their arms, they ran forward, flagging the driver ofthe bulldozer to stop, just before he inundated her with garbage. The commotion that Crandell had created by her impromptu sit-in had grabbed the attention of those Natives who had not yet departed, and, catching wind ofthe confrontation, some who had already left tumed around, hurrying back to the mound. A stand-off ensued, with the archaeologists insisting that the garbage would be buried in the mound, and the Natives insisting that it would not. Others joined Crandell in the trench. The archaeologists decided to haul their trash to the dump.'" One might have thought that this two-week confrontation, which loomed large in Ohio news, had acted as a caution to local archaeologists and amateur mound destroyers, but the presumption of privilege runs deep among those used to having their own way. The fact of new mles dawns slowly. Thus, two years later, in August 1994, a beautification scheme was hatched, purportedly to clear away the underbmsh around the Alligator Mound, a central effigy mound atop

304 NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

a two-hundred foot hill, the highest in the area, from which all the ceremonial mounds ofthe Licking Valley can be glimpsed. At one time, the effigy stood secluded guard, but the town had spread out to it by the early 1990s. Today, it sits amidst an upscale housing development, the Bryn Du Woods, prized for its fine vistas." The neighborhood brought in bulldozers to do the work of clearing, and it soon became obvious to local Natives that more than just underbmsh had been targeted for removal. The work crew had already destroyed the left front paw ofthe invaluable effigy when, by sheer chance, Shar Hunter, an Ohio Shawnee, arrived at the mound to pray. Horrified by what she saw taking place. Hunter contacted Barbara Crandell, and, together, the women quickly apprised the Licking County Historical Society of what was underway. Equally horrified, the county issued an immediate stop-work order. The bulldozers left precipitously.'^ To this day, members of the Native American Alliance of Ohio (NAAO) remain convinced that the undergrowth had merely provided the excuse for bringing in earth-moving equipment; that the actual, if covert, intention all along had been to level both the effigy and the high hill upon which it stood, to open up even more panoramic vistas for householders ofthe wealthy subdivision. It is not just archaeologists and neighborhoods that ignore NAGPRA, but industries do so, as well. In July 1994, for instance, members of NAAO discovered that, through its quarrying activity, the Central Silica Company of Zanesville, Ohio, was destroying the Wilson Mound in Perry County, Ohio. The land upon which the mound sat was in the possession of Central Silica, which had given a ninety-nine-year lease on it to the Archaeological Conservancy, a national group headquartered in Santa Fe, New Mexico, which lists its mission as preserving and conserving ancient sites by acquiring title to them, thus to control activity on them.'' Contradictorily, however, the Archaeological Conservancy had allowed Central Silica to use its conservancy land as a quarry. Worse, the Archaeological Conservancy sought to bar Native Americans from visiting the Wilson Mound, a turtle mound that is sacred to Ohio Valley Natives. NAAO challenged this prohibition on 29 September 1994, noting that it violated the American Indian Religious Freedom Act of 1978, which, among other things, guarantees Natives access to their sacred sites. As Barbara Crandell noted in her letter to the Archaeological Conservancy, "I myself have been visiting this mound for over 30 years to pray and show respect for my ancestors," so that the Conservancy's officious attempt to restrict access was highly offensive. Any way that NAAO looked at the matter, the Conservancy's

EPILOGUE 305

behavior regarding the Wilson Mound was wildly out of synch with its announced goals.'" NAAO hired Magizi Consulting of Madison, Wisconsin, to assess the impact of Central Silica's activity in terms ofthe preservation of Native American burials and sacred sites. The Magizi inspector reported on 22 July 1994 that the two-thousand-year-old turtle mound was "extremely imperiled" because Central Silica had excavated within fifty feet—and, in some instances, within ten feet—ofthe mound. The result was that the mound would "eventually slide away" from erosion as quarrying escalated." The Magizi report in hand, NAAO contacted the Ohio Department of Natural Resources (ODNR), prompting the department's ovra investigation on 24 August 1994. Finding the Magizi report to have been entirely accurate and, moreover, that "Central Silica Co. had affected land which was not in the approved mining permit," ODNR issued Chief's Order Number 1473-IM, instmcting Central Silica to halt its activities immediately.'* The Ohio Historical Society (OHS) also continues to operate on the sly, whenever it can. Over Thanksgiving weekend in 1992, for instance, the tiny town of Kirkersville, Ohio, was using federal funds to put in a new sewer treatment plant when workers accidentally uncovered a very old burial, possibly dating back to 3000 B.C.E. Someone called OHS, for local Natives spotted its archaeologists zeroing in on the site with the obvious intention of squirreling the skeleton away in its vault, along with its other 6,733 sets of Native remains." Local Natives alerted Barbara Crandell to the situation early Friday moming, and she immediately traveled to Kirkersville, arriving by 9:00 A.M. Members of the Columbus American Indian Center also arrived. Once more, a dedicated watch was instituted, with Crandell present sun up to sun down every day for the ensuing week, despite the dreadful weather. Interestingly, the local residents of Kirkersville soon sided with the Natives in protesting the grave removal. As Crandell remarked of their solidarity, "Once you explain to ordinary citizens what exhumation means, they ally themselves with the Native cause."" The resulting oversight of Natives and townsfolk, combined with the fact that federal money was being employed on the water treatment project, effectively prevented OHS from spiriting away the remains, as NAAO believes that it had planned to do. Instead, the residents of Kirkersville respectfially covered over the grave, redesigned the treatment plant, so as to leave the burial undisturbed, and erected a fence around the grave with a memorial marker fronting it. This setback did not deter OHS from attempting the same elsewhere, a full

306 NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

decade later. On 12 April 2002, The Toledo Blade newspaper broke the story of exhumations done on the quiet in Perrysburg, Ohio, at Fort Meigs. A restored. Revolutionary-era fort overlooking the Maumee River, Fort Meigs is mn by OHS as a tourist attraction. As work crews were putting in a sewer line connection to accommodate a new visitors' center, they accidentally unearthed several coffins, containing settler remains. In addition, while replacing the stockade fence, workers found two 1,400-year-old Native burials. In late March 2002, another Native grave was unearthed near the earlier site. Obviously, an ancient Native cemetery lay beneath the fence. In all three instances, OHS appeared to have hushed up the finds, quietly removing all the remains, settler and Native alike, to its forensic laboratory in Columbus, Ohio. Members ofthe Spafford family, whose ancestral cemetery had been raided unbeknownst to them, were put out about the surreptitious removals and completely gratuitous forensic analyses. Local Native Americans reacted with even greater ire at the news of this new despoliation of their ancestral graves. The different response of OHS to the two groups was disgracefully predictable: The Spafford remains were to be retumed to the family, but OHS decided to hang on to the Native bones. Natives in Toledo contested the decision, but, once OHS has Native remains in its possession, reclaiming them is next to impossible." In what NAAO considers its most flagrant and irresponsible act, late in 2001, OHS held a sudden, secret meeting with officers of the Mound Builders Country Club. In this backroom session, OHS extended its controversial lease of the cmcial Circle-Octagon ceremonial complex in Newark, Ohio, to the Mound Builders Country Club, allowing it to continue using the site as a golf course for most ofthe twenty-first century—^until the year 2088, to be exact NAAO suspects that this extension was made expeditiously to forestall action by the Select Committee ofthe Ohio Legislature, appointed in November 2001, to look into the policies and procedures goveming OHS's handling of historic and Native sites. It was not unlikely that the Select Committee would have ruled the golf course at the Newark mound complex the wildly inappropriate use of a sacred site that it is. In/Accessibility ofthe Circle-Octagon complex has been a buming issue for some time, with both NAAO and the Friends of the Mound, a group of concemed Euroamericans, attempting to open it to the public. When the land was deeded to OHS in 1933, one ofthe legal requirements was that it be held for the benefit of the public at all times. In violation of this founding stipulation, the public is only gmdgingly admitted to the grounds. Although the

EPILOGUE 307

country club has since been forced to remove the "Private Property, Keep Out" signs, which had long dotted its peripheries, the club continues to insist that anyone wishing to visit the ceremonial center must write or call for permission in advance. Moreover, it reserves the right to deny the public access. The Country Club has no such legal right, but this fact does not stop its officials from treating Native visitors badly. When, for example, Barbara Crandell led ten members of NAAO to the complex for traditional prayers on 5 November 2000, Joe Renaud, president of the Country Club, along with others, attemped to wam them off the grounds, on the excuse that they might otherwise get beaned by a golf ball. Golfers were presented as having the primary right to the complex. After the confrontation, Crandell stated that two golfers deliberately hit six balls very close to the prayer circle.^" While Gail Zion and I were walking the octagon portion ofthe complex in May of 2001, the grounds manager approached to force us off. We refused to leave. In June, 2001, as I walked the grounds again, nearby golfers tapped their mouths with their hands, chanting "woo, woo, woo." A clear pattem emerges from these various fights. On the one hand, the archaeological, industrial, business, and historical communities in the east continue to act as if NAGPRA had never been passed. On the other hand, eastem Natives are entirely on their own in attempting to press for adherence to the law, spending their personal time and money to keep tabs on groups that have sunk to sneaking around to achieve their ends. In the process. Natives are regulariy insulted, usually in a racial way, even though a comerstone of OHS resistance to NAGPRA enforcement is the insistence that there are no Native Americans in the Ohio valley. NAAO believes that, to remedy the continuing desecrations in the east, action must be pursued beyond what can be provided by individuals, or even small groups, working in isolation. Collective, planned action is necessary. In addition, the federally created swamp of "recognition" must be drained if NAGPRA has a chance of prevailing in mound country. NAAO hopes to be providing a few examples of constmctive policies and strategies that might be copied elsewhere in the east. Specifically, NAAO: 1. 2. 3. 4.

Challenges the legitimacy of govemmental recognition of Natives; Works with elected and appointed officials to bring public oversight to the issue of mound usage; Forms common cause with like-minded Euroamerican groups; Pushes for state and local legislation that requires archaeological and

308 NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

5.

historical societies, museums, and universities to consult with local Native peoples on issues pertaining to their ancestors and culture; Is creating a North American Indian Memorial Park for the reburiai of the so-called "culturally unidentifiable" remains now sequestered in institutional vaults, away from their federally w/irecognized descendants.

On the first point, NAAO does not recognize the "right" of the federal govemment to declare who is, or is not, a Native American. That right belongs exclusively to local Native American communities, whose decisions are to be respected by all other communities, especially any so far removed from an area as not to know its people. As demonstrated in chapter 5, federal recognition began as a sham and thereafter sank to the level of outright fraud in its dedicated effort to exclude as many Natives as possible from allotment. Probably less than one-third of all living Natives were even considered for enrollment between 1896 and 1907, with the vast majority of those legally barred from enrolling living in the east. Furthermore, the fanciful quantum counts attached to modem federal enrollment are remnants of the disgraceful eugenics craze, whose sole purpose was to enforce racist imperatives upon a captive people. That the U.S. govemment continues to impose this avowedly racist system of categorization on Native Americans constitutes a human-rights violation worthy of United Nations scmtiny. The NAAO holds that the only actual result of federal recognition is to pit modem Natives against each other. On the one side stands a govemmentally created in-crowd, waving aloft its paper proof of colonial privilege, as though it signaled honor not humilitation at the hands of a Master Race. On the other side sits an out-crowd, equally created by the govemment, but reviled as "fake" by the in-crowd for its failure to have obtained the same paper dispensation, even though the source of the paper flatly refused to hand it out equitably. t h e cmcial point here is that both identities are false, for both identities were imposed on Natives by an outside force that they were helpless to counteract. Consequently, federal recognition measures no one's "authenticity." If it measures anything at all, it is the chilling level of identification with selfdestruction that can be instilled in an arbitrarily selected in-crowd by a foreign invader. Since federal recognition serves no Native purpose but, instead, militates against Native solidarity, the NAAO contends that anyone who has a govemment-issue Indian card should bum it immediately in a public protest. The NAAO recognizes people in the traditional way, based on community

EPILOGUE 309

knowledge and oral lineage traditions of who folks are. Over the years, NAAO has not found the slightest basis for the dire prophecies of doom that such a policy elicits from the quantum counters. Our oral criteria have not led to a tsunami of New Age enthusiasts clamoring for admittance to NAAO. Those few who do come around leave again rather quickly, once they discover that realpolitik action on behalf of Native causes is afoot, with nary a Rainbow Eagle Animal Guide in sight. In the scheme of things, it is not very hard for people who are, themselves, traditional to distinguish someone weaned on Native precepts from someone weaned on Euro-Christian fantasies about what it means to be an Indian. On points two through four, NAAO is working with state agencies, public officials, and non-Native organizations to put pressure on violators of NAGPRA. Importantly, in such a strategy. Natives cannot be the only ones involved in the fight. In the instance of OHS, a major violator of NAGPRA, the Society receives up to $15 million dollars annually from the State of Ohio, yet claims to be a private agency with no obligation to account for its actions to the public. NAAO noticed that others besides itself have voiced complaints about OHS: the African-American community has, for instance, been disappointed by OHS's lackadaisical handling of its important history. (Ohio heavily supported the Underground Railroad, among other achievements.) For their part, Euroamerican citizens have been disgusted with OHS's seemingly ad hoc decisions quietly to destroy a large cache of invaluable primary source documents and, with little notice to their summarily fired workers, let alone the public, to close the Ohio Village, a very popular, reconstructed village from the 1860s.^' NAAO made common cause with those decrying such deeds, for a coalition is always more effective than a lone dissenter. The mutual concems about OHS mounted until, finally, in the fall of 2001, the Ohio Legislature called a Select Committee to look into the matter of OHS stewardship of its public tmst. Starting on 7 November 2001, and finishing in 30 January 2002, the Committee held fifteen public hearings on OHS and its responsibilities to the citizens of Ohio. When such an opportunity presents itself. Native groups cannot just sit on their hands and hope for the best. They must ensure their visibility or watch their issues go unaddressed. In this instance, NAAO made a point of sending representatives to every hearing to speak on prearranged topics during the Public Testimony segment of the meeting, thus putting all of its concems on the permanent public record in an orderly way. We prepared written comments, including our list of requested actions, and ensured that copies were available

310 NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

to Committee members. Specifically, NAAO requested that 1.

2.

3. 4. 5.

OHS be required to consult with local Natives, as recognized by Ohio Native communities, on any issue or action touching ancestral and modem Native history; A North American Indian Memorial Park be established to rebury Mound-Builder remains and artifacts now held in institutional collections; The Circle-Octagon complex at Newark be open to the public; Local Natives be in charge of interpreting local Native culture and history; and OHS be subject to public oversight.

Because NAAO does not snub non-Native support but welcomes coalitions as important for showing broad-based concem on an issue, we were happy not to be the only group to testify to disappointment at OHS's handling of the mounds. Particularly quizzing the unconscionable extension of the lease of the Circle-Octagon ceremonial complex for use as a golf course. Dr. Richard Shiels, Associate Professor of History at Ohio State University and founder of the Friends of the Mound, testified on the matter at the 8 November 2001, hearing: I am here to ask you to insist that OHS consult with the public on policy and usage of this site—soon, repeatedly and regularly. OHS needs to listen to public concems, not merely report upon decisions it has made. Never again should a public state memorial be leased to a private club for an additional fifty years behind closed doors.

Dr. Shiels recommended that OHS "be required to function as a public agency," observing the sunshine laws, attending to the public will, and making its records and minutes readily available to citizens. He also recommended that the Circle-Octagon site be opened to the public, particularly Natives, to whom it is sacred. He knows of the Native view of the mounds due to the working relationship between NAAO and the Friends of the Mound.^^ As an aside, especially for any novice groups looking to coalesce around mound issues, let me emphasize the amount of networking, travel, consultation, out-of-pocket expense, time, and sheer grit required to sustain this, or any other, cause. No group ever fell into success serendipitously. Above all, victory requires focus, not a passing enthusiasm for the subject that wilts under pressure, but a steady, unwavering concentration on the issue. This entails not

EPILOGUE 311

only attending but also speaking at hearings. NAAO has, for instance, ensured its visible participation at every NAGPRA hearing since the NAGPRA committee came into being. Also important to success are timing, patience, a conscious, ongoing cooperation with other group members (no back-biting allowed), and a carefully filed, accessible paper trail—not to mention many long hours of sitting on the uncomfortably straight-backed, wooden chairs typically provided at public hearings. Moreover, groups promoting Native rights must develop what the Iroquois call the "seven-span" skin, i.e., a thick skin through which offense does not penetrate easily. Groups must be prepared to be outnumbered, ignored, and even slighted without letting a negative response derail their efforts. For example, at the 9 January 2002 hearing that it was my tum to address, the NAAO delegation consisted of four women. Meanwhile, at least fifty suited-up, brief-case-toting representatives of OHS, including lawyers, marketers, and executives, crowded into the small hearing room, eyeing us warily. Legislators peered down at us from their high perches of power. Congressional aides ran in and out, as microphones snaked up from every horizontal surface. It is very lonely, standing up to address such an assembly, including many who are openly hostile to one's message. Focusing on the task, and not on the intimidation factor seated five feet behind one, requires a little pluck. The faint of heart should remain at home with their knitting. Such hard work eventually pays off, as did NAAO's on 15 Febmary 2002, when the Select Committee reported on its findings in a thirty-two page document that was comprehensive in its recommendations, all of which were heatedly opposed by OHS. By and large, the recommendations shined the light of state oversight into the inner recesses of OHS, which was thenceforward to be held strictly accountable for its use of public monies. In addition, its records were opened to the public. State Representative Kerry R. Metzger, who chaired the Select Committee, promised to enact the recommendations into law, some quite expeditiously.^^ To its lasting credit, the Committee had heard minority claims quite clearly. Not only did it require OHS to create an African-American Hall of Fame, but it also specifically addressed NAAO's requests, in four, strongly worded points: 1.

"The Select Committee, after hearing public testimony (especially from Ohioans of Native American descent), recommends that OHS develop one or more mechanisms that will advance communications and allow for appropriate input on issues of mutual concem with such persons and

312 NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

2.

3.

4.

groups." Towards forcing this point, the Committee required OHS to submit a report on its efforts by 30 September 2002.^" "The Select Committee took note of the testimony regarding the lease between the Moundbuilders [sic] Country Club and OHS and recommends that the parties affected work diligently to afford reasonable public access to this significant cultural landmark."^' "The Select Committee recommends that the state develop and implement a State Archaeological Preservation Plan that would be developed by the State Historic Preservation Office in cooperation with federal, state, and local agencies, the Ohio Archaeological Council, the Archaeological Society of Ohio, the Native American community, and other interested stakeholders."^* "The Select Committee recommends that an abandoned cemetery and unmarked human burial group preservation program be developed and implemented for the State of Ohio," since testimony had revealed that "Ohio was one of the few states which does not have a specifically designed program to protect such places.""

The last recommendation of the Committee addressed the fifth strategy that NAAO is modeling, the creation of a North American Indian Memorial Park in which Mound-Builder remains from those eastem states with no federally recognized Natives may be reinterred. NAAO believes that each of those eastem states has land that no one particularly wants that can be publicly consecrated to the purpose of reburiai. In Ohio, NAAO realized that the abandoned Femald nuclear weapons facility, shut down in 1989, was one of those places. Heavily contaminated land abutts a very lovely, unpolluted green space, which acted as a buffer zone between Femald and the surrounding community. NAAO has already worked with the Femald Environmental Management Project, which is attempting to clean up the 1100 contaminated acres of Femald, to set aside 170 green-space acres for our North American Indian Memorial Park, for the reburiai of remains and grave goods taken from the Ohio Valley mounds. This project has been eagerly received by various Ohio groups and agencies and has the solid backing of the Ohio EPA, as well as support letters from several U.S. Congresspersons and the former Secretary of Defense, Bill Richardson. Among community leaders, the Catholic Diocese of Columbus has lent its support, as have several grassroots organizations, including the Femald Residents for Environmental Safety and Health (FRESH), the group which

EPILOGUE 313

forced federal action over Femald's heavy and illicit contamination ofthe area. Federally recognized nations that originated in the Ohio Valley also support the North American Indian Memorial Park. NAAO is currently drawing up detailed plans for this site. Once plans are finalized, NAAO will push for the retum of the so-called "culturally unidentifiable" remains ofthe Ohio Valley Mound Builders from all museums, organizations, institutions, and individuals holding them, to lay the bones ofthe ancestors back in the womb of Mother Earth, where they belong. So be it.

NOTES

Foreword: Indigenist Scholarship at Its Finest 1 For deployment of the term and a usefiil selection of studies, see Mick Gidley, ed.. Representing Others: White Views of Indigenous Peoples (Exeter, UK: University of Exeter Press, 1992). Also, see Gretchen M. Bataille, ed.. Native American Representations: First Encounters, Distorted Images, and Literary Appropriations (Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press, 2000). 2 On Ponce and Coronado, see David L. Weber, The Spanish Frontier in North America (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1992) 24, 33-34,46-^9. 3 Jose Rabasa, Inventing A-M-E-R-I-C-A: Spanish Historiography and the Formation of Eurocentrism (Norman: University of Oklahoma Press, 1993) 29, 199-202. 4 Rabasa, Inventing A-M-E-R-I-C-A, 65. Such nonsense was well established in Europe during the period. See John Block Friedman, Monstrous Races in Medieval Thought (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1981). 5 Weber, Spanish Frontier, 24. 6 Rabasa, Inventing A-M-E-R-I-C-A, 65. 7 Rabasa, Inventing A-M-E-R-I-C-A, 65. 8 The first known reference to the supposed eating of human flesh by the "Caribs" (cannibals) was made by Guillermo Coma, one of Columbus's lieutenants, on 3 November 1494, although neither Coma nor any of his colleagues had ever witnessed such a practice or even encountered one ofthe "Indios" allegedly guilty of it. See Kirkpatrick Sale, The Conquest of Paradise: Christopher Columbus and the Columbian Legacy (New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1990) 131. Although he had no more concrete evidence of Native anthropophagy than did Coma, Michael de Montaigne waxed sweepingly philosophical on the implications in his 1580 treatise, "Of Cannibals," thereby forging an apparently un-

316 NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

breakable link between "primitivism" and cannibalism in the European mind; the piece is found in Michel Eyquem de Montaigne, "Des cannibales," Essais, 2 vols. (1580; Paris: Editions Gamier Freres, 1962) 1:230-45. For an illustration of some ofthe myth's staying power (in the guise of "scientific truth"), see Robert A. Myere, "Island Carib Cannibalism," Niewe West-Indische Gids 158 (1984): 147-58. 9 On scalping, see the section titled, "That Most Savage of Practices ...," in Ward Churchill, A Little Matter of Genocide: Holocaust and Denial in the Americas, 1492 to the Present (San Francisco: City Lights, 1997) 178-88. On Mesoamerica, see Peter Hassler, "The Lies ofthe Conquistadors: Cutting through the Myth of Human Sacrifice," World Press Review (Dec. 1992): 28-29. The best overall analysis with respect to cannibalism will be found in William Arens, The Man-Eating Myth: Anthropology and Anthropophagy (New York: Oxford University Press, 1979). 10 For the longer view of this process, see Vassilis Lambropoulous, The Rise ofEurocentrism: Anatomy of Interpretation (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1993). 11 Samuel Purchas, "Virginia's Merger: Or a Discourse shewing the benefits which may grow to this kingdome from American English Plantations," in Hakluytus Posthumous or Purchas His Pilgrimes, 20 vols. (Glasgow: MacLehose and Sons, 1905- 1907) 19: 239. 12 Eric R. Wolf, Europe and the People without History (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1982). 13 This process is elucidated quite well in Robert Young, White Mythologies: Writing History and the West (New York: Routledge, 1990). For a more directly materialist interpretation, see Samir Amin, Eurocentrism (New York: Monthly Review, 1989), esp., 89-117. 14 In North America, the crux of this will be found in the system of compulsory residential schooling overseen by the central govemments of both the U.S. and Canada from roughly 1880 to 1980. See, generally, David Wallace Adams, Education for Extinction: American Indians and the Boarding School Experience, 1875-1928 (Lawrence: University Press of Kansas, 1995); and John S. Malloy, A National Crime: The Canadian Govemment and the Residential School System, 1879-1980 (Winnipeg: University of Manitoba Press, 1999). Antecedents extend back almost as far as the European invasion of America itself, however. See George E. Tinker, Missionary Conquest: The Gospel and Native American Cultural Genocide (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1993). The contemporary process of "mainstreaming" Native American youngsters in public schools also accomplishes much the same purpose. 15 Albert Memmi, The Colonizer and the Colonized (Boston: Beacon Press, 1965) 107. 16 Memmi, The Colonizer and the Colonized, 89. For an excellent comparative study of how this outcome has been pursued in several colonial settings, see Martin Camoy, Education as Cultural Imperialism (New York: David McKay, 1974). 17 The results of this process, often infecting even what is intended as counterhegemonic discourse, are truly insidious. Witness, as a classic recent example, Kiowa novelist N. Scott Momaday's endorsement as fact ofthe Bering Strait migration hypothesis in an otherwise powerful polemic against the abuses of archaeology. N. Scott Momaday, "Disturbing the

NOTES 317

Spirits: Indian Bones Must Stay in the Ground," New York Times, 2 November 1996,1: 23. 18 See Walter L. Adamson, Hegemony and Revolution: A Study of Antonio Gramsci 's Political and Cultural Theory (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1980), esp. 170-79. 19 See, e.g., Bill Readings, Introducing Lyotard: Art and Politics (London: Routledge, 1991) 63, 74-80. 20 For a typical argument to the contrary, see Ralph L. Beals, "The Anthropologist as Expert Witness: Illustrations from the California Indians Land Claim Case," in Irredeemable America: The Indians'Estate and Land Tenure, ed. Imre Sutton (Albuquerque: University of New Mexieo Press, 1985) 139-56. 21 A good overview is provided by Robert E. Bieder, Science Encounters the Indian, 1820-1880 (Norman: University of Oklahoma Press, 1986). 22 For a parallel discourse, see Francis Paul Prucha, Americanizing the American Indian: Writings of the "Friends of the Indian, " 1800-1900 (Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press, 1973). 23 Robert F. Berkhofer, Jr., The White Man's Indian: Images of the American Indian from Columbus to the Present (New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1978). 24 Samuel George Morton, "Observations on the Size of the Brain in Various Races and Families of Man," Proceedings of the Academy of Natural Sciences 4 (1849): 221-24. With more specific reference to American Indians, see Morton's Crania Americana, or, a Comparative View of the Skulls of Various Aboriginal Nations of North and South America (Philadelphia: John Pennington, 1839). Overall, see William Stanton, The Leopard's Spots: Scientific Attitudes Towards Race in America, 1815-1859 (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1960). 25 Stephen Jay Gould, The Mismeasure ofMan (New York: W. W. Norton & Co., 1981); and "Morton's Ranking of Races by Cranial Capacity: Unconscious Manipulation of Data May Be a Scientistic Norm," Science 200 (5 May 1978): 503-9. 26 Richard J. Hermstein and Charles Murray, The Bell Curve: Intelligence and Class Structure in American Life (New York: Free Press, 1994). 27 Probably the leading proponent of "short dating" was Ale§ Hrdlidka, head of the Smithsonian Institution's American Btireau of Ethnology. See Ale§ Hrdliika, "The Problem of Man's Antiquity in America," Proceedings of the Eighth American Science Conference (Washington, D.C.: GPO, 1942) 53-55; and "The Race and Antiquity of the Ameri-can Indian," Scientific American (July 1901): 7-9. 28 David Hurst Thomas, Skull Wars: Kennewick Man, Archaeology, and the Battlefor Native American Identity (New York: Basic Books, 2000) 136-38. 29 Frank H. H. Roberts, quoted in Thomas, Skull Wars, 137-38. 30 Brian M. Fagan, The Great Joumey: The Peopling of Ancient America (London: Thames & Hudson, 1987)52.

318 NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

31 On linguistics, see Johanna Nichols, "Linguistic Diversity and the First Settlement in the New World," Language 66 (1990): 475-521. On genetics, see Douglas C. Wallace and Antonio Torrini, "American Indian Prehistory as Written in the Mitochondrial DNA: A Review," Human Biology (June 1992): 403-16. On Old Crow/Bluefish Cave, see William N. Irving, "New Dates from Old Bones: Twisted Fractures in Mammoth Bones and Some Flaked Bone Tools Suggest that Humans Occupied the Yukon More than 40,000 Years Ago," Natural History (February 1987): 8-13. On Monte Verde, elements of which have been dated at 30,000+ years, see Tom Dillehay, Monte Verde: A Late Pleistocene Settlement in Chile, vol. I, Paleoenvironment and Site Context (Washington, D.C.: Smithsonian Institution, 1989), and vol. 2, The Archaeological Context and Interpretation (Washington, D.C.: Smithsonian Institution, 1997). For the one that archaeologists really do not want to hear about—the site at Valsequillo, Mexico, which registered a geological date of 250,000 years—see Virginia Steen-Mclntyre, Roald Fryxell, and Harold E. Malde, "Geologic Evidence for Age of Deposits at Heyatlaco Archaeological Site, Valsequillo, Mexico," Quartenary Research 16(1981): 1-17. 32 Thomas, Skull Wars, 156. On the "Clovis Mafia," see Charles W. Petit, "Rediscovering America: The New World May Be 20,000 Years Older Than Experts Thought," U.S. News and World Report 125.14 (May, 1998): 56+. 33 For some of the most recent iterations, see Frederick Hadleigh West, ed., American Beginnings: The Prehistory and Paleontology ofBeringia (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1996). See, also, Fagan, Great Joumey. 34 For a brief chronology of the periods during which the land bridge is thought to have existed, see Jeffrey Goodman, American Genesis: The American Indian and the Origins of Modem Man (New York: Summit Books, 1981) 50. 35 Among those first ridiculed, then purged, for arguing the pre-Clovis case too strongly was George F. Carter, Curator of Anthropology at the San Diego Museum and senior geologist with Texas A&M University. See Carter's Earlier Than You Think: A Personal View of Man in America (College Station: Texas A&M University Press, 1980). Another victim is Richard S. "Scotty" MacNeish, former president ofthe Society for American Archaeology, Director ofthe R. S. Peabody Foundation for Archaeology, and winner ofthe A. V. Kidder Award for Archaeology. See MacNeish's "Early Man in the New World," American Scientist 64.3 (May-June, 1976): 316-27. Only the overwhelming reputation of Louis Leakey appears to have saved the renowned discoverer of both Australopithecines and Homo habilis from sharing the professional fates suffered by Carter, MacNeish, and many others, including Virginia Steen-Mclntyre, Roald Fryxell, and Harold E. Malde, of Valsequillo fame. See Louis S. B. Leakey, Ruth deEtte Simpson, Ranier Berger, John Witthoff, and others. Pleistocene Man at Calico (San Bernardino: San Bernardino Museum Association, 1972). 36 Jos6 de Acosta, Historia natural y moral de las Indias, ed. Jose Alcina Franch, Cr6nicas de America 34 (1590; Madrid: Historia 16, 1987); Carter, Earlier Than You Think, 5-6, 244. 37 Thomas Jefferson, Notes on the State of Virginia (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1982) 101. On the relevant aspects of international law, see L. C. Green, "Claims to Territory in Colonial North America, in L. C. Green and Olive P. Dickason, The Law ofNations and the New World (Edmonton: University of Alberta Press, 1989) 3^-42.

NOTES 319

38 Quoted in Jace Weaver, "Indian Presence with No Indians Present: NAGPRA and Its Discontents," Wicazo-Sa Review 12.2 (1997): 22. 39 David M. Oestreicher, "Text out of Context: The Arguments That Created and Sustained the Walam Olum," Bulletin, Archaeological Society of New Jersey—South Orange 50 (1995): 31-42; David M. Oestreicher, "Unmasking the Walam Olum, A Nineteenth Century Hoax," Bulletin, Archaeological Society of New Jersey—South Orange 49 (1994): 1-44; David M. Oestreicher, "Unraveling the Walam Olum," Natural History 105.10 (October 1996): 14-21. 40 Oestreicher, "Unraveling the Walam Olum," 14. 41 The team's report, published under the imprimatur of the Indiana Historical Society, was titled Walam Olum or Red Score: The Migration Legend ofthe Lenni Lenapi or Delaware Indians—A New Translation, Interpreted by Linguistic, Historical, Archaeological, Ethnological, and Physical Anthropological Studies (Chicago: Lakeside Press, 1954). To assess its impact on contemporaneous scientific attitudes, see, e.g., William B. Newcomb, "The Walam Olum ofthe Delaware Indians in Perspective," Texas Joumal of Science 7.1 (1955): 55-62 (reprinted in the Bulletin ofthe Archaeological Society of New Jersey 30 [1974]: 29-32); and August C. Mahr, "Walam Olum 1, 17: Proof of Rafinesque's Integrity," American Anthropologist, n.s., 59 (1957): 705-8. 42 Oestreicher, "Unraveling the Walam Olum," 16. For samples of Weslager's academic work see Weslager, The Delaware Indians: A History (New Brunswick: Rutgers University Press, 1972); The Delawares: A Critical Bibliography (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1978); The Delaware Westward Migration, with the Texts of Two Manuscripts, 1821-22, Responding to General Lew Cass' Inquiries about Lenape Culture and Language (Wallingford, PA: Middle Atlantic Press, 1978). 43 David McCutchen, ed.. The Red Record: The Oldest Native American History (Garden City, NY: Avery, 1989). 44 See Richard De Mille's Castaneda's Joumey: The Power and the Allegory (Santa Barbara: Capra Press, 1976), as well as his edited volume. The Don Juan Papers: Further Castaneda Controversies (Santa Barbara: Ross-Erikson, 1980). 45 As examples, see C. R. Rogers, "Some New Challenges," American Psychologist 28 (1973) 379-87; Ronald D. Cohen, "Educational Implications ofthe Teachings of Don Juan," Phi Delta Kappan 55.7 (March 1974): 496-97; Mary Douglas, "The Authenticity of Castaneda," in her Implicit Meanings (London: Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1975); Marie Coleman Nelson, "Paths of Power: Psychoanalysis and Sorcery," Psychoanalytic Review 63.3 (1976): 333-60; Bruce W. Scotton, "Relating the Work of Carlos Castaneda to Psychiatry," Bulletin ofthe Menninger Clinic 42.3 (1978): 223-38; William Stillwell, "The Process of Mysticism: Carlos Castaneda," Joumal of Humanistic Psychology 19.4 (1979): 6-29. 46 See, e.g., Hugh Mehan, TTte Reality ofEthnomethodology (New York: John Wiley, 1975). 47 Frank Spenser, Piltdown: A Scientific Forgery (New York: Oxford University Press, 1990). 48 In the chapter entitled "Widowed Land," of his The Invasion ofAmerica: Indians, Colon-

320 NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

ialism and the Cant of Conquest (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1976) 15-31, Francis Jennings details the methods used. 49 This is in accordance with a principle, referred to as teritorium rez nullius, articulated in the Discovery Doctrine. For elucidation, see Olive P. Dickason, "Concepts of Sovereignty at the Time of First Contact," in Green and Dickason, Law of Nations, 221,235. See, also, Boyce Richardson, People of Terra Nullius: Betrayal and Rebirth in Canada (Seattle/ Vancouver: University of Washington Press/Douglas Mclntire, 1993). 50 The same technique has been adopted by neonazi holocaust deniers like Paul Rassinier and Austin App to argue that the Hitlerian genocide of European Jews never "really" occurred. See Deborah Lipstadt, Denying the Holocaust: The Growing Assault on Truth and Memory (New York: Free Press, 1993) esp. 51-61,90-93. 51 For a representative survey of such depictions, see Margaret Mead and Ruth L. Bunzel, The Golden Age of American Anthropology (New York: George Braziller, 1960). On Mead's own proliferate scientific frauds, see Derek Freeman, The Fateful Hoaxing of Margaret Mead: A Historical Analysis of her Samoan Research (Boulder: Westview Press, 1999). 52 Lest it be thought that I misrepresent the intent involved, see Raymond Sokolov, "Stop Knocking Columbus: Fie on All This Self-serving Revisionism," Newsweek: Special Columbus Issue (FallAVinter, 1991): 82. More broadly, but very much in the same vein, see Paul Johnson, "Colonialism's Back—and Not a Moment Too Soon," New York Times Magazine 142 (1993): 22+. The list of those who have in varying ways uttered the words I might otherwise be accused of putting in their mouths could obviously be extended to include Christopher Hitchens, Dinesh D'Sousa, David Horowitz, Thomas Sowell, Arthur Schlesinger, Jr., and countless others. 53 For the latest entry in the cannibalogist bibliography, see Christy G. Tumer II and Jacqueline A. Tumer, Man Com: Cannibalism and Violence in the Prehistoric American Southwest (Salt Lake City: University of Utah Press, 1999). For response and a broader survey of the literature, see Ward Churchill, "Science as Psychosis: An Analysis of Man Com," North American Archaeologist 21.3 (2000): 268-88. 54 See, as examples,"The Unkindest Cut, or Who Invented Scalping? A Case Study" and "Scalping: The Ethnohistory of a Moral Question," both in James Axtell, The European and the Indian: Essays in the Ethnohistory of Norih America (New York: Oxford University Pres, 1981) 16-35,207-41, respectively. On the European origins of scalping, see, Nicholas P. Canny, "The Ideology of English Colonization: From Ireland to America," William and Mary Quarterly, 3rd. series, 30 (1973): 575-98; and James Muldoon, "The Indian as Irishman," Essex Institute Historical Collections 111 (1975): 267-89. 55 A classic example is Susan Brownmiller's benchmark study. Against Our Will: Men, Women and Rape (New York: Simon and Schuster, 1975) 140-53, in which the author insists, often contrary to all evidence (including the accounts of the supposed victims themselves), that the sexual violation of females, especially captives, was standard practice in "most," if not all, traditional societies. In fact, as Barbara Mann has shown in Iroquoian Women: The Gantowisas (New York: Peter Lang Publishing, 2000) 277-78, 367 (n 41), rape was nonexistent in eastem Native cultures. See, especially, her dismantling of poorly informed feminist diatribes against Native men as sexists and rapists, Marm, Iroquoian Women, 78-88.

NOTES 321

56 The phrase used accrues from George Weurthner, "An Eeological View of the Indian," Earth First! 7.7 (August 1987): 20-23. On the demise of the mammoths and assorted other megafauna, see Paul S. Martin and H. E. Wright, ed.. Pleistocene Extinctions: The Search for a Cause (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1967). On the buffalo and denuded landscapes, see the chapters entitled "Fire" and "Buffalo" in Sheperd Krech III, The Ecological Indian: Myth and History (New York: W. W. Norton, 1999) 101-22,123-50, respectively. On strewn litter, see Paul Valentine, "Hollywood's Noble Indians: Are We Dancing with Myths?" Washington Post, 31 March 1991, B5. 57 The most developed articulation of the "virgin soil" hypothesis will be found in Jared Diamond, Guns, Germs, and Steel: The Fates of Human Societies (New York: W. W. Norton, 1997). Important precursors will be found in Alfred Crosby, The Columbian Exchange: Biological Consequences of 1492 (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1986), and, most specifically, Alfred Crosby, "Virgin Soil Epidemics as a Factor in the Aboriginal Depopulation of America," William and Mary Quarterly, 3rd series, 32.2 (1976): 289-99. See, also, William McNeill, Plagues and Peoples (Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1976). 58 James A. Clifton, ed.. The Invented Indians: Cultural Fictions and Government Policies (New York: Transaction Books, 1990). 59 For a panoramic overview, see Mitchell Goodman, ed.. The Movement Toward a New America: The Beginnings of a Long Revolution (Philadelphia/New York: Pilgrim Press/Alfred A. Knopf, 1970). 60 Bob Thomas was one of the most influential, yet unfortunately little remembered, flgures of the period. See Steve Pavlik, ed., A Good Cherokee, A Good Anthropologist: Papers in Honor ofRobert K. Thomas (Los Angeles: UCLA American Indian Studies Center, 1998). 61 For what is probably the best profile of Clyde Warrior, as well as an excellent overview of the ferment occurring during that period, see Stan Steiner, The New Indians (New York: Delta, 1968). 62 Vine Deloria, Jr., Custer Died for Your Sins: An Indian Manifesto (1969; Norman: University of Oklahoma Press, 1988). On Alcatraz, see Adam Fortunate Eagle [Adam Nordwall], Alcatraz! Alcatraz! The Indian Occupation of 1969-1971 (Berkeley, VA: Heyday Books, 1992). On the rise of AIM, see Paul Chaat Smith and Robert Allen Warrior, Like a Hurricane: The American Indian Movement from Alcatraz to Wounded Knee (New York: New Press, 1996). 63 For an indication of the extent to which this is true, see Thomas Biolsi and Larry Zimmerman, ed., Indians and Anthropologists: Vine Deloria Jr. and the Critique of Anthropology (Tucson: University of Arizona Press, 1997). 64 Vine Deloria, Jr., We Talk, You Listen: New Tribes, New TurfQisw York: Macmillan, 1970); Behind the Trail of Broken Treaties: An Indian Declaration of Independence (New York: Delacort, 1974); Of Utmost Good Faith (San Francisco: Straight Arrow Books, 1971); God Is Red (New York: Grosset & Dunlap, 1973). 65 A comprehensive bibliography of Deloria's publications up to that point is provided in his For This Land: Writings on Religion in America (New York: Routledge, 1999) 297-306.

322 NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

66 William L. O'Neill, Coming Apart: An Informal History ofAmerica in the 1960s (Chicago: Quadrangle, 1971); Paul Joseph, Cracks in the Empire: State Politics in the Vietnam War (Boston: South End Press, 1981). 67 There were, to be sure, always a few, such as the earlier mentioned George Carter (see note 35) and Roy Harvey Pierce who had opted to do so, anyway. For a sample of Harvey Pierce's material, see his Savagism and Civilization: A Study of the American Indian in the American Mind (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1953). 68 Noam Chomsky and Edward S. Herman, After the Cataclysm: Postwar Indochina and the Reconstruction of Imperial Ideology (Boston: South End Press, 1979). 69 Henry F. Dobyns, Their Number Become Thinned: Native American Population Dynamics in Eastern North America (Knoxville: University of Tennessee Press, 1983); Russell Thornton, American Indian Holocaust and Survival: A Population History since 1492 (Norman: University of Oklahoma Press, 1987). For an excellent assessment of the meaning of these higher estimates, see Wilbur R. Jacobs, "The Tip of the Iceberg: Precolumbian Demography and Some Implications for Revisions," William and Mary Quarterly, 3rd series, 31.1 (1974): 123-32. 70 David E. Stannard, American Holocaust: Columbus and the Conquest of the New World (New York: Oxford University Press, 1992). See, also, Churchill, A Little Matter of Genocide. 71 Warren Lowes, Indian Giver: A Legacy of North American Native Peoples (Penticton, B.C.: Theytus Books, 1986). Jack Weatherford, without attribution, "borrowed" much of Lowes's material in preparing his own, otherwise excellent, Indian Givers: How the Indians of the Americas Transformed the fforW (New York: Crown, 1988). 72 Donald A. Grinde, Jr., The Iroquois in the Founding of the American Nation (San Francisco: Indian Historian Press, 1977); Bruce E. Johansen, Forgotten Founders: How the American Indian Helped Shape Democracy (Cambridge, MA: Harvard Common Press, 1982); Donald A. Grinde, Jr., and Bruce E. Johansen, Exemplar of Liberty: Native American and the Evolution ofDemocracy (Los Angeles: UCLA American Indian Studies Program, 1991). For a sampling of others involved, see Oren Lyons and John Mohawk, ed.. Exiled in the Land of the Free: Democracy, Indian Nations, and the U.S. Constitution (Santa Fe: Clear Light, 1998). 73 Robert A. Williams, Jr., The American Indian in Westem Legal Thought: The Discourses of Conquest (New York: Oxford University Press, 1990). 74 Robert K. Thomas, "Colonialism: Classic and Intemal," New University Thought 4.4 (winter 1966-67): 37-43. On Durham, Dunbar Ortiz, and Owens, see, as examples, Jimmie Durham, "Cowboys and . . ." in his A Certain Lack of Coherence: Essays on Art and Cultural Politics (London: Kala Press, 1984) 170-86; Roxanne Dunbar Ortiz, Indians of the Americas: Human Rights and Self-Determination (London: Zed Books, 1984); Louis Owens, "As If an Indian Were Really an Indian: Native American Voices and Postcolonial Theory," in Bataille, Representations, 11-25. See, also, my Fantasies of the Master Race: Literature, Cinema and the Colonization ofAmerican Indians, 2nd ed. (San Francisco: City Lights, 1998); Struggle for the Land: Native North American Resistance to Genocide, Ecocide and Colonization, 2nd ed. (Winnipeg: Arbiter Ring, 1999).

NOTES 323

75 On Memmi, see note 15. On Fanon, see Lewis R. Gordon, T. Denean Sharpley-Whiting, and Renee T. White, ed., Fanon: A Critical Reader (Oxford, UK: Blackwell, 1996). On Cabral, who seems unfortunately little remembered in the U.S. these days, see Amilcar Cabral, Unity and Struggle: Speeches and Writing ofAmilcar Cabral (New York: Monthly Review, 1979). 76 Rudolfo Acufia, Occupied America: The Chicano 's Struggle toward Liberation (San Francisco: Canfield Press, 1972); Haunani-Kay Trask, From a Native Daughter: Colonialism and Sovereignty in Hawaii, 2nd ed. (Honolulu: University of Hawai'i Press, 1999); Eduardo Galeano, Open Veins of Latin America: Five Centuries of the Pillage of a Continent (New York: Monthly Review Press, 1973). 77 See "I Am an Indigenist: Notes on the Ideology of the Fourth World," in Churchill, Struggle for the Land, 367-402. 78 Chancellor Williams, The Destruction of Black Civilizations: Great Issues of a Race from 4500 B.C. to 2000 A.D. (Chicago: Third World Press, 1987); George G. M. James, Stolen Legacy: Greek Philosophy Is Stolen from Egyptian Philosophy, 2nd ed. (Trenton, NJ: Africa World Press, 1992). For a conceptual overview ofthe field, see Molefi Kete Asante, The Afrocentric Idea (Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 1987). 79 Ranahit Guha and Gayatri Chakravorty Spivak, ed.. Selected Subaltem Studies (New York: Oxford University Press, 1988). 80 Talal Asad, ed.. Anthropology and the Colonial Encounter (Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1973); Edward W. Said, Orientalism (New York: Pantheon, 1978), TTie Question of Palestine, 2nd ed. (New York: Vintage, 1992), and Culture and Imperialism (New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1993); and Keith W. Whitelaw, The Invention of Ancient Israel: The Silencing of Palestinian History (New York: Routledge, 1996). 81 Martin Bemal, Black Athena: The Afroasiatic Roots of Classical Civilization, vol. 1, of The Fabrication ofAncient Greece. 1785-1985 (New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press, 1987, and The Afroasiatic Roots of Classical Civilization, vol. 2, of The Archaeological and Documentary Evidence (New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press, 1991). 82 See, e.g., Peter McLaren, "On Ideology and Education: Critical Pedagogy and the Cultural Politics of Resistance," in Critical Pedagogy, the State, and Cultural Struggle, ed. Henry Giroux and Peter McLaren (Albany: SUNY Press, 1989) 174-202; and "Multiculturalism and Postmodern Critique: Toward a Pedagogy of Resistance and Transformation," in Between Borders: Pedagogy and the Politics of Cultural Studies, ed. Henry A. Giroux and David McLaren (New York: Routledge, 1994) 190-222. 83 Anne McClintock, Imperial Leather: Race, Gender and Sexuality in the Colonial Contest (New York: Routledge, 1995). It should be noted that, although she is frequently categorized as such, McClintock emphatically rejects the "postcolonialist" label. See her essay, "The Angel of Progress: Pitfalls of the Term 'Post-Colonialism,'" in Colonial Discourse and Post-Colonial Theory, ed. Patrick Williams and Laura Chrisman (New York: Columbia University Press, 1994) 291-304. 84 "The Political purpose of Black Athena is, of course, to lessen European cultural arrogance," Bemal, Black Athena, 1: 73.

324 NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

85 See, e.g., David P. Henige, "The Numbers Become Thick: American Indian Historical Demography as Expiation," in Clifton, Invented Indian, 169-91. Despite his patent dearth of qualifications to address the topic, Henige was also accorded the luxury of expanding his thesis to book length for a major academic publisher. See Henige, Numbers from Nowhere: The American Indian Population Debate (Norman: University of Oklahoma Press, 1998). 86 This is covered rather thoroughly in Bruce E. Johansen, Donald A. Grinde, Jr., and Barbara A. Mann, Debating Democracy (Santa Fe, NM: Clear Light Publishers, 1998). 87 See the exchange of letters between Starmard and Elliot published in the New York Review of Books 21 October 1993. 88 Vine Deloria, Jr., Red Earth, White Lies: Native Americans and the Myth of Scientific Fact (New York: Scribner, 1995). For a sample of the invective to which Deloria has been subjected, see David Brumble, "Vine Deloria, Jr., Creationism, and Ethnic Pseudoscience," American Literary History 10.2 (summer 1998): 335-46. 89 Perhaps ironically, this is essentially the process of intellectual transformation described by Thomas Kuhn in his much celebrated monograph. The Structure of Scientific Revolutions (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1962). 90 Linda Tuhiwai Smith, Decolonizing Methodologies: Research and Indigenous Peoples (London/Dunedin, NZ: Zed Books/University of Otago Press, 1999). 91 Barbara A. Mann, "The Lynx in Time: Haudenosaunee Women's Traditions and History," American Indian Quarterly 21.3 (summer 1997): 423-49. 92 Barbara A. Mann, "Euro-forming the Data," Debating Democracy (Santa Fe, NM: Clear Light Publishers, 1998) 160-90. 93 Bruce E. Johansen and Barbara Alice Mann, ed.. Encyclopedia of the Haudenosaunee (Iroquois Confederacy). Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 2000; Barbara Alice Mann, ed. Native American Speakers of the Eastem Woodlands: Selected Speeches and Critical Analyses (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 2001). 94 To observe that the extant historical literature conceming the Haudenosaunee, Cherokee, Lenape, and Shawnee slights their descent from the Mound Builders is to understate the case. As to the latter peoples themselves, no history, as such, has been attempted (or, at least, none published). 95 This is precisely the method by which the Piltdown hoax was sustained into the 1950s, and the motive for sustaining it. See Spenser, Piltdown. 96 On the "Oka Crisis," see Linda Pertusati, In Defense of Mohawk Land: Ethnopolitical Conflict in Native North America (Albany: SUNY Press, 1997). 97 For an interesting survey of specific contexts, see Peter Nabakov, A Forest of Time: American Indian Ways of History (Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 2002). 98 See Vine Deloria, Jr., "A Simple Question of Humanity: The Moral Dimensions of the

NOTES 325

Reburial Issue" and "Sacred Lands and Religious Freedom," both in his For This Land, 187-202,203-13, respectively. 99 This is, of course, a paraphrase of Marx's famous observation that "philosophers have only interpreted the world in various ways; the point is to change it" (emphasis in the original). Karl Marx, The German Ideology (New York: New World, 1963) 197. 100 The term "praxis" is frequently employed, seldom understood. For explication of the way in which I intend it, see R. J. Bemstein, Praxis and Action (London: Duckworth, 1972). 101 "Organic intellectual" refers to those who consciously participate in an "ideological erosion" of the existing hegemony with an eye toward abolishing the order it represents. See Carl Boggs, Gramsci'sMarxism (London: Pluto Press, 1976) 52. 102 Marie Battiste, "Introduction: Unfolding the Lessons of Colonization," in Marie Battiste, ed.. Reclaiming the Indigenous Voice and Vision (Vancouver: University of British Columbia Press, 2000) xvi-xxx. 103 The phrase, "decolonization of the mind," is borrowed from Ngugi Was Thiong'o's Decolonization of the Mind: The Politics of Language in African Literature (Oxford, UK: James Currey, 1981)

Introduction: On Riding That Undead Horse of Native Discourse 1 I have addressed these problems before, in Barbara Alice Mann, "Euro-forming the Data," Debating Democracy (Santa Fe, NM: Clear Light Publishers, 1998) 160-90. 2 Barbara Alice Mann, ed.. Native American Speakers of the Eastern Woodlands: Selected Speeches and Critical Analyses (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 2001) 217.

1. The "Vuiture Culture": Anthropology "Collects" Native America 1 The term "Vulture Culture" was coined in 1975 by the Native joumal, Wassaja, as it launched a national campaign to end grave robbing and museum display of Native remains. 2 In the late eighteenth century, the Lenapi described French and British alliances as a "pair of scissors, an instrument composed of two sharp edged knives exactly alike, working against each other for the same purpose, that of cutting. By the construction of this instrument, they said, it would appear as if in shutting, these two sharp knives would strike together and destroy each other's edges, but no such thing: they only cut what comes between them. And thus the English and Americans do when they go to war against one another. It is not each other they want to destroy, but us, poor Indians, that are between them. By this means they get our land, and, when that is obtained, the scissors are closed again, and laid by for further use." All italics in the original, John Heckewelder, History, Manners, and Customs of the Indian Nations Who Once Inhabited Pennsylvania

326 NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

and the Neighboring States, the First American Frontier Series (1820, 1876; reprint. New York: Amo Press and The New York Times, 1971) 104. 3 I absolutely agree with Michael Blakey when he says that "Professional physical anthropology has, from its inception, been a powerful ideological force." Michael L. Blakely, "Skull Doctors: Intrinsic Social and Political Bias in the History of American Physical Anthropology," Critique of Anthropology 7.2 (1987): 9. 4 George Marcus and Michael M. J. Fischer, Anthropology as Cultural Critique: An Experimental Moment in the Human Sciences (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1986) 111; Bruce G. Trigger, A History of Archaeological Thought (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1989). 5 Douglas J. Preston, "Skeletons in Our Museums' Closets," Harper's (February 1989): 66. 6 Preston, "Skeletons in Our Museums' Closets," 66. 7 Andrew Gulliford, "Bones of Contention: The Repatriation of Native American Human Remains," The Public Historian 18.4(1996): 120. 8 Gerald Vizenor, "Bone Courts: The Natural Rights of Tribal Bones," Crossbloods, Bone Courts. Bingo, and Other Reports (1976; Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1990) 72. 9 Barbara Alice Mann, "In Defense of the Ancestors: Ohio Falls Silent," Native Americas 17.2 (summer 2000): 52. 10 Gulliford, "Bones of Contention," 126. The rather artificial and obfuscating NativeAleutian breakdown the govemment likes to use lists 42.5% as Native and 11.9% as Aleut, Esimo, or Koniag, Jerome C. Rose, Thomas J. Green, and Victoria D. Green, "NAGPRA Is Forever: Osteology and the Repatriation of Skeletons." Annual Report of Anthropology 25 (1996): 89. 11 RoseetaL, "NAGPRA Is Forever," 84. 12 See, for instance, curators' comments in Preston, "Skeletons in Our Museums' Closets," Harper's (Febmary 1989): 70. 13 As Edwin Wilmsen correctly observed in 1965, the so-called scientists of the antebellum period were, in fact, "untrained men who were devoting their spare time" to resolving issues of Native identity and antiquity. Edwin N. Wilmsen, "An Outline of Eariy Man Studies in the United SXsAts," American Antiquity'i\ (1965): 172. 14 Stephen Williams, Fantastic Archaeology: The Wild Side of North American Pre-history (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1991) 71. 15 For the Smithsonian Institution's tapping of Gallatin's Society as its panel of experts, see Robert E. Bieder, Science Encounters the Indian. 1820-1880: The Early Years ofAmerican Ethnology (Nomian: University of Oklahoma Press, 1986) 44. 16 Reverend James Ussher, The Annals of the World (London: G. Bedell, 1658) iii, 1. The

NOTES 327

initials "B.C.E." stand for "Before the Common Era" and are used by non-Christians instead of "Before Christ," a very ethnocentric reference. 17 Wilmsen, "An Outline of Eariy Man Studies," 172. 18 For a summary ofthe thunderbolt that was Folsom, see Wilmsen, "An Outline of Early Man Studies," 180-85. 19 Felicia A. Holton, "Archeological Digs in America," The New York Times, 15 July 1973, Ll, 16; Jeffrey L.Bada, Roy A. Schroeder, and George F. Carter, "New Evidence for the Antiquity of Man in North America Deduced from Aspartic Acid Racemization," Science 184 (17 May 1974): 791-93; L. S. B. Leakey, Ruth De Ette Simpson, and Thomas Clements, "Archaeological Excavations in the Calico Mountains, California: Preliminary Report," Science 160 (31 May 1968): 1022-23; Virginia Steen-Mclntyre, Roald Fryxell, and Harold E. Malde, "Geologic Evidence for Age of Deposits at Hueyatlaco Archaeological Site, Valsequillo, Mexico," Quartenary Research 16 (1981): 1-17. To be sure, spooked archaeologists have attacked these and other fmds, but it is important to recall that a simple attack is not the same thing as a refutation. The fmdings have never been refuted, just silenced. For an excellent examination of all extant evidence (including human remains) as well as an analysis the almost entirely emotional resistance to viewing and evaluating it in orthodox archaeological circles, see Michael A. Cremo and Richard L. Thompson, Forbidden Archaeology: The Hidden History of the Human Race (Los Angeles: Bhaktivedanta Book Pubishing, Inc., 1998) artifacts, 197-210,291-329,338-87; human remains, 413-19; 438-52; 454; 770-79; 798-99; 801-13. 20 Lewis Hanke, Aristotle and the American Indians: A Study in Race Prejudice in the Modern World (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1959) 23-24, 47. For more extensive discussion of sixteenth-century Spanish views on Native humanity, see Lewis Hanke, The Spanish Struggle for Justice in the Conquest of America (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1949). 21 Quoted in Benjamin Smith Barton, New Views ofthe Origin ofthe Tribes and Nations of America {119S; reprint, Millwood, NY: Kraus Reprint Co., 1976) xxi. Barton was working from the 1787 English translation ofthe work, Francesco Saverio Clavigero, The History of Mexico (1607; 1787; Philadelphia: Budd and Bartram, 1804). 22 Jose de Acosta, Historia natural y moral de las Indias, ed. Jose Alcina Franch, Cronicas de America 34 (1590; Madrid: Historia 16, 1987) 101. Trans. Barbara A. Mann. 23 Acosta, Historia natural y moral de las Indias, 111. Translation mine. 24 Acosta, Historia naturaly moral de las Indias, 111. Translation mine. 25 Acosta, Historia natural y moral de las Indias, 113. Translation mine. 26 Acosta, Historia naturaly moral de las Indias, 113. Translation mine. 27 For his whole discussion of his land bridge theory, see Acosta, Historia natural y moral de las Indias, 110-14. 28 Trigger, A History of Archaeological Thought, 16.

328 NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

29 Williams, Fantastic Archaeology, 32. Note that when Williams discusses the theory ofthe Jesuit Acosta's Dominican rival, Gregorio Garcia in Origen de los Indian del Nuevo Mundo (1607), Garcia is "more systematic" in discussing Native origins, but somehow not "scientific" because he considered eleven different options, all likely in his mind and the minds of his contemporaries, including Carthaginians, the "ten lost tribes of Israel," Atlanteans, and East Asians. Although Williams claims that Garcia was "unable to make critical judgments" and included a lot of "misinformation," thus damaging his discussion, the real reason for lauding Acosta over Garcia is that modem scholarship agrees only with the last possibility on Garcia's list, which was the only possibility on Acosta's. Williams, Fantastic Archaeology, 7>i. 30 For examples of unblinking acceptance ofthe theory by today's scholars, as a starting point of discussion not inquiry, see Maureen Korp, The Sacred Geography ofthe American Mound Builders, Native American Studies, vol. 2 (Lewiston, NY: The Edwin Mellen Press, 1990) 1-2; and, Charles Hudson, Knights of Spain, Warriors ofthe Sun: Hemando de Soto and the South's Ancient Chiefdoms (Athens: The University of Georgia Press, 1997) 419. Even some Native American scholars repeat this without a second thought, as for instance, Gloria Anzaldiia, Borderlands/La Frontera: The New Mestiza (San Francisco: Spinsters/Aimt Lute, 1987) 4. See, also, the uproarious fun that Vine Deloria has over the gaping holes in scientific theory on the Bering Strait, in Vine Deloria, Jr., Red Earth, White Lies: Native Americans and the Myth of Scientific Fact (New York: Scribner, 1995) 81-105. Many Native Americans today are very skeptical ofthe Bering Strait theory of first entry by Natives. The modem Lenap6 Roberta Miskokomon declared in 1981, "Our Indian ancestors did not come through the Bering Strait as the anthropologists and archaeologists theorize. We were always here, as my elders have told me. What the anthropologists neglected to say was that they didn't see our footsteps going from north America to the Bering Strait. Our footprints did not come from Asia, they are going back towards Asia." Quoted (and pooh-poohed) in Herbert C. Kraft, The Lenape: Archaeology, History, and Ethnography (Newark: Jew Jersey Historical Society, 1986) 4. Miskokomon's sentiments were echoed in 1994 by the eastem Lenape keeper, Hitakonanu'laxk, in his Grandfathers Speak, who stated that, far from a Bering Strait entry, "many Native Americans hold an opposite view, that our people traveled from here to Siberia." Hitakonanu 'laxk [Tree Beard], The Grandfathers Speak: Native American Folk Tales of the Lenape People (New York: Interlink Books, 1994) 6. He cites blood type evidence, which supports the idea of travel in both directions, Hitakonanu 'laxk. The Grandfathers Speak, 1. 31 Deloria, Red Earth, White Lies, 84. 32 T)t\on?i, Red Earth, White Lies, %S. 33 John Filson, The Discovery and Settlement of Kentucke (1784; reprint, Ann Arbor: University Microfilms, Inc., 1966) 92. 34 Benjamin Smith Barton, Observations on Some Parts of Natural History (London: C. Diley, 1787) 14. 35 Barton, New Views ofthe Origin ofthe Tribes and Nations of America, cviii-cix. 36 Barton, New Views ofthe Origin ofthe Tribes and Nations of America, 89.

NOTES 329

37 Barton, New Views of the Origin of the Tribes and Nations of America, xviii. Barton excluded the Inuit from these calculations, concluding that they were Greenlanders. 38 "America appears to have received all its human inhabitants from the old-world [sic], it has not received its animals from the same quarters. I do not doubt, that America has received several species of quadrupeds from Asia and from Europe; and perhaps these countries have received in retum some of the animals of America. At any rate, it is certain, that several of the quadrupeds known to naturalists are common to Asia, and to America; and some few are common to these two continents and to Europe. But many other animals have never been found in any other part of the world than in America; and these I am willing, at present, to consider as exclusively appertaining to America. Every thing [sic], in my opinion, supports the notion, that there has been a separate creation in the old and in the new world." Barton, New Views of the Origin of the Tribes and Nations ofAmerica, ci-cii. 39 Samuel Gardner Drake, Biography and History of the Indians of North America from Its First Discovery to the Present Time; Comprising a History of Their Wars. 7th ed. 5 vols. (Boston: Antiquarian Institute, 1837) 1: 14. 40 Drake, Biography and History of the Indians of North America, 1:14. 41 Drake, Biography and History of the Indians of North America, 1:17. 42 Drake, Biography and History of the Indians of North America, 1:17. 43 James H. McCulloh, Researches. Philosophical and Antiquatian. Conceming the Aboriginal History of America (Baltimore: Fielding Lucas, Jr., 1829) 20; William Robertson, History of America, 10th ed. (1777. London: A. Strahan, 1803). 44 McCulloh, Researches. Philosophical and Antiquatian, for England and France, 30; for England and Atlantis, 31. 45 McCulloh, Researches. Philosophical and Antiquatian, 35. 46 McCulloh, Researches. Philosophical and Antiquatian, 76. McCulloh once more engaged in catastrophic-flood reasoning on page 197. 47 yicCuWoh, Researches. Philosophical and Antiquatian, 198. 48 J. T. Short, North Americans of Antiquity, 3rd ed. (1879; New York: Harper & Brothers, Publishers, 1882) 147. 49 Short, North Americans of Antiquity, 148-50. Short cited a work by Joseph de Guignes, Recherches sur les Nagivations des Chinois. du cote de I'Amerique. & sur quelques Peuples situes a la extremite Orientate del'Asie, 1757, but the English source is, J. Von Staehlin, An Account of the New Northem Archipelago, lately discovered by the Russians in the seas of Kamtschatka and Anadir (London, 1774). In the preface to the work. Von Staehlin cited the Chinese account in which navigators "followed Asiatic coast towards the north as far as Kamtschatka, which they called Taban, crossed the ocean in an easterly direction, and at the distance of 20,000 lis, or about 2000 miles, arrived nearly under the same parallel at a country which they named Fousang, being, according to them, the land where the sun rises." Von Staehlin, An Account of the New Northem Archipelago, xiv.

330 NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

Benjamin Smith Barton also brought up the Chinese voyage, placing it in the year 458 C.E. in the appendix of Barton, New Views of the Origin of the Tribes and Nations of America, 30. 50 Alfred A. Cave, "Canaanites in a Promised Land: The American Indian and the Providential Theory of Empire," American Indian Quarterly (fall 1988): 277. 51 Cave, "Canaanites in a Promised Land," 285. 52 For origination, see Diego Duran, Historia Antigua de la Nueva Espana con Noticias de los Ritos y Costumbres de los Indios y Explicaciondel Calendario Mexicano, MS in 3 vols. (Washington, D.C.: Library of Congress, 1585) 1: 1-2. For Acosta and Torquemada on this by a nineteenth-century adherent of the theory, see, Barbara Anne Simon, TTie Ten Tribes of Israel Historically Identified with the Aborigines of the Westem Hemisphere (London: R. B. Seeley and W. Bumside, 1836) 8, 12. 53 For instance, Mrs. Simon included an entire chapter, "Migration," in support of the Bering Strait theory, Simon, The Ten Tribes of Israel, 27-49. 54 Drake, Biography and History of the Indians of North America, 1: 9. 55 Deloria, Red Earth, White Lies, 81. 56 Although over forty years old, the excellent work of Lewis Hanke on this issue is still seminal. See Hanke, The Spanish Struggle for Justice and Hanke, Aristotle and the American Indians. 57 Brace was quoted in James Shreve, 'Tenns of Estrangement," Discover, Special Issue: The Science of Race (November 1994): 60. 58 Charles-Louis de Secondat, baron de La Brede et de Montesquieu, De I 'esprit des loix, ou du rapport que les loix doivent avoir avec la constitution de chaque govemement, les moeurs, le climat, le religion, le commerce, etc., in G. Lanson, Montesquieu, Rdformatuers sociaux, collection de textes (1748; Paris: Librarie Felix Alcan, 1932) 108-10. Trans. Barbara A. Mann. 59 A similar observation is made in Robert E. Bieder, "A Brief Historical Survey of the Expropriation of American Indian Remains" (unpublished MS; Bloomington, IN: Native American Rights Fund, 1990) 3. 60 Stephen Jay Gould, "The Geometer of Race," Discover, Special Issue: The Science of Race (November 1994): 67. 61 Stephen Jay Gould, The Mismeasure of Man (New York: W. W. Norton & Company, 1981)35.

62 Carolus Lirmaeus ["Sir Charles Linne"], A General System of Nature, through the Three Grand Kingdoms ofAnimals, Vegetables, and Minerals, Systematically Divided into Their Several Classes, Orders, Genera, Species, and Varieties, with Their Habitations, Manners, Economy, Structure, and Peculiarities, trans. William Turton, M.D. (1758; 1806; reprint, Ann Arbor: University Microfilms, A Xerox Company, 1968) 9.

NOTES 331

63 Gould, "The Geometer of Race," 66. 64 Johann Friedrich Blumenbach, On the Natural Varieties of Mankind {De Generis Humani Varietate Nativa), (1775; 1795; 1865; reprint. New York: Bergman Publishers, 1969) 209. 65 Johann Friedrich Blumenbach, Beytrage zur Naturgeschichte ("Contributions to Natural History"), in On the Natural Varieties of Mankind, for the elaljoration, see 302-4. 66 The proposition that the world was "in an advanced state of degeneration" from God's grand plan was a staple of medieval thought. According to biblical history, once the unified whole of humanity (all sprung from Adam and Eve) left Eden, it spread across the world courtesy of Noah's sons.The farther from Eden, the more degenerate humans became. Degeneration was held to account for primitives. Trigger, A History of Archaeological Thought, 34. 67 Blumenbach, On the Natural Varieties of Mankind, 269. 68 Blumenbach, On the Natural Varieties of Mankind, 207. 69 Blumenbach, On the Natural Varieties of Mankind, 191-93. 70 Blumenbach, On the Natural Varieties ofMankind, 77-81. This fantasy was spread around Europe courtesy ofthe compte de Buffon. When Thomas Jefferson repeated the same slur in Notes on the State of Virginia (1772), it was African women who were so debased in their "Oranootan" partners; with Blumenbach in his 1775 De Generis Humani Varietate Nativa, it was "Indian women." Thomas Jefferson, Writings: Autobiography: A Summary View ofthe Rights of British America; Notes on the State of Virginia: Public Papers: Addresses, Messages, and Replies; Miscellany and Letters (New York: Library of America, 1984) 265; Blumenbach, On the Natural Varieties of Mankind, 81. 71 Blumenbach, On the Natural Varieties of Mankind, 81. 72 Blumenbach, On the Natural Varieties of Mankind, 201-2. 73 Reginald Horsman, Race and Manifest Destiny: The Origins of American Racial AngloSaxonism (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1981) 50-52. In this otherwise fine synopsis of the growth and spread of racial myth in early America, Horsman puzzlingly omitted discussion ofthe vitally divergent paths that the French and Germanic approaches mapped out (perhaps because, in the new United States, the Germanic "hard science" was preferred to the French "soft science" of race). 74 Camper's collected works, all arguing for craniometry, appeared posthumously as, Pieter Camper, Oeuvres qui ont pour object I 'histoire naturelle, la physiologie et I 'anatomie comparee, 3 vols. (Paris, 1803). 75 Bieder, Science Encounters the Indian, 62. 76 Charles Darwin, The Descent ofMan and Selection in Relation to Sex, ed. Robert Maynard, Great Books ofthe Westem World, vol. 49, 30th ed. (1871; 1952; Chicago: Encyclopedia Britannica, Inc., 1988) 341.

332 NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

77 See, especially, his chapter 4, "Comparisons ofthe Mental Powers of Man and the Lower Animals," chapter 5, "On the Development ofthe Intellectual and Moral Faculties during Primeval and Civilised Times," and chapter 7, "On the Races of Man," in Darwin, The Descent of Man, 304-19, 320-30, and 342-63, respectively. 78 Darwin, Descent of Man, 323. 79 For his seminal work, see Francis Galton, Hereditary Genius: An Inquiry into Its Laws and Consequences (1869; New York: D. Appleton, 1884). See also, Galton, Inquiries into Human Faculty and Its Development. (1883; London: J. M. Dent, 1907), a work that was reprinted frequently, well into the 1940s. Finally, see Galton, Natural Inheritance (London: Macmillan, 1889). Galton did not actually coin the term eugenics, meaning "well bom"—as in "Nyah, nyah: I'm better than you!"— until 1883. He was knighted in 1909 for his "discovery" of eugenics, the racist theory that underpinned Hitlerian racism. 80 Trigger, A History of Archaeological Thought, 114. 81 Nicolas Mahudel, Dissertation historique sur les monnoyes antiques d'Espagne (Paris, 1725) 1. Translation mine. 82 Trigger, A History of Archaeological Thought,60. 83 For Goguet's discussions of the progress from stone to metal tools, especially iron, see Antoine-Yves Goguet, The Origin of Laws, Arts, and Sciences, and Their Progess among the Most Ancient Nations, 3 vols. (1758; 1761; Eng. trans, reprint. New York: AMS Press, 1975) 1: 135-37. Indeed, Christian culture is still awash in stages-of thinking, either as stages or in its "step" permutations. Modem evangelical Protestants laud the ten steps to salvation devised by the old Puritans, even as Alcoholics Anonymous promotes its twelve steps to recovery, and followers of Elisabeth Kubler-Ross champion her seven stages of grief. Step thinking has come to be regarded as "common sense" by westem Christians, although it looks obviously and even childishly concocted to nonwestemers. 84 Trigger, A History of Archaeological Thought, 119. 85 A tool of colonialism, this notion was succinctly articulated as "science" by Henry Lewis Morgan in "Ethnical Periods," Proceedings of the American Association for the Advancement of Science (1875): 266-74. Two years later, he expanded upon it at length in Morgan, Ancient Society, or Researches in the Lines of Human Progress from Savagery through Barbarism to Civilization (Chicago: Charles H. Kerr & Company, 1877). For the misery occasioned Native America by stages-of-history thinking, see Barbara Alice Mann, Iroquoian Women: The Gantowisas (New York: Peter Lang, 2000) 194-202. The system proved useful in intramural, Franco-Anglo rivalries, as well. The French philosophe, Georges-Louis Leclerc, Compte de Buffon, discovered in volume six of his Histoire naturalle, generate etparticuliere (1749-1804) that English America was physically in the stage of feeble infancy. Having been but newly created, it was, therefore, unable to grow anything of worth or size, an opinion in which he was joined by Erasmus Darwin. Cited in Barton, New Views ofthe Origin ofthe Tribes and Nations of America, cvii-cviii. Buffon's charges soon rallied luminaries to the defense of America, including Thomas Jefferson and James Fenimore Cooper, who spread the debate to the general Euroamerican public. Thomas Jefferson tackled Buffon head on in Writings, 169-92, while James Fenimore Cooper replied by detailing the abundance, goodness, and size of game, espe-

NOTES 333

cially, in the opening pages of chapter IX, The Pathfinder, Or The Inland Sea (1840; New York: A Signet Classic, 1980) 115-17. 86 Lubbock did not so much invent as merely popularize this subdivision. Trigger, A History of Archaeological Thought, 94. 87 Trigger, A History of Archaeological Thought, 100. 88 John Lubbock [Lord Avebury], Prehistoric Times as Illustrated by Ancient Remains and the Manners and Customs ofModem Savages (1865; 1913; reprint. New York: Humanities Press, 1969) 557. 89 Lubbock, Prehistoric Times, 577. 90 Lubbock, Prehistoric Times, 566. 91 Lubbock, Prehistoric Times, 565. Lubbock had pressed the salience of this comparison at length: "Savages may be likened to children, and the comparison is not only current, but also highly instructive. Many naturalists consider that the early condition of the individual indicates that of the race,—that the best test of the affinities of a species are the stages through which it passes. So also it is in the case of man; the life of each individual is an epitome of the history of the race, and the gradual development of the child illustrates that of the species. Hence the importance of the similarity between savages and children." Lubbock, Prehistoric Times, 562-63. 92 Trigger, A History of Archaeological Thought, 116. 93 Lubbock, Prehistoric Times, 568. 94 Lubbock, Prehistoric Times, 560. 95 Bieder, "A Brief Historical Survey," 6. 96 Johann Friedrich Wilhelm, Franz Josef Gall, and Johan Gaspar Lavater, Beytrag zur vergleichenden Wurdigung der neuen und alteh Physiognomik (Berlin: Friedrich Baunes, 1808); Franz Josef Gall, Recherches sur le systeme nerveux en general, et sur celui de cerveau en particulier; memoir presente a I'Institut de France, le 14 mars 1808; suivi d'observations sur le rapport qui en a etefaite a cette compagniepar ses commissaires (Paris: F. Schoell, 1809); and Franz Josef Gall and Johann C. Spurzheim, Anatomie et pgysiologie du systeme nerveux en general et du cerveau en particulier (Paris: F. Schoell, 1810). This last, joint work was actually a series that continued coming out through 1819, including illustrative plates. 97 Bieder, Science Encounters the Indian, 73 (n 36). 98 Bieder, Science Encounters the Indian, 59. 99 Bieder, Science Encounters the Indian, 67. 100 Stephen Williams also points this out in Fantastic Archaeology, 40.

334 NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

101 For McKain story, see Bieder, Science Encounters the Indian, 66-67; for accepted method, see James Riding-In, "Six Pawnee Crania: Historical and Contemporary Issues Associated with the Massacre and Decapitation of Pawnee Indians in i 869," American Indian Culture and Research Joumal 16.2 (1992): 107. 102 Quoted in Stephen Jay Gould, "Morton's Ranking of Races by Cranial Capacity: Unconscious Manipulation of Data May Be a Scientitist Norm," Science 200 (5 May 1978): 503. 103 In 1978, Stephen Jay Gould tried to let Morton off the hook by claiming that Morton lent only "cautious support" to phrenology, Gould, "Morton's Ranking of Races by Cranial Capacity," 509 (n 20). The work of Robert Bieder has, however, shown this statement to be false. Bieder located many documents in the Morton Papers of the American Philosophical Society that attest to Morton's collusion with phrenology, Bieder, Science Encounters the Indian, 72 (n 36). Bieder has also shown that Morton was in contact with Franz Josef Gall, a founder of phrenology, during Morton's student years in Edinburgh. Bieder, Science Encounters the Indian, 59. 104 In a letter to Josiah Nott, Morton confessed that "I avow my belief in a plurality of origins for the htiman species." Bieder, Science Encounters the Indian, 82; Morton made a similar claim in another letter, this one to the Rev. John Bachman, Science Encounters the Indian, 100, and 100 (n 102). 105 Samuel George Morton, Crania Americana, or a Comparative View ofthe Skulls ofthe Various Aboriginal Nations of North and South America, to Which Is Prefixed an Essay on the Varieties ofthe Human Species (Philadelphia: J. Dobson, 1839) 2. 106 Morton, Crania Americana, 3. 107 Morton, Crania Americana, 6. 108 Morton, Crania Americana, 76. 109 Morton, Crania Americana, Table 2.1, 260. Although Morton went to great pains to show and measure the "elongated" skulls of the Lenape people (Morton, Crania Americana, 189), his entire sample ofthe Lenape and the Iroquois consists of one Lenape, one Cayuga, Oneida, one "Huron," and one Mound-Builder skull, Morton, Crania Americana, 189,192, 193,194,195, and 219, respectively. Thus, his sweeping generalizations are all based on samples of one. 110 Gould, "Morton's Ranking of Races by Cranial Capacity," quote, 504; demonstration of the fudging, 505--6. 111 Gould, The Mismeasure of Man, quotes, 60; whole discussion of Morton's deception regarding Natives, 56-60. 112 Gould, The Mismeasure of Man, 57. 113 Gould, "Morton's Ranking of Races by Cranial Capacity," 506. 114 Morton, Crania Americana, 82.

NOTES 335

115 See Robert Bieder's excellent summary of the twisted route to polygenesis, in Bieder, Science Encounters the Indian, 81-83. 116 Morton, Crania Americana, 272. 117 Morton, Crania Americana, TTl. 118 Morton, Crania Americana, 277. 119 McCulloh, Researches. Philosophical and Antiquatian, 3. McCulloh also objected to making Natives "a fifth class of the human species." McCulloh, Researches. Philosophical and Antiquatian, 15. 120 Bieder, Science Encounters the Indian, 92. In 1854, Josiah Nott and his colleague, George Gliddon, followed in Morton's craniometric footsteps to set up a white supremacist rant masquerading as hard science in their tome. Types of Mankind, of which "the aboriginal races of America" were one, as announced in a section header of Josiah Clark Nott and George R. Gliddon, Types of Mankind: or. Ethnological Researches Based upon the Ancient Monuments. Paintings. Sculptures, and Crania of Races, and upon Their Natural. Geographical. Philological, and Biblical History. Illustrated by Selections from the Inedited Papers of Samuel George Morton (1854; reprint, Miami: Mnemosyne Publishing Company, 1969) 271. Along with Morton and Louis Agassiz, Nott and Gliddon argued that the "Mongols, the Caucasians, the Negroes," and "the [Native] Americans" were "proximate, but not identical species," Nott and Gliddon, Types of Mankind, quotes, 276; for agreement with Morton and Agassiz, 283. It was not accidental that J. D. B. De Bow, editor of the wildly, almost incoherently, racist De Bow's Review, a southem joumal devoted to bolstering the Peculiar Institution, invited Nott to present lectures (on science, of course) to the Louisiana Legislature, published in 1849. Nott's conclusions were numbingly predictable, that the biological inferiority of Africans and Natives justified whatever the Euroamericans deigned to visit upon them by way of misery. Josiah Clark Nott, Two Lectures on the Connection between the Biblical and Physical History of Man (1849; reprint. New York: Negro Press, n.d.). Nott held that Africans and Native Americans represented four distinct creations of humanity, two apiece. Of the "American" type, there were the "Toltecan Family" and the "Barbarous Tribes." Nott and Gliddon, Types of Mankind, 111. Morton gave two "families" of Natives as the "American" and the "Toltecan." Morton, Crania Americana, 6, 63. 121 Quoted in Gould, "Morton's Ranking of Races by Cranial Capacity," 504. 122 John P. Jeffries, The Natural History of the Human Races (New York: Edward O. Jenkins, 1869) 185. To facilitate the connection, he also argued for the Bering Strait as the crossing point of the "Mongolians" into the Americas. Jeffries, The Natural History of the Human Races, 185. 123 Joseph-Arthur, compte de Gobineau, The Inequality of Human Races, trans. Adrian Collins (1854; 1915; reprint. New York: Howard Fertig, Inc., 1967) 46. Much of the "vanishing Red man" rhetoric of the nineteenth century actually rested on phrenological conclusions that Natives lacked all hope of ever developing into people who could maintain a civilization. Gobineau harped on this borrowed point in several discussions. 124 In a typical passage, Gobineau skrieked: "They will die out, as they know well; but they

336 NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

are kept, by a mysterious feeling of horror, under the yoke of the unconquerable repulsion from the white race, and although they admire its strength and general superiority, their conscience and their whole nature, in a word, their blood, revolts from the mere thought of having anything in common with it." Gobineau, The Inequality of Human Races, 171. 125 Gobineau, The Inequality of Human Races, 111-12. 126 Samuel F. Haven, Archaeology of the United States, Smithsonian Contributions to Knowledge, no. 8 (Washington, D.C.: Smithsonian Institution, 1856) 74-75. 127 Darwin, The Descent ofMan, for craniometrical tenets, 266; for Morton and his races, 346. Darwin boosters like to note that he did not hold the crania to be the absolute arbiter of merit, and it is true that he said "no one supposes that the intellect of any two animals or of any two men can be accurately gauged by the cubic contents of their skulls." Darwin, The Descent of Man, 281.1 am, however, a firm believer in context. Throughout the entire passage, Darwin is dodging the correlation of size and capacity like mad, veering into the safer territory of ants and rabbits whenever he might be called upon directly to address the issue of racial comparisons. Elsewhere in the same book, Darwin lauds his cousin, Francis Galton, for his work. Hereditary Genius (1869), which helped initiate eugenics (Darwin, The Descent of Man, 267), and, throughout, Darwin simply assumes the truth of race science, as, for example, in his discussion of the lack of ability in "savages" to abstract such concepts as "God" (Darwin, The Descent of Man, 302-3). It should not be forgotten that monogenecists like Darwin were every bit as racist as polygenecists. Furthermore, Darwin's monogenesis is not as straightforward as many now like to claim. Indeed, he was as often cited by polygeneticists as by monogeneticists. In 1879, during his discussion of the theory of the separate evolution of Native Americans (a speculation that Short, himself, rejected) Short mentioned Darwin's Old and New World monkey discussion as being seen to have lent support to the notion that two branches of humanity might well have sprung from Old and New World species of monkeys. For Short's discussions, see Short, North Americans of Antiquity, whole discussion 155-202; his demur from polygenesis, 201-2. It is easy to see how Darwin's monkey discussion could have been misconstrued by contemporaries, especially by ideologues out to seize on evidence for their own ideas. Darwin is oblique, digressive, verbose, confusing, and, sometimes, just plain aimless in his discussions. Although his drift in chapter six of Descent of Man is that humanity sprang from Old World monkeys, his argument for the exclusive derivation of humanity therefrom is fairly airy, leaving plenty of ambiguity into which polygeneticists could slide their own interpretations: "Now man unquestionably belongs in his dentition, in the structure of his nostrils, and some other respects, to the catarhine or Old World division; nor does he resemble the platyrhines [New World] more closely than the catarhines in any characters, excepting in a few of not much importance and apparently of an adaptive nature. It is therefore against all probability that some New World species should have formerly varied and produced a man-like creature, with all the distinctive characters proper to the Old World division; losing at the same time all its own distinctive characr.;rs. There can, consequently, hardly be a doubt that man is an off-shoot from the Old World simian stem; and that under a genealogical point of view he must be classed with the catarhine division." Darwin, Descent of Man, 335. Of course, what polygeneticists actively denied was that New World humans coincided with Old World humans in those very points of confluence with the "catarhine division." Darwin's "probabilities" thus transmuted into uncertainties, while his admission that there were also human similarities to New World monkeys was taken to have been a telling acknowledgment. If the human form had arisen once from the

NOTES 337

monkey form in the Old World, there seemed to be no compelling reason to suppose that it had not done so again from the altemative monkey forms in the New World. Furthermore, for all their supposedly fraught rivalry in the nineteenth century, polygeneticism and monogeneticism were equally ferocious in their racism, so that, given the importance of racism to nineteenth-century scholarship, it was really a tiny step from one philosophy to the other, something like converting from Episcopalianism to Anglicanism. Thus, I find a bit hard to swallow what modem scholars deem foregone, that the sheer appearance of Darwin's evolutionary theory scuttled the polygenetic school single-handedly. I agree, instead, with Robert Bieder that Darwin's part in the "demise of polygenism is overrated." Bieder, Science Encounters the Indian, 142 (n 77). 128 Bieder, "A Brief Historical Survey," 7-8. 129 Bieder, "A Brief Historical Survey," 9. 130 Bieder, "A Brief Historical Survey," 10. 131 Morton, Crania Americana, 194. 132 Morton, Crania Americana, for Oneida, see 193; for Wyunta, see 192. 133 Bieder, Science Encounters the Indian, 66. 134 Gould, "Morton's Ranking of Races by Cranial Capacity," 503. 135 Bieder, Science Encounters the Indian, 101. 136 Gulliford, "Bones of Contention," 123. 137 Bieder, "A Brief Historical Survey," 36. 138 D. S. Lamb, "The Army Medical Museum in American Anthropology," Proceedings of the 19th Intemational Congress ofAmericanists (1917; reprint, Nendeln, Liechtenstein: Kraus Reprint, 1968) 628. 139 Ward Churchill, A Little Matter of Genocide: Holocaust and Denial in the Americas. 1492 to the Present (San Francisco: City Lights Books, 1997) 229. 140 CburchiW, A Little Matter of Genocide, 231,232; James Riding-In, "Six Pawnee Crania," 105. 141 Churchill, A Little Matter of Genocide, 232. Some of the recounted brutality is really worthy of the Nazi SS. 142 Churchill, A Little Matter of Genocide, 233. 143 Churchill, A Little Matter of Genocide, 233. 144 Churchill, A Little Matter of Genocide, 233 (n •) and (n t). 145 Riding-In, "Six Pawnee Crania," 105. Remains from the Sand Creek Massacre are ex-

338 NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

plicitly enumerated by the Army Medical Museum's reports. Lamb, "The Army Medical Museum in American Anthropology," 625. 146 Lamb, "The Army Medical Museum in American Anthropology," 625. 147 Gulliford, "Bones of Contention," 124. 148 Bieder, "A Brief Historical Survey," 36-37. 149 Bieder, "A Brief Historical Survey," 36-37. 150 On 29 January, the trading party was attacked by the Army which, according to Pawnee tradition, summarily opened fire, killing up to nine Pawnee. Another Pawnee, taken captive, was executed by settlers who claimed that he had been "trying to escape." RidingIn, "Six Pawnee Crania," 106. 151 David Hurst Thomas, Skull Wars: Kennewick Man. Archaeology, and the Battle for Native American Identity (New York: Basic Books, 2000) 204. 152 Riding-In, "Six Pawnee Crania," 107. 153 Riding-In, "Six Pawnee Crania," 107. 154 Battlefield collections are enumerated. Lamb, "The Army Medical Museum in American Anthropology," 625. 155 For examples of the letters and the boasts, see Bieder, "A Brief Historical Survey," 45-46. 156 Bieder, "A Brief Historical Survey," 34. 157 Gulliford, "Bones of Contention," 125. 158 Bieder, "A Brief Historical Survey," 42. 159 Bieder, "A Brief Historical Survey," 38-39. 160 Bieder, "A Brief Historical Survey," 43-44. 161 Lamb, "The Army Medical Museum in American Anthropology," 628. 162 Lamb, "The Army Medical Museum in American Anthropology," 628. 163 Lamb, "The Army Medical Museum in American Anthropology," 628. 164 Riding-In, "Six Pawnee Crania," 108. 165 Lamb, "The Army Medical Museum in American Anthropology," 628. 166 Lamb, "The Army Medical Museum in American Anthropology," 627. 167 Lamb, "The Army Medical Museum in American Anthropology," 628.

NOTES 339

168 Bieder, "A Brief Historical Survey," 3 9 ^ 0 . 169 A number of different preparations existed for "preserving" bones that were doing their best to crumble to dust. This posed a particular "problem" for grave robbers looting the mounds. Poking about in a burial mound two-and-a-half miles south of what was, in 1866, the city limits of Newark, Ohio, for instance, O. C. Marsh recorded that he collected "brittle" bones "by immersing them in spermaceti melted in boiling water, a new method, used by Professor Lartet and other French paleontologists, and admirably adapted to" the purpose of plundering Ohio's burial mounds. O. C. Marsh, "Description of an Ancient Sepulchral Mound near Newark, Ohio," Historical Magazine, 2nd series, 2.4 (1867): 244. 170 Gulliford, "Bones of Contention," 124. 171 Lamb, "The Army Medical Museum in American Anthropology," 626. 172 Lamb, "The Army Medical Museum in American Anthropology," 631. 173 Lamb, "The Army Medical Museum in American Anthropology," 631. 174 Lamb, "The Army Medical Museum in American Anthropology," 631. 175 Lamb, "The Army Medical Museum in American Anthropology," 631. 176 Bieder, "A Brief Historical Survey," 32. 177 Bieder, "A Brief Historical Survey," 35. 178 Bieder, "A Brief Historical Survey," 28-29. 179 Ronald P. Rohner, The Ethnography ofFranz Boas (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1969) 82. 180 Rohner, The Ethnography of Franz Boas, 83. 181 Bieder, "A Brief Historical Survey," 31. 182 Preston, "Skeletons in Our Museums' Closets," 67. 183 Williams, Fantastic Archaeology, 64. The Bureau was originally named The Bureau of Ethnology but was renamed Bureau of American Ethnology in 1894. Gordon R. Willey and Jeremy A. Sabloff, A History ofAmerican Archaeology, 3rd ed. (1974; New York: W. H. Freeman and Company, 1993) 47. Powell also headed up the U.S. Geological Survey from 1881-1892. Williams, Fantastic Archaeology, 74. He resigned from the Survey under great pressure from westem cattlemen because he insisted that the southwestern desert was a desert, and not fertile land, as speculators were advertising it to be. Williams, Fantastic Archaeology, 75. 184 Bieder, "A Brief Historical Survey," 40-41, and 69 (n 97). 185 In 1898, the site was three miles below Hamilton, Ohio, thirty miles from mouth of the Great Miami River. Emilius Oviatt Randall, TTie Masterpieces of the Ohio Mound Builders:

340 NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

The Hilltop Fortifications, Including Fort Ancient (Columbus: The Ohio State Archaeological and Historical Society, 1908) 62-63, 74. 186 Randall, The Masterpieces of the Ohio Mound Builders, 76. 187 Randall, The Masterpieces of the Ohio Mound Builders, 68. 188 Randall, The Masterpieces of the Ohio Mound Builders, 69. 189 Bieder, "A Brief Historical Survey," 26. 190 Gulliford, "Bones of Contention," 124-25. 191 Bieder,"A Brief Historical Survey," 28. 192 Preston, "Skeletons in Our Museums' Closets," 66-67. 193 Gulliford, "Bones of Contention," 125. 194 Rohner, The Ethnography of Franz Boas, 88. 195 Rohner, The Ethnography of Franz Boas, 96. 196 Rohner, The Ethnography of Franz Boas, 89. 197 Rohner, The Ethnography of Franz Boas, 90. 198 Rohner, The Ethnography of Franz Boas, 91. 199 Rohner, The Ethnography of Franz Boas, visit to Lytton, 99; National Museum go-ahead, 96. 200 Bieder, "A Brief Historical Survey," 31. 201 Bieder, "A Brief Historical Survey," for the Chicago Field Museum in, 31; for the Army Medical Museum, 39. 202 Blakely, "Skull Doctors," 8. For admirers finding it hard to swallow, see Stephen Loring and Miroslav Prokopec, "A Most Peculiar Man: The Life and Times of AleS Hrdlifika," Reckoning with the Dead: The Larsen Bay Repatriation and the Smithsonian Institution, ed. Tamara L. Bray and Thomas W. Killion (Washington, D.C.: Smithsonian Institution Press, 1994) sexism, 29; racism, 30,36. It is simultaneously painful and hilarious to watch the sexist Hrdlifika wiggling around the question of female cranial capacities. Having already declared that sheer capacity equalled intelligence, Hrdli£ka compared male and female cranial capacities, properly adjusting for size differentials, but, to his dismay, women of every group he measured had larger capacities than the men of those groups. Unwilling to follow his own ideology to the inevitable conclusion that women were more intelligent than men, he invented a new physiological fact, just for women. It seemed that the female of the human species had an air sack between the brain and the skull bone, separating the two structures,whereas the male of the human species filled up his entire skull in a veritably manly fashion. Thus, female capacity tumed out to be less than male

NOTES 341

capacity after all, once the volume ofthe air pocket was subtracted. (Whewl) This is the origin ofthe slur, "air head." Blakely, "Skull Doctors," 16. 203 Ale§ HrdliCka, Practical Anthropology (Philadelphia: Wistar Institute of Anatomy and Biology, 1939) 100. See also Michael Blakely's assessment of Hrdlidka in Blakely, "Skull Doctors," 10-18. 204 Gulliford, "Bones of Contention," 126. 205 Loring and Prokopec, "A Most Peculiar Man," 32. 206 Loring and Prokopec, "A Most Peculiar Man," 31. 207 The woman in question was a Mrs. Laura Jones, resident of Larsen Bay, who behaved for all the world like a sociopath out on a toot. Loring and Prokopec describe Jones's letters to Hrdlidka as "almost ghoulish in their enthusiasm for obtaining more skeletons for Hrdlidka." She personally dug up recently interred "Chinamen" for the purpose, looting the dead while she was at it. In her letter to HrdliCka of 14 September 1931, having crowed over having tumed up "even more Chinamen," i.e., fresh graves, she forwarded for Hrdlidka's osteological pleasure "a Chinaman of note" whom she found wearing brocade, a que, and "a lovely white jade bracelet. I kept the bracelet (naturally)," she added, sending Hrdli£ka the "pig tail" by way of a trophy. She confided that she longed for Hrdlidka's retum so that he might "instmct [her] further in this 'bone business,'" as her husband had dubbed his wife's loathsome hobby. Loring and Prokopec, "A Most Peculiar Man," 32. 208 Loring and Prokopec, "A Most Peculiar Man," 31. 209 Bray and Killion, ed.. Reckoning with the Dead, viii, 6. On 29 May 1987, the Larsen Bay Tribal Council resolved to demand the repatriation ofthe bones and artifacts stolen from them by HrdliCka and his cronies for the Smithsonian Institution. Bray and Killion, ed.. Reckoning with the Dead, 187. In 1991, under the terms of NAGPRA, the 756 skeletal "lots" representing 1,000 different individuals and 144 "lots" of funerary artifacts stolen by Ale§ HrdliCka were repatriated (albeit reburied beneath a Russian Orthodox cross!). Loring and Prokopec, "A Most Peculiar Man," 37. 210 For ascension numbers, see Riding-In, "Six Pawnee Crania," Table 2,110. 211 AleS Hrdli6ka, Physical Anthropology ofthe Lenape or Delawares, and ofthe Eastem Indians in General, Bulletin 62 (Washington, D.C.: Bureau of American Ethnology, 1916) 112. 212 Hrdlidka, Physical Anthropology ofthe Leanpe, 115. 213 Loring and Prokopec, "A Most Peculiar Man," 27. 214 Loring and Prokopec, "A Most Peculiar Man," 26. 215 Loring and Prokopec, "A Most Peculiar Man," 27. 216 Kenn Harper, Give Me My Father's Body: The Life of Minik, the New York Eskimo (Frobisher Bay, Northwest Territory: Blacklead Books, 1986).

342 NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

217 Harper, Give Me My Father's Body, 88. 218 AleS Hrdlidka, "An Eskimo Brain," American Anthropologist 3 (1901): 454. 219 Harper, Give Me My Father's Body, 83, 96-97. 220 Haiper, Give Me My Father's Body, 218. 221 Earnest A. Hooton, The American Criminal: An Anthropological Study (1939; reprint. New York: Greenwood Press, 1969) physical types and crime, 7-10; Pearson and eugenic "biometrics," 16. 222 Consider this typical disclaimer: "Attempts to grade types according to their evolutionary development have a certain value in studies of ancient forms of man and of the apes, but when applied to contemporary races they serve no better purpose than to stir up emotional and acrimonious controversies," Earnest A Hooton, Up from the Ape, 2nd ed. (1931; New York: Macmillan Company, 1946) 658. His knuckle-rapping of the Nazis came in Hooton, The American Criminal, 3. 223 Hooton, Up from the Ape, 570. An example of his order-bringing was his protracted "study" of the 1,823 graves exhumed between 1915 and 1926 at the Pecos Pueblo, with the remains thereafter shipped to the Peabody Museum. Earnest A. Hooton, The Indians of Pecos Pueblo: A Study of Their Skeletal Remains (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1930) exhumed, 16; shipped to the Peabody, 344. Of course, in those days of heavy handed colonialism, no permission was sought from the Pueblo people before their ancient graves, even including those in the nave of the Pecos church, were invaded. These bones were subjected to every sort of measurement imaginable, for the ptirpose of establishing a racial typology of Native Americans, which, in Hooton's leamed opinion, "Morpholog-ical features"—i.e., what the Pueblo looked like—"taken from period to period clearly show a deterioration of the Pecos population toward a brutal but rather degenerate type." Hooton, The Indians of Pecos Pueblo, 346. The notion that racial intermixture resulted in "degeneration" of the "pure stock" dates back to Johann Friedrich Blumenbach, but Hooton was being thoroughly modem when he considered whether Native Americans had descended from Neanderthals and opined that they had probably arrived in the Americas between ten and twelve thousand years ago. Hooton, The Indians of Pecos Pueblo, Neanderthal, 350-51; 12,000 years, 353. Hooton decided in his discussion that Natives were not Neanderthals, and he later revised the date of Native antiquity up to 15,00020,000 years in Eamest A. Hooton, Up from the Ape, 2nd ed. (1931; New York: The Macmillan Company, 1946) 647. Ridiculously, Hooton made no effort to sort out the remains of the Spaniards or their African slaves from those of the Natives in his Pueblo sample. He consequently confused his data thoroughly, leading him to describe fancifril early Natives, who "straggled into the New World from Asia by way of the Bering Straits," in three successive waves of different racial stock: the first, a "brunet European and African long-headed stock called 'Mediterranean'"; the second, "a more primitive form with heavy browridges, low broad face and wide nose" reminiscent of "the native Australians," the "Pre-Dravidians," and the "Ainu" of Japan; and third, "an element almost certainly Negroid (not Negro)." Hooton, The Indians of"Pecos Pueblo, 361-62. 224 Hooton, Up from the Ape, 643-50. 225 Hooton, Up from the Ape, Plate 9 follows page 40.

NOTES 343

226 Hooton, Up from the Ape, Plates 21 through 39 follow page 648. 227 Describing one ofthe skeletons unearthed, Tomlinson recorded, "We have it preserved for the inspection of visitors." A. B. Tomlinson, Letter to J. S. Williams, Esq. American Pioneer 2.5 (May 1843): 201. A long description ofthe site as a tourist attraction was written by Dr. Frederick Larkin, recounting a visit he made there in 1841, in Frederick Larkin, Ancient Man in America (Randolph, NY: Author, 1880) 93-103. 228 Gulliford, "Bones of Contention," 126-27. 229 For ancestors ofthe Pawnee, Wichita, and Arikara peoples, see Riding-In, "Six Pawnee Crania," 113. For shellacking, Gulliford, "Bones of Contention," 127. 230 Bieder, "A Brief Historical Survey," 15. 231 Gulliford, "Bones of Contention," 127-28. Robert Hall states that the number of skeletons was 234. Robert L. Hall, An Archaeology ofthe Soul: North American Indian Belief and Ritual(\jThana: University of Illinois Press, 1997) 143. 232 "How to Make a Dollar on Indian Graves," Wassaja 3.6 (July 1975): 3. 233 Hall, An Archaeology ofthe Soul, 143. 234 Riding-In, "Six Pawnee Crania," 113. 235 Guilliford, "Bones of Contention," 131, 131 (n 46). 236 "The Vulture Culture," Wassaja 3.7 (August 1975): 6. 237 Robert V. Matthews, "Iroquois Sites Digging Hit," Letter to the Editor, Wassaja 3.6 (July 1975): 11. 238 "The Vulture Culture," Wassaja 3.7 (August 1975): 1. 239 "The Vulture Culture," Wassaja 3.7 (August 1975): 10. 240 Mann, "In Defense ofthe Ancestors," 55.

2. The "Slaughter" ofthe Mounds: Settler Myths and Despoliations 1 In the antebellum period, one scholar noted, "There is no subject of an antiquarian nature that has excited greater curiosity in the United States than the ancient monuments." James H. McCulloh, Researches, Philosophical and Antiquarian, Conceming the Aboriginal History of America (Baltimore: Fielding Lucas, Jr., 1829) 64. The Peabody Museum of American Archaeology was founded in 1866 by O. C. Marsh, a nephew of George Peabody, specifically to address the Mound-Builder mystery. Gordon R. Willey and Jeremy A. Sabloff, A History of American Archaeology, 3rd ed. (1974; New York: W. H. Freeman and Company, 1993) 49. Almost sixty years later, in 1887, John W. Powell noted

344 NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

that "the mystery which enshrouds" the mounds of the Ohio valley "is deeper and much more difficult to penetrate than that which hangs about the antiquities of some of the other districts" which he attributed to Natives; "in fact, they present probably the most difficult problem for solution in this respect of any ancient works in our country." J[ohn] G. Powell, Fifth Annual Report of the Bureau of Ethnology to the Secretary of the Smithsonian Institution, 1883-1884 (Washington, D.C.: Govemment Printing Office, 1887) 59. 2 Bruce G. Trigger, A History ofArchaeological Thought (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1989) 104. 3 Ephraim George Squier and E. H. Davis, Ancient Monuments of the Mississippi Valley: Comprising the Results of Extensive Original Surveys and Explorations, Smithsonian Contributions to Knowledge, vol. 1. (1848; reprint. New York: Johnson Reprint Corporation, 1965) 5. 4 The Smithsonian's first study of the motmds declared, "Not far from one hundred enclosures, of various sizes, and five hundred mounds are found in Ross county [sic], Ohio. The ntunber of tumuli in the state may be safely estimated at ten thousand, and the number of enclosures at one thousand or fifteen hundred." Squier and Davis, Ancient Monuments of the Mississippi Valley, 304. This figure is quoted in C. Morris,"The Extinct Races of America," The National Quarterly Review 24 (December 1871): 125, and repeated in J. T. Short, North Americans of Antiquity, 3rd ed. (1879; New York: Harper & Brothers, Publishers, 1882) 47-48. Ohio was a comucopia of mounds. In Licking County, Ohio, alone, in 1902, there were "probably 500 earthworks of all descriptions without including in the estimate the excavations at Flint Ridge." Gerald Fowke, Archaeolgical History of Ohio: The Mound Builders and Later Indians, 2 vols. (Columbus: Ohio State Archaeological and Historical Society, 1902) 1: 162. 5 Emilius Oviatt Randall, TTie Masterpieces of the Ohio Mound Builders: The Hilltop Fortifications, Including Fort Ancient (Coltimbus: The Ohio State Archaeological and Historical Society, 1908) 16; Henry Clyde Shetrone, Primer of Ohio Archaeology: The Mound Builders and the Indians, 5th ed. (Coltimbus: The Ohio State Archaeological and Historical Society, 1951)6. 6 Willey and Sabloff, A History of American Archaeology, 22. The phrase, "armchair scholar" is Willey and SablofPs, but the sidewinding is common to modem treatments of nineteenth-century madness on the subject of the Motmd Builders. 7 Nina Swidler, Kurt E. Dongoske, Roger Anyon, and Alan S. Downer, ed.. Native Americans and Archaeologists: Stepping Stones to Common Ground (Walnut Creek, CA: AltaMira Press, 1997) 26; Fowke, Archaeological History of Ohio, 1: 32, 34, 39, 44-53. For his part, Samuel Drake was annoyed by the extravaganza as early as 1837, prefacing his work with the sour observation that "It has been the practice of almost every writer, who has written about the primitive inhabitants of a country, to give some wild theories of others, conceming their origin, and to close the account with his own; which generally has been more visionary, if possible, than those of his predecessors." Samuel Gardner Drake, Biography and History of the Indians of North America from Its First Discovery to the Present Time; Comprising a History of Their Wars, 7th ed., 5 vol. (Boston: Antiquarian Institute, 1837)1:4. 8 Caleb Atwater, "Description of the Antiquities Discovered in the State of Ohio and Other

NOTES 345

Westem States," Archaeologia Americana: Transactions and Collections of the American Antiquarian Society 1 (1820): 105-267; Squier and Davis, Ancient Monuments of the Mississippi Valley (1848); Cyrus Thomas, Report on the Mound Explorations of the Bureau of Ethnology, Bureau of Ethnology, Annual Report no. 12 (Washington, D.C.: Smithsonian Institute, 1894). 9 See, especially, Bmce G. Trigger, "Archaeology and the Image of the American Indian," American Antiquity 34 (1980): 662-76. Trigger also emphasizes this point periodically in A History of Archaeological Thought (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1989). 10 R. S. Robertson, "The Mound-Builders of America," Magazine of American History 4 (1880): 174. 11 Robertson, "The Mound-Builders of America," 178. 12 Robertson, "The Mound-Builders of America," 179. 13 Robertson, "The Mound-Builders of America," 179, 177, respectively. 14 Robertson,"The Mound-Builders of America," 179. 15 Robertson, "The Mound-Builders of America," 179. Robertson was hardly unique in his sketch of the myth. In 1871, for instance, the archaeologist C. Morris repeated his catechism whole, dragging Native Americans—"one of the primitive races of mankind" —in across the Bering Strait, where they met, in situ, "a race of people much more civilized" than themselves "and differing widely from them in character." Morris, "The Extinct Races of America," 122. For a while, Morris declared. Natives lived side by side with the Mound Builders "with whom they were in constant warfare," but, ultimately, the Mound Builders "may have been at length extermined or driven fi-om the country" by the Natives. Morris, "The Extinct Races of America," 123. Morris concluded that this scenario was the "only reasonable conjecture in regard to their utter disappearance, and the possession of the entire country by their red-skinned successors." Morris, "The Extinct Races of America," 123. 16 As Robert Silverberg observed, "The controversy over the origin of the mounds was not merely an abstract scholariy debate, but had its roots in the great nineteenth-century campaign of extermination waged against the American Indian." Robert Silverberg, Mound Builders of Ancient America: The Archaeology of a Myth (Greenwich, CT: New York Graphic Society, Ltd., 1968) 159-60. See also, Swidler et al.. Native Americans and Archaeologists, 27; and Randall H. McGuire, "Archaeology and the First Americans," American Anthropologist 94.4 (1992): 820, 821. It is grimly amusing that, by the nineteenth century, it had become commonplace for European settlers to insist that their rivals for proprietorship of this or that invaded land had, themselves, but recently arrived. Not only were Native Americans posited as having recently migrated into the Americas, but the Maoris of New Zealand were also accused of interloping. In both instances, the charges were politically, not scientifically, motivated, since, had the indigenous people only just arrived themselves, then "they had little more historical claim to the land than the European setters had." Trigger, A History of Archaeological Thought, 139. 17 Gentleman of Elvas, "The Narrative of the Expedition of Hemando de Soto," in Spanish

346 NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

Explorers in the Southern United States, ed. Theodore H. Lewis (New York: Scribner's, 1907) 147. 18 From "A Narrative of the Expedition of Hemando de Soto," by Luis Hemandez de Biedma in Benjamin Franklin French, Historical Collections of Louisiana, vol. 2 (Philadelphia: Daniels and Smith, 1850) 105. 19 Garcilaso de la Vega, TTie Florida of the Inca,ed. Sylvia L. Hilton (1605; Madrid: Historia 16, 1986) 203. Translation mine. Cyms Thomas was of the reasoned opinion that what Vega described was the spectacular mound at Etowah, that most likely to have stood out in the minds of his informants. Cyrus Thomas, "Cherokees Probably Mound-Builders," Magazine of American History 11.5 (May 1884): 406. 20 William Strachey, The Historie of Travell into Virginia Britania, ed. Louis B. Wright and Virginia Freund (1612; London: Hakluyt Society, 1953) 95. 21 Thomas, Report on the Mound Explorations, Plate XLII opposite page 652. 22 In Historical Collection of Louisiana, 1 vols. (New York: Wiley and Putnam, 1846-1875) 3: 106, quoted in Thomas, Report on the Mound Explorations of the Bureau of Ethnology, 653. Interestingly, La Harpe also recorded having seen a "huge mound of copper" at a small lake east of a river he called the Sainte Croix. Jean-Baptiste Benard de La Harpe, The Historical Joumal of the Establishment of the French in Louisiana, ed. Glenn R. Conrad. Trans. Joan Cain and Virginia Koenig (1846; Lafayette: Center for Louisiana Studies, University of Southwestem Louisiana, 1971) 34. 23 William R. Smith, The History of Wisconsin, vol 3. (Madison, WI: Beriah Brown, Printer, 1854)262. 24 David Zeisberger, History of the Northem American Indians, ed. Archer Butler Hulbert and William Nathaniel Schwarze, Ohio Archaeological and Historical Publications, vol. 19 (1779-1780; Columbus: Ohio Archaeological and Historical Society, 1910) 30. 25 John Heckewelder, History, Manners, and Customs of the Indian Nations Who Once Inhabited Pennsylvania and the Neighboring States, The First American Frontier Series (1819; 1820; 1876; reprint. New York: Amo Press and The New York Times, 1971) 48-51. 26 Quoted in Henry Rowe Schoolcraft, Historical and Statistical Information Respecting the History, Condition, and Prospects of the Indian Tribes of the United States, 6 vols. (Philadelphia: Lippincott, Grambo, & Co., 1851-1857) 4: 135-36. Schoolcraft makes it quite clear that he is quoting Clark, not giving his own opinion, although his failtire to put quotation marks at the beginning of each paragraph of Clark's manuscript might, indeed, cause a hasty reader to think that the words had been Schoolcraft's own. For Schoolcraft's introduction of the Clark manuscript, see Schoolcraft, Historical and Statistical Information, 4: 133. Cyms Thomas probably began the mistake of crediting Schoolcraft with more honor than he deserved by attributing Clark's words to him, in Thomas, Report on the Mound Explorations of the Bureau of Ethnology, 600. Later scholars simply perpetuated Thomas's original error of claiming clearer eyes on the matter for Schoolcraft than he really had. See, for instance, Stephen Williams, Fantastic Archaeology: The Wild Side of North American Prehistory (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1991) 83. Schoolcraft, himself, fiirted heavily with the "lost race" theory, fingering Europeans as the

NOTES 347

probable Mound Builders, as demonstrated in this exeerpt from an 1845 article on the mounds: "But what shall be said of the character of the people who erected the mounds, and who have left entombed, in the WEST and SOUTHWEST, the various evidences of Art, which have been from time to time noticed? . . . We think the subject susceptible of a twofold consideration. To reconcile the fact, of the former existence, on this continent, of diverse arts, manners and customs, as shown in its ruins and factitious remains, we may well imagine two distinct eras of population, and suppose that this population originated in, and proceeded/rom, distinct, separate, and opposite parts of the globe. There are in our antiquities, and in ancient traditions, so far as these can be employed, evidences, we think, that there was a period of adventure and migration to this continent, having its impulse from the east, toward the Atlantic coasts—that it proceeded from the European coasts, in the infancy of navigation, and was home hither on the Westem breeze" (small capitals and italics in the original). Henry Rowe Schoolcraft, "Observations Respecting the Grave Creek Mound," Transactions of the American Ethnological Society 1 (1845): 415. Schoolcraft later cleaved, halfheartedly, to the Toltecan theory, as he recorded in, Schoolcraft, Historical and Statistical Information, 4: 138. This seems to have been more because he did not want to fall out of the mainstream of elite thought than because he had actually concluded as much himself. In the process of shifting gears, he fudged and slid around the issue of who had built the mounds, hinting at mystery while simultaneously indicating that they might have been Native handiwork, but only because they were really very crude structures. "We have, ourselves, within a period commencing in 1812, viewed many of these earthworks and tumuli, with a common feeling of the vague and unknown, which whispers to the mind of the beholder, as he glances at their enigmatical character, and then at the untutored Indian beside them, in tones of mystery and wonder. The impressions left are, that they cannot be ascribed to a people of high civilization. No people possessing any high degree of art and knowledge would have constructed such inartificial and eccentric works, which are incapable of enduring a siege." Schoolcraft, Historical and Statistical Information, 4: 145. These passages represent less than a ringing endorsement of Natives but are quite in keeping with Schoolcraft's racist thinking elsewhere. 27 J. Russell Harper, ed., Paul Kane's Frontier {Austin: University of Texas Press, 1971) 52. 28 McCulloh, Researches. Philosophical and Antiquarian, 36-38; John P. Jeffries, The Natural History of the Human Races (New York: Edward O. Jenkins, 1869) 185-86. 29 Henry Marie Brackenridge, Views of Louisiana, together with a Joumal of a Voyage up the Missouri River, in 1811 (Pittsburgh: Cramer, Spear and Eichbaum, Franklin Head Office, 1814). See also Brackenridge's 1811 "Sketch," in Mound Builders: The Greatest Monument of Pre-Historic Man: Cahokia or Monks Mound (St. Louis: sn, 1914). 30 Willey and Sabloff, A History of American Archaeology, 26. 31 William Henry Harrison, "A Discourse on the Aboriginies of the Valley of Ohio" (1839; reprint, Chicago: Fergus Printing Company, 1883) 13 (n *). 32 Samuel George Morton, Crania Americana, or a Comparative View of the Skulls of the Various Aboriginal Nations of North and South America, to Which Is Prefixed an Essay on the Varieties of the Human Species (Philadelphia: J. Dobson, 1839) 260. 33 Morton, Crania Americana, 260. In an April 1843 speech to the Boston Society of Natural History, Morton reiterated his "one species" theory, contending that only one

348 NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

American race, "distinct from all others," existed. His proof was that "the oldest skulls from the Peruvian cemeteries, the tombs of Mexico, and mounds of our own country, are of the same type as the heads of the most savage existing tribes. Their physical organization proves the origin of one to have been equally the origin of all . . . the American race is essentially separate and peculiar" (italics in the onginsi\). Quoted in S. P. Hildreth, "Pyramids at Marietta," American Pioneer 2.6 (June, 1843)- 245 246. 34 Fowke, Archaeological History of Ohio, 1:33. Fawn McKay Brodie, No Man Knows My History: The Life ofJoseph Smith. The Mormon Prophet, 2nd ed. (1945; New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1971)46. 35 Dr. Crookshanks, "First Population of the Westem Country," American Pioneer 2.9 (September 1843): 414. 36 Squier and Davis, Ancient Monuments of the Mississippi Valley, 301. 37 Jeffries Wyman, "Indian Moimds and Skulls in Michigan," American Joumal of Science and Arts, 3rd series, 7.37 (January 1874): 1. 38 Wyman, "Indian Mounds and Skulls in Michigan," 1. 39 William L. Stone, 'The Moundbuilders: Were They Egyptians; and Did They Ever Occupy the State of New York?" Magazine of American History 2.7 (July 1878): 538. 40

Stone, "The Moundbuilders: Were They Egyptians?" 533.

41 W. J. McGee, "On an Anatomical Peculiarity by which Crania of the Motind Builders May Be Distinguished from Those of the Modem Indians," American Joumal of Science 116 (1878): 458. 42 McGee, "On an Anatomical Peculiarity," 460. 43 McGee, "On an Anatomical Peculiarity," 461. 44 Josiah Nott and George R. Gliddon, Types ofMankind: or. Ethnological Researches Based upon the Ancient Monuments. Paintings. Sculptures, and Crania of Races, and upon Their Natural. Geographical. Philological, and Biblical History. Illustrated by Selections from the Inedited [sic] Papers of Samuel George Morton (1854; reprint, Miami: Mnemosyne Publishing Company, 1969) two types, 277; "migrations," 286. 45 Jeffries, The Natural History of the Human Races, 186. According to Herodotus, who was notoriously gullible about swallowing biased accotints, the Scythians were ptirely savage. "As concems war, this is how it is among them. When a Scythian kills his first man, he drinks his blood; of all those he kills in battle, he carries the heads to the king. . . . The warrior scalps the head thus: he cuts it in a circle round the ears and, taking the head in his hands, shakes it loose. Then he cleans out the flesh with the rib of an ox and kneads the skin with his hands. When he has softened it all, he has got himself, as it were, a napkin. He hangs the napkin from the bridle of the horse he rides himself and takes great pride in it. The man who has the most skins as napkins is judged the greatest man among these people. Many of them also make garments, to wear, out of the scalps, stitching them to-

NOTES 349

gether like the usual coats of skin." Herodotus, The History, David Grene, ed. and trans. (Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1987) 303-4. This, of course, struck nineteenth-century readers forcefully as a very likely description of Native Americans, an observation solemnly accepted as "proof" of the Scythian heritage of Natives. The reader should note that scalping was introduced by the Europeans, who paid settlers handsome "scalp bounties" on such pests as panthers, wolves, and Native Americans. 46 John Wells Foster, Pre-Historic Races of the United States of America (Chicago: S. C. Griggs and Company, 1881) 299. 47 Foster, Pre-Historic Races, 350. 48 Foster quoted Custer as stating that the "Indian cannot be elevated to that great level where he can be induced to adopt any policy or mode of life varying from those to which he has ever been accustomed by any method of teaching, argument, reasoning, or coaxing, which is not preceded and followed closely in reserve by a superior physical force. In other words, the Indian is capable of recognizing no controlling influence but that of stem, arbitrary power." Foster, Pre-Historic Races, first note, 348. 49 Foster, Pre-Historic Races, 300. Foster was hardly alone in his phrenological pejoratives against Native America. They were commonplace enough, for example, to have been recited from memory by Dr. Frederick Larkin in his wild-eyed monograph on the Mound Builders. They could not have been "Indians," he declared, because, "The skull of the Indian bears but little resemblance to that of the mound-builder. The head of the Indian is low in the moral sentiments, has large firmness and small benevolence; in fact his head indicates the cruel savage that he is." Frederick Larkin, Ancient Man in America (Randolph, NY: The Author, 1880) 2. Not content with this screed, Larkin retumed to the subject in his "General Summary" to rail anew against the Natives-as-Mound-Builder theory: "The low and barbarous condition of the Indians found occupying the American Continent at the time of its discovery by Europeans would indicate that they had never attained to any higher degree of civilization than they presented when first discovered." Larkin, Ancient Man in America, 259-60. My personal favorite is, howerer, this: "That numerous types of human beings have occupied some portions of this earth of ours for untold ages is well established, and also that they differ in many particulars. The nations of Africa who fish in the Nile and contend with the alligator, the lion and tiger for supremacy, can always be distinguished from every other race of men by their woolly hair, retreating forhead [sic] thick lips and ebony skin. The Indian tribes of America by nature are savage and possess a complexion and disposition which differs from any other people, and though he should pass through a thousand generations he still would retain his characteristics. The same would hold true of the Negro, for he could never attain the dark silken locks of the Indian or his cruel and savage nature. Whether they should live on the sands of Arabia, on the islands in the ocean, or on the inhabitable portion of either continent, they will ever retain their identity. 'The leopard can never change his spots nor the Ethiopian his skin.'" Larkin, Ancient Man in America, 273-74. 50 Foster, Pre-Historic Races, 338. Arguing the monogenecist line that humanity is all one species, not various species (353-67), Foster traced Mound-Builder customs, on the one hand, to "the Old World" (351) and argued, on the other hand, that, driven off by Natives, Mound Builders took their culture and fled to Central America (351). 51 In an 1890 monograph written preliminary to his massive 1894 reexamination of the

350 NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

mounds, Thomas marshalled evidence against the cranial theories of the mysteriously lost Mound Builders in favor of his budding argument that Native Americans had built the mounds. He forthrightly summed up his conviction that "a classification of the moundbuilders upon the forms of the skulls is not only unsatisfactory, but is misleading and valueless.... Possibly the mound-builders of the section herein designated the 'mound region' may have derived from different races; but, if so, this cannot be determined by the crania found in the mounds of the Mississippi valley. . . . This is a bold and venturous statement to make, in view of what has been published on this subject; nevertheless the vmter feels justified in making it, and believes that the data, when thoroughly studied, will sustain him." The data have. Cyrus Thomas, The Cherokees in Pre-Columbian Times (New York: N. D. C. Hodges, Publisher, 1890) 67. 52 Eamest A. Hooton, "Indian Village Site and Cemetery near Madisonville, Ohio," Papers of the Peabody Museum of American Archaeology and Ethnology 8.1(1920): 89. 53 Hooton, "Indian Village Site and Cemetery near Madisonville, Ohio," 133. 54 John T. Short, North Americans ofAntiquity, 3rd ed. (1879; New York: Harper & Brothers, Publishers, 1882) 173. 55 Short, North Americans of Antiquity, 173. 56 Squier and Davis, Ancient Monuments of the Mississippi Valley, 301. 57 Squier and Davis, Ancient Monuments of the Mississippi Valley, 303 (n). 58 The "imposing structures . . . invest the central portions of the continent with an interest not less absorbing than that which attaches to the valley of the Nile." Squier and Davis, Ancient Monuments of the Mississippi Valley, 301. 59 Lewis Henry Morgan, "Ethnical Periods," Proceedings of the American Association for the Advancement of Science (1875): 268, 271; and Lewis Hetuy Morgan, "Houses of the Mound-Builders," North American Review 123.1 (July 1876): 61. This racist fixation on supposed stages of both history and human evolution organized all chatter about Native Americans well into the twentieth centtiry, drowning out more sophisticated analyses of Native culture. See the discussion of this problem in. Trigger, "Archaeology and the Image of the American Indian," 664. 60 Morgan, "Houses of the Mound-Builders," 66. 61 Morgan, "Houses of the Mound-Builders," 66. 62 Morgan, "Houses of the Mound-Builders," 66. 63 Morgan, "Houses of the Mound-Builders," 67. 64 Hildreth, "Pyramids at Marietta," 244. 65 Hildreth, "Pyramids at Marietta," 245.

NOTES 351

66 Robertson,"The Mound-Builders of America," 175. 67 In 1968, to his credit, Silverberg clearly had his doubts about diffusion, seeing it in its historical context. Silverberg, Mound Builders of Ancient America, 70. When I first studied anthropology in the early 1970s, however, diffiisionism was still being taught. 68 This twinned proposition was very commonplace, reiterated in Mound-Builder literature automatically, like a mantra. Dr. Larkin, that arch mythologizer, articulated the two-for tenet thus: "The question [of] whether those ancient people were very numerous has long ago ceased to be a debatable subject. The State of Ohio alone has already disclosed more than twelve thousand ancient works, some of which are of giant size, and many hundred more, no doubt, formerly existed which were obliterated long before the foot of the white man touched her soil. This fact alone seems almost conclusive, that they cultivated the ground to a large extent and also in a methodical manner." He had already established phrenologcially that lowdown Natives could not have been the Mound Builders. Larkin, Ancient Man in America, quote, 102; assertions of dense, agricultural population, 59; rebuttal of theory that Native Americans were the Mound Builders, 2, 252, 259-60. 69 Squier and Davis, Ancient Monuments of the Mississippi Valley, 302. 70 Fo wkes, A rchaeological History of Ohio, 2: 412. 71 For Clark, see Schoolcraft, Historical and Statistical Information, 4: 135; Zeisberger, History of the Northem American Indians, 30. 72 The modem research on Native populations at contact tells a very different story from the official myth of low populations, showing, instead, that Native populations had been decimated early on by the Spanish introduction of smallpox, typhus, bubonic plague, and other epidemics. See the excellent work of Henry F. Dobyns, Their Number Become Thinned: Native American Population Dynamics in Eastem North America (Knoxville: University of Tennessee Press, 1983). Dobyns's first, yet sadly overdue, reassessment of estimates is also still worth examining, Henry Dobyns, "Estimating Aboriginal Amedcna Population: An Appraisal of Techniques with a New Hemispheric Estimate," Current Anthropology 1 (1966): 395-416. See also the work of Francis Jennings in uncovering the deliberately diminished estimates of Native populations in westem scholarship, in Francis Jennings, The Invasion of America: Indians. Colonialism, and the Cant of Conquest (New York: W. W. Norton, 1976) 16-31. 73 See my complete discussion of the westem reluctance to acknowledge the extent and sophistication of woodlands farming in Barbara Alice Mann, Iroquoian Women: The Gantowisas (New York: Peter Lang Publishing, 2000) 213-27. 74 James D. Richardson, ed., A Compilation of the Messages and Papers of the Presidents, 10 vols. (Washington, D.C: Bureau of National Literature, 1897) entire address, 2: 1063-92; excerpt, 2: 1083. 75 Uchardson, Messages and Papers of the Presidents, 2: 1083-84. 76 Richardson, Messages and Papers of the Presidents, 2: 1084. 77 Richardson, Messages and Papers of the Presidents, 2: 1084. Annihilation and extermin-

352 NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

ation, the two terms employed by Jackson, were nineteenth-century jargon for something that did not acquire a legal name until the twentieth century: genocide. 78 Although it was Andrew Jackson who carried off Removal starting in the 1830s, it is a gross error to assume that the policy was not fioated before then as a proposed solution to the "Indian problem." Richard Drinnon has documented its earlier appearances, noting that Jefferson had proposed Removal in 1805, with the original purpose of his Louisiana Purchase being to provide a place to receive removed Natives. President James Monroe also proposed Removal in his Monroe Doctrine. See Richard Drinnon, Facing West: The Metaphysics ofIndian-Hating and Empire-Building (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1980) Jeffersonian 83-84; Motu^oe Doctrine, 114-15. Indeed, a whole series of Removals had already occtirred by the time these two men spoke, having begun immediately after the U.S. was formed, in what James Ronda has called the "Forgotten Removals," James P. Ronda, "Forgotten Removals: The Life and Times of Hendrick Aupaumut," Mitmestrista Council for Great Lakes Native American Studies, 1991-1992 Proceedings of the Woodland National Conference (Muncie, IN: Minnestrista Cultural Center and Ball State University, 1993) 103-6. In 1797, for instance, due to settler hostility. Congress removed the Lenape and Mahicans from their original homelands around Bethlehem, Pennsylvania, moving them west to where they would be "nearer to the settlements of the savages." John Heckewelder, Narrative of the Mission of the United Brethren among the Delaware and Mohegan Indians from Its Commencement, in the Year 1740. to the Close of the Year 1808 (1818; reprint. New York: Amo Press, 1971) 388. 79 Harrison, "A Discourse on the Aboriginies of the Valley of Ohio," 7. 80 "No doubt the contest was long and bloody, and that the country, so long their residence, was not abandoned to their rivals until their numbers were too much reduced to continue the contest. Taking into consideration all the circumstances which can be collected from the works that they have left on the ground, I have come to the conclusion that these people were assailed both from their northem and southem frontier; made to recede from both directions, and that their last effort at resistance, was made on the banks of the Ohio." Harrison, "A Discotirse on the Aboriginies of the Valley of Ohio," 10. 81 R. David Edmunds, The Shawnee Prophet (Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press, 1983) 5. 82 Thomas Jefferson, Notes on the State of Virginia, in Writings: Autobiography; A Summary View of the Rights of British America; Notes on the State of Virginia; Public Papers; Addresses. Messages, and Replies; Miscellany and Letters (New York: Library of America, 1984) 223-26. Although Jefferson never directly states, "the mounds were built by Indians," this is his clear drift throughout the discussion, found in "Query XL" He consistently tums to Native behavior and traditions to explain the mounds. 83 Benjamin Smith Barton, "Observations and Conjectures conceming Certain Articles Which Were Taken out of an Ancient Tumulus, or Grave, at Cincinnati, in the County of Hamilton, and Territory of the United-States, North-West of the River Ohio," Letter to Reverend Joseph Priestley 16 May 1796, Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society, no. 23 (Philadelphia: American Philosophical Society, 1797) 197; and Observations on Some Parts of Natural History (London: C. Diley, 1787). 84 For the "Aztec" theory, see Barton, "Observations and Conjectures Conceming Certain

NOTES 353

Articles Which Were Taken out of an Ancient Tumulus," 183-85; for Natives as diminished by invasion, see Barton, "Observations and Conjectures conceming Certain Articles Which Were Taken out of an Ancient Tumulus," 190. 85 Barton, "Observations and Conjectures Conceming Certain Articles Which Were Taken out of an Ancient Tumulus," 197. 86 "From all the facts I have been able to collect upon the history of these antiquities, I am decidedly of opinion [sic], that they were erected by Indian tribes of North America." McCulloh, Researches. Philosophical and Antiquarian, quote, 519; whole discussion, 519-22. 87 Squier and Davis, Ancient Monuments of the Mississippi Valley, 306. 88 Squier and Davis, Ancient Monuments of the Mississippi Valley, 306. 89 His list included James McCulloh, Samuel G. Drake, Henry Rowe Schoolcraft, Samuel Haven, John Lubbock, Daniel G. Brinton, and Lucien Carr, along with the little known authors, C. C. Baldwin, F. M. Force, and P. R. Hoy. Thomas, Report on the Mound Explorations, 600. Powell had long harbored the suspicion that Native Americans were the authors of the mounds, as he recorded in, Powell, Fifth Annual Report of the Bureau of Ethnology, 58-60. 90 Randall H. McGuire, "The Sanctity of the Grave: White Concepts and American Indian Burials." Conflict in the Archaeology of Living Traditions, ed. Robert Layton (New York: Routledge, 1994) 175. 91 Noah Webster, "Antiquity: Letter IL From Mr. N. Webster to the Rev. Dr. Stiles, President of Yale College, Containing a Particular Account of the Famous Expedition of Ferdinando de Soto, into Florida. Dated New-York, December 15,1787," American Magazine (January 1788): 87. 92 Noah Webster, "Antiquity: Letter III, from Mr. N. Webster to the Rev. Dr. Stiles, President of Yale College, on the Remains of the Fortifications in the Westem Country, dated NewYork, January 20,1788," American Magazine (February 1788): 146. In fact, the Spanish records showed just the opposite, that Soto's men had tom down some mounds. The Gentleman of Elvas recorded that Soto and his men took the best mound dwellings for themselves. "The rest of the dwellings, with the temple, were thrown down, and every mess of three of four soldiers made a cabin, wherein they lodged." Elvas, "The Narrative of the Expedition of Hemando de Soto," 147. 93 Benjamin Smith Barton, "Observations and Conjectures Conceming Certain Articles Which Were Taken out of an Ancient Tumulus, or Grave, at Cincinnati," 186, and his copious citations in 186 (n *). 94 Jeffries, TTte Natural History of the Human Races, 186. Benard de La Harpe recited the same possibility in his early eighteenth-century summary of contemporary explanations for Native presence in the Americas: "The third opinion is that of several scholars who claim that the Indians come from the line of Orphir, the grandson of Peber and Jactan, who peopled the borders of the ocean to the east, from where his posterity passed into the two regions of New Spain and Peru. The claim is supported by the fact that the word Peru

354 NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

and that of Orphir have the same signifcance in Hebrew." Benard de La Harpe, The Historical Joumal ofthe Establishment ofthe French in Louisiana, 178. 95 Silverberg, Mound Builders ofAncient America, 94-96. See, also, the excellent rundown on Joseph Smith in Williams, Fantastic Archaeology, 159-67. Regarding the church's response to "exposes," it is noteworthy that the Mormon hierarchy excommunicated poor Fawn Brodie for heresy in response to her solid biography of Smith. Silverberg, Mound Builders of Ancient America, 94. Undaunted, the fearless iconoclast, Brodie, went on to write her celebrated biography, Thomas Jefferson: An Intimate History (1974), in which she literally blew the lid off the Sally Hemings affair, to the shrieking pain of official historians. 96 Brodie, No Man Knows My History, 35. 97 Brodie, No Man Knows My History, 36. 98 Brodie, No Man Knows My History, 36. 99 Brodie, No Man Knows My History, 43. 100 Ethan Smith, View ofthe Hebrews; Exhibiting the Destruction of Jerusalem; the Certain Restoration ofJudah and Israel; the Present State ofJudah and Israel; and an Address of the Prophet Isaiah Relative to Their Restoration (Poultney, VT: Smith & Shute, 1823). 101 Brodie, No Man Knows My History, 58. 102 Solomon Spaulding, The "Manuscript Found" or "Manuscript Story," ofthe Late Rev. Solomon Spaudingfrom a Verbatim Copy ofthe Original Now in the Care ofPres. James H. FairchildofOberlin College, Ohio (Lamoni, IA: Reorganized Church, 1885). 103 Silverberg, Mound Builders of Ancient America, 94-95. 104 Silverberg, Mound Builders of Ancient America, 96. Of course, the Church of the LatterDay Saints heatedly disputes any connections drawn between outmoded Mound-Builder fantasies and The Book of Mormon. Nevertheless, the fact that such a bizarre tale was seriously circulated long before Smith had his visions appears to me certainly to have enabled what I take for his own version ofthe Mound-Builder myth. Mound Builders were as intimately connected with mystical revelation in the nineteenth century as crop circles and alien abductions are today. 105 Williams, Fantastic Archaeology, 42. 106 Williams, Fantastic Archaeology, 39; Willey and Sabloff, A History of American Archaeology, 33. 107 Atwater, The Writings of Caleb Atwater, 12-22. 108 Atwater, The Writings of Caleb Atwater, 114. 109 Atwater, The Writings of Caleb Atwater, 115.

NOTES 355

110 Atwater's actual evidence for the Hindu derivation of the Mound Builders was that their skeletal remains were altogether too tall, slender, and "straight limbed" to have been Native. As everyone knew. Natives were "short and thick."Atwater, The Writings of Caleb Atwater, 116. 111 These skulls had been taken from a mound at the mouth of the Huron River in Ohio. Samuel George Morton, Some Observations on the Ethnography and Archaeology of the American Aborigines (New Haven: B. L. Hamlen, 1846) 4. Although Morton was wildly famous by the time he wrote on the Atwater skulls in 1846, somehow lost in the shuffle was his firm conclusion that "the male cranium present[ed], in every particular, the characteristics of the American race—i.e., that this Mound Builder skull was classically Native American—and that the "female head possess[ed] the same general character." Morton, Some Observations on the Ethnography and Archaeology of the American Aborigines, 5. 112 The laughs just keep coming in chapter III ("The Mexicans and Hindoos—the Hindoos and Persians . . . " ) and chapter VIII (Their size—their pigmies [sic]...") of John Haywood, The Natural and Aboriginal History of Tennessee, up to the First Settlements Therein by the White People, in the Year 1768 (Nashville: George Wilson, 1823) 66-86, 193-213, respectively. 113 See the leamed aside on the unlostness of the "ten tribes," in Jeffries, The Natural History of the Human Races, 190-91. 114 "From the present appearances of the earth, its islands, and other circumstances connected with them, we do not think it a hasty or rash declaration to say, that we believe, since the deluge, there was land of great extent in the Pacific, Indian, and Atlantic Oceans; no doubt much shattered and broken, yet not to such a degree as to hinder men and animals from roaming through the extended parts." McCulloh, Researches on America, Being an Attempt to Settle Some Points, 35. 115 Larkin, Ancient Man in America, for "the American elephant," see the third page (unnumbered) of the Preface; for remaining quote, 76. 116 Jeffries, The Natural History of the Human Races, 192. Amusingly enough, Jeffries had just hit other scholars for supporting the equally idiotic theory of the "ten lost tribes," scolding that "Some authors have gone to a vast amount of trouble to prove that the American Indians are the descendants of the Hebrews, and directly from the lost tribes of Israel. The proof for such theory is so meagre as to make it wholly improbable." Jeffries, The Natural History of the Human Races, 190. 117 Mann, Iroquoian Women, 257. 118 McCulloh, Researches, Philosophical and Antiquatian, 15. 119 See, for example, Jeffries, The Natural History of the Human Races, 188 and 188 (n t). 120 Josiah Priest, American Antiquities and the Discoveries in the West (Albany: Hofftnan and White, 1833) Romans, at Marietta, 42^M, generally, 389-93; Egyptians, 110-25; "lost tribes," 55-78; Greeks, 45,383-89; Welsh, 49, 224-28; Vikings, 49, 229-35; Hindus, 90, 180-81; Tartars, 274.

356 NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

121 Edwin N. Wilmsen, "An Outline of Early Man Studies in the United States," American Antiquity 31 (1965): 175. 122 William Pidgeon, Traditions of De-coo-dah and Antiquarian Researches (New York: Horace Thayer, 1858) 16-20. 123 De Witt Clinton, "A Discourse Delivered before the New-York Historical Society, at Their Anniversary Meeting, 6th December 1811," Collections of the New-York Historical Society for the Year 1811, vol. 2 (New York: I. Riley, 1811-1859) 37-116; Memoir on the Antiquities of the Western Part of New York (Albany: I. W. Clark, 1818). 124 Jeffries, The Natural History of the Human Races, 188-89; Wilmsen, "An Outline of Early Man Studies," 175. 125 See, for instance, the account of "a skeleton" buried with "fifteen copper rings and a 'breastplate' of the same metal" in, Powell, Fifth Annual Report of the Bureau of Ethnology, 47. 126 Henry Wadsworth Longfellow, "The Skeleton in Armor," Poetical Works. 6 vols. (1886; Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company, 1904) 1: 63. 127 Longfellow, "The Skeleton in Armor," I: 68.

128 Garcia also considered the Chinese, the Carthiginians, and the ever popular "ten lost tribes." See Gregorio Garcia, Origen de los Indios del Nuevo Mundo. e Indias Occidentales (1607; Madrid: En la imprenta de F. Martinez Abad, 1729). 129 McCulloh, Researches on America, quote, 26; entire consideration of the Atlantean theory, 25-35. 130 Foster, Pre-Historic Races, 396-98. 131 Foster, Pre-Historic Races, 396-98. 132 Foster, Pre-Historic Races, 397-98. 133 Stone, "The Moundbuilders: Were They Egyptians?" 535. 134 Foster, Pre-Historic Races, 398. 135 Stone, "The Moundbuilders: Were They Egyptians?" 533. 136 Crookshanks, "First Population of the Westem Country," 415. 137 Stone, "The Moundbuilders: Were They Egyptians?" 536. The cast of features forcibly struck this observer as Iroquoian, by the way. Alas, I was unable to retrieve a copy of the article with reproducible visuals for this book, so that readers might form their own opinions. 138 Stone, "The Moundbuilders: Were They Egyptians?" 538.

NOTES 357

139 Ignatius Donnelly, Atlantis: The Antediluvian World, ed. Egerton Sykes (1881; New York: Harper & Brothers Publishers, 1949) x. 140 Donnelly, Atlantis, x-xi. 141 Donnelly, Atlantis, 1-2. 142 Donnelly, Atlantis, 233-26, passim; Squier and Davis, Ancient Monuments ofthe Mississippi Valley, 301. 143 Randall, Ohio Mound Builders, 14. 144 Donnelly, Atlantis, 231. 145 Donnelly, Atlantis, 232. 146 Donnelly, Atlantis, 232. 147 Donnelly, Atlantis, 230, 237, 238. 148 Donnelly, i4//an/w, 238. 149 Caradoc of Llancarfan, Historie of Cambria, Now Called Wales (London: Rafe Newbede and Hende Denham, 1584); Richard Hakluyt, TTte Principall Navigations, Voiages and Discoveries ofthe English Nation, Made by Sea or ouer Land, to the Most Remote and Farthest Distant Quarters ofthe Earth at Any Time within the Compasse of These 1500 Yeeres (London: George Bishop, 1589). Robert Silverberg believes that Llancarfan's later redactor, David Powell, "inserted" the Modoc "fable" into the Historie of Cambria. Silverberg, Mound Builders of Ancient America, 84. 150 Interestingly enough, in his 1825 wdtten version of Iroquoian tradition. Chief David Cusick included this tidbit descdbing the fate of a very early, shipwrecked invader: "After a long time [i.e., since the creation of Turtle Island] a number of foreign people sailed from a port unknown: but unfortunately before reached [sic] their destination the winds drove them contrary; at length their ship wrecked somewhere on the southem part ofthe Great Island, and many ofthe crews pedshed; a few active persons were saved; they obtained some implements and each of them was covered with a leather bag, the big hawks carded them on the summit of a mountain and remained there but a short time the hawks seemed to threaten them, and were compelled to leave the mountain. They immediately selected a place for residence and built a small fortification [mound] in order to provide against the attacks of fiidous beasts; if there should be any made. After many years the foreign people became numerous, and extended their settlements; but afterwards they were destroyed by the monsters that ovemin [sic] the country." Punctuation as in the odginal. David Cusick, "Sketches of Ancient History ofthe Six Nations," 1825, in William M. Beauchamp, The Iroquois Trail or Foot-prints of the Six Nations, in Customs, Traditions, and History (Fayetteville, NY: H. C. Beauchamp, 1892) 5. Based on Cusick's chronology, this event apparently occurred more than 2,500 years before Columbus, which would seem to leave the twelfth-century Welsh out ofthe running. 151 Webster, "Antiquity," American Magazine (February 1788): 155. In their discussion, "Stone Heaps," Squier and Davis made a similar observation conceming stone mounds in

358 NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

"the Atlantic States, where they were raised by the Indians over the bodies of those who met their death by accident, or in the manner of whose death there was something unusual." Squier and Davis, Ancient Monuments ofthe Mississippi Valley, 184-85. This did not, however, lead them to the obvious conclusion that Natives had engaged in moundbuilding. Neither did it make them question the settler commonplace that North Amedcan Natives never built with stone. 152 Amos Stoddard, Sketches, Historical and Descriptive, of Louisiana (1812; repdnt. New York: AMS Press, 1973) 347-48. 153 Jeffries, The Natural History ofthe Human Races, 188. For his part in evaluating the Henry Ker story, Samuel Drake noted as early as 1837 that the supposed linguist did not know any Welsh! Drake, Biography and History ofthe Indians, 39. 154 John Filson, The Discovery and Settlement of Kentucke (1784; repdnt, Ann Arbor: University Microfilms, Inc., 1966) Cathiginians, 93-94; Vikings, 94-95. 155 Filson, The Discovery and Settlement of Kentucke, 95. 156 Rogers's tale is discussed in McCulloh, Researches, Philosophical and Antiquarian, 188. 157 Stuart's account is reproduced in Drake, Biography and History ofthe Indians of North America, quote, 1: 34; entire account, 1: 34-37. 158 Drake, Biography and History ofthe Indians of North America, 1: 34. 159 Drake, Biography and History ofthe Indians of North America, 1:37. 160 Drake, Biography and History ofthe Indians of North America, 1:37. 161 John Jeffdes made this same objection to the mystedous Welsh books in 1869. Jeffdes, The Natural History ofthe Human Races, 188 (n *). 162 Drake, Biography and History ofthe Indians of North America, 1:37. 163 Thomas S. Hinde, Letter to J. S. Williams, American Pioneer 1.11 (November 1842): 374. 164 Hinde, Letter to J. S. Williams, 373. 165 Filson, The Discovery and Settlement of Kentucke, 97-98. 166 Drake, Biography and History ofthe Indians of North America, 1:38. 167 Hinde, Letter to J. S. Williams, 373. Hinde fixed this problem by simply altedng the identity ofthe tale bearer from Imlay's "Abraham Choplin" to the "late William Mclntosh" (no danger of an independent double check there) and resumed his fevered argument. Hinde, Letter to J. S. Williams, 373. In fact, the name was "Chaplain," and Imlay's story was the same old silly putty: "Captain Abraham Chaplain, of Kentucky, a gentleman whose veracity may be entirely depended upon, assured the author [Imlay], that in the late war [the Amedcan Revolution], being with his company in gardson at Kaskasky, some Indians came there, and, speaking in the welsh [sic] dialect, were perfectly understood and con-

NOTES 359

versed with by two Welshmen in his company, and that they informed them of the situation of their nation as mentioned above," i.e., the Modoc story. Gilbert Imlay, A Topographical Description of the Westem Territory of North America; Containing a Succinct Account of Its Soil. Climate. Natural History. Population. Agriculture. Manners & Customs, 3rd ed. (London: J. Debrett, 1797) 368. 168 Robert E. H. Levering, "Extraordinary Coincidence; or. Supposed Discovery of the First Inhabitants of America," American Pioneer 2.9 (September 1843): 410. 169 See the full, tortured, Celtic argument, in Levering, "Extraordinary Coincidence," 406-9. 170 In outlining his five "ethnical periods," or stages of history, Henry Lewis Morgan made it clear that alphabetic vmting—i.e., not a character writing system—was the portal to and the glory of "civilization." He gave four stages of cultural development: the "Period of Savagery," the "Opening Period of Barbarism," the "Middle Period of Barbarism," the "Closing Period of Barbarism," and the "Period of Civilization." His gloss for the "Closing Period of Barbarism" was "From the use of Iron to the invention of a Phonetic Alphabet, with the use of writing in Literary Compostion." His gloss for "Civilization" refined that to "the use of Alphabetic [not character] Writing in the Production of Literary Records to the Present Time." Morgan, "Ethnical Periods," 271. 171 See the discussion of Smith's tablets in Williams, Fantastic Archaeology, 160-63. Officially, Joseph Smith "found the plates in a stone box along with a sword and breastplate," as directed to by the angel Moroni in a vision. Brodie, No Man Knows My History, 39-40. Brodie also included John C. Bennett's account, that, after the original tablets had disappeared. Smith had asked Bennett to go to New York to have plates engraved, which Smith would then exhibit as the genuine plates, making a lot of money in the process. Brodie, No Man Knows My History, 316-17. Smith had a long history of "money-digging," or trolling the ground for treasure, wherever he went. See chapter 2, "Treasures in the Earth," in Brodie, No Man Knows My History, 16-33. 172 For the date, see A[belard] B. Tomlinson, Letter to J. S. Williams, Esq., American Pioneer 2.5 (May 1843): 200; for quote, see Squier and Davis, Ancient Monuments of the Mississippi Valley, 274. Tomlinson, himself, made only brief mention of the stone, as "flat on both sides" and "about three-ei^ths of an inch thick. It has no engraving on it, except on one side, as sent" to the editor of the American Pioneer in a facsimile. Tomlinson, Letter, 200. Instead of describing the stone further, Tomlinson launched into a detailed description of other relics found and skeletons desecrated. 173 Squier and Davis, Ancient Monuments of the Mississippi Valley, 214. 174 For the prevailing reasoning on this, see Levering, "Extraordinary Coincidence," 406-10. 175 Morris, "The Extinct Races of America," 128. 176 Larkin, Ancient Man in America, 108. 177 Schoolcraft, "Observations Respecting the Grave Creek Mound," quote, 394; whole inscription discussion, 386-97. Sepculation continues today, in a jaundiced way, conceming the Grave Creek Stone. See the summary of give-and-take on the matter in Williamson, Fantastic Archaeology, 84-87. Williams does not accept the stone as genuine.

360 NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

178 Schoolcraft, "Observations Respecting the Grave Creek Mound," 395. The notion that writing was civilized and, therefore. Natives had no writing was part of racist theory. The no-written-language libel was known to have been inaccurate in Schoolcraft's time, by the way. Chroniclers such as John Heckewelder and Daniel Brinton had long documented the use of wampum writing in the woodlands. Heckewelder regularly attended councils at which wampum was read and recorded that "a good speaker will be able to point out the exact place on a belt which is to answer to each particular sentence, the same as we can point out a passage in a book." Heckewelder, History. Manners, and Customs, 108. Schoolcraft disdained Heckewelder for purely political and partisan reasons, as I detail in Barbara A. Mann, "Forbidden Ground: Racial Politics and Hidden Identity in James Fenimore Cooper's Leather-Stocking Tales," (Ph.D. diss., Univeristy of Toledo, 1997) 258-66. A far better ethnographer than Schoolcraft, Daniel Brinton reiterated Heckewelder's information, noting of wampum characters that the "designs and figures had definite meanings, recognized over wide areas." Daniel G. Brinton, The Myths of the New World: A Treatise on the Symbolism and Mythology of the Red Race of America (1868; New York: Henry Holt and Company, 1876) 16. It was simply that nineteenth-century Euroamerican propaganda defined Native writing systems out of existence on the excuse that they were not alphabetic, as was all real writing (thus also excluding Asian writing from consideration as "civilized"). It is disingenuous, a continuation of nineteenth-century jeering, for modem scholars to downplay wampum as a mere "mnemonic device," for wampum readers, who knew the characters and could read a belt cold, lived into the twentieth century. The last Iroquoian wampum readers were Solon Skye and Henan Scrogg. George S. Snyderman, "The Function of Wampum in Iroquois Religion," American Philosophical Society Proceedings 105.6 (1961): 604. For a discussion of wampum writing, see Barbara A.Mann, "The Fire at Onondaga: Wampimi as ProtoWriting," Akwesasne Notes 26th Atmiversary Issue 1.1 (spring 1995): 40-48 ; and discussions in Barbara Alice Mann, ed.. Native American Speakers of the Eastem Woodlands: Selected Speeches and Critical Analyses (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 2001) 38, 77 (n 16). Natives also carved pictograms into rocks. In 1794, George Henry Loskiel, working from information supplied by David Zeisberger and John Heckewelder, wrote that the Natives had "invented something like hieroglyphics" in addition to their "strings and belts of wampom [j/c]." He described the "hieroglyphics and characteristic figures" as being "more frequently painted upon trees than cut in stone. They are intended, either to caution against danger, to mark a place of safety, to direct the wanderer into the right parth, to record a remarkable trasaction, or to commemorate the deeds and atchievements [sic] of their celebrated heroes, and are as intelligible to them, as a written account is to us." George Henry Loskiel, History of the Mission of the United Brethren among the Indians in North America, trans. Christian Ignatius La Trobe, 3 vols. (London: Brethren's Society of the Furtherance of the Gospel, 1794) 1: 25. This much was common knowledge by 1797, when Benjamin Smith Barton recorded that "we discover proofs of the ancient existence of hieroglyphicks [sic] in various parts of North America. In the westem parts of Virginia, I have examined a large stratum of rock, which is engraven with hundred of hieroglyphics." Barton, "Observations and Conjectures," 195. Barton instanced the entire Ohio River valley, and it is true that rock inscriptions abound in Ohio. In 1902, Gerald Fowke made a list of the thirteen most prominent inscriptions, accompanied by reproductions. Fowke, Archaeological History of Ohio, 2: 417-24. 179 For the date and circtunstance of discovery, see J. T. Short, North Americans of Antiquity, 3rd ed. (1879; New York: Harper & Brothers, Publishers, 1882) 44. For the probable authenticity of the Cincinnati Tablet, see Silverberg, The Mound Builders of Ancient America, 129. Other engraved tablets have since surfaced and been accepted by scientists

NOTES 361

as genuine, as detailed in William S. Webb and Charles E. Snow, The Adena People, ed. James B. Griffin (1945; Lexington,: University of Kentucky, 1974) 91-96; and William S. Webb and Raymond S. Baby, The Adena People, No. 2, 4th printing (1957; Columbus: The Ohio Historical Society, 1975) 16-17, 83-101. 180 Squier and Davis, Ancient Monuments ofthe Mississippi Valley, 275. 181 Squier and Davis, Ancient Monuments of the Mississippi Valley, 275. In fact, the inscriptions appear classically Native. 182 Squier and Davis, Ancient Monuments of the Mississippi Valley, 274; Short, North Americans of Antiquity, 47 (n 1). 183 Short, North Americans of Antiquity, 45-46. 184 Squier and Davis, Ancient Monuments ofthe Mississippi Valley, 274. 185 Pidgeon, Traditions of De-coo-dah, 16. 186 Pidgeon, Traditions of De-coo-dah, 16. 187 Silverberg, Mound Builders of Ancient America, 128-29. 188 Short, North Americans of Antiquity, 43-44. 189 Quoted in Short, North Americans of Antiquity, 44. 190 R. J. Farquharson, "The Davenport Tablets," Proceedings ofthe American Antiquarian Society, 12 October 1876: 64-69. 191 Thomas, Report on the Mound Explorations ofthe Bureau of Ethnology, 633-43. 192 Bradley Thomas Lepper, '"Holy Stones' of Newark, Ohio, Not So Holy After All," Skeptical Inquirer {wrA^r 1991): 18, 20. 193 Lepper, "'Holy Stones' of Newark, Ohio," 18. 194 Lepper, "'Holy Stones' of Newark, Ohio," 18-19. 195 Lepper, '"Holy Stones' of Newark, Ohio," 19. The Keystone argument was based on the fact that "Master Masons" wore similar stones as insignia of their rank within the organization. Masons who owned such stones were allowed to engrave any motto they liked on them, and some became rather arcane in their inscriptions. As Charles Whittlesey crustily observed after the fiasco had died down, it was far more reasonable to suppose that a modem Mason in or about Newark had lost his stone than to assume that the stone was evidence that Freemasons had built the mounds. He had a point. Charles Whittlesey, "Archaeological Frauds: Inscriptions Attributed to the Moundbuilders—^Three Remark-able Forgeries," Tract no. 9 (February 1872), Westem Reserve Historical Society 1 (1877): 3. 196 Lepper, '"Holy Stones' of Newark, Ohio," 20.

362 NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

197 Lepper, "'Holy Stones' of Newark, Ohio," 20. 198 Williams, Fantastic Archaeology, 174. In his Tract no. 9, Whittlesey only mentioned the Hebrew Bible in Wyrick's possession, but argued from it that the "poverty stricken" Wyrick had used it to produce his artifacts in pursuit of cash. Whittlesey, "Archaeological Frauds," 4. The verdict is not entirely in yet on who perpetrated the Newark hoax, but Wyrick is obviously as high on the list as Whittlesey believed. In 2000, however, Bradley Lepper noted that, in an 1863 letter to the Smithsonian, Wyrick lamented that he might have been duped. Lepper, "'Holy Stones' of Newark, Ohio," 20. Lepper's candidate for forger was, instead, the only man on the scene capable of "translating" Hebrew (or inscribing it, for that matter) and also the very man who had originally boosted the reputation of the stones: the Rev. John McCarty. See the discussion of this possibility in Lepper, '"Holy Stones' of Newark, Ohio," 21-22. McCarty's claim to Hebrew scholarship withers under any examination of the "Holy Stones" debacle. If, on the one hand, he were being hoaxed, he was not a good enough scholar to notice the incompetence of the "Decalogue Stone." If, on the other hand, McCarty had created said stone, his credentials are equally in question, since the mistakes on it are embarrassing to any actual Hebrew scholar. When Bradley Lepper asked Frank Moore Cross, the noted ancient Hebrew scholar, for his opinion on the Hebrew of the "Decalogue Stone," Cross dismissed it as "a 'grotesque' forgery that no one fiuent in Hebrew should have been able to take seriously." Lepper, '"Holy Stones' of Newark, Ohio," 20. 199 In addition to his 1872 pamphlet, see Charles Whittlesey, "Archaeological Frauds," Tract no. 33 (November 1876), Westem Reserve and Northem Ohio Historical Society 1 (1877): 1-7; "The Grave Creek Inscribed Stone," Tract no. 44 (April, 1879), Westem Reserve and Northem Ohio Historical Society 2 (1888): 65-68; "Inscribed Stones, Licking County, Ohio," Tract no. 53 (March 1881), Westem Reserve and Northem Ohio Historical Society 2 (1888): 129-33. 200 For a blow by blow discussion of each of these attempts, see Silverberg, Mound Builders of Ancient America, 172-221. 201 Willey and Sabloff, A History of American Archaeology, 48. 202 Thomas, Report on the Mound Explorations, 528. 203 Thomas, Report on the Mound Explorations, 17. 204 Thomas, Report on the Mound Explorations, 17-18. 205 Thomas, Report on the Mound Explorations, 596, 610-25. 206 Thomas, Report on the Mound Explorations, 601. 207 Thomas, Report on the Mound Explorations, for Mound Builder fantasies as an "enchanting thought," see 603; for his closed door argument, see 601. 208 Thomas, Report on the Mound Explorations, 602. 209 Thomas had actually sketched out his arguments here in an earlier piece that identified the

NOTES 363

Cherokees as the major Mound Builders of the Ohio Valley, Thomas, The Cherokees in Pre-Columbian Times, see especially his summary, 89-94. 210 Fowke, Archaeological History of Ohio, 1: 72. 211 For Morgan's intensively racist outline of human "stages of history," see Lewis Henry Morgan, "Ethnical Periods," Proceedings of the American Association for the Advancement of Science (1875): 266-74, and the book that grew out of this well received article. Ancient Society, or Researches in the Lines of Human Progress from Savagery through Barbarism to Civilization (Chicago: Charles H. Kerr & Company, 1877). Both works establish as a certainty that Native North Americans had lived in profoundly retarded cultures. 212 Fowke, Archaeological History of Ohio, 1: 75. 213 Fowke, Archaeological History of Ohio, religion, 1:76-87; population, 1:78-85; geographical extent, 1: 86-104. 214 Fowke, Archaeological History of Ohio, 1: quote, 66; discussions of religion, population, and extent, 76-104. 215 Nevertheless, old habits die hard. Four years after Cyms Thomas demolished the myth of a mysterious, lost race of White Mound Builders, word had yet to seep into the consciousness of those scholars weaned on it. In August, 1898, for the annual convention of the American Association for the Advancement of Science, held in Columbus, Ohio, the Ohio State Archaeological and Historical Society hosted a lawn party whose tables were laid "within the great gateway of the Old Fort" in Butler County. The august company was entertained by speeches, in which "All paid high tribute to the wonderfiil works of a vanished race." Randall, The Masterpices of the Ohio Mound Builders, 76. 216 Lynda Norene ShafTer, Native Americans before 1492: The Moundbuilding Centers of the Eastem Woodlands (Armonk, NY: M. E. Sharpe, 1992) xvi. 217 Charies C. Willoughby, "The Tumer Group of Earthworks—Hamilton County, Ohio," Papers of the Peabody Museum of American Archaeology 8.3 (1922): 3. 218 Olaf H. Pmfer and Douglas H. McKenzie, Studies in Ohio Archaeology (Cleveland: The Press of Westem Reserve University, 1967) 267. 219 William D. Lipe, "A Conservation Model for American Archaeology," The Kiva 39.3-4 (1974): 213. Importantly, Lipe's "insight" did not suddenly emerge in 1971. As early as 1945, Raymond C. Vietzen, an Ohio collector who helped himself to the mounds for sixty years, admitted that digging irretrievably destroyed sites and cautioned fellow amateur archaeologists that only good records preserved the information gleaned from the destmction. Raymond C. Vietzen, The Immortal Eries (Elyria, OH: Wilmont Printing Co., 1945) 71. Since Vietzen was a parrot, not an original thinker, it is clear that the destructive nature of archaeology was common knowledge long before William Lipe noted as much, to critical acclaim. 220 Fowke, Archaeological History of Ohio, 2: 392. 221 Fowke, Archaeological History of Ohio, 2: 392. For Fowke's full description of stone

364 NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

graves, see Fowke, Archaeological History of Ohio, 2: 391-406. 222 Fowke, Archaeological History of Ohio, stone mound, 1: 375; Fowke as archaeologist 1 • 362. 223 RandaW, Ohio Mound Builders, 107. 224 RsLndaW, Ohio Mound Builders, 109. 225 McCulloh, Researches, Philosphical and Antiquarian, 509. 226 Squier and Davis, Ancient Monuments ofthe Mississippi Valley, 180. 227 Squier and Davis, Ancient Monuments ofthe Mississippi Valley, 180. 228 Randall, Ohio Mound Builders, quotes 21-22, 26; whole description, 21-23. 229 Randall, Ohio Mound Builders, 27. 230 Randall, Ohio Mound Builders, 21-22. 231 Isaac Smucker, "The Mound-Builders' Works in Licking County, Ohio," The American Historical Record 2.23 (1873): 483. 232 Gerald Fowke, Archaeological Investigations—II, Forty-Fourth Annual Report of the Bureau of American Ethnology, 1926-1927 (Washington, D.C: Govemment Printing Office, 1928)495. 233 VjundaW, Ohio Mound Builders, 18. 234 Randall, Ohio Mound Builders, 18. 235 William C. Mills, "Excavations of the Adena Mound," Ohio Archaeological and Historical Quarterly \0 (1902): 452-53. 236 Mills, "Excavations ofthe Adena Mound," 452. 237 Mills, "Excavations ofthe Adena Mound," 452. Froehlick kept a four-foot mound to show where the original had been. Mills, "Excavations ofthe Adena Mound," 460. 238 "Local History of Special Interest: Indian Mound Fiunished the Stone to Protect the Walls [of] Buckeye Lake," Thomville News (15 July 1927): 1; Normal Newell Hill, The History of Licking County, Ohio: Its Past and Present (Newark, OH: A. A. Graham, 1881) 489. John Powell gave a slightly different set of measurements, claiming that it had been "conical in form, 182 feet in diameter, and from 40 to 50 feet high, composed of stones in their natural shape." Powell, Fifth Annual Report ofthe Bureau of Ethnology, 46. 239 Quoted in, Fowke, Archaeological History of Ohio, 2: 389. In 1871, C. Morris put the plunder at 10,000 to 14,000 wagon loads of mound stones. Under the great stone mound, he recorded that workers found "fifteen or sixteen small earth-mounds around or near the circumference ofthe base, and a similar one in the centre [sic]." C. Morris, "The Extinct

NOTES 365

Races of America," The National Quarterly Review 24 (December 1871): 126. 240 Powell, Fifth Annual Report of the Bureau of Ethnology, 46-47. 241 "Local History of Special Interest: Indian Mound Furnished the Stone to Protect the Walls [of] Buckeye Lake," Thomville News (15 July 1927): 1; quote in Hill, The History of Licking County, 489, 242 Joseph Simpson, 77ie Story ofBuckeye Lake (Columbus, OH: The Hann and Adair Printing Company, 1912) 15. 243 "Local History of Special Interest," 1. 244 For Putnam's saving the Serpent Mound, see Paul E. Hooge, "The Alligator Mound: A Case Study of Archaeology and Preservation in Licking County," in Vanishing Heritage: Notes and Queries about the Arcaheology and Culture History of Licking County, Ohio, ed. Paul E. Hooge and Bradley T. Lepper (n,c.: Licking County Archaeology and Landmarks Society, 1992) 68. 245 Squire and Davis, Ancient Monuments of the Mississippi Valley, 98-100. 246 Hooge, "The Alligator Mound," 70. 247 Hooge, "The Alligator Mound," 69, The "water panther" designation is newer, based on an attempt to understand Native thinking while remaining mindful of the nearby river, but, personally, I vote for the oppossum. Wombs and earth are closely united in eastem woodlands thinking, whereas the "water panther" is a water spirit not necessarily known east of the Mississippi. Brad Lepper is one plausibly arguing for the "water panther" theory. "Archaeologist Stalks Ohio's Alligator Mound with Panther Theory," Toledo B/arfe,22Jan.2001,3A. 248 Squire and Davis, Ancient Monuments of the Mississippi Valley, 99; Smucker, "The Mound-Builders' Works in Licking County, Ohio," 484-85. 249 Hooge, "The Alligator Mound," 67. 250 Squire and Davis, Ancient Monuments of the Mississippi Valley, 99. 251 Theownerin 1858 was Ashel Aylesworth. In 1992, Paul Hooge claimed that he had placed a quarry on the front lefl leg (Hooge, "The Alligator Mound," 67), but the the Squier and Davis text defies such a reading: "Its symmetry has lately been somewhat broken by the opening of a quarry in its face." Squire and Davis, Ancient Monuments of the Mississippi Valley, 99 (n *), In fact, the left front paw was demolished in 1994. Sherry Beck Paprocki, "Indians Seek Preservation," The Plain Dealer, 4 December 1994, 12B. For the 1862 survey report, see Hooge, "The Alligator Mound," 68. 252 Smucker, "The Mound-Builders' Works in Licking County, Ohio," 484-85. 253 Hooge, "The Alligator Mound," 68-69. The point man was George Frederick Wright,

366 NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

254 Hooge, "The Alligator Mound," 71. 255 Squire and Davis, Ancient Monuments of the Mississippi Valley, 54. Gerald Fowke pointed out that, puzzlingly enough. Squire and Davis claimed twenty-ybwr mounds, but only represented twenty-three in their engraving. In addition, they also later spoke oftwenty-.su: mounds in the complex (Squire and Davis, Ancient Monuments of the Mississippi Valley, 144), Fowke, Archaeological History of Ohio, 1:198. It is possible that they were counting outlying motinds that did not fit within their map area. 256 G. Richard Peck, "The Rise and Fall of Camp Sherman: 'Ohio's Worid War One Soldier Factory,'" pamphlet, 2nd ed. (n. c : Craftsman Printing, Inc. 1980) 1. The businessmen did receive a handsome retum on their investment. The population of Chillicothe had been 16,000 before Camp Sherman; after the camp was established, that soared to 60,000, creating a housing and commercial boom. Peck, "The Rise and Fall of Camp Sherman," 2. 257 Peck, "The Rise and Fall of Camp Sherman," 3. 258 Peck, "The Rise and Fall of Camp Sherman," 2, 7. 259 Peck, "The Rise and Fall of Camp Sherman," 3. 260 Peck, "The Rise and Fall of Camp Sherman," 7. 261 Peck, "The Rise and Fall of Camp Sherman," 7. 262 Drake, Biography and History of the Indians, 1: 40. 263 Harrison, "A Discourse on the Aboriginies of the Valley of Ohio," 10. 264 Short, North Americans of Antiquity, 50. 265 Larkin, Ancient Man in America, 90; Smucker, "The Mound-Builders' Works in Licking County, Ohio," 482. 266 Smucker, "The Mound-Builders' Works in Licking County, Ohio," 482. 267 Randall, Ohio Mound Builders, 87, 88, respectively. 268 For instance, the Newark Earthworks are featured in a recent book that includes Stonehenge, Avesbury, and the pyramids of the Nile valley, among other famous ancient sites, Brian Fagan, From Black Land to Fifth Sun: The Science of Sacred Sites (Reading, MA: Helix Books, 1998). 269 Fagan, From Black Land to Fifth Sun, 198. 270 Bradley T. Lepper, "The Archaeology of the Newark Earthworks." Ancient Earthen Enclosures of the Eastem Woodlands, ed. Robert E. Mainfort, Jr., and Lytme P. Sullivan (Gainesville: University Press of Florida, 1998) 130.

NOTES 367

271 Squire and Davis, Ancient Monuments ofthe Mississippi Valley, 71; "Heath Lions Hear History of Mounds," Ace News, 6 March 1997, 5. 272 "Heath Lions Hear History of Mounds," Ace News, 6 March 1997, 5. 273 Bradley T. Lepper, "The Newark Earthworks and the Geometric Enclosures of the Scioto Valley," in Vanishing Heritage: Notes and Queries about the Archaeology and Culture History of Licking County, Ohio, ed. Paul E. Hooge and Bradley T. Lepper (n.c: Licking County Archaeology and Landmarks Society, 1992) 45. 274 "Heath Lions Hear History of Mounds," Ace News, 6 March 1997, 5; Lepper, "The Newark Earthworks and the Geometric Enclosures ofthe Scioto Valley," 46. For a 1910 photo of the shooting gallery, see "Looking Back," The Advocate, 10 February 1998,2A; for an old photo of "Hotel Idlewilde," see "Looking Back," The Advocate, 3 December 1999,2A; for a 1912 photo of a horse race in the Great Circle, see "Looking Back," The Advocate, 11 November 1996, 2A.: The settler fantasy that the earthworks were amuse-ment parks zeroed in especially on race tracks. At Fort Ancient, nineteenth-century diggers found that from "each mound extending east there was built a low earthen roadway elevation, a foot or more in height, twelve feet wide, and a little more than one-quarter of a mile in length." Since it was guessed that such structures had been constructed to accommodate games, "[t]hey have been more often than otherwise dubbed 'race courses.'" Randall, Ohio Mound Builders, 87, 88, respectively. 275 "Heath Lions Hear History of Mounds," Ace News, 6 March 1997, 5; Lepper, "The Newark Earthworks and the Geometric Enclosures of the Scioto Valley," 46. This was hardly the first demolition project against the effigy. In 1873, Isaac Smucker noted that, "a few years ago," the effigy had been scraped down to its base. "In removing the apex of the 'Eagle Mound,' (so called from its resemblance to a bird with extended wings), a flat surface was uncovered showing evidence marks of fire, and having upon it ashes and the remains of charred wood." Smucker, "The Mound-Builders' Works in Licking County, Ohio," 482. 276 Board of Licking County Commissioners, Deed #8770 to the Ohio State Archaeological and Historical Society, 9 March 1933, 500. For a 1933 photo of Conservation Corps workers restoring the mound, see "Looking Back," The Advocate, 23 June 1998, 2A. 277 Bradley T. Lepper, "The Newark Earthworks and the Geometric Enclosures ofthe Scioto Valley: Connections and Conjectures," A View from the Core: A Synthesis of Ohio Hopewell Archaeology, ed. Paul J. Pacheco (Columbus: The Ohio Archaeological Council, 1996) 42. Pavements are not unusual features, and ripping them up was not an unusual settler response to their discovery. At Fort Ancient, pavement was found in 1868 between the parallel earthwork roads the settlers identified as race tracks. Emilius Randall recorded that the " 'pavement' lay from one to three feet under the present soil surface, and was built of limestone slabs, averaging about a foot in length, six inches in width and two and a half inches in thickness. Its width was the space between the parallel walls, averaging seventyfive feet; its length appears not to have been definitely determined," but estimates varied "from one hundred to five hundred feet." He added that, in 1908, the pavement "lay, of course, beneath the present pike," i.e., settler highway. Randall, Ohio Mound Builders, 88. When the existence of this pavement was first annoimced in the July 1874, Cincinnati Quarterly Joumal of Science, excavations by "fifty gentlemen, scientifically and archaeologically inclined" promptly proceeded to pull up the pavement. While at their

368 NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

work, these gentlemen conjured up visions of kings and "were fully satisfied they were lifting up the pavement laid by the subjects of the king of the Mound Builders anywhere from ten to five hundred thousand years ago," as whim had it. Randall, Ohio Mound Builders, 90. 278 Allen M, Faxon, "Independence Celebration," Joumal of the Callipoean Society of Granville Institution 1 (4 July 1836): n.p. This was the Society's hand-written entry for the Fourth of July. The report is retained by the Ohio State Historical Society. 279 State of Ohio, General and Local Acts Passed and Joint Resolutions Adopted by the Seventy-Seventh General Assembly, vol. 99 (Springfield, OH: The Springfield Publishing Co., 1908) 630. 280 Lepper, "The Newark Earthworks," 45; Brian Fagan, "Golf and Archaeology: The Only Ancient Site with a Golf Course Faces More Destruction," Discovering Archaeology (November-December, 2000): 9, 281 Fowke, Archaeological History of Ohio, 1: 171, 282 State of Ohio, General and Local Acts Passed, 630. 283 State of Ohio, General and Local Acts Passed, 629-30. 284 State of Ohio, Franklin County, Deed #892, signed 2 April 1908, recorded 25 January 1910,2. 285 Licking County Board of Trade, Lease # 1219, completed 15 April 1910, recorded 6 November 1915, 1,2 respectively. 286 Fagan, "Golf and Archaeology,"9. 287 Lepper, "The Newark Earthworks," 45, 288 Lepper, "The Newark Earthworks," 45-46. 289 Chalmers L. Pancoast, "Golf Where Mound Builders Pray, or Centuries Old Golf Course," Typescript (7 May 1925) skeletons, 6; monument, 1. Reprinted [quoted] through Courtesy of'the New York Times. 290 Pancoast, "Golf Where Mound Builders Pray," 3. 291 Pancoast, "Golf Where Mound Builders Pray," 5. 292 Pancoast, "Golf Where Mound Builders Pray," 7.

3. "We Can Make a Waukauhoowaa": Native Traditions of the i\/lounds 1 William S, Dancey, "Putting an End to Ohio Hopewell," in Paul J. Pacheco, A View from

NOTES 369

the Core: A Synthesis of Ohio Hopewell Archaeology (Columbus: The Ohio Archaeological Council, 1996) 398^05. 2 "Grandmother" Barbara Crandell, interview by Barbara A. Mann, 9 January 2001, Thomville, Ohio. 3 Quoted in Cyrus Thomas, The Story of a Mound; or. The Shawnees in Pre-Columbian Times (Washington, D.C.: Judd & Detweiler, 1891) 4. 4 C[harles] C[hristopher] Trowbridge, Shawnese Traditions, ed. Vemon Kinietz and Erminie W. Voegelin (Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 1939) 65. 5 James H. McCulloh, Researches on America Being an Attempt to Settle Some Points Relative to the Aborigines of American, &c. (Baltimore: Joseph Robinson, 1817) 210. 6 Given "the utter absence of tradition among the Indians conceming their history," McCulloh said, "the most ample room is left us for conjecture." James H. McCulloh, Researches, Philosophical and Antiquarian, Conceming the Aboriginal History ofAmerica (Baltimore: Fielding Lucas, Jr., 1829) 64. Using only westem thinking and evidence, McCulloh nevertheless concluded in his Appendix that Natives had built the mounds, 7 Thomas Campbell Walbridge, "On Some Ancient Mounds upon the Shore of the Bay of Quint6," The Canadian Joumal, new series, 29,5 (September 1860): 413. 8 O. C. Marsh, "Description of an Ancient Sepulchral Mound near Newark, Ohio," Historical Magazine, 2nd series, 2.4 (1867): 240 and 245, respectively. 9 Isaac Smucker, "The Mound-Builders' Works in Licking County, Ohio," The American Historical Record 2.22 (1873): 483, 10 The term, "Manifest Destiny," was not actually coined until 1845, when it was used as a justification for the Mexican-American War (1846-1848), in which the U.S. unilaterally seized Texas. The phrase is credited to John L. O'SuUivan, who used it in his manfully unreadable drumbeat for war, "Annexation," The United States Magazine and Democratic Review 17,85 (Jul-Aug 1845): 5. The expansionist intention, if not the phrase, was already well established by the time O'SuUivan got aroimd to nicknaming it. Not only was it nascent in Thomas Jefferson's Louisiana Purchase (1803), but Alexis de Tocqueville can be seen alluding to its popularity in 1835, when he characterized Americans as "fulfilling their destinies" in grabbing the continent from Native America. Alexis de Tocqueville, Democracy in America (1835; New York: Vintage Books, 1990) 432, 11 Manuscript quoted in Henry Rowe Schoolcraft, Historical and Statistical Information Respecting the History, Condition, and Prospects of the Indian Tribes of the United States, 6 vols. (Philadelphia: Lippincott, Grambo, & Co., 1851-1857) 4: 135. 12 Thomas Jefferson, Writings: Autobiography; A Summary View of the Rights of British America; Notes on the State of Virginia; Public Papers; Addresses, Messages, and Replies; MiscellanyandLetter(Uey/York:LihTaTy of America, 1984)225-26. 13 Frederick Larkin, Ancient Man in America (Randolph, NY: The Author, 1880) 25. Larkin claimed that Blacksnake had been head of the Iroquois League, an impossibility, since

370 NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

Blacksnake was Seneca, whereas the Adodaroh, or Chairman of the Men's Grand Council of the League, was always Onondaga. Larkin, Ancient Man in America, 25. 14 In 1951, for example, Henry Shetrone positively asserted that Natives could not "tell the white settlers anything about" the mounds. Henry Clyde Shetrone, Primer of Ohio Archaeology: The Mound Builders and the Indians, 5th ed. (Columbus: The Ohio State Archaeological and Historical Society, 1951) 5. 15 John Patterson Maclean,"Who Were the Mound Builders?" Ohio Archaeological and Historical Quarterly 13 (1904): 93. 16 Clement W. Meighan, "The Burial of American Archaeology," Academic Questions 3 (summer 1993): 14. 17 David Roberts, In Search of the Old Ones: Exploring the Anasazi World of the Southwest (New York: Simon & Schuster, 1996) 86. 18 James Mooney, "Myths of the Cherokee," Nineteenth Annual Report of the Bureau of American Ethnology, 1897-1898, Two Parts (Washington, D.C: Govemment Printing Office, 1900)1:229. 19 Daniel G. Brinton, The Lenape and Their Legends; with the Complete Text and Symbols of the Walam Olum, A New Translation, and Inquiry into Its Authenticity (1885; reprint, Lewisburg, PA: Wennawoods Publishing, 1999) 145 (n 2). 20 Daniel G. Brinton, "Folk-Lore of the Modem Lenape," Essays of an Americanist (Philadelphia: Porter & Coates, 1890) 188. 21 Westem scholars are still loath to face the Native view of Francis La Flesche's taking of Osage medicine, still presenting what he did as rescuing it for posterity. For a history of La Flesche's advantage-taking interaction with dying and demoralized Osage medicine men, see Ganick A. Bailey, ed,. The Osage and the Invisible World (Norman: University of Oklahoma Press, 1995) 21-26. True to form. Bailey glosses over Osage objections to La Flesche's "work," barely giving it a nod. Bailey, The Osage and the Invisible World 21. 22 James Mooney, "Sacred Formulas of the Cherokees," Bureau of American Ethnology Annual Repori for 1886 (Washington, D.C: Smithsonian Institution, 1891) 309. 23 Mooney, "Sacred Formulas of the Cherokees," 310. 24 Frank G, Speck, "The Wapanachki Delawares and the English; Their Past as Viewed by an Ethnologist," The Pennsylvania Magazine 67 (1943): 339. 25 Bruce E. Johansen and Donald A. Grinde, Jr., The Encyclopedia of Native American Biography (New York: Da Capo Press, 1998) 42. 26 Barbara Alice Mann, Iroquoian Women: The Gantowisas (New York: Peter Lang Publishing, 2000): for the Gaiwi.yo as updated "tradition," see 302, 314; for my entire discussion of the new Longhouse Religion of the Gaiwi.yo, see 300-24.

NOTES 371

27 John Heckewelder, History, Manners, and Customs of the Indian Nations Who Once Inhabited Pennsylvania and the Neighboring States, The First American Frontier Series (1819; 1820; 1876; reprint. New York: Amo Press and The New York Times, 1971) 321. 28 Heckewelder, History, Manners, and Customs, 322. 29 Thomas McElwain, Mythological Tales and the Alleghany Senecas: A Study ofthe SocioReligious Context of Traditional Oral Phenomena in an Iroquois Community (Vastervik, Sweden: Ekblads Tryckeri, 1978) respectively, 29, 15-16, 17. 30 I have discussed this ethnographic problem before, in Barbara Alice Mann, "Euro-forming the Data," Debating Democracy (Santa Fe, NM: Clear Light Publishers, 1998) 182-84. 31 McCulloh, Researches on America, 210-11. 32 McCulloh, Researches on America, 211; John Haywood, The Natural and Aboriginal History of Tennessee, up to the First Settlements Therein by the White People, in the Year 1768 (Nashville: George Wilson, 1823) 218. 33 McCulloh, Researches on America, 211; Maclean, "Who Were the Mound Builders?" 94. 34 Haywood, The Natural and Aboriginal History of Tennessee, 218. 35 Thomas S. Hinde, Letter to J. S. Williams, American Pioneer 1.11 (November 1842): 374. 36 McCulloh, Researches on America, 212. For McKee as Shawnee, see David T. McNab, "The Land Was to Remain Ours," Native American Speakers ofthe Eastem Woodlands: Selected Speeches and Critical Analyses, ed. Barbara Alice Mann (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 2001) 231. 37 Haywood, The Natural and Aboriginal History of Tennessee, 2\9. 38 Maclean, "Who Were the Mound Builders?" 94. 39 Barbara R. Duncan, Living Stories ofthe Cherokee (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1998) 197. 40 Duncan, Living Stories of the Cherokee, 199. 41 Benjamin Smith Barton, New Views ofthe Origin ofthe Tribes and Nations of America (1798; reprint, Millwood, NY: Kraus Reprint Co., 1976) xlv. 42 See my citations of Gabriel Sagard (1632), Paul Le Jeune (1633-1634), Joseph Francois Lafitau (1724), Pierre de Charlevoix (1761), and Samuel de Champlain, all describing the Iroquois as "white," in Mann, Iroquoian Women, 257. Adriaen van der Donck also described the Lenape people as light skinned in 1653, noting that "some quite fair-skinned ones are to be found" and going no ftirther than to depict them generally as "olivecolored." Adriaen Comelissen van der Donck, "Description of New Netherland," 1653, trans. Diederick Goedhuys, in In Mohawk Country: Early Narrative aout a Native People, ed. Dean R. Snow, Charles T. Gehring, and William A. Stama (Syracuse: Syracuse University Press, 1996) 106,107, respectively.

372 NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE I\/IOUNDS

43 Maxm,ed., Native American Speakers of the Eastem Woodlands, 115; Thomas McElwain, e-mail to Barbara Mann, 23 May 2001. Quoted with permission. 44 For terms, Iroquoian linguist Jordan Lachler, e-mail to Barbara Mann, 23 May 2001. Quoted with permission. For Tuscarora fear and loathing of slavery, see John Heckewelder, Narrative of the Mission of the United Brethren among the Delaware and Mohegan Indians from Its Commencement, in the Year 1740. to the Close of the Year 1808 (1818; New York: Amo Press, 1971) 206-7, 227; and J. Leitch Wright, The Only Land They Knew: The Tragic Story of the American Indians in the Old South (New York: The Free Press, 1981) 1 4 3 * 4

45 George Henry Loskiel, History of the Mission of the United Brethren among the Indians in North America, trans. Christian Ignatius La Trobe, 3 vols. (London: Brethren's Society of the Furtherance of the Gospel, 1794) 1: 26-28; Barbara Alice Mann, "The Fire at Onondaga: Wampum as Proto-Writing," Akwesasne Notes 26th Atmiversary Issue I.I (spring 1995): 40-48. 46 John Reed Swanton, "Introduction," Notes on the Creek Indians, Bureau of American Ethnology, Bulletin 123, Anthropological Papers, no. 10. (Washington, D.C: Smithsonian Institution, 1939) 125. Mary Haas provided an interesting insight into how "white" and "red" labels were sorted out, showing them to have shifted back and forth, based on ball game victories and defeats. Mary R. Haas, "Creek Inter-Town Relations," American Anthropologist 42 (1940): 479-89. 47 As discussed in chapter 2, see President Andrew Jackson's Second Annual Message to Congress of 6 December 1830, in Messages and Papers of the Presidents, James D. Richardson, ed., A Compilation of the Messages and Papers of the Presidents, 10 vols. (Washington, D.C: Bureau of National Literature, 1897) 2: 1084. 48 David Zeisberger, History of the Northern American Indians, ed. Archer Butler Hulbert and William Nathaniel Schwarze. Ohio Archaeological and Historical Publications, vol. 19 (1779-1780; Columbus: Ohio Archaeological and Historical Society, 1910) 30-31. 49 Loskiel, History of the Mission of the United Brethren, 1:141. 50 Quoted in Schoolcraft, Historical and Statistical Information, 4: 135. 51 Arthur C Parker, "Origin of the Iroquois as Suggested by Their Archaeology," American Anthropologist 18 (1916): 490. He reiterated these descriptions in Arthur C. Parker, "The Archaeological History of New York, Part I," New York State Museum Bulletin 235-36 (July-August 1920): 119-22. 52 The tmdercounting was established by Henry F. Dobyns, "Estimating Aboriginal American Population: An Appraisal of Techniques with a New Hemispheric Estimate," Current Anthropology 1 (1966): 395-416. See, also, the excellent unmasking of the ftaud in Francis Jennings, The Invasion ofAmerica: Indians, Colonialism, and the Cant of Conquest (New York: W. W. Norton, 1976) 15-31. 53 In her single-handed attempt to raise academic consciousness on mound history, Lynda Shaffer noted that the southeast was almost titiimaginably different before imported germs were let loose on American soil. Large population centers, all now lost to view, were

NOTES 373

beehives of cultural routines, likewise banished from modem awareness. Lynda Norene Shaffer, Native Americans before 1492: The Mound-building Centers of the Eastem Woodlands (Armonk, NY: M. E. Sharpe, 1992) 86. Charles Hudson, who also attempted to come to grips with invasion in 1997, remarked upon the massive population implosion that happened very early on, in the wake of the first conquistadores.Cha.t\es Hudson, Knights of Spain. Warriors of the Sun: Hemando de Soto and the South's Ancient Chiefdoms (Athens: The University of Georgia Press, 1997) 418. 54 A common example of Oops-Sorry rationalizing comes in Hudson, Knights of Spain. Warriors of the Sun, 418: "The losses of life" attendant upon military attacks, he claimed, "pale in comparison to their losses from being exposed to the germs and viruses" that the Spaniards and their African slaves "unwittingly carried in their blood and breath" (italics mine). This is not the Native version of events. For instance, the Lenapd frankly told the Moravian missionaries that smallpox and venereal diseases had been European presents. Loskiel, History of the Mission of the United Brethren, 1:108. The Iroquois knew full well that European missionaries spread disease wherever they went, and part of their avoidance of missionaries was precisely based on this fact. For avoidance of missionaries, see Mann, Iroquoian Women, 296. As examples of missionaries spreading disease, see David Zeisberger coughing his way from Pennsylvania to Ohio in the eighteenth century, in H. J. Schuh, David Zeisberger. The Moravian Missionary to the American Indians (Coltunbus, OH: The Book Concem, [ca. 1928]) 63,75,99,111. David Brainerd did the same thing a generation earlier, coughing his way from New Jersey to westem Pennsylvania, spreading tuberculosis as he went. Jonathan Edwards, ed., David Brainerd: His Life and Diary (Chicago: Moody Press, 1949) 321,324-25. Both men knew they were ill and that Natives caught and died from diseases easily, yet both continued their disease-spreading treks, justifying their activities in the name of their god. 55 For traditions of deliberate spread of disease, see Mann, Iroquoian Women, 42-43. For a thorough expose of the innocence excuse based on historical records, see Ward Churchill, A Little Matter of Genocide: Holocaust and Denial in the Americas. 1492 to the Present (San Francisco: City Lights Books, 1997) 137-57,289-362. 56 YbxAson, Knights of Spain. Warriors of the Sun, A\9. 57 Henry F. Dobyns, Their Number Become Thinned: Native American Population Dynamics in Eastem North America (Knoxville: University of Tennessee Press, 1983) 18-20, 262, 264-65,268,316. 58 For trading networks, see Shaffer, Native Americans before 1492,48. 59 McCulloh, Researches on America, 211. 60 For the story of the Iroquoian rejection of the warfare-loving form of government, see Barbara A. Mann and Jerry L. Fields, "A Sign in the Sky: Dating the League of the Haudenosaunee," American Indian Culture and Research Joumat 21.2 (1997): 105-63. For those who can follow traditional recitals, two original accounts of the rejection of war govemment may be found in Arthur C. Parker, The Constitution of the Five Nations, or The Iroquois Book of the Great Law (Albany: The University of the State of New York, 1916). A third, very important account can be fotmd in John Arthur Gibson, Conceming the League: The Iroquois Tradition as Dictated in Onondaga by John Arthur Gibson, ed.

374 NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

and trans. Hanni Woodbury, Memoir 9 (1912; Winnipeg: Algonquian and Iroquoian Linguistics, 1992). 61 For the naming ofthe estate, see William S. Webb, and Charles E. Snow, The Adena People, ed. James B. Griffin (1945; reprint, Knoxville: University of Tennessee Press, 1974) 8 (n X); for first excavations, see William C. Mills, "Excavations ofthe Adena Mound," Ohio Archaeological and Historical Quarterly 10 (1902): 452-79; for follow up, see E. F. Greenman, "Excavation of the Coon Mound and an Analysis of the Adena Culture," Ohio Archaeological and Historical Quarterly 41.3 (1932): 362-523. 62 N'omi B. Greber and Katharine C. Ruhl, The Hopewell Site: A Contemporary Analysis Based on the Work of Charles C. Willoughby (Boulder, CO: Westview Press, 1989) 13. 63 Maureen Korp, The Sacred Geography ofthe American Mound Builders, Native American Studies, vol. 2 (Lewiston, NY: The Edwin Mellen Press, 1990) "no one knows," 4, 18; descendants, 19. 64 Jerry E. Clark, The Shawnee (Lexington: The University Press of Kentucky, 1977) 5; Erminie Voegelin most prominently proposed the scenario of a northem origin of the Shawnee, in Erminie Wheeler Voegelin, Mortuary Customs ofthe Shawnee and Other Eastem Tribes, Prehistory Research Series, vol. 2, no. 4 (1944; reprint. New York: AMS Press, 1980) 373. 65 James H. Howard, Shawnee! The Ceremonialism of a Native Indian Tribe and Its Cultural Background (Athens: Ohio University Press, 1981) 6-7. 66 For Ohio, see the theories of ethnographer, Erminie Wheeler Voegelin, as cited in Clark, The Shawnee, 6. For the southeast, see Howard, Shawnee! 5-6. 67 For the five lineages of the Shawnee, see Thomas Wildcat Alford, "Shawnee Story of Creation," Indians at Work 2.18 (1935): 8. Erminie Voegelin gave the five clans as "divisions," the Oawikila, KiSpoko, Pekowi, Calakaa6a, and MekoCe. Voegelin, Mortuary Customs ofthe Shawnee and Other Eastem Tribes, 243. For Shawano as onee powerful but long extinct by 1824, see Trowbridge, Shanwnese Traditions, 62. 68 Voegelin, Mortuary Customs ofthe Shawnee, 256. 69 Howard, Shawnee! 5. 70 Haywood, The Natural and Aboriginal History of Tennessee, 220. 71 James B. Griffin, The Fort Ancient Aspect, University of Michigan Anthropological Papers, no. 28 (Ann Arbor, MI: Museum of Anthropology, 1943) 11-35; and, James B. Griffin, ed. Archaeology of Eastem United States (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1952) especially 364; Clark, The Shawnee, 1. 72 CldiX\i,TheShawnee,9. 12i Clark, The Shawnee, 9. James Mooney posited Cherokee as from the Choctaw word, choluk, chuluk, or chiluk, for a pit or a cave. James Mooney, "Myths ofthe Cherokee," 15, 183.

NOTES 375

74 Howard, Shawnee! 5. 75 Charles O. PauUin, Atlas ofthe Historical Geography ofthe United States, ed. John K. Wright, Carnegie Institution of Washington, Publication no. 401 (Washington, D.C.: Carnegie Institution of Washington and the American Geographical Society of New York, 1932) Plate 24. Translation mine. 76 Howard, Shawnee! 6. 11 Thomas, The Story of a Mound, 40. 78 For the Shauwanoa wee Theeppee, see Trowbridge, Shanwnese Traditions, 5. 79 Paullin, Atlas of the Historical Geography ofthe United States, Plate 24. Translation mine. 80 Thomas, The Story of a Mound, 40. 81 Haywood, The Natural and Aboriginal History of Tennessee, 220. Interestingly, Haywood stated that the Cherokees "asserted their claim to the same lands," Haywood, The Natural and Aboriginal History of Tennessee, 220. 82 Clark, The Shawnee, 12. 83 Clark, The Shawnee, 14. 84 Henry Harvey, History ofthe Shawnee Indians, from the Year 1681 to 1854, Inclusive (1855; reprint, New York: Kraus Reprint Co., 1971) 84. 85 Harvey, History ofthe Shawnee Indians, 98. 86 Harvey, History ofthe Shawnee Indians, 99. 87 Kokomthena is also rendered Kuh-koom-they-nah by Thomas Wildcat Alford, Civilization, As Told to Florence Drake (Norman: University of Oklahoma Press, 1936) 63. Alford kept the older traditions of Grandmother, rejecting the missionary superimposition of an allpowerful, male deity. "Star Woman" is how Richard White found Kokomthena characterized, in Richard White, The Middle Ground: Indians, Empires, and Republics in the Great Lakes Region, 1650-1815 (New York: Cambridge University Press, 1991) 520 (n 3). For the secret language of Grandmother, see Charles F. Voegelin, "The Shawnee Female Deity," Yale University Publications in Anthropology 8-13 (1936): 4. 88 Voegelin, "The Shawnee Female Deity," 4. 89 Howavd, Shawnee! I. 90 Howard, Shawnee! 166; Voegelin, "The Shawnee Female Deity," 4. 91 Voegelin, "The Shawnee Female Deity," 4. 92 Alford, "Shawnee Story of Creation," 8. Alford says that the remnants ofthe Maykojay

376 NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

clan intermarried with the Seneca in Oklahoma before dying out. 93 Joab Spencer, "The Shawnee Indians: Their Customs, Traditions and Folk-lore," Transactions of the Kansas State Historical Society 10 (1908): 383. 94 Joab Spencer, "Shawnee Folk-Lore," Joumal of American Folk-Lore 22 (1909): 320. 95 Barton, New Views of the Origin of the Tribes, xciii. 96 Barton, New Views of the Origin of the Tribes, 3. 97 Letter to Barton from Heckewelder, dated 27 March 1798, in Appendix, Barton, New Views of the Origin of the Tribes, 3. 98 John Johnston, "Account of the Present State of the Indian Tribes Inhabiting Ohio," Archaeologica Americana: Transactions and Collections of the American Antiquarian Society \{\%20):m. 99 Johnston, "Account of the Present State of the Indian Tribes Inhabiting Ohio," 276. 100 George Bluejacket, "A Story of the Shawanoes," MSS, 29 October 1829, trans, and ed. John Allen Raynor (Columbus: Library, Ohio Historical Society, 1886) Typescript, Call # 970.92 R 218. 101 John P. Jeffries, The Natural History of the Human Races (New York: Edward O. Jenkins 1869)216. 102 Brinton, The Lenape and Their Legends, 145. 103 Jeffries, The Natural History of the Human Races, 216. 104 Brinton, The Lenape and Their Legends, 145 and 145 (n 2). 105 Spencer, "The Shawnee Indians 383 and 383 (n 5); Spencer, "Shawnee Folk-Lore," 320. 106 For 1812 reference, see Schoolcraft, Historical and Statistical Information, 4: 273; for 1819 reference, see Johnston, "Account of the Present State of the Indian Tribes Inhabiting Ohio," 273. 107 Brinton, The Lenape and Their Legends, 145. 108 Bluejacket, "A Story of the Shawanoes," MSS. 109 Trowbridge, Shawnese Traditions, 2. 110 The Shawnee Prophet took the name 'Tenskwatawa," meaning "Open Door," to reflect this point of Shawnee theology. R. David Edmunds, The Shawnee Prophet (Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press, 1983)34. 111 Trowbridge, Shawnese Traditions, 2, 3.

NOTES 377

112 Trowbridge, Shawnese Traditions, 216; Johnston, "Account of the Present State of the Indian Tribes Inhabiting Ohio," 273. 113 Jeffries, The Natural History of the Human Races, 216. 114 Trowbridge, Shawnese Traditions, 65; Johnston, "Accoimt of the Present State of the Indian Tribes Inhabiting Ohio," 273. 115 For a summary of Spanish depradations in Florida, as defmed both by modem Americans and Spanish conquistadores, see Mann, ed.. Native American Speakers of the Eastem Woodlands, 1-25. 116 Trowbridge, Shawnese Traditions, 57. 117 Trowbridge, Shawnese Traditions, 58. 118 Trowbridge, Shawnese Traditions, 57-58. 119 Trowbridge, Shawnese Traditions, 63. 120 Shaffer, Native Americans before 1492, 78-79. 121 Trowbridge, Shawnese Traditions, 9. 122 Trowbridge, Shawnese Traditions, 9. 123 Trowbridge, Shawnese Traditions, 59. Cyrus Thomas was convinced that the Shawnee had been primary builders of the stone graves. Painstakingly matching stone graves with recorded habitation sites of the Shawnee, Thomas made a compelling case for the Shawnee as stone mound builders. Just because his work is old does not mean that his evidence should be disregarded. Cyrus Thomas, The Problem of the Ohio Mounds (Washington, D.C: Govemment Printing Office, 1889) 26-30. 124 Trowbridge, Shawnese Traditions, 65. 125 Interestingly, a historical record exists of when some Shawnee, at least, moved to the Wabash, dating it to shortly before 1684. In that year, the Iroquois League attacked the Miami because they had invited the Shawnee to live between the Wabash and the Ohio Rivers. The Iroquois feared that the land grant was for the express ptwpose of beefing up Miami military strength against the League. Eamest A. Hooton, "Indian Village Site and Cemetery near Madisonville, Ohio," Papers of the Peabody Museum ofAmerican Archaeology and Ethnology 8.1 (1920): 136. There is a danger of using ilsolated westem records such as this to arrive at conclusive dates, however, for the westem record was spotty, haphazard, and frequently ignorant of long-standing Native alliances and networks. In this instance, the Shawnee had clearly been in contact with the Iroquois long before 1684, since they transported Iroquoian goods to Cahohia precontact. 126 Jerry Clark remarks on this strategy as it failed in Ohio during the eighteenth century but was used successftiUy to grab and sell Shawnee land in Kentucky, Clark, The Shawnee, 2. Ever since it began in the eighteenth century, westem scholars have doggedly perpetuated the settler myth of Ohio as "open" territory. The sheer fact of 12,000 earthworks there—

378 NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

some, like the so-called Alligator Moimd, possibly built within the last five hundred years, and others, like the Fort Ancient sites, also built post contact—should quickly put the lie to this assertion, but historians are often poorly acquainted with either oral traditions or archaeological evidence. 127 David Cusick, "Sketches of Ancient History of the Six Nations," 1825, in William M. Beauchamp, The Iroquois Trail or Foot-prints of the Six Nations, in Customs. Traditions, and History (Fayetteville, NY: H. C Beauchamp, 1892) 5. 128 Peter Dooyentate Clarke, Origin and Traditional History of the Wyandotts (Toronto: Hunter, Rose, & Co., 1870) 2. 129 For discussions of the problem of westem influences in Cusick, see Mann, Iroquoian Women, 72-73, 138, 308. For David Cusick (not to be conftised with Albert Cusick) as Tuscarora, see J. N. B. Hewitt, "Era of the Fonnation of the Historic League of the Iroquois." American Anthropologist (old series) 7 (1894): 62. As an "educated" Wyandot, Dooyentate was also heavily westemized. He was consequently wont to do such things as contrast the Native "red man, in his primeval nattire" with "the educated Indian"; promote the westem stereotype of the drutiken Seneca who "potirs down the fiery liquid" of booze until "the deep latent embers of revenge within him, would blaze up anew with all its ancient vindictiveness"; and believe the evangelical blither that the "descendants of Ham have been found (and are to this day) by travellers and explorers in Africa, who are entirely ignorant of the existence of God; probably their ancestors forgot God before they wandered across the arid plains of Northem Africa into the interior regions, where their descendants worship strange gods to this day," rejoicing that "the gospel light has of late years flashed on some of the benighted blarjc tribes of that dark and mysterious portion of the globe. Missionaries are now tmfolding to them the word of the true living God, contained in the sacred volume." Clarke, Origin and Traditional History of the Wyandotts, v, 15, 151-52, respectively. 130 Chief Elias Johnson, Legends. Traditions and Laws, of the Iroquois. or Six Nations (1881; reprint. New York: AMS Press, 1978) 41. 131 Joseph Francois Lafitau, Customs of the American Indians Compared with the Customs of Primitive Times, ed. and trans. William N. Fenton and Elizabeth L. Moore, 2 vols. (1724; Toronto: The Champlain Society, 1974) 1: 86. 132 Edmund de Schweinitz, The Life and Times ofDavid Zeisberger. the Westem Pioneer and Apostle of the Indians (Philadelphia: J. B. Lippincott & Co., 1870) 36-37. 133 Heckewelder, History. Manners, and Customs, 50. 134 Schweinitz, The Life and Times of David Zeisberger, 32-35. 135 De Witt Clinton, "A Discourse Delivered before the New-York Historical Society, at Their Anniversary Meeting, 6th December 1811," Collections of the New-York Historical Society for the Year 1811. vol. 2 (New York: I. Riley, 1811-1859) 92. 136 Parker, The Constitution of the Five Nations, 132. 137 Cusick, "Sketches of Ancient History of the Six Nations," 10.

NOTES 379

138 Beauchamp, The Iroquois Trail, 49. 139 Cusick, "Sketches of Ancient History of the Six Nations," 10-11. 140 Shaffer, Native Americans before 1492, 50. 141 Cusick, "Sketches of Ancient History of the Six Nations," 10. 142 Clinton, "A Discourse," 92. 143 Parker, "Origin ofthe Iroquois as Suggested by Their Archaeology," 482. 144 For Jonehrahdesegowah, see Parker, The Constitution ofthe Five Nations, 30, 64. For Wilson and pahn trees, see Parker, "Origin ofthe Iroquois as Suggested by Their Archaeology," 482-83. 145 Parker, "Origin ofthe Iroquois as Suggested by Their Archaeology," 483. 146 Arthur C. Parker, "The Archaeological History of New York, Part I," New York State Museum Bulletin 235-36 (July-August 1920): 23-26. Part ofthe reason for his contention was that Parker supported the Bering Strait theory of immigration to the Americas. 147 Parker, "The Archaeological History of New York, Part I," 24. 148 Heckewelder, History, Manners, and Customs, 50. 149 Lafitau, Customs ofthe American Indians, 1: 86. 150 Clarke, Origin and Traditional History ofthe Wyandotts, 4. 151 Cusick, "Sketches of Ancient History ofthe Six Nations," for already in Ohio, 10; for backtracking to Ohio, 12-13. The in-text quotation is from Cusick. Johnson closely paralleled Cusick, stating, "The sixth, and last family, went on their joumey toward the sun-setting, until they touched the bank ofthe great lake, which was named Kan-ha-gwarah-ka (that is a Cap), now Erie." Johnson, Legends, Traditions and Laws, 44. 152 Cusick, "Sketches of Ancient History of the Six Nations," 31; Johnson, Legends, Traditions and Laws, 176. The Jesuits tacitly supported this contention in their Relation of 1648-1649, stating that "This Lake, called Eri6, was formerly inhabited on its Southem shores by certain tribes whom we call the Nation ofthe Cat; they have been compelled to retire far inland to escape their enemies, who are farther to the West. These people ofthe Cat Nation have a number of stationary villages, for they till the soil, and speak the same language as otir Hurons." Thwaites, Jesuit Relations, 33: 63. The Erie came south into Ohio from the shoreland. Their "enemies" from the west were probably the Catawba, or eastem Sioux, who took over the southem shores of Lake Erie on their way east. 153 Cusick, "Sketches of Ancient History ofthe Six Nations," 12-13. Again, Johnson, who closely followed Cusick's tradition, stated that the Tuscarora "then went toward, between the midway and sunsetting, and traveled a great distance, when they came to a large river, which was named 0-nah-we-yo-ka (that is a principal stream) now Mississippi." Johnson, Legends, Traditions and Laws, 44.

380 NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

154 See, for instance, James Mooney's annoying, "leamed" proofs that Heckewelder was wrong about rivers for supposedly conflating the Ohio and Mississippi Rivers, Mooney, "Myths ofthe Cherokee," 18,190 (n 6). Cyrus Thomas was also puzzled by the reference but without the insufferable arrogance shown by other westemers, Thomas, The Problem ofthe Ohio Mounds, 45. 155 Horatio Hale, The Iroquois Book of Rites (1883; reprint, Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1963) 14. 156 Horatio Hale thought the vine crossing was at the Allegheny portion ofthe river. Hale, The Iroquois Book of Rites, 14. 157 Cusick, "Sketches of Ancient History ofthe Six Nations," 13. Johnson, Legends, Traditions and Laws, 44. 158 Johnson presented Tarachiawagon ("Tarenyawagon") in a way likely to confuse westem readers, who do not know that the Elder Twin was a Sky Spirit who oflen reincamated for the sake of aiding the Iroquois. Mann, Iroquoian Women, 335. Thus, when Johnson transmuted Tarachiawagon into Ayonwantha ("Hiawatha"), he was making sense to Iroquoian listeners, but not to Euroamerican readers. Johnson, Legends, Traditions and Laws, 45-46. 159 Johnson, Legends, Traditions and Laws, 4A-45. 160 Floyd G. Lotmsbury, "Iroquois-Cherokee Linguistic Relations," Bulletin ofthe Bureau of American Ethnology, vol. 180 (Washington, D.C.: Smithsonian Institution, 1961) 12. 161 Cusick, "Sketches of Ancient History of the Six Nations," 15; 15 (n *); Jesse J. Complanter, Legends of the Longhouse (Philadelphia: J. B. Lippincott, 1938) 45; Arthur C. Parker, Seneca Myths and Folk Tales (1927; Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press, 1989) 18. 162 Beauchamp, The Iroquois Trail, 61. 163 For the precontact Iroquois as tall, see Denys Delage, Lepays renverse: Amerindiens et europeens en Amerique du nord-est, 1600-1664 (Montreal: Boreal Express, 1985) 78-79. The fact of Iroquoian height was noted by explorers early on, with, for instance, the baron of Lahontan casually remarking that the Iroquois were "of a larger stature . . . than the other nations." Louis Armand, Baron de Lahontan, New Voyages to North America, ed. R. G. Thwaites, 2 vols. (1703; Chicago: A. C. McClure & Co., 1905) 2: 415. 164 J. T. Short, Norih Americans of Antiquity, 3rd ed. (1879; New York: Harper & Brothers, Publishers, 1882) 171 (n 1). 165 William C. Mills, "Excavations ofthe Adena Mound," Ohio Archaeological and Historical Quarterly 10 (1902): female, 465; males, 469,472,473,479. 166 Cyrus Thomas, Report on the Mound Explorations ofthe Bureau of Ethnology, Bureau of Ethnology, Annual Report no. 12 (Washington, D.C.: Smithsonian Institute, 1894) Ehiblin graves, 450; seven-foot skeleton, 458. 167 Johnson characterized the Onondaga as having been "foremost in the overthrow ofthe

NOTES 381

Stonish Giants," Johnson, Legends, Traditions and Laws, 47. 168 For the Onondaga Stone Giant tradition, see Beauchamp, The Iroquois Trail, 61. On 16 October 1869, the supposedly "petrified body" of a Mound Builder was unearthed in Cardiff, New York. Instantly dubbed the "Cardiff Giant" by mound mavens of the day, these "remains" enjoyed a considerable career as a public exhibit, even though the "body" was obviously a stone statue, recently carved in the Greco-Roman style, replete with curly beard. Stephens, Fantastic Archaeology, 87-90; for a hearty laugh, see especially the photo of the statue, 88. Perhaps because they had not seen the actual "body" (unlike Euroamericans, Natives do not play with dead things), the Iroquois identified it as being the Stone Giant of Onondaga tradition. Beauchamp, The Iroquois Trail, 61. Altemately, if they had seen the statue, tiie Onondaga might have been pulling a little anthropological leg with their facile identification. 169 For a discussion of the meaning of the ukilotkon (smooth/wrinkled) pair in medicine, see Mann, Iroquoian Women, 307-11. 170 C. M. Barbeau, Huron and Wyandot Mythology, Memoir 80, Anthropological Series, no. 11, Canada Department of Mines, Geological Survey (Ottawa: Govemment Printing Bureau, 1915) 280 (n 5). 171 Mooney, "Myths of the Cherokee," 15. 172 Barbeau, Huron and Wyandot Mythology, lil (n 2). 173 Haywood, The Natural and Aboriginal History of Tennessee, 234. Haywood attributed these earthen houses to pre-Cherokee populations, but the Wyandot are clear that they had been built by the Cherokee. 174 Barbeau, Huron and Wyandot Mythology, 283. Cusick identified the helpful Sky Spirit as the Holder of Heavens, not HawSiio', Cusick, "Sketches of Ancient History ofthe Six Nations," 15 (n *). As I have shown elsewhere, under missionary prodding, there was a concerted attempt to find the Iroquoian "equivalent" of God, which resulted in several named suspects, including Haw&iib', a fearsome Thunderer, who was confiised with the more benign Hihnon by nineteenth-century Iroquois, especially those under missionary influence, as were Barbeau's informants. The Holder of Heavens was the Elder Twin of the Iroquois, who transmuted into the "Creator" figure of the Christianized Longhouse religion, which began in 1799. Mann, Iroquoian Women, 304-5. 175 Barbeau, Huron and Wyandot Mythology, 282-83. 176 Barbeau, Huron and Wyandot Mythology, 283. 177 For example, see Korp, The Sacred Geography ofthe Americna Mound Builders, 20. 178 Clinton, "A Discourse," 92. 179 Clinton, "A Discourse," 93. 180 Clinton, "A Discourse," 93.

382 NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

181 Cusick, "Sketches of Ancient History ofthe Six Nations," 14. 182 Parker, "Origin of the Iroquois," 490-91. 183 Gabriel Sagard, The Long Journey to the Country ofthe Hurons, ed. George M. Wrong, with introduction and notes, trans. H. H. Langton (1632; Toronto: The Champlain Society, 1939)212. 184 Lafitau, Customs ofthe American Indians, 2: 251. 185 Colden, Cadwallader. The History ofthe Five Indian Nations Depending on the Province of New-York in America, 2 vols. (1747,1922, 1973; reprint. New York: AMS Press, 1973) 1: xxxvi. 186 Parker, "The Origin ofthe Iroquois," Erie, 492; Voegelin, Mortuary Customs ofthe Shawnee, Seneca, 368. 187 Brinton, Essays of an Americanist, 69. 188 Parker, "The Archaeological History of New York, Part I," 5^70, and Arthur C. Parker, "The Archaeological History of New York, Part II," New York State Museum Bulletin 237-38 (September-October 1920): 471-743; S. L. Frey, "Were They Mound-Builders?" American Naturalist 13 (October, 1879): quote, 638; mounds as Iroquois, 637. 189 Thomas, The Problem ofthe Ohio Mounds, 50. 190 Walbridge, "On Some Ancient Mounds upon the Shore ofthe Bay of Quinte," 409. 191 For destruction, see Walbridge, "On Some Ancient Mounds," 412; for Bay of Quinte as the Peacemaker's point of departure, see Parker, The Constitution ofthe Five Nations, 65; for date, the League was founded in 1142 C.E., see Mann and Fields, "A Sign in the Sky," 105-63. Tradition states that, from the time the Peacemaker left the Bay of Quinte until the fotmding was complete, between one hundred and one hundred twenty years had passed, Marm and Fields, "A Sign in the Sky," 115. Using the conservative century mark, I arrive at the date of 1050 CE. as the inception ofthe peace drive. 192 Henry C. Shetrone, "The Culture Problem in Ohio Archaeology," American Anthropologist 22 (1920): 163. 193 Clinton, "A Discourse," 2: 94. Bradley T. Lepper, "The Newark Earthworks and the Geometric Enclosures of the Scioto Valley: Connections and Conjectures," in Paul J. Pacheco, A View from the Core: A Synthesis of Ohio Hopewell Archaeology (Columbus: The Ohio Archaeological Council, 1996) 226-41. Lepper described the "Great Hopewell Road" as "a virtually straight set of parallel walls 60 m apart and extending a distance of 90 km from the Newark Earthworks to the cluster of earthworks in the Scioto Valley centered at modem Chillicothe." Lepper, "The Newark Earthworks," 238. On this point, it is interesting that Garcilaso de la Vega recorded of mounds in La Florida that "Para subir a la casa del curaca" ("To climb up to the house ofthe Curaca") which stood atop a high mound, "hacen calles derechas por el cerro arriba, dos o tres o mas, como son menester, de quince o veinte pies de ancho. Por paredes de estas calles hincan gruesos maderos que van juntos unos de otrosy entran en tierra mas de un estado. Por escalones

NOTES 383

atraviesan otros maderos, no menos gruesos que los que sirven de paredes, y los traban unos con otros. Estos maderos que sirven de escalones son labrados de todas cuatropartes porque la subida sea mas liana. Las gradas distan una de otra cuatro o seis u ochopies, segiin que es la disposicion y aspereza del cerro mas o menos alto" ("they make straight streets to the top, two or three or more, as are necessary, fifteen or twenty feet in width. As walls for these streets, they drive stout beams into the ground, together, side by side, deeper than the height of a person. For steps, they lay other beams, no less stout than those which serve as walls, sideways and fasten them to one another. Those beams that serve as steps are worked flat on all four sides so that the climb might be more level. The distance ofthe steps from each other are four, six, or eight feet, depending more or less upon the incline of the hill and [its] steepness"). Garcilaso de la Vega, La Florida del Inca, ed. Sylvia L. Hilton (1605; Madrid: Historia 16, 1986) 203. Translation mine. 194 Mann, Iroquoian Women, 11O-1\. 195 Parker, The Constitution ofthe Five Nations, 30. Chief Jacob Thomas (1915-1998), in his Second Epoch tradition, stated that "If any nation or individual from outside adopted the Great Law, then upon leaming it or by tracing the roots to the Great Tree, they would discipline their minds and spirits to obey and honour [sic] the wishes ofthe Council ofthe League. Then they will be made welcome to take shelter under the branches of this tree." Chief Jacob Thomas and Terry Boyle, Teachings from the Longhouse (Toronto: Stoddart Publishing Co., Limited, 1994) 17. 196 For Second Epoch tradition, see Barbara A. Mann and Jerry L. Fields, "A Sign in the Sky: Dating the League ofthe Haudenosaunee," American Indian Culture and Research Joumal 21.2 (1997): 105-63; Barbara Alice Mann, Iroquoian Women: The Gantowisas (New York: Peter Lang, 2000) 125-34; Bmce Elliott Johansen and Barbara Alice Mann, ed.. Encyclopedia of the Haudenosaunee (Iroquois Confederacy) (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 2000) 265-84. 197 Hale, The Iroquois Book of Rites, 11. 198 Brinton, The Lenape and Their Legends, 156-57. 199 Walam Olum, or Red Score: The Migration Legend ofthe Lenni Lenape or Delaware Indians (Indianapolis: Indiana Historical Society, 1954). 200 For painted sticks and bark books, see Robert Griffin and Donald A. Grinde, Jr., Apocalypse de/of Chiokoyhikoy,Chef'des Iroquois/Chief of the Iroquois (Saint-Nicolas, Quebec: Les Presses de l'Universit^ Laval, 1997) 180-81. 201 For the Lenape use of hieroglyphics in the eighteenth century, see Loskiel, History ofthe Mission ofthe United Brethren, 1: 25. See the description of a shaman's using hieroglyphic writing to counteract the missionaries, in Heckewelder, History, Manners, and Customs, 291-92. Natives also carved hieroglyphs, which anthropologists try to distinguish as "pictographs" on rocks. Robert Grumet reproduced a picture of rock "pictographs," noting that "Such engravings often depict human, animal, and abstract figures." Robert S. Grumet, The Lenapes (New York: Chelsea House Publishers, 1989) 45. John Haywood likewise^ recorded that tradition was passed along not only orally, but also "by their hieroglyphics." Haywood, The Natural and Aboriginal History of Tennessee, 226. As late as 1908, anthropologist M. R. Harrington said that the Canadian Lenap6 "reported the use of pic-

384 NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

tures painted or scratched on flat pieces of wood, peeled trees, or other suitable surfaces, which could be read by any Indian." M. R. Harrington, "A Preliminary Sketch of Lenape Cultare," American Anthropologist 15 (1913): 234.

202 To depict reincamations, the Lenape used animal figures, "for the Angry they say is possest with the spirit of a Serpent; the Bloudy with that of a Wolf; the Timorous, of a Deer; the Faithfiil, of a Dog, &c. and therefore they are figured by these Emblemes" (spellings and diction in the original), John Lederer, The Discoveries of John Lederer, In Three Several Marches from Virginia, to the West of Carolina (1672; reprint, Ann Arbor MI: University Microfilms, Inc., 1966) 5. Qualities of mind and being were also signified emblematically: "By the figure of a Stag, they imply swiftness; by that of a Serpent, wrath; of a Lion, courage; of a Dog, fidelity: by a Swan, they signify the English, alluding to their complexion, and flight over the Sea." Lederer, The Discoveries of John Lederer, 4. Mathematical concepts were also represented. "An account of Time, and other things, they keep on a string or leather thong tied in knots of several colors." Lederer, The Discoveries ofJohn Lederer, 4. In 1653, Adriaen van der Donck recorded their using wooden sticks as memo systems. Van der Donck, "Description of New Netherland," in In Mohawk Country, 125. Among the Iroquois, there was also what Lafitau called "the stick or the sign of enlistment," which used recognized symbols carved into a stick and painted vermilion. Lafitau, Customs of the American Indians, 2: 110-11. 203 Barbara A. Mann, "The Fire at Onondaga: Wampum as Proto-Wdting," Akwesasne Notes 26th Anniversary Issue 1.1 (spring 1995): 40-48; Heckewelder, History, Manners, and Customs, 108. 204 Cusick, "Sketches of Ancient History ofthe Six Nations," 16-38. Cusick renders the Adodaroh as "King Atotarho" and a number. 205 Loskiel, History ofthe Mission ofthe United Brethren, 1: 24. 206 C. S. Rafinesque, Ancient History, or Annals of Kentucky (Frankfort, KY: The Author, 1824) 10. 207 Rafinesque, Annals of Kentucky, 11. 208 Rafinesque, Annals ofKentucky, 12-13. 209 Rafinesque, Annals ofKentucky, 15. 210 Rafinesque, Annals of Kentucky, quote, 23; entire story, 23-27. Rafinesque called the Iroquois "Menguy" in a fractured rendering the Lenape slur, mengwe, meaning "the sneaky people," slung at the Iroquois by the disaffected minority of Lenap6 who became Moravian converts. Paul A. W. Wallace, ed.. Thirty Thousand Miles with John Heckewelder (Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press, 1958) etymology of mengwe, 425; usage of, Mana, Iroquoian Women, 17-18. 211 Thomas, The Problem ofthe Ohio Mounds, 45. 212 Herbert C. Kraft, "The Northem Lenape in Prehistoric and Early Colonial Times," The Lenape Indian: A Symposium. Publication no. 7 (South Orange, NJ: Archaeological Research Center, 1984) 3; Herbert C. Kraft, The Lenape: Archaeology, History, and

NOTES 385

Ethnography (Newark: New Jersey Historical Society, 1986) 4-7; Williams, Fantastic Archaeology, 114—15. 213 David M. Oestreicher, "Unmasking the Walam Olum, a Nineteenth Century Hoax," Bulletin, Archaeological Society of New Jersey—South Orange 49 (1994): 1-44. 214 David M. Oestreicher, "Text out of Context: The Arguments That Created and Sustained the Walam Olum," Bulletin, Archaeological Society of New Jersey— South Orange 50 (1995): 31-42; David M. Oestreicher, "Unraveling the Walam Olum," Natural History 105.10 (October 1996): 14-21; see, especially, 16-18. 215 Charles Beatty, The Joumal of a Two Months Tour (London: William Davenhill and George Pearch, 1768) 27. 216 Beatty, The Journal of a Two Months Tour, 90. 217 Beatty, The Joumal of a Two Months Tour, 27. 218 Haywood, The Natural and Aboriginal History of Tennessee, 215. 219 Beatty, The Joumal of a Two Months Tour, 27. 220 Haywood, The Natural and Aboriginal History of Tennessee, 215. 221 Beatty, The Joumal of a Two Months Tour, 27. 222 In 1767, Sutton said they had "settled" along the Delaware River "three hundred and seventy years ago." Beatty, The Joumal of a Two Months Tour, 27 223 Beatty, The Joumal of a Two Months Tour, 27. 224 Beatty, The Joumal of a Two Months Tour, 28. 225 Barton, New Views ofthe Origin ofthe Tribes, appendix, 29. 226 Brinton, The Lenape and Their Legends, 136. For the relationship of the Mohegans and the Lenape, in 1930, Wi-tapanoxwe ("Walks-with-daylight," Mohegan) stated that "the Mohican or Mahikan of the upper Hudson River and my people—the Mohegan of Connecticut" were "kin," having shared the trek east to the Hudson River. Gladys Tantaquidgeon, Folk Medicine ofthe Delaware and Related Algonkian Indians, Anthropological Series, no. 3 (Harrisburg: The Pennsylvania Historical and Museum Commission, 1972)65. 227 Quoted in Brinton, The Lenape and Their Legends, 137. 228 For a detailed discussion of Heckewelder's interface with the Lenape, see Barbara Alice Mann, "Forbidden Ground: Racial Politics and Hidden Identity in James Fenimore Cooper's Leather-stocking Tales," (Ph.D. diss.. University of Toledo, 1997), especially 45-187. 229 Heckewelder, History, Manners, and Customs, 47.

386 NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

230 Schweinitz, The Life and Times of David Zeisberger, 32-33, 231 Heckewelder, History. Manners, and Customs, 47, 232 Heckewelder, History. Manners, and Customs, 48. There has, for instance, been a lot of back-and-forthing conceming the "proper" form, Talligewi or Alligewi. Heckewelder ultimately came down in favor of Alligewi, based on the arguments of Colonel John Gibson (1740-1822), a militia leader, trader, and sometime adoptee of, apparently. League nations, thus acquiring some of the Native languages. They called up the evidence of "A" beginning words, in the Alligewi Sipu, or River of the Alligewi, and in the Alleghany River, Heckewelder, History. Manners, and Customs, 48, (nl) 48. J, N. B, Hewitt also came down in favor of Alligewi, in "The Name Cherokee and Its Derivation," American Anthropologist, new series, 2.3 (1900): 593. Loskiel, based on Zeisberger's vocabularies, noted that the Ohio River's entire drainage basin was known as the Alligewinengk, or "the land, into which they came from distant places," again stressing the initial "A." Loskiel, History of the Mission of the United Brethren, 1: 127. Mooney, however, came down in favor of recognizing the Cherokee name for themselves, Tsa'lag!'noting how close Talligewi comes to it. Mooney, Myths of the Cherokee, 184. I think we should all remember that the word has come through several accents, none of them belonging to the Talligewi, themselves. First, the word appears, as heard and pronounced by Lenape ears, and second, as heard and transcribed by German (Moravian) ears. The English-speaking Gibson and Hewitt just added another layer, this time of English ears. An initial 'Ts" might have been unpronounceable to some foreign speakers, and thus simplified to "A," but the Cherokee have no difficulty with it. Thus, I use Talligewi here. 233 Heckewelder, History. Manners, and Customs, 48. 234 Heckewelder, History. Manners, and Customs, 49. 235 Heckewelder, History. Manners, and Customs, 49. 236 Heckewelder, History. Manners, and Customs, 50; for the Lenape as "a powerful nation," see Haywood, The Natural and A boriginal History of Tennessee, 215. 237 Heckewelder, History. Manners, and Customs, 50. 238 Zeisberger, History of the Northem American Indians, 31. 239 Heckewelder, History. Manners, and Customs, 50. 240 Heckewelder, History. Manners, and Customs, 50. 241 Heckewelder, History. Manners, and Customs, 51. 242 Frank G. Speck, "The Wapanachki Delawares and the English; Their Past as Viewed by an Ethnologist," The Pennsylvania Magazine 67 (1943): 325-26. 243 Schweinitz, 77ie Life and Times of David Zeisberger, 35. 244 Schweinitz, The Life and Times of David Zeisberger, 36-37.

NOTES 387

245 Schoolcraft, Historical and Statistical Information, 4: 176-178. 246 Schweinitz, The Life and Times of David Zeisberger, 32-35. 247 Tantaquidgeon, Folk Medicine ofthe Delaware and Related Algonkian Indians, 65. 248 Hitakonanu 'laxk [Tree Beard], The Grandfathers Speak: Native American Folk Tales of the Lenape People (New York: Interlink Books, 1994) 7. 249 Hitakonanu 'laxk. The Grandfathers Speak, 7-8. 250 Hitakonanu 'laxk. The Grandfathers Speak, 9. 251 Gmmet, TheLenapes, 14. 252 Speck, "The Wapanachki Delawares and the English," 326. 253 Speck, "The Wapanachki Delawares and the English," 327. Speck also listed the "Munsee," but, being a division of the Lenape, they were necessarily "Brothers," independent of migrations. 254 Hendrick Aupaumut, "A Narrative of an Embassy to the Westem Indians," Memoirs ofthe Historical Society of Pennsylvania 2.1 (1827): 76. 255 Aupaumut, "A Narrative of an Embassy to the Westem Indians," 77. 256 Brinton, "Folk-Lore ofthe Modem Lenape," 188. 257 Brinton, The Lenape and Their Legends, 144. 258 For Miami migration, see Pierre de Charlevoix, Joumal of a Voyage to North America, 2 vols. (1761; repdnt, Ann Arbor, MI: University Microfilms, Inc., 1966) 2: 170. 259 William W. Newcomb, Jr., The Culture and Acculturation of the Delaware Indians, Anthropological Papers, no. 10 (Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan, 1956) 75. 260 Newcomb, The Culture and Acculturation ofthe Delaware Indians, 75. 261 Complanter, Legends ofthe Longhouse, 46. 262 Beatty, The Joumal of a Two Months Tour, 90. 263 Haywood, The Natural and Aboriginal History of Tennessee, 2Ai. 264 Peter LindestrOm, Geographia Americae with an Account ofthe Delaware Indians, Based on Surveys and Notes Made in 1654-1656, trans. Amandus Johnson (Philadelphia: The Swedish Colonial Society, 1925) 179. The 1925 edition added in a footnote, "Square and round hills had a wide distdbution and were found in South Amedca also," Lindestrom, Geographia Americae, 179 (n 15). 265 Hardngton, "A Preliminary Sketch of Lenape Culture," 221.

388 NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

266 Zeisberger, History ofthe Northem American Indians, 30-31. 267 LQs]de\, History of the Mission, 1: 141. 268 Loskiel, History ofthe Mission, 1: 120. In 1653, Adriaen van der Donck described stone mound burials still occurring. Van der Donck, "Description of New Netherland," in In Mohawk Country, 116. 269 Jonathan Edwards, ed., David Brainerd: His Life and Joumal (1749; Edinburgh: H. S. Baynes, 1826)314. 270 Van der Donck, "Description of New Netherland," in In Mohawk Country, 127. 271 Loskiel, History ofthe Mission ofthe United Brethren, 1: 35. 272 Edward Gaylord Bourne, ed.. Narratives ofthe Career of Hemando de Soto, 2 vols. (New York: Allerton Book Company, 1922) 2: 102. The "Narrative of De Soto's Expedition" is actually by Gonzalo Fernandez de Oviedo y Valdes, based on the Ranjel diary. Since Ranjel kept a record as events transpired, his days of march are considered fairly reliable, unlike the estimates of others, which seem concocted well after the fact. Bourne, Narratives ofthe Career of Hemando de Soto, 1: xvi; Hudson, Knights of Spain, Warriors ofthe Sun, 442. 273 Gentleman of Elvas, "The Narrative ofthe Expedition of Hemando de Soto," in Spanish Explorers in the Southem United States, ed. TTieodore H. Lewis (New York: Scribner's, 1907) 176. 274 B. K. Swartz, Jr., ed., Adena: The Seeking of an Identity, Symposium, March 5-7, 1970 (Muncie, IN: Ball State University, 1970)6 (n 1); Shaffer, Native Americans before 1492, 38; Webb and Baby, The Adena People, No. 2,45. 275 Hudson, Knights of Spain, Warriors ofthe Sun, Map 6, 148. 276 Haywood, The Natural and Aboriginal History of Tennessee, 225. 277 Paullin, Atlas ofthe Historical Geography ofthe United States, Plate 24. 278 Haywood, The Natural and Aboriginal History of Tennessee, 224. 279 "Linguistically the Cherokee belong to the Iroquoian stock." Mooney gives northem Iroquois, Tuscarora, and Cherokee as the three "stock" of Iroquois. Mooney, "Myths ofthe Cherokee," 16. 280 John Norton {Teyoninhokarawen), The Joumal of Major John Norton, 1816, ed. Carl F. Klinck and James J. Talman (Toronto: The Champlain Society, 1970) 46. Mooney agreed, saying, "It is evident that tribes of common stock must at one time have occupied contiguous territories." Mooney, "Myths ofthe Cherokee," 17. 281 Norton, Joumal, quotes, 46; Iroquoian derivation reaffirmed, 66. In 1951, linguist Floyd Loimsbury gauged the Iroquois-Cherokee separation at 4,000 years old; in 1961, he refmed

NOTES 389

his estimate to "around 3,500 to 3,800 years." Lounsbury, "Iroquois-Cherokee Linguistic Relations," 11. 282 James Adair, History ofthe American Indians, ed. Samuel Cole Williams (1775; Johnson City, TN: Watauga Press, 1930) 3. 283 Barton, New Views ofthe Origin ofthe Tribes, 9. 284 Haywood, The Natural and Aboriginal History of Tennessee, 236-37. 285 Haywood, The Natural and Aboriginal History of Tennessee, 226. 286 Barton, New Views ofthe Origin ofthe Tribes, xliv. 287 William S. Webb and Raymond S. Baby, TTie Adena People, No. 2, 4th printing (1957; Columbus: The Ohio Historical Society, 1975) 103. 288 For datings ofthe two cultures, see Shaffer, Native Americans before 1492,42. 289 Duncan, Living Stories ofthe Cherokee, 199. 290 Kate Herman, "Legends of the Cherokees," Joumal of American Folk-Lore 2 (1889): Eubanks, 53; tradition, 54. See also Mooney, "Myths ofthe Cherokee," for the tradition of "The Stone Man," 319-20. 291 James H. Howard, "Altamaha Cherokee Folklore and Customs," Joumal of American Folk-Lore 72.284 (April/June 1959): 136. 292 Howard, "Altamaha Cherokee Folklore and Customs," 136. 293 Mooney, "Myths ofthe Cherokee," 320, 529. 294 Duncan, Living Stories o the Cherokee, 198. 295 Mooney, "Myths ofthe Cherokee," 15, 182. All of Cherokee's renderings— "Chalaque" (Portuguese), "Cheraqui" (French) and "Cherokee" (English)—comprise nonsense syllables in the Cherokee language and imdoubtedly originated with outsiders. See also, Mooney's long etymologies of 75a lagf', Talligewi, and Allegewi, in Mooney, "Myths of the Cherokee," 184-85. Mooney claimed that "Adair's attempt to connect the name Cherokee with the word for fire, atsila, is an enor founded upon imperfect knowledge of the language" (italics in the original), Mooney, "Myths ofthe Cherokee," 16. 296 Norton, Joumal, Birth, xxv; death, xcvii; adoption, xxiv; parentage, xxviii; Scotland, xxviii; printer, xxix. 297 Norton, Joumal, for Selukuki Wohellengh 42; for tradition, 46. 298 Norton, Joumal, Tekoghwelliska as McDonald, 63; spelled Thoghwelliska, 66; spelled Tekighwelliska, 76; biographical data, 76. 299 Norton, Joumal, 66.

390 NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

300 Mooney, Myths ofthe Cherokee, 112; Raymond D. Fogelson, "Who Were the Ani-Kutanf? An Excursion into Cherokee Historical Thought," Ethnohistory 2,1 .A (1984): 256. Hicks's information should be treated with some care, for although elected principal chief in 1827, he intermingled biblical-style interpretations with traditions. For instance, he represented "Sky" as "heaven" and spoke of a unitary, Christian-like "Creation." Fogelson, "Who Were the Ani-KutAnr?" 258. These are westem, not Native, ideas, for Sky World is emphatically not heaven, while Creation is an ongoing process and the work of many hands. It was probably Haywood who most corrupted the traditions he took down, however, for he was intent upon proving that Native Americans were the "ten lost tribes of Israel." Consequently, he went out of his way to assert that Natives had formerly practiced circumcision and eagerly recited a 1728 tradition from Ohio recounting "the deluge," in which "all mankind perished, except a few, who had been saved in a canoe," in replication of Noah's flood. Haywood, The Natural and Aboriginal History of Tennessee, circumcision, 243, 244; "deluge," 243. He also falsely explicated the harvest festivals in terms of rites of Rosh HashanaA'om Kippur, not realizing that the actual correlation, assuming that one is possible, is to the harvest celebration of Sukkot. All of his related talk of "sin" and expiation thereof in the Native celebrations is completely interpolated into Native customs by himself, for there is no "sin" in traditional lore. Haywood, The Natural and Aboriginal History of Tennessee, 254-59. 301 Haywood, The Natural and Aboriginal History of Tennessee, 236. 302 Lederer, The Discoveries of John Lederer 3. 303 Haywood, The Natural and Aboriginal History of Tennessee, 236, Haywood's earlier assertion that "the Cherokees came from a country east of the Alleghenies" is just not supported by traditions that he, himself, collected. Haywood, The Natural and Aboriginal History of Tennessee, 226.1 believe that, not only he was careless with his information, forming it to fit preconceived ideas, but that he also simply did not understand much of what he was being told. 304 Lederer, The Discoveries, 3. 305 Lederer, The Discoveries, 3. 306 Haywood, The Natural and Aboriginal History of Tennessee, 226. 307 Joseph-Arthur, compte de Gobineau, The Inequality of Human Races, trans. Adrian Collins (1854; 1915; reprint. New York: Howard Fertig, Inc., 1967) 71. 308 See, for instance, Cyrus Thomas, "Cherokees Probably Mound-Builders," Magazine of American History 11.5 (May 1884): 396-407; Cyrus Thomas, The Cherokees in PreColumbian Times (New York: N. D. C. Hodges, Publisher, 1890); and Thomas, Repori on the Mound Explorations ofthe Bureau of Ethnology, 17-18. 309 Haywood, The Natural and Aboriginal History of Tennessee, 234. 310 James Mooney, "Cherokee Mound Building," American Anthropologist 2.2 (April 1889): 167, 168. 311 YoxAni ntsi as Natchez and Ani-Kitu hwagYas ancient Cherokee, see Mooney, "Myths of

NOTES 391

the Cherokee," 509, Mooney claims that the term Kitu hwagi was unanalyzable, but "derived from Kitu'hwa, the name of an ancient Cherokee settlement formerly on Tuckasegee river, just about the present Bruson City, in Swain County, North Carolina. It is noted in 1730 as one of the 'seven mother towns' of the tribe. Its inhabitants were called the Ani-Kitu ^vvagi (people of Kituhwa), and seem to have exercised a controlling influence over those of all the towns on the waters of Tuckasegee and the upper opart of Little Tennessee, the whole body being frequently classed together as Ani-Kitu hwagi ." Mooney, "Myths of the Cherokee," 182, 312 Mooney, "Myths of the Cherokee," 395, Cyrus Thomas also gave the reason for building townhouses on mounds as the "freshets" (or flash flood), citing the speed with which spring rain can "tum an insignificant creek into a raging torrent." Quoted in Mooney, "Cherokee Mound Building," 171. 313 Some confusion exists about the number of clans of Cherokee. Haywood gave eight: "Wote-a, the paint; Ne-lus-te, the hollow leaf; Nank-a-lo-hee, a clan with the hair hanging loose; Neho-lo-hawee, the blind Savanna; Cheesque, the bird; Howee, the deer; Nesonee, the clan with the rings of the ears cut off." Haywood, The Natural and Aboriginal History of Tennessee, 276, Most anthropologists claim only seven: Ani-Wodi (Paint clan); AniGilohi (long-haired or twisters clan); Ani-Kawi (deer clan); Ani-Tsiskwa (bird clan); AniSohoni (blue paint clan); Ani-Wayah (wolf clan); Ani-Gotegewi (wild potato clan). Haywood's "Ne-lus-te" clan is entirely leflout, Lewis Morgan suggested a "holly clan", Ani-sdasde, as well. Mary U, Rothrock, ed.. The Natural and Aboriginal History of Tennessee (1959; reprint, Kingsport, TN: Mary U. Rothrock, 1973), Ani-Kituwhagi, 422-23 (n d); 427 (n h). Mooney found some evidence that there were once fourteen clans, reduced to seven through conflation in the wake of heavy depopulation. Mooney, "Myths of the Cherokee," 212-13. Fourteen might also have reflected the two clan halves so common in the east. 314 Mooney, "Cherokee Mound Building," 168; Mooney, "Myths of the Cherokee," 396, 458-61 (n 50). 315 Mooney, "Myths of the Cherokee," 396. 316 Mooney, "Cherokee Mound Building," 167,168, 169. 317 Mooney, "Cherokee Mound Building," 169. 318 For Tsiskwaya fire ritual, see Mooney, "Cherokee Mound Building," 167,171. Haywood added that migration traditions of the Cherokee were "delivered at the national festival of the green com dance every year," until the late eighteenth century. Haywood, The Natural and Aboriginal History of Tennessee, 237. 319 Mooney, "Myths of the Cherokee," 396. 320 Mooney, "Myths of the Cherokee," 396. The account, "The Mounds and the Constant Fire: The Old Sacred Things," is repeated from Mooney, in Ugvwiyuhi, Journey to Sunrise: Myths and Legends of the Cherokee (Claremore, OK: Egi Press, 1977) 48-50. Grady N. Lowrey, in the dedication to Joumey to Sunrise, claimed that his father had written Joumey. Ugvwiyuhi was bom in 1914, which is fourteen years after Mooney had published

392 NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

the traditions contained, verbatim, in Joumey. Possibly, Lowrey meant that his father had compiled the slim volume, 321 Mooney, "Cherokee Mound Building," 169. 322 Norton, Joumal, 80. 323 Fogelson, "Who Were the Ani-Kutani?" 258. 324 Fogelson, "Who Were the Ani-Kutani?" 257-58. 325 Bradley Thomas Lepper, "The Archaeology of the Newark Earthworks," Ancient Earthen Enclosures of the Eastem Woodlands, ed. Robert E. Mainfort, Jr., and Lynne P, Sullivan (Gainesville: University Press of Florida, 1998) quote, 134, discussion, 133-34. 326 For Hicks's letter, see Fogelson, "Who Were the Ani-Kutinl?" 258, 327 Fogelson, "Who Were the Ani-Kutdni?" 259, 328 Haywood, The Natural and Aboriginal History of Tennessee, 266. 329 Haywood, The Natural and Aboriginal History of Tennessee, 266. 330 Brinton, The Myths of the New World, 300. 331 Fogelson, "Who Were the Ani-Kutani?" 258-59. 332 D. J. MacGowan, "Secret Indian Societies," The Historical Magazine 10.5 (May 1866): 139. 333 See the tradition, "Tsul'ka lu'. The Slant-Eyed Giant," in Mooney, "Myths of the Cherokee," 337-41, 334 Mooney, "Myths of the Cherokee," 410,480 (n 81). 335 Mooney, "Myths of the Cherokee," 500-1 (n 106). 336 Haywood, The Natural and Aboriginal History of Tennessee, 280-81. 337 John D. Hunter, Memoirs of a Captivity among the Indians of North America, from Childhood to the Age of Nineteen: With Anecdotes Descriptive of their Manners and Customs, ed. Joseph J, Kwait (1823; reprint. New York: Johnson Reprint Corporation, 1970)39,47. 338 Arthur C. Parker, The Code of Handsome Lake. The Seneca Prophet, New York State Museum Bulletin 163, Education Department Bulletin, no. 530 (Albany: University of the State of New York, 1913) 106. 339 As MacGowan put it, "The people long brooded in silence over the oppressions and outrages of this high caste, whom they deeply hated, but greatly feared." MacGowan, "Secret Indian Societies," 140.

NOTES 393

340 MacGowan, "Secret Indian Societies," 140. 341 Norton, yo«/7ia/, 80. 342 Fogelson, "Who Were the Ani-Kutani?" 258, 343 Adair, History of the American Indians, 245; Haywood, The Natural and Aboriginal History of Tennessee, 266, 344 Adair, History of the American Indians, 245. 345 See the tradition, "Origin of Disease and Medicine," in which councils of anmials punish aggressive humankind by visiting various diseases on people. Mooney, "Myths of the Cherokee," 250-51. This interpretation of disease helps explain why, in response to a smallpox outbreak in 1738, the Cherokee shamans "broke their old consecrated physicpots" and tossed out their medicine bundles as "polluted." Adair, History of the American Indians, 245. 346 MacGowan, "Secret Indian Societies," 140. Fogelson speculated that the old priesthood went underground, Fogelson, "Who Were the Ani-Kutini?" 260. This does not, however, accord with tradition. In his analysis of the great changes in Cherokee religion since the Ani'-Kuta'nf, Fogelson also left out the grave damage done to traditional thought pattems by Christianization, 347 Norton, Journal, 80. 348 Marilou Awiakta, Selu: Seeking the Com-Mother's Wisdom (Golden, CO: Fulcrum Publishing, 1993) 92-99; Virginia Camey, "'Woman Is the Mother of All': Nanye'hi and Kitteuha: War Women of the Cherokees," in Native American Speakers of the Eastem Woodlands: Selected Speeches and Critical Analyses (Westport: Greenwood Press, 2001) 123-43. 349 Haywood, The Natural and Aboriginal History of Tennessee, 266. 350 Mooney, "Myths of the Cherokee," 396-97. 351 Lieut. A. W. Whipple, Thomas Ewbank, Esq., and Prof. Wm. W. Tumer, Report upon the Indian Tribes (Washington, D.C: Govemment Printing Office, 1855) 35 Whipple's informant was Jesse Chisolm (1805-1868), a Tennessee Cherokee, the son of a Scottish trader and a Cherokee mother. Chisolm spoke fourteen Native languages. 352 Mooney, "Myths of the Cherokee," 397. 353 Parker, The Constitution of the Five Nations, 79-80 (n 3). Among the other nations named as receiving an invitation were the Adirondaks, the Wyandot, the Tionante, the Attiwendaronk, and the Erie (who seem to have accepted as westem Seneca, based on later Iroquoian tradition). 354 For Cherokee as culturally liberal not conservative, see Mooney, "Myths of the Cherokee," 229. Like so many other westem scholars, Mooney interpreted this as a "degeneration," but malleability is emblematic of intelligence responding to challenge.

394 NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

4. Kokomthena, Singing in the Fiames: Sky-Earth Logic in the iVIounds 1 For my original article defining and exploring Euro-forming, see Barbara A. Mann, "Euroforming the Data," Debating Democracy (Santa Fe, NM: Clear Light Publishers, 1998) 160-90. See also my discussion of Euro-forming in Barbara Alice Mann, Iroquoian Women: The Gantowisas (New York: Peter Lang, 2000) 62-63. There are some archaeologists who are not unaware of this damaging process. In 1980, Daniel Miller noted the cultural constraints of archaeology, that a science based on the metaphors and themes of one culture translates but awkwardly the cultural ideas of another. He cautioned archaeologists that westem culture cannot simply "reproduce itself" in its interpretations of the other culture. Daniel Miller, "Archaeology and Development," Current Anthropology 21.6 (December 1980): 709. He castigated the notion that archaeology was somehow neutral or objected as self-delusional. Miller, "Archaeology and Development," 711, 2 Maureen Korp, The Sacred Geography of the American Mound Builders, Native American Studies, vol. 2 (Lewiston, NY: The Edwin Mellen Press, 1990) 62-63. 3 Korp, Sacred Geography, 63, 4 Thomas McElwain, "Seneca Concepts of Time," Canadian Joumal of Native Studies 7,2 (1987): 272; Mann, Iroquoian Women, 91-92. 5 Gladys Tantaquidgeon, Folk Medicine of the Delaware and Related Algonkian Indians, Anthropological Series, no. 3 (Harrisburg: The Pennsylvania Historical and Museum Commission, 1972) 114, 6 For an analysis of the "magical thinking" charge, see Paula Gunn Allen, The Sacred Hoop: Recovering the Feminine in American Indian Traditions (1986; Boston: Beacon Press, 1992) 64-68. The important Dwarfs are rarely discussed. In Seneca tradition, the Djogeb", or Dwarfs, are human-like in form, just very tiny, while in Wyandot tradition, one kind has the feet of a duck and jointless elbows. Iroquoian Dwarfs live in caves or hollow trees, and, being dreadful hunters, themselves, they have a markedly kind disposal toward humans who help them hunt, handing out hunting charms and generally watching over people as well as plant life. Jesse J. Complanter, Legends of the Longhouse (Philadelphia: J. B. Lippincott, 1938) 33, 36; C, M, Barbeau, Huron and Wyandot Mythology, Memoir 80, Antfiropological Series, no. 11, Canada Department of Mines, Geological Survey (Ottawa: Government Printing Bureau, 1915)9. The DJogeo" live in caves, collect human fingemail parings, and beat their tiny drums whenever they are in need of tobacco, to alert their human suppliers to bring more. Arthur C. Parker, Seneca Myths and Folk Tales (1927; Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press, 1989) 18, The Little People or Little Men of Cherokee tradition have the same, benevolent bent toward humans and once even tried to help the Cherokee kill the Sun, which was making war on the Cherokee, James Mooney, "Myths of the Cherokee," Nineteenth Annual Report of the Bureau ofAmerican Ethnology, 1897-1898, Part 1 (Washington, D.C: Govemment Printing Office, 1900) 252, 289. Interestingly, the wondrous Little Men of Cherokee tradition, the Thunder Boys, are the sons of Selu and Kana if. Mooney, "Myths of the Cherokee," 295, 438. Dwarfs could suddenly disappear. Complanter, Legends of the Longhouse, 41. 7 Jim Brown's remark appears in his response to Warren De Boer's article, in Warren De Boer, "Ceremonial Centres from the Cayapas (Esmeraldas, Ecuador) to Chillicothe (Ohio,

NOTES 395

USA)," Cambridge Archaeological Joumal 7.2 (1997): 244. 8 The article was by Thomas McElwain, "The Archaic Roots of Eastem Woodland Eschatology: A Soul-Dualism Explanation of Adena Mortuary," Duality, Cosmos Series, vol. 1 (Edinburgh: Traditional Cosmological Society, 1986) 37-43; Thomas McElwain, e-mail to Barbara A. Mann, 26 August 2000. Quoted with permission. The West Virginian Iroquois proudly use the slur term "Mingo" (from mengwe) in a sort of in-your-face adherence to their Native identity. (See page 369 [n 210].) 9 Robert L. Hall, "In Search ofthe Ideology ofthe Adena-Hopewell Climax," in David S. Brose and N'omi Greber, Hopewell Archaeology: The Chillicothe Conference (Kent: The Kent State University Press, 1979) 258-65. 10 Robert L. Hall, An Archaeology ofthe Soul: North American Indian Belief and Ritual (Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 1997) 156.1 balk, however, at Hall's further equating reasonable extrapolation with geological "uniformitadanism." The idea of singular progression is profoundly westem and, for my money, simplistic thinking. 11 Hall, An Archaeology ofthe Soul, Hall's descent, x; modem Natives, x-xi, 103. 12 See further discussions of these issues in Mann, Iroquoian Women, 71-74; Mann, "Euroforming the Data," 160-63. 13 Gabriel Sagard, TTte Long Joumey to the Country ofthe Hurons, ed. George M. Wrong, with Introduction and Notes, trans. H. H. Langton (1632; Toronto: The Champlain Society, 1939) 73-74. 14 Reuben Gold Thwaites, ed. and trans., Les Relations de Jesuites, or The Jesuit Relations: Travels and Explorations ofthe Jesuit Missionaries in New France, 1610-1791, 73 vols. (New York: Pageant Book Company, 1959) 33:139. 15 C[harles] C[hristopher] Trowbridge, Shawnese Traditions, ed. Vemon Kinietz and Erminie W. Voegelin (Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 1939) 2-3. 16 Jonathan Edwards, ed., David Brainerd: His Life and Joumal (1749; Edinburgh: H. S. Baynes, 1826)394,395. 17 George Henry Loskiel, History ofthe Mission ofthe United Brethren among the Indians in North America, trans. Christian Ignatius La Trobe, 3 vols. (London: Brethren's Society ofthe Furtherance ofthe Gospel, 1794) 1:21. 18 Loskiel, History ofthe Mission ofthe United Brethren, 1: 34. 19 For my extended discussions ofthe good-evil interpolation, see Mann, Iroquoian Women, 71-74,307-11. 20 Korp, The Sacred Geography, 68. 21 William F. Romain, "Hopewellian Geometry: Forms at the Interface of Time and Etemity," in Paul J. Pacheco, A View from the Core: A Synthesis of Ohio Hopewell Archaeology (Columbus: The Ohio Arcaheological Council, 1996) 197.

396 NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

22 See my discussions of this process in Barbara A. Mann, "The Lynx in Time: Haudenosaunee Women's Traditions and History," American Indian Quarterly 21.3 (summer 1997): 428-29; and Mann, "Euro-forming the Data," 184-87. 23 Edward Sapir, Time Perspective in Aboriginal American Culture: A Study in Method (Ottawa: Canada Dept. of Mines, Geological Survey, 1916) 17. 24 For "sky color" as invisible and death-linked, see Parker, Seneca Myths and Folk Tales, 6. Blue is always linked with death. For instance, the "Blue Otter," a mystical being, exists to poison water and spread lethal disease, Parker, Seneca Myths and Folk Tales, 17. The Blue Lynx ofthe Dark Dance is "the herald of death," 119. See also my discussion ofthe meaning of blue, in Mann, Iroquoian Women, 347-48. For the death-making spirit as an "invisible man," see Arthur C. Parker, TTie Code of Handsome Lake, The Seneca Prophet, New York State Museum Bulletin 163, Education Department Bulletin, no. 530 (Albany: University ofthe State of New York, 1913) 18. 25 James Mooney, "Sacred Formulas of the Cherokees," Bureau of American Ethnology Annual Report for 7*55 (Washington, D.C.: Smithsonian Institution, 1891) 342. 26 John Haywood, Jite Natural and Aboriginal History of Tennessee, up to the First Settlements Therein by the White, People, in the Year 1768 (Nashville: George Wilson, 1823) 280-81; Mooney, "Myths ofthe Cherokee," 337-39. 27 Ulunsu'i, the name ofthe great stone medicine bag in the forehead ofthe Homed Serpent, means "transparency." The Homed Serpent is powerful earth medicine. Mooney, "Myths ofthe Cherokee," 542. 28 Since the mid-nineteenth century, scholars have attempted to "blame" the flip-flop ofthe Hare's Sky-Earth identity on African slaves, claiming that they corrupted the original stories of a heavenly Hare with their own pesky Br'er Rabbit. Daniel Brinton believed, for instance, that the mean and sneaky version ofthe Hare was a "low, modem, and corrupt version," and it is true that Africans brought along with them their own Rabbit stories, which did focus on him as a trickster. Brinton, The Myths ofthe New World, 175. Mooney, too, attributed the switch to the interaction between Native and African slaves in the South, Mooney, "Myths ofthe Cherokee," 233. Despite the superficial confluence of traditions, I question whether the Hare's inconsistency originated in Africa. First, whether Sky or Earth, the Native Hare was creator who carried powerful medicine in his bundle and whose tricks could be deadly, whereas the African rabbit was no creator, had no bundle, and was pretty clearly a complete buffoon. Furthermore, if Africans had influenced the figure, one might expect to find the preponderance of Earth Hares in the slave South, yet the southeastem Algonkin are those most likely to hold the Great Hare in Sky reverence. To suggest that mischievous intelligence would have appealed equally to the "primitive mind" of "Negro" and Native alike (Mooney, "Myths of the Cherokee," 233) is to substitute racism for inquiry. Looking, instead, at the ethnographic distribution ofthe Sky and Earth Hares, it becomes clear that the Earth Hare is most likely to be found among the Iroquois, Cherokee, and Lenap6. Because these were the very nations that came into the east from the far west, I suspect that their shared westem origin had more to do with the difference than did any latter-day, African influence. 29 William Strachey, The Historie ofTravell into Virginia Britania, ed. Louis B. Wright and Virginia Freund (1612; London: Hakluyt Society, 1953) 102-3. The term, Michabo, is

NOTES 397

oflen given for the Great Hare. In 1868, Daniel Brinton connected it not with Hare, necessarily, but with the Algonkin root "wab," which means "white" and gives rise to "the words for east, the dawn, the light, the day, and the moming." Brinton, Myths ofthe New World, 179. Brinton also noted that the earliest recorded stories of Michabo placed him in "the east, and in the holy formulae of meda craft, when the winds are invoked to the medicine lodge, the east is summoned in his name, the door opens in that direction, and there, at the edge ofthe earth, where the sun rises, on the shore ofthe infinite ocean that surrounds the land, he has his house and sends the luminaries forth on their daily joumey." Brinton, Myths ofthe New World, \11. 30 Brinton, The Myths ofthe New World, 175. 31 Mooney, "Myths of the Cherokee," 262. 32 As otkon, see Complanter, Legends ofthe Longhouse, 149; for his possession ofthe healing arts, see Chief Elias Johnson, Legends, Traditions and Laws, ofthe Iroquois, or Six Nations (1881; reprint. New York: AMS Press, 1978) 58-60. 33 Daniel G. Brinton, The Lenape and Their Legends: with the Complete Text and Symbols ofthe Walam Olum, A New translation, and Inquiry into Its Authenticity (1885; reprint, Lewisburg, PA: Wennawoods Publishing, 1999) 67. In 1794, Loskiel recorded that the Lenap6 "sacrifice to an hare, because, according to report, the first ancestor ofthe Indians tribes had that name." Loskiel, History ofthe Mission ofthe United Brethren, 1: 40. For the Four Winds as the cardinal directions, see William W. Newcomb, Jr., The Culture and Acculturation of the Delaware Indians, Anthropological Papers, no. 10 (Ann Arbor: University of Michigan, 1956) 59-60. 34 Even later scholars who began to grasp the meaning of the Hare continued to assume a hierarchy rather than a balance of powers between the Hare and the Four Winds. In 1885, for example, having collated as many Algonkin Great Hare traditions as he could find, Daniel Brinton realized that they always occurred in connection with fire and bright light, firm Sky associations. Unfortunately, Brinton failed to understand that the Four Winds of Earth coimterbalanced the Hare of Sky, so he continued to posit the Winds as subordinate to a "heavenly" Hare. Brinton, The Lenape and Their Legends, 66, 67. 35 Edwards, David Brainerd: His Life and Joumal, 395. 36 Edwards, David Brainerd: His Life and Joumal, 395. 37 Parker, Seneca Myths and Folk Tales, 9-10. A heavily christianized version is found in Harriet Maxwell Converse, Myths and Legends ofthe New York State Iroquois, ed. Arthur Caswell Parker, New York State Museum Bulletin 125, Education Department Bulletin, no. 437 (Albany: University ofthe State of New York, 1908) 36. Most recorded versions follow the missionary ploy of tuming Sapling and Flint into the Christian God/Jesus or the Devil, respectively, but this represents evangelical corruptions, not the tradition as it originally stood. See Mann, Iroquoian Women, 306-1. 38 For other traditions ofthe Twins and a discussion of their meaning in Iroquoian cosmology, see Mann, Iroquoian Women, traditions, 59-60; discussion, 71-74. 39 Strachey, The Historie ofTravell into Virginia Britania, 102.

398 NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

40 McElwain, "The Archaic Roots of Eastem Woodland Eschatology," 41. 41 This was from George Rogers Clark, who specified that he spoke of "the Kaskaskias, Peorias, Kahohias (now extinct), Piankashaws, Chickasaws, Cherokees, and such old nations." Henry Rowe Schoolcrafl, Historical and Statistical Information Respecting the History, Condition, and Prospects of the Indian Tribes of the United States, 6 vols. (Philadelphia: Lippincott, Grambo, & Co., 1851- 1857) quote in text, 4: 136, quote in foomote, 4: 135-36. 42 Loskiel, History ofthe Mission ofthe United Brethren, 1: 24. 43 William M. Beauchamp, The Iroquois Trail or Foot-prints ofthe Six Nations, in Customs, Traditions, and History (Fayetteville, NY: H. C. Beauchamp, 1892) 48. 44 Mooney, "Myths ofthe Cherokee," 478. 45 John Lederer, The Discoveries ofJohn Lederer, In Three Several Marches from Virginia, to the West of Carolina (1672; reprint, Ann Arbor: University Microfilms, Inc., 1966) 8. 46 Loskiel, History ofthe Mission ofthe United Brethren, 1: 24. 47 Mann, Iroquoian Women, 185-86; "The Mohawk Creation Story," Akwesasne Notes 21.5 (spring 1989): 32-29; J. N. B. Hewitt, "Iroquoian Cosmology, First Part," Twenty-first Annual Report ofthe Bureau of American Ethnology to the Secretary ofthe Smithsonian Institution, 1899-1900 (Washington, D.C.: Govemment Printing Office, 1903) 176-85, 221-31,283-95; J. N. B. Hewitt, "Iroquoian Cosmology, Second Part," Forty-third Annual Report of the Bureau of American Ethnology to the Secretary of the Smithsonian Institution, 1925-1926 (Washington, D.C.: Govemment Printing Office, 1928) 479-81; Bruce Elliott Johansen and Barbara Alice Mann, ed.. Encyclopedia ofthe Haudenosaunee (Iroquois Confederacy) (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 2000) 85-95. 48 Brinton, The Myths ofthe New World, 252-53; J. N. B. Hewitt, "The Iroquoian Concept ofthe Soul," your«a/ of American Folk-lore 8.29 (April-June 1895): 107 (n 1) . 49 John Reed Swanton, "Introduction," Notes on the Creek Indians, Smithsonian Institution. Bureau of American Ethnology, Bulletin 123. Anthropological Papers, no. 10. Washington, D.C.: Smithsonian Institution, 1939) 157; Ake Hultkrantz, Conceptions ofthe Soul among North American Indians, Monograph series, no. 1 (Stockholm: Ethnographical Museum of Sweden, 1953). 50 Joseph Fran9ois Lafitau, Customs ofthe American Indians Compared with the Customs of Primitive Times, ed. and trans. William N. Fenton and Elizabeth L. Moore, 2 vols. (1724; Toronto: The Champlain Society, 1974) 1: 230 (n 2), 230 (n 3). See my commentary on Fenton's interpretation, in Mann, Iroquoian Women, 328. 51 McElwain, "The Archaic Roots of Eastem Woodland Eschatology," 41-43; Mann, Iroquoian Women, 327-36. 52 Brinton, Myths ofthe New World, 252-53. 53 Thwaites, The Jesuit Relations, 10: 287. During the Feast ofthe Dead, the bones of all

NOTES 399

those who had died in the foregoing decade or so were buried together in an ossuary. For a lengthy description of a Feast of the Dead, see Thwaites, Jesuit Relations, 10: 265-77, 54 Lafitau, Customs of the American Indians, 1: 230, 55 Newcomb, The Culture and Acculturation of the Delaware Indians, 63. For the destination of the Earth spirit in the west, Lederer recorded in 1672 that "the abode of their lesser Deities," i,e,, their Earth spirits, "they place beyond the Mountains and Indian Ocean," Lederer, The Discoveries of John Lederer, 5. 56 Swanton, "Introduction," 157. Swanton wrongly presented yafiktca things as "evil," "sorcery," and "wizardry," and even entitled a section dealing with this "witchcraft," but, again, these notions are interpolations of westem thinking that do not accurately represent the traditional philosophy of the people who originated them. 57 M, R, Harrington, "A Preliminary Sketch of Lenape Culture," American Anthropologist 15 (1913): 228; Newcomb, The Culture and Acculturation of the Delaware Indians, 63. 58 Tantaquidgeon, Folk Medicine of the Delaware, 6. 59 Thwaites, The Jesuit Relations, 6: 115, The Seneca call these flying lights the Gahai". They work with otkon (wrinkled or tricky) forces to direct otkon shamans to the items for their medicine bundles. The Gahai "art often seen leaving the homes of such medicine people, taking them away through the air for otkon purposes. Parker, Seneca Myths and Folk Tales, 16. Missionary overlay and the subsequent Euro-forming of anthropologists have tumed the Gahai" into "demons" and their medicine people into "witches," but demonology is a completely non-Native concept and all such references should be removed from anthropological literature. For an authentic explanation of otkon medicine, see Mann, Iroquoian Women, 307-8. 60 J. N. B. Hewitt, "Iroquoian Superstitions," American Anthropologist 3.4 (October 1890): 389. Some northeastem Earth shamans deliberately worked with these lights. In 1637, for instance, the Montaignais of the Northeast described the earth-light, or shake-tent, ceremonies to the Jesuit Paul Le Jeune (who, naturally, labeled them demonic). During the ceremony, the shaman invited the Khichikouekhi, or "those who make the light," into the Apitouagan, or sacred tent. When the lights came, they were observed to line up unevenly, one above the other. Thwaites, Jesuit Relations, 12: 17. Sometimes, the shaman or quester inside the Apitouagan would be "lifted up, so that those who looked inside no longer saw him." One shaman "was lifted up, and without any one [sic] knowing how, for he suddenly disappeared ftom before their eyes. Towards evening, his robe was foimd, but not his body; a few days later, he retumed utterly wom out, and could not tell where he had been, or what he had done." The Montaignais assured Le Jeune that some medicine people disappeared, never to retum, a development they viewed as ominous. Thwaites, Jesuit Relations, 12: 21. 61 Hewitt: "Iroquoian Superstitions," 389. 62 Joab Spencer, "The Shawnee Indians: Their Customs, Traditions and Folk-lore," Transactions of the Kansas State Historical Society 10 (1908): 391; Joab Spencer, "Shawnee Folk-Lore," Joumal of American Folk-Lore 22 (1909): 322.

400 NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

63 Spencer, "Shawnee Folk-Lore," 322. 64 Spencer, "The Shawnee Indians," 391. 65 Jeremiah Curtin and J. N. B. Hewitt, "Seneca Fiction, Legends, and Myths, Part I," ThirtySecond Annual Bureau of American Ethnology, 1910-1911 (Washington, D.C.: Govemment Printing Office, 1918) 551. 66 Lafitau, Customs ofthe American Indians, for Te jennoniakoua, 1: 258; for Milky Way Trail, 1: 256; for Eskennanne, see 1: 251. In 1637, the Jesuit Paul Le Jeune rendered it, Eskendende, Thwaites, Jesuit Relations, 11: 129. See also, Mann, Iroquoian Women, 335-36. 67 For south of Sky, see Edwards, David Brainerd: His Life and Joumal, 314; Loskiel, History ofthe Mission ofthe United Brethren, 1: 35; Brinton, The Lenape and Their Legends, 69-70. For east-facing burials, see John Heckewelder, History, Manners, and Customs ofthe Indian Nations Who Once Inhabited Pennsylvania and the Neighboring States, The First American Frontier Series (1819, 1820, 1876; reprint. New York: Amo Press and The New York Times, 1971) 273; Harrington, "A Preliminary Sketch of Lenape Culture," 215. 68 Strachey, The Historie ofTravell into Virginia Britania, 102-3. 69 Strachey, The Historie ofTravell into Virginia Britania, 100. 70 Korp, The Sacred Geography, 9-10. 71 Korp, Sacred Geography, 71-lS. Yes, yes; I know that Henry Rowe Schoolcraft started the illegitimate conflation of Anishinabe and Iroquois, but the old humbug has long since been academically discredited for it. None of Schoolcraft's work is regarded as particularly reliable today and certainly should not continue to guide discourse. See my discussion of Schoolcraft's muddled "scholarship" in Mann, Iroquoian Women, 68-70. 72 Korp, Sacred Geography, 79. By the way, it has become almost a truism in archaeological circles that "burials faced east," but they tended to face many directions, as emphasized in the older records, before east-east-east became the mantra. In 1879, for instance, in a New York State mound (Iroquois country), S. L. Frey found graves facing west as well as south. S. L. Frey, "Were They Mound-Builders?" y^mencan Naturalist 13 (October, 1879): west, 642, 644; south, 643. There were obvious Earth-spirit implications in the west-facing graves, while the south-facing grave indicated a Lenap6 presence. (At contact, Lenap6 Sky spirits were still going south, as indicated in Brainerd, van der Donck, and Loskiel. It was only later on that east seems to have become the primary direction, as recorded in Harrington, "A Preliminary Sketch of Lenipe Culture," 215.). Similarly, in his 1922 excavations, Charles Willoughby found west-headed burials, as noted in N'omi B. Greber and Katharine C. Ruhl, The Hopewell Site: A Contemporary Analysis Based on the Work of Charles C. Willoughby (Boulder, CO: Westview Press, 1989) 90. The original write-up was in Charles C. Willoughby, "The Tumer Group of Earthworks—Hamilton County, Ohio," Papers ofthe Peabody Museum of American Archaeology 8.3 (1922): 1-132. 73 Korp, Sacred Geography, 80.

NOTES 401

74 For direction of prayer, see Brinton, The Lenape and Their Legends, 132. 75 See my discussion of Iroquoian reincamation, in Mann, Iroquoian Women, 334-36. 76 Mann, Iroquoian Women, 335, 336, 77 Hewitt, "Iroquoian Cosmology, First Part," 218-20. 78 Parker, Code of Handsome Lake, 18. 79 Strachey, The Historie of Travell into Virginia Britania, 102-3, 80 Strachey, The Historie of Travell into Virginia Britania, 100. 81 In 1672, John Lederer very flatly stated that the Lenape believed in "the transmigration of souls." Lederer, The Discoveries of John Lederer, 5; Loskiel recorded the same in 1794, Loskiel, History ofthe Mission ofthe United Brethren, 1: 36. 82 For coming and going, see Heckewelder, History, Manners, and Customs, 271. 83 Heckewelder, History, Manners, and Customs, quote, 247; entire passage, 247-48. 84 Heckewelder, History, Manners, and Customs, 247. 85 Edwards, David Brainerd: His Life and Joumal, 397-98. 86 Thwaites, The Jesuit Relations, 10: 287. 87 Hewitt, "The Iroquoian Concept of the Soul," 109, 111, 112, For Haskotahiihaks, the Brain Sucker, see also, Parker, Seneca Myths and Folk Tales, 10, 88 Gabriel Sagard recorded the gendered Sky destinations ofthe Iroquois in 1632, saying that male spirits went to "Yoscaha" (Sapling), whereas female spirits went to "Ataensiq" (Sky Woman, or Soika Gakwa, Our Grandmother, the Moon), in Sagard, The Long Joumey, 172. For a female Sky spirit dancing with Sky Woman, see also, Thwaites, Jesuit Relations, 10: 151. 89 Parker, Code of Handsome Lake, 22-25; Chief Jacob Thomas and Terry Boyle, Teachings from the Longhouse (Toronto: Stoddart Publishing Co,, Limited, 1994) 25-28. 90 Thwaites, The Jesuit Relations, 10: 287. The Nanticokes also held Feasts ofthe Dead, VXQX, History of the Mission of the United Brethren, 1: 12, 91 Hewitt, "The Iroquoian Concept ofthe Soul," 108,114. 92 For Iroquoian defleshing, see Lafitau, Customs of the American Indians, 2: 247. For defleshing the dead as common to Mound Builders, see Cyrus Thomas, "Who Were the Mound Builders?" American Antiquarian 7.2 (March 1885): 66-68; and William S. Webb and Charles E. Snow, TTte Adena People, ed. James B. Griffin (1945; Lexington: University of Kentucky, 1974) 185.

402 NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

93 Thwaites, Jesuit Relations, 10:293. 94 Thv/ahes, Jesuit Relations, 10: 273. 95 Loskiel, History ofthe Mission ofthe United Brethren, 1:36. 96 William N. Fenton, "Seth Newhouse's [Dayodekane's] Traditional History and Constitution ofthe Iroquois Confederacy," Proceedings ofthe American Philosophical Society 93.2 (1949): 149; Da-yo-de-ka-ne [Seth Newhouse], Cosmogony of De-ka-na-wi-da's Govemment: Cosmogony of the Iroquois Confederacy (Oshweken [sic]: Six Nations Reserve, 1885)67,95, 122. 97 Curtin and Hewitt, "Seneca Fiction, Legends, and Myths, Part I," 212. 98 Curtin and Hewitt, "Seneca Fiction, Legends, and Myths," 216, 217. 99 Curtin and Hewitt, "Seneca Fiction, Legends, and Myths," 217. These tales are very representative of bone-resuscitation traditions, including all their conventional features: those looking to reanimate deceased friends and relatives collect up their bones, set them beneath a large tree, usually hickory, and, while pushing hard against the tree trunk, shout something along the order of, "Timber!" This has the immediate effect of bringing the bones back to life. See also the tale of "Hagowanen and Ot'hegwenhda" (Curtin and Hewitt, "Seneca Fiction, Legends, and Myths," 376-99), in which the character Okteondon, his wife and friends, "went to the shore ofthe lake, where they found a large heap of bones of men. These they gathered into some order near a large hickory tree, whereupon they pushed the tree over toward the bones, saying, 'Rise, friends, or the tree will fall on you!' At this warning, and by the great orenda (magic power) of Okteondon, all the bones sprang up living men. 'Now,' said Okteondon to them, 'You have come to life, friends, and you can now go to your homes.' At this they departed." Curtin and Hewitt, "Seneca Fiction, Legends, and Myths," 398-99. In "Ongwe las and His Brother, Dagwanoenyent" (Curtin and Hewitt, "Seneca Fiction, Legends, and Myths," 488-490), Dagwanoenyent reassembled three nephews and a brother beneath a large hickory tree. In this tradition, one who had been a "man-eater" in his previous life swore off cannibalism out of gratitude. Curtin and Hewitt, "Seneca Fiction, Legends, and Myths," 490. 100 Curtin and Hewitt, "Seneca Fiction, Legends, and Myths," 401-6. In a similar vein, the tradition ofthe "Twelve Brothers and Their Uncle, Dagwanoenyent" (Curtin and Hewitt, "Seneca Fiction, Legends, and Myths," 485-88), the youngest brother reassembles bones under the direction of his uncle, Dagwanoenyent, a Flying Head (a wrinkled Earth spirit often connected with the Whirlwind people, i.e., tomados), Curtin and Hewitt, "Seneca Fiction, Legends, and Myths," 61; Parker, Seneca Myths and Folk Tales, 13. When the nephew was almost fmished, he heard "the deep roar ofthe wind and knew thereby the Great Head was coming," causing him to hurry carelessly. "Then he called out, 'Arise, you bones, or the trees will fall on you,' and as the Great Head swept with an awful noise over the skeletons, all sprang to their feet. The bones of two skeletons were interchanged. One who from the shape of his foot had gone by the name of Sharp-pointed Mocassins had but one of his own feet, while the second man had the other, so both were cripples." Curtin and Hewitt, "Seneca Fiction, Legends, and Myths," 488. Since tomados like the Uncle in this tradition often felled trees, there is an obvious reason that the shouted waming, "Get up! A tree will fall on you!" was thought capable of waking the dead. In yet another tradition, "The Legend of Hodadefion and His Elder Sister" (Curtin and Hewitt, "Seneca Fiction,

NOTES 403

Legends, and Myths," 573-86), Hodadefion, himself, made a bad job of reassembling, so that everyone wound up with misaligned legs and arms, but, being Hodadefion, he reassembled them again, this time properly. 101 Haywood, The Natural and Aboriginal History of Tennessee, 261-6S. 102 Mooney, "Myths ofthe Cherokee," 262. 103 Mooney, "Myths of the Cherokee," 250-51. The importance of Deer and his resuscitation when prematurely killed is a tradition also found among the Algonkin in the tradition of the Great Hare reanimating him from tufts of fur. Strachey, The Historie ofTravell into Virginia Britania, 102. 104 Mooney, "Myths of the Cherokee," 242,431. 105 Thomas Wildcat Alford, Civilization, As Told to Florence Drake (Norman: University of Oklahoma Press, 1936) 50. Wildcat Alford had been nine or younger when this happened, for his mother died when he was nine. Alford, Civilization, 63. 106 Tantaquidgeon, Folk Medicine ofthe Delaware and Related Algonkian Indians, 6-7. 107 Tantaquidgeon, Folk Medicine ofthe Delaware and Related A Igonkian Indians, 1. 108 The tradition of "The Vampire Skeleton" may be found in Complanter, Legends ofthe Longhouse, 140-50. 109 Complanter, Legends of the Longhouse, 14 9. 110 Complanter, Legends ofthe Longhouse, 14 9. 111 Hewitt, "The Iroquoian Concept ofthe Soul," 114. 112 O. C. Marsh, "Description of an Ancient Sepulchral Mound near Newark, Ohio," Historical Magazine, 2nd series, 2.4 (1867): 245. 113 Frederick Larkin, Ancient Man in America (Randolph, NY: The Author, 1880) 92. The truth was a lot less gory than Larkin's overheated imagination. Prisoners of war might be dispatched, however, something that could happen in conjunction with funerary rites. In 1672, for instance, John Lederer noted that, "When their great men die, they likewise slay prisoners of War to attend them." Lederer, The Discoveries of John Lederer, 5. 114 Korp, Sacred Geography, 21. 115 A. W. Vogeles, "Notes on a Lost Race of Amedca," American Naturalist 13 (January 1879): 11. 116 The modem Cannibal Posse is headed up Timothy D. White, Prehistoric Cannibalism at Mancos 5MTUMR-2346 (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1992); and Christy G. Tumer, II, and Jacqueline A. Tumer, Man Com: Cannibalism and Violence in the Prehistoric American Southwest (Salt Lake City: University of Utah Press, 1999).

404 NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

117 In fact, Brdbeuf was killed as an invader during the Iroquois war against the French from 1648 to 1649. As fitting punishment for the cultural dislocation he was causing, the Iroquois and their Wyandot allies "baptised" the greatly hated Brebeuf in scalding water, but he was never eaten. Westem sources like to present this as an Iroquoian war against the "Huron," their slur term for the Iroquois north ofthe St. Lawrence River, but it was a war against the French invaders, in which the Iroquois were joined by the Canadian Wyandot. Only the French converts were attacked, as traitors. See my discussion of these issues and distortions in the westem record in Mann, Iroquoian Women, 52, 145, 382 (n 117). 118 Ward Churchill brings up the westem fascination with cannibalism as springing from within its own culture in his deservedly scathing review ofthe Tumer flight of fancy, Man Com. Ward Churchill, "Review," North American Archaeologist 21.3 (2000): 278-81. 119 For a full discussion of this phenomenon, see William Arens, The Man-Eating Myth (New York: Oxford University Press, 1979). Arens was the first to yank academia's chain on the issue of cannibalism, pointing out the cultural hysteria behind the charge and the total lack of evidence to support it against aboriginal peoples. 120 Iroquoian tradition, for instance, recounts cannibalism as an emblem ofthe shamanic faction opposed to the Peacemaker in the Second Epoch of Haudenosaunee (Iroquoian) time. The Peacemaker sought to quell the cannibalistic snake cult of the war-mongering shaman, Adodaroh, a cult to which Ayonwantha originally belonged, as a major step to instituting democracy among the united Five Nations. Bmce Elliott Johansen and Barbara Alice Mann, ed.. Encyclopedia ofthe Haudenosaunee (Iroquois Confederacy) (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 2000), for Ayonwantha ("Hiawatha") as a cannibal, 273-74; for Adodaroh as a fearsome, snake-cult shaman, 278. All the versions of these traditions and their keepers are cited and identified in these sections. 121 Webb and Snow, The Adena People, 171-72. 122 See, for instance, Brinton, The Myths ofthe New World, 152; James Bennett Griffin, ed.. Archaeology of Eastem United States (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1952) 87. 123 Webb and Snow, The Adena People, 140,172. Interestingly, the earliest speculations held that people of rank were buried separately from commoners: "No doubt some of these tumuli were the receptacles of the common dead; while others received the remains of chiefs, or of warriors who fell in battle." Amos Stoddard, Sketches, Historical and Descriptive, of Louisiana (1812; reprint. New York: AMS Press, 1973) 350. This would have appealed to Euroamericans who had firm color, class, and religious lines separating the burials of elite Euro-Christians from the riff-raff. 124 Webb and Snow, The Adena People, 62-^3,140,169,173,177; Korp, Sacred Geography, 21. 125 Korp, The Sacred Geography, 56. 126 See Thomas McElwain for the centrality of ghost stories and the ethnological error of glossing past them, Thomas McElwain, Mythological Tales and the Alleghany Senecas: A Study ofthe Socio-Religious Context of Traditional Oral Phenomena in an Iroquois Community (Vastervik, Sweden: Ekblads Tryckeri, 1978) 51-55.

NOTES 405

127 For partial vs. complete cremations, see Webb and Snow. The Adena People, 63. 128 James Adair, History of the American Indians, ed. Samuel Cole Williams (1775; Johnson City, TN: Watauga Press, 1930) 91. 129 William S. Webb and Raymond S. Baby, The Adena People, No. 2, 4th printing (1957; Columbus: The Ohio Historical Society, 1975) 23-24. 130 See Harrington, "A Preliminary Sketch of Lendpe Culture," 232. Bears are Earth medicine, par excellence, in all eastem cultures, and the shamans of many nations seek Bear medicine, often shape-shifting into Bear as part of their rituals. Among the Iroquois, the Bear Clan retains exclusive possession ofthe healing arts. Johnson, Legends, Traditions and Laws, 5S-60. 131 Archaeologists frequently note the broken artifacts. Henry Shetrone described, for instance, "many of the finer specimens" of objects placed in a basin at Mound 17. Some "were undamaged while others had been intentionally broken," Heruy Clyde Shetrone, "Exploration ofthe Hopewell Group of Prehistoric Earthworks," Ohio Archaeological and Historical Quarterly 35.1 (1926): 46. "The objects were intermingled with earth, clay and charcoal, apparently intentionally." Shetrone, "Exploration of the Hopewell Group of Prehistoric Earthworks," 48. James Griffin stated, "Artifacts, sometimes 'killed,' were bumed along with the body or placed with the cremated remains afterwards," Griffm, Archaeology of Eastem United States, 87. Webb and Snow likewise referred to the broken artifacts. Although they attributed the condition of some to heat, which, presumably, cracked them open, Webb and Snow also cited the existence of some intentionally "mutilated" artifacts. Webb and Snow, The Adena People, 68-70. When N'omi Grebe and Katharien Ruhl discussed "killed" artifacts, they, too, decided that these "valuable objects" were broken from heat of the cremating fire, but the assignment of economic value to objects is westem, as is the reluctance to believe that anyone might intentionally destroy 'Valuable" items. Greber and Ruhl, The Hopewell Site, 76,78. 132 Hitakonanu 'laxk [Tree Beard], The Grandfathers Speak: Native American Folk Tales of the Lenape People (New York: Interiink Books, 1994) 34. 133 McElwain, "The Archaic Roots of Eastem Woodland Eschatology," 42. 134 McElwain, "The Archaic Roots of Eastem Woodland Eschatology," 42-43. 135 Erminie Wheeler Voegelin, Mortuary Customs ofthe Shawnee and Other Eastem Tribes, Prehistory Research Series, vol. 2, no. 4 (1944; reprint. New York: AMS Press, 1980): 324; James H. Howard, Shawnee! The Ceremonialism of a Native Indian Tribe and Its Cultural Background (Athens: Ohio University Press, 1981) 2. 136 Charles H. Faulkner, "The Winter House: An Early Southeast Tradition," Mid-Continental Joumal of Archaeology 2.2 (1977): 144. 137 Faulkner, "The Winter House," 146,148. 138 Adair, History ofthe American Indians, 453. 139 Henry Timberlake, The Memoirs of Lieut. Henry Timberlake (1765, 1927; reprint. New

406 NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

York: Amo Press & The New York Times, 1971) 59; William Bartratn, Travels of William Bartram, ed. Mark van Doren (1791; New York: Dover Publications, 1928) 296-97. 140 Faulkner, "The Winter House: An Early Southeast Tradition," 143. 141 Raymond S. Baby, "Archaeological Explorations at Fort Hill," Museum Echoes 21.W (1954): 86-87. 142 Faulkner, "The Winter House: An Early Southeast Tradition," 144. 143 Willoughby, "The Tumer Group of Earthworks," Mound 2 plan, 32; Mound 4 plan, 64; Mound 5 plan, 75; Mound 6 plan, 77. 144 Cyrus Thomas, The Problem ofthe Ohio Mounds (Washington, D.C: Government Printing Office, 1889)48. 145 De Boer, "Ceremonial Centres," 234-35. 146 De Boer, "Ceremonial Centres," 230. 147 De Boer, "Ceremonial Centres," 232,234. 148 Benjamin Smith Barton, New Views ofthe Origin ofthe Tribes and Nations of America (1798; reprint, Millwood, NY: Kraus Reprint Co., 1976) xliv. 149 McElwain, "A Soul-Dualism Explanation of Adena Mortuary," 42-43. 150 Peter Lindestrom, Geographia Americae with an Account ofthe Delaware Indians, Based on Surveys and Notes Made in 1654-1656, trans. Amandus Johnson (Philadelphia: The Swedish Colonial Society, 1925) 179. 151 James H. McCulloh, Researches, Philosophical and Antiquarian, Conceming the Aboriginal History of America (Baltimore: Fielding Lucas, Jr., 1829) 508. 152 Lynda Norene Shaffer, Native Americans before 1492: The Moundbuilding Centers ofthe Eastem Woodlands (Armonk, NY: M. E. Sharpe, 1992) AA-^S. 153 B. K. Swartz, Jr., ed., Adena: The Seeking of an Identity. Symposium, March 5-7, 1970 (Muncie, IN: Ball State University, 1970) 6 (n 1); Shaffer, Native Americans before 1492, 38. 154 Webb and Baby, The Adena People, No. 2,42. 155 Webb and Baby, The Adena People, No. 2,45. 156 Shaffer, Native Americans before 1492, 44—45. 157 Barbara A. Mann and Jerry L. Fields, "A Sign in the Sky: Dating the League ofthe Haudenosaunee," American Indian Culture and Research Joumal 21.2 (1997): 119-20, 122.

NOTES 407

158 Mann, Iroquoian Women, 110; whole discussion, 104-12. 159 Loskiel, History of the Mission of the United Brethren, 1: 30, 31. 160 Mooney, "Myths of the Cherokee," 258-59,442-43. 161 Mooney, "Myths of the Cherokee," 215. 162 Mann, Iroquoian Women, 91-93. 163 Elisabeth Tooker, ed.. Native North American Spirituality of the Eastem Woodlands. Sacred Myths. Dreams. Visions. Speeches. Healing Formulas. Rituals and Ceremonials (New York: Paulist Press, 1979) as given in the traditional Thanksgiving Address, "Our elder brother, the sun," 64; "Our grandmother, the moon," 65; Barbara A. Mann, "The Lynx in Time," 425. 164 Parker, Seneca Myths and Legends, 12. 165 Hitakonanu'laxk. The Grandfathers Speak, 34. Hitakonanu'laxk added that the Lenape removed to Oklahoma came to regard the moon as male, but that, "originally, here in the east, the Moon was seen as female." Hitakonanu'laxk, The Grandfathers Speak, 34. William Newcomb was using the later westem version of a male moon when he claimed that the Lenap6 called both the Sun and Moon "Elder Brother." The sex-change operation on the Moon might explain why Earth was regarded as the Sun's sister, but not the Moon's. In the earlier eastem lore, the Moon was seen as the female elder of the Earth. Newcomb, The Culture and Acculturation of the Delaware Indians, 60. 166 Loskiel, History of the Mission of the United Brethren, 1:30. 167 For Lenape moon as female, see Loskiel, History of the Mission of the United Brethren, 1: 30; for Lenape sun as male, see Edwards, Life and Joumal of the Rev. David Brainerd, 399. 168 Haywood, The Natural and Aboriginal History of Tennessee, 266. 169 Adair, History of the American Indians, 78; Mooney, "Myths of the Cherokee," 257. In 1988, Cesare Marino gave both luminaries (nunda) as that of day (igaehinunda) and that of night (nundasunoehi), and gendered them. Cesare Marino, "Honor the Elders: Symbolic Associations with Old Age in Traditional Eastem Cherokee Culture," Joumal of Cherokee Studies 13 (1988): 8. 170 Adair, History of the American Indians, 80. Adair erroneously switched genders, referring to the Cherokee moon as female. 171 Haywood, The Natural and Aboriginal History of Tennessee, 266. 172 Adair, History of the American Indians, 68-69 (n *). 173 Barton, New Views of the Origin of the Tribes and Nations ofAmerica, xliv. 174 Adair, History of the American Indians, 80.

408 NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

175 Alford, avi7/zario«, 55. 176 Alford, Civilization, 56. 177 Ray Hively and Robert Hom, "Geometry and Astronomy in Prehistoric Ohio," Archaeoastronomy 4 (1982): 1-20; Ray Hively and Robert Hom, "Hopewellian Geometry and Astronomy at High Bar^i," Archaeoastronomy 1 (1984): 85-100. 178 As "controversial," De Boer, "Ceremonial Centres," 250. 179 For eastem longevity, see Mann, Iroquoian Women, 345-46. 180 Hively and Hom, "Hopewellian Geometry and Astronomy at High Bank," 85. 181 Hively and Hom, "Geometry and Astronomy in Prehistoric Ohio," 11. 182 Hively and Hom, "Geometry and Astronomy in Prehistoric Ohio," 12-15. 183 Hively and Hom, "Geometry and Astronomy in Prehistoric Ohio," 12. 184 Hively and Hom, "Geometry and Astronomy in Prehistoric Ohio," 12. 185 Hively and Hom, "Geometry and Astronomy in Prehistoric Ohio," the seventeen alignments, 16-17; other earthworks, 17-18. 186 Once more, Cyms Thomas beat everyone else to the punch, pointing out the Newark-High Bank connection and positing the cultural continuity of their builders as the reason. Cyms Thomas, Circular. Square, and Octagonal Earthworks of Ohio (Washington, D.C: Govemment Printing Office, 1889) 20-23, 32. The Newark and High Bank earthworks were not the only "twins" around. It is clear that many more were destroyed by rip-and-nm archaeology, usually poorly documented by "gentlemen" scholars. In 1859, for instance, Thomas C. Walbridge rummaged about in Iroquoian mounds around the Bay of Quint6, Ontario, Canada. He noted that they were in the shape of "truncated cone[s]," with a base of thirty to fifty feet and a height of around twelve feet. More curiously, "in almost every instance they occur[red] in groups of two," the twin mounds being almost identical in size. Thomas Campbell Walbridge, "On Some Ancient Mounds upon the Shore of the Bay of Quinte," The Canadian Joumal, new series 29.5 (September 1860): 411. The hobbyists, Walbridge and Henry Cawthra, "opened" only one mound, their workmen destroying its artifacts in the process. Walbridge and Cawthra did not bother to check on or annotate the contents of its twin. Walbridge, "On Some Ancient Mounds," 414, 415. Perhaps a clan halves were involved in twin mounds. In 1672, John Lederer noted of certain Algonkin, "Their places of Burial they divide into four quarters, assigning to every Tribe one: for, to mingle their bodies, even when dead, they hold wicked and ominous." Lederer The Discoveries of John Lederer, 5. These concems had to do with incest, which is heavily guarded against in Native culture. 187 De Boer, "Ceremonial Centres," 246. 188 Hively and Hom, "Hopewellian Geometry and Astronomy at High Bank," 86. 189 Hively and Hom, "Hopewellian Geometry and Astronomy at High Bank," 92.

NOTES 409

190 Hively and Hom, "Hopewellian Geometry and Astronomy at High Bank," 85, 96. The other people tracking the standstills of the moon were the Cliff Dwellers of the desert southwest. 191 Hively and Hom, "Hopewellian Geometry and Astronomy at High Bank," 98. 192 Bradley T. Lepper, "Tracking Ohio's Great Hopewell Road," Archaeology 48.6 (November/December 1995): 52-56; Bradley T. Lepper, "The Archaeology ofthe Newark Earthworks," Ancient Earthen Enclosures of the Eastem Woodlands, ed. Robert E. Mainfort, Jr., and Lynne P. Sullivan (Gainesville: University Press of Florida, 1998) 130. 193 Strachey, The Historie of Travell into Virginia Britania, 97-98. 194 Lederer, The Discoveries of John Lederer, 4. 195 Jasper Donkers and Peter Sluyter, Joumal of a Voyage to New York in 1679-1680, vol. 1 (Brooklyn, NY: Transactions ofthe Long Island Historical Society, 1867) 268, also quoted in John Bierhorst, Mythology ofthe Lenape: Guides and Texts (Tucson: The University of Arizona Press, 1995) 13. In this tradition, the central tree of earth was envisioned as connecting Sky and Earth. To show this, the Munsee "then took a little straw and placed it on end in the middle ofthe figure, and proceeded, 'The earth was now dry, and there grew a tree'" from the center of its back. The tree soon began dropping critters, including people, like fruit from its branches. Donkers and Sluyter, Joumal of a Voyage, 268. 196 Quoted in Brinton, The Lenape and Their Legends, 58. The original of this story appeared on pages 61-62 of John Richardson's Diary, included in An Account ofthe Conduct ofthe Society of Friends towards the Indian Tribes, published in London in 1844.1 was, alas, unable to secure a copy ofthe original anywhere and cannot even verify that a copy ofthe book remains in existence. 197 Hitakonanu 'laxk. The Grandfathers Speak, 32. 198 J. N. B. Hewitt, "Raising and Falling ofthe Sky in Iroquois Legends," American Anthropologist 5.4 (October 1892): 344. 199 Parker, The Code of Handsome Lake, 132. J. N. B. Hewitt said that those crushed rather than transported to Sky had failed in their "duties in this life." Hewitt, "Raising and Falling ofthe Sky in Iroquois Legends," 344. 200 Daniel Brinton remarked much the same as early as 1885, noting that the graphic traditional imagery of circles within circles suggested "the meaning of^the not infrequent symbol ofthe concentric circles" in the mounds. Brinton, The Lenape and Their Legends, 58. 201 Such concentricity intrigued Hively and Hom at High Bank, Hively and Hom, "Hopewellian Geometry and Astronomy at High Bank," 88. 202 Baby, "Archaeological Explorations at Fort Hill," 86. The eighteenth-century Cherokee were still using this concentric motif in their construction, particularly in their council houses. In describing the Cherokee rotunda, or council house, William Bartram specifically

410 NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

noted that it consisted of eoncentric circles of supporting pillars. Bartram, Travels of William Bartram, 297. 203 Hall, An Archaeology ofthe Soul, 127-28. Maureen Korp also finds "attractive" the notion o f t h e mound as feminine archetype, as 'mother earth,'" but she does not develop her thinking on the matter beyond this remark, preferring to look at directionality. Korp, Sacred Geography, 4. 204 See my discussion of stages-of-history anthropology, in Mann, Iroquoian Women, 194-202. 205 N'omi B. Greber, "A Comparative Study of Site Morphonoly and Burial Patterns at Edwin Harness Mound and Seip Mounds 1 and 2," Hopewell Archaeology: The Chillicothe Conference, ed. D. S. Brose and N. Greber (Kent: The Kent State University Press, 1979) 27-38; Greber and Ruhl, The Hopewell Site, 236. 206 De Boer, "Ceremonial Centres," 236. 207 De Boer, "Ceremonial Centres," 236. 208 Brinton, The Lenape and Their Legends, lQ-11. 209 Loskiel, History ofthe Mission ofthe United Brethren, 1: 46. 210 Edwards, David Brainerd: His Life and Joumal, 400. 211 Adair, History ofthe American Indians, divining, 84; meditating, 91. 212 Raymond D. Fogelson, "Who Were the Ani-Kutani? An Excursion into Cheroke Historical Thought,"Ethnohistory ZX.A (1984): 259. 213 Haywood, The Natural and Aboriginal History of Tennessee, 267-68; Mooney, "Myths of the Cherokee," 396. 214 Haywood, The Natural and Aboriginal History of Tennessee, 268. Mooney, "Myths ofthe Cherokee," serpents, 298; lizards, 307. For bowls, water, and stones, see Adair, History of the American Indians, 91; and Lieut, A. W, Whipple, Thomas Ewbank, Esq., and Prof. Wm. W. Tumer, Report upon the Indian Tribes (Washington, D.C: Govemment Printing Office, 1855)35. 215 Haywood, The Natural and Aboriginal History of Tennessee, 261-6%. 216 Parker, Seneca Myths and Folk Tales, 28. 217 John Arthur Gibson, Conceming the League: The Iroquois Tradition as Dictated in Onondaga by John Arthur Gibson, ed. and trans. Hanni Woodbury, Memoir 9 (1912; Winnipeg: Algonquian and Iroquoian Linguistics, 1992) 222-32. 218 Marius Barbeau, Huron- Wyandot Traditional Narratives in Translations and Native Texts, Anthropological Series no. 47, Bulletin 165 (Ottawa: National Museum of Canada, 1960) 12.

NOTES 411

219 Horatio Hale, The Iroquois Book of Rites (1883; reprint, Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1963) 74, Hale called Sapling "Taronhiawagon," one of his traditional names. 220 Thwaites, Jesuit Relations, 23: 156. 221 Edwards, Life and Joumal ofthe Rev. David Brainerd, 399, 222 Parker, Code of Handsome Lake, 133. 223 J. N. B. Hewitt, "New Fire among the Iroquois," American Anthropologist 2.4 (October 1889): 319. 224 C M . Barbeau, "Supernatural Beings of the Huron and Wyandot," American Anthropological Association 16.2(1914): 304. 225 Hewitt, "New Fire among the Iroquois," 319. 226 Parker, The Code of Handsome Lake, 6. 227 Trowbridge, Shanwnese Traditions, carrying fire on travels, 56; firekeepers, 65-66. 228 John Tanner, A Narrative ofthe Captivity and Adventures of John Tanner during Thirty Years Residence among the Indians in the Interior of North America (1830; reprint. New York: Garland Publishing, 1975) 155-56. "Messenger of Peace" was a standing woodlands office, recognized by all eastem peoples, so that such messengers were granted automatic safe passage. He—or she!—was an emissary sent peacefully from group to group as a newsbearer, bringing tidings of political or spiritual developments. Political messages might include news of treaties, outbreaks of war, and councils. Spiritual messages might include direct instruction, as in the instance of Tenskwatawa's Messenger, or they might describe medicine, such as new crops or basket designs. See Barbara Alice Mann, ed. Native American Speakers of the Eastern Woodlands: Selected Speeches and Critical Analyses (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 2001) office of 39; missionaries as, 151. 229 Spencer, "Shawnee Folk-Lore," 322-23, 230 Strachey, The Historie of Travell into Virginia Britania, 97-98, quote, 98. 231 Hitakonanu 'laxk. The Grandfathers Speak, 34. 232 Brinton, The Myths ofthe New World, 151. 233 Brinton, The Lenape and Their Legends, 65. Twelve was always associated with Lenapd transubstantiation of Sky into Fire, so that, for instance, the sacrifice made upon a boy's first successful hunt required the use of "twelve straight and supple sticks" formed into a neat circle to create the hearth in which the offering was bumed, i.e., sent as "prayer" to Sky. Loskiel, History ofthe Mission ofthe United Brethren, 1: 43. 234 Daniel G. Brinton, Essays of an Americanist (Philadelphia: Porter & Coates, 1890) 187. For twelve as sacred number of the Lenap6 Sky, see M. R. Harrington, "A Preliminary Sketch of LenApe Culture,"/lmer/ca« Anthropologist 15 (1913): 233. Although William Newcomb opined in 1956 that the twelve-count at the Lenap6 Feast ofthe Dead was "in

412 NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

all probability a historic diffusion," in 1794, Loskiel very directly stated that Lenap6 lore connected it with the twelve moons ofthe year. Brinton, The Lenape and Their Legends, 65. Twelve was likewise recorded as the Lenape ceremonial number in myriad other regards by Zeisberger and Loskiel, so that the number was, in all probability, a concept native to the Lenape. In 1794, Loskiel connected the sacred number of twelve to Sky spirituality through the construction ofthe ceremonial sweat lodge (Loskiel, History ofthe Mission ofthe United Brethren, 1: 41-43), as well as through a girl's initial vision quest at her menarche (Loskiel, History ofthe Mission ofthe United Brethren, 1: 56), and recorded that a twelve-month year was kept (Loskiel, History ofthe Mission ofthe United Brethren, 1:30-31). 235 Haywood, The Natural and Aboriginal History of Tennessee, 265-66. 236 Adair, History ofthe American Indians, 20. 237 Marino, "Honor the Elders," 6, 238 Marino, "Honor the Elders," 11. 239 Marino, "Honor the Elders," 12, 240 Community firekeepers were always aged. Marino, "Honor the Elders," 5, 6. The Elderhood of Fire sprang back to life for the eastem Cherokee in 1951, when the sacred fire ofthe Cherokee, taken west with them on the Trail of Tears, was walked back to the Qualla Boundary in North Carolina, In 1984, the Cherokee of Oklahoma reunited with the Cherokee of the east, in a Sacred Fire ceremony at Red Clay, Tennessee, from whence began the horrific Trail of Tears, using the eternal fire brought to Qualla Boundary in 1951. Marino, "Honor the Elders," 6-7. 241 Marino, "Honor the Elders," 3-5. Another version ofthe tradition appears in Mooney, "Myths ofthe Cherokee," 240-^2. 242 James H. Howard, "Altamaha Cherokee Folklore and Customs," Joumal of American Folk-Lore 12.2S4 {ApnVJune 1959): 136. 243 Mooney, "Myths of the Cherokee," 319,320, 244 Gerald Fowke, Archaeological Investigations^I, Fourty-fourth Annual Repori of the Bureau of American Ethnology, 1926-1927 (Washington, D.C: Govemment Printing Office, 1928) 497; Griffin, Archaeology ofEastem United States, 87; Webb and Snow, The Adena People, 70,75-76; Korp, Sacred Geography, 16-17,24; Raymond C Vietzen, The Ancient Ohioans and Their Neighbors (Wahoo, NB: Ludi Printing Company, 1946) 116; Raymond C Vietzen, Shakin' the Bushes: From Paleo to Historic Indians (Elyria, OH: White Horse Publishers, 1976) 119. 245 Webb and Snow, The Adena People, 279-82; Korp, Sacred Geography, 16; Greber and Ruhl, The Hopewell Site, 287. 246 Webb and Snow, The Adena People, 11, 79; Greber and Ruhl, The Hopewell Site, 287. Webb and Snow speculated that the black was most likely a secondary effect of ochre's coming into contact with decomposing tissues of a corpse, Webb and Snow, The Adena

NOTES 413

People 279. However, graphite is a very deliberate application, which seems to indicate intentionality. 247 Webb and Baby, The Adena People, No. 2, 23-24. 248 Shetrone, "Explorations ofthe Hopewell Group of Prehistory Earthworks," 235. 249 Shetrone, "Explorations ofthe Hopewell Group of Prehistory Earthworks," 236. 250 Shetrone, "Explorations of the Hopewell Group of Prehistory Earthworks," 236. This interpretation was essentially reoffered by De Boer in 1997. De Boer, "Ceremonial Centres," 236. 251 Hall,Archaeology ofthe Soul, 3A. 252 Korp, Sacred Geography, 17. 253 De Boer, "Ceremonial Centres," 235, 236. 254 Mann, "Euro-forming the Data," 182. 255 Mann, "Haudenosaunee Women's Tradition and History," 428; William N. Fenton, The False Faces ofthe Iroquois (Norman: University of Oklahoma Press, 1983) 134. 256 Fenton, Fa/seFace5, 133-34. 257 Parker, Seneca Myth and Folk Tales, 17; Fenton, False Faces, 134; Mann, Iroquoian Women, 347^8. 258 Mooney, "Sacred Formulas ofthe Cherokees," 342. 259 See, for instance. Warren K. Moorehead, "The Stone Mound of the Licking County Reservoir," Ohio Archaeological and Historical Society Publications 5 (1897): 170. 260 Marino, "Honor the Elders," 6. 261 Marino, "Honor the Elders," 5. 262 Marino, "Honor the Elders," 7. 263 Adair, History ofthe American Indians, 87. 264 Adair, History ofthe American Indians, 88. 265 Mooney, "Myths of the Cherokee," 320. 266 Whipple, Ewbank, and Tumer, Report upon the Indian Tribes, 35. 267 Whipple, Ewbank, and Tumer, Repori upon the Indian Tribes, 35; Adair, History ofthe American Indians, 91.

414 NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

268 Alford, Civilization, 24-25. 269 Lindestrom, Geographia Americae, 208. 270 For No-Face Husk Doll, see Mann, Iroquoian Women, 13-14; Steve Wall, Wisdom's Daughters: Conversations with Women Elders of Native America (New York: Harper Perennial, 1993) 135-37; Chief Everett Parker and Oledoska [Ken Ryan], ne Secret of No Face: An Ireokwa Epic (Albuquerque: Native American Scholarship Fund, Inc., 1972). For Ayonwantha, see Gibson, Conceming the League, 78-81; Thomas and Boyle, Teachings from the Longhouse, 13. 271 McElwain, Mythological Tales and the Alleghany Senecas, 85-91. 272 Misinkhdlikan also passes into visibility through trees. Hitakonanu 'laxk. The Grandfathers Speak, 35, 273 Newcomb, The Culture and Acculturation ofthe Delaware Indians, 60, 274 Hewitt, "The Iroquoian Concept ofthe Soul," 114. 275 Hewitt, "The Iroquoian Concept ofthe Soul," 115. 276 Note, for example, the water-crossings in the spirit tradition recorded in Thwaites, Jesuit Relations, 10: 149-53. 277 Lafitau, Customs ofthe American Indians, 1: 253; Brinton, 'The Myths ofthe New World, 265. 278 Charles F. Voegelin, "The Shawnee Female Deity," Yale University Publications in Anthropology 8-13 (1936): 8, 279 It is notable that the Iroquoian Grandmother, Sky Woman, has a dog with her where she resides, on the moon. Thomas McElwain, "Seneca Iroquois Concepts of Time," Canadian Journal of Native Studies 7.2 (1987): 275, The dog helps Our Grandmother, the Moon, count time. Mann, "The Lynx in Time," 424, Meantime, the white dog sacrificed at the Midwinter Ceremony ofthe Iroquois, is bumed, i.e., sent to to Sky, "and on the smoke that arises from the purging fires will arise also the thanksgivings" of tiie people, Tekahionwake [E. Pauline Johnson], The Moccasin Maker (1913; reprint, Tucson: University of Arizona Press, 1987) 142-43. The Cherokee hold that Dog made the Milky Way, and he also howled at river water until his human friend realized he was forewaming that a flood was about to sweep away a town, using his second sight (a Sky ability). Mooney, "Myths ofthe Cherokee," 259, 261. 280 Mooney, "Myths ofthe Cherokee," 241-42; a modem variation of this tradition, minus the water, appeared in Marino, "Honor the Elders," 5. 281 Of course, some of the reason water near mounds and earthworks was sheer practicality. Natives in the east were well known to use its plethora of rivers, creeks, and streams as highways, for quick and easy transportation. In addition, they well knew that flood plains provided excellent growing soil. David Zeisberger recorded that the Lenap6 prized bottom land for agriculture and that Natives in mound country never farmed land that lay away

NOTES 415

from water, as did Europeans. Quoted in Newcomb, The Culture and Acculturation ofthe Delaware Indians, 14, 24, 282 Mooney says ofthe Selu and Kana t/tradition, "It is one of those myths held so sacred that in the old days one who wished to hear it from the priest ofthe tradition must first purify himself by 'going to water,' i.e., bathing in the running stream before daylight when fasting, while the priest performed his mystic ceremonies upon the bank." Mooney, "Myths ofthe Cherokee," 431. 283 Mooney, "Myths of the Cherokee," 24 2, 284 Mooney, "Myths of the Cherokee," 24 2-4 5. 285 Mooney, "Myths of the Cherokee," 24 5 ^ 6. 286 See my discussion of this woodlands practice, in Mann, Iroquoian Women, 192-93. 287 Mooney, "Myths of the Cherokee," 24 2, 288 Mooney, "Myths ofthe Cherokee," 244-43, 289 Mooney, "Myths ofthe Cherokee," 246. 290 Mooney, "Myths ofthe Cherokee," 230. 291 Voegelin, "The Shawnee Female Deity," 7. To add another layer of two-by-four logic to the Shawnee mix, tobacco and water are gendered, for women use water as their most notable witness, whereas men use tobacco as their favorite witness, Voegelin, "The Shawnee Female Deity," 8. Among the Iroquois, too, men and tobacco are associated with Sky, whereas women and water are associated with Earth, Although women used tobacco, and men used water, the primary associations of each are water/women/Earth and tobacco/men/Sky. Tobacco was brought to Earth by Sky Woman. The Great Tree growing from the center of Sky World has the aroma of buming tobacco. Johansen and Mann, Encyclopedia ofthe Haudenosaunee, 86, The vision diet of experienced medicine men was tobacco, only. Lafitau, Customs ofthe American Indians, 1:219. The vision diet of women was water and com. Mann, Iroquoian Women, 340. Water belongs, of course, to Mother Earth. 292 Loskiel, History ofthe Mission ofthe United Brethren, 1: 30. 293 The Jesuit missionary Paul Le Jeune casually noted that women sweated as well as the men, just not on the fixed schedule observed by men but whenever they could get around to it. Thwaites, Jesuits Relations, 6: 191. In 1609, Marc Lescarbot timed Iroquoian men's sweat lodges as occurring about once a month, whereas, in 1703, the Baron of Lahontan noted that the Wyandot he lived among sweated every eight days. Marc Lescarbot, The History of New France, trans. W, L. Grant, 3 vols. (1609, 1907; reprint. New York: Greenwood Press, 1968) 2:270; Louis Armand, Baron de Lahontan, New Voyages to Norih America, ed. R. G, Thwaites, 2 vols. (1703; Chicago: A. C. McClure & Co., 1905) 2: 418 (n 2). The Lenape, including women, likewise sweated regularly, although, as Heckewelder mentioned, the women's sweat lodge was located "in a different direction from that ofthe men." Loskiel, History of the Mission of the United Brethren, 1: 109; quote from

416 NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

Heckewelder, History. Manners, and Customs, 225-26. 294 Tantaquidgeon, Folk Medicine of the Delaware and Related Atgonkian Indians, 20. 295 Sagard, The Long Joumey, 198. 296 Newcomb, TTie Culture and Acculturation of the Delaware Indians, 13-14. 297 Edwards, David Brainerd: His Life and Joumal, 395. 298 Marino, "Honor the Elders," 7. 299 Mooney, "Myths of the Cherokee," 230. 300 Spencer, "Shawnee Folk-Lore," 320. 301 Vogeles, "Notes on a Lost Race of America," 11. 302 For coinage of new term, see Greber and Ruhl, The Hopewell Site, 75. 303 Webb and Snow, The Adena People, 62. 304 Webb and Snow, The Adena People, 65,68. 305 Webb and Snow, The Adena People, 111, 178. 306 Webb and Snow, The Adena People, 182. 307 Webb and Snow, The Adena People, 183. 308 Faulkner, "The Winter House: An Early Southeast Tradition," 145, 146. 309 Shetrone, "Explorations of the Hopewell Group of Prehistory Earthworks," 44-46. 310 Gloria Anzaldua, Borderlands/La Frontera: The New Mestiza (San Francisco: Spinsters/ Aunt Lute, 1987) date, 4; quotation, 5. The Serpent/Eagle pair was still alive and well in the symbology of the Moqui in Arizona in 1905, when a "white visitor" among them noticed "some of the earthenware, coarse and rude in quality, but ornamented elaborately with symbolic figures of serpents and lightning and clouds and dropping rain." So far were twentieth-century Euroamericans from having a clue as to the sacred interaction of these figures, a critic of the vase characterized them as "the pantheism or nature worship of the Indian" which "sticks out even in his ornamentation of a vase." The Commissioner of Indian Affairs, Francis Leupp, however, defended the art, which, whether "decorative" or "fetishism, " was in his opinion comparable to, and no more morally harmful than, the westem fairy tales, "Cinderella" and "Sleeping Beauty." The Eurosupremacy of these remarks was only exceeded by the crudity of comprehension they displayed. Annual Report of the Commissioner of Indians Affairs for the Fiscal Year Ended June 30. 1905, Part I (Washington, D.C: Govemment Printing Office, 1906) 1:10. 311 Daniel Brinton speculated that the Shawnee had actually spread the Homed Serpent stories to the Muscogee and Cherokee peoples, but this is unlikely when the strong and ancient

NOTES 417

Serpent traditions of the southwest are considered in light of migration tradition. Brinton, The Myths of the New World, 119. In any case, the Serpent Mound antedated the arrival of the Shawnee by a couple of millennia, at least. 312 Newcomb, The Culture and Acculturation of the Delaware Indians, 59. 313 George Bluejacket, "A Story of the Shawanoes," MSS, 29 October 1829, trans, and ed. John Allen Raynor (Columbus: Library, Ohio Historical Society, 1886) Call # 970.92 R 218. 314 Voegelin, "Shawnee Female Deity," 7. 315 Parker, Seneca Myths and Folk Tales, 8. J. N. B. Hewitt directly etymologically connected Hf ho"' (which he rendered Hi '-ne"") to the Sun, Hi'- W. Hewitt, "New Fire among the Iroquois," 319. 316 Parker, Seneca Myths and Folk Tales, 16; Converse, Myths and Legends of the New York State Iroquois, as Head Chief, 69; full discussion, 69-73. 317 Vitker, Seneca Myths and Folk Tales, 16. 318 Barbeau, "Supernatural Beings of the Huron and Wyandot," 38. 319 Arthur C. Parker, The Constitution of the Five Nations, or The Iroquois Book of the Great Law (Albany: The University of the State of New York, 1916) 30, 101. 320 For Basque fishermen in the 1480s, see Jacques Cartier, The Voyages of Jacques Cartier, ed. Ramsay Cook (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1993) xxi. Writing down this tradition in 1870, Dooyentate Clarke simply assumed that these first ships were Cartier's, but, in the last half of the twentieth century, logs of Basque fishing ships turned up, proving that the Basque had been plying the coasts off New England since the 1480s and had just not mentioned their "discovery" of a new continent to other seamen, for fear of touching off intense competition for the excellent cod-fishing grounds they had found. Peter Dooyentate Clarke, Origin and Traditional History of the Wyandotts (Toronto: Hunter, Rose, & Co., 1870)4. 321 Clarke, Origin and Traditional History of the Wyandots, 4. 322 Mooney, "Myths of the Cherokee," 281,453. 323 Mooney, "Myths of the Cherokee," 293-94. 324 For the uM prints of the Iroquoian Dwarfs, see Barbeau, Huron and Wyandot Mythology, discussion, 9; picture of an uki print, Plate X, 435. 325 Powerful shamans among the Algonkin might actually combine Eagle and Serpent medicine. The "Chief Priest" of the Algonkins whom Strachey met in 1612, for example, dressed to invite both. He wore a "middle seised Cloke of feathers," while his headdress was made of "some 12. or 16. or more Snake Sloughes, or skyns ... stuffed with Mosse, and of weasells and other vermyne." These stuffed snake skins were pulled up and tied at the crown of the head "like a great Tassell." Around the tassel was a crown of feathers.

418 NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

Spellings in the original, Strachey, The Historie ofTravell into Virginia Britania, 95-96. 326 For instance. Warren De Boer immediately went to the Water Panther as important in his consideration of mediating water, De Boer, "Ceremonial Centres," 238. Bradley Lepper also used the theme of Water Panther to interpret the so-called Alligator Mound in Ohio. Bradley T. Lepper, "Ohio's 'Alligator,'" Timeline 18.2 (Mar-Apr 2001): 18-25. 327 Bluejacket, "A Story of the Shawanoes," MSS. 328 For one tradition of the Water Panther, which Dooyentate called "White Panther," see Clarke, Origin and Traditional History of the Wyandotts, 153-58. 329 Brinton, The Myths of the New World, 115. Zinzendorf, of course, thanked his God for deliverance, but it is notable that Earth medicine, which all missionaries railed against as Satanic, had actually saved him. Then again, perhaps the Christian god is an Earth spirit. 330 Trowbridge, Shanwnese Traditions, 42. 331 Spencer, "The Shawnee Indians," 390. 332 Trowbridge, Shanwnese Traditions, 45. 333 Spencer, "The Shawnee Indians," 384, repeated in Spencer, "Shawnee Folk-Lore," 324. 334 Bierhorst, Mythology of the Lenape, 11. 335 Bierhorst, Mythology of the Lenape, 11-12. 336

Harrington,"A Preliminary Sketch of Lendpe Culture," 225-26.

337 Edwards, Life and Joumal, 395. 338 Loskiel, History of the Mission of the United Brethren, 1:114. 339 Lindestrom, Geographia Americae, 194; reiterated, 240. 340 Parker, The Code ofHandsome Lake, 30, 30 (n 3). 341 Parker, Seneca Myths and Folk Tales, 16-17. Yes, there were eastem buffalo, soon hunted to extinction by the settlers. The last buffalo in Ohio was killed by settlers in 1814. Christian Cackler, "Recollections of an Old Settler" (1874; reprint, Ravenna, OH: The Record Publishing Company, 1964) 10. 342 Barbeau, Huron and Wyandot Mythology, 257; Parker, Seneca Myths and Folk Tales, 17. 343 Thwaites, Jesuit Relations, 33:213-14. 344 Cusick, "Sketches of Ancient History of the Six Nations," 11. 345 Brinton, The Myths of the New World, 143.

NOTES 419

346 James E. Seaver, A Narrative of the Life of Mrs. Mary Jemison (1823; Syracuse, NY: Syracuse University Press, 1990) 144. 347 Barbeau, Huron and Wyandot Mythology, 257-59. 348 J. N. B. Hewitt, "Serpent Symbolism," American Anthropologist 2.2 (April 1889): 179. 349 Mann, Iroquoian Women, 99. 350 Hewitt, "Serpent Symbolism," 179-80. 351 Mooney, "Sacred Formulas of the Cherokees," 352; Ugvwiyuhi, Joumey to Sunrise: Myths and Legends of the Cherokee (Claremoe, OK: Egi Press, 1977) 30-31. 352 Howard, "Altamaha Cherokee Folklore and Customs," 137. 353 Kate Herman, "Legends of the Cherokees," Joumal of American Folk-Lore 2 (1889): 55. 354 Mooney, "Myths of the Cherokee," 396. 355 Mooney, "Myths of the Cherokee," 297-98, 301, 542. 356 Mooney, "Myths of the Cherokee," 298-300. In 1883, William Eubanks (Cherokee) recounted essentially the same story, though in less detail, in Herman, "Legends of the Cherokees," 55. 357 Herman, "Legends of the Cherokees," 55. 358 Timberlake, Memoirs, 74. Compare the story of Timberlake's unnamed shaman to that of Agan-uni'tsi. 359 Adair, History of the American Indians, 237. 360 Timberlake, Memoirs, 73-75. 361 Timberlake, Memoirs, 73 (n 41); Adair, History of the American Indians, 75 (n 42). See also, Mooney, "Myths of the Cherokee," 458-60. 362 Timberlake, Memoirs, 74. 363 Timberlake, Memoirs, 73-74. 364 Adair, History of the American Indians, 91. 365 Brinton, The Myths of the New World, 142. 366 Brinton, The Myths of the New World, 122. Brinton described this interpretation in oppositional terms of "foes" and "destruction," but this Euro-formed the Native idea. 367 Cusick, "Sketches of Ancient History of the Six Nations," 11.

420 NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

368 Thwaites, Jesuit Relations, 12: 27. Other Algonkin informed Buteux that "flashes of lightning were nothing but serpents falling upon the ground," as proven by the tracks of lightning found on trees after storms, in "the shape of those creatures, stamped, as it were, in sinuous and crooked lines around the tree." Thwaites, Jesuit Relations, 12: 27. 369 Brinton, The Myths of the New World, 118. 370 Adair, History of the A merican Indians, 91. 371 Harrington, "A Preliminary Sketch of Lendpe Culture," 226. In an altemative rain-making ritual, a Lenape shaman drew a cross + on the ground, each branch pointing to one of the Four Winds (Earth), sprinkled it with tobacco and red powder (both tokens of Sky prayer), and lay a gourd atop, calling upon the Spirit of Rain. Brinton, The Myths of the New World, 99. 372 Harrington, "A Preliminary Sketch of Lendpe Culture," 226. In 1913, the Lenap6 still had the two, ancient medicine bags they had carried with them on during their forced treks inland after European invasion in the seventeenth century. Harrington, "A Preliminary Sketch of Lendpe Culture," 225. 373 Voegelin, "The Shawnee Female Deity," 18. 374 Spencer, "Shawnee Folk-Lore," 322-23. 375 Parker, Seneca Myths and Folk Tales, 30. 376 Parker, Seneca Myths and Folk Tales, 30; see, for instance, "The Fugitive Young Woman and Her Dog Charm," in Barbeau, Huron and Wyandot Mythology, 239-41. 377 Parker, Code of Handsome Lake, 29-30; Thomas and Boyle, Teachings from the Longhouse, 30-33. For my discussion of the misleading nature of the term "witchcraft" in discussing Iroquoian otkon medicine, see Mann, Iroquoian Women, 318-20. 378 Barbeau, Huron and Wyandot Mythology, 264-65. Such hunting medicine was recorded as early as 1648, in Thv/aites, Jesuit Relations, 33: 211. 379 Parker, Seneca Myths and Folk-Tales, 18. For a tradition of Dwarfs fumbling a hunt, see Complanter, Legends of the Longhouse, 33-34. 380 Voegelin, "Shawnee Female Deity," 7-8. 381 Strachey, The Historie ofTravell into Virginia Britania, 101-2. 382 Korp, Sacred Geography, 56-57. 383 Shetrone, "Explorations of the Hopewell Group of Prehistory Earthworks," 46. 384 Shetrone, "Explorations of the Hopewell Group of Prehistory Earthworks," 49. 385 Mooney, "Myths of the Cherokee," 396.

NOTES 421

386 See, for instance, Willoughby, "The Turner Group of Earthworks," for mica and Homed Serpents, 45-46, 56,67-69; galena stone, 17. For crystal, see Shetrone, "Explorations of the Hopewell Group of Prehistory Earthworks," 49, 387 Webb and Snow, The Adena People, 95, 388 For the "egg" and "sun" alternatives of westem thought, see Shaffer, Native Americans before 1492,40. For ancient date of Serpent Mound as generally accepted, see William F. Romain, "Serpent Mound Revisited," Ohio Archaeologist 37.4 (1987): 6, 389 Thwaites, Jesuit Relations, 10:285. 390 For vague references, see, for instance, William F. Romain, "Geometry at the Serpent Mound," Ohio Archaeologist 38.1 (1988): 51. Romain's citation in a subsequent article of "Huron" and Cherokee frogs, Choctaw squirrels, and Muscogee toads, frogs, pigs, and dogs swallowing the sun are not to the point of serpents, which filled a very specific role in the cosmological balance of Earth and Sky not taken on by other animals, Romain's later refence to Iroquoian traditions of "great battles" between the sun and the Homed Serpent were westem misstatements of Sky and Earth working to achieve equilibrium. William F. Romain, "The Serpent Mound Solar Eclipse Hypothesis: Ethnohistoric Considerations," Ohio Archaeologist 38.3 (1988): 32, 33. 391 Clark Hardman, Jr., and Marjorie H, Hardman, "The Great Serpent and the Sun," Ohio Archaeologist 37.3 (19 87): 34-40. 392 For misconstrued and misapplied traditions, see note 390 above. For his correct identification ofthe Serpent Mound as a Homed Serpent effigy, see William F. Romain, "The Serpent Mound Solar Eclipse Hypothesis: Ethohistoric Considerations," Ohio Archaeologist 38.3 (1988): 33. See also, William F. Romain, "Serpent Mound Revisited," Ohio Archaeologist 37.4 (1987): 4-10, and William F. Romain, "Geometry at the Serpent Mound," Ohio Archaeologist 2S.I (1988): 50-54. 393 Robert Fletcher and Terry Cameron, "Serpent Mound: A New Look at an Old Snake-inthe-Grass," Ohio Archaeologist 3S.\ (1988): 58.

5. Blabbermouth Bones: NAGPRA, Remythologized Archaeology, and Documentary Genocide 1 For a copy ofthe Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act, see either 25 U.S.C. 3001 or U.S. Department ofthe Interior, National Park Service, and Cultural Resources Programs, Federal Historic Presevation Laws (Washington, D.C: Govemment Printing Office, 1993)63-74. 2 Earlier federal attempts to "protect" Native graves worked entirely from the archaeological point of view. Thus, the Antiquities Act, U.S, Pulic Law 59-209 passed on 8 June 1906 to protect Native graves accomplished this by making Native remains national resources. U.S. Department of the Interior, Federal Historic Presevation Laws, 46. It allowed professional archaeologists to remove graves from federal land, under permit, for museums and institutions. Thus, the act was actually aimed at thwarting looters who were destroying

422 NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

sites for the sake of relics that they could sell on the artifact circuit. The point was to preserve them for archaeologists to dig up. 3 U.S. Department ofthe Interior, Federal Historic Preservation Laws, 65. 4 The term, "documentary genocide," was coined by Russell Booker, a Virginia State Registrar, See J. David Smith, The Eugenic Assault on America: Scenes in Red, White, and Black (Fairfax, VA: George Mason University Press, 1993) term coined. 111; expansion on concept by Smith, 89-100. 5 Quoted in Barbara Alice Mann, "In Defense ofthe Ancestors: Ohio Falls Silent," Native Americas 17.2 (summer 2000): 53. 6 There is no question that grave goods were sold at this auction, as items shown in excavation photos in Vietzen's published works were also listed in the auction catalogue, including, for instance, a pot taken from a grave at the Riker Site, showing in Vietzen, From the Earth They Came, 134, and listed as item 122 on page 22 ofthe Old Bam Auction House catalogue ofthe Vietzen auction. Other grave goods from the Riker Site included twenty-five pots that Vietzen kept, refiirbished, in his museum, Raymond C. Vietzen, From the Earth They Came (Elyria, OH: White Horse Publishers, 1978) 149. Upon Vietzen's death in 1995, his widow, Ruth Vietzen, promptly put up for auction all of his artifacts, most of them grave goods, breaking apart collections to do this. The bones, she gave to the Ohio Historical Society. These were among the bones that OHS placed in a secret "curation" crypt, to which archaeologists had the key, but whose very location was kept secret from Ohio Natives. For the Findlay auctions, see Mann, "In Defense ofthe Ancestors," 50, 54-55. 7 Marm, "In Defense ofthe Ancestors," 54-55; whole account, 50-55. 8 Vietzen claimed to have been listed in Who's Who in Intemational Ari (1912), Who's Who in Antiquities (1972), Who's Who in Indian Relics (1973), the intemational Who's Who in Arts (1973), and Who's Who in America (1975), but I have been unable to verify any listing except that in H. C, Wachtel, Who's Who in Indian Relics (Union City, GA: Charley C. Drake, 1973) 1:100. Vietzen nevertheless listed them all as credits, in Raymond C. Vietzen, Their Fires Are CoW (Elyria, OH: White Horse Publishers, 1984) 9. 9 Bruce G. Trigger, A History ofArchaeological nought (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1989) 16. 10 Raymond C. Vietzen, / Touched the Indians Past (Prehistoric Era) (Elyria, OH: White Horse Publishers, 1994) 7 11 Raymond C. Vietzen, Prehistoric Indians from Darkness into Light (Elyria, OH: White Horse Publishers, 1995)7. 12 For Moorehead and Mills as his heros, see Raymond C. Vietzen, The Ancient Ohioans and Their Neighbors (Wahoo, NB: Ludi Printing Company, 1946) 167. 13 Robert E. Bieder, A Brief Historical Survey ofthe Expropriation of American Indian Remains (Bloomington, IN: Native American Rights Fund, 1990) 28. Moorehead's collection is hardly unique. Writing in 1906, another Vietzen hero, William Mills, was

NOTES 423

completely unable to tell how many of the "bone implements" pulled out of the Edwin Hamess Mound in Ohio "were placed with the burial" because a previous archaeologist, Frederick Ward Putnam, out potsherding for the Peabody Museum, had "handled" them, completely destroying their context. William C. Mills, "Explorations ofthe Edwin Hamess Mound," Ohio Archaeological and Historical Quarterly\6.2 (1906): 184. 14 Raymond C, Vietzen, My Life and Philosophy as an Archaeologist, Author, Artist (Elyria, OH: White Horse Publishers, 1992) 72. 15 Vietzen, My Life and Philosophy, 88. 16 Vietzen, My Life and Philosophy, his art, 84-85; nudes in drawing class, 89. For examples of his work, see Vietzen, The Old Warrior Speaks, 17,58,62,104,109,134,135,171-74, 176-80, 190, 203-6, 209, 211,239. 17 Raymond C. Vietzen, The Old Warrior Speaks (Elyria, OH: White Horse Publishers, 1981): 11,92-93; Vietzen, / Touched the Indians Past, 220; Vietzen, Prehistoric Indians from Darkness into Light, 11. 18 Vietzen, Prehistoric Indians from Darkness into Light, 16, 19 Vietzen, Prehistoric Indians from Darkness into Light, 16, 20 Vietzen, My Life and Philosophy, 11. 21 Raymond C. Vietzen, Shakin' the Bushes: From Paleo to Historic Indians (Elyria, OH: White Horse Publishers, 1976) 198. 22 In Vietzen's works, there are numerous references to and descriptions of his attending auctions, flea markets, and collectors' sales. See, for instance, Raymond C. Vietzen, Sittin' on a Stump (Elyria, OH: n.p,, 1968) 29, 45-46; Raymond C. Vietzen, / Touched the Indians Past, 133,138, 139, 157,188, 189, 194, 220; Vietzen, The Old Warrior Speaks, 264; Vietzen, My Life and Philosophy, 97,99, 121-22,131,230, 240,256,271. In 1976, Vietzen also made it clear that he traded for artifacts with no clear provenance. People would simply come in to sell artifacts, giving a general description of where they had found them. Vietzen, Shakin' the Bushes, 114,115. This violates the rules of archaeology, which, certainly by 1976, declared that out-of-site artifacts are practically worthless, archaeologically speaking. 23 Vietzen, Prehistoric Indians from Darkness into Light, 90. 24 Vietzen, Their Fires Are Cold, 9. 25 Vietzen, Their Fires Are Cold, 9. 26 Vietzen, / Touched the Indians Past, 176. 27 Vietzen, Shakin' the Bushes, 11. 28 Raymond C. Vietzen, The Immorial Eries (Elyria, OH: Wilmont Printing Co., 1945) "Field Technique," 71-97; quote, 71.

424 NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

29 Vietzen, Shakin' the Bushes, 158. 30 Vietzen, My Life and Philosophy, 88. 31 For the term, "avocational archaeologist," see Jerome C. Rose, Thomas J. Green, and Victoria D. Green, "NAGPRA Is Forever: Osteology and the Repatriation of Skeletons," Annual Report of Anthropology 25 (1996): 92. 32 In 1983, for example, archaeologists Michael Pratt tapped Vietzen to help out at the Pipe Creek dig in Sandusky, Ohio. Vietzen, Their Fires Are Cold, 38. A 1978 publication was made with the "Full cooperation of the Ohio Historical Society at Ohio State Museum," as stated in the eover blurb. Vietzen, From the Earth They Came, cover. 33 Vietzen, The Old Warrior Speaks, 121 34 For example, Vietzen used Henry Wadsworth Longfellow as his source on the Haudenosaunee tradition of the Great Law and, accordingly, misrepresented "Hiawatha" as the Peacemaker, thus regurgitating one of the more egregious of the nineteenth-century errors on Iroquoian tradition. Raymond C. Vietzen, Indians of the Lake Erie Basin, or Lost Nations (Wahoo, NB: Ludi Printing Co, 1965) 162,370; Vietzen, Shakin'the Bushes, 140. For a proper recital of the traditions of the Great Law, see Bruce E. Johansen and Barbara Alice Mann, ed.. Encyclopedia of the Haudenosaunee (Iroquois Confederacy) (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 2000) 267-84. For the wild inaccuracies in Longfellow's version, see Barbara Alice Mann, Iroquoian Women: The Gantowisas (New York: Peter Lang Publishing, 2000) 69, 373-74. Then again, in 1965, long after such a presentation was discredited, Vietzen described the Mound Builders as "that mystic race, whose origin or fate none can tell." Vietzen, Indians of the Lake Erie Basin, 341. 35 Vietzen, Sittin'on a Stump, 43. 36 Vietzen, Ancient Ohioans, as secretary, 17; acknowledgment, 9. 37 Vietzen, Shakin' the Bushes, 18. The founders of the Ohio Indian Relic Collectors' Society were Frank Burdett, President; Arthur Altick, Vice President; and Vietzen, SecretaryTreasurer. 38 Vietzen, / Touched the Indians Past, 9. For Zepp as Vietzen's close friend, see Vietzen, The Old Warrior Speaks, 131. 39 Vietzen, / Touched the Indians Past, 9. 40 Raymond C. Vietzen, Archaeology around the Great Lakes (Elyria, OH: White Horse Publishers, 1987)116. 41 Raymond C. Vietzen, 77ie Riker Site (n.c: Sugar Creek Valley Chapter of the Archaeological Society of Ohio, 1974) 16. See also, Vietzen's descriptions of key members of the Society, showing them all to have been amateurs and hobbyists, in Vietzen, Archaeology around the Great Lakes, 116-19. 42 Vietzen, The Riker Site, 16. By 1987, when he had begun remythologizing his career, Vietzen asserted that he had felt "somewhat wrong" while in the act of removing the Riker

NOTES 425

graves, Vietzen, Archaeology around the Great Lakes, 102.1 believe that this remorse was a later development, for, certainly, none of this supposed hesitation was apparent in his official account of the dig at the time. 43 Vietzen, The Riker Site, 21. 44 Vietzen, The Riker Site, \10-l\. 45 Vietzen, Archaeology around the Great Lakes, 101. 46 J. L. Champe, D. S. Nyers, C. Evans, A. K. Guthe, H. W. Hamilton, E. B. Jelks, C. W. Meighan, S. Olafson, G. S. Quimby, W. Smith, and F. Wendorf, "Four Statements for Archaeology," American Antiquity 27 (1961): 137-39. 47 Mark J. Lynott and Alison Wylie, ed.. Ethics in American Archaeology: Challenges for the 1990s (Washington, D.C: Society for American Archaeology, 1995) 25. 48 Lynott and Wylie, Ethics in American Archaeology, refusal to publish, 25; scholarship on looted artifacts encourage looting, 20. 49 Lynott and Wylie, ed.. Ethics in American Archaeology, 17. 50 Christopher B. Donnan, "Masterworks of Art Reveal a Remarkable Pre-Inca World," National Geographic 177.6 (June 1990): 17-33. 51 For critical articles, see Brian Alexander, "Archaeology and Looting Make a Volatile Mix," Science 250 (23 November 1990): 1074-75; and C. Nagin, "The Peruvian Gold Rush," Art and Antiquities 1 (May, 1990): 98-105+; for Donnan's rebuttal, see Christopher B. Donnan, "Archaeology and Looting: Preserving the Record," Science 251 (1 February 1991): 498. 52 Harvey Arden, "Who Owns Our Past?" National Geographic 175.3 (March 1989): 378, 383. 53 Lynott and Wylie, Ethics in American Archaeology, 43. 54 Lynott and Wylie, Ethics in American Archaeology, 25. 55 Vietzen, Archaeology around the Great Lakes, young bloods, 25; jealousies, 158. 56 Raymond C. Vietzen, Prehistoric Americans (Elyria, OH: White Horse Publishers, 1989) snubbing 69-70; days of good manners, 64. 57 Vietzen, The Immortal Eries, quote, 357-58. 58 Vietzen, The Immortal Eries, quote, 349; "Craniology" section 347-51; table of "Cranial Measurements," 358; photos, 371-75. 59 Vietzen, Indians of the Lake Erie Basin, 175-83. 60 Vietzen, The Riker Site, 177.

426 NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

61 Vietzen, The Riker Site, 174-84, 62 Vietzen, From the Earth They Came, 189, 63 Vietzen, The Immortal Eries, 343, 64 See, for example, the claim of Rose et al,, "NAGPRA Is Forever," 85, 65 See, for example. Rose et al,, "NAGPRA Is Forever," 85. 66 Barbara Crandell, interview by Barbara A, Mann, 1 January 2001, Thomville, Ohio, 67 Randall H, McGuire, "The Sanctity ofthe Grave: White Concepts and American Indian Burials," Conflict in the Archaeology of Living Traditions, ed, Robert Layton (New York: Routledge, 1994) 169-70. 68 McGuire, "The Sanctity of the Grave," 170-71. 69 See, for instance, Clement W. Meighan, "The Burial of American Archaeology," Academic Questions 3 (summer, 1993): 17. 70 Robert K, Wayne, Jennifer A, Leonard, and Alan Cooper, "Full of Sound and Fury: The Recent History of Ancient DNA," Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics 30 (1999): 460,461. 71 Presentation, Dr. Alan Goodman, Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act Review Committee Hearing, Ropes Gray Room, Harvard Law School, Cambridge, Massachusetts, 17-19 November 2001, Official Transcript, vol. 1, 17 November 2001. 72 Brett Lee Shelton and Jonathan Marks, "Genetic Markers Not a Valid Test of Native Identity,", accessed 22 February 2002, 2. 73 Kaestle was speaking specifically conceming a 9,000-year-old man pulled out of a cave in the southwest. Her remarks were cited by Marc Slonim, counsel for the Fallon PaiuteShonshone, Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act Review Committee Hearing, Ropes Gray Room, Harvard Law School, Cambridge, Massachusetts, 17-19 November 2001, Official Transcript, vol. 2, 18 November 2001. 74 Quoted by Alan Goodman, NAGPRA Hearing, vol. 2,18 November 2001, 75 Vietzen, The Ancient Ohioans, 17, 76 Vietzen, ShaMn' the Bushes, 78. 77 Vietzen, The Immorial Eries, quote, 103; repetition, 104,107, 343. 78 Vietzen, Indians ofthe Lake Erie Basin, 20, 79 Vietzen, Shakin' the Bushes, 133.

NOTES 427

80 Vietzen, The Ancient Ohioans, 17. 81 Vietzen, Sittin' on a Stump, 23; Vietzen, / Touched the Indians Past, 7; Vietzen, Prehistoric Indians from Darkness into Light, 73. 82 For Engel-Eiden Site, see Vietzen, Shakin' the Bushes, 78; for grave beads from an Oak Harbor site, see Vietzen, From the Earth They Came, 116. 83 Vietzen, The Old Warrior Speaks, 86. 84 Vietzen, Sittin' on a Stump, 29. 85 By the 1990s, Ohio Valley Natives were showing up regularly at collectors' trade shows to protest the buying and selling of mound goods, Vietzen, / Touched the Indians Past, 133, 220. For examples of his responses to the grave-robbing charge, see Vietzen, Prehistoric Americans, 23; Vietzen, The Old Warrior Speaks, 223, 265; Vietzen, Shakin' the Bushes, 23; Vietzen, / Touched the Indians Past, 136, 220; Vietzen, Archaeology around the Great Lakes, 156; Vietzen, Prehistoric Indians from Darkness into Light. 97. In 1987, Vietzen began drawing a distinction between historical and ancient graves, pleading that he had never touched historical graves. Why this made excavating ancient graves acceptable was left unexplained. Vietzen, Archaeology around the Great Lakes, 21. 86 Vietzen, Prehistoric Indians from Darkness into Light, 158. 87 Vietzen, 5i«m'ona5/um/7,43. 88 Vietzen, The Old Warrior Speaks, 99. Although Vietzen prided himself on his fakespotting ability, it is doubtful that no fakes were traded on his premises. Most shadily traded "artifacts" are fakes, Lynott and Wylie, Ethics in American Archaeology, 20. 89 Vietzen, The Old Warrior Speaks, 99. 90 Vietzen, My Life and Philosophy, 68. 91 Nina Swidler, Kurt E. Dongoske, Roger Anyon, and Alan S. Downer, ed.. Native Americans and Archaeologists: Stepping Stones to Common Ground (Walnut Creek, CA: AltaMira Press, 1997) 32. 92 Larry J. Zimmerman, "Remythologizing the Relationship between Indians and Archaeologists," in Native Americans and Archaeologists: Stepping Stones to Common Ground, Nina Swidler, Kurt E Dongoske, Roger Anyon, and Alan S. Downer, ed. (Walnut Creek, CA: AltaMira Press, 1997) 45. 93 Anita Sue Grossman, "Digging the Grave of Archaeology," Heterodoxy (spring 1993): 12. 94 Douglas J. Preston, "Skeletons in Our Museums' Closets," Harper's (February 1989): 68-69, 70. 95 Rose et al., "NAGPRA Is Forever," 82. 96 Larry J. Zimmerman, "Made Radical by My Own: An Archaeologist Leams to Accept

428 NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

Reburial," Conflict in the Archaeology of Living Traditions, ed. Robert Layton. New YorkRoutledge, 1994)61-62. 97 Meighan, "The Burial of American Archaeology," 9. 98 Paula Gunn Allen fairly nails this concept in her discussion, focusing on the Crow, of why menstruating women are careful about interacting with other medicine. 'Tribal people view menstruation as a 'medicine' of such power that it can cause the death of certain people, such as men on the eve of combat, or pregnant women. Menstruating (or any other) Crow women do not go near a particularly sacred medicine bundle, and menstruating women are not allowed among warriors getting ready for battle, or those who have been wounded, because women are perceived to be possessed of a singular power, most vital during menstruation, puberty, and pregnancy, that weakens men's powers—^physical, spiritual, or magical. The Crow and many other American Indians do not perceive signs of womanness as contamination; rather they view them as so powerful that other 'medicines' may be canceled by the very presence of that power." Paula Gunn Allen, The Sacred Hoop: Recovering the Feminine in American Indian Traditions (1986; Boston: Beacon Press 1992)253. 99 Grossman, "Digging the Grave of Archaeology," 10. 100 Grossman, "Digging the Grave of Archaeology," 10. 101 Grossman, "Digging the Grave of Archaeology," 10. 102 John Heckewelder, History. Manners, and Customs of the Indian Nations Who Once Inhabited Pennsylvania and the Neighboring States, The First American Frontier Series (1819, 1820, 1876; reprint. New York: Amo Press and The New York Times, 1971) 271. 103 Meighan, "The Burial of American Archaeology," 17. 104 Grossman, "Digging the Grave of Archaeology," 12. 105 Grossman, "Digging the Grave of Archaeology," 11. 106 Grossman, "Digging the Grave of Archaeology," 9. 107 Meighan, "The Burial of American Archaeology," 11. 108 Grossman,"Digging the Grave of Archaeology," 11. 109 Bieder, A Brief Historical Survey, 20-21. 110 Kenn Harper, Give Me My Father's Body: The Life of Minik. the New York Eskimo (Frobisher Bay, Northwest Territory: Blacklead Books, 1986) 99-100. 111 Harper, Give Me My Father's Body, 227. 112 Bieder, A Brief Historical Survey, 20.

NOTES 429

113 Grossman, "Digging the Grave of Archaeology," 11-12; Meighan, "The Burial of American Archaeology," 12. 114 Meighan, "The Burial of American Archaeology," 13. 115 Larry J, Zimmerman, "Regaining Our Nerve: Ethics, Values, and the Transformation of Archaeology," Ethics in American Archaeology: Challengesfor the 1990s, Mark J, Lynott and Alison Wylie, ed. (Washington, D.C.: Society for American Archeology, 1995) "different and valid," 65; for "malcontent," see Zimmerman, "Made Radical by My Own," 60. 116 Zimmerman, "Made Radical by My Own," 60,61,65-66. Zimmerman is hardly the only archaeologist who has recognized the racist bedrock of archaeology. In 1980, Daniel Miller recognized that archaeology grew from colonialist roots. He chastised "colonial curiosity and paternalism," arguing that such motives could neither underpin nor justify digs, Daniel Miller, "Archaeology and Development," Current Anthropology 21.6 (December 1980): 710; quote, 714. T. J. Ferguson has also criticized the colonialism at the base of archaeology and the way that modem archaeologists slide by the realization with vague references to a distastefijl past that conveniently omit the gory details. T. J. Ferguson, "Native Americans and the Practice of Archaeology," Annual Review of Anthropology 25 (1996): 64. 117 Zimmerman, "Made Radical by My Own," 60-62. What changed in the 1970s was not Native behavior but Euroamerican behavior. It was not that Natives were silent on grave robbing until then, but that archaeologists, museum curators, hobbyists, and the general public were deaf to Native protests until that time. It was only in the spillover ofthe Civil Rights Movements that Euroamericans became sensitized to perspectives other than their own. As early as 1975, Clasop Natives in Eugene, Oregon, demanded NAGPRA-style rights over their cemeteries, demanding an equal say with archaeologists in any proposed digs. Under the prodding of Wilbur Temyik, a Clasop and the Chairman of the Oregon Coastal Conservation and Development Commission, the commission adopted a policy that put archaeologists and hobbyists on notice. Thenceforward, they had to gain Native permission to dig, "'Don't Dig Indian Graves,"' Wassaja 3.4 (May 1975): 2. At the same time, the Inter-Tribal Council of Grand Rapids, Michigan, moved forcefully to protect the Norton Mounds from archaeological and recreational digging. Although under the control ofthe Grand Rapids Public Museum, the mounds had been easily entered and assaulted, with vandals and archaeologists causing damage in about equal proportions. Native youths sent in to clean up the Mounds promptly erected barricades, keeping out intruders. Fred Chivis, Director of the Inter-Tribal Council, decried the easy digging policies of the Museum, noting that Natives did not go about digging up Euroamerican cemeteries. Echoing a Native commonplace, he wondered aloud how a Euroamerican might feel is they "dug up his grandfather in order to put his bones on display." "Natives Act to Protect Grave," Wassaja 3.4 (May 1975): 2. Although it was already illegal in the 1970s just to go out with a spade and a sack, the law was largely ineffectual for lack of enforcement. Thus did the Hopi took the unheard-of step of demanding stepped-up prosecutive of looters and archaeologists who had been leaving potholes across Hopi lands in their quest for buried treasure. "'Prosecute Diggers of Artifacts,'" Wassaja 3.4 (May 1975): 11. 118 Zimmerman, "Made Radical by My Own," 61-62. 119 Zimmerman, "Made Radical by My Own," 62-63.

430 NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

120 Joe Watkins, "Writing Unwritten History," Archaeology 53.6 (November/December 2000): 38. 121 Watkins, "Writing Unwritten History," 36-37. 122 Watkins, "Writing Unwritten History," 38. Vizenor's bone court anticipated many of the stipulations of NAGPRA. In particular, it asserted that Natives had rights to their bodies, even in death, whereas science had no "absolute" claim to Native artifacts, and still less to narratives about the Native past. Gerald Vizenor, "Bone Courts: The Natural Rights of Tribal Bones," Crossbloods. Bone Couris. Bingo, and Other Reports (1976; Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1990) 63, 72, 77. Vizenor also labeled archaeology necrophilic, accused archaeologists of marching their careers over the backs of the ancestors, and accused the entire field of archaeology of intellectual imperialism, Vizenor, "Bone Courts," 67,73,75. Vizenor has since made a name for himself as a leading scholar in literature. 123 Watkins, "Writing Unwritten History," 39. 124 Watkins, "Writing Unwritten History," 38. 125 Zimmerman, "Remythologizing the Relationship between Indians and Archaeologists," 50. 126 K. Anne Pybum and Richard R. Wilk, "Responsible Archaeology Is Applied Anthropology," in Ethics in American Archaeology, ed. Mark J. Lynott and Alison Wylie (Washington, D.C: Society for American Archaeology, 1995) 71. 127 Lynott and Wylie, Ethics in American Archaeology, 33. 128 Lynott and Wylie, Ethics in American Archaeology, 29. 129 Zimmerman, "Remythologizing the Relationship between Indians and Archaeologists," 52-53; Ferguson, "Native Americans and the Practice of Archaeology," 64; Lynott and Wylie, Ethics in American Archaeology, 31. 130 Zimmerman, "Remythologizing the Relationship between Indians and Archaeologists," 53. 131 Lynott and Wylie, Ethics in American Archaeology, 11. 132 Ferguson, "Native Americans and the Practice of Archaeology," 63; quote, 74. 133 See, for instance, Raymond H. Thompson, "Dealing with the Past, and Looking to the Future," Museum News 70.1 (January/February 1991): 36-40; Evan Roth, "Success Stories," A/tAseu/n News 70.1 (January/February 1991): 41-45; Vivian Gwinn and Marilyn Norcini, "Help for the Asking," Museum News 70.1 (January/February, 1991): 52-56. 134 Lynott andWylie, Ethics in American Archaeology,15. 135 Lynott and Wylie, Ethics in American Archaeology, 76. This was a position echoed by Lyrme Goldstein and Keith Kintich, in "Ethics and the Reburial Controversy," American Antiquity 55.3 (1990): 588-89.

NOTES 431

136 Miller, "Archaeology and Development," 726. 137 Pybum and Wilk, "Responsible Archaeology Is Applied Anthropology," 73-74. 138 Ferguson, "Native Americans and the Practice of Archaeology," 65. 139 Zimmerman, "Remythologizing the Relationship between Indians and Archaeologists," 45. 140 Zimmerman, "Remythologizing the Relationship between Indians and Archaeologists," 47. 141 Zimmerman, "Remythologizing the Relationship between Indians and Archaeologists," 45; Swidler et al.. Native Americans and Archaeologists, 32. 142 Consider, for example, his discussion of grave removals in Raymond C. Vietzen, Ancient Man in Northem Ohio, Ancient Man in Northem Ohio (Lorain, OH: McCahon Printers, 1941) 33-59; see also the maps showing locations of all burials dug, 63-65; and the numerous artifacts discusssed, e.g.: 105-23. In 1978, Vietzen proudly announced that beads he had removed from a grave on the banks of the Little Portage River near Oak Harbor, Ohio, were thereafter on display in his Indian Ridge Museum, Vietzen, From the Earth They Came, 116. 143 Vietzen, My Life and Philosophy, 68. 144 Vietzen, My Life and Philosophy, 69; reiterated on 86, 273. 145 Vietzen, / Touched the Indians Past, 136. 146 Vietzen, My Life and Philosophy, 82. 147 Vietzen, / Touched the Indians Past, 21,35, 136, 220; Vietzen, Archaeology around the Great Lakes, 156. Vietzen, Shakin' the Bushes, 274; Vietzen, My Life and Philosophy, 3. 148 Vietzen, Prehistoric Americans, 75. 149 Vietzen, Sittin'on a Stump, 33. 150 Vietzen, 7yie/J//terS/7e, 198. 151 Vietzen, Sittin' on a Stump, 31. 152 Vietzen, The Immorial Eries, 75-76. 153 Vietzen, Shakin' the Bushes, 162. 154 Vietzen, Sittin' on a Stump, 102. 155 Vietzen, Shakin' the Bushes, 21. 156 Vietzen, My Life and Philosophy, 69. 157 Vietzen, Prehistoric Indians, 41.

432 NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

158 Vietzen, Sittin' on a Stump, 92, 159 Vietzen, My Life and Philosophy, 108. By 1992, when he wrote up this incident, Vietzen had convinced himself that divine intervention had miraculously prevented the purchase. Vietzen, My Life and Philosophy, 108. 160 Vietzen, My Life and Philosophy, 149. 161 Vietzen's claim of relation to Custer was actually rather tenuous. The Custer family intermarried with the Marstellers. Vietzen's aunt, Emma Marsteller, was related to Custer. Vietzen, My Life and Philosophy, 260. Other disquisitions on Custer may be found in Vietzen, The Old Warrior Speaks, 237-61; Vietzen, Their Fires Are Cold, Ml-19, which contained the stirring admonition that Custer "was one ofthe bravest soldiers America ever produced and do not forget it," 178; Vietzen, Archaeology around the Great Lakes, 25; 141-46; Vietzen, Prehistoric Americans, in which Vietzen had a "vision" ofthe Custer battlefied, noting that both Custer and he were "of German military stock and fighting was what we knew best," 63, 64; Vietzen, My Life and Philosophy, 273, 148-49; Vietzen, / Touched the Indians Past, 21, 182, 203-7. Vietzen also claimed to have been related to George S. Patton and to have had his home in Tontogany, Ohio, Vietzen, / Touched the Indians Past, 176,182. Vietzen felt a twinge of shame that Patton and Custer had "helped destroy" the beautiful southem way of life," Vietzen, / Touched the Indians Past, 21. John Wayne was another of Vietzen's heros, Vietzen, The Old Warrior Speaks, 264. 162 Vietzen, My Life and Philosophy, 149. 163 Vietzen, My Life and Philosophy, 215. 164 Vietzen, My Life and Philosophy, 271, 165 Zimmerman, "Remythologizing the Relationship between Indians and Archaeologists," 49. 166 Rose et al., "NAGPRA Is Forever," 88, 98. 167 Vietzen, Shakin' the Bushes, 78, 133; Vietzen, / Touched the Indians Past, 20, 45, 194, 211. 168 Bieder, A Brief Historical Survey, 24. 169 William L. Stone, "The Moundbuilders: Were They Egyptians; and Did They Ever Occupy the State of New York?" Magazine of American History 2.7 (July 1878): 538. 170 Thomas Campbell Walbridge, "On Some Ancient Mounds upon the Shore ofthe Bay of Quint6," The Canadian Joumal, New Series 29.5 (September 1860): 417. 171 Henry Clyde Shetrone, Primer of Ohio Archaeology: The Mound Builders and the Indians, 5th ed. (Columbus: The Ohio State Archaeological and Historical Society, 1951) quote, 15; pictures, 17, 172 Vietzen, The Riker Site, 16. 173 Vietzen, The Old Warrior Speaks, 151.

NOTES 433

174 Rose et al,, "NAGPRA Is Forever," 94. 175 McGuire, "The Sanctity of the Grave," 170-71. 176 Rose et al, "NAGPRA Is Forever," 93, 177 Anita Sue Grossman, "Digging the Grave of Archaeology," Heterodoxy (spring 1993): 9. 178 Rose et al, "NAGPRA Is Forever," 81. When they restudied those remains previously pondered, archaeologists changed the original conclusions or came to completely new ones in 62% ofthe cases. Rose et al,, "NAGPRA Is Forever," 85, Although archaeologists do not like to say so out loud, the high percentage of altered conclusions reflects the reversal ofthe racist assessments originally made. 179 Rose et al., "NAGPRA Is Forever," 86, 87. 180 Vietzen, / Touched the Indians Past, 212. 181 Vietzen, My Life and Philosophy, hauntings, 82,125; failure, 125. 182 Vietzen, Archaeology around the Great Lakes, 113-15. 183 Vietzen, / Touched the Indians Past, 123. 184 For living exhibits and "powwows," see Vietzen, Shakin' the Bushes, 191; Vietzen, Sittin' on a Stump, 109; Vietzen, Prehistoric Indians from Darkness into Light, 124. For a representative photo of Vietzen playing Indian in a feathered headdress and beaded buckskins at one of these soirees, see Vietzen, Prehistoric Indians from Darkness into Light, 188. 185 For claims of adoption, see Vietzen, The Old Warrior Speaks, 11; Vietzen, / Touched the Indians Past, 1, 220; Vietzen, Their Fires Are Cold, 9; Vietzen, My Life and Philosophy, 150. How traditional these adoptions were is open to question, however. For example, in 1987, Vietzen revealed that his Seneca name was "Tall Crane," a comment on his "long legs," in Vietzen, Archaeology around the Great Lakes, 29. Traditional Iroquoian names do not reflect personal qualities or traits, but come from a store of currently unused names kept by the Clan Mothers. For traditional adoption practices of Seneca, see Mann, Iroquoian Women, 115-11; for names as not connected with personal traits, see Mann, Iroquoian Women, 270. Since Vietzen did not acquire any lineage name, in all likelihood, a few individuals made a highly informal "adoption" by pinning a satirical moniker on him. The Navajo adoption might have been more formal than the others since Vietzen was on their land, supposedly at their invitation, as a missionary. (It is a commonplace for missionary societies to present themselves as having been invited in by the groups they proselytize.) Vietzen, The Old Warrior Speaks, 92-93, 186 Vietzen, My Life and Philosophy 98-99; Vietzen, Archaeology around the Great Lakes, 159; Vietzen, Indians ofthe Lake Erie Basin, 14-15. 187 Vietzen, The Riker Site, 202; Vietzen, My Life and Philosophy, 152. 188 Vietzen, The Old Warrior Speaks, 37; Vietzen, Prehistoric Americans, 11; Vietzen, /

434 NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

Touched the Indians Past, 29; Vietzen, Prehistoric Indians from Darkness into Light, 180; Vietzen, Their Fires Are Cold, 17-18. 189 Vietzen, / Touched the Indians Past, 27; Vietzen, The Old Warrior Speaks, 265; Vietzen, Prehistoric Americans, 25, 67; Vietzen, The Immortal Eries, 387; Vietzen, Shakin' the Bushes, 129; Vietzen, Their Fires Are Cold, 17, 190 For visions generally, see Vietzen, My Life and Philosophy, 131-32, 152, 221; Vietzen, From the Earth They Came, 195. For visions of where to dig, see Vietzen, / Touched the Indians Past, 20\. 191 Vietzen, Indians ofthe Lake Erie Basin, 127, 192 Vietzen, The Riker Site, 175. 193 Vietzen, Shakin' the Bushes, 118. 194 Vietzen, Prehistoric Americans, 80, 195 See, for instance, Meighan, "The Burial of American Archaeology," 9,17. 196 Vietzen, / Touched the Indians Past, quote, 220; repeat of argument, 133. For other examples of this assertion, seeYietzen, I Touched the Indians Past, 21,133,220; Vietzen, Prehistoric Indians from Darkness into Light, 36-37; Vietzen, Prehistoric Americans, 75; Vietzen, Archaeology around the Great Lakes, 21; Vietzen, My Life and Philosophy, 84. 197 Vietzen, Prehistoric Indians from Darkness into Light, 46. 198 Vietzen, The Immorial Eries, 161,179-80, 248, 378, 381. 199 Vietzen, Their Fires Are Cold, 21, 22. 200 Erminie Wheeler Voegelin, Mortuary Customs ofthe Shawnee and Other Eastem Tribes, Prehistory Research Series, vol. 2, no. 4 (1944; reprint. New York: AMS Press, 1980) 236. Voegelin was all for this new-fangled refusal to cross-identify living groups with moundbuilding groups. In particular, she scorned the Shawnee as stone-box grave Mound Builders in the Tennessee-Cumberland region, calling it "an open challenge to archaeologists and ethnologists" to decide the matter, although she also dubbed the attempt to assign the graves to any one "tribe" as "futile," Voegelin, Mortuary Customs, 301, 326, respectively. Of course, the Shawnee were not invited to comment. 201 The term tribe was substituted for the older and far more correct term nation in the 1901 Supreme Court decision Montoya v. United States. The Court contemptuously declared that "the word 'nation' as applied to the uncivilized Indians is so much of a misnomer as to be little more than a compliment," National Reporter System, The Supreme Court Reporter, November, 1900-July, 1901 (St. Paul: West Publishing Co., 1901) 21: 35; Montoya v. United States, 180 U.S., 261 (1901); 21 S. Ct., 358, 359 (190). 202 Shetrone, Primer of Ohio Archaeology, 23. 203 The Graham Village site along Hocking River in Hocking County, Ohio, was excavated

NOTES 435

in June and July, 1965, moments ahead of the construction crew of U.S. Highway No. 33, which went through that fall, destroying the site. Study results showed it to have been "of Fort Ancient affiliation, probably Baum Focus, with possible Woodland affmities." Tests on the site yielded carbon-14 dates of 1180 and 1070 C.E. Olaf H. Pmfer and Douglas H. McKenzie, Studies in Ohio Archaeology (Cleveland: The Press of Westem Reserve University, 1967) 63,79. One strong hypothesis described the Graham Village as a "typical Fort Ancient site" (italics in the original), i.e., Shawnee. Prufer and McKenzie, Studies in Ohio Archaeology, 78. 204 Report of John Robbins, Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act Review Committee Hearing. Ropes Gray Room, Harvard Law School, Cambridge, Massachusetts. November 17-19, 2001. 3 vols. Official Transcript, vol. 1, 17 November 2001. 205 The diddly-squat insult was offered by Bob Winters, "Spanish Trade Beads," presentation 13 October 2001, "Eastem Woodland American Indian Conference: Claiming Our Heritage for the Future," 12-14 October 2001. Morgantown, West Virginia. Winters also included samples of grave goods in his presentation, causing several traditionalists in the audience to leave the room. Winters claimed to be Shawnee. 206 Clement W. Meighan, "Some Scholars' Views on Reburial." American Antiquity 57.4 (1992): 707. 207 Vietzen, / Touched the Indians Past, 220. 208 First quote, in Vietzen, / Touched the Indians Past, 211; second sentiment, in Vietzen, Prehistoric Indians from Darkness into Light, 182. 209 Quotation, in Zimmerman, "Regaining Our Nerve," 65; as commonplace, see Zimmerman, "Remythologizing the Relationship between Indians and Archaeologists," 46; and Bieder, A Brief Historical Survey, 42. 210 Bruce G. Trigger, "Archaeology and the Image of the American Indian," American Antiquity 34 (\9S0): 613. 211 Zimmerman, "Made Radical by My Own," 64. 212 For such a dispute, see Watkins, "Writing Unwritten History," 41. 213 Vietzen, Prehistoric Americans, 75. 214 Goldstein and Kintigh, "Ethics and the Reburial Controversy," 589. 215 Trigger, "Archaeology and the Image of the American Indian," 662. 216 Larry J. Zimmerman, "We Do Not Need Your Past! Politics, Indian Time, and Archaeology," in Beyond Subsistence: Plains Archaeology and the Postprocessual Critique, ed. Philip Duke and Michael C. Wilson (Tuscaloosa: The University of Alabama Press, 1995) 28. 217 David Roberts, In Search of the Old Ones: Exploring the Anasazi World of the Southwest (New York: Simon & Schuster, 1996) 87.

436 NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

218 J. L. Champe, D. S. Nyers, C. Evans, A. K. Guthe, H. W. Hamilton, E. B. Jelks, C. W. Meighan, S. Olafson, G. S. Quimby, W. Smith, and F. Wendorf, "Four Statements for Archaeology," American Antiquity 27 (1961): 137. 219 David M. Pendergast and Clement W. Meighan, "Folk Traditions as Historical Fact: A Paiute Example," Journal of American Folk-Lore 72. 284 (April/June 1959): 128. 220 Daniel G. Brinton, Essays of an Americanist (Philadelphia: Porter & Coates, 1890), 182. The Rev. Albert Seqaqknind Anthony's grandmother was Shawnee, and his father was Minsi Lenape. Anthony lived at Six Nations, in Ontario, Canada. He and Brinton conversed from August, 1886, to September, 1887, while they collaborated on a Lenape dictionary. Brinton, Essays of an Americanist, 181. 221 Andrew Wiget, "Truth and the Hopi," Ethnohistory 29 (1982): 195. 222 Wiget, "Truth and the Hopi," 196. 223 Wiget, "Truth and the Hopi," 183, 192. 224 Mann, lroquoian Women, 29-30. 225 Barbara A. Mann and Jerry L. Fields, "A Sign in the Sky: Dating the League of the Haudenosaunee," i4merican Indian Culture and Research Journal 21.2 (1997): 105-63. 226 Thomas, Skull Wars, 244-^5. 227 Roger C. Echo-Hawk, "Ancient History in the New World: Integrating Oral Traditions and the Archaeological Record in Deep Time," American Antiquity 65.2 (April, 2000): 270. Although he included Fields' and my "Sign in the Sky," Echo-Hawk overlooked Wiget's "Truth and the Hopi," which I consider a very important study. 228 I have addressed these problems before, in Barbara Alice Mann, "Euro-forming the Data," Debating Democracy (Santa Fe, NM: Clear Light Publishers, 1998) 182-84. 229 Swidler et al.. Native Americans and Archaeologists, 92. 230 Miller, "Archaeology and Development," 714. 231 Swidler et al., Native Americans and Archaeologists, 102. 232 Grossman, "Digging the Grave of Archaeology," 11. These policy statements were actually retreads of the policy of the Society for American Archaeology which, under great pressure from Natives, announced in 1985 that it would negotiate the return of bones, but only with Natives who could prove themselves to be next of kin to the remains, a nearly impossible standard to meet. Grossman, "Digging the Grave of Archaeology," 12. 233 For "any way" disposals, see Vietzen, Prehistoric Indians from Darkness into Light, 97; for "shudder" at the "disrespect," see Vietzen, From the Earth They Came, 213. 234 Vietzen, Prehistoric Indians from Darkness into Light, 104.

NOTES 437

235 Department of the Interior, Annual Repori ofthe Commissioner of Indian Affairs for the Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 1905, Part I (Washington, D,C,: Govemment Printing Office, 1906)1:29-30. 236 Peter LindestrSm, Geographia Americae with an Account ofthe Delaware Indians, Based on Surveys and Notes Made in 1654-1656, trans. Amandus Johnson (Philadelphia: The Swedish Colonial Society, 1925) 251. 237 John Heckewelder, Narrative ofthe Mission ofthe United Brethren among the Delaware and Mohegan Indians from Its Commencement, in the Year 1740. to the Close ofthe Year 1808 (1818; reprint. New York: Amo Press, 1971) 76. 238 Bieder, A Brief Historical Survey, 18, 239 Bieder, A Brief Historical Survey, 20, 240 James D. Richardson, ed., A Compilation ofthe Messages and Papers ofthe Presidents, 10 vols. (Washington, D.C.: Bureau of National Literature, 1897) 2: 1084. 241 Richardson, The Messages and Papers ofthe Presidents, 2: 1085. 242 James Adair, History ofthe American Indians, ed. Samuel Cole Williams (1775; Johnson City, TN: Watauga Press, 1930) 92. 243 Ernest Thompson Seton, The Gospel ofthe Red Man: An Indian Bible (Garden City, NY: Doubleday, Doran & Company, Inc, 1936) 58. 244 Seton, The Gospel ofthe Red Man, 59. 245 An Historical Account ofthe Expedition against the Ohio Indian, in the Year 1764 under the Command of Henry Bouquet, Esq (Philadelphia: William Brandford, 1765) 22. 246 American State Papers: Documents, Legislative and Executive, ofthe Congress ofthe United States, 2 vols. (1832; reprint, Greenville, SC: Southem Historical Press, Inc., 1994) 1: 573. 247 Jan Hammil and Robert Cruz, "Statement of American Indians against Desecration before the World Arcaheological Congress," Conflict in the Archaeology ofLiving Traditions, ed. Robert Layton (New York: Routledge, 1994) 197. 248 Goldstein and Kintigh, "Ethics and the Reburial Controversy," 586. 249 See, for instance, the dogged insistence that repatriation demands are political, in Grossman, "Digging the Grave of Archaeology," 11. 250 Curtis M. Hinsley, Jr., The Smithsonian and the American Indian: Making a Moral Anthropology in Victorian America (Washington, D.C: Smithsonian Institution Press, 1994) 12. 251 Caleb Atwater, 77ie Writings of Caleb Atwater (Columbus: Scott and Wright, 1833) 84.

438 NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

252 J. T. Short, North Americans of Antiquity, 3rd ed. (1879; New York: Harper & Brothers, Publishers, 1882)525. 253 S. L. Frey, "Were They Mound-Builders?" American Naturalist 13 (October, 1879): graveyard, 639; burying ground, 638. 254 Hammil and Cruz, "Statement of American Indians against Desecration," 195. 255 Vietzen, Prehistoric Indians from Darkness into Light, 182. 256 Zimmerman, "Remythologizing the Relationship," 48. 257 Melissa L. Meyer, "American Indian Blood Quantum Requirements: Blood Is Thicker Than Family," in Over the Edge: Remapping the American West, ed. Valerie J. Matsumoto and Blake Allmendinger (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1999) 231. 258 Thomas, Skull Wars, 259. See my discussion of the impact of the stages-of-history theory and Morgan's Ancient Society, in Mann, lroquoian Women, 194-204. In fact, Morgan was wary of the Dawes Act, correctly predicting that it would "unquestionably" and "in a very short time" strip Native Americans of "every foot of land," flinging them headlong "into poverty." Bruce E. Johansen,'Taking Indians for a Ride: The BIA's Missing $204 Billion," Native Americas 14.1 (spring 1997): 21. 259 For origin of term, "eugenics," see Francis Galton, Inquiries into Human Faculty and Its Development (1883; London: J. M. Dent, 1907) 17; for his first work on what he would later dub "eugenics," see Francis Galton, Hereditary Genius: An Inquiry into Its Laws and Consequences (1869; New York: D. Appleton, 1884). Most of his data on "superior" people was biographical, a method he began in Hereditary Genius and continued thereafter as fool-proof His learned discussions are hilarious today, as long as one can put out-ofmind the horrendous uses to which his conclusions led in Nazi Germany. It is clear from his texts that there was nothing scientific about anything he did. He just prated portentiously in the tones of "objective science." His thesis in English Men of Science, for instance was "proved" via survey questions he sent out to "scientific men," whom he just decided, on personal whim, were eminent, Francis Galton, English Men of Science: Their Nature and Nurture (New York: D. Appleton and Company, 1875) 8. His survey was skewed by the fact that people replied, or not, as they pleased to his questionnaire. Galton carefully sorted out those who did reply by "race," which segregated the "pure English" from his "few Germans" and "Dutch," and his "Dutch-creole" and Swedish" from his "Anglo-Welsh," "Anglo-Irish," "pure Scotch," "Anglo-Scotch, Scotch-Irish, pure Irish, Welsh, Max and Channel Islands," Galton, English Men of Science, 12. In chapter 2, he considered such crucial questions as the "Energy" of his specimens, Galton, English Men of Science, 56-75—many had "Remarkable energy and activity of body, " i.e., a strong mind in a strong body (60)—as well as the "Size of Head" (74-75) and "Religious Bias" (95-106). In his "Conclusion," regarding inborn ability, Galton sagely trusted that a new taste for inquiring sciences "and adequately paid professorships" would "give rise to the establishment of a sort of scientific priesthood throughout the kingdom" of England (195). It is this sort of dangerous pseudoscience, from which Natives have long suffered, that makes so many Natives today distrust all science. 260 For the earlier "science" of "hybridity" and "degeneration," see Johann Friedrich Blumenbach, On the Natural Varieties ofMankind {De Generis Humani Varietate Nativa)

NOTES 439

(1775, 1795, 1865; reprint. New York: Bergman Publishers, 1969) hybridity, 73-81; list of human hybrids, 216-18; degeneration, 191-93. 261 Francis Galton, Natural Inheritance 0889; reprint. New York: AMS Press, 1973) 136. 262 Galton, Natural Inheritance, 87. 263 Alvan A. Tenney, "Eugenics," Encyclopedia Americana, 30 vols. (New York: Americana Corporation, 1949) 10: 569. 264 Galton, Inquiries into Human Faculty and Its Development, 200. In the following pages, he went on to show that this was really a benign and, in fact, natural process. Indeed, the "most merciful form of what I ventured to call 'eugenics' would consist in watching for the indications of superior strains or races, and in so favouring them that their progeny shall outnumber and gradually replace the old one." Galton, Inquiries into Human Faculty and Its Development, 199-200. 265 Galton, English Men of Science, 9. 266 Galton, Natural Inheritance, 197-98. 267 QaXton, Natural Inheritance, 16, 197. 268 Galton, Natural Inheritance, 28. 269 Galton, Natural Inheritance, 31. The term, mulatto, actually came from "mule," to indicate a creature that could not reproduce. 270 Angie Debo, And Still the Waters Run: The Betrayal of the Five Civilized Tribes (1940; Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1990). 271 Ward Churchill, From a Native Son: Selected Essays on Indigenism. 1985-1995 (Boston: South End Press, 1996) 204. 272 See the speech of Eufala Harjo, in United States, Repori of the Select Committee to Investigate Matters Connected with Affairs in the Indian Territory with Hearings November 11, 1906-January 9. 1907, Fifty-nineth Congress, 2nd Session, Report 5013, Parts I & 2,2 vols. (Washington, D.C: Govemment Printing Office, 1907) 1: 90-91. 273 Rennard Strickland, Newcomers to a New Land (Norman: University of Oklahoma Press, 1980)49. 274 Kent Carter, "Deciding Who Can Be Cherokee: Enrollment Records of the Dawes Commission," Chronicles of Oklahoma 69.2 (1991): 179. 275 Department of the Interior, Annual Report of the Commissioner of Indian Affairs for the Fiscal Year Ended June 30.1905,1:707: Curtis Act of 28 June 1896 was 30 Stat. L., 221, 495, 567. It provided for the rolls and land distribution. 276 United States, Statutes at Large of the United States of America. December. 1895. to March. 1897, vol. 29 (Washington, D.C: General Printing Office, 1897) 339.

440 NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

277 Department of the Interior, Annual Report of the Commissioner of Indian Affairs for the Fiscal Year Ended June 30. 1898 (Washington, D.C: Govemment Printing Office, 1898) 479-80. 278 United States, Statutes at Large of the United States of America. December. 1895. to March. 1897, vol. 29 (Washington, D.C: General Printing Office, 1897) 340. 279 Carter, "Deciding Who Can Be Cherokee," 182-83. 280 Carter, "Deciding Who Can Be Cherokee," 187. 281 Carter, "Deciding Who Can Be Cherokee," 183. 282 Carter, "Deciding Who Can Be Cherokee," 181. 283 Department of the Interior, Annual Report of the Commissioner of Indian Affairs for the Fiscal Year Ended June 30. 1898, 479. 284 Department of the Interior, Annual Report of the Commissioner of Indian Affairs for the Fiscal Year Ended June 30. 1905, 1: 582. 285 Department of the Interior, Annual Report of the Commissioner of Indian Affairs for the Fiscal Year Ended June 30.1905,1: 583. 286 Carter, "Deciding Who Can Be Cherokee," 196,198; Kent Carter, "Federal Indian Policy: Cherokee Enrollment, 1898-1907," Pro/ogwe 23.1 (1991): 34. 287 Carter, "Federal Indian Policy," 33-34. 288 Carter, "Federal Indian Policy," 34; Carter, "Deciding Who Can Be Cherokee," 198. 289 Department of the Interior, Annual Repori of the Commissioner of Indian Affairs for the Fiscal Year Ended June 30. 1905,1: 582. 290 Department of the Interior, Annual Report of the Commissioner of Indian Affairs for the Fiscal Year Ended June 30. 1905,1: 582-83. 291 Department of the Interior, Annual Report of the Commissioner of Indian Affairs for the Fiscal Year Ended June 30. 1905,1: 585. 292 Barbara Alice Mann, ed.. Native American Speakers of the Eastem Woodlands: Selected Speeches and Critical Analyses (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 2001) 210-13. 293 Mana, Native American Speakers of the Eastem Woodlands, 2lO-\ I. 294 Jack D. Forbes, Africans and Native Americans: The Language of Race and the Evolution of Red-Black Peoples (Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 1993) 89. 295 Donald E. Green, The Creek People (Phoenix: Indian Tribal Series, 1973) 58. 296 For a discussion of fabricated evidence, see Mann, Native American Speakers of the

NOTES 441

Eastern Woodlands, 213; Debo, And Still the Waters Run, 42, 45,47, 269-70. 297 In 1998, Circe Sturm argued that Freedmen were discriminated against solely on the color of their skin, which looked more African than Native, so that denying them enrollment was an act of sheer racism. Circe Sturm, "Blood Politics, Racial Classification, and Cherokee National Identity: The Trials and Tribulations of Cherokee Freedmen," American Indian Quarterly 22.1-2 (1998): 230-58. Although it is true that many, if not most, African Americans have some Native ancestry, this is not the same thing as sharing a Native cultural heritage. I do not deny that there are racist Indians out there today shunning African Natives, and that the quantum counters are foremost among their ranks, but I do deny that simple descent qualifies someone as Native. Using blood quantum as the sole determinant of identity, especially of cultural identity, is eugenics, and, as such, it is the problem, not the solution. Blood quantums be damned: Any African-Native mixed bloods who are Native by culture, memory, and self-identification are Native American. Any African-Native mixed bloods who are African American by culture, memory, and selfidentification are African American. 298 Department of the Interior, Annual Report of the Commissioner ofIndian Affairs for the Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 1905,1: 600. There was an apparent typographical error. On 1: 597, the Repori counted 31,275 Cherokee "by blood," but on 1: 623, the total was given as 31,283.1 used the first recorded statistic. Freedmen were numbered at 3,923. 299 Department of the Interior, Annual Report of the Commissioner of Indian Affairs for the Fiscal Year Ended June 30,1905,1: 597. On 1: 609 of the same report, there were 4,956 Freedmen recorded, as opposed to the 4,966 originally stated on 1: 597. It is impossible to know which number represents the typographical error. I went with the first-stated statistic, as it appeared in a statistical, not a textual, discussion. 300 Mann, Native American Speakers of the Eastern Woodlands, 213. On the final 1907 rolls of the "Creek" nation, there were 9,975 Muscogee and 5,538 Freedmen, a drop of 771 Freedmen. Department of the Interior, Annual Report of the Commissioner of Indian Affairs for the Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 1905, 1: 603, 605. 301 Department of the Interior, Annual Report of the Commissioner ofIndian Affairs for 1895, 5 vols. (Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1896) 2: 21. 302 Debo, And Still the Waters Run, 11. 303 Department of the Interior, Annual Repori of the Commissioner of Indian Affairs for the Fiscal Year Ended June 30. 1898, adoption, 103; children of mixed marriages, 104. 304 Department of the Interior, Annual Report of the Commissioner ofIndian Affairs for 1894 (Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1895) 65. 305 United States, Statutes at Large of the United States ofAmerica from December, 1887, to March, 1889, vol. 25 (Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1889) 392. 306 Interior, Annual Repori of the Commissioner ofIndian Affairs for 1894, 65-66. Although these various laws and rulings would seem to be final, in fact, the BIA ban on spousal enrollment was not necessarily firm. If one of the nations involved belonged to the socalled "Five Civilized Tribes"—the Cherokee, Chickasaw, Choctaw, "Creek" (Muscogee),

442 NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

or Seminole—then the settler spouse might be enrolled. United States, Statutes at Large of the United States of America from December, 1887, to March, 1889, vol. 25 (Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1889) 392. This dispensation was because the 1888 law conflicted with provisions of older treaties between the U.S. and those nations. By an 1866 treaty, for instance, the Choctaw and Chickasaw nations mandated the inclusion in their earlier rolls of non-Native spouses. Because spousal adoption carried property rights, this provision was soon exploited by settlers who married under Christian, not Native, law and lived off-reservation with their (often abused) Native wives but who still claimed "tribal" property, which they typically sold at profit. Consequently, the Chickasaw council made a point in 1876 of stating that automatic adoption would happen only upon marriage under Chickasaw rites, on the understanding that this enjoined the settler spouse to live in the community, where the woman would necessarily be protected. Department of the Interior, Annual Report of the Commissioner of Indian Affairs for the Fiscal Year Ended June 30,1898, All. The Cherokee made a similar ruling in 1875. Cases Argued and Decided in the Supreme Court of the United States, October Term, 1906, in 203, 204, 205, 206 U.S., Book 51, lawyer's edition (Rochester, NY: The Lawyers Cooperative Publishing Company, 1907) 79. Court case file (1906) 27 S. Ct., 29,203 U.S. 76, 51, L. Ed. 96. Angie Debo erroneously gave the year of the Cherokee council action as 1877, Debo, And Still the Waters Run, 46. 307 Department of the Interior, Annual Report of the Commissioner of Indian Affairs for the Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 1905, 1: 587. 308 Department of the Interior, Annual Report of the Commissioner of Indian Affairs for the Fiscal Year Ended June 30,1905, ruling, 1: 594; whole decree, 1: 593-94. The same logic was applied to the children of one Native and one Freedman, Interior, Annual Repori of the Commissioner of Indian Affairs for the Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 1905, 1: 590. 309 Department of the Interior, Annual Report of the Commissioner of Indian Affairs for the Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 1898, 102. 310 United States, Statutes at Large of the United States of America from December 1887, to March 1889, vol. 25 (Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1889) 392. See, also, note 303. 311 Interior, Annual Report of the Commissioner of Indian Affairs for the Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 1898,477-78. 312 Department of the Interior, Annual Report of the Commissioner of Indian Affairs for the Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 1905, 1: 142. 313 Cases Argued and Decided in the Supreme Court of the United States, October Term, 1906, in 203, 204, 205, 206 U.S., 79-80, 84. The Cherokee council ruled on spouses on 1 November 1875. 314 Debo, And Still the Waters Run, 47. In 1905, the Chickasaw rolls carried 598 Euroamericans, and the Choctaw rolls, 1,467. Today, unwitting geneaological hobbyists find their family names on rolls and instantly assume they were Native, when they could just as easily have been Euroamerican. For more detail, see the discussion of Choctaw and Chickasaw enroUees through marriage, in Department of the Interior, Annual Repori of the Commissioner of Indian Affairs for the Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 1905, 1: 586-89.

NOTES 443

315 Debo, And Still the Waters Run, 354, 316 Department of the Interior, Annual Report ofthe Commissioner of Indian Affairs for the Fiscal Year Ended June 30. 1905, 1: 5, 317 Carter, "Deciding Who Can Be Cherokee," 188, 318 The Ottawa speaker, Egushawa, put the term "pen-and-ink witchcraft" into the record in a fiery speech against the invasion ofthe Old Northwest in 1791, See [Alexander McKee], "Minutes of Debates in Council on the banks ofthe Ottawa River, (Commonly Called the Miami ofthe Lake), November, 1791" (Philadelphia: William Young, Bookseller, 1792) 11, 319 Charles A, Bowersox, A Standard History of Williams County, Ohio, 2 vols, (New York: The Lewis Publishing Company, 1920) 1: 175 320 Nevin O, Winter, A History of Northwest Ohio: A Narrative Account of Its Historical Progress and Development from the First European Exploration ofthe Maumee and Sandusky Valleys and the Adjacent Shore of Lake Erie, down to the Present Time, 3 vols, (Chicago & New York: The Lewis Publishing Co,, 1917) 1: 194, 321 Hank Harvey, "In the Footsteps ofthe Ottawa," The Toledo Blade, Magazine 18 February 1996, F6, 322 Being "virtually impassable," the Great Black Swamp made much of Northwest Ohio uninhabitable, at least, to Euroamericans, Helen Hombeck Tanner, Adele Hast, Jackqueline Peterson, and Robert J, Surtees, ed,. Atlas of Great Lakes Indian History, Miklos Pinther, cartography (Norman: University of Oklahoma Press, 1987) 116, John Heckewelder left a searing account of his attempt to cross it in 1781: "We found the roads [moccasin trails] round the head of the lake (Erie) in many places most intolerable for travelling; such indeed, as we had never before seen. Mires, and large swamps, not sufficiently frozen over to bear our horses, who were continually breaking through, and sometimes sinking belly deep into the mire, which frequently obliged us to cut strong poles to prize [pry] them out again. Deep creeks (here called rivers) were another obstacle to travelling, we having to swim our horses across, and where we could not meet with a canoe for ourselves, we had to cross on rafts, made of poles put together," John Heckewelder, Narrative ofthe Mission, 287-88, Settlers "improved" the land by draining the swamp, something now deeply regretted, since the large, deciduous swamp in northem latitudes was a natural wonder of the world. Draining the swamp destroyed Ae habitat of many species. Today, the drive is to retain the "wetlands" that are left ofthe Great Black Swamp, 323 United States, Statutes at Large ofthe United States of America Passed at the Forty-Ninth Congress, 1885-1886, vol, 24 (Washington, D,C,: Govemment Printing Office, 1886) 390, 324 Debo, And Still the Waters Run, A2-A3. 325 Department of the Interior, Annual Report ofthe Commissioner of Indian Affairs for the Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 1898,499, 504-5, 326 Interior, Annual Report ofthe Commissioner of Indian Affairs for the Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 1898, 500, 503,

444 NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

327 Interior, Annual Report ofthe Commissioner of Indian Affairs for the Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 1898, 503, 504, 506, 513, 328 Interior, Annual Report ofthe Commissioner of Indian Affairs for the Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 1898, 500. 329 Interior, Annual Report ofthe Commissioner of Indian Affairs for the Fiscal Year Ended June 30,1898, Watts as "intruders," 503, 504, 506, 508; Tennessee homeland, 503, 504, 330

Interior, Annual Report ofthe Commissioner of Indian Affairs for the Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 1898, 504.

331 Interior, Annual Report ofthe Commissioner of Indian Affairs for the Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 1898, 503, 507, For those readers geneaologically inclined, the fiill names and relationships of all the claimants are listed. Interior, Annual Report ofthe Commissioner of Indian Affairs for the Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 1898, 502-3. 332 Interior, Annual Report ofthe Commissioner of Indian Affairs for the Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 1898, 505. 333

Interior, Annual Report ofthe Commissioner of Indian Affairs for the Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 1898, 509,

334 Interior, Annual Report ofthe Commissioner of Indian Affairs for the Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 1898, 5U. 335 Interior, Annual Report ofthe Commissioner of Indian Affairs for the Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 1898, enrollment as not dependent upon Native identity, 513; fmal decision against the Wattses, 514. 336 Interior, Annual Report ofthe Commissioner of Indian Affairs for the Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 1898, 514-22. Again, for those geneaological researchers in the crowd, the full names and relationships of the thirty-six Crews lineages may be found, Interior, Annual Report ofthe Commissioner of Indian Affairs for the Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 1898, 514-16. 337 Interior, Annual Report ofthe Commissioner of Indian Affairs for the Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 1898, 524, 338

Interior, Annual Report ofthe Commissioner of Indian Affairs for the Fiscal Year Ended June 30,1898, 524.

339 Interior, Annual Report ofthe Commissioner of Indian Affairs for the Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 1898, 525, 340 The case was complicated by the fact that two groups were then known as "Eastem Cherokee," the one being those Cherokee who had refrained from going west with the first wave of Removal in 1828, and the other being those who hid out from the second wave of Removal in 1835. The Cherokee had not wanted to leave the east, so that many remained in hidingfix)mthe original attempt to remove them in 1828. Under the authority ofthe New Echota Treaty (1835), U.S, troops led by Major General Scott moved in forcibly to relocate

NOTES 445

the holdouts, resulting in the criminal forced march that is now immortalized as the Trail of Tears. Department of the Interior, Annual Report of the Commissioner of Indian Affairs for the Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 1898, 482-83. Even so, the government identified 1,100 to 1,200 people known to have evaded Scott, remaining entrenched in North Carolina. Department of the Interior, Annual Report of the Commissioner ofIndian Affairs for the Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 1898,483. As was typical of governmental estimates, this was an understatement, there having been many more holdout Cherokee than these numbers indicate. It was these second-wave holdouts who thereafter referred to themselves as Eastern Band Cherokee, and it was they who sued for Dawes enrollment as Cherokee. 341 Department of the Interior, Annual Report of the Commissioner of Indian Affairs for the Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 1898,487-89. 342 Department of the Interior, Annual Report of the Commissioner of Indian Affairs for the Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 1898, 500. 343 Department of the Interior, Annual Report of the Commissioner of Indian Affairs for the Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 1898, 479-500. 344 Department of the Interior, Annual Report of the Commissioner of Indian Affairs for the Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 1898,485. 345 Department of the Interior, Annual Report of the Commissioner of Indian Affairs for the Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 1898,483. 346 Department of the Interior, Annual Report of the Commissioner of Indian Affairs for the Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 1898, 487. 347 Department of the Interior, Annual Report of the Commissioner of Indian Affairs for the Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 1898,497. 348 Department of the Interior, Annual Report of the Commissioner of Indian Affairs for the Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 1905, 1: 589. 349 Department of the Interior, Annual Report of the Commissioner of Indian Affairs for the Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 1905,1: 582. 350 Department of the Interior, Annual Report of the Commissioner of Indian Affairs for the Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 1905,1: 583. 351 Debo, And Still the Waters Run, 90. 352 Carter, "Federal Indian Policy," 36. 353 Carter, "Federal Indian Policy," 36. 354 Smith, The Eugenic Assault on America, 74, 90. 355 Smith, The Eugenic Assault on America, 59, 72.

446 NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

356 Smith, The Eugenic Assault on America, 74, 76, 98, 357 Smith, The Eugenic Assault on America, Plecker as registrar, 60; see, especially, chapter six, "Dr, Plecker's War on the Indians," 71-82. 358 Meyer, "American Indian Blood Quantum Requirements," 234,241. 359 1990 U.S. Census and 2000 U.S, Census, United States, Bureau of the Census, Accessed 7 March 2002, 360 Melissa Meyer, in "American Indian Blood Quantum Requirements," 231, suggests that enrollment has become a benefits determination only in modem times, but allotment was always a benefit, and it was determined by enrollment, Meyer has in mind the welfare-like benefits, such as publicly paid access to medicine, housing, and higher education, that obtain today, 361 Meyer, "American Indian Blood Quantum Requirements," 243. 362 Public Comments, Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act Review Committee Hearing, Ropes Gray Room, Harvard Law School, Cambridge, Massachusetts, 17-19 November 2001, 3 vols. Official Transcript, vol. 3, 19 November 2001.

Epilogue: Strategies for Eastern Native Americans 1 Kaczmarek, Steve. "Archaeologists Delve into Newark Mound," Echoes, Ohio Historical Society newsletter (September 1992): 1; Patrick Murphy, "Archaeologists Leave Site with Mixed Emotions," The Advocate, 29 July 1992, 3 A. 2 Steve Kaczmarek, "Archaeologists Delve into Newark Mound," Echoes, Ohio Historical Society newsletter (September 1992): I. 3 Barbara Crandell, personal interview by Barbara A. Mann, 1 January 2001, Thomville, Ohio. 4 Barbara Crandell, interview by Barbara A. Mann, 9 January 2001, Thomville, Ohio. 5 Chris Kasson, "Prayer Vigil at Great Circle Mound," photograph. The Advocate, 25 July 1992, lA. 6 Barbara Crandell, personal interview by Barbara A. Mann, 1 January 2001, Thomville, Ohio. 7 Patrick Murphy, "Gov. Voinovich Sends Mediator to Local Dig," The Advocate, 15 July 1992,3 A. Murphy erroneously gave the impression that John Sanches, ofthe Ohio Center for Native American Affairs, had led the protest. 8 Barbara Crandell, personal interview by Barbara A, Mann, 1 January 2001, Thomville, Ohio.

NOTES 447

9 Patrick Murphy, "Workers at Mound Find Answers, Questions," The Advocate, 29 July 1992, lA, 10 Barbara Crandell, personal interview by Barbara A, Mann, 1 January 2001, Thomville, Ohio, See also, Patrick Murphy, "Native American Ritual Keeps Peace with Spirits," The Advocate, 29 July 1992, 3 A 11 Brian W, Lindamoor, "Alligator Mound Restoration Raises Concems," The Granville Sentinel, 25 August 1994, 3, 12 Sherry Beck Paprocki, "Indians Seek Preservation," The Plain Dealer, 4 December 1994, 12B, 13 Brent LaLonde, "Group Will Buy Ancient Sites," Columbus Dispatch, 7 January 1993,4C, 14 Barbara Crandell, Co-Chair of the Native American Alliance of Ohio, letter to Mark Michel, President, Archaeological Conservancy, 29 September 1994, 1, A copy of this letter is in my possession, and it is quoted with permission, 15 Magizi Consulting, Report on the Wilson Mound, 33 PE #10, 22 July 1994,2, This report was done for NAAO, and I am in possession of a copy of it, 16 Ohio Department of Natural Resources, Division of Reclamation, Industrial Minerals Section, Chief's Order Number 1473-IM, 25 August 1994,1,1 have a copy of this order in my possession, NAAO received a courtesy copy ofthe order, 17 The bone count, about which OHS kept very mum, was finally disclosed by David Lore, "Historical Society Needs to Do More for Indians, Woman Says," Columbus Dispatch, 11 December 2001, C4, The "woman" in question was Jean McCoard, elder ofthe Tallige Fire, On 26 March 2002, in an e-mail, I asked Martha Otto, head archaeologist at OHS who was heading up the inventory process, what the correct number was. In her 11 April 2002 reply to me. Otto acknowledged that the true number was 6,733 sets of human remains and 5,489 funerary artifacts, OHS had seriously dragged its feet in completing the required NAGPRA inventory, not finishing its initial inventory until June of 2001, six years past the official deadline. Although heavy fines theoretically apply for failure to comply, the National Parks Service has forbome to levy them, for reasons that are unclear to NAAO, 18 Barbara Crandell, interview by Barbara A, Mann, 15 May 1999, Findlay, Ohio, 19 Rebekah Scott, "Human Bones Quietly Moved from Dig Site at Fort Meigs," The Blade, 12 April 2002, A 1,A9, 20 Kent Mallett, "Native Americans Claim Harrassment," The Advocate, 14 November 2000, 3A, 21 On 27 May 1997, OHS summarily pitched a large quantity of original prison records dating fi-om the late 1800s, neither notifying nor consulting with historians or archivists on their value, James Drew, "Special Report: How Historic Records End up as History," The Toledo Blade, 23 January 2000, 1, Since these records were irreplaceable, historians, geneaologists, and archivists yelped in pain, with one archival director uttering the word "incompetence" in connection with the action. Drew, "Special Report: How Historic

448 NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

Records End up as History," The Toledo Blade, 23 January 2000,4A. Historians also noted that, in so destroying the records, OHS had violated a 1993 order from the State of Ohio requiring such records to be kept permanently. The destruction of the documents resulted in a call for state review of OHS operations. James Drew, "Historian Decries Loss of Prison Registers; Ohio Lawmaker Says Society Needs Scrutiny," The Toledo Blade, 26 January 2000, 3 A. The editors of The Toledo Blade also emphasized the irresponsibility of OHS's action in an editorial, "Once Destroyed, Forever Lost," The Toledo Blade, 27 January 2000,14 (B)A. As for the Ohio Village, OHS reopened it under pressure in April, 2002, but with part-time workers, not the skilled craftspeople formerly working there full time. Cathy Lynn Gray, "Same Village, New Interpretation," The Columbus Dispatch, 14 May 2002, 1B-2B. 22 Richard Shiels, Public Testimony to the Senate Select Committee to Study the Effectiveness of Ohio's Historical Programs and Partnerships, 8 November 2001. 23 Cathy Lynn Gray, "Legislative Panel Approves Report on Ohio Historical Society Reforms," Columbus Dispatch, 8 March 2002, 4C. 24 Ohio House of Representatives, Report of the Select Committee to Study the Effectiveness of Ohio's Historical Programs and Partnerships. Preliminary Report, 20 February 2002,29. 25 Ohio House of Representatives, Report of the Select Committee to Study the Effectiveness of Ohio's Historical Programs and Partnerships. Preliminary Report, 15 February 2002,29. 26 Ohio House of Representatives, Report of the Select Committee to Study the Effectiveness of Ohio's Historical Programs and Partnerships. Preliminary Report, 15 February 2002,30. 27 Ohio House of Representatives, Report of the Select Committee to Study the Effectiveness of Ohio's Historical Programs and Partnerships. Preliminary Report, 15 February 2002, 30.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Acosta, Jose de. Historia natural y moral de las Indias. Ed. Jos6 Alcina Franch. Cr6nicas de America 34. 1590. Madrid: Historia 16, 1987. Acufla, Rudolfo. Occupied America: The Chicano 's Struggle toward Liberation. San Francisco: Canfield Press, 1972. Adair, James. History of the American Indians. Ed. Samuel Cole Williams. 1775. Johnson City, TN: Watauga Press, 1930. Adams, David Wallace. Education for Extinction: American Indians and the Boarding School Experience, 1875-1928. Lawrence: University Press of Kansas, 1995. Adams, Richard C. Delaware Indians and Picture Writing. Syracuse, NY: Syracuse University Press, 1997. Adamson, Walter L. Hegemony and Revolution: A Study of Antonio Gramsci 's Political and Cultural Theory. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1980. Alexander, Brian. "Archaeology and Looting Make a Volatile Mix." Science 250 (23 November 1990): 1074-75. Alford, Thomas Wildcat. Civilization, As Told to Florence Drake. Norman: University of Oklahoma Press, 1936. . "Shawnee Story of Creation." Indians at Work 2.18 (1935): 7-8. Allen, Paula Gurin. The Sacred Hoop: Recovering the Feminine in American Indian Traditions. 1986. Boston: Beacon Press, 1992. American Ethnological Society. "Bulletin." October, 1861. American Ethnological Society. "Bulletin." March, 1863. American State Papers: Documents, Legislative and Executive, of the Congress of the United

450 NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

States. 2 vols. 1832. Reprint. Greenville, SC: Southem Historical Press, Inc., 1994. Amin, Samir. Eurocentrism. New York: Monthly Review, 1989. "An Act in Relation to Marriage between White Men and Indian Women," Chapter 818, Statutes at Large ofthe United States of America from December, 1887, to March, 1889. Vol, 25, Washington, D,C.: Govemment Printing Office, 1889. 392, "Ancient American Relics," .4men'ca/j Pioneer 2.5 (May 1843): 195-97. Antiquities of Ohio: Report ofthe Committee ofthe State Archaeological Society to the Centennial Commission of Ohio. 8 vols, Columbus: Ohio State Archaeological Society and Centennial Commission, 1877, Anzaldua, Gloria. Borderlands/La Frontera: The New Mestiza. San Francisco: Spinsters/Atmt Lute, 1987, "Archaeologist Stalks Ohio's Alligator Mound with Panther Theory," Toledo Blade, 22 Jan. 2001, 3A. Arden, Harvey. "Who Owns Our Past?" National Geographic 175.3 (March 1989): 376-92. Arens, William. The Man-Eating Myth: Anthropology and Anthropophagy. New York: Oxford University Press, 1979. Asad, Talal, ed. Anthropology and the Colonial Encounter. Ithaca: Comell University Press, 1973. Asante, Molefi Kete. The Afrocentric Idea. Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 1987. Atwater, Caleb. "Description of the Antiquities Discovered in the State of Ohio and Other Westem States." Archaeologia Americana: Transactions and Collections ofthe American Antiquarian Society 1 (1820): 105-267. , The Writings of Caleb Atwater. Columbus: Scott and Wright, 1833. "Auction of Indian Bones Is Stopped," Wassaja 3,7 (August 1975): 10. Aupaumut, Hendrick, "A Narrative of an Embassy to the Westem Indians." Memoirs ofthe Historical Society of Pennsylvania 2.\ (1827): 76-131, Awiakta, Marilou. Selu: Seeking the Corn-Mother's Wisdom. Golden, CO: Fulcrum Publishing, 1993. Axtell, James. The European and the Indian: Essays in the Ethnohistory of North America. New York: Oxford University Pres, 1981, Baby, Raymond S. "Archaeological Explorations at Fort Hill." Museum Echoes 27.11 (1954): 86-87. Bada, Jeffrey L., Roy A. Schroeder, and George F. Carter. "New Evidence for the Antiquity of

BIBLIOGRAPHY

451

Man in North America Deduced from Aspartic Acid Racemization," Science 184 (17 May 1974): 791-93. Bailey, Garrick A. The Osage and the Invisible World. Norman: University of Oklahoma Press, 1995. Barbeau, C. M, Huron and Wyandot Mythology. Memoir 80. Anthropological Series, no. II. Canada Department of Mines, Geological Survey. Ottawa: Govemment Printing Bureau, 1915, : "Supematural Beings ofthe Huron and Wyandot." American Anthropological Associfl/;on 16.2 (1914): 288-313, Barbeau, Marius. Huron-Wyandot Traditional Narratives in Tranlations and Native Texts. Anthropological Series no, 47, Bulletin 165, Ottawa: National Museum of Canada, 1960. Barton, Benjamin Smith. Fragments (Which Are Intended to Illustrate, in Some Degree) the Natural History of a Country Extremely Interesting to Philosophers, and Hitherto Very Imperfectly Explored. Part I. In Selected Works by Eighteenth-Century Naturalists and Travellers. 1799. Reprint, New York: Amo Press, 1974. : New Views ofthe Origin ofthe Tribes and Nations ofAmerica. 1798, Reprint, Millwood, NY: Kraus Reprint Co., 1976. -. "Observations and Conjectures Conceming Certain Articles Which Were Taken out of an Ancient Tumulus, or Grave, at Cincinnati, in the County of Hamilton, and Territory ofthe United-States, North-West ofthe River Ohio." Letter to Reverend Joseph Priestey, 16 May 1796. Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society, no. 23. Philadelphia: American Philosophical Society, 1797. 181-215. . Observations on Some Parts of Natural History. London: C. Diley, 1787. Bartram, William, Travels of William Bartram. Ed. Mark van Doren. 1791, New York: Dover Publications, 1928. Bataille, Gretchen M., ed. Native American Representations: First Encounters, Distoried Images, and Literary Appropriations. Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press, 2000. Battiste, Marie, "Introduction: Unfolding the Lessons of Colonization." In Reclaiming the Indigenous Voice and Vision. Ed. Marie Battiste. Vancouver: University of British Columbia Press, 2000. xvi-xxx. Beals, Ralph L, "The Anthropologist as Expert Wimess: Illustrations from the Califomia Indians Land Claim Case," In Irredeemable America: The Indians' Estate and Land Tenure. Ed. Imre Sutton. Albuquerque: University of New Mexico Press, 1985. 139-56. Beatty, Charles. The Journal of a Two Months Tour. London: William Davenhill and George Pearch, 1768. Beauchamp, William M, The Iroquois Trail or Foot-prints ofthe Six Nations, in Customs, Traditions, and History. Fayetteville, NY: H. C. Beauchamp, 1892.

452 NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

Benedict, Ruth Fulton. The Concept ofthe Guardian Spirit in North America. American Anthropologist Association Memorial no. 29, 1923. Reprint, Millwood, NY: Kraus Reprint Co,, 1974. Berkhofer, Robert F,, Jr. The White Man's Indian: Images of the American Indian from Columbus to the Present. New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1978, Bemal, Martin. The Afroasiatic Roots of Classical Civilization. Vol. 2: 77ie Archaeological and Documentary Evidence. New Bmnswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press, 1991. . Black Athena: The Afroasiatic Roots of Classical Civilization. Wo\. 1: The Fabrication ofAncient Greece, 1785-1985. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press, 1987, Bemstein, R. J. Praxis and Action. London: Duckworth, 1972, Bieder, Robert E, A Brief Historical Survey ofthe Expropriation of American Indian Remains. Bloomington, IN: Native American Rights Fund, 1990. -. Science Encounters the Indian, 1820-1880: The Early Years pf American Ethnology. Norman: University of Oklahoma Press, 1986. , "Scientific Attitudes toward Indian Mixed-Bloods in Early Nineteenth-Century America." Joumal of Ethnic Studies 8.2 (summer 1980): 17-30. Bierhorst, John. Mythology ofthe Lenape: Guides and Texts. Tucson: The University of Arizona Press, 1995. Biolsi, Thomas, and Larry Zimmerman, ed. Indians and Anthropologists: Vine Deloria Jr. and the Critique of Anthropology. Tucson: University of Arizona Press, 1997. Blakely, Michael L, "Skull Doctors: Intrinsic Social and Political Bias in the History of American Physical Anthropology." Critique of Anthropology 7.2 (1987): 7-35. Bluejacket, George, "A Story ofthe Shawanoes," MSS. 29 October 1829. Trans, and ed. John Allen Raynor. Columbus: Library, Ohio Historical Society, 1886. # 970.92 R 218. Blumenbach, Johann Friedrich. On the Natural Varieties of Mankind {De Generis Humani Varietate Nativa). \115. 1795, 1865. Reprint, New York: Bergman Publishers, 1969. Board of Licking County Commissioners. Deed #8770 to the Ohio State Archaeological and Historical Society. 9 March 1933, 500-3. Boggs, Carl, Gramsci's Marxism. London: Pluto Press, 1976. Bossman, S. L. "Redstone Old Fort." American Pioneer 2.2 (February 1843): 58-66. Boudinot, Elias. A Star in the West; or, a Humble Attempt to Discover the Long-lost Tribes of Israel, Preparatory to Their Retum to Their Beloved City, Jerusalem. Trenton, NJ: D. Fenton, S, Hutchinson and J. Dunham, 1816. Bourbourg, E. Charles Brasseur de. Histoire de nations civilisees du Mexique et de I'Amerique-

BIBLIOGRAPHY

453

Centrale, durant les siecles anterieurs a Christophe Columb, ecrit sur des documents originaux et entierement inedits, puises aux anciennes archives des indigenes. Paris: A, Bertrand, 1857-1859, -. Lettres pour servir d'introduction a I'histoire primitive de nations civilisees de I'Ameriqueseptentrionale. Mexico: M. Mtirguia, 1851. . Popul vuh. Le livre sacre et les mythes de I'antiquite americaine, avec les livres heroiques et historiques des Quiches . . . Texte quiche et traduction frangaise en regard, accompagnee de notes phitologiques et d 'un commentaire sur la mythologie et les migrations despeuples anciens de I'Amerique. Paris: A. Bertrand, 1861. Botime, Edward Gaylord, ed. Narratives ofthe Career of Hemando de Soto. 2 vols. New York: Allerton Book Company, 1922. Bowersox, Charles A. A Standard History of Williams County, Ohio. 2 vols. New York: The Lewis Publishing Company, 1920. Brackenridge, Henry Marie. "Sketch," 1811, Mound Builders: The Greatest Monument of PreHistoric Man: Cahokia or Monks Mound. St, Louis: sn, 1914. -. Views ofLouisiana, together with a Joumal of a Voyage up the Missouri River, in 1811. Pittsburgh: Cramer, Spear and Eichbaum, Franklin Head Office, 1814. Brashler, Janet G., Elizabeth B. Garland, and William A. Lovis, "Recent Research on Hopewell in Michigan," The Wisconsin Archaeologist 75,1-2 (1994): 2-18. Bray, Tamara L., and Thomas W. Killion, ed. Reckoning with the Dead: The Larsen Bay Repatriation and the Smithsonian Institution. Washington, D.C: Smithsonian Institution Press, 1994. Brinton, Daniel G. Essays of an Americanist. Philadelphia: Porter & Coates, 1890. . The Lenape and Their Legends; with the Complete Text and Symbols ofthe Walam Olum, A New translation, and Inquiry into Its Authenticity. 1885, Reprint, Lewisburg, PA: Wennawoods Publishing, 1999, , The Myths ofthe New World: A Treatise on the Symbolism and Mythology ofthe Red Race ofAmeric. 1868, 1876. Reprint, New York: Greenwood Press, Publishers, 1969. Brodie, Fawn McKay. No Man Knows My History: The Life of Joseph Smith, The Mormon Prophet. 2nd ed. 1945. New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1971. Brose, David S., and N'omi Greber. Hopewell Archaeology: The Chillicothe Conference. Kent: The Kent State University Press, 1979. Brownmiller, Susan. Against Our Will: Men, Women and Rape. New York: Simon and Schuster, 1975. Brumble, David, "Vine Deloria, Jr,, Creationism, and Ethnic Pseudoscience," .4mencan Literary History 10.2 (summer 1998): 335-46.

454 NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

Butler, James Davie. "The Copper Age in Wisconsin." Proceedings ofthe American Antiquarian Society. 12 October 1876, Worchester: Charles Hamilton, 1876. 57-63. Byers, A. Martin. "Is the Newark Circle-Octagon the Ohio Hopewell 'Rosetta Stone'?" Ancient Earthen Enclosures ofthe Eastem Woodlands. Ed. Robert E, Mainfort, Jr., and Lynne P, Sullivan. Gainesville: University Press of Florida, 1998. 135-53, Cabral, Amilcar, Unity and Struggle: Speeches and Writing of Amilcar Cabral. New York: Monthly Review, 1979. Cackler, Christian. "Recollections of an Old Settler," 1874, Reprint. Ravenna, OH: The Record Publishing Company, 1964. Camper, Pieter, Oeuvres qui ontpour object I'histoire naturelle, laphysiologie et I'anatomie comparee. 3 vols. Pads, 1803. Canny, Nicholas P. "The Ideology of English Colonization: From Ireland to America." William and Mary Quarterly, 3rd series, 30 (1973): 575-98. Camoy, Martin. Education as Cultural Imperialism. New York: David McKay, 1974, Carter, George F. Earlier Than You Think: A Personal View ofMan in America. College Station: Texas A&M University Press, 1980. Carter, Kent. "Deciding Who Can Be Cherokee: Enrollment Records ofthe Dawes Commission." Chronicles of Oklahoma 69.2 (1991): 174-205. . "Federal Indian Policy: Cherokee Enrollment, 1898-1907." Prologue 23.1 (1991): 25-31. Cartier, Jacques. The Voyages of Jacques Cartier. Ed, Ramsay Cook. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1993. Cases Argued and Decided in the Supreme Court ofthe United States, October Term, 1906, in 203, 204, 205, 206 U.S. Book 51. Lawyer's edition. Rochester, NY: The Lawyers Cooperative Publishing Company, 1907, Catlin, George. The Lifted and Subsided Rocks of America. London: Trubner & Co., 1870, Cave, Alfred A. "Canaanites in a Promised Land: The American Indian and the Providential Theory of Empire."/Imencan Indian Quarterly (fall 1988): 277-97. Champe, J. L., D, S. Nyers, C. Evans, A. K. Guthe, H. W. Hamilton, E. B. Jelks, C. W. Meighan, S. Olafson, G. S, Quimby, W. Smith, and F. Wendorf. "Four Statements for Archaeology." American Antiquity 27 (1961): 137-39. Charlevoix, Pierre de. Joumal of a Voyage to North America. 2 vols. 1761. Reprint, Ann Arbor: University Microfilms, Inc., 1966. Chomsky, Noam, and Edward S. Herman. After the Cataclysm: Postwar Indochina and the Reconstruction of Imperial Ideology. Boston: South End Press, 1979.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

455

Churchill, Ward. Fantasies of the Master Race: Literature. Cinema and the Colonization of American Indians, 2nd ed. San Francisco: City Lights, 1998. . From a Native Son: Selected Essays on Indigenism. 1985-1995. Boston: South End Press, 1996. . A Little Matter of Genocide: Holocaust and Denial in the Americas. 1492 to the Present. San Francisco: City Lights Books, 1997. — . "Science as Psychosis: An Analysis of Man Com." North American Archaeologist 21.3 (2000): 268-88. -. Struggle for the Land: Native Norih American Resistance to Genocide. Ecocide and Colonization, 2nd ed. Winnipeg: Arbiter Ring, 1999. Clark, Jerry E. The Shawnee. Lexington: The University Press of Kentucky, 1977. Clarke, Peter Dooyentate. Origin and Traditional History of the Wyandotts. Toronto: Hunter, Rose, & Co., 1870. Clavigero, Francesco Saverio. The History of Mexico. 1607. Philadelphia: Budd and Bartram, 1804. Clay, R. Berle. "The Essential Features of Adena Ritual and Their Implications." Southeastern Archaeology 17.1 (summer 1998): 1-20. Clements, Chase. "Beliefs Conflict with Battle Facts." The Toledo Blade, 14 August 1994, FT3. Clifton, James A., ed. The Invented Indians: Cultural Fictions and Govemment Policies. New York: Transaction Books, 1990. Clinton, De Witt. "A Discourse Delivered before the New-York Historical Society, at Their Anniversary Meeting, 6th December 1811." Collections of the New-York Historical Society for the Year 1811. Vol. 2. New York: 1. Riley, 1811-1859. 37-116. . Memoir on the Antiquities of the Westem Pari of New York. Albany: 1. W. Clark, 1818. Cohen, Ronald D. "Educational Implications of the Teachings of Don Juan." Phi Delta Kappan 55.7 (March 1974): 496-96. Colden, Cadwallader. The History of the Five Indian Nations Depending on the Province of NewYork in America. 2 vols. 1747,1922, 1973. Reprint, New York: AMS Press, 1973. Converse, Harriet Maxwell [Ya-ie-wa-noh]. Myths and Legends of the New York State Iroquois. Ed. Arthur Caswell Paricer. New York State Museum Bulletin 125. Education Department Bulletin, no. 437. Albany: University of the State of New York, 1908. Cooper, James Fenimore. The Pathfinder, or the Inland Sea. 1840. New York: A Signet Classic, 1980. Coming, James D. "Ancient Coin." American Pioneer 2.4 (April 1843): 169-70.

456 NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

Complanter, Jesse J. Legends of the Longhouse. Philadelphia: J. B. Lippincott, 1938. Comyn, John Hubert. "Mound Builders and Mounds."Encyclopedia Americana. 30 vols. New York: Americana Corporation, 1949. 19: 521-23. Craig, Isaac. "Ancient Fortification." American Pioneer 1.9 (September 1842): 299-300. Crandell, "Grandmother" Barbara. Letter to Mark Michel, President, Archaeological Conservancy, 29 September 1994. Cremo, Michael A., and Richard L. Thompson. Forbidden Archaeology: The Hidden History of the Human Race. Los Angeles: Bhaktivedanta Book Pubishing, Inc., 1998. Crookshanks, Dr. "First Population of the Westem Cow\\ry." American Pioneer 2.9 (September 1843): 412-15. Crosby, Alfred. The Columbian Exchange: Biological Consequences of 1492. Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1986. . "Virgin Soil Epidemics as a Factor in the Aboriginal Depopulation of America." William and Mary Quarterly, 3rd series, 32.2 (1976): 289-99. Curtin, Jeremiah, and J[ohn] N[apoleon] B[rinton] Hewitt. "Seneca Fiction, Legends, and Myths, Part I." Thirty-Second Annual Bureau of American Ethnology. 1910-1911. Washington, D.C: Govemment Printing Office, 1918. Curtis Act. Chapter 517. Statutes at Large of the United States of America from March, 1897. to March. 1898. Vol. 30. Washington, D.C: Govemment Printing Office, 1899. 495-519. Cusick, David. "Sketches of Ancient History of the Six Nations." 1825. In William M. Beauchamp, The Iroquois Trail or Foot-prints of the Six Nations, in Customs. Traditions, and History. Fayetteville, NY: H. C. Beauchamp, 1892. Dankers, Jasper, and Peter Sluyter. Joumal of a Voyage to New York and a Rout in Several of the American Colonies in 1679-1680. 1867. Reprint, Ann Arbor: University Microfilms, Inc., 1966. Darwin, Charles. The Descent of Man, and Selection in Relation to Sex. Ed. Robert Maynard. Great Books of the Westem World. Vol. 49. 30th ed. 1871; 1952; Chicago: Encyclopedia Britannica, Inc., 1988. 253-600. -. TTie Origin of Species. Ed. Robert Maynard. Great Books of the Westem World. Vol. 49. 30th ed. 1859; 1952; Chicago: Encyclopedia Britannica, Inc., 1988. 1-252. Dawes General Allotment in Severalty Act. Chapter 119. Statutes at Large of the United States of America Passed at the First Session of the Forty-Ninth Congress. 1885-1886. Vol. 24. Washington, D.C: Govemment Printing Office, 1887. 388-91. Da-yo-de-ka-ne [Seth Newhousej. Cosmogony of De-ka-na-wi-da 's Govemment: Cosmogony of the Iroquois Confederacy. Oshweken [sic\. Six Nations Reserve, 1885.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

457

De Boer, Warren. "Ceremonial Centres from the Cayapas (Esmeraldas, Ecuador) to Chillicothe (Ohio, USA)." Cambridge Archaeological Joumal 7.2 (1997): 225-53. De Mille, Richard. Castaneda 's Joumey: The Power and the Allegory. Santa Barbara: Capra Press, 1976. -. The Don Juan Papers: Further Castaneda Controversies. Santa Barbara: Ross-Erikson, 1980. Debo, Angie. And Still the Waters Run: The Betrayal of the Five Civilized Tribes. 1940, 1968. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1991. Delage, Denys. Lepays renverse: Amerindiens et europeens en Amerique du nord-st, 1600-1664. Montreal: Boreal Express, 1985. Deloria, Vine, Jr. Behind the Trail of Broken Treaties: An Indian Declaration of Independence. New York: Delacort, 1974. -. Custer Diedfor Your Sins: An Indian Manifesto. 1969; Norman: University of Oklahoma Press, 1988. . For This Land: Writings on Religion in America. New York: Routledge, 1999. . God Is Red. New York: Grosset & Dunlap, 1973. . Of Utmost Good Faith. San Francisco: Straight Arrow Books, 1971. . Red Earth, White Lies: Native Americans and the Myth of Scientific Fact. New York: Scribner, 1995. . We Talk. You Listen: New Tribes. New Turf. New York: Macmillan, 1970. Department of the Interior. Annual Repori of the Commissioner of Indians Affairs for the Fiscal Year Ended June 30. 1898. Washington, D.C: Govemment Printing Office, 1898. : Annual Report of the Commissioner of Indians Affairs for the Fiscal Year Ended June 30. 1905. Part I. Washington, D.C: Govemment Printing Office, 1906. . Annual Report of the Commissioner of Indians Affairs for 1894. Washington, D.C: Govemment Printing Office, 1895. -. Annual Report of the Commissioner of Indians Affairs for 1895. 5 vols. Washington, D.C: Govemment Printing Office, 1896. "'Desecration' Sachem Claims." Wassaja 3.7 (August 1975): 6. Diamond, Jared. Guns. Germs, and Steel: The Fates of Human Societies. New York: W. W. Norton, 1997. Dillehay, Tom. Monte Verde: A Late Pleistocene Settlement in Chile. Vol. 1: Paleoenvironment

458 NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

and Site Context. Washington, D,C,: Smithsonian Institution, 1989, , Monte Verde: A Late Pleistocene Settlement in Chile. Vol, 2: TJie Archaeological Context and Interpretation. Washington, D,C,: Smithsonian Institution, 1997, Dobyns, Henry F, "Estimating Aboriginal American Population: An Appraisal of Techniques with a New Hemispheric Estimate," Current Anthropology 7 (1966): 395-416, , Their Number Become Thinned: Native American Population Dynamics in Eastern North America. Knoxville: University of Tennessee Press, 1983, Donkers, Jasper, and Peter Sluyter, Joumal of a Voyage to New York in 1679-1680. Vol, 1, Brooklyn, NY: Transactions ofthe Long Island Historical Society, 1867, Donnan, Christopher B, "Archaeology and Looting: Preserving the Record," Science 251 (1 February 1991): 498, , "Masterworks of Art Reveal a Remarkable Pre-Inca World," National Geographic 177.6 (June 1990): 17-33, Donnelly, Ignatius, Atlantis: The Antediluvian World. Ed, Egerton Sykes, 1881, New York: Harper & Brothers Publishers, 1949. "'Don't Dig Indian Graves,'" Wassaja 3,4 (May 1975): 2, Douglas, Mary, Implicit Meanings. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1975. Drake, Samuel Gardner, Biography and History ofthe Indians of North America from Its First Discovery to the Present Time: Comprising a History of Their Wars. 7th ed, 5 vols, Boston: Antiquarian Institute, 1837, Drew, James, "Historian Decries Loss of Prison Registers; Ohio Lawmaker Says Society Needs Scrutiny," The Toledo Blade, 26 January 2000, A3, 'Special Report: How Historic Records End up as History." The Toledo Blade, 23 January 2000, lA, 4-5A, Drinnon, Richard. Facing West: The Metaphysics of Indian-Hating and Empire-Building. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1980, Duncan, Barbara R, Living Stories ofthe Cherokee. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1998. Duran, Diego, Historia Antigua de la Nueva Espana con Noticias de los Ritosy Costumbres de los Indios y Explicaciondel Calendario Mexicano. MS in 3 vols, 1585, Library of Congress, Washington, D.C. Durham, Jimmie. A Certain Lack of Coherence: Essays on Art and Cultural Politics. London: Kala Press, 1984, Echo-Hawk, Roger C, "Ancient History in the New World: Integrating Oral Traditions and the

BIBLIOGRAPHY

459

Archaeological Record in Deep Time," American Antiquity 65,2 (April 2000): 267-90, , "Forging a New Ancient History for Native America," In Native Americans and Archaeologists: Stepping Stones to Common Ground. Ed, Nina Swidler, Kurt E, Dongoske, Roger Anyon, and Alan S, Downer, Walnut Creek, CA: AltaMira Press, 1997, 88-102. Edmunds, R, David, The Shawnee Prophet. Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press, 1983, Edwards, Jonathan, ed, David Brainerd: His Life and Diary. 1749, Chicago: Moody Press, 1949. , ed, David Brainerd: His Life and Joumal. 1749, Edinburgh: H, S, Baynes, 1826. Eisenberg, Leslie E, Letter to the Editor, Chronicle ofHigher Education 37,6 (10 October 1990): B4, Elvas, Gentleman of, "The Narrative ofthe Expedition of Hemando de Soto," In Spanish Explorers in the Southem United States. Ed, Theodore H, Lewis, New York: Scribner's, 1907, 127-272, Fagan, Brian M, From Black Land to Fifth Sun: The Science of Sacred Sites. Reading, MA: Helix Books, 1998. -, "Golf and Archaeology: The Only Ancient Site with a Golf Course Faces More Destruction," Discovering Archaeology (November-December, 2000): 8-10, , The Great Joumey: The Peopling of Ancient America. London: Thames & Hudson, 1987, Farquharson, R, J. "The Davenport Tablets," Proceedings ofthe American Antiquarian Society. 12 October 1876, Worchester: Charles Hamilton, 1876, 64-69, Faulkner, Charles H, "The Winter House: An Early Southeast Tradition," Mid-Continental Journal of Archaeology 2,2 (1977): 141-59. Faxon, Allen M, "Independence Celebration." Joumal ofthe Callipoean Society of Granville Institution 1 (4 July 1836) n,p. Fell, Barry, America BC: Ancient Settlers in the New World. New York: Quadrangle, 1976. Fenton, William N. TTie False Faces ofthe Iroquois. Norman: University of Oklahoma Press, 1983, -. "Seth Newhouse's [Dayodekane's] Traditional History and Constitution ofthe Iroquois Confederacy." Proceedings ofthe American Philosophical Society 93,2 (1949): 233-38, Ferguson, T, J, "Native Americans and the Practice of Archaeology," Annual Review of Anthropology 25 {1996): 63-19. Ferguson, T, J,, Joe Watkins, and Gordon L, Pullar, "Native Americans and Archaeologists: Commentary and Personal Perspectives." Native Americans and Archaeologists: Stepping

460 NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

Stones to Common Ground. Ed. Nina Swidler, Kurt E. Dongoske, Roger Anyon, and Alan S. Downer, Walnut Creek, CA: AltaMira Press, 1997. 237-52. Filson, John. The Discovery and Settlement of Kentucke. 1784. Reprint. Ann Arbor: University Microfilms, Inc., 1966. Fletcher, Robert, and Terry Cameron. "Serpent Mound: A New Look at an Old Snake-in-theGrass." Ohio Archaeologist l%.\ (1988): 55-61. "Florida Burial Site: Brains to Boomerangs." Science 112 (6 August 1977): 90. Fogelson, Raymond D. "Who Were the Ani-Kutani? An Excursion into Cheroke Historical Thought." Ethnohistory 31.4 (1984): 255-63. Forbes, Jack D. Africans and Native Americans: The Language of Race and the Evolution of Red-Black Peoples. Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 1993, Fortunate Eagle, Adam [Adam Nordwall], Alcatraz! Alcatraz! The Indian Occupation of 19691971. Berkeley, VA: Heyday Books, 1992, Foster, John Wells. Pre-Historic Races ofthe United States of America. Chicago: S. C. Griggs and Company, 1881, -. "Certain Peculiarities in the Crania of the Mound-Builders." American Naturalist 6 (1872): 738^7. Fowke, Gerald. Archaeological History of Ohio: The Mound Builders and Later Indians. 2 vols. Columbus: Ohio State Archaeological and Historical Society, 1902. . Archaeological Investigations—II. Fourty-fourih Annual Report ofthe Bureau ofAmerican Ethnology, 1926-1927. Washington, D,C.: Government Printing Office, 1928.399-540. Freeman, Derek, The Fateful Hoaxing ofMargaret Mead: A Historical Analysis of Her Samoan Research. Boulder: Westview Press, 1999. French, Benjamin Franklin. Historical Collections of Louisiana. Vol. 2. Philadelphia: Daniels and Smith, 1850, Frey, S. L, "Were They Mound-Builders?" y^mencan Naturalist 13 (October, 1879): 637-47, Friedman, John Block. Monstrous Races in Medieval Thought. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1981. Galeano, Eduardo. Open Veins of Latin America: Five Centuries ofthe Pillage of a Continent. New York: Monthly Review Press, 1973. Gall, Franz Josef. Recherches sur le systeme nerveux en general, et sur celui de cerveau en particulier; memoirpresente a I'Institut de France, le 14 mars 1808; suivi d'observations sur le rapport qui en a etefaite a cette compagnie par ses commissaires. Paris: F, Schoell 1809.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

461

Gall, Franz Josef, and Johann C. Spurzheim. Anatomie et pgysiologie du systeme nerveux en general et du cerveau en particulier. Paris: F. Schoell, 1810. Galton, Francis. English Men of Science: Their Nature andNuriure. New York: D. Appleton and Company, 1875. . Hereditary Genius: An Inquiry into Its Laws and Consequences. 1869. New York: D. Appleton, 1884. . Inquiries into Human Faculty and Its Development. 1883. London: J. M. Dent, 1907. . Natural Inheritance. 1889. Reprint, New York: AMS Press, 1973. Garcia, Gregorio. Origen de los Indios del Nuevo Mundo, e Indias Occidentals. 1607. Madrid: En la imprenta de F. Martinez Abad, 1729. Gibson, Arrell Morgan. "The Centennial Legacy of the General Allotment Act." Chronicles of Oklahoma 65.3 (1987): 228-51. Gibson, John Arthur. Concerning the League: The Iroquois Tradition as Dictated in Onondaga by John Arthur Gibson. Ed. and trans. Hanni Woodbury. Memoir 9. 1912. Winnipeg: Algonquian and lroquoian Linguistics, 1992. Gidley, Mick, ed. Representing Others: White Views of Indigenous Peoples. Exeter, UK: University of Exeter Press, 1992. Giroux, Henry A., and Peter McLaren, ed. Between Borders: Pedagogy and the Politics of Cultural Studies. New York: Routledge, 1994 . Critical Pedagogy, the State, and Cultural Struggle. Albany: SUNY Press, 1989. Glotzhober, Robert C , and Bradley T. Lepper. Serpent Mound: Ohio's Enimatic Effigy Mound. Columbus: Ohio Historical Society, 1994. Gobineau, Joseph-Arthur, compte de. The Inequality of Human Races. Trans. Adrian Collins. 1854,1915. Reprint, New York: Howard Fertig, Inc., 1967. Goguet, Antoine-Yves. The Origin of Laws, Arts, and Sciences, and Their Progess among the Most Ancient Nations. 2 \ois. 1761. Reprint, New York: AMS Press, 1975. Goldberg, David Theo. "States of Whiteness." Between Law and Culture: Relocating Legal Studies. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 2001. 174-91. Goldenweiser, Alexander A. Early Civilization: An Introduction to Anthropology. New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1922. Goldstein, Lynne, and Keith Kintigh. "Ethics and the Reburial Controversy." American Antiquity 55.3 (1990): 585-91. Goodman, Alan. "Archaeology and Human Biological Variation." Conference of New England Archaeology Newsletter 17 (1998): 1-18.

462 NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

-. "Bred in the Bone?" The Sciences (March/April 1997): 20-24. , "Why Genes Don't Count (for Racial Differences in Health)." American Joumal of Public Health 90.11 (No\ember 2000): 1699-1702. Goodman, Jeffrey. American Genesis: The American Indian and the Origins of Modem Man. New York: Summit Books, 1981. Goodman, Mitchell, ed. The Movement Toward a New America: The Beginnings of a Long Revolution. Philadelphia/New York: Pilgrim Press/Alfi-ed A. Knopf, 1970. Gordon, Lewis R,, T, Denean Sharpley-Whiting, and Renee T, White, ed., Fanon: A Critical Reader. Oxford, UK: Blackwell, 1996, Gould, Stephen Jay."The Geometer of Race," Discover, Special Issue: The Science of Race (November 1994): 64-69. . The Mismeasure of Man. New York: W. W, Norton & Co., 1981. . "Morton's Ranking of Races by Cranial Capacity: Unconscious Manipulation of Data May Be a Scientistic Norm." Science 200 (5 May 1978): 503-9. Gray, Cathy Lynn. "Legislative Panel Approves Report on Ohio Historical Society Reforms." Columbus Dispatch, 8 March 2002, 4C. . "Same Village, New Interpretation." The Columbus Dispatch, 14 May 2002, 1B-2B. Greber, N'omi B, "A Comparative Study of Site Morphology and Burial Patterns at Edwin Hamess Mound and Seip Mounds 1 and 2." Hopewell Archaeology: The Chillicothe Conference. Ed. D. S, Brose and N, Greber. Kent, OH: The Kent State University Press, 1979. 27-38. Greber, N'omi B,, and Katharine C, Ruhl. The Hopewell Site: A Contemporary Analysis Based on the Work of Charles C. Willoughby. Boulder, CO: Westview Press, 1989. Green, Donald E. The Creek People. Phoenix: Indian Tribal Series, 1973. Green, L. C , and Olive P. Dickason, The Law of Nations and the New World. Edmonton: University of Alberta Press, 1989, Greenman, E. F. "Excavation ofthe Coon Moxmd and an Analysis ofthe Adena Culture." Ohio Archaeological and Historical Quarterly 41.3 (1932): 362-523. Griffin, James Bennett. The Fori Ancient Aspect. University of Michigan Anthropological Papers. No. 28. Ann Arbor: Museum of Anthropology, 1943. , ed. Archaeology of Eastem United States. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1952. Griffin, Robert, and Donald A. Grinde, Jr. Apocalypse de/ofChiokoyhikoy, Chef des Iroquois/ Chief of the Iroquois. Saint-Nicolas, Quebec: Les Presses de TUniversite Laval, 1997.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

463

Grinde, Donald A., Jr. The Iroquois in the Founding of the American Nation. San Francisco: Indian Historian Press, 1977. Grinde, Donald A., Jr., and Bruce E. Johansen. Exemplar of Liberty: Native American and the Evolution of Democracy. Los Angeles: UCLA American Indian Studies Program, 1991. Grossman, Anita Sue. "Digging the Grave of Archaeology." Heterodoxy (spring 1993): 9-12. Grumet, Robert S. The Lenapes. New York: Chelsea House Publishers, 1989. Guha, Ranahit, and Gayatri Chakravorty Spivak, ed. Selected Subaltern Studies. New York: Oxford University Press, 1988. GuUiford, Andrew. "Bones of Contention: The Repatriation of Native American Human Ksms." The Public Historian 18.4(1996): 119-34. . "Native Americans and Museums: Curation and Repatriation of Sacred and Tribal Objects." The Public Historian 14.3 (1992): 23-50. Gwinn, Vivian, and Marilyn Norcini. "Help for the Asking." Museum News 70.1 (January/ February, 1991): 52-56. Haas, Jonathan. "Policy in Practice." A/«se«m News 70.1 (January/February 1991): 46-48. Haas, Mary R. "Creek Inter-Town Relations." American Anthropologist 42 (1940): 479-89. Hakluyt, Richard. The Principall Navigations, Voiages and Discoveries of the English Nation, Made by Sea or ouer Land, to the Most Remote and Farthest Distant Quarters of the Earth at Any Time within the Compasse of These 1500 Yeeres. London: George Bishop, 1589. Hale, Horatio. The Iroquois Book of Rites. 1883. Reprint, Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1963. Hall, Robert L. An Archaeology of the Soul: North American Indian Belief and Ritual. Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 1997. . "In Search of the Ideology of the Adena-Hopewell Climax." In David S. Brose and N'omi Greber. Hopewell Archaeology: The Chillicothe Conference. Kent, OH: The Kent State University Press, 1979. 258-65. Halualani, Rona Tamiko. "Purifying the State: State Discourses, Blood Quantum, and the Legal Mis/Recognition of Hawaiians." Between Law and Culture: Relocating Legal Studies. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 2001. 141-73. Hammil, Jan, and Robert Cruz. "Statement of American Indians against Desecration before the World Archaeological Congress." In Conflict in the Archaeology of Living Traditions. Ed. Robert Layton. New York: Routledge, 1994. 195-200. Hanke, Lewis. Aristotle and the American Indians: A Study in Race Prejudice in the Modem World. Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1959.

464 NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

. The Spanish Struggle for Justice in the Conquest of America. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1949, Hardman, Clark, Jr., and Marjorie H. Hardman. "The Great Serpent and the Sun," Ohio Archaeologist 37.3 (1987): 34-40. Harper, J, Russell, ed. Paul Kane's Frontier. Austin: University of Texas Press, 1971, Harper, Kenn. Give Me My Father's Body: The Life of Minik, the New York Eskimo. Frobisher Bay, Northwest Territory: Blacklead Books, 1986. Harrington, M, R, "A Preliminary Sketch of Lendpe Culture." American Anthropologist 15 (1913): 208-35. Harrison, William Henry. "A Discourse on the Aboriginies ofthe Valley of Ohio." 1839. Reprint, Chicago: Fergus Printing Company, 1883. 1-52. Harvey, Hank. "In the Footsteps ofthe Ottawa," The Toledo Blade, Magazine, 18 February 1996, F6. Harvey, Henry. History ofthe Shawnee Indians, from the year 1681 to 1854, Inclusive. 1855. Reprint, New York: Kraus Reprint Co., 1971, Hassler, Peter. "The Lies ofthe Conquistadors: Cutting through the Myth of Human Sacrifice." World Press Review (^fx. 1992): 28-29. Haven, Samuel F. Archaeology ofthe United States. Smithsonian Contributions to Knowledge, no. 8. Washington, D.C: Smithsonian Institution, 1856. . "Report ofthe Librarian." Proceedings ofthe American Antiquarian Society. 25 April 1877. Worchester: Charles Hamilton, 1877. 33-41. . "Repwrt ofthe Librarian." Proceedings ofthe American Antiquarian Society. 12 October 1876. Worchester: Charles Hamilton, 1876. 39-61, . "Report ofthe Librarian." Proceedings ofthe American Antiquarian Society. 22 October 1876. Worchester: Charles Hamilton, 1877. 89-100. Haynes, Vance. "The Calico Site: Artifacts or Geofacts?" Science 181. 4097 (27 July 1973): 305-10. Haywood, John. The Natural and Aboriginal History of Tennessee, up to the First Settlements Therein by the White People, in the Year 1768. Nashville: George Wilson, 1823. "Heath Lions Hear History of Mounds." Ace News, 6 March 1997, 5. Heckewelder, John. History, Manners, and Customs ofthe Indian Nations Who Once Inhabited Pennsylvania and the Neighboring States. The First American Frontier Series. 1819, 1820, 1876. Reprint, New York: Amo Press and The New York Times, 1971. . Narrative ofthe Mission ofthe United Brethren among the Delaware and Mohegan

BIBLIOGRAPHY

465

Indians from Its Commencement, in the Year 1740, to the Close of the Year 1808. 1818. Reprint, New York: Amo Press, 1971. Heizer, Robert F. "A Question of Ethics in Archaeology—One Archaeologist's View." 77ie Journal of California Anthropology 1 & 2 (1974): 145-51. Henige, David P. Numbers from Nowhere: The American Indian Population Debate. Norman: University of Oklahoma Press, 1998. Herman, Kate. "Legends of the Cherokees." Jbur/ia/ of American Folk-Lore 2 (1889): 53-55. Herodotus. The History. David Grene, ed. and trans. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1987. Hermstein, Richard J., and Charles Murray. The Bell Curve: Intelligence and Class Structure in American Life. New York: Free Press, 1994. Hewitt, J[ohn] N[apoleon] B[rinton]. "Era of the Formation of the Historic League of the Iroquois."/American y^n/Aropo/ogwr, old series, 7 (1894): 61-67. . "lroquoian Cosmology, First Part." Twenty-first Annual Report of the Bureau of American Ethnology to the Secretary of the Smithsonian Institution, 1899-1900. Washington, D.C: Government Printing Office, 1903. 127-339. . "lroquoian Cosmology, Second Part." Forty-third Annual Report of the Bureau of American Ethnology to the Secretary of the Smithsonian Institution, 1925-1926. Washington, D.C: Government Printing Office, 1928. 453-819. ."The lroquoian Concept of the Soul." Journal of American Folk-lore 8.29 (April-June 1895): 107-16. . "lroquoian Superstitions." American Anthropologist 3.4 (October 1890): 388-89. . "Legend of the Founding of the Iroquois League." American Anthropologist, old series, 5 (April 1892): 131-48. . "The Name Cherokee and Its Derivation." American Anthropologist, new series, 2.3 (1900): 591-93. . "New Fire among the Iroquois." American Anthropologist 2.4 (October 1889): 319. . "Raising and Falling of the Sky in Iroquois Legends." American Anthropologist 5.4 (October 1892): 344. . "Sacred Numbers among the Iroquois." American Anthropologist 2.2 (April 1889): 165-66. . "Serpent Symbolism." .4mer(ca/iy4n//iTOpo/ogi5/2.2 (April 1889): 179-80. Hewitt, Melinda E., and G. Nicole. Thompson. "Indian Bill of Rights." 29 October 2000.

466 NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

Hildreth, S. P. "Ancient Mound at Marietta." American Pioneer 1.10 (October 1842): 340-42. . "Pyramids at Marietta." American Pioneer 2.6 (June, 1843): 243-48. Hill, Normal Newell. The History of Licking County, Ohio: Its Past and Present. Newark, OH: A.A.Graham, 1881. Hinde, Thomas S. Letter to J. S. Williams. American Pioneer 1.11 (November 1842): 373-75. Hinsley, Curtis M., Jr. Savages and Scientists: The Smithsonian Institution and the Development of American Anthropology, 1846-1910. Washington, D.C: Smithsonian Institution Press 1981. . The Smithsonian and the American Indian: Making a Moral Anthropology in Victorian America. Washington, D.C: Smithsonian Institution Press, 1994. An Historical Account of the Expedition against the Ohio Indian, in the Year 1764 under the Command of Henry Bouquet, Esq. Philadelphia: William Brandford, 1765. Hitakonanu'laxk [Tree Beard]. The Grandfathers Speak: Native American Folk Tales of the Lenape People. New York: Interlink Books, 1994. Hively, Ray, and Robert Horn. "Geometry and Astronomy in Prehistoric Ohio." Archaeoastronomy 4 (19S2): 1-20. . "Hopewellian Geometry and Astronomy at High Bank." Archaeoastronomy 1 (1984): 85-100. Hodge, Frederick Webb. Handbook ofAmerican Indians North of Mexico. 1907. Reprint, New York: Rowman and Littlefield, Inc., 1965. Holton, Felicia A. "Archeological Digs in America." TTieAfewybr/t Times, 15 July 1973,L1,16. Hooge, Paul E., and Bradley T. Lepper, ed. Vanishing Heritage: Notes and Queries about the Archaeology and Culture History of Licking County, Ohio. Licking County, OH: Licking County Archaeology and Landmarks Society, 1992. Hooton, Earnest A. The American Criminal: An Anthropological Study. 1939. Reprint, New York: Greenwood Press, 1969. . "Indian Village Site and Cemetery near Madisonville, Ohio." Papers of the Peabody Museum of American Archaeology . The Indians ofPecos

and Ethnology S.I (1920): 1-137.

Pueblo: A Study of Their Skeletal Remains. New Haven: Yale

University Press, 1930. . Up from the Ape. 2nd ed. 1931. New York: Macmillan Company, 1946. Horse-Capture, George P. "Survival of Culture." Museum News 70.1 (January/February 1991)49-51.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

467

Horsman, Reginald. Race and Manifest Destiny: The Origins of American Racial AngloSaxonism. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1981. "How to Make a Dollar on Indian Graves." Wassaja 3.6 (July 1975): 3. Howard, James H. "Altamaha Cherokee Folklore and Customs." Joumal ofAmerican Folk-Lore 72.284 April/June 1959): 134-38. . Shawnee! The Ceremonialism of a Native Indian Tribe and Its Cultural Background. Athens: Ohio University Press, 1981. HrdliCka, AleS. "An Eskimo Brain." American Anthropologist 3 (1901): 454. . Physical Anthropology of the Lenape or Delawares, and of the Eastem Indians in General. Bulletin 62. Washington, D.C: Bureau of American Ethnology, 1916. . Practical Anthropology. Philadelphia: Wistar Institute of Anatomy and Biology, 1939. Science Conference. Washington, D.C, 1942. 53-55. -. "The Problem of Man's Antiquity in America." Proceedings of the Eighth American . "The Race and Antiquity of the American Indian." Scientific American (July 1901): 7-9. . "Report on an Additional Collection of Skeletal Remains, from Arkansas and Louisiana." Joumal of the Academy of Natural Sciences of Philadelphia 14 (1909): 171-249. Hudson, Charles. Knights of Spain, Warriors of the Sun: Hemando de Soto and the South's Ancient Chiefdoms. Athens: The University of Georgia Press, 1997. Hultkrantz, Ake. Conceptions of the Soul among North American Indians. Monograph series, no. 1. Stockholm: Ethnographical Museum of Sweden, 1953. Hunter, John D. Memoirs of a Captivity among the Indians of North America, from Childhood to the Age of Nineteen: With Anecdotes Descriptive of Their Manners and Customs. Ed. Joseph J. Kwait. 1823. Reprint, New York: Johnson Reprint Corporation, 1970. Imlay, Gilbert. A Topographical Description of the Westem Territory of North America; Containing a Succinct Account of Its Soil, Climate, Natural History, Population, Agriculture, Manners & Customs. 3rd ed. London: J. Debrett, 1797. Irving, William N. "New Dates from Old Bones: Twisted Fractures in Mammoth Bones and Some Flaked Bone Tools Suggest that Humans Occupied the Yukon More than 40,000 Years Kgo." Natural History {^ihmwy 1987): 8-13. Jackson, Harry F. "Bishop Madison's Speculations on the Mounds." West Virginia History 24.4 (1963): 363-69. Jacobs, Wilbur R. "The Tip of the Iceberg: Precolumbian Demography and Some Implications for Revisions." William andMary Quarterly, 3rd series, 31.1 (1974): 123-32.

468 NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

Jahoda, Gloria. The Trail of Tears: The Story of the American Indian Removals, 1813-1855. New York: Wings Books, 1975. James, George G. M. Stolen Legacy: Greek Philosophy Is Stolen from Egyptian Philosophy. 2nd ed. Trenton, NJ: Africa World Press, 1992. Jefferson, Thomas. Notes on the State of Virginia. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1982. . Writings: Autobiography; A Summary View of the Rights of British America; Notes on the State of Virginia; Public Papers; Addresses, Messages, and Replies; Miscellany and Letters. New York: Library of America, 1984. Jeffries, John P. The Natural History of the Human Races. New York: Edward O. Jenkins, 1869. Jennings, Francis. The Invasion of America: Indians, Colonialism, and the Cant of Conquest. New York: W. W. Norton, 1976. Johansen, Bruce E. Forgotten Founders: How the American Indian Helped Shape Democracy. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Common Press, 1982. -. "Taking Indians for a Ride: The BIA's Missing $204 Billion." Native Americas 14.1 (spring, 1997): 14-23. Johansen, Bmce E., and Donald A. Grinde, Jr. The Encyclopedia ofNative American Biography. New York: Da Capo Press, 1998. Johansen, Bruce E., Donald A. Grinde, Jr., and Barbara A. Mann. Debating Democracy. Santa Fe, NM: Clear Light Publishers, 1998. Johansen, Bmce E., and Barbara Alice Mann, ed. Encyclopedia of the Haudenosaunee (Iroquois Confederacy). Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 2000. Johnson, Elias, Chief. Lege/idi, Traditions and Laws, of the Iroquois, or Six Nations. 1881. Reprint, New York: AMS Press, 1978. Johnson, Paul. "Colonialism's Back—and Not a Moment Too Soon." New York Times Magazine 142 (1993): 22+. Johnson, Troy R., ed. Contemporary Native American Political Issues. Walnut Creek, CA: AltaMira Press, 1999. Johnston, John. "Account of the Present State of the Indian Tribes Inhabiting Ohio." Archaeologica Americana: Transactions and Collections of the American Antiquarian Society 1 (1820): 271-98. Joseph, Paul. Cracks in the Empire: State Politics in the Vietnam War. Boston: South End Press 1981.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

469

Kaczmarek, Steve, "Archaeologists Devle into Newark Mound," Echoes. Ohio Historical Society Newsletter, (September 1992): 1, Kames, Henry Home, Lord, Sketches ofthe History of Man. 2 vols, Edinburgh, Scotland: W, Creech, 1774, Kappler, Charles J, Indian Affairs. U.S. Laws, Statutes, etc.. Laws and Treaties. 1 vols, Washington, D,C,: Govemment Printing Office, 1913, Kasee, Cynthia R, Letter to the Editor, Chronicle of Higher Education 37,6 (10 October 1990): B4, Kasson, Chris, "Prayer Vigil at Great Circle Mound," Photograph, The Advocate, 25 July 1992, lA, Korp, Maureen. The Sacred Geography ofthe American Mound Builders. Native American Studies, Vol, 2, Lewiston, NY: The Edwin Mellen Press, 1990. Krafl, Herbert C. TTie Lenape: Archaeology. History, and Ethnography. Newark: Jew Jersey Historical Society, 1986, -, ed. The Lenape Indian: A Symposium. Publication no, 7. South Orange, NJ: Archaeological Research Center, 1984, Krech, Sheperd, III, The Ecological Indian: Myth and History. New York: W, W, Norton, 1999, Kuhn, Thomas. TTie Structure of Scientific Revolutions. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1962, La Harpe, Jean-Baptiste Benard de. The Historical Joumal ofthe Establishment ofthe French in Louisiana. Ed, Glenn R, Conrad, Trans. Joan Cain and Virginia Koenig, 1846. Lafayette: Center for Louisiana Studies, University of Southwestern Louisiana, 1971, Lafitau, Joseph Fran?ois, Customs ofthe American Indians Compared with the Customs of Primitive Times. Ed, and trans. William N, Fenton and Elizabeth L, Moore. 2 vols, 1724, Toronto: The Champlain Society, 1974, Lahontan, Louis Armand, Baron de. New Voyages to North America. Ed, R, G. Thwaites, 2 vols, 1703. Chicago: A, C, McClure & Co., 1905, LaLonde, Brent. "Group Will Buy Ancient Sites." Columbus Dispatch, 1 January 1993,4C. Lamb, D. S, "The Army Medical Museum in American Anthropology," Proceedings ofthe 19th International Congress of Americanists. 1917, Reprint, Nendeln, Liechtenstein: Kraus Reprint, 1968, 625-32, Lambropoulous, Vassilis, The Rise of Eurocentrism: Anatomy of Interpretation. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1993,

470 NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

Larkin, Frederick. Ancient Man in America. Randolph, NY: Author, 1880. Leakey, Louis S. B., Ruth De Ette Simpson, Ranier Berger, John Witthoff, and others. Pleistocene Man at Calico. San Bernardino: San Bernardino Museum Association, 1972. , Ruth De Ette Simpson, and Thomas Clements, "Archaeological Excavations in the Calico Mountains, Califomia: Preliminary Report." Science 160 (31 May 1968): 1022-23, Lederer, John, The Discoveries ofJohn Lederer, In three several Marches from Virginia, to the West of Carolina. 1672. Reprint., Ann Arbor: University Microfilms, Inc, 1966. Lepper, Bradley Thomas. "Ancient Astronomers ofthe Ohio Valley." Timeline 15 1 (January/ February 1993): 2-11, . "The Archaeology of the Newark Earthworks," In Ancient Earthen Enclosures ofthe Eastern Woodlands. Ed. Robert E. Mainfort, Jr., and Lynne P. Sullivan, Gainesville: University Press of Florida, 1998. 114-34. . "A Brief Report on the Archaeological Integrity of Octagon State Memorial/Moundbuilders County Club." Unpub. MS. Columbus: Ohio Historical Society, 1991. . "Dem Bones." Millennium: The Advocate 1 (25 May 1999): 9-12. . "Early Archaeological Investigations in Licking County, Ohio." Ohio Archaeologist 40,4 (fall 1990): 6-7. . "The Great Serpent." Timeline 15,5 (September/October 1998): 30-45. . "An Historical Review of Archaeological Research at the Newark Earthworks." Joumal of the Steward Anthropological Society 18.1-2 (fall/spring 1988-1989) 118 . "'Holy Stones' of Newark, Ohio, Not So Holy After All." Skeptical Inquirer (winter 1991): 17-25, . "Ice Age People ofthe Great Lakes." Datum Points 2.1 (1993): 3-8. . "Mounds of Mystery." Millennium: The Advocate 2 (29 June 1999): 5-8, 10. . "Mounds Tell Us Much about the Past." The Advocate, 1 October 1990,6. . "New List ofAncient Wonders Cites Newark Earthworks." The Columbus Dispatch, 27 February 2000, 6B. . "The Newark Earthworks and the Geometric Enclosures ofthe Scioto Valley: Connections and Conjectures." In A View from the Core: A Synthesis of Ohio Hopewell Archaeology. Ed. Paul J. Pacheco. Columbus: The Ohio Archaeological Council, 1996. . "Ohio's 'Alligator.'" Timeline 18.2 (Mar-Apr 2001): 18-25. . People ofthe Mounds: Ohio's Hopewell Culture. Columbus: Hopewell Culture National Historical Park and Eastem National Park and Monument Association, 1995.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

471

, "Prehistoric Ohio: The Shaman of Newark," Curators' Curiosities. The Ohio Historical Society, 30 December 1999, -, "Tracking Ohio's Great Hopewell Road," Archaeology 48,6 (November/December 1995): 52-56, Lepper, Bradley Thomas, and Jeff Gill, "The Newark Holy Stones," Timeline 17,3 (May/June 2000): 16-25, Lescarbot, Marc, The History of New France. Trans. W, L, Grant, 3 vols, 1609, 1907, Reprint,, New York: Greenwood Press, 1968, Levering, Robert E, H, "Extraordinary Coincidence; or. Supposed Discovery ofthe First Inhabitants of America," American Pioneer 2,9 (September 1843): 406-11, Licking County Board of Trade, Licking County, Ohio, Lease #1219, Completed 15 April 1910. Recorded 6 November 1915, 1-3, Lindamoor, Brian W, "Alligator Mound Restoration Raises Concems." The Granville Sentinel, 25 August 1994, 3, 7, Lindestrfim, Peter, Geographia Americae with an Account ofthe Delaware Indians. Based on Surveys and Notes Made in 1654-1656. Trans. Amandus Johnson. Philadelphia: The Swedish Colonial Society, 1925, Linnaeus, Carolus [Carl Linn6], A General System ofNature, through the Three Grand Kingdoms of Animals. Vegetables, and Minerals. Systematically Divided into Their Several Classes. Orders. Genera. Species, and Varieties, with Their Habitations. Manners. Economy. Structure, and Peculiarities. Trans. William Turton, M.D, 1758,1806, Repdnt, Ann Arbor: University Microfilms, A Xerox Company, 1968, Lipe, William D. "A Conservation Model for American Archaeology," The Kiva 39,3-4 (1974): 213^5. Lipstadt, Deborah, Denying the Holocaust: The Growing Assault on Truth and Memory. New York: Free Press, 1993, Llancarfan, Caradoc of Historie of Cambria. Now Called Wales. London: Rafe Newberie and Henrie Denham, 1584, "Local History of Special Interest: Indian Mound Fumished the Stone to Protect the Walls [of] Buckeye Lake," Thomville News (15 July 1927): 1-2, Longfellow, Henry Wadsworth. "The Skeleton in Armor," Poetical Works. 6 vols. 1886. Boston: Houghton MifflinCompany, 1904, 1: 63-68, "Looking Back." The Advocate, 11 November 1996,2A. "Looking Back." The Advocate, 10 February 1998, 2A, "Looking Back," The Advocate, 3 December 1999, 2 A,

472 NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

"Looking Back," The Advocate, 23 June 1998, 2A, Lore, David. "Historical Society Needs to Do More for Indians, Woman Says," Columbus Dispatch, 11 December 2001, C4. Loring, Stephen, and Miroslav Prokopec. "A Most Peculiar Man: The Life and Times of AleS Hrdlidka." In Reckoning with the Dead: The Larsen Bay Repatriation and the Smithsonian Institution. Ed, Tamara L. Bray and Thomas W. Killion. Washington, D.C: Smithsonian Institution Press, 1994, 26-40. Loskiel, George Henry. History ofthe Mission ofthe United Brethren among the Indians in North America. Trans. Christian Ignatius La Trobe. 3 vols. London: Brethren's Society of the Furtherance ofthe Gospel, 1794. Lounsbury, Floyd G. "Iroquois-Cherokee Linguistic Relations." Bulletin ofthe Bureau of American Ethnology. Vol. 180. Washington, D.C: Smithsonian Institution, 1961. 11-17, Low, Charles F., Joseph Cox, Sr., Charles L. Metz, and Frank W. Langdon. "Archaeological Explorations near Madisonville, Ohio." Joumal ofthe Cincinnati Society ofNatural History 3.1 (April 1880): 40-70. Lowes, Warren. Indian Giver: A Legacy of North American Native Peoples. Penticton, B.C.: Theytus Books, 1986. Lubbock, John [Lord Avebury], Prehistoric Times as Illustrated by Ancient Remains and the Manners and Customs of Modem Savages. 1865, 1913. Reprint, New York: Humanities Press, 1969. Lynott, Mark J,, and Alison Wylie, ed. Ethics in American Archaeology: Challenges for the 1990s. Washington, D.C: Society for American Archaeology, 1995. Lyons, Oren, and John Mohawk, ed. Exiled in the Land ofthe Free: Democracy, Indian Nations, and the U.S. Constitution. Santa Fe: Clear Light, 1998. MacGowan, D. J, "Secret Indian Societies." The Historical Magazine 10.5 (May 1866): 139-41. Maclean, John Patterson. "Ancient Works at Marietta, Ohio." Ohio Archaeological and Historical Quarterly 12 (1903): 37-66. , The Mound Builders: Being an Account of a Remarkable People That Once Inhabited the Valleys ofthe Ohio and Mississippi. Cincinnati: Robert Clarke, 1879. -. "Who Were the Mound Builders?" Ohio Archaeological and Historical Quarterly 13 (1904): 91-96. MacNeish, Richard S. "Early Man in the New World." American Scientist 64.3 (May-June, 1976): 316-27. Magizi Consulting. Report on the Wilson Mound. 33 PE #10. 22 July 1994, 1-4.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

473

Mahr, August C, "Walam Olum 1,17: Proof of Rafmesque's Integrity," American Anthropologist, n.s., 59 {1951): 105-S. Mahudel, Nicolas, Dissertation historique sur les monnoyes antiques d'Espagne. Paris, 1725, Mallett, Kent, "Native Americans Claim Harrassment," The Advocate, 14 November 2000, 3A, Malloy, John S, A National Crime: The Canadian Govemment and the Residential School System. 1879-1980. Winnipeg: University of Manitoba Press, 1999, Mann, Barbara Alice, "Euro-forming the Data," Debating Democracy. Santa Fe, NM: Clear Light Publishers, 1998, 160-90, -, "The Fire at Onondaga: Wampum as Proto-Writing." Akwesasne Notes 26th Anniversary Issue, 1,1 (spring 1995): 40-48, . "Forbidden Ground: Racial Politics and Hidden Identity in James Fenimore Cooper's Leather-stocking Tales," Ph,D, diss,. University of Toledo, 1997. , "In Defense ofthe Ancestors: Ohio Falls Silent," Native Americas 17,2 (summer 2000): 50-55, . Iroquoian Women: The Gantowisas. New York: Peter Lang, 2000, . "The Lynx in Time: Haudenosaunee Women's Traditions and History," American Indian Quarterly 21,3 (summer 1997): 423-49, -, ed. Native American Speakers ofthe Eastem Woodlands: Selected Speeches and Critical Analyses. Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 2001, Mann, Barbara Alice, and Jerry L, Fields, "A Sign in the Sky: Dating the League ofthe Haudenosaunee," American Indian Culture and Research Joumal 21.2 (1997): 105-63, Marcus, George, and Michael M. J. Fischer, Anthropology as Cultural Critique: An Experimental Moment in the Human Sciences. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1986, Marino, Cesare. "Honor the Elders: Symbolic Associations with Old Age in Traditional Eastem Cherokee Culture," Joumal of Cherokee Studies 13 (1988): 3-18, Marsh, O, C, "Description of an Ancient Sepulchral Mound near Newark, Ohio," Historical Magazine, 2nd series, 2,4 (1867): 240-45, Martin, Paul S., and H. E, Wright, ed. Pleistocene Extinctions: The Search for a Cause. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1967, Marx, Karl. The German Ideology. New York: New World, 1963, Mason, Otis Tufton. The Origin of Inventions: A Study of Industry among Primitive People. 1895. New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1915.

474 NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

Mason, Ronald J. "Archaeology and Native North American Oral Tradition." American Antiquity 65.2 (April 2000): 239-66. Matthews, Robert V. "Iroquois Sites Digging Hit." Letter to the Editor. Wassaja 3.6 (July 1975): 11. Me Adams, Robert C. "Smithsonian Horizons." Smithsonian (October 1990): 10. McClintock, Anne. "The Angel of Progress: Pitfalls of the Term 'Post-Colonialism.'" In Colonial Discourse and Post-Colonial Theory. Ed. Patrick Williams and Laura Chrisman. New York: Columbia University Press, 1994. 291-304. . Imperial Leather: Race, Gender and Sexuality in the Colonial Contest. New York: Routledge, 1995. McCulloh, James H. Researches, Philosophical and Antiquarian, Concerning the Aboriginal History of America. Baltimore: Fielding Lucas, Jr., 1829. -. Researches on America Being an Attempt to Settle Some Points Relative to the Aborigines of American, &c. Baltimore: Joseph Robinson, 1817. McCutchen, David, ed. The Red Record: The Oldest Native American History. Garden City, NY: Avery, 1989. McElwain, Thomas. "The Archaic Roots of Eastern Woodland Eschatology: A Soul-Dualism Explanation of Adena Mortuary." Duality. Cosmos Series. Vol. 1. Edinburgh: Traditional Cosmological Society, 1986. 37-43. . Mythological Tales and the Alleghany Senecas: A Study of the Socio-Religious Context of Traditional Oral Phenomena in an Iroquois Community. Vastervik, Sweden: Ekblads Tryckeri, 1978. . "Seneca Iroquois Concepts of Time." Canadian Journal of Native Studies 7.2 (1987): 267-77. McGee, W. J. "On an Anatomical Peculiarity by which Crania of the Mound Builders May Be Distinguished fTom Those of the Modem Indians." American Journal of Science 116 (1878): 458-61. McGuire, Randall H. "Archaeology and the First Americans." American Anthropologist 94.4 (1992): 816-36. . 'The Sanctity of the Grave: White Concepts and American Indian Burials." Conflict in the Archaeology of Living Traditions. Ed. Robert Layton. New York: Routledge, 1994. 167-84. [McKee, Alexander]. "Minutes of Debates in Council on the Banks of the Ottawa River, (Commonly Called the Miami of the Lake), November, 1791." Philadelphia: William Young, Bookseller, 1792. McNeill, William. Plagues and Peoples. Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1976.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

475

Mead, Margaret, and Ruth L, Bunzel, The Golden Age of American Anthropology. New York: George Braziller, 1960, Mehan, Hugh. The Reality of Ethnomethodology. New York: John Wiley, 1975, Meighan, Clement W, "The Burial of American Archaeology," Academic Questions 3 (summer 1993): 9-19, , "Some Scholars' Views on Reburial," American Antiquity 57,4 (1992): 704-10, Memmi, Albert, The Colonizer and the Colonized. Boston: Beacon Press, 1965, Metz, Charles L, "The Prehistoric Monuments ofthe Little Miami Valley," Joumal Cincinnati Society of Natural History 1,3 (1878-79): 119-28,

ofthe

Meyer, Melissa L, "American Indian Blood Quantum Requirements: Blood Is Thicker Than Family," Over the Edge: Remapping the American West. Ed, Valerie J, Matsumoto and Blake Allmendinger, Berkeley: University of Califomia Press, 1999. 231-49, Miller, Brian. "Earthworks Site Played Home to Ohio National Guard," The Advocate, 17 December 2000, 5A, : "Praying for the Mounds: Group Honors Earthworks While Seeking Better Access," The Advocate, 27 August 2000, 3A. ^

^H

A

.

^ ^

#\

^V

^ \

^

A

Miller, Daniel, "Archaeology and Development," Current Anthropology 21,6 (December 1980): 709-26, Mills, William C. "Excavations of the Adena Mound," Ohio Archaeological and Historical Quarterly 10 (1902): 452-79. -. "Explorations of the Edwin Hamess Mound," Ohio Archaeological and Historical Quarterly 16,2(1906): 113-93. -. "Explorations ofthe Tremper Mound," Ohio Archaeological and Historical Quarterly 25.3 (1916): 262, -, "The Seip Mound," Putnam Anniversary Volume. New York: G, E. Stechert & Co., Publishers, 1909. 102-25. "The Mohawk Creation Story," Akwesasne Notes 21,5 (spring 1989): 32-29, Momaday, N, Scott. "Disturbing the Spirits: Indian Bones Must Stay in the Ground." New York Times, 2 November 1996, 1: 23. Montaigne, Michel Eyquem de, "Des cannibales." Essais. 2 vols, 1580, Paris: Editions Gamier Freres, 1962, 1:230-45, Montesquieu, Charles-Louis de Secondat, baron de La Brhde et de, De I 'esprit des loix. ou du rappori que les loix doivent avoir avec ta constitution de chaque govemement. les moeurs.

476 NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

le climat, le religion, le commerce, etc. In Montesquieu. Reformateurs sociaux, collection de textes. Ed. G. Lanson. 1748. Paris: Librarie Felix Mean, 1932. Mooney, James. "Cherokee Mound Building." American Anthropologist 2.2 (April 1889): 167-71. -. "Myths of the Cherokee." Nineteenth Annual Report of the Bureau ofAmerican Ethnology, 1897-1898. Part 1. Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1900. . "Sacred Formulas of the Cherokees." Bureau of American Ethnology Annual Report forl886. Washington, D.C.: Smithsonian Institution, 1891. Moorehead, Warren K. "The Stone Mound of the Licking County Reservoir." Ohio Archaeological and Historical Society Publications 5 (1897): 169-74. -. "A Study of Primitive Culture in Ohio." Putnam Anniversary Volume. New York: G. E. Stechert & Co., Publishers, 1909. 137-50. Morgan, Lewis Henry. Ancient Society, or Researches in the Lines of Human Progress from Savagery through Barbarism to Civilization. Chicago: Charles H. Kerr & Company, 1877. . "Ethnical Periods." Proceedings of the American Association for the Advancement of Science il&75):26&-74. . "Houses of the Mound-Builders." North American Review 123.1 (July 1876): 60-85. Morris, C. "The Extinct Races of America." The National Quarterly Review 24 (December 1871): 121^M. Morton, Samuel George. Crania Americana, or a Comparative View of the Skulls of the Various Aboriginal Nations of North and South America, to Which Is Prefixed an Essay on the Varieties of the Human Species. Philadelphia: J. Dobson, 1839. -. An Illustrated System of Human Anatomy, Special, General and Microscopic. Philadelphia: Grigg, Elliot and Co., 1849. . An Inquiry into the Distinctive Characteristics of the Aboriginal Race of America. Boston. 1842. Philadelphia, 1844. . "Observations on the Size of the Brain in Various Races and Families of Man." Proceedings of the Academy of Natural Sciences 4 (1849): 221-24. . Some Observations on the Ethnography and Archaeology of the American Aborigines. New Haven: B. L. Hamlen, 1846. Muldoon, James. "The Indian as Irishman." Essex Institute Historical Collections 111 (1975): 267-89. Murphy, Patrick. "Archaeologists Leave Site with Mixed Emotions." The Advocate, 29 July 1992, 3A.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

477

-. "Gov. Voinivich Sends Mediator to Local Dig." The Advocate, 15 July 1992, 3 A. -. "Native American Ritual Keeps Peace with Spirits." The Advocate, 29 July 1992, 3A. -. "Workers at Mound Find Answers, Questions." The Advocate, 29 July 1992, lA. "Museum to Return Remains of 350 Indians to 12-Tribe Group." Toledo Blade, 18 October 2000, A3. Myers, Robert A."Island Carib Cannibalism." Niewe West-Indische Gids. 158 (1984): 147-84. Nabakov, Peter. A Forest of Time: American Indian Ways of History. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 2002. Nagin, C. "The Peruvian Gold Rush." Art and Antiquities 7 (May, 1990): 98-105+. National Reporter System. The Supreme Court Reporier, November, 1900-July, 1901. Vol. 21. St. Paul: West Publishing Co., 1901. Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act Review Committee Hearing. 3 vols. Official Transcript. Ropes Gray Room, Harvard Law School, Cambridge, Massachusetts. November 17-19, 2001. "Natives Act to Protect Grave." Wassaja 3.4 (May 1975): 2. Nelson, Marie Coleman. "Paths of Power: Psychoanalysis and Sorcery." Psychoanalytic Review 63.3 (1976): 333-60. Newcomb, William B., Jr. The Culture and Acculturation of the Delaware Indians. Anthropological Papers, no. 10. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan, 1956. -. "The Walam Olum of the Delaware Indians in Perspective." Bulletin of the Archaeological Society of New Jersey 30 (1974): 29-32. . "The Walam Olum of the Delaware Indians in Perspective." Texas Journal of Science 7.1 (1955): 55-62. Nicasto, Nicholas. "Kennewick and Repatriation." Archaeology 53.3 (May/June 2000): 69-71. Nichols, Johanna. "Linguistic Diversity and the First Settlement in the New World." Language 66(1990)475-521. Norton, John [Teyoninhokarawen]. The Journal ofMajor John Norion, 1816. Ed. Carl F. Klinck and James J. Talman. Toronto: The Champlain Society, 1970. Nott, Josiah Clark. Two Lectures on the Connection between the Biblical and Physical History of Man. 1849. Reprint, New York: Negro Press, n.d. . "Unity of the Human Race." Southern Quarterly Review 9 (1846): 1-56. Nott, Josiah Clark, and George R. Gliddon. Types of Mankind: Or, Ethnological Researches

478 NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

Based upon the Ancient Monuments. Paintings. Sculptures, and Crania of Races, and upon Their Natural. Geographical. Philological, and Biblical History. Illustrated by Selections from the Inedited [sic] Papers of Samuel George Morton. 1854, Reprint, Miami: Mnemosyne Publishing Company, 1969, Oestreicher, David M, "Text out of Context: The Arguments That Created and Sustained the Walam Olum," Bulletin, Archaeological Society of New Jersey—South Orange 50 (1995):

-, "Unmasking the Walam Olum, A Nineteenth Century Hoax," Bulletin, Archaeological Society of New Jersey—South Orange 49 (1994): , "Unraveling the Walam Olum," A^a/ura///w/ory 105,10 (October 1996): 14-21, Ohio Department of Natural Resources, Division of Reclamation, Industrial Minerals Section, Chief's Order Number 1473-IM, 25 August 1994,1-2, Ohio House of Representatives. Report ofthe Select Committee to Study the Effectiveness of Ohio's Historical Programs and Partnerships, Preliminary Report, 20 February 2002, "Once Destroyed, Forever Lost," Editorial. The Toledo Blade, 27 January 2000,14(B)A. O'Neill, William L, Coming Apart: An Informal History of America in the 1960s. Chicago: Quadrangle, 1971, Ortiz, Roxanne Dunbar. Indians of the Americas: Human Rights and Self-Determination. London: Zed Books, 1984. O'Sullivan, John L, "Annexation." The United States Magazine and Democratic Review 17,85 (July-August 1845): 5-10. Owens, Louis, "As If an Indian Were Really an Indian: Native American Voices and Postcolonial Theory," In Native American Representations: First Encounters. Distorted Images, and Literary Appropriations. Ed, Gretchen M. Bataille. Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press, 2000, 11-25, Owsley, Douglas W,, and Bryan L, Guevin. "Cranial Deformation—A Cultural Practice ofthe Eighteenth Centtuy Overhill Cherokee." Journal of Cherokee Studies 7.2 (1982): 79-81, Pacheco, Paul J, A Viewfrom the Core: A Synthesis of Ohio Hopewell Archaeology. Coltimbus: The Ohio Archaeological Council, 1996. Pancoast, Chalmers L, "Golf Where Mound Builders Pray, or Centuries Old Golf Course." Typescript, 7 May 1925, Paprocki, Sherry Beck, "Indians Seek Preservation," The Plain Dealer, 4 December 1994,12B, Parker, A[rthur] C[aswell] [Gawaso Waneh]. An Analytical History of the Seneca Indians. Researches and Transactions ofthe New York State Archaeological Association, Lewis H, Morgan Chapter, 1926, Reprint, New York: Kraus Reprint Co,, 1970,

BIBLIOGRAPHY

479

-. "The Archaeological History of New York, Part I." New York State Museum Bulletin 235-36 (July-August 1920): 5-470. . "The Archaeological History of New York, Part 11." New York State Museum Bulletin 237-38 (September-October 1920): 471-743. . The Code of Handsome Lake, The Seneca Prophet. New York State Museum Bulletin 163, Education Department Bulletin, no. 530. Albany: University ofthe State of New York, 1913. . The Constitution ofthe Five Nations, or The Iroquois Book ofthe Great Law. Albany: The University ofthe State of New York, 1916. -. The Iroquois Uses of Maize and Other Food Plants. In Parker on the Iroquois. Ed. William N. Fenton. 1913. Reprint, Syracuse: Syracuse University Press, 1968. 5-119. . "Origin ofthe Iroquois As Suggested by Their Archaeology." American Anthropologist 18 (1916): 478-507. . "Problems ofthe Delaware Susquehanna Area." The Pennsylvania Archaeologist 3.2 (1932): 7-11. . Seneca Myths and Folk Tales. 1927. Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press, 1989. Parker, Everett, Chief, and Oledoska [Ken Ryan]. The Secret of No Face: An Ireokwa Epic. Albuquerque: Native American Scholarship Fund, Inc., 1972. PauUin, Charles O. Atlas ofthe Historical Geography ofthe United States. Ed. John K. Wright. Carnegie Institution of Washington, Publication no. 401. Washington, D.C: Carnegie Institution of Washington and the American Geographical Society of New York, 1932. Pavlik, Steve, ed. A Good Cherokee, a Good Anthropologist: Papers in Honor of Robert K. Thomas. Los Angeles: UCLA American Indian Studies Center, 1998. Peck, G. Richard. "The Rise and Fall of Camp Sherman: 'Ohio's World War One Soldier Factory.' " Pamphlet. 2nd ed. n.c: Craftsman Printing, Inc., 1980. Pendergast, David M., and Clement W. Meighan. "Folk Traditions as Historical Fact: A Paiute Example." Journal of American Folk-Lore 72. 284 (April/June 1959): 128-33. Pertusati, Linda. In Defense of Mohawk Land: Ethnopolitical Conflict in Native North America. Albany: SUNY Press, 1997. Petit, Charles W. "Rediscovering America: The New World May Be 20,000 Years Older Than Experts Thought." US. News and World Repori, May, 1998. Pidgeon, William. Traditions ofDe-coo-dah and Antiquarian Researches. 1852. New York: Horace Thayer, 1858. Pierce, Roy Harvey. Savagism and Civilization: A Study ofthe American Indian in the American Mind. Baltimore: John Hopkins University Press, 1953.

480 NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

Powell, J[ohn] G. Fifth Annual Report of the Bureau of Ethnology to the Secretary of the Smithsonian Institution, 1883-1884. Washington, D.C: Govemment Printing Office, 1887. Preston, Douglas J. "Anthropology and American Ancestry." Natural History 109.3 (April 2000): 88-89. . "Skeletons in Our Museums' Closets." Harper's (February 1989): 66-75. Price, H. Marcus Disputing the Dead: U.S. Law on Aboriginal Remains and Grave Goods. Columbia: University of Missouri Press, 1991. Priest, Josiah. American Antiquities and the Discoveries in the West. Albany: Hoffman and White, 1833. Pringle, Heather. "The First Urban Center in the Americas." Science 292.5517 (27 April 2001): 622-23. "'Prosecute Diggers of Artifacts.'" Wassaja 3.4 (May 1975): 11. Prucha, Francis Paul. Americanizing the American Indian: Writings of the "Friends of the Indian, " 1800-1900. Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press, 1973. Prufer, Olaf H., and R. S. Baby. Palaeo-Indians of Ohio. Columbus: Ohio Historical Society, 1963. Prufer, Olaf H., and Douglas H. McKenzie. Studies in Ohio Archaeology. Cleveland: The Press of Westem Reserve University, 1967. Purchas, Samuel. Hakluytus Posthumous or Purchas His Pilgrimes. 20 vols. Glasgow: MacLehose and Sons, 1905-1907. Pybum, K. Anne, and Richard R. Wilk. "Responsible Archaeology Is Applied Anthropology." In Ethics in American Archaeology: Challenges for the 1990s. Ed. Mark J. Lynott and Alison Wylie. Washington, D.C: Society for American Archaeology, 1995. 71-76. Rabasa, Jose. Inventing A-M-E-R-I-C-A: Spanish Historiography and the Formation ofEurocentrism. Norman: University of Oklahoma Press, 1993. Rafmesque, C[onstantine] S[amuel]. Ancient History, or Annals of Kentucky. Frankfort, KY: Author, 1824. Randall, Emilius Oviatt. The Masterpieces of the Ohio Mound Builders: The Hilltop Fortifications, Including Fort Ancient. Columbus: The Ohio State Archaelogical and Historical Society, 1908. Rau, Charles. Catalogue of the Archaeological Collection the National Museum. Smithsonian Contribution no. 287. Washington, D.C: Smithsonian Institution, 1876. Raymond, Chris. "Reburial of Indian Remains Stimulated Studies, Friction among Scholars." Chronicle of Higher Education 37.5 (3 October 1990): A7, A12-13.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

481

-, "Some Scholars Upset by Stanford's Decision to Retum American Indian Remains for Re-Burial by Tribe." Chronicle of Higher Education 35,43 (5 July 1989): A4-6, Readings, Bill. Introducing Lyotard: Art and Politics. London: Routledge, 1991. "Researchers Seek Answers on Hopewell," Society Page. Ohio Historical Society Newsletter, 7,7 (August 1992): 1-2, Richardson, Boyce, People of Terra Nullius: Betrayal and Rebirth in Canada. SeattleA'ancouver: University of Washington Press/Douglas Mclntire, 1993, Richardson, James D,, ed. A Compilation ofthe Messages and Papers ofthe Presidents. 10 vols, Washington, D,C.: Bureau of National Literature, 1897, Riding-In, James, "Six Pawnee Crania: Historical and Contemporary Issues Associated with the Massacre and Decapitation of Pawnee Indians in 1869," American Indian Culture and Research Journal 16,2 (1992): 101-19, , "Without Ethies and Morality: A Historical Overview of Imperial Archaeology and American Indians," Arizona State Law Joumal 24 (1992): 11-34, Roberts, David. In Search ofthe Old Ones: Exploring the Anasazi World ofthe Southwest. New York: Simon & Schuster, 1996. Robertson, R, S. "The Mound-Builders of America," Magazine of American History 4 (1880): 174-80, Robertson, William. History of America. 10th ed, 1777. London: A, Strahan, 1803, Rogers, C, R, "Some New Challenges," American Psychologist 28 (1973): 379-87, Rohner, Ronald P, The Ethnography of Franz Boas. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1969, Romain, William F. "Geometry at the Serpent Mound," Ohio Archaeologist 38,1 (1988): 50-54, . "Hopewellian Geometry: Forms at the Interface of Time and Eternity," In Paul J. Pacheco, A Viewfrom the Core: A Synthesis of Ohio Hopewell Archaeology. Columbus: The Ohio Archaeological Council, 1996. 196-209. , "Serpent Mound Revisited," Ohio Archaeologist 37,4 (1987): 4-10. . "The Serpent Mound Solar Eclipse Hypothesis: Ethohistoric Considerations," Ohio Archaeologist 38,3 (1988): 32-37, Ronda, James P. "Forgotten Removals: The Life and Times of Hendrick Aupatimut," Minnestrista Council for Great Lakes Native American Studies. 1991-1992 Proceedings ofthe Woodland National Conference. Muncie, IN: Minnestrista Cultural Center and Ball State University, 1993. 103-6. Rose, Jerome C , Thomas J, Green, and Victoria D, Green. "NAGPRA Is Forever: Osteology and the Repatriation of Skeletons." Annual Report of Anthropology 25 (1996): 81-103.

482 NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

Roth, Evan, "Repatriation Saga." Museum News 71,6 (November/December 1992): 12-13, , "Success Stories," A/«set/w News 70,1 (January/February 1991): 41-45, Rothrock, Mary U,, ed. The Natural and Aboriginal History of Tennessee. 1959, Reprint, Kingsport, TN: Mary U, Rothrock, 1973, Royce, C, C, "An Inquiry into the Identity and History of the Shawnee Indians," American Antiquarian and Oriental Joumal 3 (1881): 177-89, Sackler, Elizabeth, "Three Voices for Repatriation." Museum News 70,5 (September/October 1992): 58-61. Sagard, Gabriel, The Long Journey to the Country ofthe Hurons. Ed, George M, Wrong, with Introduction and Notes, Trans, H, H, Langton, 1632, Toronto: The Champlain Society, 1939, Said, Edward W, Culture and Imperialism. New York: Alfred A, Knopf, 1993, , Orientalism. New York: Pantheon, 1978, , The Question of Palestine. 2nd ed. New York: Vintage, 1992, Sale, Kirkpatrick. The Conquest ofParadise: Christopher Columbus and the Columbian Legacy. New York: Alfred A, Knopf, 1990. Sargent, Colonel Winthrop, Letter to Dr, Benjamin Smith Barton from Cincinnati on 8 September 1794, Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society, no, 21, Philadelphia: American Philosophical Society, 1797, 177-80, Schoolcraft, Henry Rowe. Historical and Statistical Information Respecting the History. Condition, and Prospects of the Indian Tribes ofthe United States. 6 vols, Philadelphia: Lippincott,

Grambo,& Co., 1851-57, . Notes on the Iroquois. or. Contributions to the Statistics. Aboriginal. History. Antiquities, and General Ethnology of Westem New-York. 1846, Reprint, Millwood, NY: Kraus Reprint Company, 1975. , "Observations Respecting the Grave Creek Mound," Transactions ofthe American Ethnological Society 1 (1845): 369-420, Schtih, H. J, David Zeisberger. The Moravian Missionary to the American Indians. Columbus, OH: The Book Concern, [ca. 1928], Schweinitz, Edmund de. The Life and Times of David Zeisberger. the Western Pioneer and Apostle of the Indians. Philadelphia: J, B, Lippincott & Co,, 1870, Scott, Rebekah, "Human Bones Quietly Moved from Dig Site at Fort Meigs." The Blade, 12 April 2002, A1,A9, Scotton, Bruce W, "Relating the Work of Carlos Castaneda to Psychiatry," Bulletin of the Menninger Clinic 42,3 (1978): 223-38,

BIBLIOGRAPHY

483

Seaver, James E. A Narrative ofthe Life of Mrs. Mary Jemison. 1823. Syracuse, NY: Syracuse University Press, 1990. Seton, Ernest Thompson. The Gospel ofthe Red Man: An Indian Bible. Garden City, NY: Doubleday, Doran & Company, Inc., 1936. Shaffer, Lynda Norene. Native Americans before 1492: The Moundbuilding Centers of the Eastern Woodlands. Armonk, NY: M. E. Sharpe, 1992. Shelton, Brett Lee, and Jonathan Marks. "Genetic Markers Not a Valid Test of Native Identity." Accessed 22 February 2002. 1-4. Shetrone, Henry Clyde. "The Culture Problem in Ohio Archaeology." American Anthropologist 22 (1920): 144-72. -. "Explorations ofthe Hopewell Group of Prehistory Earthworks." Ohio Archaeological and Historical Quarterly 35.1 (1926): 5-227. . "The Mound Builders." Part I. Natural History 30.3 (June-July 1930): 293-304. . "The Mound Builders." Part II. Natural History 30.4 (August 1930): 402-8. -. Primer of Ohio Archaeology: The Mound Builders and the Indians. 5th ed. Columbus: The Ohio State Archaeological and Historical Society, 1951. Shiels, Richard. Public Testimony to the Senate Select Committee to Study the Effectiveness of Ohio's Historical Programs & Partnerships. Columbus, Ohio. 8 November 2001. Short, John T. Norih Americans ofAntiquity. 3rd ed. 1879. New York: Harper & Brothers, Publishers, 1882. Shreve, James. 'Terms of Estrangement." Discover. Special Issue: The Science of Race (November 1994): 60. Silverberg, Robert. Mound Builders ofAncient America: The Archaeology of a Myth. Greenwich, CT: New York Graphic Society, Ltd., 1968. Simon, Barbara Anne. The Ten Tribes of Israel Historically Identified with the Aborigines ofthe Western Hemisphere. London: R. B. Seeley and W. Bumside, 1836. Simon, Ron. "How Long?" Millennium: The Advocate 2 (29 June 1999): 3-4. Simpson, Joseh. The Story of Buckeye Lake. Columbus, OH: The Hann and Adair Printing Company, 1912. Smith, Ethan. View ofthe Hebrews; Exhibiting the Destruction ofJerusalem; the Ceriain Restoration ofJudah and Israel; the Present State ofJudah and Israel; and an Address ofthe Prophet Isaiah relative to Their Restoration. Poultney, VT: Smith & Shute, 1823.

484 NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

Smith, J. David. The Eugenic Assault on America: Scenes in Red, White, and Black. Fairfax, VA: George Mason University Press, 1993. Smith, Linda Tuhiwai. Decolonizing Methodologies: Research and Indigenous Peoples. London/ Dunedin, NZ: Zed Books/University of Otago Press, 1999. Smith, Paul Chaat, and Robert Allen Warrior. Like a Hurricane: The American Indian Movement from Alcatraz to Wounded Knee. New York: New Press, 1996. Smith, Samuel Stanhope. An Essay on the Causes ofthe Variety of Complexion and Figure in the Human Species. Ed. Winthrop D. Jordan. 1810. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1965. Smith, William. History of New-York from the First Discovery to the Year M.DCCXXXII. Albany: Ryer Schermerhom, 1814. Smith, William R. The History of Wisconsin. Vol. 3. Madison, WI: Beriah Brown, Printer, 1854. Smucker, Isaac. "The Mound-Builders' Works in Licking Cotinty, Ohio." The American Historical Record 2.23 (1873): 481-85. . "The Motind Builders' Works near Newark, Ohio." The American Antiquarian 3.4 (July 1881): 261-70. Snyderman, George S. "The Function of Wampum in Iroquois Religion." American Philosophical Society Proceedings 105.6(1961): 571-608. Sokolov, Raymond. "Stop Knocking Columbus: Fie on All This Self-serving Revisionism." Newsweek: Special Columbus Issue (fall/winter, 1991): 82. Spaulding, Solomon. The "Manuscript Found" or "Manuscript Story," of the Late Rev. Solomon Spaudingfrom a Verbatim Copy ofthe Original Now in the Care ofPres. James H. Fairchild ofOberlin College, Ohio. Lamoni, IA: Reorganized Church, 1885. Speck, Frank G. "The Wapanachki Delawares and the English; Their Past as Viewed by an Ethnologist." The Pennsylvania Magazine 67 (1943): 319-44. Spencer, Joab. "Shawnee Folk-Lore." Journal of American Folk-Lore 22 (1909): 319-26. . "The Shawnee Indians: Their Customs, Traditions and Folk-lore." Transactions ofthe Kansas State Historical Society 10 (1908): 382-402. Spenser, Frank. Piltdown: A Scientific Forgery. New York: Oxford University Press, 1990. Squier, Ephraim George, and E. H. Davis. Ancient Monuments ofthe Mississippi Valley: Comprising the Results of Extensive Original Surveys and Explorations. Smithsonian Contributions to Knowledge. Vol. 1.1848. Reprint, New York: Johnson Reprint Corporation, 1965. Stannard, David E. American Holocaust: Columbus and the Conquest ofthe New World. New York: Oxford University Press, 1992.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

485

Stanton, William R. The Leopard's Spots: Scientific Attitudes towards Race in America. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1960. Starr, P. "Anthropological Work in America." Popular Science Monthly 41 (1882): 289-307. State of Ohio. Franklin County. Deed #892. Signed 2 April 1908. Recorded 25 January 1910, 1-2. . General and Local Acts Passed and Joint Resolutions Adopted by the Seventy-Seventh General Assembly. Vol. 99. Springfield, OH: The Springfield Publishing Co., 1908.629-30. Stebbens, Daniel. "Fortifications at Marietta." American Pioneer 1.10 (October 1842): 339-40. Steen-Mclntyre, Virginia, Roald Fryxell, and Harold E. Malde. "Geologic Evidence for Age of Deposits at Heyatlaco Archaeological Site, Valsequillo, Mexico." Quartenary Research 16 (1981): 1-17. Steiner, Stan. The New Indians. New York: Delta, 1968. Stillwell, William. "The Process of Mysticism: Carlos Castaneda." Joumal of Humanistic Psychology 19.4 (1979): 6-29. Stoddard, Amos. Sketches, Historical and Descriptive, of Louisiana. 1812. Reprint. New York: AMS Press, 1973 Stone, William L. "The Moundbuilders: Were They Egyptians; and Did They Ever Occupy the State of New York?" Magazine of American History 2.7 (July 1878): 533-39. Strachey, William. The Historie of Travell into Virginia Britania. Ed. Louis B. Wright and Virginia Freund. 1612. London: Hakluyt Society, 1953. Strickland, Rennard. Newcomers to a New Land. Norman: University of Oklahoma Press, 1980. Stuart, George E. "The Battle to Save Our Past." National Geographic 175.3 (March 1989): 392-93. Sturm, Circe. "Blood Politics, Racial Classification, and Cherokee National Identity: The Trials and Tribulations of Cherokee Freedmen." American Indian Quarterly 22.1-2 (1998): 230-58. Swanton, John Reed. The Indian Tribes of North America. Smithsonian Institution Bureau of American Ethnology, Bulletin 145. Washington, D.C: Smithsonian Institution Press, 1952. . "Introduction." Notes on the Creek Indians. Smithsonian Institution. Bureau of American Ethnology. Bulletin 123. Anthropological Papers, no. 10. Washington, D.C: Smithsonian Institution, 1939. 123-59. Swartz, B. K., Jr., ed. Adena: The Seeking of an Identity. Symposium, 5-7 March 1970. Muncie: Ball State University, 1970. Swidler, Nina, Kurt E. Dongoske, Roger Anyon, and Alan S. Downer, ed. Native Americans and

486 NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

Archaeologists: Stepping Stones to Common Ground. Walnut Creek, CA: AltaMira Press, 1997. Tanner, Helen Hombeck, Adele Hast, Jackqueline Peterson, and Robert J. Surtees, ed. Atlas of Great Lakes Indian History. Miklos Pinther, Cartography. Norman: University of Oklahoma Press, 1987. Tanner, John. A Narrative of the Captivity and Adventures of John Tanner during Thirty Years Residence among the Indians in the Interior of North America. 1830. Reprint. New York: Gadand Publishing, 1975. Tantaquidgeon, Gladys. Folk Medicine of the Delaware and Related Algonkian Indians. Anthropological Series, no. 3. Harrisburg: The Pennsylvania Historical and Museum Commis-sion, 1972. Tekahionwake [E. Pauline Johnson]. The Moccasin Maker. 1913. Reprint. Tucson: University of Arizona Press, 1987. Tenney, Alvan A. "Eugenics." Encyclopedia Americana. 30 vols. New York: Americana Corporation, 1949. 10:567-71. Thiong'o, Ngugi Was. Decolonization of the Mind: The Politics of Language in African Literature. Oxford, UK: James Currey, 1981. Thomas, Cyrus. "Burial Mound of the Northem Sections of the United States." Fifth Annual Report of the Bureau ofEthnology to the Secretary of the Smithsonian Institution, 1883-1884. Washington, D.C: Govemment Printing Office, 1887. 9-119. . Catalogue of Prehistoric Works East of the Rocky Mountains. Washington, D.C: Govemment Printing Office, 1891. . The Cherokees in Pre-Columbian Times. New York: N. D. C. Hodges, Publisher, 1890. . "Cherokees Probably Mound-Builders." Magazine of American History 11.5 (May 1884): 396-407. . Circular, Square, and Octagonal Earthworks of Ohio. Washington, D.C: Govemment Printing Office, 1889. — . The Problem of the Ohio Mounds. Washington, D.C: Govemment Printing Office, 1889. . Report on the Mound Explorations of the Bureau of Ethnology. Bureau of Ethnology, Annual Report no. 12. Washington, D.C: Smithsonian Institute, 1894. . The Story of a Mound; or. The Shawnees in Pre-Columbian Times. Washington, D.C: Judd&Detweiler, 1891. . "Who Were the Mound Builders?" American Antiquarian 7.2 (March 1885): 65-74. Thomas, David Hurst. Skull Wars: Kennewick Man, Archaeology, and the Battle for Native American Identity. New York: Basic Books, 2000.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

487

Thomas, Jacob, Chief, and Terry Boyle. Teachings from the Longhouse. Toronto: Stoddart Publishing Co., Limited, 1994. Thomas, Robert K. "Colonialism: Classic and Intemal." New University Thought 4.4 (winter 1966-67): 3 7 ^ 3 . Thompson, Raymond H. "Dealing with the Past, and Looking to the Future." Museum News 70.1 (January/February 1991): 36-40. Thompson, Stith. Tales of the Norih American Indians. 1929. Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1967. Thomton, Russell. American Indian Holocaust and Survival: A Population History since 1492. Norman: University of Oklahoma Press, 1987. Thwaites, Reuben Gold, ed. and trans. Les Relations de Jesuites, or The Jesuit Relations: Travels and Explorations of the Jesuit Missionaries in New France, 1610-1791.13 vo\s. New York: Pageant Book Company, 1959. Timberlake, Henry. The Memoirs of Lieut. Henry Timberlake. 1765, 1927. Reprint, New York: Amo Press & The New York Times, 1971. Tinker, George E. Missionary Conquest: The Gospel and Native American Cultural Genocide. Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1993. Tocqueville, Alexis de. Democracy m/4/wer(ca. 1835. New York: Vintage Books, 1990. Tomlinson, A[belard] B. Letter to J. S. Williams, Esq. American Pioneer 2.5 (May 1843): 197-203. Tooker, Elisabeth, ed. Native North American Spirituality of the Eastern Woodlands. Sacred Myths, Dreams, Visions, Speeches, Healing Formulas, Rituals and Ceremonials. New York: Paulist Press, 1979. Trask, Haunani-Kay. From a Native Daughter: Colonialism and Sovereignty in Hawaii, 2nd ed. Honolulu: University of Hawai'i Press, 1999. Trigger, Bruce G. "Archaeology and the Image of the American Indian." American Antiquity 34 (1980): 662-76. . A History of Archaeological Thought. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1989. Trope, Jack F., and Walter R. Echo-Hawk. "Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act: Background and Legislative History." Arizona State Law Joumal 24 (1992): 35-77. Trowbridge, C[harles] C[hristopher]. Shawnese Traditions. Ed. Vemon Kinietz and Erminie W. Voegelin. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 1939. Tumer, Christy, and Jacqueline Tumer. Man Com: Cannibalism and Violence in the Prehistoric Southwest. Salt Lake City: University of Utah Press, 1999.

488 NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

Ugvwiyuhi. Joumey to Sunrise: Myths and Legends of the Cherokee. Claremoe, OK: Egi Press, 1977. United States. Bureau of the Census, Accessed 7 March 2002. United States. Report of the Select Committee to Investigate Matters Connected with Affairs in the Indian Territory with Hearings November 11, 1906-January 9, 1907. Fifty-ninth Congress, 2nd Session, Report 5013, Parts I & II. 2 vols. Washington, D.C: Govemment Printing Office, 1907. . Statutes at Large of the United States of America, December, 1895, to March, 1897. Vol. 29. Washington, D.C: General Printing Office, 1897. . Statutes at Large of the United States of America from December, 1887, to March, 1889. Vol. 25. Washington, D.C: Government Printing Office, 1889. . Statutes at Large of the United States of America from March, 1897, to March, 1898. Vol. 30. Washington, D.C: Govemment Printing Office, 1899. . Statutes at Large of the United States of America Passed at the Forty-ninth Congress, 1885-1886. Vol. 24. Washington, D.C: Govemment Printing Office, 1886. U.S. Department of the Interior, National Park Service, and Cultural Resources Programs. Federal Historic Presevation Laws. Washington, D.C: Govemment Printing Office, 1993. Ussher, Reverend James. The Annals of the World. London: G. Bedell, 1658. Valentine, Paul. "Hollywood's Noble Indinas: Are We Dancing with Myths?" Washington Post, 31 March 1991, B5. Van der Donck, Adriaen Comelissen. "Description of New Netheriand." 1653. Trans. Diederick Goedhuys. In Mohawk Country: Early Narrative about a Native People. Ed. Dean R. Snow, Charles T. Gehring, and William A. Stama. Syracuse: Syracuse University Press, 1996. 104-30. Vega, Garcilaso de la. La Florida del Inca. Ed. Sylvia L. Hilton. 1605. Madrid: Historia 16, 1986. Versluis, Arthur. Sacred Earth: The Spiritual Landscape of Native America. Rochester, VT: Inner Traditions International, 1992. Vietzen, Raymond C. Ancient Man in Northern Ohio. Lorain, OH: McCahon Printers, 1941. . The Ancient Ohioans and Their Neighbors. Wahoo, NB: Ludi Printing Company, 1946. . Archaeology around the Great Lakes. Elyria, OH: White Horse Publishers, 1987. -. Cahokia Brought to Life: An Artifactual story ofAmerica's Great Monument. St. Louis: The Greater St. Louis Archaeological Society, 1950. . From the Earth They Came. Elyria, OH: White Horse Publishers, 1978.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

489

-. The Immortal Eries. Elyria, OH: Wilmont Printing Co., 1945. -. Indians of the Lake Erie Basin, or Lost Nations. Wahoo, NB: Ludi Printing Co, 1965. -. / Touched the Indians Past (Prehistoric Era). Elyria, OH: White Horse Publishers, 1994. . My Life and Philosophy as an Archaeologist, Author, Artist. Elyria, OH: White Horse Publishers, 1992. . The Old Warrior Speaks. Elyria, OH: White Horse Publishers, 1981. . Prehistoric Americans. Elyria, OH: White Horse Publishers, 1989. -. Prehistoric Indians from Darkness into Light. Elyria, OH: White Horse Publishers, 1995. -. The Riker Site, n.c: Sugar Creek Valley Chapter of the Archaeological Society of Ohio, 1974. . The Saga of Glover's Cave. Wahoo, NB: n.p., 1956. -. Shakin' the Bushes: From Paleo to Historic Indians. Elyria, OH: White Horse Publishers, 1976. . Sittin' on a Stump. Elyria, OH: n.p., 1968. . Their Fires Are Cold. Elyria, OH: White Horse Publishers, 1984. . Yesterday's Ohioans. Elyria, OH: Indian Ridge Museum, 1973. Vivian, R. Gwinn, and Marilyn Norcini. "Help for the Asking." Museum News 70.1 (January/ February 1991): 52-56. Vizenor, Gerald. "Bone Courts: The Natural Rights of Tribal Bones." Crossbloods, Bone Couris, Bingo, and Other Reporis. 1976. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1990. 62-82. Voegelin, Erminie Wheeler. Mortuary Customs of the Shawnee and Other Eastem Tribes. Prehistory Research Series. Vol. 2, no. 4.1944. Reprint, New York: AMS Press, 1980. Voegelin, Charles F. "The Shawnee Female Deity." Yale University Publications in Anthropol-

ogy S-13 (\936). 3-2\. Voegelin, Charies F. and Erminie W. "The Shawnee Female Deity in Historical Perspective." American Anthropologist 46 (1944): 370-75. Vogeles, A. W. "Notes on a Lost Race of America." i^merican Naturalist 13 (January 1879): 9-11. Von Staehlin, J. An Account of the New Northem Archipelago, Lately Discovered by the Russians in the Seas of Kamtschatka and Anadir. London, 1774.

490 NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

Vorse, Mary Heaton. "The Shawnee Story of Creation as Told to Mary Heaton Vorse by Thomas W. Alford." Indians at Work 2.18 (1935): 7-8. "The Vulture Culture." Wassaja 3.6 (July 1975): 3. "The Vulture Culture." Wassaja 3.7 (August 1975): 1,4, 8, 10. Wachtel, H. C Who's Who in Indian Relics. Union City, GA: Charley C. Drake, 1973. Walam Olum, or Red Score: The Migration Legend of the Lenni Lenape or Delaware Indians^A New Translation, Interpreted by Linguistic, Historical, Archaeological, Ethnological, and Physical Anthropological Studies. Chicago: Lakeside Press, 1954. Walbridge, Thomas Campbell. "On Some Ancient Mounds upon the Shore of the Bay of Quinte." The Canadian Joumal, new series 29.5 (September 1860): 409-17. Walker, Deward E., Jr. "Anthropologists Must Allow American Indians to Bury Their Dead." Chronicle of Higher Education 37.2 (12 September 1990): B2. Wall, Steve. Wisdom's Daughters: Conversations with Women Elders of Native America. New York: Harper Perennial, 1993. Wallace, Douglas C , and Antonio Torrini. "American Indian Prehistory as Written in the Mitochondrial DNA: A Review." Human Biology (June 1992): 403-16. Wallace, Paul A. W., ed. Thirty Thousand Miles with John Heckewelder. Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press, 1958. Watkins, Joe. "Writing Unwritten History." Archaeology 53.6 (November/December 2000): 36-41. Wayne, Robert K., Jermifer A. Leonard, and Alan Cooper. "Full of Sound and Fury: The Recent History of Ancient I>}:iA.." Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics 30 (1999): 457-77. Weatherford, Jack. Indian Givers: How the Indians of the Americas Transformed the World. New York: Crown, 1988. Weaver, Jace. "Indian Presence with No Indians Present: NAGPRA and Its Discontents." Wicazo-Sa Review 12.2 (1997): 13-30. Webb, William S., and Charles E. Snow. The Adena People. Ed. James B. Griffin. 1945. Reprint, Knoxville: University of Tennessee Press, 1974. Webb, William S., and Raymond S. Baby. The Adena People, No. 2. 4th printing. 1957. Columbus: The Ohio Historical Society, 1975. Weber, David L. The Spanish Frontier in North America. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1992. Webster, Noah. "Antiquity: Copy of a Letter from Mr. Webster, to the Rev. Dr. Stiles, President

BIBLIOGRAPHY

491

of Yale College, dated Philadelphia, October 22, 1787," American Magazine (December 1787): 15-19. , "Atitiquity: Letter III, From Mr, N, Webster to the Rev, Dr. Stiles, President of Yale College, on the Remains of the Fortifications in the Westem Country, Dated New-York, January 20, ll&S." American Magazine (February 1788): 146-56, , "Antiquity: Letter II, From Mr, N, Webster to the Rev, Dr, Stiles, President of Yale College, Containing a Particular Account ofthe Famous Expedition of Ferdinando de Soto, into Florida. Dated New-York, December 15, 1787," American Magazine (January 1788): 87-93, Weslager, C, A, TTie Delaware Indians: A History- New Brunswick: Rutgers University Press, 1972. , The Delawares: A Critical Bibligraphy. Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1978, , The Delaware Westward Migration, with the Texts of Two Manuscripts. 1821-22. Responding to General Lew Cass' Inquiries about Lenape Culture and Language. Wallingford, PA: Middle Atlantic Press, 1978, West, Frederick Hadleigh, ed,, American Beginnings: The Prehistory and Paleontology of Beringia. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1996, Weurthner, George. "An Ecological View ofthe Indian," Earth First! 1.1 (August 1987): 20-23, Whipple, Lieut. A, W,, Thomas Ewbank, Esq,, and Prof, Wm, W, Tumer, Report upon the Indian Tribes. Washington, D,C,: Govemment Printing Office, 1855. White, Charles, An Account ofthe Regular Gradation in Man. and in Different Animals and Vegetables; andfrom the Former to the Latter. London: C. Dilly, 1799, White, Richard, The Middle Ground: Indians. Empires, and Republics in the Great Lakes Region. 1650-1815. New York: Cambridge University Press, 1991, Whitelaw, Keith W, The Invention of Ancient Israel: The Silencing of Palestinian History. New York: Routledge, 1996, Whittlesey, Charles, "Archaeological Frauds: Inscriptions Attributed to the Moundbuilders— Three Remarkable Forgeries," Tract no, 9 (February 1872), Westem Reserve Historical Society 1 (1877): 1 ^ , -. "Archaeological Frauds," Tract no, 33 (November 1876), Westem Reserve and Northem Ohio Historical Society 1 (1877): 1-7, , "The Grave Creek Inscribed Stone," Tract no, 44 (April, 1879), Westem Reserve and Northern Ohio Historical Society 2 (1888): 65-68. -. "Inscribed Stones, Licking County, Ohio." Tract no. 53 (March 1881), Westem Reserve and Northern Ohio Historical Society 2 (1888): 129-33,

492 NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

Wiget, Andrew, "Truth and the Hopi," Ethnohistory 29 (1982): 181-99, Wilhelm, Johann Friedrich, Franz Josef Gall, and Johan Gaspar Lavater, Beytrag zur vergleichenden Wurdigung der neuen und alten Physiognomik. Berlin: Friedrich Baunes 1808, Willey, Gordon R,, and Jeremy A, Sabloff, A History of American Archaeology. 3rd ed, 1974, New York: W, H, Freeman and Company, 1993, Williams, Chancellor, The Destruction of Black Civilizations: Great Issues of a Race from 4500 B.C. to 2000 A.D. Chicago: Third World Press, 1987. Williams, Robert A,, Jr. The American Indian in Westem Legal Thought: The Discourses of Conquest. New York: Oxford University Press, 1990, Williams, Stephen. Fantastic Archaeology: The Wild Side of North American Prehistory. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1991, Willoughby, Charles C. "The Tumer Group of Earthworks—Hamilton County, Ohio." Papers ofthe Peabody Museum of American Archaeology 8,3 (1922): 1-132, Wilmsen, Edwin N, "An Outline of Early Man Studies in the United States," American Antiquity 31 (1965): 172-92, Winter, Nevin O, A History of Northwest Ohio: A Narrative Account of Its Historical Progress and Developmentfrom the First European Exploration ofthe Maumee and Sandusky Valleys and the Adjacent Shore of Lake Erie, down to the Present Time. 3 vols, Chicago & New York: The Lewis Publishing Co,, 1917, Winters, Bob, "Spanish Trade Beads," Presentation 13 October 2001, Eastem Woodland American Indian Conference: Claiming Our Heritage for the Future, 12-14 October 2001, Morgantown, West Virginia. Wolf, Eric R. Europe and the People without History. Berkeley: University of Califomia Press, 1982. Wright, Gloria. "Putting the Past to Rest," The Buckeye Lake Beacon, 11 December 1999, 1. Wright, J, Leitch. The Only Land They Knew: The Tragic Story ofthe American Indians in the Old South. New York: The Free Press, 1981. Wyman, Jeffries, "Indian Mounds and Skulls in Michigan," American Joumal of Science and Arts, 3rd series, 7.37 (January 1874): 1-9, Young, Robert, White Mythologies: Writing History and the West. New York: Routledge, 1990. Zeisberger, David, History ofthe Northem American Indians. Ed, Archer Butler Hulbert and William Nathaniel Schwarze. Ohio Archaeological and Historical Publications. Vol, 19. 1779-1780, Columbus: Ohio Archaeological and Historical Society, 1910. Zimmerman, Larry J, "Human Bones as Symbols of Power: Aboriginal American Belief Systems

BIBLIOGRAPHY

493

towards Bones and 'Grave-Robbing' Archaeologists." In Conflict in the Archaeology of Living Traditions. Ed. Robert Layton. New York: Routledge, 1994. 211-16. ." Made Radical by My Own: An Archaeologist Learns to Accept Reburial." In Conflict in the Archaeology of Living Traditions. Ed. Robert Layton. New York: Routledge, 1994. 60-67. . "Redwing." TTte Anthropology and Humanism Quarterly 11.1 (1986): 19-20. . "Regaining Our Nerve: Ethics, Values, and the Transformation of Archaeology." Ethics in American Archaeology: Challenges for the 1990s. Ed. Mark J. Lynott and Alison Wylie. Washington, D.C.: Society for American Archaeology, 1995. 64-67. . "Remythologizing the Relationship between Indians and Archaeologists." In Native Americans and Archaeologists: Stepping Stones to Common Ground. Ed. Nina Swidler, Kurt E. Dongoske, Roger Anyon, and Alan S. Downer. Walnut Creek, CA: AltaMira Press, 1997. 44-56. . "We Do Not Need Your Past! Politics, Indian Time, and Archaeology." In Beyond Subsistence: Plains Archaeology and the Postprocessual Critique. Ed. Philip Duke and Michael C. Wilson. Tuscaloosa: The University of Alabama Press, 1995. 28-45.

INDEX

Aberdeen stone mound, 90 Academy of Natural Sciences (Philadelphia), 35 Acosta, Jose de, xviii, 12-13, 14, 15, 18, 328 n(29) Act in Relation to Marriage between White Men and Indian Women (25 Stat. L., 392), 288-89 Acuiia, Rodolfo, xxii Adair, James, 277; on Ani-Kutanf, 166; on Cherokee, 155, 197, 202-3, 216,219, 234, 235; errors of, 389 n (295), 407 n (170); on Natives as "ten lost tribes of Israel," 18 "Adena," 89, 92; cremations of, 194; inception dates of, 156; as Moon-Eyed People, 156; mound of, 116; origin of term, 116; political use of term, 116, 117. See also Moon-Eyed People Adirondaks, 393 n (353) Africans, as Native Americans, 287,441 n (297) Agassiz, Louis, 39, 335 n (120); skull collecting of, 39 AIM. See American Indian Movement Aleut, 326 n (10); mummies of, 42-43 Alford, Thomas Wildcat [Gaynwawpiahsika], 121, 220, 375 n (92), 403 n (105); on astronomy, 203; on ghosts, 190-91; on Kokomthena, 375 n (87) Allen, Paula Gunn, 428 n (98)

Alligator Mound, 93, 95, 96, 365 n (251) , 377-78 n (126); attempted destruction of, 3 0 3 ^ ; as Water Panther, 365 n (247), 418 n (326) Alligewi. See Cherokee, Talligewi allotment. See Dawes Act of 1887 Altick, Arthur, 424 n (37) American Antiquarian Society, 34 American Association for the Advancement of Science, 41, 61, 363 n (215) American Association of Museums, 7 American Bureau of Ethnology, xvii, 339 n (183). See also Smithsonian Institution American Committee for the Preservation of Archaeological Collections (ACPAC), 255; Native American stereotypes of, 257 American Ethnological Society, 9 American Express Company, as sponsor of grave dig, 48 American Indian Center (Columbus, Ohio), 302, 305 American Indians Against Desecration, 7-8 American Indian Movement (AIM), xxi, xxv American Indian Religious Freedom Act (AIRFA) of 1978, 304; AIRFA Task Force, 260 American Museum of Natural History (New York), 7, 40, 41, 42, 44; treatment of Minik and Qisuk by, 46, 258 American Philosophical Society, 67 Amherst, Jeffrey, xx Anglo-Saxon Clubs of America, 297

496 NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

Ani-Kituhwagi {Kitu'hm), 160 Ani'-Kuta'ni, 161-66, 167, 392 n (339); control of disease of, 163, 212; as corrupt, 163,164; fate of, 163, 166, 393 n (346); fire of, 162, 212; founding tradition of, 162-63; invisibility of, 165; as rapists, 164, 165-66; revolt against, 163, 165-66; social hierarchy of, 162-63 Anishinabe. See Chippewa Anthony, Albert Seqaqknind, 274,436 n (220) Anthropology, 5, 6, 260; collecting of, 7-10, 40-41, 109-10, 258; development of, xi-xviii, 5-7passim, 9-19, 43; diffusionist theories of, 5S-64 passim, 76, 81, 88; as justifying colonialism, 6-7; stages-of-history thinking of, 27-28, 212, 63-64, 280-81, 332-33 n (85), 350 n (59), 359 n (170); on repatriation as power struggle, 278. See also archaeology, Mound-Builder myths, myths anthropometry, 41. See also craniometry, physiometrics Antiquities Act of 1906 (U.S. Pulic Law 59-209), 421-22 n (2) Anzaldtia, Gloria, 226 App, Austin, 320 n (50) Arapaho, 35 Archaeological Conservancy, 304—5 Archaeological Society of Ohio, 247-48; as hobbyist organization, 248, 424 n (41); as Ohio Indian Relic Collectors' Society, 247; Sugar Creek Valley, chapter of, 248, 267 Archaeology, anti-NAGPRA sentiment of, 254-61; "armchair scholars" of, 52, 344 n (6); bone collecting of, 7-9,40-41; bone studies of, 433 n (178); on "cannibalism," xiv, xx, 193-94, 315-16 n (8); colonialism of, 6-7; cultural mixing-and-matching of, 171-72, 418 n (326); "culturally unidentifiable" tactic of, 240,271-72, 275; as denying descendants of Mound Builders, 116, 117, 171, 270-71,434 n (200); destnictiveness of, 90, 91, 92, 363 n (219); development of, xiii-xx, 5-7 passim, 9-19, 326 n (13); disease studies of, 250-51; dismissal of eastem Natives

by, 239-40, 279-80, 298; dismissal of Natives by, 105, 171, 256-57, 259, 260, 261, 279; DNA studies of, 251-52; double standard of in grave digging, 251, 255, 267, 278-79, 306; on east-facing burials, 400 n (72); ethics codes of, 248-49, 273-74; Euro-forming of, 169, 394 n (1); failure of to study collections, 251, 268; fantasy element of, 268-70, passim; as "freeing" Natives from oral tradition, 272-73; grave digging/robbing of, 7,9,49; on Great Serpent Mound, 237-38; on "human sacrifice," xiv, 193; as identifying Mound-Builder descendants, 117, 171, 270-71; as ignoming Mound traditions, 116, 169, 272; modem myths of, xii, xviii; on mound color codes, 412-13 n (246); mound explanations of, 105, 237; on mounds as female archetype, 209,410 n (203); motivations of, 266-67, 269; Native American stereotypes of, 28, 30-31, 186, 257, 276; on Native remains as Euroamerican heritage, 255; on Native remains as "resources," 261; as necrophilia, 269, 430 n (122); ONE thinking of, 176, 186, 193; "partnership" model of, 261-62; poor records-keeping of, 267-68; public response to, 258-59; racism of, 8, 19-20, 88-89, 193-94, 250, 257, 259, 260,429 n (116), 433 n (178); relationship of to collectors, dealers, and hobbyists, 244, 247, 249, 254; remythologizing of, 262, 265-66; resistance to outside scholars of, 203; "Savagism" of, 64, 105-6, 115, 128, 159, 170; scientific challenges to, 327 n (19); as scoming oral tradition, IQ5-Spassim, 272-73, 275. See also Mound-Builder myths, myths Argoll, Captain, 178 Arikara, 48 Amiy Medical Museum, 35-39passim, 44, 337-38 n (145); deals of with Smithsonian, 39 Asad, Talal, xxii Atlantis, 14, 16, 52, 73-76, 143, 266 Attakullakulla, 158 Attiwendaronk, 393 n (353) Atwater, Caleb, 52, 69-70, 355 n (111); on

INDEX

497

328 n (30), 345 n (15); as two-way passage, 15, 16, 17, 328 n (30) Bering, Vitu s, 14 Berkhofer, Robert, xvi Bemal, Martin, xxii Bieder, Robert, 258, 266; on Darwin, 337 n (127); on Morton, 334 n (103); on skull collecting, 29 Biedma, Luis Hemandez de, 55 Bigfoot. See Misinkhdlikcin [The Masked Being] Blackfeet, 37 Blacksnake, Chief, 107, 109, 369-70 n (13) Blake, William, 175 B Blakey, Michael, 326 n (3) Blodgett, Officer Debbie, 241, 242 B & O Railroad, 92, 98 Blue Jacket. See Weyapiersenwah Baby, Raymond, 209 Bluejacket, Charles, 121, 184, 230 Bachman, John, 334 n (104) Bluejacket, George, 122, 123 Bailey, Garrick A., 370 n (21) Blumenbach, Johann Friedrich, 23, 26, 28, Baker, Emma Fielding, 149 30, 34, 342 n (223); on "degeneration," Baldwin, C. C , 353 n (89) 23-24; on "hybridity," 24-25; on Barbeau, C. M., 135 interspecies mating, 24-25, 331 n (70); as Barnes, Surgeon General J. K., 35 inventing "Malay race," 23, 25, 59; racist Barton, Benjamin Smith, 15, 17; on theories of, 23-25 Cherokee, 111,155; on Inuit, 329 n (37); Boas, Franz, 40,45, 46 47; bone collecting on Chinese voyages, 329-30 n (49); on of, 43^M; diary of, 43 land bridge, 15, 17; on Mahican, 145; on Mound Builders as Native American, 67, Bodely, Thomas, 110 bone collections, 7-9, 261; comparative 70, 87; on Mound Builders as Spanish, statistics on, 8; preservative methods of, 68; on Native American antiquity, 15; on 339 n (169). See also anthropology, Native Americans as light-skinned. 111; archaeology, Smithsonian Institution on Native American writing systems, 360 Booker, Russell, 422 n (4) n (178); on separate creations, 15, 329 n Boone, Daniel, 77 (38); on Shawnee arrival in North Boudinot, Elias, 18 America, 122 Bourbourg, Abbe E. Charles Brasseur de, Bartram, William, 197,409-10 n (202) 73-74, 75 Basque, 227,417 n (320) bow-and-arrow technology, 105, 130-31, Battiste, Marie, xxvi 133,157 Baudrillard, Jean, xiii Brace, Loring, 19 B.C. V5.B.C.E., 326-27 n (16) Brackenridge, Henry Marie, 59 bears, as Earth medicine, 175, 196,405 n Bradbury, John, 276 (130) Brainerd, David, on Lenape, 153, 174, 179, Beatty, Charles, 152; on Lenape migration 188, 212, 231, 400 n (72); as spreading traditions, 144, 147; on Lenape as disease, 373 n (54) Mound Builders, 151; Welsh story of, 79 Brebeuf, Jean de, 182, 188-89, 193; Beauchamp, William, 130, 133 execution of, 404 n (117) Bennett, John C , 359 n (171) Breckenridge, Clifton R., 286 Bering Strait, 10; land bri ge theory of, Brinton, Daniel Garrison, 169, 353 n (89), xvii-xviii, xxiii, l3-\9passim, 61, 62, 419 n (366); on Ani-Kuta hi, 163; on dog 70, 117, 122, 142, 143, 316-17 n (17),

Bering Strait theory, 70; on "Hindoo" Mound Builders, 69-70, 355 n (110); on mounds as cemeteries, 279; on Shawnee arrival in North America, 122; on skulls, 29; on subterranean passages, 102 Aupaumut [Hendrick], 145; on traditional interrelationships of eastern peoples, 150 Awiakta, Marilou, viii A 'wrUsdi' ["Little Deer"], 190 Aylesworth, Ashel, 365 n (251) Ayu"ini ["Swimmer"], 160, 161, 167 Aztec, xiv

498 NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

of dead, 221; on Great Hare, 396 n (28), 396-97 n (29), 297 n (34); on Great Homed Serpent, 416-17 n (311); on Lenape, 150; on Lenape motifs, 409 n (200); on Mound Builders as Native Americans, 67; on Shawnee, 108, 122-23; on reliability of oral tradition, 274; on tradition-keeping, 108, 122-23; on two-spirit philosophy, 181, 182; on Walam Olum, 141, 169; on wampum as writing, 360 n (178) British Association for the Advancement of Science, 43 Brodie, Fawn, 69, 354 n (95), 359 n (171) Brown, Jim, 171, 394-95 n (7) Brown, Joseph Epes, 170 Brown, William Wells, 1-2 Brownmiller, Susan, 320 n (55) Buckeye Lake, 93 Buffon, Georges-Louis Leclerc, Compte de, 33 I n (70), 332-33 n (85) Burdett, Frank, 424 n (37) Bureau of American Ethnology. See Smithsonian Institution Bureau of Indian AfTairs (BIA), 276, 285, 291; enrollment policies of, 289; skull collection of, 39; rules of on child enrollment, 289; rules of on spousal enrollment, 288-89,441-42 n (306). See also federal enrollment Buteux, Jacques, 235,420 n (368) Butler County Fort, 41

Cabral, Amilcar, xxii, 323 n (75) Cabrera, Doctor, 16 California Academy of Science, 40 Calliopean Society, 102 Cameron, Terry, 238 Camp Sherman, 98, 366 n (256); as Camp John Sherman, 101 Campbell, Joseph, 170 Camper, Pieter, 25-26, 28, 34 cannibalism, xiv, xx, 193-94, n 8 (315-16), 404 n (118), 404 n (119); as intra-Native slur, 194, 404 n (120) captivity narratives, 77-79 "Cardiff Giant," 134, 381 n (168) Carr, Lucien, 353 n (89); on Mound Builders as Native American, 67

Carter, George F., 318 n (35), 322 n (67), 322 n (67) Carter, Nick, 265 Cartier, Jacques, 128, 227, 417 n (320) Castaneda, Carlos, xix Catawba, 379n(152) Cathecassa ["Black Hoof"], 106, 123-25, 127 Caucasian, 23-25, 31-32; origin of term, 23 Cawthra, Henry, 408 n (186) Cayuga, 127, 131,334n(109) Celtic motifs, as interpolated into mound explanations, 209, 212 Central Silica Company (Zanesville, Ohio), 304-5 Champlain, Samuel de, 371 n (42) Chandler, Governor A. B., 246 Chaplain, Abraham, 358-59 n (167) Charlevoix., Pierre de, 371 n (42) Cherokee, xxiv, xxvi, 143, 271, 324 n (94), 398n(41);.4n/-A:Mto'/i/of, 160, 161-66, 212, 392 n (339), 393 n (346); astronomy of 201; as bringing circle-square O-D motif to Ohio, 200; as "Chalaque," 154, 389 n (295); clans of, 160, 391 n (313); com of, 159; dating traditions of, 155, 156, 157, 159, 388-89 n (281); development of democracy by, 166-68; as driven from Ohio, 147, 154, 156, 158; Eastem Band of, 295-96, 297, 444-45 n (340); enrollment bars to eastem Cherokee, 293-96; Euroamerican enrollments of, 290; Firekeepers of, 161; Freedmen enrollment of, 287; as freethinkers, 167; ground houses of, 135, 153, 197, 381 n (173); hereditary priestcraft of, 167; historical homelands of, 154-55, 158-59; hot houses of, 197, 199; as lroquoian people, 155, 388 n (279), 388 n (280); Kit u'hmof, 160, 286, 390-91 n (311); knowledge styles of, 108; as light-skinned. 111; migration traditions of, 155-56, 158-59, 226, 391 n (318); on Moon-Eyed People, 156, 200, 202,204, 237; as Mound Builders, 87, 89, 105, 117, 135, 158,159-60, 199, 362-63 n (209); mounds of, 160-61; North Carolina homeland of, 154, 293; Ohio homeland of, 155-56; outlawing of hereditary privileges by, 166; quantum-counting of, 297;

INDEX

powerfiil women of, 166-67, 217; rejection of religiosity by, 166, 167; rolls of, 293, 294; on Shawnee, 119; Spanish contact with, 154; spousal adoption of, 290; spousal enrollment of, 441-42 n (306); as Stone Giants (Stone Coats), 156-58, 164-65, 217; as Talligewi, 56, 87, 136, 146-47, 150-51, 386 n (232); Tennessee homeland of, 154-55, 158-59, 293; townhouses of, 391 n (312); Trail of Tears of, 412 n (240); as "Tsa-la-gi," 158; as Tsa'lagi'oT Tsa'ragl, 158, 389 n (295); warfare traditions of, 111,114. See also Cherokee spirituality. Native Americans Cherokee spirituality, adjacent circle C 0 motif of, 223; A 'w/'t/.s^i "[Little Deer] of, 190; booger [Earth ghosts] of, 216, 217; color codes of, 160, 177,218-19; circle in square H motif of, 223; circle motifs of, 409-10 n (202); circle-square O-D motif of, 197, 237; on cremation, 218, 219; Eagle of, 160, 227-28; on death, 190; on disease, 160, 166, 212, 393 n (345); dog of, 414 n (279); Earth medicine of, 157, 212, 217, 223; east-facing burials of, 185; east-facing prayer of, 186; elderhood of, 216-17,412 n (240); fire of, 157,161,162, 212, 216-17, 221-22, 223, 412 n (240); Fire Panther [Atsil'-Tluntu'tsi\ of, 201; Great Hare [Tsistu] of, 178, 396 n (28); Great Homed Serpent [Uktena] of, 160,177, 227, 232-34, 235, 237, 396 n (27), 416-17 n (311); invisibility of, 165, 177, 394 n (6); Little Men of, 394 n (6); mica of, 160; Milky Way of, 414 n (279); moon of, 202,407 n (169), 407 n (170); moon-sickness [menstruation] of, 157, 217; mystical mound fire of, 161; new medicine of, 167; owls of, 214; purification rite of, 223, 224, 415 n (282); rain-making of, 214; resuscitation of, 190, 202, 222; Selu and Kana '//"tradition of, 190, 222-23; shape-shifiing of, 214; Sky medicine of, 157, 162, 212, 217,414 n (279); Sky People of, 181; Snake Dance of, 232; spirit bowls of, 196, 214, 219-20; square D of, 237; sun of, 202,407 n (169); sweat lodge [ds/] of, 224; Thunder Boys of, 394 n (6); tobacco [Tso.lunego] of.

499

218-19; t//««sM'//[transparent] stone of, 160, 219, 233-39, passim, 396 n (27); water of, 214, 219-20, 221-22, 223, 233, 415 n (282); Wild Boy [I'nage-utasun'hi] of, 190, 222-23 Cheyenne, 35 Chicago Academy of Sciences, 61 Chicago Field Museum of Natural History, bone collecting of, 40,42,44; skull collecting of, 37 Chicago World's Fair (1893), 42, 245; Columbian Exposition of, 42, 116 Chickasaw, 286, 290, 294, 296, 398 n (41), 441-42 n (306), 442 n (314) Chillicothe mound group, 92 Chippewa [Anishinabe], 2, 58, 150, 185, 228 Chisolm, Jesse, 219, 393 n (351) Chitto Harjo, 3 ^ Chivington, Colonel John Milton, 35-36 Chivis, Fred, 429 n (117) Choctaw, 119, 135, 286, 287, 290, 296, 4 4 1 ^ 2 n (306), 442 n (314); as Mississippi Choctaw, 292 Choplin, Abraham, 358-59 n (167) Chouteau, Nancy, 215 , 235 Christianity, on dating Creation, 11; relationship to science of, 1, 2, 9-11,14; on Native American origins, 10, 12-14, 17-18; as never clarifying Native thought, 174-75; ONE-thinking of, 179 Church of Jesus Christ of the Latter-Day Saints, 81, 353-54 n (94); Mound-Builder mythology of, 68-69, 354 n (104) Churchill, Ward, vii, 404 n (118) Cincinnati Tablet, 83, 84, 360-61 n (179) Circle Mound. See Great Circle Mound. Circleville mound complex, 69 Clark, Clarence D., 4 Clark, General George Rogers, 398 n (41); on ancient Native warfare, 113; on high Native populations, 65, 113; on Natives as Mound Builders, 56, 58, 346-47 n (26); on Native traditions of the mounds, 107,110 Clark, Jerry, 118-19, 377-78 n (126) Clarke, Peter Dooyentate, Christian interpolations of, 128-29, 378 n (129); on European first arrival, 417 n (320); on Iroquoian migrations, 128, 131-32; on White Panther, 228 Clarke's Works, 116-17

500 NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

Clasop, 429n(117) Clavigero, Francesco Saverio, Abbe, 12 Clements, Govemor Frank, 246 Cliff Dwellers, 167,409 n (190) Clifton, James, xx Clinton, De Witt, 72, 129, 139; on Seneca, 136 Cloudland Eagle, 226 Clovis,xvii, ll,318n(35) Clovis points, 11-12 Cobum, Representative John, 35 Code of Handsome Lake. See Gaiwi:yo Cody, "Buffalo Bill," 101 Colden, Cadwallader, 120, 137 Colonialism, xxii, 5; Christian foundational stories of, 5-7; "scientific" foundational stories of, 6, 20-26; racist theories of, 19-21. See also monogenesis, polygenesis Columbus, Christopher, xiii-xiv, xvi, xviii, 11,32, 130, 315 n (8), 357 n (150) Columbus mound, 91-92, 93 Coma, Guillermo, 315 n (8) Combe, George, 30, 32-33 Cook, James, Captain, 15 Cooper, James Fenimore, 332-33 n (85) Coowescoowe [Chief John Ross], 164 Comelius, Reverend Elias, 106, 160 Complanter, Jesse, 191 Coronado, Francisco Vazquez de, xiii Cowichan, 43, 44 Crandell, Grandmother Barbara, v, vi, vii, 105; attempt to block auction by, 240-41; on "blabbermouth" bones, 251; on eastem Natives, 240; as halting destruction of Alligator Mound, 304; as leading prayers at Octagon-Circle complex, 307; as preventing Kirkersville grave removal, 305; skull purchase of, 50, 241-44; watch by at Great Circle Mound dig, 302-3; on Wilson Mound, 304 craniometry, 26,28, 30-35, 58, 70, 250, 349-50 n (51); "cranial capacities" of, xvi, 31-32, 60, 62; female "cranial capacities" of, 340-41 n (202); Franz Boas on, 43-44; methods of, 25-26, 28-29, 32; political uses of, 58; racist theory of, 25, 28-29, 32-34, 59; ranking of races by, 58, 60-63 passim; U.S. governmental involvement in, 35-39. See also anthropometry, phrenology, physiometrics

Creek. See Muscogee. Crews, Ann. See Goo Chee, Doo Chee, Tuchee Croghan, Colonel George, 122 Crookshanks, Dr., 60, 74 Cross, Frank Moore, 362 n (198) Crow, 428 n (98) Cmz, Robert, 278, 279 Cunningham, William, 86 Curley, 277-78 Curtis Act (30 Stat. L., 221), 284,290, 292-93 Cusick, Albert, 378 n (129) Cusick, Chief David, 128, 379 n (152), 379 n (153); Christian interpolations of, 128-29, 378 n (129); datings of, 130-31; on Great Homed Serpent, 231; on lroquoian migrations, \2%-'!>2passim; on Iroquois in Ohio, 130; on Holder of Heavens, 381 n (174); Mound-Building instructions of, 136; on early shipwrecked voyagers, 357 n (150) Custer, George Armstrong, 61-62, 265, 349 n (48), 432 n (161)

Dall, Dr. W. H., 38 Dancey, William, 105 Darwin, Charles, 28, 281; role of in developing racist theory, 26-27, 34, 336-37 n(127) Darwin, Erasmus, 332-33 n (85) Davenport Tablets, 85 Davey, John, 78 Davis, Dr. Edwin Hamilton, 52, 64, 83, 350 n (59); on Alligator mound, 93, 96, 365 n (251); Atlantean theory of, 75; on Cincinnati Tablet, 83; on Clarke's Works, 116; on contradictions in migration theory, 67; diffusionist theories of, 60, 62; on faux inscriptions, 81; on Grave Creek stone, 81; on Mound City, 96, 366 n (255); on stone mounds, 357-58 n (151); on Spruce Hill Fort, 91; on Toltec-Peruvian theory, 63 Dawes Act of 1887, 280, 282, 438 n (258); allotments under, 282; effect of, 284; Native resistance to 282,283; as preventing eastem Natives from enrolling, 292; purpose of, 280, 282-83,284, 295. See also Dawes Commission, federal

INDEX 501

enrollment Dawes Commission, 2S3-96 passim; applications to, 285, 296; as barring eastem Native enrollment, 291-96 passim; creation of 283-84; dissolution of, 296; enrollment procedures of, 285-90; enrollment statistics of, 296; as forced to recognize Mississippi Choctaw, 292-93; in/eligibilities under, 288-89, 291, 293, 294, 295; as limiting enrollment, 288-96 passim; methods of, 285; powers of, 284; quality of work of, 286-87; quantumcounting of, 285-86, 296; rolls of, 28290, 296; spousal enrollments of, 290, 441-42 n (306). See also Dawes Act of 1887, federal enrollment Dawes Era, 240, 297, 298. See also Dawes Act of 1887, Dawes Commission, federal enrollment Dawes Rolls, 2S2-96 passim, 297; as "Indian census," 280, 290-91. See also Dawes Act of 1887, Dawes Commission, federal enrollment Dean, Jeffrey S., 108, 273 De Boer, Warren, 394-95 n (7), 413 n (250); on circle-square O - D motif, 199-200; on color codes, 218; on copper-mica juxtapositions, 218; on mediated circlesquare O=>D motif, 212; on two-by-four logic, 199; on Water Panther, 418 n (326) DeBow, J. D. B., 335n(120) De Bry engraving, 56, 57 DeLisleMap, 119, 155 Debo, Angie, 283 Decalogue Stone, 86 degeneration, racist theory of, 23-24,26, 27, 281, 282, 331 n (66), 342 n (223) Delaware. See Lenape Deloria, Vine, Jr., xviii, xxi, xxiii, xxiv, 14, 19, 324 n (88); on Bering Strait theory, 328 n (30) 'Department of the Interior, 285, 286, 289, 290,291 De'watd'yu'ru ncf', 135 Dickson Mounds State Museum (Kampsville, Illinois), 48 discourse styles, African, 1-2; Chinese, 2; Euroamerican, 1-4 paisi'm; Native American, xx-xxvi, \-Apassim, 108-10 "Discovery Doctrine," 320 n (49) disease, 250-51, 351 n (72), 372-73 n (53);

as accidentally spread by Europeans, xx, 114 DNA, viii, 251-52 Do [sic] Drop Inn Antique Store, 241 Dobyns, Henry F., xxii, xxiii, documentary genocide, 240, 280, 296-98, 422 n (4). See also Dawes Rolls, federal enrollment Donck, Adrieaen van der, 153, 371 n (42), 384 n (202), 388 n (268), 400 n (72) Donkers, Jasper, 207 Donnan, Christopher B., 249 Donnelly, Ignatius, 15-l(i, 143 Dorfeuille's Museum (Cincinnati), 48 Dorsey, George A., 37 Drake, Samuel Gardner, 353 n (89); on Bering Strait theory, 16; on "ten lost tribes of Israel" theory, 18; as polygenecist, 16; on Welsh theory, 80, 358 n (153); on "wild theories" of Native origins, 344 n (7) Drinnon, Richard, 352 n (78) Ducoign, Chief Baptist, 113 Duran, Diego, 18 Durham, Jimmie, xxii

Eagle. See Cherokee spirituality, Cloudland Eagle, Eagle-Serpent nexus, Iroquoian spirituality, Lenape spirituality. Mound Builders, Native American spirituality, Shawnee spirituality Eagle Mound, 101, 228, 229, 367 n (275) Eagle-Serpent nexus, 126-71% passim, 416 n (310), 417-18 n (325) Earth medicine. See Cherokee spirituality, Iroquoian spirituality, Lenape spirituality. Mound Builders, Native American spirituality, Shawnee spirituality earthquakes, 164-65 Echo-Hawk, Roger, 275,436 n (227) Edgar, Governor Jim (Illinois), 49 Edwin Harness Mound, 422-23 n (113) £gM5/iawa,443n(318) Elia, RicardoJ., 261 Eliade, Mircea, 170 Elliot, J. H., xxiii Ellis, H. Holmes, 246, 247 Engel-Eiden site, 253

502 NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

enrollment. See federal enrollment Erdrich, Louise, 2 Erie, 127, 132, 137, 139, 246, 269; ossuary mounds of, 137; as westem Seneca, 270, 379 n (152), 393 n (353) Erie Canal, 72, 90 Eskimo, 326 n (10) ethnology, 1, 110. See also anthropology, archaeology Etowah mound, 346 n (19) Eubanks, William, 156, 233 eugenics, 27, 47, 173, 281-82, 289, 295, 296-97, 298, 332 n (79), 438 n (259), 439 n(264) Euro-forming, 1 ^ , 178-79, 216, 221,419 n (366); cure for, 173; as defined, 169; of Iroquoian spirituality, 170; ONE concept of, 173, 176; problem of, 169-70, 176, 394 n ( l ) Evans, Dr. J. B., 164

Fanon, Frantz, xxii Famham, Thomas J., 276-77 Faulkner, Charies, 199 Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), 242, 264, 302 federal enrollment, 240, 279, 284,442 n (308); of Afincan American Natives, 287; as benefits determination, 298, 446 n (360); as "census," 280, 290-91; as creating false identities, 308; as defining Natives out of existence, 291; eastem Natives as debarred from, 280, 291-96 passim, 308; eugenics of, 281-82, 297-98, 308; of Euroamericans, 2%1-90 passim, 442 n (314); fi'audulence of, 286-88; of Freedmen, 287,441^2 n (306); Native resistance to, 283, 286; as not dependent on Native descent, 285, 294,295; as pitting Natives against one another, 289-90, 308; purpose of, 282; qualifications for, 285; quantum-counting of, 28Q-?,2passim, 285-86, 289, 297, 308; as racist system, 280, 297-98, 308; relationship of to Dawes allotment, 280; as slighting eastem Natives, 280; as touchstone of "authentiticty," 280, 290, 308. See also Dawes Act of 1887, Dawes

Commission feminism, xx, xxiv, 256, 320 n (55) Fenton, William, 182 Ferguson, T. J., 261, 262, 429 n (116) Femald Environmental Management Project, 312 Femald Residents for Environmental Safety and Health (FRESH), 312 Fields, Jerry L., 274 Filson, John, 14, 77, 80 Finzel, Roger, 7 Fire-Water nexus, 212-26 passim, 238. See, also, Cherokee spirituality, Iroquoian spirituality, Lenape spirituality. Native American spirituality. Mound Builders, Shawnee spirituality Fischer, Michael, 6 "Five Civilized Tribes," 290 Fletcher, Robert, 238 Flint Ridge stone mound, vi, 92-93, 364 n (238), 364-65 n (239) Fogelson, Raymond, 162, 164, 393 n (346) Folsom, xvii, 11 Fol som points, 11 Foot, Lyman, 29, 30 Force, F. M., 353 n (89) Fort Ancient, 41, 98, 99, 367 n (274), 377-78 n (126); culture of as Shawnee 90, 117, 118, 127, 434-35 n (203); pavements of, 367-68 n (277); as trading with Cahokia, 126, 377 n (125); as trading with Iroquois, 126 Fort Brady, 29 Fort Harker, 37 Fort Hill works, 208-9 Fort Lyon, 36 Fort Meigs, 306 Fort Pitt, 78 Foster, John Wells, 61-62, 74, 349 n (48), 349 n (50) Foundation of Illinois Archaeology, 48 Four Winds, 179, 180, 223, 230 Fowke, Gerald, 88, 90, 91, 102, 360 n (178); on Mound Builders as "barbarians," 88-89; on Mound City, 366 n (255) Franks site, 263 Franquelin Map, 118, 119 Freedmen, 286-87,441 n (297), 442 n (308) Frey, S.L., 137, 279,400 n (72) Friends of the Mound, 306, 310

INDEX

Froehlick, Joseph, 92, 364 n (237) Frohman, Charles E., 247 Fryer, B. E., 37, 38 Fryxell, Roald, 318 n (35) Fusang, 17, 329 n (49)

Gaihonariosk, 131,147 Gaiwi.yo {Code of Handsome Lake), 109, 215,236 Galeano, Eduardo, xxii Gall, Franz Josef, 29, 334 n (103) Gallatin, Albert, 9, 59, 326 n (15) Galton, Francis, 27, 281-82, 332 n (79), 336-37 n (127), 438 n (259), 439 n (264) Garcia, Gregorio, 73, 328 n (29), 356 n (128) Garden of Eden, 10, 331 n (66) genocide, terminology of, 351-52 n (77) "Gentleman of Elvas," 55, 154 Gest, Erasmus, 83, 84 Gibson, John, 386 n (232) Gila National Forest (New Mexico), 49 Gladstone, William Edward, 75 Glidden, George, 61, 335 n (120) Gobineau, Joseph-Arthur, compte de, 33, 159-60, 335 n (123); 335-36 n (124) Goguet, Antoine-Yves, 27, 28 Goldstein, Lynne, 278 Goo Chee, Doo Chee, Tuchee [Ann Crews], 294; family of, 294, 444 n (336) Goodman, Dr. Alan, viii, 252 Gould, Stephen Jay, on development of racism, 21-22; on Samuel Morton, 31-32, 334 n (103) Graded Way, 91 Graham Village site, as Shawnee, 271, 434-35 n(203) Gramsci, Antonio, xv Grand Rapids Public Museum, 429 n (117) Grave Creek Mound (West Virginia), 48 as "open air museum," 48, 343 n (227) Grave Creek stone, 81-83, 359 n (172), 359 n(177) grave robbing,7, 9, 34-35,43,44,48-50, 240, 241, 244, 249, 252-54, 276; methods of, 37, 248-49; as public entertainment, 49; public response to, 49-50, 245, 258-59, 305; as "vulture culture," 325 n (1)

503

Great Black Swamp, 443 n (322) Great Cahokia Mound Group, 247 Great Circle Mound, 101-2; as amusement park, 101, 367 n (274); archaeological digs at, 101,102, 301-3; Eagle Mound of, 101, 228, 229; as Moundbuilders State Memorial Park, 102 Great Hare, 178, 179-80, 187, 234, 297 n (34), 403 n (103); as African Br'er Rabbit, 396 n (28); as Earth spirit, 178, 192; medicine bag of, 236; as Michabo, 178, 396-97 n (29); as Sky spirit, 178, 180. See also Cherokee spirituality, Iroquoian spirituality, Lenape spirituality. Native American spirituality, Shawnee spirituality Great Hopewell Road, 99, 139, 205, 382-83 n(193) Great Homed Serpent, 215, 226, 228, 236, 396 n (27), 416-17 n (311), 421 n (390); as antedating Eagle, 236-37; as diseasecausing, 231, 232, 234; as Earth medicine, 134; fiint as homs of, 236; interaction with Thunderers of, 234-35; medicine pouch of, 233, 235, 236; mica as scales of, 134, 160, 231, 235, 236; as rain-maker, 231, 235; as woman-connected, 232. See also Cherokee spirituality, Iroquoian spirituality, Lenape spirituality. Native American spirituality, Shawnee spirituality Great Serpent Mound, 93, 94, 365 n (244), 416-17 n (311); as Great Homed Serpent, 237; as observatory, 237-38 "Great Spirit," as missionary imposition, 123,172; as New Age interpolation, 172. See also missionaries Greber, N'omi, 212,405 n (131) Greenman, E. F., 116 Greenville Treaty, 278 Griffin, James B., 118,405 n (131) Grinde, Donald A., Jr., xxii, xxiii, xxiv Grossman, Anita Sue, 257 Grumet, Robert, 383-84 n (201) Guilliford, Andrew, 49

H Haas, Mary R., 372 n (46) Haese, Nastassia, 243

504 NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

Hakluyt, Richard, 76 Hale, Horatio, 380 n (156), 411 n (219) Hall, Robert, 170, 395 n (10); christianizations of, 180; on color codes, 218; Mahican descent of, 172; mixing and matching of, 172; on "vulviform motif," 209 Ham [son of Noah], 18 Hamilton, John E., 49 Hammil, Jan, 278, 279 Hammond, Army Surgeon General William A., 35; memo of, 36, 38 Hardman, Clark, Jr., 237-38 Hardman, Marjorie H., 237-38 Harper, Kenn, 258 Harrington, M. R., 383-84 n (201) Harrison, William Henry, 66, 99; on MoimdBuilder war for Ohio, 252 n (80) Harvard University, 42,47. See also Peabody Museum Haven, Samuel, 34, 353 n (89) Haw6nib', 135 Haywood, Judge John, 70, 159,164, 381 n (173); on Ani'-Kuta'ni, 163, 166; on Cherokee, 135, 154-55, 202, 214, 216, 375 n (81), 391 n (318); on Cherokee clans, 391 n (313); on Cherokee migration, 154, 159, 390 n (303); Christian interpolations of, 152, 390 n (300); on Lenap6, 144, 152; MoundBuilder theories of, 70, 355 n (112); on Mound Builders as "white," 70, 110; on Shawnee, 118, 119; on Native writing system, 383-84 n (201) Heckewelder, John, 56, 145, 147; on Great Black Swamp, 443 n (322); on Iroquoian migrations, 129, 131; on Iroquoian Mississippi River, 380 n (154); on Lenape burials, 256; on Lenape migrations, 56, 145, 146, 148; on Lenapd reincamation, 188; on Lenapi sweat lodges, 226; on Nanticoke concem for dead, 276; on Native discourse styles, 109; on Shawnee arrival in North America, 122; on Taltigewi-Alligewi, 386 n (232); on wampum as writing, 360 n (178) Hemings, Sally, 353-54 n (94) Henige, David, xxiii, 324 n (85) Henry, Joseph, 39 Henshaw, H. W., 38

Hermstein, Richard, xvi Herodotus, 61, 348-49 n (45) Hewitt, J[ohn] N[apoleon] B[rinton], on Alligewi, 386 n (232); on bumed bones, 192; on fire, 215,417 n (315); on Great Homed Serpent, 232; on raising and lowering of Sky, 409 n (199); on twospirit philosophy, 181, 182 Hicks, Chief Charles R., 159, 164; on AniKutani, 162,163,166; Christianizations of, 390 n (300) High Bank Earthworks, as connected with Newark Octagon-Circle complex, 205, 408 n (186); as observatory, 205 Hildreth, S. P., 64 Hinde, Thomas S., 79, 80, 110, 358-59 n (167) Hinsley, Curtis M., 278 Hirriga ["Ucita"], 55 Historical and Philosophical Society of Ohio, 66 Hitakonanu'laxk{" TtttBQw:A"], 149, 196, 208,216, 328 n (30), 407 n (165) Hively, Ray, 203-5 Hodaderion, 189 Hoei-Shin, 17 Holmes, William Henry, xvii Holstein, Dr. Theodore, 49 Hooge, Paul, 365 n (251) Hooton, Eamest Albert, 47, 62, 342 n (222); on Pecos Pueblo remains, 342 n (223) "Hopewell," 163; as Cherokee, 91, 158, 160; origin of term, 116-17; political use of term, 116, 117. See also Cherokee Hopewell Road. See Great Hopewell Road. Hopi, 108, 274, 297,429 n (117), 436 n (227) Hom, Robert, 203-5 Homed Serpent. See Great Homed Serpent Horsman, Reginald, 331 n (73) Hoy, P. R., 353 n (89) Hrdlidka, Ale§, 44,47, 340-41 n (202), 341 n (207); bone collecting of, 44-47, 341 n (209); control of American anthropology of, xvii, 45; on female "cranial capacities," 340-41 n (202); on Native American time frames, xvii, 317 n (27); physiometrics of, 45-46; treatment of Minik and Qisuk by, 46-47 Hudson, Charies, 154, 372-73 n (53), 373 n

INDEX

505

Mother Earth of, 187; ossuaries of, 137, 140, 189; otkon of, 175,178,192, 227, 231-32, 236, 399 n (59), 420 n (377); reincarnation of, 188, 189, 380 n (158); resuscitation of, 187, 188-90, 402 n (99), 402-3 n (100); Sacred Twins (Sapling and Flint) of, 179,187, 215, 218, 397 n (37); Sapling of, 215, 380 n (158), 381 n (174), 401 n (88), 411 n (219); shininess of, 130; Sky-Earth nexus of, 179, 193; Sky I medicine of, 136, 179, 214, 215,401 n (88), 409 n (199); Sky People of, 181; Sky Idlewild Park, 101 Spirits of, 175, 182, 184, 188; Sky Woman Illinois State Museum, 48 of, 181, 187, 227, 232,401 n (88), 414 n Imlay, Gilbert, 80, 358-59 n (167) (279), 415 n (291); Sky World of, 227; Indian Ridge Museum (Eyria, Ohio), 7, shape-shifting of, 231; Sun of, 175,201-2, 253-54, 265, 269; as dealers' meeting site, 215, 417 n (315); sweat lodge of, 224, 254 415-16 n (293); Thunderers of, 175, Indians of All Tribes, xxi 226-27; tobacco of, 215,415 n (291); Indigenous People's Council on BiocolonTurtle of, 175; two-by-four logic of, 179; ialism, 252 two-spirit philosophy of, 182, 184, 188; Inuit, 258, 328 n (30) uki of, 175; uki-otkon complementarity of, Iroquoian spirituality, bear medicine of, 175, 381 n (169); vampire skeletons [cannibal 405 n (130); bone marrow of, 189, 191-93 ghosts] of, 191-93, 196, 220; vision diets passim; burst skulls of, 192, 196; on of, 415 n (291); vision questers of, 129, ceremonial time, 170; on color codes, 177, 175, 208, 220,409 n (199); water of, 214, 218, 396 n (24); concentric semicircles of, 220, 224; White Panther of, 228. See also 208; complementarity of, 175; on Iroquois, Iroquois League cremation, 192; on death as invisible man, Iroquois, xxii, 118,127,143, 271, 324 n 165, 396 n (24); defleshing of, 189,196; (94), 334 n (109), 377 n (125), 384 n Direction of the Sky of, 201,218; dreams (210), 388 n (279); alliance of with of, 215; Dwarfs of, 228, 236,420 n (379); Lenap6,146; astronomy of, 201; bow-andEagle of, 175, 227, 228; Earth lights of, arrow technology of, 130,133; cannibal 183-84, 399 n (59); Earth medicine of, traditions of, 402 n (99), 404 n (120); on 134,136,179,192, 214, 227; Earth spirits "Cardiff Giant," 134, 381 n (168); cornof, 180-81, 182,183-84,189,220; eastcropping of, 201; dating traditions of, 130, facing burials of, 185; east-facing prayer 133,157; definition of Mississippi River of, 186, 215, 218; on eggs as ominous, by, 132; development of democracy by, 237; False Faces of, 218; Feast of the 137, 139^0, 167-68,404 n (120); on Dead of, 182, 188-89, 398-99 n (53); fire disease, 174, 373 n (54), 396 n (24); as of, 192, 215,417 n (315); Flying Heads driving Cherokee Mound Builders from of, 402-3 n 000); ^osts [jiskeh] of, Ohio, 129,136, 147, 156, 158; first 183-84, 220; Great Hare [Quara] of, 178, contact tradition of, 227; gendering of, 192; Great Homed Serpent of, 175, 401 n (88); geographical spread of 226-27,231-32,234-355; mounds of, 137-39; migration traditions HaskotahiShaks [The Brain Sucker] of, of, 128-33,147,148-49, 226; as 188, 196; invisibility of, 177, 187, 218; "Mingo," 395 n (8); as Mound Builders, Longhouse religion of, 215; love medicine 89,136-40, 270; Mound-Builder of, 236; medicine bags of, 235-36; traditions of, 105,135,136; mound Midwinter dog of, 414 n (279); Milky highways of, 139, 383 n (195); as in New Way Trail of, 184; moon of, 201-2;

(54) Hueyatlaco archaeological site, 12 Hultkrantz, Ake, 170,171,185; on two-spirit philosophy, 181, 186 Humboldt, Friedrich Wilhelm Heinrich Alexander, Baron von, 60 Hunter, Shar, 304 hybridity, racist theory of, 24-25, 281

506 NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

York, 113, 126, 128, 131-32; rejection of Christianity by, 174; rejection of warfare by, 373-74 n (60); residence in Ohio of, 113, 128, 129-31 passim, 147; rivalry of with Lenape, 148; "seven-span skin" of, 311; split from Cherokee of, 155; "stick of enlistment" of, 384 n (202); Stone Giants of, 129, 133-34, 136, 151, 156, 380-81 n (167); as tall people, 133-34, 380 n (163); traditional naming practices of, 433 n (185); as "uncles," 150; as "white"skinned people, 111-12, 371 n (42); warfare traditions of, 114,130, 134-35, 137. See also Cayuga, Erie, Iroquoian spirituality, Iroquois League, Mohawk, Native Americans, Oneida, Onondaga, Seneca, Tuscarora, Wyandot Iroquois League, xxii, xxiii, 369-70 n (13); Adodaroh of, 140, 141, 214, 404 n (120); Ayonwantha of, 140, 220, 380 n (158), 404 n (120); as fighting Miami, 377 n (125); founding of, 115, 137, 139-40, 274-75, 382 n (191); invitations of to other nations, 393 n (353); Jigonsaseh of, 140; as model of democracy, xxii, xxiii, 140; as moving Lenape into Ohio, 150; Peacemaker of, 137, 139, 214, 382 n (191), 404 n (120); war of against the French, 404 n (117); White Roots Road of, 139, 383 n (195)

Jackson, President Andrew, 65-66, 277, 351-52 n (77), 352 n (78) James, George, xxii Jasper stone mound, 90 Jefferson, Thomas, 2, 369 n (10); on Bering Strait migration, xviii; on Buffon, 332-33 n (85); on interspecies mating, 331 n (70); on Mound Builders as Native American, 66-67, 70, 352 n (82); on Native traditions of the mounds, 107; Removal plan of, 352 n(78) Jeffries, John P., 33, 59, 61, 72; on Bering Strait, 335 n (122); on Shawnee arrival in North America, 122, 125; on "ten lost tribes of Israel" theory, 68, 71, 355 n (116) Jennings, Francis, 319-20 n (48), 351 n (72)

Johansen, Bruce E., xxii, xxiii, xxiv Johnson, Allen, 135 Johnson, Chief Elias, on Ayonwantha/ Tarachiawagon, 380 n (158); on Iroquoian migrations, 132; on Onondaga, 380-81 n (167); on origin of Iroquois, 129; on Tuscarora, 379 n (153) Johnston, John, 122, 123, 124, 125 Johnston, LaDow, 247 joined continent theories, 16, 70. See also Bering Strait Joktans, 68, 353-54 n (94) Jones, David, 121 Jones, Laura, 341 n (207) jumars, 23 Jung, Carl, 170

K Kaestle, Fredericka, 252, 426 n (73) Kahokias,398n(41) Kamchatka, 15 Kames, Henry Home, 26, 28 Kane, Paul, 58 Kaskaskia, 113,398n(41) Kayrahoo, John, 236 Kelly, Horace, 74 Ker, Henry, 77, 358 n (153) Kinderhook "brass" plates, 85 Kingston, Maxine Hong, 2 Kintigh, Keith, 278 Kiowa, 35 Kirkersville (Ohio), grave preservation, 305 Kirkland, John Thornton, 129, 131 Kitu' hwa Mound, 161 Kline, George, viii Kokomthena. See Shawnee spirituality Koons, Shawn, 243-44 Korp, Maureen, 117, 170, 174; on cremation, 195; on female archetype of mounds, 410 n (203); on "human sacrifice," 193; mixing-and-matching of, 185-86; on red ochre, 218 Kraft, Herbert C , 143 Kroeber, Alfred, xix Ku Klux Klan, 296 Kubler-Ross, Elisabeth, 332 n (83) Kwakiutl, 43

INDEX

La Florida, 13 La Flesche, Francis, 108, 370 n (21) Lachler, Jordan, viii Ladder of Creation, 10, 23, 26, 27, 30, 39 Lafitau, Joseph Franfois, 371 n (42), 384 n (202); on dog of dead, 221; on lroquoian migrations, 129, 131; on lroquoian mound-building, 137; on two-spirit philosophy, 182 La Harpe, Jean Baptiste, Benard de 56, 346 n (22), 353-54 n (94) Lahontan, Armond Louis de Delondarce, Baron de, 380 n (163), 415-16 n (293) Lalemant, Jerome, 119 Langley, Samuel P., 41 L'Anse aux Meadows [Newfoundland], 72 Larkin, Dr. Frederick, 70-71, 99, 107, 193, 349 n (49), 351 n (68), 369-70 n (13), 403 n(113) Larsen Bay Village, 45, 341 n (209) Lartet, Louis, 339 n (169) Las Casas, Bartoleme de, 12 Le Jeune, Paul, 371 n (42), 415-16 n (293) Le Moyne, Jacques, 56 Leakey, Louis, 318 n (35) Lederer, John, 209; on Algonkin burials, 408 n (186); on Cherokee, 159; on circle motifs, 207; on killing of prisoners, 403 n (113); on Lenape, 141, 181,401 n (81) Lenape, xxiv, 45,271, 324 n (94), 334 n (109); agriculture of, 200,414-15 n (281); alliance of with Iroquois, 146; astronomy of, 201; concentric circle motif of, 207-8; Dawnland of, 147; dating traditions of, 145,147, 149-50; development of democracy by, 154,167-68; on disease, 373 n (54); as driving Cherokee Mound Builders out of Ohio, 147, 156,158; first contact tradition of, 227; geneaological traditions of, 141^2; Giants of, 151, 156; as "Grandfather Nation," 150; as light skinned, 371 n (42); migration traditions of, 140, 143-50, 226, 385 n (222); as Moravian converts, 384 n (210); MoundBuilder traditions of, 105, 145-49; as Mound Builders, 87, 89, 151-52; mound farming of, 152, 200; mounds of, 152-53, 161; Munsee of, 387 n (253), 409 n (195); Ohio homeland of, 147, 148, 150;

507

rejection of Mound-Builder cosmology by, 153-54; relationship of to Mohegan, 385 n (226); Removal of, 276; rivalry of with Iroquois, 148; on "scissors strategy," 6, 325-26 n (2); on Shawnee, 122; stone mounds of, 87, 90, 153; on Talligewi Mound Builders, 146-47,150-51; thefl of Cherokee medicine bundle by, 167; timekeeping methods of, 384 n (202); warfare traditions of, 113, 114, 146-47; writing system of, 141, 360 n (178), 383-84 n (201), 384 n (202). See also Lenape spirituality, Mahican, Mohegan, Native Americans Lenap6 spirituality, bear medicine of, 196; burials of, 256; circle motifs of, 207-8; color codes of, 256; Eagle of, 151; Earth lights of, 183; Earth medicine of, 151, 179, 212, 224; Earth spirits of, 182-83, 187, 189, 220, 399 n (55); east-facing burials of, 186; east-facing prayer of, 186; exposed bones of, 191; Feast ofthe Dead of, 183; fire of, 212, 215, 216, 224; ghosts of, 183, 191; Great Hare of, 178,179, 396 n (28), 397 n (33); Great Homed Serpent of, 226, 230-31, 235; invisibility of, 220; land ofthe dead of, 183; lunar calendar of, 216; medicine bags of, 231,235,420 n (372); mica of, 231, 235; moon of, 202, 216,407 n (165); mound cosmology of, 153; Mother Earth of, 197; Misinkhdlikan [The Masked Being] of, 220; numerology of, 216,411 n (233), 411-12 n (234); paired semicircle motif of, 207-8,409 n (195); rain-making of, 212, 226, 235,420 n (471); reincarnation of, 187-88,401 n (81); resuscitation of, 188, 202; Seven Thunderers of, 226; Sky-Earth nexus of, 178-79; Sky medicine of, 179, 212, 224; Sky People of, 181; Sky spirits of, 182-83,184,188; Sky spirits of as traveling south of Sky, 153, 183, 184-85, 188,400 n (72); Sky Woman of, 181; snake skins of, 231; Sun [Nux Kishux] of, 216; sweat lodge [machttdzin] of, 216, 224, 415-16 n (293); tobacco of, 231; tornados of, 235; two-spirit philosophy of, 182-83; view of Christian god of, 208; vision quests of, 188,215, 224,411-12 n (234); water of, 220, 224.

508 NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

See also Lenape, Native American spirituality Leon, Juan Ponce de, xiii Lepper, Bradley, 101, 162, 362 n (198); on Alligator mound as Water Panther, 365 n (247), 418 n (326); on Great Hopewell Road, 99, 139, 205, 382-83 n (193) Lescarbot, Marc, 415-16 n (293) Leupp, Francis, 276,416 n (310); on purpose of enrollment, 291 Levering, Robert E. H., 81 Levi-Strauss, Claude, 170 Lindestrom, Peter, on grave robbing, 276; on Lenape, 220,231; on Lenap6 planting mounds, 152, 200 Linnaeus, Carolus [Carl von Linn6], 21-22, 23, 30; "humors" theory of, 21 Lipe, William D., 90, 363 n (219) Little Complanter, Chief, 119 Llancarfan, Caradoc of, 76, 77, 357 n (149) Logan mounds, 98 Longfellow, Henry Wadsworth, 72-73,424 n(34) looting. See grave robbing Lore, David, 447 n (17) Loskiel, George Henry, on Alligewi, 386 n (232); on ancient Native warfare, 113; on Great Hare, 397 n (33); on Lenape, 142, 174, 181, 231, 401 n (81), 411-12 n (234); on Lenape mounds, 152-53; on Native writing, 360 n (178); on spirit travel, 153, 400 n(72) Louisiana Purchase, 369 n (10) Lounsbury, Floyd, 133, 388-89 n (281) Lowes, Warren, xxii, 322 n (71) Lowrey, Grady N., 391-92 n (320) Lubbock, John, 27-28, 333 n (91), 353 n (89) Lyell, George, 11

M MacGowan, Dr. D. J., 164,166, 392 n (339) MacLean, John Patterson, 92, 99,107, 111 MacNeish, Richard S. "Scotty," 318 n (35) Magizi Consulting, 305 Mahican, 145, 150 Mahudel, Nicolas, 27 Malde, Harold E., 318 n (35) Mandan, 71

Manifest Destiny, 107, 369 n (10) Mann, Barbara Alice, xiii, xxiv-xxvi/?as5i>i, 307, 311; on oral tradition, 274; on reburial of skull, 243-44; on two-spirit philosophy, 182 Marcus, George, 6 Marino, Cesare, 407 n (169) Marks, Jonathan, 252 Marquette, Jacques, 120 Marsh, O. C , 107, 193, 339 n (169), 343-44 n(l) Marsteller, Emma, 432 n (161) Marx, Karl, 325 n (99) Massassaga, 107 McCarty, John Winspeare, 86, 362 n (198) McClintock, Anne, xx, 323 n (83) McCoard, Elder Jean, vii, 241, 299,447 n (17) McCoard, Jordy, 241 McCulloh, James H., 16, 91, 353 n (89); on Atlantis, 73, 75; land-bridge theories of, 355 n (114); on Mound Builders as Malaysian, 59; on Mound Builders as Native American, 67, 353 n (86), 369 n (6); on Mound Builders as "white," 110; on mound traditions, 106; on Native skin tones, 71; on origins of Native Americans, 16-17 McCumber Amendments, to the Five Tribes Actofl906, 282, 296 McEIwain, Thomas, viii, 180, 200, 395 n (8), 404 n (126); on "killed" artifacts, 196-97; mound interpretations of, 171; on Native discourse styles, 109-10; on twospirit philosophy, 182 McGee, W. M., 60-61 McGuire, Randall, 68 Mclntosh, William, 358-59 n (167) McKain, Robert, 29, 30, 34 McKee, Alexander, 111,121 McKenzie, Douglas H., 90 McLaren, Peter, xxii Meighan, Clement, 108, 272, 273, 274; as anti-NAGPRA, 255,256, 257, 273 Memmi, Albert, xv, xxii menstruation. See, "moon-sickness" Metzger, Kerry R., 311 Meuser, Dr. Gordon F., 247, 248, 250 Meyer, Melissa L., 280,446 n (360) Miami, 127, 150, 377 n (125)

INDEX

Miller, Daniel, 262, 275, 394 n (1), 429 n (116) Mills, William C , 116, 134, 245, 246, 422-23 n(113) Mimbres, 49 "Mingo," 171, 369 n (210), 395 n (8) Minik, 46-47, 258 Misinkhdlikan [The Masked Being], 220 Miskokomon, Roberta, 328 n (30) missionaries, xx, 141, 246; as Congregationalist, 129; as Dominican, 137, 174; goodevil dichotomy of, 173, 397 n (37); "Great Spirit" of, 123, 172; Indian "censuses" of, 291-92; as Jesuit, 174, 182, 193, 215, 232, 379 n (152); interpolations of, 123,174, 230, 232, 375 n (87), 381 n (174), 397 n (37), 399 n (59); as Moravian, 56, 129, 145, 149, 174, 228, 373 n (54); as Quaker, 207; as spreading diesase, 373 n (54); as Unitarian, 129 Moche, 249 Modoc, Prince of Wales, 76, 77, 79, 81, 357 n(149) Mohawk, 58, 127; migration traditions of, 129, 131; warrior society of, xxv Mohawk, John, xxiii Mohegan, 145, 148,149, 275; relation to Lenap6 of, 385 n (226); Woods Dwarf traditions of, 170-71 Mohegan-Pequot, 49 monogenesis, 10, 16-17, 18, 336-37 n (127), 349 n (50) monotheism, as foreign to Native spirituality, 174-75 Monroe, President James, 352 n (78) Montaigne [Innu], 399 n (60) Montaigne, Michel Eyquem de, 315-16 n (8) Montesquieu, baron de La Brfede et de [Charles-Louis de Secondat], 21, 22; racist geography of, 20-21 Monte Video stone, 83, 85 Montoya v. United States, 434 n (201) Moody, J., 85 Mooney, James, xix, 167, 391-92 n (320); on Alligewi/ Talligewi, 386 n (232); on Cherokee clans, 391 n (313); on Cherokee color codes, 218; on Cherokee "degeneration," 393 n (354); on Cherokee mound traditions, 160, 161; on Great Hare, 396 n (28); on lroquoian peoples.

509

388 n (279), 388 n (280); on Mississippi River, 380 n (154); on terms for Cherokee, 374 n (73), 389 n (295); on Native knowledge styles, 108-9 Moon-Eyed People, 156, 200, 202; astronomy of, 202, 204; medicine bags of, 237 moon-sickness, 256; as powerful medicine, 157, 217,428 n (98) Moorehead, Warren K., 42, 245,422-23 n (113); as coining term "Hopewell," 116-17 Moqui,416n(310) Morgan, Lewis Henry, on Cherokee clans, 391 n (313); on Dawes Act, 438 n (258); stages-of thinking of, 63-64, 88, 280, 332-33 n (85), 350 n (59), 359 n (170), 363 n (211); on Mound-Builder migrations, 63-64 Mormons. See Church of Jesus Christ ofthe Latter-Day Saints Morris, C , 345 n (15), 364-65 n (239) Morton, Samuel, 30, 34, 70, 335 n (120), 355 n (111); on "cranial capacities," xvi, 31, 60; as fudging data, 31-32; on Mound Builders as Toltecs, 59, 64; on multiple creations, 334 n (104); on phrenology, 30, 334 n (103); as pologeneticist, 30, 32, 347-48 n (33); as pro-slavery, 33; skull collecting of, 34-35, 70, 334 n (109); skull "science" of, 30-31 Mound-Builder artifacts, 93; black market in, 249; as Cincinnati Tablet, 83, 84; as copper, 51, 67, 72, 85, 93, 133, 218; as cranial bowls, 196; as eagles, 236; as Homed Serpents, 218, 236; as "killed," 196-97,405 n (131); as Kinderhook "brass" plates, 85; as medicine bundles, 236; as mica, 218; public auction of, 240-41, 301, 422 n (6); as teeth, 196, 217; as tobacco pipes, 236 Mound-Builder myths, Euroamerican, 52-54, 58-59, 89, 345 n (15), 349 n (50); of "Cardiff Giant," 134, 381 n (168); as denial of Native American authorship of mounds, 54; faux artifacts of, 83, 85-86; of Mound Builders as Africans, 72 Atlanteans, 52, 73-76, 81, 111, 143, 266, 328 n (29)

510 NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

Belgians, 72 Carthiginians, 77, 328 n (29) Central-South Americans, 59-62 passim, 84, 87 Chinese, 329-30 n (49) Christian Romans, 69 Danes, 72 East Asians, 328 n (29) Egyptians, 71,72 Freemasons, 86, 361 n (195) Greek, 71 Hindu, 69-70, 71, 72, 355 n (110), 355 intermediate race between Natives and "Caucasians," 61 "Joktans," 68, 353-54 n (94) "lost race," 52, 53-54, 58,61, 64, 71, 87, 89,103, 346-47 n (26), 363 n (215) Magogites/Scythians, 61, 348-49 n (45) Malaysian, 59 mastodon tamers 70-71 Mexican, 63-64, 76 Mongols, 61, 71 Persians, 70, 72, 355 n (112); Peruvians, 59-60, 62, 68, 76, 85, 87, 347-48 n (33) Phoenicians, 72 pygmies, 70, 355 n (112) Romans, 71,80-81 Saxons, 72 Siberians, 61 Spaniards, 68 Tartars, 61,71 "ten lost tribes of Israel," 68-70, 71, 85-86, 328 n (29), 353-54 n (94) Toltecs, 59-62 passim, 64, 66, 68, 87, 346-47 n (26) Vikings, 67, 71, 72, 77 Welsh, 71, 76-81,111, 358-59 n (167) "white" race, 65, 66, 68-69, 71, 76-81, 110-12 of mounds as amusement parks, 99, 101, 103, 367 n (274); of mounds a forts, 9899,101, 102-3; of no Native tradition of Mound Builders, 106-7, 369 n (6), 370 n (14); of no reliable Native tradition of Mound Builders, 107-8, 111; political uses of, 53-54, 64, 65-6S passim, 107,

112, 345 n (16). See also myths Mound Builders, xxiv-xxv; as agriculturalists, 62, 200-1, 351 n (68); astronomy of, 204; as building in stone, 87, 90, 99,101, 134, 153, 357-58 n (151); burial customs of, 195, 225, 404 n (123); as Cherokee, 87, 89,135, 158,199; as close to Earth Spirits, 151; color codes of, 217-18, 219,256; com of, 154, 200; cremations of, 194-95,219,404 n (123); cultural collapse of, 114; as "culturally unidentifiable," 240; as defleshing corpses, 401 n (92); DNA of, 252; double hearths of, 199; Eagle of, 236; east-facing burials of, 400 n (72); geometry of, 204; high populations of, 64,113, 351 n (68); Great Homed Serpent of, 236; as literate, 83, 84, 360-61 n (179); as Native North Americans, 66-67, 87-88, 270; repatriation and reburial of, xxv, 279-80; south-facing burials of, 400 n (72); SkyEarth cosmology of, 109; sweat lodges of, 225; sweats ofthe dead of, 225-26; as Talligewi, 56, 87, 136, 146-47, 150-51; as tall people, 134; as tracking standstills of moon, 205; two-by-four logic of, 205, 212; warefare traditions of, 66, 110-11, 113, 114, 135-36; west-facing burials of, 400 n (72). See also Cherokee, Iroquois, Lenape, Mound-Builder artifacts, motmds, Shawnee Mound Builders Country Club, 103, 306-7, 312 Mound City, 92, 96-99, 366 n (255), 366 n (256) mounds, 51; basins of, 199,225-26, 387 n (264); as cemeteries, 50, 92,93, 103, 278-79; circle-square O-D motif of, 175, 197-200,225, 237; color codes of, 217-18; concentric motif, 2Q5-S passim, 211,409 n (200); of cooper, 346 n (22); destruction of, 51-52; as Earth-writing, 197; as effigies, 237; as highways, 139, 383 n (195); mediated circle-square O=>D motif of, 212-14; near-water siting of, 222, 414-15 n (281); as observatories, 200, 203-5; paired semicircle motif of, 205-7, 210; pavements of, 208, 367-68 n (277); physical descriptions of, 51, 55-56, 113, 127, 151-52,160-61; as primary "mystery" of nineteenth century, 51, n (1); spirituality of, 153-54, 222;

INDEX

of stone, 87, 90, 99, 101, 153, 357-58 n (151), 388 n (268); as amusement parks, 99, 367 n (274); as U.S. military camps, 101,102-3. See also Aberdeen stone mound. Alligator mound, Butler County Fort, Chillicothe mound group, Circleville mound complex, Clarke's Works, Columbus mound. Eagle mound, Edwin Hamess Mound, Engel-Eiden site, Etowah mound, Flint Ridge, Fort Hill works, 206; Franks site. Graded Way, Graham Village, Great Cahokia Mound Group, Great Circle Mound, Great Hopewell Road, Great Serpent Mound, High Bank Earthworks, Jasper stone mound, Kitu'hwa Mound, Logan mounds. Mound City, Newark Earthworks, Norton Mounds, Observatory Mound, Octagon-Circle complex. Paint Creek complex, Riker site. Spruce Hill Fort, Tumer Group, Wilson Mound Mulberry Creek massacre, 36-37 Murphy, Patrick, 446 n (7) Murray, Charles, xvi Muscogee, 66,119,122, 131; African American Natives of, 287; color codes of, 372 n (46); Freedmen of, 287,441 n (300); Great Homed Serpent of, 416-17 n (311); limits to enrollment of, 294-95; spousal adoption of, 290; spousal enrollment of, 441-42 n (306); two-spirit philosophy of, 183, 399 n (56) Museum of Comparative Zoology (Harvard), skull collecting of, 39 Museum of Natural History. See Smithsonian Institution myth-mongers, social status of, 66 myths, Euroamerican, xiv, 142, 144; of Bering Strait, xvi, xxi, 10, 13-19 passim, 117, 122,142, 143, 316-17 n (17), 328 n (30); of Iroquois as originating in the North, 128; of low Native American populations, xvii, 58, 64, 65, 66, 114; of Native cannibalism, xx, 315-16 n (8); of Native eco-pillaging, xx; of Native origins, 11-16; of Native sexism, xviii; of Native tenure in Americas, xvii, 11-12, 30, 317 n (27); of Natives as huntergatherers, 62, 64, 65, 66; of Natives as "ten lost tribes of Israel," 10, 14, 18-19, 355 n (116), 356 n (128); of Natives as

511

European invention, xviii; of no Native stone construction, 90, 357-58 n (151); of no Native traditions of mounds, 105, 106-7, 369 n (6), 370 n (14); of no Native writing system, 83, 84, 88, 360 n (178); of Ohio as "uninhabited," 127-28, 377-78 n (126); of no reliable Native traditions of mounds, 107-8, 111; political uses of, 53-54, 64, 65-6S passim, 107, 114-15; of "scalpology," xx, 348^9 n (45); of "virgin soil" epidemics, xx, 114

N NAGPRA Review Committee, 239; hearings of, 252, 271. See also Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA) of 1990 Namaesi Sipu, 146 Nanticoke, 150, 276,401 n (90) National Congress of American Indians, xxi National Park Service, 41, 98, 260, 271,447 n(17) Native American Alliance of Ohio (NAAO), 50,306; appearance of at NAGPRA Review Committee hearings, 311; on attempted destruction of Alligator Mound, 304; on ceremony at reburial, 244; as challenging legitimacy of federal recognition, 307-9; as creating North American Indian Memorial Park, 93, 308, 310, 312-13; as forming alliances with Euroamerican friends, 307, 309, 310; as insisting on Native interpretations of Native culture, 310; on Kirkersville grave, 305; on mandated consultation with eastem Natives, 307-8, 310; on opening Octagon-Circle complex to public, 310; as picketing public auction of grave goods, 240-41; as retrieving skull for reburial, 242-44; as saving Wilson Motind, 304-5; strategies of for eastem Natives, 307-11; testimony of before Select Committee of Ohio Legislature, 309-10, 311; as urging public oversight of Ohio Historical Society, 310; as using community recognition, 308-9; as working with public officials, 307, 309; as working with the Friends ofthe Mound, 306 Native American Graves Protection and

512 NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

Repatriation Act (NAGPRA) of 1990, 50, 89, 117, 248, 249,255-5S passim, 260, 265, 301; folklore as evidence under, 272; as ignored in the east, 240, 253,254, 264, 301-7; as inapplicable to private collections, 240, 253-54, 271; inventory of, 239, 267, 268,447 n (17); lobbies against, 254; loopholes in, 239-40, 253-54, 279; oral tradition as evidence under, 272, 275; public support of, 257-58; requirements of, 267; as slighting eastem Natives, 239-40, 279-80, 298; work of to include eastem Natives, 299 Native Americans, African mixed bloods as, 287, 441 n (297); agriculture of, 64, 351 n (73); on ancient shipwrecks, 357 n (159); ancient warfare of, 112-13, 146-47; astronomy of, 204; as authors, xviii-xxiv; "cannibalism" of, xiv, xx, 193-94, n (8) 315-16; cemeteries of as "burial grounds," 278-79; as challenging doctimentary genocide, 298-99; Christian theories of origins of, 10,12-14, 17-18; "common sense" of, 180; concem for dead of, 259, 260, 276-77; condolence councils of, 278; cranial bowls of, 196; development of democracy by, 115; discourse styles of, xxi-xwi, l-4passim, 109-10; eastem buffalo of, 418 n (341); enforcement of NAGPRA by, 301, 307; federal nonrecognition of, 279-80, 298; on feminists, XX, 256, 320 n (55); forced assimilation of, 316 n (14); as hiding in the east, 291-92; as "indigenist" scholars, xiii, xxii-xxvi; knowledge styles of, 108-10,170-71; as light-skinned, 71, 111-12; meaning of "white" to, 112; Messengers of Peace of, 411 n (228); on moon-sickness [menstruation], 256, 428 n (98); as Mound Builders, 66-67, 87-88, 270-71, 349-50 n (51); North American tenure of, xvii, 318 n (31), 318 n (35) ; on "pen-and-ink witchcrafl," 443 n (318); pictographs of, 383-84 n (201); high populations of, 64-65, 113-14, 351 n (72); professional training of, 203-4; as protesting collectors' trade shows, 254,427 n (85); as protesting/resisting grave digging, 35, 37, 254, 259,429 n (117); quantumcounters among, 289-90, 298; scalping

practices of, xiv, xx; spousal adoptions of, 287-88; stereotypes of, 28, 30-31, 54, 61, 62, 66, 90, 136,170,186, 257, 273, 276, 333 n (;91), 335-36 n (124), 349 n (48), 349 n (49); as targeted by anti-NAGPRA forces, 256-57; as "tribes," 271, 434 n (201); westem origin theories of, 11-16 passim; westem population counts of, xix, 58, 64, 65, 66, 114, 298; westem time frames for, xvii, 11-12, 30, 271, 317 n (27), 345 n (16); writing systems of, 83, 84, 141, 360 n (178), 384 n (202). See also Adirondak, Aleut, Arapaho, Arikara, Attiwendaronk, Blackfeet, Catawba, Cajmga, Cherokee, Cheyenne, Chickasaw Chippewa [Anishinabe], Choctaw, Clasop, Cliff Dwellers, Cowichan, Crow, Erie, Hopi, Inuit, Iroquois, Kahokia, Kaskaskia, Kiowa, Kwakiutl, Lenape, Mahican, Mandan, Massassaga, Miami, Mimbres Moche, Mohawk, Mohegan, MoheganPequot, Moqui, Montaigne [Innu], Muscogee, myths, Nanticoke, Natchez, Navajo, Omaha, Oneida, Onondaga, oral traditions, Osage, Ottawa, Outagamie ["Fox"], Paiute-Shoshone, Pawnee, Peoria, Piankashaw, Potomac, Sacs, Salish, Seminole, Seneca, Shawnee, Tionante, Tlingit, Toltec, Tuscarora, UtoAzteca, Wichita, Wyandot Native American spirituality, absence of oppositional thinking in, 173-74; bone marrow of, 217; burst skulls of, 194, 195-96; ceremonial time of, 170; color codes of, 112,217,219,256; complementarity of, 176; on cremation, 182,195, 217; defleshing of, 195; demarrowing of, 195; on disease dangers, 244; dogs of, 221; Eagle medicine of, 226, 228,417-18 n (325); Earth lights of, 399 n (60); Earth medicine of, 209, 212; Earth spirits of, 180,195, 220-21; east-facing burials of, 219; eggs of, 237; fire of, 195, 212, 224; ghosts of, 195-97, 220-21, 404 n (126); Great Homed Serpent of, 228, 235; on interment, 182, 195; lightning of, 420 n (368); on meaning ofthe land, 277-78; medicine bags of, 235; Milky Way Trail of, 153, 185; Mother Earth of, 197; reincamation of, 186-87,195;

INDEX

resuscitation of, 180, 186-87; shake-tent ceremonies of, 399 n (60); shape-shifting of, 123,186,405 n (130); shininess of, 230; Sky-Earth associations of, 176, 177, 178; Sky medicine of, 212; Sky people of, 181; Sky spirits of, 181,195, 221; Serpent medicine of, 226,417-18 n (325); snakeskins as umbilical cords to, 231; sweat lodges of, 224; teeth of, 196; tobacco, 215, 218, 223-24; two-by-four logic of, 176-77, 186, 205; two-spirit philosophy of, 180-85; water of, 212, 220-21, 224; vision quests of, 208, 215, See also A 'wi'Usdi', Cherokee spirituality. Great Hare, Great Homed Serpent, Eagle-Serpent nexus, Fire-Water nexus, Iroquoian spirituality, Lenape spirituality, Muscogee, Potomac, Shawnee spirituality, Sky-Earth nexus Natchez, 160 Navajo, 246, 269 New Age movement, 269; complicity with racism of, 172-73; debasement of Native tradition by, 209; fantasies of, 309; "Great Spirit" of, 172; Native Americans of, 172-73, 209,297, 309; two-spirit philosophy of, 180 New York Anatomy Acts of 1789, 258 Newark Earthworks, 99-102, 204, 306, 366 n (268); badger effigy of, 101; connection of with High Bank, 205,408 n (186); Eagle mound of, 101, 228, 228, 367 n (275); golf course on, 52, 306, 310; as observatory, 204—5; Observatory Mound of, 102; as public land, 102, 306-7; Select Committee recommendation on, 312; stone mound of, 101, See also Eagle Mound, Great Circle Mound, OctagonCircle complex Newark "Holy Stones," 85-86, 361 n (195), 362 n(198) Newcomb, William, 150, 407 n (165), 411-12 n (234) "niggerology," 33 Noah, children of as Mound Builders, 70; flood of, 13,142, 143; sons of, 10, 18, 68, 331 n (66) North American Indian Memorial Park, 308, 310,312-13 Northwestern University (Illinois), 48

513

Norton, John, [Teyoninhokarawen], 158; on Ani'-Kutahi, 161, 162, 164, 166 Norton Mounds, 429 n (117) Nott, Josiah C , 33, 61, 334 n (104), 335 n (120) Nun'yunu'wi, 157, 217, 219, See also Stone Giants

Observatory Mound, 102 Ocasta, 156-57, 217, See also Stone Giants Octagon-Circle complex, 86,102-3; as artillery range, 102; connection to High Bank of, 205; as golf course, 103; as observatory, 204-5; as public land, 103 Oestreicher, David M,, 143-44 Ohio Archaeological Society, See Archaeological Society of Ohio, Ohio Indian Relic Collectors' Society Ohio Canal, 101 Ohio Department of Natural Resources (ODNR), vi, 305 Ohio Historical Society, 245, 305, 307, 309; as aiding Ohio Indian Relic Collectors' Society, 247; as aiding Raymond C, Vietzen, 247,424 n (32); bone collection of, 422 n (6), 447 n (17); complaints about, 309; destruction of primary source documents by, 309,447-48 n (21); excavations of Eagle Mound by, 101-2; excavations at Fort Meigs by, 306; excavations at Kirkersville by, 305; hearing on by Select Committee ofthe Ohio Legislature, 306, 309-12; lease of Octagon-Circle complex by, 103, 306; NAGPRA Inventory of, 305; as Ohio State Archaeological and Historical Society, 75, 96,101, 103, 245; Ohio Village of, 309, 447-48 n (21); as permitting dig at Great Circle mound, 302; as saving Alligator mound, 93 Ohio Indian Relic Collectors' Society, 247, 254; as Ohio Archaeological Society, 247 Ohio Railroad, 101 Ohio State Historical and Archaeological Society, 41,42, 245. See also Ohio Historical Society Ohio State Museum, 245, 246, 266; as aiding

514 NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

Ohio Indian Relic Collectors' Society, 247, 254; as aiding Vietzen, 424 n (32); relationship with Archaeological Society ofOhio of, 2 4 7 ^ 8 Ohio Village, 309, 448-48 (21) Oka, XXV Old Bam Auction House, 240,422 n (6) Omaha, 108 Oneida, 112, 127, 334n(109) Onondaga, 127; on "Cardiff Giant," 381 n (168); as defeating Stone Giants, 134, 380-81 n (167); Homed Serpent of, 134; resuscitation of, 187 oral tradition, 105,117; academic contempt for, lOA-S passim; archaeology as "freeing" Natives from, 272-73; on cannibals, 194; on care of graves, 278; on disease, 157, 161,163,166, 373 n (54); as evidence under NAGPRA, 272; fundamental concepts of, 174, 175-76; of Iroquois League, 140; methodology of, 130-31, 135, 141-42, 162, 164; of mound highways, 139; as reliable, 273-75, timing of, 170,186; of warfare, 110-11,112-16 passim, 130, 135-36,137, 146-47; of "white" Mound Builders, 110-11, See also Cherokee, Iroquois, Lenape, Native Americans, Shawnee "organic intellectual," 325 n (101) Ortiz, Roxanne Dunbar, xxii Osage, 288, 289, 370 n (21) ossuary burial, 90,137,140, 189, 398-99 n (53) O'Sullivan, John L,, 369 n (10) Otis, Brevet Lieutenant Colonel George A,, 38-39 Ottawa, 270, 292 Otto, Martha Potter, 254,447 n (17) Outagamie ["Fox"], 56 Owens, Louis, xxii Owle,Freeman, 111, 156,158

Paint Creek complex, stone mound of, 99 Painted Sticks, 140,141, See also Walam Olum Paiute-Shoshone, 426 n (73) Palfrey, John Gorham, xix Parker, Arthur Caswell, on Iroquoian

migration, 131; on Iroquoian Mound Building, 136, 137; on Mound-Builder warfare, 113 Parrish, William, 74 Pawnee, 36, 38, 48, 49, 338 n (150) Peabody Museum (Harvard), 40, 41, 42, 47, 60, 343^*4 n (1), 422-23 n (113) Pearson, Kad, 47 Peary, Admiral Robert E., 46 Pecos Pueblo, 342 n (223) Peoria,398n(41) Phillips Academy (Massachusetts), 42 phrenology, 29, 32-33,43, 61, 349 n (49), 351 n (68); as promoting "Vanishing Red Man" myth, 355 n (123), See also anthropometry, craniometry, physiometrics physiometrics, 45 Piankashaw, 398n(41) Pidgeon, William, 71,83 Pierce, Roy Harvey, 322 n (67) Piltdown Man, xix, 324 n (95) Plato, 75 Plecker, Dr. Walter A., 297 Plutarch, 80 polygenesis, 10, 15, 16, 17, 30, 32, 61, 336-37 n (127); Spanish theories of, 12 Potomac, Great Hare of, 178, 179-80,185; two-spirit philosophy of, 185 Powell, David, 86, 357 n (149) Powell, John Wesley, 41, 92, 339 n (183), 343-44 n (1), 364 n (238); on Mound Builders as Native American, 67, 353 n (89) Pratt, G, Michael, 274,424 n (32) Preston, Douglas J,, 7, 255 Pridget, Johnson, 163, 164 Priest, Josiah, 71,85 Prince, Charles, viii Pnifer,OlafH,,90 Purchas, Samuel, xv Puritans, 18 Putnam, Frederick Ward, 93, 365 n (244), 422-23 n(113) Pybum, K, Anne, 260, 261,262 Pyrlaeus, Christopher, 129, 147

Qisuk, 46-47,258 Quapaw Reservation, 108, 123

INDEX

515

"Savagism," 64, 105-6, 114, 115,128, 159, 170; as defined, 105 Say p tsu'wat, 135-36 racism, 8, 114, 360 n (178); development of, Schoolcraft, Henry Rowe, 353 n (89), 360 n 19-27; prominence of in Mound-Builder (178); as conflating Iroquois and myth, 66-^7, 71, 88-89, 111 Anishinabe [Chippewa], 400 n (71); as Rafmesque-Schmaltz, Constantine Samuel, disapproving of skull collecting, 29, 34; xviii, 140-44, 384 n (210) erroneous attribution to, 58, 346-47 n (26); Randall, Emilius Oviatt, 41, 75, 91, 99; on on Grave Creek stone, 81, 83; interest in destruction of mounds, 91; on Fort Ancient phrenology of, 29; on Lenap6, 148; on 99; on mound pavements, 267-68 n (277) Shawnee arrival in North America, 123 Ranjel, Rodrigo, 154, 388 n (272) Schumaker, Paul, 38 Rassinier, Paul, 320 n (50) Schweinitz, Edmund de, on Iroquoian Red Score, 140, 141. See also fValam Olum migrations, 129; on Lenape migration Redhorse, Wayne, 50 traditions, 145^6, 147, 148 Removal, 277, 279, 287, 291,292, 295, 296, science, as borrowing from Christianity, 297, 352 n (78), 444-45 n (340); as 9-19 passim, 23, 26, 27; method of, xiv; justified by Mound-Builder myths, 65-66, monogenesis of, 10, 17; objectivity of, 68,112 xviii, 6, 52, 259-60; polygenesis of, 10, Renaud, Joe, 307 14, 16, 17; racist theories of, 20-33 Richardson, Bill, 312 passim, 88-89, 114; skull mania of, 29-30, Richardson, John, 207 34-39/7as.sj/«, 266. See also craniometry, Riding-In, James, 49 monogenesis, polygenesis Riker Site, 248, 263, 267, 269,422 n (6), "scissors strategy," 6 424-25 n (42) Scrogg, Henan, 360 n (178) Robbins, John, 271 Select Committee of the Ohio Legislature, Roberts, David, 273 306; hearings of on Ohio Historical Roherts-Moody, Donna, 299 Society, 309-12; report of, 311-12 Robertson, R. S., 53, 64, 345 n (15) Selukuki Wohellengh, 158 Robertson, William, 16 Seminole, 290,441^2 n (306) Rockford Tablet, 85 Senate Select Committee of Indian Affairs, 7 Rogers, Major, 77 Seneca, xxiii, xxiv, xxvi, 109, 127, 128, Romain, William F., 175, 238,421 n (390) 375-76 n (92); Dwarfs of, 394 n (6); Earth Ronda, James, 352 n (78) medicine of, 214; Fire of, 215; Great Rose Arts Festival (Norwich, CT), 49 Homed Serpent of, 232; on Iroquoian Ross, Chief John. See Coowescoowe dialects, 232; migration traditions of, 131, Rothrock, J. T., 38 132; mound traditions of, 136; as Mound Ruhl, Katharine, 212,405 n (131) Builders, 270; ossuary motinds of, 137; resuscitation of, 189-90; Sky medicine of, 214; Sky spirits of, 184; vampire skeletons [cannibal ghosts] of, 191-93; vision Sacs, 115 questers of, 208, 220; water medicine of, Sagard, Gabriel, 137, 174, 224, 371 n (42), 214; western stereotypes of, 136 401 n (88) Senex, John, 119 Said, Edward, xxii Septuagint Bible, 11,30 Salina site (Kansas), as "open air" museum, Serpent Mound. See Great Serpent Motind 48 Sganyadai:yoh [Handsome Lake], 189 Salish, 43 Shaffer, Lynda Norene, 89, 372-73 n (53) Sanches, John, 446 n (7) Shawnee, xxii, 66,271, 324 n (94); in Sand Creek massacre, 35-36, 337-38 n (145) Alabama, 120; ancient language of. Sapir, Edward, 176,208

516 NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

120-21; arrival in North America of, 121-25; astronomy of, 201, 203; as "Chalaque," 118-19; clans of, 118, 124, 126, 374 n (67); council house of, 230; as culturally mixed, 120; on first contact, 230; fiood of, 125; Maykojay clan of, 118, 121, 375-76 n (92); as Mound Builders, 87, 89,90,117, 125-27; Mound-Builder traditionsof, 105, 106, 111, 125; knowledge styles of, 108; lifestyle of, 120; as in Ohio valley, 118,126, 377 n (125); oral traditions of, 123-27; ossuary of, 90; Piqua of, 225; Shauwanoa wee Theqppee [Savannah and Cumberland Rivers] of, 119, 121, 125, 126; Shkipakithithipi [Cumberland River] of, 119; in southeast, 120,124-27 ; Spanish contact with, 120, 122,124-25; stone constructions of, 87, 90, 126, 377 n (123), 43 n (200) 4; Waukauhoowaa of, 125-26; western histories of, 118; as "younger brothers," 150. See also Native Americans, Shawnee spirituality Shawnee spirituality, 174; Bread Dance of, 203; circle-square O-D motif of, 197; cremation of, 225; dogs of, 221; Eagle of, 226; Earth medicine of, 123, 229-30; Earth spirits of, 184; exposed bones of, 190-91; feathers of, 235; fire of, 215-16, 223, 225; firekeepers of, 215; ghosts of, 184; Great Homed Serpent of, 228-30, 235, 416-17 n (311); Kokomthena ("Our Grandmother") of, 120-21, 123, 124, 216, 217,221, 228, 235, 375 n (87), 415 n (291); on Kokomthena^ witnesses, 223-24, 226,236; medicine bags of, 121, 235; moon of, 203; Open Doors of Spirit of, 124, 376 n (110); shape-shifling of, 123; shininess of as spirit portal, 230; Sky medicine of, 123-24; Sky World of, 124; sun of, 203; sweat lodge of, 225; tobacco of, 223,415 n (291); two-by-four logic of, 197,415 n (291); view of Christian God of, 124, 174, 229; water of, 220, 223,415 n (291); Water Panther of, 123, 228. See also Native American spirituality, Shawnee Shelton, Brett Lee, 252 Shem [son of Noah], 68 Shetrone, Henry, 217, 218, 226, 236, 245,

246, 247, 266, 370 n (14); on color codes, 218; on "killed" artifacts, 405 n (131); on Ohio Iroquoian mounds, 139 Shiels, Dr. Richard, 310 S'hondowekowa, 165 Short, John T., 63, 17, 99, 134, 279, 329 n (49), 336-37 n (127); on Cincinnati Tablet, 83 Short Arrow, Isaac, 163,164 Silverberg, Robert, 51, 69, 345 n (16), 351 n (67), 357 n (149) skulls, 29; collecting of, 29-39 passim, 266; collecting methods of, 37-38; commercial trade in, 50, 241^4, 264; U.S. government's involvement in collecting of, 35-39 passim, 44, 337-38 n (145) Sky medicine. See Cherokee spirituality, Iroquoian spirituality, Lenape spirituality. Native American spirituality, Shawnee spirituality Sky-Earth nexus, 175-212 pa.s.sim; circleeffigy complex of, 237; graphics of, 205-7. See also Cherokee spirituality, Iroquoian spirituality, Lenape spirituality, Shawnee spirituality Skye, Solon, 360 n (178) Slonim, Marc, 426 n (73) Sluyter, Peter, 207 Smith, Ethan, 69 Smith, J. David, 296 Smith, Joseph, golden tablets of, 81, 359 n (171); Moxmd-Builder mythology of, 69, 354 n (104) Smith, Redbird, 286 Smithsonian Institution, 34, A2-47 passim, 52,67, 86; bone collection of, 7-8,46, 279; Bureau of American Ethnology of, 9, 40,41, 276, 339 n (183); deals with Army Medical Museum of, 39; Larsen Bay Village collection of, 45, 341 n (209); Museum of Natural History of, 40 Smucker, Isaac, 91, 96, 99, 107, 367 n (275) Snow, Charles, 225, 236, 237,405 n (131), 412-13 n(246) Society for American Archaeology (SAA), 248-49,255,259; "accountability principle" of, 260-61; as anti-NAGPRA, 254-55; censure of commercialism by, 248; repatriation standards of, 255,436 n (232)

INDEX

Sorgenfrei, Jan, 240 Soto, Hemando de, 55, 154; expedition of, 388 n (272); as motind destroyer, 353 n (92); as putative Mound Builder, 68 Spaulding, Solomon, 69 Speck, Frank, 109, 387 n (253) Spencer, Joab, 121 spirituality. See Cherokee spirituality, lroquoian spirituality, Lenape spirituality. Native American spirituality, Shawnee spirituality Springer, Judge William D., 293-94, 295-96 Spruce Hill Fort, 91 Spurzheim, Johann G., 29 Squier, Ephraim George, 52, 64, 83; on Alligator mound, 93, 96, 365 n (251); Atlantean theory of, 75; on Cincinnati Tablet, 83; on Clarke's Works, 116; on contradictions in migration theory, 67; diffusionist theories of, 60, 62; on fatix inscriptions, 81; on Grave Creek stone, 81; on Mound City, 96, 366 n (255); on stone motinds, 357-58 n (151); on Spruce Hill Fort, 91; on Toltec-Peruvian theory, 63 "stages-of "thinking, 27-28, 63-64,212, 280, 332 n (83), 332-33 n (85), 350 n (59), 359 n (170) Stannard, David, xxii, xxiii Stanton, Edwin, 39 Steen-Mclntyre, Virginia, 318 n (35) Stoddard, Amos, 77 Stone Coats. See Stone Giants Stone Giants, 129, 156-57, 217; as cannibals, 133,134,156,157,194; as disease-casters, 157,217; as invisibe, 157; as remnants ofthe Cherokee Moimd Builders, 136,156,157; traditions of, 133-34, 151. See also Cherokee, Iroquois, Lenape, Native Americans, Onondaga, Shawnee, Tuscarora Stone, William, 60, 73, 74, 75,266 Strachey, William, on circle motifs, 207; on Eagle-Serpent medicine, 417-18 n (325); on Great Hare, 178, 187, 236; on medicine bag of Great Hare, 236; on mounds, 55; on reincamation, 187; on resuscitation, 187; on sunfire, 216; on two-spirit philosophy, 185 Strickland, Rennard, 283 Stuart, Isaac, 78

517

Sturm, Circe, 441 n (297) Sutton, Benjamin, 79, 144,145, 151, 385 n (222) Sutton, James, 43,44 Sutton, William, 43,44 Swanton, John Reed, on two-spirit philosophy, 181 Swift, E., 38

Talligewi, 87, 136, 146-47,150-51, 152; as Allegans, 148; as Alligewi, 56, 149; as disease-casters, 157; as Stone Giants, 157. See also Cherokee Tarmer, John, 215 Tantaquidgeon, Gladys, 149,170,191 Tecumseh, 165, 201 Tekoghwelliska ["Mr. McDonald"], 158 "ten lost tribes of Israel," 10, 70-71, 353-54 n (94); as Native Americans, 10,14, 18-19, 355 n (116); as "white" Mound Builders, 68-69, 85-86. See also MoundBuilder myths, myths Tenskwatawa, 106, 125, 126, 215, 229, 376 n (110), 41 I n (228) Temyik, Wilbur, 429 n (117) Third Colorado Volunteer Cavalry Regiment, 35 Thomas, Cyrus, 52, 53, 62, 86-88, 89, 103, 363 n (215); on Cherokee mounds, 161; on circle-square O-D motif, 199; on craniometry, 349-50 n (51); on Davenport Tablets, 85; on Etowah mound, 346 n (19); on lroquoian mounds, 137; misattribution to Schoolcraft of, 346-47 n (26); on Mississippi River, 380 n (154); on Mound Builders as Cherokee, 160, 362-63 n (209); on Mound Builders as Native American, 67; on Mound Builders as tall, 134; on mound siting, 391 n (312); on Newark-High Bank connection, 408 n (186); on Shawnee stone graves, 87, 377 n (123); on Walam Olum, 143 Thomas, David Hurst, 275, 280 Thomas, Jacob, 383 n (195) Thomas, Robert K., xxi, xxii, 321 n (60) Thompson, Governor Jim, (Illinois) 48 Thornton, Russell, xxii, xxiii

518 NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

Thunderbird (Great Eagle), 227. See also Cherokee spirituality, Iroquoian spirituality, Lenape spirituality, Shawnee spirituality Thunderers, 226-27 Timberlake, Henry, 197, 234 Tionante, 393 n (353) Tlingit, 40 Tobacco, Chief, 110 Toltecs, 59-60, 73 Tocqueville, Alexis de, 369 n (10) Tomlinson, Abelard B., 48, 81, 343 n (227), 359 n(172) tornados, as Sky medicine, 175, 235,402-3 n (100) Torquemada, Tomas de, 18 Townsend, John, 35, 37 Townsend, Judge Hosea, 290 tradition. See oral tradition Trask, Haunani-Kay, xxii Treaty at the Foot of the Rapids, 292 Trigger, Bruce G,, 245, 272; on archaeology as colonialism, 7; on archaeology as derivative, 13; on archaeology as political, 53; on Charles Darwin, 27 Trowbridge, Charles Christopher, 106,123, 124, 125, 229 Tsiskwaya, 161 7i«/'/ta/«^ 164-65, 177 Turner Group, 90,236; basins of, 226, 236, circle-square O-D motif of, 199,226; color codes of, 217-18 Tuscarora, 112,127, 129, 379 n (153), 388 n (279); bow-and-arrow technology of, 133; migration traditions of, 132-33; as split, 133, 380 n (156); Stone Giants of, 129, 133

u Ucita ["Hiniga"], 55 f/gvw/yMW, 391-92 n (320) Uktena. See Cherokee spirituality. Great Homed Serpent Ulufisu 'r/stone. See Cherokee spirituality United States National Museum, 40,43,44 University of Michigan, 40 University of Washington, 40 U.S. Anny Corp of Engineers, 98; as holding largest bone collection in U.S., 267; as

uncooperative with NAGPRA Review Committee, 271 U,S, Census, 298 Ussher, James, Archishop of Armagh, 11,15 Uto-Azteca, 226

Valdes, Gonzalo Fernandez de Oviedo y, 388 n(272) Valsequillo, Mexico, 12 Vandervoort, Terre L,, 242 Vega, Garcilaso de la, 55; on Etowah mound, 346 n (19); on mound design, 382-83 n (193) Vietzen, "Colonel" Raymond C , 240,422 n (6), 424 n (41); as aided by the Ohio Historical Society, 247; as anti-NAGPRA, 245, 254; as artist, 245; on archaeological destruction, 363 n (219); archaeological training of, 245,246; career of, 244-48; claim of to be archaeologist, 247; claims of Native adoption of, 269,433 n (185); claims of reincarnation from Natives of, 269; as cold-shouldered by archaeologists, 249, 268; complaints of about new-breed archaeologists, 249; craniometry of, 250; as daring girl to kiss skull, 264; as debunking Native claims of descent from Mound Builders, 270; as denying eastem Native identity, 279; disease studies of, 250; dismissal of oral tradition by, 273; as disrespectful of remains, 263-64; education of, 245-46; fantasies of, 245, 267, 268-70; as forming Archaeological Society of Ohio, 247-48; as forming Ohio Indian Relic Collectors' Society, 247; as GMC Tmck dealer, 246; as grave robber, 252-54, 262-63,431 n (142); as "honoring" Natives, 263; honors claimed by, 422 n (8); as identifying modem descendants of Mound Builders, 270; Indian Ridge Museum of, 7, 253-54, 265, 269; as Kentucky "Colonel," 246; lax dig security of, 263-64; military career of, 246; as minister/missionary, 245-46; on Mound-Builder burials, 275-76; necrophilia of, 269-70; as "playing Indian," 269,433 n (184); poor knowledge of Native Americans of, 247, 276,424 n

INDEX

Custer, 265,432 n (161); as related to George S. Patton, 432 n (161); as relics dealer, 246, 247,253-54,264,423 n (22), 427 n (88); remorse of, 268-69,424-25 n (42); remythologizing of, 262-66, 424-25 n (42), 427 n (85); as scoming oral tradition, 272; as trafficking in human remains, 264-65,432 n (159); views of on slavery, 246,432 n (161) Vietzen, Ruth, 422 n (6) Vikings, 67, 71, 72-73, 77, 81, 133 Virchow, Rudolph, 43 Vizenor, Gerald, 260,430 n (122) Voegelin, Erminie, 271, 374 n (64), 374 n (67), 434 n (200) Vogeles, Lieutenant A. W., 193 Von Staelin, J., 329 n (49) Voshall, Charlie, 263 "Vulture Culture," 1, 325 n (1)

w fValam Olum, xviii, xix, 140-44, 169 Walbridge, Thomas Campbell, 107,266,408 n(186) wampum, 112, 219, 141, 145, 276; as writing system, 141, 360 n (178) Wappaockanita, Chief, 110 Warren, Dr. J. C , 59 Warrior, Clyde, xxi, 321 n (61) Water Panther, 228, 365 n (247) Watkins, Joe, 260 Watts, Malachai, 293; family of, 293-94, 444 n (331) Wayne, Anthony, 98-99,278 Weatherford, Jack, 322 n (71) Webb, William, 225, 236,237,405 n (131), 412-13 n (246) Webster, Noah, theory of Spaniards as Mound Builders, 68; theory of Welsh as Mound Builders, 76-77 Welsh, Mark, 302 Wesleyan Convent Mission, 246 Weslager, C, A,, xviii West Virginia Committee on Native American Archaeological and Burial Policies, 255-56 Weyapiersenwah ["Bluejacket"], 122 White, Charles, 26, 28 White, Richard, "white guilt," 257-58

519

Whitelaw, Keith, xxii Whittlesey, Charles, 86, 361 n (195), 362 n (198) Wichita, 48 Wickliffe site (Kentucky), as "open air" musuem, 48 Wiget, Andrew, 274,436 n (227) Wilk, Richard R,, 260, 261 Williams, Chancellor, xxii Williams, Robert A., Jr., xxii Williams, Stephen, 51, 143, 328 n (29) Williamson, Hugh, 69 Willoughby, Charles C , 400 n (72) Wilmsen, Edwin, 11, 326 n (13) Wilson Mound, 304-5 Wilson, Dr. Peter [Chief fVaowawanaonk], 131 Wing, S. B., 99 Winters, Bob, 435 n (205) fVi-tapanoxwe ["Walks-with-daylight"], 148; on ghosts 183, 191; on Lenapd-Mohegan connection, 385 n (226) "witchcraft," 109, 230, 236, 399 n (56), 399 n (59), 420 n (377) women, as Earth medicine, 151, 157, 161 Worthington, General Thomas, 92,116 Wright, George Frederick, 365 n (253) Wyandot, 127, 128, 151, 393 n (353); on Cherokee ground houses, 135, 381 n (173); Dwarfs of, 394 n (6); Earth medicine of, 214, 228; Great Homed Serpent of, 215, 231, 232; on Mound Builders as Cherokee, 135; as "imcles," 150; water of, 214—15; war of against French, 404 n (117); White Panther sect of, 228 Wyman, Jeffries, 60 Wymer, DeeAnne, 301-2 Wynepuehsika, Chief, 111 Wyrick, David, 85-86, 362 n (198) Wyunta ["Tall Chief"], 34

Yale University, 47 Yarrow, Dr, H. C , 38

Zeisberger, David, 56, 129, 145-46, 148; on ancient Lenape warfare, 113, 147; on

520 NATIVE AMERICANS, ARCHAEOLOGISTS, AND THE MOUNDS

Lenape agriculture, 414-15 n (281); on Lenape mounds, 56, 152; on Lenap6 sweat lodge, 216; on Native populations, 65; on Native writing, 360 n (178); as spreading disease, 373 n (54) Zepp, Dr. E. C , 247^8 Zimmerman, Larry, 272,279; on antiNAGPRA lobby, 255; as attacked by antiNAGPRA lobby, 259-60; on "partnership" model, 261; on racism in archaeology, 259,429 n (116); on "remythologized" archaeology, 262, 266 Zinzendorf, Nicholas Ludwig, Count of, 228-29,418 n (329) Zion, Gail, vii, 241, 307