Featured: Hare and Tabor T Shirts for discerning antiquarians

Hare and Tabor T Shirts for discerning antiquarians

Inscribed Across the Landscape: The Cursus Monuments of Great Britain

Inscribed Across the Landscape: The Cursus Monuments of Great Britain

Login

Register here - as a registered user you get more features and fewer ads.

Who's Online

There are currently, 490 guests and 8 members online.

Sponsors

Area Guide - Lower Ohio Valley (Ohio, Indiana, Illinois, Kentucky,) U.S. Ohio

Submitted by bat400 on Wednesday, 26 April 2006  Page Views: 8595

Pre-Contact

<< County Introductions >>

Country: United States State: Ohio
Internal Links:

Cahokia - Monk's Mound
Cahokia - Monk's Mound submitted by bat400 : Monk's Mound taken from the SE. bat 400. 23 June 2007. (Vote or comment on this photo)
Location, location, location.

The watershed of the lower Ohio River was the cradle of the largest city in North America north of Mexico prior to 1800 AD. It was an independent birthplace of accurate plotting of the sun and moon's movement. And it is an exception to the anthropological "rule" that only farming allows the building of large public works by a society.

The following describes the people who populated the Lower Ohio by cultural artifacts they left behind - including large building projects. The people who built them may not have been displaced by others, but instead, likely changed their lifestyle over time.

More to life than food. Archaic Tradition.

From roughly 8000 BC to 1000 BC the Paleo-Indian cultures that lived throughout the Americas had given way in the Lower Ohio to the Archaic Tradition. The climate was roughly that found in the area today with most animals and plants of the region in evidence as they were documented by the first Europeans to arrive (~1650AD.)

Archaic people made full use of their environment, with varied tools for hunting, fishing, and food preparation. The population was still nomadic or semi-nomadic hunter gatherers, but toward the end of this period they left signs of living for longer periods in one location.

Late in the period they devoted time and resources to artistic and ritual activities. They had started to leave ritual burials (in purpose made cemetery sites,) make decorative items, and build large mounds of shell. Archaic sites are less obvious than the structures made by later peoples. There are few sites to visit that are purely associated with the Archaic period, though there are places with evidence of use through out most prehistoric periods (e.g. Flint Ridge quarries, Licking County, Ohio. )

Masters of Mounds. The Woodland Tradition.

The Woodland Tradition starts at ~1000BC throughout the Lower Ohio Valley, with the introduction of pottery, and "ends" at about 1200 AD. There are several different Woodland cultures over time. The characteristics of the Woodland Traditions that separate them from the Archaic period include:
* Extended occupation in single areas,
* Working a wide variety of decorative objects,
* Using trade materials from the Great Lakes, throughout the Ohio and Mississippi Valleys, and east and south to the Appalachian Mountains,
* Elaborate burial rituals,
* Building mounds, earthworks and hill "forts,"
* Plotting movements of the sun and moon.

The epicenter of Woodland Tradition was Ohio. Roughly from earliest to latest these cultures are the Hopewell (1000 BC - 500 AD,) Adena (800 BC - 100 AD,) Fort Ancient (~0 - 1200 AD.)

The Hopewell peoples left earthworks and mounds. Many of them sighted alignments of the sun or moon. One of the largest sites is the Newark Earthworks, Newark Ohio, with large earthen enclosures, connecting corridors, and many mounds. The complex originally covered 4 square miles. These ceremonial centers don't appear to have been settlements, although living sites are often found near these areas. The mounds are sometimes associated with burials of different types.

Although the Hopewell built huge earthwork complexes, some of the largest single conical mounds are associated with the Adena culture, including Miamisburg Mound, Miamisburg Ohio. This is the largest conical mound in eastern US, and is about 870 feet in circumference and was originally over 70 feet high.

Effigy mounds are generally low relief, no more than 3 to 8 feet high. Great Serpent Mound, near Peebles Ohio, is dated to the Fort Ancient culture and is probably the best known effigy mound in the US. The mound takes the form of a coiled snake, devouring an egg. Winding over a hilltop ridge it is over 1000 feet long.


Urban Living. The Mississippian Tradition.

The Mississippian Tradition (1000AD - 1400 AD) has overlap with the late Woodland period. The main characteristics of this period include agriculture based on corn, wide trading networks, central city / town locations with villages and farms in outlying areas, and building flat-topped earthen pyramids and mounds topped by temples or palaces. There are indications of an elite group separated from the majority of inhabitants and a rich civic / religious life.

The outstanding site associated with this culture was Cahokia, in southern Illinois. In this region both the Missouri and Ohio rivers meet the Mississippi forming an area known as the American Bottom. Cahokia appears to have been the center of a society that occupied the Mississippi watershed for three to four centuries.

The city of Cahokia consisted of a central pyramid, a complex of mounds, and a large central plaza, all enclosed by a wooden stockade. Around this city center were more mounds, many permanent dwellings, smaller plazas, cemeteries, and a wooden pole circle with astronomical alignments. Still farther out were villages and farmsteads. Smaller towns and cities existed along the Mississippi and Ohio Rivers. At the height of Cahokia's sway the city population is estimated to have been 10,000 to 20,000. This made it the largest city north of the Aztec Empire, half a continent away, and was only surpassed by a modern city in North America by Philadelphia in 1800.

No written language was used and there is little evidence of a written numbering system. As Cahokia was abandoned as a permanent settlement at around 1400 AD, prior to the arrival of French explorers in the area, there is no written record of any details of religion, governance, or personality of the society. French and Spanish explorers found the remnants of the Mississippians farther south, people who still built mounds on a smaller scale into the 1700's, but the tradition had already died out in the Ohio Valley.

History

European settlers found Ohio Valley Indian groups living in small permanent and seasonal villages by farming, hunting, and gathering. There were also large "empty" areas used as hunting grounds without settlement. There was evidence (unrecognized at the time) that local populations had been decreased by European diseases. But there was, and is, no evidence that the then unused mound builder's towns had been vacated by either sudden epidemic or invasion by conquering outsiders.

The local native people neither claimed the mounds as their own creations, nor had a common explanation for them. Many Europeans could not believe that these sites had been created by the ancestors of the locals. Instead, wild and popular speculations held sway that the mounds had been created by the Lost Tribe of Israel, Atlantis refugees, or Vikings. These myths began to be dispelled as early as the mid 1800's, but occasional outbursts about ancient Egyptians or space-faring mound builders still get an airing in the media today.

The early building cultures of the Lower Ohio had favored locations later desired by the Europeans, (for similar reasons) so that most sites are now entirely lost. There are over a thousand sites in the Lower Ohio River area that are known to archeologists but have not been excavated. Many of these are not noticeable to the casual observer and as the eastern US has no tradition of public footpaths or common land (outside of government owned lands) sites on private land are inaccessible to most, but can fall prey to looters.


Some helpful references and resources:

Today the sites that can be seen are those that were the most inaccessible to European use at the time ( Fort Hill, Ohio) or were just too big to be easily destroyed (Cahokia.) Most public sites are owned or maintained by State governments.

"An Introduction to Indiana Prehistory", by James Kellar, Indiana Historical Society, 1983. General enough to apply to the whole area.

Ancient Monuments of the Mississippi Valley, by EG Squire and EH Davis, Smithsonian Contributions to Knowledge, No. 1, 1848. The original scholarly work, the first publication of the Smithsonian Institute. Still in print, with detailed maps of the era.

Mound Builders of Ancient America, by Robert Silverberg, New York Geographic Society, 1968. Entertaining overall history and the history of the myth of exotic origins of the mounds.

General Resources on Net:

University of Maryland center for archeological astronomy.

National Historic Landmarks – a Division of the US National Parks Service

National Register of Historic Places – An official listing of places worthy of preservation. This listing can aid in receiving federal funds for preservation, and prevents the use of federal monies in damaging or destroying the site.

State by State Guide from Digs archeology magazine for kids.

Illinois

The American Bottom. Illinois State Historical Library, Springfield

Indiana

Indiana University Glenn Black Archeology center and museum.

Indiana University Archeology current digs.

Ohio

Ohio Historical Society website.

Ohio History Central Online Encyclopedia.

Kentucky

Kentucky Heritage Council. Kentucky Prehistory.

Please add your thoughts on this site

Rock Art and the Prehistory of Atlantic Europe, Bradley

Rock Art and the Prehistory of Atlantic Europe, Bradley

Sponsors

More County Introductions

See all County Introductions →

"Area Guide - Lower Ohio Valley (Ohio, Indiana, Illinois, Kentucky,) U.S." | Login/Create an Account | 6 News and Comments
  
Go back to top of page    Comments are owned by the poster. We aren't responsible for their content.
Re: farming by the Hopewell by Anonymous on Sunday, 30 April 2006
The plants I'm speaking of do grow as wild plants today (one example I recall was a form of goosefoot), but the seeds found showed signs of being bred for larger seeds and greater yield. Those strains, I was told, died out when they were no longer cultivated and the weeds today presumably are descended from the same wild ancestors they were cultivated from. I was told that when corn arrived and the native weeds ceased to be cultivated, health deteriorated in ways that were easily noticeable to those examining skeletons from the different eras, implying that while corn was tastier and had better yield, the nutrition provided by the developed weeds was superior. Shades of McDonald's . . . even then.

The woman who was doing this research at the time was working near the Newark site, but I would have to brave the depths of the box stacks in my attic to find out just where. She lectured at the Newark site on a couple Saturdays when I lived in nearby Heath and I hung out at the mounds a lot, probably 1988.
[ Reply to This ]
    Re: farming by the Hopewell by bat400 on Monday, 01 May 2006
    (User Info | Send a Message)
    I understand. Yes, such variations of the plants would indicate real "farming" as opposed to gardening wild plants. I'm going to be visiting at the Glenn Black museum soon, and although their area of interest is the Mississippian site at Angel Mounds, they have done work at Hopewell sites as well. Perhaps someone there can point me to some information of this.

    I believe that some researchers point to the abandonment of the large Mississippian sites (and eventually that tradition) was due to health problems associated with a corn based diet. I believe pellagra had been pointed to as a probably "diet caused" disease that might have led to a move from more exclusive farming and back to farming / hunting & gathering. I'll try to find some more information.
    [ Reply to This ]
    Re: farming by the Hopewell by cpdunl01 on Wednesday, 12 April 2017
    (User Info | Send a Message)
    I'm only ten years late to this thread, but just the same, last time I was at Toltec Mounds just outside Little Rock Arkansas, I noticed that they had an outdoor display with all of the wild variants of crops that the Plum Bayou people had domesticated. They have found the seeds, I believe, and while the domestic versions died out the wild variants survived which is what they have growing there. There was easily 30 or more plants. Also worth noting is that the best explanation they have for why people left the Toltec Mounds area is that they just simply picked up and moved to Cahokia, which was bigger than London at the time. They had ethnic neighborhoods there and I think enough related Plum Bayou artifacts have been found there to make it more than speculative.
    [ Reply to This ]
      Re: farming by the Hopewell by bat400 on Tuesday, 25 April 2017
      (User Info | Send a Message)
      It's been more than 10 years since I was at Toltec Mounds. Do you have some new photos or added information for the site listing? It would be great to have some added information on the Portal site pages for Toltec . This Regional Introduction probably needs some updating. More recent information seems to keep pushing back the introduction of plants from outside of this region to earlier dates and the use by the Hopewell of domesticated sunflower, squash, maygrass and goosefoot, at a minimum, based on seed casing and size of grains alone. It also seems that now more research on plant domestication is focused on molecular examination of various strains and their relationships.
      [ Reply to This ]

Re: farming by the Hopewell by bat400 on Friday, 28 April 2006
(User Info | Send a Message)
I'm by no means an expert, and my guide is certainly a summary. You may be quite right, although this is not anything I've read.
I'm unsure where gardening / farming would split. The people of the Woodland period appear to have been "gardeners" in the sense that they seem to have encouraged specific wild plants by controlled burns and weeding out unwanted plants. (I think that supposition is based on pollen, seed, and plant pieces found at sites.) And I've read that there is some evidence that nut tree
orchards appear to have been cultivated by pre-historic people in that way. I believe part of the "not farmers" idea is based on a lack of obvious farming tools like chert hoes. They don't appear in a big way until Mississippian culture.
But the "gardeners" not "farmers" idea would be blown away by evidence of slected breeding, as you describe. (e.g. Maize - it was developed until it couldn't propagate without humans.) The Fort Ancient museum in Ohio has an interesting outdoor garden of wild plants, created from evidence at Woodland sites.
I was unaware that any remains have been found that are not in evidence as wild plants growing today. Is your source from information at the Newark site?
[ Reply to This ]

Re: farming by the Hopewell by Anonymous on Wednesday, 26 April 2006
I had been told that the builders of the Newark Earthworks did farm, planting and over generations improving local plants which now are no longer cultivated. Someone who had done archaeological botanical research said they found the altered seeds in the living areas, but iover centuries they were replaced as crops by corn. However, that was over 15 years ago, and research may have turned up conflicting evidence.
[ Reply to This ]

Your Name: Anonymous [ Register Now ]
Subject:


Add your comment or contribution to this page. Spam or offensive posts are deleted immediately, don't even bother

<<< What is five plus one as a number? (Please type the answer to this question in the little box on the left)
You can also embed videos and other things. For Youtube please copy and paste the 'embed code'.
For Google Street View please include Street View in the text.
Create a web link like this: <a href="https://www.megalithic.co.uk">This is a link</a>  

Allowed HTML is:
<p> <b> <i> <a> <img> <em> <br> <strong> <blockquote> <tt> <li> <ol> <ul> <object> <param> <embed> <iframe>

We would like to know more about this location. Please feel free to add a brief description and any relevant information in your own language.
Wir möchten mehr über diese Stätte erfahren. Bitte zögern Sie nicht, eine kurze Beschreibung und relevante Informationen in Deutsch hinzuzufügen.
Nous aimerions en savoir encore un peu sur les lieux. S'il vous plaît n'hesitez pas à ajouter une courte description et tous les renseignements pertinents dans votre propre langue.
Quisieramos informarnos un poco más de las lugares. No dude en añadir una breve descripción y otros datos relevantes en su propio idioma.