Chapter 1

Produced by Julia Miller and the Online Distributed Proofreading Team at http://www.pgdp.net (This file was produced from scans of public domain material produced by Microsoft for their Live Search Books site.)

Transcriber's Note

A number of typographical errors have been maintained in this version of this book. They have been marked with a [TN-#], which refers to a description in the complete list found at the end of the text. Inconsistencies in spelling and hyphenation have been maintained. A list of inconsistently spelled and hyphenated words is found at the end of the text.

Oe ligatures have been expanded.

THE ANCIENT MONUMENTS

OF

NORTH AND SOUTH AMERICA.

SECOND EDITION,

Corrected, enlarged and with some additions,

BY C. S. RAFINESQUE, A. M.--Ph. D.

_Professor of Historical and Natural Sciences, Member of many Learned Societies in Philadelphia, New York, Lexington, Cincinnatti,[TN-1] Nashville, Paris, Bordeaux, Brussels, Bonn, Vienna, Zurich, Naples &c, the American Antiquarian Society, the Northern Antiquarian Society of Copenhagen &c._

The massive ruins the arts and skill unfold Of busy workers, and their styles reveal, The objects and designs of such devisers: In silent voices they speak, to thinking minds They teach, who were the human throngs that left Uplifted marks for witness of past ages.

_PHILADELPHIA_

1838.

Printed for the Author.

NOTICE.

This Essay or Introduction to my Researches on the Antiquities and Monuments of North and South America, was printed in September 1838 in the first Number of the American Museum of Baltimore, a literary monthly periodical undertaken by Messrs. Brooks and Snodgrass, as a new series of the North American Quarterly Magazine. Being printed in a hurry and at a distance several material errors occured,[TN-2] which are now rectified, and this second edition will form thereby the Introduction to my long contemplated Work on the Ancient Monuments of this continent: to which I alluded in my work on the Ancient Nations of America published in 1836. I will add some notes or additions thereto, and may gradualy[TN-3] publish my original descriptions and views, plans, maps &c, of such as I have surveyed, examined and studied between 1818 and this time; comparing them with those observed by others in America or elsewhere of the same character--such works are of a national importance or interest, and ought to be patronized by the States or Learned Societies, or wealthy patriots; but if there is little prospect of their doing so, I must either delay or curtail the publication of the interesting materials collected for 20 years past.

INTRODUCTION.

The feelings that lead some men to investigate remains of antiquity and search into their origin, dates and purposes, are similar to those actuating lofty minds, when not satisfied with the surface of things, they inquire into the source and origin of every thing accessible to human ken, and scrutinize or analize[TN-4] every tangible object. Such feelings lead us to trace events and principles, to ascend rivers to their sources, to climb the rugged sides of mountains and reach their lofty summits, to plough the waves and dive into the sea, or even soar into the air, to scan and measure the heavenly bodies, and at last to lift our eyes and souls to the _Supreme Being_, the source of all.--Applied to mankind the same feelings invite us to seek for the origin of arts and sciences, the steps of civilization on earth, the rise of nations, states and empires, tracing their cradles, dispersions and migrations by the dim records of traditional tales, or the more certain monumental evidence of human structures.

This last evidence is but a branch of the archeological science, embracing besides the study of documents, records, medals, coins, inscriptions, implements, &c., buried in the earth or hidden in recesses: while the ruins of cities, palaces and temples, altars and graves, pyramids and towers, walls and roads, sculptures and idols--reveal to our inquiries not only the existence of their devisers and framers at their locations, but give us a view of their civilization, religions, manners and abilities.

If the annals of the Greeks and Romans had been lost, as have been those of Egypt, of Assyria and many other early empires, we should still have in the ruins and monuments of Italy, and Greece, complete evidence of the existence of those nations, their location, power and skill; nay, even of the extent of their dominion by their colonial monuments, scattered from Syria to Spain, from Lybia to Britain. If the British annals should ever be lost hereafter by neglect or revolutions, the ruins of dwellings, churches, monuments &c., built in the British style, will reveal the existence or preserve the memory of the wide extent of British power by colonies sent from North America to Guyana, from Hindustan to Ceylon, South Africa and Australia.

And thus it is in both Americas where many nations and empires have dwelt and passed away, risen and fallen by turns, leaving few or no records, except the traces of their existence, and widely spread colonies by the ruins of their cities and monuments, standing yet as silent witnesses of past dominion and great power. It is only of late that they have begun to deserve the attention of learned men and historians--what had been stated by Ulloa, Humboldt, Juarros, Delrio, &c., of some of them, chiefly found in the Spanish part of America, as well as the scattered accounts of the many fragments found in North America, from the lakes of Canada to Louisiana, although confined to a few places or widely remote localities, have begun to excite the curiosity of all inquiring men, and are soon likely to deserve as much interest as the famed ruins of Palmyra and Thebes, Babylon and Persepolis; when the future historians of America shall make known the wonderful and astonishing results that they have suggested, or will soon unfold, particularly when accurately surveyed and explored, drawn and engraved; instead of being hidden and veiled, or hardly noticed by the detractors of the Americans, the false historians of the school of Depaw and Robertson, who have perverted or omitted the most striking features of American history.

The most erroneous conceptions prevail as yet concerning them, and the most rude or absurd ideas are entertained in our country of their objects and nature. As in modern Greece, every ruin is now a _Paleo-castro_ or old castle for the vulgar peasant or herdsman, thus all our ruins of the West are _Indian forts_ for the settlers of the Western states; and every traveller gazing at random at a few, exclaims that _nothing is known about them, nor their builders_. The more refined writers can be very sentimental on their veiled origin, but scarcely any one takes the trouble to compare them with others elsewhere, in or out of America, which would be, however, the only means to attain the object they seem desirous of, or to unravel their historical riddle. Some writers speak of them as if they were only a few mounds and graves, scarcely worthy of notice; yet they are such mounds as are found yet in the Trojan plains, sung by Homer, dating at least three thousand years ago, and even by many deemed earlier than the Trojan war, and still existing to this day to baffle our inquiries: while similar monuments existing by thousands in the plains of Scythia and Tartary, Persia and Arabia, as well as the forests and prairies of North America, evince a striking connexion of purpose and skill by remote ancient nations of both hemispheres.

But our monuments do not merely consist in such mounds or tumuli, since we find besides in North America, ruins of cities, some of which were walled with earth or even stones, real forts or citadels, temples and altars of all shapes, but chiefly circular, square or polygonal, some elliptical, hexagonal, octagonal, _&_c., quite regularly pointing to the cardinal points. We have also traces of buildings, foundations, roads, avenues, causeways, canals, bridges, dromes, or racecourses, pillars and pyramids, wells, pits, arenas, _&_c. And of these not a few, but hundreds of them, many of which are unsurveyed and undescribed as yet. These, it must be recollected, are all north of Mexico, or the region of the more perfect monuments of Mexican and Central America, although often in the same style. There, as in South America, structures are met of the most elaborate workmanship, of cut and carved stones, with hard cement, vaulted arches, fine sculptures and even inscriptions. The materials of our Northern monuments are often ruder, chiefly of earth, clay, gravel, small stones, or even _shells_ near the sea-shores, sometimes of _pizé_ or beaten and rammed clay, (as in Peru,) unbaked bricks and rough stones. These facts may confirm the Mexican traditions, stating that the nations of Anahuac (now Mexico) once dwelt further north, in our fruitful Western plains, where wood abounded and stones were scarce, wherefore they built their cities and _t_emples[TN-5] of wood, raising altars, platforms, walls and entrenchments of earth or clay.

The dreams and false hypotheses upon America have amused the learned for ages: in attempting to account for the origin of the Americans and their monuments, they have generally neglected to compare them with the monuments and languages of all the other nations scattered over the whole earth, or else only taking a partial view of them, comparing a few fragments of two or three nations or regions, a few words of a centesimal part of the actual languages, the writers or historians have fallen into egregious mistakes; more fond of systematic errors than hidden truth, they have indulged, without due consideration, in mere dreams or systems, based on a few facts, that are overruled by hundreds of other facts, unknown to them, or neglected when known. It would be useless and tedious to refute again such false systems, that have been refuted and upset by each other. It may, however, be needful, perhaps, to mention three of the most absurd, in order to warn against them, or show their improbability and impossibility. They may be called for distinction sake, the _Jewish_ system, the _Mongolic_ system, and the _American_ system.

Among these the first named is one of the oldest, and at the same time, has yet a powerful hold upon many minds; it ascribes the whole American population with one hundred languages and one thousand dialects, myriads of ruins and monuments, _to the Jews_! either of the ten dispersed tribes, who were not Jews but Israelites--or of Solomon's time and voyages, while the Jews only began to exist as such after his death--or of patriarchal times antecedent to their existence, when they were only OBRIM, whom we miscall _Hebrews_, or going still further back to the times of Noah and Peleg, when not even the Obrim had any existence. It has been proved that the American nations did not possess the use of the plough, iron, alphabets, or week of seven days, which no Jewish nor Hebrew descendants could have forgotten. The American languages have as much, or more affinities with the Sanscrit, Greek, Latin, Celtic, Persian, Berber, Turkish, &c., languages, than with the old and modern Hebrew and Arabic. The Jews or IEUDI, who only began two thousand four hundred years ago were not navigators; therefore it is evident that they cannot have come to America and produced here the two thousand nations and tribes of this vast continent: nay, not even a single one of them perhaps.

The Mongolic opinion, lately revived by Ranking, is the most extravagant of all, since it ventures to assert seriously, and derive all these nations and languages from late colonies of Mongols within less than one thousand years ago, who came to America over the ice, bringing with them tame elephants for sport, that are since become the fossil elephants and mammoths buried in our diluvial or alluvial soil--to state these absurdities is a sufficient refutation, every man of any reading and scientific knowledge will perceive the impossibility.

Galindo and Josiah Priest have quite lately revived also the opinion of some dreaming philosophers who had asserted that America was the _cradle of mankind_ or one of them, instead of Central Asia. Galindo allows, however, the Caucasian race of men to be distinct; but he says--"_The hum_a_n[TN-6] race of America I must assert to be the most ancient on the globe_;[TN-7]"[8-*]

He goes on to state that to the primæval civilization of America must be assigned a great and indefinite antiquity, leaving however no palpable monuments; but sending colonies to civilize China and Japan! is not this preposterous? where are the proofs either from traditions, languages, monuments or other sources?

Meantime Josiah Priest, in his compilation on American antiquities, has boldly asserted that Noah's ark rested in America, (whereabout?) and that he had three sons, one white, one red and one black! (what was the color of their wives?) from whom are descended the three races of mankind, who colonized the whole earth, leaving, however, neither white nor black in America[TN-8] The glaring incongruity, of these bold assertions, or of the indefinite origin of Galindo are equally palpable; but nevertheless it is not improbable that they will find now and hereafter other advocates, since the absurd Jewish origin of all the Americans has still many believers, and even Ranking has perhaps some supporters.

To admit that America was the only cradle of mankind, is based on no evidence whatever, either historical or philological or monumental: while on the contrary all the monuments and records of the eastern oontinent[TN-9] trace this cradle to Central Asia. To suppose that America was one of the human cradles, is certainly worthy of inquiry; but such a cradle must be sought for and located somewhere, and neither the volcanic mountains, nor swampy plains of South America, nor the frigid wilds of North America, appear calculated to offer it. Others have been thought of in Africa and Australia; but seldom in the spirit of seeking truth, rather in that of supporting some favorite doctrine. Such speculations ought at least to be based on better foundations than mere assertions, evident philological proofs are required before they can be listened to, and no total and complete diversity of mankind in every aspect has been found any where to support the theory of a plurality of human species and Cradles. Europe and Africa have been repeatedly invaded by migrations from Asia. In America such migrations can be traced north and east by the Atlantic ocean, or north west from Berhring's[TN-10] strait, while we have not the faintest indication of invasions of Asia from America. The only traditional account of the invasion of Europe, and North Africa by the _Atlantes_ (probably Americans, for the great _Atlantis_ was this continent) is involved in doubt, and besides these very Atlantes were deemed Neptunian colonies; although it must be confessed that in almost every instance the colonists to America appear to have found previous inhabitants, who must have been still earlier and remote colonies, if they were not indigenous. But the sea-shores of North America from Labrador to Carolina were desert at a very late period comparatively, when the Western tribes came there.

The actual purpose does not extend to all the details of these deep inquiries, but is chiefly confined to ascertain and prove the similarity of the oldest primitive monuments of both hemispheres, and whereby a connection of coeval and similar civilization is evinced in the earliest times before the records of history. This evidence, which may be called _monumental_, dives into the gloom of past ages, and hence descends to ours, reaching our understanding by gradual links: while the _philological_ evidence of spoken modern languages, fragments or children of older primitive languages, ascends by their means to equal antiquity; both combining, therefore, to complete the history of mankind, where annals and traditions cease to lead us or are quite obscure: these combined bring more certainty to the scrutinising mind than the mere physical features of men, and their complexions, so fluctuating and mingled. But neither of them solve the question of the actual original Cradle or Cradles of mankind. If indeed monuments and languages of various parts of the earth were quite different, and the features or colors of men likewise distinct there, we might suppose there could have been several species and cradles of men: but it is not so, features and languages are so variable and mingling in our own times, and so diversified every where, as to baffle and preclude complete insulation. Monuments are also after all so much alike in many remote parts, that although divisible into styles of various ages and stages of improvement, they do evince a great similarity in coeval ages or stages of civilization.

To prove this great fact and the important results, might be the subject of a large work, and we have heard that Mr. Warden has been engaged in Paris in something of this kind. His work has not yet reached us; but whenever it will be completed, it shall be only one step towards the elucidation of this deep theme. Many facts are yearly evolved in America, new researches undertaken and discoveries made: while in Africa, Lybia, Arabia, Persia, India and even the Oceanic world of Australia and Polynesia, similar discoveries are progressing and new facts made known, that will unfold many new and unexpected analogies with American inquiries. Of the early Monuments of China, Tartary and Thibet, we know little or nothing, and in the very heart of Asia, the real Cradle of Arts and Sciences, if not mankind itself, our learned travellers have not yet penetrated, and the most interesting region of the globe is thus almost unknown to us. This subject is therefore in a progressive state of inquiries, and future ages will yet add thereto: although a number of Ruins and Monuments crumble or disappear under the plough or the leveling energy of men, little respecting these structures of antiquity, enough of unexplored sites will be discovered and surveyed: some of our rudest monuments appear indestructible, the lofty mounds of earth have withstood like the heavy pyramids of Egypt, the lapse of countless ages, some even appear now covered with a dress of new soil, or even diluvial coat, as if they were antediluvian!

Meantime we may endeavor to collect and compare the facts already known, and deduce therefrom some useful instruction to satisfy curiosity or gratify the greedy wish to ascend to the origin of every thing, and of mankind above all. The most proper and obvious way to elucidate American Antiquities and Monuments, would be by classifying them, which has however never been attempted, having always been noticed or elucidated loosely at random, or in a kind of geographical arrangement of the regions where found. Such classification might be based either on their styles, forms and materials, or ultimately their ascertained scopes of purposes which are even now often doubtful or doubted. They might thus be divided into classes or series easily distinguished between themselves, but all finding their equivalents or similar structures in the Eastern Continent, _an important fact_ to be kept in mind. There are out of America some structures not found in it, but there are none in it that cannot be detected somewhere else, either in Europe, North Africa or Asia, Polynesia, &c, among the earliest Monuments or Ruins, or the rudest structures. None of the latest styles and improved Architecture, such as Colonnades, roofed temples, Budhist and Mahometan temples, Gothic or Modern Churches, fortifications with large towers or bastions--are met in America, being a convincing proof that all the American structures were of a previous date, or of an earlier style, than these later.

But even some very ancient Eastern structures are lacking in America, or only found in a modified form. Thus although the Cyclopian structures had been denied to America, they are not quite lacking; although their Tyrinthian style, the rudest of huge unshapen blocks of stone put together, has not yet been met with, the other Cyclopian styles are found of rough polygones or irregular squared stones: the most common however is of rough flat stones put together pretty much as our dry walls are to this day by us.

If we do not exactly find in this Continent, the Celtic style of Stonehenge and circles of stones scattered from Persia to Scotland, we meet several other branches of the Celtic style, standing rough pillars, massive altars, circles of earth, fortified villages similar to those of Britain, miscalled _Roman Camps_, although no such camps are found where the Romans went out of Celtica, and the American camps or forts are certainly not Roman! Whether the Celtic race ever came to America has been doubted, and maybe deemed doubtful yet: there are two strong arguments against it at least, the lack of Monuments like the Stonehenge temples, and the Celtic structure of Language, or regular series of interposed ideas not being widely spread in America, and chiefly found in Brazil and Florida, where nations of another lineage dwelt. Yet it is pretty certain, notwithstanding that nearly all the writers, omit it or deny it, that the old Celts had an intercourse of trade in America once, even from Gaul. It has lately been discovered by Sir A. Brooke, that there are Celtic monuments in Morocco, he describes a large mound with a circle of stones around. The N. W. of Africa must in very early time have been one of the regions whence the _Atlantes_ went or came; this is an historical fact, and their posterity yet live in Africa from Mount Atlas to Nubia, their language[TN-11] have the Celtic and Semetic structure.

They gave name to the Atlantic Ocean, and this name is one of the few that have reached our times, Africa and Spain once joined, even the Berbers have a tradition of it. The same Nations filled Lybia and Spain, the _Bas-Tules_, _As-Tures_ of Spain were _Tulas_, _Turas_, as in Central Asia and Central America; so were also the _Tur-tules_ or _Tur-detani_, &c. while the _Cantes_ of Spain were akin to the _Antes_ of Lybia, _Hyantes_ of Greece. The Greeks have stated that their Atlantes or _Atalantoi_ were formed of the united nations of Atlas and Antoi or Anteus.

Pyramids exactly similar to those of Egypt, and pillared temples similar to those of Thebes, are not met with in America; but we have their equivalent in the pyramidal Teocalis of Anahuac, and the temples of Peru, similar to the pyramidal temples of Assyria and India, towers in stages like those of Lybia, Syria and China. In all cases the materials depend pretty much on the localities, and the kind of stones or proper materials at hand, although often carried from a distance, and requiring the joint labors of many thousand men during several years.