White Settlers Buried the Truth About the Midwests Mysterious Mound Cities

[Judi Lynn]

Pioneers and early archaeologists credited distant civilizations, not Native Americans, with building these sophisticated complexes



View of Monks Mound from Woodhenge Circle (Photo courtesy of Sarah E. Baires)
By Sarah E. Baires, Zócalo Public Square
smithsonian.com
February 23, 2018 10:56AM

Around 1100 or 1200 A.D., the largest city north of Mexico was Cahokia, sitting in what is now southern Illinois, across the Mississippi River from St. Louis. Built around 1050 A.D. and occupied through 1400 A.D., Cahokia had a peak population of between 25,000 and 50,000 people. Now a UNESCO World Heritage Site, Cahokia was composed of three boroughs (Cahokia, East St. Louis, and St. Louis) connected to each other via waterways and walking trails that extended across the Mississippi River floodplain for some 20 square km. Its population consisted of agriculturalists who grew large amounts of maize, and craft specialists who made beautiful pots, shell jewelry, arrow-points, and flint clay figurines.

The city of Cahokia is one of many large earthen mound complexes that dot the landscapes of the Ohio and Mississippi River Valleys and across the Southeast. Despite the preponderance of archaeological evidence that these mound complexes were the work of sophisticated Native American civilizations, this rich history was obscured by the Myth of the Mound Builders, a narrative that arose ostensibly to explain the existence of the mounds. Examining both the history of Cahokia and the historic myths that were created to explain it reveals the troubling role that early archaeologists played in diminishing, or even eradicating, the achievements of pre-Columbian civilizations on the North American continent, just as the U.S. government was expanding westward by taking control of Native American lands.

. . .



View of Cahokia from Rattlesnake Mound ca 1175 A.D., drawn by Glen Baker 
(Image courtesy of Sarah E. Baires)

The largest mound at Cahokia was Monks Mound, a four-terraced platform mound about 100 feet high that served as the city’s central point. Atop its summit sat one of the largest rectangular buildings ever constructed at Cahokia; it likely served as a ritual space.

. . .

The creation of the Myth of the Mounds parallels early American expansionist practices like the state-sanctioned removal of Native peoples from their ancestral lands to make way for the movement of “new” Americans into the Western “frontier.” Part of this forced removal included the erasure of Native American ties to their cultural landscapes.

In the 19th century, evolutionary theory began to take hold of the interpretations of the past, as archaeological research moved away from the armchair and into the realm of scientific inquiry. Within this frame of reference, antiquarians and early archaeologists, as described by Bruce Trigger, attempted to demonstrate that the New World, like the Old World, “could boast indigenous cultural achievements rivaling those of Europe.” Discoveries of ancient stone cities in Central America and Mexico served as the catalyst for this quest, recognizing New World societies as comparable culturally and technologically to those of Europe.

But this perspective collided with Lewis Henry Morgan’s 1881 text Houses and House-life of the American Aborigines. Morgan, an anthropologist and social theorist, argued that Mesoamerican societies (such as the Maya and Aztec) exemplified the evolutionary category of “Middle Barbarism”—the highest stage of cultural and technological evolution to be achieved by any indigenous group in the Americas. By contrast, Morgan said that Native Americans located in the growing territories of the new United States were quintessential examples of “Stone Age” cultures—unprogressive and static communities incapable of technological or cultural advancement. These ideologies framed the archaeological research of the time.

Read more: https://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/white-settlers-buried-truth-about-midwests-mysterious-mound-cities-180968246/#gMJWq2s4GDbYjTOL.99

Anthropology:
https://www.democraticunderground.com/12293623

[rzemanfl]

1. Have you read "1491?" n/t

[Judi Lynn]

2. I'm part of the way through it!

Someone at DU mentioned it sometime late last year, and I had to get a copy, too.

That book is so worth reading!

Have you finished it, yourself?

[rzemanfl]

3. I have, sometime late last year. The stuff about the various dynasties gets a little thick at times,

but overall it is very thought provoking.

[Judi Lynn]

4. It's a shame US Americans have been raised to believe everything in the Western Hemisphere

which has any value was created by and only by white Anglo Saxon invaders, and that civilization only happens through the presence of the conquerors who also rewrite history when they plunder and murder their way to absolute power.

Just a little short-sighted, and profoundly ignorant and stupid is the most one could say about common perceptions of pre-Columbian life in the Americas.

So glad real information is coming to life now, through rapidly improving technologies, whether or not racist Americans are capable of understanding it.

Regarding the book, I had to stand a little at a distance, myself, from the dynasties information, especially considering the author shared his ancestry as being among the first European arrivals in the U.S. It seemed he would have an unavoidable influence to see or seek information which would tend to supplement his conditioned point of view. I really did back away, have reservations while going through that material. You do have to hand it to the author, however, for working really hard to deliver a lot of very worthy information to his readers.

[lunasun]

5. I have been to Cahokia . So much to learn about what the area was like almost a 1000 yrs ago