134 ARCHAEOLOGY OF THE UNITED STATES. 



western Virginia (the ancient Huitramann aland). It purports to be of an appa- 

 rently early period, namely 1328. 1 It is in the Celtiberic character, hut has not 

 been deciphered. Its archaeology appears corroborative of the Cimbrian and the 

 Tuscarora traditions, representing a white race in the Ante-Columbian periods in 

 this part of America." (Vol. IV. p. IIS.)' 2 



Although Mr. Schoolcraft does not admit that any race, except the true aboriginal 

 one, has erected any of the monuments of the country, he refers, occasionally, to 

 indications of foreign presence that may have left an impression upon the arts of 

 the people. " There may also be forms of art, disinterred from American soil, 

 introduced from Asia, or by early adventurers from the Mediterranean, which have' 

 tended to direct the Indian mind to incipient steps of art or civilization. But 

 these vestiges only serve to perplex, without unravelling the subject." (Vol. V. p. 

 85. See also Ibid., p. 115.) 



Vague intimations of this kind are apt to excite the imagination, and to mislead 

 it. We should be glad to see gathered into one chapter, under an appropriate 

 head, all the evidences of art beyond the ability of the natives, that must be assigned 

 to an ante-Columbian period, and all other indications of a foreign people, before 

 that era, in the United States. They cannot be numerous, and the point is of 

 sufficient importance to be distinctly presented, with all the force it possesses. 

 They have hitherto proved unsubstantial whenever we have attempted to grasp 

 them. We have before us the " Alabama Stone," found, some thirty years ago, 

 near the Black Warrior river, which has been described as containing the following 

 inscription in Roman letters — 3 



HISRNEHNDREV. 



To our eyes, it reads, HISPAN. ET IND. REX. as plainly as the same inscription 

 on a Spanish quarter of a dollar that is somewhat worn. The figures may be as 

 above represented, but of course they cannot be intended for a date. 



We have seen the " Rutland stone," on which " the strokes, filled with a black 

 composition," resemble remarkably a regular series of literal characters; but they 

 were formed by the same hand that formed the stone, and are only freaks of 

 crystallization. 4 



1 Judging from the age of a tree on the mound. The stone has no date. 



5 This much controverted relic is a hard piece of sandstone in an irregular elliptical shape, an inch 

 and three-fourths in length, and an inch and a half in breadth, having upon it three lines of characters, 

 apparently alphabetic, which M. Joraard thought to be Lilian, while other European archajologists 

 have considered them nearer to the Phoenician, the Old British, or the Celtiberic. No one professes 

 to interpret their meaning. Its claims to notice rest entirely upon the assertion of the owner and exca- 

 vator of the Grave Creek Mound, that it was found in the heart of that tumulus. It is stated, in 

 opposition to its authenticity, that its discovery was not mentioned at the time of the excavation, nor 

 until the mound and its contents were used as an exhibition. If genuine, it is at least unicpie, and is 

 unsupported by any similar or analogous relic. Trans, of Am. Ethnol. Soc, Vol. I. Ibid., Vol. II. 

 Articles by Mr. Schoolcraft and Mr. Sqnier. 



' J Western Messenger, May, 1838. l An'Tiqihtates American.!?, p. SCO. 



