590 THE MOUNDS OF THE MISSISSIPPI VALLEY. 
either wholly or in part, by ditches and earthen walls. The palisades 
that once stood on some of these embankments* had long since rotted 
away, and in their places were growing oak trees which, from the 
number of concentric circles, must have been three hundred years old; 
and there were evident indications, not only that they had sprung up 
since the erection of these works, but that they were at least a second 
growth. The trenches were, in some cases, deep and wide, and in 
others shallow and narrow; and the breastworks varied in height from 
3 to 10 feet. In one case near Elmira they are said to have been 14 
feet wide at the base.t There were one or more entrances to these 
forts, from one of which a “covered way” sometimes led to the water.t 
The form of these inclosures was determined by the nature of the 
ground; and in area they varied from 2 to 6 acres, though occasionally 
they were much larger, as, for instance, the one near Livonia, N. Y., 
which contained 16 acres,§ and the one 14 miles from Sacketts Harbor, 
which, according to Moulton, “covers 50 acres.”|| That they were 
very numerous is evident from Squier’s estimate, placing them at from 
200 to 250;4] and as they seem to have made up in number what they 
lacked in size, it is equally evident that taken in mass the amount of 
labor involved in their construction must have been immense. It would 
be a grave mistake however to regard this as a measure of the popu- 
lousness of this region, since it probably resulted from the custom of 
the Indians of changing their village sites every “ten, fifteen, or thirty 
years,” or in fact whenever the searcity of fire-wood, the exhaustion of 
their fields, or the prevalence of an epidemic made such a step desir- 
able.** 
This is a brief general description of these inclosures as they appear 
to-day; and if we compare them with the “defensive works” as depicted 
in Ancient Monuments of the Mississippi Valley, it will be seen that 
they are very like those along the southern shore of Lake Erie, as well 
as the smallest of those in the Ohio Valley; and that they do not 
differ, except in size, from those found in the same valley, which are 
usually ascribed to the mound-builders. In situation, form, and struc- 
ture they are the same, and as both were cevered with heavy forests, 
there can be no difference urged between them upon the score of antiq- 
*MSS. of Prof. KE. N. Horsford in Abor. Mon. of New York, p. 38. 
+t Abor. Mon. of New York, p. 38. 
{ Kirkland MSS. quoted in Moulton, New York, pp. 16 and 17. In one case he 
speaks of a ‘covered way in the middle of a stockade down to the water;” in the 
other he says, ‘‘a way was dug to the water.” 
§ Abor. Mon. of New York, p. 44. 
EEC ynperlo. 
qj Abor. Mon, of New York, p. 11. Compare Moulton, p. 18, who says that on the 
south side of Lake Erie, for « distance of 50 miles, ‘is a series of old fortifications, 
some of which are from 2 to 4 miles apart, others half a mile only.” 
““Sagard, Voyage des Hurons, tome 1, p. 81: Paris, 1865, La Vega, 1, p. 265: 
Paris, 1709. 
My 
