THOMAS.I THE OHIO DISTRICT. 565 



opinion largely upon his knowledge of the Indian modes of defense. His 

 remarks on this jwint have so much force in them that we quote ihe 

 following paragrajih : * ■ 



Those works ill northern Ohio an<l Western New York, which exhiliit the trenches 

 on theoutsiileofthe p;irapet, are also chisseil as defensiye, while those which ocenpy 

 level plateaux in tin? valley of the Ohio, with the trench inside, which are by far 

 the most numerous [?] are classed as sacred inclosures. I do not recognize the ini- 

 portauce«f this distinction. Many writers, who have speculated up'on this feature, 

 setHU to have adopted the idea thut the enemy, whoever he may have been, settled 

 down before these works, as did the Greeks under the walls of Troy, and engaged 

 in a protracted siegf . Now, every one acquainted with Indian warfare knows that 

 it consists in surprises. A blow is struck, a massacre ensues. -and a retreat follows. 

 Savages have not the means of subduing a fortification by regular approaches, nor 

 the accnniuhited provisions to sustain them while awaiting the result. A company 

 of infantry on the plains, protected by an enclosure of palisades, trunks of trees set 

 upright and sharpened to a point, may defy the combined power of the Indians 

 indefinitely, or until their supplies give out. The inoiiud-builders, if thc-ir enemies 

 were like modern Indians, had only to guard against sudden attacks, and a row of 

 pickets, without reference to whether the trench were inside or outside, would be 

 effectual. Catliu has shown that the Maudans; in fortifying their villages, con- 

 structed the ditch instde, the warriors using the embankment as a .shelter while they 

 shot their arrows through the interstices of the iiiokets.' 



Short'* carefully avoids any discussion of the question, which fact may 

 be accepted as a-clear indication that he did not feel inclined to give 

 his assent to the view advanced by the authors of ''Ancient Monu- 

 ments." Nadaillac,^ on the other hand, is disposed to adopt it in a 

 modified sense.* But in the American edition, the following words 

 introduced by the editor, Prof. Dall, express an entirely, opposite 

 view: " It is more reasonable to suppose theid to have been fortified 

 villages, according to a usage met with in various parts of the Missis- 

 sippi valley by the first explorers."" 



Lewis H. Morgan^ remarks that " with respect to the large circular 

 inclosures adjacent to and communicating with tjie squares, it is not 

 necessary that we should know their object. The one attached to the 

 High Bank Pueblo contains 20 acres of land, and doubtless subserved 

 some useful purpose in their plan of life. The 'first suggestion which 

 presents itself is, that as a substitute fbr a fen'ce it surrounded the gar- 

 den of the village in which they cultivated their maize, beans, squashes, 

 and tobacco. xVt the Minnitare village a similar indosure may now 

 be seen by the side ofr the village surrounding their cultivated land, 

 consisting partly of hedge and jjartly of stakes." This is the most 

 likely explanation of these works that has yet been presented. Whether 

 these dirt walls were mere supports to stockadesj is a question hot yet 

 settled ; nevertheless, as they were intended as a protection not only 

 against wild beasts, but also against human foes, it is probable that they 



' Letters and notes * * " on the X. A.Indians, ^ L'Ain6'riqu« PMbistoriqne: 



London, 1844. vol. I. p. 81. .Prehistoric races 4 P 301. 



1881. jip. 174-175. '* Houses and House Lite of the American Abo- 

 '^ North .\iuerieans of Antiquity. riginese. 



