296 



SCIENCE. 



[Vol. XV. No. 380 



stocks were found. One proof of this is seen in the group- 

 ing and geographical distribution of the comprehensive fami- 

 lies over the continent. 



Judging by the growth of languages in Europe, although 

 the cases are not exactly parallel, centuries must be allowed 

 for this local development. It is said by those best qualified 

 to judge, that the shifting, changing, and tribal develop- 

 ment known to have taken place among the Dakotas of the 

 North-west alone must have required three or four centuries 

 in advance of the Columbian discovery. The necessary in- 

 ference to be drawn from this is, that the tribes, or rather 

 families of tribes, found inhabiting this " mound region " by 

 the first European explorers, had occupied substantially the 

 same area for hundreds of years previous thereto. Not that 

 there was no shifting or changing of positions by tribes, for 

 there can be no doubt that this occurred to a greater or less 

 extent, but that the families or stocks mentioned, or most of 

 them, were in the area included in the eastern half of the 

 United States and Canada (which we designate in a broad 

 sense the "mound region") for centuries preceding the ad- 

 vent of the white man. 



The same method of reasoning will apply to some extent 

 to the growth of customs, as this must also have required 

 time. The result of this course of reasoning, which seems 

 to be justified by the facts, is to force us to one of the fol- 

 lowing conclusions: 1st, That the mound-builders, if a dif- 

 ferent race or people from the Indians, disappeared from the 

 mound area many centuries before the advent of the whites; 

 or, 2d, That there was an overlapping of the two races, that 

 is to say, they occupied the area jointly for some centuries; 

 or, 3d, That the Indians were the authors of the ancient 

 monuments. As it will be necessary in the course of this 

 investigation to discuss the question of the authorship of 

 some of these antiquities, the decision reached on this sub- 

 ject is important in this connection. 



Turning now to the Cherokees, we will proceed with the 

 special object of this paper. 



It is conceded that there is no hope of reconstructing a 

 systematic pre-Columbian history of any one of the tribes or 

 peoples of the area under consideration. The utmost that 

 can be expected is, by a careful and thorough correlation of 

 the data, to throw some light into that past which has so 

 long been considered as wrapped in impenetrable mystery. 

 It is by no means probable that as much will be accom- 

 plished in regard to the past of the people of this region as 

 has been done for Mexico and Central America, yet it is the 

 belief of the writer that much more is possible in this direc- 

 tion than has generally been supposed. 



This tribe was for a long time a puzzling factor to stu- 

 de^« of ethnology, as they were in doubt whether to con- 

 ^^ j~_lji abnormal offshoot from one of the well-known 

 .stocks or the remnant of some undetermined or ex- 

 \' family. It now appears, however, to be the clearly 

 settled opinion of linguists that the language is an offshoot 

 of the Huron-Iroquois stock. This is an important fact in 

 the study of the past, not only of this tribe, but also of the 

 family with which it is connected, as it necessitates looking 

 to the same point for the origin of both. 



When the people of this tribe first became known to the 

 Europeans, they were located in the mountainous region in- 

 cluding the south east corner of what is now Tennessee, the 



sout^-west portion of North Carolina, the north-west part of 

 South Carolina, and a strip along the northern border of 

 Georgia, — a section which they continued to occupy down 

 to a recent date, and where a remnant may still be found. 



The first notice of them is found in the chronicles of De 

 Soto's expedition, which speak of them as the " Chelaques " 

 or " Achelaques," words which give more correctly the 

 sound of the name they gave themselves than the modern 

 Anglicized form "Cherokee." These early records locate 

 them about the head waters of the Savannah River. The 

 exact route of the Spanish expedition has not been satisfac- 

 torily determined ; nevertheless it is conceded by those best 

 qualified to decide, that, when De Soto encountered people 

 of this tribe, he was somewhere about the head waters of the 

 Savannah, probably in the noi'th-eastern part of Georgia. 

 It was in this section, presumably in western North Caro- 

 lina, that John Lederer encountered them during his visit 

 to this part of the continent in 1669-70, for there can be no 

 longer any reasonable doubt that he alludes to them where 

 he speaks of the Indians of the " Apalatian Mountains." 

 Their subsequent history is too well known to require fur- 

 ther mention here. 



Their relation to the Iroquois indicates a northern rather 

 than a southern or south-western origin. This seems to be 

 confirmed by the few rays of light which tradition, the rec- 

 ords, and archaeology throw upon tlieir past history. Hay- 

 wood states, in his "Natural and Aboriginal History of 

 Tennessee," that they " were firmly established on the Ten- 

 nessee River or Hogohega (the Holston) before the year 

 1650, and had dominion over all the country on the east 

 side of the Alleghany Mountains, which includes the head 

 waters of the Yadkin, Catawba, Broad River, and the head 

 waters of the Savannah," — a statement borne out by the fact 

 that as late as 1756, when the English built Fort Dobbs on 

 the Yadkin, not far from Salisbury, they first obtained the 

 privilege of doing so by treaty with Atacullaeulla, the Cher- 

 okee chief. The same authority states that they formerly 

 had temporary settlements on New River (the Upper Ka- 

 nawha) and on the head waters of the Holston. In De 

 Lisle's maps, 1700 to 1712, Cherokee villages are located on 

 the extreme head waters of the Holston and Clinch Rivers, 

 as well as on and about the mouth of the Little Tennessee. 



Their traditions in regard to their migrations are some- 

 what confused, and, like all Indian traditions, must be taken 

 only with careful sifting, and where strengthened by cor- 

 roborative evidence or well-marked indications of being an- 

 cient. Yet there is a uniformity in some respects which, 

 independent of other evidence, would justify the assumption 

 that they contain a vein of truth and have some basis of 

 fact. 



One of the most important of these is that mentioned by 

 John Haywood in the work above named, in which they 

 claim to have formerly lived in the Ohio valley, and to 

 have constructed the Grave Creek mound and other earth- 

 works in that section. This author's statement is as fol- 

 lows: — 



" The Cherokees had an oration in which was contained 

 the history of their migrations, which was lengthy." This 

 related "that they came from the upper part of the Ohio, 

 where they erected the mounds on Grave Creek, and that they 

 removed hither [East Tennessee] from the country where Hon- 



