294 Cincinnati Society of Natural History. 
township presents an almost precipitous front, the slopes bordering 
the Little Miami are much less abrupt, receding gradually for a half 
mile to a mile from the stream. A plain of rich alluvial or bottom 
land varying from one eighth to three quarters of a mile in width, oc- 
cupies a position bettween the bluffs and the rivers. Jutting out from 
the hills or bluffs are plateaus, of drift gravel formation, having a 
range of elevation of from thirty to one hundred feet above the first 
bottom of the river. On these elevated plains along the course of the 
Little Miami river, the Prehistoric Monuments are found in greatest 
number. . 
In the northeastern portion of the township, located on a level pla- 
teau, elevated about one hundred feet above the Little Miami river, and 
in surveys Nos. 1775 and 1575, is an interesting group of earthworks. Of 
this group several of the most prominent were described in a former 
paper, entitled the ‘“ Prehistoric Monuments of the Little Miami Val- 
ley,’* and designated as Group D on the accompanying chart. Since — 
the time of the publication of the above mentioned paper, many ad- 
ditional works have been discovered. In the present paper, I shall 
continue the same enumeration as in the former, and designate this 
Group D accordingly, so as to avoid confusion. 
No. 1 of this group is the largest and most important earthwork in 
this portion ofthe valley. It is located on-an elevated ridge, about four 
hundred yards west of Mr. Michael Turner’s residence. It consists of 
a circular embankment, inclosing an area of about four acres. This em- 
bankment has a gateway to the southeast thirty-six yards wide: leading 
from this gateway is a causeway one hundred feet wide, and extending 
three hundred feet. A mound five and a half feet high is located just 
within the gateway. An interesting description of this work by Col. Chas. 
Whittlesey, was published in Smithsonian Contributions, Vol. iii., 
Art. 7, May, 1850;+ and in a paper entitled “ The Antiquities of the 
Miami Valley,” Cincinnati Chronicle, November, 1839, by T. C. Day, 
Esq. Col. Whittlesey erroneously located this work in Clermont county, 
whereas it is situated in Hamilton. No. 2 0n chart is a circular em- 
bankment, having a diameter of about one hundred and twenty-five 
yards. The material for its construction was evidently taken from | 
within the inclosure. The level of the inclosed area being from 
eighteen to twenty-four inches lower than the general plain on which 
* Vide This JouRNAL, Vol. i., No. 8, Oct., 1878. 
+ See supplementary plan, by Col. Charles Whittlesey, on chart. 
the work is located. The work has a gateway about forty feet wide to 
