User talk:Conaughy/Sandbox
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Kahnawáˀkye in Tuscarora means "waterway", "kye" is augmentive suffix. Kaniatarowanenneh means "big waterway" in Mohawk. Conaughy (talk) 01:40, 27 May 2008 (UTC)
“It’s the general attitude of the American people,” Olafson commented. “We’re lucky the pyramids are in a backward country like Egypt. If they were in the U.S., they would have been dismantled for railroad ballast or bridge abutments by now.” Sunday Gazette-Mail April 19, 1970
"The territory now embraced in West Virginia was an unexplored wilderness when it first became known to white men. That it was first inhabited not many generations before the coming of the white explorer is evidenced by many relics found, such as pieces of flint, rude stone implements, human bones, large mounds, and other unmistakable witnesses to that fact. Different Indian tribes at various times had their homes within the present limits of the state: the Delawares in the Monongahela Valley; the Mohicans in the Kanawha Valley; the Conoys in the New River Valley, and the Shawnees on the south branch of the Potomac. The first permanent settlement in the state was made at New Mecklenburg in 1727; this is now Shepherdstown, the oldest town in West Virginia. In 1681 Charles II granted to a company of gentlemen a tract of land which comprised as a part of what is now called the "Eastern Pan Handle" of the state."--Copyright © 2008 by Kevin Knight. Dedicated to the Immaculate Heart of Mary. The editor of New Advent Kevin Knight. The Catholic Encyclopedia
1622, the Conoy were on the Chesepeake, not at the the latest Monogahela Culture sites and especially at the last several Fort Ancient sites (1650~1666) around the Kanawhan Region, the Buffalo 620 remains yet to be reburied. 20th century scholar and authors had not access to documents as easily as we today. They just did know, yet, they declared the wrong to be fact.
If the following is true, then, early writers guessing the ancient Kanawhan were the Coney knew not the contemporary documents of which the Piscaway Nation cittes: [The Piscataways (Conoys) are not mentioned by Smith, and Mooney thinks it likely that the names Piscataway was "a collective term for several small tribes west of Patuxent, including, probably, the Moyaones" referred to by Captain Smith.
The history of the Nacochtanks and Tauxenents is lost in that of their more powerful neighbors, writes Mooney. "After Smith's voyage up the Potomac, in 1608 we hear no more of them until 1622 when a party from Jamestown ascending the river in quest of supplies, stopped at a settlement on the south bank, at the mouth of the Potomac creek. The chief here had no corn to spare, but said that 'his mortal enemies,' the Nocochtanks and Moyaones, on the other side of the river had plenty, and offered the services of fifty warriors to go and help the Nacochtank, and after a stubborn fight eighteen of the Nadochtanks were killed and the remainder driven from their cabins, which were then plundered and burned. This battle was probably fought on the slopes just across the navy yard bridge," says Mooney.]
Following is from a Biblio of recommended reading from WVa Archeologist... (Glacial Kame, Adena, Hopewell and Fort Ancient ) MITOCHONDRIAL DNA ANALYSIS OF THE OHIO HOPEWELL OF THE HOPEWELL MOUND GROUP. DISSERTATION. Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree. Doctor of Philosophy in the Graduate School of the Ohio State University, By Lisa A. Mills, M.A., B.A The Ohio State University 2003, Dissertation Committee: Approved by Dr. Paul Sciulli, Professor William Dancey; Professor D. Andrew Merrwiwther, Advisor; Professor N’omi Greber, Department of Anthropology http://www.ohiolink.edu/etd/send-pdf.cgi?osu1054605467
Ohio Hopewell Relevant Populations Combining mtDNA studies of both ancient and contemporary Native American populations, with mtDNA analysis of individuals interred within the mounds of the Hopewell Mound Group this research seeks to address the following questions: 1. What are the phylogenetic relationships and affiliations between the Ohio Hopewell Mound Group mtDNA lineages to other ancient and contemporary North Native American mtDNA lineages ? 2. What information does mtDNA add to what is known biologically about the prehistoric groups of the Ohio River Valley ? 3. Is there evidence to support matrilineal descent among the Ohio Hopewell of the Hopewell Mound Group ? 4. Is there segregation of individuals interred within the Ohio Hopewell Mound Group based upon mtDNA lineages; specifically within Mounds 2 and 25 ? The first two questions will be outlined in this chapter, while the last two questions will be discussed in Chapter Five. Question 1 deals with phylogenetic relationships between the Ohio Hopewell Mound Group lineages and other ancient and contemporary Native American lineages. First, it is important to look at what is defined as a “population or sample ” in terms of ancient DNA studies. It is not a complete or random sampling of every individual and in some cases, it is a subset of a subset of individuals. In ancient DNA studies, the first subset of the sample are those individuals who were interred vs those who were not interred for whatever reason. This can leave out the very young who might not be culturally recognized as members of the group at the time of their death or 47
anyone who have passed away when it is not possible to transport them to the mounds for interment. Also during archaeological recovery, especially those from earlier periods when information gathering techniques were not as developed, a sampling bias could have developed because material objects were of primary interest to archaeologists of that time. However, in the case of the Ohio Hopewell of the Hopewell Mound Group, there does not seem to be an internment bias within the sample. Based upon a biological profile of skeletal material recovered by Moorehead and Shetrone, equal numbers of males and females make up the sample as well as a normal distribution of age groups (Johnston 2002). Therefore, based upon this analysis there does not seem to be an unequal internment of males vs females or old vs young within those interred in the mounds of the Hopewell Mound Group. The final sample subset is based upon what samples will amplify, which is based upon conditions of interment, age of samples, molecular techniques and sometimes simply luck. It is possible to start out with a beginning sample of 200 and only get 40 to amplify. All things considered, the samples that are utilized in this study and others are not true “samples”. Ancient Native American samples which were utilized to explore phylogenetic relationships among the Ohio Hopewell Mound Group lineages include two populations from the western United States, Pyramid Lake and Stillwater March, and one population from Illinois, the Oneota. Kaestle (1998) RFLP typed 18 individuals from the Pyramid Lake region of Nevada, dating from 860 (+/- 75) to 9200 (+/- 60) B.P. and 21 individuals from the Stillwater Marsh region of Nevada, dating from 290 (+/- 80) to 3290 (+/- 90) B.P. (Table 2). Both populations overlap the time range of the Ohio Hopewell Mound 48
Table 2: MtDNA RFLP Haplotype Frequencies of Modern and Ancient Native American Populations References: (1) Bolnick and Smith (in press) (6) Schultz et al. (2001) (2) Merriwether and Ferrel (1996) (7) Stone (1996) (3) Ward et al. (1991) (8) Merriwether et al. (1995) (4) Lorenz and Smith (1996); Malhi et al. (2001) (9) Bolnick (2002) (5) Kaestle (1998) (10) Mills (this study) Table 2: MtDNA RFLP Haplotype Frequencies of Modern and Ancient Native American Populations
Some Cherokee oral traditions state that the ancestors of the Cherokee were the builders of the Ohio Hopewell mounds (Mooney 1900). Even if the Cherokee are not the ancestors of the Ohio Hopewell, there may have been trading interaction between the Ohio Hopewell and another group thought to be the ancestors of the Cherokee, the Connestee (Walthall 1990). The Connestee (2150 B.P. to 2550 B.P.) located in western 50
North Carolina may have provided the Ohio Hopewell with raw materials such as mica, quartz crystals, steatite and chlorite schists for their elaborate and exotic mortuary rituals. It is possible that as they were trading material items they were also trading genetic material. It might also be that the trading may be a result of reciprocal obligation and formal gift-giving between lineages or clans that controlled specific geographical areas. So that lineages or clans controlled an area and its resources, and at the time of death of that clan leader, raw materials for mortuary gifts or mortuary gifts were placed with the individual at the time of special internment within the mound. Lorenz and Smith (1996) and Malhi et al. (2001) collected and provided the mtDNA haplotype frequencies for the Oklahoma Red Cross Cherokee and Stillwell Cherokee samples. Both groups are similar to the Mohawks in that they belong to the Amerind language family and within the sublevel language of Iroquoian. Also included from the southeast are RFLP data from Bolnick and Smith (in press) from the Creek and Chocktaw. Both groups belong to the Muskogean language family and in early historic times, the Creek inhabited much of Alabama and Georgia while the Chocktaw were in southern Mississippi. Contemporary and ancient Native American samples which might address the first two questions concerning phylogenetic relationships, origins and affiliations and genetic information about the prehistoric Ohio River Valley include populations from the northwest United States. Based upon linguistic evidence, Siebert (1967) proposed that the region between Lake Huron and Georgian Bay, with a northern boundary of Lake Nipissing and a southern boundary of Lake Ontario, as the homeland of the Proto- Algonquian people. Snow (1976) utilizing archaeological evidence indicates that the 51
Proto-Algonquian homeland should be larger, extending to the west by Niagara Falls. Berman (1982) however, suggests a western homeland for the Proto-Algonquian based upon further linguistic data. He suggests that based upon similarities between the Proto- Algonquian and Proto-Salish vowel systems, one could place the Proto-Algonquian homeland near that of the Proto-Salish, which is located in the Northwest culture area (Berman 1982). Based upon a combination of archaeological and linguistic evidence, Denny (1991) has added support to Berman’s idea of a western homeland for the Proto- Algonquian. Denny (1991) however suggests that the Red Ocher/Glacial Kame Twin Burial Complex populations might be descended from populations of the Western Idaho Archaic Burial Complex. According to Denny (1991), glottochronological evidence suggests that the appearance of the Red Ocher/Glacial Kame Twin Burial Complex in the Great Lakes occurs at about the same time as Proto-Algonquian begins to undergo modifications into Algonquian. Denny (1991) also suggests that about 4,000 B.P., the people of the Western Idaho Archaic Burial Complex migrated to the Great Lakes and were Proto-Algonquian language speakers. Goddard (1994) utilizing linguistic data focusing on words connected to subsistence adds further support to Denny’s idea of a western origin. Goddard (1994) states that Algonquian should be viewed as a cline, from west to east, with the greatest time depth in the west and the earliest in the east reinforcing the hypothesis of a western homeland for Proto-Algonquian. Three ancient samples from the proposed Algonquian homeland are the Braden, De Moss and Congdon sites (Table 2). The Braden and De Moss sites are located along the Snake River in the Plateau and date to approximately 6000 B.P.. They are both considered part 52
of the Western Idaho Archaic Burial Complex. Farther northwest, near the Columbia River in the Plateau, the Congdon site dates to approximately 3000 B.P. and overlaps the time range of the Glacial Kame population in the Great Lakes region. Schultz et al. (2001) have provided preliminary RFLP data on a small number of samples from the Braden , De Moss and Congdon sites, combining the data from the Braden and De Moss sites (Table 2). Two contemporary Native American populations from the Pacific northwest rime are the Bella Coola and Nuu-Chah-Nulth. The Bella Coola are classified in the Salishan language family and inhabit theNorthwest coast while the Nuu-Chah- Nulth are Wakashan speakers, which is the neighboring language group and are located in the Columbia Plateau near the ancient Braden, De Moss and Congdon sites. Ward et al. (1991) provides mtDNA RFLP and sequence data from both populations (Table 2). To explore the second question of what information mtDNA analysis can add to what is known biologically about the prehistoric Ohio River Valley, it is important to start with hypotheses relating to biological affinities. Webb and Snow (1945), based mainly upon cranial morphology, suggested that the Ohio Hopewell were characterized by three cranial shapes. About 80% of their sample were dolicocephalic or long-headed,while 10% to 15% of the sample was brachycephalic or round-headed, leaving the remaining sample as unidentifiable. Snow defined the dolicocephalic type as Hopewell type 1 while the brachycephalic were considered “Adena-like” in their shape and designated Hopewell type 2. Based upon the three cranial types, Snow postulated that the Hopewell type 1 cranial shapes were descendants of indigenous populations of the Ohio River Valley, while the Adena type cranial shapes had migrated into the area. He further suggests the 53
possibility that the Hopewellian type 2 cranial shapes were a result of admixture between indigenous Hopewell and the invading Adena. However, Prufer (1964) did not observe a clear change from brachycephalic to dolicocephalic and suggested instead a migration of the Illinois Hopewell dolicocephalic types into the Ohio River Valley. Dragoo (1964) first proposed two migrations. The first by the “Lenid People” of the Late Archaic Burial Complex located near the Great Lakes, who intermixed with the Adena-Red Ocher people of central Indiana-north central Illinois. The second migration was similar to the first in that the “Lenid People” intermixed with the Adena of the Ohio River Valley to produce the Ohio Hopewell. All of these ideas suggest distinct biological gaps between the Glacial Kame, Adena and Hopewell as outside populations migrate into Ohio. Reichs (1975,1984), utilizing metric and discrete cranial characteristics, examined the hypothesis that the Ohio Hopewell populations and culture originated in Illinois utilizing populations of both Illinois and Ohio Hopewell. Her results demonstrated that the Illinois and Ohio Hopewell populations were distinct from each other biologically. Sciulli and Mahaney (1986) extended Reich’s work within the Ohio River Valley by looking at distinct local populations within Ohio from the Glacial Kame Late Archaic populations (ca. 3000-2500 B.P.), Adena Early Woodland (ca. 3000-2000 B.P.) and Hopewell Middle Woodland (ca. 2000-1700 B.P.). Sciulli and Mahaney (1986), based upon analysis of cranial measures and discrete cranial trait frequencies, concluded that the Hopewell Mound Group site samples demonstrated the same configuration of cranial size and shape variation and discrete trait expression as the Glacial Kame. The Adena samples were only included in 54
erie
"In the Genesee country and along Lake Erie were the Seneca and Erie tribes, who were in constant intercourse and perhaps allied for defense. On both sides of the Niagara River were the villages of the Attiwandaronk or Neuter tribe looked upon as an old and parent body of all the Huron-Iroquois stock. Ji-gon-sa-she (Ye-gowane), the "Mother of Nations," the woman who was recognized as a lineal descendant of "the first woman on earth," e. g., the direct descendant of the first Iroquoian family, lived in a Neuter village near the Niagara; and the tribe enjoyed enhanced prestige in consequence. Some eastern settlements were occupied by a band known as the Wenro; they were of the neuter tribe.
When the idea of an Iroquian confederacy was conceived, presumably by the Seneca, the Erie nation could not be persuaded, and the southern Iroquois were not at all attracted. The neuters seemed to see no need of entering the league, for in their distinctive place as the parent nation they did not anticipate that either of the main branches--their Huron and Iroquois kin--of the parent stock would cease to respect their ancient authority. Hence, only the Mohawk, Oneida, Onondaga, Cayuga and Seneca tribes subscribed tot he articles of friendship which created the Iroquois Confederacy, or Long House as it was otherwise called." -- The History of New York State, Lewis Historical Publishing Company, Inc., 1927 [Authorities--this chapter is based mainly upon, and indeed may be considered an abridgment of, the excellent and exhaustive "Archeological History of New York," written by Arthur C. Parker, State Archeologist, and published in 1922 by the University of the State of New York, as Nos. 235, 236, 237, 238 of the "New York State Museum Bulletin." Another principal source is "Aboriginal occupation of New York," by Dr. Wm. M. Beauchamp, published in "New York State Museum Bulletin," 1900, No. 32.
Other sources include other works by Beauchamp and Parker: "Jesuit Relations," and allied documents, 1810-1791. Thwaite's Edition; "Documents Relating to the colonial History of New York," by O'Callaghan; "ancient Man in America." By Frederick Larkin; "Ancient Monuments in Western New York," T. Apoleon Cheney, in "Thirteenth Report State Cabinet of Natural History," (1859), and "Senate Documents," 1860, No. 89; bulletins of "United States Bureau of Ethnology, Smithsonian Institution,"; Francis Parkman's Works; Severance's Niagara Frontier works; Brodhead's "History of State of New York."; Sagard's "Histoirie du Canada" (1636); "History of Brooklyn and Queens, and Counties of Nassau and Suffolk, Long Island," by Henry Isham Hazelton, 1925; "History of Lancaster County, Pennsylvania." H. M. J. Klein and E. Melvin Williams, 1924; "Pennsylvania Archives; League of The Ho-de-no-sau-nee, or Iroquois." By L. H. Morgan, and "History of the Five Indian Nations Depending on the Province of New York" (1727), by Cadwallader Colden.]
Kentaientonga, Honniasont (or Black Minqua), and Rigué, and shared an Iroquoian language similar to that of the Huron. A farming people, they lived in permanent palisaded towns (fortified with a fence of stakes), and had an aggressive reputation. Tribal warfare from 1635, particularly with the Iroquois, diminished their population by 1680 and their tribal identity was lost. Survivors were absorbed into the Iroquois although some joined the Seneca of Ohio, where they became known as the Mingo. -- source has long known info, nothing new here...
The researchers charted the climate and distribution time line of the mammoth from 126,000 to 6,000 years ago by modeling ocean currents, rainfall, and other factors. Modern humans likely entered the mammoth's core habitat areas around 40,000 years ago, he said. At the same time, forests were expanding north, eventually outcompeting the shrubby plants that mammoths depended on for survival. Nogués-Bravo stopped short of saying that the mammoths would have survived had humans not happened along. But he did point out the species adapted to an earlier collapse of favorable environmental conditions before humans emerged. Larry Agenbroad, site director for the Mammoth Site research facility in Hot Springs, South Dakota, was not involved in the new study. "Climate Change, Then Humans, Drove Mammoths Extinct" -- Kimberly Johnson for National Geographic News April 1, 2008
Sunflowers were a cultivated food crop in what is now the eastern United States 4,000 to 5,000 years ago, most experts agree. The latest evidence supports an independent origin for Mexican sunflower farming, said study leader David Lentz of the University of Cincinnati. research funded by National Geographic Society, reported by National Geographic News is part of the National Geographic Society
As he explained, his attributions were based on “clues” (Bullen 1975:2) or “hints from fields and rivers” (Bullen 1968:33) in Florida. In 1968, and to a slightly lesser extent in 1975, he had little choice. In 1999 Jerald Milanich (personal communication) noted that Bullen’s failure to utilize dated contexts from Florida was understandable: “There simply weren’t any such contexts at the time.” Bullen’s conclusions were supported and informed by work done elsewhere at sites with good stratigraphic integrity and related radiocarbon dates. Most calendrical dates cited in the Guide are from the Stanfield-Worley rock shelter in Alabama (DeJarnette et al. 1962), the St. Albans site in West Virginia (Broyles 1968), and North Carolina sites reported by Joffre L. Coe(1964).
Twigtwees—as the Six Nations called the the Miamis, the French called them Ouitaneous. (Shea's "Charlevoix, American Antiquarian Collection," p. 63. Vol. II.)
Tioniontate tobacco people dade or some dialects tate "brothers" or "kendred", Mengine Iroquoian French spelling, Chinique tobacco people place Chiniondaista tobacco people she guards or Big water people she guards Keni-o-u-dade-stat stat means to guard ou means those who guard Ka-na or Cono means boaters ie canoers wha means to go make way or path (water) gha or gas those people's place habitat in some dialects those who go by way of canoe cana-da(de) in Wendat means village and cana-da(de) kindred's village kinitate Chinique que = french what por-que for-what
1750 GIST's Journal Sunday 18.—I was very sick, and sweated myself according to the Indian Custom in a Sweat-House, which gave Me Ease, and my Fever abated. He was near Pittsburgh
Monday 19.—Set out early in the Morning the same Course (S 70 W) travelled very hard about 2o M to a small Indian [34] Town of the Delawares called Shannopin on the SE Side of the River Ohio, where We rested and got Corn for our Horses.
Tuesday 20 Wednesday 21 Thursday 22 and Friday 23.—I was unwell and stayed in this Town to recover myself; While I was here I took an Opportunity to set my Compass privately, & took the Distance across the River, for I understood it was dangerous to let a Compass be seen among these Indians: The River Ohio is 76 Poles wide at Shannopin Town: There are about twenty Families in this Town: The Land in general from Potomack to this Place is mean stony and broken, here and there good Spots upon the Creeks and Branches but no Body of it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.251.255.141 (talk) 06:59, 8 April 2008 (UTC)
[Pages 9-30. Page numbers will appear in the text in brackets in bold print.] DARLINGTON: Sir William Berkeley, Governor of Virginia, was informed by the Indians, in 1648, "that within five dayes journey to the Westward and by South there is a great high mountaine, and at foot thereof great Rivers that run into a great Sea; and that there are men that come hither in ships, (but not the same that ours be) they wear apparell and have reed caps on their heads, and ride on Beasts like our horses, but have much longer ears, and other circumstances they declare for the certainty of these things." ("A Perfect Description of Virginia," 1649, Vol. III, of Tracts, p. 13. Also in Massachusetts Historical Society Collection, Vol. IX, Second Series, p. 105.) These rivers, doubtless were those [13] now known as the Kanawha, Kentucky, Cumberland and Tennessee, whose waters flow from the western slope of the Allegheny Mountains to the Ohio and Mississippi and into the Gulf of Mexico, long before frequented by Spaniards. Governor Berkeley made preparations for discovery in person, with a company of fifty horse and fifty footmen, but abandoned the enterprise, probably in consequence of the disastrous results to the king in his contest with the Parliament engaging his attention—Berkeley being a firm Royalist.
On the 20th of May, 1670, Lederer began his second expedition, in company with one Major Harris (Major William Harris of the Regiment of Charles City and Henrico Counties), twenty Christian horsemen and five Indians. They marched from the Falls of James River to the Monakin (Tuscarora) village, probably the same is marked on Fry and Jefferson's Map of 1751*, on James River, in the present county of Cumberland, and continued westward one hundred miles farther to what he calls "the south branch of James River," and which "Major Harris vainly supposed to be an arm of the Lake of Canada," as he observed it ran [16] northward, "and was inclined to erect a pillar in memory of the Discovery." It seems evident from the description, distance given and his map, that they had reached the James River, at its bend to the north, a few miles east from the the present city of Lynchburg, in Campbell County. Here he parted from his company, excepting one Susquehanna Indian, and then went south to the Roanoke, to the Island and town of Akenatzi (On "Fry and Jefferson's" Map the Occoneachy is laid down at the junction of the Staunton (Roanoke) and Dan Rivers, in the present Mecklenburg County. See also "Byrd's Journey to the Land of Eden." Richmond, 1866, p. 5) where he was well received. Here he met four strange Indians, survivors of fifty who had come, Lederer says, "from some land by the Sea to the northwest," (probably the great Lakes.) He calls them Rickahickans and states that "they were treacherously killed in the night by the Indians of Akenatzi." He conjectured that these strange Indians came from an arm or bay of the Sea of California, which he supposed stretched up into the continent. From Akenatzi he journeyed southward into Carolina and thence returned to Akamatuch.
[*Fry and Jefferson's Map, 1755 unavailable at this time.]
These strange Indians, or Rickahickans, doubtless were fugitives of the tribe known as Eries, or the Nation of the Cat, whose country was on the south shore of Lake Erie. They were conquered and destroyed as a nation by the Iroquois in 1654—5.
The Fathers call the tribe Riguehronnous, or those of the Cat Nation. (Jesuit Relations," 1660, p. 7, Vol. III. Id., 1661, p. 29.) The considerable number of the defeated Eries or Rickahickans appear to have reached Virginia in 1655, about which time the Iroquois completed their conquest. (See Charlevoix's "History of New France," Vol. II, P. 266 and note. Parkmans's "Jesuits in America," pp. 438-441.) A [17] special law was passed to remove by force "the new-come western and inland Indians drawn from the Mountaines and lately sett downe near the falls of James River to the number of six or seven hundred." (Hening, p. 402.)
Captain Edward Hill, at the head of 100 men, assisted by Tottopottemen, King of the Pomukies, with 100 warriors, attacked the Rickahickans. The allies were defeated, Tottopottemen slain. Captain Hill was cashiered for his conduct and his estate charged with the cost of procuring a peace with the Rickahickans. It is probable that with the fugitive Eries were some of the Neutres and Hurons, kindred tribes, and also routed by the Iroquois. (Hening, p. 423, Burke's "History of Virginia," Vol. II, pp. 104-107. See also Galletin, in "Transactions of the American Antiquarian Society," Vol. II, p. 73. Evan's "Analysis," 1755, p. 13.)
On August 30th of the same year, Lederer again set out, in company with Captain Collet, nine Englishmen and five Indians. They first went to the Falls of Rappahannock, near the present Fredericksburg; next day they passed the junction of the Rapid Anna, in Culpepper County, and keeping along the north side of the Rappahannock, on the 26th reached the Blue Ridge, in the present county of Rappahannock; there they ascended the summit of the mountain, observed and noted the great mountain range east and west. The cold prevented them from proceeding any farther, and they returned, having penetrated much farther northwestward than any one previously. Inconsiderable as the distance may now seem, Lederer was convinced those persons were in error who supposed it but eight or ten days' journey from the Atlantic to the Indian Ocean, and that an arm or bay of the Sea of California extended up into the country. Nor were there to be found on the west of the mountains large rivers, like [18] those on the east. His opinions evidently were changed by the information obtained from the unfortunate stranger or Erie Indians.--BY WILLIAM M. DARLINGTON [1815-1889] PITTSBURGH, J. R. WELDIN & CO., 1893. Part 1. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.251.255.141 (talk) 06:46, 8 April 2008 (UTC)
The First Explorations of the Trans-Alleghany Region by the Virginians 1650- 1674 By Clarence Walworth Alvord and Lee Bidgood Published by The Arthur H. Clark Company, Cleveland, Ohio, 1912 NOTES 1. Parkman, Francis. La Salle and the discovery o f the Great West, 51. 2. See pages 191-192.N 3. Parkman, Francis. La Salle, 5. 4. Winsor, Justin. Cartier to Frontenac, 183. See also his Mississippi Basin, 452, for a similar statement. 5. See pages 24-25 for the so-called La Salle discovery. 6. The Contest in -qmerica between Great Britain and France (London, 1757), 176. 7. We shall not enter into the discussion of who first reached the branches of the Mississippi. Historians seem inclined to deny that jean Nicollet visited the Wisconsin in 1734. The question of the two French traders of 1754 and of the wanderings of Grosseilliers and Radisson is very complex. There seems to be no doubt about Father Allouez's visit to the Wisconsin River in 1670. If he was the first white man to cross the divide, the French discovery preceded the English by a little over a year. Shea, John G. Discovery and Exploration of the Mississippi Valley, xx-xxv; for bibliography of discussion of jean Nicollet's expedition, see Wisconsin Historical Collections, vol. xi, i, footnote i. 8. Although many have suspected the accounts of La Salle's discovery of the Ohio, the majority of historians have accepted it upon very slender evidence. Mr. Frank E. Melvin of the University of Illinois has finally proved, in our opinion, by the use of new evidence, its falsity. His essay on this subject will soon be published. The latest writer concerning this region, Mr. Hanna, in his Wilderness Trail, vol. ii, 87 et seq. is also prepared to reject the tale as a fabrication, and writes that it is "only a question of time when that evidence will be declared to be wholly false." 9. See Turner's brilliant essay, "The Significance of the Frontier in American History," in American Historical Association, Report, 1893, p. 199. 10 "Mountaynes Apalatsi:" Capt. Newport's Discoveries, 1607 Public Record Office, London; also American Antiquarian Society, Transactions, vol. iv, 40, 46-48 ; and Brawn, A. First Republic in America, 34. 11 American Antiquarian Society, Transactions, vol. iv, 40 et seg.; Smith, John. Generall historie of Virginia, vol. i, 195-197 12 See pages 101-102; also footnote 114 for discussion of the date of the law in question.
75 State of the British and French Colonies (London, 31755), reproduces Coxe exactly. [John Mitchell, The Contest in .America (1757), speaks of "A large branch of the Ohio, called Wood River, from Colonel Wood of Virginia, who discovered it first in x654, and several times afterwards, of which an authentic account is to be seen in the archives of the royal society, besides the accounts we have of that discovery from our historians." The "authentic account" referred to is that of the Batts-Fallam party of 1671, sent to the Royal Society by Mr. Clayton, and printed hereinafter with an accompanying commentary by Mitchell, who in the passage quoted means that it is a narrative, not of the supposed journey of 1654, but of one of the "times afterwards." Mitchell also repeats from Coxe the stories of the alleged discovery of the Mississippi by parties from New England and New Jersey in 1672 and r678 [see pages 233, 243], and subsequent writers have sometimes apparently confused these with the exploits attributed to Wood. Ramsey [Annals of Tennessee, 37), and Martin [North-Carolina, vol. i, 115], say that Wood reached the Ohio in 1654. Adair [American Indians (1775), 308] claims that Wood was the first discoverer of the Mississippi, 1654-1664. Thomas Jefferys [History of the French Dominions in America, 134], claims the first discovery of the Mississippi for Wood, 1654-1664. On Jefferys's map [Winsor, Mississippi Basin, 421], it is stated that Wood went beyond the Mississippi in the decade mentioned. Rafinesque [Marshall, History of Kentucky, 37), says that Kentucky was first discovered by Colonel Wood in 1654. Parkman [La Salle and the Discovery of the Great West, 5] repeats the story that Colonel Wood reached a branch of the Mississippi in 1654, to dismiss it as unfounded. Winsor [Cartier to Frontenac, 183] mentions Coxe's version of the matter but does not credit it. In the Mississippi Basin on page 229, he states it as a fact that Colonel Abraham Wood led an expedition up the Dan River and through the Blue Ridge to the New River, in 1744 [sic], while on page 452 he refers to the unsupported narrative of adventures of Colonel Wood in 1654-1664 as a part of the English scheme to push their claims to the Mississippi Basin about 1764. There is no evidence other than Coxe of a journey by Wood in 1654. The fact that Batts and Fallam found marked trees on their route on both slopes of the mountains in 1671 proves that other white men had preceded them, but not that Wood was the man or the date 1654; on the contrary, had the marks been left by Wood, his agents would mast likely have recognized them as such.
The begging question remains as "who were these 1654 exploriers into the Monechee healing springs region?" Conjectures of the Land beyond the Apalataean Mountains They are certainly in a great error, who imagine that the continent of North-America is but eight or ten days journey over from the Atlantick to the Indian ocean: which all reasonable men must acknowledge, if they consider that Sir Francis Drake kept a west-northwest course from Cape Mendocino to California. Nevertheless, by what I gathered from the stranger Indians at Akenatzy of their voyage by sea to the very mountains from a far distant northwest country, I am brought over to their opinion who think that the Indian ocean does stretch an arm or bay from California into the continent as far as the Apalataean mountains, answerable to the Gulfs of Florida and Mexico on this side. Yet I am far from believing with some, that such great and navigable rivers are to be found on the other side the Apalataeans falling into the Indian ocean, as those which run from them to the eastward. My first reason is derived from the knowledge and experience we already have of South-America, whose Andes send the greatest rivers in the world (as the Amazones and Rio de la Plata, etc.) into the Atlantick, but none at all into the Pacifique sea. Another argument is, that all our water-fowl which delight in lakes and rivers, as swans, geese, ducks, etc., come over the mountains from the Lake of Canada, when it is frozen over every winter, to our fresh rivers; which they would never do, could they find any on the other side of the Apalatxans.
Local troops, an extra brief treatment:
A couple of dozen local farmer/boat workers were recruited here for Col Kelley by Whaley and Starr the Gen Manager of the Liverpool Salt Works, Hartford et al in April 29th, 1862. This was after the packet Captain, who picked up food stuff from the Kanawha farmers and delivered regularly to Parkersburg Quater Master Charles Conley, explained that he didn't have much on this trip. A large bunch of Kentucky Confederates was attacked by Col Kelley around Guyandott and these Confederates scattered in groups on the Kanawha. Grandpa Chuck said they took everything there was to eat and cleaned out the wild game, too, 1861-1862, even the reseeding stock. That's why the Union Supply's civilian packet Captain's trade dropped to nothing to ableless pickup. Not even a chicken's egg was left.*
These civil packets under the Union out of Parkesburg Supply command regularly hauled local supplies with a few from the 9th WV Infantry on guard duty on the packets. The 1st Infantry and 106th Mason County WV Guard under Colonel R.B.J.P. Smith patrolled and some also did sentry duty at our river crossings. These were on the huge flotila that evacuated civilian salt miners, residents and civilian government people during the Confedrate overrun of Charleston WV. Our 9th Infantry held back the charging Conderates at Elk River in Charleston untill the Union and civil authority could board the backets and barges that took them to Point Pleasnt. The Mason County Militia Cavalry kept flanking the 9th's position each time platoons of Convederate Infantry tried to attke down river of the Elk. The local packets had small guns which was also along side our Infantry on the Kanawha, firing into the the main Confederate columns coming down the Kanawha River untill all the civil boats and barges were well underway to Point Pleasant. One historians claimed these troops gallantly held that line at the Elk's mouth. Historians all claim that this was one of the most intelligent executive of a military recall and retreat manoeuvre exercised in the US miltary history, so they write. It was written that the fleet moving the refugees of the Charleston region was so great that a fellow could skip across the barges and paddleboats from one side of the Kanwha to the other as they moved down to Point Pleasant. The Union Command slowly fell back to the road to Ravenswood and would regoined the moving frontline fighting troops at Point Pleasant. The 9th boarded the sparsely tinclad packets to follow the upper end of the refugee fleet and R.B.J.P Smith's Mason County Cavalry continued their flanking manoeuvre assisting the local gun packet's cannon fire and rifle firing 9th from the decks and side-boats all along the bank of the Kanawha as they moved back down to Point Pleasant.
In July 1861, a Union regiment, the Second Kentucky Infantry, was ordered to Guyandotte as a result of the Border Rangers' seizure of a steamboat near Greenbottom. Shortly after the arrival of Union troops on July 11, several of Guyandotte's citizens took the oath of allegiance and Union flags were prominently displayed. A uniformed Home Guard unit rowed across the river accompanied by an elderly female color-bearer, Mrs. Caroline White. White, a Union supporter from Guyandotte who had fled to Ohio, presented a flag to one of the Union companies and gave them her blessing, to which the soldiers replied with "vociferous cheers."13 After dispersing local militia in a brief fight at Barboursville on July 13, however, the Second Kentucky moved into the Kanawha Valley and civil chaos in the county resumed unchecked.
To counter the aggressive Confederate sympathizers, Union authorities initiated the formation of local Union regiments. In Ceredo, threats of destruction issued by area secessionists led the townspeople to form the Fifth Virginia Infantry. Later in the year, Kellian V. Whaley, who had filled the congressional seat vacated by Albert Jenkins, was authorized to form another Union regiment, the Ninth Virginia Infantry. Whaley began raising troops in Ceredo, but in late October the regiment's recruit camp was moved to Guyandotte, a step which must have horrified the town's Confederate supporters.14 Nearly one hundred and fifty troops were stationed in Guyandotte, but they were untrained recruits who had not yet been mustered into service. Sickness, particularly measles, was prevalent in the camp. The regimental surgeon recorded that twenty men were on furlough and eighteen others were hospitalized. Colonel John Zeigler, who commanded the Fifth Virginia, lent Whaley about thirty-five cavalrymen, but their commanding officer refused to allow his troopers to patrol outside the town, thereby rendering them ineffectual. The head of the cavalry detachment, Lieutenant William E. Feazel, declared, "I did not come here to scout, but to recruit my horses and get them shod." The lack of reconnaissance left the town open to an attack, a fatal mistake exploited by the Confederates.15 The Tragic Fate of Guyandotte By Joe Geiger, Jr. Volume 54 (1995), pp. 28-41
[edit] MAHICAN: the word as a dictionary entry
archived for future articles Conaughy (talk) 07:13, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
Posted: Mon May 23, 2005 10:00 pm Post subject: MAHICAN: the word as a dictionary entry
Perhaps some of you might want to make a paper copy of this for permanent keeping. I posted it recently on the Mohican-7@yahoogroups.com URL. If there is a problem, just let me know. See my address at bottom. Don't get hypnotized when reading this! It was hard enough for me in just proofreading it.
+++++++++++++ MAHICAN: the word as a dictionary entry
The following is comprehensive for the word “Mahican” in my unpublished paper titled “Mahican Words Compiled by Carl Masthay, 1998” with modifications:
SOURCES: E, Jonathan Edwards: Observations on the language of the Muhhekaneew Indians, New Haven, Conn., 1788, Connecticut Society of Arts and Sciences Ho, Frederick Webb Hodge, ed.: Handbook of American Indians north of Mexico, Part 1, BAE Bull. 30, Washington, D.C., 1907 (1975), Smithsonian Institution R, Edward M. Ruttenber: History of the Indian tribes of Hudson’s River, 1872 (Port Washington, N.Y., 1971, Kennikat Press) R1, Edward M. Ruttenber: Footprints of the Red men. Indian geographical names in the valley of Hudson’s River, the valley of the Mohawk, and on the Delaware: Their location and probable meaning of some of them, (Newburgh, N.Y.) 1906, New York State Historical Association V, Carl F. and Florence M. Voegelin: Classification and index of the world’s languages, New York, 1977, Elsevier
Mahican The primary form: Muhheakanneuw [R1], Mukkekaneew [E]; plural Muhhekaneok [E], Muhheakunnuk [R1], Muhheakunneyuk [R], meaning ‘the great tidal river of the Muhheakan'neuw nation’ [R1] or ‘those dwelling on the great tidewater’, from Mah. machche ‘great’ + hekan, akin to Del. hikan ‘ebb-tide’ + -eew ‘he/she is’, or -ok ‘(plural)’. Further translations are ‘the people of the waters that are never still’ (Davidson 1893, p. 45) and ‘seaside people’. There is only one original, constant pronunciation for “Mahican/Mohican” and that is like the first syllable in “mother” /muh-/, not /mo-/.
Chief Hendrick Aupaumut in [R1] wrote: Muhheakun'nuk, “The great waters or sea, which are constantly in motion, either ebbing or flowing.” [R1] added: “Muhheakun was the national name . . . and -nuk, the equivalent of Massachusetts -tuk, Lenape -ittuck, ‘tidal river, or estuary’.” This is not true; instead -[n]uk is really a form of the plural [C.M.].
The secondary form, explained as a misunderstanding of Muhheakunnuk, comes from Montagnais “maigan” (‘wolf’) translated as French Loups (/loo/, ‘wolves’) or French Manhingans (at earliest usage 1626-1662) and Dutch Mahikan, Maikan, etc., with the farther afield ‘wolf’ Algonquin Maïngan (“maingan” or “mahingan”) and Cree Mahéggun. Ninety miles southeastward in Connecticut there is Mohegan, a different but closely related language and people whose name is derived not from the “wolf” word but from Mmooyauhegunnewuck [Mm?] (1786), Moyanhegunnewog (1749), and Mohanhegumewog [m error?], matching the related Penobscot (in Maine) Mauhiga'newak, ‘people of the mouth of the river where it opens out into a harbor’ (Speck 1928). The later Mohegan self-designation Mahí·ks (1902) and Pequot Moheges (1762) can be compared to Pequot (Noyes 1690, at Stonington; Mohegan-Pequot) mucks ‘wolf’, which may parallel Mahican ‘wolf” mechchaooh (Barton in Hodge), maihtshow (Ruttenber), and nehjao (Morgan in Hodge; misprint?), and ma-ur-chäou [illegible r or s; or ur, wi, or uh?] (Jefferson 1802-1808).
Brasser (1974) wrote that “Adriaen Block (1614) and later colonial authorities usually referred to the tribe as ‘Mahicans,’ ‘Mahikanders,’ and similar names. It is possible that these names resulted from the early Dutch use of Delaware or Munsee Indian interpreters from coastal New Netherland, who pronounced the tribe’s name as Mauheekunee, Mahi'kanak, Mà·hí·kan, Mà·hí·kani·w. . . . By 1662 the name ‘Loups’ began to lose its specificity and was used to refer to several tribes in New England and New York State.”
The variants [Ho and V]: Agotsaganes (Mohawk ‘stutterers’, ‘those who speak a strange tongue’), Agotsagenens, Agozhagàuta, Akochakaneñ’, Aquatsagané, Aquatzagane, Atsayongky; Brothertown or less correctly Brotherton (in part); Canoe Indians; Hikanagi (Shawnee); Housatonic; Loo’s, Loups (French; in part); Machicans, Machingans, Macicani, Mahakanders, Mahakans, Mahckanders (misprint), Mahegan, Maheingans, Mahekanders, Mahhekaneew, Mahicanders, Mahicanni, Mahicans, Mahiccanni, Mahiccans, Mahiccon, Mahicon, Mahigan, Mahiganathicoit, Mahiganaticois, Mahigan-Aticois, Mahigane, Mahiggins, Mahik' (Tuscarora name), Mahikan, Mahikanders, Mahikkanders, Mahillendras (misprint?), Mahinganak, Mahinganiois, Mahingans, Mahingaus (misprint), Mahycander, Maicanders, Maikans, Maikens, Makicander, Makihander, Makimanes, Makingans, Malukander (misprint), Manhikani, Manhikans, Manhingans, Manikans, Mankikani, Mauraigans, Mauraygans, Mayekanders, Mayganathicoise, Mayhiccondas, Maykanders, Mehihammers, Mhíkana (Shawnee), Miheconders, Mihicanders, Moheakakannsew, Moheakanneews, Moheakenunks, Moheakounuck, Moheakunnuks, Mohecan, Moheckons, Moheconnock, Mo-heegan, Mohekin, Mo-he-kun-e-uk, Mo-he'-kun-ne-uk (Mohegan: ‘seaside people’), Mohekunnuks, Mohekunuh, Mohicander, Mohicands, Mohicanrs, Mohicans, Mohiccons, Mohickan, Mohickanders, Mohicken, Mohickons, Mohigon, Mohikan, Mohikander, Mohikonders, Mohikons, Mohingans, Mohingaus, Mohocanders, Mohogans, Mohokanders, Mohuccons, Mohuccories, Morahicanders, Moraigane, Moraiguns, Moraingans, Morargans, Mourigan, Muckhekanies, Muhekannew, Muhheakunneuw, Muhheakunnuk, Muhheconnuck, Muhheeckanew, Muh-hee-kun-eew, Muhhekaneew, Muhhekaneok (plural; ‘the people of the waters that are never still’, p. 45, Davidson 1893), Muhhekanew, Muhhekaniew, Muhhekanneuk, Muhhekanok, Muhhekenow, Muhhekunneau, Muhhekunneyuk (plural), Muhkekaneew, Mukickans, Mukkekaneaw, Nhíkana (Shawnee), Orunges, Ouiagies, Ourages, Ouragies, Poh-he-gan, River Indians (Dutch), Stockbridge Indians, Tumewand (Lenape: ‘wolf-god’, fabrication by Raffinesque, 1836), Uragees.
The traditions that the Mahicans give of their origin is as follows [R from Mass. Hist. Soc. Coll. IX, 101]: “The country formerly owned by the Muhheakunnuk nation was situated partly in Massachusetts and partly in the states of Vermont and New York. The inhabitants dwelt chiefly in little towns and villages. Their chief seat was on Hudson’s river, now it is called Albany, which was called Pempotowwuthut-Muhhecanneuw, or the fire-place of the Muhheakunnuk nation. . . . Our forefathers asserted that they were emigrants from west-by-north of another country; that they passed over great waters, where this and the other country are nearly connected, called Ukhkokpeck; it signifies snake water or water where snakes are abundant; and that they lived by [the] side of a great water or sea, from whence they derive the name of Muhheakunnuk nation. . . . As they were coming from the west, they found many great waters, but none of them flowing and ebbing like Muhheakunnuk until they came to Hudson’s river; then they said one to another, this is like Muhheakunnuk our nativity. And when they found grain was very plenty in that country, they agreed to kindle a fire there and hang a kettle, whereof they and their children after them might dip out their daily refreshment.”
The villages of the Mahican, as recorded, were Aepjin [/AH-pyin/], Kaunaumeek (Stockbridge), Maringoman’s Castle, Monemius, Potic, Scaticook (3 villages in Dutchess and Rensselaer counties, N.Y., and Litchfield county, Conn.), Schodac, Wiatiac, Wiltmeet, Winooskeek, and Wyantenuc [Ho].
The five divisions of the Mahican confederacy — the Mahican proper, Wiekagjoc (= Westenhuck?), Mechkentowoon, Wawyachtonoc, and Westenhuck (Stockbridges) [R in Ho]. These Mahicans are not the Mohegans (Pequot-Mohegans under Uncas) of southeastern Connecticut who lived in an area between the Thames and the Connecticut called Mohegoneak (Môhî'ganiuk), of the same etymological origin as that of Mahican.
Carl Masthay, 838 Larkin Ave., Saint Louis, Missouri 63141, 21 May 2005
nativity \ne-ti-ve-te, na-\ n, pl -ties
1 : the process or circumstances of being born : birth
2 cap : the birth of Christ
(C) 1995 Zane Publishing, Inc. The Merriam-Webster Dictionary (C) 1994 by Merriam-Webster, Incorporated Conaughy (talk) 07:47, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
assert \e-sert\ vb
1 : to state positively
2 : to demonstrate the existence of syn declare, affirm, protest, avow, claim assertive \-ser-tiv\ adj assertiveness n
(C) 1995 Zane Publishing, Inc. The Merriam-Webster Dictionary (C) 1994 by Merriam-Webster, Incorporated Conaughy (talk) 08:03, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
