The Historic Indian of the Ohio Valley: An Archaeologist's View

Abstract

I think I should take the liberty of altering the title of this paper as it appears on the program from Archaeologist's View to An Archaeologist's View. This for the simple reason that what I shall say is based largely upon personal experience and observations and may not therefore properly reflect the attitude of my archaeological and historical colleagues as a collective group. I must say at the very outset that we in Indiana have long been interested in the Indian of history and especially that phase of Indian history which constitutes the theoretical approach to his prehistoric past. This interest goes back at least to the year 1935, when, at Indianapolis, a meeting was held under the auspices of the National Research Council for the purpose of discussing the technical problems relating to the comparative study of the archaeological cultures in the upper Mississippi Valley and Great Lakes Region. The major portion of the three-day session was devoted to discussion of just what constituted Hopewell, Woodland, Middle Mississippi, and so forth, all of which were, and are, archaeological problems which need not concern us here. Throughout the meeting, however, intermixed with comments pertaining strictly to archaeological manifestations, the question of historical tribes and ethnic groups kept creeping in. Among the discussants there were representatives of the states of Wisconsin, Iowa, Minnesota, Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Ohio, Kentucky, and New York. Others were in the nature of delegates at large, and to the latter group should go most of the credit for what thought was given to historic tribes of the area. Specific mention of Indian tribes by name, in connection with late archaeological complexes, was made by only two persons in detailing their problems on a state basis, Keyes of Iowa and Ritchie of New York, and it should be noted that neither are from the Ohio Valley proper. The meeting closed with the thought