I think the OP was referring mainly to North American natives, which leaves out the pyramids. The archetypical “Indian”, in America as well as elsewhere probably is a tee-pee dwelling, horse riding, buffalo hunting, feather bonnet wearing Great Plains warrior. But I think the stereotype may be even stronger in the UK and Europe, because that was the picture of American Indians exported to Europe by Buffalo Bill in the late 19th century.
It’s hard for the present generation to appreciate how big a hit Buffalo Bill was in Europe. Some well known people who were kids in the era used to play “Cowboys and Indians”, but I won’t say who. You know how it is–Godwin’s law and all that.
I have come across many smaller ruins while hiking in New Mexico. Usually all that is left is low walls, 2-3 feet high. Doorways, and sometimes the bottoms of windows, are often visible. One site, on top of a mesa (and not on any map), has the remains of approximately 100 buildings. No walls higher than 4 feet, however.
1- because it’s quasi relevant to the thread (they’re of possible Indian origin as the land was definitely occupied by Creeks from time to time)
2- by total coincidence, it just got bumped today
An interesting thing is that these piles actually have their own miniature ecosystem (whatever a miniature ecosystem is called) of the plants growing through them and the animals living in them and the like. My grandmother burned all of those woods twice just in my childhood, so it always came right back. (As mentioned in the thread, there’s also a chance they could just be stones picked up and moved by slaves as the place was once part of a plantation, and they’re also the size of graves, so who knows.)
And also, as I have previously mentioned, because of the numerous cowboy and indian films made. When I was young in the '50s and '60s, they were a staple diet in the cinema. All I knew about the American Indian was what John Wayne told me about them. All that was depicted in popular culture was as you have described.
“Failed to maintain”?? Rather, say, “deliberately destroyed”. American Indians and their cultures were considered inferior at best, sub-human at worst. The only thing lower than an Indian (to them) was a Black slave, and there were some plantation owners who tried to hold Indians as slaves. Of course, the Indians knew the land, and could vanish far more easily than Blacks could. Nevertheless, that’s one of the avenues by which many Black Americans came to have Indian blood.
My ancestors, the Cherokee, were thought by many about 250 years ago to be one of the Lost Tribes of Israel and, as such, given marginally greater respect than other tribes, but they still quite deliberately destroyed the Cherokee nation’s religious structure. If you read history, you’ll find that altruistic whites attempted to proselytize as many as possible and send them to college, with the intent that they marry whites and disappear into white society. That was the earliest, and by far the gentlest, of such efforts. When the Indian Schools were founded, they used coercion at best, and force at worst, to take kids from their families and turn them into imitation whites. If you want to read a horror story, read the history of the Indian Schools.
When gold was found on Cherokee land in Georgia, whites determined to drive them out. And, when the Supreme Court ruled in favor of the Cherokees, President Jackson asked the court how it was going to enforce its decree. That Cherokees had saved his life when he was fighting other tribes was irrelevant to him. You won’t find a single person of Indian (or Native American, if you want to be PC) descent who knows American history who has an iota of respect for Andy Jackson. He had more than any other president to do with the wholesale removal of many Indian tribes from their ancestral lands east of the MIssissippi.
My great grandfather (with his brothers) escaped from the Army on the Trail of Tears in Kentucky and settled there. When the Civil War came along, he refused to fight in “the white man’s war”. He hid in the woods whenever soldiers of either side passed through, and after my grandfather was born, my great grandmother hid him in a chest during those times. My grandmother’s ancestors were among the Keetowah, who voluntarily left Cherokee territory a generation earlier, to take land in Missouri. Of course, when white settlers began to migrate into Missouri, it was time for the Cherokees to go, again. That great grandfather managed to hold on to some land for a time. Of course, he was a miller, and millers were extremely important to farmers back then. Still, he lost the land eventually, and died in poverty. But that was all after the Civil War.
North America - especially those regions which were visited by Spanish explorers - was all but depopulated due to diseases (smallpox and measles, primarily) which were brought by those explorers. By the time the English and French got around to exploring the same regions, they were pretty empty. The Mound Builders civilization (they had a large nation, with many population centers, and an emperor) was the most important one we know anything about that was destroyed. Ponce de Leon and his men were walking disasters as they went through.
There are pyramids in North America (even in the United States) as well. Monks Mound (in Illinois which is both in the US and east of the Mississippi) is among the largest in the hemisphere.
There are many mounds and pyramids along the Natchez Trace. This is now a national park that follows the ancient trade route that paralleled the Mississippi river.
I also mentioned Fort Ancient ( in Ohio - also in the US, and east of the Mississippi).
I am aware of the difference. I was just using the wording that **flodnak **used. Though I suspect that his/her point was that the buildings that survived the destruction were not maintained.
That’s interesting. I was wondering why in some European comics I’ve read, some actually dating from the 1930s (such as Quick et Flupke by Tintin’s creator Hergé) the little kids have fun playing Cowboys and Indians. When did this ever become part of their culture? I’d heard of Buffalo Bill before, but I didn’t know he had such an influence on European culture.
As I’ve said, cowboys and Indians was a very strong part of post war culture in the UK, and, for me, it came from the movies. I’ve only fairly recently heard about Buffalo Bill’s shows in Europe. I think whatever influence he had had waned by World War II.
NineToTheSky if you ever get a chance at a vacation in the U.S. I would highly recommend a visit to some of the places linked above. In addition to Hovenweep and Chaco, Wupatki National Monument and the spectacular Canyon De Chelley National Monument also have some decent ruins. But in that regard Mesa Verde is probably in a class by itself as one of the United States’ most impressive national parks. All of the above could be done in a single extended trip to the American Southwest, with plenty of other features like the Grand Canyon thrown in - in fact I did just that a year or two ago ( minus Chaco, which I’ve done in an earlier trip ). Well worth it if you like outdoorsy vacations.
Funnily enough, Mrs Nine is flying off to the (eastern) States on Thursday to visit friends.
Back in the '70s, I used to drive around the US a lot, and on one of my trips - from San Francisco to Denver - I stayed at Durango. But, sadly, I wasn’t aware of the dwellings at Mesa Verde, so I didn’t see them.
I’ve always liked the American deserts and canyons, and would dearly love to visit them again.
Somewhere along the route to an undergrad degree in anthro. I’m afraid it’s somewhere in somebody’s monograph on the Mound Builders. I most likely read it in some anthology of papers (and chapters, excerpts, etc.) that was required for one of my upper-level courses. Honestly, I wouldn’t have mentioned it if I wasn’t certain of what I’d read, but I probably shouldn’t have mentioned it in GQ when I don’t recall who the researcher was.
According to the author, they had three social classes: the emperor and his family, nobles, and slaves. The emperor was required to marry a slave. Children (other than the emperor’s heir, one presumes) were demoted one social class from their parents. But, since the emperor was required to marry a slave woman, and nobles were also required to marry slaves (both male and female) a constant churning through the classes occurred.
It may help you with credibility when you recall (I presume you already know) that massive public works - whether it’s pyramids in Egypt or South America, or the Great Wall, or anything else of the sort by less developed societies - requires that all (or nearly all) members of that society contribute at least some of their time on a regular basis to those public works. You can even find modern accounts of analogous efforts from (IIRC) 1950s China. And the mounds were massive public works; there’s no doubt of that. Just because they were built of dirt rather than something that holds its shape better… The descendants of the Incans in some regions where they are the majority serve in annual work levees to this day (National Geographic, among other reports). It’s just that the Mound Builders hadn’t learned about working in stone.
This, now, is pure speculation, but it seems to me that in all of the places where ancient peoples built in stone, the climates were relatively dry, and places which could serve as quarries for stone were at least partially exposed by the elements. Bear in mind that all parts of North America east of the Mississippi aren’t just temperate; they also have a history of abundant precipitation, going back at least as far as the most recent Ice Age.
When you hardly ever see bare stone outcrops of any size (look at any of the mountain ranges of this region - even the Smokies have very little bare rock showing), using it as a building material is not likely to occur to you all that readily. Bear also in mind that the western hemisphere remained in the Stone Age until the arrival of Europeans. There was some copper (mainly acquired from mines around the Great Lakes) in North America, and lots of it in South America where mining was far more extensively practiced. Some of it was made into tools, but bronze had not been discovered - at least not in North America, and I don’t think in South America, either. I do not recall ever seeing mention of it. It takes an innovator to think of mixing copper and tin. Once discovered, people find it’s a great material.
Many tools in what became the American southwest (and northern Mexico) were made of non-metallic substances, including lava (the kind that is glassy and will fracture to give sharp edges), jade and turquoise (bizarre as the latter two may seem). And though there was a plentiful supply of rock in the desert southwest, more buildings were constructed of adobe than anything else. Why? One reason would be the difficulty of working stone without tools that are harder than the stone to shape it.
I invite correction from anyone who possesses more authoritative knowledge on the subject of empires and public works, or of the history of monumental stone structures.
The page spoke- links to shows a couple of plank houses. But only single story. Early explorers along the lower Columbia were surprised to see on the bluffs two-story Chinook plank houses complete with balconies and shuttered windows. From the river, they basically looked like contempory European houses.
tygerbryght I’m fine with your source. I just haven’t ever seen it in anything I’ve read. The only stuff I’ve seen is on mound builders in the Great Lakes states and Missouri. I’m not going to ever study that subject to the depth that I’m sure you have. I’m glad you elaborated a little on that subject, which was the intent of my question.
It has been argued, but it is not conclusively proven ( as far as I know ), that the Mississippian mound-builders ( i.e. Cahokia ) were influenced by Mesoamerican contacts. When Europeans arrived in the 17th century, their remnants, the Natchez, had a highly stratified society by North American indian standards.
All that was depicted in popular culture was as you have described.
( minus Chaco, which I’ve done in an earlier trip ). Well worth it if you like outdoorsy vacations.