Cahokia Mounds State Historic Site, located on an older alignment of Route 66 near Collinsville, Ill., is featured in an excellent article in the current issue of National Geographic.
The story reportedly has boosted number of visitors at Cahokia Mounds and prompted a follow-up story by the Suburban Journals of St. Louis.
The National Geographic article by Glenn Hodges touches on the site’s majesty, Americans’ profound ignorance of it, and the fact it and other nearby American Indian mounds have been threatened or erased by development. Here’s a good explanation about such sites:
Other Indian mounds in St. Louis and East St. Louis were leveled and paved over during much of the 19th and 20th centuries. (Kip Welborn’s recent book, “Things to Look Out for on Route 66 in St. Louis,” delves into this in one chapter.)
But it was one of President Eisenhower’s domestic policies — a target of much anger by Route 66ers — that became Cahokia Mounds’ salvation.
President Dwight Eisenhower’s interstate highway program, though a massive undertaking that changed America’s landscape as dramatically as the railroads once did, contained provisions for the study of archaeological sites in its path. This meant more money for excavations than had ever been available, as well as a clear agenda for where to dig, when, and how fast. With two highways slated to skewer the ancient city—I-55/70 now bisects Cahokia’s north plaza, creating a road sandwich with Collinsville Road, a quarter mile to the south— archaeologists began to systematically study the site. What they found was nothing less than revelatory.
It became apparent that Cahokia was more than just a stupendous pile of earth or a ceremonial site where scattered tribes congregated once in a while. Nearly everywhere they dug, archaeologists found homes—indicating that thousands of people had once lived in the community—and many of these homes had been built within a very brief span of time. In fact, the whole city seemed to spring to life almost overnight around 1050, a phenomenon now referred to as a “big bang.” People streamed in from surrounding areas, built houses, and quickly constructed the infrastructure of a new city—including several mounds with buildings on top and a grand plaza the size of 45 football fields, used for everything from sporting events to communal feasts to religious celebrations.
Because Cahokia Mounds was deemed such a significant historic site, the interstate highway system inadvertently saved it.
However, it still remains a mystery why the Cahokia city was built, and why it was already abandoned when Columbus set foot on the New World in 1492. A number of fascinating theories abound, which is why the whole article is worth reading.
Then there’s this poignant passage when the author tries to find the original mound in St. Louis:
When I drive to St. Louis to see if anything still memorializes the big mound (named, with an appropriate lack of imagination, Big Mound) that was destroyed there by 1869, I’m surprised to see that the exact spot where it was located is where the new bridge from East St. Louis will land. I ask around and learn that archaeologists excavated this lot too before construction started. But they didn’t find a trace of Big Mound, only remnants of the 19th-century factories that had taken its place. That is now the accessible history of this site. The rest is gone.
After a failed first attempt, I do finally locate a marker for Big Mound. It’s a little cobblestone memorial a half block down Broadway from Mound Street, with a missing plaque and grass growing between its rocks. As luck would have it, I find it just as a man arrives to spray it with weed killer. I ask him if he works for the city, and he says no. His name is Gary Zigrang, and he owns a building down the block. He’s called the city about the marker’s disrepair, and they haven’t done anything, so he’s taking matters into his own hands. And as he sprays the weeds on the forgotten memorial for the forgotten mound of the forgotten people who once lived here, he says, “What a shame. There’s history here, and it needs to be taken care of.”
Great story Ron. Thanks. I don’t know if I ever realized that his was along on old alignment of Route 66. Might have to add this to our trip plans.
The relative obscurity of Cahokia Mounds, given it’s significance, is actually downplayed somewhat in this article.
At any rate, Cahokia is definitely a sight to behold, and is highly recommended to all; the stretch of highway referenced in the Nat Geo article really does have an “Old 66” feel to it, as an added bonus.
And please note that the theory of the site being of “Native American” origin has now been called into question more than ever—e.g., a little more than a decade ago, a massive stone structure was detected below Monks Mound that certainly has the potential of solving this mystery once and for all, but unfortunately all further inquiries regarding it have been met with official silence.
See “Advanced Civilizations of Prehistoric America” by Frank Joseph for a wonderful open-minded look at the history of Cahokia; you will be amazed.
Gerry, before you get too enthusiastic about Mr. Joseph’s writing, you’d best be aware he became infamous as the neo-Nazi who tried to lead a march in Skokie, Ill., during the 1970s. Yes, he’s that guy.
His real name is Frank Collin, and he was kicked out of the white supremacy group when his Jewish ancestry was revealed and for child molestation, the latter of which he served prison time.
Because of these things, I hope you understand why the views of Mr. Collin, aka Mr. Joseph, should be looked at with considerable skepticism.
Sources: https://www.flavinscorner.com/collin.htm
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frank_Collin
https://downwithjugears.blogspot.com/2005/08/frank-collin-affair.html
That might be, but the BOOK I referenced is pretty good and contains a lot of info I’ve come across elsewhere.
I’m sorry, Gerry, but when the leading light of such an unorthodox theory turns out to be a felon and a white supremacist, it makes everything he writes highly dubious.
I lived near Cahokia Mounds for eight years and visited the site. Before today, I never heard or read any researcher or scholar who doesn’t think Cahokia Mounds wasn’t built by American Indians. The evidence that the mounds were built by Native Americans is far too vast to dismiss.
That’s not true, Ron.
There are MANY folks who wondered, and still do, just who these “Mississippians” really are, where they came from, and where they went.
Those are unanswered questions, right to this day; the Nat Geo article alludes to all of that, albeit in a “sheepish” way.
If the mounds weren’t built by American Indians, who did?
That’s an excellent question, and one I don’t have a
definitive answer to, to be sure. However, it’s very hard to deny
that there’s a lot of evidence that Mesoamericans of sorts– from
the south — moved up in to the Mississippi Valley for reasons
unknown. Read “The Moundbuilders” by Robert Silverberg, a
mainstream scholar who readily admits that there are many
unresolved questions about the exact origins of these Middle
Mississippians. And if you haven’t been to Cahokia lately, you will
now find confirmation in their visitor center of the discovery of
the massive stone structure residing under the dirt of Monks Mound,
but with no further explanations or details.
One idea, Gerry, is to study a little linguistics.
Another speculation is escape from the jaguar religions and empires of Mexico. It’s speculated that some Nations split with peoples migrating through the desert from Mexico into the Southeast. Check out the origin stories of the Southeastern tribes. The mounds remind me of the pyramid cities found in Mexico and is integral with government, religion, astronomy, calendar sytem, and recreation.
Another is that when DeSoto landed, his men witnessed the building of mounds. His men murdered thousand without just cause. Many of his men got sick from disease they had brought with them. DeSoto himself died. These diseases swept through the Mississippi valley killing millions. When Captain Smith came to the East coast as well as the Pilgrims they were told that many Indians had died due to disease. Village after village were encountered with grass growing over the remains of most all villages.
My ancestors built those mounds without a doubt in my mind.
My point to Ron was that while he claims the Native American angle to be a “slam dunk,” if we go back to the NG article we find the following “evidence”:
__________________________________________________________________
“In fact, the whole city seemed to spring to life almost overnight around 1050, a phenomenon now referred to as a ‘big bang’.”
“Making the story even more interesting was the clear evidence of ritual human sacrifice.“
“Was Cahokia an empire, like the Mesoamerican civilizations to the south?”
“We don’t even know what this place was called …”
“You know what they say,” says Bill Iseminger, an archaeologist who has worked at Cahokia for 40 years. “Put three archaeologists in a room and you get five opinions.”
“… a hegemonic empire sustained by force that reached deep into the Mississippian world and perhaps connected to Mesoamerican civilizations such as the Maya or Toltec.”
“Pauketat argues, that Cahokia’s political economy was centralized and broad reaching.”
“Washington University’s John Kelly, a longtime stalwart of Cahokian archaeology, sums up the present understanding of Cahokia nicely: ‘People aren’t really sure what it is.’”
“Nor do people know what happened to it.”
__________________________________________________________________
Sounds pretty convincing to me …. NOT.
The whole establishment-based game of its sticking with the “isolationist” theory is ridiculous, it’s obvious that ancient folks living far back in prehistory had the means to travel worldwide, and did so. In this particular case, it would only have required travel from the Yucatan to the mouth of the Mississippi, which doesn’t seem unreasonable.
So if Cahokia has “Mayan” stamped all over it (and it does for a number of reasons), so be it; and BTW, these folks (Mayans, Toltecs, or whoever) from the south were Native Americans, too, just Native Americans from a different part of the Americas.
Thus, one can drop the silly “racist” charges, if so inclined to press them — which is quite goofy, too.
Gerry, if you don’t think that being a felon and a neo-Nazi doesn’t hurt one’s credibility when espousing an unorthodox theory, then I don’t know what to say.
You’re straying off topic, Ron; besides, Frank Joseph is NOT the only one expressing doubts about the “assumed” origins of Cahokia, and if you were really “up” on this topic you would know that.
And on that note I’ll mention another NG quote I forgot to include in my earlier response, above: “But with less than one percent of Cahokia excavated, speculation by every camp remains in higher supply than evidence.”
It is certainly relevant — and not off-topic — when the leading light of those alternative theories has a humongous credibility problem. What does it say when he’s the most prominent person advocating this? Why can’t they get someone who’s better and less compromised?
There ARE other people, and I already mentioned one as a great example, i.e., Mr. Silverberg, he being more of the mainstream.
However, I will also add that there really isn’t a whole lot of stuff available in print —- amazingly, given the significance of Cahokia — beyond the usual academic mumbo-jumbo that’s not only inconclusive, but not very interesting to boot.
But at any rate, the Bottom Line here (incl. Nat Geo) is that the jury is certainly still out regarding the true origins & nature of Cahokia.