Grand Mound and the Muskrat

and Grand Mound the Muskrat A Model of Ancient Cosmology on the Rainy River

David Mather

rand Mound, located in the floodplain of the Rainy Originally listed in the National Register of Historic Gand Big Fork rivers on Minnesota’s northern border, Places in 1972, Grand Mound was awarded the higher is the state’s largest American Indian earthwork. For more designation of National Historic Landmark in 2011—one than 2,000 years, it has been a regional monument, sacred of only 25 in Minnesota. This second listing recognizes place, and cemetery. With the rounded diamond shape of the importance of the site as a whole in North American its massive, 25-foot-high body and its roughly 200-foot- archaeology, as well as the magnificent symbolic architec- long, low-lying tail, it is also a symbol of ancient cosmol- ture of the Grand Mound itself.2 ogy, perhaps representing a world-creation story. Grand Mound had been known since the nineteenth The big mound stands within an archaeological site century as an enormous but otherwise typical burial that also contains smaller earthworks and the deeply bur- mound, the “undisputed king of Laurel mounds,” accord- ied layers of an ancient fishing village. Acquired by the ing to archaeologist Edward N. Lugenbeal. It was therefore Minnesota Historical Society in 1970, the site as a whole a shock for the audience at the 1995 Ontario Archaeo- has been variously known as the Smith site (21KC3), the logical Society conference when MNHS site manager Laurel Mounds, and Grand Mound Historic Site. Laurel Michael K. Budak and Canadian archaeologist C. S. Reid pottery was first identified and described here in the revealed a new dimension of the place that we all thought 1930s and has since been recognized as an important was so familiar. Their presentation, “Grand Mound and the archaeological marker over a vast area of the northern Serpent,” announced discovery of the earthwork’s tail and midcontinent.1 recognized Grand Mound for the first time as an effigy.3

194 MINNESOTA HISTORY Grand Mound had been known since the nineteenth century as the “undisputed king of Laurel mounds.”

I build on Budak and Reid’s discovery here, although my interpretation respectfully differs from theirs. Instead of linking the Grand Mound’s tail with serpent imagery, I consider the totality of the mound—the body and tail together—as an effigy representing a muskrat, the Earth Diver of ancient legend, who brought up mud so the flooded world could be magically created anew. I present this idea as an archaeological model, which is a means to connect abstract theories with known data.4 The result is not a claim about what did or did not hap- Visitors on the Grand Mound, early 1900s. A trench left by looters is visible at right. pen in the past. Rather, it is a way of exploring this intriguing possibility for Grand Mound within the regional site spans at least 5,000 years of there, the spiritual practices of context of archaeology, culture, land- American Indian history, but the mound building emanated, being scape, and environmental history. focus of most investigations has been adapted by intervening groups ac- the two periods when the mounds cording to their own traditions. Thus, were built and primary use of the while the Middle Woodland Tradition istorical interest in Grand site occurred: the Middle and Late on the Rainy River was connected in HMound began in the nineteenth Woodland traditions, as represented important ways to that of southern century, as digging by antiquarians by Laurel and Blackduck pottery, re- Minnesota, Illinois, Ohio, and every- and looters damaged this and other spectively. Layers with Laurel pottery where in between, it was also an inde- earthworks along the Rainy River. (Middle Woodland) date from about pendent and unique entity. After local resident Fred Smith 200 BCE to 650 CE. Above those are In some areas of the Smith site, bought the site containing Grand layers with Blackduck and other Late deeper (older) levels without ceramics Mound to protect it, archaeologists Woodland pottery, dating from about demonstrate American Indian use from the University of Minnesota in- 650 to 1400 CE.6 Many archaeologists of the site for fishing in the spring, vestigated two of the small mounds in believe that the two traditions are a tradition that continued through 1933 and 1956. By the late 1960s, Uni- culturally related, despite the change the later periods of mound building. versity of Wisconsin archaeologists in pottery style, and that this entire Stone tools from the pre-Laurel com- recognized that the layer-cake stra- period shows a continuum of use at ponent were also found on the higher tigraphy of the village area held more the site. promise for learning about the past Burial mounds and ceramics are and focused their attention there. By diagnostic traits of the Woodland Tra- DAVID MATHER is the National Reg- that time, the archaeological site as dition as a whole. Mounds and Laurel ister archaeologist in the State Historic Preservation Office at the Minnesota a whole (earthworks and village) was pottery first appeared on the Rainy Historical Society. He dedicates this known as the Smith site.5 River at the beginning of the Middle article to the memory of Mike Budak The archaeology of the Smith Woodland through contact, most (1950–2007), former MNHS manager of likely via an extensive North Ameri- Grand Mound Historic Site who taught so much, to so many, about this impor- facing: Grand Mound, standing 25 feet tall, can trade network with the Hopewell tant place. about 1980 Culture of present-day Ohio. From

SPRING 2015 195 In world-creation (or re-creation) stories from many parts of the world, the Earth Diver plays a heroic role in the aftermath of a global flood.

terrace above the floodplain, where part of the mound by taking a series voles and lemmings, adult muskrats the visitor’s center was built.7 of three one-inch-diameter soil cores typically weigh about three pounds. Because of its large size, Grand along the center of the tail, corre- Their total body length is around Mound itself is generally assumed to sponding to three cores outside of it. 28.5 inches, of which approximately be from the Laurel period, as those The deeper layers of dark soil within one-third is the tail.9 Muskrats are mounds are typically much larger the tail showed that soil had been perhaps “grand” when compared than Blackduck mounds. However, piled up at that location. The tail was to most other rodents, but they are the diagnostic artifacts from the built upon a natural ridge of flood- nonetheless small animals and it may mound’s outer layers, exposed either plain soils, but its relatively straight be surprising to think of them as the by antiquarian pot hunters or burrow- line can be differentiated from the inspiration for a giant effigy mound. ing animals, are primarily Blackduck curving ridge in LiDAR (aerial laser This model proposes, however, that in age. It is likely, in my opinion, sensing) imagery. This orientation, the Grand Mound effigy was not that the origins of Grand Mound are along with the coring results and the meant to be the small animal itself Laurel but that construction, or at obviously constructed juncture of the but, rather, was built to represent a least use, continued in later centuries. tail with body of the mound, demon- big idea. Because of the symmetry of the effigy strate that the tail is not a natural In world-creation (or re-creation) as a whole, I believe that the tail was landscape feature.8 stories from many parts of the world, part of the original intent. the Earth Diver plays a heroic role Budak and Reid’s investigation in the aftermath of a global flood. In of the tail involved surface mapping, uskrats, aquatic rodents these stories, some mud must be re- which showed that it tapers down Mnative to North America, are trieved from deep under the water so quickly from the mound’s body and common in Minnesota. They have fat, that dry land can be magically created. then gradually decreases in height furry bodies, pointy noses, and long, Always a diminutive creature such over its roughly 200-foot length. They thin tails. By far the largest of the as an insect or diving duck, the Earth confirmed that it is a constructed taxonomic subfamily that includes Diver succeeds when stronger animals have failed and hope is fading. Oral traditions of a muskrat as the Earth Diver are known from Algonquian- speaking groups including the Ojibwe and Cree, as well as Siouan speakers including the Dakota. Edward Benton-Benai tells an Ojibwe version in The Mishomis Book. The Creator has caused a global flood to purify the earth. Waynaboozhoo, the legendary spirit of the people, finds a log floating on the surface of the water and gradually gathers

Replica Laurel and Blackduck pots (left to right), diagnostic of the Woodland Tradition, made by former Grand Mound site manager Mike Budak

196 MINNESOTA HISTORY the animals to him. He tries to swim down to the bottom to retrieve some earth to remake the dry land, but the water is too deep and he is unsuccessful. One by one, the animals volunteer to try: first the loon, then the grebe, the mink, the otter, and the turtle. The other animals scoff when the muskrat tries, but he ultimately succeeds at the cost of his life. With the mud that the muskrat retrieves, the earth is remade on the turtle’s shell as a small island that grows and grows.10 Folklorist Richard Dorson pres- ents a slightly different version of the story, told to him by an Ojibwe elder on Michigan’s Upper Peninsula in Mike Budak’s presentation of soil core results confirming that the 1946, with the animals being first the tail is not a natural landscape feature loon, then the otter and, last, the successful muskrat. He prefaces it with the observation, “Listening to a living tale of the Deluge and Creation gives one a queasy feeling. Here is Genesis before anyone wrote it down.”11 In a Cree version recorded by George Nelson in the early-nineteenth century, the earth is flooded in a battle between the culture hero and supernatural underwater lynxes. The otter is sent first to look for mud. It is unsuccessful and dies, but is brought back to life. The muskrat is then asked to try. “Come my little brother, go thou, thou art small and very ac- Budak’s map of the tail; the height profiles at bottom show the taper. tive, art fond of water, and goeth to great depths—thy reward shall be that of the otter.” A cord is tied to his foot so that he can be pulled back. He dives and comes up dead, but he has a little mud in his paws and mouth. He is revived and tries again. This time he brings a mouthful of earth and “a good deal more in his hands which he held pressed to [his] breast.” The hero re-makes the world from this ball of mud, blowing it in all directions.12 A Dakota version was told to Amos Oneroad in the early-twentieth century by elders in his community at Sisseton, South Dakota. It begins as Wakan Tanka descends a rainbow to LiDAR (aerial laser sensing) map, revealing the tail differentiated from the natural ridge

SPRING 2015 197 the surface of the sea. From his lower differences in language and culture other earthworks of the Smith site, ribs, he creates two Unktehi, under- as they moved around the world. The but I suspect the practice was more world panthers. They in turn create Earth Diver itself is always a small common than archaeologists have several animals: the loon, otter, grebe, animal. All versions that I’m aware recognized. Most mound excavations and the muskrat. These animals each of from the North American midcon- occurred in the late-nineteenth and try to swim to the bottom of the sea to tinent feature the muskrat in that early-twentieth centuries before retrieve primordial mud so the land central role.14 modern archaeological methods can be made. All die in the attempt Muskrat bones have been found were developed, so small bones but are revived by the Unktehi. Only in the archaeological layers of the would likely have been overlooked. the muskrat is successful, and the Smith site, as well as other area sites; Many excavations of that time did sediment it brings is spread to the not surprisingly, these animals were not collect animal bones at all, and west by the Unktehi. They all swim in well known to residents of the Rainy those that were recovered often were that direction and finally reach land. River when Grand Mound was con- not identified. Once there, the animals are trans- structed.15 Also, bones indicating Those early excavations more formed into people, and the Unktehi ceremonial muskrat burials have frequently documented another form instruct them in the mysteries of the been found in Middle Woodland of Earth Diver symbolism, however: Medicine Dance.13 mounds in southern Minnesota black, “special soils associated with Other versions of the Earth Diver and western Illinois, built at the wet, mucky, lake bottom or riverside story are known from across North time when the tradition of mound locations” that had been intentionally America, Asia, and eastern Europe building arrived from the Hopewell gathered and transported to construct and may be related to world-creation Culture heartland of present-day layers within some earthworks. In stories from other parts of the globe. Ohio. The Earth Diver story appears this way, the Earth Diver story was While these stories vary greatly in to have been an important aspect of reenacted in building a mound and, details, their common elements may Hopewell cosmology.16 symbolically, each mound repre- point to deeply ancient connections It is not known if muskrat burials between groups who later developed are present in the Grand Mound or Muskrat in winter

198 MINNESOTA HISTORY With the mud that the muskrat retrieves, the earth is remade on the turtle’s shell as a small island that grows and grows.

sented the creation of the earth. the prototypical example of a burial Driftless Area (and contiguous parts While not limited to Middle Wood- mound. That was a mistake, as dis- of Iowa and Minnesota).22 land mounds, this trait is best known covery of the tail first indicated. This The only earthwork with a some- from earthworks of that period.17 revelation is broadened when further what similar form to Grand Mound Together, the muskrat burials considering the mound’s size, form, that I’ve seen recorded is the West- and wetland-soil layers indicate that and landscape position. In truth, bourne Mound near Lake Manitoba in inclusion of Earth Diver symbolism Grand Mound is no more typical of Canada, about 300 miles northwest of was a widespread practice in Middle other Minnesota earthworks than the Grand Mound. Archaeologist E. Leigh Woodland mound construction, state capitol is of other Minnesota Syms has described it as an effigy of when Grand Mound was likely buildings. Grand Mound stands alone “a 10 foot high muskrat with a long begun.18 In at least some cases, the and, with the Earth Diver story, its tail.”23 There are differences—the animal representing the Earth Diver unique qualities are the foundation Westbourne Mound is considerably was a muskrat. for this interpretive model. shorter than Grand Mound, while its Muskrats themselves build For size, Grand Mound is not just tail is twice as long—but the two ap- mounds, constructing their dome- big, it is enormous—staggeringly pear to share the same general traits. shaped houses of vegetation and large—measuring about 140 feet in The age of the Westbourne Mound’s mud that rise above the surface of length and 100 feet in width. The origin is not securely known, although shallow water. They also bring sedi- volume of its 25-foot- high body alone it contains burials under limestone ment up from the bottom during the is around 15 times greater than the slabs, which bring to mind the stone winter, and deposit it on the surface average size of other Minnesota earth- crypts that are often considered a trait of the ice. These aspects of muskrat works.20 It is bigger than the largest of the Middle Woodland Tradition.24 behavior show why they are a natural mound downstream on the Rainy Little is known about the inter- candidate for the Earth Diver role, River at Long Sault Rapids, which ar- nal structure of Grand Mound, but and in that context, perhaps even an chaeologist W. A. Kenyon called “the antiquarian E. McColl’s 1883 account inspiration for burial mound con- most spectacular prehistoric native suggests the Middle Woodland use of struction. Benton-Benai wrote: “The monument in all of Canada.”21 black, wetland soils described above. Creator has made it so that muskrats Regarding form, with one excep- will always be with us because of the tion, Grand Mound has no direct par- The inner part of the mound was sacrifice that our little brother made allels. It is not a large conical mound black earth mixed with ashes and for all of us many years ago when (archaeologists’ term for round, having the appearance of being the Earth was covered with water. dome-shaped mounds), the most thoroughly mixed together with The muskrats do their part today in common form of ancient earthwork. water and subjected to considerable remembering the Great Flood; they Some “compound” mounds are coni- heat, so that any pebbles found build their homes in the shape of the cal with linear appendages or ramps, therein were burnt. Above this little ball of Earth and the island that but Grand Mound is unlike those. mixture there is a covering from 1½ was formed from it.” Because of its Some linear mounds are hundreds of feet to 2 feet of clay, and covering role as the Earth Diver, Wazhashk the feet long, but again, Grand Mound’s the clay there is from 5 feet to 6 feet muskrat is now seen as a symbol of tail is different. Grand Mound is a of black earth, which had neither Ojibwe cultural survival.19 three-dimensional representation been mixed with ashes nor sub- rather than a profile outline, the form jected to the action of fire.25 more commonly identified as an s the largest in the state, effigy mound, such as the Marching Considering the source of this A Grand Mound was long seen as Bears or Thunderbirds of Wisconsin’s black earth brings us to the final

SPRING 2015 199 point: landscape position. Most that all mounds on the Rainy River ing Hannaford site are rich with fish mounds were built on high eleva- were built at natural cataracts—river bones.29 tions, overlooking lower areas.26 This confluences or rapids—where stur- It is not known precisely why is such a prevalent trend that archae- geon and other fish spawn in the this location was chosen for Grand ologists who encounter a fine view spring. This relationship is not a Mound, a mound unlike all the during a survey often start looking coincidence. Those concentrations others. Perhaps the decision was re- around for mounds. In some cases, of fish at the end of the long winter lated to a dream or vision from a com- mounds were built right on the edge were a life-saving resource, bringing munity leader or a significant event of higher landforms, where they are people to congregate at these places that is unrecorded in history. We do clearly visible from below and ap- for thousands of years before the first know, however, that the site was a wet pear even more prominent from that mounds were built. The floodplain area of meandering river channels perspective.27 layers at the Smith site and neighbor- from about 5,900 to 2,250 years ago, The expected location for mounds at the Smith site would be up on the higher terrace, where the visitor’s center is located, but the reality is the opposite. Grand Mound was built on a floodplain, in a location that is still occasionally inundated. It is not even at a high point within the floodplain. Rather, it is close to the water, between the active river channels and a marshy abandoned channel of the Big Fork River. More than size, perhaps more than even its form, this is the most unusual aspect of Minnesota’s most prominent ancient earthwork.

Grand Mound in relation to the Rainy River and abandoned channel of the Big Fork River ust as muskrat biology pro- Jvides an obvious North American candidate for the Earth Diver role, Grand Mound’s vicinity is an ideal setting for the flood story. This watery connection is apparent at the site itself and perhaps even more so at a regional level. Grand Mound is one of a network of ancient mound and village sites along the roughly 90-mile course of the Rainy River. Of these, Grand Mound (the Smith site) and the mounds in Canada at the Long Sault Rapids are the most prominent. At r e v L i i tt Long Sault, the mounds overlook R le k F r o o r F k

g R a natural landing at the base of the i i B v e rapids, where generations of visitors r have created a unique prairie opening in the forest.28 At Grand Mound, the choice of location is not so obvious, except Regional context: Grand Mound and other features, both natural and constructed.

200 MINNESOTA HISTORY On a regional level it is clear, even today, that this is a place where water has become land.

at which point a change in hydrology mounds to represent the Earth Diver The Earth Diver story can be seen caused the floodplain to start build- story, and it appears from McColl’s as an intriguing component of Grand ing upward.30 The date of this change 1883 description that black soil is Mound and the Smith site as a whole, is remarkably close to the beginning present in Grand Mound as well. but I also believe that the connection of the Middle Woodland Tradition Moreover, in the context of the may go much farther than that. Grand around 2,200 years ago, as marked mound’s floodplain location, one Mound is within the basin of a vast, by the first appearance of Laurel ce- could claim that Grand Mound is ancient lakebed. On a regional level it ramics in this area. There were older, actually the ultimate example of an is clear, even today, that this is a place higher, and drier parts of the river Earth Diver mound because the whole where water has become land. valley all around, so it appears that earthwork was made from wetland Minnesota was most recently it was a conscious decision to begin soils. Like at Long Sault Rapids, there covered by glaciers during the Wis- this mound on newly formed earth. may be borrow pits (low spots left consin Glaciation, from about 75,000 As the construction continued for when soil was removed) adjacent to to 12,000 years ago. As the climate centuries—until approximately 600 Grand Mound, but these areas do warmed at the beginning of the pres- years ago—the surrounding levels of not compare with the scale of the ent interglacial period, the Lauren- the village built up naturally through earthwork.31 I suspect that much of tian ice sheets melted and retreated silt and clay sediments deposited in the soil used to build Grand Mound to the north. In their wake was an successive floods, creating a remark- came from the Grand Mound Oxbow, enormous meltwater lake now known able archaeological palimpsest of the marshy former channel of the Big as Glacial Lake Agassiz, its area larger Rainy River history. Fork River southwest of the mound, than all of the Great Lakes combined. As described above, black, wetland or mud from the Rainy River’s bank in The shoreline shifted over thousands soils were used in Middle Woodland low water.32 of years as the ice margins changed

Before and after: Glacial coverage and Lake Agassiz (left), and the region about 7,000 years later, a giant lakebed where Grand Mound and other Woodland Tradition earthworks were constructed. Present-day landmarks superimposed on both views.

SPRING 2015 201 and new drainages periodically ap- boggy.34 With Grand Mound a notable habitat for real muskrats. They un- peared. Living remnants of Glacial exception, this higher level of the nat- questionably became so once it began Lake Agassiz include Lake of the ural levee was where burial mounds to drain.36 Woods, Red Lake, Lake Manitoba, and were typically constructed. American Indians have lived Lake Winnipeg. Another legacy is the While the presence of Grand continually around or within the expansive peatlands of northwestern Mound within the lakebed but near boundaries of the glacial lake since Minnesota.33 this ridge could be seen as a coinci- it had water, but about 7,000 years Glacial Lake Agassiz occasion- dence, it is noteworthy that the West- passed between the end of the lake’s ally stabilized long enough to form bourne Mound occupies a similar Emerson Phase and the time when beaches. The closest of these to Grand position relative to the ridge about Laurel mound building began.37 I Mound is a ridge about 20 miles to 300 miles away. This is a large dis- do not discount the possibility that the south, which formed during the tance, but it is still within the Laurel direct knowledge of the lake could be giant lake’s Emerson Phase, about world, as indicated by the distribution passed down through so many gen- 10,000 to 9,200 years ago. As this of archaeological finds.35 erations (although 7,000 years is un- part of the glacial lake retreated, the The Westbourne Mound’s tail questionably a long time). I am more Rainy River formed in its basin, flow- leads to the edge of a dry oxbow chan- intrigued, however, with another pos- ing westward into the “new” Lake of nel of the Whitemud River. Similarly, sibility: that American Indians of the the Woods. Over time, the river cut Grand Mound’s tail extends toward Middle Woodland and related periods down through the lakebed and built the Rainy and the old channel of the interpreted their landscape as a place up its floodplain from redeposited Big Fork River. I like to imagine these that had once been underwater and lake-bottom clay and silt. This process two giant muskrats climbing out of Periodically inundated setting of Grand created a strip of rich upland soils their marshes, near the western and Mound, 1970. The mound is near the bank along the margins of the river, while southern shores, respectively, of Gla- of the Rainy River (left) in the muskrat-like areas inland (also within the Lake cial Lake Agassiz. The edges of the landform created by the flooded abandoned Agassiz basin) have remained wet and giant lake may have always been good channel and Big Fork River.

202 MINNESOTA HISTORY Visiting Grand Mound Once part of the Minnesota Historical Society’s network new interpretation created, and physical improvements of historic sites, Grand Mound closed to the public in to the site completed. We do not yet have a grand open- 2002, though protection and preservation have contin- ing date, but we’re hopeful and excited that in several ued. Now, the Society is discussing ways to make the site years you will be able to walk the trails at one of our most publicly accessible again. important historic places, and MNHS will again have a Over the past year MNHS staff members have met network of 27 historic sites across the state. For more many times internally, with our Indian Advisory Commit- information and updates, stay tuned to www.mnhs.org tee, and with members of the International Falls commu- and MNHS mailings. nity. Response to the idea of re-opening the site has been very positive, but much work remains. Community en- —Ben Leonard, manager of gagement will continue, resources need to be reallocated, community outreach and partnerships

correctly identified a span of Glacial seen their homeland’s former lakebed such as pottery styles and dates, and Lake Agassiz. Perhaps some saw it lit- in terms of their own ancient story observations about Middle Woodland erally as a place where the Earth Diver of the global flood. In that sense, this earthworks as well as ethnographic story occurred, or perhaps it was al- model is an archaeological interpre- accounts of Earth Diver stories, glacial ways seen as an allegory. Either way, tation of cosmology connected to an geology, and biological information it was a place where the Earth Diver ancient analysis of glacial geology. about muskrats.39 had a special resonance. When the Grand Mound was built over the Middle Woodland practice of mound course of many centuries, and count- building reached the Rainy River, this rand Mound is the center of less generations lived nearby during older tradition achieved even greater Gthe interpretive model presented that time and later. I seriously doubt synergy with the Earth Diver symbol- here: a muskrat effigy representing that all of those people shared a sin- ism of Hopewell spirituality. the Earth Diver, the little hero who gle view of what the Grand Mound Successful hunter-gatherers are helped re-create the world after a “meant,” and it would be arrogant for experts at reading and interpreting global flood. In this model, the Earth us today to believe we know what they their landscape, drawing on cultural Diver story is spectacularly repre- thought. This model is simply one pos- traditions often referred to as tradi- sented in the region’s American sibility, which allows us to explore as- tional ecological knowledge. Recog- Indian earthworks, inspired by Earth pects of the deep history of this place. nition of the beach levels of a glacial Diver cosmology brought north from Ancient, complex, and mysteri- lakebed over such a large distance the Hopewell heartland and blended ous, Grand Mound did not become a would be an impressive testimony to with already ancient indigenous National Historic Landmark because this indigenous science. It was trau- Earth Diver traditions. Also in this of an interpretation. Rather, it war- matic for nineteenth-century Euro- model, the legacy of Glacial Lake rants that status because (among pean geologists to first recognize the Agassiz provided a unique and more other reasons) the site’s great history existence of ancient glacial landforms direct connection with the Earth and integrity make such interpreta- because they contradicted cultural Diver story than was present in other tions possible. More important, just traditions of the Biblical flood de- parts of the Hopewellian world. as the muskrat Wazhashk is a symbol scribed in Genesis. Swiss naturalist It is useful and interesting to of cultural survival, the ancient earth- Louis Agassiz was among the first explore these ideas, but it is also works of the Rainy River endure.40 to promote the “Glacial Theory,” and important to remember that the With proper protection and care, as Minnesota geologist Warren Upham model is not a historical truth. It is an practiced in Ontario by the Rainy later named the glacial lake in his interpretive idea, focused on a single River First Nations community at Kay- honor.38 In contrast, the American theme. In building it, I’ve interwoven Nah-Chi-Wah-Nung Historical Centre, Indian builders of Grand Mound and a theory of the ancient Earth Diver they will always remain for the bene- the Westbourne Mound may have connection with archaeological data, fit of future generations.

SPRING 2015 203 Notes

I am grateful to Barbara Howard, Sarah Beimers, 1973). For more context on the archaeology of mology, see Lance Foster, “The Ioway and the and my other State Historic Preservation Office the Rainy River and Woodland Tradition, see Guy Landscape of Southeast Iowa,” Journal of the Iowa (SHPO) colleagues for their support. Over many Gibbon, Archaeology of Minnesota: The Prehistory Archaeological Society 43 (1996): 1–5. For wide- years, this research has benefited greatly from of the Upper Mississippi River Region (Minneapolis: spread occurrence of the story, see Yu. E. Berez- conversations with Elisse Aune, Rose Berens, University of Minnesota Press, 2012), 113–43, kin, “‘Earth Diver’ and ‘Emergence from Under Mike Budak, Kevin Brownlee, Bill Clayton, Patri- 181–201; W. A. Kenyon, Mounds of Sacred Earth: the Earth’: Cosmogonic Tales as Evidence in cia Emerson, Grant Goltz, Mary Graves, Christy Burial Mounds of Ontario (Toronto: Royal Ontario Favor of the Heterogenic Origins of the Ameri- Hohman-Caine, Stacey Jack, Lee Johnson, Jim Museum, 1986), 41–72; J. V. Wright, A History of can Indians,” Archaeology, Ethnology and Anthro- Jones Jr., Jim Leonard II, Erika Martin Seibert, Ver- the Native People of Canada, vol. 2, 1,000 B.C.–A.D. pology of Eurasia 32 (2007): 110–23; Elli Kaija gil Noble, Ed Oerichbauer, Jeff Richner, Bill Ross, 500 (Hull: Canadian Museum of Civilization, Köngäs, “The Earth-Diver (Th. A. 812),” Ethno James Stoltman, Leigh Syms, Matt Thomas, 1999), 725–80. history 7/2 (1960): 151–80; Alan Dundes, “Earth- Annie Wilson, Sherry Wilson and Willie Wilson, 6. In northern Minnesota, including the Diver: Creation of the Mythopoeic Male,” among many others—thank you! Many thanks Rainy River, where the Early Woodland Tradition American Anthropologist 64/5 (1962): 1032–51. also to John Crippen and the Minnesota Histori- is not present, these periods are often called Ini- 15. Lugenbeal, “Archaeology of the Smith cal Society (MNHS) historic sites department and tial and Terminal Woodland. I retain the Middle/ Site,” 356; Paul W. Lukens Jr., “The Vertebrate to Ben Leonard for enjoyable recent adventures Late terminology because I am discussing con- Fauna from Pike Bay Mound, Smith Mound 4, and at Grand Mound. nections with regions where those terms apply. McKinstry Mound 1,” in Laurel Culture in Minne- 1. Michael K. Budak, Grand Mound (St. Paul: Dates of archaeological periods are approxi- sota, 37–45; Darcy Morey, Carl Falk, and Holmes Minnesota Historical Society Press, 1995), 9–15. mations, usually based on interpretations of a Semken Jr., “Vertebrate Remains from the 2. Elden Johnson, “National Register of His- few radiocarbon tests and related archaeological McKinstry Site,” in The McKinstry Site (21KC2): toric Places Documentation Form: The Laurel data. The dates used here follow Budak, Grand Final Report of Phase III Investigations, ed. M. M. Mounds,” and David Mather, “National Historic Mound. The most recent overview of the historic Thomas and D. Mather (Maple Grove: Loucks & Landmark Nomination: Grand Mound” (Washing- contexts in this region proposes slightly different Associates, 1996), copy in SHPO; George Rapp Jr. ton, D.C.: U.S. Dept. of Interior, National Park Ser- spans of time and includes the Late Woodland; et al., Final Report: Hannaford Data Recovery Proj- vice, 1971 and 2006, respectively); Mather, “Grand Constance Arzigian, “National Register of His- ect (Duluth: Archaeometry Laboratory, 1995), Mound is a National Historic Landmark: Minne- toric Places Multiple Property Documentation 193–218, copy in SHPO; David Arthurs, Archaeo- sota Archaeology and the National Register of Form: The Woodland Tradition in Minnesota logical Investigations at the Long Sault Site: A Strat- Historic Places in 2011,” Minnesota Archaeologist (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Dept. of Interior, National ified Habitation and Burial Station on the Rainy 70 (2011): 84–112. Park Service, 2012). River in Northwestern Ontario, Ontario Ministry of 3. Edward N. Lugenbeal, “The Archaeology of 7. Douglas A. Birk and Douglas C. George, Citizenship and Culture, Report 7, 1986, 69; David the Smith Site: A Study of the Ceramics and Cul- “A Woodland Survey Strategy and Its Application Mather, “Zooarchaeology at the Rainy Lake City ture History of Minnesota Laurel and Blackduck” to the Salvage of a Late Archaic Locus of the Saloon: Historic, Woodland and Archaic Compo- (PhD diss., University of Wisconsin, 1976), 5; Smith Mounds Site (21KC3), Koochiching County, nents at 21KC13, Voyageurs National Park,” Min- Michael K. Budak and C. S. Reid, “Grand Mound Minnesota,” Minnesota Archaeologist 35/3 (1976): nesota Archaeologist 67 (2008): 43–62. and the Serpent,” presented at the 22nd Annual 1–30. 16. Kent Bakken et al., Mitakuye Owas, All My Meeting of the Ontario Archaeological Society, 8. Budak and Reid, “Grand Mound and the Relations: Authentication, Recovery and Reburial at Thunder Bay, 1995, copy in SHPO, MNHS. The Serpent.” the Lincoln Mounds for the Bloomington Central discovery occurred after Budak’s book, Grand 9. Paul Errington, Muskrat Populations: Popu- Station Project, Bloomington, Minnesota (St. Paul: Mound, was published. Correspondence in lation Dynamics on an Important Species (Ames: Summit Envirosolutions, 2006), 71–72, copy in MNHS historic sites department files indicates Iowa State University Press, 1963), 3–31; Gale R. SHPO; Lynn M. Alex, Iowa’s Archaeological Past that Budak hoped to update the site’s exhibits Willner et al., “Ondatra zibethicus,” Mammalian (Iowa City: University of Iowa Press, 2000), and interpretive materials, but this was not pos- Species 141 (1980): 1–8; Evan B. Hazard, The Mam- 98–100; Joel W. Martin, The Land Looks After Us: sible before the site was closed to the public in mals of Minnesota (Minneapolis: University of A History of Native American Religion (Oxford: 2002. He did, however, reroute the walking trail Minnesota Press, 1982), 97–99; Jason Abraham, Oxford University Press, 2000), 18–21. See also to go around, rather than over, the tail. “Modern-Day Trappers,” Minnesota Conservation Brian M. Fagan, Ancient North America: The 4. The Earth Diver story appears in many Volunteer, Jan./Feb. 2007, 38–45. Archaeology of a Continent, 4th ed. (New York: American Indian cultures and on other 10. Benton-Benai, Mishomis Book, 29–34. Thames & Hudson, 2005), 435–56; Gibbon, continents. For one example, see Edward 11. Richard A. Dorson, Blood-Stoppers and Archaeology of Minnesota, 123–28. Benton-Banai, The Mishomis Book: The Voice Bear-Walkers: Folk Tales of Immigrants, Lumber- 17. Robert L. Hall, An Archaeology of the Soul: of the Ojibway (Hayward, WI: Indian Country jacks & Indians (Cambridge: Harvard University North American Indian Belief and Ritual (Urbana: Communications, 1988), 29–34. Guy Gibbon, An- Press, 1952), 42–48. See also Victor Barnouw, University of Illinois Press, 1997), 8, 18 (quote), 23. thropological Archaeology (New York: Columbia Wisconsin Chippewa Myths & Tales and their Rela- See also Robert C. Mainfort Jr., Pinson Mounds: University Press, 1984), 47, describes the mod- tion to Chippewa Life (Madison: University of Wis- Middle Woodland Ceremonialism in the Midsouth eling process as a “playful, creative interlude in consin Press, 1977), 38–40. (Fayetteville: University of Arkansas Press, 2013), which processes are simulated and assumptions 12. Jennifer S. H. Brown and Robert Bright- 205; Christopher Carr, “Scioto Hopewell Ritual tried out; no commitment needs to be made man, “The Orders of the Dreamed”: George Nelson Gatherings: A Review and Discussion of Previous that this is what necessarily happened in the on Cree and Northern Ojibwa Religion and Myth, Interpretations and Data,” in Gathering Hopewell: past” (emphasis in original). 1823 (St. Paul: Minnesota Historical Society Society, Ritual, and Ritual Interaction, ed. C. Carr 5. For more detail on the archaeology of this Press, 1988), 47 (emphasis in original). and D. T. Case (New York: Kluwer Academic/ important site, see Budak, Grand Mound; Lugen- 13. Amos E. Oneroad and Alanson B. Skinner, Plenum Publishers, 2005), 463–79. beal, “Archaeology of the Smith Site”; Mather, Being Dakota: Tales & Traditions of the Sisseton & 18. American Indian earthworks were built “National Historic Landmark Nomination”; Wahpeton, ed. Laura L. Anderson (St. Paul: Min- for more than two millennia, and their symbolic James B. Stoltman, The Laurel Culture in Minne- nesota Historical Society Press, 2003), 188–89. architecture is complex and diverse. My focus is sota (St. Paul: Minnesota Historical Society, 14. For muskrat as Earth Diver in Ioway cos- on one aspect of a much larger cultural tradition.

204 MINNESOTA HISTORY 19. Peter Marchand, “Between Ice and Hard Places Documentation Form: Indian Mounds Shield (Toronto: Natural Heritage/Natural Times,” Minnesota Conservation Volunteer, Jan./ Park Mound Group” (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Dept. History, 1994), 47; Ronald J. Mason, Great Lakes Feb. 2005, 18–25; Hazard, Mammals of Minne- of Interior, National Park Service, 2013). Archaeology (New York: Academic Press, 1981), sota, 98; Benton-Benai, Mishomis Book, 34; 25. E. McColl, Aug. 7, 1883, quoted in Winchell, 284–92. Brenda J. Child, Holding Our World Together: Aborigines of Minnesota, 375. 36. For muskrats and their habitat in the Gla- Ojibwe Women and the Survival of Community 26. Arzigian and Stevenson, Minnesota’s In- cial Lake Agassiz basin of northern Minnesota, (New York: Viking, 2012), 28, 121. dian Mounds, 142. Manitoba, and Ontario, see Errington, Muskrat 20. Budak, Grand Mound, 28, estimates that it 27. On siting at Long Sault Rapids, see Ar- Populations, 410–19. contains about 90,000 cubic feet of soil— thurs, Archaeological Investigations, 19. Other 37. Matthew Boyd, “Paleoindian Geoarchae- approximately 5,000 tons. My comparison with Rainy River mounds with this position include ology of the Assiniboine Delta of Glacial Lake other mounds is based Constance M. Arzigian the single mound by the sturgeon hatchery at Agassiz,” Canadian Journal of Archaeology 31/3 and Katherine P. Stevenson, Minnesota’s Indian Manitou Rapids and McKinstry Mound 1 at the (2007): 198–221; Michael A. Magner, “The Lake of Mounds and Burial Sites: A Synthesis of Prehistoric Little Fork River. the Woods/Rainy River Late Paleoindian Com- and Early Historic Archaeological Data (St. Paul: 28. Rainy River First Nations, Kay-Nah- Chi- plex: An Initial Assessment from the Rainy River Office of the State Archaeologist, 2003), 65. Wah-Nung: Guide to Medicinal, Edible and Tradi- Region of Minnesota,” Minnesota Archaeologist Earlier sources—George Bryce, Among the Mound tional Plants (Stratton, ON: Kay-Nah-Chi-Wah- 60 (2001): 87–98. Builders’ Remains (Winnipeg: Historical and Sci- Nung Historical Centre, 2006), 1; Arthurs, Ar- 38. Fikret Berkes, Sacred Ecology: Traditional entific Society of Manitoba, 1904), 45, and New- chaeological Investigations, 19; David Mather, Ecological Knowledge and Resource Management, ton H. Winchell, Aborigines of Minnesota (St. Paul: “The Place of the Long Rapids,” Minnesota Con- 3rd ed. (New York: Routledge, 2012); Warren Minnesota Historical Society, 1911), 369, incor- servation Volunteer, May/June 2011, 28–39. Upham: The Glacial Lake Agassiz (Washington: rectly list the height as 45 feet. Lugenbeal, “Ar- 29. Budak, Grand Mound, 13–14; Lugenbeal, U.S. Geological Survey Monograph 25, 1896). chaeology of the Smith Site,” 5, and Budak, Grand “Archaeology of the Smith Site,” 655; Rapp et al., 39. The model could be taken farther, as Mound, 12, 28 explain that 45 feet is the distance Hannaford, 196. there are other effigy earthworks on the ridge along the slope from the edge of the mound to 30. Edwin R. Hajic, “Geoarchaeology of in Manitoba and, nearby on the Rainy River, the summit but the vertical height is 25 feet. Phase III Excavations,” in McKinstry Site (21KC2), McKinstry Mound 2 was also built in the flood- 21. Kenyon, Mounds of Sacred Earth, 1. Long 6.11–6.12. Hajic investigated a number of loca- plain. Syms, Aboriginal Mounds, 56; Lloyd A. Wil- Sault is a conical mound about 113 feet in diame- tions along the Rainy River, including the Smith ford, “The Prehistoric Indians of Minnesota: The ter and 24 feet high. Arthurs, Archaeological In- site, and based his chronology on radiocarbon McKinstry Mounds of the Rainy River Aspect,” vestigations, 21, states that it is “dwarfed by the dates and analysis of layers revealed by deep Minnesota History 31 (Dec. 1950): 231–37. I have truly monumental proportions of Grand Mound.” geological cores. Geomorphology is the study focused on Grand Mound and, secondarily, the 22. Robert A. Birmingham and Leslie E. of landforms and their geological history. Geo Westbourne Mound, as the most obvious exam- Eisenberg, Indian Mounds of Wisconsin (Madison: archaeology examines archaeological sites in ples of muskrat/Earth Diver mounds. University of Wisconsin Press, 2000), 109–36; the context of geology. 40. Child, Holding Our World Together, 28, 121. James L. Theler and Robert F. Boszhardt, Twelve 31. Arthurs, Archaeological Investigations, 21. Millennia: Archaeology of the Upper Mississippi During flooding in June 2014, I noticed an area of River Valley (Iowa City: University of Iowa Press, deeper water on the north side of the mound to- The photos on p. 194, by Mike Budak, and 196, 2003), 127–29. Dakota elders have identified a ward the Rainy River, which could be an ancient by Mary Graves, are courtesy Mary Graves; p. 198 profile-effigy mound at Diamond Bluff, Wiscon- borrow pit. is by Michael Furtman ©michaelfurtman.com. sin (across the Mississippi River from Red Wing), 32. James K. Huber, Results of a Paleoecologi- LiDAR map, p. 197, is by Andrew LaBounty from as a muskrat, referring to the Earth Diver story; cal Study of Grand Mound Oxbow Lake, Koochich- data collected by the International Water Insti- Michael P. Bergervoet, “A Monument Mosaic: ing County, Minnesota (Duluth: Archaeometry tute, 2009; all other maps are by Matt Kania/ Merging Indian Oral Tradition and Scientific Laboratory, 1995), 3, SHPO; Rapp et al., Hanna Map Hero. The remaining illustrations are in Method” (MS thesis, Minnesota State ford, 39–40. This study provides a useful analysis MNHS collections: p. 197, top and middle, in University—Mankato, 2008), 68–70. of vegetation change at the Smith site. SHPO, by Mike Budak; and p. 202, by Robert 23. E. Leigh Syms, Aboriginal Mounds in 33. Richard W. Ojakangas and Charles L. Wheeler. Southern Manitoba: An Evaluative Overview (Parks Matsch, Minnesota’s Geology (Minneapolis: Uni- Canada, 1978), 35. Syms writes, “There is some versity of Minnesota Press, 1982), 105–10; H. E. danger of imaginative individuals seeing animal Wright Jr., Barbara A. Coffin, and Norman E. Aas- forms in irregular, geometric forms, but I have eng, eds., The Patterned Peatlands of Minnesota been impressed with the muskrat-like appear- (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, ance of the Westbourne Mound (#160) every 1992), 9–11. time I have visited it”; Aboriginal Mounds, 43. 34. A. F. Bajc, Quaternary Geology: Rainy I greatly appreciate my 2007 visit to this mound River—Fort Frances Area (Toronto: Ontario Geo- with Dr. Syms. logical Survey Report 286, 2001), 28. These drier 24. Westbourne is an accumulative mound, soils contribute to a microhabitat with elms, built in stages over a long period of time; Syms, oaks, and related vegetation, described at a Aboriginal Mounds, 40, 82. Disturbance by loot- smaller scale along the Wawiag River, which ers revealed artifacts that Syms identifies with also flows through marshy lakebottom of Gla- the Devil’s Lake-Sourisford Burial Complex (Late cial Lake Agassiz; Jon Nelson, Quetico: Near to Prehistoric—more recent than Laurel). Arzigian Nature’s Heart (Toronto: Natural Heritage Books, and Stevenson, Minnesota’s Indian Mounds, 2009), 103–09. 473–75; Birmingham and Eisenberg, Wisconsin’s 35. Wright, History of the Native People, Indian Mounds, 85; Sigrid Arnott, Geoff Jones, 725–80; Grace Rajnovich, Reading Rock Art: Inter- and David Maki, “National Register of Historic preting the Indian Rock Paintings of the Canadian

SPRING 2015 205

Copyright of Minnesota History is the property of the Minnesota Historical Society, and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or users or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder’s express written permission: contact us.

Individuals may print or download articles for personal use.

To request permission for educational or commercial use, contact us. Include the author’s name and article title in the body of your message. But first--

If you think you may need permission, here are some guidelines:

Students and researchers • You do not need permission to quote or paraphrase portions of an article, as long as your work falls within the fair use provision of copyright law. Using information from an article to develop an argument is fair use. Quoting brief pieces of text in an unpublished paper or thesis is fair use. Even quoting in a work to be published can be fair use, depending on the amount quoted. Read about fair use here: http://www.copyright.gov/fls/fl102.html • You should, however, always credit the article as a source for your work.

Teachers • You do not need permission to incorporate parts of an article into a lesson. • You do need permission to assign an article, either by downloading multiple copies or by sending students to the online pdf. There is a small per-copy use fee for assigned reading. Contact us for more information.

About Illustrations • Minnesota History credits the sources for illustrations at the end of each article. Minnesota History itself does not hold copyright on images and therefore cannot grant permission to reproduce them. • For information on using illustrations owned by the Minnesota Historical Society, see MHS Library FAQ.