Archeologists Discover Ancient Metropolis Beneath St. Louis

Archeologists Discover Ancient Metropolis Beneath St. Louis

Cahokia, IL (KPLR)— Patrick Durst isn`t digging for gold, but he found the tool that could have done so, a few thousand years ago.

'This would be fastened or left onto a handle a stick and used for agriculture,' says Patrick Durst showing a digging tool that looks like it was made yesterday.

It`s been a virtual goldmine for archeologists at the old stockyards in East St. Louis. For the past four years they`ve been uncovering artifacts as work progresses on the new Mississippi River Bridge.

'It's sort of an unparalleled opportunity to investigate a very large portion of a major metropolitan system major residential complex in the Midwest,' says Durst.

Durst and a team of 80 archeologists have determined that from 900ad to 1200ad, as many as 3500 people lived where the stockyards stood. And like nearby Cahokia Mounds, this site might have had more.

'At one time historically there were anywhere from 40 to 50 mounds documented and associate it in this area with the site,' says Durst. 'Throughout history, starting with the civil war, those sites actually became level due to some of the industry and railroad expansion in the East St. Louis area.'

They`ve unearthed evidence that a sophisticated sprawling metropolis stretched for eight miles on both sides of the river.

Yet more evidence that we are still unsure of our history. I found it pretty cool that there are more mounds than whats visible.

For those not familiar with Cahokia mounds -
Cahokia Mounds Official Site
Cahokia Mounds - Wikipedia

Cahokia Mounds State Historic Site ( /kəˈhoʊkiə/) is the area of an ancient indigenous city (c. 600–1400 CE) located in the American Bottom floodplain, between East Saint Louis and Collinsville in south-western Illinois, across the Mississippi River from St. Louis, Missouri. The 2,200-acre (8.9 km2) site included 120 human-built earthwork mounds over an area of six square miles, of which 80 remain.[2] Cahokia Mounds is the largest archaeological site related to the Mississippian culture, which developed advanced societies in central and eastern North America, beginning more than five centuries before the arrival of Europeans.[3]

Cahokia Mounds is a National Historic Landmark and designated site for state protection. In addition, it is one of only 21 World Heritage Sites within the United States. It is the largest prehistoric earthen construction in the Americas north of Mexico.[2]

This entire area once contained a city that was larger than London (mid 1500's). Discoveries like this almost always captures my attention. The more we can learn about our past will enhance our future.

Anyways I thought I would share.

reply to post by Xcathdra


In other news archaeologists have discovered another, crappier, ancient metropolis under East St. Louis.

reply to post by Xcathdra


Good spot and an interesting read. So it appears to be a native american settlement?

By the way, out of curiosity, where does it say the city was bigger than London? I haven't read that bit anywhere?

The destruction of Native American culture and our ignorant acceptance of the situation is the true American tragedy. ( and conspiracy!)

reply to post by Flavian


The part about London is in the official Cahokia Mounds website link. Left hand side just under the picture.

Originally posted by emaildogs
The destruction of Native American culture and our ignorant acceptance of the situation is the true American tragedy. ( and conspiracy!)

True. In reading the above OP, I was thinking about my family's visit to St. Louis and the mounds area in about 1981. I was shocked that at that time the main mound was a weed-covered little hill with absolutely nothing on the site except a small sign, and party trash everywhere. Maybe some day the highly touted St. Louis Arch will be seen as a worthless relic as has been the case with the mounds. I'm please to hear a better understanding of the area is becoming clearer.

Modern-day Americans will never appreciate the cultures and societies of Native Americans. Forget cowboys and settlers fighting Indians as typically found in our literature. Seek out, for example, the journeys of the Lewis and Clark journey across the north west from St. Louis to the Pacific if you want to "met" real Indians..

reply to post by Xcathdra


Ah, thank you for that. It is certainly an interesting site and i have to confess i had absolutely no idea it even existed! Probably a side effect of being spoiled for history where i am!

I may be reading this wrong (if so, please correct me) but it appears that rather than, say, a continuous development, it appears to be more urban sprawl? As such, you would expect it to be spread over a greater distance than conventional cities.

Are there any indications as to what caused the collapse of the place?

Originally posted by Flavian
Ah, thank you for that. It is certainly an interesting site and i have to confess i had absolutely no idea it even existed! Probably a side effect of being spoiled for history where i am!

Its ok because I had the same thought process on that. Nothing like hiding history in plain sight.

Originally posted by Flavian
I may be reading this wrong (if so, please correct me) but it appears that rather than, say, a continuous development, it appears to be more urban sprawl? As such, you would expect it to be spread over a greater distance than conventional cities.

Good question.. I have no idea to be honest. Back in those days what population constituted a city or metropolis. Without modern infrastructure I would say this recent discovery is pretty big. They stated the metropolis was 8 miles and was on both sides of the river.

Pretty impressive in my opinion.

Originally posted by Flavian
Are there any indications as to what caused the collapse of the place?

No one really knows.. This is from wikipedia -

Cahokia began to decline after 1300 CE. It was abandoned more than a century before Europeans arrived in North America, in the early 16th century,[25] and the area around it was largely uninhabited by indigenous tribes.[26] Scholars have proposed environmental factors, such as over-hunting and deforestation as explanations. The houses, stockade, and residential and industrial fires would have required the annual harvesting of thousands of logs. In addition, climate change could have aggravated effects of erosion due to deforestation, and adversely affected the cultivation of maize, on which the community had depended.

Another possible cause is invasion by outside peoples, though the only evidence of warfare found so far is the wooden stockade and watchtowers that enclosed Cahokia's main ceremonial precinct. Due to the lack of other evidence for warfare, the palisade appears to have been more for ritual or formal separation than for military purposes. Diseases transmitted among the large, dense urban population are another possible cause of decline. Many recent theories propose conquest-induced political collapse as the primary reason for Cahokia’s abandonment.[27]

reply to post by emaildogs

The destruction of Native American culture and our ignorant acceptance of the situation is the true American tragedy. ( and conspiracy!)

Whilst I agree with you entirely I do think it's worthwhile pointing out that this site was abandoned about a century before any European contact.

reply to post by Xcathdra


Thanks so much for all that info, i really appreciate it.

The 1300 CE date is very interesting - possibly victims of rampaging Toltecs and Aztecs? (A bit of a leap of faith i know but the time frame fits).

Originally posted by Flavian
reply to post by Xcathdra

 

Thanks so much for all that info, i really appreciate it.

The 1300 CE date is very interesting - possibly victims of rampaging Toltecs and Aztecs? (A bit of a leap of faith i know but the time frame fits).

You are welcome.

I was wondering if the mounds are in any way linked to the mounds in Ohio. Serpent mound, as its called, has had archeologists all over the spectrum on its purpose. There was an epsiode of Ancient Aliens that did a segment on the mounds.

I bring that up because of how easy it was for people to bury the mounds from societal progress. There are similarities between the 2 sites and my question is does anyone know if there are other mounds between E. St. Louis and Ohio?

Originally posted by Flavian
reply to post by Xcathdra

 

Thanks so much for all that info, i really appreciate it.
The 1300 CE date is very interesting - possibly victims of rampaging Toltecs and Aztecs? (A bit of a leap of faith i know but the time frame fits).

Early Spanish explorers encountered groups in Florida who still reflected the Mississippian culture, and apparently the leadership referred to their subjects as 'stinkards'.
I've always kinda figured that the inhabitants took a look around at their roles in a highly stratified society...looked away to the lush landscapes of the region...and simply walked off to explore better options.

reply to post by Xcathdra


There are many mounds in the area. I live in Western Kentucky and I know of several around here. I know of one area that has several small mounds as well as a burial ground that few people know about and isn't really documented. The Mississippi Valley is covered with evidence of early civilization.

This is one of the more known mounds in Kentucky.
en.wikipedia.org...

Wickliffe Mounds (15 BA 4) is a prehistoric, Mississippian culture archaeological site located in Ballard County, Kentucky, just outside the town of Wickliffe, about three miles from the confluence of the Ohio and Mississippi rivers. Archaeology investigations have linked the site with others along the Ohio River in Illinois and Kentucky as part of the Angel Phase of Mississippian culture.

Very cool. I say we dig it up. Excavate it. All of it. Dig up all of St. Louis. The Cardinals haven't been doing so well anyway. ( gimme a break I'm from the 80's) Excavate the site, move it, then put St. Louis back. Yeah.. that will work.

People want to know the secrets to the wonders of the world, the megalithic monuments, if ancient man really could have been more advanced than we give them credit for. There are tons of these types of sites all over the world under other cities. I say a few of these should be sacrificed so we can actually learn something new. Perhaps not one as large as the Home of The Cardinals ( Ah ha) some other. It's ashame that we cannot declare these sites historical monuments and dig them up just because you have a few million ants crawling all over the place. Looks like the truth of the past will stay buried.

Originally posted by Xcathdra
There are similarities between the 2 sites and my question is does anyone know if there are other mounds between E. St. Louis and Ohio?

edit on 26-1-2012 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)

I live in Indianapolis, IN. I know that Mounds State Park near Anderson, IN has several burial mounds. Anderson High Schools old gym "The Wigwam" is built on one of the mounds. There are also mounds around the Shelbyville, IN area.

www.thecabinet.com...

this link is not the best source, but will suffice for the basic information.

The site has 10 structures built in to the earth. The legond of this area and the burial mounds surrounds the Pukwudgie peoples. This is an ancient group of beings, said to have: grey skin, stand 2 feet tall, elongated ears, noss, and fingers, and could take the form of animals (picture leprechauns).

Not that i buy into midget creatures (keep in mind that i am Miami Indian. The Miami people populated and controlled almost the entirety of Indiana, E Illinois, W Ohio, S Michigan, and N Kentucky. I have never heard of such peoples from our history, but i know as well that the Miami had mounds of our own. The heart of our civilization centered around Kokomo, Wabash, and Fort Wayne ((which we burned down 3 times before the final fort stayed)); but this is not to say the legonds of the Pukwudgies may not hold truth.

To directly answer the question- yes, there are several mounds in between Ohio and St. Louis

The person that said something about the mounds having trash on them is because, they are in a bad neighborhod called "state park" the peolpe there are gettho and the mounds are in IL not St.louis MO. East st.louis is also in IL not MO.! So you want to talk BS about our arch when you do not even know what you are talking about.
The mounds are full of neat aritafacts when people go there and they look good they can find arrow heads all over. people that live by them kinda ignore them because,in school here they always go on a feild trip to see them. Plus they are in a bad neighborhood.
The mounds are 35 mins from my house I live in St.lous MO. That is also why I read this because, the title is misleading since the mounds are in IL not st.louis MO. I thought you found something that was really under st.louis and I was wondering why it wasn't on the news.

reply to post by JohnPhoenix


well go ahead and dig it up because,it is in the worse neighborhood ever where everyone is shooting everyone and back up off the CARDS!! and becfore you want to go on a rant about St.Louis Mo. Find out your facts first because the mounds are in IL!!!

Originally posted by TropicKandie
reply to post by JohnPhoenix

 

well go ahead and dig it up because,it is in the worse neighborhood ever where everyone is shooting everyone and back up off the CARDS!! and becfore you want to go on a rant about St.Louis Mo. Find out your facts first because the mounds are in IL!!!

Hey, I liked the Cards.. Under IL huh.. I was just going on the title of the thread.. even better but couldn't we just dig up Chicago instead?

I agree the title is misleading.

however, its not my title. I used the articles title.