Archaeologists Dig Up 1,400-Year-Old Native American Canal in Alabama

In Gulf Shores, locals referred to an odd feature in the landscape as the indian ditch. As far back as the 1820s, a handful of antiquarians and United States Army engineers recognized it as a feature that predated white settlers. Harry King was fascinated by the remnants of the large trench, which was 30 feet wide and 3 feet deep. King encouraged researchers to look at the archaeology museum at the University of South Alabama. The ditch was thought to be an antebellum construction built by slaves.

It took me a long time to look at it. There are many reasons why you might have a big ditch, from logging to rice farming. When I looked at it, I realized it was different.

Waselkov began an investigation of the site with the help of a team of volunteers. They confirmed that this long-overlooked trench is a feat of engineering and a rare archaeological find: a canal, nearly a mile long, built for canoe travel 1,400 years ago. In a report published online in June in the Journal of Field Archaeology, the researchers described how the canal would have connected the Gulf of Mexico with more protected bays, allowing better access between coastal fishing areas and trade routes to the rest of theSoutheast.

Victor Thompson, director of the Laboratory of Archaeology at the University of Georgia, was not involved in the study but reviewed the findings.

He says that they were able to engineer the landscapes that allowed them to flourish for thousands of years. The archaeology in this region is amazing and speaks to the sophistication and ingenuity of Indigenous societies in the Southeast.

In its heyday, the canal would have stretched from Oyster Bay in the north to Little Lagoon in the south. The land between the two bodies of water is six feet high. If someone dug a trench across the peninsula, they would risk draining the water table into the sea-level outlets. Canoe travelers would have had to carry their boats around the two dams at either end of the passageway. Canoes would only need a small amount of water to travel through the canal. The canal was only accessible during the winter when the water table is higher. The canal would have made a good path through a forested area if it was dry.

Two sections of the canal were dug. They were able to place the construction between 576 and 650 C.E. through radiocarbon dating. Pottery came into widespread use and societies were formed in small hamlets that built mounds during the period known as the Woodland period.

The small village of Plash Island is believed to have been responsible for the construction of the canal. Individuals from this village could have taken the canal to get to camps closer to the Gulf, where they processed, smoked, and dried fish for better preservation. Access to fish and foraged plants was important for the Native Americans living in this area.

The canal would have aided traffic greatly. You would be taking your life in your hands if you canoed out of Mobile Bay. I don't want to do that in a canoe in the Gulf. Evidence exists for canoe journeys in this region, for example, where the Seminoles and other Native American groups crossed to the Bahamas.

Long-distance traffic is one of the things that the Middle Woodland period is known for. Goods such as stones, shells, and other items were traded in the eastern half of North America. The canal would have been a good way to travel between the Florida coast and Mobile Bay.

The Florida Museum of Natural History's William Marquardt was not involved in the study. If you get into Mobile Bay, you have a choice of going to multiple pathways into the Southeast.

Archaeologists know that there was a highway system of natural waterways and footpaths across the Southeast, but not many Indigenous canals. The Calusa, who established a kingdom fueled by fishing that resisted Spanish colonization, built a canal at Pine Island as far back as 1000 years ago. The Calusa built a canal that was shorter than the sea level at Mound Key. The canals built by the Indigenous people of the Americas are very different from the ones built by the Hokoham culture.

They all have the same knowledge of hydro-engineering and large-scale labor. The canal in Alabama is very old. We see organized states popping up later on. It speaks to a more collective kind of labor project.

The type of labor needed for large-scale engineering projects was thought to require strong hierarchies. The earliest evidence of chiefdoms in this part of the Southeast is from 1000 C.E. Evidence of social hierarchy can be found in graves and housing. There doesn't seem to be a "chiefly elite" that would have directed big construction projects according to Waselkov.

It takes a lot of cooperation to build these things, and then to maintain them. Someone has to clean them out for them to keep working. Irrigation canals cause all kinds of social conflicts. It's kind of odd to have one in a society that looks like it's open minded.

Some archaeologists have come around to the idea that a rigidly hierarchical society was not a requirement for complex city-building. According to Marquardt, the type of long-distance trade of shell artifacts, beads and other goods that Native Americans engaged in 1,400 years ago in the Eastern U.S. would not have been affected by hierarchy. He says that trade and commerce can be seen as something that makes people rich or aggrandized, but that may not have been the case in the past. It could have been a ritual value or ceremonial value. It was good to have these things and to move them around.

The report looked at the factors that could have made the canal functional. He hopes that the findings will prompt other archaeologists to look at similar features.

He says there is more to be found. Archaeologists find what they look for, but only what they look for.