> I'm on a genealogy list that is currently dealing with who originally
> inhabited the land now known as Kentucky. I recall seeing a map, in
> a National Geographic Atlas I think, and that part of the country is
> designated as "original people unknown" or some such language. Someone
> else on the list thought that this land was used for hunting grounds by
> a number of tribes, but that no one actually lived there. I'm not a
> strong history scholar -- does anyone know the answer to this question?
The current state of historical and archaeological research in both
south-central and western Kentucky, and north-central Tennessee suggests
that these regions were largely abandoned as locations for villages or
towns sometime between 1400 and 1500 A.D. (please note that a few
scholars argue this point). I have done some relatively extensive
research (about 10 years so far) on the archaeology of north-central
Tennessee, and find little evidence to support very substantive
occupations after ca. 1450 A.D. When Euroamerican explorers, traders,
etc. entered the region beginning in the 18th century, the region was
apparently (the documentary evidence is somewhat weak for this time
period) shared by a wide range of tribal groups as "hunting grounds" (and
probably as buffer zones between territories). Groups generally
mentioned are the Cherokee, Shawnee, and Creek. Certainly, the Cherokee
and Shawnee were involved in strong efforts to repel colonization of the
Cumberland River region during the late 1700s, suggesting some form of
shared interest in the region.
Hope this helps a little...
Kevin E. Smith
Assistant Professor of Anthropology
Middle Tennessee State University
kesmith@frank.mtsu.edu