North Carolina Office of Archives & History Department of Cultural Resources
Historical Publications Section The Colonial Records Project
Jan-Michael Poff, Editor
Historical Publications Section
4622 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-4622
Phone: (919) 733-7442
Fax: (919) 733-1439

North
Carolina
Historical
Review



Last Updated 05/21/01


Flora and Fauna


Creatures of Carolina from Roanoke Island to Purgatory Mountain

BY WILLIAM S. POWELL*

[Vol. 50 (1973), 155-168]

Ecologists, conservationists, and other groups with special interests have made a very telling impact on North Carolina and, indeed, on the whole country in recent years. Perhaps some of their activity may be credited with the successful move looking toward the creation of a North Carolina state zoo at Purgatory Mountain near Asheboro. Chapters of societies whose chief aim is the prevention of cruelty to animals have multiplied recently in this state.

The time has come, I expect, when a popular interest might be stirred in what I have chosen to call the “creatures of Carolina”—the animals and birds and other forms of moving life which have been here longer than Europeans. Our wonderful variety of flora has been carefully studied, listed, photographed, propagated, and preserved, but except for a few specialized studies and a book or two on the animals of the mountains, the fauna has been ignored.

Since I sometimes play at being a historian, I have entertained myself for the past few years by collecting references to animals in some of the early as well as more recent records of North Carolina. These references are numerous, some of them are ancient, and in my opinion many of them are fascinating. The wildlife of the North Carolina region was among the earliest aspects of the New World to be reported in England and, of course, these finds were made in our estate. One of the first things Arthur Barlowe saw after landing on Roanake Island in 1584 was “such a flocke of Cranes (the most part white) [which] arose under us, with such a crye redoubled by many Ecchoes, as if an armie of men had showed all together.” The woods, he reported, were full of deer, rabbits, and birds “even in the middest of Summer, in incredible aboundance.”1 A few days later the English had an opportunity to witness an Indian fishing, “and in lesse then halfe an howre, he had laden his boate as deepe as it could swimme.” Before long the enormity of the animal population was realized, and the white intruders anticipated a most lucrative trade with the native Indians for furs and skins—a “trafficke for trifles,” one of them expressed it when he realized that these commodities, valuable on the London market, might be had for cheap knives, a few beads, or a small mirror. In listing what they had seen, the earliest Englishmen described some animals hitherto unknown to them, and from their attempts we can guess that they had seen raccoons and opposums. Squirrels and bears were soon added to the list of animals seen within about a hundred miles of Roanoke Island, while it was reported that the natives sometimes killed a “Lyon”—probably a panther. Wolves were also mentioned, and explorer Thomas Hariot, who was perhaps England’s most noted scientist, compiled a list of nearly thirty beasts. He was also able to identify or describe almost ninety birds including turkeys, mourning doves, partridges, cranes, herons, swans, geese, and the beautiful but now extinct Carolina paroquet. Nearly a dozen and a half of the birds had been tried by the English for food.

Fish also interested these people, and in the late winter and early spring they saw plenty of sturgeons. Herrings or shad were highly praised and were found “to be most delicate and pleasant meate.” Trout, porpoise, skate, bream, mullet, flounders, and sole, together with “twelve sorts more” for which they knew only the Indian name, were also mentioned. Sea crabs, the king crab, oysters, mussels, and scallops also provided food for the native and the explorer. “There are many Tortoyses both of lande and sea kinde,” Hariot concluded. “[T]heir backs & bellies are shelled very thicke; their head, feete, and taile, which are in appearance, seems ougly as though they were members of a serpent or venemous: but notwithstanding they are very good meate, as also their egges. Some have bene founde of a yard in bredth and better.”2

Subsequent expeditions into North Carolina confirmed the accuracy of the observations of Barlowe and Hariot. William Hilton, writing of his voyage into the Cape Fear country in 1664, mentioned the

abundance of Deer and Turkies every where; we never going on shoar, but saw of each, also Partridges great store, Cranes abundance, Conies [rabbits], which we saw in several places; we heard several Wolfes howling in the woods, and saw where they had torn a Deer in pieces. Also in the River we saw great store of Ducks, Teile, Widgeon, and in the woods great flocks of Parrakeeto’s.3

John Lawson’s chapter on “The Natural History of Carolina” in his New Voyage to Carolina which appeared in 1709, is the most complete, the most accurate for the time, and certainly the most interesting of all accounts in this area. Among the beasts of Carolina, in addition to those already noted, he listed the wildcat, muskrat, elk, mole, weasel, and rats and mice. In a classification that seems strange to us today, Lawson grouped under “Insects of Carolina” an assortment of snakes, lizards, frogs, and terrapins. His roll of birds included 110 different names, and among those unfamiliar to Europeans were the hummingbird, redbird, and paroquet. When you have heard an English visitor to North Carolina exclaim over our cardinal or marvel at the hummingbird, you can appreciate Lawson’s fascination. He considered the hummingbird to be

the Miracle of all our wing’d Animals; He is feather’d as a Bird, and gets his Living as the Bees, by sucking the Honey from each Flower. In some of the larger sort of Flowers, he will bury himself, by diving to suck the bottom of it, so that he is quite cover’d, and oftentimes Children catch them in those Flowers, and keep them alive for five or six days. They are different Colours, the Cock differing from the Hen. The Cock is of a green, red, Aurora, and other Colours mixt. He is much less than a Wren, and very nimble. His nest is one of the greatest Pieces of Workmanship the whole Tribe of wing’d Animals can shew, it commonly hanging on a single Bryar, most artificially woven, a small Hole being left to go in and out at. The Eggs are the Bigness of Pease:

The fish of Carolina Lawson divided into three categories. He listed forty-one saltwater fish which included several sorts of whales in the scheme of classification which he understood. There were nineteen freshwater fish known to him and eighteen shellfish, plus crawfish and mussels, which he set apart in his list as thriving in fresh water. “The Blue Fish,” Lawson related,

is one of our best Fishes, and always very fat. They are as long as a Salmon, and indeed, I think, full as good Meat. These Fish come (in the Fall of the Year) generally after there has been one black Frost, when there appear great Shoals of them. The Hatteras Indians, and others, run into the Sands of the Sea, and strike them.... Sometimes, many Cart-loads of these are thrown and left dry on the Sea side, which comes by their eager Pursuit of the small Fish, in which they run themselves ashoar, and the Tide leaving them, they cannot recover the Water again. They are called Blue-Fish, because they are of that Colour, and have a forked Tail, and are shaped like a Dolphin.4

As the years passed knowledge increased, and later observers were more scientific, more cautious in what they said, and less likely to accept hearsay evidence. In 1731 Mark Catesby, a London-trained naturalist, grouped the beasts of the Carolinas into four broad categories. Completely unknown in the Old World were the American opossum, raccoon, and wolverine. There were fourteen new species of a genus known in Europe, including several deers and squirrels, a fox, the polecat, and porcupines. Catesby considered the beaver which he found here to be the same as the one known in England, and there were more than a dozen in this category, including the house rat. Unknown here until introduced from abroad, he said, were the horse, donkey, cow, sheep, goat, hog, dog, and cat; but a recent close study of some of John White’s watercolor drawings made on and around Roanoke Island in the sixteenth century suggests that the Indians there had dogs.5

The question was raised in the seventeeth and eighteenth centuries as to whether elks had ever been known in the North Carolina area, and the answer has not yet been provided. John Lederer in 1670 described a particularly flowery meadow in which herds of large red deer were accustomed to feed. Because of their size, Lederer observed, these deer were called elks by many people. Nearly forty years later John Lawson took an opposite stance. He described and named the elk as an inhabitant of Carolina and added that “some take him for the red Deer of America, but he is not: For, if brought and kept in Company with one of that sort, of the contrary Sex, he will never couple.” Dr. John Brickell, writing some thirty years after Lawson and often actually plagiarizing Lawson, agreed and added considerably to what had already been said. Brickell noted that elks were common in the savannah lands near the mountains. In the early twentieth century it was reported that elk bones had been discovered in Avery County near the town of Banner Elk, but more modern archaeologists question the identity of bones from Indian sites as those of the elk.6 Nevertheless, more than forty geographical features in North Carolina have the word elk as a part of their name.7

Game was long so common in the fields and woods that hunting was not regarded as a sport but simply as a means of securing food. It was also a means of ridding the country of “vermin,” as most wildlife was described for many years. The creatures destroyed or damaged crops and killed livestock. The legislature of the colony was concerned with this problem on many occasions. In a speech made about harvesttime in 1736, Governor Gabriel Johnston suggested to the legislators: “For the better preserving your Cattle, Corn and other grains, I believe you will find it highly necessary to provide a sufficient reward for the Killing of Vermin which I am informed have done great Mischief in most parts of the Province.”8 Even though such laws had been passed before, the first apparently in 1715, another one was added. A few years later, in 1744, a committee of the council considered another move with unusual implications. The committee agreed “that all single men & other strollers hunting, killing the Deer at all times leaving the carcases in the woods which bring down the vermin and increase them and also burn the herbage rarely pay any taxes or tend any corn....” To remedy this unhappy situation, the council recommended to the legislature “that such persons should be obliged to plant and tend Corn and give security for their taxes under a penalty.”9 This was by no means the first time that carelessness in the woods had been condemned. A court in 1696 found that a certain defendant was “a person of Evill fame [and] ordered that [he] be noe wayes Lycenced nor any wayes permitted to hunt for any wild Cattle or any other Game upon any of their Lordships lands within this Government.”10

At about the same time laws were being passed to rid the countryside of vermin, the question of conservation seems to have arisen. In 1738 the legislature passed what may well have been the earliest of such laws. Under penalty of £5 for each offense, the killing or destroying of deer annually between February 15 and July 15 was prohibited. Masters were responsible for any violations of this act by their servants or slaves.11

Tales of wild animals and the hunting of them occur in the folklore of North Carolina. Many such stories had their origin in the eighteenth century. A traveler from Quebec stopped at an inn, apparently Mackay’s Tavern, on the south side of Albemarle Sound, in the spring of 1786. “We here fell in with a very agreeable Englishman who had been round the world with Captain Cook. He keeps a very profitable store here.... His stories about the bears, wolves, panthers, wild deer, rattlesnakes, moccasins, black snakes, horse racers, mosquitoes, bullfrogs, ... ticks, sand flies, etc., etc., with which this part of the world abounds, were really very curious.”12

Charles Lanman, traveling in the mountains of North Carolina in the spring of 1848, passed along the edge of “the most gloomy thicket imaginable.” It was about a mile wide and more than three miles long and said to be the home of ferocious wild animals. No white man had had the courage to explore it. It was near this spot some years earlier, before the Cherokee Indians had been driven out, that an Indian woman and two young girls and a baby were passing. “In the unexpected moment,” Lanman recorded, “an enraged panther crossed their trail, and while it fell upon and destroyed the mother and one child, the elder girl ran for her life, carrying the infant on her back. The little heroine had not gone over half a mile with her burden before the panther caught up with her, and dragged the infant from her grasp; and while the savage creature was destroying this third victim, the little girl made her escape to a neighboring encampment.”13

In seeking information about panthers, Lanman talked with one of the oldest inhabitants of the region, but he professed to know little about them. He had had one frightening encounter, however, which he shared with his questioner:

It was a very dark night, and I was belated on the western ridge, near the Big Laurel ravine. I was jogging along at a slow rate, when my horse made a terrible leap aside, and I saw directly in front of me one of the biggest of panthers. He soon uttered a shriek or scream (which sounded like a woman in distress) and got out of the way, so that I could pass along. Every bone in my horse’s body trembled with fear, and I can tell you that my own feelings were pretty squally. On my way was I still jogging, when the panther again made his appearance, just as he had before, and gave another of his infernal yells. I had no weapon with me, and I now thought I was a gone case. Again did the animal disappear, and again did I continue on my journey. I had not gone more than a hundred yards before I saw, on the upper side of the road, what looked like a couple of balls of fire, and just as I endeavored to urge my horse a little faster, another dreadful scream rang far down the valley. But, to make a long story short, this animal followed me until I got within a half a mile of my house, and, though he ran around me at least a dozen times, and uttered more than a dozen screams, he never touched me, and I got safely home. If you can gather any information from this adventure you are welcome to it; but all I know about the animal is this, that I hate him as I do the devil.14

It is clear why the panther, or “painter” as he was sometimes called, attracted so much unfavorable attention. The Moravians, in recording the wildlife around them in the Piedmont in 1764, described the panther as being “the color of a Deer, and is of about the same size, not counting feet. It has large claws, with which it climbs trees, and head like a cat. It is a cruel beast, eating only fresh meat, will not eat carrion, nor what has been dead only a short time. But they are not numerous, and so soon as one is seen it is killed.”15 This was, indeed, a strange animal in the eyes of Europeans. From his home at Brunswick in the early spring of 1767, Governor William Tryon wrote the Earl of Shelburne:

As the Panther of this continent I am told has never been imported into Europe, and as it is the King of the American forests, I presume to send a male panther under your Lordships patronage to be presented for his Majesty’s acceptance. He is six months old; I have had him four months, by constantly handling he is become perfectly tame and familiar: When full grown his coat will much resemble that of the lioness. Panthers have been killed (for it is very uncommon to catch them alive) ten feet in length from the nose to the end of the tail. I am very solicitous for his safe arrival, as I am ambitious that he may be permitted to add to his Majesty’s collection of wild beasts.16

Tryon’s gift from the forests of North Carolina was accepted and became a part of King George’s menagerie at Kew.

Bears have sometimes been classed with panthers as animals to be feared. They were listed among the vermin to be eradicated under some early laws, and the Moravians suggested the reason for this in a brief description which they recorded in their records of 1764. “Bears are rather large,” it was observed, “more than 300 lbs. in weight.... In my opinion the Bear is remarkable because he eats everything that cattle eat and all that men eat. Then he is a robber animal, eats swine and cows and anything he can get. He eats grass, acorns, chestnuts, grain, nuts, grapes, honey, milk, bread, cooked vegetables, in short everything that a man eats.” On the other hand, the Moravian records noted, “Bear meat is considered very wholesome, and Bear fat, with salad, is as good as Olive Oil.”17

Hunting bears must have required a certain spirit and a dash of bravery. A 2,000-acre tract of land offered for sale on Tar River once was described as “full of vast large Cyprus, and near adjoining to Desart, called the Canetar ... being full of vast high Reeds, and there is brave hunting the Bear.”18 A hundred years made few changes except to shift the scene from the Coastal Plain to the mountains. The Mountain Region in 1848 was described as remote and isolated. Speaking of Black Mountain, which we know today as Mount Mitchell, Charles Lanman commented that “its chief inhabitants are the panther, the bear and the dear. Almost its only human denizen is one Frederick Burnet, a ‘mighty hunter,’ who is now upwards of forty years of age, and is said to have slain between five hundred and six hundred bears upon this mountain alone.”19

Wolves were less frightening to pioneer settlers than these larger creatures. William Byrd observed that a wolf “will not attack a man in the keenest of his hunger but run away from him, as from an animal more mischievous than himself.” Byrd added, however, that “the inhabitants hereabouts take the trouble to dig abundance of wolf pits, so deep and perpendicular that when a wolf is tempted into them he can no more scramble out again than a husband who has taken the leap can scramble out of matrimony.” Yet, following the massacre of whites by the Tuscarora Indians in 1711, dead bodies had been eaten by wolves before they could be buried. The sound of wolves in the night was long regarded as most unpleasant. A missionary in the Albemarle in 1691 told about how they would “roar about the Houses” after dark. Byrd spoke of being “serenaded with their shrill pipes almost every night,“ while the Moravian Bishop Spangenburg called it “such music of 6 different cornets the like of which I have never heard in my life.” Bishop Francis Asbury spent a night in the spring of 1790 in a cabin near the head of Watauga River where his rest was disturbed by a severe thunderstorm and by the “most hideous yelling of wolves.”20

The buffalo was a gentler creature but apparently was never found in the Coastal Plain Region. John Lawson was aware of their existence in the vague west. A member of William Byrd’s survey party in 1728 sighted three buffaloes but lacked the proper shot to fell them. Another time a young buffalo, two years old, was killed. He was described as being as large as an ox, with short legs and “a deep body, with shagged hair on his head and shoulders. His horns were short and very strong.” Bishop Spangenburg in 1752, when he was seeking land for his Moravian settlement, commented on the “buffalo haunts” in the Piedmont section of the colony. In Daniel Boone’s time, from Salisbury west it was said that a party of three or four men with dogs could kill from ten to twenty buffaloes a day. It may have been as the result of such widespread slaughter that the Catawba Indians at the Augusta Conference in 1763 complained that whites had spoiled their hunting lands “100. Miles every way,” and as a result both buffaloes and deer were scarce.21

Skunks or polecats and opossums or possums attracted the attention of early settlers one way or another. Hariot found a skunk which had been killed by an Indian, and “in another place” he said he detected “the smell where one or more had lately beene before: whereby we gather besides then by the relation of the people that there are some in the countrey.” For the oppossum Hariot apparently knew only the Indian name; he said the English never captured one but they did eat the “very good meat” when it was brought to them by friendly Indians.22

Understandably, neither Lawson nor the Moravians had much to say about the skunk. “They smell like a Fox,” Lawson thought, “but ten times stronger. When a Dog encounters them, they [spray] upon him, and he will not be sweet again in a Fortnight or more. The Indians love to eat their Flesh, which has no manner of ill Smell, when the Bladder is out. I know no use their Furs are put to. They are easily brought up tame.” To the Moravians he was “a creature which looks like a pretty, little cat, generally black and white, but it has a bushy tail like a squirrel. He who comes too near it,” they admonished, “is horribly repaid by what it throws out, which is a foul fluid which it has in a special sac in its body. The Indians eat its flesh,” they agreed with Lawson, “and consider it a delicacy.” Byrd reported that on one occasion a member of his party killed a skunk upon which he made a comfortable meal. Others, Byrd said, “were so squeamish they could not be persuaded at first to taste, as they said, of so unsavory an animal; but seeing the man smack his lips with more pleasure than usual, they ventured at last to be of his mess, and instead of finding the flesh rank and high tasted they owned it to be the sweetest morsel they had ever eat in their lives.”23

Numerous other creatures caught the eye of the early settler. By no means the least of these was the alligator. A line passing through Laurinburg, Fayetteville, Goldsboro, Greenville, Plymouth, and Kitty Hawk would roughly mark the inland or western range of this survivor of the Age of Reptiles, 365 million years ago. Lawson, Byrd, and Brickell all commented on the alligators of North Carolina. Hugh Meredith, a Welsh settler in North Carolina who had recently come from Pennsylvania, wrote Benjamin Franklin in 1731 that they were numerous in the lower Cape Fear region “but not very mischievous; however on their Account Swimming is less practis’d here than in the Northern Provinces.” A Scottish visitor to the Cape Fear in 1775 happened to be in a boat with some friends and relatives when her sister-in-law, whose home was nearby, spotted an alligator asleep on the bank of the river. Since this lady had lost many a good goose to the alligators of the swamps, she was determined to have revenge. Some Negro servants were landed and they attacked the alligator with their oars. A blow on the eyes awakened the reptile and the Negroes continued to hit him until one of them succeeded in “thrusting a long knife into his throat.” An English tourist recalled that in 1798 he was on the banks of Alligator River in Hyde County when a young alligator was sighted. “It was of the same species as the crocodile of Egypt, from which it differed very little,” he recorded. “It seized a stick, and with its sharp and monstrous teeth, severed it into three pieces, leaving it shorter by a foot, and holding the middle piece in its mouth, while the end dropped on the ground, and the remainder continued in my hand. In this manner, though deemed very young, it could have treated the limb of a man.”24

John Lawson made passing reference to the bullfrog, “so call’d,” he said, “because he lows exactly like that Beast, which makes Strangers wonder (when by the side of a Marsh) what’s the matter, for they hear the Frogs low, and can see no Cattle.” Approaching Edenton in 1786, a traveler from Quebec noted in his journal: “I never in my life heard such a horrid noise as the bullfrogs made.” A few nights later, after he had crossed Albemarle Sound, he wrote: “We retired early to bed. The night is so sultry and the bullfrogs and others made such an eternal noise that it was impossible to sleep.” Another traveler, an Englishman this time, initially had a different reaction to such a serenade. “My companions were delighted with the frog concerts in the woods, and hailed them, as we do the cuckoo, as the harbinger of spring. I opened my window the first night, supposing that these choristers were birds, and it was a night or two before I was undeceived. I have not thought them musical since I discovered my mistake.” Mark Catesby reported a useful service believed to be performed by frogs. It was thought that they kept springs clean and purified the water, so when frogs were found in or near springs they were never molested.25

If time permitted, I would tell you of the pleasure found by early North Carolinians in the mockingbird’s serenade from atop a tree or chimney, or of the eighteenth century discovery of sea gulls taking clams high in the air and dropping them to break them open, some terrifying accounts of encounters with poisonous snakes, of the Moravians’ attempts to differentiate between turtles and terrapins, or of problems caused by ants and mosquitoes.

Most of these creatures are now truly a part of our history. Some, unfortunately, are extinct, while others are quite rare. The human population explosion, the expansion of our cities and towns, the construction of four-, six-, or even eight-lane highways, and the use of powerful chemicals and fertilizers have changed the face of land in many places. Wildlife preserves and game management areas offer sanctuary to some of these creatures, but they deserve better treatment at our hands in the future than they have sometimes had in the past. Perhaps the North Carolina Zoological Gardens at Purgatory Mountain can provide the research facilities and produce the knowledge necessary as well as the sympathetic attitude required to see that these creatures which share the earth here with us will survive.


Footnotes

* Mr. Powell, curator of the North Carolina Collection at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, delivered his presidential address at the dinner meeting of the North Carolina Literary and Historical Association.

1 David Beers Quinn (ed.), The Roanoke Voyages (London: Hakluyt Society, 2 volumes [Second Series, No. CIV], 1955), I, 96, 98, hereinafter cited as Quinn, Roanoke Voyages.

2 Quinn, Roanoke Voyages, I, 330-331, 355-362.

3 “A Relation of a Discovery, by William Hilton, 1664,” in Alexander S. Salley, Jr. (ed.), Narratives of Early Carolina (New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1911), 47.

4 John Lawson, A New Voyage to Carolina, edited by Hugh T. Lefler (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1967), 120-165, hereinafter cited as Lawson, A New Voyage to Carolina.

5 Mark Catesby, The Natural History of Carolina, Florida, and the Bahama Islands (London: Printed for Benjamin White, 2 volumes, 1771), I, xxiv-xxv, hereinafter cited as Catesby, Natural History of Carolina; Paul Hulton and David Beers Quinn (eds.), The American Drawings of John White, 1577-1590 (London: Trustees of the British Museum, 2 volumes, 1964), I, 85-87.

6 John Brickell, The Natural History of North-Carolina (Dublin: Printed by James Carson, 1737), 108-109; William P. Cumming (ed.), The Discoveries of John Lederer (Charlottesville: University Press of Virginia, 1958), 35; John Preston Arthur, Western North Carolina: A History (Raleigh: Edwards & Broughton Printing Company, 1914), 517, hereinafter cited as Arthur, Western North Carolina.

7 William S. Powell, The North Carolina Gazetteer (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1968), 160-161, and passim.

8 William L. Saunders (ed.), The Colonial Records of North Carolina (Raleigh: State of North Carolina, 10 volumes, 1886-1890), IV, 228, hereinafter cited as Saunders, Colonial Records.

9 Saunders, Colonial Records, IV, 745.

10 Mattie Erma Edwards Parker (ed.), North Carolina Higher-Court Records, 1670-1696 (Raleigh: State Department of Archives and History, 1968), 270.

11 Walter Clark (ed.), The State Records of North Carolina (Winston and Goldsboro: State of North Carolina, 16 volumes, numbered XI-XXVI, 1895-1906), XXIII, 128, hereinafter cited as Clark, State Records.

12 Robert Hunter, Jr., Quebec to Carolina in 1785-1786, edited by Louis B. Wright and Marion Tinling (San Marino, California: Huntington Library, 1943), 269-270, hereinafter cited as Hunter, Quebec to Carolina.

13 Charles Lanman, Letters from the Alleghany Mountains (New York: Geo. P. Putnam, 1849), 67-68, hereinafter cited as Lanman, Letters.

14 Lanman, Letters, 68-69.

15 Adelaide L. Fries and others (eds.), Records of the Moravians in North Carolina (Raleigh: North Carolina Historical Commission [State Department of Archives and History], 11 volumes, 1922-1969), II, 577-578, hereinafter cited as Fries and others, Records of the Moravians.

16 Saunders, Colonial Records, VII, 445.

17 Fries and others, Records of the Moravians, II, 577.

18 Virginia Gazette (Williamsburg), February 23, 1739.

19 Lanman, Letters, 131.

20 Louis B. Wright (ed.), The Prose Works of William Byrd (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1966), 206, 240, hereinafter cited as The Prose Works of William Byrd; Saunders, Colonial Records, I, 827; Thomas Wilson, A Brief Journal of the Life, Travels and Labours of Love in the Work of the Ministry, of that Eminent and Faithful Servant of Jesus Christ (Dublin: Printed by and for Sam. Fuller, 1728), 29; Saunders, Colonial Records, V, 8; Francis Asbury, The Journal and Letters of Francis Asbury, edited by Elmer T. Clark and others (London: Epworth Press, 3 volumes, 1958), I, 630-631.

21 Lawson, A New Voyage to Carolina, 120-121; The Prose Works of William Byrd, 104, 140; Saunders, Colonial Records, V, 9, XI, 189; Arthur, Western North Carolina, 250-251. For a survey of this subject see Douglas L. Rights, “The Buffalo in North Carolina,” North Carolina Historical Review, IX (July, 1932), 242-249.

22 Quinn, Roanoke Voyages, I, 331, 355-356.

23 Lawson, A New Voyage to Carolina, 124; Fries and others, Records of the Moravians, II, 578; The Prose Works of William Byrd, 318.

24 Darrell E. Louder, “The Alligator, North Carolina’s Link with the Past,” Wildlife in North Carolina, XXIX (August, 1965), 4-6; Pennsylvania Gazette (Philadelphia), May 13, 1731; Janet Schaw, Journal of a Lady of Quality; Being the Narrative of a Journey from Scotland to the West Indies, North Carolina, and Portugal, in the Years 1774-1776, edited by Evangeline Walker Andrews with the collaboration of Charles McLean Andrews (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1923), 149-150; Charles William Janson, The Stranger in America (London: James Cundee, 1807), 308-309.

25 Lawson, A New Voyage to Carolina, 137; Hunter, Quebec to Carolina, 264, 270; Adam Hodgson, Letters from North Carolina (London: Hurst, Robinson, & Co., 2 volumes, 1824), I, 40; Catesby, Natural History of Carolina, II, 72.



| Out-of-Print Bookshelf | Maps | Newspapers | Picture Gallery | Other Useful Links | NC Historical Review |

North Carolina Office of Archives & History Department of Cultural Resources
Colonial Records Project Home Page | Subjects Home Page