Download Complete Internet of Things Using Single Board Computers. Principles of IoT and Python Programming 1st Edition G. Kanagachidambaresan PDF for All Chapters
Download Complete Internet of Things Using Single Board Computers. Principles of IoT and Python Programming 1st Edition G. Kanagachidambaresan PDF for All Chapters
com
https://ebookmeta.com/product/internet-of-things-using-
single-board-computers-principles-of-iot-and-python-
programming-1st-edition-g-kanagachidambaresan/
OR CLICK HERE
DOWLOAD NOW
https://ebookmeta.com/product/role-of-single-board-computers-sbcs-in-
rapid-iot-prototyping-internet-of-things-g-r-kanagachidambaresan/
ebookmeta.com
https://ebookmeta.com/product/internet-of-things-iot-principles-
paradigms-and-applications-of-iot-english-edition-lakhwani/
ebookmeta.com
https://ebookmeta.com/product/re-imagining-writing-interdisciplinary-
perspectives-1st-edition-phil-fitzsimmons-johanna-pentikainen/
ebookmeta.com
Military Advanced Regional Anesthesia and Analgesia
Handbook 2nd Edition Chester Buckenmaier
https://ebookmeta.com/product/military-advanced-regional-anesthesia-
and-analgesia-handbook-2nd-edition-chester-buckenmaier/
ebookmeta.com
https://ebookmeta.com/product/mirrors-of-infinity-the-dimensional-
alliance-3-2nd-edition-bonnie-k-t-dillabough/
ebookmeta.com
https://ebookmeta.com/product/when-angels-fall-1st-edition-hancock-
sherryl/
ebookmeta.com
Primary Care 6th Edition Lynne M. Hektor Dunphy
https://ebookmeta.com/product/primary-care-6th-edition-lynne-m-hektor-
dunphy/
ebookmeta.com
MAKER
I N N O VAT I O N S
SERIES
Internet
of Things Using
Single Board
Computers
Principles of IoT and
Python Programming
—
G. R. Kanagachidambaresan
Internet of Things
Using Single Board
Computers
Principles of IoT and Python
Programming
G. R. Kanagachidambaresan
Internet of Things Using Single Board Computers: Principles of IoT and
Python Programming
G. R. Kanagachidambaresan
Chennai, India
ISBN-13 (pbk): 978-1-4842-8107-9 ISBN-13 (electronic): 978-1-4842-8108-6
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4842-8108-6
v
Table of Contents
Smart Devices�����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������16
Human-Computer Interaction������������������������������������������������������������������������16
Context Awareness���������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������17
Actuators�������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������18
IoT and Smart City Applications��������������������������������������������������������������������������22
Automobile Sensors��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������22
Smart Home Sensors�������������������������������������������������������������������������������������23
Smart Transportation Sensors�����������������������������������������������������������������������25
Summary������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������28
References����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������28
vi
Table of Contents
vii
Table of Contents
viii
Table of Contents
ix
Table of Contents
x
Table of Contents
Index�������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������281
xi
About the Author
G. R. Kanagachidambaresan completed
his PhD in Information and Communication
Engineering from Anna University, Chennai,
in 2017. He is currently an associate professor
in the CSE Department at Vel Tech Rangarajan
Dr. Sagunthala R&D Institute of Science and
Technology. He is also a visiting professor at
the University of Johannesburg.
His main research interest includes the
Internet of Things, Industry 4.0, body sensor
network, and fault-tolerant wireless sensor
network. He has published several reputed articles and undertaken several
consultancy activities for leading MNC companies. He has guest-edited
several special issue volumes and books and served as an editorial review
board member for peer-reviewed journals. He is TEC committee member
in DBT, GOI, India.
He is presently working on several government-sponsored research
projects like ISRO, DBT, and DST. He is Wiley’s editor-in-chief of the Next
Generation Computer and Communication Engineering Series. He is also
the managing director for Eazythings Technology Private Limited.
xiii
About the Technical Reviewer
Massimo Nardone has more than 22 years
of experience in security, web/mobile
development, cloud, and IT architecture. His
true IT passions are security and Android.
He has been programming and teaching
how to program with Android, Perl, PHP, Java,
VB, Python, C/C++, and MySQL for more than
20 years.
He has a master of science degree in
computing science from the University of
Salerno, Italy.
He has worked as a project manager, software engineer, research
engineer, chief security architect, information security manager,
PCI/SCADA auditor, and senior lead IT security/cloud/SCADA architect
for many years.
xv
Acknowledgments
My heartfelt thanks to Apress, especially Jessica Vakili and Susan
McDermott, for helping me throughout this project.
I sincerely thank the Department of BioTechnology (DBT-India) for
their funding (BT/PR38273/AAQ/3/980/2020) on the smart aquaculture
project.
I would also like to extend thanks to my JRFs: Ms. Meenakshi KV, Mr.
M. Akash, Ms. A. V. Anandhalekshmi, and Ms. V. Sowmiya.
I give special thanks to my son Mr. Ananthajith K, my wife, Dr. Mahima
V, my parents, Mr. G. S. Ramasubramanian and Mrs. Lalitha, and
Mrs. Chandra, Mr. Venkatraman, Mrs. V. Chitra, and Mr. V. Bharath for their
timely support.
xvii
Preface
The rapid growth of technology and new smart, sustainable development
initiatives has made the Internet of Things (IoT) and edge analytics
an inevitable platform for all engineering domains. The need for a
sophisticated and ambient environment has resulted in an exponential
growth in automation and artificial intelligence. The right sensor or
actuator, a specific processor, and the correct transmission unit can offer
the best solution to any IoT problem. Lightweight machine learning
or mathematical logic can bring a good solution to existing smart-city
problems.
This book provides detailed information on sensors, their interfacing
connections, programming with single-board computers, and creating
integrated projects with a combination of sensors, processors, and
actuators. A detailed introduction to Python and Arduino-based
programming is also discussed to kindle interest in IoT programming. IoT
products’ wired and wireless connections are discussed, and programming
examples are provided.
This is a completely new textbook that reflects recent developments
while providing a comprehensive introduction to the fields of IoT, single-
board computers, and Python programming. It is aimed at advanced
undergraduates as well as researchers and practitioners. This book deals more
with electronics and programming than simple text. It best suits outcome-
based education systems and can aid industry-ready IoT engineers.
Funding Information
The part of this book is supported by the Department of Biotechnology
funding information (BT/PR38273/AAQ/3/980/2020).
xix
CHAPTER 1
An Overview of the
Internet of Things
(IoT) and Sensors
Recent advancements in single-board computers (SBCs) [16] and boards
have made the Internet of Things (IoT) more accessible and easier to use.
The complete automation, information analysis from sensor data, and
integration of individual components with IoT systems helps to build new
Smart environment solutions. The scope of the areas is broadened with
IoT components and sensors.
IoT uses existing and emerging technology for event detection and
automation. IoT has the advantages of recent software advancements,
reducing hardware prices and available technology options. It created a
great change in product delivery and services and a major revolution in
Industry 4.0. Figure 1-1 illustrates the key features of IoT.
© G. R. Kanagachidambaresan 2022 1
G. R. Kanagachidambaresan, Internet of Things Using Single Board Computers,
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4842-8108-6_1
Chapter 1 An Overview of the Internet of Things (IoT) and Sensors
Sensors
Sensors are the main data acquisition and detection system, which
converts any physical quantity (i.e., event) into a signal. In some sensors,
direct conversion takes place; in others, multiple conversions take place
to attain accuracy and quantification. Some of the sensors used in IoT and
prototyping are shown in Figure 1-2. Sensors are collectively connected
with an A/D converter to convert their signals to digital forms so that a
processor understands and can program effectively. Figure 1-2 illustrates
sensor classification (mode of operation, signal output, and energy-based).
2
Chapter 1 An Overview of the Internet of Things (IoT) and Sensors
Energy-based
Generator
Energy generation–based sensors provides conversion energy conversion,
like voltage and current, on any physical event. For example, a
piezoelectric sensor converts vibration energy to a proportional voltage.
The seebeck metal junction converts the change in temperature to
proportional energy conversion.
3
Chapter 1 An Overview of the Internet of Things (IoT) and Sensors
Conversion
Sensors convert one mode of physical quantity to another; for example,
an anemometer converts air velocity to rotational motion, which is further
converted to electrical voltage for measurement. These sensors are
operated in a proportional zone for calibration and stable operation. Most
sensors provide linear data conversion.
Signal Output
Analog
Sensors such as anemometers provide analog conversion of data. Analog
signal from annemometer is converted to digital data with the help of an
analog-to-digital converter. The sensor’s frequency of operation should
be far greater than the frequency of the physical quantity to get clear
information after digital conversion.
Discrete
Cameras and tile-based sensors provide discrete and digital information
directly to the processor. This makes the sensor easy to integrate with any
digital processor.
Mode of Operation
Sensors are deflection- or comparison-based. Deflection happens when
sensing a physical event. This is normally an angular-based movement
between two points. Comparison-based meters normally work with
standard available data. GPS sensors provide comparison-based sensing.
4
Chapter 1 An Overview of the Internet of Things (IoT) and Sensors
Electronic Sensors
Figure 1-3 illustrates sensor classification based on the field of operation,
such as mechanical, optical, electrical, acoustic, thermal, chemical,
radiation, biological, and magnetic.
Mechanical
• Linear and angular position
• Acceleration
5
Chapter 1 An Overview of the Internet of Things (IoT) and Sensors
• Force
• Strain
Optical
• Wave velocity
• Wave amplitude
Electrical
• Conductivity
• Potential difference
• Field
Thermal
• Heat flux
• Thermal conductivity
Chemical
• States and identifies
• Color change
• Change in voltage
6
Chapter 1 An Overview of the Internet of Things (IoT) and Sensors
Radiation
• Energy
• Intensity
Biological
• Mass
• Concentration
• States
• Magnetic
• Magnetic field
• Magnetic flux
• Permeability
Connectivity
Figure 1-4 illustrates the connectivity features of IoT communication.
7
Chapter 1 An Overview of the Internet of Things (IoT) and Sensors
Bluetooth Low Energy, Zigbee, LoRa, and Wi-Fi are the most common
types of connectivity in an IoT environment. I2C, SPI, and Rx-Tx serial
communication protocols are examples of wired connectivity.
Bluetooth
Bluetooth network technology creates a personal area network (PAN) by
wirelessly connecting mobile devices over a short distance. The Bluetooth
architecture has its own independent model with a stack of protocols; it
does not follow the standard OSI or TCP/IP models.
Zigbee
The Zigbee 3.0 protocol [1] is an IEEE 802.15.4 specification that supports
a 2.4 GHz frequency band. The following are some of the features of
Zigbee 3.0.
8
Chapter 1 An Overview of the Internet of Things (IoT) and Sensors
Wi-Fi
Wi-Fi [2] is a technology that transfers data through radio waves that can
make small gadgets exchange data connected within a small router. Wi-Fi
uses the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers’ (IEEE) 802.11
standards for effective data transmission.
IEEE 802.11 devices have the primary benefit of making it easier to
deploy local area networks (LANs) at a lower cost. They can host wireless
LANs in outdoor areas and airports, where running cables to every device
isn’t practical.
9
Chapter 1 An Overview of the Internet of Things (IoT) and Sensors
LoRa
LoRa [3] is a long-range wireless communication technology derived from
the CSS chirp-based spread spectrum. The chirp pulses communicate
information, similar to BATS communication.
Wired Communication
I 2C
I2C (Inter-Integrated Circuit) [4] is a two-wired communication protocol
(see Figure 1-5). It is a bus interface, serial communication protocol built
into devices. It has recently become a popular protocol for short-distance
communication.
Only two bidirectional open-drain lines—SDA (Serial Data) and SCL
(Serial Clock)—are used for data communication. Both lines are cranked
up. The SDA pin sends and receives data. SCL carries the clock signal.
I2C has two modes of operation: master and slave. Master mode is the
most advanced mode.
Slave mode obeys the command from the master and transmits or
receives data accordingly.
Each clock’s high to low pulse on the SCL line synchronizes each data
bit transferred on the SDA line. Figure 1-5 shows I2C communication
protocols.
10
Chapter 1 An Overview of the Internet of Things (IoT) and Sensors
SPI
The data communication module uses SDA and SCL dual connection
lines. SDA receives and transmits data. Serial Peripheral Interface (SPI)
communication is mainly used by components such as RTC, A-to-D
converters, and other computer peripherals. SPI [5] communication uses
a full duplex synchronous communication protocol that works in serial
mode between the master and slave devices. Figure 1-6 illustrates SPI
communication protocols.
Serial Communication
Serial communication is a straightforward and dependable way to send
data over long distances. RS-232 is a widely used serial communication
protocol. The data in this standard is sent in serial format at a preset
speed (called a baud rate/number) of bits communicated between
the sender and receiver. Common baud rates are 4800, 9600, 19200,
and 38400. Figure 1-7 shows the connection diagram for the UART
communication scheme.
11
Chapter 1 An Overview of the Internet of Things (IoT) and Sensors
Machine Intelligence
Machine intelligence [14] attempts to program a computer to perform
previously human-only tasks. In general, the learning process in intelligent
machines entails gathering information about their environment,
deploying that information to build knowledge about it, and then
generalizing that knowledge base to deal with environmental uncertainty.
Two machine intelligence techniques—imitation learning and
reinforcement learning—have been developed to help machines learn.
The learning algorithms are opted based on consideration of tasks and
their characteristics. Intelligent systems are an option to collect data
from the agents and acquire knowledge about its surrounding, and the
computation is adapted for the environment. To maintain control over
a society of autonomous agents, the agents’ learning process requires a
self-organizing mechanism. It should be noted that imbuing intelligent
machines with the capacity to learn is a difficult task; however, the capacity
to learn is what defines a machine as intelligent. Figure 1-8 illustrates
machine learning classification based on input data.
12
Chapter 1 An Overview of the Internet of Things (IoT) and Sensors
13
Chapter 1 An Overview of the Internet of Things (IoT) and Sensors
Active Management
The main components and operation of a closed-loop sensor management
system are depicted in Figure 1-9. The raw sensor data is processed for
information relevant to the sensing objective when the sensor is chosen,
and a measurement is taken. This usually requires the fusion of data from
several sensing modalities (e.g., optical and acoustic) and other properties,
as well as the addition of information from earlier measurements and
possibly other sources. Auxiliary information, such as target tracks or
choices about non-sensor manager-related concerns, may be generated by
the loop’s fusion and signal processing. For sensor management reasons,
they must generate a state of information that allows quantification
of the benefits of each feasible sensor selection in the following time
epoch. Currently, accessible quantification methodologies range from
statistical (e.g., mean risk or knowledge gain) to entirely heuristic. The
sensor management must then optimize which sensor to use for the next
measurement.
14
Chapter 1 An Overview of the Internet of Things (IoT) and Sensors
Sensor Fusion
Sensor fusion is a technique for reducing the amount of uncertainty in a
robot’s navigation or task performance by combining data from multiple
sensors, as shown in Figure 1-10. Sensor fusion helps the robot create a
more accurate world model, which allows it to navigate and behave better.
There are three main methods for combining sensor data.
15
Discovering Diverse Content Through
Random Scribd Documents
common except hatred of slavery and belief in hard money. He
withdrew from the convention immediately after the nomination was
made, and entered into correspondence with leading Democrats,
endeavoring to bring about the nomination of a Democratic
candidate whom he stood ready to support. Failing in this, he
reluctantly voted for Grant’s second election.
In 1876, Judge Hoadly earnestly entered into the movement
known to contemporary history as “Tilden and Reform,” believing that
the interests of the country would be best subserved by the election
of Tilden and Hendricks. In the memorable legal contest that ensued,
before the electoral commission, the Democratic Committee invited
Judge Hoadly to argue the Oregon and Florida cases before that
body, which he did in such manner as to make national a reputation
for legal ability that had heretofore been largely confined to his own
portion of the West. This probably caused his call to the (temporary)
presidency of the Democratic National Convention of 1880.
One of the immediate but unpremeditated fruits of this political
activity came in 1883, when Judge Hoadly was named by the
Democrats of Ohio as their candidate for governor. He entered upon
the canvas with activity, and his speeches at Hamilton and Piqua,
were reported and eagerly circulated by the Democratic State
Committee as campaign documents. After making some ten
speeches, he was unfortunately stricken with malarial fever, which
prevented his continuing upon the stump until the last week of the
campaign. Although not yet entirely recovered, he was able to
appear in Cleveland, Sandusky, Toledo and Dayton, addressing
immense audiences with marked effect. A campaign that had of
necessity lagged because of the absence of its chief, took on a new
vigor, the Democratic heart was fired anew, and George Hoadly
became Governor of the State by the emphatic majority of 12,529
over Judge Foraker, the Republican nominee. Not only this, but the
close counties went Democratic, a legislature was secured, and
Henry B. Payne, the life-long friend of Governor Hoadly’s father, was
sent to represent Ohio in the United States Senate.
It is a matter of settled historical opinion, that the Buckeye State,
with all its famous governors, was never possessed of a better chief
magistrate than the one whose administration opened under such
favoring influences. A knowledge of the needs of the state, gained
from long acquaintance, a wisdom that could be made effective in
practical affairs, calm judgment, and an eye that could look higher
than the levels of mere partisanship, were among the things that
aided him; and “the greatest good to the greatest number” was the
principle that inspired all his acts.
A renomination was, of course, a foregone conclusion. In 1885,
the Democratic State Convention proclaimed by acclamation that
George Hoadly should again become its candidate for governor. He
accepted, although knowing that Ohio was then practically a
Republican State, and that one man could hardly expect to
accomplish the miracle of permanent Democracy. Judge Foraker
was once more the Republican choice, and in the fall election was
chosen by a vote of 359,281 to 341,830 for Hoadly; the Rev. A. B.
Leonard, the Prohibition candidate receiving 28,081, and John W.
Northrup, the Greenback candidate 2,001 votes. Although the defeat
was decisive, it was sweetened to Governor Hoadly by the fact that
in 1885, as in 1883, he ran ahead of his ticket, being defeated by the
smallest, and, in 1883 elected by the largest plurality given against
or for any of the gentlemen upon the same ticket.
When Governor Hoadly saw his successor duly inaugurated, he
cheerfully returned to the active labors of his profession, in
Cincinnati, where he remained until March, 1887, when the call to
the chief city of the Union came in such shape that it could not be
ignored. His practice had extended into such fields that the removal
was almost a necessity, and his health demanded a change of
climate. He located in New York, and became a partner in the firm of
Hoadly, Lauterbach & Johnson—a firm that stands in the front rank,
and that has an immense clientage, not only in New York, but all
through the country. His chief thought and ambition since then has
been in his profession. In the spring of 1890, Governor David B. Hill
appointed him a member of the commission to revise the judiciary
article of the constitution of New York, but because of professional
engagements which detained him in the trial of a case in Detroit,
Michigan, during the entire spring and summer months of that year,
he was compelled to decline the appointment.
In recent years, Judge Hoadly has been honored by the degree of
Doctor of Laws, conferred by Yale College in 1885, by Dartmouth
College in 1889, while his own college, once Hudson but now
Adelbert, gave him the same title some years ago. He is a Free
Mason, a Knight Templar, and has taken the 33rd degree of the
Ancient and Accepted Scottish rite, and has always performed
anything in his power to advance the interests of the order.
Of Judge Hoadly’s professional life in New York, much might be
said, were this the place to say it. Outside of that, little can be said,
for he has had time for little else. As “an Ohio man” he is always at
home to any Buckeye neighbor, or impression, or memory that
connect him with the days and scenes of his youth and early
manhood. He may be seen occasionally in the gatherings of the
Ohio Society, and when there, he is not allowed to remain in his seat
unheard. Few men are as approachable in any walk of life; few men
more companionable when he can command leisure for
companionship. His friendships are strong, his decisions intuitive, his
principles those of his honored ancestors, and Jonathan Edwards’
severe theology has had little reflection in his generous religious
views. A single phrase might sum up his whole life and character: A
typical American jurist and gentlemen.
James Harrison Kennedy.
FOOTNOTES
[10] “The founding of Ohio,” an address of Senator George F.
Hoar, at Marietta, Ohio, April 7, 1888.
DE SOTO’S CAMPS IN THE
CHICKASAW COUNTRY IN 1540-1.
North Americans will probably always take a special interest in the
adventures of the army of the Spanish commander De Soto, apart
from the general charm of the subject, for it is to the chronicles of the
same that they are indebted for the very earliest accounts of the
Indian nations, who, in the sixteenth century inhabited the territory
now comprising the southeastern quarter of the United States.
The route pursued by the expedition during the years 1539 to
1543 has long been the subject of much discussion, but no
satisfactory conclusions have been arrived at concerning the matter
as a whole. Indeed there can scarcely be said to be a single point on
the entire line of march which has been established beyond cavil. It
is not now my intention to add to the mass of general comment, but
merely to treat of a certain point of the route which personal enquiry
and exploration in the field have enabled me to make up my mind
about in all surety.
This point is the location of the particular village of the Chickasaws
in northeastern Mississippi, where De Soto went into camp on
December 17, 1540, and of the smaller village to the northward
whither he retreated about the first week in the ensuing March, after
the fierce night attack of the natives which almost ruined the
Spaniards.
Before proceeding to give my own conclusions as to the true
position of these villages, it is but proper to furnish an abstract of the
descriptions given by the old writers, together with the opinions of
the modern historians of Mississippi and of other people now
inhabiting the northeastern counties of the State. The various
authorities (excepting the popular views) will be quoted in the order
in which they have appeared in printed form before the world.
The anonymous “Gentleman of Elvas” one of the Portuguese
volunteers, an eye-witness, comes first. His work, the “True Relation”
etc., appeared in 1557. He says that Chicaza was a small town of
twenty houses, and that the land was thickly inhabited, and that it
was fertile, the greater part being under cultivation. Also that the
Spaniards removed from that town where they wintered to the one
where the cacique was accustomed to live, half a league off,
because it was in the open country, on a prairie favorable for them.
The second authority is Garcilaso de la Vega, “the Inca,” who,
however, was only a compiler, writing in 1591, from information given
by three separate members of the little army. His book, “La Florida
del Ynca” etc., first appeared in 1605. It furnishes a more elaborate
account of the Chicaza transactions than the proceeding one, and to
the following effect. The place had two hundred fires and was
situated on a hill extending north and south, which was watered by
many little brooks covered with nut, oak, and other similar trees. In
order to lodge more commodiously they built themselves houses
with wood and straw that they procured from the neighboring
villages. Three days after the fight referred to, the General ordered
the force to advance a league, search for wood and straw, and build
a town to be named Chicacilla.
Factor Biedma’s account of the expedition, first published (in
French) in 1841, is a very brief one. In the Chicaza affair,
Buckingham Smith (1866) renders his words as stating that the army
moved to “a cottage about a mile off.”
Nor does the abridged journal of Rodrigo Ranjel, De Soto’s private
secretary, which was not printed till 1851, afford any information as
to the first town. But he relates how the Spaniards, after their defeat,
at once went to a savana or prairie a league off, where they erected
huts and barracks, and established camp on a declivity and hill.
As may be easily supposed the next Europeans to visit that region,
the English and French traders and soldiers of the eighteenth
century, had more urgent matters to attend to than the verification of
historical statements, for no mention of De Soto or the expedition is
made in their scanty writings or reports on this region, and
apparently the Chickasaws had forgotten all about his invasion. The
American settlers of nearly a century later were still less likely to
know about the matter, for the De Soto expedition can scarcely be
said to have become known to people in general in the United States
till after the publication of Theodore Irving’s interesting book in 1835.
Searching next in all accessible modern histories and books, the
first attempt at definite localizing that I can find is in the appendix to
the Smithsonian Report for 1867. The Rev. Samuel Agnew, writing
from Guntown, Mississippi, under date of January 11, 1868, states
that twelve years before, there had been pointed out to him on a long
ridge between John’s Creek and Friendship Church, in Pontotoc
County, the remains of ancient ditches or embankments. These he
surmised might probably be the remains of De Soto’s winter camp,
but he hoped that some intelligent antiquarian would look further into
the matter.
The most comprehensive attempt however, to identify these
camps, was made by Hon. J. F. H. Claiborne, in his “Mississippi as a
Province” etc., published in 1880. In this book he wrote that:—
“There (the old Indian trail) struck Pontotoc ridge, four miles east
of the ancient Chickasaw Council House. Near this point stood the
first Chickasaw town, and in this vicinity the Spaniards went into
winter quarters.
“At that period a portion of the Chickasaws still resided in the
mountain region of east Tennessee, but a large body of them had
taken possession of the territory where De Soto found them, and
their principal settlement or town, or series of villages, was on the
ridge from the ancient Council House (near Redland) north fifteen
miles (near Pontotoc) and northeast, on the ‘mean prairie’ eight or
ten miles, within a few miles of Tallahatchie River....
“Four miles east of the ancient Council House, on the Pontotoc
ridge, near the source of the Suckartonchee Creek, are the vestiges
of a fortified camp, evidently once strongly entrenched, after the
European style of that day, with bastions and towers. Leaden balls
and fragments of metal have been often found in these ruins. The
enclosure was square, and the whole area, as evidenced by the
remains, would have afforded shelter to the Spaniards and their live
stock.... The chief of the Chickasaws resided about two miles
southeast of the present town of Pontotoc, on the head-waters of
Coonawa, now called Pontotoc Creek.... The exact position of this
entrenched camp is still indicated by the vestiges that remain. Some
persons contend that De Soto left this stronghold, advanced to
Chickasilla, one mile northwest from where Pontotoc now stands,
and commenced the attack on the Chickasaw towns. This would be
to reverse the detailed accounts of the writers that accompanied
him.... After the destruction of their camp, the Spaniards moved
three miles to the village of Chickasilla, where they were annoyed by
desultory attacks.”
In forming his opinions on the matter, Claiborne acknowledged his
indebtedness to W. J. N. Walton of Aberdeen, Mississippi, a
gentleman who “in early life was secretary of Levi Colbert, head chief
of the Chickasaws, familiar with their language and with all their
traditions,” and to W. B. Wilkes of the same place, a man whose
tastes inclined him to archaeological pursuits. It is with diffidence
therefore, that I venture to disagree with these conclusions, in my
own statement.
As to the ideas of the farmers and others living in the old
Chickasaw County, there is no uniformity of opinion as to the site of
Soto’s camps. There are many local candidates for that honor, and
so far as I could find out, there is no good reason to adopt one more
than another. The place pointed out to Mr. Agnew is probably the site
of Mound Builder’s work, of which class of remains there is no lack in
northern Mississippi.[11] The same may be said of the position
assigned to Chicaza by Claiborne, though the locality he means is
rather to the southeast of Redland and in Chickasaw County.
The Chicaza of Soto’s time was on a high ridge or hill located
about one mile northwest of Redland, on the S½ of the S¼ of
Section 21, and the N½ of the N W½ of Section 28, town 11, range
3E. in Pontotoc county. The hill extends north and south, and on
both sides there are many little spring branches flowing out of the
base of the hill and uniting with the larger streams at a distance of
from one to four or five rods. The main part of the town was located
on Section 28. A part of it is under cultivation and has farm buildings
upon it, while the remainder of the site is covered by young timber
and brush.
Many years ago there was an Indian mission school that is said to
have been located where the farm building now stands. In the new
ground broken up within recent years, there were beds of charcoal
and ashes found at different points, and even in the old portion of the
cultivated land charcoal is occasionally brought to the surface by the
plough. These are undoubtedly remains of old Chicaza, and the
beds of charcoal and ashes mark the sites of the houses burned by
the Indians. As regards the location, there is no other place in either
Lee or Pontotoc counties—where the oldest Chickasaw settlements
were undoubtedly situated—that corresponds to the topographical
description given by the Inca.
Chicacilla was probably located on the S E¼ of Section 5, town
11, range 3 E., about 3½ miles north and a very little west of
Chicaza. At this point there is debris, etc., indicating that there was
once an old Chickasaw village there. The narratives of the
expedition, however, do not give sufficient data regarding this site, so
that it is impossible to fully identify the place by them, there being
nothing beyond the statement already quoted that it was located on
a sloping hill, a league distant from Chicaza. This being the only
ancient Chickasaw village site properly lying on sloping ground, and
at about the right distance from the burned town; it is more than
probable that the position given above is the correct one. It is
presumable that after the place was abandoned by the Spaniards,
the Indians took possession of it, and occupied the houses in lieu of
those destroyed by both parties. Besides this, it supplied them with a
well fortified (palisaded) town in which to re-establish themselves.
At these two towns of Chicaza and Chicacilla, there are no
vestiges of fortifications or entrenchments of any description, in fact
there are none to be found in any of the Chickasaw old towns (or
“fields”) that can be identified. It is probable that the fortified towns
described in the De Soto and the early French expeditions were
merely wooden walls or palisades, for otherwise there would be
traces of them still remaining, so that at least some of them could be
recognized as such.
The above conclusions were incidentally arrived at in the course of
some archaeological explorations made in January and February
1891, in the former country of the Chickasaws, and may be
considered as a contribution to some future revision of the generally
accepted route of De Soto and his little army east of the Mississippi.
T. H. Lewis.
FOOTNOTES
[11] Continuous wet weather and the resulting flooded state of
the country prevented the writer from visiting the Agnew locality,
which he had intended to examine like the others.
CHICAGO PIONEERS.
Hon. Isaac N. Arnold.
Isaac Newton Arnold was born at Hartwick, near Cooperstown,
Otsego Co., New York, Nov. 30, 1813. His father George Washington
Arnold was a physician of honorable standing, and the family in
America dates back to the earliest settlement of New England, some
of its members being associates of Roger Williams and other sterling
men, who established in Rhode Island the first real Republic that
ever gladdened the hearts of men with its assertion and protection of
liberty and independent, sovereign manhood. The natural
surroundings of his youth—the romantic scenery of Otsego County,
with its beautiful lakes and extensive forests, so delightfully
picturesque—were well calculated to develop a strong and noble
manhood. Amidst this beauty of nature and comparative solitude, the
man who was to make such a success of life drank in inspiration and
learned to love the pure and the beautiful. Early thrown upon his own
resources, self-made and self-reliant, he reached a position of
greatness, through a career of usefulness, honor and integrity. His
early education was obtained in the country schools and the village
academy. From seventeen to twenty years of age he employed his
time in teaching half the year and in attending school the other half,
his revenue from teaching enabling him to support himself in his
pursuit of an education. Ultimately he began to prepare himself for
the profession in which he afterwards achieved such a notable
success. Reading law in the offices of Richard Cooper and Judge
Morehouse of Cooperstown, Mr. Arnold was admitted to the bar in
1835, and after practicing for a brief time as a partner of Judge
Morehouse, he came to Chicago in 1836, and at once began that
illustrious professional career which placed him among the foremost
jurists not only of Illinois, but of the nation. It is scarcely possible to
have a more graphic and faithful picture of a life than was drawn by
Hon. E. B. Washburne in his eloquent eulogy of Mr. Arnold before
the Chicago Historical Society. He said: “During all the active years
of a long and well-spent life, Mr. Arnold has been a citizen of
Chicago, contributing by his indefatigable industry, his
unimpeachable integrity, his patriotism, his public spirit, his rare
abilities, his great acquirements, his spotless moral character, his
high social qualifications and instincts as a thorough gentleman to
give lustre to the city of his residence and to the generation to which
he belonged; a successful lawyer that stood in the front ranks of his
profession; a cautious, far-seeing and wise legislator, distinguishing
himself in the halls of legislation, national as well as state; a
successful public speaker and a writer of great power and wide-
spread popularity, he has left to the generations that succeed him
the legacy of a noble example and a noble name.”
Mr. Arnold was enrolled at the bar of the Supreme Court in Illinois
Dec. 9, 1841, and in that same year he became counsel in a case
which established his ability as a lawyer and brought him
prominently before the profession. It was a time of great business
depression, and a recreant legislature had passed an act of
repudiation of public debts and providing that unless the property of
a judgment debtor should bring two-thirds of its appraised value, it
should not be sold under execution. Mr. Arnold was a determined
opponent, of such legislation, and being employed by a New York
judgment creditor to enforce his claim against a debtor, he attacked
the constitutionality of the act, carried the case to the Supreme Court
of the United States, where the case came on in January, 1843. Mr.
Arnold presented an irrefutable written argument and Chief Justice
Taney in one of the ablest and most elaborate opinions ever
delivered in the court, sustained the position of the counsel for the
appellant. Mr. Arnold was a powerful advocate whether before court
or jury. He was exceedingly pains-taking in the preparation of his
cases—which is half the battle with the lawyer—and before a jury he
had no superior. As one of his associates at the bar has put it: “He
was a learned lawyer, a jurist in the same sense of the term, and for
more than thirty years stood at the head of the Chicago bar.”
In 1842 he was elected to the Lower House of the Illinois General
Assembly. There were in that body at this time many men of
distinction and marked ability, but none that were superior to the
subject of this sketch. In 1844 Mr. Arnold was again elected to the
House. At the close of this session of the legislature in 1846, Mr.
Arnold retired from public life, and did not re-enter it until 1856. In
politics he had been a Democrat, and in 1844 was a presidential
elector on the Polk ticket. But becoming indignant at the repeal of the
Missouri Compromise, he became what was known as an anti-
Nebraska Democrat and in 1856, at the urgent solicitation of the anti-
Nebraska Democrats and Republicans of Cook County, he again
consented to become a candidate for the House of Representatives
in the State Legislature. This was at the time that Bissel was elected
Governor and his right to take the seat was challenged by the
Democrats on the ground that he once accepted a challenge to fight
a duel. Mr. Arnold championed the Governor’s cause, and his
speech in his defense not only really settled the question, but gave
him a high reputation over the whole State, marking him as one of
the ablest public men of the time.
In the historical election at which Abraham Lincoln was first
elected President of the United States, Mr. Arnold was elected a
representative in the Thirty-seventh Congress from the Chicago
district. That Congress met in extra session, July 4, 1861, and has
passed into history as one of the most notable and momentous
events in the life of the Republic. The Administration at the time was
confronted by an open rebellion against the National authority, and it
was for this session of Congress to determine just what should be
done in the premises. Mr. Arnold had long known Mr. Lincoln, and
between the two men there was a warm feeling of regard, and
perhaps no man took his seat in this memorable session upon whom
the President placed greater reliance than he did upon Mr. Arnold.
The respect that was generally entertained for his abilities was
evidenced by the fact that he was selected to pronounce the eulogy
on the occasion of the death of Stephen A. Douglass. The regular
session of the Thirty-seventh Congress met on the second day of
December, 1861, at a time when the country was fully plunged into
the midst of civil war. Mr. Arnold took his seat in the House, and at
once entered actively into all the important proceedings of the body.
His labors as a representative were very great and of the highest
usefulness. Among his official acts that will live forever as a
memento to his manhood and his statesmanship was his vote to
abolish slavery in the District of Columbia and his introduction of a
bill, which against a determined opposition he persistently pushed to
enactment, to prohibit slavery in every place subject to the National
jurisdiction. One who knew him well, expressed the opinion however,
that the ablest and most notable speech which he made in
Congress, was the one delivered May 2, 1862, in the support of the
bill to confiscate rebel property. This speech, because of its value as
an exponent of constitutional law, challenged the attention of the
lawyer members. He was ceaseless in administering blows against
the institution of slavery. He acted in this regard steadily upon his
own declaration: “Whenever we can give slavery a constitutional
blow, let us do it.” On February 15, 1863, he introduced a resolution,
which was passed, declaring that the constitution should be so
amended as to abolish slavery in the United States; and this was the
first step ever taken in Congress in favor of the abolition and
prevention of slavery in the country.
In his speech advocating this resolution, he uttered the following
vigorous language and eloquent sentiment: “In view of the long
catalogue of wrongs that slavery has inflicted upon the country, I
demand to-day in the Congress of the United States the death of
slavery. We can have no permanent peace while slavery lives. It now
reels and staggers in the last death struggle. Let us strike the
monster this last decisive blow. Pass this joint resolution and the
Thirty-eighth Congress will live in history as that which consummated
the great work of freeing a continent from the curse of human
bondage. The great spectacle of this vote which knocks off the
fetters of a whole race will make this scene immortal.” Further on he
said: “I mean to fight this cause of the war—this cause of the
expenditure of all the blood and treasure from which my country is
now suffering; this institution which has filled our whole land with
sorrow, desolation and anguish—I mean to fight it until neither on the
statute-book nor in the constitution shall there be left a single
sentence or word which can be construed to sustain the stupendous
wrong. Let us now in the name of Liberty, Justice and of God
consummate this grand resolution. Let us now make our country the
home of the free.”
Mr. Arnold’s congressional career ended with the Thirty-eighth
Congress March 3, 1865. He had served his country so well, had
given the Administration such loyal, able and efficient support and
won such a splendid fame that it was generally regretted that he
would not consent to be returned. After President Lincoln’s
assassination, he accepted the appointment from President Johnson
of Auditor of the Treasury for the Port Office department, as a
residence in Washington afforded him a more ready access to
documents that were necessary to enable him to complete his work
entitled the “History of Abraham Lincoln and the Overthrow of
Slavery in the United States,” the preparation of which he had
commenced before the assassination. He finally resigned the
position however, and returned to Chicago in 1867. He then
completed his work referred to, which is one of surprising interest
and of exceptional historic value. In 1872, he resumed his bar
practice in Chicago and continued actively in his profession for two
or three years, when failing health compelled him to abandon it.
From that time until his death, he lived a retired life in his pleasant
home among his books and papers, where surrounded by his family
and congenial friends he dispensed an elegant and gracious
hospitality. He now had leisure to devote himself to favorite literary
pursuits. He devoted himself to historic themes as he had a love for
historical research, and a power of analysis which enabled him to do
valuable work in historical and biographical writing. In 1880, he
brought out a work entitled “Life of Benedict Arnold—His Patriotism
and His Treason.” It is generally acknowledged to be a work of ability
and fairness. Certainly it showed the independence and courage of
the author for it required something of courage to meet the popular
prejudice with which the name of Benedict Arnold is regarded. But
the author said that he wished to “make known the patriotic service
of Benedict Arnold; the sufferings, heroism and the wrongs which
drove him to a desperate action and induced one of the most heroic
men of an heroic age to perpetrate an unpardonable crime.” The
book is really one of great historic value. Mr. Arnold was never quite
satisfied with his work on Mr. Lincoln and the overthrow of slavery.
About two years before his death, therefore, he began to write the
“Life of Abraham Lincoln,” and it is upon this work, says one of his
ardent admirers, that his reputation as a biographer and historian
must rest.
He was the author of a great number of sketches. “To whatever he
undertook,” says one, “Mr. Arnold brought the qualities of a ripe
intelligence, great vigor and a sound judgment.” At an age when
most men rest, he was pursuing to its legitimate honors and rewards
the career of a man of letters and of a historian. With an intellectual
and finely chiseled face, of an erect and well-formed person, of quiet
and gentlemanly manners and courteous carriage and bearing, Mr.
Arnold was a man who always attracted attention. He was a
communicant of the Protestant Episcopal Church, and for many
years a vestryman of St. James’ Church in Chicago. The successes
of life and the usual hardening influences of public life had no effect
upon his manly Christian character. The better side of his nature was
at all times in the ascendancy. His earnest, paramount desire was to
be useful in the world, and he freely understood that to gratify that
desire man must be alive to the claims of his fellow man upon him.
On his seventieth birthday he wrote: “Three score and ten; Death
must be at no great distance. I wish to live only so long as I may be
to some extent useful, and not when I shall be a burden. May my
remaining days be useful and innocent.” He was possessed of many
noble traits of character, not likely to be known outside of his
immediate circle of friends. He was a great lover of children, and
devotedly tender in his own home.
Mr. Arnold was twice married. His first marriage was with
Catherine E. Dorrance of Pittsfield, Mass., who died October 1839.
His second marriage was with Harriet Augusta Dorrance, a sister of
his former wife, August 4, 1841. Nine children were born of this
marriage. Mr. Arnold died at his residence in Chicago, April 24, 1884,
mourned by the great city in which he lived and a multitude of others
who appreciate the worth of true manhood. No citizen of Chicago
ever had more numerous or more eloquent eulogies pronounced
upon his death; the memory of no citizen was ever honored by such
a gathering of distinguished people as assembled to pay the last sad
tribute to Mr. Arnold’s memory.
Howard Louis Conard.
SOME ANCIENT METHODS OF
PUNISHMENT IN MASSACHUSETTS.
Scarcely anything indicates so accurately the predominant traits
and condition of a people at any given period, as do the laws by
which they are governed and the mode in which those laws are
administered. Hence, in studying the early history of Massachusetts
much important aid may be derived from the records of the courts
and magistrates of that time. These give us a tolerable correct idea
of the laws then in force which were designed to regulate the
conduct of men in the various relations of life and show what was the
practical administration of those laws. This is quite as true (perhaps
more so), of the laws concerning what may be termed minor
offences or breaches of social duty, for which men were held legally
accountable, as it is of the graver crimes.
Some of the laws relating to this class of minor offences have
undergone changes within the last two hundred years, particularly
since our separation from the Mother Country.
These changes have been not so much in regard to the nature
and description of the offence itself, as in regard to the penalty. They
have in Massachusetts at the present time, and have had ever since
the American Revolution, laws against drunkenness, vagrancy, petty
larceny, libel and slander, profane cursing and swearing, Sabbath
breaking, unlawful games or plays, lewdness, common railing and
brawling, and idle and disorderly conduct generally. Our Colonial
ancestors had laws substantially like those in force so far as relates
to the offences themselves.
In fact, the present statutes on these subjects are many of them
copies of the provincial statutes. But the penalties are quite different.
They now punish breaching of these laws by a small fine or by
imprisonment for a short term, or by both. For similar breaches of the
statute and common law in the early history of Massachusetts some
very different penalties were provided. These were actually enforced
in frequent instances, which is hardly true of similar cases at the
present day.
The Magistrates and Courts that administered the laws in
Massachusetts during the first century and a half after its settlement
were full believers in the propriety and efficacy of corporal
punishment for a certain class of transgressions. Having based their
criminal code largely upon that of Moses, they were well persuaded
that, if in no case they exceeded the Hebrew limit of forty stripes,
they would have the Divine sanction. With this illustrious precedent
constantly in view as a rule of action, they did not hesitate to apply
the rod whenever it seemed to them appropriate and adequate
penalty for the offence. Crimes of a graver character were dealt with
by tribunals of larger jurisdiction and punished by imprisonment or
death. But for a large class of misdemeanors, particularly such as
were considered scandalous or tending to disorder and of evil
example, the rod was a very frequent instrument of punishment.
It was a matter within the discretion of the Magistrate to some
extent. This office was held by William Pynehon, of Springfield,
Mass., for the first eleven years, afterwards for half a century by
John Pynehon and his associates. In awarding this punishment of
whipping little regard seems to have been paid by the court to the
sex or social position of the offender. If the infliction of the penalty
tended to disgrace the culprit, the commission of the offence was in
itself disgraceful. The degrading punishment was regarded the just
and proper sequence of the disgraceful crime.
The constable was the officer by whom the sentence was
executed, and the public whipping post was the place. The time was
sometimes the day on which the court was held. Occasionally, the
day of the weekly religious lecture was designated as the time for the
infliction.
Sometimes whipping was an alternative sentence to be inflicted if
the offender failed to pay his fine. Often it was the only punishment
awarded.
Some instances will be given, taken from the records—most of
them are from the Pynehon record, containing cases tried by William
Pynehon as a Magistrate, and cases tried by his son, John Pynehon,
in connection with Eleziar Holyoke and Dr. Samuel Chapin who were
commissioners appointed by the General Court.