The Problem of the Ohio Mounds by Cyrus Thomas
page 31 of 77 (40%)
page 31 of 77 (40%)
![]() | ![]() |
|
The Cahokia pottery which he found along the creek of that name
(Madison County, Ill.) he ascribes to Indians, and believes it to be of comparatively recent origin. Most of the mound pottery is mixed with pulverized shells, which is also true of most Indian pottery. [Footnote: Dumont, Mem. Hist. La., vol. 2, 1753, p. 271; Adair, Hist. Am. Indians, p. 424; Loskiel, Gesell. der Miss., p. 70, etc.] Du Pratz says that "the Natchez Indians make pots of an extraordinary size, cruses with a medium-sized opening, jars, bottles with long necks holding two pints, and pots or cruses for holding bear's oil;" [Footnote: Hist. La., p. 79.] also that they colored them a beautiful red by using ocher, which becomes red after burning. As is well known, the bottle-shaped vase with a long neck is the typical form of clay vessels found in the mounds of Arkansas and southeastern Missouri, and is also common in the mounds and stone graves of middle Tennessee. Those colored or ornamented with red are often found in the mounds of the former sections. It is worthy of notice in this connection that the two localities--near Saint Genevieve, Mo., and near Shawneetown, Ill.--where so many fragments of large clay vessels used in making salt have been found, were occupied for a considerable time by the Shawnee Indians. As will hereafter be shown, there are reasons for believing this pottery was made by the Shawnees. The statement so often made that the mound pottery, especially that of Ohio, far excels that of the Indians is not justified by the facts. |
|