GROUND STONE—PROBLEMATICAL FORMS
THE GORGET AND ORNAMENTS AS SEEN BY EARLY EXPLORERS
On pages 24–26 will be found the Nomenclature Committee’s classification
of these, which it is not necessary to repeat here. While I follow that
grouping, yet I expand it somewhat. I do not begin with the spade-shaped
form, but with the oval, whether pendant or ornament.
[Illustration:
FIG. 289. (S. 1–1.) Perforated pebbles from near Menard mound,
Arkansas County, Arkansas. The simplest form of ornament. Collection
of C. B. Moore, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.
]
[Illustration:
FIG. 290. (S. 1–1.) An object of jade, which was found on a
village-site, on the banks of the Miami River, Miami County, Ohio.
It is in the collection of J. A. Rayner.
]
Fig. 292, showing two hundred and twenty-one forms in this class, is
followed by a list of figures illustrating each type. It was not
required, therefore, that figures be appended to the Committee’s
list—these outlines being sufficiently close to that arrangement to
stand in its stead.
If one will reflect on the beginnings of human culture, it may seem to
one that the earliest man picked up a flat bit of bright stone without
irregular edges—perhaps it was oval—and drilled a little hole in the
top, and wore it about his neck as an ornament. It is not to be supposed
that man began with the specialized forms, or a ridged ornament, which
must have been of later development. Whether by later, one means a few
generations or a thousand years, is immaterial, for, as we have observed
in other places in this book, some tribes progressed rapidly, while
others did not. Among the latter, the period of development in
ornamental stones would be practically nil, for there are no
problematical forms among such Indians as the Seris, whom McGee found in
the stone age as late as 1901.[8]
[Illustration:
FIG. 291. (S. 1–2.) Peabody Museum, Harvard University, collection.
Further development of the single-perforation stone ornament. The
circular disc is seldom found, and was probably an ear-ring.
]
[Illustration:
FIG. 292
]
Now, while such Indians as the Seris have not progressed, we must not
imagine that the rate of progress among other tribes was always very
low. It may have been rapid or it may have been retarded; no man can
affirm with reference to this. But it is to be supposed that the
progress was considerable, for the Indian is superior to most other
tribes of barbarians.
[Illustration:
FIG. 293. (S. varying.) Andover collection. Three ovate pendants
drilled at either end. The one to the right is decorated with eight
incised lines on the right end, and seven at the left. The specimen
to the left is full size, the centre one, a pendant of veined
quartz, is two thirds size, while the smaller one is one third size.
]
It is not necessary to point out that the Indian brain is finer than the
Australian or African brain. The Indian is bright, he is alert, he is
quick to avail himself of natural advantages. I have always been of the
opinion that, had the Indian discovered the properties of iron, and
constructed more permanent dwellings, he would have developed a high
culture peculiarly his own, on this continent.
[Illustration:
FIG. 294. (S. 1–1.) Ohio State Archæological and Historical Society
collection. An ornament made of strips of ocean shell about one inch
wide at the centre and gradually tapering to about three fourths of
an inch at the end. Ornaments of this kind varied in length from six
inches to four inches. The ends were cut square, into which a small
hole was bored, about the centre of the ornament, to a depth of one
fourth of an inch. A second hole was bored from the concave side to
connect with the first hole, thus forming a means of attachment that
could not be seen from the convex side. The strips were cut from the
body of the shell and conform to the general curve of the shell.
]
We may imagine that the first aborigine to discover the possibilities of
the stone ornament, selected an unusually soft claystone, punched a hole
through it with a thorn, and the material being very soft, the rim
between the perforation and the upper part gave way and the stone was
lost. Meantime, other natives, seeing and admiring this new ornament,
followed his example. Presently, it was ascertained that slate and
sandstone, while harder to drill, retained their shape and were more
serviceable than softer clay-stones. Somebody discovered that it was
well to make two perforations in the oval stone. Again, that by grinding
the edge of the stone one could change the form, and thus the objects
shown in Fig. 291 came into use. A stone of near the desired shape was
worked accordingly, and flat discs remained as more or less circular or
rectangular ornaments. Thus, slate and shale, rectangular in the natural
state, were made into rectangular or square ornaments and tablets.
[Illustration:
FIG. 295. (S. about 1–2.) Five specimens, two of which are ovate, two
pointed, and the upper one to the left is spade-shaped. But the
upper one was broken and afterwards ground down, so that its present
form is no indication that the original form is spade-shaped.
Collection of Peabody Museum, Cambridge, Mass.
]
On the folder herewith presented as Fig. 292, I have drawn all the forms
of polished stones of the problematical and ornamental class. That is,
all of them that have been brought to my attention. There will be few
specimens illustrated in this section that are not included in the
figure mentioned. My aim in presenting so many of these is to include
all the types. Some odd-shaped problematical forms may be considered as
the result of individual fancy on the part of prehistoric man, and not
true types.
The outlines shown in Fig. 292 are illustrated, further on in the
chapter, by specimens either full size, half-size, or less. To the left
are the letters indicating the various rows, while the numbers refer to
type specimens. Readers should bear in mind that the numbers represent
illustrations and not pages.
_Left side of diagram_ _Right side of diagram_
A. Two specimens in 305. A. 311.
B. 298, 296. B. 296.
C. 295, 381. C. 381.
D. 371, 373. D. 376.
E. 299, 300. E. 301, lower specimen.
F. 301, several in 348. F. 330, central specimen.
G. 338, lower specimen 355. G. 338, lower specimen.
H. 305, 308. H. 344, specimens 1 and 3.
I. 355, 357–8. I. 351, lower specimen (centre).
J. 353. J. 353, right specimen.
K. 332, nos. 7 and 9 of 344. K. 344, no. 10.
L. 314, top row at the right; L. 344, specimens 1 and 3.
349, bottom specimen to left.
M. 386. M. 362.
N. 315. N. 366.
O. 386. O. 363.
These two hundred and twenty-one outlines are of different objects in
various museum collections, not quite one third being on exhibition in
Andover and the others in the Peabody Museum, Harvard University; Ohio
State Archæological and Historical Society, Columbus; the Field Museum,
Chicago; Smithsonian at Washington; the Dominion Museum at Toronto; the
Art Museum at Cincinnati, etc. I have omitted the locality of these, but
reference to the illustrations presented in this chapter of specimens
from all over the country, will give one an idea of the range.
Each row is lettered. At the top, A, are the simple forms, pecked and
ground and perhaps polished, but not perforated. A begins with the oval
and ends in the tablet form with four concave sides. B also begins with
the oval, is perforated, and ends in the pendant form. Under the 10th
specimen, counting from the left end of row B, I have drawn a small
arrow indicating that this form may be traced through another series.
This is lettered row C. The sixth specimen, counting from the right
towards the left in row B, is a spade-shaped gorget. This may have
suggested the true spade form. I have drawn an arrow from this specimen
and inserted a number of spud-shaped objects which are lettered D.
Row E begins with the simple oval, again, but is doubly perforated. This
row ends in the flat tablet, concave sides with two perforations on
either side of the centre. The seventh specimen, counting from right to
left in this row, has underneath it two arrows, which indicate two other
series. The first, row F, ending in the ridged form; second, row H,
exhibiting progression in the concavity in the sides until it terminates
in the double crescent, or problematical form with curved arms. Opposite
the short series F is another series under the same letter, beginning
with the second specimen from right to left in row E. This form of
tablet may be carried through the series to a highly specialized form
with angular depressions on either side of the centre.
[Illustration:
FIG. 296. (S. 1–2.) The purpose of these spade-shaped forms is not
clear. Probably they are developments of the simple, straight-side
ornament. Andover collection.
]
[Illustration:
FIG. 297. (S. 1–1.) This long, rectangular slate ornament becoming
broken was ground down and reperforated and used for suspension.
This specimen was originally something like six inches in length and
was perforated about two inches from either end. Aside from the
perforations it was worn or tied at right angles to the position in
which it would hang in its present form. The two perforations would
cause it to hang downwards. Andover collection.
]
[Illustration:
FIG. 298. (S. 1–2.) Pendants and shield forms (top). In the centre is
a small pendant perforated for suspension. The three specimens at
the bottom of the figure represent the squared pendant and oval
pendant. The latter has been grooved for suspension. It was probably
a different form originally, judging from the perforations, and was
later changed to the pendant form. Andover collection.
]
All the specimens thus far in the plate, except the spud-shaped form and
the ridged objects, are flat gorgets and pendants which the Committee
classify under the general term “laminae”; that is those having flat
surfaces, or surfaces nearly flat. In row G, to the left, is arranged
the development of yet another form with wings. The first specimen is
the pick-shaped object of slate or granite, drilled through. This may
gradually expand or change its form, but usually the centre is wide and
the wings not very prominent.
[Illustration:
FIG. 299. (S. 1–1 to 1–2.) Andover collection. The ordinary flat
tablet with concave sides and rounded ends. I have found several of
these on the chests and arms of skeletons. The lower specimen
presents a peculiarity noted in a number of similar objects in the
Peabody Museum, Cambridge. There is a polished groove between the
two perforations. There are four or five specimens, all from the
same locality in Maine, on exhibition in the Peabody Museum which
present this peculiarity. The groove is worn smooth and apparently
the polish is the result of the rubbing back and forth of the thongs
with which this specimen was fastened. To what it was fastened I am
unable to state. The upper specimen exhibits three perforations.
]
[Illustration:
FIG. 300. (S. 1–5.) This figure illustrates twenty-nine slate pendants
and tablets of several types ranging from the oval to the ridged
form. These are from Indiana and Ohio and are all beautiful
specimens, well made. The one at the bottom, in the centre, is
rather an unusual form. Collection of Albert L. Addis, Albion,
Indiana.
]
[Illustration:
FIG. 301. (S. 2–5.) Denotes the passing of the oval ornament into the
rectangular class and the tablet form. The long one to the left is
rather unusual. Sometimes these long ornaments have concave sides,
or may be straight pendants of unusual size. Collection of C. L.
Baatz, Massillon, Ohio.
]
[Illustration:
FIG. 302. (S. 1–1.) A long pointed red sandstone ornament with notches
(presumably records) on either edge and originally perforated near
each end. Becoming broken, it was perforated on either side at the
top either for repair or for suspension. Andover collection.
]
[Illustration:
FIG. 303. (S. 1–1.) A splendid illustration of the ovate form, pointed
at either end, highly polished. Such a specimen as this must have
been very highly prized by ancient man. Collection of Dudley A.
Martin, Duboistown, Pennsylvania.
]
In row I we begin with the oval pebble, not the flat pebble of the
gorget class. This specimen is practically the same as the first in row
G, with this difference that it is placed horizontally instead of
vertically. But after the first two forms, the type varies, being long
or short, but always with rounded ends until it terminates in the
beautiful crescents shown in the centre of the page. Readers are
referred to various illustrations throughout this chapter on
problematical forms which show specimens of this type nearly full size.
[Illustration:
FIG. 304. (S. 1–1.) An unusual form of ornament. Small perforation at
the top, grooves or indentations, forming a neck. Large perforations
below, which are worn smooth. A few such ornaments have been found
in this country, but they are exceedingly rare. Material, dark red
jasper. Collection of F. B. Valentine, Ridgeley, West Virginia.
]
At the right, in row I, are the slightly curved crescents or pick-like
forms. More pronounced curves in these, as shown in row J, enable one to
make a series ending in the L-shaped forms. In row K, the oval slate
pebble is drilled through its long diameter, or through the short
diameter, according to the fancy of the native, and the grain or strata
of the stone. Some of the specimens exhibit slightly flaring sides and
these become more pronounced until the “butterfly” form of problematical
stones is apparent. The eighth specimen from the left toward the right
in row K indicates how this stone may take another form. Row M to the
left indicates small pendants, probably used for nose, rings, and
ear-rings. These are not very common. M, to the right, is the series
beginning with two forms of ridged unperforated gorgets which are
coffin-shaped, and ending in the ridged gorget, opposite which (to the
right) are drawn two arrows. On the right of the plate, in row N, is the
ridged gorget terminating in the boat-shaped object; and below, the
ridged form ending in two objects having elevated, horn-like
protuberances in the centre. Row O, to the left, is the ordinary oval,
not flat but thick and round, which may be slightly grooved at one end.
This series progresses through forms with wide shoulders and narrow
necks and long, pointed bodies. Of the purpose of these we possess no
knowledge. Numbers of them are found in the United States; but none of
the specimens shown at the right in row O (left side of sheet) have to
my knowledge been found in mounds or graves.
[Illustration:
FIG. 305. (S. 1–5.) A good series of the flat, rectangular gorgets
(also a few ovate ones) of all kinds. The three central objects and
the lower central one do not belong in this classification. Students
should examine all these twenty-seven objects carefully. Materials:
slate, granite, sandstone, diorite. Collection of J. A. Rayner,
Piqua, Ohio.
]
The materials out of which these two hundred and twenty-one specimens
are made are various shales, granite, sandstone, banded slate, mica
schist, and porphyry.
The arranging of all these types is not arbitrary. Another observer
might group them in a different manner. I do not maintain that they
should be grouped this way. But we have so many of them in our American
museums that an attempt at grouping and classifying them should be made.
About twelve years ago, just before Mr. Peabody endowed the Department
of Archæology at Phillips Academy, I began the study of the
problematical or unknown forms. I found that these objects were
mentioned more or less briefly in nearly a hundred reports, books, and
scientific papers. In the “Handbook of American Indians,” they are
discussed under various heads and small illustrations are presented.
[Illustration:
FIG. 306. (S. 1–2.) The straight bar-pendant; then one with slightly
concave sides. At the top, a broken rectangular form with concave
sides. Andover collection.
]
[Illustration:
FIG. 307. The upper ones, full size. The two to the left, 1–3 size.
The two to the right, 3–5 size. Andover collection. These broken and
re-worked forms are described elsewhere in this chapter.
]
[Illustration:
FIG. 308. (S. 4–5.) Found in a mound at Moundville, Alabama, on the
Black Warrior River, by Clarence B. Moore. Material: dark mica
schist. There are tablets found in the South and Southwest which are
different from the forms occurring in the Ohio Valley. This tablet
lay near a skeleton. Mr. Moore states that it was covered with
decayed wood and that there were traces of pigment. Tablets somewhat
similar to this are found in the Pueblo ruins in southern Arizona.
But in these the centre is depressed, and it appears as if they were
used as palettes on which was placed paint, according to the theory
of Frank Hamilton Gushing. Such tablets do not properly belong in a
class of objects for suspension, but I have included two or three of
them here.
]
In presenting deductions in this volume on problematical forms I shall
not be so presumptuous as to claim to have arrived at a solution of the
origin and uses of this class of objects. It is quite certain that a
great deal that I have to say will be improved upon by archæologists of
a generation hence. But I want to offer some suggestions as to this
strange class of implements. Since nobody appears fully to understand
them, there can be no harm in pointing out certain features common to
this or that type of problematical forms. The deductions are based on a
study of these objects and the conditions under which they are found,
and I beg the critical archæologist, who may not concur in my
deductions, to offer suggestions and determinations of his own as to
their classification and use.
[Illustration:
FIG. 309. (S. 1–1.) Material: dark, hard slate. A typical perforated
ornament on which some marks or lines have been cut. Collection of
Dauphin County Historical Society, Pennsylvania.
]
Before placing these objects into their various classes, we should
consider the essential points at issue. These objects are called
problematical forms, or ceremonials, or charms, or banner-stones, or any
one of fifty other names. Such names both indicate ignorance of the
purpose prehistoric man had in mind, and also emphasize the need of a
complete archæological nomenclature which will enable us to do away with
such unscientific and amateurish terms. The difficulty in the way of
superseding these is, that after thirty or more years of use some of
these terms have become fixed. The general designation—problematical
forms—was first applied to them by Professor W. H. Holmes.
_First_, most of them are made of unusual materials; that is, the
ancient Indian selected a bright, clear stone, a stone with well-defined
bands, or a fine-grained, dark brown sandstone, or a bright granite. He
did not use ordinary limestone, and he employed gray slate or black
slate without bands when he could obtain nothing else. He preferred
brighter colors. The very material and its treatment indicate that these
objects in their purpose stand apart from the ordinary run of common
artifacts.
_Second_, he brought these objects to a state of high finish, all of
which involved a deal of labor.
[Illustration:
FIG. 310. (S. 1–1.) Carved animal figures on both sides of a flat
piece of catlinite. North Dakota. Collection of Henry Montgomery,
Toronto, Canada.
]
_Third_, he was very particular how he made them, and I shall show
pictures illustrating the progress of the double-winged problematical
form from the block of slate to the chipped specimen.
_Fourth_, he cast away broken axes or celts, and we seldom find a broken
spear that is re-chipped, unless for use as a scraper. But it is
significant that he made use of at least half of the broken
problematical forms. This may seem trivial, but it is important; for we
must inquire into every detail with reference to these objects because
it is only by such study that we shall learn anything about them.
_Fifth_, he made his perforations at right angles to the grain or bands
of the stone, which should be noted. The exceptions are rare. If he
drilled with the grain, the stone would chip, and before he finished the
object, it might break.
_Sixth_, he drilled the specimen before it was completed, knowing that
the drilling was a dangerous process at best. And if he did not prize
the specimen very highly, he would not have cared when he drilled it.
_Seventh_, he placed these objects with his dead. He buried them in
altars, or under other conditions which stamped them as peculiar and
valuable.
After ascertaining that slate pebbles were rare, he looked about for
material and discovered veins of slate which outcropped in certain
portions of the United States. He quarried slate even as he quarried
flint, though on a less extensive scale. He blocked out this slate after
the fashion of “turtle backs,” in order that he might conveniently
transport it and work it into desired forms at his leisure. There is a
village-site on Martin’s Creek, Pennsylvania, where numbers of these
problematical forms have been found. There are thirty or more of them in
our museum from this site alone.
[Illustration:
FIG. 311. (S. 1–1.) J. A. Rayner’s collection. Material: fine
sandstone, dark brown color. An unusual flat tablet, in that there
are four concave sides. Yet this specimen must not be considered of
the winged type. It is a flat tablet with the sides cut out into
this fanciful form. It seems to me that the intention of the workman
was to cut lines or designs upon the surfaces as he did in Figs. 309
and 312.
]
A study of the distribution and character of problematical forms
acquaints one with the significant fact that the quarried slate or shale
was worked into forms more or less specialized. The specimens from
Martin’s Creek are of the winged or crescent or expanded winged type;
and they can be recognized as from that site. The flat ornaments seem to
have been manufactured out of ordinary water-worn fragments, or thin
slabs of shale.
[Illustration:
FIG. 312. (S. 1–1.) Brown fine-grained sandstone. J. A. Rayner’s
collection, Piqua, Ohio. Found in a mound one half mile north of
Piqua. The original was sent me for examination. It bears a close
resemblance to the “Cincinnati tablet” in treatment and form. The
designs are not hieroglyphic, but are of that peculiar serpentine
character noted on so many of the engraved shells, pottery, etc.
Only half of it was found, and as the break appears to be old, the
specimen is of unquestioned genuineness.
]
Up to the present, with few exceptions, I have considered the
manufacture and use of these objects in prehistoric times. Now, I wish
to present a number of pages with reference to the ornaments in use
among Indians between the years 1600 and 1800.
I said in the introduction of “The Stone Age” that wherever I found a
valuable paper dealing with certain subjects along the lines followed in
this book, such paper would in whole, or in part, be quoted.
[Illustration:
FIG. 313. (S. 1–2.) Engraved tablets of fine sandstone. Collection of
J. A. Rayner, Piqua, Ohio. These may or may not be genuine. At any
rate, they are two very interesting tablets, but they have to me a
suggestion of the school slate, as if the person who made them was
familiar with our modern slates. However, I do not wish to do the
specimens an injustice, although they bear written characters, and
of course these are always viewed with suspicion, since so few have
been found in this country. Whether the tablets are the work of
prehistoric man, I leave for others to decide. Mr. Rayner, who owns
these tablets, states that they were both found in a mound near
Piqua, Ohio. He sent me at the time a blue-print picture of the
mound and gave a complete account of the exploration.
]
[Illustration:
FIG. 314. (S. 1–4.) Gorgets and problematical forms from the
collection of W. A. Holmes, Chicago, Illinois. The tube to the left
in the lower row is somewhat longer than the average specimen. The
one to the right, lower row, being grooved and perforated at one
end, is quite rare. The double-pointed object in the centre has its
counterpart in the Andover collection, and at Washington and
elsewhere.
]
Professor Lucien Carr, for many years librarian at Harvard University,
published a number of important papers. In 1897, the American
Antiquarian Society printed one of Professor Carr’s memoirs entitled,
“Dress and Ornaments of Certain American Indians.” This paper, and
others along similar lines, brings within convenient compass the
essential things said by early travelers concerning our natives. As a
librarian—for Mr. Carr, although a historian, was not an archæologist—he
dealt with the early historic period. His paper is, therefore, of
peculiar value in connection with our study of ornaments, problematical
forms, etc. It must be remembered that there is little in the literature
of early America as to the use of stone in problematical form. Since
Professor Carr, who examined the material thoroughly, found so few
references, his paper is in support of my contention that the early
historians and travelers among Indians found few, if any, of the
problematical forms in use. On the contrary there were great quantities
of ornamental objects in evidence, and these are mentioned by the eighty
writers quoted by Professor Carr in his footnotes:—
[Illustration:
FIG. 315. (S. 1–3.) Unfinished objects, ridged, with expanded sides.
This form occurs both in the flat tablet and in the true ridged
type. Material: slate and shale. Collection of B. Beasley,
Montgomery, Alabama.
]
“Of the use of labrets and of the custom among the men of piercing the
nipples and inserting a reed or cane in the hole, I do not propose to
speak, as the evidence on the point is not altogether satisfactory.
Cabeza de Vaca,[9] it is true, asserts that both customs existed among
the Indians of Florida; and Adair[10] and Father Paul Ragueneau[11]
speak of piercing the lip, but in such an indefinite manner that it does
not carry much weight. At all events their statements are not
corroborated, as they would have been if the custom had been general,
and hence I do not insist upon their acceptance.
[Illustration:
FIG. 316. (S. 1–2.) Face and rear of the gorget with expanded sides.
The face is flat, the reverse is convex. These are usually
perforated from the face downward, the holes being small on the
reverse. They were not drilled with a reed or hollow drill, as the
holes are cone-shaped. This type and the flat, tablet-like form
occur more in the mounds than other forms, and seem to have been
favorite ornaments among mound-building tribes. Phillips Academy
collection.
]
“But whilst the existence among our Indians of these two methods of
bodily mutilation, or, if the term be preferred, of ornamentation, may
well be doubted, the same cannot be said of the customs of piercing the
nose and ears. These were widespread, and were usually common to all the
members of the tribe, women as well as men; though there were tribes,
like the Iroquois, in which the women did not pierce the nose, and ‘it
was only among certain others, that they pierced the ears.’[12] Although
evidently intended for ornamental purposes, yet there were people among
whom the custom had something of a religious significance, resembling in
this respect the practice of infant baptism among ourselves. Thus, for
example, we are told by Perrot[13] that the operation was performed when
the child was five or six months old by a medicine-man (‘jongleur’), who
made an invocation to the sun, or some chosen spirit, beseeching him to
have pity on the child and preserve its life. He then pierced the ears
with a bone, and the nose with a needle; and filled the wounds in the
former with small rolls of bark, and that in the latter with the quill
end of a feather. These were suffered to remain until the wounds healed,
when they were removed, and in their places were substituted tufts of
the down of birds. The ceremony was always accompanied by a feast, and
handsome presents were made to the Shaman and his assistants.
[Illustration:
FIG. 317. (S. about 1–2.) The specimen to the left, the winged type,
is a typical Pennsylvania-New Jersey type. It is quite different
from those of farther west and the upper Mississippi Valley. The one
to the right is not essentially different from kindred specimens
north or west of the Pennsylvania region. From the collection of C.
E. Cromley, Williamsport, Pennsylvania.
]
“The holes in the ears of the men and women were of different sizes, and
served to distinguish the sexes;[14] those in the ears of the women
being small, whilst the men sometimes cut a slit almost entirely around
the rim of the ear, which ‘they distend and stretch as much as
possible,’ so much so, in fact, that the loop hangs almost to the
shoulder.[15] Not unfrequently the outer edge of skin is torn apart; and
then the Indian is plunged into the depths of humiliation until, by
paring the broken ends, they can be made to grow together.[16]
Heckwelder[17] reports an instance of an Indian, who was with difficulty
prevented from killing himself on account of an accident of this
character; and he adds that it was owing to the frequency of such
accidents that the custom of stretching the holes in the ears to this
enormous extent was falling into desuetude.
“Of the articles worn in the ears and nose, our accounts are full and
explicit. To a certain extent they were the same—might in fact have been
used indiscriminately; and yet such an arrangement must have been
one-sided, for whilst the nose ornaments could be used in the ears,
there were so many worn in the ears that could not be adapted to the
nose, that it seems advisable to consider them separately. Beginning
then with nose-rings, as this entire class is usually called, we find
that, relatively speaking, they were few in number, and that the
material of which they were generally made was shell. The savages, for
instance, whom Sagard[18] saw in Canada, had a blue bead (patinotre) of
good size which hung down from above, on the upper lip. On the Atlantic
Coast a ‘large pearl, or a piece of silver, gold, or wampum’[19] was
used; and in ‘the interior parts’ of the country, sea-shells were much
worn and were ‘reckoned very ornamental.’[20] In the Gulf States, ‘such
coarse diamonds as their own hilly country produced were, in old times,
fastened with a deer’s sinew to their hair, nose, ears and maccasenes.’
They also, so it is said, formerly used nose-rings and jewels; but, ‘at
present they hang a piece of battered silver or pewter, or a large bead
to the nostril, like the European method of treating swine to prevent
them from rooting.’[21]
“On the other hand, their supply of rings, pendants, and articles of
different kinds worn in the ears, was practically unlimited. Shells in
the shape of beads of different sizes, pendants, and small cylinders
like the stem of a Holland pipe, were in use among the Indians of
Canada, as were small pieces of a red stone worked into the shape of an
arrow-head.[22] The New England and Western Indians indulged in pendants
in ‘the formes of birds, beasts, and fishes, carved out of bone, shells,
and stone’[23] and farther to the south ‘they decorate the lappets of
their ears with pearls, rings, sparkling stones, feathers, flowers,
corals, or silver crosses.’[24] In Carolina they ‘wear great Bobs in
their Ears and sometimes in the Holes thereof they put Eagles and other
Birds Feathers for a Trophy.’[25] Copper, in the shape of beads,
pendants, or wire, was in use from Canada to Florida, as were tufts of
down as large as the fist, oiled and painted red.[26] Fish-bladders,
which are said to have looked like pearl, were worn in the South,[27] as
was a pin made of the interior of a shell, called Burgo, as large as the
little finger and quite as long, with a head to prevent it from slipping
through the hole in which it was inserted.[28] Finally, according to
Strachey,[29] and his account, we may remark, in passing, is a good
summary of the whole subject, ‘their ears they bore with wyde holes,
commonly two or three, and in the same they doe hang chaines of stayned
pearls, braceletts of white bone or shreds of copper, beaten thinne and
bright, and wound up hollowe, and with a great pride, certaine fowles
leggs, eagles, hawkes, turkeys, etc., etc., with beast’s claws, beares,
arrahacounes, squirrels, etc.’
“Closely connected with this style of personal ornamentation, and of
interest on account of the wide field it afforded for the display of
individual taste,[30] were the methods of dressing the hair. To specify
a tithe of the fashions that prevailed in this particular among the
different tribes, or among the members of the same tribe, would take
more time than we can well afford.”
Professor Carr proceeds to discuss at some length the various methods of
hair-dressing, of hair-ornamentation, etc. I omit much of his discourse.
He states that medicine-men in Virginia “‘shave all their heads saving
their creste which they weare in manner of a cokscombe,’ and ‘fasten a
small black birde above one of their eares as a badge of their
office.’”[31]
[Illustration:
FIG. 318. (S. about 1–4.) Types of problematical forms from H. M.
Braun’s collection, East St. Louis, Illinois. Most of the specimens
found near Edwardsville (as were these), not far from the famous
Cahokia group of mounds, seem to be typical of that region. The
specimen to the left, no. 1595, is more of the Wisconsin than of the
Mississippi Valley type. The two to the right are similar to Georgia
and Tennessee forms. All of these are unfinished, except perhaps the
one to the right. Materials: steatite and rose quartz.
]
“On solemn occasions, as on gala-days, the Iroquois wore above the ear a
tuft of the feathers, or the wing, or the whole skin, of some rare
bird;[32] and the Virginia Indians tied up the lock of hair which they
leave full length on the left side of the head, with an ‘arteficyall and
well labored knott, stuck with many colored gew-gawes, as the cast head
or brow-antle of a deare, the hand of their enemie dryed, croisettes of
bright and shyning copper, like the newe moone. Many wore the whole
skyne of a hauke stuffed, with the wings abroad ... and to the feathers
they will fasten a little rattle, about the bignes of the chape of a
rapier, which they take from the tayle of a snake, and some tymes divers
kinds of shells, hanging loose by small purflects or threeds, that,
being shaken as they move, they might make a certaine murmuring or
whisteling noise by gathering wynd, in which they seeme to take great
jollity, and hold yt a kind of bravery.’[33]
[Illustration:
FIG. 319. (S. 1–4.) Four unfinished winged objects from Beloit College
collection, Wisconsin. Material: mottled granite and porphyry. To
work hard materials into these forms must have required both skill
and patience on the part of the natives.
]
“In addition to the articles noted above and worn as ornaments, honors,
etc., there were others that were used as bracelets, necklaces, gorgets,
etc. As a rule they were of bone, pearl, shell, and copper, though the
claws and talons of beasts and birds of prey[34] were also used. Except
occasionally in size, they did not differ materially from the beads,
pendants, etc., that were worn on the head and in the ears. Taking up
these articles in their order, we find that in the Gulf States the
Indians made bracelets of bone. For this purpose they chose the rib of a
deer, which was soaked in boiling water and thus rendered soft and
pliable. It was then worked into the desired shape, and is said to have
been as white and smooth as polished ivory.[35] In Virginia ‘polished,’
or as they are sometimes called ‘smooth bones,’ were used in connection
with ‘pearles and little beedes of copper,’ as necklaces and
ear-rings;[36] and in New England, as we have seen, bones carved in the
shape of birds, beasts and fishes were worn as pendants in the ears; and
in Waymouth’s voyage we are told that they were also used as bracelets.
[Illustration:
FIG. 320. (S. 1–2.) The first stage in the making of the problematical
form. These are of slate and are from Ohio, Indiana, and
Pennsylvania. The upper specimen is a block of slate which has been
worked into shape by means of a heavy hand-hammer. The first stage
is not unlike that observed in the manufacture of flint implements.
The central and lower ones represent the second stage in the process
of pecking, while the one to the right is still further reduced, and
the elevation, strengthening the perforation, is worked into relief.
Andover collection.
]
“Of pearls, there seems to have been an abundance,[37] though they were
unequally distributed. Owing perhaps to this fact, and to the
extravagant accounts of some of the old writers, it has been thought
that they were, not unfrequently, confounded with shell beads; and, yet,
the statements as to their use are too frequent and too detailed in
character, to leave any doubt about the matter, even without the
confirmatory evidence of the mounds. Upon this point the chroniclers of
De Soto’s expedition are in full accord; and whilst we may well doubt
whether the Spaniards took ‘three hundred and ninety-two pounds of
pearls, and little babies and birds made of them’ from the graves near
Cutifachiqui,[38] yet when we are told that pearls ‘of the bigness of
good pease’ were found in Virginia, and that one man ‘gathered together
from among the savage people about five thousand’ of them,[39] we cannot
but admit that there is a foundation of fact in the story of the old
writer, extravagant as it seems to be.”
Professor Carr, in the same paper I have quoted, speaks regarding both
copper and shell in use in early historic times as ornaments.
I shall quote what he has to say on those subjects in their proper
places in subsequent chapters. His article on “Dress and Ornaments,”
ends with these words:—
“With this suggestion, as to the additional use of what was evidently a
leading article in the Indian’s toilet, our investigation must come to a
close. In it we have endeavored not only to picture the dress and
ornaments of our savages, but we have been obliged to examine the
materials of which their dresses and ornaments were made, and to
describe the arts by which these materials were fitted for their several
uses. It has been a laborious task, but fortunately the sources of
information were abundant; and whilst it is probable that our treatment
of the subject has not been as complete as might have been desired, yet
it is believed, that enough has been given to justify us in accepting,
as our own, the statement that ‘from what has been said as to their
method of adorning themselves, it might be inferred that the savages,
instead of adding to their personal beauty (for they are, nearly all,
well made), were really trying to render themselves unnatural and
hideous.’ This is true; and yet when they are in full dress, the
fantastical arrangement of their ornaments not only has nothing in it
that is offensive, but it really possesses a certain charm which is
pleasing in itself and makes them appear to great advantage.”[40]