ARCHEOLOGICAL INVESTIGATIONS IN MISSOURI 37 



have been illustrated in tins or the preliminary report, as indicated. 

 A few explanatory remarks may be in order. Cord-roughened rims, 

 assigned to class I in the table, probably affiliate with the first type of 

 ware discussed in this section. Under class II, the first 5 groups, 

 including all rims with punched bosses as well as those lacking 

 bosses but having dentate stamp or cord- wrapped stick impressions, 

 belong to the second ware described above. The remaining specimens, 

 except as noted here, may be assigned to the third and most abundant 

 pottery type from the site ; a few probably represent the finer variant, 

 but these are rare. 



As the table shows, nearly half (40 percent) of the rims bear cross- 

 hatched incising and punctates. The incising occurs as a band 1 to 3 

 cm. wide, and was evidently used on vessels of all sizes and perhaps 

 of several different shapes. The punctates vary widely, owing to the 

 different instruments used to produce them and to the various angles 

 at which the tool was impressed into the clay; a few look as if they 

 had been gouged out rather than punched. Forty additional cross- 

 hatched rims are indicated with a question mark, since they are broken 

 so that the punctate band if present would not be shown. They prob- 

 ably belong with this group, in which case the proportion would rise 

 to 48 percent. 



The last group in the table includes all rims showing no decoration 

 or other surface modification. Some are from large moderately heavy 

 pots and in profile show a shallow concave or channelled form. Others 

 are smaller and lighter, and show a recurving or flaring rim rising 

 from a low constricted neck (fig. 4, g). Some of the smallest possibly 

 do not show a complete rim exterior, hence may be incorrectly classed 

 with this group. As a whole, they are not made with especial care, 

 and may come from pots of humble function. Unfortunately, there 

 is no clue to the shapes and general appearance of the original vessels 

 from which they were broken. The plainness of the recurved rim.s, 

 together with their profile, suggests certain Mississippian forms (see 

 p. 76) rather than Hopewellian or Woodland. 



