ARCHEOLOGICAL INVESTIGATIONS IN" MISSOURI 201 



the rim type and decoration are found also on many of the larger 

 rougher jars at the latter site. As at Renner, cord-roughening is un- 

 common in Trempealeau pottery. In short, the basic techniques and 

 procedures in Trempealeau ceramics are virtually all duplicated at 

 Renner; differences between the two localities are concerned with de- 

 tails rather than with fundamentals. 



Another northern peripheral variant of the Hopewellian culture 

 has been described by Quimby (1941) as the Goodall focus. This com- 

 prises ten burial mound sites scattered east of the lower end of Lake 

 Michigan from the Muskegon River in Newaygo County, Mich., south- 

 ward to La Porte County, Indiana. Ceramic remains include 33 com- 

 plete or reconstructed vessels and about 150 sherds. The vessels, so 

 far as one may judge from the illustrations and descriptions, are mostly 

 smaller than the usual Renner type, though they resemble some of the 

 better-made pieces from Line Creek. There is apparently more dentate 

 stamping in the Goodall wares, and the flat bases and bell-shaped jars 

 (Quimby, 1941, pi. 15, fig. 1; pi. 16, fig. 2; pi. 17, fig. 1) are unlike 

 Renner. On the other hand, quadrilobate vessels, the cross-hatched 

 and punctate rims, undecorated neck band, alternate area body decora- 

 tion, rocker-roughening, cord-wrapped stick and dentate stamp im- 

 pressions on the rim, and pointed base jars with rim bosses ( Quimby ,^ 

 pi. 16, fig. 3), occur at Goodall and at Renner. There are too few re- 

 storable vessels from Renner to warrant positive assertions, but I am 

 inclined to suspect that many, perhaps most, of the traits listed by 

 Quimby for his types II and III can be duplicated in the sherd series 

 from the Missouri site. Type III of the Goodall focus probably cor- 

 responds to the cord-roughened vessel with embossed rim at Renner. 



Other items in the Goodall focus that can be paralleled at Renner 

 are heavy stemmed or corner-notched chert projectile points, flint flake 

 knives, small copper celt blades, bone effigies of perforated bear teeth, 

 socketed antler projectile points, stemmed scrapers, and expanded base 

 drill points. 



North of the Ohio River, in the Upper Mississippi drainage basin, 

 the Hopewell Culture appears to have reached its zenith in the great 

 geometrical earthworks and well-stocked burial mounds of southern 

 Ohio. These structures, which have commanded the attention and 

 the interest of prehistorians since at least the days of Squier and Davis 

 nearly a century ago, are a far cry from the village sites and com- 

 paratively obscure burial tumuli of the Kansas City area. It is un- 

 necessary to review here the complex nature of the burial mounds 

 at the major Hopewell sites or to detail the remarkable finds of 

 mortuary and ceremonial paraphernalia in which stone, bone, copper, 

 mica, pearls, obsidian, and other media were used. Several popular 

 and numerous technical reports have already covered this ground more 



497261—43 14 



