THE MOUNDS OF THE MISSISSIPPI VALLEY. 591 
uity. The relics, too—especially the implements and ornaments of stone, 
bone, and shell—that are found under similar circumstances within or 
near these two series of works are identical in form and finish;" and the 
best specimens of the Iroquois black pottery, described by Morgan* as 
being of various designs and sizes, and of such “ fine texture as to ad- 
mit a tolerable polish, and so firm as to have the appearance of stone,” 
can not have been very different from the same class of articles that 
have been taken from the mounds in the Ohio Valley. Indeed Mr. 
Squier? says that the terra cottas of western New York compare favor- 
ably with anything he had yet seen of native workmanship; and that 
the earthen pipes, said by Morgan to be nearly aS hard as marble, fan- 
cifully molded in the form of animals and of the human head, are so 
“hard, smooth, and symmetrical as almost to induce doubts of their 
aboriginal origin.” 
In view of these manifold resemblances, too numerous and too close 
to have been the result of accident, it behooves us to inquire into the 
origin of the earth-works in western New York. According to Mr. 
Squiert they were, one and all—mounds as well as embankments— 
‘erected by the Iroquois or their western neighbors;” and he bases 
this opinion upon a comparison of the “relics and traces of occupancy” 
that are found within these abandoned inclosures with those which 
mark the sites of towns and forts that are known to have been oeccu- 
pied by the recent Indians. These he declares to be identical, as is 
also their pottery, whilst their pipes and ornaments are said to be in- 
distinguishable. ‘ The indications of aboriginal dwellings are precisely 
similar, and, so far as can be discovered, have equal claim to antiquity. 
Near many of these works are found cemeteries, in which well-preserved 
skeletons are contained, and which, except in the absence of European 
* League of the Iroquois, p. 354, The Indians everywhere east of the Mississippi 
and south of the lakes had made great progress in the manufacture of earthenware. 
Thus we are told that ‘‘the Roanoke Indians have earthen pots, large, white, and 
sweet:” Hakluyt’s Voyages, m1, p. 304. The Creeks, Chickasaws, ete., ‘‘make 
earthen pots of very different sizes, so as to contain from 2 to 10 gallons; large 
pitchers to carry water; bowls, dishes, platters, basins, and a prodigious number 
of other vessels of such antiquated forms as would be tedious to describe and impos- 
sible toname. Their method of glazing them is, they place them over a large fire 
of smoky pitch pine, which makes them smooth, black, and firm:” Adair, p. 425. 
Among the Natchez these vessels were ‘‘d’un assez beau rouge:” Du Pratz, 0, p. 
179: Paris, 1758. ‘*‘ The Naudowessies make black pottery nearly as hard as iron:” 
Carver, pp. 101-223. West of the Mississippi, at Naguatex, there are vessels made of 
clay which differ very little from those of Estremoz and Montremor:” Knight of 
Elvas in Hist. Coll. Louisiana, part U, p. 201. In Ancient Society, note to p. 530. 
Morgan, on the authority of Mr. IF. A. Cushing, tells us that ‘“‘the Iroquois orna- 
mented their jars and pipes with minature human faces attached as buttons;” and 
as this style of ornamentation is believed to be somewhat unusual, it may be well 
to say that, in the Peabody Museum at Cambridge, there are several bowls of black 
pottery, from stone graves in Tennessee, which are ornamented in this manner, 
+ Abor. Mon. of New York, p.13 and chapt. v. 
it. ¢., p. 82. 
