niMMAS] SIMILAR PIPES. 705 



itoi' pipes tliey arc called and used without a stem. The bowl is 

 always central, whether having some animal carved around it or not."' 



If this writer had referred to Adair's History of the American Indians, 

 page 423, he would have found this statement: "They [Indians] 

 make beautiful stone pipes; and the Cheerake, the best of any of the 

 Indians; for their mountainous country contains many different sorts 

 and colors of soils proper for such uses. They easily form them 

 with their tomahawks and afterwards finish them in any form with 

 their knives, the pipes being' of a very soft quality till they are smoked 

 with and used in the tire, when they be(;ome quite hard. They are 

 often a fnll si)an long and the l)owls are about half as large again as 

 those of our English pipes. The fore part of each commonly runs 

 out with a sharp peak two or three fingers broad and a quarter of an 

 inch thick;" and he adds further, as if intending to describe the typ 

 ical form of the Ohio pipe, " on both sides of the bowl lengthwise." 

 This addition is important, as it leaves no doubt in the mind as to the 

 particular form of pipe intended. As this statement was made over a- 

 century ago, it nuist have been from seeing them in use and not from 

 having discovered them in mounds. 



E. A. Barber^ says: " Tlie earliest stone pipes from the mounds were 

 ' always carved from a single piece and consist of a flat curved base of 

 variable length and width, with the bowl rising from the center of the 

 convex side' (Auc. Mon., 228). * The typical mound pipe is the ' Moni- 

 tor' form, as it may be termed, possessing a short, cylindrical, urn- or 

 spool-shaped bowl rising from the center of a flat and slightly curved 

 base." 



According to this statement the " Monitor " type is considered the 

 oldest form of the monnd-builder's pipe and yet we not only have the 

 evidence that it was in use among the Indians of this region, but it is 

 easy to trace in the mound specimens the moiliflcatious which brought 

 into use the simple form of the modern Indian pipe. For example there 

 is one of the form shown in Fig. 301 from Hamilton County, Ohio; 

 another ft'om a large mound in Kanawha valley, West Virginia; sev- 

 eral taken from Indian graves in Essex county, Mass. ; •' another found 

 in the grave of a Seneca Indian in the valley of the (lenessee;^ and 

 others found by the assistants of the Bureau of Ethnology in the mounds 

 of western North Carolina and east Tennessee. 



So far the modification consists in simply shortening the forward pro- 

 jection of the stem or base, the bowl remaining perpendicular. The 

 next modification is shown in Fig. 3-14, which represents a type less com- 

 mon than the preceding, but found in several localities, as, forexamjiJe, 

 in Hamilton county, Ohio; mounds in Sullivan county, eastern Tennes- 

 see (by the Bureau assistants); and in Virginia.^ In these, although 



1 Thti Young Mineralogist and Antiquarian. April, 1885, p. 79. 



■'Amcr. Nat., vol.10 (1882), pp. 26.'.--266. 



3 Abbott, Primitivi' Industry, Fig. :ii:). p. 313: Bulletin Es.sox Institute, vol. :i. p. 123. 



^ Morgan. League of tin- Iroquoi-s, p. 356. 



5 Ran. Areb. Coll.. Smithsonian Inst., p. 50, Fig. 190. 



12 KTH 4,') 



