104 ABORIGINAL POTTERY OF EASTERN UNITED STATES [eth.ann.20 



St Francis river region, and may l)e regarded, it seems to me, as excep- 

 tional examples of the same general group of ware. The little bottle e 

 contains a rather rudel}' pngraved ligure of an eagle, the head appear- 

 ing on one side, and the tail, pointed upward, on the other. The par- 

 ticular locality from which the bottle came is not known. Ware closely 

 related to the ]Mi<ldle and Lower Mississippi pottery is found in Texas, 

 but its limitations on the west are not yet defined. Examples of the 

 more elaborate incised designs lielonging to this grouj) of ware are 

 brought together in plate Liii. 



The vessels illustrated in plate lii are now preserved in the Museum 

 of Science and Art in Philadelphia, and were kindly plac(Ml at ui}' dis- 

 posal by Dr Stewart Culin, of that museum. They form part of the 

 Dickerson collection recenth' acquired and reported on jjv Dr Culin." 

 It is noteworthy that the designs engraved on these vases bear a 

 striking resemblance to the scroll work of the middle ^Mississippi 

 valley on the north and of the Gulf coast farther east, and it is to 

 be expected that these designs will ))e found to affiliate closeh' with 

 Mexican work, as do the forms of many of the vessels. 



I'OTTERY OF THE GL'LF COAST 



OCCURRKNCK 



Along the Gulf coast east of the delta of the Mississippi pottery is 

 found in many localities and under varying conditions. Tiie features 

 most chai'acteristic of the wares of the West recur with decreasing 

 frequenc}' and under less typical forms until Florida is reached. 

 Features typical of Appalachian and Floridian wares nuiko their 

 appearance east of Pensacola l)ay. 



The manner of occurrence of the ceramic remains of the Gulf region 

 is interesting. In many cases several varieties of ware are inter- 

 mingled on a single site. This is espcM'ially true of some of the kitchen- 

 midden and shell-inound sites, which, it would seem, must have l)een 

 the resort of different tribes, and even of distinct linguistic families, 

 who visited the tide-water shores from time to time in search of 

 shellfish. In the mounds, however, the conditions are simpler, and 

 in cases we seem to have the exdusive product of a single people. 

 This simi)licity in the burial pottery may be due to the fact that only 

 particular forms of ware were used for mortuary purposes. With 

 some peoples, as has been already noted, certain kinds of vessels were 

 devoted exclusi\-ely to culinary uses. Remains of the latter utensils 

 will be found very generally in shell deposits, and it is in these deposits 

 and not in the mounds that we would exp(>ct to find the wares of non- 

 I'esident communities. 



n Culin, Stewart, Bulletin of the Department of Archseology and Paleontology, University of Penn- 

 sylvania, vol. ir, number 3. 



