Archaeological Investigations in Jefferson County, Mo. 209 
drills, long and short polished awls of deer bone, very fine 
needles without eyes made from slivers of bone, flattened polished 
bones, chisel shaped smooth edge bones, large flat disc shaped 
grinding stones, large mushroom shaped pottery “trowels,” 
perforated pottery discs, small shell beads, perforated shell hoes, 
columellae of Busycon shells, pitted sandstone drill holder and 
sandstone “‘arrowshaft straighteners.” (See Plate XIII). 
It is not certain to which aspect the Jenni mound must be 
assigned. The mound was not found in immediate association 
with the village, whereas the mound at the Herrell component 
was in the village. Other traits found from this mound tie up 
with the Plattin focus, namely stone box graves which are with- 
out burial furniture and bundle burials similar to one of the 
stone box graves from the Boyce focus and deep narrow cere- 
monial pit below center of mound. As in the case of the Boyce 
mound there was a deep refuse pit below the mound base. 
The lack of Plattin Clay Tempered ware, the dominance of 
Imperial Plain ware and an effigy flange indicated Kimmswick 
affliation. The two color mound fill and the burned ceremonial 
building at the base of the mound with the extended burial 
under it cannot be linked with either the Plattin or Kimmswick 
focus, but the total lack of Plattin Clay Tempered ware tends 
to tie the mound in with the Kimmswick focus. However, since 
we found only a few sherds from the Jenni mound we cannot 
be sure which focus to tie the mound up to. 
We have a similar situation at the Schock mound. The rect- 
angular flat limestone platform on which the fragmentary bun- 
dle burials were placed looks Middle Mississippi but the oval 
vault over the edge of the platform and burials looks Wood- 
land. The isolation of this mound from a village, the presence 
of Imperial Plain pottery only and the deep narrow refuse pit be- 
low the mound base plainly indicates that possibly both the 
Jenni and the Schock mound were left by the same group. 
Inasmuch as we have only the ceremonial component represented 
at these two sites we are not yet in a position to give aspect 
status to either mound. However, it looks very much as if 
