SOME ABORIGINAL SITES ON MISSISSIPPI RIVER. 371 
was rather infrequently resorted to, and while some few vessels from this region 
have solid coatings of red, they are exceptional and they usually bear incised deco- 
ration in addition. Vessels with polychrome designs are very exceptionally met 
with in the Lower Mississippi province. 
Human effigy vessels are comparatively abundant in the region lying north of 
the Arkansas river, while south of that river vessels of this type are seldom found. 
There can be no question that north of the Arkansas the average quality of 
the ware and the character of the modeling are inferior to those of the region to 
the southward. 
The pottery of the Arkansas river, as we have said, shares the distinctive feat- 
ures present in that of both territories. Incised decoration, as well as the use of 
pigments for decoration of pottery, are abundantly evident in the valley of the 
Arkansas. 
Vessels representing the human form, are fairly numerous along the Arkan- 
sas, but are not found there in the same numbers they are met with in regions 
farther north. 
In the sites of the Arkansas river also are many vessels resembling the less- 
carefully made ones of the region to the north, while many others, in excellence of 
ware and beauty of form and of decoration, call to mind the better work of the 
Lower Mississippi Valley. 
As the reader possibly may care to inquire further as to the pottery of these 
regions, we would suggest that the two memoirs of Professor Holmes, already cited, 
and “Contributions to the Archeology of Missouri, Part I, Pottery, ' and our 
“Antiquities of the St. Francis, White and Black rivers, Arkansas,’ * treat of the 
pottery of the Middle Mississippi region. 
The aboriginal pottery of Middle Tennessee, which we presume may be classed 
as belonging to the Middle Mississippi region, is deseribed in General Thruston's 
work, “Antiquities of Tennessee.” 
The ware of the Lower ма Valley region is considered by Professor 
Holmes in the Twentieth Annual Report of the Bureau, and, im part, in our 
“Antiquities of the Ouachita Valley.” ° 
The earthenware of the Arkansas river is partly described in Holmes’ memoirs 
already referred to; in his “Collection from Arkansas County ” *; and in our “ Cer- 
tain Mounds of Arkansas and of Mississippi, Part I. Mounds id Cemeteries of 
the Lower Arkansas River.” ° 
In parts of this report reference will be made to the exact number of earthen- 
ware vessels found by us at various sites under description. To assume that all 
these vessels are entire would be incorrect; in fact but few of them are so. It is 
our endeavor to convey an idea of the approximate total of vessels placed by the 
1 Dr. Edward Evers. 
2 Journ. Acad. Nat. Sci., Phila., Vol. XIV. 
3 Journ. Acad. Nat. Sci., Phila., Vol. XIV. 
* Third An. Rep. Bur. Ethn , p. 476 et seq. 
5 Journ. Acad. Nat. Sci., Phila? Vol. XIII. 
