webb] ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY OF NORRIS BASIN 133 



head to the east, was found at a depth of 35 inches. The preservation 

 was poor. In association with the burial was one large clay bowl 

 within which was another broken bowl. The larger bowl was touch- 

 ing the occipital (pi. 87, a) . 



Pottery 



Sherds from this site show no large or heavy vessels. The ware 

 here is generally thin and of two classes, shell tempered and sand or 

 gravel tempered. Shell-tempered sherds are plain small vessels or 

 grass paddle-marked. One small mortuary vessel was of four-lobed, 

 square-rimmed design, having four triangular punctate areas, one 

 between each lobe, as shown in plate 87, b. The sand-tempered ware 

 all bears a square stamped design, as shown in plate 88, a. This ware 

 is quite thin and is porous as the result of the loss of large pieces of 

 gravel. 



Plate 87, &, shows a group of mortuary vessels from this site. Plate 

 88, <2, shows artifacts taken from Burial No. 6. Besides a shell pend- 

 ant and beads, a double-bitted small celt was found. With the burial 

 of a child in this group there was a steatite ring, as shown. This ring 

 was 1.8 inches outside diameter and 0.8 inch in depth. 



Conclusions 



Site No. 15 was the only prehistoric cemetery found during this 

 survey. All other groups of burials were associated either with caves 

 or mounds. For this reason it was most unfortunate that it was not 

 possible to carry on excavation over a larger area at this site. 



The rather meager excavation permitted definitely suggested that 

 the cemetery had once been a village site in which storage bins had 

 been dug. When such storage bins were emptied of their supplies 

 they later were used as refuse pits. Sometimes burials were made in 

 them, these burials being covered with rubbish of the village, which 

 contained mussel shells and potsherds. 



Flexed burials predominated and the use of shallow bowls as mor- 

 tuary offerings seemed to be general. 



From the material recovered there appears to be very little, if any, 

 connection between this site and any other site investigated during 

 the survey. The entire absence of any evidence of wooden structures 

 seems significant, and hardly to be accounted for by the relatively 

 small area investigated. 



Site No. 16.— TAYLOR FARM MOUND 



The farm of Dr. Samuel Taylor is 3% miles west of Clinton, 

 Anderson County, Tenn. It is on Clinch River and lies near High- 

 way No. 61. This particular site, a circular earth mound about 30 



