1892,] Shell Heaps of Florida. 921 
The theory that the shell fish were eaten without recourse 
to cooking would seem untenable, since too many shells are 
found in perfect condition. It is true that a certain propor- 
tion of the ampullariz and paludine (about ten per cent. in 
some of the heaps) is perforated, and that these perforations 
were artificially made, since there are no predatory fresh-water 
mollusks ; still it is difficult to see of what assistance such a 
perforation would be in the extraction of the shell fish without 
the aid of boiling water. It is therefore apparent that the 
subject of the culinary methods of the savages’ who built the 
earlier shell heaps of the St. John’s—a question never 
before touched upon—opens a field for careful research. 
NOTE C. 
SIZE OF THE SHELLS OF THE MOUNDS AS COMPARED TO 
RECENT SHELLS OF THE SAME SPECIES. 
While the shells of ampullariz and paludine from certain 
shell heaps greatly exceed in size those of recent specimens, as 
the subjoined table, kindly compiled by Mr. H. A. Pilsbry of 
the Academy of Natural Sciences of Philadelphia, will prove, 
the shells met with in certain other mounds of the St. John’s 
show little, if any, excess in size over living specimens to be 
found in the neighborhood. In a number of the older mounds 
(if absence of pottery be taken as an indication of greater 
antiquity, and there seems to be no reason why it should not) 
shells are much smaller than in certain mounds at times but 
a few miles distant, where pottery is found in abundance. It 
would seem therefore, that there must have been a middle 
period when these fresh-water shell fish attained their highest 
degrée of development, and that that period was reached after 
the completion of certain shell heaps and during the construc- 
tion of others. Neither Buffalo Bluff, Orange Mound nor the 
portion of the shell heap on Hitchen’s Creek, where very large 
shells were found by the writer, can be considered as belong- 
ing to the older shell heaps of the St. John’s. 
*Lewis Morgan (Ancient Society, New York, 1877) draws the line between sav- 
agery and barbarism at the point where pottery comes into use. The distinction is 
approved by Fiske “ The Discovery of America” vol. 1, page 24, et seq. 
