16 
edge over on the outside, as seems to have been done on the fragments 
illustrated in Plate II, figures 7 and 8. Other pieces suggest that the 
thinned edge was folded over on the inside. In some cases, as on the frag- 
ment illustrated in Plate VIII, figure 8, a thin layer of clay was luted to 
the margin of the rim 1 . Ornamentation in relief, like that on the fragment 
seen in Plate V, figure 4, was luted on. 
After the walls and the rims were formed the inside was probably 
scraped and smoothed, possibly with the edges and sides of clam shells 
like that in Plate XX, figure 6. Stones, also, may have been used for 
smoothing the surface, for several smooth, oval, and spatulate stones were 
found that show signs of use, and would have served admirably for the 
purpose. 
The exterior paste of most of the pots was welded or malleated either 
by rubbing, scarifying, or paddling. The object in roughening or scarifying 
may have been to overcome the crackling or crazing so often seen on smooth- 
ly finished surfaces. The operation of finishing and smoothing the pots 
seems to have brought the clay to the surface and concealed the coarser 
particles; the surface then shrank more than the interior and in some 
cases broke up into a network of fine cracks, something like a glaze which 
crazes when it does not fit the body. Possibly a pot with a rough surface, 
especially when the roughening also gave a certain decorative effect, 
w r as preferred to a crazed one. Some of the unscarified fragments show 
this crazed or crackled appearance. 
The surface of a few pieces seems to have been roughened by rubbing 
with a wisp of dried grass. 
Most of the fragments are scarified, giving the surface a ridged or 
corrugated appearance. The scratches or grooves are horizontal, oblique, 
or vertical, but mostly horizontal; and they vary in width from one-six- 
teenth to about one-fourth inch. The ragged edges and the rough appear- 
ance of the bottom of the grooves on some of the fragments, suggest that 
the surface had become partly dried before it was scarified. Scarified 
fragments are illustrated in Plate II, figures 1, 2, 3, and 9; Plate IV, figure 2; 
Plate VI, figures 10 and 11; Plate VII, figure 5; Plate IX, figures 1, 3, and 7; 
Plate X, figure 12; Plate XI, figures 1 and 6; Plate XII, figure 10; Plate 
XIII, figures 3, 6, and 11; and Plate XIV, figures 1 and 3. The scratches 
on many fragments cross each other at different angles and in many cases 
give either a cross-hatched or pseudo-textile effect (Plate II, figure 2). 
The writer discovered by actual experiment that similar effects can 
be produced either with a notched or toothed tool, or with a paddle ribbed 
on the flat sides, and drawn along lengthwise. Most of the grooves found 
on the pottery here seem to have been produced with toothed or notched 
tools. 
Pottery from later Neutral sites in the same county is not scarified. 
Parker found scarified pottery at the Erie site near Ripley, N.Y., 2 and 
it has also been found in Wyoming valley, Pennsylvania. 3 
'Part of it has scaled off in this specimen. 
“Parker, A. C.: “Origin of the Iroquois as Suggested by Their Archaeology,’’ American Anthropologist, vol, 
18, p. 487 (1016). 
8 Wren, Christopher; "A Study of North Appalachian Indian Pottery,” Proceedings of the Wyoming Historical 
and Geological Society, Wilkes-Harre, Pa., 1914, Plate 3. 
