DESCRIPTION AND COMPARISON

Figure 14. Bowls(1-3. Straight sided bowls with flat bases, 4. Old Town Red slipped shallow bowl, 5. A typical shallow bowl)

Jars range in size from small vessels of perhaps a pint capacity to vessels of several gallons. Only the smaller jars occurred as burial furniture, however. The larger jars have been reconstructed from sherds found in refuse pits and so are part of the domestic complex. Most of the jars have some form of strap handle and seem to have been the only vessel form decorated by incising or by punching out nodes. Such examples of incising as are evidenced in this collection are very poorly executed (Fig. 9).

This vessel form was very largely a mortuary form with little apparent value on the domestic scene. This is particularly true of the long, narrow necked vessels. These often showed specialized or individualized treatment by the addition of ridges or collars of clay at the base of the neck, occasionally at the midpoint of the body (Fig. 15;2) and by the variation of treatment of the base so that in this collection no one form could be called standard. There was a tendency, however to flatten and then indent the bottom of the bottles. Other basal embellishments included a narrow truncated base and angular forms (Fig. 15;1, 2, 3, 4). Our most interesting bottle was found on the floor of house three (Fig. 15;5). It was crudely made but uniquely shaped—reminiscent almost of a Grecian urn. An elongated globular body with a short and narrow neck. Strap handles run from the rim to the shoulder, but not out to its full width.

Figure 15. Water Bottles

As a check against interpretation and as a means of getting an idea of possible relationships of the Neeley’s Ferry Plain vessels found elsewhere, each vessel was taken up separately. The procedure used consisted first in describing the vessel, and secondly any comparisons that could be made.

The vessels were roughly classified and then evaluated in order. First was a broken water bottle that has had an angular ring base which has a fillet at the base of the neck. The body is sub-globular, tending toward carination but not enough so that there was agreement that it is carinated (No. 75 found with burial 21). A similar vessel is shown by Griffin (1952, p. 320) and is identified with the New Madrid focus. Griffin (1952, plate 124K) shows a vessel that is similar coming from the St. Francis area. Williams (1956) in his thesis, has included the New Madrid Focus in the Cairo Lowland which he notes as a Phase. Another similar vessel is a Neely’s Ferry Plain bottle coming from Monette, Arkansas (Phillips, et al., 1951, Fig. 105, F). It seems from the references that this particular vessel is relatively typical of the St. Francis Malden Plain area but could have some relationship to the Cairo Lowland area.

Another water bottle has an annular ring base that is perforated (No. 189, burial 35). The body is sub-globular and is definitely carinated. The neck is long and flares at the opening and the vessel surface is burnished. It is classed as Neeley’s Ferry Plain due to the prevalence of large flakes of shell which show on the surface. It is comparable to a vessel figured in Phillips, et. al., (1951, Fig. 103f) noted as a Neeley’s Ferry or Bell Plain bottle that comes from the St. Francis River near Monette, Arkansas.

The next bottle (F. S. 60 with burial 17) has a globular body, a long neck and flares slightly at the opening. The base is flat. It is a Neeley’s Ferry Plain vessel. The overall bottle shape seems to be a generalized one and none could be found with which it compared very thoroughly. A similar Neeley’s Ferry Plain water bottle (F. S. 88 with burial 24) also has an almost globular body with a flat base but this vessel has a fillet at the base of the neck and the neck is slightly flaring. A vessel somewhat similar to this is figured on plate 3 of Potter and Evers (1880) in the center at the top of the page. The vessel shown came from southeastern Missouri. A broken water bottle (F. S. 406, house 2), was associated with the fireplace in house two. It compares very favorably with specimen number 60 but is somewhat carinated similar to specimen number 75. The neck is missing. A Neeley’s Ferry Plain long necked water bottle (F. S. 81, burial 23), has a globular body but has a flat base which extends from the body and is similar in external appearance to an annular ring base. The neck contracts toward the opening and has a slightly smaller diameter at the opening. The body shape and base are somewhat similar to Keno Trailed shown in the Belcher Mound report plate 112 A through D (Webb, 1959). The neck shape is similar to Sanders Plain (Suhm, et. al., 1954). The neck shape also approaches that of the Spiro Engraved (Baerreis, 1957, pl. 64, A, D, F, G and H). However, theneck does not contract as much at the opening. It appears that this neck shape may be derived from or at least be related to the neck shapes in the Caddo area.

A broken water bottle or a jar (FS 118, burial 27) is not readily identifiable as to exact form. The body of the vessel is sub-globular and the base is somewhat rounded. Perhaps it was a short necked vessel. A short necked (FS 76, burial 22) Neeley’s Ferry Plain jar is broken. It is a sub-globular shaped vessel with a flat base that is very similar in body shape to vessel number 60. Another short necked water bottle (FS 39, burial 15) has a globular body with a flattened and depressed base. This compares with a Neeley’s Ferry vessel (Phillips, et. al., 1951: Fig. 104A) from Cross county, Arkansas. There is some uncertainty concerning the type base on this vessel. Another specimen (FS 191, burial 34) is a short necked water bottle that has a sub-globular body and a depressed base. It is similar to field specimen 39 but the body is not quite as globular.

A very unusual vessel, also Neeley’s Ferry Plain (FS 418), was found associated with house 3. It is a water bottle form but has two strap handles (Fig. 15;5). It is somewhat similar to a vessel from Cross county, Arkansas (Phillips, et. al., 1951: Fig. 93D). The latter has a much wider opening and the body is much more globular.

The next group of vessels consists of plates and bowls. An Old Town Red plate or bowl (FS 119, burial 27) is painted both inside and out. It has a flat disk bottom. The one vessel that it seems to compare with in general shape is a Sanders Plain (Suhm, et. al., 1954; pl. 60, D) which is of a different temper but is partly red filmed. A plate or shallow bowl has approximately the same shape as that of the Old Town Red but is Neeley’s Ferry Plain (FS 313, burial 37). It seems to be in the same tradition because the lip is flattened in the same manner as the Old Town Red plate. The rims on these plates are indistinct, grading into the bowl wall. The other plate form (FS 145, house 1) is not quite as well done as the two previously described but is approximately the same shape and has the same characteristics. It is also a Neeley’s Ferry Plain plate and is much like the two preceding except it is larger than the others. An example of a plate that is somewhat similar in shape and which is red filmed or red painted, and thus an Old Town Red vessel, is shown in Evers (1880: pl. 17, Fig. 173).

Bowls are the next group of vessels. One is a shallow bowl (FS 25 burial 7) of Neeley’s Ferry Plain ware. It has a rounded lip. It compares very closely with two vessels from Cross County, Arkansas (Phillips, et. al., 1951: Fig. 100 F and G). Another shallow bowl (FS 104, burial 25) is of the same type and general shape. A slightly different bowl (FS 90, burial 24) (Fig. 16) has notches around the edge of the lip giving it a pie-crust effect and it is much the same as one from Mississippi county, Arkansas (Evers, 1880, Fig. 100 F and G).

Straight sided bowls (FS 35 burial 12 and FS 61 burial 17) of Neeley’s Ferry Plain ware have relatively straight sides, rounded bases and rounded lips and compare to Sanders Plain (Suhm, et. al., 1954: pl. 60 B, D, E). The bowls are similar to one that is smaller in size that was found in a house on the Lofton Site I, 23SN42, in the Table Rock Reservoir, Missouri (Chapman, personal communication).

Figure 16. Pottery Vessels with Burial 24

Two bowls, marked as field specimen 190, occurred with burial 33. The field notes mention only one bowl and no picture was made of the burial. One bowl is plain (Suhm, et. al., 1954: pl. 60B), and the other is straight sided of Neeley’s Ferry Plain paste which has a series of nodes placed opposite each other, four on three sides and three on one side (Fig. 14;3). No vessels could be found that were comparable.

A Neeley’s Ferry Plain bowl (FS 36 burial 12) has an incurved side and a somewhat rounded, almost flat base. It compares in shape with a Barkman Engraved bowl shown in plate 4,C (Suhm, et. al., 1954). Also similar in shape is F in the same plate. Several of the engraved types from the Caddoan area have somewhat similarly shaped bowls represented within them and it seems very possible that this bowl shape derives from that general area.

A small bowl (FS 26) is Neeley’s Ferry Plain. It is relatively deep and steep sided with a rounded bottom. It was unassociated with any feature. It is roughly made and nothing could be found to compare it with.

Two jars of the same type but differing in size are of importance in the interpretation. One is a large jar (FS 419, house 3) of globular shape with a recurved rim. The other is a miniature jar of the same type (FS 89, burial 24) (Fig. 16right). Both have two bifurcated strap handles. The large vessel seems to be the standard utility ware of the Neeley’s Ferry Plain and of the widespread so-called Mississippi Plain. A vessel very similar is shown in a group of shell tempered ones from Middle Mississippi features at Moundville (Griffin, 1952; Fig. 151: 4). The small vessel associated with the burial was probably made specifically as a grave offering rather than for utilitarian purposes. This tends to support the suggestion made earlier that the whole vessels found with burials are representative of mortuary customs rather than a true representation of the pottery characteristically used domestically.

A decorated pottery vessel (FS 426) was found associated with house 3. It is Neeley’s Ferry paste, has a bifurcated handle and has a decoration that is a series of incised half moon designs on the shoulder, each of three lines similar to Matthews Incised decoration. The incising is crude on the vessel and it is suspected that this might be an influence from the Cairo Lowland area where Matthews Incised is much better done and is more prominent. Another Neeley’s Ferry Plain jar (FS 13) with the bifurcated strap handles has a design on it that is similar to the Matthews Incised and it also has a series of punch and bosses associated with the design. A vessel similar to this is shown in Porter and Evers (1880; pl. 12, center right). On this same plate are two other vessels with the punch and boss impressions both of which are middle Mississippi types from southeastern Missouri. The incised decoration and bosses are also shown on vessels found at the Matthews site (Walker and Adams 1941; p. 116, pl. 15, A and B).

There are three other vessels from the site. One is a water bottle (FS 2, burial 1) which has a raised portion rather than a fillet at the base of the neck and which has a straight long neck slightly tapering toward the opening. Similar to it is a long necked Neeley’s Ferry Plain vessel (FS 125, burial 28) with a carination which is partly filleted. The base is flat. The last of the three is one with a cut base. It is a relatively long straight necked water bottle. There is no information concerning its location on the site.

The sherd analysis gives a picture of the domestic ceramic complex. A study of the whole vessels indicates the mortuary wares and shapes used by these people. That these are not the same as the domestic styles is clearly shown from the data inTable 4. The 31 complete or restorable vessels from Lawhorn constituted 76% mortuary types. The other 24% came from house floors and refuse pits to give a picture of the domestic wares. Except for the one unusual strap handled water bottle, these were bowls and jars of assorted size. While some shallow bowls and a few plate forms were identified from sherds no complete vessels of these types were found on the domestic scene. Shallow bowls in their complete state were entirely within the mortuary list of finds. The difference in vessel form as indicated by potsherds from the domestic complex and whole vessels for this mortuary complex is tabulated inTable 4. In column III only those vessels found with burials have been tabulated to give a more precise picture of the mortuary ceramic complex. This will point out how nearly the complete vessel inventory is indicative of the mortuary class. In addition to vessel type it will be noted that there is an impressive rise in the number of vessels with flat bases in the mortuary vessel group as compared to the evidence from the potsherd collection.

It becomes clear that while complete pottery vessels present an accurate ceramic picture it is a specialized one and different from that of the sherd count analysis. The difference may be a direct reflection of different segments of the village life pattern, the funerary customs on the one hand and home life on the other.

Other interpretations might be made on the same pottery and potsherd collection. Variation of mortuary wares between major towns could easily exist while utility wares of each followed a more widespread and fundamental pattern so that little variation would be apparent between two such towns if judged from potsherds, but a pronounced difference if judged by complete vessels.

With the early type pottery, or with one assumed to be early, the conclusion was reached that the best way to describe the sand tempered wares would be to call them “sand tempered plain,” “sand tempered cord marked” and “sand tempered fabric impressed.” The sand tempered plain is similar to Thomas Plain in the lower valley (Phillips, et. al., 1951; 141-2) and to Barnes Plain in the Cairo Lowland (Williams, 1956; 204). The sand tempered cord marked is similarto the Blue Lakes Cord marked in the Lower Valley (Phillips, et. al., 1951: 142-4) and to Barnes Cord marked in the Cairo Lowland (Williams, 1956: 204). The fabric impressed sand tempered sherds are similar to the Twin Lakes Fabric Impressed (Phillips, et. al., 1951: 144-5) in the lower valley and similar to the fabric impressed occurring in the Barnes series in the Cairo Lowland. It does not seem advisable to name the sand tempered sherds that are from the Lawhorn site as separate types. Further, the distribution of the Lower Valley types Thomas Plain, Blue Lake Cord marked and Twin Lakes Fabric Impressed appear to be too far away to equate them with the Lawhorn series on the basis of the sample at Lawhorn. The same can be said for the Barnes series.

The pottery was first classified with the aid of books and advice of several archaeologists. Before publication a check of the pottery was made resulting in the re-evaluation of a few of the types. Most important was the declassification of incised sherds other than Wallace Incised. Further, the painted wares were classed as Carson Red on Buff and Nodena Red and White only.

A search of the literature on southeastern pottery was done to try to find the time period in which the Lawhorn pottery fitted. According to Phillips, Ford and Griffin (1951: 132-133), the Carson Red on Buff and Nodena Red and White are included under the term Avenue Painted and this ware extends into period B about half way. Wallace Incised, although it is primarily a late type, in period A, has been found on sites extending all the way to the end of period C. The other incised types are somewhat similar to Barton Incised and Kent Incised, but neither type could be definitely identified. Barton Incised has been found in the St. Francis area on sites extending back almost to Period D, and Kent Incised occurs at least halfway into Period B. Due to the small number of sherds and uncertainty of identification of type all of the incised sherds except Wallace were thrown into an unclassified category.

On the basis of the pottery types, the most predominant being Neeley’s Ferry Plain which starts at approximately the beginning of Period B or Period C and maintains this maximum popularity to the end of Period B, it was decided that this site probably falls in the latter part of Period B.

These were quite common on the site, particularly in areas of house concentration. A total of 33 either whole or fragmentary specimens were catalogued. Of these, six were the plain disks so common to Mississippian sites (Fig. 17:1) while 27 were perforated. All of the perforated specimens had a hole through the center of the disk and may well have been spindle whorls (Fig. 17:2). These ranged in size from 3 to 8 cm. in diameter. Nine of the spindle whorl type disks had well smoothed edges while the remaining edges were either roughly smoothed or unmodified after breaking. All of them were of Neeley’s Ferry Plain except one made from an Old Town Red sherd. The drilled disks were most commonly found in association with the houses, although several specimens were found in refuse pits. Four of the perforated disks had more than one hole drilled in them (Fig. 17:3). One had two completed holes with a third just started on one surface. Another example had a central hole and another drilling had been started from both sides but not carried to completion (Fig. 17:4).

In eleven of the drilled disks the holes were at an angle, probably due to improper drilling, the angle drilling from one side being necessary to meet the perforation from the opposite side.

There were six unperforated disks which ranged in size from 2 to 6 cm. in diameter. Two of these had smoothed edges while the others had been roughly shaped only. The smallest of these disks had a smoothed edge with a groove incised into it.

Seven examples of drilled pottery were found of which two are perforated rims, the holes being drilled after firing. One piece has been perforated several times. One of the drilled rimsherds, (FS 124) was on the chest of burial 28. It may have been used as a pendant. Another specimen, (FS 225) had three incompleted holes as well as the perforation. One perforated sherd was Old Town Red, another sand-tempered cord-marked and the rest were Neeley’s Ferry Plain.

The projectile points found at the Lawhorn site presented a variety of forms and sizes. The wide range of types seemed at first very difficult to explain. Further, pictures and written definitions of points were very hard to reconcile with the specimens at hand. An example of this difficulty was a point that seemed to answer all the requirements of the Motley type (Ford, Phillips, Haag 1955; p. 129), but which failed the test of visual examination by Ford. How many of the others originally typed would fail a similar visual examination test is open to question. Therefore, a separation of like with like form was made and unless a fair number of a particular type was present, no certain identification of type was made.

There was a total of 95 identifiable points of which 84% were surface finds. Only 4% were found in the general midden, but 12% were at the very base of the deposit. These points were first separated into 26 types, however eighteen of these were represented by one or, at most, two specimens. Only eight of the types were present in sufficient numbers to represent a local industry.

Figure 17. Pottery Disks

In theory, at least, points found in repetitive numbers should represent a local industry and so aid in identifying their makers. The one-of-a-kind types would likely represent individual variation, trade, or the result of some Indian’s collecting habits.

All of the projectile points except one which appears to be missing were separated according to the characteristics of size, shape and general process of manufacture. The 95 projectile points were placed into four major groups and a number of smaller units.

One general arrowhead type seemed to be characteristic and made up more than a third of the total number of points from the site. These were 34 corner notched points with straight or rounded bases that varied in length from 44 mm. to 22 mm. and in width measured at the shoulders 11 to 18 mm. (Fig. 18;1-3). There is a rather great range in thickness due to the fact that some of the stone was of poor quality and could not be thinned properly. The usual thickness was 2 to 5 mm. This particular point type is, in general, similar to the Scallorn type (Bell, 1960; 84, pl. 42). It also compares fairly well with the points that come from the Matthews site and similar sites in the Cairo lowland area. It is approximately the same as the Table Rock Corner Notched arrowhead from the Table Rock area southwestern Missouri (Bray, 1956, Fig. 18, Rows 4-5, and p. 126). A secondary type that occurs with this and which is of some probable importance is made up of ten specimens. These have a relatively straight stem but otherwise are very similar to the major point type (Fig. 18;4). The points are similar to the Bonham points (Bell, 1960, 10 pl. 5). The dimensions on these points are as follows. The length ranges from 27 to 38 mm. and the width ranges from 12 to 19 mm.; the thickness is on the average 5 to 6 mm.

Probably associated with these two types and considered to be a part of the projectile point complex of the Mississippi occupation is a small ovoid type made up of seventeen specimens some of which may have been blank forms since they do not appear to be finished (Fig. 19;1). The range in length of these specimens is from 22 to 37 mm. Thickness ranging from 4 to 8 mm varies considerably probably due to the fact that some are blank forms rather than finished products. Width at the base which is, for the most part, the widest position of the points varies from 14 to 20 mm. These points are somewhat similar to the Catan points, (Bell, 1958; 14 pl. 7). The Catan points range from 500 to 800 A.D. according to Bell’s compilations. The Lawhorn specimens are also similar in some respects to Young points (Bell, 1960; 100, pl. 50). Young points supposedly range from 1200 to 1500 A.D. They also compare rather closely with ovate forms, Category “O,” found abundantly only in the late marginal Mississippi Complex at the Rice Site (Bray, 1956, Fig. 13, and p. 79).

Figure 18. Corner Notched and Stemmed Arrowheads(1-3. Scallorn or Table Rock Corner Notched. 4. Bonham)

Figure 19. Ovoid and Trianguloid Arrowheads(1. Catan, 2. Young, 3. Maude, 4. Fort Ancient, 5. Mississippi triangular, 6. unclassified)

There are a few triangular points that may be of some diagnostic value. One group of three are concave based triangular points and are relatively large in size. The one nearly complete specimen is 38 mm. long and 13 wide (Fig. 19;3). These perhaps can be compared with the Maude point (Bell 1958; 48, pl 24). They also might be comparable with the Fresno points (Bell, 1960; 44, pl. 22). However, these points seem to be much shorter than the Maude variety and it is probable that those found on the Lawhorn site are more comparable with the Maude if with either of the two. The Maude points supposedly date between 1200 and 1500 A.D. The Fresno points are thought to date from 800 to 900 A.D. along to 1600 A.D.

There are also two triangular points with straight base and these are not very comparable to any others except the general Mississippian type (Fig. 19;5). One triangular form is very long, serrated (Figure 19;4) and is strikingly similar to the Fort Ancient point (Bell, 1960; 40, pl. 20), which supposedly dates between 1200 and 1600 A.D. The length of this point is 46 mm. and the width is 13 mm. One other point compares favorably with some that occur in the Table Rock Reservoir area in southwestern Missouri associated with the late complex which includes shell tempered pottery. It is a side notched variety with a straight base and is 41 mm. long and 14 mm. wide (Fig. 19;6). The length width proportions are similar to those of the most prominent arrowhead types on the site. Thus, it may have been made by someone on the site.

The preceding types seem to form a general complex that is associated primarily with the Mississippian occupation and there is no indication that there has been any great deal of influence in the area except from the same directions (North and South) that were noted in regard to the pottery. The Scallorn point type is similar to those from the Cairo lowland area and the Bonham is similar to those from the Caddo area from the south. It is expected that both are good Malden Plain, St. Francis River area types.

One other type might possibly be associated with the Mississippian occupation and it is one that can be classed as Gary (Bell, 1958; 28 pl. 14). There are four specimens (Fig. 20;1). Gary is supposed to date somewhere between 2000 B.C. to 600 A.D. but the evidence in the Table Rock area indicates that this probably dates more nearly between 1000 A.D. and 1500 A.D. (Marshall, 1958). The fact that the Gary type has been found in association with earlier periods elsewhere makes it questionable to place it with the Mississippian occupation here. It should be pointed out that it might be associated with the Mississippian component for the type was definitely associated with the latest occupation in the Table Rock area on upper White River.

The prominent type that seems to be associated with the earliest occupation or the component associated with the sand tempered pottery on the site is a relatively small dart point that is a stemmed form with a convex base and has little or no shoulder (Fig. 20,2-5). The range in size is from 38 mm. to 51 mm. long and 19 to 27 mm. wide. They are relatively thick (6 to 12 mm.) points, and there are seven represented from the site.

Figure 20. Stemmed Projectile Points(1. Gary. 2-5. Unclassified)

There are no other main groupings but there were a number of points about the same size that could not be readily classified (Fig. 21;1-2). One in this group is very similar to the Hardin point (Bell, 1960; 56, pl. 28) for it is beveled, serrated, and has the correct shape but it is much smaller than the Hardin points usually are (Fig. 21;3). This is not thought to be a Hardin point but is perhaps in the same general tradition. There are two relatively large points that are somewhat similar to the Burkett points and these may have some association with the main ones from the site (Fig. 21;6). One point (Fig. 21;4) is comparable to the Motley (Bell, 1958; 62, 131) which supposedly dates between 1300 and 200 B.C. A projectile point similar in type to Snyder (Fig. 21;5) was missing from the collections when they were restudied. Another point (Fig. 21;7) compares very favorably with the Uvalde (Bell, 1960; 92, p. 146), which supposedly dates somewhere between 4000 and 1000 B.C.

It is very probable that some of the early points were picked up by the people making the sand tempered pottery. For that matter they may have been picked up by the later occupants, the Mississippi people. Certainly, it is felt that these cannot be used for dating the early occupation on the site. There is no assurance, for example, that the site was not used by people earlier than the time of the sand tempered pottery. There is no evidence from stratification or superposition from the excavations, that indicated more than two occupations of the site.

The points that did not seem to have like members present were placed in a general unclassified category and some of these have been illustrated in case they might have some significance that would aid in placing the early or the late components on the site.

Chipped stone tools were relatively uncommon at Lawhorn and are typified inFigure 22. Number 1 and 2 are unifacial thumb nail scrapers. Number 3 is a reworked projectile point while numbers 4 and 5, are fine pointed drills or scrapers. Number 6 is a graver.

One large tool showed a good work polish and also indications that it had been resharpened (Fig. 22;7). It was 7 cm. wide and 15.5 cm. long. There were several flint fragments showing a high degree of work polish which came from similar type tools.

Two chipped and polished celts were found. One of these was 3 cm. wide in the center and 2.4 cm. at the bit. It was 7.5 cm. long but broken so that the true length could only be estimated at perhaps 10 cm. This was a chisel type of tool. The second specimen was made by removing large flakes over two faces to give a crude hand axe type of specimen 8 cm. × 4.5 cm. × 2 cm. thick. Work polish was evident on the highest portions of the surface.

There were five sandstone mortars found on this site, two of which were surface finds and which measured respectively (1) 15 cm. in diameter, 6.5 thick with a central depression of 1.5 cm. and (2) 7.5 cm. × 13 cm. × 6 cm. thick. The latter was utilized on both surfaces. The first of these two specimens, made of red sandstone, was the best of the mortars from this site (Fig. 23;2).

Figure 21. Projectile Points(1-2. Unclassified. 3. Hardin-like. 4. Motley. 5. Snyders Notched. 6. Burkett-like. 7. Uvalde)

Figure 22. Chipped Stone Tools(1-2. Thumbnail end scrapers. 3. Reworked projectile point scraper. 4-5. Drills. 6. Graver. 7. Adz)

Associated with house 1 and located near the fire-basin were two mortars. One of these was 20 × 15 × 8 cm. and had a central depression of 2 cm. The reverse side was used as a whetstone. The other mortar was much smaller, measuring 9 × 13 × 4.5 cm., basin shaped on one side and bearing use marks of a crude pestle on the other. Associated with these two mortars were six stones showing wear as crude unmodified stone pestles (Fig. 23;1). Feature 12, a fire basin, also had a mortar and pestle association. A small mortar 8 × 10 × 5 cm. had five stone pestles with it. Four of these stones showed considerable wear while the fifth was not used.

All of these mortars and pestles were basically unmodified field stones or river pebbles which gradually received some alteration of shape through use.

There were nine abraders, two of which are of particular interest. One showed heavy use as an abrader on one side and three edges. Much of this use was as a sharpener for small pointed objects. The other side, while showing use as an abrader, was also cupped for grinding purposes. Over much of the surface, powdered yellow ochre had become impregnated into the porous sandstone. Another specimen showed long wide grooves on two surfaces while another had been ground flat. This portion of the stone was heavily impregnated with red ochre. The other abrading stones were unmodified pieces except for the miscellaneous grooves resulting from use (Fig. 24;1, top).

Four asymmetrical whetstones were found in the general midden. These were about 5 × 8 cm. by 1.5 cm. One of these was bitted at one end much like a celt. Their use as whetstones was rather obvious (Fig. 24;1, bottom).

The use of potsherds for abrading is reported from the Mississippi alluvial valley area as far south as Memphis. It is a very minor trait. The occasional finds point up this usage as a stop-gap measure when a good stone abrader was not immediately available. This is a thing to be expected in the relatively stoneless alluvial valley. At the Lawhorn site 16 sherd abraders have been found. These show the same haphazard use over their surfaces as do the stone abraders. Ten of them were from Neeley’s Ferry shell tempered sherds and six were made from the sand tempered sherds. Two of the Neeley’s Ferry abraders show only the narrow pointed type of abrading groove while the other eight show the full length and width abrading slots such as might have been used for arrow shaft straightening and smoothing (Fig. 24;2, left). All of the sand tempered sherd abraders show the pointed narrow type of groove none of which are large enough to be used as shaft grinders (Fig. 24;2, right). In spite of the fact that it appears that sand tempered and shell tempered sherds represent two components with perhaps a considerable time span between them, it seems most probable that this use of sherd abraders is to be linked with the Mississippian component and that the use of the earlier sand tempered sherds by the later people was simply a convenience procedure. Two burned clay masses, of very sandy clay, were also used as abraders. These were the pointed narrow type.

Figure 23. Mortars and Pestles

Figure 24. Stone and Pottery Abraders and Stone Pipe(1. Stone abraders, 2. Potsherd abraders, 3. Stone pipe)

Two anvilstones were found on the surface, one made from limestone and the other from sandstone. Their opposing surfaces seemed to have been used as grinders or pestles. Here again, there is multiple usage of rough unmodified stones. They were seldom pecked or ground to a shape, rather they were modified through use.

Seven pebble hammerstones were found in the general excavations. Most of them were either sandstone or chert and of nondescript shape ranging in size from 4 to 8 cm. in diameter. Many of the sandstone specimens showed use as grinding Stones as well as hammerstones, again pointing up the multiple tool use of pebbles. The chert pieces were not shaped, showing only the natural weathered surfaces except where they had been used.

Six fragments of celts were found, five of which were granite and one hematite. The five granite specimens consisted of three bit ends and two poll ends and the hematite specimen was only the central shaft section. These celts were all small, probably not over 10 to 18 cm. long. The bits were about 4.8 cm. wide with thickness averaging 2.5 cm. The poll ends were somewhat narrower than the bits but not pronouncedly so.

Only one pipe was found but it may be of considerable value for interpretation of the relationship of the site to other areas. It was picked up by Mr. Lawhorn when his plow turned over a burial. The pipe is made of stone and has a non-functional stem projection commonly seen on pipes from Spiro (Baerreis, 1957 p. 25). The bowl is quite large and at right angles to the stem (Fig. 24;3). The bowl is slightly elliptical in outline with both sides flattened on their lower portions. The bottom of the bowl and the stem projection have also been flattened while the functional portion of the stem is round in cross section. This is about ⅓ longer than the depth of the bowl. The projection is quite small. There is a crudely incised groove around the stem.

Bone tools were of common occurrence in the general midden of the site and were also associated with house patterns 1 and 3. Six deer ulna awls and three ulna awls from small animals (Fig. 25;1); ten splinter awls (Fig. 25;4) and a single fish fin awl; a deer cannon bone beamer (Fig. 25;2) and a deer scapula hoe (Fig. 25;3) make up most of the inventory of bone tools. One deer mandible appeared to have been utilized since a dull work polish is noticeable on it. The teeth are fractured on one side as if broken off in the course of use.

Bone beads were found associated with house patterns and were made from bird bones (Fig. 26;1 bottom). One measured 1.5 cm. and another 1.3 × 1.5 cm. and a third .8 × 2.6 cm. A large bird bone had been in the process of bead manufacture (Fig. 26;1, top). The bone had been cut at each end then circled in two places with cuts that hadn’t been completed.

Antler tips were utilized for various purposes. Specimens included two barbed projectile points and one unfinished tip with a drilled base. Twelve other tips were probably flaking tools.

Brickette and daub were so scarce that many pieces were catalogued as specimens. These present an interesting class of materials and give aid far beyond their intrinsic worth in telling the Lawhorn story. Once again this points up the value of saving everything found during the course of field work.

There is no way of knowing how much of this material has been lost as a result of erosion and the almost melting away of softer pieces in the heavy rains of the passing centuries. Slightly over 100 pieces which were eroded beyond identification were picked up during the course of excavation. They represent either daub or broken clay objects of unknown use. There were 103 pieces of daub, broken into various sizes, which had been heavily impregnated with grass. Six of these specimens show impressions of small poles which would have been from 2 to 5 cm. in diameter (Fig. 26;2). The composition of the fired material ranges from a sandy clay to a white ball clay with a heavy sand admixture. It should be noted that the natural soils of the Lawhorn site do not contain enough clay to fire into a brickette form. Consequently such brickette as was found must be the result of clays brought in from a distance.

Most specimens were rather soft and it is doubtful if they had ever been used as heating stones. Many samples show some surface smoothing as if they were portions of floors, firebasins or perhaps house walls. It is presumed that if the daub was used on house walls, the firing was accidental as the result of house burnings, that only a minor portion of such daub would survive. However, judging from the burned clay floors and fire basins found, it is evident that burned clay, as such, fired well enough to withstand the erosion of time. A higher percentage of wall daub should have been found if it had been extensively used.

Figure 25. Bone Tools(1. Ulna awls, 2. Beamer, 3. Deer scapula hoe, 4. Splinter awls)

Figure 26. Bone Beads and Burned Clay Daub(1. Cut bone, a step in making beads, and bone beads. 2. Daub with whole cane impressions and evidence of interweaving of canes)

Back to Index Next