Art in Shell of the Ancient Americans: Second annual report of the Bureau of Ethnology to the Secretary of the Smithsonian Institution, 1880-81, pages 179-306Holmes, William Henry
History
Art in Shell of the Ancient Americans: Second annual report of the Bureau of Ethnology to the Secretary of the Smithsonian Institution, 1880-81, pages 179-306
Holmes, William Henry
Indian art; Indians -- Antiquities
The gorget presented in Fig. 1 of this plate is copied from
Schoolcraft.[132] It was taken, along with many other interesting
relics, from one of the ossuaries at Beverly, Canada West. It is formed
from some large sea shell, and is three inches in width by three and
three-fourths inches in length. Its perforations are four in number, and
are so placed as to be conveniently used either for suspension by a
single cord or for fixing firmly by means of two or more cords. It seems
to hold a middle place between pendants proper and the pierced tablets
under consideration.[133]
The unique specimen given in Fig. 2 is from Cedar Keys, Florida, but
whether from a grave or a shell-heap I am at present unable to state. In
its perforations, which are large and doubly conical, it resembles very
closely the typical tablet of stone. The outline is peculiar; being
rounded at the top, it grows broader toward the base like a celt, and
terminates at the outer corners in well-rounded points, the edge between
being ornamented with a series of notches or teeth. It has been cut from
the wall of a _Busycon perversum_, and is sharply curved. The surface is
roughened by time, but there is no evidence of wear by use either in the
perforations or in the notches at the base.
[Illustration: PL. L--PERFORATED PLATES.
1. Ornament from Beverly, C. W.
2. Ornament from Florida.
3, 4. Objects from the Grave Creek Mound, Va.
5. Perforated plate from Ohio.]
In studying these remarkable specimens the fact that they so seldom show
marks of use presents itself for explanation. Dr. Charles Rau, whose
opinions in such matters are always worthy of consideration, remarks
"that at first sight one might be inclined to consider them as objects
of ornament, or as badges of distinction; but this view is not
corroborated by the appearance of the perforations, which exhibit no
trace of that peculiar abrasion produced by constant suspension. The
classification of the tablets as 'gorgets,' therefore, appears to be
erroneous."[134]
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account