SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION--BUREAU OF ETHNOLOGY. PREHISTORIC TEXTILE FABRICS OF THE UNITED STATES, DERIVED FROM IMPRESSIONS ON POTTERY. by WILLIAM H. HOLMES. * * * * * * * * * * * * * * CONTENTS. Page. Introductory 397 First Group 401 Second Group 404 Third Group 413 Fourth Group 416 Fifth Group 417 Sixth Group 418 Miscellaneous 420 ILLUSTRATIONS. [Transcriber's Note:In the original text, the position of illustrations was determined byavailable page space. For this e-text, each figure caption has beenplaced directly _after_ the paragraph describing the figure. Figure 88, which shared a caption with Figure 89, has been shifted down to joinFigure 90. The captions are identical except for number. ] Plate XXXIX. --Pottery, with impressions of textile fabrics 397 Fig. 60. --Cord-marked vessel, Great Britain 399 61. --Cord and fabric marked vessel, Pennsylvania 400 62. --Combination of threads in coffee sacking 401 63. --Section of same 401 64. --Fabric from the ancient pottery of New York 402 65. --Fabric from the ancient pottery of District of Columbia 402 66. --Fabric from the ancient pottery of Arizona 402 67. --Fabric from the caves of Kentucky 403 68. --Fabric from the Swiss Lake Dwellings 403 69. --Fabric from a mound in Ohio 403 70. --Fabric from a mound in Ohio 403 71. --Section of the same 403 72. --Fabric from the ancient pottery of Tennessee 405 73. --Section of same 405 74. --Diagram showing method of weaving 405 75. --Device for making the twist 406 76. --Fabric from the ancient pottery of Tennessee 406 77. --Fabric from the ancient pottery of Georgia 407 78. --Fabric from the ancient pottery of Tennessee 407 79. --Fabric from the ancient pottery of Tennessee 408 80. --Fabric from the ancient pottery of Tennessee 408 81. --Fabric from the ancient pottery of Arkansas 408 82. --Fabric from the ancient pottery of Illinois 409 83. --Fabric from the ancient pottery of Illinois 410 84. --Fabric from the ancient pottery of Missouri 410 85. --Fabric from the ancient pottery of Tennessee 410 86. --Fabric from a copper celt, Iowa 411 87. --Fabric from Vancouver's Island 412 88. --Fabric from the Lake Dwellings of Switzerland 412 89. --Fabric from the Lake Dwellings of Switzerland 412 90. --Fabric from the Lake Dwellings of Switzerland 413 91. --Section of third form of fabric 414 92. --Device for weaving same 414 93. --Fabric from the ancient pottery of Tennessee 414 94. --Fabric from the ancient pottery of Tennessee 414 95. --Fabric from the ancient pottery of Tennessee 414 96. --Fabric from the ancient pottery of Tennessee 415 97. --Fabric from the Northwest coast 415 98. --Fabric from the ancient pottery of Tennessee 416 99. --Fabric from the ancient pottery of Alabama 416 100. --Fabric from the ancient pottery of Iowa 417 101. --Plaiting of an ancient sandal 417 102. --Braiding done by the Lake Dwellers 418 103. --Fabric from the ancient pottery of District of Columbia 419 104. --Fabric from the ancient pottery of North Carolina 419 105. --Fabric from the ancient pottery of North Carolina 420 106. --Net from the Lake Dwellings 420 107. --Fabric from the ancient pottery of New Jersey 421 108. --Fabric from the ancient pottery of New Jersey 421 109. --Fabric from the ancient pottery of New Jersey 422 110. --Fabric from the ancient pottery of Pennsylvania 422 111. --Impression on the ancient pottery of Ohio 423 112. --Impression on the ancient pottery of New Jersey 423 113. --Impression on the ancient pottery of Alabama 423 114. --Impression on the ancient pottery of Maryland 424 115. --Impression on the ancient pottery of Alabama 425 [Illustration: BUREAU OF ETHNOLOGY ANNUAL REPORT 1882 PL. XXXIX 1. POTSHERD. 2. CLAY CAST. 3. POTSHERD. 4. CLAY CAST. 5. POTSHERD. 6. CLAY CAST. A. Hoen & Co. Litho[*illegible*], Baltimore. POTTERY WITH IMPRESSIONS OF TEXTILE FABRICS. ] PREHISTORIC TEXTILE FABRICS OF THE UNITED STATES, DERIVED FROM IMPRESSIONS ON POTTERY. By W. H. Holmes. INTRODUCTORY. It is not my intention in this paper to make an exhaustive study of theart of weaving as practiced by the ancient peoples of this country. Todo this would necessitate a very extended study of the materials usedand of the methods of preparing them, as well as of the arts of spinningand weaving practiced by primitive peoples generally. This would be avery wide field, and one which I have no need of entering. I may statehere, however, that the materials used by savages in weaving theirsimple fabrics consist generally of the fibre of bark, flax, hemp, nettles, and grasses, which is spun into thread of various sizes; or ofsplints of wood, twigs, roots, vines, porcupine quills, feathers, and avariety of animal tissues, either plaited or used in an untwisted state. The articles produced are mats, baskets, nets, bags, plain cloths, andentire garments, such as capes, hats, belts, and sandals. It has been noticed by a few authors that twisted or plaited cords, as well as a considerable variety of woven fabrics, have been usedby primitive tribes in the manufacture and ornamentation of pottery. Impressions of these made in the soft clay are frequently preserved onvery ancient ware, the original fabrics having long since crumbled todust. It is to these that I propose calling attention, their restorationhaving been successfully accomplished in many hundreds of cases bytaking impressions in clay from the ancient pottery. The perfect manner in which the fabric in all its details of plaiting, netting, and weaving can be brought out is a matter of astonishment; thecloth itself could hardly make all the particulars of its constructionmore manifest. The examples presented in the accompanying plate will be veryinstructive, as the fragment of pottery is given on the left, with itsrather obscure intaglio impressions, and the clay cast on the right withthe cords of the fabric in high relief. The great body of illustrationshave been made in pen directly from the clay impressions, and, althoughdetails are more distinctly shown than in the specimens themselves, I believe that nothing is presented that cannot with ease be seen in theoriginals. Alongside of these restorations I have placed illustrationsof fabrics from other primitive sources. There appears to be a pretty general impression that baskets of theordinary rigid character have been extensively used by our ancientpeoples in the manufacture of pottery to build the vessel in or upon;but my investigations tend to show that such is not the case, andthat nets or sacks of pliable materials have been almost exclusivelyemployed. These have been applied to the surface of the vessel, sometimes covering the exterior entirely, and at others only the bodyor a part of the body. The interior surface is sometimes partiallydecorated in the same manner. The nets or other fabrics used have generally been removed before thevessel was burned or even dried. Professor Wyman, in speaking casuallyof the cord-marked pottery of Tennessee, says: "It seems incredible that even an Indian would be so prodigal of time and labor as to make the necessary quantity of well-twisted cord or thread, and weave it into shape for the mere purpose of serving as a mold which must be destroyed in making a single copy. " This remark is, however, based upon a false assumption. The fact thatthe net or fabric has generally been removed while the clay was stillsoft being susceptible of easy proof. I have observed in many casesthat handles and ornaments have been added, and that impressed andincised designs have been made in the soft clay _after_ the removalof the woven fabric; besides this there would be no need of the supportof a net after the vessel had been fully finished and slightly hardened. Furthermore, I have no doubt that these _textilia_ were employed asmuch for the purpose of enhancing the appearance of the vessel as forsupporting it during the process of construction. I have observed, inrelation to this point, that in a number of cases, notably the greatsalt vessels of Saline River, Illinois, the fabric has been appliedafter the vessel was finished. I arrive at this conclusion from havingnoticed that the loose threads of the net-like cover sag or festoontoward the rim as if applied to the inverted vessel, Fig. 82. If the nethad been used to suspend the vessel while building, the threads wouldnecessarily have hung in the opposite direction. In support of the idea that ornament was a leading consideration in theemployment of these coarse fabrics, we have the well-known fact thatsimple cord-markings, arranged to form patterns, have been employedby many peoples for embellishment alone. This was a common practiceof the ancient inhabitants of Great Britain, as shown by Jewett. Theaccompanying cut (Fig. 60) is copied from his work. [1] [Illustration: Fig. 60. --Ancient British vase with cord ornamentation. ] [Footnote 1: Jewett, Llewellynn: Grave mounds and their contents, p. 92. ] It is a remarkable fact that very few entire cord-marked vessels havebeen obtained in this country, although fragments of such are veryplentiful. In Fig. 61 we have an ancient vase from Pennsylvania. It presents acombination of net or basket markings and of separate cord-markings. The regularity of the impressions upon the globular body indicatesalmost unbroken contact with the interior surface of the woven vessel. The neck and rim have apparently received finishing touches byseparately impressing cords or narrow bands of some woven fabric. [Illustration: Fig. 61. --Ancient fabric marked vessel, Pennsylvania. ] Many examples show very irregular markings such as might have been madeby rolling the plastic vessel irregularly upon a woven surface, or bymolding it in an improvised sack made by tying up the margins of a pieceof cloth. It is necessary to distinguish carefully the cord and fabric markingsfrom the stamped designs so common in southern pottery, as well asfrom the incised designs, some of which imitate fabric markings veryclosely. I shall present at once a selection from the numerous examples of thefabrics restored. For convenience of study I have arranged them in sixgroups, some miscellaneous examples being added in a seventh group. For comparison, a number of illustrations of both ancient and moderntextiles are presented. In regard to methods of manufacture but little need be said. Theappliances used have been extremely simple, the work in a vast majorityof cases having been done by hand. It is probable that in many instancesa simple frame has been used, the threads of the web or warp beingfixed at one end and those of the woof being carried through them bythe fingers or by a simple needle or shuttle. A loom with a device forcarrying the alternate threads of the warp back and forth may have beenused, but that form of fabric in which the threads are twisted in pairsat each crossing of the woof could only have been made by hand. The probable methods will be dwelt upon more in detail as the groupsare presented. In verifying the various methods of fabrication I havebeen greatly assisted by Miss Kate C. Osgood, who has successfullyreproduced, in cotton cord, all the varieties discovered, all themechanism necessary being a number of pins set in a drawing board orframe, in the form of three sides of a rectangle, the warp being fixedat one end only and the woof passing back and forth between the lateralrows of pins, as shown in Fig. 74. FIRST GROUP. Fig. 62 illustrates a small fragment of an ordinary coffee sack which Itake as a type of the first group. It is a loosely woven fabric of thesimplest construction; the two sets of threads being interwoven at rightangles to each other, alternate threads of one series passing over andunder each of the opposing series as shown in the section, Fig. 63. [Illustration: Fig. 62. --Type of Group one--portion of a coffee sack. ] [Illustration: Fig. 63. --Section. ] It is a remarkable fact that loosely woven examples of this kind ofcloth are rarely, if ever, found among the impressions upon clay or inthe fabrics themselves where preserved by the salts of copper or bycharring. The reason of this probably is that the combination is suchthat when loosely woven the threads would not remain in place undertension, and the twisted and knotted varieties were consequentlypreferred. It is possible that many of the very irregular impressions observed, inwhich it is so difficult to trace the combinations of the threads, areof distorted fabrics of this class. This stuff may be woven by hand in a simple frame, or by any of theprimitive forms of the loom. In most cases, so far as the impressions upon pottery show, when thisparticular combination is employed, the warp is generally very heavy andthe woof comparatively light. This gives a cloth differing greatly fromthe type in appearance; and when, as is usually the case, the woofthreads are beaten down tightly, obscuring those of the web, theresemblance to the type is quite lost. Examples of this kind of weaving may be obtained from the fictileremains of nearly all the Atlantic States. The specimen presented in Fig. 64 was obtained from a small fragment ofancient pottery from the State of New York. [Illustration: Fig. 64. --Fabric impressed upon ancient pottery, New York. ] It is generally quite difficult to determine which set of threads is thewarp and which the woof. In most cases I have preferred to call the moreclosely placed threads the woof, as they are readily beaten down by abaton, whereas it would be difficult to manipulate the warp threads ifso closely placed. In the specimen illustrated, only the tightly woventhreads of the woof appear. The impression is not sufficiently distinctto show the exact character of the thread, but there are indicationsthat it has been twisted. The regularity and prominence of the ridgesindicate a strong, tightly drawn warp. Fig. 65 represents a form of this type of fabric very common inimpressions upon the pottery of the Middle Atlantic States. Thisspecimen was obtained from a small potsherd picked up near Washington, D. C. The woof or cross-threads are small and uniform in thickness, andpass alternately over and under the somewhat rigid fillets of the web. The apparent rigidity of these fillets may result from the tighteningof the series when the fabric was applied to the plastic surface of thevessel. [Illustration: Fig. 65. --From a fragment of ancient pottery, District of Columbia. ] I present in Fig. 66 the only example of the impression of a wovenfabric found by the writer in two summers' work among the remains of theancient Cliff-Dwellers. It was obtained from the banks of the San JuanRiver, in southeastern Utah. It is probably the imprint of the interiorsurface of a more or less rigid basket, such as are to be seen amongmany of the modern tribes of the Southwest. The character of the warpcannot be determined, as the woof, which has been of moderately heavyrushes or other untwisted, vegetable fillets, entirely hides it. [Illustration: Fig. 66. --From a fragment of ancient Cliff-house pottery. ] The caves of Kentucky have furnished specimens of ancient weaving ofmuch interest. One of these, a small fragment of a mat apparently madefrom the fiber of bark, or a fibrous rush, is illustrated in Fig. 67. [Illustration: Fig. 67. --Fabric from a cave in Kentucky. ] This simple combination of the web and woof has been employed by allancient weavers who have left us examples of their work. The specimengiven in Fig. 68 is the work of the ancient Lake-Dwellers ofSwitzerland. It is a mat plaited or woven of strips of bast, and wasfound at Robenhausen, having been preserved in a charred state. [2]Keller gives another example of a similar fabric of much finer texturein Fig. 8, Pl. CXXXVI. [Illustration: Fig. 68. --Fabric from Swiss Lake-Dwellings. ] [Footnote 2: Keller: Lake-Dwellers. Fig. 2, Pl. CXXXIV. ] An illustration of this form of fabric is given by Foster, [3] andreproduced in Fig. 69. [Illustration: Fig. 69. --Cloth from a mound, Ohio. ] [Footnote 3: Foster: Prehistoric Times. ] In the same place this author presents another form of cloth shown in myFig. 70. In Fig. 71 we have a section of this fabric. These cloths, witha number of other specimens, were taken from a mound on the west side ofthe Great Miama River, Butler County, Ohio. The fabric in both samplesappears to be composed of some material allied to hemp. As his remarkson these specimens, as well as on the general subject, are quiteinteresting, I quote them somewhat at length. "The separation between the fibre and the wood appears to have been as thorough and effectual as at this day by the process of rotting and hackling. The thread, though coarse, is uniform in size, and regularly spun. Two modes of weaving are recognized: In one, by the alternate intersection of the warp and woof, and in the other, the weft is wound once around the warp, a process which could not be accomplished except by hand. In the illustration the interstices have been enlarged to show the method of weaving, but in the original the texture was about the same as that in coarse sail-cloth. In some of the Butler County specimens there is evidently a fringed border. " [Illustration: Fig. 70. --Cloth from a mound, Ohio. ] [Illustration: Fig. 71. --Section. ] In regard to the second specimen described, I would remark that it is avery unusual form, no such combination of the parts having come to mynotice either in the ancient fabrics themselves or in the impressions onpottery. In a very closely woven cloth it might be possible to employsuch a combination, each thread of the web being turned once around eachthread of the woof as shown in Fig. 71; but certainly it would work ina very unsatisfactory manner in open fabrics. I would suggest that thisexample may possibly belong to my second group, which, upon the surface, would have a similar appearance. The combination of this form is shownin the section, Fig. 73. SECOND GROUP. It is not impossible, as previously stated, that open fabrics of theplain type were avoided for the reason that the threads would not remainin place if subjected to tension. A very ingenious method of fixing thethreads of open work, without resorting to the device of knotting hasbeen extensively employed in the manufacture of ancient textiles. Thesimplest form of cloth in which this combination is used is shown inFig. 72. This example, which was obtained from a small fragment ofpottery found in Polk County, Tennessee, may be taken as a type. [Illustration: Fig. 72. --From ancient pottery, Tennessee. ] [Illustration: Fig. 73. --Section. ] Two series of threads are interwoven at right angles, the warp seriesbeing arranged in pairs and the woof singly. At each intersection thepairs of warp threads are twisted half around upon themselves, inclosingthe woof threads and holding them quite firmly, so that the open meshis well preserved even when much strained. Fabrics of this characterhave been employed by the ancient potters of a very extended region, including nearly all the Atlantic States. There are also many varietiesof this form, of fabric resulting from differences in the size andspacing of the threads. These differences are well brought out in theseries of illustrations that follow. In regard to the manufacture of this particular fabric, I am unable toarrive at any very definite conclusion. As demonstrated by Miss Osgood, it may be knitted by hand, the threads of the warp being fixed at oneend and the woof at both by wrapping about pegs set in a drawing boardor frame, as shown in the diagram, Fig. 74. [Illustration: Fig. 74. --Diagram showing the method of weaving Form 2. ] The combination is extremely difficult to produce by mechanical means, and must have been beyond the reach of any primitive loom. I haveprepared a diagram, Fig. 75, which, shows very clearly the arrangementof threads, and illustrates a possible method of supporting the warpwhile the woof is carried across. As each thread of the woof is laid inplace, the threads of the warp can be thrown to the opposite support, a turn or half twist being made at each exchange. The work could be doneequally well by beginning at the top and working downward. For the sakeof clearness I have drawn but one pair of the warp threads. [Illustration: Fig. 75. --Theoretic device for working the twist. ] Fig. 76 illustrates a characteristic example of this class obtained froma fragment of pottery from the great mound at Sevierville, Tenn. [Illustration: Fig. 76. --From fragment of mound pottery, Tennessee. ] The impression is quite perfect. The cords are somewhat uneven, and seemto have been only moderately well twisted. They were probably made ofsome vegetable fiber. It will be observed that the threads of the woofare placed at regular intervals, while those of the web are irregularlyplaced. It is interesting to notice that in one case the warp has notbeen doubled, the single thread having, as a consequence, exactly thesame relation to the opposing series as corresponding threads in thefirst form of fabric presented. The impression, of which this is only apart, indicates that the cloth was considerably distorted when appliedto the soft clay. The slipping of one of the woof threads is well shownin the upper part of the figure. The fabric shown in Fig. 77 has been impressed upon an earthen vesselfrom Macon, Ga. It has been very well and neatly formed, and all thedetails of fiber, twist, and combination can be made out. [Illustration: Fig. 77. --From ancient pottery, Georgia. ] The example given in Fig. 78 differs from the preceding in the spacingand pairing of the warp cords. It was obtained from a fragment ofancient pottery recently collected at Reel Foot Lake, Tennessee. [Illustration: Fig. 78. --From ancient pottery, Tennessee. ] Fig. 79 represents another interesting specimen from the pottery of thesame locality. The border is woven somewhat differently from the body ofthe fabric, two threads of the woof being included in each loop of thewarp. [Illustration: Fig. 79. --From ancient pottery, Tennessee. ] Fig. 80 is from the pottery of the same locality. The threads are muchmore closely woven than those already given. [Illustration: Fig. 80. --From ancient pottery, Tennessee. ] The next example, Fig. 81, impressed upon a fragment of clay fromArkansas, has been made of coarse, well-twisted cords. An ornamentalborder has been produced by looping the cords of the woof, which seemto have been five in number, each one passing over four others beforerecrossing the warp. [Illustration: Fig. 81. --From a piece of clay, Arkansas. ] In no locality are so many fine impressions of textiles upon clayvessels found as in the ancient salt-making districts of the MississippiValley. The huge bowl or tub-like vessels used by the primitivesalt-makers have very generally been modeled in coarse nets, orotherwise have had many varieties of netting impressed upon them forornament. In the accompanying plate (XXXIX) two fine examples of these impressionsare given. They are somewhat more clearly defined than the majority ofthose from which the other illustrations are made. Fig. 82 illustrates a specimen in which every detail is perfectlypreserved. Only a small portion of the original is shown in the cut. Thecords are heavy and well twisted, but the spacing is somewhat irregular. I observe one interesting fact in regard to this impression. The fabrichas apparently been applied to the inverted vessel, as the loose cordsof the woof which run parallel with the rim droop or hang in festoonsbetween the cords of the warp as shown in the illustration, which ishere placed, as drawn from the inverted fragment. The inference to bedrawn from this fact is that the fabric was applied to the exterior ofthe vessel, after it was completed and inverted, for the purpose ofenhancing its beauty. When we recollect, however, that these vesselswere probably built for service only, with thick walls and rude finish, we are at a loss to see why so much pains should have been taken intheir embellishment. It seems highly probable that, generally, theinspiring idea was one of utility, and that the fabric served in someway as a support to the pliable clay, or that the network of shallowimpressions was supposed to act after the manner of a _dégraissant_to neutralize the tendency to fracture. [Illustration: Fig. 82. --From fragment of a large salt vessel, Saline River, Illinois. ] Another example from the same locality is shown in Fig. 83. This issimilar to that shown in the lower figure of Plate XXXIX. It is veryneatly woven of evenly spun and well-twisted thread. The double seriesis widely spaced as shown in the drawing. [Illustration: Fig. 83. --From a salt vessel, Saline River, Illinois. ] The very interesting specimen illustrated in Fig. 84 was obtained froma small fragment of pottery found in Fort Ripley County, Missouri. Thecombination of the two series of threads or strands clearly indicatesthe type of fabric under consideration, the twisted cords of the warpbeing placed very far apart. The remarkable feature of this example isthe character of the woof, which seems to be a broad braid formed byplaiting three strands of untwisted fiber, probably bast. All thedetails are shown in the most satisfactory manner in the clay cast. [Illustration: Fig. 84. --From ancient pottery, Missouri. ] The open character of the web in this specimen assists very much, inexplaining the structure of tightly-woven examples such as that shown inFig. 85, in which the cross cords are so closely placed that the broadbands of the opposing series are completely hidden. [Illustration: Fig. 85. --From ancient pottery, Tennessee. ] I have made the drawing to show fillets of fiber appearing at the ends. These do not appear in the impression. It is highly probable, however, that these fillets are plaited bands, as in the preceding example. Theyare wide and flat, giving somewhat the effect of basket-work of splintsor of rushes. This specimen was obtained in Carter County, Tennessee. We have a few pieces of this variety of fabric which have been preservedby contact with the salts of copper. Professor Farquharson describesan example from a mound on the banks of the Mississippi River, nearthe city of Davenport. It had been wrapped about a copper implementresembling a celt, and was at the time of its recovery in a very perfectstate of preservation. In describing this cloth Mr. Farquharson saysthat "the warp is composed of four cords, that is, of _two double and twisted_ cords, and the woof of _one_ such doubled and twisted cord which passes between the two parts of the warp; the latter being twisted at each change, allowing the cords to be brought close together so as to cover the woof almost entirely. "His illustration is somewhat erroneous, the artist not having had quitea clear understanding of the combination of threads. This cloth has ageneral resemblance to ordinary coffee-sacking. In Fig. 86 I give anillustration of this fabric derived from the opposite side of the celt. [Illustration: Fig. 86. --Fabric from a copper celt, Iowa. ] Although I am not quite positive, it is my opinion, after havingexamined the specimen carefully, that the body of the cloth belongsto my first group and that the border only is of the second group. My section and drawing give a clear idea of the construction of thisfabric. A finely-preserved bit of cloth belonging to the group underconsideration was recently found fixed to the surface of a copper imagefrom one of the Etowah mounds in Georgia. This form of weaving is very common among the productions of the moderntribes of Western America. A very good example is shown in Fig. 87, which represents the border of a cape like garment made by the ClyoquotIndians, of Vancouver's Island. It is woven, apparently, of the fiber ofbark, both web and woof showing considerable diversity in the size ofthe cords. The border has been strengthened by sewing in a broad, thinfillet of rawhide. [Illustration: Fig. 87. --Modern work, Vancouver's Island. ] The beautiful mats of the northwest coast peoples, from California toOunalaska, are often woven in this manner, the materials being bast, grass, or rushes. The Lake Dwellers of Switzerland seem to have made a great manyvarieties of cloth of this type. I have reproduced four examples fromthe great work of Dr. Keller. Fig. 88 is copied from his Fig. 1, PlateCXXXV. It exhibits some variations from the type, double strips of bastbeing bound by a woof consisting of alternate strips of bast and cords. It is from Robenhausen. [Illustration: Fig. 88. --Fabric from the Lake Dwellings, Switzerland. ] In Figs. 89 and 90 we have typical examples from the same locality. Thewoof series seems to consist of untwisted strands of bast or flax. [Illustration: Figs. 89 and 90. --Fabrics from the Lake Dwellings, Switzerland. ] THIRD GROUP. A third form of fabric is distinguished from the last by markedpeculiarities in the combinations of the threads. The threads of thewarp are arranged in pairs as in the last form described, but aretwisted in such a way as to inclose two of the opposing series insteadof one, each succeeding pair of warp threads taking up alternate pairsof the woof threads, as shown in the section, Fig. 91. This is a veryinteresting variety, and apparently one that would possess coherence andelasticity of a very high order. [Illustration: Fig. 91. --Section. ] In Fig. 92 a simple scheme of plaiting or weaving this material issuggested. It will be seen to differ from the last chiefly in the wayin which the woof is taken up by the warp. [Illustration: Fig. 92. --Theoretical device for weaving third group. ] The ancient pottery of the Mississippi Valley furnishes many examples ofthis fabric. It is made of twisted cords and threads of sizes similar tothose of the other work described, varying from the weight of ordinaryspool cotton to that of heavy twine. The mesh is generally quite open. In Fig. 93 we have a very well preserved example from Reelfoot Lake, Tennessee. It was obtained from a large fragment of coarse pottery. Other pieces are nearly twice as coarse, while some are much finer. [Illustration: Fig. 93. --From the ancient pottery of Tennessee. ] Figs. 94 and 95 are finer specimens from the same locality. [Illustration: Fig. 94. Fig. 95. From the ancient pottery of Tennessee. ] We have also good examples from Saline River, Illinois. They areobtained from fragments of the gigantic salt vessels so plentifulin that locality. The upper figure of Plate XXXIX illustrates one of these specimens. Other examples hare been obtained from Roane County, Tennessee. A piece of charred cloth from a mound in Butler County, Ohio, has beenwoven in this manner. Foster has described examples of the two precedingforms from the same locality. The material used is a vegetable fiberobtained from the bark of trees or from some fibrous weed. This specimenis now in the National Museum. An interesting variety of this form is given in Fig. 96. It is from asmall piece of pottery exhumed from a mound on Fain's Island, JeffersonCounty, Tennessee. The threads of the woof are quite close together, those of the web far apart. [Illustration: Fig. 96. --From ancient pottery, Tennessee. ] A very fine example of this variety of fabric was obtained by Dr. Tarrowfrom an ancient cemetery near Dos Pueblos, Cal. It is illustrated inFig. 2, Plate XIV, vol. VII, of Surveys West of the 100th Meridian. [4]In describing it, Professor Putnam says that the fiber is probablyobtained from a species of _yucca_. He says that "the woof is made of two strands, crossing the warp in such a manner that the strands alternate in passing, over and under it, and at the same time inclosing two alternate strands, of the latter, making a letter X figure of the warp, united at the center of the X by the double strands of the woof. "It should be noticed that the series of cords called the woof byProfessor Putnam are designated as warp in my own descriptions. Theillustration shows a fabric identical with that given in the upperfigure of Plate XXXIX, and the description quoted describes perfectlythe type of fabric under consideration. [Footnote 4: Putnam, F. W. , in Vol. VII of Surveys West of the 100th Meridian, page 244. ] This method of weaving is still practiced by some of the western tribes, as may be seen by a visit to the national collection. A somewhat complicated arrangement of the threads may be seen inthe fabric shown in Fig. 97. It is clearly only a variation of thecombination just described. The manner in which the threads pass over, under, and across each other can be more easily understood by referenceto the figure than by any description. It comes from one of theNorthwest coast tribes. [Illustration: Fig. 97. --Modern fabric, Northwest coast. ] FOURTH GROUP. A fourth form of fabric, illustrated in Fig. 98, is of very rareoccurrence on our fictile remains. [Illustration: Fig. 98. --Diagonal fabric, ancient pottery of Tennessee. ] It is a very neatly woven diagonal from the ancient pottery of PolkCounty, Tennessee. Two series of cords have been interwoven at rightangles to each other, but so arranged as to produce a diagonal pattern. One series of the cords is fine and well twisted, the other coarser andvery slightly twisted. The remarkable sample of matting shown in Fig. 99 is from a small pieceof pottery from Alabama. It has been worked in the diagonal style, butis somewhat different from the last example. It has probably been madeof rushes or heavy blades of grass. [Illustration: Fig. 99. --From the ancient pottery of Alabama. ] The texture shown in Fig. 100 is from a rather indistinct impressionupon a small fragment of pottery from Iowa. One series of the strandsseems to have been quite rigid, while the other has been pliable, andappear in the impression only where they have crossed the rigid series. The dotted lines indicate their probable course on the under side of thecross threads. [Illustration: Fig. 100. --From ancient pottery, Iowa. ] This form of fabric is very common in modern work. FIFTH GROUP. In Fig. 101 I present a variety of ancient fabric which has not to myknowledge been found upon ceramic products. This specimen shows themethod of plaiting sandals practiced by the ancient inhabitants ofKentucky. Numbers of these very interesting relics have been obtainedfrom the great caves of that State. They are beautifully woven, and wellshaped to the foot. [Illustration: Fig. 101. --Plaiting of a sandal, Kentucky cave. ] The fiber has the appearance of bast and is plaited in untwistedstrands, after the manner shown in the illustration. Professor Putmandescribes a number of cast-off sandals from Salt Cave, Kentucky, as"neatly made of finely braided and twisted leaves of rushes. "[5] [Footnote 5: Putnam, F. W. Eighth Annual Report of the Peabody Museum, p. 49. ] Fig. 102 illustrates a somewhat similar method of plaiting practiced bythe Lake Dwellers of Switzerland, from one of Keller's figures. [6] [Illustration: Fig. 102. --Braiding done by the Lake-Dwellers. ] [Footnote 6: Keller, Dr. F. Lake Dwellers. Fig. 3; Pl. CXXXVI. ] SIXTH GROUP. The art of making nets of spun and twisted cords seems to have beenpracticed by many of the ancient peoples of America. Beautiful exampleshave been found in the _huacas_ of the Incas and in the tombs of theAztecs. They were used by the prehistoric tribes of California and theancient inhabitants of Alaska. Nets were in use by the Indians ofFlorida and Virginia at the time of the discovery, and the ancientpottery of the Atlantic States has preserved impressions of a numberof varieties. It is possible that some of these impressions may be fromEuropean nets, but we have plentiful historical proof that nets of hempwere in use by the natives, and as all of this pottery is very old it isprobable that the impressions upon the fragments are from nets of nativemanufacture. Wyman states that nets or net impressions have not been found among theantiquities of Tennessee. I have found, however, that the pottery ofCarolina, Virginia, and Maryland furnish examples of netting in greatnumbers. In many cases the meshes have been distorted by stretching andoverlapping so that the fabric cannot be examined in detail; in othercases the impressions have been so deep that casts cannot be taken, andin a majority of cases the fragments are so decayed that no details ofthe cords and their combinations can be made out. In Fig. 103 we have a thoroughly satisfactory restoration from a smallfragment of pottery picked up in the District of Columbia. It is showna little larger than natural size in the drawing. The impression is soperfect that the twist of the cord and the form of the knot may be seenwith ease. Most of the examples from this locality are of much finercord and have a less open mesh than the specimen illustrated. It isa noteworthy fact that in one of these specimens an incised patternhas been added to the surface of the soft clay after the removalof the net. Recent collections from the mounds of Western North Carolina havebrought to light many examples of net-marked pottery. Generally theimpressions are quite obscure, but enough can be seen in the cast toshow clearly the character of the fabric. The restoration given inFig. 104 represents an average mesh, others being finer and otherscoarser. Another specimen from the same collection is shown in Fig. 105. The impression is not very distinct, bat there is an apparent doublingof the cords, indicating a very unusual combination. It is possible thatthis may have come from the imperfect imprinting, but I can detect noindications of a shifting of the net upon the soft clay. [Illustration: Fig. 103. --From ancient pottery, District of Columbia. ] [Illustration: Fig. 104. --Net from the pottery of North Carolina. ] [Illustration: Fig. 105. --Net from the pottery of North Carolina. ] Many interesting examples could be given, both from the ancient andmodern work of the inhabitants of the Pacific coast, but for the presentI shall content myself by presenting a single example from the LakeDwellings of Switzerland (Fig. 106): [Illustration: Fig. 106. --Net from the Swiss Lake Dwellings. Keller, plate, CXXX. ] MISCELLANEOUS FORMS. The forms of fabrics used by the ancient tribes of the Middle andNorthern Atlantic States in the manufacture and ornamentation of theirpottery have differed materially from those used in the South and West. As a rule the fragments are smaller and the impressions less perfectlypreserved. The fabrics have been more complicated and less carefullyapplied to the vessel. In many cases the impressions seem to havebeen made from disconnected bands, belts, or strips of cloth. Singlecords, or cords arranged in groups by rolling on sticks, or by othercontrivances, have been extensively employed. Baskets have doubtlessbeen used, some of which have been woven, but others have apparentlybeen of bark or skin, with stitched designs of thread or quills. Someof the impressions suggest the use of woven vessels or fabrics filledup with clay or resin, so that the prominences only are imprinted, orotherwise cloths may have been used in which raised figures were worked. Fig. 107 is obtained from a fragment of pottery from New Jersey. Theimpressions are extremely puzzling, but are such as I imagine might bemade by the use of a basket, the meshes of which had been filled up withclay or resin so that only the more prominent ridges or series of thongsremain uncovered to give impressions upon the clay. But the threads orthongs indicate a pliable net rather than a basket, and the appearanceof the horizontal threads at the ends of the series of raised stitchessuggests that possibly the material may have been bark or smooth clothwith a heavy pattern stitched into it. [Illustration: Fig. 107. --From the ancient pottery of New Jersey. ] Very similar to the above is the example given in Fig. 108, also derivedfrom the pottery of New Jersey. [Illustration: Fig. 108. --From the ancient pottery of New Jersey. ] Fig. 109 illustrates an impression upon another fragment from the samestate. This impression may have been made by a piece of birch bark orfine fabric with a pattern sewed into it with cords or quills. [Illustration: Fig. 109. --From the ancient pottery of New Jersey. ] Fig. 110 illustrates an impression upon a large, well-made vase, withscalloped rim, from Easton, Pa. The character of the fabric is difficultto make out, the impression suggesting bead-work. That it is from afabric, however, is evident from the fact that there is system anduniformity in the arrangement of markings, the indentations alternatingas in the impressions of fabrics of the simplest type. Yet there isan appearance of patchwork in the impression that suggests separateapplications of the material. [Illustration: Fig. 110. --From the ancient pottery of Pennsylvania. ] In Figs. 111 and 112 we have what appear to be impressions of bands orbelts. The first shown consists of six parallel cords, coarse and welltwisted, with a border of short cord indentations placed at regularintervals. This is a very usual form in all parts of the country, fromthe Mandan towns of the Missouri to Florida. It is possible that thecords may in this case have been separately impressed, but the examplegiven in Fig. 112 is undoubtedly from, a woven band or belt, the middleportion of which seems to have been a closely-woven cloth, with a sortof pattern produced by series of raised or knotted threads. The bordersconsist of single longitudinal cord impressions with an edging of shortcord indentations placed at right angles to the belt. [Illustration: Fig. 111. --From the ancient pottery of Ohio. ] [Illustration: Fig. 112. --From the ancient pottery of New Jersey. ] Similar to the last is the very effective decorative design impressedupon a large fragment of pottery from Alabama, shown in Fig. 113. Thepeculiarity of this example is the use of plaited instead of twistedcords. The work is neatly done and very effective. It seems to me almostcertain that single cords have been used. They have been so imprintedas to form a zone, filled with groups of lines placed at various angles. An ornamental border of short lines has been added, as in the examplespreviously given. [Illustration: Fig. 113. --From the ancient pottery of Alabama. ] Two other examples of cord ornamentation, which may be duplicated fromthe pottery of almost any of the Atlantic States, are presented in Figs. 114 and 115, the first from a fragment of pottery from Charles County, Maryland, and the other from the pottery of Alabama. [Illustration: Fig. 114. --Cord-markings from ancient pottery of Maryland. ] [Illustration: Fig. 115. --Cord-markings from ancient pottery of Alabama. ] It will readily be seen that it is extremely difficult to draw a linebetween an ornamentation produced by the use of single or grouped cordsand that made by the use of fabrics. It is not less difficult to say just how much of this use of cordsand fabrics is to be attributed to manufacture simply and how much toornament. Although the restorations here presented certainly throw considerablelight upon the textile fabrics of the ancient inhabitants of theAtlantic States, it cannot be affirmed that anything like a completeidea of their fabrics has been gained. Impressions upon potteryrepresent a class of work utilized in the fictile arts. We cannotsay what other fabrics were produced and used for other purposes. However this may be, attention should be called to the fact that thework described, though varied and ingenious, exhibits no characters inexecution or design not wholly consonant with the art of a stone-agepeople. There is nothing superior to or specifically different from thework of our modern Indians. The origin of the use of fabrics and of separate cords in theornamentation of pottery is very obscure. Baskets and nets weredoubtless in use by many tribes throughout their pottery making period. The shaping of earthen vessels in or upon baskets either of plain barkor of woven splints or of fiber must frequently have occurred. Thepeculiar impressions left upon the clay probably came in time to beregarded as ornamental, and were applied for purposes of embellishmentalone. Decorative art has thus been enriched by many elements of beauty. These now survive in incised, stamped, and painted designs. The forms aswell as the ornamentation of clay vessels very naturally preserve tracesof the former intimacy of the two arts. Since the stereotyping of these pages I have come upon a short paper byGeorge E. Sellers (Popular Science Monthly, Vol. XI, p. 573), in whichis given what I believe to be a correct view of the use of nets in themanufacture of the large salt vessels referred to on pages 398 and 409. The use of interior conical moulds of indurated clay makes clear thereasons for the reversed festooning of the cords to which I calledattention. INDEX Cord-markings on pottery 423 Diagonal textiles 416 Fabrics, Diagonal 417 Forms of 401 from New Jersey 421 " Iowa 411 " Mississippi Valley 408-411 " Southern States 407 of lake dwellers 413 Miscellaneous 415Farquharson, Prof. , describes fabric from Iowa 411 Holmes, W. H. , Catalogue of Ethnological collections 393 Jewett, L. , British vase from the work of 399 Keller, Dr. F. , on fabrics of Swiss lake dwellers 404, 412, 413, 418, 420 Lake dwellings, Fabrics from Swiss 403, 412, 413, 418, 420 Mississippi Valley, Prehistoric fabrics from 408-411 Nets from Atlantic coast 419 Osgood, Miss Kate C. , reproduced methods of fabrication 400, 406 Putnam, F. W. , on ancient fabrics 415, 418 Swiss lake dwellings, Fabrics from 403, 412, 413, 418, 420 Textiles, Diagonal 417 Forms of 401 from Mississippi Valley, Prehistoric 408-411 " New Jersey, Prehistoric 421 " Southern States, Prehistoric 407 " Swiss Lake dwellers, Prehistoric 413 Miscellaneous 415 used to support pottery 398 Vase from the work of Llewellyn Jewett, British 399 Weaving illustrated from pottery, Materials used in 397 Modes of 401, 405, 413Wyman, Prof. , on cord-marked pottery of Tennessee 398 Yarrow, Dr. , H. C. , obtained fabrics from pottery in California 415