| By Author | [ A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z | Other Symbols ] |
| By Title | [ A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z | Other Symbols ] |
| By Language |
|
Download this book: [ ASCII | HTML | PDF ] Look for this book on Amazon Tweet |
Title: Mohave Pottery
Author: Kroeber, Alfred L., Harner, Michaell J.
Language: English
As this book started as an ASCII text book there are no pictures available.
*** Start of this LibraryBlog Digital Book "Mohave Pottery" ***
Transcriber Note:
Bold text in the original version has been marked like =this=.
UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA PUBLICATIONS
ANTHROPOLOGICAL RECORDS
VOLUME XVI
1955-1961
UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA PRESS
BERKELEY AND LOS ANGELES
1961
KRAUS REPRINT CO.
Millwood, New York
1976
UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA PRESS
BERKELEY AND LOS ANGELES
CALIFORNIA
CAMBRIDGE UNIVERSITY PRESS
LONDON, ENGLAND
_Reprinted with the permission of the
University of California Press_
KRAUS REPRINT CO.
A U.S. Division of Kraus-Thomson Organization Limited
Printed in U.S.A.
CONTENTS
1. Mohave Pottery, by A. L. Kroeber and Michael J. Harner 1
2. The Aboriginal Population of the San Joaquin Valley,
California, by S. F. Cook 31
3. The Aboriginal Population of the North Coast of California,
by S. F. Cook 81
4. The Aboriginal Population of Alameda and Contra Costa
Counties, California, by S. F. Cook 131
5. California Athabascan Groups, by Martin A. Baumhoff 157
6. Colonial Expeditions to the Interior of California, Central
Valley, 1800-1820, by S. F. Cook 239
7. Shoshone-Bannock Subsistence and Society, by Robert F.
Murphy and Yolanda Murphy 293
8. A Burial Cave in Baja California, The Palmer Collection,
1887, by William C. Massey and Carolyn M. Osborne 339
9. Washo Religion, by James F. Downs 365
MOHAVE POTTERY
BY A. L. KROEBER AND MICHAEL J. HARNER
ANTHROPOLOGICAL RECORDS Vol. 16, No. 1 UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA
ANTHROPOLOGICAL RECORDS
Editors (Berkeley): R. L. Olson, R. F. Heizer, T. D. McCown, J. H. Rowe
Volume 16, No. 1, pp. 1-30, plates 1-8, 2 figures in text
Submitted by editors August 4, 1954 Issued May 6, 1955 Price, 75 cents
University of California Press Berkeley and Los Angeles California
Cambridge University Press London, England
Manufactured in the United States of America
FOREWORD
The pottery here described was collected fifty years ago by Kroeber and
is all in the University's Museum of Anthropology.
It is described for ethnological comparability by Kroeber, with emphasis
on use, shape, painted design, and names of designs; and for
archaeological utilization by Harner, with special attention to ware,
temper, firing, hardness, forms, paint and color, and technological
considerations generally. The two parts were written independently. They
overlap here and there, especially on vessel shapes; but, after a few
duplications were excised, it has seemed advantageous, after adding a
brief concordance of terms employed by the two authors, to let the
independent treatments of shapes stand double.
No comparisons with other native ceramic arts, recent or ancient, are
undertaken by us.
A. L. K.
M. J. H.
CONTENTS
PART I. ETHNOGRAPHICAL ANALYSIS
By A. L. Kroeber
Page
Pottery shapes recognized by the Mohave 1
Pottery objects other than vessels 2
Technological notes 2
Description of the pottery 3
Plate 1: Bowls 3
Plate 2: Bowls 3
Plate 3: Platters 4
Plate 4: Spoons 5
Plate 5: Jars, pots, jugs, cups 6
Plate 6: Bowls, platters, parchers, canteens 7
Plate 7: Spoon backs, toys, pipes, pot rests 7
Plate 8: Jar, cup, platter, bowls, spoons 8
Summary of shapes 8
Summary of painted designs and elements 9
The Mohave pottery style 10
Appendix I. Memoranda on the destroyed Academy collection 12
Appendix II. A small Mohave bowl 12
Appendix III. Granite temper and limonite pigment examination,
by Professor Charles Meyer 13
Appendix IV. Mohave pottery in other museums 13
Appendix V. Correlation of Kroeber and Harner shape classes 13
PART II. A DESCRIPTION FOR THE ARCHAEOLOGIST
PARKER RED-ON-BUFF, FORT MOHAVE VARIANT, AND PARKER BUFF, FORT MOHAVE
VARIANT
By Michael J. Harner
Introduction 15
Parker Red-on-Buff, Fort Mohave variant 16
Parker Buff, Fort Mohave variant 18
Bibliography 20
Plates 23
MOHAVE POTTERY
PART I ETHNOGRAPHICAL ANALYSIS
BY
A. L. KROEBER
POTTERY SHAPES RECOGNIZED BY THE MOHAVE
The generic Mohave name for pottery vessels seems to be kwáθki,[1] the
word for bowl.
[1] Orthography: θ, ð, like th in thick, this; s, somewhat
retroflex; tš, much like English ch; ly, ny, palatalized l, n,
like Castilian ll, ñ (y is never a vowel in the transcription
used); v, bilabial; t, retroflex; ', glottal stop; q, a back k; h
is rather faint initially, but rough, nearly like Spanish j when
medial, final (or initial through slurring of an unaccented
initial vowel). Unaccented phonemic a is sounded a or e
indifferently. Length is not indicated in this paper. The acute
accent on vowels indicates a stressed syllable, which is also
raised in pitch.
The shapes for which Mohave names were obtained are mainly those which
segregate out objectively on examination of a collection:
kwáθki, an open bowl with slightly everted lip, often with a band
of mesquite bark--both bean mesquite and screw mesquite are
specified in my notes--tied around the neck. The shape is shown in
pls. 1, 2, 6,_a_-_c_, 8,_d_-_h_; the name kwáθki was specifically
applied to 1,_d_, 2,_b_, 2,_h_, 6,_a_.
kayéθa, a platter, that is, a low round bowl or flat dish without
neck or everted lip, was applied to pl. 3,_d_. The shape is shown
in pls. 3,_a_-_d_, _g_, 8,_c_.
kayúka, pl. 3,_c_, or kakápa, also a platter, but oval, and
smaller. Pls. 3,_e_, _f_, _h_-_j_, 6,_d_, _e_.
kam'óta, a spoon, ladle, dipper, or scoop, more or less triangular.
Pls. 4, 7,_a_-_i_, 8,_i_-_k_. Subclasses were not named to me,
except for kam'óta ahmá, those with a quail head at the handle.
katéla, bi-pointed tray for parching. Pl. 6,_f_, _g_.
It will be observed that the last five names all begin with ka-.
The name suyíre was given to pl. 6,_c_, which is intermediate
between bowl and platter.
táskyena is a cook pot. Pl. 5,_c_.
tšuváva, a large cook pot, a foot and a half to two feet high. I
have seen one of these in use, full to the brim with maize, beans,
and fish, being stirred by an old man with three arrow weed sticks
tied in the middle; but I did not secure one. It is set on three
conical supports of pottery as shown in pl. 7,_n_, _o_.
A still larger pot, up to a yard in diameter, too big to cook in,
was sometimes made to ferry small children across the river, a
swimmer pushing the vessel (Handbook, 1925, p. 739). I would
imagine it would be least likely to tip over if made in the shape
of a giant kwáθki bowl.
hápurui, water jar, as kept around the house, "olla" shaped, pls.
5,_a_, _b_, 8,_a_. The name contains the stem for water: (a)há.
I happened not to secure the name of the small-mouthed canteen
water jar used in traveling, as shown in pl. 6,_h_.
A small-mouthed jar with short side-spout at one end, too large for
travel and probably used chiefly for storage of seeds, is called
hápurui hanemó, "duck jar," from its resemblance to the floating
bird. Pl. 6,_i_.
There are also handled jugs, pl. 5,_d_-_g_, and handled cups, pls.
5,_h_-_i_, 8,_b_, which I suspect of having been devised after
contact with Americans, although some specimens show use and the
painted designs are in good Mohave style. My doubts are
strengthened by my having obtained no specific name for either
handled shape: the high jug, 5,_g_, was called a jar, hápurui; the
low jug, 5,_e_, kwáθki, bowl; and in 1900 I bought a cup for which
the name kwáθki aha-suraitši was given.
In the dreamed Mastamhó myth of the origin of culture (AR 11:1, 1948,
see 7:76, p. 63), the culture hero calls some of the principal vessel
forms by two sets of names, the first being recondite, twisted, or
punning. The list is:
to bring water in (u)más-toyám[2] hápurui
to cook in umás-te-to'óro táskyena
to cook in umás-te-hamóka[3] tšuváva
spoon, ladle umás-uyúla kam'óta
food platter han'amé kakápa
bowl umás-iáða táskyena
parching dish umás-eyavkwa-havík[4] katéla
arrow weed stirrer umás-kasára so'óna
[2] Umás- is frequent in ritual names. It may be a form of humar,
"child."
[3] Hamók(a) is "three"--because of the three pot rests.
[4] Havík is "two"--because of the two hornlike ends.
It will be noted that handled jugs and handled cups are lacking from
this list, though so are canteens and round platters.
Small-and-flaring-necked spheroid jars, holding a gallon or more, are
found in the region, and in 1900 I secured two Mohave examples which
were destroyed in 1906 with the Academy of Sciences building. They
served to store seeds, and seem often to have been hidden in caves and
out-of-the-way spots by Shoshonean desert tribes. I secured one near
Needles in 1908, now no. 13875 in the Museum of Anthropology, but it
belonged to a Chemehuevi woman who was born in Chemehuevi Valley and was
in 1908 living in Mohave Valley, married to a Mohave who was himself
half-Chemehuevi. She had made the jar many years before: in fact, it was
the first and last pottery vessel she attempted, she said. The ware is
definitely paler than Mohave pottery: a sort of half-yellow. It bears on
its upper half a red pattern, but this is fainter than most Mohave
patterns, and most resembles occasional fishnet patterns on the under
sides or backs of Mohave bowls, platters, or spoons. It has 42 vertical
(radiating) lines and 7 horizontal (encircling) lines, resulting in 252
hollow quadrilaterals. The vessel also has two mends or strengthenings
with lumps of black gum. The overall height, 225 mm., is 75 per cent of
the maximum body diameter, 300 mm., which comes at about 100 mm., or
less than halfway up. The mouth and neck diameters are 69 and 58 mm., or
23 per cent and 19 per cent of the body diameter.
POTTERY OBJECTS OTHER THAN VESSELS
Two figures idly modeled, or serving as toys--made for sale, it was
said--were found in a household: a lizard and a hummingbird, plate
7,_j_,_k_, nos. 1726, 1727. They seem at least partly baked, but have
since been washed with yellow ocher, which would turn to red on baking.
The bird also has a white-painted beak and spots.
I saw pottery human figures and dolls, both with and without hair of
shredded cottonwood bark, cradles, etc., offered for sale by Mohave
women to tourists on the station platform--Needles was a scheduled
25-minute meal stop for most trains. I did not purchase any of these,
nor any small platters or handled jugs or cups, which were sometimes
also offered. This was perhaps a mistake; but I was eager to impress on
the Indians generally that my interest was in native, nontourist
objects. While material was occasionally brought to me in town, this was
uncommon, and I secured most of it from Mohave houses, especially
native-style ones across the river in Arizona. Typically, the bows and
arrows hawked by a few old men at the trains for twenty-five cents were
not the plain long Mohave willow bows, but red- and blue-painted
miniature willow imitations of the Chemehuevi retroflex horn or
composite bow.
Pipes, short and tubular, are made of pottery. Plate 7,_l_ (no. 4264),
was made for a boy, and was unfinished, remaining unbaked. Plate 7,_m_
(no. 13870), is a fragment, 62 mm. long, about 11 through the mouth end,
19 at the break, buff-colored, with gray (overfired) paste at the
fracture. I secured at least one other pipe, no. 1719, which cannot at
present be found in the Museum.
Pot rests, put under the large tšuváva cookpots, were made of clay, as
shown in plate 7,_n_,_o_.
In 1904 I secured an arrow-straightener of pottery, no. 4367, shown in
Handbook, plate 49,_f_. It carries a longitudinal ridge, a sort of
notched comb; presumably to receive, after being heated, the joints of
arrows of cane or reed. However, cane arrows, though known to the
Mohave, were only occasionally used. The usual ones of arrow weed,
without foreshaft or attached head, were simply warmed and bent by
hand.
TECHNOLOGICAL NOTES
I saw pottery made about 1902-1904, and have little to add to the
record.
Clay is tempered with sandstone crushed on the metate, and built up
by coiling. The start of a vessel may be spiral, but its body
consists of concentric rings. The paste is rolled out into a slim
sausage, the length of which is roughly estimated on the vessel. It
is then laid on the last [preceding] coil, and any excess pinched
off. It is beaten, with a light and rapid patting with a wooden
paddle, against a smooth cobble held inside, and its edge finished
flat by scraping between the thumbnail and index finger. Then the
next coil is added. The maker sits with the growing vessel on the
thighs of her stretched legs, or with one leg flat in front of her
and the other doubled under. The paint is yellow ocher, which is
put on with a little stick and burns dull red. The patterns are
carelessly done, and often shaky. (Handbook, pp. 737-738.)
In 1904, I added the following in notebook 60-33:
A "dish" [bowl] is modeled with the rim incurved [or vertical].
Finally, the rim is turned outward with the fingers, a few inches
at a time; [to make the slight neck which] after firing is bound
with screw-mesquite [a'íse] fiber. A small oval platter seen made
was built up circularly with rolls of clay, then additional pieces
were added on two sides and paddled even.
I noted that no slip was being used by Mohave potters, nor does
examination reveal any.
In 1904, notebook 60-34, I noted: "If dishes crack, they are mended by
hair binding, or now a wire, being passed between two perforations." I
did not note how the holes were bored, nor whether the hair was human or
horse.
No. 4326 is a small piece of rock such as was crushed and metate-ground
for temper. It is not sandstone, as I stated in 1923, but granite,
according to my colleague Professor Charles Meyer, whose courtesy is
acknowledged and whose information is summarized in Appendix III.
No. 4295 consists of several small slabs of yellow oxide of iron, for
grinding up as design paint, which on firing makes the red ocher color
which is both darker and more saturatedly red than the light
reddish-buff ground color of Mohave pottery. Its composition is also
given in Appendix III on the basis of Professor Meyer's examination.
Both it and no. 4354 were obtained at matekwaθ-kutšyep, "yellow paint
wide open," a spot in a wash cutting across the peneplain from Avimota,
Mt. Manchester, in Nevada opposite Fort Mohave.
Several samples of material that might help further elucidate the
technology of Mohave pottery have unfortunately been misplaced in the
Museum since at least several years. Quite possibly they have been put
together into one tray, which was then mislaid. They include:
1759, sample of pottery clay.
4326, sample of pottery temper, presumably after grinding.
4295, 4354, sample of yellow ocher for painting designs.
4277, piece of broken pot.
13871, two sherds.
1719, pottery pipe.
Another lot of similar accessories was once included in a collection
belonging to the California Academy of Sciences and is listed in
Appendix I.
I secured half a dozen paddles, kanóθki, for smoothing the fresh coils
of pottery vessels. All of these prove to have been cut from white oak
staves of whiskey barrels, whose two-way curvature perhaps suggested to
the Mohave their adaptability for the purpose. Four of the six pieces
still show staining by iron barrel hoops. Three, however, had had their
concavity partly whittled flat. I presume that in the old days paddles
were made of cottonwood or mesquite. The length and width dimensions of
the "blades," that is, exclusive of handles, are:
4276...... 117 90
4311...... 113 100
4346...... 118 100 flattened
4347...... 100 80 flattened
4348...... 70 50 with 2 last makes a 3-size nest
13839......140 75 flat, almost biconvex
The second and last of these paddles are accompanied by their
"anvils"--waterworn stones. No. 4312 is somewhat three-cornered, 90-95
mm. in length, 43 mm. thick, has one flattish side, one convex, and
weighs 18 oz. No. 13840, though got four years later, is quite similar:
85-90 mm., 48 mm. thick, one side flattish, weight also 18 oz.
DESCRIPTION OF THE POTTERY
All pieces are actually inscribed with and cataloged under a number
beginning with the prefix 1-, which denotes provenience from native
California. This prefix, being unvarying, is omitted in the present
treatise.
The objects described were collected by myself in three lots, in Mohave
Valley, on both sides of the Colorado River, as follows:
In 1902 Accession 40 Specimens 1-1710-1760
In 1904 Acc. 135-138 Specs. 1-4259-4381
In 1908 Acc. 325 Specs. 1-13771-13775
Of these nearly 300 objects, some 70 are of pottery.
An earlier collection, made in 1900 for the California Academy of
Sciences, was destroyed by fire on the day of the San Francisco
earthquake, April 18, 1906. Some notations on it were preserved and are
summarized in Appendix I.
PLATE 1: BOWLS
_a_, 13773, diameter 258 mm., height 127 mm.
_b_, 1733, d. 233, h. 177. Design: ta-lame-θlame, "patches" (?).
The painting is very uneven.
_c_, 13772, d. 281, h. 140.
_d_, 1715, d. 269, h. 151. Design, linear: ta-tsir-qa-(t)sirqa face
paint; dots: belly of yellow-hammer (red-shafted flicker, kukhó).
The outside is striped. The execution is experienced, sure, light,
and effective.
_e_, 13774, d. 240, h. 142. The designs inside are similar to those
of _d_, and are repeated on the outside of the vessel.
_f_, 13778, d. 195, h. 97.
_g_, 13780, d. 181, h. 89.
_h_, 13779, d. 185, h. 87.
Of these 8 bowls, 3 (_f_, _g_, _h_, evidently from one household) run
from 181 to 195 mm. in diameter; the other 5, from 233 to 281 mm.
Proportions of height to diameter are, seriated: 47, 49, 49, 50, 50, 50,
56, 59.
The pattern is fundamentally the same on the inside of all 8 bowls,
except that spotting is omitted in _f_. It consists of triple-line bars
that branch at an acute angle; one fork soon ends, the second goes on
and merges with a branch from another bar, and so on in a complex
pattern extending over the entire inside. The forks--which are also
junctions--each contain a small solid-filled triangle, into which the
thin middle line of each bar runs. Or, the middle lines might be said to
emerge from the points of the solid triangles. The two remaining lines
of the bars are therefore mere borders or shadows: they never touch a
solid triangle. The dead ends of the forking branches point at each
other, or inward toward the center, in most cases: _a_, _b_, _d_, _f_,
_g_, _h_. In _c_ they point parallel; _e_ is unskillfully painted and
lacks the dead or free ends.
This pattern is complex and calls for skill in execution. _e_ is a
botch, _a_ irregularly crowded, _g_, _h_ simplified and open; the rest
show successful control, especially _b_, _c_, _d_. Only _b_ differs in
that the dead or free branches each end in a solid circle. The solid
triangles tend to vary somewhat in shape, from equilateral to narrow
isosceles, even in well painted bowls: cf. _b_, _c_; this variation is
perhaps unavoidable.
This pattern is the most ambitious of Mohave design treatments.
The outer side of these bowls is painted with vertical stripes down from
the rim 6 times. Usually they are thinnish lines, in _c_ wider stripes.
Bowls _e_ and _f_ partly repeat the inside pattern on their outside.
PLATE 2: BOWLS
_a_, 13771, diameter 246-260 mm. slightly oval, height 115-118 mm.,
thickness 7.5 mm. toward bottom. Weight 38 oz. There is a neck band
of mesquite bark.
_b_, 4321, d. 282, h. 150. Design: kan'ú, (Maricopa) basketry
pattern.
_c_, 13775, d. 260, h. 100. Almost as flat as the platters of pl.
3, but there is a neck, and it is bound.
_d_, 1740, d. 210, h. 104. Design: coyote teeth.
_e_, 13776, d. 266 (260-272), h. 140, thickness toward bottom 9, at
neck 4-4.5, at lip 5. Both paste and surface are unusually
yellowish. A neck-binding has been lost, leaving a 20-mm. wide
yellowish strip paler than the darkened general surface. Wt. 37 oz.
_f._, 1732, d. 227, h. 130. Wt. 35 oz. Design, inside: humanape,
butterfly; outside, hotahpave face paint.
_g_, 1714, d. 177, h. 121. The H/D proportion, 68 per cent, is,
with pl. 8,_h_, the highest of all bowls. I called it a "deep pot"
when I acquired it. Wt. 23 oz. Design, outside: (i)yamtšupeṭ(a)
face paint.
_h_, 4292, "model," i.e., made for sale, d. 149, h. 77. Design,
inside, halytôṭa, spider; outside, atcí'ara, fish tail. This
vessel, as well as the platter 4294, pl. 3,_j_, was secured from
the wife of Tokwaθa, "Muskmelon"; he gave the account of Olive
Oatman's return published in 1951 in No. 4 of the Publications of
the Kroeber Anthropological Society, also dictated a myth about the
origin of war, and was accorded a running or mourning ceremony on
his death. He is a historic character, having been encountered by
the Ives party in 1858 and mentioned in Möllhausen. He was one of
the nine hostages imprisoned at Fort Yuma and escaped from there--a
disturbance that ended in the defeat of the Mohave in battle by
Armistead later in 1859.
These 8 bowls vary more in proportion than those of plate 1. H/D ratio
runs, seriated: 38, 45, 50, 52, 53, 57, 68 per cent, average 52, as
against 51 per cent average for plate 1. The lowest bowl in the present
lot is _c_, with _a_ next; the highest is _g_. These three are outside
the limits of plate 1.
The interior designs are less uniform than in plate 1.
_a_ and _b_ show an overall interior pattern of solid rhomboidal
quadrilaterals or hexagons reduced to triangles in the interstices and
toward the rim; each such figure being surrounded by 3 thin parallel
lines. Where the outermost of these enclosing lines intersect, two of
the four angles are solidified, producing secondary hourglass figures.
The effect is a bit like a tortoise carapace; but the design was named
only for _b_, and then as recalling an overall pattern of basketry,
which the Mohave do not themselves weave or coil though they know and
use it. In _a_, there are four large hexagons filling most of the field
(actually one is more pentagonal, one heptagonal); along the edges are
four lenticular areas, each enclosing two triangles; two of these lenses
show in the photograph. In _b_, the figures are grouped in four parallel
tiers extending across the bowl. In _b_, the _outside_ carries vertical
stripes; in _a_, eight right-slanting and eight left-slanting lines
enclosing as many diamonds and hourglass figures, with solid filling of
the upper and lower corners of the diamonds and meeting corners of the
hourglasses.
_c_ and _d_ are crossed by rows of solid triangles touching at the
corners. These aim at being equilateral in _c_ (the flattest of the
bowls), so that the intervening background spaces are also roughly
equilateral, and there is an overall dark-light effect. But in _d_ the
triangles are narrower-based, or isosceles, and their points meet the
bases instead of the corners of triangles in the tier above, so that the
effect is one of pattern in rows rather than overall. This is the design
that was called "coyote teeth"; which fairly agrees with plate
4,_l_,_q_.
_f_ also has solid triangles, but they meet point to point, leaving
light rhomboids between their two rows. The center is a lightly
quartered circle; toward the rim, there is a row of smaller, double,
point-to-point (hourglass) triangles, each set over the outer point of a
rhomboid. These outer triangles are each crossed by a bar of light
background--a feature not repeated in the collection, and seeming
strange to me; but it does yield a pair of miniature solid
triangles--that favorite Mohave design device--in the waist of each
outer hourglass. The miniature solid angle also recurs in the central
quartering. The solid middle triangles as well as the medium-sized ones
toward the rim are followed outside their edge (or inside the light
rhomboids) by a row of dots. These rows of dots, with faint lines,
further extend to the actual rim of the vessel, completing skewed
hexagonal shapes of their own (one is heptagonal). The design name
given, "butterfly," probably applies to the point-to-point large solid
triangles, possibly to the rhomboids. On the _outside_, to which the
design name "halter face paint" applies, there are eight double-outlined
hourglass triangle pairs, meeting tips solid, the rest of their
interiors and the intervening hexagons being stippled with oval,
streakish dots. Cf. the outside of _a_.
_e_ has been much rubbed in the middle, but the design toward the rim is
allied to those of the bowls in plate 1--triple lines turning back or
forking at acute angles. Only the solid small triangles at junctures and
ends seem to be lacking. The _outside_ carries 58 vertical stripes
averaging about 4 mm. wide.
_g_ is the tallest bowl, with a height-diameter ratio of more than 2/3,
due in part to a semiconical bottom. It is considerably worn inside, and
food has spilled over and crusted part of the outside. The discernible
interior design is in a band below the rim. This is crossed by a series
of diagonals sloping downward to the right, with a little solid filling
triangle in the acute angle made by the diagonal with the border of the
band. In addition, a left-sloping diagonal extends down from the rim to
the middle of the right-sloping one, with a filling triangle at the
juncture. The _outside_ is continuously covered by what in other vessels
was usually called "fish bones"--but here was named (i)yam-tšuperta, a
face paint--19 columns of downward and 19 of upward pointing zigzags,
all points filled in red. Eight such horizontally progressing zigzag
lines are still perceptible; there may have been one or two more, but
not over ten altogether. This pattern is most effective in a fairly high
field (it is common in spoons), such as this tall bowl affords on its
exterior.
_h_ has free-standing eight-legged spider figures interspersed with
dots. A spider design recurs in plate 3,_i_; and in 3,_j_ a similar
figure is called tortoise. The stripes and lines of the _outside_ were
called "fish tail"--it is not quite apparent why.
In summary for exterior designs, _a_ and _f_ have hourglasses, _g_ the
zigzag fish bones, the others in this plate "radial" or vertical lines,
wholly or partly widened in _e_, _h_ to stripes.
PLATE 3: PLATTERS
Plate 3 shows flat bowls, dishes, or plates, more or less platterlike,
sometimes round and sometimes oval. They differ from the bowls of plates
1 and 2 in being lower, in having no neck, and no outcurved rim.
===========================================================
Pl. | No. |D(L) | W | W/L | H| H/D |Th.|Curv.
| | | |(per cent)| |(per cent) | |
------+-----+------+---+----------+--+-----------+---+-----
3,_a_|13784|272 |...| |79| 29 |5.0| 330
| | | | | | | |
3,_b_|13783|283 |...| |88| 31 |5.0| 348
| | | | | | | |
3,_c_|1713 |262 |...| |77| 29 |5.5| 320
| | | | | | | |
3,_d_|1722 |202 |...| |71| 35 |5.5| 270
| | | | | | | |
3,_e_,| | | | | | | |
_f_|13785|266 |215| 81 |66| 28+ |6.5| 303
| | | | | | | |
3,_g_|1751 |145* |...| |48| 33 |6.0| 195
| | | | | | | |
3,_h_|13786|166 |147| 89 |59| 38+ |5.5| 217
| | | | | | | |
3,_i_|1738 |157 |135| 86 |43| 29.5+ |5.0| 191
| | | | | | | |
3,_j_|4294 |155 |121| 78 |44| 32+ |5.5| 178
------+-----+------+---+----------+--+-----------+---+-----
_Note:_ D(L), diameter _or_ greatest length; Th., thickness; Curv.,
length of tape laid curving along diam. or max. length of under
side; *147 long, 143 wide, but round in intent; +Mean of H/L and
W/L. All dimensions in mm.
It will be seen that the H/D ratio is from 28 to 38 per cent; whereas
that for bowls is from 38 to 68 per cent, with 21 out of 24 between 45
and 61.
Platters _i_ and _j_ were described when collected as "dish-like spoons"
or scoops; _j_, like plate 2,_h_, is from Tokwaθa's household.
_Designs_
As regards painted design, _a_ and _b_ revert to the all-over regular
forking of plate 1, but with dark background instead of light or
spot-studded, so that the pattern really is negative in effect. It is
probably significant that the only two platelike bowls carrying this
design should be the only ones to present it negatively. The pattern is
well executed in both. It is of course somewhat easier to carry out
regularly on a flattish plate than in an up-curving bowl.
_d_ was called "himáka lameθlame, its back leaves" (or "patches"?--cf.
pl. 4,_d_). This presumably refers to the large dot-studded hexagonal
areas--hexagonal at least in intent. My notes also name a "tšitθôk
face-paint" design, which would then be the name of the interconnected
hourglass figures which constitute the primary or positive element of
the patterning. The combination of these two design elements recurs on
the exterior of the jar of plate 8,_a_. The back or _under_ side of _d_
in the present plate is boldly checkered, as shown in plate 8,_c_. It is
possible that the leaf name refers to this checker.
_c_ and _g_ were both designated as fish backbone, which as a pattern we
have already encountered on bowl 2,_g_, though there on the outer side
and named after a face paint: parallel zigzags with solid-filled angles.
The idea seems to be that of a fish backbone as it might be drawn out
with ribs attached--"herringbone" in our own nomenclature. Then 3,_g_
would be the more representational form with the vertebral column left
in--though it is also partway transitional to the triple-line
angle-and-forking pattern of plate 1 and of 3,_a_,_b_ above. The
simpler, merely parallel-chevron form of the design--with the vertebrae
omitted--is perhaps more usual, and is shown recurring in _e_ and in
plate 4,_f_,_k_. The under side of _c_ has 67 vertical (radiating)
lines.--Plate 3,_g_, no. 1751, was obtained from Nyavarup along with no.
1749, plate 4,_o_, which see. Nyavarup, like Tokwaθa, was a historic
character, having been encountered by the Ives party in 1858 and
mentioned in Möllhausen. In 1902 he told me the creation, which will be
published as myth no. 9.
_f_ is the _under_ or convex side of _e_, but its spots (12-14 mm.
diameter) reappear as the sole inside pattern in _h_, and between the
tortoises of _j_. The inside dots of _h_ and the outside ones of _f_
were however put on differently: in _h_ in rows across the oval, in _f_
irregularly or perhaps spirally. The under side of _h_ also has dots,
fainter than on the front. In _j_ the dots seem inserted with reference
to the larger figures of tortoises.
These tortoises of _j_ are definitely similar to the halytôṭa spiders of
plate 2,_h_, but are also distinctive, with enclosed-line quadrilateral
body, 3-toed legs at corners, and head and tail. Both 3,_j_ and 2,_h_
however were made to sell, are more representational than most Mohave
pottery paintings, and should be viewed with a degree of reserve, though
I believe that their designs have basis in native usage.
3,_i_ as halytôṭa, spider, is puzzling as to why its name, and is also
abnormal formally.
PLATE 4: SPOONS
These are ladles, dippers, scoops, as one will, but I retain the "spoon"
which the Mohave most often gave as their English term for native
kam'óta. They are of course not taken into the mouth, but held to it
while gruel flows out; or perhaps more often they serve as a convenient
holder of an individual or temporary portion which is scooped into the
mouth with two or three fingers which are then sucked off. They also
serve to ladle boiled food from large cook pots into bowls or platters.
I give, first, identifications, sizes, and design names; then shapes;
and finally a discussion of painted patterns.
_Identifications_
_a_, 13800, length 174 mm.
_b_, 1731, l. 201. Called kas'uyule. Design doubtfully recorded as
hotahpave face paint.
_c_, 13802, l. 182.
_d_, 4320, l. 175. Design name: ta-hlame-hlame, "patches," and
"butterfly inside," humanape iyaly ("in the mouth"?).
_e_, 1736, l. 123; handle hollow, rattling, "tšíwitšiwitš."
_f_, 7098, from older University collections (pre-1901), Mohave
provenience assumed, not recorded; l. 194; handle hollow, rattling.
_g_, 1737, l. 175. Design name: kyauelkyau, "angled, zigzag."
_h_, 13803, l. 225.
_i_, 13805, l. 178.
_j_, 13804, l. 190.
_k_, 1747, l. 186.
_l_, 1730, l. 198. Design name: coyote teeth.
_m_, 13809, l. 207.
_n_, 13810, l. 156.
_o_, 1749, l. 113. Design name: fish backbone. This piece was
obtained from Nyavarup: see pl. 3,_g_.
_p_, 1712, l. 155. Design name: raccoon hand.
_q_, 4319, l. 225. Design name: coyote teeth.
_r_, 4356, l. 177.
_s_, 13807, l. 210.
_Shapes_
Hollow, rattling handles, consisting of a three-cornered box, are found
on _e_,_f_,_r_. In each case, the end is modeled into a rude quail's
head, showing eyes and beak (or topknot?).
Some rudiments of a quail head, but without hollow compartment, appear
also in _a_-_d_,_q_; possibly in _i_,_k_.
The foregoing have the outer edges, toward the top, somewhat raised and
a bit incurved. This sort of an edge shows also in _g_,_h_,_j_, which
however possess no rudiments of the quail's head. The edge faces forward
(if the hollow of the spoon is regarded as its front).
Another group of spoons have their edge rather turned outward--that is,
away from the hollow. This group includes _l_-_p_ and _s_. These average
somewhat flatter, and the apex is generally rounder, than in those with
forward-turned edge: see especially _n_,_o_,_p_,_s_; also _m_; only _l_
comes to a point. Also, the total width ratio is greater in this group.
The classification thus is:
A. Edge raised, turned forward; apex pointed
1. Quail head apex, hollow rattling compartment
2. Quail head or rudiment
3. Plain apex
B. Edge facing outward, top usually rounder, total
shape shallow, broad.
Additional spoons are shown in plates 7,_i_ and 8,_i_-_k_; and in
7,_a_-_h_ appear the _back_ patterns of eight spoons whose fronts are
reproduced in plate 4. This comes to a total of 23 pieces; which seriate
in size, and group as to subclass, as follows:
========================================
Pl. | L. (mm.)| Subclass
------+---------+-----------------------
7,_i_ | 226 | | | | B |
4,_h_ | 225 | | | A3 | |
4,_q_ | 225 | | A2r | | |
4,_s_ | 210 | | | | B |
4,_m_ | 207 | | | | B |
4,_b_ | 201 | | A2r | | |
4,_l_ | 198 | | | | B |
4,_f_ | 194 | A1q | | | |
4,_j_ | 190 | | | A3 | |
4,_k_ | 186 | | A2r | | |
4,_c_ | 182 | | A2r | | |
4,_i_ | 178 | | A2r | | |
4,_r_ | 177 | A1q | | | |
4,_g_ | 175 | | | A3 | |
4,_d_ | 175 | | A2r | | |
4,_a_ | 174 | | A2r | | |
8,_k_ | 167 | [A] | | | |
4,_n_ | 156 | | | | B |
4,_p_ | 155 | | | | B |
8,_j_ | 140 | | | | B |
8,_i_ | 135 | | | | B |
4,_e_ | 123 | A1q | | | |
4,_o_ | 113 | | | | B |
------+---------+-----+-------+----+---+
Note A: Handle retroflex
It will be seen that all four subclasses of spoons are represented by
examples both above and below the median 178 mm. length. Also, the three
longest spoons in the collection belong to three different subclasses.
The salient feature is that the blunt-ended "B" spoons have a bimodal
distribution: from 198 mm. up, from 156 down. I should not be surprised
if B forms turned up in the intervening range; but I should expect the
bimodality to remain even if many additional specimens became available.
For the rest, it may be significant that the pointed-end classes A2, A3
are unrepresented below 170; and the clear quail-head (and rattle-box)
class A1 not above 195. It may be that beyond a certain size the firing
of the juxtaposed solid head and hollow rattle was difficult for the
Mohave.
_Designs_
The great majority of spoons are painted inside, usually outside (on the
back) also, though there mostly with longitudinal lines or stripes only.
The angled-and-forking overall pattern so characteristic of bowls occurs
in spoons, but is rare: _b_ is an example. The area of a scoop is
generally hardly wide and large enough for this design. In _b_ it
reduces in effect to a sort of cramped swastika.
One of the two most frequent patterns of spoons is that of
_g_,_h_,_i_,_j_,_m_--the last in negative effect and unsprinkled with
dots. The central feature is a column of three (or two and a half)
rhomboids. These are flanked and meshed by four (or three) triangles.
The rhomboids and the triangles are separated by three lines, making,
with their own boundaries, five parallel lines in all (though this
number is sometimes reduced); and where points of triangles meet (and
sometimes of rhomboids also) the corners are solid. It is obvious that
this pattern is related in several features to the commonest pattern of
bowls, but with adaptation to a more cramped field--chiefly by omission
of forking and back-angled elements. The only name obtained--once--was
kyauelkyau, which is said to mean zigzag or angled.
Another spoon pattern has two or three tiers of light rhomboids
separated by pairs of dark triangles, apex to apex (hourglass): see
_a_,_d_. There is no thin-line bordering or separating in this pattern.
For _d_, the design names cited were ta-hlame-hlame, "patches," and
"butterfly inside"; but I do not know which of these names refers to the
hollow rhomboids and which to the paired solid triangles.
Another tiered design arrangement is shown in _l_ and _q_. Both were
called coyote teeth, which speaks for itself. It will be seen that the
teeth are in opposite rows, geared into diastemas--which does not hold
for plate 2,_d_. In one of these spoons the solid-color teeth have a
line border, in the other a row of dots. In both there are two longer
double-toothed bands across the middle, two shorter one-way-facing bands
of teeth at the ends. "Coyote teeth" appears as a face paint--a
cross-barred line--in Handbook, figure 61,_b_.
A second design of outstanding frequency in spoons is represented by
_e_,_f_,_k_,_o_, (s). It was twice designated as fish backbone (with
adhering ribs). The backbone itself appears only twice in the five
examples in plate 4 (_e_,_o_), and is by no means dominant then. The
sets of parallel ribs or chevrons number from 10 to nearly 20, and make
either 3 or 5 bends (i.e., are formed by 4 or 6 lines). The bends are
filled in with small solid triangles in _f_,_k_,_s_. Rows of dots show
in _e_ and _s_.
Other designs each occur only once in the collection.
_c_, polka dots only.
_n_, a fishnetlike design, no name obtained, vertical corners filled in
solidly.
_p_, raccoon hand (first mistranslated "otter," but the otter is
"water-raccoon" in Mohave), with five hollow-line toes, background of
fine dots. There is some reminiscence of the forking bowl design, but
without angling back or hooks.
_s_, perhaps a simplified version of the pattern of _g_-_j_,_m_?
There is no marked correlation between any of these designs and the
shape classes of spoons that have been defined.
PLATE 5: JARS, POTS, JUGS, CUPS
_a_, water jar, 1723, recorded as "hápurui, small olla for seeds,
or for water in summer"; diameter mouth 128 mm., height 200 mm.
Neck d. about 83 per cent of mouth, body d. about double that of
neck and greater than height. There is an annular base which is not
present in the two other water jars. Design: tšitθôk style of face
paint.
_b_, water jar, 13792, mouth d. 177, h. 194. Neck d. 81 per cent of
mouth, body d. equals height.
_c_, fire-blackened cook pot, 13789, mouth d. 250, h. 192. Neck d,
227, body d. 250.
_d_, handled jug (spoutless pitcher), 1725, mouth d. 85, h. 95.
Design: ta-skilye-skilye, viz., outside points of chin tattooing.
_e_, handled jug, 1724, mouth d. 86, h. 90. Design: hotahpave,
viz., halter pattern of face painting.
_f_, handled jug, 13795, mouth d. 105, h. 147. This piece had not
been used when collected, and may have been a model for sale.
_g_, handled jug, 1739, called hápurui, jar, mouth d. 92, h. 140.
Design: fish backbone.
_h_, small, handled cup, 13796, mouth d. 88, h. 47. Used and
somewhat worn.
_i_, handled cup, 2-7359, mouth d. 128, h. 90. From older
(pre-1901) University collections, provenience and collector not
recorded. Assumed to be Mohave, but condition suggests the vessel
was made for sale and not used.
The two water jars are of about the same height, toward 8 in., but _a_
is smaller-mouthed and bigger-bellied than _b_. The neck diameters are
around 5/6 to 4/5 of the mouths. _a_ is somewhat greater through the
body than it is high; _b_, nearly the same. Another and larger jar is
shown in plate 8,_a_.
The cook pot, _c_, has the opening as large as the body diameter; the
neck is only 9 to 10 per cent smaller than the mouth, the height only 77
per cent of the width. This pot is somewhat higher in silhouette
proportion than any of the bowls, but not much higher than the highest
of them, viz., 2,_g_ and 8,_h_.
The four handled jugs fall into two classes: _d_ and _e_, medium; _f_
and _g_, high. In the former, the height is about a tenth greater than
the mouth diameter, in the latter, about a half greater. Also, in the
medium jugs, the base of the handle springs from the lower half of the
vessel; in the high ones, from the middle or above. In all cases the
handle rises somewhat above the lip. The neck is less than the mouth by
12 to 15 per cent.
The cups are like the jugs except that they are lower and the main
painted designs come inside. In fact, the cups seem to be small bowls
with a handle attached.
I am quite uncertain whether the handled jugs and cups are native Mohave
forms or derived in imitation of Caucasian shapes. It is unclear what
specific function their handles would have served in Mohave life, in
sand-floored houses empty of furniture or apparatus. Yet probably _g_
and certainly _h_ have been used. And the ware of the jugs and cups, as
well as their painted designs, are typical Mohave. They look like an
"acculturation acceptance"--a new trait adopted into the old native
pattern. The problem will probably be solved when enough datable
precontact and protocontact ware from the Mohave and kindred Yuman
tribes becomes available.
With these round vessels the forking-and-angled design of the bowl
interiors recurs: in the jar _a_, the jug _f_, on the interior of cup
_i_. It will be seen that these come with and without dot stippling. The
pattern of jug _d_ was called tattoo points; but it is the same as the
coyote teeth of plate 4,_l_,_q_. Similarly, _e_, though called
hotahpave halter, resembles plate 4,_g_-_i_; and _g_, called fish
backbone, lines up with the fish backbone designs on spoons: plate
4,_e_,_f_,_k_,_o_,_s_.
PLATE 6: BOWLS, PLATTERS, PARCHERS, CANTEENS
_a_, bowl, 4293; diameter 151 mm., height 76 mm. Design: inside,
raccoon hand; outside, fish bone, atcí isáka.[5] This is from
Tokwaθa's wife.
_b_, broken bowl, 4282; d. 157, h. 85. Design; raccoon hand.
_c_. large bowl or platter, 1745, of type called suyíre, d. 330, h.
125. Weight, 44 oz. The flanges to hold mesquite bark binding in
place are unusually prominent.
This is the largest and second heaviest round vessel in the
collection; but it is low, 38 per cent of the diameter--at the
minimum for bowls, maximum for platters. It is not strictly a bowl,
because there is no neck constriction: the vessel curves in
unbroken convexity up to the rim. On the other hand it is not a
typical platter because it has flanges and is bound like a bowl.
There are 11 of these flanges, 25 to 35 mm. long, projecting 5 to 8
mm., and spaced quite irregularly, with 120, 95, 90, 55, 85, 65,
115, 95, 75, 120, 75 mm. between their centers.
[5] Atcí is fish, isáka is bone, but the form mostly obtained was
(i)taṭ, backbone.
The bowls _a_ and _b_ are grouped together because of their raccoon-hand
designs; compare also plate 4,_p_. Bowl _a_ looks unused and may have
been made for sale; _b_ has been used and is probably from the same
house, though almost certainly not painted by the same person.
The large platter-bowl _c_ has its painted design built up around four
big rhomboids or hexagons, nearly rounded into pointed ovoids with
triple solid tips; between which similarly pointed triangles project
toward the center from the rim.
The oval platters _d_ and _e_, nos. 1738, 4294, are the convex backs or
under sides of plate 3,_i_,_j_. The former looks used, the latter new
and perhaps for sale. The tortoises on the under (6,_e_) and tortoise
carapace on the upper (3,_j_) side of the same piece seem an
exaggeration from normal Mohave style. In my field catalogue I entered
_d_ as "dish-like spoon"; and _e_, two years later, simply as "oval
spoon," which is confirmed by the notation: kam'óta kapeta, viz.,
"tortoise spoon."
The two katéla or parchers, _f_ and _g_, having adjacent numbers, 13787
and 13788, are probably out of one household--a conservative one,
inasmuch as they were secured in 1908. They differ slightly in
proportions, yet are closely similar. Piece _f_, the longer and flatter,
has its ends brought into a semblance of the abbreviated quail beaks and
eyes found on some spoons--class A2. The rims of both _f_ and _g_ are
transversely flat and wiped or pinched over inward to extra thickness,
then scored regularly with a fingernail or stick; in _g_ the outer edge
has also been lightly punch-marked.[6]
[6] In 1904, I saw in a native house upriver from Fort Mohave a
bi-pointed parcher or katéla which had nose and eyes at the ends
like those on quail spoons; and another which had along the edge
a line of overlapping impressions that might have been made by
the square corner of a board or tool. This description suggests
6,_f_ and 6,_g_, which I secured four years later at Needles.
The canteen in its net, _h_, no. 13793, has evidently seen use. This was
the kind taken on journeys. There is a faded design of three vertical
figures in double outline. Each of these consists of three
near-rhomboids set on top of one another, with the joints between them
open, so that the three of them appear as a single figure. Within each
of the figures and between them there are dots 4-6 mm. in diameter. The
bottom of the vessel is unpainted.
The plain duck seed-bin or canteen _i_, no. 4297, would be practical for
use sitting in the sand in the house or under the ramada shade. It
contained melon seeds when I purchased it.
PLATE 7: SPOON BACKS, TOYS, PIPES, POT RESTS
_a_, back of spoon 13803 shown in pl. 4,_h_; l. 225 mm.
_b_, back of 13809 shown in pl. 4,_m_; l. 207.
_c_, back of 1749 shown in pl. 4,_o_; l. 113.
_d_, back of 13810 shown in pl. 4,_n_; l. 156.
_e_, back of 1736 shown in pl. 4,_e_; l. 123.
_f_, back of 1747 shown in pl. 4,_k_; l. 186.
_g_, back of 1731 shown in pl. 4,_b_; l. 201.
_h_, back of 13802 shown in pl. 4,_c_; l. 182.
_i_, back of 13808; l. 226; front not shown.
_j_, lizard figure, 1726; max. l. 110. Probably a toy or amusement;
not used ritually.
_k_, hummingbird figure, 1727; l., beak to tail, 54.
_l_, clay pipe, 4264, boy's, unbaked, unfinished; l. 55.
_m_, clay pipe, 13870; broken, 62 mm. remaining.
_n_,_o_, clay pot rests, 4283b, 4283c; h. 92, 85.
The convex backs of spoons _a_-_i_ are not the only painted ones, but
show the more ambitious attempts, if this adjective is applicable to
rudeness of their degree. The prevalent painting is lengthwise striping,
though crosswise (_i_), and both ways (_d_), occur. The lengthwise
stripes may be plain lengthwise lines (_b_,_g_); heavy stripes with
light (_e_) or with rows of dots (_f_); flanked by multiple zigzags and
forming the fish backbone design (_c_,_h_); negative effect (_e_). Piece
_a_ is irregularly interesting: three diagonally curved lines sweep
across the convex back, and are subdivided by transverse lines into
about a dozen triangles and quadrilaterals of unlike shapes; nine of
these contain a polygonal spot or daub.
PLATE 8: JAR, CUP, PLATTER, BOWLS, SPOONS
This plate comprises vessels of various shapes which I had at first
intended not to illustrate or which had been overlooked.
_a_, large water jar, 13791, classing with pl. 5,_a_,_b_. Rim
diameter 255 mm., neck 227, maximum body diameter 315, height 255.
The design is of large solid hourglass figures separating
rhomboidal-hexagonal areas each bordered by double lines and
containing about 35 oval-round spots about 7-12 mm. across. The
pattern recalls that of the interior of pl. 3,_d_.
_b_, handled cup, 38406, of the type of pl. 5,_h_,_i_. Mohave
provenience assumed. Rim d. 100, h. 70. Interior design, 6
radiating lanceolate or petaloid areas, double-line bordered,
containing from 33 to 50 spots. There are small solid triangles
where the "petal" borders meet, and dots also in the peripheral
spaces. The handle is striped crosswise; the outside of the vessel,
vertically. Compare pl. 5,_h_,_i_.
_c_, _under_ side of platter 1722, front shown in pl. 3,_d_; d. 203
mm. The design is a solid dark and light checker of 25 whole or
partial squares.
_d_, bowl, 1721, d. 220 mm., h. 135, ratio 61 per cent. Design: the
forked-and-angled pattern, crudely executed, and called teítθôk
face paint. The dots were named hatúhk, rows of tattoo dots. The
_outside_ is painted with crossing lines, forming triangles and
diamonds, called sóaka, small net.
_e_, large bowl, 1746, d. 320, h. 150, ratio 47 per cent. Wt. 41
oz. The interior design, called atalyke hamalye, leaves of an
edible tuber-bearing plant, is fishnetlike: thin lines forming
squares bisected by diagonals running one way; or, a network of
right-angled triangles turning somewhat irregular toward the
vessel's rim. Opposite acute angles filled in solid. This design
apparently was begun by drawing 5 parallel lines across the
interior, demarcating 6 segments. These were then crossed, nearly
vertically, by 6 lines; and then by 6 diagonals. _Outside_,
vertical stripes 10 or more mm. wide. There are three peglike
projections, irregularly spaced, to keep binding from slipping.
Two, broken off, are 7-8 mm. across; the third projects 11 mm.
_f_,_g_ are _outside_-painted bowls, both with height 48 per cent
of their rim diameter, almost the same as _e_. _f_, 13777, d. 310,
h. 150; thickness near bottom 7-9 mm., at neck 4.5-6, at lip 6.5-7;
wt. 48 oz.--heaviest piece in the collection. _g_, 13781, d. 165,
h. 80; wt. 14 oz. The design of _f_ is negative in effect: a band
of light diamonds reserved on darker background; they are about
twice as high as wide, and each is inner-outlined with a dark
border. The interior is dark and worn smooth. The pattern of _g_ is
irregular: diagonals sloping to the right, with left-sloping ones
crossing every other one of these; but to the side, the
left-sloping lines come thicker, the right-sloping ones are
omitted.
_h_, 13790, is a fire-blackened bowl that has been cooked in and
the contents run over; d. 185, h. 125, ratio 68 per cent. This is
the maximum for a Mohave bowl, though equaled by pl. 2,_g_; and the
shape is still that of a bowl rather than of a pot (olla) such as
pl. 5,_c_. The ratio of rim, neck, and body diameters is 100, 95,
97 per cent for 8,_h_, whereas the pot 5,_c_ has 100, 91, 100 per
cent, and its height is 77 instead of 68 per cent.
_i_,_j_,_k_, 13811, 1750, 13806, are spoons, the first
blunt-topped, the last with 135° back-curved handle. The maximum
lengths are 135, 140, 167 mm. The patterns are as follows.
_i_, no. 13811, outlined diamonds and triangles containing from 9 to 4
dots. The surface is worn, and the arrangement of figures of the two
shapes may have been more regular than now appears; but the painting was
slovenly at best.
_j_, no. 1750, very similar to the fishbone design of plate 4,_o_. There
are 12 thinnish cross lines, each with four upward angles. 8,_j_ and
4,_o_ are very similar and bear adjoining numbers, 1750 and 1749, and
were almost certainly the product of the same hand.
_h_, 13806, parallel line-angles, pointed right, then left, then again
right across the front of the hollow of the scoop. These angles are
formed by 18 or 19 cross lines.
SUMMARY OF SHAPES
_Bowls_: kwáθki. Diameter about twice the height; neck concave, often
strengthened with a lashing of mesquite bark; lip gently everted;
principal design inside; outside design usually mere lines, stripes,
rows of dots. H/D down to 38 per cent, usually 45-61 per cent, in two
cases 68 per cent--one of these has been cooked in. (Pls. 1,_a_-_h_,
2,_a_-_h_, 6,_a_-_c_, 8,_d_-_h_.)
_Round platter or plate_: kayéθa. Lipless; continuous curvature.
Principal design inside (above). H/D 29-35 percent. (Pls. 3,_a_-_d_,
_g_, 8,_c_.)
_Oval platter_: kayúka or kakápa. Like the last except for being oval,
with width/length percentage between 78 and 89. They also average
smaller than the round plates--modes around 160 mm. and 260 mm.
respectively; but the two classes do overlap in size. (Pls. 3,_e_-_f_,
_h_-_j_, 6,_d_-_e_.)
_Spoon_, _ladle_, _dipper_, _scoop_: kam'óta. These are oval trays
brought at one end to (A) a point or rude quail's head, or (B) to a
sharp rounding or blunt point. The second type is obviously related in
form to the oval platters; though most spoons are longer than most
platters. Their range is from 113 to 226 mm. Painted design on the inner
side varied; on the back it is usually simpler, but also varied. A few
spoons are built up at the "handle" into a hollow box that rattles.
_Parcher_: katéla. As the spoons can be construed as oval platters
pointed at one end, the parchers--used to shake live coals with grain or
seeds--are two-ended, with well-raised points. They are about twice as
long as spoons, and longer than any known platters or bowls: 340-385
mm., with a width about seven-tenths that. They are wholly unpainted.
(Pl. 6,_f_, _g_.)
The five foregoing shapes are all "open" and relatively flat. There are
about the same number of "tall" shapes--pots, jars, jugs, etc. But these
are represented by notably fewer specimens. Whether this disproportion
existed in precontact times, I do not know. It is possible that cooking
vessels and containers of American make had begun to crowd out native
forms by 1902-1908 faster than bowls, platters, and spoons were being
displaced.
_Cook pot_: táskyena. The single specimen available, 5,_c_, is about the
size of a bowl but higher (77 per cent as against 68 per cent maximum);
mouth and body diameter the same, neck constricted 9 to 10 per cent. No
handles, paint, or decoration.
_Large cook pot_: tšuváva. Set on three rests. It may have been
proportionally higher than the táskyena, but my recollection is fifty
years old.
_Water jar_: hápurui. Unhandled, painted. The largest dimension is the
body diameter, usually below the middle. Next largest dimension is the
height, though in one case this is about equaled by the mouth diameter.
The neck has from 80 to 87 per cent the diameter of the mouth.
One specimen (5,_a_) differs from the two others in showing considerably
more taper from body to neck and mouth and in having an annular base.
The contained volume would be around a gallon or up. (Pls. 5,_a_, _b_,
8,_a_.)
_Oval seed-storage jar (or canteen) with short side spout_: hápurui
hanemó, "duck jar" from its shape. The single specimen is unpainted.
(Pl. 6,_i_.)
_Seed jar with small flaring mouth._ See Appendix I.
_Canteen for carrying_ in sling or net. Short spout on top, as in a
basket or gourd. One specimen, painted. (Pl. 6,_h_.)
_Handled jug_: no native name obtained, except hápurui, jar, or kwáθki,
bowl. May be a postcontact form. Higher than wide; no spout. Painted
outside. (Pl. 5,_d_-_g_.)
_Handled cup_: also unnamed, except perhaps kwáθki, and perhaps
postcontact. Wider than high. Painted design mainly inside. (Pls.
5,_h_-_i_, 8,_b_.)
TRANSITIONAL AND EXCEPTIONAL PIECES
Bowls with principal painting outside: 8,_f_, _g_.
Bowls of height more than two-thirds diameter: 2,_g_, base somewhat
conical; 8,_h_, fire blackened.
Bowl with cylindrical projections to prevent slip of neck binding:
8,_e_.
Transition bowl-platter with 11 flanges to hold binding; no neck or
recurved rim; H/D ratio 38 per cent on border between bowl and round
platter classes. The diameter is greater than that of any other bowl or
platter in the collection (8,_e_ is next), and the weight is second
heaviest (8,_f_ being first): 6,_c_. Called suyíre.
Spoon with ribbon handle curled back (only "handled" spoon): 8,_k_.
Water jar with annular base (found otherwise only on handled jugs), and
considerably reduced neck and mouth: 5,_a_.
SUMMARY OF PAINTED DESIGNS AND ELEMENTS
_"Angled-and-forked" continuous pattern_: usually of triple lines;
background stippled or empty. Bowls 1,_a_-_h_, 2,_e_, 8,_d_; platters
3,_a_-_b_, 3,_g_ (called "fish bones"); spoon 4,_b_; jar 5,_a_, jug
5,_g_; cup 5,_i_. I did not obtain a name for this design as an overall
pattern. Some element in it, perhaps the filled-in angle, was twice
denominated tšitθôk face paint.
_"Hourglass" figures_: (1) as principal design, bowl 2,_f_; platter
3,_d_; spoons 4,_a_, 4,_d_ (in rows), 4,_q_; jar 8,_a_; jug 5,_e_. (2)
as secondary design element with rhomboids, bowls 2,_a_, _b_; spoons
4,_g_, _h_, _i_, _j_, _m_ with diamonds in column. The hourglass figure
can of course be construed as the "filled-in angle" enlarged.
_Quadrilaterals-hexagons_, shifting from one to the other according to
exigencies of the field. The mark + designates painted figures, that are
dark; others are open, left as part of the lighter background, or
stippled.
A. Four central polygons: bowls +2,_a_, +6,_c_ (in this, rounded
into ovals).
B. More than four: bowls +2,_b_, 2,_f_; platter 3,_d_; jug 5,_e_;
cup 8,_b_.
C. In rows: spoons 4,_a_, _d_; jar 8,_a_.
D. In columns: spoons 4,_g_, _h_, _i_, _j_, +_m_.
_Rows of dark and light triangles_: bowls 2,_a_, _b_; spoons 4,_l_, _q_
(these spaced and "geared"); 2,_b_, 4,_l_, _q_ named coyote teeth; jug
5,_d_, named tattoo points.
_Fishbone (fish backbone) pattern_: of parallel angled lines, from one
to four chevrons in each line. Usually about half the angles are filled
in; this is indicated by the asterisk *.
A. With vertebral column shown by central line: platter *3,_g_
(transitional to angled-and-forked pattern); spoons 4,_e_ (with
stippling), *4,_o_, 7,_h_ outside, 8,_j_; jug *5,_g_.
B. Without vertebral column, zigzag parallels only: Bowl *2,_g_;
platters *3,_c_, *3,_e_; spoons *4,_f_, *4,_k_, *4,_s_, 7,_c_
outside, 8,_k_ (direction of angles unusual).
C. (Named fishbone or fishtail, but design of straight stripes
only: bowl 2,_h_ outside; spoon 7,_e_ outside.)
_Circular center of design_: bowl 2,_f_; oval platter 6,_d_; cup 8,_b_.
_Fishnetlike design_, crossing lines, square or diagonal. Asterisk *
denotes filled-in angles.
A. On inside of vessel: bowls *8,_e_, perhaps 2,_g_; spoons *4,_n_,
8,_i_ (really rows of polygons, stippled).
B. On outside of vessel: bowls 8,_c_ (bold checker), 8,_f_, 8,_g_;
spoons 7,_a_ (with blobs in centers), 7,_d_.
_Large polka dots_ as design: platters 3,_f_ outside, 3,_h_, 3,_j_
(combined with tortoises); spoons 4,_c_, 7,_a_ (central blobs in
polygon), 7,_f_ (with stripes).
_Stippling_: more or less as shading or value effect or border.
A. Of areas: bowls 1,_a_, _b_, _c_, _d_, _e_, _g_, _h_, 2,_e_, _h_,
8,_d_; platters, 3,_d_, (3,_j_); spoons 4,_b_, _e_, _g_, _i_, _j_,
_q_, _r_, 8,_i_; jars 5,_b_, 8,_a_; jug 5,_f_; cups 5,_i_, 8,_b_.
B. Row of spots as outer or inner border: bowl 6,_a_; platter
3,_g_; spoons 4,_h_, _p_, _q_; canteen 6,_h_.
_Solid angles, corners filled in_: (see * under fishbone and fishnet
patterns; and regular in "angled-and-forked.") Total occurrence is in
more than thirty vessels. Bowls 1,_a_-_h_, 2,_a_, _b_, (_c_), _f_, _g_
outside, 6,_c_, 8,_d_, _e_; platters 3,_a_, _b_, _c_, _d_, _e_, _g_;
spoons 4,_b_, _f_, _g_, _h_, _i_, _k_, _m_, _n_, _r_, _s_; jar 5,_a_;
jugs 5,_e_, _f_, _f_; cups 5(_h_), _i_, 8,_b_.
_Negative (dark) effect_:
A. Dark background, pattern light: bowl 8,_f_ outside; platters
3,_a_, _b_; spoon 4,_m_.
B. Dark and light areas alternating evenly: bowls 2,_c_, _d_;
platter 8,_c_ outside.
C. Seeming negative, owing to masses of dark polygons: bowls 2,_a_,
(_b_).
SUMMARY OF DESIGN NAMES
Designs are named most frequently after animals or their parts, once
after a leaf. Next most frequent are names derived from patterns of face
painting or tattooing. A few are descriptive, like "patches," "zigzag."
_Animals or parts._
Fish (back)bone: 3,_c_, 3,_g_, 4,_o_, 4,_q_, 5,_g_, 6,_a_ outside
Fish tail (?): 2,_h_ outside
Coyote teeth: 2,_d_, 4,_l_, 4,_q_
Raccoon hand: 6,_a_, 6,_b_, 4,_p_
Yellowhammer belly: 1,_a_
Tortoise: 3,_j_, 6,_e_ outside
Spider: 2,_h_, 3,_i_, 6,_d_ outside
Butterfly: 2,_f_; "in mouth," 4,_d_
_Plant parts._
(Cottonwood) leaves: 3,_d_, 8,_e_
Of these, coyote teeth, yellow-hammer belly, butterfly, and (atalyka)
leaf occur also as names of face paintings (Handbook, p. 732, fig.
61,_b_-_e_).
The Handbook (p. 738) mentions a few additional names for pottery
designs: rain, rainbow (this also a face painting), melon markings.
_Face paintings or tattoo._
tšitθôk: 3,_d_, 5,_a_. This seems to denote an element in what I
have called the forked-and-angled pattern of plate 1. Also recorded
as tšitgôk.
hotahpave, "halter": 2,_f_, 5,_e_. It seems to refer to paired
crossing lines as part of hourglass figures. In Handbook (fig.
61,_i_-_j_) it appears as point-to-point chevrons on the cheeks.
ta-tsirqa-tsirqa: 1,_d_. In Handbook (fig. 61,_k_, _l_) it appears
as sharp points under the eyes (cf. ibid., fig. 61,_g_, _h_,
"ha-tsira-tsirk," a vertical line down from the eye).
ta-skilye-skilye: 5,_d_. Reference is to a column of horizontal
points at the edge of one style of women's chin tattoo. (See
Handbook, p. 521, fig. 46,_q_.)
iya-m-tšupe(r)t(a): 2,_g_. Iya is the mouth; tšupeta, to hold back
or cover.
_"Adjectivally" descriptive._
ta-hlame-hlame, "patches": 1,_b_, 4,_d_
kyauelkyau, "angled, zigzag": 4,_g_
kan'ú (?), "patterned": 2,_b_
It is evident that there is no deeper symbolic significance in the
pattern names. They are like our crow's foot, horseshoe, pigtail,
fleur-de-lys, diamond, spade, wavy, broken--metaphorically or directly
descriptive. The Mohave in addition have available a number of striking
and familiar types of designs with which women ornament their faces.
In their actual, though of course transient, face decoration, the
Mohave, though not quite the artistic equals of the Seri, paint with far
more care, neatness, and precision than they bestow on their pottery. It
is significant that it is the patterns of pottery that are named after
those painted on their cheeks, not the reverse.
THE MOHAVE POTTERY STYLE
Mohave pottery was made in a culture which set little intrinsic value on
anything technological and looked upon economic acquisition as in itself
unworthy and fit only for dissipation. Artifacts were used but not
prized; and they all perished upon their owner's death.
Certain qualities of Mohave pottery are expectable as a product of this
atmosphere: lack of evenness and finish or precision, the appearance of
haste or indifference in manufacture. Surfaces are not quite true or
even, thicknesses variable, firing intensity somewhat spotty; diameters
vary enough for the eye to see some lopsidedness from the round, or sway
in the level of a rim. Particularly in the painted designs, which do not
contribute to functional use, inequalities, crowding, wavering lines,
departures from symmetry, are all conspicuous.
At the same time the ware is never incompetent. It has reasonable
strength, toughness, hardness for its purpose. Its shapes are definite
and well standardized. It never tries merely to get by. This is proved
by the fact that, except for vessels like cook pots and parchers, where
decoration would be wasted, painting is the rule, and mostly, painting
on both sides. The execution of this painting is often enough slovenly;
but it is firm in aim. There are a series of design patterns more or
less fitted to the several shapes; there is considerable choice between
these, and even more freedom of adaptation to shape of field. Timidity
was not one of the earmarks of the Mohave potter; if her pattern came
out neatly, well and good; if uneven or crowded, there was no harm
done. Standards were not particularly high, especially not as regards
exactness; but they called for vigor of approach. Emphasis is on the
overall effect of pattern, not on its items. The continuous
forked-and-angled design, the combinations of hourglass figures, of
spaced rhomboids or hexagons, even the simpler fishbone pattern--all
have this total-field approach, with relative indifference to figure
elements that got squeezed, stretched, or distorted.
Some of these patterns, especially the forked-and-angled continuous or
interlocking one, are not easy to plan or apply with reference to a
given field, whether circular or otherwise; yet they are attempted again
and again with a slapdash gusto.
Elements like the triple line, or an extra line shadowing the edge of a
solid area, or a row of dots following an inner or outer contour, or the
filling either of figures or background with stippled spots, and the
superabundant solid-filled angles--either opposite or apart--are simple
enough to execute in themselves; but the frequency of their use, often
of two or three of them at once, are evidence that the Mohave potter was
at least not skimping her decoration, even though she was unworried if
it came out skew or ragged. After all, these details might have simply
been left out instead of being executed.
In fundamental form, the bowls, platters, parchers are pleasing; and in
design and its relation to its field, vessels like 1,_b_, _c_, 2,_g_,
3,_a_, _b_--or 3,_c_, _e_, 5,_g_; or 4,_g_; _h_, _m_, _p_; or 3,_d_,
4,_r_--show concepts that in the hands of a more interested or
aesthetically more experienced population would have had definite
potentialities.
There is then a standard in the Mohave pottery art, and behind this a
tradition. How this tradition grew will be gradually worked out as a
corpus of published data on the ceramic wares of other tribes of the
region becomes available, and especially as archaeological information
accumulates. Personally, I have always assumed that Colorado River ware
as represented by historic Yuma and Mohave pottery was a variant in a
cotradition that includes also Hohokam, much of Sonora, and probably
southern California. This seems also the basic view of Malcom Rogers,
Schroeder, Treganza, Meighan, my present collaborator Harner, and the
few others who have concerned themselves with Colorado Valley pottery.
But of course the full story is long and complex; and the present
description and Harner's analysis are merely thresholds from which the
problem can be really entered. Rogers' "Yuman Pottery Making" is a
useful preliminary survey and stimulating. Meanwhile a Patayan tradition
has been set up for the mountains and desert east of the Mohave habitat
along the Colorado. But we have scant information on the Patayan
development, and that little seems quite different from the historic
Mohave one. So far as there may be resemblances, I hope that our present
detailed contribution will induce those who know Patayan to point out in
print such similarities as they discern.
APPENDIX I
MEMORANDA ON THE DESTROYED ACADEMY COLLECTION
The Mohave ethnological collection which was destroyed by fire at the
California Academy of Sciences in San Francisco in 1906 consisted of 67
items, according to a record preserved in my notebook 7. Of these 67, 32
were pottery vessels and 12 were ceramic ancillaries. The latter
consisted of four paddles, three pebbles used as anvils, yellow pigment,
two samples of potter's clay, one of clay pounded small, and a sample of
fine-crushed rock for tempering.
The vessels comprised:
11 bowls, one of them of kwáθki shape; mostly listed by me as
"dishes"; they may include some platters
3 bowllike vessels, listed as: "kwáθki, small pot"; "suyíre, round
dish"; "tšemátšive, pot with designs inside and out"
1 "dish, corrugated outside"
9 spoons
1 fire-blackened pot
1 cup, named as "kwáθki aha-suraitši"
1 jar, "hápurui, water jug"
2 seed jars, described as: "25, water jug, wheat jar,
aha-tše-kemauvitše, in halves, rejoined with mesquite gum"; and
"39, jar, top sealed with mesquite gum; contains melon seeds for
roasting and pounding; to take them out, the mouth of the jar is
set on hot coals"
2 parchers, double-ended
1 jar with rope handle (canteen like pl. 6, _h_? or a water jar
carried by a rope around its neck?)
I do not know whether in 1900 I meant the same by jar, jug, pot as now.
My "dish" of then may have included some platters as well as bowls. I
was not using the term "bowl"; and "pot" seems to have designated
sometimes a cook pot or olla, sometimes simply any open pottery vessel,
including bowls. Nor can I imagine now what I may have meant by the
"corrugation" on a dish. A cup is mentioned, but called a special kind
of kwáθki. If the "hápurui, water jug" was handled, it would show that
handled jugs were called by the same name as widemouthed jars, hápurui.
The two seed jars were evidently of the small-necked and small-mouthed
type discussed in connection with the Chemehuevi seed jar no. 13875.
The design names obtained in 1900 were:
Fish bones, fish back, usually written atciθtatr (= atšitaṭ): on
four spoons and one "dish."
Spider, haldâda (for halytôṭa), on one "pot." I sketched the core
of the pattern: an hourglass figure (meeting angles) with double
lines from the corners.
Cottonwood leaf, on three spoons and the jar with rope handle
Matitšiav leaf (a bush growing away from river), on one spoon
Turtle (viz., carapace markings), on one spoon
Hotaxpam, on the tšemátšive "pot," also on one spoon; described as
a red X painted below the eyes by women; hotaxpave, halter, the
cross-strap being near the horse's eye
Kari hanyóra, "basket pattern," on the outside of a dish
Rain, kovau, on two dish-pots; on the outside in at least one
Rainbow, kwalisei, on the outside of two "dishes" and one spoon. I
think these are simply stripes or parallel lines on the under side.
Rainbow occurs also as a design on women's wooden dice, and as a
face paint.
Fishnet, once on the outside of a "dish"
Melon markings, kamíto hanyóra, on one of the seed-water jars
Clouds were given as the name of the "corrugations" on dish no. 46.
I evidently asked a foolish question.
Handbook of California Indians (fig. 64, p. 738) shows a typical bowl
and spoon from this Academy collection, which I had drawn before their
destruction. The bowl pattern is outside, consists of heavy stripes and
thin lines, and was called "rain." The spoon pattern was probably on the
inside, was called "fish backbone," and is similar to that of plate
4,_f_, _k_, _s_.
APPENDIX II
A SMALL MOHAVE BOWL
About 1908 I was given or purchased as a souvenir a small bowl which is
now Peabody Museum no. 54-41-10/34461. It is a typical bowl except for
being smaller than any in the University collection.
It is 123 mm. in diameter, 64 in height; H/D ratio is therefore 52 per
cent. The ridge is finished with a horizontally flat edge 4-5 mm. wide.
I estimate the mean thickness of the ware as around 4 mm. The weight is
7 oz. There is a mesquite lashing below the rim with three knots in it.
The inner side is worn by use, and parts of the design are no longer
plain. The basic element is the raccoon hand, of which there were
originally 20 to 24 units. Each of these consists of a solid red
triangle, isosceles or equilateral, with sides of 15-20 mm. From each
triangle project four digits--bars 6-12 mm. long. The hands are
scattered rather evenly over the field, but pointing in all directions:
toward the center, toward the rim, or across the circle. Between the
hand units there are red dots 2-3 mm. in diameter.
The under side carries 41 vertical (radiating) lines 1-2 mm. wide and
30-80 mm. long.
APPENDIX III
GRANITE TEMPER AND LIMONITE PIGMENT EXAMINATION
By
PROFESSOR CHARLES MEYER
The piece of granite, no. 4326, used for temper is high in quartz (20-25
per cent) and potash feldspar (35-40 per cent), with perhaps 10 per cent
of black mica now chloritized. The remainder is probably soda-rich
plagioclase, a feldspar. This is a very acid granite, silica probably
constituting around 70 per cent of the total mass. As a result, as the
rock surface weathered, it would not wash off as clay but would maintain
hard spicules and sharp angles of quartz useful as temper.
The limonite pigment, no. 4295, Fe{2}O{3}·n(+)H{2}O, has mostly
crystallized on exposure to become toethite, Fe{2}O{3}·nH{2}O. If
originally derived from a sulphide, none of this seems to remain. Some
clay is contained and a little quartz silt; also some carbonate in the
form of calcite, which acts as a cement for the whole; but the total of
silicates and carbonates, that is, noniron oxide, is not over 10 per
cent. On roasting, the water content is driven off, and the remaining
Fe{2}O{3} is red. A reducing heating with carbon however produces
magnetic powder Fe{3}O{4}, a black pigment.
APPENDIX IV
MOHAVE POTTERY IN OTHER MUSEUMS
In 1934 F. H. Douglas, of the Denver Art Museum, wrote my colleague
Gifford about Mohave pottery which he had seen on display in various
museums, without special search of catalogues or storerooms. The list
may still be useful.
U. S. National Museum: 25 vessels, mostly old, many collected by Palmer,
some evidently mislabeled Diegueño or Pimo. One anvil stone. [_Yuma_, a
bowl and a 5-necked vase, from Palmer; the Yuma went in for "fancy" or
tourist pieces earlier than the Mohave. _Cocopa_, McGee got 4 plates, a
Mohave type dipper, unpainted, 2 paddles.]
Peabody Museum, Harvard: 10 vessels collected by Edward Palmer in 1876,
viz., 1 very large jar, 2 other jars, 1 tiny jar, 3 bowls, 3 dippers;
also 2 pottery dolls, a paddle, an anvil stone, a "vessel of mud and
straw." There is also a pottery doll secured by Jules Marcou in 1854--he
must have been on the Whipple Expedition! [I have seen this lot and,
like everything Palmer got, it is excellent. Together with National
Museum pieces, these of Palmer's are the most important collection of
Mohave pottery extant. There seem to be no handled vessels; but there
are dolls--besides Marcou's. The Palmer collections, formed twenty-five
to thirty years before mine, will be the touchstone of the "purity" of
mine. From having seen the Palmer material, I am confident that Mohave
native ware had not been _seriously_ impaired technologically or
stylistically by 1902-1908; but it must have been affected somewhat--the
railroad came through in 1886--and it will be desirable to know at what
points it had begun to change.--A. L. K.]
Chicago Natural History Museum: 8 vessels (bowls, dippers, jars,
canteen), also 3 dolls, collected in 1901. [The date points to Owen, who
was in southern California about then. From Yuma, one painted, one
unpainted bowl.]
Museum of the American Indian: 15 assorted pieces, 3 of them unpainted.
[Same number from _Yuma_]. [Possibly Edward Davis of Mesa Grande
collected these.]
University of Pennsylvania: [2 _Yuma_ pottery dolls].
Denver Art Museum: 3 human-headed vases, pre-1900. Also 5 brand-new
pieces bought at Needles in 1934.
It is curious that none of these collections have been described, except
possibly for stray pieces in nonethnographic connections. They aggregate
into a group probably at least as large as that discussed here; perhaps
considerably larger when the storerooms shall have been examined.
APPENDIX V
CORRELATION OF KROEBER AND HARNER SHAPE CLASSES
_Kroeber_ _Harner_
Bowl I
Platter II
Bowl, deep III
Cook pot IV
Water jar V, VI
Canteen VII
Handled cup VIII, IX
Handled jug X
Spoon (scoop) XI-XVI
Parcher XVII-XVIII
[Illustration: Fig. 1. Profile shape types. Exterior to left; section to
right.]
PART II
A DESCRIPTION FOR THE ARCHAEOLOGIST
PARKER RED-ON-BUFF, FORT MOHAVE VARIANT AND PARKER BUFF, FORT MOHAVE
VARIANT
BY
MICHAEL J. HARNER
INTRODUCTION
The following analysis of the Mohave pottery collected by Professor
Kroeber is primarily for the use of the archaeologist to aid him in
identifying historic Mohave ceramics. Not represented in the collection
is pottery made by the Mohave south of Parker. Some typological
differences may exist between the pottery of those settlements and the
pottery in Kroeber's collection, which is from Mohave Valley. In
addition, the evidence seems to indicate that Mohave ceramics were
undergoing changes in the late historic period. Since the historic
period can be considered to extend back to the time of the first Spanish
contacts, other chronologically significant "historic" Mohave pottery
types or type variants may be discerned through additional research. For
these reasons "Fort Mohave" is introduced here as a variant or subtype
name in preference to using "Historic Mohave" which is felt to be too
inclusive a term.
In referring to historic Mohave pottery, Malcolm Rogers (1945, p. 179)
once used the name "Needles Red-on-Buff." However, the description of
Needles Red-on-Buff by Colton (1939, pp. 12-13) and the use of that type
name by Schroeder (1952, p. 32) indicate that each has in mind a type
distinguishable from the pottery described in this paper. At the same
time, Schroeder (1952, p. 20) clearly considers that his Parker types
include historic Mohave pottery within their typological range, and I am
of the same opinion. The descriptions of Parker Red-on-Buff, Parker
Buff, and Parker Stucco by Schroeder (1952, pp. 19-22) agree in basic
characteristics with most of the pottery described in the present paper.
However, some forms which do not seem to occur prehistorically in the
Lower Colorado Buff Ware, such as cups, ring bases and keels, are
present in the late historic collection described here. Such new forms
can be of definite use as chronological diagnostics, but it is difficult
to justify setting up a new type on the basis of them alone.
Consequently, the qualification "Fort Mohave variant" has been added to
the Parker type names to denote this late historic pottery complex. When
more detailed descriptions are available for the earlier ceramics of the
Parker Series, the typological contrast may prove to be of sufficient
scope to warrant classifying the Fort Mohave variants as full-fledged
types. In any case, such descriptions must be made before useful
comparisons can be attempted.
The description which follows does not include pottery figurines, toys,
rattles, pipes, or pot rests. Also one undecorated jar[7] was not
included in the study.
[7] UCMA no. 1/4297. Pl. 6,_i_.
Techniques of description used here are almost entirely based upon
Colton and Hargrave (1937), Shepard (MS), and Gifford (1953); the latter
paper being also the source of the paint permanency scale.[8] Color
analysis is based upon the Munsell Soil Color Chart and hardness tests
upon Moh's scale. Depth and diameter measurements refer to exterior
dimensions.
[8] I wish to thank A. H. Schroeder. R. C. Euler, and H. S.
Colton for their constructive criticism of this description.
[Illustration: Fig. 2. Rim and lip types. Interior to left; exterior to
right.]
Since the size of the collection leaves much to be desired, particularly
as regards Parker Buff, Fort Mohave variant, the writer wishes to
emphasize that the definitions of these variants are only tentative and
hopes that others will not hesitate to revise them in the light of
additional evidence.
PARKER RED-ON-BUFF, FORT MOHAVE VARIANT
GENERAL DESCRIPTION
=Synonym=: None.
=Variant named for=: Fort Mohave Reservation.
=Illustrations=: This publication.
=Type specimens=: Mohave pottery collection at the University of
California Museum of Anthropology.
=Type sites=: All specimens were collected ethnographically on the Fort
Mohave Reservation in the vicinity of Needles, California.
=Cultural association=: Historic Mohave.
=Time=: In use and collected during the years 1902 through 1908.
=Size of sample=: 33 bowls; 4 jars; 7 cups; and 29 scoops.
ANALYSIS
=Construction technique=: Coiling.
=Finishing technique=: Paddle and anvil.
=Firing=: Fully to incompletely oxidized.
=Paste=:
_Color._--Range: hue 2.5YR to 10R; value 6 to 7; chroma 4 to 6.
Most common: 2.5YR 6/5 (between a weak reddish orange and a weak
orange.)
_Temper._--Size: average .4 mm. (fine); maximum 1.4 mm. (coarse);
minimum microscopic. Greatest range between average and maximum
observed in a single vessel is .4 to 1.3 mm. Kind: predominantly
white angular and subangular particles (feldspar) together with a
small amount of white rounded particles (quartz). Some mica
(copper-colored) is present, but except for a few vessels is hardly
noticeable.[9] No sherd temper is visible. Amount: When seen in
cross section the amount of the paste surface occupied by temper
particles ranges from ca. 30 per cent to ca. 50 per cent; the
average being ca. 40 per cent.
[9] Mineral identifications were kindly made by Dr. Adolf Pabst,
Department of Geological Sciences, University of California.]
_Carbon streak._--None.
_Texture._--Rough.
_Hardness._--Where the paste is buff-colored: range of hardness is
2 to 6.5; average is 4. Where the paste is grayish: range 3.5 to
8.5; average 6.5. These hardness ratings can be in error ± .5 owing
to variability in the mineral set used for testing.
_Fracture._--Medium to crumbling.
=Surface finish=: Anvil depressions are generally discernible on
interior surfaces of vessels. Surfaces are uniformly smoothed, but not
polished. All vessels are unslipped (a few scoops have a sliplike
surface appearance, owing to one or both of their surfaces being
completely painted over; but the painting marks make it evident that
these are not applications of the clay wash that characterizes a true
slip.).
=Surface color=:
_Bowls._--Exterior: range of hue 10R to 10YR; value 2 to 8; chroma
1 to 6. Most common: 5YR 6/4 (pale neutral brown). Interior: range
of hue 2.5YR to 10YR; value 3 to 8; chroma 1 to 8. Most common:
2.5YR 6/7 (weak to moderate orange).
_Jars._--Exterior: range of hue 10R to 10YR; value 3 to 7; chroma 1
to 8. Most common: sample insufficient. Interior: range of hue and
value same as for exterior surface; chroma 1 to 6. Most common:
sample insufficient.
_Cups._--Exterior: range of hue 10R to 10YR; value 3 to 8; chroma 1
to 7. Most common: 2.5YR 6/6 (moderate orange pink). Interior:
range of hue and chroma same as for exterior surface; value 4 to 8.
Most common: 5YR 7/4 (between moderate orange-pink and weak
yellowish orange).
_Scoops._--(For colors of completely painted-over surfaces, consult
section on "Decoration.") Exterior: range of hue 2.5YR to 7.5YR;
value 2 to 8; chroma 1 to 6. Most common: 5YR 5/4 (between pale
reddish brown and moderate yellowish brown). Interior: range of hue
and value same as for exterior; chroma 1 to 7. Most common: 5YR 6/4
(between weak reddish orange and light yellowish brown).
=Fire clouds=:
_Placement._--Occur on any part of the exteriors of all classes of
vessels; never occur on the interiors of bowls, but sometimes on
the interiors of jars, cups and scoops. Indistinct in shape.
_Amount._--Every vessel has at least one fire cloud on its exterior
surface. Presence of fire clouds on the interior surface is more
variable. Fire clouds are extremely variable in size.
Bowls: Exterior: as many as 14 per vessel.
Often cover more than one-half of the surface.
Interior: no fire clouds.
Jars: Exterior: as many as 4 per vessel. Cover
less than half of the surface. Interior: ranges
from being entirely free of fire clouds to being
completely blackened through use.
Cups: Exterior: as many as 4 per vessel, and
at least 1. Interior: with the exception of 1
cup, which has 1 small fire cloud, they are
lacking.
Scoops: Exterior: as many as 12 per vessel.
Often cover more than one-half of the surface.
Interior: not more than 1. Occur only occasionally.
_Color._--Value 2 to 7, chroma 1 (light gray to near black). Hue
depends upon vessel surface color.
=Form=:
_Bowls: Straight wall (circular and oval)._--
Profile form types: I (circular bowls) and II
(oval bowls).
Lip and rim types: Lip type B. Rim types 1, 2,
and 3. Types 1 and 2 occur on both circular
and oval bowls, type 1 being the more common.
Type 3 occurs on a single circular bowl.
Shoulders: None.
Base: Rounded.
Diameter range: (a) for circular bowls, 12.3 to
33.0 cm.; (b) for oval bowls, maximum length
ranges from 15.4 to 26.8 cm. and maximum
width from 12.0 to 21.6 cm.
Depth range: (a) for circular bowls, 6.0 to 13.4
cm.; (b) for oval bowls, 4.5 to 6.6 cm. when
measured at the point of maximum length and
3.1 to 5.5 cm. when measured at the point of
maximum width.
Wall thickness range: (a) at rim, 4 to 9 mm.;
(b) at a distance of 1 cm. below rim, 4 to
7.5 mm.; (c) at center of vessel base, 4 to
9 mm.
Additional features: None, with the exception
of the largest circular straight walled bowl,
which has pottery knobs. (a) Nature of
feature: short oval pottery knobs apparently
for the purpose of holding in place vegetal
bindings which were sometimes wrapped
around vessels at the lip. (b) Placement:
encircle the vessel at the lip and project
horizontally from it; tops of the knobs are
15 to 20 mm. below the rim. (c) Dimensions:
knobs project from the vessel 9 to
12 mm. Their dimensions horizontally range
from 30 to 38 mm., and vertically range
from 21 to 24 mm. (d) Method of attachment:
affixed to vessel before firing. (e) Number:
11.
_Bowls: Recurved wall bowls._--
Profile form types: Range from type III to type IV.
Lip and rim types: Lip type A. Rim types 1 and
2, sometimes grading into types 4 and 5.
Type 1 is the most common; types 4 and 5
the least.
Shoulders: Rounded.
Base: Rounded.
Mouth diameter range: 14.1 to 32.0 cm.
Depth range: 7.9 to 16.3 cm.
Wall thickness range: (a) at rim, 4 to 9 mm.;
(b) at point of greatest incurve, 3.5 to 8.5
mm.; (c) at vessel base, 3.5 to 10 mm.
Additional features: A minority of the recurved
wall bowls have pottery knobs. (a) Nature of
feature: short oval knobs or longer conical
knobs (the latter on only one vessel) apparently
for the purpose of holding in place vegetal
bindings which were sometimes wrapped
around vessels at the lip. (b) Placement:
Knobs encircle the vessel at the lip and project
horizontally; tops of the oval knobs are
17 to 41 mm. below the rim; tops of the conical
knobs are 23 to 28 mm. below the rim.
(c) Dimensions: oval knobs project 4 to 9 mm.
from the vessel; range in horizontal length from
from 14 to 58 mm.; range in vertical length
from 8 to 22 mm. Conical knobs project from
the vessel ca. 12 mm. (only one is unbroken
and measurable); basal diameter is 8 mm.
(d) Method of attachment: affixed to the vessel
before firing. (e) Number per vessel:
varies for oval knobs, 3, 4, or 6; the one
vessel having conical knobs has 3.
_Jars: wide mouth._--
Profile form types: V and VI (the latter type
having an annular base).
Lip and rim types: Lip type A. Rim types 1 and
2.
Shoulders: Rounded.
Bases: Rounded, sometimes with the addition
of an annular base.
Mouth diameter range: 12.6 to 25.1 cm.
Depth range: 19.2 to 25.4 cm.
Wall thickness range: (a) at rim, 4 to 8 mm.;
(b) at point of greatest incurve, 4 to 5 mm.;
(c) at center of vessel base, 4.5 to 5.5 mm.
Additional features: One jar has an annular
base, probably in imitation of such bases on
chinaware. Dimensions: diameter, 10.2 cm.;
thickness at rim of base ring, 6.4 to 8.0 mm.
Base ring lip is type D; rim of ring is type 2.
_Jar:_ narrow mouth (canteen).--
Profile form type: VII.
Lip and rim types: Lip type C. Rim type 6.
Shoulders: Rounded.
Base: Rounded.
Mouth diameter: 3.9 cm.
Depth: 18.2 cm.
Wall thickness range: (a) at rim, 4 to 5 mm.;
(b) at a distance of 1 cm. below rim, 7 mm.;
(c) at center of vessel base, 6 mm.
Additional features: None.
_Cups._--
Profile form types: VIII, IX, and X (the latter
two types having annular bases).
Lip and rim types: Lip type A. Rim types 1 and
2, sometimes grading into 4 and 5 respectively.
Shoulders: Rounded.
Bases: Rounded, often with the addition of an
annular base.
Mouth diameter range: 8.4 to 12.8 cm.
Depth range: 4.5 to 14.8 cm.
Wall thickness range: (a) at rim, 4 to 7 mm.;
(b) at point of greatest incurve, 3 to 6 mm.;
(c) at center of vessel base, 6 to 8.5 mm.
for cups without an annular base and 9 to 12
mm. for cups with an annular base.
Additional features:
Loop handles: (a) Nature of feature: single
pottery loop per cup. (b) Placement: upper
end of handle at rim of vessel; bottom edge
of lower end of handle is from 3.6 to 7.5
cm. below rim. (c) Dimensions: range of
maximum distance between inside surface
of loop and exterior surface of the nearest
part of vessel proper, 12.5 to 33.8 mm.;
range of handle width (tangent to vessel)
11 to 30.9 mm.; range of handle thickness
(perpendicular to vessel), 6 to 14.2 mm.
Loop handle edges can be classified as to
rim type: types 1, 2, 3, 5 occur.
Annular bases: (a) Nature of feature: a ring
base is often characteristic of the cups,
probably in imitation of such bases on
chinaware. (b) Dimensions: diameter
range, 5.8 to 7.1 cm.; thickness at ring
rim, 4 to 8 mm. Lips of base ring are
types D, E, F, or G. Rims of base ring
are types 1, 2, 3, 4, or 5.
_Scoops without rattle handles._--
Profile form types: XI ranging to XII and, in
one case, modified to XIII; type XIV represents
the scoops with modeling.
Lip and rim types: Lip type B. Rim type 1,
sometimes grading into rim type 4 at the
lower, circular end of the scoop.
Shoulders: None.
Base: Rounded.
Diameter range: (a) for scoops without modeling,
maximum length ranges from 10.9 to
22.6 cm. and maximum width ranges from
7.1 to 16.1 cm.; (b) for modeled scoops, maximum
length ranges from 13.4 cm. to 27.8 cm.
and maximum width from 8.8 to 17.0 cm.
Depth range: (a) for scoops without modeling,
depth ranges from 2.6 to 5.3 cm. when
measured at the point of maximum length and
2.4 to 5.1 cm. when measured at the point of
maximum width.
Wall thickness range: (presence or absence of
modeling does not seem to correlate with any
variation in wall thickness) (a) at rim, 4 to
5 mm.; (b) at a distance of 1 cm. below rim,
4.5 to 8.5 mm.; (c) at center of vessel base,
4.5 to 14 mm.
Additional features: None for the scoops without
modeling, with the exception of one vessel
which has a curved handle (see profile form
type XIII) 42.1 mm. long. Scoops with modeling
have two types of features:
"Keels": (a) Nature of feature: a keel-like
ridge characterizes every scoop with
modeling. (b) Placement: Along the exterior
surface of the vessel, starting at
the handle end and tapering in the amount
of projection as it approaches the base of
the scoop. (c) Dimensions: range of keel
projection from surface proper of vessel,
ca. 5 to ca. 15 mm. Keel lip is type G.
Keel rim is type 5. (d) Method of attachment:
either molded from the coils of the
vessel proper or affixed before firing.
"Eyes": (a) Nature of feature: round to oval
lumps of clay occurring on most of the
vessels having keels, and on no others.
(b) Placement: the two "eyes" are located
on opposite sides of the keel at the juncture
of the keel and the vessel proper on the
handle of the scoop. (c) Dimensions: diameter
of "eyes" ranges from 5 to 24 mm.;
they project 2.7 to 8.3 mm. from the surface
of the vessel. (d) Method of attachment:
affixed before firing.
_Scoops with rattle handles._--Differ from scoops without rattle
handles as follows.
Profile form types: range from XV to XVI.
Diameter range: range of maximum length, 12.2
to 18.9 cm.; of maximum width, 6.9 to 9.2 cm.
Depth range: at the point of maximum length,
3.1 to 6.4 cm.; at the point of maximum width,
2.8 to 3.3 cm.
Wall thickness range: (a) at rim, 3.5 to 6.6 mm.;
(b) at a distance of 1 cm. below the rim, 4.5
to 8.5 mm.; (c) at center of vessel base, 5.5
to 9 mm.
Additional features: All rattle-handled scoops
have the "eyes" and "keel" previously described.
Rattle handle: (a) Nature of feature: a single
closed compartment containing some loose,
small, hard objects (probably pebbles or
pottery pellets). (b) Placement: located
in the handle of the scoop and with its length
oriented along the length of the handle. (c)
Dimensions: compartment occupies less
than one-half the total length of the vessel.
Its exact dimensions are uncertain, since
none of the handles are broken open; probably
the interior length ranges from ca. 30
to ca. 49 mm. and the interior width from
ca. 32 to ca. 55 mm.
Decoration:
_Paint._--(a) Color: range of hue 7.5R to 2.5YR; range of value 2
to 5; range of chroma 2 to 8. Most common color: 10R 3/3 (a dark
red). (b) Material: iron, from limonite. (c) Permanency: averages
the same for interiors and exteriors of vessels. Approximately 50
per cent of the tests yielded a rating of 1, with the remaining 50
per cent about equally divided among ratings 2, 3, and 4. (d)
Polishing over decoration: None.
_Design._--The reader is referred to the discussion of this subject
by Kroeber in Part I.
COMPARISON
The reader is referred to the corresponding section for Parker Buff,
Fort Mohave Variant.
RANGE
The reader is referred to the corresponding section for Parker Buff,
Fort Mohave Variant.
PARKER BUFF, FORT MOHAVE VARIANT
GENERAL DESCRIPTION
=Synonym=: None.
=Variant named for=: Fort Mohave Reservation.
=Illustrations=: This publication.
=Type specimens=: Mohave pottery collection at the University of
California Museum of Anthropology; specifically, specimens 1/13788,
1/13789, 1/13790, and 1/15707.
=Type sites=: Same as for Parker Red-on-Buff, Fort Mohave variant.
=Cultural association=: Same as for Parker Red-on-Buff, Fort Mohave
variant.
=Time=: Same as for Parker Red-on-Buff, Fort Mohave variant.
=Size of sample=: 2 bowls; 2 parchers.
ANALYSIS
=Construction technique and finishing technique=: The same as for Parker
Red-on-Buff, Fort Mohave variant; firing and paste characteristics are
likewise within the range described for that type.
=Surface finish=: Anvil depressions are generally discernible on
interior surfaces of vessels. All vessels are unslipped. Interior
surfaces of all vessels and the exterior of one parcher and part of the
exterior of the other are smooth, but not polished. The exterior
surfaces of the bowls and part of the exterior of one of the parchers
have an extremely rough, granular surface, called "stucco."
=Surface color=: Exterior surfaces of bowls are covered with the soot
from cooking fires. Interior surfaces of parchers and one bowl are
likewise uniformly blackened through use. Otherwise the surface color is
visible and within the range described for Parker Red-on-Buff, Fort
Mohave variant.
=Fire clouds=: These are partially visible on the exteriors of the
parchers and may be present on the exterior and interior surfaces
elsewhere. However, the considerable smoke-blackening prevents adequate
observation of them (removal of a portion of the soot on the exterior of
one bowl revealed one such cloud).
=Form=:
_Bowls._--
Profile form type: IV.
Lip and rim types: Lip type A. Rim types 1 and 2,
sometimes grading into types 4 and 5 respectively.
Shoulders: Rounded.
Base: Rounded.
Mouth diameter range: 18.5 to 25 cm.
Depth range: 13.4 to 19.8 cm.
Wall thickness range: (a) at rim, 5 to 9 mm.; (b)
at point of greatest incurve, 3.5 to 5 mm.; (c)
at center of vessel base, 6 to 8 mm.
_Parchers._--These are boatlike, double-pointed shapes.
Profile form types: XVII and XVIII.
Lip and rim types: Lip type B. Rim types 1 and 2.
Shoulders: None.
Base: Rounded.
Diameter range: range in maximum length is 34 to
38.1 cm.; range in maximum width is 23.9 to
26.6 cm.
Depth range: at point of maximum length, 13.7 to
13.9 cm.; at point of maximum width, 8.6 to
8.8 cm.
Wall thickness range: (a) at rim, 7 to 9 mm.; (b)
at a distance of 1 cm. below the rim, 5 to 6.5
mm.; (c) at center of vessel base, 5.5 to 7.5 mm.
Additional features: On one of the bowls and on
both of the parching trays the topmost coil, constituting
the rim and upper part of the lip, is
not completely flattened, resulting in what is
sometimes called a "folded rim." This makes
the rim and the lip thicker in cross section.
This "folded rim" is characterized by a treatment
of parallel, angular (fingernail?) indentations
both on the interior and exterior surfaces.
The distance from the rim to the bottom edge of
the fold ranges from 2.4 to 7 mm.
=Painted decoration=: None.
COMPARISON
Differs from Parker Red-on-Buff, Fort Mohave variant, in not having
painted decoration; and in having a "stucco" surface and/or an indented
"folded rim." The parcher is a form which does not occur among the
painted vessels (i.e., as Parker Red-on-Buff, Fort Mohave variant) in
the collection.
RANGE
Incompletely determined. At least from the northern end of Mohave Valley
south along the Colorado River to the valley below Parker.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Colton, Harold S.
1939. An Archaeological Survey of Northwestern
Arizona including the Description of Fifteen
New Pottery Types. Bull. 16, Museum of
Northern Arizona. Flagstaff.
Colton, Harold S., and Lyndon L. Hargrave
1937. Handbook of Northern Arizona Pottery Wares,
Bull. 11, Museum of Northern Arizona.
Flagstaff.
Gifford, James (ed.)
1953. A Guide to the Description of Pottery Types
in the Southwest. Department of Anthropology,
University of Arizona. Tucson. (Mimeo.)
Munsell Color Co., Inc.
Munsell Soil Color Chart, Hues--7.5R Thru
5Y. Baltimore.
Rogers, Malcolm J.
1936. Yuman Pottery Making. San Diego Museum
Papers, No. 2. San Diego.
1945. An Outline of Yuman Prehistory. Southwestern
Journal of Anthropology, 1 (2):167-198.
Albuquerque.
Schroeder, Albert H.
1952. A Brief Survey of the Lower Colorado River
from Davis Dam to the International Border.
Bureau of Reclamation Reproduction Unit,
Region Three. Boulder City.
Shepard, Anna O.
MS. The Description of Pottery Color.
PLATES
[Illustration: Plate 1. Bowls]
[Illustration: Plate 2. Bowls]
[Illustration: Plate 3. Platters]
[Illustration: Plate 4. Spoons]
[Illustration: Plate 5. Jars, pots, jugs, cups]
[Illustration: Plate 6. Bowls, platters, parchers, canteens]
[Illustration: Plate 7. Spoon backs, toys, pipes, pot rests]
[Illustration: Plate 8. Jar, cup, platter, bowls, spoons]
*** End of this LibraryBlog Digital Book "Mohave Pottery" ***
Copyright 2023 LibraryBlog. All rights reserved.