Fig. 314. (S. 1–4.) Gorgets and problematical forms from the collection of W. A. Holmes, Chicago, Illinois. The tube to the left in the lower row is somewhat longer than the average specimen. The one to the right, lower row, being grooved and perforated at one end, is quite rare. The double-pointed object in the centre has its counterpart in the Andover collection, and at Washington and elsewhere.
Professor Lucien Carr, for many years librarian at Harvard University, published a number of important papers. In 1897, the American Antiquarian Society printed one of Professor Carr’s memoirs entitled, “Dress and Ornaments of Certain American Indians.” This paper, and others along similar lines, brings within convenient compass the essential things said by early travelers concerning our natives. As a librarian—for Mr. Carr, although a historian, was not an archæologist—he dealt with the early historic period. His paper is, therefore, of peculiar value in connection with our study of ornaments, problematical forms, etc. It must be remembered that there is little in the literature of early America as to the use of stone in problematical form. Since Professor Carr, who examined the material thoroughly, found so few references, his paper is in support of my contention that the early historians and travelers among Indians found few, if any, of the problematical forms in use. On the contrary there were great quantities of ornamental objects in evidence, and these are mentioned by the eighty writers quoted by Professor Carr in his footnotes:—
Fig. 315. (S. 1–3.) Unfinished objects, ridged, with expanded sides. This form occurs both in the flat tablet and in the true ridged type. Material: slate and shale. Collection of B. Beasley, Montgomery, Alabama.
“Of the use of labrets and of the custom among the men of piercing the nipples and inserting a reed or cane in the hole, I do not propose to speak, as the evidence on the point is not altogether satisfactory. Cabeza de Vaca,[[9]] it is true, asserts that both customs existed among the Indians of Florida; and Adair[[10]] and Father Paul Ragueneau[[11]] speak of piercing the lip, but in such an indefinite manner that it does not carry much weight. At all events their statements are not corroborated, as they would have been if the custom had been general, and hence I do not insist upon their acceptance.
Fig. 316. (S. 1–2.) Face and rear of the gorget with expanded sides. The face is flat, the reverse is convex. These are usually perforated from the face downward, the holes being small on the reverse. They were not drilled with a reed or hollow drill, as the holes are cone-shaped. This type and the flat, tablet-like form occur more in the mounds than other forms, and seem to have been favorite ornaments among mound-building tribes. Phillips Academy collection.
“But whilst the existence among our Indians of these two methods of bodily mutilation, or, if the term be preferred, of ornamentation, may well be doubted, the same cannot be said of the customs of piercing the nose and ears. These were widespread, and were usually common to all the members of the tribe, women as well as men; though there were tribes, like the Iroquois, in which the women did not pierce the nose, and ‘it was only among certain others, that they pierced the ears.’[[12]] Although evidently intended for ornamental purposes, yet there were people among whom the custom had something of a religious significance, resembling in this respect the practice of infant baptism among ourselves. Thus, for example, we are told by Perrot[[13]] that the operation was performed when the child was five or six months old by a medicine-man (‘jongleur’), who made an invocation to the sun, or some chosen spirit, beseeching him to have pity on the child and preserve its life. He then pierced the ears with a bone, and the nose with a needle; and filled the wounds in the former with small rolls of bark, and that in the latter with the quill end of a feather. These were suffered to remain until the wounds healed, when they were removed, and in their places were substituted tufts of the down of birds. The ceremony was always accompanied by a feast, and handsome presents were made to the Shaman and his assistants.
Fig. 317. (S. about 1–2.) The specimen to the left, the winged type, is a typical Pennsylvania-New Jersey type. It is quite different from those of farther west and the upper Mississippi Valley. The one to the right is not essentially different from kindred specimens north or west of the Pennsylvania region. From the collection of C. E. Cromley, Williamsport, Pennsylvania.