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