North American Stone Implements — Inside the Classic

(0 User reviews)   795
In Category - Social Conditions
Rau, Charles, 1826-1887 Project Gutenberg 2012 Not confirmed
United States -- Antiquities; Indians of North America -- Implements; Stone implements -- United States Readers of public-domain and historical texts
Project Gutenberg digital edition en

Edition facts

Words 9,329
Reading time 41 min
Text sections 1

Before opening North American Stone Implements — Inside the Classic, the edition data offers a quick orientation: 9,329 words, 41 min estimated reading time, and 1 detected text section.

The text analysis averages about 24.9 words per sentence, while the detected sections provide another way to judge how the source is divided.

Project Gutenberg metadata also associates the work with “United States -- Antiquities,” connecting these edition facts with the source record’s subject description.

Charles Rau's 1873 Smithsonian report examines North American stone implements, questioning the applicability of European paleolithic/neolithic divisions to indigenous artifacts. Through detailed evidence—including Koch's burned mastodon, mound-builder pipes, and European goods in mounds—Rau argues for cautious classification, emphasizing the promiscuous occurrence of chipped and ground tools.
Share
Editorial Edition Score 4.4/5

Calculated from edition completeness, EPUB availability, text structure and catalogue metadata. Not a user rating.

How this score is calculated
  • Description quality20 pts
  • Title & short description10 pts
  • Source metadata20 pts
  • Text length15 pts
  • Chapters / structure15 pts
  • EPUB file integrity20 pts

Total of 100 points, scaled to a 2.5-5.0 range. Editions with an empty description or a missing EPUB file are not scored.

Edition quality

Read the Text

Produced by K Nordquist, JoAnn Greenwood, and the Online Distributed Proofreading Team at http://www.pgdp.net (This file was produced from images generously made available by The Internet Archive/American Libraries.)

NORTH AMERICAN STONE IMPLEMENTS.

REPRINTED FROM THE REPORT OF THE SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION FOR 1872.

WASHINGTON: GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE. 1873.

NORTH AMERICAN STONE IMPLEMENTS.

The division of the European stone age into a period of chipped stone, and a succeeding one of ground or polished stone, or, into the palaeolithic and neolithic periods, seems to be fully borne out by facts, and is likely to remain an uncontroverted basis for future investigation in Europe. In North America chipped as well as ground implements are abundant; yet they occur promiscuously, and thus far cannot be referred respectively to certain epochs in the development of the aborigines of the country. Archaeological investigation in North America, however, is but of recent date, and a careful examination of our caves and drift-beds possibly may lead to results similar to those obtained in Europe. When in the latter part of the world man lived contemporaneously with the now extinct large pachydermatous and carnivorous animals, he used unground flint tools of rude workmanship, which were superseded in the later stages of the European stone age, comprising the neolithic period, by more finished articles of flint and other stone, many of which were brought into final shape by the processes of grinding and polishing. In North America stone implements likewise have been found associated with the osseous remains of extinct animals; yet these implements, it appears, differed in no wise from those in use among the aborigines at the period of their first intercourse with the whites.

In the year 1839, the late Dr. Albert C. Koch discovered in the bottom of the Bourbeuse River, in Gasconade County, Missouri, the remains of a _Mastodon giganteus_ under very peculiar circumstances. The greater portion of the bones appeared more or less burned, and there was sufficient evidence that the fire had been kindled by human agency, and with the design of killing the huge creature, which had been found mired in the mud, and in an entirely helpless condition. The animal's fore and hind legs, untouched by the fire, were in a perpendicular position, with the toes attached to the feet, showing that the ground in which the animal had sunk, now a grayish-colored clay, was in a plastic condition when the occurrence took place. Those portions of the skeleton, however, which had been exposed above the surface of the clay, were partially consumed by the fire, and a layer of wood-ashes and charred bones, varying in thickness from two to six inches, indicated that the burning had been continued for some length of time. The fire appeared to have been most destructive around the head of the animal. Mingled with the ashes and bones was a large number of broken pieces of rock, which evidently had been carried to the spot from the bank of the Bourbeuse River to be hurled at the animal. But the burning and hurling of stones, it seems, did not satisfy the assailants of the mastodon; for Dr. Koch found among the ashes, bones, and rocks _several stone arrow-heads, a spear-head, and some stone axes_, which were taken out in the presence of a number of witnesses, consisting of the people of the neighborhood, who had been attracted by the novelty of the excavation. The layer of ashes and bones was covered by strata of alluvial deposits, consisting of clay, sand, and soil, from eight to nine feet thick, which form the bottom of the Bourbeuse River in general.

About one year after this excavation, Dr. Koch found at another place, in Benton County, Missouri, in the bottom of the Pomme de Terre River, about ten miles above its junction with the Osage, _several stone arrow-heads_ mingled with the bones of a nearly entire skeleton of the Missourium. The two arrow-heads found with the bones "were in such a position as to furnish evidence still more conclusive, perhaps, than in the other case, of their being of equal, if not older date, than the bones themselves; for, besides that they were found in a layer of vegetable mold which was covered by twenty feet in thickness of alternate layers of sand, clay, and gravel, one of the arrow-heads lay underneath the thigh-bone of the skeleton, the bone actually resting in contact upon it, so that it could not have been brought thither after the deposit of the bone; a fact which I was careful thoroughly to investigate."[1]

Charles Rau opens his 1873 Smithsonian report by directly challenging the transposition of European stone-age chronology to North America. While acknowledging that the division into paleolithic and neolithic periods is "fully borne out by facts" in Europe, he immediately notes that in North America, chipped and ground implements "occur promiscuously" and cannot yet be assigned to distinct epochs. This cautious, evidence-first stance sets the tone for a work that prioritizes observed data over imported frameworks.

A Burned Mastodon and Human Agency

Rau presents a striking case from 1839: Dr. Albert C. Koch discovered a Mastodon giganteus in Missouri whose bones were partially burned, with a layer of wood-ashes and charred bones two to six inches thick. The hind legs, untouched by fire, remained upright in clay, indicating the animal was mired when killed. Broken rocks from the riverbank were mingled with the ashes, suggesting they were hurled at the creature. Rau reports this as evidence that "the fire had been kindled by human agency" to dispatch the helpless animal. Yet he refrains from claiming this proves a distinct paleolithic period, noting that similar implements appear in later contexts.

Mound-Builder Pipes and the Perils of Classification

Rau scrutinizes the claim that mound-builders used only one type of pipe—those without a stem hole. He cites Squier and Davis's attribution of a bird-with-human-head pipe to mound-builders, despite its stem hole, and notes that Stevens doubted such pipes came from mounds. Rau then provides counter-evidence: a rock-crystal pipe from a mound near Bainbridge, Ohio, with two hollows meeting at an obtuse angle, which Davis confirmed belonged to the primary deposit. Rau concludes that "the mound-builders confined themselves by no means to the use of one particular class of pipes," urging caution against rigid typologies.

European Goods in Mounds: A Chronological Test

Rau addresses the persistence of mound-building into the contact period. He cites Garcilasso de la Vega on Florida earthworks and Le Moyne de Morgues's depiction of a funeral mound with arrows and a shell cup. More concretely, he presents Colonel Charles C. Jones's report of glass beads, silver ornaments, and even a rifle barrel fragment found in mounds—though only in secondary interments. Rau notes one exception: a primary deposit with European goods, suggesting that mound-building continued "when the first Europeans arrived" but soon declined. This evidence complicates any simple timeline of prehistoric versus historic artifacts.

Rau's report is best read as a series of archaeological case studies rather than a synthetic narrative. Each observation—from the Bourbeuse mastodon to the crystal pipe—is presented with its source and context, inviting readers to weigh the evidence themselves. The work rewards attention to how Rau qualifies his claims, often using phrases like "it appears" or "thus far cannot be referred." This restraint makes the occasional firm conclusion, such as the mound-builders' use of stemmed pipes, all the more striking.

That rainy afternoon, Rau’s patient doubts about neat categories lingered—stone tools refusing their assigned eras, mingling like strangers at a depot. His care for the unnamed makers made me wonder about later arrivals, their own tangled beginnings. So I drifted to Our Foreigners: A Chronicle of Americans in the Making — Reading Notes, and found the same promiscuous story, told in new voices.

There are no reviews for this eBook.

0
0 out of 5 (0 User reviews )

Add a Review

Your Rating *
There are no comments for this eBook.

Reader reflection

How did this book work for you?

Your answers remain private and are stored only in this browser.

Your progress 0 / 10
1

Which reading stage best describes you?

2

Did this book hold your interest?

3

How likely are you to recommend this book?

4

How easy was the book to follow?

Related eBooks