I'm not convinced that pot is Fremont anyway. It looks like it could be a whiteware, and the design is more Ancestral Pueblo than Fremont.

"Most scholars agree that the Paiutes entered Utah about A.D. 1100-1200" ??? White man scholars, Mormon scholars, Paiute scholars? Modern-day white man scholars are constantly writing books and teaching lectures about the inaccuracies of the "white man scholar" refuting the "Fremont or Anasazi" fantasy hypothesis. One day history books will be changed to reflect what is true. It is so easy to through mud in my direction, then copy and paste some other person's words to show your ignorance. The Paiute know their history! It is still told to their children today! It is a history that they hold dear to their hearts. If you want to know the TRUE history, seek one of them. Glenn Rogers would be someone that will answer your questions and tell you the history of the Paiute, or you might want to check out a book written with beautiful photography about the Paiute published in 2010 "Southern Paiute: A Portrait" written by William Logan Hebner. This beautiful book was published with grants from the Utah Humanities Council, and puts into words and pictures the history of a beautiful people who have lived here long before "A.D. 1100-1200" Your copy and paste information comes from "scholars" who never took the time to ask a Paiute about their history!

Read a little more Indian Historian and you will see the real issue is the white man and how he has nearly destroyed my people, Don't be so arrogant! Learn some of the humility found among the Paiute Indian people. It would be good for you.

Now for your first lesson, please go to the Paiute Tribe website and learn the real story of the Paiute people and how they were nearly exterminated by the white man and his so-called benevolence! Read further my friend and then tell us which of the five bands of the Paiute you think you know anything about. We are not as uneducated as you like to portray us! Humility comes from long suffering. We have suffered for decades! But we remain more confident and proud to be Paiute!

The Paiute Indian Tribe of Utah, or (PITU); as it is often called, was created on April 3, 1980 by an act of Congress (25 U.S.C. § 761), which resulted in the Restoration Act (public law 96-227). The Tribe consists of five constituent bands: Cedar, Indian Peaks, Kanosh, Koosharem, and Shivwits. These five Bands have independent identities as communities that date back hundreds of years.

The Paiute Indian Tribe of Utah is engaged in the long, slow climb back from near destruction by the invasion of European settlers and Mormon Pioneers. Their numbers, once in the thousands, dwindled to less than 800. Various US Government movements only made things worse.

Prior to 1954, each Band (except the Cedar Band) of Paiutes had its own separate reservation and functioning Tribal government. But Indian policy took a radical step backwards when Utah Senator Arthur V. Watkins, chairman of the Senate Interior Committee Subcommittee on Indian Affairs, promoted passage of Public Law 762 on September 1, 1954, which resulted in the termination of all federal responsibility over Indian tribes. To set an example, Watkins pushed for termination of Utah Indian groups, including the Shivwits, Kanosh, Koorsharem, and Indian Peaks Paiutes. Once a people able to travel over the land with freedom and impunity, they were forced to deal with a new set of unfamiliar laws and beliefs.

Repudiation of this termination policy began in 1970 under President Nixon and eventually led to the restoration of the federal trust relationship of the five Bands reorganized as the Paiute Indian Tribe of Utah.

Thus, while the PITU community itself is only in its second generation of existence, the PITU is actually a confederation of constituent Paiute communities that have been independent for many generations.

The Paiutes have struggled for more than 100 years to obtain a small place to call home and to live free. Still the effort to secure water rights and land to preserve the culture and way of life goes on. Now the Tribe is seeking to rebuild and regain its culture, sovereignty, and autonomy, and provide for its people. The struggle is long and difficult but the Paiute will survive.

??? - You must NOT have been taught well by your blood brothers. Providing support for your contention is obviously harder than blaming the white man. That requires no effort.

The Southern Paiutes of Utah live in the southwestern corner of the state where the Great Basin and the Colorado Plateau meet. The Southern Paiute language is one of the northern Numic branches of the large Uto-Aztecan language family. Most scholars agree that the Paiutes entered Utah about A.D. 1100-1200.

Historically, the largest population concentrations of Paiutes were along the Virgin and Muddy rivers; other Paiutes adapted to a more arid desert environment that centered on water sources such as springs. Both desert and riverine groups were mainly foragers, hunting rabbits, deer, and mountain sheep, and gathering seeds, roots, tubers, berries, and nuts. Paiutes also practiced limited irrigation agriculture along the banks of the Virgin, Santa Clara, and Muddy rivers. They raised corn, squash, melons, gourds, sunflowers, and, later, winter wheat.

Paiute social organization was based on the family. Fluid groupings of families sometimes formed loose bands, which were often named after a major resource or geographic feature of their home territory. Paiute groups gathered together in the fall for dances and marriages. Marriage meant the establishment of a joint household and was not marked by ceremony. Although monogamy was the norm, marriage variants such as sororal polygamy and polyandry were present.

The riverine Paiutes had influential chiefs with limited power based on their ability to create consensus among the group. Leadership in the desert groups was usually only task specific. Some individuals were better at hunting rabbits, or at healing, or at twining baskets, and they organized those activities.

The supernatural world of the Paiutes revolved around the activities of Wolf and Coyote. Wolf was the elder brother and the more responsible god, while Coyote often acted the role of the trickster and troublemaker. Stories of the activities of these and other spirit animals generally were told in the winter.

The first recorded contact between Utah Paiutes and Europeans occurred in 1776 when the Escalante-Dominguez party encountered Paiute women gathering seeds. In 1826-27 Jedediah Smith passed through Paiute country and established an overland route to California. Trappers, traders, and emigrants on their way to California soon followed. The increased presence of Europeans and their animals had serious effects on the Paiutes. The animals of the emigrants ate the grasses and often the corn that served as food for the Paiute. The Paiutes, especially young women and children, became commodities as mounted Utes and Navajos raided for slaves to trade to the Europeans.

Although the Euro-American travelers posed a threat to the Paiutes, it was the arrival of the Mormons in the 1850s that destroyed their sovereignty and traditional lifestyle. The Mormons came to stay, and they settled in places that had traditionally served the Paiutes as foraging and camping areas. As a result, starvation and disease drastically reduced the Paiute population. Between 1854 and 1858 the Mormons conducted a fairly intensive missionary effort among the Paiutes.

The Utah Paiutes and the federal government signed a treaty in 1865, but it was not ratified by the Senate. The first reservation for the Paiutes was established at Shivwits, near St. George, in 1891. Other small reservations were established by executive order: Indian Peaks in 1915, Koosharem in 1928, and Kanosh in 1929. The Cedar City Paiutes were treated as a scattered band and lived on land owned by the Mormon Church.

A Paiute agency was established in Cedar City in 1927 by the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA). Nevertheless, very little federal help was available for the Paiutes. Paiute women worked as maids, cleaning houses and washing clothes. Paiute men worked as section hands for the railroad, did intermittent labor on farms, and sometimes worked small plots on reservation land.

In 1935 the Shivwits and the Kanosh Paiutes voted to accept the Wheeler-Howard Act. Known as the Indian Reorganization Act (IRA) this legislation encouraged tribal self-governance and the protection of Indian land rights. With their new IRA governments, they received more help than before from the federal government. They were given $10,000 loans under the Indian Service Revolving Credit Fund in the 1940s.

During the 1950s the Utah Paiutes became victims of the termination policy of Congress. Although BIA documents clearly recognized that the Paiutes were not ready to survive without the benefits of the trust relationship, Utah Senator Arthur Watkins included them on the list of tribes to be terminated. Without federal tax protection, health and education benefits, or agricultural assistance, the Paiutes were reduced to a miserable existence during the late 1950s and 1960s.

The Paiutes filed for the land that they had lost to the Anglo settlers with the Indian Claims Commission in 1951 and were awarded 27 cents per acre in 1965. Distribution of the award money began in 1971. In 1972 the Utah Paiute Tribal Corporation was incorporated and 113 HUD housing units were built at Richfield, Joseph, Shivwits, and the Cedar City area between 1976 and 1989.

Efforts toward restoration of federal status began in 1973 when petitions were circulated among the bands calling for the federal government to again recognize the Paiutes. This became a reality on 3 April 1980 when President Carter signed legislation that restored federal recognition and called for the Secretary of the Interior to present legislation for a Paiute reservation to Congress by 3 April 1982. On 17 February 1984 the Paiutes received 4,470 acres of poor BLM land scattered throughout southwestern Utah and a $2.5 million fund from which they could draw interest for economic development and tribal services. In recent years they have built new houses, operated two sewing factories, and dramatically improved their health care and educational opportunities.

By Ronald L. Holt, a Professor of Anthropology at Weber State University who was awarded a Fullbright Fellowship for Belarus in 2004.

Also see: Pamela Bunte and Robert Franklin, From the Sands to the Mountain: Change and Persistence in a Southern Paiute Community (1987); Isabel Kelly and Catherine Fowler, Handbook of North American Indians, vol. 11 (1986); Martha Knack, Life Is With People: Household Organization of the Contemporary Southern Paiute Indians (1980); and Ronald L. Holt, Beneath These Red Cliffs: An Ethnohistory of the Utah Paiutes (1992).

In response to "Indian Historian" You quote a white man's writings about a people who do not need a white man to tell them their history. The Native American from this area know their history. They tell the stories of who they are and why "clay pots" (white man's words) are placed where they are and why. More importantly, how they are and were made. They are Paiute! Not Fremont! Not Anasazi! If I want to know "Indian Historian" truth and history, I would ask a Paiute! Not a white man!

Most archaeologists believe the Fremont developed out of existing groups of hunter-gatherers on the Colorado Plateau and in the eastern Great Basin. These small groups were, like their Fremont descendants, diverse, flexible, and adaptable. They ranged from fairly large and relatively sedentary populations in environments where resources were more readily accessible, to small, highly mobile family-sized groups where resources were widely dispersed. Over a span of about a thousand years, from sometime after 2,500 years ago to about 1,500 years ago, different groups of these hunter-gatherers gradually adopted, in a piecemeal fashion, many of the traits associated with the farming societies of the Southwest and Mexico.

First, corn and other cultivated plants (called domesticates), initially developed in what is now Mexico, then diffused northward throughout the greater Southwest and were added to the wild food subsistence base of native people sometime about 2,500 to 2,000 years ago in areas on either side of the southern Wasatch Plateau. This early use of corn and other domesticates occurred well before settled villages developed, and it seems that farming at first was just a part-time affair practiced by people who were still essentially nomadic hunters and gatherers. The earliest "Fremont" corn, radiocarbon dated to 2,340-l,940 years ago, comes from a cache near Elsinore, Utah; corn in sites along Muddy Creek in the San Rafael Swell date to just after the time of Christ. These sites suggest that farming was well established in some areas by 2,000 years ago. Outside this region, however, full-time hunting and gathering lifestyles seem to have continued unchanged. For example, in the deserts of the eastern Great Basin, at all of the many cave sites like Fish Springs, Lakeside, Black Rock, and Danger Cave, domesticates are absent throughout this early period and subsistence was based entirely on wild foods.

Second, between about 2,000 to 1,500 years ago, many of the objects associated with the use of domesticates, such as pottery and large basin-shaped grinding implements, were added to the people's tools. It is noteworthy that Fremont pottery first occurs as early as 1,500 years ago in several caves and rock shelters associated with mobile hunting and gathering groups and is not found in what we think of as settled villages until several hundred years later. The production and use of these tools, in addition to the growing of corn, beans, and squash, appears to have spread to other hunting and gathering groups to the north as well as to both the east and west of the central Wasatch Plateau region. By about 1,300 years ago, sites with corn and pottery are also found in the Uinta Basin and around the Great Salt Lake; and within several hundred years after that, corn and/or pottery are present throughout the Fremont region.

Third, between about 1,750 and 1,250 years ago, architecture at some (but far from all) open sites changed from small, thin-walled habitation structures and subterranean storage pits to larger semi-subterranean timber and mud houses and above-ground mud- or rock-walled granaries. The presence of such substantial buildings suggests that, at some sites at least, some people were becoming more fully sedentary and were relying more on farming than on the collecting of wild foods.

By about A.D. 750 , hunting and gathering groups on the east and west sides of the Wasatch Plateau had adopted and modified many features of settled village life and to a greater or lesser extent had integrated them into their subsistence and settlement patterns. For the next five hundred years or so, this crystallized Fremont pattern remained essentially unchanged in the heartland of the Fremont region, but many of its features, such as its pottery, spread to groups as far away as central Nevada, southern Idaho, northwestern Colorado, and southwestern Wyoming. Whether these items were present in all these areas as the result of trade or local manufacture is presently unclear.

Significantly, there are actually very few common traits that distinguish what can be considered "classic" Fremont. Pithouse villages and farming are found over large areas of the United States about this same time and are not very helpful in distinguishing the Fremont from other groups. Many artifact forms, such as projectile point styles, also are not unique to the Fremont and are not helpful in separating the Fremont from their contemporaries. A number of other material items--such as stone balls, basin-shaped metates with small secondary grinding surfaces, and elongated corner-notched arrow points--are characteristic of the Fremont, but they are either so variable from place to place, or so limited in distribution, that they are not very useful traits for distinguishing the Fremont.

Fortunately, there are four relatively distinctive artifact categories which do distinguish the Fremont, materially, from other prehistoric societies. Unfortunately, they are only rarely found together. The first is a one-rod-and-bundle basketry construction style so unique that it has led some to suggest that the Fremont culture can be defined on the basis of this single artifact category alone. This technique is markedly different from that used by both contemporary Anasazi groups and from later historically known Numic-speaking groups such as the Ute and Shoshoni.

A second trait is a unique "Fremont" moccasin style constructed from the hock of a deer or mountain sheep leg. This and other moccasin types found in Fremont sites are very different from the woven yucca sandals of the Anasazi. A third item is actually an art style represented in three dimensions by trapezoidal-shaped clay figurines with readily identified hair "bobs" and necklaces. These same trapezoidal figures are depicted in Fremont pictographs and petroglyph panels. Magic and/or religious functions have been ascribed to these painted and sculpted figures, but no one really knows their purpose or meaning.

The fourth and last major artifact category is the gray, coil pottery which is most often used to identify archaeological sites as Fremont. This pottery is not very different from that made by other Southwestern groups, nor are its vessel forms and designs distinct. What distinguishes Fremont pottery from other ceramic types is the material from which it is constructed. Variations in temper, the granular rock or sand added to wet clay to insure even drying and to prevent cracking, have been used to identify five major Fremont ceramic types. They include Snake Valley gray in the southwestern part of the Fremont region, Sevier gray in the central area, Great Salt Lake gray in the northwestern area, and Uinta and Emery gray in the northeast and southwestern regions. Sevier, Snake Valley, and Emery gray also occur in painted varieties. A unique and beautiful painted bowl form, Ivie Creek black-on-white, is found along either side of the southern Wasatch Plateau. In addition to these five major types found at Fremont villages, a variety of locally made pottery wares are found on the fringes of the Fremont region in areas occupied by people who seem to have been principally hunters and gatherers rather than farmers.

At the height of this classic Fremont period, about 1,000 years ago, people who in one way or another fit the rather broad description of Fremont could be found from what is now Grand Junction, Colorado, on the east to Ely, Nevada, on the west. They lived as far north as modern Pocatello, Idaho, and on the south to present-day Cedar City, Utah.

After about A.D. 1250, the Fremont as an identifiable archaeological phenomenon began to disappear in much the same uneven fashion that it appeared. That is, between the years 1250 and 1500, classic traits such as one-rod-and-bundle basketry, thin-walled gray pottery, and clay figurines disappear from the Fremont region. No one can quite agree on what happened, but there seem to be a number of interrelated factors behind this change. Two seem most likely. First, climatic conditions favorable for farming seem to have changed during this period, forcing local groups to rely more and more on wild food resources and to adopt the increased mobility necessitated in collecting wild food. By itself, however, this climatic change probably would not have resulted in the Fremont demise, because the flexibility and adaptability which characterized the Fremont had allowed them to weather similar changes. However, new groups of hunter-gatherers appear to have migrated into the Fremont area from the southwestern Great Basin sometime after about 1,000 years ago. These full-time hunter-gatherers were apparently the ancestors of the Numic-speaking Ute, Paiute, and Shoshoni peoples who inhabited the region at historic contact, and perhaps they displaced or replaced the part-time Fremont hunter-gatherers with whom they were in competition.

Whether or not Fremont peoples died out, were forced to move, or were integrated into Numic-speaking groups is unclear, and even the matter of the postulated Ute/Paiute/Shoshoni migration remains a matter of spirited debate. It appears that the sudden replacement of classic Fremont artifacts by different kinds of basketry, pottery, and art styles historically associated with Utah's contemporary native inhabitants suggests that Fremont peoples were, for the most part, pushed out of the region and were replaced rather than integrated into Numic-speaking groups. This interpretation is strengthened by the fact that the most recent Fremont or Fremont-like materials, dating to about 500 years ago, are found at the northern and easternmost fringes of the Fremont region, in the Douglas Creek area of northwestern Colorado and on the Snake River plain of southern Idaho--areas at maximum distance along the postulated migration route of Numic-speaking populations.

See: David B. Madsen, Exploring The Fremont (1989).

Check with Kaibab Paiutes about their fremontian ancestors.

If you know anything about the Native American from the area that you found the pot, you would know that only the Paiutes lived in this area! Do not say that it is of the Fremont Indian! It is Paiute!