Unpopular opinion: the 'painted' pottery at the Cahokia Mounds site has been over-restored

I drove down to Collinsville, Illinois last month to finally see Monk's Mound in person. Spent two hours in the museum looking at the pottery displays. Something felt off about the designs though. They looked too crisp, too bright. I asked one of the rangers if the pottery was original or reconstructed. She kind of dodged the question. Later I found a note in the exhibit text saying some pieces had 'modern pigment reconstruction' done in the 1990s. That means someone guessed at the patterns and colors. Makes me wonder how much of what we see is real vs what some grad student thought looked cool. Has anyone else noticed that at other sites?

2 comments

2 Comments

sanchez.pat12d ago

Oh man, did you catch that weird glossy finish on some of the Cahokia beaker pots too? I went there in 2019 and something about the red lines just looked WRONG, like someone used a paint marker instead of natural clay pigment. My buddy works in artifact conservation and he told me a lot of sites do this now because museums want things to look "museum perfect" for visitors. It honestly makes me ANGRY because you're totally right, nobody actually knows what those patterns looked like back then. I saw similar stuff at the Spiro Mounds in Oklahoma where the shell engravings looked way too fresh, like someone just made them up. The whole thing feels dishonest to me, like we're being shown a cartoon version of history instead of the real thing.

johnson.paul12d ago

Used to think museums were spot on but damn this honestly makes me reconsider everything lol.