It is well known that the term slip, as used among archaeologists, has no uniform connotation; nor has it been defined satisfactorily either by archaeologists or by technologists. The loose and indiscriminate practice of subjective “slip reckoning” has produced numerous fallacies and untenable “classifications” in literature. The purpose of this note is to consider the properties and functions of a slip with respect to archaeological pottery. Any concern with historical retrospects of cogent nomenclature, or with individual instances illustrating misconceptions and confusions, lies outside my present scope. Nor is it my intention to settle any “problem.”

Progress in knowledge of the more ancient stone cultures in North America has made increasingly apparent the existence of a gap in time between the fairly well-known, modern North American Indian and his Paleo-Indian predecessors. The extent of the break presents a problem to both archaeology and geology. Obviously, it is possible to approach the problem by leading from the earlier horizons toward the later, or in the reverse direction. The expansion and development of the “alluvial chronology” affords a basis for approach from the later horizons, as the last events in this chronology are effectively dated in the pottery cultures of the Southwest. The discovery by Mr. Joseph H. Toulouse, Jr., of the stone artifacts of a hunting people, who did not use pottery, in the heart of the Pueblo area appeared to offer such an opportunity. It seemed that it might afford a series of stages transitional backward from the known dates of the Puebloan stages toward the remote Paleo-Indians. The geologic results raise more problems than are solved, yet have some importance in extending knowledge along the fringes of the problem.

The westernmost of the great Pueblo IV sites of the Jeddito Valley is Awatovi, occupied through the exploration and mission periods to 1700. The next upstream is Kawaika-a, inhabited, on the basis of archaeological evidence, at least to the end of the fifteenth century: a tree-ring date of A.D. 1495. Historical evidence has been thought to indicate sixteenth-century occupation of Kawaika-a, and destruction by Tovar in 1540. It has even been taken to show that Kawaika-a was sparsely repopulated by 1583, and finally deserted only between that date and 1598.

During the early fall of 1941, excavations were made by the National Park Service at the Lamar site, Bibb County, Georgia, on the ground of the proposed south section of the levee which will surround the site. The area was formerly forested and is level, poorly drained, and subject to frequent flooding by the Ocmulgee River. Elevation varies little in the river valley; in the section trenched, it ranges between 276.4 feet and 278.9 feet. The occupation area of the Lamar site lies on slightly higher ground with a maximum height of 282 feet (exclusive of the mounds). The surface soil of the bottom land, including the Lamar village site, is Congaree Silty Clay Loam, a recent alluvial deposit of the Ocmulgee River.

Shortly after the original article on the Susanville atlatl appeared in American Antiquity, Mr. M. R. Harrington, Curator of the Southwest Museum, wrote us that he had information which would probably clear up the problems presented by this unusual specimen. In the first place, it appears that Charlie Paiute was not the principal in the case, but rather his son-in-law, George Evans, husband of Charlie's daughter, Orrie Evans. Secondly, the evidence is incontrovertible that the origin of the Susanville atlatl was due to stimulation, by a professional archaeologist, of a native Indian workman. This possibility was recognized by us where we stated“ . . . Charlie Paiute may have learned the use of the atlatl in recent times from someone who was familiar with the San Juan archaeological specimens.”

In recent years there has been a lamentable tendency on the part of academic archaeologists to professionalize their field, with a consequently growing distinction between “amateurs” and “professionals.” That this distinction is a false one has been demonstrated by the work of such “amateurs” as Lemley of Arkansas, Langford of Illinois, and many others. The boundary between these two classes of excavators has been one of attachment or non-attachment to an academic institution, without regard to the real issue: techniques. This distinction is happily undergoing process of change, as the very existence of American Antiquity bears witness. Founded as an outlet for both amateur and professional work, it has done much to allay hostilities and opposition on both sides.

The projectile points described below are surface finds discovered by Oscar Lewis within a few miles of his ranch located about twenty miles south of Glendive, Montana. As some of the types represented are those which have been found to have considerable antiquity elsewhere and the complex is similar to that recorded in Pictograph Cave I, a cultural horizon buried under two other prehistoric and one historic horizon at Pictograph Cave near Billings, Montana, their occurrence in this locality is of interest.