The importance of being able to date accurately the remains of past societies has long been recognized by archaeologists. The problem has always been to find methods that work in the absence of historical records. Recent developments, such as tree-ring dating, have been great contributions, but they are not applicable everywhere. There is still a great need for new methods to supplement and extend the range of present dating procedures.

A large field of knowledge so far largely unexplored for possible dating methods is the physics and chemistry of archaeological remains. One area in this field is the study of naturally occurring radioactive elements. Some of these elements have been used by geologists to date ancient rock strata, but applications to archaeological materials have not been made. Recently, however, two possible methods for using radioactive elements to date archaeological remains have been proposed on theoretical grounds. It is not yet definitely known whether they will work, or how well. Further research is necessary.

In a recent paper we explored the possibility of comparing the physical and chemical characteristics of aboriginal sites by the small-sample method. The two mounds investigated showed clear differences with respect to certain features. Whether or not there were quantitative distinctions pertaining to other properties depended upon the validity of the sampling method. It thus became apparent to us that a further investigation should be made wherein the results obtained by sampling could be tested by comparison with data based upon practical certainty. In other words one mound should be sampled and at the same time be completely excavated so as to determine the actual values for the entities under consideration. Concomitantly, an opportunity would be offered to make an archaeological analysis of an aboriginal site in its entirety, including a tabulation of all the cultural elements present, such as artifacts and burials.

In the exceedingly important symposium, “Man in Northeastern North America,” edited by Frederick Johnson, Frederica de Laguna has published a very interesting and elucidative paper, “The Importance of the Eskimo in Northeastern Archeology,” dealing chiefly with the relations between the Dorset Eskimo and the prehistoric Indians of the Northeast. The subject is fascinating, indeed, partly because the Dorset culture has a rather peculiar position within the prehistoric Eskimo cultures, and partly because even the Indian cultures of the Northeast coast in many respects have cultural traits alien to other prehistoric Indian cultures. In fact, the dissimilarity between Dorset and the neighboring Thule culture is so striking that the Eskimo origin of the Dorset culture has been seriously doubted by Therkel Mathiassen and Henry B. Collins. Collins, however, later agreed in the opinion, originally expressed by Diamond Jenness, that Dorset, in spite of the Indian-like features, may be an Eskimo culture.

In the summer of 1945, members of the Illinois State Museum under the direction of Thorne Deuel, Director of the Museum, excavated a group of Indian burial mounds in the Havana, Mason County area. Burial No. 10 in Mound No. 9 of this group yielded 22 rounded bead-like objects, composed of strongly oxidized iron, together with slightly more than 1000 ground shell and pearl or pearl slug beads. As the burial was evidently prehistoric and of Hopewellian age, it was at once conjectured that the iron might be of meteoric origin. In January, 1946, several of these supposed iron beads were sent to the State Geological Survey, with the request that the nature and source of the iron be determined if possible. In addition, Dr. Deuel kindly made available the data presented herein on the nature of the discovery and on the size, shape, and arrangement of the supposed beads.

The senior author has for a number of years worked on the problem of the numerous and virtually unknown burial sites on the bluffs bordering the valley of the Republican River in Geary and Clay Counties, Kansas. This work has been a matter of some urgency, owing to the prevalence of unsystematic amateur excavation on the more prominent stone cairns found in the area. Fortunately, the complete excavation of the larger cairns involves too much labor for the merely curious, and it has often been possible to salvage material and information despite disturbance.

In the past year through excavations of sites and examination of various collections, there have appeared elements in a late context that do not follow or conform to the archaeological traditions known for Florida up to this time. On the east coast the collections of material excavated by W. J. Winter gave us new data on the late period around St. Augustine and its cultural affiliations to the Georgia coast. This has been named the St. Augustine Period. In the excavation of a Spanish mission site3 in Jefferson County by the Archaeological Survey of the Florida Park Service there appeared elements sufficiently different in time and content to name a new period the Leon-Jefferson.

Here follows a discussion and summary of the characteristics of the two periods.

In writing an article for scientific publication one preferably should have done some original research in that field, or if his disposition is such that he wishes to criticize the work of those who have spent decades in methodical observations in regions different from his own, he should have made a real effort to ascertain the facts before going into print. In the writer's opinion, Dr. Kelley's article on the Clear Fork culture in a recent issue of American Antiquity does not measure up to these criteria.

The writer has studied the Clear Fork culture for over twenty years. He published pictures of five Clear Fork gouges in Volume 1, 1929, of the Texas Archeological and Paleontological Society Bulletin In Volume 2, 1930, of the same Bulletin he illustrated artifacts from the McLean and the Gibson sites, both of which contain Clear Fork and other ancient types of artifacts.

Conventional methods of making line drawings from photographs not suitable for reproduction consist, in general, of inking in desired features on a large print of the photograph, usually blue, and then bleaching out the photographic image. This procedure, which gives good results in skilled hands, produces a line image consisting only of the applied ink lines, which are usually somewhat degraded because the paper fibers are displaced (“exploded“) by the chemical action of the bleaching solution. This same chemical action makes difficult additional ink work after bleaching.

High-contrast films developed during the last decade make possible several simplifications of this procedure. When the ink work on a blueprint is satisfactory (as determined by viewing through a deep blue filter), the print, as is, may be sent to the engraver, with instructions to “drop out the blue,” which he does by using a high contrast “color blind” emulsion, such as Kodalith.

“La Correlaciόn de los Afios Azteca y Cristiano” by Alfonso Caso, Revista Mexicana de Estudios Antropologicos, Vol. 3, pp. 11–45, Mexico, 1939, may be tested by means of some astronomical data. For this purpose, sources are supplied.

Paul Radin, “The Sources and Authenticity of the History of the Ancient Mexicans,” University of California Publications in American Archeology and Ethnology, Vol. 17, No. 1, Berkeley, 1920 (Codex Telleriano-Remensis, Part 4, pp. 45–50):

P. 46, PI. 5, “In the year 12 rabbit (1426 A.D.) … there was an eclipse of the earth(?).“

A stone ax of West Indian type is included among the collections from north Florida in the Florida State Museum (cat. no. 3535). In view of the ever-interesting question of Antillean-Floridian relationships, this specimen seems worth considering in some detail.

Information in the Florida State Museum catalog indicates that the ax was received in 1914 from A. W. Sargent of Gainesville who found it on the surface near Newnan's Lake, Alachua County. This is about five miles east of Gainesville. It was accompanied by the base of a spearhead, an arrowhead, and a sherd of St. Johns Check Stamped pottery (cat. nos. 3536-3538).

The ax has a roughly rectangular blade; shallow, grooved neck; and broad butt, with a large ear-like projection on either side of the butt and a pair of smaller ones on top (Fig. 55). In cross section, one side is strongly convex and the other partially flattened, so that the artifact might more properly be called an “adze.” Its length is 15.8 cm. and its width 10.9 cm.

In 1944, the present writer, in collaboration with Philip Phillips, published a short analytical article upon a newly discovered (or recognized) style of negative-painted pottery from Crystal River, Florida. The ceramics in question, numbering three vessels in all, were excavated many years before by Clarence B. Moore and illustrated by him. They were taken from a sand burial mound in association with a number of other artifacts and with human burials. In our 1944 analysis it was pointed out that these Crystal River specimens exhibited the same technical processes of decoration— a negative or resist-dye application of a dark design background over a lighter-colored surface—as that seen on numerous Middle Mississippian pottery bottles; nevertheless, it was also made clear that the style of the painting, the forms of the vessels, and the quality of the ware were distinctly non-Mississippian.

Eastern archaeologists are familiar with the phenomena which have, in recent years, been interpreted as the Southern Cult. Although there is some dispute concerning the functional nature of the Cult, its exact position in the prehistoric time scale, and the sources which inspired it, there is common recognition of its elements and widespread occurrences. These component elements are artistic motifs and certain specialized, non-utilitarian artifact types which are bound together by a unity of style and technical treatment. The geographic occurrences are predominantly Southeastern but extend from the Atlantic to the western periphery of the Mound Area. The intrinsic qualities of the elements easily lend them to interpretation as ritualistic symbols and paraphernalia, and their frequent appearance in large mound sites adds to the implications of ceremonial import.