NO. 7 PAWNEE ARCriEOLOGY WEDEL 5 



Focus but no documentary record exists as to the tribe which 

 inhabited it. It definitely antedates the historic Pawnee sites of the 

 nineteenth century. This is of some interest because there are Pawnee 

 traditions pointing to early residence of the tribe somewhere in this 

 section of southeastern Nebraska, suggesting the possibility of a 

 generic connection with the Oneota. 



As regards the relation of these three postcontact archeological 

 complexes to one another, dissimilar conclusions have been reached 

 by different field and laboratory workers. Strong expressed the 

 belief that the sites now labeled collectively as the Lower Loup Focus 

 probably represented a very early historic horizon directly ancestral 

 to the somewhat simpler and decadent Pawnee culture of the nine- 

 teenth century. His use of the term "protohistoric Pawnee" in speak- 

 ing of these remains reflects a view with which the present writer 

 has elsewhere indicated his general agreement.' . Dunlevy, on the 

 other hand, dissenting after her detailed analysis of material from 

 two of these sites, was persuaded that the Lower Loup Focus is 

 more closely related to the Oneota than to the historic Pawnee." 

 Since these differences of viewpoint occur among individuals dealing 

 with substantially the same materials, it seems worthwhile to re- 

 examine the data on which they rest. 



In the accompanying table the presence or apparent absence of 

 traits has been indicated for each of the three cultural complexes 

 above mentioned. The traits, totaling 120, have been grouped in 

 seven categories which, with exception of ceramics and miscellaneous 

 items, are based upon function rather than on form or substance. 

 Traits for the historic Pawnee and the Lower Loup Focus have been 

 compiled largely but not exclusively from published sources. In the 

 absence of complete analyses for the recently worked sites, the data 

 therefrom have been incorporated in and added to a check list based 

 on the published studies. Actually, this somewhat superficial treat- 

 ment involved no changes in the list other than its slight expansion 

 to include a larger number of traits. Data on the Oneota Aspect, 

 including three Wisconsin variants or foci, have been drawn from a 

 list furnished by W. C. McKern, of the Milwaukee Public Museum, 

 which has been supplemented by the published report on the Leary 

 site in Nebraska. No attempt has been made to weight the various 

 elements or' to determine the degree to which a particular trait may 

 be present in one or another of the groups. It has not always been 



^ Strong, op. cit., pp. 68, 297 ; Wedel, op. cit., pp. 38-42, 74. 

 ° Dunlevy, op. cit., p. 216. 



