oe entre STUTSMAN FOCUS—WHEELER 205 
eord or fabric are clearly different, and examples of each are to be found in 
pottery from Plains sites. In many sherds in the Hintz sample, the spiraled 
grooves and ridges have been partly or almost wholly obliterated by subsequent 
smoothing or buffing. As in the case of the numerous partially smoothed simple 
stamped sherds from Hintz, it might be inferred that for many potters the 
decorative effect of cord-marking had no importance as such. 
Smoothed.—6,597 specimens, or 74 percent of the sample. This is by far the 
largest grouping in the Hintz pottery collection. All the specimens are unslipped. 
It seems likely that many of the examples classified as ‘‘smoothed” (or buffed, 
possibly scraped, but not burnished) were at first simple stamped or cord-marked 
and were then evened off, perhaps with the bare hand dipped in water. Many 
writers refer to the sherds placed in this group as “plain” sherds. 
APPENDAGES: 
The specimens in this category include 12 fragmentary strap handies and one 
fragmentary lug, described as follows. 
Handles.—12 specimens. Two examples are merely end fragments which have 
been welded onto the upper rim, in one case, and onto the shoulder or body, in 
the other. The other 10 specimens are fragments of the “body” of strap handles 
which retain rounded lateral edges in three instances, but only one rounded 
lateral edge in seven instances. Measurements of the intact specimens are: 
Maximum width, 17.5 to 28 mm.; maximum thickness, 6.75 to 10 mm. Four of 
the ten fragments are decorated: One with ciosely spaced parallel diagonal 
wrapped-stick impressions, three with closely spaced horizontal cord impres- 
sions. In two of the latter, the cord had a Z-twist; in the third, the cord had 
an S-twist. The cther six fragments are smoothed. 
Lug—11 specimen. The single example present is part of what appears to 
have been a subtriangular projection, 9.5 mm. in maximum thickness. One sur- 
face (upper?) is decorated with plats of alternating closely spaced parallel 
diagonal and widely spaced horizontal cord impressions. The cord had an 
S-twist. 
SPLIT SHERDS: 
Lastly, there is a residual group of 670 sherds in the Hintz collection which 
I am ealling “split” sherds for the reason that they have been sundered parallel 
to the long (?) axis and retain only one surface. Beyond segregating and 
counting them, these fragments did not seem to merit further attention. It 
might be noted that these specimens suggest the strong probability that Hintz 
pottery was lump modeled and thinned by paddle and anvil—as I have stated 
in previous pages—rather than built up by the coiling technique. 
DISTRIBUTION OF CLASSIFIED POTTERY FRAGMENTS, AND CHARACTERIZATION AND 
POSSIBLE AFFINITY OF THE CERAMIC COMPLEX, AT THE HINTZ SITE 
The provenience of all the classified pottery fragments obtained from the 
Hintz site is given in accompanying table 8. 
Distribution—tThe provenience of the rim sherds of 13 locally identifiable rim 
types and 9 (rim) types defined at other sites in the Northern Plains, and the 
provenience of the body sherds, classified into three groups on the basis of 
exterior surface finish, in the Hintz excavations, permit the following obser- 
vations on the distribution of rim sherd types and body sherd groups in the 
Hintz site or component: 
1. By far the commonest of the 13 “local” rim types is Melville Cord Impressed, 
represented by 226 specimens, or 49.5 percent of the sample of 13 local types. 
This rim type is also the most “popular,” or most widely dispersed, of these rim 
types: examples of this rim type were associated with all five excavated struc- 
