The individual craftsperson is often lost in the broad patterns of normative analysis. Recent South Carolina research has attempted to refocus on the individual and how that individual interacts within and between communities. The technological and stylistic analysis of slave-made pottery from three contemporaneous, 19th-century slave settlements in Beaufort County, South Carolina, was aimed at recognizing individual potters. Suspected potter-level idiosyncracies allowed for the modeling of five potters, or one to two potters per community. The results also suggest that no ceramic exchange occurred between the slave rows, even though they were all in proximity and two were elements of a single plantation. The findings have implications for understanding the use context of late Colonoware, and for delineating potter-topotter variation within the well-entrenched tradition.

The American Civil War was a defining event in the history of the United States, and scholarly and public interest in the conflict remains high. Archaeological sites from the Civil War can provide valuable data that cannot be gleaned from the archival record or oral history. The archaeological study of battlefields, skirmish sites, earthworks, trenches, camps, and picket posts provides specific details that augment the other data sources. However, the archaeological treatment of Civil War sites-specifically the use of inappropriate methods-continues to be a problem. As many areas of the heartland of the Civil War face growing development pressures, it is imperative that archaeologists reconsider their approaches to Civil War sites.

In their 2002 study comparing Early Navajo period tree ring dates and thermoluminescence (TL) results from sherds and fire-altered rocks, Dykeman et al. (2002:145) applaud the "remarkable correspondence between tree-ring and thermoluminescence results." However, re-examination of their data suggests that the rate of certain correspondence (40%) is low, and mathematical modeling shows that a similar rate (35%) could be achieved with random guesses for dates. As the Dykeman et al. (2002) article was presented to champion the use of TL dating on sherds and fire-altered rocks, this re-examination yields a call for more extensive controlled testing of the TL method before its widespread use in North American archaeology.

It was with great curiosity, and ultimately great disappointment, that I read the latest essay from Dr. Jay Custer (2005). His article stands as a very interesting study of a personal journey. For 28 of his 33 years of experience, Custer chose to ignore surviving Indian groups in Delaware and to downplay the relationship of extant Indians and people of the pre-Contact periods. After being called on his failings, Custer transformed into (from his perspective) one of the only archaeologists to work properly with Indians. The article is self-serving, rife with logical gaps, and full of misrepresentation of extreme positions as the norm (sensu Rush Limbaugh).The organizational failings of the essay make it difficult to dissect. One would hope that an article bemoaning a hyperreality and a universally shared (among Euro-american archaeologists) archaeological thought world would explicitly define those terms and would include extensive case studies to demonstrate the existence of attributes expected in hyperrealities and the archaeological thought world. Custer fails to do this.To prevent duplicating his failings, I here define a straw man as a falsehood or extreme position presented as the truth or norm. A straw man is often created and then readily destroyed in the name of debate, precluding the advocate from having to address the true complexity of an issue. When the National Rifle Association (NRA) paints all liberals as wanting to confiscate and destroy all *This article does not necessarily reflect the opinion of my employer. 71Ó 2005, Baywood Publishing Co., Inc. / ESPENSHADE

As professional archaeologists and avocational detectorists increasingly collaborate in field research, professional archaeologists must consider how the use of avocational detectorists may bias data. The potential biases may include the following: highly diverse discovery rates; underrepresentation of certain classes of artifacts, especially ferrous items; work rates less than those of professional archaeologists; and amplified areas of negative data due to a self-fulfilling prophecy. Archaeologists are encouraged to collect the information needed to help recognize such biases and to regiment data collection to minimize biases.