[73] Dr. L. G. Yates, Smiths. Rep., 1886, pt. I, p. 296, further explained in Bulletin of the Santa Barbara Soc. of Nat. History, No. 2; Moorehead, l. c., pp. 249 to 250, etc.
[74] Abbott, l. c., p. 232, fig. 220, from Illinois; Rau, Smith’s Contrib., p. 27, No. 101, from Tennessee (cf. for both pl. VIII, fig. 2); Moorehead, l. c., p. 251, fig. 29, from Santa Barbara, Cal.
[75] Moorehead, l. c., p. 92, fig. 113.
[76] Rau, l. c., p. 27, figs. 105-106, Abbott, pp. 228 and 230, figs. 216 and 218.
[77] Abbott, l. c., p. 233, fig. 222, Rau, fig. 103.
[78] Abbott, l. c., pp. 232 and 233, figs. 221 and 223.
[79] Native Races, IV, p. 711.
[80] According to Dr. L. G. Yates, Bulletin 2 of the Santa Barbara Soc. of Nat. Hist., the California Indians regard such pear-shaped stones as charms and use them as such. This is analogous to their superstitious belief concerning stone hatchets whose original significance has long been forgotten and hence is no explanation of the original use to which these articles were put.
[81] Cf. F. W. Putnam, l. c., p. 195.