It seems apparent from Julian Steward's latest statement on The Direct Historical Approach to Archaeology that he still conceives of a basic conflict, or at least an inherent competition, between the direct historical and midwestern taxonomic methods, in spite of his initial statement to the contrary. He manifests a conviction that the latter is being overemphasized at the expense of the former. If his fears are well founded (and there are instances of malpractice which might be cited in support of his position), I should be among the first to join his crusade in defense of the direct historical “approach.” However, in that case, his criticism should be directed against the culprits who are misusing methods rather than against any given method itself. Instead, Steward adopts the tone of one who sets out to compare the respective values of two conflicting methods, to the glorification of one and the general degradation of the other.