Household ritual, gender, and figurines in the Hohokam regional system

Item Type text; Dissertation-Reproduction (electronic)

Authors Stinson, Susan L.

Publisher The University of Arizona.

Rights Copyright © is held by the author. Digital access to this material is made possible by the University Libraries, University of Arizona. Further transmission, reproduction or presentation (such as public display or performance) of protected items is prohibited except with permission of the author.

Download date 07/10/2021 03:12:05

Link to Item http://hdl.handle.net/10150/280754 HOUSEHOLD RITUAL, GENDER, AND FIGURINES IN THE HOHOKAM

REGIONAL SYSTEM

by

Susan Lynne Stinson

A Dissertation Submitted to the Faculty of the

DEPARTMENT OF ANTHROPOLOGY

In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements For the Degree of

DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY

In the Graduate College

THE UNIVERSITY OF ARIZONA

2004 UMI Number: 3158160

INFORMATION TO USERS

The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted. Broken or indistinct print, colored or poor quality illustrations and photographs, print bleed-through, substandard margins, and improper alignment can adversely affect reproduction. In the unlikely event that the author did not send a complete manuscript and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if unauthorized copyright material had to be removed, a note will indicate the deletion.

UMI

UMI Microform 3158160

Copyright 2005 by ProQuest Information and Learning Company.

All rights reserved. This microform edition is protected against

unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code.

ProQuest Information and Learning Company 300 North Zeeb Road P.O. Box 1346 Ann Arbor, Ml 48106-1346 The University of Arizona "o Graduate College

As members of the Final Examination Committee, we certify that we have read the disseitation prepaied by Susan T.ynnp Stinsnn

entitled Household Ritual, Gender, And Figurines in the Hohokam

Regional System

and recommend that it be accepted as fulfilling the dissertation requirement for the

Degree of Doctor of Philosophy

dbte '

?auL R. FishI date // Dean date

date

date

Final approval and acceptance of this dissertation is contingent upon the candidate's submission of the final copies of the dissertation to the Graduate College. I hereby certify that I have read this dissertation prepared under my direction and recommend that it be accepted as fulfilling the dissertation requirement.

i ~0€&- date 3

STATEMENT BY AUTHOR

This dissertation has been submitted in partial fulfillment of requirements for an advanced degree at The University of Arizona and is deposited in the University Library to be made available to borrowers under rules of the Library.

Brief quotations from this dissertation are allowable without special permission, provided that accurate acknowledgment of source is made. Requests for permission for extended quotation from or reproduction of this manuscript in whole or in part may be granted by the head of the major department or the Dean of the Graduate College when in his or her judgment the proposed use of the material is in the interests of scholarship. In all other instances, however, permission must be obtained from the author.

SIGNED 4

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

This dissertation benefited immensely from the endless guidance and wisdom of my advisor, Barbara J. Mills, and committee members Jeffrey S. Dean, Paul R. Fish, and Suzanne K. Fish. I also received valuable support, advice, and guidance from Carol Kramer, Sandra Stinson, John Stinson, Kate Sarther, Natalie Munro, Sarah Herr, and Scott Van Keuren. This work would not have been possible without their help and encouragement. Funding for this research was received from the National Science Foundation (SBR-0203218) and the Department of Anthropology at the University of Arizona. Of course, the content and ideas expressed in this essay are the sole responsibility of the author. 5

TABLE OF CONTENTS

LIST OF FIGURES 8

LIST OF TABLES 10

ABSTRACT 11

1. THE ARCHAEOLOGY OF DOMESTIC RITUAL 13 Ritual in the Greater Southwest 16 Domestic vs. Communal Ritual 18 Approaches to the Study of the Household 21 The Economy of Production and Consumption 21 Social and Ritual Organization of the Household 22 Gender Roles within the Household 26 Chapter Summary 29

2. THE INTERSECTION OF AGENCY, FIGURINES, AND GENDER 32 The Basics of Agency Theory 32 Agency Theory in Concert with Practice Theory 35 Ritual Action and Artifacts 39 Identity, Gender, and Personhood 43 Current Theory and Ceramic Figurines 46 Figurines in the Domestic Sphere 49 Summary 52

3. THE HISTORICAL AND SOCIAL CONTEXT OF HOHOKAM FIGURINES 54 The Research Collections 56 Snaketown 56 The Grewe Site 61 Hohokam Households, Site Structure, and Ritual 66 Pre-Classic Household and Community Ritual 69 The Pre-Classic to Classic Transition in the Hohokam Region 74 Figurines in the Greater Southwest 75 Prior Studies of Hohokam Figurines 84

4. A MODEL OF FIGURINE FUNCTION 89 Figurine Attributes and a Model of Figurine Function 90 Alternate Hypotheses for Figurine Use 95 Hypothesis 1: Figurines and Ancestor Veneration 96 Hypothesis 2: Healing, Curing, and Figurines 100 6

TABLE OF CONTENTS - Continued

Hypothesis 3: Figurines as Children's Toys 102 Summary 103

5. FIGURINE CONSTRUCTION, USE, AND DISPOSAL AT SNAKETOWN AND GREWE 104 Raw Materials, Construction Methods, and Figurine Form 106 The Form and Construction of Hohokam Figurines 109 Sex Characteristics: Female, Male, and Androgynous 113 Burned and Broken 116 Figurine Disposal Contexts 119 Chronology and Figurine Disposal Context 126 Summary of Figurine Data Patterns 130

6. DERMATOGLYPHICS AND SEX 132 Sex and Gender in Archaeology 133 Gender Research in Archaeology 134 Sociopolitical Organization and Gender 135 Economy and Gender 136 Gender and Hohokam Archaeology 141 Dermatoglyphics 142 Anatomy of Human Skin 144 Ridge Counting 146 Previous Work on the Ridge Counting Technique 150 Archaeological Corrugated Ceramics from the American Southwest 150 Philippines Ethnographic Study 153 Comparative Ethnographic Sample of Fingerprints 154 Summary of Dermatoglyphic and Preliminary Ridge Count Studies 158

7. SEXING FIGURINE PRODUCERS IN HOHOKAM HOUSEHOLDS 160 Clay Shrinkage Experiment 161 Fingerprint Ridge Counting Methods 168 Analysis of Dermatoglyphic Data 172 Age vs. Sex 175 Context of Figurines Associated with Male Producers 180 Summary of Archaeological and Ethnographic Fingerprint Data 182 The Value of Future Dermatoglyphic Analyses in Archaeology 183

8. GENDERED AGENTS IN DOMESTIC HOHOKAM RITUAL 185 The Function of Figurines in the Hohokam Regional System 186 Ancestors, Figurines, and Women in the Hohokam Household 188 Ancestor Worship and the Socioeconomic Climate of the Hohokam 191 7

TABLE OF CONTENTS - Continued

The Social and Environmental Conditions of the Pre-classic period Hohokam 192 Ancestor Ritual and Ties to the Land 195 Rights to Land and Other Important Resources 196 The Materiality of Memory and Commemoration 200 Ancestor Ritual and Figurines from an Ethnographic Perspective 204 Women and Ancestors 207 Summary 210

APPENDIX A, FIGURINE ATTRIBUTE DATA 213

APPENDIX B, DERMATOGLYPHIC DATA FROM ETHNOGRAPHIC SAMPLE 283

APPENDIX C, DERMATOGLYPHIC DATA FROM ARCHAEOLOGICAL SAMPLE 294

REFERENCES 299 8

LIST OF FIGURES

FIGURE 1.1, Figurines from Snaketown 14 FIGURE 1.2, Map of sites within the Hohokam regional system 15 FIGURE 3.1, Map of large Snaketown features 57 FIGURE 3.2, Grewe site location in relation to the Casa Grande ruin ....; 62 FIGURE 3.3, Archaeological features in the NE locus at the Grewe site 63 FIGURE 3.4, Number of figurines from each excavation episode 65 FIGURE 3.5 Courtyard group 67 FIGURE 3.6, Ballcourt I at Snaketown 70 FIGURE 3.7, Refiise mound at Snaketown 71 FIGURE 3.8, Hohokam stone palettes 73 FIGURE 3.9, Stone censors from Snaketown cache 1; lOG 74 FIGURE 3.10, Composite drawing of early agricultural figurine from the Tucson Basin 78 FIGURE 3.11, Pecos Pueblo figurine 79 FIGURE 3.12, Figurine from Pillings Cave 80 FIGURE 3.13, Female figurines from cache 2:9F at Snaketown 82 FIGURE 3.14, Solid animal figurines from cache 2:9F at Snaketown 83 FIGURE 4.1, A tavu in the Ditilebit house of Awear, Fordata, c. 1920 98 FIGURE 5.1, Drawing of a Hohokam figurine 105 FIGURE 5.2, Figurine with one-piece construction 110 FIGURE 5.3, Figurine with one-piece construction 110 FIGURE 5.4, Example of two-piece construction method Ill FIGURE 5.5, Appliqued coffee bean eyes 112 FIGURE 5.6, Examples of headbands and ear plugs 112 FIGURE 5.7, Possible pregnant female 115 FIGURE 5.8, Portion of Snaketown map 121 FIGURE 5.9, Portion of Snaketown map 122 FIGURE 5.10, Features containing figurines at the Grewe site 124 FIGURE 5.11, Number of figurines by disposal context and time period at Snaketown the Grewe site 129 FIGURE 6.1, Cross section of a friction ridge 145 FIGURE 6.2, Ridge count index technique 147 FIGURE 6.3, Female prints from the ethnographic collection 156 FIGURE 6.4, Male prints from the ethnographic collection 156 FIGURE 6.5, Male and female mean RCI values for the ethnographic fingerprint assemblage 157 FIGURE 7.1, RCI values for female1 fingerprints in clay sample GB-183 166 FIGURE 7.2, Comparison of RCI values for fingerprints in ink and fired clays 167 FIGURE 7.3, Ceramic sherd with fingerprints 169 FIGURE 7.4, Example of figurine head and features that typically exhibit fingerprints 170 9

LIST OF FIGURES - Continued

FIGURE 7.5, Distribution of ridge count values for archaeological samples 173 FIGURE 7.6, Distribution of ridge count values for ethnographic samples 173 FIGURE 8.1, Figurine head from the Sedentary period, Sacaton phase 189 FIGURE 8.2, Graves from a single family in the Bisbee cemetery 205 10

LIST OF TABLES

TABLE 3.1, Hohokam chronologies for southern Arizona 55 TABLE 3.2, Partial list of anthropomorphic figurines found in the Greater Southwest 76 TABLE 4.1, Functional classes and figurine attributes 92 TABLE 4.2, Attributes recorded for all figurines 94 TABLE 4.3, Attributes coded for fiinctional classes of figurines 96 TABLE 5.1, List of figurine body parts within the assemblage 106 TABLE 5.2, Clay sample locations 108 TABLE 5.3, Types of appliqued adornment seen on the figurines 112 TABLE 5.4, Presence of sex characteristics on figurine torsos 114 TABLE 5.5, Treatment of figurines 116 TABLE 5.6, Extent of burning on figurines 117 TABLE 5.7, Use-wear visible on figurines 119 TABLE 5.8, Figurine disposal contexts 120 TABLE 5.9, Figurine part with spatial and temporal context 127 TABLE 6.1, Female and male total ridge count differences 148 TABLE 6.2, Ridge counts of prehistoric fingerprints 151 TABLE 6.3, Ridge count index values for modem fingerprint sample 154 TABLE 7.1, Fingerprints in clay from clay source GB-183 163 TABLE 7.2, Fingerprints in clay from clay source GB-199 163 TABLE 7.3, Fingerprints in clay from clay source GB-253 164 TABLE 7.4, Fingerprints in clay from clay source GB-262 164 TABLE 7.5, Fingerprints in clay from clay source GB-266 165 TABLE 7.6, Context of figurines associated with male producers 181 11

ABSTRACT

Study of ritual in the Greater Southwest is dominated by research at the suprahousehold and community levels. However, this approach ignores the most basic segment of society, the household. This research addresses household ritual by determining the production, use, and discard of anthropomorphic ceramic figurines that were used at the sites of Snaketown and Grewe during the Pioneer (300 B.C.-A.D. 700) and Colonial (A.D. 700-900) periods. Agency and practice theory provide a background for this examination of human representations that may be tied with the creation of personhood and identity.

Some 1440 figurines and figurine fragments are analyzed in order to determine their function and the sex of those individuals producing them. Function is determined by recording the patterns of construction, form, use-wear, damage, and disposal for each artifact. These results are compared to cross-cultural pattems of figurine use including ancestor ritual, healing and curing ritual, and the play of children (toys.) All aspects of figurine manufacture, use, and discard indicate that these items were employed in ancestor ritual within Hohokam households.

In addition to the analysis of figurine attributes, I also determine who the producers of these figures were by examining fingerprint impressions left in the clay surface of the representations. Dermatoglyphic analyses provide the link between the manufacture of figurines and gender roles within the household. Ridge counting is used to distinguish between children and adults and males and females. A ridge count is a quantitative measure of the size and density of the fingerprint pattern, which is strongly 12 inherited. The ridge count indices for the archaeological sample are compared with ridge count values from an ethnographic collection of Native American prints. These distributions of ridge count values show that women are the primary producers of the figurines, however a small percentage of men are manufacturing them in certain households.

As part of ancestor ritual, figurines function as representations of deceased relatives who perpetuate access to property and resource rights. Women often maintain this ritual, which commemorates the dead while reinforcing social memory among the

Hohokam. 13

CHAPTER 1

THE ARCHAEOLOGY OF DOMESTIC RITUAL

Small ceramic figurines have been recovered from houses throughout the

Hohokam regional system and portions of northern Mexico during the period from 300

B.C. to A.D. 900. The high frequency of these figurines found in houses suggests that

ritual involving the use of these figures occurred in households on a regular basis, which

is contrary to the common belief that figurines are archaeological rarities.

I directly address household ritual by determining the production, use, and discard

of these anthropomorphic figurines (Figure 1.1). These figures have been the focus of

several descriptive studies, yet their interpretation is still equivocal. Hohokam

researchers have assumed that all figurines in this area were used within community-wide

cult activities associated with ballcourts and ballgames or agricultural fertility. I examine

whether these figurines were instead a part of domestic ritual by testing three alternative

hypotheses for their use: healing and curing ritual, ritual associated with an ancestor cult,

and children's toys.

Some 1460 figurines and other small ceramic items from museum collections

were analyzed as part of this project. The figurines were recovered from the sites of

Snaketown and Grewe in southern Arizona (Figure 1.2). They are an ideal sample to study in terms of household ritual because they are primarily female in form, they are

deposited in domestic refiise, and they are found over a large regional area. In order to

determine figurine function, patterns of construction material, form, use-wear, damage, and disposal were analyzed. The results are compared to cross-cultural patterns of 14

s i li

Figure 1.1 Figurines from Snaketown (After Haury 1976:258). figurine use including vehicles of magic (ancestor ritual and healing and curing ritual) and children's toys. As a part of ancestor ritual, figurines function as representations of deceased relatives who perpetuate access to property and resource rights as well as provide comfort to their descendants. Figurines used in healing and curing ritual commonly represent good spirits who protect a person from harm and they also are associated with fertility and pregnancy. It has also been suggested that some of these figurines may be ftinctioning as children's toys.

Gender relations in the Hohokam region have not been major focus of research in recent years (Crown 2000). However, one prominent study conducted by Crown and

Fish (1996) examines change in the status and prestige of women during the Pre-Classic to Classic transition. They found that this time period was generally characterized by increasing social differentiation, and as part of this process, women's workloads increased. Women also were involved with increases in productive specialization. 15

NEVADA UTAH SO]"

AR ZONA

^APPROXIMATE LIMITS OF (HOHOKAM MATERIAL CULTURE \ Flagstaff v»ro» DISTRIBUTION OF Tuzigoof ^COLON^AL/ Mcntetumai 1 SEDENTARY Castle .PERIOD Calkins HOHOKAM Ran<» BALLCOURTS

Pueblo Grande Caso Buena Los Cotino»,,X^-g>i It I C '^'^^'iSnoketown Pomt of Pines v^yv-^v^Escalonte •V I Pointed RocKs C^„..Gr«-e \ Gronde \ ^^ntono Cove Hodg« University Indian Rum JaCI(rol>bif.'*'>^"'^®°" Tonqge Veide TresAlQinot Valshni Gteesm [BoboeomSrV^'" ~Sor> \ , Coyetano | GUW OF Kilometers CALIFORNIA

Figure 1.2 Map of Sites within the Hohokam Regional System Defined by both ballcourts and material culture (After Crown and Judge 1991). 16

Although these changes seem to have placed extra burdens on women, their prestige increased within compound groups during the Classic period. Men were clearly dependent on women for their productive and reproductive capabilities even though asymmetry in sexual status was still present. Gender studies in the Hohokam regional system need to be greatly expanded beyond this particular transition.

My research also looks at gender roles within the household through the development of new methods for identifying the sex of figurine producers. This method analyzes the fingerprints that were impressed into the figurines by their producers. The large sample of Hohokam figurines was analyzed and many of these have partial fingerprint impressions. By linking the sex of the producer to the figurine morphology, use wear, and contexts of disposal, I am able to look at several dimensions of variation in household ritual across the Hohokam area. This research employs material culture over architectural data, it focuses on common household ritual over the more easily visible communal ritual, and it seeks to connect specific gendered roles with particular aspects of household ritual. I then move beyond these initial topics to ask how this ritual action affected social relationships, specifically gender relations, within the household. And I consider how identity and gender intersect in Hohokam domestic ritual.

Ritual in the Greater Southwest

The study of ritual in the Greater Southwest has long been dominated by research that focuses on social scales above the level of the household. Sodality formation, cults, community integration associated with migration events, and social power gained from control over community ritual are all current research topics (Adams 1991; Crovm 1994; Hays-Gilpin and Hill 2000; Lekson et al. 1988; Lipe and Hegmon 1989; Potter and Perry

2000; Spielmann 1998; Walker et al. 2000; Ware and Blinman 2000; Wilcox 1991).

Although research at the scale of suprahousehold and community organization has made important contributions, current approaches largely ignore the most basic and ubiquitous segment of any larger society, the household.

Many researchers also create an artificial dichotomy between domestic and ritual contexts, instead of viewing human behavior, material culture, and architecture on a continuum (Adler 1993). I propose that throughout Southwestern prehistory, "domestic" and "ritual" need not be considered separate contexts, and ritual practices are not always designed solely for public integration. Constructed spaces are employed for multiple purposes with multiple meanings. However, the large, socially integrative structures found at the far end of this continuum, remain the primary focus of ritual study. These facilities are often spatially separate from other general use areas, and activities associated with them frequently involve large segments of the population (Adler and

Wilshusen 1990; Lipe and Hegmon 1989). Household ritual has been lost in this search for integrative mechanisms associated with aggregation and with regional movements of people. It has also been forgotten in the study of more competitive ritual such as some forms of feasting (Potter 2000; Spielmann 1998). By ignoring domestic ritual, we have limited our knowledge of the continuum of ritual behavior and we have marginalized the common daily ritual of individuals and of specific households. 18

Domestic vs. Communal Ritual

I think there are two basic reasons for the concentration of attention on ritual behavior above the level of the household. First, much of the evidence for suprahousehold and community ritual is more accessible in the archaeological record than is that for household ritual. Ideology and ritual behavior are highly intangible, and communal spaces such as great kivas, ballcourts, plazas, and platform mounds are the

most visible indicators of ritual in the American Southwest. These facilities are commonly defined by their overall size, internal features, and construction methods when compared to other, particularly domestic, structures at a site. Large-scale architecture does create a built environment for the elaboration of ritual, and this environment imparts knowledge and reinforces social patterns (Hegmon 1989). However, domestic architecture can fulfill the same roles at a different scale.

Communal ritual spaces are fi"equently studied at the scale of regional populations, yet some work, such as Crown and Wills' (2003) study of Chacoan kiva renewal and rebuilding, and Cameron's (2002) investigation of the Bluff Great House berm, concentrate on specific aspects of these large ritual facilities. Constructions such as these are conspicuous and designed for use beyond everyday activities. Stone

(2002:391) argues that these communal designs are a "visual and permanent reification of political organizations inherent in the ceremonial performances" held in them. The political organizations along with the communal architecture may be redefined over time.

These broad relationships are the basis for most archaeological studies of ritual, while 19 material culture that can also inform on ritual activities is frequently passed over (Walker et al. 2000).

In a study on ritual object life histories at the site of Homol'ovi in northern

Arizona, Walker (1995) claims objects and spaces serving in a ritual capacity act as the material basis for ritual technologies. His work is an example of the study of ritual objects, yet by focusing on ceremonial, sacrificial, and kratophanous deposits in large kivas, he does not delve beyond the communal level. By contrast, domestic ritual artifacts are often perishable, portable, and may be curated for long periods of time which diminishes their visibility in the archaeological record (Schachner 2001). Items may not be recognizable as ritually important when in fact they do have ritual uses in contexts such as the household. Mills' (2004) exploration of Weiner's (1992) concept of inalienable possessions (Weiner 1992) as an alternative to traditional prestige goods explanations provides a useful way of examining ritual objects that are embued with social memory and power. These objects do not circulate widely and they "materialize histories of social relations" (Mills 2004:240). She stresses that although some of these items may be recognized in the archaeological record on their form alone, depositional context is truly the key to understanding their role in power relations and both the establishment and defeat of hierarchy. These depositional contexts are different from ordinary domestic trash, a point also made by Walker (1995).

The second reason for the current research concentration on suprahousehold ritual is tied to a general emphasis on the study of regional processes and interactions

(Abbott 2000; Adler 1996; Crown and Judge 1991; Hegmon 2000; Lekson 1986; Wills 20 and Leonard 1994), rather than those on an individual or small group level. The study of ritual structures can lead to an understanding of relationships on a regional scale (Plog

1989; Wilcox and Sternberg 1983). Aggregation is an important social process that has received much recent attention in the Greater Southwest (Hegmon 2000), and ritually specialized spaces are considered necessary for the integration of growing communities

(Kintigh 1994; Lipe and Hegmon 1989; Longacre 1966).

Collective ritual can bring diverse people together by linking the ideological with the social. It can also regulate social systems, sanctify the decisions of leaders, and cause social change. Crown's (1994) research on Salado Polychrome pottery and its association with a Southwestern cult and Adam's (1991) work on the Pueblo Katsina cult of the northern Southwest are classic studies that focus on regional interaction. In particular, kivas and great kivas have been the center of numerous studies on ritual and community integration (Adler 1993; Lekson 1988; Schachner 2001; Smith 1990; Van

Dyke 2002). Stone's (2002) investigation of kiva diversity in the Point of Pines region is one example of this research. She documents the internal features and overall size of kivas through time to support community stability in the face of increasing factionalism.

More recent work examines change in the use of communal space and ritual that is linked with changes in social and political organization (Creel and Anyon 2003; Potter 1998;

Schachner 2001; Skibo et al. 2002).

Investigating the tie between ritual and regional networks is crucial for understanding many of the patterns seen in prehistory. Yet, household archaeology is once again becoming an important topic of research as agency-based perspectives refocus attention on smaller social scales (e.g. Allison [ed.] 1999; Dobres and Hoffman [eds.]

1999). The material dimension of houses that manifests in a person-to-object relationship constitutes an important factor in how people view themselves and their world. Daily activities and practices can tell us how power is organized in the household in relation to

wealth, resource rights, small-scale ritual, and gender roles. This basic level of social

organization is therefore a fundamental building block in our investigations into social

memory and relations of power. Ritual is embedded in many aspects of household life, and it is often tied to those aspects of social memory that maintain and perpetuate the

history of each particular household. Therefore, the study of domestic ritual is integral

for understanding the ties between families, their past kin, and place.

Approaches to the Study of the Household

In early research on households, domestic activities were considered to be unchanging and standardized phenomena and therefore their study was often perceived as relatively insignificant (Allison 1999). This view is now changing (e.g. Allison 1999;

Blanton 1994; Carsten and Hugh-Jones 1995; Wilk and Rathje 1982); however, the lack of work on household ritual has not increased significantly. Instead, most studies focus on the household as a unit of production and consumption at both social and economic levels (Alexander 1999; Allison 1999; Meadows 1999).

The Economy of Production and Consumption

Much of the early work on households was concerned with defining the household, the family, the dwelling structure, and the domestic unit (Home 1982; Kramer 22

1982; Tsakirgis 1996; Wilk and Rathje 1982). It was also a priority to determine how each of these units was connected to the others. Wilk and Rathje (1982:618) equate the household with the "most common social component of subsistence, the smallest and most abundant activity group." Others define the household as a residence unit, which is focused on certain social or economic tasks (Netting, Wilk, and Arnold 1984).

Regardless of definition, the total household is part of a domestic strategy to meet the productive, distributive, and reproductive needs of the individuals forming its membership.

Households are frequently defined by economic cooperation rather than by strictly coresidence. Common household functions include production, distribution, transmission, and reproduction (Wilk and Rathje 1982). Production involves procuring resources and increasing the value of resources already in the household's possession.

Distribution is the process of transferring resources from producer to consumers.

Transmission depends on the concept of ownership within the household and it entails transferring rights, roles, and property between generations. Finally, reproduction is the raising and socializing of household children. Other than reproduction, these functions are primarily focused on the economy of households, which ignores a wide range of social and ritual behaviors that occur daily in the domestic context.

Social and Ritual Organization of the Household

Some attempts have been made to tie economic aspects of household life with social organization and other aspects of society (Blanton 1994). Blanton's (1994) cross- cultural wealth comparison analyzes the formal properties of dwellings to assess 23 household social reproductive strategies. He manages to link the social and physical realms of the household by evaluating strategies employed by heads of households to attain and preserve the desired social status of the household. Many similar studies target the variability in household structure and how this relates to the associated social grouping that lives and fiinctions as a unit (Home 1982; Howell 1995; Kramer 1982;

Reidand Whittlesey 1982; Waterson 1995).

Recent work by Gillespie (2000a) reassesses Levi-Strauss' concept of house as social group. In the 1970's, the house was used as an analytical concept where it was considered a form of social structure (Carsten and Hugh-Jones 1995). The house society was described by Levi-Strauss (1982:174) as "a corporate body holding an estate made up of both material and immaterial wealth, which perpetuates itself through the transmission of its name, its goods, and its titles down a real or imaginary line, considered legitimate as long as this continuity can express itself in the language of kinship or of affinity and, most often, of both."

Gillespie (2000b) finds that Mayan houses, in both construction and use, are a microcosm that reflects a version of the larger universe and its concomitant social relations. House details, such as altars (or sleeping houses) reflect these same principles and form a material point of contact between the living and the dead. The perpetuation of these houses and their claim to resources, including land, was and still is grounded in a connection to ancestral origins. "As keepers of the land and givers of life... (Maya) ancestors fuse local affinities and generational continuity to the very landscape itself 24

(Watanabe 1990:139). In this case study, social relations, household construction and use, and household-based ancestor ritual are all tied together.

Few other substantial studies of prehistoric household ritual have been undertaken, although some researchers are now studying house floor assemblages and other classes of material objects that are associated with domestic activities and the life history of dwelling structures (LaMotta and Schiffer 1999). These house floor assemblages are sometimes deposited as the result of ritual abandonment procedures even though they can be mistaken for other forms of cultural deposition (Lightfoot 1993;

Seymour and Schiffer 1987; Walker 1995).

Two more recent studies of households explore the links between artifacts, social memory, and the ritual processes where houses integrate themselves within the surrounding community (Hodder and Cessford 2004; Joyce 2000). In the first of these studies, Joyce (2000) outlines several ethnographic cases of communities that perpetuate the "house society" concept. She then goes on to demonstrate that certain curated objects can be used to materialize memory in the house and therefore aid in the continuity of the house through time. This idea that there is a critical tie between tangible manifestations of social relations and their representation in social memory is then laid out with archaeological evidence from the prehispanic Maya. Oral tradition plays an important role in this process of materializing social memory. Among the Maya, the permanence of stone is necessary for marking the continuity and identity of houses, and ties to other resources or pieces of property. Individual names, social memory, and heirloomed ornaments are the important ingredients for maintaining these house histories. In the end. 25 each individual's work advances the general house interests and these houses can be ranked internally as well as externally (McKinnon 1991).

Similar recent work on these issues was conducted by Hodder and Cessford

(2004) and is based upon their research on the emergence of large settled villages in

Southwest Asia. They concentrate on the way that social meaning, rules, and power are embedded within everyday practices in the households of (^atal Hoyiik. How is power accepted and made sense of within early concentrated villages? Hodder and Cessford

(2004) propose that daily practice can maintain memory and relationships with the past history of a particular family, and the repetition of these everyday behaviors may be enough to aid in the reproduction of dominant groups or lineages through time. In some communities social memory may, in fact, be inseparable from daily practice, and as

Hodder and Cessford (2004:18) acknowledge, "power is always embedded within meaning, knowledge, or discourse."

Household archaeology has the potential to inform us about how families participate in more general aspects of society. "Rather than be overly concerned that some households are not single-family units, or that some houses contain more or less than a single household, we should perhaps give some thought to the family as a social unit worthy of archaeological study, while realizing that houses contained families in some form or another" (Deetz 1982:718). The important point is that households are basic yet crucial units in which we can find variability in the archaeological record. The house can also provide the basis for discussing the interconnection of material culture. history, and the social reproduction that active household agents are continually dealing with (Joyce 2000).

Gender Roles within the Household

Household archaeology is tied in important ways to the study of gender. Much like ritual, gender often has been deemed invisible in the domestic sphere. Men, especially, tend towards archaeological invisibility in household studies (David 1971) because of the common belief that women's activities are those represented by domestic refuse and household floor assemblages (Tringham 1991). Ethnographically, however, both women and men participate in household-based ritual activities. This research also indicates that men's and women's roles may be very different from case to case, reflecting the great variety in ritual practice at the household level. Ritual can reinforce existing roles, including those defined by gender, and it "provides a context for the active negotiation of change" (Hays-Gilpin 2000:92). Therefore, gender is an important variable to understand in the study of household ritual.

Discussions of gender in the household tend to highlight women because of their presumed association with the domestic realm, even though men are often considered the head of the household. This leads to a division between male and female space which is not always accurate. The delineation of gendered space and the identification of gendered divisions of labor are ubiquitous topics in the literature (Blanton 1994; Hodder

1983; Lyons 1989; Rapoport 1990; Tringham 1991). However, recent work is challenging the gender oppositions inherent in much of the work on male and female spaces by pointing out that domestic spatial relationships are relatively complex (Allison

1999; Goldberg 1999; Kent 1984; Spencer-Wood 1999; vom Bruck 1997).

Classical Athenian houses provide one example of the diversity actually present in a society that is traditionally thought of as having a gender dichotomy of male-public and female-domestic (Goldberg 1999). Goldberg (1999) contends that most research on

Greek households has been simplistic and biased by stressing the separation of male and female space in the house. Rather than relying on textual material alone, she incorporates archaeological data into her assessments of Athenian houses, and she finds that the courtyard is a main area for integration of household members as well as non-household members. A strict separation of gendered space appears to only occur on a regular basis in very wealthy families. Therefore, Athenian houses were spaces where women interacted with men, other women, and a world larger than the house alone. Men may have owned the houses, but women may have used their traditional roles in innovative ways to increase respect and authority in the household.

Closely related to this study, Spencer-Wood's (1999) work on Victorian nineteenth-century houses draws on perceptions of gender relations in ancient Greece.

She summarizes the elite Victorian practice of legitimizing the dominance of males in society by using Classical Greek archaeology. However, as we now know from her work as well as that of Goldberg's, the classical Greek gender dichotomy was not necessarily made real in daily life. Instead, there were variable gender ideologies at play in Greek society as there were in later Victorian society. Spencer-Wood (1999:162) makes the interesting point that "diversity of Victorian women's public cooperative housekeeping 28 enterprises raises questions about whether it is always possible to define the household as distinctly separate from the community." In both Greek and Victorian communities, women were never solely relegated to the domestic realm and men were not excluded from it entirely.

A third study exploring the material remnants of house structures and their contents at nineteenth-century Australian goldfield houses by Lawrence (1999) provides us with another look at complexity in designations of gendered space. The analysis of houses and their associated assemblages allows her to discuss household ftinction and gender composition in these small, temporary camps on the Moorabool diggings west of

Melbourne. Household composition, subsistence patterns, and material culture within the settlement are all influenced by gender relations. Women were generally in charge of subsistence farming and they also maintained the household's cultural identity. They used goods to increase the respectability of the household, and these processes are visible in the archaeological assemblages associated with certain houses and not with others.

All three of these studies are examples of the diversity in gender relations that exist beyond the previously common view that all things public were associated with men and objectivity, and all things related to the household were tied to women and subjectivity. Complexity is not a frequently employed trait to describe archaeological gender studies. As more research asks appropriate questions concerning the agency of men and women within and outside of the house, the more we realize that there was no one single binary opposition between male and female in prehistory. The interconnection between gender and domestic ritual is one specific area in which this complexity is rarely 29 addressed. Yet, it is a primary arena for discussions of variability in how households define and perpetuate themselves.

In summary, the visibility of household ritual has been diminished by the heavy concentration on communal ritual in the Greater Southwest. The spaces and objects used in large-scale ritual are much easier to identify and study, and regional interactions have been a major focus of archaeological work in the Americas in general. Domestic ritual is important for maintaining social memory at the small scale and establishing gender roles within the social picture. Again, there is no one gender ideology and the relationships perpetuated by household ritual may influence a wide array of other social situations.

Chapter Summaries

The research in my study fills the large void in studies of household ritual by concentrating on everyday ritual practices involving human ceramic figurines in the

Greater Southwest. The first two chapters of this dissertation lay the theoretical framework for this research into household ritual by reviewing previous research into the study of the household. In the present chapter I compared approaches to both domestic and communal ritual, and discussed gender and ritual within the broader context of the house. In Chapter 2 my use of agency theory is defined. The intersection of agency theory, practice theory, and personal identity is particularly important in the domestic realm, and this theoretical basis forms the structure by which gender relations and power within the household can be explored. At the end of Chapter 2,1 have included an overview of theory utilized in studies of ceramic figurine function throughout the world.

Most research on anthropomorphic figurines has been descriptive, but a handftil of 30 studies concentrate on the social significance of figurines and these are examined for comparative purposes.

A brief summary of Hohokam site organization and household structure is

included in Chapter 3. Haury's (1965) work on Snaketown figurines is compared against

Love's (2001) reexamination of the same collection, which I have also utilized for the research presented here. This chapter also contains the history of the Snaketown and

Grewe research collections.

In Chapter 4,1 present a new model for analyzing figurine function. It is partially

based on Ucko's (1962) model that uses a variety of specific figurine characteristics, such

as construction material, form, use-wear, other forms of pre-depositional damage, and disposal context. I use this model to test three alternative hypotheses of Hohokam figurine function.

A range of figurine data is presented in Chapter 5, including characteristics of figurine construction, use, and disposal fi^om the anthropomorphic figurines in the

Snaketown and Grewe collections. An assessment of these attributes leads to an evaluation of the three hypotheses of figurine function.

Chapter 6 contains a discussion of sex and gender studies in archaeology, which prefaces a discussion of dermatoglyphic methods to identify the sex of figurine producers in the Hohokam region. A ridge counting method is employed to make this distinction, and this provides a quantitative means of determining sex roles in the archaeological record. The dermatoglyphic data from fingerprints visible on figurines from the sites of

Snaketown and Grewe is recounted in Chapter 7. These archaeological data are then 31 compared against a sample of modem Native American fingerprints that are currently housed at the Smithsonian Institution. The comparison allows for the accurate identification of male and female prints on the figurines.

Finally, Chapter 8 concludes this research with a discussion of gender roles, ancestor ritual, and figurine production within Hohokam households. Ties to ancestors increase the visibility of those individuals involved in maintaining the ritual connections between the current household and past family members by furthering their family's rights to certain natural and cultural resources. 32

CHAPTER 2

THE INTERSECTION OF AGENCY, FIGURINES, AND GENDER

Humans are envisioned as entering contexts informed by experience and by their knowledge of history and social structure; they are taken to have a sense of what is or is not habitual, appropriate, opportune, painful, or rewarding in those contexts, and their actions are assumed to be informed by this sense. Martin Wobst (2000:40)

The active agents of southwestern prehistory are individual people and social groups of varying size. Agency is not a separate entity, but an opportunity for humans to act. And these actions in turn shape social structure. Agency also allows us to see human beings as variable, which is a dynamic concept and one that creates a cycle where structure is constantly changing as actions inform structure and at the same time change it. Therefore, people are the operators of culture (Wobst 2000), and the consideration of their actions allows a more accurate discussion of how humans really behave. Humans are complex and the recognition of action as a component of behavior creates an opportunity for us, as archaeologists, to address more theoretical questions with more complex content. Finally, action-conscious research forces us to include social contradictions, disjunctures, and competing interests to enter into our interpretations of prehistoric contexts (Wobst 2000).

The Basics of Agency Theory

Agency has been defined as self-determination, and it is often discussed as part of an agency-structure dialectic. Structure is equated with social and political institutions.

Structure can also be conceptualized as principles and resources that both enable and constrain agency, such as prestige goods or reHgious beliefs (A. Joyce 2000:71-72).

Beyond the early inquiries into self-determination, personal identity, and intentionality seen in Greek philosophy and the writings of John Locke, David Hume, Jean-Jacques

Rosseau, Adam Smith, and John Stuart Mill, Parsons (1949) saw institutions as heavily constraining on individual choice (Dobres and Robb 2000). Yet, he also proposed that human decisions were supported by a basic rationality. In the 1960's, Halperin (1994) emphasized explaining the relationship between large-scale constraining institutions and small-scale individual choice. This view was more readily embraced by sociocultural and economic anthropologists rather than archaeological anthropologists, who were more focused on cultural ecology and neo-evolutionary theory at that time. More recent agency theory is backed by the work of Giddens (1979, 1984) and Bourdieu (1977).

Giddens (1979, 1984) argued that people as a result of their actions (perhaps unintended), create the conditions and structures around them. Bourdieu (1977) instead focused on the everyday aspects of daily life (habitus) that people use to create institutions and beliefs that then constrain them. This occurs without the direct awareness or control of humans maintaining these behaviors. Both Giddens and Bourdieu claim that these structure- building processes are always on-going and recursive, and they exist without the purposefial manipulation of people. However, Giddens limits his structuration theory by treating society as an institution separate from its members.

In the 1980's and 1990's four areas of archaeological inquiry exhibited interest in agency theory (Dobres and Robb 2000). First, agency was seen in studies of gender dynamics and the gendered nature of archaeological practice (Gero 1983; Silverblatt 34

1988). Second, research into material culture variability used agency theory to explain the range of human behavior needed to produce this variation. In this work, meaning is seen as context-dependent and variable depending on the actor's situation and personal decisions (Hodder 1987b). Third, phenomenology and Gidden's structuration theory

(Giddens 1979) emphasized the connection between human action and material culture.

And finally, agency theory provided the ideal background for the study of emerging inequality (Mills [ed.] 2000; Price and Feinman 1995). Agency theory is currently being employed in a wide array of different research questions that see humans as actors in the world around them rather than as passive entities that are unable to create social change of any kind.

Dobres and Robb (2000:7-8) define four general principles of current agency theory and these are:

1) Material conditions of social life;

2) Simultaneously constraining and enabling influence of social, symbolic, and

material structures and institutions, habituation, and beliefs;

3) Importance of the motivations and actions of agents; and

4) Dialectic of structure and agency.

Agency is not action itself, and instead it can be seen as a "socially significant quality of action" (Dobres and Robb 2000:8).

These principles appear to be operating in the vast array of different approaches to agency that are present in the archaeological literature today. Agency can operate in many ways, and it is commonly employed on different scales such as individual agency. 35 multiple agencies, and the agency of people as a whole. Researchers tend to have different views of the role that agency plays in social reproduction, and agency can be tied to social scale and material culture in a number of ways as well. All of this variability aside, agency is always a political concept, and we must be careful to not recreate our own society through the androcentric bias of assuming that past action is identical, or even similar, to action in modem, westernized society. It is therefore important to modify agency theory to fit the relevant archaeological questions, appropriate scales of investigation, and the unique quality of archaeological data.

Agency Theory in Concert with Practice Theory

Practice theory is not the same as agency theory. Pauketat (2000:115) defines practice theory as "a theory of the continuous and historically contingent enactments or embodiments of people's ethos, attitudes, agendas, and dispositions." In essence, practice theory states that human agency triggers sociocultural change (A. Joyce

2000:71). It helps us make sense of small-scale actions that may have a range of consequences. These small-scale behaviors may seem spontaneous, second-nature, and based in common sense, yet they form the basis for knowledge that guides social perceptions and norms. Practice theory operates at the intersection of thought and action.

And, it is applicable to many archaeological problems since our understanding of the long term is built up on traces of the smallest acts. The study of long term processes is frequently the focus of archaeological investigation and it is reinforced by preservation and recovery at sites (Hodder 2000). Often researchers forget that large scale or gross patterning is created by the small repetitious acts that occur on a daily basis. Early work on practice theory comes from Marx (1963) and his ideas of "praxis" or the practical engagement of humans with the world around them including their focus on material production. He proposed that society itself is a plurality of individuals who live through the relationships they form during daily material production (Marx and

Engels 1970). Giddens (1979, 1984) employed some of these ideas in his critique of formalism, by stating that humans, as a result of the unintended consequences of their actions, originated the structure and factors influencing their lives. He claimed that structure-building is a never-ending process between actors and other unknown forces that never reaches equilibrium. At the same time, Bourdieu (1977) began concentrating on how society is formed by the common routines of daily life that comprise social practice. These everyday actions were termed habitus, and in Bourdieu's conceptualization, daily domestic behavior legitimizes social order. Habitus is therefore the foundation for social reproduction in the household, which in turn is the basis for the reproduction of society's larger social structure (Blanton 1995). Practice creates social rules and these rules structure society, which in turn perpetuates practice.

Practice theory and the dialectic between agency and structure were considered mainstream topics in sociocultural anthropology by the middle of the 1980's (Ortner

1984). Philosophy (Turner 1994) and feminist studies (Kegan Gardiner 1995) soon followed suit and in archaeology, a concern with individuals as agents emerged out of post-processualism. Marxist agendas (Leone 1986; Spriggs 1984) explored the relationship between structure, conflict, and large-scale sociopolitical change. Others, such as Hodder (1982), began to discuss the action of structure and symbols without a 37 direct link to practice theory and habitus. However, outright archaeological interest in agency and practice theory greatly increased throughout the 1980's and 1990's, particularly in the realm of gender-oriented research (Silverblatt 1988; Conkey and Gero

1997).

According to Dobres and Robb (2000:5) some core elements of contemporary practice theory can be summarized in these points.

1) "Society is a plurality of individuals who exist only by virtue of the relationships they create during everyday material production {praxis).'" 2) "Humans produce their cultural histories through praxis, which highlights the processual nature of social reproduction." 3) "Individual (or group) free-will and volition are explicitly disavowed, in part because people do not choose the conditions within which they live." 4) "These structural conditions have a strong material basis." 5) "Institutional settings and conditions constitute a material world that is made, experienced, and perceived (that is, symbolized and made meaningful) by those living in it." 6) "Society exists as the result of antecedent conditions, which gives time and history prominent roles in shaping social formations and the particular practices constituting them."

As an example of current research, a recent article by Hodder and Cessford (2004) incorporates practice theory into their discussion of the formation of large, settled villages in Southwest Asia at the site of (^atal Hoyiik in central Turkey. They stress that social rules are learned in daily practice within the household, and that daily practices become larger scale social practices with repetition over time. These social practices have a spatial component along with a temporality and rhythm. Hodder and Cessford

(2004:18) specifically ask if the alteration of social practices in everyday life can create the possibility of centralized coordinating functions. They argue that habitual behavior 38 was commemorative and the construction of social memory was dependent on these actions. They also conclude that at ^atal Hoyuk, the house was the main mechanism for creating social rules and constructing social memory. These processes within the domestic realm perhaps provided the foundation for the social integration and consolidation of power necessary in agglomerating communities.

Hegmon (2003:221) comments in her recent review of theory in North American archaeology that: "agency is everywhere." She points out that agency theory is most often applied to discussions of leadership and inequality in North American archaeology, such as Pauketat's (1994) work on elite-controlled ideology in Mississippian chiefdoms.

And she also stresses the benefit of examining the recursive relationship between agency, practice, and structure, instead of simply addressing agency alone. The study of practice allows us to more fully understand how agency is created and perpetuated. Hegmon

(2003) draws two important conclusions about the use of agency in North American archaeology. First, details of practice are more easily observed because of the richness of the archaeological record and because of the exceptional quality of dating in this area of the world. Second, a large portion of North American archaeology is concerned with time periods and locations that do not exhibit institutionalized inequality. This creates an ideal situation in which to employ practice and agency in situations markedly different than our own westernized world, which bypasses one of the main biases typically associated with the use of agency theory.

In the following sections I discuss in greater detail how agency theory and practice can be applied to research on ritual and agency, and I discuss the interplay 39 between ritual practice and the objects associated with ritual behavior. This approach is especially useful for work on the level of the household since small-scale, individualized behaviors are more easily seen in this context. I also relate the concepts of personhood and identity to the study of gender in the household. These topics are integral to the application of agency theory, and are central in my definition and use of agency and practice theory.

Ritual Action and Artifacts

Agency and practice are integral to social and ritual change and they have been applied to only a limited number of archaeological questions. Ritual is continually reproduced in everyday practice and on one level habitus can be considered analogous to ritual. Blanton (1995) states that in ritual and in habitus, household inequality is made to appear powerful and holy. Walker and Lucero (2000) take this idea a step further by claiming that public events are successful because those in control incorporate everyday ritual into these larger public events. This explains why household rituals are then embedded within the ancestral rites of lineages. Small-scale ritual is often difficult to define in prehistory, and artifacts often provide the only real evidence of these behaviors in the archaeological record. Therefore, it is necessary to consider artifacts as evidence of ritual agents.

In practice theory, the real concern is the action of many people in social negotiations, and meaning does not reside in these people or in the artifacts constantly around them, but in the moment of interaction between the two (Pauketat 2000).

Artifacts influence how people interact with one another, and they instigate change in 40 how people evaluate each other and themselves. These objects also provide individuals within a community with a means of changing their social intent, and "they provide group members with material scales to evaluate the individualization or 'groupification' efforts of their cohort members" (Wobst 2000:47). Understanding how artifacts were used by agents is as or more important than determining the functional and symbolic aspects of the artifact. Yet, the latter information is often required to piece together ways in which an artifact helps to define an agent's interests.

Social beings are constructed through the material world, and human agency is frequently an act that reproduces the agency of the objects that help to socialize these very individuals (Meskell 2004). The study of materiality can be defined as an

"exploration of the situated experiences of material life, the constitution of the object world and, concomitantly, its shaping of human experience" (Meskell 2004:2). This dialectic of people and things creates a physical engagement with the world where context is naturally important. Objects are brought into being only with the intervention of humans. There is a transformation that occurs as things are embedded and mobilized within human experience through the process of practice. Meskell's (2004) new work on materiality and object worlds in ancient Egypt provides a thorough look into how processes and situations can transform material items into more than simply their constituent parts. She claims that "thingness lends objects an elusive inflection that impels us to think through the specificity and salience of the object world within the larger constitutive social frame" (Meskell 2004:14). This social framework includes the ubiquitous domains of exchange, consumption, waste, and excess. 41

When addressing concepts of materiality, current scholars seem to be both

retracing and redefining the work of earlier anthropologists and philosophers including

Hegel, Marx, V. Gordon Childe, and Mauss (Meskell 2004:17-21). In Mauss' (1954)

discussions, things are either commodities or gifts. Commodities are alienable, object­

like, and quantity is more important quality. On the other hand, gifts are inalienable and

subject-like, and quality is an important gift attribute. However, it is important to

remember that we use these objects to constitute ourselves in the material world at certain

times, and because of this, at some point things are themselves embued with life. In

Godelier's (1999) view, these things never really exist, only people who appear as people

or as objects. Humans and material items can take each other's place, and when an object

is given fi-om one person to another, a piece of the giver is embodied in the object and in

the materiality of exchange itself.

Miller (1987) argues that culture and the process of objectification can be defined

against each other, which leads to the conclusion that subjects and objects do not exist

independently. In ritual, imaginary replicas can stand in for real people, and the sacred

can even be thought of as representing a specific type of relationship that people have with the origin of a thing (Godelier 1999). As part of this interaction and the creation of an object, people are replaced by duplicates of themselves in material form. Mills

(2004:7) states that "ritual is authenticated through the transmission process," which can involve an array of actions including the process of manufacturing an object. The biography of an artifact starts with this process, and then the journey continues through different cycles of use and discard. And learning the path of this object life allows prehistorians to gain insight into a range of different archaeological problems.

The ritual object life histories discussed by Walker (1995) are based in behavioral archaeology; however, they apply in many respects to this discussion of artifacts and their practical place in agency and practice theory. He defines five major postulates for the study of ritual. First, ritual objects and spaces serve as material resources for ritual technologies. Second, ritual technologies can be analyzed by examining the performance characteristics of the spaces they occur in and the artifacts that are associated with them.

Third, distinctive ritual life histories do exist and these pathways lead to unique archaeological deposits. Fourth, ritual resources and technologies may vary from community to community, which could trigger competition and resulting social change.

And fifth, the concept of the artifact should be extended to include people and architecture in addition to the traditionally mobile object. Several of these postulates are of use in my application of practice theory. I find that the first three of Walker's points are useful, and the idea of distinctive ritual life histories with resulting singular deposits is particularly applicable to my study of anthropomorphic figurines. In Chapter 4,1 outline my model of figurine function that is based in several respects on this idea. I choose to employ Walker's fourth postulate on a smaller scale by acknowledging that ritual resources and technologies vary on a household-to-household basis rather than on the community level. I am not arguing that this variation is not also present on a societal level; however, for my purposes it is more interesting to conceive of this competition and variation in ritual at the household scale. 43

By examining these artifact biographies, a new perspective on household ritual is gained which opens a door into the realms of identity and personhood. How do individuals see themselves in their replicas and the objects they create and help to embue with life? And if humans gain some of their own identity from the material world that they themselves have created, then when does personhood begin? Also, how do identity and personhood interact with each other?

Identity, Gender, and Personhood

Agency theory helps to bridge the dichotomy between individualism and holism, and practice theory allows a person's identity to be perpetuated through daily ritual activities. Practice theory and agency are also intimately connected with gender in the archaeological record since "the very idea of'engendering' the past populates it with agents" (Hegmon 2003:221). The concepts of personhood, self, and gender are so intertwined, as to be nearly inseparable within the lifetime of each human being.

Personhood includes both the social and collective components of one's identity, and it is legitimized in people's relationships and interactions with each other and with objects.

Gillespie's (2001) research on Mayan representations of personhood focuses on the individual by examining "lived lives." She targets three major bodies of data, which are burials, imagery, and written text, for use in investigating "the person." This idea of personhood is rooted in the work of Linton (1936), Goodenough (1965), and Mauss

(1985). Their work and that of other anthropologists defines social persona as an amalgam of qualities including, gender, age, birth order, kin affiliations of relatives, life experiences, and metaphysical essences. Personhood is even more than this and can be characterized by a name or title with associated crests, insignia, or other symbolic markings, which mark a state of being (Gillespie 2001). More simply, the terms, "self and "individual," represent a self-contained, independent moral being. Therefore, the concepts of personhood and individual are acutely different social constructions. Meskell

(1999) claims that each human being is a narrator of their multiple selves, and to have a sense of self is to have a sense of one's place within the culturally situated context of personhood. In essence a sense of self is to have an awareness of those collected attributes that define their own personhood.

I agree with Gillespie (2001:84) that "what have often been seen as individualistic representations and actions may be better understood as social constructions that symbolically refer to a 'person,' whose identities, statuses, and motivations were shaped by their linkages to others in a collectivity." I also think that people are complex and that they have a number of different selves or personal identities. For this reason, a more subtle and nuanced approach is necessary for the study of ancient personhood and the multiple selves that are the building blocks of this personhood.

One of the most fundamental attributes of the self is gender, which is often closely associated with sexual characteristics of the body. Meskell (1999) undertakes a thorough discussion of the body and embodiment in anthropological thought, and she relies heavily on feminist theory to fi-ame her ovra work on individuals in Egypt. The materiality of the body can be explained as the experience of "being-in-the-body" which is determined partially by one's specific physical reality (Meskell 1999:38). "The framework of the body is the base upon which the project of the self is constructed" (Meskell 1999:108). Therefore, a consideration of the archaeological body is necessary for a better understanding of both personhood and an individual's perception of his or her self in the study of prehistoric gender roles. Meskell identifies two main trends in our archaeological involvement with the body: 1) the body as object or artifact, and 2) the body as "the scene of display." However, neither of these trends recognizes that the body is a foundation for social relations, and that it also contributes directly to these relations. The body is not something simply to be controlled or acted upon. As scholars of prehistory, we should strive to see bodies as lived, identities as individuals, and the complexity of personhood.

My view of agency is eclectic, in that it encompasses many operative qualities at once, and I agree with Dobres and Robb (2000:8) that agency is a "socially significant quality of action rather than being synonymous with, or reducible to, action itself." I use intentionality and social reproduction as important elements of my investigation into agency in the Hohokam regional system. I am interested in the construction of a sense of household and this research is focused at two different, but closely related, scales of inquiry: Hohokam households and the individuals within these social units. Some archaeological reconstructions of agency make an assumption that male equates to head of household, which relegates the remaining invisible portion of society (including women and children) to non-agenthood and passivity. Through discussions of sex, gender, and materiality of the lived body, I strive to see all sexes and genders as possible agents in the Greater Southwest. 46

The use of artifacts is rooted in human agency but the practice of using figurines in the household on a regular basis creates an object meaning that is independent of those directly using the figurine. I intend to investigate this meaning and the relationships between these figurines, the producers of these objects, and the households that maintain them. The following section reviews some of the current theory employed in the study of anthropomorphic figurines in various societies around the world. Much of this theory is still primarily based on functional interpretations of heavily descriptive data. However, the work of Lesure (1997, 2000), in particular, is much more nuanced and it does account for some of the inevitable complexity present in the analysis of small objects made in human form. In this section I also summarize the work of Follensbee (2000) and Marcus

(1998), who both target figurines that are used in the domestic realm. These studies provide some of the only research on the household use of figures that moves beyond the descriptive.

Current Theory and Ceramic Figurines

Figurines are small, stylistically simple figures that are produced fi-om variable media. They occur in sites throughout the world and often are considered to have been used in ritual activities (Brumfiel 1996; Follensbee 2000; Kelly 1972; Lesure 1997, 2002;

Marcus 1998; Scott 1958; Sprehn 2000; Stocker 1991; Stocker and Charlton 2001; Voigt

1983, 1991). Their fiinction has been most commonly attributed to fertility and cult rituals that occur on a community-wide scale (Hays-Gilpin 2000; James 1959; Morris

1951; Morss 1954; Renaud 1929; Rice 1981; Ucko 1962, 1968). The above-mentioned studies frequently are based on descriptive data, they do not involve the testing of different functional hypotheses, and they do not examine the life history of an artifact. However, a number of other interpretations of the social contexts of production and use of archaeologically recovered figurines have been proposed, including their use as vehicles of magic (amulets and charms), figures used in life-cycle ceremonies, initiation figures, toys, and representations of ancestors used in household ritual (Follensbee 2000; Guillen 1988, 1993; Marcus 1998; Ucko 1962, 1968; Voigt

1983, 1991). In particular, the research of Ucko (1962, 1968) and that of Voigt (1983,

1991) expanded our methods for determining figurine use in a variety of different archaeological contexts. Ucko (1962) applies an object biography approach to figures from Crete by adapting patterns of cross-cultural ethnographic figurine production, use, and disposal into diverse functional categories that can be utilized in a range of settings.

Voigt (1991) then operationalized Ucko's model again in her work in Southwest Asia.

She takes this model a step further by searching for archaeological signatures that aid in the identification of function in different cultural contexts.

Other prominent hypotheses come from the work of Guillen (1993) who advocates their use in female-focused life-crisis ceremonies, and Lesure (1997) who believes that these figurines were employed to mediate social relationships within the community, especially those centered on marriage practices. Lesure's (2002) most recent article concerning figurines in early villages is one of the few works devoted to expanding our knowledge of theory in relation to figurines. He takes a slightly different approach from his earlier work by examining how other analysts find meaning in these 48 artifacts, and he emphasizes diversity in his attempts to elucidate the meaning of figurines. "Meanings are not fixed relations between objects and ideas but mobile products of the ongoing conversations and activities that constitute social life" (Lesure

2002). But where does this negotiated meaning reside in these artifacts and how is it visible to archaeologists? Lesure pinpoints two major avenues of questioning that researchers typically employ when studying figurines. First, is meaning found in surface phenomena which are apparent to social actors, or is it relegated to deep structures which are only minimally perceived? And second, are meanings autonomous systems that are understood through the workings of their internal relationships, or are they simply social products that necessitate study of their interaction with social conditions?

Lesure addresses these issues with four analytical modes of meaning: iconography, use, social analysis, and symbolic studies. He then concludes that a comparative perspective is a better way of deciphering figurine meaning, and he urges other researchers to consider varying patterns at all scales. This work is useful in attempting to scrutinize the arguments present in figurine analyses and to examine how archaeologists approach the meaning of these objects. However as Joyce (2002:603) aptly reminds us, not all figurine analyses are focused on "meaning." Her own work is

"concerned with the phenomenological question of how the practice of shaping malleable material (clay) into representational form served to embed particular senses of the human body as culturally shaped in those making and using figurines" (Joyce 2002:603). The lesson here is that questions of figurine meaning or other deep, symbolic structures need 49 to be clearly delineated, and discussions of both small-scale variety and large-scale

patterning are both valid in the appropriate contexts.

Figurines in the Domestic Sphere

Although figurines are often linked to large-scale ritual processes such as the

maintenance of various religious cults or the perpetuation of the goddess ("mother- goddess" in particular), in reality they are most commonly recovered from household

contexts. Hodder (1991) argues that in Europe, the formation of sedentary villages and

the increasing acceptance of domestication appear to be linked with an expansion of

domestic symbolism. He also ties these processes with increasing numbers of female

figurines and more visible domestic elaboration. This pattern of female figurines recovered in association with the household is a worldwide phenomenon (Bailey 1994;

Guillen 1988, 1993; Lesure 2002).

A connection between gender roles and figurine imagery also is seen throughout a

large portion of Mexico and Central America in the work of Joyce (1993). She suggests that human imagery on ceramic vessels (male) and on small figurines (female) provides a

medium for the negotiation of status within the household and the larger society as a whole. In her work in Honduras she argues that representational objects are first mental constructs which are then given material form, where they become public. At this point they can be transformed into new mental representations by other people who view them, and figurines should be seen as representations. These figures are iconic and their physical appearance is the result of a dialogic process that constructs human identity.

Joyce concludes that figurines from Cerro Palenque represent women's engagement in household work. "Differences in the precise nature of men's and women's contributions highlighted by human figures in different media illuminate the interplay of gender, labor, and social stratification" (Joyce 1993:255). Her work provides an excellent example of how figurines were functioning in the household to maintain the status of this social group and to mediate tensions inherent in increasing social stratification.

However, only the work of Barbour (1975), Follensbee (2000), and Marcus

(1998) directly connects ceramic figurines in human form with ritual in the domestic sphere. Marcus (1998) has proposed that small, ceramic figurines in human form represented ancestors in early Mesoamerican village rituals. She connects figurines specifically with women's ritual and ancestor worship in Early to Middle Formative period villages in Oaxaca. Her argument is that the female segment of society maintains ancestral ties and is responsible for the ritual needed to support it. The figurines in this practice would have functioned as surrogate versions of the deceased individual that were fed food, drink, and words during occasional ritual events designed to remind the ancestors of their continuing involvement with their descendant communities. In essence, these figurines provided a venue for the return of ancestors and spirits. The human representations represented specific individuals, and after participation in rituals conducted by the descendants, the figurines were often deliberately broken and then discarded. These same female Zapotec descendants also practiced "water divination" as part of this ritual system. Marcus' (1998) research contradicts much of the diverse earlier work on Mesoamerican figurines, which followed traditional European and Asian interpretations that described these objects as goddesses, fertility symbols, and toys. 51

Contrary to this research, Follensbee (2000) and Barbour (1975) both cite Mayan and

Aztec ethnohistoric evidence of the use of figurines for healing within the household.

Barbour (1975) claims that they were used as part of healing ritual heavily associated with fertility and pregnancy, while Follensbee (2000) believes that figures were employed for curing specific diseases and for preventing general illness and misfortune in all segments of the population (Bruce 1973). She analyzes Gulf Coast Olmec imagery, including figurines, in order to explore the social implications of gender roles.

Follensbee directly attacks Marcus' conclusion by claiming that there is no corroborating evidence from ethnohistoric and ethnographic sources to support a claim of ancestor worship. Follensbee argues instead that these Olmec figurines were used in the household as part of ritual scenes designed to cure or prevent disease. However, her research is similar to Marcus' work by suggesting that the figures were broken post-ritual as part of the depositional process. Because the vast majority of the imagery is female, she also claims that women were involved in the production of the artifacts and they were therefore the main practitioners of the ritual activities associated with them.

Certain commonalities are present in the current research on the use of figurines in the household. First, they are most firequently recovered directly from house floors, internal house features such as postholes or hearths, or from refuse associated with other everyday household items that is deposited outside of the home. Second, they are predominately female in form and often display obvious female physical characteristics.

As a result of this emphasis on female imagery, most researchers argue that they were produced, used, and discarded by women in the household. There are a range of different 52 functional interpretations for their use, yet none of these hypotheses involve notions of goddesses or cult figures. And finally, most of this research is based on a thorough survey and compilation of ethnographic and ethnohistoric accounts from a range of different societies.

Summary

...since societies are made up of individuals, and since individuals can form groups to further their ends, [then] directed, intentional behavior of individual actors or ideologies can lead to structural change. Indeed, societies might best be seen as non-static negotiations between a variety of changing and uncertain perspectives.

Ian Hodder (1987a:6)

The joint use of agency theory and practice theory to examine figurine production, use, and disposal in the Greater Southwest is ideal because they allow me to focus on the social interaction between the daily use of these artifacts, the individuals producing them, and others in the community who encounter this imagery. How were these figurines functioning on different levels that engage issues of representation, memory, and materiality? Who was producing them and how where elements of these individuals embodied in the objects they were manufacturing? Finally, how do issues impact questions concerning the economic and social perpetuation of households through time?

Early Hohokam figurines are an ideal sample of figures to study in terms of household ritual. The assemblages appear to be dominated by female forms, they are deposited in domestic refuse after use, and they occur over a large area of southern Arizona and northern Mexico during the Pioneer (300 BC to AD 700) and Colonial (AD

700 to 900) periods (Haury 1976; Hays-Gilpin 2000; Thomas and King 1985; Wilcox and

Sternberg 1983). Yet, most studies in this region have been descriptive in nature with little attention paid to the possible social roles of those individuals manufacturing and using these artifacts. My research reanalyzes two prominent Hohokam figurine assemblages with a new model based on agency and practice theory, in order to clarify the manner in which these artifacts were used within the household and to determine how their use was affecting gender roles within this context. 54

CHAPTER 3

THE HISTORICAL AND ARCHAEOLOGICAL CONTEXT OF HOHOKAM FIGURINES

The Hohokam are typically known for a red-on-buff ceramic tradition, a large- scale canal irrigation network, and large structures such as platform mounds, ballcourts, and adobe "great houses" located throughout the Sonoran Desert. Sites in this region now date back more than 2000 years to the Early Agricultural period. These early villages are currently thought to be the precursors of later Hohokam villages, primarily because of excavation at sites along the Santa Cruz River in the Tucson Basin (Dayman

2001; Mabry et al. 1997).

The subsequent Pioneer (300 B.C.-A.D. 700) and Colonial (A.D. 700-900) periods are the time periods targeted for my research (see Table 3.1 for full Hohokam chronology). During this pre-Sedentary time range numerous farming villages were expanding along major waterways (Salt, Gila, and Santa Cruz Rivers) and the massive canals associated with them. This is a period of population growth and geographic expansion with an established pattern of irrigation agriculture (Bayman 2001).

In this chapter, I provide a brief history of research at the two major sites

(Snaketown and Grewe) that produced the figurine collections analyzed in my work. I also summarize the current knowledge of Hohokam household organization, site structure, and Pre-Classic period ritual. Finally, I examine several different previous interpretations of Hohokam figurines Irom research completed at Snaketown and Grewe 55

Table 3.1 Hohokam Chronologies for Southern Arizona Note the compressed time scale prior to A.D. 1. (Adapted from Dayman 2001:264)

Time Regional Periods Conventional Phoenix Basin Tucson Basin) Periods (Dean 1988) (Wallace and Craig 1988) Post-Classic Post-Classic Polvoron Tucson A.D.1450 Civano Late Classic Classic Soho Tanque Verde Early

A.D. 1150 Sedentary Sacaton Rincon

A.D. 900 Pre-Classic Santa Cruz Rillito Colonial Gila Butte Canada del Oro

A.D. 700 Snaketown Snaketown

Sweetwater

7 Pioneer Estrella

Formative Vahki Tortolita

Red Mountain Agua Caliente

Late A.D. 1 Cienega Phase 400 B.C. Early

1200 B.C. San Pedro Phase in earlier years. These studies are primarily descriptive, but they do offer untested functional hypotheses which contradict each other. Through an application of the model outlined in Chapter 4,1 attempt to resolve these contradictions by testing a number of figurine use hypotheses.

The Research Collections

The most well-known and referenced figurine collection in the Greater Southwest comes from Snaketown, and I examined all figurines (partial and whole) from the Pioneer and Colonial periods at the site. Another large assemblage of anthropomorphic figurines comes ft-om the nearby site of Grewe, and all figurines (partial and whole) from the same time periods were analyzed as well. Other smaller groupings of figurines have been recovered from additional sites; however, the prominence and size of these two assemblages warrants their reanalysis in light of the questions I am addressing.

Snaketown

A large number (n=1463) of partial and complete figurines was analyzed for this study. The greater number (n=1254) comes from the site of Snaketown in southern

Arizona (Figure 3.1). It is a large Hohokam village located on the north bank of the Gila

River, south of the Phoenix Basin (Gladwin 1942. 1948; Gladwin et al. 1937; Haury

1976). Initial excavation of the site was conducted in 1934-35 by Harold Gladwin as part of the activities of the Gila Pueblo Foundation (Gladwin et al. 1937). A number of important new developments in Hohokam archaeology resulted from this work including the recognition of a long developmental period preceding the previously known time 57 periods. The inventory of cultural items was greatly expanded, a connection between

Mesoamerica and the Southwest was strengthened, and most notably the beginnings of a definite, calendar-based, Hohokam chronology were hatched.

KEY TT- MODERN FIMA HOOSE

•If-PIMA HOUSE RUtN • OLC PIMA ROUND HOCSE .6 TT - PIMA STRUTURE '-x-FENCE

) }--HOHOKAM MOUNDS :!2r~'-7 1

O- PIMA WELL ):t5' .-'16/

BALL COURT ! -23 "-->22

n V • 24

•0-31

,0. Q iBALLC0URT2 " „ # HQHOKAM WELLS i^-55 Z':-i59;X\

O'PPf'^ TEffPACE n ^56^ i-ts

HOHOwftM CANAL* 4-7 O

Figure 3.1 Map of Large Snaketown Features (After Haury 1976:37).

During the succeeding decade, however, a number of chronological questions were raised, and consequently the Snaketown data were reevaluated several times by 58

Gladwin, first in 1942 and subsequently in 1948 (Gladwin 1942, 1948). No major new developments resulted from this reevaluation of the accumulated data, although the continued work increased interest in the Hohokam as a subject of archaeological inquiry.

In 1964-65, new portions of the site were excavated by Emil W. Haury in order to more accurately address questions about chronology, irrigation technology, Hohokam origins, and Mesoamerican influence. He felt that the earlier work of Gladwin could only extend so far in answering certain questions, and that the only way new conclusions could be reached was through fresh excavation at the site. Specific research goals (Haury

1976:39) were:

1) To reexamine the basis for the Hohokam chronology by employing improved stratigraphic and cross-dating techniques, and by using new dating tools, radiocarbon and archaeomagnetic analyses among them, which had not yet been devised in the 1930s 2) To develop a clearer picture than now available of Hohokam origins by expanding knowledge of the initial cultural phases and to attempt to link these to the San Pedro Stage, the terminal manifestations of the Cochise complex 3) On the basis of the anticipated new data, to evaluate the kind, extent, and time of Mesoamerican influences known to have been exerted on the Hohokam 4) To concentrate on the history of irrigated agriculture

In 1976 a large volume was produced containing the results of this work. The strongest new data were reported on chronology, the economy of irrigated agriculture, and the recognition of new architectural forms including the platform mound. Haury's analysis of the ceramic figurines was published as part of this volume along with detailed descriptions of artifacts from a wide range of other media. In addition to this volume, a large quantity of both visual and written documentation has been ongoing as part of the

Snaketown repatriation project at the Arizona State Museum. Suzanne Fish and Paul 59

Fish have been instrumental in organizing this research and gaining valuable data on many items that were never previously analyzed in a detailed manner before they were repatriated to the Gila River Indian Community.

The most recent work completed at Snaketown was a cultural resource survey conducted by staff members at the Arizona State Museum, who were under contract with the Western Archaeological Center, National Park Service. They published a report in

1981 in which the survey plan and all results were detailed (Wilcox et al. 1981). The goal of this work was to conduct an inventory and determine the significance of all cultural resources located within the boundaries of the proposed Hohokam-Pima National

Monument. In addition to the site of Snaketown proper, the survey included four Classic

Period Hohokam sites, prehistoric and historic canal segments, and a modem Piman cemetery. There was also intent on the part of researchers to more definitively establish the periphery of Snaketown itself During the course of the survey, a group of Piman landowners objected to the project, and as a result only 30 percent of the original survey area was covered. However, the results of this survey include a number of detailed patterns in house construction and site organization as well as a definite northern boundary for the site. This boundary is in fact the Classic Period component, AZ

U: 13:24. They also realized that the perimeter of trash mounds is likely not an ideal indicator of site boundaries and instead a traditional method outlining the artifact scatter would be more accurate.

The site is located in the desert environment of the Sonoran Desert between

Tucson and Phoenix, and at the time of Snaketown's occupation, the Gila River would 60 have contained substantially more water than it does today (Bryan 1925). A more detailed account of the terrain directly around Snaketown can be found in Haury (1976).

Although the site is situated on a terrace just above the river's floodplain, this terrace along with another just below it would have provided ample land for farming. The site itself is open with a fair amount of sprawl among the houses, and the site nearly occupies nearly a square kilometer. "The typical house had side walls and roof of reeds internally supported by a framework of posts and other structural elements variously put together and externally veneered with dirt" (Haury 1976:45). A total of 42 structures from the

Pioneer period and 43 from the Colonial period has been excavated from both seasons

(1934-35 and 1964-65). Many of the houses are clustered together around open courtyard spaces, and these groupings likely represent extended family or other close kin relations of some kind. I examined the contexts of figurine disposal, and I discovered that figurines were evenly distributed in a number of different houses and trash deposits.

These results are discussed in more detail in Chapter 5.

Figurines were recovered from every time horizon at Snaketown. Haury (1976) thought that they were not made for use as toys because of their frequency and formalization. Their use at Snaketown apparently continued uninterrupted for over a thousand years, although their frinction does appear to have changed dramatically at the beginning of the Sedentary period. Haury (1976) analyzed 1072 figurines and figurine fragments. All of these, and some fragments that were not reported by Haury, were analyzed as part of my research. 61

The excavation materials from both projects (1934-35 and 1964-65 seasons), including the ceramic figurines, are all currently housed in the Arizona State Museum, with the exception of artifacts from burial contexts, some of which have been repatriated to the Gila River Community. These burial items, which have been the focus research by the Arizona State Museum, were not included in the analysis discussed in this research.

The large figurine assemblage analyzed in this work is from non-burial contexts only.

The Grewe Site

A smaller assemblage of figurines (n=209) comes from the Grewe site, which is a large site in the heart of the middle Gila River Valley (Figures 3.2 and 3.3). Much like

Snaketown, Grewe is an extensive site with a dense population and it appears to have covered an area close to 2 square miles. Grewe is the Preclassic component of a larger site that also encompasses the "Great House" at Casa Grande, which was built in the early to mid-A.D. 1300's (Wilcox and Shenk 1977; Wilcox and Sternberg 1983). The

Grewe portion (Preclassic period occupation) of the site is located approximately one mile east of the later part of the settlement, which was the focus of Classic period settlement. Detailed topographic and landscape information on the area immediately surrounding the site can be found in Craig (2001a, 2004).

A number of early archaeologists did work at Casa Grande including Bandelier

(1892), Fewkes (1892), and Middeleff (1896). Fewkes (1912) returned to the site in 1906 and 1908, when he excavated and stabilized portions of the Classic period occupation.

Gladwin (1928) completed a small excavation in both Casa Grande and Grewe in the 62

-|wt{g Duoizuy la »v>>s

a Q'

Figure 3.2 Grewe Site Location in Relation to the Casa Grande Ruins (After Craig 2001a;9). 63

/•T\, J J

Figure 3.3 Archaeological Features in the NE Locus at the Grewe Site (After Craig 2001a:31). 64

1920's. However, the first major excavation of Grewe occurred in 1930 and 1931 and was led by Woodward (1931, 1941) and Hayden for the Van Bergen-Los Angeles

Museum. They excavated 50 pithouses, 160 cremations, and a range of other pits and middens. Sadly, nothing beyond preliminary reports was ever published on these efforts.

Finally, in 1946 and 1963, Frank Midvale surveyed and mapped both Grewe and Casa

Grande as part of a larger study he was conducting on prehistoric canals (Craig 2001a).

Recently, a more extensive excavation of Grewe was completed by Northland

Research, Inc., as the result of an Arizona Department of Transportation (ADOT) contract to mitigate archaeological resources along State Routes 87 and 287 (Craig

2001a, 2004). This project, titled the Grewe Archaeological Research Project or GARP, has contributed an enormous body of data to that already gathered during earlier work. A large quantity of features (n=1300) were recorded, including 247 structures, many of which are focused around courtyard areas like those seen at many other Preclassic settlements in central and southern Arizona. These are again thought to represent household-like groupings of individuals who interact on a social and economic level daily. Craig's (2004) dissertation was also a result of this work, and he analyzes wealth and status differences between houses within the sites.

Ceramic figurines were recovered from numerous houses and trash mounds spaced throughout the site during both excavation episodes. I analyzed Preclassic period figurines from both the Woodward/Hayden excavation and the more recent work done by

Northland Research, Inc. Their discard context is discussed in detail in Chapter 5. Love

(2001) completed an analysis of the recently excavated figurines (205 whole and partial 65 figurines) and her work on these figurines as well as the Snaketown figures is discussed later in this chapter.

The figurine assemblage is currently split between the Arizona State Museum (the majority of the collection is there) and the Los Angeles County Museum of Natural

History; however, all of the recently excavated figures from GARP are located in Tucson at the Arizona State Museum. Figure 3.4 illustrates the number of figurines that were analyzed for this work from each site excavation episode.

Table 3.4 Number of Figurines from Each Excavation Episode 66

Hohokam Households, Site Structure, and Ritual

The internal domestic organization of many early Hohokam villages follows a pattern that has been documented by numerous researchers throughout the Tucson and

Phoenix Basins. Early agricultural period villages, Pioneer period sites, and most Pre-

Classic period sites are characterized by groups of houses clustered together around courtyards or small plazas that most likely shared other features such as ovens, refuse middens, and cemeteries (Gregory 1991). These residential groups are frequently termed

"house groups" or "house clusters" (Wilcox et al. 1981). Other terms for this arrangement of houses include "courtyard groups" (Howard 1985) and the more general term, "households" (Doelle et al. 1987). Craig (2001a) makes a clear distinction between house clusters and courtyard groups in his work at the Grewe site. House clusters are contemporaneous and contain only those houses that were likely interacting with each other on a daily basis. On the other hand, courtyard groups are not contemporaneous and they include all features that are found grouped together (Figure 3.5). These represent all houses that may have been occupied by an interacting group of individuals over time or even generations. I adhere to this system of classification in my further discussion of

Hohokam site organization.

These house clusters likely were basic units of production and consumption

(Wilcox et al. 1981), and Doyel (1991) suggests that they may have even functioned as corporate descent groups, although this idea has not been thoroughly tested. However, it is clear that these constellations of features and dwelling structures do represent the spatial domain of some sort of social group. Kin groups probably do form the basis of 67

/•' V I fiicsrrv^^ ^ ^

, jS, I 1 !

Figure 3.5 Courtyard Group (After Craig 2001a:31). this settlement pattern. The aggregation of several of these residential groups also is visible at some sites (village segments), which indicates the presence of social organization above the level of the household. Howard (1985) suggests that there was a developmental cycle of domestic groups as part of their growth. This process is apparent when tracing house histories at the site of Grewe (Craig 2001a; Henderson 2001). Here, at the end of a house's life a new structure appears to be constructed adjacent to the first building. All homes in the house cluster undergo this process, which creates a ring or

"daisy chain" effect that produces the non-contemporaneous, but nevertheless related, courtyard group.

Large sites like Snaketown and Grewe contain numerous courtyard groups that are scattered more densely around a large central plaza and more loosely in surrounding areas. The site structure of Snaketown is characterized by an inner and an outer ring of trash mounds, and these seem to correlate chronologically with the inner mounds constructed earlier in time (Haury 1976; Wilcox et al. 1981). There is a dense concentration of houses within the central ring of mounds and all immediately adjacent 68 areas. The layout of the Grewe site is somewhat different, but the pattern of house clusters gathered around larger open areas remains the same. Large Hohokam sites, such as these, are usually part of "irrigation communities" that are situated along rivers or specific canals and are thought to be tied to other villages in social or economic ways.

At the beginning of the Pre-Classic period there appears to have been more formalization in site organization, and during the Colonial period settlements were expanding significantly to more remote areas (Bayman 2001; Fish and Fish 1994a).

However during the early Pioneer period, Craig's (2001b, 2004) work on domestic architecture and household wealth at the Grewe site provides a unique opportunity to view small-scale differences between houses and between house clusters. He concentrates on the relationship between architectural variability and Hohokam household organization to determine an architectural reflection of wealth. Since architecture is often all that remains of a prehistoric household, Craig analyzes differences in construction material, construction style, and house size in order to formulate a wealth value for each house. Wealth equals the overall amount of labor expended in house construction. Construction cost estimates for 132 pithouses at Grewe indicate that there are cycles of wealth for families and each household cannot maintain high levels of wealth for extended generations. Increasing inequality is evident between the early and late Pioneer periods, the early and middle Colonial periods, and the early and middle Sedentary periods. The time of lowest inequality was found during the early

Pioneer period and the transition between the Pioneer and Colonial periods. By overlapping demographic information with these trends of social inequality it becomes apparent that the wealth cycles are tied to population numbers. In times of low population, social relations are relatively equal, and during times of population growth, the accumulation of wealth and increasing inequality are evident (Craig 2001b, 2004).

Craig's work illustrates that although Hohokam scholars may believe that patterns in basic site and house cluster organization are well evidenced and commonplace archaeological knowledge, there is much still to be learned about architectural variability in the Hohokam region. The nuances and small-scale details of this variability may provide the key to deciphering some of the social questions that remain to be answered about household organization and the relationships between houses in courtyard groups.

Pre-Classic Household and Community Ritual

During the Pre-Classic period, there are numerous indicators of ritual at a multitude of scales. Communal ritual is evidenced in the presence of large central plazas, ballcourts, and trash mounds that were eventually capped with a layer of caliche after a period of use. Plazas are considered public spaces that could have been used for a vast array of public events and ceremonies, and they are present at most villages. They may also have been used by individuals and small groups of people for a variety of daily household activities.

Ballcourts were present by the early Colonial period and even possibly the end of the Pioneer period, and they increased in density and distribution throughout the Colonial and Sedentary periods (Gregory 1991). There are 238 ballcourts that have been identified at 194 sites in the Greater Southwest (Marshall 2001:120). This form of communal architecture is highly public and would have allowed for viewing of in ball games or 70 participation in any associated ball game ceremony by all segments of society (Figure

3.6). Ballcourts have been classified into two major size classes, which each have different spatial orientations. Snaketown type courts are larger with and east-west orientation, while Casa Grande tj^e courts have smaller dimensions and are oriented in a

Figure 3.6 Ballcourt I at Snaketown (After Plog 1997:83). north-south direction (Marshall 2001). This orientation has been considered integral to ballcourt interpretation, and it is not considered to be random. Common interpretations of these preferred orientations along cardinal directions try to link ballcourt arrangement with astronomical events (Wilcox 1991; Wilcox and Sternberg 1983), however the exact nature of these possible connections is unknown. Ballcourts have also been associated with large exchange networks for a number of goods, where ballcourt villages would 71 have functioned as centralized marketplaces at specific times of the year (Abbott et al.

2001).

Large trash mounds appear by the Snaketown phase (A.D. 700-775) of the

Pioneer period, and they are formed either by the gradual deposition of refuse over a period of time or by the secondary deposition of trash that was taken from other contexts and redeposited in one or several successive events in order to form a mound (Crown

1991; Haury 1976). They represent a very specific type of garbage disposal, and Haury

(1976:82) comments that refiise was deposited along the sloping surface of the mound once the height of the accumulation was at least one meter (Figure 3.7). These mounds do contain household refuse rather than exclusively ritual deposits, however it is probable that these constructions functioned in a more public and ritual manner.

Platform mounds, which are those mounds that were leveled off at the top, forming a distinct elevated surface, are an example of structures whose purpose was more complicated than that of a garbage dump. One of the earliest platform mounds at the site

Figure 3.7 Refuse Mound at Snaketown (After Haury 1976:10). 72

of Snaketown is Mound 40, which was also capped by a layer of caliche later during its use. Its first elevated surface was present around A.D. 500, indicating the need for a raised surface that was likely used for public and ritual use during the Snaketown phase

(Haury 1976:82). During the Colonial period ten additional mounds were added and

Mound 39 was capped with caliche during the Santa Cruz phase (Crown 1991:147).

Capped mounds seem to have served an integrative function of some kind, and many of them are located adjacent to other public spaces such as the central plaza and large crematory areas.

By the middle Colonial period at Snaketown there were numerous cremation cemeteries. Palettes, censors, and carved shell ornaments were all associated with these spaces and with crematory remains, and they appear to be the hallmarks of Hohokam social identity (Wilcox 1991). These items provide evidence of ritual on a much smaller social scale than that exemplified in communal structures such as ballcourts and platform mounds. There is a particularly high association between human ash and stone palettes, and although exact use of these palettes is unknown, many exhibit traces of lead on their surface. Some have raised borders with decorative carving or incising, while others have zoomorphic or anthropomorphic images carved around these borders (Figure 3.8). And many have plain borders or are simply tabular pieces of stone in a rectangular shape.

There is an enormous range in palette size and elaboration. Many palettes do have encrustations of different pigments or other substances on their surfaces, and fire seems to have been an important element in their use. In fact, a number of these palettes appear to have gone through the crematory fire along with human remains. The pigments, 73 including lead, may have changed color during firing, thereby creating a "magical effecf during cremation ritual (Haury 1976:288).

'• m i 7•;-'^1

Figure 3.8 Hohokam Stone Palettes (After Plog 1997:84).

Clay and stone censors also appear to play a role in small scale ritual among the

Hohokam, and they were first discovered at Snaketown during the Estrella phase (Haury

1976:226). They are plain or decorated with various geometric, zoomorphic, or

anthropomorphic designs and carving (Figure 3.9). They were likely intended to bum

incense and many do exhibit signs of burning, however a number of them show no effects

of burning substances in them. Therefore, their use may have been both practical and

symbolic. Censors are found in caches and often they were broken prior to deposition.

The use of censors, palettes, and anthropomorphic figurines ceased at the end of the Pre-

Classic period at a time when other dramatic changes were occurring in both ritual

practice and sociopolitical organization. 74

Figure 3.9 Stone Censors from Snaketown Cache 1:10G (After Haury 1976:186).

The Pre-Classic to Classic Transition in the Hohokam Region

A number of dramatic changes in settlement, technology, material culture, and ideology appear to occur at the boundary between the Pre-Classic (A.D. 700-1150) and

Classic (A.D. 1150-1450) periods (Abbott 2000; Bayman 2001; Crown and Fish 1996).

At the onset of the Classic period ball courts were abandoned, platform mounds were constructed with increasing frequency, adobe compounds were often placed upon these mounds, a decline in buff ware occurred with red wares and polychromes appearing everywhere, and there was a cessation of figurine production. Along with these enormous changes, there was increasing social differentiation and complexity (Crown and Fish 1996). The emergence of an elite has been associated with the platform mound compounds, and increasing burial differentiation supports this hypothesis. There was also increasing intensity of craft manufacture including the production of polychrome and red ware ceramics along with shell and specialized lithic production (Abbott 2000).

There was a greater emphasis on agave and cotton cultivation, and more inhumations were replacing the practice of cremation upon an individual's death (Crown and Fish

1996).

I think that these enormous changes in daily life signify equally large changes in household organization at this time. Household ritual is an important component of the social maintenance of the house, and undoubtedly, domestic ritual underwent dramatic alterations during this transition. Figurines were no longer a part of household or community ritual, and they essentially fall out of the archaeological record at this time.

The new or altered forms of household ritual are not precisely known and the implications behind these changes are discussed in the final chapter of this dissertation.

Figurines in the Greater Southwest

Figurines are found in several areas of the Greater Southwest (see Table 3.2), although the largest quantity has been recovered from sites in the Hohokam region of

Southern Arizona. Early Agricultural period deposits (1200 to 800 B.C.) in the Tucson basin have yielded some of the earliest ceramic figurines in the Southwest at sites such as

Las Capas and Los Pozos (Stinson 2005). The figurines in this assemblage are highly 76

Table 3.2 Partial List of Anthropomorphic Figurines Found in the Greater Southwest

LOCATION NUMBER SOURCE Canyon de Chelly 3 Morss 1954 Monument Valley 1 Morss 1954 Segi Canyon 6 Guernsey 1931 Keam's Canyon 1 Morss 1954 Canyon del Muerto 7 Morris 1927 Grand Gulch 1 Morss 1954 Sagiotsosi Canyon 1 Guernsey and Kidder 1921 Fremont River area 80 Morss 1954 Range Creek, UT 11 Morss 1954 Rasmussen Cave, UT 7 Morss 1954 Sky House, UT 3 Morss 1954 Castle Park, CO 1 Morss 1954 Glade Park, CO 2 Morss 1954 Kanosh, UT 4 Morss 1954 Winona Village 6 McGregor 1941 Groom Creek (Prescott) 403 Scott 1958 Hassayampa Ruin (Prescott) 39 Motsinger 2000 Stoney Ridge site (Prescott) 2 Motsinger 2000 Pecos 16+ Kidder 1932 Bluff Ruin 3 Haury and Sayles 1947 Bear Ruin 6 Haury 1941 SU site 2 Martin 1943 Tularosa Cave 1 Morss 1954 Turkey Foot Ridge site 1 Martin and Rinaldo 1950 Ventana Cave 7 Haury 1950 Tres Alamos 9 Tuthill 1947 Gleeson 4 Morss 1954 San Simon Village 4 Morss 1954 Marsh Pass 2 Kidder and Guernsey 1919 Pueblo Bonito 5 Pepper 1920 Po-Shu, Chama Valley 1 JeanQon 1923 Otowi 1 Wilson 1916 Chihuahua D;12:6 1 Sayles 1936 Red Mountain site 1 Lambert 1956 Deming-Luna County 19 Lambert 1956 Los Homos 2 Morss 1954 Los Muertos 4 Morss 1954 Convento site 2 Di Peso et al. 1974 77

Tastiota Bay, Mexico 12 Owen 1956 Seri sites (Son N:6:%, Son 12 Bowen 1976 1:11:4, Son 1:11:12) Home Depot site 7 Ferg and Doak 1999 Las Capas 108 Stinson 2005 Los Pozos 93 Stinson 2005 Grewe site 208 Love 2001 Snaketown 1203 Haury 1976 Julian Wash 12 Stinson (analysis) Dove Mountain area 20 Stinson (analysis) Clearwater site (Rio Nuevo) 30 Stinson (analysis) Presidio site (Rio Nuevo) 14 Stinson (analysis) Triangle Road site 2 Gregonis 1999 variable, but they majority consist of an upper section of clay that was elongated into a head and torso and a lower portion composed of two lobes of clay forming a bulbous base

(Figure 3.10). The main embellishment on these representations is that of appliqued or incised hair braids. The figurines from these two sites form the largest collection from such an early time period, but ceramic figurines continue to be manufactured in the

Tucson area for thousands of years after this time. Slight changes in form occur over this long period, although the basic shape and decoration remain the same. After the San

Pedro phase (1200-800 B.C.), figurines were more common during the Cienega phase

(800 B.C.-A.D. 150) with examples coming from Santa Cruz Bend, Coffee Camp, and

Wetlands sites.

Outside of the Hohokam area, anthropomorphic representations have been found at a number of Basketmaker sites in northern Arizona. Small quantities of these figures were recovered from the Fremont River area, Canyon de Chelly, Monument Valley, Segi 78

Figure 3.10 Composite Drawing of Early Agricultural Period Figurine from Las Capas and Los Pozos in the Tucson Basin (Courtesy of Robert Ciaccio).

Canyon, Keam's Canyon, Canyon del Muerto, Cave 26 of the Grand Gulch area, and

Cave 14 in Sagiotsosi Canyon (Guernsey 1931; Guernsey and Kidder 1921; Morris 1927;

Morss 1954). Many of these early examples are constructed of unfired clay and they were found in covered shelters that protected them from a range of destructive elements.

Those unfired figures from the Fremont River area (Image Cave) are primarily female in form with pinched nose ridges and no arms (Morss 1954). Hair and various ornaments are present as appliqued items, and clay aprons are also present on some of the figurines.

One of the most well-known figurine assemblages in the Greater Southwest comes from a cache found in Fillings Cave near Range Creek in northeastern Utah

(Figure 3.11). Eleven complete and highly decorated clay figures were discovered lying in a cave wall recess and only partially covered by a flat stone (Morss 1954). The entire assemblage is unfired and sexes are clearly distinguished by anatomical features in addition to differences in dress and ornamentation. The precise function of these 79 figurines is not known, however it is likely that they were intended for a specific ritual use in which they represent important, powerful, or sacred individuals or entities.

Figure 3.11 Figurine from Fillings Cave (After Morss 1954:77).

During later time periods, figurines were present in small quantities at sites in

Utah, Colorado, the Kayenta region of northern Arizona, portions of New Mexico, areas to the east of the traditional Hohokam region in southeastern Arizona, and northern

Mexico (Table 3.2). Larger assemblages of figures have been recovered from the

Prescott area and Pecos Pueblo. Those from the Prescott area have been stylistically compared to the Hohokam Pioneer figurines although they date much later in time to

Pueblo II and III periods (Haury 1937; Morss 1954; Scott 1958). On the other hand, the

Pecos figures are surprisingly variable in style, and those that are flat-bodied with 80 triangular heads are relatively unique in the American Southwest (Figure 3.12).

Figure 3.12 Pecos Pueblo Figurine (After Morss 1954:111).

Anthropomorphic figurines are found throughout the Greater Southwest, yet they are not found in large quantities outside of the Hohokam region, with the exception of those from the Prescott area described by Scott (1958). In the Hohokam area figurines were most frequently deposited loose in domestic refuse or in house structures, however hidden caches of both zoomorphic and anthropomorphic figures were also present at sites in this region.

Artifact caches, sometimes called hoards, were secluded in prehistory for a number of possible reasons. These isolated and concentrated deposits of wealth items or sacred objects may have been deposited to safeguard personal wealth. They may have concealed cultural items that could not be destroyed because of the power they embodied, or they may have been hidden to propitiate supernatural powers at sacred times. "The common denominator was the idea that the earth was the safest keeper of secrets" (Haury

1976:175). These depositional contexts are one way of identifying inalienable possessions in the archaeological record. 81

A cache composed solely of anthropomorphic figurines was discovered with a cremation at the site of Tres Alamos in the San Pedro river valley (Tuthill 1947). The nine individuals portrayed in the cache exhibit both coffee bean and slit eyes and several of them have appliqued headbands. They are all similar in appearance to Santa

Cruz figurines found with crematory remains at Snaketown (Haury 1976). Necklaces are visible as lines of distinct punctuate dots, while pendants are appliqued blobs of clay. No other forms of ornamentation are apparent.

Although the Tres Alamos cache was associated with human remains, most other

Hohokam caches of figurines were isolated and not found in conjunction with cremations or inhumations. One particularly notable cache of fifteen complete figurines was found just south of Silverbell Road between Rillito and Marana in the Tucson Basin. They were excavated by a private collector, Ruth Vaughan, and were therefore named the

Vaughan Cache (Allen 2000). These figures were highly fragmented, possibly as the result of intentional breakage before deposition in a pit, however they have now been reconstructed. Both females and males are represented in the collection and they are decorated with paint, incised decoration representing jewelry, and an array of appliqued ornaments. These figurines appear to represent individuals associated with the ballgame.

Ten of the figures were standing and five were seated, with four playing flutes and one

(woman with child) acting as a possible onlooker. The figurines form a scene that may have represented ballgame ceremony and may have been used in ritual surrounding ballcourt ritual. 82

Two large caches of a range of artifacts were discovered during the excavations at

Snaketown. Cache 2:9F contained an array of items (n=97) ranging from broken pottery vessels (including human effigies), zoomorphic figurines, clay censors, shell bracelets, carbonized perishables (basketry, cordage, matting, etc.), and two anthropomorphic figurines. The human figures were both seated females that have no individualizing features or ornamentation (Figure 3.13). The nineteen animal figurines are all identical to one another and they may represent deer (Figure 3.14). These animals are similar in form to fifteen figurines discovered by Gushing (1890) at Los Guanacos in 1887. The Los

Guanacos cache also contained various objects of other media, such as censors and pigments. Haury (1976:177) hypothesized that these animals represented female deer that may have functioned as fertility rite objects, although their true is unknown. Cache

2:9F at Snaketovm was packed into a pit located within the fill of House 7 (Pioneer period), and the cache itself was dated to the Sacaton phase of the Sedentary period.

i* I

Figure 3.13 Female Figurines from Cache 2:9F at Snaketown (After Haury 1976:182). 83

Figure 3.14 Solid Animal Figurines from Cache 2:9F at Snaketown (After Haury 1976:177).

Cache 1:10G at Snaketown also contained a variety of objects placed in a Colonial period pit. These items (n=95) included clay censors, stone vessels (with both zoomorphic and anthropomorphic effigies), three pyrite mirror fragments, possible medicine stones, mano and metate fragments, stone-working tools, and a single figurine head. Interestingly, this cache contains both utilitarian and ritual items, however it is not known if these items were individually owned or if they were instead controlled by a larger village unit such as a clan. Haury (1976) speculates that caches were an innovation of the late Pioneer/early Colonial period (A.D. 500-900). These caches contain only a small proportion of the total figurine assemblage at Snaketown, yet they signify possible ritual figurine functions that are different fi-om those found loose in domestic refuse. 84

Prior Studies of Hohokam Figurines

In the Hohokam regional system, most studies of ritual concentrate on ballcourts and other forms of communal architecture such as platform mounds (Wilcox 1991).

Figurines have been studied, but primarily from a descriptive basis (Haury 1976; Morss

1954). Stylistic typology has been the central goal of much of this research and those that do consider function are quick to spotlight agricultural fertility and other cults

(ballgame ritual) as the most likely targets for figurine use. In this section, I outline the major work that has been done on figurines from Snaketown and Grewe. I also briefly mention several other smaller studies of figurines in the Hohokam area. None of these studies address household ritual, and gender is noticeably absent from all of this research.

Data on gender ideology and ritual in the American Southwest are summarized by

Hays-Gilpin (2000), and she finds that among the Hohokam, there are few keys to gender roles in Hohokam iconography or artistic styles. She argues that figurines, which are common throughout the American Southwest, are probably not being used as "fertility figures" as many researchers have proposed for other areas of the world (Hays-Gilpin

2000:111). Instead, she concludes that they may play a role in cremation ritual and the renegotiation of family relations that occur upon a relative's death. Hays-Gilpin previously hypothesized that these figures were functioning as toys used to instruct younger women about practical roles in the household. This viewpoint is similar to work done by Cory (1956) on African figurines that were used for educational purposes during puberty rites. Previous research of Hohokam figurines has concentrated on their use in ritual associated with ball courts or agricultural fertility. However, as I already have 85 mentioned, the emphasis has been placed on the style of figurines, which has more to do with chronological placement than with function.

A stylistic typology of the Snaketown figures comprises most of Haury's (1976) description of the 1072 whole and partial fragments that he analyzed. He claims that a well-developed figurine complex is one of the hallmarks of Hohokam society, and he believed that the inspiration for their construction came from the south, in Mexico or other portions of Mesoamerica. Haury subdivided his analysis into phase time periods, although there are few visible changes in form and style from the Vahki phase of the

Pioneer period through the Santa Cruz phase of the Colonial period. After this time, figurines in the Sedentary period exhibited more facial realism than previously seen and these figurines consisted of only a hollow head (earlier figurines were of solid construction), which was positioned on a piece of perishable material such as a wooden stick. No figurines were recovered from Classic period excavations.

Haury claims that sex characteristics were portrayed equally between men and women, and he concluded that these physical depictions of sex were incidental to the subject matter of these figurines. Although there is a heavy emphasis on describing the form of these artifacts, Haury does provide two possible hypotheses for their use. He claims that during the Pioneer period, figurines were used in the domestic sphere as house gods that were involved in house blessings and fertility. This conclusion is based on the possibility that the figures were placed upright in the ground because of their leg form and the presence of household reed impressions in the clay of some of these figurines. At the begiiming of the Colonial period, Haury observed that there was a substantial change in the symbolic function and form of these figures. During this later time period, he proposes that they were used strictly in funerary ritual as symbolic expressions of spirits protecting the dead in the afterlife. This transformation is based on

Haury's conclusion that the figurines from the Colonial period were being manufactured in a slightly different form than those from the earlier period and that they were being deposited in different contexts. He does not believe that the figures ever functioned in witchcraft or in relation to agricultural productivity.

Wilcox and Sternberg (1983) agree with this interpretation of figurines as house gods watching over family members and the safety and security of the home. However, they propose that after the Pioneer period, anthropomorphic figurines were used as part of a pan-Hohokam ancestor cult that was practiced on a community scale. It was associated with Mesoamerican ballgame ritual where the figurines represented ball players (Wilcox

1991; Wilcox and Sternberg 1983).

In another primarily descriptive study. Love (2001) examines the recently excavated Grewe figures where she emphasizes her disagreement with Haury's

Snaketown typology. In her study, 205 whole and partial figurines from Pre-Classic period contexts were analyzed. Their morphology, method of construction, and depositional context were employed to compare this collection against the well-known

Snaketown assemblage. Love also claims to address the function and significance of these objects, yet she never directly proposes a function and instead chooses to focus on her comparison with Haury's conclusions. She suggests that the Grewe figurines are functionally and stylistically distinct from the Snaketown collection, rather than conforming to a pan-Hohokam figurine complex. This argument is based on two observations. First, the majority of Grewe figurines were recovered from house floors

(60.5%) rather than domestic trash as reported by Haury (1976) for the Snaketown figures. And second, she claims that the concentrated spatial patterning at Grewe contradicts the notion of a widely shared figurine belief system that was pervasive in the

Hohokam area across space and time. Love's view therefore also contradicts the Wilcox and Sternberg (1983) argument that relies on the assumption that all figurines within the

Hohokam regional system fall into one functional class.

A slightly different model of figurine use has been proposed by Thomas and King

(1985) who focus on two Colonial period figurine caches from the Salt River Valley.

One of these caches is part of the Sonoqui Wash assemblage, and it was discovered within a primary cremation with a range of other artifacts in addition to the crematory remains themselves. They argue that the figurines here were functioning as one component of funerary rites. The interesting point to their argument is their belief that the manufacturing process was integral to the actual function of the figure. Therefore, the completed object's life was fairly short and perhaps less important than the production process itself This is fiirther support for approaching artifact analyses by compiling object biographies.

All of these different studies are, in fact, contradictory, and no definitive functional interpretation has been agreed upon by Hohokam scholars. Therefore, my work clarifies the differing viewpoints of this previous research by testing different hypotheses about figurine assemblages from two different Hohokam sites. I test assumptions made by Haury (1976) and Wilcox and Sternberg (1983) that all small anthropomorphic figurines in the Hohokam region were acting as house gods that conferred a blessing on the structure, the social unit residing in the home, or both. And I test Love's conclusion that figurines within the Hohokam regional system are possibly unrelated, with distinct uses from one site to the next. In contrast to their hypotheses, I propose that significant changes in figurine use associated with cremation ritual did not occur until the beginning of the Sedentary period and that prior to this change, figurine function was more consistent and was situated within the household. 89

CHAPTER 4

A MODEL OF FIGURINE FUNCTION

An object may always signify its own material possibilities and thereby the more general world of material practices. What is of importance is certainly not the idea of physicality as some 'ultimate constraint' or final determining factor, but rather the manner in which everyday objects continually assert their presence as simultaneously material force and symbol. D. Miller (1987:105)

Small clay, stone, and wooden figures in the form of both humans and animals have been found at many early habitation sites around the world (Brumfiel 1996; Kelly

1972; Lesure 1997; Morss 1954; Scott 1958; Stocker 1991; Voigt 1991). Although these figurines are ubiquitous, their function is sometimes difficult to discern. For many years, researchers concentrated on the significance of figurines without asking how they were used in any context.

One of the first archaeologists to delve into figurine function in a detailed manner,

Ucko (1962) aptly points out, that four lines of enquiry should be considered when analyzing figurines. These main categories of data are defined as the detailed descriptive analysis of figurines, their archaeological context, later historical evidence from the relevant geographic location, and analogous anthropological information. He collected data on anthropomorphic figurines from Crete by compiling information from these four major categories, which established a new method for determining figurine fiinction.

In the 1960's Ucko (1962, 1968) realized that certain patterns of manufacture, use, and discard characterized different categories of figurines. As he points out, cross- 90 cultural studies support the inference that classes of figurines can be distinguished based on construction material, use-wear, form, damage, and disposal contexts. Ucko's dimensions of variation provide an important means of analyzing the function of figurines recovered from archaeological contexts, and especially for identifying those figurines that might be used in domestic ritual. These categories simply form a framework for inferring the purpose and use of archaeologically-recovered figurines.

Voigt (1983; 1991) employed this classification system in her subsequent work on figurines from the 6'^ millennium site of Hajji Firuz in fran. She analyzed 16 figurines that were recovered from the excavation of 27 structures that were partially or completely cleared as part of the Hasanlu Project in 1968. Detailed information on the figurines' damage patterns, construction information, and depositional attributes was compared against the model developed originally by Ucko (1962).

Like Voigt (1991), I also employ Ucko's model for determining figurine ftinction.

In this chapter, I outline the functional model that I employ in order to assess figurine use. This model is adapted from Ucko's (1962, 1968) earlier work and is applicable in a variety of contextual situations. Three alternative hypotheses for their frinction are then proposed along with the archaeological pattern expected for each hypothesis.

Figurine Attributes and a Model of Figurine Function

Most studies of figurine use, whether based in the household or in the larger community, do not employ a testable model. Instead, they are typically descriptive and they tend to concentrate on a single possible use for the objects based on context of recovery alone. I propose that a set model, which compiles ethnographic and 91 ethnohistoric figurine characteristics and ties these to function, will produce more accurate and meaningful conclusions. This model incorporates a range of possible activities that encompass ritual contexts at various social scales, as well as non-ritual contexts. I believe it accounts for the wide range of variability that might arise in numerous archaeological situations. For each functional class, I have broken down the attributes into four categories of material, form, use-wear, and disposal. These characteristics provide a clear picture of aspects of the figurines which are readily apparent upon archaeological excavation. I believe there is less subjectivity in this model because it allows for the testing of different functional hypotheses rather than moving directly from a description of the artifacts to a single proposed use.

In order to employ this model and determine figurine function, a number of characteristics were recorded for each artifact. These attributes are employed to place figurines into a specific functional class such as vehicles of magic, supernatural figures or gods, initiation figures, and toys as originally defined by Ucko (1962) and Voigt (1983).

The cross-cultural patterns of construction material, form, use-wear, damage, and disposal for each functional class are listed in Table 4.1. I have modified Ucko's classification and added to each of these fiinctional classes in order to increase their breadth of application to current archaeological collections. I also have created the category of healing or curing figurines since there is ample cross-cultural literature that supports this as a common use of figurines in many areas of the world (Evans-Pritchard

1937; Kluckhohn 1944; Lyons 1998; Middleton 1967; Parsons 1985; Stewart and 92

Table 4.1 Functional Classes and Figurine Attributes

CLASS ATTRIBUTES Ancestor Material: Ordinary materials, like clay, wax, and other organic Veneration substances Cult Figures Form: Small, portable and take the form of humans (male, female, or sexless) Use: Used singly and sometimes in groups Used over an extended period but usually made and disposed of as part of a single behavioral sequence Wear; No substantial wear but may have polish or abrasion from use over an extended period of time May be purposely broken as part of the deposition process Disposal: Whole figures or fragments deposited within domestic structures, in pits, or in habitation debris

Healing and Material: Ordinary materials, like clay, wood, and other organic Curing substances Figures Heavy emphasis on perishable materials Form: Small, portable and take the form of humans (males, females, sexless) or animals Use: Used singly and made for a single use episode Wear: Moderate use wear visible on personal charms Disposal: Frequently destroyed by breaking at consistent locations (neck, waist) or burning and then deposited in domestic refrise

Supernatural Material: May be made of precious or common material or God Form: Technologically superior to other figures and may be Figures accompanied by iconic elements such as plants, animals, or other objects Human form with highly variable size Often exhibit detailed ornamentation or decoration Use: Used singly or in groups Used over an extended period of time but little wear and may be stored in a special purpose context Wear: Localized areas of wear may occur on surface from ritual touching Disposal: Deposited in special purpose structures or inaccessible places May be deposited in a group with other cult figures May be ritually broken but rarely burned prior to disposal 93

Initiation Material: Rare or costly materials or common materials Figures Form: Vary widely in style, technical competence, and size Human or animal form and form or pose is highly variable Use: Used in groups only for a short period of time (one initiation ritual) and then stored in special structures Wear: Surface may exhibit minor wear from handling, especially at base Disposal: Often deposited in groups of different figures (entire teaching unit) at inaccessible locations Toys Material: Common materials such as clay or wood Form: Either crudely or well made and portable Animals, humans, and imaginary forms that may be sexed or sexless Often have arm stubs or are simple cylinders Use: Used singly or in groups and more durable figures used for long periods of time Careless or rough handling in domestic contexts Wear: Significant wear, chipping, abrasion, and breakage however breakage is random Disposal: Never found in ritual contexts and treated like all other domestic debris with no patterning of any kind

Strathem 2001; Wallace 1966). It is also important to mention that some figurines may be used in religious or regional cults that are unrelated to ancestor ritual. Both ritual and non-ritual patterns are compared against those discovered for the archaeological figurines studied here. I first investigate whether Hohokam figurines were manufactured for household consumption using contextual information before examining several different uses for the figures (see Chapter 5). Then these data are combined with the fingerprint sexing data (discussed in Chapters 6 and 7) for each figurine in order to create a complete picture of how these objects were being used and who was manufacturing them.

Eight separate but interrelated figurine characteristics were recorded for each complete or fragmented figure. These data variables are construction material, figurine 94

Table 4.2 Attributes Recorded for all Figurines

Figurine Attributes Coding Options Part of Figurine Head Torso Head and Torso Torso and Leg(s) Segments (Possible arms or legs) Leg With Upturned Foot Rounded Appendage Blunt-ended Appendage Pointed Appendage Spatulate Appendage Rectangular Appendage Head/Torso/Leg(s) Whole Figurine Other Sex Female Male Indeterminate Unknown Pregnant Yes No Burning Slight Moderate Severe Use-Wear Slight Moderate Severe Purposeful Breakage Yes No Post-Depositional Mutilation Yes No Disposal Context House (within or underneath) Exterior Pit Domestic Trash Mound or Midden Cremation Other (Archaeological Trench or Modem Surface) Unknovra form, use-wear, damage or purposeful mutilation, sex characteristics, burning, purposeful breakage, and disposal context. The coding possibilities for these attributes are listed in

Table 4.2. The functional categories of supernatural figures and initiation figures were not considered as possible functional hypotheses for the Hohokam figurines because it is readily apparent fi-om a cursory investigation of the objects that they do not fit many of those construction criteria. They are not made of expensive or rare materials and they are not highly detailed or individualized. They are also not deposited in special caches or special purpose structures. However, these two classes were included in the general discussion since they are found in other figurine assemblages and should be considered as possible functions when analyzing other anthropomorphic figurine collections. Table 4.3 lists the expected archaeological attributes for figurines in each functional class, which aids in the identification of specific categories of figures.

Alternate Hypotheses for Figurine Use

Three alternative hypotheses for the use of these figurines are tested; (1) the use of these figurines as representations of deceased relatives in ancestor cult worship; (2) the use of figurines in curing or healing rituals that were designed to protect a person or family from illness, evil power, and natural disaster; and (3) the use of figurines as toys by children. These three fiinctional classes are the most applicable to the figurine assemblages analyzed here, because they are the functional classes that are characterized by disposal in houses or in household refuse. Since the figurines fi-om Snaketown and

Grewe were deposited in household-related contexts, their use as supernatural and initiation figures was ruled out first. The data variables and functional model mentioned 96 in the previous section form the basis for these determinations. A summary of each hypothesis follows, along with the expected archaeological conditions for that particular figurine function.

Table 4.3 Attributes Coded for Functional Classes of Figurines

Attributes Ancestor Healing/ Supernatural Initiation Toys Cult Curing Figures Figures Figures Figures

Common Material (non- X X X X X perishable) Common Material X X X X (perishable) Precious Material X X Ornamentation/ X X Individualization Use-wear X X X Burning X X Intentional Breakage X X X Mutilation X Disposal in Refuse X X X Disposal in House Structure X Specialized Disposal X X

Hypothesis 1: Figurines and Ancestor Veneration

Ancestor ritual is common in Africa, Asia, and North and South America, and it can be practiced on a number of different levels (Fiawoo 1976; Kopytoff 1971; Mabuchi

1976; Maeda 1976; Nash 1970; Newell 1976). Nevertheless, there are certain attributes of ancestor worship that are seemingly universal throughout the world (Fortes 1976).

Death does not end a person's participation in the lives of his or her family community.

Instead, this participation simply takes a different form than if they were still living, and 97 the contributions that this person made while living are still recognized and valued. It is important for the ancestors to be reincorporated into the community in a different spiritual capacity after death, and this is frequently made real in specific material ways with the use of altars, shrines, memorial tablets, and figurines (Fortes 1965, 1976).

However, ancestors can also be used to mark a familial tie to certain places or rights

(McAnany 1995). In this sense ancestors are venerated by name so that their descendants can inherit certain places and resource rights, and frequently ancestors were buried within residential compounds to further these ties. The interesting point here is that "the practice of ancestor veneration ultimately is not about the dead, but about how the living make use of the dead" (McAnany 1995:162).

The practice of ancestor ritual lengthens individual identities by extending a relative's lifespan beyond that of their physical existence. Ancestors are often the "root" of their social unit, and in certain communities the house is itself a temple to these deceased relatives (McKinnon 2000:168). Among the Tanimbarese of Indonesia, carved wooden panels in the form of an abstract human being are placed in the house in such a manner that the arms of the image extend upward and appear to support the main roof beams (Figure 4.1). The ancestor statues (tavu) in this community form a symbolic base for the house and those residing in it. The tavu forms a pathway of time and identity that link the actions of the past (ancestors) with the action of the present (descendants)

(McKinnon 2000:169). In this case, the tavu represented ancestors as human figures that were objectified into the house construction. While this form of symbolic meaning is not found in all systems of ancestor worship, this form of ritual is always designed to 98 maintain contact between deceased and living family members. It is important to specify that these "relatives are treated as relatives, not as deities" (Marcus 1998:20). Worship may imply behavior and thought that is not present as an integral part of this ritual (Brain

Figure 4.1 A Tavu in the Ditilebit House of Awear, Fordata, c. 1920 (After McKinnon 2000:165).

1973), and perhaps we should use the term, honored.

Some communities place certain restrictions on who can actually become an ancestor, as among the Akan people of Ghana and the Ivory Coast (Ephirim-Donkor

1997). To be an ancestor the deceased must first have been an elder, and upon his or her demise become one of the eternal beings. The ancestors are thus a distinct group of eternal saints held separate from other spiritual personalities who are also endowed with 99 immortality but are not considered ancestors (Ephirim-Donkor 1997). In other societies, there are fewer restrictions on who is considered an ancestor and in fact, these groups may exhibit a high degree of ritual variability from household to household (Krige and

Drige 1943).

A person can have a rather variable moral character and still be considered an ancestor, yet in many communities those who die in abnormal ways (catastrophic death) are often excluded. The ritual involved in ancestor veneration is often continued through time because of a belief that the ancestors will become angered and therefore inflict harm or bring trouble if the descendants terminate their ritual duties. Although, other societies feel that if their ancestors are appeased with favorable offerings and ceremony, then these spirits will bestow good luck and prosperity on the family (McAnany 1995).

The ethnographic and ethnohistoric literature (Ahem 1973; Fortes 1976; Kerns

1983; Marcus 1998; Rattray 1923, 1927) provides several implications for the archaeological recognition of ancestor veneration and figurine use. First, these artifacts are constructed of common materials and are not highly individualized with detailed ornamentation. Instead they are often stylistically simple with few additions of clothing or jewelry. Second, they will frequently be broken as part of the disposal process when they are no longer needed, but will have no other appreciable use-wear. Many of the figurines may be portrayed as females since the majority of lineal kin obligations fall to women as mothers and daughters (Di Leonardo 1997; Prior 1997; Stack 1997). Finally, because their use is relegated to the domestic sphere, their disposal is in household refuse, or in deposits directly associated with the house. Occasionally, they may be associated 100 with burials. In cases where the majority of the community participates in some form of ancestor veneration, ritual can take the form of cult behavior where this form of ritual is community-wide yet practiced on a household basis.

Hypothesis 2: Healing, Curing, and Figurines

A second possible usage of these figurines is in ceremonies intended to cure, heal, ensure future health and fertility, and ward off evil power (Evans-Pritchard 1937;

Kluckhohn 1944; Lyons 1998; Middleton 1967; Middleton and Winter 1963; Olmos and

Paravisini-Gebert 2001; Parsons 1985; Perrone et al. 1989; Stewart and Strathem 2001;

Wallace 1966). Magic is defined as a realm of power where people can directly affect nature or other individuals (Golomb 1985; Middleton 1967; Olmos and Paravisini-Gebert

2001; Stewart and Strathem 2001; Trotter and Chavira 1981), as exemplified by the practices of curing and witchcraft. Malicious behaviors are believed by many societies to cause illness, and witchcraft is thought to be a manifestation of this power (Crawford

1967; Simmons 1974).

Witches throughout the world have a range of paraphernalia that they employ when exercising destructive magic, and much of this is perishable or intangible (Driver

1969; Kapur 1983; Kluckhohn 1944; Perrone et al. 1989; Reynolds 1963). However, many witches also employ some sort of doll or charm which helps to generate illness in the intended victim or aids the witch in some other way. Often this object is made of clay or stone and is called either an effigy or a familiar depending on its function. Effigy figures are commonly used to represent the victim symbolically during acts of evil where the witch magically inserts or injects a foreign object (thorns, sticks, splinters, glass, or some other projectile) into the doll (Kluckhohn 1944:32; Morss 1954; Parsons 1927;

Perrone et al. 1989:186). When these figures are disposed of, it is believed that the victim will die as a result. Familiars are physically similar to the effigy figures, however they are used as agents or animated weapons which carry out tasks for their master, the witch (Gelfand 1967; Harwood 1970; Middleton and Winter 1963; Reynolds 1963:27).

These items are rare and it is much more common to encounter figurines used in opposition to witchcraft and in healing and curing ritual.

Ucko (1968) proposed that figurines in some communities were manipulated as vehicles of magic to produce, prevent, or counteract a negative situation. These figures along with other kinds of medicine or personal charms worn on the body, are safeguards and they may even represent good spirits that are able to remove evil or perpetuate good

(Reynolds 1963:69-79). Another protector is a clay or stone doll-like object that represents a good spirit who watches over an individual, and it is almost physically identical to the witch's familiars. These may be used as part of healing ritual heavily associated with fertility and pregnancy in addition to their use in counteracting witchcraft

(Barbour 1975). They also may be employed for everything from curing specific diseases to preventing illness and misfortune in all segments of the population (Bruce

1973;Follensbee 2000).

The evidence from these ethnographic and ethnohistoric sources indicates that figures associated with household healing and curing ritual are stylistically simple with little detailed ornamentation or individualization. They are constructed of common and often perishable materials, and after their use, the disposal process inevitably requires 102 burning and breakage at standardized and patterned locations on the figurine body so that the figurines are ritually destroyed. Deposition occurs singly in houses or in habitation debris with no special burial locations.

Hypothesis 3: Figurines as Children's Toys

Two recent studies on children in prehistory have been completed by researchers working in the Southwest. The first looks at fingerprints impressed on the surface of clay animal figurines and ceramics from the Sinagua area in northern Arizona (Kamp et al.

1999). Using variability in the ridge breadth of fingerprints, Kamp et al. (1999) inferred that the ceramics were manufactured primarily by adults while children were constructing most of the animal figurines supposedly for use as toys. The other notable recent work on children in the archaeological record has been done by Crown (1999, 2001) in her study of the socialization involved in pottery production in the American Southwest. She finds that children learned to decorate pots at different ages, and that children were able to visualize designs more readily than they were able to execute them accurately.

The use of figurines as children's toys is the third hypothesis being tested. Small, ceramic animal figurines are frequently classified as the play items of children and their manufacture is often attributed to children (Kamp et al. 1999; Kenyon 1956; Pumpelly

1908; Ucko 1962; Voigt 1983). There is also a small quantity of ethnographic evidence that indicates human figurines were considered toys as well, and these would have functioned as dolls (Evans-Pritchard 1939; Fewkes 1923; Fortes 1938). Figurines used as toys are roughly handled so that they are often missing appendages and they are heavily chipped and worn from play. They are constructed of inexpensive materials such as clay. wood, or other perishable objects. Disposal occurs in habitation refuse and there is no ritual breakage or burning as part of this depositional process.

Summary

This general functional model is useful in identifying how a wide range of anthropomorphic figurines might have been used in prehistoric communities. It may be applied in any time period, and in any area of the world where these items are recovered.

The categories are based on a compilation of figurine use from a number of ethnographic and ethnohistoric sources, and archaeological characteristics for each class are also outlined.

The specific hypotheses tested in this research aid in the identification of the use of figurines within Hohokam households. They allow me to ascertain whether the figures were used in domestic ritual (either ancestor-related or for healing and curing) or in child's play. All of the figurines from Snaketown and Grewe underwent analysis to determine their likely use (see Chapter 7) as the first component of this research project. 104

CHAPTER 5

FIGURINE CONSTRUCTION, USE, AND DISPOSAL AT SNAKETOWN AND GREWE

People transform natural materials into objects that satisfy their culturally embedded needs and in the process transform themselves as they create new desires and acquire new knowledge of their lifeworlds. Meskell (2004:18)

Anthropomorphic figurines can be constructed fi-om a range of inorganic and organic materials including stone, clay, wood, shell, bone, and amber. The most common

natural material for figurines in the Greater Southwest is clay, which is modeled by hand and then usually fired. The Snaketown and Grewe figurines analyzed here are clay representations of relatively unelaborated humans that stand approximately four to eight centimeters tall (Figure 5.1). Excavation reports from the sites and previous research

(Haury 1976; Love 2001) on the figurines themselves indicate that these objects were recovered primarily from household refrise, although small percentages were found in other contexts. Disposal context of the figurines is examined in greater detail in a later section of this chapter, along with patterns of burning and breakage, the presence of sex characteristics, and a discussion of raw materials and construction methods for the figurines in both assemblages.

Unless otherwise mentioned, all results reported in this chapter are from the combined Snaketown and Grewe figurine assemblages. In certain cases, such as the following discussion of raw materials, specific differences between the sites will be 105 delineated. However, the similarities in these two collections are too great for me to not treat them as one analytical assemblage. A total of 1463 figurines, figurine fragments, or

Figure 5.1 Drawing of a Hohokam Figurine This is a compilation of major figurine characteristics (After Haury 1976:256). other clay objects such as squeezes, comprises this analytical assemblage, with 1203 figurines from Snaketown and 208 from Grewe. The fifty-two other objects, such as squeezes of clay, are divided between fifty-one from Snaketown and one from Grewe. A total of 1411 fragments are identifiable as originating from an anthropomorphic figurine.

Most of the figurines are fragmented and body segments are all that remain of the original anthropomorphic figurines. Table 5.1 lists the quantity of all figurine parts as they were analyzed. Appendages refer to segments that are either legs or arms, and where distinction between them is essentially impossible. All raw attribute data for this figurine assemblage is listed in Appendix A. 106

Table 5.1 List of Figurine Body Parts within the Assemblage

Figurine Body Part Number Percentages Head 206 14.6 Torso 293 20.8 Head and Torso 51 3.6 Torso and Leg(s) 62 4.4 Cylindrical Segments (Arms or Legs?) 389 27.6 Leg with a Realistic Foot 94 6.7 Rounded Appendage 160 11.3 Blunt Appendage 34 2.4 Pointed Appendage 76 5.4 Spatulate Appendage 13 0.9 Rectangular Appendage 9 0.6 Head/Torso/Leg(s) 3 0.2 Complete Figurine 13 0.9 Other Fragment (LFnidentifiable) 8 0.6 Total 1411 100.0

Raw Materials, Construction Methods, and Figurine Form

The figurines were constructed from alluvial clay that was probably obtained from locally available deposits near the sites. These deposits are most commonly found within the bed of the Gila River, in older deposits within the river's bank or in shallow basins near the habitation site or the riverbank. Geological surveys indicate that the area immediately surrounding Snaketown is characterized by fine-grained alluvium, rather than substantial rock outcrops (Abbott 2000; Schaller 1994). Other than the bed of the

Gila River, this area is essentially sand-free, with the term sand signifying grains between

0.0625 mm and 2.0 mm in size (Rice 1987:38). Smaller grains include silt and clay, and grains larger than sand are considered gravel. Sand grains are continuously eroding from the large areas of rock that comprise mountains throughout southern Arizona, and these 107 grains become progressively smaller during transportation away from their original source. Certain minerals such as feldspar, amphibole, and micas (biotite, muscovite, etc.) tend to disintegrate prior to becoming well-rounded. However, other minerals such as quartz become well-rounded over time with abrasion as they move away from bedrock.

Eventually, all of this abrasion results in fine-grained silt and clay which has been designated fine-grained alluvium (Pewe et al. 1986).

The area immediately upstream from Snaketown is characterized by bedrock comprised of light-colored granite with small quantities of phyllite and schist also mixed into the adjacent mountains. And the land across the Gila River to the south of the site contains sands derived from coarse-grained granite that is composed of quartz, plagioclase feldspar, and K-feldspar (Elizabeth J. Miksa, personal communication).

The area around the Grewe site contains primarily volcanic rocks, such as pink granite and its main by-products of quartz and feldspar. Small quantities of felsite, quartzite, other metamorphic rocks, sandstone, and caliche lumps are also present in the sands of this area (Elizabeth J. Miksa, personal communication).

In February of 2001, Elizabeth J. Miksa collected six clay samples from different locations along the Gila River. Five of these spots were located in close proximity or within the site of Snaketown, and one was taken from the Gila River bed at the Grewe site. Table 5.2 provides more detailed information about their exact locations.

I used four of the Snaketown samples and the single Grewe site clay sample for clay shrinkage experiments (courtesy of Elizabeth J. Miksa), which are explained in Chapter

7, but I also completed a cursory, macroscopic investigation of these clays in order to 108

Table 5.2 Clay Sample Locations

Sample # UTM Northing UTM Easting Map Name Comments GB-183 3652670 452700 Blackwater From Gila River bed GB-191 3676780 410300 Gila Butte NW From alluvial stream downcutting terrace above Gila River GB-199 3672040 413690 Gila Butte NW From shallow basin adjacent to Snaketown GB-253 3669960 413300 Gila Butte NW From Gila River bed GB-262 3666080 408220 Gila Butte NW From Gila River terrace GB-266 3668930 414460 Gila Butte NW From Gila River terrace compare them against the clay used to manufacture the figurines from both archaeological sites. All of the samples range from light to medium reddish-brown, although the sample from the Grewe site (GB-183) is grayer in color and therefore appears to contain a lower percentage of ferromagnesian minerals than the other samples taken from areas adjacent to Snaketown. Very little sand or natural temper is present in any of the clays, which is similar to the figurines' clay. Therefore, the texture, color, and inclusion content of the sample clays is nearly identical to those used in figurine manufacture.

Of course, a simple macroscopic study of these clays tells us very little about the chemical composition of this raw material. The point of this research is not to undertake a detailed compositional analysis of figurine raw materials and source. Therefore, I can only claim that the similarity in clays does not rule out the use of locally available clays by figurine producers at Snaketovra and Grewe. It is clear that clays from a far distance. 109 such as white kaolin clays from northern Arizona, were not transported for the construction of these artifacts. And it seems likely that members of the household could have gathered clay from the bed of the Gila River, or from shallow basins that would have allowed clay to settle out of pooling water within the sites.

The Form and Construction of Hohokam Figurines

The construction of the Snaketown and Grewe figurines is very similar and at both sites the methods used to form them are simple and would have required little investment of time. As Haury (1976) noted, the figures were constructed by hand using either a one-piece or a two-piece method, and none appear to be mold-made. The one- piece method is less common (<1% of my combined assemblage) and is carried out by using a single piece of clay to roughly form a head and an adjoined body. My use of the term, one-piece method, is different from Haury's use of the term. He refers to small individual heads made during the later Sedentary period as being constructed from the one-piece method. These heads were then placed on sticks or other segments of a perishable material. My definition of the one-piece method includes the formation of a body and an adjoined head from a single piece of clay, and they are found in Pioneer period deposits in small numbers. Frequently these figurines do not display separate arms and legs, and their facial features are incised or formed by manipulating the clay already comprising the head. Often these figurines are shorter than those constructed from the two-piece method and the head is the largest portion of the artifact (Figure 5.2 and 5.3). 110

Figure 5.2 Figure 5.3 Figurine with One-Piece Construction Figurine with One-Piece Construction (After Haury 1976:259) (After Haury 1976:261)

Figurines constructed fi-om the two-piece method are much more common in both the Snaketown and Grewe assemblages. These objects were formed by joining small coils or rods of clay together, side-by-side (Figure 5.4). The upper portion of the joined coils was modeled into the head and torso, and the lower coils were either separated or joined to form the legs. In most cases, the line where the two rods of clay were joined is visible in the finished product. The vast majority of analyzed figurines were formed in a standing position with straight legs and arms placed by the sides of the torso. However, a small percentage (n=18 or 1.3%) were seated with legs separated and bent at roughly 90° angles. The upper bodies of these seated figures are identical to those that are standing, and there are no other distinguishable features on these figurines. Body position and posture is remarkably uniform across the assemblage. Facial features usually include a punctate or incised mouth and eyes, and the nose is often a small pinched ridge of clay. Ill f

Figure 5.4 Example of Two-Piece Construction Method (After Haury 1976:256)

Arms, and other anatomic details, such as a pregnant belly, coffee bean eyes, and sexual features like breasts and a penis were appliqued using small separate segments of clay.

The process of applique was also employed to attach the few items of adornment that are found on some of these figurines. These include headbands, ear plugs or spools, belts, leg and arm bracelets, and possible necklaces. The exact percentages of these embellishments within the assemblage are found in Table 5.3, yet these numbers are very small, and in general these figurines are not characterized by adornment. The most commonly added feature is a coffee bean eye shape where two small half-moon pieces of clay are joined together to form a hollow circle (see Figure 5.5). Nine headbands were observed, along with eight examples of ear plugs or spools (Figure 5.6). Three figurines have small pebbles or crystals pushed into the center of the torso near the anatomical location of the human heart. And two partial figurines exhibit the placement of random 112

Table 5.3 Types of Appliqued Adornment Seen on the Figurines

Adornments Number Coffee Bean Eyes 13 Headband 9 Ear Plugs 8 Belt 3 Necklace 3 Arm Bands or Bracelets 1 Leg Bands 1 Hair 1 Total 39

Figure 5.5 Figure 5.6 Appliqued Coffee Bean Eyes Examples of Headbands and Ear Plugs (After Haury 1976:263) (After Haury 1976:263) 113 red pigment on portions of the torso.

Incising is also visible on several figures (<1%) and each incising pattern is unique. Parallel lines are the most frequent occurrence and they are seen on the torso and legs of a small number of objects. I think that both the incising and the placement of red pigment on the figurines may represent other forms of adornment such body paint or tattooing. These elements of personal adornment are intriguing, but when viewed in the larger context of the entire assemblage of 1411 figurines, their presence is not particularly meaningful in terms of general trends. Yet, these items of jewelry or clothing are perhaps indicative of individuals, and they may serve as personal identifiers to those producing the figurines.

Sex Characteristics: Female, Male, or Androgynous

...the lived experience for an individual in a female body differs from that of a male body, irrespective of the gendered identity that they assume. Lynn Meskell (1999:69)

The Snaketown and Grewe figurines portray three different states of phcnotypic sex, or the type of reproductive organs that an individual develops prior to birth. Females and males are designated on the basis of obvious sex characteristics, such as breasts or a penis. However, a large number of the figurines were androgynous in appearance, which does not preclude the possibility that they were sexed to those making and using the objects. The attribution of qualities or characteristics that are not readily visible on the figurines is obviously impossible. Therefore, all discussions comparing male and female figures are referring only to the subset of objects with discernible sex characteristics. It is 114 true that female figurines have two anatomical indicators of sex (breasts and female genitals) while men have only one (penis), which could preferentially increase the number of females identified. However, only those figurines that had breasts were considered female, because it is possible that female genital markings could instead actually represent a piece of clothing or something other form of body adornment. The number of figurines in each of these categories is listed in Table 5.4. Only complete figurines or iragments that include the torso (where sexual features are visible) are considered in this assessment of sex characteristics.

Table 5.4 Presence of Sex Characteristics on Figurine Torsos

Sex Number of Percentages Figurines Female 95 17.4 Male 9 1.6 Androgynous 442 81.0 Total 546 100.0

There are clearly more figurines with an absence of sex characteristics (81.0% of all torsos), yet of the 104 that do exhibit sexual features (19.0% of all torsos), females heavily outweigh males by a ratio of 10.6/1. Females comprise 91.3% of these figurines while males only represent 8.7% of them. Also, a small percentage of figurines (n=3 or

0.5% of all torsos) exhibit large, distended or seemingly pregnant bellies (Figure 5.7).

This low frequency does not appear to be significant in terms of the entire assemblage. 115

Figure 5.7 Possible Pregnant Female (After Haury 1976:262)

There is no doubt that women are portrayed with more frequency than men in

Hohokam figurines, when the choice to model sex characteristics is made by the figurine producer. Recent work by Lesure (2000) points out that the prevalence of female imagery is a world-wide general pattern particularly in Neolithic contexts. He

(2000:587) claims that female figurines "have been seen as part of a 'natural,' ahistorical religion. Iconographic variation has been either ignored or lumped into all-encompassing concepts such as 'mother-goddess." A number of feminist scholars have criticized this view as serving to perpetuate Western categories of gender and culture (Meskell 1995).

And it is clear that these ideas need to be challenged in future research on sex and gender, but the common pattern of female imagery in small anthropomorphic figurines around the world is noteworthy. 116

Burned and Broken

I examined all 1411 figurines and figurine fragments for patterns of burning, intentional breakage, mutilation, and use-wear (see Figure 5.5 for data). Several notable trends were apparent in this analysis. First, the strongest pattern is that of intentional breakage in two particular locations on the body of these figurines. Pre-depositional breakage is present on 98.9% of these figurines, with breaks occurring at the neck, the top of the legs, or at both of these points. Breakage is assumed to be intentional, primarily because the break points are not at sections of the figures that are structurally weak.

Nearly all of these figurines are formed from the two-piece method in which two identical coils of clay are joined together lengthwise. This process actually produces a weakened plane down the center of each figure rather than weakened horizontal planes at the neck and torso/legs boundary. Also, the breakage was considered deliberate from the excavator's accounts. "With few exceptions all figurines recovered were fragmentary.

Some significance may be read into this, for I believe it means that there was willful breakage following their utilization, perhaps to discourage recovery as playthings by children" (Haury 1976:255-256). Of course, without the empirical evidence of

Table 5.5 Treatment of Figurines

Figurine Characteristics Number Percentage Intentional Breakage 1396 98.9 Purposeful Burning 892 63.2 Mutilation 55 3.9 Use-Wear 28 2.0 Total Figurines in Assemblage 1411 100.0 117 experimental strength testing to support my conclusion, the intentionality of this breakage is not definitive.

The second most notable pattern is that of purposefial burning on specific portions of the figurine body. No burning was apparent on 519 or 36.8% of the figurine fragments. Therefore, at least some degree of burning was noticeable on 63.2% of the figures. I recorded three subjective levels of burning: slight or spotty charring, moderate burning in large but localized areas of the figurine, and heavy burning that is all over the body and causes significant darkening of the clay (Table 5.6). High levels of burning were seen on 447 (50.1% of those figures exhibiting burning) figurines. Moderate burning was recorded on 222 (24.9%) figurines, and slight burning was visible on 223

(25.0%)) of the figures.

Table 5.6 Extent of Burning on Figurines

Extent of Burning Number Percentage Slight Burning 223 50.1 Moderate Burning 222 24.9 Heavy Burning 447 25.0 Total 892 100.0

A large number of these objects are burned to some degree, arid clearly more of them are burned heavily as opposed to lightly. However, the most interesting observation is that in all of these categories, the majority of figures are burned primarily on the back of the torso and legs, or on all sides of the legs only. If cylindrical segments are removed from the sample because it is impossible to determine if they are arms or legs, then 118 burning on the legs and lower torso alone accounts for 34.3% of all burning occurrences in the assemblage. I am arguing that this patterning indicates the figurines were placed either upright into a fire with the legs immersed in flame, coals, or another extremely hot material, or they were laid flat with their backs on the fire or other burning substance.

This scorching of the figurines may have occurred as part of a specific use of the artifacts, or it may have taken place during the ritual destruction of these items.

However, I do not think that this patterned burning on the lower portions of the figurines is incidental.

Mutilation, in the form of non-decorative puncturing, pecking, grooving, or gouging, is present on 55 (3.9%) of the figures. The most common types of mutilation are the purposefiil abrasion and scraping away of facial features after firing had hardened the ceramic item. These abraded areas are localized, and the remainder of the figurine is essentially untouched in these cases. Therefore, I do not think that these abraded areas are the result of post-depositional processes or erosion. Several other representations exhibit random pecking around the neck and upper chest region of the torso that also appears to have occurred post-firing. These altered figurines represent only a small portion of the larger assemblage, yet their presence does warrant further consideration in light of the possible function of these artifacts.

Finally, I examined possible examples of use-wear, which are identifiable by areas of polish and other forms of abrasion (Figure 5.7). Use-wear is produced by performing repeated physical action, such as holding or wearing the item in the same manner. In addition to increased polish, the items may appear striated or pitted in areas 119 of increased use. Upon investigation of the entire assemblage, only 28 figurines (2.0%) exhibited any form of use-wear. Of these, only one exhibited moderate use-wear and slight wear was visible on 27 figurines. This use-wear may be the result of repeated handling over time of these specific figures, but only a very small proportion of the assemblage was treated in this manner.

Table 5.7 Use-wear Visible on Figurines

Degree of Use-wear Number Percentage Slight Use-wear 27 96.4 Moderate Use-wear 1 3.6 Severe Use-wear 0 0.0 Total 28 100.0

Figurine Disposal Contexts

Excavation reports from Snaketown and Grewe, and the work of other Hohokam scholars has reinforced the idea that anthropomorphic figurines were deposited in household refuse instead of receiving special treatment at the time of their disposal

(Haury 1976:255; Love 2001). My research further supports this conclusion. Of the

1023 figurines with a known archaeological context, 780 (76.0%)) were recovered from a feature or deposit directly associated with the household (Table 5.8). These contexts include the house structure itself (occupation surface, lower house fill, hearth, or sub- floor pit), exterior pits filled with domestic refuse, and large trash mounds that also contain domestic refuse. The most common disposal context of these categories is the small exterior pit filled with domestic trash (35.1%) of all known contexts). The least 120 common household context is the large domestic trash mound (10.6%). Figurines

(23.3%) were also recovered from arbitrary archaeological units such as geological trenches and test pits of various kinds, as well as the modem ground surface. And a very small number (n=4 or 0.30%) were found in cremations during the Pioneer period. No figurines were found in any other type of archaeological context. Therefore, there is a clear association between figurines and households and the deposits these households produced through daily living.

Table 5.8 Figurine Disposal Contexts

Archaeological Context Number Percentage House Structure (surface, sub-floor pit, house fill) 310 30.3 Exterior Pit filled with Domestic Trash 359 35.1 Large Domestic Trash Mound 111 10.6 Cremations 4 0.30 Archaeological Trenches or Modem Ground Surface 239 23.3 Total of Figurines with Known Context 1023 100.0

I also examined the distribution of features containing figurines within each site in order to determine if figures were deposited in clustered areas or whether they were spread evenly throughout the sites. At Snaketown figurines were found in the three largest trash mounds (29, 39, and 40), which are all located adjacent to habitation structures in the most heavily populated, southern portion of the site (Figures 5.8 and

5.9). These mounds are also adjacent to the central plaza in the middle of the site, which indicates that they were highly visible within the village. Mounds 39 and 40 were both capped with caliche during the late Pioneer and Colonial periods, and this increases the 121

MOU ND

Figure 5.8 Portion of Snaketown Map Mound 29 and surrounding structures (After Haury 1976:26). 122

•U

• S.. "I •I3 j .••.../ (

!• . ® : L s + r J 10 G 1 .r^V't---^^. '.'

O. S/'^o 8 0 • •^fIS 1 • .••/ •'*•/r" -' > V^' w° ' WON r% '": _ • 4: • "N (• J-t WOflK >/• ..i C : r t\

-.. / ^S."?.... £#.!;:)•-'• r / : " 7 <0 J * 'r^i *. 1^: •• / / -N, ) V i '""^ (' \..^'

•

(^, l3(t«M>«S)

MOUND 40 borrow PITS

MOUND 39 /

Figure 5.9 Portion of Snaketown Map Mounds 39 and 40 with surrounding structures (After Haury 1976:33). 123 likelihood that they were also used for public events or ceremony at some point during their history. Their construction is still based on the gradual deposition of domestic refuse over time, and these mounds in particular are composed entirely of trash. They conform to Haury's Type 1 mound, which contain no additions of desert soil to the accumulating trash (Haury 1976:81). Therefore, these mounds were not purposefully constructed as platforms by moving primary trash and redepositing it at these locations. I believe that the trash deposited in these mounds was not considered sacred at the time of its disposal, even if the mound was later used for communal ceremony or events.

In addition, Mound 39 is located between houses and a crematory floor, although no figurines were found in association with cremations in this part of the site. The four figurines that were associated with specific cremations were located in the far northern and southeastern segments of the site. The remaining figures were recovered from houses and exterior trash pits that were scattered widely throughout the site boundaries.

All areas of the site have features containing figurines, although not all houses have these associated human representations. Instead, these artifacts are dispersed in domestic contexts at the sites with no apparent clustering in certain courtyard groups. It is therefore obvious that no one segment of the population had exclusive access to the manufacture or use of these figurines.

The intrasite locations of figurines at the Grewe site are similar to those seen at

Snaketown (Figure 5.10). In general, figures were deposited widely throughout the site in a number of different houses, although one cluster of houses in the northeast portion of

the excavated right-of-way does appear to contain more figurines than other courtyard 124

Figure 5.10 Features Containing Figurines at the Grewe Site (After Love 2001:168). 125 groups. These eight houses (Features 217, 284, 302, 305, 350, 359, 427, and 452) located in Yard 23 all contain figurine fragments. Love (2001:174) argues that there is a second cluster of houses with figurines located even further to the east within the site. Here, three closely situated houses contain several figurines, but this portion of the sites is filled with houses that also contain figures. Therefore, I disagree with her finding, and instead claim that both Grewe and Snaketown have widely dispersed figurine assemblages that do not exhibit significant clustering in certain features.

This pattern where figurines are scattered throughout domestic contexts in a village is seen in a number of communities throughout the Greater Southwest and northern Mexico. Sites such as La Pintada on the western coast of Mexico (Mountjoy

1991), La Quemada (Ben Nelson, personal communication), Tastiota Bay in Mexico

(Owen 1956), the Convento Site (Di Peso et al. 1974), and sites throughout the Prescott area (Scott 1958) all support this pattern of figurine disposal in domestic refuse. Marcus

(1998) also argues that even Oaxacan figurines are typically found in residences, in arranged scenes within the household, and in domestic midden debris. Therefore, I argue that all of these figurines were associated with the domestic realm at these sites. They were being manufactured, used, and disposed of within the household, and no particular segment of the population had greater access to this class of material items. At both

Snaketown and the Grewe site a large proportion of the excavated contexts were domestic. It is possible that there were other contexts in which figurines may have occurred, but which were not sampled or not sampled as heavily. However, this common 126 disposal context does not preclude the use of these figurines in different ways in each of these different communities.

Chronology and Figurine Disposal Context

The figurine assemblage studied here is limited to items deposited in Pioneer and

Colonial period contexts, primarily because figurines are greatly reduced in number during the Sedentary period and become virtually non-existent during the Classic period.

The majority of the figurines were associated with the Pioneer period, however there are differences between the two sites of Snaketown and Grewe, which I believe are directly related to the proportion of Pioneer/Colonial features that were excavated at each site.

At Snaketown, the largest number of figurines (n=731 or 89.2%) came from

Pioneer period deposits (see Table 5.9), and only 3.5% of the figurine assemblage was recovered from Colonial period contexts. A slightly larger number of figurines (n=76 or

9.2%) were associated with contexts that were transitional between the Pioneer and

Colonial periods (indeterminate between Snaketown and Gila Butte phases). The 1964-

65 investigation conducted by Haury (1976:362) targeted nearly even numbers of Pioneer

(n=42) and Colonial period (n=43) houses for excavation. With the numbers of excavated house contexts being equal, 119 figurines were found in Pioneer period

Snaketown houses while only 9 were recovered from Colonial period houses. Therefore, it is clear that most of these anthropomorphic figurines were being disposed of during

Pioneer period times at Snaketown.

In contrast, a significantly larger number of Colonial period houses were excavated at the Grewe site. At Grewe, only 26.0% of the 213 excavated houses with 127

Table 5.9 Figurine Part with Spatial and Temporal Context

Figurine Part Pioneer Pioneer Pioneer Pioneer P-C P-C House Exterior Trash Other or Exterior Trash Pit Mound Unknown Pit Mound Head 6 18 16 15

Torso 38 74 28 39 4 6

Head and 2 4 4 Torso

Torso and 2 4 3 13 1 1 Leg(s)

Cylindrical 45 120 20 64 7 4 Segment

Leg With Foot 5 21 5 10 3 3

Rounded App. 12 48 7 21 1

Blunt App. 1 12 8 1 1

Pointed App. 7 23 1 11

Spatulate App. 6 2 1

Rectangular 1 1 2 2 App.

Head/Torso/ 1 Leg

Complete 1 1 1

Other 1 1 1 5

Total 119 330 88 196 17 16 128

Figurine P-C Col. Col. Col. Col. Col. Part Other or House Exterior Trash Cremation Other or Unknown Pit Mound Unknown Head 3 1 1 5

Torso 2 1 1 2

Head and 2 4 Torso

Torso and 1 Leg(s)

Cylindrical 3 3 3 3 1 2 Segment

Leg With 1 2 1 Foot

Rounded 2 2 1 App.

Blunt App. 1

Pointed App. 2

Spatulate 1 App.

Rectangular App.

Head/Torso/ 1 Leg

Complete 2 1

Other 1

Total 14 9 8 5 5 15 129 definitive chronological placement were Pioneer period, and 43.0% were Colonial period.

This lower proportion of Pioneer to Colonial period contexts is likely the cause of the lower total numbers of figurines at Grewe, since at other sites the height of figurine use appears to have been in the early Pioneer period. Therefore, I believe that the ubiquitous use of these figurines in the Snaketown and Grewe households is primarily limited to the

Pioneer period (Figure 5.11). Further study of this pattern at other Pioneer period sites is warranted in order to verify the significance of this concentration of figurines in the archaeological record, and to determine if it extends to other villages beyond the site of

Snaketown.

350

Pioiie^ period Pioneer/Colonial transition Colonial penotfi *" ' • TIme piflbds

• Houses • Extenor Pits • Refuse Mounds ;

Figure 5.11 Number of Figurines by Disposal Context and Time Period at Snaketown and the Grewe Site 130

Summary of Figurine Data Patterns

These data provide useful information for reconstructing a portion of the life histories of these figurines, which were formed from locally available clay that was not altered with the addition of processed temper in the form of sand or crushed rock. Most of the figures were formed from two conjoined coils of clay into a standing image that has no distinguishable facial or body features. Little adornment is visible, but those figurines that do have embellishments are most commonly seen with appliqued ear plugs and headbands. There are few other individualizing elements on these figurines.

Many of the representations are androgynous, but of those exhibiting sex characteristics, the overwhelming majority is female. Other patterns in the assemblage include purposeful breakage at the neck or the torso/legs boundary in 98.9% of the figures. Intentional burning is apparent on the majority of figurines as well, and these charred areas are most frequently visible on the lower torso and legs of the image as if the artifact was stuck into a fire standing upright. No significant signs of use-wear or mutilation are present in the assemblage. The purposeful burning and breakage in consistent locations may have occurred during a single use of these items or as specific behaviors associated with the depositional process.

Finally, Hohokam figurines conform to a world-wide pattern of disposal in household trash contexts, including occupation floors, features within houses, exterior refrase pits, and large communal-use trash mounds. Although Snaketown and Grewe, these areas were more heavily sampled than other contexts at the sites. There are no definitive intrasite spatial trends, and instead figurines were discovered in a range of 131 contexts scattered throughout both Snaketown and the Grewe site. These data comprise the first segment of information needed to address my questions of figurine function and their context of use. 132

CHAPTER 6

DERMATOGLYPHICS AND SEX

The attribution of gender in the archaeological record is often assigned on the basis of domestic and public contexts, where men are associated with public realms and women are relegated to the domestic sphere. These assumptions in the Greater

Southwest are based on ethnographic accounts, and scholars have linked women with the production of figurines because it is a ceramic technology that is connected with the household. A knowledge of the gender roles associated with anthropomorphic figurine production and use is crucial for understanding how these objects help to define individual and house identity. My research seeks to identify the sex of those producing figurines in a more concrete and objective manner through the use of fingerprint analysis.

Current research on the topic of sex in the archaeological record is often referred to as the study of gender in prehistory because these two terms are frequently confounded. In many societies, including our own, gender cannot be characterized as a male-female dichotomy, and instead it might be better seen on a continuum or even as a process (Gero and Conkey 1991). This concept is understandably difficult to fully define and conceive of from the archaeological record alone. For our purposes, it is useful to define gender as a socially-constructed category that may be based on a number of different factors including biological characteristics, social class, and personality characteristics. Each society's and each individual's interpretation of gender categories and ideology may be just as diverse as are archaeologists' conceptions of gendered relations in the past. 133

Sex and Gender in Archaeology

Sex is most commonly defined in a biological manner with discriminating factors being the primary and secondary sexual characteristics. However, recent research has suggested that sex is also a social construct where certain physical features may not function in the same way cross-culturally (Claassen 1992; Hill 1998). This implies that the concept of biological sex is in fact a cultural category, and therefore may not have been as important (as it is in the Western world) to people in prehistory.

I believe that for our discussions in archaeology, where many of the prehistoric social categories are intangible, we should limit use of the term "sex" for reference to biological characteristics. Gender, on the other hand, refers to those culturally- determined categories of sexual identity that are different for every person (Conkey and

Gero 1991; Crown 2000). Clearly, this ambiguity in the literature signifies the need for distinct definitions of gender and sex in all future research. We also should carefully target the category of sexual identity, either biological or cultural, which is specifically appropriate for the research questions at issue.

For my research into the identity of ceramic figurine producers, I am analyzing only biological dermatoglyphic characteristics, which define the sex of the individuals.

Therefore, during the presentation of these data I specifically limit my discussion to the term, "sex." I then move on to consider the roles of these individuals in the household, at which time it is appropriate to use the term, "gender," since I am making the assumption that sex characteristics are a factor in the cultural determination of Hohokam gender 134 categories. It is possible that there were some exceptions to these gender classes in

Hohokam society, but it is impossible for me to determine them at this time.

Gender Research in Archaeology

The study of gender is of particular interest to archaeologists working in all parts of the world for two main reasons. First and most importantly, gender is a fundamental organizing principle within most major archaeological topics of research (Brumfiel 1991;

Claassen 1992; Conkey and Spector 1984; Crown 2000; Gero 1991; Hill 1998; Hudecek-

Cuffe 1998; Kent 1998; Miller 1993; Mills 1995; Sorensen 2000). Some of these are household organization, divisions of labor, the origins of agriculture, and craft specialization. Second, gender relations and ideology have long been neglected as a direct focus of archaeological research (Wright 1996). The push for a more thorough knowledge of gendered relations did not occur in archaeology until relatively late when compared to the rest of the social and behavioral sciences, which became interested in these issues as an outgrowth of the feminist movement. Once this dearth of knowledge was fully recognized, steps were taken to correct the male-centered research bias to the extent that men in prehistory are often ignored as research subjects.

Some of the earliest published anthropological work specifically targeting gender relations and the differences between males and females was done by Mead (1949) in a rather controversial study of the body and sexes in America. From here, a surge of research on women in ethnographic and archaeological settings occurred during the

1970's and 1980's with a concentration on feminist perspectives (e.g.. Beck 1978;

Conkey and Spector 1984; Dahlberg 1981; Gero 1985; Leacock 1978; Moore 1988; 135

Reiter 1975; Spector 1983). The 1990's are characterized by another wave of ethnographic and biological work (Di Leonardo 1991), with much of the study focused on specific places or topics of research (e.g., Henderson 1995; Wajcman 1991). In addition, women and the general topic of gender are currently subjects of interest in a range of archaeological contexts from ancient, literate societies (Archer et al. 1994;

Fantham et al. 1994; Pomeroy 1975; Silverblatt 1987) to prehistoric groups from around the world (Brumfiel 1991; Classsen 1997; Crovra 2000; Gero 1991; Kent 1998; Joyce

1993; Mills 2000; Wright 1991, 1996).

The brief review of the archaeological study of gender presented here provides insight into the current state of this research. It also allows us, as scholars of prehistory, to determine which areas need more work. Many of these studies search for analogy in ethnographic research in the major areas of sociopolitical organization and economy.

They often link archaeological material culture with ethnographic and ethnohistoric behavior described in studies similar to those in the following sections.

Sociopolitical Organization and Gender

The social and political power that men and women each control is varied from one society to the next, and often this power is intimately linked with economic success . as will be discussed in the following section. However, throughout much of the world, one central theme is the division of power and leadership between males and females within the household. Among the Qashqa'i of Iran, political transactions away from the home are primarily the responsibility of men. Women are well aware of these subtle aspects of political transactions and they are often forthcoming with their opinions about 136 these matters at specific times in the privacy of their own houses (Beck 1978). Social knowledge frequently flows along kinship lines, and women who are in close contact with kin may be in a better position to gain political power within the household and even leadership within the community (Draper 1975; Friedl 1991; Lee 1982).

This trend of male control and power over the political sphere is not universal, and exceptions can be found in societies such as the Western Pueblos in the Greater

Southwest or the Yokoch, Mono, and Miwok of central California. The Western Pueblos of Arizona and New Mexico (Hopi, Zuni, Acoma, and Laguna) are characterized by matrilocal residence, matrilineal exogamous clans, and an emphasis on the ownership of land and houses by women (Eggan 1950; Dozier 1970). In general, women in these societies are important and well-respected members of society who make many of the important household decisions and care for the ritual possessions of the family and possibly even the lineage. A similar situation existed among the matrilocal Yokoch,

Mono, and Miwok of California at the time of European contact. Sociopolitical authority was controlled by senior women and most females in the community specialized in at least one profession such as doctoring, basketmaking, trading, or ceremonial singing

(Dick-Bissonnette 1998). These different communities provide examples where gender acts as one of the dominant organizing principles in the society, upon which settlement, kinship systems, and even ritual systems are structured.

Economy and Gender

Economic systems are organized around four major activities: production

(subsistence and non-subsistence), distribution, consumption, and discard. All of these 137 processes are closely linked to social and political systems, and gender is a major organizing factor in each. Labor organization is perhaps one of the most visible aspects of economy that is defined by gender relations in all societies. A substantial amount of the research done on gender has centered on the economic differences between male and female gender roles, primarily because this is one of the more readily measurable and observable behaviors. However, in many communities the social position of both women and men is dependent on their economic productivity and their access to social information. This is particularly important in small-scale societies where the household is the basic unit of production (Draper 1975; Estioko-Griffin 1981; Lee 1982; Peacock

1991).

Many studies of power, status, and gender relations are based on the work of either Marx or Weber (Lamphere 2000). Marxist views stress the control over productive resources, while Weberian influence is felt in prestige-based structures that emphasize class and status as separate variables. In contrast, to these theories, Lamphere reminds us that in the Greater Southwest, notions of power may not have been tied solely to the secular world of material production and class. Instead, status may be linked with ritual power and knowledge of the supernatural. Ritual action would equate with political action. Based on ethnographic evidence, Lamphere (2000:387) argues that "ritual structures that are village- or community-wide or that seem to have served primarily for male ritual activities would perhaps indicate that women participated in ritual in limited ways or had their own religious societies." She focuses her attention on two models of power and gender relations. The

"balance model" states that it is more difficult for certain households to accumulate more than others. In this situation, kin groups and households were the most important ritual units, and ritual spaces and objects would have been accessible to both men and women.

In the "ritual power model," honor and prestige is conferred on those with ritual power, and this prestige should be visible in archaeological contexts like the burials of ritual practitioners. Under this model, certain households could concentrate more resources, increasing inequality within the community. In the Greater Southwest one or both of these models may have been operating in prehistory, yet other aspects of daily practice, such as craft production, can contribute to the balance of power within and between households.

The organization of craft production is also greatly influenced by gender ideology in many communities at all levels of complexity. Much of the work on this topic has been concerned with gender attribution for certain tasks or types of production (Mills

2000; Murdock 1973), and craft specialization is no exception. Brumfiel's (1991) examination of Aztec women and the activities of weaving and cooking suggests that after Aztec rule both textiles and food were more intensively produced by these women.

On the contrary, pottery production is often associated with male control in industrial settings where specialization is increasing, and the opposite is true in low-scale production systems where women are the primary ceramic producers (Arnold 1985; Rice

1991; Wright 1991). Longacre's (1991) work in the Philippines indicates that men begin controlling the systems of ceramic production and distribution when the manufacturing 139 process becomes more profitable. This trend may be influenced by the processes of aggregation, urbanization, and the value of the goods being manufactured. It is important to stress that there are no truly universal gender ideologies, and the vast diversity in gender roles and identities from one society to the next should really be examined on an individual basis.

The work of Mills (2000) on gender, craft production, and inequality suggests that specialization is a key factor in the interpretation of gender in the archaeological record.

She outlines three separate "pathways to specialization" in the Greater Southwest (Mills

2000:307). First, craft production can change from a gendered division of labor to a nongendered one within the household. Second, male and female roles are more differentiated as gendered production is intensified within the household. And third, production shifts to an extra-household context along gendered lines. The first pathway is particularly important in cases where children add greatly to the total labor force of the household. Here, the entire labor of the household can be pooled together in times of increasing craft specialization and material output. Often women's status does decline in conjunction with increasing dependence on agriculture and the material items associated with these changes in food processing and cooking. Yet, it is possible that women may gain status by retaining partial or complete control over food storage and distribution.

Mills also argues that Weiner's (1992) term, "inalienable possessions," is useful in examining the status of individuals associated with certain valuable items like land use rights, ritual items, and even ritual knowledge itself. These people (male or female) may have greatly enhanced status within the society because of their connection to these items 140 of exceptional value. Finally, Mills (2000:341) argues that "changes in demands on labor for craft production were closely correlated with the process of aggregation, although how labor was organized and the meaning of that organization for differences in women's and men's status may have varied widely" among groups in the Greater

Southwest.

Crafting and social identity are explored in Costin and Wright's (1998) compilation of varied papers on craft production. They concentrate on the ways that

"productive activities involved in crafting create social identities, social categories, and social relationships" (Costin and Wright 1998:3). Craft items can communicate social identity and they intersect all cultural domains. The process of crafting involves a relationship between the producer and the consumer, and the economy underlying this interaction cannot be understood without also examining the social aspects of this relationship. They recognize the agency of craft producers, who are involved in the creation of the organization of production. Access to resources and political structures may be limiting, but craft producers are still active participants in the process of creating material objects.

A couple of chapters in Costin and Wright's volume are particularly enlightening about gender divisions of labor and craft production. Clark and Houston (1998) target

Mayan artisans for their investigation of engendered craft activities and Maya perceptions of self. And Costin (1998) focuses on often over-looked female laborers who were producing cloth for elite patrons. In this situation, the Inka state redirected prestige away fi-om those cloth producers and instead attributed it the state itself These authors identify 141

not only the basic determinants of social identity like age and gender, but they are also

interested in the "prerogatives of social identity - such as autonomy, control, power,

privilege, and prestige" (Costin and Wright 1998:8).

Gender and Hohokam Archaeology

The scope of work on gender relations is immense; however, there are still large

gaps in our knowledge of women and men in the archaeological record including the

Hohokam region. In fact, there has been only one exclusive study of gender in the

Hohokam area (Crown and Fish 1996). Crovra and Fish (1996) contrast the status and

prestige of women in the Pre-Classic period against that in the Classic period, and they

examine changes in the division of labor, women's workload, and prestige structure.

They found that cooking, pottery-making, and fiber-processing became more labor

intensive during the Classic period. Women also had differential access to power and

knowledge because of changes in domestic architecture, and that women who lived in

enclosed compounds appeared to have more prestige.

There are a number of chapters in a recent volume (Crown 2000) that address

gender and the Hohokam in the context of patterns across the Greater Southwest although

most of the work is concentrated on northern Arizona and New Mexico. Hegmon et al.

(2000) discuss gender and the organization of space, including the household in all major

cultural areas of the American Southwest. In the Hohokam region, they contend that

during the Pre-Classic period, labor recruitment was important for each courtyard group, and this would have made the composition of household groups more flexible. This in turn would have increased women's degree of residential choice along with their 142 autonomy. As women were recruited for household membership, their prestige and power may have also increased. The organization of labor appears to have been quite flexible as well, which would have facilitated women's social networking within the community. During the Classic period, this situation may have become divided with some women living in more privileged surroundings, such as the compounds on platform mounds. Similar to Crown and Fish's (1996) findings, Hegmon et al. (2000) conclude that during the Classic period, women's overall status may have declined in concert with a decrease in residential flexibility. Although, women living in these compounds may have maintained a higher level of status than those living outside of them.

Unlike the social and economic focus of this previous work, my research addresses the connection between gender roles and household ritual. I discuss the actual sex of those involved in figurine production by employing a fingerprint sexing technique that can be used on any plastic archaeological material (e.g. clay, plaster, adobe bricks).

One of the most crucial advancements yet to be made in archaeological gender studies is in the area of new methodology, and this method of sexing fingerprints provides a direct and quantitative link to the sex of a craft producer.

Dermatoglyphics

The small, dermal ridges and furrows found on fingers, palms, and feet are very personal and mysterious features of the human body. Consequently, fingerprints have become a consummate symbol of individuality throughout the world. However, this human fascination with fingerprints is not a recent development, and there are many examples of ancient prints from virtually all continents. 143

In 1880, Henry Faulds published the first scientific discussion of fingerprints in a volume of Nature. Here he describes "skin-furrows of the hand" that are visible on prehistoric Japanese ceramics, the hand of a Gibraltar monkey {Macacus innus), and

Egyptian confessions (Faulds 1880:605). He concludes that the patterns may be useful in several ways (Faulds 1880:605):

1) We may perhaps be able to extend to other animals the analogies found by me to exist in the monkeys. 2) These analogies may admit of further analysis, and may assist, when better understood, in ethnological classifications. 3) If so, those which are found in ancient pottery may become of immense historical importance. 4) The fingers of mummies, by special preparation, may yield results for comparison. I am very doubtful, however, of this. 5) When bloody finger-marks or impressions on clay, glass, etc., exist, they may lead to the scientific identification of criminals.

Faulds alludes to the possible historical importance of ancient prints in clay, and since his publication numerous archaeological examples of fingerprints in old clay have been documented (Berry 1991; Cummins 1941; Cummins and Midlo 1976; Galton 1892;

Moenssens 1971; Astrom and Eriksson 1980). Many artifacts in the Middle East, Egypt, and Asia have been uncovered bearing fingerprints, both intentionally and accidentally placed. In fact, one of the earliest occurrences of ancient prints on Neolithic bricks (7000

B.C.) has been described by Berry (1991). The hand-made bricks used in wall construction, were shaped like flattened cigars, and the surface was impressed with a herringbone pattern by pairs of prints from the brick-maker's thumbs (Berry 1991). Nail marks were supposedly used as signatures on Assyrian bricks, and there is even a Latin v^ord, palmatus, which is said to describe the purposeful impression of a hand in soft clay 144

(Galton 1892). Also, there are Chinese loan contracts (nearly 1200 years old) that display

the fingerprints of both witnesses and all parties in the contract (Wilton 1938).

Presumably, these prints were applied as a form of token identification.

Fingerprints are also found on prehistoric artifacts throughout the Americas.

Typically, both hand prints and foot prints are found in rock art (Cole 1994), on clay

seals, paper seals (Ashbaugh 1999), and either thumb or finger impressions are visible on

indented, corrugated ceramic vessels, other ceramic vessels, and ceramic figurines

(Astrom and Eriksson 1980; Branigan et al. 2002). As Faulds (1880) so presciently

suggested, these ancient fingerprints may prove useful in the study of the organization of

ceramic production because of the unique characteristics found in the friction ridge

pattern.

Anatomy of Human Skin

Human skin is either smooth as is found on most of the body or it is furrowed, and

it can be divided into the dermis (inner layer) and the epidermis (outer layer) (Figure 6.1).

Furrowed skin is defined as volar since it is composed of fused volar pads (the walking

pads found on all mammals) that are characterized by a textured surface of ridges

(Ashbaugh 1999). Volar skin is unique in that it only contains sweat glands and no hair

or sebaceous glands, and it typically lacks pigmentation. The friction ridges found on

volar skin are beneficial because they increase friction between the skin surface and any

other surfaces that are touched. The ridges are composed of individual ridge units that

fuse during initial development, and at this time during intrauterine development the ridges are in their permanent and immutable configuration (Ashbaugh 1999; Babler 1990; 145

Epidermis

Granular

Spinous

Secondary Ridge' Primaiy Ridge Between Pores

Primary Ridge at a Poi Pore Duct

Dennis Papillae Pegs

•Sweat Gland

Figure 6.1 Cross Section of a Friction Ridge (After Ashbaugh 1999:71).

Basu 1985; Malvalwala 1978). Each ridge unit has an associated pore opening for a sweat gland that opens at the top of the ridge. These pores constantly release perspiration causing a latent fingerprint to be left on a surface when touched. There are no furrows in between the ridges, and instead the ridges taper off and join each other in a narrow valley.

Four basic postulates of dermatoglyphics define the usefulness of ridge characteristics for both the identification of individuals and the study of genetic populations, sex, and disease (Ashbaugh 1999:88). The four postulates are: (1) fi-iction ridges develop on the fetus in their definitive form before birth, (2) friction ridges are persistent throughout life except for permanent scarring, (3) friction ridge patterns and 146 the details in small areas of friction ridges are unique and never repeated, and (4) overall, friction ridge patterns vary within limits that allow for classification.

Of particular importance to this project is the statement that the friction ridge patterns and characteristics persist through life. The basal cell system (the deepest portion of the epidermal layer) continually proliferates itself in a constant pattern and these cells migrate up to the surface replacing cells that are being constantly sloughed off

(Ashbaugh 1999; Babler 1990). Therefore, this immutable cell system maintains the unique friction ridge pattern that is present at the time of birth.

Ridge Counting

Increasingly, researchers are proving that many dermatoglyphic characteristics are heritable in humans, making distinctions between sex and genetically-bounded populations apparent (Leguebe 1982; Malvalwala et al. 1990; Rife 1990). These differences are visible in the pattern of friction ridges that make up a fingerprint

(Moenssens 1971). As a finger is impressed into any soft substance, the grooves of the image represent the actual, three-dimensional friction ridge pattern of the skin. Ridge width seems to vary slightly between people. It is roughly 0.45 mm in adult males, and women's are finer and have narrower friction ridges (Moenssens .1971). Ridge counting is a method that determines the number of friction ridges that touch or cross an imaginary line drawn across a specified length of the print so that is it is perpendicular to the ridges themselves (Figure 6.2). Sex differences have been noted using ridge counting techniques and this difference is perceptible in both whole and partial prints (Cummins

1941; Cummins and Midlo 1976; Cummins et al. 1941; Micle and Kobyliansky 1987; 147

Figure 6.2 Ridge Count Index Technique A drawing of an ulnar loop of the right index finger. Only those ridges that actually touch the line are used in the ridge count (After Malvalwala 1978).

Ohler and Cummins 1942). For example, Jantz (1975) found that on average American white men (n=133) had a total ridge count value of 135, while American white women

(n=132) had a mean value of 126. Although males have higher total ridge counts values, these ridges are spread over a larger surface area than ridges comprising female prints. If ridges are counted over a specified smaller area (rather than the entire surface of the fingertip), such as 1 cm, women actually have higher ridge count indices than men because the density of ridges is greater in female prints.

A measure of pattern (whorl, loop, arch, etc.) frequency has also been employed to determine differences. This method, called Dankmeijer's index is much more subjective than total ridge counts (Flickinger 1976). Also, it has a limited range of applicability on partial prints (since the pattern is not completely visible), which are 148 common on archaeological remains. Ridge counts, on the other hand, are an objective, quantitative measure of the size of the fingerprint pattern, which is a strongly inherited trait. The important advantages of a ridge count index (RCI) are: it is fully heritable, it eliminates subjectivity, and it allows for statistical analyses (Flickinger 1976).

Table 6.1 is a compiled list of medical and anthropological dermatoglyphic studies (total ridge count values) of various populations around the world. In this table, the male total ridge counts are higher because they have more total ridges over a larger surface area. However, the increased density of female ridges indicates that index values

(ridges/cm) for the female segment of these populations is higher than that for males.

Those populations with male and female means that are comparable actually have more widely disparate ridge count index values. This difference in density appears to be the result of both a genetic factor influencing ridge breadth and spacing along with sexual dimorphism.

Table 6.1 Female and Male Total Ridge Count Differences

Population Female Mean Male Mean Source African American 1 129.21 130.81 Jantz 1975 African American 2 106.40 119.00 Steinberg 1975 American Caucasian 1 126.08 134.74 Jantz 1975 American Caucasian 2 114.90 129.30 Plato 1975 Andamanese 141.48 147.33 Buchi 1978 Apache 147.06 147.83 Flickinger 1976 Bagatha, India 62.02 68.28 Reddy 1975 Bedik-Bassari 122.95 121.55 Jantz 1975 149

British 126.97 145.18 Buchi 1978 Central India 151.40 158.00 Buchi 1978 Choctaw 106.55 108.28 Flickinger 1976 Delta de I'Ebre 125.05 143.12 Arquimbau 1993 D'Entrecasteaux 154.94 166.69 McKenzie 1975 Dogon 118.44 126.46 Jantz 1975 Domsod 134.10 143.18 Gyenis 1975 Dutch 123.90 131.00 Buchi 1978 Easter Island 1 162.30 175.53 Jantz 1975 Easter Island 2 161.09 177.10 Meier 1975 German 131.40 145.94 Buchi 1978 Kalita Caste 124.61 137.33 Buchi 1978 Khasi 124.78 142.94 Buchi 1978 Kiskunlachaza 133.68 143.63 Gyenis 1975 Korcula 124.31 136.63 Milicic 1990 La Liebana 131.77 139.65 Martin 1993 Lambadi 133.80 140.46 Buchi 1978 Malapantaram 145.98 160.76 Buchi 1978 Milne Bay 166.04 162.72 McKenzie 1975 Navajo 142.72 148.49 Flickinger 1976 Nubians 121.13 132.21 Pospisil 1990 Parsi 135.93 139.83 Buchi 1978 Peljesac 135.03 149.22 Milicic 1990 Pereg 129.67 138.78 Gyenis 1975 Pygmy 97.66 96.65 Jantz 1975 Rarhi Brahmin 128.64 143.19 Buchi 1978 Tharu 121.50 130.61 Buchi 1978 Tibetans 138.6 156.23 Buchi 1978 150

Previous Work on the Ridge Counting Technique

Fingerprints constitute a new line of evidence for archaeologists, and because of this, I have conducted two separate pilot projects to test the validity of this technique.

The first of these was completed using ceramic archaeological material from the

American Southwest and the latter involved the dermatoglyphic analysis of modem male and female individuals from the Philippines. Following these studies, I employed the identical ridge counting technique that I also use on the archaeological sample of fingerprints taken from Snaketown and Grewe figurines (see Chapter 7) on a large sample of modem Native American fingerprints. These modem prints provide an ideal comparison for the archaeological prints, and they provide further proof of the sex differences seen in ridge count values. I explain each of these studies in the order that I undertook them.

Archaeological Cormgated Ceramics from the American Southwest

In 1995 I conducted a study of partial fingerprints on 54 Tusayan Corrugated vessels from five sites in east-central and northeastem Arizona, including Bailey Ruin and three sites (Transwestem Survey Project sites 442-30, 423-124, and 423-101) in the

Little Colorado area (Mills et al. 1999; Zedeno and Mills 1993). Tusayan Cormgated ceramics are characterized by a high quality white, kaolin clay. This clay allows the fingerprints to be easily detected, as opposed to many of the other coarser clays (with larger temper) that comprise most cormgated wares throughout the northem Southwest.

The study attempted to sex ancient fingerprints on pottery by examining the dermatoglyphic and genetic evidence behind fingerprint sex characteristics (Stinson 151

1995). I employed a ridge counting technique to quantitatively measure differences in the print size of potters by examining the sherds under a binocular microscope at 1.5X magnification. The ridge count values (ridges/cm) ranged from 12.5 to 22.5 and are visible in Table 6.2. Clearly, both of these end values are extreme outliers. The high end may represent children and there is also a small group clustered around 20.0, which may represent women. The median value is 16.0 r/cm and there is a wide unimodal distribution that is indeterminate as to sex or age. In fact, it is difficult to determine if the variation seen in these data is characteristic of both male and female potters, or simply within the range of variation for a single sex in the archaeological population. Results of these analyses indicated that the ridge counting technique works with partial prints; however, with no comparative collection of modem prints it was impossible to determine the sex of those producing these ceramics.

Table 6.2 Ridge Counts of Prehistoric Fingerprints

Sample # Site FS# Ridges/cm 1 442-30 300 14.0 2 442-30 300 15.0 3 442-30 300 22.5 4 442-30 300 16.7 5 442-30 300 14.0 6 442-30 300 20.0 7 442-30 300 14.0 8 442-30 300 13.3 9 442-30 300 12.5 10 442-30 300 14.0 11 442-30 300 15.0 12 442-30 300 15.0 13 442-30 300 16.7 14 442-30 300 17.5 15 442-30 300 14.0 16 442-30 300 16.0 17 442-30 300 15.0 18 442-30 300 15.7 19 442-30 300 16.7 20 442-30 300 16.0 21 442-30 300 18.0 22 442-30 300 20.0 23 442-30 300 20.0 24 442-30 300 18.3 25 442-30 300 16.7 26 442-30 300 17.5 27 442-30 300 20.0 28 442-30 300 16.7 29 442-30 300 17.0 30 423-124 15.7 31 423-124 15.0 32 423-124 16.0 33 423-124 14.0 34 423-124 14.0 35 423-124 16.7 36 423-124 18.0 37 423-124 15.0 38 423-124 17.0 153

39 423-124 16.0 40 423-124 16.7 41 423-101 627 17.1 42 423-101 627 17.1 43 423-101 627 16.7 44 423-101 627 13.3 45 423-101 627 15.0 46 423-101 627 15.7 47 423-101 627 16.0 48 423-101 627 14.0 49 Bailey Ruin 2058 16.0 50 Bailey Ruin 2058 20.0 51 Bailey Ruin 2058 18.0 52 Bailey Ruin 2058 17.5 53 Bailey Ruin 2058 16.0 54 Bailey Ruin 2058 16.7

Philippine Ethnographic Study

In 1999 I conducted another pretest of this ridge counting technique on a small sample of prints from a modem group of genetically related individuals living in the

Philippines (Stinson 1999). A ridge count index (RCI) was determined for each

fingerprint taken (49 prints from 20 individuals), and was based on a counting interval of

1 cm. All data were collected and then analyzed using the Image Pro computer program.

Each fingerprint image was fed directly into the computer by capturing the magnified image (under stereomicroscope at 25x) with a digital camera that was attached to the microscope. The mean RCI for males is 13.8 ridges per cm, and the female RCI is 20.3 154 ridges per cm (see Table 6.3), and there is no overlap in the male and female ranges of

RCI values. Clearly, in this small sample men have fewer and larger ridges per area.

Women tend to have many more and much narrower ridges within the pattern area. This small study provides another example of the applicability of this technique to distinguish genetically-related females from males by analyzing dermatoglj^hic characteristics.

Table 6.3 Ridge Count Index Values for Modern Fingerprint Sample

Females Males 18.5 14.0 17.0 14.5 19.0 15.0 18.5 15.0 23.0 11.5 23.5 15.0 20.5 13.5 21.0 13.0 21.5 13.0

Comparative Ethnographic Sample of Southwestern Native American Fingerprints

The analysis of this ethnographic collection of fingerprints is intended to provide a base against which to compare the archaeological sample of prints analyzed in Chapter

7. My previous research on archaeological fingerprints (Stinson 1995) indicates the necessity of a comparative Native American sample in order to adequately differentiate between male and female prints on the figurines I am currently investigating.

The sample that I use of Southwestern Native Americans is based on a collection of prints housed in the dermatoglyphic archive at the National Museum of Natural

History (Smithsonian Institution) in Washington D.C. The collection contains finger and 155 palm prints from 437 individuals, and it was originally collected by Dr. James V. Neel, formerly of the University of Michigan Medical School. The prints are divided between

197 females and 240 males, and examples of the ink prints are visible in Figures 6.3 and

6.4. I deleted Athabascan prints from the sample to more closely represent the possible range of prehispanic groups from the southern Southwest.

Ridge count values were determined for all individuals in this collection by measuring three separate ridge count values from three different fingers for each person.

All ridges that crossed a 1.0 cm line (defined with Mitutoyo Absolute Digimatic digital calipers) drawn perpendicularly to the ridges were counted (see Figure 6.1 for example of method). These three counts were then averaged together, which increases the statistical validity of these values, since there can be extremely slight differences in ridge counts from one finger to another on the same individual. I then use both the bimodal distribution and the male and female mean RCI values for comparative purposes. These raw data are reported in their entirety in Appendix B.

The overall female mean is 29.7 ridges/cm, and the sample has a range of 22.3-

33.3 ridges/cm. The lower male mean is 21.3 ridges/cm, and this sample has a range of

16.0-27.0 ridges/cm. An analysis of variance confirms that these two statistical populations are distinct; however there is a small range of overlap between male and female RCI values from 23.5-24.7 ridges/cm (Figure 6.5). It is statistically impossible to place a value falling in this range into a male or female category without knowledge of the actual sex of the individual in question. Therefore, the presence of this ambiguous range may have a direct bearing on the placement of questionable archaeological RCI Figure 6.3 Female Prints from the Ethnographic Collection

Figure 6.4 Male Prints from the Ethnographic Collection 157

Figure 6.5 Male and Female Mean RCI Values for the Ethnographic Fingerprint Assemblage values into a specific sex category if they fall into this intermediate zone. However, archaeological values above the upper end of this range (24.7 ridges/cm) are likely female, and values below the lower end of this range (23.5 ridges/cm) are probably male.

It is always possible that although the male and female means of this ethnographic sample are statistically separate, in reality there might be an individual of one sex with an outlier value that places them within the range of the other sex. Therefore, for the purposes of this research, I am making an assumption that no outliers are present in the archaeological sample of prints, simply because it is impossible to identify them. The results of this ethnographic print study will be discussed in further detail in Chapter 7 in relation to the archaeological sample of fingerprints from figurines. 158

Summary of Dermatoglyphics and Preliminary Ridge Count Studies

Studies of sex and gender in the Greater Southwest are typically concerned with sociopolitical aspects of household divisions of labor or with a gendered organization of craft production, specifically craft specialization. I feel that the most important work being done on gender in prehistory acknowledges the variety of gendered practice and sees beyond traditional economic interpretations of gendered divisions of labor. This work explores the power, status, and prestige inherent in ritual knowledge and inalienable possessions, and it also delves into links between gendered craft production and definitions of self and personhood. I also argue that new methodologies, such as dermatoglyphics, provide a ft-esh perspective on issues of sex in the archaeological record. These methods can then be used to propose how gendered relations might be structured within different societies, recognizing that gender is differentially constructed in each instance.

Previous research by myself (Stinson 1999) and others has proven that fingerprints are a viable data set for determining sex in the archaeological record if a known sample of comparable prints is available as a baseline. Without this sample, it is difficult to glean much meaningful information about sex fi-om the archaeological data, as my study of Tusayan Corrugated ceramics (Stinson 1995) corroborates. Although the more recent study of Southwest ethnographic prints could be used to re-evaluate the fingerprints on these corrugated ceramics. An ethnographic sample of fingerprints, such as the one I employ in this study, is also valuable for a comparison to other classes of 159 data beyond that obtained from the Snaketown and Grewe figurines. It may be used as a base for any other dermatoglyphic studies in the pre-Athabascan Greater Southwest. 160

CHAPTER 7

SEXING FIGURINE PRODUCERS IN HOHOKAM HOUSEHOLDS

Dermatoglyphic research has proven that sex can be identified in the archaeological record by measuring ridge characteristics on fingerprints visible in a range of soft materials. The method of ridge counting and the calculation of a ridge count index (RCI) are particularly useful for determining sex from a partial fingerprint.

Therefore, I have employed ridge counting on a sample of archaeological fingerprints recovered from the anthropomorphic Snaketown and Grewe figurines, which are described in Chapter 5. This method is identical to that described in Chapter 6, and I have already tested it on one archaeological and two ethnographic fingerprint samples.

In this chapter, I outline my technique for applying this method to the archaeological samples. This involves proper identification of an archaeological fingerprint along with accurate measurement of the ridge count. A total of 184 separate fingerprints or partial fingerprints were identified on figurines from Snaketown and

Grewe. Of these, 183 were from Snaketown figures, while only one print was analyzed from a Grewe figurine. Several other Grewe figurines exhibited fingerprints, however in each of these cases; the prints were either smeared or not clear enough for precise measurement and therefore not adequate for analysis. All 184 fingerprints are grouped together into one archaeological sample for analysis.

The analysis results are presented here along with a comparison to the ethnographic fingerprint data first summarized at the end of Chapter 6. The ethnographic prints are used as a comparative base upon which to interpret the archaeological data. I 161 also discuss the difference between age and sex trends in dermatoglyphic data. Age estimates can be determined from fingerprint data in a manner similar to that used for sex identification. However, age and sex can be distinguished from one another in most cases, and I explain my position on this topic in contrast to Kamp et al.'s (1999) argument, which focuses on age determinations and the identification of children in prehistory.

Prior to the presentation of these data, it is important to report the results of a clay shrinkage study that I completed with samples of clay collected from the Gila River near the Snaketown and Grewe sites. These samples were described in greater detail in

Chapter 5, and they were collected by Elizabeth Miksa during her geological sampling of the area. Clay shrinkage is a potential problem for accurate analysis of the fingerprint characteristics, and it is imperative that rates of shrinkage are taken into account when comparing the ethnographic print collection to the clay archaeological sample.

Clay Shrinkage Experiment

When clay minerals are fired at high temperatures (> 600°C), they first lose the water of hydration. They then undergo major changes such as expansion, contraction, the breakdown of their mineral structure, and the formation of new silicates. The greatest amount of shrinkage occurs at temperatures above 900 to 1100°C, although it is highly unlikely that any of the Snaketown or Grewe figurines were fired to this extreme (Rice

1987:91). The soft and friable nature of the figurine clay indicates that these objects were probably fired at temperatures no higher than 500°C. Re-firing of these ceramic items was not conducted as part of this research; therefore this is a subjective observation on 162 my part. It is possible that the figurines were fired at temperatures slightly higher or lower than 500°C, although I am certain that these items were thoroughly fired. In addition, the nature of the clays being use, which are alluvial clays, suggests that they would not withstand high temperature firing without the incorporation of specific types and quantities of appropriate tempering agents.

I conducted this clay shrinkage experiment in order to determine the presence and degree of shrinkage in the fingerprints found on these figurines. High rates of shrinkage would make a comparison of the archaeological and ethnographic fingerprints difficult.

And this would then make sexing the archaeological prints nearly impossible, unless consistent shrinkage ratios could be used to adjust the archaeological ridge count values.

If clay shrinkage rates are negligible, no adjustments would be needed and the archaeological and ethnographic print assemblages could be compared easily.

The clays employed in this experiment were collected by Elizabeth Miksa

(personal communication) from five separate locations near the archaeological sites (see

Chapter 6). Four of these were obtained from alluvial deposits within or near the Gila

River at Snaketown, and one was collected from an alluvial deposit within the Gila River adjacent to the Grewe site. I am making the assumption, based on physical clay characteristics and proximity to the river sources, that these clays are representative of clays that were used to construct the anthropomorphic figurines. Therefore, these five raw clays were chosen to test shrinkage rates of the figurine clays.

Shrinkage was measured by first obtaining the ink fingerprints of ten random individuals (five women and five men). These people are unrelated to each other, and 163 because of this, their fingerprints may not fall within the appropriate male and female ranges seen in the ethnographic distribution of prints. These random fingerprints were then impressed into wet balls of each of the five clays. The balls were allowed to dry for

48 hours and then they were fired in a kiln at 500°C. After the completion of each stage

(wet, dry, fired and allowed to cool), the ridge count values for each individual were measured on each clay sample. A digital caliper was used to measure both the ink ridges and those visible in the clay. The results of these measurements are listed in Tables 7.1,

7.2, 7.3, 7.4, and 7.5.

Table 7.1 Fingerprints in Clay from Clay Source GB-183

Sample RCI - Ink Print RCI - Wet Clay RCI - Dry Clay RCI - Fired (r/cm) (r/cm) (r/cm) Clay (r/cm) F1 21.9 21.6 22.8 22.0 F2 22.9 22.7 23.8 22.9 F3 18.6 18.5 19.7 18.7 F4 24.2 24.1 25.3 24.2 F5 20.6 20.2 21.2 20.6 Ml 16.6 16.4 17.5 16.5 M2 17.4 17.3 18.5 17.5 M3 18.0 17.8 19.0 18.0 M4 14.0 13.9 15.0 14.0 M5 14.0 13.8 15.0 14.1

Table 7.2 Fingerprints in Clay from Clay Source GB-199

Sample RCI - Ink Print RCI - Wet Clay RCI - Dry Clay RCI - Fired (r/cm) (r/cm) (r/cm) Clay (r/cm) F1 21.9 21.8 23.8 22.0 F2 22.9 22.8 24.7 22.9 F3 18.6 19.5 21.3 18.6 F4 24.2 24.0 26.0 24.3 F5 20.6 20.6 22.7 20.6 164

Ml 16.6 16.5 18.5 16.6 M2 17.4 17.3 19.3 17.4 M3 18.0 17.9 19.8 18.1 M4 14.0 13.9 15.8 14.0 M5 14.0 13.9 15.9 14.1

Table 7.3 Fingerprints in Clay from Clay Source GB-253

Sample RCI - Ink Print RCI - Wet Clay RCI - Dry Clay RCI - Fired (r/cm) (r/cm) (r/cm) Clay (r/cm) F1 21.9 21.7 22.5 21.9 F2 22.9 22.7 23.6 23.0 F3 18.6 18.5 19.5 18.7 F4 24.2 23.5 24.4 24.1 F5 20.6 20.5 21.5 20.6 Ml 16.6 16.4 17.2 16.7 M2 17.4 17.2 18.0 17.5 M3 18.0 17.5 18.4 17.9 M4 14.0 13.9 14.7 14.0 M5 14.0 13.8 14.6 14.1

Table 7.4 Fingerprints in Clay from Clay Source GB-262

Sample RCI - Ink Print RCI - Wet Clay RCI - Dry Clay RCI - Fired (r/cm) (r/cm) (r/cm) Clay (r/cm) F1 21.9 21.6 22.5 21.8 F2 22.9 22.7 23.7 22.8 F3 18.6 18.3 18.9 18.6 F4 24.2 24.0 25.1 24.1 F5 20.6 20.4 21.4 20.7 Ml 16.6 16.5 17.5 16.5 M2 17.4 17.1 17.9 17.4 M3 18.0 17.7 18.8 17.9 M4 14.0 13.8 14.8 14.0 M5 14.0 13.8 14.7 14.0 165

Table 7.5 Fingerprints in Clay from Clay Source GB-266

Sample RCI - Ink Print RCI - Wet Clay RCI - Dry Clay RCI - Fired (r/cm) (r/cm) (r/cm) Clay (r/cm) F1 21.9 21.5 22.2 21.9 F2 22.9 22.6 23.1 22.9 F3 18.6 18.3 18.9 18.7 F4 24.2 23.8 24.5 24.3 F5 20.6 18.5 19.2 20.6 Ml 16.6 16.1 16.9 16.7 M2 17.4 16.9 17.6 17.5 M3 18.0 17.6 18.3 18.1 M4 14.0 13.7 14.3 14.1 M5 14.0 13.8 14.4 14.1

There are several clear patterns in these data (Figure 7.1). First, there are no major alterations of the clay minerals which cause drastic shrinkage, although there are slight variations between the clays and there is a small amount of expansion and contraction throughout the wetting, drying, and firing cycle. Certain clays, because of their chemical composition, appear to expand and contract more readily. Clay from the

GB-199 source is an example of this composition, and it exhibits an average increase of

2.0 r/cm from the wet to the dry stage, as a result of shrinkage. However, it also expands at a greater rate when fired, such that RCI values from prints on the fired clay balls return to within hundredths of millimeters of the RCI value measured from the ink prints.

The slightly lower RCI values (in relation to the ink prints) associated with prints in wet clay are another general pattern. I hypothesize that the presence of fewer ridges per centimeter is the result of the dovmward force used to impress the fingerprint into a 166

RCI Values for Femalel Fingerprints in Clay Sample GB-183

22.8

22.6 22 4

•9 22.2 —Fi;

21.6 21.4 -I - 21.2

Measuremont Stages

Figure 7.1 RCI Values for Femalel Fingerprints in Clay Sample GB-183 This is an example of the expansion-shrinkage-expansion pattern from wet, dry, and fired clay stages. The line represents the actual RCI values for a single individual's prints in clay from clay source GB-183. Stage l=Ink fingerprint of Femalel, Stage 2=Fingerprint in wet clay. Stage 3=Fingerprint in dry clay, Stage 4=Fingerprint in fired clay. plastic substance. This force acts differently on an immobile substrate such as paper.

Clay spreads slightly as this pressure is applied, which causes the resultant lower RCI value.

The third pattern in these data is associated with minor amounts of shrinkage as the clay dries. Higher RCI values were recorded for the dried samples, which indicate that as water evaporates from the clay mineral lattice structure, the clay minerals collapse inward causing the space between the fingerprint ridges to decrease. If the figurines were only dried and not fired, RCI values would need to be adjusted for this shrinkage. 167

However, firing at 500°C appears to expand these clays and reverse the upward trend of RCI values seen in the drying stage. This expansion counteracts the shrinkage that occurred in the previous step, and at this firing temperature, the RCI values approach that of the ink prints (Figure 7.2). The exact firing temperature of the archaeological figurines is unknown and it is possible that if they were fired at a temperature higher or lower than 500°C, the resulting RCI values may not match those from the ink prints so closely. Therefore, for the purposes of this research an assumption is being made that the firing temperature is similar between the archaeological artifacts and the clay shrinkage balls.

Comparison of RCI values for Fingerprints in Ink and Fired Clays

30

25

20 w 3 m > 15 - -

10

5 ir I

F1 F2 F3 F4 F5 Ml M2 M3 M4 M5 ;

Figure 7.2 Comparison of RCI Values for Fingerprints in Ink and Fired Clays Lines represent the RCI values for inked fingerprints and the fingerprints in all five fired clay samples for each individual. 168

The overall effect of these three stages of wet, dry, and fired clay produces RCI values

from fingerprints in fired Gila River clay that differ from the RCI values of the ink prints

by only 0.02 to 0.10 ridges/centimeter. These differences are minor,

and they are not significant enough to warrant any adjustments for shrinkage when

analyzing the archaeological fingerprints. Of course, this conclusion only applies for

those clay objects that were fired at a low temperature, and all figurines in this

assemblage were fired within this low range.

Fingerprint Ridge Counting Methods

Now that the introduction of bias as a result of clay shrinkage has been ruled out,

I outline my technique for identifying viable whole or partial fingerprints on the

figurines. Fingerprints sometimes can be difficult to recognize, and they are most easily

seen when impressed in clays that are fine-grained with little added tempering material. I

then discuss the technical aspects of ridge counting on the archaeological samples, which

are similar to those employed on the fingerprints in the clay shrinkage experiment.

Fingerprints can be found anywhere on the surface of a clay vessel, figurine, or

other artifact. However, there are certain parts of ceramic vessels and figurine bodies that

have higher incidences of fingerprint impressions. Ceramic jars tend to have a higher number of prints around the inside neck and rim of the vessel. This area is typically

unslipped and not highly polished, and this portion of the jar is often gripped by hand

while the potter turns the vessel during forming and finishing procedures. In certain parts of the world, like the Greater Southwest, corrugation is a finishing technique that creates 169 a textured exterior surface on the vessel (Figure 7.3). Unsmoothed coils are continuously indented with the side of a finger such as the thumb. These indentations usually preserve small fingerprint areas that may only contain 5-10 ridges, but can be clearly identified as

fingerprints (see Chapter 6 for dermatoglyphic study on corrugated ceramics). Other unfinished areas of the pot, including the base of both bowls and jars, are likely to preserve a fingerprint impression. It is probable that fingerprints were present on a large portion of the vessel during the forming stage, and these prints were then obliterated during the smoothing, polishing, or painting stages of production. Occasionally, a print may be visible in applied pigments, such as slips or paints, however this is rare.

Figure 7.3 Ceramic Sherd with Fingerprints Corrugated Ceramic (Tusayan White Ware, Moenkopi Corrugated sherd fi"om the Transwestem Survey Project Site 442-30) with Visible Fingerprints 170

Figurines also have certain areas that are more prone to retain fingerprints impressed into their surface. The majority of the figurine body, including the torso, arms, and legs, is less likely to carry remnants of prints. Instead, partial prints are often visible on portions of the face and head. The pinched nose on many Hohokam figurines is an exceptionally common area in which to find ridges (Figure 7.4). The top of the head and the sides of the face are other areas where finger ridges are often seen. These facial parts require more hand shaping and molding in a detailed manner and they are also areas that are more difficult to scrape smooth. I do not believe that they were purposefully placed on the figurines as a marker of any kind, and instead I believe that they are unintentionally placed traces of the individual manufacturing these human representations.

Figure 7.4 Example of Figurine Head and Features that Typically Exhibit Fingerprints (After Haury 1976:262) 171

The easiest way to locate and view the fingerprint impressions on the Snaketown and Grewe figurines is to rotate the object under an oblique, concentrated light source.

This light is most effective when placed at 45° from the angle of viewing, rather than as a source directly overhead. Angled light placement is ideal since it bounces over the ridges and magnifies their relief macroscopically.

Once identified, I measured the ridge count index for each of the 184 prints by first accurately recording the distance between the ridge impressions at either end of the visible print area. This distance is measured perpendicular to the trend of the ridges. I then counted the number of ridge impressions within this area that crossed the perpendicular line first measured. All measurements were taken with a digital caliper that was also used to determine ridge count indices for the sample of ethnographic fingerprints discussed earlier. This process was completed by viewing the ridge area under a zoom stereomicroscope at 25x magnification. Curvature of the figurine surface that exhibits the prints was not a problem during analysis because in all cases it was measured at less than 10° from the perpendicular. Since the fingerprints on these only slightly curved surfaces were partial and not whole they did not cover a large enough area

(<8.8mm) to warrant a curvature adjustment. Calculations of the RCI values completed with the curved distance produced ridge count indices that were lower by only 0.04 r/cm, and I determined that it was more precise to use a digital caliper rather than a flexible ruler for measurement. Therefore, the actual ridges counted were divided by the actual distance that they covered on the figurine, and then this value was converted into a ridges/centimeter ratio. This ratio, or ridge count index (RCI), is therefore consistently 172 measured for both the archaeological and ethnographic samples of fingerprints compared in this study. The following section contains the results of this comparative dermatoglyphic analysis, and all raw, ridge count data for the archaeological assemblage can be found in Appendix C.

Analysis of the Dermatoglyphic Data

The mean RCI for all 184 archaeological fingerprint samples is 28.2 r/cm, which is a relatively high mean ridge count index. However, the distribution of these ridge count values is much more meaningful since I am comparing these values to the distribution of ethnographic RCI values described in Chapter 6 (see Figure 7.5 and 7.6).

The values range between 16.0 and 45.0 r/cm, although the majority of samples are clustered between 24.0 and 33.0 r/cm. These archaeological samples form a jagged distribution with high peaks at 25, 28, 30, and 33 r/cm. Two lower peaks are present at

20 and 36 r/cm. The low points in between these peaks are likely a result of sample size, and not a truly multi-modal distribution. If the archaeological sample were larger, I believe that this distribution would fill in and smooth out, thereby reducing the size of these troughs in between the higher peaks.

The archaeological distribution shows 78.9% (n=145) of the Snaketown and

Grewe samples falling into the female range (24.7-37.5 r/cm), and 12.4% (n=23) falling into the male range (16.0-23.5 r/cm). A relatively large number of samples (n=14 or

7.6%) can be found in the ambiguous zone between 23.5 and 24.7 r/cm. In this range it is statistically impossible to determine if the fingerprints belong to a man or a woman because of overlap in the ethnographic assemblage. Therefore, in reality these values Figure 7.5 Distribution of Ridge Count Values for Archaeological Samples

Figure 7.6 Distribution of Ridge Count Values for Ethnographic Samples 174 may be split evenly between men and women or they may represent all females or all males. If I remove these values from the distribution and only consider those with a clear sex identity, then 86.3% of the archaeological fingerprints are female and 13.7% are male. Finally, there are two samples that are outliers on the upper end of the female range, and they have ridge count indices of 40.0 and 45.0 r/cm. These values are exceptionally high and simply may be female outliers that possess an inordinately large number of ridges per fingertip. It is also possible that these samples represent young children whose fingers have not yet grown enough to produce an adult RCI. Every person is bom with a permanent number of friction ridges, which does not increase or decrease throughout their life. So, children's fi-iction ridges are densely packed into a smaller surface area that increases as the child grows. This produces high RCI values in young children, which may account for the outliers in the archaeological assemblage. I discuss sex, age, and friction ridges in more detail in the following section.

An initial comparison between the archaeological and ethnographic assemblages indicates that these two distributions are similar in terms of their overall value ranges. In fact, the high and low values for the two distributions are nearly identical, which ftirther supports that the ethnographic assemblage is an appropriate genetic population against which to compare the archaeological fingerprints. If a genetic connection (at least on some level) between these two populations was nonexistent, then it is possible that the range of RCI values between them would be wildly disparate. However, that is not the case with these data and instead they are compatible for these analyses. 175

There are a couple of differences, though, when the distributions are viewed in a more detailed manner. First, the most obvious difference is that the archaeological distribution is not spread evenly between males and females, as is the ethnographic distribution. There are more females in proportion to males represented in the archaeological collection. I conclude that the larger number of women in this distribution is because more women than men were manufacturing these figurines at Snaketown and

Grewe.

Second, there are a relatively large number of individuals that are ambiguous as to sex. I do not know the reason for the large quantity of ambiguous fingerprints, and I feel that this may result from a number of different factors, such as population outliers or simply greater overlap in the RCI values for the male and female segments of the population. At this time it is impossible to differentiate between these and other possible factors with the current data.

Because I am arguing that sex is the primary determining factor in the dermatoglyphic differences visible in these assemblages, it is important to discuss the ways that both age and sex can affect friction ridge properties since both are active in determining friction ridge characteristics. In the following section, I present my arguments that support a strong connection between sex and ridge count indices, and I address recent research on ties between age and similar ridge count values.

Age vs. Sex

Both sex and age are linked to differences in dermatoglyphic characteristics. And in a recent article, Kamp et al. (1999:309) argue that "the high correlation between age 176 and ridge breadth allows an estimation of the age of the (ceramic) producer sufficient for separating adults' prints from those of children." They employ a definition of ridge breadth from Penrose (1968), where a measurement is taken from the center of one frirrow across the ridge to the center of the adjacent furrow. They measured ridge breadth pairs from the ink prints of 107 people, who come from a range of different ethnic backgrounds. From these measurements they produced regression equations for predicting age using average ridge breadth values (Kamp et al. 1999:312). They also measured ridge breadth pairs from the fingerprints of 101 individuals whose prints were impressed into clay tablets. This experiment was designed to test the validity of their conclusions when they did not have the ability to average ridge breadth pairs from all ten fingers of one individual. Clay shrinkage is always an issue when examining friction ridges that have been impressed into a plastic material, so Kamp et al. tested shrinkage levels using Sinagua area clays. The researchers recorded the prints of 105 people in clay tablets that were measured wet, dry, and after firing at 800°C. Shrinkage was minimal and therefore not statistically significant. And finally, they applied all of these pilot studies to an archaeological situation in the Sinagua region of northern Arizona.

Fingerprints on small animal figurines were contrasted with those found on corrugated ceramic vessels, such as Elden Corrugated and Sunset Corrugated, in order to differentiate between adult and child production. Fingerprints from a sample of 26 figurines and 31 corrugated vessels were compared with each other. They concluded that the smaller ridge breadths found on the figurines were indicative of children's prints, 177 while the larger ridge breadths of prints on the corrugated pots were those of adults. Yet, there is some cross-over, and several prints on the figurines fall into their adult age range.

Their results are provocative, and it is entirely possible that the animal figurines were constructed by children, which is the interpretation that Kamp et al. (1999) propose

(also see Kamp and Whittaker 1999). These figurines were recovered in much higher numbers than anthropomorphic figures similar to those from the Hohokam region, and the animal figures were crudely formed and even found in association with children's burials (Kamp and Whittaker 1999:60; Kamp et al. 1999). In contrast to this, the corrugated vessels were probably made by adult women in particular. The difference in their function and the context of their use indicates that these two artifact classes likely were manufactured by different segments of the community. In the Sinagua example, age differentiation therefore is more important in identifying the producers of these figurines. However, there are a couple of methodological problems with their work that warrant further discussion.

Kamp and her colleagues do not take into account the vast biological anthropology literature supporting sex differences in dermatoglyphic characteristics

(Arquimbau 1993; Buchi 1978; Cummins 1941; Cummins andMidlo 1976; Cummins et al. 1941; Flickinger 1976; Jantz 1975; Martin 1993; Meier 1978; Micle and Kobyliansky

1987; Milicic 1990; Ohler and Cummins 1942; Pospisil 1990; Sternberg 1975). Instead,

Kamp et al. (1999:314) claim that "while sex differences in ridge breadth are not insignificant in some populations, the magnitude of the difference is small enough that the effect would tend to be swamped by age differences." The reality of the situation is 178 that there are statistically substantial differences in male and female ridge counts in most populations, and Native Americans in the Greater Southwest are no exception. My analysis of an ethnographic fingerprint collection from southwestern Native Americans clearly indicates that there is a statistical difference between adult male and female ridge counts. The bimodal distribution of this assemblage is exceptionally strong, despite the genetically diverse population that it represents. Therefore, it is important to remember that both sex and age contribute to dermatoglyphic characteristics, and both can be isolated in studies measuring ridge count indices.

I do not believe that growth is a substantial factor in the determination of ridge count values when you employ a knovra adult sample of ridge count values for comparative purposes. Even Kamp et al. (1999) admit that their regression equation falls apart somewhat during the teenage years of puberty. The ridge breadth values they are using seem to greatly disperse during these teenage years, and they do not form a linear arrangement in this age segment (Kamp et al. 1999:312). Also, Battley's (1942) research has conclusively proven that there is no appreciable difference between the imprints of a person taken at the age of 16, and those taken when he or she has attained their maximum growth. Ordinarily, the variations resulting from growth of the ridges will be found to be no greater than those caused by the expansion of the ridges under pressure.

The only substantial difference in ridge count values is visible between very young children who have significantly higher RCI values, and adults who have lower

RCI values relative to these children. These children have RCI measurements well at the upper end of the female range, and I believe that the two outliers (40.0 and 45.0 r/cm) in 179 my archaeological assemblage represent the prints of young children under the age of twelve. Individuals in the pubescent years do present a problem, and it is possible that some of the archaeological samples in the female range instead represent teenagers of either sex. I think that it is impossible at this time to isolate these individuals, if they are contributing to the high number of female prints in the archaeological sample. The context and use of these figurines is therefore useful in determining if there is supporting evidence for the use of the artifacts as children's toys. However, teenagers may be engaged in the same activities and ritual processes that adults are participating in.

Sex, age, and ethnic background are all contributing factors to the size of friction ridges and their density on the fingertip. I argue that sex is a particularly important component of ridge count indices, and it is discernible in an archaeological context with a comparison to a population that has at least a minimal genetic connection. The genetic relationship between the ethnographic and archaeological samples from Snaketown and

Grewe is not direct. Yet, even though the ethnographic sample is diverse, it is limited to

Native Americans from the Greater Southwest. It is genetically-closer to the archaeological populations than the modem sample of people that Kamp et al. (1999) used as the basis of their regression equation. And the ethnographic prints that I employ are clearly separated into two modes based on sex, which is the most important argument for their use as a comparative collection.

Age certainly needs to be considered, and there is a clear difference between young children and adult ridge breadth measurements. However, sex rather than age is the predominant component behind the dermatoglyphic differences seen in prints from 180 the Snaketown and Grewe figurines. Adults can be separated from children using methods similar to those described by Kamp et al. (1999), and then a comparative collection of ethnographic prints can be employed to separate females from males within the adult group. Teenagers of both sexes and male children may be mistakenly interpreted as members of a different age or sex sub-group, but artifact function and context of use may help to evaluate these cases.

Context of Figurines Associated with Male Producers

Since women are often linked with the domestic world, it is not surprising that the majority of figurines used in Hohokam households were manufactured by women

(78.9%). However, the 12.4% of figurines that appear to have been produced by men are contrary to this assumption. Eleven of those figurines with an inferred male producer

(n=23) are associated with known proveniences that include houses and exterior pits

(Table 7.6). The single figurine fragment from Grewe that possessed a fingerprint impression was identified as produced by a male individual, however, the precise context of this figurine is unknown. The eleven figurines with known context were recovered from Snaketown, with ten coming from Pioneer period deposits and one from a

Pioneer/Colonial transitional context.

Only two figurine fragments (likely made by males) were recovered from the subfloor areas of houses in different portions of Snaketown, and all others were excavated from exterior pits in five different segments of the site. Two particular contexts stand out and provide interesting results. The first, pit 2 in section 1 IF, contains four fragments from different figurines and all four exhibit male fingerprints on their 181

Table 7.6 Context of Figurines Associated with Male Producers

Context Time Period Number Section 1 IF, Pit 2, Level 2 Pioneer 4 Section lOG, Pit under Level 7 Pioneer 1 Section 8E, Pit 1, fill Pioneer 1 Section lOE, Pit 7, fill Pioneer 1 Section lOE, Pit 8, fill Pioneer 1 Section lOF, Subfioor pit, House 13, Level 4 Pioneer 1 Section 6G, Subfioor pit. House 2 Pioneer 1 Arbitrary archaeological provenience Pioneer 12 Section IIG, Pit 12, Stratum 1, Level 5 Pioneer/Colonial 1 transition surfaces. It is possible that a single male individual (RCI values are 20.0, 20.0, 18.3, and

22 r/cm) was using this pit for repeated deposition of figurines that he was using in his household. Or, it may signify that several men, possibly relatives, where using the same context for deposition. Either way, this indicates continuity of figurine production by a man or men in this household.

A second pit located in section lOG of the site contains two figurine fragments that each exhibit partial fingerprints. One of these prints is from a male individual and one is from a female. In this case, two households may have been contributing refuse to the same context, or two people were responsible for figurine production in the same household. If two individuals were involved in the manufacture of figurines it is unclear if they were contemporaneous or living at different points in time. Nevertheless, both of these examples provide information about the range of variability in figurine production, and they indicate that both men and women were involved in this process and were possibly interacting with each other as part of this action. 182

Summary of Archaeological and Ethnographic Fingerprint Data

These data show that the ethnographic assemblage discussed in Chapter 6 is a good dermatoglyphic baseline for comparison against archaeological datasets in the

Greater Southwest. The archaeological and ethnographic assemblages share the same overall range of RCI values, with the exception of the two outliers at the upper end of the female archaeological range. I interpret these individuals as children, which accounts for their exceptionally high ridge count indices.

The clay shrinkage experiment indicated that no adjustments were necessary to account for expansion or shrinkage of the clay during the drying and firing process that would have occurred during figurine manufacture. Measurements of ridges per centimeter were recorded for 10 individuals while the local Gila River clays were wet, dry, and fired at SOO^C. Slight contraction of the clays occurred during drying, as the water of hydration evaporated from the lattice structure of these clays. However, these clays also expanded a small amount during firing which counteracted the shrinkage from the previous step. In the end, ridge count values for prints on the fired clay balls were comparable (differences of 0.02-1.0mm) to the ink print values, so no shrinkage adjustments were taken.

An analysis of the archaeological fingerprints indicates that more women than men were producing anthropomorphic figurines at the sites of Snaketown and Grewe.

This is an important discovery in light of the fact that the majority of the figurines exhibiting sex characteristics did represent adult women. Sometimes, the most logical explanation for a prevalence of female imagery in figurines is simply that most of them were made and used by women (Lesure 2000:600). I believe that this is true in the case of the Hohokam figurines discussed here, and I also think that women were the primary focus of this use. Yet, 12.4% of the figurines were potentially produced by men in their respective households, indicating that they were not excluded from this activity. These men may have fulfilled the same domestic roles in their houses as women in other households for a number of reasons. Women in these households may have died, moved out, or were never there in the first place. Or perhaps the household activity requiring figurines was occasionally performed by men for an other unknown reason. Of course, it is also possible that some of the female prints were made by adolescent males who were already involved in the practice of household ritual.

The Value of Future Dermatoglyphic Analyses in Archaeology

Dermatoglyphic analyses have a promising future in studies of prehistory, and they present us with a new avenue for identifying sex in the archaeological record. In order to increase the applicability of this type of research, there are several things that should be completed first. More modem Native American fingerprint samples need to be added to those that I have used in this research. In particular, the addition of different age groups beyond the adult classification would provide a better assemblage by which to clarify questions concerning sex, age, and differences in friction ridge characteristics.

Experimental tests should be conducted on fingerprints impressed into a range of different media, such as plaster, paint, or pitch. We could then assess if additional adjustments were needed when measuring ridge counts, in case different materials 184 respond uniquely to the force of impressing ridges into the substrate. Expansion and shrinkage tests for these media would be essential as well.

And finally, we must begin the process of accumulating a large database of ridge count values from a range of architectural features and other artifacts throughout the

Greater Southwest. This database would stimulate discussions of sex and gender in all areas of prehistoric life, and in both household and communal contexts. It would also increase the sample size such that we would see the full range of variation in dermatoglyphic characteristics in this region of the world. 185

CHAPTER 8

GENDERED AGENTS IN DOMESTIC HOHOKAM RITUAL

... the social world is made up of individuals who speak and act in meaningful ways; these individuals create the social world which gives them their identity and being, and their creations can only be understood through a process of interpretation. Henrietta Moore (1990:111)

Actors construct their social world through practice, and simultaneously both their way of living in this world and their identity are constituted symbolically. In fact, the process of identity creation itself can be a continuous and symbolic process. Prehistoric women and men were not constantly being acted upon, but instead they created, subverted, and were constrained by social customs. For archaeologists, the task is to focus on materiality and the tangible residues of these processes. "Materiality is intimately linked to doing and making, the sensuous process of human interactions with things" (Meskell 2004:64). Objects can signify the spaces in between the states of the present and past, and the living and dead. They cross boundaries of space, time, and geography. Scholars have long seen the qualities of materiality in the activation of memory, and as Foucault (1972) concludes, the reality of the past is embodied in the imagery and objects that represent it. Certain artifacts and sacred spaces, such as ancestral shrines, tombs, and memorials may be involved in the distribution of personhood beyond the physical body of the individual (Meskell 2004). In this sense, personhood can be extended through time and space, and it can trigger the processes of remembering and forgetting. 186

In this chapter I discuss ways that materiality, memory, and the creation of personhood are connected in the Hohokam regional system during the Pre-Classic period.

But first, I explore the function of anthropomorphic figurines in Hohokam households by examining their characteristics in comparison to the three hypotheses presented in

Chapter 4. The dermatoglyphic data and the sex of those individuals manufacturing the figurines are summarized, as seen in Chapter 7. I then argue that these figurines are being used primarily by women as a material connection between the living and the dead as part of ancestor ritual occurring in a domestic context. The making and venerating of an ancestral image can be a common, everyday behavior while at the same time being highly spiritual. The symbolic representation of ancestors and spirits undoubtedly was part of a larger village-wide cult structure, but we can glimpse it working in individual circumstances as part of a social organization that is centered around houses.

The Function of Figurines in the Hohokam Regional System

Anthropomorphic figurines are found throughout the Hohokam regional system, and they are remarkably similar in construction techniques, form, and contexts of use and disposal. At the sites of Snaketown and Grewe, which are located along the Gila River, large assemblages of figurines were recovered from Pioneer and Colonial period deposits.

During this time, these small ceramic figures were constructed of alluvial clay that was readily available along the river. They are simple in form with little ornamentation and few individualizing features, however many of the representations portray female sex characteristics. The vast majority of them are intentionally broken at patterned points on the figurine body, and they are also frequently burned in localized areas such as the legs 187 and back of the torso. Use-wear and mutilation are extremely rare occurrences in this assemblage. At the end of their use lives, these items were deposited alongside other forms of domestic refuse outside of the home, or they were left in household features.

These figurines were clearly used in a household context and then discarded as common everyday items.

Ancestor ritual, curing and healing ritual, and children's play time were the three possible areas of figurine use explored in Chapter 4. In light of the figurine characteristics, a reappraisal of these three hypotheses for figurine use indicates that these representations were likely ftinctioning as ancestral images in domestic rituals designed to maintain ties to past relatives. Certain attributes (burning, breakage, and disposal) of these figures are similar to those seen in artifacts of healing and curing ritual, however other characteristics are incongruous with this hypothesis. For example, ritual intended to counteract witchcraft or evil often requires effigies which are considered charms and may even be worn on the body for protection (Reynolds 1963:69-79). These frequently exhibit polish or other forms of wear irom extended handling over a period of time.

Figurines that healers manipulate often exhibit varying degrees of mutilation that were inflicted post-firing. The Snaketown and Grewe figures do not possess these characteristics, and I therefore conclude that the assemblage was not used in healing and curing ritual.

Clearly these items were not the play things of younger children, as evidenced by both the contextual data and the dermatoglyphic data. The figures were not heavily worn, chipped, and broken in ways that indicate they were used as toys. Also, my conclusion 188 that nearly all fingerprints (RCI values) on the figurines belonged to adult individuals further supports that these artifacts were not manufactured by children. The use of these figurines as healing and curing objects or as toys has been ruled out by comparing their characteristics to those identified by the ethnographic and ethnohistoric literature as compiled by Ucko (1962, 1968).

Therefore, I argue that these figurines were specifically produced for participation in ancestor veneration ceremonies that formed the basis of a community-wide ancestor cult. They exhibit all of the cross-cultural characteristics, based on ethnographic and ethnohistoric data, which were described in Chapter 4. The high preponderance of female sex attributes and the dominance of female figurine producers leads me to conclude that women were the primary actors in ancestor ritual within the household.

This is a common practice worldwide, although among the Hohokam, the dermatoglyphic evidence identifies male individuals who are also participating in this ritual by manufacturing figurines.

Ancestors, Figurines, and Women in the Hohokam Household

Ancestor worship among the Hohokam can be most easily connected to the household during the Pioneer and Colonial periods. Figurines that appear to represent primarily female ancestor images have been found in houses and in domestic refuse at

Snaketown and Grewe during this time. They are not directly associated with cremation materials or interment events at this time, even though other artifacts such as stone palettes, stylized projectile points, and censors were found in burial contexts (Bayman 189

2001:279). However, during the Sedentary period both the manufacturing techniques for anthropomorphic figurines and their contexts of use and disposal change dramatically.

After A.D. 900, figurines were no longer solid full-body representations. They were instead hollow faces constructed from white kaolin clay that was modeled around a stem of an unknown perishable material, and in fact a fibrous impression of this material is often visible on the inside of the head (Figure 8.1 is an example of these heads). The reason for these changes in figurine form and construction is unknown, however it is likely tied to alterations in ancestor ritual that were also occurring at this time. These later images exhibit much greater facial detail and more reaUsm than the earlier figures from the Pioneer and Colonial periods. As a result of this attention to facial detail, the clay was carefully smoothed thereby eliminating any partial fingerprints that may have been impressed into the surface. The context of their deposition also changed, and these items were directly associated with cremation deposits rather than domestic refuse.

Haury (1976:260) observed that the two clay heads recovered from Cremation 20;5F

Figure 8.1 Figurine Head from Sedentary Period, Sacaton Phase (After Haury 1976:260). 190 were "subjected to such intense heat in the crematory fire that the clay became viscous and bubbly." It seems likely that these figurines were still used in some form of ancestor veneration since they were clearly associated with cremated remains. But, the exact nature of these practices was transformed into something different than the earlier form of household-based ancestor worship. These rituals may have become more public, even if still instigated and carried out by the immediate household of the deceased individual.

The activation of an ancestral memory may still have been the primary goal of such practice. And, the fact that there are more recognizable attributes of clothing and adornment on these figurines may suggest that they were signifying differences in identity.

Large cremation cemeteries were used throughout the Hohokam regional system until around A.D. 1100, and then inhumation became the preferred method of interment.

Figurines were no longer present in either household or burial contexts, and it is unclear if ancestor veneration was practiced during the Classic period. Haury (1976) argued that the absence of figurines, censors, and stone palettes at this time, confirmed that ancestor worship was no longer part of household ritual. These markers of individual identity may have become obsolete, but their disappearance from the archaeological record does not preclude the continued practice of ancestor veneration in another form. Instead, platform mounds may have functioned as more public, communal markers for legitimizing ancestral memory and hereditary rights to resources and land. During the Sedentary period ancestor ritual was already a much more public ceremony which was focused 191 around the cremation event itself. This type of commemoration may have then been further transformed throughout the Classic period.

After A.D. 1150, migrants from northern communities located above the

Mogollon Rim began to move south into areas like the Tonto Basin and the San Pedro

Valley. These populations were integrating into established communities, and "platform mound settlement organization offered an institutional context for ideologically mediating different ethnic divisions in Classic period Hohokam and Salado society"

(Bayman 2001:287). Compounds and platform mounds may have also created a different structure for maintaining ancestral linkages during this time of social and political change.

Ancestor Worship and the Socioeconomic Climate of the Hohokam

During the Pioneer and Colonial periods, small ceramic figurines were formed in representation of either specific or generic ancestors. The specific ancestors may have included all deceased household members, or more likely, the living targeted certain individuals for veneration. Therefore, worship may not have extended equally to all members of a lineage upon their death. It would have been preferentially employed when a particularly important or influential member of the family died, and the practice of their worship would have served a number of structures within the larger house group.

The men and women responsible for forming these images and carrying out the daily practice involved in ancestor ritual were helping to define the social identity of the household. They were activating and making real a connection between the past, the living, and the future. At the same time they were metaphorically writing their own 192

personal histories through the maintenance of social memory. And they were perhaps

consciously or unconsciously fostering a pattern of increasing social or economic

inequality by maintaining the ancestral connections to land and other valuable resources.

I propose that this daily practice took place within a larger community-wide framework

that can be defined as an ancestor cult. Cults extend beyond the reach of a single

household, yet they are less inclusive than large-scale religion. Regional cults promote

the flow of goods, services, and both ritual and secular knowledge across spatial

boundaries (Crown 1994:223). They can occur in all types of societies and they can be

either egalitarian or exclusive. Turner (1974; 185) argues that "ancestral cults and

political cults and their local embodiments tend to represent crucial power divisions and

classificatory distinctions within and among politically discrete groups..." Therefore, a

Hohokam ancestor cult would have represented a more exclusive form of organization

based within the household. The following cultural and environmental history of Pre-

Classic period Hohokam communities forms the background for a discussion of ancestor

ritual, households, wealth, and population growth.

The Social and Environmental Conditions of the Pre-Classic Period Hohokam

During the Pre-Classic period, irrigation communities were prevalent along the

Salt and Gila rivers, and villages within this system relied on canal water to grow many

crops. However, other methods of farming and resource exploitation were also occurring. Masse (1991) discusses two main types of land use: zonal and disjunctive.

Zonal land use describes a system where resources exist in distinct bands or zones that radiate out from the residential portion of the village. These areas may be farmed 193 through floodwater irrigation, canal irrigation, or dry farming. Disjunctive land use involves the regular exploitation of noncontiguous land segments for farming or the gathering of other resources. These areas may be located substantially further from the residential area and may even be several kilometers from each other. Both zonal and disjunctive methods were operating during the Pioneer and Colonial periods.

Irrigation community networks typically included a number of villages which were frequently spaced in a regular maimer fi-om one another. This spacing may indicate that each community was maintaining its own primary resource zones immediately surrounding the residential area (Masse 1991). As population increased throughout the

Pre-Classic period, terrace irrigation was added to some sites. This may have foreshadowed developments in the early Classic period, which are associated with increasing agricultural intensification, along with increases in dry farming techniques and agave cultivation.

Snaketown and Grewe were the largest villages during the Pioneer and Colonial periods, yet there are still widely disparate theories about the population of each.

Population estimates for Snaketown have ranged fi-om 300 people (Doelle 1995) up to

2000 individuals (Haury 1976) based on different methods of house discovery during excavation (Dayman 2001:274). The low estimates are probably the result of not including a large number of missed pithouses in the calculations, which implies that the higher estimates may be more accurate.

At Grewe, Craig's (2001c) demographic study indicates that there were 300-350 people at the site during the Pioneer period. By the middle Colonial period (A.D. 825- 194

875), population had increased to 800 to 1000 individuals, and after this time, it decreased and never reached these numbers again before the site was vacated. Craig argues that this increase is at least partly the result of immigration into the site with the establishment of new courtyard groups. At its height, the Grewe population was just below the ethnographic thresholds triggering the presence of highly differentiated leaders. "Although there are no indications that the population of Grewe ever exceeded the carrying capacity of the local environment, population pressure still may have put a strain on the productive capabilities of the irrigation system at different points in time"

(Craig 2001c:48).

Recent stream flow reconstructions that are based on dendroclimatological and modem discharge data for the upper Gila River are useful for assessing agricultural productivity (Graybill et al. 1999). The Pioneer period and most of the Colonial period both exhibited fairly predictable flow magnitudes. So even though there were periods of high and low productivity, flows were usually predictable for a number of years at a time.

However, during the early Colonial period (A.D. 725-775), huge floods characterized the flow pattern. The late A.D. 740's were a time of great uncertainty, and there must have been at least some resource stress at this time. When population is growing and the agricultural productivity system is stressed, the demands on each household are increased. Those households with access to more viable agricultural land, or land that does not flood extensively would be more likely to accumulate surpluses and develop wealth over time (Fish and Fish 2000). These house groups would be particularly concerned with furthering their hereditary claims to land through the honoring of their 195 ancestors. The maintenance of this link between the living and the dead would therefore be both personally commemorative and of economic value.

Large extended family (defined as genetic and other relationships) residences can be another consequence of increasing population when labor and production demands on a household are increasing substantially (McAnany 1995). The great changes in social and political organization that occurred during the Pre-Classic to Classic period transition among the Hohokam may be the result of increasing political centralization or a more formalized system of socioeconomic inequality. Further study of household ritual and changes in the manner that ancestors are venerated during this time would greatly increase our knowledge of these larger changes occurring on a community-wide scale.

Sometimes the key to understanding dramatic transitions, such as that seen at the boundary of the Pre-Classic and Classic periods, is often found mirrored in smaller scale change at the household level.

Ancestor Ritual and Ties to the Land

In the mid-1990's, McAnany's (1995) work on Mayan ancestor veneration opened the door for discussions of the origins of hereditary claims to land. Spaces are continually used and reused, and genealogy can be expressed through this cycle. The practice of this worship and the physical presence of interments or cremations in specific locations create a text-free genealogy. During the Pioneer and Colonial periods in the

Hohokam area, I argue that ancestor veneration was used to establish some of the first rights to land or other resources in this portion of the Greater Southwest by extending the lives of deceased household members. The household members may have joined the 196 household in a variety of ways, and I think that Hohokam kinship was probably bilateral.

Irrigation was likely done at social scales that were suprahousehold in organization and based on labor input (Fish and Fish 2000).

Rights to Land and Other Important Resources

Ancestors can be used to mark a familial tie to certain places or rights (McAnany

1995). In this sense, ancestors are venerated by name so that their descendants can inherit certain places and resource rights, and frequently in ancient Mayan residences, ancestors were even buried within residential compounds, establishing a physical and spiritual presence over time. This pattern may be the result of a developing system of land tenure and fixed plots that were active during the Formative period in Mesoamerica.

McAnany (1995) claims that the extreme form of ancestor veneration which can be termed divine kingship, emerged from the agrarian system of ancestor worship.

Therefore, new elites appropriated these practices for their own use in the political realm rather than simply the agricultural realm.

This discussion of kingship and elite ancestor veneration is of course not directly applicable to my research on the Hohokam, yet McAnany's study of the beginnings of ancestor worship at Formative period Mayan settlements is particularly appropriate. She

(1995:33-39) finds that the primary practices associated with ancestor veneration are feasting, bloodletting, sacrifice, other female-dominated domestic ritual, and creating images of the ancestors. This social practice of creating ancestors is an indicator of the partitioning of land into exclusionary tracts that are passed along hereditary lines. "When we detect archaeologically the selective social practice of creating ancestors, this 197 indicates that proprietary resource rights have already crystallized, generally at the level of a macrofamily grouping such as a lineage" (McAnany 1995:110). Therefore, the family (as defined by a household) becomes the resource-holding group, and this overall process is probably a direct result of subsistence intensification.

It is important to realize that a household may be actively participating in the honoring of their ancestors in only one or two house structures within the larger extended family. This pattern would account for the more dispersed but uniform figurine distribution at both Snaketovm and Grewe. Those houses containing figurines were practicing ancestor worship for a family (possibly self-defined or bilateral rather than lineage-based) group larger than the specific house structure associated with the figures.

Strong houses have the best land, which fosters an emerging system of inequality as these family groups gain household wealth over generations. And within this multi-house family, social heterogeneity is also present internally. Links between ancestors and land certainly do not promote economic equality, and instead they can support differential access to resources and status at a number of levels.

Craig's (2001b, 2004) work on domestic architecture and household wealth at the

Grewe site provides further support for socioeconomic inequality that can be associated with ancestor worship. By focusing on the relationship between variability and Hohokam household organization, he determines an architectural value of wealth, which identifies small-scale differences in wealth between houses and house clusters. Craig found that there was increasing inequality throughout the Pioneer and Colonial periods, and this inequality appears to be tied to increasing population. Therefore, the practice of ancestor 198 veneration, population growth, and a hereditary tie to resources all seem to be interconnected factors that together can affect household wealth.

A closer look at the houses Craig found to be most expensive exposes a connection between anthropomorphic figurines and these households. Construction costs were calculated for 123 pithouses at the Grewe site, and these were divided into four categories: inexpensive, average, expensive, and very expensive (Craig 2001b:124-127).

The most expensive structure at the site was Feature 427 and the least expensive was

Feature 87. In addition, one particular courtyard, courtyard 23 in Residential Area B, contained five of the ten most expensive houses in the project area. Both of these contexts contained more ceramic figurines than any other single house or refuse deposit.

Structures in Courtyard 23 were associated with 25 separate figurines or figurine fragments, and the single greatest concentration of figurines in one house (n=7) occurred in Feature 427. There appears to be a clear link between very expensive and expensive houses and the presence of anthropomorphic figurines in these structures. Large numbers of figurines were not deposited in or associated with inexpensive houses such as Feature

87, which supports the idea that figurines and ancestor veneration were used to further household ties to resources. Wealthier households would be more concerned with maintaining the profitable lands and resources that they already controlled, while poorer households would be more interested in finding new opportunities.

Emergent social inequality can be tied to population growth and ancestor veneration, and the "corporate nature of lineal social structure provides a viable mechanism of social differentiation" (McAnany 1995:11). This can then become 199 institutionalized over time. Over a number of household generations, these processes can further accelerate, leading to the formation of a much more highly stratified society in which ancestor veneration may eventually transform into a community-wide ritual. This may have occurred during the Classic period among the Hohokam, and thus we see a corresponding decrease in the use of figurines during this period.

The social organization that best describes the Preclassic period Hohokam is the house society concept, first proposed by Levi-Strauss (1982). Houses, rather than individuals or families, were the subjects of rights and obligations, and the materialization and perpetuity of the house over time were most important (Gillespie

2000). It is more productive to view the populations of Snaketown and Grewe as groups of houses, where the dynamic quality of kin-like, economic, ritual, and co-residential relations are enacted within both the symbolic and physical boundaries of the house.

These social groups create house-centered relationships that individuals use to define their responses to certain situations, such as when property rights are challenged. "As for people who must maintain the house, they assume a physical and social 'place' - they are given an identity for themselves and a Iramework for interacting with others - by their membership within, or attachment to, a house" (Gillespie 2000:27). Ancestor ritual among the Hohokam would have played an important role in sustaining the perpetuity of the household through generations of household members. Within house societies, unequal access to different types of property differentiates houses from one another, and this contributes to increasing hierarchy. Therefore, houses are pervasive structures that situate social identities within the community as a result of the daily actions carried out 200 within and around their confines. It is important to remember that a house can comprise a single physical structure, several structures, or some other designated area. The activation of ancestral memory is a significant component of Hohokam houses that helps members perpetuate the household from which their very identity is at least partially derived.

The Materiality of Memory and Commemoration

The process of remembering is often equated with commemoration, and at communal levels this is materialized in large-scale monuments, shrines, and other public spaces. On a smaller scale it can be found in domestic ritual such as ancestor veneration.

Memory refers to the recognition and recall necessary to access to those things that are already known, but perhaps suppressed. Implicit memory is non-declarative and it retains the knowledge for our skills and habits, and explicit memory is conscious and apparent in the experience of remembering (Joyce 2003:106). "The network of memory is associative, not hierarchical or categorical. Associative structures of memory are inherently personalized, uniquely differentiated by experience, within the bounds of similar associations promoted by common enculturation" (Joyce 2003:107). Over time, memories can become less literal and they may enter long-term memory as a translation of the original reality. This translation or representation is created by incorporating previous knowledge into the memory. How does the materiality of everyday life contribute to the construction of this social memory among the Hohokam? And how do figurines and ancestor worship, in particular, perpetuate the social identity of the household? 201

Joyce (2003) claims that Mayan writing systems and calendars were technologies of memory. I think that the practice of forming and activating ancestor figures is also a small-scale technology of memory that employs both explicit and implicit memory. It is important to remember that multiple memories can be present within one material form.

The Hohokam figurines, or materializations of memory, were functioning within the household, but the knowledge required to manufacture and use these figures of similar form was community-wide. Although, I do not mean to imply that there is any sanctioned control over the household ritual employing these figurines, since they are widespread throughout the Hohokam region and they are not limited to specific houses or portions of a site. Instead, I argue that the power held in these ancestral relationships was widely acknowledged and part of a regional ancestor cult at sites like Snaketown and

Grewe. Each household or family unit (which may include more than one house structure), regardless of social or economic status, was actively controlling the worship of their related ancestors in an effort to increase the prosperity of the household and to support long-held claims to land and other resources. And the females, as based on dermatoglyphic data, in each of these households were the primary progenitors who were maintaining the hereditary lines vital for the continuance of these claims over a long time span. Although this practice was not limited to strict gender roles since 12.4% of the ancestor figurines were constructed by men. Through time, these rituals were transformed into a more public ceremony during the Sedentary period, with the deposition of figurines directly into the crematory fire. 202

Memory is an everyday practice that is intricately tied to the process of forgetting

(Joyce 2003). Each ancestral memory can only endure in sustained contexts, and habitual bodily practice is necessary to embed these images in the explicit memory of those living in the household and in the larger community. This maintenance occurs as memory is performed, in either auditory or visual ritual. The act of forming the Hohokam figurines is the first step in this ritual process, and it is a substantial part of the veneration practice.

The exact nature of the remaining figurine activation and ritual use is not known, yet it is apparent that at some point in the life history of these objects, they are no longer needed or they are replaced by new figurines. These new figurines may represent newly deceased individuals that are addressed by name, or they may simply symbolize a more amorphous group of generic family ancestors who required a new material representation for various reasons. Either way, replacement and forgetting are natural components of this process. As Joyce (2003:108) reminds us, "if we were not constantly forgetting things, we would soon be as incapable of functioning as people left without continuous memory."

The social persona of these ancestral individuals is expressed in this form of household ritual, and at the same time the living people involved in this practice are enacting relationships through this ritual that help to define their own personhood. These relationships can exist between different people, people and groups, different groups, people and material objects, and the living and the dead (Gillespie 2001). Ideas of personhood have been continually linked with mortuary practices because of the social, political, and economic relationships negotiated between the living and the deceased. 203

"The dead, who are often transformed into ancestors or other forms of spirits as the result of fiinerary rites, are resignified at the time of death rituals and also in subsequent actions that may involved handling their curate remains and in rites of commemoration that innovate social memories of the dead for political ends" (Gillespie 2001:78). Figurines used in ancestor ritual are material symbols of the social relationship formed by living persons between themselves and those that have died. The end of a figurine's use-life does not necessarily end this relationship, and instead it may simply change the active nature of the interaction.

The termination of Hohokam figurine use is characterized by purposeful breakage at the neck and the tops of the legs. The destruction of these figures prior to their disposal in domestic refuse is consistent with the interpretation that breakage somehow disembodied the ancestral spirit from the small clay image in human form. And it was then possible to dispose of them in everyday trash with other common domestic items.

This disposal can be thought of as a metaphorical forgetting of ancestors far removed from their living descendants. The continual cycle of ancestor replacement may mirror the cycle of forgetting and remembering that characterizes all other forms of social memory. Whether these figurines were broken and deposited shortly after the burial of an ancestor, or were kept active in the house for a longer period of time, forgetting (even if only metaphorical) may be an important component of this ritual. It is currently impossible to determine the actual length of time between figurine manufacture and disposal at the sites of Snaketown and Grewe. Therefore, it is also conceivable that these artifacts were created and immediately used as an act of remembrance, and then they 204 were quickly discarded after the ceremony. In this case, the formal process of forgetting may not have been a necessary component of the disposal process. Regardless, these

Hohokam ancestor figurines strengthened individual memory and shaped shared social memory at the same time. They also played a strategic role by legitimizing claims to family-controlled or owned resources and thereby contributed to the practice of inheritance. In the following section, I have summarized the literature concerning ancestor veneration in order to emphasize the commonalities in these beliefs across different societies. These ethnographic examples provide a picture of the daily practice involved in fostering these ancestral relationships.

Ancestor Ritual and Figurines from an Ethnographic Perspective

All communities which practice some form of behavior that honors the ancestors, employ artifacts which are activated by the living. These objects may take many forms, yet they all seem to embody remembered lives. And all seem to "symbolize the coalescence of lineage and locale" (McAnany 1995:110). Even in modem Western society, there is much ceremony and commemoration surrounding cemeteries and funerals on a regular basis so that memories are maintained and living relatives are linked to those that are deceased (Figure 8.2).

There is ample cross-cultural ethnographic evidence that supports a connection between figurines and the representation of human ancestors as a tangible way of opening up a line of communication between the living and the dead (Kerns 1983; Marcus 1998;

Rattray 1923, 1927). These figurines represent specific individuals even though many of them look identical to one another, and presumably this is a result of geneonymy, which 205

Figure 8.2 Graves from a Single Family in the Bisbee Cemetery (Photograph taken by the author). simply means to call an ancestor by name (Marcus 1998;19; Newell 1976). The practice of using a specific ancestor's name is enough to call then to the occasion and it is this act which creates a connection between the two worlds. Therefore, the figurines need not be individualized in any way for the ritual to be effective. Their presence provides a real, material avenue for the ancestral spirit to return (Fortes 1976), and for this same reason the age of the portrayal is unimportant for ritual effectiveness. In fact, there are some

Chinese communities that prefer to view their ancestors as they were physically at a younger age when they were healthy and active (Ahem 1973). 206

Most ethnographic research has focused on the material objects of ancestor veneration, which are not directly associated with the funeral process itself These artifacts are often employed in ceremony post-dating the actual burial in order to reestablish contact with the particular ancestor being honored. However, items that create a tangible connection to ancestor spirits occasionally do play a direct role in funerary rites. These objects are most commonly visible during ritual centered on reburials and exhumations that occur over time. Among certain communities in south

China, corpses are frequently interred, only to be exhumed at a later date and placed in ceramic vessels located on a specific nearby hill (Freedman 1966). This exhumation prolongs the funerary rites of these individuals, so that the burial is not limited to a single discrete event but a series of events over a specified length of time. In Neolithic Chinese villages, small ceramic figurines and clay tablets were constructed just after the death of a relative and the subsequent burial of this person in or near the house structure (Ahem

1973; Hsu 1948).

In Afi-ica, the LoDagaa also practice a more protracted form of funerary ritual that is relatively elaborate and helps to ease tensions that develop after a family member's death (Goody 1962). Through these burial ceremonies, a deceased relative is transformed into an ancestor over the course of these rituals. A number of objects, including figurines and other sacrificial items, are constructed at the beginning of this process and they are then used long after the actual death of the individual so that contact is maintained

(Fortes 1965). In both this example and that of the Chinese villages, the original manufacture of these figurines and other artifacts was tied to the ceremony directly 207 surrounding death and burial. They were then continually activated, often by women, in household ritual after the ftanerary rites were concluded. Symbolic feeding of the representations was necessary to appease the ancestor spirit it was embodying and to ensure their help and blessings.

If we rely on the ethnographic and ethnohistoric records, then it becomes clear that women are often those who perpetuate ancestor ritual, and figurines can form an important part of these honoring ceremonies. Therefore, it seems logical that there is also a connection between women and these ceramic ancestor representations. Divination may be closely tied to these events and women would have also taken a leadership role in these rituals (Marcus 1998).

Women and Ancestors

In communities where ritual is the means to integration, ritual creates material culture and social ties within and between families in the same village. And as part of this, it connects families with their ancestors. It appears that in many societies these ritual tasks that tie the living to the dead are carried out by the women in the community who are frequently thought of as the managers of kin relations. Marcus (1998) argues that the female segment of society maintains the ancestral ties and is responsible for the ritual needed to support it. This ritual would have occurred primarily in the domestic sphere where women were in control, and men's ritual was therefore conducted outside of the home. She summarized Zapotec ethnographic information that describes women not only participating in the honoring of ancestors, but also water divination and healing. 208

Both of these practices took place in the traditionally female domain of the household as

well.

The Black Carib women of Belize and Guatemala are an excellent example of a

group of women who nurture kin ties in the community and subsequently are prominent

in the ritual system (Kems 1983). The majority of lineal kin obligations fall to women as

mothers and daughters (Di Leonardo 1997; Prior 1997; Stack 1997), and among the

Black Carib, daughters take care of their aging parents and then organize the necessary

ritual once they have died. As mothers, they protect their children throughout their lives,

and both of these roles (mother and daughter) are associated with strength. Women's

roots are in the world of kinship and community while men tend to see their lives

suspended somewhere between home and the world outside the community (Kems 1983).

Black Carib ancestor rituals serve one major purpose, which is to satisfy the needs

of the dead so that the living are protected from harm or illness. The ceremonies are

rather festive although with a singular purpose of sharing food and drink with the living

and the dead. The cooperative work required to put the ritual together and the

distribution of food to a group of people beyond the immediate family express tmst, generosity, and kinship (Kems 1983). Interestingly, many of these ritual events that take

place once a relative has been deceased for some period of time are thought to be requested by the ancestor, and usually the message is passed along through a dream or a

close relative. These events are organized by and mostly attended by women in the community who maintain this contact with the ancestral world. They primarily take

place in household spaces such as courtyards or even the home, and the deceased is often 209 represented by some of their former clothing. However, in many other societies the ancestor is identified with other forms of material culture, such as figurines.

Another example connecting women with the worship of their ancestors is found in a number of Chinese villages (Ahem 1973). Specifically, the Taiwanese practice ancestor worship is carried out by revering their ancestors in ancestral halls and by ritually maintaining wooden ancestral tablets in the domestic realm. Their cult of the dead employs these ancestral tablets as markers of ancestral household lines that then serve to define the larger kinship system (Ahem 1973). Women are in charge of storing, ritually using, and destroying the tablets as part of normal household activities, and these items are fi-equently entering the archaeological record as refuse because they are destroyed after several years of use. New tablets are continually being constructed as close relatives die over time.

Ancestors reside at that critical point balanced between past and future, and their presence both materially and symbolically supports social and economic claims made by their descendants (McAnany 1995). Therefore, ancestor veneration can be an extremely powerful organizing force for all segments of the population regardless of socioeconomic status. The daily practice of this worship in the household draws power from the past and focuses it into renewed growth and maintenance of the family unit.

One of the most important contributions of families is of course descendants.

These individuals perpetuate the ritual connection to their ancestors, who may be their parents. Both men and women can maintain this link; however women are the primary participants in ancestor worship which occurs in a domestic setting. This link between 210 female ancestors and female descendants results in the production of a greater number of figurines in female form. In fact, Roosevelt (1988) argues that in those communities where female figurines are most abundant and where they are deposited in domestic refuse, houses, individual burials, and caches (rather than communal ritual spaces or features), economic and demographic changes were occurring. These groups may be undergoing an intensification of staple food crop production, and women may have gained in status because of their dual roles in production and reproduction. This process would be intensified if property and rank were passed along female lines.

It is important to remember that both generic and specific ancestors can be the focus of this ritual (Hodder and Cessford 2004:32). Both named ancestral individuals and the generic class of ancestral spirits can be represented and embodied in small human images or figurines. These figures are valuable components in house ritual and they function to initiate and maintain connections between living and deceased portions of the same family through daily practice. "Ancestor veneration, as a creative social practice, is about naming and claiming - naming progenitors, naming descendants, and by virtue of these proper nouns establishing proprietary claims to resources" (McAnany 1995:xi).

Among the Hohokam, rights to land and other resources were probably bilateral and focused on the perpetuity of the house itself, rather than being passed fi-om one generation to the next in a lineal manner.

Summary

The primary aim of this research has been to expand our knowledge of households and particularly household ritual in the Greater Southwest. It is clear ft-om 211 this examination of figurines that ritual occurred in the house on a frequent, regular basis in the form of ancestor veneration. The active worshipping of ancestors does appear to be preferentially tied to female gender roles; however this practice may affect gender relations in households where men were found to be the primary actors in this ritual. The honoring of deceased relatives helps living individuals construct their own social biographies by providing an ancestral context for their past. And it also provides a glimpse into how the Hohokam employed memory and commemoration as part of daily practice. Household ritual can have larger socioeconomic implications beyond the individual family unit. This particular form of ritual behavior may be tied to status and power differentiation between families by emphasizing the value of hereditary resource entitlements. There are differences in wealth between households during the Pioneer and

Colonial periods and access to prime agricultural land and other resources would have been extremely important for the maintenance of these status differences.

Other goals of this research include determining the nature of figurine use in the household, specifically how they functioned and who was constructing them. The value of dermatoglyphic methods was tested and proven, and it is clear that fingerprint impressions exist on artifacts and are useful for pinpointing sex in the archaeological record. Dermatoglj^hic analyses in this research indicate that gender relations in the household may have been more complicated in prehistory than commonly acknowledged.

Finally, ancestor ritual can greatly affect both individual and family social life histories, which significantly impact the formation of personhood and identity. Therefore, house 212 identity was largely determined by house history among the Hohokam during the Pioneer and Colonial periods.

During the Colonial period changes were beginning to occur in the role that figurines played in ancestor ritual. Anthropomorphic representations were being produced in far fewer numbers than in the early Pioneer period, although at this time they were stylistically identical to the earlier figures and were deposited in the same types of contexts. Therefore, they seem to be foreshadowing the later changes in ritual that are more dramatic during the Sedentary period and altogether different at the onset of the

Classic period. Communal ritual seems to overshadow domestic ritual during the Classic period and this may be the result of further increasing population levels that necessitated the introduction of ritually integrative mechanisms functioning at suprahousehold levels.

It is also possible that communal ritual was used to differentiate between different residential compounds in specific contexts. Either way, house-based ancestor ritual appears to fade away entirely during the Classic period. Household ritual was an important component of the perpetuation of Pioneer period houses, and it appears to have played an integral role in how men and women created and defined their own personhood within the house. 213

APPENDIX A

FIGURINE ATTRIBUTE DATA

Key to Data Coding:

Part 1 Head 2 Torso 3 Head and torso 4 Torso and leg(s) 5 Cylindrical segments 6 Leg with upturned foot 6.1 Rounded appendage 6.2 Blunt appendage 6.3 Pointed appendage 6.4 Spatulate appendage 6.5 Rectangular appendage 7 Head/torso/leg 8 Whole figurine 9 Other

Sex 1 Female 2 Male 3 Indeterminate (torso missing)

Pregnant 1 Yes

Burning 1 Slight burning 2 Moderate burning 3 Severe burning

Use-wear 1 Slight use-wear 2 Moderate use-wear 3 Severe use-wear 214

Breakage 1 Yes (at either the neck or top of the legs)

Mutilation 1 Yes

Context 1 House (within or in subfeature) 2 Exterior pit 3 Refuse mound 4 Cremation 5 Other (archaeological trench or on surface) 215

TIME USE-

1 44947 SN Pioneer 6.01 2 44949 SN Pioneer 6.01 3 44362 SN Pioneer 6.01 1 4 44947 SN Pioneer 6.03 1 5 44947 SN Pioneer 6.03 6 44947 SN Pioneer 5 7 43350 SN Colonial 9 8 44947 SN Pioneer 6.03 3 9 43554 SN Pioneer 6.03 2 10 43554 SN Pioneer 6.03 3 11 43554 SN Pioneer 9 12 43554 SN Pioneer 9 13 43554 SN Pioneer 4 3 2 14 43554 SN Pioneer 5 15 43554 SN Pioneer 5 16 43554 SN Pioneer 6.02 17 43554 SN Pioneer 6 18 43554 SN Pioneer 5 19 43554 SN Pioneer 5 20 45021 SN Pioneer 6.05 3 21 43554 SN Pioneer 2 3 22 43554 SN Pioneer 6.02 23 43554 SN Pioneer 6.03 24 43350 SN Colonial 6.02 2 25 47484 SN Pioneer 6.05 3 26 47473 SN Pioneer 6.05 3 27 44853 SN Pioneer 6.03 28 43554 SN Pioneer 6.02 29 44367 SN Pioneer 8 1 30 45571 SN Pioneer 3 3 31 45021 SN Pioneer 6.02 3 32 45021 SN Pioneer 6.01 3 33 45021 SN Pioneer 1 34 45021 SN Pioneer 7 1 35 45021 SN Pioneer 4 3 36 45021 SN Pioneer 8 3 37 45021 SN Pioneer 1 38 45021 SN Pioneer 4 1 39 45021 SN Pioneer 3 3 40 45021 SN Pioneer 6.02 3 45021 SN Pioneer 2 2 216

42 45021 SN Pioneer 6.02 43 45021 SN Pioneer 6.02 2 44 45021 SN Pioneer 6.01 45 44949 SN Pioneer 5 46 44949 SN Pioneer 5 3 47 44949 SN Pioneer 6.03 3 48 44949 SN Pioneer 6.03 3 49 44949 SN Pioneer 6.01 3 50 44949 SN Pioneer 6.02 3 51 44949 SN Pioneer 6.01 3 52 44949 SN Pioneer 6 3 53 44949 SN Pioneer 6 3 54 44949 SN Pioneer 6 3 55 44949 SN Pioneer 6 3 56 44949 SN Pioneer 6 3 57 43563 SN 2 1 58 44853 SN Pioneer 2 1 3 59 53152 SN 6.03 3 60 45613 SN Pioneer 2 1 3 61 47485 SN 2 1 1 62 44947 SN Pioneer 6 63 44844 SN 6.01 1 64 46138 SN Colonial 6 65 46138 SN Colonial 6.01 1 66 47404 SN 9 3 67 47469 SN 6 3 68 53149 SN 8 3 3 69 45619 SN 1 1 70 45565 SN Pioneer 6 3 71 43350 SN Colonial 6 3 72 47473 SN Pioneer 8 3 73 47473 SN Pioneer 3 3 74 46143 SN 2 3 75 47465 SN 5 3 76 44627 SN 5 3 77 45599 SN 5 3 78 47465 SN 5 3 79 46141 SN Colonial 6 80 53149 SN 6 3 81 53149 SN 6 3 82 53149 SN 9 83 47470 SN Pioneer 6 3 84 53150 SN 6.03 3 85 47473 SN Pioneer 6 3 217

86 53799 SN 5 3 87 53150 SN 2 3 3 88 45874 SN 5 3 89 44658 SN 6.05 90 45570 SN 1 91 53150 SN 9 92 53150 SN 6.05 3 93 53150 SN 6 3 94 44960 SN Pioneer 1 3 95 43785 SN 5 96 43058 SN 4 3 97 45664 SN 3 3 3 98 49627 SN 3 3 3 99 45291 SN 2 1 1 100 45570 SN 1 101 45616 SN Pioneer 1 3 102 43789 SN 1 103 45894 SN 9 104 45889 SN 5 105 45293 SN 1 1 106 46142 SN 2 1 1 107 45905 SN 1 3 108 45187 SN 1 3 109 45362 SN 9 110 45190 SN 1 111 45612 SN Pioneer 2 3 3 112 45610 SN Pioneer 2 3 3 113 45564 SN Pioneer 1 3 114 45956 SN 2 3 3 115 47483 SN 1 3 116 47470 SN Pioneer 1 117 45613 SN Pioneer 2 1 118 45895 SN 1 3 119 45894 SN 6.01 . 3 120 45609 SN Pioneer 1 1 121 44658 SN 3 1 3 122 44849 SN 6.01 3 123 45956 SN 9 3 124 44658 SN 6 125 44848 SN 1 126 47476 SN 6.02 127 47465 SN 6.01 1 128 45617 SN Pioneer 1 3 129 45605 SN Pioneer 1 3 218

130 45615 SN Pioneer 4 1 131 45706 SN 1 3 132 45606 SN Pioneer 6 133 45896 SN 9 3 134 45560 SN Pioneer 1 3 135 47476 SN 4 3 136 47484 SN 1 3 137 47475 SN 6.01 138 43906 SN 1 3 139 47483 SN 6.02 3 140 47475 SN 2 3 3 141 44623 SN 2 1 142 43554 SN Pioneer 2 1 143 44948 SN Pioneer 3 3 2 144 47482 SN 1 3 145 43728 SN 3 1 146 44910 SN 4 3 147 47967 SN 4 3 3 148 47713 SN 2 3 3 149 45564 SN Pioneer 3 1 3 150 45612 SN Pioneer 1 3 151 45730 SN 6 3 152 25926 SN 1 1 153 43554 SN Pioneer 1 1 154 47483 SN 1 3 155 47483 SN 3 3 3 156 47716 SN 3 3 3 157 25549 SN 1 3 158 44853 SN Pioneer 2 3 3 159 44360 SN 4 3 1 160 45954 SN 1 3 161 44356 SN Pioneer 4 3 162 47473 SN Pioneer 1 3 163 44654 SN 2 1 164 25939 SN 1 3 165 25944 SN 1 3 166 25918 SN 1 3 167 25940 SN 1 3 168 45956 SN 2 3 169 45908 SN 2 1 170 45598 SN 1 171 26274 SN 1 3 172 25852 SN 1 3 173 25928 SN 1 3 219

174 45571 SN Pioneer 3 3 3 1 175 45601 SN 1 176 45956 SN 2 1 177 26572 SN 3 1 178 44947 SN Pioneer 1 1 179 43554 SN Pioneer 1 3 180 27568 SN 1 181 45565 SN Pioneer 6.01 3 182 43784 SN 5 183 45606 SN Pioneer 1 3 184 43350 SN Colonial 6.01 3 185 49784 SN 9 1 186 45894 SN 9 187 45906 SN 1 3 188 45565 SN Pioneer 6 189 45565 SN Pioneer 6.02 3 190 45021 SN Pioneer 2 1 3 191 4595 SN 6.01 3 192 45954 SN 9 3 193 45894 SN 1 1 194 45021 SN Pioneer 5 195 44879 SN 6.01 3 196 49628 SN 9 197 44626 SN 5 3 198 47439 SN 6.01 199 44628 SN 5 3 200 45610 SN Pioneer 6 3 201 45448 SN 5 3 202 43357 SN Colonial 5 203 47709 SN 9 3 204 44805 SN Colonial 5 3 205 45709 SN 6 3 206 4405 SN 6.01 1 207 45021 SN Pioneer 6 1 208 45571 SN Pioneer 6 3 209 45565 SN Pioneer 5 1 210 47484 SN 1 3 211 47483 SN 6.01 3 212 45954 SN 2 1 3 213 43086 SN 6.01 214 45894 SN 6.01 3 215 45954 SN 9 216 45894 SN 9 3 217 45894 SN 5 3 220

218 45899 SN 6.01 3 219 45954 SN 6.01 220 45565 SN Pioneer 6.01 3 221 45894 SN 5 222 47484 SN 6.05 3 223 47484 SN 6.01 3 224 45565 SN Pioneer 6.01 3 225 45906 SN 4 3 3 226 47464 SN 6 3 227 4748 SN 6.01 3 228 45956 SN 5 3 229 45021 SN Pioneer 6 230 45565 SN Pioneer 6 3 231 45954 SN 6.01 1 232 45489 SN 4 3 1 233 45954 SN 5 234 47481 SN 5 3 235 47484 SN 6.01 3 236 45021 SN Pioneer 6 237 45024 SN Colonial 1 1 238 44805 SN Colonial 6.01 3 239 44950 SN Pioneer 1 3 240 47466 SN 6.01 3 241 47466 SN 6.01 3 242 47481 SN 4 3 3 243 25749 SN 8 2 3 244 27661 SN 1 245 25554 SN 1 3 246 25601 SN 1 3 247 27305 SN 1 3 248 47469 SN 1 3 249 27300 SN 3 3 250 26853 SN 1 251 45564 SN Pioneer 1 3 252 27192 SN 1 3 253 45203 SN 1 254 27651 SN 1 1 255 45606 SN Pioneer 1 256 26629 SN 1 3 257 45906 SN 1 258 26630 SN 1 3 259 25986 SN 9 3 260 27700 SN 1 3 261 25998 SN 3 1 221

262 45020 SN 3 1 3 263 45600 SN 6.02 264 45614 SN Pioneer 2 3 265 45609 SN Pioneer 1 3 266 25550 SN 1 3 267 45605 SN Pioneer 2 3 2 268 45906 SN 6.01 3 269 43554 SN Pioneer 9 270 27305 SN 1 3 271 27651 SN 1 3 272 27817 SN 9 273 45591 SN Pioneer 1 3 274 25739 SN 1 3 275 47466 SN 1 3 276 27639 SN 1 3 277 25933 SN 1 3 278 25190 SN 1 279 25166 SN 1 280 26463 SN 1 3 281 44853 SN Pioneer 1 282 25552 SN 1 283 45612 SN Pioneer 1 284 47967 SN 3 2 3 285 45607 SN Pioneer 2 1 286 47475 SN 3 1 2 287 47476 SN 1 3 288 45570 SN 1 3 289 27646 SN 1 3 290 27646 SN 1 3 291 45021 SN Pioneer 3 3 1 292 45191 SN 4 1 293 4809 SN 3 1 294 45604 SN Pioneer 1 1 295 46139 SN Colonial 1 3 296 45892 SN 9 297 43787 SN 9 298 26925 SN 2 2 299 45608 SN 1 300 47708 SN 3 3 2 301 43083 SN 1 3 302 25675 SN 1 3 303 47468 SN Pioneer 1 1 304 43555 SN Pioneer 3 3 305 26943 SN 1 222

306 45485 SN 1 307 45602 SN Pioneer 1 308 6603 SN 1 3 309 44621 SN 9 310 44657 SN 1 3 311 25694 SN 2 1 312 47478 SN 3 1 313 43558 SN 3 3 314 26952 SN 1 3 315 43788 SN 3 1 3 316 46050 SN 1 317 25862 SN 2 1 1 318 25189 SN 4 1 3 319 26553 SN 2 1 320 25588 SN 1 321 25290 SN 1 322 27211 SN 3 3 323 25079 SN 4 3 3 324 25106 SN 4 1 1 325 25080 SN 3 1 3 326 25183 SN 2 1 3 327 25924 SN 2 1 3 328 25702 SN 2 3 3 329 27680 SN 9 3 330 25687 SN 2 1 3 331 25919 SN 2 3 3 332 25938 SN 3 1 1 333 27655 SN 4 3 334 25795 SN 2 2 3 335 25923 SN 2 3 3 336 25941 SN 2 1 3 337 27641 SN 6.04 3 338 27643 SN 6.01 339 27674 SN 6 3 340 27643 SN 6.01 341 27643 SN 6.01 3 342 27674 SN 6 3 343 27641 SN 6 3 344 27641 SN 6.01 3 345 27641 SN 6.01 3 346 27674 SN 6.01 347 27643 SN 6.01 3 348 27674 SN 6.01 349 27674 SN 9 223

350 27643 SN 6.01 3 351 26811 SN 1 3 352 26580 SN 1 353 26852 SN 1 3 354 27652 SN 3 1 3 355 26634 SN 1 3 356 26835 SN 4 3 3 357 25529 SN 3 3 2 358 26930 SN 1 359 26255 SN 1 360 25863 SN 3 1 3 361 26460 SN 2 2 3 362 27681 SN 5 3 363 25556 SN 6.01 1 364 27640 SN 6.01 3 365 27659 SN 6.01 366 25159 SN 6 367 27705 SN 6.01 3 368 25783 SN 1 369 25936 SN 2 3 3 370 25781 SN 1 3 371 25691 SN 1 3 372 25693 SN 9 2 373 25758 SN 1 374 26554 SN 6.04 3 375 25692 SN 1 3 376 25343 SN 2 1 377 27407 SN 4 1 378 25493 SN 6 3 379 27436 SN 2 3 1 380 26856 SN 3 3 381 26094 SN 1 3 382 27658 SN Pioneer 3 1 1 383 25492 SN 9 3 384 27684 SN 6.01 385 27288 SN 8 3 3 386 26682 SN 2 1 3 387 26683 SN 9 3 388 26684 SN 1 3 389 26663 SN 2 3 390 26662 SN 2 1 391 26599 SN 1 3 392 26813 SN 4 1 3 393 25747 SN 2 1 3 224

394 27650 SN 6.01 3 395 27660 SN 6.01 3 396 27686 SN 6 3 397 27686 SN 6.01 3 398 27694 SN 5 399 27642 SN 6.01 3 400 27642 SN 6 1 401 27660 SN 5 3 402 27685 SN 2 3 3 403 27960 SN 1 3 404 27664 SN 6 3 405 27682 SN 6 3 406 27683 SN 2 3 3 407 27682 SN 6.03 408 27682 SN 6 3 409 27650 SN 6 1 410 27650 SN 6.03 3 411 27685 SN 2 3 1 412 27544 SN 2 3 413 27416 SN 1 3 414 27037 SN 2 1 1 415 27679 SN 6 1 416 27656 SN 6.01 417 25901 SN 1 418 27679 SN 9 419 27679 SN 6.01 420 27655 SN 6.03 421 25677 SN 2 1 3 422 27656 SN 1 3 423 25864 SN 1 424 25676 SN 4 3 425 26932 SN 3 3 426 27084 SN 1 3 427 25551 SN 1 1 428 27395 SN 6.01 3 429 25553 SN 2 3 430 25557 SN 2 3 3 431 27666 SN 6 432 25715 SN 2 1 433 25320 SN 5 434 25774 SN 3 3 3 435 27697 SN 3 3 3 436 27475 SN 5 1 437 27649 SN 6.01 3 225

438 27649 SN 1 1 439 27691 SN 6.01 1 440 25780 SN 2 1 3 441 25784 SN 1 3 442 27549 SN 2 1 443 25779 SN 2 3 444 26659 SN • 2 3 3 445 26638 SN 4 3 3 446 26640 SN 2 3 3 447 26660 SN 1 1 448 25785 SN 1 3 449 25024 SN 3 1 3 450 26639 SN 2 3 1 451 27665 SN 1 1 452 27665 SN 5 453 27665 SN 2 1 1 454 27665 SN 6.01 455 27665 SN 6.01 1 456 27665 SN 6.01 457 27665 SN 5 458 27665 SN 5 459 27665 SN 6 460 27665 SN 5 461 27408 SN 6.01 462 25990 SN 1 1 463 25759 SN 1 464 27424 SN 4 3 465 25372 SN 2 3 1 466 25738 SN 1 3 467 25767 SN 1 3 468 25745 SN 1 3 469 27675 SN 1 3 470 25647 SN 1 1 471 27701 SN 6.03 472 27677 SN 1 473 27678 SN 1 3 474 25513 SN 6.03 3 475 25165 SN 1 476 27670 SN 9 3 477 27676 SN 2 1 478 25722 SN 1 3 479 25773 SN 1 3 480 27678 SN 9 481 27703 SN 2 3 3 226

482 27642 SN 6.01 3 483 27703 SN 9 3 484 27642 SN 6.01 3 485 27642 SN 6.03 3 486 27642 SN 6.01 1 487 27642 SN 6.01 3 488 27642 SN 6.03 489 27645 SN 6.01 3 490 27638 SN 6.01 3 491 25985 SN 4 2 3 492 25909 SN 5 3 493 25993 SN 8 3 3 494 27707 SN 6.01 3 495 25743 SN 1 3 496 25744 SN 3 1 3 497 25746 SN 2 3 3 498 26851 SN 6.03 3 499 25158 SN 4 1 500 25191 SN 2 1 3 501 25584 SN 2 1 3 502 25796 SN 3 3 503 27637 SN 1 504 27633 SN 1 1 505 27636 SN 9 3 506 27671 SN 9 507 27632 SN 6 3 508 25698 SN 2 1 3 509 27036 SN 2 1 510 25435 SN 5 511 25772 SN 1 512 25973 SN 1 3 513 27677 SN 1 514 26462 SN 2 1 1 515 27648 SN 2 3 516 27691 SN 6.03 3 517 25514 SN 6.03 1 518 27559 SN 6 3 519 27631 SN 6 520 27629 SN 8 1 3 521 27699 SN 2 1 3 522 27676 SN 2 3 1 523 27695 SN 6.01 3 524 25930 SN 1 3 525 25927 SN 1 227

526 25934 SN 1 1 527 25943 SN 1 3 528 25532 SN 3 1 529 25937 SN 1 3 530 26249 SN 4 3 3 531 27188 SN 1 3 532 27662 SN 1 3 533 26258 SN 1 3 534 26257 SN 1 535 25503 SN 1 3 536 27083 SN 1 537 26275 SN 1 3 538 26951 SN 1 3 539 27142 SN 3 1 3 540 27141 SN 2 1 3 541 53220 SN 6.01 3 542 53220 SN 6.01 3 543 SN Pioneer 6.02 3 544 SN Pioneer 6.02 1 545 SN Pioneer 6.01 3 546 SN Pioneer 5 3 547 SN Pioneer 6.02 3 548 SN Pioneer 6.01 549 SN Pioneer 5 550 SN Pioneer 6.02 1 551 SN Pioneer 6 1 552 SN Pioneer 6.03 3 553 SN Pioneer 5 3 554 SN Pioneer 6 2 555 SN Pioneer 5 3 556 SN Pioneer 5 2 557 SN Pioneer 5 2 558 SN Pioneer 5 2 559 SN Pioneer 5 560 SN Pioneer 5 3 561 SN Pioneer 6.03 2 562 SN Pioneer 6 563 SN Pioneer 5 564 SN Pioneer 6.03 565 SN Pioneer 6.03 2 566 SN Pioneer 5 567 SN Pioneer 6.03 2 568 SN Pioneer 6.02 2 569 SN Pioneer 6.01 2 228

570 SN Colonial 7 3 571 SN Pioneer 2 3 572 SN Pioneer 2 3 573 SN Pioneer 2 3 574 SN Pioneer 5 575 SN Pioneer 6.01 576 SN Pioneer 6.01 577 SN Pioneer 2 3 578 SN Pioneer 2 3 579 SN Pioneer 6.01 580 SN Pioneer 2 3 581 SN Pioneer 2 1 582 SN Pioneer 6.03 583 SN Pioneer 2 3 584 SN Pioneer 2 1 585 SN Pioneer 5 586 SN Pioneer 6.03 587 SN Pioneer 6.01 588 SN Pioneer 2 3 589 SN Pioneer 6.01 590 SN Pioneer 2 3 591 SN Pioneer 5 592 SN Pioneer 4 1 593 SN Pioneer 6.01 594 SN Pioneer 2 3 595 SN Pioneer 2 3 596 SN Pioneer 4 3 597 SN Pioneer 2 3 598 SN Pioneer 5 599 SN Pioneer 6.02 600 SN Pioneer 6.04 601 SN Pioneer 5 602 SN Pioneer 5 603 SN Pioneer 6.03 604 SN Pioneer 6.03 605 SN Pioneer 5 606 SN Pioneer 2 3 607 SN Pioneer 6.01 608 SN Pioneer 5 609 SN Pioneer 2 3 610 SN Pioneer 6.01 611 SN Pioneer 6 612 SN Pioneer 4 3 613 SN Colonial 5 229

614 SN Colonial 5 615 SN Colonial 5 616 SN Colonial 6.03 617 SN Colonial 6.03 1 618 SN Pioneer 6.02 2 619 SN Pioneer 6.01 2 620 SN Pioneer 3 3 1 621 SN Pioneer 6.01 1 622 SN Pioneer 5 1 623 SN Pioneer 5 624 SN Pioneer 5 1 625 SN Pioneer 5 626 SN Pioneer 2 3 1 627 SN Pioneer 9 1 628 SN Pioneer 2 1 1 629 SN Pioneer 2 3 2 630 SN Pioneer 2 3 2 631 SN Pioneer 5 1 632 SN Pioneer 2 3 3 633 SN Pioneer 5 1 634 SN Pioneer 2 3 2 635 SN Pioneer 5 1 636 SN Pioneer 9 1 2 637 SN Pioneer 5 2 638 SN Pioneer 6.03 1 639 SN Pioneer 5 640 SN Pioneer 6.01 2 641 SN Pioneer 2 3 642 SN Pioneer 2 3 2 643 SN Pioneer 5 2 644 SN Pioneer 5 645 SN Pioneer 6.01 646 SN Pioneer 5 647 SN Pioneer 5 648 SN Pioneer 2 3 649 SN Pioneer 5 3 650 SN Pioneer 2 3 2 651 SN Pioneer 2 3 2 652 SN Pioneer 6.01 653 SN Pioneer 5 1 654 SN Pioneer 2 3 2 655 SN Pioneer 5 656 SN Pioneer 2 3 657 SN Pioneer 6.01 1 230

658 SN Pioneer 2 3 1 659 SN Pioneer 6.02 1 660 SN Pioneer 6.03 2 661 SN Pioneer 6.04 1 662 SN Pioneer 2 3 2 663 SN Pioneer 6.01 2 664 SN Pioneer 5 1 665 SN Pioneer 9 666 SN Pioneer 5 1 667 SN Pioneer 5 1 668 SN Pioneer 5 2 669 SN Pioneer 5 670 SN Pioneer 2 3 2 671 SN Pioneer 5 672 SN Pioneer 5 2 673 SN Pioneer 6.04 1 674 SN Pioneer 6.01 675 SN Pioneer 6.01 676 SN Pioneer 5 677 SN Pioneer 6 2 678 SN Pioneer 5 1 679 SN Pioneer 5 2 680 SN Pioneer 6.01 681 SN Pioneer 2 3 1 682 SN Pioneer 6.01 2 683 SN Colonial 6.01 684 SN Colonial 6.01 2 685 SN Pioneer 5 2 686 SN Pioneer 5 687 SN Pioneer 6.03 1 688 SN Pioneer 5 689 SN Pioneer 6.01 690 SN Pioneer 2 3 1 691 SN Pioneer 1 2 692 SN Pioneer 2 3 2 693 SN Pioneer 5 694 SN Pioneer 2 3 1 695 SN Pioneer 2 1 2 696 SN Pioneer 6.01 1 697 SN Pioneer 5 2 698 SN Pioneer 6.03 1 699 SN Pioneer 2 3 1 700 SN Pioneer 4 3 2 701 SN Pioneer 5 231

702 SN Pioneer 5 2 703 SN Pioneer 2 3 704 SN Pioneer 5 1 705 SN Pioneer 5 2 706 SN Pioneer 5 3 707 SN Pioneer 5 3 708 SN Pioneer 5 709 SN Pioneer 6 1 710 SN Pioneer 2 3 2 711 SN Pioneer 2 3 in SN Pioneer 6 2 713 SN Pioneer 6 2 714 SN Pioneer 5 715 SN Pioneer 5 1 716 SN Pioneer 5 2 717 SN Pioneer 5 2 718 SN Pioneer 5 2 719 SN Pioneer 6.03 1 720 SN Pioneer 2 3 1 721 SN Pioneer 2 3 1 722 SN Pioneer 2 3 2 723 SN P-C 2 3 2 724 SN P-C 2 3 2 725 SN P-C 2 3 3 726 SN P-C 6 1 727 SN P-C 6 728 SN P-C 5 729 SN P-C 4 3 2 730 SN P-C 2 3 1 731 SN P-C 5 732 SN P-C 6.02 3 733 SN Colonial 5 734 SN Pioneer 1 735 SN Pioneer 6.03 736 SN Pioneer 2 3 737 SN Pioneer 6.03 738 SN Pioneer 5 1 739 SN Pioneer 2 3 1 740 SN Pioneer 5 2 741 SN Pioneer 5 1 742 SN Pioneer 2 3 1 743 SN Pioneer 5 1 744 SN Pioneer 5 745 SN Pioneer 6.01 232

746 SN Pioneer 6.03 747 SN Pioneer 2 3 1 748 SN Pioneer 5 1 749 SN Pioneer 6.01 750 SN Pioneer 4 3 1 751 SN Pioneer 6.01 752 SN Pioneer 2 3 753 SN Pioneer 2 3 1 754 SN Pioneer 6.03 755 SN Pioneer 2 3 756 SN Pioneer 5 757 SN Pioneer 2 3 3 758 SN Pioneer 5 3 759 SN Pioneer 2 3 760 SN Pioneer 5 1 761 SN Pioneer 5 1 762 SN Pioneer 2 3 763 SN Pioneer 6.03 1 764 SN Pioneer 5 765 SN Pioneer 6 766 SN P-C 6 767 SN P-C 5 3 768 SN P-C 5 769 SN P-C 2 3 1 770 SN P-C 2 3 771 SN P-C 5 772 SN P-C 5 773 SN P-C 6.02 1 774 SN P-C 5 775 SN P-C 6 1 776 SN P-C 2 3 777 SN P-C 2 3 1 778 SN P-C 6.04 779 SN P-C 4 3 1 780 SN Pioneer 5 3 781 SN Pioneer 9 782 SN Pioneer 5 3 783 SN Pioneer 5 2 784 SN Pioneer 2 3 785 SN Pioneer 5 786 SN P-C 2 3 787 SN Pioneer 5 3 788 SN Colonial 2 3 2 789 SN Pioneer 5 3 233

790 SN Pioneer 5 791 SN Pioneer 5 1 792 SN Pioneer 5 793 SN Pioneer 6 3 794 SN Pioneer 6.01 795 SN Pioneer 5 3 796 SN Pioneer 6.01 2 797 SN Pioneer 2 3 1 798 SN Pioneer 6.05 799 SN Pioneer 5 800 SN Pioneer 6.01 3 801 SN Pioneer 5 802 SN Pioneer 6.01 803 SN Pioneer 6.01 3 804 SN Pioneer 6.01 1 805 SN Pioneer 5 3 806 SN Pioneer 6 3 807 SN Pioneer 5 3 808 SN Pioneer 5 809 SN Pioneer 5 3 810 SN Colonial 5 2 811 SN Colonial 6.04 812 SN Colonial 5 1 813 SN Colonial 5 3 814 SN Pioneer 6.02 1 815 SN Pioneer 2 3 2 816 SN Pioneer 5 2 817 SN Pioneer 5 818 SN Pioneer 5 1 819 SN Pioneer 6.03 2 820 SN Pioneer 5 1 821 SN Pioneer 2 3 2 822 SN Pioneer 6.01 1 823 SN Pioneer 6.01 2 824 SN Pioneer 6.03 2 825 SN Pioneer 2 3 2 826 SN Pioneer 5 1 827 SN Pioneer 5 828 SN Pioneer 2 3 3 829 SN Pioneer 4 3 1 830 SN Pioneer 1 3 831 SN Pioneer 2 3 3 832 SN Pioneer 5 2 833 SN Pioneer 5 2 234

834 SN Pioneer 5 1 835 SN Pioneer 6.04 2 836 SN Pioneer 5 3 837 SN Pioneer 6.01 2 838 SN Pioneer 4 3 839 SN Pioneer 2 3 1 840 SN Pioneer 4 3 841 SN Pioneer 2 3 2 842 SN Pioneer 5 843 SN Pioneer 4 3 844 SN Pioneer 1 2 845 SN Pioneer 2 3 1 846 SN Pioneer 1 2 847 SN Pioneer 5 1 848 SN Pioneer 5 2 849 SN Pioneer 6.03 850 SN Pioneer 5 851 SN 4 1 3 852 SN 2 3 2 853 SN 2 3 2 854 SN Pioneer 2 3 3 855 SN Pioneer 6.01 3 856 SN Pioneer 1 3 857 SN Pioneer 6.01 858 SN Pioneer 5 3 859 SN Pioneer 6.01 860 SN Colonial 5 1 861 SN P-C 2 3 862 SN P-C 6 863 SN P-C 5 1 864 SN P-C 5 865 SN P-C 5 2 866 SN P-C 6 3 867 SN Pioneer 1 2 868 SN Pioneer 2 3 3 869 SN Pioneer 5 3 870 SN Pioneer 2 3 2 871 SN Pioneer 2 3 872 SN Pioneer 5 2 873 SN Pioneer 5 1 874 SN Pioneer 2 1 2 875 SN Pioneer 2 1 876 SN Pioneer 2 3 2 877 SN Pioneer 2 3 235

878 SN Pioneer 6.01 2 879 SN Pioneer 6.03 880 SN Pioneer 5 881 SN Pioneer 5 3 882 SN Pioneer 5 883 SN Pioneer 6.01 884 SN Pioneer 2 3 1 885 SN Pioneer 6.04 2 886 SN Pioneer 5 1 887 SN Pioneer 6.03 2 888 SN Pioneer 5 2 889 SN Pioneer 5 890 SN Colonial 2 3 2 891 SN Pioneer 6.01 1 892 SN Colonial 5 893 SN Pioneer 2 3 1 894 SN Pioneer 5 3 895 SN Pioneer 5 896 SN Pioneer 2 3 2 897 SN Pioneer 6.01 898 SN Pioneer 5 899 SN Pioneer 5 900 SN Pioneer 5 2 901 SN Pioneer 6.01 3 902 SN Pioneer 6.02 903 SN Pioneer 1 3 904 SN Pioneer 2 3 2 905 SN Pioneer 2 3 2 906 SN Pioneer 2 3 2 907 SN Pioneer 2 3 3 908 SN Pioneer 5 909 SN Pioneer 5 3 910 SN Pioneer 5 1 911 SN Pioneer 5 2 912 SN Pioneer 5 2 913 SN Pioneer 5 1 914 SN Pioneer 6.01 3 915 SN Pioneer 5 1 916 SN Pioneer 2 3 3 917 SN Pioneer 5 3 918 SN Pioneer 5 3 919 SN Pioneer 2 3 920 SN Pioneer 5 2 921 SN Pioneer 5 3 236

922 SN Pioneer 6 3 923 SN Pioneer 2 3 924 SN Pioneer 5 925 SN Pioneer 6 3 926 SN Pioneer 2 3 2 927 SN Pioneer 5 928 SN Pioneer 6.01 929 SN Pioneer 5 930 SN Pioneer 1 3 931 SN Pioneer 1 3 932 SN Pioneer 1 3 933 SN Pioneer 2 3 3 934 SN Pioneer 5 935 SN Pioneer 2 3 2 936 SN Pioneer 5 3 937 SN Pioneer 5 3 938 SN Pioneer 5 2 939 SN Pioneer 6.03 3 940 SN Pioneer 5 941 SN Pioneer 6.01 3 942 SN Pioneer 1 3 943 SN Pioneer 6.03 3 944 SN Pioneer 6.04 3 945 SN Pioneer 6.05 3 946 SN Pioneer 2 3 3 947 SN Pioneer 5 3 948 SN Pioneer 2 3 1 949 SN Pioneer 2 3 950 SN Pioneer 6 2 951 SN Pioneer 5 952 SN Pioneer 6.01 953 SN Pioneer 6.01 3 954 SN P-C 5 955 SN P-C 6.01 3 956 SN P-C 2 3 3 957 SN Pioneer 6.01 2 958 SN Pioneer 2 3 959 SN Pioneer 5 1 960 SN Pioneer 6.01 2 961 SN Pioneer 2 3 962 SN Pioneer 2 3 3 963 SN Pioneer 2 3 1 964 SN Pioneer 6 3 965 SN Pioneer 6.01 3 237

966 SN Pioneer 2 3 3 967 SN Pioneer 2 3 3 968 SN Pioneer 6.04 3 969 SN Pioneer 5 3 970 SN Pioneer 6.01 3 971 SN Pioneer 5 2 972 SN Pioneer 5 2 973 SN Pioneer 5 1 974 SN Pioneer 5 975 SN Pioneer 5 2 976 SN Pioneer 5 3 977 SN Pioneer 5 978 SN Pioneer 2 3 3 979 SN Pioneer 5 980 SN Pioneer 2 3 2 981 SN Pioneer 2 3 2 982 SN Pioneer 5 983 SN Pioneer 5 984 SN Pioneer 2 3 3 985 SN Pioneer 5 1 986 SN Pioneer 5 987 SN Pioneer 5 3 988 SN Pioneer 6 1 989 SN Pioneer 2 3 3 990 SN Pioneer 4 3 1 991 SN Pioneer 4 3 1 992 SN Pioneer 1 993 SN Pioneer 1 994 SN Pioneer 4 3 2 995 SN Pioneer 2 3 2 996 SN Pioneer 1 2 997 SN Pioneer 2 3 2 998 SN Pioneer 2 3 2 999 SN Pioneer 4 3 2 1000 SN Pioneer 2 3 3 1001 SN Pioneer 1 2 1002 SN Pioneer 5 3 1003 SN Pioneer 6.01 1 1004 SN Pioneer 2 3 2 1005 SN Pioneer 1 1006 SN Pioneer 5 1 1007 SN Pioneer 5 1 1008 SN Pioneer 2 3 1 1009 SN Pioneer 2 3 2 238

1010 SN Pioneer 5 2 1011 SN Pioneer 2 3 2 1012 SN Pioneer 2 3 1 1013 SN Pioneer 2 3 2 1014 SN Pioneer 2 3 3 1015 SN Pioneer 2 3 1016 SN Pioneer 5 2 1017 SN Pioneer 5 2 1018 SN Pioneer 5 1 1019 SN Pioneer 6 1 1020 SN Pioneer 2 1 1 1021 SN Pioneer 5 2 1022 SN Pioneer 2 3 2 1023 SN Pioneer 4 3 1024 SN Pioneer 5 3 1025 SN Pioneer 6.01 2 1026 SN Pioneer 5 2 1027 SN Pioneer 5 1028 SN Pioneer 5 2 1029 SN Pioneer 5 2 1030 SN Pioneer 1 2 1031 SN Pioneer 6.03 1032 SN Pioneer 6.01 1033 SN Pioneer 2 3 1 1034 SN Pioneer 5 1035 SN Pioneer 5 1036 SN Pioneer 6.01 3 1037 SN Pioneer 5 1038 SN Pioneer 5 1 1039 SN Pioneer 2 3 1 1040 SN Pioneer 2 3 2 1041 SN Pioneer 2 3 1042 SN Pioneer 6 1043 SN Pioneer 6.01 3 1044 SN Pioneer 2 3 1 1045 SN Pioneer 2 3 1 1046 SN Pioneer 5 2 1047 SN Pioneer 2 3 1048 SN Pioneer 6 1 1049 SN Pioneer 5 2 1050 SN Pioneer 2 3 1051 SN Pioneer 2 3 3 1052 SN Pioneer 2 3 1 1053 SN Pioneer 5 3 239

1054 SN Pioneer 2 3 1055 SN Pioneer 6.05 2 1056 SN Pioneer 2 3 3 1057 SN Pioneer 5 1 1058 SN Pioneer 6.01 1059 SN Pioneer 6.01 1060 SN Pioneer 5 2 1061 SN Pioneer 2 3 2 1062 SN Pioneer 5 2 1063 SN Pioneer 5 1 1064 SN Pioneer 6.02 1065 SN Pioneer 5 1066 SN Pioneer 1 1 1067 SN Pioneer 2 3 1068 SN Pioneer 2 3 1 1069 SN Pioneer 2 3 1 1070 SN Pioneer 1 2 1071 SN Pioneer 6.01 2 1072 SN Pioneer 2 3 1 1073 SN Pioneer 2 3 3 1074 SN Pioneer 5 1 1075 SN Pioneer 6.01 1 1076 SN Pioneer 6.01 2 1077 SN Pioneer 2 3 2 1078 SN Pioneer 2 3 1 1079 SN Pioneer 6.02 1080 SN Pioneer 2 3 2 1081 SN Pioneer 2 3 3 1082 SN Pioneer 5 1083 SN Pioneer 5 2 1084 SN Pioneer 2 3 1 1085 SN Pioneer 2 3 1086 SN Pioneer 6.01 2 1087 SN Pioneer 6 3 1088 SN Pioneer 5 2 1089 SN Pioneer 6.01 2 1090 SN Pioneer 2 3 2 1091 SN Pioneer 5 1092 SN Pioneer 5 1093 SN Pioneer 5 1 1094 SN Pioneer 5 1095 SN Pioneer 2 3 2 1096 SN Pioneer 5 3 1097 SN Pioneer 2 3 2 1098 SN Pioneer 2 3 1 1099 SN Pioneer 6.01 1100 SN Pioneer 2 3 1 1101 SN Pioneer 5 1102 SN Pioneer 6.01 1 1103 SN Pioneer 5 3 1104 SN Pioneer 1 2 1105 SN Pioneer 2 3 1 1106 SN Pioneer 5 3 1107 SN Pioneer 4 3 2 1108 SN Pioneer 5 3 1109 SN Pioneer 6.03 2 1110 SN Pioneer 2 3 3 1111 SN Pioneer 2 3 2 1112 SN Pioneer 2 3 3 1113 SN Pioneer 6.03 1114 SN Pioneer 2 3 2 1115 SN Pioneer 6.01 2 1116 SN Pioneer 2 3 3 1117 SN Pioneer 2 3 3 1118 SN Pioneer 5 2 1119 SN Pioneer 5 1 1120 SN Pioneer 5 2 1121 SN Pioneer 1 2 1122 SN Pioneer 2 3 1 1123 SN Pioneer 5 2 1124 SN Pioneer 2 3 2 1125 SN Pioneer 1 3 1126 SN Pioneer 5 2 1127 SN Pioneer 1 3 1128 SN Pioneer 5 3 1129 SN Pioneer 5 2 1130 SN Pioneer 6.04 2 1131 SN Pioneer 5 1132 SN Pioneer 5 3 1133 SN Pioneer 5 3 1134 SN Pioneer 5 1 1135 SN Pioneer 5 1 1136 SN Pioneer 5 2 1137 SN Pioneer 5 2 1138 SN Pioneer 6.01 2 1139 SN Pioneer 5 1 1140 SN Pioneer 1 2 1141 SN Pioneer 2 3 2 241

1142 SN 9 1143 SN 6.03 1 1144 SN 5 2 1145 SN 1 1146 SN 9 3 1147 SN 1 3 1148 SN 6.01 2 1149 SN 9 1150 SN 6.01 2 1151 SN 9 1152 SN 5 2 1153 SN 5 2 1154 SN 6.01 2 1155 SN 6 2 1156 SN 2 3 2 1157 SN 9 1158 SN 5 2 1159 SN 9 1160 SN 5 2 1161 SN 5 2 1162 SN 5 3 1163 SN 6.03 1164 SN Pioneer 5 3 1165 SN Pioneer 9 1 1166 SN Pioneer 5 3 1167 SN Pioneer 5 1168 SN Pioneer 6 1169 SN Pioneer 2 3 3 1170 SN Pioneer 2 3 2 1171 SN Pioneer 6.01 2 1172 SN Pioneer 5 1173 SN Pioneer 5 2 1174 SN Pioneer 5 1175 SN Pioneer 2 3 2 1176 SN Pioneer 2 3 1177 SN Pioneer 5 2 1178 SN Pioneer 5 1179 SN Pioneer 5 1180 SN Pioneer 5 2 1181 SN Pioneer 2 3 2 1182 SN Pioneer 2 3 2 1183 SN Pioneer 4 3 1 1184 SN Pioneer 6.01 1 1185 SN Pioneer 5 2 242

1186 SN Pioneer 5 2 1187 SN Pioneer 2 3 1188 SN Pioneer 5 2 1189 SN Pioneer 5 1190 SN Pioneer 5 1191 SN Pioneer 5 2 1192 SN Pioneer 2 3 2 1193 SN Pioneer 2 3 2 1194 SN Pioneer 6.03 3 1195 SN Pioneer 5 3 1196 SN Pioneer 5 1 1197 SN Pioneer 6.01 2 1198 SN Pioneer 5 3 1199 SN Pioneer 6.03 2 1200 SN Pioneer 4 3 3 1201 SN Pioneer 6.01 1202 SN Pioneer 6.03 2 1203 SN Pioneer 5 1204 SN Pioneer 5 1 1205 SN Pioneer 5 3 1206 SN Pioneer 5 2 1207 SN Pioneer 5 2 1208 SN Pioneer 5 3 1209 SN Pioneer 6.03 1210 SN Pioneer 2 3 2 1211 SN Pioneer 2 3 2 1212 SN Pioneer 6.01 2 1213 SN Pioneer 5 1214 SN Pioneer 6 2 1215 SN Pioneer 5 1 1216 SN Pioneer 5 2 1217 SN Pioneer 6.01 1218 SN Pioneer 5 2 1219 SN Pioneer 1 3 1220 SN Pioneer 2 3 2 1221 SN Pioneer 5 1222 SN Pioneer 1 2 1223 SN Pioneer 2 1 1 1224 SN Pioneer 5 3 1225 SN Pioneer 2 3 1226 SN Pioneer 5 3 1227 SN Pioneer 5 1228 SN Pioneer 6.01 1229 SN Pioneer 6 243

1230 SN Pioneer 6.01 1231 SN Pioneer 6.01 1232 4873 GR 7 3 3 1233 14280 GR Colonial 1 3 1234 12219 GR Colonial 8 3 1 1235 11361 GR Colonial 1 1236 8759 GR Colonial 3 3 ni>i 2345 GR Colonial 3 1 1238 11620 GR Colonial 1 1239 6883 GR Colonial 5 1 1240 6883 GR Colonial 2 1 1 1241 11882 GR Colonial 1 1242 8837 GR Colonial 3 3 2 1243 13146 GR 4 3 3 1244 11584 GR 4 3 3 1245 11945 GR 4 2 1246 7671 GR Colonial 3 1 1247 4829 GR 8 3 3 1248 14259 GR 1 1249 9792 GR Pioneer 1 1250 1309 GR 2 3 1251 1309 GR 1 1252 4888 GR 8 3 2 1253 7671 GR Colonial 2 1 1 1254 6615 GR 3 1 1255 11517 GR 2 1 1256 10494 GR 4 3 1 1257 10761 GR P-C 3 1 3 1258 10761 GR P-C 8 3 1259 10761 GR P-C 8 3 2 1260 10777 GR P-C 2 3 3 1261 10755 GR P-C 4 3 1262 10770 GR P-C 6 3 1263 14381 GR P-C 1 3 1264 10529 GR P-C 3 1 1265 11591 GR Pioneer 1 3 1266 14749 GR P-C 1 1267 10660 GR P-C 5 1268 10660 GR P-C 5 1269 10660 GR P-C 5 1270 10660 GR P-C 1 1271 13195 GR Colonial 1 1272 1118 GR 1 1273 13086 GR 5 1 m m cn m (N m m

r<-i ro ro in ^ m inin'rfcomcNiriinin m (N vo in (N •tT m m •Tf m in IT) vo iri in rj- ^ (N m CN m OS CN in ro CO -H »n m o o o o o o o o o o vd vd ^ vd MS vd ^ vd

piCeiCiiCtiPiiCiipipjiCeiCtittipipieiHpiPiCtHPiQipiQiPilCiiCi^CiiDiCeiCcJaiPilpciPilDileiipiittiliiOiPilQiQiPilCcjDii oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo

OO M3 0(NOs^Os«NOOs^ incNr^^OsoooooocN'^ooOTi-Ttooi^ ov£)i>r^(N(Nr^00r400(Nr<-)mT|-0\0s o •^m^tNvoi^voinTr ^r^OoooO'-^'-^(Nooosinoooooin^ eNr

Trinvoc^ooosO'--cNm'^invoc^oooso — rNm-rrm^t^oooso—H(Nr<-)'Trinvot^ooo\0-H(Nm'^in^r^ C^r~-t^l^t^t^OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOONONONOsONONOsOSONOsOOOOOOOOOO-^-H^— fN(N(N(N(N(N(N

1318 13209 GR 6 1319 11226 GR 6.03 3 1320 13075 GR 5 3 1321 10407 GR 5 1322 10407 GR 5 1323 10407 GR 5 1324 11167 GR 5 1325 10890 GR 5 1326 5122 GR 6.01 1327 14394 GR 6.03 3 1328 1884 GR 5 1329 13076 GR 6.01 2 1330 13134 GR 6 2 1331 11764 GR 5 1332 11100 GR 2 3 1333 7783 GR 6.03 1334 14605 GR 2 3 1335 5391 GR 5 1336 9454 GR 6 1337 11169 GR 6 1338 14391 GR 2 1 1339 6025 GR 4 3 3 1340 11137 GR 6 1341 2338 GR 6.03 1342 13639 GR 6.03 1 1343 8973 GR 5 3 1344 13069 GR 5 1345 5081 GR 6 1 1346 12110 GR 5 1347 12728 GR 6 3 1348 11125 GR 6.03 3 1349 7557 GR 2 3 1350 13212 GR 5 1351 12136 GR 5 1352 11127 GR 5 3 1353 11127 GR 5 3 1354 11127 GR 2 3 1355 11127 GR 2 1 3 1356 7706 GR 4 3 3 1357 12940 GR 5 1358 1414 GR 6.01 1 1359 11114 GR 6.03 1360 14349 GR 5 3 1361 7996 GR 5 3 246

1362 13210 GR 5 1 1363 12022 GR 5 1364 5947 GR 5 1365 12078 GR 2 3 1 1366 1998 GR 5 1367 7868 GR 2 1 1368 145 GR 5 1369 1428 GR 5 3 1370 5882 GR 5 3 1371 9274 GR 5 3 1372 6845 GR 5 1373 12083 GR 5 1374 14355 GR 6.03 1375 14355 GR 5 1376 14355 GR 5 3 1377 10691 GR 6.03 1378 10691 GR 5 1 1379 4956 GR 5 1 1380 9108 GR 4 3 1381 14393 GR 5 3 1382 1926 GR 6 3 1383 14739 GR 2 3 1384 6647 GR 5 1385 5938 GR 5 1 1386 13093 GR 5 1387 7626 GR 6.02 1388 2719 GR 6.03 1 1389 11153 GR 5 1390 9106 GR 5 1391 9106 GR 6.03 3 1392 14427 GR 5 3 1393 14427 GR 2 3 3 1394 14347 GR 5 1395 9440 GR 5 1396 7495 GR 5 1397 12813 GR 2 3 3 1398 12018 GR 2 3 1 1399 13381 GR 5 1400 13381 GR 5 1401 6346 GR 5 1402 11121 GR 2 3 1403 6799 GR 5 1404 6799 GR 5 1405 8156 GR 5 3 1406 14265 GR 2 1407 13095 GR 5 1408 13095 GR 5 1409 5712 GR 2 1410 13228 GR 5 1411 7604 GR 6.03 1412 a-4431-521 GR 8 1413 g646 GR 1 1414 g648 GR 1 1415 g647 GR 1 1416 g651 GR 4 1417 g652 GR 2 1418 g653 GR 2 1419 a-4431-520 GR 1 1420 a4431-901 GR 9 1421 a4431-901 GR 6 1422 a4431-90l GR 6.02 1423 a4431-901 GR 6.03 1424 a4431-901 GR 5 1425 site 2 GR 5 1426 a4431-901 GR 9 1427 a4431-901 GR 6.02 1428 a4431-901 GR 5 1429 a4431-901 GR 6 1430 a4431-901 GR 5 1431 a4431-901 GR 5 1432 a4431-901 GR 5 1433 a4431-901 GR 2 1434 a4431-901 GR 4 1435 a4431-901 GR 5 1436 site 2 GR 6.02 1437 a4431-897 GR 6.02 1438 a4431-897 GR 6 1439 a4431-897 GR 6 1440 a4431-897 GR 6.01 1441 27669 SN 6 1442 SN 9 1443 47487 SN 1 1444 44883 SN 6.02 1445 SN 9 1446 44940 SN 2 1447 47472 SN 1 1448 SN 9 1449 26278 SN 3 248

1450 47497 SN 9 1451 27399 SN 2 1 1452 26573 SN 2 1 1453 26251 SN 8 3 3 1454 26832 SN 1 1455 25562 SN 1 1456 26485 SN 1 1457 25942 SN 2 1 2 1458 27001 SN 2 1 1 1459 26628 SN 1 1460 26931 SN 3 3 1 1461 26135 SN 1 2 1462 27690 SN 2 3 3 1463 26635 SN 2 3 3 249

FIG# CAT# BREAK MUTILAT CONTEXT FINGRPR 1 44947 1 1 2 2 44949 1 2 3 44362 1 5 yes 4 44947 1 2 5 44947 1 2 6 44947 1 2 7 43350 1 4 8 44947 1 1 2 9 43554 1 5 10 43554 1 5 11 43554 1 5 yes 12 43554 1 5 13 43554 1 5 14 43554 1 5 yes 15 43554 1 5 16 43554 1 5 17 43554 1 5 18 43554 1 5 19 43554 1 5 20 45021 1 1 5 21 43554 1 5 22 43554 1 5 23 43554 1 5 24 43350 1 4 25 47484 1 5 26 47473 1 3 27 44853 1 2 28 43554 1 5 29 44367 1 30 45571 1 3 yes 31 45021 1 1 5 32 45021 1 5 33 45021 1 5 34 45021 1 5 35 45021 1 5 36 45021 1 5 37 45021 1 5 38 45021 1 5 39 45021 1 1 5 40 45021 1 5 41 45021 1 5 42 45021 1 5 43 45021 1 5 44 45021 1 5 45 44949 1 2 46 44949 1 2 47 44949 1 2 48 44949 1 2 49 44949 1 2 50 44949 1 2 51 44949 1 2 52 44949 1 2 53 44949 1 2 54 44949 1 2 55 44949 1 2 56 44949 1 2 57 43563 1 5 58 44853 1 2 yes 59 53152 1 60 45613 1 3 61 47485 1 1 5 yes 62 44947 1 2 63 44844 1 1 5 64 46138 1 1 65 46138 1 1 66 47404 1 67 47469 1 5 68 53149 yes 69 45619 1 5 70 45565 1 2 yes 71 43350 1 4 72 47473 1 3 73 47473 1 3 yes 74 46143 1 5 75 47465 1 5 76 44627 1 77 45599 1 5 78 47465 1 5 79 46141 1 1 80 53149 1 yes 81 53149 1 82 53149 1 83 47470 1 1 3 84 53150 1 85 47473 1 3 86 53799 1 yes 87 53150 1 1 yes 88 45874 1 89 44658 1 90 45570 1 5 91 53150 1 92 53150 1 93 53150 1 94 44960 1 1 3 95 43785 1 96 43058 1 5 97 45664 1 98 49627 1 99 45291 1 1 100 45570 1 5 101 45616 1 3 yes 102 43789 1 103 45894 1 104 45889 1 105 45293 1 1 yes 106 46142 1 5 107 45905 1 108 45187 1 1 yes 109 45362 1 110 45190 1 111 45612 1 3 112 45610 1 3 113 45564 1 2 114 45956 1 115 47483 1 5 116 47470 1 3 117 45613 1 3 118 45895 1 119 45894 1 120 45609 1 1 3 121 44658 1 yes 122 44849 1 5 123 45956 1 124 44658 1 1 125 44848 1 5 126 47476 1 5 127 47465 1 5 128 45617 1 3 129 45605 1 1 3 130 45615 1 3 252

131 45706 1 132 45606 1 3 133 45896 1 134 45560 1 1 3 135 47476 1 5 136 47484 1 5 yes 137 47475 1 1 138 43906 1 139 47483 1 5 yes 140 47475 1 1 141 44623 1 142 43554 1 5 143 44948 1 2 144 47482 1 5 yes 145 43728 1 146 44910 1 5 147 47967 1 148 47713 1 149 45564 1 2 150 45612 1 3 151 45730 1 152 25926 1 153 43554 1 5 154 47483 1 5 155 47483 1 5 156 47716 1 157 25549 1 158 44853 1 2 yes 159 44360 1 160 45954 1 161 44356 1 5 162 47473 1 3 163 44654 1 164 25939 1 165 25944 1 1 yes 166 25918 1 167 25940 1 168 45956 1 yes 169 45908 1 170 45598 1 5 171 26274 1 yes 172 25852 1 173 25928 1 174 45571 1 1 3 175 45601 1 1 5 176 45956 1 177 26572 1 178 44947 1 2 179 43554 1 1 5 180 27568 1 1 yes 181 45565 1 2 182 43784 1 183 45606 1 1 3 184 43350 1 4 185 49784 1 186 45894 1 187 45906 1 yes 188 45565 1 2 189 45565 1 2 190 45021 1 5 191 4595 1 192 45954 1 193 45894 1 194 45021 1 5 195 44879 1 196 49628 1 197 44626 1 yes 198 47439 1 199 44628 1 200 45610 1 3 201 45448 1 202 43357 1 4 203 47709 1 204 44805 1 1 205 45709 1 206 4405 1 207 45021 1 5 208 45571 1 3 209 45565 1 2 210 47484 1 1 5 211 47483 1 5 yes 212 45954 1 213 43086 1 5 214 45894 1 215 45954 1 216 45894 1 217 45894 1 218 45899 1 219 45954 220 45565 221 45894 222 47484 223 47484 224 45565 225 45906 226 47464 227 4748 228 45956 229 45021 230 45565 231 45954 232 45489 233 45954 234 47481 235 47484 236 45021 237 45024 238 44805 239 44950 240 47466 241 47466 242 47481 243 25749 244 27661 245 25554 246 25601 247 27305 248 47469 249 27300 250 26853 251 45564 252 27192 253 45203 254 27651 255 45606 256 26629 257 45906 258 26630 259 25986 260 27700 261 25998 262 45020 255

263 45600 1 5 264 45614 1 3 265 45609 1 3 266 25550 1 1 267 45605 1 3 268 45906 1 269 43554 1 5 270 27305 1 271 27651 1 1 272 27817 1 273 45591 1 1 274 25739 1 275 47466 1 5 276 27639 1 1 277 25933 1 278 25190 1 279 25166 1 280 26463 1 281 44853 1 2 282 25552 1 283 45612 1 3 284 47967 1 285 45607 1 3 286 47475 1 1 1 287 47476 1 5 288 45570 1 5 yes 289 27646 1 290 27646 1 291 45021 1 5 292 45191 1 293 4809 1 294 45604 1 3 295 46139 1 1 296 45892 1 297 43787 1 298 26925 1 299 45608 1 2 yes 300 47708 1 1 yes 301 43083 1 1 302 25675 1 303 47468 1 3 304 43555 1 5 305 26943 1 306 45485 1 307 45602 308 6603 309 44621 310 44657 311 25694 312 47478 5 yes 313 43558 5 314 26952 315 43788 316 46050 317 25862 318 25189 319 26553 320 25588 321 25290 322 27211 323 25079 yes 324 25106 325 25080 326 25183 327 25924 328 25702 329 27680 330 25687 yes 331 25919 332 25938 333 27655 334 25795 yes 335 25923 336 25941 337 27641 yes 338 27643 339 27674 340 27643 341 27643 342 27674 343 27641 344 27641 345 27641 346 27674 347 27643 348 27674 349 27674 350 27643 351 26811 1 352 26580 1 353 26852 1 354 27652 1 355 26634 1 yes 356 26835 1 357 25529 1 358 26930 1 yes 359 26255 1 360 25863 1 361 26460 1 362 27681 1 363 25556 1 364 27640 1 365 27659 1 366 25159 1 yes 367 27705 1 yes 368 25783 1 369 25936 1 1 370 25781 1 371 25691 1 yes 372 25693 1 yes 373 25758 1 yes 374 26554 1 375 25692 1 yes 376 25343 1 yes 377 27407 1 378 25493 1 379 27436 1 1 380 26856 1 381 26094 1 382 27658 1 1 3 383 25492 1 384 27684 1 385 27288 386 26682 1 387 26683 1 388 26684 1 389 26663 1 390 26662 1 391 26599 1 1 392 26813 1 393 25747 1 394 27650 1 258

395 27660 396 27686 397 27686 398 27694 399 27642 400 27642 401 27660 402 27685 yes 403 27960 404 27664 405 27682 406 27683 407 27682 yes 408 27682 yes 409 27650 410 27650 411 27685 412 27544 413 27416 414 27037 415 27679 416 27656 417 25901 418 27679 419 27679 420 27655 421 25677 422 27656 423 25864 424 25676 yes 425 26932 426 27084 427 25551 428 27395 429 25553 430 25557 431 27666 432 25715 433 25320 434 25774 435 27697 436 27475 437 27649 438 27649 yes 259

439 27691 440 25780 441 25784 442 27549 443 25779 yes 444 26659 445 26638 446 26640 447 26660 448 25785 449 25024 450 26639 451 27665 452 27665 yes 453 27665 454 27665 455 27665 456 27665 457 27665 458 27665 459 27665 460 27665 461 27408 462 25990 463 25759 464 27424 465 25372 466 25738 467 25767 468 25745 469 27675 470 25647 471 27701 472 27677 yes 473 27678 474 25513 475 25165 yes 476 27670 477 27676 478 25722 479 25773 480 27678 481 27703 482 27642 483 27703 484 27642 485 27642 486 27642 487 27642 488 27642 489 27645 490 27638 491 25985 492 25909 493 25993 494 27707 495 25743 496 25744 497 25746 498 26851 499 25158 500 25191 501 25584 502 25796 503 27637 504 27633 505 27636 506 27671 507 27632 508 25698 509 27036 510 25435 511 25772 yes 512 25973 513 27677 514 26462 yes 515 27648 yes 516 27691 517 25514 518 27559 519 27631 520 27629 521 27699 522 27676 523 27695 524 25930 yes 525 25927 yes 526 25934 261

527 25943 1 528 25532 1 529 25937 1 530 26249 1 531 27188 1 532 27662 1 533 26258 1 534 26257 1 535 25503 1 536 27083 1 537 26275 1 538 26951 1 539 27142 1 540 27141 1 541 53220 1 yes 542 53220 1 yes 543 1 2 544 1 2 yes 545 1 2 546 1 2 547 1 2 548 1 2 yes 549 1 2 550 1 2 yes 551 1 2 552 1 2 553 1 2 554 1 2 yes 555 1 2 556 1 2 yes 557 1 2 yes 558 1 2 yes 559 1 2 yes 560 1 2 561 1 2 yes 562 1 2 yes 563 1 2 yes 564 1 2 565 1 5 566 1 5 567 1 5 568 1 5 569 1 5 570 1 2 571 2 572 2 573 2 574 2 575 2 576 2 577 2 578 2 579 2 580 2 581 2 582 2 583 2 584 2 585 2 586 2 587 2 588 3 589 3 590 3 591 3 592 3 593 3 594 2 595 2 596 2 597 2 598 2 599 2 600 2 601 2 602 2 603 2 604 2 605 2 606 5 607 5 608 5 609 5 610 5 611 5 3 3 3 263

615 3 616 3 617 3 618 2 619 2 620 5 621 5 622 623 624 625 626 627 yes 628 629 3 630 3 631 3 632 3 633 3 634 3 635 3 636 3 yes 637 3 638 3 639 3 640 2 641 2 642 2 yes 643 5 644 5 645 5 646 5 647 5 648 3 649 3 650 2 651 2 652 2 653 2 yes 654 2 655 2 yes 656 2 657 2 yes 658 2 264

659 2 660 2 661 2 yes 662 2 663 2 664 2 665 2 666 2 667 2 668 2 669 2 670 2 671 1 yes 672 2 673 2 yes 674 2 675 2 676 2 677 2 678 2 679 2 yes 680 2 681 2 682 2 yes 683 2 yes 684 2 yes 685 2 yes 686 2 687 2 yes 688 2 689 2 690 5 691 5 692 5 693 5 694 5 yes 695 5 696 5 yes 697 5 698 5 699 5 700 5 701 5 702 5 703 5 yes 704 5 705 5 706 5 yes 707 5 708 5 709 5 yes 710 3 711 3 712 1 713 1 714 1 715 1 716 1 111 1 718 1 719 1 720 1 721 1 yes 722 1 723 724 3 725 3 726 3 727 3 728 2 729 3 yes 730 3 yes 731 3 12,1 3 yes 132 1 734 5 735 5 736 1 131 1 738 1 739 1 yes 740 1 741 1 yes 742 1 743 1 yes 744 1 745 1 746 1 yes 266

747 yes 748 749 750 751 752 753 754 755 756 757 2 758 2 759 2 760 2 761 2 762 2 yes 763 2 764 2 765 2 766 3 767 3 768 3 769 3 770 3 771 2 772 2 773 2 774 2 775 2 776 2 777 2 778 2 779 2 780 5 781 5 yes 782 5 783 5 784 5 yes 785 5 786 2 yes 787 2 788 2 yes 789 2 790 2 267

791 2 792 1 yes 793 2 794 1 795 2 796 1 797 2 798 2 799 2 800 2 801 1 802 2 803 5 804 2 805 2 806 2 yes 807 5 808 5 809 5 810 2 811 2 yes 812 2 813 2 yes 814 2 yes 815 2 816 2 817 2 818 2 819 2 yes 820 2 821 2 822 2 823 2 824 2 825 2 yes 826 2 yes 827 1 yes 828 1 829 5 830 2 yes 831 2 832 2 833 2 834 2 835 2 2 836 2 837 5 838 5 839 840 5 5 841 5 842 5 843 5 yes 844 5 845 5 846 5 847 848 5 5 yes 849 5 850 2 yes 851 852 2 853 2 3 yes 854 3 855 856 3 857 3 3 858 5 859 860 5 861 2 862 2 yes 863 2 864 2 865 2 866 2 867 2 868 2 yes 869 2 870 2 871 2 2 yes 2 3 3 3 3 3 269

879 2 880 2 881 2 882 2 yes 883 2 yes 884 5 885 5 yes 886 5 yes 887 5 888 5 889 3 yes 890 1 891 2 892 1 893 3 894 3 895 3 896 3 897 3 898 2 899 2 900 2 901 2 902 2 903 2 904 2 905 2 906 2 yes 907 2 908 2 yes 909 2 910 2 911 2 912 2 913 2 914 2 915 2 916 5 917 5 918 5 yes 919 2 920 2 921 2 yes 922 2 270

923 2 924 2 925 2 926 2 927 2 928 2 929 2 930 5 931 5 932 5 933 5 934 5 935 2 936 2 yes 937 2 938 2 yes 939 2 940 2 yes 941 2 942 2 yes 943 2 944 2 945 3 946 3 947 3 yes 948 5 949 5 950 5 951 5 952 5 953 5 954 3 955 3 956 3 957 5 958 5 yes 959 5 960 5 yes 961 5 962 5 963 5 964 5 965 5 966 5 967 5 968 5 969 5 970 5 yes 971 5 972 yes 973 974 5 975 5 976 5 yes 977 5 978 5 979 5 980 1 981 1 982 1 983 1 984 5 985 5 986 5 yes 987 5 yes 988 5 yes 989 5 990 5 991 5 yes 992 5 993 2 994 2 995 2 996 2 997 2 998 2 999 2 1000 2 1001 2 1002 2 1003 2 yes 1004 2 1005 2 1006 2 1007 2 1008 2 1009 2 1010 2 272

1011 2 1012 2 1013 2 1014 2 1015 2 1016 2 1017 2 1018 2 1019 2 yes 1020 2 1021 2 1022 2 1023 2 1024 2 1025 2 yes 1026 2 1027 2 1028 2 1029 2 1030 2 1031 2 1032 2 1033 2 1034 2 1035 2 1036 2 1037 2 1038 2 1039 2 1040 2 1041 1042 1043 1044 1045 1046 1047 yes 1048 yes 1049 1050 1051 1052 yes 1053 1054 1055 1 1056 1 1057 1 1058 1 1059 1 1060 1 1061 1 1062 1 1063 1 1064 1 1065 1 1066 1 1067 1 1068 1 1069 1 1070 2 1071 2 1072 2 1073 2 1074 2 1075 2 1076 2 1077 2 1078 2 1079 2 1080 2 1081 2 1082 2 1083 2 1084 2 1085 2 1086 2 1087 2 1088 2 1089 2 1090 2 1091 2 1092 2 1093 2 1094 2 1095 2 1096 2 1097 2 1098 2 274

1099 2 1100 2 1101 2 1102 2 1103 2 1104 yes 1105 1106 1107 1108 1109 1110 nil 1112 1113 1114 1115 1116 1117 1118 yes 1119 1120 1121 1122 1123 1124 2 1125 2 1126 2 1127 2 1128 2 1129 2 1130 2 1131 2 1132 2 1133 2 1134 2 1135 2 1136 2 1137 2 1138 2 1139 2 1140 5 1141 5 1142 275

1143 1144 1145 yes 1146 1147 1148 1149 1150 1151 1152 1153 1154 1155 yes 1156 1157 1158 1159 1160 1161 1162 1163 1164 5 1165 5 1166 5 yes 1167 5 1168 5 1169 3 1170 3 1171 3 1172 3 1173 3 1174 3 1175 3 1176 3 1177 3 1178 3 1179 3 1180 3 1181 5 1182 5 1183 5 1184 5 1185 5 1186 5 276

1187 5 1188 3 1189 5 1190 5 1191 5 1192 5 1193 5 1194 5 1195 5 1196 5 1197 5 1198 5 1199 2 1200 5 1201 5 yes 1202 5 1203 5 1204 1205 1206 1207 1208 1209 1210 1211 5 1212 5 1213 5 1214 2 1215 2 1216 2 1217 2 1218 1 1219 1 1220 1 1221 1 1222 1 1223 1 1224 1 1225 5 1226 5 1227 1 1228 1 1229 1 1230 1 1231 1232 4873 1233 14280 1234 12219 1235 11361 1236 8759 1237 2345 1238 11620 1239 6883 1240 6883 1241 11882 1242 8837 1243 13146 1244 11584 1245 11945 1246 7671 1247 4829 1248 14259 1249 9792 1250 1309 1251 1309 1252 4888 1253 7671 1254 6615 1255 11517 1256 10494 1257 10761 1258 10761 1259 10761 1260 10777 1261 10755 1262 10770 1263 14381 1264 10529 1265 11591 1266 14749 1267 10660 1268 10660 1269 10660 1270 10660 1271 13195 1272 1118 1273 13086 1274 11848 278

1275 12106 1276 11840 Mil 14232 1278 11119 1279 11426 1280 8969 1281 9472 1282 4360 1283 11159 1284 11141 1285 11165 1286 6472 1287 9107 1288 5881 1289 12109 1290 2208 1291 8818 1292 8818 1293 11122 1294 4584 1295 7598 1296 11150 1297 8184 1298 13084 1299 5900 1300 1750 1301 11117 1302 12120 1303 12536 1304 9447 1305 9447 1306 8142 1307 8142 1308 12767 1309 11338 1310 7812 1311 9378 1312 10732 1313 1833 1314 10993 1315 11154 1316 10449 1317 13209 1318 13209 1319 11226 1320 13075 1321 10407 1322 10407 1323 10407 1324 11167 1325 10890 1326 5122 1327 14394 1328 1884 1329 13076 1330 13134 1331 11764 1332 11100 1333 7783 1334 14605 1335 5391 1336 9454 1337 11169 1338 14391 1339 6025 1340 11137 1341 2338 1342 13639 1343 8973 1344 13069 1345 5081 1346 12110 1347 12728 1348 11125 1349 7557 1350 13212 1351 12136 1352 11127 1353 11127 1354 11127 1355 11127 1356 7706 1357 12940 1358 1414 1359 11114 1360 14349 1361 7996 1362 13210 1363 12022 1364 5947 1365 12078 1366 1998 1367 7868 1368 145 1369 1428 1370 5882 1371 9274 1372 6845 1373 12083 1374 14355 1375 14355 1376 14355 nil 10691 1378 10691 1379 4956 1380 9108 1381 14393 1382 1926 1383 14739 1384 6647 1385 5938 1386 13093 1387 7626 1388 2719 1389 11153 1390 9106 1391 9106 1392 14427 1393 14427 1394 14347 1395 9440 1396 7495 1397 12813 1398 12018 1399 13381 1400 13381 1401 6346 1402 11121 1403 6799 1404 6799 1405 8156 1406 14265 281

1407 13095 1 1408 13095 1 1409 5712 1 1410 13228 1 1411 7604 1 1412a-4431-521 1 1413 g646 1 1414 g648 1 1415 g647 1 1416 §651 1 1417 g652 1 1418 g653 1 1419 a-4431-520 1 1 1420 a4431-901 no prov yes 1421 a4431-901 1 no prov 1422 a4431-901 1 no prov 1423 a4431-901 1 no prov 1424 a4431-901 1 no prov 1425 site 2 1 no prov 1426 a4431-901 1 no prov 1427 a4431-901 1 no prov 1428 a4431-901 1 no prov 1429 a4431-901 1 no prov 1430 a4431-901 1 no prov 1431 a4431-901 1 no prov 1432 a4431-901 1 no prov 1433 a4431-901 1 no prov 1434 a4431-901 1 no prov 1435 a4431-901 1 no prov 1436 site 2 1 4 1437 a4431-897 1 5 1438 a4431-897 1 5 1439 a4431-897 1 5 1440 a4431-897 1 5 1441 27669 1 1442 1443 47487 1 yes 1444 44883 1 yes 1445 1446 44940 1 yes 1447 47472 1 yes 1448 1449 26278 1 yes 1450 47497 yes 1451 27399 1 1452 26573 1 yes 1453 26251 yes 1454 26832 1 yes 1455 25562 1 yes 1456 26485 1 yes 1457 25942 1 yes 1458 27001 1 yes 1459 26628 1 yes 1460 26931 1 yes 1461 26135 1 yes 1462 27690 1 yes 1463 26635 1 yes APPENDIX B

DERMATOGLYPHIC DATA FROM ETHNOGRAPHIC SAMPLE

Sample# SEX* RCI RC2 RC3 Mean RCI 03A0013 1 30 30 30 30 03A0018 1 28 28 27 27.7 03A0019 1 24 26 25 25 03A0021 1 29 29 25 27.7 03A0025 I 30 30 30 30 03A0030 1 27 27 27 27 03A0031 1 28 30 29 29 03A0032 1 30 30 30 30 03A0038 I 30 31 30 30.3 03A0039 I 23 28 24 25.3 03A0040 I 25 25 27 25.7 03A0041 1 28 28 27 28.7 03A0042 I 29 28 33 30 03A0044 I 30 30 30 30 03A0046 I 23 23 23 23 03A0047 1 33 33 33 33 03A0049 I 27 27 27 27 03A0054 1 32 32 25 29.7 03A0057 I 27 30 31 29.3 03A0058 I 24 24 24 24 03A0059 I 28 26 27 27 03A0060 1 29 28 28 28.3 03A0063 1 29 31 27 29 03A0070 1 26 26 26 26 03A0071 1 25 25 25 25 03A0072 1 24 24 25 24.3 03A0073 1 30 26 28 28 03A0075 1 25 25 33 27.7 03A0077 I 24 31 34 29.7 03A0084 1 27 27 31 28.3 03B0101 1 35 29 31 31.7 03B0102 1 31 33 32 32 03B0106 1 28 27 28 28.7 03B0113 1 31 31 31 31 03B0114 1 26 26 26 26 03B0116 1 27 29 28 28 03B0118 1 32 31 28 30.3 03B0121 1 27 26 24 25.7 284

03B0123 1 27 26 30 27.7 03B0124 1 34 30 25 29.7 03B0127 1 25 30 26 27 03B0130 1 32 25 25 27.3 03B0131 1 24 28 26 26 03B0132 1 30 29 29 29.3 03B0142 1 30 34 29 31 03C0207 1 25 26 27 27 03C0209 1 26 24 25 25 03C0213 1 31 31 31 31 03C0215 1 31 28 30 29.7 03C0216 1 30 23 27 26.7 03C0222 1 30 30 30 30 03C0226 1 26 26 26 26 03C0227 1 23 23 27 24.3 03C0228 1 29 30 30 29.7 03C0234 1 22 28 22 24 03C0244 1 28 26 30 28 03C0245 1 29 26 33 29.3 03C0246 1 25 27 25 25.7 03C0247 1 28 29 23 26.7 03C0248 1 27 28 29 28 03C0250 1 30 29 28 29 03C0254 1 29 29 29 29 03C0255 1 25 26 29 27.5 03C0260 1 30 33 32 31.7 03D0323 1 30 30 30 30 03D0327 1 27 31 29 29 03D0330 1 27 26 22 25 03D0334 1 30 28 30 29.3 03D0336 1 27 28 30 28.3 03D0343 1 27 25 22 24.7 03D0344 1 32 31 34 32.3 03D0351 1 23 25 24 24 03D0353 1 28 28 28 28 03D0355 1 30 26 23 27 03D0366 1 29 29 29 29 03D0374 1 31 26 26 27.7 03D0380 1 26 31 28 28.3 03K1015 1 30 23 24 25.7 03K1017 1 26 27 28 27 03K1020 1 25 28 24 25.7 03K1023 1 28 29 28 28.3 03K1032 1 30 30 30 30 03K1035 1 25 27 26 26 03K1040 1 27 27 27 27 03K1041 1 29 30 30 29.7 03K1043 1 26 27 28 27 03K1046 1 25 28 26 26.3 03K1049 1 26 31 28 28.3 03K1054 1 28 27 • 30 28.3 03K1056 1 30 23 27 26.7 03K1057 1 29 23 26 26 03K1058 1 27 27 27 27 03K1061 1 25 26 29 26.7 03K1071 1 30 26 29 28.3 03K1074 1 24 28 27 26.3 03K1076 1 28 26 27 27 03K1090 1 26 26 26 26 03K1091 1 31 27 29 29 03L1100 1 29 28 25 27.3 03L1107 1 34 30 32 33 03L1110 1 24 27 30 27 03L1113 1 26 31 33 30 03L1116 1 34 34 32 33.3 03L1121 1 25 27 26 26 03M1200 1 29 29 28 28.7 03M1204 1 26 30 27 27.7 03M1205 1 25 27 32 28 03M1207 1 29 31 29 29.7 03M1217 1 24 27 26 25.7 03M1226 1 26 26 22 24.7 03M1230 1 26 26 25 25.7 03N1301 1 26 27 27 26.7 03N1303 1 31 28 29 29.3 03N1306 1 29 30 27 28.7 03N1308 1 21 24 22 22.3 03N1310 1 29 32 29 30 03N1313 1 31 30 30 30.3 03N1315 1 25 26 26 25.7 03N1319 1 27 27 27 27 03N1321 1 32 28 33 31 03N1324 1 31 27 25 27.7 03N1329 1 25 27 27 26.3 03P1500 1 25 24 27 25.3 03P1504 1 30 30 30 30 03Q1610 1 34 34 30 32.7 03Q1614 1 24 24 24 24 03Q1616 1 29 31 30 30 03Q1617 1 29 33 29 30.3 03Q1622 1 25 25 23 24.3 03Q1630 1 29 22 28 26.3 03Q1632 1 29 27 27 27.3 03Q1639 1 27 27 29 27.7 03Q1641 1 25 25 24 24.7 03R1701 1 29 28 28 28.3 03R1703 1 29 26 29 28 03R1706 1 29 27 27 27.7 03R1708 1 26 29 30 28.3 03R1710 1 30 29 29 29.3 03R1717 1 27 27 27 27 03R1718 1 28 25 27 26.7 03R1720 1 25 25 25 25 03R1723 1 28 27 27 27.3 03R1726 1 27 29 28 28 03R1727 1 26 25 25 25.3 03R1745 1 28 28 29 28.3 03R1750 1 23 24 30 25.7 03S1805 1 30 32 29 30.3 03S1809 1 28 31 31 30 03S1818 1 31 31 31 30.7 03S1819 1 29 26 22 25.7 03S1820 1 34 30 30 31.3 03T1904 1 32 30 31 31 03T1907 1 26 34 26 28.7 03T1912 1 26 31 27 28 03T1914 1 30 31 29 30 03T1923 1 28 29 31 29.3 03T1926 1 27 27 33 29 03T1928 1 34 33 32 33 03T1929 1 28 27 25 26.7 03T1930 1 30 28 31 29.7 03T1932 1 30 25 28 27.7 03T1933 1 28 31 31 30 03T1939 1 27 26 27 26.7 03T1942 1 27 25 26 26 03T1951 1 26 30 29 28.3 03T1953 1 29 21 26 26 03T1959 1 26 30 25 27 11A0012 1 29 25 27 27 11A0017 1 31 29 29 29.3 11A0029 1 33 29 26 29.3 r-- (N00 l L U OO ON 30 32 26 27 28 26 27 25 28 28 22 24 (N CN 22 17.7 19.7 17.7 19.3 19.3 31.7 30.3 32.3 30.5 25.7 29.7 27.3 27.3 28.3 28.7 23.7 24.3 25.7 29.3 25.3 27.3 21.3 21.7 20.3 21.3

00 00 ON 1^ 00 O CN ON ON 32 30 30 30 32 32 28 25 27 25 26 28 27 27 25 26 26 27 27 29 25 25 25 29 28 28 22 25 22 22 (N CN 20 22

o in CN r- ON 00 ON 00 TT 32 33 30 30 30 32 22 28 29 25 29 28 24 27 22 25 27 23 24 28 28 20 22 23 m

CO ON ON ON (N r- r- 00 o ON r- 30 30 32 32 33 25 28 26 29 26 27 26 25 26 27 29 25 24 25 27 25 23 28 26 21 m CO CN CN (N CN CN CN 20 23 23 24

(N(N(NfN

ON CN CN O OO oo ^ r- m in in r~- m m VO r- oo 00 ON ON O (N

03A0068 2 18 20 22 20 03A0069 2 19 17 18 18 03A0078 2 23 19 26 23 03A0080 2 23 21 20 21.3 03A0081 2 21 21 22 21.3 03A0083 2 22 18 20 20 03A0085 2 19 20 22 20.3 03B0100 2 19 20 15 18 03B0105 2 19 20 19 19.3 03B0109 2 20 22 19 20.3 03B0110 2 22 21 17 20 03B0111 2 21 22 19 20.7 03B0117 2 18 19 18 18.3 03B0128 2 22 22 18 20.7 03B0140 2 22 19 20 20.3 03B0141 2 17 18 17 17.3 03B0143 2 21 23 19 21 03B0144 2 18 20 18 18.7 03B0145 2 20 16 18 18 03C0200 2 21 23 20 21.3 03C0201 2 22 24 22 22.7 03C0203 2 19 19 19 19 03C0208 2 19 19 16 18 03C0211 2 19 16 20 18.3 03C0218 2 18 17 18 17.7 03C0230 2 22 19 19 21 03C0233 2 20 16 18 18 03C0237 2 18 18 19 18.3 03C0238 2 22 21 19 20.7 03C0240 2 22 19 16 19 03C0241 2 18 19 19 18.7 03C0243 2 18 20 20 19.3 03C0252 2 19 18 19 18.7 03C0253 2 22 18 17 19 03C0258 2 17 17 17 17 03C0259 2 18 22 22 20.7 03C0262 2 20 19 19 19.3 03C0263 2 21 26 23 23.3 03C0264 2 19 19 18 18.7 03D0301 2 23 23 23 23 03D0302 2 18 21 22 20.3 03D0303 2 23 23 23 23 03D0304 2 25 19 25 23 03D0313 2 19 19 21 19.7 03D0314 2 16 20 20 18.7 03D0315 2 23 20 23 22 03D0326 2 23 24 23 23.3 03D0328 2 23 23 23 23 03D0329 2 20 21 19 20 03D0331 2 26 26 26 26 03D0332 2 24 24 24 24 03D0338 2 21 18 19 19.3 03D0339 2 22 21 22 21.7 03D0340 2 19 24 21 21.3 03D0347 2 19 19 19 19 03D0348 2 19 19 25 22 03D0349 2 23 19 21 21 03D0350 2 24 17 21 21 03D0358 2 25 17 19 20.3 03D0360 2 21 21 23 21.7 03D0362 2 24 24 24 24 03D0363 2 22 22 24 22.7 03D0364 2 22 23 18 21 03D0365 2 24 23 21 22.7 03D0370 2 21 18 17 18.7 03D0377 2 21 18 19 19.3 03K1001 2 19 22 21 20.7 03K1003 2 25 23 27 25 03K1004 2 24 26 25 25 03K1007 2 19 18 23 20 03K1009 2 19 24 21 21.3 03K1011 2 24 23 24 23.7 03K1013 2 20 22 19 20.3 03K1014 2 22 22 21 21.7 03K1016 2 17 20 19 18.7 03K1021 2 22 21 21 21.3 03K1022 2 28 22 20 23.3 03K1027 2 22 19 20 20.3 03K1028 2 18 25 20 21 03K1029 2 21 20 25 22 03K1030 2 23 22 20 21.7 03K1031 2 25 19 22 22 03K1034 2 22 23 21 22 03K1039 2 21 21 22 21.3 03K1055 2 19 23 20 20.7 03K1066 2 18 21 22 20.3 03K1069 2 23 23 21 22.3 03K1070 2 20 18 21 19.7 290

03K1077 2 20 20 22 20.7 03K1078 2 23 23 23 23 03K1093 2 22 19 17 19.3 03K1094 2 18 22 18 19.3 03K1096 2 15 18 15 16 03K1097 2 27 25 24 25.3 03K1098 2 20 19 21 20 03L1101 2 19 19 22 20 03L1105 2 18 19 19 18.7 03L1106 2 19 18 20 19 03L1109 2 17 20 21 19.3 03L1111 2 24 23 18 21.7 03L1112 2 19 23 23 21.7 03M1203 2 21 21 19 20.3 03M1206 2 19 18 19 18.7 03M1215 2 21 19 19 19.7 03M1216 2 18 16 24 19.3 03N1300 2 21 17 18 18.7 03N1305 2 21 22 19 20.7 03N1307 2 18 21 20 19.7 03N1322 2 20 19 17 18.7 03N1327 2 22 18 20 20 03N1328 2 21 22 20 21 03N1332 2 21 19 21 20.3 03P1502 2 21 18 19 19.3 03Q1600 2 22 23 22 22.3 03Q1611 2 22 23 21 22 03Q1613 2 23 22 25 23.3 03Q1615 2 21 24 20 21.7 03Q1623 2 18 19 18 18.3 03Q1629 2 20 16 24 20 03Q1638 2 23 16 20 19.7 03Q1640 2 23 22 25 23.3 03R1700 2 22 22 22 22 03R1714 2 24 23 23 23.3 03R1715 2 23 24 21 22.7 03R1721 2 19 21 17 19 03R1722 2 18 19 18 18.3 03R1725 2 24 20 19 21 03R1730 2 24 21 20 21.7 03R1734 2 18 25 24 22.3 03R1739 2 19 17 22 19.3 03R1748 2 23 22 25 23.3 03S1800 2 23 18 25 22 03S1801 2 21 21 22 21.3 03SI802 2 18 21 21 20 03S1803 2 22 19 20 20.3 03S1810 2 22 24 21 22.3 03S1813 2 17 22 20 19.7 03S1814 2 20 22 19 20.3 03S1816 2 20 24 • 25 23 03T1641 2 22 19 19 20 03T1901 2 16 19 20 18.3 03T1902 2 19 20 23 20.7 03T1903 2 20 23 26 23 03T1905 2 22 20 16 19.3 03T1907 2 24 23 18 21.7 03T1910 2 19 20 20 19.7 03T1911 2 24 26 20 23.3 03T1913 2 22 22 17 20.3 03T1916 2 19 19 18 18.7 03T1917 2 20 20 20 20 03T1922 2 17 18 18 17.7 03T1925 2 23 21 23 22.3 03T1945 2 22 26 16 21.3 03T1958 2 23 18 19 20 08U2001 2 22 19 18 19.7 08U2002 2 23 23 21 22.3 08U2006 2 19 20 22 20.3 08U2009 2 20 19 19 19.3 08U2011 2 21 23 24 22.7 08U2012 2 27 28 21 25.3 08U2025 2 19 19 18 18.7 08U2027 2 20 22 22 21.3 08U2029 2 20 19 18 19 08U2030 2 21 23 21 21.7 08U2041 2 17 17 17 17 08U2044 2 23 18 19 20 08U2045 2 20 21 21 20.7 08U2046 2 24 27 26 25.7 08U2047 2 20 19 17 18.7 08U2048 2 21 20 20 20.3 08U2082 2 24 25 24 24.3 08U2084 2 19 19 19 19 08X2305 2 18 18 19 18.3 08X2315 2 19 21 16 18.7 08X2316 2 22 19 17 19.3 08X2317 2 20 22 22 21.3 08X2319 2 22 22 22 22 08X2320 2 23 20 23 22 08X2321 2 23 21 22 22 08X2323 2 26 17 18 20.3 08X2329 2 22 16 22 20 08X2338 2 22 20 19 20.3 llAOOOl 2 17 21 19 19 11A0003 2 15 19 21 18.3 11A0004 2 24 24 23 23.7 11A0006 2 22 22 22 22 11A0033 2 21 20 20 20.3 11A0036 2 21 20 19 20 11A0040 2 21 22 24 22.3 11A0049 2 22 26 25 24.3 11A0057 2 18 18 24 20 11A0066 2 20 17 17 18 11A0076 2 27 23 21 23.7 11A0077 2 23 23 23 23 11A0082 2 17 22 15 18 11A0086 2 17 20 19 18.7 11A0097 2 21 17 18 18.7 11B0104 2 26 23 24 24.3 11B0109 2 17 16 17 16.7 11B0120 2 20 22 23 21.7 11B0122 2 22 21 18 20.3 11B0125 2 33 21 27 27 11B0130 2 20 15 17 17.3 11B0167 2 20 25 23 22.7 11B0176 2 21 20 17 19.3 11B0180 2 19 19 17 18.3 11B0181 2 26 25 27 26 11B0191 2 18 22 22 20.7 11B0192 2 23 23 20 22 11B0196 2 20 19 22 20.3 11B0197 2 22 20 19 20.3 11B0198 2 17 15 23 18.3 11B0199 2 24 21 19 21.3 11C0200 2 23 19 23 21.7 11C0201 2 17 21 22 20 11C0202 2 17 22 20 19.7 11D0301 2 19 20 22 20.3 11D0309 2 19 21 21 20.3 11D0310 2 21 21 20 20.7 11D0314 2 15 19 20 18 11D0327 2 23 17 20 20 11D0369 2 24 22 26 24 11D0370 2 21 16 18 18.3 *l=Female 2=Male APPENDIX C

DERMATOGLYPHIC DATA FROM ARCHAEOLOGICAL SAMPLE

SITE RIDGES MM RCI ST 10 3 33.3 ST 7 2.5 28 ST 8 3 26.7 ST 18 5 36 ST 11 3.5 31.4 ST 11 3.5 31.4 ST 10 4 25 ST 10 4 25 ST 12 4.5 26.7 ST 12 5 24 ST 7 3 23.3 ST 5 1.5 33.3 ST 12 4 30 ST 5 1.5 33.3 ST 9 2 45 ST 10 6 16.7 ST 7 3 23.3 ST 5 2 25 ST 9 3 30 ST 8 3 36.7 ST 12 3.5 34.3 ST 8 3 26.7 ST 15 4 37.5 ST 8 3 26.7 ST 13 4 32.5 ST 7 2.5 28 ST 17 6 28.3 ST 5 2 25 ST 8 2.5 32 ST 9 2.5 36 ST 7 2 35 ST 14 4.5 31.1 ST 14 5.5 25.5 ST 7 2.5 28 ST 10 4 25 ST 13 4 32.5 ST 10 3.5 28.6 ST 6 2 30 ST 7 2.5 28 ST 8 3 26.7 ST 6 2.5 24 ST 7 2.5 28 ST 13 5 26 ST 8 4.5 17.8 ST 7 3 23.3 ST 11 4.5 24.4 ST 6 2.5 24 ST 6 2 30 ST 15 4.5 33.3 ST 9 3 30 ST 10 4.5 22.2 ST 11 5 22 ST 6 2 30 ST 9 3 30 ST 11 5 22 ST 10 3.5 28.6 ST 11 4 27.5 ST 15 6 25 ST 11 4.5 24.4 ST 4.00 2 20 ST 11 5 22 ST 6 3 20 ST 6 2 30 ST 10 4 25 ST 11 6 18.3 ST 6 2 30 ST 8 3 26.7 ST 5 2 25 ST 12 4 30 ST 14 6.5 21.5 ST 8 3 26.7 ST 7 2 35 ST 18 7 25.7 ST 7 2.5 28 ST 11 4 27.5 ST 4 1.5 26.7 ST 5 2 25 ST 6 3 20 ST 7 2 35 ST 5 1.5 33.3 ST 9 3.5 25.7 ST 5 1.5 33.3 296

ST 10 3 33.3 ST 5 1.5 33.3 ST 5 1.5 33.3 ST 13 4 32.5 ST 11 4 27.5 ST 6 2 30 ST 6 2 30 ST 6 2 30 ST 18 6 30 ST 8 2.5 32 ST 12 4 30 ST 5 1.5 33.3 ST 8 2.5 32 ST 5 2 25 ST 5 1.5 33.3 ST 6 2 30 ST 8 2.5 32 ST 6 2.5 24 ST 10 3.5 28.6 ST 4 1.5 26.7 ST 7 3 23.3 ST 5 1.5 33.3 ST 11 4 27.5 ST 19 8 23.8 ST 14 6 23.3 ST 5 2 25 ST 7 3.5 20 ST 7 2.5 28 ST 6 2 30 ST 10 3.5 31.4 ST 7 2.5 28 ST 7 3 23.3 ST 13 4.5 32.5 ST 6 2 30 ST 10 3.5 31.4 ST 6 2.5 24 ST 6 2.5 24 ST 8 3 26.7 ST 9 3.5 25.7 ST 7 2.5 28 ST 5 1.5 33.3 ST 13 4 32.5 ST 10 3.5 31.4 ST 6 2.5 24 ST 9 3.5 25.7 ST 8 3 26.7 ST 5 1.5 33.3 ST 5 2 25 ST 6 2 30 ST 8 2.5 32 ST 7 2.5 28 ST 9 3 30 ST 6 2 30 ST 8 3 26.7 ST 7 2.5 28 ST 8 3 26.7 ST 14 4.5 31.1 ST 7 2.5 28 ST 10 3.5 28.5 ST 5 1.5 33.3 ST 9 3.5 25.7 ST 8 3 26.7 ST 5 1.5 33.3 ST 8 3.5 22.9 ST 6 2.5 24 ST 6 2 30 ST 8 2.5 32 ST 8 3 26.7 ST 11 4 27.5 ST 6 2 30 ST 9 3 30 ST 6 2 30 ST 7 3 23.3 ST 9 3.5 25.7 ST 11 4 27.5 ST 10 3.5 28.5 ST 6 2.5 24 ST 10 3.5 28.6 ST 10 3.5 28.6 GR 18 8.7 20.7 ST 6 2 30 ST 10 4 25 ST 10 3.5 28.6 ST 12 3 40 ST 7 2.5 28 ST 11 4.5 24.4 ST 9 3.5 25.7 ST 12 4.5 26.7 ST 17 6 28.3 ST 12 4 30 ST 10 3 33.3 ST 9 3 30 ST 5 2 25 ST 16 5 32 ST 11 4.5 24.4 ST 8 3 26.7 ST 9 2.5 36 ST 10 3.5 28.6 ST 7 2 35 ST 8 4 20 ST 8 4 20 ST 9 2.5 36 299

REFERENCES

Abbott, David R. 2000 Ceramics and Community Organization among the Hohokam. The University of Arizona Press, Tucson.

Abbott, David R., Susan L. Stinson and Scott Van Keuren 2001 The Economic Implications of Hohokam Buff Ware Exchange during the Early Sedentary Period. Kiva 67(l):7-29.

Adams, E. Charles 1991 The Origin and Development of the Pueblo Katsina Cult. The University of Arizona Press, Tucson.

Adler, Michael 1993 Why is a Kiva? New Interpretations of Prehistoric Social Integrative Architecture in the Northern Rio Grande Region of New Mexico. Journal of Anthropological Research 49:319-346.

1996 Land Tenure, Archaeology, and the Ancestral Pueblo Social Landscape. Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 15:337-371.

Adler, Michael and Richard Wilshusen 1990 Large-Scale Integrative Facilities in Tribal Societies: Cross-Cultural and Southwestern US Examples. World Archaeology 22{2y.\33-\46.

Ahem, Emily M. 1973 The Cult of the Dead in a Chinese Village. Stanford University Press, Stanford.

Alexander, Rani T. 1999 Mesoamerican House Lots and Archaeological Site Structure: Problems of Inference in Yaxcaba, Yucatan, Mexico, 1750-1B47. In The Archaeology of Household Activities, edited by P. M. Allison, pp. 78-101. Routledge, London.

Allen, Paul L. 2000 The Long Journey of the Vaughan Cache. In Tucson Citizen, Tucson.

Allison, Penelope M. (editor) 1999 The Archaeology of Household Activities. Routledge, London. 300

Allison, Penelope M. 1999 Introduction. In The Archaeology of Household Activities, edited by P. M. Allison, pp. 1-18. Routledge, London.

Archer, Leonie J., Susan Fischler and Maria Wyke (editors) 1994 Women in Ancient Societies. Routledge, New York.

Arnold, Dean E. 1985 Ceramic Theory and Cultural Process. New Studies in Archaeology. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

Arquimbau, R., E. Esteban and L. Farrands 1993 Finger Dermatoglyphics in Delta de I'Ebre: A Mediterranean Spanish Population. Anthropologischer Anzeiger 51(3):267-274.

Ashbaugh, David R. 1999 Quantitative-Qualitative Friction Ridge Analysis. CRC Press, Boca Raton.

Astrom, Paul and Sven Eriksson 1980 Fingerprints and Archaeology. Gotab, Kungalv, Sweden.

Babler, W. J. 1990 Prenatal Communalities in Epidermal Ridge Development. In Trends in Dermatoglyphic Research, edited by N. M. Durham and C. C. Plato, pp. 54-68. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Netherlands.

Bailey, Douglass W. 1994 Reading Prehistoric Figurines as Individuals. World Archaeology 25(3):321-331.

Bandelier, Adolph F. 1892 Final Report of Investigations among the Indians of the Southwestern United States (Part II). Papers of the Archaeological Institute of America, American Series 4. Archaeological Institute of America.

Barbour, Warren 1975 The Figurines and Figurine Chronology of Ancient Teotihuacan, Mexico. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation. University of Rochester.

Basu, Arabinda 1985 Dermatoglyphics of Mysore Population. Anthropological Survey of India, Calcutta. 301

Battley, Henry 1942 Single Finger Prints. Yale University Press, New Haven.

Bayman, James M. 2001 The Hohokam of Southwest North America. Journal of World Prehistory 15(3):257-311.

Beck, Lois 1978 Women among Qashqa'i Nomadic Pastoralists in Iran. In Women in the Muslim World, edited by L. Beck and N. Keddie, pp. 351-373. Harvard University Press, Cambridge.

Berry, John 1991 The History and Development of Fingerprinting. In Advances in Fingerprint Technology, edited by H. Lee and R. E. Gaensslen, pp. 2-38. Elsevier, New York.

Blanton, Richard 1994 House and Households: A Comparative Study. Plenum Press, New York.

Bordieu, Pierre 1977 Outline of a Theory of Practice. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

Bowen, T. 1976 Seri Prehistory, The Archaeology of the Central Coast of Sonora, Mexico. Anthropological Papers of the University of Arizona 27. University of Arizona Press, Tucson.

Brain, James 1973 Ancestors as Elders in Africa: Further Thoughts. Africa 43(2):122-133.

Branigan, Keith, Yiannis Papadatos and Douglas Wynn 2002 Fingerprints on Early Minoan Pottery: A Pilot Study. Annual of the British School at Athens 97:49-53.

Bruce, Robert D. 1973 Figuras Ceremoniales Lacandonas de Hule. Boletin del I.N.A.H. 5:25-34.

Brumfiel, Elizabeth M. 1991 Weaving and Cooking: Women's Production in Aztec Mexico. In Engendering Archaeology, Women and Prehistory, edited by J. M. Gero and M. W. Conkey, pp. 224-254. Blackwell Publishers, Oxford.

1996 Figurines and the Aztec State: Testing the Effectiveness of Ideological 302

Domination. In Gender and Archaeology, edited by R. P. Wright, pp. 143- 166. University of Pennsylvania Press, Philadelphia.

Bryan, Kirk 1925 The Papago Country, Arizona. United States Geological Survey Water- Supply Paper 499. United States Geological Survey, Washington, D.C.

Buchi, Eric C. 1978 Finger Ridge Counts in Samples From Tribal Populations of India with Application of a Three-Factor Theory. In Dermatoglyphics, edited by J. Mavalwala, pp. 91-101. Mouton Publishers, Paris.

Cameron, Catherine M. 2002 Sacred Earthen Architecture in the Northern Southwest: The Bluff Great House Berm. American Antiquity 67(4):677-696.

Carsten, J. and H. Hugh-Jones (editors) 1995 About the House: Levi-Strauss and Beyond. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

Claassen, Cheryl 1992 Questioning Gender: An Introduction. In Exploring Gender through Archaeology, edited by C. Claassen, pp. 1-9. Prehistory Press, Madison.

1997 Changing Venue: Women's Lives in Prehistoric North America. In Women in Prehistory, North America and Mesoamerica, edited by C. Claassen and R. A. Joyce, pp. 65-87. University of Pennsylvania Press, Philadelphia.

Clark, John E. and Stephen D. Houston 1998 Craft Specialization, Gender, and Personhood among the Post-Conquest Maya of Yucatan, Mexico. In Craft and Social Identity, edited by C. L. Costin and R. P. Wright, pp. 31-46. Archaeological Papers of the American Anthropological Association, vol. 8, M. E. Whalen, general editor. American Anthropological Association, Arlington, Virginia.

Cole, S. 1994 Roots of Anasazi and Pueblo Imagery in Basketmaker II Rock Art and Material Culture. Kiva 60(2):289-311.

Conkey, Margaret W. and Janet D. Spector 1984 Archaeology and the Study of Gender. Advances in Archaeological Method and Theory 7:1-38. 303

Conkey, Margaret W. and Joan M. Gero 1991 Tensions, Pluralities, and Engendering Archaeology: An Introduction to Women and Prehistory. In Engendering Archaeology, Women and Prehistory, edited by J. M. Gero and M. W. Conkey, pp. 3-30. Blackwell Publishers, Oxford.

1997 Programme to Practice: Gender and Feminism in Archaeology, yinnwa/ Review of Anthropology 26:411-437.

Cory, Hans 1956 African Figurines: Their Ceremonial Use in Puberty Rites in Tanganyika. Faber and Faber, London.

Costin, Cathy L. 1998 Introduction: Craft and Social Identity. \n Craft and Social Identity, edited by C. L. Costin and R. P. Wright, pp. 3-18. Archaeological Papers of the American Anthropological Association, vol. 8, M. E. Whalen, general editor. American Anthropological Association, Arlington, Virginia.

Costin, Cathy L. and Rita P. Wright (editors) 1998 Craft and Social Identity. 8. American Anthropological Association, Arlington, Virginia.

Craig, Douglas B. (editor) 2001 The Grewe Archaeological Research Project. Northland Research, Inc., Temper, AZ.

Craig, Douglas B. 2001a Domestic Architecture. In The Grewe Archaeological Research Project, V. 1, Project Background and Feature Descriptions, edited by D. B. Craig, pp. 63-108. Anthropological Papers No. 99-1. Northland Research, Inc., Tempe, AZ.

2001b Domestic Architecture and Household Wealth at Grewe. In The Grewe Archaeological Research Project, V. 3, Synthesis, edited by D. B. Craig, pp. 115-129. Anthropological Papers No.99-1. Northland Research, Inc., Tempe, AZ.

2001c The Demographic Implications of Architectural Change at Grewe. In The Grewe Archaeological Research Project, V. 3, Synthesis, edited by D. B. Craig, pp. 37-50. Anthropological Papers No. 99-1. Northland Research, Inc., Tempe, AZ. 304

2004 Beyond Snaketown: Household Inequality and Political Power in Early Hohokam Society. Ph.D. Dissertation, University of Arizona.

Crawford, J. R. 1967 Witchcraft and Sorcery in Rhodesia. Oxford University Press, London.

Creel, Darrell and Roger Anyon 2003 New Interpretations of Mimbres Public Architecture and Space: Implications for Cultural Change. American Antiquity 68(l):67-92.

Crown, Patricia L. 1991 The Hohokam: Current Views of Prehistory and the Regional System. In Chaco & Hohokam: Prehistoric Regional Systems in the American Southwest, edited by P. L. Crown and W. J. Judge, pp. 135-158. School of American Research Press, Santa Fe.

1994 Ceramics and Ideology: Salado Polychrome Pottery. University of New Mexico Press, Albuquerque.

1999 Socialization in American Southwest Pottery Decoration. In Pottery and People: A Dynamic Interaction, edited by J. M. Skibo and G. M. Feinman, pp. 25-43. University of Utah Press, Salt Lake City.

2000 Women cfe Men in the Prehispanic Southwest. School of American Research Press, Santa Fe.

2001 Learning to Make Pottery in the Prehispanic American Southwest. Journal of Anthropological Research 57(4):451-470.

Crown, Patricia L. and Suzanne K. Fish 1996 Gender and Status in the Hohokam Pre-Classic to Classic Transition. American Anthropologist 98(4):803-1086.

Crown, Patricia L. and W. James Judge (editors) 1991 Chaco & Hohokam: Prehistoric Regional Systems in the American Southwest. School of American Research Press, Santa Fe.

Crown, Patricia L. and W. H. Wills 2003 Modifying Pottery and Kivas at Chaco: Pentimento, Restoration, or Renewal? American Antiquity 68(3):511-532.

Cummins, Harold 1941 Ancient Finger Prints in Clay. The Scientific Monthly May:389-402. 305

Cummins, Harold and C. Midlo 1976 Finger Prints, Palms and Soles. Research Publishing Co., South Berlin, Massachusetts.

Cummins, Harold, W. J. Waits and J. T. McQuitty 1941 The Breadths of Epidermal Ridges of the Finger Tips and Palms: A Study of Variation. American Journal of Anatomy 68:127-151.

Cushing, Frank Hamilton 1890 Preliminary Notes on the Origin, Working Hypothesis, and Primary Researches of the Hemenway Southwestern Archaeological Expedition. Paper presented at the Congres International des Americanistes, Berlin.

Dahlberg, F. 1981 Woman the Gatherer. Yale University Press, New Haven.

David, Nicholas 1971 The Fulani Compound and the Archaeologist. World Archaeology 3(1):111-131.

Deetz, James J. F. 1982 Households. American Behavioral Scientist 25(6):717-724.

Dick-Bissonnette, Linda E. 1998 Gender and Authority among the Yokoch, Mono, and Miwok of Central California. Journal of Anthropological Research 54:49-72.

Di Leonardo, Micaela (editor) 1991 Gender at the Crossroads of Knowledge. University of California Press, Berkeley.

Di Leonardo, Micaela 1997 The Female World of Cards and Holidays: Women, Families, and the Work of Kinship. In Gender in Cross-Cultural Perspective, edited by C. B. Brettell and C. F. Sargent, pp. 340-350. Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River.

Di Peso, C. C., John B. Rinaldo and Gloria J. Fenner 1974 Casas Grandes, A Fallen Trading Center of the Gran Chichimeca 6, Ceramics and Shell. Northland Press, Flagstaff.

Dobres, Marcia-Anne and C. R. Hoffman (editors) 1999 The Social Dynamics of Technology: Practice, Politics, and World Views. Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington, D.C. 306

Dobres, Marcia-Anne and John E. Robb 2000 Agency in Archaeology: Paradigm or Platitude? In Agency in Archaeology, edited by M.-A. Dobres and J. Robb, pp. 3-17. Routledge, London.

Doelle, William H. 1995 A Method for Estimating Regional Population. In The Roosevelt Community Development Study: New Perspectives on Tonto Basin Prehistory, edited by M. D. Elson, M. T. Stark and D. Gregory, pp. 513- 536. Anthropological Papers No. 15. Center for Desert Archaeology, Tucson.

Doelle, William H., Fred W. Huntington and Henry D. Wallace 1987 Rincon Phase Community Reorganization in the Tucson Basin. In The Hohokam Village: Site Structure and Organization, edited by D. E. Doyel, pp. 71-95. Southwestern and Rocky Mountain Division American Association for the Advancement of Science, Glenwood Springs, CO.

Doyel, David E. 1991 Hohokam Cultural Evolution in the Phoenix Basin. In Exploring the Hohokam: Prehistoric Desert Peoples of the American Southwest, edited by G. J. Gumerman, pp. 231-278. University of New Mexico Press, Albuquerque.

Dozier, Edward P. 1970 The Pueblo Indians of North America. Waveland Press, Inc., Prospect Heights, Illinois.

Draper, Patricia 1975 !Kung Women; Contrasts in Sexual Egalitarianism in Foraging and Sedentary Contexts. In Toward an Anthropology of Women, edited by R. R. Reiter, pp. 77-109. Monthly Review Press, New York.

Driver, Harold 1969 Indians of North America. University of Chicago Press, Chicago.

Eggan, Fred 1950 Social Organization of the Western Pueblos. The University of Chicago Publications in Anthropology. The University of Chicago Press, Chicago.

Ephirim-Donkor, Anthony 1997 African Spirituality: On Becoming Ancestors. Africa World Press, Inc., Trenton. 307

Estioko-Griffin, Agnes and P. Bion Griffin 1981 Women the Hunter: The Agta. In Woman the Gatherer, edited by F. Dahlberg, pp. 121-151. Yale University Press, New Haven.

Evans-Pritchard, E. 1937 Witchcraft, Oracles, and Magic among the Azande. Oxford University Press, Oxford.

1939 Economic Life of the Nuer. Sudan Notes 20:209-245

Fantham, Elaine, Helene Peet Foley, Natalie Boymel Kampen, Susan B. Pomeroy and H. A. Shapiro 1994 Women in the Classical World. Oxford University Press, New York.

Faulds, Henry 1880 On the Skin-Furrows of the Hand. Nature October 28:605.

Ferg, Alan and David P. Doak 1999 Ceramics. In Archaeological Data Recovery at the Home Depot Site, AZ AA: 12:352 (ASM), in Marana, Pima County, Arizona, edited by D. P. Doak, pp. 60-66. SWCA Cultural Resources Report No. 99-146. SWCA Inc., Tucson.

Fewkes, Jesse W. 1892 A Report on the Present Condition of a Ruin in Arizona Called Casa Grande. Journal of American Ethnology and Archaeology 2:177-193.

1923 Clay Figurines Made by Navaho Children. American Anthropologist 25:559-563.

Fiawoo, D. K. 1976 Characteristic Features of Ewe Ancestor Worship. In Ancestors, edited by W. H. Newell, pp. 263-282. Mounton Publishers, Paris.

Fish, Suzanne K. and Paul R. Fish 1994 Multisite Communities as Measures of Hohokam Aggregation. In The Ancient Southwestern Community: Models and Methods for the Study of Prehistoric Social Organization, edited by H. W. W and R. D. Leonard, pp. 119-130. University of New Mexico Press, Albuquerque.

2000 The Institutional Contexts of Hohokam Complexity. In Alternative Leadership Strategies in the Prehispanic Southwest, edited by B. J. Mills, pp. 154-167. University of Arizona Press, Tucson. 308

Flickinger, G. 1976 A Comparative Dermatoglyphic Study of the Apache, Choctaw, and Navajo Indians. Ph. D., University of Southern Mississippi.

Follensbee, Billie J. A. 2000 Sex and Gender in Olmec Art and Archaeology. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, University of Maryland.

Fortes, Meyer 1938 Social and Psychological Aspects of Education in Taleland. Africa 11:1- 64.

1965 Some Reflections on Ancestor Worship in Africa. In African Systems of Thought, edited by M. Fortes and G. Dieterlen, pp. 122-142. Oxford University Press, London.

1976 An Introductory Comment. In Ancestors, edited by W. H. Newell, pp. 1- 16. Mouton Publishers, Paris.

Foucault, Michael 1972 The Archaeology of Knowledge. Routledge, London.

1977 Discipline and Punish: the Birth of the Prison. Penguin, London.

Freedman, Maurice 1966 Chinese Lineage and Society: Fukien and Kwangtung. Athlone, London.

Friedl, Erika 1991 The Dynamics of Women's Spheres of Action in Rural Iran. In Women in Middle Eastern History, edited by N. Keddie and B. Baron, pp. 195-214. Yale University Press, New Haven.

Galton, Francis 1892 Finger Prints. Macmillan and Co., London.

Gelfand, M. 1967 The African Witch. E & S Livingstone, Edinburgh.

Gero, Joan M. 1983 Gender Bias in Archaeology: A Cross-Cultural Perspective. In The Socio- Politics of Archaeology, edited by J. M. Gero, D. Lacey and M. Blakey, pp. 51-57. Research Reports no. 23. University of Massachusetts, Amherst. 309

1985 Socio-politics and the Woman-at-Home Ideology. American Antiquity 50:342-350.

1991 Genderlithics: Women's Roles in Stone Tool Production. In Engendering Archaeology, Women and Prehistory, edited by J. M. Gero and M. W. Conkey, pp. 163-193. Blackwell Publishers, Oxford.

Gero, Joan M. and Margaret W. Conkey (editors) 1991 Engendering Archaeology: Women and Prehistory. Blackwell, Oxford.

Giddens, Anthony 1979 Central Problems in Social Theory: Action, Structure, and Contradiction in Social Analysis. University of California Press, Berkeley.

1984 The Constitution of Society: Outline of a Theory of Structuration. Polity Press, Cambridge.

Gillespie, Susan D. 2000a Levi-Strauss: Maison and Societe a Maisons. In Beyond Kinship: Social and Material Reproduction in House Societies, edited by R. A. Joyce and S. D. Gillespie, pp. 22-52. University of Pennsylvania Press, Philadelphia.

2000b Maya "Nested Houses": The Ritual Construction of Place. In Beyond Kinship: Social and Material Reproduction in House Societies, edited by J. Rosemary A and S. D. Gillespie, pp. 135-160. University of Pennsylvania Press, Philadelphia.

2001 Personhood, Agency, and Mortuary Ritual: A Case Study from the Ancient Maya. Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 20:73-112.

Gladwin, Harold S. 1928 Excavations at Casa Grande, Arizona. Southwest Museum Paper 2:7-30.

1942 Excavations at Snaketown III: Revisions. Medallion Papers, No. 3. Gila Pueblo, Globe.

1948 Excavations at Snaketown IV: Review and Conclusions. Medallion Papers, No. 38. Gila Pueblo, Globe.

Gladwin, Harold S., Emil W. Haury, E. B. Sayles and N. Gladwin 1937 Excavations at Snaketown, Material Culture. Medallion Papers, No. 25. Gila Pueblo, Globe. 310

Godelier, Maurice 1999 Enigme du don. Polity Press, Cambridge.

Goldberg, Marilyn Y. 1999 Spatial and Behavioral Negotiation in Classical Athenian City Houses. In The Archaeology of Household Activities, edited by P. M. Allison, pp. 142-161. Routledge, London.

Golomb, Louis 1985 An Anthropology of Curing in Multiethnic Thailand. Illinois Studies in Anthropology No. 15. University of Illinois Press, Urbana.

Goodenough, Ward H. 1965 Rethinking 'Status' and 'Role': Toward a General Model of the Cultural Organization of Social Relationships. In The Relevance of Models for Social Anthropology, edited by M. Banton, pp. 1-24. ASA Monographs No. 1. Tavistock, London.

Goody, Jack. 1962 Death, Property, and the Ancestors: A Study of the Mortuary Customs of the LoDagaa of West Africa. Stanford University Press, Stanford.

Graybill, Donald A., David A. Gregory, Gary S. Funkhouser and Fred L. Nials 1999 Long-Term Streamflow Reconstructions, River Channel Morphology, and Aboriginal Irrigation Systems along the Salt and Gila Rivers. In Environmental Change and Human Adaptation in the Ancient Southwest, edited by D. E. Doyel and J. S. Dean.

Gregonis, Linda M. 1999 Ceramic Artifact Analysis. In The Tortolita Phase in the Tortolita Foothills: Investigations at the Triangle Road Site (AZ BB:9:87 [ASM]), Oro Valley, Arizona, edited by K. Wellman, pp. 55-68. Archaeological Report No. 97-161. SWCA Inc., Tucson.

Gregory, David A. 1991 Form and Variation in Hohokam Settlement Patterns. In Chaco & Hohokam: Prehistoric Regional Systems in the American Southwest, edited by P. L. Crown and W. J. Judge, pp. 159-193. School of American Research Press, Santa Fe.

Guernsey, Samuel J. 1931 Explorations in Northeastern Arizona. Peabody Museum Papers 12(1). 311

Guernsey, Samuel J. and Alfred V. Kidder 1921 Basket-maker Caves of Northeastern Arizona. Peabody Museum Papers 8(2).

Guillen, Ann C. 1988 Thematic and Contextual Analyses of Chalcatzingo Figurines. Mexican 10(5):98-102.

1993 Women, Rituals, and Social Dynamics at Ancient Chalcatzingo. Latin American Antiquity 4(3):209-224. Gyenis, Gyula 1975 Dermatoglyphics of Three Hungarian Populations. American Journal of Physical Anthropology 42:229-232.

Halperin, R. H. 1994 Cultural Economies Past and Present. University of Texas Press, Austin.

Harwood, A. 1970 Witchcraft, Sorcery, and Social Categories among the Safwa. Oxford University Press, London.

Haury, Emil W. 1937 Figurines and Miscellaneous Clay Objects. In Excavations at Snaketown-I, Material Culture, edited by H. S. Gladwin, M. P. N. 24, general editor.

1941 Excavations in the Forestdale Valley, East-Central Arizona. University of Arizona Bulletin 11(4).

1976 The Hohokam. The University of Arizona Press, Tucson.

Haury, Emil W. and E. B. Sayles 1947 An Early Pit House of the Mogollon Culture. University of Arizona Bulletin 18(4).

Hays-Gilpin, Kelly 2000 Gender Ideology and Ritual Activities. In Women & Men in the Prehispanic Southwest, edited by P. L. Crown, pp. 91-136. School of American Research Press, Santa Fe.

Hays-Gilpin, Kelly and J. H. Hill 2000 The Flower World in Prehistoric Southwest Material Culture. In The Archaeology of Regional Interaction: Religion, Warfare & Exchange across the American Southwest & Beyond, edited by M. Hegmon, pp. 411-428. University Press of Colorado, Boulder. 312

Hegmon, Michelle 1989 Social Integration and Architecture. In The Architecture of Social Integration in Prehistoric Pueblos, edited by W. D. Lipe and M. Hegmon, pp. 5-14. Occasional Paper No. 1. Crow Canyon Archaeological Center, Cortez, Colorado.

2003 Setting Theoretical Egos Aside: Issues and Theory in North American Archaeology. American Antiquity 68(2):213-243.

Hegmon, Michelle (editor) 2000 The Archaeology of Regional Interaction: Religion, Warfare, and Exchange across the American Southwest and Beyond. University Press of Colorado, Boulder.

Hegmon, Michelle, Scott G. Ortman and Janet L. Mobley-Tanaka 2000 Women, Men and the Organization of Space. In Women and & Men in the Prehispanic Southwest, edited by P. L. Crown, pp. 43-90. School of American Research Press, Santa Fe.

Henderson, Helen K. 1995 Gender and Agricultural Development. The University of Arizona Press, Tucson.

Henderson, Kathleen 2001 Household Organization and Activity at Grewe. In The Grewe Archaeological Research Project, V. 3, Synthesis, edited by D. B. Craig, pp. 93-114. Anthropological Papers No. 99-1. Northland Research, Inc., Tempe, AZ.

Hill, Erica 1998 Gender-Informed Archaeology: The Priority of Definition, the Use of Analogy, and the Multivariate Approach. Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory 5(1):99-128.

Hodder, Ian 1982 Symbolic and Structural Archaeology. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

1983 Burials, Houses, Women and Men in the European Neolithic. In Ideology, Power, and Prehistory, edited by D. Miller and C. Tilley, pp. 51-63. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

1987a Archaeology as Long-Term History. Cambridge University Press, 313

Cambridge.

1987b The Archaeology of Contextual Meanings. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

1991 The Domestication of Europe. Basil Blackwell, Oxford.

2000 Agency and Individuals in Long-Term Processes. In Agency in Archaeology, edited by M.-A. Dobres and J. E. Robb, pp. 21-33. Routledge, London.

Hodder, Ian and Craig Cessford 2004 Daily Practice and Social Memory at ^atalHoyuk. American Antiquity 69(l):17-40.

Home, Lee 1982 The Household in Space. American Behavioral Scientist 25(6):677-685.

Howard, Jerry B. 1985 Courtyard Groups and Domestic Cycling: A Hypothetical Model of Growth. In Proceedings of the 1983 Hohokam Symposium, Part I, edited by A. J. Dittert and D. E. Dove, pp. 311-326. Occasional Paper, No. 2. Arizona Archaeological Society, Phoenix.

Howell, Signe 1995 The Lio House: Building, Category, Idea, Value. In About the House: Levi-Strauss and Beyond, edited by J. Carsten and H. Hugh-Jones, pp. 149-169. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

Hsu, Francis L. K. 1948 Under the Ancestors' Shadow: Chinese Culture and Personality. Columbia University Press, New York.

Hudecek-Cuffe, Caroline R. 1998 Engendering Northern Plains Paleoindian Archaeology. BAR International Series 699. British Archeological Reports, Oxford.

James, E. O. 1959 The Cult of the Mother Goddess: An Archaeological and Documentary Study. Praeger, New York.

Jantz, Richard L. 1975 Population Variation in Asymmetry and Diversity from Finger to Finger for Digital Ridge-Counts. American Journal of Physical Anthropology 314

42(2):215-224.

Jean9on, J. A. 1923 Excavations in the Chama Valley, New Mexico. Bureau of American Ethnology, Bulletin 81 .

Joyce, Arthur 2000 The Founding of Monte Alban: Sacred Propositions and Social Practices. In Agency in Archaeology, edited by M.-A. Dobres and J. E. Robb, pp. 71- 91. Routledge, London.

Joyce, Rosemary A. 1993 Women's Work: Images of Production and Reproduction in Prehispanic Southern Central America. Current Anthropology 34(3);255-274.

2000 Heirlooms and Houses: Materiality and Social Memory. In Beyond Kinship: Social and Material Reproduction in House Societies, edited by R. A. Joyce and S. D. Gillespie, pp. 189-212. University of Pennsylvania Press, Philadelphia. 2002 Comments from The Goddess Diffracted: Thinking About the Figurines of Early Villages. Current Anthropology 43(4):602-603.

2003 Concrete Memories: Fragments of the Past in the Classic Maya Present (500-1000 AD). In Archaeologies of Memory, edited by R. M. V. Dyke and S. E. Alcock, pp. 104-125. Blackwell Pubhshing, Maiden, MA.

Kamp, Kathryn and John Whittaker 1999 Surviving Adversity: Life in an Elden Phase Sinagua Village. Anthropological Papers No. 120. University of Utah Press, Salt Lake City.

Kamp, Kathryn A., Nichole Timmerman, Gregg Lind, Jules Greybill and Ian Natowsky 1999 Discovering Childhood: Using Fingerprints to Find Children in the Archaeological Record. American Antiquity 64(2):309-315.

Kapur, S. 1983 Witchcraft in Western India. Orient Longman, Bombay.

Kegan Gardiner, J. (editor) 1995 Provoking Agents: Gender and Agency in Theory and Practice. University of Illinois Press, Urbana.

Kelly, R. E. 1972 Navaho Ritual Figurines: Form and Function. In A/ava/zo Called Dolls, pp. 13-46. Museum of Navaho Ceremonial Art, Santa Fe. 315

Kent, Susan 1984 Analyzing Activity Areas: An Ethnoarchaeological Study of the Use of Space. University of New Mexico Press, Albuquerque.

Kent, Susan (editor) 1998 Gender in African Prehistory. Altimira Press, London.

Kenyon, Kathleen 1956 Jericho and its Setting in Near Eastern History. Antiquity 30:184-195.

Kerns, Virginia 1983 Women and the Ancestors. University of Illinois Press, Urbana.

Kidder, Alfred V. 1932 The Artifacts of Pecos. Phillips Academy, Andover.

Kidder, Alfred V. and Samuel J. Guernsey 1919 Archaeological Explorations in Northeastern Arizona. Bureau of American Ethnology, Bulletin 65.

Kintigh, Keith W. 1994 Chaco, Communal Architecture, and Cibolan Aggregation. In The Ancient Southwestern Community, Models and Methods for the Study of Prehistoric Social Organization, edited by W. H. Wills and R. D. Leonard, pp. 131-140. University of New Mexico Press, Albuquerque.

Kluckhohn, Clyde 1944 Navajo Witchcraft. Harvard University, Cambridge. Kopytoff, Igor 1971 Ancestors as Elders in Africa. Africa 41(2);129-141.

Kramer, Carol 1982 Ethnographic Households and Archaeological Interpretation. American Behavioral Scientist 25(6):663-675.

Krige, Eileen J. and Jacob D. Drige 1943 The Realm of a Rain-Queen: A Study of the Pattern of Lovedu Society. Oxford University Press, London.

LaMotta, Vincent M. and Michael B. Schiffer 1999 Formation Processes of House Floor Assemblages. In The Archaeology of Household Activities, edited by P. M. Allison, pp. 19-29. Routledge, London. 316

Lambert, M. 1956 Some Clay and Stone Figurines from the Mogollon-Mimbres Area, Luna County, New Mexico. El Palacio 63(9-10):259-283.

Lamphere, Louise 2000 Gender Models in the Southwest: A Sociocultural Perspective. In Women & Men in the Prehispanic Southwest: Labor, Power, & Prestige, edited by P. L. Crown, pp. 379-402. School of American Research Press, Santa Fe.

Leacock, Eleanor 1978 Women's Status in Egalitarian Society: Implications for Social Evolution. Current Anthropology 19:247-275.

Lee, Richard 1982 Politics, Sexual and Non-Sexual, in an Egalitarian Society. In Politics and History in Band Societies, edited by E. Leacock and R. Lee, pp. 37-59. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

Leguebe, A. and S. Vrydagh 1982 Geographical Variability of Digital Ridge-Counts. Homo 33(4): 183-194.

Lekson, Stephen H. 1986 Great Pueblo Architecture of Chaco Canyon, New Mexico. University of New Mexico Press, Albuquerque.

1988 The Mangas Phase in Mimbres Archaeology. Kiva 53(2):129-146.

Lekson, Stephen H., Thomas C. Windes, John R. Stein and W. James Judge 1988 The Chaco Canyon Community. Scientific American 256(7):100-109.

Leone, Mark P. 1986 Symbolic, Structural, and Critical Archaeology. In American Archaeology Past and Future: A Celebration of the Society for American Archaeology 1935-1985, edited by D. J. Meltzer, D. D. Fowler and J. A. Sabloff, pp. 415-438. Society for American Archaeology, Washington, D.C.

Lesure, Richard G. 1997 Figurines and Social Identities in Early Sedentary Societies of Coastal Chiapas, Mexico, 1550-800 b.c. In Women in Prehistory, North America and Mesoamerica, edited by C. Claassen and R. A. Joyce, pp. 227-248. University of Pennsylvania Press, Philadelphia.

2002 The Goddess Diffracted: Thinking about the Figurines of Early Villages. Current Anthropology 43(4):587-610. 317

Levi-Strauss, Claude 1982 The Way of the Masks. Translated by S. Modelski. University of Washington Press, Seattle.

Lightfoot, Ricky R. 1993 Abandonment Processes in Prehistoric Pueblos. In Abandonment of Settlements and Regions: Ethnoarchaeological and Archaeological Approaches, edited by C. M. Cameron and S. A. Tomka, pp. 165- 177. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

Linton, Ralph 1936 The Study of Man: An Introduction. D. Appleton-Century, New York.

Lipe, William D. and Michelle Hegmon (editors) 1989 The Architecture of Social Integration in Prehistoric Pueblos. Crow Canyon Archaeological Center, Cortez, Colorado.

Longacre, William A. 1966 Changing Patterns of Social Integration: A Prehistoric Example from the American Southwest. American Anthropologist 68(1):94-102.

1991 Ceramic Ethnoarchaeology: An Introduction. In Ceraw/c Ethnoarchaeology, edited by W. A. Longacre, pp. 1-10. The University of Arizona Press, Tucson.

Love, Tina K. 2001 Hohokam Figurines from the Grewe Site. In The Grewe Archaeological Research Project v. 2: Material Culture, Part I: Ceramic Studies, edited by D. R. Abbott, pp. 161-176. Anthropological Papers No. 99-1. Northland Research, Inc., Tempe.

Lyons, Diane. 1989 Men's Houses: Women's Spaces: The Spatial Ordering of Households in Doulo, North Cameroon. In Households and Communities, edited by S. MacEachem, D. Archer and R. Garvin, pp. 108-II5. Proceedings of the 21st Annual Chacmool Conference. University of Calgary, Calgary.

1998 Witchcraft, Gender, Power, and Intimate Relations in Mura Compounds in Dela, Northern Cameroon. World Archaeology 29(3):344-362.

Mabry, Jonathan B., Deborah L. Swartz, Helga Wocherl, J. Archer and Michael Lindeman 1997 Archaeological Investigations at Early Village Sites in the Middle Santa Cruz Valley: Site and Feature Descriptions. Anthropological Papers, No. 318

18. Center for Desert Archaeology, Tucson.

Mabuchi, Toichi 1976 A Note on Ancestor Worship in "Cognatic" Societies. In Ancestors, edited by W. H. Newell, pp. 105-118. Mounton Publishers, Paris.

Maeda, Takashi 1976 Ancestor Worship in Japan: Facts and History. In Ancestors, edited by W. H. Newell, pp. 139-162. Mouton Publishers, Paris.

Malvalwala, Jamshed 1978 Methodology for Dermatoglyphics - Fingers and Palms. In Dermatoglyphics, An International Perspective, edited by J. Malvalwala, pp. 19-54. Mouton Publishers, Paris.

Malvalwala, Jamshed, P. Malvalwala and S. M. Kamali 1990 Dermatoglyphics and Population Distance. In Trends in Dermatoglyphic Research, edited by N. M. Durham and C. C. Plato, pp. 190-199. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Netherlands.

Marcus, Joyce 1998 Women's Ritual in Formative Oaxaca. Prehistory and Human Ecology of the Valley of Oaxaca 11. Museum of Anthropology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor.

Marshall, John T. 2001 BaWcourt. In The Grewe Archaeological Research Project, Vol. 1: Project Background and Feature Descriptions, edited by D. B. Craig, pp. 109- 124. Anthropological Papers No. 99-1. Northland Research, Inc., Tempe, AZ.

Martin, J. and P. Gomez 1993 Dermatoglyphic Analysis of La Liebana. Anthropologischer Anzeiger 51(2):14-158. Martin, Paul S. 1943 The SU Site. Field Museum of Natural History, Anthropological Series 32(2).

Martin, Paul S. and John B. Rinaldo 1950 Turkey Foot Ridge Site. Fieldiana: Anthropology 38(2).

Marx, Karl 1963 The Eighteenth Brumaire of Louis Bonaparte. International Publishers, 319

New York.

Marx, Karl and F. Engels 1970 The German Ideology. International Publishers, New York.

Masse, W. Bruce 1991 The Quest for Subsistence Sufficiency and Civilization in the Sonoran Desert. In Chaco & Hohokam: Prehistoric Regional Systems in the American Southwest, edited by P. L. Crown and W. J. Judge, pp. 195-223. School of American Research Press, Santa Fe.

Mauss, Marcel 1954 The Gift: Forms and Functions of Exchange in Archaic Societies. Translated by Ian Cunnison. Cohen and West, London.

1985 A Category of the Human Mind: The Notion of Person, the Notion of Self In The Category of the Person: Anthropology, Philosophy, History, edited by M. Carrithers, S. Collins and S. Lukes, pp. 1-25. Translated by W. D. Halls. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

McAnany, Patricia 1994 Living with the Ancestors. University of Texas Press, Austin.

McKenzie, Ruth and P. Parsons 1995 High Pattern Intensity Indices and Ridge Counts from Milne Bay District of Papua New Guinea and Their Bearing on the Origin of the Australian Aborigines. American Journal of Physical Anthropology 42:251-254.

McKinnon, Susan 1991 From a Shattered Sun: Hierarchy, Gender, and Alliance in the Tanimbar Islands. University of Wisconsin Press, Madison.

2000 The Tanimbarese Tavu: The Ideology of Growth and the Material Configurations of Houses and Hierarchy in an Indonesian Society. In Beyond Kinship: Social and Material Reproduction in House Societies, edited by R. A. Joyce and S. D. Gillespie, pp. 161-176. University of Pennsylvania Press, Philadelphia.

Mead, Margaret 1949 Male and Female. Quill Press, New York.

Meadows, Karen 1999 The Appetites of Households in Early Roman Britain. In The Archaeology of Household Activities, edited by P. M. Allison, pp. 101-120. Routledge, 320

New York.

Meier, Robert 1975 Dermatoglyphics of Easter Islanders Analyzed by Pattern Type, Admixture Effect, and Ridge Count Variation. American Journal of Physical Anthropology 42:269-276.

Meskell, Lynn M. 1995 Goddesses, Gimbutas, and 'New Age' Archaeology. Antiquity 69:74-86.

1999 Archaeologies of Social Life: Age, Sex, Class et cetera in Ancient Egypt. Blackwell Publishers, Oxford.

2004 Object Worlds in Ancient Egypt. Berg, Oxford.

Micle, S. and E. Kobyliansky 1987 Dermatoglyphic Sexual Dimorphism in Yemenite Jews. Bulletin et Memoires de la Societe d'Anthropologic de Paris 14(2):95-114.

Milicic, J. 1990 Dermatoglyphics in the Eastern Adriatic. In Trends in Dermatoglyphic Research, edited by N. M. Durham and C. C. Plato, pp. 200-208. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Netherlands.

Middleton, J. 1967 Magic, Witchcraft, and Curing. University of Texas Press, Austin.

Middleton, J. and E. H. Winter 1963 Witchcraft and Sorcery in East Africa. Routledge & Kegan Paul, London.

Miller, Arthur G. 1995 The Painted Tombs of Oaxaca, Mexico. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

Miller, D. 1987 Material Culture as Mass Consumption. Basil Blackwell, New York.

Mills, Barbara J. 2000 Gender, Craft Production, and Inequality. In Women & Men in the Prehispanic Southwest, edited by P. L. Crown, pp. 301-344. School of American Research Press, Santa Fe.

2004 Ritual Practice and Hohokam Trajectories. Paper presented at the Amerind Seminar, "Hohokam Trajectories in World Perspective", Amerind 321

Seminar.

Mills, Barbara J., Sarah A. Herr and Scott Van Keuren (editors) 1999 Living on the Edge of the Rim. University of Arizona Press, Tucson.

Mindeleff, Cosmos 1896 Casa Grande Ruin. Thirteenth Annual Report of the Bureau of American Ethnology, 1891-1892. U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C.

Moenssens, A. 1971 Fingerprint Techniques. Chiton Book Company.

Moore, Henrietta L. 1988 Feminism and Anthropology. University of Minnesota Press, Minneapolis.

1990 Paul Ricoeur: Action, Meaning and Text. In Reading Material Culture, edited by C. Tilley, pp. 85-120. Blackwell, Oxford.

Morris, Earl H. 1927 The Beginnings of Pottery Making in the San Juan Area; Unfired Prototypes and the Wares of the Earliest Ceramic Period. Anthropological Papers of the American Museum of Natural History 28(2).

1951 Basket Maker III Human Figurines from Northeastern Arizona. American Antiquity 7:33-40.

Morss, Neil 1954 Clay Figurines of the American Southwest. Papers of the Peabody Museum of American Archaeology 1. Harvard University Press, Cambridge.

Mountjoy, Joseph B. 1991 The Analysis of Preclassic Figurines Excavated from the site of La Pintada in the Central Coastal Plain of Jalisco, Mexico. In The New World Figurine Project, edited by T. Stocker, pp. 85-97. vol. 1. Research Press, Provo, Utah.

Murdock, George and Catarina Provost 1973 Factors in the Division of Labor by Sex: A Cross-Cultural Analysis. Ethnology 12:203-225.

Nash, June 1970 In the Eyes of the Ancestors. Waveland Press, Inc., Prospect Heights, 322

Illinois.

Netting, Robert M., Richard W. Wilk and Erik J. Amould (editors) 1984 Households: Comparative and Historical Studies of the Domestic Group. University of California Press, Berkeley.

Newell, William H. 1976 Good and Bad Ancestors. In Ancestors, edited by W. H. Newell, pp. 17- 32. Mouton Publishers, Paris.

Ohler, Edwin A. and Harold Cummins 1942 Sexual Differences in Breadths of Epidermal Ridges on Finger Tips and Palms. American Journal of Physical anthropology 24(3):341-362.

Olmos, Margarite Fernandez and Lizabeth Paravisini-Gebert 2001 Healing Cultures: Art and Religion as Curative Practices in the Caribbean and Its Diaspora. Palgrave, New York.

Ortner, Sherry B. 1984 Theory in Anthropology since the Sixties. Comparative Studies in Society and History 26(1):126-166.

Owen, R. C. 1956 Some Clay Figurines and Seri Dolls from Coastal Sonora, Mexico. The 21(3-4); 1-11.

Parsons, E. 1985 Witchcraft among the Pueblos: Indians or Spanish? Man 27(70, 80): 106- 112, 125-128.

1927 Witchcraft among the Pueblos: Indian or Spanish? Man 27(70,80): 106- 112, 125-128.

Parsons, T. 1949 The Structure of Social Action. Free Press of Glencoe, New York.

Pauketat, Timothy R. 1994 The Ascent of Chiefs: Cahokia and Mississippian Politics in Native North America. University of Alabama Press, Tuscaloosa.

2000 The Tragedy of the Commoners. In Agency in Archaeology, edited by M.- A. Dobres and J. E. Robb, pp. 113-129. Routledge, London. 323

Peacock, Nadine R. 1991 Rethinking the Sexual Division of Labor: Reproduction and Women's Work among the Efe. In Gender at the Crossroads of Knowledge: Feminist Anthropology in the Postmodern Era, edited by M. Di Leonardo, pp. 339-360. University of California Press, Berkeley. Penrose, L. S. 1968 Memorandum on Dermatoglyphic Nomenclature. Birth Defects Original Articles Series 4(3). The March of Dimes National Foundation, New York.

Pepper, George H. 1920 Pueblo Bonito. Anthropological Papers of the American Museum of Natural History 27.

Perrone, B., H. H. Stockel and V. Kreuger 1989 Medicine Women, Curanderas, and Women Doctors. University of Oklahoma Press, Norman.

Pewe, Troy L., Cathy S. Wellendorf and James T. Bales 1986 Environmental Geology of the Tempe Quadrangle, Maricopa County, Arizona. Geological Investigation Series Map No. GI-2-A. Arizona Bureau of Geology and Mineral Technology, Tucson.

Plato, Chris, James Cereginno and Florena Sternberg 1975 The Dermatoglyphics of American Caucasians. Journal of Physical Anthropology 42:195-210.

Plog, Stephen 1989 Ritual, Exchange, and the Development of Regional Systems. In The Architecture of Social Integration in Prehistoric Pueblos, edited by W. D. Lipe and M. Hegmon, pp. 143-154. Crow Canyon Archaeological Center, Cortez, Colorado.

Pomeroy, Susan B. 1975 Goddesses, Whores, Wives, and Slaves. Schocken Books, New York.

Pospisil, M. and V. Ferak 1990 The Dermatoglyphics of Egyptian Nubians. In Trends in Dermatoglyphic Research, edited by N. M. Durham and C. C. Plato, pp. 234-243. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Netherlands.

Potter, James M. 1998 The Structure of Open Space in Late Prehistoric Settlements in the Southwest. In Migration and Reorganization, edited by K. A. Spielman, 324

pp. 137-163. Arizona State University Press, Tempe.

2000 Pots, Parties, and Politics: Communal Feasting in the American Southwest. American Antiquity 65(3):471-492.

Potter, James M. and Elizabeth M. Perry 2000 Ritual as a Power Resource in the American Southwest. In Alternative Leadership Strategies in the Prehispanic Southwest, edited by B. J. Mills, pp. 60-78. The University of Arizona Press, Tucson.

Price, T. Douglas and Gary M. Feinman (editors) 1995 Foundations of Social Inequality. Plenum, New York.

Prior, Marsha. 1997 Matrifocality, Power, and Gender Relations in Jamaica. In Gender in Cross-Cultural Perspective, edited by C. B. Brettell and C. F. Sargent, pp. 329-336. Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River.

Pumpelly, R. 1908 Explorations in Turkestan. Carnegie Institution, Washington, D.C.

Rapoport, Arthur 1990 The Meaning of the Built Environment: A Nonverbal Communication Approach. University of Arizona Press, Tucson.

Rattray, Robert S. 1923 Ashanti. Clarendon Press, Oxford.

1927 Religion & Art in Ashanti. Clarendon Press, London.

Reddy, G. 1975 Finger Dermatoglyphics of the Bagathas of Araku Valley, India. American Journal of Physical Anthropologists 42:225-228.

Reid, J. Jefferson and Stephanie M. Whittlesey 1982 Households at Grasshopper Pueblo. American Behavioral Scientist 25(6):687-703.

Reiter, Rayna R. 1975 Toward an Anthropology of Women. Monthly Review Press, New York.

Renaud, E. B. 1929 Prehistoric Female Figurines from America and the Old World. The Scientific Monthly 28:507-512. 325

Reynolds, Barrie 1963 Magic, Divination, and Witchcraft among the Barotse of Northern Rhodesia. University of California Press, Berkeley.

Rice, Prudence 1981 Evolution of Specialized Pottery Production: A Trial Model. Current Anthropology 22:219-240.

1987 Pottery Analysis: The University of Chicago Press, Chicago.

Rife, D. 1990 Dermatoglyphics as Genetic Markers. In Trends in Dermatoglyphic Research, edited by N. M. Durham and C. C. Plato, pp. 10-15. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Netherlands.

Roosevelt, Anna C. 1988 Interpreting Certain Female Images in Prehistoric Art. In The Role of Gender in Precolumbian Art and Architecture, edited by V. Miller, pp. 1- 34. University Press of America, Washington, D.C.

Sayles, E. B. 1936 An Archaeological Survey of Chihuahua, Mexico. Medallion Paper, no. 22.

Schachner, Gregson 2001 Ritual Control and Transformation in Middle-Range Societies: An Example from the American Southwest. Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 20:168-194.

Schaller, D. M. 1994 Geographic Sources of Phoenix Basin Plainware Based on Petrographic Analysis. In Pueblo Grande Project: Ceramics and the Production and Exchange of Pottery in the Central Phoenix Basin, part 1, edited by D. R. Abbott, pp. 17-90. Soil Systems Publications in Archaeology 20, vol. 3. Soil Systems, Phoenix.

Scott, S. 1958 Pottery Figurines from Central Arizona. Master's, University of Arizona.

Seymour, Deni and Michael B. Schiffer 1987 A Preliminary Analysis of Pithouse Assemblages from Snaketown, Arizona. In Method and Theory for Activity Area Research: An Ethnoarchaeological Approach, edited by S. Kent, pp. 549-602. Columbia 326

University Press, New York.

Silverblatt, Irene 1987 Moon, Sun, and Witches. Princeton University Press, Princeton.

1988 Women in States. Annual Review of Anthropology 17:427-460.

Simmons, Marc 1974 Witchcraft in the Southwest. Northland Press, Flagstaff.

Skibo, James M., Eugene B. McCluney and William H. Walker 2002 The Joyce Well Site: On the Frontier of the Casa Grandes World. University of Utah Press, Salt Lake City. Smith, Watson 1990 When is a Kiva? In When is a Kiva and Other Questions about Southwestern Archaeology, edited by R. H. Thompson, pp. 59-75. University of Arizona Press, Tucson.

Sorensen, Marie Louis Stig 2000 Gender Archaeology. Polity Press, Cambridge.

Spector, Janet 1983 Male/Female Task Differentiation among the Hidatsa; Toward the Development of an Archaeological Approach to the Study of Gender. In The Hidden Half: Studies of Plains Indian Women, edited by P. Albers and B. Medicine, pp. 77-100. University Press of America, Lanham, Maryland.

Spencer-Wood, Suzanne M. 1999 The World Their Household: Changing Meanings of the Domestic Sphere in the Nineteenth Century. In The Archaeology of Household Activities, edited by P. M. Allison, pp. 162-189. Routledge, London.

Spielmann, Katherine A. 1998 Ritual Craft Specialists in Middle Range Societies. In Craft and Social Identity, edited by C. L. Costin and R. P. Wright, pp. 153-159. Archaeological Papers of the American Anthropological Association, vol. 8, M. E. Whalen, general editor. American Anthropological Association, Arlington, Virginia.

Sprehn, Maria 2000 The Use of Cases Grandes Human Effigy Vessels. Paper presented at the 33rd Annual Chacmool Conference, Calgary. 327

Spriggs, M. (editor) 1984 Marxist Perspectives in Archaeology. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

Stack, Carol 1997 Domestic Networks: "Those You Count On". In Gender in Cross- Cultural Perspective, edited by C. B. Brettell and C. F. Sargent, pp. 319- 328. Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, New Jersey.

Steinberg, Florence, James Cereghino and Chris Plato 1975 The Dermatoglyphics of American Negroes. American Journal of Physical Anthropology 42:183-194.

Stewart, Pamela J. and Andrew Strathem 2001 Humors and Substances, Ideas of the Body in New Guinea. Bergin & Garvey, Westport, Connecticut.

Stinson, Susan L. 1995 Ceramics, Gender, and Fingerprints in the American Southwest. University of Arizona.

1999 Fingerprints, Sex, and Ceramic Figurines from Snaketown, Arizona. Paper presented at the Poster presented at the Society for American Archaeology Meeting, Philadelphia.

2005 Remembering the Ancestors: Ceramic Figurines from Las Capas and Los Pozos. In The Early Agricultural Period in Southern Arizona: Material Culture, edited by R. J. Silva. Anthropological Paper 35. Center for Desert Archaeology, in press, Tucson.

Stocker, Terry 1991 The New World Figurine Project, Vol 1. Research Press, Provo, Utah.

Stocker, Terry and Cynthia L. O. Charleton (editors) 2001 The New World Figurine Project, Volume 2. Research Press at Brigham Young University.

Stone, Tammy 2002 Kiva Diversity in the Point of Pines Region of Arizona. Kiva 67(4):385- 411.

Thomas, Charles Matthew and Jeffrey Howard King 1985 Hohokam Figurine Assemblages: A Suggested Ritual Context. In Proceedings of the 1983 Hohokam Symposium, Part II, edited by J. Alfred 328

E. Dittert and D. E. Dove, pp. 687-732. Arizona Archaeological Society Occasional Paper No. 2. Arizona Archaeological Society, Phoenix.

Tringham, Ruth 1991 Households with Faces: the Challenge of Gender in Prehistoric Architectural Remains. In Engendering Archaeology: Women and Prehistory, edited by J. M. Gero and M. W. Conkey, pp. 93-131. Blackwell, Oxford.

Trotter, Robert T. and Juan Antonio Chavira 1981 Curanderismo. University of Georgia Press, Athens.

Tsakirgis, Barbara 1996 Houses and Households. American Journal of Archaeology 100(4):777- 781.

Turner, S. 1994 The Social Theory of Practices: Tradition, Tacit Knowledge, and Presuppositions. University of Chicago Press, Chicago.

Turner, Victor 1974 Dramas, Fields, and Metaphors, Symbolic Action in Human Society. Ithaca, Cornell University Press.

Tuthill, Carr 1947 The Tres Alamos Site on the San Pedro River, Southeastern Arizona. The Amerind Foundation.

Ucko, Peter J. 1962 The Interpretation of Prehistoric Anthropomorphic Figurines. Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute of Great Britain and Ireland 92(1):38- 54.

1968 Anthropomorphic Figurines of Predynastic Egypt and Neolithic Crete with Comparative Material from the Prehistoric Near East and Mainland Greece. Royal Anthropological Institute of Great Britain and Ireland, Occasional Paper, no. 24. Szmidla, London.

Van Dyke, Ruth M. 2002 The Chacoan Great Kiva in Outlier Communities: Investigating Integrative Spaces across the San Juan Basin. Kiva 67(3):231-247.

Voigt, Mary 1983 Hajji Firuz Tepe, Iran: The Neolithic Village. The University Museum, 329

University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia.

1991 The Goddess from Anatolia. Oriental Rug Review 11(2):32-39.

Vom Bruck, Gabriele 1997 A House Turned Inside Out. Journal of Material Culture 2(2):139-172.

Wajcman, Judy 1991 Feminism Confronts Technology. The Pennsylvania State University Press, University Park, Pennsylvania.

Walker, William H. 1995 Ritual Prehistory: A Pueblo Case Study. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation. University of Arizona.

Walker, William H. and Lisa J. Lucero 2000 The Depositional History of Ritual and Power. In Agency in Archaeology, edited by M.-A. Dobres and J. E. Robb, pp. 130-147. Routledge, London.

Walker, William H., Vincent LaMotta and A. Charles Adams 2000 Katsinas and Kiva Abandonment at Homol'ovi: A Deposit Oriented Perspective on Religion in Southwest Prehistory. In The Archaeology of Regional Interaction in the Prehistoric Southwest, edited by M. Hegmon, pp. 341-360. University of Colorado Press, Boulder.

Wallace, Anthony F. C. 1966 Religion, An Anthropological View. Random House, New York.

Ware, John A. and Eric Blinman 2000 Cultural Collapse and Reorganization: The Origin and Spread of Pueblo Ritual Sodalities. In The Archaeology of Regional Interaction: Religion, Warfare, & Exchange across the American Southwest & Beyond, edited by M. Hegmon, pp. 381-409. University Press of Colorado, Boulder.

Watanabe, John M. 1990 From Saints to Shibboleths: Image, Structure, and Identity in Maya Religious Syncretism. American Ethnologist 17:131-150.

Waterson, Roxana 1995 Houses and Hierarchies in Island Southeast Asia In About the House: Levi-Strauss and Beyond, edited by J. Carsten and H. Hugh-Jones, pp. 47- 68. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

Weiner, Annette B. 330

1992 Inalienable Possessions: The Paradox of Keeping-While-Giving. University of California Press, Berkeley.

Wilcox, David R. 1991 The Mesoamerican Ballgame in the American Southwest. In The Mesoamerican Ballgame, edited by V. L. Scarborough and D. R. Wilcox, pp. 99-125. The University of Arizona Press, Tucson.

Wilcox, David R. and L. O. Shenk 1977 The Architecture of the Casa Grande and its Interpretation. Arizona State Museum Archaeological Series, No. 115. University of Arizona Press, Tucson.

Wilcox, David R. and Charles Sternberg 1983 Hohokam Ballcourts and Their Interpretation. Archaeological Series No. 160. Arizona State Museum, Tucson.

Wilcox, David R., T. Randall McGuire and Charles Sternberg 1981 Snaketown Revisited: A Partial Cultural Resource Survey, Analysis of Site Structure and an Ethnohistoric Study of the Proposed Hohokam-Pima National Monument. Archaeological Series No. 155. Arizona State Museum, Tucson.

Wilk, Richard R. and William L. Rathje 1982 Household Archaeology. American Behavioral Scientist 25(6):617-639.

Wills, W. H. and Robert D. Leonard (editors) 1994 The Ancient Southwestern Community: Models and Methods for the Study of Prehistoric Social Organization. University of New Mexico Press, Albuquerque.

Wilson, L. L. W. 1916 A Prehistoric Anthropomorphic Figure from the Rio Grande Basin. American Anthropologist 18:548-551.

Wilton, G. 1938 Fingerprints: History, Law and Romance. William Hodge and Co., London.

Wobst, H. Martin 2000 Agency in (spite of) Material Culture. In Agency in Archaeology, edited by M.-A. Dobres and J. E. Robb, pp. 40-50. Routledge, London. 331

Woodward, Arthur 1931 The Grewe Site, Gila Valley, Arizona. Los Angeles Museum of History, Science, and Art, Los Angeles.

1941 Hohokam Mosaic Mirrors. Quarterly of the Los Angeles County Museum of History, Science, and Art 1(4):6-11.

Wright, Rita P. 1991 Women's Labor and Pottery Production in Prehistory. In Engendering Archaeology, Women and Prehistory, edited by J. M. Gero and M. W. Conkey, pp. 194-223. Blackwell Publishers, Oxford.

1996 Contexts of Specialization: V. Gordon Childe and Social Evolution. In Craft Specialization and Social Evolution: In Memory of V. Gordon Childe, edited by B. Wailes, pp. 123-132. University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia

Wright, Rita P. (editor) 1996 Gender and Archaeology. University of Pennsylvania Press, Philadelphia.

Zedeno, Maris Nieves. and Barbara J. Mills 1993 Ceramic Production and Distribution: Introduction and Problem Definition. In Across the Colorado Plateau: Anthropological Studies for the Transwestern Pipeline Expansion Project, Volume 16: Interpretation of Ceramic Artifacts, edited by B. J. Mills, C. E. Goetze and M. N. Zedeno, pp. 175-185. Office of Contract Archaeology and Maxwell Museum of Anthropology, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque.