Ceramic production, distribution, and consumption in two Classic period Hohokam communities
Item Type text; Dissertation-Reproduction (electronic)
Authors Harry, Karen Gayle, 1960-
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 10/10/2021 21:58:11
Link to Item http://hdl.handle.net/10150/282552 INFORMATION TO USERS
This manuscript has been reproduced from the microfilm master. UMI fibns the text direct^ from the origmal or copy submitted. Thus, some thesis and dissertation copies are m typewriter &ce, while others may be from aiqr of computer printer.
The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted. Broken or indistinct print, colored or poor qua% illustrations and photographs, print bleedthrough, substandard margins, and improper alignment can adversely afi^ reproduction.
In the unlikely event that the author did not send UMI a complete manuscript and there are missmg pages, these win be noted. Also, if unauthorized copyright material had to be removed, a note will indicate the deletion.
Oversize materials (e.g., maps, drawings, charts) are reproduced by sectioning the original, beginning at the upper left-hand comer and continuing from left to right in equal sections with smaO overlaps. Each original is also photogr^hed in one exposure and is inchided in reduced form at the back of the book.
Photographs included in the original manuscript have been reproduced xerographicaOy m this copy. Higher quality 6" x 9" black and white photographic prints are available for any photographs or illustrations appearing in this copy for an additional charge. Contact UMI directly to order. UMI A Bell & HioweQ bfimnation Compai^ 300 North Road, Ann Aibor MI 48106-1346 USA 313/761-4700 800/521-0600 I CERAMIC PRODUCTION, DISTRIBUTION, AND CONSUMPTION
IN TWO CLASSIC PERIOD HOHOKAM COMMUNITIES
by
Karen Gayle Harry
Copyright ® Karen G. Harry 1997
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
1997 DMI Nuaiber: 9814456
Copyright 1997 by Harry, Karen Gayle
All rights reserved.
UMI Microronn 9814456 Copyright 1998, by UMI Company. All rights reserved.
This micrororm edition is protected against unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code.
UMI 300 North Zeefo Road Ann Arfoor, MI 48103 THE UNIVERSITY OF ARIZONA « GRADUATE COLLEGE
As members of the Final Examination Connnittee, we certify that we have read the dissertation prepared by Karen Gayle Harry entitled Ceramic Production. Distribution, and Consumption in
Two Classic Period Hohokam Communities
and recommend that it be accepted as fulfilling the dissertation requirement for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy
Paul R. Fish , Date —. |o If. "t?- ttacBara J. aula *• Date"^
// 7 / ^ 7 E. Charles Adams Date
Date
Date
Final approval and acceptance of this dissertation is contingent upon the candidate's submission of the fiital copy 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. V-~- 1
Dissertation^ Directpr^^ paul —Fish 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 co be made available to borrowers under rules of the Library.
Brief quotations from diis dissertation are allowable without special permission, provided diat accurate acicnowledgement of source is made. Requests for permission for extended quotatiun from or reproduction of this manuscript in whole or in part may be granted by the copyright holder.
SIGNED: 4
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
This dissertation could not iiave been completed without die help of numerous individuals and institutions. Funding was provided by the National Science Foundation (Dissertation Improvement Grant S SBR-9400239), the Wenner-Gren Foundation for Anthropological Research (PiWoctoral Grant # 5722), and die Missouri Universi^ Research Reactor. Additional research fimds were provided through scholarships obtained from the University of Arizona Graduate College, Arizona Archaeological and Historical Socie^. and the Gilbert Ray Altschul Scholarship Fund of Statistical Research, Inc.
Nancy Mahaney of die Central Araona Repository and Arthur Vokes of die Arizona State Museum provided access to ceramic collections. Ilie Portland Cement Company and the City of Tucson permitted die collection of arti&cts from sites located on dieir lands. Held work was complet^ dirough die help of Nancy Alamote, Susan Bierer, Polly Cegielski, Lee Fratt, Arlene Garcia, Guillermo Gonzalez, Carta Harrington. Robbie Heckman, Vincent La Motta. and Mark Slaughter. I especially thank die many indivkluals who toiled in 1 IS° heat to help collect my needed sherds, often only in reoun for a milkshake. I also diank Gavin Archer. James Bayman. Paul Fish, Richard Lange, and John Madsen for helping me to locate sherds collected during odier projects, and Guadalupe Sanchez de Carpenter for processing arti^cts and locating various information and field notes. Bill Deaver, Bob Jones, and Linda Gregonis graciously examined sherds and provided ware identifications.
Ceramic test tiles were made in die Laboratory of Traditional Technology dirough die permission of Mark Neupert and Michael Schiffer. Researchers at die Missouri University Research Reactor chemically analyzed die sherds. I would especially like to diank Donna Glowacki for processing die samples, and Michael Glascock and Hector Neff for overseeing die neutron activation analysis and guiding me dirough die statistical analyses. The temper was analyzed by by Beth Mikk, James Heidke, Michael Wiley, and Diana Kamilli of die Center for Desert Archaeology. These researchers deserve special dianks for dieir efforts to determine die source location of the sands, and for their many hours of conversations and advice. Appreciation is also given to Kathe Kubish for experdy drafting the illustrations.
As with most projects, diis dissertation reflects die input of many individuals. I especially diank die members of my dissertation commntee for dieir direction and encouragement. Paul Fish. Barbara Mills, and Charles Adams provided excellent guidance diroughout die process. In addition, comments by and conversations with Suzanne Fish are gready appreciated. Others, not already mentioned above, who provtied useful advkx are David Killick, John Madsen, and Mark Slaughter.
Finally, I would like to diank my family and firiends for dieir support. To die many archaeologists in die Tucson community, I thank you for making diese past years so memorable and enjoyable. I have learned much during my stay here. To my family- Lee Harry, Gayle Harry, Mark Slaughter, and Maia Slaughter-1 extend my deepest dianks. Mark, especially, has provided not only friendship and encouragement, but archaeological insight that has fiirthered my career. Lastly. I gratefully diank Maia for her endless, joyous, interruptions and her utter disregard for my research. Dedicated to die people of the prehistoric Marana and Los Robles communities;
and to Mark, for his support and encouragement 6
TABLE OF CONTENTS
UST OF ILLUSTRATIONS 9
UST OF TABLES 12
ABSTRACT 15
L INTRODUCTION 17 The Economic Structure of Prehistoric Conununides 17 The Community Concept 17 Inferring Community &onomic Organization 19 Research Significance 22
IL RESEARCH SETTING 24 Previous Research in the Marana and Los Robles Communities 24 Geographic and Cultural Context 27 Description of the Communities 31 Marana Commum'ty 31 Los Robles Conununity 37 Discussion 40 in. RESEARCH DESIGN 45 Theoretical Orientation 45 Settlement Communities and Boundaries 46 Economic Integration Within Communities 46 Discussion 47 Community Self-Sufficiency vs. Interaction 48 Discussion 49 Site Hierarchies and Differentially-Distributed Artifacts 51 Centralization Models 51 Evaluation of the Centralization Models 53 Alternative Model 57 Research Questions 59 Previous Compositional Research in the Area 62 Research Methods 64 Why tiiis Data Base? 64 Issues in Compositional Research 66 Data Requirements 70 rV. MINERALOGICAL ANALYSIS OF TEMPER 75 Geological Setting 75 Methods 77 Initial Temper Assignments 80 Blind Tests 81 TABLE OF CONTENTS - Continued 7
Reevaluation of Thin Sections 84 Temper Reassignments 84 Results 84 Initial Assignments 84 Blind Tests 87 Reevaluation of the Thin Sections 93 Temper Reassignments 95 Discussion 98
V. CHEMICAL ANALYSIS 105 Sampling Strategy 105 Sherds 105 Clays 106 Sands 112 General Analytical Methods 113 Laboratory Techniques 113 Data Reduction 116 Ceramic Ccoipositional Groups 118 Patterning of Clays 121 Comparison of Sherds and Clays 122 Results 122 Chemical Patterns of Sherds 122 Chemical Patterns of Clays 140 Comparison of Sherds and Clays 154 Discussion 162
VI. PATTERNS OF CERAMIC PRODUCTION. DISTRIBUTION, AND CONSUMPTION IN THE STUDY REGION 166 tater-site and Inter-community Organization 166 Consumption 167 Production 180 Location of Production 180 Comparison of Chemical and Petrographic Data 181 Do Sands Equal Produaion Location? 185 Archaeological Evidence 188 Discussion 193 Dimensions of Variability 196 Distribution 200 Variability of Products 202 Intra-site Patterns at the Marana Platform Mound Village 210 Research Questions Revisited 214 Discussion 217
Vn. UNDERSTANDING SETTLEMENT COMMUNITIES 219 Settlement Communities and Boundaries 219 Economic Integration Wltiiin Communities 219 TABLE OF CONTENTS - Contimed 8
Ethnographic Models of Ceramic Specialization 220 Upland-Lowland Ties 223 Community Self-Sufficiency vs. Interaction 225 Inward vs. Outward-Looking Models 225 Muualism 228 Settlement Hierarchies 230 Interpretation of Differentially-Distributed Artifacts 230 Centralized Production 231 Centralized Distribution. 233 Centralized Consumption 236 Role of the Elite Residents 240 Alternative Model 242 Leadership Strategies in the Marana Community 244 Concluding Thoughts 249
APPENDIX ONE: PROVENIENCE INFORMATION FOR ANALYZED SHERDS SAMPLES 252
APPENDIX TWO: CERAMIC CODING FORM 279
APPENDDC THREE: ATTRIBUTE ANALYSIS OF SHERDS 280
APPENDD( FOUR: PETROGRAPHIC AND QUALITATIVE ANALYSIS OF TANQUE VERDE RED-ON-BROWN SHERDS 302
APPENDDC FIVE: DESERT ARCHAEOLOGY LETTER REPORT 363
APPENDDC SDC: PETROGRAPHIC AND CHEMICAL ASSIGNMENTS 373
APPENDDC SEVEN: ELEMENTAL CONCENTRATIONS FOR SHERDS, CLAYS. AND SANDS 396
APPENDDC EIGHT: MAHALANOBIS PROBABILFTIES OF GROUP MEMBERSHIP FOR SHERDS 4%
REFERENCES CTTED 519 9
LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS
Figure 2.1. Location of the Marana and Los Robles Communities 2S
Figure 2.2. Distribution of fiiil-coverage and transect survey in the Northern Tucson Basin Survey Project 26
Figure 2.3. Location of early Classic period habitation sites in the Marana and Los Robles communities 32
Rgure 2.4. Map of the Marana Mound site 35
Figure 4.1. Geologic map of the smdy area and adjacent regions 76
Figure 4.2. Petro^ies map of the Tucson Basin and Avra Valley 79
Figure 5.1. Locations of chemically analyzed clays collected within the study region ... 109
Figure 5.2. Locations of chemically analyzed clays collected outside the sudy region ... Ill
Figure 5.3. Locations of chemically analyzed sands collected wnthin the study region ... 114
Figure 5.4. Locations of chemically analyzed sands collected oucide of the study region 115
Figure 5.5. Eight compositional reference groups plotted relative to principal components i and 2 of the 721 sherd data set 134
Figure 5.6. Thirty-two elements plotted relative to principal components I and 2 of the 721 sherd data set 135
Figure 5.7. Eight compositional reference groups plottted relative to principal components I and 3 of the 721 sherd data set 136
Figure 5.8. Thirty-two elements plotted relative principal components 1 and 3 of the 721 sherd data set 137
Figure 5.9. Plot of canonical discriminanant fimctions 1 and 2 derived ftom discriminant analysis of the five smdy area reference groups 141
Rgure 5.10. Plot of canonical discriminant functions I and 3 derived from discriminant analysis of the five smdy area reference groups 142
Figure 5.11. Plot of logged antimony and cobalt values in the five sudy area reference groups 143
Figure 5.12. Plot of 27 clays relative to principal components 1 and 2 148 UST OF ILLUSTRATIONS - Continued 10
Figure 5.13. Plot of logged chromium and cesium values for the 27 clays 149
Figure 5.14. Plot of logged strontium and calcium values for the 27 clays 150
Figure 5.15. Plot of the logged strontium and calcium values for the 27 clays 151
Figure S. 16. Plot of the logged cobalt and scandium values for the 27 clays 153
Figure 5.17. "^Tempered" clays plotted relative to principal components 1 and 2 of the 721 sherd data set 158
Figure 5.18. Logged cesium and cobalt values in the "tempered" clays 159
Figure 5.19. Logged strontium and sodium values in the "tempered" clays 160
Figure 5.20. Logged cobalt and scandium values for the eight compositional reference groups 164
Figure 6.1. Proportions of sherds assigned to the various chemical reference groups, for sites in the Marana and Los Robles Conununities 174
Rgure 6.2. Compositional diversity (richness component) of ceramics recovered trom various sites in the Marana Community 177
Figure 6.3. Compositional diversity (evenness component) of ceramics recovered (rom various sites in the Marana Community 177
Figure 6.4. Compositional diversity (richness component) of ceramics recovered from various sites in the Los Robles Community 179
Figure 6.5. Compositional diversity (evenness component) of ceramics recovered ftom various sites in the Los Robles Conununity 179
Figure 6.6. Diversity (richness component) of surftce treatment for die compositional groups 206
Figure 6.7. Diversity (evenness component) of !>urtice treatment by compositional group 206
Figure 6.8. Diversity (richness component) of ceramic form by compositional group ... 209
Figure 6.9. Diversity (evenness component) of ceramic form by compositional group ... 209
Figure 6.10. Compositional diversity (richness component) of ceramics recovered from Marana platform mound proveniences 213 UST OF ILLUSTRATIONS - Continued II
Figure 6.11. Compositional diversity (evenness component) of ceramics recovered from Marana pl^onn mound proveniences 213 12
LIST OF TABLES
Table 2.1. Proportion of Red-on-brown Sherds Recovered from Various Sites 29
Table 2.2. Evidence from Excavated Sites Suggesting Sedentary Occupation 43
Table 3.1. Economic Parameters to be Evaluated 60
Table 3.2. Threshold Distances of Clays and Tempers (after Arnold 1991:338) 67
Table 3.3. Sherds from the Marana and Los Robles Communides Used in the Present Study 71
Table 3.4. Analyzed Sherds from Outside the Marana and Los Robles Communities .... 73
Table 4.1. Number of Point-Counted Samples Available for Each Petrofacies 78
Table 4.2. Results of Initial Temper Assignments 85
Table 4.3. Results of Blind Tests 88
Table 4.4. Summary of Blind Test Results Based on Binocular Analysis 90
Table 4.5. Summary of Blind Test Results Based on Final Temper Assigimients 9l
Table 4.6. Groups Assigned by Kamilli to Sherd Thin Sections 94
Table 4.7. Methods Used to Determine Temper Reassignments by Karen Harry 96
Table 4.8. Results of Harry's Temper Reassignments 99
Table 4.9. Percent of Carbonate Grains (LSCA) in Sherd Thin Sections 102
Table 4.10. Percent of Carbonate Grains (LSCA) in Petro^ie Sand Samples 103
Table 5.1. List of Clays Submitted for Neutron Activation Analysis 107
Table 5.2. List of Sands Submitted for Neutron Activation Analysis 113
Table 5.3. Compositional Groups Obtained during the Previous Smdy of Tanque Verde Red- on-brown Sherds 123
Table 5.4. Results of Principal Components Analysis of die 721 Sherd Data Set 125
Table 5.5. Coefficients for die First 13 Principal Components of the 721 Sherd Data Set. 126 UST OF TABLES - Continued 13
Table 5.6. Chemical Group Assigmnents for Sherds 127
Table 5.7. Mean Elemental Concentrations (in ppm) of Compositional Groups 128
Table 5.8. Group Membership Probabilities for Selected Sherds Assiped to Group A .. 131
Table 5.9. Results of Principal Components Analysis of the Clay Data Set 146
Table 5.10. Coefficients for the first 8 Principal Components of the Clay Data Set 147
Table 5.11. Probabilities of Tempered Clays Belonging to Sherd Reference Groups .... 156
Table 6.1. Number of Sherds by Site Assigned to Each Chemical Compositional Group . 168
Table 6.2. Percent of Sherds from Marana and Los Robles Community Sites by Chemical Group 171
Table 6.3. Percent of Sherds Recovered from Outside of the Study Region, by Site and Chemical Group 172
Table 6.4. Number of Thin-Sectioned Sherds Assigned to Each Chemical Group, by Kamilli's Petrographic Groups 182
Table 6.5. Number of Thin-Secnoned Sherds Assigned to Each Chemical Group. According to Harry's Petrographic Reassignments 183
Table 6.6. Results of Lombard's Penrographic Analysis of Tanque Verde Phase Sherds from die Marana and Los Robles Communities 187
Table 6.7. Proportion of Polishing Stones Recovered from Various Sites 191
Table 6.8. Number and Proportion of Sherds Assigned to Each Chemical Group, by Paint Color 203
Table 6.9. Number of Sherds Assigned to Exh Chemical Group, by Ceramic Surface Treatment 205
Table 6.10. Number of Sherds Assigned to Each Chemical Group, by Ceramic Form ... 208
Table 6.11. Number and Proportion of Sherds Assigned to Each Chemical Group, by Vessel Form 210
Table 6.12. Number and Proportion of Sherds, by Chemical Group. Recovered from Different Areas of the Marana Platform Mound Site 212
Table 6.13. Number and Proportion of Sherds, by Paint Color. Recovered firom Different UST OF TABLES - Contwued 14
Areas of the Marana Platform Mound Site 215
Table 7.1. Number and Propotion of Sherds, by Region, Assigned to Each Chemical Group227
Table 7.2. Geologic Sources of Obsidian from die Marana Mound Site and ASU Sites .. 235 15
ABSTRACT
Using compositional data, ttiis study investigates die organization of ceramic produaion and distribution in die Marana and Los Robles communities, two pFehistoric Hohokam site clusters dating to the early Classic period (ca. A.O. 1100-1300). Like many other site clusters in the
Southwest, each community is characterized by a settlement hierarchy composed of a primary village surrounded by numerous, smaller satellite villages in a variety of ecological settings. In the
Marana and Los Robles communities, die primary villages contain public architecmre in the form of platform mounds. Research in die Marana community indicates that, diere, die platform mound site and odier sites near the top of die settlement hierarchy contain higher proportions of nonlocal and luxury goods dian other sealements in die community. One such class of differentially- distributed artifacts is die ceramic ware known as Tanque Verde Red-on-brown. It is diis ceramic ware diat forms tiie basis of dm dissertation.
The presence of settiement hierarchies and diverse ecological settings have raised questions about die socioeconomic relationship of a community's inhabitants. Using compositional data obtained from die chemical and mineralogical analysis of Tanque Verde Red-on-brown ceramics, die present study focuses on three research issues; (I) die degree of integration or interaction between residents of a single community; (2) die relationship of community inhabitants widi people living outside the community; and (3) die significance of site hierarchies and differentially- distributed artif^. Particular emphasis is placed on the latter research issue. It is concluded diat die higher proportions of Tanque Verde Red-on-brown ceramics found at some sites reflects neither centralized production nor elite-controlled distribution, as has been suggested by some researchers. Nor. however, do die data support diose models suggesting that each household was 16 economically self-sufficient. Instead, production and distribution mechanisms were found to be more variable than can be accomodated by previous models. It is argued that the economic organization reflects a combination of strategies used by the community leaders to maintain and solidify their social statuses. To examine why these strategies were adopted, the local culniral sequence and the history of population shifts are considered. 17
CHAPTER ONE
INTRODUCTION
This study investigates die organizadon of ceramic production and distribution in two prehistoric Hohokam communides. The purpose of die study is to shed light on die economic organization of one common sealement pattern, die hierarchial site cluster. Hierarchical site clusters reflea a common spadal organizadon of preh^ru: setdements in die Greater Soudiwest.
These clusters often consist of one or more large, primary villages surrounded by numerous, smaller satellite villages. Because die villages within die clusters are believed to have been socially, economically, or pob'tically interdependent, diese clusters are referred to here as communities. Although such clusters occur in many areas of die die Southwest, die social and economic organizadon of diese clusters remains poorly understood. Substantial disagreement exists about why diese site clusters developed and what dieir form implies about die socioeconomic relauonship of dieir inhabitants. To investigate diese issues, die following study examines how one commodity was produced and distributed within two Classic period Hohokam communities.
Specifically, die study examines die production and distribution of Tanque Verde Red-on-brown ceramics within die Los Robles and Marana settlement clusters of die lower Santa Cruz River
Valley, southern Arizona.
The Economic Structure of Prehistoric Communities
The Community Concept
Site clusters can be found in abnost every region of die prehistoric Southwest, including the
Hohokam, Mogollon, and Anasazi areas. Similar setdement patterns, albeit of different scales, occur outside of the Southwest in die Vfississippian culture region of die Southeast and in various 18 cultural regions of aorthem and central Mexico. In southern Arizona these site clusters, or conununities, often exhibit a settlement hierarchy consisting of a large site surrounded by smaller sites, in which the largest sites contain higher proportions of nonlocal and labor-intensive goods.
In the 1970s and early 1980s, site clusters were the focus of substantial controversy by
Southwestern archaeologists (Graves and Reid 1984; Lightfoot 1984; Reid 198S; Upham 1982;
Upham et al. 1981), who debated whether dieir presence reflected a system of social complexity.
In recent years, diere has been a resurgence of Interest in these settlement systems, as reflected in recent the publication of two edited volumes (Upham et al. 1989; Wills and Leonard 1994).
Although the debate over social complexly condnues (Lightfoot and Most 1989; Lightfoot and
Upham 1989; McGuire and Saitta 1996; Reid and Whittlesey 1989; G. Rice 1990b), other researchers have shifted the research focus to understanding these conununities as integrated ecosystems (Crown 1987; S. Fish and P. Fish 1990.1994; S. Fish et al. 1989; Jewen 1989).
In the Hohokam area, the community concept was first applied to site clusters found adjacent to die prehistoric irrigation canals of die Salt-Gila heardand (Doyel 1976, 1980. 1981). These communides. termed irrigadon communides, consist of numerous smaller sites and at least one large site containing either a ballcourt (during die pre-CIassic periods, ca. A.D. 300-1100) or platform mound (during the Classic period, ca. A.D. 1100-I400). Since the identificadon of diese canal communides. irrigadon communities have been fimher defined (Crown 1987; Gregory 1987;
Gregory and Nials 1985) and odier commum'des have been recognized in nonriverine areas (i.e..
Doelle et al. 1987; S. Fish et al. 1989. 1992; G. Rice 1987. 1990a). (For a review of the
Hohokam community, see S. Fish and P. Fish 1994).
In southern Arizona, archaeologists have tended to view site clusters as representing integrated systems containing economically interdependent inhabitants (Crown 1987; Doyel 1980. 1981; S.
Fish and P. Fish 1990; S. Fish et al. 1989. 1992; G. Rice 1990a). Two types of Hohokam 19
communities have been recognized, reflecting two different economic strategies. In the Salt and
Gila river valleys, communities were dependent on irrigation agriculture and villages were placed
to maximize access to irrigation water. Residential zones were confined to valley boaoms, with
the adjacent foothills used on a limited basts for resource procurement activities (Crown 1987).
In communities located away from these major rivers, such as the Los Robles and Marana
communities, the pattern differed. Here, residential areas were placed both on the valley bottom
and in the adjacent bajada or foothUl zones (S. Fish and P. Fish 1990, 1992: G. Rice [990a).
Subsistence in these areas depended primarily on dry Arming and involved the exploitation of
different ecological zones contained within die conununity boundaries. Because these communities
depended on a diversified subsistence base, these communities tended to be larger dian those along
Che Salt and Gila rivers (G. Rice 1990a). Although the two ^pes of Hohokam communides differ
in terms of settlement layout and subsistence base, both are believed to have been economically
based. Archaeologists studying irrigation conmiunities have proposed that these communities
developed out of a need to operate and maintain irrigation canals (Crown 1987; Gregory and Nials
198S; Upham and Rice 1980). In these communities, platform mound sites would have played a
major role in irrigation management. By contrast, archaeologists smdying non-irrigation
communities have proposed that diose communities functioned to encourage resource sharing and
subsistence exchange (S. Fish and P. Fish 1990. 1994; G. Rice 1990a). According to this view,
one fiuiction of platform mound sites in non-irrigation communities would have been to facilitate
resource circulation.
Inferring Community Economic Organization: Previous Studies and Methods
The presence of settlement hierarchies invites die interpretation that die largest sites functioned as economic centers. Archaeologists woridng in different regions have suggested diat residents of 20
the largest settlemeius participated in different production and distribution activities than did those
of smaller settlements. Additionally, an economic system characterized by centralized management
and a high level of specialized production and distribution is often inferred. Internal exchange,
commodity production, and long-distance trade are often believed to have occurred exclusively or
primarily at the largest settiements. With a fbv notable exceptions, however, these inferences have
been based primarily on indirect evidence. For example, archaeologists woridng in the Hohokam
(Bayman 1992. 1994. 1995; Neiizel 1991; G. Rice 1987; league 1984. 1985. 1989a) and
prehistoric Pueblo (Plog 1989a, 1989b; Upham 1982) regions have suggested tiiat patterns of
differential arnfkt distribution result from economic centralization. According to this view, sites
containing unusually high proportions of particular artifkt classes are places where those artifkts
were produced and/or distributed. Using a similar line of reasoning, other archaeologists have
interred centralized production or distribution from caches of potential trade items (Howard 1987;
G. Rice 1987). Finally, specialized production is often inferred from qualities of tiie artifacts
themselves. Such qualities include standardized attributes (Crown 1984. 1994. 1995; Hegmon et
al. 1995; Lindauer 1988; Motsinger 1993; Whittlesey 1974. 1987a) and those diat reflect a
relatively high input of labor (Feinman et al. 1981; Hagstrum 1985; Neitzel 1991).
Although the above lines of evidence are suggestive of economic centralization, they do not
prove its existence nor do tiiey inform on the nature of any centralization that might exist. Fur
example, differential artifaa distributions and the presence of artifact caches can result from any
of several processes. Based solely on these patterns, one is unable to distinguish between
differential production, redistribution, and consumption. That is, the high proportions of certain artists commonly found at large sites could result either from the localized production of the commodity, from the stockpiling of the commodity for redistribution, or from the greater consumption of the commodity at certain settiements. In the absence of additional data, it is 21
impossible to determine which of these possibilities prevails. Measures of attribute standardization
and labor input similarly are insufficient for proving centralized production. Although numerous studies have demonstrated a relationship between diese measures and craft specialization, this
connection is complex and poorly understood. Studies suggest diat this relationship can be alfected
by factors (such as the level of demand, the intended market, and the intended vessel function)
other than the organization of production (Harry 1997b; Hegmoo et al. 199S; Plog 199S; B. Stark
1995; M. Stark 1993).
To overcome the problems associated with die above studies, die present project relies on the
use of compositional analysis to examine die economic organization of the settiement communities
being examined. Although some Southwestern archaeologists (i.e., Bayman 1992, 1994. 1995:
Griffith et al. 1992; Teague 1984), have studied economic organization dirough a consideration
of die differential distribution of die tools and by-products associated with production, diis mediod
requires die availability of excavation data from a large number of sites. Compositional analysis,
on die other hand, requires only diat artifocts (in diis case, Tanque Verde Red-on-brown ceramics)
be available from each site to be studied. Because diese artifacts can be obtained from surface collections, it is possible to acquire data from a large number of sites. Several recent studies have demonstrated die usefulness of ceramic compositional analysis for examining die economic organization of settlement clusters in southern Arizona (Abbott 1994a; P. Fish et al. 1992b; Simon
1994b; Simon and Bunon 1992; Simon et al. 1992). A second general benefit of using ceramic compositional analysis derives from die nature of die sherds diemselves. Because ceramics are
made from multiple constituents diat can be analyzed separately, more dian one line of evidence can be obtained concerning production location. In die present study, inferences derive from bodi die chemical analysts of die ceramic pastes and die petrographic analysis of die mineralogical inclusions. Because die Hohokam used wash sands to temper their ceramics, petrography has 22 proved to be an especially successful sourcing technique in southern Arizona. Finally, ceramic compositional analysis is particularly well-suited for ceramic studies on the Tucson Basin.
Geologic diversity in this region makes it possible to source sands to areas as small as I.S km x
.8 km in size (Heidke 1993, 1997). Additionally, numerous previous compositional studies have been conducted in the area. These studies demonstrate the feasibility of such research and provide a basic research foundation upon which the present study builds.
Research Significance
The research reported here is significant for three reasons. First, although numerous investigations have been conducted into the Classic period Hohokam who lived along the Salt and
Gila rivers, until recently little was known of their contemporaries who resided outside of these major river basins. By focusing on a Hohokam community in a nonriverine area, the present sudy sheds light on die economic organization of conununities that were not based on irrigation agriculture. This information can then be used to compare the economic organkation of irrigation and non-irrigation communities. Second, this study represents one step toward understanding the economic correlates of one type of common settlement pattern, the hierarchical multisite community. Although there exist other studies that have attempted to describe the organization of production and distribution in various clusters, in most of these studies inferences derive tirom indirect evidence. By relying on the interpretation of compositional data, the current research is able to evaluate more accurately the organization of ceramic production and distnbution than studies relying solely on artifaa attnbutes or on the differential distribution of artifacts. Finally, this research offers to build an analytic case for the use of ceramic compositional data in the evaluation of prehistoric economic organization. In previous compositional smdies the research focus has commonly been restricted to issues of ceramic distribution. Because this smdy addresses 23 aspects of all three economic components (i.e., production, distribution, and consumption), it demonstrates how compositional data can be used to integrate these three components, and how it can be used to more fully evaluate the issue of economic organization. 24
CHAPTER TWO
RESEARCH SETTING
The Marana and Los Robles communities are located just north of the Tucson Basin (Figure
2.1). As a result of numerous field projects conducted in the region, a substantial body uf
information is available about diese two communities. To provide a background for the research
design, in this chapter I summarize information about the Marana and Los Robles site clusters.
Previous Research in the Marana and Los Robles Communities
The existence of the communides was discovered in the 1980s, through an intensive pedestrian
survey conducted by the Arizona State Museum. This project, termed the Northern Tucson Basin
Survey Project, was undertaken to investigate settlement patterns around three platform mounds
(the Marana Mound, the Los Robles Mound, and the McClellan Mound). This project involved
the full-coverage survey of areas around three platform mounds, and coverage of additional tracts
of land through supplemental transects (Figure 2.2). In addition, systematic surface collections
were made at recorded sites (Madsen et al. 1993). The intensity of the survey coverage resulted
in the identificadon of the two Classic period communities centered around the platform mounds
(Downum 1993; S. Fish et al. 1992b; Madsen et al. 1993). Specifically, the survey resulted in
recugm'uon of a settlement hierarchy, documentadon of the community boundaries, and evidence of internal differentiation and integration within the communities (S. Fish et al. 1992b).
Additional information about die communities is available firom research projects conducted at specific sites. In the Marana community, substandai excavations have been undertaken at die
Marana Platform Mound site (Bayman 1994; P. Fish et al. 1992a), and at the habitation setdements of Los Morteros (Lange 1989; Wallace 1995), Muchas Casas, Rancho Derrio. and Rancho Bajo 25
Salf-Gilo Hohokam-
Morona Community
LOS Roblct Tucson Basin Community Hohokam
I Plotform Mound
0 13
Rgure 2.1. Locatioa of the Marana and Los Robles communities.
(Henderson, ed. 1987; G. Rice 1985, ed. 1987). Small-scale test excavations have been undertaken at the habitation sites of Chicken Ranch (Sanchez de Carpenter 1995), La Vaca
Enferma (Bayman 1994), and Huntington Ruin (Harry to Bittle 1994). Additionally, a detailed mapping and surface collection project has been carried out at La Vaca Enferma (Archer 1994).
In the Los Robles community, midgation research has been carried out at the habitation site of
Cake Ranch (Halbirt et al. 1990), and small-scale excavations have been undertaken at die 26
\ ^
9tuin
# Bdileowrf • Ptotfu. m MOunO A Trtneft«m SyrvtT ?"«nf#€t ^100% Surm
Figure 2.2. Distribudoa of fiiU-coverage and transect survey in the Northern Tucson Basin Survey Project (reprinted from P. Fish et al. l993:Figure 1.1). 27
settlements of Cerro Prieto (Downum et al. 1993; Harry 1994), Hog Farm (Richard Lange.
personal communication 1994), and Los Robles Platform Mound (Harry 1994). These site-specific
projects are relevant to the present study because they provide important contextual information.
First, they make available information on the proportions of Tanque Verde Red-on-brown ceramics
present at each site. Because this dissertation deals with the production, distribution, and
consumption of differentially-distributed artiticts, information on the proportions of Tanque Verde
Red-on-brown ceramics is essential. Second, die excavation data complement that available tirom
the survey projea. and provide additional evidence concerning the (iinaion and temporal
placement of the sites being snidied. These data make it possible to ensure, for most of the
analyses, that only sherds from habitation sites have been used.'
Geographic and Cultural Context
The Los Robles and Marana communities are located between two major culniral zones of the
Hohokam. the Salt-Gila "core" area, and the Tucson Basin "periphery." Traditionally, the area
adjacent to the Salt and Gila Rivers has been considered the heartland of the Hohokam. Inhabitants along these rivers constructed large irrigation canals and had an elaborate material culture.
Hohokam living along lesser watercourses were thought to have been culturally peripheral to the
Salt-Gila Hohokam, and exhibited material cultures considered to be local variants of the heartland culoire. The Tucson Basin Hohokam are traditionaOy viewed as one such varianL Until recently, areas between the core and peripheries, such as the area occupied by the Marana and Los Robles communities, were believed to have been sparsely populated at best, and culmrally impoverished relative to these other areas. The documentation of hundreds of sites by the Northern Tucson
' Where sherds from non-habitation sites are included in the analyses, these are clearly identified. For a description of the sampling strategy, see Chapter Three. 28
Basin Survey Project, tiowever, iias altered diis viewpoint. As a result of that survey, we now
know that large populations, complex settlement paiienis, and monumental architecture existed in
an area previously thought to have been largely unoccupied.
Culturally, the Los Robles and Marana communities are affiliated with the Tucson Basin
Hohokam. In the Marana community, nearly all of the Classic period decorated wares are Tanque
Verde Red-on-brown, a type associated with the Tucson Basin. In the Los Robles community, the
simation is somewhat less distinct due to a lower proportion of decorated wares, more deeply
buried sur^e deposits, and fewer excavations. Nonetheless, it is evident that there are higher
frequencies of buff wares within the boundaries of the Los Robles community than within those
of Marana. Most of the buff wares, however, appear to be Pre-classic. Regardless, the
predominance of brown ware over buff ware sherds in the Los Robles area suggests that the
inhabitants of that area were more closely affiliated with the Tucson Basin than the Phoenix Basin
(Downum 1993:8).
Although the presence of Tanque Verde Red-on-brown ceramics suggests affiliation of the two communities with the Tucson Basin, there are some diflerences between the areas. Except for the sites near the top of the settlement hierarchy, most of the sites in the Marana and Los Robles communities contain relatively low proportions (i.e.. < S%) of decorated ceramics (Table 2.1).
In contrast, most Classic period habitation sites in the central Tucson Basin contain more than 25
percent decorated ceramics (see Dart 1984:65). The high proportions of buff wares in the Los
Robles area also distinguishes that community from sites in the central Tucson Basin. These patterns suggest that the inhabitants of the Marana and Los Robles communities were culturally related to, but at the same time distinct from, diose of the Tucson Basin. Downum (1993:8) has suggested diat the Los Robles region might best be considered a transition zone, in which the populations formed a link between the Hohokam residents of the Phoenix Basin and those living 29
Table 2.1. Proportion of Red-on-brown Sherds Recovered from Various Sites"
Site Percent Sample Context Citation
Marma Comnauiity
Maiana Mound 18.7 14.387 Excavadon (middens) Bayman 1994; Table A-8
Los Moiteios 20.8 3960 Excavanon (all Class Heidke t995b: I contexts)^ Table 5.66
Chicken Ranch 8.5 744 Systematic sur&ce Harry 1994 coUecdon
Sueilo de Saguaro 3 335 Excavanon (middens) Sanchez de Carpenter 1995
La Vaca Enfemia 4 264 Excavadon (middens) Sanchez de Carpenter 1995
ASUSices^ <5 unknown Excavanon (all Bayman 1994:64 contexts) Los Robles Community
Cerro Prieto^ 1.7 9417 Excavanon (terraces) Harry 1994
Cerro Prieto 10.8 649 Excavanon Downum et al. (terrace+strucnire) 1993:Table4.1
Cake Ranch 1.4 994 Excavanon (all Kisselburg and contexts) Lancaster 1990
* IiKludes all sites for which information is available
^ Includes all sherds from single component. Classic period secondary trash deposits
* Includes sherds from the sites of Rancho Derrio, Muchas Casas, and Rancho Bajo; all excavated by Arizona State Univesity (ASU)
~ The sherds from the Harry excavations derive from three test pits placed behirvl agricultural terraces. The sherds from the Downum excavanons derive fhm test pits placed in a structure and an agriculRiral terrace. The proportion of red-on-brown sherds in the Downum assemblage is likely inflated due to the recovery of sherds fnmi reconstmctible Tanque Verde Red-on-brown vessels. It is possible, however, that red-on-brown sherds are underrepresented in the sherds from the Harry excavanons. since these were recovered from agriculniral terraces containing few artifacts. Because of the weathered condinon of the surface sherds, (he proportion of decorated sherds at Cerro Pheto cannot be determined accurately without additional excavation. 30
in otiier regions sucii as the Tucson Basin. Avra Valley, and Papagueria. The Marana conununity might also be considered transitional, in this case between the major culture areas of the Phoenix and Tucson basins.
The two communities are simated along major communication corridors. They flank either side of the Santa Cruz River, which would have hmcdoned as a natural transportation route between the Tucson and Phoenix Basin Hohokam. The Los Robles community additionally was intersected by the Los Robles Wash and the Brawley River. These two waterways would have connected the Los Robles cotiununity with Hohokam populations in the Avra and Altar Valleys, and ultimately the Papagueria (Downum 1993:8). The geographic location of diese communities suggests that they may have played a major role in Classic period exchange.
Both settlement clusters contain Pre-classic (ca. A.D. 300-1100) as well as early Classic (ca.
A.D. 1100-1300) period sites, although the densest occupations occur during the early Classic.
An abrupt increase in die number of sites and die amount of habitadon area occupied indicates an influx of population during the late eleventh century; it was during or just before diis period diat die two platform mounds were construaed (S. Fish et al. 1989b. 1992b). Prior to diis time, die two areas apparently were organized in communities centered on ballcourt villages. In die Los
Robles area, die Pre-classic settlement was centered at die ball coun site of Hog Farm. In die
Marana area, diere were two dispersed Pre-classic site clusters, one containing the ballcourt village of Los Morteros and die other encompassing a ballcourt village in an upland area of die Tortolita
Mountains. By die early Classic period, however, diese ballcourts had been abandoned and two platform mounds constructed within the areas previously occupied by the ballcourt communities.
The abandonment of the ballcourts and die construcdon of die platform mounds corresponds to other setdement changes in the areas. In the Los Robles area, die site of Hog Farm continued to be occupied but apparendy lost its position of central importance. This position, instead, seems to 31 have shifted to two other sites; the Los Robles Platform Mound site, and the site of Cerro Prieto
(a large terraced hillside village). In the Marana area, the two Pre-classic communities coalesced into one larger conrniunity centered on the newly-founded Marana Platform Mound site.
Settlement continued in die riverine and mountain edge zones, but expanded to include the previously-unoccupied middle bajada zone. Although dramatic, die setUement changes described above were short-lived. A virtual absence of Salado pottery indicates that the two platform mound communities were abandoned sometime prior to A.D. 1300. Although Tanque Verde
Red-on-brown ceramics span die entire Classic period sequence, an absence of F-hook and Dther late Classic period designs on these sherds supports diis temporal placement.
Description of the Commiiiiities
Several lines of evidence suggest that diese early Classic period site clusters functioned as integrated communities (see S. Fish et al. 1992b; Downum 1993). Within each cluster, a settlement pattern has been identified of continuous sites organized around a primary village with monumental architecture (Figure 2.3). Outside of these clusters of sites. Uiere are buffer zones separating the sites within each conununity from those of other clusters. Evidence of settlement hierarchies within each cluster lends further support to the interpretation that they functioned as integrated settlement systems. In die Marana communis, additional evidence of integration comes from die recent identification of a Classic period canal linking die platform mound site widi sites located at die northern end of the Tucson Mountains (S. Fish et al. I992b:21).
Marana Community
As a result of the survey intensity, die boundaries of die Marana community are relatively well defined. The eastern and western boundaries correspond to die upper slopes of die Tortolita
Mountains and die floodplain of die Santa Cruz River, respectively. The northern boundary is 32
\ \ V vp Marana Community Los Robles \ - \ Community ^ AV'\ \. -
,P-- v.Sv ,'• / =vp^---- f, f-Lj -K--y» ^ S , i f Somomtjo iV ^ ,; / \ ^ I • L "•-•V" ! "' f ' V ('•-'* H4 "•• • k-"' lX\- \ ••. 1
S'lvfr 9eu \ V"' ^ -\;. \ 't /'/ V»v°- \^ iU?NM ?N //
•!.. \ I / )* \ i/ t / I ^ -V'', s ..J^ \ / ' V, f \ > '/A.., '* / , I J r X Nif'iiv" ' I ^
4 u V ^ ••; A
'f, < \ ^
-• -. • «i ^ 1 --'vx^ t ' .., • Plotform Mound Sift f " A Trincheros Sife • Compound S,.tl.m.nf COTmunitY 5. Sucno d# SOQuoros • Non-Compound S«ttlem«nt voeo inhrmo 7. Marana Mound Los RoNes Community "ueiw* Cosos 9. Rcncho Bqo I. CoNa Roneti 10. Chiekin Ronen 2 Ctrro Priato II Huntingtan 3. Reblts Mound 12. LOs Morttros 4. Hog Farm
Figure 2.3. Location of early Classic period habitation sites in the Marana and Los Robles communities. 33 marked by a rapid drop-off in sites in the vicinity of Guild Wasii. Because tiiis area has been surveyed, the paucity of early Classic sites in this area is believed to reflect accurately the settlement pattern. This unoccupied area may have functioned as a buffer zone between the Classic period conununities of Marana and McClellan. The southern boundary is somewhat less clear, but is in the vicinity of the northern end of the Tucson Mountains.
The Marana community encompasses some 146 sq km (56 sq mi; S. Fish et. ai. 1992b;26) and contains more than two dozen habitation sites. Bayman (1994:18) has estimated the total population of die community at welt over one thousand, of which perhaps a third resided at the platform mound site. Thus, although settlement within the conununity was more dispersed than in Hohokam irrigation communities, the number of people incorporated was relatively substantial by prehistoric Southwestern standards. A diversity of site types, including habitation settlements, trincheras. agriculniral sites, and miscellaneous activity areas are found within the community.
Additionally, as discussed above, a prehistoric canal extended from the northern tip of the Tucson
Mountains to the vicinity of the platform mound site.
A settlement hierarchy of three tiers has been identified in the Marana community based on site size, visible architectural remains, and ceramic assemblages (S. Pish et al. 1989b. 1992b).
Class I sites are die largest habitation sites, contain compound-walled enclosures, and generally have between 16% and 21 % decorated ceramics in their ceramic assemblages (see Table 2.1).
Additionally, small amounts of non-local ceramics are consistently present at most of these sites.
There are only four sites in the Marana community assigned to diis class: diese are the platform mound site (also known as the Nelson Ranch site. AZ AA: 12:251). an upland bajada site (La Vaca
Enferma. AZ AA:8:184). and two riverine sites (Los Morteros, AZ AA; 12:57 and the Huntington
Site. AZ AA: 12:73). Of diese sites, die platform mound site is the largest and contains the greatest number of compound enclosures. Despite die smaller proportion of decorated ceramics at the site 34 of La Vaca Enferma, it is included in this site class because of its substantial architecture, including dry-laid masonry structures and a small compound. The amount of masonry rubble suggests that the compound may have stood two stories. Class II sites are intermediate in size, and usually have architectural remains visible on the ground surike. These remains consist primarily of cobble outlines and coursed adobe. Decorated ceramics at these sites comprise less than ten percent of
Che ceramic assemblages. Class III sites are the smallest and tend to lack surface indications of architecture, although excavation has shovm that these sites contain adobe surface structures and pidiouses (S. Fish et al. I992b:38). Like the Class Q sites, less than ten percent of the ceramics from these sites are decorated. In the Marana community, more than three-fourths of the Classic period residential sites fall into die Class III category. The Marana Platform Mound site undoubtedly was the focal point of the community. Intensive mapping of the site indicates that it spanned a 1.5 km by O.S km area, and contained between 22 and 2S residential compounds (P.
Fish et al. 1992a; Rgure 2.4). The platform mound, located near the central portion of the site, stands some three to four meters high and contains approximately 900 cubic meters of fill. In comparison to other Hohokam mounds, this size is considered quite small. Because mounds typically are enlarged in stages, however, the mound's size may be partially a result of the site's short occupational span (P. Fish et al. I992a:6S). A compound wall encloses the mound and several rooms at the mound's base. Refiise recovered from a nearby midden suggests that rooms within the platform mound compound were used as domestic residences (Bayman 1994; 19:
Bubemyre 1993). The site of Los Morteros, located at the northern tip of the Tucson Mountains, would have been another important village within the community. Information about the Classic period occupation of the site comes from two excavation projects (Lange 1989; Wallace 1995).
The site, which exhibits a long occupational sequence, contained a ballcourt during Pre-classic times. Although the ballcourt was abandoned by the Classic period, several lines of evidence •s AZ AA'I2'25I (ASM) o 100 Mtltft 0 »00 ftVl - M Mound«0froftti moifAtf odoto oiciUUclu** 01 —^ Wall MQinoAl «Mlk PoftMbIt couflyertf A) <#»> / / / /o/yA a , Plpllorm WO-Mound^ iCompMnd WaU Mound—
o ' ) o oo / :;f fr ';s8 fl" y *00 - ».«•• 9^ I —v-» aa,., o • Co--/ ...•>» •ft / i. + i. im * X (lU
iMyure 2.4. Map ol the Marana M«)unil Siie. (rcprinicd from S. Pisli ci al. 1992b: Figure 3.6). 36 suggest that the vUlage continued to occupy an important position within the community. Like other Class I sites within the community, the site exhibits compound architecture (Wallace
1995:784) and a high proportion of decorated ceramics (see Table 2.1). Additionally, hillside
terraces (known as the Linda Vista trincheras) are present within the site boundaries. These trincheras contained both residential structures and agriculniral terraces (Wallace 1995:788).
Wallace (1995:789) has suggested that the trincheras may have been functionally equivalent tu platform mounds. The recovery of a shell trumpet, an artist typically associated with platform mounds, lends support to this hypothesis. Citing a hypothesis presented by Downum and others
(1993). Wallace alternatively suggests that the trincheras may have complemented the functions of platform mounds.
Substantial ecological variabih'ty characterizes the Marana conununity. S. Fish et al. (1992b) have idendfied six zones of prehistoric use within the community. Zone I consists of the lower bajada. and was used for settlement and both alluvial fan and floodwater farming. It is in this zone that the platform mound site is located. Zone 2 refers to the middle bajada. Huge rockptle Melds are found in diis zone; studies have determined that these features were used for the large-scale cultivation of agave using run-off agricultural techniques (S. Fish et al. 1992a). Zone 3. used largely for the gathering of saguaro fhiit and other upper bajada plant resources, spans the middle and upper bajada. The mountain pediment zone comprises Zone 4, and was used for both residential habiution and agriculture. The upland compound site of La Vaca Enferma is located in this zone. Zone 5 consists of the floodplain and river terraces of the Santa Cruz Eliver. and was used for residence, irrigation and floodwater agriculture, and the gathering of riparian resources.
The Tucson Mountains comprise Zone 6. These mountains slopes were used for residence (in the form of trincheras), dry farming, and the gathering of wild resources. The presence of these ecological zones suggests that access to resources would have varied by site, and raises the 37 possibility of intra-community specializadon and exchange. Specialized subsistence production is suggested by the presence of huge rockpile fields clustered above the platform mound site. S. Fish and odiers (1992a:86) have proposed that the Marana Mound site residents used these fields to cultivate agave for exchange. This interpretation is supported by a higher proportion of agave knives at the mound village than odier habitation sites (Bayman 1994). Additional evidence of subsistence specialization and exchange comes from a comparison of pollen and botanical data from various sites in the community (S. Fish and Donaldson 1991). These data indicate that, although most cultigens were grown at all sites, differences existed in the emphasis placed on various cultigens. In spite of these differences in production, consumption patterns were similar across the sites suggesting exchange of subsistence resources.
Los Robles Community
Compared to the Marana community, less work has been conducted in the Los Robles area.
Additionally, alluviation has obscured surface remains in the vicinity of the Los Robles Wash.
Because of these two situations, the parameters of the Los Robles community are not as well understood as diey are for the Marana conomunity. The community appears, however, to have been more or less bounded by the Silverbell Mountains on the west, the Santa Cruz flats on die north, and the Santa Cruz on the east. The soudiem boundary is less clear, but probably was in the vicinity of the confluence of die Brawley and the Los Robles washes. Separation of die Los
Robles and Marana communities is indicated by a drop-off in site density as one approaches die
Santa Cruz River (Downum 1993:11).
Like die Marana community, die Los Robles community contains a vanety of site types, including a platform mound site, a trincheras site, a reservoir, habitation sites, agricultural areas, and special use loci (Downum 1993). More than a dozen early Classic habitation sites have been identified in die area, although die paucity of decorated ceramics recovered from surface 38
assemblages makes it possible that the actual number is higher. A settlement hierarchy among the
habitation sites is apparent, with the largest population most likely residing at the trincheras site of Cerro Prieto. A second important site would have been the Los Robles Platform Mound site, although the heavy alluviatioD at the site and the presence of a Pre-classic component makes it difHcult to detennine the size of the Classic period component. Below this upper tier in the setUement hierarchy would have been residential sites containing compound architecmre. and settlements lacking such compounds.
Numerous unresolved questions exist concerning die namre of the Los Robles plad:brm mound and its adjacent settlement. The mound consists of a rectangular earthem hill, measuring approximately 3S m x 37 m and standing about 2 m above the surrounding ground level (Downum
1993:24-27). No walls or architectural features are visible, however, and the mound resembles natural gravel rises that are found nearby. These qualities raise the question as to whether the mound represents a true Hohokam platform mound or a culnirally-modified natural feaure. Citing several lines of evidence, including artifact density and the regular shape of the mound. Downum
(I993:2S-26) suggests that it was culturally constructed. Regardless of the mound's origin, however, the density of artifacts on its surface suggests that it was used prehistorically and probably fimctioned in a manner equivalent to culurally-constructed platform mounds.
Sherds recovered from the mound's sur^ indicate diat it was used during the early Classic period. Downum (1993:117) reports that diagnostic sherds collected firom die ground surface of
Che mound date entirely to die Classic period, and he dierefore suggests diat die mound village was newly sealed at this time. Three test pits excavated at die site^. however, demonstrate the presence of a substantial Pre-classic component Although a few Classic period sherds were
^ These (est pits, placed in tbiee middens at the site, were excavated as a pan of this dissenadon research. 39
recovered, most of die diagnostic ceramks contained Sedentary period designs. These excavation
results suggest that much, and possibly most, of the site's occupation predated use of die mound.
Because most of die site is buried, it is impossible to determine the extent of die Classic period
occupation from surface remains. Whether die Classic period setdement functioned as a major
village or as a largely uninhabited ceremonial center (as has been posited for some other platform
mound sites; see Jacobs and Rice 1994a, 1994b) is unknown.
Less than two kilometers nordiwest of die platform mound site is die site of Cerro Prieto.
Like die oincheras in die Marana community, die terraces at Cerro Prieto include die remains uf
bodi residential strucmres and agricultural features (Downum et al. 1993). The residential
population of diis site was evtdentiy quite large; durmg die mappmg of die site. 232 stone feanires
were identified as probable domestic shelters. Test excavations within one of these features
confirmed a domestic function (Downum et al. 1993:67). A large outcrop of tabular andesite
occurs on die summit of die hill just above Cerro Prieto. This material, geographically restricted
to die Cerro Prieto area (Madsen 1993:72). was widely used for manufacturing die tabular knives
used to process agave. These knives are especially frequent in die Marana community, and dieir
presence suggests that trade relations existed between die two communities.
The presence of a large trincheras village so close to a platform mound raises questions concerning die relationship of die two site types. As discussed above, Wallace (1995) has suggested that trincheras villages were fimctionally similar to villages containing platform mounds.
Downum (1993:119-120), however, has proposed diat die two settiements may have been constructed by difiering populations. Noting diat platform mounds are generally associated widi die Salt and Gila River valleys, and trincheras widi northern Sonora. he suggests diat die presence of diese two architectural forms in a single community may reflect die co-residence of two populations. Regardless, the unusual size of Cerro Prieto and its location beneadi a relatively 40
scarce and important lithic resource indicate tiiat tbe settlement played an important role within the
Classic period community.
Like the Marana community, the Los Robles community subsumed ecologically diverse areas.
Downum (1993:16) suggests that there were diree zones of exploitation within the Los Robles
community; the floodplain, the bajada, and a rocky upland zone. The floodplain zone was used
for residential occupation, floodwater and dry fuming, and the gathering of riverine resources.
Dry farming was practiced on the bajada, and wild resources could have been gathered in the
upland zone. Although the environment was largely redundant with that found in the Marana
community, some differences seem to have existed. In particular, the large-scale cultivatiua of
agave seems not to have been practiced in this community.
Discussion
The Marana and Los Robles areas followed similar settlement trajectories. Both contained
Pre-classic communities organized around ballcourts. and both were characterized by population
expansion during the early Classic period. It was at this time (A.D. 1050 or 1100), that the
platform mounds and trincheras were constructed and the early Classic communities coalesced.
These communities, however, were short-lived. An absence of Salado pottery indicates that both
areas were abandoned sometime prior to A.D. 1300.
Despite the many similarities, some differences are apparent between the two communities
(Downum 1993 Tucson Basin populations than did the Los Robles community. Compared to the Los Robles community, the Marana community contained higher proportions of Tanque Verde Red-on-brown ceramics and lower proportions of Phoenix Basin buff wares. Second, slight differences in subsistence practices characterized the two regions. Although agriculnire in the Los Robles area was largely confined to the floodplain. a greater diversity of practices characterized the Marana 41 community. In addition to floodwater fimning along the floodplain, die Marana inhabitants practiced irrigation agriculture, ak chin techniques, and dry farming. In particular, die Marana community seems to have specialized in the cultivation of agave. Because the harvesting and processing of die agave required the use of tabular knives made from materials available only in the Los Robles community, diis specialization would have fostered exchange ties between die two communities. Some researchers have challenged de notion diat setUement hierarchies necessarily reflect die presence of an integrated community. Two arguments have been posed against die community concept in some parts of the Southwest: diat die large and small sites were not contemporaneous, and diat die small sites were seasonally occupied satellites of die large setdements (Graves and Reid 1984). Several lines of evidence suggest diat diese arguments do not apply in die case of the Marana and Los Robles communities. As discussed above, ceramic evidence suggests diat Classic period occupation of die areas was confined to die early Classic period. Additional evidence for diis temporal assignment comes from archaeomagnetic and radiocarbon dates diat have been obtained from excavated sites. In the Marana community, diese include dates obtained from the large villages of die Marana Platform Mound site (WilUam Deaver. personal commum'cation 1992; cited in P. Fish et al. 1992a:63), and Los Morteros (Wallace 1995); as well as die smaller setdements of Muchas Casas, Rancho Derrio. and Rancho Bajo (Henderson 1987). In the Los Robles community, archaeomagnetic and radiocarbon dates are available from only one site, a medium-sized setdement known as Cake Ranch. The dates from diat site also suggest an early Classic period occupation (Halbin et al. 1990). Additional support for site contemporaneity comes from die location of several sites in die Marana community along a single canal. The possibility diat residents of die Marana community were seasonally mobile has been raised by Bayman (1994.1995) and by Wallace (1995). Bayman proposes diat die platform mound 42 site was host to large populations during riual and other seasonal events; Wallace suggests that residents of Los Morteros may have seasonally resided at sites across the Santa Cruz River to participate in the agave harvest. Despite the possibility of some seasonal movement within the community, however, evidence from excavated sites indicates that settlements within the community were largely sedentary. This evidence (summarized in Table 2.2) is from large sites at the top of dK proposed settlement hierarchy, as well as from small sites belonging to the lower tiers. The data presented in Table 2.2 support the interpretation that sites identified from surface remains as part of the settlement hierarchy were occupied for most or all of the year. The evidence of intensive occupation does not rule out the possibility diat there was some seasonal movement; however, it does suggest that each site within the settlement hierarchy functioned as the primary place of residence for most or all of that settlement's inhabitants. I'able 2.2. Evidence from Excavated Sites Suggesting Sedentary Occupation Site Investment in Architectural Artifact and Feature Diversity Substantial Middens Labor Marana Community Maraiia MCIUIHI Sile includes plaifonn mound, Roor assemblages contain a mix of domestic Yes (Bayman 1994:143 resideiiiial compounds, and nonlocal and manufacturing items (P. Fish ei al. 1992a); and Table A-16) wood species for arcltitectural storage rooms are present (P.Fish et al. 1992a); supports (P. Fishetal. 1992a) middens contain diversity of artifacts typical of intensive sedeniism (Baynian 1994) L«>s Moneri>!> Site includes adobe-wallcd Tanque Verde pltase cemetery is present; liigh Yes (Wallace structures uiid compound diversity of ariifaci types are present typical of 1995:787, 798) architecture (Wallace I99S) intensive sedeniism (Wallace I99S) 1^ Vaca Enfcmia Houses include adobe and cobble Artifact diversity is typical of intensive Yes (Bayman foundaiioiLs; compound present sedeniism (Baynian 1994:142); human burials 1994:143) (possibly two-story) Itave been recovered from dte site (Paul Fish, personal communication ciied in Bayman 1994:142) Muchas Casas Sile includes adobe-walled Artifact diversity is typical of iniensive Yes (Beniard-Slutw siruciures and an oversized rcxun sedeniism; reflects non-subsisience aciiviiies 1987a; Bosiwick 1987; inierprcied as a communal siruciure (such as shell working, fiber manufacture, Hackbardi 1987a, (Rice 1987) pottery prixluciion, etc.) as well as subsistence I987h) aciiviiies (Rice 1987); cemeiery coniaining Tanque Verde pliase componeiu is preseiu (Bosiwick 1987); specialized storage nmms are prescni (Rice 1987) Table 2.2. Uvidence from Excavated Sites Suggesting Sedentary Occupation (continued) Site investmeni in Architectural Artifact and Feature Diversity Substantial Middens Labor Marana Community (voniinuetl) Raiiclio Bajo No ciuiipouiiils or adobe siruciurcs Ariifaci diversity is typical of iniciisively- Data not available were present occupied sites (Hackbartli 1987c) Raiicho Derrio No compounds or siandii)g adobe Artifact diversity includes grinding iniplemeius Yes (Benurd-SI>aw structures; houses were prepared as well as iix)ls for pottery manufacnjre and 1987b) pitliouses (two of whicb were adobe- weaving; site contained a specialized storage lined) structure and a cremation (Bemard-Sltaw 1987b) Los Robles Community Ccrro Prieco Sice includes numerous compound Diversity of artifacts typical of sedentary sites Yes (see Downum et encltisures and more tlian 2(10 (see Downuni el al. l993:Table 4.1); possible al. 1993:79) masonry structures (Downum et al. cremation area liKated (Downum et al. 1993:79- 1993); levelling of floors for 80) compounds and hauling of boulders would have required substantial effort (see Downuni et al. 1993:75) Cake Ranch Adobe-walled pidunises present Features include storage pits and cremations; Yes (Halbirt et al. (Malbirt et al. 1990) artifact diversity includes milling equipment, 1990) storage vessels, and ceremonial and ornamental objects (Halbirt et al. 1990) 45 CHAPTER THREE RESEARCH DESIGN Theoretical Orientatioii Although simple site aggregates are knovm to have occurred as early as 2000 years ago in the Greater Southwest (Lightfoot and Upham 1989:586). the present research deals with larger multisite complexes that developed between A.D. 1100 and 1300 in the Greater Southwest. These site clusters typically exhibit a senlement hierarchy of three or more tiers and range in diameter trom 10 to 50 km (Jewett 1989; Lightfoot and Upham 1989). The largest sites in a community commonly differ from other habitadon sites in architecture, artifact distribudons. and mortuary goods. Great Kivas are generally present at the largest Anasazi and Mogollon sites, whereas platform mounds are typically present at the largest sites to Hohokam setdement clusters. In some areas, these forms of public or monumental architecmre are absent from die smaller setUements. The largest sites can also be distinguished from die smaller sites by their higher proponions of decorated ceramics, nonlocal goods, and storage space (Howard 1987; Jewett 1989; Lighdbot 1984:42-49; Lightfoot and Upham 1989:586-587; Upham 1982). In addidon to patterned differences between settlements, site clusters share other common atn-ibutes. Agricultural intensificanon (Adams 1989; Buge 1984; S. Fish et al. 1985. 1989b. 1992a; Upham 1982) and subsistence diversification (Adams 1989:189; P. Fish 1989; S. Fish et. al. 1985; Hill and Trierweiler 1986) characterize many setdement clusters. Addidonally. extensive regional and pan-regional exchange networks are usually evident (Adams 1989; P. IHsh 1989; Upham 1982). These characteristics of setdement communities raise several questions about die organization of production and distribution within and between communities. In diis section. I 46 discuss the research issues that underlie the present study. These issues have to do with die nature of the interaction between residents of a single site or community; die relationship of community inhabitants with people living outside of the community; and die significance of site hierarchies and differentially-distributed artifacts. Settlement Communities and Boundaries Ecooomic IntegratioD Witbin Conunuiuties. The presence of a settlement community implies diat some form of interdependence existed between die community members. Whedier diis interdependence was social, political, or economic, or some combination of diese diree. is unknown. As discussed in Chapter One, most researchers have suggested that- at least for Hohokam conununities- die interdependence was economically based. In riverine communities, integration is believed to have been based on die need to maintain irrigation canals and to allocate water resources. In nonriverine communities, integration may have been based on die need to diffuse subsistence risk. In this case, risk could be off%t dirough the exchange of products between different environmental zones (S. Fish and P. Fish 1990, 1994a). Ethnographically, craft specialization often develops to foster exchange ties needed to offset subsistence shortfolls. These ties can work in one of two ways. In peasant communities, potters are often individuals lacking sufficient agricultural land to support diemselves dirough farming (Arnold 1985; Netting 1990). Where an entire village specializes in ceramic production, die village may be located in an agriculmrally marginal area (Arnold 1993). Ceramics in these cases are regularly exchanged for food products. A second way that craft specialization can be used to off^ subsistence shortfalls is dirough the creation of a buffering mechanism. In this strategy, different villages specialize in die production of different craft products to create a need for intervillage exchange. Among ceramic specialists, different potters or villages may specialize 47 in particular wares or vessel forms to assure the need for exchange (Chavez 1992: Reina and Hill 1978). Here, craft products are traded primarily for other nonsubsistence items. The social ties created by the trade of these items, however, establish a buffering mechanism whereby food can be obtained during times of localized crop ^lures. This strategy permits subsistence risks to be spread among different villages within die economic system (Ford 1972; Spieimann 1986. I99I). In the situations described above, exchange networks are created to (Militate die exchange of food from areas of localized abundance to those experiencing subsistence shortfalls. For such economic systems to work, exchange networks must incorporate villages from environmentally diverse areas. As a result, Rautman (1993) has argued diat die primary determinant of social interaction will be environmental setting radier dian geographic distance. Discussion. Social interaction widiin die Marana and Los Robles communities is believed CO have been high. This interaction is suggested by the presence of monumental architecture at centrally located sites, and by the presence of agricultural fields and odier special use sites spanning the areas between habitation loci. In the Marana community, interaction is further indicated by a canal connecting several of the habitation sites (S. Fish et al. I992b:2l) and by evidence of subsistence trade (Fish and Donaldson 1991). The question remains, however, to what degree these social and subsistence ties were reflected in odier activities. The possibility of intracommunity craft specialization has been raised by several researchers. The Marana Platform Mound site is located on the lower bajada in an area of relatively poor resource potential. Its central location within die community, however, suggests diat it may have been simated to take advantage of exchange activities (S. Fish and P. Fish 1992b;25). As discussed above, craft specialization is one way diat residents of agriculturally poor areas can offset resource shortages. If this was die case in die Marana community, residents of 48 the mound site might be expected to have specialized in the production in ceramics. Alternatively, the mound residents may have Militated the exchange of ceramics produced elsewhere in the community. The reladonship of villages located in difierent ecological zones is currently under debate. Evidence from the Marana conunum'ty suggests that subsistence specialization and exchange occurred between villages of different zones (Fish and Donaldson 1991; S. Fish and P. Fish 1994; S. Fish et al. 1989a). Bayman (1994) has further suggested that these patterns extended to some nonsubsistence activities. Echoing this viewpoint are Arizona State University researchers studying platform mound communities in die Tonto Basin. G. Rice (1990a:12) has proposed (hat the upland villages in that area were economically dependent upon die lowland villages; Spiehnann (1997) has further proposed that nonsubsistence goods were traded from the riverine villages to the upland sites through down-the-line exchange. These trade patterns, Spielmann proposes, resulted because the riverine villages were larger and more established, and ±erefore had more opportum'ty than die smaller upland communides to develop external trade reladonships. An alternative viewpoint has been advanced by Ciolek-Torrello (1994), who believes diat die upland sites were economically independent of die lowland sites. The present study will evaluate patterns of ceramic production and exchange to examine die issues raised here. Community Self-Suffidency vs. Interaction. SetUement communities are identified archaeologically by the presence of a cluster of sites typically separated from odier clusters by vacant zones (Jewea 1989). The existence of setdement boundaries implies diat members of a particular community interact more widi one another dian diey do with individuals outside of diat community (S. Fish and P. Fish 1990:162; Jewett 1989; Neitzel 1994). The degree to which community boundaries determine patterns of exchange, however, remains unresolved. 49 Two studies of cultural boundaries are relevant to the present research projea. Working in the Maya Lowlands, Rands (1967; Rands and Bishop 1980) has advanced alternative hypotheses to describe intraregional exchange patterns. Where exchange boundaries are sharply delineated, a region (or a community) is said to be inward-looking. These patterns. Rands proposes, indicate that exchange was conducted primarily within the community, by some form of redistributive ur market system centered at the largest site. Where exchange boundaries are overlapping or blurred, the community is said to be outward-looking. In such conmunides. local senlements maintain exchange reladonships independent of the primary center. A second model of cultural boundaries concerns die relationship between the degree of centralization and community size. This model, formulated by Kowalewski et al. (1983). holds that systems characterized by a high degree of centralization will be smaller in size dian less centralized ones. Interaction in such conmiunities will occur primarily widiin community boundaries. Less-centralized communities, by contrast, will be larger and will exhibit more permeable boundaries. In these communities, exchange is expected to occur treely across community boundaries. Discussion. The degree to which Hohokam platform mound conununities were inward- vs. outward-oriented is debated. One viewpoint holds that the communities exhibited strong inward tendencies and were largely self-sufficient (Gregory 1991:188). A second viewpoint posits that platform mound cnmmunines were characterized by a high degree of interaction and cooperation (Craig et al. 1992:27-29; Jewett 1989). Most researchers smdying die Marana and Los Robles communities ascribe to die latter point of view. Several lines of evidence suggest diat interaction between the two communities was high. As discussed in Chapter Two. a high quality source of tabular andesite outcrops at the summit of Cerro Prieto in the Los Robles community. Because this material was used to harvest and process agave by die Marana community residents. 50 its presence suggests trade relations between the two communities. The locations of the communities along riverine corridors connecting the Papagueria. Salt-Gila River valleys, and Tucson Basin fiinber raises the possibility of external exchange. If intercommunity exchange ties were common, they may have been induced culmrally through the intentional partitioning of specializations. Stark (1993:51) reports that such practices are conmion ethnographically. Groups occupying homogenous environmental zones may panition up specializations by community or region to perpetuate social relations between communities, irrespective of ecology. In Amazonia, this division ot labor may involve the types of crafts produced (Chemela 1992). In highland South America, potters specialize in subtypes of goods within a particular region, ensuring that each community actively engages in the exchange network (Chavez 1992). Some researchers have suggested that the platform mound communities of the Tonto Basin were characterized by this type of system, in which each platform mound community specialized in the production of different ceramic wares (Simon 1994a: Stark and Heidke 1995). G. Rice (1987:140-141) has proposed that the entire community of Marana specialized in ceramic production tor exchange beyond the community's limits. According to his model, ceramic production was conducted at the household level under the management of a centralized leader. This conclusion is based on evidence recovered from excavations at the sites of Muchas Casas. Rancho Bajo. and Rancho Derrio. In diis case, however, the evidence- large numbers of poaery production tools and stored vessels- could reflea processes other than community specialization. 51 This study evaluates the degree to which the Marana and Los Robles conununities were self-sufficient vs. interdependent in dieir consumption of Tanque Verde Red-on-brown ceramics. This will be accomplished by examining whether ceramics were exchanged primarily within each community or whether it occurred fmly across community boundaries. Additionally, the sudy investigates whether one or both communities specialized in die production of die Tanque Verde Red-on-brown ceramics, and whether di%rent communities specialized in die production of different forms or subtypes. As discussed in Chapter Two, die Marana and Los Robles communities were relatively dispersed. If the model proposed by Kowalewsld et al. (1983) is correct, dierefore, it is expected that exchange would have occurred freely across community boundaries. In Rands' terminology, such a community would be said to be outward-looking. If. on die odier hand, die community boundaries largely determined social and economic interaction, one would expect exchange to have been largely confined within each community. Site Hierarchies and Differentialfy-Distributed Arttfacts Ceatralizatioa Mottels. The presence of setdement hierarchies and the differential distribution of artifacts invite die obvious interpretation that die largest sites fiinaioned as some sort of social, political, or economic centers. Archaeologists working in different regions have suggested diat residents of die largest setdements participated in different production and disiribuuon activiu'es than did diose of smaller sites. Additionally, an economic system characterized by centralized management and a high level of specialized production and distnbution is often inferred. A common premise is diat producdon in setdement clusters is centralized at the largest sites. Commodities proposed to have been centrally produced include ceramics (Neitzel 1991: Upham 1982). textiles (Neicel 1991). jewelry and status ornaments (McGuire 1985; Neitzel 1991). 52 and litbic tools (Neitzei 1991; Upham 1982). Some archaeologists (i.e., McGuire 1985; Neitzel 1991) have proposed that these centrally-produced goods were manufactured by craft specialists employed by the elite (termed attached specialists by Brumfiel and Earle 1987). Alternatively, centralized craft production could have been carried out by the elite themselves, under a system of embedded specialization as proposed by Ames (1995). A second often-stated premise is that distribution was also centralized. Models of centralized distribution take one of two forms. Elite-controlled redistribution has been posited for Anasazi and Mogollon great kiva sites (Lightfoot 1984; Upham 1982) and for platform mound sites in the Hohokam area (Doyel 199Ia:258; McGuire 1985; Simon and Burton 1992:267; Teague 1984; Wilcox 1979). Most models of elite-controlled redistnbution maintain that high-status goods are the primary materials fiinneled through the redistributive hierarchy. These goods are believed to have tunctioned as status markers, whose circulation the elite controlled in order to maintain and increase their power (Lightfoot 1984; McGuire 1985; Neitzel 1991; Upham 1982). Some archaeologists have proposed that subsistence and utilitarian goods were redistributed by the elite as well (Teague 1984; Upham 1982). A second model of centralized distribution holds that although large settlements functioned as economic centers, exchange of goods at these centers occurred largely without elite intervention. Such spatially-centralized distribution coukl result either from ritual exchanges or from market-like exchanges occurring at trading fairs (S. Fish and P. Fish 1990:180; S. Plog 1989a, 1989b). A third means by which the largest settlements are commonly believed to have differed from other settlements is in the occurrence of long-distance exchange activities. Researchers of prehistoric Pueblo (Lightfoot 1984; F. Plog 1983; Upham 1982) and Hohokam (McGuire 1985) settlement clusters have hypothesized that the elite residents of settlement clusters maintained exchange alliances from which the non-elite were excluded. Inclusion in these exchange alliances 53 is believed to have provided access to nonlocal prestige items. Because nonelite residents were excluded from long-distance exchange activities, they were unable to acquire these restricted commodities. Similar theories have been applied on the intrasite level. Noting that protokiva proveniences tend to have higher proportions of redwares than other proveniences in some Anasazi sites, Blinman (1989) has suggested that die residents living nearest these strucmres may have had preferential access to exchanged goods. Other researchers (S. Plog 1989a; Doyel 1993:471) have suggested that higher proportions of nonlocal ceramics near public architectural features reflects a centralization of exchange near those feanires. Evaluation of the Centralization Models. The above models share the recurring premise that complex site clusters reflect economic centralization. Internal exchange, commodity production, and long-distance trade are often believed to have occuned exclusively or primarily at the largest settlements. In most cases, these inferences are based on the differential distribution of certain artifact classes widiin setdement clusters. Because artifact frequency is positively correlated with site size, diese ardfacts are presumed to have been produced and/or redistributed at the largest sites. These conclusions, however, remain unproven. By themselves, artifact distributions are unable to distinguish between differential production, redistribution, and cnnsumption. In other words, the high proportion of certain artifact types found at large sites could result trom eidier the localized production of the commodity, die stockpiling of the commodity for redistribudon. or the greater consumption of the commodity at certain settlements. In die absence of additional data, it is impossible to determine which of diese possibilities prevails. Significantiy. anthropological data do not support die assumption of centralized production and distribution in non-market societies. In an economic analysis of Hawaiian chiefdoms. Earle 54 (1977) found that except for products manufactured specifically for elite consumption, cralit production was carried out by individual households in dispersed villages. Similar patterns obtain archaeologically. For example, centralized production in die Mayan lowlands appears to have been rare (P. Rice 19S7). Ceramic compositional studies from Palenque (Rands and Bishop 1980: Bishop 1980; Bishop and Rands 1982) and Tikai (Fry 1979, 1980) indicate that the production of pottery vessels was carried out at settlements located at some distance from the Classic Mayan civic-ceremonial centers (P. Rice 1987:78). Instead of fiincdoning as production centers. P. Rice (1987:79) concludes that the Mayan centers functioned primarily as consumers of ceramics produced in odier settlements. An absence of centralized production may also have characterized prehistoric Mississippian cultures (Muiler 1987). Data suggest diat centralized distribution is also less prevalent than conmionly assumed. Earle (1977) has identified two processes, mobilizauon and reciprocity, by which goods were transferred within and between Hawaiian chiefdoms. Mobilization involved the transfer of goods from the general population to the elite; however, contrary to the expectations of most redistribution models, these goods were not redistributed to die general population (cf. Service 1962). Instead, they were consumed by the elite or used to finance elite activities. The second type of exchange, reciprocity, took place outside die redistributive hierarchy and involved direct barter between trading partners or km. Earie (1977) reports that the vast majority of exchange in the Hawaiian chiefidonis took this form. Reciprocity not only characterized exchange within individual districts, but between districts as well. Most exchanges in the Classic Mayan lowlands appear also to have taken place through a reciprocal exchange system (see Fry 1980: P. Rice 1987). 55 These data suggest that in non-market and non-state level societies, elite goods are the only type of commodities that will be produced and distributed under elite control (see also Clark and Parry 1990). Earle (1987) argues that this type of production results from the elite desire to control access to societal status markers. The type of goods that are documented to have been produced and distributed under elite control differ, though, firom most types of differentially distributed artists found in the American Southwest First, most conmiodities produced by attached specialists are items of personal adornment or items otherwise used for public display (see Brumfiei 1987; Earle 1977.1987;. In Southwestern settlement clusters, diffi:rentiaUy distributed artifacts include a variety of goods including raw lithic materials, finished tools, and decorated ceramics. If. as Earle (1977) has argued, goods produced by attached specialists functioned as status markers, then most of the differentially distributed goods found in Southwestern settlement clusters would not have been sufficiently visible to convey stanis messages (see Wobst 1977). A second difference between artif^ts found in the Southwest and goods produced by attached specialists is in the general availability of the products. As Earle (1987) has noted, wealth objects must be scarce if elite are to control the production process. This scarcity. Earle suggests, can reflect eidier the natural rarity of the raw material used or the amount of skilled labor required in manufacture. Again, these conditions do not characterize most artist classes represented in the Southwest. Finally, the two groups of materials differ in their distribution. Wealth objects in ethnographic contexts are extremely limited and their distribution highly restricted. In the Southwest, differentially distributed anifaa classes are found at most or all villages within settlement clusters. Although they are more ftequent at some sites and in some contexts than in others, their widespread occurrence suggests that they did not function in the same manner as the highly restricted wealth objects described by Brumfiei (1987) and Earle (1977. 1987). 56 Comparative data thus suggest that most of the differentially distributed goods found in Southwestern settlement clusters are unlikely to have been produced by attached specialists. Rather, diese goods were likely to have been produced at the household level, and exchanged through reciprocal exchange networks. Brumfiel and Earle (1987) suggest that reciprocal exchange networks will prevail over centralized exchange mechanisms because of the greater stability the former provide. On the one hand, it is probably difficult for political elites to play an important role in redistribution. The difficulties of transporting, storing, and allocating bulky subsistence goods have been mentioned... Attempts to extend redistribution to (he general population would encounter monumental problems. Markets avoid many of die administrative complexities of redistribution, but diey also defy regulatory efforts. Whenever the supply of subsistence goods (particularly food) decreases, producer households provision diemselves first.... and even draconian efforts by central administrators can fail to pull adequate supplies into market circulation... On the other hand, peasants seem to resist dependence upon economic institutions that are under the domination of political elites... In this context, we can begin to understand why the Hawaiians and the Late Classic Maya opted for direct reciprocal exchange; it avoided elite interference and could be stabilized by personalistic bonds (Brumfiel and Earle 1987:6-7). In the following section, an alternative model is proposed to account for the differential distribution of artifacts in Southwestern settlement clusters. This model posits a high degree of 57 interaction and exciiange within and between clusters; it does not, however, presuppose the existence of a centralized economic system. Alternative Model. The alternative model suggests that production within prehistoric Southwestern settlement clusters was organized at the household level, with exchange occurring primarily through reciprocal exchange ties. This model does not exclude the possibility that some exchange was carried out through ritual distribution and occasional trading fairs; however, these mechanisms are believed to have been less important than direct exchange. Two explanations have been advanced in the anthropological literature to account for the development of craft specialization. One explanation, already alluded to above, suggests that craft specializadon follows the development of political power. As one segment of die population increases in power, these elite may eidier employ specialists to produce status markers that can be used to reinforce their societal positions (Brumfiel and Earle 1987). or they may produce these sutus markers themselves (Ames 1995). A second explanation suggests that productive specialization is a namral result of environmental diversity. As initially formulated, this explanation posits that specialization develops to facilitate the regular flow of goods between different microenvironments (Service 1962). A more recent version of this model suggests diat craft specialization is initiated by populations lacking access to an adequate subsistence base (Arnold 1985). According to this version, populations unable to support themselves turn to craft production as a means of off%tting food shortages. Neither of these models appear to characterize specialization in Southwestern settlement clusters. As argued above, few or none of the potentially specialized products found in these communities are likely to have been made by attached specialists. Further, it is unlikely diat any group was able to sustain sufficient surpluses to regularly support a large population of specialists 58 dependent upon odiers for their subsistence. Instead, some type of specialized production is likely to have been carried out on a part-time basis by all or most households. After Service (1962). it is suggested that specialization in settlement clusters fiinctioned to ofBset environmental differences, but in this case the differences were probably temporally variable. According to this view, a regular exchange of craft products would have functioned to maintain die social and exchange ties necessary to offkt the occasional, localized, subsistence failures (Dean et al. I98S: Ford 1972: Halstead and O'Shea 1989; O'Shea and Halstead 1989; Rautman 1993; Spielmann 1991). Under the alternative model presented here, nonlocal and otiier differentially distributed goods were available to all community members. In spite of the ^ that the elite did not maintain exclusive access to these conunodities, these goods could still have functioned as wealth items and served to have increase the elites' power. Certainly. Uie higher firequencies of these goods at the largest setdements indicate die residents of tiiese sites were able to acquire and consume a higher proportion of die goods. Such widely accessible but differentially distributed goods are termed generaiized wealth by Brumfiel and Earle (1987). Because the elite can "afford" a greater quantity of diese goods. Brumfiel and Earle (1987) suggest diat they are able to meet dieir social payments and develop a body of supporters. Further inequality can result if "the domestic system of wealdi production and exchange is tied to interregional trade.... Interacting regional elites can agree to exchange dieir stores of domestic wealth, each supplying the other with what becomes stuck of exotic wealth... (Brumfiel and Earle 1987:7)." This model suggests diat the differential distribution of nonlocal and certain other goods results from die differential consumption of die goods by community members. Because of superior social and economic positions, some members of die population are able to acquire a greater proportion of diese goods. By manipulatilng diis wealth and opening exchange ties with die 59 elite of other areas, acquisition of these goods serves to strengthen the social and economic posidon of the elite residents of the largest sites. Most households within the community are believed tu parucipate in the production and exchange of craft products, widi different households, villages or communities specializing in the production of different commodities. Research Questions If an economic system is to be adequately characterized, the production, distribution, and consumption systems must each be examined (see Pool 1992). Although numerous typologies have been advanced to describe die organization of production (Balfet 1965; Peacock 1982; P. Rice 1981; Santley et al. 1989; van der Leeuw 1984) and distribution (Earle 1977; Polanyi 1957). the tendency of these typologies to mask cross-cultural variation limit their heuristic value. In reaction to these limitations, a recent trend exists in economic anthropology to focus less on the descriptive characterization of economic systems and more on understanding the different dimensions uf economic variability (see Costin 1991; Pool 1992; Tosi 1984). As Pool (1992) has noted, the analytical separation of these dimensions must logically precede any explanation of economic variation. Only alter the separate dimensions have been defined can the interaction of the different components be understood. Two separate frameworks have been advanced recently that emphasize different parameters of economic variation (Costin 1991; Pool 1992). Although all of the economic parameters outlined by Costin and Pool cannot be addressed using ceramic compositional data, their frameworks provide a useful method by which to structure the present research. Table 3.1 lists the economic parameters to be addressed in the present study, summaries their relevance to the present research, and outlines the data expectations. Table 3.1. EconomiL- Parameiers lo Be Evaluated Puranieier Description Citation Research Relevance and Data Expectations PriMluciion Ciuilcxi Degree iif elite sp Cuiiceiiiraiion (or Geogruphic organi/atiun of Custin 1991; The greater Ihe nucleation of prtNlucliun, Ihe more restricted should lie the source areas Itwaiion of pruliiciimi) prcMliictiun; can range from Puol 1992 of clays ami tempers dispersed tu nucleated Settle2 Quantity of vessels prixlnced Putil 1992 If producing sites or settlement clusters were characterised by differences in prtxluction scale, there should exist differences in the pruponion uf ceramics suurced to each site or seiilcmci« duster Varial>ilUy 4>f priHlucu- Niunlicr uf diffcrem vessel in PtH>l 1992 If different villages or sciilement clusters spcciali/.cil in the production of different ridiness each class (indicates the vessel fonns (i.e., bowls or jars) or sulMy|)es (i.e , polychrome vs. red-onbrown), elalM)ti4tiun of ceramic there should exist a correlation iietween Amii or siilHyiic and compositional groupings manufucture at the pruductiun entity) Vuriabilliy uf priHlucisi' Relative frequency of vessels in Pool 1992 If different villages or settlement clusters SI1cuiuli^ed in the production of different evenness each class (indicates the degree vessel forms (i.e.. bowls or jars) or subiy|)es (i.e , polychrome vs. red-onbrown), of product specialization at the there should exist a correlation between hinn or sulMypc and compositional groupings pnxluctiun entity) ' It may not Iw |H>ssib|e lo fully evaluate this parameter. Cum|H)sitiunal data can lie used, at liest, only to eliminate tlie possibility of attached prtxluction. As Costin (1991 ;26) lias noted, "lo itleniify context, the production debris and ils defining features must lie directly associated with one another, not simply observed at or recovered from the same site... Tlie distinction is imponant, because we expect a wider variety of activities.... at higher order sites if this is where markets/distribution cliannels are liwaied." ^ PkH)l (1992.27H) suggests tliat scale can apply e()ually well tu the iii|)uls of a production system as tu the oiuputs. Only one as|Kci of scale, the amount uf products, is considered here. Although the ubsolutu numlier of ceramics prixlnced at any one site canixM Ix: i|uuniiried under the present study, prixluction scale can Ix: assessed iiiinpiirallvcly teiwccii tiles in ilie iwi> clusters. I^ir example, il will lie |N»>ihlc lii asMkk whcllicr ilifTcrcnccs in priiiluclivc kcalc cxisi liclwccn kil» iinil vckkcl calc£oncs. Table 3.1, izcimomic Parameters to Be Evaluated (coiiiinucil) Parumelcr Dciicripiioii Ciialioii RcHcarch Rclevaiicc and Data Gxpcciaiioiis Disuibution Cciuruli'/aiitiii Degree lo wliicli Uisiriluuioii is PIMII IW2 If iJisiribuiion was cenirali/cU (eiilicr (tiruugh eliic-conlnillctl rcUislribuiion or ihrougli cciUrali/eU and/or regiiluled non eliie controlled nieclianisnyi such as trade fairs or marketplaces), this should l)c rcHecicd in diversity measures Conxmiption Nuclculioii of coiiiiiiiiiersi Otfgrcu (0 wliicli cuiuiunurii of Pool IW2 If consiuners of certain vessel categories (in ibis case, composiiional groupings) were puniukilar vesstel caicgories are highly nucleated, the ceramics assigned to the com|H)siiional grinipings should also be nitcleaietl or Uisipcrseil acri»s> higldy nucleated lltc luntliieaiw Scgrcgulioi) The ilifrercmial ilistrilmiiun of I'uol IWJ If sites panicipated in dilfercni exchange spheres, (he assemblages of cach site should vciiSiel classics Iwtween sites contain differing proponions of ceramics from tlte various cuntpositional gruupittgs Variubiliiy of coiumner NiuiilMr of difrcrciii vessel PcmiI 1992 In this study, a vessel class is identiried as a grmip of ceramics tliat contain clays aitd ussciiiblugcii-- classes represenicd in (he tempers deriving from the same area. T>iis |>arameier allows inferences to be made (iixoiuHiiiu richitcii!) coiisiiiner assemblage about the number of producers {Mironized by each site. The greater the number of different vessel classes in ttie comumer assemblage, the greater is the niuntier of producing areas that were likely patronixed Varialiiliiy of consumer Relative frequeitcy of vessels in P(H>I 1992 Tliis parameter allows inferciices tu lie made alxiut the intensity of the ceramic assemblages- - evenness each class exchange between producers and particular sites. Tlie greater the intensity of exchange Iwtween particular producing and consuming areas, the greater should lie the niimlier of ceramics in ihe coiuuining asscntblage suurced (o (he paiilcular producing area. ^ Several studies have altem|KU to examine the issue of centralized distribution tlu'ough diversity nieasures After Teague (1984:192) I pro|M)se that if Ihe plaifonn ntound sites functioned as centruli/cd disiriliuiion centers, then the diversity of ceramic and temper groups represented at cach platfonn mound site should equal or exceed the diversity represented in the remainder of the conununity AdditionaUy, a similar proportion and diversity of compositional groupings should IK represented in each village wiihin a single ciNimiuniiy (Alden 1982; Graves 1991; Longacre and Siark 1992; Pires-Ferreira 1976; P. Rice 1987 79) Finally, under centralized distribution Ihe proportion of ceramics recovered from differeiM vilbges shiMild niri reflect distances lo production locations. If, however, eucli village dcvelojted its t>wn excliange lies, considerable viiriulion should iKXur l)etween the pro|M>rtion of diflercm ceramic groupings fmmd at ihe siles (Pires-Ferreirii 1976), and villages should contain biglier proportions of ceramics tniin nearby ceramic producing villages ON 62 After the parameters listed in Table 3.1 have been individually evaluated, the following research questions can be addressed. (1) Was production centered at the platform mound site(s)? (2) If production was not centralized at the platform mound site(s), did certain villages or areaswithin the communities specialize in the production of Tanque Verde Red-on-brown ceramics? (3) If specialization is apparent in any form, did different villages or conmiunities specialize in the production of different subtypes or forms? (4) Did the residents of the largest sites maintain different exchange networks than the residents of the smaller sites? (S) Did diose people living nearest the platform mound maintain different exchange networks than those people living further away from the mound? (6) Were Tanque Verde Red-on-brown ceramics exchanged through a central location within the communities, or did reciprocal exchange networks prevail? (S) To what degree did ceramic circulate within clusters; that is, to what degree was each village autonomous? (8) What was the relationship between settlement clusters? Did exchange occur primarily within these boundaries, or did exchange occur freely between them? Were exchange patterns determined primarily by community boundaries or by the proximity of sites to one another? Once these questions have been answered, the theoretical issues raised earlier in this chapter can be examined. Previous Compositional Research in the Area Two characterization studies have been conducted using ceramics firom the project area. These are a petrographic study of Tucson Basin ceramics (Lombard 1987b). and a chemical characterization study of Tanque Verde Red-on-brown ceramics firom southern Arizona (P. Fish et al. 1992b). Because diese smdies represent prior attempts to characterize Tucson Basin ceramics, their results can be used to assess the feasibility of additional research efforts and to 63 structure current research expectations. Accordingly, the results of these studies are briefly summarized below. Because the prehistoric residents of the Tucson Basin tempered their ceramics with wash sands, petrography has proved a usefiil method by which to examine issues of ceramic production and exchange. The most extensive petrographic study was conducted by Lombard (1987b), who analyzed sand and ceramic samples collected from throughout the Tucson Basin. Through an extensive sampling of sands and a careful consideration of bedrock geology, Lombard was able to identify in the region twelve geological petro^ies. or areas containing mineralogically distinct sands. Subsequent and on-going research has confirmed and refined the definition of these petro^ies (see Chapter Four). As a part of Lombard's (1987b) research, he analyzed 56 sherds from the Marana and the Los Robles communities, 18 of which were Tanque Verde Red-on-brown. All of the Tanque Verde Red-on-brown sherds were found to contain sands from supracrustal sources deriving from west of the Santa Cruz River. Chemical characterization studies have lagged behind petrographic studies in southern Arizona. Recently, however, P. Fish et al. (1992b) analyzed the paste chemistry of a large sample of Tanque Verde Red-on-brown ceramics colleaed from areas throughout southern Arizona. These ceramics were analyzed at the Missouri University Research Reactor (MURR) using Neutron Activation Analysis (NAA). Their study consisted of the analysis of 12 clay samples and of 347 sherds. The 12 clay samples were collected firom different areas of the Tucson Basin, and included four samples collected from within the boundaries of the Vlarana community. Of the sherd samples. 209 derive from die Marana community and nine derive fi-om the Los Robles community. From this research. P. Fish et al. (1992b) were able to identify several ceramic compositional groupings, one of which (termed the Marana grouping) occurs most fi%quently in 64 sherds from the Marana community. Sherds belonging to die Marana compositionai grouping were inferred to have been produced in the Marana community. Within the general Marana grouping, tiiree compositionai subgroupings were defined; these were designated Marana A, Marana BC, and Marana D. The researchers were unable, however, to match the ceramic compositional groupings with any of the clay samples. Research Methods Why this Data Base? The Los Robles and the Marana communities offer several general advantages for sudying the economic organization of settlement clusters. First, because the communities are located outside of major urban areas, archaeological remains in both communities are relatively undisturbed. Second, a significant amount of research has been conducted previously within the two communities. Both communities have been intensively surveyed, resulting in the relatively thorough documentadon of community components. Additional data are available from excavation projects that have been undertaken at various sites (see Chapter Three). Fmally, because both communities were abandoned prior to the late Classic period, temporal control is strengthened. Ceramics were selected for study for several reasons. First, because tbey are one of the more common artito classes, diey can be obtained from most habitation sites. Second, advances in characterization studies make it possible to distinguish ceramics on the basis of their chemical and mineralogical compositions. Because these compositions largely reflect the make-up of the sediments from which diey derive, compositionai data can be used to source ceramics in geologically diverse areas. Further, because ceramics contain several constituents, inferences are strengthened by analyzing more than one component. Additional benefits accrue from the specific use of Tanque Verde Red-on-brown ceramics. Chronological control is strengthened because these 65 ceramics were produced only during the Classic period (A.D. 1150-1450). (Because the project area was abandoned by A.D. 1300, chronological control is further tightened in the present study). Finally, the differential distribution of Tanque Verde Red-on-brown ceramics within die soidy area makes these artists suitable for addressing the questions raised in the research orientation. Archaeologists soidying ceramic production and distribution issues have often emphasized the use of direct evidence, such as die distribution of manu^turing materials and by-products (Feinman 1980; Santley et al. 1989; B. Stark 1985), or the occurrence of production (B. Stark 1985) and distribution (Peacock 1982; Millon 1973, 1981) ^ilities. Identification of diese materials and features, however, can be problematic, especially in non-industrial societies or in settings where production intensity was low (Pool 1992; B. Stark 1985). Further, reliance on direCT data generally requires diat a large number of contemporaneous sites have been excavated. Because of these drawbacks, die present study relies on die use of ceramic compositional data. Although it will not be possible to reconstruct all aspects of the economic system, the use of compositional data offers the advantage of allowing a relatively large number of sites to be investigated. In addition to diese general advantages, benefits derive from die previous compositional studies diat have been conducted on ceramics from the region. These petrographic and NAA soidies demonstrate diat ceramic clays and tempers from tiiese communities can be accurately sourced. The large body of data already compiled on Tucson Basin petrofacies makes it possible to compare the temper in sherds against known sand compositions. The results of die previous paste compositional study indicate diat ceramic clays can also be distinguished from one another. A previous analyses conducted on Tanque Verde Red-on-brown sherds from die Marana community and on ceramic "cookies" manufktured from Tucson Basin sherds demonstrated that 66 the compositional groupings did not result firom temper differences (Elam et al. 1992). Rather, group definition was shown to reflect chemical difierences in the clays. These data suggest that chemical differences exist in the local clays and that it may be possible, with additional clay sampling, to match ceramic compositional groupings with specific clay deposits. Although patterned differences could not be identified in the clay samples analyzed by P. Fish et al. (1992b). this outcome may have resulted from the small number of clay samples analyzed. In a snidy of 130 clay samples obtained from the Hopi Mesas, Bishop et al. (1988) were able to match ceramic pastes to specific clay deposits, in spite of the to that die clays obtained from any one mesa or geological formation did not have a single compositional pattern. Thus, it is possible that the sampling of additional clay deposits will permit ceramic groupings to be "sourced" to specific clay deposits. The results of the previous NAA sudy also suggest that the identification of additional compositional groupings is likely to occur with additional ceramic sampling, bi the previous snidy. the recognition of compositional subgroupings was made possible only because of the large sample of ceramics analyzed from sites in the Marana mound area. Compared to sites from the latter area, a higher proportion of the ceramics obtained from die Los Robles community and from other areas in the Marana community remained ungrouped. As additional samples are collected from sites in these areas, it is probable diat these previously ungrouped ceramics can be placed in newly recognized groupings or subgroupings. Issues in Compositional Research As in any smdy of intra-regional ceramic exchange, a major methodological issue has to do with distinguishing ceramic exchange from the mutual exploitation of clay sources. Because of the small spatial scale of the area being examined, a single clay source could have been exploited by more than one village. A one-to-one correlation dierefore cannot be assumed between 67 compositional groupings and production locale, but requires that additional information be obtained prior to the interpretation of clay composidonal data. A recent survey of the ethnographic literature rndkates that potters generally do not travel more dian 7 km to obtain clays and tempering materials (Table 3.2; Arnold 1985,1991). These data suggest that villages less than 14 km apart may have overlapping resource areas. Accordingly, many archaeologists consider 14 km the cut-off distance for the smdy of ceramic production and exchange. It should be noted, however, that the 7 km threshold distance represents the range beyond which most potters do not travel. In practice, die actual distances traveled can vary from less than I km to more than 20-50 km (Arnold 1985). The distance traveled depends upon a variety of factors, including resource availability and distribudon, resource quality, and die requirements of die local technology. If accurate inferences about production and exchange patterns are to be derived using ceramic compositional smdies, diese Actors must be considered in addition to diat of distance to resource. Table 3.2. Threshold Distances of Clays and Tempers (after Arnold 1991:338)"^ Resource Preferred 2d 3d km % km % km % Clay I 36.8 4 70.9 7 85.5 Temper 1 46.8 3 74.3 7 91.4 Within die project area, clays and tempering materials are widely distributed. Clay-rich sediments are located in die floodplain and along the banks of major rivers. Other sources of clay * This table lists die percentage of potters that traveled a particular distance to obtain a clay or temper 68 may have been found in the prehistoric canals and reservoirs located in the communities. Although bajada slopes are a source of argillic clays in other areas of the Tucson Basin (Whittlesey 1997). no argillic clay sources are known in the sudy area. This clay distribution suggests that potters from villages located on the bajadas or mountain slopes may have been required to travel to the floodplain for clay. Sand is the primary tempering agent found in Tanque Verde Red-on-brown vessels. Sands suitable for use as temper occur in the major river channels and in washes draining the surrounding mountains. Because washes are ubiquitous within die smdy area, residents of virtually every site in die Marana and Los Robles communitks would have bad access to a nearby (< 0.5 ion) sand source. Thus, although Arnold's edmographic survey indicates that potters will often travel up to 7 km for tempering materials, such distances are not expected to have characterized the Marana and Los Robles potters. A study by Miksa and Heidke(199S) supports diis interpretation. Their study indicates that, for the pottery-producing conununities for which Uiey had data, 73 percent of those that used sand temper obtained the material within a distance of I km. The farthest distance traveled was 3 km. In die present study, interpretations of production and exchange patterns are strengdiened by comparing data obtained from die analyses of both die pastes and die tempers. Research issues will be addressed by first chemically analyzing the ceramics to idendfy clay compositional groupings. Each grouping is believed to represent ceramics produced from a single clay source or firom two or more closely related sources (Bishop et al. 1982:301). If diese groupings can be chemically matched to knowm clay sources, then a probable procurement radius can be drawn around diese sources and the production locales infened. Even if clays and ceramics cannot be matched, production location can be inferred according to die 'Criterion of Abundance" principle 69 (Bishop et al. 1982:301). This principle holds that a greater proportion of pottery is consumed at its production location than is disseminated to any other single site. According to the assumptions of this principle, the site (or sites) containing the highest proportion of any compositional grouping is inferred to have been the probable production locale of that grouping. Inferences derived from relative abundance measures can be then tested against petrographic data. To interpret the latter data, village locations will be compared to the locations of available wash sands. Because of the ubiquity of sands in in the study area, potters will be assumed to have utilized the nearest available sands. Because of the relatively large size of the settlement communities, the problem of potential overlapping resource zones will not apply to all sites or to all research questions. For example, the Marana community encompasses 146 sq km and contains some sites diat are up to 20 km apan. The southrastem portion of the Marana community is some 3S km distant from the northwestern portion of the Los Robles community. EHnally, it is noted that the two platform mound sites are located some 17 km apart. Because of the length of these distances, it will be possible in many cases to distinguish zones of production from zones of exchange because the areas are sufficiently distant to preclude the likelihood of overlapping resource zones. For settlements more closely situated, it may still be possible to infer production location. Although a one-to-one correlation between compositional groupings and production location cannot be assumed, when coupled widi temper data more specific inferences may be possible. As discussed in an earlier section, previous experiments have demonstrated Tanque Verde Red-on-brown ceramic compositional groupings are not substantially affected by the temper inclusions. This circumstance suggests that, if close associations are found to occur between clay and temper groups, diese ceramics are likely to have been produced by the same group of potters. 70 Although the possibility exists that potters from different villages will have exploited the same clay source, it is considered less likely that they will have exploited both the same clays and the same tempers. Similar arguments have been made by Abbott (1991. 1993). who compared clay and temper data to derive inferences about production and exchange between Hohokam populations separated by as little as S km. Data Requirements To address the research questions posed at the beginning of this chapter, the appropriate sand. clay, and ceramic samples were obtained and analyzed. Sand samples were collected from major rivers and bajada slopes in an attempt to increase the resolution of the previously defined petrofacies. To determine whether compositional groupings of the pastes could be matched to contemporary clays, clays were obtained from both riverine and nonriverine areas. The sampling and analysis of the clays and sands are described further in Chapters Four and Five, respectively. Five hundred fifty-eight sherds were chemically analyzed from the Marana and Los Robles communities (Table 3.3). These include 224 sherds analyzed previously by P. Fish et al. (1992b). and 334 sherds analyzed as a part of the present project. All sherds submitted for NAA analysis by the author were characterized mineralogically to obtain information on temper source. In addition. 79 of the sherds previously analyzed by Fish et al. were submitted characterized mineralogically. The remaining 145 sherds couU not be analyzed for temper source because of insufficient sherd sizes. Sherd samples were acquired from both surface and excavation collections. Where possible, only those sherds that measured larger than 70 cnr or were part of reconstnictible vessels were included in the analysis. Heavily weathered sherds were avoided, and attempts were made 71 to avoid including more than one sherd from die same vessel. So that information on vessel form could be obtained, whenever possible rim sherds were preferentially selected over body sherds. Table 3.3. Sherds from the Marana and Los Robles Communities Used in the Present Study Site Site Type Total N NAA Analysis Mineralogical Sherds Analysis Fish Harry Marana Conummay Marana Mound Platfonn Mound 210 127 83 115 Los Moneros Compound 35 19 16 31 Huntingtoa Compound 29 5 24 28 La Vaca Eofenna Compound 19 5 14 14 SueAo de Saguaro Other habitation 19 3 16 16 Muchas Casas Other habiiadon 31 10 21 29 Raucbo Derrio Other habitanon 10 10 - 8 Qiicken Ranch Other habitation 32 5 27 30 Misc. Other habitanon 15 15 - 2 Misc. Noo-babitadon 10 10 - 3 Misc. Unknown 6 6 - 3 Total Marana 416 215 201 279 Los Robles Community Robles Mound Placfbmi Mound 27 6 21 22 CeiTO Prieu) Trincberas 24 - 24 24 Hog I^nn Other habitanon 30 - 30 30 Cake Ranch Other habitanon 30 - 30 30 Misc. Other habitadon 25 3 22 22 Misc. Mon-babiodon 2 - 2 2 Misc. Uniaxwn 4 - 4 4 Total Los Robles 142 9 133 134 TOTAL 558 224 334 413 72 The sampling strategy was designed to include sherds from a variety of site types. These include the two platform mound sites, other large villages in each community (i.e.. the compound settlements and the site of Cerro Prieto), and numerous smaller habitadon and nonhabitation sites. This sampling design was structured to answer questions concerning inter- and intra-community organization. Intensive sampling of the Marana platform mound community was undertaken to address intra-village distribution patterns. Chemical data are available for an addidonal 163 Tanque Verde Red-on-brown sherds collected from regions outside of the Marana and Los Robles communities (Table 3.4). Most of these sherds (n= 136) were analyzed by P. Fish et al. (1992b) as a part of their earlier study: the remaining 27 sherds were submitted by the author as a part of the current study. The 27 sherds submitted by the author all derive from the site off Como, a site initially believed to be a part of the Marana Community. After the analyses were completed, however, a detailed examination of the Marana Community and adjacent sites demonstrated that Como was not a part of the Marana Conununity. Information available for these and odier sherds from areas outside of the two communities are included in portions of the present project. Specifically, information obtained from the chemical analyses of these sherds is used to assess the extent of exchange between the Marana and Los Robles communities and other areas. Information on die entire assemblage of 721 sherds (consisting of the 558 sherds from the Marana and Los Robles communities and the 163 sherds from other areas) is found in Appendix I. For each of the 721 sherds, three types of analyses were conducted. These include attribute, petrographic, and chemical analyses. Prior to the analysis, each sherd was assigned a five-digit analytical identified code (termed die ANID). The code, consisting of of die digits TF" followed by three numerical digits, followed that used in the earlier analysis of die Tanque Verde 73 Table 3.4. Analyzed Sherds from Outside the Marana and Los Robles Communities Site Total N NAA Analysis Mineralogical Sherds Fish Harry ~ Southern Soma Cruz SalidadelSol 12 12 - PuniadeAgua 7 7 - VfaniDez Hill 1 I - - A-Mouniain 10 10 - Tottd S. Santa Cruz. 30 30 - Eastern Tucson Basin University Indian Ruin 4 4 - Whipcail 10 10 - Tanque Verde Ruin 10 10 - Total E. Tuaon Basin 24 24 - Northern Tucson Basin Hodges 14 14 . Como 33 6 27 31 Ina-Silverbell 3 3 - 2 Touil N. Tuaon Basin 50 23 27 33 Lower Santa Cruz AZ AA:6:2 (ASM) 8 8 - Phoenix Basin Pueblo Grande 3 3 - Casa Grande 13 13 - Las Colinas 15 15 - Fortified HiU 10 10 - Toud Phoenix Basin 41 41 - Papagueria Jackrabbit 10 10 - TOTAL 163 136 27 33 74 Red-oa-brown sherds conduaed by P. Fish et al. (1992b). This coding system enabled the difierent data bases obtained from the attribute, petrographic, and chemical analyses to be easily linked. The attribute analysis and results are described in Appendices 2 and 3. The petrographic and chemical analyses are described in Ch^ters Three and Four, respectively. 75 CHAPTER FOUR MINERALOGICAL ANALYSIS OF TEMPER A total of 446 Tanque Verde Red-on-brown sherds were characterized mineralogically (see Table 3.3). These include 413 sherds recovered from sites in the Marana and Los Robles communities, and 33 sherds recovered from two sites south of the Marana community. The mineraological analyses were conducted to provide information on the source of the sands used to temper the ceramics. Background information relevant to die temper study, the methods used In the analysis, and the results of the research are presented in this chapter. Geological Setting Substantial geologic diversity characterizes die Tucson Basin and adjacent areas, making it possible to distinguish sands from different areas and to obtain information on ceramic production source. The following description derives from geological maps compiled by Upman (1993) and Reynolds (1988). and a a report by Madsen (1993). The smdy area can be divided into two broad geological zones separated by the Santa Cruz River. West of the river, the mountains are comprised of supracrustal rocks that were exposed during Late Miocene faulting. These mountains contain primarily volcanic rocks such as basalt, andesite. and rhyolite. and sedimentary rocks. A different geological environment occurs east of the river, where the bedrock is mostly basement (deep crustal) rocks. These rocks consist of granitic rocks and of highly metamorphosed sedimentary rocks exposed during Tertiary period faulting. Wtdiin diese two general zones, localized variadoos on the general patterns described above can be found (Figure 4.1). For example, limited plutonic bedrock exposures occur west of die Santa Cruz River in the vicinity of die Silverbell Mountains and on the western portion of the 76 $ ROSLSS UARANA suRvpr sumer COBTARO VIONITY _ INOPTHERN TUCSON BASIN) TN 10 Miltt 19 KilontUn Extrusive Bo Basalt Volconics Hio Hematite (ironOude) j j Intrusive Lio Umonite (iron Oiidel \^lconics Rr Recreation Redbeds [T] Metomorphic ^ \ Ko Siltstone Sedemeniory y Umq Ultromylonites jJjjH Wis Wtiite Limestone To ToDuior Andesiie Figure 4.1. Geological map of the study area and adjacent regions (after Madsen 1993; Figure 5.4). 77 Tucson Mountains. Similarly, on the nortbwest end of the Tortolita Mountains an isolated unit of volcanic rock occurs. Just to the west of the northern tip of the Tucson Mountains is an outcropping of white limestone, the only known limestone exposure in the vicinity. The significance of these geological patterns is discussed in the final section of this chapter. Methods The present study builds on numerous petrographic analyses diat have been conducted in the Tucson Basin area (i.e., Heidke 19%, 1997; Kamilli 1994, 1996; Lombard 1985, 1986a. 1986b. 1987a. 1987b, 1987c. 1987d, 1987e, 1989. 1990). As a result of these studies, more than 200 sand samples have been analyzed petrographically (i.e.. have been point-counted under the polarizing microscope; Table 4.1), and many more samples have been examined under the binocular microscope. This research has resulted in the identificadon of more than two dozen petrofacies. or zones of composidonally similar sands (Figure 4.2; see also Appendix 4). Of the petrot^ies listed in Table 4.1 and Figure 4.1. all but two encompass mountain or bajada slopes. These bajada petrofacies contain sands that closely mirror the bedrock mineralogy. The Santa Cruz River and Brawley Wash petro^ies. in contrast, contain sands diat have washed down ftom the mountains and have, in some cases, been carried great distances. As a result, the rocks and minerals in the sands often are disaggregated, and die sands reflect the mixing of several sources. The sands from these areas dius tend to be heterogeneous and difficult to match to source location. Addiuonally. because these drainages contain sands firom di^rent watersheds, their sand compositions vary significantly over dme. The temper identification sudy was conducted by researchers from die Center for Desert Archaeology and consisted of die analysis of sherd samples and additional sands. As a pan of die smdy. die additional sand samples were collected to determine whether die petrofacies in die 78 Table 4.1. Number of Point-Counted Samples Available for Each Petrofacies Petroticies No. Samples No. Additional Previously Analyzed Samples Analyzed Amole (Q) 5 - Avra (D) 3 - Batamote (R) 5 - Black Mountain (K) 8 - Brawley Wash (S) 22 2 Catalina (B) 10 - Beehive (Jl) 10 - Twin HUls (J2) 9 - Wassum (J3) 5 - Cocoraque (U) 5 - Dos Titos (V) 2 - Durham High (N) 5 - Durham Low (N) 4 - Empire (HI) 10 - Golden Gate (L) 14 - Recortado (T) 3 - RUUto (M) 6 8 RUlitoWest(MW) 4 - Rincon (A) 9 - Roskruge (Y) 3 - Samaniego (C) I 5 Santa Cruz (P) 8 6 Santa Rita (G) 7 - Sierriu (0) 15 - Tonolita (E) 33 8 Waterman (W) 5 - Marana and Los Robles communides could be more precisely defined, and to provide a basis tor visual comparison with sands found in the ceramics. A sample of each sand was washed and placed in a vial for comparative purposes, and 29 of the samples were diin-sectioned and analyzed petrographically (see Table 4.1). Of the sherds. aU 446 were examined by James Heidke under the binocular microscope and 25 were were selected for point count analysis. The point count EXPLANATION A • Rineon s • Bro><«y Wgin B • Coteiino T a Reeertodo C • Semonicqe u • Coeoroaue 0 • S£RfilTA imK Kilometers Figure 4.2. Petrofacies map of the Tucson Basin and Avra Vailey (reprinted from Appendix 4:Figure 1) 80 analysis was conducted by Michael Wiley. The temper study can be broken down into four parts; (1) initial temper assignments by Jim Heidke and Michael Wiley, (2) blind tests of the technique. (3) reevaluation of the diin seaions by Diana Kamilli. and (4) temper reassignments by Karen Harry. Initial Temper Assignments The initial temper assignments were made by Jim Heidke and Michael Wiley using the following procedures (see Appendix 4 for greater detail). 1. Petrofacies were identified using geologic maps and point-count data obtained from sand samples. 2. Heidke examined loose grains from each sand sample to ensure that he could distinguish sands from di^rent petrofacies using the binocular microscope. 3. Heidke examined each sherd under the binocular microscope, and assigned each sherd a tripartite designation (see Appendix 4;Tab!e 6). This designation consists of a value for temper type (TT), temper source generic (TSG), and temper source specific (TSS). TT refers to the tempering material, and indicates whether the sherd was tempered with sand, micaceous rock, or other material. TSG refers to the tectonic origin of the sand, and indicates whether the sand fragments are volcanic, igneous, metamorphic. or sedimentary. TSS refers to the petro^ies to which the sands were assigned. This tripartite assigiunent resulted in 38 unique temper variable combinations.' ' The number (38) of unique temper groups reported here difiers from the number (40) reported in Appendix 4. This difierence results from die removal of four of the sherds from die data base, alter die compledon of die Appendix 4 repon. These sherds were removed because diey were determined not to belong to die Tanque Verde Red-on-brown type. 81 4. A sample of the sherds was selected for thin section (point count) analysis. The sample was selected based on die unique temper groupings obtained by Heidke. and was designed to provide information on the 18 temper groupings to which most (86%) of the sherds were assigned. 5. The point count data obtained from the sherds were compared to diat obtained from the sands to arrive at the petrograpber's (i.e., Wiley's) temper source assignments for the sherd thin sections. 6. Wiley's assignments (based on point count data) were compared against Heidke's tripartite assignments (based on binocular examination). Final temper assignments (designated TSSFINAL) were then made for alt sherds, based on the correlation of Heidke's temper groupings with Wiley's assignments. Blind Tests [n order to test the accuracy of the technique oudined above, blind tests of the meUiod were conducted. These tests consisted of the binocular analysis of test dies made from local clays and sands. The test tiles were made by the author by mixing 40% sand temper to 60% wet clay, a propordon similar to that found in Tanque Verde Red-on-brown sherds. The resulting tiles were fired at 725° C for a holding time of 20 minutes in an oxidizing electric kiln. All clay and sand samples were collected from the study area (i.e., the area encompassed by the Marana and Los Robles communities) and adjacent regions. As each clay and sand sample was collected, a sample number was assigned and the collection location marked on a map. This technique made it possible to document the origia of die sand and clay samples used in the manu^cture of each test tile. As a result, the petrofacies from which each sand sample derived was known to die audior. In order to test the accuracy of the temper assignment technique used 82 by Desert Archaeology, however, this infonnaiioQ was aot given to the temper analysts. The test tiles then were submitted to Jim Heidke for binocular analysis and he was asked to analyze each tile as he would a sherd. Specifically, Heidke was asked to assign each tile a tripartite designation consisting of temper type, temper source generic, and temper source specific. After the point-count analysis was completed for the sherds, each die was assigned a final temper designadon following die same techniques used to assign the final temper designations (TSSFINAL) for the sherds (see Appendix 4). Two sets of tests were conducted. In the first test, 100 test tiles were made by arbitrarily mixing local clay samples with samples of local sands. After examining these tiles, however. Heidke stated diat they contained improbable mixtures of sand grains. That is. some of the tiles contained combinadons of minerals not seen in prehistoric sherds. Heidke correctly identified these mixtures as resulting from die combination of sands and clays from geographically and geologically distant areas. In some cases, for example, clays obtained firom granitic areas were combined with sands firom volcanic petrofsicies. Because it is unlikely diat prehistoric potters would have used clays and sands from geographically distant areas, anodier set of test tiles was made using sands and clays collected from n^rby areas. Forty test tiles were submitted in diis second test. The blind tests were designed by die author to test the accuracy of the petrographic identifications. As discussed in Appendix 4, petrographic assignments were based on quantitative and qualitative comparisons of die sands found in sherds widi contemporary sand samples. There are several reasons, however, why die sands in die sherds might not match precisely die sands in collections. First, because most clays contain some sand-sized grains, not all grains in die ceramic pastes are likely to have been added as temper. Second, because only a subset of die sands available in any given petrofacies have been sampled, die variability present in a petrotacies can 83 only be approximated. Because we do not know where prehistoric potters obtained their sands, our current sampling techniques are unlikely to match exactly those used by prehistoric potters. For example, the potters may have obtained sands from unsampled washes. In these cases, the unsampled washes may differ mineralogically from the sampled washes used to define the petrofacies. Even if the sherds are tempered with sands from sampled washes, however, the proportions of minerals and lithic fragments can differ. In collecting the sands used to define the petrofacies. random sampling techniques were employed in most cases to ensure that the samples collected would be representative of the sands found in the wash (see Miksa and Heidke I99S for a discussion of these techniques). In gathering sands for ceramic manufocture. however, the prehistoric potters may have used collection techniques that resulted in non-representative samples. As Miksa and Heidke (1995:9-4) have noted human behavior can include collection biases and processing biases that may result in the addition or loss of certain grain types or sizes. Active stream channels sort sand grains by size, shape, and specific gravity; so bars or channels of sorted material can be found in any stream bed. Placer deposits, or concentrations of heavy minerals. are also common. The intermittent character of many of the drainages in the Southwest leaves this wide variety of "presorted" sand readily available. Many behaviors of the prehistoric potter could affect the composition and/or appearance of sand used as temper. For instance, potters may have selected sand bars of a particular grain size, or selected placer deposits, or sifred their sand. The blind tests were designed to assess whether the petrofacie definitions were sufficiently broad to encompass sands collected from different locations and by different techniques than those 84 samples used to define die petrofacies. Additionally, die test provided a means by which to assess die expertise of the temper analyst. It should be noted, however, diat viewpoints of the petrographers differ firom those presented here. Whereas the author believes diat die blind tests provide information on die accuracy of die temper assignments in die prehistoric sherds. Bedi Miksa and Jim Heidke of Desert Archaeology disagree. Because die test dies represent a different population from die sherds, diey believe die results of die blind tests have littie bearing on die results of die sherd analyses. Reevaluation of Thin Sections After die initial temper assignments were made, additional research was conducted on sands firom die Avra Valley (Appendix S). The results of diis research indicated that die "final" temper assignments (designated TSSFINAL) were not likely to be correct. As a result, Diana Kamilli from Desert Archaeology re-examined die 25 sherd diin sections to deteremine whether die initial temper assignments were indeed incorrect. Her re-examination consisted of maidng a qualitative comparison of the sherd diin sections of die Brawley Wash sands. Temper Reassignments Based on die results of Heidke's temper groups, die blind tests, and die reevaluation of die diin sections, die author reassigned each sherd to a new group. Results Initial Assignments The results of die initial temper assignments are presented in Table 4.2 (see also Appendices 4 and 6). The tripartite designations in Table 4.2 represent the TT/TSG/TSS assignments made by Jim Heidke during die binocular analysis. The italicized designations represent die "finar temper groups (designated TSSRNAL) made after comparing the tripartite designations with the 85 Table 4.2. Results of Initial Temper Assignment TSSHNALand Count TSSFINALand Count TT/TSG/TSS TT/TSG/TSS Unassigned S (Brawley Wash) -9/-9I-9 1 4I2J-9 30 1/-9/-9 1 4/2/1 21 4/-9/-9 20 4/2/10 39 4/I/C I 4/2/12 17 4/l/J 2 4/2/E 15 4/I/Jl 1 4/11/MW 40 4/l/P 1 4/1I/P 27 4/31-9 1 4/I2/-9 12 4/3/N 1 4/15/MW 5 4/10/-9 1 4/16/-9 7 4/1 l/M 3 4/17/-9 21 4/13/1 1 fotti/ Brawley Wash 234 4/13/11 4 4/13/M 1 S or J 1 (Brawley Wash or Beehive) 4/14/-9 3 4/1/J2 5 4/15/-9 3 4/17/10 I 5 or£, (Brawley Wash or Golden Gate) 4/18/U I 4/I/-9 19 4/19/-9 10 4/1/MW 8 10/-9/-9 1 4/11/-9 57 Tooi/ Unassigned 58 Total Brawley or Golden Gate 84 L (Golden Gate Petrofacies) S or P (Brawley Wash or Santa Cruz) 4/18/-9 12 38 (Batamoie Petrofacies?) •W13/-9 15 TOTAL 446 86 point-count temper assignments. Thus, for example, all sherds assigned to 4/I/-9. 4/1/MW. and 4/11/-9 during the binocular analysis were reassigned to S or L (Brawley Wash or Golden Gate) petrofacies based on the results of die point-count analysis. Several points concerning the results of die binocular analysis can be made from this table. First, a relatively large number (n==38) of unique temper groupings was assigned during the binocular analysis. Compared to odaer petrographic projects that have been conducted in die area, diis number is unusually high and suggests that the assemblage is more heterogeneous dian other assemblages. Second, less than 2S% of the sherds were assigned to a specific petrofacies (TSS) during die binocular examination. These include 72 sherds assigned to petroticies found within die Marana and Los Robles communities, ten sherds assigned to petrofocies located outside of the communides, and one sherd assigned to a petrof^ies diat crosses dirough die communities. Sherds assigned to petrofacies within the communities include one sherd assigned to die Samaniego (C) petro^ies. IS sherds to die Tortolita (E) petrofacies, 4 sherds to die Rillito (M) petrofacies. and S2 sherds to die Rillito West (MW) petro&cies. Of diese petrofecies, Samaniego is located in die Los Robles conunum'ty and the others are in die Marana community. Another 28 sherds were assigned to die Santa Cruz (P) pecro^ies which crosses die Marana community. As diese numbers indicate, die majority of die sherds could not be assigned to petrofacies located in either community. The remaining ten sherds assigned to petrofacies include sherds assigned to die petrofacies located on die east side of die Tucson Mountains (petro^ies J, JI and J2), die northern edge of the Tortolita Mountains (N). and die edge of die Roskruge Mountains (U). The final temper assignments placed all but 13 percent of die sherds in petro^ies. More dian half of die sherds were assigned to die Brawley Wash compositional zone and nearly anodier diird were assigned to possible Brawley Wash sources. Again, die majority of the sherds (78%) were assigned to petrofacies not located in either of the two communities. 87 The assignment of the sherds to the Brawley Wash compositional zone was based on the comparison of point-count data obtained from sherds and sands. As discussed above, subsequent to this analysis it was learned that some of the point-count data from the Brawley Wash area was in error and these assignments were therefore overturned (see discussion below). Regardless, as Heidke and Wiley note in Appendix 4, the sands in the sherds never provided an exact match with any of the identified peao^ies. Based on the available (incorrea) point-count data, the Brawley Wash petro^ies merely provided the closest match between the sands and sherds. Thus, in the initial temper assignments Heidke and Wiley proposed that the source of the sands may have been in an unsampled area adjacent to the Brawley Wash. Blind Tests The results of the blind tests are presented Table 4.3. For each analyzed tile, the results include a comparison of the actual petrofacies with the TSS and the TSSFINAL petrofacie assignments. The actual petroi^ies refers to the area from which the sands used to temper the tiles were collected. TSS assignments are those made by Heidke during the binocular analysis, and TSSFINAL assignments are the reassignments of the TSS/TSG/TSS groupings based on concordance with the point-count data. The TSSFINAL assignments were made by the author using the same techniques employed to arrive at the final temper assignments for the sherds (see Appendix 4). For example, in the petrographic sudy all sherds designated 4/111-9 by Heidke were reassigned to petrofacies S or L by Wiley (See Appendix S:TabIe 15). Accordingly, in the blind tests tile KHl 11- which had been designated 4/11/-9 in the binocular analysis- was reassigned toTSSRNAL = SorL. 88 Table 4.3. Results of Blind Tests Tile No. Actual Pettofiicies Petio&cies Assigmnenr Is Assignmeat Correct? TT/TSG/TSS TSSFINAL TT/TSG/TSS TSSFINAL KHOOl J1 (Beehive) 4/1/J N/A N/A KHIII MW (Rillito West) 4/1I/-9 S orL N/A N KHlt2 J2 (Twin Hills) 4/I/J2 S or/I Y N KH113 B (Catalina) 4/2/E S N N KH114 S (Brawley Wash) 4/2/11 SorP N/A Y KHllS P (Santa Cruz) 4/2/11 SorP N/A Y KH116 C (Samaniego) 4/1/C N/A Y N/A ICH117 E (Tonolita) 4/2/E S Y N KHllS E (Tonoliia) 4/2/E S Y N KH119 MW (Rillito West) 4/11/-9 SorL N/A N ICH120 M (Rillito) 4/2/11 SorP N/A N ICH121 S (Btawley Wash) 4/11/-9 SorL N/A Y KH122 C (Samaniego) 4/1/C N/A Y N/A ICH123 A (Riocon) 4/2/10 S N/A N KH124 E (Tonolita) 4/2/E S Y N KH125 C (Samaniego) 4/1/C N/A Y N/A KH126 J (West Branch) 4/1/J N/A Y N/A KH127 P (Santa Cruz) 4/11/-9 SorL N/A N KH128 MW (Rillito West) 4/1/-9 SorL N/A N KH129 M (Rillito) 4/1/J2 S or J1 N N KH130 P (Santa Cruz) 4/11/-9 S orL N/A N KH131 M (Rillito) 4/11/M N/A Y N/A KH132 M (Rillito) 4/2/10 S N/A N KH133 C (Samaniego) 4/1/C N/A Y N/A KH134 c (Samaniego) 4/1/C N/A Y N/A KH135 E (Tonolita) 4/2/E S Y N KH136 M (Rillito) 4/1/-9 SorL N/A N ICH137 C (Samaniego) 4/1/C N/A Y N/A KHI38 E (Tonolita) 4/2/-9 S N/A N KH139 E (Tonolita) 4/2/E S Y N KH140 P (Santa Cruz) 4/11/-9 SorL N/A N KH141 M (Rillito) 4/-9/-9 N/A N/A N/A KHI42 B (Catalina) 4/-9/-9 N/A N/A N/A KH143 E (Tonolita) 4/2/E S Y N KH144 S (Brawley Wash) 4/-9/-9 N/A N/A N/A KH145 E (Tonolita) 4/2/E S Y N KH146 P (Santa Cruz) 4/2/11 S or P N/A Y KH147 C (Samaniego) 4/1/C N/A Y N/A KH148 C (Samaniego) 4/1/C N/A Y N/A KH149 M (Rillito) 4/1/-9 SorL N/A N ^ TT/TSG/TSS assigmnenis were made by Jim Heidke. TSSRNAL assigmnenu were made by the author following the same techniques used to assign TSSFINAL designations to the shenls (see Appendix 4). ^ Because Petrofacies 'JT is a subset of Petrofacies *J.' this assignment is considered incorrect. 89 To (Militate interpretation of the blind test results, the data are summarized in Tables 4.4 and 4.5. These tables provide information on the number of correct identifications for (a) die dies submiaed from each petro^ies. and (b) the dies assigned to each petrofacies. For example, the upper portion of Table 4.4 indicates that only one die was submitted containing Twin Hills (J2) sands; this die was correcdy identified by Heidke to that petro^ies. The lower portion of the table, however, indicates that he also idendfied incorrectly a second die as containing Twin Hills sands. Table 4.4 illustrates several trends in die binocular analysis relevant to the interpretadon ot the temper assignments of the sherds. The following points are noted. 1. Of the 40 test dies submioed for analysis, only two (5%) were mistdendfled by Heidke. The misidendfied tiles are one (KHl 13) tempered with Catalina sands and one (KHI29) tempered with Rillito sands. It should be noted diat aldiough diese dies were misidendfied at the TSS (petrofacies) level, bodi were idendfied correcdy at the TSG (tectonic origin) level. 2. Almost half (n=l9) of die dies could not be assigned to a specific petrofacies by Heidke. Of diose dies, most (n= 16) contained sands from the Rillito, Rillito West. Santa Cruz, or Brawley Wash petrofocies. Only one die (KH131) with sands firom these petrofacies was identified correcdy to die petrofacies level. These patterns indicate that it is difficult to disdnguish sands from diese four petro^ies using die binocular microscope. In fiact. distinguishing diese sands from one anodier was sufficiendy difficult to lead Heidke to create a special category (TSS=II) encompassing all four petrofacies. 90 Table 4.4. Summary of Blind Test Results Based oa Binocular Analysis Petrofacies Assignment Correct Assignment? Total Yes No S/A* Actucd Petrofacies A (Rincon) - - 1 I B (Catalioa) - I I 2 C (Samaniego) 8 - 8 E (Totiolita) 7 - I 8 J (West Branch) I - I J (Beehive) I - 1 J (Twin Hills) I - 1 M (Riilito) I 1 5 7 M (Riilito West) - - 3 3 P (Santa Cruz) - - 5 5 S (Brawley Wash) - - 3 3 TOTAL 19 2 19 40 TSS Assignment by Heidke C (Samaniego) 8 - - 8 E (Tortolita) 7 1 - 8 J (West Branch) 2 - - 2 J (Twin Hills) 1 I - 2 M (Riilito) 1 - - I Indeterminate'* - - 19 19 TOTAL 19 •) 19 40 4 Includes all dies not assigned to a speci& petro&ctes by Heidke (i.e., all ales assigned (o SS=-9. 10. or II) 91 Table 4.5. Summary of Blind Test Results Based on Final Temper Assigmnents Petrofacies Assignment Correct Assignment? Total Yes No N/A^ Acmd Petrofacies A (Rincon) - I - 1 B (Catalina) - I I 2 C (Samaniego) - - 8 8 E (Tortolita) - 8 - 8 J (West Branch) - - I 1 JI (Beehive) - - 1 I 12 (Twin Hills) - 1 - I M (Rillito) - 5 2 7 MW (Rillito West) - 3 - 3 P (Sana Cruz) 2 3 - 5 S (Brawley Wash) 2 - 1 3 TOTAL 4 22 14 40 TSSFINAL Assignments S (Brawley Wash) - 11 - 11 S or J (Brawley or Beehive) - 2 - 2 S or L (Brawley or Golden Gate) 1 8 - 9 SorP (Brawley or Santa Cruz) 3 1 - 4 N/A* (Not Applicable) - - 14 14 TOTAL 4 22 14 40 Refers to dies given a TSS designadon diat was not subjected to point-count analysis. TSSFINAL assignments were made by die audior following (he same techniques used to assign TSSFINAL designadons to die sherds. 3. Excluding the four petrof^ies discussed above. Heidke was quite successtiil in identifying the petro^ies from which the sands in the tiles derived. Other petrofacies represented in die blind tests include four firom volcanic sources (Samaniego, West Branch, Beehive, and Twin Hills) and three from plutonic sources (Rincon, Catalina, and Tortolita). Of the eleven dies submitted from volcanic sources, all were assigned to dieir correct petrofacies. Of the eleven tiles submitted from plutonic sources, seven were identified correcdy and one incorrectly. The misidentified sherd was a Catalina-tempered tile (KHl 13) assigned to the Tortolita petrofacies. The remaining diree tiles with plutonic sands were not assigned to a specific petro^ies. 4. Of the six pecro^ies diat occur in die soidy area (i.e.. Samaniego. Tonolita. Rillito. RilUto West, Santa Cruz, and Brawley Wash), only two could be accurately identified in the blind tests. These were die Samaniego and die Tonolita petrofacies. All eight tiles made firom Samaniego sands were identified correcdy. Additionally, no tiles containing sands firom other petro^ies were assigned to die Samaniego source. This suggests diat Heidke is able to accurately identify Samaniego tempers using the binocular microscope. Of die eight tiles containing Tortolita sands, seven were identified correcdy and one was assigned to an indeterminate temper source. Only one tile (containing Catalina sands) was incorrectly assigned to die Tonolita source. This suggests diat Heidke also is able to identify Tonolita sands with a high degree of accuracy, aldiough some sherds with sands from odier plutonic sources could have been assigned mistakenly to diat source. Table 4.5 summarizes die results of die blind tests pertaining to die final temper assignments. CJniike die petrofacies assignments based on die binocular analysis, the final temper assignments 93 are largely inaccurate/ Specifically, most of the test tiles were incorrectly assigned to a Brawley Wash or related source. As discussed in the following sectioa, however, it was later learned that the Brawley Wash assignmenis were based on inaccurate point-count data. Reevabtation of the Thin Sections After the initial temper assignments were made, additional research was conducted into Avra Valley sands, including the sands used to character^ the Brawley Wash petro^ies. Thin sections of these sands were recounted by Diana Kamilli of Desert Archaeology, who found that they contained more microcline than originally recorded (see Appendix S). Accordingly, based on quantitative comparisons of the sherds and sands, the sherds no longer appeared to derive trom the Brawley Wash area. Kamilli's qualitative comparison of the sherds and sands confirmed that the Brawley Wash assignments were incorrect. Based on her examination of the 25 sherd thin sections. Kamilli placed the thin-sectioned sherds into five groups and nine subgroups (Table 4.6). These groups foil into two general divisions; a group containing a high proportion of volcanic rock fragments (Kamilli's Group I) and a group containing granitic rock fragments and varying amounts of felsite (Kamilli's Groups 2 through 5). Four major Irthic sources are represented in die sands found in the sherd thin sections; a felsite. a granite with some cataclasis. an intermediate granite, and a siltstone. In several of the sherds diese parent materials are mixed, suggesting to KamUli and her colleagues that the sands in the 25 sherds could have come from a single source area (see Appendix 5). Specifically, the sands may have derived from a river or trunk stream containing sands from several lesser ^ Miksa and Heidke (personal communication 1995) believe that die mediod used by die author to make (he final temper assignmenis is in error. As discussed earlier in diis chapter, diey suggest that because the sherds and die test dies represent two distinct populadons. die tripardte desigiadons (i.e.. TT/TSG/TSS) made for die test dies cannot be compared direcdy to die point-count data obtained for die sherds. Table 4.6. Groups Assigned by Kamilli to Sherd Thin Sections Group TT/TSG/TSS No. Volcanic (or Felsitic) Rich Sands 1.1 4/I/-9 4/1/J2 4/11/-9 4/I2/-9 1.2 4/16/-9 4/18/-9 1.3 4/I3/-9 1.4 4/I/MW Granitic and Volcanic Sand Mixtures 2.1 4/2/-9 4/2/10 4/2/11 4/2/E 2.2 4/2/E 3.1 4/11/-9 4.1 Aim 4/2/12 4/11/MW 4/15/MW 4/17/-9 5.1 4/2/10 4/2/11 4/11/P 95 drainages. Like Heidke did in the binocular analysis, Kamilli divided the sherds into a relatively large number of groups. The diversity represented in the sherd sample again suggests that the sands may have derived from a single source containing sands firom a variety of petrofacies. The spatial scale of this "source," of course, is unknown. The source location is likewise unknown. Noting that the sands lack the prominent metamorphic overlay with cataclasis and/or seriticization that are present in many Tucson Basin sands, Kamilli and her colleagues suggest the sands derive from outside of the basin proper. Because this overlay is often absent in Tortolita sands, they suggest a possible source area is the Tortolita Mountains or the region north of the Tortolitas (see Appendix 5). Heidke fimher proposes that problems in identifying the source of the sands may result from early Classic period production practices. Specifically, he suggests that production may have been highly localized at this time. If so, ceramic production may have been confined to areas adjacent to a drainage or drainages that have not yet been sampled. Temper Reassignments Based on the results of the blind tests and the reevaluation of the thin sections by Diana Kamilli. the author reassigned the sherds to new temper groupings. The sherds were divided three primary groups (Groups 1.2, and Indeterminate) and four subgroups (C?. J?. Jl? and Jl?). The question marks in the subgroup designations reflect the tentative naoire of these designations; these are tentative because diey were not confirmed dirough thin section analysis. The methods used to derive die temper reassignments are oudined in Table 4.7. Group I consists of all sherds assigned to TSG=I by Heidke during the binocular analysis. These sherds were identified by Heidke as containing predominantly volcanic sands: Kamilli's analysis of twi) 96 Table 4.7. Methods Used to Determine Temper Reassigmneots by Karen Harry Harry Temper TT/TSG/TSS Rationale for Reassignment Reassignments Designations Felsite-Rich 1 4111* Refers to volcanic sands; diese sherds were consistendy disringuished from all other sherds during Kamilli's reanalysis (see Appendix S) C? 4/1/C Because Heidke successfully identified this petro&cies during die blind tests, ihis TSS assignment was considered likely correct J? 4/1/J Same as above Jl? 4/1/Jl Same as above Mixed •) AI2J* Refers to plutonic sands: diese sherds were consistendy assigned to Groups 2 dirough 5 (i.e.. separated firom Group 1) in Kamilli's analysis. Indetermincae TSG and TSS - indeterminate by Heidke; none diin secdoned 4/3/-9. 4/3/N Not diin secdoned 4/10/* dirough 4/19/* See text * refers to all designations for diat cohmuu for example. */-9/-9 refers to all temper types (TT) followed by -9/-9 97 tbin-sectioned sherds ftom this group confinned this identification (see Table 4.6 and Appendix S). Within diis group were several sherds assigned to specific petrofacies during the binocular analysis. These include sherds from Petrof^ie C, J, Jl. and J2. Because Heidke was successful in identifying these petro^ies during the blind tests, these petro^ies assignments were retained by the author during the temper reassignments. Group 2 consists of sherds assigned to TSG=2: these sherds were identified by both Heidke and Kamilli as containing predominantly plutonic sands. It should be noted that the IS sherds assigned initially to Petrofacies E (or the Tortolita petrofacies) are included in Group 2, but are not assigned to a more specific subgroup. This decision was based on die results of the diin section analysis, which indicate that the sherds assigned initially Petroi^ies E do not contain Tortolita sands. For example, of the 41 Tortolita sands that have been diin sectioned, the mean percent of LVF grains is only 0.116 and the maximum percent is 1.3 (data on file. Center for Desert Archaeology). However, die thin secdoned sherds assiped initially to Petrofacies E included 9.3 percent (sample XDP-12) and 15.8 percent (sample XDP-13) LVF grains. These data indicate that die diin sectioned sherds contain far more felsite dian any of die sampled Tortolita sands, and suggest that die sherds are unlikely to have been produced in die Tonolita area. Sherds reassigned by die author to indeterminate include those assigned by Heidke to bodi TSG =-9 and TSS=-9 and a single sherd assigned to 4/3/-9. No sherds from diese designadons were diin sectioned. Additionally, all sherds assigned TSG 10 dirough 19 were placed in die indeterminate category. This decision was based on bodi the nature of these categories and dieir grouping by Kamilli. These catagories include sands identified by Heidke as belonging to one of two or more TSG categories. Because these categories tended to overlap with one another, it is likely diat die sherds assigned to diese categories contain sands that also overlap in composition. In odier words, die tempers assigned to diese categories likely exhibit a continuum of compositions 98 rather than discrete groupings. Additionally, diin-sectioned sherds from these TSG categories included sherds placed by Kamilli into the volanic-rich category (Group 1) and the category of granitic and volcanic mixures (Groups 2 through S). For example, sherds assigned to TSG 11 are found in Kamilli's Groups 1.1, 3.1,4.1 and S.l. TSG 12 and 13, which are identified as possibly TSG 11 (see Table 6 in Appendix 4) are found in Group 1. Because of diese inconsistencies, these categories are considered to include a continuum of sand mixtures ranging from volcanic-rich tu varying amounts of granitic and volcanic grains. Table 4.8 summarizes the results of the temper reassignments (see also Appendix 6). This cable indicates that more than half of the sherds are assigned to neither temper group. Slightly more than one-third of the assemblage was assigned to Group 2 and less than one-tenth was assigned to Group 1. Because the petrofacies assignments are considered tentative, the subgroup assignments are qualified. Nonedieless. they do indicate die maximum proportion of sherds likely top have been produced in the petro^ies listed. For example, only one sherd was assigned by Heidke to Petrofacies C. the Samaniego petrofiu;ies. Because this petroticies encompasses most of the Los Robles communis, this suggests diat less than 0.2 percem of die sherds were produced in chat area. The absence of any sherds assigned to Petro^ies E, the Tortolita petro^ies. suggests chat few or no Tanque Verde Red-on-brown vessels were produced in that area. These and other implications of the temper data are discussed in greater detail in Chapter Seven. Discussioii The present sudy builds upon more dian a decade of petrographic research conducted in the Tucson Basin and adjacent regions. Most previous studies, however, have been of pre-Classic sherds. These studies indicate that sands used to temper pre-CIassic sherds generally derive from bajada washes. Parent materials of sands in diose sherds are usually unmixed and the petrofacies 99 Table 4.8. Results of Harry's Temper Reassignments Petrographic Group No. Percent of Assigned By Harry Assemblage Felsite-Rich I 33 7.4 1(C?) I 0.2 1(J?) 2 0.4 I (Jl?) I 0.2 Mixed 2 160 35.9 Indetenmate 249 55.8 easily identified. Based on diese findings, it was expected that similar patterns would be reflected in die present Tanque Verde Red-on-brown collection. Instead, however, sands from diese sherds were found to contain grains from a variety of different bedrock sources. In most cases, grains from these different parent sources were found mixed widiin a single sherd. These findings made it impossible in most cases to match sands in die sherds with specific petrofacies. Additionally, the results suggest that Classic period ceramic production practices may have been quite different from diose of pre-Classic periods. The mixture of sands and die large number of temper groups assigned by die petrographers suggest diat die tempers do not necessarily ^ into discrete groups, but radier exhibit a continuum of sand mixtures. This patterning suggests that the sands found in many of die sherds may have been obtained from trunk streams radier dian from bajada washes. Some support for diis interpretation derives from smdies documenting a higher proportioa of fine-grained sands in Tanque Verde Red-on-brown sherds dian in odier sherd types (Heidke l995a:Tables F.9 and F. 10; 100 Whittlesey 1986:90). Alternatively, the mixture of parent sources could indicate that the sands were collected from an area conoiniog a mixture of bedrock outcropptngs. Such outcr(^ mixtures are found on the northern end of the Tortolita Mountains and the northwestern edge of the Tucson Mountains (see Figure 4.1). In an effort to determine whether die sands derived from trunk or tributary streams, the author scanned the thin sections to obtain information on grain size and texture. This study was based on die premise diat sands collected from bajada washes would be coarser and more angular dian sands collected firom trunk streams. This assumption, in turn, was based on die fact that sand grains become more eroded and worn smooth as they are carried forther from the source area. No systematic di^rences in grain size or texmre, however, were noted. Thin sections of sands obtained from bajada and trunk stream sources were also compared, but again no differences were discerned. It should be noted that sands from modem river channels differ in size and texmre from those carried by die prehistoric channels (Lombard I987a;349). In contrast to modem sands, prehistoric trunk stream channels typically contain fine- to medium-grained sands widi rounded edges. Lombard (I987a:349) suggests that diis is because the currenUy incised channels carry sands discharged from nearby bajada streams, whereas die surtice flows of die prehistoric channels would have carried sand grains a great distance. Whether these see and texural differences would be reflected in tempering materials though is unknown. Wallace (1957:210-212) has stated diat die roundness and sphericity of die mineral grains less dian 1.0 mm in diameter are of no use to die petrographer in determining distance of travel. Grains this size or smaller are not worn round or smooth by travel in air or water due to cushioning effect of a diin layer of die medium surrounding each grain. Unforunately too, most of die mineral grains found in pottery temper are I.O mm or less in diameter. lOl A major difference between the sand samples and sherd tempers is the amount of carbonate present (designated LSCA in the temper study; see Appendix 4).^ The percent of LSCA in the point-counted sherd and sand samples is listed in Tables 4.9 and 4.10, respeaively. As the data in diese tables indicate, the sherds tended to contain more LSCA than the sand samples. Although there is some overlap in die ranges of LSCA, it s in general much more frequent in die sherd samples. These patterns support die interpretation diat most of die sherds come from sources not represented in the petro&cie sand samples. As discussed in the first section of this chapter, an outcropping of white limestone is present near die northwestern tip of the Tucson Mountains (see Figure 4.1). This area also contains outcrops of bodi plutonic and volcanic sources, and dius is a possible source for die mixture of sands found in many of die sherds. Unfortunately, cultivation has obscured many of die washes diat once ran dirough die area. As a result, only four sand samples have been examined from diis area (designated Rillito West). As the data in Table 4.10 indicate, however, diese samples contain only low proportions of LSCA. Thus, diis area can be considered at best only a tentative source of die sands. In conclusion, die source location of die sands remains unknown. Most either derive from a major trunk stream or from a bajada wash draining mixed bedrock sources. During die blind tests, Heidke was unable to distinguish sands deriving from the Rillito (M), Rillito West (RW). Santa Cruz (P). or Brawley Wash (S) petro^ies. All of die sources contain sands of mixed origin, and die sands may dius derive from one of diese sources. Only two other petrographic studies have been conducted in the Tucson Basin of Tanque Verde Red-on-brown sherds. These * Carbonate grains counted in the temper study iociixfed only duse grains diat were a primary component of die sand. Carbonate fonned post-depodtionaUy can be distinguished Grom carbonate grains included as sand by dieir shape and texnire. Carbonate grains included as part of die temper are clasnc (i.e., have bits and pieces of angular quartz and other minerals and possibly rocks widun diem). Carbonates formed post-depositionally. in contrast form in cracks in die paste, with small arms extending off the main body of the grain into the paste of the sherd (Wiley 1997). Table 4.9. Percent of Carbonate Grains (LSCA) in Sherd Thin Sections XDP Anid LSCA XDP-Ol PF509 6.3 XDP-02 PF087 5.5 XDP-03 PF120 2.9 XDP-04 pno4 5.8 XDP-05 PF617 5.0 XDP-06 PF702 8.0 XDP-07 PF086 16.4 XDP-08 PF533 3.6 XDP-09 PF132 5.4 XDP-IO PF684 I.I XDP-II PF728 ll.O XDP-12 PF035 6.6 XDP-13 PF713 6.5 XDP-14 PF680 11.4 XDP-15 PF530 0.0 XDP-16 PF627 2.8 XDP-17 PF486 4.0 XDP-18 PF695 9.8 XDP-19 PF440 2.4 XDP-20 PF716 8.2 XDP-21 PF081 25.0 XDP-22 PF607 8.9 XDP-23 PF563 8.4 XDP-24 PF660 9.5 XDP-25 PF587 1.8 103 Table 4.10. Percent of Carbonate Grains (LSCA) in Petrofacie Sand Samples Petrofacies N Sand LSCA Percent Samples Minimum Maximum Mean Rincon A 9 1.7 0.3 Caialina B 10 - 5.7 0.9 Samaniego C 6 - - - Avra D 3 0.9 1.4 I.l Tortoiita E 41 - 0.3 <0. 1 Durham Low F 4 . - Santa Rita G 7 - 6.4 0.9 Empire High H 7 0.5 6.2 1.7 Empire Low I 3 1.4 6.0 4.4 Beehive J1 10 - 4.4 1.7 Twin Hills J2 9 - 3.2 1.2 Wassum J3 5 - 3.7 1.3 Black Mt K 8 - 0.6 0.1 Golden Gate L 14 - 2.0 0.6 Rillito M 14 - 4.0 0.4 Rillito West MW 4 - 1.6 0.5 Durham High N 5 - 2.7 1.5 Sierriia 0 15 - - - Santa Cruz P 14 - 1.0 0.2 Amole Q 5 - - - Batamoce R 5 - 27.1 5.6 Brawley S 24 - 17.5 1.6 Recortado T 3 - 1.9 0.6 Cocoraque U 5 - 1.0 0.7 Dos Titos V 4 - 1.7 1.0 Waterman W 5 - 7.8 3.6 Rosicruge Y 3 0.7 1.2 1.0 None N/A 18 - 9.0 1.8 104 include a study of sherds from the University Ruin (Wallace 19S7) and a study of sherds from the site of Gibbon Springs (Heidice 1996; Kamilli 1996). Significandy, in both of these soidies the northwestern tip of the Tucson Mountains was identified as a possible source for some sherds. Based solely on geological patterns, researchers from Desert Archaeology believe that the sherds may come from the vicinity of the Tortolita Mountains or from north of that area (see Appendix 5). Archaeological data, however, suggest that these are unlikely sources. As discussed in Chapter Two, few habitadon sites are located in die Tortolitas nordi of die Marana platform mound. Additionally, with die exception of die Marana platform mound site, ceramic assemblages from sites north of die Tucson Mountains contain extremely low proponions of Tanque Verde Red-on-brown ceramics. These patterns suggest diat the hi nordiem portion of die Tucson Basin is an unlikely location for die production of most Tanque Verde Red-on-brown ceramics. Although some similarities exist between the sands in die sherds and the Tortolita sands, die tempers do not derive from die Tortolita petrofacies. Because of die extensive point-count data from diat area (n=41 samples), that petrofacies is relatively well understood. Sampling in the Tortolita petrofiu:ies has been particularly extensive in the vicinity of die major sites. None of the sherds match any of die Tortolita sand samples that have been collected. Furdier implications of the temper data are discussed in Chapter Six. 105 CHAPTER FIVE CHEMICAL ANALYSIS Chenucal analyses were undertaken with two primary goals in mind. First, the analytical results were used to partition the ceramic assemblage into distinct groups. Chemical differences between these groups, in turn, were interpreted as representing differences in raw materials, and- most likely- differences in potters or producdon locations. Second, to try to identify where the compositional groups were produced, die clay chemistry of the sherds was compared against that of naturally occurring clays. Besides these two primary goals, a secondary aim was to assess the potential utility of neutron activation analysis for soudiem ArKona clays and sherds. Most previous analyses have focused on clays and sherds from the northern Arizona region. At die start of this project, the degree to which NAA could be used successfully to partition sherds and clays tirom southern Arizona was therefore unknown. To meet die three goals oudined above, chemical analyses were undertaken on sherds, raw clays, and sands. The methods and analytical results are described in Uiis chapter. Sampling Strategy Sherds As discussed in Chapter Three. 594 Tanque Verde Red-on-brown sherds were chemically analyzed firom die Marana and Los Robles conununides. These include 233 sherds analyzed previously by P. Fish and odiers (1992b) and 361 sherds analyzed as a part of this project (see Table 3.3). In addition, chemical data from die 127 sherds analyzed by P. Fish and odiers (1992b) from outside die two communities are used for soaie comparative purposes. The sampling strategy for die sherds is described in greater detail in Chapter Three. 106 Clays Thirty-seven clays from the Tucson Basin and sunounding areas were analyzed (Table 5.1). Of diese, 25 (PF75I through PR69 and PF776 through PF781) were submitted by the author as part of the present study. The remaining 12 clay samples were submitted by Paul Fish during the earlier characterization study (see P. Fish et al. 1992b). Clays were collected from both riverine and nonriverine areas. Within the Marana and Los Robles communities, clays are primarily confined to floodplain of die Santa Cruz and Los Robles rivers. Most of the clays submitted from the study area were obtained from diese areas (Figiure 5.1). These clays tend to be of a high quality and contain relatively few aplastic inclusions. Although alluvial clay sources are nearly ubiquitous along die river banks and floodplain areas, clays are scarce in other areas. One nonriverine source of clay that would have been available prehistorically is Pan Quemado, a prehistoric reservoir located to die southeast of die Cerro Prieto site. This reservoir contains water during only a portion of the year; during the dry season, clay settled in die bottom of die reservoir is easily collected. Contemporary clay (Clay 25; or Sample PF777 in Table 5.1 and Rgure 5.1) collected from diis reservoir is of a high quality and appears suitable for prehistoric ceramic manufktuie. Another possible clay source may have been die canal located in die Marana community. Because diis canal remains unexcavated. however, no clays from diis source were submitted for chemical analysis. Other dian die clay sample from Pan (^emado, no nonriverine clays were analyzed from die Los Robles community. In die Marana community, six clays from bajada sources were submitied for analysis. Five of these clays (PF065, PF066. PF759, PFT78, PF779) were collected from modem depressions or areas where fine-grained sediments had setded. These areas include catde tanks, areas behind anificially constructed berms. and small patches of ground along die 107 Table S.1. List of Clays Submitted for Neutron Activation Analysis LocadoQ and Clay No. Descripdon Quality Sample No. Tucson Mts. PF056 lOA Unievigated argillic clay; many carbonate inclusions; Good same as Sample lOA in Hany l997;Table M. 1 PR53 10 Unievigated argillic clay: many carbonate inclusions; Good same as Sample 10 in Harry 1997:Table M.l PF756 16 Levigated argillic clay witb carbooate inclusions Good removed; Same as Clay 16 in Harry 1997;Table M.l; Same as Sample 10 above (PF7S3) except levigated CataUmMts. PF059 6 Poniatoc ridge; Gay 6 in Harry l997:Table M. 1 Good PF75I 7 Alluvial clay from Tanque Verde floodplaim Same as Good Clay 7 in Harry 199'7:Table M.l Rincon Mts. PF060 9 Same as Clay 9 in Harry 1997:Table M. 1 Good Tortolita Mts. PF065 None Very silcy; from Cottonwood Wasb Poor PF066 None Very silty; from Derrio Wash Poor PF759 23 Very silty; from a modem ponding area Poor PF777 41 Exposed in tire tracks Good PF778 44 Very silty; fn»n a modem ponding area Poor PF779 45 Very silty; firom Derrio Wash Poor SilverbeU Mis. PR60 24 From modem ponding area Good PF769 25 From the bottom of prehistoric reservoir AZ AA:7:43 Good (ASM), the Pan Quemado site Other PF064 None Very silty; from the Canada del Oro Poor PF763 28 From modem water tank Good 108 Table S.1. List of Clays (continued) Location and Clay No. Commems Quality Sample No. Brawley Wash PF758 22 None Good PF761 26 None Good PR62 27 Very silty and sandy; from flats by Pinal Air Park Poor PR66 33 Good PF767 34 None Good PFT76 35 None Good Soma Cruz River PFOSS 4 Same as Clay 4 in Harry l997:TabIe M. 1 and Staaim 90 Good Tiles 17 and 18 in Whittlesey l987b:Table 8.1 PF057 None Same as Stratum 70 clay in Whittlesey 1987b Good PF0S8 2 Same as Clay 2 in Harry 1997;Table M. 1 and Stratum Good 80, Sample No. 4, Tile 13 in Whittlesey 1987b PF061 S Same as Clay S in Harry 1997:Table M.l and Tile 1 in Good Whittlesey l987b:Table 8.1 PF062 None None Good PP063 None None Good PF754 12 Same as Clay 12 in Harry 1997:Table M. 1 Good PF755 15 Same as Clay 15 in Harry 1997:Table M.l Good PF757 20 Same as Qay 20 in Harry 1997:Table M. 1 Good PF764 30 None Good PF765 31 None Good PF768' 38 None Good PF780 47 None Good PR81 48 Very silty Poor ' Clay 38 (PF768) may contain sediments derived frvm Brawley Wash. See text for explanaaon. 109 \ 761 -v^ I ^ ri ,,,«1.-.*' ** ^' ..f®»X-Vesv f-\«. , /•*c'rai-fo/ifa «n."^r' Somanitge ••/' 764. / / ' V' Wi(ii-Xi^ ^ '^V76^ 759 ^ '""•V-t ''*' ^ • s.;-,r S«" ,, , •^' " ' 777 5.. Mr* r \ \ 6^63 V». ?^78l ! ) \\ XVA ' ) ± .'TSO . // I , '11 < I \ /; S. > V / 'V> > , ^ '-i > ,,\l'l/, i--*" % •••'',/< - ''. •'/. "s ^ \ l."U i\ ' H?' i ^ rc.M I ' *^c t 5/„ •'" ^ "i ' 'I' •>.- . Figure 5.1. Locations of chemically analyzed clays collected within the study region. Numbers represent the last digits of the ANID (i.e., PF ). 110 bajada washes. None of these sources would have been available prehistorically. and all contained extremely silty clays unsuitable for ceramic manufiicture. They were included in the analysis in the hopes that they would provide information on the chemical composition of clays that may have formed in the Tortolita Mountains. The sixth clay source sampled from the Tortolita Mountain bajada is Clay 41 (designated PF778 in the chemical analysis). This clay was located on a bluff above the Chicken Ranch site and is exposed in the ruts of tire tracks formed by off-road recreational vehicles. The clay is of a high quality and appears suitable for ceramic manufacture. Whether the source represents a substantial subsurf^e exposure or sediments that have only recently settled in the tire tracks is unknown. Limited digging in the area, however, indicates that the clay extends at least six inches below the modern ground surface. This fact, coupled with the high quality of die clay (i.e., lack of silt and sand inclusions), suggests that the former may be the case. Other than dus single possible source, however, no prehistoric sources of usable clay could be located in the Tortolita Mountain area. The distribution of clay resources suggests that clays may not have been equally accessible to all inhabitants of the Marana and Los Robles communities. In the Los Robles area, most habitation sites are located in the floodplain near clay resources. In die Marana community, however, habitation sites are located in several zones, including riverine, lower bajada. and upland bajada areas (see Chapter Two). Residents of sites away from the riverine areas may have been required to travel to the floodplain to obtain clay. To provide a comparative basis for interpreting ceramic paste chemistry, several clays from areas outside of the Marana and Los Robles communities were submitted for analysis (Figure 5.2). These include Santa Cruz River clays collected from the southern portion of die Tucson Basin and clays collected from die Tucson. Caialina, and Rincon Mountains. Prehistorically. die Santa Cruz River was almost certainly exploited for clay. Habitation sites are densely simated along the Ill Toitolira Uts. -»Santa Cataiina Uts. ^ TUCSON V<^ Rmcon ARIZONA I Figure 5.2. Locadons of chemically aoalyzed clays collected outside of the study region. Numbers represent the last digits of die ANID (i.e., PF ). floodplain, and clay lenses are found nearly everywhere the riverbank is exposed. Because much of die riverbank has been cemented over, however, samples could not be obtained from that stretch of the river located south of die site of Los Morteros and north of Clay 20 (PF757). Samples submitted from die Tucson Mountains include Clays 10 (PF056), lOA (PF753) and 16 (PF756). These clays are residual clays deriving from die argillic horizon, and are exposed wherever the surface sediments have been eroded. Because diey contain numerous caliche inclusions, however. 112 they require leviganon to be usable. Samples 10 and lOA represent difTerent samples of the same clay deposit; Sample 16 is a levigated portion of Sample 10. A single sample. Clay 9 (PF060) was submitted from the Rincon Mountains. This clay was collected near the modem town of Vail, and is icnown locally as the "Vail clay." This clay souice has been used coomiercially for brickmaking, and is often used by amateur potters for making hand-built vessels.' Four clay samples were analyzed from the flanks of the Catalina Mountains. Sample 6 (PF0S9) is a residual clay that was exposed in an upper bajada wash. PF064 (no sample number) was collected from a small patch of clay found in the Canada del Ore river; this clay is very silty and unsuitable for ceramic manufacture. Sample 7 (PF7S1) is a sedimentary clay collected from the Tanque Verde Wash tloodplain, and Sample 8 (PF7S2) is a cienega clay collected from Gibbons Spring, a spring found on the upper bajada near the eastern edge of the mountains. The latter sample is very silty. however, and therefore also unsuitable for ceramic manu^ture. Prior to analysis, all clay samples submitted by the author were made into tiles and fired in an oxidizing electric kiln to a temperature of 700^ C. After reaching IW C. the tiles were held at that temperature for 20 minutes. Sands Unlike clay, sand occurs throughout the smdy area and adjacent regions. It is easily collected from the rivers and ephemeral washes that drain the surrounding mountains, and would have been immediately accessible to all residents of the communities. Ten sand samples were submitted for chemical analysis (Table 5.2). Five of these (PF067 through PF07I) were submitted ' Despite its popularity among amateur potters. Laurel Thomberg (a professional pocter who makes replicas of prehistoric pots for a living) believes that this clay is poorly suited for ceramic manu&cture. She DOCS that the low shrinkage and plasticity of the clay make it better suited to brick manu^cture than the to (he construction of hand built vessels (Harry 1997:Table II. i). 113 Table S.2. List of Sands Submitted for Neutron Activation Analysis Petro&cies PFNo. Sand No. Conunents Catalina PF067 None From the Canada del Oro Tortolita PF068 None From Derrio Wash Tortolita PF069 None From Cottonwood Wash Santa Cniz PF070 None From Santa Cruz at San Xavier Site Santa Cruz PF071 None From Santa Cruz at Los Morteros Site Brawley pn87 SS-327 From Los Robles Wash at Silverbell Rd. Tortolita PF788 SS-320 From an lumamed wash near die Rancbo Oecrio site Rillito PF789 SS-164 From wash at die Los Morteros site Rillito West PF790 SS-189 From wash near the Huntington site Santa Cruz PF791 ICH-215 Santa Cruz at Ainurre Road by P. Fish et al. (1992b) as a part of the earlier study; the remaining five samples (PR87 through PF79I) were submitted by die author as a pan of die present study. Of the ten sands, eight were collected from within die boundaries of the Los Robles and Marana community (Figure S.3) and the remaining two were collected from other areas of the Tucson Basin (Figure S.4). General Analytical Methods This section describes the general analytical metiiods used in die chemical compositional analysis. Details specific to the present projea are described in die subsequent section. Laboratory Techniques The samples described above were chemically characterized using neutron activation analysis. This analysis was conducted at the Missouri University Research Reactor Facility (MURR), University of Missouri, Colombia, under die direction of Hector Neff and Michael 114 \ \ s C" ^ A / 1IF*" -- «. • • • -- ^.Vj> , . ^V. ^^ 60y^?—: ii I ^ X- / 1 , < Tortolita Mtt.\% '-. J - Vv K ^ / r /^ • ••-^ t ..N> .x-' -f 5offloiii«go '/• / yX • y ^ •*•' '/»«••• «,/.,^i ^ ^ 788^ ^GG ^^ V-i '"•• ^ iV«»^ ^ 8911 \ fits. \ I -» ^ 789 ^ ' > ' 790 i f y I / *5.1 V ? , ^1 "i > X %i»'''\\* ' I H ^ U ^ 5.<-"Ct \ ^^'.w..4-'V 'i'l \ ,V ^ V*# '•<' \ Y "•* b 4 j^ ''"t •?• r ;' V1 yvS\ :•t«^••. ir t ->... . > i ' • ''• V-' Figure S.3. Locations of ciiemically analyzed sands collected within the study region. Numbers represent the last digits of the AMID (i.e., PF ). 115 TatttUtt Uts. Santa Calalina Mts. TUCSON Figure 5.4. Locations of ciiemically analyzed sands collected outside of the study region. Numbers represent die last digits of the ANID (i.e., PF ). Glascock. The techniques used at MURR are detailed in Glascock (1992), from which the following summary derives. Neutron activadon analysis consists of bombarding the substance to be studied (in this case, the sherd, clay and sand samples) with neutrons. During bombardment, some of die nuclei of the constituent elements will be transformed into unstable radioactive isotopes. These isotopes decay 116 with characteristic half-lives, during which gamma rays having discrete energies are emiaed. Because the energies are uniquely characteristic of the elements from which they are emitted, the elemental composition of the substance can be qualitatively determined by measuring the gamma rays. Furthermore, because the number of gamma rays detected is proportional to the amount of Che specific element present, the substance can be characteraed quantitatively by counting the gamma rays emitted. Analyzed samples include the sherd, clay, and sand samples described above. Prior to analysis, each sample was assigned a five-digit analytical identification code (termed the ANID) consisting of the digits "PF" followed by three numerical digits. To prepare each sherd sample for analysis, the inner and outer surfaces of each sherd were removed using a tungsten-carbide drill burr. This procedure ensures that the chemical data obtained reflect primarily the composition of Che sherd paste rather than that of any slip, paint, or caliche that might have adhered to the sherd sur^e. After the surges were removed, the sherds were ground into powder and samples of approximately 200 mg. were irradiated. Each sample was subjected to a short (five-second) and a long (24-hour) irradiation, with a single gamma-count after the short irradiation and two gamma-counts after the long irradiation. This procedure resulted in concentration data for 33 elements. Data Reduction Interpretation of the compositional data involved a variety of pattern recognition and statistical procedures (described below). These procedures were based on the concentrations of 32 elements (As, La, Lu, Nd, Sm. U. Yb. Ce. Co, Cr, Cs. Eu, Fe, Hf. Rb, Sb, Sc. Sr. Ta. Tb. Th. Zn, Sr, Al. Ba, Ca, Dy, K, Mn, Na, Fi, and V). Because Ni values were missing for more than half the observations in the data set, diis element was excluded from the data analysis. 117 Missing values may occur when an element's concentration is near the detection limit. When concentrations of a particular element are missed for only a few specimens, values can be substimted by choosing a value that minimizes the Mahalanobis distance for the specimen from the group centroid (Glascock 1992:19). In the present smdy, the "group" consists of all of the Tanque Verde Red-on-brown sherds (n=721) that have been chemically analyzed. Because of the large group size, the number of elements measured, and the relatively few missing values encountered, substimtion of missing values in the present smdy is unlikely to obscure a sample's true affiliation (P. Fishetal. 1992b:23). After the missing values were replaced, all elemental concentrations were transformed to log base 10 values. This transformation serves two purposes (Glascock 1992:16). First, it tends to normalize the distribution for trace elements, and second, it compensates for differences in magniudes between the major and trace elements. All pattern recognition and statistical procedures were based on die logarithmic transformations. In general, the data reduction techniques followed those used by P. Fish et al. (1992b) in the previous NAA study of Tanque Verde Red-on-brown sherds. They differ, however, in the treatment of multiple samples. The previous researchers in several instances analyzed multiple samples taken from single sherd or clay specimens. In their analysis, they created each analyzed sample as a single specimen for analytical purposes. In the present smdy. however, elemental concentrations for these multiple samples were averaged, so diat each sherd or clay specimen is included only once in the data manipulation. This process was undertaken to ensure that the effect of a single sherd on any compositional group would not be inflated. 118 Data reduction was undertaken with two goals in mind: (1) to assign sherds to compositionai groups, and (2) to compare the chemistry of the sherds with that of die local clays and sands. The techniques used to accomplish each of these goals are discussed below. Ceramic Compositioaal Groups. To derive ceramic compositional groups, chemical data for all 721 analyzed Tanque Verde Red-on-brown sherds were used. The quantity of sherds and die large number of elements (n=32) included in the analysis resulted in an enormous amount of data requiring reduction. As Glascock (1992:15-16) has stated In pottery characterization studies using NAA. one frequently generates vast amounts of data on a large number of specimens. The volume of data is so substantial and die associations between elements and specimens are so complex, diat more advanced methods tor data handling and evaluating data are required (Doran and Hodson 1975). Unfortunately, diere is no single "textbook" metiiod for data reduction and interpretation diat guarantees a satisfoctory result for all applications. As a result, different approaches are required to achieve greater understanding of each data set. Different approaches diat can be used in compositional data analysis have been discussed in detail by otiier researchers (i.e., Baxter 1994; Bishop and Neff 1989; Glascock 1992; Harbottle 1976). Aldiough specific approaches may vary, in general diey involve (I) some method DF methods by which to identify possible groups believed to have come from a single source area, and (2) some method or methods by which to evaluate whether Uiese initial, hypothetical groups are indeed internally cohesive and distinct firom other groups. MeUiods used in the present smdy to 119 identify potential groups include cluster analysis, the examination of bivariate plots, and principal components analysis. Group refinement and evaluation was accomplished through the determination of the Mahalanobis distances of individual specimens from group centroids. Cluster analysis is often the first step used in compositional data reduction (Glascock 1992). Such analysis results in dendograms that can be visually inspected for grouping tendencies. Although this method is often useful for identifying preliminary groups, it can be problemaucal for highly correlated data such as that obtained from compositional analysis. Compositional groups are generally elongated due to inicrelement correlation; cluster analysis, however, tends to force data into hypersphencal groups. As a result, groups obtained from cluster analysis will rarely reflea the true underlying structure of a compositional data set (Glascock 1992). In the present smdy. cluster analysis was used only to obtain preliminary information on grouping tendencies. Furthermore, because of the large size of die data set and because of the prior availability of information on grouping tendencies, it was not used as a first step on the entire sherd assemblage. Rather, cluster analysis was conducted only on subsets of the assemblage and after other group assignments were made. In die present snidy. squared mean Euclidean distances and the average-linkage method were used to cluster the data. The cluster analyses were conducted using die MCONDIST and MAGCLUS programs and SYSTAT. Bivariate plots are useful for examining die location of specimens in two-dimensional space. Obvious partitions in the data set may be revealed in such plots, although the reduction of multidimensional data to a two-dimensional graph necessarily involves die loss of some informadon. Bivariate spaces may be defined either by original concentrations of any two elements, or by derived spaces defined by die linear transformations of the original data. In die present study, both techniques were used. Linear transformations were achieved durough die use 120 of principal components analysis (PCA). PCA is a technique that reduces the dimensionality of the data set while sacrificing a minimal amount of information, and is especially useful for dealing with highly correlated data. PCA results in a set of scores for each specimen on a new set of axes, or components, which are arranged in order of decreasing variance subsumed. For this study, principal component scores were calculated on the entire data set of 721 sherds and 32 elements using the correlation matrix of the data. The resulting data were then used to identify potential compositional groups du'ough the creation of scatterplots using principal components as the axes. Because compositional data are correlated, two-dimensional plots based on the first two or three derived components will provide more information on die underlying structure of the data set than will plots based on two elements alone. After potential compositional groups were identified, group composition was evaluated and refined using Mahalanobis distance calculations. The Mahalanobis distance is defined as the measure of die squared Euclidean distance between a group centroid and a specimen, divided by the group variance in the direction of the specimen (Sayre 1975. cited in Glascock 1992:18). This statistic is appropriate for compositional data because, unlike the simple Euclidean measure, it incorporates information about interelement conelations. Using Mahalanobis distance calculations, it is possible to derive probabilities that a particular specimen belongs to a particular group. These probabilities are based not oniy on the proximity of a specimen to a group centroid. but also on the rate at which the density of data points decreases from the group toward diat specimen. Calculation of Mahalanobis distances requires that the group being sudied contains at least one more member than the number of variables by which it is defined (Glascock 1992: Sayre 1975). Ideally, the number of specimens should be several times greater than the number of variables. Since concentration data were available for 32 elements in the present study, groups 121 defined by all elements would require at least 33 members before Mahalanobis distances could be determined. Several groups, however, had less than this number. In these cases, Mahalanobis distances were based on principal components calculated over the total data set rather than on the original element concentrations. To reduce the number of variables in the calculations, all principal components were eliminated from the analysis except those subsuming the largest amount of variance. The number of components to retain is a subjective decision, and depends on the size of die groups being studied and die amount of variance subsumed by die components. Mahalanobis distance calcuiadons were used iii diree ways. First, diey were used to assip newly analyzed sherds to previously identified composidonal groups. Second, diey provided a means by which to refine die membership of provisional groups idendfied dirough cluster analysis or bivariate plots. Finally, diey were used to assess whether or not die hypodiesized groups reflected a meaningful partidoning of die data set. The latter goal was accomplished by examining the degree to which each group was internally cohesive and distinct from all other groups. To counteraa die bias diat each specimen introduces to a group, specimens were removed from dieir assigned groups prior to calculating dieir Mahalanobis distances (Glascock 1992:20). Principal components and Mahalanobis distance analyses were conducted using a series of GAUSS language routines by Neff (1990). Patteming of Clays. Clay compositional data were examined to determine whedier diere existed any chemical trends diat could aid in die interpretadon of die ceramic data. The data were examined using principal components analysis and bivariate plots of PCA scores and elements. In die analysis of die clays, principal components scores were calculated on die 37 analyzed clays and 32 eletuents using die coneladon matrix of die data. 122 Comparison of Sherds and Clays. After the sherd and ciay chemical data had been examined separately, the two sets of data were compared. These procedures allowed inferences to be developed concerning where the clays used in the sherds may have derived. In an ideal situation, a chemical "match" can be identified between a ceramic compositional group and a tempered clay, and the source of the clay can be directly inferred. More often, however, a direct match will not be found. In these cases, general source areas may nonetheless be suggested by the data. The clays and the sherds were compared using two types of analyses. First. Mahalanobis distance calculations were used to derive probabilides that a particular clay, tempered widi locally collected sands, belonged to each ceramic compositional group. The "tempered clay" compositions, described in more detail below, were obtained using a simulated tempering program developed by Heaor Neff (1990). Second, bivariate plots of PGA scores and seleaed elements were generated showing the relationship of the clays (tempered and untempered) and the sherds. These plots were then examined for relevant trends or grouping tendencies. Results Chemical Patterns of Sherds In die previous compositional study (P. Fish et al. 1992b), diree primary reference groups and four subgroups were identified (Table 5.3). The primary groups were termed Tucson Basin. Phoenix, and Papagueria. The four subgroups, labeled Marana>A, Marana-BC, Marana-D. and South Tucson, were all assigned to the Tucson Basin primary reference group. Prior knowledge of these groups provided a logical starting point for investigating the grouping tendencies of the 361 newly analyzed sherds. Of the previously analyzed groups, only Marana-A and Marana-BC contained sufficient members to permit the calculation of Mahalanobis 123 Table 5.3. Compositional Groups Obtained by P. Fish et al. (1992b) Piovenience Tucson Basin Phoenix Papa Un- of Sherds gueria giouped Marana Marana Marana So. Ungipd. A BC D Tucson Tucson Basin Basin Vfaiana 49 69 28 61 - - 17 Communicy •y Robies - - I 6 - - Community Other 2 6 I 2 3 Northern Tucson Basin Sites Pantano • • 6 8 • 10 Wash Site Cluster Souchem ~ 2 14 8 • " 6 Sana Cruz Site Cluster Other 8 Lower SaniaCniz Sices Phoenix 1 3 1 4 11 10 11 Basin Sices Papagueria - - - - - 8 2 Sices TOTAL 52 78 32 21 89 11 26 51 124 probabilities based on all 32 elements. As a first step, the probability was calculated that each uf the 361 sherds belonged to the Marana-A or Marana-BC group. Additional groups were Uien identified dirough a combination of cluster analysis and an examination of bivariate plots. The distinctiveness and cohesiveness of the groups were evaluated through the use of Mahalanobis distance calculations. For groups with more than 33 members, distance calculations were based on all 32 elements. For groups with fewer than 33 members, calculations were based on the first 13 principal components derived from the analysis of the entire 721 sherd data set. The results of the PCA, presented in Table S.4, demonstrate that these components subsume more than 90 percent of the variance in die total data set. The coefficients for these components are presented in Table 5.5. Using the procedures outlines above and in the previous section, a total of eight compositional groups were identified (Table 5.6). These include five groups containing sherds recovered primarily from die study region, and three additional groups comprised of sherds collected mostly from outside of the smdy region. Summary elemental data for each of tiiese groups are presented in Table 5.7. The five groups associated with the sudy region include two diat were previously identified and diree diat are newly defined. The previously identified groups are A and BC: these correspond to the groups termed Marana-A and Marana-BC by P. Ftsh et al. (1992b).^ .\s discussed above, to determine whedier any of die newly analyzed sherds belonged to either of diese two groups, probabilities of group membership were calculated based on Mahalanobis distances. ^ In the present study, tbe "Maiaua' prefix was removed from the names of these composidooal groups CO avoid any coanocaiion about production location. 125 Table S.4. Results of Principal Components Analysis of the 721 Sherd Data Set Compoaent Eigenvalue Variance Explained % Cumulative % I 0.0689 23.70 23.70 2 0.0543 18.67 4136 3 0.0366 12J8 54.94 4 0.0261 8.967 63.91 5 0.0172 5.924 69.83 6 0.0138 4.725 74J6 7 0.0100 3.425 77.98 8 0.0082 2.822 80.80 9 0.0076 1602 83.41 10 0.0065 1225 85.63 11 0.0053 1.830 87.46 12 0.0049 1.680 89.14 13 0.0047 1.611 90.75 14 0.0039 U25 9108 15 0.0036 1.221 93J0 16 0.0032 1.096 9439 17 0.0029 0.9965 95 J9 18 0.0023 0.7772 96.17 19 0.0020 0.6942 96.86 20 0.0020 0.6858 9755 21 0.0015 0J2O3 98.07 22 0.0010 03309 98.40 23 0.0010 0J277 98.73 24 0.0008 0.2891 99.02 25 0.0007 0.2371 99.25 26 0.0006 0.2010 99.45 27 0.0004 0.1486 99.60 28 Q.0G04 0.1315 99.73 29 0.0003 0.1046 99.84 30 0.0002 0.0853 99.92 31 0.0001 0.0445 99.97 32 0.0001 0.0307 100.0 Table 5.5. Ciieftlciencs Cor the First 13 Principal Components of the 721 Sherd Data Set lilcmciu I'COl l'C02 l'C03 l'C04 l'C05 PC06 l'C07 mi8 l'C:09 rcio pen J'C12 PCI 3 As 0.4230 •0.3734 0.2091 0.0039 -0.0265 •0.0017 0.4589 -0.3832 -0,2369 0.2850 -0.0944 •0.2531 0,0806 1.U 0.0660 0.1051 0.063} 0.0257 -0.0073 0.0597 0.0490 -0.0707 0,(V<39 0.0045 -0.0838 0.1495 0.0074 l.u 0.1019 0.2064 -0.1318 0.2609 -0.0029 -0.0761 -0.0542 •0.0222 0,1121 0.1479 •0.0797 •0.1569 0.0767 Nil 0.0870 0 III! 0.0726 0.0478 -0.0311 0.0340 0.1013 •0.1278 0,0896 -0.0098 -0.0551 0.2384 •0.0568 Sm 0.0829 0,1.371 0.0390 0.0802 -0.0362 0.0510 0.0460 -0.0247 0.0461 0.0150 -0.0.581 0.0793 -0.0183 U 0.0842 0 0651 -0.1072 0.3254 -0.1895 0.40Z5 0.1953 0.3160 •0.2852 0.0792 0.1.566 •0.0027 •0.0182 Yl> 0.1078 0.2230 -0.1214 0.2474 •0.0128 -0.0701 -0.0980 •0.0363 0,1443 0.1731 -0.0746 -0.1500 0.0708 ( 'c 0.0780 (1 1151 0.0080 0.0429 -0.0294 0.05.32 0.0415 •0.0679 0.0726 -0,0113 -0 1104 0.1351 •0,0063 to 0.1433 0.1392 0.3901 -0.1115 -0.0647 -0,0527 0,0329 0.0900 •00249 -0.1181 -0.0424 0.0390 -0,0362 Cl 0.2046 0.2418 0.1726 -0.0165 -0.0399 -0.2300 -0.0645 •0.0463 •0.0986 •0.1286 -0.0833 0.3014 04712 Cs 0.390.5 -0.2453 •0.2202 -0.2817 -0.5085 0.1979 -0.0607 0.1689 0.4055 -0.1031 -0 0705 -0.0289 •0.0925 |!U 0.0664 0,0973 0.1408 -0.0163 -0.0029 0.0233 -0.0081 -0.0658 0.0938 -0.0023 •0,0436 0.0187 •0.0874 I'C 0.0847 0,0918 0.2336 •0.1183 •0.0800 0.0368 0.0052 •0.0244 •0.0538 -0.0609 0,0386 -0.0040 •0.0427 nr 0.0807 0,0765 •0.0243 0.0904 •0.0476 0.1850 -0.2882 -0.1730 •0.1608 -0.1253 •0.0727 •0,2329 0.1227 Kb 0.0909 0.0536 -0.1659 •0.0353 •0.0348 0.1087 •0.0543 0.0880 0.1153 -0.0391 •0.0683 •0.0179 •0.0445 Sl> 0.5501 -0.1987 •0.1990 0.0978 0.6541 0.0140 •0.0866 0.0736 0.0239 •0.3038 0.0334 0.1526 •0.0982 Sc 0.1640 0.1702 0.1597 •0.0462 •0.0707 -0.1454 -0.0479 0.0452 0.0320 -0.0139 •0.0197 0.0710 O.IOII Sr •0.1329 •0.20H0 0.3.559 0.0814 0.1619 0.4318 0.0750 0.J718 0.4097 0.0501 0.1150 0.1351 0.4909 't'a 0.0302 0.1407 •0.0707 0.2948 -0.0954 0.1410 0.3165 •0.0051 •0.0997 0.1099 -0.1519 0.3566 •0.1672 n> 0.1445 0,2287 •0.0172 0.1949 -0.0726 •0.1275 0.1720 •0.2816 0.3926 •0.0515 0,6946 •0.0923 •0.0533 r»i 0.0846 0,1149 •0.14l>4 0.1264 •0.0135 0.2394 0.0249 0.0947 -0.0715 •0.0322 -0.1219 0.1058 0.1201 /n 0.2207 0,0765 0.1299 •0.0614 0,0419 •0.1057 -0 1200 0.5379 -0.2974 0.2744 0 41.55 •0.0901 0.0067 /.I 0.0958 00949 0.00H3 0.1.563 -0.0579 0.2963 -0..3415 -0.2Z59 •0.1272 •0.1023 -0,0177 •0.3601 0.Z523 Al 0.0161 00281 0.0iS2 -0.1015 -0.0572 0.0702 0.0572 0.0390 00312 0,0698 00230 •0.0154 -0.0957 Hu 0.0283 -0 0586 0.0916 •0.0605 0.2246 0.1299 -0.3387 •0.1078 0.1905 0,6940 •0.0509 0.0991 •0.1335 C'u -0.0356 •04721 0.26 Table S.6. Chemical Group Assignments for Sherds Giemical Group Corresponding Group in Sherds from Sherds from Total Fishetal. (1992b) Snidy Area Other Areas Associated with Study Region A Vfarana-A 9 107 BC Marana-BC 27 125 E None 31 31 F None 20 20 C None 37 39 Associated with Areas Outside of Study Region Phoenix Phoenix 11 11 Papagueria Papagueria 26 26 S. Tucson S. Tucson Basin 21 23 Association Unknown Uoassigned Ungrouped Tucson Basin 272 67 339 Total 558 163 721 Sherds showing significant probabilities (in this case, p > I) of belonging to the Vfarana-A or Marana-BC group were added to that data base, and the group charaaeristics re-examined. The addition or new sherds to a group changes the group's shape and its centroid position. As a result, some sherds previously assigned to the group may no longer show significant probabilities of membership, and other sherds that previously showed little probability may now show higher probabilities of group membership. As new sherds are added, then, one of two things can happen. If the group is sharply defined and distinct from other groups and unassigned sherds, the addition of sherds will result in the strengdiening of the group definidon. In this case. 128 Table 5.7. Mean Elemental Concentrations (in ppm) of Compositional Groups Element Group A Group BC Group E Group F Mean SD Mean SD Mean SD Mean SD As 7.95 122 7.18 1.60 lOJO 1.74 12.45 1J3 U 36.1 2J 36.6 15 37.8 IJ 33.7 IJ Lu 0J2 0.03 0.42 0.04 0J8 0.02 0J5 0.02 Nd 30J 2.8 30.2 3.4 316 3.3 28.9 3.0 Sm 5.78 0J6 6.04 0J7 6J7 0.21 5J7 0.29 U 2^8 0J5 3.04 0.44 3J8 0J8 2-52 OJO Yb 125 0.24 191 0J2 168 0.20 2.44 0.18 Ce 71.2 4.8 710 S3 76.6 69.5 3.4 Co lOJ 1.2 8J 0.7 10.0 OJ 8.1 0.7 Cr 28.6 2J 30.6 12 29.7 13 27.1 11 Cs 7.8 0.9 9.1 0.9 10.6 0.6 23.6 6.2 Eu 1.23 0.06 1.17 0.05 1.23 0.04 1.19 0.06 Fe 33452 2795 28180 1800 30330 1246 31638 2167 Hf 6J8 0J6 7.01 0.81 6.55 0.49 7.70 0.99 Rb 117.6 9.5 144J 9.9 127.0 7.4 131.0 8.0 Sb 1.17 0.16 1.74 0.14 1J3 0.07 1.74 0.25 Sc 8J9 0.89 8.46 0.60 8.60 0.42 8J3 0.64 Sr 473.7 66.9 366.1 56.9 3765 49.9 326.6 45J Ta 0.96 0.15 0.98 0.08 1.25 0.09 0.78 0.05 Tb 0.65 0.09 0.74 0.12 0.71 0.15 0.62 0.08 Th 11.7 1.2 14J 1.9 12.4 0.6 10.9 0.9 Zn 73.6 12.2 m 113 73.6 12.4 67.1 9.2 Zr 161.6 23.4 1782 31.4 167.7 26.0 203.1 34J A1 80019 3855 75706 3969 80058 4189 78493 4061 Ba 820 9"? 800 108 742 196 947 U9 Ca 41830 8672 31047 9439 44016 8918 47846 5334 Dy 3.46 0J7 4.06 0J7 4.23 OJO 3.47 OJl K 27450 2282 29613 2012 28998 1628 28303 1171 Mn 667.2 104.7 660.6 94.6 814.4 575 517.6 60.6 Na 15442 829 14633 1065 14521 1285 7930 791 Ti 3070 365 2769 335 2646 422 2823 435 V 83.8 10.7 68.1 6.4 70.1 7.6 75.7 7.2 129 Table S.7. Mean Elemental Concentrations (in ppm) of Compositional Groups (continued) Elements Group G S. Tucson Papagueria Phoenix Mean SD Mean SD Mean SD Mean SD As 734 2.00 732 1.20 15.04 2.96 11.89 1.73 U 34.9 2.1 35.9 12 43.0 1.9 45.7 3J Lu 0J9 0.03 0.42 0.01 0.47 0.02 0.41 0.02 Nd 30.9 3.0 31.5 12 373 15 411 3.2 Sm 5.94 0J9 6.15 0.26 7.28 032 7.40 0.29 U 3.14 0J7 4.28 0J7 3.05 036 2.46 0..30 Yb 183 0.25 180 0.11 3.29 0.16 "*.92 0.13 Ce 70.2 5.0 71.7 4.2 87J 43 6.1 Co L0.8 0.9 IS 0.7 14.9 0.8 223 I.: Cr 31.1 2.5 33.0 17 51.6 1.9 96.0 10.7 Cs 10.6 2.6 133 1.8 12J 1.1 8.0 1.2 Eu 1.24 0.07 1.05 0.07 132 0.05 1.60 0.06 Fe 33903 1963 27496 1600 38231 1817 49493 2660 Hf 7.47 0J4 7.26 0.49 7.72 0.63 5.63 0.60 Rb 133.1 13.8 141.7 6.2 130.8 63 102.0 5.4 Sb 1.26 0.14 IJO 0.11 338 036 1.10 0.10 Sc 9.92 0.82 8.67 0.60 13.49 0.64 1730 0.95 Sr 293.4 52.5 297.7 91.4 349.8 55J 3463 36.2 Ta 0.86 0.05 1.14 0.08 1.07 0.07 0.99 0.04 Tb 0.71 0.10 0.79 0.08 1.00 0.11 1.09 0.12 Th 11.8 1.2 152 0.8 12.9 1.1 10.8 0.6 Zn 83.7 15.7 70.0 7.6 113.0 7.9 lOOJ 53 Zr 185.7 21.2 185.2 14.9 211.6 27.8 1612 112 A1 80627 5431 79895 3497 76447 3755 88865 4096 Ba 805 114 556 67 840 100 782 216 Ca 34126 8846 33055 10050 38905 8739 22195 3717 Dy 4.15 OJO 3.83 0.20 4.76 0.25 435 0.19 fC 28123 2790 30803 1509 28799 1652 30248 2787 Mn 702.8 89J 594.1 64.2 1117.7 97.0 1068.6 753 Ma 11670 1329 9785 766 13153 930 11423 647 Ti 3095 498 2401 287 3872 391 3888 128 V 89.7 8.8 61.2 6.0 98.4 7.8 104.7 83 130 group configuradon will not substantially change, and difTeiences between the sherds in the group and all other sherds will become increasingly pronounced. If the group is not well defined, however, the addition of new sherds will cause the group to become increasingly diffuse and to exhibit greater overlap with other groups. The comparison of newly analyzed sherds to a previously defined group, then, provides one means by which to evaluate the distinctiveness of a particular group. In the present study, the size of the Marana-A group more than doubled (from 52 to 107 sherds: see Tables S.3 and S.6) with the addition of sherds firom the newly analyzed collection. Marana-BC increased from 78 tu 125 sherds. The addition of these sherds had the effect of strengthening the separation of these two groups. For example, in the previous smdy several sherds assigned to Marana-A also showed significant probabilities (defined here as p> 1) of belonging to Marana-BC. WiUi the increased group sKes. however, these overlaps virtually disappeared (Table 5.8). In fact, in the present study no sherd assigned to Group A has a probabUity of greater than 0.0001 of also belonging to Group BC (see Appendix 8). Significantly, only one sherd previously assiped to Marana-A was removed from the group as a result of the addition of new sherds.'' These results support the conclusion that Marana-A. as originally defined, represented a distinct and meaningflil partitioning of Tanque Verde Red-on-brown pastes. Dtiring the process of adding new sherds to Groups A and BC, an outlier group of sherds within Marana-BC was identified. Examination of bivariate plots suggested that these sherds formed a unique group separate from Marana-BC. and they were accordingly reassigned to a new * This sherd, PF279, onginally had a probability of 2.536 of belonging to Marana-A. With the addidon of the new sherds, its probability fell to 0.172 and the sherd was removed from Group A. The decision to [move the sherd was based on the conservative approach taisn in die present analysis, in which only sherds having p> I were included in Groups A and BC. 131 Table S.8. Group Membership Probabilities for Selected Sherds Assigned to Group A^ Anid P.Fishetal. (1992b) Present Snidy Marana-A Marana-BC A BC PF045 24.967 3.363 69.872 0.000 PF080 77.892 9.508 56.132 0.000 PF094 80.146 2.291 90.655 0.000 PF105 72.925 8.565 81.949 0.000 PF115 42.334 15.778 48.203 0.000 PF143 90.983 6.496 98.738 0.000 PF165 64.679 3.380 81.784 0.000 PF180 53.814 1.843 91.148 0.000 PF192 81.160 4.228 96.549 0.000 PF284 99.931 2.430 99.973 0.000 group termed Group E. These reassignments were supported by Mahalanobis distance calculations. Group E contains several of the newly analyzed sherds as well as numerous sherds previously assigned by P. Fish et al. (1992b) to Marana-BC.^ The removal of these sherds from the Marana-BC group contributed to the greater cohesiveness of Group EC and its decreased overlap with Group A. As die data in Appendix 8 indicate, only six sherds assigned to Marana-BC exhibit probabilities ofgreater than 0.0001 of also belonging to Marana-A. Even for these six ' These include ail of the sherds assigned diat exhibited probabilides of > I of belonging to Marana-A and Maiana-BC in (he snidy by P. Fish et al. (1992b). * Sherds in Group E diat were previously assigned to Marana-BC are PFOOT. PF0I8. PF027. PF046. PF054. FF179. PF210. PF211. and PF287. 132 sherds, however, the probabilities of overlap with Group A are extremely low, with all p values being less than or equal to 0.002. One group defined previously by P. EMsh et al. (1992b) was discarded as a result of the procedure described above. This group, Marana-D, became increasingly diffuse as more sherds were added until virtually every sherd showed some probability of belonging to the group. In other words, there was no clear boundary for this group, and no point at which probabilities of group membership sharply declined. Significantly, of the four Tucson Basin subgroups identified previously. Marana-D was considered to be the least well defined. The previous researchers described this group as being 'more heterogeneous and more difficult to characterize" than the other subgroups (P. Fish et al. 1992b:244). One reason for the heterogeneity of this group may have been the inclusion within the group of sherds from more than one production location. Examinadon of the chemical data from the newly analyzed sherds suggested the presence of a new group not previously recognized. This group, termed Group F, exhibits litde chemical variability and is quite distinct chemically from sherds outside of the group. Thineen of the newly analyzed sherds were assigned to Group F; when sherds analyzed by P. Fish et al. {1992b) were compared to this group, an additional seven sherds were found to belong to die group. All seven of these sherds derived from the Marana-D subgroup, suggesting that the previous researchers had recognized these sherds as being chemically similar. One explanation for the Marana-D subgroup, then, is that it contained sherds belonging to a distinct chemical group, but that the small sample size resulted in poor group definition and in the inclusion of sherds from outside the "acual" group. The inclusion of these other sherds, in turn, would serve to pull other sherds in die group, creating the diffuse, heterogeneous group identified as Marana-D. 133 In addition to Groups E and F, a ihiid new group was identified. This group was termed Group G. The remaining three groups identified were all defined by P. Fish et ai. (1992b). and are believed to represent production locations outside of the Marana and Los Robles regions. These groups were termed the Phoenix, Papagueria, and South Tucson reference groups. Only two of the newly analyzed sherds were assigned to any of these groups. These two sherds were both assigned to the South Tucson group (see Table 5.6). A conservative approach was taken in defining the compositional groups. Once hypothetical groups were identified, either through cluster analysis or the examination of bivariate plots, the cohesiveness of the groups was evaluated through the use of Mahalanobis distances. Only those hypothetical groups that could be shown to be internally coherent were retained as compositional groups. The conservancy of this approach resulted in nearly half of the sherds remaining unassigned. The resulting groups, however, are believed to represent an archaeologically meaningful partitioning of die data. The cohesiveness of these groups, and their separation firom the other groups, are demonstrated in Appendix 8. Figure S.S shows a plot of the eight compositional reference groups relative to principal components 1 and 2. To aid in the interpretation of this figure. Rgure 5.6 shows the 32 elements plotted relative to diese same components. As the distribution of sherds in Figure 5.5 indicates, the Phoenix. Papagueria. and F groups are the most distina chemically of the eight groups. In Figures 5.7 and 5.8 these same reference groups and elements are plotted against principal components I and 3. These various plots illustrate the following chemical patterns present in the ceramic data base. I. The non-Tucson Basin reference groups (Phoenix and Papagueria) are the most distinct chemically. Of die six Tucson Basin groups (i.e.. A. BC. E. F G. and I I ( ) - S lucsori ( 1 l%jiKUjv)er lo (.) Phuem * O V I J t I r ) I ) ( 1 a I ) I I I ijij a'lJ?"DD X u "Viu u -u- I (11)^ () ()•' (I n 1 (I f)o o o 1 0 02 0.03 O 04 IT(I I i^'igurc S.5. i£iglu compositional rcfurcnces groups ploiced relative (o principal components I and 2 of the 721 sherd data set. WccliiMtjIe ( oi\luiii!i l»>. Ii. II t J CJ a . Co t > I () or. o o? 0 OP. O o \'\ 0 1H I'COl i'igure 5.6. Thirty-iwt) elements plotted relative to principal components I and 2 «»f the 721 sherd data set. ^ - S \^^( t>OI> V - Mii|itj Uli^' ' 0 O.'i 0 (>.' (10 1 0 00 0 01 O 02 0 o.s O 04 l'( () 1 Figure 5.7. Eight ctHnpositional references groups ploiteil relative to principal components I anJ 3 of the 721 sherd data set. Ellipses represent 90% ctinfidencu levels l\)r meinhership in the groups. o\OJ Ce. Ni) " r>m " So () Of o a? O Oh O 10 0. 1 -1 O IH ('( (I I figure 5.8. Thirty-two cicincms plotted relative principal components I and 3 ol'the 721 sherd data set. South Tucson), Group F shows the clearest separation from the other groups. The remainder of the Tucson Basin groups exhibit a greater degree of chemical similarity (see also Appendix 8). 2. PC 1 tends to be negatively correlated with the alkaline elements and positively correlated with As, Cs, and Sb (see Table 5.5). The group most positively correlated with diis component is the Papagueria group; Phoenix and Group F are also correlated widi PC I, diougb to a somewhat lesser extent. These correlauons largely reflect the concentrations of the elements listed above. 3. PC 2 is negatively correlated with Ca, As, and Cs (see Table 5.5). The group scoring lowest on this component is Group F. a group containing high concentrations of these elements relative to the other groups (see Table 5.7). Group F is especially low in Na. an element positively correlated with PC 2. 4. PC 3 tends to be positively correlated with the transitional elements (see Table 5.5). Scoring highest on PC 3 is die Phoenix group, a group exhibiting high proportions of these elements relative to other groups (see Table 5.7 and P. Fish et al. 1992b). Among the Tucson Basin groups, there is overlap of die groups on PC 3 but a general trend can nonetheless be discerned. Of diese groups, die South Tucson scored die lowest, followed by BC and F. and dien by E and G. Group A scored die highest of die Tucson Basin groups on PC 3. The potential significance of these trends is discussed below and in the following chapter. Of die eight compositional groups defined in this snidy. five (A. BC. E. F. and G) are composed primarily of sherds recovered from die Marana and Los Robles communities. A sixdi group, Soudi Tucson, contains sherds collected from die sites in die Tucson Basin, located some 139 20-30 km south of these two communities. The final two groups are the Phoenix and Papagueria groups, each of which contains sherds recovered firom areas ranging between SO and 125 km distant from the two communities. Although the production location of these groups remains unproven, the associadoa of the Phoenix and Papagueria groups with areas distant from the two conununities suggests that they were not made within the Tucson Basin region. The remaining six groups, in contrast, are likely to have been produced in or near the Tucson Basin. These patterns suggest that Groups A, BC, E, F, G, and South Tucson were all produced in die same general region (i.e., the Tucson Basin or sunounding area). Accordingly, the general similarity of these groups to one another is not unexpected. This similarity results in the overlap of diese groups on two-dimensional plots. When all 32 dimensions are considered, however, the groups show clear and unambiguous separation (see Appendix 8). In other words, although the groups are clearly separated when data from all 32 elements are considered, the loss of data required to produce the two-dhnensional plots results in a greater overlap of these groups than seen in multidimensional space. Not surprisingly, Mabaianobis distance probabilities demonsffate that some groups are more distinct dian others. As discussed above. Groups A and BC show clear and distinct separation. Groups E and G, in contrast, show a higher degree of overlap with other groups. These differences reflect both die sample size available for each group and die chemical homogeneity of the group. For Groups A and BC, large sample sizes seem responsible for their clear separadon. Group F and the Papagueria group, however, are also fairly distinct, despite the relatively small numbers of sherds assigned to their groups. In diis case, die separation of these from odier groups likely reflects dieir chemical homogeneity. Groups E and G are less chemically distinct, suggesting that small sample sizes and greater chemical heterogeneity have contributed 140 to these patterns. If additional sherds are evenoially added to these groups, however, it may be that the chemical overlap between these and odier groups will decrease. This is precisely what happened when additional sherds were added to Groups A and BC in the present study. To further illustrate die relationship of the five compositional groups associated die study area, discriminant function plots were generated (Figures S.9 and S. 10). Figure S.9 demonstrates diat of diese five groups. Groups A, E and G exhibit the greatest degree of overlap. Significandy. these groups also show die highest degree of overlap on Mahalanobis distance probabilities (see Appendix 8) and on other axes (Figure S.ll), suggesting diat diey are indeed more alike chemically dian are any of die odier groups. Despite dieir general chemical similarity, however, diey show fairly clear separation when all 32 elements are considered. Separation of these groups is illustrated in Figure 5.10. Chemical Patterns of Clays Chemical analysis of raw clays was conducted to provide information about die source of die clays used in die sherds. As discussed earlier in this chapter, 37 clays from die Tucson Basin and sunounding areas were sampled. Of diese. 10 were of a quality insufficient for die manuticQire of vessels. In collecting die clays for analysis, it was considered unlikely diat any of die sampled deposits would match precisely the clay deposits exploited prehistorically. This is especially true for the alluvial clays, since there are innumerable clay lenses exposed in the major river beds. Further, because ceramic paste chemistry reflects components of die sherd in addition to die clay, obtaining an exaa "match" between die clays and die pastes becomes even less likely. Even in die absence of direa matches, however, chemical patterning of die raw clays can be used to inform on potential source areas exploited prehistorically. If clays of a single type or firom a single general area can be shown to be more similar to one another dian diey are to odier clays. Figure 5.9. Plot of canonical discriminant functions I and 2 derived from discriminant analysis of the five study area reference groups. Ellipses represent 90% confidence levels for membership in the groups. -- ^«i«i UPMI |Mr- Figure 5.10. Plot of canonical discriminant functions 1 and 3 derived from discriminant analysis of the tlve study area 4^ reference groups. Ellipses represent 90% confidence levels for membership in the groups. lO tu oo o o o o o o lO CT» O BC oo oo o oo o CD OO cS O OS 0 00 o of) O \ b O 25 O JSS () AO SB Figure 5. M. PIDI of logged antimony and cobali values in the five study area reference groups. Ellipses represent 90% confidence levels for membership in the groups. 144 then it may be possible to derive inferences about the general areas exploited for clays, even in the absence of direct chemical matches. The chemical data obtained from the raw clays were examined with respect to the following issues. First, do patterned chemkal differences exist between clays of different origins? That is, are clays collected from alluvial regions more similar to one another than diey are to argillic or other primary clays? Second, can die clays collected from different geographical feamres be distinguished from one another'? Specifically, can the clays of die Brawley Wash be distinguished from the clays of the Santa Cruz River? Finally, do patterned trends exist among the clays collected from a single river bed? Are diere any elements diat become increasingly enriched or diluted as one moves downstream along the Santa Cruz River or Brawley Wash? These issues were examined to assess the range and patterning of the naural variability found in die raw clays. If pattemmg can be documented to exist among clays from a similar area, it may eventually be possible to match clays found in prehistoric ceramics with a general source area. A similar approach characterizes die petrographic analysis of the sand temper. The ubiquity of sands in southern Arizona makes it impossible to sample every sand source diat could have been used prehistorically. Through an intensive sampling program, however, it has been possible to identify areas (termed petrof^ies) containing mineralogically similar sands. Because of die limited number of clays so far diat have been characterized chemically, it is not yet possible to identify whether similar facies might exist for die clays. One goal of die present analysis, dien. is to assess die potential for identifying such facies. Analysis of the clay data consisted of conducting a principal components analysis on all 37 clays, and graphing die distribution of die 27 potentially usable clays (see Table 5.1) on various plots. The 10 silty clays were omitted from diese plots since dieir chemistry is not likely to reflect 145 that of usable clays. The results of the principal components analysis are presented in Tables 5.9 and S.lO. Figure S.12 shows the distribution of the clays on components I and 2. These components account for more than SO percent of the variance in the data set (see Table 3.9). Plots of these clays against selected elements are provided in Figures S. 13 through S. IS. Figures 5.12 through 5.15 illustrate several chemical patterns in the clays relevant to the interpretation of ceramic paste chemistry. First, it is apparent that the clays collected tirom areas other than the major rivers tend to be die most distinct chemically. In Figure 5.12, for example, the clays scoring highest and lowest on components I and 2 tend to be clays other than those collected from the Santa Cruz River and Brawley Wash. Figures 5.13 through 5.15 demonstrate that these patterns also hold true for individual elements. Although only one quality (i.e.. non-silty) clay was sampled from the Tortolita Mountains, the data suggest that it is distinct chemically. This clay scored higher than any other clay on PC 1, reflecting its low concentrations of As, Sb. and Cs and its extremely high concentrations of Na, Sr, Ca, Co and Cr. Some of these patterns are further illustrated in Figures 5.13 through 5.15. The potenual significance of these data are discussed in the following sections. Of the nonriverine clay sources, only one clay horizon was sampled more than once. This was the argillic horcon exposed in the Tucson Mountains. Three samples were analyzed from this source; diese include two unlevigated samples (PF0S6 and PF7S3) collected from areas approximately 5 km apart, and one sample (PRS6) that was levigated prior to analysis. The two unlevigated samples provide a preliminary means by which to assess die range of chemical variation in diis geographically broad exposure. If the range of chemical variation within this source is less than that between sources, then it may be possible to define a chemical signature for this argillic horkon. The two unlevigated clay sources suggest that this indeed may be possible. Except in Rgure 5.13, these two clays plot quite closely together Table 3.9. Results of Principal Components Analysis of the Clay Data Set Component Egenvalue Variance Explained % Cumulative % 1 0.1775 35.32 35J2 2 0.0908 18.06 53J8 3 0.0731 I4i5 67.93 4 0.0339 6.739 74.67 5 0.0275 5.474 80.14 6 0.0268 5J34 85.48 7 0.0199 3.955 89.43 8 0.0130 2J85 9102 9 0.0082 1.629 93.65 10 0.0074 1.4«1 95.13 11 0.0064 1.279 96.41 12 0.0045 0.8965 97J0 13 0.0031 0.6254 97.93 14 0.0025 0.4987 98.43 15 0.0020 0J903 98.82 16 0.0013 0.2672 99.08 17 0.00095 0.1892 99.27 18 0.00091 0.1815 99.45 19 0.00062 0.1238 99J8 20 0.00057 0.1137 99.69 21 0.00046 0.0923 99.78 22 0.00035 0.0701 99.85 23 0.00028 0.0565 99.91 24 0.00014 0.0286 99.94 25 0.000095 0.0189 99.96 26 0.000069 0.0138 99.97 27 0.000056 0.0111 99.98 28 0.000032 0.0063 99.99 29 0.000029 0.0058 100.0 30 0.000012 0.0024 lOO.O 31 0.000006 0.0012 lOO.O 32 0.000004 O.G008 100.0 147 Table 5.10. Coefficients for the First Eight Principal Components of the Clay Data Set Bement PCOl PC02 PC03 PC04 PC05 PC06 PC07 PC08 As •03203 -0.2185 0.0203 -0.2486 -0.2022 0.4144 0.0969 0.2538 U .0.1838 0.0862 •0.0820 0.1542 -0.0132 •0.0396 •0.0737 0.0941 Lu .0.0679 0.0642 •0.1031 0.0526 0.1292 0.0544 -0.1437 -0.0890 Nd -0.1692 0.0321 •0.0787 0.2193 -0.0970 -0.2953 •0.0253 0.0942 Sm •0.1472 0.1065 -0.1271 0.1417 0.0595 •0.0597 •0.0981 0.0303 U -0.0571 -0.0494 •0.0966 0.0862 -0.0249 0.0796 0.0371 •0.4644 Yb •0.0887 0.0762 •0.0865 0.1130 0.1828 0.0401 -0.1764 •0.0865 Ce •0.1745 0.0968 -0.1238 0.1527 0.0155 •0.0472 -0.0523 0.0647 Co 0.0992 0.1185 -03312 •0.1524 •0.1921 -0.1784 -0.0419 -0.0210 Cr -0.0111 0.1147 -0.1266 -0J802 0.1651 •0J415 0.2346 0.1710 Cs -OJ550 •0.2422 0.2022 -0.2420 0.0579 0.0377 •0.1056 •0.4596 Eu -0.1082 0.1181 -0.0907 0.0675 0.0373 -0.0179 •0.0579 0.0868 Fe 0.0178 0.1222 •0.1253 •0.1941 •0.1387 -0.0264 •0.0467 0.0163 Hf -0.0674 0.0337 0.0654 0.0180 0J891 •0.0256 0.4233 -0.0318 Rb -0.0628 0.0934 0.0100 -0.1280 0.0237 0.1378 0.0316 •0.2280 Sb -0J923 •0.2462 •0.2620 0.2363 -0.1414 •0J593 0J915 •0.0556 Sc -0.0652 0.1246 •0.0902 •0.1971 -0.0042 •0.0022 -0.1135 0.0661 Sr 0.2214 •0.2490 •0.1179 0.1116 -0.2608 0.2995 0.2568 0.1747 Ta 0.0188 0.1393 •0.0930 0.0004 0.0538 0.1102 0.0562 •0.1824 Tb -0.1989 0.1450 •0.0867 0.0641 0J959 0.2643 •0.2030 0.4128 Th •0.1982 0.0859 •0.1555 0.2777 -0.1317 0.0115 •0.1259 -0.0641 Zn -0.0471 0.2466 •0J458 -0.2673 0.0002 0.0827 •0.0017 -0.2047 Zr -0.0740 0.0270 0.0357 0.0532 0J640 0.0012 0.3894 0.0177 Al -0.0671 0.1180 0.0031 •0.0217 •0.1092 0.0396 -0.0647 •0.0174 Ba -0.0540 0.1730 -0.1499 0.0507 •0.1076 03591 0.2692 0.0673 Ca 0.1302 -0.6650 •0.4863 -0.1309 0J054 0.0176 -0.2234 0.0377 Dy -0.1550 0.1090 -0.1461 0.1148 0.1368 0.0085 -0.1430 •0.1281 K -0.0581 0.1046 0.0278 •0.1406 0.1049 0.1.568 0.1606 •0.1661 Mn -0.0173 0J027 •0.2997 -0.0561 -o.r»o 0.1293 0.0383 -0.0466 Na 0.2965 0.0370 -0.2353 0J177 0.0877 0.2401 0.1735 -0.1791 Ti 0.0889 0.1173 -0.2160 •0.1846 0.1682 -0.0091 0.0541 0.0112 V 0.0223 0.0638 •0.0895 -0.2467 •0.1499 •0.1207 0.1187 0.0855 » \ » ' 1 ' 1 ' 1•''' 1 1 • ' 1 ' c.> • pros9 • »'J 769 O CI VI • • o • o • f0 1 X c:> o HI yi>3 " o m " tS X + H K H H PF760 o / C) 1 O — Iticson Mia H |/ H * • M uu • - Cutiiliitu Mia K o A — Rmi on Mis o • pr/b* - 1 • — rurlulilci Mia • - Silverbell Mis. L » + - Dlhei 1 • - (idiwley Wash A Ui K - Siinlci Cru^ -i.. -i... .—i. 1 1 . 1 . 1 1 'i' o I (") t) DOB 0 0') 0 00 o O'l o ott o 1 :• I'CO I 4^ 5.12. Plot of 27 clays relalivu lo principal components I and 2, derived from ihe analysis of (lie 37 clays. oo I" 1 F • 1 -| 1 1- -I— oby P( 763 O • IX> - PK0b6 O QPK /b6 M + • A X " • X X X X PF760 «• X * X " \ - T — K < pr769 r^ ^ # • o Hr /5» • O = lucson Mis • ^ SilveiUell Mts. • =• Cutalinu Mt:>. + - Olhej A Rincon Mis • - Biuwley Wdiih • = rortolitu M(s. K ^ Surilu C(iu Ui ' « • • 1 1 1 0 ) 4() I 1 SO 1 hS 1 60 1 6b 1 70 1 7b 1 80 1 H CK I'igure 5.13. Plot t)f logged chromium unJ cesium values for llie 27 clays. llWfilliHiJiil 1 1 1 —R- IN ' ' ' A' Pr 760 ^ X P Pr0b9 X K X X "x • + X • X K # K M • • o - \u(.son Mlb VL - P» /bl • Ccilaliiiu Mis • »»l /Sb V " A Kiiicun Mts • = Tudulito Mis. O pro56 ° T Silveibell Mis. V| Hf/59 ^ + Olliet o '^> pr /t.i • Uiuwle>' Wash X Santa Ciui (11 ~ TILL > • ' ' 2 JO ,55 2 •!() 2 2 50 2 55 2 60 2 (.5 2 7(i SK' Figure 3.14. Plot of logged .sirontium and calcium values for che 27 clays. l-'igurc 5.IS. Plot of o r- lO ci i£> lU '--'OH o O CO IN O O DO D.75 O.S cu ,S2 0.95 (he - logged sironiiuni —1 > O o pr/53 O PF056 1.1 r T- and culcium O 1 1 I.I. Pf /flO O • N K Pf ' • PF059 PFV60 /fll values for 1.1 X • 1 H A X K " ' ihe 27clays. ft CO X 12 •••| • 9 X —' • K • X y I 1 I PF769 J + 1 r- I • ' • • I • o • A 'J + X •• = = = T- Catulmo Mia Tucson Mis, Silverbell Rincon Mis. Bfiivhiey Toilolila Siinlii Other I • I .'5 Crui Wusli Mis Mis I I 152 on the various graphs. Furthermore, elemental concentrations for these two samples are quite similar for a number of elements not shown in these graphs, such as Ta, Sc. Hf, Al, K. Na. and V (see Appendix 7). Although concentrations for some elements (such as Cr; see Figure 5.13) differ more widely, in general these two samples are quite similar chemically. Since these samples were taken approximately 5 km apart from one another, their chemical similarity suggests that argillic clays may be sufficiently homogenous to allow argillic clay facies to be identified. Clays collected from alluvial sources, however, appear to be less chemically homogenous. These patterns are not unexpected, since alluvial clays contain sediments from a variety of bedrock sources. Despite this chemical variability, however, there is some suggestion that clays cotleaed from a single river tend to share some chemical similarities. Although there is a great deal of overlap on some of the bivariate plots, for example, there is some tendency for the Santa Cruz River clays to cluster together and to be separate from the Brawley Wash clays. For some elements, such as Cr and Sr (see Figures S.13 and S. 14). there is very litde overlap between the clays of the two rivers. The relatively small number of clays analyzed from each river precludes the evaluation of the two groups through Mahalanobis distance probabilities. Nonetheless, significant differences are apparent between the two rivers in concentrations of some elements. These differences suggest it may be possible, eventually, to distinguish ceramics made from clays obtained from these two areas. To examine whether patterned trends exist among the clays collected from a single river bed. chemical data obtained from the Santa Cruz River clays were examined. These data indicate that there is general tendency for transitional elements to increase as clays are collected tiirther north (downstream). These trends are illustrated graphically in Figure S.16 for the transitional elements Co and Sc. This figure indicates that two basic groups of clays can be distinguished; a PF7S.5 Clays north of the Tucson Mis. PI 768 pr765 PF764 PF061 X PF062 PrOb5 PF754 PF7aO PF757 PF057 P 06J * Cloys adjacent and south of the Tucson Mts. PF06H * 1 .50 \ Sb \ Ad L/l I'igurc 3.16. Plot of the logged cobalt and scandium values for the 27 clays. U> 154 group containing those clays collected north of die Tucson Mountains, and a group containing clays collected adjacent to and soudi of the mountains. It should be noted that this trend occurs only in a very general sense; clays cannot be ordered individually along these axes. This result may occur because of the relatively smaU stretch of the river (<70 km) from which the clays were collected. As discussed above, because alluvial clays derive from aansported sediments collected upstream, chemical overlap between clays collected from different areas is to be expected. On a very gross level, however, it may be possible to identify general chemical trends. Additional sampling is needed to determine whether these differences in elemental concentradons characterize the river as a whole. Comparison of Sherds and Clays After the chemical patterns of die sherds and clays had been investigated individually, data obtained from the two groups were compared. These comparisons were undertaken to determine whether any matches existed between die clays and sherds: and, if not, whether diere existed any patterns that might inform on possible source areas of die clays. Because the chemical data obtained from sherds reflects die chemistry of bodi the clay and sand constituents, raw clays were not compared direcdy to die sherds. Instead, die chemical compositions of various clay and sand mixmres were derived to simulate tempered clays, and diese clay-sand mixtures were used for comparison. Two types of analyses were conducted. First, probabilities were cakulated diat these "tempered" clays belonged to each of the various reference groups. This analysis was followed by die creation of bivanate plots showing various two-dimensional relationships of the clay-sand mixtures to die compositional reference groups. Chemical data for die clay and sand mixmres were obtained using a simulated tempering program developed by NefF (1990). Concentration data were derived by calculating the effect of 155 adding sand to die clays. To simulate prehistoric tempering techniques, a ratio of 70% clay and 30% sand was used. This ratio approximates that found in prehistoric Tanque Verde Red-on-brown ceramics. To derive the simulated clay-sand mixtures, each of the 27 high quality clays were "tempered" with the nearest available analyzed sand. The clay-sand combinations used in this analysis are listed in Table 5.11. After concentradon data were obtained for die simulated clay-sand mixtures, the probability diat each of diese mixmres belonged to die various compositional reference group was calculated. These probabilities were based on Mahalanobis distance calculations using the same techniques employed widi the sherds. The results of diese analysis are presented in Table 5.11. Not surprisingly, diere were few matches between die clay-sand mixoires and die compositional groups. There is only one instance in which a clay-sand mixture exhibits p > I of belonging to a compositional group. This is a Brawley Wash clay-sand mixture (PF776/PF787) diat shows a probability of 1.794 of belonging to Group G. Perhaps significandy, die second highest probability also derives from the comparison of a Brawley Wash clay and Group G. This sample, PF758/PF787, has a probability of 0.724 of belonging to Group G. These clays, as well as two of die remaining diree Brawley Wash clays, all show a higher probability of belonging to Group G than to any other group. In addition to die Brawley Wash clays, odier clays that are chemically similar to Group G include the clay (PF769) collected from the Pan Quemado reservoir in the Silverbell Mountain area, and clays (PF755 and 757) collected from die West Branch of die Santa Cruz River. The low probabilides reflected in Table 5.11 indicate diat none of the clay-sand mixmres match precisely the clays and sands found in die compositional groups. As a result, none of the compositional groups can be matched with specific clay sources. Neither, at this point, has the 156 Table 5. II. Probabilities of Tempered Clays Belonging to Sherd Reference Groups Location & Anid Elemental Probabilities Principle CompooeDt Probabilities^ (tfCltPf/Sand BC G E F South Papa- Tucsoo gueria Tuaon Mts. PF056/PF070 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.017 0.000 0.000 PF753/PP070 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.011 0.000 0.000 PF756/PP07O 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.012 0.009 0.000 CamUna Mts. PF059/PP067 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.279 0.003 0.000 PF75iyPF067 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.002 0.000 0.000 ^ncon Mts. PF060/PP067 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.067 0.000 0.000 Tortolita Mis. PF777/PF788 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 SlverbeU Mts. PF760/PF787 0.000 0.000 0.001 0.000 0.910 0.000 0.001 PF769/PF787 0.000 0.000 0.177 O.OOl 0.006 0.031 0.000 Other PF763/PF787 0.000 0.000 0.002 0.000 0.003 0.000 0.000 Brtnvley Wash PF758/PF787 0.000 0.000 0.724 0.000 0.020 0.000 0.000 PF761/PF787 0.000 0.000 0.123 0.000 0.005 0.000 0.000 PF766/PF787 0.000 0.000 0.112 0.001 0.014 0.013 0.000 PF767/PF787 0.000 0.000 0.001 0.000 0.003 0.001 0.000 PF776/PF787 0.000 0.000 1.794 0.010 0.045 0.011 0.000 Santa Cruz Fiver PF055/PF07I 0.000 0.000 0.028 0.000 0.026 0.000 0.000 PF057/PF071 0.000 0.000 0.013 0.010 0.055 0.001 0.000 PF058/PF071 o.ooo 0.000 0.009 0.003 0068 0.002 l).0(X) PF061/PF071 0.000 0.000 0.032 0.001 0.012 0.008 0.000 PR)62/PF07I 0.000 0.000 0.004 O.OOl 0.024 0.000 0.000 PF063/PF071 0.000 0.000 0.001 0.186 0.099 0.007 0.000 PF754/PF071 0.000 0.039 0.06S 0.002 0.020 0.000 0.000 PF755/PP071 0.000 0.000 0.104 0.000 0.002 0.000 0.000 PF757/PF071 0.000 0.000 0.191 0000 0.037 0.000 0.000 PF764/PF071 0.000 o.oos 0.013 0.000 0.011 0.000 0.001 PF765/PF071 o.ooo 0.003 0.011 0.001 0.011 0.000 0.000 PF768/PF071 0.000 0.000 0.014 0.003 0.004 0.000 0.000 PF780/Pf=07l 0.000 0.000 0.013 0.056 0.018 0.001 0.000 ^ Based on tbe first 13 components derived from the 721 sherd data base. 157 range of clay chemical variability been documented sufficiently to assign the compositional groups to general geographical areas. Some potential clues, however, are present. As discussed above, the Brawley Wash clays most closely match Group G. Furthermore, only a few clays from other areas show probabilities of more than O.l of belonging to Group G. These patterns suggest the possibility that Group G consists of clays collected somewhere near the Brawley Wash area. In contrast, the single clay collected from the Tortolita Mountain area shows virually no probability of belonging to any of the compositional groups. This clay is the only sample to exhibit such uniformly low probabilities, suggesting diat, of the clays, the Tortolita sample differs the must from the pastes in the Tanque Verde Red-on-brown sherds. The relationship of the "tempered clays" (represented by the simulated clay-sand mixtures) and various ceramic compositional groups are illustrated in Figures S. 17 dirough S. 19. Because only two dimensions are represented in these graphs, relationships between groups and clays may be distorted. In particular, the overlap of elUpses and clays in these graphs may not necessarily reflect chemical matches. For example, in Figure S. 17 several clays fall within die ellipse of the Papagueria group. Yet. when data from die full 32 set of elements are considered, these clays show virtually no overlap with this group (see Table S.11). While die presentation of data in two dimensions can be visually usefid, dien, interpretadons based on these graphs must be made widi caudon. In most cases, bivanate plots are best used to to reveal or illustrate potential relanonships. diat are dien either confirmed or rejected widi other lines of evidence. Several patterns are worth noting in Figures S. 17 dirough S. 19. Each of these patterns illustrate reladonships between clays and compositional groups diat occur on numerous bivariate plots. The recurrence of these patterns across several axes suggest that diey are not fortuitous, but diat diey reflect die true underlying structure of die data set. For example, in all of these figures I'hoeilix Popoqueria UCSQO = lucson Mis = Catoliiia Mis Rincon Mis == lortolitu Mis. = Silverbell Mis - Other = Biawley Wash = Santa Ciui O I 0 0? O 0 1 O 00 O.Ot O 02 O 03 O 04 PCO ) Figure 5.17. "Tempered" clays (i.e., simulated clay-sand mixtures) plotted relative to principal components I and 2 of the 721 sherd data set. Ellipses represent 90% conHdence intervals for membership in the compositional reference groups. lucsun Mts Culalina Mts Rincuii Mts lorlolila Mts Silveibell Mis = Other = Brawley Wosli Saitla Cru2 n (> O H 1 0 I 2 \ A 1 6 1 8 cw Figure 3.18. Logged L-csium and cobalt values in tlie "tempered" clays (i.e., simulated clay-sand mixtures). Ellipses represent 90% confidence intervals for membership in the compositiimal reference groups. 2" liicsod Mts. ColQlina Mis Rinco(» Mts loilolito Mts Siluerliell Mis Othef Uruwluy Wush Sonta Cfui J.ti Figure 5.19. U>ggcJ stroniium and sixlium values in the "tempered" clays (i.e., simulated clay-sand mixtures). Hllip.sus ^ represent 90% contldcncc intervals fi)r membership in the compositional reference groups. S 161 Group F is quite distant from the single TonoUta Mountain clay sample. The differences between this clay and Group F are not confined to one or two elements, but are characteristic of numerous elements. Furthermore, these differences are quite substantial. For example, while the Tortolita Mountain clay has the highest amount of Co and the lowest amount of Cs of any of the analyzed clays. Group F shows the opposite patterning relative to the other compositional groups (see Figure 5.18). Odier significant differences between Group F and the Tonolita clay are their proportions of Cr, Sc, Mn, Na, Cs, and Hf. Group F also differs substantially from the the alluvial clays collected from the Santa Cmz River and die Brawley Wash. In Figures 5.17 through 5.19. the clays that overlap with Group F tend to be those that were collected from the mountain areas. In particular, the Tucson Mountain clays and Group F share a tendency to have high concentrations of Cs and low concentrations of Na relative to the other clays and compositional groups. Although the Tucson Mountains are not believed to be the source of the clays used in the Group F sherds. Group F pastes may contain argillic clays collected from odier areas. This Inference, while admittedly tentative, is suggested by the similarities exhibited between Group F and the clays collected firom mountain exposures. These clays and Group F tend to have high concentrations of Cs and low concentrations of Co and Na relative to the alluvial clays. Group G exhibits low concentrations of Ca. Sr. and Na relative to the other compositional groups. Clays exhibiting these patterns are those collected from the Tucson Mountains, from Brawley Wash, and from die Pan Quemado reservoir in the Silverbell Mountains. For many elemental concentrations, the Brawley Wash clays show the greatest overlap with Group G (see Figure 5.19. for example). The Santa Cruz clays, in contrast, tend to overlap with Groups A. BC. 162 and E on several axes. The potential significance of these patterns are discussed in the following section. Discussion Eight compositional groups have been identified in die 721 sherd data set. Of these, five (Groups A. BC. E. F. and G) are associated with the study area and three (Phoenix, Papagueria. and Soudi Tucson) are associated with other regions. The production areas of these groups are unknown, although some hypotheses can be advanced. The paucity of sherds firom the Marana and Los Robles communities assigned to die Phoenix. Papagueria. and Soudi Tucson groups suggests diat sherds from these groups were produced outside of die smdy area. By contrast. Groups A dtfough G contain primarily sherds from the communities, suggesting diat they were produced in or near diese areas. Chemical data obtained from clays indicate that with additional clay sampling, it may eventually be possible to identify areas containing chemically similar clays. The chemical similarity of the two unlevigated Tucson Mountain clay samples, for example, suggests that diis argillic horizon may be sufficiendy homogenous to be characterized through die analysis of only a few samples. Because multiple samples from other primary clays were not analyzed, die range of chemical variability in diese odier deposits is unknown. In general, however, the potential for identifying geological facies based on clay chemistry ;^pears to be higher for clays from non-alluvial dian alluvial sources. Some chemical trends, however, are nonedieless hinted at for die alluvial clays. A comparison of chemical data obtained from die Brawley Wash and Santa Cruz River clays suggests die possibility diat diese two rivers can be distinguished chemically. Additionally, as discussed above, diere is some suggestion diat transitional elements increase as clays are collected further 163 downstream (nordi). This possibility was raised earlier by P. Fish et ai. (1992b), after examining the chemical patterning of the compositional groups. Figure 5.20 shows all eight compositional groups plotted relative to transitional elements Co and Sc. As this figure indicates, sherds in the Phoenix group tend to have higher concentrations of these two elements than sherds in die Tucson Basin groups (i.e.. South Tucson and Groups A through G). Because Phoenix is located norUi of the Tucson Basin, these patterns support the interpretation that transitional elements decline as one moves north in southern Arizona. The P^agueria group is intermediate between the Phoenix and Tucson groups. This group was interpreted by P. Fish et. al. (1992b) as deriving possibly ttom the area west of the Tucson Basin. An alternative interpretation, however, is that it was produced in the Casa Grande area located between the Tucson and Phoenix basins. Of the 26 sherds assigned to the Papagueria group, eight were collected from the Jackrabbit Ruin in the Papagueria. Because of the high percentages of Tanque Verde Red-on-brown ceramics at that site. P. Fish et al. (I992b;243) suggested the Papagueria was the probable source area of those sherds. Seven of the sherds, however, came ftom the site of Casa Grande and another eight were collected firom AA:6;2 (ASM), a site located north of the Tucson Basin and south of Casa Grande. The relatively high proportion of sherds ftom the Papagueria group assigned to these sites at least raises the possibility of a nordiem source for the Papagueria group. Because none of die compositional groups could be matched directly with any of the clays, production sources of the compositional groups remain unknown. Nonetheless, some tentative hypotheses can be advanced. The higher concentrations of transitional elements in A. E. and G relative to BC and F raise the possibility that they were produced somewhere to the north of the latter two groups. Similarities between Group G and the clays from Brawley Wash (iirther suggest that Group G may have been produced somewhere in the general vicinity of the Brawley Wash > Phoenix BC S. Tucson CI a> o r~» 0 a 0 9 I O 1 \ 1 2 I I -1 I l-igure 5.20. Logged cobali and scandium values for (lie cighl compositional reference groups. 165 region. P. Fish et al. (1992b) raise the possibility that Marana-BC (here referred to as Group BC) contained clays collected from the Santa Cruz River. The data presented here (see Table 5.11) tentatively support diis hypothesis. Although Group BC shows any negligible probabilities of containing any of the clay-sand mixtures considered here, the closest correlations are with clays from the Santa Cruz River.* Finally, a comparison of Group F with the clay-sand mixnires suggests that Group F may not have been manu^tured in die Tonolita Mountain area. This suggestion is based on die dissimilarity between Group F and die single high-quality Tonolita Mountain clay that was analyzed. The hypotheses raised above are admittedly speculative and. at this time, are based on limited evidence. In die following chapter, the evidence obtained from the chemical analyses is compared against diat obtained from the petrographic studies in order to strengthen intepretations about production and distribution patterns. " Although some of the Santa Cruz River clays exhibit higher probabilities of belonging to other compositional groups, it must be remembered that probabilities reflect not only chemical similarities but the group's sample size and chemical heterogeneity. Because Group BC contains aatge number of members and is (airly homogenous relative to other groups, its probabilities cannot be compared direcdy to other groups containing fewer members and exhibiting greater chemical homogeneity. 166 CHAPTER SIX PATTERNS OF CERAMIC PRODUCTION, DISTRIBUTION, AND CONSUMPTION IN THE STUDY REGION In tbe last two chapters, data obtained from the compositional analysis of Tanque Verde Red-on-brown ceramics were presented. To develop inferences about economic organization within the study region, these data are compared with one another and with other lines of evidence in the present chapter. The chapter is divided into four sections. In the first part, economic relations between sites and between the Marana and Los Robles communities are investigated. This is accomplished by examining how and where Tanque Verde Red-on-brown ceramics were produced, distributed, and consumed within the study region. Tbe relationship between production location (i.e., compositional group) and ceramic morphology and decoration are examined in the second section. In the third section, intra-site patterns at the Marana platform mound village are investigated to determine whether residents living near tbe platform mound maintained different exchange ties than residents living in other areas of the village. These three sections inform on the parameters of economic variation discussed in the research design (see Table 3.1). Once these parameters have been evaluated, die research questions raised in Chapter Three can be answered. These answers, specific to the interpretation of the Marana and Los Robles communities, are outlined in the chapter's final section. The theoretical implications of these interpretations are discussed in Chapter Seven. Inter-site and Inter-community Organization This section examines general patterns of ceramic production, distribution, and consumption between the various sites and the two communities. Although consumption 167 logically follows production and distribution, it is the first of the economic components to be considered below. This organization was selected because many aspects of production and distribution can be evaluated only through a consideration of consumption patterns. Consumption Consumption is perhaps the easiest of tiie three components of the economic system to measure archaeologically. In diis section, as elsewhere in this chapter, inferences derive largely ftom a consideration of compositional group distribution. The identification of compositional groups was successfully accomplished through the chemical analysis of the ceramic pastes. The petrographic analyses, in contrast, were less successful in partitioning the sherds into meaningful groups. The results of the petrographic study suggest that the sands present in die sherds do not fall into discrete groups, but represent a continuum of mineralogical inclusions. Accordingly, in die present chapter it is the chemical compositional groups- rather dian diose derived from the petrographic analyses— diat form the basis of die study. Tables 6.1 dirough 6.3 present information concerning die consumption patterns of the various sites examined. In Table 6.1. die number of sherds assigned to each compositional group is listed by site. To aid in the interpretation of these data, the proportion of sherds assigned to each group is listed in Table 6.2 (for sites in die Marana and Los Robles communities) and Table 6.3 (for sites in odier regions). Four economic parameters related to consumption are relevant to die present study (see Table 3.1). These are (a) nucleation of consumers, (b) segregation, (c ) taxonomic richness of die consumer assemblages, and (d) evenness of the consumer assemblages. Using die data presented in Tables 6.1 dirough 6.3. each of diese parameters is evaluated below. Tuhle 6.1. Number of Sherds by Site Assigned to Each Chemical CompDsilional Group Provenience A BC E F G South Papa- Phoenix Unassigned TOTAL Tucson gueria Manilla Community Maraiia Mound 49 58 6 - 2 1 94 210 Los Morteros 10 12 I 1 - n 35 Huniingtoii 8 7 1 - - 13 29 Chicken Ranch 8 II 2 - 1 10 32 AA:I2;674 - 3 - - 1 4 Muclias Castas 1 - 1 17 - 12 31 Rancho Bajo - - - - 1 1 Raiiclio Denio 3 I I - - 5 10 AA; 12:646 - - - - 4 4 La Vaca Entcnna - - - 8 1! 19 SucAo dc Saguaro 1 - 2 - 9 7 19 . AA:8;28 - - - - 1 1 AA:8;31 - - - - 1 1 2 AA:8;80 - - - - - 1 1 AA:8;82 - - - - - 2 2 AA:8;86 1 - - - - - 1 Oilier lowland ' 1 1 - - - 2 4 Odtcr upland' 1 - 4 - 2 4 11 a> OO Table 6.1. Number of Sherds by Site Assigned to Each Chemical Compositional Group (continued) Provenience A BC E F G South Papa- Phoenix Uiiassigned TOTAL Tucson gueria Uts Kohles Community Robles Mound 1 2 - 1 6 17 27 Ccrro Prieio s 1 - - 4 14 24 Hog Fann 5 1 5 1 1 17 30 . Cuke Raiicli 2 1 7 - 20 30 Piiial Air Park - - - 1 3 4 AA:ll;i3 - - - . 3 3 AA: 11:43 - - - 1 1 AA:7:II0 - - - - I I AA;7:128 1 - - . 1 2 . AA:7:43 - - - 3 3 AA:7:76 1 - - - - 1 AA;7;9 - I - 2 - - 4 7 Oilier' - - - 1 8 9 Northern Tucson Bosin > Hoiteca 6 - - 1 1 4 14 Ina-Silvcrbell 1 - - - . 2 3 Conui 5 19 - - 1 8 33 Southern Tucson Bosin A-Mouniuiii - - - - 7 3 10 . Martinez Hill - - - - I 1 Punta de Aguu - - • - - 7 7 Sulida del Sol - - - • 7 5 12 Tilble 6.1. Number of ShcrUii by Site Assigned lo Each Chemical Compositional Group (continued) Provenience A BC E F G Sautli Papa- Phoenix Uiiassigned TOTAL Tucson gueria Emtern Tucson Basin Taiiquc Vcrdc Ruiii . .... 2 • - 8 10 University Indian Ruin ...... 44 Whipiail ..... 4. . 6 10 Northern Santa Cruz River Volley AA;6:2 ...... 8 - - 8 Phoenix Casa Grande ...... 7 .6 13 Las Colinas ...... 2 II 2 15 Pueblo Grande I ----- I - I 3 Fonifled Hill . 2 - - - - - 8 10 Popognerio Jackrabbit ..... - 8 - 2 10 TOTAL 107 125 31 20 39 23 26 M 339 721 ' Includes iM)iiliubiiaiii>n sites and sites of unknown fuimiion Table 6.2. Pcrcenl of Sherils from Marana and Los Rohles Community Sites by Chemical Group Provenience A BC E F G S. Tltcson Unassigned TOTAL N Marana Community Lowlaiul Sites Maruivi MtiuiiU 23 3 27.6 2.9 1.0 0,5 44.8 210 Lus MoriertMi 28.6 34.3 2.9 2.9 - 3J 4 35 Huntington 27.6 24.1 3.4 • - 44.8 29 Chicken Ranch 25.0 34 4 6.3 • - 3.1 31.3 32 Muchus Casaii 3.2 - 3.2 54 8 - 38.7 31 Other hiwluiul hubitaiiun^ 15 8 21.1 5.3 - • - 57.9 19 Otiier lowland 25.0 2 5 - - • 50.0 4 Uphuu! Sites Upland Cunipuund ' 2.6 5 3 - 44.7 47.4 38 Otlusr upland liabiiatiun - - - 16.7 83.3 6 Oilier upland ' 16.7 33.3 - 16.7 33.3 12 Los Robles Community Rubles Mound 3.7 7.4 - 3.7 22.2 63.0 27 Cerro Prieto 20.8 4 2 - - 16.7 58.3 24 Hog Fann 16 7 3 3 16,7 3.3 3.3 56.7 30 Cake Ranch 6.7 3 3 23 3 - - 66.7 30 Other Imbitatiun 8.0 4.0 - 160 72 0 25 Other' - - - - IQO.O 6 ' Thciic iiiicrdii derive from iioiUubiiaiioii slics aiid siics of unknown function. ^ TliCiic slicrds arc froni iJie sites of La Vaca linfcnna and SucAo de Saguaro. See test for an explanation of wliy slierds from tlicsc sites were conibiitcd. Table 6.3. Percem of Sherds Recovered from Outside of the Study Region, by Site and Chemical Group Provenience A BC G S. Tucson Papagueria Phoenix Unassigned TOTAL Northern Tucson Basin Hoilgcii 14.3 42.9 7.1 7.1 - - 28.6 14 Conu) 15.2 57.6 3.0 - - - 24.2 33 TomI Northern Tucson 16.0 50.0 2.0 2.0 - - 28.0 50 Southern Tucson Btisin A-Mouniain - - - 70.0 - - 30.0 10 Sulida del Sul - - - 58.3 - - 41.7 12 Southern Tucson Basin - - - 46.7 - - 5i.J JO Eastern Tucson Basin Tauque Vcrdc Ruiii - - - 20.0 - - 80.0 10 Wliipiail - - - 40.0 - - 60.0 10 Total Eastern Tttcson - - - 25.0 - - 75.0 24 Northern Santa Cruz AA:6:2 - - - - 100.0 - - 8 PaiHipagueria Jackrabbii - - - - 80.0 - 20.0 10 Phoenix Cusa Grande - - - - 53.8 - 46.2 13 Las Colinas - - - • 73.3 - 13.3 15 i'ordflcd Hill - 20.0 - - - - 80.0 10 Total Phoenix 2.4 4.9 - - 24.4 20.8 41.5 41 173 Figure 6.1 graphically illustrates the degree of nucleation and segregation tor the consumption of Tanque Verde Red-on-brown ceramics in the Marana and Los Robles communides. The data in this figure derive from Table 6.2, although only (hose sites having sample sizes of greater than 20 are included. It should be noted diat in Table 6.2 and Figure 6.1. the sites of La Vaca Enfenna and Sueno de Sagauaro have been combined and are called jointly the "Upland Compound." These data were combined because of die proximity of the two sites tu one anodier (they are only O.S km apart) and die similari^ of their ceramic assemblages. The intbrmadon presented in Table 6.1 shows that die two sites exhibit similar consumption patterns. Nucleation of die consumers refers to die degree to which consumers of particular vessel categories (in diis case, die compostdonal groups) are nucleated or dispersed across die landscape (Pool 1992). In Chapter Three, I proposed diat if consumers of die various compositional groups were highly nucleated, dien the ceramics assigned to the groups should also be highly nucleated. Figure 6.1 indicates diat diere is a great deal of variability in diis parameter. For example, in the Marana and Los Robles communities, die consumers of ceramics assigned to compositional Group F were largely confined to the site of Muchas Casas. Although a few Group F sherds were recovered from other sites (i.e., from Huntington, Cerro Prieto, and Hog Farm), only Muchas Casas is characterized by high proportions of diese sherds. In contrast. Group A sherds are found diroughout die smdy region. These sherds are frequent at sites near die nordiem end of die Tucson Mountains, on the bajada of die Tortoiita Mountains, and in the Samaniego Hills. These patterns show diat the consumers of Group A sherds were relatively dispersed in comparison to consumers of Group F sherds. Fmally, it should be noted diat several groups are unevenly distributed across die landscape. Group G sherds, for example, are found at die Upland Compound sites of die Marana community and at several sites (particularly Cerro Prieto and Robles Mound) in die Los 174 \ v«p, J . ,»• * 't . . Samani§go ' 5r/vfr •5*^. y ">«. ''<1 V ••'///% vX \ ; .•n^ r 1 2 t. Cake Ranch Z. CerroPheto 3. Robles Mound unao. 4. HogFann 5. Upland Coiapaund 6. MaranaMouod 7. MuchasCasas 3. Oiicken Ranch 9. Hunnngton 10. LosMbrteros Figure 6.1. Proportions of sherds assiped to the various chemical reference groups, for sites in the Marana and Los Robles Communities. 175 Robles commuoities. Sites found i}etween these two areas, however, are either lacking these sherds (in the case of the Marana Mound site) or contain only low frequencies (in the case of Hog Farm). Similarly, in the Los Robles community Group E sherds are frequent at the sites of Cake Ranch and Hog Farm, but are absent from the assemblages of the intervening sites of Cerro Prieto and Los Robles. These data suggest that consumption patterns are not determmed by the proximity of the consumers either to one another or to the producers or distributors of the ceramics. Segregation refers to the differential distribution of compositional groups between sites (Pool 1992). This parameter informs on the degree to which the residents of different sites produced their own ceramics and/or participated in the same exchange spheres. If sites participated in different exchange spheres, the assemblages of each sites should contain differing proportions of ceramics from the various compositional groupings. As with nucleatiun. an examination of Figure 6.1 shows diat the degree of segregation between sites is highly variable. Four sites- Marana Mound. Los Morteros. Huntington, and Chicken Ranch- exhibit highly similar ceramic assemblages. Each of these sites exhibits a similar range and proportion of compositional groups. This patterning suggests that the residents of these four sites shared exchange networks. Consumption of ceramics at other sites, however, is more segregated. As discussed above. Muchas Casas and the Upland Compound sites exhibit ceramic assemblages highly segregated from those of other sites in the Marana community. In the Los Robles community, the sites of Cake Ranch and Hog Farm are relatively similar to one another, but differ from the sites of Robles Mound and Cerro Prieto. Tcaonomic richness and evenness refer to the variability, or diversity, present in the consumer assemblages. Richness refers to the number of di^rent compositional groups in the consumer assemblage, and allows inferences to be made about the number of producers paaonized 176 by each site. In general, the greater the number of compositional groups represented in the consumer assemblage, the greater the number of producing areas (sites or potters) diat were patronized. In the present study, however, two caveats to this assumption should be kept in mind. First, the number of compositionai groups may not accurately reflect die number production locations. This is because a single production area could have exploited more than one clay source or, conversely, a single source could have been exploited by more than one production area. Additionally, because of the large proportion of unassiped sherds, the number ot composidonal groups actually present in any particular site collection is unknown. This is especially significant for the sites from the Los Robles community, where the number of unassigned sherds is particularly high. Despite these problems, examining the taxonomic richness through die known compositional groups is nonetheless instructive. Because sites in die Los Robles community have more unassigned sherds than those in die Marana community, however, the two communities are examined independentiy of one another. In contrast to richnness, evenness refers to the relative frequency of die sherds assigned to each compositional group. This parameter describes how evenly die sample from each site is distributed among die compositional groups, and allows inferences to be made about die intensity of ceramic exchange between producers and particular sites. The greater the intensity of exchange between a producing area and a site, die greater should be die number of ceramics from diat site sourced to die producing area. The taxonomic richness and diversity of various sites from the Marana community are illustrated in Rgures 6.2 and 6.3. These figures derive from a statistical program developed by fCintigh (1984) to offiset die effects of sample size. This randomization procedure is important since diversity and sample size tend to be correlated (see Kintigh 1984; Mills 1994; Rhode 1988). 177 MM LM M cn u c «UP XIu 'S, MC O 20 SO 100 200 SOO Sample Size Figuie 6.2. Compos^nal diversity (riciiness compooeot) of ceramics recovered from various sites in the Marana Community. 'MM* refers to the Marana Mound site, 'LM' refers to Los Moneros, 'H' refers to Huntington Ruin, 'CH* refers to Cbiclcen Ranch, 'MC refers to Muchas Casas. and 'UP* refers to the Upland Compound sites (i.e.. La Vaca Enferma and Suefio de Saguaro). Dotted lines mark the 95 percent confidence interval. Sample Size Figure 6.3. Compositional diversity (evenness component) of ceramics recovered from various sites in die Marana Community. 'MM' refers to the Marana Mound site, 'LM' refers to Los Moneros, 'H' refers to Huntington Ruin, "CH' refers to Chicken Ranch, 'MC refers to Muchas Casas, and 'UP' refers to the Upland Compound sites (i.e.. La Vaca Enferma and Sueiio de Saguaro). Dotted lines mark the 9S percent confidence interval. 178 Figure 6.2 demonstrates that for any given sample size, only one site examined in the Marana Community had fewer composidonal groups than expected. This site was the Upland Compound site. These data patterns suggest that die residents of the Upland Compound sites may have maintained more restricted exchange des than residents of odier sites. Figure 6.3 shows chat for three of die Marana conununi^ sites (Los Morteros, Huntington, and Chicken Ranch), the analyzed sherds are relatively evenly distributed across die composidonal groups. For the sites ot Marana Mound, Muchas Casas, and the Upland Compound, however, die sherds are distributed among die compositional groups less evenly dian expected at die 95 percent confidence level. This implies diat die latter three sites maintained significandy stronger exchange ties widi some producers of Tanque Verde Red-on-brown ceramics dian widi others. These same parameters are graphically illustrated for the Los Robles community sites in Figures 6.4 and 6.5. Rgure 6.4 shows diat only die Hog Farm site assemblage lies outside the 95 percent confidence interval, having a greater dian expected number of compositional groups. The greater richness of the Hog Farm assemblage likely relates to the location of die site between the Santa Cruz and Brawley rivers. This location would have placed the residents of Hog Farm in an ideal location to interact widi residents of die Marana community, nordiem Tucson Basin. Avra Valley, and die remainder of die Los Robles communis. None of the Los Robles sites have assemblages less evenly distributed dian expected at die 95 percent confidence level (Figure 6.5). The data illustrated in Rgures 6.1 dirough 6.5 indicate the following patterns. First, die type and proportion of compositional groups found at die Marana Mound site are similar to diose found at die sites of Los Morteros. Huntington, and Chicken Ranch. Significandy, diese are die sites in the community that exhibit high proportions of Tanque Verde Red-on-brovm ceramics (see Chapter Two). The odier two sites examined (Muchas Casas and die Upland Compound) exhibit 179 Sample Size Figure 6.4. Compositional diversity (richness component) of ceramics recovered from various sites in the Los Robles Conununity. "RM* refers to the Robles Mound site. "CP" refers to Cerro Prieto, "HF" refers to Hog Farm, and "CR" refers to Caice Ranch. Dotted lines mark the 9S percent confidence interval. X cs B X HF , CP , RM ta at V CR G C u > ai 20 so Sample Size Figure 6.5. Compositional diversity (evenness component) of ceramics recovered from various sites in the Los Robles Community. "RM" refers to die Robles Mound site, "CP" refers to Cerro Prieto, "HF" refers to Hog Farm, and "CR" refers to Cake Ranch. Dotted lines mark the 95 percent confidence interval. 180 very different consumption patterns. Second, consumption patterns do not reflect community boundaries. Altliougb some compositional groups are more frequent in one conununity than in the other, all five of the groups crosscut communis boundaries. Fmally, ceramic consumption is not determined by site proximity. In several cases, compositional groups are found at widely separated sites but not at sites located more closely together. As discussed above, for example. Group G comprises nearly half the analyzed ceramic collection from the Upland Compound site in the Marana community. Despite the proximity of the Upland Compound to die Marana Mound site and to Muchas Casas. Group G sherds are rare or absenct from diose sites. However, this group is present in significant quantities at the more distant sites of Cerro Prieto and Hog Farm. Production In the research design I proposed to evaluate diree parameters (see Table 3.1) related to the organization of production. Before these parameters can be evaluated, however, the location of production must be assessed for each of the compositional groups. Below. 1 use several lines of evidence to develop inferences about where the Tanque Verde Red-on-brown ceramics might have been produced. This is followed by an evaluation of the economic parameters outlined in Chapter Three. Location of Production. Several lines of evidence are used to evaluate produaion location. First, the chemical and petrographic data are compared to learn how the major constituents of the sherds (the pastes and die aplastic inclusions) correspond to die raw materials collected from the area. Second, the distribution of compositional groups and of ceramic production tools are examined. These and other lines of evidence are then integrated to derive conclusions not only about the probable areas where the Tanque Verde Red-on-brown ceramics were produced, but also about the areas where they were not produced. 181 Comparison of Chemical and Petrographic Data. The compositional analyses were undertaken widi two goals in mind: to identify groups of compositionaily similar sherds, and to identify die probable production locations of these groups. As discussed above, the first goal was met through die chemical analysis of die ceramic pastes. Interpretation of where the ceramics in diese groups were produced, however, is more problematical. In Chapter Five, die chemistry of die ceramic pastes was compared widi diat of raw materials (clays and sands) to obtain informadon relevant to the second goal. Additional evidence of where diese sherds were produced derives from a comparison of the chemical and petrographic data. As discussed in Chapter Four, diin sections of 25 sherds were examined under die polarizing microscope. The sherds were placed by Diana Kamilli into two primary groups and nine subgroups (Appendix 5). The primary groups consisted of a group of sherds containing primarily felsite-rich (or volcanic) sands, and a group containing a mixture of felsidc and granitic grains. The correlation of diese petrographic groups with die chemical groups is presented in Table 6.4. It should be noted diat. because die selection of die 25 sherds for diin section analysis was made before the results of the chemical study were obtained, some chemical compositional groups are not represented in die diin section sherds presented in Table 6.4. For comparison purposes. Table 6.5 presents die correlation of die chemical groups with die petrographic reassignments made by Harry (see Chapter Four). This table inchides data for all 446 sherds analyzed mineralogically. Because die petrographic groups are based, in diis case, on binocular examination rather dian the diin-section analyses, diey are considered less reliable dian diose presented in Table 6.4. The information in Tables 6.4 and 6.5 suggests diat two of the chemical groups. Groups E and F. are associated primarily with felsite-rich sands. Such sands are found in volcanic 182 Table 6.4. Number of Thin-Sectiooed Sherds Assigned to Each Chemical Group, by Kamilli's Petrographic Groups Petrographic Group Qemical Compositional Groups TOTAL Assigned by Kamilli A BC E G Unassigned Felsiie-Rich l.l - I I 3 5 1.2 - I 1 2 1.3 - - I I 1.4 - . 1 I Total Felsite-Rich - / 2 6 9 Mixed 2.1 - 1 4 5 2 2 - . 1 I 3.1 - . I I 4.1 5 - I 6 5.1 - 2 1 2 Total Mixed 5 3 8 16 TOTAL 5 3 I 2 14 25 petro^cies, located in the study region exclusively on the west side of the Santa Cruz River. Groups A and BC. in contrast, appear to contain sands primarily of mixed origin. An unresolved quesDon is where these sands come from. As discussed in Chapter Four, they could come from either a small tributary or bajada wash draming an area of mixed bedrock sources, or from a higher-order stream (such as the Santa Cruz River) containing sands deposited from various sources. Significantly, all five of the Group A sherds petrographically analyzed by Kamilli were placed into the same petrographic subcategory. This category, termed Group 4.1 by Kamilli. is characterized by tempers containing grains of intermediate granite (that is. granite exhibiting both sodic and calcic plagioclase). Kamilli (Appendix 3) reports that this intermediate granite lacks the 183 Table 6.S. Number of Thin-Sectioned Sherds Assigned to Each Chemical Group. According to Harry's Petrograpbic Reassignments Petro. Group Chemical Compositional Groups TOTAL Assigned by Harry A BC E F G South Un- Tucson assigned Fekite-Rich I - - 6 5 - 1 21 33 1 (C?) 1 I 1 (J?) 1 I 1 (Jl?) 2 2 Mixed 2 34 49 I I 3 - 72 160 Indeterminate 32 39 19 12 26 1 120 249 TOTAL 66 88 26 18 29 2 217 446 cataclastic texture that is so common in many Tucson Basin sands. Because this cataclasis is also Tortolita source area for these tempers (Appendix 5, page 4). However, the Group 4.1 sherds also contain more than IS percent felsitic grains, minerals that are commonly lacidng in Tortoliu sands. Of the 41 sand samples that have been petrographically analyzed from the Tunolita Mountains, the mean amount of felsite is only 0.12 percent and the maximum for any sample is 1.3 percent (data on file. Center for Desert Archaeology). The sands contained in the Group G sherds appear to vary between the sherds. According to Kamilli's groupings (Table 6.4), Group G contains primarily felsite-rich sands. According to the petrographic groups assigned by Harry (based on the binocular identifications; Table 6.5). however, these sherds contain sands of mixed origin. These differences suggest that the Group 184 G sherds contain particularly heterogeneous sands, possibly indicating that they were collected from a higher-order stream. How do the conclusions presented above correspond to those derived from die chemical analyses? In the previous chapter, it was noted that none of the sampled geological clays could be matched directly with any of the ceramic compositional groups. Some tentative conclusions about where the clays may have been obtained nonedieless were advanced. In Chapter Five, it was suggested that the Group G sherds may have been made of clays collected from the general Brawley Wash area. Although the petrographic data show that these sherds were not tempered with sands from any of the known Avra Valley or Brawley Wash petro^ies, they do contain sands deriving from somewhere west of the Santa Cruz River. It is possible, though unproven. diat the sands come from an unsampled area in the Brawley Wash area. This tentative conclusion is strengthened by the presence of microcline, radier than unieatured-or-perthidc alkali feldspars, in the Group G (Kamilli Group 1) sherds. Heidke et al. (Appendix S) report that microcline tends to be more common in die Brawley Wash, whereas unleatured-or-perthitic feldspars tend to be more frequent in Tucson Basin sands. Of die other chemical compositional groups presented in Tables 6.4 and 6.5. diere are very tew clues about where die clays in diese sherds may have been collected. As discussed in Chapter F'tve. P. Fish et al. (1992b) suggested that die Group EC sherds may have been made from Santa Cruz River clays collected irom the northern tip of die Tucson Mountains. As shown in Tables 6.4 and 6.5. sherds in diis group contain sands of mixed origin. The source of diese sands is unknown, although die Santa Cruz River is one possibility. It was also tentatively suggested in Chapter Five diat die production area of sherds in Groups A. E, and G was north of diat for sherds in Groups F. BC. and die soudiem Tucson Basin. This is a difficult proposition to evaluate from 185 the petrographic data, although the absence of cataclasdc textures in the sands of the Group A sherds (Group 4.1 Kamilli's petrographic groups) suggests that Group A may have derived somewhere north of the Tucson Basin proper (see Appendix S). Do Sands Equal Production Location? The petrography data sununarized in Chapter Four suggest that few or none of the analyzed sherds were produced in the Samaniego or Tonolita petrofacies, two of the major petrofacies encompassing the Marana and Los Robles communities. This would indicate that, unless potters were using nonlocal sands to construct their vessels, these ceramics were not produced in either of die petro^ies. In the present sudy. it has been assumed that the prehistoric potters used die nearest available sands in tempering dieir pots. This assumpdon forms the basis for using petrographic data to determine production location. If die assumption is incorrect, dien our inferences concerning economic organizadon may also be incorrect. Because of die significance of diis issue, several additional lines of evidence were examined to determine whedier die potters of die Marana and Los Robles communities might have used nonlocal sands in die manuf^ture Tanque Verde Red-on-brown ceramics. As discussed in Chapter Three, on theoretical grounds it is considered unlikely diat the potters would have used nonlocal sands. Because sands are ubiquitous in die sudy region, residents of virtually every site in die Marana and Los Robles communides had access to a nearby sand source. Additionally, an ethnographic survey shows diat most potters who use sand as a tempering agent travel less dian 1 Ion to obtain die material (Miksa and Heidke 1995). This finding has also been supported archaeologically. Studies of Hohokam pottery production have demonstrated diat. in diose areas studied, prehistoric potters tempered dieir vessels with die nearest available sands (Abbott 1994a: 142; Abbott et al. 1991:5; Harry 1997a, 1997b: Heidke 1993. 1997). 186 A review of other petrographic studies indicate that the Hobokam were not averse to using Tortolita and Samaniego sands as tempering agents. Two petrographic snidies other dian the cunent projea have been conducted in the vicinity. The first of these was carried out by James Lombard (1987b) who analyzed plain, red-on-brown. and red ware ceramics from die Marana and Los Robles conununides and other areas. Table 6.6 summarizes Lombard's results for die ceramics ftom the smdy region. The data in this table show that most (80%) of die plain wares from the Marana Mound were tempered with sands from the Tortolita petrofiu:ies. the petro^cies local to that site. Plain wares from die sites in the Los Robles commum'ty (Cerro Prieto and Robles Mound) were more variable, but a small proportion (18%) were also made widi local, or Samaniego. sands. None of the 18 Tanque Verde Red-on-brown sherds analyzed by Lombard contained sands from die Tortolita petrofacies or even from other basement sources. Interestingly, and in contrast to die findings of the present project, a high proportion (44%) of diese sherds were reported to contain Samaniego sands. Although it is possible that Lombard's sherds contained Samaniego sands, it seems more likely that die temper was misidentified. Lombard's research represents die first substantial petrographic smdy conducted in die Tucson Basin and adjacent regions, and as a result was based on less intensive sand sampling and less refined analytical techniques dian die current project. Thus, it seems likely diat the red-on-brown sherds analyzed by Lombard- like many of those analyzed in die present project- contained felsitic-rich sands from west of die Santa Cruz River, but not necessarily from die Samaniego petrofacies. Finally, the data in Table 6.6 indicate diat a high proportion of die Lombard's red ware sherds contain Tortolita sands. Although Lombard's work represents die only thin-section analysis conducted of sherds from die Marana Mound. Cerro Prieto. and Robles Mound sites, binocular and hand lens examination of other red and plain ware sherds from die Marana Mound site support his 187 Table 6.6. Results of Lombard's Petrographic Analysis of Tanque Verde Phase Sherds from the Marana and Los Robles Communities * Ware and Site Basement Supracrustai Other TOTAL Tortoiia Unimown Samaniego Unknown Plain Marana Mound 8 2 10 Cerro Prieto 2 7 9 Robles Mound 1 I 6 8 Red-on-brown Marana Mound 3 9 12 Cerro Prieto 5 5 Robles Mound 1 1 Red Marana Mound 6 1 7 Cerro Prieto Robles Mound 4 4 TOTAL 14 1 11 11 19 56 interpretations. These analyses indicate that many red and plain ware sherds from the mound site contain metamorphic sands like diose found in die Tonolita sands (Paul Fish, personal communication 1996; Robbie Heckman. personal communication 1996). The second petrographic study conducted in die region is an analysis of sherds from the site of Los Morteros (Heidke I99Sb). That snidy indicated diat Tortolita sands are common in wares other dian Tanque Verde Red-on-brown. For example, in the Late Rincon (late pre-Classic) phase, some 14 percent of the red-on-brown sherds are identified as having Tonoliu sands: this * Data in this table derive from Lombard 1987b;TabIe 1 188 falls to less than l.S percent in the early Classic period (Heidke 199Sa:Tables F.9 and F.IO). Some 37 percent of early Classic sherds, however, were also found to contain Tortolita sands. The petrographic data summarized above indicate that the Hohokam were willing to use the Samaniego and Tortolita sands in die production of the vessels. Furthermore, die evidence suggests nodiing about diese sands that would have led potters to reject diem for use in red-on- broum vessels. The presence of Tortolita sands in die red ware ceramics suggests diat diey were used to produce vessels of similar sizes and shapes as diose found in die Tanque Verde Red-on- brown assemblage. Abboa (I98S) has argued diat red ware ceramics functioned as high-value commodities among die Hohokam; if so, it seems unlikely diat potters would have used local sands for die red ware ceramics but considered diem inadequate for other, less-valued decorated wares. Finally, die presence of carbonates in die sands of the Tanque Verde Red-on-brown vessels argues against die interpretation diat potters imported die sands. As discussed in Appendix 5. the analyzed Tanque Verde Red-on-brown sherds contain a higher dm normal quantity of carbonates. These carbonates are much less frequent in die red and plain ware sands (Robbie Heckman. personal communication 1996). Because carbonates can cause die vessel wall to spall over time, it is unlikely diat potters would have expended unnecessary effort to obtain such inferior sands. The most parsimonious explanation, dien, for die absence of Samaniego and TortoUa sands in the Tanque Verde Red-on-brown assemblage is that die vessels were not produced at sites located in these petrof^ies. Archaeological Evidence. The distribution of die compositional groups and of ceramic production tools provides anodier line of evidence for interpreting production location. The distribution of compositional groups was presented in Tables 6.1 dirough 6.3 above, and illustrated in Figure 6.1. These patterns can inform on production location dirough die 'criterion of 189 abundance" diesis (Bishop et al. 1982:201). This diesis holds diat a greater propordon of poaery is consumed at its production location dian is distributed to any odier single site. Based on diis thesis, archaeologists often interpret die site (or sites) containing die highest proportion of any compositional grouping as its probable production locale. Group A is widely distributed, but is most frequent at sites near the nordiem tip of die Tucson Mountains. Los Morteros, Huntington, and Chicken Ranch all exhibit frequencies uf greater dian 25 percent for diis group. Odier sites, especially die Marana Mound site and Cerro Prieto, have only slightiy lower frequencies. Significantiy, Group A is less frequent in die northern Tucson Basin site assemblages and is absent from die assemblages of odier areas. These patterns tentatively suggest diat the Group A vessels were made somewhere near die northern tip of the Tucson Mountains. Group BC is also widely distnbuted, aldiough its distribution varies spatially. Among die sudy region sites. Group BC sherds are most frequent at die sites of Lus Morteros and Chicken Ranch located near die soudiem portion of die study area. This group, however, is even better represented at die northern Tucson Basin sites where it represents about half of die analyzed ceramics. A northern Tucson Basin source area for Group BC sherds dierefore seems likely. The presence of mixed (volcanic and plutonic) sands in diese sherds argues against their production at upland sites such as Como. One possible production area for diese sherds is the site of Hodges, a large village located between die Santa Cruz and Rillito Rivers. The highest proportion of Group E and G sherds are found at sites in die Los Robles community and the upland areas of the Marana community. As discussed above, both groups contain sands predominately volcanic in origin. This demonstrates diat diey could not have been made in the upland Marana area. One possible production area is somewhere in or near die Los 190 Robles communis; a second possibili^ is that they were made in anodier region (for example, (he Avra Valley) and traded into the Los Robles and Marana communities. Group F sherds are frequent only at the site of Muchas Casas. There, more than half the analyzed sherd collection is assigned to this group. The petrographic data, however, show that these vessels were not produced at Muchas Casas. Their production location is therefore unknown, although their low proportion elsewhere suggests they were not made at any of die sites analyzed in this study. The distribution of ceramic production materials provides anotiier line of evidence by which to examine the issue of production location. Here, I examine die distribution of polishing stones between various sites. Woridng in the Tonto Basin, Stark and Heidke (1992:163) have noted a positive correlation between die number of polishing stones recovered from a site and the proportion of sherds containing local temper. This correlation suggests that polishing stone ftequency can inform on ceramic production intensity. In die Marana and Los Robles communities, diese data are available only for a few sites and dierefore cannot inform on all sites. Additionally, it should be kept in mind diat polishing stones only indicate die occurrence of ceramic production; they do not inform on die types of wares produced. Thus, a high proponion stones may indicate that ceramics were produced, but it does not necessarily follow diat diese ceramics were red-oa-brown. As with other lines of evidence, die polishing stone data must be compared with other information before inferences concerning production intensity are made. Table 6.7 shows the proportion of polishing stones recovered from various sites in the sudy region, as well as for other sites in the Tucson Basin. Of the other sites included here. West Branch is known to have specialized in die production of ceramics for exchange (Harry 1997a. 1997b; Heidke 1993, 1997). Not surprisingly, diat site contains die highest proportion of polishing Table 6.7. Proporcion of Polishing Stones Recovered from Various Sites Site Ratio® Period Reference Context Maram Conumtnity Maraiui Mound Site U.U8 Classic Bayman l994:Tables A-6, A-8 Midden contexts oidy Los Mortcros 0.17 Mixed' Wallace 199S;820 Mixed ASU Sites ' 0.44 Late Sedctuaiy-Classic Wallace 1995:820 Mixed ASU Sites' 0.17 Late Scdentary-Classic Bayman 1994:Tablc 4.2 Midden contexts only Uplaitd Compound" 0.08 Late Scdentaiv-Classic Bayman l994:Table 4.2 Midden contexts only Los Robtes Community Ccrro Pricto " <0.1 Classic Harry 1994 Agricultural terraccs Ccrro Pricto <0.2 Classic Downum 1993a:Table 4.1 House and agriculwral Cake Ranch " <0.01 Classic Halbirt and Stubing 1990 Mixed Other Tucson Bosin Sites West Branch- Wyoming 0.30 Scdentaiy Wallace 1993:82 Mixed and Irvington Loci West Branch- SRI Locus 0.23 Scdeiuary Harry 1994 Mixed Tanque Verde Wash 0.02 Sedentary Wallace 1995:82 Mixed Gibbons Spring 0.09 Classic Pratt 1996; Gregonis 1996 Mixed ^ After Wnlluce (199S;82), the ratio of polisliing stones was calculated as follows ((number of polishing stones/number of sherds)* 100). '' Includes nialerials spanning the Colonial ihrougli the Clasic periods. ' Tlie ASU sites are those excavated by Arizona State University (see O. Rice ed. 1987), and are Rancho Derrio, Muchas Casas, and Rancho Bajo. * These sites are Vacu Enfenna and SueiVu de Saguaro, iwo sites in the Tortoliut Mountains that were test excavated by iaines Bayman. ^ During my test cxcavaticins of tlic agricultural tcrraccs at tlie site, 994 slierds and 0 polishing stones were recovered. During Downuin's test exiavations at the site, 649 sherds and no polishing stones were recovered. " During cxcuvations at Uic site, 9417 sherds and no polishing stones were recovered. 192 ones of any of the sites.The Tanque Verde Wash site, in contrast, produced very few ceramics and obtained most of its vessels through trade (Heidke 1993. 1997). This site, as might be expected, has a very low polishing stone ratio. Finally, at the Gibbons Spring site, pottery was both produced and obtained through trade. Ceramic production clearly occurred, but nowhere near the scale of that indicated at West Branch (Heidke 19%; Kamilli 19%). The Gibbons Spring polishing stone ratio is intermediate between that of the sites of West Branch and Tanque Verde Wash. Of the Marana and Los Robles sites for which we have data, the highest proportion of polishing stones come from Los Morteros" and die sites excavated by Arizona State University (ASU). The ASU sites are Rancho Derrio, Muchas Casas, and Rancho Bajo. The ratio for these sites. 0.17. is intermediate between that for Gibbons Spring (a village characterized by both pottery production and pottery importation) and West Branch (a specialized ceramic production center). These data suggest that Los Morteros and the ASU sites produced ceramics, but not as intensively as the ceramic specialists that resided at West Branch. The Marana Mound and Upland Compound sites have ratios similar to diat of Gibbon Springs. This shows that these residents produced ceramics, but less intensively than the residents of Los Morteros and the ASU sites. Finally, the extremely low polishing stone ratios at the sites of Cerro Prieto and Cake Ranch indicates that pottery production was only rarely conducted at these Los Robles sites. The ratio of 0.44 for the ASU sites is disregarded. As Wallace (1995:820) has suggested, this ratio "may be somewhat inflated due to the high percemage of burned structures and floor assemblages recovered." The second rado (0.17) given for die ASU sites was obtained from midden contexts, and is believed to be better represeniadve of die sites' assemblages. "Aldiough die rado of polishing stones is not broken down for individual periods at (he site of Los Morteros. die propordon of polishing stones in de Classic does not appear to be substaodaily higher or fewer dian other periods (see Dan 199S;Table 8.25). 193 As discussed above, die presence of polishing stones indicates die production of ceramics but does not inform on die types of ceramics produced. The petrographic data, however, show that the ceramics produced in the Tortolita petro&cies wete largely confined to plain and red ware. Wallace (1995:820) has suggested diat at the ASU sites, pottery production focused on plain ware ceramics. He bases Uiis conclusion on the lack of hematite-stained polishing stones and the low percentages of decorated ceramics at those sites. At the Marana Mound site, in contrast, significant quantities of red pigment and hematite-stained polishing stones have been recovered (Paul Fish, personal communication 1996), suggesting diat red ware ceramics were made at that site. The presence of Tortolita sands in red ware sherds supports die interpretation diat these vessels were made at die mound site (see Table 6.6). As discussed in Chapter Sbi, die Tonoltia petrofocies encompasses die Marana Mound site. Discussion. The production location of die Tanque Verde Red-on-brown sherds remains unresolved. Although die petrographic, chemical, and archaeological data provide clues, they cannot pinpoint die villages diat made the vessels. Nonetheless, diey do inform on where die vessels were not produced. Additionally, in some cases, general production regions may tentatively be proposed. Geologically, die sherds fall into two major groups: a group containing mostly felsitic minerals and a group containing a mixture of felsitic and granitic grains. The sherds in die first group almost certainly were produced somewhere west of the Santa Cruz River, where volcanic outcrops are common. The production area(s) of sherds in die latter group is more difficult to pinpoint. They contain sands diat could derive either from an area containing a mixture of bedrock outcroppings or from a major trunk stream (such as the Santa Cruz River). Mixed bedrock outcroppings occur in diree areas of die study region: (I) in die Samaniego Hills of die Los Robles 194 community, (2) near Owl Head Buttes along die northern edge of die Tortolita Mountains, and (3) at the northern end of die Tucson Mountains. As discussed in Appendix Four, however, none of die sands sampled from diese areas match die sands found in die sherds. Among odier differences, die sands in these areas contain fewer carbonates dian most of die sherds. The Tonolita and Saroaniego sands, in particular, are easy to identify visually and are unlikely to have been missed during die mineralogical (binocular) analysis. In die Owl Head Buttes area, an absence of Classic period villages fiirther argues against this being die source location. The northern end of the Tucson Mountains is more problematical, however. This area contains two petrofacies. termed RilUto and Rillito West, diat contain sands of mixed geological origin. Again, none of die sands sampled from diese petrofacies match die sands in any of die diin-sectioned sherds. However, die blind tests suggest diat Heidke had difficulty identifying diese sands using die binocular microscope. Additionally, diere have been only a few sand samples analyzed from die Rillito West petrofacies. As discussed in Chapter Four, a limestone outcropping near diis area could be die source of some carbonates found in die sherds. Additional sampling is needed to determine whedier diis is the case. Two major trunk streams, die Brawley Wash and die Santa Cruz River, are found in die study region. The Brawley Wash contains more microcline dian most of the sherds, suggesting diat it was not die source of most of die tempers. Nor do die sands collected from die Santa Cruz River match die sands in die sherds. In contrast to bajada washes, however, die composition of trunk streams can vary significantly over time, depending on die entrenchment of die bed and on localized variations in rain&ll. Thus, the Santa Cruz River cannot be ruled out as a source of the sands. Although die Brawley River is an unlikely source (see Appendix S), die northern portions of that river have been less intensively sampled dian areas to die south. The presence of fine 195 grained sands in some Tanque Verde Red-on-brown sherds (Heidke l99S;TabIes F.9 and F. 10 and Whittlesey 1986:90) lends support to the interpretation that trunk stream sands may have been used. To sunmiarize, although we can confuiently state where the ceramics were not produced, it is more difficult to infer where they were produced. Few. if any, of the analyzed Tanque Verde Red-on-brown sherds were made in the Samaniego or Tortolita petrofocies. This indicates that neither platform mound village emphasized die production of these vessels. Sites where they may have been produced include those located near die northern dp of die Tucson Mountains (Los Morteros or Hundngton Ruin), those located adjacent to major trunk streams (Hog Farm or Hodges), and diose outside die study region and adjacent to washes diat have yet to be sampled. The production locations of individual compositional groups are likewise unknown, although some tentative inferences can be advanced. Groups A and BC bodi contain sands from mixed geological sources, perhaps indicating a production area along die Santa Cruz River. Although none of die sampled clays show a probability of more dian 0.0001 of belonging to Group A. Group BC is chemically more similar to die Santa Cruz River clays dian to any odier sampled clays. The high frequencies of Group BC sherds at sites in die nordiem Tucson Basin suggest diat diey may have been produced in that area. One possibility is diat diey were made at Hodges, a large village site located just south of die Marana community along the Santa Cruz River. Group G sherds may have been produced somewhere near Brawley Wash. This possibility is suggested by a comparison of die raw clay and ceramic paste chemistries, and by die frequency of Group G sherds in die Los Robles community. Group G sherds contain predominately felsitic sands, flmher indicating a source somewhere west of die Santa Cruz River. The production areas of Groups E and F are even more difficult to evaluate, aldiough die presence of felsitic sands in 196 Group E sherds implies they were made west of the Santa Cruz River. Unfortunately, none of the Group F sherds were analyzed using the polarizing microscope. Eghteen of these sherds, however, were examined under die binocular microscope by James Heidke. Only one of these sherds was recorded as having predominately plutonic sands; the remainder contained eidier mostly volcanic (n=5) or mixed volcanic/plutonic sands (nsl2). The mineralogy establishes that the Group F sherds could not have been produced in the Tortolita petrof^ies, an area containing predominately plutonic sands. Radier. the mineralogical variability recorded by Heidke suggests that these sherds- like many others— were made with sands from a geologically mixed source. Significantly, the ceramic pastes of the Group F sherds differ more from the single high-quality Tonolita clay sample than from any of the other sampled clays, lending support to the interpretadon diat die Group F sherds were not made in the Tortolita petrofacies. The discovery that Group F sherds were not made with Tonolita sands is especially Interesting given the frequency of these sherds at Muchas Casas. a site located in the Tonolita petrofacies. This finding reveals die importance of using caution when making inferences about production location based on ceramic frequencies. Aldiough edmographic (Graves 1991) and archaeological (Harry 1997a. 1997b: Heidke 1993, 1997) studies have shown diat producing villages will have higher frequencies of die ceramics diey produce dian will any consumer villages, it does not follow diat die site having the highest proportion of a compositional group is necessarily die producing site. Rather, die producing site may- as in the present case- be one diat has yet to be sampled. Dimensioos of Variability. Of the production parameters oudines in Table 3.1. diree are relevant to the present discussion. These are (1) context. (2) concentration (or location of production), and (3) scale. Each of diese dimensions is discussed below. 197 Context refers to the degree of elite sponsorship. Attached specialists are supported by elite patrons and produce goods for elite consumption, whereas independent specialists operate outside of elite control producing goods used by most or all households (Costin 1991). Costm (1991:125) states that these two types of production can be distinguished by the location of production: in attached specialization, production will occur near elite or governmental facilities. Recently, however, it has been argued that these two types of specialization do not describe the fiill range of elite-involved productive specializations. Accordingly, Ames (1995) has proposed a third type of specialization, that of the embedded specialist. The embedded specialist is one who makes elite goods for his or her own consumption and for consumption by other elite residents. The specialist is often a member of the elite, and produces goods for personal consumption and for consumption by other elite. As in attached specialization, embedded specialization results in production being localized near elite or governmental faciUti'es. The two can be distinguished, however, by the association of production debris with household refuse. In attached specialization, production debris should be associated either with nonresidential workshops, or with low-status households. In embedded specialization, in contrast, production occurs within the context of the elite household. In diis case, production debris should be associated with refuse firom high status households (Trubitt 1996. 1997). The present study clearly indicates diat die production of Tanque Verde Red-on-brown ceramics in the Marana and Los Robles communities was neither under elite control nor produced by die elite diemselves. Had die ceramics been produced by either embedded or attached specialists, diey should have sourced to one or both platform mounds. The fact diat residents of neidier platform mound village manufactured die Tanque Verde Red-on-brown vessels shows that production was by independent potters. 198 Concentiadoa refers to the degree to which ceramic producers are dispersed or nucleated across the landscape. In dispersed production systems, producers are evenly distributed across the landscape and all commum'des contain potters. In nucleated systems, ceramic producers are aggregated into a single communis and their products are exchanged in a regional basis (Costin 1991:13; Pool 1992:280). Between these two extremes are a continuum of organizational forms. Because die production areas of the vessels are unknown, diis parameter cannot be fiilly evaluated. The range of variability in the tempers and the clays, however, suggests that production was not highly nucleated. Ali of the sites examined in the Marana and Los Robles communities have ceramics belonging to numerous compositional groups. This compositional diversity suggests diat the ceramics came from a number of sources, and not from a few specialized production centers. Additionally, it suggests that if Tanque Verde Red-on-brown ceramics were produced at any of these sites, those sites did not dominate ceramic production. Based on ethnoarchaeological data. Longacre and Stark (1992) have proposed tiiat prehistoric ceramic production sites can be identified through die sudy of compositional diversity. Their research has shown that, ethnographically, villages specializing in pottery production will exhibit littie compositional diversity compared to villages diat obtain vessels dirough exchange (Longacre and Stark 1992). This proposition receives support archaeologicaily. The West Branch site is a Rincon phase (late pre-CIassic) site in the Tucson Basin diat specialized in the production of pottery. Chemical and petrographic analyses of sherds trom diat site have revealed a remarkably homogeneous ceramic assemblage (Harry and Zedeiio 1997; Harry 1997a, 1997b; Heidke 1997). At West Branch, nearly 90 percent of die ceramics were locally made, suggesting that the West Branch potters obtained few ceramics from odier areas. Odier sites in the basin, however, have heterogeneous 199 assemblages composed of ceramics obtained firom a number of production sources. A similar situation was encountered at Griffin Wash, a ceramic production site in the Tonto Basin. Like West Branch, the Griffin Wash ceramic assemblage exhibitied little variation in temper (Stark and Heidke I99S). These archaeological and ethnographic data suggest that villages specializing in the production of ceramics will obtain few vessels from other areas, and as a result will exhibit low compositional diversity. The diversity present in the Los Robles and Marana site assemblages, therefore, suggest that none of these sites specialized in the production of ceramics, at least not to the extent that sites such as West Branch and Griffin Wash did. The polishing stone ratios discussed above support this interpretation. The quantity of vessels produced is referred to as the production scale. In Chapter Three 1 proposed that if producing sites or settlement clusters were characterized by differences in production scale, differences should exist in the proportions of ceramics sourced to each site or settlement cluster. Because die producing sites could not be identified, however, this parameter cannot be evaluated. Based on die data presented in Tables 6.1 dirough 6.3 and Figure 6.1. it can be suggested tentatively that die producers of Groups A and BC manufactured a greater quantity of ceramics dian the producers of odier compositional groups. If. however, die odier groups were made outside of the study region, they may have been produced in great quantity but traded into the Marana and Los Robles communities in only small amounts. Without knowing where the ceramics were produced, any conclusions concerning die production scale remain tentative. Nonetheless, it can be inferred diat if any of die sites analyzed did produce Tanque Verde Red-on- brown ceramics, the production did not approach die degree of specialization indicated for the previous period. 200 Distribution The organization of distnbution is the most difficult of the three economic components (i.e., production, distributioa, and consumption) to measure archaeologically. As Pool (1992:282) has noted, distribution 'is an act that leaves few direct traces in the archaeological record.' Although this component cannot be directly evaluated, inferences can be developed through a consideration of die patterns of consumption. Only one parameter relevant to die organization of distribution was outlined in the research design. This parameter, centralization, refers to die degree to which distribution was centralized and/or regulated (Pool 1992:282). Centralization, dierefore, has bodi spatial and socioeconomic aspects, aldiough diese two need not coincide. An example of a spatially centralized and regulated distribution system would include one in which die elite leaders of die society controlled the distribution of products. A spatially centralized but unregulated system would include one in which transactions were conducted widiout elite intervention, between individuals a trade fairs or ritual centers. Aldiough diese two systems are analytically separate, diey leave identical archaeological traces. Therefore, the present sudy examines only die degree to which exchange was centralized but does not assess the degree of elite regulation. In Chapter Three I proposed diat if distribution of Tanque Verde Red-on-brown ceramics was centralized (either dirough elite^ontrolled redistribution or dirough non-elne controlled mechanisms such as trade ^irs), this should be reflected in diversity measures. Specifically. I argued diat if the platform mound sites functioned as centralized distribution centers, then compositional diversity at die platform mound siie(s) should equal or exceed die diversity represented in die remainder of die community. Additionally, each village in die community should exhibit a similar proportion and diversity of compositional groups. If each village 201 developed its own exchange ties, however, considerable variation should occur between sites in the proportion and diversity of compositional groups. The data illustrated in Figures 6.2 through 6.5 show diat the platform mound sites exhibit no greater diversity than other sites in their commum'ties. Furthermore, in both communities compositional groups are present at some non-mound sites that are lacking from the mound site collections. For example, in the Marana community more than half of the analyzed ceramics from the site of Muchas Casas belong to Group F, a compositional group not represented in any of the 210 sherds analyzed from the Marana Mound site. Group G, firequent in die ceramic collections from sites in the upland areas of the Marana community, is also scarce at the Marana Mound site. In the Los Robles conmiunity similar patterns occur. Group E is found at the sites of Cake Ranch and Hog Farm but is missing from the ceramic collection of the Robles Mound site. Despite the dissimilarity of these ceramic collections, other sites exhibit more similar assemblages. The Marana Mound site, Los Morteros, Huntington, and Chicken Ranch all have compositionaiiy similar ceramic collections. Not only are the same compositional groups present at these sites, but the proportion of sherds assigned to each group is similar from site to site. These data patterns suggest that different mechanisms were responsible for the distribution of Tanque Verde Red-on-brown ceramics. Some sites (such as Muchas Casas, the Upland Compound. Cake Ranch. Hog Farm, and Cerro Prieto) appear to have maintained exchange networks independent of the platform mound sites. These consumers likely obtained their ceramics Uirough independent exchange channels maintained widi kin or acquaintances of otiier villages. Other sites, notably Marana Mound. Los Morteros. Huntington, and Chicken Ranch, likely participated in some form of centralized exchange network. For these residents. Tanque Verde Red-on-brown ceramics may have been obtained through tiirough redistribution during trade 202 fails or ritual activities. Significantly, these are the four sites in the Marana Conununity with the highest proportion of Tanque Verde Red-on-brown ceramics. Figure 6.1 illustrates that, for those sites not participating in a centralized distribution system, trade ties were highly variable and do not reflect site proximity. Residents of the Upland Compound site in the Marana communis, for example, shared exchange networks with many residents in the Los Robles conununity. The residents of Muchas Casas, however, maintained different exchange ties than those residents of other sites. The significance of these and other patterns are discussed in Chapter EighL Variability of Products Ceramic variability can refer to any of a number of aoributes, including design element and layout, vessel classes, vessel forms, and technological qualities. In this section. I examine how compositional groups vary with morphological and technological attributes of the ceramic assemblage. Ceramic attributes examined include the color of die paint, surface treatment, and ceramic form. Measures of richness and evenness are considered in the following discussion. As Pool (1992:280) has stated The number of different vessel classes represented in the assemblage, that is, its taxonomic richness, reflects die elaboration of ceramic manuiacture at the production entity (Rice 1981:1989). The relative frequency of vessels in each class, the evenness of the assemblage, indicates die degree of product specializanon at die production endty. Table 6.8 shows die correlation between chemical group and paint color. The least amount of variation is found in Group F. in which all eighteen of die analyzed sherds have red 203 Table 6.8. Number and Proportion of Sherds Assigned to E^h Chemical Group, by Paint Color''* Chemical Group Red Black Other TOTAL A a 57 3 8 68 row % 83.8 4.4 11.8 100 BC a 81 3 9 93 row % 87.1 3.2 9.7 100 E a 13 5 8 26 row % 50.0 19.2 30.8 100 F 0 18 - . 18 row % 100.0 - - 100 G a 19 9 2 30 row % 63.3 30.0 6.7 100 S. Tucson n 5 - 1 6 row % fiJ.i - 16.7 100 Papagueria a 4 - - 4 row % 100.0 - - 100 Phoenix a I - - 1 row % too - - 100 Unassigned n 198 18 15 231 row % 85.7 7.8 6.5 100 TOTAL n 396 38 43 477 row % 83.0 8.0 9.0 100.0 paint Groups E and G are the most variable, containing a higher proportion of black paint than odier groups. Group E also has die highest proportion of paint assigned to the "Other" category. These paints include brown, purple, and odier colors that do not f^l neatly into the red or black Of the 721 analyzed sherds. 244 are omitted &om die table. The omitted sherds consist of diose sherds that were analyzed by P. Fish et al. (1992b) and that were completely consumed during analysis. .As a result, inlbrmadoo about the color of paint tor these sherds could not be obtained. 204 category. The differences between the groups could reflect varying preferences of the poaers or differences in amount of control the potter had over the manufkturing and firing process. Perhaps significantly. Groups A and BC are associated primarily with sites that contain high proportions of Tanque Verde Red-on-brown ceramics. These groups are most frequent at sites in the Marana Community and the northern Tucson Basin. Groups E and G, in contrast, occur at sites having low proportions of Tanque Verde Red-on-brown ceramics and are frequent in the Los Robles community. Robbie Heckman (personal communication, 1996) has observed that many of the sherds from the Los Robles community appear to be more poorly fired and to have more flaws than sherds from die Marana Mound site. The difierences in the paint, therefore, may reflect differences in firing technology. If die potters maidng the Group E and G sherds had less control over die manufacmring process, diey would have produced vessels exhibiting more variable paint color. The correlation between chemical group and surface treatment is shown in Table 6.9. Figure 6.6 shows that most of die groups contain die expected number of categories in surface treatment. One exception is die Phoenix group, which is just slightly outside die 95 percent confidence interval, indicating a higher dian expected richness. Because this group contains only two members, however, diis finding should be interpreted widi caution. The data illustrated in Figure 6.6 demonstrate diat different producers of Tanque Verde Red-on-brown ceramics employed a similar range of surface treatments in manufacturing die vessels. Smudged vessels, for example, were not confined to any one compositional group but were made in all areas (see Table 6.9). Figure 6.7, however, indicates that surface treatments are not evenly distnbuted among die compositional groups. Besides the Phoenix group, diree groups ^1 outside of the 95 percent confidence interval. These groups— Group G. Soudi Tucson, and die Papagueria groups- 205 Table 6.9. Number of Sherds Assigned to Each Chemical Group, by Ceraniic Sur^ce Treatment'^ Cbem Group None Smudged Whiie- Slipped & Poly TOTAL slipped smudged chrome A n 42 45 6 - I 94 row % 44.7 47.9 6.4 - I.I 100 BC a 63 32 1 - 1 97 row % 64.9 33.0 l.O - 1.0 100 E a 15 11 1 1 . 28 row % 53.6 39.3 3.6 3.6 • 100 F a 6 13 - - - 19 row % 31.6 68.4 - - • 100 G n 24 5 1 . 30 row % 80.0 16.7 3.3 - - 100 S. Tucson a 2 15 1 . . 18 row % ll.l 83.3 5.6 - - 100 •> Phoenix a 1 1 - - . row % 50.0 50.0 - - - too Papagueria a 1 12 - - - 13 row % 7.7 92.3 - - - too Unassigned 0 134 114 15 4 2 269 row % 49.8 42.4 5.6 1.4 0.7 100 TOTAL 0 288 248 25 5 4 570 row % 50.5 43.5 4.4 0.9 0.7 100 Of the 721 analyzed sherds. 151 are omiaed from die table. The omined sherds consist uf diosc diat were consumed during analysis, before die informadon on sur&ce treatment was recorded. 206 A BC tn 01U C x:u ai PHOE: —^ I Z i 2» Sample Size Figure 6.6. Diversity (richness component) of surface treatment for the coa?po«itiQaal groups. ("TUCS" designates the S. Tucson group. "PHOEN" the Phoenix group, and "PAPG" the Papagueria group). Dotted lines mark the 95 percent confidence interval. nK E S 9}m E~~ VA w ea BC >if PHOEN TUCS PAPG I 2 ] 10 20 so too Sample Size Figure 6.7. Diversi^ (evenness componem) of surface treatment by compositional group. ("TUCS" designates the S. Tucson group, "PHOEN" the Phoenix group, and "PAPG" the Papagueria group). Doaed lines mark the 9S percent confidence interval. 207 ail exlubit less than exq)ected evenness in the distribution of surface treatment categories. Among Group G sherds, a higher than normal proportion of the sherds do not have any surface treatment. The South Tucson and Papagueria groups, in contrast, have high proportions of smudged ceramics. These findings indicate diat no single production location (as represented by the compositional groups) bad a monopoly on the manufacture of a particular vessel category. However, there do appear to have been differences in production emphasis. Thus, for example, although smudged vessels were made in all areas, they were especially emphasized in die areas that produced the South Tucson and Papagueria vessels. Table 6.10 shows the correlation between chemical group and ceramic form. Based on the data in this table, the diversity of ceramic form is plotted for each chemical group in Figures 6.8 and 6.9. These figures show that all the compositional groups have the expected degree of diversity viven their sample sizes. Some groups, however, contain more bowls dian others (Table 6.11). In particular, the South Tucson group and Groups E and G contain high proportions of bowls relative to jars. These differences could reflect specialization in these production areas, although they more likely relate to the distances over which the vessels were traded. Elsewhere. Heidke et al. (1994) have found that the Tanque Verde Red-on-brown form most likely to be traded is die bowl. Because bowls are easier to tranport than jars, this finding is not unexpected. The South Tucson group is believed U) have been produced more than 15 miles south of the southernmost boundary of the Marana and Los Robles communities. Any South Tucson ceramics found in the study region, therefore, represent vessels transported over several miles. It is unknown where die Group E and G vessels were made, but if they were also made outside of the smdy region then bowls could have been acquired more easily than jars. Table 6.10. Number of Sherds Assigned lo Each Chemical Composliional Group, by Ceramic Form Cttcmical Bowl Jar Plate/ Indel. TOTAL Group platter Hemi Out- Ouicurved Incurved Flare- Semi- Nfs' Flare- Siratghl Nfs' spherical curveil or rim flare rim collar hemispherical A 30 - - 1 - 35 4 1 7 29 J07 BC 39 3 2 1 - 1 23 4 1 14 37 125 E 8 1 - 1 8 - - 1 12 31 F 9 - I - - S I • I 3 20 G » - - • 1 7 - - I 21 39 S. TUcsun 10 - - 2 I 9 - - - 1 23 Papaguerin 1 - - 17 - - S 3 26 Phoenix - - - I - 7 - - 1 - 2 11 UrusiiieiKil 86 3 3 7 2 4 87 10 2 28 3 104 399 TOTAL l»l 7 6 9 6 8 198 19 4 38 3 212 721 ' NU refers lo niA further spccitieU. 209 BC m um e Xiu TUCS t X t ta It n Sample Size Figure 6.8. Diversity (riclmess component) of ceramic form by compositional group. ("TUCS" designates the S. Tucson group, "PHOEN" the Phoenix group, and "PAPG" the Papagueria group). Dotted lines mark the 95 percent confidence interval. PAPG. BC PHOEN TUC cs o 100 Sample Size Figure 6.9. Diversity (evenness component) of ceramic form by compositional group. ("TUCS" designates the S. Tucson group, "PHOEN" the Phoenix group, and "PAPG" the Papagueria group). Dotted lines mark the 95 percent confidence interval. t 210 Table 6.11. Number and Proportion of Sherds Assigned to Each Chemical Group. by Vessel Form Giemical Group Bowl Jar Plate/platter Indet. Toial BowlrJar A 66 12 • 29 107 6:1 61.7 11.2 - 27.1 100 BC 69 19 - 37 122 4:1 56.6 15.6 - 30.3 100 E 18 1 - 12 31 18:1 58.1 3.2 - 38.7 100 F 15 2 - 3 20 8:1 75.0 lO.O - 15.0 100 G 17 1 _ 21 39 17:1 43.6 2.6 - 53.8 100 Papagueria 18 5 - 3 26 4:1 69.2 19.2 - 11.5 100 Phoenix 8 1 - 2 II 8:1 72.7 9.1 - 18.2 100 S. Tucson 22 - - I 23 >22:1 95.7 - 4.3 100 Unassigned 192 40 3 104 299 5:1 64.2 13.4 2.9 3.5 100 TOTAL 425 81 3 212 721 5:1 58.9 II.2 0.4 29.4 100 I Intra-site Patterns at the Marana Platform Mound Village f ' To examine economic organization within platform mound villages, ceramic compositional diversity was examined for different areas of die Marana Mound site. This smdy was undertaken with two goals in mind; (1) to evaluate whether distnbution of ceramics within the mound village was centralized, and (2) to determine whether residents living near the platform mound maintained different trade ties dian residents of other areas. To address these issues, the ceramics analyzed 211 from the Marana Mound site were divided into three groups: those collected from within SO m of the platform mound, those collected from proveniences located between SO and 300 m of the mound, and those obtained more than 300 m from the mound. Table 6.12 shows the reladonship between these proveniences and the compositional groups. This table demonstrates that compositional group frequency varies with distance from the mound. Group A comprises more than one-fourth of the ceramics analyzed from die non-mound proveniences, but is absent from ceramics collected from the mound vicinity. Further, the proportion of Group A sherds increases with increasing distance from the mound. Group BC. in contrast, shows the opposite patterning. This group is most common in die ceramics collected near the mound, but declines in frequency as one moves farther away. These differences in frequencies are substantial: Group BC is twice as common in sherds near the mound than it is in sherds collected from the outer areas of the sites. Bayman (1995:51) has proposed that if redistribution of commodities was centralized at the platform mound, dien the mound proveniences should exhibit greater diversity than odier areas of die site. To investigate diis possibility, die compositional diversity of the diree provenience groups was plotted in Figures 6.10 and 6.11. These figures illustrate diat die ceramics recovered from die mound vicinity have less diversity than diose recovered from other areas. Not only did people living near the mound have fewer compositional groups represented in dieir assemblages than residents of other areas (Figure 6.10), but dieir ceramics were also less evenly distributed among these groups (Figure 6.11). The latter finding is significant at die 95 percent confidence interval. These findings demonstrate that the distribution of Tanque Verde Red-on-brown ceramics was not centralized at die platform mound. Additionally, diey indicate diat residents living near 212 Table 6.12. Number and Proportion of Sherds, by Chemical Group, Recovered from Different Areas of die Marana Platform Mound Site Chemical Group Dctaoce from Platform Mound TOTAL < 50m 50-300 m >300m A n - 23 26 49 column % - 27.7 30.2 23.3 BC a 18 21 19 S8 column % 43.9 25.3 22.1 27.6 E a - 3 3 6 column % - 3.6 3.5 2.9 G n 1 1 - 2 column % 2.4 1.2 - l.O S. Tucson a - 1 - I column % - 1.2 - 0.5 Unassigned a 22 34 38 94 column % 53.7 41.0 44.2 44.8 TOTAL n 41 83 86 210 column % 100 100 100 100 the mound maintained more restricted exchange des than did residents of other areas, at least for the acquisition of Tanque Verde Red-on-brown ceramics. The information presented above indicates diat the residents living nearest die mound maintained different exchange des than residents living in odier areas of die village. In pardcular. while non-mound residents consumed substantial quantities of Group A ceramics, the mound residents consumed little, if any, of these vessels. Instead, die mound residents emphasized the consumption of Group BC vessels. Vessels from diis group were also consumed by residents of other areas, but in lesser quantities. It was suggested above diat Group BC may have been produced in die nordiem Tucson Basin. The production location of Group A is unknown, but was tenatively hypothesized to have been somewhere to die north of die Group BC production area. 213 CO COu B x: u as o 20 SO 100 Sample Size Figure 6.10. Composidooai diversity (richness component) of ceramics recovered from Marana platform mound proveniences. 'A' refers to proveniences located within SO meters of the platform mound; "B" refers to proveniences located between SO and 300 meters of the platform mound; and "C refers to to proveniences located greater than 300 meters distant from the platform mound. Doaed Unes mark the 9S percent confidence interval. X eg E -B-- X -e- I lo COu c C > d 20 50 100 Sample Size Figure 6.11. Composidonal diversity (evenness component) of ceramics recovered from Marana platform mound proveniences. 'A' refers to proveniences located within SO meters of the platform mound, "B" refers to proveniences located between SO and 300 meters of the platform mound, and "C refers to to proveniences located greater dian 300 meters distant from the platform mound. Doaed lines mark the 9S percent confidence interval. 214 If these production inferences are correct, then, che consumption patterns could indicate that the mound residents maintained stronger exchange ties than other residents wiUi the northern Tucson Basin area. People living farther away from the mound, in contrast, may have traded more with potters living to the north of diat area. The reasons for the different exchange ties are unknown, but may relate to the quality or perceived quality of die vessels. Table 6.13 shows die relationship between paint color and distance from die platform mound. Those ceramics collected near die mound have die highest proportion of red paint and the lowest proportion of "other" (brown, purple, or odier variations between red and black) paint. As die distance from die platform mound increases, die proportion of red paint decreases and "other" paint increases. If red paint was die ideal and die goal of the manufocturing process, dien other paint colors might reflect decreasing control over the manufacturing process. If so, diese patterns could indicate diat die mound residents maintained more restriaed trade ties in order to obtain less variable, and dierefore less flawed, vessels. Research Questions Revisited From die findings presented above, it is now possible to answer die research questions posed in Chapter Three. Each question is discussed individually below. (1) Was production centered at the platform mound site(s) ? No. The compositional data indicate that fi^, if any, Tanque Verde Red-on-brown ceramics were produced at die Marana Mound or Robles Mound sites. (2) If production was not centraUzed at the platform mound site(s), did certain villages or areas within the communities specicdize in the production of Tanque Verde Red-on-brown ceranucs? This question remains unanswered. We know diat specialized production of diese vessels did not occur at any of die villages located in die Tortolita or Samaniego petrofacies. The 215 Table 6.13. Number and Proportion of Sherds, by Paint Color, Recovered from Different Areas of die Marana Platform Mound Site Paint Color Distance from Platform Mound TOTAL < 50 m 50-300 m > 300 m Red a 31 37 39 107 column % 91.2 86.0 79.6 84.9 Black n - - 2 2 column % - - 4.1 1.6 Other a 3 6 8 17 column % 8.8 14.0 16.3 13.5 TOTAL a 34 43 49 126 column % too 100 100 100 possibility cannot be ruled out. however, diat their specialked production occurred at one or mure sites along the Santa Cruz River or at sites located in petrofiacies containing mixed sands. Such sites include Hog Farm. Los Morteros. and Huntington. Regardless of whether specialized production occurred in the Marana or Los Robles communides. the polishing stone data and the heterogeneity of die temper and clay groups indicate diat the level of specialization did not approach that indicated for the pre-CIassic period in the Tucson Basin. (3) If specialization is apparent in any form, (M d^rem villages or communities specialize in the production of d^erent subtypes or forms? There is some correlation between compositional group and ceramic subtype (or manner of surface treatment). However, these differences are not absolute- no surfu:e treatment is associated exclusively with any one composidonal group. Rather, differences between compositionai groups appear to reflect variation in production emphasis. Specialization in ceramic form is more difficult to evaluate. Although 216 some compositional groups have more bowls than other groups, these differences are more likely to relate to distances between the production and consumption locations than they are to specialization by form. (4) Did the residents of the largest sites maintain d^erent exchange networks than the residents of the smaller sites? Yes. The data presented in this chapter demonstrate that the sites near the top of die settlement hierarchies participated in similar exchange networks, but that the residents of the smaller sites were excluded from these networks and relied on independent exchange ties. (5) Did those people living nearest the platform mound maintain differem exchange networks than those people living farther away from the mound? Yes. At the Marana Mound village, compositional diversity indicates tiiat those people living nearest the platform mound obtained ceramics from a more restricted number of production sources. Altiiough all compositional groups represented in the mound proveniences also occurred elsewhere at the site, the converse was not true. Group A, frequent in the ceramic collections of the non-mound proveniences, was absent in the ceramic collection from die mound vicinity. (6) Were Tanque Verde Red-on-brown ceramics exchanged through a central location within the communities, or (tid reciprocal exchange networks prevail? Both mechanisms appear to have been responsible for the distribution of the ceramics. In the Marana community, four sites exhibit a similar range of compositional diversity, suggesting that die residents of these sites obtained dieir ceramics durough some type of centralized distribution. Ceramics could eidier have been obtained through elite-controlled redistribution of tiie wares, or- more likely- as a result of non-elite controlled exchange during trade fsiirs or rituals. Reciprocal exchange networks, however, appear to have characterized other sites in the Marana and Los Robles communities. 217 (7) To wfta degree did ceramics circulate wUhui clusters; that is, to what degree was each village autonomous? None of the villages were self-sufficient ceramically, as indicated by the diversity of compositional groups and temper types found at all sites. These data show that all sites obtained at least some of their ceramics through exchange, and in fan many sites obtained nearly all of their Tanque Verde Red-on-brown ceramics firom other areas. Despite the higher proportions of Tanque Verde Red-on-brown ceramics in the Marana Mound site assemblage, for example, the mound village was dependent on other producers for its consumption of Tanque Verde Red-on-brown vessels. (8) What was the relationship between settlement clusters? Did exchange occur primarify within these boundaries, or did exchange occur freely between them? Were exchange patterns determined primarify by community boundaries or by the proximity of sites to one another? Exchange was not confined widiin communis boundaries, but occurred freely across community boundaries and between the residents of different areas. Nonedieless, exchange patterns are not accounted for by proximity of the sites to one another. In several instances, a single compositional group is found at sites spatially separated from one another, but not at sites in the intervening areas. Discussion Although several questions remain unanswered concerning the production, distribution, and consumption of Tanque Verde Red-on-brown ceramics in the study region, a general picture is beginning to emerge. The ceramics were made in several locadotis and widely traded, including to areas where diey were not produced. Although the production locations of die Tanque Verde Red-on-brown ceramics are unknown, diey clearly do not include any of the sites in the Tortolita or Samaniego petro^ies. These sites include bodi platform mound villages. Production may have 218 occurred at sites found along major rivers such as Los Morteros, Huntington, and Hog Farm, although this conclusion is speculative. If production did occur at these sites, however, it never approached the scale of craft specializadon apparent in the previous period. The location of production may have been determined partly by the distribudon of raw materials. In the pre- Classic periods, ceramic production was most frequent at sites near the Santa Cruz River, where potters would have had easy access to the clays, sands, water, and fuels necessary for ceramic manufacture. Sites such as the Marana Mound are at some distance firom these resources, however, and dierefore may have specialized m the production of other products for exchange. In the case of the Marana Mound site, specialization in the cultivation of agave is well documented (S. Fish et. al 1989a, 1992a). As Lombard (1987b) has suggested, the Marana Mound residents may have traded agave and agave products for Tanque Verde Red-on-brown ceramics. The implications of diese and odier conclusions for understanding settlement clusters are discussed in die following chapter. 219 CHAPTER SEVEN UNDERSTANDING SETTLEMENT COMMUNITIES The previous chapter presented conclusions specific to the Marana and Los Robies communities. In this chapter, I discuss the implications of these conclusions for the interpretation of settlement clusters. The organization of this chapter follows that presented in the research design (Chapter Three). Research issues examined include ioteraction between residents of a single site or conununity; the relationship of community inhabitants with people living outside of the community; and the significance of site hierarchies and differentially-distributed artifacts. These topics are addressed using the findings presented in die previous chapters. Where possible, diese findings are compared with those obtained from other platform mound studies to evaluate the represemativenes of these patterns. These sections are then followed by a discussion of leadership strategies employed in die study region, as indicated by die ceramic compositional data. The chapter concludes by considering die methodological contributions of dus study to the discipline or archaeology. Settlement Commimities and Boundaries Economic Integration Wthin Communities The degree of economic integration widiin platform mound communities has been debated. S. Fish and P. Fish (1994) have suggested diat platform mound communities found outside of the Salt-Gila riverine areas fimctioned partly to facilitate risk sharing and subsistence exchange. Such exchange of foodstuffs has been documented for sites in die Marana community (S. Fish and Donaldson 1991). Unresolved, however, is the degree to which these subsistence ties governed other aspects of the residents' lives. The data presented in the previous chapters show diat none 220 of the sites were autonomous ceramically, at least not in the consumption of Tanque Verde Red-on- brown ceramics. This finding demonstrates that the residents of different sites were interconnected, although not necessarily in the ways predicted from anthropological models. Two research questions related to intracommunity integration, first advanced in Chapter Three, are examined below. These are (I) did specialization in the production of Tanque Verde Red-on- brown ceramics occur and. if so, do the production locations follow expectations deriving trum ethnographic models; and (2) what economic relationships are indicated for sites between the upland and lowland zones? Ethnographic Models of Ceramic Spedalizatioa. In the Marana and Los Rubies communities, the high proportions of Tanque Verde Red-on-brown ceramics containing nonlocal tempers strongly suggest that some form of specialized production existed. At the Marana Mound site, for example, more than 20 percent of the ceram^ assemblage consists of Tanque Verde Red- on-brown ceramics. Most or all of these vessels were made somewhere other than the Marana Mound site. This level of demand implies that some form of specialized produaion was in place. As discussed in Chapter Three, villages specialoing in pottery production historically tend to be located in agriculturally marginal areas. In these cases pottery production is initiated to offset subsistence shortfalls. If such a situadon characterized die prehistoric communides of Marana or Los Robles, production should have been centered in one or more of die villages located away from the major rivers or streams. The most productive zone for Arming in die Marana community would have been along die Santa Cruz River, near die northern tip of die Tucson Mountains. Rich alluvial soils and a reliable source of water are present in this area. Sites located away from the floodplain, in contrast, would have been forced to rely on less predictable agriculural techniques such as agave farming. In die Los Robles community, villages are concentrated along die Brawley 221 Wash and differences between sites in agricultural potential are therefore less pronounced. Some distinctions, however, are nonetheless apparent. Hog Farm, for example, is located between two major rivers (the Santa Cruz and Brawley Wash) and was therefore especially well-suited for agricultural pursuits. Although the location of Tanque Verde Red-on-brown ceramic production is unknown, the petrographic data indicate that few, if any, vessels were made at sites located in the resource-poor areas of the Marana or Los Robles communities. For example, few or no Tanque Verde Red-on- brown vessels were made at the Marana Mound site, a village located in an agriculmrally marginal area. It was suggested in the previous chapter that if Tanque Verde Red-on-brown ceramics were indeed made in either of the two communities, the most likely area(s) of production (based on the petrographic data) would have been either near the northern tip of the Tucson Mountains or at some other location adjacent to the Santa Cruz or Brawley rivers. Sites that meet these criteria include Los Morteros, Huntington, and Hog Farm. Compared to other areas of the communities, all of diese sites are located in agriculmrally-fiavorable environments. These findings suggest that ceramic production in the study region was not undertaken to offset recurrent subsistence shortfalls. These conclusions add to a growing body of evidence suggesting that, in the prehistoric Southwest ceramic specialization was not confined to agriculturally impoverished villages. Although specialized ceramic production has so far been identified at only a few sites, these sites are not concentrated in resource-poor regions. At the West Branch site of the southern Tucson Basin, for example, a comparative snidy has shown that die ceramic specialists residing there were not impoverished (either in terms of wealth objects or agricultural outputs) relative to the consumers of dieir vessels (Harry 1997a. 1997b). In the San Juan Basin, ceramic production was concentrated in die Chuska Mountains, an area that should 222 have been more productive agriculturally than the Chaco Canyon region where the consumers lived (Toll 1981). Another site inferred to have specialized in ceramic production is that of Griffin Wash in the Tonto Basin. Although others (Stark and Hekike 1995) have conjectured chat the residents of Griffin Wash initiated ceramic production in response to a shortage of irrigable land, the botanical data do not support this interpretation. Pollen analyses have shown com pollen ubiquity values to be several times higher for the Griffin Wash site than for any other site in the region. Moreover, accordbg to the Griffin Wash researchers, these values are "virtually unsurpassed in southern Arizona" (Stark et al. 1995:234). These data suggest that, compared with other sites, com agriculture was highly successfully Griffin Wash. Although die com couid have been obtained through exchange, lower pollen frequencies at other sites do not support this intererpretation. As I have contended elsewhere (Harry 1997a. 1997b), if we are to argue effectively that potters were trading vessels for food we must first demonstrate that their consumers bad food surpluses to exchange. The pollen data, however, suggest that in this case the ceramic consumers (i.e.. residents of other sites) had fbver surpluses than did the ceramic producers (i.e.. residents of Griffin). An alternative interpretation of the pollen data has been advanced by Stark et al. (1995:234), who propose that the differences in pollen firequencies reflect contrasting methods of storing the com. Specifically, they suggest that the Griffin Wash residents stored a higher proportion of their com still attached to die cob. compared with die residents of odier sites who stored primarily shelled com. This interpretation, however, also argues against die importation of com at Griffin Wash. Because shelled com is less bulky than unshelled com. com intended for exchange is likely to be removed from die cob prior to transport. Regardless of how die com was stored, dien. die pollen data suggest diat die residents of Griffin Wash cultivated at 223 least as much com as other sites in the region, including those sites believed to have been consumers of their vessels. If poor agricultural potential did not lead to ceramic specialization, what toors might have been responsible? In Chapter Three, it was suggested diat craft specialization can function to offset subsistence risk through the creation of buffering mechanisms. In this strategy, different villages specialize in the production of different craft products to facilitate intervillage ties. Although no village depends regularly on other villages for food, the exchange ties created tiu-ough the trade of craft products make it possible for food to be exchanged during years of localized crop failures. According to this scenario, most or ail villages empbasaed the production of objects for exchange. Sites located along major rivers, for example, would have had easy access to the clays, sands, water and fuels needed to make vessels. Accordingly, diese sites may have stressed ceramic production. Sites located in other areas may have specialized in other products for exchange. Support for this interpretation comes from the Marana Mound site, where several tines of evidence suggest that those residents emphasized the cultivation of agave for exchange (S. Fish et ai. 1992a). Upland-Lowland Ties. Platform mound communities located away firom the so-called "Hohokam core'* area often encompass a variety of ecological zones and elevational settings. Economic relationships between sites in different elevational zones has been a topic of recent debate. Some researchers have proposed tiiat the upland sites were dependent on the lowland sites for subsistence (G. Rice i990a:12) and nonsubststence (Bayman 1996; Spielmann 1997) goods, whereas other researchers believe that the sites in the two regions were economically independent (Ciolek-Torrello 1994). Until recently, however, these differing interpretations have been based more on theoretical positions dian on archaeological evidence. 224 fnformadoa from the present study shows that, in the Marana community, the upland sites were not dependent on the lowland sites for the acquisition of Tanque Verde Red-on-brown ceramics. Rather, upland site residents appear to have obtained these goods through independent exchange channels. Shared exchange networks do character^ di^rent sites, but these networks encompass primarily sites within, rather than acmss. elevational settings. For example, in the Marana community die sites of La Vaca Enferma and Sueno de Saguaro exhibit similar compositional diversity (see Table 6.2). Both sites are in die upland area of the community. In die lowland zone, die sites of Marana Mound, Los Morteros, Huntington, and Chicken Ranch all exhibit similar ceramic assemblages. These findinp show that economic ties- at least diose reflecting the exchange of Tanque Verde Red-on-brown ceramics- were maintained primarily between residents of the same elevadonal zones. The ceramic assemblage from Muchas Casas demonstrates, however, that not ail villages in a zone participated in these exchange networks. This site, located in the lowland zone of the Marana community, maintained different exchange ties dian other lowland villages. Similar conclusions have derived from ceramic sudies of platform mound communities in the Tonto Basin. In that project, sites were grouped together based on attributes of the plain ware assemblages. These groupings, based on die surtice treatment and pastes of the sherds, suggested that greater interaction occurred between sites within similar ecological zones than across elevational settings (Jacobs and Rice I994b:92S). These findings suggest that sites in die upland settings were not economically dependent on the larger villages found in die lowland areas. They fiirther suggest diat ceramic exchange between the two areas was limited. Other types of exchange, however, are not ruled out. As discussed earlier. Fish and Donaldson (1991) have documented the existence of subsistence 225 exchange between sites in the Marana community. Because their study did not include sites in the upland areas, it is unknown whether subsistence products were exchanged between die upland and lowland areas. Working in the Tonto Basin, Spielmann (1997) has argued against subsistence trade between sites in these settings. She bases her argument on evidence indicating that similar agricultural products were cultivated in both areas. This evidence demonstrates that neither area specialized exclusively in the cultivation of a particular agricultural produa: it does not preclude, however, the differential emphasis and exchange of products. Community Self-Sufficiency vs. Interaction This research issue deals with die degree to which the residents of die Marana and Los Robles communities interacted with neighboring communities and villages. Two research questions are addressed: (1) to what degree were the communities inwardly- vs. outwardly- focused?, and (2) if intercommunity ties are indicated through the exchange of Tanque Verde Red- on-brown ceramics, do different communities specialize in die production of different forms ur subtypes of this ware? Inward vs. Outward-Lookiiig Models. The compositional evidence shows diat Tanque Verde Red-on-brown ceramics circulated between die Marana and Los Robles communities. This finding supports die model advanced by Kowalewski et al. (1983), which holds diat systems charaoenzed by dispersed pqjulations will be characterized by permeable boundaries and a high degree of interaction with outside regions. Similar Hndings characterize platform mound communities in odier regions. Researchers working in die Tonto (Simon and Bunon 1992; Stark and Heidke 1992, 1995) and Phoenix (Abbott 1991, 1994a, 1994b) basins also have identified a high degree of ceramic exchange across community boundaries. 226 The exchange patterns of Tanque Verde Red-on-bro^vn ceramics, however, may not reflect the movement of other commodities. Abbott's (1994a, 1994b) work in the Phoenix Basin has shown that diffisrent ceramic wares circulated in different networks. Specifically, his data show that for irrigation conmiunities in the Phoenix Basin, plain ware ceramics circulated primarily between sites within the same irrigation system, whereas red ware ceramics circulated across canal- system boundaries. Abbott (1994a:361) suggests that this patterning reflects different types of social relations. Plain vessels, he proposes, woukl have been exchanged primarily between people sharing close personal relationships, as found among residents living along the same canal system. Red ware vessels, in contrast, were more highly valued and are more likely to have been traded between more socially distant people. Like red wares, red-on-brown ceramics are likely to have been more highly valued than plain ware containers. If a situation similar to that in the Phoenix Basin characterized the Marana and Los Robles communities, plain ware ceramics may have circulated more frequently within, than between, the two communities. Although Tanque Verde Red-on-brown ceramics moved freely across community boundaries, the compositional data indicate that their trade networks were nonetheless spatially bounded. Table 7.1 lists the number and percent of sherds assigned to each compositional group for the areas from which ceramics have been analyzed. This table shows the presence of at least three regions characterized by a high degree of interaction. These are (I) a region encompassing the Los Robles conmiunity, die Marana community, and the northern Tucson Basin: (2) a region encompassing the southern Tucson Basin and die eastern Tucson Basin: and (3) a region encompassing the Papagueria and the lower Santa Cruz river area. Each region is characterized by a high degree of internal ceramic exchange, but exhibits almost no evidence of exchange with the other two regions. The only area to depart from diis pattern is the Phoenix basin, where Table 7.1. Number and Percent of Sherds, by Region, Assigned to Each Chemical Group Proveiiieiicc A BC E F G S. Tucson Papagueria Plioenix Uiiassigiied TOTAL Maraiia Coniniuniiy 83 93 18 18 22 2 _ . 180 416 20.0 22.4 4.3 4.3 5.3 0.5 - - 43.3 100% Iu)s Rubles Coiiuuuiiity IS 5 13 2 IS - - - 92 142 10.6 S.5 9.2 1.4 J 0.6 - - - 64.8 100% Lower Saiiia Cruz _ - . . 8 - - 8 ------100 - - 100% Nordiern Tucson Basiii 8 25 - . 2 I - - 14 50 16.0 50.0 - • 4.0 2.0 - - 28.0 100% Souilierii Tucson Basin - _ . . - 14 - - 16 30 - - - - - 46.7 - - 53.3 100% Gasieni Tucson Basin . _ . . - 6 - - 18 24 - - - - - 25.0 - - 75.0 100% Papagueria - . - - - • 8 - 2 10 ------80.0 - 20.0 100% Phoenix 1 2 . . - - 10 II 17 41 2 4 4.9 - - - - 24.4 26.8 41.5 100% 228 sherds of many compositional groups are found, including those associated primarily with the Papagueria/Iower Santa Cruz region and the Marana/Los Robles/Northem Tucson Basin region. These exchange patterns demonstrate that exchange of Tanque Verde was confined to spatially bounded regions, but that these regions did not coincide with conununity boundaries. This pattern diffisrs from that of the pre-Classic Tucson Basin, in which red-on-brown ceramics were widely traded over larger areas (Heidke 1993, 1997), lending support to the interpreution that the Classic period was characteroed by increasing regionalization (Doelle et al. 199S: Doelle and WaUace 1991; Wilcox 1989, 1991). Mutualism. Culturally-induced mutualism occurs when different conununities specialize in the production of different commodities for exchange. In the present smdy, this issue was addressed through the examination of only one conmiodity. Tanque Verde Red-on-brown ceramics. Compositional data were examined to determine whether one or both communities specialized in the production of Tanque Verde Red-on-brown ceramics, and whether different communities specialized in the production of different forms or subtypes. Because the production location(s) of the wares was not determined, however, these questions could only be partially addressed. The compositional data indicate that conmiunity-wide specialization in Tanque Verde Red- on-brown ceramics did not occur in the Marana or the Los Robles communities. If most or all villages in a community had specialized in the production of these wares, then many ceramics should have been tempered with sands from the Tortolita or Samaneigo petrofacies. The distnbution of compositional groups further supports the interpretation that production of Tanque Verde Red-on-brown ceramics was not confined to a single commum'ty. If one community had depended on the other for its acquisition of Tanque Verde Red-on-brown ceramics, the diversity of compositional groups should not have differed substantially between the two communities. The 229 to that differences did occur suggests that neidier community had a monopoly on the production of these wares. Whedier different production locations focused on the production of different forms (i.e.. bowls or jars) is more difficult to determine. Except for the South Tucson compositional group, all groups contained both bowl and jar sherds. This indicates that no production location (with the possible exception of that where the South Tucson sherds were made) produced exclusively one form. Certain production locations may have emphasized the production of certain forms, however, aldiougb diis cannot be evaluated without knowing the production locations uf the compositional groups. Although mutualistic ties were not indicated through Tanque Verde Red-on-brown ceramics, such ties may nonetheless have been present The possil)ility that the Marana or Los Robles communities specialized in the production of other artifkt classes was not evaluated. In the Tonto Basin, several lines of evidence have suggested that different platform mound communities in titat area specialized in the production of different wares. Specifically, it has been suggested that the production and distribution of undecorated. corrugated, and red ware ceramics were under die control of different communities (Simon 1994b: Stark and Heidke 199S). Simon (I994b:679) has interpreted diis as indicating that A network of communities associated with each platform mound participated in a complementary suite of production activities. Each group of settiements was economically viable Uirough an internally supportive interdependence. Whether a similar situation characterized the Marana and Los Robles communities remains unknown. 230 Settlement Hierarciiies A second research domain presented in Chapter Three deals with the significance of site hierarchies and of differentially-distributed arti&cts. The presence of a settlement hierarchy suggests that some form of vertkal social organization was present Many researchers have further suggested that sites having public or monumental architecture and substantial quantities of high- value goods flmctioned as economic centers within the community. Centralized production (McGuire 198S; Neitzel 1991; Teague 198S; Upham 1982) and redistribution (Doyel 1991b; Lightfoot 1984; Plog 1989a; Simon and Burton 1992; Teague 1985; Upham 1982; Wilcox 1979) of exotic and luxury goods are often inferred for these settlements. In the research desip, 1 argued from anthropological data that Tanque Verde Red-on-brown ceramics were not likely to have been centrally produced and distributed. Instead. I suggested that the higher proportions of decorated ceramics likely reflected the greater ability of some residents to "afford" these wares. The compositional data obtained from the present study make it possible to examine diese issues. The following research questions are addressed below. Fu^t. what processes were responsible for the differential distribution of Tanque Verde Red-on-brown ceramics in die Marana and Los Robles communities? Second, what role did the elite residents play in the production and exchange of these conmiodities? And, finally, how do these conclusions contribute to our emerging understanding of Hohokam economic organization? Interpretation of Differentialfy-Diaributed Artifacts Various explanations have been advanced for the concentration of exotic and other high- value goods at large sites. As discussed above, many archaeologists have suggested that these patterns reflect processes of centralized production and/or distribution. Rejecting the economic complexity implied by these centralization models, some archeologists have recently proposed that 231 artifact concentrations reflects centralized consumption by all members of the community. According to this scenario, concentrations of high-value goods result firom pan-community gatherings at ritual or social centers. These various models are evaluated below. Centralized Production. The compositional data indicate that, in the Marana and Los Robles communities, production of Tanque Verde Red-on-brown ceramics was neither produced by the elite nor under was it under their control. Few, if any, of the ceramics were made at the platform mound sites. These findings parallel those of other communities. Until recently, most interpretations of centralized ceramic production were based on indirect evidence such as the differential distribution of ceramics or the standardization of vessel attributes. Only recently has (he organization of ceramic production in settlement conununities been investigated more directly. Two such studies other than the present one have been completed. The first of these relied on compositional data to identify the production location of plain and red ware vessels in Phoenix Basin irrigation communities (Abbott 1994a, 1994b). Contrary to centralization models, that study found that poaery production occurred at the smaller. satelUte settlements rather than the largest and most central villages. The second snidy compared the distribution of polishing stones between platfonn mound and non-platform mound settlements in the Tonto Basin (Griffith et al. 1992). No significant differences were found in the polishing stone frequencies, suggesting to the authors that ceramic production was not centralized. Shell is a second commodity often believed to have been produced at platform mound sites under elite conotil (Howard 198S; McGuire 1985: McGuire and Howard 1987; Teague 1989b). These inferences derive primarily from evidence of shell working at platform mound sites. Without comparative data firom non-mound sites, however, these conclusions remain speculative. In those instances where comparative data are available, the presence of centralized production has not been supported. Woridng in the Livingston area of the 232 Tonto Basin. Griffith and VIcCaitney (1994:806) have compared ratios of shell debitage to completed shell artifacts for platform mound and non-mound sites. These rados were correlated across sites, suggesting to the authors that there was little specialization in shell production in the Livingston area. It should be noted, however, that most of die shell arrived in the Tonto Basin as finished ornaments. Thus, little specialization- centralized or decentralized- is expected for this commodity in die smdy region. At the Marana Mound site (Bayman 19%) and at die site of Las Colinas (Teague 1989b; 127-128), intrasite comparisons of shell production have also been made. These studies indicate that, radier dian being concentrated near the mounds as would be expeaed if production was under elite conorol. shell debris was relatively evenly dispersed across the sites. One commodity diat does not follow die patterns outlined above is obsidian. Teague (1985) has found that obsidian production debris was relatively more frequent at mound dian at non-mound sites in the Phoenix Basin. These firequencies were calculated as die proponion of obsidian cores and waste material to finished obsidian objects. Similar conclusions have been reached by Bayman (1996) working in die Marana community. Here, obsidian production debris was more frequent at die platform mound village dian it was for villages in die upland area or the ASU sites. Comparative data were not obtained, however, for other sites near die top of die setdement hierarchy, such as Los Morteros or Huntington. Significantiy. it should be noted diat although production debris was more frequent at die mound site relative to odier sites examined in die community, it was not concentrated near die mound vicinity. The evidence summarized here demonstrates that higher proportions of certain goods at platform mound sites do not necessarily indicate elite control of die production process. None of die commodities cited here were found to have been produced exclusively or primarily near die platform mounds. The production of some goods, such as obsidian, may have been emphasized 233 at the platform mound villages, but the evidence suggests dieir manu^cture was under the auspices of independent, rather than attached, producers. These findings support the conclusion reached by Stark (1995:337), who has stated that We have every reason to believe that productive specialization- particularly in utilitarian goods- characterized many, if not most, prehistoric economic systems in the Southwest throughout die twelth dirough fourteenth centuries.... As our understanding of the mechanics of productive specialization grows, however, earlier models that linked specialization in subsistence goods with elite control (e.g., Cordell and Plog 1979:420) are no longer tenable. Centralized Distribution. Differing mechanisms were responsible for the distribution of Tanque Verde Red-on-brown ceramics in die Marana and Los Robles commum'ties. Some sites apparently participated in centralized exchange networks, while others maintained independent exchange ties. Signiflcantiy, it is the sites near the top of die settlement hierarchies (as indicated by site size and proportion of high-value goods) tiiat seem to have shared exchange networks. In the previous chapter, 1 suggested that residents of these sites obtained dieir Tanque Verde Red-on- brown vessels dirough some form of indirect exchange, such as that which would occur at trade fairs or markets. The sites near the lower end of the settlement hierarchy evidentiy were left out of diese exchange activities, and relied instead on odier social ties to obtain decorated ceramics. Few odier smdies have compared die compositional patterns of artifacts recovered from a single platform mound community. Those soidies diat have been conducted, however, do not support die interpretation diat nonlocal goods were redistributed from platform mound villages to die smaller, satellite settiements. In the Phoenix Basin, for example. Abbott (1994a. 1994b) found 234 that the largest site (Pueblo Grande) in the community obtained more nonlocal ceramics than other did sites along die irrigation canal. These nonlocal vessels, however, were used and discarded at Pueblo Grande rather than being redistributed to smaller sites. A second snidy examined diversity in obsidian sources between various Hohokam sites (Peterson et al. 1997). That study concluded that redistribution of obsidian from platform mound sites is not supported for many communities, including die Escalante complex in the Phoenix Basin. Arguing against centralized redistribution in die Escalante community are several obsidian sources that are present in die coUecdons of small sites, but missing from diose of the platform mound. This finding mirrors diat of die present sQidy. where some ceramic compositional groups found at satellite sites are also absent from die platform mound village. Although a previous smdy (Bayman 1995. 19%) has concluded that obsidian and shell were redistributed widiin die Marana communis from die platform mound village, diese interpretations are based entirely on die diffisrential distribution of obsidian and shell artifacts between some sites widiin die community. To determine whedier compositional diversity supports die interpretation of centralized redistribution, I have compared obsidian sourcing data available from different sites in die commum'ty. In die research design I proposed diat if distribution was centralized, dien a similar proportion and diversity of compositional groups should be represented at different sites in die community (Alden 1982; Graves 1991; Longacre and Stark 1992; Pires- Ferreira 1976; P. Rice 1987:79). Table 7.2 lists die obsidian sourcing data available from die Marana community. This table shows that die residents of die Marana Mound site obtained obsidian from a greater number of sources than did the residents of the ASU sites. Furthermore, die diversity of sources differs between die two site groups. In particular, die ASU sites are characterized by a higher proportion of Sauceda obsidian dian die Marana Mound site. Aldiough 235 Table 7.2. Geologic Sources of Obsidian from die Marana Mound and ASU Sites Source Marana Mound' ASU Sites^ 0 % a % Sauceda 77 70.6 68 97.1 Vulture 8 7.3 - - Superior 4 3.7 2 2.9 Mule Creek 7 6.4 - - Cow Canyon 2 1.8 - - Unknown "A" 3 2.8 - - Unsourced 8 7.3 - - TOTAL 109 100 70 100 compositional data are not published for obsidian from other sites in die community. Bayman (1996) reports diat one of two obsidian arti^icts sourced from sites in die upland area of the Marana communicy came from Mule Creek. Because Mule Creek obsidian is rare from the Marana Mound collection (6.4%) and is absent from die ASU samples, Bayman tentatively interprets this as evidence diat the upland residents emphas^ different interaction networks than residents of die lowland sites. These composidonal data support die interpretation diat die residents of the ASU sites, and possibly of die upland sites, obtained dieir obsidian dirough independent exchange des rather than through redistribution mechanisms centered at die platform mound village. Because obsidian has not been sourced from other sites in die community, however, it is unknown whether die sites near die top of die settlement hierarchy obtained dieir obsidian (as diey did their Tanque Verde Red-on-brown ceramics) dirough centralized exchange networks. ' From Bayman l995:Table 3 ' From Shackley 1987; ASU sites refer to the sites of Muchas Casas. Rancho Derrio. aod Rancho Bajo 236 The informadon summarized above suggests that distribution mechanisms within Hohoicam platform mound communities do not fall neatly into any one category. Products likely circulated as a result of both centralized and decentralized mechanisms. The compositional data obtained tirum the present study suggests that sites near the top of the hierarchy participated in centralized exchange networks from which the other sites were excluded. Within the Marana community, at least, participation in exchange networks appears to have depended on the role and posidon of settlement within the larger community. The degree to which these patterns characterized other platform mound communides is unknown, although centralized redistribudon does not appear to have been as frequent as some archaeologists have believed. In particular, the assumpdon that sites with low frequencies of goods obtained these wares through redistribudon from sites with high frequencies is not supported through the composidonal data. Centralized Consmnptioo. In recent years, die idea of pan-commum'ty gatherings at platform mounds and other places of public or monumental architecture has gained in popularity among Southwestern archaeologists. These gatherinp, which could have included feasts, dances or odier rituals, are believed to have attracted members from diroughout die community and resulted in the centralized consumpdon of decorated M/ares and odier valued goods. According to diis view, high proportions of decorated wares resulted from visitors bringing in serving vessels to use during potluck ceremonies (Bayman 1994:71: Blinman 1989: Stark 1995:340). Other valued goods, such as obsidian projecdle points and shell, could have been used and discarded during ceremonies conducted at the platform mound village (Bayman 199S, 1996). According to diese models, die decorated wares and valued goods were available to everyone and consumed by all members of die community. Their consumpdon, however, was concentrated at die primary village where die rituals and feasts were centered. Furthermore, although everyone had access to diese 237 goods, the residents of the primary village (and the hosts of die rituals) had preferential access to these goods by virme of dieir position as event sponsors (see Bayman 1994; Blinman 1989). Although compelling evidence of large-scale poduck gatherings exists at Anasazi sites (see Blinman 1989). it is less clear whether similar gadierings occurred in the Hohokam region. The question is not so much whether community-wide gatherings took place. Rather, the issue is whedier the high frequencies of decorated wares and other goods resulted primarily from these gatherings. Obviously, if die decorated ceramics at die Robles Mound and Marana Mound villages were brought in by visitors from odier sites, dieir presence would tell us little about die exchange networks of die mound villagers. Before any fiirdier interpretations are drawn from die compositional data, dien, it is important to examine how die Tanque Verde Red-on-brown ceramics arrived at diese sites. Aldiough Bayman (1994.199S) has suggested that some of die midden debris, including decorated ceramics, was deposited at die Marana Mound site during pan-community gatherings, several lines of evidence suggest diat these processes had littie effect on midden composition. Most of die ceramics appear instead to reflect houshold debris. A study by Bubemyre (1993) of vessel forms from die Marana Mound site indicates diat diere were similar proportions of bowls, jars, and other vessel forms between middens associated with die mound and odier residential precincts. This suggests diat similar activities took place in bodi areas. One difference noted by Bubemyre, however, was diat bowls from non-mound proveniences were larger dian bowls from die mound vicinity. She suggests diat diis may reflect ehher die babinial serving or die occasional feasting of greater numbers of people in the residential compounds dian at die platform mound. I argue diat die former is the more likely explanation. As Bubemyre (1993:28) has stated The difierence in bowl size as a reflection of a difference in the of the typical serving and consuming units is supported by die architecmral patterns. Residential compounds are diougbt to represent multiple household groups. This is based on the number of rooms diat compounds contain The platform mound architecture is consistent with a single household or very small group of households. The similar bowl to jar ratios at the mound precinct and non-mound areas further suggests that substantial feasting dul not occur in the non-mound areas. If large numbers of people had been hosted in the non-mound compounds, this influx of visitors should have resulted in higher bowl to jar ratios (see Blinman 1989). Further, if these visitors had left behind large quantities of decorated vessels, then die proportion of decorated wares should be higher in these contexts than in the platform mound area. The compositional data also argue against the deposition of Tanque Verde Red-on-brown vessels by visitors from other sites. As discussed above, ceramics from Muchas Casas and the Upland Compound sites contain compositional groups not reflected in the mound site assemblage. If visitors from diese sites had deposited die vessels, then the compositional diversity should have reflected this activity. Specifically, the compositional groups found at Muchas Casas and the Upland Compound sites should have been present in die mound site assemblage. AlUiough the compositional diversity is similar between die mound site and die sites of Los Morteros. Huntington, and Chicken Ranch, it is unlikely diat the Tanque Verde Red-on-brown ceramics were deposited by visitors from these sites. Had diese residents left behind the decorated wares, the mound site should have contained abnormally high proportions of these wares relative to the siKs 239 iroin which they came. Because the mound site had no higher proportions of Tanque Verde Red- on-brown ceramics than the sites of Los Morteros, Huntington, and Chicicen Ranch, it is unlikely that diey were deposited by visitors from these sites. This proposition can be tested by comparing the bowl to jar rados between die non-mound proveniences of the Marana Mound site and the latter duee sites. If die decorated wares were indeed deposited during periodic feasts, dien the bowl to jar ranos should be higher at die mound site dian at die odier sites. Aldiough diese data are not currently available from Los Morteros, Huntington, and Chicken Ranch, diey are recoverable and it should be possible therefore to test diis issue in die future. A final line of evidence against die feasting hypodiesis derives from a comparison of artifact densides. If substandal quantides of debris had been left behind by large influxes of people, dien increased artifyct densities should have resulted. However, a comparison of artifact densities between die mound and non-mound proveniences of the Marana Mound site shows no patterened differences (Bayman 1994.-143). Similarly, artifact densities at die mound site are nu higher dian diey are at die upland sites (Bayman 1994; 143). These data suggest diat die high proportions of Tanque Verde Red-on-brown ceramics found at die Marana Mound site do not result from feasting activities. Aldiough fewer data are available from die Los Robles community, similar conclusions are indicated diere as well. The presence of certain compositional groups at some sites, and dieir absence from die mound site, suggests dial die vessels were not deposited by visitors from diese non-mound sites. The degree to which diese findings apply to other platform mound communities is unknown. In contrast to die patterns discussed above, die Livingston and Pinto mounds in the Tomo Basin are characterized by unusually high bowl to jar ratios (Rice et al. 1994; Simon I994c). These findings support die interpretation diat feasts were commonly held at diese locations. In 240 contrast to the Marana platform mound, however, diese mounds lacked residential compounds at their base. These differences show diat not all platform mounds fiucdoned in die same manner (see also Elson 1996). A growing body of evidence indicates diat while some platform mounds contained or were surrounded by residences, odiers appear to have been unoccupied. Additionally, some mounds were constructed within populous villages whereas others were built in vacant areas. These diffierences emphasize die importance of assessing platform mound function and acdvities on a case by case basis. Role of the Elite Residents This section summanzes die role of community leaders in die production and distribution of valued goods, and examines how dieir exchange networks compare with diose of other community residents. As discussed above, die compositional data show diat in die Marana and Los Robles communities, die production of Tanque Verde Red-on-brown ceramics was neither centralized nor under elite control. The production of some commodities, such as obsidian tools, was partially centralized at some platform mound sites, but diis produaion occurred without elite intervention. Had obsidian production been conducted or controlled by the elite, manufacturing debris at platform mound sites should have been concentrated near die mounds. Because few smdies of production organization have been conducted dial use Because the residents of the platform mound villages were economically and socially advantaged relative to other people, diey would have been in a position to select part-time specializations with high social and economic returns. 241 Just as the community leaders did not control or paiticipaie in the production process, the compositional data indicate that they did not control die distribution of high value goods. The evidence shows that in the Marana and Los Robles communities, sites near the bottom of the hierarchy obtained Tanque Verde Red-on-brown ceramk» through independently maintained exchange ties. Similar conclusions were reached concerning obsidian exchange in die Escalante community (Peterson et al. 1997). Although other settlements in the Marana community obtained ceramics through centralized mechanisms, diese did not include elite-controlled redistribution. Had ceramic distribution been controlled by the elites, then the compositional diversity of the ceramics obtained from near die mound vicinity should have mirrored diat found in the collecdons obtained from die remaining areas of die Marana Mound site, Los Motteros, Hundngton Ruin, and Chicken Ranch. The data presented in Tables 6.2 and 6.12. however, indicate that this was not the case. Significantly, similar findings characterize die Pueblo Grande obsidian assemblage. At that platform mound site, researchers found diat significant associations existed between certain burial groups and obsidian sources. They interpreted this as evidence that obsidian was not obtained dirough elite-controlled redistnbudon at Pueblo Grande (Peterson et al. 1997:254). Rather dian mirroring the composidonal diversity found elsewhere in die community, a growing body of evidence suggests diat the community leaders living nearest die pladbrm mounds maintained more restricted exchange ties dian other residents. Three intrasite studies of compositional diversity have been conducted at Hohokam platform mound sites. In ail of diese smdies, artifact collecdons recovered from near platform mounds exhibited lower composidonal diversity dian diose obtained from odier areas of die sites. These studies include (I) die analysis of red ware ceramics from die site of Las Colinas (Abbott 1988); (2) die analysis of obsidian artifacts from die site of Pueblo Grande (Peterson 1994; Peterson et al. 1997); and (3) die analysis 242 of Tanque Verde Red-on-brown ceramics from die Marana Mound site (die present study). Why die elites should obtain dieir coounodides from f^r sources is unknown, aldiougb some possible reasons can be advanced. One explanation may be diat die restricted trade ties simply reflea die smaller number of people residing at the platform mound dian in odier residential compounds. If single households resided at platform mound compounds but multiple households lived at other compounds, dien die difierences in compositional groups may reflect simply die number of individuals maintaining trade des. A second possibility is diat die trade des maintained by die elites reflect restrined allegiances maintained for social or polidcai reasons. Alternative Model In die research design 1 presented an alternative model to account for die differential distribution of arti&cts within settlement clusters. This model held that exchange within Southwestern setdement communities occurred primarily dirough reciprocal trade ties radier dian dirough centralized distnbution mechanisms. Nonlocal and other differentially distributed goods were available to all communis members, but were consumed in higher quantities by wealdiier members who used diese commodities to strengthen dieir economic and social positions. This model is partially supported by die compositional data. The distribution of Tanque Verde Red-on-brown ceramics shows diat these vessels were available to ail members of die Marana and Los Robl« communities. That dieir differentiat distributions did not result from elite control of die production and distribution process is supported by die compositional data. The interpretation diat diese wares were exchanged primarily dirough reciprocal trade ties, however, is not upheld. Radier. different exchange systems were shown to characterize different villages widiin die communities. While reciprocal trade ties character^ most sites, sites located near die 243 top of the settlement hierarchy were characterized by some form of centralized distribution mechanisms. Compared wid] other sites in the commmiities, sites having high proportions of Tanque Verde Red-on-brown ceramics also have greater quantities of nonlocal and other luxury goods (Bayman 1994; S. Fish et al. 1992b). The association of Tanque Verde Red-on-brown ceramics with other status indicators suggests diat they fimctioned as wealth items and that their differential consumption reflects social and economic differences. Using Brumfiel and Earle's (1987) terminology, such items are referred as generalized wealth. Access to these wares was not restricted in die sense diat they could be consumed only by the elite, but they were consumed more frequently by persons of elevated status. A similar situation characterizes ceramic consumption among the modem-day Kalinga of the Phillipines (Graves 1994). There, wealthy households maintain larger ceramic inventories dian poorer ones despite the fact that they do not control pottery production and exchange. Instead, wealthy Kalinga use exchange (and the obb'gations that flow firom it) to promote their prestige Wealthy households contain more pottery, and often more expensive pottery, because of the economic and political role they hope to play in the community (Graves 1994:164). These findings show tiiat die economic organkation of settlement communities does not t^l neatiy into either of the two schools of diought diat have dominated die study of Southwestern site clusters. These schools, prominent in die 1980s, were characterized by opposing viewpoints diat have been intensely and often passionately debated. According to one school of diought. the presence of settiement hierarchies indicates die existence of a highly complex society, characterized 244 by elite leaders who controlled the production and exchange of coounodities from the largest villages (Lightfoot 1984; McGuire 1985; Upham 1982; Wilcox 1991). The alternative view holds diat the prehistoric communities were character^ by an egalitarian society, in which each village was largely self-sufficient and economically independent of the large villages (Downum 1993a; Reid 198S; Reid and Whittlesey 1989). According to this viewpoint, ceramics were produced in ahnost every household and the exchange that did occur took place through the practice of gifting and informal trade between individuals. As discussed above, neither of these models adequately describes the production and distribution of Tanque Verde Red-on-brown ceramics. Contrary to the expectations of the egaliurian models proposed by Reid (198S; Reid and Whittlesey 1989), ceramics were not produced in every village. Instead, many households were dependent on other producers for the acquisition of these wares. Also in contrast to the expectations of the egalitarian models, some centralized distribution mechanisms were present. However, die data do not completely meet the expectations of die elite control models. Neidier production nor distribution was regulated by the elite. Radier. the economic organization indicated for die Marana and Los Robles communities appears to have been somewhere between diat suggested by either of these models. Leadership Strategies in tlie Marana Commuiuty The data presented in diis study were used to describe how die production, distnbution. and consumption of one commodity were organized in die study region. To explain why diis organization developed, however, is more difficult. In die case of die Marana community, an unusually large quantity of information is available, making it possible to begin to address diis question. In diis section, I suggest diat die ceramic pattemmg evidenced in die Marana community reflects strategies used by community leaders to solidify their positions. To understand why the 245 leaders selected die particular mix of strategies that they did. however, requires an understanding of the local cultural sequence and the history of population shifts. Here, I present a brief reconstruction of the leadership strategies indicated by the ceramic patterns, and outline some possible reasons why the data take die form that they do. The following discussion of leadership strategies draws upon a recent model advanced by Blanton et al. (1996a) and expanded upon by Feinman (1995). This model suggests that there are two types of leadership strategies diat can be adopted: a network-based strategy, in which the leaders' prestige derives largely from the linkages that he or she has with individuals from other regions; and a corporate-based strategy, in which die leaders' position derives primarily from the support of kinship-based groups. In die network mode, emphasis is placed on individual prestige and wealdi accumulation. Kinship is de-emphasized, and long-distance trade and the acquisition of exotic wealdi goods are pursued. Under this strategy. leaders maintain dieir status largely by excluding non-elite members of die community from trade networks. The corporate mode, in contrast, is characterized by an emphasis on kinship affiliation and conununal ritual. Societies dominated by diis mode are characterized by the construction of public architecmre and relatively suppressed economic differentiation. In a society dominated by a corporate mode of leadership, all members of die communty have more or less equal access to trade goods and trade networks (Feinman 1995). Patterns of ceramic consumption indicate diat elements of both saategies were present in the Marana community. As predicted by the network mode, wealth differentials are evident between sites near the top of the settlement hierarchy and die lower-tier settiements (Bayman 1994). These wealth differences were indicated by patterns in obsidian and shell consumption, and in the consumption of Tanque Verde Red-on-brown vessels. The patterns suggest Uiat access to 246 Tanque Verde Red-on-brown vessels was determined in part by die status and wealth of the individual. Further, the vessels appear to have circulated in different exchange networks, and whether or not an individual or settlement participated in a given network also was affected by social status. Those individuals or settlements that could ''afford" to acquire significant numbers of Tanque Verde Red-on-brown vessels shared exchange networks.Those persons who could acquire and consume only a limited number of vessels, however, appear to have been excluded from these trade ties. These data patterns suggest that the individuals residing at the higher-tier settlements used a network-based strategy to foster social mequality between themselves and the residents of the lower-tier settlements. Despite these indications of a network-based strategy, odier evidence suggests die presence of a corporate-based leadership. Such evidence includes a lack of economic differentiation between die residents of the platform mound site (Bayman 1994), and shared access to exchange networks between the residents of the the Marana Mound compound and those of die Marana Mound, Los Morteros, Huntington, and Chicken Ranch sites. These data demonstrate diat the leaders of die communis- diat is, diose people who lived widiin die platform mound compound- were not characterized by substantially greater wealth or access to trade networks dian other residents of diese sites. Such patterns, according to Feinman (199S), are characteristic of societies dominated by a corporate-based leadership mode. How are we to interpret these seemingly contradiaory patterns? 1 suggest that the data patterns are not contradictory at all, but rather indicate die use of different strategies in different social settings. The likelihood that these modes coexist in most societies has been acknowledged by bodi Feinman (1995:264) and Blanton et. al (1996b:), and fiirther emphasized by Demarest (1996) and Kolb (1996). To understand why a particular mode dominated in a particular social 247 setting, however, requires an understanding of the local social and historical setting. In the Marana community, I argue that the use of diese two very different types of leadership strategies was related to the population fluxes that characterized the area at the start of the Classic period. Significantly, with the exception of the Marana Mound site, all of the settlements characterized by shared exchange networks and high proportions of Tanque Verde Red-on-brown sherds had lengthy pre-Classic period occupations. Those settiemeats excluded from tiiese networks, however, were all newly settled at the start of the Classic period. Littler (1997) has proposed that in the Salt River region, pre-CIassic Hohokam communities were dominated by a corporate leadership mode. By the Classic period, however, he suggests diat tiiis pattern had undergone a shift toward a more network-oriented strategy. The ceramic paaeming evidenced in die Marana community may reflect tendencies in this area. As already discussed, the sites of Los Morteros, Huntington, and Chicken Ranch ail exhibit evidence of lengthy pre-Classic occupations. In all of these cases, settiement appears to have extended back to at least Colonial (700-900 A.O.) times. It is clear, dien, tiiat tiie occupants of these sites had a long history of interaction. This history would have led to close social ties between the inhabitants, which undoubtedly continued throughout the occupational sequence. It is even possible diat these settiements were integrated through a corporate-based leadership strategy. If so. it seems likely that diese ties and die corporate strategy wouU have cootinued into die early Classic period. Sometime near the end of die pre-Classic period or the start of the Classic period, the Marana Mound site was settied. Like diat of Los Morteros and the other sites discussed above, die artifact assemblage firom die Marana Mound site is dominated by high proportions of Tanque Verde Red-on-brown sherds and odier materials typically associated with die Tucson Basin tradition. The similarity of diis assemblage to Tucson Basin sites suggests diat die Marana Mound 248 settlers may have originated from that area. It seems further likely that the settlers, or at least the residents of die platform mound compound, derived from the sites of Los Morteros or Huntington. As discussed in Chapter Three, a canal links the Marana Mound site with that of Los Morteros. indicating the integration of these two settlements. It is unlikely diat outsiders would have been able to construct die platform mound and command leadership of diese already established communities. Instead, it seems more likely diat the people who lived at die base of die platform mound were akeady established elites from long-standing settiements in die pre-CIassic community. If so. these elites would have had kin ties with die residents of previously-occupied sites such as Los Morteros, Huntington, and Chkken Ranch. These ties would have been resulted in a continuation of die corporate strategy that characterized die pre-CIassic mode, and would explain die shared exchange networks evident between diese sites. Odier newly setded areas of die Marana communi^r. however, appear to reflect population influxes from odier areas. These sites ate characterized by low frequencies of Tanque Verde Red- on-brown ceramics, which distinguishes diese sites firom odiers in die Tucson Basin. These patterns suggest diat die immigrants came from some area odier dian die Tucson Basin: one not characterized by a significant red-on-brown tradition. As newcomers, diese setders appear to have been excluded from die established trade networks. They would not have had kin ties with die residents of sites such as Los Morteros. Huntington. Chicken Ranch and Marana Mound, and dierefore would not have been a part of die corporate group. To maintain dieir elite stanis. dien. die preexisting leaders of die commum'ty were forced to adopt a new leadership strategy. The ceramic data suggest diat the leaders of die Marana community adopted a network strategy when dealing widi diese newcomers. By excluding them from established exchange networks, they were able to mainfain social inequality and secure their social positions over diese new immigrants. 249 Concloding Thoughts This study demonstrates tiie importance of using direct evidence for modeling prehistoric economic organizatioa. The data presented here contribute to the understanding of one common settlement pattern, the hierarchical site cluster. As in any archaeological study, the patterns demonstrated here may or may not apply to other commodities or other settlement communities. Some of the limitations of the present study have ahready been discussed. These include die use of only one artist type (Tanque Verde Red-on-brown ceramics) for modeling prehistoric organization, and the restriction of the study to only one geographical region (the far northern Tucson Basin). In particular, it is stressed diat die patterns exhibited by die Tanque Verde Red-on- brown ceramics may not characterize all arti^ types. In studying conimum'ty boundaries, for example, different wares have been demonstrated to exhibit different spatial patterns (Abbott 1994a, 1994b). Additionally, the role tiiat die elites played in die production and distribution of goods may have varied depending on die commodity. In particular, rare commodities such as turquoise or strombus shells may have circulated in different networks. Finally, different settiement communities were undoubtedly characterized by different economic organizations. This is true even for different Hohokam platform mound communities. Communities in die Phoenix Basin, for example, are likely to have been more hierarchically organized than die Marana and Los Robles clusters. Nonetiieless. die data presented here and in odier studies suggest diat elitc- controUed production and distribution may have been more rare prehistorically than is sometimes assumed by Southwestern archaeologists. Despite diese limitations, die present smdy offers several contributions to archaeologists studying settiement communities in other regions. Perhaps most importantly, it demonstrates diat differential distributions of artif^ need not indicate elite-controlled production and distribution. 250 The data further suggest diat economic interpretatioiis based on setdement patterns and artifact distributions should be viewed with caudon. In particular, it cannot be assumed that small sites having few luxury goods were dependent on the larger settlements for the acquisition of these commodities. Significantly, similar findings are emerging from the smdy of the large Mississippian communities in the soudieastem United States, where models of elite-controlled production and distnl)ution are being discarded based on new data (Blitz 1990; Brown et al. 1990 Cobb 1988). The present study also demonstrates the need for caution in interpreting compositional data. Production location is sometimes inferred using the "criterion of abundance" hypothesis (Bishop et al. 1982:201). This thesis holds that a greater proportion of pottery is consumed at its production location than is distributed to any other single site. Based on this thesis, archaeologists have sometimes interpreted the site (or sites) containing the highest proportion of any compositional group as the production locale of diat group. This study, however, shows that such conclusions may not ahvays be sound. If the composnional group was not manufactured at any of the sampled sites, then incorrect conclusions could result from this method. The potential for erroneous conclusions was demonstrated in Chapter Sbi, where it was shown that high proportions of Group F sherds characterized the Muchas Casas assemblage. Contrary to die criterion of abundance thesis, die petrographic data proved that Group F vessels were not made at diat site. Finally, the present study demonstrates diat compositional analysis can be an effective method for studying prehistoric economic organization, even within relatively small geographical areas. The need for direct data to address economic issues is clearly demonstrated: many of the conclusions presented here are at odds with previous interpretations based on indirect evidence. Aldiough other direa methods for studying economic organization exist, most of diese techniques 251 require data from a large number of excavated sites. Compositional analysis, in contrast, is a relatively inexpensive technique that can provule information on a large number of sites. This sudy demonstrates the usefiibiess of diis technique for studying not only regional issues, but intraregional topics as well. APPENDIX ONE PROVENIENCE AND OTHER INFORMATION FOR ANALYZED SHERD SAMPLES Appendix 1. Sherd Samples Analyzed Aniil' Provciuence Site Nanie ASM Site Oiher Siic No.^ Site Type Temper NAA No. Analysis^ Analysis'* PF«)OI Muraiia Ctiinniuiiily N/A AA;I2;470 M 18 Noiihabiiaiion Yes Yes PF002 Maraiu Coiiimunity N/A AA: 12:470 M 18 Nonhahiiailun No Yes PF003 Marana Cominuniiy N/A AA.8.82 M-254 Habitation No Yes PFO(M Maraiu Cuiiimuniiy N/A AA.-8:82 M-254 Habiiaiion No Yes PFCXIS Muraita Cumnmniiy La Vaca Enfcnna AA.8:27 M-174 Habiiaiiun No Yes PF006 Maraiu Coinmiiniiy La Vaca Enfenna AA;8:27 M-174 Habiiaiion No Yes PF007/0()8 Marana Cuinmuiiiiy N/A AA:8:I86 M-376 Unknown Yes Yes PF009 Maraiu Coinmuniiy N/A AA;8;S9 M-220 Unknown Yes Yes PFOlO Maraiu Coimnuniiy N/A AA:8.80 M-252 Habiiaiion Yes Yes PPOU Marana Cumniuniiy N/A AA: 12:646 M 165 Habiiaiion Yes Yes PF012 Maraiu Cummuniiy N/A AA;12:646 M-I6S Habitation No Yes PF0I3 Marana Cuininuniiy Sueno (le Saguaru AA:8;87 M-261 Habitation No Yes PF0J4 Marana Conununiiy N/A AA:8:94 M-268 Noidiabiiation No Yes PF0I5 Marana Ciimmuniiy Upland Ballcuun AA:8;I84 M-374 Nonhabitation No Yes PF016 Maraiu Cummunity N/A AA:8:57 M-218 Nonhabiiaiion No Yes PFOl? Maraiu Coinmuniiy N/A AA:8:121 M-300 Noiihabiiation Yes Yes PF0I8 Marana Coinmuniiy N/A AA:8:94 M-268 Nonliabiiaiion No Yes PF019 Marana Communiiy N/A AA;12:646 M-16S Habitation No Yes PP020 Marana Community N/A AA:12:646 M-I6S Habiiaiion No Yes PFOl I Marana Cummuniiy N/A AA;12:663 M 210 Unknown No Yes PF022 Marana Cummuniiy N/A AA:8:86 M 260 Nonliabiiaiion No Yes PF023 Marana Cummuniiy N/A AA;8;90 M-264 Unknown No Yes PF024 Los Roblcs Comnumiiy Pinal Air Park AA:7:20 M-296 Habiiaiion No Yes PP025 Maraiu Coininuiiity N/A AA;8:3I M-178 Habiiaiion No Yes PF026^ Maraiu Coinmuniiy Suenu lie Saguaro AA:8:87 M 261 liabiiuliun No Yes PF027 Maraiu Coinmuniiy N/A AA:8 98 M-272 Unknown Yes Yes PF«28 Marana Cummuniiy N/A AA:8:31 M 178 Hahiittiiun No Yes PF02'J Maraiu Cummuniiy N/A AA:8:28 M 175 Habiiaiiun No Yes Pi-'l)1() Maraiw Coininiinliv Ijt Vaca Bnfenna AA8:27 M-174 Habiiaiiun No Yes Appendix I. Sherd Samples Analyzed (continued) Anid' ProvenicDcc Site Name ASM Site Otiwr Site No.^ Site Type Temper No. Analysis^ > z PF()31 Manilla Coinmuniiy La Vaca Enfermn AA:8:27 M-174 Habitation No Yes PF032 Marana Cunununiiy Upland Ballcourt AA:8:184 M-374 Nonhabitation Yes Yes PF033 Manina CiiinmiutUy Chicken Ranch AA;I2.I18 TB-501 Habiution Yes Yes PF034 Nuniiern 'Hicsun Basin Cumu AA. 12.409 TB-223 Habitation Yes Yes PF«3S Noitliern IXicsun Basin Ina-Silverbcll AA:I2:3I1 TB-167 Habitation Yes Yes PF03h Maraiiu Community Huntington Site AA: 12:73 TB-502 Habitation Yes Yes PF037 Maraiia Cunimuiiiiy Los Moncros AA; 12:57 N/A Habitation No Yes PF038 Maraiw Community Los Moncros AA;12;57 N/A Habitation Yes Yes PF039 Marana Community Los Moneros AA: 12:57 N/A Habitation Yes Yes PF(MO Maruiw Community Los Moncros AA:I2:57 N/A Habitation Yes Yes PF(M3 Marana Community Los Moneros AA:I2;57 N/A Habiution No Yes PF()44 Maruiia Comrouniiy Los Muneros AA:I2;57 N/A Habil«lion No Yes PF(M5 Nurtliern IVcson Basin Como AA:12:409 TB-223 Habitation No Yes PF046 Marana Community Huntington Site AA: 12:73 TB-502 Habitation Yes Yes PF047 Marana Conununity Huntington Site AA: 12:73 TB-502 Habiution Yes Yes PF(M8 Nonhcrn Tucson Basin Como AA. 12.409 TB-223 Habiution No Yes PF04!) Northern Tucson Basin Ina-Silverbcl) AA; 12:31! TB-167 Habitation No Yes PFOSO Marana Community La Vaca Enferma AA:8;27 M-174 Habitation No Yes PP051 Marana Community Chicken Ranch AA:12:1I8 TB-501 Habitation No Yes PF052 Marana Community N/A AA: 12:470 M-18 Nonhabitation No Yes PF0S3 Marana Community Sueno lie Saguaro AA;8;87 M-261 Habitation No Yes PF054 Marana Ctimmiinity N/A AA:8:98 M-272 Unknown No Yes PF072 Marana Community Marana Mound AA 12:251 M-200 Habitation No Yes PF073 Maruiu Community Marana Mound AA: 12:251 M-200 Habitation No Yes PF074 Marana Coiiiinunity Marana Mound AA;I2:25I M-200 Habitation No Yes PF075 Maranu Community Marana Mound AA;12;251 M-200 Habitation Nu Yes PF()76 Marana Commiiniiy Marana Mound AA 12 251 M-200 Habitation Yes Yes PF<)77 Marana Community Marana Mound AA.12 251 M 200 Mabitation Vcs Yes l>l=()78 Miimm cmiuiuiuiu Mnrnna M.nimi AA M-20lt Habitation YSSj Yes Appendix I. Slierd Samples Analyzed (continued) Aiiid' ProvciiiciiL'c Site Name ASM Silc Oilier Sice No.^ Site Type Temper NAA No. Analysis^ Analysis'* PR)79 Maraiu Ct)miimiiiiy Marana Moumi AA;I2:25I M-200 Habitation Nu Yes PF080 Maraiu Communiiy Marana Mound AA.12.251 M-200 Habiuiion No Yes PF081 Maraiu Cuininuniiy Marana Mound A A. 12:251 M-200 Habitation Yes Yes PF0H2 Maraiu CuininunUy Marana Muund AA: 12:251 M-200 Habitation No Yes PF083/)28 Maraiu Cummuniiy Marana Mound AA:i2:25l M-200 Habitation Yes Yes PF(MI4 Maraiu Cununiiiiiiy Marana Mound AA:I2:251 M-200 Habitation Yes Yes PF(»85 Maraiu Communiiy Maraiu Mound AA:12;251 M-200 Habitation No Yes PF086 Maraiu Communiiy Marana Mound AA:12:251 M-200 Habiution Yes Yes PF0K7 Marana Communiiy Marana Mound AA:12:2SI M-200 Habitation Yes Yes PF088 Marana Cummuniiy Marana Mound AA;l2;25l M-200 Habitation Yes Yes PP089 Marana Communiiy Marana Mound AA:12:251 M-200 Habitation No Yes PF(WO Marana Community Marana Mound AA;I2;25I M-200 Habitation Yes Yes PF09J Marana Community Marana Mound AA:>2;251 M-200 Habiution No Yes PF092 Marana Community Marana Mound AA:I2;25I M-200 Habitation No Yes PF0»J3 Marana Community Marana Mound AA;12;25I M-200 Habitation No Yes PF»»4 Marana Community Marana Mound AA:12:25l M-200 Habiution Yes Yes PF095 Marana Community Marana Mound AA:I2:25I M-200 Habitation No Yes PFOWi Marana Community Marana Mound AA;l2;25l M-200 Habitation No Yes PP0D7 Maraiu Community Marana Mound AA:I2:251 M-200 Habitation No Yes PF(W8 Marana Community Marana Mound AA:I2:2SI M-200 Habitation No Yes PFOW Marana Communiiy Marana Minind AA;12;25> M-200 Habitation Nu Yes PFI()0 Marana Communiiy Maraiu Mound AA; 12:251 M-200 Habitation No Yes PFIOI Marana Community Marana Muund AA:I2:2SI M-200 Habitation Nu Yes PF102 Marana Community Marana Mound AA;12;25l M-200 Habitation No Yes PFI03 Maraiu Cummuniiy Maraiu Muund AA:12:251 M 200 Habiiutlun Nu Yes PFI04 Marana Cummuniiy Marana Muund A A;12:251 M 200 Habiiutiun Nu Yes PFI05 Marana Cummuniiy Maraiu MiHiiid AA:12:251 M 200 Habitaiiun No Yes PM()6 Maraiu Cummuniiy Marana Mmiiid AA:12:251 M 2(KI Hiilntatiuii Nu Yes PF107 Maraiu Cummumtv Maraiu Muuixi AA:t2:25l M ?«*> Hahuuiiim Nu Yes Appendix 1. Sherd Samples Analyzed (continued) Anid' Proveiuciicc Site Naine ASM Sice Oilier Site No.^ Site Type Temper NAA No. Analysis^ Analysis'* PF108 Mnrniu Cuininuniiy Marana Mounil AA. 12.251 M-200 Habitation No Yes PFI09 Manilla Cominuniiy Marana Mound AA:J2:25I M-200 Habiiaiion No Yes PFIIO Marana Conununity Marana Mouml AA;I2;2SI M-200 Habiiaiion No Yes PFin Marana Cunununiiy Marana Mount AA.l2;25t M-200 Habiution No Yes ppn2 Marana Coinmuniiy Marana Mound AA; 12:231 M-200 Habiiaiion Yes Yes PF113 Mantivk Communiiy Marana Mound AA.12:25I M-200 Habiiaiion No Yes PFn4 Marana Cominuniiy Marana Mound AA;12:2SI M-200 Habiution No Yes PF1I5 Marana Cummuniiy Marana Mound AA:I2:25I M-200 Habiiaiion No Yes PF116 Marana Communiiy Marana Mound AA:I2:2SI M-200 Habitation No Yes PFI17 Marana Communiiy Marana Mound AA;12:2SI M-200 Habiution No Yes PFII8 Maraiu Communiiy Marana Mound AA:I2:2SI M-200 Habiution No Yes PFua Marana Communiiy Marana Mound AA;t2;25l M-200 Habitation No Yes PFI20 Marana Communiiy Marana Mound AA: 12:251 M-200 Habiution Yes Yes PF12I/122 Marana Communiiy Marana Mound AA: 12:251 M-200 Habiuiion Yes Yes PF123 Marana Communiiy Marana Mound AA:12.251 M-200 ttabiution Yes Yes PPI24 Marana Communiiy Marana Mound AA:I2:25I M-200 Habiuiion Yes Yes PF125 Marana Communiiy Marana Mound AA:I2:2SI M-200 Habiuiion No Yes PP126 Maraiu Communiiy Marana Mound AA; 12:251 M-200 Habiution No Yes PFI27 Marana Coimnuniiy Marana Mound AA:12:251 M-200 Habiuiion No Yes PF129 Marana Communiiy Marana Mound AA:12;2SI M-200 Habiuiion Yes Yes PF130 Marana Communiiy Marana Mound AA:12:25» M-200 Habiuiion Yes Yes PF13I Marana Communiiy Marana Mound AA: 12:251 M-200 Habiuiion Yes Yes PF132 Marana Communiiy Marana Mound AA; 12:251 M 200 Habiuiion Yes Yes PFI33 Maraiu Cominuniiy Marana Mound AA:12:251 M-200 Habitation Yes Yes PF134 Maraiu Communiiy Marana Mound AA:I2:25I M-2()0 Habiuiion Yes Yes PP13.S Maraiu Communiiy Marana Mound AA;l2;25l M 200 Haltiiaiiun Yes Yes PPI36 Maraiu roininimiiy Marana Mound AA: 12:251 M 200 Habiuiion Yes Yes PFI37 Maraiu Coinnuiniiy Marana Mmind AA:I2:25I M 2 Anid' Provenience Site Naine ASM Siie Oilier Site No.^ Sile Type Temper NAA No. Analysis^ Analysis'* PF139 Marana Community Marena Mound AA; 12:251 M-200 Habiialion Yes Yes PP140 Marana Community Los Moneros AA;>2;57 N/A Habitation Yes Yes PFI4I Muraiia Community Los Moneros AA: 12:57 N/A Habiialion Yes Yes PF142 Marana Community Los Moneros AA: 12:57 N/A Habitation Yes Yes PP143 Marana Community Los Moneros AA: 12:57 N/A Habitation Yes Yes PF144 Maratu Cummtmiiy Los Moneros AA: 12:57 N/A Habiialion No Yes PF145 Marana Communiiy Los Moneros AA:12:57 N/A Habitation Yes Yes PFJ46 Marana Commtmiiy Los Moneros AA: 12:57 N/A Habiialion Yes Yes PF147 Marana Communiiy Los Moneros AA:I2:57 N/A Habiialion Yes Yes PPI48 Marana Community Los Moneros AA: 12:57 N/A Habitation Yes Yes PFI49 Manna Communiiy Los Moneros AA;I2;57 N/A Habiialion Yes Yes PF150 Marana Community Marana Mouml AA: 12:251 M-200 Habitation Yes Yes PF151 Marena Community Marena Mound AA;12:251 M-200 Habitation Yes Yes PFI52 Marana Community Marana Mound AA:12:251 M-200 Habiialion Yes Yes PP153 Marena Community Marena Mound AA: 12:251 M-200 Habitation Yes Yes PPI54 Marana Communiiy Marana Mound AA:12:251 M-200 Habitation Yes Yes PFI56 Marana Community Marana Mound AA: 12:251 M-200 Habitation No Yes PPI57 Marana Community N/A AA; 12:674 TB-278 Habiution No Yes PFI58 Marena Community N/A AA: 12:674 TB-278 Habitation No Yes PF159 Marena Cotmnunity Rancho Derrio AA: 12:466 AA:12;3(ASU) Habitation No Yes PP160 Marena Community Muchas Casas AA;12:36S AA; 12;2(ASU) Habitation Yes Yes PF161 Marana Communiiy Muchas Casas AA; 12:368 AA;12:2(ASU) Habitation Yes Yes PP162 Marana Community Muchas Casas AA: 12:368 AA: 12:2(ASU) Habitation Yes Yes PFJ63 Marana Community Muchas Casas AA;12:368 AA:12;2(ASU) Habitation Yes Yes PFI64 Muruiia Community Muchas Casas AA; 12:368 AA: I2:2(ASU) Habitation Yes Yes PF165 Marana Community Muchas Casas AA:12:368 AA;12:2(ASU) Habitation No Yes PFI66 Marana Communiiy Muchas Casas AA:I2:368 AA:12:2(ASU) Habiialion Yes Yes PF167 Muraiia Cuinmuiiity Muclias Casas AA:I2:368 AA:I2:2(ASU) lluhiiation No Yes PFJ68 Marana Communitv Miiciws Casas AA:12:368 AA 12 2(ASIH Italnlation Yes Yes Appendix I. Sherd Samples Analyzed (continued) Aiiid* Provciiiciice Siie Name ASM Site Oilier Site No.^ Site Type Temper NAA No. Analysis^ Analysis'* PF169 Mnraivk Community Muctias Casas AA.12:368 AA:12;2(ASU) Habitation Yes Yes PFI70 Maraiia Coinniuniiy Ranciiu Baju AA: 12:367 AA:12;1(ASU) Habitation No Yes PFI71 Marana Cumniuniiy Ranchu Oerriu AA:I2:466 AA;12;3(ASU) Habitation Yes Yes PP172 Marana Cummuniiy Ranclio Derrio AA:12:466 AA:12;3(ASU) Habitation Yes Yes PF173 Marana Cummuniiy Rancliu Derrio AA;I2:466 AA;12:3(ASU) Habitation Yes Yes PFI74 Marana Cummimiiy Ranclio Derrio AA: 12:466 AA: I2:3(ASU) Habitation No Yes PP175 Marana Communily Ranchu Derrio AA; 12:466 AA;I2:3(ASU) Habitation Yes Yes PP176 Marana Cummuniiy Rancho Derrio AA:12:466 AA;12:3(ASU) Habiiatlon Yes Yes PP177 Marana Cummuniiy Rancho Derrio AA:12:466 AA:12;3(ASU) Habitation Yes Yes PPI78 Marana Cummuniiy Rancho Derrio AA:12:466 AA:12;3(ASU) Habitation Yes Yes PFI79 Marana Cununmmy Rancho Derrio AA:12:466 AA;12;3(ASU) Habitation Yes Yes PF180 PttoeniK Basin Pueblo Gramle U;9:7 N/A Habitation No Yes PF18I Plioenix Basin Pueblo Grande U;9;7 N/A Habitaiion No Yes PF182 Pliuenix Basin Pueblo Gramle U:9;7 N/A Habitation No Yes PF183 Marana Cummuniiy Marana Mound AA:12:2S1 M-200 Habitation No Yes PFI84 Marana Cummuniiy Marana Mound AA: 12:251 M-200 Habitation No Yes PF18S Maraiu Communily Marana Mound AA: 12:251 M-200 Habitation No Yes PF186 Marana Cummuitiiy Marana Mound AA: 12:251 M-200 Habitation No Yes PFI87 Marana Cummuniiy Marana Mound AA; 12:251 M-200 Habitation No Yes PFt88 Marana Cummuniiy Marana Mound AA;12;251 M-200 Habitaiion No Yes PFI89 Marana Communily Marana Mound AA:12;25I M-200 Habitation No Yes PFI90 Marana Cummuniiy Marana Mound AA:I2:25I M-200 Habiiaiion No Yes PF191 Marana Community Marana Mound AA;12:25l M 200 Habitation Nu Yes PPJ92 Marana Cummuniiy Marana Mound AA; 12:251 M 200 Habitation No Yes PF193 Marana Communily Marana Mound AA:12;25I M 200 Habitation No Yes PP194 Marana Communily Marana Mound AA;12;251 M-200 Habitation No Yes PPI95 Maraiu Communily Marana Mtnind AA:I2:25I M 200 Habitation No Yes PF196 Murana Conunuiiiiy Marana Mraind AA 12 251 M 200 Habitaiion No Yes PFI97 Maraiu rummiiiiilv Marana Mound AA l? ?5| M-3()0 Habiiaiion No Yes Appendix I. Sherd Samples Analyzed (continued) AniU' Prnveiiicncc Site Nanic ASM Site Other Site Nii.^ Site Type Temper NAA No. Analysis^ Analysis^ PF1»« MHrana Cummunity Marana Mound AA; 12:251 M-200 Habitation No Yes PR 199 Marana Cummunity Marana Mound AA:I2:25I M 200 Habitation No Yes PP200 Marana Cunununiiy Marana Mouml AA;l2;25l M-200 Habitation No Yes PF20I Marana Cummuniiy Marana Mound AA:12:231 M-200 Habiution No Yes PF202 Marana Cumnumiiy Marana Mound AA;I2;2SI M-200 Habiution No Yes PP203 Marana Community Marana Mound AA:l2:25l M-200 Habiution No Yes PF204 Marana Cummuniiy Marana Mound AA:I2;251 M-200 Habitation No Yes PF205 Marana Community Marana Mound AA;I2;2SI M-200 Habiution No Yes PF206 Marana Community Marana Mound AA:12.251 M-200 Habitation No Yes PF207 Marana Community Marana Mound AA:12:251 M-200 Habitation No Yes PP208 Marana Community Marana Mound AA:l2;25l M-200 Habitation No Yes PF209 Marana Community Marana Mound AA:12;2S1 M-200 Habitation No Yes PF2I0 Marana Community Marana Mound AA:I2:25I M-200 Habitation No Yes PF2\l Marana Community Marana Mound AA;I2;2S1 M-200 Habitation No Yes PF2I2 Marana Community Marana Mound AA:12:251 M-200 Habitation No Yes PF2I3 Marana Community Marana Mound AA:12:2SI M-200 Habitation No Yes PF2I4 Marana Community Marana Mound AA:I2;2S1 M-200 Habiution No Yes PF215 Marana Cummuniiy Marana Mound AA:12:251 M-200 Habitation No Yes PF216 Marana Community Marana Mound AA:12:25I M-200 Habiution No Yes PF217 Marana Community Marana Mound AA:12:25I M-200 Habitation Yes Yes PF2I8 Marana Community Marana Mound AA; 12:251 M-200 Habitation No Yes PF219 Lower Sana Cr\u N^A AA.6;2 N/A Habitation No Yes PF220 Lower Santa Cruz N/A AA:6:2 N/A Habitation No Yes PF22I Luwer Santa Cnu N/A AA:6:2 N/A Habitation No Yes PF222 Lower Santa Cnu N/A AA:6:2 N/A Habitation No Yes PF223 Lower Sania Cnu N/A AA;6;2 N/A Habitation No Yes PF224 Lower Santa Cnu N/A AA:6;2 N/A Habiution No Yes PF225 Lower Santa Cnu N/A AA;6;2 N/A Habitation No Yes PF22ft Lower SuiUa Cnu N/A AA:6:2 Haliiiaiiiin No Ye, Appendix 1. Sherd Samples Analyzed (cominued) Anid' Pfoveiiicncc Site Nanie ASM Site Oilier Site Nii.^ Site Type Temper NAA No. Analysis^ Analysis'* PF228 Phiienix Busiii Las Colinas T:12;10 N/A Habiution No Yes PP229 Phucnix Basin Las Coliius T;I2:I0 N/A Habitation No Yes PF230 PhtwniK Basin Las Colinas T:12;10 N/A Habiution No Yes PF231 Pliuenix Basin l^s Colinas T:12;10 N/A Habitation No Yes PF232 Phoenix Basin Las Colinas T:12.I0 N/A Habitaiion No Yes PF233 Phoenix Basin l^s Colinas T:I2:I0 N/A Habitation No Yes PF234 Plioenix Basin Las Colinas T:12:10 N/A Habitation No Yes PP235 Ptioenix Basin Ijis Colinas T;I2:I0 N/A Habitation No Yes PF236 Phoenix Basin Las Colinas T:I2;I0 N/A Habitation No Yes PF237 Ptioenix Basin Las Colinas T:I2;10 N/A Habiution No Yes PF238 Phoenix Basin Las Colinas T.I2;I0 N/A Habiution No Yes PF239 Phoci^x Basin Las Colinas T.I2;10 N/A Habiution No Yes PF240 Phoenix Basin Las Colinas T;12:10 N/A Habiution No Yes PF24I Phoenix Basin Las Colinas T:I2:I0 N/A Habiution No Yes PP242 Phoenix Basin Las Colinas T;I2:10 N/A Habiution No Yes PF243 Souiheni Sania Cruz Puma de Agua BB; 14:44 N/A Habiution No Yes PF244 Southern Santa Ciuz Puma tie Agua BB; 14:44 N/A Habiution No Yes PF245 Southern Sania Cruz Puna de Agua BB:14:44 N/A Habitation No Yes PF246 Papagueria Jackrabbil Ruin DD:I:6 N/A Habiution No Yes PF247 Papagucria Jackralibit Ruin DD:1:6 N/A Habitaiion No Yes PF248 Papagueria Jackrabbit Ruin DD:1:6 N/A Habitation No Yes PF249 Papagueria Jackrabbit Ruin DD:I:6 N/A Habiution No Yes PF250 Papagueria Jackralibit Ruin DD:1.6 N/A Habitation No Yes PF25I Papagueria Jackrabbit Ruin DD:I:6 N/A Habitation No Yes PF252 Pa|iagueria Jackrabbit Ruin DD:I:6 N/A Habiuiion No Yes PF253 Papagueria Jackrabbit Ruin DD:I:6 N/A Habiution No Yes PF254 Papagueria Jackrabbit Ruin DD: 1:6 N/A Habiuiion No Yes PF25S Pa|>agueriu Jackrabbit Ruin DO: 1:6 N/A Habitation No Yes PF?56 StuHhern Simla Cm/. P«i«a lie Aciia BB 13 4K N/A Hahiiatiou Yes Appendix t. Sherd Samples Analyzed (cuniinued) Aiiid' Pruveiiieiice Site Name ASM Site Odier Sile No.^ She Type Temper NAA No. Analysis^ Analysis'* PF2S7 Suuiheni Saiila Cruz Puma tie Agua BB; 13:48 N/A Habiution No Yes PP258 Souiheni Saitta Cruz PuniB dc Agua BB.13.48 N/A Habitation No Yes PH25f> SuuUieni SaiiU Cruz Puma lie Agua BB;I3:43 N/A Habitation No Yes l'F260 Eastern Tucson Basin University InJian Ruin BB:9:33 N/A Habitation No Yes PP261 Eastern Tucson Basin University litilian Ruin BB:9:33 N/A Habiution No Yes PF262 Easicm Tucson Basin University Indian Ruin BB;».33 N/A Habitation No Yes PF253 Eastern Tucson Basin University hidian Ruin BB.9.33 N/A Habiution No Yes PP264 Phoenix Basin Foniried Hill T:13;8 N/A Habiution No Yes PF265 Phoenix Basin Foniried Hill T:I3;8 N/A Habiution No Yes PF256 Pliuenix Basin FoniPied Hill T;13.8 N/A Habiution No Yes PF267 Phoenix Basin Foniried Hill T.13:8 N/A Habiution No Yes PF268 Phoenix Basin Foniried Hill T:I3:8 N/A Habiution No Yes PF269 Phoenix Basin Fonified Hill T.13.8 N/A Habiution No Yes PF270 Phoenix Basin Foniried Hill T:I3:8 N/A Habiution No Yes PF271 Phoenix Basin FoniHed Hill T:I3:8 N/A Habiution No Yes PF272 Phoenix Basin PoniHcd Hill T;13.8 N/A Habiution No Yes PF273 Piioenix Basin Foniried Hill T;I3;8 N/A Habiution No Yes PF274 Marana Conununity Marana Mound AA:I2:2SI M-200 Habiution No Yes PF275 Maraiu Conununity Marana Mound AA:I2:2SI M-200 Habiution No Yes PF276 Marana Conununity Marana Mound AA: 12.251 M 200 Habiution No Yes PF277 Maruiu Community Marana Mound AA:I2:2SI M-200 Habiution No Yes PF278 Marana Conununily Maraiu Mound AA;I2:25I M-200 Habiution No Yes PF279 Marana Cunimunity Maraiu Mound AA:I2:2SI M-200 Habiution No Yes PF280 Maraiu Conununily Maraiu Mound AA 12 251 M-200 Habitation No Yes PF281 Maraiu Coiiiinuiiiiy Maraiu MiHind AA. I2 251 M-200 Habitation No Yes PF282 Maraiu Comnumity Maraiu Mimnd AA 12:251 M-200 Habiution No Yes PF283 Maraiu Coiniminity Maraiu Mmind AA.12.251 M-200 Habitation No Yes PF284 Muruiu Ciiinimiiiiiy Maraiu Mound AA 12 251 M-200 Habiuiion No Yes PF285 Maraiw Coinuumilv Maraiu Moui*! AA M 200 Haliitaiion No Yes Appendix i. Sherd Samples Analyzed (continued) Anid' ProvciuciiL'c Site Naiiic ASM Site Oilier Site No.^ Silc Type Temper NAA No. Analysis^ Analysis'* PF286 Marana Community Marana MounU AA;I2:2S1 M-200 Habitation No Yes PP287 Marana Cummuniiy Marana Mounl AA.U.251 M-200 Habitation No Yes PF288 Marana Coinmuniiy Marana MounJ AA;12:2SI M-200 Habitation No Yes PF289 Marana Communiiy Marana Mound AA.I2:25l M-200 Habitation No Yes PF29{) Marana Cuminiuiiiy Marana Mound A A.12:251 M-200 Habitation No Yes PF2'JI Marana Cummuniiy Marana Mound AA:I2:25I M-200 Habitation No Yes PF292 Maraiu Community Marana Mound AA; 12:251 M-200 Habitation No Yes PF293 Southern Santa Cniz A-Mouniain BB;13:22 N/A Habitation No Yes PF294 Southern Santa Cruz A-Mount«in BB: 13:22 N/A Habitation No Yes PF295 Southern Santa Cruz A-MounUiin BB;13:22 N/A Habitation No Yes PF296 Southern Santa Cruz A-Motmtain BB; 13:22 N/A Habitation No Yes PF297 SouUtent Santa Cruz A-Mountain BB;I3:22 N/A Habitation No Yes PF298 Southeni Santa Cruz A-Mountain BB; 13:22 N/A Habiution No Yes PF299 Southern Santa Criiz A-Mountain BB; 13:22 N/A Habitation No Yes PF300 Southern Santa Cruz A-Mounuiin BB:13:22 N/A Habitation No Yes PF301 Southern Santa Cruz A-Mountain BB; 13:22 N/A Habitation No Yes PF302 Southern Santa Cruz A-Mounuin BB:13:22 N/A Habitation No Yes PP303 Eastern Tucson Basin Whipuil BB:10:3 N/A Habiution No Yes PF304 Eastern Tticson Basin Whiptail BB:10;3 N/A Habitation No Yes PF305 Eastern "nicson Basin Whiptail BB:I0:3 N/A Habitation No Yes PF306 Eastern Tucson Basin Whiptail BB:I0:3 N/A Habitation No Yes PF307 Eastern TUcsun Basin Whiptail BB;I0;3 N/A Habitation No Yes PF30R Eastern T\icson Basin Whiptail BB:10:3 N/A Habitation No Yes PF309 Eastern Tucson Basin Whiptail BB:10:3 N/A Habitation No Yes PF3I0 Eastern 7\icson Basin Whiptail BB:I0:3 .N/A ilabitatiun No Yes PF3U Eastern Tucson Basin Wltiptail BB:I0:3 N/A Habitation No Yes PF3I2 Easleni Tucson Basin Wliiptail BB:10:3 N/A ilubilatioii No Yes PF3I3 Eastern Tucson Basin Tamiiie Vcnle Ruin BB:I4:I N/A llabitatiuii No Yes l'l-314 PjtMcrn Tucson Basin Tamiie Vcrite Ruin BB 14 1 N'A No Yes Appendix 1. Sherd Samples Analyzed (continued) Aniil' Provciueitce Site Naine ASM Site Other Site No.^ Site Type Temper NAA No. Analysis^ Analysis'* PF315 EaMern Tucson Basin Tanque Vertlc Ruin BB;I4:1 N/A Habitation No Yes PF3I6 Easieni Tucson Basin Tawiue Verile Ruin BB:I4:I N/A Habitation No Yes PF317 Baslero Tucson Basin Tani|ue Verde Ruin BB:I4:I N/A Habiution No Yes PF318 Easicm Tucson Basin Tani)ue Verde Ruin BB:i4:l N/A Habitation No Yes PF3I9 Easieni TUcson Basin Tanque Verde Ruin BB:I4:I N/A Habitation No Yes PP320 Easleni Tucson Basin Taiv)ue Verde Ruin BB.H.I N/A Habitation No Yes PP321 Easlern Tucson Basin Tanque Verde Ruin BB:14:1 N/A Habitation No Yes PF322 Easieni IVcson Basin Tawiue Verde Ruin BB;I4;I N/A Habitation No Yes PF323 Smithcni Sanu Cruz Maninc'/ Hill BB.13.2 N/A Habitation No Yes PF324 Nunhem Tucson Basin Hodges AA:I2:I8 N/A Habitation No Yes PF325 Nociliem 'I\icsun Basin Hodges AA:I2;18 N/A Habitation No Yes PP326 Northern Tucson Busin Hodges AA:I2:18 N/A Habitation No Yes PP327 Northern Tucson Basin Hodges AA.I2:i8 N/A Habitation No Yes PF328 Northern "nicsun Basin Nudges AA:I2;I8 N/A Habitation No Yes PP329 Nonhcrn Tucson Basin Hodges AA.12.I8 N/A Habiution No Yes PF330 Noflhem Tuaon Basin Hodges AA.i2.18 N/A HahiUlion No Yes PF331 Noithcm IMcson Basin Hodges AA.I2.18 N/A Habiuition No Yes PF332 Nonheni Tucson Basin Hodges AA:I2:I8 N/A Habitation No Yes PF333 Nonheni "nicson Basin Hodges AA:12;I8 N/A Habitation No Yes PF334 Northern Tucson Basin Hodges AA:12:18 N/A Habitation No Yes PF335 Nonheni Tucson Basin Hodges AA.I2.I8 N/A Habiution No Yes PF336 Northeni TUcson Basin Hodges AA:I2:I8 N/A Habitation No Yes PF337 Nonhern Tucson Basin HtxJges AA:I2;18 N/A Habitation No Yes PF338 Phoenix Basin Casa Grande N/A N/A Habitation No Yes PF339 Phoenix Basin Casa Grande N/A N/A Habiution No Yes PF340 Phoenix Basin Casa Grande N/A N/A Habiution No Yes PF34I Phoenix Basin Casa Grande N/A N/A Habitation No Yes PP342 Phoeitix Basin Casa Grande N/A N/A Habitation No Yes PF343 Phoenix Bwsiiii Casa Oramlc N/A N/A Habilalion No Yes Appendix 1. Sherd Samples Analyzed (continued) Anid' Proveiiicnt'c Site Nanie ASM Site Otiwr Site No.^ Site Type Temper NAA Nt>. Analysis^ Analysis" PF344 Phoenix Basin Casa Grande N/A N/A Habitation No Yes PF345 Phoenix Basin Casa GraniJe N/A N/A Habitation No Yes PF345 Phoerox Basin Casa Qramlc N/A N/A Habitation No Yes PF347 Manilla Cuiiununiiy Los Morieros AA.12:57 N/A Habitation Yes Yes PF348 Marana Community Los Motteros AA; 12:57 N/A Habitation Yes Yes PP349 Marena Community Los Moneros AA;12:57 N/A Habiution Yes Yes PF350 Marana Cummuniiy Chicken Ranch AA:I2:II8 TB-501 Habitation Yes Yes PF351 Marana Community Chicicen Ranch AA:I2:1I8 TB-501 Habitation Yes Yes PP352 Marana Community N/A AA;12.674 TB-278 Habitation No Yes PF353 Marana Community N/A AA; 12.674 TB-278 Habitation No Yes PF354 Marana Conununity Chickcn Ranch AA;l2;lt8 TB 501 Habitation No Yes PP355 Northern Tucson Basin Como AA;12:409 TB-223 Habitation Yes Yes PF357 Marena Conununity Huntington Site AA;I2.73 TB-502 Habitation No Yes PP3S8 Marana Community Huiaingfun Site AA:12:73 TB-502 Habitation Yes Yes PF359 Northern Tucson Basin Como AA;12;409 TB-223 Habiution Yes Yes PF360 Noiihem 'nicson Basin Como AA:I2:409 TB-223 Habitation Yes Yes PP361 Nonhern Tucson Basin Ina-Silverbell AA;t2;3ll TB 167 Habitation Yes Yes PF362 Southern Santa Cniz Salida del So) AA; 16:44 N/A Habitation No Yes PF363 Southeni Santa Cruz Salida del Sol AA:16:44 N/A Habitation No Yes PP364 Smiihem Santa Cmz Salida del So) AA:16:44 N/A Habiution No Yes PF365 Southern Santa Cniz Salida del Sol AA;16:44 N/A Habiution No Yes PF366 Smitiiem Santa Cruz Salida del Sol AA: 16:44 N/A Habitation No Yes PP367 Southern Santa Cm/ Salida del So) AA:I6:44 N/A Habitation No Yes PF368 Southern Santa Cniz Salida del So) AA:I6;44 N/A Habitation No Yes PF369 Southern Santa Cruz Salida del Sot AA; 16:44 N/A Haliitatiun No Yes PF370 Southern Santa Cniz Salida del Sol AA;I6:44 N/A Habitation No Yes PF37I Soulherii Siiiita Cruz Salida del Sol AA;I6:44 N/A Habitation No Yes PF372 Simtliern Santa Cm/ Salida del Sol AA; 16:44 N/A Hal>itation No Yes PP373 SiNilhcrn Simla Cruz Salida del Sol AA:I644 N/A Hnhiiaiion No Yes III I ^ Appendix I. Sherd Samples Analyzed (continued) Aiiid' Provciiicncc Site Name ASM Site Other Site No.^ Site Type Temper NAA No. Analysis^ Analysis'* PF374 Phuciiix Basiin Casa GraniJe N/A N/A Habitation No Yes PF37S Phoeiiix Baiiii) Casa Qranik N/A N/A Habitation No Yes PP376 Phuciiix Bnsiin Casa Granile N/A N/A Habitation No Yes PF377 Ptiueiiix Biiiiiii Casa Grantle N/A N/A Habitation No Yes PF378 Lus RoMeii Cummviiiiiy Los Robles MOUIKI AA.ir.2S R-138 Habitation No Yes PF379 Lus Riiblesi Cunununity Los Rubles Mound AA: 11:25 R-138 Habitation No Yes PF38(» Los Rublcii Cummuiiiiy N/A AA:7:9 R 19 Habitation No Yes PP381 Los Ruliles ConimunUy N/A A A. 7:9 R-19 Habitation No Yes PF382 Los Rohles Coniniuiij(y Los Rubles Mounl AA; 11:25 R-138 Habitation Yes Yes PF383 Lus Rublcsi CoinnmnUy Lus Robles Mound AA:ll;25 R-138 Habitation No Yes PF384 Lus Rubles Cuminuniiy Los Robles Mouml AA:11:25 R-138 Habitation No Yes PF385 Lus Rubles Cuinmuniiy Los Robles Mounil AA:11:25 R-I3B Habitation No Yes PP386 Lus Rubles Cuiiunuiiity Cake Ranch AA:7;3 N/A Habitation Yes Yes PP387 Los Rubles Communiiy Cake Ranch AA:7:3 N/A Habitation Yes Yes PF388 Lus Rubles Cummuniiy Cake Ranch AA:7;3 N/A Habitation Yes Yes PF389 Lus Rubles Cunununiiy Cake RaiKh AA:7:3 N/A Habitation Yes Yes PF390 Lus Rubles Community Cake Ranch AA;7:3 N/A Habitation Yes Yes PF39I Lus Rubles Cummuniiy Cake Ranch AA:7;3 N/A Haliilation Yes Yes PP392 Lus Rubles Cummuniiy Cake Ranch AA.7;3 N/A Habitation Yes Yes PF393 Lus Rubles Cummuniiy Cake Ranch AA:7:3 N/A Habitation Yes Yes PF394 Los Robles Community Cake Ranch AA:7:3 N/A Habitatiun Yes Yes PF395 Lus Robles Cummuniiy Cake Ranch AA:7:3 N/A Habitation Yes Yes PF396 Lus Rubles Cummiimiy Cake Ranch AA:7:3 N/A Habitation Yes Yes PF397 Lus Rubles Cuminuiuty Cake Ranch AA;7:3 N/A Habitation Yes Yes PP398 Lus Robles Community Cake Ranch AA:7:3 N/A Habitation Yes Yes PF399 Los Robles Cuimnunity Cake Ranch AA:7:3 N/A Habitation Yes Yes PF4t)l) Los Robles Cummuniiy Cake Ranch AA;7;3 N/A Habitutiun Yes Yes PP4()) Los Robles Cummuniiy Cake Ranch AA:7:3 N/A Habitatiun Yes Yes PR"? Los Rubles Cumimmitv Cake Ranch AA:7:3 N/A Habiiiiiioii Yes Yes Appendix 1. Sherd Samples Analyzed (cominued) AiiiU' Provciiieiicc Site Name ASM Siie Oilier Sile No.^ Sice Type Temper NAA No. Analysis'' Analysis'* PP403 Lu!i Rubles Cummuniiy Cake Ranch AA;7.3 N/A Habiialion Yes Yes PP404 Los Rubles Cumiiiuniiy Cake Ranch AA:7:3 N/A Habilaliun Yes Yes PF405 Lus Rubles Cuinmuniiy Cake Ranch AA;7:3 N/A Habiiaiiun Yes Yes PF4()6 Lus Rubles Cumiimnity Cake Ranch AA:7.3 N/A Habiialion Yes Yes PF407 Liis Rubles Cummuniiy Cake Ranch AA:7.3 N/A Habiialion Yes Yes PF408 Lus Rubles Communiiy Cake Ranch AA:7:3 N/A Habiialion Yes Yes PF4l)«> Lus Rubles Cuinmuniiy Cake Ranch AA:7:3 N/A Habilaliun Yes Yes PF4I(I Los Rubles Cuinmuniiy Cake Ranch AA;7:3 N/A Halijiaii Anid' ProvcniciiLC Site Naiiic ASM Site Odicr Site No.^ Site Type Temper NAA No. Analysis^ Analysis'* PF432 Maraiu Cuiniiiuiiiiy Muchas Cusas AA 12 368 AA:I2;2(ASU) Hahiialion Yes Yes PP434 Maraiu Comimmiiy Muchas Casas AA 12 368 AA;12;2(ASU) Hahiiaiion Yes Yes PF435 Maraiui Cuminiiiiiiy Muclias Casas AA 12 368 AA;I2:2(ASU) llabiiaiion Yes Yes PP436 Maruiia Coininuniiy Muclias Casas AA 12 368 AA;I2:2(ASU) Habitation Yes Yes PF437 Marnna Community Muctias Casas AA 12 368 AA:12;2(ASU) llabiiaiion Yes Yes PF438 Nonlierii 'nicstm Batjn Cojno AA 12 409 TB-223 Hahiialion Yes Yes PF439 Nonhcnt Tucson Basin Como AA 12 409 TB 223 Habitation Yes Yes PF440 Nortlieni Tncson Basin Como AA 12 409 TB-223 Habitation Yes Yes PF44I Nonhcrn 'Hicson Basin Coino AA 12 409 TB-223 Hahiialion Yes Yes PF442 Nonhcrn Tucson Basin Como AA 12 409 TB 223 Habitatiun Yes Yes PF443 Nunhern Tucson Basin Como AA 12 409 TB 223 Habitation Yes Yes PF444 Northuri) Tucson Basin Como AA 12 409 TB-223 Habitation Yes Yes PF445 Nonliem Tucson Basin Como AA 12 409 TB-223 Habitation Yes Yes PF446 Nunhern Tucson Basin Como AA 12 409 TB 223 Habitation Yes Yes PF447 Nonliem Tucson Basin Como AA 12 409 TB-223 Habitation Yes Yes PP448 Nonliem Tucson Basin Como AA 12 409 TB-223 Habitation Yes Yes Pl'449 Nonhcrn Tucson Basin Como AA 12 409 TB-223 Habitation Yes Yes PF450 Nonliem Tucson Basin Como AA 12 409 TB-223 Habitation Yes Yes PF451 Nonliem Tucson Basin Como AA 12 409 TB-223 Habiution Yes Yes PF452 Nonhem 'Hicson Basin Como AA 12 409 TB-223 Hahiialion Yes Yes PF453 Nonliem Tucson Basin Como AA 12 409 TB-223 Habitation Yes Yes PF454 Nonhurn I'ucsun Basin Como AA 12 409 TB-223 Hahiialion Yes Yes PF455 Nonliem Tucson Basin Como AA 12 409 TB-223 Habitation Yes Yes PF456 Nonliem Tucson Basin Como AA 12 409 TB 223 Habitation Yes Yes PF457 Nonliem Tucson Basin Como AA 12 409 TB 223 Hahiialion Yes Yes PF458 Nonliem 'Hicsoii Basin Como AA 12 409 TB 223 Habitation Yes Yes PP45'J Nonhcrn 'hicson Basin Coiiii) AA 12 409 TB 223 Hiibiiaiion Yes Yes PF46() Niinliorii 'htcsoii Basin Como AA 12 409 TB 223 Hahiialion Vcs Yes Pl-4hl Nonhcrn nicson B»Mn Ci'mv AA 12 4IM TB 223 Hultiiuiion VCN Yes Appendix I. Sherd Samples Analyzed (continued) Aiiid' Provenience Site Name ASM Siie Oilier Siie No.^ Site Type Temper NAA No. Analysis^ Analysis'* PP4ft2 Nonhcrn Tiicsun Busiii Como AA 12:409 TB223 Habitation Yes Yes PF463 Nudiicrn 'nicsun Basin Como AA 12:409 TB 223 Habitation Yes Yes PF464 Nunhern Tucson Basin Como AA 12:409 TB 223 Habitation Yes Yes PF465 Maraiu Cuminuniiy Los Morleros AA 12:57 N/A Habitation Yes Yes PF466 Maraiu Cuinmuniiy Los Morleros AA 12:57 N/A Habitation Yes Yes PF467 Maraiw Coinmuniiy Los Moncros AA 12:57 N/A Habitation Yes Yes PF46H Maraiia Coiiimiinily Los Morleros AA 12:57 N/A Habiiaiion Yes Yes PF46y Maram Cuinmuniiy Los Morleros AA 12:57 N/A Habitation Yes Yes PF470 Maraiu Community Los Morleros AA 12:57 N/A Habitation Yes Yes PF47I Maraiu Cuiimiiiniiy Los Morleros AA 12:57 N/A Habitation Yes Yes PF472 Marana Community Los Morleros AA 12:57 N/A Habitation Yes Yes PF473 Maraiiu Communiiy Los Morleros AA 12:57 N/A Habitation Yes Yes PF474 Marana Cuinmuniiy Los Morleros AA 12:57 N/A Habitation Yes Yes PF475 Marana Community Los Morleros AA 12:57 N/A Habitation Yes Yes PF476 Maraiu Coinmuniiy Los Moneros AA 12:57 N/A Habiiaiion Yes Yes PF477 Maraiu Community Los Moneros AA 12:57 N/A Habitation Yes Yes PF478 Marana Communiiy Los Moneros AA 12:57 N/A Habitation Yes Yes PF479 Maiaiu Coiiununiiy Los Moneros AA 12:57 N/A Habitation Yes Yes PF4K0 Maraiu Communiiy Los Moneros AA 12:57 N/A Habitation Yes Yes PF482 Maraiu Communiiy Hunlinston Site AA 12:73 TB 502 Habitation Yes Yes PF483 Maraiu Communiiy Hunlineloii Sile AA 12:73 TB 502 Habitation Yes Yes PF4K4 Marana Community HuMington Siie AA 12:73 TB 502 Habitation Yes Yes PF485 Marana Coinmuniiy llunlineion Siie AA 12:73 TB 502 Habitation Yes Yes PF486 Maraiu Community Kuniingion Siic AA 12:73 TB 502 Habitation Yes Yes PF487 Maraivi Community Hurtington Site AA 12:73 TB 502 Habitation Yes Yes PJ-488 Maraiu Communiiy Huniingion Siic AA 12:73 TB-502 Hubiiaiion Yes Yes PF4H'J Maraiu Coinmuniiy MuiHingiim Siic AA 12:73 TB 5(»2 Mahitalion Yes Yes PF4yi) Maraiu Community Huntington Sue AA 12.73 TB 502 Halntutton Yes Yes PF4y| Maraiu Coimnunllv HiiiMiimion Site AA 12 73 TB 502 liiil)ilnlioii Yes Yes Appendix I. Sherd Samples Analyzed (continued) Anid' ProvciiiciiL'c Silc Name ASM Site Other Site No.^ Silc Type Temper NAA No. AimlyMs^ Analysis^ PF492 Manilla Cominuiiiiy Huningion Siie AA 12.73 TB-502 Habitation Yes Yes PF4<)3 Maraiia Cummuniiy Huniinglon Site AA 12:73 TB-502 Habitation Yes Yes PF494 Marana Cummuniiy Huningiun Site AA 12:73 TB 502 Habitation Yes Yes PF495 Marana Cummuniiy Huntington Site AA 12:73 TB 502 Habitation Yes Yes PF496 Marana Cummuniiy Huniinglon Site AA 12:73 TB 502 Habitation Yes Yes PF4'J7 Marana Cummuniiy Huntington Silc AA 12:73 TB-502 Habitation Yes Yes PF498 Marana Cummuniiy Huntington Site AA 12:73 TB 502 Habitation Yes Yes PP499 Marunu Cummuniiy Huntington Site AA 12:73 TB 502 Habitation Yes Yes PF5()0 Marana Cummuniiy Huntington Site AA 12:73 TB 502 Habitation Yes Yes PF50I Marana Cummuniiy Huntington Site AA 12:73 TB 502 Habitation Yes Yes PF502 Marana Cummuniiy Humingion Site AA 12:73 TB 502 Habitation Yes Yes PF503 Marana Cummuniiy Huntington Site AA 12:73 TB 502 Habitation Yes Yes PF505 Marana Cummuniiy Huniinglon Site AA 12:73 TB-502 Habitation Yes Yes PP506 Marana Cummuniiy Huniinglon Site AA 12:73 TB-502 Habitation Yes Yes PF507 Marana Cummuniiy Chicken Ranch AA 12:118 TB 501 Habitation Yes Yes PF508 Maruiw Cuinmmuiy Chicken RaiKh AA 12:118 TB-501 Habiiatiun Yes Yes PP509 Marana Curmnuniiy Chicken Ranch AA 12:118 TB 501 Habitaiiun Yes Yes PF510 Marana Cummuniiy Chicken Ranch AA 12:118 TB 501 Habiiatiun Yes Yes PFSn Marana Cummuniiy Chicken Rancli AA 12:118 TB 501 Habitation Yes Yes PF512 Marana Cummuniiy Chicken Ranch AA 12:118 TB-501 Habiiatiun Yes Yes PF513 Marana Cunununiiy Chicken Ranch AA 12:118 TB 501 Habitaiiun Yes Yes PF5J4 Marana Cummuniiy Chicken Rancli AA 12:118 TB-501 Habitation Yes Yes PF5I5 Maraiu Cunununiiy Cliicken Rancli AA 12:118 TB 501 Habitation Yes Yes PF516 Marana Cominuiiiiy Chicken Ranch AA 12:118 TB 501 Habitation Yes Yes PF517 Muruiu Cuminiiniiy Cliicken Ranch AA 12 118 TB 501 Hubitaliun Yes Yes PF518 Muraiu Cuimminiiy Chicken Ranch AA 12 118 TB 501 Hubitaituii Yci Yes PFSl'J Muraiu Cuiniituuuy Chicken Ranch AA 12 118 TB 501 Hutiiiaiion Yes Yes PF520 Muruiu Cuinmunity Chickcn Ranch AA 12 118 TB 501 Habiiatiun Yes Yes PF52I Muruiiii (^llll^ulllllv Chicken Ranch AA 12 IIK TB 5 Anid' Proveiiicncc Site Name ASM Siie Oilier Siic No.^ Sile Type Temper NAA No. Analysis^ Analysis'* PF522 Muraiu Cuminuniiy Chicken Ranch AA:I2:II8 TB 501 Hahiiaiiun Yes Yes PF523 Maruita Coinmuniiy Chicken Ranch AA:12.1)& TB 501 liabiiaiion Yes Yes PF524 Maruiia Comiminiiy Chicken Ranch AA:12;1I8 TB 501 Mabiiaiiun Yes Yes PF525 Murana Cummumty Chicken Raitch AA.I2.U8 TB-501 Habilalion Yes Yes PF526 Maraiia Cummuniiy Chicken Ranch AA:I2:II8 TB 501 Habitation Yes Yes PF527 Maraiia Cuiiiinunity Chicken Ranch AA:12;1I8 TB 501 Hahiiaiion Yes Yes PF52H Marana Commumiy Chickcn Ranch AA.I2.M8 TB-501 Habilalion Yes Yes PF52» Maraiia Comiiiiiiiily Chicken Ranch AA:I2:I18 TB 501 Habitation Yes Yes PF530 Maraiia Community Chicken Ranch AA:l2:n8 TB-501 Habilalion Yes Yes PP531 Maraiia Communiiy Chicken RaiKh AA.12.M8 TB-501 Habilalion Yes Yes PF532 Maraiia Cummuiiity Chickcn Ranch AA;l2:n8 TB 501 Habiution Yes Yes PF533 Manilla Cuiiimuiiiiy Chicken Ranch AA:I2:1I8 TB-501 Habitatiun Yes Yes PF534 Marana Communiiy La Vaca Enfenna AA.8.27 M-n4 Habilalion Yes Yes PP535 Marana Cummuniiy La Vaca Enfenna AA.8.27 Ml 74 Habilalion Yes Yes PF536 Marana Communiiy La Vaca Enfenna AA:8:27 M-174 Habitation Yes Yes PP537 Marana Cummuniiy La Vaca Enfenna AA:8:27 M 174 Habitation Yes Yes PF538 Marana Cummuniiy La Vaca Enfenna AA:8.27 M 174 Habitation Yes Yes PF539 Marana Cummuniiy La Vaca Enfenna AA.8.27 M 174 Habitation Yes Yes PF540 Marana Communiiy La Vaca Enfenna AA:8:27 M 174 Habitation Yes Yes PF54I Marana Community La Vaca Enfenna AA:8:27 M 174 Habitaiiun Yes Yes PP542 Marana Commimity La Vaca Enfenna AA.8:27 M 174 Habitation Yes Yes PF543 Marana Communiiy La Vaca Enferma AA;8 27 M 174 Habitation Yes Yes PF544 Marana Communiiy La Vaca Enferma AA:8:27 M 174 Habitation Yes Yes PF545 Marana Community La Vaca Enfenna AA;8:27 M 174 Habilalion Yes Yes PF546 Marana Comiimnily Iji Vaca Enferma AA.8.27 M 174 Habilalion Yes Yes PF547 Marana Commumiy La Vaca Enfenna AA 8.27 M 174 Habitation Yes Yes PF548 Maraiu Coiimiimiiy Siiciio lie Sagiiaru AA:8:87 M 361 Hdbiiation Yes Yes PF54y Murana Communiiy Siiciio tic Sagiiaro AA:8:87 M 261 Habilalion Yes Yes PPSSH Muruiu Comnuinuv Sue no ilu Sauimro AA « 87 M 2hl Hubilalion Yes Ye. Appendix I. Sherd Samples Analyzed (continued) Aiiid' Provciiieiicc Site Nanie ASM Siie Oilier Site No.^ Sice Type Temper NAA No. Analysis^ Analysis'* PFS51 Murana Ciiinmuniiy Sueno lie Saguaru AA;8;87 M-261 Habitation Yes Yes HP552 Marana Coininuniiy Sueno lie Saguaro AA;8;87 M 261 Habiiaiiun Yes Yes PF553 Maraiia Cuiiimuiiity Sueno (k Saguaro AA:8;87 M 261 Habiuiion Yes Yes PF554 Marana Coinmuniiy Sueno dc Sagiwro AA:8.87 M-261 Habitation Yes Yes PF555 Marana Coininuniiy Sueno lie Saguaro AA;8.87 M-261 Habiiaiion Yes Yes PF556 Marana CummunUy Sueno lie Saguaru AA:8:87 M 261 Habitation Yes Yes PF557 Marana Communiiy Sueno lie Saguaro AA:8;87 M-261 Habiuiiion Yes Yes PF558 Marana Cuinmiiniiy Suenu lie Saguaro AA.8.87 M-261 Habiiaiion Yes Yes PF559 Marana Cuinmuniiy Sueno lie Saguaru AA:8;87 M 261 Habitation Yes Yes PP560 Marana Ciunniuniiy Suenu lie Saguaro AA:8:87 M-261 Habitation Yes Yes PF56I Marana Cuminuniiy Sueno lie Saguaru AA;8:87 M 261 Habitation Yes Yes PP562 Marana CummunUy Suenu lie Saguaro AA:8;87 M-261 Habitation Yes Yes PF563 Marana Communiiy Suenu lie Saguaru AA:8:87 M 261 Habitation Yes Yes PF564 Los Robles Communiiy Los Rubles MuumJ AA;II 25 R 138 Habitation Yes Yes PF565 Los Rubles Cunununiiy Los Rubles Muund AA'.II 2S R 138 Habitation Yes Yes PP566 Los Rubles Communiiy Los Robles Muuml AA:II 25 R-138 Habitation Yes Yes PF567 Los Robles Communiiy Los Robles Mound AA:II 25 R 138 Habiution Yes Yes PPS68 Los Rubles Communiiy Los Rubles Muuml AA.M 25 R 138 Habitation Yes Yes PP56'J Los Rubles Communiiy Los Robles Mound AA.Il 25 R 138 Habiiaiion Yes Yes PF570 Lus Rubles Community Lus Robles Mound AA.Il 25 R 138 Habiution Yes Yes PF571 Los Rubles Communiiy Los Rubles Muund AA:I1 25 R 138 Habitation Yes Yes PF572 Los Robles Communiiy Lus Rubles Muund AA.Il 25 R 138 Habiiaiion Yes Yes PF573 Los Rubles Cummuniiy Lus Rubles Mound AA:II 25 R 138 Habitation Yes Yes PF574 Lus Rubles Cummuniiy Los Robles Mound AA:II 25 R 138 Habiiaiion Yes Yes PF575 Lus Rubles Conununiiy Los Rubles Muund AA:II 25 R 138 Habiiaiiun Yes Yes PP576 Los Rubles Communiiy Lus Robles Mmind AA;I1 25 R 138 Habiiaiion Yes Yes PP577 Los Robles Cummuniiy Los Robles MiNind AA.Il 25 R 138 Habiiaiion Yes Yes PF578 Los Robles Cimumimiy Los Rohles Mound AA II 25 R 138 Habitation Yes Yes l'PS7«) I.OS BoWcs Coinmunuv Los Rubles Mouikl AA 11 2S R UK Uiibuaiinit Yes Yes Appendix I. Sherd Samples Analyzed (continued) Aiiid' PruveiucnL'c Silc Name ASM She Oilter Silc Ni>.^ Site Type Temper NAA No. Aiialysiii^ Aiialysiii^ PF580 Los Rulitcii Cuininuniiy Los Rubles Muunii AA 11.25 R-138 Habiiaiiun Yes Yes PF581 Loii Rubles Communiiy Los Rubles Muund AA 11.25 R 138 Habiiaiiun Yes Yes PP582 Lus Rubles Cuminuiiiiy Los Rubles Mound AA 11:25 R 138 Habiiaiiun Yes Yes PF583 Lus Rubles Cuininuiuiy Los Rubles Mound AA 11.25 R 138 Habilalton Yes Yes PF584 Los Rubles Communiiy Lus Rubles Muund AA 11.25 R-138 Habiuiiun Yes Yes PF585 Los Rubles Communiiy Cerro Prieiu AA 7 II N/A Habiiaiiun Yes Yes PF586 Lus Rubles Communiiy CciTu Prieiu AA 7 II N/A Habiiaiion Yes Yes PH587 L(» Rubles Communiiy Genu Prielo AA 7 li N/A Habilalion Yes Yes PF588 Lus Rubles Communiiy Cerru Prieiu AA 7 11 N/A Habiiaiion Yes Yes PF589 Los Rubles Cummuiiily Cerro Prieiu AA 7 11 N/A Habiiaiiun Yes Yes PF590 Lus Rubles Cunimuniiy Cerru Prielo AA 7 11 N/A Habiiaiion Yes Yes PF59I Los Robles Communiiy Cerro Prieiu AA 7 II N/A Habiiaiion Yes Yes PF592 Lus Rubles Cummuniiy Cerru Prielo AA 7 11 N/A Habiiaiion Yes Yes PF5i>3 Lus Robles Community Cerru Prieiu AA 7 11 N/A Habiiaiion Yes Yes PF594 Lus Rubles Communiiy Cerru Prielo AA 7 II N/A Habiiaiion Yes Yes PF595 Los Rubles Communiiy Cerro Prieiu AA 1 11 N/A Habiiaiion Yes Yes PP596 Los Rubles Cummuniiy Cerro Prielo AA 7 11 N/A Habiiaiion Yes Yes PF597 Los Rubles Cummuniiy Cerru Prieiu AA 7 11 N/A Habiuiiun Yes Yes PF598 Los Rubles Communiiy Cerro Prielo AA 7 n N/A Habiiaiiun Yes Yes PF51W Los Robles Coinmunil)' Cerro Prielo AA 7 11 N/A Habiiaiion Yes Yes PFfiOO Los Robles Communiiy Cerru Prielo AA 7 11 N/A Habiiaiion Yes Yes PF601 Los Robles Cummuniiy Cerro Prielo AA 7 11 N/A Habiiaiion Yes Yes PF6()2 Los Rt)hles Communiiy Cerro Prielo AA 7 II N/A Habiiaiion Yes Yes PPfi03 Los Rubles Cunununiiy Cerro Prielo AA 7 11 N/A Habiiaiion Yes Yes PFWM Los Rubles Communiiy Cerro Prielo AA 7 11 N/A Habiiaiion Yes Yes PFfiOS 1.US Rubles Cunununiiy Cerro Prielo AA 7 11 N/A Hubiiaiion Yes Yes PH6()6 Los Robles Communiiy Cerro Prielo AA 7 11 N*A Habiiaiion Yes Yes Pl-Vi<)7 l.os Rtiblus Communiiy Cerru Pnelo AA 7 II N/A Habiiaiion Yes Yes PI-N)K (.OS Robles Ciiinmimilv Cerro Priclti AA 7 11 N/A llahilaiKiii Y" Appendix I. Sherd Samples Analyzed (continued) Aiiij' Pnivciiiciii'c Sile Nanie ASM Site OiJicr Site No.^ Sile Type Temper NAA No. Analysis^ Analysis'* PF609 Lus Robles Communiiy Hog Farm AA 11 12 R 129 Habiiaiion Yes Yes PF6J0 Lo!> Rubles Cummuniiy Hog Farm AA U 12 R 129 Habitation Yes Yes PF61I Los Rubles Communiiy Hog Farm AA 11 12 R 129 Habiiaiion Yes Yes PF6I2 Lus Rubles Communiiy Hog Fann AA II 12 R 129 Habiiaiion Yes Yes PF5J3 Lus Rot>les Commimiiy Hug Fann AA 11 12 R 129 Habitation Yes Yes PF6I4 Los Robles Cominuiiiiy Hug Fann AA 11 12 R 129 Habiiaiion Yes Yes PF615 Los Robles Conununiiy Hug Farm AA 11 12 R 129 Habitation Yes Yes PF616 Los Robles Communiiy Hug Fann AA 11 12 R 129 Habitation Yes Yes PF6I7 Los Rubles Cummuniiy Hog Fann AA 11 12 R 129 Habiiaiion Yes Yes PF618 Los Rubles Cummuniiy Hog Fann AA II 12 R 129 Habitation Yes Yes PP6)9 Lus Robles Community Hog Fann AA 11 12 R 129 Habiution Yes Yes PF620 Los Robles Communiiy Hog Fann AA 11 12 R 129 Habiiaiion Yes Yes PF62I Los Rubles Cummuniiy Hog Fann AA 11 12 R 129 Habitation Yes Yes PF622 Los Robles Communiiy Hog Fann AA 11 12 R 129 Habitation Yes Yes PF623 Lus Robles Communiiy Hog Fann AA II 12 R 129 Habitation Yes Yes PF624 Lus Robles Community Hog Farm AA 11 12 R 129 Habitation Yes Yes PF625 Los Rubles Cummuniiy Hug Farm AA 11 12 R 129 Habiiaiion Yes Yes PF62fi Lus Robles Communiiy Hug Farm AA 11 12 R 129 Habitation Yes Yes PF627 Los Robles Community Hog Fann AA 11 12 R 129 Habitation Yes Yes PF628 Lus Rubles Cummuniiy Hug Fann AA 11 12 R 129 Habiiaiion Yes Yes PF629 Lus Robles Conununiiy Hog Fann AA II 12 R 129 Habitation Yes Yes PP630 Lus Ruliles Communiiy Hog Fann AA 11 12 R 129 Habitation Yes Yes PF631 Los Robles Conununiiy Hug Fann AA 11 12 R 129 Habitation Yes Yes PF632 Los Rubles Cummuniiy Hug Fann AA 11 12 R 129 Habiiaiion Yes Yes PF633 Los Rubles Communiiy Hug Fann AA II 12 R 129 Habiiaiion Yes Yes PF634 Lus Rubles Cuniinuniiy Hug Fann AA II 12 R 129 Habiiaiion Yes Yes PFf.35 Los Rubles Cummuniiy Hog Funn AA U 12 R 129 Habitation Yes Yc^ PF636 Los Rubles Coininiiniiy Hug Funn AA 11 12 R 129 llabilaliuii Yes Yes PF617 I.OS Rubles rummuHiiv Hub L-ann AA II |2 P L?'J Hitbiialiun Ycn Yes Appendix I. Sherd Samples Analyzed (continued) Aiiij' Provciueiice Site Nbiuc ASM Site Oclier Site No.* Site Type Temper NAA No. Analysis^ Analysis'* PF638 Lus Robic!) Cummuniiy Hug Farm AA:ll:l2 R 129 Habiiaiion Yes Yes PF63!> Los Robles Cotiununiiy N/A AA;7:9 R-19 Habiialiun Yes Yes PF Aiiid' Prove iiicncc Site Nanic ASM Siie Oilier Sile No.^ Site Type Temper NAA No. Analysis^ Analysts'* PP668 Manilla Cuininiiiiiiy Marana Muuikl AA:I2:2SI M-200 Httbiiaiion Yes Yes PP66>> Marana Cummuniiy Marana Mound AA;l2.25l M 200 Habiiaiion Yes Yes PF670 Manilla Ctimmuniiy Marana MuuinJ AA;i2:25l M-200 Hahiuiion Yes Yes PP671 Marana Cuininumty Marana Muunil AA:I2-.2S1 M 200 Habiiaiion Yes Yes PP672 Maraiu Cummuniiy Marana Muuml AA:12:2SI M 200 Habtiaiiun Yes Yes PP673 Maraiu Communiiy Marana Mounil AA:I2:25I M 200 Habiiaiion Yes Yes PP674 Marana Cuininuniiy Marana Mouivl AA. 12.251 M-200 Habiiaiion Yes Yes PP675 Maruiu Coiniiiiiniiy Marana Muiiikl AA:J2:25J M-200 Habiiaiion Yes Yes PF676 Maraiu Cummuniiy Marana Mound AA:I2:25I M-200 Habiiaiion Yes Yes PF677 Marana Cummuniiy Marana Mixind AA:I2:25I M-200 Habiiaiion Yes Yes PF678 Maraiu Cummuniiy Marana Mound AA;I2:2S1 M-200 Habiuiion Yes Yes PF679 Maraiu CiimmuiUiy Maraiu Mound AA. 12:251 M-200 Habiiaiion Yes Yes PF680 Marana Cmninuniiy Maraiu Mound AA. 12.251 M-200 Habiiaiion Yes Yes PP68I Marana Cummuniiy Marana Muund AA;12:25I M-200 Habiiaiion Yes Yes PP682 Marana Cummuniiy Marana Mound AA: 12:251 M-200 Habiuiion Yes Yes PP683 Maraiu Cummuniiy Marana Mound AA: 12:251 M-200 Habiuiion Yes Yes PF684 Maraiu Cummuniiy Marana Mixind AA:12;251 M-2U0 Habiiaiion Yes Yes PF685 Maraiu Cuinmuiiiiy Marana Muund AA:12:2S1 M-200 Habiiaiion Yes Yes PP686 Maraiu Communiiy Marana Mound AA:12:251 M-200 Habiiaiion Yes Yes PF687 Maraiu Communiiy Marana Mmmd AA:12;25I M-200 Habiuiion Yes Yes PP688 Maraiu Cummuniiy Marana Mraiml AA:12:2S1 M-200 Habiiaiion Yes Yes PP68i) Maraiu Cummuniiy Mararu Muund AA:12;25l M-200 Habiiaiion Yes Yes PF6y() Maraiu Communiiy Marana Mtnind AA:12:25I M-200 Habiiaiion Yes Yes PF691 Maraiu Cummuniiy Maraiu Muund AA:l2:25t M-200 Habiiaiion Yes Yes PF692 Maruiu Communiiy Maraiu MiNiml AA;12:251 M-200 Habilaliun Yes Yes PF693 Muraiu Commimiiy Maraiu Mound AA: 12:251 M-200 Habiiaiion Yes Yes PF694 Maraiu Cummuniiy Maraiu Mmind AA;12:251 M 200 Habilaliun Yes Yes »'P695 Muraiu Coiiiiiwnity Maraiu Mmiiid AA: 12:251 M 200 Habiiaiioi) Yes Yes l»l-"696 Maruiu ruiiiiniinilv Maruiu MtHiikl AA:I2:25I M 200 Huhiiaii.in Yes Yes Appendix I. Sherd Samples Analyzed (continued) Aiiid' Provenience Site Name ASM Site Oilier Site No." Site Type Temper NAA No. Analysis^ Analysis'* PF697 Marana Cummuniiy Marana Muuni) AA;I2:251 M-200 Habilalion Yes Yes PF698 Marann Cummuniiy Marana MuunJ AA:12:251 M-200 Habiiaiion Yes Yes PP(»») Marana Conununiiy Marana Mound AA.\2.25» M-200 Habilalion Yes Yes PP7()0 Maraiu Community Marana MuumJ AA:12:25I M-200 Habitation Yes Yes PF701 Maraiu Cuininuniiy Maraiu Mouml AA:I2:2SI M-200 Habiuiion Yes Yes PF702 Marana Cummuniiy Marana Muun) AA. 12:251 M-200 Habiuiion Yes Yes PF703 Marana Cummuniiy Marana Muuml AA;I2:2SI M-200 HabiMllon Yes Yes PF7()4 Marana Cummuniiy Marana Mound AA. 12:251 M-200 Habilalion Yes Yes PF705 Marana Cummuniiy Marana Mound AA:I2:2SI M-200 HabiUiiion Yes Yes PP706 Marana Cummuniiy Marana Mound AA;I2:2SI M-200 Habitation Yes Yes PF707 Marana Cummuniiy Marana Mound AA;I2:25I M-200 Habilalion Yes Yes PF708 Marana Cummuniiy Marana Mound AA:12:25t M-200 Habilalion Yes Yes PF709 Marana Cummuniiy Marana Mound AA:I2.25I M-200 Habiuiion Yes Yes PF7I0 Marana Cummuniiy Marana Mound AA; 12:251 M-200 Habiutiion Yes Yes PF7II Marana Cummuniiy Marana Mound AA; 12:251 M-200 Habilalion Yes Yes PF712 Marana Cuimnitniiy Marana Mound AA:12:251 M-200 Habilalion Yes Yes PF713 Marana Cummuniiy Marana Mound AA:12;251 M-200 Hatriiaiion Yes Yes PF714 Marana Cummuniiy Marana Mound AA:12:25I M-200 Habilalion Yes Yes PF7I5 Marana Cummuniiy Marana Mound AA:I2:25I M-200 Habiuiion Yes Yes PF716 Marana Cummuniiy Marana Mound AA:12:251 M-200 Habilalion Yes Yes PF7I7 Marana Cummuniiy Maraiu Mound AA:I2:25I M 200 Habilalion Yes Yes PF7I8 Marana Cummuniiy Marana Mound AA:I2:25I M-200 Habiuiiun Yes Yes PF719 Marana Cummuniiy Maraiu Muui«l AA:12:251 M-2U0 Habilalion Yes Yes PF720 Marana Cummuniiy Marana Mound AA;12:25I M-200 Habiuiion Yes Yes PF721 Marana Cummuniiy Maraiu Mound AA;12;251 M 200 Habilalion Yes Yes PF722 Marana Cunununiiy Marana Mtmnd AA:12:25I M 200 Habilalion Yes Yes PF723 Maraiu Cummuniiy Marana MiHind AA:I2:25I M 200 Habiuiiim Yes Yes PF724 Marana Conuiiuniiy Murana Mmiikl AA;12;25I M 2«KI Habilaliun Yes Yes l'P7?5 Mwraiw Cumimniiiv Muraiw MoumJ AA:|?2S1 M 2IM) yes Yes Appendix 1. Sherd Samples Analyzed (continued) Aniii' Provenience Site Nanie ASM Site Other Site No.* Site Type Temper NAA No. Analysis^ Analysis^ PF726 Marana Community Marana MiHind AA;12:2SI M-2(X) Habitation Yes Yes PF727 Marana Cunununiiy Maraiu Mound AA.I2:25l M-200 Habitation Yes Yes PF728 Marana Cummuniiy Marana MiHiml AA:12;251 M-200 Habitation Yes Yes PF729 Marana Cummuniiy Marana Mound AA;I2.25I M-200 Habitation Yes Yes PF730 Marana Cumnuuuty Marana Mound AA.I2;2Sl M-200 Habitation Yes Yes PF731 Marana Cummuniiy Marana Mound AA:I2:2S1 M-200 Habitation Yes Yes PF732 Marana Cimimuiiiiy Marana Mound AA.I2;2SI M-200 Habitation Yes Yes PF733 Marana Cummunity Marana Mound AA. 12:251 M-200 Habitation Yes Yes PF734 Marana Cummuniiy Maraiu Mound AA;I2:2SI M-200 Habitation Yes Yes PF735 Marana Cummuniiy Marana Mound AA:12;2S1 M-200 Habitation Yes Yes PF736 Marana Cummunity Marana Mound AA:12:2SI M-200 Habitation Yes Yes PF737 Marana Community Marana Mound AA:I2:2S1 M-200 Habitation Yes Yes PF738 Marana Community Marana Mound AA: 12:251 M 200 Habitation Yes Yes PF73»> Marana Cummunity Marana Mound AA:12:251 M-200 Habitation Yes Yes PF740 Marana Cummuniiy Marana Mound AA:I2;2SI M-200 Habitation Yes Yes PF74I Marana Cummunity Marana Mound AA:I2:2SI M-200 Habiutiun Yes Yes PF742 Marana Cummunity Marana Mound AA:12;25l M-200 Habitation Yes Yes PF743 Marana Cummimiiy Marana Mound AA:I2:25I M-200 Habitation Yes Yes PF744 Marana Cummunity Marana Mound AA:I2:25I M-200 Habitation Yes Yes PF745 Marana Cummuniiy Marana Mound AA:12:251 M-200 Habitation Yes Yes PF746 Marana Cunununiiy Marana Mound AA:I2:25I M-200 Habitation Yes Yes PF747 Marana Cummunity Maraiu Mound AA:12:25I M-2ao Habitation Yes Yes PP748 Marana Cunununiiy Marana Mound AA:»2:251 M-200 Habitation Yes Yes PF749 Marana Cummuniiy Maraiu Mound AA:I2:25I M 200 Habitation Yes Yes PF7S0 Marana Cunmttmitv Marana Minind AA:12:251 M-200 Yes Yes 1. Suin|)|cii Willi iiiiirc iluiii tun: iiiiiiilwr (i.e., PH007/008) liaU inulii|)lc samples analysed clieiiiicdlly 2, "M-", "TB-", uixt "R-" desigiuiium refer lo icm|Mirary site imnilicrs assigiieU by lltc Nortlient Tucson Basin survey Projects. "(ASU)" designations refer to suite niuiil)crs assigned by Ar'uoim Siuie University. 3. Refers to the mineralogicul analysis of temper jiunicules under the binocuilar microscope 4.Suiiiplcs PFUOl ihriMigli PP38S were analyzed by P. Fish el al. (1992b); llie remaining samples were analy;ecd by llie auilior as a part of the present sludy S. PH026 wus initially assigned to site AA:8:103 (ASM), or -M-277. This site was later combined with site AA:8:87 (ASM). 279 APPENDIX TWO CERAMIC CODING FORM (1) AN© (PF Sample No.) (7) Variant N = none (2) ASM Site Number P = polychrome S = smudged (3) Recovery Coniext SL = white-slipped E = excavatioD S/SL - smudged and white-slipped S = sur&ce 99 = data not available 99 = daa not available (8) Color of Paint (4) Vessel Sbape B = black B » bowl R = red J = jar 0 = variation between these colors 0 = otber 99 = data not available 1 = indeterminam/data not available (9) Rim Diameter (5) Vessel Pan Measured in cennmeters for all rims 1 = rim estimated to bave at least 5% if the 2 = body rim intact (i.e., > 18% of the arc), 0 = odier or that measure at least 23.S cm in 99 = data not available leogth (6) Vessel Form 0 = indeterminant 1 = bowl 2 = jar 3 = bowl, outcurved or hemispherical 4 = bowl, outcurved 5 = hemispherical 6 = Qare-rimmed 7 = semi-flare 8 = incurved 9 = plate/platter 10 = seed jar (complete incurved) 11 = flare-rimmed jar 12 = straight collar jar 13 = scoop 99 = daia not available APPENDIX THREE ATTRIBUTE ANALYSIS OF SHERDS 281 Appendix 3. Attribute Analysis of Sherds Anid ASM Recovery Vessel Vessel Vessel Variant Paint Rira dia Site No. Context Shape Part Form meter (cm) PFOOl AA:12:470 E B 1 5 S R 0 PF002 AA:12:470 E B 2 I S 99 0 PF003 AA;8:82 99 B 1 5 99 0 0 PF004 AA:8:82 99 I 2 0 99 B 0 PF005 AA:8:27 99 I 2 0 99 99 0 PF006 AA;8:27 99 I 2 0 99 0 0 PF007/008 AA:8:I86 99 B 1 5 S 0 22 PF(X)9 AA:8:59 99 I 2 0 N R 0 PFOlO AA;8;80 99 B 1 5 S R 0 PFOll AA:t2:646 99 B 2 I S R 0 PF012 AA:12:64 Appendix 3. Attribute Analysis of Sherds Anid ASM Recovery Vessel Vessel Vessel Variant Paint Rim dia Site No. Context Shape Part Fonn meter (era) PF037 AA:12:57 S B 1 5 S 99 0 PF038 AA:12:57 S B 1 5 S R 0 PF039 AA:I2:57 99 B 1 N R 30 PF040 AA:12:57 99 J 2 2 S R 0 PF043 AA:12:57 S B 1 5 S 99 0 PF044 AA:12:57 S B 1 5 s 99 0 PF045 AA:12:409 E I 2 99 99 0 PF046 AA:12:73 S B 2 1 S 0 0 PF(M7 AA:12:73 S I 2 N R 0 PF048 AA:12:409 E B 1 5 99 R 0 PF049 AA:12:311 S B 1 5 99 99 0 PF050 AA:8:27 S I 2 99 99 0 PF051 AA:12:118 s B 1 5 S 99 0 PF052 AA:12:470 E I 2 99 99 0 PF053 AA:8:87 s B 2 1 N 99 0 PF054 AA:8:98 s B 2 1 S 99 0 PF072 AA:12:251 E I 2 99 R 0 PF073 AA:12:251 E B 9 1 S 99 0 PF074 AA:12:25l E B 9 1 S 99 0 PF075 AA:12:251 E I 2 99 99 0 PF076 AA:12:25l E B 2 1 N R 0 PF077 AA:12:25I E B 2 1 S R 0 PF078 AA:12:251 E B 1 5 N R 20 PF079 AA:12:25l E I 2 0 99 0 0 PF080 AA:12:251 E I 2 0 99 99 0 PF08I AA:I2;25i E B I 5 \ R 0 PF082 AA:12:25l E B 9 1 S 0 0 PF083/i:8 AA:12:251 E B I 3 N R 28 PF084 AA:12:25I E B 7 I S R 0 PF085 AA:12:251 E B 9 I 99 99 0 PF086 AA:12:25l E J 2 2 S R 0 PF087 AA:12:251 E J 2 2 N R 0 PF088 AA:12:25I E B I 5 S R 0 PF089 AA:12:251 E B 1 1 99 99 0 PF090 AA:12:251 E B 1 5 S R 283 Appendix 3. Attribute Analysis of Sherds Anid ASM Recovery Vessel Vessel Vessel Variant Paint Rim Site No. Context Shape Part Form mete PF091 AA:12:25l E B 9 I N 99 0 PF092 AA:12:25l E B 9 I S 0 0 PF093 AA:12:25l E B 9 I S 99 0 PF094 AA:12:25l E B 1 5 S 0 30 PF095 AA:12:25l E B I 5 N 99 0 PF096 AA:12:251 E B 9 I s 0 0 PF097 AA:12:25l E I 9 0 N 99 0 PF098 AA:12:251 E B 9 I 99 99 0 PF099 AA:12:25l E B I 1 N 99 0 PFIOO AA:12:251 E B I 5 N 99 0 PFIOI AA:12:25l E I 2 0 99 99 0 PF102 AA:12:25l E B 9 8 99 R 0 PF103 AA:I2:25l E B 9 1 S 99 0 PF104 AA:12:251 E B 9 I 99 R 0 PF105 AA:12:251 E I 9 0 N 99 0 PF106 AA:12:25l E B 9 I S 99 0 PFI07 AA;12:251 E I 9 0 99 99 0 PF108 AA:12:251 E B 9 1 99 0 0 PF109 AA:12:251 E I 9 0 N 99 0 PFllO AA:l2:25l E B 1 5 99 0 0 PFlll AA:l2:25l E B 9 1 99 B Q PF112 AA:12:251 E B 1 7 S R 30 PF113 AA:12:25l E J 2 •> 99 99 0 PF114 AA:12:251 E I 9 0 99 99 0 PF115 AA:ll-25l E I 9 0 99 99 0 PF116 AA:12:25l E I 9 0 99 99 0 PF117 AA:l2:25l E I 9 0 N 99 0 PF118 AA:li25l E B 9 1 99 99 0 PF119 AA:12:251 E B 9 1 S 99 0 PF120 AA:l2:::5l E B 1 1 S R 0 PF121/122 AA:l2:25l E I t 0 N R 0 PF123 AA:12:251 E B I 5 N R 16 PF124 AA:12:251 E J 7 •) N R 0 PF125 AA:12:251 E J 9 •) N R 0 PF126 AA:12:251 E B I 5 99 99 Q Appendix 3. Attribute Analysis of Sherds Anid ASM Recovery Vessel Vessel Vessel Variant Paint Rim dia Site No. Context Stupe Part Form meter (era) PF127 AA:12;251 E B 9 1 99 99 0 PF129 AA:12:251 E B I 5 N R .10 PF130 AA:12:251 E B 1 5 S R 0 PFI31 AA:12:251 E I 2 S R 0 PF132 AA:12:251 E B 2 1 s 0 0 PF133 AA:12:251 E J 2 2 N R 0 PF134 AA:12:251 E B 1 1 s R 0 PF135 AA:12:251 E B 1 5 N R 36 PF136 AA:l2:25l E B 1 5 S O 34 PF137 AA:12:251 E B 2 1 S/SL 99 0 PF138 AA:12:251 E B 2 1 S R 0 PF139 AA:12:251 E B 1 5 N O 0 PF140 AA:12:57 E B 2 1 S R 0 PF141 AA:12:57 E B 2 1 s R 0 PF142 AA:l2d7 E I 2 0 N R 0 PF143 AA:i2:57 E B 2 1 S R 0 PF144 AA:12J7 E I 9 0 99 99 0 PF145 AA:12:57 E I 2 0 S R 0 PF146 AA:12:57 E I 2 0 99 R 0 PF147 AA:l2d7 E I 2 0 N R 0 PF148 AA:12:57 E B 2 1 99 R 0 PF149 AA:12d7 E J 1 2 S R 0 PF150 AA:12:25I 99 B 1 1 N R 0 PF151 AA:I2:251 99 B 1 5 N R 0 PF152 AA:12:251 99 B I 8 S R 18 FFI53 AA;I2;25l 99 B I 5 N R 0 PF154 AA:12:251 99 B 1 5 N R 20 PF156 AA:12:251 E J 1 2 99 99 0 PF157 AA:12:674 S I 2 0 N 99 0 PF158 AA:12:674 S J 1 2 N 99 0 PF159 AA:12;466 E B 2 1 S 99 0 PF160 AA:12:368 E I 2 0 S R 0 PF161 AA:I2:368 E B 1 5 S B 34 PF162 AA:12J68 E B 1 5 s R 28 PF163 AA:12:368 E B 1 5 S R 22 285 Appendix 3. Attribute Analysis of Sherds Anid ASM Recovery Vessel Vessel Vessel Variant Paint Rim Site No. Context Shape Part Form mete PF164 AA:12J68 E B I I N R 0 PF165 AA:I2J68 E J "7 2 S 99 0 PF166 AA:12:368 E I 2 0 N R 0 PF167 AA;12J68 E B 1 1 S 99 0 PF168 AA:12:368 E B 2 I S R 0 PF169 AA:12J68 E B 1 5 5 R 0 PF170 AA:12J67 E I 2 0 S 99 0 PF171 AA;12:4<56 E I 2 0 S/SL 0 0 PF172 AA:12:466 E B I 5 N R 0 PF173 AA:12:466 E B I 5 S R PF174 AA:12:466 E B 1 1 99 99 0 PF175 AA:12:466 E I 2 0 S R 0 PF176 AA:12:466 E J 2 2 S R 0 PFI77 AA:12;466 E B 2 I S R 0 PF178 AA:12:466 E B 2 I S R 0 PF179 AA:12:466 E I 2 0 N R 0 PF180 U:9:7 E I 2 0 S 99 0 PF181 U:9:7 E B 2 1 99 99 0 PF182 U:9:7 E B 2 I S 99 0 PF183 AA:12:251 99 B I I 99 99 0 PF184 AA:12:251 99 I 2 0 99 99 0 PF185 AA:12:251 99 I 2 0 99 99 0 PF186 AA:12:251 99 I 2 0 S 99 0 PF187 AA:12;251 99 J 2 2 99 99 0 PF188 AA:12:251 99 I 2 0 99 99 0 PF189 AA:12:251 99 B 2 I 99 99 0 PF190 AA:I2:25l 99 B 2 1 S 99 0 PF191 AA:I2:25l 99 I 2 0 S 99 0 PF192 AA: 12:251 99 J 2 2 99 99 0 PF193 AA:12:251 99 B 2 I 99 99 0 PF194 AA:12:251 99 J 2 •y S 99 0 PF195 AA:12:251 99 B I I 99 99 0 PF196 AA:I2:251 99 J I 2 S 99 0 PF197 AA; 12:251 99 I 2 0 S 99 0 PF198 AA:12:251 99 B 2 1 99 99 0 286 Appendix 3. Attribute Analysis of Sherds Anid ASM Recovery Vessel Vessel Vessel Variant Paint Rim dia- SiteNo. Context Shape Part Funu meter (era) PF199 AA:l2:25l 99 I 2 0 S 99 0 PF200 AA; 12:251 99 B 2 I 99 99 0 PF201 AA:12:251 99 B 2 I S 99 0 PF202 AA:12:251 99 J 2 2 S 99 0 PF203 AA:12:251 99 B 1 I 99 99 0 PR04 AA:12:25l 99 B I 1 99 99 0 PROS AA:12:25l 99 B 2 1 99 99 0 PR06 AA:12:251 99 I 2 0 S 99 0 pno7 AA:12:25I 99 J 2 2 S 99 0 PF208 AA:l2:25l 99 I 0 S 99 0 PF209 AA:12:251 99 B 2 I N 99 0 PF210 AA:I2:251 99 I 2 0 99 99 0 PF211 AA:12:25l 99 B 2 1 S 99 0 PF212 AA:12:251 99 B 2 I 99 99 0 PF213 AA:12:251 99 J 2 2 S 99 0 PF214 AA:I2;251 99 I 0 99 99 0 PF215 AA:12:25l 99 J 2 2 99 99 0 PF216 AA:12:25l 99 I 2 0 S 99 0 PF217 AA:I2:25I 99 B 2 I S R 0 PF218 AA:li25I 99 I 0 S 99 0 PF219 AA:6:2 S I 1 0 S R 0 PF220 AA:6:2 S B 2 1 99 99 0 PF221 AA:6:2 S B 2 1 S 99 0 PF222 AA:6:2 S J 1 2 99 99 0 PF223 AA:6:2 S J 2 2 99 99 0 PF224 AA.-6:2 S B 2 1 S 99 0 PF225 AA:6:2 S J 2 2 99 99 0 PF226 AA:6:2 S J 2 2 99 99 0 PF228 T:12:10 E J 2 2 99 99 0 PF229 T:12:10 E B 1 1 99 99 0 PF230 T:I2:10 E B 2 1 99 99 0 PF231 T:12:10 E B I 6 99 99 0 PF232 T:12:10 E B 2 I S 99 0 PF233 T:12:10 E B 2 1 99 99 0 PF234 T:12:10 E B •) I N R 0 287 Appendix 3. Attribute Analysis of Sherds Anid ASM Recovery Vessel Vessel Vessel Variant Paint EUm 1 Site No. Context Shape Part Form metei PF235 1:12:10 E B 2 1 99 99 0 PF236 1:12:10 E B 2 1 99 99 0 PF237 T:12;10 E B 2 1 S 99 0 PF238 T:12:10 E I 2 0 99 99 0 PF239 T:12:10 E I 2 0 99 99 0 PF240 T:12;10 E B 2 1 99 99 0 PF241 1:12:10 E I 2 0 99 99 0 PF242 T:12:10 E B 2 1 S 99 0 PF243 BB:14:44 E B I 1 99 99 0 PF244 BB:14:44 E I 2 0 99 99 0 PF245 BB;14:44 E I 2 0 99 99 0 PF246 DD:1:6 E B 2 1 S 99 0 PF247 DD:l:6 E B 2 1 99 99 0 PF248 DD:1:6 E B 2 1 99 99 0 PF249 DD:1:6 E B 2 I S 99 0 PF250 DD:1:6 E B 2 1 99 99 0 PF251 DD:I:6 E B 2 1 S 99 0 PF252 DD:1:6 E B 2 1 S 99 0 PF253 DD:1:6 E B 2 1 99 99 0 PF254 DD:1:6 99 B 1 1 99 99 0 PF255 DD:1:6 99 B 2 I S 99 0 PF256 BB:13:48 99 B 1 1 99 99 0 PF257 BB:13:48 99 B 1 1 99 99 0 PF258 BB:13:48 99 B I 5 99 99 0 PF259 BB:13:43 99 B 2 1 99 99 0 PF260 BB:9:33 99 B I 6 99 99 0 PF261 BB:9-J3 99 B 1 5 99 99 0 PF262 BB:9;33 99 B 2 I S 99 0 PF263 BB:9:33 99 B 2 I S 99 0 PF264 T;13:8 99 I 2 0 99 99 0 PF265 T:I3:8 99 B 2 1 S 99 0 PF266 T:13;8 99 B 2 1 S 99 0 PF267 T:13:8 99 B 2 1 S 99 0 PF268 T:13:8 99 B 2 1 99 99 0 PF269 T:13:8 99 I 2 0 S 99 0 388 Appendix 3. Attribute Analysis of Sherds Anid ASM Recovery Vessel Vessel Vessel Variant Paint Rim dia Site No. ConCext Shape Part Form meter (cm) PF270 T:13:8 99 B I 1 99 99 0 PF271 T:I3:8 99 B I 5 99 99 0 PF272 T:13:8 99 B I 5 99 99 0 PF273 T:13:8 99 B 2 1 99 99 0 PF274 AA:12:25l 99 I 2 0 99 99 0 PF275 AA:12:251 99 B I 1 S 99 0 PF276 AA:12:251 99 J 2 t 99 99 0 PF277 AA:12:25I 99 B 2 1 99 99 0 PF278 AA:ll-25l 99 B I I 99 99 0 PF279 AA:12:25l 99 B 1 I 99 99 0 PF280 AA:12:251 99 I 2 0 99 99 0 PF281 AA:12:25l 99 B I 1 99 99 0 PF282 AA:ll-25l 99 J 2 2 99 99 0 PF283 AA:12:25l 99 B 2 1 S 99 0 PF284 AA:l2:25l 99 B I 1 S 99 0 PF285 AA:12:25l 99 B 2 1 S 99 0 PF286 AA;12:25l 99 B 1to 1 S 99 0 PF287 AA:12:25l 99 I to 0 99 99 0 PF288 AA:11-25I 99 I 0 99 99 0 PR89 AA:12:251 99 B I 1 99 99 0 PF290 AA:12:251 99 J 2 2 S 99 0 PF291 AA:12:251 99 I 9 0 S 99 0 PF292 AA:12:251 99 I 9 0 S 99 0 PF293 BB:13:22 99 B 2 1 S 99 0 PF294 BB:13:22 99 B I 5 99 99 0 PF295 BB:13:22 99 B t 1 99 oq 0 PF296 BB:13:22 99 B I 5 99 99 0 PF297 BB:13:22 99 B 2 1 S 99 0 PF298 BB:13:22 99 B I 5 S 99 0 PF299 BB:13:22 99 B 1 1 99 99 0 PF300 BB:13:22 99 B 2 1 S 99 0 PF301 BB:13:22 99 B I 1 99 99 0 PF302 BB:13:22 99 B 2 1 99 99 0 PF303 BB:10:3 99 B 5 99 99 0 PF304 BB:10:3 99 B 1 1 S 99 0 289 Appendix 3. Attribute Analysis of Sherds Anid ASM Recovery Vessel Vessel Vessel Variant Paint Rim dia Site No. Context Shape Part Form meter (on) PF305 BB:10:3 99 J 2 7 99 99 0 PF306 BB:10:3 99 8 1 L 99 99 0 PF307 BB:10:3 99 8 1 1 99 99 0 PF308 BB:I0:3 99 8 1 5 S 99 0 PF309 BB:10-J 99 8 9 1 99 99 0 PF310 88:10:3 99 8 I 5 S 99 0 PF311 BB:10-J 99 8 1 1 99 99 0 PF3i: BB:10-J 99 8 1 S 99 0 PF313 88:14:1 99 J 2 •> 99 99 0 PF314 88:14:1 99 8 2 1 S 99 0 pni5 88:14:1 99 8 1 5 S 99 I) PF316 88:14:1 99 8 1 5 99 99 0 PF317 88:14:1 99 8 1 1 S 99 0 PF318 88:14:1 99 8 1 5 99 99 0 PF319 88:14:1 99 8 2 I S 99 0 PF320 88:14:1 99 8 2 1 S 99 0 PF321 38:14:1 99 8 1 5 S 99 0 PF32: 88:14:1 99 J 2 1 99 99 0 PF323 88:13:2 99 8 2 1 S 99 0 PF324 AA:12;18 99 B 2 5 99 99 0 PF325 AA:12:18 E J 9 99 99 0 PF326 AA:12:18 E 8 1 4 99 99 0 PF327 AA:12:18 E 8 2 5 99 99 0 PF328 AA:12:18 99 8 2 99 99 0 PF329 AA:12:18 E 8 2 5 S 99 0 QQ PF330 AA;12;18 E 8 1 S 0 pn3i AA:12:18 E 8 n 5 99 99 0 PF332 AA:12:18 E 8 2 5 99 99 0 PF333 AA:12:18 E 8 9 1 S 99 0 PF334 AA;12:18 E 8 5 S 99 0 PF335 AA:12:18 E 8 5 S 99 0 'y PF336 AA:12:18 E 8 5 99 99 0 PF337 AA:12:18 E 8 1 5 S 99 0 PF338 N/A 99 I 2 0 99 R 0 PF339 N/A 99 8 9 8 S R 0 290 Appendix 3. Attribute Analysis of Sherds Anid ASM Recovery Vessel Vessel Vessel Variant Paint Rim Site No. Context Shape Part Form mete PF340 N/A 99 B 9 8 99 R 0 PF341 N/A 99 B 9 8 N R 0 PF342 N/A 99 J 9 2 S 99 0 PF343 N/A 99 B 9 8 S 99 0 PF344 N/A 99 B 2 I s 99 Q PF345 N/A 99 B 2 I s 99 0 PF346 N/A 99 B 2 1 99 99 0 PF347 AA:12:57 E I 2 0 N R 0 PF348 AA;I2:57 E I 2 0 s R 0 PF349 AA:12:57 E I 2 0 N R 0 PF350 AA:12:II8 99 B 1 5 S R 0 PF35I AA:I2:1I8 S B I 5 99 R ') PF352 AA:12:674 S I 2 0 99 99 1) PF353 AA:12:674 S B 2 I s 99 0 PF354 AA:12:118 S B 9 1 S 99 0 PF355 AA:12:409 E J 1 11 N R 0 PF357 AA:12:73 S I 2 0 99 99 1) pn58 AA:12:73 S I 2 0 N R 0 PF359 AA:I2:409 E I 2 0 S R 0 PF360 AA:12:409 E B 2 1 S R 0 PF36I AA:12:3U S B 2 1 S R 0 Pn62 AA:16:44 99 B I 5 N R 0 PF363 AA:I6:44 99 B 1 5 S R 0 PF364 AA:16:44 99 B 1 5 S 99 0 PF365 AA:16:44 99 B 1 5 S 99 0 PF366 AA; 16:44 09 B I 5 N R n PF367 AA:16:44 99 B I 5 S R 0 PF368 AA:16:44 99 B 1 5 s R 0 Pn69 AA:16:44 99 B I 5 N R 0 Pn70 AA;16:44 99 B I 5 5 99 0 PF371 AA:16:44 99 B 1 6 S R 0 PF372 AA:16:44 99 B 1 5 99 99 0 PF373 AA;16:44 99 B 1 5 S R 0 PF374 N/A 99 B I 1 99 99 0 PF375 N/A 99 I 2 0 5 R 0 Appendix 3. Attribute Analysis of Sherds Anid ASM Recovery Vessel Vessel Vessel Variant Paint Rim di Site No. Context Shape Part Form meter Pn76 N/A 99 B 2 1 S R 0 PBT? N/A 99 B 1 1 99 99 0 pn78 AA:Il:25 S I 0 99 99 0 PF379 AA:ll:25 S B I 99 99 n PF380 AA:7;9 S I 0 N 99 0 PF381 AA:7;9 S I 0 N 99 0 PF382 AA:11:25 S J •> SL 99 0 PF383 AA:ll:25 S I 0 0 99 99 0 Pn84 AA:ll:25 S B I 5 99 99 0 PF385 AA:ll:25 99 B 1 I 99 99 0 PF386 AA;7:3 E I *» 0 N R 0 PF387 AA:7:3 E B 1 5 S R 0 PF388 AA:7:3 E B I 7 N O 0 PF389 AA;7:3 E B I 8 N R 13 PF390 AA:7:3 E B I 5 S B 0 PF391 AA:7:3 E J 1 N R 0 PF392 AA;7:3 E B I 5 N R 0 PF393 AA:7:3 E B 1 5 S R 0 PF394 AA:7:3 E I -> 0 S O 0 PF395 AA:7:3 E I 0 N R 0 PF396 AA:7-3 E B 1 5 S B 0 PF397 AA:7:3 E B 1 5 S R 30 PF398 AA:7:3 E I 2 0 N B 0 PF399 AA:7:3 E B •> I S/SL 0 0 PF400 AA:7J E I 2 0 S R 0 PF401 AA:7;3 E r 0 N R 0 PF402 AA:7:3 E I 2 0 N B 0 PF403 AAJJ E I 2 0 N R 0 PF404 AA:7:3 E I 1 0 N R 0 PF405 AA:7J E B t I S R 0 PF406 AA:7:3 E B 1 I S R 0 PF407 AA:7:3 E B 1 I s R 0 PF408 AA:7-J E B 1 5 S R 0 PF409 AA:7:3 E I 2 0 N R 0 PF410 AAJ-3 E B 1 I S R 0 Appendix 3. Attribute Analysis of Sherds Anid ASM Recovery Vessel Vessel Vessel Variant Paint Rim di Sice No. Context Shape Part Form meter PF411 AA:7:3 E I 2 0 N R 0 PF412 AA:7:3 E B •> 1 N B 0 PF413 AA:7-J E B I 5 S R 0 PF414 AA-J-3 E I I 0 N B 0 PF415 AA:7:3 E B 1 8 N R 0 PF416 AA:12:368 E I 2 0 N R 0 PF417 AA:12:368 E B 1 5 S R 0 PF418 AA:12J68 E B 1 5 S R 34 PF419 AA: 12:368 E B I 5 S R 32 PF420 AA:12J68 E I 0 S R 0 PF421 AA:12:368 E B 2 I s R 0 PF422 AA:12J68 E J 2 •) N R 0 PF423 AA:12J68 E J 1 11 N R 18 PF424 AA;12J68 E J 2 s 0 0 PF425 AA:12:368 E B 1 5 s R 20 PF426 AA:12J68 E B 1 5 N R 0 PF427 AA:11-368 E 0 1 9 s R 0 PF428 AA: 11-368 E I 0 s R 0 PF429 AA:12:368 E I 2 0 N B 0 PF430 AA:11368 E B 1 3 s R 0 PF431 AA:11368 E [ •» 0 s R 0 PF432 AA;11368 E B 1 3 s R 18 PF434 AA:11368 E 0 1 9 N R 28 PF435 AA: 12:368 E B 1 5 s R 24 PF436 AA:11368 E I 2 0 N B 0 PF437 AA;11368 E B 1 5 S R 24 PF438 AA:11409 99 B 1 5 s R 24 PF439 AA:12:409 E B 1 5 N R 0 PF440 AA:11409 99 B 4 S R 0 PF441 AA: 12:409 E I t 0 N R 0 1 PF442 AA:11409 E J 2 N R 0 PF443 AA:11409 E I t 0 N R 0 T T PF444 AA:12:409 99 J M R 0 PF445 AA:12:409 99 B 1 5 N R 0 PF446 AA:11409 S B 1 5 N R 10 293 Appendix 3. Attribute Analysis of Sherds Anid ASM Recovery Vessel Vessel Vessel Variant Paint Rim Site No. Context Shape Part Form mete PF447 AA:12:409 99 B 1 5 N R 0 PF448 AA:12:409 E I 2 0 N R 0 PF449 AA:12:409 E I 1 0 N 0 0 PF450 AA:12:409 E B 1 4 N 0 0 PF451 AA:12:409 E B 2 I S R 0 PF452 AA:12:409 99 B I 3 S R 0 PF453 AA:12:409 99 I 2 0 N R 0 PF454 AA:12:409 99 J 1 12 N 0 16 PF455 AA:I2:409 99 J •> 1 N R 0 PF456 AA:12:409 99 B 2 1 N R 0 PF457 AA:12:409 99 I 1 0 N R 0 PF458 AA:12:409 E I 2 0 N B 0 PF459 AA:12:409 99 B 1 5 N R 0 PF460 AA:12:409 99 I •> 0 N R 0 PF461 AA:12:409 E J 2 2 N R 0 PF462 AA:12:409 E B 1 5 N R 0 PF463 AA:12:409 E J 2 2 N R 0 PF464 AA:12:409 E I 2 0 N R 0 PF465 AA:12:57 E J I 11 N O 20 PF466 AA:12:57 E B I 7 N R 0 PF467 AA:12:57 E B 1 5 S R 25 PF468 AA:12:57 E J 1 11 N R 15 PF469 AA:12:57 E B 1 5 N 0 20 PF470 AA:12:57 E B 1 5 S R 30 PF471 AA:12:57 E B 1 5 S R 30 n PF472 AA; 12:57 E B i 8 N R PF473 AA:12:57 E B 1 3 S R 0 PF474 AA: 12:57 E B 1 7 S R 32 PF475 AA:12:57 E B I 5 N R 24 PF476 AA:12:57 E B I 5 N B 24 PF477 AA:12:57 E B 1 5 N R 0 PF478 AA:12:57 E B 1 5 N R 0 PF479 AA:12:57 E B 1 5 iV 99 0 PF480 AA:12:57 E J 1 11 S R 0 PF482 AA:12:73 S B 1 5 N R 16 Appendix 3. Attribute Anaiysis of Sherds Anid ASM Recovery Vessel Vessel Vessel Vanant Paint Rira til Site No. Context Shape Part Form meter i PF483 AA:12:73 S J I 1 N R 0 PF484 AA:12;73 S I 0 M 0 0 PF485 AA:12:73 S I 0 S R 0 PF486 AA:12:73 E B I 5 S R 0 PF487 AA:12:73 E J 11 s R 0 PF488 AA:12:73 E I 0 SL R 0 PF489 AA:12:73 E I 0 S R 0 PF490 AA:12:73 E B n 1 S R 0 PF491 AA:12:73 E B 2 1 S R 0 PF492 AA:12:73 E I 0 P R 0 PF493 AA:12:73 E J n 2 P R 0 PF494 AA:12:73 E B I 5 S R 0 PF495 AA:12:73 E I 1 0 N R 0 PF496 AA:12:73 S B 1 S R 0 PF497 AA:12:73 E I 0 N R 0 PF498 AA:12:73 S B I 5 S R 24 PF499 AA:12:73 S I 0 N R 0 PF500 AA:12:73 s I 0 N R 0 PF501 AA:12:73 99 I 0 N R 0 PF502 AA:12:73 S I 0 N R 0 PF503 AA:12:73 E I 0 N R 0 PF505 AA;12:73 99 B 2 1 N R 0 PF506 AA:12:73 E I 0 N R 0 PF507 AA:12:118 S B 1 5 S R 0 PF508 AA:12:118 S B I 5 N R 0 PF509 AA;i;:118 S B 1 5 N R n PF5I0 AA:12:118 S B 1 5 N R 0 PF511 AA:12:118 S B 1 5 S R 0 PF512 AA:12:118 S B 1 1 s R 0 PF513 AA:12:118 S B 1 5 s R 0 PF514 AA:12:118 S B I 5 N B 0 PF515 AA:12:1I8 S I t 0 N R 0 PF516 AA:12:118 s B 1 5 N R 0 PF517 AA:12:118 s B 1 5 N R 0 PF518 AA;12:118 s B 1 5 N R 0 295 Appendix 3. Attribute Analysis of Sherds Anid ASM Recovery Vessel Vessel Vessel Variant Paint Rim Jia- Site No. Context Shape Part Form meter (on) PF519 AA:12:I18 S B 2 I N R (J PF520 AA:12:118 S I 2 0 N R 0 PF521 AA:12:118 S I 2 0 S R 0 PF522 AA:12:118 S I 2 0 N R 0 PF523 AA:12:ll8 S I 2 0 S B 0 PF524 AA:11-118 S 2 2 SL B 0 PF525 AA:12:118 S I 2 0 N R 0 PF526 AA:12:118 S I 2 0 N R 0 PF527 AA:12:ll8 S I 2 0 N R 0 PF528 AA:12:118 s I 2 0 N R 0 PF529 AA:12:118 s J I 11 N R 20 PF530 AA:12:118 S I I 0 N B 0 PF531 AA:12:118 S B I 5 N R 0 PF532 AA:I2;118 s B 2 1 S R 0 PF533 AA;12:U8 s B 1 5 M R 0 PF534 AA:8:27 s B 1 5 N R 0 PF535 AA;8:27 E I 2 0 N B 0 PF536 AA:8:27 E I 0 M B 0 PF537 AA:8:27 s B I 5 N R 0 PF538 AA:8:27 s I 2 0 N R 0 PF539 AA:8:27 E B 2 I N R 0 PF5-tO AA:8:27 S I 0 N R 0 PF541 AA:8:27 S J I 11 N R 20 PF542 AA:8:27 s B 2 I N 0 0 PF543 AA;8;27 s B I I N R 0 PF5-U AA;8:27 s J 1 11 N R 18 PF545 AA:8:27 E B I 5 N R 0 PF546 AA:8:27 E B 2 I S R 0 PF547 AA:8:27 99 I 0 N R 0 PF548 AA:8:87 E I t 0 iV B 0 PF549 AA:8:87 3 B I 5 N R 0 PF550 AA:8:87 E B I N R 0 PF551 AA:8:87 E B 1 I SL R 0 PF552 AA:8:87 E I 2 0 N B 0 PF553 AA;8:87 S B 1 5 99 R 0 296 Appendix 3. Attribute Analysis of Sherds Anid ASM Recovery Vessel Vessel Vessel Variant Paint Rim Ji Site No. Context Shape Part Form meter PF554 AA:8:87 S I 2 0 N B 0 PF555 AA:8:87 S B 2 L N R 0 PF556 AA:8:87 E B 2 I N 0 0 PFS57 AA:8:87 99 I 2 0 N B 0 PF558 AA:8:87 S I 2 0 N B 0 PF559 AA:8:87 E I 0 N R 0 PF560 AA:8:87 S B 2 I N R 0 PF561 AA;8:87 S I 2 0 N B 0 PFS62 AA:8:87 s J 2 2 N B 0 PF563 AA:8:87 s I 2 0 N R 0 PF564 AA:1I:25 E J 1 It N R 14 PF565 AA:11:25 E I 2 0 N R 0 PF566 AA:11:25 S B 1 5 N R 18 PF567 AA:1I:25 s [ 2 0 N R 0 PF568 AA:ll:25 s I 1 0 N R 0 PF569 AA:11:25 E B I 5 N R 0 PF570 AA:11:25 99 B I 5 S R 0 PF571 AA:11:25 S J 1 11 N R 14 PF572 AA:11:25 E J 1 12 N R 12 PF573 AA:11:25 E B 2 I S R 0 PF574 AA:11:25 E I 0 N R 0 PF575 AA:11:25 S I 2 0 SL R 0 PF576 AA:11:25 S I 1 0 S R 0 PF577 AA:11:25 S B I 1 N R 0 PF578 AA: 11:25 s I 2 0 SL 0 0 PFST) .\A:11:25 s B i 5 N R 0 PF580 AA;11;25 s B I 5 N B 0 PF581 AA:H:25 E I t 0 S R 0 PF582 AA:ll:25 E I 0 S R 0 PF58.1 AA;I1:25 S I 0 s R 1) PF584 AA: 11:25 E I 7 0 N R 0 PF585 AA:7:11 S I 2 0 SL B 0 PF586 AA:7:1I S B 7 1 LV R 0 PF587 AA;7:11 s J t 2 s R 0 PF588 AA:7:H E B 7 1 s R 0 297 Appendix 3. Attribute Analysis of Sherds Anid ASM Recovery Vessel Vessel Vessel Variant Paint Rim Site No. Context Shape Part Form mete PF589 AA:7:1I E B 2 I N B 0 PF590 AA:7;ll S I 2 0 N R 0 PF591 AA;7:U S I 2 0 N R 0 PF592 AA:7:n S B 2 I M R 0 PF593 AA;7:ll E I 2 0 N R 0 PF594 AA:7:Il E B I 5 S R 0 PF595 AA;7:11 S I 2 0 N R () PF596 AA;7:ll E B 2 1 N R 0 PF597 AA:7:ll E I 2 0 S R 0 PF598 AA:7:1I E I •)to 0 N 0 0 PF599 AA:7:ll S B 2 I N R 0 PF600 AA:7:11 S B I N R 0 PF601 AA:7:n s B 1 5 N R 0 PF602 AA;7:11 s I I 0 S R 0 PF603 AA:7:11 E I 2 0 N R 0 PF604 AA:7:11 S I 2 0 S R 0 PF605 AA:7:11 E I 2 0 N R 0 PF606 AA:7:11 E J 2 N 0 0 PF607 AA;7:II E J 2 2 N R 0 PF608 AA:7:ll E B I 5 S R 40 PF609 AA:I1:12 S I 0 N B 0 PF6I0 AA;11:12 S I 2 0 S R 0 PF61I AA:U:I2 S B 2 I s R 0 PF612 AA;11:12 S I 2 0 N R 0 PF613 AA;I1:12 S B I 5 S R 0 PF6I4 AA;II;i: S B »4 5 N R (1 PF615 AA:ll:12 S I 2 0 N R 0 PF616 AA.-11:12 S r 2 0 N B 0 PF617 AA:ll:l2 S B 1 5 S R 0 PF618 AA:11:12 S I •) 0 S R 0 PF619 AA;I1:12 E I 2 0 s R 0 PF620 AA:ll:12 E B I 5 N 99 24 PF621 AA:11:12 E I 2 0 N R 0 PF622 AA;II:12 E I 1 0 N R 0 PF623 AA:11:12 E B I 5 N R 0 298 Appendix 3. Attribute Analysis of Sherds Anid ASM Recovery Vessel Vessel Vessel Variant Paint Rim dia- SiteNo. Context Shape Part Form meter (cm) PF624 AA:ll:12 S B 2 1 N R 0 PF625 AA:11:I2 S I 2 0 N R 0 PF626 AA:ll:12 S I 2 0 S R 0 PF627 AA;11:12 E J 2 11 N 0 0 PF628 AA:ll:12 E B 1 5 S R 12 PF629 AA;I1:12 E B I I S R 0 PF630 AA:11:12 E B 1 5 N R 32 PF631 AA;ll:12 E J 1 12 S R 20 PF632 AA:ll:12 E B 1 5 N R 16 PF633 AA:ll:12 E B 1 4 N R 28 PF634 AA:11:12 S I 2 0 N R 0 PF635 AA:11:12 S I 2 0 N R 0 PF636 AA:ll:l2 E B 1 5 N R 24 PF637 AA:11:12 E B I 5 N B 38 PF638 AA:1I:12 S B 2 1 N R 0 PF639 AA:7:9 S B 1 4 N R 0 PF640 AA:7:9 s B I 5 N R 0 PF641 AA:7:9 S B I 1 M R 0 PF642 AA:7:9 S B I 5 N R 0 PF643 AA:7:9 S B 1 7 N R 0 PF644 AA:7:20 S I 2 0 N B 0 PF645 AA:7:20 S B I 5 N R 0 PF646 AA:7:20 S B I 5 N B 28 PF647 AA:ll:23 S I I 0 N R 0 PF648 AA:ll:23 S B I 5 N R 0 PF<550 AA:n;23 s r 2 0 S R 0 PF651 AA:Il:66 s B 1 5 s R 0 PF652 AA:U:66 s I 2 0 N R 0 PF653 AA:7:76 S I 2 0 S 0 0 PF654 AA:7:110 S B 2 1 N R 0 PF655 AA:11:56 S B I 5 iV R 0 PF656 AA;11:43 S B 1 I N R 12 PF6J7 AA:7;114 s B 2 I N R 0 PF658 AA:7;43 s I 2 0 S R 0 PF659 AA;7;43 s B 2 1 N R 0 299 Appendix 3. Attribute Analysis of Sherds Anid ASM Recovery Vessel Vessel Vessel Variant Paint Rimdia- SiteNo. Context Shape Part Form meter (cm) PF660 AA:7:128 S B I 5 N B 0 PF661 AA:7;128 S I 2 0 N 0 0 PF662 AA:7:43 s B I 5 S R u PF663 AA:7:172 s I 2 0 N R 0 PF664 AA;11;68 s I 2 0 99 R 0 PF665 AA:11.56 s I 2 0 N R 0 PF666 AA:11:56 s I 2 0 N R 0 PF667 AA:U:56 s B I 1 N R 0 PF668 AA:12:251 E J 2 2 N R 0 PF669 AA:12:25l E I 2 0 N R 0 PF670 AA:12:251 E B I 5 N R 20 PF67I AA:12:251 E J 2 2 S R 0 PF672 AA:12:251 E I 2 0 S R 0 PF673 AA:12:25l E I 2 0 N R 0 PF674 AA:l2:25l E B I 5 S R 0 PF675 AA:12:25l E B I 5 N R 0 PF676 AA:12:251 E B I 5 S R 0 PF677 AA:12:251 E B I 5 S R 0 PF678 AA:12:251 E B 1 5 N R 0 PF679 AA:12:251 E B 2 1 N R 0 PF680 AA:12:251 E I 2 0 N R 0 PF681 AA:12:251 E B 2 I N R 0 PF682 AA:I2:251 E B I 5 N R 0 PF683 AA:I2:25I E B 1 5 N R 0 PF68* AA:12:251 E I 2 0 N R 0 PF685 AA;li25l E I 2 0 N R 0 PF686 AA:12:25l E I 2 0 N R 0 PF687 AA:12:251 E B 1 5 S R 18 PF688 AA;I2:251 E 0 1 9 S R 0 PF689 AA:12:251 E J 1 11 N O 30 PF690 AA:l2:25l E B I 5 N R 0 PF691 AA:12:251 E J 2 11 SL R 0 PF692 AA;12:251 E B I 5 SL R 0 PF693 AA:12:251 E B 2 1 SL R 0 PF694 AA;12:251 E B 2 I SL R 0 300 Appendix 3. Attribute Analysis of Sherds Anid ASM Recovery Vessel Vessel Vessel Variant Paint Rim' Site No. Context Shape Part Form metei PF695 AA:12:25l E B I 4 SL R 26 PF696 AA;l2:25l E B 1 5 SL R 0 PF697 AA:l2:25l E I 2 0 SL 0 0 PF698 AA:12:251 E I 2 0 N B 0 PF699 AA:12:251 E J 2 2 N R 0 pnoo AA:12:25l E B I 5 N R 38 PF701 AA:12:251 E B I 5 S R 18 PF702 AA:l2:25l E B 1 N R 0 PF703 AA:l2:25l E B I 5 N R 0 PF704 AA:i2:251 E B I 5 SL R 0 PF705 AA:12:251 E J 1 11 N R 0 PF706 AA:12;251 E B 1 5 N R 0 PF707 AA;12:251 E I 2 0 N R 0 PF708 AA:12:251 E J I 11 N R 16 pno9 AA:12:251 E J 1 11 S R 24 PF710 AA:12:251 E B 1 5 S R 0 PF711 AA:12:251 E B 1 5 s R 36 PF712 AA:l2:25l E B I 5 s R 0 PF713 AA;12:251 E B I 5 s R 0 PF714 AA:12:251 E J 2 2 N R 0 PF7I5 AA:12:25I E B 2 1 s R 0 pni6 AA:ll-25l E B I 4 s R 40 PF717 AA:12:251 E I 2 0 N R 0 PF718 AA:12:251 E J 1 11 N R 14 PF719 AA:l2:25l E I 2 0 S R 0 PF720 AA:12:25l E J 2 2 SL R 0 PF721 AA:12:25l E B 1 5 S R 22 PF722 AA:12:251 E J 2 2 s R 0 PF723 AA:12:251 E B 2 1 S R 0 PF724 AA:12:25l E B I 5 s 0 0 PF725 AA:12:251 E J I 11 s R 18 PF726 AA;I2;25I E J 2 2 N R 0 PF727 AA:12;251 E B 1 5 N R 22 PF728 AA:12:251 E B 1 5 N 0 22 PF729 AA:12:25I E B 1 5 N R 28 301 Appendix 3. Attribute Analysis of Sherds Anid ASM Recovery Vessel Vessel Vessel Variant Paint Rim dia Site No. Context Shape Part Form meter (cm) PF730 AA:12:251 E B 1 5 N R 24 PF731 AA:12:251 E I 2 0 N R 0 PF732 AA:12:251 E J 1 12 N R 0 PF733 AA;11-251 E B 1 7 N 0 T> PF734 AA:12;251 E B 1 5 N R 0 PF735 AA:12:25l E J 2 2 S R 0 PF736 AA:12:25l E I 2 0 N R 0 PF737 AA;12:251 E B 2 I S R 0 PF738 AA:12:251 E B I 5 N R 0 PR39 AA:12:251 E B 2 I N R 0 PF740 AA:12:25l E B I 5 S R 0 PF741 AA:12:25l E B I 5 SL 0 32 PF742 AA:l2:25l E I 2 0 SL R 0 PR43 AA:12:25l E B I 3 SL R 24 PF744 AA:li25l E B 1 7 SL 0 26 PF745 AA:12:25l E B I 7 SL R 24 PF746 AA:12;251 E I 2 0 SL R 0 PF747 AA:12:25l E B 1 5 S/SL R 0 PF748 AA:12:25l E I 2 0 SL R 0 PF749 AA:12:251 E B 1 5 S/SL R 30 PF750 AA:12:251 E I 2 0 SL R 0 302 APPENDIX FOUR PETROGRAPmC AND QUALITATIVE ANALYSIS OF TANQUE VERDE RED-ON-BROWN SHERDS FROM THE NORTHERN TUCSON BASIN AND AVRA VALLEY by James M. Heidke and Michael K. Wiley Center for Desert Archaeology 303 ObjectiTes of the Study Ceramic vessels produced in the prehistoric southwest often contain abundant temper such as sand, disaggregated rock, and crushed sherd. Both sand and disaggregated rock tempers can be used as indicators of the provenance of archaeological ceramics when their geological sources are identiiied (Arnold 1985; Miksa 199S; Miksa and Heidke 199S; Schaller 1994; Shepard 1936, 1942). The goal of the present study is to identify the provenance of Tanque Verde Red-on-brown ceramics recovered from a number of sites located in the Northern Tucson Basin and Avra Valley on the basis of the temper found within them. The focus of this sudy is on sand temper. A sample of wash sands from the project area was collected and analyzed. Those samples supplement the informadon on geological sources previously compiled by Lombard (1986,1987a, 1987b, 1987c. 1987d, 1987e, 1989, 1990) and KamUli (1994). A collection of 4S0' sherds and 29 sand samples were submitted by Ms. Karen G. Harry to The Center for Desert Archaeology for qualitative and petrographic analysis. Twenty-five of the 4S0 sherds submitted were selected by James Heidke to be point-counted, and the point count data was then used to test and refine his temper characterKadon of the entire collection of sherds. In addition to die qualitative and petrographic analyses of the sherds, "grain boxes," keys to diose boxes, and hand sample descriptions were prepared for each petrofacies. or sand composition zone, relevant to this study. ' Harry's note: Four of these sherds were later (fetennioed not to be Tanque Verde Red-on- brown. Accordingly, diey were subsequently dropped from the analyses and are aot included in the discussion in Chapter Four. 304 Establisiung the Petrofades Petrographic modal analysis, or point counting, is a quantitative technique that provides data for the evaluatioa of samples on the basis of the quantity and composition of grain types present. It allows samples to be grouped based on the numerical abundances of different grain types. This technique was selected for this project because it allows sand samples to be compared directly to sand-size tempering material found in ceramics from study area sites. This section describes how sands were processed, and point-counted in thin-section to provide the basis for an actualistic petro^ies model, or map of modem sand composition zones (Ingersoll 1990). Subsequent sections detail how the diin-section-based petrof^ies model was used to detine expected characteristics of the sand in hand sample as viewed dirough a binocular microscope, and how the hand sample model was applied to die sand temper in the pottery sherds and verified. Geology of the Tucson Basin and Ana Valley The geology of the Tucson Basin and Avra Valley has been extensively studied (Lombard 1986, 1987a. 1987b. 1987c. I987d, I987e. 1989. 1990; KamUU 1994). For the scope of the present sudy the geology of the entire Tucson Basin and Avra Valley were not reexamined, instead specific parts of the Tucson Basin and Avra Valley were looked at in detail in order to clarify, and in some cases designate new. petrofacies. To that end. Liptnan's (1993) recem map of the Tucson Mountain's bedrock geology was used to refine petrofiu:ies boundaries along the eastern side of the Tucson Mountains. Petrofacies Modeling Sands derived from similar source rocks under simUar conditions will have similar compositions. When we study sands within a well-defined region and determine that those sands can be broken into subsets on the basis of composition and spatial contiguity, we have detlned 305 petFoi^ies, or sand composition zones. The petrofkies concept was originally introduced for the study of sand provenance in sandstones. Petrofacies in ancient sedimentary deposits have both lateral (spatial) and vertical (time) components. In modem sands, we deal only with the spatial component. The time component is effectively held constant, barring major climatic and/or tectom'c changes widiin the time scale under smdy. For the purposes of archaeology, we can think of the petrof^ies as temper resource procurement zones whose sand compositions are distinct from one anodier. Drainage basins rarely coincide exactly with rock units, yet they are the geomorphological unit in which sands are created and transported. A preliminary petrofacies map is created by comparing bedrock geology to the geomorphology and drainage pattern in a region. The preliminary petrofacies map is tested by sampling sands and characterizing their composition. Resolution of the petrofacies boundaries depends on the scale of variability in the source rocks, the scale at which samples are collected, the resolution of the analytical technique, and the statistical techniques employed. Petrofocies are identified in several steps. Geologists use geologic maps of the nearby mountains and alluvial fuis, and note which washes drain which rock types. From this they draw in zones of valley sand that should have the same composition. They then go out and coUea sands from several washes within each zone and prepare each sand sample for viewing under a microscope. Numerical point counts of die minerals and rock fragments in each sand can then be analyzed statistically. Ideally, the statistical analyses group the numerical information into well- defined petrofocies. Geologists and ceramists then work together to choose pottery sherds representative of a problem or site. The potsherds are thin-sectioned and the temper examined in die same manner as the sands. Poaery temper compositions are dien compared to die different petrofacies to find 306 compositional matches and, therefore, likely sources for the materials used to manufacture the pot. The current petrof^ies map for the Tucson Basin and Avra Valley is shown in Rgure 1. Analysis of the Sands Sand Sample Preparation and Thin-Sectiomng The collected sands were split and cleaned by Ms. Harry at Desert Archaeology's lab before being used for band samples or thin-sections. To prepare the samples, each one was repeatedly halved using a "riffle" style sample splitter until it was small enough to fill a 30 dram vial, about 130 grams. The sample splitter was used to ensure that die small samples would be random representatives of the larger samples without sorting or settling biases. Once a 130 gram sample was obtained, each sample was washed in a 10 percent HCl solution for IS to 30 seconds to remove caliche coatings from die grains. This is not long enough to remove limestone or caliche grains from the sample. The sample was then rinsed at least three times to remove all HCl, and wet screened in a .075 mm sieve to remove grains smaller than silt size. This sieve is slightiy larger than the accepted sand-silt break at .0625 mm; however, most samples were so coarse that littie information was lost Washed and screened samples were placed into jars and oven dried. Once dry, they were split again (using the sample splitter) down to a size appropriate for thin-section preparation (approximately 1 tablespoon, or 25 gm). The remainder of the washed sand was reuined fur use as a hand sample. The remaining unwashed sand was placed into storage in tyvek bags. Thin-sections were prepared by Quality Thin-Sections of Tucson, Arizona. Each sand sample was mixed with epoxy and set into a small block. Once the blocks hardened, they were treated as rocks and tiiin-sectioned. All thin-sections were etched with hydrofluoric acid and 307 EXPUNATION A • Rincen S • Braicy Wqsa a • Cataiine T • Rtcortado C • Somonicqo U > Coeoreou* 0 • A»re V • Oes Titos t " Tertolite W • Waltraien r a Oiimem Lo* Y • Roak'ijqt ^ C • Senta Rita ' HI m Empiri J m Cat Uountoin (1-3) K m Stock Ueunioin L • Cetdtn Cdt* (1-5) i H m Rniito (J MW - RUito west I ARIZONA N m Oumom Hiqn I 0 • Strrito / P - Sonto C/u» Rivtr ( 0 • Ainaw A R • aotofnelt Uountoin PtnmMtr SiRRfTA EMPIRE Kilometers Figure I. Current (1995) petrofacies map of the Tucson Basin and Avra Valley. 308 stained for potassium and calcium so that potassium feldspars and plagioclase feldspars could be readily identified. All tbin-secdons had permanent cover slips placed on them. Point-Count Methodology Point counting is a modal analysis, one that provides information on the relative volume of each mineral in the sample (Chayes 19S6; 1). Sand thin-sections were point-counted using the Gazzi-Dicldnson technique (Dickinson 1970; Gazzi 1966), in which all grains diat are sand size or larger are counted as individual mineral species regardless of whether or not diey occur as tree minerals or in rock fragments. Descriptive notes were kept to indicate the circumstances under which each of the mineral types occurred. The advantage of using this technique is chat sand mamrity effects are minimized, and sands, or sand tempers, of different grain sizes can be compared. For example, a very immamre granitic sand might contain large numbers of granite grains and very few free minerals. A mature granitic sand would be predominantly tree minerals with few granite fragments. The Gazzi-Dickinson technique allows die two sands to be compared, because all sand size mineral grains in the immature sands are counted as minerals not as rocks. This technique is appropriate because we wish to compare data from sands with sand-tempered sherds. It is unlikely that we will sample "the sand" from which prehistoric potters collected their temper, but we have sampled sands derived from die same bedrock in the same geographic units as diose available to prehistoric potters. We may have sampled sands that are more or less mature than the prehistoric sands, but die Gazzi-Dickenson mediod ensures diat all daa collected from a geographic area can be evaluated as a unit Point counts of single minerals and rock grains were made using a high-powered petrographic microscqie. Only grains .0625 mm in diameter or larger were counted. The largest 309 stage grid-spacing was chosen that would: (1) allow a count of 400 temper grain points per slide; (2) cover the entire slide; and (3) not count too many grains twice. Sedimentologists currently prefer to count each grain multiple times if it is large enough to cross more than one grid point. In theory, this allows the larger grains that occupy more of the volume of the sand to be counted more accurately. However, it could lead to a misrepresentation of some grains if the sand is very immature widi a wide range of grain sizes, or if the grain size distnbution is strongly bimodal. For sands widi univariate normal grain size distributions, the grid spacing should be large enough for most of die grains to be represented by one grid point. In any case, it is most important to establish a rigid coundng procedure, and to be consistent within the data set. Then die data from all counts will be comparable and errors will remain within the counting error estimate (Van der Plas and Tobi 1965). Single crystal grains larger than .0625 mm in diameter were counted as dieir mineral name (i.e.. quartz) even if they were pan of a coarse rock fragment like granite. Rock fragments composed of grains less than .0625 mm were given a lidiic name based on their texmre and mineralogy, following the classificadon system proposed by Dickinson (1970). The point count parameters used in this smdy are reported in Table I. All terminology was dien brought into conformity with die nomenclature used by Lombard in his smdies of die Tucson Basin and Avra Valley (Lombard 1986, 1987d, 1990). This was accomplished by recalculating, or summing, the values of some parameters (Table 2). Excellent discussions of the methods and reasons for the method and terminology may be found in Dickinson (1970), Lombard (I987d:98-I03), Miksa (1992:159-162), and Stark and Heidke (1992:136-139). Although diirty-five grain types were poim-counted in diis soidy, only 23 of die grain types were acmally encountered in the sands and sherds. Ten of the grain types represent lidiic 310 Table 1. Grain Types Found in the Tucson Basin and Avra Valley Sand and Sherd Thin- Sections Grain [)escription Monomineralic Grains QTZ All quanz types. Uasaiaed. KSPAR Alkali feldspan: Yellow sained NA/K feldspan. unfeatured or peitbetic. MICR Microcline: Alkali feldspar with cross-batch twinning, sained yellow or unstained. CAPLAG Calsic plagioclase Teldspar (CaNa). commonly zoned andesine or labradorite: stained pink, commonly wiUt broad albite or compound twinning, well defined zoning. NAPLAG Sodic plagioclase feldspar (NaCa), commonly oligoclase; very laiely stained pink, commonly with albite twinning, occasional carlsbad twinning, poor zoning: seritization minor. MUSC Sand-sized muscovite mica. BIOT Sand-sized bictite mica. 00 (/odifferenciated opaque minerals, not necessarily oxides. EPl Undifferentiated members of tbe epidote family. SANID Alkali feldspar of the sanidine variety. SPHENE Commonly rhombic, honey-colored grains. CACO Undifferentiated sand-sized carbonate minerals (not aggregates). GAR Undifferentiated garnet group minerals. PX Undifferentiaied members of die pyroxene group. AMPH Undifferentiated memben of die amphibole group. Volcanic Lithic Fragmam LVF Felsic to intermediate volcanic: Microgranular nonfelted mosaics of submicroscopic quanz and feldspars, often with microphenocrysts of feldspar, quartz, or rarely ferromagnesian miiKrals. Groundmass is fine to glassy, always has well-developed potassium feldspar (yellow) stain, may have calcium plagioclase (pink) stain as well. This category tepresens lavas and tuffs of rhyolite. rhyodacite. dadte. and latite compositions. LVFB Biotite-bearing felsic volcanic grains. LVl Intermediate volcanic rock: MicrogranulU laths of intermediaie feldspar crystals in random lo parallel fabric. Commonly intergrown with amphibole and opaque oxides. Rarely traces of yellows stain: usually red stained. Represents intermediate lavas such as latite. andesite or quanz-andesite. LVM lotermediate to basic volcanic: Visible microlites or laths of feldspar crystals in random to parallel fabric, usually with glassy or devitrified or otherwise altered dark groundmass. Often with phenocrysts of opaque oxides, occasional quartz, olivine, or pyroxene. Rarely yellow sained, often very well-developed pink stain, representing intermediate to basic lavas such as latite. andesite. qtz-andesite. basalt, or trachyte. LW Glassy volcanics: Vitric or vitrophyric grains showing relia shards, pumiceous fabric. welding, or perlitic structures, sometimes with micropbenocrysts. representing pyroclastic or vitrophyric rocks. 311 Grain Description Volcanic Uthic Fragments (continued) LVH Hypabyyssal votcanic rock: Equagranuiar aobedial to subbedial fddpar-cicb aggregates with DO glassy or devitrified groundniass, courser graioed tbaa LVF, generally with yellow and pink stain, representing sbaOow igneous intrusive rocks. Se(Umntary Uthic Fragments LSS Siltstones: Granular aggregates of equant siihangiilar to rounded silt-sized grains, with or without interstitial cemenL May be well to poorly sotted, with or without sand-sized grains. Composition varies from quartzose to lithic-arkosic. with some maflc-rich varieties. LSA Argillite: Dark, extremely fine grained without visible foliation, may have mass extincuon. may bave variable amounts of silt-sized inclusions. Represents shales, slates, and mudstones LSCH Giert: Microcrystalline aggregates of pure silica. LSCA Carbonate: Mosaics of very fine caldte crystals, with or without interstitial clay-to sand- sized grains. Most appear to be fragmetss of soil carbonate and ate subround to very round. This category represents caliche. LSTE Sherd temper (Counted only in sherd samples). Dark, semiopaque angular to subrouod grains, generally with discrete edges, generally including silt- lo sand-sized temper grains. Metamorphic Lithic Fragments LMA (2uartz-feldspar (mica) aggregates: Quartz, feldspan. mica, and opaque oxides in aggregates with highly sutured grain boundaries but no planar-oriented fabric. Some represent schists ur LMT (2uartz-feldspar-mica tectooite; Grains with strong planar oriented fabric in aggregates of quartz, feldspan. micas, and opaque oxides. Commonly display mineral segregation with alternating quarts-feldspar and mica ribbons. Grains are commonly sutured and/or elongated. These represent the finn grained schists and gneisses. LMTP Phyllite: (Juartz-feldspar-mica tectonite in which the mica grains are oriented in a planar fabric but are silt-sized or smaller. little or no mineral segregation. LMM Microgranular quartz aggregates; Nonoriented polygonal aggregates of newl-grown sttasin- fiee quartz wiUi sutured, planar, or curved grain boundaries. LMF Foliated quaitz aggregates; Platar-orieniaed fabric developed in mostly strained quartz crystasl with sutured crystaline boundaries. Some quartzite; cataclastic quartz. LMVF Metamorphosed feisic volcanic rock commonly with tectonically oriented grains. Traces of phenocyrsts and volcanic textures remain Other Grain Types Other! Not used in this study. Others Not used in this study. UNKN Grains that cannot be identified, grains that are itxletenninate. ! 312 Table 2. Recalculated Parameters Used in this Study Recalculated parameters used in calculating percentage figures for comparison with the sand sample data base A. Umwinned potassium fiddspar grains (KSPAR = KSPAR + SANID) B. Tool plagioclase feldspar grains (FLAG = NAPLAG + CAPLAG) C. Undifferendacd members of tbe Pyroxene and Ampbibole groups (PYR = PX + AMPH) D. Total felsidc volcanic fragments (LVF = LVF + LVFB) E. Total microlitic volcanic fragments (LVM = LVI + LVM) F. Total quartz feldspar and mica tectonite fragments (LMT = LMT + LMTP) G. Unknown (UNKN = SPHENE + UNIW) Recalculated parameters used in ternary diagrams H. Vfonocrystalline quartz grains (Qm = QTZ) I. Tocal plagioclase feldspar grains (P = PLAG) J. Total alkali feldspar grains (K = KSPAR + MICR) i; I K. Total feldspar grains I (F = P + K) i L. Total metamorphic lidiic fragments j (Lm = LMM + LMF + LMA + LMT + LMTP) f ' M. Total volcanic litluc fragments (Lv = LVF + LVFB + LVI + LVM + LVH + LW) N. Total sedimentary lidiic fragments (Ls = LSS + LSA + LSCH + LSCA) 0. Total lidiic fragments (Lt = Lm + Lv -r- Ls) 313 fragments, and 11 are monomineralic. The 22nd point-count parameter is sherd temper; it is used only when sherd fragments, or grog, are found in pottery thin-sections. A 23rd point-count parameter, "unknown," was also counted. This was done to ensure that the counting was rigorous and that each sand sized grain which fell under the petrographic microscope's crosshairs was counted. Table 3 reports the sand point-count data by sample number. The data are presented as they were collected, so percentages of each grain type would have to be computed. An attempt was made to count 400 grains per thin-section, but this was not always possible, so the raw data values are not directly comparable without transformation to percentages. Methods of Qualitative Description Qualitative Descriptions of Sands in Thin-Section. As each thin-section is point counted, separate descriptions must be recorded of the grain types present in the sample. Commonly, a mineral, a rock type, or a mineral texture is present that is very distinctive, even unique, to a peorof^es. These grains are called "key grains" and may supply the necessary clue to source a potsherd to a specific petrofacies. However, such information could be lost for some coarser grained rocks, unless especially noted, because of the Gazzi-Dickinson method used here for point counting. Qualitative Descriptions of Sands in Band Sample. AH of die numbers and statistical analyses that may result ftom point counting a thin-sectioned sand sample provide liale comfort to the ceramicist. untrained in detailed petrography, when faced with the task of identifying the source of a coarse-grained sand temper. Therefore, descriptions of die loose sands, grouped by petrofacies, were made. I II iB WB. Table 3. All Sand Point-Count Data (Raw Counts are Given) Pciro- Monocrysialliiw Grains QIY KSI'AK MICR NAPLAO CAI'I^G SANID MUSC BIOT VX AMI'll GAR CH) SPHENU liPl S4 c 145 97 0 23 74 5 2 8 0 1 0 6 0 0 0 S3 c 109 39 0 83 41 6 2 10 3 1 0 16 0 0 0 94 1* 106 97 0 0 109 0 3 2 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 103 Ji 31 80 0 0 191 0 1 29 2 40 0 1 0 2 0 109 t- 110 93 0 0 138 0 0 12 0 17 0 4 0 0 0 272 J2 23 4 0 0 5 0 3 0 0 0 0 6 0 0 0 274 JI 40 6 0 0 Ji 0 1 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 275 J2 46 6 0 0 53 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 0 0 0 280 JI 31 22 0 0 26 0 1 I 0 0 0 2 0 0 8 282 il 38 20 0 1 29 0 0 2 0 1 0 3 0 0 0 287 12 14 5 0 0 94 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 6 288 J2 19 0 0 0 36 0 0 I 0 0 0 3 0 0 2 290 12 33 0 0 6 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 I 293 J2 33 6 0 2 59 0 0 2 0 0 0 6 0 0 I 308 f 130 39 2 3 62 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 2 0 309 1' 103 74 2 1 98 0 1 2 0 0 0 3 0 3 0 3J0 I' 124 69 0 1 107 0 2 1 1 3 1 8 0 2 0 311 7 96 3 0 36 6 0 4 1 1 2 0 12 0 0 3 312 ? 103 0 0 31 18 0 1 6 4 0 0 9 0 0 3 313 7 108 3 0 34 3 0 1 1 3 0 0 3 0 0 0 314 li 191 5 0 57 79 2 1 10 0 15 0 3 0 2 0 313 li 179 1 0 140 24 0 2 7 0 20 0 12 0 2 0 317 C 214 0 0 134 6 1 7 3 0 1 0 7 0 1 0 319 1: 172 88 0 21 74 0 7 2 0 I J 14 0 4 0 321 I: 131 123 0 1 J23 0 J 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 322 E 190 5 0 170 4 0 0 7 0 0 0 2 0 I 0 324 I* 132 89 0 0 93 0 2 1 0 1 0 2 0 0 0 125 I' 145 77 0 U 97 0 1 0 0 (1 0 0 0 2 0 326 1* 173 0 (> 143 2 0 2 3 0 2 0 1 0 2 I 328 7 139 76 0 3 78 0 1 0 0 (1 0 1 0 0 0 Table 3. Cuminued. Volcanic Liihic Fragmcius Sedimentary Liiliic Meiamorpluc Liiliic Fragmciiis Oilier Grain Types Fragnienlii l.VI' l.VPW l.VI l.VM l-VII I.VV I5S UA l-SCA UCII l-MT IMIT IMA IMI-' IMM IJ4VF oniR2 OTIIR3 link. Talal $4 7 0 20 0 s 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 400 SS II 2 21 0 31 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 400 94 57 4 2 0 14 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 400 103 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 400 109 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 i 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 400 272 228 0 0 0 123 2 1 0 4 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 400 274 313 0 2 0 9 0 2 0 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 400 27S 113 0 0 0 159 0 3 0 12 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 400 280 222 21 4 4 17 0 0 0 IS s 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 400 282 218 47 2 0 I 0 0 0 14 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 400 287 103 2 0 0 163 0 0 0 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 400 288 214 0 1 0 119 0 0 0 S 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 400 290 302 0 2 0 48 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 400 293 22 0 8 0 259 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 400 308 112 5 0 0 II 0 0 0 4 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 400 309 80 5 3 0 18 0 0 0 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 400 310 6S 1 0 0 8 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 400 311 »9i i 2 3 29 0 0 0 0 I u 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 400 312 189 8 7 1 IS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 3 400 313 183 8 1 1 27 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 2 400 314 i 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 1 378 315 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 u 0 7 0 0 0 0 0 3 400 317 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 II 0 ID 0 0 0 0 0 1 400 319 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 0 5 u 0 0 0 0 2 400 321 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 5 0 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 400 322 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 n 0 7 0 10 0 0 0 0 0 1 400 324 65 0 0 0 9 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 2 0 u 0 0 0 0 400 32S 53 0 0 0 17 0 0 0 0 3 3 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 400 326 49 3 1 u 12 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 (1 u 0 a 2 400 oj 328 65 1) 3 (1 15 0 1) 0 1 3 1 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 2 394 1 316 Each of the appropriate sands collected were placed in a dish and examined under a low power binocular microscope. The grains in each sample were named, described, and assigned an estimate of relative abundance (see Miksa and Heidke 1995 for additional explanation). Ideally this process should result in petrofacies descriptions that are clear and comprehensive; descriptions that a ceramicist can use to characterize and source tempering materials with the aid of a low power microscope. To make things easier for the ceramicist, a collection of sand-sized mineral and rock specimens representadve of each petrofacies was gathered and glued into covered match boxes. Each grain type was numbered and ulentified in a key accompanying die detailed petrofacies description. In this way, Heidke could compare coarse sand grains observed in a sherd with those * in a petrofacies box (Kamilli 1994). Abbreviated petroticies descripoons. derived from examinadon of hand samples, thin-sections, and geologic maps, are presented in Tables 4 and 5. Analysis of the Sherds Binocular Microscopic Characterizatiott of the Sherds Once die petro^ies descriptions and grain boxes were completed, diey were used to guide die characterization of temper composition in a typological grab sample of Tanque Verde Red-on- brown sherds chosen by Ms. Harry. The grab sample included 450 sherds recovered from 35 I sites. Sherds were examined at 10 to 15 power magnification using a Linitron ZSM binocular i ! microscope with a Lite Mite Series 9 circular illuminator. Three variables were used to characterize temper composition (Table 6). The first variable, temper type, was used to characterize whether or not die temper composition was dominated by a micaceous material, such as gneiss, schist, phyllite or muscovite mica. The second 317 Table 4. Letter Designations and Short Descriptions for Several Tucson Basin Petrofacies TorwUta Petrafixies (E). Domioaud by giaoodiorice liiluc grains and free componeiis derived from (be granodiorice. A variety of free minerals sticb as quartz, plagioclase. k-spar. hornblende, spbeoe. epidote and the occasional garnet are present. The presence of spbene and clear quartz, either free or iocorpotated in granodiorite Uthic grains, are very distinctive of this petrofacies. In hand sample the abundance of lithics versus free monomineralic grains can vary considerably. Durham Low Petrofacies (F). Bounds the nonh-westera edge of Petrofacies E and is difficult to distinguisb from E because the two petrofacies share many similar grain types. Although they do share some similarities Petrofacies F does seem to contain more lithic metamorp^ grains in general Free minerals include light pink k-spar. white plagioclase, quartz, and biotite. A few flne-to-course grained schist (some may be pbyllite) grains are present. Petrofacies J I. A lithic rich petrofacies couaining multi-colored (purple/pink/green) rhyolite Udiic sand. LVF and LVFB dominate this petrofacies (although some samples have 00 LVFB). Many samples are eoirely made up of rhyolite. Rhymite tends to be more pink in this area. A few samples bave limonite or hematite staining, making them appear yellow or red in color. Little to no free minerals may be present in this petro&des. ftle green quartzite grains are present. Free minerals include quartz, plagioclase and occasionally biotite. although biotite its very rare as a free mineral. Petrofacies JZ Characterized by hypabossal lithic volcanic grains (LVH which look like 'dirty snowballs' as described by Lombard 1990). It also incluto LVF and LVFB grains as well, but in lesser amounts than found in Petrofacies Jl. Basalt grains are rare within (his petrofacies. In general, free monomineralic grains are in slightly higher abundance here than in JI. in particular, plagioclase grains are much more common here. At least two samples from this petrofacies contain very distinctive euhedral dark-olive-green garnets. Petrofacies J3. Dominated by rhyolite lithic sand and contains mostly LVF and lesser amounts of LVFB. This is considered as an intermediate petrofacies between J2 and M. This petrofacies has abundant monomineralic grains, much more so than either it or J2. including free granitic componeots such as quartz, plagioclase. K-spor. muscovite and hornblende. It also contains small amounts of granite, gneiss and schist grains. Rillito Petrofacies (M). Conains rhyolite. andesite anl quartz. T**^ '"t '•hpnc'^™! by it* bimodal grain size distribution. Granite 'metagranite" and quartzite can aba be found in varying abundances within this petrofacies. Three samples (47.171. 178) in the petrofacies contain abundant LVFB grains which can easily be conftoed with Jl samples, however LVFB grains in (his petrofacies tend to be less multi-colored than those in il. The remainder of the samples in the petrofacies contain liale or no LVFB. Durham High Petntfacies (N). Bounds die extreme north-western edge of I^trofacies E It contains granitic lithic grains and metamorphic lithics graiu. Metamorphic grains include ptnal schist which is a very distinctive grato type within this petrofacies. Granite grains tend to look slightly more like a true intermediate granite than those found in Petrofacies E. Some volcanic (LVM and LVF) grains can be found heie as well. In general, this petrofacies contains much more metamorphic material than that found in Petrofacies E or F. although it is difficult to distinguish from both of them. Santa Cruz River Petrofiicies iP). Represents the Sana Cruz River. Free quartz and plagioclase are the dominant grain types found bete. Lithicgruns include volcanics and lesser amounts of granite. The river picks up volcanic and granitic grains south of (he Rillito River and Canada del Oro River confluences and granitics and metamorphics north of the confluences (i.e. red garnets from the Catalinas and Tortolitas can be found commonly in sands north of the confluences but rarely to the south). 318 Table S. Letter Designations and Short Descriptions for the Avra Valley Petrofacies (After KamiUi 1994) Samaniego Petrqfijcies (Q Tbis petrofacies consists of Uihic grains (estimated 50%) of two types of granite (a very pink coiuse feldspar, biotite granite: and a somewhat altered, darker grey, hornblende biotite granite), felsic-to-intermediate volcamc and volcaniclastic rock, and lesser amotins of siltstoie and sandstone. Minor amounts of basalt, carbonate or cheit were seen. Free minerals (estimated S0%) include quartz and very pink alkali feldspar. Avra Petrofacies (D) This petrofacies contains lithic grains (estimated 7S%) of a high percentage of dark, intermediaie-to-mallc volcanic grains; loser amounts of lighter volcanic and volcaniclastic grains; also mixture of pale pink microgramte. and salt-ani- peppcr granite. Very little carbonate or sediment was seea Free minerals (estimated 2S%) include quanz. alkali feldspan. plagioclase. epidote and biotite. Waterman Petrofacies (W) (Samples 260. 262. 262. and 264) contain lithic grains (estimated 70%) of sediments (Silstones and sandstones, carbonate, uace of shale), and felsic-to-intermediate volcanic and volcaniclastic grains. Free minerals (estimated 30%) include quaitz. alkali feldspars, chalky plagioclase. amphibole. epidote. and chlorite. Sample 263 is dominated by very fine-grained, intermediate, biotite-beating volcanic rock (estimated 90% lithics). Free minerals consist of quanz. alkali feldspar, and calcic plagioclase. Dos Titos Petrofacies (V) Tbis petrofacies consists of lithics (estimated 75%) dominated by a very distinctive microgramte. In thin secuun. it has an interdergrowth of plagioclase laths and quartz, and minor alkali feldspar. In band sample the grains are altered- looking granite, bufl^ colored with white feldspan. The sands also contain somewhat altered felsic volcamcs and volcaniclastics. some sedinifnts (most in sample 265) such as siltstone and traces of carbonate. Free minerals (estimated 25%) include quartz and alkali feldspar grains from the granite. Cocoraque Petrcffiicies (U) Tbe sands sampled in this area do not form a umfied petrofacies but demonstrate transitional features. Nevertheless they are included here in order to add to the data base of tbe Avra Valley sands. This petrofacies contains a high percentage of lithics (estimated 50-70%). All samples include traces of siltstone. but no carbonate. Samples 253. 255. and 256 contain both granite, and felsic volcanics and volcaniclastics (including some obsidian). The granite m hand sample is mostly gicy and altered, with black mica and amphibole. Tbe source of this granite is not known. Sample 256 has a trace of the key grain microgramte from the Dos Titos area, (see Petrofacies V). Recortodo Petrofiicies (T) Subgroup 1. Tbis group contains lithics (estimated 75%) that include a distinctive igneous rock, seen here in thin section as a monzodiorite (zoned plagioclase laths, variable amounts of alkali feblspar. amphibole or biotite. and minor amounts ot quartz). It is probably the same as Keith's 'Diorite of Garcia Ranch' (MZd^ and the "Oiorite of Cocoraque Butte" (Kdc). (Keith. 1976. map index). Keith states that the Cocoraque Butte diorite is a "gray medium-grained homblenle and biotite-bearing diorite". and notes that the Garcia Ranch diorite is similar to it but generally finer grained. Recortado Petrofacies (T) Subgroup 2. This group contains lithics (estimated 75%) that include felsic volcanic and volcaniclastic grains, the monzodionte (in lesser amounts), and variable amounts of siltstone and shale. Samples 250 and AV-8 (271) (officially in the Roskrvge Petrofacies contain only traces of tbe monzodiorite and much more of the intermediae-to-mafic volcanic materials ut Keith's Cocoraque formation (1976). 319 Table S. Continued. Roskruge Petrqfades (Y) This petiofacies coocains lithics (esdmaicd 90%) that are dominated by intermediaie-to-mafic volcanic rocks. Many grains are alured and cut by epidote. and many mafic grains have altered to iron oxide. There are also some felsic-to- totermediate volcaniclastics. siltstones and sandstones. Free minerals (estimated < 10%) include quartz, feldspars, epidote and traces of limonite. It should be noted that the two northern sand samples (AV-8. 271 and ISO) in this petrofacies contain traces of the key material monzodiorite. Bauawte Petrofacies (R) This is a very distinct petrofacies. Lithics (estiniaied 90%) are dominated by felty basalt with altered mafic minerals, lesser amoutts of fme grained. intermediateHo-mafic volcaoic rock, and small amounts of felsic volcanic and volcaniclastic grains (+/- biotite). Free minerals (estimated 10%) include quartz, feldspar, pyroxene, amphibole. and epidote. No clastic sediments were seen, but sand sample 239 contains carbonate. Sierrita Petrafucies (0) This petrofacies contains abundant free minerals (estimated 8S%) they include mostly quartz, white or buff alkali feldspar, and buff sodic-to-tntermediate plagioclase. The small amounts of maHc minerals are magoetite. epidote. bleached biotite. and garnet. Lithics (estimated 1S%) include mica granite, traces of rfayolite and volcaniclasuc rock, and traces of siltstone. Brawley Wash Petrofiicies (S) Subgroup I. This group contains lithics (estimated 30%) chey include fels'c volcanic and volcaniclastic grains, and some grey granite. Few sedimens. carbonates or basalts were seen. The free minerals (estimated 70%) ate dominant in these samples and include much quanz (commonly bipyramidal crystals from the rhyolites), alkali feldspar, sodic plagioclase and traces of magnetite. Brawley Wash Pefft^cies (S) Subgroup 2. This group cotxains lithics (estimated S0%) that include variably altered felsic volcanics and volcaniclastics. altered buff, grey or greenish granite+/-epidcce. and minor siltstone and cherts. Very little carbonate was seen. Freeminerals (estimated S0%) include cloudy quartz. +1- altered feldspars, and minor sercitized plagioclase. The mafics are amphibole. epidote. hematite, magnetite, bleached biotite and muscovite mica. Rillito West Petrofacies (MW) This petrofacies contains lithics (estimated 80%) that are very mixed and include a variety of felsic volcanic and volcaniclastic grains, some with primary biotite; two types of grainite - a gray altered hornblende granite, and a pmk granite with traces of green mica; and less than about 5% altered arkosic siltstones. Free minerals include quartz, feldspars, and pale or green/brown biotites. Amole Petrofacies (Q) This petrofacies contains lithics (estimated 50%) that consist almost entirely of two types of fresh granite; an imphibole-biotite gray granite (most in sample AV-22 (193)). and a pink granite (mast in sample AV-20 (191)). The free, fresh, subangular minerals (estimated 50%) appear to have been derived from these granite sources and mclude quanz. white or red alkali feldspar, and white oligoclase plagioclase. Malics (from the gray granite) are amphibole. bleached biotite, muscovite and epidote. There are only traces of volcanic and sedimentary rocks. Golden Gate Petrofacies (L) This petrofacies has been provisionally divided into five subgroups. These will be described from nonh to south, out of numerical order. 320 Table S. Continued. CoUen Gate Petrofacies (L) Subgroup 5. Sample 36 cooiaim litbics (estiiiiated 70%) (bat are domioued by a salt-aod-pepper borneblende giamce. Tbere is also some siltstone aod cbeit (?). Free mioetals include quanz. alkali feldspar, sodic and intermediate plagioclase. Golden Gate Petrofacies (L) Subgroup 4. Sample 35,36, and 232 cooain litbics (esaiaated 8S%) tbat are quite evenly divided between red rbyolite ane light- colored volcanics and volcaoiclastic grains; gray borneblende granite: and olive-green siltstone and sandstone. Free mineral include quartz and feldspars. Golden Gate Petrafacies (L) Subgnxtp 3. Sample 38 contains litbics (estimated 95%) that ate dominated by silstone (20%). shale, chert, and carbonate, along with andesite-bosalt (15%). and other altered-appearing dark to lighter-colored volcanic grains. It is bard to distmguish these fine, layered volcanic grains from shales in hand sample. Pale volcaniclastic grains are rare. Golden Gate Petrofacies (L) Subgroup 2. Samples 206-208 contain litbics (estimated 85%) that are dominated (20%) by siltstone (some with copper stain) and sbale. Tbin seaions migbt show some of the shales to be fine grained pbyllites or slightly metamorphosed volcanic grains. Tbere are also light-to-intermediate volcaniclastic materials (20%). some rhyolite. and lesier amounts of an amphibole granite. There are traces of basalt. Golden Gate Petrcfiicies (L) Subgnmp L Samples 113-115.202. and 203 contain litbics (estimated 80%) tbat include pink or tight-colored volcaniclastic gruns (especially in TM-30 which is fuitber into the moutains) and olive-green silty sandstone (an even mix m TM-31. 32. 33. and 34). Free minerals include quanz. some quartz crystab. alkali feldspar, and sodic plagioclase. The blue-green and scarlet staining on some grains is from copper mineralizuion. Tbere is little granite. 321 Table 6. Ceramic Attribute Coding Index Provenience Attributes 1. ASM Quad (QUAD) 2. ASM Site Number (ASMSITE) 3. Feature Number (FEATNUM) 4. PF Number (PF) Typological & Technological Attributes 5. Ceramic Type [Only ceramic type codes acniaily recorded are listedl (CERTYPE) 12 = Middle Riocoa Red-oa-brown 17 = Late Rincon or Tauiue Verde RedH)ii-brown 18 = Taoque Vetde Red^o-brown 19 - Middle Rincon. Late Rincon, or Tanque Verde RedK)n-bn>vm 22 = Rincon Red-on-btown (i.e.. Early, Middle, or Late Rincon Red-cn-brown) 23 = Rincon or Tanque Verde Red-on-brown 25 = Indeterminate red-on-biown 6. Temper Type (TT) -9 = Indeterminate Temper Type 1 = High LMT (>2S% gneiss/schist) 2 = High LMT/low sand (7-25% gneiss/schist) 3 = Low LMT/high sand (1-7% gneiss/schist) 4 = High sand (<1% gneiss/schist) 5 = tOgh muscovite mica (>25% MUSQ 6 = Mixed sand and muscovite mica (1-25% MUSC) 7 = Gneiss/schist and muscovite mica (> 25% LMT-t-MUSC) 8 = Mixed sand, gneiss/schist, and muscovite mica (1-25% LMT+MUSC) 9 = Sand and crushed sherd 10 = High phyllite (>25% LMTP) 11 = Sand and fiber 7. Temper Source Generic (TSG) -9 = Indeterminae Genenc Temper Source 1 = Igneous volcanic sands 2 = Igneous plutonic sands 3 = Meomorphic sands 4 = Sedimentary sands 5 = Crushed rock [Gila or Wingfield Plaiol (can be used widi Temper Types 1. 5. 7. and 10) 6 = Fine paste (low percentage of oonplasiics. natural component of clay?) 322 Table 6. Continued 7. Tempo- Source Generic (TSG) (condnued) 8 = Sherd, or grog, temper 9 s Mixed volcanic and sedimentary sands 10 = Mixed volcanic, granitic, and sedimentary sands 11 ^Provisional category; Indeterminate RilHto (M), Rillito West (MW), Santa Cruz (P), and Brawley Wash(S) 12 = Provisional category: Indeterminate TSG 1 (volcanic) or TSG 11 (above) 13 = Provisional category: Indeterminate TSG 2 (granitic) or TSG 11 (above) 14 = Provisional category: Indeterminate TSG 2 (granitic) or TSG 3 (metamorphic) 15 = Provisional category: Indetenninaie Rillito West (MW) or anodier Avra Valley source 16 = Provisional category: Indeterminate Ourliam High (N) or an Avra Valley source 17 = Provisional category: Possible Avra Valley source 18 = Provisional category: Likely Avra Valley source 19 = Provisional category: Avra Valley source or TSG 11 (above) 8. Temper Source Specific (TSS) -9 = Indeterminate Specific Temper Source A = Rincon Petro&cies B == Catalina Petro&cies B2 = Caialina Petro&cies (Fine grained two mica granite) C =: Samaniego Pe!ro£u:ies D = Avra Petroi^ies E = Tonolita Petro&cies F s Durham Low Petro&cies G = Santa Rita Petro&cies HI = Empire (High and Low) Petro&cies J = West Branch Coimnum'cy (represents a subset of Jl) JI = Southern 1/3 of Lombard's Cat Mountain Petro&cies (West Branch is a subset) J2 = MiMe 1/3 of Lombard's Cat Mountain Petro&ctes (St. Mary's is a subset) J3 = Northern 1/3 of Lombard's Cat Mountain Petro&cies (with a new boundary between Rillito) K = Black Mountain Peao&cies LI = Golden Gate Petro&cies. Kamilli's Subgroup 1 L2 = Golden Gate Petrofiicies. Kamilli's Subgroup 2 L4 = Golden Gate Petrofecies. Kamilli's Subgroup 4 M = Rillito Petro&cies (most samples are from tie east side of the Tucson Mms ) MW = Rillito West Petro&cies M = Durham High Petro&cies 0 = Sierrita Petro&cies P = Sania Cruz River composidon Q = Amole Petro&cies R. = Batamote Petro&cies S - Undifferentiated Brawley Wash composidon Sv = Brawley Wash 'Volcanic' composidon Sm = Brawley Wash 'Metamorphic'* composidon 323 Table 6. Continued 8. Temper Source Specific (TSS) T = Reconado Petroacies U = Cocoraque Petro&cies Y = Dos Titos Petio&cies W = Watennan Petro&cies Y = Rosknige Petro&cies Z = St. Mary's Community (repiesenis a subset of J2) I = Monzodiorice (based on Schuk Toak reseaicii) 10 = lodeteraunace granitic composidon widi low amount of volcanic grains II = Indetenninaie granitic composition widi greater amoum of volcanic dian TSS 10 12 = Indeterminate granidc composidon widi low amoum of monzodiorite 9. Sample Large Enough To Section? (SECTION) N = No. not large enough to diin-section Y = Yes. large enough to produce a diiD>secdon 10. Sample Available to Sectioo? (USE) M = Maybe, need co check (AA: 12:409) N = No. requites addidonal audiorizadon (AA: 12:S7, AA: 12:73. AA: 12:368. & AA: 12:466) Y = Yes, all other sites 11. Thin section sample number (XDPSAMP) 12. Comments (COMMENTS) 13. Concatenation of temper type, geoeric temper source, and spedfk temper source fields (TTGS) 14. Final temper characterization fleld (TSSFINAL) The final temper characterizadon field represents Uie reassignment of TTGS values based on cocordance widi Michael Wiley's interpretation of temper provenance. Blank = Indeterminate source and/or concordance. Includes sherds belonging to untested TTGS groups: represents approximately 13.7S percent of sample. L = Undifferentiated Golden Gate Petio&cies composidon R? = Possible Batamote Petro&cies S = UndiKerendated Brawley Wash composidon S/JI = Brawley Wash or J1 composidon S/L = Brawley Wash or Golden Gate compcsidon S>T = Brawley Wash or Santa Cruz River composidon 324 temper variable, generic temper source, was used to characterize the geographic and tectonic origin of the temper grains observed. A given sherd was attributed to a generic source based on binocular microscopic observation of the rock fragments and monomineralic grains known to define particular geographic and tectonic settinp. The diird temper variable, specific temper source, was used to characterize die petro^ies of origin for the observed temper grains. A given sherd was attributed to a specific source based on the binocular microscopic observation of die distinctive suite of rock fragments and monomineralic grains in the abundances known to define a particular petroiacies. In this way, we attempt to use the precise data gained from thin-section smdies as a means of assigning tempers to petrofacies without thin-sectioning each sherd. The difference between the "generic" and "specific" temper source attributes used in this study lies in the finer level of spatial resolution implied by the petro^ies. In practice, the information represented by the "generic" attribute is redundant with the informadon represented by die "specific" attribute when die sand temper observed in a given sherd permits its assignment to a petro^ies. It is sometimes die case, however, diat die temper does not exhibit any or all of the sand grains necessary for a specific assignment. For example, it is often difficult to characterize die specific temper source of small or badly burned sherds, diose diat are sparsely tempered, or diose fnim a granitic provenance. However, die temper grains diat can be observed in diose sorts of sherds are often sufficient to category die generic origin of the sand. Important compositional and limited provenance information would be lost in diose cases if only an attribute recording die petrofticies of origin was retpiired during analysis, because die petrofacies assignment for all such cases would, by definition, be recorded as "indeterminate." A number of unknown or extrabasinal temper compositions were encountered during the binocular microscopic characterization. As diese compositions were encountered, a brief note describing each composition was recorded in a sherd observation's "comments" field. After all 325 sherds were characterized the entire "comments" field was reviewed. Ad hoc generic temper source codes were defined for groups of sherds sharing similar "comments." In the present study approximately half of the sherds were assigned to ad hoc generic temper source categoric. Testing the Binocular Microscope Characterization. The binocular microscopic temper characterizatioa was tested by point counting a sample of the characterized sherds and comparing each point-counted sherd's compositional profile against similar compositional data derived from the sand samples. After temper characterization was completed, and the data verified, a list cross-tabulating the diree temper variables was printed. Forty unique temper variable combinations were present. A stratified sample of sherds was selected for petrographic analysis based on that list. The point-counted sample was stratified by temper composition (the unique combinations of the temper type, generic temper source, and specific temper source variables) and site location. Eighteen of the 40 um'que temper groups were selected for detailed petrographic analysis. Although the 18 temper groups represent less than half of the number of groups present, diey contain approximately 86 percent of all characterized sherds (388 4S0 0.862). In the end. 2S sherds were selected for thin-sectioning and petrographic analysis. That number represents a S.5 percent sample fraction for the entire data set (n = 4S0). and 6.4 percent sample fraction for the sampled groups (n » 388). Selection of Sberds for Thin-SectioDing and Their Preparation. Selection of sherds for tiiin-sectioning within the 18 temper groups was not random, since only sherds large enough to be diin-sectioned (i.e., ^ 27 x 46 mm) could be included. Sherds were samrated with epoxy. then sectioned parallel to the vessel wall to provide a large area tor pomt counting. I hey were stained for potassium feldspar and plagioclase feldspar, and permanentiy cover slipped. Sand-sized 326 material ia the sherds was then counted using the same methods and grain types as for the sands except that one additional variable, sherd temper, was included in the point count. Table 7 reports the point-count data for the thin-sectioned Tanque Verde Red-on-brown sherds. Interpretation of Sherd Provenance Petrofodes Assignment Based on a Process of Elimination. A process of elimination was utilized to arrive at possible sources for the ceramic sherd samples based on comparison uf individual sherd composition profiles with composidonal ranges documented in all of the Tucson Basin and Avra Valley petro^ies, as well as a number of individual samples with unassigned petrofacies designations. Percentage values were compared following the allowable minimum and maximum range for a given point count as shown in a chart compiled by Van der Plas and Tubt (1965). This process \vas only conducted for samples XDP-1 through XDP-24. Sample XDP-25 was excluded from this process due to its early assignment to die Golden Gate Petrofacies (Petrofocies L). The process of elimination was iterative. The first iteration employed the four most abundant grain types present in die sherds (Table 8). Sherd samples generally matched anywhere from two to six petrofacies. All sherd samples matched the category "unassigned peaofacies or misc. sample" in die first round of elimination. In die second iteration itU grain type parameters present in a sherd sample were compared agamst ^ grain type parameters present in each of the possible petrofacies identified in the first step (Table 9). In this second round of elimination sherd samples were found to match no more dian two petro^ies. In fan. only five of die 24 samples were assigned to more than one petro^ies. Table 7. All Sherd Pdint-Count Daca (Raw Counts are Given) Siicrd • Moiiocrysialliiie Grains Sample QIY KSI'AK MICK NAI'I.AG CAI'l^G SANID MUSC WOT PX AMI'll GAR oo SI'IIUNE UPl CACO XDI'-l 56 17 0 1 42 0 0 1 0 1 0 a 0 0 0 XDJ'2 SB 22 0 0 27 0 0 0 0 1 0 6 0 0 0 XDl'-l 45 21 1 0 43 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 0 0 0 XDI'4 123 SS 0 0 128 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 0 1 0 XDI' 5 80 07 0 0 92 0 0 3 0 0 0 6 0 2 0 XDI' 6 132 i7 0 0 106 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 0 0 0 XDI'-7 HS 52 0 3 65 0 0 2 0 3 0 6 0 1 0 XDI' 8 88 65 1 4 73 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 XDI'-9 100 46 1 2 65 0 0 0 0 3 0 5 0 1 0 XDI'-10 98 40 U 0 54 0 0 1 0 5 0 5 0 0 0 XDI'-H 92 52 1 0 83 0 0 1 2 0 0 12 0 0 0 XDI'-12 l(M 53 0 0 85 0 1 0 0 2 1 0 0 3 0 XDI'13 93 44 0 0 68 0 0 0 0 4 0 3 0 0 0 XDI* 14 109 19 3 0 4S 0 0 0 1 0 0 8 0 1 0 XDI' IS 61 17 0 0 61 0 0 1 1 0 0 6 0 4 0 XDI'-16 106 72 0 0 119 0 0 4 0 2 0 12 0 5 0 XDI'-17 90 61 0 0 105 0 0 2 0 1 0 4 0 7 0 XDI' 18 S6 45 0 0 73 0 0 2 0 0 0 II 0 2 0 XDI' 19 126 63 0 0 68 0 0 0 0 1 0 7 0 3 0 XDI' 20 7S 28 u 8 39 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 1 0 XDI' 21 91 26 3 0 44 0 0 1 0 3 0 3 0 0 0 XDI' 22 70 65 0 0 88 0 0 0 0 S 0 12 0 4 0 XDI' 23 66 IS 2 1 30 0 0 1 0 2 0 7 0 0 u XDI' 24 5S 51 II 0 81 0 0 1 0 1 0 4 0 1 0 XDI' 2S 80 24 5 0 31 (1 «) 0 0 I 0 6 0 (1 0 Table 7. Coniinucd. Volcanic UOuc Pruginenu SeUimemary Luhic Sherd Metamurphic Liihic Fragtncius Oihcr Grain Type Prafinicnis Temper I.VI^ LVIU l.VI l.VM l.VIl l.VV liiS ISK UCA UCII ISTE iMT IJ4TP IJyfA 1J4M IJ4VF 0'niK2 <)TI1R3 IMk Toul 101 0 u 4 0 0 0 0 16 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 252 172 u u 3 0 0 0 0 17 2 2 0 0 0 u 0 0 0 0 0 310 116 0 u 7 0 u 0 0 7 0 0 u 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 246 3 0 u 3 0 0 0 0 2U 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 342 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 13 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 265 8 0 u u 0 0 0 0 27 0 0 u 0 0 0 0 0 0 u 0 33B 4U u u 1 0 u 0 0 52 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Q 0 2 317 36 0 0 u 0 0 0 0 10 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 2 2»l 64 u u 2 0 5 u 0 17 1 0 1 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 316 53 0 0 1 u 0 0 0 3 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 261 U u u 0 0 u 0 0 3S 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 297 28 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 20 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 301 44 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 18 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 2711 114 0 u 5 0 0 0 0 40 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 351 138 0 0 2 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 u 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 297 29 0 u u 0 0 0 0 10 0 0 u 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 361 66 0 u 2 0 1 0 0 14 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 354 84 0 u 8 1 3 0 0 31 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 317 58 u (1 1 1 0 u u 8 2 0 u 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 338 J40 u » 3 6 0 u 0 27 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 330 84 0 u I 0 0 0 0 8b U 0 u 0 I u 0 0 0 0 I 344 tlfj 1 u > 0 1 <1 u iS 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 395 74 0 0 4 3 0 1 0 Vi U 0 0 0 1 () 0 0 u 0 1 227 67 u u 2 0 1 0 0 itt 0 2 u 0 0 0 u 0 u il 1 2Wi 72 0 0 0 0 6 36 12 s 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 278 329 Table 8. Possible Petrofacies Assignments Based on Matching Four Primary Parameter Abundances' Sample Misc. Petro&des Letter Designatioas Number Sampler s C P L K 0 E D J1 R XDP-l < • XDP-2 XDP-3 ••• i XDP-4 L • - f XDP-5 t • I XDP-6 XDP-7 XDP-8 i...... ^ K -V, XDP-9 ••••• XDP-10 XDP-l 1 XDP-12 f] XDP-13 XDP-14 XDP-15 XDP-16 XDP-17 XDP-18 XDP-19 XDP-20 XDP-21 -• XDP-22 XDP-23 XDP-24 XDP-25 ' Shaded ceils = petro&cies diat contain accepcabie composidonal percentage ranges. ~ Refers to samples not assigned to any petro&cies Table 9. Possible Petrof^ies Assignments Based on Matching All Parameter Abundances' Sample Petro&des Letter Designadons S P L ji R XDP-1 i , - • XDP-2 XDP-3 XDP4 ill XDP-5 '' y XDP-6 XDP-7 XDP-8 t- XDP-9 XDP-10 i! i;", " XDP-11 XDP-12 XDP-13 XDP-14 XDP-15 XDP-16 XDP-17 XDP-18 XDP-19 XDP-20 XDP-21 XDP-22 XDP-23 - •• XDP-24 XDP-25 ' Shaded ceils = petro&cies that contain acceptable composidonal percentage ranges. ~ = Assignment based on only one grain type abundance. 331 Sample XDP-21 was found not to match any petrofacies when all grain type parameter percentages were compared. Due to the extremely high abundance of LSCA in this sherd (25 percent of total), it was assigned to the Batamote Penrofiicies (Petro^ies R) hecau.se imly thut petrofacies contains LSCA in die range encountered in XDP-21 (i.e., Batamote Petrofacies LSCA range 0-27 percent of total). It should be noted, however, that the LVM percentage in sherd sample XDP-21 (0.2 percent) is lower than die lowest LVM percentage recorded in the Batamote Petrofacies sand samples (range of 3.8-47.6 percent); aU other parameters fell within their allowable ranges. Example. For an example of how possible petro^ies were eliminated we will work through the entire process of elimination for sherd sample XDP-S. 1. The first four parameters used for comparison of sherds and petrofacies compositional percentage ranges include; a. Percentage of quartz (QTZPCT) b. Percentage of untwinned potassium feldspar (KSPARPCT) c. Percentage of plagioclase feldspar (PLAGPCT) d. Percentage of fclsitic volcanic rock fragments (LVFPCT) 2. When applied, these first comparisons eliminated 21 of 28 possible petrofacies assignments. Table 10 lists the remaining seven possible petrofacies and the percentage values of the four most abundant grain types in the sherd along with the range of values for each of the seven petrofiacies. Note that all of the percentage values for the sherd M within the compositional percentage ranges for each of the seven petrofacies. Thus, die seven petrof^ies are retained as possible temper resource procurement zones. 332 Table 10. Possible Petrofocies Assignments for Sherd Sample XDP-S after Preliminary Grain Type Comparison OTZPCT KSPARPCT PLAGPCT LVFPCT XDP-5 30.1 25.2 34.7 .3 Petrofacies C 23.4 - 36.3 11.0-25.5 16.7-31.0 0- 18 E 6.3 - 53.5 .3 - 36.7 17.1-50.8 0- 1.3 K 22.4 - 48.7 4.9 - 30.7 12.4-46.2 0-9.7 0 28.7-47.8 2.8 - 28.7 17.8-44.3 0-19 P 19.7 - 43.8 0-25.1 16.2 - 36.3 0-28.0 s 9.7-43.9 3.7-28.4 3.4-35.6 0-61.3 Uoassigned 5.8 - 44.4 0 - 33.2 4.4 - 34.0 0-71.1 333 3. Next the percentage values for all grain type parameters in sample XDP-5 were compared widi the percentage ranges for all grain type parameters present in each of the seven remaining petrofacies. Table 11 lists the parameter percentage ranges that fall outside the allowable range of sample XDP-S. This step eliminated five of the seven possible petro^ies. 4. One of the two possible peorofocies remaining at this point included an "unassigned" category. That category consists of miscellaneous point-counted sand samples collected from all over die Tucson Basin and Avra Valley; none of those sand samples have ever been related to a defined petro^ies. All of sample XDP-S's percentage values were directly compared against each of die individual "unassigned" sand sample point count parameter percentage values. This step eliminated all ten of die sand samples present in die "unassigned" category (Table 12). 5. Therefore, dirough a process of elimination, only Petrofacies S - die Brawley Wash sand composition zone - matched all of die grain type parameter percentage values observed in sherd sample XDP-S. Based on our cunent understanding of Tucson Basin and Avra Valley sand temper resources. Brawley Wash (Peffofacies S) contains die only possible source for the sand temper contained in sample XDP- 5 (Table 13). Visua/ Comparison of Sherds Assigned to Petrofacies S with Brawley Wash (Petrofacies S) Sands in Thin Section. As a result of diis process of elimination most diin-sectioned sherds included in this smdy were assigned to the Brawley Wash Petrofacies (Petro^cies S). The next logical step in determining if Brawley Wash sands were indeed the probable source for die sand Table 11. Possible Petro&cies Assignments for Sherd Sample XDP-S After All Grain Type Comparisons ' LVMPCT MICRPCT LSCAPCT XDP-5 .3 0 4.9 Petrofacies C SM-31S 0-5.1 0 E 0-.5 0-3.6 0-J o K 1 a-.62 1 0 0 &2-2K3 a P 0 - 13.3 0-11.0 0-1.0 s 0 - 20.9 0-13.1 0 - 17.5 o o 1 0 Unassigned 0-21.7 po ' Note; Shaded cells = unacceptable composidonal percentage ranges. 335 Table 12. All Unassigned Samples Biminated from Possible Source List for Sherd Sample XDP-5' QTZPCT KSPARPCT PLAGPCT LVFPCT LVMPCT MICRPCT XDP-5 30.1 25.2 lA.l .3 .3 0 Sand Sample 59 44.2 . 1^1 1.3 2.5 7.6 122 31.7 lET' 34.0 : . • 3.0 6.0 195 IZS 5.> 6.6 .4 196 I8J L7 4.4 7!.t' 2.2 2 245 6.4 hZ 8tl 21.7 _2 246 5;S .7 T.J 1.3 5.1 3 311 24.0 .8 1&.5 4^ 1.3 0 312 25.8 a xts 4U 2.0 0 313 27.0 . I4i3^ 4SS .5 0 328 35.3 19S 20.6 16.5 .8 0 ' Sfaatied cells = unacceptable composidon percentage. 336 Table 13. Final Assignment; Sherd Sample XDP-S's Grain Type Parameter Percentages Match Ail of die Brawley Wash (Petrofacies S) Parameter Ranges. Grain Type Percent in Sample XDP-5 Pctrofiicies S QTZPCT 30.1 9.7-43.9 KSPARPCT 25.2 3.7-28.4 MICRPCT 0 0-13.1 PLAGPCT 34.7 3.4-35.6 LVFPCT .3 0^1.3 LVMPCT .3 0-20.9 LWPCT 0 0-6.8 LVHPCT 0 0-7.8 LSSPCT 0 0-4.0 LSAPCT 0 0-5.3 LCSCHPCT 0 0-1.3 LSCAPCT 4.9 0-17.5 LMMPCT 0 0-5.1 LMPFPCT 0 0-4.5 LMAPCT 0 0-12.7 LMTPCT 0 0-5.4 MUSCPCT 0 0-2.0 BIOTPCT l.I 0-2.0 PYRPCT 0 0-5.7 OOPCT 2.2 0-6.4 EPIPCT .7 0-1.2 GARPCT 0 0-.3 337 temper was to visually compare sand diia sections from Brawley Wash to the sherd thin sections that were assigned to diis petro^ies as a possible source. When compared side by side it was found that grain types in the sands did not exactly match those found in the sherds. This finding leads us to believe that Brawley Wash should be considered the 'possible' source for die temper found in these sherds. It is more likely, however, that the temper source for most of the sherds is from an unsampled area or areas located somewhere within die Brawley Wash drainage network. Many areas of the Avra Valley have never been sampled or are under-sampled due to land access problems. Ternary Diagrams. Previous studies of Tucson Basin ceramic production provenance have relied on ternary diagrams to show die relationship between a sherd's composition and the composition of a petrofacies (Lombard 1986. 1987a, I987d. 1990). In order to faciliute comparisons between the Tanque Verde Red-on-brown sherds included in die present study and Lombard's earlier work, we have plotted data from the 25 point-counted sherds on the three types of ternary diagrams fovored by Lombard. These ternary diagrams also allow us to express the relationship between sherd composition, and inferred production provenance, and the composition of Brawley Wash sands. Figure 2 shows die location of the 25 sherd samples plotted on a QmFLt ternary diagram. Sherds assigned to die 'possible Brawley Wash" composition group are shown as solid diamonds. Sherds assigned to die 'possible Brawley Wash or Golden Gate Petro^ies' composition group are shown as hollow squares. The sherd assigned to die "possible Brawley Wash or Santa Cruz River" composition category is shown as an inverted hollow triangle. The sherd assigned to die 'possible Brawley Wash or Petrofacies Jl" category is shown as a hollow triangle. The sherd assigned to die "possible Batamote Petroticies" category is shown as a hollow circle. The sherd 338 Qm • 0 •' Petrofades S, Brawley Wash P KEY • = possible Brawley Wash V = possible Brawley Wash or Santa Cruz River • = possible Brawley Wash or Golden Gate Petrofades A = possible Brawley Wash or Petro£ades J1 O = possible Batamote Petrofodes • Figure 2. QmFLt plot of point-counted sherd composition. The convex hull shown represents the outermost members of the point-counted Brawley Wash (Petro&cies S) sand samples. 339 assigned to the "Golden Gate Petro^ies" is shown as a hollow star. A convex hull representing the outermost members of the 2S point-counted Brawley Wash sand samples is also shown for comparative purposes. Eleven of the sherds assigned a "possible Brawley Wash" composition fall within the convex hull of the Brawley Wash sand samples, two M on the lines forming tbe hull, and five fall outside of tbe hull. Most of those that ^1 outside of the Convex hull contain proportions of quartz and feldspar that are relatively higher than any individual Brawley Wash sand sample. Figure 3 shows die location of die 25 sherd samples plotted on a QmPK ternary diagram. Symbols used in diis figure follow tbe convendons listed above. Seventeen of the sherds assigned a "possible Brawley Wash" composition ^ within die convex hull of the Brawley Wash sand samples, and one tills outside of die hull. Rgure 4 shows die location of the 25 sherd samples plotted on a LmLvLs ternary diagram, following similar conventions. Six of the sherds assigned a "possible Brawley Wash" composition till within the convex hull of tbe Brawley Wash sand samples, two fall on a line forming die hull, and ten till outside of die hull. Taken togedier die diree ternary diagrams generally support die assignment of most of die point-counted sherds to a "possible Brawley Wash" provenance or related category (i.e.. "possible Brawley Wash or Santa Cruz River." "possible Brawley Wash or Golden Gate Petrofacies." or "possible Brawley Wash or Petroticies Jl"). However, many of die "possible Brawley Wash" sherds appear to contain too much sedimentary lithic material. Further inspection of die dau reveals an important aspect of diis pattern: there is an inverse relationship between die overall lithic percentage and die percentage of sedimentary fragments in die lidiics (Figure 5). In odier words, die "possible Brawley Wash" sherds that contain die highest percentage of sedimentary rock fragments are among die sherds diat have die lowest overall lithic percentage. Anodier explanation 340 Qm \ / OA 7 \ / °[< / \ •t A \ Lyv\ \ \\ Petrofedes S, \ Brawley Wash \ p / \ k- KEY 4 = possible Brawley Wash V = possible Brawley Wash or Santa Cruz River • = possible Brawley Wash or Golden Gate Petrofiides A = possible Brawley Wash or Petro£ades J1 0 = possible Batamote Petrofades it = Golden Gate Petrofodes Figure 3. QmPK plot of point-counted sberd composition. The convex bull shown represents the outermost members of the point-counted Brawley Wash (Petro&cies S) sand samples. 341 Lm Petio&des S, Brawley Wash Lv •r KEY • = possible Brawley Wash V - possible Brawley Wash or Santa Gruz River • = possible Brawley Wash or Golden Gate Petrofades A = possible Brawley Wash or Petrofedes J1 O = possible Batamote Petrofades it = Golden Gate Petrofades Figure 4. LmLvLs plot of point-counted sherd composition. The convex hull shown represents the outermost members of die point-counted Brawley Wash (Petrofocies S) sand samples. 342 100 1 r r 1 1 1 1 1 1 ' 1 ' • • 1 • • • 80 - (D O ca •*-> 60 • - MM 0 • • oL- 2 • • . o 40 ^ • - B _l1 • • • 20 • ^ • • • 0 C 20 40 60 80 100 Percentage Ls In Uthlcs 4 = possible Brawtey Wash Figure 5. Scatterplot of sherd samples assigned "a possible Brawley Wash" provenance showing the relationship between the overall lithic percentage of the sample and the percentage of the lithic grains that are sedimentary. A regression line dirough die samples is shown to emphasize the orend in the data. 343 for the relatively high percentage of sedimentary fragments seen in the Tanque Verde Red-on- brown sherds relates to the way carbonate grains have been treated by vanous petrographers. Carbonate - The LSCA Parameter. The grain type parameter LSCA represents clastic cryptocrystalline calcium carbonate grains. In the samples examined for this sudy, these carbonate grains were a primary component of the sand when the sand was used as a tempering material for ceramic vessel production; they are not the result of post-depositional ^tors. LSCA percentages for the 25 sherd samples point-counted for this project contained varying, but seemingly high, values (average 7.07 percent) relative to die point-counted sand samples iTom Brawley Wash (Petrofacies S, average 1.62 percent). The relatively high percentage of LSCA in the sherds led us to question, investigate, and finally to rule out any meaningful source of error that could have led to die different percentage values seen in die sherds and sands. The first possible source for die di^rence diat we investigated was whedier or not the sand diin-sections point-counted by Lombard were stained for calcium. When dun-sections are stained pink for calcium die LSCA grains stand out from all of die other grains present and diey are easily identified. However, we found diat diin-sections point-counted by Lombard were not consistendy stained pink for calcium. Therefore, lack of staining could be a source for low point counts of LSCA in some of die sand samples analyzed by Lombard. The second possible source for die difference diat we investigated was whedier or not the grain type LSCA had been identified and used consistendy by all petrographers who have contributed to the sand (and sherd) data base. It was determined, from rereading Lombard (I987d:99), diat he did not identify die grain type LSCA in die same way that we have here. Funhermore, Lombard excluded caliche grains from analysis. Lombard (1987d:99) states; 344 Cryptocrystalline calcium carbonate grains representing caliche were excluded because of possil)le confusion with post depositional growth of calcium carbonate in pore spaces of excavated pot sherds. Lombard's exclusion of caliche is a likely source of di^rence between his work and the work of other petrographers who have contributed to the Tucson Basin and Avra Valley sand (and sherd) data base. For this smdy Lombard's exclusion of caliche is especially important because he point-counted 9 of the 2S sand thin sections included in the Brawley Wash Petrofacies (Petrofacies S), and the process of elimination indicated that the Brawley Wash sand composition is the best match for the sand temper observed in many of the analyzed sherds. Therefore, lack of consistency in die identification and use of the LSCA parameter could not be ruled out as a possible source of the difference. The lack of consistent use of calcium stain, identification criteria, and inclusion/exclusion of caliche during analysis suggested to us that systematic biases could be present in the sand data base. In order to address that issue data from all of the petrographers who have point-counted sand samples collected from the Tucson Basin and Avra Valley were compared to see if any systematic bias in the amount of LSCA counted by each petrographer existed. The LSCA percentage data for all point-counted Tucson Basin and Avra Valley sands were compared in a series of box-and- whiskers plots (Figure 6). Examination of Figure 6 indicates no systematic bias in die percentage of LSCA counted by each petrographer. Because the process of elimination suggests that many of die sherds included in diis smdy were tempered with Brawley Wash sand, the LSCA percentage data for all point-counted sand samples from that source were also compared in a series of box- 345 WILEY —f o o. S LOMBARD •BQBDOEOD 0 0 o L J o o o o DONAHUE 1 C 10 20 30 Percentage LSCA in All Tucson Basin and Avra Valley Sand Samples Figure 6. Box-and-wiiiskers plocs comparing the percentage of LSCA recorded by each petrographer who has contributed to the Tucson Basin and Avra Valley sand data base. 346 and-whiskers plots (Figure 7). Examination of Figure 7, again, indicates no systematic bias in the percentage of LSCA counted by each petrograpber. Therefore, the evidence available to us suggests that, while Lombard's point-count data likely under-represent the percentage of caliche present in sand (and sherd) samples he recorded, no meaningful source of error, responsible for the difierence in die percentage values seen in the sherds assigned a Brawley Wash provenance and Brawley )Vasb sands, is present. Thus, we conclude that die differences observed are real and fundamental. The differences may well relate to the fact that caliche, a chemical sediment, can form at very localized scales and it may. or may not, be physically transported and accumulated in die same way as odier sand-sized grains (Waters 1992:28). Correspondence Analysis of the Sherd Point Count Data. Correspondence analysis was employed as a method of data reduction and exploradon to analyze the sherd point count data. It provided a graphical means to summarize temper composition and, therefore, acted as an independent check on die compositional groupings previously identified. Correspondence analysis is a principal components analysis method for the display of rows and columns of a two-way contingency table as points in a low-dimensional vector space (Carr 1990). The geometry of die rows, which in our data set represent die individual sherd samples, is related to die geometry of die columns, which represent die point count parameters, resulting in a "correspondence" between the rows and columns (Greenacre 1984); a row and column point will be close if die value at dieir intersection is relatively large (lUngrose 1992). Carr (1990) provides a short, but useful, summary of the techm'que: A relatively simple transformation is applied to a contingency table to yield a square, symmetric matrix for which eigenvalues and eigenveaors 347 r—T- LOMBARD (D £ 2O) 0 1 DONAHUE 0 5 10 15 20 Percentage LSCA in All Brawley Wash (Petrofades S) Sand Samples Rgure 7. Box-and-whiskers plots comparing the percentage of LSCA recorded by each petrographer who has point-counted a sand sample from Brawley Wash (Peffofacies S). 348 are calculated. From the eigenvalues and eigenvectors, factor loadings are calculated separately for the individuals and the atmT)utes. By combining ^or loadings, individuals and attributes can be plotted simultaneously in a two-dimensional plan to yield a clustering pattern. Although correspondence analysis is statistically based, it is primarily a geometric technique (Greenacre 1984). As Ringrose (1992) has noted, the algebraic technique employed by correspondence analysis is purely deterministic; therefore it provides little indication of the strengdi of any apparent relationships. For that reason many authors (Baxter 1991; Escoufier and Junca 1986) emphasize the exploratory, as opposed to confirmatory (Lewis 1986), nature of its results. Melguen (1974) first recognized the usefulness of correspondence analysis as a tool for identifying and characterizing sedimentary facies. We have employed correspondence analysis for that purpose in earlier studies of Tucson Basin (Heidke 1989), Tonto Basin (Miksa and Heidke I99S. Stark and Heidke 1992), and Lower Verde Valley (Heidke et al. 1995) sand composition zones. We have also used it to aid in the identification and characterization of ceramic temper composition groups in the Tucson Basin (Heidke 1993) and Lower Verde Valley (Heidke et al. 1995). Two correspondence analysis trials were run with the sherd poim count data. The first trial used the data from all 25 thin-secdoned sherd samples and 18 of die point count parameters recorded (ten parameters were dropped because they were not recorded in any of the sherds, six parameters were dropped because they were rare with an average frequency of less than 0.25 percent per sample, and "unknowns," although present, were deleted). The second trial dropped one sherd sample and two point count parameters (one absent in the remaining sherds and one rare). 349 Figuie 8 shows the results of the first correspondence analysis: it is a plot of the sherds on the Hrst two factors. One sample (XDP-2S, indicated by a hollow star) plots far away from the oUiers. This sample contained a reladvely high count of siltstone fragments (LSS), and the only argillaceous sedimentary rock fragments (LSA) recorded in this study. It is also one of only two samples diat were not assigned a possible Brawley Wash composition, or related category, based on die process of eliminadon. The correspondence analysis, therefore, supports die contendon diat die composidon of sample XDP-2S is unlike diat of any of die other point-counted sherds. However, as noted by Ringrose (1988), it is important to be on die look out for particularly influendal rows or columns in a data set which can dominate the results of a correspondence analysis. Sample XDP-2S appears to be just such an influential member. Therefore it was dropped from the data base, and the correspondence analysis program was rerun. The second correspondence analysis trial was conducted after dropping sherd sample XDP- 25 and die LSS and LSA point count parameters firom the data base. Figure 9 shows die results of diat analysis: it is a plot of die point count parameters on die first two correspondence analysis factors. (Note, in order not to obscure die point count parameters, the 24 sherd samples are not shown on Figure 9.) The first factor accounts for 52.3 percent of the variation, and die second factor accounts for 16.3 percent. These two factors comprise a total of 68.6 percent of the variadoQ and lead us to conclude diat die correspondence analysis was highly successful in reducing die dimensionality of die data. Each of die remaining diirteen factors accounted tor less dian 10 percent of the variation. The first two factors are readily interpretable in terms of tectonic origin of die sand temper when die ranked parameter optimal scores are examined (Table 14). The first faaor is interpreted as a contrast between rocks, especially volcanic rocks, and minerals, because die lithic parameters Table 14. Sherd Sample Correspondence Analysis (Trial 2) and Ranked Parameter Optional Scores Parameter Factor 1 Parameter Factor 2 LVH -1.079 MICR -1.071 LVF -0.664 LSCA -0.691 LVM -0.581 LSCH -0.333 NAPLAG -0.524 NAPLAG -0.252 MICR -0.485 LMA -0.212 LSCH -0.384 AMPH -0.1% LW -0.377 LVH -0.188 LSCA -0.051 QTZ -0.02 00 •0.018 00 0.044 AMPH 0.036 KSPAR 0.082 LMA 0.128 BIOT 0.085 QTZ 0.163 LVF 0.095 EPI 0.215 LVM 0.102 CAPLAG 0.296 CAPLAG 0.103 KSPAR 0.33 EPI 0.536 BIOT 0.362 LW 0.603 Eigenvalue 0.148 0.046 Percentage of Variance 52.3 16.3 Cumulative Percenage 52.3 68.6 351 1.0 0.5 - CN occ !— 0.0 - -0.5 - -1.0 -3 -2 -1 0 FACTOR 1 KEY ^ = possible Brawley Wash V = possible Brawley Wash or Santa Cruz River a = possible Brawley Wash or Golden Gate Petrofades A = possible Brawley Wash or Petrofiades J1 O = possible Batamote Petrofades •it = Golden Gate Petrofocies Figure 8. Sherd samples plotted on the first two correspondence analysis Actors (Trial 1). 352 1.0 0.5 - LWM. CvJ 00 - GC O NAPLAG. .^mk h- LSCH. -1.0 - MCR. -1.5 -1.5 -1.0 -0.5 0.0 0.5 1.0 FACT0R1 Figure 9. Point-count parameters plotted on tlie first two correspondence analysis faaors (Trial 2). 353 generally received the lowest (negative) fiu;tor scores while the mineral parameters received the highest (positive) factor scores. The second factor is interpreted as representing a contrast between sedimentary rocks and volcanic rocks, because the sedimentary lithic parameters received negative factor scores while the volcanic lithic parameters received positive factor scores. The second factor also represents a contrast between sodic plagioclase and calcic plagioclase. because the sodic plagioclase parameter received a negative factor score while the calcic plagioclase parameter received a positive factor score. Figure 10 shows the location of the 24 sherd samples, included in die second trial, pioaed on die first two correspondence analysis factors. The plotting symbols used in diis figure tbilow the conventions used previously with die ternary diagrams. A one-standard-deviation elUpse has been drawn around die distribution of sherds assigned to die 'possible Brawley Wash" composition group in order to facilitate dieir comparison with sherds assigned to die other categories. Ringrose (1992) has suggested drawing convex hulls, or lines joining die outermost members of a group, for similar interpretive purposes. By definition a convex hull must contain all members of a group, while a one-standard-deviation sample ellipse contains slightly more than two-diirds of a group's members. In this data set both mediods produce similar results. Examination of Figure 10 supports die compositional group assignments made previously. Only one sherd, sample XDP-IO. that was not assigned to the "possible Brawley Wash" composition group f^ls within die one-standard-deviation sample elUpse (and convex hull) of diat group. That sherd was assigned to die "possible Brawley Wash or Santa Cruz River" composition category. The diree sherds assigned to the "possible Brawley Wash or Golden Gate Petrofacies" composition group are somewhat clustered together. Nearby is the sherd assigned to the "possible Brawley Wash or Petrofacies JI" composition category. The sherds assiped to die "possible 354 U- -0.5 FACT0R1 • = possible Brawley Wash V s possible Brawley Wash or Santa Cniz River • ~ possible Brawley Wash or Golden Gate Petrofedes A = possible Brawley Wash or Petrofodes J1 O = possible Batamote Petrofades •it = Golden Gate Petrofades Figure 10. Sherd samples plotted on the first two correspondence analysis faaors (Trial 2). 355 Brawley Wash or Golden Gate Petrofacies' group and the sherd assigned to the 'possible Brawley Wash or Petrof^ies Jl" category contain more lithic firagments dian die sherds that were assigned to the "possible Brawley Wash" composition group. Sample XDP-21, shown as a hollow circle, was the only sherd included in the second correspondence analysis trial that was not assigned a possible Brawley Wash composition, or related category, based on the process of elimination. That sherd was assigned to die "possible Batamote P6trofiu;ies" category. It plots f^er away from the "possible Brawley Wash" sample ellipse than any of the temper categories related to Brawley Wash. The correspondence analysis, therefore, supports die contention that the composition of sample XDP-21 is unlike diat of any of the other point-counted sherds included in die second correspondence analysis trial. Discussion. The results of die two correspondence analysis trials support the composidon groupings previously identified. The two sherds that plot tirthest away from the other samples. XDP-25 (in trial 1) and XDP-21 (in trial 2). are the only two point-counted sherds not assigned a temper source provenance related to Brawley Wash. The eighteen point-counted sherds that were assigned solely a Brawley Wash provenance cluster together; only one other sherd. XDP-IO assigned a "possible Brawley Wash or Santa Cruz River" provenance, also ^lls within the one- standard-deviation sample ellipse (and convex hull) of die "possible Brawley Wash" group. Sherds assigned to two categories related to the "possible Brawley Wash group," namely die samples assigned a "possible Brawley Wash or Golden Gate Petrofacies" and "possible Brawley Wash or Petrofacies Jl" provenance, plot close to die "possible Brawley Wash" sherds but outside of dieir one-standard-deviation sample ellipse (and convex hull). However, the results of diese two correspondence analysis trials did not produce die distinct clusters of temper composition we have seen in other Tucson Basin data sets (Heidke 1993) or in sherds recovered from the Lower Verde 356 Valley (Heidke et al. 199S). Therefore, we advocate a cautious and conservative use of the data. Only two of the 25 point-counted sherds were not assigned a temper provenance related to Brawiey Wash; the remaining 23 sherds were assigned to four categories all of which potentially involve a "possible Brawiey Wash" provenance. Archaeological Assessment and Conclusions Final Temper Assignments Table IS reports Heidke's binocular microscopic characterization of the point-counted sherds, Wiley's characterization based on a process of eliminadon, and the final interred analytical group membership of the sherds. Examinadon of Table IS shows how the results of the petrographic microscopic characterKadon were used to develop the final temper assignments and assess dieir accuracy. The ceramicist's final group represents the reassignment of temper provenance based on die petrographer's assessment. For example, aU sherds characterized as "sand-tempered, iikeiy Avra Valley sourcc, specific source indeterminate" by Heidke (i.e.. TT=4/TSG=18/TSS=:-9) were rrassigned to Petro^ies L, based on Wiley's analysis of sample XDP-25. Six of die tested groups contained more dian one sherd. In four of those groups Wiley assigned bodi sherds die same provenance. Thus, the reassignment of diose sherds to the ceramicist's final group was straighttbrward. However, In two of the six groups Wiley 's analysis led him to assign die sherds to more dian one provenance. For example, Heidke characterized samples XDP-9 and XDP-10 die same, "igneous plutonic sand temper widi volcanic grains present' (i.e., TT=4/TSG=2/TSS=11), while Wiley's assessment led him to assigned XDP-9 a 'possible Brawiey Wash" provenance and XDP-10 a "possible Brawiey Wash or Santa Cruz River" provenance. In order for the ceramicist's final group to provide a conservative assessment of 357 Table 15. Ceramic Thin-Secdon Inventory and Classification Sample No. ASM Site Amd TT/TSG/TSS' Petrograpber's Ceramicist's Assignment^ Final Group' XDP-25 AA;7:11 PF587 4/18/-9 L L XDP-21 AA: 12:251 PF081 4/13/-9 R? R? XDP-4 AA: 12:251 PF704 4/2/-9 S S XDP-5 AA:11:12 PF617 4/2/-9 S S XDP-6 AA: 12:251 PF702 4/2/1 S S XDP-7 AA: 12:251 PF086 4/2/10 S S XDP-8 AA:12:1I8 PF533 4/2/10 S S XDP-ll AA: 12:251 PF728 4/2/12 S S XDP-12 AA: 12:311 PF035 4I2IE s s XDP-13 AA: 12:251 PF713 4/2/E s S XDP-17 AA: 12:73 PF486 4/11/MW s s XDP-18 AA: 12:251 PF695 4/11/MW s s XDP-19 AA: 12:409 PF440 4/11/P s s XDP-20 AA: 12:251 PF716 4/12/-9 s s XDP-22 AA:7:11 PF607 4/15/MW s s XDP-23 AA:8:87 PF563 4/16/-9 s s XDP-24 AA:7:128 PF660 4/17/-9 s s XDP-2 AA: 12:251 PF087 4/1/J2 SorJl S or J1 XDP-l AA:12:118 PF509 4/1/-9 S or L S or L XDP-3 AA: 12:251 PF120 4/1/MW S orL S or L XDP-I4 AA:12:251 PF680 4/11/-9 S S or L XDP-15 AA:12:118 PF530 4/11/-9 S or L S or L XDP-16 AA:11:12 ?fsn 4/11/-9 S Sor L XDP-9 AA:12:251 PF132 4/2/11 S SorP XDP-10 AA: 12:251 PF684 4/2/11 SorP SorP ' See Table 6 for TT/TSG/TSS codes. ' See Table 9 for petiograptaer's assignmeiu. ' See Table 6 for final temper assignment codes. 358 temper provenance, all sherds characterized by Heidke as "igneous plutonic sand temper with volcanic grains present" were assigned a "possible Brawley Wash or Santa Cruz River" provenance. Similarly, all sherds characterized by Heidke as "indeterminate Rillito, Rillito West. Santa Cruz River, or Brawley Wash sand-tempered" (i.e.. TT=4/TSG = ll/TSS=-9) were assiped a "possible Brawley Wash or Golden Gate Petrofacies' provenance. The conservative nature of the final assignments means diat the "possible Brawley Wash or Santa Cruz River" and "possible Brawley Wash or Golden Gate Petro^ies" categories will be over-represented, and that the number of sherds that could only represent a "possible Brawley Wash" provenance will be under-represented. The rate of agreement between Wiley's assessment and the ceramicist's final assignment can also be calculated from the data provided in Table IS. The classification of die two analysts is in agreement in 22 of the 25 cases, or 88 percent of the time. Site Data and the Issue of Local Production Temper characterization data for the <:ntire typological grab sample of Tanque Verde Red- on-brown sherds recovered from the Northern Tucson Basin and Avra Valley sites included in this sudy are reported in Table 16. We believe one word of caution is in order regarding die use of the data presented in Table 16; it cannot be emphasized strongly enough that these data are derived from grab samples. Therefore, die relative percentage of each temper composition reported does not necessarily represent the actual underlying frequency distribution. Rather, the data should be viewed as displaying die presence or absence of specific temper compositions in the Tanque Verde Red-on- brown pottery recovered from particular sites. 359 Table 16. Temper Characterization for Sherds, Reported by Site ASM Site Temper Source Row Unassigoed L R? S SORJl S or L SorP Total AA:7J 7 2 I 14 0 6 0 30 AA:7:9 2 0 0 2 0 1 0 5 AA:7:I1 4 4 2 11 0 3 0 24 AA:7;20 0 0 0 1 0 1 1 3 AA:7:43 2 0 0 1 0 0 0 3 AA:7:76 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 I AA;7:110 0 0 0 0 0 I 0 1 AA:7:II4 0 0 0 I 0 0 0 1 AA:7;128 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 2 AA:7:172 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 AA:8:27 3 0 0 6 0 3 2 14 AA:8:59 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 AA:8:80 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 AA:8:87 2 0 0 10 1 3 0 16 AA:8:98 0 0 0 0 0 I 0 1 AA:8:I2l 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 I AA:8:184 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 AA:8:186 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 AA;ll:l2 4 I 0 16 0 9 0 30 AA: 11:23 2 0 0 1 0 I 0 4 AA: 11:25 10 1 0 4 0 5 2 22 AA: 11:43 I 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 AA; 11:56 1 0 0 2 1 0 0 4 AA: 11:66 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 2 AA: 11:68 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 AA:12:11 4 0 1 16 1 6 2 30 AA: 12:25 9 0 4 60 1 19 22 115 AA: 12:31 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 2 AA: 12:36 3 0 1 13 I 12 0 30 AA: 12:40 I 0 1 21 0 7 1 31 AA: 12:46 I 0 0 7 0 0 0 8 AA: 12:47 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 I AA: 12:57 3 0 3 17 0 3 5 31 AA: 12:64 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 I AA: 12:73 3 0 2 20 0 3 1 30 Colunm Total 62 12 15 234 5 84 38 450 360 Interpretation of the data is also contingent upon an understanding of what sand temper resources were locally available to die prehistoric potters residing at the sites being smdied. In a recent study (Miksa and Heidke 199S) we examined the relationship between the distance traditional potters travel to collect tempering materials and the type of material utilized. We found that potters who used rock tempers were willing to travel distances ranging from less than I km up to 8 km in order to procure their material, while potters who udlized sand temper exploited nearby resources (.01-3 km). Seventy-three percent of the potters using sand temper (n = IS) were found to travel no more dian I km to collect it, and the 3 km distance represents a value that lies far outside the overall distribution. From this we conclude that any sand-tempered pottery containing a composition similar to that available in washes located widiin 3 km of the archaeological site from which it was recovered should, in a behavioral sense, be considered die product of "local" manufiacture because some potters do travel that far to collect temper. However, die ethnographic evidence also suggests that composidonal compatibility between the sand temper in a sherd and die sands present in die washes located closest to its recovery site may be a better measure of "local" ceramic production. Sand-tempered pottery displaying compositions Uiat are not available within 3 km of a site are best considered "nonlocal" items. The consultant agreement for diis smdy specifies diat compatibility with local geology will be die sole criterion used to determine whether or not a sherd contains a "local" temper resource. Based on that criterion we can state diat most of die point-counted Tanque Verde Red-on-brown sherds are not local. By extension, we can also state tiiat most of die odier sherds belonging to those tested groups are not local. The Pig Farm site, or Hog Farm site, AZ AA:11:12 (ASM) appears to be die only site included in diis study diat is located in a setting where die Brawley Wash sand composition could 361 be considered a geologically compadble, "local" temper resource. With respect to the other sites, if there are any sherds tempered with geologically compatible, "local" temper resources present in the characterized typological grab sample, those sherds belong to untested temper categories: sherds belonging to those categories are reported as "unassigned" in Table 16. Concluding Thoughts and Suggestions for Further Study The sand temper in 450 Tanque Verde Red-on-brown sherds was characterized with the aid of a binocular, reflected-h'ght microscope. Twenty-five of the characterized sherds were later point-counted with die aid of a petrographic microscope. Through an iterative process ut' elimination each sherd's sand temper point count data were compared with all available point- counted sand data from the Tucson Basin and Avra Valley, grouped by petrofacies. in order to posit the likely provenance for each sherd's temper. The process of elimination indicated that the best "possible" match for most of those sherds' sand temper is Brawley Wash or a related composition. The provenance classification resulting from die process of elimination was dien used to generate plotting symbols so that die sherds could be identified on ternary diagrams and correspondence analysis plots. Sherd compositions were dien plotted on ternary diagrams and compared with die distribution of Brawley Wash sands. That comparison generally supported the results of the process of elimination: most sherd samples fell within die convex hull drawn around die Brawley Wash sands. Two correspondence analysis trials were also conducted. Aldiough correspondence analysis is not a useful means for assigning provenance, it is a useful technique for examining whether or not samples believed to be similar cluster together, and whedier or not samples believed to be dissimilar are not clustered. The two correspondence analysis trials also supported die results of die process of elimination: sherds believed to be similar were clustered, while sherds believed to be dissimilar were not clustered. The results of Uiese studies were then 362 related to the original temper characterization. Temper compositions identified with the binocular microscope were reassigned based on the results of the detailed, petrograpbic study. The tmal agreement rate between the binocular microscopic characterizadon and die petrographic characterization was 88 percent in die tested categories; 86 percent of the sherds are members of those categories. Based on all of diese procedures and lines of evidence, we concluded diat most of the Tanque Verde Red-on-brown pottery from the tested sites is not local, using the strict criterion of geologic compatibility between die temper composition and die site of recovery. Only at the Pig Farm site, AZ AA: 11:12 (ASM), could the Brawley Wash sand composition be considered a geologically "local" temper resource. However, a behavioral reassessment of the temper data may indicate diat much of die pottery examined here was produced trom a temper resource located within 3 km of die recovery site. Te ternary diagrams provided in diis study permit direct comparison of die sherd point count data collected here with similar Tanque Verde Red-on-brown point count data (rom the Northern Tucson Basin and Avra Valley (Lombard I987d;Figure 10a) and Southern Tucson Basin (Lombard 1987a:Figure 20.9 and 20.16). Point count data from other Tanque Verde Red-on- brown sherds recovered from Avra Valley sites, reported in Kamilli (I994:TabIe L.2) and Heidke et al. (1994:Table 12.20), are also amenable to being plotted on ternary diagrams, aldiough the audiors did not do so. If die results of diis sudy are compared with diose of Lombard, it should be remembered that Lombard did not consider die possibility that prehistoric potters may have used trunk stream sands, such as diose found in Brawley Wash, as temper. As well, we presendy have a much better understanding of what die sand temper resources of the Avra Valley consist of. During Lombard's tenure as die preeminent Tucson Basin ceramic petrographer. only 57 sand samples from the Avra Valley (including Brawley Wash) had been point-counted, whereas now there are 111 point-counted sand samples from the Avra Valley. APPENDIX FIVE DESERT ARCHAEOLOGY LETTER REPORT Addendum to Petrographic and Qualitatiye Analysis of Tanque Verde Red-on-brown Sherds from the Northern Tucson Basin and Avra Valley by James M. Heidke. Bizabeth J. Miksa, Diana C. Kamilli. and Michael K. Wiley 364 DESERT ARCHAEOLOGY, INC. 39~5 N. Tucson Blvd. Tucson. Arizona 85~16 William H. DoeUe, Ph.D. (520) 88l-22.<4 F.\X 881-0325 Pmtdent ciiMit: arck#d 9 January 1996 Karen Hany 5251 S. Bryce Ave. Tucson, AZ 85746 DESERT ARCHAEOLOGY LETTER REPORT NO. 96-102 (DAI Project No. C94-001) Addendum to Petzographic and Qualitative Analysis of Tanque Verde Red-on-Brown Sherds from the Northern Tucson Basin and Am Valley E}ear Karen: Thank you for letting us review your sherd thin sections again. We have been comparing them to the Avra Valley sands (originally collected for the Shuk Toak Mitigation projeii) that were recehtly loaned to us by the Tohono Codham Natioa Diana Kamilli has finished recounting the sands, and we now have better comparative information for these thin sections. Our primary goal in taking a 'second look" at your sherds has been to determine whether or not Ae defeult "Brawley Wash" designation for the tempers of most of your thin-sectioned sherds was accurate. This designation was not satisfying to any of us at the time; however, it was the best we cotild do with the available point count data, in the absence of the Avia Valley thin sections. Unfortunately, [Tiana's recount of the Avra Valley sand thin sections has confirmed our worst fears. The point counts provided by the Donahues are not compatible with the other samples in the Tucson Basin data set We have had to replace aQ of their point counts with the new data coOected by I^ana. In so doin^ we now know that the Brawley Wash sands contain hir more microdine than was recorded by the Donahues. Your sherd samples contain little or no miorodine * this was one attribute that made them appear to be compatible with the Donahue data set On this basis alone, the Brawley Wash assi^unent becomes unlikely. We felt it would be best to check qualitative grain aspects before entirely ruling out Brawley Wash as a source. Diana scanned your thin sections while the Avra Valley samples were still £resh in her mind, and she was able to place your samples into five major groups that she fieels reflect four major source rocks alone or in combinatioa The groups are described as follows (also see Table 1): Group 1: Felsite-rich tempers. (Felsitespelsic volcanic rock). This group has five sherds containing mostly fielsite (Group 1.1: Sherds I, 2,14,15, 20), two sherds containing felsite and siltstone (Group 12: Sherds 23,25), one sherd with felsite and abundant carbonate (Group U: Datrt Arckuology. [nc. Uttir gtfort No. 9S-10Z Table I: Ouiu's qualiutive awcsuncnt a( the sheds. Croup a •f S u <« £ e i "5 S 3 o E X "S »«• 3 S| m « 1 TT/TSC/TSS iS £ V ** 1 I. •« u £ 5 a IJ C f 2 u 3 X 1 P P Tr P 4/1/.9 2 Tr P p 4/1/12 1.1 M P P p 4/11/.9 13 P 4/11/.9 20 Tr P Tr P p 4/12/-9 U 23 Tr Tr Tr P P p 4/16/-9 25 P P Tr P p 4/U/.9 U 21 Is Tr P P P 4/13/.9 U 3 Tr Tr Tr P p 4/1/MW Ll. 4 Tr p p */2/4 p p 5 Tr rSmSm Tr ZI S p Tr P m Tr P p 4/2/W MuMiAaasK 10 p Tr Tr fSSm Tr Tr p 4/.2/11 12 Tr M P P p 4/2/E 12 13 Tr Tr P p 4/?/E ' 3.1 16 P P p Tr Tr Tr Tr 4/11/.9 6 Tr P 4/2/1 ~ P 11 p Tr Tr Tr 4/2/12 4.1 17 H P 4/lI/V(W 18 4/n/Mw 9 22 P P 4/15/MW M 24 M P P 4/17/4 7 p 7 p P p Tr 4/2/10 5.1 9 p Tr Tr p P p rjygl Tr P 4/2/11 19 p Tr Tr Tr P p Tr Tr 4/lI/P B Tr • nee P • present VAbwid^;-.t. 366 Oaat Arthwolojy. Inc. Page 3 Utter Report No. 96-102 Sherd 21) and one sherd with a mix of felsite and very small amounts of other materials (Group 1.4: Sherd 3). Group 2: This group comprises granite aggregates that are dominated by sodic plagioclase (Na- plag) and unfieatured potassiiun fdds^ (K-spar). Catadastic textures (essentially a metamorphic overlay on the granite) are commonly seen in these thin sections. The tempers also contain very small amounts of felsite and an intermediate granite (a granite that has both sodic and calcic plagioclase [Ca-plag]). The intermediate granite has no catadastic textures. This group has two sherds that lack the metamorphic overlay (Group 2.1: Sherds 4, 5) and four sher^ with common catadastic textures (Group 2.1; Shads 8,10,12,13). Group 3: This "Group" has only one sherd. It contains mostly free minerals that seem to be derived from the granite seen in Group 2 sherds. It has some fielsite but lacks the catadastic textures seen in Group 22. Diana felt this should actually have been designated as a Group 2 sherd, but the mistake (putting it in a group alone) was noticed after some plots had been made, and we didn't want to rerun the plots. You may want to keep this in unind as you view the figures. Group 4: This group is characterized by tempers that have the intermediate granite. There is commonly felsite in these tempers, usually in amoimts greater than 15%. Group 4 contains six sherds designated as Group 41: Sherd numbers are 6,11,17,18,22,24. Group 5: This group of sherds contains a mix of fielsite, the granite of Group 2/3 sherds, and the intermediate granite of Group 4 sherds. Sherds in Group 5.1 are 7,9,19. Diana notes that, in general, caliche is present in most samples and is no help in separating them, and that temper groups 2 through 5 are dominated by unfeatured-or-perthitic alkali fieldspars, not by microdine Group 1 has a bit more mioodine, but becauM this group is felsite rich, the total microcline percentage is still low. Diana rules out the possibility of these sherds coming from Brawley Wash or the Avra Valley in general, based on some of the following patterns: 1. LMF and LMM (catadasis measured by sheared quartz) appear in sands from the Southern Tucson Basin up to the Tortolita samples but Aere is very little in the Avra Valley. 2. Tucson Basin sands tend to have unfeatured-or-perthitic alkali feldspars (K- spar) while Brawl^ Wash sands have more microbe. Some Tortolita sands have more miondine than the Tucson Basin ones. Your sherds are domixuited by the unfieatured-or-perthitic alkali fieldspars. 3. The sand tempers in your sherds come from four diSierent sources: a felsite, a granite with some catadasis, an intermediate granite, and a siltstone (in Group 1.2 only). In several sherds these parent materi^ are mixed. This suggests that the tempering sands could have come from a sin^e area where sand from these rocks occur in relatively uiunixed lower order streams that are tributaries to relatively mixed hi^er order streams. • 367 Oistrt Ardiuolojy. Inc. Page 4 Utur Report No. 96-102 4. Granite aggregates (granite as rock fragments, not fully broken down into free minerals) are rare from Brawley Wash, common in the Tucson Basin and in your sherds. There are some problems with assuming a Tucson Basin source for your sherds, however. For instance, yotir sherds do not exhibit the prominent metamorphic overlay with cataclasis and/or seridtization that are present in many Tucson Basin sands. This overlay is often absent in the Tortolita sands, excluding those samples that contain Pinal Schist Diana feels that a Northern Tucson Basin or Tortolita source is likely for these sands. Based on Diana's qualitative analysis, Jim and Beth looked at the point count data generated by Michael last year, to see if we could separate Diana's groups quantitatively. Jim generated the correspondence analysis plot using Di^'s groups as plotting symbols (Figure 1; after Heidke and V^^ey 1995:Figure 8). As you can see, Figuie 1 allows us to separate Group 1 samples firom an other samples. This same separation of Group 1 from all other samples is seen in a QFL plot. Figure 2 (cf. Heidke and Wiley, 1995: Hgure 2). The separation seems to be due solely to the differences in LVF (fdsite) abundance between Group 1 and all other groups (Figure 3). Unfortunately, we were unable to separate Diana's groups 2 through 5 from one another by any eff^ve means. We feel that this is primarily because Diana's group separations rely on distinctions between granites. Michael did not make these distinctions while counting. Even if such distinctions were made during counting Beth fieels that they would not be statistically distinguishable. Diaxta feels that they might make a statistical difoence Be that as it may, the differences between granite and interme^te granite would be difficult to see in hand sample, so the issue becomes moot Finally, Jim listed Diana's group designations against his TT/TSG/TSS assignments and vice- versa (Table 2; cf Heidke and Wiley 1995:Table 15]. Table 2 shows first of all that the samples were difierent enough from one another to inspire both I^ana and Jim to split 25 samples into a large number of groups (nine and 18 groups, respectively). From this we again draw the condusion that the sample is drawn from a population of broadly similar source sands that appear heterogenous in detail Secondly, Table 2 shows that Jim and Diana saw the same attributes as important in separating the sherds into groups. For instance^ Diana's Group 1 sherds are classified by Jim as T5G=1 (Igneous volcanic sands) or TSG=I1,12,13,16,18. (Broadly speaking, these are variations on 'volcanic plus free minerals.*) Diana's Group 2 through 5 sherds are classified by Jim as TSGs2 Ggneous plutonic sands) or TSG=11,15,17. There is one instance in which Jim applies the same code (4/11/•9) to sherds from Group 1 and any another group. This code is applied to two Group 1 sherds (14 and 15) and the one sherd from Group 3 (sh^ 16). Furthermore, there is one instance in which ^ identified the intermediate granite as separate from the other granite. Sherd 6 was identified by ^ as '4/2/1," a 'monzodioiite,' which suggests that the nearly pure intermediate granite temper in this sample was distinctive. (All of the other Group 4 samples had higher LVF counts and were identified by Hm as being either RiUito West or indeterminate plutonic volcanic) 368 Datrt Ardaaloff, bte. Page 5 Utter Report No. 96-102 ".U 0.5 0.0 -0.5 -1.0 n -3 -1 0 • FACTOR! Figure 1: Sherd samples plotted on the first two cottespondence anafysis Victors with symbols representing Diana KamiHis groups. CAfter Heidke and Wiley 1995: Figure 8). 369 Datrt Atdiaiologf. Inc. Utttr Report No. S6-10Z Page 0 Qm Figure 2: QmFLt plot of point-counted sherd composition with symbols representing Diana KamilK's groups. After Heidke and V\raey 1995? Z 370 Daat Anhuoloff. Inc. p , Later Report So. 96-102 ® 1 1 ! 1 r 6 - ^ 4 - a. I 1 1 I I 0 10 20 00 40 60 60 LVFPCT Figure 3: Notched box plot showing the LVF percent in each of Diana KamiHi's groups. 371 Datrt Atdunlog^. Inc. Page 8 Letter Xeport So. 96-102 Tjble 1: KamiUTs groups Usieil by Heidke's TTCS groups uid vice versa. 1 Count ICimUIi Croup TTCS Count TTCS Kamilli Croup I I.I WU-9 t 4/1/.9 1.1 I 1.1 4/1/12 I 4/1/J2 1.1 I 1.4 4/1/MW 2 4/lt/.9 1.1 2 1.1 4/lt/.9 I 1.1 1 3.1 4/11/.9 I */16/-9 U 2 4.1 4/lt/MW , MVHA tJ I 5.1 4A1/P 1 4/13/.9 IJ I t.l 1 4/1/MW 1.4 I U 4/13/.9 2 2.1 1 4.1 4/15/MW I 4/J/lO 12 I U 4/16/.9 t */2/U 2.2 1 4.1 */m-9 2 4/2/E 2.2 I U *ntM 1 4/U/-9 3.1 2 It */2/-9 2 4/n/MW 4.1 1 4.t 4/2/t I 4/15/MW 4.1 I 2.2 4/2/10 t MMI-H 4.1 I It 4/2/10 t 4/2/T .4.1 1 2.2 4/2/11 1 4/2/12 4.1 I 5.1 4/2/n 1 4/11/P 5.1 I 4.1 4/2/U I 4/2/10 5.1 U 4/2/E I 4/2/11 5.1 At this point, you are probably reeling from the implications of this and wondering what it means and wh^er it on or should affect any of your conclusions. We recotnmend reassigning the sherds into two groups (Diana's group 1 versus all other groups, see Table 2 for TTGSS codes). We recant the suggested "Brawl^ Wash* assignment for the sherds. Beth, Diana, and \Gchael feel that the sands in these sherds come from the north end of the Tucson Basin, either somewhere around the TortoUtas or in the 'Granite Sea" to the north of the Tortolitas and south of the Gila River. We are incensed at our current inability to identify the sand. 372 Oacrt Arthttalogy. Inc. Pige 9 Utter Report No. SS-IOZ Jim feels very strongly that Tanque Verde Phase production may be so highly localized that we cannot addr^ production questions without a finer source sample grid. Although we have many samples in the northern Tucson Basin, it is a very large area. The sand samples are widely spac^, and, more importantly, are concentrated in major drainages. If Jim is right, then we must sample smaller drainages, prefmbly next to known Oassic period sites, to solve this provenance conundrum. Sincercly, James M. Heidke Diana C Kamilli Elizabeth J. Miksa APPENDIX SK PETROGRAPHIC AND CHEMICAL ASSIGNMENTS 374 Appendix 6: Petrt^raphic and Chemical Assigments' Anid Temper Assigmnents Chemical TS/TSG/TSS TSSFinal Harry Assignment Reassigmnent PFOOl 4/2/10 S 2 Unassigned PF002 N/A N/A N/A A PF003 N/A N/A N/A Unassigned PF004 N/A N/A N/A Unassigned PF005 N/A N/A N/A G PF006 N/A N/A N/A Unassigned PF007/008 4/ll/MW S Indet. E PF009 4/1 l/P S Indet. G PFOlO 4/ll/MW S Indet. Unassigned PFOII 4/2/11 SorP 2 Unassigned PF012 N/A N/A N/A Unassigned PF013 N/A N/A N/A Unassigned PF014 N/A N/A N/A G PF0I5 N/A N/A N/A Unassigned PF016 N/A N/A N/A Unassigned PF017 4/12/-9 S Indet. Unassigned PF018 N/A N/A N/A E PF019 N/A N/A N/A Unassigned PF020 N/A N/A N/A Unassigned PF021 N/A N/A N/A Unassigned PF022 N/A N/A N/A A PF023 N/A N/A N/A Unassigned PF024 N/A N/A N/A Unassigned PF025 N/A N/A N/A G PF026 N/A N/A N/A Unassigned PF027 4/1/MW S or L 1 E PF028 N/A N/A N/A Unassigned PF029 N/A N/A N/A Unassigned PF030 N/A N/A N/A G PF031 N/A N/A N/A G PF032 4/2/1 S 2 A PF033 4/2/1 S 2 A PF034 4/2/11 SorP 2 G 375 Appendix 6: Petrographic and Chemical Assigments' Aiiid Teniper Assignmenis Chemical Assignment TS/TSG/TSS TSSFinal Harry Reassignment PF035 4/2/E S 2 Unassigned PF036 4/2/10 S 2 Uaassigned PF037 N/A N/A N/A Unassigned PF038 4/13/-9 R? Indet. F PF039 4/1/J None 1(J?) Unassigned PF040 4/2/11 SorP 2 BC PF043 N/A N/A N/A A PF044 N/A N/A N/A A PF045 N/A N/A N/A A PF046 4/lI/MW S Indet. E PF047 4/2/10 S 2 Unassigned PF048 N/A N/A N/A BC PF049 N/A N/A N/A Unassigned PF050 N/A N/A N/A Unassigned PF051 N/A N/A N/A BC PF052 N/A N/A N/A BC PF053 N/A N/A N/A A PF054 N/A N/A N/A E PF072 N/A N/A N/A BC PF073 N/A N/A N/A Unassigned PF074 N/A N/A N/A Unassigned PF075 N/A N/A N/A BC PF076 4/II/MW S lodet. Unassigned PF077 4/II/MW s Indet. A PF078 4/2/11 SorP 2 BC PF079 N/A N/A N/A BC PF080 N/A N/A N/A A PF081 4/13/-9 R? lodet. Unassigned PF082 N/A N/A N/A BC PF083/128 4/2/11 SorP 2 Unassigned PF084 4/lI/MW S Indet. A PF085 N/A N/A N/A Unassigned PF086 4/2/10 S 2 BC 376 Appendix 6: Petrographic and Cbemitai Assigments' Anid Temper Asstgmnents Chemical TS/TSG/TSS TSSFmal Hary Assigranem Reassigmnent PF087 4/I/J2 Sor J1 1 Unassigned PF088 4/1/-9 SorL I Unassigned PF089 N/A N/A N/A Unassigned PF090 4/11/MW S Indet. Unassigned PF091 N/A N/A N/A A PF092 N/A N/A N/A A PF093 N/A N/A N/A Unassigned PF094 4/lI/MW S Indet. A PF095 N/A N/A N/A Unassigned PF096 N/A N/A N/A A PF097 N/A N/A N/A Unassigned PF098 N/A N/A N/A Unassigned PF099 N/A N/A N/A A PFIOO N/A N/A N/A A PFIOI N/A N/A N/A Unassigned PF102 N/A N/A N/A Unassigned PF103 N/A N/A N/A Unassigned PF104 N/A N/A N/A BC PF105 N/A N/A N/A A PFI06 N/A N/A N/A A PF107 N/A N/A N/A A PF108 N/A N/A N/A A PF109 N/A N/A N/A A PFllO N/A N/A N/A Unassigned PFlll N/A N/A N/A Unassigned PF1I2 4/12/-9 S Indet. Unassigned PF113 N/A N/A N/A BC PFIM N/A N/A N/A BC PF115 N/A N/A N/A A PF116 N/A N/A N/A Unassigned PFI17 N/A N/A N/A Unassigned PF118 N/A N/A N/A Unassigned PFU9 N/A N/A N/A Unassigned 377 Appendix 6: Petrographic and Chemical Assigments' Anid Temper Assignments Cheoiical Assigiunent TsrrsGnss TSSFinal Harry Reassigmnent PF120 4/l/MW SorL 1 Unassigned PFI21/122 4/11/MW S Indet. A PF123 4/1/-9 SorL 1 Unassigned PF124 4/2/11 SorP 2 BC PFI25 N/A N/A N/A BC PFI26 N/A N/A N/A Unassigned PFI27 N/A N/A N/A BC PFI29 4/111-9 SorL lodet. Unassigned PF130 4/2/11 SorP 2 BC PF131 4/15/MW S Indet. Unassigned PF132 4/2/11 SorP 2 Unassigned PF133 4/11/MW S lodet. Unassigned PF134 4111-9 S or L 1 Unassigned PF135 4/2/10 S 2 BC PF136 4121-9 S 2 BC PF137 N/A N/A N/A Unassigned PF138 4121-9 S 2 BC PF139 4/2/11 SorP 2 BC PFI40 4/I/-9 SorL I Unassigned PF14I 4/2/10 S 2 A PF142 4/n/M None lodet. BC PF143 4/lI/MW S lodet. A PF144 N/A N/A N/A BC PF145 4/2/11 SorP 2 Unassigned PF146 4/2/11 SorP 2 Unassigned PF147 4/2/10 S 2 BC PF148 4/2/11 SorP 2 BC PF149 4/2/10 S 2 BC PF150 4/2/10 S 2 BC PF151 4/2/10 S 2 BC PF152 4/2/10 S 2 BC PFI53 4/2/-9 S 2 BC PF154 4/13/-9 R? Indet. BC 378 Appendix 6: Petrographic and Chemical Assigments' Anid Temper Assignments Chemical TS/TSG/TSS TSSFmal Harry Assignment Reassignment PF156 N/A N/A N/A Unassigiied PF157 N/A N/A N/A BC PFI58 N/A N/A N/A Unassigned PF159 N/A N/A N/A Unassigned PF160 4/2/1 S 2 Unassigned PF161 4/1/MW Sor L 1 Unassigned PF162 4/1/-9 S or L 1 Unassigned PF163 4/I/MW S or L 1 F PF164 4/ll/MW S Indet. F PF165 N/A N/A N/A A PF166 4/11/P S Indet. F PF167 N/A N/A N/A F PF168 4/15/-9 None lodet. F PF169 4/11/P S Indet. F PF170 N/A N/A N/A Unassigned PF171 4/2/1 S 2 Unassigned PF172 4/2/E S 2 Unassigned PF173 4/2/1 S 2 A PF174 N/A N/A N/A Unassigned PF175 4/2/E S 2 Unassigned PFI76 4/2/E S 2 BC PF177 4/-9/-9 NODE Indet. A PF178 4/2/E S 2 A PF179 4/ll/MW S Indet. E PF180 N/A N/A N/A A PF181 N/A N/A N/A Unassigned PF182 N/A N/A N/A Papagueria PF183 N/A N/A N/A BC PFI84 N/A N/A N/A BC PF185 N/A N/A N/A BC PF186 N/A N/A N/A A PF187 N/A N/A N/A BC PF188 N/A N/A N/A Unassigned 379 Appendix 6: Petrograpiiic and Chemical Assfgments' Anid Temper Assigmnenis Chemical Assignment TS/TSG/TSS TSSFinal Harry Reassignment PF189 N/A N/A N/A A PF190 N/A N/A N/A Uoasstgned PF191 N/A N/A N/A A PF192 N/A N/A N/A A PF193 N/A N/A N/A Unassigned PF194 N/A N/A N/A A PF195 N/A N/A N/A A PFI96 N/A N/A N/A A PF197 N/A N/A N/A Unassigned PF198 N/A N/A N/A BC PF199 N/A N/A N/A Unassigned PF200 N/A N/A N/A A PF201 N/A N/A N/A A PF202 N/A N/A N/A Unassigned PF203 N/A N/A N/A Unassigned PF204 N/A N/A N/A Unassigned PF205 N/A N/A N/A BC PF206 N/A N/A N/A BC PF207 N/A N/A N/A Unassigned PF208 N/A N/A N/A BC PF209 N/A N/A N/A A PF210 N/A N/A N/A E PF211 N/A N/A N/A E PF212 N/A N/A N/A BC PF213 N/A N/A N/A Unassigned PF214 N/A N/A N/A BC PF215 N/A N/A N/A Unassigned PF216 N/A N/A N/A A PF217 4/2/10 S 2 BC PF2I8 N/A N/A N/A Unassigned PF219 N/A N/A N/A Papagueria PF220 N/A N/A N/A Papagueria PF221 N/A N/A N/A Papagueria 380 Appendix 6: Petrographic and Chemical Assigments' Anid Temper Assigmnents Chemical Assignment TS/TSG/TSS TSSFinal Harry Reassignment PF222 N/A N/A N/A Papagueria PF223 N/A N/A N/A Papagueria PF224 N/A N/A N/A Papagueria PF225 N/A N/A N/A Papagueria PF226 N/A N/A N/A Papagueria PF228 N/A N/A N/A Phoenix PF229 N/A N/A N/A Phoenix PF230 N/A N/A N/A Phoenix PF231 N/A N/A N/A Phoenix PF232 N/A N/A N/A Unassigned PF233 N/A N/A N/A Phoenix PF234 N/A N/A N/A Phoenix PF235 N/A N/A N/A Phoenix PF236 N/A N/A N/A Unassigned PF237 N/A N/A N/A Phoenix PF238 N/A N/A N/A Phoenix PF239 N/A N/A N/A Phoenix PF240 N/A N/A N/A Phoenix PF241 N/A N/A N/A Papagueria PF242 N/A N/A N/A Papagueria PF243 N/A N/A N/A Unassigned PF244 N/A N/A N/A Unassigned PF245 N/A N/A N/A Unassigned PF246 N/A N/A N/A Unassigned PF247 NVA N/A N/A Papagueria PF248 N/A N/A N/A Papagueria PF249 N/A N/A N/A Unassigned PF250 N/A N/A N/A Papagueria PF251 N/A N/A N/A Papagueria PF252 N/A N/A N/A Papagueria PF253 N/A N/A N/A Papagueria PF254 N/A N/A N/A Papagueria PF255 N/A N/A N/A Papagueria 381 Appendix 6: Petrographic and Chemical Assigments' Anid Temper Assignments Chemical TS/TSG/TSS TSSFinal H-'jry Assignment Reassignment PF256 N/A N/A N/A Unassigned PF257 N/A N/A N/A Unassigned PF258 N/A N/A N/A Unassigned PF259 N/A N/A N/A Unassigned PF260 N/A N/A N/A Unassigned PF261 N/A N/A N/A Unassigned PF262 N/A N/A N/A Unassigned PF263 N/A N/A N/A Unassigned PF264 N/A N/A N/A Unassigned PF265 N/A N/A N/A Unassigned PF266 N/A N/A N/A Unassigned PF267 N/A N/A N/A Unassigned PF268 N/A N/A N/A Unassigned PF269 N/A N/A N/A BC PF270 N/A N/A N/A Unassigned PF27I N/A N/A N/A Unassigned PF272 N/A N/A N/A BC PF273 N/A N/A N/A Unassigned PF274 N/A N/A N/A A PF275 N/A N/A N/A A PF276 N/A N/A N/A Unassigned PRT? N/A N/A N/A BC PF278 N/A N/A N/A Unassigned PF279 N/A N/A N/A Unassigned PF2gO N/A N/A N/A A PF281 N/A N/A N/A Unassigned PF282 N/A N/A N/A Unassigned PF283 N/A N/A N/A A PF284 N/A N/A N/A A PF285 N/A N/A N/A Unassigned PF286 N/A N/A N/A Unassigned PF287 N/A N/A N/A E PF288 N/A N/A N/A Unassigned 382 Appendix 6: Petrograpiiic and Chemical Assigments' Anid Temper Assignments Chemical Assignment TS/TSG/TSS TSSFmal Harry Reassignment PF289 N/A N/A N/A A PR90 N/A N/A N/A BC PF291 N/A N/A N/A A PF292 N/A N/A N/A Unassigned PF293 N/A N/A N/A S. Tucson PF294 N/A N/A N/A S. Tucson PF295 N/A N/A N/A Unassigned PF296 N/A N/A N/A Uoassigned PR97 N/A N/A N/A S. Tucson PF298 N/A N/A N/A S. Tucson PR99 N/A N/A N/A Unassigned PF300 N/A N/A N/A S. Tucson PF30I N/A N/A N/A S. Tucson PF302 N/A N/A N/A S. Tucson PF303 N/A N/A N/A Unassigned PF304 N/A N/A N/A S. Tucson PF305 N/A N/A N/A Unassigned PF306 N/A N/A N/A Unassigned PF307 N/A N/A N/A Unassigned PF308 N/A N/A N/A S. Tucson PF309 N/A N/A N/A Unassigned PF310 N/A N/A N/A Unassigned PBll N/A N/A N/A S. Tucson PF3I2 N/A N/A N/A S. Tucson pni3 N/A N/A N/A Unassigned pni4 N/A N/A N/A S. Tucson PF315 N/A N/A N/A Unassigned pni6 N/A N/A N/A Unassigned PF317 N/A N/A N/A Unassigned PRIS N/A N/A N/A Unassigned PF319 N/A N/A N/A Unassigned PF320 N/A N/A N/A S. Tucson pn2i N/A N/A N/A Unassigned 383 Appendix 6: Petrograpiiic and Chemical Assigments' Anid Temper Assignments Chemical TS/TSG/TSS TSSFinal Harry Assignment Reassignment PF322 N/A N/A N/A Unassigned Pn23 N/A N/A N/A Uoassigned Pn24 N/A N/A N/A BC PF325 N/A N/A N/A Unassigned PF326 N/A N/A N/A BC Pn27 N/A N/A N/A S. Tucson Pn28 N/A N/A N/A Unassigned PF329 N/A N/A N/A G PBSO N/A N/A N/A BC PBS I N/A N/A N/A BC Pn32 N/A N/A N/A BC PF333 N/A N/A N/A Unassigned PF334 N/A N/A N/A Unassigned PF335 N/A N/A N/A A Pn36 N/A N/A N/A A PF337 N/A N/A N/A BC PF338 N/A N/A N/A Unassigned PB39 N/A N/A N/A Unassigned PF340 N/A N/A N/A Unassigned PF341 N/A N/A N/A Papagueria PF342 N/A N/A N/A Papagueria PF343 N/A N/A N/A Unassigned PF344 N/A N/A N/A Unassigned PF345 N/A N/A N/A Papagueria PF346 N/A N/A N/A Unassigned PF347 4/11/-9 S or L iDdet. BC PF348 4/10/-9 None Indet. Unassigned PF349 4/ll/MW S indet. A PBSO 4/2/1 S 2 A PBSl 4/2/-9 S 2 BC Pn52 N/A N/A N/A BC Pn53 N/A N/A N/A BC Pn54 N/A N/A N/A A 384 Appendix 6: Petrographic and Ciiemical Assigments^ Anid Temper Assignmenis Chemical Assignment TS/TSG/TSS TSSFinal Harry Reassignment PRSS 4/11/-9 SorL lodet. BC Pn57 N/A N/A N/A BC PBSS 4/2/11 SorP 2 BC PF359 4/ll/MW S Indet. Lfnassigned pneo 4/1l/P S Indet. BC PF36I 4/2/1 S 2 A PF362 N/A N/A N/A Unassigned PF363 N/A N/A N/A S. Tucson PF364 N/A N/A N/A S. Tucson PF365 N/A N/A N/A S. Tucson PF366 N/A N/A N/A LFoassigned PF367 N/A N/A N/A Unassigned PF368 N/A N/A N/A Unassigned PF369 N/A N/A N/A S. Tucson PF370 N/A N/A N/A S. Tucson PB71 N/A N/A N/A S. Tucson PR72 N/A N/A N/A Unassigned PF373 N/A N/A N/A S. Tucson PF374 N/A N/A N/A Papagueria Pn75 N/A N/A N/A Papagueria Pn76 N/A N/A N/A Papagueria PF377 N/A N/A N/A Papagueria Pn78 N/A N/A N/A G PB79 N/A N/A N/A F PF380 N/A N/A N/A G PF381 N/A N/A N/A Unassigned PF382 4/I1/-9 S or L Indet. Unassigned PF383 N/A N/A N/A Unassigned PF384 N/A N/A N/A G PF385 N/A N/A N/A G PF386 4/2/12 S 2 Unassigned PF387 4/I2/-9 S Indet. Unassigned PF388 4/Il/MW s Indet. Unassigned 385 Appendix 6: Petrographic and Chemical Assigments' Anid Temper Assigunents Chemical TS/TSG/TSS TSSFmal Harry Assigmnent Reassigmnent pn89 4/2/E S 2 Unassigned PF390 4/11/-9 S orL Indet. Unassigned PF391 4/11/P S Indet. Unassigned PF392 4/11/-9 S or L lodec. BC pn93 4/2/1 S 2 E Pn94 4/1/-9 S or L 1 E PF395 4/I7/-9 S lodet. Unassigned pn96 4/I9/-9 None Indet. Unassigned PF397 4/17/-9 S lodet. E pn98 4/I9/-9 None lodet. Unassigned pn99 4/18/-9 L Indet. E PF400 4/19/-9 None Indet. Unassigned PF401 4/1/-9 S or L 1 E PF402 4/11/P S lodet. Unassigned PF403 41-91-9 None lodet. Unassigned PF404 41-91-9 None Indet. Unassigned PF405 4/18/-9 L Indet. E PF406 4/2/1 S 2 Unassigned PF407 4/11/-9 S or L Indet. Unassigned PF408 4121-9 S 2 Unassigned PF409 4/2/1 S 2 Unassigned PF410 4/2/1 S 2 A PF411 41-91-9 None lodet. Unassigned PF412 4/18/U None lodet. E PF413 4/2/1 S 2 A PF414 4/11/-9 S or L lodet. Unassigned PF415 4/13/-9 R? Indet. Unassigned PF416 4/2/E S 2 Unassigned PF417 4/1/MW S or L I F PF418 4/11/MW S Indet. Unassigned PF419 4/n/MW S Indet. F PF420 4/1/-9 S or L 1 Unassigned PF421 4/1/MW S or L 1 F 386 Appendix 6: Petrographic and Cbemical Assigments' Anid Temper Assigmnents Chemical Assigmnent TS/TSG/TSS TSSFinal Harry Reassigmnent PF422 4/1/MW SorL 1 F PF423 4/1/P None 1 F PF424 4/1/J2 S orJl 1 E PF425 4/11/P S lodet. F PF426 4/12/-9 S lodet. F PF427 4/13/-9 R? Indet. Unassigned PF428 4/2/1 S 2 Unassigned PF429 4/1/-9 SorL 1 Unassigned PF430 4/1/-9 SorL 1 Unassigned PF431 4/15/MW S Indet. F PF432 4/11/P S lodet. F PF434 4/2/10 S 2 Unassigned PF43S 4/11/-9 SorL lodet. F PF436 4/11/-9 SorL Indet. Unassigned PF437 4/11/-9 SorL lodet F PF438 4/13/-9 R? Indet. A PF439 4/11/-9 SorL lodet. BC PF440 4/11/P S Indet. BC PF44I 4/2/10 S 2 Unassigned PF442 4/2/E S 2 Unassigned PF443 4/11/P S Indet. BC PF444 4/2/-9 S 2 Unassigned PF445 4/11/MW S Indet. A PF446 4/11/P S Indet. Unassigned PF447 4/11/P S Indet. BC PF448 4/11/P S Indet. BC PF449 4/11/P S Indet. BC PF450 4/11/P S Indet. BC PF451 4/11/-9 SorL Indet. BC PF452 4/11/P S Indet. BC PF453 4/11/P S Indet. BC PF454 4/11/P S Indet. BC PF455 4/n/-9 SorL Indet. BC 387 Appendix 6: Petrograpiiic and Chemical Assigments' Anid Temper Assignments Chemical Assignment TS/TSG/TSS TSSFmal Harry Reassignment PF456 4/n/p S Indec BC PF457 4/2/10 S 2 A PF458 4/ll/MW S Indet. BC PF459 4/11/-9 Sor L lodec Uoassigned PF460 4/2/-9 S 2 A PF46I 4/1I/-9 S orL Indet. Unassigned PF462 4/II/-9 S or L Indet. BC PF463 4/14/-9 None Indet. Unassigned PF464 4/11/P S Indet. BC PF465 4/2/11 SorP 2 BC PF466 4/2/12 S 2 Unassigned PF467 4/2/12 S 2 A PF468 4/2/-9 S 2 A PF469 4/1I/-9 S or L Indet. E PF470 4/2/12 S 2 A PF471 4/2/12 S 2 Unassigned PF472 4/13/-9 R? Indet. Unassigned PF473 4/2/E S 2 BC PF474 4/2/10 S 2 BC PF475 4/2/10 S 2 BC PF476 4/2/12 S 2 A PF477 4/lI/MW S Indet. Unassigned PF478 4/2/-9 S 2 A PF479 4/13/-9 R? Indet BC PF480 4/2/10 S 2 Unassigned PF482 4/2/-9 S 2 Unassigned PF483 4/2/10 S 2 Unassigned PF484 4/13/-9 R? Indet. BC PF485 4/2/12 S 2 Unassigned PF486 4/ll/MW S Indet. A PF487 4/II/MW S Indet. A PF488 -91-91-9 None Indet. Unassigned PF489 4/ll/MW S Indet Unassigned 388 Appendix 6: Petrographic and Chemical Assigments' Anid Temper Assigmnents Chemical Assignment TS/TSG/TSS TSSRnal Harry Reassigmnent PF490 4/1/-9 S or L 1 Unassigned PF491 4/11/MW S Indet. A PF492 4/2/1 S 2 A PF493 4/13/-9 R? [odec BC PF494 4/11/MW S Indet. A PF495 4/11/MW s Indet. A PF496 4/2/12 s 2 A PF497 4/11/MW s Indet. A PF498 4/11/-9 SorL Indet. BC PF499 4/12/-9 S Indet. Unassigned PFSOO 4/2/11 SorP 2 Unassigned PF501 4/11/-9 SorL Indet. Unassigned PF502 4/2/10 S 2 Unassigned PF503 4/2/10 S 2 BC PF505 4/2/-9 S 2 BC PF506 4/12/-9 S Indet. Unassigned PF507 4/2/10 S 2 Unassigned PF508 4/11/-9 SorL Indet. BC PF509 4/1/-9 S or L 1 Unassigned PF510 4/2/11 SorP 2 BC PFsn 4/2/10 S 2 BC PF512 4/13/11 None Indet. BC PF513 4/2/-9 S 2 BC PF514 4/11/M None Indet. Unassigned PF515 4/11/-9 S or L Indet. Unassigned PF516 4/11/-9 S or L Indet. BC PF517 4/2/12 S 2 A PF518 4/11/MW S Indet. E PF519 4/Il/MW S Indet. Unassigned PF520 4/II/MW S Indet. A PF52I 4/11/MW S Indet. A PF522 4/I/-9 S or L I S. Tucson PF523 4/11/P S Indet. BC 389 Appendix 6: Petrographic and Chemical Assigments' Anid Temper Assigmnents Chemical Assignment TS/TSG/TSS TSSFinal Harry Reassignment PF524 4/2/12 S 2 A PF525 4/2/11 SorP 2 BC PF526 4/ll/MW S Indet. Unassigned PF527 4/2/-9 S 2 Unassigned PF528 4/-9/-9 None Indct. BC PF529 4/13/-9 R? Indet. Unassigned PF530 4/11/-9 S or L Indet. e PF53I 4/1/J2 SorJl 1 Unassigned PF532 4/13/1 None Indet. A PF533 4/2/10 S 2 Unassigned PF534 4/19/-9 None Indet. G PF535 4/11/-9 S or L Indet. Unassigned PF536 4/2/1 S 2 Unassigned PF537 4/11/M None Indet. G PF538 4/2/E S 2 Unassigned PF539 4/17/-9 S lodet. G PF540 4/11/-9 S or L Indet. G PF541 4/2/11 SorP 2 Unassigned PF542 4/1I/-9 SorL Indet. G PF543 4/16/-9 S Indet. Unassigned PF544 4/12/-9 S Indet. Unassigned PF545 4/17/-9 S Indet. Unassigned PF546 4/2/11 SorP 2 Unassigned PF547 4/-9/-9 None Indet. Unassigned PF548 4/11/P S Indet. E PF549 4121-9 S 2 Unassigned PF550 4/16/-9 S Indet. Unassigned PF551 4/1/J2 SorJl 1 Unassigned PF552 4/1/-9 S or L 1 E PF553 4I2J-9 S 2 G PF554 4/16/-9 S Indet. G PF555 4/16/-9 S Indet. Unassigned PF556 4/-9/-9 None Indet. G 390 Appendix 6: Petrographic and Chemical Assigments' Anid Temper Assignmeots Chemical Assigunent TS/TSG/TSS TSSFinal Harry Reassigmnent PF557 4/17/-9 S Indet. G PF558 4/16/-9 S Indec G PF559 4/I6/-9 S Indet. G PF560 4/11/-9 S or L Indet. Unassigned PF561 4/11/-9 S or L Indet. G PF562 4/19/-9 None Indet. G PF563 4/16/-9 S Indet. G PF564 4/2/10 S 2 BC PF565 4/14/-9 None Indet. BC PF566 4/II/-9 Sot L Indet. Unassigned PF567 41-91-9 Mooe Indet. Unassigned PF568 4/I9/-9 None Indet, G PF569 41 lie None 1(C?) Unassigned PF570 4/2/1 S 2 Unassigned PF571 4/11/-9 S or L Indet. Unassigned PF572 10/-9/-9 None Indet. Unassigned PF573 4/14/-9 None Indet. Unassigned PF574 4/2/1 S 2 A PF575 4/11/-9 S or L Indet. Unassigned PF576 4/I9/-9 None Indet. G PF577 41-91-9 None Indet. Unassigned PF578 41-91-9 None Indet. Unassigned PF579 4/2/11 SorP 2 Unassigned PF580 4/18/-9 L Indet. G PF581 4/2/11 SorP 2 Unassigned PF582 4/lI/MW S Indet. Unassigned PF583 4/1/MW S or L I Unassigned PF584 4/-9/-9 None Indet. Unassigned PF585 4/18/-9 L Indet. G PF586 4/17/10 Mone Indet. Unassigned PF587 4/18/-9 L Indet. Unassigned PF588 4121-9 S 2 G PF589 4/17/-9 S Indet. Unassigned 391 Appendix 6: Petrographic and Chemical Assigments' Anid Temper Assignments Chemical /Assignment TS/TSG/TSS TSSFinal Harry Reassignment PF590 4/11/-9 SorL Indet. LTnassigned PF591 4/17/-9 S Indet. Unassigned PF592 4/II/-9 SorL Indet. Unassigned PF593 4/2/10 S 2 Unassigned PF594 4/13/-9 R? Indet. Unassigned PF595 4/3/-9 None Indet. Unassigned PF596 4/ll/MW S Indet. Unassigned PF597 4/I3/-9 R? Indet. Unassigned PF598 4/17/-9 S Indet. Unassigned PF599 4/18/-9 L Indet. A PF600 4/II/-9 S or L Indet. BC PF601 4/18/-9 L Indet. G PF602 4/ll/MW S Indet. A PF603 4/-9/-9 None Indet. G PF604 4/15/-9 None Indet. Unassigned PF605 4/12/-9 S Indet. A PF606 4/15/MW S Indet. A PF607 4/15/MW S Indet. A PF608 4/17/-9 S Indet. Unassigned PF609 4/H/P S Indet. BC PF610 4/2/10 S 2 F PF611 4/2/12 S 2 A PF612 4/2/12 S 2 Unassigned PF613 4/-9/-9 Mone Indet. Unassigned PF6I4 4/-9/-9 None Indet. Unassigned PF6I5 4/2/1 S 2 Unassigned PF616 4/18/-9 L Indet. Unassigned PF6I7 4/2/-9 S 2 Unassigned PF618 4/I7/-9 S Indet. Unassigned PF6I9 4/17/-9 s Indet. E PF620 4/15/MW s Indet. A PF621 4/11/-9 S or L Indet. Unassigned PF622 4/I7/-9 S Indet. E 392 Appendix 6: Petrograpliic and Chemical Assigments' Anid Temper Assignments Chemical Assignment TS/TSG/TSS TSSRnal Harry Reassignment PF623 4/11/-9 S or L Indet. E PF624 4/11/-9 S or L Indet. E PF625 4/-9I-9 None [ndet. Unassigned PF626 4/II/.9 S or L Indet. Unassigned PF627 4/I1/-9 S or L Indet. Unassigned PF628 4I2J-9 S 2 Unassigned PF629 4/11/-9 S or L Indet. Unassigned PF630 4/I1/-9 S or L Indet. Unassigned PF631 4/II/-9 S or L Indet. Unassigned PF632 4/2/1 S 2 A PF633 mil? S Indet. Unassigned PF634 4/Il/MW S Indet. A PF635 4/1I/-9 Sor L Indet. Unassigned PF636 4/I9/-9 None Indet. A PF637 4m1-9 S Indet. E PF638 4/17/-9 S Indet. G PF639 4/1/-9 S or L 1 E PF640 4/19/-9 None Indet. Unassigned PF641 4/-9/-9 None Indet. Unassigned PF642 4I2JE S 2 Unassigned PF643 4/17/-9 S Indet. G PF644 4/1/-9 S or L 1 Unassigned PF645 4/2/11 S or P 2 Unassigned PF646 4/17/-9 S Indet. G PF647 4/1/Jl None UJl?) Unassigned PF648 4/11/-9 SorL Indet. Unassigned PF650 4/11/P S Indet. Unassigned PF651 4/18/-9 L Indet. Unassigned PF652 4/18/-9 L Indet. Unassigned PF653 4/17/-9 S Indet. A PF654 4/1/-9 S or L 1 Unassigned PF655 4121-9 S 2 Unassigned PF656 4/1/J None I(J?) Unassigned 393 Appendix 6: Petrographic and Chemical Assigments' Anid Temper Assignments Chemical Assignment TS/TSG/TSS TSSFuud Harry Reassignment PF657 4/17/-9 S lodet. Unassigned PFd58 4/2/-9 S 2 UnassigDed PF659 4/15/-9 None lodet. Uoasstgned PF660 4/17/-9 S lodet. A PF661 4/I8/-9 L lodet. IToassigiied PF662 1/-9/-9 None lodet. Unassigned PF663 4/17/-9 S Indet. Unassigned PF664 4/18/-9 L Indet. G PF665 4/I/J2 SorJI I Unassigned PF666 4/17/-9 S lodet. Unassigned PF667 4/19/-9 None lodet. Unassigned PF668 4/13/M None lodet. BC PF669 4/2/E S 2 Uoassigned PF670 4/2/11 SorP 2 BC PF671 4/2/11 SorP 2 Uoassigned PF672 4/2/11 SorP 2 Uoassigned PF673 4/1 l/P S lodet. Uoassigned PF674 4/2/E S 2 Uoassigned PF675 4/2/10 S 2 BC PF676 4/-9/-9 None lodet. Unassigned PF677 4/2/11 SorP 2 Unassigned PF678 4/2/11 SorP 2 BC PF679 4/1l/P S Indet. BC PFdSO 4/II/-9 SorL lodet. G PF681 4/2/11 SorP 2 BC PF682 4/2/11 SorP 2 BC PF683 4/1/-9 S or L 1 Unassigned PF684 4/2/11 SorP 2 BC PF685 4/2/11 SorP 2 BC PF686 4/2/-9 S 2 Unassigned PF687 41-91-9 None lodet. A PF688 4/3/N None Indet. Uoassigned PF689 mno S 2 Uoassigned 394 Appendix 6: Petrographic and Cbemicai Assigments' Anid Temper Assigmnems Chemical Assignment TS/TSG/TSS TSSFmal Harry Reassigmnent PF690 4/2/10 S 2 BC PF691 4/2/10 S 2 A PF692 4/2/12 S 2 A PF693 4/2/1 S 2 A PF694 4/11/MW S lodet. A PF695 4/n/MW S Indet. Lfnassigned PF696 4/2/12 S 2 A PF697 4/1/-9 SorL 1 Unassigned PF698 4/2/10 S 2 Unassigned PF699 4/13/-9 R? Indet. Unassigned PF700 4/n/.9 SorL Indec Unassigned PF701 4/ll/MW S Indet. Unassigned PR02 4/2/1 S 2 A PROS 4/2/10 S 2 A PF704 4I2J-9 S 2 Unassigned PF705 4/2/-9 S 2 Unassigned PF706 4/2/11 SorP 2 BC PF707 4/2/10 S 2 BC PF708 4/2/E S 2 Unassigned PF709 4/11/-9 S orL Indet. Unassigned PF710 4/2/11 SorP 2 BC PF71I 4/2/-9 S 2 BC PR12 4/2/11 SorP 2 Unassigned PF713 4/2/E S 2 Unassigned PF7I4 4/11/-9 S or L Indet. BC PF7I5 4/2/11 SorP 2 BC PF7I6 4/12/-9 S Indet. Unassiped PF717 4/2/11 SorP 2 A PF718 4I2J12 S 2 A PF719 4/2/10 S 2 A PF720 4/2/10 S 2 Unassigned PF721 4/2/10 S 2 Unassigned PF722 4I2J-9 S 2 BC 395 Appendix 6: Petrographic and Chemical Assigments' Anid Temper Assignments Chemical Assignment TS/TSGyrss TSSFmal Harry Reassignment PF723 4/11/-9 Sort lodet. G PF724 4/11/-9 S or L lodet. E PF725 4121-9 S 2 BC PF726 4/2/11 SorP 2 Uoassigned PF727 4/-9/-9 None lodet. A PF728 AIUM S 2 A PF729 4/13/11 None Indet. BC PF730 4/13/11 None Indet. A PF731 4/2/12 S 2 Unassigned PF732 4/2/11 SorP 2 A PF733 4/11/-9 S or L lodet. E PF734 4/2/-9 S 2 BC PF735 4/2/10 S 2 Unassigoed PF736 4/2/10 S 2 BC PF737 4/12/-9 S lodet. Unassigned PF738 4/11/-9 S or L lodet. Unassigned PF739 4/13/-9 R? lodet. Unassigned PF740 4/13/11 None lodet. BC PF741 4/12/-9 S lodet. Unassigned PF742 4/2/-9 S 2 BC PF743 4/11/-9 S or L lodet. Unassigned PF744 4/11/-9 S or L Indet. S. Tucson PF745 4/-9/-9 None lodet. Unassigned PF746 4/11/-9 S or L lodet. E PF747 4/1I/-9 S or L [ndet. Unassigoed PR48 4/2/-9 S 2 Unassigned PF749 4/2/-9 S 2 Unassigned PF750 4/12/-9 S lodet. Unassigoed 1. N/A refers (o those sherds that were not petrographkally analzyed. APPENDIX SEVEN ELEMENTAL CONCENTRATIONS FOR SHERDS, CLAYS, AND SANDS Appendix 7. Elemental Concentrations (in parts per million) for Sherds, Clays, and Sands iii AS I.A I.U NU SM U YH CH CO CR CS •ntsi: From Stiiiiy Artui (n = yJ4) 'imi * 4..H 0..1K8 .10.5 5..19 3.02 2.65 69.9 9.93 33.3 11.11 f>.n M.l 0.140 10.3 5.70 3.05 2.33 72.8 n.63 30.6 8.64 7.'J() 41U 0.462 29.8 6.(i4 3.29 3.14 87.7 10.52 .15.5 15.59 'HMM' .14.0 0..164 32.0 5.57 2.69 2.29 68.6 9.94 30.8 1.3.26 6.55 .15.5 0.411 29.9 5.92 3.14 2.86 75.0 10.88 31.5 10.60 y.35 15.9 0.504 28.7 6.12 4.04 3..14 72.6 9.15 35.8 15.80 6.7.1 18.0 0.188 32.4 6.32 3.53 2.67 8I.!> 10.67 31.1 11.21 6.95 .11.2 0.401 29.1 5.74 3.13 2.80 72.2 11.77 32.4 12.31 •I'd 10* 5.21 18.4 0.459 29.0 6.12 3.15 3.04 81.8 10.76 36.0 6.89 'I'Ol 1 • 4.26 .1.1.7 0.490 29.1 5.59 2.80 3.41 69.5 9.08 31.8 10.84 5.12 41.9 0.475 33.1 6.40 3.53 3.08 92.7 9.18 30.1 10.32 'Hin* y.48 41.1 0.484 40.2 7.35 3.57 3.45 89.1 14.29 .16.9 20.68 TOM* 6.09 16.4 0.414 32.2 6.16 3.06 2.87 75.7 I2..18 31.3 12.04 »F0I5* 7.16 17.8 0.422 32.5 6.20 3.34 2.77 80.5 10.69 33.6 11.87 9.15 19.1 0.401 36.0 6.60 3.43 2.79 79.8 11.28 31.1 11.30 'I-0I7* 9.59 .15.9 0.426 31.5 6.25 3.64 2.67 7.1.1 7.57 31.4 11.50 9.29 40.1 0.185 .15.7 6.32 3.49 2.76 84.3 10.29 29.6 11.23 10.31 45.5 0.674 42.2 8.11 3.90 4.66 95.5 14.36 59.2 9.83 6.96 40.1 0.177 15.9 6.11 3.37 2.43 82.1 10.07 .14.4 6.65 'I-02I* HAS 42.7 0.428 37.9 6.66 3.80 2.92 91.2 11.84 .14.1 6.17 6.91) .15.8 0.111 29.0 5.72 2.92 2.24 74.2 10.45 28.7 8.58 •HI23* 5.79 41.6 0.481 51.4 6.7(1 1.71 1.22 94.1 12.69 37.3 7.84 Appendix 7. Elemental Concentrations (in parts per million) tor Sherds, Clays, and Sands id AS LA l.U ND SM U Y« Cli CO CR CS l'|-()24* 14.42 34.5 0.316 .33.2 5.14 2.73 2.29 68.2 10.47 26.6 10.56 l'l-"025* 6.87 34.2 0..396 29.6 5.73 3.43 2.52 7 J.9 9.63 26.1 10.57 .">.31 32.9 0.373 30.5 5.57 2.85 2.57 67.6 10,69 31.4 9.06 l'l-()27* II..*>7 .36.7 0.370 .34.8 6.19 3.73 2.59 77.9 10.17 27.7 10.75 l'l()28* ().19 40.0 0.337 35.1 6.06 2.79 2.32 80.4 10.71 28.5 8.36 I'J()2y* 6.21 40.6 0.455 40.0 6.76 .3.16 .3.18 82.6 10.03 39.8 10.61 I'I'O.IO* 4.80 .38.9 0.402 .35.7 6.24 3.24 2.77 80.2 10..38 29.8 9.04 .'>.40 35.7 0.400 31.5 6.03 3.39 2.78 75.6 10.86 31.2 9.76 1'I(I32* 8. iiiJ AS I.A I.U NI) SM U YH CI: CO CR CS I'l-OSO* 5.87 32.6 0.375 28.0 5.54 2.67 2.54 67.3 11.38 32.7 8.27 I'i-O.'Sl' 8.10 .34.2 0.457 28.3 5.84 3.28 2.97 68.9 8.71 31.9 10.33 l'l-().12* 7.-51 31.4 0.344 27.5 5.08 2.50 2.31 63.2 7.94 27.6 7.90 6.4.'i 37.6 0.347 31.3 5.97 2.53 2..30 71.8 10.37 26.7 8.30 11.78 .35.9 0.367 .30.6 6.04 3.04 2.59 70.1 9.54 28.6 10.26 l'H)72* 7.68 .35.7 0.377 29.9 5.83 2.76 2.71 72.9 9.02 .3.3.1 8.19 IM()73* 7.46 32.7 0.350 29.5 5.58 3.01 2.43 69.5 8.80 31.5 9.91 I'I"(I74' .5.96 40.7 0.398 .33.3 5.97 4..30 2.54 78.8 7.42 26.2 8.85 l'F()75* 5.97 .34.8 0..367 29.5 5.61 2.65 2.51 71.1 8.31 31.2 10.00 l'l-()76* 8.02 .35.5 0.374 31.8 5.98 3..34 2.66 70.1 6.81 31.1 11.00 l'l-077» 6.77 .35.3 0.303 30.3 5.49 2.56 2.06 68.7 8.91 26.3 7.69 I'Vim* 7.97 31.8 0.346 26.1 5.38 2.44 2.36 64.7 7.69 29.7 8.45 I'l-OTJ* 5.6.1 .16.1 0.386 31.8 6.06 2.63 2.60 71.0 6.47 28.0 8.82 mm' 8,51 .35.2 0.323 30.5 5.64 .3.17 2.20 68.3 9.10 26.0 8.14 IM-08r 10.96 33.9 0.387 28.3 5.59 2.97 2.65 69.5 8.30 29.9 11.34 l'H)82* 8.49 33.2 0..343 28.2 5..38 2.37 2.33 66.7 7.07 27.4 8.46 l'l'()83/I2«* 5.72 33.0 0.323 29.8 5.57 3.74 2.24 65.3 8.73 31.5 6.72 l'l-(»84* 7.12 31.9 0.259 27.1 4.89 2.38 1.73 67.2 9.97 23.8 7.29 I'I085* 9.86 36.4 0..389 31.8 6.17 .3.21 2.72 72.1 9.30 27.0 9.66 l'|-()86« 7.45 33.0 0.364 28.1 5.58 2.75 2.52 66.8 8.82 30.8 10.72 J'1'087* K.61 36.2 0.388 32.2 6.19 3.3 J 2.6() 73.2 7.64 32.7 11.18 I'I"(I88* 7.93 33.7 (1.318 28.9 5.36 3.07 2.11 66.1 6.86 26.9 7.87 l'l'()89* 7.97 35.9 0.376 30.3 5.88 3.25 2.04 72.9 8.82 29.5 10.67 IM-IWO* 7.55 .14.5 11.299 30.3 5.52 2.55 2.01 67.5 ').27 25.6 7.45 Appendix 7. Elemental Concentrations (in parts per million) for Sherds, Clays, and Sands id AS l.A l.U Nl) SM U YH rii ro CR CS 5.()6 36.4 0.295 32.0 5.48 2.36 2.04 71.6 8.99 25.6 7.89 9.29 .39.7 0.319 33.4 5.93 2.81 2.23 79.2 11.31 30.8 9.25 14..12 32.7 0.364 28.0 5.58 .3.22 2.48 65.4 8.37 28.9 10.74 IM-(W4* K.6() 34.7 0.322 30.6 5.66 2.54 2.22 69.9 10.06 29.1 8.05 I'l-O'J.i* .5.17 .34.9 0.442 29.2 5.69 2.75 3.08 70.4 8.14 31.9 5.37 8.71 36.6 0.305 32.5 5.60 2.55 2.13 72.6 9.69 27.9 8.03 l'l-()97* 12.88 35.4 0.326 .30.7 5.56 3..34 2.20 72.2 9.38 31.5 12.13 38.5 0.303 .14.0 6.12 3.53 2.08 75.4 9.79 28.4 8.95 I'l-O'J'J* 7..12 32.2 0.293 27.8 5.19 2.38 2.(K) 65.4 9.20 24.3 5.95 I'I'KH)* 9.79 36.5 0.305 31.0 5.69 2.47 2.09 71.3 10.50 28.4 7.57 I'l-inp .5.28 30.8 0.329 28.0 5.17 2.41 2.26 60.2 8.52 .14.2 5.61 6.(19 34.1 0.323 30.4 5.48 2.88 2.16 65.3 9.28 26.5 7.58 I'FIO.T 6.01 32.8 0..349 31.2 5.79 3.05 2.39 65.8 11.47 26.9 10.54 J'l-HM' 5.79 33.5 0.4(M) 30.6 5.55 3.07 2.80 64.3 7.68 32.0 10.37 I'l-lOS* 8.49 .36.7 0.331 32.4 5.81 3.05 2.29 71.7 9.67 29.2 8.53 7.76 37.4 0.300 31.5 5.84 2.96 2.08 75.4 9.81 26.4 7.55 7.06 33.4 0.310 31.4 5.44 2.70 2.13 66.9 10.15 27.8 7.63 8.(>H 3(».h 0.363 29.(1 5.84 2.61 2.35 69.3 10.24 29.5 8.21 l'M(W 8.40 .35.8 0.337 .10.1 5.63 2.70 2..14 69.5 9.27 28.3 6.02 I'l-no' ll.(W .35.9 0..343 29.1 5.84 2.88 2..35 71.3 9.85 29.1 9.58 ri'iiiK 8.50 42.3 0..352 37.1 6.14 2.82 2.29 82.3 9.40 28.5 7.77 I'M 12* 10.74 34.0 0..38I 28.8 5.57 2.91 2.56 68.4 8.11 28.3 12.91 I'lll.v 5.23 43.8 0.413 35.7 6.67 2.66 2.'J8 82.9 7.71 .10.3 8.20 I'l l N* 8.01 35.9 0.469 Z'!.') 5.84 2.'J2 ()8.0 7.70 30.3 9.07 Appendix 7. Elemental Concentrations (in parts per million) for Sherds, Clays, and Sands lid AS I.A I.U ND SM U YH CI- CO CR CS I'l-ns* 7.74 36.) 0.319 28.6 5.58 2.18 2.15 69.9 8.99 27.1 7.39 ll..'i5 3.-5.6 0.363 29.7 5.94 2.85 2.49 69.4 9.50 26.9 9.06 7.W 31.4 0.359 25.8 5.27 3.06 2.48 62.1 8.68 25.7 7.39 n-iiBB 20.46 40.4 0.426 31.5 5.95 3.77 3.03 81.2 8.57 25.1 12.46 I'l-I I'J* 14.1'J 41.0 0.633 32.9 6.94 3.32 4.43 80.9 10.46 40.3 8.00 13.71 0.393 29.7 5.89 3.52 2.71 70.3 9.93 31.9 13..33 l'ri2Wl22* 6.46 2'J.S 0.287 25.3 4.81 2.34 1.89 58.0 8.32 24.3 5.52 I'l-I 23• fi.'J4 3.3.2 0.383 28.4 5.58 2.68 2.53 66.1 8.17 28.3 11.00 »'FI24* •J.'JB 40.7 0.414 32.7 6.18 2.73 2.85 79.5 7.74 29.9 7.94 IM'US* 10.43 3.'i.2 0.497 29.8 5.75 2.70 3.25 69.2 8.37 26.5 8.32 l'FI26* 6..3.i 32.9 0.497 26.7 5.49 2.82 3.36 64.3 7.79 27.8 5..38 nM27* 7.83 34.6 0.474 27.4 5.65 2.33 3.08 67.6 8.51 29.5 9.18 IM'129* K.I2 44.0 0.514 41.1 7.85 3.18 3.38 96.4 8.00 30.8 9.97 I'l-l.lO* 6.86 38.1 0.462 33.0 6.41 3.09 3.26 76.0 8.97 32.0 10.18 9.S1 0.402 27.5 5.95 3.07 2.84 69.1 7.56 34.5 11.50 l'l-132* 7.(>8 33.5 0.441 26.7 5.29 2.77 2.96 60.6 7.65 33.3 10.16 n-133' 8..^! .34.4 0.369 27.4 5.60 2.28 2.48 67.8 7.43 28.2 8..34 'J.27 34.1 0.398 29.5 5.75 3.39 2.59 69.0 7.06 28.4 9.23 I'll 35* .S.83 39.0 0.406 31.8 6.16 2.87 2.80 77.0 8.54 30.6 10.54 I'I'I36* 4.K3 37.1 0.438 30.8 6.03 3.04 3.01 72.4 8.21 30.8 9.16 ni37' 7.(M 3.3.1 0.4.34 27.7 5.61 4.17 3.01 64.0 6.28 23.5 21.29 I'I13K* 6.^1 38.0 0.427 32.2 6.2(1 3.44 2.93 7(1.7 9.18 32.8 10.12 I'M 39* 7*n 37.0 0.403 31.1 5.88 2.63 2.77 72.3 8.1(1 31.1 9..1(i I'IMO* 33.7 (1,397 5.71 3.43 2.73 (|9.2 31.2 11.08 Appendix 7. Elemental Concentrations (in parts per million) for Sherds, Clays, and Sands a AS LA l-U NO SM U Y» C1-: CO CU CH T141' 10.14 .18.1 0.319 31.5 5.98 2.41 2.28 76.0 10.65 27.7 8.26 'I-N2' 4.90 .14. !> 0.417 28.7 5.79 2..32 2.84 70.6 7.79 28.1 8.29 8.5(> 36 8 0.319 29.3 5.66 2.86 2.28 72.3 9.66 29.1 8.07 'I144' «.77 .164 0.451 31.7 6.26 3.43 3.12 71.5 8.58 31.3 9.19 'I-145* 4.W .36,'J 0.343 .30.1 6.13 3.49 2.48 71.3 9.00 26.3 19.91 'I-146* 11.51 410 0.576 40.8 8.20 2.70 3.94 94.7 8.16 28.9 9.75 'I'I47* 11.77 .13.« 0.540 31.8 5.82 3.28 3.65 65.7 8.08 29.4 9.33 •II4H* 6.06 414 0.418 33.5 6.25 2..35 2.92 78.2 7.45 28.7 9.12 >|-14'J* 8.K5 33 9 0.448 29.2 5.85 2.2K 2.y« 65.7 7.2H 27.6 8.05 •ri.M)* 8.2'J 370 0.405 31.5 5.81 2.52 2.74 6K.8 7.89 27.2 8.56 •I-ISM 6.45 .380 0.407 33.5 6.32 2.74 2.88 75.1 8.37 27.9 9.23 •II52' 7.14 42.6 0.402 .34.4 6.67 2.65 2.76 8.3.1 8.70 30.6 9.52 •M.VT 0.44 .38 3 0.449 31.4 6.15 2.82 3.(m 71.8 8.31 27.1 8.66 'l'l.'>4* 6.67 .34.4 0.3KK 30.8 6.08 2.96 2.68 70.2 7.34 25.9 7.31 S.'J'J 37.6 0.414 31.6 6.25 3.91 2.85 72.6 7.05 30.0 15.64 'Mi?* 6.75 .168 0.457 32.3 6.23 .1.37 3.09 74.2 9.28 30.0 9.63 'MSH* .1.02 32 2 0.414 27.6 5.40 2.69 2.88 63.3 7.96 26.7 5.77 7.'J6 37(1 0.446 29.5 6.07 3.31 2.99 70.7 8.11 28.9 11.62 6.25 .36 6 0.265 29.5 5.63 2.44 1.78 70.9 13.75 25.2 6.86 'I16I* 15.H6 35 9 0.403 29.7 5.91 3.57 2.6(. 72.1 10.20 28.9 17.22 •n62* 1 I.K.I 32 2 0..353 29.2 5.48 3.45 2.37 6K.2 HM2 25.7 13.44 •I-163* 1.1.74 35 8 ()..149 30.4 5.48 2.44 2.32 72.5 7.87 28.1 19.16 '1'1(.4* 11 .K.l 33 1 0..3li4 26.9 5.45 2.42 2.42 (>K.3 9.4 (. 24.0 26.21 Ml OS* K.Kd 35 9 (1.317 31.(1 5.(i6 2.7(1 2.22 73.9 7.7(1 s*fw«wik*w|pieepiewwwFPi Appendix 7. Elemental Concentrations (in parts per million) for Sherds, Clays, and Sands Aniil AS I.A l.U Nl) SM U YH Cli CO CR ca I'l-K.fi* 12.(M .14.6 0.121 27.8 5.16 2.11 2.25 65.6 7.58 24.3 22.79 l'I'167* .14.'J ()..147 30.2 5..18 2.50 2.41 71.0 8..16 29.4 19.02 1.1.66 .14.4 0..142 27.5 5.33 2.17 2.35 71.0 8.18 31.0 18.(>9 I'lU.'r l.l.d'J .11.7 O.KW 26.8 5.05 2.12 2.06 66.9 8.44 24.5 32.20 l'|-17()* l'J.68 .14.5 0.241 27.4 5.14 2.88 1.61 68.8 7.40 21.4 27.85 I'l'l71* 8.()'J .14.1 0.106 .10.2 5.73 2.44 2.12 69.2 I0..18 23.3 9.76 I'I'I72» .1."J4 .14..1 (1.575 32.5 6.28 3.22 3.94 72.8 8.02 28.0 4.99 I'M 73* 8.'J.S .15.7 0.112 31.5 5.'J6 2.64 2.15 71.7 13.05 31.7 8.54 ril74* n..i.s .11.5 0.167 27.'J 5.50 3.80 2.46 66.2 8.44 30.2 10.26 I'l-I75* .5.48 .18.4 0.744 .16.2 7.17 .1.71 4.95 85.3 8.32 32.7 6.62 l'l'l76* 7.57 .15 .'J 0.187 33.0 6.(H) 2.'J7 2.7 J 71.5 7.57 26.9 8.42 I'ri77' 7.'J2 .15.1 0..10'J 28.2 5.68 2.45 2.14 71.4 11.13 28.1 8.77 I'I'I7«* 'J. 76 .16.'J 0.315 32.4 6.02 2.51 2..14 75.2 13.46 31.2 8.72 l'l'17'J* 'J.75 40.0 0.376 34.8 6.5'J 3.34 2.57 79.8 9.33 29.2 10.17 I'llS.T 5.25 .18.8 0.402 .13.7 6.21 2.62 2.77 75.5 K.I 3 31.2 9.26 8.81 .14.4 0.425 10.0 5.82 3.3') 2.'J6 70.5 8..15 .10.0 10.44 I'lMKS* 6.')2 40.2 0.422 .15.7 6.55 3.2'J 2.9K 78.K 1(1.51 37.5 9.85 7.40 .15..1 ().2W 2'.;..i 5.4.1 2.61 2.07 66.6 «.65 25.9 5.61 l'M«7» 8.07 .15.1 0..180 31.0 5.78 2.62 2.66 69.7 8.45 33.7 10.45 niH8* ').(n 58.4 0..101 47.8 7.67 2.4'J 2.20 117.6 KI.O'J 28.3 8.11 IM'IK'r 7.47 11.7 0..101 30.0 5.48 2.5'J 2.08 67.(1 'V.5 1 29.6 6.39 I'i'l'JO* H.I,'J .14.4 0.405 30.(> 5.'<5 3..18 2.82 70.5 7.17 .10.4 11.92 I'll')!* K.dl .15.1 0.121 32.0 5.«5 2.()5 2.14 70.4 11.75 29.5 7.52 IMI'U* 10.14 15.5 0.12(1 31.0 5.70 1.(10 2.11 't.H ? 29.6 K.46 ^ iwwewwe Appendix 7. Elemental Concentrations (in parts per million) for Sherds, Clays, and Sands Anil] AS l.A I.U Nl) SM U YB CH CO CR CS IM'IO.I* (.,51 .17.2 0.4(H 32.5 6.57 3.34 2.81 75.2 7.53 31.0 11,49 7.80 .14.7 0.313 .10.4 5.63 2.71 2.24 68.7 10.21 26.2 7,53 I'M'JS* (..98 .1.1.2 0.295 28.2 5.25 2,45 1.95 64,9 9,51 26,0 7.11 I'll'Jfi* (>.01 .18.0 0.324 31.3 5.92 2.60 2.16 72,5 9,97 28,2 8,25 I'l'l'J?* 8.02 38.2 0.4(M 31,7 6.52 3.20 2.77 76,6 8,(H) 33.1 14,17 I'M'JK* .1,87 .17.7 0.470 .14.5 6.41 2,97 .1.21 76,1 7,91 29.9 8,49 I'liyy 6.68 .16.2 (1.407 31.5 6,05 3,75 2.78 72,4 7,00 25.9 18.92 l'l-2()l)* 10,21 36.7 0.325 31.2 5.95 3,07 2.23 71,3 10,06 27.8 8.02 7.6.'» 34.5 0.294 29.9 5.55 2,47 2,06 67.7 9.29 27.3 7.29 l'l-2()2* .•5.20 .13.3 0.370 24,9 5.41 1,95 2.68 65.8 8,62 30.4 5.70 lM-2()3* 5,62 39.2 0.496 33.0 6,76 3.97 3.42 80.7 7,.19 28.2 5.30 l'l'2(M* 6.46 36.7 0.367 28,3 5,77 3.45 2.40 70.7 7,67 36.5 7.05 n-2()5* 7,86 38.2 0.372 29.6 6,08 2.56 2.60 74,5 8.48 28.8 8.74 l'l'2()f)* 9.70 32.0 0.338 24,4 5,12 2,92 2..12 63,7 7.71 25.8 6.70 l'l'2()7* 4.56 .18,3 (t.5l2 33.9 6.74 3.08 3.73 78.5 7.85 .10.9 5.40 l'l'2(m* 4.01 .15.7 0.371 31,3 5,76 2,44 2.67 68.4 8.37 29,2 8.77 l'l'2()'J* 6.60 33.7 0.275 26,5 5,18 2.61 1.87 64.6 9.43 25,1 7.24 l'l'2l()* 11.65 37.7 0.375 28.6 6,17 3,.14 2.64 72.5 9..14 27,8 10.56 n-211* 9.65 .18.1 0.381 29.1 6,12 3.03 2.57 75.7 9.46 29,5 10.53 I'l'2l2* 6.07 .14.7 0.401 25.9 5,78 3.54 2.71 67.7 8.89 31,7 9,75 I'I2I.1« 11.81 .16.3 (I,.167 25.5 5,29 2.81 2.51 67.3 8.12 31,2 6,78 l'l'214* 6.25 37.0 0.446 30.8 5.87 .1.16 3.09 70.6 8.22 31,7 9,39 I'l215* K.8.3 41.1 0.421 .12.5 5.86 2.71 2,81 79.(1 7.55 27,3 8.77 I'r2l(.* 3(1.8 0.311 28.8 5.94 2.37 2.24 71.7 I2.(i0 31.(. 8,11 Appendix 7. Elemental Concentrations (in parts per million) for Sherds, Clays, and Sands lilt AS I.A I.U NIJ •SM U YH CI- CO CR CS l'l-217' 0.24 .14.9 0.174 10.6 5.91 2.48 2.59 68.8 7.49 29.0 8.98 7.44 .17.1 0.490 26.7 .5.61 2.99 1..18 70.1 8.64 27.5 9.65 l'l'274' 7.91 .1.5.1 0.101 .14.4 6.06 2..18 2.07 71.4 13.02 32.5 7.61 n-275* 7.7(> .16.9 0.1.15 12.8 5.97 3.25 2..13 69.2 9.98 28.7 7.57 i'1'276* 4.8.1 64.9 0.508 44.0 7.58 3.45 1.48 110.6 7.45 29.2 5.44 l'l'277* 7,.17 .18.1 0.190 .15.9 6.55 .1.51 2.77 76.2 8.09 28.6 7.67 »'l'278* 7.77 4.1.1) 0.470 40.5 7..18 3.96 3.28 91.2 7.70 29.5 5.97 l'l-27'J» 6.12 .1.5.3 0.202 29.2 5.45 1.25 1.96 66.6 8.76 25.3 7.20 l'l-2K()* 7.42 .1.5.8 0.126 10.4 5.61 2.81 2.21 69.9 9.61 25.9 6.58 PI28r y.48 .11).2 0.411 26.1 .5.28 3.40 2.88 62.6 9.13 31.7 9.86 l'l-282* 6.77 10.4 0..191 25.4 4.81 3.21 2.65 58.2 8.37 27.4 9.06 l'l'2H.T 8.6.5 1.1.6 0.122 11.0 5.68 .1.1.5 2.18 65.6 10.74 26.7 8.28 n-284' 7.27 .1.5.5 0.118 29.4 .5.67 2.73 2.19 69.2 10.09 28.5 7.93 l'l-285* 6.11 .1.5.9 0.426 10.9 5.89 3.78 2.80 70.9 7.78 .14.7 7.21 ri-286* 9.12 .14.2 0.4.18 11.1 6.29 3.86 2.90 71.9 7.14 28.1 11..18 1M787* lt)..S.1 17.9 ()..192 12.9 6.46 3.66 2.(.6 74.1 9.80 28.9 10.98 l'l'288* 11.80 11.9 0.4(M 11.0 6.07 4.14 2.81 71.1 9.46 27.8 11.51 l'l-2«'J* 6.72 27.7 0.240 21.6 4.41 2.28 1.62 55.5 8.12 21.9 5.51 l'F2'JI)* 9.26 .1S.1 0..184 .10.2 5.82 3.65 2.52 67.7 7.97 27.2 8.51 l'l-2Vl* 7.24 .18.1 0..160 12.6 6.18 .1.21 2.45 74.0 8.88 26.8 5.80 ri'2'J2* .1.1.2.5 44.0 0.481 .14.5 6.98 1.97 1,29 89.4 10.09 11.9 I4..14 l'l'.147' 8.67 .15.1 0.407 .10,8 5.79 2.62 2,81 66.8 8.11 .10.1 7.62 IM-34K* 11.42 .15,5 0.425 29. 5.78 1.18 2,84 (>7,4 8.44 .10.6 9.02 7.12 15.2 0.124 2K,1 5.(i6 1.11 2,24 (i7,0 K.59 2K.2 6.71 L/1 Appendix 7. Elemental Concentrations (in parts per million) for Sherds, Clays, and Sands \id AS l.A l.U NO SM U YH (Ui CO CR CS I'laio* 7.24 32.9 0.316 32.2 .'5..'S7 2.95 2.11 67.1 12.65 27.1 7.67 1 • .^.83 33.8 0.430 31.1 .5.72 .3..30 2.88 66.1 8.04 31.0 7.94 (1.74 38.3 0.443 30.6 5.98 3.27 3.04 70.7 8.90 31.9 9.58 .i.7() 37.4 0.433 30.0 6.18 3.78 3.01 73.9 9.11 .30.5 9.21 36.9 0.3.36 31.8 5.75 3.25 2.23 70.5 10.09 28.9 7.20 l'l-35.S* 7.1)3 34.2 0.422 .30.7 5.86 3..38 3.00 65.8 8.22 31.0 9.72 7.1.i 32.7 0.396 32.2 5.62 2.93 2.78 64.1 8.25 30.1 7.92 riOSB* 8.07 .34.7 0.404 29.1 5.70 2.73 2.70 65.4 8.24 29.1 7.21 9.88 32.3 0..354 28.9 5.63 3.20 2.44 62.2 9.33 27.6 8.95 I'l-.lriO* 6,2U 37.8 0.413 32.9 6.14 3.12 2.90 75.3 8.86 32.8 9.65 IMMhr 33.9 0.377 28.8 5.81 2.69 2.62 65.4 12.71 31.0 8.5(1 l'l-37«* (>.6h 32.7 0..373 28.7 5.47 2.96 2.55 63.2 n.45 2(1.9 7.41 I'l'.iyy 9.91) .32.3 0..360 2.i.9 5.(M 2.43 2.39 63.4 7.08 24.3 17.22 l'l'38()* 6.8.'» .3.3.7 0..361 29.2 5.70 2.31 2.63 67.5 10.14 .30.5 8.86 l'l-38l* .30.32 46.7 0.437 33.8 6.50 4.11 3.20 86.8 10.04 23.2 18.77 l'l'382' 10.41 .34.2 0.370 29..5 5.65 2.81 2.62 65.5 7.80 33.9 9..36 n383* 39.7 0.4 l.n 32.9 6.85 2.96 3.02 76.4 11.01 .34.1 9.17 l'l-384* .^.23 .34.4 0.386 29.2 5.73 3.14 2.(>8 68.9 9.84 34.3 6.67 I'l"38S • 8.70 31.6 0..344 27.2 5..35 3.11 2.41 61.0 10.93 29.7 7.00 I'I386 8.90 36 1 0.317 32.1 5.62 2.97 2.37 72.1 9.85 29.0 8.01 l'l-387 9.40 33.3 0..398 27.1 5.73 3.65 2.58 67.8 7..30 27.7 10.55 l'l'388 7.53 .38.2 0.320 31.3 6.21 2.90 2.11 74.0 10.4(1 28.3 7,65 l'l-3H'J 7.22 37.1 0.109 34.6 5.79 3.99 3.23 70,4 8.32 .3.3.1 4.49 l'13«Jl) S.lh 37.3 0.384 30,2 6.42 2.50 2.(.3 75,5 12.20 38,7 l(),2l) Appendix 7. Elemental Concentrations (in parts per million) (or Sherds, Clays, and Sands tiiil AS 1 A l.U Nl> SM U Yll Cli c:o CR c:s ri.TJi 4.37 .34..') 0..380 49.8 .'>.82 2.S8 2.56 67.3 8.76 36.3 5.32 8.40 3.S.8 (1.420 29.9 6.27 3.24 2.62 70.7 10.13 .35.2 10.93 I'l'.TAI 11.09 .36..i 0.36.i 32..5 6..36 .3.27 2..35 71.0 9.55 29.3 9.32 J 2.06 .3.'5,7 0.443 29.2 6.29 3.89 3.00 74.4 9.74 27.9 9.78 l'l-.V)5 7.'J8 34.2 (I..351 .'58.2 6.02 2.94 2.29 69.0 12.25 30.6 7.03 I'l-.WO 6.24 36.6 0.371 31.7 6.48 3..'50 2.48 73.4 10.65 36.3 9.31 J'l'.W? 'J.,S3 .38.2 0.373 .30.7 6.37 4.06 2.55 77.0 9.82 29.6 10.61 I'l-.VJK .S.40 3S..'> 0.364 31.4 6.13 3.19 2.52 74.0 12.16 41.5 7.90 8..*iO 38..'i 0.392 .32.7 6..16 3.99 2.68 76.5 9.59 27.5 10.40 1>1'4()() 13.y'J 37.2 0.363 27.S 6.47 3.58 2.7(1 72.9 9.90 31.2 9.52 I'HOl Anid AS l-A I.U NO SM U YH ai CO CH CS l'F4I5 5,13 0.55) .34.1 7.58 5.13 3.58 03.9 9.24 33.7 5.66 l'l-416 5.38 0.458 37.8 7.59 3.74 3.46 93.9 14.87 40.5 11.95 l'l'417 13,37 0..16I 30.2 5.72 2.89 2.58 7.3.1 8.28 28.6 20.09 I'l-418 12.21) 0.365 25.1 5-33 3.59 2.68 63.8 10.15 25.6 14.25 I'Rl'J n.7i 0.33'.) 31.5 5.65 1.94 2.59 71.9 8.66 27.1 .34.83 l'l'420 6.66 0.410 30.6 6.52 3.90 2.98 78.6 8.46 35.9 17.37 IM-421 n.8«.) 0.348 29.0 5.54 2.32 2.31 71.0 K.53 27.5 27.-36 IM'422 1 l.'J.S 0.339 27.7 5.37 2.46 2.26 69.6 7.87 29.9 19.41 l'l"42.1 M.H6 0.370 22.6 5.27 3.03 2.65 69.7 8.17 25.3 22.58 IM'424 10.18 0.380 29.1 6.39 3.83 3.01 79.0 9.85 31.3 11.72 IMM25 11.56 0.375 30.2 5.37 2.25 2.65 71.9 7.74 28.2 15.59 l'l-42r. 15.21 0..362 .37.2 6.04 2.37 2.76 75.3 K.82 27.9 20.03 n-427 5.'J3 0.2'Jl) 29.1 5.95 2.30 2.40 74.6 11.53 28.9 8.73 1'1'428 4.-35 0.215 3K.0 5.55 3.02 1.52 68.6 14.24 24.1 4.82 l'r42'J 16.-35 0.397 29.3 5.96 3.79 2.71 72.9 10.85 29.1 17.17 n-4.1() 14.76 0.3B9 28.3 5.90 4.38 2.55 68.3 10.38 28.1 16.88 13,42 0.347 31.6 5.63 2.47 2.52 72.6 8.90 28.4 .36.07 l'l'432 10.47 0.335 29.6 5.26 1.77 2.46 68.6 7.72 26.1 14.41 I'r434 4.73 0.608 33.1 7.16 6.16 4.73 83.2 8.54 31.3 5.02 l'l-43.S 15.2'J 0..364 28.3 5.47 2.26 2.50 69.0 8.23 28.3 27.86 l'l'4.16 14.70 0.3K4 29.8 5.74 4.58 2.72 69.2 10.10 28.4 16.86 l'l'437 12.66 0.359 24,8 5.46 1.88 2.55 69,8 8.21 28.8 27.64 1'I4.18 8.83 0.353 33,8 6-36 3.29 2.3K 74.3 10,82 29.4 8.46 l'l'4.VJ 6.1'^ 0.467 3«,4 6,39 3-05 3-5) 75.3 9,07 30,7 0.73 Appendix 7. Elemental Concentrations (in parts per million) for Sherds, Clays, and Sands AniJ AS I.A I.U Nl) SM U YH CI- CO cu CS n'4-K) 6.84 .19.4 0.406 .1.1.1 6.45 2.83 .1.14 75.9 9.02 30.9 9.42 7.1)1 .11.4 0.490 29.0 5.57 4.16 .3.47 69.9 8.54 29.1 8.03 l'l'442 4.17 32.0 0.709 26.9 5.43 3.(M 4..18 66.7 8.19 28.4 5.75 I'l-m.l 6.72 38.5 0.419 .15.9 6..18 2.81 2.77 78.3 8.85 30.0 8.41 .1.40 37.4 0.574 .14.1 6.56 .1.51 3.92 79.2 8.38 29.3 5.43 l'|-445 5.84 38.0 0.357 32.1 6.17 3.22 2.20 76.6 10.92 30.4 8.71 l'l'44<> 12.85 47.8 0.424 .14.8 6.82 5.17 .1.10 94.8 12.46 32.8 11.41 l'l"447 5.86 .35.4 0.367 29.0 5.95 2.36 2.82 71.1 8.56 32.9 9.45 IM'44H 6.52 4\.H 0.430 38.2 6.66 2.H3 3.29 85.3 8.69 33.3 9.24 l'l'44'J 7.77 38.8 0.429 .14.3 6.67 3.57 2.90 82.1 8.23 28.2 9.05 l»l-450 6.21 40.4 0.537 .3.1.1 6.46 2.75 4.04 81.6 9.06 31.7 9.68 l'F451 4.86 37.5 0.385 33.0 6.17 3.69 2.92 79.3 9.07 31.2 8.98 l'l'452 7.85 36.8 0.423 32.2 5.98 3.43 .1.21 72.4 9.71 .15.6 10.10 l'l"453 6..16 40.8 0.395 .38.7 6.69 2.37 3.08 86.2 9.11 32.3 9.76 l'l"454 7.49 39.9 0.439 28.0 6.62 3.61 3.26 81.0 9.39 29.5 9.24 l'l'4S5 8.76 37.4 0.409 .10.1 6.14 2.56 3..33 72.8 8.47 29.1 9.74 PI456 5.46 .35.9 0.394 25.6 5.96 .1.49 2.56 69.2 8.94 32.0 8.56 n^57 8.OT 37.6 0.340 26.9 6.11 2.89 2.19 71.6 10.36 32.3 R.40 l'R58 6.22 39.5 0.396 26.6 6.46 2.95 2.67 79.4 9.36 31.1 9.04 I'IM.VJ 7.07 40.0 0.441 26.5 6.64 3.50 2.64 77.9 9.46 .15.8 12.79 l'l-46() 8.71 37.0 0.332 37.5 6.02 2.81 2.57 71.7 10.92 29.2 8..35 l'l'46l 21.24 .35.6 0.353 24.8 5.98 3.7tl 2.27 71.5 9.83 36.4 23.61 I'r462 5.'J1 34.3 0.374 24.9 5.63 3.06 2.52 68.8 8.57 33.5 10.45 l'l'463 4.H1 37.6 24.8 5.96 4.54 5.02 73.7 7.47 30.4 5..30 Appendix 7. Elemental Concentrations (in parts per million) tor Sherds. Clays, and Sands nil) AS 1,A l.U ND SM U Y» CU CO CK CS l'l'464 8.33 35.0 0.407 26.5 5.80 3.22 2.69 68.9 8.62 30.9 7.47 l'l'465 1(I.3'J 38.4 0.427 25.5 6.07 3.64 2.79 76.2 8.42 31.8 8.33 J'I'46A 7.97 .36.7 0.310 27.3 6.32 3.04 2.38 74.6 1.3.45 33.2 8.25 IM'467 7.44 35.2 0.333 25.0 5.77 3.40 2.12 68.7 10.55 28.8 8.12 IM'468 •J.(M .36.0 0.299 25.8 5.68 3.08 1.95 72.8 0.78 26.9 5.89 l*l''46'J 13.69 37. J 0.398 28.9 6..36 4.21 2.51 76.6 10.51 32.8 9.96 JT470 7.36 37.3 0.320 27.2 5.81 2.74 2.03 68.7 12.43 30.3 7.56 l'l'47l 13.2.-5 33.3 0.302 24.6 5.56 3.46 1.99 65.6 10.53 27.0 7.59 l'F472 7.64 37.6 0.390 28.2 6.32 3.95 2.44 74.0 8.94 36.9 10.62 PI-473 9.00 35.6 0.427 24.1 5.93 3.21 2.77 67.2 8.50 31.8 9.70 lM-474 9.10 38.3 0..391 27.0 6.61 3.37 2.61 76.4 8.75 33.8 9.90 rr475 6.54 37.6 0.423 29.7 6..34 .3.19 2.62 74.3 8.71 .32.1 9.96 l'I-476 7.96 .34.0 0.316 25.3 5.71 3..39 1.98 68.4 11.25 28.0 8.02 l»R77 29.9 0.308 21.4 5.20 2.85 2.17 60.4 11.32 26.0 6.95 I'r478 .34.2 0.314 26.7 5.88 2.94 2.01 70.8 1.3.18 33.2 8.56 l'F479 6.32 .36.8 0.372 26.6 6.27 3.04 2..37 75.0 8.94 31.3 8.73 Pl"480 7.58 32.3 0.660 22.1 5.62 3.50 4..39 64.5 8.46 29.6 8.01 IM"482 6.49 34.7 0..393 .35.7 6.00 3.17 2.66 68.2 7.61 29.1 8.76 PI-483 7.86 .35.1 0.475 32.9 5.62 3.24 2.91 68.5 8.78 31.3 10..38 l'F484 9.64 40.3 0.407 26.5 6.00 3.95 2.70 77.3 9.33 32.9 10.74 l'F485 8.13 35.9 0.310 28.3 5.97 3.37 2.32 71.3 10.98 27.1 8.36 l'F48') 91.5 14.92 54.1 18.83 Appendix 7. Elemental Concentrations (in parts per million) lor Sherds, Clays, and Sands Anid AS I.A I.U NO SM U YH c:i£ CO cu CS I'l'SN 1.5.46 31.1 0.364 25.1 4.60 3.26 2.54 57.2 4.01 18.2 8.05 I'l'SlS 6.20 33.4 0.430 30.3 5.82 .3.21 3.04 67.1 11.68 34.1 9.51 IM'SUt 7.8S 35.2 0.4(»0 20.6 6.16 3.05 3.10 71.5 7.70 28.5 0.14 I'rsi? 6.4« 35.7 0.321 40.0 5.76 .3.18 2..15 73.2 10.40 26.8 7.00 I'F5I8 7.62 30.6 0..370 .34.1 6.57 2.89 2.55 R2.4 0.78 29.0 10.65 6.45 38.4 0.377 30.5 6.41 3.41 2.68 77.2 0.27 38.0 10.40 6.2« 37.5 0.327 .12.2 5.04 .3.01 2.46 74.1 10.06 26.7 8.32 PI'S 21 6.H) .35.6 0.333 30.7 5.71 3.30 2.32 71.0 10.89 29.4 8.30 JM-522 9.H7 36.6 0.4 U 21.5 6.(K> 3.63 2.95 76.2 9.20 39.9 11.15 PF52.1 8.85 37.8 0.430 33.0 6.78 .3.14 .3.01 78.0 9.63 29,7 0.46 P1'.'S24 7.03 .35.4 0.314 33.6 5.71 2.83 2.17 72.9 10.76 26.0 8.37 PF52S 4.50 37.0 0.411 28.5 6.19 2.29 3.07 74.6 8.84 31.6 9.40 I'l\i26 4.45 .35.3 0.576 29.4 5.06 3.40 3.88 72.4 8.15 27.6 6.61 n-527 .3.52 .38.1 0.480 33.4 6.67 4.35 3.49 80.3 8.17 30.4 6.03 Pl-528 5.22 34.0 0.440 29.7 6.12 3.84 3.22 70.9 8.85 32.1 9.86 PF52') 8.42 35.0 0.418 25.8 5.93 5.47 2.80 70.2 8.64 .30.7 9.55 l'l"53() 8.6(1 37.0 0.416 32.3 6.56 3.56 2.04 70.8 10.00 30.5 11.10 6.82 32.8 0.457 24.5 5.71 4.32 2.00 60.3 8.14 28.2 16.02 Pr532 7.36 36.5 0.303 29.3 6.05 2.82 2.06 76.4 12.07 32.8 8.47 5.95 35.7 0.300 30.6 5.02 3.27 3.18 70.7 8.32 36.2 8.22 Pl'534 'J.42 .38.2 0.400 .34.3 6.56 2.62 .3.10 76.6 11.10 30.7 14.93 Pl'535 4.05 43.0 0.402 34.1 6.38 2.53 3.14 85.0 8.78 33.8 8.21 PI'S 30 1(1.67 36.0 (I..107 25.5 (1.23 2.14 I.OK 72.6 12..16 38.4 7.00 l'l-.537 8,01 33.7 0.380 31.5 5.(.7 3.62 2.60 66.0 10.06 28.4 8.22 Appendix 7. Elemental Concentrations (in parts per million) lor Sherds. Clays, and Sands till AS I.A l.U NO SM U Y» CI- CO CR CS i'i'48y KMV 4().() 0.338 31.6 6.69 3.48 2.52 78.5 10.20 23.4 22.48 12,30 41.3 0.382 .35.3 6.92 4.12 2.88 80.3 8.64 31.9 26.36 my J «.37 31.3 0.261 29.4 5.51 2.63 1.89 64.3 11.89 28.3 6.86 l'l-492 7.9.1 33.4 0.310 26.4 5.69 2.7« 2.17 69.3 10.84 28.9 8.39 7.98 32.2 0.363 21.7 5.48 2.85 2.56 64.1 8.21 28.6 7.86 6.54 39.2 0.335 29.7 6.59 2.87 2.37 76.6 9.84 31.2 8.19 l'l'4'J.i 9.7« 36.7 0.319 30.6 6.15 3.03 2.44 74.7 11.11 30.3 8.16 l'l'496 7.4.3 m5 0.317 .34.9 6.10 2.96 2.38 78.9 10.15 29.5 8.19 1»I-4U7 4..'i| 3.5.4 0.319 28.6 5.64 2.93 2.28 72.9 8.53 24.9 6.49 IM'4'JK 8.31 36.4 0.540 30.2 6.25 3.05 3.65 74.6 8.93 30.8 9.76 |.|.-499 l().7.S 34.6 0.375 27.5 5.78 2.81 2.69 71.3 9.58 .33.4 7.29 I'l'SOO 1()..S4 32.8 0.410 2K.8 5.64 2.98 3.03 64.3 8.66 30.5 9.78 I'FSOl 9. IS 37.9 0.343 .35.5 6.13 3.05 2.60 74.3 10.57 27.3 7.68 l'l'.'502 8.73 3.5.4 f).462 27.9 6.14 2.83 3..34 68.7 8.04 29.7 8.79 l'l<503 6..Sf> 37.1 0.431 33.4 6.21 2.89 3.14 72.8 9.78 31.8 9.63 l'l'5()5 4.43 39.3 0.510 31.9 6.40 3.42 3.75 73.8 8.74 .30.5 8.37 I'F.iOf) 8.12 36.5 0.380 .36.0 6.03 .3.81 2.95 70.8 7.96 .35.1 8.57 PF307 3.98 34.8 0.411 25.0 6.06 3.42 3.09 72.0 9.10 34.1 9.63 lM-508 1(1.23 36.4 0.392 2K.0 6.13 3.10 2.77 71.7 9.52 31.8 10.36 l'l<509 11.5(1 31.5 0.375 28.1 5.42 3.7.1 2.47 66.3 8.52 26.3 9.4 7 I'l-.SIO .1.(M 42.1 0.483 29.6 6.53 3.05 .1.24 82.0 7.93 29.1 8..33 mil .5.99 32.H 0.4t)2 26.2 5.87 2.53 2.92 (>6.0 7.90 30.2 8.01 I'l-512 8.04 36.8 0.435 25.2 6.31 2.7(1 2.9K 73.7 8.86 32.9 9.77 I'ISM .'i.92 35.7 0.426 29.6 6.10 .1.01 2.«8 72.2 9.37 .14.1 10.70 Appendix 7. Elemental Concentrations (in parts per million) for Sherds, Clays, and Sands iiiU i;u Mi III- Hll SH SC SK lA IB HI ZN ttrth: From SimJy Area ».(W4 3030S.7 5.93 155.7 1.094 9.43 353.5 I.no 0.659 14.1 74.6 l'F(K)2* l.2-t(l .36497.9 6.98 132.7 l.(MO 9.00 421.3 0.968 0.623 12.2 73.5 I'l-OO.l* 1.316 31429.6 6.97 167.1 1.873 10.11 280.6 1.116 0.973 15.0 90.5 n-'l)04* MO? 33148.9 7.43 127.3 1.983 9.01 327.5 0.809 0.754 lO.K 79.4 1.217 .34.S87.«) 7.32 142.0 1.410 9.91 248.1 0.951 0.731 14.2 81.9 l'|-(M)6* 1.1.10 33629.5 7.67 177.5 2.107 10.39 221.3 1.060 0.740 16.6 98.1 vvimimw* 1.26.1 31279.1 6.45 145.4 1.285 9.26 324.6 1.239 0.908 13.4 75.7 l'l-()09* 1.267 .36862.3 6.52 149.8 1..343 10.66 282.9 0.928 0.872 11.4 91.3 1.2.17 31010.9 6.71 147.6 1..308 I0..30 .302.9 1.132 0.772 15.5 80.0 I'l-on* 1.J4.S 30047.0 6.27 1.59.0 1.135 9.35 329.7 1.020 0.645 12.3 73.0 I'l'OU* l.a.'iS 28164.9 6.83 145.6 1.109 10.08 320.2 2.023 0.741 12.6 63.6 I'l-Ol.l* I..198 33696.9 6.20 187.9 2.115 12.14 243.7 1.205 1.073 16.0 109.5 I'l-OH* I..1K1 3660.'5..'> 7.07 145.3 I..503 10.70 246.0 0.904 0.723 11.4 82.4 IM-015* 1.246 32606.3 6.58 1.57.3 1.682 9.92 372.1 1.172 0.915 14.9 80.8 I'I'OK)* 1.274 32166..'5 6.18 140.5 1.821 9.22 .354.2 1.229 0.933 12.9 85.5 i'roi7* 1.023 27370..'5 6.09 1.39.4 1.816 8.59 252.6 1.0.55 0.876 1.3.9 90.6 n-oiB' 1.314 32761.4 6.79 140.7 1.177 9.31 .353.2 1.294 0.748 12.8 74.5 J'lOl'J* 1.474 4.3998.9 10.75 151.1 4.757 14.14 269.4 1.596 1.067 15.5 123.1 i'r<)2<)' 1.183 26723.4 5.76 118.7 1.218 8.50 .345.1 0.989 0.758 15.1 68.8 l'IV2l* 1..34.') 32081.9 7.06 140.2 1.624 10.32 .343.4 1.096 0.798 16.2 87.0 l'HI22' 1.210 339.'il.S 5.84 1.34.0 1.211 8.58 VrJ.2 1.089 0.685 13.0 76.0 l'll)2.T 1.360 33731.0 7.3) 154.5 1.541 J 1.09 .301.1 1.278 0.807 18.2 78.4 l'Ji)24* 1.16<) 332.'>3.2 5.«'J 1 19.(1 l.O'JK 9.1)3 371 0.705 ().5()7 9.5 70.5 Appendix 7. Elemental Concentrations (in parts per million) for Sherds. Clays, and Sands iiiJ AS I.A I.U NO SM IJ YH c:h CO c:h CS 4.07 40.8 0.468 41.9 7.19 3.89 3.43 86.0 10.(H 31.0 10.81 iM'sao 12.72 38.8 0.455 31.4 6.81 3.23 2.88 78.0 12.63 37.1 17.68 .i.0.1 .35.9 0.421 32.8 6.28 .3.19 3.06 72.6 10.25 29.4 9.44 I'l-541 6.02 .39.7 0.469 33.4 6.94 2.78 3.27 78.1 9.71 .33.2 10.37 l'l'542 8.60 35.1 0.414 33.3 6.23 3.(M 2.69 69.5 11.21 33.1 12.46 1'I54.1 K.25 40.9 0.474 41.0 7.07 3.71 .3.11 79.0 12.15 .33.9 17.14 I'l.i44 8.70 47.6 0.403 47.5 6.91 3.30 3.19 97.6 10.54 30.6 10.43 l'l-S45 10.48 37.2 0.404 42.7 6.12 3.13 3.21 74.7 12.73 33.4 13.48 l'l-546 lo.iy 35.5 0.414 32.3 6.18 3.77 .3.13 72.6 10.85 40.5 17.05 l'l"547 .1.2« 41.5 0.409 .34.3 6.70 3.48 2.98 81.3 11.74 44.1 13.49 l'IV>48 0.86 36.2 0.362 37.5 6.31 3.64 2.77 73.2 9.73 28.5 10.71 IM"54'J 4.37 47.2 0..547 40.7 8.13 3.49 4.25 95.0 I2..54 41.0 8.30 I'lSSO 12.26 .36.4 0.447 33.4 6.30 3.56 3.44 71.7 9.95 36.7 12.16 l'l'55) 8.82 37.0 0.469 36.6 6.57 4.10 3.47 73.1 7.84 32.0 13.75 IM-552 14.46 37.7 0.378 40.0 6.60 3.28 2.95 76.5 10.45 31.4 11.12 I'rsss 11.7'J 39.8 0.417 38.7 6.43 2.57 .3.14 78.2 8.64 32.7 11.93 I'|-.S.i4 .S.20 .36.9 0.401 30.0 6.42 .3.91 3.08 73.8 10.98 30.0 12.93 l'l-555 (>.84 35.5 0.383 30.7 6.26 2.93 3.05 70.9 11.29 32.9 12.93 I'l-ssr. y.O'J 32.1 0..362 28.4 5.73 3.33 2.88 67.2 11.73 29.0 8.23 I'|-.i57 'J.4.1 32.4 0.380 36.0 5.57 3.04 2.H9 64.7 n.25 28.2 8.28 I'l'-VSK 6.81 .34.7 0..354 29.3 5.85 2.84 2.76 68.6 11.05 31.9 10.76 »'I'55'J (>.42 35.2 0.382 35.1 6.12 2.78 2.92 68.2 10.81 28.5 8.03 I'l'Sf.d (..IS 35.8 0.38(1 32.0 5.97 2.5K 2.80 70.(1 10.74 29.1 8.50 I'l'V)! K.IH) 35.8 0.41(1 36.6 (..31 3.78 3.31 72.8 12.98 .35.2 13.80 4^ Appendix 7. Elemental Concentrations (in parts per million) for Sherds, Clays, and Sands lid AS I.A I.U NO .SM U YH CI- CO t:K (\S .*>.21) .36.6 0.4.10 11.0 (>.26 2.81 .1.15 72.1 10.92 32.4 13.30 'J.ftd .15.4 0.1'J7 29.4 6.08 2.54 2.95 71.3 10.95 .10.2 10.47 .S.«l 41.8 (1.454 .13.5 6.70 .1..19 3.55 8.1.9 9.70 .14.6 10.01 3.(>3 .\S.8 ()..17'J 36.4 5.96 2.52 2.85 68.0 8.71 .13.3 9.83 l'l'S(.() S.84 42.6 0.486 40.0 7.57 3.22 3.82 86.1 10.77 37.3 6.93 •1.49 .TJ.y (1.610 40.6 «.I5 4.45 4.63 86.1 12.75 .15.6 14.52 l'IS6H 6.72 .14.6 0.1W 29.0 5.97 3.28 3.10 69.2 11.18 32.0 11.06 S.2K .16.'J 0.408 28.7 6.IHI 2.87 2.97 68.9 8.64 31.8 4.41 IM57(> 7.-47 .17.y ()..1(I2 29.1 5..14 3.43 1.79 72.5 12.68 24.6 8.13 PIS?! 6..iy 41.1) 0.45'J 31.0 6.87 4.41 3.56 81.2 10.25 36.4 6.95 l'|-572 12.22 40.1 0.51.1 32.5 7.26 2.50 3.81 82.5 14.19 65.7 lO.U l'l'573 4..S5 .16.2 (1.16'J 31.1 6.09 3.02 .1.11 69.0 9.18 35.2 9.08 l'l'574 'J.a 2 .17.9 0..114 .10.1 5.84 2.75 2..19 71.3 9.69 29.2 8.61 IMS7S .S.85 .14.8 0.184 28.6 5.83 2.51 2.59 (>7.7 8.05 .10.8 5.83 l'l'S7(. 12.7() .14.0 0.405 29.8 5.80 3.45 2.72 66.8 10.80 34.4 11.40 I'l-.W? .1.22 4(l..1 (1.461 32.1 6.62 3.07 2.86 81.6 10..14 .16.1 7.15 I'IV>7« 12.()7 •l.'i.'' 0.415 29.2 6.16 3.66 2.53 (|9.4 8.68 34.6 11.65 n'570 4.'J8 42..'> 0.418 12.8 6.98 3.47 2.97 84.0 9.28 35.8 6.76 IM'Smi 7. Anid AS I.A I.U NO SM U YH CI: CO ("K CS 13.23 39..i 0.423 .35.3 6.61 2.83 3.16 79.2 8.03 29.1 11.92 l'l-587 lO.'JJ 38.'J l).452 32.7 6.51 3.3'J 2.93 77.4 ll.O'J 37.2 13.32 IM-SK8 H.2(J .34.8 (1.379 29.3 5.82 2.81 2.96 68.9 9.50 31.1 8.52 H.4>J 40.8 0.402 .32.7 6.50 2.81 2.99 79.8 9.38 .35.1 11.69 I'I'S'JI) H.M) .36.1) 0.411 .30.6 6.11 3.02 2.79 73.0 11.72 42.4 8.64 I'l-S'Jl 31.'J (1.334 30.6 5.58 2.91 2.45 64.4 10.51 29.8 13.49 ri'592 5.3« 42.2 0.492 .36.7 6.90 3.03 .3.52 86.2 7.82 29.1 6.37 I'lViW 4.81) .38.9 0.489 27.4 6.72 3.45 .1.77 77.9 8.40 32.4 6.19 40.5 (».39(» 32.1 6.35 3.17 2.83 74.3 10.84 39.5 11.76 I'Ksys 8.27 44.2 (1.532 42.0 8.52 3.67 3.97 98.8 20.85 55.1 20.57 l'l-.S96 13..'^() 37.7 0.460 .32.7 6.58 3.50 .3.50 73.8 8.55 37.1 16.42 I'Fsy? 6.28 32.9 0.354 28.4 5.56 2.59 2.57 67.1 9.22 33.0 9.01 I'IS98 11.84 32.3 0.395 .^2.2 5.53 3.56 2.97 64.7 10.05 33.4 11.58 I'i'.soy 7.50 41.8 0.416 32.2 6.98 4.01 .3.11 87.5 11..55 37.2 10.31 I'l-fiOO .•>.20 35 .S ().4m 31.2 5.99 2.98 3.10 66.5 9.33 31.9 9.26 IMYiOl .S.13 .38.5 (1.383 .34.6 6.54 3..36 2.94 78.2 12.74 36.5 14.46 l'IYi()2 8.8.5 37.9 0..345 36.8 6.31 .3.11 2.73 75.0 9.96 31.1 8.41 )'IY)()3 6.8) 33..5 0.371 26.4 .5.78 2.98 2.91 69.0 10..38 .30.4 10.92 .i.SS .34.2 0.331 .30.0 5.43 2.87 2.59 67.5 10.92 58.7 7.60 I'l-ftOS 8.71 34.6 0.298 26.3 5.42 3.62 2.09 67.9 10.2(1 26.2 5.88 I'l'fiDI) y.1.5 .3.5.9 0.322 28.4 5.48 3.05 2.27 67.7 10.55 26.4 6.47 7.87 .36.1 1).3.V3 29.0 5.58 3.28 2.(.4 68.3 9.03 25.4 5.57 I'l'fidS 12.4.1 32.(1 (1.351 2(>.(i 5.40 2.39 2 2'! (.4.4 11.20 .30.1 10.93 7,08 39.4 II.44S .14.0 (>.48 XV, 3.(t5 78.4 11.04 37.'< 1 1.43 Appendix 7. Elemental Concentrations (in parts per million) for Sherds, Clays, and Sands liil AS I.A I.U ND SM U YH Cli CO CR CS IMY.K) 12.59 3l).«» 0.309 30.2 4.85 2.35 2.53 6(1.9 6.57 24.9 20.74 IM(>n K.I2 .TJ.7 0.3.10 .10.8 5.98 2.94 2.51 81.0 11.81 28.1 8.14 I'I'6I2 11.01) .16.6 0.329 31.5 6.09 3.09 2.49 73.8 11.86 40.4 8.52 l'IY)13 t,.^^ 3».l) 0.41.5 30.8 6.18 3.02 3.03 76.0 10.40 41.4 7.51 7.1)7 33.7 0.380 27.2 5.52 3.18 2.98 68.0 8.89 28.4 7.53 l'r<)l.*i .18.2 0.280 31.7 6.30 4..19 2.36 75.0 17.41 30.7 10.60 11..18 38.0 0.417 .16.2 6.44 3.25 3.46 75.9 9.41 .15.0 16.14 I'l'ftlV 5.4(> 43.3 0.455 .14.2 6.74 3.88 2.97 84.1 11.25 37.1 7.23 10.07 .14.3 0..196 31.6 5.59 2.51 2.86 69.4 9.71 40.2 6.05 I'lYil'J 10.2.1 38..S 0.388 40.4 6.51 3.08 2.88 79.3 9.86 32.3 9.69 l'J-62() K..3() 36.6 o..ior> 27.1 5.70 2.78 2.45 70.1 8.93 25.8 6.05 l'r()2l 32.3 0.437 26.9 5.61 3.59 3.38 66.1 7.67 24.2 7.27 m>22 12.70 .18.8 0.376 .12.3 6.34 3.71 2.42 74.8 10.22 29.2 10.74 n r>23 lO.KI 39.8 0.380 .1.1.1 6.69 3.63 2.98 79.4 10.23 29.3 11.37 l'l-624 •J.K.3 40.2 0.399 36.0 6.86 3.98 3.10 82.2 11..12 39.5 11.94 l'IYi25 'J.'JI .1.'5.6 0.414 28.7 5.75 3.60 .1.17 66.3 8.22 33.8 14.16 i'ir)26 H.M 37.8 0..1.10 .18.2 6.09 3.20 2.54 74.5 9.78 29.5 8.33 l'l(>27 4.07 4I.K 0.443 37.6 6.85 2.99 3.43 84.2 8.8(1 .10.7 5,68 l'IYi2« K..'SO .14.2 (),375 29.3 5.42 3.93 2.52 63.2 8.06 33.5 9.16 l'l"f)29 !>.l 1 .1.1.0 0.446 27.4 5.66 3.97 3,17 67.2 7.92 25.5 8.62 7..11) 36.8 0.368 29,6 5.84 4.05 2.49 70.4 7.99 33.0 8.26 l'l(.3l 7..SI VJ.'J 0..192 37.6 6.5« 3.10 2.KK «2.2 8.61 29.3 ,5.61 l'»'6.12 «..V1 .1.S.4 0.284 2''.3 5.78 3.05 2,02 68.7 10,88 27.4 7.94 l'l()33 I>.'I2 37.7 0,103 10.5 5.83 3.23 2.ti2 74.8 9.77 28.7 6.44 Appendix 7. Elemental Concentrations (in parts per million) for Sherds, Clays, and Sands liil AS 1 A I.U Nl) SM U YH Cl£ CO Cl< CS I'i65y 12.42 34.2 (1.304 39.0 5.61 3.75 2.09 69.(1 9.93 26.5 7.05 1 .16.2 0.329 29.3 5.74 .3.63 2.27 68.9 10.11 27.0 7.54 l'»Y)61 8.94 31).7 0.333 32.3 5.24 3.11 2.23 61.7 10.05 28.0 8.14 4.38 51.6 (1.570 44.2 9.02 3.93 4.08 105.3 18.11 86.4 16.24 l'IY>63 .^.72 .36.7 0.398 22.5 6.16 4.31 2.71 75.1 7.56 32.4 15.16 l'l-664 7.01 37.5 0.424 31.6 6.36 3.98 3.26 74.2 11.97 31.3 12.76 n-665 10.7H 37.0 0.352 33.4 5.67 3.44 2..39 70.3 8.21 26.2 9.68 ri'666 ll.<)7 33.6 0.337 19.5 5.49 3.80 2.29 66.2 9.51 33.0 10.76 l'l-667 9.27 36.9 0..355 21.3 6.07 3.43 2.45 72.7 9.25 31.7 6.70 ri'f>r)8 0.49 38.9 0.413 30.5 6..36 3.20 2.85 74.4 8.05 28.8 7.23 IM-hh'J 7.92 29.6 0..347 24.9 4.95 2.86 2.49 56.5 8.28 25.fi 4.86 r|-67(J 7.98 34.4 0.369 26.5 5.63 3.58 2.72 67.6 7.63 27.5 8.03 l'F671 6.49 35.3 0.401 29.3 5.69 3.75 2.85 70.8 8.88 29.9 6.11 P1Y>72 .S.42 39.5 0.350 27.9 5.37 2.62 2.73 74.2 8.06 27.8 7.31 l'l-67.1 6.71 31.9 (1.318 26.8 5.24 3.83 2.12 61.4 8.96 23.4 5.76 riY.74 4.21 37.1 0.463 27.2 6.50 3.13 3.54 74.8 8.64 32.6 5.92 6.5(1 34.3 0.451 28.9 5.89 4.21 .3.15 66.6 8.52 .30.8 9..35 l'l"67(> 14.23 41.3 0.525 30.6 6.54 3.97 .3.71 80.7 8.54 .38.9 7.25 l'IY)77 I2.7(» .34.8 0.484 49.3 6.28 .3.42 3.43 68.7 8.29 31.5 9.16 J'l-Yi7K .S.91 34,8 0.385 20.8 5.72 3.57 2.62 68.3 7.88 28.4 8.36 I'lY.Ti 9.70 35.2 0.341 21.8 5.54 3.35 2.43 67.5 7.87 29.8 8.50 nmi 6.71 .3.1.7 lUHO 26.1 .^.36 2.69 2. .11) 63.6 9.58 29.3 8.21 I'lY.H 1 7.HI) 35.2 0.443 27.3 5.(>9 2.89 2.97 1)7.2 9.03 29.9 6.96 1'1(>K2 7.711 33.K (1.4(i3 2<).(> 5.78 2.52 3.19 65.5 7.19 27.4 6.86 OO Appendix 7. Elemental Concentrations (in parts per million) for Sherds. Clays, and Sands till AS l.A l.U ND SM U YH CI- CO CR CS 7.1.S 40.0 0.446 38.1 6.66 3.51 3.42 78.3 9.96 32.8 9.41 n-Yi.ri 9.70 37.0 0.439 38.4 6.25 3.23 3.25 74.2 8.84 .35.3 15.74 6.78 .35.1 0.303 27.4 5.53 3.06 2.08 68.7 9.52 27.0 5.92 VVuM 11.21 37.6 0..393 31.8 6.27 3.49 2.56 75.7 10.33 29.9 10.88 'J.40 .34.3 0.401 32.1 5.87 3.13 3.06 69.1 10.18 32.3 11.29 11.97 37.8 0..357 .35.7 6.26 4.17 2.50 75.3 10.41 29.7 10.17 l'l'64l) 6.98 34.7 0.353 26.0 5.58 2.87 2.88 64.1 9.44 36,7 5.88 l'l-641 7..10 39.8 0.405 41.6 6..35 2.86 .3.16 78.6 8.55 29.4 8.19 l'l'642 7.5!) 32.4 0.320 27.1 5.02 3.36 2.16 62.9 10.69 39.9 7.58 1'»'643 bM 33.0 0.367 29.3 5.34 3.19 2.76 64.7 10.00 28.2 10.42 IM'644 10.03 33.8 0.397 30.6 6.(M) 3.85 2.61 69.7 7.10 28.1 6.67 l'l'645 9.22 35.1 0.504 38.9 6.98 3.92 3.74 76.3 8.83 .3.1.3 8.62 l'I-646 .5.90 32.3 0.365 26.8 5..39 3.54 2..34 63.8 10.21 30.2 9.56 !»l-r)47 36.01 32.1 0.245 28.6 5.03 4.03 1.91 62.4 7.22 13.7 42.56 l'ir)48 12.9(1 33.8 0..367 24.3 5.33 3.82 2.81 70.1 9.98 31.7 15.04 pi'oau 3.98 37.7 0.374 27.8 6.12 3..35 2.71 70.7 8.43 30.9 9.26 m)5i 8.18 34.2 0.339 28.8 5.65 2.36 2.94 71.9 10.36 29.4 9.05 l»l'652 13.1.5 38.7 0.450 .36.3 6.75 3.83 3..39 78.8 8.26 .13.3 14.03 l'IY)53 9.62 .36.3 0.322 31.9 5.98 3.39 2.28 70.4 10.70 28.3 8.20 1»F654 16..57 36.5 0.355 .34.2 6.00 .3.91 2..37 72.9 11.65 35.1 17.82 I'lYiSS 6.84 39.7 0..382 29.7 6.17 3.45 2.58 71.7 9.11 33.3 9.66 l»IY)56 43.71 31.7 0.253 30.0 4.82 2..30 1.49 61.4 9.82 19.2 .15.39 11.74 31.3 0.322 37.4 5.21 5.05 2.08 63.0 12.53 28.2 26.09 nY).S8 5,7.5 42.2 0..394 22.4 6.16 3.22 3.01) 83.7 9.84 .34.7 6.50 Appendix 7. Elemental Concentrations (in parts per million) tor Sherds. Clays, and Sands niii AS 1.A I.U ND SM U Yli Cli CO CR CS 7.66 34.3 0.319 28.5 5.69 3.20 2.49 66.1 8.96 30.4 9.24 l*|684 8.19 .36.1 0.446 31.9 6.11 2.70 3.03 71.3 9.08 31.7 9.92 PI-68') 9.22 36.6 0.428 25.6 5.80 2.92 3.24 71.9 8.12 26.9 7.97 IM-686 11.26 34.2 0.311 30.2 5.74 3.50 2.82 65.7 12.27 29.9 8.94 IM-'687 9.12 37.3 0.323 27.8 5.93 3.16 2.24 74.0 10.55 29.9 7.63 PIY188 14.49 .38.9 0.501 .38.6 6.63 2.53 3.32 76.3 12..34 43.3 11.22 l'l-68y 8.94 .l.'S.B 0.282 29.7 5.64 4.18 2.33 67.6 9.66 27.2 7.99 l'l-'6 AS I.A I.IJ NO SM U YH CI- CO CU CS I'I'7(I7 5.67 36.5 0.501 27.9 6.08 3.20 3.47 71.3 8.59 31.9 9.27 l>l"7()H (1.59 31.8 0.378 23.5 5.51 3.43 2.61 65.8 8.40 29.2 7.86 l'l'7(W ll.K'J 34.8 0.471 40.3 6.01 4.44 3.22 69.8 8..34 32.8 14.58 l'l'71(l 6.48 .34.4 0.401 27.9 5.54 3.37 2.72 65.2 8.29 29.1 7.54 l'l-71l 8.K5 36.2 0.445 30.6 5.88 3.09 .3.14 69.3 8.68 30.8 9..38 l'l'712 7..14 39.0 0.331 29.1 5.91 3.09 3.01 71.6 8.39 29.4 9.18 I'|-7I3 8.61 37.5 0.561 30.9 6.64 4.12 3.52 75.5 9.27 36.7 9,30 ri'714 8..16 36.5 0.464 .30.7 6.12 3.58 .3.12 71.5 8.08 26.7 7.75 5.34 36.2 0.423 28.2 5.72 2.51 2.94 68.5 8.70 31.9 9.12 l'l-7U. 7.92 35.0 0.332 29.4 5.84 2.97 2.78 67.9 8.79 30.8 9.78 I'I'7I7 9.47 3.3.2 0.310 .34.4 5.52 2.77 2.19 65.4 12.26 29.1 6.60 l'l-718 9.32 36.0 0.338 31.1 6.01 2.59 2.22 70.9 12.54 30.7 7.66 l'l-7l'J 7..37 38.3 0..3S3 30.4 5.80 3.06 2.59 72.3 9.71 26.4 7.59 ri-72() 5..W 33.0 0.437 27.0 5.58 2.72 3.03 66.5 7.46 26.5 5..55 l'l-72) 14.93 35.6 0.325 29.2 6.42 11.33 2.52 69.2 9,85 26.8 10.51 l'l-722 7,8(1 38.1 0.498 28.9 6.32 3.96 3.27 72.8 8.99 33.9 10.02 l'|-723 8.91 31.3 0.442 26.8 5.40 .3.14 2.92 62.1 10.48 30.6 9.08 l'i-724 8.37 37.4 0.451 31.9 6.32 3.56 2.98 76.6 9.65 27.9 10.11 in-725 7.(M 38.3 0.522 34.3 6.23 4.33 3.76 75.3 9.14 33.8 10.48 l'l-726 l((.59 .34.8 0.491 31.2 6.17 4.73 3.79 69.3 8.26 28.3 9.23 l'F727 7.21 .36,3 0.368 30.5 5.76 2.86 2.49 70.5 10.52 31.6 8.19 1'I72« «,91 36.5 0.334 34.4 5.92 2.78 2.60 71.4 10.89 27.7 8.77 l'l-72M 6.K2 40.4 0,445 36.7 6.74 .1.99 2.91 79.8 8.01 29.0 8.86 I'lJVl «.«4 41.9 .16./ 6.5K 3.11 2.71 H4.H 11.03 30.7 H.27 Appendix 7. Elemental Concentrations (in parts per million) for Sherds. Clays, and Sands liil AS 1.A l.U NO SM U YU Cl- CO CR CS I'R.ll 7.7(1 .37.2 (I..344 38.4 6.09 .3.77 2.18 70.2 9.63 28.1 7.95 l'l'7.12 y.io 38.6 0.321 29.6 5.95 2.89 2.15 73.8 9.84 27.2 7.92 l'i-733 12.60 .37.1 0.393 29.1 6.44 3.25 2.51 75.6 10.22 29.0 10.58 l'l-734 10.56 37.9 0.453 30.3 6.56 3.18 .3.21 76.9 9.10 32.2 10..32 l'l-735 6.13 .38.8 0.482 32.0 6.41 2.76 .3.16 79.6 8.60 30.3 7.16 l'|-736 4.76 .36.9 0.374 27.7 6.31 3.02 2.66 73.5 8.65 30.2 9.81 IM-737 .33.21 33.3 0.412 71.9 5.99 4.21 2.51 68.0 7.68 29.0 10.14 l'l'738 14.9.1 .34.6 0.363 25.7 5.70 2.93 2.39 65.5 8.51 29.6 11.52 l'l'739 7.91 .38.9 0.421 38.7 5.87 .3.13 2.57 74.8 7.83 28.9 7.04 l'l'74() 8.47 34.1 0.412 25.5 5.00 .3.13 2.75 64.8 7.73 n.i 8.92 l'l-741 6.54 37.7 0.358 28.6 6.28 3.79 2.46 75.7 7.90 34.0 7.99 l'F742 7.14 31.8 (I..340 23.2 4.90 3.42 2.25 62.5 7.74 28.9 9.50 PI-743 9.43 34.6 0.402 28.8 6.00 3.94 2.61 71.0 8.17 31.8 13.56 l'l-744 7.(K) 37.0 0.413 28.5 6.18 3.76 2.68 72.4 7.75 .34.4 13.40 I'r745 6.54 41.4 0.429 28.6 6.32 4.72 2.94 77.3 7.42 29.8 17.39 l'l-746 11.29 .35.6 ()..381 28.5 5.97 4.09 2.48 71.3 9.01 27.0 9.78 IM-747 10.20 37.4 0..399 30.9 6.59 4.14 2.61 75.6 10.86 31.7 1.3.01 l'l-748 11.18 50.0 0.728 58.4 9.53 3.93 5.15 101.6 1.3.27 53.7 7.82 l'l-'74'J 7.58 .34.0 0.393 45.5 5.99 4.33 2.67 68.1 7.98 33.0 19.10 l'l-7S0 1(1.24 28.8 0.272 22.9 4.34 2.80 1.84 57.0 l.M 26.7 11.90 4^ ro Appendix 7. Elemental Concentrations (in parts per million) for Sherds, Clays, and Sands llli AS l.A I.U NU SM U Y» CI: CO CK CS nrJn: i'rom Outsidt: of Study Arna (n = l27) 'J. 12 37.3 (I..331 32.9 6.04 3.40 2..30 74.3 10.63 .30.1 8.06 I'l-ISr IS.64 .34.2 0.278 28.5 5..34 2.13 1.98 67.8 6.(X) 23.3 27.51 11.37 43.3 0.478 .39.4 7.49 2.77 3..38 90.2 14.90 53.9 12.97 I'rZl'J* 13.(W W.') 0.464 36.0 6.88 2.55 3.27 80.9 13.63 52.2 11.34 l'l'220* 14.27 43.4 0.460 36.3 7.37 2.75 3.28 89.8 15.89 52.1 13.08 l'l-22r 1.S.64 sy.."! 0.410 33.7 6.56 2..i9 2.82 77.9 1.3.82 49.4 10.77 l'l-222* 11.85 42.7 0.446 33.3 6.96 3.11 .3.16 85.6 13.43 49.6 10.45 IM'223* l.i.W 42.8 0.452 37.1 7.21 2.88 3.21 82.3 14..50 49.8 11.01 l'l"224* 12.60 3D.6 0.452 .33.7 6.80 2.61 .3.15 81.0 1.3.74 52.7 11.07 lM-225* l.'>.3«J 42.7 0.458 .35.5 7.14 2.B7 3.12 86.2 14.69 53.2 12.07 l'F226' UJS 42.6 0.441 33.6 7.17 2.47 3.23 86.1 14.71 50.2 11.67 n'228* 11.78 4.3.2 0.384 37.0 6.99 2.52 2.75 91.1 20.97 84.1 6.94 IM'22y* 12.14 4.'>.8 0.436 45.6 7.45 2.35 3.01 92.4 22.78 93.8 7.21 l'l"23()* 13..39 46.4 0.416 42.4 7.64 2.58 2.93 95.7 25.28 95.3 9.07 10.40 4y.y 0.425 42.1 7.69 2.22 2.97 100.8 22.63 93.2 7.54 IM'232* 6.09 40.8 0.469 .32.3 7.IM 5..33 3.17 83.7 8.64 32.8 6.01 IM'233* 15.(M 52.7 0.400 47.9 7.77 2.81 2.87 im.8 24.54 92.3 8.88 l'l'234* 44.4 0.423 38.9 7.41 2.76 2.88 90.6 22.01 92.5 8..33 n..ii 44.9 0.418 42.0 7.37 2.77 3.05 88.5 20.43 86.2 10.73 l'l-'23()* 4.47 46.4 0.235 33.4 4.98 2.16 1.50 88.6 13.45 23.7 2.93 l'l'237* 1(I.S2 41.4 0.443 40.8 6.93 2.74 3.13 82.1 19.78 97.7 7.10 l'J-23H* 8.66 43.7 0.395 44.2 7.23 2.17 2.«3 90.2 22.34 94.2 7.15 l'l-'23y 12.01 43.5 0..393 38.7 7.23 2.24 2.71 89.3 23.24 102.4 8.09 Appendix 7. Elemental Concentrations (in parts per million) lor Sherds. Clays, and Sands •lid AS I.A I.U NIJ SM U YU CI: t:o CR CS 11.80 47.1 0.429 43.0 7.72 1.93 2.95 93.7 23.50 124.8 7.16 l'I-241* U).y3 4.'i.2 0.466 38.4 7.56 2.65 3.24 90.9 15.57 50.1 13.72 l'l-242* J 5.76 43.«J 0.469 38.0 7.39 2.72 3.24 91.2 16.42 49.7 13.53 l'l'24.T 7.01 32.9 0.345 28.1 5.31 3.98 2.30 59.7 7.31 31.7 7..34 ri'244* 22.KK .3.5.4 0.317 31.6 5.56 3.12 2.08 65.3 8.69 26.8 21.10 lM-245* 3(1.8 0.322 30.2 5.80 3.30 2.21 68.7 9.36 27.4 23.99 l'l'246' 9.3.1 37.2 0.412 32.7 6.26 3.20 2.91 73.5 12.03 41.9 8.17 Pl'247» l.S.1.3 44.9 n.502 40.0 7.44 3.15 3.47 90.4 14.90 51.9 13.26 I'1'248* 13.77 44.1 0.505 37.9 7.51 .3.17 3.42 87.3 15.09 52.6 11.16 |>|.-249* 12.84 40.7 0.403 32.6 6.41 2.86 2.67 79.5 11.10 44.6 7.70 J'F25()' n.y> 41.3 0.463 37.1 7.03 3.21 3.21 91.1 15.13 53.3 11.90 l'l-25P l.'>.'J4 41.9 0.491 .36.3 7.24 3.27 3.37 84.4 14.60 49.5 12.17 PF252* 43.« 0.49.3 .39.0 7.62 .3.27 .3.44 88.0 14.96 .54.8 1.3.31 »M"253* n.w 43.4 0.503 37.2 7.39 3.85 3.53 89.0 15.77 53.3 13.57 l'l-254* 13.'J.S 4.5.9 0.5(M1 39.3 7.82 2.96 3.41 93.9 15..33 53.6 12.95 l'F255* 27.10 47.1 0.490 42.7 8.(H) .3.33 3.64 97.5 16.54 52.7 14.29 ni-V)* IH.'J8 .34.0 0.281 29.7 5.22 3.08 1.94 63.6 9.32 24.2 29.13 n'2S7* S.\7 44.2 0.412 38.7 6.87 3.11 2.71 81.2 11.31 31.4 7.86 l'l-25«* 8.37 .34.5 0.287 29.8 5.45 3.88 2.01 66.8 7.81 25.1 15.01 I'r259* 4.03 .34.9 0.282 26.5 4.75 2.25 1.89 60.7 5.15 25.1 4.40 ri'26()' .3.21 28.9 0.643 26.4 5.31 1..58 4.15 53.4 3.83 16.0 3.62 .S.(I3 42.(> 0.418 35.6 7.11 4.21 2.87 79.1 13.46 33.7 6.86 l'l'262* <1.67 43.3 0.428 36.5 7.41 4.40 2.94 «8.'J 13.89 30.2 «..3« ri'26.1* 3.4(1 24.1 11.545 22.1 4.62 2.03 3.55 45.3 3.<.8 15.3 3.23 Appendix 7. Elemental Concentrations (in parts per million) for Sherds, Clays, and Sands AS l.A l.U ND SM U YH CI- (X) CR CS (>.16 34.6 0.626 34.8 7.11 5.74 4.35 76.4 7.95 25.4 4.19 12.39 43.2 0.575 .38.1 7.25 3.97 3.97 86.5 10.66 41.2 7.73 lo.yj 3'J.4 0.391 34.8 6.84 4.44 2.63 76.5 11.60 33.9 7.49 l'l-267* H).2.1 38.4 0.375 32.6 6.45 3.65 2.57 75.2 11..35 32.3 7.41 l'l'26«' 11. 39.4 0.490 33.7 6.25 3.89 3.26 74.8 8.84 .37.6 7.57 l>J"2<>y* S.ft\ 33.8 0.355 31.1 5.69 3.17 2.40 66.2 7.91 29.7 9.09 l'l'27(l* 3(».2 0.223 35.5 5.88 2.85 1.53 62.8 12.83 8.3 4.61 l'l-271* 16.10 38.3 0.660 37.0 6.80 4.91 4.57 77.9 9.89 41.2 6.91 I'r2'72* H.48 34.1 0.389 29.3 5.75 2.88 2.65 67.2 8.28 28.9 7.23 I'r273* 13.49 4U.9 0.637 38.1 6.88 4.73 4.39 79.7 9.26 36.6 6.66 l'l'293* 6.31 33.9 0.395 30.1 5.85 4.09 2.64 69.1 7.08 31.2 11.16 PI-2'M* 8.57 31.5 0.405 29.4 5.61 4.36 2.70 67.4 7.42 29.2 11.02 l'l-2 itid AS I.A I.U NO SM U YH c:i-: CO CK CS I'I-.1(I7* 8.«y 27.8 (1.420 26.0 5..3« 5.23 2.80 57.8 7.02 26.7 19.71 I'KIOH* 7.52 .14.4 0.425 .30.2 6.13 5.05 2.83 68.7 7.01 29.2 13.78 I'lMO'J' 25.65 33.0 0.305 27.8 5.22 5.03 1.85 63.6 8.39 26.4 59.83 I'l'.lKI* H.I'J .35.3 0.373 31.9 6.(H) 4.01 2.45 66.0 9.54 31.4 7.19 n-.iir 6.64 .35.6 0.422 31.9 6.24 4.26 2.81 71.5 7.42 31.8 16.35 l'J3J2* 8.08 35.9 0.389 32.1 6.13 4.67 2.67 74.2 7.96 31.9 14.33 5.67 .30.7 0.461 28.3 5.21 5.(K) 3.07 63.0 7.71 25.7 4.59 mi4' 8.72 .34.9 0..397 30.4 5.91 3.94 2.72 69.9 7.59 31.5 11.45 21.51 35.9 0.276 30.4 5.29 3.61 1.85 69.9 8.34 20.3 21.22 I'l 316* 11.12 41.8 0.326 30.7 5.61 3.80 2.14 73.0 8.59 27.4 12.63 PIM17* 9.47 .38.0 0.407 .35.0 6.20 4.54 2.68 76.0 7.10 28.3 10.55 l'l-3I8* 6.43 33.4 0.330 30.8 5.44 2.51 2.16 68.0 9.76 38.3 6.01 I'l'.llO* 2.71 23.3 (1.576 22.4 4.74 1.79 3.90 43.4 4.29 16.7 4.71 5.92 37.4 0.429 .34.6 6.44 4.17 2.89 7.3.7 8.73 36.6 14.72 IM-321* 7.58 37.5 0.380 35.7 6.55 4.13 2.60 78.1 11.20 26.6 9.20 l'l'322* 5.93 37.0 0.374 .34.3 6..35 3.14 2.60 72.5 11.06 .34.7 5.75 l'l-323* 6.65 25.4 0.403 24.3 5.03 4.67 2.70 53.5 6.29 18.8 16.57 l>l'324* 9.19 37.9 0.498 34.9 6.74 4.05 .3.41 74.0 7.72 29.9 8.71 l'l-325* 7.94 38.3 0.441 35.6 6.56 3.12 3.08 71.9 8.44 40.8 9.26 l'l-326* 4.13 37.3 0.394 33.4 6.21 3.55 2.69 7.3.1 8.52 33.5 9.66 J'1'327* 6.79 39.7 0.4.39 .36.3 6.63 4.45 .3.01 79.4 8.58 .3.3.1 16.44 1'1328' 9.82 .34.9 0.3.30 31.4 5.65 4.14 2.15 67.8 8.95 28.7 12.02 l'l"32'J* 6.42 32.3 0.372 29.7 5.58 3.48 2.62 64.3 10.16 27.9 7.71 l*l'33()* 5.08 32.4 0.389 28.5 5.14 2.51 2.77 61.8 7.43 32.2 8,91 Appendix 7. Elemental Concentrations (In parts per million) for Sherds, Clays, and Sands lid AS I.A I.U NO SM U YH c:ii CO PR CS 6.3'J 39.4 0.427 29.0 6.07 3.24 2.91 75.5 9.04 29.3 9.66 (i.'J? 33.9 0.456 28.7 5.78 2.69 3.20 66.1 8.72 31.6 8.37 IH.26 37.4 0.29.1 32.0 5.61 .3.37 2.02 72.2 8.69 23.7 16.63 36.2 0.429 .35,0 6.16 2.99 2.95 76.2 7.12 24.0 4.78 i.m 36.9 0.320 27.9 5.57 3.13 2.23 69.4 9.98 28.8 8.22 8,63 39.3 0..346 30.1 5.K7 2.80 2.40 72.5 10.31 30.2 8.23 ri'337* 7.03 .3.S.6 0..394 28.2 5.94 2.90 2.71 69.1 H.IO .30.8 8.86 I'I33»* K.44 .37.1 0.410 30.0 6.15 3.41 2.76 74.6 10.56 .30.1 10.54 l'l'33'J* 23.98 39.2 0.4(M) 31.7 6..36 2.81 2.78 88.2 11.64 29.0 9.79 l'|-34()* 16.42 43.0 0.477 .37.1 7.14 3.93 3.38 87.7 13.22 27.6 19.32 l'l-34l* 14.23 42.0 0.470 37.4 7.15 .3.71 3..30 87.6 15.48 51.5 11.99 l'l'342* 17.44 4.3.1 0.479 40.2 7.32 .3.10 .3.27 87.9 14.50 49.6 12.63 I'I343' 39.9 0.444 31.1 6..38 3.49 3.04 78.1 9.62 40.6 7.90 I'l344* 10.17 37.4 0.41.1 29.0 5.68 3.66 2.83 72.1 10..39 43.2 12.80 l'l'34.'i* 1.1 ..5 7 42.2 0.482 .36.3 7.18 .3.21 3.23 83.9 15.49 55.0 1.3.23 l'|-346* 14.69 42.6 0.473 31.4 7.02 4.29 3.26 84.5 15.11 50.5 12.76 I'r362* 27.61 29.9 0.2S7 25.1 4.62 3.08 1.69 56.8 9.16 22.7 18..32 l'l'3()3* 8.67 38.4 (1.414 31.9 6.38 3.83 2.83 72.5 8.23 .34.1 12.79 l'l'364* 7.33 37.0 0.412 31.1 6.42 4.49 2.84 73.3 8.75 36.8 1.3.13 l'J'365* 6.97 36.8 0.41.1 31.8 6.03 3.88 2.86 72.7 7.59 32.6 14.59 l'l'36(i* 9.01 32.8 0.407 28.7 5.99 4..35 2.81 65.7 6.9ii 27.5 9.80 I'l-.Ki?* 7, (1.99 .38.7 (1.417 .34.5 (1.41 3.94 2.K(i 75.5 'J.(I3 .35.9 11.00 Appendix 7. Elemental Concentrations (in parts per million) for Sherds, Clays, and Sands d AS I.A l.U ND SM U YH CO c:r CS '|-37()* 7.44 32.1 (1.4(19 28.0 5.79 4.51 2.75 62.7 7.36 32.4 16.52 'l'37r .3.5 ..i 0.423 32.6 5.98 4..37 2.76 69.5 7.26 33.5 13.44 n.s.s 32.4 0.255 27.9 4.99 .3.10 1.65 60.6 7.39 19.8 18.76 'l-'37.V 4.27 .3.5.(1 0.417 32.0 5.99 4.16 2.82 68.5 7.20 .34.4 12.69 •I-.174* l.'i.22 44.2 0.484 .39.2 7..35 3.62 3.43 88.7 14.84 48.6 11.86 'I-37S* 14.46 42.8 0.4K4 37.7 7.37 3.40 3.36 87.2 14.80 52.5 12.97 'l-.17fi* 17.(»l 4.5..5 0.476 42.9 7.53 3.20 .3.18 90.2 14.86 51.0 12..54 'I-.177* 14.19 40.4 0.467 36.0 6.77 2.96 3.25 79.8 1.3.21 48.6 9.78 >•1 f/i=37; 1.'>.12 42..5 0.394 .38.2 6.86 4..54 2.67 86.6 1.3.24 30.4 18.88 'l-OSh* .11.88 42.8 0.397 33.9 6.25 3.48 2.80 77.9 7..34 45.7 .33.19 »l-()57* 1.3.44 40.6 0.388 32.3 6.43 4.48 2.51 81.7 12.76 31.0 15.89 •H)58* la-s.** 37.0 0.3S'J 29.6 .-5.82 4.03 2..3'J 73.3 10.91 2.5.2 14.20 I.5..59 .33.7 0.4.34 30.8 6.11 4.69 2.89 69.8 11.51 .36.1 50.31 •|'()6()* 8..17 27..5 0.3.38 24.9 4.76 4.01 2.23 56.0 13.05 64.8 22.45 M-imi* 8.34 47.2 0.4.34 39.0 7.59 4.34 2.95 95.0 17.45 31.5 21.81 'l"()62* 1.3.88 42.2 0.427 .35.2 7.15 4.29 2.92 84.1 15.45 30.8 18.08 y.87 39.6 0.450 .34.0 6.61 .3..37 .3.12 78.6 10.82 28.0 14.78 'hl)(>4* (>.M 36.9 0.3()0 29.2 6.01 2.(>7 2.49 67.1 14.22 .39.3 9.56 'l'065* O.O'J 31.4 0.371 28.3 5.53 2.79 2.55 64.3 12.72 .39.1 9.17 '1-066* 2..54 25.8 0.326 25.2 4.94 4.41 2.00 5.3.2 17.60 .34.4 7.08 M7S1 3.'JK 44.7 ll.<)44 27.4 8.90 4.18 4.91 93.3 10.()9 32.4 9.29 M'7S2 I3.K6 22.5 (1.409 13.7 4.(H 3.2(1 2.49 45.7 14.83 43.1 18.24 'I-7S3 .11 (.'>4 44.6 (1. Vi4 28.7 (1.48 4.2(1 2.41 84.6 7.35 32.4 49.15 Appendix 7. Elemental Concentrations (in parts per million) tor Sherds. Clays, and Sands iU AS I.A I.U NO SM U YH CI- CO CR CS l.i.rid 42.8 0.433 43.5 7.16 4.89 2.97 90.1 1.3.81 43.8 17.24 1M« 5l).(i 0.495 .39.0 8.94 5.67 3.27 1(U.8 18.81 47.1 21.48 l'l-75h 22.2S ()(1.7 (1.430 44.0 9.60 4.01 2.K7 112.8 9.69 51.1 28.38 I'I7S7 11.K7 41.5 0.389 23.9 6.75 4.85 2.60 84.1 1.3.50 33.9 16.(>5 y..S4 46.0 0.464 38.0 8.22 2.97 3.08 93.5 16.20 57.0 22..38 l»l-75'J 4.S2 32.2 0.380 38.9 5.85 3.93 2.48 67.0 18.72 56.8 11.50 l'l-76(l lO.HK 38.9 0.451 33.2 7.26 4.01 .3.16 81.5 14.07 68.7 14.69 l'l'761 15.S3 40.y 0.529 40.1 8.69 3.65 3.48 104.9 17.7(1 48.4 20.88 l'l-'7()2 \2.n 44.(1 0.441 .34.6 7.69 3.58 3.10 90.3 19.15 62.6 15.76 2I.7H 5 7. J 0.31 a 49.3 9.46 .5.51 .3.28 118.0 20.43 41,6 24,29 l'l-764 28.53 46.2 0.471 .35.8 7.96 4.12 3.16 94.7 14.(i6 47.8 16.84 IM'7(>5 18.27 45.2 0.495 30.9 8.04 4.67 3.35 94.6 14.61 44.7 19.67 l'l-766 13.69 45.6 0.459 .35.9 7.38 4.75 3.10 95.8 14.10 49.3 13.22 I'1'767 24..32 50.9 0.477 .39.1 8..39 4.68 3.30 104.7 17.54 48.3 16.60 l*l-'7f)8 l(l..3K 44.7 (1.510 27.0 7.94 6.25 3.64 92.6 17.02 39.8 17.57 l'l'76V y.«7 44.3 0.444 .34.2 8.05 2.86 3.13 96.5 19.17 6(1.2 14.21 l'l-776 'J.()3 42.0 0.4IH) 31.9 6.83 4.20 2.88 86.5 12.56 52.1 13.04 v\nm ().4(> 37.7 0..399 29.1 6.61 3.11 2.35 81.9 31.90 69.2 6..39 I'lniH 5.5(1 29.8 0.402 19.2 5.46 3.93 2.31 60.2 18.06 47.0 10.88 l'l-77 AniU AS I.A l.u NU SM U YH CH CO CR CS .17.0 0.216 25.4 3.78 1.8H 1.48 67.6 2.54 5.4 1.66 0.89 10.2 0.116 12.0 2.08 0.76 0.79 22.9 0.96 3.0 0.99 IM'OVO* 7.07 29.6 0.289 25.4 4.63 .1.31 1.87 56.7 6.11) 16.8 6.98 l'H)7r .S.74 35.4 0.473 .12.7 6.26 3.76 3.10 72.6 6.49 21.1 7.18 l>l-787 5.5.1 21.5 0.25(1 18.9 3.54 2.63 1.89 .19.4 3.57 11.1 4..54 l'l-'7K« •1.12 51.8 0.574 49.8 10.27 6.65 3.60 121.7 5.16 16.5 2.60 PI'78'J 5..12 .11.7 0.428 27.1 5.28 2.63 3.32 62.3 4.48 21.2 5.08 4.44 3(1.6 0.273 28.9 6.15 2.62 2.13 77.2 5.95 23.0 5.29 l'r7 liU M- Ml- Kli SI) SC SK lA TU Til /N 1.226 .10760.1 7.56 NO.I 1.092 8.86 3(«».0 0.839 0.669 10.6 62.5 1.175 .14081..1 7.71 127.1 1.1.59 9.59 301.9 0.808 0.638 10.4 76.3 l'H)27* 1.2m itw.sa.T 5.79 13.3.1 1.170 8.52 337.6 1.232 0.705 11.7 69.8 I..120 344.10.0 5.88 140.1 1.182 8.67 448.1 0.999 0.654 12.4 72.4 l'l'(»2y* 1.284 3.3879.7 6.98 166.3 1.6.36 10.71) 241.9 1.022 0.781 16.3 83.3 1.2KH 32404.1 7.13 1.38.K 1.482 9.11 265.5 0.920 0.710 12.1 75.4 1.2.^1 33547.0 7.26 140.0 I..540 9.46 294.0 0.938 0.7.10 J1.9 71.6 l'l()32* 1..1I7 .39172.3 5.28 121.8 1.490 10.69 450.9 0.807 0.635 10.3 79.9 I.2H6 3861.5.7 5.48 115.0 1.411 10.05 498.0 0.794 0.860 10.0 74.4 1.2ft«J 32560.1 7.-34 1.36.7 1.175 8.95 316.1 0.781 0.673 n.o 61.3 • i.im 28908.5 5.84 144.3 1.751 10.20 375.6 0.974 0.608 11.4 62.3 l'F()36* 1.266 26134.8 K.Ol 128.0 1.317 9.28 373.2 l.(K)l 0.823 11.9 53.7 l'l'(»37* 1.207 .34474.5 6.64 167.2 1.268 9.86 211.7 0.872 0.940 12.1 82.2 I'l-mn* 1.128 3(H98.4 6.41 151.2 1.541 7.49 .305.0 0.773 0.578 10.8 54.4 I'l-O.TJ* 1.1.18 29794.9 6.12 1.35.3 3.662 7.19 137(1.4 0.783 0.485 10.7 93.7 1.121 28167.0 6.02 153.9 1.652 8.22 369.4 0.986 0.882 13.3 59.5 I'lW.V .35591.5 6.23 1.33.5 1.184 9.27 377.6 1.043 J).697 1.3.9 67.6 rj-7M4* 1.278 .32244.1 6.31 125.2 0.955 7.73 380.2 1.068 0.682 11.7 57.6 I'HMS' 1..342 35467.6 6.06 1.30.3 1.264 9.05 442.1 1.046 0.712 13.7 75.2 1.206 29542.4 6.19 122.0 1.176 8.18 356.9 1.259 0.861 11.9 64.0 l'r(M7* I.l8ri 26865.8 6.41 119.6 1.628 9.57 .343.4 0.955 0.859 12.2 57.4 1.23.*i 29008.6 6.09 138.2 1.733 8.27 .158.4 1.010 0.775 14.1 62.2 l.(l7?i 24416.5 5.75 132.7 1.5.15 7.5« 3.1«.4 0.K56 (l.7H liU liU I1-: 111- Kl) SB sc: SK lA TH TM ZN I'l-osr 1.175 291.19.8 10.19 147.3 1.886 9.09 306.6 0.947 0.886 14.3 66.3 1.(120 27848.9 6.(H) 1.15.3 1.477 7.98 .148.2 0.856 0.794 11.5 62.2 mw-T 1.211 5.76 120.4 l.(X)9 8.12 404.8 1.129 0.699 11.8 65.8 l'l'()54* 1.188 29855.5 6.24 118.2 1.340 8.42 .147.5 1.111 0.711 11.1 67.1 n'(i72* 1.2IH) 2945.1.8 7.24 1.17.6 1.699 8.95 4.19.8 0.982 0.731 1.1.4 69.5 l.lll 29276.9 6.49 1.13.3 2.924 9.12 319.1 1.024 0.733 12..5 76.6 l'l'()74* 1.1.38 24907.8 6.24 148.2 1.701 7.59 338.6 0.877 0.746 12.9 52.0 l»l-075* l.23'J 28444.5 6.45 161.8 1.811 8.78 315.4 0.933 0.874 13.0 65.9 l»l-076* 1.(120 25964.2 6.45 1.19.3 2.668 8.25 274.3 1.070 0.632 14.1 72.3 l'|-077* 1.192 .10805.8 5.47 122.2 1.079 8.02 410.1 l.OOTi 0.616 U.7 58.3 l»l'()78* 1.1)81 25298.2 5.95 1.17.5 1.470 7.85 .163.9 0.930 0.724 11.4 .58.9 l'l'079* 1.210 25665.2 5.71 149.9 1..542 8.13 .104.7 0.988 0.775 14.4 57.2 I'l-OKO* 1.201 29582.1 5.95 117.4 1.044 8.03 458.5 l.W»4 0.640 10.8 60.2 PI-OBl* 1.146 28498.0 6.92 124.9 2.361 8.42 3(M.9 0.868 0.798 14.6 64.5 l'l-()82* 1.092 25554.0 6.91 137.9 1.7.54 7.85 393.8 0.854 0.667 12.5 52.4 1.125 26670.7 5.86 122.1 1.076 7.99 5.14.8 0.952 0.637 10.8 58.7 n-084* 1.211 .11865.0 6.13 111.6 1.091 7.70 5(K).3 0.746 0.549 9.7 58.5 IM'OSS* 1.180 28.502.1 6.56 116.4 1.149 8.12 399.9 1.180 0.760 11.4 62.4 l'l-()86* 1.109 27879.1 6.12 142.1 1.5.32 9.06 .143.3 0.926 0.7.17 13.6 67.4 1M'()87* I.IO(> 26894.2 6.50 152.2 3.324 8.68 2.13.2 1.161 0.886 14.1 82.0 1.002 22156.8 5.91 115.1 1.219 6.95 3.18.9 0.873 0.577 11.2 53.6 I'Hm'j* 1.180 28976.3 8,31 131.8 1.694 8.93 292.3 1.068 0.694 12.6 69.1 l'J(Wl)* 1.1K5 29880.3 5.77 117.5 1.002 7.58 426.K 1.024 0.629 11.0 56.6 I'Hwr 1.2(11 32493.(1 6.37 131.5 1.03'J 8.05 397.7 0.923 (1.579 11.2 64.5 Appendix 7: Elemental Concentrations (in parts per million) for Sherds, Clays, and Sands liU 1-U lli in- HU SH se: SK TA IB TU ZN 1.261 35247.7 6.33 116.8 1.216 9.50 422.6 0.9.35 0.680 12.4 81.9 I'l-OW 1.0.11 26472.8 5.57 11.3.6 2.841 8.25 370.1 0.980 0.645 11.6 79.5 l'HW4* l.lVl 30536.8 6.16 116.6 1.091 8.76 505.7 l.(KM 0.693 11.6 64.5 I'RWS* 1.165 26406.6 6.86 12.3.2 0.999 9.45 364.5 0.981 0.706 10.7 65.6 I'I'd'Jh* 1.226 32171.0 5.87 122.4 1.128 8.31 462.5 0.981 0.628 12.0 62.4 1.15'J 28956.9 6.63 143.5 2.533 8.(H) 441.4 0.963 0.665 12.4 68.1 1.272 32738.3 6.41 128.4 1.204 9.10 426.6 1.067 0.599 12.6 67.1 1.1.16 28272.9 6.22 98.7 1.058 7.21 425.8 0.752 0.560 10.3 55.7 IM-HM)* 1.251 34475.4 5.95 115.4 1.144 8.61 459.8 1.052 0.648 11.9 64.6 I'l'KM' 1.061 25530.3 6.53 126.8 1.319 7.69 .344.5 0.904 0.612 9.7 62.5 I'M 02 • l.l'J'J 29308.5 5.99 114.2 1.048 8.50 404.8 0.777 0.693 9.6 53.2 l'l-lt)3* I.1K2 .3.381.3.3 5.62 116.0 1.297 9.47 .387.8 0.951 0.654 12.1 73.1 I'l-KW* 1.095 29255.9 6.09 152.9 1.564 9.03 330.7 0.907 0.689 1.3.0 65.9 I'IKW 1.181 .3.3377.9 6.35 119.7 1.2.32 8.56 381.9 1.1.33 0.694 12.8 66.0 n-iim* 1.237 32688.9 5.91 122.9 0.986 8.03 441.8 1.283 0.687 11.4 60.8 I'I'1(I7* 1.194 3125.3.4 6.66 102.5 1.126 8.59 570.8 0.808 0.611 10.8 63.4 I'FIOH* 1.194 .32140.3 5.83 119.9 1.129 8.43 4.39.6 1.092 0.648 11.5 65.1 I'l-lO'J* 1.151 .30782.1 5.94 102.1 1.040 8.07 482.5 1.211 0.637 11.3 73.6 I'l-no* 1.199 .30.349.6 5.84 120.2 1.281 8.40 396.5 1.231 0.709 11.1 77.8 I'riiiK I.IH2 29764.1 6.03 11.3.6 1.152 7.98 464.1 1.071 0.667 11.0 70.1 ri'ii2* 1.047 27218.1 6.36 137.9 2.146 8.60 .301.3 1.022 0.650 12.4 72.7 26135.9 6.36 1.36.7 1.643 7.51 338.5 0.944 0.733 19.1 66.4 I'MH* l.H.i 26433.8 5.79 I45.H 1.684 8.18 381.4 (1.903 0.702 13.1 64.4 I'M I*)* M4'J 277()4.'J 5.25 118.3 I.IOI 7.68 4(.K.7 l.0(>2 0.5'J2 10.8 69.0 Appendix 7: Elemental Concentrations (in parts per million) for Sherds, Clays, and Sands i;u I'l- III- KH SH SC SK 1 A m Til ZN 116' 1.185 2«'JI7.7 5..30 115.2 1.181 H.27 432.2 1.194 0.705 11.1 71.0 I17* 1.12'J 2(i4W.O 6.05 113.6 1.4.33 7.67 .347.9 0.859 0.615 9.8 66.7 118* 1.13(1 2'J(.33.2 7.73 128.8 1.678 8.56 4.37.4 1.092 0.745 16.1 71.0 II9* L23H 3I«'J2.4 10.54 154.1 3.46 i 10.22 296.8 1.403 0.912 15.0 90.7 121)» 1.133 2'J75(i.4 5.81 1.34.1 3.«)43 9.31 302.5 1.071 0.697 14.0 95.2 121/122* 1.068 28472.1 6.25 96.4 1.013 6.99 508.6 0.780 0.527 9.2 57.4 I2.1* I.I2H 25606.5 5.97 1.30.0 1.921 8.07 284.5 0.955 0.660 11.3 75.9 »24* l.l.SS 24847.3 5.93 132.8 1.849 7.59 385.6 0.897 0.736 17.5 65.5 125* 1.120 25286.6 6.98 131.3 1.680 7.85 399.4 1.059 0.756 14.7 70.7 126* I.OW 26393.2 6.37 116.4 I..356 9.09 418.1 1.024 0.765 11.1 (>6.3 127' 1.145 272W.'J 6.54 140.5 1.802 8.48 .361.9 1.002 0.717 12.0 81.7 129* 1.543 28642.9 5.42 145.6 1.667 8.48 .346.8 1.614 0.876 1.3.4 73.0 no* 1.231 29985.5 5.98 149.6 1.731 8.96 378.6 1.167 0.809 13.4 78.7 1.152 29376.7 6.01 1.39.2 1.916 9.86 274.3 0.988 0.731 13.5 10(1.5 132' 1.013 27713.9 5.99 144.6 I..507 9.06 .347.9 0.953 0.700 12.3 74.2 I.13* 1.041 25205.7 5.93 114.5 1.9.56 7.74 312.9 2.143 0.619 11.8 78.6 134* 1.022 23179.9 6.01 1.33.8 2.64(> 7.45 278.1 1.102 0.654 15.3 77.0 13.*i* 1.222 29267.7 5.77 151.8 1.672 8.98 378.8 1.154 0.739 13.7 82.8 136* 1.140 28374.5 7.68 149.8 1.582 8.80 .3.32.9 l.(HH) 0.744 1.3.9 72.9 137' O.H58 22567.5 5.28 158.0 1.1.38 7.83 173.2 1.264 0.65() 17.7 69.2 138* l.l'J8 30544.7 6,69 152.0 1.679 9.18 369.,'i 1.0.39 0.826 14.(1 66.2 139* 1.143 28682.5 6.72 142.6 1.6.30 8.88 386.3 0.982 0.684 1.3.4 77.4 140' l.I(>2 3181.8.5 6.33 131.4 1.547 9.(. ll i;u II-; III- KH .SH HC SK TA Til ZN I'I42* 1.144 2.S400.4 7.08 145.6 1.692 7.57 312.9 0.956 0.697 12.9 61.0 IH.T 1,177 312(M.8 6.08 121.0 1.171 8.26 458.1 1.169 0.690 13.1 70.1 II44* 1.19(i 2682(i..'» 6..59 1.39.3 1.800 8.46 .351.7 1.106 0.771 18.8 65.9 IN.*)* 1.207 29437..5 6.70 136.0 0.920 8.44 493.1 0.996 0.694 16.0 64.3 J"14h* l.(>12 2635.'>.1 5.42 128.2 2..399 8.63 .347.4 1.4.39 1.011 12.4 66.6 I147» I.U)7 27431.0 6.41 144.2 1.926 8..35 324.5 1.059 0.783 12.7 65.5 I" 148* 1.IH4 264(11.6 6.02 147.8 1.767 8.22 322.6 1.0J5 0.7.38 13.1 62.0 I'140* 24843.6 7.63 145.3 1.801 7.25 290.8 0.963 0.724 12.1 53.1 ri50* 24794.2 A.23 144.0 J. 792 T.hS .346.6 0.900 0.7.35 11.9 57.2 MSI* 1.200 2.^892.1 6.85 140.0 1.754 8..33 .343.6 1.083 0.775 12.4 64.4 \-l52* 1.272 26730.6 6.58 142.0 1.799 8.64 .335.2 0.98(1 0.783 14.3 64.2 ri53» l.l.i.i 2.1841.4 7.84 1.3.3.0 1.8.36 7.94 375.0 0.920 0.780 12.3 64.2 1-I.'i4* 1.17) 22407.1 6.07 1.33.6 1.501 7..38 367.0 l.(K)3 0.726 11.0 .56.7 l.()2() 26278.5 6.31 152.9 3.104 8.42 191.7 1.2.33 0.701 14.9 65.8 ri57* 1.226 28164.8 6..i« 147.5 1.991 8.89 .3.55.2 1.0.35 0.771 16.6 65.9 MSK* i.imo 247.14.2 6.63 117.3 1.143 8.42 297.0 0.816 0.9(n 10.1 53.9 1.171 28889.7 7.02 141.8 2.054 8.71 273.3 1.013 0.832 12.4 80.3 l-KiO* 1.282 18013.9 5.21 106.8 0.796 10.45 498.8 0.774 0.613 11.2 74.7 IWil* 1.1.34 28174.9 5.93 1.39.3 3.478 9.34 297.0 0.950 0.729 13.9 72.8 l'U>2* I.II7S 24400.5 5.07 120.3 2.983 7.73 263.7 0.991 0.69(1 11.8 58.7 1.187 .14.362.8 6.6.1 132.2 2.120 9.19 .351.6 0.802 0.673 10.5 87.4 1I(.4* 1.240 33379.0 7.«)S 134.3 2.053 9.57 4m.K 0.793 0.(.77 9.6 63.2 IM.S* 1.224 2953').2 l>.20 124.2 I.043 7.97 49.1.1 1.083 0.(i9'J 11.6 56.6 IKiO* MW2 2WN.5 5.''2 119.2 1.510 8.12 2(>K.(. 0.7.1.1 O..S«>K 9,8 73.2 Appendix 7; Elemental Concentrations (in parts per million) for Sherds, Clays, and Sands AniJ l-U I1-: 111" KH SH SC SR TA TH Til /N I-167* 1.107 34.103.1 8.03 127.3 1.911 8.98 314.3 0.795 0.700 U.5 57.9 I'lfiK* 1.1'JO 33945.9 (>.85 127.6 1.880 8.85 294.9 0.740 0.656 12.0 58.0 1.184 .33287.9 6.70 126.6 2.054 8.64 264.6 0.7.39 0.613 9.2 57.6 I-171)* 1.16.1 25085.7 4.44 164.7 4.8(HI 7.01 406.6 0.767 0.564 11.2 72.8 I-17!* I.2.'i2 31103.9 5.27 12.3.7 1.278 8.41 366.0 0.941 0.674 11.7 64.2 I'172* 1.2.'>7 26906.3 6.11 110.3 1.225 8.85 .337.9 1.043 0.921 10.4 60.6 I-173* l-.l.TS .37591.7 5.15 115.2 1.4.50 10.79 411.8 0.726 0.684 U.3 86.0 I-174* 1.18'J 28460.4 5.38 132.5 2.(K)9 8.86 398.9 2.511 0.7.34 11.8 65.9 I'I75* 1..VJI 30789.1 f>.(Mi 124.4 1.296 10.02 336.8 1..341 1.074 12.8 84.5 I-176* 1.22.5 2.5315.7 7..30 141.4 1.618 7.64 337.6 0.994 0.773 12.5 33.2 I-177* 1.272 32198.6 6.(M 114.0 1.1.58 9.05 454.6 0.849 0.693 11.9 67.0 I-I78' 1..148 37129.5 5.36 117.5 1.525 10.94 402.3 0.768 0.705 10.9 86.4 IM7y* 1.228 28(H)9.6 6.23 119.6 1.148 8.17 322.5 1.192 0.784 12.8 63.2 I-I83* 1.170 27486.6 7.37 149.6 1.801 8.70 .389.6 0.982 0.740 14.2 57.9 I-184* 1.164 28305.9 (>.12 144.6 1.727 8.81 379.2 0.980 0.8.39 12.7 62.1 I'M 85* 1.222 32570.3 6.03 150.2 1.880 10.67 439.2 0.979 0.825 15.6 81.9 I'186* l.N.S 28288.4 5.(M 108.1 0.984 7.40 537.6 0.957 0.659 12.0 55.6 I-187* 1.144 29473.5 5.69 14.3.9 1.741 8.92 .387.(> 0.954 0.732 1.3.2 60.0 I-188* 1.324 .30937.4 5.52 113.7 1.108 8.50 468.8 0.808 0.722 12.3 59.9 I-I89* 1.184 31566.3 5.87 111.5 1.032 7.73 518.6 0.969 0.630 1.3.1 56.7 I'I'JO* 1.071 25714.2 6.53 1.32.3 2.311 8.21 315.8 1.002 0.766 1.3.4 71.7 iior 1..35.S 37461.9 5.77 115.0 1.379 9.()ll 470.') 0.821 0.691 10.3 69.8 I'192* 1.215 32505.7 (1.49 120.1 1.103 8.33 465.8 1.105 0.745 11.6 62.0 MW* 1.1.14 2414(1.8 5.8(1 137.0 3.438 8.(10 258.(> 1.057 0.849 14.0 74.9 • UtWJJll IliUili Appendix 7: Elemental Concentrations (in parts per million) for Sherds, Clays, and Sands liU liU I-I-; III' KB SI) SC SR TA IB TII ZN i'i'iy4' 1.194 .12081.9 .-5.-1.1 119.2 1.089 8.33 447.0 0.897 0.638 11.4 62.6 niw 1.187 .1226.'>.1 .">.62 114.1 1.052 7.47 479.5 0.801 0.592 9.8 54.8 1.24.^ .1.1412.2 6.1.5 I3I.I 1.1.10 8.70 4.10.1 1.022 0.678 12.2 60.2 1.202 27648..^ 6.4.1 150.9 2.575 9.14 316.1 1.017 0.935 14.0 76.8 I'l-l'JB* 1.2.">4 27.160.9 7.01 147.1 1.6.15 7.85 300.4 1.019 0.871 1.1.1 52.6 I'ri'j'j' l.dhll 2.5 21.->.2 6.19 164.6 1.087 8.37 215.1 1.1.55 0.725 15.9 63.7 ri'2()(>* 1.2.12 .12.126.7 .5.71 126.4 l.HH) 8.58 .189.7 1.032 0.691 12.6 63.6 l'l-201' l.l'Jl .1098.1.6 .5.11 118.1 l.or>i 8.11 479.3 0.996 0.644 11.5 73.9 l'l'"2()2* 1.14.1 2.'51.18..'5 5.17 I2I.4 1.028 9.26 410.9 0.923 0.676 10.5 64.6 l'l"203* 1.260 27.10.S.1 8.08 141.8 1.2(W 8.43 311.4 3.317 0.907 14.7 60.6 IM"2(M* I.IOS 2365.S.1 7.79 112.0 1.212 7.33 309.9 1.062 0.726 20.7 58.6 l'l'2(W 1.186 26747.0 6.10 132.9 1.609 8.20 4.19.2 0.923 0.752 1.1.8 79.9 l'|-2()ft* 1.017 24887..1 6.64 122.H 1.565 7.36 487.5 0.874 0.611 13.5 68.3 l'l"207* 1.2'JO .10229.1 6.02 118.9 1.088 9.65 373.5 1.153 0.927 10.9 66.3 l'l'"2()8* 1.118 26890.8 6.10 1.19.4 1.664 8..14 .147.0 l.(M)9 0.716 12.2 7.1.1 l'l-2l)!>* 1.1.S7 .10.14 7..') .5.74 115.2 0.948 7.57 491.9 0.802 0.541 10.1 69.7 1M'21(>* 1.160 28883.6 .5.55 119.1 1.170 8.42 406.1 1.178 0.764 11.2 78.4 l'|-2II' 1.2.11 2987.1.9 6.17 125 ..5 1.220 8.77 .1.13.5 1.187 0.741 12.0 77.7 n-212» 1.178 28211.6 6.69 1.19.8 1.684 8.87 .196.5 1.084 0.731 15.0 79.2 l*l-2l.l* 1.072 26.'i61.6 6.48 125.4 2.019 8.03 416.7 0.825 0.646 12.4 72.1 I'I2N* I.IW 2721I..1 6.89 148.0 1.725 H.75 143.6 0.964 0.755 14.0 74.7 I.I.VS 24901.0 7.12 139.(. 1.617 7.79 424.7 0.927 0.7.14 ll.l 60.8 1.142 .16117.1 5.6t. 120.1 1.406 1(1.51 4.1K.0 0.881 0.672 10.8 92.8 I'I217* 1.207 26411.9 6.1'; 153.1 1.800 8.15 156,7 1.005 0.753 12.4 68.0 Appendix 7; Elemental Concentrations (in parts per million) for Sherds, Clays, and Sands )iil i:u ll-l 111- KH su SC SR TA m III Z.N I.21S 25838.0 4.87 125.1 1.450 9.83 359.6 1.402 0.743 11.2 67.8 l'l'274* 1.322 .3W78.1 6.05 111.0 1..362 9.85 444.6 0.796 0.746 9.9 78.8 l'l"27S* 1.23S 33959.3 6.48 119.2 1.209 8.29 430.0 1.048 0.687 11.6 64.3 l'l-276» 1.3fi(> 25728.8 7.13 104.7 1.072 8.97 .360.8 1.207 0.989 i.3.1 56.3 j>|.-277* 1,223 26624.8 7.67 129.6 1.629 7.75 422.0 0.988 0.920 1.3.4 60.5 l»l'278* 1.473 27028.7 7.96 121.2 1.163 9.63 .331.7 1.072 0.937 18.8 59.3 l'l-27'J' 1.123 31214.2 5.65 132.4 1.259 8.17 357.4 0.873 0.595 10.9 61.0 1.147 31101.7 6.20 110.6 0.940 7.62 506.5 1.018 0.736 12.1 63.8 IM'28r l.(M6 30125.0 7.09 127.2 2.415 9,27 .331.5 l.Otl 0.868 11,4 77.4 l'l-282* 0.977 26364.3 6.05 129.8 2.053 8.94 319,3 0.793 0.662 lO.I .59,7 l'l'283* 1.1'Ji) 33615.4 6.25 108.5 1.179 8.61 460.4 0.808 0,732 11.7 69,8 l'l>284' 1.184 33698.5 6.13 123.4 1.089 8.55 410,7 0.993 0,756 U.7 71,2 l'|-285* t.(mo 24720.6 7.84 114.8 1.294 7.64 309.2 0.976 0,783 1.3.1 57,2 J»l'28f)* l.(>48 27541.3 7.12 1.36.0 2.7.38 7.81 283.9 1.183 0.855 15.3 90.5 I»1'28T 1.212 31991.2 6.33 127.0 1.249 8.69 3H.I 1.222 0.813 12,0 74.3 l'l"288» 1.108 27182.5 7.00 127.7 3.712 8.32 .306.3 1.296 0.825 12,9 78.9 PI'28'J* 1.017 29757.6 5.47 98.5 1.052 6.69 552.6 0.705 0.486 9.6 54.0 l»l'"29()* 1.128 26368.2 7.73 139.4 1.751 7.59 401.9 0.883 0,734 18.4 60.2 PI. 291* 1.271 31544.4 7.83 108.1 1.015 7,84 449.6 1..333 0,781 11.9 62.4 PI-292* 1.270 .34724.2 9.12 142.1 4.674 10.53 264.9 1.085 0.987 17.3 83.1 I'1-34 7* 1.1S4 28099.5 6.77 125.4 1.455 8.19 369.5 0.929 0.789 13.1 71.4 l'IM48* 1.137 29128.8 8.93 137.2 1.722 8.37 342.0 1.006 0.791 1.3.0 74.9 J'1-349* 1.147 33959.4 6.51) 1 10.9 1.092 K.O(i 47K.4 1.113 0.657 12.3 71,6 IM'3S(r 1.24(1 35347.4 6.41 1(13.1 1.312 9.23 44 AniJ i;u 11- III- KH SB SC SK lA IB Tn ZN I'lM/i 1 • i.tm 2«.1(i().(i (..47 140.1 1.445 8.02 .337.8 0.920 0.766 12.7 68.1 I'l.lS:!' l.U>4 29«).3S,'J 7..34 142.1) 1.708 8.66 300.8 0.929 0.747 13.6 74.6 1.2(15 29401.6 K.2K 137.4 1.780 8.52 .349.7 0.954 0.770 18.8 68.8 1.2.13 .14417.1 6..18 107.0 1.147 8.10 512.2 1.116 0.718 11.7 72.5 .KtCiKS.."? (1.17 142.1 1.704 8.(>9 321.0 1.017 0.783 15.4 76.8 I'I'.ISV 1 .U'J(> 27622..^ (1.32 131.3 1.817 7.88 .151.4 0.936 0.786 12.5 72.7 nasK' 1.11'J 2M)4H.4 7.11 122.8 l.(>40 8.12 476.5 0.901 0.742 12.2 73.3 i.l4'J 2KIK5.0 ().2() 11.3.6 1.915 8.33 405.0 U.88fl 0.687 10.3 67.3 I'lOfid* 1.198 31104.(1 7.17 145.7 1.798 8.88 .355.3 1.031 0.782 1.3.6 78.0 I'l.ior 1.2'.)l) 413.S1.4 (>.08 114.1 1.898 10.92 529.9 0.726 0.786 9,9 93.7 IM-37K* 1.22K 3.1(111.(> 7.24 109.9 1.131 8.84 336.5 0.792 0.734 11.5 80.1 I.III2 2«320.7 7.97 129.5 1.209 7.26 286.6 0.755 0.699 11.6 70.9 n-38ii' 1.20.S 32(>S.S.2 (..27 122.2 1.118 9.38 275.9 0.831 0.781 lO.G 86.8 IM3Kr 1.2(11 .3.1477.3 (1.92 I49.K 2.791 10.80 228.4 l.(K)6 0.786 20.4 76.0 1.179 31(i(i2.0 7.22 126.1 l.(.38 8.63 238.4 0.900 0.850 11.5 72.8 1.24'J 3ti33«.K (i.(i5 145.9 1.711 9.63 431.6 l.(KI2 l.(K)7 15.9 161.8 I'l-.IM • 1.11(1 2K.562.7 7.22 129.5 I..198 8.95 243.4 0.907 0.718 12.0 121.2 1.12'J .V1I)H4.7 (..(.5 108.4 1.117 9.59 325.9 0.812 0.672 10.7 91.7 I'13K(. 1.21(1 32794.S 6.32 120.7 1.037 8.12 479.2 1.095 0..362 12.2 41.7 I'I3K7 l.dlll 2.19.57.9 7.(m 131.8 2.280 7.61 3.39.8 1.191 0.409 1.3.9 49.6 1'I3HK 1.2.S2 .34737.') (1.92 127.4 1.106 8.11 421.7 1.103 0.365 13.7 43.5 I'lMK'J l.N'> 314(i«.7 (..K4 114.1 1.049 9.69 .162.5 1.284 0.923 14.8 42.6 ri-.V)|) 1..1.17 32(.HI.(. 6.72 148.7 1.422 10.74 263.0 0.959 1.118 11.5 54.4 I'l'.V)! l.im-t 2.S 3.53.1 7.2K 112.9 1.1.1(1 7.87 37(1.8 0.«'»7 0.815 10.5 51.0 Appendix 7: Elemental Concantrations (in parts per million) for Sherds, Clays, and Sands lid i:iJ 1"H III- HH SH sc: SH 1 A TH Til /.N l'I.VJ2 1.16(1 .1(I14.<>.1 6.23 15.1.3 1.599 9.68 328.9 (1.931 l.(KI2 13.4 50.8 I'lMW 1.1% .11014.0 6.20 117.4 1.28.1 «..54 379.9 1.192 0.385 11.8 44.9 l'l'394 1.2(H 28867..'» 7.17 121.7 1.279 7.93 502.3 1.196 0.491 13.3 47.7 1M3'J5 1.26(1 36482.1 6.46 109.5 1.398 9..16 540.2 0.792 0.374 10.7 74.0 I'I'.TJf) 1 ..1.1.1 .10814.2 6.46 146.2 1.325 9.45 290.0 0.871 0.423 11.6 52.1 l'1397 I.2.S.S .1(ttl2.() 6.89 128.8 1.321 8.33 .151.9 1.309 0.421 12.6 72.1 I'I'.VJB 1.2'JK 32.S05.7 6.54 129,0 1.219 10.19 290.3 0.897 0.440 12.1 57.4 I'l-.TJO 1.224 29393.6 6.48 126.8 I.IOI 8.18 375.9 1.228 0.423 12.2 68.6 1.1'J() 31459.9 6.28 115.7 1.196 8.61 422.4 1.619 0.911 12.3 61.5 I'IMOl 1.164 28647.6 6.67 125.8 1.192 8.02 4.13.7 1.219 0.684 12.1 54.6 l'l-4()2 1.06.1 2786.5.1 7.67 157.4 1.951 8.45 410.2 0.987 0.947 14.9 65.0 l'l"4()3 1.166 28466.6 6.57 13.1.7 1.350 8.90 .17.1.1 0.864 0..193 10.7 71.7 l'l'4()4 1.127 327.53..5 6.25 153.3 1.376 10.55 .147.0 0.921 0.454 12.3 79.8 1'I4()S 1.2.1.S .10171.8 6.54 1.15.2 1.2.16 8.32 417.2 1.249 0.967 13.6 60.4 l'l"406 1.171 31540.8 6.54 118.7 0.975 7.86 656.7 1.021 0..159 12.3 .54.1 l'l-407 1.027 24267.6 6.79 1.13.3 2.4.18 7.70 3tM).5 1.077 0.898 13.6 62.3 l'l-4(m 1.2T> 32059.1 7.01 136.1 1..191 10.55 270.1 1.093 0.523 14.9 75.0 IM'4(W 1.25(1 .15948.1 5.85 105.7 1.3(>5 9.(K» 509.5 0.723 0.357 Kt.O 64.2 ri'4l() 1.42.5 35800.6 7.49 132.7 1.1.19 9.74 516.1 0.962 0.745 14.3 81.3 I'Rll l.,S27 .14765.4 7.85 162.6 1.799 12.16 201.0 1.028 0.993 17.4 184.6 I'I'4I2 1.2K.1 29998.7 6.63 1.10.7 1.231 8.64 416.3 1.153 0.728 12.6 74.5 I')-4I3 l.l'i? .1.1550.7 6.42 118.8 1.065 7.90 4(>6.9 0.901 0.(i39 11.2 70.2 1'1'414 1.17(1 32109.1 7.29 140.3 1.338 10.84 254.0 0.932 0.812 11.9 97.0 l'l-4I.S l.l'M .10850.1 8.49 114.9 1.31(1 9.K9 185.4 l.K.l 0.821 33.7 71.1 Appendix 7; Elemental Concentrations (in parts per million) for Sherds, Clays, and Sands till i:u IM III- Kl) SH S(? su 1 A TH Til /.N 1.437 36279.7 6.87 188.5 1.832 11.86 257.5 1.161 (1.978 17.4 120.6 I'I417 l.2(»i .34376.0 8.23 1.35.2 1.931 9.03 .384.2 0.797 0.636 11.1 67.1 l'l-418 I.O.SH 25.'i48.0 6.12 132.1 3.320 8.14 370.9 0.880 0.727 12.0 79.2 1.233 32(M4.4 7.33 1.33.2 1.952 8.72 3.39.3 0.7.35 0.657 10.5 67.6 ri-42() l.2'J2 31W3.8 7.93 159.5 2.311 10.79 287.6 0.922 0.711 14.6 103.5 ri-42l l.2.3(» 3t)327.6 7.83 133.3 1.701 8.50 285.9 0,762 0,440 10.2 70.2 I'I422 I.I.IH 29.384.1 7.58 120.4 I..5.55 8.28 .332.1 0.723 0.607 10.2 67.8 l'l'423 1.171) 29.57.3.2 9.07 126.6 1.570 8.28 323.3 0.830 0.686 12.7 63.9 rR24 I.IK7 .3().'S4ft.« 7.37 1.33.8 1.265 9.27 4.30.7 1.244 0.685 13.0 79.3 I'I'42.'S 1.226 33HH6.8 8.97 124.1 1.778 8.99 293.« 0.801 0.551 10.9 67.0 l'l42ri 1.2'Jt) 31031.7 7.97 142.2 1.683 8.69 422.9 0.777 t).705 10.8 80.6 l'l-427 1.237 37461.6 6.06 122.0 1.050 10.72 560.5 0.964 0.415 1.5.3 87.1 I'I42« 1.293 397.58..1 5.70 97.5 0.621 10.12 687.4 0.794 0.3.33 12.0 108.2 l'l'42y I.I4K 28493.6 7.21 140.6 3.856 9.35 .371.6 0.948 0.825 1.3.4 116.0 l'l'4.1() 1.1 (I'J 27.'i01..'5 6.13 141.2 3.659 9.87 276.2 1.0.33 0.663 12.9 80.8 l*l'431 l.2.3y 31472.8 7.57 1.39.0 1.962 8.74 .377.9 0.797 0.602 12.5 70.5 l'l'432 l.l(>7 32769.8 8.13 119.4 1.8.39 9.43 .327.4 0.938 0.629 n.o 60.3 l'14.14 1.3.36 30283.1 8.48 119.6 1.985 9.51 415.7 2.266 0.6.35 17.7 67.4 I'I43.'> 1.17.^ 31616.0 8.02 1.30.5 1.7.39 8.29 .348.7 0,721 0.620 11.4 69.8 l'l'43t» 1.13K 27853.5 7.23 139.9 3.833 9.23 366.3 0.989 (1.653 12.6 77.3 l'l-437 1.236 315.39.1 10.04 129.6 1.583 8.32 270.6 0.782 0.440 11.1 K1.4 l'l'43H 1,231 33265.3 6.(11 127.3 1.150 8.81 512.0 1.078 0.619 12.8 74.2 IM4.V» l.22tl 281911.9 7.97 152.1 1.754 8.9(> 378.7 1.184 0.783 15.7 75.2 I'r440 1.21'» 289V3.9 7,1(1 154.9 1.741 K.«7 412.5 0.9K(i 0,(.9| 14.3 75.1 Appendix 7; Elemental Concentrations (in parts per million) for Sherds, Clays, and Sands lid FH IIF KB SH St: .SK lA TH Til ZN l'R41 1.117 2S841.3 6.68 128.2 1.791 8.46 .178.3 1.108 0.708 12.2 74.2 I'I442 1.090 2.'56y.1.4 6.71 126.7 1.217 10.05 480.9 1.020 0.673 12.7 64.9 1.21)5 276.'i8.1 8.05 140.8 1.898 8.49 474.2 l.(M)5 0.739 14.5 70.0 I'IM44 1.212 28.1 •lid i:u III-' KH su SC SR TA TH Til ZN 1.194 29187.3 8.97 1.39.6 1.762 8.07 .388.1 0.95.5 0.510 17.5 84.5 I'IMfih \ .363 4(H)28.I) 6.m 116.0 1.353 10.22 4.38.4 0.759 1.059 10.6 76.9 l'l'467 32493.4 6.93 115.6 1.122 8.13 451.8 0.862 0.449 11.9 7.3.1 I.2I8 31874.0 6.40 111.4 0.978 7..38 429.8 1.016 0.432 12.0 86.3 1.229 31.S13.9 6.80 122.2 1.142 8.54 .365.4 1.137 0.515 13.0 95.4 l'l'47() 1.2.'i() 36783.6 6..33 108.9 1..387 9.73 451.6 0.718 0.594 10.2 101.0 Pl'471 l.l.S'J 31.397.2 6.61 105.3 1.125 7.58 483.6 0.761 0.411 10.7 61.2 l»l'472 1.123 27663..'* 7.09 128.5 1..303 8.27 249.5 1.004 0.476 1.3.2 90.8 l>l-473 1.143 29618.2 6.83 147.0 1.854 8.57 322.9 0.918 0.484 13.0 50.5 IM-474 1.2(>4 .3()150..'> 7.66 151.7 1.782 8.32 315.8 0.965 1.191 14.3 92.4 l'l'47S 1.214 2'J46.'5..5 7.30 151.8 1.790 8.39 286.5 1.018 1.115 15.4 91.5 IM-47f) 1.20(> 33876.5 6.90 107.2 1.207 8.41 518.4 0.837 0.793 10.9 93.0 IM'477 1.112 32863.3 6.05 98.4 1.684 8.51 479.6 0.633 0.390 9.5 102.0 l'l-478 1.2.36 38640.0 5.69 115.9 1.829 10.42 470.5 0.7.35 0.459 10.8 113.3 l'l'47'J 1.1'J7 28658.6 6.23 140.2 1.744 8.21 462.4 0.953 0.504 13.3 89.1 l'l'48() 1.1.33 26424.3 5.74 124.4 1.409 8.89 309.1 0.877 1.227 11.6 100.4 l'l'482 1.201 26660.2 7.38 144.5 1.7.33 9.73 326.5 0.915 0.661 12.6 88.5 J'l-4«3 l.(l()S 29347.5 7.(M 153.7 1.741 8.44 262.1 0.9(M 0.466 13.6 87.8 l'l-484 1.21.i 31578.8 8.17 151.2 2.069 8.99 429.0 1.001 0.563 17.4 96.5 1.281) 32260.3 6.31 114.3 1.164 8.04 398.3 0.836 1.103 11.5 85.0 l'l-4H(> 1.26S 35056.2 <>.46 127.7 1.190 7.90 569.3 1.063 0.465 11.8 75.2 I'I487 1.262 3665(1.5 6.30 109.0 1.237 9.80 7.13.0 0.765 0.620 10.9 81.4 l'l-48H l.-'i.SlI 38891.. 1 6.41 180.5 0.670 15.00 421.5 1.072 1.270 13.4 103.1 l'14K') 1.438 .3li(H1.5 7.62 167.11 1.550 9.01 467.4 1.1119 0.771 1.3.5 69.3 Appendix 7: Elemental Concentrations (in parts per million) lor Sherds, Clays, and Sands lid i:u I'l- ilF Kii SH SC SR lA m Til ZN I'IM'JO 1.298 296.50.7 7.21 158.9 1.830 10.22 288.9 0.870 0.815 12.8 105.0 l'l-4'Jl 1.200 .15072.2 6.16 101.9 I..330 9.13 773.7 0.715 0.604 9.2 72.6 1.21.5 .13211..1 6.94 111.9 1.121 8.78 526.4 0.850 0.727 12.6 68.4 Pl'493 1.079 27941.0 6.43 140.4 1.782 8.07 589.2 0.900 0.708 12.3 62.2 l'l-494 1.269 33748..5 6.46 131.5 1.1.58 8.50 494.6 1.031 0.745 13.5 65.6 I'lM'JS 1.261 35979.2 6.48 123.5 1.171 8.77 561.2 1.036 0.738 12.5 68.1 l'l'496 i..iin .35737.2 6.17 131.7 1.438 8.53 546.0 0.967 0.671 14.7 66.2 I'R'J? 1.16:) 28969.9 6.28 114.5 1.086 6.66 602.3 1.045 0.499 11.1 63.7 I'l'49« 1.202 28596.3 7.25 145.7 1.847 8.57 484.4 0.984 0.829 13.9 66.3 l'l''40'J 1.122 29897.0 7.43 108.9 2.264 9.03 .379.1 0.896 0.684 12.7 80.5 I'l-SOO I.KM 26836.8 7.08 139.6 1.719 8.46 387.5 0.921 0.625 14.0 70.0 l»l'5()l 1.247 .32120.1 6.93 116.8 1.190 8.30 510.1 1.127 0.725 13.1 105.9 1M'502 1.171 26362.3 6.37 139.5 1.769 8.32 433.1 0.863 0.678 12.1 105.4 1.178 28792.5 7.22 152.6 2.013 8.56 309.5 1.002 0.768 13.7 72.7 1.178 25678.2 7.27 140.4 1.698 8.07 468.3 0.867 0.741 16.4 70.9 l'F5()f> 1.103 26130.1 6.64 121.1 1.445 8.50 .361.9 0.878 0.646 1.3.9 72.6 l'l-\5()7 1.241 29788.7 7.38 161.1 1.801 8.89 4.36.7 1.050 0.815 14.2 68.8 I'FSOB 1.180 29517.3 6.88 157.2 1.902 8.96 .394.7 0.905 0.844 14.5 68.6 I'I'Sd'J 1.0.10 25059.8 6.52 115.1 2.916 7.42 496.6 0.920 0.776 11.7 96.9 IT.'SK) 1.181 272.35.3 7.27 1.38.5 1.543 7.75 370.5 0.917 0.533 17.1 57.1 IMVi 11 1.114 26102.7 8.00 143.7 1.510 7.79 374.6 1.006 0.730 12.2 .54.2 l'l-512 I.1.S.1 29324.7 6.42 151.4 1 . till i:u rii ill' KH SH SC SR TA IB Til ZN l'F.S15 1.1.35 28208.3 7.(M) 144.4 1.668 8.45 .352.7 0.849 0.780 13.0 65.1 I'l-SU) 1.187 28()1W.2 7.47 156.1 1.803 8.10 381.1 0.9.34 0.770 14.2 59.3 I'l-Sl? I.24II 32641.7 6.46 123.7 1.198 7.97 570.8 0.862 0.658 11.8 60.3 I'l'SlS 1.2.57 2W09.6 6.83 1.39.1 1.107 8.45 390.9 1..321 0.716 12.6 64.4 I'l-siy 1.18(1 28370.5 7.43 1.30.2 I..362 8.77 .341.1 0.966 0.827 13.3 63.5 n52(> 1.2.5fi .33728.3 6.64 122.9 1.159 8.42 476.0 I.OIM 0.688 13.0 64.2 l'l'S21 1.188 34105.1 7.28 122.7 1.167 8.47 442.0 0.818 0.719 11.1 72.6 m22 i.loy .30754.6 7.23 146.5 1.312 9.83 .368.2 0.968 0.898 14.1 68.2 n-523 1.254 29538.2 7.75 153.1 1.931 8.33 411.1 1.014 0.902 15.5 60.5 IM-524 1.233 32698.6 7.12 118.7 1.218 8.56 580.8 0.747 0.738 10.6 67.7 l'l'525 1.178 29158.8 7.67 153.8 1.853 8.68 449.3 0.907 0.527 15.0 63.0 n'52f» 1.258 24917.6 6.7(1 130.7 1.103 8.95 .399.1 0.955 0.888 11.3 59.0 l'F527 1.349 28671.0 7.55 132.4 1.119 8.87 616.1 1.1.56 0.943 1.3.3 57.4 Pl'528 1.166 29505.0 7.(M 1.5.3.2 1.825 8.70 480.1 0.990 0.815 14.4 61.3 nS29 1.184 28741.1 9.19 152.2 1.765 8.27 450.5 (1.837 0.571 32.6 62.6 l'|-530 1.271 30.306.9 7.22 131.9 1.267 8.59 .3.55.7 1.251 0.905 12.4 67.7 l'IS3l IVJM 25636.8 7.39 176.0 1.1.50 8..38 148.0 1.354 0.763 17.9 63.3 IM-532 1.267 38691.5 5.72 118.4 1.281 10.59 575.4 0.760 0.8.34 10.8 97.0 1.187 28739.8 7.20 143.8 I. lid i-;u I'M III' Kli SH SC SK TA r» HI ZN I'l-S.VJ 1..17I .174.15.1 7.90 167.8 1.5.15 11.88 2.14.1 0.924 0.8.1.1 1.1.6 118.1 PI'.S4(» i.2sy .12201.6 9.11 1.14.0 1.561 <>.22 125.2 0.941 0.721 12.7 81.6 l'IS41 1.271 2'J635.8 8.88 149.4 1.871 9.15 401.5 1.261 1.027 14.5 1QI.9 l'IVt42 l.2«7 .161.17.1 7.92 1.15.2 1.221 10.24 272.6 0.8.12 0.698 11.6 88.6 IMS-}.! 1.401 .17228.2 7.61 170.2 1.571 12.08 .142.7 0.918 0.801 11.6 112.0 I'IS44 1.26(1 .10424.« 6.59 128.5 1.245 8.46 .198.1 1.252 0.891 1.1.2 76.9 I'I545 l.29() .15 IS 7.1 6.82 148.8 1.264 11.02 264.8 0.889 0.779 12.4 98.4 l'i;>4r> I.2II .1.18.1S.'J 7.25 171.6 2.791 10.8.1 19.1.1 0.9.19 0.699 1.1.3 94,2 l'I.S47 i..rs7 .16766.4 8.48 146.0 1.898 1(1.47 424.4 1 .(»19 0.701 14.8 105.2 l'l-.'>4K 1.171 .lO'J.l'J..! 6.18 120.0 1.264 8.60 445.8 1.151 0.740 12.0 75.8 I'I54'J l.4'J7 .14.175.4 6.6.1 142.(1 1..547 11..55 120.0 1.412 0.975 18.5 88.7 I'lSSO I.IW .1.1189.4 7.60 145.0 1.688 10.8.1 410.0 0.990 0.778 14.7 120.7 PISS \ 1.1()2 28157.8 7.12 152.1 2.587 9.01 198.1 1.081 0.R15 14.2 97.5 l*iSS2 I.2SS .11.1.19.8 6.16 127.0 1.252 8.88 .185.9 1.299 0.757 12.2 80.6 l'ISS.1 1..!()» .1.1799.6 7.92 147.9 1.210 10.20 198.8 0.797 0.648 1.1.1 68.4 I'ISS4 1.304 14215..1 7.81 114.4 1.222 1()..11 .179.9 0.892 0.721 1.1.2 79.9 I'lSSS 1.24(1 .15728..1 6.64 146.6 1.481 10.70 24K.8 0.902 0.692 12.0 85..1 I'l'SSf. 1.21(1 .14128.0 7.47 11.1.6 1.219 9.86 1.l>:.1 0.888 0.(>99 13.4 70.5 I'ISS7 1.217 .1.1519.9 7.46 118.1 1.217 9.S6 15V.2 0.797 0.411 10.3 74.8 I'ISSK 1.2.1.1 .1.1985.0 6.78 122.4 1.256 9.64 .1.11.1 0.8.15 0.814 12.0 75.1 l')'SS') 1.22(1 .1.1001 )..1 7.20 11.1.5 1.021 9.79 .187.1 0.875 0.4(i9 11.6 78.4 IMSI.II 1..10(i Kill.1.1 7.08 112.7 1.221 9.21 127.1 0.842 0.661 11.4 70.7 I..111 .155(i2.7 7.HI 146.8 1.291 10.84 2.14.4 0.928 0.745 12.5 90.5 l'IS(i2 1,2«2 14')54.9 7.22 140.1 1.212 ltl.54 18^.7 0.871 0.750 14.4 90.4 Appendix 7: Elemental Concentrations (in parts per million) for Sherds, Clays, and Sands AniJ i:u I-I-; iir lil) SH SC SR •|A r» ni y.N l.2(.y 3.3(H7.6 7.(.() 1.34.6 1.2.33 9.82 261.4 0.870 0.720 12.9 70.7 l'l'S()4 I.2U. 318.3().'J 6.76 173.6 1.958 10.11 298.7 0.938 0.829 16.4 90.0 I'lVtOS 1.173 2y 174.8 6.29 157.8 1.671 8.72 240.2 0.885 0.680 1.3.3 73.0 1.378 3U.47.2 7.65 147.6 1..369 111.43 328.1 1.218 0.861 15.7 82.3 l'KVi7 1.413 31()3I.() 6.23 172.8 0.602 11.18 437.3 1.277 1.083 1.3.7 71.8 l'IVi(>8 1.26y 3.S88I).7 7.79 1.39.0 1.191 10.48 320.3 0.852 0.744 11.8 85.2 l.|7y 2884(1.(1 7..36 1.38.1 1.513 9.09 464.1 0.964 0.687 1.3.2 72.4 I'l-.iVO 1.2.36 40671.3 .i.7.1 112..i 0.822 9.21 492.5 0.936 0.516 11.6 69.9 IM-571 l.2(>8 313l.'i.8 144.2 1.560 10.33 .335.3 l.UM 0.805 17.6 75.1 I'l-.i72 l..3.'i| 44278.8 7.97 126.9 2.437 1.5.46 198.4 1.091 0.956 14.6 90.6 l'i;573 1.141 29814.3 .*>.37 169.0 1.903 9.50 296.4 0.872 0.7(H) 14.9 81.3 »'l-574 1.234 324.3'J.S 5.94 131.^ 1.296 8.46 .387.1 0.911 0.707 11.6 77.5 I'l'.i75 1.172 27610.2 7.3« 100.3 I..368 M.OO .369.2 0.769 0.655 10.4 89.6 l'l-57 iiiJ l-U 1J-; III- KH SH .SC Sli lA IB 111 ZN I'l'.*i87 1.272 33375.5 7.08 147.9 2,097 10.79 2.38.3 0.992 0.835 14.5 139.9 IM'5«K 1,235 321.38.3 7.93 131.7 1.124 9.21 280.0 0.830 0.711 11.3 58.4 I.2KI 31.320.8 6.76 149.0 1.603 9.()9 229.2 0.937 0.834 13.4 76.4 1,1'J« .30.501.3 7.46 142.2 1.554 9.74 .333.1 0.992 0.726 12.3 82.3 l'15'JI 1,197 32015.7 6.50 1.30.7 1.205 9.44 363.8 0.783 0.657 10.4 66.3 I'lViya l,2HU 23175.1 7.25 120,0 1.299 8..37 .358.2 l.(M3 0.885 12.1 49.5 I'I'SO.I 1.219 28919.1 8.41 141.0 1.159 9.67 289.1 1.109 0.823 17.8 61.8 l,2.VJ 37165.4 6.01 140.0 1.784 10.90 .352.3 1.085 0.744 16.1 97.2 I'J-SW 1.609 44086.1 (>.56 187.1 0.605 16.45 285.7 1.190 1.2.34 14.4 129.7 I'I'S'Jft 1.218 32907.2 8.20 171.9 2.167 10.93 270.4 1.029 0.817 15.6 10.3.7 l'l'597 1.160 31128.2 8.04 129.1 1..342 9.13 251.0 0.893 0.()58 10.9 60.5 1.(185 27221.4 6.93 127.9 2.760 9.21 439.7 0.889 0.426 12.1 68.3 l'l'59'J I..148 42076.2 7.80 144.5 I..393 10.31 492.8 1.460 0.671 14.6 77.0 1.128 28833.4 6.26 169.6 1.865 9.12 366.1 0.960 0.704 15.4 66.6 1,367 379 J4.8 7.13 156.7 1.423 11.89 227.4 0.945 0.821 13.6 86.7 I'I'6{I2 1.262 .30721.7 6.63 128.7 1.324 8.16 416.1 1.132 0.682 12.7 85.2 1.214 3.3430.9 7.14 1.35.4 1.251 10.97 316.6 0.895 0.742 11.7 66.4 I'KUW 1,077 30936.4 7.45 140.4 1.514 9.52 324.3 0.963 0.694 12.4 110.5 l'l-Y)()S 1,154 30647.3 6.11 102.9 1.099 7.71 471.9 1.147 0.618 11.4 70.0 I'I-Y)()f> 1.1.38 .30125.3 (1,60 108,3 1.054 7.43 503,9 1.029 0.622 11.3 68.3 1,093 28976.8 (>.63 96,5 0.990 7.16 4,36,7 1.006 0.614 10.3 65.7 I'l'608 l.20.'i .34328,3 6.29 122.2 I..3.32 9.63 363,4 1.016 0.()49 10.6 76.1 1,227 32152.9 7.63 171.1 2.144 111,59 327.3 1.124 0.843 16.1 81.8 1.(170 2()KI4.2 (t,K2 1.19.(. 1,322 7,31 335.7 (1.7.3(1 (1.581 10.4 52.2 Appendix 7: Elemental Concentrations (in parts per million) for Sherds, Clays, and Sands \inil I-II l-li III- UH SH sc: su lA IB Til ZN I'lYi 11 l.-lOfi .1.1697.8 7.,18 111.1 1.156 8.70 442.8 0.896 0.634 1.3,5 82.6 1.223 .140H4.H 6.70 114.1 1,2.15 9.81 5(M).2 l.(M4 0,645 12,6 74.9 1.210 29677.9 7.00 1.16,7 1.515 9.82 272.2 0.949 0,807 12.4 72.1 1.107 2.W 1.5.1 5.79 1.10.5 I..149 9.45 .144.0 0.920 0.724 13.8 59.6 1..10S 51082.7 6.25 115.2 0.9(H 1.1.11 532.1 0,903 (1.671 14.0 108.4 l'F6K. 1.2.SI .1(M)I«.9 7..14 154.0 2.518 10.0.1 .151.3 1.0.10 0.867 14.0 89.8 1..117 .12754..1 7.42 1.15.8 1,585 10.78 .156.3 1.160 0.895 17.2 84.9 I'l'KlH l.UH) 2925 2..1 7.44 119.6 1.456 9.6.1 467,4 0.878 0.722 tl.4 1.54.1 I'lVilV 1.260 294.10.4 6,19 124.0 J,209 8.55 472.9 J.J87 0.534 J 2.5 77.0 l'l-62() 1.1'J7 29.H7.5 5.94 99.7 1,069 7.82 461.9 0.802 0,651 10.7 67.5 I.(m2 23228.8 6.07 119.8 1.901 8..15 .157.6 0.861 0,812 10.3 58.0 l'|-622 1.227 .11485.5 6,46 125.4 1.217 8.86 274.7 1.204 0.737 11.9 96.9 l'IVi23 1.2.S.1 .11127.7 6,68 1.10.0 1.1.18 9.10 .157.4 1.579 0,750 13.1 74.2 l'l'f>24 i..in .11959,2 8.(H 115,6 1,164 9,57 409.4 1.447 0.885 1.1.5 75.0 l'IYi2S 1.097 11472.1 7.(M 145.0 2.406 9.95 197.5 0.955 0.744 1.1.5 71.2 1.2f. iiiil i-:u II-: iir KB SB SC SR TA IB Til ZN I'lYi.lS l.22() 29597.5 8.70 143.5 2.206 10.15 246.8 l.(HH) 0.7.15 1.1.3 67.3 I'l-Yi.lfi 1.149 .11919.8 6.19 104.6 1.128 8.01 508.6 0.997 0.658 11.2 69.7 l'l-()37 1.251 .12098.0 6.47 130.8 l.2(KI 9.01 .187.7 1.2.16 0.816 12.2 87.3 l.2U» .14291.4 7.95 145.3 1.257 10.40 375.6 0.859 0.684 12.3 83.0 Pl'hS'J 1.211 31364.6 6..34 122.1 1.2m 9.(H) 296.0 1.192 0.694 12.0 92.5 I.II.1 2849.1.4 6.71 121.4 1.453 9.02 .158.1 0.905 0.666 11.0 87.6 l'IY)41 1..T58 29642.4 8.12 143.2 l.()»8 8.25 247.5 0.834 0.7.19 11.9 .54.0 (l.'J')7 29.180.9 6.20 133.0 1.4.16 9.12 318.3 0.769 0.622 13.0 106.7 I'lTH.I I.N4 .1.1141.5 7.25 12.1.9 1.144 9.50 287.9 0.843 0.574 J 0.4 85.1 l'IY)44 O.'JO'J 22.151..1 6.93 112.2 2.526 7.29 345.6 1.033 0.661 17.7 136.2 l'l'645 1.28 till i;u ri- III- KH S» s<: SK lA IH Til /.N l'l'66() l.l«7 .12.116.4 6..5y 116.4 I.0I3 8.13 398.6 1.093 (J.679 II.7 74.9 i'ir>i>i 1.123 31.508.1 7.6.5 117.0 1.210 9.01 378.2 0.746 0.386 9.8 149.7 1.738 .'i0677.(> 8.13 2(M.9 2.655 19.35 106.2 1.276 1.218 17.9 127.3 I'lYiO.I 1.088 2.i719.3 7.46 146.2 1..124 8.56 186.2 1.159 0.431 16.7 88.2 l'l()(.4 1..344 8.12 1.36.3 1.088 l().(>3 215.2 0.925 0.827 12.0 104.9 1.147 2'J679.2 6.76 117.5 1.870 8.89 496.1 0.869 0.715 10.7 195.4 l>l'(>r>(i 1.148 3089(1.1 7.80 131.0 2.420 8.95 .321.4 0.986 0..387 11.4 l(M.6 l.K>7 27'J(I7.A 6.4.5 108.1 1.417 9.77 406.6 0.892 0.422 11.8 98.9 l.l'J2 2684 l..i 7..38 131.4 1.710 8.(H 307.9 1.020 0.661 17.3 70.3 O.'JK.'S 237'J'J.2 11.25 102.(1 l.ori5 8.43 389.3 0.851 0.575 9.8 63.5 1.1(17 262l.'>.7 6.97 1.10.7 1.810 7.75 317.2 0.882 0.689 19.1 65.9 l.l.VS 27(M4..5 6.82 109.4 1.223 9.62 4.54.5 1.028 0.779 11.4 80.2 l.lSl 26S6'J.'J 7.57 J 20.4 1.293 9.23 389,7 0.837 0.6K) 11.5 <)7.3 l'|Vi73 I.1.18 27281.9 6.42 101.9 I.II6 7.65 .191.2 0.720 0.575 y.i 65.7 l'll>74 1.261 2W27.4 6.69 128.4 1.162 10.21 .151.8 1.042 0.5)2 12.0 9.3.0 l'l'675 l.d'W 20273.6 6.96 135.7 1.884 8.76 372.6 1.204 0.837 18.0 77.5 1.174 33277.8 10.00 164.3 3.832 8.88 292.4 1.508 0.818 15.8 81.7 l'l()77 1.1.'>2 27811.3 7.11 146.4 1.943 8.29 .308.5 0.968 1.190 14.0 94.3 l'l l'l(.7'J 1.117 26728.9 6.95 1.18.7 1.764 7.65 284.2 0.9(1(1 0.416 12.7 65.2 IM'fiHI) 1.174 .30.542.0 6.39 114.9 1.155 8.79 328.4 0.749 0.581 10.6 90.7 I'lf.Hl I.U>(I 2K733.2 6.K3 127.4 1.58(1 8.(.2 427.4 (1.903 0.(.59 12.8 92.6 riiiHJ 1.1.1H 24«(IS.() (i.iil 124.6 1.267 7.(10 410.4 (1.751 0.744 12.2 7(1.9 1.1 IH 285K4.7 5.71 127.2 2,144 8.71 348.1 0.588 12.3 1 13.3 Appendix 7; Elemental Concentrations (in parts per million) for Sherds, Clays, and Sands litl i-:u II- III' KH SH sc: .SU 1 A TH Til ZN l'l'684 I.IW .1(M)44.I 7.10 151.1 1.812 8.70 167.5 0.055 0.6.17 I2.« in.2 1.174 25.\17.7 7.06 111.8 1.6.15 7.42 .160.7 0.8V / 0.675 11.0 86.2 l'l'68(> 1.22(1 .m)33.7 6.41 II 1.6 2.065 I0..10 458.9 0.769 0.628 11.2 1.18.5 I.2.SH .1.167.1.7 6.71 117.2 1.218 8.40 440.7 1.110 0.429 12.4 98.5 PI-68H 1.412 .1.S8.11.'J 7.11 124.2 1.IM)8 11.70 170.5 0.804 0.700 10.7 141.0 I'lViK'i l.2(M .142(16.0 6.12 121.1 1.069 8.15 479.6 I..142 0.595 11.9 108.1 1.162 284.'>2..1 6..51 150.6 1.700 8..11 127.5 1.020 0.621 12.4 102.2 J'Rt'Jl 1.102 .12421.2 6.50 110.2 1.045 8..10 480.7 1.021 0.570 11.0 82.5 l'l-'692 1.22.'^ .l.'S6.i().7 6.10 108.8 1.684 9.54 540.1 0.840 0.611 10.4 91.8 P1'6'J3 1.2f)7 .1.S.121.0 7.55 117.8 1.211 8.88 401.5 0.877 0.552 11.1 88.6 l'lf)94 1.208 .1210.1.4 6.6.1 121.6 1.006 7.00 410.2 0.075 0.(i0.1 12.1 82.0 I'l-O'J.'i 1.266 11010.6 6.26 II2.I 1.086 7.87 462.5 1.004 0.626 11.8 80.1 i.2iy .14028.1) 6.57 125.1 1.051 8.77 448.4 0.001 0.505 14.1 84.5 l'|-6«J7 1.117 2561.1.0 0.22 118.4 1.264 7.81 272.2 1.107 0.418 14.1 86.4 I'I698 11I17..1 8.56 12.1.1 1.269 10.54 .156.6 5.890 2.040 11.9 79.5 1.074 26126..S 6.55 141.1 1.612 7.11 .161.0 0.870 0.5.14 12.7 56.6 2'J2(M.6 6.78 1.18.2 2.4.19 0.06 .150.7 1.002 (1.715 15.1 KM.O I.21.S 16080.9 6.06 12.1.7 1.404 11.07 428.7 1.018 0.586 11.2 115.1 l'l'7()2 1.266 .11411.0 7.1)1) 115.0 0.0.14 8.12 488.7 0.818 0.501 11.6 80.1 I'I-7(I3 i.2iy 14166.6 6.02 106.7 1.261 0.22 400.1 0.725 (1.584 10.6 04.7 l'l'7(>4 1.28.1 110.1.'».8 6.48 122.4 I.2.i0 10.04 167.8 1.146 0.776 12.1 75.5 l»l''71)5 1..1.^2 1.S601.1 6.84 112.6 1.150 0.17 454.5 0.750 0.805 10.2 100.5 I'I7(I(. 1.12S 28125.1 6.71 1.16.7 1.761 8.57 .161.7 I..1(11 (1.602 12.7 85.0 |'I7I)7 l.l.SH 201)18.1 8.lt,l 150.7 1.562 8 54 126.1 0.041 II.7IH, 11.4 7«.« Appendix 7; Elemental Concentrations (in parts per million) for Sherds. Clays, and Sands ilid i:u Mi III- Kli SH SC .S|{ lA in Til /.N IM'7()8 1.184 26424.8 7..30 126.5 1.367 9.23 316.0 1.012 0.958 10.8 97.7 I.I3S .losy.v.'i 6.92 162.2 2.303 9.66 221.9 1.0.16 0.711 15.1 167.0 l'171() 1 M'M) 290.50.7 6..18 127.5 1.708 8.46 457.7 0.941 0.607 13.1 87.2 l'l-7n i.ns 28288.8 7.16 141.4 1.837 8.36 350.6 0.941 0.644 17.0 86.5 I'I712 1.180 2792.1.5 6..16 141.9 1.974 8.37 .137.5 0.981 0.610 14.0 95.8 l'J-713 1.2.12 .12699.6 6.90 140.5 1.771 10.76 257.2 1.225 0.762 13.1 109.8 I'l-714 1.182 28262.8 9.32 1.15.8 1.728 8.08 519.5 1.006 0.680 14.8 91.5 I'l-?!.-* I.l.i4 29069.0 7.02 1.19.2 1.664 8.65 333.5 0.885 f).676 12.6 84.5 n-716 1.14.*> 28884.5 6.88 1.10.3 2.172 8.67 369.5 0.987 0.636 13.3 95.9 l'l-7J7 J.2(»y .15057.3 5.90 l(KI.6 1.269 9.14 591.7 0.792 0.584 9.7 98.8 I'I'7I8 1.267 .19171.5 5.70 107.6 1.290 9.86 509.1 0.809 0.501 10.8 102.4 PI-719 1.21)y .111.18.3 6.53 116.5 1.066 7.96 488.H 1.034 0.603 \\J 80.8 l'l-72l) 1.188 25221..1 6.56 119.5 1.240 8.17 410.4 0.972 0.633 13.4 61.0 l'l'72l I.KW 27819.0 6.02 132.8 1.8.19 8.47 6(M.3 0.851 0.585 12.9 91.7 IM722 1.1.VJ 3I)()9».7 6.25 164.0 1.764 •J.47 .101.9 1.008 0.734 15.5 76.6 l'l-723 l.ll.'i .14613.9 8.22 132.3 1.155 9.68 328.7 0.8.10 0.619 10.9 88.7 l'l'724 1.241 29891.6 7.14 126.2 1.289 H.33 380.5 1.2.10 0.697 12.2 91.9 l'/'725 I.20.1 .10.18I.6 8..14 152.1 1.858 9.31 .138.6 0.936 0.686 19.5 74.1 J'l'72(i 1.174 2<>987.(l 5.67 128.3 2.417 8.32 .197.2 1.393 0.783 12.2 75.6 IM'727 1.218 35965.6 0.37 128.1 1.078 8.81 511.4 0.952 0.719 11.9 75.2 I'I72« 1.251 33892.3 6.48 114.4 1.190 8.90 558.2 0.825 0.659 11.1 82.2 J'l-72'J 1.2K5 28491.9 1..1K >42.2 1.963 K.26 412.S (1.912 (1.711 15.4 71.6 I'l 7.111 l.2(t.*i 36125.1 6.22 128.6 1.129 K.88 422.5 1.048 0.689 12.9 77.6 I*I73I 1.220 34808.2 6.49 120.1 1.1(>4 8.29 373.H 1.41 Aniil i:n lli III- KU SB SC SK TA TB III /.N in 1.274 .3.3318.2 6.52 124.1 1.098 8.20 357.9 0.966 0.472 12.5 63.4 7^^ 1.224 28659.7 6.43 117.5 1.184 8.27 371.0 1.251 0.554 12.3 72.9 734 1.228 .30216.8 7.03 143.7 1.955 9.29 297.2 1.163 1.076 14.9 105.4 735 1.2.3«J 267.30.1 5.84 116.6 1..309 9.36 266.3 1.105 0.559 13.7 64.1 73f. 1.217 28285.3 7.28 142.3 1.790 8.65 299.7 0.998 0.562 1.3.3 100.7 737 l.(»4 738 i.i.iy 30130.4 6.91 124.8 2.431 8.45 297.2 0.947 0.458 12.1 61.5 73'> 1.143 26446.0 7.23 126.8 1.603 7.87 448.5 0.958 0.510 12.9 93.6 74(1 1.167 27521.4 7.08 142.9 1.766 8.14 320.8 0.963 0.789 13.0 49.5 741 1.160 27259.8 7..38 124.7 1..3(M 8.46 294.5 1.213 0.696 14.0 67.0 742 1.024 28285.8 6.80 138.4 1.670 8.32 298.1 0.900 0.764 13.0 71.8 743 1.086 26602.7 6.57 1.39.0 4.078 8.57 255.4 1.074 1.217 13.9 105.2 744 1.0.SK 273.38.4 8.(M 1.34.5 1.284 8.48 281.0 I.II4 1.108 14.9 64.5 74S 1.037 26657.1 6.86 159.8 1.139 8.47 180.8 1.223 1.167 17.8 105.0 74(» 1.14.5 27892.5 6.52 115.2 1.1.39 7.99 373.6 1.219 0.907 11.4 83.9 747 1.242 29904.8 7.48 122.4 3.950 9.14 .351.0 I.I 15 1.249 1.3.8 93.8 74R 1.62H 42.547.5 12.64 126.0 2.798 14.34 324.7 1.757 2.081 12.7 109.1 74y 1.011 27176.7 6.48 152.3 1.199 8.74 1.39.3 1.125 1.176 15.3 77.6 7.'t() 1.02.5 26289.3 6.74 106.4 2.(«)1 6.94 608.0 0.784 0.371 10.4 98.2 I» Biiii jj> |i«i wiiwHi>p»t ji m I *tm Appendix 7. Elemental Concentrations (in parts per million) for Sherds, Clays, and Sands anij i:u ri-: lu' uh sh sc su ia ih tii zn Shurils From Oiilsidi; of Sutily Area (n=l27) I'lMBt)* 1.244 .34018.7 6.05 12.3.5 1.1.39 K.68 402.9 l.(K)8 0.760 12.3 62.3 l.l'JK 31045.7 6.-36 122.3 1.871 7.92 543.4 0.754 0.564 9.9 50.0 riIH2* 1..5.54 .3'J4I4.4 7.98 131.7 .3.527 14.14 321.4 0.996 0.918 1.3.7 104.5 1.461 .3637().3 7.70 126.9 .3.225 12.90 312.1 1.018 0.857 12.2 104.4 IM'22(C l..i48 .38128.(1 7.(K) 132.9 3.549 14.22 372.8 1.020 0.935 12.6 125.1 l'i-22I* l..16y 34687.8 6.83 121.6 3.458 12.10 426.2 1.014 0.815 11.8 105.0 l'l-222» 1.500 358HI.8 7.17 125.8 3.(>09 12.41 431.3 1 .(H)5 0.874 12.1 110.6 l'F223* 1.4.53 .3.5(194.1 7.(MI 129.2 3.113 12.51 298.2 1.015 0.906 11.7 1 13.6 n-224* 1.484 .35948.7 7.61, 127.0 .3.(H)1 12.77 367.1 1.039 0.864 11.6 109.6 l'l-22S* 1.517 .37203.7 7.57 131.5 3.4()(i 13.44 362.2 1.012 0.8K8 12.1 120.2 I'r226* 1.498 .35614.8 6.78 124.8 2.991 13.13 .391.6 1.059 0.917 12.1 115.3 n228* 1..V54 47932.8 5.81 96.2 1.173 16.47 335 5 0.951 1.086 10.7 94.8 l'l"22'J* 1.5 liii i;u I'li III- KH SB SC SK lA IH Til ZN l'l'240* 1,60.1 52129.1 5.13 98,4 1,068 17.00 406.0 0.989 0.866 10.9 101.8 n-24I* 1.558 .3821.3.0 7.03 137,6 3.220 1.3,87 272.6 1.017 1.167 12.8 125.3 l*l'242* 1.588 38871.8 6.93 133.6 3.324 13,88 348.5 1.064 1.016 13.3 107.6 l'l-243' 1.05.1 28087.9 8.03 142.7 1.140 7.78 440.0 0.879 0.667 13.0 II 1.6 |.1.-244* l.)88 28891.3 5.91 142.7 5.179 7.61 .394.7 0.783 0.680 10.9 88.4 l'l-245* J.251) 29221.8 5.30 149.9 5.254 7.97 404.2 0.779 0.723 14.3 101.4 l..12!> .11661.4 6.72 117.2 2.637 11,07 .159.3 0.927 0.991 13.4 63.8 PI-24 7* 1.542 .19749.4 8.0f> 141.2 3.552 1.3.98 277.2 1.045 1.180 13.8 106.6 l'l'248' 1.537 38709.4 7.88 122.0 3.522 13.74 355.5 1.162 1.0.3(1 12.2 108.5 l'l'249* 1..124 32717.4 7.29 118.9 2.683 10.83 300.0 0.967 0.822 12.8 66.2 I..547 38572.0 8.44 1.34.4 ,3.671 1.3.27 309.7 1.268 1.183 13.2 105.1 I'lasi* 1.497 380.37.7 7.92 13.3.1 3.434 13.37 312.3 1.1.57 1.014 13.5 96.6 I'r252* 1.592 40896.1 9.15 1.35.1 3.657 13.9() .301.0 1.011 1.249 12.1 106.7 I'|-2.i3' 1.557 41099.7 9.02 136.5 .1„351 14..15 316.3 1.087 1.024 13.8 115.1 JM2S4* 1.538 39118.8 8.(H> 132.7 3.0.39 13.82 280.2 1.117 l.(M2 14.6 116.0 l'l'2S5* 1.580 4fHI25.4 7.83 145.2 4.903 14.55 322.3 1.159 1.052 15.0 114.9 ri'2.^6* I.2I7 .141«9.4 6.21 152,5 4..153 8.59 571.4 0.858 0.6)7 11.4 69.5 JM-2S7* 1.433 36.380.4 8.29 133,3 1,(M5 9.17 .377.9 1.112 0,9(16 13.6 61.6 l'l'2S8* 1.145 30236.9 6,64 127,2 1,287 6.88 483.0 0.888 0,608 1U.6 60.8 l'F259* 0.970 2,1596.0 7,25 125,1 0,8,14 6,02 .197.3 0.803 0,592 11.2 47.4 l'l-2f)l)* 1.(170 21720.2 3,61 120,7 0,557 7,15 220.1 1.271 0.878 10.4 55.4 ri'26r 1.487 47907.1 10,18 129,8 0.7,19 10,35 417.9 1.496 (1,926 14.5 76.1 ri'2<>2* I.(i5l 4790.1,3 10,67 147,5 0,740 10,42 473.1 1.560 1.112 17.1 72.3 0,921 20542,3 2.93 118,3 0.409 7.12 214.() 1.169 0.721 8.6 53.1 Appendix 7. Elemental Concentrations (in parts per million) for Sherds, Clays, and Sands lit) i:u 1-H III- KB SB SC SR TA IB Til ZN J'1'264* 1.283 24439.7 6.10 09.6 0.881 8.45 .371.5 1.814 l.KM 11.0 53.8 1.234 .34618.2 10.70 157.2 3.762 10.26 306.3 1.380 1.162 18.2 82.3 1.32ft .36.'519.2 7.08 129.4 2.010 9.00 284.1 1.092 0.921 17.4 80.0 1.207 36627.9 7,38 128.2 1.032 8.98 285.6 1.101 0.800 1.3.7 80.8 1.13S 32485.6 0.00 147.3 2.524 9.10 278.3 1.199 0.834 14.5 67.7 1.124 27473.7 6.46 141.1 1.747 7.98 310.7 0.891 0.763 12.7 63.3 PI-270* 1.2'J3 .3791.') .4 5..36 81.2 0.587 3.17 477.3 1.057 0.652 7.8 68.2 l'l-27»' 1.171 32778.8 12.18 163.2 4.105 8.98 251.3 1.445 1.151 15.3 71.2 l'l'272* 1.124 27431.6 6.93 124.2 1.619 7.83 .346.7 1.173 0.766 1.3.3 61.6 n-273* 1.1.30 32.S89.2 10.09 161.0 4.079 8.25 264.3 2.119 0.966 16.1 68.5 l'l''2'J3' 0.083 2.')909.6 7.17 135.7 1.186 8.15 237.4 1.130 0.732 14.4 63.1 l'l'294* 0.020 26891..1 7.18 1.38.9 1.486 «.19 219.7 1.166 0.746 15.7 63.5 PI-295* 1.121 29938.2 7.00 131.4 2..399 7.19 423.7 3.284 0.597 11.4 63.8 l'l-2yf)* 0.041 23958.8 7.88 134.4 1.189 7.47 290.1 1.151 0.773 14.9 57.5 l'l'297* I.20.S 2744 7.7 7..36 140.2 1.273 8.78 293.0 1.225 0.856 15.4 69.0 <).96.S 26662.0 6.64 1.54.3 1..308 8.63 180.1 1.215 0.769 16.0 6.3.2 l»l-2'W» l.O.'il 28515.1 5.30 130.3 2.021 6.86 590.7 0.745 0.590 12.9 57.3 1.030 28901.8 8.23 145.6 1.376 9.40 168.5 1.201 0.783 15.4 72.4 I'l-.lOl* 1.01 ft 25823..1 7.27 1.35.7 1.298 8.08 244.5 1.168 0.760 14.2 63.9 l'l'3()2* 1.0.34 25266.3 7.46 1.35.8 1.305 7.71 257.1 1.110 0.769 15.0 60.6 1.6()() 46679.4 10.68 142.7 0.769 10.88 446.7 1.492 1.045 15.6 83.6 I'KKH* (I.OOft 25427.8 6.59 140.8 1.118 7.94 449.2 1.124 0.759 15.5 63.7 I'l MO'S * 1.242 34K17.6 ».0| 11.3.3 0.644 8.04 677.7 1.1.34 0.778 11.7 59.7 1.2S4 34K40.0 K.31 127.7 1.614 8.60 863.7 l.O(H 0.777 11.7 72.6 Appendix 7. Elemental Concentrations (in parts per million) for Sherds. Clays, and Sands liJ l-U Fl- liF KB SB SC SK TA IB Til ZN I'131)7* O.K42 24.394.1 5.83 155.3 1.136 8.43 335.5 1.230 0.804 19.0 65.3 I'i'.icm* 0.'J52 2.5806.2 6.57 152.4 1.2.30 8.14 432.9 1.218 0.763 16.4 6.3.2 I'IMO'J* 1.065 30394.3 6.22 152.9 3.603 7.93 2.361.9 0.831 0.560 16.9 79.0 1.193 .35054.5 7.71 122.0 0.888 8.70 663.6 1.053 0.749 11.2 64.0 mir i.(m 26617.6 7.42 151.7 1.234 8.28 451.0 1.184 0.790 15.1 66.1 1.120 27351.5 6.96 147.1 1.326 8.57 281.3 1.1.33 0.851 14.2 68.7 l.0'J3 23647.8 6.24 116.9 0.952 8.25 326.2 3.759 0.761 9.4 56.7 1.022 26228.8 6.72 133.1 1.490 8.12 227.8 1.146 0.740 13.9 95.3 1.116 28844.7 6.12 1.39.7 3.386 7.10 7.38.8 0.836 0.598 11.6 73.3 pr3u>* 1.117 29556.8 6.53 125.3 1.7.39 7.62 614.6 0.794 0.635 12.0 79.4 IM317* 1.096 24049.4 8.50 125.8 1.168 7.46 265.5 0.986 0.787 13.8 61.0 I'F3I8* 1.1.54 .34451.7 6.66 108.3 1.044 8.10 4.30.6 1.051 0.744 11.1 69.8 PJ319* 0.9.S.'> 20745.4 3.59 121.5 0.600 6..38 218.3 0.796 0.823 8.5 51.4 l'l'320* 1.083 30249.3 7.13 147.5 1.354 9.78 189.8 1.092 0.766 16.0 78.7 I'l32r 1.282 .30877.3 6.29 147.6 1.100 8.32 459.3 1.013 0.813 1.3.5 73.1 Pl'322* 1.278 .36791.9 7.43 117.2 0.794 8.83 .350.3 0.962 0.848 14.0 70.9 l'I'323* 0.7.'iK 20023.1 5.67 129.9 l.(M)3 6.38 4(M.8 1.296 0.693 15.6 57.1 J'I324* I.I.W 26231.9 7.01 129.8 1.672 7.93 3J.3.9 0.949 0.865 18.6 68.8 in-325* 1..31)2 .35741.2 6.84 131.5 1..326 10.72 253.4 0.967 0.935 1.3.1 97.4 n''326' 1.199 .30323.5 7.39 159.7 1.642 9.12 299.5 1.069 0.825 13.0 75.0 1'I327* 1.129 28394.6 6.97 1.38.6 1.207 9.45 227.4 1.091 0.847 15.4 78.0 I'I328* 1.123 28028.5 7.05 129.6 1.442 7.89 616.1 0.885 0.732 11.7 67.8 l'l-32y 1.171 31105.7 7.17 115.7 1.1.34 K.6K 347.1 11.79(1 0.729 ').« 67.2 l'l'33()* I.0K2 29193.3 »).83 152.6 1.676 K.«9 277.7 1.043 (1.721 12.7 79.6 Appendix 7. Elemental Concentrations (in parts per million) for Sherds, Clays, and Sands lid i:u lli 111- KU SIJ SC SR l A IH ni ZN 1.1.iS 6.70 1.38.7 1.685 8.66 .341.0 0.987 0.8(K) 15.8 71.7 I.I7'J 281.5.5.2 .5.72 1.35.4 1.483 8.75 .349.4 0.880 0.826 13.1 77.5 IM'333* 29980.4 6.45 150.0 2.458 7.93 529.6 0.877 0.592 14.4 78.2 l'|-334* 1.273 23123.2 7.17 109.4 1.276 8.24 .382.3 0.920 0.836 10.9 58.6 J»l-33.'i • l.2.*)l) .34644.8 .5.92 127.2 1.059 8..35 386.2 0.991 0.7.35 12.2 74.1 l'l''336* 1.287 34.371..5 6.02 127.0 1.117 8.39 387.2 0.996 0.703 13.1 72.8 IM-337* 1.160 28963.2 6.84 142.1 1.742 8.42 287.5 0.995 0.794 13.0 75.7 1»IM3«* 1.227 30639.3 6.94 121.8 1.170 8.45 385.5 1.2.39 0.857 12.1 72.4 1>1M39* 1.308 3S404.2 5.41 1.30.3 7.577 10.20 327.6 0.857 0.882 12.9 87.7 1.417 43783.1 7.69 152.7 2.421 11.44 331.7 0.870 0.955 16.8 88.3 n341* 1..S28 .37410.9 7.23 118.2 3.385 1.3.30 412.8 1.072 0.996 12.7 11.3.9 1M342* 1.5 ly 38.301.2 7.43 127.3 3.568 13.75 465.6 1.034 1.033 12.2 122.3 I'l 343* l.l'J7 .3.3.3.51.4 8.05 160.8 2.410 9.73 289.1 1.235 0.831 15.3 77.3 PI-344* 1.138 33.3.52.-5 7.22 142.7 2.176 10.27 .353.2 0.972 0.742 1.3.5 11.3.2 l'l-345« 1..^3.'> 40920.9 7.96 I34.t» 4.280 13.88 362.8 1.019 0.974 13.0 125.2 l'l'346* 1.4.S2 397.50.8 7.74 132.3 6.502 12.94 313.7 1.006 0.920 2t.8 105.3 lM-362* l).i>97 28102.7 5.16 126.9 4.131 7.39 531.6 0.733 0.527 10.3 71.8 l'F3()3* 1.1.34 28361.0 7.67 137.3 1.360 8.88 446.9 1.004 0.780 14.6 72.7 l'1364* 1.128 27903.6 7.09 1.35.5 1.287 9.(H» 328.7 1.133 0.819 17.0 73.0 n'36S* I.IMI 27479.4 7..30 144.5 1.212 8.51 237.9 l.MW 0.736 15.7 70.9 l>I-36fi* 0.')4.'> 26937.6 6.98 131.9 1.2m 7.85 290.6 1.203 0.683 18.6 65.8 I'r367* 1.31fi .382.35.4 7.70 116.7 0.849 9.48 548.8 1.076 0.860 13.3 71.6 ri'36«* 1.127 30526.6 6.09 113.9 I.H27 6.96 I..553 0.574 10.9 72.9 I.II2 .30794.3 6.97 1.35.8 1.276 9.(iO 317.6 1.1.33 0.737 14.8 76.0 Appendix 7. Elemental Concentrations (in parts per million) for Sherds, Clays, and Sands AniJ l-U Mi 111- RH SB SC SH lA IH Til ZN 26410.9 6.83 141.8 1.197 8.33 320.7 1.374 0.701 16.3 69.0 0.993 28704..i 7.89 144.1 1..566 8.86 2.54.2 1.120 0.739 15.6 74.3 Vl'372' 1.130 27598.1 5.27 129.1 2.136 6.81 895.9 0.745 0.552 10.4 65.1 l'l'373* 1.028 27676.0 8.25 141.6 1.200 8.66 431.4 1.170 0.737 14.8 71.3 J..519 37781.6 8.19 128.9 5.411 13..32 284.2 1.120 0.997 16.3 108.8 n-37.s« 1..529 .39346.6 7.63 124.8 3.695 1.3.65 44.3.7 1.076 1.074 1.3.2 122.5 IM-376* \ .S(>9 40197.3 8.29 140.8 4.033 13.86 350.3 1.028 1.083 13.0 125.1 l'|-377* 1.42.-5 37496.7 7.96 125.1 2.999 12.51 398.0 1.117 0.911 11.4 110.2 (n=^7) IM-05S* 1.307 35797.9 5.13 157.7 2.936 12.19 357.5 0.984 0.707 18.3 119.9 1.284 34985.7 7.13 212.2 1.986 13..35 179.5 0.960 0.761 14.1 81.6 l'FttS7* 1.289 350.35.4 5.25 140.3 2.199 11..32 464.0 0.994 0.726 16.8 94.6 JM'058* 1.178 30368.5 4.90 147.6 2.156 9.66 469.7 0.884 0.670 15.0 90.5 l'l'Q59* 1.1.'57 33473.9 4.58 186.3 2.181 12..34 227.4 l.(K)2 0.735 11.9 101.1 I'l-mo* 0.923 29190.5 7.30 1.30.9 1.876 10..34 249.6 0.717 0.597 8.2 83.2 1.435 36646.5 4.02 145.9 1.829 13.13 .357.9 0.900 0.880 19.7 122.5 l'l-()62* 1 .s.-so .35233.8 3.85 145.5 2.282 12.41 396.9 1.032 0.865 15.6 107.1 J'im3» 1.282 30603.2 6.(H) 142.9 1.9.33 10.23 .368.1 1.0.35 0.848 13.9 83.6 l'l'064* 1.294 41675.6 2.55 122.9 1.019 13.50 254.3 0.849 0.717 15.1 106.3 l'l-()65* 1.152 32372.4 4.71 138.4 1.310 10.60 320.8 1.078 0.654 10.3 90.1 I'lWiO* 1.113 .39712.7 5.37 14.3.9 0.665 9.99 566.4 1.207 0.516 8.8 93.2 1'I75I 1.(.71 .34180.3 7.26 189.4 0.505 14.80 174.7 1.471 1.679 16.3 161.1 1'1-'7S2 0.91.2 45277.8 4.26 193.2 0.6(>4 16.01 5')8.4 1.116 0.800 8.1 195.9 l'l'7.S3 l.4<.2 32826.11 7.34 19(>.3 1.409 13.8(1 l'J|.5 0.946 1.278 13.0 96.6 Appendix 7. Elemental Concentrations (in parts per million) lor Sherds, Clays, and Sands Aniii i:u I'li 111- RU SB SC SK TA Tli Til ZN I'I754 1.380 37412.1 6.66 162.2 2.509 12.26 313.0 1.079 0.937 18.8 155.6 1.668 46520.1 5.01 177.6 3.360 15.77 198.6 1.056 1.047 19.8 221.8 )»l'756 1.982 39007.0 7.96 195.8 2.912 17.98 226.4 1.047 1..393 17.5 161.9 lM-757 1.311 33391.8 5.88 161.5 2.835 U.31 401.1 0.994 1.074 18.3 146.5 IT758 1.626 38653.5 5,78 159.7 3.30ri 14.61 188.0 1.049 1.284 15.1 160.0 l'l'7S'J 1.21.*» 45797.7 5.36 180.1 1.416 14.02 .31W.2 1..345 0.378 12.5 186.1 lM-76() 1.449 34550.7 7.99 132.5 3.523 13.65 469.0 1.074 0.687 12.9 125.1 l'l'7()l 1.6.50 4.3475.5 5.47 188.5 3.114 15.31 205.8 1.222 1.585 19.5 193.7 l'l-762 1.472 49186.6 5.07 192.0 1.672 16.46 150.4 1.182 0.755 16.9 206.0 IM-7f)3 1.660 46020.9 4.69 175.1 4.503 16.02 278.5 1.089 0.804 24.9 221.3 I'I764 1 ..5(H) 37880.4 5.-39 165.7 2.573 1.3.68 318.6 1.167 1.263 17.5 167.0 l'l'765 1.561 .38563.1 5.56 172.5 2.447 1.3.94 293.2 1.183 1.312 17.0 181.0 Pl'766 1.418 36087.6 6.53 187.0 2.210 13.08 231.6 1.221 1.016 20.2 143.4 I'r767 1..568 43133.2 5.17 206.8 2.314 15.25 189.4 1.295 1.084 22.0 215.9 I'r76« 1.590 42485.8 4.84 195.4 1.8.58 15.55 266.5 1.4.32 0.793 18.3 169.4 l')"76y 1.639 4()061.3 7.02 165.0 1.841 16.57 161.6 1.169 1..345 15.3 181.1 lM-776 1.336 32876.6 7.08 161.K 2.08H 11.(H) 205.2 1.115 1.116 15.0 145.7 l'l'777 1.478 61.395.2 4.50 159.7 0.794 19.01 457.2 1.146 0.945 10.9 211.6 1>|-77K 1.149 43108.5 5.26 187.0 0.953 12.06 314.8 1.278 0.520 10.7 204.9 \'\nv) 1.204 446()5.3 5.97 173.6 1.131 11.82 391.3 1.281 0.749 11.1 180.2 I'lnno 1.35(1 331.39.1 6.17 165.2 1.920 11 ..30 253.4 1.020 1.1.30 14.8 124.2 l.4'J9 .38875.5 5.96 174.6 2.493 13.18 284.3 1.206 1.210 16.8 171.6 Siinils l>i = JO) I'ilKtT (I.K87 11295.9 3..14 122.(1 0.532 3.61 4(10.2 0.626 (1.421 8.6 24.0 Appendix 7. Elemental Concentrations (in parts per million) for Sherds. Clays, and Sands )iJ i:u III- RH Sli S(.' SR TA TH Til ZN J'ltUiB* OMH 9470.5 2.00 101.1 0.312 5.22 524.1 0.543 0.377 7.9 17.3 ((.552 .1.119.4 1.18 92.6 0.070 l.(M 414.3 0.334 0.240 2.4 6.7 l).967 22(K)7.2 5.23 138.8 2.182 5.78 451.8 0.920 0.498 10.8 43.8 m)7r 23669.7 10.(K> 134.5 1.729 7.(K) 429.6 1.168 0.832 18.7 48.1 l'l'787 (I.7K3 14932.4 3.11 161.4 1.447 3.99 274.1 0.555 ()..156 7.4 7.5.3 l'l'788 2.224 14374.5 8.81 108.1 0.262 7.78 489.9 1.945 0.947 25.4 42.4 J'l--78() 1.074 15725.9 6.47 143.0 1.978 5.01 266.8 0.790 0.658 9.2 36.0 l'l-7'JO 1.31.1 2(M)34.5 4.91 1.54.1 1.1.13 5.75 484.3 0.848 0.559 lO.t 102.4 l'l'7'JI 0.608 7822.6 2.80 140.2 l.(W7 2.40 297.4 0.392 0.202 5.3 46.9 •f- o\ to Appendix 7. Elemental Concentrations (in parts per million) tor Sherds, Clays, and Sands niil /.K Al. HA (A 1>Y K MN NA 11 V ifn/i; From Sliiily .Ifnil fn = .W) I'HIOr N(>.3 84441.1 659.0 40979.4 3.76 28783.5 640.9 I.WM.9 2960.5 66.7 82568.) 704.6 29(W4.7 .1.75 27105.4 62.1.5 14797.9 .3442.0 97.0 l'l'l)l)3* >74.8 K464().0 880.0 27.177.6 4.71 291K>5.7 808.0 10155.1 2769.5 76.2 IKd.K 7948.1.4 869.4 50 KM.5 3..14 24114.0 636.0 10373.3 2532.3 76.1 I7.S.4 80126.2 684.2 .11160.9 3.95 26175.2 737.4 12794.7 277.1.0 83.9 l'l-0()6* 18.T2 8.1512.2 709.3 16067.4 4.59 31875.9 715.9 7588.7 2037.6 87.0 IS4.(» 82064.5 648.6 130.10.5 4.05 290.19.0 8(M.3 15643.4 2796.7 76.5 l'l'(«)y* 157.7 88191.8 871.8 26074.7 4.25 28272.3 786.7 12599.4 2703.4 93.6 n'olo* 7.1639.9 588..1 .10243.2 4.31 25114.2 839.7 14093.2 2418.5 66.9 IM-Oll* ISS.S 8.1565.9 716.1 34428.1 4.04 .10694.1 694.3 15098.8 2545.0 72.4 1.59.1 86.121.2 72.1.0 20533.3 3.82 26877.1 671.2 15899.2 1862.9 65.4 169.7 91046.8 1004.5 29683.7 5.20 33199.4 866.8 8031.2 3106.9 97.2 VJ'014* 2(M.4 82771.8 564.8 27557.6 4.18 27180.1 789.7 12188.2 3149.5 99.9 l'R)15' 172.9 80872..1 647.1 25139.2 3.78 29185.4 848.6 15256.7 32(M).3 71.7 J>I'0I6' 177..1 79990.8 678,8 32420.8 3.65 26882.4 914.6 1.1811.4 2.132.8 66.0 I'l-on* no.i 78791.2 561.2 37252.1 4.46 27848.8 729.7 11724.4 2.199.1 57.6 I'RIIH* 17.1.4 82224.1 546.2 34699.5 3.42 266.14.7 822.7 14599.5 1469.6 61.7 I'lOI'J' 265..1 80859.7 877.4 25903.7 6.20 .1.1018.0 1125.5 11860.2 3780.2 118.7 ri-i)2i)* 14.T.1 71.110.1 7.15.1 35481.3 3.51 293.19.8 872.8 l(»9t>7.4 2245.3 49.9 l'l-021' U)6.() 74479.7 958.2 55050.9 4.21 30309.0 972.0 15021.1 3282.2 77.9 l'l"022* 149,2 80801.2 608.6 440.16.3 3.00 23247.9 670.0 15534.7 2465.0 70.0 l'l'()23* 190.1 74852.8 791.5 18893.7 4..18 281(i2.(. 9'J4.9 15324.3 .1427.2 72.6 J'1'024* 14(>.2 7(.071..1 50510.2 2.K2 249114 K 111957.7 2296.9 82.6 Appendix 7; Elemental Concentrations (in parts per million) lor Sherds, Clays, and Sands iniil •/M Al. BA t:A l)Y K MN NA Tl V ITJ.l 77610.0 907.9 19809.8 4.17 25654.5 650.4 12949.1 2642.0 78.1 IHXH 74263.9 826.9 .14424.3 3.73 2.3071.3 689.1 12550.6 1800.5 91.9 l'l-027* 81098.7 (»73.1 499.34.8 4.12 27068.5 808.7 14882.4 2594.3 7.3.1 14H.4 83358.4 915.8 19466.6 2.94 27502.0 634.9 15600.3 1718.9 82.6 168.6 86242.3 725.5 14469.8 4.54 30373.2 807.4 14867.2 .3416.6 77.5 I'l-O.IO* 174.0 76972.2 639.6 2.3252.8 .3.41 27145.9 725.5 12.337.1 2015.6 70.8 I'HWl* J 76.4 78939.4 845.0 28678.9 3.68 26800.2 760.1 13490.0 2814,7 83.2 l'l'(U2' 12.1.9 86707.6 761.3 43998.1 2.94 25594.9 82.3.1 14805.6 2508.5 105.6 J.38.1 8I8.3I).8 683.4 51)151.9 3.21) 22947.3 804.7 15892.9 3727.4 106,3 J'1034* U)4.'J 74900.0 712.2 36326.9 3.64 26095.4 565.5 U219.4 1905.4 72.4 1.34.(1 78616.9 615.3 49202.8 .3.71 2.5574.0 612.2 129.56.2 2337.3 67.2 nui6* 189.4 8(154.5.1 841.7 57084.1 3.67 2.3852.1 607.8 15915.3 2058.6 61.8 J'F037* no.s 88082.3 1106.6 25319.1 3.55 28969.3 579.7 8349.2 2589.4 82.7 IM-038* 141.0 75931.1 812.2 41029.3 3.10 274.36.1 558.6 9284.2 1799.0 71.1 I'him* 1A3.4 95467.5 959.3 43803.0 2.59 25049.4 676.9 10062.9 2330.0 84.4 pi'tm' 160.8 75786.5 756.9 .32115.4 3.89 29814.6 640.1 14676.8 2074.9 70.4 154.5 88785.5 1003.4 20297.9 3.72 29344.6 650.4 15934.8 3009.3 86.9 l'HI44* 153.9 86520.7 8.30.1 .36.357.7 3.73 27961.6 846.1 16.343.6 .3057.8 79.6 I'lW.'S* 162.7 878.33.7 814.9 26863.5 3.58 29107.2 660.7 15060.5 3173.8 92.3 I'HMh* 156.4 84679.4 764.2 32034.2 4.35 31854.2 822.8 17079.6 2826.9 67.5 l'l-047' 158.1 8(H)23.8 773.6 58826.1 4.12 2.3526.(1 589.3 1519.3.0 2987.8 71.8 I'lWS' 146.2 76945.7 839.4 23523.0 4.1) 29292.5 646.7 J 5377.6 .3327.4 71.5 121.4 77434.5 993.7 27453.9 5.5K 32(>6«.(. 778.9 1555(1.6 2562.5 63.5 rivso' 2(18.5 81290.9 579.7 I7I86.I 3.75 258(15.7 (i82.(l 13957.8 3276.0 90.8 ^ Appendix 7: Elemental Concentrations (in parts per million) for Sherds. Clays, and Sands Mid ZJ< Al. HA CA DY K MN NA W V ri-051 • 78959.2 884.3 28626.8 4.14 28238.4 751.7 14647.5 .3062.4 83.6 PIU'>2* 136.7 7011)6.1 709.1 33678.8 3.69 29985.6 588.1 14505.3 2640.1 75.8 85.3 Appendix 7: Elemental Concentrations (in parts per million) for Sherds, Clays, and Sands AniU ZK Al. HA CA DY K MN NA T1 70780.5 697.7 32655.5 3.51 26528.7 669.9 15837.7 3109.6 94.9 I'l-O'J.T imv 74^20.4 606.0 72175.5 3.82 27279.8 6.35.5 11068.8 2144.8 81.5 I'l-OW • KilMi 78932.8 740.9 50689.8 3.33 294IM.O 592.9 15081.2 2429.7 70.5 IS7.\ 78557.3 924.6 .39975.9 4.03 27270.9 597.0 15986.9 2261.6 66.6 138.1 76984 ..5 756.9 42.349.7 3.04 28JM3.7 572.7 15577.6 2768.4 79.1 I'l-oy?* I67.!» 814.35.4 859.5 .35705.4 .3.42 .30825.1 569.6 16298.2 31(M).2 103.9 »47M 97l(«).5 742.4 31105.8 3.40 29024.0 565.3 12884.7 4209.0 101.8 IM'd'JO* 137.7 76042.8 999.0 28484.1 2.90 26518.4 623.2 162.35.5 3039.6 68.3 I'l-lOO* 120.0 79917.9 767.4 41563.4 3.34 2743.3.6 60(..2 14954.0 2938.4 89.0 I'lMDl* 143.(1 67289.4 821.6 32301.7 3.23 31494.7 623.9 11454.9 2595.4 59.0 |'|-102* 147.2 73887.9 847.5 40947.0 3.46 23750.8 537.5 12301.4 2579.2 90.1 I'l'IOT 129.(1 87403.8 733.5 .35796.6 .3.32 26259.0 677.7 1.3.354.6 2962.6 96.0 I'I'KW I4l).(i 81749.5 70f).6 34322.7 3.80 31412.0 597.8 14324.7 2764.2 64.1 I'l-lOS* ISH.2 81.341.7 781.5 44883.9 3.53 28014.7 .566.7 1.5475.9 2782.6 72.8 ITIOO* 1.^3.2 80143.3 880.0 43807.4 3..35 28149.9 595.9 1608.3.6 3118.6 76.9 PI-107* I47.H 79724.5 973.8 43476.6 3.18 27660.7 645.7 14995.4 2771.4 88.8 JM-lOB' 146.7 84367.4 940.7 44700.0 .3.71 27219.4 674.3 15764.1 .3228.1 77.9 I'l-KW l.l.'i./ 78.357.0 943.2 552(KJ.6 3.44 .307.38.9 654.3 1412.3.0 2703.9 69.4 I'FIIO* N4..i 78875.6 806.3 51131.2 .3.31 25418.5 761.') 14528.2 2667.1 69.4 n-ni8 1^0.1) 75694.0 854.4 60680.4 3.23 26274.0 611.0 15783.8 2323.3 68.0 i'i-n2' l.'S6,4 75(KI7.5 654.2 48829.4 3.56 286((0.7 597.1 10616.1 1825.9 74.7 I'FII.V 164. i 71716.3 714.6 23960.0 4.13 28260.1 714.6 14742.0 3076.9 71.3 57.7 I'MH* 140.0 76533.8 812.5 .30851.8 3.73 29344.(1 750.6 14763.8 2819.4 74.4 I'l-llS* 133.') 79624.2 886.2 52006.0 3.45 27243.3 773 S 15610.1 2401.8 Appendix 7: Elemental Concentrations (in parts per million) (or Sherds, Clays, and Sands /.K A1 HA fA l>Y K MN NA 11 V IH)* 1)7.3 7'J.381.« 716.1 53231.5 3.47 27842.3 756.4 \4719.2 2224.4 64.1 117* 146.1 72066.8 566.8 44646.6 3.46 25278.7 780.(1 13768.6 2323.9 77.5 1 !«• J«4.« 714.17.7 830.7 .1.3376.2 4.03 27859.0 580.4 12947.9 2243.5 77.1 U'J* 237.7 724.35.3 724.6 56789.6 5.61 31081.5 696.4 9815.2 3467.7 84.3 12()' 1.36.2 76663.1 476.4 46524.3 3.72 28162.3 716.9 11058.5 2781.0 84.3 I2I/I22* I.S.5.8 7()7.3«.2 860.5 51129.5 2.66 27094.5 618.4 1514.3.2 2519.8 79.7 123* 1.36..') 73842.2 639.8 38(M)4.4 3.84 27517.6 608.0 10982.2 2375.2 71.3 124* 144.S 6'J(K)8.y 680.1 43239.7 3.93 27262.7 577.3 14.307.3 2320.4 67.7 I25* N8.9 7()7(H).2 778.7 52.352.9 3.91 25794.5 754.2 14403.9 2063.6 63.3 12()* 1.34.7 74879.7 640.7 64313.4 3.85 26152.8 608.0 15156.3 2655.1 71.0 127* 144.5 7S7.'>y.(l 704.9 .36122.4 4.31 281.35.4 659.4 14664.5 2716.0 65.2 129* J4 /.H Al. 1»A fA DY K MN NA T1 V 142* 152.'J 75550.1 771.1 15206.6 3.40 20(K)5.0 6.33.3 15.3.54.6 2402.2 62.6 143* 145.0 77200.3 644.6 55207.3 .3.59 26507.9 592.2 14904.3 .3087.9 72.0 144* UiO.I 72.348.8 6.33.0 31631.2 4..34 28610.7 640.0 15.396.4 2578.3 68.6 HS' 160,2 8.3542.1 646.7 386(R>.1 3.87 27529.9 532.7 15043.2 .3456.4 78.6 146* 144.7 71575.2 587.2 60708.3 5.37 244(H).5 606.2 13121.7 2739.5 66.5 147* 146.9 75702.8 661.6 26205.4 4.62 27024.3 6(M).6 14747.3 2570.1 62.2 148* 1.1.1.0 73141.5 728.0 27153.3 4.24 28010.4 555,5 15066.1 2757.5 65.5 U'J* 194.4 73633.7 747.1 22030.8 3.70 28676.1 586.5 14175.6 2546.9 .56.1 15(1* 15.1.1 70J55.4 740.2 3I0{M.3 3.72 27495.3 604.8 14500.2 2477.2 67.5 ISf 166.3 7l8'.i2.4 682.0 26.305.0 .3.81 27807.4 660.6 16463.4 2180.0 62.0 J52* 150.6 7661.0.4 714.4 34145.2 4.10 26689.8 616.8 15542.5 2885.3 6.S.0 15.1* 180.8 7(H)I'4.3 664.5 50873.8 3.80 24715.5 604.7 14115.3 2376.5 70.8 l.i4* 144.2 71.302.4 784.4 3.3463.0 3.93 2818.3.7 516.6 16261.7 2271.3 71.9 15b* 146.7 84007.4 520.3 15U5.8 3.81 31636.8 516.0 0715.7 2613.0 54.6 157* 14.3.8 76634.0 065.1 31548.9 4.11 27317.4 822.9 1.3822.1 3125.4 74.5 I5«* 103.6 82233.0 872.1 420.34.6 4.40 29643.8 62.3.2 17431.8 2.356.8 51.9 159* 176.6 75578.0 623.0 43159.1 4.58 26273.0 025.1 10583.6 2257.8 82.6 160* 136.7 00320.8 001.3 30210.2 2.93 23246.7 576.2 10472.6 4062.6 KM.4 161* 152.0 7()(H6.0 873.4 72602.6 3..30 26070.8 608.2 lllio.l 2.365.6 74.0 162* 1.30.7 66232.6 043.2 75016.8 3.63 23668.7 503.1 10524.1 2731.1 68.3 163* 170.2 82.342.8 1028.0 4.3410.7 .3.21 2761KI.7 444.7 7404.8 .3752.0 72.8 164* 103.7 70803.7 013.6 500.30.(. 3.59 20057.3 585.2 8066.6 3587.8 60.9 165* 145.0 77077.0 7(iO. 1 48417.0 3.65 20152.2 520.1 15017.4 2602.3 70.1 Kifi* I4K.4 74766.4 877.6 46352.2 3.50 27.357.3 30(,.2 60(i6.7 2805.3 78.8 Appendix 7: Elemental Concentrations (in parts per million) for Sherds, Clays, and Sands Anil) /.K Al HA t'A DY K MN NA n V I'JO.f) 74'Jl.l.2 1064.1 46379.4 3.39 28338.7 447.7 7559.2 2593.6 78.0 I'I'K.K* 157.4 77508.5 868.1 48128.5 3.40 27998.1 472.4 7476.6 2910.0 84.0 174.'J 76880.1 947.1 51565.2 3.22 25787.5 415.1 6619.5 2777.2 75.9 lUU) 8'J1H)2..1 11H)2.4 30226.0 2.85 .30812.5 385.7 11120.8 2456.6 57.0 l'l'17r 14K.'J 81579.1 7.35.8 2.3524.2 3.56 25846.1 6.35.6 14329.0 3299.1 76.2 I'I'I72* 105.5 71071.2 y(«».4 49287.5 4.70 23929.5 623.5 15.399.3 2722.3 57.2 I'I173* l.VJ.l 84071.9 654.2 4I(M0.4 3.52 21729.6 774.7 14740.9 3272.0 103.8 l'|-174* 140.2 71535.0 772.3 57269.5 3..54 25712.2 489.5 9684.2 2385.4 66.2 Ui6.6 76674.4 762.8 41050.0 5.60 24632.4 725.9 15877.5 26,34.2 64.8 17«.() 6 W.I 1.4 729.6 287.35.2 4.07 28(i83.4 560.3 15617.0 2798.0 65.2 1'I177* U>1.7 7(>2.t0.8 704.3 .34899.1 3.47 24.377.6 646.4 15269.(1 31.30.9 79.9 l'l-17H» 1.15.6 848.16.8 (.79.3 42225.9 3.68 23281.2 766.1 14260.1 3167.6 84.7 l*M7y 14'J,.1 76409.1 .561.2 44470.1 4.61 285.33.0 725.1 1.3657.1 1908.3 59.3 18.1.0 73183.5 781.7 26993.8 3.85 .3(M32.1 617.6 14332.9 2528.1 61.9 PI-IH4* n.i.'j 71064.8 689.4 6(H)18.3 3.78 26211.5 668.1 12.306.2 2465.4 69.5 I'I'IW 144.6 77264.4 784.7 25031.0 4.16 .3(M28.2 731.5 10903.2 2917.3 68.3 125.2 79041.8 9(i8.5 40669.8 3.25 29054.0 602.3 14316.1 2754.1 66.2 l'll«7* 145.2 71809.5 818.6 50.5(Kl.l 3.93 30310.1 695.7 11917.9 2958.4 69.0 147.8 74(M1.8 808.7 3.3097.1 3.59 25763.3 593.1 15354.0 .3(M9.4 79.5 n-lH9* 148.2 7()938.5 915.4 4.3554.2 3.55 289.34.1 545.7 14721.6 3144.6 68.5 j'l'iyo* 15().4 67332.0 615.1 49789.2 3.92 27657.1 527.5 9.306.1 2801.2 54.9 i*i'i9r 15(1.2 80507..1 76(1.4 32889.3 3.59 2756(1.7 708.0 1595.3.6 34(i6.l 95.0 ) 5(1.0 73271.3 750.3 4H855.5 3.45 27922.7 (i02.7 14179.8 2936.4 70.11 150.1 (i')B2 niU /.H Al. HA CA l)Y K MN NA n V 141.7 77.581.9 889.0 10910.0 1.93 28642.4 581.5 14770.7 3241.2 72.2 14(1.1 7.1.52.5.4 828.1 42.155.2 2.88 27679.6 .565.3 15928.4 3.101.6 79.4 n-196* I6.3.H 89511.1 769.4 27653.6 4.16 .10575.9 582.2 16143.4 2893.6 87.5 ni'JT 1SH.3 72517.1 720.0 48891.5 4.30 29875.5 593.1 7915.7 2611.3 67.4 17K.6 69024.7 811.0 25121.1 3.90 100.14.1 644.6 1.1615.0 2676.0 65.8 n-i'j'j* 14.1.7 82508.0 1872.5 29807.5 3.87 .12155.2 486.0 6621.4 2564.4 73.4 IM-KK)* 140.8 80646.0 844.1 429J3.5 3.74 27()91.2 602.7 15191.8 3628.8 87.0 i'r2(n* 14.1.7 78617.8 825.2 32(H)7.7 3.65 .10ri48.1 512.9 14282.3 31.18.7 70.7 l'l'202* 142.6 71586.5 781.4 47922.2 3.79 26351.9 671.5 14010.2 2459.7 54.5 l'l-2()3* 226.4 7.1471.7 795.5 .11)107.6 4.84 10968.9 577.8 1.5947.7 2934.1 71.0 IM'KM* 2I.1..'i 66222.6 621.1 49905.4 4.02 28218.0 474.7 1.1978.9 2962.6 62.3 l'l'2()5* 177.4 65965.5 756.0 52678.5 .1.52 2791.1.0 650.3 14067.7 2578.3 57.7 l'I-'2()6* 162.9 66.11M.9 882.8 43162.3 3.47 27111.8 .591.2 1.1891.0 2592.3 72.0 l'l-2(17* 167.5 72115.1 902.5 .1.1521.1 5.14 29766.6 519.4 15148.5 2977.2 63.8 l'l'2(W l.'S9.() 76596.6 882.5 29.157.4 3.89 11978.4 702.1 1322.1.5 3063.3 65.7 16II..S 7580.1.1 941.1 4.1.541.7 3.02 27625.6 541.7 15109.5 2456.8 82.7 l'l-2U>* IS'J.K 75821.0 894.5 56011.2 3.98 26168.2 789.7 1.1(M9.1 2498.7 69.7 i'r2ir 171.7 8(M07.7 694.7 34609.1 4.42 10953.0 738.6 14159.3 2180.8 65.6 n-212' 1H1.9 740.19.5 666.9 43515.5 4.46 27474.9 688.7 15379.4 2674.9 77.5 l'l-213' 1(>K.7 64115.2 879.9 68615.4 1..14 28965.0 496.6 10140.1 2193.8 59.5 l*F2M* 16.1.2 76418.6 812.6 23141.2 4.24 32110.7 594.2 14056.5 2906.2 57.2 l'l-21S* 19«.ll 74100.7 1066.1 37.155.0 4.00 32219.3 613.5 150.16.5 2841.1 72.3 l'l-2l(i* 161.2 81995.8 807.0 29494.9 1.5(1 28773.3 751.0 15519.7 1101.9 87.3 I'l-217' |(>7.7 71896.2 808.2 21812.4 4.17 31221.1 541.5 I3K65.I 1171.0 65.9 Appendix 7. Elemental Concentrations (in parts per million) for Sherds, Clays, and Sands nill /K Al. UA (A OY K MN NA 11 V 145.1 7271.5.7 902.6 62799.0 4.08 26090.5 685.6 1.3958.7 2.531.6 70.6 l'l-27-4* 17.1.1 82072.6 74.3.1 42411.1 3..33 265.34.1 872.5 16428.(1 .35.34.1 104.6 l'l-27.S* 182.6 81499.4 861.9 43380.0 3.38 31101.0 637.8 15539.6 3193.6 82.3 IM-27()* 214.0 78725.7 784.9 .54446.1 4.89 23890.7 631.3 16157.7 2796.6 64.6 l'l'277» 2(I'J.8 725.37.2 777.7 45742.0 4.28 29557.3 642.9 16014.4 2654.2 66.2 l'l-27«* 2.S.'t..1 79763.9 770.7 44582.1 5.29 27505.7 584.0 14867.5 2949.3 69.3 l'l'27'J* 163.7 86307.0 785.7 27690.8 3.09 30893.6 548.4 15187.1 3258.5 99.6 l»l-'28(t' 2(16.4 77414.8 866.5 48142.3 3.65 30877.7 6(M.6 16212.8 2652.6 78.4 I'l1• 82019.7 691.1 43.337.4 3.76 29500.3 896.2 13178.1 2426.6 77.4 l'l-282* 16«>.() 78888.4 805.7 47030.4 3.59 27164.3 692.3 I543I.9 2305.7 58.4 JM-2K3* 17.S.5 76422.8 888.2 4.30.36.5 3.38 26401.0 688.5 15784.7 3239.2 91.5 I'I284* 168.1 80W4.2 806.2 32749.8 .3.67 2961)4.9 630.5 16117.3 310.3.9 83.4 209.6 67581.5 633.3 62500.6 4.(M 29405.9 518.9 11552.6 2792.8 64.0 IM'286' 193.0 74487.6 739.6 34467.0 4.11 31298.3 703.5 11642.2 2582.5 51.9 I'1'287* 18.1..1 83205.0 627.4 419.36.5 4.07 28394.2 768.9 14077.1 2640.9 64.7 PI-288* 216.1 732.35.8 7.39.6 51440.6 4.06 28342.1 690.5 13160.3 2464.1 73.5 l'l-28'J* 14.S.S 72484.3 847.7 46492.4 2.40 26305.8 474.0 16458.2 2.362.7 79.0 l»l-'2'J()' 218.1 72474.7 8(K).4 40857.4 3.82 28.358.6 .544.0 14905.0 2222.5 67.8 l'l'29l' 224..S 7761.3.2 841.9 27467.0 3.57 531.5 15861.6 2896.4 72,0 |'|.-2'J2* 228.2 8.3075.8 777.3 27827.1 4.66 .30856.3 711.4 141.33.3 3258.4 82.4 Vl-MT 146.6 72876.6 832.8 25.551.5 3.70 32078.3 603.7 15.385.1 2477.1 63.5 ri-.HH' iao.."! 76035.5 743.4 .38724.0 0.78 29227.3 708.9 15174.0 2994.2 79.5 I(>H.2 78492.8 692.1 .362.34.7 3.02 29010.1 507.5 15976.1 .3(M6.0 77.9 148.4 77405.9 683.0 46337.7 3.10 22622.7 761.3 15139.7 3046.0 88.2 Appendix 7: Elemental Concentrations (in parts per million) for Sherds, Clays, and Sands liii /K Al. HA CA IJY K MN NA n V I'F.WI* I.'i4.y 78208.2 686.9 29307.7 3.89 30282.7 603.8 14704.8 2572.8 63.8 »'I352* »8».S 77737.3 717.6 22769.4 3.74 26B63.3 616.7 15495.0 2628.8 71.4 n.iss* IV8.() 78817.4 956.1 3.3.547.1 4.01 27547.0 667.0 1.3941.6 2729.0 63.9 ria'i4* IS 6.4 73205.6 774.3 60455.3 .3.16 26(H) 1.3 592.9 15280.6 319.3.1 86.3 I'l-.l/iS* 145.0 80640.6 940.4 25824.9 3.66 31235.1 593.5 14533,5 3228.5 75.0 l'l'3S7* 134.3 60374.0 846.5 25.393.6 3.63 27429.7 605.3 14078.9 2529.2 61.2 l'l-358* 166.3 75711.6 1276.9 27871.3 3.84 29687.2 624.9 14984.6 2683.7 67.0 n-'-ifly* 162.1 73727.3 762.9 7117.3.1 3.52 25448.5 591.0 11822.6 2582.7 73.1 206.7 773'J5.0 907.9 20305.3 3.93 28869.8 662.7 15564.7 2574.2 69.1 I'I361» 147.7 81924.6 M0.5 41145.0 3.48 24739.4 829.8 14310.7 2871.2 94.5 ri078* !82..'5 72611.6 797.7 42039.8 3.73 25747.4 778.7 13132.8 3056.3 86.3 I'JMTJ* 18.') .6 77505.3 UHtl.l 40741.5 3.47 290.34.1 489.2 9310.8 2504.6 68.4 I'l-.ISO* 141.6 78687.2 906.0 29682.1 3.86 291(NM 712.4 10955.2 2687.2 77.0 l.iS.-S 95012.3 1161.3 17496.2 3.92 378.35.6 993.2 10527.9 2798.4 73.6 n"382* 16.S.3 77885.3 694.1 21047.5 3.84 26225.1 523.2 11889.2 2771.4 73.3 l'l"38.1* I.*>0.5 81665.8 1023.5 .38917.1 5.10 .3.3553.7 907.9 13938.0 2462.9 69.6 l'l-.184* 1.5.3.2 71758.8 727.7 37302.5 .3.81 25687.5 893.5 1.3.557.4 3223.6 73.4 168.6 78(M9.4 740.5 .50164.3 .3.51 27.397.6 670.6 11967.0 2803.1 101.4 IM-38<. 146.7 81833.8 769.4 44723.1 3.44 28903.6 844.9 16713.8 3220.6 75.7 l'l-387 146.6 76.308.3 1110.3 46947.4 4.22 29.381.2 820.2 11662.9 26.33.1 65.7 l'|-388 1.54.3 84201.5 860.8 28760.8 3.62 28604.6 684.4 17.561.7 .3431.3 86.3 l'J"38«J 164.0 7<)716.6 1137.4 .33163.4 4.60 25271.2 745.4 16196.5 2902.4 86.0 155.8 83306.7 702.8 106.39.9 4.45 33215.7 991.3 1.3645.8 2662.6 91.1 (16348.0 802.2 56(i83.2 3.91 2(.037.3 698.2 11640.1 2652.0 70.6 Appendix 7: Elemental Concentrations (in parts per million) for Sherds, Clays, and Sands /.l< al. ua c:a l)y k mn na Tl v 120.2 81604.4 723.2 44(M9.6 4..39 31855.2 763.0 1.3672.9 2602.4 65.2 132.5 7W8I..1 678.4 .1031.3.3 4.06 28271.5 759.9 137.38.5 2869.5 69.9 >>•394 174.y 7.*>S47.7 8S3.1 .13063.7 4.86 30477.0 851.2 15428.4 3132.1 85.7 'i-.vj5 142.8 8029.'i.5 743.2 48703.7 3.32 27385.9 719.5 16583.6 3496.4 93.2 143.4 soia-s.-'s 871.0 10214.8 4.37 30933.9 849.1 1462.3.9 1195.2 69.4 •l-'.VJ? l.'ih.l 83441.0 73i'>.8 33567.5 4.10 31209.6 847.1 16071.4 2949.6 83.7 'f3'j8 142.7 81764.1 102Z.4 1.3811.9 4.18 29879.1 953.8 13410.9 .3023.6 80.3 'IWJ'J 147.9 826u2.0 721.1 32837.6 4.51 30797.5 836.5 170.38.1 2459.6 65.2 'I-41M) 148.4 84287.4 781.8 45718.4 3.87 28290.7 806.6 14660.9 2413.3 73.1 •rol I.S3.I 87993.7 633.3 34743.4 3.84 26792.9 818.9 17018.8 2715.5 74.4 'I'4()2 180.1 77179.7 796.2 29362.7 4.33 34785.7 633.5 14740.0 2171.1 102.8 'l-"4l)3 161.1 7.*).*)87.6 860.4 41289.3 3.66 28274.4 892.3 12528.8 2221.1 70.5 •|-4()4 144.8 83s48.9 724.2 15662.8 4.56 31176.5 914.9 M648.7 3112.9 86.1 'l-4().'i 137.6 8.1290.1 8.18.7 38.330.9 4.01 31475.6 832.3 1.1428.1 3093.9 72.4 'l--4l)f) l.')8.0 80440.1 910.1 45651.9 3.85 26624.2 778.9 16298.7 3265.3 81.0 •|-4»7 144.8 713j4.7 1017.0 46820.5 4.16 27582.1 783.4 11415.7 2140.4 64.1 'i-408 l.'57.6 809.16.1 792.7 45.394.3 4.87 27226.8 981.8 13920.3 2897.2 92.2 •}-40'j 1.53..5 79.11.5.6 9.19.9 49605.6 .3.10 27714.1 737.7 17098.5 2919.4 108.6 •I410 2.30.2 89702.3 813.9 26m9.5 3.57 26645.7 962.7 16045.5 2798.7 loo.o •I411 208.1 82427.3 79.).6 29230.0 4.95 29420.9 978.0 1.3045.8 3122.9 96.6 'I-4I2 I94..'i 83074.6 916.0 49054.3 4..38 29362.5 846.7 15119.7 2459.2 64.2 '1'413 174.y 8.38S 1.9 urn 2.0 42928.2 3.39 27689.0 625.0 17475.0 3108.5 88.9 '1-414 203.4 8S79(I.7 1031.4 1 1689.9 4.13 .30912.5 'IK 1.4 137 /.K Al. »A CA 1)Y K MN NA n V •410 IW.S 89037.7 998.9 10577.3 4.81 35813.3 1406.1 13202.6 .3789.5 93,0 •417 245.5 86046.0 1182.0 46445.9 4.03 29278.7 497.8 8670.1 3192.1 89,3 ••418 1^8.9 71147.6 1207.1 74281.8 3..38 25696.5 885.8 11.391.3 2258.8 73,3 •419 220.6 70457.3 770.6 45159.0 .3.44 28229.9 587.4 75.35.6 2755.4 79,9 •4211 245.5 86567.6 043.4 22331.6 4.30 329.35.2 854.5 10967.1 2809.0 71.3 •'421 20.1.9 8178U.2 808.4 51979.5 3.69 29132.1 580.1 7860.4 2.358.6 71.5 ••422 211.9 80762.5 1048.0 49121.0 3.30 29124.6 5.54.8 7765.1 2567.2 78.0 •423 229.5 77422.3 1015.1 50.345.9 .3.16 28145.8 516.7 7555.8 3036.5 76,6 •424 212.8 82121.8 064.2 42964.7 4.07 29482.3 763.7 141.35.3 2717.3 65.2 •4 2.'* 245.7 871.55.2 1320.2 41168.8 3.03 29609.0 553.7 8463.9 3266.8 86.7 •426 208.1 80.342.5 877.1 54512.0 3.87 29318.2 616.9 7738.5 2678.9 74.1 •'427 147.4 89794.4 1080.6 251.38,9 .3.41 30607.5 717.3 15.302.9 2899.3 87.7 •428 157.1 89(>34.0 1005.4 31514.0 2.74 23601.3 956.6 21327.0 3621.4 116,5 ••42 V 221.2 81811.7 950.5 76941.6 3.8U 28085.3 769.2 12259.3 2578.3 83,2 ••43(» 197.4 74.'59fi.9 845.6 75403.9 3.83 26415.4 722.2 1214.3.0 2783.0 78,4 •431 219.4 74401.1 702.8 48898.7 .3.10 260.36.1 537.3 7099.8 2063.7 68,2 •432 2(M.9 81109.7 10.35.0 41401.6 3.31 29294.8 518.5 7894.3 2870.8 73,3 •434 274.5 77207.3 925.0 48.391.1 5.22 251.38.3 827.9 16109.9 2851.4 62,2 •43S 214.3 70108.8 819.5 52841.0 3.27 27101.0 568.3 7803.3 2965.8 72.1 •43(> 203.7 77150.1 844.0 7.5512.0 3.53 269(K).0 709.6 11852.6 .3079,1 85.(1 •'437 283.0 70702.3 715.9 .54558.1 3.43 27829.9 493.6 7871.0 2975.3 67.8 •438 195.3 78400.7 982.0 39728.4 3.57 27550.4 045.7 15.326.9 3192,9 79.4 •43'J 2.39.1. 74113.2 755.3 .39415.2 3.75 27901.7 004.8 15325.0 2750.3 00.5 •441) 200.3 77000.1 796.8 288.34.2 4.31 29850.8 049.<1 15002.9 32(H.2 73.0 Appendix 7: Elemental Concentrations (in parts per million) for Sherds, Clays, and Sands AniJ ZR Al. HA CA I)Y K MN NA T1 V 1M'44J 70U)«.3 699.7 64778.6 5.04 26493.2 U6.5 12748.9 236S.4 71.2 l'R42 211.6 72202.3 1(K)6.4 65219.6 3.89 26056.7 771.7 14175.5 2611.8 58.5 24.V() 77.308.6 10.53.6 294.54.4 3.97 31127.0 629.5 1.3715.1 .3546.3 69.1 PI-444 203.6 7487.5.4 690.0 46311.8 4.83 2.3061.8 687.2 16(M)8.5 2985.1 73.3 l'R45 208,9 81785.0 709.7 39614.9 3.59 27892.9 614.3 1.5561.5 2955.4 68.0 ri'446 248.9 81.367.2 886.1 48547.8 3.79 26667.0 675.3 14945.1 .3679.1 113.8 l'l-447 247.1 78264.0 854.6 207.35.3 4.12 29241.0 634.0 14676.8 3133.5 70.4 I'1'448 198.0 76664.4 780.1 19938.7 3.98 28252.9 612.4 14953.6 2899.2 65.0 I'I-44 iiiJ ZK Al. HA CA UY K MN NA n V 2S.1.I) 73742.7 795.2 241.3.3.6 3.54 29271.2 620.4 15447.6 2637.6 6.3.1 JM'46r) IS'J.O 86276.8 7.37.2 40870.0 3.18 26270.6 872.2 15744.4 2975.0 95.3 l'|-467 184.7 78944.0 917.3 37106.8 3.75 28319.1 683.4 16761.0 .3.394.1 88.8 l»l''468 18.1.5 798.57.6 970.6 37108.8 .3.17 28125.0 598.6 15901.6 3084.2 69.5 PJ'460 100.8 80167.5 803.8 52527.6 4.50 26940.6 803.8 13367.7 2450.0 84.3 l'l-47() 174.6 8.5253.1 802.9 4.3587.1 3.73 24223.5 989.8 16087.2 3130.0 107.4 rr47i I77..'5 79509.9 795.1 55696.4 3.60 26151.7 67.3.7 15965.8 3955.6 91.0 l»|-472 198.8 80341.5 709.1 51333.7 3.84 3(X)28.3 709.3 11069.4 2869.2 58.0 I'r473 196.9 83195.8 7.59.1 21494.7 4.37 30873.5 707.4 14566.3 2928.0 69.3 l'l-474 21.1.9 77912.2 906.3 29007.1 4.44 .30507.2 668.6 15244.1 2981.5 75.0 n'47.'i 21.TO 81049.9 889.4 23270.6 4.28 30998.6 724.6 15182.3 2787.8 72.2 l'l-47(> 19U.7 82740.1 841.7 50770.8 3.48 23704.0 670.9 15741.7 3716.7 96.0 PR 77 180.6 70848.8 783.7 7771.5.8 3.16 2.3604.3 783.7 1.3062.9 3335.7 95.4 »'1'478 176.7 80735.2 694.9 47503.4 3.69 2.3215.1 807.6 14647.6 3825.3 114.5 Pl'470 1S0.8 77573.4 1000.8 27009.0 4.62 28573.2 637.5 14359.3 3183.5 66.9 l'F480 187.6 795.54.1 948.6 455.30.6 4.66 24758.1 741.7 1.5427.5 2146.0 63.0 l'J-4«2 190.1 76065.4 828.9 21185.6 .5.18 .30915.7 610.6 16147.3 29.32.1 69.3 P»'483 194.4 80254.1 752.9 36693.8 3.96 30178.5 877.2 13241.7 2410.6 82.2 l'l-484 2.1S.6 78760.8 1046.9 33524.9 4.14 285(M.9 695.6 14473.1 3.306.2 82.2 l'l-48S I9.3..3 84080.7 850.6 46092.1 .3.73 26142.8 691.0 16602.8 3158.7 97.1 l'J-486 146..1 79848.5 829.3 5.3031.5 3..37 28444.7 687.3 16144.9 .3452.8 83.1 l'l-487 1HS.2 82506.4 808.9 48707.8 3.18 26528.9 895.4 15.374.7 3378.1 99.5 l'l-488 91031.3 661.4 50315.6 7.08 32874.6 10(M.5 18278.2 43.39.7 142.6 l'l-489 18(1.1 98761.4 778.3 24554.6 4.33 .31)522.6 652.9 17826.7 5229.6 96.7 Appendix 7: Elemental Concentrations (in parts per million) for Sherds, Clays, and Sands /.!< AL UA CA IJY K MN NA n V I'IM'Jd 180.6 94449.1 792.0 28607.0 4.20 31029.3 993.1 8214.0 2949.5 62.6 I'l'-l'Jl iri6.i 84996.8 781.8 6196.1.2 .1.11 25485.7 856.6 15010.3 2692.8 10.1.8 1H4.6 75826.8 954.7 52180.1 2.98 25191.5 757.9 15198.1 3567.0 88.4 181.6 7.1711.2 985.0 .19312.7 4.16 32415.0 647.3 15814.5 2239.5 70.2 207.3 8.1.125.9 849.9 .16804.6 3.83 28473.4 612.5 1653t'.3 3142.1 81.0 168.1 78702.7 832.7 52266.8 4.02 30749.9 749.1 15273.6 2507.3 92.5 171.9 83060.(1 833.5 .19133.5 3.38 29950.3 723.7 1.5466.7 3797.4 83.5 I'l'4y7 167.8 77996.5 887.6 58096.7 3.63 29723.9 659.0 16426.5 2968.0 62.3 »M-4y8 216.6 75383.1 691.8 40389.4 4.92 29047.5 842.8 14649.7 3057.1 62.0 I'R'J'J 100.5 80217.6 841.0 49401.1 4.81 32177.0 741.5 10.195.5 2830.1 75.9 PI'SfM) l!>7.7 76458.4 885.2 43968.9 8.43 .10122.9 665.5 14985.1 .1577.7 87.7 Pl-51)1 17.VJ 81401.1 1157.8 38970.4 4.98 29750.9 668.2 1.5987.6 3403,8 76.5 l'l-5()2 164.1 76956.7 1344.7 3.1567.4 4.64 29381.0 787.8 15373.1 2990.7 67.2 171.8 87410.8 809.2 2.1516.3 5.04 .13243.6 658.1 152(X).0 3147.3 63.0 J'l-SOS 17.S..1 78322.0 948.6 38227.4 5..16 27495.7 569.8 1.5025.5 2953.0 74.7 in-"5(K) 150.4 71516.9 783.7 36821.3 4.08 .14696.2 580.1 10913.8 2825.7 74.0 I'l-SO? 2.18.7 77530.3 751.9 22390.0 3.78 31686.9 1017.5 14688.9 4105.1 55.6 in-ViOH 164.2 78006.4 709.6 28630.6 4..14 .10.186.0 888.3 14751.0 3372.5 77.1 l'J4.6 66461.0 673.3 71164.1 3.48 287(M.9 680.4 11292.7 2422.5 63.2 I'KiUI 212.9 75059,5 718.0 3.1408.0 3.86 29703.5 696.8 15724.4 2775.0 69.2 l'F5ll 216.6 76476.6 850.6 28874.1 .1.76 .1045.1.0 638.5 15959.5 2454.5 59.5 177.2 73812.8 777.7 36411.6 3.82 .1021)9.(1 947.6 14211.8 3.176.4 62.4 I'ISI.l 2.18.4 80505.5 851.3 18054.5 4.20 290 2 3.7 954.4 15488.5 3316.5 63.6 I'l'iM 74072.5 909.7 66263.3 3.74 3099kh 376.1 7715.1 25.18.2 63..1 Appendix 7; Elemental Concentrations (in parts per million) for Sherds. Clays, and Sands /!< Al. HA CA l)Y K MN NA n V 'ISIS 216.4 69853.5 712.3 37766.3 3.77 27322.9 744.5 12533.1 2855.6 70.9 •1-516 200.3 7.3561.3 700.4 24.399.0 4.08 29785.4 766.7 14732.5 2600.2 61.9 '1'5J7 I'JO.J 81442.6 91M.3 29195.7 3.36 28058.2 747.5 16178.5 2950.0 75.6 'rsi8 IK8.9 75631.4 667.1 4571.3.7 4..35 30680.9 887.8 14031.1 2488.7 65.1 224..1 74425.3 630.8 44251.7 3.80 25617.4 769.3 11030.8 2731.4 62.4 •l'521) 2I.V> 83762.7 940.1 257.35.7 2.93 297.34.3 759.3 16346.3 .3059.2 80.9 l'J7.0 76586.6 731.5 41399.6 3.50 26601.1 894.2 15144.6 3152.6 79.6 'K122 I'J'J.l 78660.5 6(K».7 54088.9 4.05 31037.1 629.6 9737.8 2742.4 67.3 'l'523 20K..'> 73162.5 763.1 26519.7 3.96 29598.6 1181.3 14311.0 2808.6 65.6 'I-524 20.3.4 77069.7 683.8 45621.4 3.10 25093.2 745.4 1564.3.1 3533.0 87.4 'I-S25 202.8 78555.5 837.9 28785.6 3.98 29201.2 688.4 15543.8 2899.2 67.8 'l'526 183.H 76412.5 814.5 46907.3 3.56 26887.2 787.4 15934.5 2682.6 54.7 'r.i27 2.37.0 80886.0 834.0 53828.7 6.00 28512.2 697.8 17087.2 42.34.2 66.1 'I-528 17.5.6 75100.0 772.4 31321.1 4.10 32670.6 729.8 14862.5 2837.2 79.7 l»l'52'J 25y.5 7.3574.5 802.3 31252.3 3.53 29984.7 778.5 14316.1 2662.4 .59.1 M-530 2(M.'J 77757.2 624.8 28079.0 4.51 28239.7 998.0 15837.5 .3.541.5 72.6 'KS.ll I82..1 9(K)90.8 608.7 18516.3 4.70 .36121.6 746.4 7686.7 2072.7 58.4 l'F532 l.'>2.4 84789.1 795.3 4152.3.2 3.24 25095.6 922.6 15088.5 .3682.1 111.2 l'l-533 132.7 77513.9 7.38.9 28546.4 3.79 29510.1 712.3 14150.8 3047.2 62.2 'l"534 183.8 83850.9 1010.6 19943.6 5.24 31875.9 791.3 11.309.9 3179.9 95.4 207.9 88293.5 1149.2 12962.7 4..32 36994.2 552.5 8466.3 .3377.3 93.9 TS.Ki 159.6 8.3527.5 8.38.0 39056.2 4.08 23224.4 682.0 15191.2 38.36.1 95.6 188.8 78886.6 773.7 4.3065.0 4.23 24522.9 691.0 12865.9 2878.4 95.9 llil.l 84566.2 1040.6 28247.1 5.59 2K486.6 672.6 13925.0 3936.2 75.1 Appendix 7. Elemental Concentrations (in parts per million) for Sherds, Clays, and Sands id /.K AI. HA CA l)Y K MN NA Tl V I'l'S.VJ 186.1 92109.1 985.5 25.358.6 4.80 .34319.8 705.6 8672.7 .3659.0 100.7 I'EUI) 250.2 81917.3 862.5 26162.5 4.82 .30881.6 731.1 12920.9 3114.8 88.9 2l»6.'J 78120.7 1032.7 23668.3 5.50 29984.1 854.2 13258.4 2581.9 100.4 l'IS42 1 till /.U Al. HA (A OY K MN NA n V l'l-563 2(13.6 89.541..5 KM 1.2 3.3974.4 4.74 27227.7 697.2 11894.0 2891.3 95.1 l'l-564 l.'52..1 «.149(».4 665.2 15693.2 4.23 .35427.7 867.3 124.3.3.4 2474.9 68.9 I'lVift.S 144.6 83126.0 802.6 12685.9 4.72 31671.9 708.2 14299.7 3124.3 86.3 20K..3 73201.3 864.6 31671.0 5.(M 28433.3 801.0 14441.2 3150.7 84.9 I'l'Sfi? 172.6 69408.2 588.1 47363.0 7.66 303.36.7 753.3 16755.1 3221.1 68.9 n-.'568 201.8 87027.6 814.0 29602.2 4.31 30381.9 882.2 12608.3 2510.4 93.2 I'l'SfiO 224.1 76896.8 1025.7 28800.3 4.37 37095.7 695.6 14946.7 4070.2 77.6 l'IVi7() 142.6 933.39.2 780.8 21845.2 3.07 26508.9 846.6 19327.0 4.305.7 112.5 162.8 74042..5 997.6 30229.4 4.81 30287.3 778.4 15.384.5 2905.7 93.6 IM'572 n7.9 91470.4 851.4 9151.7 5.77 28276.1 633.1 6892.1 5125.0 107.6 l'l'573 l.-iO.! 82952.3 935.9 17126.3 4.03 31620.2 686.2 129.36.3 2028.5 66.1 Pl''574 142.6 82276.0 771.1 29371.2 .3.51 30161.7 763.2 14448.2 3302.2 79.6 1M-S75 174.8 66777.2 848.9 11.399.3 3.65 24.541.3 490.8 12018.4 2517.1 59.5 l'|-576 214.2 8195S.2 969.5 35906.1 4.51 35760.9 684.3 10221.6 3.393.8 95.8 J'I577 197.9 82814.8 893.4 36468.3 6.(M 27856.8 803.7 15260.0 4190.0 82.8 l'IV>7« 164.2 7485.3.1 803.8 61486.9 4.43 24264.3 648.8 11482.1 2222.5 70.0 1M-S7y 178.4 78633.8 853.3 37896.8 5.44 27258.1 684.6 14732.1 3899.4 84.5 176.4 85987.1 746.5 .34613.7 4.51 29152.1 738.3 9886.5 3669.2 90.7 12.5.1 802.57.0 855.7 11295.2 8.60 31142.7 669.9 13776.3 2196.8 73.3 imi 81244.1 731.3 24663.7 4.36 .32514.5 656.9 14.356.3 41.30.4 70.9 l'l'5«3 l.'i8..S 74100.2 850.8 6.3562.8 4.09 27429.1 876.1 11198.4 2693.5 63.8 195.7 91.359.5 105 I.I 30328.8 3.49 27133.5 972.4 15007.0 3.361.5 95.1 I'lViHS 21)1.6 79837.0 747.2 43611.7 3.77 23697.8 598.7 11511.2 2973.2 86.7 22H.5 71710.0 112K.I 72425.8 4.38 24938.8 5(.6.7 8577.3 2467.2 65.2 Appendix 7: Elemental Concentrations (in parts per million) for Sherds, Clays, and Sands Aniil /It Al. »A (A DY K MN NA II V l'l'S87 1H3.5 82I).S2.3 II1I4.0 17144.0 5.01 35703.7 961.3 7682.2 3161.3 82.3 IMSKK 2(I'J.3 7(>631.7 861.2 49229.8 4.24 25329.7 5(>4.8 10765.3 .3545.4 96.(1 l'IV>«9 l«.S.4 83178.9 .3.18.34 ..i 5.97 28059.4 633,4 9400.7 218.3.5 87.6 I'l-syo I72..S 71920.0 102.S.3 69881.0 4.14 21750.3 689.5 7663.0 2951.4 83.9 IM'S'Jl IK'J.K 7.'i483.8 844.5 428S3.8 3.73 24316.8 592.7 11613.3 3205.5 98.7 ri'.'i92 ivn.8 76474.0 1010.0 46489.2 4.07 24393.3 535.0 16598.2 3807.5 53.0 I'l-ViW 242.6 79.S.56.2 727.8 37772.6 4.25 25159.0 546.5 1.550.3.0 .3428.1 91.5 144.4 87.333.3 624.3 38665.3 4.65 32133.6 761.4 9720.1 3126.0 92.9 I'lSW I.Vi.O 9972.i.2 774..S 27746.2 6.66 31800.8 1162.3 13159.7 4734.0 96.4 I'l-Vi'Jfi 21M .6 94110.2 662.3 .30.3.57.1 4.19 32(N)8.I 575.0 7702.4 2698.2 83.4 I'l-SO? 2(12.3 77254.8 662.8 147UU 3.43 27933.7 515.5 14603.8 2947.4 85.4 IM-'.i'JH t9H.K 78371.8 829.2 66609.3 3.85 29369.0 686.8 9195.3 2748.5 72.7 ri-S'J'J 2(M.I 88126.3 921.6 .33479.4 4.74 31208.6 727.0 14057.7 .381.3.5 88.8 I'l-WM) 173.') 83120.6 917.4 21920.0 4.44 31935.9 713.8 12775.4 2439.3 85.7 I'lWIl 19(1.9 88323.1 619.0 25736.0 4.77 29747.7 761.3 10.349.1 2884.4 102.1 l'l'Y)l)2 i«y..i 77.'?20.9 7.S2.6 41905.9 4.01 28526.6 701.7 1.3942.3 4339.0 82.6 IM-'603 2117.2 76738.J 721.3 30593.4 4.09 25874.5 627.5 11696.4 3988.1 91.0 l'l'6{H 2(19.2 73120.9 801.6 48844.4 3.99 31434.1 693.1 9509.9 2743.6 89.1 PI'6(W 1.1(1.7 774H4.I 970.0 52626.3 3.13 26886.9 7.34.1 15220.8 2785.4 76.3 l'l'60f) 73238.2 772.7 50732.4 .3.57 28496.1 687.3 15118.6 2780.6 80.2 7.3224.7 922.4 49583.8 3.41 2542R.9 (i9().9 14858.2 3039.4 76.2 I.Vi.3 796(i6..i 64.1.7 47994.3 3.93 24920.2 778.6 11526.9 .1074.6 96.2 1'|-'<>IW 22(1.1) 8.*) 107.8 843.1 18200.0 4.52 .34767.1 794.0 13106.6 3485.9 76.3 2112.S 80263.6 1017.8 42956.3 4.27 2')45K.') 517.4 9()51.(1 2408.3 85.7 Appendix 7. Elemental Concentrations (in parts per million) tor Sherds. Clays, and Sands tiU y.K Al. HA CA I3Y K MN NA n V I'lYill 163.3 77876.1 778.5 388.39.8 3..38 24079.7 821.6 170CK).2 3588.4 87.0 172.6 81463.2 792.2 40287.1 4.12 26560.4 706.3 1.1515.7 3790.2 80.3 222.2 724«J2.3 8.S6.4 36364.2 4.73 310.39.7 759.8 10778.1 3100.5 80.3 UO.S 81877.3 1072.6 45625.2 4.40 27.345.2 658.4 14382.5 2797.7 52.6 I'lVilS nil] /H Al. HA CA 1)Y K MN NA 11 V 22'J.4 83380.5 051.8 23070.0 4.41 27186.0 743.7 10560.2 3506.5 76./ I'hO.Vi 140.8 8(N)82.2 880.9 4.1643.7 3.43 28148.0 503.4 1.1002.8 2898.1 85.3 VlhM 135.6 81151.5 621.5 47534.1 4.(H) 28600.4 871.1 13014.4 2176.7 68.2 217.6 84027.2 672.8 .142.16.7 4.58 31754.3 657.3 96.10.1 3654.8 00.4 I'lYi.VJ 151.0 78268.3 718.2 .15888.7 4.30 205.18.4 770.3 14181.2 2849.0 71.1 »'IY)40 1.55.1 71153.3 1120.6 .31M20.0 3.88 20035.2 601.5 10610.3 2858.8 76.3 l'IY>41 230.5 70177.8 1355.8 42104.5 4.81 30185.6 526.5 0855.4 3032.8 67.1 l'IYi42 110.6 71074.0 802.6 56440.0 3.38 20077.0 680.8 0818.0 3126.9 59.0 »>lf)43 170.7 74404.5 687.8 .34200.5 .3.31 24086.3 561.7 11672.0 2052.0 85.7 l'l'644 223.2 71578.6 851.3 37712.4 3.81 20257.5 628.5 Ul.103.3 2.17.1.1 47.4 l'l"64.i 215.0 8.1.363.3 10.10.7 37282.0 4.65 20781.2 570.8 I2H(H).H .1625.0 74.6 I'1'646 172.5 76550.5 800.5 20470.1 3.03 27012.4 651.0 1.3225.0 .1555.4 8.1.1 n()47 156.4 101810.6 1281.6 4.3834.0 3.08 20360.3 446.2 3427.4 2757.6 66.3 l'l'64« 181.6 76554.6 2270.5 65532.0 3.73 20632.3 685.5 10453.6 2816.0 63.8 l'I'65() 165.6 81425.0 857.6 17871.3 4.51 .15265.7 645.8 1.3.150.9 2863.0 73.4 220.0 74063.6 642.8 43322.2 4.14 28272.0 581.1 12284.5 2010.2 78.0 I>l'6.*i2 168.7 8(KH)7.3 857.6 20140.0 6.41 .10830.4 563.0 8223.0 2455.0 70.5 )'JY)53 160.3 82622.5 880.7 4234.3.8 3.00 25626.8 605.2 15441.0 .1008.2 84.8 l'l'654 17B.7 84550.0 10(>0.2 41377.6 4.00 32037.8 756.2 10004.0 3702.1 83.3 l'l'6S5 1.34.7 80718.3 723.7 17860.0 4.<.2 31028.5 6.14.2 12848.5 .1011.5 75,3 I'lWfi 123.3 ilN)480.5 1465.4 12164.0 3.30 31802.0 .187.1 4110.0 2549.9 70.8 I'lhUy 150.(> 8588(>.0 001.3 74714.0 3.53 .11065.5 871.3 10715.8 3268.1 05.0 I'HiSK I (>4.3 827()(I.'J 8()8.3 10847.1 4.4(> 1246(1.8 758.6 17287.7 .1651.7 84.2 151.5 07545.8 84r..5 1 3.45 25510.5 607,2 14516.3 3285.6 61.6 Appendix 7: Elemental Concentrations (in parts per million) for Sherds, Clays, and Sands Anid /K Al. »A CA DY K MN NA 11 V 145.4 75428.6 703.1 51310.0 3.32 284.36.2 532.9 14440.9 2857.4 77.1 IW.O 82771.6 789.5 31709.9 4.20 26715.2 555.5 1.3894.4 3920.0 81.5 I'lY)ft2 183.2 105657.6 600.1 5746.4 6.88 .34469.5 842.8 9.364.1 4661.5 102.2 187.2 82862.0 769.8 16272.6 5.28 .32418.3 470.7 9567.9 3927.8 57.2 l'|-664 187.9 84291.1 878.9 25562.4 4.80 28023.2 821.6 10968.1 .3228.1 85.5 PI"66S 162..5 83685.3 1091.9 40182.9 3.65 27271.1 712.6 10950.5 2729.9 66.1 iM'666 180.2 79018.6 842.9 S 1642.1 3.93 24949.0 561.9 10521.9 2641.0 71.5 l'l'667 169.6 82945.4 1.149.2 44.300.1 4.01 25902.8 6.35.8 12996.6 3302.7 69.8 l')-668 2)l).7 75487.8 850.8 23856.2 .3.40 .30961.5 5.35.6 13606,9 2493.8 75,3 I'1Y)69 i6:.y 7.3986.1 829.9 57646.7 3.98 25795.0 634.1 14673.8 2769.2 56.4 l'l'670 1.56.(1 72124.8 739.4 36560.0 .3.91 27180.8 653.4 14449.8 2463.7 57.1 l'l'671 1.50.8 765.37.1 984.1 50020.0 .3.71 23941.2 600.5 15506.0 3129.2 65,4 IM'672 160.2 80970.3 1018.4 47618.5 3.58 27843.8 570.5 15149.3 2285.3 66,9 l'l-673 141.7 68621.8 782.1 32.345.0 3.48 23273.6 519.3 13282.8 2563.6 72.8 riY)74 152.0 80285.6 742.0 35556.4 4.60 25622.8 675.7 17105.6 2886.5 62.3 »'IY>75 159.y 74815.4 828.8 43802.6 3.98 29031.4 698.8 140.32.2 2645.9 56.9 l'l-676 222.2 68414.0 845.7 23(K)1.5 5.07 31816.0 474.5 11469.4 3499.8 73.4 l'IVi77 190.3 75681.7 837.6 28683.4 4.26 28(HO.O 589.0 15.365.5 3258.8 78.2 l'l'Y.78 162.8 77083.6 827.7 32480.7 4.86 3(M)5().9 664.9 1.5.581.2 2914.6 71.4 l'l'67») 155.0 74682.0 811.7 32794.6 4.26 28715.6 602.7 15151.4 2934.8 74.6 l'l"()8(l 164.7 71888.9 771.0 45505.2 3.33 27709.3 546.6 12546.(1 2261.7 83.5 I'lYiHJ 175.9 77848.2 924.3 27157.3 3.66 32818.9 689.8 1.3258.3 2270.9 76.5 157.9 70645.0 875.4 29290.0 3.50 299(>9.3 513.2 15670.4 2589.7 60.7 131.2 7.5018.0 (>.39.0 49959.K 3.92 270(12.2 5K6.9 11017.1 2446.7 74.9 Appendix 7: Elemental Concentrations (in parts per million) for Sherds, Clays, and Sands liJ y.K Al. HA lAi 1>Y K MN NA 11 V IM()K4 H2.4 76138.4 786.1 26487.8 4.27 27574.1 658.6 15294.6 3330.0 65.7 l>l-6K5 188.7 74282.1 727.7 M'mA 4.71 28529.5 645.7 1.5481.2 2794.4 67.4 l>iYi8(i 171.7 80711.4 817.7 41230.0 3.72 24707.9 711.7 12850.0 2254.5 87.8 l.SS.l 78927.0 946.5 4951.3.1 3.96 29517.8 648.1 14970.1 3528.5 77.7 l'l'()88 1<)4.7 76758.2 822.1 51210.0 4.65 27197.0 878.9 1.3644.8 .3411.1 84.7 l'l'68'J 144.7 80553.8 698.6 40410.0 .3.14 27225.0 526.8 15290.0 31.36.3 67.6 |'l-()y() 18.'S.I) 78976.9 829.6 24851.1 4.32 31127.6 650.7 15846.7 2824.6 60.3 I'l-h'Jl 155.1 75915.2 941.2 50828.8 3.45 28351.0 563.3 15003.9 2720.6 73.0 I'lYiya 159.5 80461.4 961.5 51647.8 3.36 2412.5.3 687.1 14249.8 3287.5 83.8 PI'<|U3 156.0 80915.6 7.54.7 39309.3 3.50 24829.2 640.7 15984.9 3076.5 83.0 l'l-(>«)4 154.4 80137.8 899.0 47777.5 3.92 31786.0 649.9 15405.2 3299.7 82.8 I'lWS 142.6 75309.2 881.6 42121.4 3.46 .30.391.2 562.7 15680.6 3043.6 70.2 n'f)y6 171.8 77800.7 790.4 32867.1 3.53 27.369.0 505.9 15434.4 3067.1 77.4 l'l-6'J7 218.9 71055.8 648.4 4181.3.2 4.15 28589.9 497.2 15029.6 .3061.1 71.0 l'IYi lid /K Al. HA (A l)Y K MN NA n V l')-7l)8 189.1 80749.0 1026.5 44140.4 4.47 25617.5 606.6 15526.5 2252.2 68.5 K>6.K 80804.8 780.1 37920.0 4.38 31294.4 616.8 9285.2 2369.9 77.3 l'i71(J 167.4 73442.0 911.8 33509.0 3.85 30538.9 552.0 14099.4 2720.8 54.6 201.0 7.37.52.1 788.3 29320.8 3.62 26768.7 665.4 1.3696.1 2644.1 70.2 IM-712 164..'> 76134.5 815.0 24037.7 4.42 27974.9 675.2 13744.7 2788.6 68.8 rryi.i I44.'j 86(H)3.9 680.0 22269.4 3.76 26369.5 597.8 119.35.5 2857.9 80.7 229.8 69987.4 831.1 .39714.3 4.02 29229.5 640.1 15846.6 2727.1 72.3 IM'7l5 159.2 79561.6 748.7 .35711.3 3.91 26042.7 574.2 154.54.7 3039.6 62.4 PI-716 183.0 73060.7 746.1 38679.7 3.53 26418.4 572.5 12178.9 2764.0 65.1 PF7J7 188.6 78433.7 794.0 59010.0 2.78 25289.2 747.2 1.5631.9 .3544.4 100.7 VVlXti 126.B 8I2IB.0 818.9 36330.0 3.73 25943.8 784.8 15552.3 3131.5 99.7 I'l'7l9 172.9 78235.1 789.0 50593.3 3.19 26.308.5 692.8 15131.0 2799,3 78.4 l'l'72() 200.2 74637..5 899.2 56229.4 3.56 25144.5 536.7 16279.0 2932.3 67.1 n-72J 191.1 77137.1 754.3 36157.0 4.05 31148.5 695.4 16532.1 2469.1 93.3 IM-722 132.9 80914.1 688.9 19010.0 4.07 .34517.2 708.1 i 2853.0 2442.5 74.3 l'l'723 178.4 75608.9 595.5 42529.6 3.70 27318.3 603.7 11855.1 .34.34.7 91.6 J'r724 180.2 76320.3 867.1 4251K).8 4.17 308(M.4 850.0 15682.1 2349.7 54.6 IM-725 220.1 79264.2 744.1 24580.(1 4.18 29888.8 727.5 14511.8 2487.7 66.6 l'l-726 147.2 756.59.1 793.9 37986.4 4.22 33766.7 727.0 12506.5 2150.7 76.4 PJ'727 1.*>1..*> 84170.8 842.7 .35262.7 3.60 30171.6 (>07.« 15226.9 3227.1 76.5 l'l-728 162.2 77413.6 861.3 47118.() 3.77 289'J5.8 674.6 14544.5 2892.7 90.4 l*l'729 176.7 748 72.9 866.3 33(k)9.() 4.43 .30521.6 594.7 14970.9 .3.357.6 66.6 l'l-73() 14.1..*) 807'J3.4 864.3 32518.9 3.92 30078.4 629.1 14699.5 .3416.3 92.0 l'l-731 157.2 kl)534.(> 751.6 27482.3 3.7k 32ik'j.l 553.7 15515.7 2613.7 77.6 Appendix 7. Elemental Concentrations (in parts per million) (or Sherds. Clays, and Sands Dill /.k al. ba c:a I)y k mn na n v l'l'732 164.2 81044.1 764.8 31.549.3 3.49 31(M).3.7 646.3 15844.8 2801.4 %.3 l'»-733 127.0 70989.8 7.34.8 651.39.0 4.12 28995.9 788.6 13326.5 3062.4 64.5 l'l'734 170..S 79382.0 868.0 24145.4 4.41 32093.1 683.3 14182.4 .3558.6 73.4 l'l-73.1 1.50.7 73113.9 949.5 46791.0 5.40 28934.7 743.0 13704.3 27.34.5 72.6 I'1'736 h.s.o 7.3221.6 749.1 26198.5 4.18 29134.1 766.4 15638.9 2868.7 67.0 I'1'737 161.8 67456.3 839.8 55.369.4 4.40 29664.0 6.54.9 10655.7 1826.1 62.4 IM<7.18 mo..*! 72613.6 679.0 77229.9 3.59 25994.2 461.6 8736.9 2444.8 78,5 l'l-7.11) 162.9 71646.5 801.1 .34286.1 4.13 314(M).8 617.7 1.3841.9 2908.5 57.8 JM-741) l.'ia.s 71916.9 781.2 .34025.3 3.94 33295.3 611.3 14798.1 2688.0 56.4 l'l'74l I7.'»..i 71737.0 688.9 48902.4 4.18 32485.4 502.1 12101.9 Z573.6 58.5 I'1'742 16.1.2 72818.1 701.4 .34550.9 4.24 28433.7 519.6 14.553.9 2809.4 73.7 l'l'743 153.0 76037.8 826.0 51224.3 4.05 31531.1 648.9 10287.3 2293.0 82.6 l'l'744 19.5.8 76861.6 709.4 42692.7 4.10 31830.4 538.0 9311.5 2765.9 63.8 l'J'74S 147.5 8.3662.5 470.4 240.30.0 3.82 .34142.2 635.3 8612.9 2368.1 52.0 PI-746 146.6 72673.8 701.2 584.30.5 3.85 28954.2 783.1 14431.9 2286.0 60.5 IM-747 173.0 71718.8 925.1 48476.7 4.57 303.35.2 71.3.5 1.3(M9.3 3194.0 84.3 l'l-748 288.9 76636.8 784.5 36065.7 7.-37 30586.3 977.3 1.3635.4 .3653.0 107.5 P»'74y 141.9 80562.0 451.0 42205.6 4.15 33479.1 533.9 8719.9 2334.2 51.0 lM-75() 183.0 66483.3 1023.8 1166(M.8 2.63 26202.6 405.6 9379.4 2636.8 77.7 4^ OO -4 Appendix 7. Elemental Concentrations (in parts per million) tor Sherds, Clays, and Sands Anid /U Al. HA (A UY K MN NA T1 V Shurdx h'rom OiihitU- of SliiJy Area (n= l27) I'llSO* 142.2 79132.6 655.8 .30851.3 3.99 28591.0 60.3.1 15011.3 2814.5 78.0 I'MSI* 163.6 7831)4.8 980.0 24532.9 2.98 26755.7 318.5 7605.9 2.521.1 73.9 200.2 71869.9 855.6 32109.2 4.79 28818.9 10.30.5 13619.5 3833.2 102.3 I'r2l9* 212.5 7198.5.4 730.2 36080.7 4.95 29937.6 998.9 13197.7 3726.3 1(M).9 i'l-220* 188.1 77272.2 816.8 41021.8 4.92 28287.7 1146.0 11.387.3 3730.5 92.0 n-22P 176.8 6886.5.4 894.9 58158.3 4.37 283J 2.0 878.0 12803.2 4180.7 89.7 l'l-222' 191.2 niAl.l 989.2 42491.0 4.96 32313.8 1056.5 13522.8 .3972.1 95.5 194.8 74926.8 872.3 48956.4 4.73 20846.8 1049.9 12085.5 442J.7 105.5 n224* 212.7 74861.0 912.4 .35204.7 4.51 29504.0 1003.8 13.345.8 4528.3 94.5 IM'22S* 20l.fi mm A 1057.5 31708.0 5.00 30757.8 1146.6 13987.7 4668.3 105.3 l»l-226' 192.4 71884..5 747.6 46576.5 4.83 27094.4 1071.6 12607.9 3820.6 94.5 l'l'228* 174..'5 94463.3 71.3.9 2102.3.5 4.63 31979.0 994.5 11743.3 3929.3 102.5 IM-22<)* 162.3 93447.8 954.9 21306.2 4.27 31578.1 1088.8 10932.4 3959.7 123.6 l'l-23()* 168.1 9.5129.4 596.2 16958.9 4.60 29431.3 1152.7 10070.8 3760.1 107.2 l'l-23r 142.3 87577.8 1079.9 24268.0 4.60 .30221.5 1022.5 110.35.5 4a54.8 105.0 lM-232' 231.2 76 Id /K Al. BA CA DY K MN NA 11 V •I-240* 161.0 88498.1 952.0 21842.6 4.65 29217.6 1070.8 11527.3 .3941.7 110.3 '1-24 !• 211.7 81706.5 887.4 28421.1 5.31 29434.8 1228.5 1.3025.5 3946.4 98.3 ')-242* 213.0 76.358.5 905.9 3050r).3 4.82 .30175.6 1165.4 12870.8 3663.5 94.1 '1-243* 215.9 91960.1 874.0 24171.8 .3.16 31901.9 471.3 20511.8 2350.8 74.8 'I-244* 172.3 94107.7 1.392.6 45(Hk'>.l 3.42 31956.6 491.6 9597.4 2582.7 78.2 'I'24.'>* lAO.O 88048.8 1.346.7 42796.4 .3.71 .34396.2 559,3 919.3.8 2626.9 69.1 '1'246* l»J7.4 75561.0 856.3 5K703.1 4.66 29123.4 669.3 12665.9 .3663.1 78.3 'l'247* 2.35.6 81063.7 923.4 28018.3 4.93 275.37.1 1130.4 13794.8 3813.7 89.9 •I-248* 2.35.3 725.35.7 797.3 .38057.1 5.10 31222.1 1142.8 1181.3.2 .3221.6 80.1 M'24y* l'W.2 68465.9 856.6 51567.3 3.88 27079.3 6(M.7 12340.2 3118.6 87.3 'I'2.i0* 229.4 75666.5 887.1 317(K1.2 4.88 29293.1 1148.9 14681.5 3496.2 94.9 •I-251* 256.9 75.365.3 687.5 36409.4 4.97 28409.8 1079.3 1.3741.1 4257.5 95.0 •l'2S2» 278.2 79823.8 76.3.1 319.59.8 4.72 30653.2 1114.0 14309.3 404.3.2 11.3.5 'I-253* 275.8 81970.1 722.2 2H 172.9 4.61 29762.0 1274.4 125.36.4 3333.0 91.9 »l'254* 230.2 78946.3 764.2 42120.0 4.71 28411.3 1158.6 12275.7 3300.5 106.2 '1-255 • 226.5 79466.6 936.9 40.349.9 4.51 27.388.1 1.397.5 11.365.5 40.38.6 95.9 M-256* 170.0 112353.9 984.5 23578.1 2.96 30236.3 557.6 10343.2 2924.4 86.9 'r257* 237.8 89142.3 794.3 2.3555.2 4.22 27374.7 5.36.7 18675.0 4107.2 84.0 '1-258* 195.6 79950.7 1063.6 48999.0 2.70 28859.5 431..3 14147.4 2692.8 8.3.7 'l-25'J* 199.8 85130.0 793.7 2IMMH).) 2.91 31785.6 .330.8 21501.7 2016.7 49.2 102.7 94446.3 <>3(1.(1 143(H).0 3.62 985.« \7(U3.') 936.2 40.7 'l'26I' 2«.3.2 84956.7 524.4 .34 792.8 4.29 28152.0 548.4 I87.38.I 82.36.9 151.9 'J--2f)2* 3211.0 911)18.2 646.6 44.305.1 5.04 299)2.5 585.0 2l)374. til) ZK Al. HA CA DY K MN NA 11 V l'l'264* t'J'J.2 72.^94.7 823.6 HI 277.0 5.23 25468.7 665.0 15142.9 3160.5 70.2 ri-26.5* 319.0 7826.'5.8 748.9 45657.3 6.(M) .35960.9 721.6 11707.9 3750.4 85.5 l»l-26()* 193.3 85356.7 737.9 30780.0 3.80 28031.8 677.4 16107.3 3843.6 79.8 l'l'2r>7* 210.(1 85591.9 608.9 31446.3 3.78 27765.1 679.0 16088.8 .3.3.55.1 99.3 l'l'26«* 28.1.8 74298.0 758.9 21.3.55.9 4.03 33.323.9 588.8 15266.5 2952.9 76.9 Pl'26'J* iy3..s 77788.6 854.7 33134.7 3.63 28525.3 593.7 15832.6 2431.8 68.1 l'l'27()* 161.1 100099.5 585.3 27533.8 2.80 1812.1.7 459.6 29722.0 4032.8 70.3 n-271 • .347.2 68062.1 771.7 52664.5 5.44 .32906.8 663.8 11.399.1 .3065.7 76.3 PI-272* 203.3 76709.1 751.8 352K3.9 3.86 28068.2 632.5 15396.8 2535.9 70.3 IM-273* 294.7 67636.9 824.2 42141.1 4.90 3.3472.9 685.1 11494.6 .3317.7 86.1 l'l-29.1* 18.S.0 81491.0 503.9 23785.6 3.79 .32109.0 571.2 11589.8 2812.9 56.0 J>F294» 187.4 79656.8 465.6 27950.1 3.59 31542.6 688.2 10109.2 1986.8 54.4 I'r295» 189.8 84885.5 810.0 49.362.4 2.89 27900.3 531.6 12632.2 3042.0 76.8 l'l-296* 197.6 76043.9 526.3 508.33.8 3.77 .30413.3 550.9 10199.2 2427.3 57.9 l'l-297* 188.0 79145.4 511.6 41546.3 4.16 .30013.6 613.6 9790.8 2105.4 55.2 l'l'298* 169.7 86434.9 462.5 28722.6 3.87 32199.8 564.1 9150.7 2451.6 59.0 l'l-299* J.S.3.8 85111.1 970.3 nmiM 2.66 24702.6 593.6 111.59.1 2246.7 77.8 I'l'.lOO* 204.0 79489.8 485.9 22879.2 3.60 31207.7 585.8 97.34.1 2433.5 58.1 IM'.KU* 2(M.S 79614.0 577.9 25053.6 3.60 31826.0 568.1 10269.3 2246.6 63.3 l'l-.1()2* 197.6 73729.1 629.6 285.35.4 3.74 28843.0 618.5 11158.4 2562.0 56.5 296.7 90381.3 623.7 38229.4 4.94 27682.2 6(MI.3 19725.9 7280.1 131.8 178.4 76514.8 585.9 4.3055.0 3.56 29562.K 585.7 8622.1 2202.7 70.6 I'l-.KW 226.3 70925.6 6.38.5 737.3.3.7 3.63 26439.4 466.7 16487.1 5046.9 116.9 216.7 75038.0 752.0 6.3420.3 3.92 29146.7 455.3 13169.1 4173.9 U6.7 Appendix 7. Elemental Concentrations (in parts per million) for Sherds, Clays, and Sands J y.H AI. BA (A 1)Y K MN NA ri V >40.8 82619.3 448.3 49510.3 3.90 31269.3 494.9 5450.6 2212.7 58.6 181.5 80981.3 514.8 40966.1 3.85 3.3923.1 513.7 8758.7 2260.7 56.9 •IMO'J* 189.6 89151.6 941.5 60122.7 2.79 30922.0 656.6 8(M3.1 2643.3 99.8 •1311)* 220.2 78719.2 667.4 52083.2 3.81 2(i8l9.2 429.4 17050.6 4089.5 101.0 194.1 81790.1 505.7 24944.9 .3.71 .302.38.0 630.5 10509.3 2818.4 58.4 'I'll 2* I89..1 78.365.2 487.2 .30653.2 4.07 31108.6 594.6 10077.1 2115.6 63.3 >79.5 75927.9 869.8 617W>.3 3.81 2(>416.8 652.1 17213.5 2779.3 55.2 '1'314* 178.8 75995.2 521.8 3l.t8l.O 3.61 31666.3 539.1 10125.2 2147.7 48.8 J52.8 88951.4 818.8 46052.8 2.91 3112.3.4 569,4 1439.3.3 2768.6 74.7 'I-316* 179.7 78667.5 752.4 52894.0 3.34 28022.1 565.5 16264.4 3121.9 86.3 •r3l7* 2.38.1 72594.4 585.9 550(16.2 3.90 31809.0 515.8 9707.1 2430.7 57.4 'I'3I8* 197.9 78013.7 804.6 44J78.5 .3.18 27604.5 588.8 14.359.0 2736.4 80.0 'l-3iy* 107.9 84377.2 749.5 18)89.8 4.18 24907.8 875.3 16903.9 1147.1 .37.8 'r32()* 206.0 87370.7 538.0 16933.3 3.99 32215.8 712.8 9556.8 2993.0 74.1 •I-32I* 191.8 78011.8 691.7 585.39.1 3.88 31178.6 655.9 17166.6 .3516.8 91.3 'l'322» 229.3 84141.9 781.4 2.3S10.0 3.76 27022.3 567.5 16809.1 4451.2 94.1 'I-323* 142.3 66950.2 816.6 64461.4 3.45 27023.7 555.4 5728.9 1829.9 46.0 'I-324* 194.8 68878.5 652.7 .38.S76.8 4.29 29160.7 610.9 14660.0 2688.8 66.3 'l'325* 172.3 92758.3 885.4 14''>68.6 4.45 33687.7 541.0 11656.5 2752.0 86.8 l'l-326* 210.2 82163.6 719.7 15S84.1 3.79 32721.9 568.5 14769.4 2763.3 70.5 'I-327* 197.2 81565.9 619.2 47X16.6 4..3() 31989.2 552.0 8396.0 2037.5 67.3 'I-328* 181.4 81862.1 671.6 41 i88.6 3.13 28737.5 554.5 16700.2 2985.0 76.0 l'l''32'J* 191.5 74224.3 K15.1 34'195.7 3.57 25223.K 11I6.O 13152.5 2613.7 93.1 'l-33()* 1.5(1.9 7'J(I5I.2 688.6 14192.7 3.57 32311.6 502.4 14905.6 2468.5 60.4 Appendix 7. Elemental Concentrations (in parts per million) for Sherds, Clays, and Sands iiiiJ /.R Al. HA (A l)Y K MN NA Tl V m.ir !6().y 75064.0 693.7 41649.4 4.15 28.145.8 749.6 15652.2 .3069.1 63.6 ISS.fl 73890.6 682.8 48758.0 4.55 .34494.9 627.9 12725.9 2.382.6 64.0 H'J.S 89821.1 783.1 35139.4 3.12 33195.5 550.6 17990.6 2591.0 76.4 l'l'33-«* 177.7 75972.3 872.3 57435.0 4.43 26946.6 525.5 17.395.4 2776.4 49.4 l'l''335' 136.4 84128.2 717.1 27718.0 .3.29 29880.8 589.4 16405.6 2993.2 89.0 Vl'336* 143.6 81835.9 724.1 36192.1 3.51 27064.9 595.0 15475.3 2685.9 73.0 l'l-337* 178.3 75732.6 666.8 2.3593.9 4.11 .30425.7 587.8 1.5.321.5 2602.1 76.6 l'l'338* 173..^ 75087.9 594.0 56668.3 3.87 250.34.2 830.0 14164.2 2564.3 71.1 in'33y* J 32.7 763B1.2 857.6 35217.4 3.77 27038.0 1048.1 17024.4 3259.7 84.9 l'|-34()» IK.i.S 91459.3 623.9 15163.0 4.32 31180.9 932.4 16010.9 3.357.9 107.4 PF34I* 18.3.0 70803.5 655.4 57.351.2 4.78 25101.5 1084.2 12779.2 4329.3 87.8 IM'342* IBO..** 75444.8 997.7 54632.0 4.75 25911.1 1119,7 12757.8 3235.3 101.8 l'l-343* 160.4 77685.9 750.9 18937.0 4.91 35083.4 578.9 14817.7 2993.2 73.1 ri344* 187.6 76787.8 694.4 45 745.5 3.73 30180.0 622.5 10568.5 2926.0 81.8 in''345* 193.4 79009.3 8U8.6 44779.6 4..34 282.34.5 1154.1 13014.5 4031.3 109.7 l'|-346» 195.0 76578.8 804.4 .37353.8 4.47 31202.4 998.5 14189.3 3355.3 88.2 ri362* 132.2 87310.5 1030.3 96863.0 2.40 22751.2 529.0 7567.1 2746.1 71.3 PJ"363* 191.3 78413.3 529.1 .39562.1 3.88 289.30.2 646.6 101.30.6 2566.5 60.3 IM'364* 1K4.6 72571.5 587.7 29330.0 3.75 267(M.9 6(M.0 9236.1 2097.1 55.3 ri'365* 160.3 82760.8 528.4 37829.0 3.86 30948.0 551.2 10187.7 2299.1 61.1 l'l-36fi* l.'il.7 82113.9 593.6 26120.0 .3.14 33068.5 878.8 11715.1 1997.4 58.9 1'1>367* 194.7 80594.8 667.7 58417.6 4.10 23862.9 487.7 16642.8 4840.4 96.5 I'I'ShK* 152.8 79638.0 1051.0 84829.1 2.68 24808.4 605.2 11.388.3 3161.8 83.7 l'l-369* Kid. 2 81703.9 661.6 41224.1 3.74 30315.5 689.9 9185.8 2257.1 61.8 Appendix 7. Elemental Concentrations (in pans per million) for Sherds, Clays, and Sands Aiiiti /.K Al. HA CA DY K MN NA 11 V N'J.3 81701.9 661.6 41224.1 3.74 .10115.5 689.9 9185.8 2257.1 61.8 177.9 8.1204.5 5.15.4 2.1512.4 .1.71 10690.2 4.55.2 9838.2 2452.3 70.1 IM-372* »4».3 8881.1.0 1078.0 72549.6 2.56 26694.1 496.7 l.14(M.4 2472.6 73.2 l'l'37.1* 179.-1 79561.0 556.9 16479.9 3.77 29244.3 522.0 10.191.6 2605.7 64.2 I'1M7'I* 21)1.7 78595.4 777.1 17255.8 4.92 27210.0 1146.7 14614.7 4108.7 108.2 l'l'37.'»* 19H.() 79561.5 858.1 4.1121.2 4.37 26852.6 1117.1 13207.6 3699.0 101.5 l'i"376* 205.4 814.16.8 851.4 11225.9 4..18 29432.2 1160.6 14174.0 3746.8 107.7 l'|-.177* 176.8 74882.0 750.4 .131.1.1.0 4.64 28875.7 1056.6 1445.1.4 .1529.3 1(M).5 Chtyx (n = A7) I.17..1 84209.0 525.9 .10956.3 4..15 22931.1 970.9 11560.9 3052.7 82.7 l'|-(W6* 159.6 110288.4 652.4 7564.2 4.59 .1.5450.1 647.8 4622.0 3082.8 97.9 n-()57* 146.0 80879. J 621.6 33021.9 4.44 23842.6 849.8 12824.2 32B4.8 90.5 I'l-OSS* 1.10.4 78696.6 640.5 32268.8 4.15 27481.1 1073.7 13689.3 3149.9 79.2 122.7 8298.1.4 11.1.2 39021.6 4.60 311.10.3 667.2 7007.3 3269.6 71.4 n-()6()* 170.7 56546.9 2.19.6 96037.6 1.35 22693.2 626.1 7890.7 .1747.6 93.3 115.9 87146.8 510.6 13129.8 5.24 23791.1 564.8 10487.5 3.103.8 85.1 I'IWi2* 109.7 87790.1 701.2 37926.0 5.01 23922.3 1.145.1 117.54.7 3624.1 94.2 155..1 78708.6 540.5 .12.171.3 4.45 25.->n.8 954.5 1.1219.2 2911.9 70.1 lM-064* 63.8 101692.2 477.1 21639.7 4.45 \')5y4.() 763.0 7.183.8 3218.1 90.7 I'l-OfKi* 12.1.9 80512.5 569.0 9791.5 4.14 24857.8 89.1.1 11162.2 3147.9 74.2 I'l'()66* 1.19,1 87142.4 529.7 20974.9 2.89 21140.3 1126.3 20606.1 4468.0 114.5 I'I7SI IH(>.K 95221.6 615.4 13537.3 7.42 28801.9 753.5 18688.4 4580.1 .59.0 l'h-7S2 12.1.7 75101.1 749.2 46779.7 1.81 .144(10.8 912.5 11711.4 4845.5 91.5 l'l'75.1 17(1.0 105117.(. 727.8 7(i91.() 4.21 1442K.5 862.6 4012.1 2504.5 91.6 Appendix 7. Elemental Concentrations (in parts per million) for Sherds, Clays, and Sands AniJ /.R Al. UA CA OY K MN NA ri V I47.y 87570.5 522.5 331.39.6 5.66 26028.1 9.34.1 I(M40.5 4120.1 78.3 l'l'755 127.2 111248.8 .542.2 24224.1 6.67 26777.4 1720.4 718.3.8 .3814.1 121.9 IM-7S6 220.8 121766.0 584.7 10476.5 5.77 33326.3 737.4 4577.8 3037.1 105.5 l'l"7S7 147.7 83736.6 809.1 21647.4 4.89 28843.1 972.3 14011.0 3721.0 70.8 l'l"75« 1.57.0 88791.9 833.8 .30776.7 5.86 32996..5 11.59.7 107.58.4 .5.378.1 10.3.2 n'759 129.7 93.307.9 714.9 15268.4 4.68 27869.3 962.6 14074.1 4901.2 109.0 lM-760 203.4 75337.5 721.6 4B066.3 6.01 24738.1 702.4 11608.1 4.331.8 92.7 l'l'761 1.13.6 95076.4 744..5 22874.3 .5.86 28266.6 1.303.7 8868.9 4232.7 10.5.4 »')'762 J.37.0 101780,3 6.57.1 8305.9 6.23 31543.1 1181.3 8576.0 4122.0 98.5 l»l'7f>3 127.9 101804.9 745.5 29475.9 6.33 24368.6 1.596.7 8448.6 3231.6 97.1 l'l-764 Ny.-i 95716.8 806.5 390.50.9 5.90 25997.9 1090.6 10940.6 4064.1 82.3 l'l-7f)S 133.0 95751.6 750.7 42690.8 6.76 30852.8 1226.2 9596.7 4905.9 95.3 l'l-766 188.3 85937.0 754.1 11060.0 5.23 37183.5 1191.3 11863.0 3824.0 82.8 l'l-767 126.9 973r«).3 815.3 16980.0 6.36 37639.0 1398.0 8556.3 42.38.9 86.7 n-768 120.7 98353.8 772.2 26850.0 7.31 34127.2 139.5.1 12226.8 5545.8 99.5 niM 171.1 92054.8 617.8 845.'!. 1 6.08 33967.8 947.1 7948.5 5(165.7 105.4 l'l'77f) 183.5 82253.1 7(KI.2 20310.5 4.94 .3431.3.4 972.1 11.357.5 4727.6 82.9 l'l'777 120.3 89636.7 666.4 305.50.2 .3.51 26684.9 1.5.54.3 150.58.2 7329.3 1.54.2 l'l-778 120.3 91624.4 777.2 17843.7 3.80 .34161.3 1051.1 16929.4 4013.3 109.0 l'l-77y 133.9 9.3855.3 602.0 20148.8 3.67 31026.4 11.35.5 18253.2 5323.0 116.7 l'l-7H() 150.6 91.3.16.6 654.3 21.392.2 5.20 30607.2 954.0 1451.3.4 .3574.3 78.1 PI-781 161.5 960r>9.4 898.1 21032.3 6.42 32197.4 985.1 11631.0 3666.8 103.9 Saiuli (n—10) I'lmy* 'HI.U H2(i. Aiml /»( Al. HA CA DY K MN NA T1 V n"(K>8* 63.2 71680.0 772.9 18445.9 2.76 24730.6 310.8 25487.2 1426.0 .36.8 I'lOO'V 32.8 f)48>J0.2 1068.7 7099.7 1.56 36360.2 89.5 21062.4 1058.) 14.4 novo* 141.3 7.3891.3 755.0 15529.8 3.23 28989.7 541.2 21637.8 3396.0 81.0 i'io7r 248.S 71664.1 684.5 19.S45.9 3.95 28088.0 543.8 20881.0 2810.7 69.8 I'l 7«7 70.7 59212.5 799.7 19803.0 3.56 .12787.2 434.9 14867.3 2127.3 41.6 l'l"788 18<>.6 75705.9 1051.7 18697.0 5.29 30914.0 529^ 22975.3 2765.8 76.5 VVIV) 159.9 56254.0 798.8 26504.4 3.51 35789.6 503.8 14449.4 2723.2 38.2 I'l-790 117.5 68181.8 983.4 9433.4 2.89 35748.8 537.6 19523.8 2U24.5 35.5 n-7yi 71.9 MMb.b 927.0 10.364.6 1.63 31841.1 168.6 22145.7 1137.5 26.3 * samples rufcr U) suiimiUcd in pruviuus project (sec f. Fish el al. 1992b) vo LA APPENDIX EIGHT Mahalanobis Probabilities of Group Membership for Sherds 497 Appendix 8. Probabilities of Group Membership for Sherds (iroup and Elemental t'roluhilitics Principal Component I'mhahilitie:. ^ Aniil No. A BC G E F S. Tucson Papaijucru Group A PF002 5.496 0.000 0.016 0.006 0.003 0.037 0.000 PF022 20J55 0.000 0.031 0J13 0.022 0.040 0.000 PF032 19J86 0.000 l.OlO 0.001 0.017 0.016 0.004 PF033 67.176 0.000 0.015 0.000 0.003 0.001 0.004 PF043 82.419 0.000 O.Oll 0.452 0.011 0.081 0.000 PF044 1251 0.000 0.193 0.018 0.005 0.041 0.000 PF045 69.872 0.000 0.033 0.289 0.007 0.028 0.000 PF053 14.232 0.000 0.048 1776 0.027 0.020 0.000 PF077 99.171 0.000 0.010 0.129 0.029 0.047 0.000 PF080 56.132 0.000 0.005 0.496 0.028 0.090 0.000 PF084 62.785 0.000 0.002 0.000 0.004 0.020 0.000 PF091 52.030 0.000 0.001 0.008 O.Oll 0.069 0.000 PF092 55.573 0.000 0.160 0.244 0.007 0.056 0.000 PF094 90.655 0.000 0.194 0.153 0.048 0.420 0.000 PF096 99.998 0.000 0.081 0.131 0.017 0.071 o.ooo PF099 30.112 0.000 0.178 0.002 0.033 0.014 0.000 PFIOO 96.685 0.000 0.031 0.109 0.010 0.016 0.000 PFI05 81.949 0.000 0.042 1.413 0.049 0.189 0.000 PF106 88.262 0.000 0.011 0.046 0.007 0.013 0.000 PF107 73.7S3 0.000 2.760 0.005 0.017 0.154 0.000 PF108 86.692 0.000 0.030 1556 0.040 0.077 0.000 PF109 90.276 0.000 0.005 0.008 0.074 0.043 0.000 PF115 48.203 0.000 0.010 0J66 0.119 0.101 0.000 PF121/122 86.722 0.000 3.027 0.000 0.023 0.048 0.000 PFWI 69.460 0.000 !.84^ 0.284 0.022 0.095 o.oon PF143 98.738 0.000 0.028 0.158 0.021 0.050 0.000 PF165 81.784 0.000 0.043 0.123 0.031 0.110 0.000 PF173 86.404 0.000 0.009 0.002 0.006 0.005 0.007 PF177 91.238 0.000 1819 0.028 0.013 0.154 0.000 PF178 66.716 0.000 0.004 0.012 0.018 0.018 0.013 n « A A nnn PF180 91.148 0.000 0.093 1.141 0.012 u.crry PFI86 63.748 0.000 0.041 0.003 0.036 0.014 0.000 PF189 55.691 0.000 0.127 0.003 0.016 0.078 o.ooo PF19I 93.965 0.000 0.022 0.009 0.008 0.024 0.004 498 Appendix 8. Probabilities of Group Membership for Sherds Group anJ Elemental I'rohahiluics Principal GmipDncni ProbabiliUci AniJ No. A BC G E F S. TucMin I'apauucna PF192 96J49 0.000 0.024 0.974 0.037 0208 0.000 PF194 87.790 0.000 0.003 0.140 0.031 0.069 0.000 PF195 78.898 0.000 0.011 0.001 0.007 0.029 0.000 PF196 80.419 0.000 0.017 0.118 0.009 0.163 0.000 PF200 79.683 0.000 0.010 0.999 0.012 0.014 0.000 PF201 74.606 0.000 0.007 0.010 0.023 0.037 0.000 PF209 57.605 0.000 0.005 0.000 0.014 0.046 0.000 PF216 49.117 0.000 0.040 0.019 0.022 0.065 0.013 PF274 32277 0.000 0.003 0.000 0.004 0.006 0.015 PF275 97.715 0.000 0.022 0.169 0.024 0.033 0.000 PF280 22.135 0.000 0.045 0.004 0.023 0.0.34 0.000 PF283 86J71 0.000 0.108 0.043 0.020 0.016 0.000 PF284 99.973 0.000 0.020 0.090 0.017 0.065 0.000 PF289 18.114 0.000 0.012 0.000 0.006 0.008 0.000 PF291 1.897 0.000 0.005 0.000 0.023 0.007 0.000 PF3.15 59.472 0.000 0.007 0.127 0.008 0.019 0.000 PF336 87J14 0.000 0.019 1.776 0.036 0.201 0.000 PF349 26.638 0.000 0.009 0.001 0.012 0.026 0.000 PF350 67.278 0.000 21.496 0.002 0.008 0.002 O.OOl PF354 63.480 0.000 0.021 0.007 0.011 0.005 0.000 PF361 5.727 0.000 0.751 O.OOO 0.039 0.004 0.008 PF410 4.895 0.000 0.109 0.458 0.006 0.004 0.000 PF413 50.1.36 0.000 0.001 0.003 0.018 0.009 0.000 PF438 27.949 0.000 0.032 1.071 0.025 0.024 0.000 PF445 37.710 0.000 0.092 0.037 0.014 0.019 o.ooc PF457 10.755 0.000 0.043 0.080 0.028 0.017 0.000 PF460 13.170 0.000 0.001 0.066 0.044 0.033 0.000 PF467 44.251 0.000 0.131 0.041 0.011 0.004 0.000 PF468 33.626 0.000 0.001 0.002 0.015 0.003 0.000 PF470 13.080 0.000 0.016 0.000 0.009 0.001 0.001 PF476 U51 0.000 0.017 0.000 0.008 0.000 0.000 PF478 3J15 0.000 O.OOl 0.000 0.006 0.000 0.005 PF486 31.770 0.000 0.015 0.028 0.007 0.013 0.000 PF487 5.928 0.000 0.029 0.000 0.003 0.005 0.001 PF491 4.326 0.000 0.315 0.000 0.004 0.006 0.000 499 Appendix 8. Probabilities of Group Membership for Sherds Griiup anJ Elemental I'rutuhililics Principal Cunipuncnt Pruhahiliiio AniJ iVo. A BC G EPS. Tucson I'apa^utna PF492 23.712 0.000 1455 0.004 0.013 0.027 0.000 PF494 30.060 0.000 0.001 0.093 0.016 0.122 0.000 PF495 26.704 0.000 0.536 0.849 0.028 0.080 0.000 PF496 8.015 0.000 0.002 0.074 0.013 0.012 0.000 PF497 4.610 0.000 0.039 0.001 0.016 0.004 0.000 PF517 18.183 0.000 0.013 0.161 0.016 0.178 0.000 PF520 22.857 0.000 0.022 0J60 0.013 0.091 0.000 PF521 23.405 0.000 0.075 0.023 0.019 0.009 0.000 PF524 66.487 0.000 0.005 0.001 0.007 0.017 0.000 PF532 20.740 0.000 0.001 0.000 0.003 0.001 0.010 PF574 35.227 0.000 0.071 4.005 0.060 0.1.36 0.000 PF599 7.778 0.000 0.226 4.487 0.010 0.001 0.000 PF602 3.091 0.000 0.137 1.199 0.027 0.006 0.000 PF605 55.698 0.000 0.038 0.007 0.026 0.003 0.000 PF606 44J52 0.000 0.418 0.030 0.023 0.024 0.000 PF607 23J41 0.000 1.107 0.003 0.050 0.007 0.000 PF611 20.567 0.000 0.028 0.103 0.007 0.004 0.001 PF620 39.885 0.000 0.952 0.012 0.063 0.070 0.000 PF632 28.937 0.000 0.100 0.002 0.005 0.003 0.000 PF634 3.233 0.000 0.000 1.608 0.028 0.006 0.000 PF636 55.024 0.000 0J62 0.000 0.018 0.019 0.000 PF653 82.209 0.000 0.086 0.403 0.023 0.029 0.000 PF660 40J84 0.000 0.047 0.004 0.012 0.006 o.ooo PF687 60J76 0.000 0.073 0.166 0.025 0.002 0.000 PF691 '5.950 O.uOO 0J.30 0.189 0.084 0.081 O.Qtt) PF692 41.285 0.000 3J30 0.001 0.132 0.003 0.004 PF693 26.240 0.000 3J69 0.229 0.027 0.028 0.000 PF694 45.042 0.000 0.055 0.157 0.050 0.010 0.000 PF696 26.955 0.000 0.001 0.022 0.015 0.060 0.000 PF702 35.619 0.000 0.008 0.003 0.015 0.009 0.000 PF703 77.176 0.000 0.018 0.004 0.030 0.046 0.002 PF717 9.773 0.000 0.009 0.000 0.005 0.001 0.007 PF718 33.046 0.000 0.011 0.003 0.008 0.010 0.005 PF719 89J63 0.000 0.259 0.103 0.034 0.015 0.000 PF727 85.065 0.000 0.022 0.077 0.020 0.172 0.000 500 Appendix 8. Probabilities of Group Membership for Sherds I Group anJ lilcmcntal Pruhabilitius Principal Comptmcni Prnbabilitics Anid No. A BC G S. Tucson I'apaiucria PF728 82.696 0.000 0.050 0.132 0.045 0.109 0.000 PF730 30.858 0.000 0.001 0.949 0.010 0.017 0.000 PF732 28.878 0.000 0.040 0.748 0.010 0.046 0.000 Group BC PF040 0.000 36.697 0.048 0J92 2.009 0.243 0.000 PF048 0.001 82.182 0.041 0.119 0J44 0.054 0.000 PF051 0.000 2J03 0.000 0.031 0J94 0.039 0.000 PF052 0.000 42.190 0.473 0.059 0.967 0.250 0.000 PF072 0.000 71.689 0.081 0.107 1.810 0.480 0.000 PF075 0.000 I9J25 0.020 0.012 1.060 0.114 O.OCQ PF078 0.000 74.843 0.016 0.121 1.132 0.314 0.000 PF079 0.000 4.089 0.001 0.006 0.647 0.097 0.000 PF082 0.000 80.247 0.019 0.003 6.088 0.152 0.000 PF086 0.000 56.550 0.003 0.136 0.636 0.063 0.000 PF104 0.000 95.126 0.011 0.098 1.262 0.288 0.000 PF113 0.000 14.438 0.913 0.079 0.299 0.065 0.000 PF114 0.000 26.242 0.002 0.241 1043 0350 0.000 PF124 0.000 19268 0.204 0.005 1.056 0.265 0.000 PF125 0.000 47.842 0.000 0.089 0.228 0.254 0.000 PF127 0.000 98J60 0.002 0.061 0.984 0.140 0.000 PF1.30 0.000 90.502 0.002 1J!24 0J90 0.015 0.000 PF135 0.001 65J79 0.004 0.115 0.176 0.003 0.000 PF136 0.000 94.469 0.087 0.118 0.971 0.223 0.000 PF158 0.001 98JI3 0.209 2.188 0.653 0.262 O.OOQ PF139 0.002 97.432 0.022 OJ03 1.118 0.670 0.000 PF142 0.000 53.960 0.015 0.004 0.839 0.136 0.000 PF144 0.000 79.454 0.000 0.058 0.238 0.078 0.000 PF147 0.000 52.464 0.000 0.004 0.084 0.245 0.000 PF148 0.000 91.492 0.024 0.025 0.918 0.028 0.000 PF149 0.000 51.124 0.002 0.000 0.556 0.086 0.000 PF150 0.000 89.704 0.004 0.019 1.960 0.200 0.000 PF151 0.000 71.004 0.002 0.122 0.617 0.188 0.000 PFI52 0.000 96.670 0.091 0.125 0.480 0.047 0.000 PF153 0.000 52.237 0.001 0.041 0.426 0.141 0.000 501 Appendix 8. Probabilities of Group Membership for Sherds Group anJ Elcnicrnjl Probabilities Principal Cumpuncnt l'r»habiluiCN Amd No. A BC G E F S. 1 ucson I'apagucna PF154 0.000 28.852 0.002 0.045 1.777 0.265 0.000 PF157 0.000 50.175 0.001 0.051 0J18 0.005 0.000 PF176 0.000 93.299 0.003 0.038 0.826 0.876 0.000 PF183 0.000 98.195 0.051 0.016 1.707 0.118 0.000 PF184 0.000 69.924 0.000 0.460 0.736 0.118 0.000 PF185 0.000 9.669 0J88 0.019 0.614 0.216 0.000 PF187 0.000 65.084 0.003 0.133 3J36 0.097 o.ooo PF198 0.000 10.748 0.007 0.026 0.300 0.075 0.000 PF205 0.000 91.048 0.742 0.074 3.184 0.249 0.000 PF206 0.000 57.177 0.194 0.004 1.642 0.442 0.000 PF208 0.000 46.050 0.098 0.011 0.838 0.023 0.000 PF212 0.000 80.011 0.001 0.128 0349 0.001 0.000 PF214 0.000 92.558 0.026 0.037 1.438 0J89 0.000 PF217 0.000 89.043 0.005 0.003 1.845 0.188 0.000 PF269 0.000 54.533 0.049 0.009 1.736 0.067 0.000 PF272 0.002 34.673 0.001 0.032 0.617 0318 0.000 PF277 0.000 60.892 0.051 0.054 0.674 0.012 0.000 PF290 0.000 35.861 0.028 0.004 1.961 0.130 0.000 PF324 0.000 3.801 0.026 0.037 0.159 0.017 0.000 PF326 0.000 91.603 0.034 0.008 0.085 0.174 0.000 PF330 0.000 56.949 0.002 0.001 0.454 0.647 0.000 PF33I 0.000 75.963 0.402 0.541 0.266 0.003 0.000 PF332 0.000 9.618 0.110 0.646 1.170 1.068 0.000 PF337 0.000 99.225 0.039 0.027 0J09 0J37 0.000 o PF347 0.000 55.036 0.014 0.090 2.557 o 0.000 PF351 0.000 90.688 0.077 0.263 0.864 0.885 0.000 Pn52 0.000 90.782 0227 0.108 0J74 0.521 0.000 PF353 0.000 66.679 0J151 0.055 1.265 0.005 0.000 PF355 0.000 33.876 0.009 0.104 0.848 0.070 0.000 PF357 0.000 59.411 0.006 0.006 1.911 0.249 0.000 PF358 0.000 45.086 0.088 0.012 12J74 0.116 0.000 PF360 0.000 98.157 0.989 0.061 0.874 0.251 0.000 PF392 0.000 2.206 0.003 5.983 0J15 0.087 0.000 PF439 0.000 57.948 0.007 0.158 0.645 0.005 0.000 PF440 0.000 99.062 0.056 0.210 0.939 0.069 0.000 502 Appendix 8. Probabilities of Group Membership for Sherds Group and Elemental Probabilities Principal Component Prtibabiluics AniJ No. A BC G E F S. Tucson Papagucna PF443 0.000 58J32 9.027 0.007 3371 0.026 0.000 PF447 0.000 84.266 U12 0.001 1.150 0.154 0.000 PF448 0.000 66.454 0.084 0.023 0.898 0J27 0.000 PF449 0.000 35.529 0.082 0.019 1.078 0.000 0.000 PF450 0.000 10.024 3.887 0.013 0.732 0.002 0.000 PF451 0.000 14.002 4J01 0.006 0.528 0.041 0.000 PF452 0.000 93J21 0.617 0.014 0J35 0.037 0.000 PF453 0.000 19J24 0.841 0.025 1.999 0.140 0.000 PF454 0.000 45.647 2.798 0.014 1.732 0.001 0.000 PF455 0.000 29.904 0.188 0.010 0.682 1.181 0.000 PF456 0.000 57.102 0.028 0.003 0.519 0.026 0.000 PF458 0.000 60.124 0.028 0.029 1.137 0.022 0.000 PF462 0.000 4J47 3.503 0.003 1358 0.003 0.000 PF464 0.000 12.410 0.056 0.029 3.922 0.074 0.000 PF465 0.000 69.423 1.545 0.001 0.626 0.012 0.000 PF473 0.000 16.726 0.014 0.010 0.639 0360 0.000 PF474 0.000 6.206 0.027 0.086 0.287 0.009 0.000 PF475 0.000 52.277 0.130 0.072 0.209 0.008 0.000 PF479 0.000 33.220 0.119 0.013 1.036 0.021 0.000 PF484 0.000 38.488 1648 0.005 1.271 0.000 0.000 PF493 0.000 10.638 0331 0.007 4.252 0.203 0.000 PF498 0.000 48.077 0.009 0.186 0.873 0.013 0.000 PF503 0.000 6J97 0.166 0.016 0380 O.O.^t 0.000 PF505 0.000 1958 1.083 0.013 0.629 0.001 0.000 PF508 0.000 91.142 0.126 0.078 0J28 0.087 0.000 PF510 0.000 34.479 3.139 0.180 0J36 0.014 0.000 PF511 o.ooo 71.543 0.016 0.031 5.115 1.761 0.000 PF512 0.000 18.971 0382 1.176 1395 0.445 0.000 PF513 0.000 51.868 0381 0.005 0.419 0.011 0.000 PF516 0.000 91.659 0.030 0.035 0.848 0.667 0.000 PF523 0.000 23.517 0.006 0.036 0.246 0.046 0.000 PF525 0.000 45J97 3.6«3 0.004 0.923 0.007 0.000 PF528 0.000 14357 0.025 0.101 0.616 0.003 0.000 PF564 0.000 1.063 0.081 0.010 0.082 0.083 0.000 PF565 0.000 6.620 0.233 0.004 0.051 0.061 0.000 503 Appendix 8. Probabilities of Group Membership for Sherds IZlcmcntal I'rohahilitics I'rinctpal Cmipuncni I'rnhalnliiicN AniJ No. A BC G li I- S. l uoitn PF600 A 4J47 0.039 0.034 1.242 0.137 0.000 PF609 0.000 37.766 0.561 0.011 0.135 0.028 0.000 PF668 0.000 32.736 0.045 0.001 0.957 0.467 0.000 PF670 0.000 32 J16 0.017 0.007 0J17 0.055 0.000 PF675 Q.m 32.692 0.000 0.014 0JI6 0.001 0.000 PF678 0.000 3.257 0.012 0.013 0.422 0.000 0.000 PF679 0.000 3J76 0.040 0.012 0.450 0.057 0.000 PF681 0.000 31.475 0J35 0.027 3.022 0J05 0.000 PF682 0.000 4J65 0.046 0.015 8J43 0J44 0.000 PF684 0.000 36J42 0.110 0.032 0.706 0.032 0.000 PF685 0.000 28J36 3.098 0.054 0^87 0.020 0.000 PF690 0.000 72.616 0.015 0.019 1.064 0.140 0.000 PF706 0.000 40.402 0.000 0.163 0J78 0.035 0.000 PF707 0.000 95.136 3J46 0.077 1.718 0.136 0.000 PF710 0.000 80.974 0.093 0.003 4.277 0.045 0.000 PF7U o.ooo 99.433 0.086 0.021 1.189 0.159 0.000 pnw 0.000 25.410 0.087 0.010 1.587 0.000 0.000 PF715 0.001 58.052 0.642 0.011 1.260 0.023 0.000 PF722 0.000 39J92 0.013 0.070 0.156 0.794 0.000 PF725 0.000 76.976 0.151 0.052 0J12 0.007 0.000 PF729 0.000 31.686 0.017 0.008 0.892 0.001 0.000 PF734 0.000 23.673 0.033 0.022 0.086 0.005 0.000 PF736 0.000 12.945 0.126 0.011 0.259 0.001 0.000 PF740 o.ooo 27.054 0.001 0.026 1.116 0.761 0.000 PF742 0.000 1.981 0J91 0.003 0.736 0.050 0.000 Group E PF007/008 0.082 0.000 0.001 25.121 0.019 0.054 0.000 PF018 0.012 0.000 0.001 ;i.499 0.091 1J07 0.000 PF027 0.056 0.000 0.014 97.772 0.029 0.055 0.000 PF046 0.428 0.000 0.002 51.158 0.052 0.062 0.000 PF054 0J08 0.000 0.000 30.767 0.141 0J45 0.000 PF179 0.005 0.000 0.000 43.027 0.101 0.879 0.000 PF210 0.056 0.000 0.001 96.211 0.480 0.118 0.000 PF211 0.444 0.000 0.002 71.807 0.293 0.918 0.000 504 Appendix 8. Probabilities of Group Membership for Sherds I Group and Elcmuiual Prubabilittcs Pnncipai Conipuncnt Prnbahilitn;> Anid No. A BC G E F S. rucMin PapaiULTu PF287 0.016 0.000 0.004 96.951 0.059 0.242 0.000 PF393 0.000 0.000 O.QOO 19.118 0.023 0.026 0.000 PF394 0.000 0.000 O.GOO 15.438 0.067 0.010 0.000 PF397 0.052 0.000 0.001 48.987 0.018 0.008 0.000 PF399 0.001 0.000 0.004 26.207 0.034 0.051 0.000 PF401 0.004 0.000 0.000 33J13 0.018 0.038 0.000 PF405 0.181 0.000 0.Q00 66.683 0.073 0.025 0.000 PF412 0.135 0.000 0.001 98i)58 0.238 0.119 0.000 PF424 0.037 0.000 0.045 39298 0.180 0.157 0.000 PF469 0.003 0.000 0.020 16.677 0.085 0.003 0.000 PF518 1.078 0.000 0.001 11JJ86 0.063 1824 0.000 PF530 0.112 0.000 0.002 28.672 0.016 0.020 0.000 PF548 0.000 0.000 0.149 5.162 1.934 0.009 0.000 PF552 0.096 0.000 0.001 91.244 0.076 0.098 0.000 PF619 0.192 0.000 0.007 25.821 0.042 0.244 0.000 PF622 0.000 0.000 0.001 64i00 0.017 0.018 0.000 PF623 0.001 0.000 0.000 70.862 0.050 0.080 0.000 PF624 0.047 0.000 0.000 47.833 0.061 0.091 0.000 PF637 0.059 0.000 0.000 63J38 0.089 0.191 0.000 PF639 0.045 0.000 0.032 62.273 0.028 0.011 0.000 PF724 0.007 0.000 0.007 8.744 0J41 0.019 0.000 PF733 0.019 0.000 0.000 90J99 0.067 0.197 0.000 PF746 0.001 0.000 0.000 16.181 0.128 0.015 0.000 Group F PF038 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 41.984 0.000 0.000 PF163 0.000 0.000 0.204 0.000 36.296 0.005 0.000 PF164 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 7.628 0.002 0.000 PF166 0.000 0.000 0.002 0.000 46.458 0.000 0.000 PF167 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 83.754 0.000 0.000 PF168 0.000 0.000 0.001 0.000 40.982 0.000 0.000 PF169 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 30.853 0.000 0.000 PF379 0.000 0.000 0.007 0.000 61193 0.003 0.000 PF417 0.000 0.000 0.062 0.000 81J80 0.019 0.000 PF419 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 26.485 0.000 0.000 505 Appendix 8. Probabilities of Group Membership for Sherds Ciroup anU Elcnicinai I'rohahililics L'rinapal Conip»ncnt I'mbahiliiics Anid No. A \iC. G E I- S. I'ucMm I'apauucri.i PF421 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 45.456 0.000 0.000 PF422 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 57.921 0.001 0.000 PF423 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 80.686 0.020 0.000 PF425 0.000 0.000 0.002 0.000 68.406 0.003 0.000 PF426 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 46.179 0.001 0.000 PF431 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 54.897 0.000 0.000 PF432 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 79.684 0.001 0.000 PF435 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 70.905 0.000 0.000 PF437 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 44.166 0.000 0.000 PF610 0.000 0.000 0.001 0.000 35.887 0.000 o.ooo Group G PF005 0.002 0.001 99.650 0.898 0.087 0.401 0.000 PF009 0.000 0.000 34.114 0.185 0.096 0.160 0.000 PF014 0.001 0.000 54J92 0.023 0.018 0.071 0.000 PF025 0.000 0.000 30.070 0.020 0.179 0.121 0.000 PF030 0.000 0.003 57.419 0.713 0.174 3.030 0.000 PF031 0.018 0.106 99.148 0.768 0.153 0.097 o.ooo PF034 0.000 0.000 81262 0.183 1.077 0.188 0.000 PF329 0.444 0.000 7X160 0.011 0.121 0.133 0.000 PF378 0J86 0.000 27310 0.011 0.069 0.017 0.000 PF380 0.000 0.000 56.008 0.057 0J33 0.058 0.000 PF384 0.000 0.000 18.468 0.003 0.082 0.000 0.001 PF385 0.035 0.000 93.705 0.006 0.057 0.015 0.000 PF534 0.000 0.000 14.932 0.003 0.178 0.042 0.000 PF537 U17 0.000 9.195 0.062 0.063 0.004 0.000 PF539 0.000 0.000 25J22 0.000 0.097 0.075 0.000 PF540 0.001 0.007 21.663 0.061 0.265 0.007 0.000 PF542 0.000 0.000 89.478 0.007 OJOl 1215 o.ooo PF553 0.000 0.000 71.116 0.000 0.477 0.002 o.ooo PF554 0.001 0.000 38.936 0.014 0.024 0.112 0.000 PF556 0.000 0.000 51.671 0.183 0.038 0.010 0.000 PF557 0.001 0.000 47.486 0.140 0.103 0.077 0.000 PF558 0.722 0.000 33.807 0.056 0.088 0.610 0.000 PF559 0.000 0.000 6.280 0.010 0.033 0.192 0.000 506 Appendix 8. Probabilities of Group Membership for Sherds Group and Elcmcnial I'robabiluics Principal Compuncnt t'rohahiiiCic.s INo. A BC G E r S. Tuc>i>n Papa|;ucn: PF561 0.000 0.000 39J96 0.018 0.023 0.065 0.000 PF562 0.000 0.000 73.786 0.000 0.022 0.086 0.000 PF563 0.000 0.000 89J48 0.032 0.489 0.116 0.000 PF568 0.005 0.000 9.917 0.138 0.151 0.186 0.000 PF576 0.000 0.000 78.970 0.017 0.228 0.025 0.000 PF580 0.000 0.000 33.857 0.000 0.061 0.069 0.000 PF585 0.000 0.000 7lj91 0.003 0.160 1.909 0.001 PF588 0.000 0.000 47.692 0.001 0.158 0.720 0.000 PF601 0.000 0.000 71.194 0.002 0.013 0.512 0.000 PF603 0.000 0.000 49.252 0.006 0.045 1016 0.000 PF638 0.000 0.000 5.422 0.031 0.191 1279 0.000 PF643 0.002 0.000 39J68 0.002 0.097 0J96 0.000 PF646 0.049 0.001 66.463 0.009 0.120 0.038 o.ooo PF664 0.000 0.000 30.005 0.009 0.031 0.010 0.000 PF680 0.037 0.000 51.143 0.004 0.563 0J15 o.ooo PF723 0.000 0.000 14.223 0.015 0.085 0.057 0.000 ucson PF293 0.000 0.000 0.002 0.005 0.103 46.672 0.000 PF294 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.005 0.088 59J62 0.000 PF297 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.086 0.126 55J54 0.000 PF298 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.040 90.779 0.000 PF300 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.001 0.040 78.408 0.000 PF301 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.004 0.263 98.416 0.000 PF302 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.003 0J40 56.431 0.000 pnw 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.441 29.706 0.000 PF308 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0354 52.570 0.000 PF311 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.001 0.139 S6.038 0.000 PF312 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.007 0.193 33.976 o.ooo PF314 0.000 0.000 0.003 0.004 0.209 12.917 0.000 PF320 0.000 0.000 0.002 0.001 0.023 20.149 o.ooo PF327 0.000 0.000 0.001 0.000 0.102 60.782 0.000 PF363 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.168 0-920 74J65 0.000 PF364 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.033 0.407 7.412 0.000 PF365 0.000 0.000 0.001 0.002 0.188 40.277 0.000 507 Appendix 8. Probabilities of Group Membership for Sherds Group and Elemental rrobabiliiics Principai Componcni Probahilnics AniJ No. A uc G E F S. I'ucson I'apaguci PF369 0.000 0.000 0.001 1.806 0J06 40J99 0.000 PF370 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.001 0.405 69J5I 0.000 PF371 0.000 0.000 o.ooo 0.000 0249 1.218 0.000 PF373 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.039 26.269 0.000 PF522 0.000 0.000 0.058 0.995 0.694 53.467 0.000 PF744 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.002 0.405 14.756 0.000 Papagueritt PF182 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.039 0.000 60J84 PF2I9 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.037 0.001 82299 PF220 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.042 0.000 90.772 PF221 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.155 0.000 5.932 PF222 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.107 0.000 66.657 PF223 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.025 0.000 39.930 FF224 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.100 0.001 95.981 PF225 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.033 0.000 36.060 PF226 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.054 0.001 77.603 PF241 0.000 0.000 0.001 0.000 0.007 0.001 43J2: PF242 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.027 0.002 75.243 PF247 0.000 0.000 o.ooo 0.000 0.009 0.000 84.603 PF248 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.026 0.001 7J38 PF250 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.013 0.000 91.698 PF251 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.010 0.000 65.065 PF252 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.007 0.000 4.109 PF253 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.013 0.000 0.784 PF254 0.000 0.000 OiXX) 0.000 0.014 0.001 88.618 PF255 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.003 0.000 2.193 PF341 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.021 0.000 24353 PF342 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.044 0.000 19.479 PF345 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.015 0.000 79.601 PF374 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.003 0.000 5.990 PF375 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.038 0.000 90.827 PF376 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.010 0.000 93J85 PF377 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.028 0.001 11.423 508 Appendix 8. Probabilities of Group Membership for Sherds Gruup and Elemental Prubabiliticii Principal Component I'rohahilities Anid No. A BC G E F S. I'ueson Papaiueru Phoardx PF228 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.001 0.000 0.000 PF229 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.001 0.000 0.000 PF230 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 PF231 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.001 0.000 0.000 PF233 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.001 0.000 0.000 PF234 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 PF235 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.001 0.000 PF237 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.003 0.001 0.000 PF238 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 PF239 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 PF240 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 tssigned PFOOl 0.000 0.000 0.473 0.017 0.025 0.157 0.000 PF003 0.000 0.000 0.004 0.005 0.184 0.290 0.000 PFO(M 0.000 0.000 0.006 0.000 5.926 0J6O 0.000 PF006 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.050 0J91 0.000 PFOlO 0.000 0.000 0.194 0.048 0.061 0.055 0.009 PFOll 0.000 0.062 0J28 0.213 0.166 0.701 0.000 PF012 0.000 0.000 U.GOO 0.674 0.021 O.lli (J.UOO PF0I3 0.000 0.000 0.005 0.000 0.029 0.022 0.000 PF0I5 0.003 9.028 0.054 2.085 0.055 0.019 0.000 PF016 0.004 0.024 0.003 0.834 0.113 0.039 0.000 PF017 0.000 0.000 0.002 0.038 0.059 0.234 0.000 PF019 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.003 0.000 0.023 PF020 0.000 0.000 0.009 0.128 0.434 1.934 0.000 PFOll 0.000 0.000 0.881 0.001 0.052 0.000 0.035 PF023 o.ooo 0.000 0.148 0.013 0.009 0.002 0.003 PF024 0.000 0.000 4213 0.010 0.082 0.008 0.000 PF026 0.000 0.000 0.474 0.013 0J91 1.689 0.000 FF028 0.041 0.000 0.037 0J83 0.045 0.051 0.000 PF029 0.000 0.762 0.200 0.250 0.019 0J09 0.000 PF035 0.000 0.580 0.001 0.109 0.807 0.221 0.000 PF036 0.000 0.000 0.001 0.268 0.746 0.832 0.000 509 Appendix 8. Probabilities of Group Membership for Sherds Group and Elcmcnial Prohahilitics Principal Componciu Probabilities Am J No. A BC G E F S. Tuoiini Papa^ucr PF037 0.000 0.000 0.064 0.000 0.825 0.003 O.OOO PF039 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.013 0.001 0.000 PF047 0.000 0.001 0.007 0.252 0J09 0.016 0.000 PF049 0.000 0.095 0.007 0.024 0.160 0.007 0.000 PF050 0.000 0.000 3.232 0.001 0.008 0.640 0.001 PF073 0.000 0.000 0.002 0.000 0J29 0.000 0.000 PF074 0.000 0.098 0.015 0.018 0.426 0.041 0.000 PF076 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.190 0.015 0.000 PF081 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0J82 0.030 0.000 PF083/128 0.000 0.000 0.022 0.001 0.014 0.057 o.ooo . PF085 10.918 0.000 0.000 91.797 0.163 0.253 0.000 j PF087 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.013 0.001 0.000 j PF088 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.033 1.282 0.187 0.000 PF089 0.000 0.001 0.002 0.134 0.649 0.438 o.ooo PF090 0.000 0.000 0.039 0.021 0.033 0.059 0.000 ' PF093 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.049 0.002 o.ooo PF095 0.000 0.000 0.044 0.000 0.558 0.260 0.001 : PF097 0.000 0.000 0.054 0.000 0.187 0.004 0.000 PF098 0.001 0.000 0.015 0.006 0.002 0.008 o.ooo PFlOl 0.000 0.000 0.005 0.001 1J18 0.195 o.ooo PFI02 0.045 0.000 1.125 0.002 0.041 0.140 0.000 PF103 0.004 0.000 0.151 0.053 0.019 0.029 o.ooo PFllO 19.047 0.000 0.000 52.804 0.144 0.173 0.000 ' PFlll 0.526 0.000 0.677 0.486 0.091 0.246 0.000 PF112 0.000 o.ooo O.OOO 0.000 0.478 0.169 0.000 PF116 2-428 0.000 0.000 43.209 0.174 0.072 o.ooo 1 PFU7 0.014 0.092 O.OOl 0.267 0.170 0.1.^^ 0.000 1 PF118 0.000 0.000 0.004 0.021 0J76 0.103 o.ooo i PF119 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.007 0.000 0.005 PF120 o.ooo 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.028 0.001 0.000 PF123 0.000 0.000 O.OOO 0.002 1.421 0.048 0.000 PF126 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.250 0.008 0.000 PF129 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.073 0.027 0.002 0.000 PF131 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.001 0382 1.179 0.000 PF132 o.ooo 0.465 0.000 0.646 1.273 0.891 0.000 510 Appendix 8. Probabilities of Group Membership for Sherds Group anJ Elemental I'nihabilitics Principal ConipuncnC Priihahilitic.s Anid No. A BC G E F S. Tucson Papa^ucna PF133 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.002 0.298 0.054 0.000 PF134 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.027 0.003 0.000 PF137 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.027 0.445 0.000 PF140 0.000 0.000 0.000 0J06 OJll 6.773 0.000 PF145 0.000 0.000 0.018 0.000 0.003 0.108 0.000 PF146 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.016 0.001 0.000 PF156 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.019 0.001 0.000 PF158 0.000 0.000 0.151 0.000 OJ02 0.015 0.000 PF159 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.010 0.074 0.015 0.000 PF160 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 PF161 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.023 0.001 0.000 PF162 o.ooo 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.054 0.001 0.000 PF170 0.000 0.000 0.001 0.000 0.020 0.000 0.000 PF171 0.021 0.000 0.029 0.182 0.024 0.035 0.000 PF172 0.000 0.000 0.006 0.000 0.107 0.002 0.000 PF174 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.187 0.012 0.000 PF175 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.023 0.000 0.000 PF181 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0J64 0.000 0.000 PF188 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.106 0.005 0.004 0.000 PF190 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0J92 0.017 0.000 PF193 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.009 0.000 0.000 PF197 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.298 0.004 0.000 PF199 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.077 0.001 0.000 PF202 0.000 0.000 0.075 0.001 0.431 0.138 0.000 PF203 0.000 0.000 0.000 0,000 0.008 0.000 0.000 PF204 0.000 0.000 0.001 o.ooo 0.110 0.076 0.000 PF207 0.000 0.000 0.023 0.000 0.102 0.014 0.000 PF2I3 0.000 0.002 0.086 0.000 0.479 0.487 0.000 PF215 0.000 0.255 U33 0.153 13.899 0.288 0.000 PF218 0.000 0.000 0.000 4.438 0.291 0.047 0.000 PF232 0.000 0.000 0.004 0.000 0.014 0.000 0.000 PF236 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 PF243 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.001 0.140 0.001 0.000 PF244 0.000 0.000 0.001 0.000 0.010 0.000 0.000 PF245 0.000 0.000 0.003 0.000 0.016 0.000 0.000 t 511 Appendix 8. Probabilities of Group Membership for Sherds Gruup aniJ Elcmcmal l'r>ihahilitic.N Principal CumpniKnt rri'biiiiliiics J No. A HC cl E 1" S. l UtNl'll I'apuiiULr PF246 0.000 0.000 0.002 0.000 0J50 O.OOl 0.293 PF249 0.000 0.000 0.001 0.000 0J33 0.021 0.065 PF256 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.087 0.000 0.000 PF257 0.026 0.000 0.001 0.001 0.002 0.005 0.000 PF258 0.000 0.000 0.046 o.ooo 0.091 0.238 0.000 PF:59 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.038 0.008 0.000 PF260 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.017 0.000 0.000 PF261 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 PF262 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 PF263 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.044 0.000 0.000 PF264 0.000 0.000 0.000 o.ooo 0.006 0.000 0.000 PF265 0.000 0.000 0.005 0.000 0.008 0.000 0.005 PF266 0.000 0.000 O.OOl 0.002 0.014 0.000 0.000 pn67 0.003 0.000 0.019 0.006 0.010 0.000 0.003 PF268 0.000 0.000 0.010 0.000 0.044 0.005 0.000 PF270 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 PF271 o.ooo 0.000 0.000 0.000 O.OOl 0.000 0.000 PF273 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.002 0.000 0.000 PF276 0.000 0.000 0.008 0.000 0.016 0.002 0.000 PF278 0.000 0.000 0.008 o.ooo 0.063 0.002 0.000 PF279 0.172 0.000 0.000 0.003 0.011 0.028 0.000 pf:si 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.001 0.062 0.004 0.000 PF282 0.000 0.000 0.020 0.001 0.409 0.008 0.000 PF285 0.000 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.233 0.154 0.000 PF286 0.000 0.000 0.001 o.ooo a020 0.001 0.000 PF238 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.010 nnon nnno PF292 0.000 0.000 0.007 0.000 0.001 0.000 0.000 PF295 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.033 0.000 0.000 PF296 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.001 0.241 1.5.15 0.000 PF299 0.000 o.ooo 0.003 0.000 0.413 0.016 0.000 PF303 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 pno5 0.000 0.000 0.006 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 pno6 0.000 0.000 0.075 0.000 0.013 0.000 0.000 pno7 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.230 1.612 0.000 PF309 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.013 0.000 0.000 512 Appendix 8. Probabilities of Group Membership for Sherds Ulcmcntal I'rolialnlilics Principal Compuncnt t'rohahilitic\ J No. A HC i; li I- S. 1 iicxi'ti I'apai^utrM PF310 0.000 0.000 0.004 0.000 0.001 0.000 0.000 PF313 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.006 0.000 0.000 PF315 0.000 0.000 0.005 0.000 0.045 0.000 0.000 PF316 0.000 0.000 0.090 0.000 0.097 0.004 0.000 PF317 0.000 0.000 0.004 0.001 0.412 3.872 0.000 PF318 0.006 0.000 0.156 0.000 0.019 0J48 0.005 pni9 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.025 0.000 0.000 PF321 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.120 0.007 0.000 0.000 PF322 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.001 0.001 0.000 PF323 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.106 0J94 o.ooo PF325 0.000 0.000 0.015 0.015 0.116 0.016 0.000 PF32S o.ooo 0.000 0.078 0.003 0.042 0.041 0.000 PF333 0.000 o.ooo 0.001 0.000 0.074 0.008 0.000 PF334 0.000 0.000 0.009 0.000 0.455 0.008 o.ooo PF338 9.242 0.000 0.000 35.116 0.050 0.065 0.000 PF339 0.000 0.000 0.047 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 PF340 0.000 0.000 0.009 0.000 0.004 0.002 0.000 PF343 0.000 0.000 0.030 0.000 0.083 0.014 0.000 PF344 0.000 0.001 0.004 0.001 1.198 0.017 o.ooo PF346 0.000 o.ooo 0.000 0.000 0.004 0.000 0.681 PF348 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.060 0.157 0.000 PF359 0.003 0.001 0.001 0.006 0.946 0.040 0.000 PF362 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.016 0.000 0.000 PF366 0.000 0.000 0.000 0J03 0.192 2.391 0.000 PF367 0.000 O.Of" 0.001 0.000 0.001 0.000 0.000 PF3 Appendix 8. Probabilities of Group Membership for Sherds Group and Elemental Pruhabiiitici Principal G'mpimcm l'riiliahilitic.s INo. A BC G E I- S. TucsDii I'apa^ucri PF391 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.059 0.513 0.008 PF395 0.000 o.ooo 0.021 0.002 0.003 0.002 0.002 PF396 0.000 0.000 0.086 0.090 0.021 0.008 0.000 PF398 0.000 0.000 0.011 0.072 0.012 0.034 0.001 PF400 0.019 0.000 0.000 12.112 0.051 0.012 0.000 PF402 0.000 O.OOl 0.019 0.001 0.104 0.026 0.000 PF403 0.000 0.000 0.162 0.260 0.272 0.246 0.000 PF4(M 0.000 0.000 0.120 0.058 0.008 0.684 0.000 PF406 0.015 0.000 0.029 0.073 0.004 0.028 0.000 PF407 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.055 0.010 0.000 PF408 0.000 0.000 0.002 0.022 0.027 0.021 0.005 PF409 0.028 0.000 0.002 0.000 0.003 0.004 0.000 PF411 0.000 0.000 0.002 0.001 0.009 0.000 0.009 PF414 0.000 0.000 1.232 0.003 0.020 0.169 0.015 PF415 0.000 0.000 0.007 0.000 0.023 0.000 0.000 PF416 0.000 0.000 0.076 0.002 0.005 0.000 0.002 PF418 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.015 0.000 0.000 PF420 0.000 0.000 0.020 0.000 0.189 0.006 0.000 PF427 0.000 0.000 0.001 0.008 0.004 0.067 0.000 PF428 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 O.OOO 0.000 PF429 0.000 0.000 0.003 0.000 0.011 O.OOO 0.000 PF430 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.014 0.000 0.1)00 PF434 0.000 o.ooo 0.000 0.000 0.012 0.000 0.000 PF436 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.040 0.000 0.000 PF441 0.000 O.OOl 0.000 0.027 0.149 0.000 0.000 PF442 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.190 0.001 0.000 PF444 0.000 0.000 0.161 0.000 0.080 0.001 0.001 PF446 0.000 0.000 0.084 0.059 0.030 0.000 0.000 PF459 0.000 0.000 0.005 0.029 0.180 15J73 0.000 PF461 0.000 o.ooo 0.003 0.000 0.575 0.029 0.00(J PF463 0.000 0.000 0.001 0.000 0.012 0.000 0.000 PF466 0.630 0.000 0.001 0.004 0.008 0.004 0.010 PF471 0.282 0.000 0.013 0.012 0.005 0.002 0.000 PF472 0.000 0.000 0.158 0.271 0.418 0.092 0.000 PF477 0.463 O.GOO 0.002 0.000 0.024 O.OOO 0.000 514 Appendix 8. Probabilities of Group Membership for Sherds Group anU Elcmcnul Pmhabiliiioi Principal Comptincnt I'n'hal'ilitio mil No. A HC G E 1- S. TucM'n 1'apa^ui.na PF480 0.000 0.000 0.011 0.030 0.017 0.000 0.000 PF482 0.000 0.000 0.012 0.025 0.701 0.045 0.000 PF483 0.000 0.289 0.086 0.046 0.354 0.025 0.000 PF485 0.031 0.000 0.G01 0.020 0.020 0.000 0.000 PF488 0.000 0.000 0.038 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 PF489 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.004 0.002 0.000 PF490 0.000 0.000 0.001 0.000 0.289 0.250 0.000 PF499 0.000 0.000 0.004 0.001 1.142 0.111 0.003 PF500 0.000 0.000 0.047 0J86 1.167 0.010 0.000 PF501 0.632 0.000 0.018 0.475 0.119 0.001 0.000 PF502 0.000 0.164 0.285 0.027 0.799 0.004 0.000 PF506 0.000 0.000 0.034 0.270 1074 11.871 0.000 PF507 0.000 0.081 0.105 0.032 0.188 0.001 0.000 PF509 0.000 0.000 0.001 0.000 0.039 0.000 0.000 PF514 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.061 0.005 0.000 PF515 0.000 0.020 0J16 0.138 0.980 0.126 0.000 PF519 0.000 0.000 0.002 0.783 0J45 9J53 0.000 PF526 0.000 0.000 0.003 0.010 0J33 0.007 0.000 PF527 0.000 0.000 0.028 0.000 0.009 0.000 0.000 PF529 0.000 0.025 0.026 0.003 0.652 0.000 0.000 PF531 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.020 0.094 0.000 PF533 0.000 0.271 0.023 0.245 0.636 0J51 0.000 PF535 0.000 0.000 0.017 0.000 0.034 0.001 0.000 PF536 0.006 0.000 038 0.001 0.006 0.043 0.071 PF538 0.000 0.000 0.002 0.020 0.058 0.000 0.000 PF541 o.ooo O.OOl 0.000 0.187 0J82 0.00? 0.001 PF543 0.000 0.000 2.467 0.000 0.102 0.048 0.000 PF544 0.002 0.000 0.259 24.673 0.078 0.018 0.000 PF545 0.000 0.000 1.015 0.065 0.046 0.696 0.000 PF546 0.000 0.000 0.001 0.000 0.072 0.015 0.000 PF547 0.000 0.000 0.072 0.004 0.031 0.001 0.001 PF549 0.000 0.000 0.006 0.000 0.006 0.000 0.001 PF550 0.000 0.000 0.003 0.039 1634 0.827 0.000 PF551 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.012 0.008 0.000 PF555 0.000 o.ooo 0.945 0.005 0.084 1.216 0.000 515 Appendix 8. Probabilities of Group Membership for Sherds Oroup and Hlcmcntal I'rcihaHiluics Principal Cunipimciu I'rnlialiilitics Aniil Ni). A BC G E F S. l ucvin I'apa^ucru PF560 0.038 0.000 0.077 0.019 0.023 0.079 0.001 PF566 0.000 0.000 0.135 0.006 0.042 0.002 0.019 PF567 0.000 o.ooo 0.020 0.000 0.001 0.001 O.OOO PF569 0.000 0.000 0.006 0.000 0.408 0.002 0.022 PF570 0.000 0.000 0.001 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 PF571 0.000 o.ooo 0J47 0.018 0.094 0.000 0.002 PF572 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.010 0.001 0.000 PF573 0.000 0.447 0.003 0.002 0.495 0.083 0.000 PF575 0.000 0.000 0.806 0.000 0.518 0.035 0.000 PFS77 0.000 0.000 0.419 0.003 0.036 0.000 0.006 , PF578 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.060 0.001 0.000 • PF579 0.000 o.ooo 0.047 0.002 0.024 0.000 0.001 PF581 0.000 0.000 0.013 0.002 0.026 0.001 0.000 PF582 0.063 o.ooo 0.007 1.576 0.012 0.103 0.000 ' PF583 0.000 0.000 0.001 0.000 0.065 0.000 0.000 PF584 0.000 0.000 0J35 0.000 0.005 0.000 0.000 PF586 0.000 0.000 0.014 0.000 0.503 0.005 0.000 PF587 0.000 0.000 0.002 0.000 0.046 0.055 0.000 PF589 0.000 o.ooo 0.099 0.025 0.452 0.838 0.000 PF590 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.052 0.789 1.898 0.001 PF591 0.000 0.000 5.107 0.001 0.130 0.071 0.000 PF592 0.000 0.000 0.094 0.001 0.163 0.018 0.000 PF593 0.000 0.000 0.050 0.000 0.032 0.001 0.000 PF594 0.000 0.000 0.002 0.292 0.137 0.824 0.000 PF595 0.000 0.000 0.004 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 r PF5% o.coo o.cco 0.001 0.000 o.;o4 1.739 o.coo 1 PF597 0.000 0.001 3.427 0.001 0.038 0.774 0.000 1 PF598 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 1.282 0.002 0.000 PF604 0.000 0.000 0.001 0.000 0.259 0.078 0.001 PF608 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.413 0.052 0.166 0.000 PF6I2 OJIO 0.000 0.135 0.222 0.014 0.132 0.002 PF6I3 0.000 0.000 0.043 0.046 0.460 4.103 0.020 PF614 0.000 0.000 0J02 1.828 2.415 0.444 0.000 PF615 0.000 o.ooo 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 PF6I6 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.776 0.061 0.000 516 Appendix 8. Probabilities of Group Membership for Sherds Group and Elemental Probabilities Principal Cuniponcnt Pruhalnlitio^ inid No. A BC G E F S. Tucinn Papaijucri: PF617 0.000 0.000 0.012 0.004 0.029 0.000 0.026 PF618 0.000 0.000 0.003 0.000 1.115 0.057 0.000 PF62I 0.000 0.000 0.001 0.003 0.113 0.001 0.000 PF625 0.000 0.000 0.000 O.OOO 0.029 0.154 0.000 PF626 0.027 0.000 0.004 0.648 0.013 0.002 0.000 PF627 0.000 0.000 0.065 0.000 0.073 0.006 0.005 PF628 0.000 0.001 0.004 0.022 0.222 2.030 0.000 PF629 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.006 0.000 0.000 PF630 0.000 0.012 0.161 0.017 0.222 0.044 0.000 PF631 0.000 0.000 0.002 0.000 0.056 0.005 0.000 PF633 0.926 0.000 0.443 0.000 0.013 0.048 0.000 PF635 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0J35 0.165 0.000 PF640 0.000 0.000 0278 0.001 5.601 0.876 0.000 PF641 0.000 0.000 0.040 0.000 0.699 0.011 0.000 PF642 0.000 0.000 0.948 0.004 0.940 0.1.33 0.000 PF644 0.000 0.000 0.024 0.000 0.017 0.001 0.000 PF645 0.000 0.000 0.008 0J65 1.091 0.019 0.000 PF647 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 PF648 0.000 0.000 0.005 0.000 0.022 0.000 0.000 PF650 0.000 0.004 0.001 O.OOl 0.203 0.002 0.000 PF651 0.001 0.000 0.033 0.013 0.232 4.716 0.000 PF652 0.000 0.000 0.026 0.000 0.002 0.013 0.000 PF654 0.000 0.000 0J!67 O.OOO 0.021 0.001 0.000 PF655 0.000 0.170 0.004 0.001 0.054 0.004 0.000 PF656 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 PF657 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.164 0.000 0.000 PF658 0.000 0.000 0.009 O.OlO 0.028 0.001 0.000 PF659 0.004 0.000 0.055 0.043 0.015 0.001 0.000 PF661 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.001 0.035 0.001 0.000 PF662 0.000 0.000 0.013 0.000 0.000 0.002 0.000 PF663 0.000 0.000 0.118 0.000 0.052 0.191 0.000 PF665 0.000 0.000 0.685 0.001 0.430 0.001 0.000 PF666 0.000 0.000 0.004 0.000 0540 0.001 0.000 PF667 0.000 0.000 0J05 0.035 1.445 0.004 0.000 PF669 0.000 0.000 0.175 0.000 0J41 0.111 0.000 517 Appendix 8. Probabilities of Group Membership for Sherds Group and Elemental Probabilities Principal Conipunent Probahilitieii dNo. A BC G E F S. Tucion Papa^ucr PF671 0.000 0.000 0.029 0.002 0J196 0.002 0.000 PF672 0.000 0.000 3.011 0.026 1321 0.994 0.000 PF673 0.018 0.000 1.614 0.001 0.102 0.052 0.000 PF674 0.000 0.000 0.013 0.001 0.097 0.002 0.001 PF676 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.012 0.000 0.000 FF677 0.000 0.042 0.006 0.004 0.065 0.004 0.000 PF683 0.000 0.002 0.032 0.000 0.617 0.001 0.000 PF686 0.000 0.000 0.003 0.001 0.137 0.002 0.000 PF688 0.000 0.000 0.001 0.000 0.057 0.001 1.980 PF689 0.006 0.000 0.001 0.005 0.009 0.001 0.000 PF695 0.000 0.000 0.001 0.019 0.018 0.010 0.000 PF697 0.000 0.000 0.002 0.000 0.052 0.000 0.000 PF698 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 PF699 0.000 0.000 0.001 0.121 1.916 0.030 0.000 PF700 0.000 0.000 0.001 0.000 0.253 0.009 0.000 PF701 0.000 0.000 0.005 0.053 0.030 0.002 0.000 PF704 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.055 0.000 0.000 PF705 0.086 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.005 0.000 0.003 PF708 0.000 0.000 0.014 0.087 0.830 0.002 0.000 PF709 0.000 0.000 0.006 0.000 0.017 0.003 0.000 PF712 0.000 0.648 0.058 0.005 0.778 0.034 0.000 PF713 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.057 0.059 0.025 0.000 PF716 0.000 0.040 0.100 0.000 2J24 0.013 0.000 PF720 0.000 0.000 0.015 0.000 0J67 0.009 0.000 PF721 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.019 0.000 0.000 PF726 O.QCO 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.043 0.002 0.000 PF731 0.035 0.000 0.001 0.084 0.013 0.004 0.000 PF735 0.000 0.000 0.001 0.046 0.161 0.117 0.000 PF737 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 PF738 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.621 0.005 0.000 PF739 0.000 0J93 1.142 0.011 1490 0.086 0.000 PF741 0.000 0.017 0.004 0.010 0.214 0.827 0.000 PF743 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.004 0.000 0.000 PF745 0.000 0.000 0.001 0.000 0.022 0.758 0.000 PF747 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.028 0.000 0.000 518 Appendix 8. Probabilities of Group Membership for Sherds (iroup anJ Elemental Probabilities I'nnctpal Component Probabilities ' /\nid No. A BC G E F S. Tueson Papa^ueria PF748 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.002 0.000 0.000 PF749 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.014 0JO2 0.000 PF750 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.059 0.002 0.000 ^ Principal component probabilities were calctiiated using the first 13 principal components of the total 721 sherd data set. These 13 components represent more than 90% of the total variance in the data set. 519 REFERENCES CITED Abbott, David R. 1985 Spheres of Intra-Cultural Exchange and the Ceramics of the Salt-Gila Aqueduct Project In Proceedings of the 1983 Hohokam Symposium, Part II. ed. by Alfred E. Dittert, Jr. and Donald E. Dove, pp. 419-438. Arizona Archaeological Society Occasional Paper No. 2. Phoenix. 1988 Form, Function. Technology, and Style in Hohokam Ceramics, la The 1982-1984 Excavations at Las Colinas: The Site and Its Features, vol. 11. by David A. Gregory, Wilb'am L Deaver, Suzanne K. Fish, Ronald Gardiner. Robert W. Layhe, Fred L. Nials, and Lynn S. Teague, pp. 73-199. Arizona State Museum Archaeological Series No. 162. University of Arizona, Tucson. 1991 Paleohydraulics and Ceramic Exchange: Structure and Interaction in Hohokam Communities. Paper presented at the S6di Annual Meeting of the Society t'ur American Archaeology, New Orleans. 1993 Differential Participation in Local Exchange Networks: Evidence for Social Stratification Among the Classic Period Hohokam. Paper presented at the 58th Annual Meeting of the Society for American Archaeology. St. Louis. 1994a Hohokam Social Structure and Irrigation Management: The Ceramic Evidence from the Central Phoenix Basin. Ph.D. Dissertation. Department of Anthropology. Arkona State University. Tempe. 1994b Synthesis and Conclusions. In The Pueblo Grande Project: Ceramics and the Production and Exchange of Pottery in the Centred Phoenix Basin, vol. Ql. «1. by David R. Abbott, pp. 407-432. Soil Systems Publications in Archaeology No. 20. Phoenix. Abbott David R.. David M. Schaller. and Robert I. Bimie 1991 Compositional Analysis of Hohokam Pottery from the Salt River Valley. Arizona. Paper presented at the 62nd Annual Meeting of the Southwestern Anthropological .Association. Tucson. Adams. E. Charles 1989 The Homol'ovi Research Program. /Crva 54(3): 175-194. Alden. John R. 1982 Marketplace Exchange as Indirea Distribution: An Iranian Example. In Comexts for Prehistoric Exchange, ed. by Jonatiion E. Ericson and Timothy K. Earle. pp. 83-101. Academic Press. London. 520 Ames, Keuietb M. 199S Chiefly Power and Household Production on the Northwest Coast. In Foundations of Social InequaUty, ed. By T. Douglas Price and Gary M. Feinman, pp. 155-187. Plenum Press, New York. Archer, Gavin H. 1994 The 1993 Report: AZ AA:8:27 Intrasite Mapping Projea. Ms. on file. Arizona State Museum. Arnold, Dean E. 1985 Ceramic Theory and Qtlaavl Process. Cambridge University Press. Cambridge. 1991 Ethnoarchaeology and Investigations of Ceramic Production and Exchange: Can We Go Beyond Cautionary Tales? In The Ceramic Legacy of Anna 0. Shepard, ed. by R.L. Bishop and F.W. Lange, pp. 321-345. University of Colorado Press. Niwot. Colorado. 1993 Ecology and Ceramic Production in an Andean Community. Cambridge University Press. Cambridge. Balfet. Helene 1965 Ethnographical Observations in North Africa and Archaeological Interpretation; The Pottery of the Maghreb. In Ceramics and Man, ed. by Frederick R. Matson. pp. 161-177. Viking Fund Publications in Anthropology No. 41. Aldine Publishing Company, Chicago. Baxter. M.J. 1994 Exploratory Multivariate Analysis in Archaeobgy. Edinburgh University Press. Edinburgh. Bayman. James M. 1992 The Circulation of Exotics in a Tucson Basin Platform Mound Community. In Proceedings of the Second Salado Conference, Globe. AZ 1992. ed. by Richard C. Lange and Stephen Germick. pp. 31-37. Occasional Paper. Arizona Archaeological Society, Phoenix. 1994 Cro/r Production and Political Economy at the Marana Platform Mound Community. Ph.D. Dissertation, Department of Anthropology. Arizona State University. Tempe. 1995 Rediinking "Redistribution" in the Archaeological Record: Obsidian Exchange at the Marana Platform Mound. Journal of Amhropobgical Research 51:37-63. 1996 Shell Ornament Consumption in a Classic Hohokam Platform Mound Community Center. Journal of Field Archaeobgy 23:403-420. 521 Bernard-Shaw, Mary 1987a A Descriptive Summary of the Excavation Results at Locus A, AZ AA;12:2 (ASU), Muchas Casas. In Field Investigations at the Marana Complex, ed. by T. Kathleen Henderson, pp. 61-84. Anthropological Field Studies No. 14. Arizona State University, Tempe. Bemard-Shaw, Mary (continued) 1987b A Descriptive Summary of die Excavation Results at Locus I. AZ AA:12:3 (ASLT), Rancho Derrio. In Field Investigations at tke Marana Complex, ed. by T. Kathleen Henderson, pp. 159-176. Anthropological Field Studies No. 14. Arizona State University, Tempe. Bishop, R. L. 1980 Aspects of Ceramic Compositional Modeling. In Models and Methods in Regional Exchange, ed. by R.E. Fry, pp. 47-66. SAA Papers No. 1. Society for American Archaeology, Washington, D.C. Bishop, R.L.. V. Canouts, S.P. DeAtley, A. Qoyawayma, W. Aikens 1988 The Formation of Ceramic Analytic Groups: Hopi Pottery Production and Exchange, A.D. 1300-1600. Journal of Field Archaeobgy 15(3):317-338. Bishop, R.L. and H. Neff 1989 Compositional Data Analysis in Archaeology. In Archaeobgical Chemistry IV. ed. by R.O. Allen, pp. 576-586. Advances in Chemistry Series No. 220. American Chemical Society, Washmgton, D.C. Bishop, Ronald L. and R.L. Rands 1982 Maya Fme Paste Ceramics: A Compositional Perspective. In The Analysis of Fine Paste Ceramics, ed. by J.A. Sabloff, pp. 283-314. Memoirs of the Peabody Museum of Archaeology and Ethnology, vol. XV. part II. Harvard University. Cambridge. Bishop, Ronald L., Robert L. Rands, and George R. Holley 1982 Ceramic Composition Analysis in Archaeological Perspectives. In Advances in Archaeological Method and Theory, vol. V, ed. by Michael B. Schiffer. pp. 275-330. Academic Press. New York. Blanton. Richard E.. Gary M. Geimnan. Stephen A. Kowalewski, and Peter N. Peregrine 1996a Agency, Ideology, and Power in Archaeological Theory: Part I: \ Dual- Processula Theory for the Evolution of Mesoamerian Civilization.. Current Anthropobgy 37(1): 1-32. 1996b Reply. Current Anthropobgy 37{l):65-6S). 522 Blinman, Eric 1989 Potlucic in the Protokiva: Ceramics and Ceremonialism in E*ueblo I Villages. The Architecture of Social Imegraaon in Prehistoric Pueblos, ed. by William D. Lipe and Michelle Hegman. pp. 113-124. Crow Canyon Archaeological Center Occasional Paper No. 1. Cortez. Colorado. Blitz, John Howard 1991 Community Organization in a SmaUScde Mississippian Society: Implications for Chiefdom Formation. Ph.D. Dissertation. City University of New York. Bostwick, Todd W. 1987 A Descriptive Summary of the Excavation Results at Locus D. AZ AA:12;2 (ASU), Muchas Casas. In Field Investigations at the Marana Complex, ed. by T. Kathleen Henderson, pp. 85-120. Anthropological Reld Studies No. 14. Arizona State University, Tempe. Brown, James A., Richard A. Kerber, and Howard D. Winters 1990 Trade and Evolution of Exchange Reladons at the Beginning of the Mississippian Period. In The Mississippian Emergence, ed. by Bruce D. Smith, pp. 251-280. Smithsonian Instimtion Press. Washington. Brumfiel, Elizabeth 1987 Elite and Utilitarian Crafts in the Aztec State. In Specialization, Exchange, and and Complex Societies, ed. by E. Brumfiel and T. Earle, pp. 102-118. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. Brumfiel, E. and T. K. Earle 1987 Specialization, Exchange, and Complex Societies: An Introduction. In Specialization, Exchange, and Complex Societies, ed. by E. Brumfiel and T. ^le, pp. 1-9. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. Bubemyre, Trixi D. 1993 Implications of Ceramic Variability at a Hohokam Platform Mound Village. Master's Paper. Department of Anthropology, University of Arizona, Tucson. Buge, D.E. 1984 Prehistoric Subsistence Strategies in the Ojo Caliente Valley. New Mexico. In Prehistoric Agricultural Strategies in the Southwest, ed. by Suzanne K. Fish and Paul R. Fish. pp. 27-34. Anthropological Paper No. 33. Arizona Sute University. Tempe. Chavez. Karen Mohr 1992 The Organization of Production and Distribution of Traditional Pottery in South Highland Peru. In Ceramic Production and Distribution: An Integrated Approach. ed. by G.J. Bey. ID and C. Pool. pp. 49-92. Westview Press. Boulder. 523 Chernela. Jane 1992 Social Meaning and Material Transaction: The Wanano-Tukano of Brazil and Columbia. Journal of Amhropobgical Archaeobgy 11(2): II1-124. Ciolek-Torrello. Richard 1994 Some Thoughts on Rural Setdement and Subsistence. In The Roosevelt Rural Sites Study: Prehistoric Rural Settlements in the Tonto Basin, vol. II. part II. ed. by Richud Ciolek-Torrello. Steven D. Shelley, and Su Benaron. pp. 669-688. Stadstical Research Technical Series No. 28. Tucson. Clark, John E. And William J. Parry 1990 Craft Specialization and Cultural Complexity. Research in Economic Anthropology 12:289-346. Cobb, Charles Richard 1988 Mill Creek Chert Bfface Production: Mississippian Political Economy in Illinois. University Microfilms International, Ann Arbor. Cordeil, Linda S. and Fred Plog 1979 Escaping the Confines of Normative Thought: A Reevaluation of Puebioan Prehistory. American Antiquity 44(3):405-429. Costin. C. L. 1991 Craft Specialization: Issues in Defining, Documenting, and Explaining the Organization of Production. In Archaeological Method and Theory, vol. III. ed. by M.S. Schiffer, pp. 1-56. University of Arizona Press. Tucson. Craig, Douglas B., Mark D. Elson, and J. Scott Wood 1992 The Grovah diul Dcvciuptricai of a P'stfcriu Mound Cortirnuulty in the Eastern Tonto Basin. In Proceedngs of die Second Salado Conference, Gbbe, AZ1992. ed. by Richard C. Lange and Stephen Germick, pp. 22-30. Occasional Paper. Arizona Archaeological Society, Phoenix. Crown. Patricia 1984 Design Variability in Salt-Gila Aqueduct Red-on-buff Ceramics. In Hohokam Archaeology Along the Salt-Gila Aqueduct, Central Arizona Project: Material Culture, vol. VIII. ed. by Lynn S. Teague and Patricia L. Crown, pp. 205-248. Arizona State Museum Archaeological Series No. 150. University of Arizona. Tucson. 1987 Classic Period Hohokam Setdement in the Casa Grande Ruins Area. Arizona. Journal of Field Archaeology 14:147-162. 1994 Ceramics and Ideobgy: Salado Polychrome Pottery. University of New Mexico Press, Albuquerque. 524 Crown, Patricia 1995 The Production of the Salado Polychromes in the American Southwest. In Ceramic Production in the American Southwest, ed. by Barbara J. Mills and Patricia L. Crown, pp. 142-166. The University of Arizona Press. Tucson. Dart, Allen 1984 Archaeological Site Sign^cance Evaluations for Cienega Ventana Project. Technical Report No. 84-8. Institute for American Research, Tucson. 199S Ground Stone Artif^. In Archaeological Investigations at Los Morteros. A Prehistoric Settlement in the Northern Tucson Basin, Part II, by Henry D. Wallace, pp. 503-566. Anthropological Papers No. 17. Center for Desert Archaeology. Tucson. Dean, J.S., R.C. Euler, G.J. Gumerman, F. Plog, R. Heviey, and T.V.N. Karlstrom 1985 Human Behavior, Demography, and Paleoenvironment on the Colorado Plateaus. American Antiquity 50:537-554. Demarest. Aruther A. 19% Conunents. Current Anthropology 37(l):S6. Doelle, William H., David A. Gregory, and Henry D. Wallace 1995 Classic Period Platform Mound Systems in Southern Arizona. In The Roosevelt Community Devebpment Study: New Perspectives on Tonto Basin Prehistory, ed. by Mark D. Elson, Miriam T. Stark, and David A. Gregory, pp. 385-440. Anthropological Papers No. 15. Center for Desert Archaeology. Tucson. Doelle, William H., Frederick W. Huntington and Henry D. Wallace 1987 Rinccs Phase Recrganizaiicn is ±e Tucson Sasin. In The Hohokam Village: Site Structure and Organization, ed. by David E. Doyel, pp. 71-96. Southwestern and Rocky Mountain Division of the American Association for the Advancement of Science, Glenwood Springs, Colorado. Doelle, William H. and Henry D. Wallace 1991 The Changing Role of the Tucson Basin in the Hohokam Regional System. In Exploring the Hohokam: Prehistoric Desert Peoples of the American Southwest, ed. by George J. Gumerman. pp. 279-346. Amerind Foundation New World Study Series No. 1. University of New Mexico Press. Albuquerque. Doran. I.E., and F.R. Hodson 1975 Mathematics and Computers in Archaeology. The University Press. Edinburgh. Downum. Christian E. 1993 Between Desert and River: Hohokam Settlement and Land Use in the Los Robles Community. Anthropological Papers of the University of Arizona No. 57. The University of Arizona Press. Tucson. 525 Downum, Christian E., John E. Douglas, and Douglas B. Craig 1993 The Cerro Prieto Site. In Between Desert and River: Hohokam Settlement and Land Use in die Los Robles Community, pp. 53-95, by Christian E. Downum. Anthropological Papers of the University of Arizona No. 57. University of Arizona Press, Tucson. Doyel, David E. 1976 Classic Period Hohokam in the Gila Basin. The Kiva 42:27-38). 1980 Hohokam Social Organization and the Sedentary to Classic Transition. In Current Issues in Hohokam Prehistory: Proceedings of a Symposium, ed. by D. Doyel and F. Plog, pp. 23-40. Anthropological Research Papers No. 23. Arizona State University. Tempe. 1981 Late Hohokam Prehistory in Southern Arizona. Contributions to Archaeology No. 2. Gila Press. Scottsdale. Doyel. David E. (continued) I99la Hohokam Cultural Evolution in the Phoenix Basin. In Exploring the Hohokam: Prehistoric Desert Peoples of the American Southwest, ed. by George J. Gumerman, pp. 231-278. Amerind Foundation New World Snidy Series No. 1. University of New Mexico Press, Albuquerque. 1991b Hohokam Exchange and Interaction. In Chaco and Hohokam: Prehistoric Regional Systems in the American Southwest, ed. by Patricia L. Crown and W. James Judge, pp. 225-252. School of American Research Advanced Seminar Series, School of American Research Press. Santa Fe. 1993 On Rivers and Boundaries in the Phoenix Basin, Arizona. Kiva 58(4); 455-474. Earle, T.K. 1977 A Reappraisal of Redistribution in Complex Hawaiian Chiefdoms. In Exchange Systems in Prehistory, ed. by Timothy K. Earle and Jonathon E. Ericson. pp. 213-232. Academic Press. London. 1987 Specialization and the Producdon of Wealth: Hawaiian Chiefdoms and the Inka ^pire. In Specializiation, Exchange, and Complex Societies, ed. by E. Brumfiel and T. Earle. pp. 64-75. Cambridge University Press. Cambridge. Elam. J.M.. C. Carr. M.D. Glascock, and H. Neff 1992 Ultrasonic Disaggregation and INAA of Textural Fractions of Tucson Basin and Ohio Valley Ceramics. In Chemical Characterization of Ceramic Pastes in Archaeobgy, ed. by Hector Neff, pp. 93-112. Monographs in World Archaeology No. 7. Prehistory Press, Madison. 526 Elson, Mark D. 1996 Ethnographic Perspective on Prehistoric Platform Mounds of the Tonto Basin. Central Arizona. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation. Department of Anthropology. University of Arizona, Tucson. Feinman, Gary M. 1980 The Relationship between Administrative Organization and Ceramic Production in the Valley of Oaxaca. Pb.D. Dissertation, Department of Anthropology, City University of New York Graduate Center, New York. 1995 The Emergence of Inequality: A Focus on Strategies and Processes, in Foundaaons of Social Inequality, ed. By T. Douglas Price and Gary M. Feiman. pp. 255-269. Plenum Press, New York. Feinman. Gary M., Steadman Upham. and Kent G. Lightfoot 1981 The Production Step Measure: An Ordinal Index of Labor Input in Ceramic Manufecture. American Antiquity Fish. Paul R. 1989 The Hohokam: 1,000 Years of Prehistory in the Sonoran Desert. In Dynamics of Southwestern Prehistory, ed. by Linda Cordell and George Gumerman. pp. 1-17. Smidisonian Instimtion Inquiries in Archaeology. Washington, D.C. Fish, Paul R., Suzanne K. Fish, Curtiss Brennan, Douglass Gann, and James Bayman 1992a Marana: Configuration of an Early Classic Period Hohokam Platform Mound Site. In Proceedings cfihe Second Sat^ Cottference, Globe, AZ1992, ed. by Richard C. Lange and Stephen Germick, pp. 62-68. Occasional Paper. Arizona Archaeological Society, Phoenix. Fish. Paul R., Suzanne K. Fish, and John Madsen 1993 An Introduction to Research Goals and Perspectives. In The Northern Tucson Basin Survey: Research Directions and Badiground Studies, ed. by John H. Madsen, Paul R. Fish, and Suzanne K. Fish, pp. 3-12. Arizona State Museum Archaeological Series No. 182. University of Arizona. Tucson. Fish. Paul R., Suzanne K. Fish, Stephanie Whitdesey, Hector Neff, Michael D. Glascock, and J. M. Elam 1992b An Evaluation of the Production and Exchange of Tanque Verde Red-on-brown Ceramics in Soudiem Arizona. In Chemical Characterization of Ceramic Pastes in Archaeology, ed. by Hector Neff. pp. 233-254. Monographs in World Archaeology No. 7. Prehistory Press, Madison. Fish, Suzanne K., and Marcia Donaldson 1991 Production and Consumption in the Archaeological Record: A Hohokam Example. The Kiva 56(3):255-276. 527 Fish, Suzanne K. and Paul R. Fish 1990 An Archaeological Assessment of Ecosystems in the Tucson Basin of Southern Arizona. In The Ecosystem Approach in Anthropology: From Concept to Practice. ed. by E. Moran, pp. 159-lW. University of Michigan Press. Ann Arbor. 1992 The Marana Community in Comparative Context. In The Marana Community in the Hohokam World, ed. by Suzanne K. E^h, Paul R. Fish, and John H. Madseon, pp. 97-106. Anthropological Papers of the University of Arizona No. 56. University of Arizona Press, Tucson. 1994 Multisite Communities as Measures of Hohokam Aggregation. In The Ancient Southwestern Community: Models for die Study of Prehistoric Social Organization, pp. 119-130, ed. by W.H. Wills and Robert D. Leonard. University of New Mexico Press, Albuquerque. Fish, Suzanne K., Paul R. Fish, and John Madsen 1985 A Preliminary Analysis of Hohokam Settlement and Agriculture in the Northern Tucson Basin. In ^ceedings of the 1983 Hohokam Symposium, Part /. ed. by Alfred E. Dittert, Jr. and Donald E. Dove, pp. 75-100. Arizona Archaeological Society Occasional Paper No. 2. Phoenix. Fish. Suzanne K., Paul R. Rsh, and John Madsen 1989a Analyzing Regional Agriculmre: A Hohokam Example. In The Case for Full Coverage Survey, ed. by Suzanne Rsh and Steve Kowalewski. pp. 189-218. Smidisonian Instiution Press, Washington. D.C. 1989b Differentiation and Integration in a Tucson Basin Classic Period Hohokam Community. In The SociopoUtical Structure of Prehistoric Southwestern Societies. ed. by S. Upham, K. Lightfoot, and R. Jewett, pp. 237-267. Westview Press. Boulder. 1992a Evidence for Large-Scale Agave Cultivation in the Marana Community. In The Marana Community in the Hohokam World, ed. by Suzanne K. Fish. Paul R. Fish, and John H. Mad%n. pp. 73-87. Anthropological Papers of the University ut Arizona No. 56. University of Arizona Press, Tucson. 1992b Evolution and Structure of the Classic Period Marana Community. The Marana Community in the Hohokam World, ed. by Suzanne K. Fish, Paul R. Fish, and John H. Madsen, pp. 20-40. Anthropological Papers of the University of Arizona No. 56. University of Arizona Press, Tucson. Ford. R. I. 1972 Barter. Gift, or Violence: An Analysis of Tewa Intertribal Exchange. In Social Exchange and Interaction, pp. 21-46, ed. by E.N. Wihnson. University of Michigan, Museum of Anthropology. Anthropological Papers No. 46. 528 Fry. R.E. 1979 The Economics of Pottery at Tikal, Guatemala: Models of Exchange for Serving Vessels. American Antiquity 44:209-225. 1980 Models of Exchange for Major Shape Classes of Lowland Maya Pottery. In Models and Methods in Regional Exchange, ed. by R.E. Fry. pp. 3-18. SAA Papers No. 1. Society for American Archaeology, Washington, D.C. Fratt, Lee 19% Ground Stone Tools and Other Stone Artifacts from the Gibbon Springs Site (AZ BB:9:50[ASM1). In Excavation of the Gibbon Springs Site: A Classic Period Village in the Northeastern Tucson Basin, ed. by Mark C. Slaughter and Heidi Roberts, pp. 267-330. SWCA Archaeological Report No. 94-87. Glascock, Michael D. 1992 Neutron Acdvanon Analysis. In Chemical Charaaerization of Ceramic Pastes in Archaeology, ed. by Hector Neff, pp. 11-26. Monographs in World Archaeology No. 7. Prehistory Press, Madison. Graves, Michael W. 1991 Pottery Production and Distribution Among the Kalinga: A Study of Household and Regional Organization and Differentiation. In Ceramic Ethnoarchaeology. ed. by W.A. Longacre, pp. 112-143. The University of Arizona Press, Tucson. 1994 Community Boundaries in Late Prehistoric Puebloan Society; Kalinga Ethnoarchuology as a Model for the Southwestern Production and Exchange of Pottery. In The Ancient Southwestern Community: Models for the Study of Prehistoric Social Organization, pp. 149-170. ed. by W.H. Wills and Robert D. Leonard. Universi^ of New Mexico Press, Albuquerque. Graves. Michael W. and J. Jefferson Reid 1984 Social Complexity in the American Southwest: A View firom East-Cenaal Arizona. In Recent Research in MogoUon Archaeology, ed. by S. Upham. F. Plog, D.G. Batcho, and B.E. Kauffinan. pp. 266-275. The University Museum Occasional Papers 10. New Mexico State University, Las Cruces. Gregonis. Linda M. 1996 Cultural Interaction in die Northeastern Tucson Basin: The Gibbon Springs Ceramic Assemblage. In Excavation of the Gibbon Springs Site: A Classic Period Village in the Northeastern Tucson Basin, pp. 183-258. ed. by Mark C. Slaughter and Heidi Roberts. SWCA Archaeological Report No. 94-87. Tucson. 529 Gregory, David A. 1987 The Morphology of Platform Mounds and the Structure of Classic Period Hohokam Sites. In The Hohokam Village: Site Structure and Organization, ed. by D.E. Doyel, pp. 183-210. Southwest and Rocky Mountain Division of the American Association for die Advancement of Science, Glenwood Springs. Colorado. 1991 Form and Variadon in Hohokam Settlement Patterns. In Chaco and Hohokam: Prehistoric Regional System in the American Southwest, ed. by P.L. Crown and W.J. Judge, pp. 159-194. School of American Research Advanced Seminar Series. Santa Fe. Gregory, David and Fred Nials 1985 Observadons Concerning the Distribution of Classic Period Hohokam Platform Mounds, to Proceedings of the 1983 Hohokam Symposium, ed. by A.E. Dittert. Jr.. and D.E. Doyel. pp. 373-388. Arizona Archaeological Society Occasional Paper 2. Phoenix. Griffith, Carol A. and Peter H. McCartoey 1994 Shell Artifiicts from the Livingston Area. In The Archaeology of ^Scdado in the Livingston Area of the Tonto Basin Roosevelt PUufbrm Mound Study: Report on the Livingston Management Group, Pinto Creek Complex, Part 2. ed. by David Jacobs, pp. 799-808. Roosevelt Monograph Series No. 3. Anthropological Field Studies No. 32. Arizona State University. Tempe. GriffiUi. Carol A.. Keith W. Kintigh. and Mary S. Carroll 1992 The toference of Social Complexity from Distribudons of Exotic Ardf^ts in the Tonto Basin, to Developing Perspectives on Tonto Basin Prehistory, ed. by C.L. Redman. G.E. Rice, and K.E. Pedrick, pp. 77-86. Roosevelt Monograph Series No. 2, Anthropological Field Studies No. 26. Arizona State University. Tempe. Hackbarth. Maik 1987a A Descriptive Summary of die Excavadon Results at Locus E. AZ AA:12;2 (ASU). Muchas Casas. In Field Investigations at the Marana Complex, ed. by T. Kadileen Henderson, pp. 121-150. Andiropological Field Snidies No. 14. Arizona State University, Tempe. 1987b A Descriptive Sununary of die Excavation Results at Locus H. AZ AA:12:2 (ASU). Muchas Casas. In Field Investigations at the Marana Complex, ed. by T. Kadileen Henderson, pp. 151-158. Anthropological Field Studies No. 14. Arizona State University. Tempe. 1987c A Descriptive Summary of die Excavation Results at Locus 1. AZ AA:I2:1 (ASU). Rancho Bajo. to Field Investigations at the Marana Complex, ed. by T. Kathleen Henderson, pp. 177-184. Anthropological Field Studies Nu. 14. Arizona State University. Tempe. 530 Hagstrum. Melissa B. 1985 Measuring Prehistoric Ceramic Craft Specialization: A Test Case in the American Southwest. JounuUof Field Archaeology I2il):65-15. Halbirt, Carl and Michael Stubing 1990 Ground Stone Artifacts. In Investigations at the Cake Ranch Site: A Classic Period Hohokant Village in the Lower Santa Cruz River Basin. Pinal County. Arizona, by C. D. Halbin, T.K. Henderson, and J.E. Kisseiburg, pp. 84-98. Northland Research, Inc. Ms. on file, U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Reclamation. Arizona Projects Office, Contract No. 2-PA-30-00740. Halbirt, Carl D., T. Kathleen Henderson, and JoAnn E. Kisseiburg 1990 Investigations at the Cake Ranch Site: A Classic Period Hohokam Village in the Lower Santa Cruz River Basin, Pinal County. Arizona. Report on file. U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Reclamation, Arizona Projects Office. Contract No. 3-PA-30-00740 Task 65. Phoenix, Arizona. Halstead, Paul and John O'Shea 1989 Introduction. Bad Year Economics: Cultural Responses to Risk and Uncertainty. ed. by P. Halstead and J. O'Shea, pp. 1-7. Cambridge University Press. Cambridge. Harbottle, G. 1976 Activation Analysis in Archaeology. Radiochemistry 3:33-72. Harry. Karen G. 1994 Field notes for Arizona State Museum for Archaeological Permit Number 94-112. On file. Arizona State Museum. University of Arizona. Tucson. 1997a Community-Based Craft Specialization: The West Branch Site. In .Wew Perspectives on the Hohokam VUlage. ed. by David E. Doyel and Suzanne K. Fish. Southwestern and Rocky Mountain Division of the American Association for the Advancement of Science. Glenwood Springs. Colorado. In press. 1997b Craft Specialization: Context, Models, and Theory. In Archaeological Investigations at the SRI Locus. West Branch Site (AZ AA:I6:3 [ASMJ): A Rincon Phase Village in the Tucson Basin, ed. by Karen G. Harry and Stephanie M. Whittlesey, pp. 13-1 through 13-74. Statistical Research Technical Series. Tucson. In press. 1997c Table M.I. Clay Samples. Munsell Colors, and Analyses Conducted. In Archaeobgical Investigations at the SRI Locus. West Branch Site (AZ AA:I6:3 fASMJ): A Rincon Phase Village in the Tucson Basin, ed. by Karen G. Harry and Stephanie M. Whittlesey, pp. M-4. Statistical Research Technical Series. Tucson. In press. 531 Harry, Karen G. to David Bitile 1994 Letter of August 8, 1994. On file, Arizona State Museum. Harry, Karen G. and Maria Nieves Zedeno 1997 Chemical Characterization of Ceramic Pastes. In Archaeological Invesrigations at the SRI Locus, West Branch Site (AZ AA:16:3 [ASM/): A Rincon Phase Village in the Tucson Basin, ed. by Karen G. Harry and Stephanie M. Whittlesey, pp. 12-1 through 12-39. Statistical Research Technical Series. Tucson. In press. Hegmon. Michelle, Winston Hurst, and James R. Allison 1995 Production for Local Consumption and Exchange: Comparisons of Early Red and White Ware Ceramics in the San Juan Region. In Ceramic Production in the American Southwest, ed. by Barbara J. Mills and Patricia L. Crown, pp. 30-62. University of Arizona Press, Tucson. Heidke. James M. 1993 Applied Quantitative Ceramic Petrology, An Example from Southeastern Arizona. Paper presented at the Araona Archaeological Council Meeting and Symposium: Recent Advances in Southwestern Ceramic Analysis. 199Sa Appendix F, Ceramic Forms and Data Tables. In Archaeological Investigations at Los Morteros: A Prehistoric Settlement in the Northern Tucson Basin. Part II. by Henry D. Wallace, pp. 979-1076. Andiropological Papers No. 17. Center for Desert Archaeology, Tucson. 1995b Ceramic Analysis. In Archaeological Investigations at Los Morteros, A Prehistoric Settlement in the Northern Tucson Basin, by Henry D. Wallace, pp. 263-442. Anthropological Papers No. 17. Center for Desert Archaeology. Tucson. 1996 Qualitative Temper Characterization of Potsherds from die Gibbon Springs Site. In Excavation of the Gibbon Springs Site: A Classic Period Village in the Northeastern Tucson Basin, ed. by Mark C. Slaughter and Heidi Roberts, pp. 259-266. SWCA Archaeological Report No. 94-87. Tucson. 1997 Production and Distribution of Rincon Phase Pottery: Evidence from the Julian Wash Site. In A Rincon Phase Occupation at the Julian Wash Site, AZ BB:13:17 (ASM), ed. Jonathon B. Mabry. Technical Report No. 96-7. Center for Desen Archaeology, Tucson. In Press. Heidke, James M.. Christine E. Goetze, and Allen Dart 1994 Schuk Toak Project Ceramics: Chronology, Formation Processes, and Prehistory of the Avra Valley. In Archaeobgical Studies of the Avra Valley, Arizona: Excavations in the Schuk Toak Distria: Sciemfflc Stuties and Interpretations, vol. n. Anthropological Paper No. 16. Center for Desert Archaeology, Tucson. 532 Henderson, T. Kathleen 1987 Ceramics, Dates, and die Growth of die Marana Community. In SauUes in the Hohokam Community of Marana, ed. by Glen E. Rice, pp. 49-78. Anthropological Field Shidies No. IS. Arizona State University. Tempe. Henderson, T. Kathleen (editor) 1987 Field Investigations at the Marana Community Complex. AnUuropological Field Studies No. 14. Arizona State University, Tempe. Hill, J.N. and W.N. Trierweiler 1986 Prehistoric Responses to Food Stress on the Pajarito Plateau: Technical Report and Results of the Pajarito Archaeological Research Project, 1977-1985. Report submitted to die National Science Foundadon in Pardal Fulfillment of grant BNS-78-08118. Howard, Ann Valdo 1985 A Reconstruction of Hohokam Interregional Shell Production and Exchange Widiin Southwestern Arizona. In Proceedings cfthe 1983 Hohokam Symposium. Part 11, ed. by Alfred E. Dittert, Jr., and Donald E. Dove, pp. 459-472. Arizona Archaeological Society Occasional Paper No. 2. Phoenix. Howard, Jerry B. 1987 The Lehi Canal System: Organization of a Classic Period Community. In The Hohokam Village: Site Structure and Organization, ed. by David E. Doyel. pp. 211-222. Soudiwesteni and Rocky Mountain Division of die American Association for die Advancement of Science. Glenwood Springs. 1992 Architecmre and Ideology: An Approach to the Funaional Analysis of Platform Mounds. In Proceedings of the Second Salado Conference, Globe, AZ1992. ed. by Richard C. Lange and Stephen Germick, pp. 69-77. Occasional Paper. Arizona Archaeological Society, Phoenix. Jacobs. David and Glen E. Rice 1994a The Livingston Site Group. In Archaeology of die Salado in the Livingston Area of Tonto Basin, Roosevelt Platform Mound Study: Report on the Livingston Management Group, Pinto Creek Complex, Part I, pp. 1-20, by David Jacobs. Roosevelt Monograph Series No. 3, Anthropological Field Studies No. 32. Arizona State University. Tempe. 1994b Summary. In Archaeology of die Salado in the Livingston Area of Tomo Basin, Roosevelt Platform Mound Sauty: Report on die Livingston Management Group. Pinto Creek Complex, Part 1, pp. 923-926, by David Jacobs. Roosevelt Monograph Series No. 3. Anthropological Field Studies No. 32. Arizona State University. Tempe. 533 Jewell, Roberta A. 1989 Distance, Interactioa, and Complexity; The Spatial Organization of Pan-Regional Settlement Clusters in the American Southwest In The Sociopolitical Structure of Prehistoric Southwestern Societies, ed. by Steadman Upham. Kent G. Lightfoot, and Roberta A. Jewett pp. 363-380. Westview Press. Boulder. Kamilli, Diana C. 1994 A Petrographic Study of Pottery from the Schuk Toak District In Archaeobgical Studies of the Avra Valley, Arizona: Excavations in the Schuk Toak District: Scientific Studies and Interpretations, vol. H. Anthropological Paper No. 16. Center for Desert Archaeology, Tucson. 1996 Appendix B: Petrographic Report on Ceramics from die Gibbon Springs Project. In Excavation of the Gibbon Springs Site: A Classic Period Village in the Northeastern Tucson Basin, ed. by Mark C. Slaughter and Heidi Roberts, pp. B. 1-B. 11. SWCA Archaeological Report No. 94-87. Kintigh. Keith W. 1984 Measuring Archaeological Diversity by Comparison with Simulated Assemblages. American Antiquity 49:44-54. Kisselburg, J.E. and J. Lancaster 1990 Ceramic Artifects. In Investigations at the Cake Ranch Sue: A Classic Period Hohokam Village in the Lower Santa Cruz River Basin, Pinal County, Arizona, by C. D. Halbirt, T.K. Henderson, and J.E. Kisselburg, pp. 57-69. Northland Research, inc. Ms. on file. U.S. Department of the Interior. Bureau of Reclamation, Arizona Projects Office. Contraa No. 2-PA-30-00740. Kolb. Micheal J. 1996 1996 Comments. Current Anthropology i7{l):59-iO. Kowalewsid. Stephen A., Richard E. Blanton. Gary Feinman. and Laura Finsten 1983 Boundaries. Scale, and Iniemal Organization. Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 2:32-56. Lange. Richard C. 1989 The 1979-1983 Testing at Los Morteros: AZ AA:12:57 (ASM), A Large Hohokam Village Site in the Tucson Basin. Arizona State Museum Archaeological Series No. 177. University of Arizona. Tucson. Lightfoot Kent G. 1984 Prehistoric Political Dynamics: A Case Study fi-om the American Southwest. Northern Illinois University Press. Dekalb. 534 Lightfoot, Kent G. and Rachel Most 1989 Interpreting Settlement Hierarchies: A Reassessment of Pinedate and Snowflake Settlement Patterns. In The Sociopolitical Structure of Prehistoric Southwestern Societies, pp. 389-417, ed. by S. Upham, K.G. Lightfoot. and R.A. Jewen. Westview Press, Boulder, Co. Lightfoot, K. G. and S. Upham 1989 The Sociopolitical Structure of Prehistoric Southwestern Societies: Concluding Thoughts. In The Socwpolitical Structure of Prehistoric Southwestern Societies. ed. by Steadman Upham, Kent G. Lightfoot, and Roberta A. Jewett, pp. 583-593. Westview Press, Boulder. Lindauer. Owen 1988 A Study of Vessel Form and Painted Designs to Explore Regional Interaction of the Sedentary Period Hohokam. Ph.D. Dissertation, Department of Anthropology. Arizona State University. University Microfilms International. Ann Arbor. Lipman. Peter W. 1993 Geologic Map of the Tucson Mountains Caldera. Southern Arizona. Miscellaneous Investigations Series Map I-220S. United States Geological Survey. Department of the Interior. Washington. D.C. Litder. Mathew L. 1997 Canal Irrigation and the Emergence of Hohokam Inequality. Ms. in possession of author. Lombard. James 1985 Report on Sand Temper Composition firom BB: 13:15 Ceramics. In Excavations at the Valencia Site: A Preclassic Hohokam Village in the Southern Tucson Basin. by William H. Doelle, pp. 297-304. Institute for American Research Anthropological Papers No. 3. Tucson. 1986a A Petrographic Analysis of West Branch Site Ceramics. In Archaeological Investigations at the West Branch Site: Early and Middle Rincon Occupation in the Southern Tucson Basin, by Frederick W. Huntington, pp. 429-444. Instimte for American Research Anthropological Papers No. 5. Tucson. 1986b Petrographic Results of Point Counts on 40 Ceramic Sherds from AZ BB: 13:68. In Archaeological Investigations at the Tanque Verde Site: A Middle Rincon Settlement in the Eastern Tucson Basin, by Mark D. Elson. pp. 473-484. Institute for American Research Andu'opological Papers No. 7. Tucson. 1987a Ceramic Petrography. In The Archaeology of the San Xavier Bridge Site (AZ BB:I3:I4) Tucson Basin, Southern Arizona, ed. by John C. Ravesloot. pp. 335-368. Arizona State Museum Archaeological Series No. 171. University of Arizona. Tucson. 535 Lombard, James 1987b Provenance of Sand Temper in Hohokam Ceramics. Arizona. Geoarchaeobgy: An International Journal 2(2):91-119. 1987c Composition of Ephemeral Stream Sands in the Canada del Oro Valley. In Prehistoric Settlement in the Canada del Oro Valley. Arizona: The Rancho Vistoso Survey Project, by D.B. Craig and H.D. Wallace, pp. 207-216. Anthropological Papers No. 8. Institute for American Research, Tucson. 1987d Petrographic Study of Ceramics from the Corona De Tucson Project Sites; Appendix D. In The Corona de Tucson Projea: Prehistoric Use of a Bajada Environment, by B. Huckell, M. Tagg, and L. Huckell, pp. 313-333. Archaeological Series No. 174. University of Arizona. Tucson. I987e Supplementary Report on Temper Sand Characterization and Supporting Data tor the Ceramic Petrography Study. In The Archaeology of the San )Oivier Bridge Site (AZ 88:13:14) Tucson Basin, Southern Arizona, ed. by J.C. Ravesloot. pp. 409-416. Archaeological Studies No. 171. University of Arizona. Tucson. 1989 Sand Sample Thin Section Analysis Data, la Hohokam Archaeology Along Phase 8 of the Tucson Aquedua Centred Arizona Projea, ed. by J.S. Czaplicld and J.C. Ravesloot. pp. 365-366. Arizona State Museum Archaeological Series No. 178. University of Arizona. Tucson. 1990 Petrographic Report on Ceramics from die Cienega Site, AZ BB:9; 143. In Rincon Phase Seasonal Occupation in the Northeastern Tucson Basin, by Mary Bamard-Shaw and F.W. Huntington, pp. 213-232. Technical Report No. 90-2. Center for Desert Archaeology, Tucson. Longacre. William A., and Miriam T. Stark 1992 Ceramics. Kinship, and Space: A Kalinga Example. Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 11(2): 125-136. Madsen. John H. 1993 Geology of the Lower Santa Cruz River Drainage Basin: A Pilot Study of Prehistoric Stone Procurement In The Northern Tucson Basin Survey: Research Directions and Background Studies, ed. by John H. Madsen. Paul R. Fish, and Suzanne K. Fish. pp. 59-84. Arizona State Museum Archaeological Series No. 182. Madsen. John H.. Paul R. Fish, and Suzanne K. Fish 1993 Field Methods and Techniques. In The Northern Tucson Basin Survey: Research Direction and Background SauUes, ed. by John H. Madsen, Paul R. Fish, and Suzanne K. Fish, pp. 13-32. Arizona State Museum Archaeological Series No. 182. University of Arizona. Tucson. 536 McGuiie, Randall H. I98S The Role of Shell Exchange in the Explanation of Hohokam Prehistory. In Proceedings of the 1983 Hohokam Coitference, Pan II, ed. by Alfred E. Dittert and Donald E. Dove, pp. 413-419. Arizona Archaeological Society Occasional Paper 2. Phoenix. McGuire. Randall H. and Ann Valdo Howard 1987 The Structure and Organization of Hohokam Shell Exchange The Kiva 52:113-146. McGuire, Randall H. and Dean J. Saitta 1996 Although They Have Petty Chiefdoms. They Obey Them Badly: The Dialeaics of Prehispanic Western Pueblo Social Organization. American Antiquity 61(2): 197-216. Miksa, Elizabeth and James M. Heidke 1995 Drawing a Line in the Sands: Models of Ceramic Temper Provenance. In The Roosevelt Community Devebpment Study: Ceramic Chronobgy, Technology, and Economics, vol. II, ed. by James M. Heidke and Miriam T. Stark, pp. 133-206. Anthropological Papers No. 14. Center for Desert Archaeology. Tucson. Millon. R. 1973 Urbanization at Teotihuacan. Mexico, vol. I. The Teotihuacan Map, Pan I. Text. University of Texas Press. Austin. 1981 Teotihuacan: City, State, and Civilization. In Archaeology: Supplement to the Handbook of Middle American Indians, vol. I. ed. by V.R. Bricker and J. A. Sabloff, pp. 198-243. University of Texas Press. Austin. Mills. Barbara J. 1994 Community Dynamics and Archaeological Dynamics: Some Archaeological Considerations of Middle-Range Theory. In The Ancient Southwestern Community: Models and Methods for the Saufy of Prehistoric Social Organization. ed. by W.H. Wills and Robert D. Leonard, pp. 55-66. University of New Mexico Press. Albuquerque. Motsinger, Thomas N. 1993 Protohistoric Economic Specialization in the Upper Rio Grande Valley. Paper presented at die 1993 Anasazi Symposium. Farmington. Muller. J. 1987 Salt, Chert, and Shell: Mississippian Exchange and Economy, hi Specialization, Exchange, and Complex Sociaies, ed. by E. Brumfiel and T. Earle. pp. 10-21. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. 537 Neff. Heaor 1990 A series of routines written in GAUSS language. Programs are available from Hector Neff, Research Reactor, University of Missouri-Columbia. Neitzel, Jill E. 1991 Hohokam Material Culture and Behavior: The Dimensions of Organizational Change. In Exploring the Hohokam: Prehistoric Desert Peoples of the American Southwest, ed. by George J. Gumennan, pp. 177-230. Amerind Foundation Publication. University of New Mexico Press, Albuquerque. 1994 Boundary Dynamics in the Chacoan Regional System. In The Ancient Southwestern Community: Models ami Methods for the Study of Prehistoric Social Organizaaon, ed. by W. H. Wills and Robert D. Leonard, pp. 209-240. University of New Mexico Press, Albuquerque. Netting, Robert McC. Netting 1990 Population, Permanent Agriculture, and Politics: Unpacking die Evolutionary Portmanteau. In The Evolution of Political Systems, ed. by Steadman Upbam. pp. 21-61. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. O'Shea. J. and P. Halstead 1989 Conclusions: Bad Year Economics. In Bad Year Economics: Cultural Responses to Risk and Uncertainty, ed. by Paul Halstead and John O'Shea, pp. 123-126. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. Peacock. D.P.S. 1982 Pottery in the Roman World: An Ethnoarchaeobgical Approach. Longmans. London. Peterson. Jane D. 1994 Chipped Stone. In The Pueblo Grande Projea: Material Culture, vol. IV. ed. by Michael S. Foster, pp. 49-118. Soil Systems Publications in Archaeology No. 20. Phoenix. Peterson. Jane. Douglas Mitchell, and M. Steven Shackley 1997 The Social and Economic Contexts of Lithic Procurement: Obsidian trom Classic-Period Hohokam Sites. American Andquity 62(2):231-259. Pires-Ferreira. J.W. 1976 Obsidian Exchange in Formative Mesoamerica. In The Early Mesoamerican Village, ed. by Kent Rannery. pp. 292-306. Academic Press. New York. Plog, Fred 1983 Polidcal and Economic Alliances on the Colorado Plateaus. A.D. 400-1450. Advances in World Archaeology 2:289-330. 538 Plog, Stephen 1989a Ritual, Exchange, and the Developmeni of Regional Systems. In The Architecture of Social Integration in Prehistoric Pueblos, ed. by W.D. Upe and Michelle Hegmon, pp. 143-154. Occasional Paper No. 1. Crow Canyon Archaeological Center, Cortez. 1989b The Sociopolitics of Exchange (and Archaeological Research) in die Northern Southwest. In The Sociopolitical Structure of Prehistoric Southwestern Societies. ed. by Steadman Upham, Kent G. Ughtfooc, and Roberta A. Jewett, pp. 129-148. Westview Press, Boulder. 1995 Paradigms and Pottery; The Analysis of Production and Exchange in the American Southwest. In Cerandc Producnon in the American Southwest, ed. by Barbara J. Mills and Patricia L. Crown, pp. 268-280. University of Arizona Press, Tucson. Poianyi, K. 1957 The Economy and InstifiJted Process. In Trade and Market in the Early Empires. ed. by K. Poianyi. C. Arensberg, and H. Pearson, pp. 243-269. Free Press. Glencoe. Pool, C. A. 1992 Integrating Ceramic Production and Distribution. In Ceramic Production and Distribution: An Integrated Approach, ed. by G.J. Bery III and C.A. Pool. pp. 275-313. Westview Press. Boulder. Rands, Robert L. 1967 Ceramic Technology and Trade in die Palenque Region. Mexico. In American Historical Anthropobgy: Esst^s in Honor of Leslie Spier, ed. by Carroll L. Riley and Walter W. Taylor, pp. 137-151. Southern Illinois Press, Carbondale. Rands, Robert L. and Ronald L. Bishop 1980 Resource Procurement Zones and Patterns of Ceramic Exchange in die Palenque Region. Mexico. In Models and Methods in Regional Exchange, ed. by R.E. Fry. pp. 19-46. Society for American Archaeology Papers No. I. Society for American Archaeology, Washington. D.C. Rautman, Allison E. 1993 Resource Variability, Risk, and die Structure of Social Networks: An Example from the Prehistoric Southwest. American Antiqiuty 58(3):403-424. Reid. J.J. 1985 Measuring Social Complexity in die American Soudiwest. In Status, Structure, and Strat^cation: Current Archaeological Reconstructions, ed. by M. Thompson. M.T. Garcia, and F.J. Kense, pp. 167-174. The Archaeological Association of die University of Calgary, Calgary. 539 Reid, J.J. and S.M. Whittlesey 1989 The Complicated and the Complex: Observations on the Archaeological Record of Large Pueblos. In The SociopoliticcU Structure of Prehistoric Southwestern Societies, ed. by Steadman Upham. Kent G. Ligbtfbot, and Roberta A. Jewett, pp. 184-195. Westview Press, Boulder. Reina, Ruben E. and Rovert M. Hill, HI 1978 The Traditional Pottery of Guatemala. University of Texas Press. Austin. Reynolds, Stephen I. 1988 Geologic Map of Arizona. Arizona Geological Survey Map 26. Arizona Geological Survey. Rhode. David 1988 Measurement of Archaeological Diversity and the Sample Size Effect. American Antiquity 53:708-716. Rice. Glen E. 1987 Floor Assemblages of the Marana Community Complex. In Studies in the Hohokam Community of Marana, ed. by Glen E. Rice, pp. 79-142. Anthropological Field Snidies No. 15. Arizona State University, Tempe. 1990a Toward a Study of the Salado of the Tonto Basin. In A Design for Salado Research, ed. by Glen E. Rice, pp. 1-19. Roosevelt Monograph Series No. 1. Anthropological Field Studies No. 22. Arizona State University, Tempe. 1990b Variability in the Development of Classic Period Elites. In A Design for Salado Research, ed. by Glen Wee, pp. 31-40. Roosevelt Monograph Series No. 1. Anthropological Field Studies No. 22. Arizona State University. Tempe. Rice. Glen E. (editor) 1985 A Research Design for the Investigation of the Marana Community Complex. Anthropological Field Snidies No. 10. Arizona State University. Tempe. 1987 Studies in the Hohduun Community of Marana. Anthropological Field Studies No. 15. Arizona State University, Tempe. Rice. Glen E.. Peter H. McCarmey. and David Jacobs 1994 Artifea Assemblages from V:5:66/I5a and V:5:76/700. \n Archaeobgy of the Salado in the Livingston Area of Tonto Basin, Roosevelt Platform Mound Study: Report on the Livingston Management Group. Pinto Creek Complex, Part /.pp. 267-286, by David Jacobs. Roosevelt Monograph Series No. 3. Anthropological Field Snidies No. 32. Arizona State University. Tempe. 540 Rice, Prudence 1981 Evolution of Specialized Pottery Production: A Trial Model. Current Anthropobgy 22(3):219-240. 1987 Economic Change in the Lowland Maya Late Classic Period. In Specialization. Exchange, and Complex Societies, ed. by E. Brumfiel and T. Earle, pp. 76-85. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. 1989 Ceramic Diversity, Production, and Use. In Quantifying Diversity in Archaetogy. ed. by R.D. Leonard and G.T. Jones, pp. 109-117. Cambridge University Press. Cambridge. Sanchez de Carpenter, Guadelupe 1995 Limited Testing Excavation at AZ AA:12:118(ASM). Chicken Ranch Site, a Lower Bajada Site of the Classic Hohokam Marana Mound Community. Draft report on file, Arizona State Museum, Universi^ of Arizona. Tucson. Santley, R.. P. Arnold 01, and C. Pool 1989 The Ceramic Production System at Matacapan, Veracruz, Mexico. Journal of Field Archaeology 16(l):l(ir7-132. Sayre. E.V. 1975 Brookhaven Procedures for Statistical Analyses of Multivariate Archaeometric Data. Brookhaven National Laboratory Report BNL-23128. New York (unpublished). Service, E. R. 1962 Primitive Social Organization. Random House, New York. Shackley, M. Steven 1987 X-Ray Ruorescence (XRF) Analysis of Obsidian Artifuns from the Marana Hohokam Complex. In Smdies in the Hohokam Conummity of Marana, ed. by Glen E. Rice, pp. 217-222. Anthropological Field Smdies No. 15. Arizona State University, Tempe. Simon, Arleyn W. 1994a Compositional Analysis of the Livingston Ceramic Assemblage. In The Archaeobgy of the Salado in the Livingston Area of the Tomo Basin Roosevelt Platform Mound Study: Report on the Livingston Management Group, Pinto Creek Complex, Parti, ed. by David Jacobs, pp. Roosevelt Monograph Series No. 3, Anthropological Field Smdies No. 32. Arizona State University. Tempe. 541 Simon, Arleyn W. 199^ Performance Analysis of the Livingston Ceramic Assemblage. In The Archaeology oftiie Salado in the Uvingston Area of the Tomo Basin Roosevelt Platform Mound Study: Report on the Livingston Management Group, Pinto Creek Complex, Part 2, ed. by David Jacobs, pp. 663-680. Roosevelt Monograph Series No. 3. Anthropological Field Studies No. 32. Araona State University, Tempe. 1994c Ceramic Evidence for Room Function. In The Archaeology of the Salado in the Livingston Area of the Tonto Basin Roosevelt Platform Mound Study: Report on the Livingston Management Group, Pinto Creek Complex. Part 2, ed. by David Jacobs, pp. 681-708. Roosevelt Monograph Series No. 3, Anthropological Field Smdies No. 32. Arizona State University, Tempe. Simon. Arleyn W., and James H. Burton 1992 Salado Ceramics and Community Relationships. In Proceedings of the Second Salado Conference, Globe, AL1992, ed. by R.C. Lange and S. Germick. pp. 259-274. Occasional Paper 1992. Arizona Archaeological Society. Phoenix. Simon, Arleyn W., Jean-Christophe Komorowski, and James H. Burton 1992 Patterns of Production and Distribution of Salado Wares as a Measure of Complexity. In Developing Perspectives on Tonto Basin Prehistory, ed. by C.L. Redman, G.E. Rice, and K.E. Pedrick, pp. 61-76. Roosevelt Monograph Series No. 2. Anthropological Field Smdies No. 26. Arizona State University. Tempe. Spiebnann. Katherine A. 1986 Interaction Among Egalitarian Societies. Journal of Anthropological Archaeobgy 5:279-312. 1991 Interaction Among Nonhierarchical Societies. In Farmers. Hunters, and Colonists: Interaction Between tfu Southwest and the Southern Picons, ed. by K. A. Spielmann, pp. 1-17. University of Arizona Press, Tucson. 1995 Food Storage and Consumption at Bass Point Mound. In Where the Rivers Converge: Report on the Rock Island Complex. Roosevelt Platform Mound Study. by Owen Lindauer, pp. 426-435. Roosevelt Monograph Series No. 4. Anthropological Field Studies No. 33. Arizona State University, Tempe. 1997 Upland Subsistence and the Nanire of Upland-Riverine Interaction. In Classic Period Settlement in the Uplands of Tonto Basin: Report on the Uplands Complex. Roosevelt Platform Motind Stu^, by Theodore J. Oliver, pp. 17.2-17.11. Roosevelt Monograph Series No. 5, Anthropological Field Studies No. 34. Arizona State University, Tempe. In Press. 542 Stark, Barbara J. 1985 Archaeological Identification of Pottery Production Locations; Ethnoarchaeological and Archaeological Data in Mesoamenca. In Decocting Prehistoric Ceramics, ed. by B. Nelson, pp. 158-194. Southern Illinois University Press, Carbondale. 1995 Problems in Analysis of Standardization and Specialkation in Pottery. InCeranuc Production in the American Southwest, ed. by Barbara J. Mills and Patrica L. Crown, pp. 231-267. University of Arizona Press. Tucson. Stark, Miriam T. 1993 Pottery Economics: A Kalinga Ethnoarchaeological Sauty. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation. Department of Anthropology, University of Arizona. Tucson. 1995 Commodities and Interaction m the Prehistoric Tonto Basin. In The Roosevelt Community Development Study: New Perspectives on Tonxo Basin Prehistory, ed. by Mark D. Elson. Miriam T. Stark, and David A. Gregory, pp. 307-342. Anthropological Papers No. 15. Center for Desert Archaeology. Tucson. Stark, Miriam T.. Jeffrey J. Clark, and Mark D. Elson 1995 Causes and Consequences of Migration in the 13th Cenoiry Tonto Basin. Journal of Anthropological Archaeobgy 14:212-246. Stark, Miriam T. and James M. Heidke 1992 The Plainware and Redware Ceramic Assemblages. In The Rye Creek Project: Archaeobgy in the Upper Tonto Basin: Arttfaa and Spec^c Analyses, vol. Q, pp. by Mark D. Elson and Douglas B. Craig, pp. 89-214. Anthropological Papers No. 11. Center for Desert Archaeology. Tucson. 1995 Early Classic Period Variability in Utilitarian Ceramic Production and Distribution. In The Roosevelt Community Development Study: Ceramic Chronology, Technology, and Economics, vol. II, ed. by James M. Heidke and Miriam T. Stark, pp. 363-393. Anthropological Papers No. 14. Center for Desen Archaeology, Tucson. Teague. Lynn S. 1984 The Organization of Hohokam Economy, la Part 2 of Hohokam Archaeology Along the Salt-Gila Aqueckct, Central Arizona Projea: Synthesis and Conclusions. vol. IX, ed. by Lytm S. Teague and Patricia L. Crown, pp. 187-250. Arizona State Museum Archaeological Series No. ISO. University of Arizona. Tucson. 1985 The Organization of Hohokam Exchange. In Proceedings of the 1983 Hohokam Symposium, Part II, ed. by Alfred E. Dittert. Jr. and Donald E. Dove, pp. 397-418. Arizona Archaeological Society Occasional Paper No. 2. Phoenix. 543 league, Lynn S. 1989a Local and Regional Organization and Interaction. ItxHohokam Archaeology Along Phase B of the Tucson Aqueduct Central Arizona Project: Synthesis and Interpretations, vol. I, ed. by J.S. Czaplicid and J.C. Ravesloot, pp. 277-340. Arizona State Museum Archaeological Series No. 178. University of Arizona. Tucson. 1989b Production and Distribution at Las Coiinas. In The I982-1984 Excavations at Las Coiinas: Synthesis and Conclusions, vol. VI, by Lynn S. Teague, pp. 89-131. Arizona State Museum Archaeological Series No. 162. University of Arizona. Tucson. ToU. H. Wolcott 1981 Ceramic Comparisons Concerning Redistribution in Chaco Canyon. New Mexico. In Production and Distribution: A Ceramic Viewpoint, ed. by Hilary Howard and Elaine Morris, pp. 83-122. BAR International Series No. 120. Tosi, M. 1984 The Notion of Craft Specialization and Its Representation in the Archaeological Record of Early States in the Turanian Basin. In Marxist Perspectives in Archaeology, ed. by M. Spriggs. pp. 22-52. Cambridge University Press. Cambridge. Trubitt, Mary Beth 1996 Household Status, Marine Shell Bead Production, and the Development of Cahokia in the Mississippian Period. Unpublished Ph.D. Dissertation. Department of Anthropology, Northwestern University. Evanston, Illinois. 1997 Household Stanis and Craft Working at Cahokia. Paper presented at the 62nd Annual Meeting of die Socieqr for American Archaeology, in a Symposium entitled "New Research on Craft Production and Specialization at the Household Scale," Nashville. Upham, Steadman 1982 Polities and Power: An Economic and Political History of the Western Puebb. Academic Press, New York. Upham, Steadman. Kent G. Lightfoot, and Gary M. Feiimian 1981 Explaining Socially Determined Ceramic Distributions in the Prehistoric Plateau Southwest. American Antiquity 46:822-833. Upham, Steadman, Kent Lightfoot, and Roberta Jewett (editors) 1989 The Sociopolitical Structure of Prehistoric Southwestern Societies. Westview Press. Boulder. 544 Upham, Steadman, and Glen Rice 1980 Up the Canal Without a Pattern; Modelling Hohokam Interaction and Exchange. In Current Issues in Hohokam Prehistory: Proceedings of a Symposium, ed. by David E. Doyel and Fred Plog, pp. 78-105. Arizona State University Anthropological Research Papers 23. Tempe. van der Leeuw. S.E. 1984 Pottery Manu&cture: Some Complications for the Smdy of Trade. In Pots and Potters: Currem Approaches in Ceramic Archaeology, ed. by P.M. Rice. pp. 55-69. Instimte of Archaeology, Universi^ of California at Los Angeles. Los Angeles. Wallace, Henry D. 1995 Archaeobgical Investigations at Los Morteros, A Prehistoric Settlement in the Northern Tucson Basin. Anthropological Papers No. 17. Center for Desen Archaeology, Tucson. Wallace, Robert S. 1957 Petrographic Analysis of Pottery from University Indian Ruin. In Excavations. 1940, at University Indian Ruin, by Julian D. Hayden, pp. 209-219. Southern Monuments Association Technical Series No. 5. Gila Pueblo. Globe. Whittlesey, Stephanie M. 1974 Identification of Imported Ceramics Through Functional Analysis of Attributes. 77i 1986 The Ceramic Assemblage. In The 1985 Excavations at the Hodges Site. Pima County, Arizona, ed. by Robert W. Layhe, pp. 61-126. Arizona State Museum Archaeological Series No. 170. University of Arizona, Tucson. 1987a A Stylistic Study of Tanque Verde Red-on-brown Pottery, la The Archaeology of the San Xavier Bridge Site (AZ BB:I3:I4) Tucson Basin, Southern Arizona, ed. by John C. Ravesloot, pp. 117-147. Archaeological Series No. 171. University of Arizona, Tucson. 1987b Problems of Ceramic Production and Exchange. In The Archaeology of the San Xavier Bridge Site (AZ BB:I3:14) Tucson Basin, Southern Arizona, ed. by John C. Ravesloot, pp. 99-116. Arizona State Museum Archaeological Series No. 171. University of Arizona, Tucson. 1988 Variability in Tanque Verde Red-on-brown. In Recem Research on Tucson Basin Prehistory: Proceettings cfthe Second Tucson Basin Conference, ed. by William H. Ooelle and Paul R. Fish, pp. 373-385. Antiiropological Papers No. 10. Instimte for American Research, Tucson. 545 Whittlesey, Stephanie M. 1997 Clay and Temper Materials. In Archaeobgical Investigations at the SRI Locus, West Branch Site (AZ AA:I6:3 [ASM]): A Rincon Phase Village in the Tucson Basin, ed. by Karen G. Harry and Stephanie M. Whittlesey, pp. M.1-M.4. Statistical Research Technical ^ries. Tucson. In press. Wilcox, David R. 1979 The Hohokam Regional System. In An Archaeobgical Test of Sites in the Gila Butte-Santan Region, South-Central Arizona, by Glen Rice. pp. 77-116. Anthropological Research Paper No. 18. Arizona State University. Tempe. 1989 Hohokam Warfare. In Culaares in Coi0ct: Current Archaeological Perspectives, ed. by D.C. Tkaczuk and B.C. Vivian, pp. 163-172. Proceedings of the 1987 Chacmool Conference of the Archaeological Association of the University of Calgary. University of Calgary Press, Calgary. 1991 Hohokam Social Complexi^. In Chaco and Hohokam: Prehistoric Regional Systems in the American Southwest, ed. by Patricia L. Crown and W. James Judge, pp. 253-275. School of American Research Advanced Seminar Series. School of American Research Press, Santa Fe. Wiley, Michael K. 1997 Desert Archaeology Letter Report No. 94-148: West Branch Petrography, Caliche Sudy. In Archaeobgical Investigatbns at the SRI Locus, West Branch Site (AZ AA:16:3 [ASM]): A Rincon Phase Village in the Tucson Basin, ed. by Karen G. Harry and Stephanie M. Whittlesey, pp. K.4-K.5. Statistical Research Technical Series. Tucson. In press. Wobst, H.M. 1977 Stylistic Behavior and Information Exchange. In Papers for the Direaor: Research Essays in Honor of James B. Griffith, ed. by C.E. Cleland, pp. 317-K2. University of Michigan, Museum of Anthropology, Anthropological Papers 61. P 99 0 PF013 AA:8:87 99 B 2 1 P 99 0 PF014 AA:8:94 99 B I 5 99 B 0 PF015 AA;8:184 S I 2 0 99 99 0 PF016 AA:8:57 99 B 1 S 0 0 PF017 AA;8:121 S B I 5 S 0 34 PF018 AA;8:94 99 I •) 0 99 99 0 PF019 AA:12:646 99 B 1 5 99 99 0 PF020 AA:12:646 99 B 2 1 S 99 0 PF021 AA;12:663 99 B 2 1 99 99 0 PF022 AA:8:86 99 B 1 6 S 99 0 PF023 AA:8:90 99 B 1 5 99 99 0 PF024 AA:7:20 99 B 2 1 SL B 0 PF025 AA:8-Jl 99 I 2 0 99 99 0 PF026 AA;8:87 99 I 2 0 99 99 0 PF027 AA;8:98 99 B 2 1 S R 0 PF028 AA:8:31 99 1 2 0 99 99 0 PF029 AA:8:28 99 B I 5 S 99 0 PF030 AA:8:27 99 I 2 0 99 99 0 PF031 AA:8:27 99 I 2 0 S R 0 PF032 AA:8:184 99 B 1 5 N R 0 PF033 AA:12:118 99 B 2 1 M 0 0 PF034 AA:12:409 E I 1 0 S 99 0 PF035 AA:12:311 S I 2 0 S R 0 PF036 AA:12:73 S B 2 I N R 0 283