Ceramic Resource Selection and Social Violence in the Gallina Area of the American Southwest Connie Constan

University of New Mexico UNM Digital Repository

Anthropology ETDs Electronic Theses and Dissertations

7-1-2011 Ceramic Resource Selection and Social Violence in the Gallina Area of the American Southwest Connie Constan

Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalrepository.unm.edu/anth_etds Part of the Anthropology Commons

Recommended Citation Constan, Connie. "Ceramic Resource Selection and Social Violence in the Gallina Area of the American Southwest." (2011). https://digitalrepository.unm.edu/anth_etds/15

This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by the Electronic Theses and Dissertations at UNM Digital Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Anthropology ETDs by an authorized administrator of UNM Digital Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected].

CERAMIC RESOURCE SELECTION AND SOCIAL VIOLENCE IN THE GALLINA AREA OF THE AMERICAN SOUTHWEST

CONNIE IRENE CONSTAN

B.A., Anthropology, University of Montana, 1999 M.A., Anthropology, University of New Mexico, 2002

DISSERTATION

Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of

Doctor of Philosophy Anthropology

The University of New Mexico Albuquerque, New Mexico

August 2011

iii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

First, I would like to voice great appreciation for my committee. Dr. Patricia

Crown (chair) stuck with me through various permutations of dissertation topics over many years. Without Patty’s support and encouragement, I would not have completed this research. Thanks to Dr. James Boone for his insightful comments and font of knowledge. I could stop in and ask questions any time and Jim would suggest a reference without having to check an author or title. Dr. Richard Chapman provided a substantial sounding board for my ideas with respect to patterns in the Southwest. Dick also provided me with a job at the Office of Contract Archeology when I was in need of one.

Dr. Jane Selverstone from Earth and Planetary Sciences was a superb outside committee member. Her assistance with the petrographic slides and geologic background was integral to many aspects of this dissertation.

This study has been funded by a Clay Minerals Society Student Research Grant, a

Research Project and Travel grant and a Graduate Dean’s Dissertation Nominee award from the Office of Graduate Studies (UNM), several Graduate Research Development grants from the Graduate Professional Student Association (UNM), a Hibben Trust dissertation grant from the Maxwell Museum of Anthropology (UNM), a Hibben Trust fellowship from the Anthropology Department (UNM), and a Whipple Scholarship from the First United Methodist Church of Albuquerque.

The field aspect of this project involved many people. Michelle Baland was a field assistant extraordinaire. She put up with heat, rain, long days, and camping for over ten weeks. Archaeologists from the Santa Fe National Forest, Mike Bremer, Jeremy

Kulisheck, Jennifer Dyer, and Tony Largaespada, facilitated the permits, provided us with a truck and radio, and helped in numerous other ways. Richard Montoya, Fire

Management Officer for the Cuba Ranger District, made sure we were in the loop with restrictions and fires on the district and that we were safe by having the Deadman

Lookouts (Jared Taylor and Sean Sandoval) check in with us daily via radio.

A special thank you goes to Dave Phillips and Catherine Baudoin at the Maxwell

Museum of Anthropology for access to collections and amazing flexibility in scheduling.

The genuine interest and well-wishes from all the staff at the Maxwell Museum was so wonderful. Jim Connolly, X-ray Diffraction Lab Manager, assisted immeasurably and put up with my flying into his office at odd times with desperate pleas.

Duane Moore provided invaluable help in understanding the world of clay minerals.

Dewey showed me how to prepare my X-Ray diffraction samples and looked at almost

300 XRD tracings for me. He also introduced me to the fabulous people of the Clay

Minerals Society. The support and feedback I received at the annual CMS meetings aided in many aspects of this study, not just monetarily. Dewey Moore and Shelley

Roberts also gave me a huge amount of moral support during the dissertation writing phase.

It took an army of friends to get all the laboratory work done. I am grateful to

Marilyn Riggs, Teresa Cordua, Lauren Alberti, Cathy Brandenburg, Michelle Baland, and Doug McConville for lots of help with the mind-numbing lab tests. Special thanks to

Dorothy Larson for work on the chemical analysis, Natalie Heberling for the cost distance map, and Mia Jonnson for redrafting the artifact sketches. There are many other friends who have helped along the way.

My dissertation writing group (Beth Stone, Veronica Arias, and Wes Allen-

Arave) provided a forum for venting, problem solving, and accountability to the process.

I will really miss the 9pm phone calls every night. I truly believe that I would not have finished this year, if I had not been involved with this group of people. I sincerely appreciated all your ideas and encouragement.

Graduate school was so much more fun being a part of the Millennium Cohort:

Audrey Salem, Gwen Mohr, Hannah Mattson, Jo Snell, Kelly Peoples, Kristy

Worthington, Luke Kellett, Marcus Hamilton, Roberto Herrera, Scott Worman, and Sue

Boone. You guys rock! The patience of the Heritage Team on the Gila National Forest also is appreciated as it took me a while to finish my degree. I now look forward to working with you all on a permanent basis.

Additional thanks go to Dr. Ann Ramenofsky for her heart-felt support throughout my time at the University of New Mexico. The other Gallina groupies, Adam Byrd,

Paula Massouh, Erik Simpson, and Lewis Borck, always were quick to provide a reference or an opinion. But the most important acknowledgements go to my parents,

Kerry and Beverly Constan, and my close friends, Jennifer Dyer and Kari Schleher. I couldn’t have done it without you. Words are inadequate to express my appreciation for everything over the years.

CERAMIC RESOURCE SELECTION AND SOCIAL VIOLENCE IN THE GALLINA AREA OF THE AMERICAN SOUTHWEST

CONNIE IRENE CONSTAN

B.A. Anthropology, University of Montana, 1999 M.A., Anthropology, University of New Mexico, 2002 Ph.D., Anthropology, University of New Mexico, 2011

ABSTRACT

My dissertation examines the relationship between social violence and ceramic

resource procurement. Do people in middle-range societies alter resource use in response to conflict? Specifically, does social strife influence the distance to which potters in middle-range societies will travel to collect ceramic resources? This work builds on a

technological choice theoretical framework. Technological choice studies examine the

choices made by artisans during the production sequence. These choices can create

variability in the final product, or conversely a more standardized form. Artifact

variability has been approached through economic and social interpretations. Each

approach brings a different theoretical mind set to the study of technology and choice.

Also behavioral archaeologists have focused on performance characteristics of artifacts

and how they may reflect choice. Technology encompasses both behavioral and material

aspects. A holistic approach to raw material selection incorporates both materials science

work on the physical characteristics of objects and investigation of the cultural and social

situation in which the items were produced. Focusing on societies in conflict requires

understanding of both the potters’ materials and their cultural setting.

vii

Distance and quality are primary elements in clay selection. Clay is heavy, so for many potters distance is the determining factor in clay selection (Arnold 1985, 2000).

Dean Arnold (1985, 2000) estimated procurement thresholds using worldwide ethnographic data from 111 traditional societies. He found that for both clays and tempers, people prefer to travel only one kilometer, but they will go up to four kilometers if necessary. These thresholds were the basis for the field component of my research.

Pottery production occurred throughout the American Southwest under conditions of pervasive conflict in the 13th century A.D. The Gallina area is an ideal location for investigating resource procurement and social violence in northwestern New Mexico.

Conflict in this area is evidenced by defensive architecture, such as towers and cliff houses (Haas and Creamer 1985; Mackey and Green 1979; Schulman 1949, 1950), burned structures with human remains (Gallenkamp 1953; Hibben 1944; Mackey and

Green 1979), and human remains with embedded projectile points and skull trauma

(Chase 1976; Mackey and Green 1979). Two sites in the Gallina area were chosen, one with a defensive setting and architecture the other with an open site plan and no defensive structures. Ceramics from each of the sites and the clay resources in proximity to the sites were examined to see if conflict affected resource selection.

In this research, X-ray diffraction (XRD) determined the clay mineralogy of ceramic pastes and the collected natural clays, petrography identified the aplastic mineralogy of the sherds and collected samples, and inductively coupled plasma-mass spectrometry (ICP-MS) provided the chemistry of the ceramic pastes and the natural clays. Numerous field and laboratory characterizations provided more information about the qualities of the available clays and the ceramics themselves. The combined results of

viii

the laboratory tests, mineralogical studies, and chemical comparisons indicate that

Gallina potters did not alter their resource selection in response to social violence.

My study addresses an important question that advances both anthropological and geological knowledge. The methodology of this research is innovative and has resulted in clay performance, mineralogy, chemistry, and petrographic database generation for the

Gallina area. It also serves to evaluate the utility of the multiple techniques employed.

Additionally, my investigation has attempted to synthesize the literature of an under- studied culture area in the American Southwest.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

LIST OF FIGURES ...... xiv LIST OF TABLES ...... xvii CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION ...... 1 ORGANIZATION OF THE DISSERTATION ...... 3 CHAPTER 2: TECHNOLOGICAL CHOICE AND CONTEXT ...... 7 THEORETICAL PERSPECTIVE ...... 7 History of Technological Studies ...... 7 Contextual Approach ...... 11 Economic Factors ...... 14 Social Factors ...... 18 CONCLUSION ...... 22 CHAPTER 3: THEORIES OF SOCIAL VIOLENCE AND RESOURCE PROCUREMENT ...... 23 SOCIAL VIOLENCE ...... 23 Causes of Conflict ...... 24 Methods of Conflict ...... 25 Effects of Conflict ...... 26 Risk Mitigation ...... 28 RESOURCE PROCUREMENT ...... 31 Distance Thresholds...... 31 Quality of Resources ...... 32 MODEL...... 34 Hypotheses ...... 34 Assumptions ...... 35 SUMMARY ...... 37 CHAPTER 4: CONFLICT IN THE AMERICAN SOUTHWEST ...... 39 SOUTHWESTERN CHRONOLOGY ...... 42 Early Period: Initial Conflict ...... 43 Middle Period: Decline in Social Violence ...... 43 Transitional Period: Resurgence of Social Violence ...... 44 Late Period: Intense Conflict ...... 45 Historic Period: Colonial Conflict ...... 46 EXPLANATIONS FOR PREHISPANIC SOUTHWEST CONFLICT ...... 47 Scarce Resources ...... 48 Vengeance ...... 48 Ritual ...... 49 EVIDENCE FOR CONFLICT ...... 50 Architecture...... 50 Settlement Patterns ...... 52 Burned Sites ...... 59 Traumatic Death ...... 62

GALLINA EVIDENCE ...... 67 CONSEQUENCES OF CONFLICT ...... 72 CHAPTER 5: GALLINA CULTURE AREA ...... 75 GALLINA SYNTHESIS...... 75 Gallina Boundaries ...... 75 PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT ...... 76 Topography ...... 76 Geology ...... 82 Soils ...... 84 Water ...... 85 Climate ...... 88 Vegetation ...... 91 Fauna ...... 94 PREVIOUS RESEARCH ...... 95 GALLINA OVERVIEW ...... 99 Chronology ...... 100 Architecture...... 105 Settlement Patterns ...... 118 Material Culture ...... 122 Human Remains ...... 134 CONCLUSION ...... 139 CHAPTER 6: AN EXPLORATION OF GALLINA CERAMICS ...... 141 PREVIOUS RESEARCH ...... 141 PRODUCTION ...... 143 GALLINA CERAMIC TYPES ...... 145 Gallina Gray ...... 147 Gallina Utility ...... 149 EXCHANGE ...... 150 USE ...... 153 Vessel Function ...... 154 Whole Vessels...... 156 DISCARD ...... 161 Surface Assemblages ...... 162 Excavated Assemblages ...... 163 CONCLUSION ...... 169 CHAPTER 7: THE DAVIS RANCH SITE AND NOGALES CLIFF HOUSE ...... 171 DAVIS RANCH SITE ...... 174 Site Location ...... 174 Site Layout ...... 176 Previous Research and Chronology ...... 181 Material Culture ...... 183 Human Remains ...... 189 NOGALES CLIFF HOUSE ...... 190 Site Location ...... 190

Site Layout ...... 193 Previous Research and Chronology ...... 206 Material Culture ...... 206 Human Remains ...... 218 SUMMARY ...... 220 CHAPTER 8: METHODOLOGY AND ANALYSIS OF CERAMICS ...... 222 ARCHAEOLOGICAL MATERIALS ...... 222 Analytical Methods ...... 226 Archaeothermometry and Clay Oxidation Analysis ...... 228 X-Ray Diffraction ...... 232 Petrography ...... 241 Inductively Coupled Plasma-Mass Spectrometry ...... 249 Performance Characteristics ...... 253 SUMMARY ...... 257 CHAPTER 9: NATURE OF CLAYS AND GEOLOGIC RESOURCE SURVEY 261 NATURE OF CLAYS...... 261 Clay Sources ...... 261 ANCESTRAL PUEBLOAN POTTERY ...... 262 GEOLOGY OF THE GALLINA AREA ...... 263 Cretaceous ...... 267 Tertiary ...... 270 Quaternary ...... 274 SUMMARY OF REGIONAL GEOLOGY ...... 275 GEOLOGICAL RESOURCE SURVEY ...... 276 Survey Results ...... 277 SUMMARY ...... 285 CHAPTER 10: NATURAL CLAYS ANALYSIS AND COMPARISON TO CERAMICS ...... 288 NATURAL CLAYS ...... 288 Petrography ...... 290 X-Ray Diffraction ...... 296 Inductively Coupled Plasma-Mass Spectrometry ...... 302 Clay Oxidation and Laboratory Characterization ...... 307 Performance Characteristics ...... 317 COMPARISON OF RESULTS ...... 320 CONCLUSION ...... 324 CHAPTER 11: CONCLUSION...... 328 EVALUATION OF RESULTS...... 328 IMPLICATIONS ...... 334 REFERENCES CITED ...... 340 APPENDICES ...... 418 APPENDIX A: ADDITIONAL GEOLOGIC FORMATION DESCRIPTIONS ...... 419

xii

APPENDIX B: CLAY SAMPLES FIELD AND LABORATORY TESTS DATA ...... 437 APPENDIX C: CERAMIC AND CLAY SAMPLES PETROGRAPHIC DATA ...... 466 APPENDIX D: CERAMIC AND CLAY SAMPLES ICP-MS DATA ...... 479

xiii

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 4.1 Conflict Imagery ...... 39 Figure 4.2 Demographic Curves and Density Isopleths ...... 46 Figure 4.3 Tunnel Connecting Tower and Kiva at Sun Point Pueblo, Mesa Verde ...... 51 Figure 4.4 Plan of Atsinna ...... 53 Figure 4.5 Plan of Sapawe with Detail of Western Section ...... 54 Figure 4.6 Ladder Construction Technique ...... 55 Figure 4.7 Reservoir at Acoma Pueblo ...... 56 Figure 4.8 Clustering of Sites Circa A.D. 1400 ...... 57 Figure 4.9 Postulated Signaling Networks ...... 59 Figure 4.10 Unintentional Fire at Casa Chica ...... 60 Figure 4.11 Experimental Intentionally Burned Structure ...... 61 Figure 4.12 Viga Showing Evidence of Intentional Burning ...... 62 Figure 4.13 Depictions of Weapons ...... 63 Figure 4.14 Massacre Victims from a Gallina Site ...... 64 Figure 4.15 Scalping marks from Betatakin Kiva ...... 65 Figure 4.16 Processed Human Bones from Burnt Mesa ...... 66 Figure 4.17 Illustration of Tower at Rattlesnake Ridge ...... 67 Figure 4.18 Gavilan Cliff House ...... 68 Figure 4.19 Plan and Profile of Reservoir at Rattlesnake Ridge...... 69 Figure 4.20 Line of Sight between Towers in the Gallina Area ...... 70 Figure 4.21 Massacre – Bodies on Floor at Bg88 ...... 71 Figure 4.22 Image of Cranial Trauma at Bg3 ...... 72 Figure 5.1 Gallina Districts Map ...... 76 Figure 5.2 Physiographic Map ...... 78 Figure 5.3 Tectonic Features ...... 82 Figure 5.4 Soils Map ...... 84 Figure 5.5 Major Drainages of the Gallina Area ...... 86 Figure 5.6 Pithouse Construction ...... 106 Figure 5.7 Pithouse Plan ...... 107 Figure 5.8 Unit House Plan ...... 109 Figure 5.9 Reconstructed Gallina Unit House ...... 110 Figure 5.10 Outbuilding Plan ...... 112 Figure 5.11 Raised Floor Diagram ...... 113 Figure 5.12 Ramada Post Holes and Plan ...... 114 Figure 5.13 Windbreak in Activity Area B ...... 115 Figure 5.14 Bg 21 Redondo Tower at the Carricito Community ...... 116 Figure 5.15 Bg 20 Tower at Rattlesnake Ridge ...... 117 Figure 5.16 Gallina Projectile Point Shapes ...... 126 Figure 5.17 Examples of Gallina Murals ...... 134 Figure 6.1 Gallina Bowl from Bg88T ...... 147 Figure 6.2 Duck Effigy Pot from the Cuchillo Site ...... 148 Figure 6.3 Pointed Bottom Pot and Globular Jar ...... 149 Figure 6.4 Boxplot of Orifice Diameter by Form ...... 158 Figure 6.5 Boxplot of Vessel Volume by Form ...... 159 Figure 7.1 Site Locations Map ...... 173 Figure 7.2 Davis Ranch Site Photograph ...... 174 Figure 7.3 Davis Ranch Site Plan ...... 177 Figure 7.4 Plan of 1801 Pithouse ...... 178 Figure 7.5 Plan of 174 Cluster ...... 178

xiv

Figure 7.6 Plan of 173 Cluster ...... 179 Figure 7.7 Plan of 172 Pithouse ...... 180 Figure 7.8 Plan of 171 Cluster ...... 180 Figure 7.9 Plan of 1711 Cluster ...... 181 Figure 7.10 Plan of Excavated Surface Unit House ...... 182 Figure 7.11 Stem and Leaf Diagram of Tree-Ring Dates for the Davis Ranch Site ...... 183 Figure 7.12 Photographs of Gallina Utility Sherd ...... 185 Figure 7.13 Photographs of Gallina Gray Olla Sherd ...... 186 Figure 7.14 Photographs of Gallina Gray Jar Sherd ...... 187 Figure 7.15 Photographs of Gallina Gray Bowl Sherd ...... 187 Figure 7.16 Sketch of Biface from 172 Pithouse ...... 188 Figure 7.17 Photographs of Gallina Utility Jar Base Piece ...... 188 Figure 7.18 Sketch of Scraper from 1711 Cluster ...... 189 Figure 7.19 Nogales Cliff House Photographs ...... 191 Figure 7.20 Nogales Cliff House Site Plan ...... 194 Figure 7.21 Plan of House I ...... 195 Figure 7.22 Plan of House II ...... 196 Figure 7.23 Plan of House III ...... 197 Figure 7.24 Plan of House IV ...... 198 Figure 7.25 Plan of House V ...... 199 Figure 7.26 Plan of House VI ...... 200 Figure 7.27 Plan of House VII ...... 201 Figure 7.28 Plan of House VIII ...... 202 Figure 7.29 Plan of House IX ...... 203 Figure 7.30 Plan of House X ...... 204 Figure 7.31 Plan of House XI ...... 204 Figure 7.32 Examples of Plans of Cists ...... 205 Figure 7.33 Stem and Leaf Diagram of Tree-Ring Dates for Nogales Cliff House ...... 206 Figure 7.34 Photographs of Gallina Gray Bowl Sherd from House I ...... 208 Figure 7.35 Image of Gaming Piece Petroglyph ...... 209 Figure 7.36 Tree Mural from House III ...... 209 Figure 7.37 Photograph of Submarine Pot ...... 210 Figure 7.38 Photograph of Olla from House V ...... 211 Figure 7.39 Photographs of Gallina Utility Jar Sherd from House VI ...... 212 Figure 7.40 Photographs of Gallina Gray Olla Sherd from House VII...... 212 Figure 7.41 Photographs of Gallina Gray Sherd with Fillet from House VIII...... 213 Figure 7.42 Photographs of Gallina Gray Sherd from House IX ...... 213 Figure 7.43 Photograph of Bird Mural from House X ...... 214 Figure 7.44 Photographs of Gallina Utility Jar Sherd from Cist 7...... 216 Figure 8.1 Original Firing Temperature Estimates ...... 230 Figure 8.2 Firing Temperatures Compared Across the Sites and Types ...... 230 Figure 8.3 Example of Oriented XRD Tracing from a Davis Ranch Site Ceramic ...... 238 Figure 8.4 Example of Oriented XRD Tracing from a Nogales Cliff House Ceramic ...... 240 Figure 8.5 Overlay of Plain and Coarse XRD Tracing Showing Similarities ...... 241 Figure 8.6 Discriminant Function Plot Showing Separation of the Two Sites ...... 251 Figure 8.7 Discriminant Function Plot Showing Separation of the Ceramic Types ...... 252 Figure 8.8 Bivariate Elemental Concentration Plot Showing the Five Temper Groups ...... 253 Figure 8.9 Boxplot of the Ceramic Apparent Porosity Percentages ...... 256 Figure 9.1 Tectonic Map of Area ...... 264 Figure 9.2 Geologic Map ...... 265 Figure 9.3 Stratigraphic Column at Mouth of Spring Canyon ...... 266

Figure 9.4 Paleogeography of the Certaceous Period ...... 267 Figure 9.5 Paleogeography in Tertiary Period ...... 271 Figure 9.6 Geologic Resource Survey Area with Cost Distance from Nogales Cliff House ...... 279 Figure 9.7 Frequency of Collected Clays Map ...... 281 Figure 10.1 Example of an XRD Tracing from the Lewis Shale ...... 297 Figure 10.2 Example of an XRD Tracing from the Kirtland-Fruitland Undivided ...... 297 Figure 10.3 Example of an XRD Tracing from the Nacimiento Formation ...... 299 Figure 10.4 Example of an XRD Tracing from the San Jose Formation ...... 299 Figure 10.5 Example of an XRD Tracing from the Quaternary Terrace Deposits ...... 300 Figure 10.6 Example of an XRD Tracing from the Quaternary Alluvium ...... 300 Figure 10.7 Bivariate Elemental Concentrations Characteristic of the Kirtland-Fruitland ...... 303 Figure 10.8 Bivariate Elemental Concentrations Characteristic of the Lewis Shale ...... 304 Figure 10.9 Bivaritate Elemental Concentrations Characteristic of the Quaternary Alluvium .... 304 Figure 10.10 Bivariate Elemental Concentrations Characteristic of the Quaternary Terrace ...... 305 Figure 10.11 Bivariate Elemental Concentrations Characteristic of Nacimiento Formation ...... 305 Figure 10.12 Bivariate Elemental Concentrations Characteristic of the San Jose Formation ..... 306 Figure 10.13 Boxplot of Apparent Porosity Percentages ...... 319 Figure 10.14 Bivariate Elemental Concentration Plot of Clays and Black-on-gray Sherds ...... 322 Figure 10.15 Bivariate Elemental Concentration Plot Showing Clays and Coarse Sherds ...... 323 Figure A.1 Paleogeography of the Early Permian Period ...... 421 Figure A.2 Paleogeography of the Late Triassic Period ...... 423 Figure A.3 Paleogeography of the Late Jurassic Period ...... 426

xvi

LIST OF TABLES

Table 3.1 Motives for Social Violence ...... 24 Table 4.1 LeBlanc’s Temporal Divisions ...... 42 Table 4.2 Temporal Divisions Used in this Study ...... 42 Table 5.1 Climate Data from Across the Gallina Area ...... 89 Table 5.2 Phase Schemes for the Gallina Region ...... 101 Table 5.3 Dendrochronological Dates from Gallina Area ...... 104 Table 5.4 Human Remains from Gallina Area ...... 135 Table 6.1 Gallina Ceramic Typologies ...... 146 Table 6.2 Gallina Sites with Trade Wares Present by District ...... 152 Table 6.3 Orifice Diameters ...... 158 Table 6.4 Vessel Volume ...... 159 Table 6.5 Excavated and Tested Gallina Sites ...... 164 Table 6.6 Excavated Assemblages Utility Ware and Gray Ware by Site Type ...... 166 Table 6.7 Excavated Assemblages Jars and Bowls by Site Type ...... 168 Table 6.8 Ceramic Assemblages from Three Ancestral Puebloan Villages ...... 169 Table 7.1 Archaeological Flora and Fauna from the Davis Ranch Site ...... 175 Table 7.2 Ceramic Counts by Structure at Davis Ranch Site Cluster 174 ...... 186 Table 7.3 Archaeological Flora and Fauna from Nogales Cliff House ...... 192 Table 7.4 Human Remains from Nogales Cliff House ...... 220 Table 8.1 Nogales Cliff House Ceramic Sample ...... 223 Table 8.2 Davis Ranch Site Ceramic Sample ...... 224 Table 8.3 Ceramic Color Groups with Munsell Color Ranges ...... 232 Table 8.4 Munsell Color Groups of Sherds Refired at 1000oC ...... 232 Table 8.5 XRD Ceramic Sample Breakdown ...... 233 Table 8.6 XRD Results from the Davis Ranch Site by Ceramic Type and Cluster ...... 236 Table 8.7 XRD Results from the Davis Ranch Site by Ceramic Type and Structure Type ...... 237 Table 8.8 XRD Results from Nogales Cliff House by Ceramic Type and Structure ...... 239 Table 8.9 Petrographic Variables ...... 243 Table 8.10 General Trends in Thin Sections from the Davis Ranch Site ...... 244 Table 8.11 General Trends in Thin Sections from Nogales Cliff House ...... 247 Table 8.12 Munsell Color Groups for the Ceramics ...... 254 Table 8.13 Ceramic by Munsell Color Groups ...... 254 Table 8.14 Hardness of the Ceramics ...... 255 Table 8.15 Ceramic Apparent Porosity Percentages ...... 256 Table 8.16 Thermal Shock Results ...... 257 Table 9.1 Members of the San Jose Formation ...... 273 Table 9.2 Clay Deposits Settings and Size ...... 282 Table 9.3 Results of Field Test Performed on Clay Deposits ...... 284 Table 10.1 Natural Clay Sample Counts by Technique ...... 289 Table 10.2 General Trends in the Petrography of the Narural Clays ...... 291 Table 10.3 XRD Clay Sample Breakdown ...... 296 Table 10.4 Clay Minerals in the Natural Clay XRD Results ...... 301 Table 10.5 Formation Clustering By Element ...... 303 Table 10.6 Relation between Fired and Unfired Colors of Clay ...... 308 Table 10.7 Unfired Clay Color Groups ...... 308 Table 10.8 Munsell Color Groups for the Unfired Clays ...... 309 Table 10.9 Fired (1000oC) Clay Color Groups ...... 309 Table 10.10 Munsell Color Groups of Clays Fired at 1000oC ...... 309 Table 10.11 Drying Shrinkage Averages by Formation ...... 313

xvii

Table 10.12 Water of Plasticity Averages by Formation ...... 315 Table 10.13 Particle Size Analysis Formation Averages ...... 316 Table 10.14 Fired (750oC) Clay Color Groups ...... 317 Table 10.15 Musell Color Groups for the Clays Fired at 750oC ...... 317 Table 10.16 Apparent Porosity Percentages ...... 318 Table 10.17 Thermal Shock Results ...... 319

xviii

CHAPTER 1: Introduction

This dissertation examines if middle-range societies alter resource use in response

to social conflict. In particular, the question addressed in this study is whether or not

conflict influenced the distance to which potters in the prehispanic American Southwest

traveled to collect ceramic resources. My goal has been to discover the rules behind the artisans’ decisions through the study of ceramic technology. This research advances anthropological knowledge of resource choices by traditional potters. It determines whether potters chose to stay closer to home during times of conflict. This, in turn, provides information for anthropologists studying the organization of technology and organization of production by documenting some of the variation in resource selection among potters producing at the household level.

For a case study, this project compares two small villages in the Gallina area of the American Southwest, the Davis Ranch Site and Nogales Cliff House. The Gallina region is a resource-rich district with abundant linear clay-bearing deposits (Baltz 1967;

Smith and Lucas 1991). Ceramic assemblages here include both decorated and utility wares, with only extremely rare evidence of exchange of finished ceramics (Holbrook and Mackey 1975; Lange 1956). Gallina sites date between approximately A.D. 1050 and 1300. The Davis Ranch Site has been dated by tree-rings to between A.D. 1049 and

1256 with a clustering of dates in the A.D. 1240s (Mackey and Holbrook 1978). Nogales

Cliff House has tree-ring dates from only A.D. 1239 to 1267 with dates clustering in the

A.D. 1250s and 1260s (Bannister 1951; Robinson and Warren 1971; Smiley 1951). This pair of sites is ideal for this study because they are situated in the same geologic context.

Yet, while the Davis Ranch Site shows no evidence of defensive structures, Nogales Cliff

House lies in an obviously defensive posture. In addition, neither site shows evidence of

exchange in pottery (Holbrook and Mackey 1975; Pattison 1968) and several clay and

shale outcrops exist in the vicinity (Baltz 1967). My goal has been to compare the

resources used at the two sites to see how conflict affected resource choice.

Even with clay resources available nearby, determining the provenance of a clay

deposit and its procurement location for a specific ceramic paste is complex due to

potters’ mixing of clays and their removal of aplastic impurities (DeBoer and Lathrap

1979; Diaz 1966; Foster 1948, 1967; Lackey 1982; Matson 1975; Rice 1987; Shepard

1976; Voyatzoglou 1974). Other confounding factors include the inherent heterogeneity

of clay deposits, and the uneven distribution of minor and trace elements in clay beds

(Rapp 1985; Rapp and Hill 1998). I focus on the broader choices made between available kinds of clay. To accomplish this, I examined the archaeologically recovered finished ceramics with X-ray diffraction for clay mineralogy, with petrography for natural and added aplastics, and with inductively coupled plasma-mass spectrometry to measure the elemental concentrations. I then conducted a geological field survey for clays around the Davis Ranch Site and Nogales Cliff House and analyzed the clays with

X-ray difffraction, petrography, inductively coupled plasma-mass spectrometry, and numerous other laboratory characterization tests. The results of the analyses of the ceramics and the clays were compared to determine from which geologic formation(s) the potters selected their clay(s).

I conclude that there is no difference in diversity of raw materials exploited between the two sites. Clays within one kilometer of the defensive site were not employed by the ancient potters for the utilitarian ceramics, but possibly were utilized for

the painted ceramics. I could not show exclusive use of the clays from within one kilometer of the non-defensive site for the painted ceramics, however they could be exploited for the utilitarian ceramics. This suggests that specific performance characteristics and/or aesthetics were the driving force. In this area, there is no evidence that conflict influences ceramic resource procurement.

ORGANIZATION OF THE DISSERTATION

Chapter 2 presents the theoretical background underlying this research. The technological choice perspective is reviewed both historically and through its main interpretive frameworks, economic and social approaches. A more holistic avenue in technological choice studies emphasizes the production of an object within a cultural context. This integrates both the economic materials science investigations of performance characteristics so common in the American behavioral tradition and the social identity focus from the French socio-ethnological tradition. Placing the manufacturing sequence in a cultural context allows for expansion of the influences considered in pottery production.

Chapter 3 discusses social violence, resource procurement, and their place in the model for this study. The causes, methods, and effects of conflict are outlined; risk mitigation is examined within a setting of social violence. Distance and quality of materials are the topics presented with respect to resource procurement decisions. As for the model and hypotheses, they bring together conflict and raw material selection. The possible reasons behind the potters’ decisions are conserving production time by using nearby clays, conserving activity time with high performance clays, inaccessibility of

traditional clay beds, strict use of traditional clay deposits, or a preference for the

aesthetics of specific clays.

Chapter 4 summarizes the evidence for conflict in the American Southwest. A

chronology related to levels of social violence in the region is derived from Steven

LeBlanc (1999). Several explanations for conflict in the Southwest are laid out here.

With the background set, evidence for social strife is examined through architecture,

settlement patterns, burned sites, and signs of traumatic death. Specific evidence of

conflict in the Gallina area is presented as a prelude to discussion of this culture area for

the current research project.

Chapter 5 is a compilation of the available literature on the Gallina culture area.

Due to a substantial length of time between now and the last comprehensive review of

Gallina archaeology (Hibben 19391), this chapter covers more than the specific evidence

for violence and description of ceramics that are the foci of this study. The physical

environment, previous research, chronology, architecture, settlement patterns, material

culture, and human remains are discussed. It is hoped that this effort will benefit future

students of the Gallina people.

Chapter 6 focuses on the pottery of the Gallina area of the American Southwest.

A synthesis of previous work and the different painted and utility ware types are presented. Production, exchange (or lack thereof in this case), use, and discard of Gallina ceramics are investigated. This was facilitated through a comparison of frequencies from excavated assemblages and available whole vessel measurements.

1 In many instances Frank Hibben’s dissertation is cited as Hibben (1940). The official copy from Harvard has a date of December 15, 1939. Therefore, his dissertation is cited as Hibben (1939) throughout this document.

Chapter 7 presents the archaeological case study beginning with the site selection

criteria. Following the parameters for inclusion in the study, each site is thoroughly

described. The previous research at each village, especially excavation methods and tree-

ring dates, are discussed. The site location and layout along with material culture for

each community are summarized. Details of the recovered human remains also are

introduced.

Chapter 8 reviews the methodology used and the archaeological materials, i.e.

ceramic sherds, examined in this study. The artifact analysis incorporated

archaeothermometry to estimate the original firing temperature and compare 1000oC

color groups, X-ray diffraction to look at the clay mineralogy, petrography to describe the

aplastics, and inductively coupled plasma-mass spectrometry to identify the elemental concentrations in the Gallina ceramics. Additionally, I looked at firing attributes and performance characteristics through color, hardness, porosity, and thermal shock. The results of the analysis of the ceramics are presented here.

Chapter 9 begins with a discussion of the nature of clays and clay sources.

Characteristics of Ancestral Puebloan ceramics in relationship to clay raw material selection are assessed. Next, I describe each of the geologic formations in the study area.

During the geological survey, each natural clay sample collected was tested for workability and other qualities. I also examined the distribution and frequency of clay

deposits on the landscape. The final section considers the formations in terms of clay

content based on lithology and characteristics of the clay deposits.

Chapter 10 presents the analysis of the natural clays and comparison to the

ceramic results. Petrography was used to illustrate the inclusions, X-ray diffraction to

determine the clay minerals present, and inductively coupled plasma-mass spectrometry to ascertain the chemical composition. Performance characteristics of the natural clays were investigated through color, hardness, porosity, and thermal shock tests. Other laboratory tests, such as particle size, drying shrinkage, and water of plasticity, were conducted to further describe the clays. The final section contrasts the ceramic and clay results.

Chapter 11 summarizes and synthesizes the dissertation. The model and hypotheses also are evaluated. At a household scale of production, ceramics may be fabricated only a couple times a year, which limits the risk in ceramic resource procurement. Safety concerns seem to be less important than accessing clays with known performance characteristics and cultural aesthetic value. This research has advanced our knowledge of technological choices made by middle-range society potters.

Human choices and behavior are fundamental anthropological issues. As anthropologists, archaeologists infer behavior and beliefs from material remains that people have created and utilized. Recovered archaeologically, materials and their related technologies are “concrete expressions and embodiments of human thoughts and ideas”

(Childe 1956:1). Because technology is an integral part of culture, the study of technological choice is one path by which we can better understand human behavior, and raw material selection lies at the foundation of such decisions.

CHAPTER 2: Technological Choice and Context

THEORETICAL PERSPECTIVE

This study expands investigations of resource selection to encompass raw materials chosen by potters in middle-range societies beset by social violence. Focusing on societies in conflict requires an approach that includes understanding of both the potters’ materials and their cultural setting. The social landscape and the ceramic ecology must be brought together when examining potters choices; the raw material selection needs to be contextualized. With a contextual approach, outside factors, such as social violence, can be incorporated into explorations of technological choice.

The goal of research into technological choice is to discover the rules behind the artisan’s decisions. Technological choice, as defined in this study, is the series of choices made by artisans during the production sequence (Tite et al. 2003). It is also termed technological style and technical choice (Dobres and Hoffman 1999; Lemonnier 1993;

Schiffer 2003). In her study of technological style, Lechtman (1977, 1999) noted that production involves accommodation between available raw materials and the object's intended function. The physical properties of raw materials are invariant; therefore, variations in the ways these resources are manipulated reflect cultural selection.

History of Technological Studies

Technological style and technological choice have been examined, for example, in stone tools (e.g. Fitzhugh 2001; Nelson 1991; Pétrequin 1993), metallurgy (e.g. Childs

1991; Lechtman 1977; Maret 1980; Pryce et al. 2007), weapons systems (e.g. Bleed

1986; Govoroff 1993; Lyman et al. 2009), assemblages (e.g. Bowdler and Smith 1999;

Dobres 1995; Schriever et al. 2011; Wake 1999), and ceramics (e.g. Chilton 1998; Fiori

et al. 2010; Goodby 1998; Van der Leeuw 1993). The pioneering work in studies of

technological choice by archaeologists André Leroi-Gourhan (1943, 1945) and Heather

Lechtman (1977, 1979) reflects the two schools of thought, French and American traditions. In the French tradition, Leroi-Gourhan (1943, 1945) was the first to name and apply the analytic technique of chaînes opératoire to archaeology. His ideas were influenced by Marcel Mauss’ concept of enchaînement organique (1935, 1941).

Enchaînement organique is the process by which natural resources are changed into objects through bodily gestures within social settings. Chaînes opératoire analysis is used to examine in detail productive sequences and decision-making strategies. This is both an analytic method and an interpretive methodology. This analytic tool is mainly applied to two types of research: to identify the sequential technical operations in the production of an object and to infer the cognitive processes and logic systems underlying the production sequence. The concept of chaînes opératoire analysis was developed and disseminated to the English-language audience in the writings of social anthropologist

Pierre Lemonnier (e.g. 1986, 1992, 1993). Lemonnier (e.g. 1983, 1984, 1989, 1992) describes technical activities as the interaction of five elements: matter, energy, objects, gestures in sequence, and knowledge.

Exemplifying the American tradition, Lechtman (e.g. 1977, 1979, 1984, 1999) argues that the process of creating artifacts can be stylistic. These behaviors are what constitute technological style (Lechtman 1977). She uses gilding versus alloying gold in the Andes to illustrate technological style choice and how it may relate to cultural beliefs.

One of the primary ways Andean objects carried and conveyed meaning was through the materials and procedures used in their manufacture. Andean peoples used the mechanical

properties of metal that allow it to be shaped as a solid material: plasticity, malleability, hardening through deformation, and softening through moderate annealing. The most important physical property of Andean metals and alloys was their color. Metal objects often underwent dramatic color changes during the fabrication process. Ethnographic research in the Andes reveals a belief in the presence of a life force or animating essence in all things, including manufactured objects. The development of the essential qualities in metal comes from altering the previous condition and transforming it. Color was the external and enhanced consequence of a change in internal state or structural order. In this case, the style is situated within the cultural context.

The parallels between the French and American traditions are the goal of understanding the entire operational sequence for production and use of a group of artifacts. This is seen in the similarity of Michael Schiffer’s behavioral chain (e.g.

Schiffer 1975; Schiffer and Skibo 1987) and the concept of the chaînes opératoire (e.g.

Lemonnier 1986, 1992; Leroi-Gourhan 1943, 1945). They both emphasize understanding the manufacture and use of material culture and how that technical behavior creates and mediates social relations (Stark 1998), which are part of the cultural context. This is common ground for sociologists, anthropologists, and archaeologists.

For sociologists, technologies can be analyzed as cultural choices (e.g. Bijker et al. 1987; Bijker and Law 1992; Law 1991; Latour 1991, 1996). They have examined how consumers select from new technologies and the effect this has on innovation. One example looks at the power of public interest in high-tech developments, and states that

"all technologies are shaped and mirrored by trade-offs in our society" (Bijker and Law

1992:3). The study of the Nimitz Freeway collapse in Oakland during the 1989 Loma

Prieta earthquake showed that there was engineering available to prevent the collapse, but balancing public interest with state expenditures kept the California Highway Department from enacting the safeguards. Technologies are heterogeneous; they are not isolated and do not have natural trajectories to their changes. They are not driven by the materials, but are influenced by their social situation.

The anthropological perspective (e.g. Ingold 1988, 1990, 1993, 2001; Lemonnier

1986, 1992, 1993; Pfaffenberger 1988, 1992) is in keeping with the sociological view of cultural choices, which depend on functional, social, economic, and ideological criteria.

To illustrate the cultural setting of technological choices, Tim Ingold’s (2001) stance on the technical process focuses on the product of practiced skill, not intellectual problem solving. Skilled practice includes care, judgment, and dexterity, not just mechanical force. The activity itself generates the form, not the design that precedes it. Skills are qualities of people and can be subtle indicators of social relations, affiliations, and identity (Ingold 1993).

In the case of archaeology (e.g. Dobres and Hoffman 1994, 1999; Schiffer and

Skibo 1987, 1997; Schiffer 1992; Stark 1996, 1998; Van der Leeuw 1993), there has been a renewed interest in technological studies. As an archaeological exemplar, Miriam Stark

(1998) believes that material culture patterning is key to examining social boundaries, whether reflecting ethnicity, migration, or economic systems. Investigations of technological choices can contribute to a better understanding of material culture patterning and social boundaries in the archaeological record. In the realm of pottery,

Stark (1996) proposes that technological aspects of style in ceramics differ from decoration in that they are more stable over time and that they better reflect group

boundaries (cf. Dietler and Herbich 1994, 1998). Overall, a technological approach to artifact variability may resolve the archaeological issues of social boundaries (Stark

1998).

Contextual Approach

Both material science information about how the technology worked and how it fits in the wider cultural context are imperative to understanding people’s choices in the past (Sillar and Tite 2000). Peter Bleed (2001:153) asserts that artifacts are a result of technology, which is “informed by behavioral contexts that can be observed in terms of knowledge, applications, and standards practiced by artisans.” In Bleed's (2001) model, constraints on artifact makers are separated into two categories: adjustable constraints and internal constraints. Adjustable constraints include environmental circumscription of resources, tasks, or demands. Internal constraints are bodies of wisdom, lore, and knowledge that limit choices.

Marie-Claude Mahias (1993) looks at technical variants in ceramic production in

India, and argues that contextual, material, or social factors influence the production process. The choice of clays is related to geology, distance to source, forming processes, and the ceramic’s intended function, while the forming process and intended function can be related to social structure and belief. Technical problems in pottery-making have many solutions, but once a solution is selected the potter is locked into that choice. For example, donkey dung may be the best temper, but using it could affect access to a higher status in India. These technical variants identify specific social groups since all variants are socially significant.

The distribution of production techniques has been approached through both

economic and social lenses, but Alexander Livingstone Smith’s (2000) ethnographic

research in northern Cameroon shows that complex mechanisms are involved in the

regional patterns of clay processing for pottery production. To examine material culture

patterning at the technical level, six parameters were used: functional and environmental

factors, production context, distribution networks, learning lineages, identity of the

producers, and settlement patterns. Livingstone Smith found that in northern Cameroon

the functional and environmental factors did not constrain the potters’ selections, since all

their choices in modification of the clay were equally viable. The production context is

homogenous across the study area being made in a dispersed household specialization

mode. This is seen in the distribution networks in that most pots are bought nearby at

potters’ households; long distance exchange was used to obtain only a small fraction of a

household pottery inventory.

Reflecting the social context, learning lineages fall within ethno-linguistic groups as most potters learn their craft from members of their family. The post-marriage mobility of female potters in northern Cameroon is very small, less than 10 kilometers, and displacements are at the intra- or inter-village level. The identity of the producers, based on language affiliation and social status, and the settlement patterns, reflecting social boundaries, of the area both point to a regional identity that transcends classic ethnic affiliations. Cultural patterning at the regional level shows interaction between different ethno-linguistic groups (e.g. Dietler and Herbich 1994, 1998; Hegmon 1992,

1998; MacEachern 1994, 1998; Stark et al. 1998) and the variation in clay preparation

methods in northern Cameroon stems from long-term interactions in distinct areas

(Livingstone Smith 2000).

Rather than focusing on the functional or symbolic aspects of technological choices, Bill Sillar (2000) promotes an analysis of the cultural context in which an object is produced. His study shows how pottery production in the Andes is embedded in other cultural practices. To examine the choice of dung as a fuel for firing ceramics, the production, procurement, and method of dung use are illustrated. Pottery is produced at the household level in several parts of Peru and Bolivia and dung is used as a fuel for the firing of vessels. The availability and properties of animal dung are linked to Andean animal husbandry practices. Dung is integral to agricultural and household activities. It is used as a fertilizer on fields and as a fuel for cooking. The use of dung in other aspects of the household economy means it is readily available for pottery firing also. This choice of fuel for firing, as opposed to wood, allows ceramics to be more stable and sustainable as a craft activity. The material properties alone of dung as a fuel for firing are not enough to explain technological choices. The performance characteristics must be considered within the technical, social, and economic context of production and use.

The cultural context of the production and use is crucial, but a holistic approach incorporating both economic studies of the materials and social studies of the behaviors must be brought together. Many in this field of study are promoting a more integrated look at the choices that are made in production (see Sillar and Tite 2000). As with the provenience of an artifact, if the context is lost, interpretation is meaningless. In the ceramic ecology approach, presented below, the materials science work is lacking the

human context, but the information it provides is important to understanding what

choices people had.

Economic Factors

Focusing on environmental constraints and performance characteristics as the primary influences upon potters’ choices only recognizes the economic factors of the context. For example, Dean Arnold (1985, 2000) discusses the effects of material quality, distance, weather, and climate on the potter's decision of where and when to gather resources and produce pots. Weather and climate affect adequate drying and firing of finished pots. Pottery as a full-time craft can only occur in year-round warm and

sunny climates. Areas with a rainy or snowy season will only have pottery production

during the dry, warm seasons. This is a classic ceramic ecology approach.

Another example of a strictly ecological determinism interpretation is the advantage of specific surface colors for ceramic vessels in relation to their functional use

(Arnold 1985:22-23). Water storage vessels in hot climates may be selectively made out of white or pale firing clays because the light colors reflect heat (Rye 1976). In contrast, cooking pots should be dark in color to retain heat. The dark color of the vessel surface can be achieved through a dark firing clay or smudging of the jar. Sooting of the cooking pot from general use also can contribute to darkening the surface and aid heat retention

(Rye 1976). The traditions of a society may weigh more heavily or at least influence the choice of colors for pottery; the social mores cannot be discounted.

Many characteristics of clay that influence selection are not visible in a fired ceramic. To look at production, one must first look at technology, specifically selection of resources. Susanne DeAtley and William Melson (1986) compared the technological

characteristics and compositional patterns of area clays and ceramics from one

prehispanic hamlet in the American Southwest. The purpose was to see if firing potential

and product function were well matched to the clays chosen by the ancient potters. The

results showed that the potters were using the Morrison Formation clays. They chose those clays because they were best for low-temperature, open-firing technology and there

was open access to clay deposits. It may be that these clays also produced ceramics that

fit well into the mental template, derived from social values, of how a ceramic should

look, but the authors did not expand their analysis to include cultural influences.

James Skibo and Michael Schiffer (2001) investigate technical choice through

examination of performance characteristics. They argue that artifact design is based on

people trying to solve daily problems. In a straightforward setting, the producer is the

user and therefore the producer can easily assess the relationship between technological

choice and performance. Skibo and Schiffer's design theory has four parts: behavioral

chain, activities and interactions, technical choices and compromises, and performance

characteristics. As stated above, the behavioral chain is similar to the French sociology

and ethnology of technology chaînes opératoire (operational chain of production). Each

step in the behavioral chain is an activity that is composed of interactions, and all

technological choices include compromise. Technical choices can be influenced by

performance characteristics. Performance characteristics run from physical properties

(mechanical, thermal, or chemical performance) to sensory aspects (taste, smell, sight,

touch, hearing). These performance characteristics provide an excellent baseline for

understanding technological choices, but some of the problems potters are trying to solve

also may be beyond mechanics and aesthetics.

Michael Tite and colleagues (2001) examine performance characteristics, specifically characteristics related to transport, storage, and cooking, and their influence on technological choices in ceramics. Clay type, temper type and concentration, and firing temperature are discussed in detail. Technological choice has five main areas in pottery making: raw materials, tools, energy sources, techniques, and the sequence (Sillar and Tite 2000; Tite et al. 2001). The potters’ perceptions of the technological choices made and the consumers’ perceptions of the finished product are just as important as the main areas of choice in any technology.

The conclusions are that high strength in pottery comes from a low temper concentration and a high firing temperature. High toughness and high thermal shock resistance come from a high temper concentration and a low firing temperature. In the case of storage and transport, strength and toughness do not appear to be major factors.

But for cooking vessels thermal shock resistance is a key player in the technological choices made in production.

Shell and limestone tempered ceramics are an excellent contrast to quartz sand tempered vessels for performance characteristics. The thermal expansion of calcite

(calcium carbonate) is much closer to the expansion of the clay body than the quartz thermal expansion, therefore shell and limestone tempered pottery survive thermal shock better. However, the risk of spalling during the firing process when shell or limestone was used as temper requires development of counteragents to prevent the decomposition of calcite in the firing. This suggests that when shell or limestone temper was selected the choice was intentional.

Adequate pottery can be produced from many alternative clays, tempers, and

firing methods. It is rare that appropriate raw materials for ceramic construction are unavailable (Van der Leeuw 1993). Technological choices are frequently a compromise in performance characteristics, but they are a good starting place for understanding the numerous variables and choices made in the ceramic production sequence (Tite et al.

2001). Once the direct influences, discussed above, of technical choices are considered, the indirect influences, such as mode of production, extent of craft specialization, distribution network, and contexts of use, can be studied (Sillar and Tite 2000).

Christopher Pool (2000) also uses a behavioral approach to evaluate the utility of pottery firing technologies. In the Sierra de los Tuxtlas, Veracruz, Mexico, both kilns and open firing methods have been used for over 1,700 years. Kilns are noted as having many advantages over open firings (D. Arnold 1985:213; Rice 1987:153; Rye 1981:98;

Shepard 1976:75). The choice of kiln or non-kiln firing techniques is not always based on the technological advantage of kilns or increased production. The performance characteristics of firing facilities must be weighed against their natural, social, and economic contexts. On the one hand, kilns allow greater control over the firing process, higher maximum temperatures, better fuel efficiency, and the ability to fire when it is windy or raining. On the other hand, open firings have lower material and labor costs and use less fuel than simple updraft kilns.

The reasons for the maintenance of a dual firing system in the Tuxtlas Mountains differ for the ancient and modern potters. During the Classic Period, ceramics were used in multiple contexts, which resulted in the production of both fine decorated wares and coarse utility wares. The prehispanic artisans chose to fire the vessels with finer pastes

and painted decoration in kilns, while the coarse-textured utilitarian pots were finished in open firings. As for the modern situation, plastics, metals, and commercial ceramics have replaced many of the previous uses of pottery. For the few utilitarian vessels still produced open firing is sufficient. The continued use of some simple updraft kilns now relates to space management in densely settled communities. Potters that live on small house lots use kilns to avoid having to move the firing location due to micro- environmental conditions (P. Arnold 1991). This case study illustrates the need to place technological choices in context (Pool 2000), while looking at the materials and processes available to the producer.

Social Factors

Other approaches to technological choice focus on issues of social identity, such as gender (Dobres 1995, 1999), meaning (Pfaffenberger 1992, 1999), ethnicity (Gosselain

1998; Stark 1998), and socioeconomic factors (Hosler 1996; Mahias 1993) and ignore

physical properties effects. To illustrate, Marcia-Anne Dobres (1995) addresses the linkage between technological choice and gender in Late Magdalenian site-specific composite assemblages through studying agency and symbolism. In her analysis, she finds that decisions are said to be context-specific and serve to identify and create status for the tool producers.

Prehistoric technology is seen solely as the embodiment of social rules. The Late

Magdalenian production was linked to gender through technical strategies. These technical strategies could have served to identify and create status for the tool producers.

This may have been demonstrated as technical skill and know-how, differential access to raw materials, and/or differential access to the end products. Skill and access to

resources are more negotiable than the patterns of a technological sequence. Negotiation

is not a completely conscious part of Dobres’ technical strategy. It is most likely a “tacit

and routinized” (Bourdieu’s concept of habitus 1977, 1984) way to effect social interests

via skill, craft, and knowledge practiced in view of others. The location of production is

an important element in this form of social display. All together, material culture and

technology combine the social, material, and symbolic. This emphasizes the social factors

without also addressing the material constraints.

Dorothy Hosler (1996) conducted an ethnographic study of the behavior of a

village of Andean potters. Production techniques co-vary with gender and residence.

The prop method is used by the lower barrio men and by women. The free-form method is associated with the upper barrio men. In other areas of the northern Andes, all potters are women. Technological style reflects social categories and economic differences.

Another gendered example from Cameroon notes that both Nsei women and men make pottery, but women produce utility wares while the men manufacture ceremonial vessels

(Gosselain 1998). These gendered differences may be social constraints, but are there any practical material reasons also contributing to the separation?

Bryan Pfaffenberger (1992) looks at the concept of the sociotechnical system and the Standard View of technology. He defines the Standard View as a Modernist construct following the lines of ‘necessity is the mother of invention’ and then argues that sociotechnical systems not only produce goods, but also power and meaning. This is related to the idea that ritual contributes to defining the function of material culture. For example, when Gawans, Pacific islanders, create a canoe every step involves various rites, not to mention the technical acts of construction. These steps transform the canoe

from a dark, heavy log from the land into a light and airy seagoing vessel. The purpose

of the canoe is not transportation, but a means to create fame. Here technology is less

important than the meaning and social information the artifact conveys (Pfaffenberger

1999). The social experiences of creating objects, and less so the objects themselves,

make intersubjective meaning. As people are correctly guided to the socially accepted

meaning, the self and society are constructed along a specified path.

The sociotechnical system “refers to the distinctive technological activity that

stems from the linkage of techniques and material culture to the social coordination of

labor” (Pfaffenberger 1992: 497). Sociotechnical-system building is sociogenic and involves the construction of society, which is related to structuration theory (Giddens

1984). Sociotechnical systems not only produce goods, but also power and meaning.

This is connected to the idea that ritual contributes to defining the function of material

culture.

Much of technological knowledge is nonverbal and transmitted by experiential

learning, visual and spatial thinking, and analogical reasoning. The artifact triggers a

social template of behavior via the social meaning of its style. The social experiences of

creating objects (technology), and less so the objects themselves, make intersubjective

meaning. Pfaffenberger states that “in their material conditions technological activities

embody a social template designed to solve a culturally formulated problem or moral

conflict” (1999:160). As people are correctly guided to the socially accepted meaning,

the self and society are constructed along a specified path. Social beliefs may help define

the function of objects, but limits of raw materials also can influence an object’s function.

In a study of south Cameroonian potters, Olivier Gosselain (1998) sees technological choices as social behaviors not adaptation to environment and functional forces. Technical behaviors come from the learning process, which is socially acquired

(Dietler and Herbich 1994). Style can be present in each stage of the production process

(Childs 1991; Dietler and Herbich 1989; Lechtman 1977; Lechtman and Steinberg 1979), so for each step the question becomes whether the learning context or the practice context is more influential. Different stages of the production process have different stylistic significance. The performance characteristics of the final vessels are only a side effect of the social and economic system of the producers.

The technical choices for the Cameroon potters were functionally equivalent and there is little interdependence between stages in the production process, therefore no environmental, technical, or functional constraints affect a potter’s particular behavior.

The potters choose to select, process, and form their materials as they were taught rather than change their habits. This suggests that technological choice is related to traditions or styles, which can be linked to social identity. In this case, the forming stage was most indicative of social identity, while the clay processing, firing, and post-firing treatments were not as significant. For example, two sisters with the same teacher, their mother, moved to separate villages upon marriage. They continued to use the same forming methods, but they used different procedures for processing raw materials and firing the vessels. These different procedures reflected the habits of the other potters in their new villages. Gosselain (1998) sees the social constraints as dominant, but he does acknowledge the role of the material constraints in the production process.

CONCLUSION

Technological choice research has focused on how each part of the production sequence is controlled and the multitude of reasons behind each decision in the sequence.

The most easily modified area in the pottery production sequence is raw materials, while ideas about shape and process are quite ingrained and not likely to change. The interface between execution and raw materials is where choices are least affected by cultural frameworks (Van der Leeuw 1994). It either works or it doesn’t work. Even so, the context of the production cannot be ignored. Belief systems, daily or seasonal habit, and the social landscape – to name a few – easily could influence raw material selection.

A holistic approach to raw material selection needs to incorporate both materials science work on the physical characteristics and investigation of the cultural and social situation in which the items were produced. The psychological state of the individual or community of producers rarely has factored into studies of technological choice (contra

DeBoer 1990). In my research, flexibility in raw material choice allows ancient potter to change selections in response to outside influences from the social landscape in which they lived. Additionally, when the threat of violence is pervasive in a society, resource procurement is the part of the production sequence most fraught with danger as it is conducted outside the safety of home. So will a potter make different resource choices when they are psychologically stressed by imminent conflict in their daily lives?

CHAPTER 3: Theories of Social Violence and Resource Procurement

The choices an artisan makes in selecting resources to produce objects could be

influenced by the greater social landscape in which they live. This research seeks

understanding of the role social violence may play in influencing resource procurement.

Due to the constraints of the archaeological record, the focus here is on ceramics, which

survive well in many parts of the world. The relationship between conflict and ceramic

resource procurement will be addressed in the model presented at the end of this chapter.

SOCIAL VIOLENCE

In the past, social violence was often key to survival. Prehistoric conflict was

purposeful, organized, and effective. If the threat of attack was great enough, people

responded with defensive measures. The threat of violence resulted in many of the same

behaviors as outright conflict. Prehistoric conflict was common and deadly. Tribal and

chiefdom-level violence generally resulted in fatalities far greater in proportion to the total population than those experienced by Europe during World Wars I and II (Keeley

1996; LeBlanc 1999:9). For much of human history about 25% of men and 3-5% of

women died as a result of conflict (Keeley 1996; LeBlanc 1999:9).

To clarify, violence, conflict, and war need to be defined. Violence is an exertion

of any physical force so as to injure or abuse (Webster 2001). Conflict can be defined as

prolonged fighting, especially with weapons (Webster 2001). The term war or warfare

has had many meanings across disciplines and within anthropology. Here war is a state

or period of armed hostility existing between politically autonomous communities, which

at such times regard the actions (violent or otherwise) of their members against the

opponents as legitimate expressions of the sovereign policy of the community (Meggitt

1977). In this case, the definition of war includes motive. Conflict refers to fighting but

without specific motive. Violence is the action itself. To alleviate repetition, I will be

using conflict and social violence interchangeably in a general sense throughout this

dissertation.

Causes of Conflict

Economic reasons and revenge for murder are the main causes of pre-state warfare (Keeley 1996:115). Economic issues are dependent on the subsistence focus of the group, while personal motives are much less common. Other motives for social violence occur in simple and middle-range societies (Table 3.1). Carol Ember and

Melvin Ember’s (1992) cross-cultural study examining ecological, psychological, and social theories for the frequency of warfare suggests that unpredictable natural disasters and socialization for mistrust create an environment of fear. Fear of nature and fear of others can lead people to buffer against ecological unpredictability by taking resources from their enemies. However, the initial causes of most conflicts are acts of violence that call for immediate defense or later retaliation.

Table 3.1 Motives compiled from Keeley (1996: Table 8.1)

Motives for Social Violence

. Revenge, retaliation, and defense

. Economic (booty, land, poaching, slaves)

. Capture of women (for wives?)

. Personal (prestige, trophies, visions)

. Political (subjugation, tribute) – more state level societies

Methods of Conflict

Smaller-scale societies make their decisions about conflict based on discussion,

consensus, and shared risks and rewards (Sillitoe 1978). The tactics and aims of social

violence in simpler societies tend to focus on raiding as to harass, decimate, and terrorize

the enemy (Allen and Arkush 2006). Strategies at the non-state level were of two

varieties: attritional and endemic conflict (Keeley 1996:48). Attrition involved frequent,

low-casualty raids and battles with occasional massacres. Intense endemic conflict led to

destruction of houses and fields, taking of wealth and food, and killing or capture of

women and children.

Forms of Combat. The forms of combat used by simple and middle-range societies were battles, raids or ambushes, and massacres (Keeley 1996:59). Raids were

the most common while massacres were relatively rare. Formal battles are agreed to by

both sides as to time and place. Warriors would line up on the field of battle for combat

and were sometimes divided into specialized coordinated units (Otterbein 1989). In

smaller-scale societies, organized battles involved projectile fire with little hand-to-hand

combat (Allen and Arkush 2006). Ambushes were more strategically important.

Generally, they were planned to surround the enemy or lead them into a trap (Otterbein

1989). Raiding or surprise attacks consist of a quick strike against part of a settlement,

especially at night. Raiding could include capture of women and children and their

incorporation into the victorious group (LeBlanc 1999:17). Each successful raid would

weaken the enemy. With a weakened enemy, a massacre could occur. The targeted

group’s weak points were known and a plan of massacre could be conducted (LeBlanc

1999:15).

In tribal level warfare, the tactics tend to involve raiding, ambush, and surprise attacks. Classic forms of attack were the dawn raid, killing the lone person on the landscape, or inviting the enemy to a feast and massacring them (LeBlanc with Register

2003:147). When raiding is the principal form of combat, half or more than half of the casualties are women and children (Kelly 2000:100). At fortified sites, the tactics used most commonly were projectiles and fire (Wileman 2009:38-39). To protect themselves from raids, watches were established, especially at night and in the early morning hours.

The purpose of the guard in the tower was not to prevent raids, since small groups of men moving in the dark would be difficult to detect, but to keep the raiders from escaping and minimize the damage once the attacking party was exposed (Keeley 1996:46-47).

When women’s chores keep them in the vicinity of their habitation and ambush is the main strategy, women comprise only a small fraction of the casualties (Kelly

2000:100). The threat of ambush would have resulted in fewer hunting parties, less wild- food collection by women, and generally less efficient subsistence (LeBlanc 1999:15).

Surprise attacks are aimed at isolated dwellings and individuals or small groups

(Wileman 2009:36). Only a few people may be killed at a time, but the cumulative effect was serious (Keeley 1996:66).

Effects of Conflict

The effects of conflict can be approached in many ways, but Julie Wileman’s

(2009) breakdown of archaeologically visible short, medium, and long term effects is very encompassing. Visible short term effects include the bodies of the dead (loss of life), refugees, and burned habitations, communities, and fields. Changes in patterns of resettlement, clearance, sedimentation, and territorial control can occur within the

medium term timeframe. Over the long term, there may be shifts in trade networks and

political alliances, adjustments in cultural groupings, modifications in land use and

production, and general cultural change. From immediate to a generation later, social

violence can have myriad effects, which are further discussed below.

Short term effects. Archaeologically visible features of sudden social violence include evidence of weapons trauma on bodies and destruction horizons in settlements.

Crops might be burned or abandoned in the fields and storehouses may be destroyed or looted. Livestock could be killed to feed the victors or left to die in corrals when their owners flee. Evidence of sudden abandonment – leaving household goods – and

desecration of ceremonial structures are important indicators of abrupt aggressive action.

Loss of housing and displacement of people are significant and immediate effects

of conflict. The results of displacement, such as famine, disease, stress, and despair, also contribute to short term troubles. The situation that the survivors of conflict find themselves in is both exhausting and demoralizing, which can lead to much suffering

(Wileman 2009:46). Additionally, displaced populations can impact the natural landscape through deforestation for fuel and shelter and decimation of wild animal populations for food. Disturbance and intimidation of mammals and birds, plant destruction, contamination, and overuse of the habitat can cause extinction of some species and environmental degradation.

Medium term effects. Within about a year or more after the cessation of social

violence, farm land may have reverted to brush, irrigation systems may have filled with

sediments, and temporary shelters may have reached a level of permanence or rebuilding

begun in a different or expedient form (Wileman 2009:47). Dislocation of settlement

patterns and altered spatial morphology of structures could be seen as later results of conflict. Land use and communication or travel routes may be changed with the presence of new populations or absence of people in an area. The deforestation from initial refugees can produce massive erosion. The medium term effects tend to be seen at the landscape level with changes due to resettlement, clearance, seizure, and abandonment

(Wileman 2009:45).

Long term effects. From several years to a generation after the end of hostilities, the cultural fabric of an area may be changed by the new ideas, styles, and products of the conquering group (Wileman 2009:49). Material culture, ceremonial traditions, and land use also may alter to align with the culture of the victors. Communication and trade routes can be realigned to connect to the political and economic interests of the current rulers. These routes also can be used as a mechanism of control regulating access to certain communities. The victorious and the conquered could be separated by status and wealth in the resulting integrated society.

Risk Mitigation

So how might people try to mitigate some of the effects of conflict, especially in the short-term? Albert Ellis (1958, 1976), Milton Friedman (1953), and Gary Becker

(1976) were early proponents of rational choice theory, which proposes that people make decisions based on their assessment of current circumstances, doing a cost-benefit analysis every time they are about to act. The nature and quantity of non-household activities, i.e. what activities and how long one is away from home, contribute to an individual’s exposure to risk (Miethe et al. 1987). In criminology terms, exposure to risk is the physical visibility and accessibility of persons or objects to potential offenders

(Meiethe et al. 1987). This is even applicable at the level of routine activities. A routine activity is defined as any recurrent, prevalent activity that provides for basic individual and collective needs (Cohen and Felson 1979). Changes in routine activities affect exposure to risk by affecting the convergence in time and space of the elements for a predatory criminal event. Predatory criminal events require three minimal elements: motivated offenders, suitable targets, and the absence of capable guardians (Cohen and

Felson 1979). Increased time away from home, increases the convergence of the minimal elements for predatory crime.

To avoid ambush during routine activities, the best strategy is to limit activities to daylight hours, work in a group, and bring a protector, if possible. Foraging is done on a frequent or daily basis and physical visibility and accessibility can be high due to the restricted spatial distribution of seasonal resources (Milner et al. 1991). Yanomamo men guard people engaged in subsistence activities outside the village (Chagnon 1968).

Females are more risk-averse than males and have a greater fear of threat (Block 1983;

Warr 1984). In response to this fear, women tend to travel in groups (Felson 1997).

However this fear is not limited to women, New Guinean men experience nightmares about being isolated from their companions and clubbed to death (LeBlanc with Register

2003:151).

An example of tribal-level social violence associated with resource procurement comes from the Andaman Islands. The conflicts between the Jarawa and Aka-Bea were centered on encounters during resource exploitation, especially daily subsistence activities (Kelly 2000:91). The potential for ambush is reflected in the Jarawa men wearing chest guards any time they left their homes for food procurement (Sarkar

1990:8). Isolated individuals might readily be killed when out hunting or gathering

(Radcliffe-Brown 1964:86). The shoot-on-sight policy of both tribes is illustrated in the murder of a girl that was separated from her foraging group in February of 1893. She was found the next day killed by a Jarawa arrow a few hundred yards from her home

(Portman 1899:751).

Tribal-level conflict resulted in a constant daily threat of attack (LeBlanc with

Register 2003:155). Psychological effects of conflict can be pervasive as described in the villages of Bulgaria in the early 20th century: “fear is the great fact of their daily

lives…[as with] children who flee in terror at the sight of a stranger” (Brailsford 1906:36-

37). Living in an area with unpredictable natural disasters or a constant threat of social

violence can influence people’s ability to trust and therefore they will raise children who

are mistrustful (Ember and Ember 1992; Wileman 2009:47). Mistrustful adults may

respond hostilely when threatened, which could lead to more conflicts (Ember and Ember

1992). Severe distress and even mental illness is likely when people are witnessing the

destruction of their families, homes, and cultural symbols or religious centers (Wileman

2009:46).

Conflict can be overarching in people’s daily lives and influence all their

decisions (LeBlanc 1999:316). Constant military assessments are made when visiting

another village. Maintaining a reputation of strong leadership and strength would be

important. The degree of risk must be calculated any time people leave the settlement for

subsistence or trading purposes.

RESOURCE PROCUREMENT

Most inorganic remains are derived from geologic raw materials. These materials are procured from a specific deposit, such as a quarry, mine, geologic formation, outcrop, or other geologic feature. A substantial group of rock and mineral resources require no processing before or during the production of the object. These are the lithic materials, such as obsidian, jade, marble, and native copper. Some processing is necessary for the materials used in the production of ceramics. Clay, temper, and water are required for forming pottery and can normally be collected in relative proximity to a settlement.

Another group of materials involves more advanced processing and extraction techniques. Complex ores used in metallurgy require extensive work in the smelting and alloying steps. The primary elements in selection for many resources are distance to source and quality of the raw material.

Distance Thresholds

Many spatial theories follow the assumption that resource procurement decisions

minimize energy and information expenditures or maximize energy or information

returns (e.g. Clarke 1977:42; Christenson 1982; Doxiadis 1970:393). David Browman

(1976) sees four major procurement costs: geodesic distance, pheric distance, transport

costs, and social and psychological costs. The maximum distance for frequently used

resources is one day’s round-trip travel. The preferred collecting distance for women is

one hour’s walk (4-5 km), while men’s maximum hunting distance is a one-day radius

(35 km) (Browman 1976). For agriculturalists, distance to fields is generally not more

than one kilometer, but the maximum distance is four kilometers (Chisholm 1979). This

agrees with the site catchment model of two hours walking distance for hunting and

gathering groups and one hour for sedentary farming groups (e.g. Higgs and Vita-Finzi

1972; Jarman 1972; Jarman et al. 1972; Kohler 1992; Kruse 2007; Preucel 1987, 1990).

Clay is heavy, so for many potters distance is the determining factor in clay selection (Arnold 1985, 2000). Dean Arnold (1985, 2000) estimated procurement

thresholds using worldwide ethnographic data from 111 traditional societies. He found

that for both clays and tempers, people prefer to travel only one kilometer, but they will

go up to four kilometers if necessary. This is an example of the Principle of Least Effort,

which emphasizes that an individual’s movement will always take paths that minimize

the average rate of effort (e.g. Chisholm 1979; Zipf 1949). An extension of this concept

is the idea that frequently used objects will be lower in weight. In the case of ceramics, a

study of the weight, use frequency, and life-span of Shipibo-Conibo pottery links weight

positively to life-span, i.e. the larger the pot, the longer its life-span due to less frequent

movement and use (DeBoer 1985). As for the distance to glaze, slip, and paint sources, it is less precise, ranging from 1 to 880 kilometers (Arnold 1985). Since glaze, slip, and paint are used in significantly smaller quantities, least-cost principles are less likely to be a factor in their procurement.

Quality of Resources

The issue of resource selection is most commonly applied to stone and precious minerals, such as obsidian (Bellot-Gurlet et al. 1999; Hughes et al. 1998; Hughes and

Smith 1993; Shackley 1988; Tabares et al. 2005; Yacobaccio et al. 2004), chert (Luedtke

1979; Malyk-Selivanova et al. 1998; Roll et al. 2005), steatite or soapstone (Kohl et al.

1979; Wisseman et al. 2002), metals (Grant 1999; Mauk and Hancock 1998) and

ornamental stone (Hammond et al. 1977; Kovacevich et al. 2005; Weigand et al. 1977;

Zedeño et al. 2005). The quality of these materials can be a significant factor in their

selection. For example, the stone used for flintknapping must be uniform or

homogeneous, very hard and brittle, and have a very small or microscopic grain size with

a smooth texture (Andrefsky 2005:41). With such strict requirements, some prehistoric

peoples had to import stone or travel long distances to procure materials of the right

quality (Whittaker 1994:65).

Ceramic resources must be of sufficient quality to make pottery. The

characteristics and accessibility of clays, tempering materials, and fuel for firing can

affect ceramic production (Arnold 1985:20). Specific resources may be necessary when

certain characteristics are important. In the case of cooking pots, the materials must be

able to withstand repeated thermal shock events. For decorated ceramics, the paste clay

must accept slip clay and the slip clay must accept paint. Mineral composition, degree of

crystallinity, plasticity, particle size, and the amount of non-plastics, soluble salts, and exchangeable cations all factor in the quality of a clay (Arnold 1985:21). Temper can be added to modify the performance characteristics of a particular clay. In other cases, the potter may choose to sift or screen the temper or clay or age the clay to improve it before use (e.g. Bowen and Moser 1968:92-95; Cortes 1958:98; Dobbs 1897:3; Fontana et al.

1962:57; Howry 1976:79; London 1981; MacKay 1930:128; Reina and Hill 1978:32-33;

Rye 1976; Thompson 1958:66; Van de Velde and Van de Velde 1939:28-29). As for fuels for firing, the choice may vary with the firing method (Arnold 1985:31). In general, not every ceramic resource or type of fuel is appropriate for all local pottery production and the resources must be tested and experimented with to determine which are most suitable (Cardew 1969:255-260; Hill 1975; Rye 1981:29-57).

MODEL

Models of resource choice tend to compare distance from material source (Arnold

1985, 2000) to performance or aesthetic characteristics of the finished item (Eygun 2001;

Skibo and Schiffer 2001; Tite et al. 2001). But how does social violence alter resource

selection? This question is not commonly asked in either ethnographic or archaeological

literature, probably because of the “myth of the peaceful savage” (e.g. Keeley 1996;

LeBlanc with Register 2003). We know that populations respond to conflict by building

defensive architecture, forming alliances, developing weapons and armor, and/or

relocating their settlements (e.g. LeBlanc 1999:8; Wileman 2009:11). What is less clear

is how they respond in their resource choices.

Hypotheses

Ceramic resource selection could be altered in response to reduction in mobility

associated with increased risk of attack. It also may be that potters do not change their

clay selection since performance characteristics, aesthetics, and/or traditional use are

more important and worth the risk. A non-defensive site is used as the control to

determine the potters’ choices without an atmosphere of social violence.

Ho: In an atmosphere of social violence, potters will take risks to procure ceramic resources with specific qualities.

HA: In an atmosphere of social violence, potters will not take risks to procure ceramic

resources with specific qualities and instead use clays closer to their habitations

regardless of the quality of the clay.

To test these hypotheses, clay from finished ceramics and collected natural clays

were compared to determine what choices people were making at an earlier

non-defensive site compared to a later defensive site. First, the archaeological ceramics from the two sites were analyzed. Then assuming that potters would preferentially travel one kilometer or less for raw materials (Arnold 1985, 2000), a geological survey for clays was conducted within a one kilometer radius around each site. The analysis of the natural clays established a data set of the range of clays available in the local area around the two sites. The ceramic results and the natural clay data set were compared to determine from which local formations the potters were extracting their clays. If the potters were mixing clays, analytical results could indicate which formations they were mixing.

If none of the clays within one kilometer of the sites had matched, then the survey radius would have been extended to four kilometers following topographic features of the landscape and geologic formations. If the clays located during the extended survey did not match the archaeological samples, then it must be concluded that the clay types originally used by the prehispanic artisans no longer exist in surfacial deposits, or that they occur farther away from the study area. These two possibilities cannot be differentiated, but it did not happen that the utilized clays were inaccessible at the surface.

Assumptions

A primary assumption in this study is that clay resource selection is an adjustable constraint, predominantly influenced by local geology. The resource environment is the background for the potter's decisions. Potters may choose to conserve production time by using the closest workable clays, or conserve later activity time by collecting resources from a greater distance that create the most efficient finished pots. At the same time,

access to resources may be circumscribed by the social environment. Both social and

economic factors may affect raw material procurement when conflict is a concern.

An important premise is that there is continuity in the ceramic environment,

specifically that the clays used by the prehispanic potters are still available, can be

located, and are in the same relative position. Clay minerals evolve in soils, and clay

deposits are formed by in situ weathering of bedrock, by sedimentary deposition, and as

part of clay-bearing rocks. Clays are then manipulated by potters to produce ceramic

vessels. Manipulation and mixing of clays will not be problematic since minor and

trace-element patterns in pottery are not usually altered during the creative processes

(including removal of aplastic impurities), by use, or by taphonomic processes (Rapp and

Hill 1998). This implies that there is a set of physical, chemical, and/or mineral

characteristics in the clay deposits that is retained in the finished ceramics.

Even though minor and trace-element patterns are present in the finished ceramics and permit natural clay and finished ceramic matching, they are not at a level of specificity sufficient to pinpoint clay procurement sites. As the Provenance Postulate states “there exist differences in chemical composition between different natural sources that exceed in some recognizable way, the differences observed within a given source”

(Weigand et al. 1977:24), but the variation within a given source does not allow for a single location within a linear clay deposit to be identified as the specific clay mine used prehistorically. Therefore, mineral and chemical analyses were used in tandem to determine the clays selected by the Gallina artisans.

An additional assumption is that unspecialized household level production of pottery in temperate climates will be conducted only once or twice a year. Unspecialized

household level production existed throughout the prehispanic American Southwest and

involved making a limited amount of vessels – only enough for the individual

household’s needs (Hagstrum 1995). Also, weather and climate affect adequate drying

and firing of finished ceramics (Arnold 1985). Generally, areas with rainy or snowy

seasons will only have pottery production during dry periods.

SUMMARY

Social violence and conflict encompass actions themselves and fighting. When

the term war or warfare is used a specific motive is implied. Therefore, social violence

and conflict are used here, but not war or warfare. The most common causes of conflict

in simple and middle-range societies are revenge for an act of violence and economic

reasons. In these same societies, the tactics of social violence involve ambushes, raiding,

battles, and massacres, with an emphasis on ambushes and raiding to harass and terrorize

the enemy. Risk mitigation strategies involve limiting activities to daylight hours,

working in a group, and bringing a lookout or protector. Loss of life and family

members, displacement of surviving victims, and destruction of villages emerge as

immediate effects of conflict. Additionally, psychological effects of the constant daily

threat of attack were pervasive.

As for resource selection, many studies suggest that resource selection is

primarily dependent on distance to a source and the quality of the material. Dean Arnold

(1985, 2000) has found ethnographically that for both clays and tempers, people prefer to travel only one kilometer, but they will go up to four kilometers if necessary. This

follows the assumption that resource procurement decisions minimize the average rate of

effort. Also, ceramic resources (clays, temper, and fuel) must be of sufficient quality to

make pottery and the final product must be able to withstand repeated thermal shock events, especially in the case of cooking pots.

So does conflict alter ceramic resource selection? Does the archaeological record show a reduction in mobility associated with increased risk of attack? Reasons for a change in clay source between two sites could be the distance and weight of the clay being procured. Or potters may not change their clay selection preferring certain performance characteristics or aesthetics. The hypotheses presented above attempt to differentiate the influences of distance, performance characteristics, and conflict.

In this chapter, social violence, resource selection, and the construction of the model tested with this research have been discussed. Social violence was pervasive and common in the prehistoric world. Conflict can have many effects and these include changes to patterns of daily activities. The influence of social violence on resource selection has received little attention and needs to be examined more fully.

CHAPTER 4: Conflict in the American Southwest

Conflict and social violence were common in the past. They affected people’s daily lives and choices. Even the threat of violence modified human behavior in the past.

The reaction to threats of violence and direct proof of conflict can be found in the

American Southwest.

There is much evidence for the “march of the shield-bearing warriors” in the

Southwest. It was not a land of peaceful pueblos as Ruth Benedict (1934) and Laura

Thompson (1945) led so many to believe. Conflict can be easily seen (Figure 4.1) in rock art, kiva murals, painted ceramics, Spanish documents, and Pueblo myths and oral tradition (LeBlanc 1999). Basketmaker pictographs depict atlatls, flayed skins, trophy heads, and decapitated bodies (Cole 1984, 1985, 1989, 1990), which may represent an atlatl warrior cult (Farmer 1997) or corn fertility rites (Wilcox and Haas 1994). Pueblo

III and IV period rock art and kiva murals present shields and shield bearers (Crotty

1995, 2001). The realistic figures at the center of Mimbres Black-on-white bowls illustrate many violent acts, such as figures shot with arrows, severed heads, and decapitation scenes (Brody et al. 1983; Davis 1995).

(a) (b) (c)

Figure 4.1 (a) Petroglyph from Creston, Galisteo Basin; (b) Mural from east wall of Kiva 2 at Pottery Mound from Hibben (1975:Figures 101-103); (c) Mimbres bowl from Davis (1995:146,180)

Narratives from the early Spanish expeditions and colonization (Hammond and

Rey 1940, 1953 1966; Haas and Creamer 1996; Schroeder and Matson 1965; Winship

1896) record warfare between Zuni and Acoma and between Zuni and Hopi. T.J.

Ferguson and Richard Hart (1985) compiled a survey of historic incidents of conflict

associated with the Zuni. The Spanish (Bolton 1949) also noted the formal battle stance

used by Zuni and Hopi warriors during their initial encounters. These tactics suggest

large groups of organized fighters were involved in engagements, but when the leader

was killed that organization tended to fall apart (Cushing 1896; LeBlanc 1999:290).

The war chief, warrior societies, and fighting skills were highly important in

Pueblo culture (Ellis 1951; Titiev 1944). The Twin Warrior deities are a common motif

in mythologies throughout North America and Mesoamerica (Walker 2008). The War

Twins of Pueblo myth led the people out of the lower world and into this one (Parsons

1996:210-266). They were heavily armed (Cushing 1896) and aided the people in fighting witches (Cushing 1923:163-171). Oral traditions also tell of social violence in

the Puebloan world. Ekkehart Malotki (1993) presents Hopi oral accounts describing the

destruction of seven villages. The attacks involved burning the village, killing men and

boys, and taking women and girls captive. Awatovi (Courlander 1982; Fewkes 1893) and

Mishongnovi (Beaglehole 1935; Rushforth and Upham 1992) are examples of intra-group conflict, while stories of Zuni battles with Acoma illustrate contemporary inter-group warfare (Cushing 1896).

The ethnographic literature of the Southwest points to warfare as extremely common and well planned (Ellis 1951, 1967; Haas and Creamer 1997; Rice 2001; Wilcox

1991). Prior to the late A.D. 1600s warfare was between the pueblos, but after the 1600s

Pueblo people began to ally themselves against the Athapaskans, Numic-speakers, and

Spaniards (Hackett 1942; Kessell 2008; Madsen 1994; Reeve 1957), although some

alliances between Pueblos and Apaches were used to target the Spanish (Brugge 1969).

The Pima and Maricopa of southern Arizona collaborated against the Yuma, Mohave,

Yavapia, and Apache (Hackenberg 1974:189; Kroeber and Fontana 1986:193; Spier

1933). This change from internecine conflict to inter-group raiding may have contributed

to the debate as to who was the enemy: pueblo verses pueblo (Linton 1944b) or nomad verses pueblo (Kidder 1924).

The internecine pueblo conflict model (Jones 1966; LeBlanc 1999:53,275; Upham

1982; White 1976) points to social strife between Puebloan groups of different languages, which also is connected to the structure of prehispanic alliances. However, Puebloan alliances did fight speakers of the same language occasionally (Wilcox 1981). As for the nomad raiders model (Reagan 1931; Jett 1964; Ambler and Sutton 1989; Lightfoot and

Kuckelman 1995), numerous historic cases indicate violence between these two groups.

For example, the historic raids on the Sobaipuri by the Apache lead to abandonment of

the San Pedro Valley (Bolton 1936:362-363; Fish and Fish 1989), although co-habitation

of or trade between the Sobaipuri and Apache is postulated by Deni Seymour (2004).

The Apaches also raided the dispersed settlements of the Pima and Maricopa (Rice 2001).

Athapaskans posed a serious threat to the pueblos in the 17th and 18th centuries (Dozier

1954). In general, prehispanic Southwest warfare was inter-pueblo warfare, which is

noted in the early historical record from the 16th century.

SOUTHWESTERN CHRONOLOGY

The chronology of the Southwest has been widely discussed (e.g. Cordell 1997;

Reed and Stein 1998; Robinson 1976). This section presents a timeline in terms of

conflict in the region. Steven LeBlanc (1999) divides the temporal sequence into three

broad periods (Early, Middle, and Late), due to the degree of archaeological information available (Table 4.1). It is not that social violence was consistently intense within each period, but there is not enough evidence to see meaningful changes within the periods, especially the Early Period.

Table 4.1 LeBlanc’s (1999) temporal divisions

Period Dates Descriptor Early Period Up to A.D. 900 Endemic conflict Middle Period A.D. 900-1250 Pax with a twist Late Period A.D. 1250-1550 Crisis and catastrophe

Although these broad time periods conflate many of the significant cultural

changes in the Ancestral Puebloan sequence (Walker 2008), they are used here to focus

on the trends in social violence. A transitional period has been extracted and an historic

period added to the sequence for this study (Table 4.2). Each of these periods is

discussed below.

Table 4.2 Temporal divisions used in this study

Period Dates Descriptor Early Period A.D. 1-900 Initial conflict Middle Period A.D. 900-1150 Decline in social violence Transitional Period A.D. 1150-1250 Resurgence of social violence Late Period A.D. 1250-1600 Intense conflict Historic Period A.D. 1600-1900 Colonial conflict

Early Period: Initial Conflict

The Early Period covers the span from A.D. 1 to 900 (LeBlanc 1999). It was a time of raiding with the intensity of conflict increasing in the late 8th century. Sites were

placed in defensive locations, such as hilltops, cliff overhangs or caves, and associated

with massive masonry embankment-like walls [trincheras]. An alternative to a defensive position was the construction of a stockade. Rohn (1975) believes that stockaded settlements and farmsteads are more common than recorded because surface stripping was not conducted far enough out from the structures. In several cases, the early component of a site was burned and then there appears to be a switch to hilltop settlements for habitations. Not all the hilltops are extremely high or difficult to access; they are situated on the best defensive location available in that area.

These slightly defensive sites and the lower number of dead point to raiding and

ambush tactics. During a raid, all the defenders may have been killed and the

reproductive-age females taken as captives (LeBlanc 1999:141). Other captives may

have been taken and then sacrificed and placed in cists or proto-kivas (LeBlanc

1999:90,145). Unburied bodies found in burned pithouses suggest victims were trapped

and killed in the structure.

Middle Period: Decline in Social Violence

The Middle Period (A.D. 900-1150) has a noticeable lack of conflict with few

sites located in defensive configurations or positions, fewer burned sites, and lower

occurrences of unburied bodies (LeBlanc 1999). Social violence seems to have taken a

new form with evidence for extreme processing of human remains. These extreme

processing events (Kuckelman et al. 2000; Lekson 2002) are characterized as purposeful

mistreatment of the dead (LeBlanc 1999), cases of cannibalism (Turner and Turner

1999), and ceremonial situations possibly associated with disposal of witches (Walker

2008). The human remains are processed in the same manner as large animal carcasses.

These badly treated individuals are associated with the Chaco Interaction Sphere and

Great House communities (LeBlanc 1999; Turner and Turner 1999). The areas of the

Southwest beyond Chacoan influence show different signs of social violence during this time. In the La Plata River Valley, a subgroup of women show a pattern of battering and may represent a subclass of captive women (Martin et al. 2008). Massacres, scalping, and hand-to-hand combat also occur in limited amounts during the Middle Period

(Billman 2008; Bustard 2008).

Transitional Period: Resurgence of Social Violence

With the decline of Chaco, social violence begins to rise again. From A.D. 1150 to 1250, a transition occurs from the “Pax Chaco” to intense conflict in the late 13th century. Unburied bodies, defensive architecture and layout, more aggregated sites and sites in defensive locations increase in frequency again. In the Middle and Upper Agua

Fria area near Prescott, a network of small hilltop pueblo sites suggest internal feuding or a peripheral conflict between the people of west-central Arizona and the Phoenix Basin

Hohokam (Wilcox et al. 2001a). At Wupatki, a group of bodies were exposed to carnivores before they were dumped in a room (Turner and Turner 1990). Burning and disarticulated bodies with missing extremities were recovered in the Zuni area (Anyon et al. 1983:757). This demonstrates a movement from mistreatment of human remains back to standard tribal level warfare (LeBlanc 1999:195).

Late Period: Intense Conflict

The archaeological record is more detailed for the Late Period, which stretches

from A.D. 1250 to 1600, ending with Spanish colonization (LeBlanc 1999; Lekson

2002). In response to the reappearance of conflict, people abandoned some areas of the

American Southwest and began aggregating into larger more defensively configured and

rapidly constructed villages (Haas and Creamer 1996). These villages became clustered

on the landscape, which led to the creation of no-man’s-lands. Alternate interpretations for the coalescence of communities include unhealthy living conditions and nutritional stress in association with or related to environmental changes (Clark et al. 2003).

Initially, the clusters were approximately 30 km (20 miles) apart, which is equivalent to the distance a person can walk in a day (Drennan 1984). By the early 14th

century, the small clusters between big clusters had been abandoned. This increased the

separation of clusters to 130 km (80 miles), but the within cluster distance among villages

remained 5 km (3 miles). This within cluster distance tried to balance farming and

defensive support constraints (LeBlanc 1999:266) or other social stresses. Eventually,

some of the larger clusters aggregated in a single site, such as Acoma and Pecos.

Demographic trends and population densities are depicted in several figures from the

Center for Desert Archaeology Coalescent Communities Project (Figure 4.2). The

clusters in the Ancestral Puebloan region reached a static state in the 15th century.

Figure 4.2 Demographic curves and density isopleths from Clark et al. (2003:Figures 1-4)

Historic Period: Colonial Conflict

The Historic period, as presented here, begins in A.D. 1600 and reaches to the window of statehood, circa 1900. This time period is not part of the prehispanic pattern due to the change from tribal level to state level conflict. The arrival of formal military forces with the Spanish colonization in A.D. 1598 and subsequent Mexican and U.S. territorial occupations changed the structure of conflict in the Southwest (Spicer 1962).

Early on Athapaskans raided the Pueblos and southern Arizona peoples (Bolton

1936:362-363; Ferguson and Hart 1985; Quam 1972; Russell 1908:37-66). As a

generally unified force, the Pueblos banded together and evicted the Spanish in the

Pueblo Revolt of 1680 (Kessell 2008). The Reconquista in the 1690s involved numerous

formal battles between De Vargas’ troops and the Puebloan rebels (Kessell and

Hendricks 1992; Kessell et al. 1995, 1998). Genizaro communities in the 18th century

were locations of forcibly settled captives that functioned as guard villages controlling access to other Spanish settlements (Dozier 1970).

Under Mexican rule (1821–1846), the settlements dealt with hostile tribes, revolted against Mexican efforts to limit local authority in 1837, and suffered periodic invasions by the Republic of Texas in the 1840s (Twitchell 1912). Shortly after the entrance of American troops in 1846, a series of forts was established to protect against the Apache, Navajo, and Comanche (Bender 1934). In 1847, soldiers subdued a local uprising in northern New Mexico. During the Civil War, the Confederacy invaded New

Mexico and had a couple skirmishes and battles with Federal forces (Colton 1959; Kerby

1958). After the Civil War, New Mexico remained a rough territory with vigilantes and various political assassinations (Robertson 1979).

EXPLANATIONS FOR PREHISPANIC SOUTHWEST CONFLICT

Conflict may stem from a need to steal resources, to push other groups off of choice lands, to carry out revenge, to steal wives, to acquire slaves, or to enhance a warrior’s status (Wilcox and Haas 1994). These explanations are in line with the overarching causes of pre-state warfare documented by Lawrence Keeley (1996:115).

For the Southwest, Steven LeBlanc (1999) emphasizes three reasons for social violence: scarce resources, vengeance, and ritual. Each will be discussed in the following section.

Scarce Resources

The scarce resources model argues that resources were limited and people ultimately fought for them (LeBlanc 1999:11). Scarce resources are related to carrying capacity, which is the number of people that can be supported on a given amount of land.

The Southwest is marginal for agriculture and has periods of drought, flood, and arroyo cutting as well as periods of increased or decreased climatic variability. Over short intervals, successive bad years must have resulted in food stress approaching starvation.

People went to war because they were pressing against their carrying capacity and needed the resources of adjacent groups (LeBlanc 1999).

For example, the resurgence of violence in the Transitional Period coincides with a climate change from optimal to very poor around A.D. 1200. Stephen Lekson (2002) reformed Jeffrey Dean’s (1996a) time of “high temporal variability” from A.D. 1350 to

1560 to a time of “high seasonal variability” from A.D. 1250 to 1450. Competition for resources began to increase with this climate change, which led to intense conflict in the

Late Period. After A.D. 1250, there is evidence for social violence and the abandonment of vast regions, particularly those at higher elevations.

Vengeance

The vengeance model involves revenge for the killing of one’s family members or members of one’s group or simply an attitude that “they are the enemy” (LeBlanc

1999:13). Functional conflict (Coser 1956; Simmel 1908) identifies the strengths and the boundaries of a group and establishes group identity. Groups engaged in social violence tend to be internally intolerant and generate a collective persona (Eller 2006:49). Pueblo culture is seen as a very cohesive society (Benedict 1934; Bennett 1946; Goldfrank 1945;

Thompson 1945) that could follow a functional conflict pattern. Warfare based on scarce resources initially may have evolved into a vengeance mode. Along similar lines,

Lawrence Keeley (1996:15) found resources and vengeance to be the main causes of pre- state warfare.

Ritual

One version of the ritual model suggests that conflicts were staged to decide disputes or to allow men to show their strength (LeBlanc 1999:14). This behavior was highly regulated by societies and resulted in few deaths. Sometimes organized formations met in formal battles (LeBlanc 1999:45). This biological approach follows from observed behavior in the animal kingdom where most individual and intra-group aggression is “ritualized” and not fatal (Eller 2006:37). Generally, fights are not prolonged and they do not escalate into full-scale sustained violence. Only two kinds of species, ants and higher primates, participate in intentional or orchestrated violence against members of their own species in an inter-group setting (van der Dennen

1995:151).

Witchcraft persecution also falls under the ritual model and offers an alternative to or an explanation for possible Pueblo cannibalism (Darling 1999; Ogilvie and Hilton

2000; Walker 1998). Anomalous skeletal remains and ceremonial contexts seem to be associated. Human remains with evidence of ritual violence were purposely placed in locations that were contact points between worlds, such as pithouses and kivas. The frequency of deposition of human remains in pithouses and kivas shows an increase in use of kivas as pithouses decrease in use and finally disappear in the Pueblo IV period

(Walker 2008). Towers also have assemblages of human remains and may have both

defensive and ritual features (King 2004; Mackey and Green 1979; Rohn 1989:149; Van

Dyke 2006; Wormington 1955). Witches, in various forms, were killed and sent to the

underworld through rituals, which may have included anthropophagy (Walker 2008).

EVIDENCE FOR CONFLICT

Archaeological evidence for conflict comes from architecture, artifacts, burned sites, skeletal evidence, rock art, and no-man’s lands (Wilcox and Haas 1994). Steven

LeBlanc (1999) focused on settlement patterns, burned structures, and human remains with signs of violent death. A cluster of these traits will provide a strong case for social violence. It is the major increases or decreases of this evidence that can indicate how important conflict was at a particular time. This discussion will include architecture, settlement patterns, burned sites, and evidence of traumatic death.

Architecture

Walls were the main defensive feature of most sites with three categories: stockades, freestanding walls, and walls of outer rooms (LeBlanc 1999:56). Towers built into settlements were another defensive element, but they were more common in the

Mesa Verde region, as at Hovenweep (Kenzle 1993; Winter 1981). Safeguarded entryways, internal walls, and tunnels were additional defensive features (Figure 4.3).

Many towers are connected to kivas by tunnels and functioned as an escape route

(Mackey and Green 1979; Wilcox and Haas 1994). Tunnels also linked pithouses and surface structures (Dick 1976; Ellis 1991).

Figure 4.3 Tunnel connecting tower and kiva Sun Point Pueblo, Mesa Verde (by author)

Defensive systems in the prehispanic Southwest were composed of palisades, forts, hill-slope retreats, fortified villages, and guard villages (Farmer 1957; Wilcox and

Haas 1994). Palisades were built as wooden stockades around a family farmstead. The level of construction of these palisades suggests a defensive function (Rohn 1975) rather than the alternative as a means to corral children, dogs, or turkeys (Walt 1985). Forts in this context are small walled plaza sites located on a high prominence. They vary in intensity of use and may have been shrines or places of religious retreat too (Wilcox and

Haas 1994). Hill-slope retreats generally are built on high isolated buttes or hills and many times consist of massive masonry embankments, referred to as trincheras. There is debate as to the use of trincheras as defensive retreats (e.g. Gerald 1990; Spoerl 1984;

Wilcox 1979) versus use as agricultural terraces (e.g. Fish and Fish 1989; Katzer 1987;

Luebben et al. 1986). Fortified villages were most common in the Late Period. They

consisted of a central plaza enclosed by roomblocks and accessed through a narrow

corridor (Adams 1989; Reed 1956). Placement of sites in order to limit access to a larger

cluster of settlements falls under guard villages. Examples of such sites have been

identified at the Hopi First Mesa (Dozier 1954), Chimney Rock (Jeançon 1922), the Glen

Canyon area (Lindsay et al. 1968), and Perry Mesa along the Agua Fria (Wilcox et al.

2001b).

Settlement Patterns

The most significant elements of settlement patterns in relation to conflict are site

configurations, location, distribution, and line-of-sight connections. Site configurations involve defensive layouts, increased site size, and rapid construction techniques. The placement of sites on defensive land forms and securing of domestic water supplies may have developed from a rise in social violence. Clustering and no-man’s-lands evolved and affected the distribution of sites on the landscape. Visual communication between sites within a cluster could facilitate alliances and provide for signals requesting aid when attacked. The most developed examples of these conflict influenced settlement patterns are found during the Late Period in the Ancestral Puebloan area.

Site Configurations. Defensive layouts go hand in hand with aggregation. The resulting site configurations include cliff dwellings, mesa-top “forts”, inward-facing plaza communities (walled towns, Figure 4.4), and massive room groups (LeBlanc

1999:216). Military terminology gives three kinds of defensive sites: refuges, strongholds, and strategic defenses. Refuges are small and not used as habitations. They are strictly a place of retreat when the main settlement is threatened. Strongholds allow for long-term residence and are capable of withstanding siege and organized attack.

These fortified towns or hamlets are the most common kind of defensive site in the

Southwest (LeBlanc 1999:71). Strategic defenses relate to the arrangement of mutually

supporting settlements, such as the clustering of sites and line-of-sight alliances.

Figure 4.4 Plan of Atsinna modified from Morgan (1994:128)

In the Late Period there is a trend for site size to increase (LeBlanc 1999:62)

(Figure 4.5). This process of aggregation and reorganization (e.g. Adler 1996; Spielmann

1998) appears across the Southwest at this time. One idea is that a larger site is harder to attack. Other interpretations of increased settlement size point to reorganization and change in social, economic, and ideological realms during a period of substantial migrations (Adams 2002; Ahlstrom et al. 1995; Crown 1994; Lekson et al. 2002; Stone

1994; Woodson 1999). Current research by the Center for Desert Archaeology (Clark et

al. 2003), postulates coalescent societies similar to native settlements described by early

Europeans in the American Southeast (Kowalewski 2001, 2003).

Figure 4.5 Sapawe with detail of western section modified from Morgan (1994:216-217)

Rapid construction of sites also suggests that warfare may have necessitated new

defensive communities quickly (LeBlanc 1999:63). In fairness, rapid construction also

can be used by migrant groups when arriving in a new area. Ladder construction is an

efficient way to build swiftly (Figure 4.6). Single-ladder construction is done by building two long parallel walls and then partitioning this long space with cross walls in order to form rooms. A variant is double-ladder construction where the long walls are separated by two room widths. The cross walls are added to span between the long walls and then partition walls are erected parallel to the long walls. This type of building technique was uses in the Kayenta, Salinas, Jemez, Hopi, Rio Puerco, and Zuni areas (Dean 1996b;

Hayes et al. 1981; Liebmann 2006; Mindeleff 1891; Roney 1996; Watson et al. 1980).

Figure 4.6 Ladder construction technique modified from LeBlanc (1999:Figure 2.4)

Site Location. During times of social strife, higher locations or places with

restricted access are preferable (LeBlanc 1999:66). Sites could be placed on hilltops, in

caves, and along the edges of mesas. Hilltops are the most common choice due to their

height advantage, the ability to observe approaching people, and as a position for line-of-

sight communication with allies. The restricted access found in caves is the goal, but

they do have a cost with less proximity to necessary resources. Placement along the

edges of mesas or other shear rock faces may have been a compromise for defensive purposes and to minimize the distance to water, which is frequently available from springs at the foot of a mesa.

Protected domestic water supplies are another factor in choice of defensive

locations (LeBlanc 1999:68). People built adjacent to or directly on springs, dammed

small drainages near sites, established walk-in wells, and constructed reservoirs or basins

in plazas (Crown 1987) (Figure 4.7). Numerous sites have “spring” in their name, like

Gallinas Springs and Big Spring Ruin (LeBlanc 1999:225). Examples of retention and

catchment basins were built at Gran Quivera, Poshu, Castle Rock, and several pueblos in

the Galisteo Basin (Hayes et al. 1981; Jeançon 1923; Kuckelman 2000; Nelson 1914).

Walk-in-wells have been documented numerous places, such as Paquimé and in the El

Morro Valley (DiPeso 1974; LeBlanc 1978). Among others, reservoirs were found at

Yellow Jacket Springs and Kechibawa (Fewkes 1919; Kintigh 1985).

Figure 4.7 Reservoir at Acoma Pueblo, photograph by author

Site Distribution. The most important trend in site distributions is the presence of

site clusters with adjacent empty spaces (no-man’s-lands) or buffer zones between the clusters (LeBlanc 1999:69) (Figure 4.8). This is aggregation beyond the village level.

Site clusters are strategic defenses with the settlements situated to be mutually supporting. Clustering was a defensive choice, since collecting wood for fuel and wild plants would have been negatively affected by concentrating people in small areas.

Figure 4.8 Clustering of sites circa A.D. 1400 modified from Fish et al. (1994:Figure 7.2)

Instances of paired large sites also appear in the El Morro Valley (LeBlanc

1999:218). Social groups seem to have sometimes combined without merging their identities by placing large sites adjacent to each other, such as the Cienega and Mirabal sites or Atsinna and North Atsinna. This pairing may have extended to the physical connection of room groups with different architecture at the Kluckhohn site. These paired sites were part of a larger clustering in the El Morro Valley.

Line-of-Sight Communication. Site inter-visibility is linked to the development of site clusters (LeBlanc 1999:72). If sites were meant to be mutually supporting, then they had to be able to communicate for help during attack. Ethnographic accounts note that smoke and selenite mirrors have both been used in signaling, and fire was probably used at night (A. Ellis 1991; F. Ellis 1956:35; Ellis and Dodge 1987). When several sites

are found to be inter-visible and form a cluster, then a gap is found with no inter-

visibility, this suggests an alliance boundary (Haas and Creamer 1993).

Several prehispanic networks are proposed for the Southwest, and many of these

suggested systems may have utilized tower structures as a platform for signaling (Figure

4.9). The Gallina area has numerous visually linked towers (Byrd 2010; Sleeter 1987).

Other line-of-sight networks have been put forth for the Chaco area (Hayes et al. 1981),

Mesa Verde (Hayes and Windes 1975:155-156) with possible connections to towers in

the Montezuma Valley (Lange and Lange 1988), the Kayenta area (Haas and Creamer

1993; Kvamme 1993), Casas Grandes sphere (DiPeso 1974:2:364), Sonora region (Riley

1987), and the Navajo pueblitos (Powers and Johnson 1987). The conjectured Rio

Grande signaling network may have cumulatively extended at least 600 km (375 miles)

connecting sites from Bandelier National Monument south to Chilili and from the

Continental Divide east to San Cristobal in the Galisteo Basin (A. Ellis 1991).

Figure 4.9 Suggested signaling networks from Andrea Ellis (1991:Figure 1)

Burned Sites

Fires do not feed off of the structures themselves; rather they are fueled by the

materials inside the structure (Lally 2005:88). A structure must be excavated to determine the cause and origin of a structural fire (Lally 2005:192). Surface observations can be clouded by wildfires that have passed over the site. An estimated 25 to 50 percent of all prehispanic structures were burned (Walker 1995). Fires can be divided into

unintentional and intentional types. The intentional conflagrations are significant to cases

of prehispanic violence. The investigation must then separate deliberate burning at

abandonment and conflict related fires.

Unintentional Fires. Accidental fires were not common (LeBlanc 1999:75).

Setting fire to either a pithouse or pueblo rooms is difficult due to the construction

materials (Glennie and Lipe 1984). Therefore, unintentional fires would not have involved very many rooms (Figure 4.10). An accidental fire could happen with a hearth as the source of ignition. Another possibility is that ash and embers cleaned from a hearth and thrown into a trash room could cause ignition, as happened at Casa Chica in

Chihuahua (Lally 2005:209).

Figure 4.10 Unintentional fire at Casa Chica from Lally (2005:Figure 34)

Intentional Fires. An incendiary cause must be assumed if no other ignition source is available (Lally 2005:224). Deliberate burning of a community (Figure 4.11) on abandonment may have occurred for ritual reasons (e.g. Wilshusen 1988) or to keep the site from their enemies, but all the household goods would have been removed prior to ignition. Isolated rooms at a site also may have been set fire as a means to clean out trash or vermin. A history of burning kivas on abandonment can be demonstrated archaeologically (LeBlanc 1999:77), but there is no association of unburied bodies with these conflagrations. Isolated human bones associated with the burned layers of kivas at

Homol’ovi II appear to have been added to kivas as part of the abandonment ritual

(LaMotta 1996). With up to 50 percent of all prehispanic structures showing burning,

termination rituals account for most intentional fires (e.g. Montgomery 1992; Walker

1995, 1996).

Figure 4.11 Experimental intentionally burned structure from Lally (2005:Figure 58)

Warfare-related burning is evidenced by sets of roomblocks or entire sites being burned with household goods in place (LeBlanc 1999:81). Mud structures are difficult to burn and the attackers had to bring a fire source and some fuels with them to get the buildings to ignite (Glennie 1983; Wilshusen 1986:247) (Figure 4.12). They could pull the ladders out of any structure entered through the roof in order to trap people and then finish them off by setting the village or roomblock alight. At Salmon Ruin a tower kiva was burned with more than 30 children trapped inside or on the roof (R. Adams 1980;

Shipman 1983:51). There are also documented instances of bodies found in ventilator shafts as people tried to escape the fire (e.g. Bahti 1949). Additionally, it appears that bodies were thrown into kivas and pithouses and then burned (Walker 1998; 2008). The reason behind the burning may have been to force the inhabitants to move, since surviving after their homes and resources were destroyed was problematic. This also

keeps the defenders from following and attacking the retreating victors, who were probably carrying their spoils.

Figure 4.12 Viga showing evidence of intentional burning from Lally (2005:Figure 63)

Traumatic Death

Traumatic deaths are seen in both buried and unburied bodies. Arrows are not that lethal – most deaths resulted from blunt force trauma. Many deaths occurred after battles from wounds received, rather than on the battleground, which means that a formal burial could happen. Human skeletal remains with trauma and embedded weapons are the most clear cut evidence for prehispanic conflict (Cordell 1989; Prudden 1897:61).

Weapons changed through time. LeBlanc (1999) notes use of atlatls and fending sticks during the Early Period and then a switch to bow and arrows with shields in the

Middle Period (Figure 4.13). With the advent of the recurved bow in the Late Period the sequence is complete. Hand-to-hand fighting used bone daggers (“awls” longer than 20 cm), stone knives, wood and antler clubs, and stone axes. Mauls and double-bitted axes with no wear patterns were used as weapons only (Jeançon 1923; LeBlanc 1999). Clubs

and battle-axes are very effective weapons and produce serious blunt force trauma. Other possible weapons include wooden swords, spears, and tchamahias, which are celt-shaped groundstone objects. Stockpiling weapons, such as arrows and daggers, occurred prior to the Spanish in the Southwest (LeBlanc 1999). Also, arrow-shaft straighteners increase in frequency after A.D. 1300 (R. Lange 1992; Toulouse 1939; Woodbury 1954).

(a) (b) (c)

Figure 4.13 (a) atlatl and fending stick modified from LeBlanc (1999:Figure 3.1); (b) recurved bow depicted in kiva mural from Hibben (1975:Figure 49); (c) self bow modified from LeBlanc (1999:Figure 3.2)

Unburied Bodies and Trauma. Formal burials are found across cultural groups around the world (Saxe 1970). Unburied bodies indicate some disruption to the social system. In the prehispanic Southwest, bodies that lack grave goods and are discovered in haphazard positions suggest a violent end (Figure 4.14). Disarticulated human remains on the floors or in the fill of structures also point to social strife. These products of conflict frequently occur in groups and many times are missing body parts, such as heads and hands (LeBlanc 1999:85). The clearest indications of a traumatic death are human remains with embedded arrow or dart points (e.g. Cosgrove and Cosgrove 1932:25;

Guernsey and Kidder 1921:5; Judd 1954:257; McGimsey 1980:169; McKenna 1984:355;

Morris 1939:42; Roberts 1940:136; Wormington 1947:71-72).

Figure 4.14 Massacre victims from a Gallina site photo courtesy of USFS

Trophies of Human Remains. Trophies were often part of the spoils of war; heads or skulls were the most common trophies (Keeley 1996:100). In the Southwest, skeletons

without heads are more frequent than artifacts of human bone (e.g. Haury 1936; Gladwin

1945; Rohn 1977; Turner and Turner 1990). For example, trophy skulls were suspended in the House of the Skulls at Paquimé (DiPeso 1974:8:53-63). However, human bone objects do occur in the form of bowls made from skull parts (Ezell and Olson 1955), a perforated tarsal (P. Martin et al. 1949:176), a flesher made from a femur (Reiter

1938:85), a pendant from cranial bone (Peckham 1963b), long bone wands (DiPeso

1974), Hopi bow guards made from scapulae (Wright 1979), and inlaid skulls (Kidder

1932:270).

Scalping was customary across North America and scalp societies in the Pueblos

performed important social functions (Keeley 1996:101). Characteristic cut marks on a

skull along with preserved scalps are evidence of this practice (Figure 4.15). Scalping

also is documented archaeologically from the Southwest (W. Allen et al. 1985; Dutton

1963:81-97,201-204; Friederici 1907; Parsons 1924). A curated scalp was included as a

grave good with an individual at a cave in the Kayenta area (Kidder and Guernsey 1919).

Scalps and basketry scalp stretchers have been recovered in Utah (Howard and Janetski

1992).

Figure 4.15 Scalping marks from Betatakin Kiva with detail of upper cut to the right

Processed Human Remains. Beyond taking trophies, the serious mistreatment of bodies has lead to debate among Southwest archaeologists and physical anthropologists

(e.g. Bustard 2008; Dongoske et al. 2000; Lekson 2002; Martin et al. 2008; Turner and

Turner 1999; White 1992). During the Middle Period large numbers of individuals were killed and their bodies processed as if they were animals (Figure 4.16). Events almost always involve several victims, averaging six or seven people with up to 35 individuals.

The full age spectrum is represented, but half are adults. At the Cowboy Wash site, 24 individuals in four room clusters were processed (Billman 1997; Lambert 1997; Leonard

1997). One suggestion for this mistreatment is cannibalism (Turner 1983; Turner and

Turner 1999). The problem is that the volume of meat represented at the Cowboy Wash site – 1,200 pounds – would take hundreds of people to eat (LeBlanc 1999:175).

Figure 4.16 Processed human bones from Burnt Mesa (Photo by Alan P. Brew 1969)

Christy and Jacqueline Turner conducted a study of skeletal remains from 76 sites and produced six minimal indicators for cannibalism in the Southwest: breakage, cut marks, anvil abrasions, burning, many missing vertebrae, and pot-polishing (Turner and

Turner 1999:24). A concern with the Turners’ analyses is that the context of the finds is not part of the discussion (Walker 2008). Additionally, the climatic record for the Middle

Period does not indicate a situation requiring starvation cannibalism (Dean 1996a). Other explanations for this processing of human remains is witchcraft retribution (Darling

1999; Walker 1998), anthropophagy (Kuckelman et al. 2000), and ritualized dismemberment (Ogilvie and Hilton 1993).

GALLINA EVIDENCE

The Gallina Phase stretches from A.D. 1050 to 1300 with a rise in social violence

during the 13th century. This is consistent with Transitional Period resurgence of tribal

level warfare. Conflict in the Gallina area is evidenced by defensive architecture, such as

towers (Figure 4.17), tunnels, and stockades (Haas and Creamer 1985; Mackey and

Green 1979; Schulman 1949, 1950). The Gallina towers have two periods of use dating

to the 11th and the 13th centuries (Robinson and Warren 1971; Robinson et al. 1974).

Tunnels connecting pithouses, unit houses, and towers are known from at least four

Gallina sites (Dick 1976; Ellis 1991; Fiero 1978; Green et al. 1958; Mackey and Green

1979). The stockade settlements in this area seem to date prior to the Transitional Period increase in social strife (Dick 1976; Hammack 1965; Seaman 1976).

Figure 4.17 Illustration of tower at Rattlesnake Ridge from Hibben (1948:Figure 6)

The settlement patterns have many elements of a defensive nature. The rise of the cliff houses and villages later in the Gallina Phase, with cliff houses only occurring in the

A.D. 1250s and 1260s, points to defensive action on their part. Gallina sites occur in

three types of locations: cliffs, promontories, and narrow ridges; low terraces along

streams; and cliff-caves (Figure 4.18). They tend to occur on topographic rises with only

seven percent of habitations located in valley bottoms (Muceus and Lawrence 1990).

Several interpretations have been postulated for Gallina settlement patterns, such as

conserving farmland, to avoid flooding, preference for certain ecozones, breezes keep the

bugs down, and defensive locales (e.g. Ellis 1991; Elyea 1994; Elliott and Smith 1985;

Plog 1984; Winter 1983:3). As for them all being defensive, Sleeter (1987) shows that

violence increases around A.D. 1250, but sites still occur in the same elevation ranges

throughout the 13th century.

Figure 4.18 Gavilan Cliff House photograph by author

In order to alleviate water accessibility issues for prehispanic villages, both domestic use and family gardens, reservoirs were constructed (Turney 1985; Wyatt

1996a). The reservoirs were formed in two ways: damming a drainage or developing a catchment pool for surface run-off. The dam and diversion walls were built with stone and log cores and covered with earth and stone slabs (Perret 1976; Wyatt 1996c). The

western reservoir inside the Rattlesnake Ridge community (Figure 4.19) consists of a shallow basin with raised stone covered banks, a “well” for filling containers, a diversion wall, and a paved overflow channel (Hatch et al. 1994; Perret 1976).

Figure 4.19 Plan and profile of Rattlesnake Ridge reservoir from Bice (1980:Fig.10&11)

The Ojitos and Llaves Districts in the Gallina area have the highest site densities

(Dick 1976; Simpson 2008). The districts are presented in Chapter Five. Based on a clustering analysis of sites in the Llaves District, five spatial groups were found and when line-of-sight was examined about 80% of the towers in the Llaves District could be visually linked (Sleeter 1987). These results were supported with a GIS study of intervisiblity among 90 Gallina towers, which revealed two clusters corresponding to the

Ojito and Llaves Districts (Figure 4.20), but overall lines-of-sight showed alliance between the two districts (Byrd 2010).

Figure 4.20 Line of sight between towers in the Gallina area from Byrd (2010:Figure 8)

Intentionally burned structures with household goods and human remains have

been found (e.g. Hatch et al. 1994; Mackey and Green 1979; Pattison 1968). Based on

surface vestiges, 34% of habitations burned (Mackey and Green 1979; Mackey and

Holbrook 1978) and results from excavations were consistent showing 33% of the sites as burnt, including two that had no surface indications of conflagration (Mackey and Green

1979). Burned structures with human remains and structures with skeletons showing trauma (Figure 4.21) also support the 13th century time frame (Robinson and Warren

1971; Robinson et al. 1974).

Figure 4.21 Massacre – bodies on floor at Bg88 from Mackey and Green (1979:Figure1)

Human remains with embedded projectile points and skull trauma are the most compelling evidence of violence in the Gallina area (Chase 1976; Mackey and Green

1979). One study (Mackey and Green 1979; Mackey and Holbrook 1978) shows that

44% of Gallina individuals are found unburied on floors of burned structures and that

31% of individuals show evidence of traumatic death (Figure 4.22). Another skeletal

series (Chase 1976) has similar results with 38% of individuals exhibiting trauma, and

60% of the adults suffering a violent death. Research conducted by the Turners (Turner

et al. 1993) examined the skeletons from five massacre sites for evidence of cannibalism.

Their investigation did not support anthropophagy in these groups. The age and sex

ratios, along with the context, of the 55 individuals in the massacre study suggest raiding

and captive taking due to the high number of males and low number of females and

children. At the very end, the Gallina people tried to defend themselves through site

location and architecture, but it was not enough.

Figure 4.22 Image of cranial trauma at Bg3 from Turner et al. (1993:Figure 1)

CONSEQUENCES OF CONFLICT

The consequences of conflict are both concrete and social. There are territorial

losses and gains, different settlement strategies, population movements, demographic

impacts, subsistence challenges, formation of alliances, new trade partnerships, and

changes in social structures and community integration (LeBlanc 1999; Solometo 2004,

2010). Productive lands and year-round water sources are examples of reasons to acquire territory. Defensive measures are taken with respect to settlements through fortification, clustering, and aggregation, which involve population movement at various scales. The population demographics are shaped by the targets of attacks, i.e. were a few men killed

or was the entire village massacred. The rise of large towns caused economic difficulties

due to local environmental degradation, increased travel time to resources, and greater

ease of disease transmission. Alliances were formed through kin connections and

expanded through trade relations. Trade opportunities may have been reduced because of

the greater distances between settlement clusters, but the need for certain commodities

and the opportunity to create distant allies may have rewarded the extra effort in making

new trade partnerships. The level of social complexity along with the degree of

community integration had to change to accommodate the larger village size and

increased sedentism. These social mechanisms also allowed for leaders to direct labor

investments in defense at the expense of other tasks within the community.

In the Southwest, violence minimally affected settlement patterns and led to

aggregation and abandonment of some areas (Wilcox and Haas 1994). Population movement caused significant demographic and economic disruption with high mortality rates for both males and females (Solometo 2004, 2010). Integrative social structures seem to be key to large populations living together and performing communal tasks

(Glowacki 2006; Kintigh et al. 2004), which may be related to the rise of the Kachina cult

(Adams 1991; Stone 1994) and the broader Southwestern cult (Crown 1994). Changes in

daily life are hinted at through greater exploitation of wild resources (Kuckelman 2010)

entailing more time away from the settlement for the men and placement of villages at a

water source allowing women to stay inside the pueblo where they could perform their

daily tasks in safety (LeBlanc 1999:226)

The Southwest has a long history of conflict. There are historical and ethnographic accounts. Archaeological evidence occurs in the form of defensive sites,

burned sites, unburied bodies, and individuals who died from violence. The mid-13th century was a time of social turmoil, massive relocations of population, and changes in

Pueblo culture (Kuckelman 2010). The question is not whether conflict or its threat existed, but the extent to which social behavior was significantly modified with respect to violence.

CHAPTER 5: Gallina Culture Area

GALLINA SYNTHESIS

The Gallina area is an ideal location for examining how violence altered lifestyles

in the American Southwest. Conflict in this region is evidenced by defensive

architecture, such as towers and cliff houses (Haas and Creamer 1985; Mackey and Green

1979; Schulman 1949, 1950), burned structures with human remains (Gallenkamp 1953;

Hibben 1944; Mackey and Green 1979), and human remains with embedded projectile points and skull trauma (Chase 1976; Mackey and Green 1979). Because no

comprehensive synthesis exists, this chapter provides an overview of Gallina culture.

Gallina Boundaries

The Rio Gallina is in the heartland of the “Gallina country” which is generally

bounded by the Chama River to the east and the upper San Juan drainage on the west

(Crown et al. 1996; Langenfield and Baker 1988), although seasonal use sites are found

east of the Chama River into the Canjilon Mountain area (Bertram 1988; Ellis 1988).

The northern edge generally is seen as El Vado dam, but some blurring of the line occurs

to the far side of Heron Lake and possibly to the Colorado border (Anschuetz 2006;

Seaman 1976; Simpson 2008). The San Pedro Mountains and the upper Rio Puerco

bound the core on the south, while there is overlap with other groups beyond Cuba

toward Cabezon (Myers 2007; Schulman 1950; Simpson 2008).

Districts within the larger Gallina area have been proposed by Herbert Dick

(1976) and expanded by Erik Simpson (2008). The seven districts (Figure 5.1) are

divided along geographic features, with the three districts west of the Continental Divide

– Dulce, Gobernador, and Ojitos – being areas of mesas and canyons while the four

eastern districts – Stinking Lake, Canjilon, Llaves, and Cuba – have valleys, steep ridges,

and broken relief with high mountain peaks.

Figure 5.1 Gallina districts map from Simpson (2008:Figure 6)

The Gallina culture stretches across and into Rio Arriba, Sandoval, McKinley,

and San Juan counties. The lands are under federal, state, and private ownership.

Federal agencies with a piece of the Gallina territory include the U.S. Forest Service, the

Bureau of Land Management, and the Bureau of Indian Affairs. The New Mexico

Department of State Lands and the Department of Transportation manage this area for the

state. Private property is primarily found as in-holdings within the federal lands and associated with the small rural communities of Lindrith, Gallina, Coyote, Regina, and La

Jara.

PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT

Topography

The Gallina region lies in parts of both the Colorado Plateau and Southern Rocky

Mountain Provinces (Fenneman 1931; Hunt 1974). The semiarid Colorado Plateau Province consists of the highest plateaus in the country. They cover wide areas with periodic interruption

by canyons, mesas, hogbacks, cuestas, and cliffs (Hunt 1974). The Gallina core is in the eastern

part of the Navajo Section of the Colorado Plateau (Fiero 1978:1-2). The Navajo Section consists

of mesas, buttes, canyons, escarpments, and dry washes (Fenneman 1931). The Gallina region

primarily has mesas or low cuestas separated by broad valleys. However, the southern portion of

the Gallina culture area falls in the Datil Section of the Colorado Plateau Province. The Datil

Section is characterized by lava flows, volcanic necks, and other extrusive and intrusive igneous remnants (Fenneman 1931; Snead 1979). In addition, volcanic ash has decomposed into smetitic clays that blanket the eroding hillsides (Chronic 1987:157).

The Southern Rocky Mountain Province consists of mountain ranges and intermontane basins with the higher parts forming the Continental Divide (Hunt 1974). They form a series of broad north-south trending granitic mountains with steeply dipping sedimentary deposits on their flanks (Fenneman 1931). In the Gallina area, the San Pedro Mountains, the Sierra Nacimiento, and the Canjilon Mountains are part of the western edge of the Southern Rocky Mountain

Province (Hunt 1974). Hogbacks and monoclinal foothills also occur in the Southern Rocky

Mountains, but in the Gallina area the Hogback Monocline is not part of this province.

The Continental Divide essentially cuts the Gallina area in half (Figure 5.2). The western half is characterized by mesas and steep canyons that open up into small valleys to the north. To the south, the mesas are less extreme and border on broad valleys (Dick 1976). Elmer Baltz

(1967:5) describes two physiographic sectors in the western half of the Gallina region: Tapicios

Plateau and Largo Plain. Farther to the north, the Gobernador and Dulce sector occurs. The northern and central areas of the Tapicitos Plateau are a greatly dissected high plateau with west- flowing intermittent streams that join Canyon Largo. The southern portion consists of irregular mesas that extend west from the Continental Divide to the Largo Plains. Along the western edge is an escarpment (Baltz 1967:7-8).

Figure 5.2 Physiographic map from Baltz (1967:Figure 2)

The Largo Plains sector includes the broad low mesas that border Canyon Largo.

The plains are mildly dissected by intermittent streams that flow into the canyon. Theses drainages generally consist of swales and shallow valleys. The sector rises to the east

where it meets the divide (Baltz 1967:7). The Gobernador and Dulce sector slopes

westward toward the central axis of the San Juan Basin. Narrow canyons have been cut

into the plateau and these drainages flow northwest to the San Juan River. Volcanic

dikes create ridges and walls stretching for many kilometers (Chronic 1987:64-66).

The eastern half of the Gallina area is more broken with long north-south running ridges with east-facing vertical cliffs and steep but traversable west slopes (Dick 1976). On this side of the Continental Divide are six sectors. The Yeguas Mesas sector includes numerous high, long, and narrow mesas separated by deep and steep-walled canyons related to Lleguas Canyon and its tributaries. The Continental Divide edges this sector on the west (Baltz 1967:8).

A striking feature of this area is the Northern Hogback Belt. It extends north from the foothills of the San Pedro Mountains and is made up of long high narrow hogback ridges separated by parallel alluvial valleys. The hogbacks are breached by gaps through which the intermittent streams of the belt drain eastward to the Rio Gallina. These distinctive ridges rise

120 to 180 meters (400-600 ft) above the valleys (Baltz 1967:9-10).

The Capulin and peaks area is not discussed by Baltz (1967), but he does delineate it (see

Figure 5.2). This section consists of broken and rough terrain from the northern slopes of the San

Pedro Mountains across Capulin Mesa and to the peaks of the Gallina Mountains. It is characterized by mountains, isolated ridges, mesas, canyons, and narrow valley bottoms (Maker et al. 1973). This series of mesas, ridges, and peaks are related to the Gallina Uplift (Bingler

1968). Gallina and Dead Man peaks are in the north with Golondrino and Capulin Mesas sloping southward to the edge of the uplift (Simpson 2008).

The mountains, the San Pedro Mountains and the Sierra Nacimiento, are the western margin of the Southern Rocky Mountains. The uplifting that created these ranges is from emplacement of granitoid plutons and metavolcanics (Bennison 1990; Wilks 2005). Some the volcanic materials are associated with the Jemez Mountains magmas (Sleeter 1987). The mountains of this section contain Pedernal Chert and bound the Polvadera and Jemez Obsidian sources (Fiero 1978). Sedimentary rock formations containing chert and quartzite deposits are visible and accessible (Constan and Riggs 2007; Smith and Huckell 2005). The Canjilon

Mountains are physically separate, but they are part of the greater San Luis Uplift (Wilks 2005).

To the west of the San Pedro Mountains is the San Pedro Foothills sector. It lies

between the upper part of San Jose Creek and the upper part of the Rio Puerco. West-

sloping terraces are cut by west-trending valleys. These valleys are broad and shallow at

their western outlet and narrow and deep at their eastern terminus (Baltz 1967:8-9). This

portion of the upper Rio Puerco basin has fewer high mesas and the valley floor is lower

in elevation (Simpson 2008).

The Penistaja Cuestas sector is in the southern part of the Gallina area. Several

major sloping benches or cuestas extend from east to west as broad curved bands

interrupted by narrow valleys and low rounded hills. The southern edge of each cuesta is

a steep escarpment. The drainage flows to the south with elevation increasing to the

north (Baltz 1967:5-7). In the vicinity of Cuba, New Mexico, the sedimentary formations

and beds of gypsum bend sharply up toward the Sierra Nacimiento and break off near the

Nacimiento fault (Chronic 1987:156). Close to the southern edge of this sector, the Rio

Puerco Fault Belt appears (Elyea 1994).

With all the varied relief in the Gallina area, corridors of transit were primarily

north-south trending. The east-west access followed the Chama River valley to the Rio

Gallina canyon. This connected with Lleguas Canyon, which provides an easy passage over the Continental Divide and into the San Juan Basin (Douglass 1917a). During the historic period, Tewa people crossed the region travelling north to trade with Utes and others (Gonzales-Peterson et al. 1997). It was also used by the colonial Spanish based on a stone marker “S.H. 1740” found along this route (Douglass 1917a). A more northern route was used in the early 1800s. The Old Spanish Trail connected the Hispanic villages to the Navajo settlements of the San Juan drainage by going east from the Chama River between Abiquiu and Tierra Amarilla, following a route similar to current Highway 84

(Poague et al. 1996).

Valleys in the Gallina uplands sit at 1,800 to 2,100 meters (6,000-7,000 ft) with the high flat-topped mesas ranging from 2,100 to 2,400 meters (7,000-8,000 ft) in elevation. The mountain peaks generally are around 2,700 meters (9,000 ft), but a few top out above 3,000 meters (10,000 ft). The altitude means the snows are deep in the winter and the clayey roads are impassable (Hibben 1939:xxvi). West of the Continental

Divide the elevation increases from 2,400 to 2,300 meters (7,000-7,600 ft) on a northern trajectory (Dick 1976). The east side of the divide includes the San Pedro Fault System that produced the steep ridges and “hogbacks” so typical of this area. This fault system is subject to periodic movement that leads to tremors (Zeller 1990).

The high altitudes encountered in the Gallina region have led to seasonal use of certain elevations. Short-term use of highlands is a common pattern in the Southwest.

Hunting, plant gathering, mining, and ritual activities are all documented (Winter

1983:8). In support of these types of seasonal use, Gallina sites at higher elevations,

especially over 2,400 meters (8,000 ft), tend to be non-habitation scatters associated with

resource exploitation (Logan 1989; Muceus and Lawrence 1990). Non-structural sites

have been found at lower altitudes, but they seem to be related to agricultural activities

(McKenna 1995; Ware et al. 1999).

Geology

The Gallina area lies at the convergence of four tectonic features (Figure 5.3): the

eastern portion of the San Juan Basin, the Nacimiento and Gallina-Archuleta Uplifts, and

the western edge of the Chama Basin (Bingler 1968). The San Juan Basin was subsiding

through the Tertiary and therefore filled with sedimentary deposits of sand, gravel, clay,

and volcanic ash over igneous and metamorphic basement rocks (Baltz 1967). The

sedimentary materials were coming from the San Juan Mountains to the north and the

southern end of the Rocky Mountains to the east. The Nacimiento and Gallina-Archuleta

Uplifts run north-south along the central axis of the Gallina culture area.

Figure 5.3 Tectonic features based on Ridgley (1977:Figure 1)

The Llaves Valley illustrates the confluence of geologic formations along the

uplifts and peripheries of the basins (Fassett et al. 1977:33-34). The westward oriented

dip slope coming off the San Juan Basin is composed of Tertiary sandstone cliffs.

Jurassic formations cap the northern end of the Gallina-Archuleta arch while Cretaceous groups were lifted to form the Northern Hogback Belt that runs down the valley. The westward oriented dip slope and high country at the margin of the Chama Basin include

Jurassic, Cretaceous, and other Mesozoic Period units. Chama Basin rocks are largely sedimentary shale, sandstone, and limestone and range in age from Mississippian to

Tertiary (Bingler 1968).

The major streams in the area have eroded the shale layers forming valleys and steep slopes (Baltz 1967:5). The more resistant sandstones have been left to cap the mesas and broad benches leading to a region of strong topographic relief. Badlands have formed from the differential erosion of thick shale units with beds of thin soft sandstone and sandy shale. The granites of the San Pedro Mountains and the Sierra Nacimiento are more resistant to erosion than the predominant sedimentary rocks.

The Tertiary deposits in all the main drainages are overlain by Pleistocene and

Recent age alluvium (Baltz 1967:59) that consists of sand, silt, clay and some gravel.

The Recent Epoch has had extensive degradation (Hunt 1956:65) with arroyo cutting

during dry periods. Since A.D. 1300 it has been dry and warm, which promoted downcutting, except for a brief period of alluvial deposition in the 16th and 17th centuries.

Currently stream channels are entrenched in deep arroyos that are cut into the Pleistocene

and Recent age alluvium (Fiero 1978:8).

Soils

Soils on the slopes of the ridges tend to be shallow (Langenfeld and Baker 1988) and increase in depth toward the sage flats (Hudspeth et al. 1994). Most of the Gallina area consists of moderately dark- and dark-colored soils typical of the mountains and valleys of New Mexico (Maker et al. 1974). Three soil orders dominate the region

(Figure 5.4): Mollisols, Alfisols, and Entisols (Morain 1979). Mollisols are common in semiarid grasslands and forested areas and have a dark, humus-rich surface horizon.

They have a high base saturation dominated by calcium. With moderately high water holding capacity and well-developed horizons these soils have higher fertility for the practice of agriculture (Morain 1979).

Figure 5.4 Soils Map with county line based on USGS Soil Map (4-R-34,583)

Alfisols are yellowish or reddish-yellow and have a subsurface clay accumulation.

These clay minerals hold bases and water leading to a high base saturation and high water

holding capacity. This soil order can have problems with compaction and cultivation

(Morain 1979). The Entisols lack soil horizons due to active erosion. They are a mineral

soil that supports plant growth. Climate and vegetation vary with these soils (Morain

1979).

Inceptisols appear in the highest elevations and have weakly developed horizons

due to the young age of the soil. They contain minerals that are still able to be altered by

weathering processes, but they have lost bases and/or iron and aluminum. These soils

form in more humid areas and hence occur in the mountains (Morain 1979). Patches of

light-colored Aridisols also are present and have subsurface accumulations of carbonates

and salts. These soils are characteristic of dry climates and are low in organic matter.

They have a high degree of alkalinity and tend to be barren (Morain 1979).

Water

The major drainages in the Gallina region (Figure 5.5) are the Chama River, Rio

Gallina, Rio Puerco, and Largo and Lleguas canyons (Seaman 1976). The Continental

Divide cuts across the Gallina region and separates its drainage (Baltz 1967). West of the

divide the area is drained by intermittent streams that flow to Largo canyon, which

continues northwest to the San Juan River. The east side of the divide is part of the Rio

Grande Basin. The Llaves District’s intermittent streams drain into the Rio Gallina and

then into the Chama River. The Chama is a major tributary of the Rio Grande. The

northern section of this culture area runs into Archuleta Arroyo, which also connects to

the Chama River. The southern Cuba District drains from the San Pedro Mountains into

San Jose Creek. This creek flows into the Rio Puerco, which joins the Rio Grande. The

Chama River is the only major perennial water source, but one can access water by

digging in the sand in many places (Dick 1976). In the study area, the Lleguas drainage usually carries surface or near surface water for most of the year (Sliwinski 1989).

Figure 5.5 Major drainages with the Gallina culture area outlined

Potable water is a concern in the Gallina area. Surface water is not common and the Rio Gallina is considered to be undrinkable (Douglass 1917a; Smith and Dick 1977).

Springs occur at the base of cliffs and along mesa slopes and are the main source of drinking water, although some springs also have a high alkali content (Ceram 1971;

Hibben 1951). Many sites are located on or near the rim of deep drainages with access to seasonal and permanent water sources (Smith and Dick 1977; Horton and Logan 1994).

Few sites are more than three kilometers from water, but the vertical distance makes water retrieval an intensive task (Dick 1976).

In prehispanic villages, reservoirs were constructed to alleviate water accessibility

issues for both domestic use and family gardens (Turney 1985; Wyatt 1996a). At least

ten are known in the Gallina area – Capulin Creek (1), Wolf Draw (2), Mesa Golondrino

(2), Deep Canyon Spring area (1), Wild Horse (2), and Rattlesnake Ridge (2) – and

Bg20/2 at Rattlesnake Ridge has been excavated (Bahti 1949; Bain 1976; Dick 1981;

Douglass 1917a; Green 1962; Hatch et al. 1994; Hibben 1948, 1951; Perret 1976;

Peterson et al. 1998; Smith and Dick 1977; Turney 1985; Wyatt 1996c). The reservoirs were formed in two ways: damming a drainage or developing a catchment pool for surface run-off. They also vary in size ranging from a 75 m2 water control feature to 625

m2 pools behind large dams. The dams are described as standing 1.5 m high – originally

up to 3 m tall – 2 to 15 m thick, and 23 to 113 m long (Dick 1975; Wyatt 1996c). The

dam and diversion walls were built with stone and log cores and covered with earth and

stone slabs (Perret 1976; Wyatt 1996c).

The western reservoir at the Rattlesnake Ridge community was excavated in 1976

by Florence Hawley Ellis and the Ghost Ranch Archaeological Seminar (Hatch et al.

1994; Perret 1976). The reservoir system consists of a shallow basin with raised stone-

covered banks, a “well” for filling containers, a diversion wall, and a paved overflow

channel. The basin may have been lined with stone slabs and clay or built in a natural

sandstone block depression and the clay filtered in from the adjacent Menefee Formation

shales. The presence of sedge growing in the reservoir and the large dead juniper trees

inside the feature show that the reservoir is still holding large amounts of standing water

during parts of the year (Housley 1976).

Climate

Precipitation increases with elevation, but the growing season decreases with

elevation making the region agriculturally marginal. Gallina habitations associated with

terraced gardens seems to be located on the higher north- to northwest-facing slopes where more precipitation is received and retained in the early spring (Hibben 1939:xxvii,

Wyatt 1996a). Precipitation increases approximately 10 centimeter per 300 meters (4 in/1,000 ft) in elevation (Maker et al. 1973:6). Currently, the rainfall and snowfall data for the Ojitos, Llaves, and Dulce Districts indicate more amenable climates for agriculture based on precipitation amounts (Table 5.1). Over half of the annual precipitation occurs between May and October as rain, but the snow pack in the mountains contributes melt water during the growing season.

Corn in the Southwest generally requires a 120-day frost-free season (Minnis

1981). In this century, the Gallina region season was too short and the nights were too cool for modern corn agriculture (Fiero 1978:12; Hibben 1939:xxvii, Mackey and

Holbrook 1978; Seaman 1976:10). The Spanish did not colonize this severe landscape and the area primarily has been used for ranching since the 19th century. The weather

station at Gavilan, New Mexico, demonstrates the harshness of the area with the lowest

official recorded temperature in New Mexico, -10oC (-50oF) in February 1951. As

elevation increases, the mean annual temperature decreases about four degrees per 300

meters (Maker et al. 1973:7). The Ojitos, Llaves, and Gobernador Districts have median

frost-free seasons that would be sufficient, but marginal for corn (see Table 5.1). In the

lower elevations, the freeze-free period can be up to five months, from May through

September.

Table 5.1 Climate data from across the Gallina area (data are from the Western Regional Climate Center www.wrcc.dri.edu)

Elevation Max Temp Min Temp Rainfall Snowfall Median Frost Station Years District (ft) (F) (F) (in) (in) Free Dulce 6,770 62.7 25.8 17.52 57.8 83 1906-2010 Dulce Governador 6,170 65.8 32.1 12.31 35.8 123 1925-1951 Gobernador El Vado Dam 6,900 62.6 27.2 14.52 44.2 95 1906-2010 Stinking Lake Gavilan 7,350 61.8 21.6 16.92 74.1 66 1929-1970 Ojitos Lindrith 6,900 62.7 30.5 14.65 60.2 129 1971-2010 Ojitos Lybrook 7,260 61.1 34.9 10.85 25.4 150 1951-2010 Ojitos Capulin 7,200 unk unk 14.94 41.5 135 1916-1930 Llaves Regina 7,450 61.5 29.1 15.84 49.7 109 1914-1969 Llaves Cuba 6,900 63.8 28.5 13.16 28.6 98 1938-2010 Cuba 89

The triumvirate of corn, beans, and squash typical of prehispanic agriculture was

found in the Gallina area. White flint corn (Zea), red, yellow, and white beans

(Phaseolus vulgaris), and cushaw pumpkin and summer or fall squash (Cucurbita

moschata and Cucurbita pepo) have been documented from excavations (Hibben

1939:243-244). Corn was the staple crop. It is genetically mutable and adaptable to

numerous conditions (Mangelsdorf 1974). The corn recovered from Gallina sites is

Chapalote race (Mackey 1985). Linear regression analysis of mean corn cob

measurements against abandonment dates for twelve sites in the Llaves Valley shows a

reduction in cob size over a 20-year period in the 13th century (Holbrook and Mackey

1976; Mackey 1985; Mackey and Holbrook 1978). These alterations in the crop may

have been due to soil exhaustion or changing climate. Small-cobbed and small-kernelled corn seem to be common in high altitude sites (Stuart and Farwell 1983:148). They represent a distinct variety grown in the colder, higher settings (Stuart and Farwell

1983:150). These small-kerneled cobs also appear at another earlier dated Gallina site

(Moore and Ford 1978; Stuart and Farwell 1983:150).

Over the extent of the Gallina occupation, there was an increase in aridity and a shift from winter precipitation to summer thunderstorms with little infiltration (Holbrook

1977). The fast runoff during the summer rains and clearing of fields contributed to erosion, which the Gallina people tried to counter by building check dams, terraces, and linear borders (Mackey and Holbrook 1978). The initial dry period in the Gallina region was between A.D. 1080 and 1125 (Holbrook and Mackey 1976). Abandonment of the

Gallina area coincided with the Great Drought that stretched from A.D. 1275 to 1300

(Euler et al. 1979).

Vegetation

The region is in a transitional zone of pine-covered mesas and sage-covered valleys and canyons. The Gallina area has four major ecozones: sagebrush flats, piñon- juniper woodland, ponderosa pine-Douglas fir forest, and spruce fir forest (Elmore 1976;

Seaman 1976). Some native and introduced grassed meadows and valleys occur and the badlands lack vegetation (Fiero 1978). The flora varies from sage brush in the valleys with piñon-juniper on the slopes and lower ridge tops to ponderosa and scattered fir on the north exposures and mesa tops (Cartledge 1988). The piñon-juniper woodland is the dominant ecological zone with ponderosa pine forest the next most common (Seaman

1976). Grasses include both native (blue grama, hairy grama, James’ galleta, Indian and littleseed ricegrass, little bluestem, squirreltail, prairie junegrass, bunch grass, buckwheat,

Kentucky bluegrass, and western wheatgrass) and introduced (crested wheat grass and rye grass). Parts of the big sagebrush valleys have been “mowed” to remove the sage and then grass was seeded for cattle grazing.

Elevation, slope, aspect, and moisture all affect the flora. At lower elevations, between 1,400 and 2,000 meters (4,500-6,500 ft), the piñon-juniper belt consists of widely spaced, open, mixed stands of piñon pine and Utah juniper (Elmore 1976:13).

Single-leaf and Mexican piñon along with alligator and one-seed juniper also occur.

Juniper is more common at the lower altitudes with saltbush, greasewood, mountain mahogany, cacti, and yuccas intermixed in the lower reaches. Piñon becomes more abundant at the upper elevations and encounters ponderosa pine and Gambel oak.

Sagebrush can be interspersed and sometimes takes over with saltbush on the gentler slopes. Cottonwoods, walnuts, and sycamores can be found near springs and along

streams, while the drier areas produce rabbitbrush, fernbush, cliffrose, Apache-plume,

squawbush, and scrub oak.

The mid-elevation pine-oak belt, between 2,000 and 2,400 meters (6,500-8,000

ft), is dominated by widely scattered individuals or open park-like stands of ponderosa pine and Gambel oak (Elmore 1976:109). The cool north-facing slopes have thicker stands of pine with some Douglas fir intermingled. The drier, lower slopes have mixtures with piñon pine. Upper altitudes can be interspersed with aspen. The other characteristic shrubs and trees of this belt include maple, service berry, bearberry, buckbrush, hawthorn, roses, shrubby cinque-foil, snowberry, and Rocky Mountain juniper. The riparian areas have narrow-life and lanceleaf cottonwoods, thinleaf alder, water birch, chokecherry, and occasional blue spruce.

Higher altitude vegetation, between 2,400 and 2,900 meters (8,000-9,500 ft), is

part of the fir-aspen belt (Elmore 1976:157). Douglas fir occurs in dense stands due to

more moisture and for protection against the strong winds. The quaking aspen appear in

areas with greater soil moisture. The south-facing slopes have mixed Douglas fir and

ponderosa pine. The common juniper and white fir also can be found in this zone.

Shade-loving shrubs and trees, such as kinnikinnik, honeysuckle, raspberry, thimbleberry,

and mountain ash regularly occur here. Along streams and near springs can be found

willows and alpine clematis. Areas affected by fire tend to be colonized by lodgepole

pine and aspens.

The mountain peaks reach into the spruce-fir belt (Elmore 1976:173), between

2,900 and 3,500 meters (9,500-11,500 ft). The two key species are the Engelmann spruce and subalpine fir, which grow along streams or next to meadows in tight clumps. The

spruce is larger and more abundant. Vegetation gets smaller, stunted, and dwarfed near the tree line due to high winds and adverse conditions. The other shrubs and trees of this belt consist or waxflower, Wolf’s currant, Bebb willow, myrtle blueberry, blue spruce, lodgepole, bristlecone, and limber pines.

Generally, the Gallina region is mixed encinal woodland with piñon and juniper dominant (50-60%) and ponderosa or Douglas fir forest the next most common (20-

30%). The stands of sagebrush in the open valleys compose another ten percent of the vegetation. The spruce fir forest makes up the last ten percent (Seaman 1976). Ecotonal areas with highly mixed plant communities are widespread, especially on the lower elevation slopes (Holbrook 1975:8).

The forest-line moved during the Gallina Phase and has moved since based on pollen samples from LA 12072 (Holbrook 1975:168-169; Holbrook and Mackey 1976;

Mackey and Holbrook 1978). The first occupation at LA 12072 was a time of increased moisture with greater tree cover in the Llaves Valley. Ponderosa pine, firs, piñon, and juniper were growing at lower elevations than at present. The habitation structure was remodeled and the second occupation shows evidence of a decrease in tree cover with the

Llaves Valley being more deforested than it is currently. This change in forest line could be related to climate shifts or human activities, such as clearing land for farming or cutting trees for fuel and construction.

The Gallina people followed a mixed subsistence utilizing both wild and domestic plants. Current wild comestibles around Rattlesnake Ridge include acorns, pine nuts (every 3-4 years), cactus buds, prickly pear pads, juniper berries, squawberry, yucca fruit and seeds, barberry fruit, and grass/flower seeds (Housley 1976). The edible

riparian plants near Nogales Cliff House consist of Arizona walnut, Indian ricegrass,

dropseed grasses, cattail, and various brooms (Pattison 1968:20-22). Plants likely

gathered in the Canjilon area are June grass, Indian millet, acorns, yucca, pine nuts,

juniper berries, serviceberries, chokecherries, currant leaves and berries, raspberries,

strawberries, buckthorn berries, sumac berries, dock stems and roots, lily bulbs, flower

buds of the rabbitbrush, rose hips, dandelion greens, onions, celery, and cactus fruits and

pads (Ellis 1988:187-188).

Fauna

The common mammals in the Gallina area include mule deer, elk, black bear, mountain

lion, bobcat, coyote, gray fox, badger, skunk, jackrabbit, and cottontail (Holbrook 1975:9). In the

19th century pronghorn antelope, mountain sheep, and wolves also were known in the region

(Bailey 1931). The Merriman elk species was documented in this area, but became extinct in the

late 1880s (Bailey 1931:58). Jaguar did have a range that extended into northwestern New

Mexico before contact (Federal Register 2006). The rodent fauna in the Llaves Valley are

dominated by members of the Sciuridae and Cricetidae families (Holbrook 1975:12). Small,

medium, and large birds appear in all the ecological zones. Small birds are represented by blue

birds, tanagers, sparrows, and wrens. Examples of medium birds are flickers, meadowlarks,

woodpeckers, magpies, and quails. The large birds consist of turkeys, owls, ducks, marsh and red-tail hawks, eagles, and vultures (Hibben 1939:2; Messing 1976).

Both turkeys and dogs appear to have been kept in the Gallina area based on the presence of articulated burials of each (Green et al. 1958:54; Seaman 1976:110). Turkey

was raised as a food source, but was not the major meat contributor to the Gallina diet.

Other faunal remains in archaeological sites, point to utilization of mule deer, elk,

mountain sheep, ducks, and rabbits for subsistence (Fiero 1978:203; Seaman 1976:104).

Bones of burrowing animals cannot be clearly separated from dietary use versus post-

abandonment activities.

PREVIOUS RESEARCH

Spanish reconnaissance expeditions against the Navajo were some of the first

forays into the Gallina lands until the Wheeler Survey passed along the Rio Gallina in

1874 (Schulman 1950:293). Edward Cope (1879), the expedition paleontologist,

described a prehistoric community of 30 structures on Porcupine Ridge, which he called

Cristone. Detailed information on the sites of the Gallina area was finally provided by

William Douglass (1917a, 1917b). He called it the Land of the Small House People and

discussed the architecture, building techniques, material remains, agriculture, trails, and

possible shrines.

Archaeological investigation of the region began in the 1930s with work by Harry

Mera (1935, 1938) and Frank Hibben (1938, 1939). Mera (1938) named it the Largo

cultural phase and presented four characteristic artifacts – conical bottomed jars, tri- notched axes, comb arrowshaft straighteners, and elbow pipes – and three architectural forms – pithouses, surface houses, and small pueblos. Hibben (1938) published on the

Gallina Phase in the same year as Mera. The two names for the cultural area have been combined as Largo-Gallina, although general usage favors simply Gallina.

Hibben continued with his studies in the area and wrote his dissertation on “The

Gallina Culture of North Central New Mexico” (1939)2. His doctoral work and later

2 Many articles cite Hibben’s dissertation with a date of 1940. The 1939 date used here and throughout

publications (Hibben 1948, 1949) discuss the distribution of sites, excavated structures,

architectural forms and affiliations, agricultural terracing, material remains, and skeletal

series. The characteristic traits Hibben (1938) gives are the same as Mera’s (1938) with

the addition of antler celts and lenticular knives.

The University of New Mexico funded field schools in the Gallina region for

several summers in the 1940s and 1950s. Hibben’s students from these expeditions were

the major contributors to Gallina publications through the 1960s. They excavated

villages (Bahti 1949; Green 1962, 1964; Green et al. 1958; Pendleton 1952), isolated

habitations (Green 1956), and cliff houses (Kleindienst 1956; Pattison 1968; Schulman

1949). Multiple class papers and field reports are in the Maxwell Museum of

Anthropology archives (e.g. Bell 1940; Black and Rook 1955; Hicks 1949; Tyson 1954).

In addition, Nancy Wilkinson (1958) wrote about the material remains of the Gallina

people.

There was a 15 year hiatus between the end of University of New Mexico work in the

Gallina area in 1956 and the beginning of a series of field schools from Ghost Ranch led by

Florence Hawley Ellis in 1971. James Mackey and Sally Holbrook from the University of

California at Berkeley and Herbert Dick from Adams State College also began research on the

Gallina culture in 1971. Summer field schools from Adams State College – under Herbert Dick – and the University of Toronto – under Laetitia Sample – were established in 1972. Academic archaeological investigations continued through the 1970s from Ghost Ranch (Ellis 1988, 1991;

Ellis and Ellis n.d.), Adams State College (Dick 1975, 1976, 1978), the Universities of California

Berkeley and Santa Barbara (Holbrook and Mackey 1976; Mackey and Green 1979; Mackey and

comes from the cover page on the official copy at Harvard University (December 15, 1939).

Holbrook 1978), the University of Toronto (Mohr and Sample 1972; Sample and Mohr 1975;

Snow 1978), and the University of South Carolina.

Cultural Resource Management in the region started in the 1960s with salvage

archaeology at the Llaves Site (Bussey 1963) and in the Lagunitas area (Hammack 1965),

but came into its own in the 1970s through projects on federal lands (e.g. Fiero 1978;

Seaman 1976; Whiteaker 1976). Pedestrian survey was used by federal agencies, including the U.S. Forest Service, Bureau of Land Management, and Bureau of Indian

Affairs, to locate archaeological sites prior to projects. Less-than-complete survey

sampling strategies resulted in overlooked sites, so the Forest Service took another

approach to site discovery through site location modeling (Plog 1984).

In the 1980s, Ellis (Ellis and Ellis n.d) continued with the Ghost Ranch

Archaeological Seminars. The field work concentrated on the Rattlesnake Ridge

community (Bice 1980; Hatch et al. 1994). Federal agencies focused on energy

exploration and development during the 1980s. Timber sales were another major activity

in this decade. They tended to be large projects and were both contracted out and

performed “in-house” by Forest Service archaeologists. Because archaeological work

has been done by numerous contractors the results have not been integrated, although an

early attempt at synthesis can be found in the overview of the Middle Rio Grande by

Linda Cordell (1978:46-50).

In 1990, a symposium on Gallina archaeology was held at the Society for

American Archaeology annual meeting in Las Vegas, Nevada. The paper topics included

historic context (Bunker 1990), cultural traits (Ellis and Dodge 1990), ceramics (Knight

1990), settlement patterns (Baker and Langenfeld 1990; Muceus and Lawrence 1990),

social organization (Whatley 1990), communication networks (Dodge 1990; Sleeter

1990), and future research strategies (Gomolak 1990). The discussants were Phillip H.

Shelley, from Eastern New Mexico University, and Florence Hawley Ellis. The symposium was followed by a push to interpret Gallina sites for the public.

The University of New Mexico once again ventured into the Gallina region with the 1993 UNM Archaeological Field School under the direction of Robert Leonard.

Fieldwork consisted of pedestrian block survey on the Tapicitos Plateau (Hudspeth et al.

1994). Another brief academic investigation was conducted by the University of Texas at

El Paso in 1997 (Peterson et al. 1998). The UTEP field school surveyed 1,800 acres in the Wild Horse Canyon area. They recorded 135 sites dating from Archaic to Historic times.

The Gallina area was discussed in the “Pueblo Cultures in Transition” chapter

(Crown et al. 1996) in the Prehistoric Pueblo World book (Adler 1996). This was the beginning of a paleodemographic profile for population movements in the northern Rio

Grande. The Gallina population is interpreted as growing in place without external involvement and then declining quickly with the remaining people moving into other existing aggregated pueblo communities.

Range and ecosystem management was a goal in cultural resource management of the 1990s. This involved large archaeological surveys for prescribed burns and fuel treatment (e.g. Wyatt 1992a, 1996c). Several Wildland Urban Interface projects were performed in the Gallina culture area during the first decade of the 21st century (e.g.

Schub 2002; Stull 2003). The Wildland Urban Interface program creates fuel breaks in forested lands surrounding communities in order to minimize the risk to life and property

from wildfires. Additional research continued when the U.S. Department of Agriculture

commissioned a study of prehistoric and historic sites on the Santa Fe National Forest

(Scheick 2006).

Recent academic research on the Gallina Phase has produced two theses (Myers

2007; Simpson 2008) and two dissertations (Lally 2005; Massouh 2009). Joe Lally

(2005) from the University of New Mexico investigated the cause of structural fires with one case study being a possible Gallina pithouse and surface structure. An assessment of ceramic assemblages at the southern boundary of the Gallina culture area was undertaken by Nate Myers (2007) at Eastern New Mexico University. Gallina ceramics do occur, but are found with numerous other decorated wares from various areas. Erik Simpson (2008) from Prescott College used Gallina architecture to examine the origins and migrations of the Gallina people. The most recent dissertation by Paula Massouh (2009) from

American University focuses on a single Gallina household in the Ojitos District. Her monograph uses museum collections to look at activities and interactions occurring at the household level (Massouh 2004). Field reports from Eastern New Mexico University work on Mesa Portales in the southern part of the Gallina region (Durand 2002, 2003,

2005; Ferriman 2005) and an analysis of materials from the Lagunitas Ruin (Wiseman

2008) also have added to the literature.

GALLINA OVERVIEW

The only recent attempts at synthesis of the Gallina literature have been

Massouh’s (2009) dissertation and Simpson’s (2008) thesis. These documents are a major contribution to Gallina studies, but they do not provide detail across the Gallina

culture. This section provides an overview of all Gallina manifestations. It covers

Gallina chronology, architecture, settlement patterns, material culture, and human

remains.

Chronology

The Gallina chronological sequence remains largely unrefined. Initial occupations have been suggested circa A.D. 850-950, followed by a move to lower and more restricted elevation ranges around A.D. 1000 (Stuart 1987; Stuart and Farwell 1983). This move to lower elevation ranges coincides with an increase in effective moisture and high water tables on the Colorado

Plateau (Euler et al. 1979). Settlement types diversified between A.D. 1000 and 1275; during this period, many sites show two distinct occupations, which may be related to climatic changes specific to the Gallina area. These climatic changes include two dry periods between A.D. 1080-

1125 and 1275-1300 (Holbrook and Mackey 1976). Around A.D. 1275, with the onset of the

Great Drought (Euler et al. 1979), the Gallina area was completely abandoned.

Several phase schemes have been proposed for the Gallina and their predecessors

(Table 5.2). The Largo, Bancos, and Golondrino names in Table 5.2 are alternate phase

names suggested for the Arboles Phase. Researchers (e.g. Ellis 1988; Legare 1989;

Stuart and Gauthier 1981) seem to agree that the Gallina culture derives from the Rosa

settlements to the north. However, the 200 year gap in time between the Rosa and

Gallina Phases is troublesome. Timothy Seaman (1976) postulates that the gap may be

due to bias in excavation of surface structures and more investigation of pithouses could

provide the missing dated sites. David Hill and Mark Willis (1995) mention that

transitional sites may be found on the Jicarilla Apache Reservation. The sites simply

may be deeply buried or have later cultural material that obscures earlier components

100

(Gomolak 1987; Wyatt 1996b), which is probably true for both Rosa Phase and Archaic

Period occupations.

Table 5.2 Phase schemes for the Gallina region Source Rosa Phase Piedra Phase Arboles Phase Gallina Phase Dick 1976, 1988 850-950 LARGO 1050/1100-1300 Ellis 1976, 1988 700-850 850/900-950 925-1050 1050-1300 Ellis & Ellis n.d. 700-850 850-925/950 BANCOS 1050-1300 Legare 1989 700-850 850-950 950-1050 1050-1275 Martinez 1998 700-850 850-950 950-1100 1050/1100-1300 Myers 2007 700-850 850-950 950-1050 1000/1050-1300 Simpson 2008 700-800 800-900/950 950-1050 1050/1100-1275 Sleeter 1987 600-950 LARGO 1100-1275 Stuart & Gauthier 700-850 850-950 950-1050 1050-1275 1981 Wyatt 1995a 700-850 GOLONDRINO GOLONDRINO 1050-1275

Work in the Gobernador and Navajo Reservoir Districts (Eddy 1966; Hall 1944) established the Rosa-Piedra-Arboles chronology. The Rosa Phase (A.D. 700-850) saw a population increase in the Reservoir District with an influx of people from the

Gobernador area (Eddy 1966). There was a tendency toward larger villages composed of six or more pithouses. Compared to the previous Sambrio Phase, pithouses were deepened and enlarged and now had accompanying surface storage structures. The Rosa

Phase saw the transition from low-fired brownware to higher-fired grayware ceramics.

Neck-banded and painted pottery styles also appear at this time. There was a decrease in projectile points and an increase in manos and metates. One burial from the Llaves

Valley was found to have a Rosa Phase radiocarbon date of 1290 ± 100 B.P. (Gomolak

1988; Ogilvie and Hilton 1987).

The Piedra Phase (A.D. 850-950) had a shift in village populations upstream due to environmental changes associated with stream entrenchment (Eddy 1966). Stockades enclosed smaller groups of pithouses and surface structures. The surface structures were

101

used for both storage and habitation. Village size increased with up to 19 pithouses and

13 surface structures at one site. Large kivas emerged in the villages with an introduction

of ritual objects. Black-on-white ceramics consist of both carbon and mineral paint

types. Projectile points continued to decrease in frequency, while groundstone continued

to increase. At this time, there was a high frequency of burned houses and two groups of

unburied burned human remains (Eddy 1966:493). Some pithouses in the Llaves Valley

(Dick 1976, 1988) and on Golondrino Mesa (Wyatt 1995a, 1996b) suggest a pre-Gallina

Phase occupation. Bill Wyatt (1995a, 1996a, 1996b) proposes a Golondrino Phase (A.D.

850-1050) that is transitional from Rosa to Gallina. He focuses on a series of pithouses

with adobe storage/granary features and few painted ceramics.

The Arboles Phase (A.D. 950-1050) continues with movement upstream and a population decrease (Eddy 1966). There was a decrease in site size with only one or two pithouses and surface structures per site. No villages or kivas were present in the Navajo

Reservoir area. Pithouses and surface structures were both used as residences. Slipped black-on-white pottery was a defining trait. Frank Eddy argues that increases in the

abundance of knives, choppers, hammers, and certain groundstone tools indicate a rise in the use of wild plants (1966:503). Between A.D. 1000 and 1050 the Reservoir District was abandoned with a shift of people to the north. Roger Green (1964:39) states “the

Arboles Phase may stand as a northern outgrown of the Rosa Phase [via the Piedra

Phase], while the Largo-Gallina Phase may stand as its southern expression.” Herbert

Dick (1976) would prefer to call this the Largo Phase. Alfred Dittert (cited in Ellis and

Ellis n.d., Reed 1963; Sciscenti 1962) hypothesized that a Bancos Phase developed as some people moved south of the San Juan River at the same time the Arboles group

102

moved to the northeast. The name Bancos Phase comes from the Bancos Black-on-white ceramic type that is described as a transitional Rosa-Gallina pottery (Eddy 1966:385;

Reed 1963; Sciscenti 1962).

The Gallina Phase (A.D. 1050-1275/1300) is coincident with the Gallina culture.

The dates are based on dendrochronological samples from over forty excavated sites

(Table 5.3). Tree-ring results span from A.D. 941vv to 1267rG. The earliest cutting date, 1059r is from the central tower at Rattlesnake Ridge (Robinson and Warren 1971).

Only three sites have 11th century dates. This may be due to bias in selection of villages

for excavation, rather than isolated field structures. It is thought that the single or

multiple unit homesteads occur early in time and that villages arise later, but isolated

homesteads continue throughout the Gallina Phase (Seaman 1976). Twenty percent of

the dated sites come from the 12th century, while 75 percent show occupations during the

13th century. Not all structures at a village were occupied simultaneously (Dick 1976)

and reoccupation of sites did occur (Green 1962, 1964).

The Gallina area seems to follow the “out of phase” highland adaptation with late, post

A.D. 1000, pithouse occupations in upland regions (Stuart and Farwell 1983). Isolated deep pithouses are found in colder, high elevation areas of both the Ancestral Puebloan and Mogollon traditions in the 12th and 13th centuries. The majority of these pithouses occur in forested areas of

piñon-juniper and mixed ponderosa pine between 2,080 to 2,280 meters (6,840-7,500 ft)

elevation. The Gallina pattern is similar to the Valdez Phase of the Taos District (Cordell

1978:48; Stuart and Farwell 1983:119,143). Both pithouses and surface houses are found

together and contemporaneously in the Gallina region. It has been suggested that Gallina houses

were occupied seasonally with surface houses being used in the warmer months and the pithouses

during colder times due to their better heat retention (Elliott 1983).

103

Table 5.3 Dendrochronological dates from the Gallina area

LA No. Site Name Site Type Tree Ring Dates Clustering 641 Capulin Ranger Station village 1004-1106 1106 649 Nogales, Bg 03 cliff house 1239-1267 1260s isolated 653 Kiva House 1023-1258 1250s homestead Chupadero Ranger Station, 654 village 1069-1260 1260 Chupadero Camp 6292 T.P. Site/Leeson Community village 1221, 1240s 1240s 11633 L/102 village 1197-1244 1230s-1240s isolated 11843 Kinslow (Seaman Site) 941-1100 1050-1100 homestead 11850 Fiero Site village 1163-1245 1183,1230s isolated 12054 UC LG 77 1101-1247 1240-1247 homestead isolated 12055 UC LG 42 1144-1257 1245++B homestead isolated 12056 UC LG 42 1252-1280 homestead 12059 Davis Ranch village 1049-1256 1244-1253 isolated 12062 Reconstructed Unit House 1144-1260 1228-1260 homestead isolated 12063 UC LG 231 1046-1259 1231-1259 homestead 12066 UC LG 124 village 1024-1253 1238-1252 isolated 12069 FS 22 1117-1253 1243v homestead isolated 12070 UC LG 368 1047-1257 1237-1257 homestead isolated 12072 UC LG 325 1193-1247 1245-1247 homestead isolated 12073 UC LG 390 1031-1250 1244-1250 homestead isolated no cutting 12378 Evans Site, Bg 07 1181-1261 homestead dates 22860 Cerrito Ruin, Bg 01 village 1239-1240 1200s 22861 Cuchillo House, Bg 02 village 1155-1254 1250-1260 22865 Huerfano Mesa village 1200-1266 1230, 1241 isolated 22897 Alkali Spring 1200-1260 homestead 22915 Carricito Community, Bg 22 village 1187-1264 1200s 22916 Carricito Community, Bg 23 village 1187-1264 early 1200s Carricito Community, Redondo 22917 village 1187-1264 1250s-1260s Tower, Bg 21 35648 Rattlesnake, Hormigas, Bg 19 village 1055-1243 1080s, 1220s,

104

Table 5.3 continued

LA No. Site Name Site Type Tree Ring Dates Clustering and 20 1243 isolated 46307 Owl Point 1150 homestead isolated 57386 Scorpion House, Bg 87 1239 homestead isolated 57398 Trio site, Bg 53 1121 homestead 61568 Leeson Community, Bg 88 village 1211-1249 1211 isolated 61569 Bg 91 1211-1238 1230s homestead 61578 Leeson Community, Bg 51 village 1178-1208 1190-1208 1220s and 61578 Leeson Community, Bg 52 village 1228-1252 1250s 61580 Leeson Community, Bg 95 village 1180-1236 1236 102097 Largo Cliffhouse cliff house 1083

102098 Burriones Cliff House, Bg 30 cliff house 1256-1266 1260-1270 127385 Leeson Community, Bg 92 village 1210-1239 1239 127386 Scorpion Summit House cliff house 1243-1256 1240s-1250s isolated no cutting 127387 Archuleta Ruin, Bg 50 1025-1245 homestead dates Leeson Community, Bg 80-82, 127812 village 1200-1253 1220s-1230s 84, 87 No LA Starve Out Ridge, Bg 08 village 1140-1249

Architecture

Gallina architecture includes pithouses, surface houses, outbuildings, ramadas,

and towers. Much of the structural detail comes from Erik Simpson’s (2008) master’s

thesis that explores Gallina residential architecture and Herbert Dick’s (1976) synthetic

report on Gallina architecture. Eighty-six percent of habitations have a north-south orientation (Simpson 2008). It has been postulated that pithouses with an east-west orientation may be earlier in time following on the Rosa tradition (Dick 1976; Wyatt

1996a).

Pithouse. Gallina pithouses are generally circular with an average diameter of 5.5

meters (Simpson 2008) (Figure 5.6). They were dug into the ground and exposed interior

105

walls commonly were plastered with a series of thin slips of adobe mud composed of a fine clay and colorful shale for tint. The color was white to pinkish to gray. Layers were all applied during the initial construction. The average depth of a Gallina pithouse is 2.2 m deep, which falls in the “very deep” category (Bullard 1962; Simpson 2008).

Figure 5.6 Pithouse construction from Green (1956:Figure 2)

Internal features include a hearth, deflector, ash pit, ventilator, wing walls,

banquettes, storage bins, and niches (Figure 5.7). The hearth is commonly four-sided

sandstone slab-lined or circular clay-lined (some unlined). Many hearths have an adobe

collar. Generally, the deflector is u-shaped and encloses an ash pit that was used to hold

the pointed bottom pots. Radiating heat from the ashes in the hearth and the walls of the

deflector kept the pot in the ash pit warm. The fresh air intake ventilator was located in

the south wall.

106

A Hearth B Deflector C Bin D Ash pit E Banquette F Ventilator G Hearth collar I Post hole L Subfloor cist

Figure 5.7 Pithouse plan drawing from Simpson (2008)

Partitioning the room, the wing walls extend from the wall to the deflector and were built of coursed adobe. A banquette encircled the west, north, and east walls from wing wall to wing wall. Storage bins were located in the wing walls, the banquette, the southeast and southwest corners of the main room above ground, and below the floor.

Rarely bins were placed north of the wing walls or on the roof. They often have small vent holes with sandstone, adobe, or vegetal plugs. Niches used for storage do occur as recesses in the wall. Periodically, sub-floor storage pits are encountered.

Only one structure in the Gallina area appears to have a sipapu (Ellis 1991).

Sipapu is the term used for a small hole in the floor that symbolizes where people emerged from the underworld. Rather than a sipapu, there seems to be a chamber below the bottom slab of the hearth in many Gallina habitations (Dick 1975; Ellis 1988). These

107

chambers have been found to contain smooth river cobbles, fine ash, and partially burned

wood. They may be part of a house blessing ceremony (Ellis 1991; Simpson 2008).

Another unusual feature is the presences of tunnels between structures: pithouse

to pithouse, pithouse to unit house, or pithouse to tower. Similar tunnels connecting

towers and kivas have been found at Mesa Verde (e.g. Burgh 1934; Fewkes 1921;

Lancaster and Van Cleave 1954; Reed 1943) and Hovenweep (e.g. Martin 1929, 1930;

Martin and Rinaldo 1939). Tunnels are known from at least four Gallina sites: Huerfano

Mesa, Butts Village, Fiero Site/LA 11850, and the Bg88 complex (Dick 1976; Ellis 1991;

Fiero 1978; Green et al. 1958; Mackey and Green 1979). With an entrance of about 75-

centimeter diameter, the tunnels are only big enough for one person at a time. Some are

completely subterranean, while others were trenched with a pole and adobe roof. These

tunnels run from 8 to 20 meters or more. This secret movement corridor may have been

ritual or defensive in nature (Simpson 2008).

Surface (Unit) House. Surface unit houses tend to be square and consist of a

single room (Figure 5.8). Walls are thick with widths up to one meter. They vary from six to eight meters in length and stood up to three meters high (Simpson 2008). Large unshaped sandstone blocks with mud chinking were used and the exterior of the structure also was coated with mud. Surface unit house features duplicate the arrangement of pithouse features with only minor differences (Figure 5.9). In Gallina unit houses, the

banquette is built of coursed adobe, masonry, or jacal and the ventilator does not have

timber supports.

108

A Hearth B Deflector C Bin E Banquette F Ventilator G Hearth collar I Post hole J Niche L Subfloor cist M Ladder post X Bin vent

Figure 5.8 Unit House plan drawing from Simpson (2008)

As with pithouses, access to the structure was gained through the roof, evident from ladder depressions in the floor near the deflector. The roof typically was supported by four posts placed in the wing walls and the banquette. Roof storage bins are in evidence at some dwellings (Dick 1976, 1988), along with flagstones on the roof work area (Hibben 1939:58). The interior walls were plastered with a combination of adobe mud and fine clay. A similar plaster was used to level the floor, which was then covered with large tabular sandstone flagstones in the main room or just the area around the hearth.

109

Figure 5.9 Reconstructed Gallina Unit House (LA 12062) interior photographs by author

The floor space is consistent between pithouses and unit houses with an average of 25 square meters. This falls in William Bullard’s (1962) large category. The structure is divided into a main room and a partition room by the wing walls and deflector. The main room was the general living area used for food preparation, eating, and sleeping, while the partition room did not have flagstones and was used for miscellaneous storage

(Simpson 2008).

Frank Hibben (1948) defines a separate architectural form called “pueblo-like structures.” His description conflates multi-room habitations and surface storage structures. Multi-room habitation structures are rare in the Gallina area (Dick 1980).

They consist of between two and seven surface houses with contiguous walls. There are

110

no interior doorways and entrance for each unit was via the roof. Typical interior

features are present in each room. Double unit houses are found at a few sites, such as

Rattlesnake Ridge, the Evans Site, and Owl Point. Carricito has two separate multi-room habitation blocks with five and seven rooms each (Green 1964).

Outbuilding. The outbuildings typically consist of small contiguous compartments

with thin stone walls, jacal construction, adobe alone, or various combinations of these

three methods (Figure 5.10). They have raised floors with no doorways or fire pits

(Figure 5.11). The outbuildings average one to four rooms, but have been noted with up

to twenty-seven rooms in an arc (e.g. Bahti 1949; Fiero 1978). The uses of outbuildings

include corn drying, storage, turkey pens, mealing rooms, and burials of both turkeys and

humans. They tend to be associated with either a pithouse or a unit house (e.g. Green

1956; Lange 1956). One in six pithouses has a surface outbuilding, but they are less

commonly associated with unit houses (Dick 1976).

111

Figure 5.10 Outbuilding plan drawing from Fiero (1978:Figure 21)

Storage rooms also are associated with agricultural features. These are smaller rectangular structures, generally one or two meters by two meters (Anschuetz 2006;

Wyatt 1996a), and sometimes incorporate natural boulders as part of their construction

(Sciscenti 1962). Bigger storage roomblocks have been noted with large field systems, such as the five room building with raised floors at Bg91 (Green et al. 1958). The size, construction, and location of these structures suggests use for field monitoring, maintenance, and crop harvesting (Ware et al. 1999:2.67), similar to the function of

Puebloan fieldhouses (Ellis 1978; Haury 1956; Moore 1978, 1979).

112

Figure 5.11 Raised floor diagram from Green et al. (1958:Figure 3)

Another form of outbuilding has been variously called “granaries” (Green et al.

1958:56) and “gallina unit pueblos” (Mohr and Sample 1972). They are heavy walled,

multi-roomed constructions with attached or enclosed unit houses (Mohr and Simopoulis

1976). These buildings have raised floors with thin interior walls of coursed adobe or

narrow masonry (Sample and Mohr 1975). This variant is more commonly found in the

Ojitos District (Simpson 2008). Storage cists are found associated with habitations

occasionally (Green 1962; Pattison 1968).

Ramada. In the Gallina area, ramadas consist of a post and roof system without

walls (Mackey and Green 1979:145) (Figure 5.12). The roof was built with poles and

mortar. Some of the ramadas were then enclosed with brush walls (Mackey 1976; Moore

1988). This may explain the disarray of “post” holes in the adjacent burned adobe area at

the Archuleta pithouse (Green 1956). These structures, such as LA 12074, are

amorphous and produce little debris (Holbrook and Mackey 1975).

113

Figure 5.12 Ramada post holes from Mackey and Green (1979:Figure 5)

Other general shelters, such as windbreaks and sun shades, also have been discovered (Bahti 1949; Ellis 1988; Fiero 1978; Ware et al. 1999). At LA 11850,

Activity Area B was set up as a windbreak and sun shade area associated with four mealing bins (Figure 5.13). Activity Area C had a concentration of artifacts with two post holes, suggesting that this was a sun shade attached to an outbuilding (Fiero 1978).

Another example of a windbreak is described as a partial alignment of large sandstone blocks used for a low wall with a soil stain to the northeast of the rock alignment (Ware et al. 1999:2.3). All kinds of shelters can be found in villages or connected to seasonal camps (e.g. Ellis 1988; Fiero 1978; Moore 1988).

114

Figure 5.13 Windbreak in Activity Area B from Fiero (1978:Figure 22)

Tower. Towers can be identified as “peaked, circular mounds without a central depression” (Mackey and Green 1979:145) and “exhibit thick double wall construction of dressed masonry blocks” (Upham and Reed 1989:155) (Figure 5.14). The double walls were thick with a rubble fill. The ventilator shaft for the interior hearth was built inside the rubble section of the wall. Towers were entered through the roof. The estimated original height of these structures was between eight and ten meters with diameters from five to nine meters (Hibben 1948; Simpson 2008). The top of the tower would have cleared the surrounding trees and allowed for visibility in all directions (Upham and Reed

1989). This would have facilitated line-of sight communication among towers (e.g.

115

Douglass 1917a; Sleeter 1987; Byrd 2010) and they could have been used as observation locations to protect community fields (Baker and Lagenfield 1990).

Figure 5.14 Bg 21 Redondo Tower at the Carricito Community, photograph by author

Initial work on Gallina towers (Douglass 1917a; Hibben 1948; Schulman

1950:293) indicated that towers were both circular and rectangular in form, but that the exteriors were always somewhat rounded. There appears to have been confusion separating towers and unit house surface remains, but currently towers are defined as circular structures (Dick 1976) (Figure 5.15). In one instance, a unit house was converted into a tower at Rattlesnake Ridge (Bg 19 structure). There are 90 recorded towers in the

Gallina area (Byrd 2010) and they tend to be associated with villages, although they can be found in isolation (Dick 1976). The floors were covered with flagstones in some instances and bins, banquettes, and murals have occasionally been found (Fiero 1978;

Hibben 1948; Schulman 1950:293). Sometimes another structure was attached or

116

connected to the tower, like a unit house, pithouse, or cist (Green 1962; Green et al.

1958:55; Hibben 1948; Schulman 1950:293).

Figure 5.15 Bg 20 tower at Rattlesnake Ridge, photograph by author

Data from seven excavated towers (Green 1962, 1964; Hatch et al. 1994;

Holbrook and Mackey 1975; Mackey and Green 1979) show evidence of defensive use based on burning, human remains, defensive location, and defensive features. The defensive features include thick double-wall construction with fine masonry, greater wall height than other structures, building on artificial mounds to increase height, and connecting towers with habitations through subsurface tunnels (Mackey and Green

1979). Some towers, e.g. Bg 20, 21, and 88T, were converted into storage structures for corn during a secondary occupation (Green 1962, 1964; Mackey and Green 1979). Marie

Wormington (1955) suggests towers in general had some ritual use, but Gallina towers do

117

not commonly have ceremonial features, such as murals, niches, and benches, and most importantly they are not large enough to hold a group for ritual activities (Green and

Mackey 1979:149). As defensive structures, Gallina towers were not very successful in preventing violence, but they may have allowed the watchman to provide a warning when the attackers first appeared and they could have been used to signal for help.

Settlement Patterns

In the Llaves area, pit houses outnumber surface houses by five or six to one

(Dick 1976). The sequence of architecture is suggested as pithouses only occurring earlier and pithouses and surface unit houses together occurring later (Dick and Davidson

1985; Elyea 1994; Seaman 1976). Cliff dwellings appear toward the end of the sequence. The typical community is characterized as a dispersive village (Dick 1980;

1988). A dispersive village consists of scattered or physically separated habitations placed in preferred areas or bounded by a topographic feature (Anschuetz 1998; Dick

1980). Population estimates for the Huerfano community were calculated at around 40 people (Davidson 1978; Dick and Davidson 1985). This estimate is consistent with household size suggested by whole ceramic vessel volumes studies in Chapter Six of this dissertation. Steven LeBlanc (1999:149) states that the Gallina population was not large overall.

Gallina villages occur in four types of locations: cliff edges, promontories, and narrow ridges; flat mesa tops; low terraces along streams; and caves or overhangs

(Hibben 1948). Isolated homesteads generally are located in open valleys, on slopes, or on low ridges (Simpson 2008). Gallina sites as a whole tend to occur on topographic rises with only seven percent of habitations located in valley bottoms (Muceus and

118

Lawrence 1990). This happens across time in the Gallina region, especially pithouse

sites. Pithouses are the most common Gallina site type and have the largest range in

elevation (Elyea 1994).

Based on several settlement pattern studies (Elyea 1994; Elliott and Smith 1985;

Muceus and Lawrence 1990; Plog 1984; Sleeter 1987) there are at least five different

interpretations for the location of Gallina sites on topographic rises: 1. conserving

agricultural land, 2. stabilizing pithouses in valley alluvium is difficult and they could

flood in the valleys, 3. patterning of sites on terraces and ridges is typical of river valleys,

4. showing preference for specific vegetation zones, and 5. raiding and warfare defensive

locales. Placement also has been associated with locations having better drainage (Ellis

1991; Wyatt 1996a) and to catch the mountain breeze to drive away the bugs (Ceram

1971; Winter 1983:3). As for them all being defensive, Richard Sleeter (1987) shows

that violence increases around A.D. 1250, but habitation sites are still occurring in the

same elevation ranges throughout the 13th century. Actually, the elevation is bimodal between A.D. 1200 and 1249 with modes at 2,100 meters (6,900 ft) and 2,250 meters

(7,400 ft). Between A.D. 1250 and 1300 the mode for habitation sites is 2,200 meters

(7,200 ft). Therefore, no change in habitation site location with respect to elevation co-

occurs with the increase in violence.

The Ojitos and Llaves Districts have the highest site densities (Dick 1976;

Simpson 2008). A cluster analysis was performed on sites in the Llaves District and

found five spatial groups (Sleeter 1987). When line-of-sight was checked between towers in the Llaves District, about 80% of the towers could be visually linked based on

119

topographic location (Sleeter 1987). These results were supported by a GIS study of intervisiblity among 90 towers in the Gallina area (Byrd 2010). Adam Byrd (2010) found that there were two clusters corresponding to the Ojito and Llaves Districts, but overall lines-of-sight showed alliance between the two districts.

A signaling experiment was conducted in 1986 using selenite – a glassy form of gypsum – and smoke (Page 1986). Selenite signals could be seen at a distance of almost eight kilometers (5 miles). Other tower studies (Baker and Langenfeld 1990; Byrd 2010;

Sleeter 1990) found that towers in the Gallina area were spaced from five to nine kilometers (3-5.5 miles) apart. These distances could be traversed with shaved and polished selenite lenses (A. Ellis 1991). Selenite pendants from Gallina sites show knowledge of and access to selenite. Based on ethnographic research, smoke and fire signals also were used in the Ancestral Puebloan area (F. Ellis 1956; F. Ellis and Dodge

1987).

Timothy Seaman (1976) believes that architectural and functional differences in sites may come from internal development through time. Settlement moves from early pithouse sites to communities with multiple structure types. The group size increases to village based sites from an earlier nuclear or extended family group. Emil Haury (1956) recognized that with aggregation into larger villages some fields were far away. “This demanded more time in transit to and from field work and greater risk of loss of crops to marauders. The distant farmhouse [isolated homestead], strategically located with respect to the fields, was the solution. This served jointly as a temporary home, as an observation post, and for crop storage at harvest time” (1956:7). Therefore, the isolated

120

homestead may have been a function of aggregation. Aggregation can be defensive in

that it increases the number of people at a site that can defend it.

The Gallina lived in isolation and the Llaves District had a high site density

during the mid-1200s. This may reflect population pressure, which in turn led to competition and may explain the evidence for violence (Seaman 1976). Conflict in the

Gallina area is indicated by defensive architecture, such as towers and cliff houses, burned structures with human remains, and human remains with embedded projectile

points and skull trauma (human remains are discussed below). Burned structures are

defined as having roof clay fired to bright red, gray pottery refired and oxidized to a

bright red paste, and quantities of carbonized roofing beams or corn (Mackey and Green

1979). Based on surface vestiges, 34% of habitations burned (Mackey and Green 1979;

Mackey and Holbrook 1978) and results from excavations were consistent showing 33%

of the sites as burnt, including two that had no surface indications of conflagration

(Mackey and Green 1979).

Another element of the conflict puzzle is the significantly deteriorating climatic

conditions in the 13th century (Mackey and Holbrook 1978; Mackey and Green

1979:153). Subsistence moves from a high degree of hunting to emphasis on storage of

surplus foods, both wild and domestic (Seaman 1976). Multiple occupations of sites with

transformation of older structures into storage and thin, unstratified midden deposits point

to short occupations with frequent movement of people in the Gallina area during the

mid-to-late A.D. 1200s (Green et al. 1958:58). Dates from burned structures with human

121

remains and structures with skeletons showing trauma also support the 13th century time frame (Robinson and Warren 1971; Robinson et al. 1974).

Material Culture

Four artifacts have been noted as characteristic of the Gallina Phase: pointed bottom pots, tri-notched axes, elbow pipes, and comb arrowshaft straighteners (Hibben

1938; Mera 1938). Antler celts and basal tanged knives also have been added to the list

(Hibben 1939). Nancy Wilkinson (1958) provides a succinct summary of the Gallina material remains. Many excavated Gallina sites have rich assemblages. One site, LA

11805, will be used as an exemplar for the discussion of Gallina material culture.

Excavated by Kathleen Fiero (1978) through the Museum of New Mexico, LA 11850 consists of two pithouses, two towers, and a 21 room outbuilding. The artifact assemblage is composed of ceramics, lithics, groundstone, bone, perishables, ornaments, and ceremonial items.

Ceramics. Gallina ceramics include both painted and utility types, which are further investigated and described in Chapter Six of this dissertation. Harold Colton

(1965) places Gallina Black-on-gray under the white or gray pottery tradition in the Rio

Grande Series of the Tusayan Gray Ware. Tusayan Gray Ware is described as light to dark gray in color with a scraped surface that is rarely smoothed or polished. No slip and a dull black paint if decorated. Some textured types do occur. Temper is quartz and feldspar sand ranging in size from medium fine to coarse grains. The temper tends to protrude through the surface. Bowls and jars are the most common forms. The Gallina types follow the Tusayan Gray Ware in most elements.

122

Frank Hibben (1949) summarized Gallina pottery types based on the earlier work

of Harry Mera (1935, 1938) and his own excavations. He identified eight ceramic types,

but his students (Green 1956, 1962; Lange 1941, 1956) collapsed them into three types:

black-on-gray, plain, and coarse. Gallina Black-on-gray has a fine-grained homogeneous paste, medium to light gray in color with a fine quality sand temper. Vessels were formed by coiling and were thinned by scraping. The surface is therefore smooth and regular with scraping striations on the interior of closed forms. The forms include large and small ollas with lugs, small bowls, and effigy pots. The surface is not slipped.

Decoration consists of dull grayish-black carbon paint dots, cross hachures, occasional zoomorphs, hour-glass figures, and checkerboards.

The Gallina Plain Utility type has a gray to dark gray fine- to coarse-grained paste with a quartz sand temper. Vessels were formed by coiled and bonded construction and they were thinned by a method resembling paddle and anvil. The exterior is even with some smoothing, while the interior shows depressions that may be finger indentations, rather than anvil impressions (evidenced by a finger print retained in the clay of a sherd from Nogales Cliff House). The principal forms are pointed or semi- pointed bottom pots with wide orifices and lugs. The pointed bottom pots are described as tall jars with no decoration other than fillets near the mouth and some surface sparkle from muscovite flecks.

The Gallina Coarse Utility type has a medium dark gray to very dark gray coarse sandy paste with large quartz pebbles and fragments of quartz and feldspar. Vessels were formed by coiling and scraping (regular scraping marks can be seen on the exterior).

123

The surface is often fire blackened and crumbly with a rough and gritty, but fairly even

texture. The forms include wide mouthed, squat, flat, or indented bottom jars and bowls.

There is no decoration on these ceramics.

At LA 11850, forty-nine whole and reconstructable vessels were found along with

36,805 sherds. The separation of the ceramic types into Gallina Gray and Gallina Utility was based on paste, temper, and surface treatment. Unfired vessels have been recovered on occasion from other Gallina sites (Hibben 1949; Wilkinson 1958). The forms coming from the whole vessels are jars, ollas, canteens, bowls, seed jars, miniature bowls, and effigy pots in Gallina Gray, while the Gallina Utility had small-mouthed jars, large-

mouthed jars, bowls, and miniature vessels. The large-mouthed pointed bottom pots with

soot on the exterior were the standard utility vessel (Fiero 1978:109). Numerous worked

and drilled sherds were recovered from each ceramic type. The worked sherds were used

for scraping, abrading, and as a fiber or cordage tool, and possibly for gaming,

ornamentation, or as spindle whorls. Nine of the total sherds were intrusive: one

Mogollon Smudged Brownware, one McElmo Black-on-white, four Mancos Black-on-

white, and one Wiyo Black-on-white. As is typical of Gallina sites, tradewares are rare to non-existent in ceramic assemblages (Green 1956; Lange 1956). In addition, a portion of a tubular clay pipe came from the fill of the south pithouse.

Lithics. Lithic debitage was not documented in early excavations. The tools were

the focus of the chipped-stone descriptions. Fiero’s work (1978) produced an analysis of

both debitage and tools and their distributions across the site. Chert was the predominant

raw material (Fiero 1978:204). Tools consisted of projectile points, bifaces, drills,

scrapers, and utilized flakes. Frank Hibben (1938) includes a semi-lanceolate or basal

124

tanged knife in his Gallina characteristic trait list. These basal tanged knives are described as having two forms: pointed basal tang with parallel sides above the hafting notches and a variant with a straight or convex end (Green 1962:152; Kleindienst

1956:10). Projectile points appear to be found in greater numbers at Gallina sites (Wyatt

1996a). Points and scrapers have been found cached in pots (Green 1964:38; Pattison

1968:72; Wilkinson 1958).

Projectile points generally are small triangular side-notched or corner-notched points with flat, concave, and rounded bases (Wikinson 1958; Wyatt 1996a). At Fiero’s site, side-notched, corner-notched, and stemmed projectile points were recovered. The side-notched style composed almost 60% of the points. Hibben (1939:228) had a majority of corner-notched broad bladed points with expanding bases and saw these as the local Gallina type (Figure 5.16). While the side-notched narrow bladed points with squarish bases were found embedded in the victims of the attack at Cuchillo and were the type of the enemy (Hibben 1939:229). Later Hibben decided that both types are indigenous (Lange 1941:40 note 4). Un-notched triangular points also occur (Ellis 1988;

Lange 1941). On Gallina sites one also can find Middle Archaic San Jose or McKean type points (Lane et al. 2004; Wyatt 1995b), which have been speculated to be associated with the Gallina Phase (Bertram 1988). Bill Wyatt (1996a) suggests that Archaic style points appear to lag into the Gallina period due to contemporary use of atlatls and the bow and arrow.

125

Figure 5.16 Gallina projectile point shapes from Ellis (1988:182-185) [Note: not to scale or relative to one another]

Hibben (1939) documented the corner-notched as predominately made from

Pedernal chert and the side-notched from obsidian, while Florence Hawley Ellis (1988) noted obsidian side-notched points as the most common type. The Evans Site (Lange

1941) shows a similar trend with three forms present: side-notched, corner-notched, and un-notched. The side-notched were mostly obsidian, the three corner-notched were all chalcedony, and the two un-notched triangular points were both obsidian and chalcedony.

Even though obsidian is preferred for some of the projectile points, chert tends to be the most abundant lithic material at sites (e.g. Lane et al. 2004).

Steven Shackley (1999) conducted a source provenance of 62 obsidian bifaces and pieces of debitage from nine Gallina sites, representing the Rattlesnake Ridge,

Leeson, and Carricito villages, along with the Archuleta Pithouse, Burriones Cliff House, and the Evans Site. All of the artifacts were produced from two obsidian sources in the

Jemez Mountains. The materials come from the El Rechuelos Rhyolite of the Polvadera

Group to the north and the Valle Grande Member of the Tewa Group in the Valles

Caldera.

Other stone implements from LA 11850 included axes, mauls, floor polishers, pot polishers, quartzite hammerstones, arrowshaft straighteners, a sandstone griddle, and circular sandstone pot covers. Pestles also have been noted in the Gallina area (Lange

126

1941:44; Wilkinson 1958). As an alternative to the stone pot lids, some Gallina vessels

were sealed with clay pot plugs (Hibben 1939:139-143; Lange 1941:46; Wilkinson

1958). Bins also were covered with shaped stone slabs (Hibben 1939:60; Lange 1941:46;

Wilkinson 1958). Clay bin plugs, similar to the pot plugs, have been found in place at the

bases of interior bins (Hibben 1939:144-145; Lange 1941:46). Another possible covering

stone, are the “capitals” (Hibben 1939:56-57; Lange 1941:41) that have been described as

round sandstone discs for the top of the roof posts. These discs are problematic and their

purpose has been questioned (Wilkinson 1958). They tend to be found with roof debris,

which led Roger Green (1962:150) to suggest they are hatchway covers. The occurrence

of four discs or fragments per house also could relate to the presence of roof bins with

them functioning as corner roof bin covers.

Groundstone. The groundstone objects at Fiero’s site were mostly grinding tools of local arkosic sandstone. Both slab and basin metates were unearthed with two-hand and one-hand manos. The slab metates and two-hand manos make up the majority, which is in keeping with other Gallina sites (Wilkinson 1958). A palette with traces of hematite on the surface was found in the fill of the outbuilding. A sandstone pipe fragment came from the north tower. Eight stone cylinders were found in various parts of the site and were made from sandstone, limestone, calcite and an igneous rock. Gallina cylinders also can be made from clay (Hibben 1939:136; Lange 1941:47). Possible functions of the cylinders are as tiponi, “cloud mountains,” altar pedestals, fire dogs, or props for raised floors.

Bone and Antler. Awls are the most common bone tools at LA 11850 and at

other Gallina habitations. Only one of the awls from Fiero’s excavation would fit the

127

definition of a dagger, being over 20 centimeters in length (LeBlanc 1999:113). Several

bone counters or gaming pieces came from the floor and fill of the north pithouse.

Needles, spatulate forms, flakers, and bird bone whistles also were found. The spatulate

forms may have functioned as rubbing tools or scrapers. These seem to be related to the

antler celts that Hibben (1938) includes in his characteristic traits of Gallina assemblages.

Antler axes and adzes also have been recovered previously (Hibben 1939:150-154;

Wilkinson 1958).

Mammal leg-bones, mammal ribs, and bird bones were all present at LA 11850

and suggest a considerable reliance on hunting (Fiero 1978:203). The faunal remains

consisted of elk, deer, rabbits, gophers, wood rats, and turkeys. Tools were produced

from deer, elk, gray wolf, bobcat, and coyote or dog. Beaver bones and a bison phalanx

may have been trade items. Mountain or Bighorn sheep and Pronghorn antelope bones

have been identified at other Gallina sites (Lange 1941; Seaman 1976).

Perishables. This category includes wood, fiber, and basketry artifacts, along

with botanical remains. The wooden pieces were fragmentary at LA 11850. Known

wooden objects from Gallina sites consist of digging sticks, bows, arrows, knife-shafts, cradle-boards, billets, seed-beaters, bowls, platters, ladles, gouges, spatulas, ladder sections, and toggles, which may be gaming pieces (Hibben 1939:199-214; Wilkinson

1958). Types of wood represented are piñon, juniper, ponderosa pine, oak, box elder, mountain mahogany, willow, cottonwood, and sacaton reed for the arrowshafts.

A single yucca cordage sandal fragment was recovered during Fiero’s

excavations. Woven sandals from the Gallina area are described as predominantly

twilled with corner-notched toes and square heels (Hibben 1939:182-194; Wilkinson

128

1958). Cordage was worked employing whole leaves, twisted fibers, and braiding

(Hibben 1939:165-169). Whole yucca leaves were used as reinforcement in adobe walls, to bind cracked pottery vessels being looped through the paired repair holes, and to form harnesses or suspension systems for ceramics. Yucca and human hair were the only surviving materials from the cordage.

Hibben’s work produced numerous fiber items (1939:161-165). Yucca was twilled to create a bow guard. Matting was made from twined muhlenbergia grass, juniper bark, and rush. A net bag was formed with yucca cord in an open netting weave combined with fine human hair cordage to fill the openings. Another bag was twined from shredded juniper bark. Also of importance are pot rings used to support the pointed-bottom vessels. The ring consists of loosely gathered yucca fibers or shredded juniper bark wrapped with split yucca leaves. More commonly a worn basket with a hole in the center was placed in a slight depression on the floor to support the pointed-bottom pots.

Basketry was preserved in several Gallina sites (Hibben 1939:171-178; Wilkinson

1958). The majority are coiled with a few woven/wicker specimens. Materials are yucca with the addition of willow in the wicker ones. The coiled examples tend to be two-rod and bundle with interlocking stitches. Shapes are dominated by the open circular tray with others in the form of bowls, carrying baskets, and pointed-bottomed bottles – sometimes pitch-coated.

Hides were tanned and used by the Gallina people (Hibben 1939:169-170). A piece of deerskin was found with sinew stitching. Other fragments of processed animal skins were formed into bags to hold corn pollen and medicine bundles. No fabrics have

129

been recovered in the Gallina area, but possible frames and wall pegs for weaving are mentioned (Dick 1976:25, 43; Hibben 1939:61, 69; Lange 1941:23, 28-29), along with suspected shuttles (Green 1962:152; Hibben 1939:156). Numerous worked sherds were recovered at LA 11850, but none were definitely identified as spindle whorls (Fiero

1978:135). A rack for weaving may have been necessary to create the feather cord cloth found with one of the burials at Gavilan Cliff House. Feather cord cloth was made from yucca cords wrapped around split quills of the down feathers from golden eagles and turkeys (Hibben 1939:159-160).

Corn appears to be the main source of food at LA 11850. Squash also was recovered here. The final element of the triumvirate, beans, has been found at other

Gallina sites (Dick 1976:55; Hibben 1939:243-244). Corn was stored in roof bins for unit houses and in outbuildings for pithouses, while the interior bins held tools and materials (Dick 1988; Murray 1978). Corn husk braids were found in large numbers during Hibben’s research (1939:168-169), suggesting that a couple ears of corn would have their husks turned back and braided together to be hung in the houses. Wild grasses, amaranth and ragweed, were stored and processed at Fiero’s site (1978:203). Seeds, nuts, and berries have come out of some excavations (e.g. Hibben 1939:243-244; Lange

1941:59).

Ornaments. Beads and pendants are the primary Gallina ornamentation. These items are well represented at LA 11850. The pendants are ovoid or rectangular in shape and consist of selenite, kaolin, limonite and shell, calcite, bird skull, other bone, and possibly some of the worked sherds. Other materials used for pendants were gypsum and travertine (Wilkinson 1958). Selenite seems to be a preferred material for the pendants

130

(e.g. Green 1964:38; Pattison 1968:79), which may be connected to its use for signaling lenses.

Beads occur in tubular and disc forms. At LA 11850, both stone, including a drilled gypsum crystal, and bone were used for beads. Ceramic, shell, selenite, basalt, tuff, travertine, and slate beads have been uncovered in the Gallina area (Lange 1941:57;

Seaman 1976:55, 99; Wilkinson 1958). Bone appears to dominate the choice for beads, although over five hundred travertine beads were recovered from Bg88T along with two pounds of travertine fragments (Black and Rook 1955). Additionally, effigies of birds and beetles were cut from gypsum and selenite for use as ornaments or amulets (Hibben

1939:235-236; Wilkinson 1958).

Ceremonial Objects. The most likely ceremonial object from Fiero’s excavation

(1978:95) is the tiponi from Activity Area C. Tiponi are corn-mother figures made of conically shaped pieces of sandstone. Three of these fetish symbols were discovered near the hearths at the Evans Site (Lange 1941:44-45, 1944). An alternate interpretation of these objects is their use as pedestals or “cloud mountains” on an altar (Wilkinson 1958).

They also could have a more mundane function as fire dogs or props for raised floors.

Several of the previously described artifacts from LA 11850 may have ritual uses: pipes, whistles, gaming pieces, palettes, and cylinders. At Nogales Cliff House, prayer sticks, pahos, were preserved in one of the storage cists (Hibben 1939:208-209). They were made of willow and box elder, with one exception of sacaton reed in the form of a cross. There are striations on the surface of the prayer sticks and a few have remnants of pigment. No feathers were attached, but feathers from mountain blue bird and red- shafted flicker were found in the fill at Nogales. These feathers probably were used for

131

decoration on pahos. Additionaly, feathers from a western red-tail hawk were embedded in the floor of a structure (Hibben 1939:170).

Mineral specimens of kaolin, malachite, azurite, argillite, and calcite came from the storage rooms at LA 11850. Also, sandstone concretions, petrified wood, and quartzite cobbles from a lightening stone set were recovered. Gallina medicine bundles have been found in tanned skin bags, a basket, and an olla (Hibben 1939:237). They consist of crystals, pigments, clay, fossils, concretions, unusual rocks, antler tines, and long bones of small mammals. The quartz and chalcedony pebbles were polished and grooved, which suggests use as lightening stones (Hibben 1939:220). Another ritual cache from the Butts Village included pieces of travertine, quartz lightening stones, two bird-shaped sandstone concretions, a stone axe head, and a group of modified coprolites

(Ellis 1988:39-40). The travertine probably came from the nearby cave out of which a tributary of the Rio Gallina flows.

It seems that basic religious activities were associated with the household (Green

1964:39; Mackey and Green 1979:150) and may have been hearth-centered. Florence

Hawley Ellis (1988, 1991) uncovered sub-hearth chambers with tiny sipapus in common habitation structures. The mini-sipapu may represent a familial shrine or be part of a house blessing ceremony (Anschuetz 2006; Ellis 1988, 1991; Simpson 2008). At the village scale, Herbert Dick (1988) suggests that a council house was present for each community. Pithouse 78 is the largest structure on Huerfano Mesa with a 7.5 meter diameter (Dick 1978). It had 17 layers of plaster on the walls and a piece of polished turquoise embedded in the wall above the ventilator. The hearth was collared and had a

132

25 centimeter wide groove surrounding it. In the main room, the encircling bench was capped with a layer of red clay before it was plastered.

House III at Nogales Cliff House may be another ritual structure. It is the largest room in the community and had a substantial figurative mural (Hibben 1939:41; Pattison

1968:41). The fire pit is big and has a high coping of adobe. In the southwest corner of the main room is an adobe platform on the floor. A banquette also encircles this room.

Ceremonial objects were recovered from the storage cist associated with this house. A proposed Gallina “kiva” was unearthed at the Butts Village (Ellis 1988, 1991; Hayden

1978) connected by a tunnel to the house (GBN-1) with the previously mentioned religious cache. The “kiva” (GBN-6) has typical Gallina habitation interior features with the addition of two sipapus in the floor to the north of the hearth. The sipapus were outlined with yellow pigment and were covered, one by a red sandstone disk and the other sealed with clay. Ellis (1988:41) conjectures that the sealed sipapu near the fire pit may have been obstructed when the fire was being fed. It appears to be ritually closed and the farther sipapu probably replaced it.

Imagery. Gallina murals consist of repeated motifs or combinations of different elements: a floral or plant motif, animals and birds, pennants, pendants, stacked triangles, checkerboards, eyes, and targets (Green 1962; Hatch et al. 1994; Hibben 1939;

Kleindienst 1956; Lange 1941; Wilkinson 1958) (Figure 5.17). The murals were done on a whitish gypsum wash background with red hematite or black carbon paint (Hibben

1939:72), although the birds at Nogales Cliff House were painted in white on the brown adobe wall. House V at Cerrito was the only structure that Hibben backfilled and he did

133

so to preserve the murals. Petroglyphs also are known from the Gallina area (Kleindienst

1956; Pattison 1968; Reed 2004).

Figure 5.17 Examples of Gallina murals from Wilkinson (1958:Figure 1)

Human Remains

Based on the NAGPRA lists generated by the Maxwell Museum and the Museum of New Mexico and information in the published literature, over 150 individuals have been recovered from Gallina sites (Table 5.4). Analysis on Gallina human remains has been conducted by Robert Bell (1940), James Chase (1976, 1978), Frank Hibben3 (1939),

Charles Lange (1940), Greg Nelson and Feicia Madimenos (2010), and David Weaver

(1976). The idea of different genetic populations or a Plains association has been

questioned (King 1992). A comparison of physical features between Gallina individuals

and other populations from the Ancestral Puebloan tradition showed a greater similarity

of Gallina peoples to Rosa individuals (Mackey 1977). Research conducted by the

Christy and Jacqueline Turner (Turner et al. 1993) examined the skeletons from five

3 The text in Hibben’s dissertation is a copy of the texts in Bell and Lange’s papers.

134

massacre sites for evidence of cannibalism. Their investigation did not support anthropophagy in these groups. The age and sex ratios, along with the context, of the 55 individuals in the massacre study suggest raiding and captive taking due to the high number of males and low number of females and children.

Earlier research on violence in the Gallina area (Mackey and Green 1979; Mackey and Holbrook 1978) indicates that 44% of Gallina individuals are found in communal interments/unburied on floors of burned structures and that 31% of individuals show evidence of violent death. Another skeletal series (Chase 1976) has similar results with

38% of individuals exhibiting trauma, and 60% of the adults suffering a violent death.

Overall, the Gallina skeletal population has 57% individuals dying from violence, but

91% of those are from six massacres (see Table 5.4).

Table 5.4 Human remains from the Gallina area

LA No. Site Name Individuals References Violent 641 Capulin 1 Mera 1938, Green et al. 1958 0 Hibben 1939, Lange 1940, Bell 1940, 649 Nogales 21 Pattison 1968 9 654 Chupadero Arroyo 3 Chase 1976, Mera 1938 3 1365 Butts Village 2 Ellis and Ellis n.d., Ellis 1991 0 2298 Tapicitoes, Bg 05 2 Hibben 1939, Lange 1940 0 6163 Gallina Burial 1 Reed 1963 0 6865 Lagunitas Ruin 1 Wiseman 2008, Hammack 1965 0 6866 Bull Snake Hill 1 Hammack 1965 0 11633 L/102 6 Massouh 2004, 2009 0 11841 Whiteaker Site 1 Weaver 1976, Whiteaker 1976 1 11843 Kinslow 5 Seaman 1976 0 11850 Fiero Site 4 Fiero 1978 0 12060 Mackey private 3 Mackey unpublished 0 12063 Mackey FS 1 Holbrook and Mackey 1975 0 12378 Evans Site 1 Lange 1941 0 22861 Cuchillo 17 Hibben 1939, Lange 1940, Bell 1940 16 22865 Huerfano Mesa 13 Chase 1976, Dick and Davidson 1985 1

135

Table 5.4 continued

LA No. Site Name Individuals References Violent 22902 Alkali Springs 2 Chase 1976 0 22915 Carricito 1 Green 1964 0 22925 Hacha Ridge 3 Dick 1978 0 23043 Lleguas Canyon 1 Chase 1976 1 Bahti 1949, Greet et al. 1958, Hatch et al. 35648 Rattlesnake Ridge 37 1994 35 Nelson 2010, National Geographic web 49387 Canada Simon I 7 article 7 Mackey and Green 1979, Black and Rook 61568 Starve Out Bg 88 12 1955 11 61569 Leeson Bg 91 1 Green et al. 1958 0 61578 Leeson Bg 51 5 Mackey and Green 1979 5 84870 Gavilan 2 Hibben 1939, Lange 1940, Bell 1940 0 No LA Llaves Valley 4 Chase 1976 2 No LA King Ranch 1 Mackey unpublished 0 159 91

Skeletal Remains. The few osteological studies of Gallina skeletal materials (Bell

1940; Chase 1976, 1978; Lange 1940; Weaver 1976) are consistent in their descriptions.

Females averaged 151cm in stature, while males were around 158cm (Bell 1940; Chase

1976, 1978; Hibben 1939). It was rare to live beyond age 45 with 70% of the Adams

State College series dead by age 30 (Chase 1976). Women seem to outlive men and most

of the elderly burials are female.

Both Lange (1940) and Chase (1976, 1978) found lambdoid flattening, possibly

from cradle-boarding, occipital curvature or deformed occipital and parietal bones, and

dental abscess and caries with severely worn dentition. Chase (1976, 1978) also noted

secondary pitting of the parietals, pyorrhea – inflammation of the sockets of the teeth –

osteoporosis, arthritis in the elderly, and oseomalacia – bowing of the bones. Traces of

metopism, persistence of the frontal metopic suture in the adult, were recorded by Lange

136

(1940). Weaver (1976) mentions lambdoid flattening in his analysis, while Nelson and

Madimenos (2010) refer to it as obelionic cranial deformation.

Trauma includes blunt force fractures and embedded projectile points (Chase

1976; Hibben 1939; Lange 1940). Healed fractures were noted on several individuals.

Often hands, feet, lumbar vertebrae, mandibles, and tibias are missing while at other

times only lumbar vertebrae, tarsals, and carpals are found (Chase 1976; Green 1956;

Hibben 1951). Some in the Adams State College series were burned, whether accidental

or purposeful is unclear (Chase 1976).

Burial Characteristics. Massacres, killings of a number of people at one time,

dominate the collection. Intentional burials are less common in the overall Gallina

skeletal series. Within the formal burial population, multiple burials are common (Chase

1976; Weaver 1976) with mixtures of children and adults or more than one adult. Burials

have been found in the interior of bins, in storage cists, sub-floor interments, shallow

graves within ten meters of habitations, a formal burial area at Nogales Cliff House, and a

natural crevice with a stone slab cover below Pack Rat Cliff House (Chase 1976; Green

et al. 1958; Hibben 1939; Pattison 1968).

Formal burials consist of four types: filled burial with a stone cap, shallow grave

filled and uncapped, filled bin uncapped or capped, and hollow log or stone-lined crypt with a stone cap (Chase 1976). Burial in houses seems to be preferred and they tend to be in bins (Chase 1976; Green et al. 1958). No formal burials are found to the south of structures or facing south, although burials in houses are customarily in the southern section (Chase 1976). Dismemberment prior to burial is suggested by striations on

137

femora and the proximal end of tibias (Chase 1976). This feature has led some to propose cannibalism (Chase 1976; Mackey and Green 1979).

The remains tend to be loosely flexed on their left side with the head to the west; however the shape of the container does influence the position (Green et al. 1958). Six of the nine burials in the cemetery at Nogales Cliff House were flexed on their left side with the head to the west (Pattison 1968). The Adams State College series was predominately positioned dorsally on a north-south axis with the head to the north and the face to the west or east (Chase 1976). One burial was fully extended at Gavilan Cliff House (Hibben

1939).

Burial goods include whole ceramic vessels, sherds, a metate, a mano, a feather- cord robe, juniper-bark mats, a pendant, beads, a digging stick, antler tools, bird bones, seeds, concretions, cordage, and a modified human bone (Chase 1976; Green et al. 1958;

Hibben 1939). The placement of burial goods illustrates care for the deceased. The bodies were wrapped in a blanket, i.e. feather-cord robe or cordage cloth, and laid on a juniper-bark mat. Tools, such as the digging stick, antler artifacts, and mano, were placed with the person. Other significant objects, as in the case of ornamentation or ritual items, may have accompanied the individual. A broken metate was situated under the head of one woman and a broken pointed bottom pot was placed over the head of another burial (Pattison 1968:117) Food also may have been given to the dead as pumpkin seeds and bird bones were discovered with two different interments (Chase 1976).

138

CONCLUSION

Through a compilation of the literature and recent in-depth studies (Constan 2010;

Massouh 2009; Simpson 2008), Gallina ceramics, households, and architecture are well

characterized. Several settlement pattern studies have been conducted (Elyea 1994;

Elliott and Smith 1985; Muceus and Lawrence 1990; Plog 1984; Sleeter 1987), but the

general perception of typical Gallina site locations does not match what is recorded. For

example, in discussions with several avocational archaeologists fascinated by the Gallina

culture and some professional archaeologists they believe Gallina sites only occur on

ridges. This idea is traceable to Herbert Dick’s work (Dick 1981), which involved survey

of ridge tops only. When archaeologists ignore the drainages and valleys during survey,

the recorded site density is dramatically affected as with the Bootjack Timber Sale

changing from 1 site per 31 ha (76 acres) when only the ridges were examined to 1 per 6

ha (16 acres) when the drainages were included (Elliott 1983). This also could be influenced by the relatively small number of dated Gallina sites, which tend to be located on ridges. Therefore, future research needs to address the chronological deficiencies by dating of wood samples in collections and excavation of more structures, especially pithouses. Pithouses are underrepresented in the Gallina excavated site sample.

Additionally, more work should be conducted in the Gobernador and Dulce Districts in order to look for transitional time period sites, prior to the Gallina Phase.

As for the current research question, environmentally the Gallina area has sufficient resources for ceramic production with many geologic formations containing clay-rich rocks and residual or sedimentary clay deposits (see Chapter Nine). Direct

139

evidence for pottery production occurs as worked sherds with edge angles possibly attributable to scraping pottery (Fiero 1978:135) and the presence of polishing stones.

The uncommon recovery of raw clay, mineral specimens, and unfired vessels suggest unspecialized household production. Whole vessel attributes, such as the quality of design execution, cursorily observed in the Maxwell Museum Gallina collection and a broader vessel metric study by James Mackey (Holbrook and Mackey 1975) provide indirect evidence of household production (see Chapter Six). The Gallina area environment allowed for ceramic production and both direct and indirect evidence indicate production at the household level.

140

CHAPTER 6: An Exploration of Gallina Ceramics

This chapter focuses on the ceramics of the Gallina area of the American

Southwest. Previous research on Gallina pottery is limited and there is little consistency in typology. I present a brief review of previous work and focus on the production, exchange, use, and discard of Gallina ceramics. This is facilitated through presentation of new type descriptions, discussion of the paucity of trade wares, analysis of available whole vessel measurements, and comparison of frequencies from excavated assemblages.

PREVIOUS RESEARCH

In the uplands of northwestern New Mexico, pottery preserves very well in both

surface and subsurface contexts. Prehispanic archaeological sites with ceramics have

been recognized in the Gallina area of northwestern New Mexico since the late 1800s.

Early explorers in the American Southwest noted and described pottery in the Gallina

area (Cope 1879; Douglass 1917a). Initial research on Gallina ceramics was descriptive

and focused on development and modification of types (Hibben 1939, 1949; Lange 1941;

Mera 1935, 1938; Pattison 1968; Pendleton 1952; Wilkinson 1958). One exception to

this was a paper on Gallina painted pottery design (Koehring 1948), which linked the

design elements and layouts to woven basketry traditions. The Gallina Black-on-gray ceramic type seemed to fit with the greater northern Ancestral Puebloan tradition (Hibben

1949), but the unusual conical shape of the utility vessels caused much speculation (e.g.

Dick 1976; Dittert as quoted in Sciscenti 1962; Ellis 1988; Hester 1963; Hibben 1938,

1949; Mera 1935, 1938). Rather than viewing this as an autochthonous development, both Harry Mera (1935, 1938) and Frank Hibben (1939, 1949) suggested a non-puebloan

141

source, such as the Navajo, Woodland, Plains, or Great Basin cultures, for the origin of

the pointed bottom pot form.

Investigations of Gallina pottery continued to be scarce into the 1970s and 1980s.

Associated with the University of Toronto, Bryan Snow’s (1978) masters research on the

Owl Point site incorporated ceramic analysis. In the volume From Drought to Drought,

Florence Hawley Ellis (1988), discussed vessel shape and theorized on functional use.

The San Juan to Ojo transmission line project involved the excavation of three Gallina

sites: LA 11841, 11843, and 11850. Each data recovery report included a chapter on the

pottery from the site. At LA 11841, Ralph Whiteaker (1976) found an unusually low

frequency of painted ollas and some possible utility ware bowl sherds, although 64

percent of the assemblage was of indeterminate vessel form. Tim Seaman (1976) worked

at LA 11843 and supplemented the basic ceramic analysis with X-ray fluorescence of 150 sherds from five sites. The spectra showed little difference among the samples and suggested use of a single clay source or geologically homogeneous clays across the

Gallina region (Seaman 1976:42). Kathleen Fiero (1978) built on Seaman’s (1976) analysis and compared the assemblages from LA 11843 and 11850.

The 1990s and 2000s generated a bit more information about Gallina pottery. The

1990 Society for American Archaeology symposium on Gallina archaeology included a paper on Largo-Gallina ceramics (Knight 1990). Seven cultural resource management reports (Bargman 2003; Bullock 1998; Elyea 1994, 2004; Polk et al. 2000; Ware et al.

1999) incorporated ceramic studies. Recently, an analysis of the previously excavated

Lagunitas Ruin materials was undertaken (Wiseman 2008). Also, pottery was integrated

142

into graduate research by Nate Myers (2007) from Eastern New Mexico University and

by Paula Massouh (2004, 2009) from American University.

PRODUCTION

In the Southwest there are three known modes of production: unspecialized

household production, dispersed household specialization, and community specialization

(Costin 1991, 2001; Hagstrum 1995; Hegmon et al. 1995). Unspecialized household production is the domestic mode of production, where each family makes crafts for its own use. It affords maximum autonomy and flexibility. This strategy is especially good for mobile groups.

Dispersed household specialization is the domestic mode of production with surplus, where family producers make a few craft goods beyond their household needs.

Producing families are dispersed throughout the consuming community. This leads to some economic interdependence, while still allowing household flexibility. Such a strategy helps to create bonds within the community, which could be key during difficult times. Dispersed household specialization was common throughout much of the

Southwest (Hagstrum 1995), e.g. early San Juan white wares (Wilson and Blinman

1995).

Community specialization changes the spatial distribution of producers and localizes family pottery-making work groups near resources. The crafts of the community are distributed to other communities in the region. Dependency between the larger population and the specialist producers results in increased economic integration of society. This form of specialization occurs in several settings in the Southwest, such as

143

the North San Juan (Hegmon et al. 1995), South-central Arizona (Crown 1995), Chaco

region (Toll 1990), the Zuni area (Mills 1995), Pecos Pueblo (Powell 2002), the Northern

Rio Grande (Hagstum 1985), and the Galisteo Basin (Schleher 2010), but appears to be

restricted to specific types and vessel forms.

The level of specialization can be assessed through the concentration, intensity,

and scale of production (Costin 1991; Hegmon et al. 1995). The generalized ceramic

inventories in Gallina habitations do not support the concentrations of pottery found with

specialization. The limited amounts of pottery indicate less intensive production. Also,

the absence of workshops shows a small scale of production. Based on their level of

execution and degree of standardization (Mills and Crown 1995), Gallina ceramics were

produced at the household level.

Direct evidence for pottery production appears with the presence of tools, materials, and features used in the manufacturing process, such as worked sherds

(scrapers), polishing stones, paint brushes, palettes, raw clay, temper, pigments, ground stone with residue of clay or minerals, firing features, clay mixing basins, pukis, and unfired vessels (Mills and Crown 1995). In the Gallina area, worked sherd scrapers and polishing stones are well documented (e.g. Green 1956; Lange 1956; Seaman 1976), but these tools can have multiple uses outside the realm of pottery production. With only rare occurrences of other direct evidence of ceramic production, i.e. raw clay in bins at one house on Rattlesnake Ridge (Hatch et al. 1994), a groundstone palette with residue of hematite (Fiero 1978:188), kaolin, argillite, and hematite specimens (Fiero 1978:189;

Hibben 1939:238), and unfired vessels (Pattison 1968; Wilkinson 1958), it appears that production was generally unspecialized.

144

Derived from the tool evidence, ceramic inventories, level of execution, and

degree of standardization, Gallina pottery represents the autonomous family farming

household as primary producer. Basic decorative designs and vessel forms were shared

within and among communities, but no form of specialization is evident. Each Gallina

household apparently produced utility pots for their own use, but the potter’s house at

Rattlesnake Ridge in combination with the ceramic oxidation analysis presented in

Chapter Eight suggests that dispersed household specialization may have occurred in the

production of painted ceramics. In either case, community specialization was not part of

the Gallina pottery production technology.

GALLINA CERAMIC TYPES

Initially the ceramic types for this investigation were divided into Gallina Black-

on-gray, Gallina Plain Utility, and Gallina Coarse Utility. As with Roger Green and colleagues (1958), the utilitarian types were found to grade from fine to coarse temper and a useful separation could not be formed. Therefore, the types are presented as gray and utility. This is in general agreement with current academic and cultural resource management ceramic analyses in the Gallina area (Table 6.1).

145

Table 6.1 Gallina Ceramic Typologies

Mera F. Ellis Hibben Lange Green Pattison Mackey Seaman / Knight Wilson Myers (1935, 1938) (1936, 1988) (1939, 1949) (1941, 1956) (1956, 1962) (1968) (1975, 1976) Fiero (1990) (1994, 1999) (2007) (1976/1978) Gallina Gallina Gallina Gallina Gallina Gallina Gallina Gallina Gray Gallina Gallina Gallina Black-on- Black-on- Black-on- Black-on- Black-on- Black-on- Black-on- ware Black-on- Black-on- Black- white white gray gray white gray white gray white on-white Gallina Plain Gallina Gallina Gallina undecorated Plain Plain Plain undecorated undecorated undecorated Gallina Gallina Gallina Plain Gallina Gallina Gallina Utility wares Gallina Gallina Gallina Gray Gallina Utility Utility Utility Utility ware Plain Utility Plain Utility by texture Utility ware Plain Utility Gray Gallina Gallina Coarse Coarse 146 Utility Utility Gallina Rough Utility fused Gallina Gallina Punched Utility ware Punched Gallina Plain Gallina Gallina unfired Plain Plain unfired unfired Gallina Gallina Neck- Washboard banded Utility Utility Gallina Smudged Gallina Corrugated

Gallina Gray

Gallina Gray includes Hibben’s (1949) Gallina Black-on-gray and Gallina Plain

Undecorated. Gallina Black-on-gray is synonymous with Gallina Black-on-white (Bahti

1949:Note 6). This description is compiled from Dittert and Plog (1980), Ellis (1988),

Fiero (1978), Hawley (1936), Hibben (1939, 1949), Knight (1990), Koehring (1948),

Lange (1941), McGregor (1965), Mera (1935), Pattison (1968), Pendleton (1952),

Seaman (1976), and Wilkinson (1958).

The paste is fine, homogenous, and light to medium gray in color. Temper is crushed fine sand consisting of feldspar, quartz, muscovite, and magnetite4. The forms

include bowls, ollas, seed jars, canteens, and effigy vessels (duck and submarine pots)

with bowls and jars being the most common (Figures 6.1 and 6.2). Bowls are

hemispherical in shape with inverted rims. Jars tend to have a sharply restricted neck and

are ellipsoid in shape with straight or everted rims.

Figure 6.1 Gallina bowl from Bg88T (Maxwell 55.17.43)

4 The petrographic results in Chapter Eight suggest that the temper noted as magnetite is probably hematite.

147

Surfaces are gray and smoothed on bowl interiors and jar exteriors, while jars show scraping striations on the interior. The smoothed surfaces are sometimes polished

(streaky polishing) over the decoration on the upper portion of the ollas and on bowl interiors. No formal slip is used, but a wash of the paste clay or polishing to float the surface does occur. Paint is dull grayish-black carbon paint, or carbon mineral paint possibly containing manganese.

Figure 6.2 Duck effigy pot from the Cuchillo site (Maxwell 40.2.302)

Decoration is on the interior of bowls and the upper half of jars from the base of the neck to the point of maximum diameter. Designs are simple and crudely executed

(wavering, poorly joined lines, unaligned elements) with an emphasis on geometric and linear forms. Narrow parallel bands of lines and hatching are common and rims can be ticked on bowls. Less common elements and motifs include dots, cross-hatching, checkerboards, hourglass figures, hatched triangles, nested chevrons, pendant triangles, triangles with pendant dots, zoomorphs, and anthropomorphs. A smudged variant of this type has been noted (Wilkinson 1958).

148

Gallina Utility

Gallina Utility incorporates Hibben’s (1949) Gallina Coarse Utility, Gallina Plain

Utility, and Gallina Punched Utility types. This description is compiled from Ellis

(1988), Fiero (1978), Hawley (1936), Hibben (1939, 1949), Knight (1990), Lange (1941),

Mera (1935), Pattison (1968), Pendleton (1952), Seaman (1976), and Wilkinson (1958).

The paste is coarse, quite porous (friable), sandy textured, and dark gray to black

in color. Temper is medium to very coarse water-worn quartz and feldspar sand. The forms consist of jars and bowls with the bowls being rare. Jars can be pointed bottom pots with an inverted ovoid shape or wide-mouthed, flat or indented-bottomed globular shapes (Figure 6.3). Enhancement of the rims was generally by banding, but fillets do occur.

Figure 6.3 Pointed bottom pot (Maxwell 40.2.641) and globular jar (Maxwell 40.2.16)

149

Interior surfaces were scraped and exteriors were scraped and wiped, although

coils were not always completely obliterated. Fine scraping striations are common on the

exterior of vessels, while the interior shows depressions that may be finger indentations

(rather than paddle and anvil impressions). The surface is a dull gray color and

sometimes has decorative texturing or a surface sparkle from muscovite flecks.

The decorative treatments include banding, fillets, smearing, clapboard,

washboard, punching, incising, and basket impressing. The clapboard and washboard

effect is generally restricted to the neck of the jar and the basket impressions are on the

base due to use of a basket mold. A separate type called Gallina Corrugated has been

suggested for the textured utility sherds (Knight 1990).

EXCHANGE

Exchange has been defined as the mutually beneficial movement of goods

between people (Darvill 2002). Most systems of exchange tend to focus on obtaining

materials not readily available locally. This can be done within a culture group or

between different cultures, which is generally referred to as trade (Darvill 2002). Local

production of Gallina ceramics is evident (discussed above) and a lack of trade wares is

characteristic of many Gallina ceramic assemblages (Lange 1956; Seaman 1976).

The paucity of trade wares has been a theme in the Gallina literature (Green 1956;

Hibben 1949; Lange 1956; Mera 1938). Few Gallina sherds have been found outside the home territory. About five total Gallina Black-on-gray sherds were recovered at Pindi

Pueblo and at a site in the Tesuque Valley (Stubbs and Stallings 1953; Stubbs as quoted in Lange 1956:82). Also, Neil Judd (1954:195-196) found three Gallina pointed bottom pots in Room 314 and Kiva W at Pueblo Bonito in Chaco Canyon.

150

The same is true inside the Gallina area where only trace amounts of trade wares are documented in the Llaves and Ojitos Districts (Table 6.2). Harry Mera (1935) noted

six exotic sherds total, but three could not be identified. The three that could be typed

were Chaco II Black-on-white, Santa Fe Black-on-white, and a Mesa Verde series sherd.

He also recovered a Chaco Black-on-white jar from the excavation of a Gallina pithouse

(as cited in Lange 1956:82). Roger Green (1956) found a number of Chacoan vessels during his excavation of the Archuleta pithouse. They included a Chaco II Black-on- white bowl, a corrugated jar with ledge lugs, and sherds from Chaco Corrugated and

Exuberant Corrugated jars. These Chacoan ceramics were associated with the first occupation of the pithouse probably dating between A.D. 1050 and 1100. Both the Ojitos and Llaves Districts have trace occurrences of Chacoan types, which with the Archuleta pithouse vessels and pointed bottom pots at Pueblo Bonito suggest a more definite contact between Gallina and Chaco peoples.

Sally Holbrook and James Mackey (1975) mention only six Gallina sites with trade wares: Chaco Black-on-white (2 sites), Tewa Polychrome (1 site), Jemez Black-on-

white (2 sites), and Biscuit B (1 site). The compiled list (Table 6.2) of exotic ceramics

from Gallina sites presents a similar pattern with the presence of sherds from multiple

pottery series and covering a wide time span. The Mesa Verde and Cibola series, the

White Mountain Redwares, and the Mogollon brownwares fall into the temporal

framework associated with out of phase upland occupations (Stuart and Farwell

1983:157). The Tewa series pottery, the early Rio Grande Glazeware, and the historic

polychrome point to trace use of the area by other peoples after the Gallina abandonment.

151

Table 6.2 Gallina sites with trade wares present by district

Trade Percent Site Name Types District LA No. Wares of Total Kwahe’e B/W, Socorro B/W, Lagunitas Ruin Cebolleta B/W, Wingate B/R, Cuba 6865 248 9.0 Mancos B/W, Gallup B/W 6866 Bull Snake Hill 1 unk Mogollon brownware dipper Cuba Gallup B/W Cuba 12760 5 0.04 Gallup B/W, Wingate B/R, Cuba 14319 33 0.08 Escavada B/W, Chaco B/W Escavada B/W, Gallup B/W, Chaco B/W, Wingate B/R & Cuba

14320 206 12.5 Polychrome Chaco B/W, Escavada B/W, Cuba 14322 57 0.09 Gallup B/W, Wingate B/R Escavada B/W, Chaco B/W, Cuba 14324 72 12.7 Gallup B/W Archuleta Ruin (Bg Chaco B/W, Chaco Corrugated Cuba 127387 50) 4 0.01 Kwahe’e B/W, Socorro B/W, Gallup B/W, Santa Fe B/W, Cuba

145166 429 0.1 Puerco B/W & B/R Bancos B/W, Piedra B/W, Rosa Gallina Burial B/W, Lino Gray, Rosa Neck- Dulce 6163 9 12.9 banded & Gray Rosa brown smooth and Rosa La Jara/Vicenti Site Gobernador 14318 182 3.0 gray Rosa-Gallina grayware Gobernador 111059 20 83.3 Rosa-Gallina transitional Gobernador 111061 80 100 Rosa-Gallina grayware Gobernador 121860 61 94.4 Rosa-Gallina gray and impressed Gobernador 121861 34 89.6 Rosa-Gallina gray and whiteware Gobernador 121866 44 86.0 Rosa-Gallina gray and Gobernador 121869 71 73.2 indeterminate Rosa-Gallina grayware Gobernador 121876 243 79.7 641 Capulin Pithouse 1 unk Chaco B/W jar Llaves 5859 Llaves Site 5 0.01 Vallecitos B/W, Jemez B/W Llaves 11841 Whiteaker site 3 0 Agua Fria Glaze-on-red Llaves Mogollon Smudged Brownware, Fiero site McElmo B/W, Mancos B/W, Llaves 11850 9 0 Wiyo B/W Reconstructed Unit Mesa Verde series or Tewa series Llaves 12062 House 3 0 Chaco II sherd Ojitos 1710 1 unk Mesa Verde series Ojitos 1712 1 unk 4520 Canada Larga Ruin 1 0.12 Bancos B/W Ojitos 61569 Bg 91 4 0.003 Chaco Corrugated Ojitos

152

Trade wares appear in all districts except Stinking Lake, which has had very little excavation and minimal survey. Based on the data in Table 6.2, the majority of the foreign pottery (58%) comes from the southern edge of the Gallina area in the Cuba

District. This may be a cultural boundary effect. There are several other excavated sites in the Cuba District with Gallina pottery in the minority of the assemblage (Mackey

1976; Myers 2007). The Rosa style ceramics only occur in the northern districts and may represent transitional occupations or another boundary effect.

The foreign sherds in the Llaves District, such as the Mesa Verde series and

Mogollon brownwares, may be “pieces of places” (Bradley 2000; Helms 1988, 1993;

Spielmann 2002). Geographically distant places may have social and symbolic significance and thereby the items or raw materials, “the pieces,” from these distant places may have ideological importance (Bradley 2000; Helms 1988, 1993:3). These significant objects may represent direct interactions with the people of the distant place or down-the-line movement of these special sherds. With so few exotic sherds in the heartland of the Gallina area and relatively low numbers along most of the borders, ongoing trade is not indicated.

USE

As containers, ceramic vessels are used for storage, cooking, serving, and transport (Rice 1987:208). Storage properties are affected by duration of storage, frequency of use of the contents, and the liquid or dry nature of the contents. Cooking requires efficient use of the heat from the fire or stones. Serving vessels tend to be open

153

for ease of access or visibility of the food and may have fine finishes and decoration.

Transport can be restricted by the weight of the vessel when it is full.

The capacity, stability, accessibility of contents, and transportability of a pot also can have implications for the function of a vessel (Rice 1987:225). Capacity, which derives from the form and size of a vessel, is the focus of this analysis. It can be connected to the contents of the vessel (Nelson 1981) or related to standard units of volume (e.g. Turner and Lofgren 1966; Rottländer 1967). Size and weight of a pot also affect the frequency of use of the vessel (Rice 1987:298). For example, large and heavy pots are hard to move and would be used for storage or for special and rare cooking needs.

Vessel Function

Gallina vessels come in a variety of forms: bowls, jars, canteens, and effigies.

Bowls, as the only open form, were used for serving. The canteens follow the function their name implies and were small-scale water transport containers. Gallina effigies generally are in the shape of birds and most likely had a ritual use. The jars have several forms including globular utility vessels, decorated ollas, small or miniature jars, and the pointed bottom pots. Globular jars seem to have functioned both as storage containers and cooking vessels. Another storage vessel, the decorated ollas probably held water or food in most instances, but also have been found with ceremonial objects inside. In the

Southwest literature, small and miniature jars are often considered to be the products of children (e.g. Crown 2001; Kamp 2001).

As for the pointed bottom pots, Florence Hawley Ellis (1988:133) says that

“pointed bottom” is a misnomer for a tapered lower body or underbody, and that sharply

154

pointed bases are not overly common in the Gallina area. Her explanation is that the style of bases changed through time in the Gallina Phase and varied geographically within the region. Timothy Seaman (1976:48) also proposed that these pots occur primarily after A.D. 1200 at villages. Both Frank Hibben (1949) and Florence Hawley

Ellis (1988) comment on vessels with tapered or relatively small under sides existing in other northern Ancestral Puebloan areas.

In any case, the pointed bottom pots and the globular jars were both used for cooking based on the presence of soot on each jar shape (Hibben 1949; Holbrook and

Mackey 1975). With two forms being used for cooking, a discussion of diet and food preparation techniques is necessary. Both food choice and cooking methods can affect vessel morphology (Helton-Croll 2010:61; Pavlů 1997:84). Based on ethnographic studies (Linton 1944a; Mills 1985), rounded-base vessels tend to be placed on fire dogs or are suspended over the fire for cooking, while conical-base pots tend to be put directly in the fire for cooking.

Historically in the American Southwest, pointed bottom pots were used by the

Navajo. They had a diet focused on wild plants and animals (Helton-Croll 2010:62), which is supported by archaeological data from Dinétah sites (Brown 1991; Kendrick

2001). Observations of Navajo cooking methods record that most meat was stewed and that seeds and greens were boiled (Elmore 1938, 1943). In contrast to Navajo culinary techniques, Pueblo people typically use globular jars for cooking. Studies of Ancestral

Puebloan sites have suggested that wild plants comprised about 20 percent of the diet, but domesticated crops could have constituted up to 100 percent of the diet in good harvest

155

years (e.g. Spielmann et al. 1990; Wetterstrom 1986). Ethnographic and historic accounts of Jemez and Zuni food preparation (Mills 1999; Reagan 1917; Stevenson 1904) note boiling of meat and varied methods for plant processing, although the majority of plants were cooked in a jar over the fire.

The size and shape of a cooking vessel is connected to the size and shape of the hearth where it is used (Helton-Croll 2010:76). In a typical Gallina habitation, both a hearth and adjacent ash pit are present (Simpson 2008). Gallina hearths are situated just south of the center of the structure. They tend to be four-sided and lined with sandstone slabs. The ash pit is located south of the hearth and is enclosed by the deflector.

Contemporaneous Puebloan cooks, such as the Jemez people, used rounded-base pots.

Excavated Jemez hearths are rectangular and slab-lined with some fire dogs documented

(Reiter 1938). Possible fire dogs for holding a jar above a fire have been found in the slab-lined Gallina hearths (Lange 1941, 1956). The conical-base pots of the Navajo were used in basin-shaped and unlined thermal features (Helton-Croll 2010:72). The unlined ash pits in Gallina habitations are similar in morphology to Navajo thermal features. The dual Gallina hearth and ash pit system would allow for flexibility in cooking and cater to both domestic and wild food preparation. Additionally, the radiating heat from the hearth and the walls of the deflector could keep a pot in the ash pit warm for an extended period

(Simpson 2008).

Whole Vessels

The function of Gallina vessel forms can be examined in greater detail through whole vessel metrics. James Mackey amassed measurements on over 100 Gallina whole

156

vessels from the Laboratory of Anthropology and University of New Mexico collections

(Holbrook and Mackey 1975). I entered these metrics into a database in order to examine variation in vessel size5. Mills (1989, 1995) states that volume is the best dimension for study of vessel size, although orifice diameter also is a useful measurement. The vessels were divided into four forms: bowls, ollas, jars, and pointed bottom pots. Bowls are hemisphere-shaped with no neck and include both painted and utility wares, although utility bowls are extremely rare. The olla category incorporates both painted and utility

(uncommon) ollas and canteens with a basic globular shape, constricted neck, and small opening. The jars have either a flat bottom, globular body, and wide opening form or are amorphously shaped utility vessels. The pointed bottom pots essentially are a utility jar with a pointed rather than a flat base. They often have exterior sooting from use as cooking vessels (Hibben 1949). Effigies and ladles also are found, but are infrequent. In addition, reworked vessels have been noted, such as a bowl being reused as a scoop

(Holbrook and Mackey 1975).

Orifice diameter is associated with open form, i.e. bowl, vessel size (Mills 1995) and is linked to function here. The jars and ollas have narrow openings that limit access to the contents (Table 6.3, Figure 6.4). This implies storage of food and/or water.

Gallina ollas have been found with adobe plugs and corn still in them. The small opening on the ollas also would decrease loss of water from evaporation and aid pouring (Rice

1987:237). Some cooking may have been done in the large jars that are missing from the data set, since they are described by James Mackey (Holbrook and Mackey 1975) as

5 James Mackey could not be located to grant permission for use of these data. In total, he measured 237 whole vessels, but values for only 131 were included in the report to the U.S. Forest Service (Holbrook and Mackey 1975). Metrics for the largest volume vessels from each category are missing from this data set.

157

having wide orifices. The pointed bottom pots were used almost exclusively for cooking

(Ellis 1988). A wide mouth allows access to the food being cooked or served, which explains the larger orifice diameters for the pointed bottom pots and bowls respectively.

Table 6.3 Orifice Diameter measured in centimeters

Form Count Mean S.D. C.V. Min. Max. Bowl 46 14.5 3.4 23.61 6.7 19.8 Jar 31 4.4 1.3 29.31 2.5 7.5 Olla 26 5.3 1.8 33.55 2.4 10.0 Pointed 27 19.0 5.8 30.50 10.4 31.5

Figure 6.4 Boxplot of Orifice Diameter by Form

Barbara Mills (1995) says that volume is the best overall metric for study of vessel size. The mean volume of the ollas is 695 cc, which most likely indicates the mode for the smaller corn storage vessels (Table 6.4). Frank Hibben (1949) notes the largest olla volume as 4,000 cc and Florence Hawley Ellis (1988) found the mean volume

158

of the ollas at the Canjilon Mountain sites to be 3,241 cc. These large ollas would hold

about one gallon of water for household daily use. Florence Hawley Ellis (1988) also

determined the median capacity for the canteens from the high-altitude hunting and gathering sites to be 2,750 cc. This is about three quarts and would be appropriate to the water needed for day treks. The jars have the smallest mean volume again supporting the presence of the small amorphous vessel measurements and the absence of the large jar metrics (Figure 6.5).

Table 6.4 Vessel Volume measured in cubic centimeters

Form Count Mean S.D. C.V. Min. Max. Bowl 46 803.8 417.4 51.93 70 1,400 Jar 31 193.7 111.8 57.70 14 440 Olla 27 695.0 469.4 67.55 100 2,200 Pointed 27 7,541 7,773 103.07 580 34,000

Figure 6.5 Boxplot of Vessel Volume by Form

159

The relationship between serving bowl and cooking vessel volume has been used

to indicate family size in the western Ancestral Puebloan area (Turner and Lofgren 1966).

When the mean bowl volume, assuming an individual serving size, is divided into the

mean pointed bottom pot volume, the results show that one cooking vessel could provide approximately nine bowl servings. Pointed bottom pots may conserve cooking time and fuel (Ellis 1988; Helton-Croll 2010). The cook can bury the lower half of the vessel in hot coals and ashes to conserve heat and facilitate its transfer. This fits with the presence of an ash pit feature adjacent to the hearth and enclosed by the deflector (Bahti 1949;

Dick 1976; Green 1956; Simpson 2008). The nine-serving-size cooking pots could suggest that the food was prepared and then kept warm in the ash pit (Green 1962;

Hibben 1939:65) to provide two meals through the day for a household of four or five people. This single preparation for the day has been observed as a cooking technique with the Highland Maya (Nelson 1981) and Papago of southern Arizona (Underhill

1979), and has been suggested as a cooking pattern in the prehispanic Southwest (Crown

2000:255; Nelson and LeBlanc 1986:124).

The median capacity for the pointed bottom pots at the Canjilon Mountain seasonal use sites is 1,960 cc with the mean volume of bowls being 940 cc (Ellis 1988).

This suggests a household of two people – not everyone may have gone to the mountain – eating once a day. They were probably away from the structure during the day hunting and gathering. The extremely large pointed bottom vessel outliers, over 17,000 cc in the

Mackey data (Holbrook and Mackey 1975) and found at LA 11850 (Fiero 1978), may have been used to process seasonal wild plants for later use (Ellis 1988:140). They are very large vessels and would not be used frequently due to their bulk, much as large pots

160

for canning are used once or twice a year to preserve the harvest. Another explanation for very large food preparation vessels in the Greater Southwest is for feasting (Hayden

2001:40-41; Wills and Crown 2004:Table 9.1). However, in the case of the Gallina, no other indicators of feasting, such as concentrations of faunal remains, are present.

Based on the metrics of Gallina whole pots and the vessel functions discussed above, it appears that Gallina women cooked once a day for two meals to feed their nuclear family of four or five members. They maintained a mixed diet of both wild and domestic plants and animals. They might stew meats and boil plants in either the rounded-base or conical-base cooking vessels. A correlation between pointed bottom pots and foraging subsistence indicates a possible preference for conical-base vessels in processing wild plants and animals (Helton-Croll 2010:61), which suggests that the globular jars may have been specifically used to cook domesticated resources.

DISCARD

The linkage between human discard or loss and the archaeological record is central to archaeological inference (Schiffer 1972). We must assume that artifact assemblages reflect human behavior. Surface assemblages have been used for research since the 1970s (Lewarch and O’Brien 1981). Arid and semiarid environments lend themselves well to surface archaeology due to higher visibility. Excavated assemblages from undisturbed sites can avoid the bias created by recreational collection from surface artifact scatters. Although, transformation processes can affect both surface and subsurface assemblages (Schiffer 1987).

161

Surface Assemblages

In general, surface assemblages in the Gallina area are discussed by site and show

a high frequency of Gallina Utility sherds and minimal numbers of Gallina Gray, which

are only separated when paint (Gallina Black-on-gray) is present. Rarely are surface

ceramic assemblages described across a project area. One notable exception is Mike

Elliott’s (1983) observations from the Boot Jack Timber Sale. He comments on the

numerous bases from broken pointed bottomed pots and the wide range of variation in the

site ceramic assemblages. The decorated ceramics have paste colors from orange, tan,

and gray to near white. The paint varies from thin gray to blue to deep black. The utility

wares range in color from red to brown or tan and light to dark gray. Surface texturing

consists of wide banding and corrugation, coiled basketry impressions, and pinched

knobs.

A formal study of surface assemblages appears in the Jones Canyon report

(Wilson 1994). In-field analysis of 3,148 sherds revealed numerous ceramic traditions and types, although Gallina ceramics dominated in all the assemblages. The presence of

Cibola, Mesa Verde, and Rio Grande whitewares, along with White Mountain redwares

and Mogollon brownwares reflects the location of Jones Canyon on the southern

boundary of the Gallina area. As apparent from the ceramics, this was an interaction

zone between the Gallina and other contemporary Pueblo III Period groups (Elyea 1994,

2003, 2004; Hammack 1965; Mackey 1976; Myers 2007; Wiseman 2008).

Below the surface, no documented differences occur between ceramics in burials

versus rooms versus trash areas. Abandoned houses were used as trash dumps and burial

162

locations, as shown by Pithouse 1A at Huerfano Mesa village (Dick 1976). Formal

burials also appear outside of structures (see Chapter Five). Vessels in burials at Nogales

Cliff House consisted of a large pointed bottom pot and an olla with Burial 2 and a

broken pointed bottom pot inverted over the head of the deceased in Burial 9 (Pattison

1968). The Gallina burial analyzed by Erik Reed (1963) included a gourd-shaped

Bancos Black-on-white vessel, an unpainted ladle, an unpainted bird effigy jar, a globular

utility jar, a wide-mouthed jar, and sherds from a Rosa Black-on-white bowl, a Rosa

Neck-banded jar, a small Rosa Gray jar, a Gallina Black-on-gray bowl, and various plain sherds. As with this early Gallina burial, sherds appeared in three burials in the Llaves

Valley; specifically, the burial in Surface House 8 at Huerfano Mesa village incorporated a single large sherd (Chase 1976).

Excavated Assemblages

Forty-eight Gallina sites with excavation or testing have published ceramic assemblage frequencies (Table 6.5). The vast majority of the sites are undated or date to the 13th century, so temporal comparisons were not attempted. Based on categories from

Thomas Cartledge (1988), the sites were separated into agricultural features, villages,

isolated homesteads, and an “other” type. The agricultural features include sites with

isolated ramadas and storage structures that are associated with fields. Villages have

multiple habitation structures and some incorporate towers. The isolated homesteads tend to be composed of one or two habitation structures, pithouses or unit houses, with small storage features periodically occurring. The “other” category is composed of a burial, an artifact scatter with a feature, remote storage locations, and two isolated towers.

163

Table 6.5 Excavated and Tested Gallina Sites

LA No. Site Name Dates Source 649 Nogales Cliff House (Bg 3) 1239-1267 Pattison 1968 4520 Canada Larga Ruin Sciscenti 1962 5859 Llaves Site Bussey 1963 5860 Post Site Post 1982 6163 Gallina Burial Reed 1963 6865 Lagunitas Ruin Wiseman 2008 11633 L/102 1197 -1244 Massouh 2009 11841 Whiteaker Site Whiteaker 1976 11843 Kinslow (Seaman Site) 941 -1100 Seaman 1976 11850 Fiero Site 1163-1245 Fiero 1978 12058 Chama Tower/Douglas Tower Holbrook & Mackey 1975 12059 Davis Ranch 1244 -1256 Holbrook & Mackey 1975 12062 Reconstructed Unit House 1228-1260 Holbrook & Mackey 1975 12063 1231-1259 Holbrook & Mackey 1975 12065 Holbrook & Mackey 1975 12069 1117 -1253 Holbrook & Mackey 1975 12070 1237-1257 Holbrook & Mackey 1975 12071 Chacon Tower Holbrook & Mackey 1975 12074 Holbrook & Mackey 1975 12378 Evans Site (Bg 7) 1181 -1261 Lange 1956 12760 Mackey 1976 14318 La Jara/Vicenti Site Knight 1990 14319 Mackey 1976 14320 Mackey 1976 14322 Mackey 1976 14324 Mackey 1976 20155 La Jara Project Maxwell 1981 22915 Carricito Community, Bg 22 1187 -1248 Green 1964 22916 Carricito Community, Bg 23 1201-1213 Green 1964 22917 Carricito Community, Redondo Tower 1257-1260 Green 1964 35648 Rattlesnake/Hormigas 1034-1243 Green 1962 35985 Seaman 1983 46307 Owl Point 1150 Snow 1978 52254 Moore 1988 61568 Leeson Community, Bg 88 1211 -1249 Black & Rook 1955 61569 Bg 91 1211-1238 Green et al. 1958 111059 Ware et al. 1999 111061 Polk et al. 2000

164

Table 6.5 continued LA No. Site Name Dates Source 121860 Ware et al. 1999 121861 Ware et al. 1999 121866 Ware et al. 1999 121869 Ware et al. 1999 121876 Ware et al. 1999 127385 Leeson Community, Bg 92 1210 -1239 Brody & Lindsey 1955 127387 Archuleta Ruin (Bg 50) 1025-1245 Green 1956 127812 Starve Out Point/Leeson Community 1200-1253 Tyson 1954 145166 1046-1266 Myers 2007 no la Packrat House Schulman 1949

There are no apparent trends by site type in the utility to grayware (decorated) ratio. Only six sites have a ratio less than one (Table 6.6). The percent utility ranges from 100% to 31% with an average of 76% utility ware. With the recognition that

“[artifact] quantities must be interpreted with great care” (Schiffer 1983:685), I would posit that the high proportion of utility sherds may be related to storage needs or cuisine.

A high frequency of utility wares could indicate a cuisine of stewed foods (Potter and

Ortman 2004). The Gallina people may have been taking their stew pots with them to all their activity locations.

The jar versus bowl ratio does not show any patterns by site type either. A single isolated homestead site has a ratio of less than one (Table 6.7). With an average of 81% jar sherds, the percent jar ranges from 99% to 21%. With the same cautions of interpreting artifact quantities (Schiffer 1983), I propose that this elevated proportion of jar sherds is related to storage or is a product of cuisine. Low bowl frequencies could suggest that roasting also was an important cooking method (Potter and Ortman 2004).

The Gallina are located in an upland setting with access to artiodactyls. In addition, outdoor hearths and roasting pits have been recorded near habitations in this area (e.g.

165

Ellis 1988; Hammack 1965; Seaman 1976). The ratios point to a mixed approach to cuisine including both stews and roasted meats. This mixed approach is supported by the faunal and floral remains from Gallina sites (Anschuetz 2006; Fiero 1978:204; Wyatt

1996a).

Table 6.6 Excavated Assemblages Utility Ware and Gray Ware by Site Type

LA No. Site Name Utility % Grayware % Ratio U:G Count Site Type agricultural 111059 91.6 8.3 11.0 24 feature agricultural 4520 Canada Larga Ruin 58.1 41.9 1.4 917 feature agricultural 61569 Bg 91 53.9 46.1 1.2 1119 feature agricultural 12074 31.3 60.5 0.5 86 feature 121876 92.3 7.5 12.3 305 village Nogales Cliff House village 649 (Bg 3) 92.2 7.8 11.8 2365 14318 La Jara/Vicenti Site 88.5 11.5 7.7 6071 village 11843 Kinslow (Seaman Site) 83.3 16.6 5.0 3116 village 11633 L/102 72.6 15.0 4.8 7603 village Carricito Community, village 22917 Redondo Tower 81.0 18.9 4.3 407 5860 Post Site 78.0 22.0 3.5 177 village 35648 Rattlesnake/Hormigas 74.6 25.3 2.9 2856 village 11850 Fiero Site 64.0 36.0 1.7 36796 village Starve Out Point/Leeson village 127812 Community 62.1 37.9 1.6 478 12059 Davis Ranch 55.5 44.5 1.2 2306 village Leeson Community, Bg village 61568 88 50.6 49.4 1.0 3509 52254 47.9 52.1 0.9 288 village Carricito Community, village 22915 Bg 22 43.5 56.6 0.8 1295 Carricito Community, village 22916 Bg 23 43.6 56.5 0.8 1393 isolated 111061 100.0 0.0 80.0 80 homestead isolated 121861 97.5 2.5 39.0 40 homestead isolated 121869 94.7 5.3 17.8 94 homestead isolated 12760 94.1 5.9 16.0 119 homestead

166

Table 6.6 continued LA No. Site Name Utility % Grayware % Ratio U:G Count Site Type 14319 isolated 90.2 9.8 9.2 419 homestead isolated 35985 88.9 11.1 8.0 81 homestead isolated 14322 86.4 13.6 6.4 649 homestead isolated 145166 86.5 13.5 6.4 3392 homestead isolated 20155 La Jara Project 86.3 13.4 6.3 219 homestead isolated 12378 Evans Site (Bg 7) 83.6 16.4 5.1 424 homestead isolated 127387 Archuleta Ruin (Bg 50) 83.1 16.9 4.9 534 homestead isolated 14320 82.9 17.1 4.8 1649 homestead isolated 121866 81.0 19.0 4.3 42 homestead isolated 6865 Lagunitas Ruin 80.3 11.0 7.2 2864 homestead isolated 14324 79.6 20.4 3.9 568 homestead isolated 5859 Llaves Site 74.9 24.1 3.1 489 homestead isolated 46307 Owl Point 68.0 31.9 2.1 7460 homestead isolated 12063 65.6 34.4 1.9 5013 homestead Leeson Community, Bg isolated 127385 92 65.6 34.4 1.9 1794 homestead isolated 12070 57.5 42.5 1.4 2715 homestead Reconstructed Unit isolated 12062 House 51.8 48.2 1.1 6910 homestead isolated 12069 41.6 58.4 0.7 517 homestead other 121860 98.4 1.6 63.0 64 (scatter w/feature) other 6163 Gallina Burial 92.8 7.1 13.0 70 (isolated burial) other 12071 Chacon Tower 66.1 33.9 1.9 749 (isolated tower) other 12065 63.2 36.8 1.7 57 (remote storage) Chama Tower/Douglas other 12058 Tower 63.1 36.9 1.7 328 (isolated tower) other No LA Packrat House 44.3 55.7 0.8 122 (remote storage)

167

Table 6.7 Excavated Assemblages Jars and Bowls by Site Type

LA No. Site Name Jar % Bowl % Ratio J:B Count Site Type agricultural 4520 Canada Larga Ruin 91.5 8.5 10.8 917 feature agricultural 12074 83.7 8.1 10.3 86 feature agricultural 61569 Bg 91 84.8 15.2 5.6 1119 feature Nogales Cliff House (Bg 649 3) 99.7 0.3 336.9 2365 village Carricito Community, 22916 Bg 23 97.1 2.6 37.3 1393 village 35648 Rattlesnake/Hormigas 92.3 7.6 12.2 2856 village 11850 Fiero Site 84.0 9.5 9.0 36796 village 11843 Kinslow (Seaman Site) 83.3 10.2 8.1 3116 village Carricito Community, 22915 Bg 22 86.8 13.2 6.6 1295 village 14318 La Jara/Vicenti Site 73.5 12.2 6.1 6071 village Carricito Community, 22917 Redondo Tower 85.7 14.2 6.0 407 village 12059 Davis Ranch 85.3 14.7 5.8 2306 village Starve Out Point/Leeson 127812 Community 70.3 28.5 2.5 478 village 52254 51.2 48.6 1.1 288 village isolated 12070 97.1 2.9 33.4 2715 homestead Reconstructed Unit isolated 12062 House 95.7 4.3 22.3 6910 homestead isolated 12069 93.8 6.2 15.2 517 homestead isolated 5859 Llaves Site 90.5 9.5 9.5 489 homestead isolated 12063 89.8 10.2 8.8 5013 homestead Leeson Community, Bg isolated 127385 92 81.8 18.2 4.5 1794 homestead isolated 20155 La Jara Project 78.4 21.6 3.6 219 homestead isolated 11841 Whiteaker Site 21.8 78.1 0.3 4004 homestead other 12071 Chacon Tower 96.0 4.0 24.0 749 (isolated tower) other 6163 Gallina Burial 92.8 7.1 13.0 70 (isolated burial) Chama Tower/ other 12058 Douglas Tower 89.3 10.7 8.3 328 (isolated tower) other 12065 84.2 15.8 5.3 57 (remote storage) other No LA Packrat House 82.8 17.2 4.8 122 (remote storage)

168

So how do these percentages and ratios compare to other sites in the Ancestral

Puebloan area? Ceramic counts from McPhee Village (Yunker and Wilshusen 1999),

Pueblo Alto (Toll and McKenna 1987:Tables 1.2 and 1.5), and Sand Canyon Pueblo

(Ortman and Bradley 2002) illustrate narrower ranges of percent utility wares and percent

jars (Table 6.8). However, the average percentages of 72% utility wares and 82% jars for

these three villages are almost identical to the average Gallina village percentages of 67%

utility wares and 81% jars. As for the ratios, communal feasting occurred at these three

villages, but this does not appear to be driving the proportions in the ceramic assemblages

or all the ratios would be similar.

Table 6.8 Ceramic Assemblages from Ancestral Puebloan Villages and Gallina Averages

Site Utility % Decorated % Ratio U:D Jar % Bowl % Ratio J:B Count McPhee Village 88.6 11.3 7.8 91.8 8.2 11.2 99,999 Pueblo Alto 57.5 42.5 1.4 70.2 29.8 2.4 83,394 Sand Canyon 68.8 31.2 2.2 82.7 17.3 4.8 102,961 GallinaP bl villages 67.0 32.1 3.5 81.0 16.2 9.5 66,600 ()

CONCLUSION

Compared to many other ceramics in the American Southwest, Gallina pottery has

been little researched. We do know it is locally produced and used at the household

level. Few trade wares supplement Gallina assemblages. The capacity and form of the

vessels seems to reflect household size and cuisine. The average-sized pointed bottom cooking pots have a volume equivalent to nine servings, which suggests that a Gallina woman was cooking for her household for the day rather than for each meal. Some very large vessels may have been used to process seasonal wild plants. Cooking methods

169

varied with two sooted vessel forms. The rounded-base and conical-base cooking pots suggest utilization of both domestic and wild food resources. Ceramic assemblage frequencies point to both stewing and roasting as cooking techniques. Overall, the

Gallina ceramics show a focus on the household with a mixed diet and cuisine.

For the future, production and cuisine need to be further investigated.

Additionally, the timeless questions associated with the pointed bottom pots and the origins and abandonment movement of the Gallina people call for examination. To look at production, technological studies and vessel metrics of ceramics among more communities and across the Gallina districts could be conducted. Expanded design analyses with the current larger collections and comparison to other Southwest iconography would be informative about social interactions. Organic residue analysis in combination with botanical and faunal studies could prove useful in understanding

Gallina cuisine. Pointed bottom pots or semi-conical vessels with tapered or relatively small underbodies do occur at other northern Ancestral Puebloan sites (Ellis 1988;

Hibben 1949). Details of time, space, cuisine, and possibly environment need to be brought together with respect to other Ancestral Puebloan occurrences of conical-base vessels. The origins and abandonment movement of the Gallina people can be addressed through the pottery. Research on the technological and stylistic aspects of Gallina Black- on-gray, Rosa Black-on-white (Knight 1990; Peckham 1963; Reed 1963), Vallecitos

Black-on-white (Ford et al. 1972; Mackey 1982), and Wiyo Black-on-white (Beal 1987;

Mera 1935) might end the debate. These are just a few of the many avenues for

continued study of Gallina ceramics.

170

CHAPTER 7: The Davis Ranch Site and Nogales Cliff House

To examine the relationship between social violence and resource procurement, I needed to find sites that met several criteria. The selection criteria first required an archaeological group that produced pottery and exchanged ceramics rarely. Virtually any

Gallina assemblage meets these criteria, as illustrated in Chapter Six. Evidence of ongoing conflict is another important criterion met at many Gallina sites and discussed at the end of Chapter Four. These first criteria pinpointed the Gallina people as a useful example.

Within the Gallina area, I sought sites that minimally were previously excavated and dated by tree-rings. Then the excavated and dated villages needed to show different degrees of defensive posture, so that I had one site without and one with evidence of conflict response. For the purposes of this research, a defensive site is defined as occurring in a defensible location, such as within a cliff overhang, along a canyon rim, or on top of a prominent ridge (e.g. Kuckelman 2002), and with defensive architecture and site configurations, such as access-restrictive structures, towers, tunnels between subsurface and surface structures, and structures adjacent to natural barriers (e.g.

Kuckelman 2002). A non-defensive site lacks a highly defensible location and defensive architecture or site configuration.

The next requirement was varied geology, providing the potters several options from which to choose. Within this varied geology, clay-bearing formations must occur so that ceramic production would have been locally feasible. Preferably, geologic setting needed to be held constant. This was achieved by selecting sites in a similar geological setting. Finally, the excavated archaeological collections, sites, and surrounding geology

171

had to be accessible. This project required permission from landowners and museums,

especially for destructive analyses. All of the criteria were met with the Davis Ranch Site

and Nogales Cliff House.

Both sites are Gallina villages with dendrochronological dates. The excavated

collections are housed at the Maxwell Museum of Anthropology at the University of New

Mexico in Albuquerque and at the Laboratory of Anthropology at the Museum of New

Mexico in Santa Fe (although portions of these collections are incomplete, either missing

or possibly never wholly accessioned by the original project investigators). Surface

collection was used to supplement the missing collections. As for different degrees of

defense, Nogales Cliff House is hidden in a defensive location in a cliff overhang of a

narrow side canyon. The Davis Ranch Site is situated on a terrace rise toward the edge of

the Llaves Valley. There is no defensive architecture and it has an open site

configuration. Based on these factors, Nogales Cliff House is considered the defensive

site and Davis Ranch is the non-defensive site for this study.

The geology of the Gallina region is highly diverse including eleven formations within seven kilometers of the two sites (Baltz 1967). Additionally, several clay and clay shale deposits exist in the vicinity (Baltz 1967; Smith and Lucas 1991). The geologic setting was held constant since both the Davis Ranch Site and Nogales Cliff House are situated on the same drainage. Accessibility was simplified through the archaeological sites being located on federal land (Santa Fe National Forest) with the excavated collections accessioned to museums in New Mexico. The project area is depicted in

Figure 7.1.

172

These sites are on federal land and their locational information is protected by law. 36CFR296.18

Figure 7.1 Site locations map

173

DAVIS RANCH SITE (LA 12059)

Site Location

The Davis Ranch Site consists of five surface houses and nine pithouses dispersed across the top, sides, and base of a 400 meter long rise (Figure 7.2). It is located on a

Quaternary gravel terrace feature toward the western edge of the Llaves Valley at an elevation of 2,200 meters (7,240 ft). There is no defensive architecture and it has an open site configuration. The smoke from the hearths would have been visible to anyone in this part of the valley, and there may have been deforestation around the structures for construction and firewood.

Figure 7.2 Davis Ranch Site photograph taken by Kari Schleher

174

This site is in what would be considered woodland, but the 2002 BMG Fire, named for the local Benson-Montin-Greer Drilling Corporation office, destroyed most of the overstory, leaving behind mainly grasses. Vegetation was piñon-juniper and ponderosa pine before the fire. Archaeological pollen samples from the floor of the structure (Table 7.1) included pine trees, Douglas firs, junipers, oaks, grasses, cheno-ams, maize, sunflowers, ragweeds, sage brush, birch trees, and a few unknown pollens

(Mackey and Holbrook 1978). The faunal remains were scarce but included rock squirrels and mule deer (Holbrook 1975).

Table 7.1 Archaeological flora and fauna from the Davis Ranch Site

TAXONOMIC NAME COMMON NAME

Pinus Pine trees

Pseudotsuga Douglas firs

Juniperus Junipers

Quercus Oaks

Gramineae Grasses

Chenopodiaceae (“Cheno-Ams” Amaranthus) Chenopdium/amaranth

Zea Maize/corn

High-spine Compositae Sunflower group

Low-spine Compositae Ragweed group

Artemisia Sage brush

Betulaceae Birch trees

Spermophilus veriegatus Rock squirrels

Odocoileus hemionus Mule deer

175

Holbrook (1975) notes that mule deer, elk, black bear, mountain lion, bobcat,

coyote, gray fox, badger, skunk, and rabbit are modern occupants of the Llaves Valley,

and that pronghorn antelope, mountain sheep, and wolves occurred there in the nineteenth

century. The closest water source would have been the drainage to the north of the rise

(outlet of Spring Canyon), which joins with other intermittent drainages and wraps

around the rise on the east side (see Figure 7.1).

Site Layout

The 14 structures in the Davis Ranch community are described in order from north to south along the rise (Figure 7.3). The US Forest Service site numbers are used to distinguish isolated habitations and habitation clusters (AR-03-10-02-171, AR-03-10-02-

172, AR-03-10-02-173, AR-03-10-02-174, AR-03-10-02-1711, and AR-03-10-02-1801).

The entire village is listed under a single Laboratory of Anthropology number (LA

12059). Details of the site clusters are derived from a series of site forms and personal observations in the field.

176

Figure 7.3 Davis Ranch Site Plan

1801 pithouse: This single pithouse is oval in shape and about five meters by eight meters (Figure 7.4). The presence of quartzite cobbles and gravel helps define the edge on the northeast and east sides. The fill color is slightly darker than the surrounding soil. This pithouse feature is a very shallow depression, which creates a small bowl on this finger ridge.

177

Figure 7.4 Plan of 1801 pithouse based on Constan (2006)

174 cluster: The 174 cluster includes four pithouses, two surface houses, and a grid garden (Figure 7.5). The pithouse diameters are 8 meters, 7 meters, 7 meters, and

6.5 meters. The surface houses are 4.5 meters by 5 meters and 5 meters by 5 meters. The

southern surface house was burned and has burned adobe and charred corn present. The

presence of burned jacal indicates possible jacal construction on one of the bins. The

surface houses were vandalized prior to 1971 (UC Site Form 1975).

Figure 7.5 Plan of 174 cluster based on Toya (2002)

178

173 cluster: The 173 cluster has one pithouse and one surface house (Figure 7.6).

The surface house had been looted in the past. Separate trash areas for each of the structures are discernable with the pithouse midden to the southeast and the surface house midden to the southwest. This is the surface house excavated by Mackey and Holbrook in 1974, which showed mud and boulder construction.

Figure 7.6 Plan of 173 cluster based on Dudley (2002)

172 pithouse: This pithouse is approximately nine meters in diameter (Figure

7.7). It covers most of the width of the rise at this point. There is a large boulder and dirt spoil mound on the west side indicative of past vandalism or animal activity. In addition, there is an active erosional cut on east side of the pithouse.

179

Figure 7.7 Plan of 172 pithouse based on Dudley (2002)

171 cluster: The 171 cluster consists of one pithouse and one surface house

(Figure 7.8). The pithouse is eight meters in diameter and the surface house is seven meters by seven meters. The surface house takes up the width of the rise here. It was built of medium boulders and mud. Spoil dirt heaped on the east side of the pithouse could indicate looting or bioturbation.

Figure of 7.8 Plan of 171 cluster based on Hungerford (2002)

180

1711 cluster: The 1711 cluster has one pithouse and one surface structure, possibly for storage (an outbuilding). The surface structure is three meters by three meters and the pithouse is nine meters in diameter (Figure 7.9). Loss of ground cover

due to the 2002 forest fire has caused erosion in this area, and the surface structure has

deflated to grade. The typical thin walls of Gallina outbuildings would erode and

collapse to the current ground surface more easily, as did the surface structure here.

Figure 7.9 Plan of 1711 cluster based on Toya (2002)

Previous Research and Chronology

At the Davis Ranch Site, the surface houses average 5.5 meters by 5.5 meters and

the pithouses average eight meters in diameter. Excavation was conducted by James

Mackey and Sally Holbrook in 1974 (Holbrook and Mackey 1975). Only one structure

was excavated (see Figures 7.6 and 7.10), a badly looted and burned surface unit house at

the center of the dispersed village. Excavation methods involved definition of walls by

trowel and trenching, removal of fill with shovel and trowel to the roof fall level, and

troweling and 1/8 or 1/16 inch mesh screening down to the floor level. Artifacts were

181

labeled by feature and bagged as fill, roof fall, or floor level. Also the habitation areas

(north of the bins) and the storage areas (south of the bins) were kept separate in the

excavation.

The excavated surface house had typical 50% rubble rock fill with adobe walls.

Interior features included a bench running along the north, east, and west walls (Figure

7.10). An unlined cist in the center of the house was dug into the sandy soil. The

habitation is oriented with a north-south alignment of cist, fire pit, deflector, and ventilator. The floor was lined with flagstones north of the bins. Two post holes were present, one in each of the main bins. The floor area was over 30 square meters.

A Hearth B Deflector C Bin E Banquette F Ventilator I Post hole L Subfloor cist

Figure 7.10 Plan of excavated surface unit house from Simpson (2008)

182

This single surface house produced over 2,000 ceramic sherds. None of the pottery is non-local. Ceramic sherds still litter the surface around the excavated structure.

Dendrochronological dates (Figure 7.11) range between A.D. 1049vv and 1256v. A clustering of dates in the 1240s indicates construction, probably in A.D. 1244. The early dates are not cutting dates.

Figure 7.11 Stem and leaf diagram of tree-ring dates for the Davis Ranch Site

104 9vv

112 7vv

120 2vv 121 0vv, 8vv 122 2vv, 9vv 123 2vv 124 0vv, 0vv, 2vv, 2vv, 2vv, 3vv, 3r, 4vv, 4vv, 4vv, 4vv, 4r, 4r, 4r, 4r, 4r, 4r, 4rB, 4rB, 5v, 6vv, 8vv 125 3+r, 3+rB, 6v

Material Culture

Based on information from local residents, the assemblage from the excavated surface house included several whole vessels that were looted from the structure prior to the archaeological work (Holbrook and Mackey 1975). Excavated counts of pottery from the Davis Ranch Site (reconstructed pot equals one sherd) were designated as 339 bowl sherds, 688 olla sherds and 1,279 utility sherds for a total of 2,306 sherds. The bulk sherd collections from the Davis Ranch Site (Holbrook and Mackey 1975) consist of

1,374 Gallina Gray (31.3%) and 3,018 Gallina Utility (68.7%) sherds, combining the excavated and surface counts. The excavated whole vessels included three reconstructed bowls, one reconstructed pointed bottom jar, and one reconstructed utility vessel. The

183

restored pots are housed at the Museum of Indian Arts and Culture in Santa Fe. In

addition, one adobe pot top and one adobe bin plug were found. Adobe pot tops were

used to cover ollas, while the bin plugs closed access to the bin storage.

Seven slab metates, typical of the Llaves Valley, came from the surface house.

This numbers of metates suggests fairly intensive processing of foods, especially corn.

Gallina slab metates are normally associated with two-handed manos. Chipped-stone lithics are not discussed in the excavation report (Holbrook and Mackey 1975) and were never accessioned to the collections, but cores, hammerstones, lithic debitage, and non- local lithic materials are present on the surface (Constan 2006). Perishables consisted of

42 corn cobs (Mackey and Holbrook 1978). The flora and fauna are discussed above (see

Table 7.1).

Overall, the surface remains of the Davis Ranch Site include lithic debitage, chipped-stone tools, projectile points, stone-tool manufacturing items, groundstone tools, non-local lithic material, ceramics, burned adobe, flagstones, bin covers, and architectural stone. The archaeological materials are compiled from the Holbrook and Mackey (1975) report, previous site forms from the Forest Service, and field observations (Constan

2006). Each habitation group’s surface assemblage follows.

1801 pithouse: The lithics consisted of quartzite, siltstone, and pedernal chert

flakes (FS site form 2006). There are 17 quartzite flakes and 8 tested quartzite cobbles.

The quartzite ranges in color from blue to pink to white. There are two siltstone flakes

and one pedernal chert flake. Also an obsidian scraper was noted. An unidentified

sandstone tool, possible flagstone, ground on one side and along the edges also was

184

found. The ceramics included seven Gallina Utility and three Gallina Gray (Figure 7.12).

No painted sherds were seen.

Left: exterior, Right: interior

Figure 7.12 Photographs of Gallina Utility jar sherd (DC51)

174 cluster: The chipped-stone assemblage contained the following materials – pedernal chert, quartzite, and obsidian (FS site form 2002). This included small, corner- notched obsidian points. A sandstone metate, quartzite mano, sandstone bin covers, and flagstone represent the groundstone. Also present were burned jacal and adobe and charred corn. The southern surface house has flagstone and quantities of burned adobe.

The associated midden for the southern surface house is to the southwest. Several sandstone bin covers were seen at the eastern pithouse. The northern surface house had more lithics than the other structures with large pieces of obsidian, but chert and quartzite also were present. Some of these artifacts may be from the two pithouses to the north.

Distinct surface middens were not apparent in relation to each structure, therefore the northern-most pithouse artifacts could be mix with the adjacent pithouse and northern surface house.

185

Left: exterior, Right: interior

Figure of 7.13 Photographs of Gallina Gray olla sherd (DB51)

As for the ceramics, Gallina Gray (including black-on-gray), Gallina Utility (with some neck-banded), and burned black-on-gray sherds that had turned black-on-red were noted (Figures 7.13 and 7.14). With at least ten rims, this cluster had a higher number of rim sherds than the other clusters. The total sherd count was 761 sherds with 134 Gallina

Gray and 627 Gallina Utility (Constan 2006). The counts for each of the structures are presented in Table 7.2.

Table 7.2 Ceramic counts by structure at Davis Ranch Site cluster 174

Structure Designation Gallina Gray Gallina Utility TOTALS

Southern surface house 33 125 184

Eastern pithouse 16 44 60

Northern surface house 32 189 221

Northern pithouse 27 189 296

TOTALS 134 627 761

186

Left: exterior, Right: interior

Figure of 7.14 Photographs of Gallina Gray jar sherd (DP31)

173 cluster: The assemblage consisted of chert, quartzite, and obsidian lithic debitage and Gallina Gray with some black-on-gray and Gallina Utility including neck- banded sherds (Figure 7.15). The ceramic count was approximately 150 sherds composed of 30 black-on-gray and 120 jar sherds with more Gallina Utility than Gallina

Gray (Constan 2006). The pottery was not separated by structure, but the types were fairly evenly divided between the pithouse and the surface house.

Left: exterior, Right: interior

Figure 7.15 Photographs of Gallina Gray bowl sherd (DB18)

172 pithouse: There were artifacts washing downslope for about 30 meters below

the structure. A small number of quartzite and obsidian flakes, one chert biface (Figure

187

7.16), and three hammerstones occurred around the pithouse (FS site form 2002). Also, five pieces of petrified wood were noted at the habitation. There were 21 sherds with three Gallina Gray (including one painted sherd) and 18 Gallina Utility, counting a filleted sherd from a pointed bottom pot (Constan 2006).

NOT TO SCALE

Length = 49 mm

Width = 22 mm

Thickness = 8 mm

Figure 7.16 Sketch of biface from 172 pithouse

171 cluster: Most of the artifacts at this cluster were eroding down the rise due to sheet washing. The assemblage consisted of chert lithic debitage and Gallina Gray and

Gallina Utility ceramics (Figure 7.17). The pottery count was one Gallina Gray, unpainted, and seven Gallina Utility sherds (Constan 2006). Black-on-gray ceramics were noted at a previous site visit and may have moved down slope.

Left: exterior, Right: interior

Figure 7.17 Photographs of Gallina Utility jar base piece (DC01)

188

1711 cluster: The lithics included quartzite and chert flakes as well as a chert thumbnail scraper (FS site form 2002) (Figure 7.18). The quartzite was especially

smashed up at this cluster. This cluster had a large number of sherds with 1,136 counted

on the surface (Constan 2006). The ceramic assemblage was composed of Gallina Gray

and Gallina Utility. Black-on-gray sherds representing both bowl and jar forms occurred.

The Gallina Utility exhibits a wide variety of surface “treatment” with some neck-

banding, several colors (red, gray, tan, brown), varying degrees of temper erupting

through the surface, and some very thick sherds. The pottery count was 960 Gallina

Utility and 176 Gallina Gray with 67 painted sherds.

NOT TO SCALE

Length = 21 mm

Width = 17 mm

Thickness = 6 mm

Figure 7.18 Sketch of scraper from 1711 cluster

Human Remains

From discussions with local people (Grace Davis, Jerry Tiptin, the Meeks, the

Huffmans, and the Granny Averill clan) by James Mackey and Sally Holbrook in the

1970s, it was learned that the excavated surface house was pothunted over a 20 year

period by ranchers and one adult male skeleton was removed. Burial in houses was

preferred by the Gallina people and they tended to be in bins, although they also occurred

in storage cists and as sub-floor interments (Chase 1976; Green et al. 1958). Gallina

189

males averaged around 158cm in stature and rarely lived beyond age 45 (Bell 1940;

Chase 1976; Hibben 1939). Lambdoid flattening, possibly from cradle-boarding, seems to have been a common trait (Chase 1976; Lange 1940; Weaver 1976).

NOGALES CLIFF HOUSE (LA 649)

Site Location

Nogales Cliff House is set in a defensive location in a sandstone cliff overhang at the head of a narrow side ravine off Spring Canyon (Figure 7.19). It is nestled in an open rock shelter or overhang, which was created by erosion of clay and shale layers in the faces of conglomeratic sandstones of the San Jose Formation. The approximate elevation at the site is 2,400 meters (7,900 ft). The cliff house is not visible from the canyon floor and is about one kilometer from the canyon mouth. Currently, the site has local water until late spring from snow melt on top of the mesa and snow accumulation in a sheltered recess of the cliff face (Pattison 1968:20). However, no catchment system was designed to hold this water, although a small basin was pecked into the rock at House IX.

190

Figure 7.19 Nogales Cliff House photographs by Kari Schleher and author

Spring Canyon has riparian vegetation with a small intermittent stream fed by run-off and a semi-permanent spring 100 meters east of the trail up to the cliff house

(Zeller 1990). The stream may have flowed year round during the occupation of Nogales

Cliff House, since it was noted as permanent by Natalie Pattison (1968:18). Brush-lined garden plots have been observed on the west slopes of the canyon (Green et al. 1958:51-

52). The modern vegetation along Spring Canyon and the Nogales side canyon is mixed- conifer with ponderosa pine and Douglas fir growing toward the bottom of the ravine.

Brushy plants include Gambel oak, alder-leaf mountain mahogany, and deer brush.

Piñon, juniper, grey oak, prickly pear cactus, and banana yucca also can occur. The edible riparian plants listed by Natalie Pattison (1968:20-22) are Arizona walnut, Indian

191

ricegrass, dropseed grasses, cat-tail, and baccharises (“brooms”). Sally Holbrook (1975) cataloged cottonwood, chokecherry, and oak in riparian areas and ponderosa pine,

Douglas fir, spruce, fir, and aspen above 2,200 meters (7,200 ft).

The botanical and zoological remains recovered from the cliff dwelling are listed in Table 7.3. At Nogales Cliff House, the wood species used in construction or for tools include oak, juniper, piñon pine, ponderosa pine, Douglas fir, willow, service berry, alder-leaf mountain mahogany, maple/box elder, alder, cottonwood, and sacaton reed

(Pattison 1968:84-85). Fibers, fabrics, and woven materials from the site were composed of yucca, grasses, feathers, rabbit fur, buckskin, juniper bark, corn husk, and sagebrush.

Based on the bone and antler types used for tools at the cliff house (Pattison 1968:8-9) and the depictions of animals in Gallina artwork (Hibben 1939:63; Wilkinson 1958), the fauna present were mountain sheep, pronghorn antelope, elk, deer, turkey, hawk, geese, rabbit, and other indistinct small mammals. Except the mountain sheep and pronghorn antelope, these animals are consistent with current upland habitat populations (Constan

2006; Holbrook 1975).

Table 7.3 Archaeological flora and fauna from Nogales Cliff House

TAXONOMIC NAME COMMON NAME

Zea White flint corn

Phaseolus vulgaris Red, white, and yellow beans

Cucurbita pepo Pumpkin

Pinus edulis Piñon seeds

Yucca baccata Yucca seeds and root

192

Table 7.3 continued

TAXONOMIC NAME COMMON NAME

Typha latifolia Cat tail root

Opuntia sp. Cactus fruit

Cuercus sp. Acorns

Celtis reticulate Hackberry seeds

Sporobulus sp. Drop seed grass

Muhlenbergia sp. Muhly grass

Odocoileus hemionus Mule deer

Cynomys sp. Prairie dog

Thomonys sp. Gopher

Syvilagus sp. Cottontail rabbit

Lepus sp. Jackrabbit

Citellus sp. Ground squirrel

Antilocapra Americana Pronghorn antelope

Meleagris gallopovo merriami Wild turkey

Site Layout

Nogales Cliff House is the largest of the Gallina cliff houses and the only cliff dwelling with defensive architecture, a tower, incorporated into the village. There were

11 habitation rooms and at least 20 storage compartments (Figure 7.20). Three houses and eight cists were in the two upper level areas. Construction techniques include sandstone blocks with adobe mortar, adobe walls with a rock core or binder, and puddled

193

adobe/jacal (Pattison 1968). The situation within the rock overhang influenced the construction technique chosen by the builders. The plan of each house conforms to the typical Gallina pattern with banquettes, wall benches, storage bins, roof posts, deflectors, hearths, ventilators, niches, flagstone floors, and roof bins. The following descriptions are summarized from Pattison (1968).

C19 —

Figure 7.20 Nogales Cliff House Site Plan based on Pattison (1968:Figure 3)

House I is the western balcony house, which could be called the “tower” room.

Entrance was gained using a ladder to go up and over the wall. The shape of this habitation conformed to the cliff face with additional adjustments calling for a wall-hole rather than a ventilator shaft (Figure 7.21). This may have served a dual purpose as a vent and a peep-hole. Retaining walls and rubble fill brought the floor to level and then it

194

was sealed with adobe. No roof posts or post holes were identified so it appears there was no roof due to the natural shelter offered by the overhang. The outer wall was of jacal construction. Interior features included a circular fire pit with no coping and bins, but the bins were destroyed by vandalism prior to the 1939 excavation. The walls were badly blackened from fire. One tree-ring date was obtained from this structure (A.D.

1154p – 1267rG).

Figure 7.21 Plan of House I based on Hibben (1939:Figure 7)

House II is the eastern balcony house. Its shape also conformed to the cliff face and includes a wall-hole vent, which could be used as a peep-hole (Figure 7.22). A similar method to that documented in House I was used to level the floor. Again there was no evidence of a roof and jacal construction was undertaken for the walls (“pole and stick support with puddled adobe” [Pattison 1968:38]). In this house the fire pit was rectangular with a collar. Bins were present but they were damaged and destroyed by vandals. Even though the walls were badly blackened by fire, a petroglyph of a gaming

195

piece was still visible pecked into the rock face (see Figure 7.35). The cist (Cist 18)

above House II also was badly blackened by fire. Charred beams and burned adobe were

retrieved in the habitation. A tree-ring date was obtained from this structure (A.D. 1205

– 1256rL). The L in the dendro date designates a characteristic surface patination and smoothness, which develops on beams stripped of bark.

Figure 7.22 Plan of House II based on Hibben (1939:Figure 8)

House III was the largest habitation structure and was located in a central position. To create a level floor, fill was added at the front of the room and it was pecked into the rock at the rear, then the entire floor was covered with adobe plaster and paved with large flagstones. Entrance was through the roof, which also provided access to

Houses I and II. Construction consisted of stone blocks in courses mortared with adobe; then the walls were plastered with adobe. The fire pit was rectangular and larger than usual with a high coping of adobe. Other interior features included a banquette on three sides of room, bins built of puddled adobe with a few small stones for fill, two of roof

196

posts set into niches in the banquette, and a 12.5 centimeter wide pure adobe platform on the floor (Figure 7.23). Since the front wall is gone, the fire screen, vent shaft, and any adjacent bins are missing. The rear wall had a blue-gray gypsum wash with a black carbon paint mural of the “tree of life” above the banquette (see Figure 7.36). Burning blackened the walls of the house and charred the contents of the adjoining cists. Two tree-ring dates were obtained from this structure (A.D. 1163p – 1265r and 1201fp –

1267B).

Figure 7.23 Plan of House III based on Hibben (1939:Figure 9)

House IV was a typical Gallina habitation with flagstone covered floors, interior bins, deflector, hearth, and a ventilator shaft (Figure 7.24). The bins were built of puddled adobe with stones as binders. The hearth was rectangular with an adobe cap around its edge. The walls consisted of sandstone blocks and adobe with the west wall being formed by the cliff face. This house also showed evidence of burning, but not direct ignition of the structure. The house caught fire from the adjacent burning building.

197

Figure 7.24 Plan of House IV based on Hibben (1939:Figure 10)

House V was similar to the adjoining House IV. The floor was covered with

flagstones and there was an adobe platform on the floor along the north wall (Figure

7.25). Several sets of bins were built of an adobe with pebble fill. The hearth was

rectangular, but there was no deflector; the ventilator shaft was present in the south wall.

The walls were sandstone with adobe and the roof was pole and adobe. The roof

completely burned, possibly due to attackers piling fuel on top of it. This house was the site of the massacre (see Table 7.4 Burials 6-8, 10, and 14-20 in the Human Remains

section below).

198

Figure 7.25 Plan of House V based on Hibben (1939:Figure 11)

House VI had a typical Gallina layout, but some accommodation was necessary to orient the hearth to the south due to the habitation’s location along the cliff face (Figure

7.26). The usual complement of bins, fire screen, ventilator, and a square hearth were

present, but the flagstone floor was fragmentary. The walls consisted of sandstone slabs

with adobe mortar and were originally plastered with adobe on the interior. There were

roof post molds near the deflector. This house appears to have unintentional burning

similar to House IV.

199

Figure 7.26 Plan of House VI based on Hibben (1939:Figure 12)

House VII is located at the curve in the rock alcove, which caused it to have an unusual layout in order to preserve a vaguely south oriented hearth complex. The bins, deflector, and ventilator shaft are missing due to erosion (Figure 7.27). The rectangular fire pit was still visible, but the floor had been disturbed by pothunters. No flagstones were present probably due to this disturbance. There was a semi-circular bench in the northeast corner that facilitated access to the adjacent cist/workroom (Cist 10). The walls were of the same sandstone and adobe construction as the rest of the habitations on this level. Burning did occur at this house, but to a lesser degree than the other structures in this section of the community.

200

Figure 7.27 Plan of House VII based on Hibben (1939:Figure 13)

House VIII was relatively large and had a banquette running along at least three walls, similar to the banquette in House III. Two posts were set in the north wall banquette and sockets for two posts were found in the floor at the cliff edge (Figure 7.28).

This four-post roof support system also allowed access to Cists 14 and 15, which were located in the cliff above House VIII. These cists have smoke-blackening from the fire that destroyed the village.

201

Figure 7.28 Plan of House VIII based on Hibben (1939:Figure 14)

House IX had a floor built on rock and fill. It was covered with a packed-adobe surface and flagstones around the fire pit area. Only the rectangular hearth was extant

(Figure 7.29). The bins, deflector, and ventilator shaft have eroded away. The walls

were a single thickness sandstone block with adobe mortar. The rear wall and a basin

were pecked out of the cliff face. Also three small holes were carved into the rock floor

along the rear wall. The roof of this habitation would have been used to access Cists 16

and 17 in the cliff above. Evidence of fire was minimal in this structure.

202

Figure 7.29 Plan of House IX based on Hibben (1939:Figure 15)

House X is about 65 meters to the east of the main structures. The interior

features consisted of an oval fire pit, post holes, and possible loom sockets (Hibben

1939:69) (Figure 7.30 only depicts the hearth). The walls were of single thickness sandstone construction. Of note is the pictograph of flying birds painted on the rear wall in a light bluish-white pigment (see Figure 7.43). The pigment may be an organic substance or a clay (Peckham 1972; Wilson 1999). The fire did not reach this habitation.

203

Figure 7.30 Plan of House X based on Hibben (1939:Figure 14)

House XI is located in the cliff above the southern most storage cists and the burial area. The structure only has three walls remaining (Figure 7.31). The floor and its features are completely eroded away. The wall construction was sandstone with adobe mortar. This house showed no evidence of burning.

Figure 7.31 Plan of House XI and Cist 13 based on Zeller (1990:Figure 4)

204

Cists: Twenty storage cists (Figure 7.32) were constructed with adobe-mortared

walls (cists 7-13), in spaces between houses and the cliff face (cists 1-6, 20), or in natural cavities (cists 14-19). They were used for storage, work space, and burials . The walls of

the cists were smaller and thinner than the habitation walls. Natural cists 16 and 19 were

divided by low puddled adobe walls. Cists 3 and 20 were only separated by a coping.

Cist 10 actually was used as both a workroom and a storage area. Entrance to most cists

was through the roof.

Figure 7.32 Examples of plans of cists based on Hibben (1939:Figure 18)

Two ledge cists were noted by Hibben (1939:70) across the side canyon, but

appear to be no longer extant based on an inspection of the rincon (Constan 2006).

Ledge cists were common in cliff house settings. Nogales Cliff House does not have any

subfloor cists. The large number of cists at the village suggests that extra storage was

necessary in an area under social and environmental stress. A tree-ring date was obtained

from Cist 2 (A.D. 1116p – 1239r). This early date may be due to use of this alcove for

storage several years before a permanent community was established here or reuse of

205

older wood. An additional tree-ring date comes from an unprovenienced piece of wood, possibly from Cist 3 (A.D. 1200fp – 1259r).

Previous Research and Chronology

Excavation of the Nogales Cliff House site was conducted in 1939 by Ernst

Blumenthal and Carroll Burroughs under Frank Hibben’s direction. The entire settlement was excavated, except a one meter square stratigraphic column in the southeast corner of each structure (Pattison 1968). Additional surface collection was conducted at Nogales

Cliff House by the University of New Mexico field school in the summer of 1948

(Hibben 1951:93,96; Schulman 1949:note). Dendrochronological dates place the occupation from A.D. 1239 to 1267 with dates clustering in the 1250s and 1260s (Figure

7.33). The A.D. 1239 date is only from a storage room in the “balcony” area. The storage room may have been utilized well before the village was established or this single specimen might have been reused from an earlier site.

Figure 7.33 Stem and leaf diagram of tree-ring dates for Nogales Cliff House

123 9r 124 125 6rL, 9r 126 5r, 7B, 7rG

Material Culture

The excavation at Nogales Cliff House yielded ceramics, chipped stone,

groundstone, cordage, sandals, basket fragments, bone tools, ornaments, woven objects,

worked wood, corn cobs, vegetal materials, and faunal bones. Prayer sticks and a large

medicine cache were found and indicate ritual performance at the site. The collections

206

from this site are currently housed at the Maxwell Museum of Anthropology in

Albuquerque. Unprovenienced artifacts from within the site boundaries included

metates, an arrowshaft straightener, two arrowheads, and scattered scrapers and sherds.

Nine whole, mended, or reconstructed ceramic vessels from the cliff dwelling also are

housed at the Maxwell Museum. Over 4,000 sherds from seven of the cliff house

structures are curated in the museum’s collections. In association with the 1948 UNM

field school, 397 sherds were collected in the general cliff house area including 375

Gallina Gray and 14 Gallina Utility (with eight wide neck-banded). Current enumeration

of the ceramic bulk collections from the cliff house are 1,688 Gallina Gray (44.8%) and

2,084 Gallina Utility sherds (55.2%). None of the ceramics are trade wares. The

discussions of each assemblage are based on Ernst Blumenthal (1939) and Natalie

Pattison (1968).

House I: This habitation contained ceramic, stone, bone, and organic artifacts.

The ceramics total 539 sherds with 2 painted Gallina Gray and 537 Gallina Utility

(Figure 7.34). There also was a small restorable pointed bottom pot. The stone artifacts

included a hammerstone, two sandstone mano fragments (rectangular in cross-section), sandstone bin covers, pieces of laminated sandstone with flecks of muscovite, and one fragment of reddish sandstone. The rest of the assemblage was composed of bone awls, faunal bones, cordage, and vegetal material. The skeletal remains of a baby were found in this structure.

207

Left: exterior, Right: interior

Figure 7.34 Photographs of Gallina Gray bowl sherd from House I (NB33)

House II: This household assemblage had clay, stone, bone, and organic artifacts.

The excavation notes listed sherds, but no bulk ceramics from this habitation were

located in the Maxwell Museum collections. The pottery all may be incorporated into a

reconstructed vessel. Eight olla plugs made of clay were recovered. The stone materials included two sandstone or friable conglomerate metates, five sandstone mano fragments

(squarish cross-section), a projectile point, a maul, and an axe. The only bone objects were awls. Organic artifacts and ecofacts consisted of cordage, a sandal, five sandal fragments, a piece of buckskin, a bow, a broken arrow, a corn cob, and twigs. The unusual items were three pendants, one bead, a pottery implement, and a cylinder or pestle. In addition, a bundle of feathers was embedded in the floor of the habitation.

Feathers also were found in the fill of one of the structures (Blumenthal 1939; Pattison

1968:94), but it was not clear in the excavation notes which structure. The petroglyph

(Figure 7.35), noted previously, comes fromthis habitation.

208

Right: schematic

Figure 7.35 Image of gaming piece petroglyph based on Hibben (1939:Plate LXIVb)

House III: This habitation contained clay, bone, and organic artifacts. The ceramics totaled 126 sherds including 56 Gallina Utility with 70 wide neck-banded. An olla plug and a bin plug made of clay also were recovered. Among all the houses, 16 bin plugs were found (Pattison 1968:84). The bone items present were awls and a bead.

Organic artifacts and ecofacts included cordage, a pot ring, a bundle of grass tied with grass, an arrow, worked wood, a worked stick, a cross-shaped wooden object, and corn material. Corn husk ties were found in the floor fill at the cliff house (Pattison 1968:93), but the exact provenience was not noted. The mural, mentioned above, documented in this house is illustrated here (Figure 7.36)

Figure 7.36 Tree mural from House III based on Hibben (1939:Plate LVII)

209

House IV: This household assemblage had ceramic, stone, bone, and organic

artifacts. The “submarine” pot from Nogales Cliff House is shown below (Figure 7.37).

The excavation notes listed sherds, but no bulk ceramics from this habitation were found in the Maxwell Museum collections. The pottery all may be incorporated into the reconstructed pointed bottom pot. The stone artifacts included nine sandstone manos, an obsidian projectile point, a cache of scrapers in an olla, and a cache of stones (four flakes, two white soft stones, five large pebbles) found in an olla. A cache of scrapers was

reported by Pattison (1968:72), but this was probably the same as the cache of stones

mentioned by Blumenthal (1939). The other cultural materials at House IV were bone

awls and cordage.

Figure 7.37 Photograph of submarine pot by Bernie Bernard (Maxwell 40.2.406)

House V: This habitation had pottery, stone, bone, and organic artifacts. The

excavation notes listed a large amount of sherds, but no bulk ceramics from this house

were found in the Maxwell Museum collections. The pottery all may be incorporated

into several reconstructed vessels (undecorated bowl, painted jar, undecorated pot,

unfired pot). A whole olla was recovered (Figure 7.38). The stone artifacts consisted of

210

a mano, axes, a flint scraper, and a separate cache of scrapers. The bone items include

awls, a needle, and antler fragments. As for organic materials, cordage was present. Two

beads also were found in this structure, each one associated with skeletal remains (see

Table 7.4 Burials 6 and 10).

Figure 7.38 Photograph of olla from House V by Bernie Bernard (Maxwell 40.2.408)

House VI: This household assemblage had ceramic, stone, bone, and organic

artifacts. The pottery totaled 542 sherds with 336 Gallina Gray, including black-on-gray

pieces, and 189 Gallina Utility featuring 17 with punched decoration (Figure 7.39). A

restorable cord-marked bowl also was recovered. The stone objects included a grooved maul, 13 flint chips, two flint cores, and two polishing stones. The other items were bone awls, cordage, and animal hair.

211

Left: exterior, Right: interior

Figure 7.39 Photographs of Gallina Utility jar sherd from House VI (NC20)

House VII: This habitation contained pottery, stone, bone, and organic artifacts.

The ceramics totaled 592 sherds with 282 Gallina Gray, including black-on-gray, and 310

Gallina Utility (Figure 7.40). In addition, a worked sherd was recovered in this house.

The only stone materials were two projectile points. The bone objects consisted of awls, an antler adze, and a piece of worked bone. Organic artifacts included a notched arrowshaft, a bow mid-section fragment, and cordage.

Left: exterior, Right: interior

Figure 7.40 Photographs of Gallina Gray olla sherd from House VII (NB13)

House VIII: This household assemblage had ceramic, bone, and organic artifacts.

The pottery totaled 1,262 sherds with 1,025 Gallina Gray, including painted pieces, and

212

254 Gallina Utility, featuring one plain incised sherd (Figure 7.41). There was also a

restorable “cord-marked” vessel. Another worked sherd was discovered at this structure.

The other objects were bone awls and cordage.

Left: exterior, Right: interior

Figure 7.41 Photographs of Gallina Gray sherd with fillet from House VIII (NP04)

House IX: This household assemblage had pottery, bone, and organic artifacts.

The ceramics consisted of 34 unpainted Gallina Gray sherds (Figure 7.42). The remaining artifacts included bone awls and cordage.

Left: exterior, Right: interior

Figure 7.42 Photographs of Gallina Gray sherd from House IX (NP03)

213

House X: No artifacts were found in this structure. The fire did not reach here, so the remaining occupants, raiders, or looters may have cleaned it out at a later time. An axe was found on the trail accessing the cliff house, which passed just below this house.

The pictograph of birds in flight is featured in this habitation (Figure 7.43).

Figure 7.43 Photograph of bird mural from House X by author

House XI: This structure’s floor had eroded completely. No artifacts were found.

Cist 1: This storage structure was associated with Houses I and II. It contained ceramic and organic artifacts. Blumenthal’s (1939) excavation notes listed sherds, but no bulk ceramics from this cist were found in the Maxwell Museum collections. The organic artifacts consisted of a bundle of arrow shafts without points.

Cist 2: This cist is adjacent to House II. Its assemblage had ceramic and organic artifacts. The excavation notes included pottery pieces, but no bulk ceramics associataed with this structure were found in the Maxwell Museum collections. The organic artifacts

214

included ladder rungs, two prayer sticks, and vegetal material. Also an unidentified artifact was found in a hole in the rock of the cist (Blumenthal 1939).

Cist 3: This storage structure is behind House III. It contained clay, stone, bone, and organic artifacts. No bulk ceramics from this cist were located in the Maxwell

Museum collections, even though they were noted by Blumenthal (1939). The pottery all may be incorporated into five restorable vessels. Three worked sherds and two sherds with mending ties were found. Also a clay pipe fragment, a bin plug, and four olla plugs were recovered. The stone items included 21 sandstone mano fragments, two metate fragments, axes, two arrowheads, and three polishing stones. Objects of bone consisted of a worked antler fragment, worked bone (a possible game counter), bone awls, six bone beads, and three bone pendants. The organic artifacts and ecofacts were two sections of one bow, arrows, two wooden arrow points, digging tools, a graving tool, 13 prayer sticks, worked wood, pointed worked wood, twine and feather rope, a fragment of a sandal, cordage, twined grass matting, a fabric fragment, one to three baskets fragmented and charred, a rabbit-fur blanket, buckskin, sagebrush fibers, faunal bones, and seeds.

Cist 4: This cist is adjacent to House III. Its assemblage had pottery, stone, and organic artifacts. The excavation notes listed sherds, but no bulk ceramics from this structure were located in the Maxwell Museum collections. The only stone object was a mano. The organic artifacts and ecofacts included arrows and vegetal material.

Cist 5: This storage structure was associated with House III. Nothing was listed directly coming from this cist. The excavation notes stated that 64 sandal fragments came from this section of the site (Blumenthal 1939).

215

Cist 6: This cist is located between Houses III and VIII. The largest ceremonial medicine cache came from this structure. The medicine bag included 76 stone objects, antler tines, and long bones of small mammals. See Natalie Pattison’s thesis (1968:72-

73) and Frank Hibben’s dissertation (1939:238-240) for a list of the contents. All the stone, antler, and bone items show evidence of grinding. The powder from this rubbing may have been used for medicinal or ritual purposes (Hibben 1939:241).

Cist 7: This storage structure is in the southern section of the site. It predominately contained ceramics. There were a total of 659 sherds with 9 Gallina Gray, including painted pieces, and 650 Gallina Utility (Figure 7.44). The excavation notes mentioned a reconstructed vessel and one miscellaneous rock from this cist.

Left: exterior, Right: interior

Figure 7.44 Photographs of Gallina Utility jar sherd from Cist 7 (NC01)

Cist 8: This cist also is from the southern portion of the village. It contained a burial (Burial 11), but no artifacts were documented coming from this structure. Looters may have cleaned it out in the past. Of note, nine billets/platters/cradleboards were documented coming from cists at the cliff house (Pattison 1968:85-86).

216

Cist 9: This storage structure was associated with Houses III and VII. It

contained ceramic and organic artifacts. Based on Blumenthal’s (1939) excavation notes,

pottery sherds were unearthed, but no bulk ceramics from this cist were found in the

Maxwell Museum collections. The pottery may be incorporated into a restorable vessel.

The organic artifacts and ecofacts included arrows, a foreshaft or arrow, a woven

straw/grass object, a straw bundle, and a roll of yucca.

Cist 10: This workroom/storage cist was accessed from House VII. Its

assemblage had pottery, stone, bone, and organic artifacts. The excavation notes listed

sherds, but the Maxwell Museum could not locate any bulk ceramics from this structure

in their collections. The stone and bone objects included a medium-grained sandstone

mano and worked bone. The organic artifacts consisted of an antler implement, a

possible digging stick, and parts of a burned sandal.

Cist 11: This cist is adjacent to and superimposed over the burial area (Burial 13).

Blumenthal’s (1939) excavation notes do list pottery pieces, but no bulk ceramics from

Cist 11 were found in the Maxwell Museum collections.

Cist 12: This storage structure is in the southern part of the village. It contained

ceramic, bone, and organic artifacts. The excavation notes listed sherds, but no bulk

ceramics from this cist were located in the Maxwell Museum collections. The only bone object was a single bead. The organic artifacts include possible wooden arrow points, a ladder rung, and worked wood.

Cist 13: This cist is adjacent to House XI. The contents were all associated with

an interment (Burials 1 and 2). The assemblage had stone and organic artifacts. The

217

stone items were a scraper, a mano, and a metate. The organic artifacts and ecofacts consisted of juniper bark matting, buckskin, and seeds.

Cists 14-18: These storage structures are in the cliff face and are inaccessible.

They have not been excavated.

Cist 19: This cist was associated with the Cist 10 workroom. It was not cataloged separately during the excavation.

Cist 20: This area was originally considered part of Cist 3. The two spaces were only separated by a coping. Cists 3, 4, 5, 6, and 20 held the largest store of artifacts and ecofacts at the site (Pattison 1968:65). All five of these structures were associated with

House III.

Burial Area: Burial 5 had a selenite pendant and four bone beads; two pots also may have been associated with this interment. Burial 9 included a broken pointed bottom pot placed over the deceased’s head.

Human Remains

The information on the human remains was compiled by Natalie Pattison from

Hibben’s site map (1939:Figure 6), honors papers (Bell 1940; Lange 1940), excavation notes (Blumenthal 1939) and corrections (Green 1957). The skeletal materials are housed in the Osteology Laboratory at the University of New Mexico in Albuquerque.

For the burial numbers see Table 7.4. The bones of a small baby were recovered from a deep pit made by pothunters in House I, but the burial may have originally been located in the wall of the habitation. The remains of one elderly female with a groove along the

218

sagittal suture were found in House VI. The locale of this burial was inferred based on

human bones in House VI mentioned by Ernst Blumenthal (1939).

There was a formal burial area at the southern end of the site with four intentional

burials (a pregnant woman, a woman with two pots and a stone pendant, an unsexed

individual with a pointed bottom pot over the cranium, and a male with a pre-coronal fracture/depression). The bodies from the inhumations lay in a flexed position, usually on the left side with the head oriented to the west. Five other intentional burials were discovered: four burials in cists and one burial in the wall of House I. The burials in

Cists 8 and 11 seem to have been interred as part of the burial area before the cists were built (older female and middle-aged male respectively). Cist 13 appears to have been built for the double burial of a mother and child. The woman had a broken mano and metate under her head and the child was in her arms.

Eleven individuals were found in House V lying on the floor as victims of an

attack with charcoal from the burned roof beams among the skeletons (Pattison

1968:24,50). These individuals included one middle-aged female, two males in their

early twenties, five children, and portions of three unsexed adults. Much of the site was

burned with Houses I, II, III, and V being badly charred, several houses and cists (Houses

IV, VI, and VII and Cists 14 and 15) had associated burning, probably of their roofs. It

appears that the people in House V died before or during the fire. Since the bodies were

not exposed to postmortem animal scavenging, the attack appears to have taken place in

winter with a covering snowfall (Turner et al. 1993). “The retreat into a well-hidden

refuge did not succeed in preventing eventual destruction” (Pattison 1968:25).

219

Table 7.4 Human remains from Nogales Cliff House (based on Pattison 1968:Table 6)

Burial No. Locale Sex Age Method of Deposition 1 Cist 13 Female 27-30 Intentional, flexed 2 Cist 13 4-6 Intentional 3 House VI Female 50+ Unknown 4 Burial area Female 40-45 Intentional, flexed 5 Burial area Female middle-aged Intentional, flexed 6 House V < 1 year Not intentional (victim of massacre) 7 House V Female middle-aged Not intentional (victim of massacre) 8 House V < 3 years Not intentional (victim of massacre) 9 Burial area Intentional, flexed 10 House V < 3 years Not intentional (victim of massacre) 11 Cist 8 Female 50+ Intentional 12 Burial area Male 40-45 Intentional, flexed 13 Cist 11 Male 45-50 Intentional, flexed 14 House V 1 Not intentional (victim of massacre) 15 House V Male 20-25 Not intentional (victim of massacre) 16 House V Male 19-21 Not intentional (victim of massacre) 17 House V Adult Not intentional (victim of massacre) 18 House V 3 Not intentional (victim of massacre) 19 (new no.) House V Not intentional (victim of massacre) 20 (new no.) House V Not intentional (victim of massacre) 21 (new no.) House I Baby Intentional

SUMMARY

Generally, both the Davis Ranch Site and Nogales Cliff House are good illustrations of the Gallina cultural tradition. The Davis Ranch Site is typical of a Gallina dispersive village. The combination of pithouses, surface houses, outbuildings, and one identified grid garden are configured in a series of small open clusters along a rise. This village tree-ring dates indicate construction in the A.D. 1240s and abandonment within a decade. The ceramic assemblage in both the excavation report (Holbrook and Mackey

1975) and from surface observations (Constan 2006) consistently has more Gallina

Utility sherds than Gallina Gray, especially painted pieces. As illustrated in Chapter Six,

220

this is characteristic of other Gallina pottery assemblages. The low frequency of black-

on-gray sherds could have been affected by collection by local residents or forest visitors.

Nogales Cliff House epitomizes a defensive site configuration with its compact layout and adjacent structures. Dendrochronological dates show occupation of the community in the A.D. 1250s and 1260s. Both sites were built about ten years apart, suggesting escalation of social violence at that time. The assemblages by structure from the cliff dwelling had more Gallina Utility sherds than Gallina Gray in most cases, except

Houses VI, VIII, and XI. Nine whole pots were located in the collections at the Maxwell

Museum, but an additional nine restorable vessels were not found at the museum.

221

CHAPTER 8: Methodology and Analysis of Ceramics

Centered on the Davis Ranch Site and Nogales Cliff House, my research used

microscopic, compositional, and experimental analyses of archaeological ceramics and

local temper and clay deposits to examine technological choices of Gallina potters.

Microscopic and compositional examination of the archaeological ceramics laid the

groundwork for the geological resource survey. The local clay and aplastic temper

deposits located during the resource survey were microscopically and compositionally

tested to compare to the ceramics. Beginning with the pottery, an archaeothermometry study was conducted, which informed the patterns from the X-ray diffraction (XRD).

The mineralogy revealed in the XRD analysis helped with the petrographic work.

Knowing the minerals aided understanding the inductively coupled plasma-mass spectrometry data and the performance characteristics behaviors.

ARCHAEOLOGICAL MATERIALS

The excavation at Nogales Cliff House yielded over 4,000 sherds, which are currently housed at the Maxwell Museum of Anthropology at the University of New

Mexico in Albuquerque. A sample of 30 sherds from the Maxwell Museum collection was used for this study (Table 8.1). The sherds were selected based on minimum sherd

dimensions of four to five centimeters and provenience to structure. Large sherds

allowed for multiple pieces to be removed without destroying the entire piece, although

some of the black-on-gray pieces were smaller due to a limited number of recovered

painted sherds. An effort was made to include ceramics from as many structures as

possible to represent the variation at the cliff dwelling. Some of the houses and most of

222

the cists did not have sherds in the museum collection (see descriptions in Chapter

Seven).

Table 8.1 Nogales Cliff House Ceramic Sample

Sample No. Structure Type Form Comments NB01 Cist 7 black-on-gray olla Slightly coarser temper NB02 House 8 black-on-gray olla NB07 House 8 black-on-gray olla Dark gray background NB13 House 7 black-on-gray olla NB15 House 7 black-on-gray olla NB21 House 6 black-on-gray olla NB29 House 6 black-on-gray olla NB33 House 1 black-on-gray bowl Only bowl sherd NB34 House 1 black-on-gray olla NB39 Cist 7 black-on-gray olla NC01 Cist 7 coarse jar NC06 House 8 coarse jar Reddish, “overfired” sherd NC09 House 8 coarse jar NC14 House 7 coarse jar NC20 House 6 coarse jar NC23 House 1 coarse jar NC24 House 1 coarse jar Sooted NC27 House 1 coarse jar NC28 House 3 coarse jar Wide neck banded NC30 House 3 coarse jar NP01 Cist 7 plain jar NP02 Cist 7 plain jar NP03 House 9 plain jar Slightly coarser temper NP04 House 8 plain jar Fillet, can see coils in profile NP07 House 8 plain jar NP11 House 7 plain jar NP14 House 6 plain jar NP16 House 6 plain jar NP18 House 6 plain jar NP21 House 6 plain jar Punched décor

The single unit house excavated from the Davis Ranch Site produced around

2,300 ceramic sherds, some of which are currently housed at the Laboratory of

Anthropology at the Museum of New Mexico in Santa Fe. The collections at the

Laboratory of Anthropology consist of a small number (124 sherds) of bulk ceramics,

223

apparently from a single reconstructable vessel. The rest of the excavated pottery may still be in possession of James Mackey, who could not be located. Therefore, surface collection was used for the Davis Ranch Site. Surface accumulations from all the structures in the Davis Ranch community produced over 2,000 sherds. Surface collection of 295 sherds [Forest Service Special Use Permit No. SFE212501] allowed for selection of a 30 sherd working sample (Table 8.2). The sherds were selected based on size and provenience to cluster and structure. Three of the clusters (171, 172, and 1801) did not have sufficient ceramics to be included (see descriptions in Chapter Seven). It was important to have sherds from both pithouses and surface houses in the sample. The unused sherds will be returned to the appropriate structures at the site.

Table 8.2 Davis Ranch Site Ceramic Sample

Sample Site Structure Type Form Comments No. No. DB001 173 pithouse black-on-gray olla DB017 173 surface house black-on-gray bowl Paint turned red DB018 173 surface house black-on-gray bowl Beginning repair hole DB019 173 surface house black-on-gray olla DB054 174 surface house black-on-gray olla DB055 174 surface house black-on-gray olla DB059 1711 pithouse black-on-gray bowl DB060 1711 pithouse black-on-gray olla DB061 1711 pithouse black-on-gray olla DB107 1711 pithouse black-on-gray bowl Fillet on exterior DC001 173 surface house coarse jar Very thick pot base DC002 173 surface house coarse jar Voids where temper came out DC003 173 surface house coarse jar DC026 173 pithouse coarse jar Thick sherd DC043 174 surface house coarse jar DC044 174 surface house coarse jar DC045 174 surface house coarse jar DC048 174 surface house coarse jar DC049 174 surface house coarse jar DC051 1711 pithouse coarse jar DP001 173 pithouse plain jar S emi-thick sherd DP002 173 pithouse plain jar Semi-thick sherd

224

Table 8.2 continued Sample Site Structure Type Form Comments No. No. DP004 173 pithouse plain jar Curved fracture DP019 173 surface house plain jar Fingernail marks DP020 173 surface house plain jar Semi-thick sherd DP031 174 pithouse plain jar DP061 174 surface house plain jar DP102 1711 pithouse plain jar DP103 1711 pithouse Plain jar DP104 1711 pithouse Plain jar Sherd from shoulder area

My study began with identifying three ceramic types (black-on-gray, plain, and coarse) and then sampling the collections from both sites. As the research progressed, it became apparent that the plain type was problematic for several reasons. First, a “plain” sherd easily could be an unpainted section of a black-on-gray vessel. Second, the overall plain type designation was originally based on a single whole vessel from the Evans Site

(Lange 1941). Third, there is a continuum in the grain size from the utilitarian types

(Green et al. 1958). These issues were borne out in several of the analytical results (see below).

The final types defined for Gallina ceramics are Gallina Gray and Gallina Utility.

This is in keeping with some academic (Ellis 1988; Mera 1935) and cultural resource management (Fiero 1978; Seaman 1976) research. These two types are fully described in

Chapter Six and the history of the types is discussed in Chapter Five. The key separating factor is the coarseness of the temper and the smoothness of the surface. The Gallina

Gray sherds have finer temper and a smooth surface, while the Gallina Utility sherds have quite coarse temper and a rough gritty surface.

225

Analytical Methods

Characterization of ceramics requires understanding of the materials and

processes used by potters. The materials focused on in my study include the clays and

the aplastics, while the firing temperature and atmosphere were the processes

investigated. Examination of how these materials and processes affected the performance

of the ceramics also was undertaken.

To start, the original firing temperature range for Gallina vessels was explored through an archaeothermometry study. Archaeothermometry is the determination of the temperature at which pottery was fired. It is useful for understanding the ancient potter’s

general control over the firing process and the desired qualities for the finished vessel.

Clay oxidation analysis expanded on the refiring test. Controling the firing conditions

allows for comparison of clay composition through color.

X-ray diffraction (XRD) was used to examine the clay mineralogy of the ceramic bodies (both clays and aplastics). This technique is one of the few methods that can

identify clay mineral constituents (Bishop et al. 1982). It is not used extensively by archaeologists since pottery is mineralogically complex, the method is only semi- quantitative, and the transformed clays in ceramics give little response to the X-ray beam

(Bradley 1964; Rice 1987:385; Velde and Druc 1999:273). I performed the XRD

analysis using the instrumentation at the University of New Mexico in the Department of

Earth and Planetary Sciences.

Petrographic analysis was used to identify the aplastic mineralogy of the sherds and complement the firing atmosphere information from the oxidation test. Petrography

of “ceramic materials is justified by the concept of ceramic materials as artificial stone

226

(Bamps 1883)” (quoted in Rice 1987:376) and it is typically used for identification of

aplastics (Shepard 1976:139). Petrographic studies of southwestern ceramics have

touched on the Ancestral Puebloan (Douglass and Schaller 1993; Garrett 1979; Hegmon

1995; Longacre 1964; Mills et al. 1997; Nordenskiold 1895; Oppelt 1994; Ruscavage-

Barz 2002; Schwartz et al. 1980; Shepard 1936, 1938, 1939, 1942, 1965), Hohokam

(Abbott and Schaller 1994; Beck and Neff 2007; Dulaney 1986; Gladwin 1937; Hepburn

1983; Lombard 1985, 1986; Schaller 1987; Swarthout and Dulaney 1978; Wallace 1954),

and Mogollon (Burgett 2006; Crown 1980; Ennes 1995). I conducted the petrography in

the microscope laboratory of the Earth and Planetary Sciences Department at the

University of New Mexico.

Inductively coupled plasma-mass spectrometry provided the chemistry of the

ceramic pastes and temper grains. Compositional analyses applied to southwestern

ceramics include inductively coupled plasma-mass spectrometry (Cogswell et al. 2005;

Kennett et al. 2002; Triadan et al. 1997), instrumental neutron activation analysis (Creel et al. 2002; Crown and Bishop 1987; Deutchman 1980; Glowacki et al. 1998; Hegmon et

al. 1997; Neff et al. 1997; Neitzel and Bishop 1990), X-ray fluorescence (Bower 1986;

Crown 1983; Olinger 1988; Olinger and Woosley 1989; Seaman 1976), X-ray diffraction

(Bradley and Hoffer 1985; Douglass and Schaller 1993; Kay 1994; Lightfoot and Jewett

1984), microprobe (Abbott et al. 2008; DeAtley and Melson 1986; Douglass and Schaller

1993), and heavy mineral analysis (Balsom 1984; Douglass 1990). The choice of inductively coupled plasma-mass spectrometry (ICP-MS) rather than instrumental neutron activation analysis (INAA) is based on its capacity for extremely low detection limits, which exceed those of instrumental neutron activation analysis (Barclay 2001),

227

and its lower costs. The ability to pinpoint aplastic versus clay body in the sherds and

natural clay samples with the laser ablation process also produced a data set of greater

resolution. The ICP-MS was carried out by Dr. Hector Neff at the Institute for Integrated

Research in Materials, Environments, and Societies at California State University Long

Beach.

Performance characteristics examined in these ceramics included color, hardness,

porosity, and thermal shock resistance. The color achieved in the firing process needs to

fit the ceramic tradition of the potter. Durability and abrasion resistance of a ceramic

material can be assessed through hardness. Porosity, the ratio of volume of pore space to

total finished ceramic volume, can be measured to a degree. Only the open pores, those

with surface connectivity, are accessible to laboratory testing. The volume of these open

pores is the apparent porosity. Thermal shock occurs when the temperatures in a vessel

body are uneven, which causes stress (Bronitsky 1986).

Archaeothermometry and Clay Oxidation Analysis

The most commonly used technique for archaeothermometry involves

examination of color, hardness, and weight changes in a sherd as it is refired at increasing

temperatures. There are several complicating issues with this technique. Many post-

depositional processes, such as leaching, mineral recrystallization, and rehydration, can

alter the properties used to estimate the firing temperature. Temperatures vary within the

fire itself and this draws into question the validity of using a single sherd to determine the initial firing temperature for an entire vessel. Additional disadvantages of this method are the low accuracy of the determination due to sensitivity to variations in time and

atmosphere and the errors in estimating due to organics in the ceramic matrix.

228

Even with the issues involved with refiring experiments, a large sample size can

provide general conclusions about firing temperatures (Chambliss 2003; Shepard

1976:222; Tite 1969). Therefore, I removed chips with a diamond saw from a larger

sample of 108 finished ceramics to determine original firing temperature. The

experiment was executed with a Fischer Scientific digital display PMC 703-059

programmable kiln in the Laboratory for Ceramic Analysis at the University of New

Mexico. The chips were fired for thirty minutes at 50oC increments between 400oC and

1000oC (Rice 1987:427). At each increment, the Munsell color of the core, the Mohs’

hardness, and shrinkage were compared to the parent sherd. Change in two or more of

these attributes indicated that the original firing temperature has been reached or

exceeded (Hammond 1971; Tite 1969).

The firing temperature can be bracketed on the high side due to the absence of

high temperature minerals (Brindley and Lemaitre 1987:Table 7.1a; Grim 1968:Table

9.3), such as mullite (950-1150oC), cristobalite (1000-1200oC), or spinel (900-1050oC).

This indicates a temperature less than 900ºC. The continued presence of aplastic

materials in the ceramics – quartz, feldspar, and mica – shows a temperature of less than

850ºC. Quartz transitions from α to β in the firing process, but reverts to its α state upon

cooling. The feldspars melt at over 1000 ºC, but the micas decompose by 850ºC

(Brindley and Lemaitre 1987:Table 7.1a).

Open firings are short and only reach relatively low temperatures. Modern New

Mexico Pueblo potters tend to fire their vessels for 20 to 40 minutes (Shepard 1976:87).

Heat is uneven in this type of firing, and the duration at the maximum temperature is

quite short. In general, open firings attain maximum temperatures between 600 and

229

850ºC (Rice 1987:156). Based on refiring color changes, the firing process for the

majority of prehispanic Gallina ceramics reached temperatures between 750 and 800ºC, which fits with the typical temperatures for open fired ceramics in the American

Southwest (Figure 8.1).

Figure 8.1 Original firing temperature estimates

Figure 8.2 Firing temperatures compared across the sites and types

230

The two sites have a similar range in firing temperatures (Figure 8.2). At the

Davis Ranch Site, the overall average firing temperature was 758ºC and the median was

800ºC. For Nogales Cliff House, the overall average temperature was 775ºC with a median of 750ºC. The black-on-gray ceramics are all above 700ºC, while none of the coarse pottery is above 850ºC. It appears that the coarse ceramics at Nogales Cliff

House generally are higher fired than the coarse at the Davis Ranch Site. Otherwise, the firing temperatures for the black-on-gray and plain are fairly consistent between the two sites.

With the original firing temperature determined, each sherd chip was fired to

1000ºC to even out firing differences and create a baseline for comparison of color in the oxidation experiment. The ceramics fell into color groups that include buff, yellowish red, and red (Tables 8.3 and 8.4). The color groups are based on clusters developed by

Thomas Windes (1977:Table 10.5), Barbara Mills (1987:Table 12.2), Trixi Bubemyre and Barbara Mills (1993:Table 64), and Hannah Mattson (2010:Table 5.2). All types

(black-on-gray, plain, and coarse) from both sites appear in the Group 4 yellowish red color group, but only the black-on-gray and plain (Gallina Gray) occur in the buff firing groups. This suggests that a minimum of two clay sources may have been used in production of the Gallina pottery, although the separation was not overarching. Some of the Gallina Gray ceramics were made with the same firing color clay as the coarse

Gallina Utility vessels.

231

Table 8.3 Ceramic Color Groups with Munsell Color Ranges

Color Group Color Munsell Color Range 7.5YR (7/3-7/4) 1 Buff 7.5YR (8/2-8/4) 2 Buff 5YR(7/4) Yellowish 7.5YR (6/6-6/8) 3 Red 7.5YR (7/6) 5YR(5/6-5/8) Yellowish 4 5YR(6/4-6/8) Red 5YR(7/8) 2.5YR(5/6-5/8) 5 Red 2.5YR(6/6)

Table 8.4 Munsell Color Groups of Sherds Refired at 1000oC

Davis Ranch Site Nogales Cliff House Black- Black- Color Group on-gray Plain Coarse on-gray Plain Coarse Total 1 (Buff) 5 3 11 5 24 2 (Buff) 1 1 3 (Yellowish Red) 8 1 9 4 (Yellowish Red) 5 15 18 7 11 11 67 5 (Red) 7 7 Total 18 18 18 18 18 18 108

X-Ray Diffraction (XRD)

Each mineral has a unique structure. X-ray diffraction analysis (XRD) characterizes minerals by their crystalline structure. By identifying mineral phases their chemical compositions are known, or can be approximated if the mineral is part of a solid solution series. The principles of XRD are given in X-Ray Diffraction and Identification and Analysis of Clay Minerals by Duane Moore and Robert Reynolds (1997). This technique provides a way to determine the specific clay minerals present in ceramics and geological clays.

232

The X-ray diffraction equipment in the Earth and Planetary Sciences Department

at the University of New Mexico was used for this research. The XRD laboratory

includes a Scintag Pad V diffractometer/ goniometer with Scintillation detector,

DataScan4 software (Materials Data, Inc.) for diffractometer automation and data

collection, and Jade 9.1 software (Materials Data, Inc.) accessing the complete

International Center for Diffraction Data Powder diffraction file (ICDD PDF-4+) database for data analysis and interpretation.

Both random and oriented mounts were generated for each ceramic type from each site (Table 8.5). For sherds, a chip from each was powdered (10 mg) by hand in a

Diamonite mortar and pestle. The powder was put in a side-pack mount to maximize the random orientation of the particles. Each sample was run between two and sixty degrees

2θ to determine the minerals present. Non-clay minerals are almost always present in clay samples. Having a list of the diagnostic peaks for the common accessory non-clay minerals with good intensity at the low angles typically scanned for clay minerals can be of assistance when interpreting a pattern. Also, quartz diffraction lines can be used as an internal standard for measurement of d values. Then each side loading random mount was run between five and twenty degrees 2θ to look for evidence of vitrification.

Table 8.5 XRD ceramic sample breakdown

Site Name Random 2-60 deg Random 5-20 deg Oriented 2-32 deg

Davis Ranch Site 30 30 30

Nogales Cliff House 30 30 30

233

The problem with clays is that the clay mineral diffraction maxima are not visible

or only faintly so because the particles are very small and there are not enough atoms

present in any single plane to give a decent intensity. This is complicated by the sheet structure (essentially two-dimensional form) of clays. So the trick is to use the sheet structure to our advantage by creating an oriented sample. Orienting the clays makes them lie one on top of the other in the same plane forming a pseudomacrocrystal, which

amplifies the diffraction for the plane parallel to the layers.

The planes parallel to the sheet structure are called the basal spacing of the clays.

Discrete clay minerals are best identified from this basal spacing. A set of diffraction

patterns of the common, discrete clay minerals is helpful for identification. These

diffraction patterns can be from standard reference clays or calculated by a computer

program. Peaks of mixed-layered clays tend to be very broad and are best identified by

comparison to models of mixed basal spacing from clay specific computer software

(Moore and Reynolds 1997:296). There are three computer programs that are used for

modeling clays: NEWMOD (Reynolds 1985), WILDFIRE (Reynolds 1993), and

SYBILLA (ChevronTexaco Inc.).

The goal of clay sample preparation is either perfectly oriented clay sheets

parallel to the substrate or perfectly random orientation. A glass slide mount is the most

basic and easiest oriented sample preparation technique. To create a glass slide mount,

the powder from the random mount was placed in de-ionized water with a pinch of

sodium hexametaphosphate, a deflocculant, and then stirred to disperse. Little or no

carbonates, sulfates, or iron oxides and few organics were present in the clays samples so

no chemical pretreatments were undertaken. After suspension and timed settling (five

234

minutes), the top layer clay suspension was decanted with a medicine dropper and placed

on a glass slide. Based on Stoke’s Law, five minutes of gravity sedimentation will

separate out the particles over 18µm. Once the clay suspension had dried on the slide and

an XRD tracing was produced the clay minerals could be determined.

A couple of the ceramic oriented mounts also were glycolated to look for

rehydration of swelling clays. Swelling clays include smectites, some mixed-layer clays, and vermiculite. Organic liquids, primarily ethylene glycol and glycerol, are extensively used as an auxiliary treatment to expand swelling clays. Whether or not a mineral expands and the amount of expansion can provide essential supplementary information aiding clay mineral identification.

For the Davis Ranch Site, the three ceramic types were compared across three of the structure clusters, 173, 174, and 1711 (Table 8.6). The clusters have unit houses, pithouses, a storage structure, and a grid garden. The results indicate that the black-on-

gray ceramics are similar among the clusters with illite patterns and a possible kaolin

trace at the middle cluster (173). The coarse sherds are also similar between the clusters

with a definite illite pattern and possible kaolin at the two clusters on the top of the rise

(173 and 174). As for the plain pottery, it is similar to the coarse ceramic results with

illite present at all three clusters, but possible kaolin minerals at the 173 and 174 clusters.

The difference in the presence of a kaolin peak may be related to the firing temperature of

the ceramics. A higher firing temperature would cause more of the clay minerals to lose

intensity in the XRD patterns due to loss of crystalline structure (Brindley and Lemaitre

1987).

235

Table 8.6 XRD results from the Davis Ranch Site by ceramic type and cluster

Cluster No. Ceramic Type Illite Kaolin

Black-on-gray M t

173 Coarse M t

Plain M t

Black-on-gray t

174 Coarse M L

Plain M t

Black-on-gray M

1711 Coarse M

Plain M

M=most abundant, L=less abundant, t=trace amounts

Mineral transformations in clays upon heating have been documented since the

1960s (Grim 1968; Wahl 1965). Between 500 and 550ºC, kaolin minerals convert to metakaolin, which has a semi-crystalline organization but retains the hexagonal form of the original crystals. Smectite shows a gradual destruction of its lattice between 600 and

850ºC. Illite is similar to smectite with a slow disappearance of crystalline structure between 700 and 850ºC. Both smectite and illite can maintain some crystal form through this process.

The firing temperatures for these ceramics reached between 600o and 900oC (see

Figure 8.1). At these temperatures, smectites, illites, and kaolins begin to lose their characteristic crystalline structure. In the ceramic diffraction patterns, illite and illite- smectite peaks are present, but in lower intensities. The illite peaks are narrow and the

236

illite-smectite has broad peaks that show about 10% expandable smectite that had not completely dehydrated in the firing process. The transformation of kaolin into metakaolin means that the presence of kaolin mineral peaks in the diffraction patterns is rare even if it was more common in the origin natural clays used by the Gallina potters.

A comparison by ceramic type for the pithouses and unit houses was conducted to see if there is a difference between clays at different structural types (Table 8.7). No difference could be identified between the clays used at the unit houses and the pithouses for any of the ceramic types. In general, the clays from the Davis Ranch Site ceramics are dominated by an illite clay mineral, which is due to the survival of the illite crystal structure during the firing process. All the ceramic samples from the Davis Ranch Site have very similar patterns showing illite and kaolin minerals (Figure 8.3).

Table 8.7 XRD results from the Davis Ranch Site by ceramic type and structure type

Structure Type Ceramic Type Illite Kaolin

Black-on-gray M

Pithouses Coarse M t

Plain M

Black-on-gray M

Surface houses Coarse M t

Plain M t

M=most abundant, L=less abundant, t=trace amounts

237

Quartz peak Quartz feldspar peak peak feldspar

Potassium

Potassium feldspar peak feldspar Potassium Illite peak Kaolin peak Kaolin

Figure 8.3 Example of oriented XRD tracing from a Davis Ranch Site ceramic

For Nogales Cliff House, I compared the three ceramic types from six habitation structures and one storage cist (Table 8.8). The houses are located along the cliff

(Houses XIII and IX), at the base of the alcove (Houses III, XI, and XII), and House I in the upper “balcony” (see Figure 7.20). The black-on-gray ceramics are similar amongst the houses, with an illite pattern and some residual kaolin mineral. The coarse and plain pottery types are the same. There is no difference between the habitations and the storage cist, which also shows a pattern with illite and possible kaolin minerals. As with the

Davis Ranch Site sherds, the clays from the Nogales Cliff House ceramics are dominated by an illite pattern with some remaining evidence of kaolin minerals (Figure 8.4). This

238

also is probably due to illite’s retention of its crystal structure upon heating, unlike most other clay minerals (Brindley and Lemaitre 1987).

Table 8.8 XRD results from Nogales Cliff House by ceramic type and structure

Structure Ceramic Type Illite Kaolin

Black-on-gray M

House I Coarse M t

Plain

Black-on-gray

House III Coarse M L

Plain

Black-on-gray M

House VI Coarse M

Plain M

Black-on-gray M

House VII Coarse M t

Plain M

Black-on-gray M L

House VIII Coarse M

Plain M t

Black-on-gray

House IX Coarse

Plain M L

Black-on-gray M L

Cist 7 Coarse M

Plain M

M=most abundant, L=less abundant, t=trace amounts

239

Quartz peak Quartz

Potassium feldspar peak feldspar Potassium Potassium feldspar peak feldspar Potassium Plagioclase peak Plagioclase Kaolin peak Kaolin Illite peak

Figure 8.4 Example of an oriented XRD tracing from a Nogales Cliff House ceramic

Based on the surviving clay mineralogy of the ceramics from Nogales Cliff House and the Davis Ranch Site, the plain samples seem to have more affinity with the coarse sherds (Figure 8.5). This is in line with the difficulty in typing unpainted sherds, which tend to have a continuum between the painted and the very coarse pieces (Green et al.

1958). Overall, both sites have similar diffraction patterns, which suggest that the potters from each community were making similar clay selections or, the patterns of different clays become similar during firing.

240

Note the alignment and similar peak intensities of the plain (upper) and coarse (lower) diffraction patterns.

Figure 8.5 Overlay of plain and coarse XRD tracings showing similarities

Petrography

Petrographic analyses involve the use of petrographic thin sections. This method is one of the most commonly used to determine mineralogy for ceramics in archaeological research (Rye 1981:50). The two categories for mineralogical description are mineral identification and texture. Identification applies to the proportions and conditions of the minerals. Texture includes crystallinity, fabric, grain size, and shape.

Granulometrics can be used to characterize ceramic thin sections. This technique examines size, sorting, shape, and percentage of different kinds of inclusions in the fabric

(Rice 1987:379). The shape of the grains can provide information about the depositional origin of the clay (Rice 1987:73).

241

For petrographic analysis, a chip was cut from each of the 60 sherds for the petrographic thin sections. Quality Thin Sections in Tucson, Arizona, prepared the slides by taking a two to three millimeter thick and 2 cm2 slice that was then ground to a 0.03 mm thickness. A Zeiss petrographic microscope in the Department of Earth and

Planetary Sciences at the University of New Mexico was used for this study.

The petrographic analysis of the 60 ceramic slides recorded information on the coarse:fine distribution, sorting, optic state, and mineral and rock clast granulometrics

(Table 8.9). Voids and mineral alterations were not specifically documented, but general trends were noted. A single transect across the length of the slide with a 50 grain minimum was the baseline. Textural analysis of the aplastics and micromass was preferential to a strict point-count due to possible skewing of void space volume from the poor sherd slide preparation. The aplastic minerals present were identified by their optical properties under the polarized light of a petrographic microscope. Additionally, the size and shape (roundness and sphericity) were documented for each type of inclusion

(Pettijohn et al. 1987; Powers 1953). The firing atmosphere was approximated through the micromass optic state: an active state is seen as a bright micromass, while an inactive state is seen as a dark micromass. A coarse:fine distribution was described and the percent aplastics was determined using estimator charts (Matthew et al. 1991). Other notable aspects, such as sorting (Harrell 1984), were recorded for each slide. The abundance of aplastics was estimated at 2.5x power, while the grain characterization was conducted at 10x power. This methodology follows Patricia Capone (1995:187-189), the systematic description technique of Ian Whitbread (1989), and trends in soil micromorphology (e.g. Bullock et al. 1985; FitzPatrick 1993; Ringrose-Voase 1991).

242

Table 8.9 Petrographic variables

1. Inclusions a. Type – lithic fragments, minerals present b. Shape – sphericity and roundness c. Size i. Granule 4-2 mm ii. Very coarse sand 2.0-1.0mm iii. Coarse sand 1.0-0.5mm iv. Medium sand 0.5-0.25mm v. Fine sand 0.25-0.125mm vi. Very fine sand 0.125-0.0625mm 2. Coarse:fine distribution – close packed, single spaced, double spaced 3. Micromass a. Optic state (firing atmosphere) i. Inactive, slightly, moderately, very active 4. Other notable aspects

The coarse:fine distribution is related to the aplastic percentage, which was estimated using comparator charts (Matthew et al. 1991). For the black-on-gray ceramics from the Davis Ranch Site, the aplastic percentage ranged from 10% to 30% with an average of 17.5% (Table 8.10). These percentages correlate to coarse:fine distributions described as open spaced, single spaced, and close packed.

The Davis Ranch Site black-on-gray sherds were poorly to well sorted. A reducing or neutral firing atmosphere is indicated by the inactive to moderately active optic state. As for the mineral granulometrics, the quartz and potassium feldspar both occurred as very fine to coarse sand grains with low to high sphericity. The quartz showed sub-rounded, angular, and very angular edges, whereas the potassium feldspar was sub-angular and angular in degree of roundness. Plagioclase was relatively rare, with very fine to medium size sand grains that were low to moderate in sphericity and rounded to sub-angular. The rare muscovite grains were very fine to fine sand in size with low sphericity and rounded edges. All the rock clasts were sedimentary in origin,

243

but they were somewhat uncommon in occurrence. The rock clast grains ranged in size from fine to coarse sand with low to moderate sphericity. Their degree of roundness was noted as sub-rounded, angular, and very angular.

Table 8.10 General trends in thin sections from the Davis Ranch Site

Attribute Black-on-gray Coarse Plain

Aplastic 17.5% 19.5% 19.0% Average C:f Single spaced Single spaced Single spaced Distribution Sorting Well sorted Very poorly sorted Moderately well sorted

Optic State Inactive Inactive Slightly active Fine to medium sand, Coarse to very coarse sand, Medium to coarse sand, Quartz high sphericity, moderate sphericity, moderate sphericity, angular grains very angular grains angular grains

Potassium Fine to medium sand, Coarse to very coarse sand, Medium sand size, Feldspar moderate sphericity, moderate sphericity, moderate sphericity, angular grains angular grains sub-angular grains Fine sand size, Medium to coarse sand, Medium to coarse Plagioclase low sphericity, high sphericity, sand, low sphericity, rounded grains sub-rounded grains sub-rounded grains Very fine sand, Fine sand size, Fine sand size, Muscovite low sphericity, low sphericity, low sphericity, rounded grains rounded grains rounded grains Sedimentary clasts, Sedimentary & igneous clasts, Sedimentary clasts, Rock Clasts coarse sand size, medium to coarse sand size, coarse sand size, sphericity and moderate sphericity, high sphericity, rounding vary sub-rounded grains rounded grains Large elongate voids oriented parallel to the surface in some of the coarse sherds, Voids generally voids are irregularly shaped and suggest burned out organics

Weathered feldspars with some transforming into clay minerals, thermal Alterations alteration of feldspars inherited from igneous parent rock, and strained quartz

244

In the collection of coarse sherds from the Davis Ranch site, the aplastics

averaged 19.5% with a range of 15% to 25%. Most were single spaced with a few open

spaced coarse:fine distributions. The coarse ceramic thin sections were very poorly to

poorly sorted. The inactive to moderately active optic state suggests a reducing or neutral

firing atmosphere. The quartz and plagioclase were fine to very coarse sand size grains

with low to high sphericity. The degree of roundness for the quartz was angular to very

angular, while the plagioclase was sub-rounded to very angular. The potassium feldspar had medium to very coarse sand grains with low to high sphericity and sub-angular to very angular edges. Muscovite was uncommon and ranged in grain size from very fine to medium sand. It had low sphericity and rounded borders. All the rock clasts contained the quartz and feldspar suite of minerals with medium to very coarse sand size grains.

They were sub-rounded and angular with low to high sphericity.

The Davis Ranch Site plain pottery coarse:fine distribution ranged from open spaced to close packed with 10% to 25% aplastics and an average of 19%. The plain slides went from very poorly to well sorted. With a slightly to moderately active optic state, reducing to neutral firing atmospheres were used. Both the quartz and potassium feldspar grains range in size from fine to coarse sand. The quartz are moderately spherical with sub-rounded to angular borders. The potassium feldspar have low to high sphericity with rounded to very angular edges. The plagioclase grains tended to be medium to very coarse sand size and had low to high sphericity with rounded to angular margins. Similar to other mica grains in the Gallina ceramics, the muscovite in the plain pottery at the Davis Ranch Site was very fine to medium sand size with low sphericity and rounded to sub-rounded borders. The rock clasts are sedimentary in origin and range

245

from medium to very coarse sand size with low and high sphericity. The degree of

roundness in the rock clast grains goes from rounded to sub-angular. Epidote is present in three of the plain thin sections (DP20, DP31, and DP104).

From Nogales Cliff House, the black-on-gray slides have a close packed, single spaced, and open spaced coarse:fine distribution with aplastics composing 10% to 30% and averaging 19% (Table 8.11). These painted ceramics are poorly to well sorted. The optic state ranges from inactive to very active, which indicates varying firing atmospheres. The quartz grains are very fine to coarse sand size with low to high sphericity and sub-rounded to angular margins. The potassium feldspar and plagioclase are similar with fine to coarse sand grains and low to high sphericity. The potassium feldspar has sub-angular and angular degree of roundness, while the plagioclase are sub- rounded to angular. Muscovite is rare, but does appear as fine sand grains with low sphericity and rounded borders. The rock clasts contain cemented or inter-grown quartz and feldspars with fine to very coarse sand size grains. They have low and high sphericity and edges that are rounded and sub-angular. Epidote appears in two thin sections (NB01 and NB39) from the storage cist.

The coarse ceramics at Nogales Cliff House were fairly consistent with a single spaced coarse:fine distribution and 20% aplastics. They are very poorly to poorly sorted and have an inactive to slightly active optic state. The optic state suggests a reducing or neutral firing atmosphere. Most of the inclusions range from fine to very coarse sand size. The quartz and potassium feldspar grains are fine to very coarse sand with low to high sphericity and sub-rounded to very angular edges. The plagioclase occurs as fine to coarse sand grains with low to high sphericity and sub-rounded to angular borders. As

246

for the very rare muscovite, it is fine to medium sand size with low sphericity and rounded margins. The rock clast grains are similar to the single quartz and potassium feldspar with a fine to very coarse sand size. They are low and high in sphericity along with rounded to angular edges. Two slides (NC01 and NC14) have a few epidote grains.

Table 8.11 General trends in thin sections from Nogales Cliff House

Attribute Black-on-gray Coarse Plain

Aplastic 19.0% 20.5% 19.5% Average C:f Single spaced Single spaced Single spaced Distribution Sorting Moderately well sorted Poorly sorted Very poorly to poorly Optic State Inactive Inactive Slightly active Medium to coarse sand, Medium to coarse sand, Medium to coarse sand, Quartz moderate sphericity, varying sphericity and moderate sphericity, sub-angular grains rounding sub-angular grains

Potassium Medium to coarse sand, Medium to coarse sand, Medium to coarse sand, Feldspar low sphericity, low sphericity, moderate sphericity, sub-angular grains sub- angular to angular sub-angular grains Fine to medium sand, Medium to coarse sand, Fine to medium sand, Plagioclase moderate sphericity, low sphericity, varying sphericity, sub-angular grains angular grains rounded grains Fine sand size, Fine to medium sand, Fine sand size, Muscovite low sphericity, low sphericity, low sphericity, rounded grains rounded grains rounded grains Sedimentary & igneous Sedimentary & igneous Sedimentary & igneous Rock Clasts clasts, fine to medium clasts, medium to coarse clasts, medium to coarse sand, high sphericity, sand, low sphericity, sand, low sphericity, sub-angular grains rounding varies rounding varies

Voids Generally the voids are irregularly shaped and suggest burned out organics, some appear to be the result of large aplastic grains lost during preparation of the slides

Alterations Weathered feldspars with some transforming into clay minerals, thermal alteration and strain in quartz and feldspars inherited from igneous parent rock

247

The Nogales Cliff House plain pottery in thin section has a varied coarse:fine distribution ranging from close packed to double spaced. The aplastics compose 10% to

25% with an average of 19.5%. The inclusions are very poorly to well sorted. The optic state goes from inactive to very active and points to varying firing conditions. The quartz and potassium feldspar grains are medium to coarse sand size with sub-rounded to angular margins. A moderate to high sphericity is characteristic of the quartz, while the potassium feldspar has low to high sphericity. The plagioclase is fine to medium sand size with low to high sphericity and rounded to sub-angular edges. Muscovite is rare with a very fine to medium sand size, low sphericity, and rounded borders. The rock clasts are composed of quartz and feldspars with some granule size grains. Most of the grains are medium to coarse sand size. These clastic inclusions have low to high sphericity and rounded to angular margins. Epidote occurs in four slides (NP02, NP03,

NP18, and NP21).

For all the sherds, quartz was the most common mineral with potassium feldspar second. Some instances of perthite were recorded, but there was not a pattern across the ceramics. Plagioclase appears in most of the samples (68%) and muscovite occurs in some (37%). Epidote is present in only 11 samples (18%) and is very rare, with only one or two grains in each of the slides where identified. The rock clasts are made up of quartz and feldspars; some have hematite cementation, some a siliceous cement, and some inter-grown. Hematite also was noted as distinct opaque grains. The aplastic inclusions are predominately single spaced making up 20% of the ceramic body. At least

17 of the thin sections had clay pellets that were not completely mixed into the clay

248

matrix. The granulometrics and textural analysis show relative consistency in Gallina

ceramic production for the painted and utility types.

Inductively Coupled Plasma-Mass Spectrometry (ICP-MS)

Chemical characterization determines major, minor, and trace elements present in each sample. Trace-element analysis is preferable in regions of geological uniformity

(Williams and Jenkins 1976; Rye 1981:47), which is artificially constructed in this study by selecting sites along the same drainage. Inductively coupled plasma-mass

spectrometry (ICP-MS) can analyze up to 72 major, minor, and trace elements. Laser

ablation-ICP-MS uses a laser to pinpoint and vaporize a portion of the sample. The

vaporized material is transported into a chamber where it encounters a plasma torch. The

plasma breaks down the material into charged ions. These ions are sent through a mass

spectrometer where the atoms are counted.

Samples from the ceramic sherds were ablated, focusing on the clay and aplastics

separately. Each sample was ablated three times pinpointing the paste of the ceramics for

all 60 samples. Aplastic grains were targeted in 55 of the ceramic samples. Forty-five

elements were counted for each paste and aplastic target with 10 major, 12 minor, and 23

trace elements. The ten major elements in descending order by abundance are Si, Al, Fe,

K, Na, Ti, Ca, Mg, Zr, and Ba. This is typical and follows with the eight elements

traditionally found in ceramic materials: silicon, aluminum, iron, calcium, magnesium,

sodium, potassium, and titanium (Rye 1981:48). No bulk characterization was

attempted. Discriminant function analysis was conducted on the chemical data from the

ceramic pastes. This is a statistical technique used to determine if a set of variables can

249

be employed to predict category membership. Additionally, bivariate plots of log-base

10 elemental concentrations from the “temper” grains correspond to the elements in the quartz (high silicon) and feldspar (high potassium and calcium) inclusions.

Only two studies have examined chemical variation in Gallina ceramics (Massouh

2009; Seaman 1976). Timothy Seaman (1976) worked at LA 11843 and supplemented the basic ceramic analysis with a sample of 150 sherds, 100 Gallina Utility and 50

Gallina Gray, from five sites (LA 10702, 11841, 11843, 11850, and 12571) subjected to

X-ray fluorescence. Based on use of specific spectra peaks to differentiate other

Southwest ceramics (Snow and Fullbright 1976) and in obsidian sourcing studies of the time (Condie and Blaxland 1970; Hester and Mitchel 1974; Ward 1974), Seaman (1976) focused on the Sr/Rb/Zr spectra peaks. The spectra showed little difference among the samples and suggested use of a single clay source or geologically homogeneous clays across the Gallina region (Seaman 1976:42).

Paula Massouh’s (2009) research involved instrumental neutron activation analysis of 80 Gallina sherds, 40 Gallina Utility and 40 Gallina Gray, from the L/102

Site. The ceramics were divided into four compositional groups with 8% of the sherds not assigned to a group. Group 1 (21% of the sample) had a higher concentration of sodium and contained mostly utility sherds. Group 2 (45% of the sample) included most of the Gallina Gray sherds and ¼ of the Gallina Utility sherds. Similar in composition to

Group 2, Group 3 included 15% of the sample. Group 4 was diverse with only a few sherds, 10% of the sample. The presence of Gallina Gray and Gallina Utility sherds in all groups suggests that Gallina potters from L/102 were not selecting different clays for the different types (Massouh 2009:152-157; Speakman and Glascock 2006).

250

The inductively coupled plasma-mass spectrometry analysis was conducted by

Hector Neff (2008, 2011) at the Institute for Integrated Research in Materials,

Environments, and Societies at California State University Long Beach. The 60 samples were coded as black-on-white, plain, and coarse. The results show that the three types from the two sites tend to be chemically distinct, especially the black-on-white and the coarse. In the first discriminant function plot (Figure 8.6), the sites appear to be distinct in the Y dimension. The second discriminant function plot (Figure 8.7) shows separation between what could be classified as the Gallina Gray (black-on-white and plain variant) and the Gallina Utility (coarse). Both discriminant function plots seem to depict the close relationship of the black-on-white and plain ceramics. This is in keeping with the evidence from observations of Gallina sherds and the petrographic analysis presented above.

Figure 8.6 Discriminant function plot showing separation of the two sites

251

Figure 8.7 Discriminant function plot showing separation of Gallina Gray and Utility

The aplastic elemental concentrations also were investigated (Neff 2008). The

log-base 10 elemental concentration plot (Figure 8.8) shows five temper groups, which readily correspond to the minerals identified in both the petrographic and XRD analyses.

Temper 1 and 2 have a high silicon content, related to the quartz grains. Temper 4 is high in potassium and reflects the presence of potassium feldspar. Temper 5 has a significant amount of calcium, which is congruent with plagioclase, a member of the Na-Ca feldspar series. Temper 3 was noted as paste-like and most likely consists of the incompletely mixed clay clasts seen in the petrographic thin sections.

252

Figure 8.8 Bivariate elemental concentration plot showing the five temper groups

Performance Characteristics

The performance characteristics of color, hardness, porosity, and thermal shock resistance were analyzed. The original color of the paste, which is related to the surface color since no slips occur, was recorded using the Munsell color system (Tables 8.12 and

8.13). The colors fall in a gray to white spectrum, which aligns with the Ancestral

Puebloan grayware and whiteware traditions. The only members of the dark gray color group are two coarse sherds from Nogales Cliff House, and the majority of the sherds in the white color group are black-on-gray or plain. These colors indicate a reducing or neutral firing atmosphere. The light brown color group includes both coarse and plain sherds. There is a slightly wider range of colors represented at the cliff dwelling, which

253

may be a function of the greater number of habitations represented in the sample population. On the whole, the two sites show similar color groupings.

Table 8.12 Munsell Color Groups for the Ceramics

Color Group Color Munsell Color Range V Dark Gray Gley1(4/N) Gley1(5/N-6/N) W Gray 10YR(5/1-6/1) 2.5Y(6/1) Gley1(7/N) Gley2(8/5PB) 10YR(6/2) Light X 10YR(7/1-7/2) Gray 2.5Y(7/1) 2.5YR(7/1) 7.5YR(7/1) 10YR(5/2) Light 10YR(6/3) Y Brown 7.5YR(6/3) 7.5YR(7/3) Gley1(8/N) 10YR(8/1) Z White 2.5Y(8/1) 2.5YR(8/1) 5YR(8/1)

Table 8.13 Ceramics by Munsell Color Group

Davis Ranch Site Nogales Cliff House Black- Black- Color Group on-gray Plain Coarse on-gray Plain Coarse Total Dark Gray (V) 2 2 Gray (W) 2 1 3 1 4 2 13 Light Gray (X) 7 8 3 6 3 4 31 Light Brown (Y) 3 1 2 6 White (Z) 1 1 1 3 2 8 Total 10 10 10 10 10 10 60

Durability, a ceramic vessel’s ability to survive normal use, can be approximated through measurement of the sherd’s hardness. The Mohs hardness was assessed by scratch testing with a set of hardness picks. The majority (67%) of the sherds have a

254

hardness of 2.5, between calcite and gypsum. The black-on-gray have the narrowest hardness span, while the coarse sherds range between talc and apatite (Table 8.14). At

the Davis Ranch Site, the black-on-gray has a consistent hardness of 2.5, while the coarse sherds have a wider range. The bulk of the pottery from both sites has a similar hardness, but some of the plain and coarse ceramics from Nogales Cliff House are softer than any of the sherds from the Davis Ranch Site.

Table 8.14 Hardness of the Ceramics

Davis Ranch Site Nogales Cliff House Black- Black- Hardness on-gray Plain Coarse on-gray Plain Coarse Total 1.5 3 4 7 2.5 10 6 3 8 7 6 40 3.5 4 5 2 11 4.5 2 2 Total 10 10 10 10 10 10 60

I determined the apparent porosity of the ceramics by cutting and drying a chip

from three sherds of each type from each site. The chips were weighed (Wf) and then

boiled in water for three hours. After the chips cooled in the water, they were weighed

suspended in water (Sw) and in air (Sf). The volume of the chip (Vf) was calculated [Sf

– Sw] x 1cc/gm. The apparent porosity formula is [(Sf – Wf)/Vf] x 100. The overall

average porosity was 29.4 percent with the black-on-gray samples having lower apparent

porosity, especially at the Davis Ranch Site, and the coarse ceramics generally having

higher apparent porosity (Table 8.15 and Figure 8.9). The type averages have similar

values at both sites, although the Davis Ranch Site does have a wider range. There is a

larger difference between the averages for the coarse sherds from each site. The Nogales

255

Cliff House porosity percentages fall within the confines of the porosity numbers from the Davis Ranch Site.

Table 8.15 Ceramic Apparent Porosity Percentages

Site Type Series 1 % Series 2 % Series 3 % Average % Davis Black-on-gray 20.0 28.6 31.3 26.6 Ranch Coarse 27.3 33.3 37.5 32.7 Site Plain 27.0 29.4 30.8 29.1 Nogales Black-on-gray 25.0 25.0 33.3 27.8 Cliff Coarse 27.2 29.4 32.0 29.5 House Plain 27.8 31.8 32.0 30.5

Figure 8.9 Boxplot of the Ceramic Apparent Porosity Percentages

Thermal shock resistance was tested through the quench technique. Another chip was removed from one parent sherd per type per site. The chips were submerged in boiling water for five minutes and then plunged into ice water. This was repeated twenty times. To protect the chips in the boiling water, each was placed in a metal mesh tea

256

strainer. After the cold plunge, each chip was examined with a 10x hand lens to look for

spalling or cracking. Minor spalling was documented, but no cracks appeared (Table

8.16). The coarse and plain sherds had analogous resistance to each other and at both the cliff dwelling and the open site. The black-on-gray ceramics held up the best at each site.

Table 8.16 Thermal Shock Results

Site Type Thermal Shock Resistance th Davis Black-on-gray Minor spalling first noted at the 18 quench cycle. Ranch Coarse Minor spalling first noted at the 12th quench cycle. Site Plain Minor spalling first noted at the 12th quench cycle. th Nogales Black-on-gray Minor spalling first noted at the 15 quench cycle. Cliff Coarse Minor spalling first noted at the 13th quench cycle. House Plain Minor spalling first noted at the 12th quench cycle.

No significant differences in performance characteristics are apparent between the

ceramics from the two sites. Among the types, the Davis Ranch Site black-on-gray pottery had the best thermal shock resistance, the lowest porosity, and the most consistent hardness. The black-on-gray and coarse sherds do seem to show slight dissimilarities, such as the coarse having the widest range of colors and hardnesses while the black-on-

gray show more control in production with fewer colors and a narrower hardness range.

This separation between the painted and utility sherds also is most visible in the porosity

and thermal shock results from the Davis Ranch Site.

SUMMARY

In this chapter, I elucidated the analytical methods and presented the

archaeological materials used for my research. The 60 ceramics from the two sites, non-

defensive and defensive, were put through numerous tests to characterize the ceramic

257

types and the assemblages from the sites. The non-defensive site is the control and the

pottery from the defensive cliff dwelling has been compared to it. The firing temperature

and oxidization colors were determined. X-ray diffraction, petrography, and inductively

coupled plasma-mass spectrometry were conducted. Additional laboratory tests were done to examine the performance characteristics of the ceramics. In general, the ceramics from the two sites are very similar to each other and share certain trends.

At the Davis Ranch Site, the clays are illite and kaolin with distinct clustering for each of the ceramic types based on the elemental analysis (see Figures 8.6 and 8.7). The pottery types also show similarities in temper, predominately quartz and feldspars, both chemically and petrographically (see Figure 8.8 and Table 8.10). The estimated original firing temperature for the sherds from the Davis Ranch Site has a median of 800oC. The

black-on-gray sherds were all fired at or above 700oC, while the coarse type had

temperatures of 850oC or less (see Figure 8.2). When refired to 1000oC, the Davis Ranch

sherd colors fell into buff and yellowish red groups. Only black-on-gray and plain occur

in the buff color group, but all three types are represented in the yellowish red groups

(see Table 8.4). The color of the same ceramics when recovered from the archaeological

context exhibited white, light gray, gray, and light brown tones (see Table 8.13). The

light brown group contained three coarse sherds. All the types from this site were present

in the white, light gray, and gray groups. The hardness of the Davis Ranch ceramics

ranged from 2.5 to 4.5. The average apparent porosity of these same sherds went from

black-on-gray with the lowest to plain and then coarse having the highest porosity (see

Table 8.15). As for the thermal shock resistance, the black-on-gray survived the quench

258

test the best with both the plain and coarse first spalling during the same earlier cycle (see

Table 8.16).

The ceramics from Nogales Cliff House also have illite and kaolin clays with

elemental clustering by type (see Figures 8.6 and 8.7). The same quartz and feldspar aplastic materials were added or naturally occur in the pottery from both sites based on the chemical and petrographic analyses (see Figure 8.8 and Table 8.11). With an estimated original firing temperature median of 750oC, the sherds from the cliff dwelling

were fired at a slightly lower temperature than those from the Davis Ranch Site. The

minimum temperature for the black-on-gray and the maximum temperature for the coarse

types from Nogales are the same at both sites (see Figure 8.2). More variation in color

occurred when the sherds were refired to 1000oC with colors of buff, yellowish red, and

red present (see Table 8.4). Seven coarse sherds from Nogales Cliff House refired to a

red color, but as at Davis Ranch only black-on-gray and plain appear in the buff color

groups. The initial color of the pottery when excavated fell into the same categories as

the Davis Ranch ceramic with the addition of two coarse sherds in a dark gray color

group (see Table 8.13). In the light brown group both plain and coarse occur, while only

black-on-gray and plain were documented in the white group at the cliff dwelling. The

light gray and gray color groups had the highest membership and included all three types

at both sites. Some of the Nogales ceramics were softer and the overall range was from

1.5 to 3.5. The majority have the same hardness as the Davis Ranch ceramics. As for the

average apparent porosity, the black-on-gray sherds again have the lowest, with coarse

next and plain having the highest average porosity (see Table 8.15). The thermal shock

results were very similar to those from the Davis Ranch Site – the black-on-gray had the

259

highest resistance and the coarse and plain began spalling at almost the same cycle (see

Table 8.16).

The level of consistency between the two sites and among the types indicated little to no change in the practices of the Gallina potters under a social environment of conflict. The following chapters provide information on what raw material choices the

Gallina potters had in proximity to these two villages. This will allow for further understanding of the clay selections being made by prehispanic household ceramic producers, and in turn, conjectures offered as to the driving forces behind resource procurement within this culture area.

260

Chapter 9: Nature of Clays and Geologic Resource Survey

This research examines the technological choices in ceramic resource

procurement of the Gallina area. Knowledge of the regional geology is necessary for understanding what options Gallina potters had in selecting their clays. Basically, clay is a material of small particles that becomes plastic when wet, dries hard retaining its molded shape, and changes characteristics when fired to a durable substance (McPherson

and McPherson 1990; Rye 1981:29; Shepard 1976:6). In this chapter, I discuss the

natural sources of clays, typical Ancestral Puebloan pottery raw material selection, the

geological formations in the study area, and the clays available in these formations.

NATURE OF CLAYS

Clays can be defined in many ways. In general, the term denotes a fine-grained

earthy material that becomes plastic when moistened (Dodd 1964). More specifically

clays comprise a group of minerals that vary on a continuum with a sheet-like or lath-like

structure, a category of rocks and soils dominated by clay minerals, and a particle-size

grade (< 2µm) that makes up the major fraction of those minerals, rocks, and soils

(Jackson 1997). To the potter, clays are defined by their plasticity (Rice 1987:52), which is initially checked via workability.

Clay Sources

Clay materials suitable for ceramics can be found in three forms: residual clays, sedimentary clays, and clay-rich rocks. Residual clays result from the weathering of and

generally are deposits on their parent rock. They contain coarse, unaltered, angular

fragments of the parent material and have a low organic content (Rice 1987:37). Overall,

261

residual clays are coarse with low plasticity. Associated with residual clays are the clays and clay minerals in soils (Velde and Druc 1999:71). These tend to be concentrated in the top of soil profiles near the surface. Because the climate in the American Southwest is arid, illite and smectite are the predominant clay minerals in the soils (Grim 1968:515).

Sedimentary clays consist of concentrated deposits of transported clay-rich materials. These clay deposits are homogeneous with a finer texture (Rice 1987:37).

They also may have a high organic content. Sedimentary clays can be subdivided by the means of transport of environment of deposition, such as marine, fluvial, lacustrine, aeolian, and glacial clays. The deposits may be located off-shore, along river banks, in lakes, and on flood plains (Velde and Druc 1999:71).

Shales are laminated, indurated rocks with more than 67% clay-sized minerals

(Jackson 1997). These clay-rich rocks must be ground and soaked to access the plastic properties unless they have weathered to a plastic state. Young, unburied or shallow clay-rich sediments may not be as hard as rock yet. Shales are dominated by illite

(Meunier and Velde 2004:80; Weaver 1959). Additionally, smectite is common in

Mesozoic and younger shales (Meunier and Velde 2004:80; Rice 1987:48).

ANCESTRAL PUEBLOAN POTTERY

Eric Blinman (1993) traced the changes in technology of Ancestral Puebloan ceramics with emphasis on choices of raw materials. Early ceramics of this region were made of residual or sedimentary clays. Sedimentary clays, especially alluvial clays, are useable but may have a high iron content. This resulted in brown surface colors on early pottery, i.e. brown wares. Typical Ancestral Puebloan pottery occurs in colors of gray,

262

white, and red. Gray ware technology emerged around A.D. 500 with the switch to

shales. Clay-rich rocks when processed to access the plasticity of the clay content have

high shrinkage ratios and need to be modified by addition of angular, fine-grained tempering materials with a coefficient of thermal expansion similar to that of the clay.

Clays from shale are best when fired in a neutral atmosphere, which allows for production of a gray to white surface color. By the 7th century A.D. the formulation of

the black-on-white tradition was established.

The San Juan Red Ware tradition developed around A.D. 750. Red wares evolved

from use of iron-rich, gray shale clays that turn red when fired in an oxidizing

atmosphere. Potters could use the same shale clays, but manipulate the final surface

color through use of different firing atmospheres. The Tsegi Orange Ware and White

Mountain Red Ware series were continuations of this complementary red ware tradition.

The red wares were part of a specialized production and exchange network that reached

many areas of the American Southwest (Blinman 1993).

GEOLOGY OF THE GALLINA AREA

The Llaves Valley area, heartland of the Gallina people, lies at the intersection of the eastern San Juan Basin, the southern Gallina-Archuleta Arch, and the western

Nacimiento uplift (Figure 9.1). The San Juan Basin is a large structural basin adjacent to

the Colorado Plateau that contains Paleozoic through Tertiary sedimentary deposits

(Baltz 1967). The Gallina-Archuleta Arch is a tectonic structural divide that separates the

San Juan Basin from the Chama Basin to the east (Crouse 1985; Hultgren 1986). The

263

Nacimiento uplift consists of a series of north-trending fault blocks that are slightly tilted to the east (Crouse 1985; Woodward 1974).

Figure 9.1 Tectonic map of area based on Woodward (1974:Figure1)

Within seven kilometers of the Davis Ranch Site and Nogales Cliff House, there are formations representing Permian through Eocene times, along with four types of unconsolidated Pleistocene and Recent age deposits. The Cretaceous rocks have economic importance, with drilling for oil occurring in the Mancos Shale, natural gas in the Dakota and Point Lookout Sandstones, and coal mining in the Menefee and Fruitland

Formations (Fassett 2010). The formations and deposits located within the one kilometer

survey area include the Cretaceous Lewis Shale and Kirtland-Fruitland Formations

undivided; the Tertiary Nacimiento and San Jose Formations; and the Quaternary terrace

gravels and alluvium (Figure 9.2).

264

CANYON SURVEY AREA

RANCH SURVEY AREA

The circles represent a one kilometer radius from each of the two sites.

Figure 9.2 Geologic map from Baltz (1967:Plate 1) with one kilometer radius marked

I present the rock formations from oldest to youngest with those from within one kilometer in this chapter and those from farther afield in Appendix A. Elmer Baltz

(1967), David Crouse (1985), and Michael Hultgren (1986) were used as a baseline for the formation descriptions and thickness measurements because their work is specific to my study area. Other geological research on these extensive formations has been incorporated to provide current information. Spencer Lucas and collegues identified many of the fossils listed below; I did not find any fossils during my fieldwork. To illustrate the stratigraphic relationship in the survey area, a column from the mouth of

Spring Canyon is given (Figure 9.3).

265

Figure 9.3 Stratigraphic column

at mouth of Spring Canyon from

Baltz (1967:Plate 2)

266

Cretaceous

During the Early Cretaceous, the second phase of the disarticulation of Pangea

started. The south Atlantic and the eastern Indian Oceans opened. Rifting began

between North America and Europe. Also, exotic crustal fragments joined the western margin of North America (Scotese 2000). Rapid sea-floor spreading in the Cretaceous increased the volume of the mid-ocean ridges, which lead to sea level rise. This affected the subduction of oceanic crust under western North America, creating an arc and foreland basin. In combination, the rise in sea level and the foreland basin allowed the

Western Interior Seaway to develop. This shallow sea is represented in the study area by marine sedimentary deposits (Figure 9.4). The climate of the Cretaceous was much warmer and more humid globally than today. The warm water of the shallow Cretaceous sea made the local climate milder (Scotese 2000). This warming is indicated by dinosaurs and palm trees found in the San Juan Basin (Hunt and Lucas 1992).

Figure 9.4 Paleogeography of the Cretaceous Period from Blakey and Ranney (2008)

267

In the Llaves Valley area the formations of the Cretaceous, starting with the

oldest, are the Dakota Sandstone, Mancos Shale, Point Lookout Sandstone, Menefee

Formation, Cliff House Sandstone, Lewis Shale, Pictured Cliffs Sandstone, and the

Kirtland Shale/Fruitland Formation undivided. The Dakota Sandstone has been divided

into several members (Owen et al. 2005), but it will be described at the formation level in

Appendix A. The Mancos Shale has several members (see Crouse 1985 and Hultgren

1986) that will be lumped for this study’s purposes. The Cretaceous includes the

formations in the Mesa Verde Group. The Mesa Verde Group was named by William H.

Holmes (1877), and Arthur Collier (1919) divided it into three formations at the type

locality of Mesa Verde National Park: Point Lookout Sandstone, Menefee Formation, and

Cliff House Sandstone. Within the project area, the Lewis Shale and the Kirtland-

Fruitland Undivided are the only Cretaceous formations.

Lewis Shale. The Lewis Shale was named by Charles Cross and others (1899) for exposures near Fort Lewis, Colorado. This formation is not well exposed in the Llaves

Valley, but does range in thickness from 150 to 650 meters within the research area. It is

composed of light to dark gray fissile clay shale with some inter-bedded calcareous

siltstone, fine-grained sandstone, and thin limestone beds with large septarian limestone

concretion zones. The Huerfanito bentonite bed also can be seen in the Lewis Shale

throughout the San Juan Basin. Sedimentary structures are not prevalent. The rock is

thinly bedded sandy shale and siltstone with shaley siltstone. Some carbonaceous

material is present in the upper portion of this formation (Baltz 1967; Crouse 1985;

Fassett et al. 1997; Hultgren 1986). On the basis of a fossil assemblage that includes

marine invertebrates, such as Inoceramus vanuxemi, Placenticeras syrtale, Placenticeras

268

placenta, Placenticeras planum, Didymoceras cheyennense, and Baculites species, a Late

Cretaceous age can be assigned to the Lewis Shale (Lucas and Sealey 1992; Sealey and

Lucas 1997). Derived from the lithology, the shells of marine invertebrate fossils in the

concretionary limestone beds, and the presence of a large, deep water predator fossil (a

mosasaur), the Lewis Shale represents deep water, offshore marine deposits that formed

after the southwestward trangression of the Cretaceous sea (Baltz 1967; Fassett 1974;

Lucas et al. 2005e).

Kirtland Shale and Fruitland Formation undivided. Clyde Bauer (1916) named

the Kirtland Shale for exposures between Kirtland and Farmington, New Mexico, and the

Fruitland Formation for exposures near Fruitland, New Mexico. The Kirtland Shale and

Fruitland Formation undivided ranges in thickness from 12 to 80 meters in the study area.

It is composed of a thin and complex sequence of dark-gray to black or yellow to tan

shale, siltstone, and fine- to coarse-grained sandstone. Coal often occurs in the Fruitland

Formation. Sedimentary structures are rare, but do include some cross-bedding in the

sandstone. The rock varies from friable carbonaceous sandstone and cross-bedded

sandstone to smectitic or carbonaceous claystone and massive sandstone. Fine-grained channel deposits consisting of carbonaceous shale, coal or dark gray mudstone are typical of this combined formation (Baltz 1967; Crouse 1985; Fassett 2010; Hunt 1992).

The fossil diversity decreases from the Fruitland Formation through the Kirtland

Shale. The Fruitland Formation contains swamp plants, such as Amenia species, Sequoia

cuneata, and Brachyphyllum macrocarpum, and invertebrates tolerant of brackish water

in the lower units, like oysters, with freshwater unionid bivalves and gastropods in the

269

higher units (Hunt and Lucas 1992). The Kirtland Shale includes upland ferns and

terrestrial vertebrates, like diverse turtle fauna, carnosaurs, sauropods, ankylosaurs, hadrosaurs, and certopsians (Hunt and Lucas 1992; Sullivan 1997). Silicified wood

fragments occur in the lower portion of the undivided unit (Crouse 1985). This fossil

assemblage is consistent with a Late Cretaceous age. Based on the marine Ophiomorpha

and Inoceramus fossils and coal in the fine-grained even-bedded lower unit and the

stream-channel sandstone with fossil wood in the upper unit, the Fruitland Formation

represents coastal-swamp, barrier shoreline, river, flood-plain, and lacustrine deposits

that occurred during the uplift of the Nacimientos, while the Kirtland Shale represents

fluvial deposition with paleoflow to the northeast (Aubrey 1997; Baltz 1967; Fassett

1974; Hunt and Lucas 1992).

Tertiary

A warm temperate climate was present across much of North America in the early

Tertiary Period, which coincides with the flow of rivers and streams in the San Juan

Basin (Figure 9.5). This warm climate is evidenced by crocodile fossils present in the

formations of the study area (Lucas et al. 1981). The global climate was much warmer

than our current climate at the beginning of the Tertiary Period, but by the end the

climate was similar to today’s (Scotese 2000).

270

Figure 9.5 Paleogeography in Tertiary Period from Blakey and Ranney (2008)

In the Llaves Valley area the formations of the Tertiary, starting with the oldest, are the Ojo Alamo Sandstone, Nacmiento Formation, and San Jose Formation. Only the

Nacimiento and San Jose Formations occur within the survey area. The San Jose

Formation was named by George G. Simpson (1948), and Elmer Baltz (1967) divided it into four members: Cuba Mesa, Regina, Llaves, and Tapicitos. This formation will be described below with details of each member presented in tabular form (Table 9.1).

Thereby the variation in divisions found on the geologic maps of the research area will be

covered.

Nacimiento Formation. Named for the town of Nacimiento (now Cuba, New

Mexico), this formation was named as the Nacimiento Group by James Gardner (1910)

and solidified into the Nacimiento Formation by Carle Dane (1946). In the Llaves Valley

area, it ranges in thickness from approximately 9 to 530 meters. The lithology of the formation here consists of gray shale and inter-bedded fine to medium-grained sandstone

271

with some siltstone. Beds of olive-green chloritic shale commonly occur in the Northern

Hogback Belt area. Sedimentary structures include lenticular siltstones and sandstones

with some thick ledge-forming sandstone beds. Cross-bedding appears in this formation

within the San Juan Basin (Baltz 1967; Crouse 1985; Williamson and Lucas 1992).

Some of the rocks are highly carbonaceous with fossils of mammals, fish, crocodiles, an

aquatic lizard (Champsosaurus), and many types of turtles (Gilmore 1919; Lucas et al.

1981). Mammalian fossils also have been recovered from the Nacimiento Formation in

the San Juan Basin (Williamson and Lucas 1997). The overall fossil assemblage is

consistent with an early to middle Paleocene age. Based on the lithology, pollen and

spore flora (Anderson 1960), and vertebrate fossils, which point to a terrestrial low-land environment, the Nacimiento Formation represents meandering-river, flood-plain, swamp and lacustrine deposits (Aubrey 1997; Baltz 1967; Williamson and Lucas 1992).

San Jose Formation. The San Jose Formation was named by George G. Simpson

(1948) for exposures in the San Jose Valley of northwest Sandoval County, New Mexico.

It ranges in thickness from 60 to 550 meters in the research area. The basal unit, Cuba

Mesa Member, consists of sandstones with minor shales. The Regina, Llaves, and

Tapicitos Members inter-tongue. These three upper members are composed of white,

yellow, tan, brown, red, and maroon shales (Baltz 1967). David Crouse (1985) noted the

variegated shales of the upper members forming small, rounded hills. The mudstones of

this formation are highly bioturbated, but some show strong laminations and lenticular

bedding (Smith 1992). Vertebrate fauna noted in the San Jose Formation include gars, a

frog, turtles, lizards, a snake, crocodilians, a bird, and mammals (Lucas et al. 1981; Lucas

and Williamson 1992). This fossil assemblage (Hyracotherium, Coryphodon,

272

Hyopsodus, paramys, Microsyops, pelycodus, Oxyaena, Didymictis, and Meniscotherium)

indicates an early Eocene age for the formation as a whole. Cretaceous shark teeth and

Tertiary mammal teeth are present as part of the sedimentary detritus that formed this

formation. The San Jose Formation is fluvial in origin with sediments coming from the

early Laramide-age uplifts (Aubrey 1997). The depositional environment encompassed

both high-energy, low-sinuosity streams, extensive floodplains, and some lacustrine settings. Overbank flows and sedimentation on vegetated banks during frequent floods account for the variegated shales (Smith 1992). Each member of this formation is described from Elmer Baltz (1967), David Crouse (1985), and Larry Smith (1992) in the

following table (Table 9.1). Only the Cuba Mesa and Llaves Members occur within the

one kilometer survey area.

Table 9.1 Members of the San Jose Formation

Member Thickness Lithology Sedimentary Depositional Name (meters) Structures Environment

Cuba Mesa 60-240 coarse-grained, locally sandstone is cross- Silicified and carbonized conglomeratic, bedded and the shale logs are found in the sandstone with is in thin lenses with a sandstone, which indicate reddish, green, and lenticular shape stream-channel deposits gray shales

Regina 150-460 drab colored, thick lenticular detritus deposited in the variegated shale, sandstones lined with southern part of the siltstone, and mudrock occur Tertiary basin sandstone throughout

Llaves Up to 400 conglomeratic sheet sandstones large fan of coarse sandstone with thin occur; sandstones are detritus deposited in the beds of variegated cross-bedded northern part of the shale Tertiary basin

Tapicitos 90-150 variegated shale and sandstone beds range flood-plain and stream- sandstone; shale is from thin to thick and channel deposits primarily reddish to are lenticular in shape maroon in color with cross-bedding

273

Quaternary

By this time, the continental landmasses were in their current position (Scotese

2000). The Quaternary Period incorporates the Last Ice Age, about 18,000 years ago.

The polar ice sheet expanded and then contracted, but did not reach New Mexico. When expanded the sea levels were low and the climate was cooler and more seasonal.

Pleistocene fauna recovered in Rio Arriba County, New Mexico, includes Columbian mammoths, Bison antiquus, a Pleistocene camel, a Niobrara horse, a dire wolf, and a shrub ox (Morgan and Lucas 2005). The Quaternary age units in the greater area are represented by unconsolidated terrace, alluvial, colluvial, and landslide deposits, but only terrace deposits and alluvium occur within the survey radii. In order to reflect the Llaves

Valley vicinity specifically, the descriptions of these deposits are compiled from Baltz

(1967), Crouse (1985), and Hultgren (1986).

Colluvium and Gravel. These terrace deposits occur along the western side of the

Llaves Valley and along the Rio Gallina. They lie above the floodplain and occur on rounded ridges. The depositional terraces range in thickness from two to six meters.

They consist of quartizite, granite, chert, limestone, sandstone, and conglomerate gravel and rounded cobbles loosely held together by clay and silt. These deposits are predominately of Pleistocene age.

Alluvium. Alluvium fills the broad valleys and stream drainages in the Llaves area. It is the result of current erosional and depositional processes with stream channels entrenched in arroyos that cut into the same alluvium. The deposits range in thickness from 12 to 15 meters. The alluvial material consists of unconsolidated silts, sands, clays,

274

and minor amounts of gravels deposited by streams. The Alluvium is primarily of Recent age.

SUMMARY OF REGIONAL GEOLOGY

As presented in the geologic resource descriptions above and in Appendix A, many of the formations in the greater study area contain shales and claystones. The

Permian and Triassic age formations do have shales. The Morrison Formation from the

Jurassic Period includes shales, claystone, and kaolinite in the sandstones. Chalcedony pebbles in the conglomerates alter to kaolinite. The claystones and shales from these formations are smectitic.

All of the Cretaceous formations have shales, with several being carbonaceous.

The Dakota Sandstone, Menefee Formation, and Kirtland- Fruitland Formation are those with carbonaceous shales. The Kirtland- Fruitland Formation also has some smectitic claystones and shaley clays. The Menefee Formation has lenses of coal and coaly shale.

The Mancos Shale is calcareous, while the Lewis Shale is a gray fissile clay shale. The

Tertiary formations all have shales, which tend to be greenish in color with some gray and reddish clay shales.

Reflecting the more recent age of the Quaternary formations, the clays are of the sedimentary form in the terrace gravels and alluvium. The deposits are unconsolidated and loose. The color of the fine fraction in the terrace gravels seems to correspond to the texture of the deposit with sandy clays being more yellow and the shaley clays being gray or greenish. The alluvial clays tend to be a light tan color.

275

GEOLOGICAL RESOURCE SURVEY

The two archaeological sites are located along the same drainage (see Figure 7.1), which means that related primary and secondary clay deposits will have the same mineralogical composition (Meunier 2005). Even though minor and trace-element patterns in the finished ceramics will permit clay type and finished ceramic matching, they are not at a level of specificity sufficient to pinpoint clay procurement sites. As the

Provenance Postulate states "there exist differences in chemical composition between different natural sources that exceed in some recognizable way, the differences observed within a given source" (Weigand et al. 1977:24), but the variation within a given source does not allow for a single location within a linear clay bed to be identified as the specific clay mine used prehistorically. This does not preclude the chance that recognizable clays mines could be discovered or that natural clays could be found at an archaeological site.

The assumption that potters prefer to travel less than one kilometer, but will go up to four kilometers, for clays establishes the primary geological resource survey area

(Arnold 1985, 2000). During the fieldwork stage, a one kilometer radius centered at each site was systematically and comprehensively surveyed for workable clays. The survey was conducted by walking evenly spaced transects of no more than five meters.

Geological maps were used to assist in confirming the presence and extent of clay deposits. If no clays were present within the one kilometer radius or if the clays did not match the finished ceramics, then the survey would have been extended to a four kilometer radius, following topographic features typically associated with clay exposures, such as established drainages and weathered bedrock.

276

A field assistant (Michelle Baland) and I spent ten weeks conducting pedestrian

survey for clay exposures within one kilometer of each site. When a possible clay

deposit was encountered, the geologic uniqueness and boundaries of the deposit were

established and the properties of the clays were field-tested. The field tests consisted of

assessing workability, odor, condition, hardness, and presence of organics. We checked

that each deposit could be formed into a coil before selecting it for collection. Most

exposures were relatively small, although the larger outcrops in the Quaternary

formations and the Tertiary Nacimiento formation called for numerous samples. To

conform to standard geological practice, multiple samples of 200 grams each dispersed

vertically and horizontally across the deposit were collected and their locations plotted

with a Garmin eTreks GPS unit (Bronitsky 1986; Rapp and Hill 1998). Aplastics that

reflect the temper in the ceramics were collected based on grain-size variation, i.e.

medium to coarse-grained sands were taken from several ant hills and fine to medium-

grained sands were collected from the dry creek bed and other intermittent drainages.

Survey Results

The natural clays were collected in the field from each formation within one kilometer of the Davis Ranch Site and Nogales Cliff House (see Figure 9.2). The geologic formations of the study area represent the Cretaceous, Tertiary, and Quaternary

Periods. The clays from the canyon, i.e. around Nogales Cliff House, are all from the

Tertiary Period. The ranch clays from the Davis Ranch Site radius represent all three geologic periods.

The clay survey was conducted during the summer of 2006 (Figure 9.6). Permission for access to the area and collection of clay samples was attained from the Santa Fe National

277

Forest and private landowners, Faye Davis and Pablo Casados. Samples from the Davis and Casados properties were minimal for two reasons: the deposits were very homogenous and the owners were more amenable to fewer samples. The owner of the third parcel of private property could not be located, so the area was avoided. This does not affect the results since the property lies within the Nacimiento Formation and alluvial deposits, which were highly sampled around the 70 acre property. The survey radius around Nogales Cliff House consisted of Spring Canyon, several small tributary drainages, and cliff faces topped by knife ridges. The tops of the knife ridges were inaccessible, so the survey was concentrated in the canyon and the side drainages. The outcrops along the trail to Nogales Cliff House also were carefully examined. This is an appropriate strategy as clays used by pre-industrial potters tend to be soils, weathered clay-rich rocks on slopes, or young unconsolidated sedimentary deposits (Velde and Druc

1999:71).

278

Figure 9.6 Geologic Resource Survey Area showing Cost Distance from Nogales Cliff House

279

Frequency of Clays. A total of 126 samples were collected, with 109 coming

from the ranch survey area and 17 coming from the canyon and associated drainages

(Figure 9.7). The steep terrain and low visibility due to forest litter on the ground surface

limited the encounter rate for clays in the canyon. This corresponds with the smaller

number of samples from the San Jose Formation (10 samples). The most samples were

collected from the Nacimiento Formation in the ranch radius. The variation in deposit

setting, color, texture, etc. in the Nacimiento Formation contributed to the large number

(66) of samples collected. The Quaternary alluvium covered a similar area, but was very

homogenous in both setting and consistency, so only 11 samples were collected from the

alluvial deposits. A similar number were collected from across the Quaternary terraces

(12), but an additional 10 samples were taken from the units of a substantial clay outcrop

at the southern end of the Davis Ranch Site rise. The smallest number of samples came

from the two Cretaceous formations with only four from the Kirtland-Fruitland

Undivided and three from the Lewis Shale. Ten samples were from the boundaries of

formations and were not assigned to a specific formation.

Field Characterization. For each sample, the setting and the size of the deposit were noted (Table 9.2). The Cretaceous Kirtland-Fruitland Undivided Formation had

clay exposures on the tops of knobs, along ridges, and ridge slopes. The Lewis Shale was

accessible in drainage cuts. The Tertriary San Jose Formation revealed clay deposits in

the Spring Canyon stream banks and on the ridges at the base of the sandstone cliffs high

up in the canyon. Nacimiento Formation clays were found in a variety of locations, such

as in drainages and washes, along ridges and benches, and along slopes and the base of

280

Figure 9.7 Frequency of Collected Clays Map

281

ridges. One hummock of clay in the Nacimeinto Formation (R039) was sampled near the northern edge of the survey area. The Quaternary terrace deposits had clay on the benches, on their slopes, and as a substantial outcrop at the southern end of the Davis

Ranch Site rise. As for the Quaternary alluvium, it is very clayey and covers the entire valley bottom along with the bases of the surrounding ridges.

Table 9.2 Clay deposit settings and size

Formation Setting Size Kirtland-Fruitland (Kkf) knobs, ridges, and slopes 18 to 144 m2 Lewis Shale (Kl) exposed in drainages 3.5 to 12.5 m2 arroyos, slopes, ridges, benches, Nacimiento Formation (Tn) <1 to 72 m2 and as a hummock of clay San Jose Formation (Ts) stream banks, bases of cliffs <1 to >10 m2 Alluvium (Qal) valley floor and base of ridges <1 to entire valley Terrace Deposits (Qcg) benches, slopes, and as an outcrop <1 to >100 m2

The size of the deposits ranged from less than one square meter to the entire valley bottom. The Cretaceous Lewis Shale had the smallest maximum exposures with sizes from 3.5 m2 to 12.5 m2. The Kirtland-Fruitland Undivided generally had larger clay deposits starting at 18 m2 and up to 144 m2. The Tertiary Nacimiento Formation had a similarly wide range with less than 1 m2 and up to the entire surface of a bench. The San

Jose Formation outcrops were smaller spanning from less than 1 m2 to over 10 m2. The

Quaternary terrace deposits were less than 1 m2 and over 100 m2 with the entire southern end of the Davis Ranch Site rise being clay about 30 meters high. As for the Quaternary alluvium, it covers the entire valley floor with some small pocket (less than one square meter) of more concentrated clays.

282

The field tests consisted of assessing odor, hardness, condition, workability, and presence of organics (Table 9.3). As is typical of clays and clayey deposits, most of the samples were musty smelling when damp. The exceptions were lithified shales and deposits with a high sand content. Less than 10% of the samples were lithified. The lithified shales were soft and could be scratched with a fingernail. They broke under low pressure. Hardness and condition are connected.

The condition of all formations consisted of dry and homogenous deposits. All were loose, except the Lewis Shale, with some showing compaction and mud-cracking.

The lithified shale from the Cretaceous Lewis Shale dissolved into clay when it was wetted. In the field, the finer fraction exposures of the Cretaceous Kirkland-Fruitland

Formation were deceptive: many times a deposit was encountered and it ended up being loose silt and not a clay. When a clay deposit was identified in this formation it tended to be mud-cracked, loose, dry, and homogenous. The Tertiary formations were associated either with sandy or shaley residual deposits, in most cases. Typical alluvial and terrace deposits, the Quaternary clay samples were composed of fine alluvial clays and many gritty clays from the finer fraction of the terrace deposits.

Workability varied among the formations. The clays from the canyon, including the San Jose Formation and one Nacimiento Formation sample, had the poorest workability, while the Quaternary alluvium had the best workability. All of the clays made a coil, but when a ring was attempted the Cretaceous clays needed extra water and the gritty Quaternary terrace deposits never quite achieved a ring. The Tertiary

Nacimiento Formation clays from the ranch area rarely could be formed into a ring, but

283

Table 9.3 Results of field tests performed on clay deposits

Formation Odor Hardness Condition Workability Organics dry, homogenous, loose, thin coils, no ring except roots of various sizes Kirtland-Fruitland (Kkf) musty not lithified mud-cracked with lots of water throughout dry, homogenous, loose, or thin coils, triangular ring, few roots in shale, smaller Lewis Shale (Kl) musty soft shales lithified shale just may need more water roots in loose clay dry, homogenous, coarse, thin coils, most didn’t form a soft if small roots, pine needles Nacimiento Formation (Tn) musty some loose, some compact, ring, but with lots of water lithified on many deposits many mud-cracked some could form a ring dry, homogenous, some coils, no rings except twice roots, range in size and San Jose Formation (Ts) musty not lithified sandy, some shaley with a fat coil frequency dry, homogenous, loose, thin coils, many rings, Alluvium (Qal) musty not lithified small or fine rootlets fine-grained almost knots

284 dry, homogenous, gritty, Thin coils, gritty initially, area of wildfire, few Terrace Deposits (Qcg) musty not lithified some loose, some compact almost make a ring plants, very sparse rootlets

some did with enough water. The San Jose Formation clays only achieved a ring twice

using a fat coil. In general, the clays from the survey area do not have an extremely high

degree of workability, but they do become plastic.

Surface clays and some sedimentary clays often have large quantities of organics

(Rice 1987:334). The presence of organics was visually noted and seemed to be

dominated by plant roots. Local vegetation was directly related to the organics in the

deposits. In the area of the 2002 BMG Wildfire (primarily the Quaternary gravel

terraces), there were few plants so the organic content was very sparse and consisted of

tiny rootlets when present. Only small or fine rootlets appeared in the Quaternary

alluvium. The Nacimiento Formation had pine needles in many of its clay exposures,

which were occurring in the forested locales. Those from the San Jose Formation in

stream banks in the canyon had a fair amount of organics, especially small to large roots.

In the Cretaceous Kirkland-Fruitland Formation, roots of various sizes occurred

throughout the deposits, while the Cretaceous Lewis Shale had few roots in the shale

lenses and smaller roots in the loose clays.

SUMMARY

Six geological formations, one with two members represented, occur within one kilometer of the two selected archaeological sites (see Figure 9.1). Several clay and shale deposits exist in the vicinity of the Davis Ranch Site and Nogales Cliff House (Baltz

1967). However, few exposed beds of shale were found during this survey. The basic characteristics of the clay deposits and the geological formations are summarized here.

285

The Kirtland-Fruitland Undivided has carbonaceous shales, shaley clays, and smectitic claystones. In this formation, the clay exposures documented are large, dry, and homogenous. No beds of lithified shale or claystone were apparent in the survey area.

Workability was decent and organic content was higher than some of the other clay deposits. The Lewis Shale is a gray fissile lithified shale. Only one deposit encountered in the survey was a soft lens of shale, the others were weathered loose clays derived from the shales. These clays had good workability with only trace amounts of organics.

From the Tertiary formations, the Nacimiento shales are gray and green and those encountered were soft when lithified. In many cases, shaley plates were found at depth mixed into the residual clay deposit. The clay deposits from this formation tended to be slightly more coarse and contained small roots and pine needles. The San Jose Formation includes variegated shales with green, gray, and reddish colors; no lithified beds were found during my fieldwork. Roots were common and some were sandy in texture.

Reflecting the more recent age of the Quaternary formations, the clays are of the sedimentary form in the terrace gravels and alluvium. The alluvial deposits are unconsolidated and loose. The alluvial clays tend to be a light tan color. Some fine and small roots are scattered throughout. These clays had the best workability. In the terrace gravels, the color of the fine fraction seems to correspond to the texture of the deposit with sandy clays being more yellow and the shaley clays being gray or greenish. Many of the terrace deposit clays were gritty initially when tested for workability, but became less so with manipulation and water.

Overall, the tested properties indicate that many of the clays would be sufficient for pottery production, but further manipulation could improve their qualities. It appears

286

that Gallina ceramics were made with clay from shales as was common in the Ancestral

Puebloan region (Blinman 1993). Clays derived from shales provide the gray color that allows for the development of black-on-white designs. This suggests that the Quaternary deposits are unlikely sources for Gallina pottery clays, because these sedimentary clays are not generally used in the Ancestral Puebloan tradition.

287

CHAPTER 10: Natural Clays Analysis and Comparison to Ceramics

This study assesses the Gallina potters’ choices in clays used in the pottery from the Davis Ranch Site and Nogales Cliff House. These two sites represent villages during times of conflict (the cliff dwelling), and times of peace (the open site). Therefore, ceramic resource selection is examined with respect to social violence. To accomplish this, microscopy and chemical and mineral characterizations were performed to identify the clays from a sample of ceramics from the two sites. Also I conducted a resource survey to locate natural clays on the landscape. The natural clays and the clays from the

ceramics were then compared to see if resource procurement strategies changed when the population was under threat of social violence.

The geological resource survey involved locating natural clays in a one kilometer radius around each of the sites. The natural clays were field tested before collection and then prepared as briquettes for firing at the previously determined archaeological ceramic original firing temperature (see Chapter Eight). X-ray diffraction (XRD) was performed on both unfired and fired samples of the natural clays. Fired tiles were made into thin sections and sent for elemental analysis. Both the archaeological ceramics and natural clay samples were submitted together for the chemical study. Laboratory tests of the natural clays were conducted last as it became clear that the performance characteristics of the clays may have been a deciding factor for the Gallina potters.

NATURAL CLAYS

Twenty-eight samples were selected for further characterization from the 126 collected natural clays. About five samples per geologic formation were chosen based on

288

an observed range of variability, with preference for clays with greater workability.

Some formations did not have the requisite number of samples to choose from, so the final total was 28 clay samples. Each of the selected clay samples was tested for water of plasticity and drying shrinkage (see below), which required forming a 10 cm by 3 cm by

2 cm briquette. This briquette was fired to the average prehispanic firing temperature determined through refiring experiments. The refiring experiment is discussed in Chapter

Eight. Briquettes fired to the average temperature were used to produce equivalent mineral transformations in the natural clays and the fired ceramic sherds. Chips were removed from each fired briquette for the XRD, ICP-MS, and petrographic thin sectioning (Table 10.1). Only 23 samples were sent for the inductively coupled plasma- mass spectrometry analysis due to time constraints associated with the ending of a

National Science Foundation archaeometry grant to the laboratory. The thin section slides were made by Spectrum Petrographics, Inc. Thin sections for representative aplastic samples also were examined, i.e. one from an ant hill and one from a stream bed.

Table 10.1 Natural clay sample counts by technique Formation Petrography XRD ICP-MS Kirtland-Fruitland (Kkf) 4 4 3

Lewis Shale (Kl) 3 3 3

Alluvium (Qal) 5 5 4

Terrace Deposits (Qcg) 5 5 5

Nacimiento Formation (Tn) 5 5 4

San Jose – Cuba Mesa (Tsc) 5 5 3

San Jose – Llaves (Tsl) 1 1 1

TOTAL 28 28 23

289

Petrography

The same methodology was used for both the ceramic and clay slides (see

Chapter Eight). The two aplastic deposit samples were done as grain mounts. When the

clay samples were prepared for thin sectioning, minimal working of the clays was

performed, just enough to form each into a small blob that could be dried and then fired.

This should have preserved the natural coarse:fine distribution in the clays. The

coarse:fine distribution was documented as double spaced, single spaced, or close

packed, which corresponded to 5-15% aplastics, 15-20% aplastics, and 25-30% aplastics

respectively. Of the 28 clay thin sections, six were double spaced, 11 were single spaced,

and 11 more were close packed (Table 10.2). Most of the geologic formations spanned

adjoining categories, such as double spaced and single spaced in the Kirtland-Fruitland

Undivided or single spaced and close packed in the San Jose Formation and the

Quaternary alluvial and terrace deposits. The Lewis Shale covered all three categories,

while the Nacimiento Formation has end members of double spaced and close packed. A

typical commercial clay body mixture is 50% clay, 25% quartz, and 25% feldspar

(Norton 1970:259; Rice 1987:75), whereas the natural clays in this research are generally

80% clay and 20% quartz and feldspar. In most pre-industrial ceramics, the aplastic percentage is at least 20% because less temper than that would affect the strength of the vessel (Kilikoglou et al. 1998).

290

Table 10.2 General trends in petrography of the natural clays Cretaceous Tertiary Quaternary

Attribute Kirtland-Fruitland Lewis Shale Nacimiento San Jose Alluvium Terrace Deposits

Aplastic Avg. 13.8% 18.3% 18.4% 27.5% 22.0% 22.0%

C:f Dist. Double spaced Single spaced Single spaced Close packed Single spaced Single spaced

Well and poorly Moderately well Moderately well and Sorting Poorly sorted Poorly sorted Poorly sorted sorted sorted poorly sorted

Optic State Very active Moderately active Moderately active Moderately active Moderately active Very active

Fine to coarse sand, Fine to coarse sand, Fine to coarse sand, Fine to coarse sand, Fine to coarse sand, Fine to coarse sand, Quartz low sphericity, low sphericity, moderate sphericity, low sphericity, moderate sphericity, moderate sphericity,

291 sub-rounded grains angular grains angular grains angular grains angular grains angular grains

No twinning, but Medium sand size, Fine to medium sand, Fine to coarse sand, Fine to very coarse, Medium to coarse, Potassium present based on high sphericity, low sphericity, low sphericity, moderate sphericity, low sphericity, Feldspar XRD results sub-rounded grains angular grains sub-angular grains angular grains sub-angular grains

Fine sand size, Fine to medium sand, Fine to m edium sand, Fine to medium sand, Medium sand, Medium sand, Plagioclase moderate sphericity, moderate sphericity, low sphericity, low sphericity, low sphericity, low sphericity, angular grains sub-rounded grains angular grains sub-angular grains angular grains angular grains

Fine sand size, Fine sand size, Fine sand size, Fine sand size, Fine to medium sand, Muscovite low sphericity, None identified low sphericity, low sphericity, low sphericity, low sphericity, rounded grains rounded grains rounded grains rounded grains rounded grains

Sedimentary & Sedimentary & Sedimentary & Sedimentary & Sedimentary & Sedimentary & igneous clasts, igneous clasts, igneous clasts, igneous clasts, igneous clasts, igneous clasts, medium to very Rock Clasts fine to very coarse, coarse to very coarse, fine to medium sand, medium to coarse, medium sand size, coarse sand size, low sphericity, low sphericity, sphericity and sphericity varies, moderate sphericity, low sphericity, rounding varies sub-rounded grains rounding vary sub-rounded grains sub-rounded grains sub-rounded grains

Alterations Weathered feldspars some transforming into clay minerals, thermal alteration of feldspars inherited from igneous parent rock, strained quartz

Sorting was determined with comparator charts (Harrell 1984) separated into very

poorly sorted, poorly sorted, moderately well sorted, and well sorted. Most were either

poorly (36%) or moderately well sorted (32%). Fewer were at the extremes of very

poorly (14%) or well sorted (18%). The Cretaceous Kirtland-Fruitland Undivided was

both poorly and well sorted, while the Lewis Shale ranged from moderately well to well

sorted. The Tertiary Nacimiento Formation covered all categories from very poorly to

well sorted. Adjacent categories of poorly and moderately well sorted were noted for the

San Jose Formation. The Quaternary alluvium also showed the full range of categories

from very poorly to well sorted. As for the Quaternary terrace deposits, they went from

very poorly to moderately well sorted.

The optic state of the clay thin sections reflects their being fired at 750oC in an oxidizing atmosphere. All of the samples were moderately to very active in their optic state, except for three slightly active slides, which could be a function of somewhat thicker blobs in the sample preparation. The difference in the moderately and very active thin sections also could be related to the preparation of the sample or to the firing color of the clays. A lighter firing clay may seem more active in a thin section.

As with the ceramics, the minerals present include quartz, feldspar, and mica.

Quartz and potassium feldspar occur in all the samples. Quartz is the most common, while potassium feldspar is the second most prevalent. Plagioclase appears most of the time (90%), half of the time muscovite is present (50%). Epidote is in five of the clay

samples in trace amounts. The formations represented with epidote grains are the

Nacimiento, San Jose, and Quaternary alluvium.

292

For all the formations, the quartz grain size ranges from very fine to very coarse

sand. In the Cretaceous Kirtland-Friutland Undivided, the quartz grains have both low

and high sphericity with degrees of roundness described as sub-rounded, sub-angular, and

angular. The Lewis Shale quartz grains are low in sphericity and are sub-angular to very

angular. The quartz grains in the Tertiary Nacimiento Formation have sphericity ranging

from low to high and degree of roundness from sub-rounded to angular. In the San Jose

Formation, the sphericity is low and moderate with all the quartz grains being angular.

The Quaternary alluvium has moderate and high sphericity and sub-rounded to very

angular quartz grains. As for the Quaternary terrace deposits, the quartz grains are low

and moderate in sphericity and sub-angular and angular in degree of roundness.

The majority of the clay thin sections had examples of tartan twinning in the potassium feldspar grains, which aided in differentiating it from the quartz. Some instances of perthite were recorded, but there was not a pattern across the formations.

Most of the potassium feldspar grains in each formation ranged in size from very fine to very coarse sand. The Cretaceous Kirtland-Fruitland Undivided potassium feldspar grains are very similar in sphericity and rounding to the quartz grains in the same formation. The Lewis Shale has high sphericity and sub-rounded potassium feldspar grains. The Tertiary Nacimiento Formation shows low and moderate sphericity with sub- rounded and angular potassium feldspar grains. The potassium feldspar grains in the San

Jose Formation have low to moderate sphericity and sub-angular to angular degree of roundness. The Quaternary alluvium has moderate to high sphericity and sub-angular to very angular potassium feldspar grains. As for the Quaternary terrace deposits, the

293

potassium feldspar grains are low to moderate in sphericity and sub-angular to very

angular in degree of roundness.

Most of the plagioclase grains across all the formations are fine to medium sand

size. The Cretaceous Kirtland-Fruitland Undivided plagioclase has low and high sphericity with sub-angular and angular grains. The Lewis Shale also has low and high sphericity plagioclase with rounded and sub-rounded grains. In the Tertiary Nacimiento

Formation, the plagioclase are low to moderate in sphericity and are sub-angular and angular in degree of roundness. The San Jose Formation ranges from low to high sphericity and from rounded to angular for its plagioclase grains. As for the Quaternary alluvium plagioclase grains, they are low to moderate in sphericity and sub-angular to angular in degree of roundness. The Quaternary terrace deposits are similar in sphericity to the alluvium and have sub-rounded to angular plagioclase grains.

Every formation, except the Lewis Shale, has at least one occurrence of muscovite. The muscovite grains range in size from very fine to medium sand, but the majority are fine sand size. As is typical of mica grains, the muscovite are all low in sphericity with a long narrow shape. The muscovite grains show rounding to sub-angular edges with most being rounded. There is little difference in the muscovite granulometrics among the formations.

When the rock clast fragments in the clay thin sections were examined a difference appeared between the canyon clays and the ranch clays. The canyon clays have only hematite-cemented quartz rock clasts, whereas the ranch clays have quartz and feldspars rock clasts. This may be an erroneous conclusion, if there are untwinned potassium feldspar grains in the rock clasts. In general, all the rock clast grains are

294

medium to very coarse sand size. The Cretaceous Kirtland-Fruitland Undivided

Formation quartz and feldspars rock clasts are low to moderate in sphericity and sub- rounded to sub-angular in degree of roundness. The Lewis Shale has low and high sphericity quartz and feldspars rock clasts with rounded, sub-rounded, and angular edges.

The Tertiary Nacimiento Formation has no rock clasts in the single canyon sample and those from the ranch radius are quartz and feldspars. The rock clast grains from the

Nacimiento Formation have low sphericity and are rounded to sub-rounded. In the San

Jose Formation (canyon), the rock clasts are all hematite cemented quartz grains that are relatively fine in size with moderate sphericity and sub-rounded edges. It appears that

San Jose Formation (canyon) clays also have more muscovite than the samples from the ranch survey area. The Quaternary alluvium has quartz and feldspars rock clasts with low to high sphericity and a rounded to very angular shape. As for the Quaternary terrace deposits, the quartz and feldspars rock clast sphericity ranges from low to high and the grains are rounded to sub-rounded.

Two grain mounts of possible temper material were examined. One is granules and pebbles from an ant hill. The ants size sorted the quartz and feldspar grains. Another well sorted deposit of fine to coarse quartz and feldspar sand was collected from a wash embankment. The grains from the ant hill were too large to have been used in the ceramics. The minerals, particle shape, size range, and quantity (Rice 1987:409) were problematic for separating natural and added aplastics. The minerals present were the same in all the samples and the quantity also was consistent. Particle shape and size varied greatly and did not show bimodal patterns that might indicate addition of coarser grains, for example.

295

X-ray Diffraction (XRD)

The parameters for the X-ray diffraction analysis were presented in Chapter Eight

and the samples are given in Table 10.3. The Cretaceous formations within one

kilometer of the two archaeological sites include the Lewis Shale and the Kirtland Shale

and Fruitland Undivided. The Lewis Shale is dominated by smectite with some illite and

kaolin (Figure 10.1). In slight contrast, the Kirtland Shale and Fruitland Undivided

Formation finest fraction is predominately kaolin with smectite and some illite (Figure

10.2). Quartz and feldspar occur in all the clay samples analyzed, but quartz provided the

greatest intensity, indicating a greater amount in the sample. Potassium feldspar was

always present, but plagioclase was absent from some of the XRD patterns. Muscovite

was more difficult to separate from the overlapping clay mineral patterns, however it is

found in many of the samples. Similar results for the occurrence of the aplastic minerals

were found in the petrographic analysis (see above).

Table 10.3 XRD clay sample breakdown

Sample Category Random 2-60 deg Oriented 2-32 deg Glycolated 2-14 deg

Natural Clays 28 28 28

Fired Clay Tiles X 28 X

296

Smectite peak Smectite

Kaolin peak Kaolin Quartz peak Quartz

Plagioclase peak Plagioclase Potassium Feldspar peak Feldspar Potassium Illite peak

Figure 10.1 Example of an XRD tracing from the Lewis Shale

Kaolin peak Kaolin Smectite peak Smectite Quartz peak Quartz

Illite peak Potassium Feldspar peak Feldspar Potassium

Figure 10.2 Example of an XRD tracing from the Kirtland-Fruitland Undivided

297

From the Tertiary Period, the Nacimiento Formation clay minerals are predominately kaolin with smectite and some illite (Figure 10.3). The San Jose

Formation has multiple members with the Cuba Mesa and Llaves Members appearing in the study area. The Cuba Mesa Member clay fraction is dominated by kaolin with illite and some smectite (Figure 10.4). The Llaves Member also is dominated by kaolin with illite and smectite, although this is based on a single sample. For interpretive purposes, the results from the two members will be lumped under the San Jose Formation designation, which does not present a loss of variation in the XRD analysis.

The Quaternary age units within the survey radii are unconsolidated terrace deposits and alluvium. The Quaternary Colluvium and Gravel is a terrace deposit with a fine-fraction predominately composed of smectite with kaolin and illite (Figure 10.5).

Covering the valley bottom, the Quaternary Alluvium generally is loose and manifests hexagonal mud cracking when dry. It is dominated by kaolin with smectite and illite

(Figure 10.6).

298

Kaolin peak Kaolin Quartz peak Quartz

Illite peak Smectite peak Smectite Potassium Feldspar peak Feldspar Potassium Plagioclase peak Plagioclase

Figure 10.3 Example of an XRD tracing from the Nacimiento Formation

Kaolin peak Kaolin Quartz peak Quartz

Chlorite peak Chlorite

Smectite peak Smectite Illite peak Potassium Feldspar peak Feldspar Potassium

Figure 10.4 Example of an XRD tracing from the San Jose Formation

299

Smectite peak Smectite

Quartz peak Quartz

Kaolin peak Kaolin Potassium Feldspar peak Feldspar Potassium Plagioclase peak Plagioclase Illite peak

Figure 10.5 Example of an XRD tracing from the Quaternary terrace deposits

Quartz peak Quartz Kaolin peak Kaolin

Smectite peak Smectite Illite peak Potassium Feldspar peak Feldspar Potassium Plagioclase peak Plagioclase

Figure 10.6 Example of an XRD tracing from the Quaternary alluvium

300

The canyon samples’ (all of the San Jose Formation and a few Nacimiento

Formation) clay mineralogy is predominately kaolin, but they do contain illite and smectite. The ranch clays are more varied with kaolin or smectite being the dominant minerals, although illite does appear in all the ranch samples. Quartz, plagioclase, and potassium feldspar occur in the clays from both the canyon and the ranch survey areas.

Overall, these sedimentary formations provided similar choices in clay mineralogy for the

Gallina potters (Table 10.4).

Table 10.4 Clay minerals in the natural clay XRD results

Formation Smectite Illite Kaolin

Kirtland-Fruitland L L M Cretaceous Lewis Shale M L L

Nacimiento L L M Tertiary San Jose L L M

Alluvium L L M Quaternary Terrace Deposits M L L

M=most abundant, L=less abundant, t=trace amounts

All of the geologic formations in the area contain kaolin, smectite, and illite.

Smectite has a very fine particle size with high plasticity and shrinkage during drying

(Rice 1987:49). The cracking that occurs during drying can be alleviated by combining smectite with one or more other clays. Small amounts of smectite, less than 10%, can improve workability and add strength when dried. A clay like smectite with good workability but high shrinkage is usually mixed with a clay with poor workability but low shrinkage, such as chlorite, illite, or kaolin. The different proportions of smectite, illite, and kaolin in the natural clays means that the Gallina potters still may have mixed clays

301

from different formations to achieve the best workability and plasticity with lower

shrinkage.

When the clay tiles were fired to 750oC the XRD patterns only retained illite

peaks. It is not clear what volume of kaolin and smectite minerals were in the ceramics.

A small kaolin peak does appear in some of the ceramic XRD patterns. The kaolin signal could be due to alteration of feldspar grains, which convert to kaolin. In any case, the loss of intensity when the clay minerals are heated does not allow for robust conclusions

to be drawn about which formation was selected by the Gallina potters. However, the

results from the clays do provide important information about the clay minerals available

to the prehispanic ceramic producers.

Inductively Coupled Plasma-Mass Spectrometry (ICP-MS)

Each sample was ablated three times pinpointing the fabric of the natural clays for the 23 submitted clay samples. Aplastic grains were targeted in 10 clay samples with only five geologic formations represented (San Jose Formation is absent). The geologic formations cannot be as readily separated using the chemical data. A K-means cluster analysis produced five clusters but they all cross-cut formations. Bivariate elemental concentration plots also were generated to try to distinguish the geologic formations.

None of the bivariate plots give distinct clusters, but the elements in Table 10.5 seem to characterize each formation to a degree. The element clustering for each formation is shown in Figures 10.7 to 10.12.

302

Table 10.5 Formation clustering by element

Formation Element Bivariate Plot

Kirtland-Fruitland (Kkf) cesium Ce vs Sr

Lewis Shale (Kl) yttrium Y vs Rb

Alluvium (Qal) iron Fe vs Cr

Terrace Deposits (Qcg) titanium Ti vs Th

Nacimiento Formation (Tn) barium Ba vs Mn

San Jose Formation (Ts) thorium Th vs Nd, Th vs La

Figure 10.7 Bivariate elemental concentrations characteristic of the Kirtland-Fruitland Formation (Kkf)

303

Figure 10.8 Bivariate elemental concentrations characteristic of the Lewis Shale (Kl)

Figure 10.9 Bivariate elemental concentrations characteristic of the Quaternary alluvium (Qal)

304

Figure 10.10 Bivariate elemental concentrations characteristic of the Quaternary terrace deposits (Qcg)

Figure 10.11 Bivariate elemental concentrations characteristic of the Nacimiento Formation (Tn)

305

Figure 10.12 Bivariate elemental concentrations characteristic of San Jose Formation (Ts)

Paula Massouh’s (2009) investigation of L/102 included collection of clays from area formations and instrumental neutron activation analysis of the clays for comparison to the ceramics. As discussed in Chapter Eight, the ceramics were assigned to four groups. Group 1 was linked to clays from the Nacimiento Formation. The Menefee

Formation clays also plotted near Group 1. Group 2 did not appear to be associated with a specific clay, but it was close to the Group 3 ceramics and the San Jose Formation.

Group 4 was diverse and was not connected to any of the clay samples. Groups 1 and 2 encompass the majority of the ceramics and probably reflect local production (Speakman and Glascock 2006). The Nacimiento and San Jose Formations are the most likely candidates for the Gallina clays used at the L/102 site (Massouh 2009:156-159; Reed and

Hensler 2007).

306

Clay Oxidation and Laboratory Characterization

The characterization of the clays by formation aided in differentiating these similar resources. This was addressed through laboratory tests and an oxidation experiment with the natural clays. The laboratory tests included Munsell color, texture, presence of salt or lime impurities, presence of smectitic clay, drying shrinkage, water of plasticity, and a particle size analysis. Clay oxidation analysis involves controlling the firing atmosphere and firing the clays to a high temperature in order to isolate compositional characteristics seen in colors.

The color of natural clays is the product of iron compounds and organic materials

(Shepard 1976:16). When neither organics nor iron are present the clay is white in color.

Clays with organic materials tend to be gray to blackish, which is related to the amount and the condition of the organics themselves. Iron compounds lead to red, brown, buff, and yellow clays.

The final color of the pottery derives from the clay, its impurities, and the original firing conditions (time, temperature, and atmosphere). The relationships between fired and unfired colors of clays are presented in Table 10.6, which is derived from Prudence

Rice (1987:Table 11.1) and Anna Shepard (1976:Table 1). Colors of low-fired natural clays are limited to white, black, orange-red, or a mixture of these resulting in cream, brown, or gray colors (Rice 1987:333). When clays are low-fired the main determinant of the final color is iron, but this is only after the organic matter in the clay has been oxidized and eliminated (Rice 1987:334). The chemical state of the iron (ferric or ferrous), the amount of iron compounds present, and the distribution of iron in the clay affect the color of the finished ceramic (Rice 1987:335).

307

Table 10.6 Relation between fired and unfired colors of clay Fired Color Raw Color White White, neutral gray, black Light brown (buff) Cream, yellow, neutral gray, black, gray-brown (rare), brown (rare) Red and brown Yellow, red, brown, grays, black Dark gray and black All colors

The Munsell color was documented for the clays in their natural state (Tables 10.7 and 10.8) and fired at 1000oC in an oxidizing atmosphere (Table 10.9 and 10.10). The

unfired clay color groups are based on the color categories in the Munsell system. Chips

from the briquettes were fired at a high temperature in a controlled oxidizing

environment to ensure that all the organic materials were burned out of the clay. I

recorded the final colors and separated the samples into color groups based on previous

oxidation studies with Southwestern ceramics (Bubemyre and Mills 1993:Table 64;

Mattson 2010:Table 5.2; Mills 1987:Table 12.2; Windes 1977:Table 10.5).

Table 10.7 Unfired Clay Color Groups

Color Group Color Munsell Color Range 5Y(5/2, 5/3) A Olive 5Y(6/3) 2.5Y(5/1) 5Y(5/1) B Gray 5Y(7/1) 10YR(6/2) Light 2.5Y(5/2-5/4) C Brown 10YR(5/4) 7.5YR(5/3, 5/4) D Brown 10YR(4/2) 10YR(5/3)

308

Table 10.8 Munsell Color Groups for the Unfired Clays

Cretaceous Tertiary Quaternary Kirtland- Lewis San Terrace Color Group Fruitland Shale Nacimiento Jose Alluvium Deposits Total A (Olive) 1 2 1 4 B (Gray) 1 1 2 4 C (Light Brown) 2 1 4 1 4 12 D (Brown) 1 1 2 4 8 Total 4 3 5 6 5 5 28

The Cretaceous Kirtland-Fruitland Undivided and Lewis Shale are naturally gray

to brown in color with a high firing color of yellowish red or red. The Tertiary

Nacimiento and San Jose Formations occur as greenish (olive) to gray to brown clays and

fire to yellowish red or red in most cases. One San Jose Formation clay, C09, fires to

buff; this sample is the only buff firing clay. The Quaternary alluvium and terrace

deposits also have a greenish (olive), gray, or brown tint, but they all fire to yellowish

red.

Table 10.9 Fired (1000oC) Clay Color Groups

Color Group Color Munsell Color Range 1 Buff 7.5YR(7/4) 7.5YR(5/6) Yellowish 3 7.5YR (6/6-6/8) Red 7.5YR (7/6) Yellowish 5YR(5/8) 4 Red 5YR(6/6-6/8) 5 Red 2.5YR(5/8)

Table 10.10 Munsell Color Groups of Clays Fired at 1000oC

Cretaceous Tertiary Quaternary Kirtland- Lewis San Terrace Color Group Fruitland Shale Nacimiento Jose Alluvium Deposits Total 1 (Buff) 1 1 3 (Yellowish Red) 1 3 4 4 (Yellowish Red) 4 1 5 1 5 5 21 5 (Red) 1 1 2 Total 4 3 5 6 5 5 28

309

Testing for the presence or absence of grit is a simple mechanism for looking at

the texture of the clay. A clay that feels smooth or slimy is usually a fine clay, while one

that is stiff and gritty is a coarse clay (Rice 1987:72). Non-plastics help the water to

escape and help with shrinkage and warping. Inclusions weaken ceramics because they are different from clay, but they increase the workability of the clay by making it more or less plastic (Shepard 1976:25). They reduce drying and firing shrinkage by opening pores. Certain aplastics can improve thermal shock resistance and provide a skeletal

structure for the vessel. Fine organics help with plasticity, while coarse organics reduce

shrinkage. Organics burn out when the pottery is fired, which creates pores. This is good

for shrinkage and thermal shock resistance, but not as helpful for storing liquids.

Grittiness was noted during several tests, but the tooth test seemed to identify five

categories: not gritty, very very slightly gritty, very slightly gritty, slightly gritty, and

gritty. These categories suggest clayey, silty, and sandy gradations. The Cretaceous

Kirtland-Fruitland Undivided samples have a clayey or finer sandy texture. The Lewis

Shale was predominantly clayey or with coarser sand present. Clayey and finer sandy

texture describes the Tertiary Nacimiento Formation. The San Jose Formation had more

variation ranging from silty through the gradations in sandiness. The Quaternary

alluvium and terrace deposits were similar to the San Jose Formation spanning from

clayey to silty to coarser sandy in texture.

Tasting the clay can reveal the presence of salts. A bitter or slight pucker

sensation indicates the presence of soluble salts. A 1:1 (one normal) solution of

hydrochloric acid can be dropped onto powdered dry clay to test for the presence of

calcium carbonate (lime). Lime takes up water making the clay more workable, but can

310

lead to spalling when the ceramic is fired due to decomposition of calcium carbonate and release of carbon dioxide gas between 600 and 900oC (Arnold 1985:26). The lime spalling problem can be solved by the addition of salt (Rye 1976). Adding lime and salt can bleach iron if there is a high iron content in the clay. Lime also can help with thermal shock resistance (e.g. Hoard et al. 1995; Steponaitis 1983, 1984; Tite et al. 2001).

To test for impurities, a 1:1 HCl solution and taste were used to look for the presence of calcium carbonate and salts, respectively, in the natural clays. Four samples

(C03, C13, R32, and R43) reacted as an indication of calcium carbonate (lime) in the clay. Eight more clays (C07, R01, R30, R45, R54, R88, R89, R109) had a possible reaction to one drop of the HCl solution, but other drops on the same sample did not react. No significant bubbling occurred to indicate calcium carbonate in 57% of the clays. The Cretaceous formations did not have definite reactions to the HCl, although one Lewis Shale sample possibly reacted. Most of the Quaternary alluvium and terrace deposits showed a presence of lime. Some of the Tertiary samples’ minor bubbling suggest calcium carbonate. Only one sample (R43 – Quaternary alluvium) had a very slight salt taste. None of the other clays were even remotely salty.

Bentonites are a type of rock composed of smectite clays with high expandability

(CMS Glossary 2009). They are very absorbent and their volume swells, sometimes visibly, with the addition of water. All smectites are expandable, but non-bentonitic smectites are expandable only in the structure of the mineral (Rice 1987:48). Dry and finely divided clay is slowly added to water in a test tube. If swelling or a great increase in the volume of the clay occurs the clay is bentonitic. These clays will crack as the

311

vessel dries. The bentonitic composition of the clay influences workability, drying, and

firing.

In the test for bentonitic clays, no swelling was observed. Bentonites typically

form from alteration of glassy volcanic tuff or ash (CMS Glossary 2009). Since there are

no volcanic ash or tuff deposits in the survey area, the absence of bentonitic clays, i.e.

visibly expanding smectites, is congruent with the regional geology. Smectites do occur,

as evidenced by X-ray diffraction, but they are not from bentonites.

The amount of shrinkage is a highly important characteristic of any clay. In this study, both the linear and weight percent drying shrinkage were determined (Rhodes

1957:200; Rice 1987:71). The formula for the weight percent shrinkage is [(initial weight – final weight)/initial weight] x 100. Shrinkage occurs as the water of plasticity is

lost through drying (Rice 1987:64; Shepard 1976:72). The water around the clay

platelets evaporates and the particles move closer together, which leads to shrinkage.

The two primary kinds of water loss are from the film and pore water, which are

mechanically combined with the clay body (Rice 1987:63-65). Fine clays have more film

water and therefore have higher shrinkage. One study suggests illites have more

cracking, while well-ordered kaolinites have less cracking (West and Ford 1967). Drying

clay objects always shrink more in one direction than another – wedging of the clay can

help with this issue by evenly distributing moisture and inclusions (Rye 1981:20).

The drying shrinkage rates based on length and weight percent were recorded

(Table 10.11 presents the averages, see Appendix B for complete results). The

Cretaceous formations averaged 28.8 and 10.3% weight loss with a 13.6 and 10.6% loss

in length. The Tertiary formations showed the least shrinkage with averages of 25.6 and

312

23.2% weight loss and 8.0 and 7.4% in length. The Quaternary formations were in between with averages of 24.5 and 27.1% weight loss and 9.2 and 9.6% in length. The canyon clays, which are almost the same subset as the San Jose Formation, had less shrinkage (23.3% weight and 7.4% length) than the ranch clays (27.0% weight and

10.2% length). The overall range in weight loss was from 18.0 to 34.5% with an average of 26.1%. The loss in length ranged from 4.0 to 16.0% with an average of 9.4%.

Table 10.11 Drying shrinkage averages by formation Average Weight Average Length Formation Shrinkage % Shrinkage %

Kirtland-Fruitland (Kkf) 28.8% 13.6%

Lewis Shale (Kl) 30.3% 10.6%

Alluvium (Qal) 24.5% 9.2%

Terrace Deposits (Qcg) 27.1% 9.6%

Nacimiento Formation (Tn) 25.6% 8.0%

San Jose Formation (Ts) 23.2% 7.4%

Another test, water of plasticity, determines the amount of water that is required to make a clay plastic and workable. The water coats the clay platelets and allows them to move across one another. On the one hand, smaller particles have greater plasticity and lead to greater strength due to more surface area to bond (Rice 1987:59,69). On the other hand, smaller particles need more water to become plastic and then they shrink more as they dry (Rhodes 1957:199). The formula (Rice 1987:62) for the percentage water of plasticity is [(weight wet – weight dry)/weight dry] x 100. Water of plasticity also can be measured by adding water from a graduated cylinder to a set weight of dry

313

clay. Recording the amount of water for initial plasticity and the amount for stickiness

provides the range of water of plasticity (Rice 1987:62). The proportion of water needed

to maintain plasticity ranges from 15% to 50% with most pottery clays varying from 20%

to 35% (Rye 1981:21).

To look at water of plasticity, the initial plasticity amount, the sticky state amount,

and the weight percent were determined starting with 50 g of clay (Table 10.12 presents

the averages, see Appendix B for complete results). The Cretaceous clays averaged 14.5

and15.0 ml for initial plasticity and 16.5 and 17.7 ml to reach the sticky stage. The

Tertiary clays required the least water to become plastic with averages of 12.1 and 10.8

ml for initial plasticity and 1.41 and 12.8 for the sticky stage. The Quaternary clays were

in the middle with averages of 12.0 and 12.9 ml at initial plasticity and 14.1 and 15.2 ml

at the sticky stage. The ranch clays used an average 13.2 ml to achieve a plastic state and

15.3 ml to start sticking. The canyon clays, essentially the San Jose Formation, used less

water with 10.8 ml for initial plasticity and 13.0 ml to become sticky. For all the clays,

the average was 12.6 ml for initial plasticity and 14.8 ml to reach the sticky stage with a

range of 8 to 17 ml for initial and 9 to 20 for sticky. The water of plasticity percentage,

calculated from the wet weight of the briquette and the weight after drying, ranged from

an average of 30.4% to 43.9% with an overall average of 35.6%.

Wet sieving through a stack of standard screens and filter paper that approximate

the Wentworth size classification (Wentworth 1922, 1933) allows for description of the

clay as sandy or silty. Wet sieving is not very accurate and the finest particles are usually

lost (Rice 1987:73). The particle size distribution provides information related to plasticity and shrinkage. The finer the particle size is the greater the plasticity of the clay.

314

This is due to the larger number of clay platelets and therefore a larger surface area (Rice

1987:59). The higher the surface area of the particle the more water needed to get plasticity and the more shrinkage as it dries and fires. Potters prefer clays with a range of particle sizes (Rice 1987:74). The amount of aplastic material in a ceramic is generally more than 10% by volume. For different clay minerals, the most useful percentage of inclusions varies.

Table 10.12 Water of plasticity averages by formation

Average Initial Average Sticky Average Formation Water (ml) Water (ml) Water %*

Kirtland-Fruitland (Kkf) 14.5 16.5 40.4%

Lewis Shale (Kl) 15.0 17.7 43.9%

Alluvium (Qal) 12.0 14.1 32.6%

Terrace Deposits (Qcg) 12.9 15.2 37.1%

Nacimiento Formation (Tn) 12.1 14.1 34.5%

San Jose Formation (Ts) 10.8 12.8 30.4%

*average water of plasticity percent NOT calculated with sticky water amounts

To investigate the particle size distribution in the natural clays, 50 grams of clay were soaked and then washed through a set of U.S. standard sieves with mesh numbers corresponding to the Wentworth grain size classes (Folk 1968). The remaining particles and water were run through Grade 1 filter paper to separate the silt and clay fractions.

This filter paper size catches medium silt, but the filters appear to have trapped both the silt and clay fractions (curling of dried filter contents suggests the clays also were collected). Most of the clays can be described as dominated by silt and clay with only the

Cretaceous Lewis Shale more sandy (Table 10.13).

315

Table 10.13 Particle Size Analysis Formation Averages

Granules Very Coarse Coarse Medium Fine Very Fine Coarse Silt and Dominant Formation % Sand % Sand % Sand % Sand % Sand % Silt % Clay % Fraction

Kirtland-Fruitland 0.79 0.54 2.12 10.99 18.19 20.00 5.73 38.06 Silt and clay (Kkf)

Lewis Shale (Kl) 1.71 0.45 1.52 8.95 40.55 18.80 4.00 20.14 Fine sand

Alluvium (Qal) 0.51 0.85 2.70 8.33 24.69 21.19 6.14 31.94 Silt and clay 316 Terrace Deposits 1.98 0.48 1.74 10.40 18.91 26.06 8.44 27.28 Silt and clay (Qcg)

Nacimiento 0.89 0.92 3.54 10.43 18.62 20.73 7.03 34.70 Silt and clay Formation (Tn)

San Jose 1.52 1.45 3.99 10.20 21.66 23.92 7.93 26.28 Silt and clay Formation (Ts)

Performance Characteristics

Clays have multiple properties that affect performance characteristics of the

finished ceramics in different ways. Color, hardness, porosity, and thermal shock

resistance were tested for the natural clays in the same manner as the ceramics in Chapter

Eight. The same 28 samples were made into clay tiles and fired at 750oC, to approximate

the prehispanic firing temperature. Munsell colors were recorded and grouped into the

same color groups as for the 1000oC previously presented (Tables 10.14 and 10.15). The

majority (86%) fall into the yellowish red groups. The Lewis Shale and San Jose

Formation are the exceptions with samples in the buff and red groups.

Table 10.14 Fired (750oC) Clay Color Groups

Color Group Color Munsell Color Range 1 Buff 7.5YR(7/4) 7.5YR(5/6) Yellowish 3 7.5YR (6/6) Red 7.5YR (7/6) Yellowish 5YR(5/6) 4 Red 5YR(6/6, 6/8) 2.5YR(5/6) 5 Red 2.5YR(6/6)

Table 10.15 Munsell Color Groups for the Clays Fired at 750oC Cretaceous Tertiary Quaternary Kirtland- Lewis San Terrace Nacimiento Alluvium Color Group Fruitland Shale Jose Deposits Total 1 (Buff) 1 1 2 3 (Yellowish Red) 1 4 3 2 2 12 4 (Yellowish Red) 3 2 1 3 3 12 5 (Red) 2 2 Total 4 3 5 6 5 5 28

Hardness is a proxy for durability and abrasion resistance. Strength and

toughness associated with transport durability are found with use of clays with higher

calcium oxide contents and smaller inclusion sizes (Mantiatis et al. 1984; Tite et al.

317

2001). All the fired clay tiles had a hardness of about 1.5 and could be scratched with a

fingernail. The tiles were thicker than the typical sherds, so this may have affected the

hardness achieved at equivalent temperatures. Some of the tiles still had minor vestiges

of a carbon core after the hour long firing at 750oC.

Porosity, the ratio of volume of pore space to total finished ceramic volume,

varies with different clays. Refractory clays with little flux material, which lowers the

melting point, stay porous even at firing temperatures above 945oC, while other clays

with natural fluxes sinter and vitrify at much lower temperatures (Shepard 1976:83). The

apparent porosity averaged 38.9 percent for all the natural clay tiles. The Quaternary

terrace deposits had the lowest average apparent porosity (Table 10.16 and Figure 10.13).

Table 10.16 Apparent Porosity Percentages

Formation Series 1 % Series 2 % Series 3 % Average % Kirtland-Fruitland 35.6 40.0 35.0 36.9 Cretaceous Lewis Shale 28.2 44.4 41.3 38.0 Nacimiento 55.5 40.0 37.3 44.3 Tertiary San Jose 44.4 31.6 45.7 40.6 Alluvium 31.4 35.6 43.8 36.9 Quaternary Terrace Deposits 44.2 36.8 28.9 36.6

For cooking durability, thermal shock resistance is better in non-calcareous clays

due to their lower thermal expansion coefficient (Paynter and Tite 2001; Tite et al. 2001).

The fired clay tiles also were subjected to 20 cycles of the quench test (Table 10.17).

Trace amounts of sloughing, seen as sediments in the pans, occurred throughout the

experiment. This is most likely related to the low hardness of the tiles. The Tertiary

clays were at opposite ends of resistance with the San Jose Formation showing the first

318

signs of thermal shock and the Nacimiento Formation having the best survivability in the quench test format.

Figure 10.13 Boxplot of Apparent Porosity Percentages

Table 10.17 Thermal Shock Results

Formation Thermal Shock Resistance Minor spalling first noted at the 10th quench cycle; chipping Kirtland-Fruitland in the last quench cycles. Cretaceous Minor spalling first noted at the 11th quench cycle; chipping Lewis Shale in the last quench cycles. Minor spalling first noted at the 14th quench cycle; extensive Nacimiento rounding of edges and corners by the final quench cycle. Tertiary Minor spalling first noted at the 9th quench cycle; extensive San Jose rounding of edges and corners by the final quench cycle. Minor spalling first noted at the 10th quench cycle; rounding Alluvium of edges by final quench cycle. Quaternary Minor spalling first noted at the 12th quench cycle; rounding Terrace Deposits of edges by final quench cycle.

319

COMPARISON OF RESULTS

X-ray diffraction was most useful for identifying the clay minerals available to the

Gallina potters from the raw unfired clay patterns. All of the clays in the area are mixed smectite, illite, and kaolin. Chlorite does appear in a few of the raw clay patterns (e.g.

Figure 10.4). The relative volume of each clay mineral differs in each sample, but in general kaolin is dominant in the canyon clays and smectite is dominant in the ranch clays. The X-ray diffraction data were not able to discriminate between the ceramics due to loss of clay mineral crystalline structure in the firing process. Illite was present in most of the ceramic XRD patterns, but only traces of other clay minerals could be teased out periodically.

The 1000oC firing resulted in five color groups that include buff, yellowish red, and red coloration. The yellowish red Group 4 had the most members in both the clays

(75%) and the ceramics (62%). The buff Group 2 only had one sample, a plain ceramic from Nogales Cliff House (NP07). No clays fell into this buff color group. As for the buff Group 1, only one clay sample from the San Jose Formation (C09) was a member, but 22% of the ceramics fired to this buff color in the oxidizing atmosphere of the kiln.

The majority of these buff color sherds had a red surface with a buff core. The surfaces do not appear to be slipped. Alterations in the pottery chemistry may have occurred while they were buried, such as acid soil leaching or staining on the ceramic surface.

Based on the rock clasts in the ceramics and clays, the petrographic analysis suggests that the ancient potters were not using clays from the area around Nogales Cliff

House. The canyon clays all have hematite-cemented quartz rock clasts, whereas the ranch clays contain quartz and feldspar rock clasts. All of the ceramic thin sections with

320

rock clasts had quartz and feldspars grains. This is contrary to the results from the

1000oC firing color groups and suggests that Gallina women were using another buff firing clay from a formation farther away or an outcrop in the San Jose Formation from a different drainage (also at a greater distance).

Previous chemical research points to use of a single formation (Seaman 1976) possibly the Nacimiento, Meneffe, or San Jose Formations (Massouh 2009). Combined with the petrographic information, Timothy Seaman (1976) and Paula Massouh’s (2009) chemical analyses, constrained by the geology of this study area, suggest primary use of the Nacimiento Formation. The inductively coupled plasma-mass spectrometry results show that distinct clays were used for the painted versus utilitarian ceramics (Neff 2011).

The figures depicting the black-on-white and coarse ceramics are shown with the clay samples plotted over the ceramic ellipses (Figures 10.14 and 10.15). The Nacimiento clays from the ranch survey (R60, R78, and R89) are the only formation represented inside the ceramic ellipses for both ceramic types. For the other formations, one clay sample always falls outside the ellipses, but none of the formations can be eliminated completely from use in ceramic production. The Quaternary alluvium (R43, R88, R103, and R109) definitely was not used for the painted pottery, which agrees with the

Ancestral Puebloan use of shale clays for their gray wares (Blinman 1993), but the chemical results do not rule out its use for the utilitarian pottery.

321

Black-on-gray from Nogales Cliff House

Black-on-gray from the Davis Ranch Site

x Natural clays (R=ranch area, C=canyon area)

Figure 10.14 Bivariate elemental concentration plot of clays and black-on-gray sherds

322

Coarse from Nogales Cliff House

Coarse from the Davis Ranch Site x Natural clays (R=ranch area, C=canyon area)

Figure 10.15 Bivariate elemental concentration plot showing clays and coarse sherds

The Tertiary Nacimiento and San Jose Formations are suspected as sources based on a combination of my findings and Massouh’s (2009) work. Nacimiento Formation clay deposits are readily available and require little processing. They have decent workability and a range of particle sizes. There is not an inordinate amount of shrinkage when these clays dry. As for the San Jose Formation clay outcrops, they are more difficult to access and could be smaller deposits. Their workability is the worst of all the

323

formations and they tend to be coarser, which could require more processing of the raw

materials before use in pottery production. They have a similar range in shrinkage to the

Nacimiento Formation. If the potters preferred a lithified shale deposit, the Cretaceous

Lewis Shale is easily processed since it readily disaggregates when soaked. In the case of

the Kirtland-Fruitland Undivided, the shrinkage length was greater than any of the other

formations probably due to the extra water needed to achieve better workability. The

Quaternary alluvium and terrace deposits seem unlikely candidates, especially with the

Ancestral Puebloan preference for clays from shales (Blinman 1993).

The performance characteristics (color, hardness, porosity, thermal shock

resistance) of the ceramics and natural clays show few similarities. Color did not directly

align, probably due to use of different firing atmospheres. The lower hardness for the

clays versus the ceramics suggests that potters might have sieved the natural clays to

select for smaller inclusions and thereby increase the hardness or added fluxes to produce

sintering. The apparent porosity test showed similar trends across the ceramic types and

geologic formations. For the ceramics, apparent porosity did not correlate with the

function of the vessels. Porosity also increases thermal shock resistance by interfering

with crack propagation (Bishop et al. 1982; Rye 1981:27). However, this property did

not manifest itself in the thermal shock resistance experiment of the ceramics or the

clays. All of the samples showed minor spalling in a similar range of cycles.

CONCLUSION

Petrography was used to identify the aplastic mineralogy, X-ray diffraction to examine the clay mineralogy, and inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry to

324

determine the chemistry. Numerous additional characterization tests were undertaken to

further flesh out the qualities of the natural clays. These tests examined both inherent

attributes and performance characteristics. Through these analytic techniques, the composition of Gallina finished ceramics was compared to the available clay deposits around the Davis Ranch Site and Nogales Cliff House.

As mentioned in Chapter Eight, the plain pottery is problematic. At 1000oC, the

black-on-gray and plain ceramics fell mostly into the buff and yellowish red groups and

the coarse sherds were the only ones in the red group, although most of the coarse were

part of the yellowish red color group. The sorting of the grains and grain size in the

petrographic thin sections showed similar ranges for the three types, but the black-on-

gray tended to be finer-grained and better sorted and the coarse sherds were coarser-

grained and poorly sorted. The plain ceramic slides showed both of these patterns with

some finer-grained and some coarser-grained sherds. In the XRD tracing, the plain

sherds were more similar to the coarse pottery. The chemical analysis illustrated a close

relationship between the black-on-gray and plain sherds (see Figure 8.6). Overall, it

seems appropriate to place the plain and black-on-gray into one type, Gallina Gray, with

two variants.

In the end, none of the analytical results were definitive and many contradicted

each other. It appears that the Gallina potters may have been using different clays for the

Gallina Gray and Gallina Utility ceramic types. The procurement area for the clays may

be different for the gray and utility types. For the Gallina Gray, a separate unsampled

San Jose Formation clay could have been used, while the Gallina Utility probably came

from the Nacimiento Formation in the ranch area. The combined results of these

325

mineralogical, elemental, and experimental comparisons indicate that the Gallina potters had numerous adequate choices within a short distance of each site, but they did not select clays based on proximity to their home. It is apparent that social violence did not alter ceramic resource selection.

So why might the Gallina potters have chosen clays from these two formations?

The Nacimiento Formation contains kaolin clay with smectite and some illite. The aplastics consist of quartz, potassium feldspar, plagioclase, muscovite, and sedimentary and igneous rock clasts. The most common particles sizes are from the silt and clay fraction (35%) with less granules and sand than the San Jose Formation (see Table

10.13). Drying shrinkage had the second lowest average percentages and the water of plasticity averages were lower than many of the other formations. Unfired colors include olive and light brown, while the oxidation colors were yellowish red. The apparent porosity was the highest of all with an average of 44 percent. As for the key performance characteristic, the Nacimiento Formation had the best survivability in the thermal shock test.

The San Jose Formation is composed of the same suite of clay and aplastic minerals with kaolin most abundant of the clays. The silt and clay fraction (26%) was the highest percent (26%), but there were more granules and sand than the Nacimiento

Formation (see Table 10.13). This coarseness would require sieving of the clay before use in construction of the fine-grained black-on-gray ceramics. Water of plasticity and drying shrinkage were the lowest of all the formations. The San Jose Formation had the second highest apparent porosity (41% average) and the worst thermal shock resistance.

Colors for the unfired clay samples were olive, gray, and brown with oxidation colors of

326

buff, yellowish red, and red. The buff firing color is most likely the performance characteristic sought after with clays from the San Jose Formation.

Overall, both of these formations are higher in kaolin with lower water of plasticity and drying shrinkage. The buff firing color of the San Jose Formation and the higher thermal shock resistance of the Nacimiento Formation may have influenced the

Gallina potters’ selection. Additionally, these are the formations indicated in Paula

Massouh’s (2009) chemical characterization of Ojitos District Gallina sherds and clays.

The combination of kaolin-rich clays, firing color, and cooking performance supports these two formations as quality choices for ceramic production.

327

CHAPTER 11: Conclusion

The technological choices involved in ceramic production can be influenced by

many factors. This research examined ceramic resource selection and its relationship to social violence. As an investigation of technological choice, this is not a sourcing study.

The choices prehistoric potters living in an area under conflict made between several available clays types are the focus.

EVALUATION OF RESULTS

In many cases, the determining factors in resource selection are distance to source and quality of the raw material. Following the Principle of Least Effort, the assumption is that resource procurement decisions minimize energy and information expenditures to maximize energy or information returns (Zipf 1949). The maximum distance for frequently used resources is one day’s round-trip travel. For agriculturalists, distance to fields is generally not more than one kilometer, but the maximum distance is four kilometers (Chisholm 1979). This is in agreement with estimated ceramic raw material procurement thresholds of one kilometer and up to four kilometers if necessary (Arnold

1985, 2000).

As for quality of materials, ceramic resources – including clays, tempering materials, and fuel for firing – must be of sufficient quality to make pottery and may have additional cultural constraints on their selection. Generally, variability in pottery composition reflects raw material diversity, the ways in which raw materials are selected and processed to form pastes, and the changing availability of raw materials through time

(Arnold 2000). Finished ceramic composition appears to be influenced primarily by geological context and geographic location of the village (Arnold 1985:232). However,

328

my theoretical perspective acknowledges the importance of a holistic approach and incorporation of social context.

The presence of pervasive social violence may affect the choices people make in their daily lives, especially in resource procurement. Rational choice theory states that people make decisions based on their assessment of current circumstances (Eller 2006).

The length of time spent away from home and the nature of the activities performed when away can impact an individual’s exposure to risk. Choices associated with completion of routine activities affect exposure to risk by affecting the convergence in time and space of the victims and attackers (Cohen and Felson 1979). Time spent away from home is time when the potential for attack is heightened.

Isolated individuals might readily be killed when out performing daily activities.

To avoid ambush during routine activities, the best strategy is to limit activities to daylight hours, work in a group, and bring a protector. Levels of strife that result in a constant daily threat of attack can influence people’s ability to trust (Ember and Ember

1992). Psychological effects of conflict can be pervasive with severe distress and even mental illness occurring (Wileman 2009:46). With social violence influencing all decisions, the risks must be assessed every time a person leaves home for subsistence, resource procurement, or trading purposes. This study focuses on the relationship between resource quality and risk.

Archaeological evidence for conflict in the Southwest can be found in architecture, settlement patterns, burned sites, and indicators of traumatic death (LeBlanc

1999). Violence in the Gallina area is apparent in their defensive architecture, such as towers, tunnels, and stockades (Mackey and Green 1979). Settlement pattern studies of

329

Gallina sites show a preference for cliffs, promontories, caves, narrow ridges, and low

terraces (Muceus and Lawrence 1990). The switch to clustered communities and the

appearance of a few cliff houses later in the Gallina Phase is a reaction to social violence

in the area. Clustering of sites and line-of-sight connections among clusters also supports the atmosphere of strife. At least 30 percent of houses in the Gallina area were set on fire and the majority of these were intentionally burned with household goods intact (Mackey and Holbrook 1978). Traumatic death is found in Gallina remains with embedded projectile points and skull trauma. One estimate suggests that 60 percent of

Gallina adults suffered a violent death (Chase 1976). The Gallina people tried to defend themselves, but clustered communities, hidden cliff houses, restricted access to site locations, and towers with line-of sight connections were not enough to prevent several massacres and abandonment of the area.

Many characteristics of clay that influence selection are not distinguishable in a fired ceramic. To look at production, one must first characterize the resources available.

The geologic formations within one kilometer of two Gallina archaeological sites were investigated. The two sites, Nogales Cliff House and the Davis Ranch Site, represent a defensive situation and an open non-defensive site respectively. The outcrops around these sites generally can be characterized as carbonaceous and smectitic shales with some associated shaley residual clays or unconsolidated and loose sedimentary clays of more recent age.

In terms of technological choice, the clays extracted from shales can be used to produce pottery with a gray to white surface color. Eric Blinman (1993) notes a switch from alluvial sedimentary clays to clays from shale around A.D. 500 in the Ancestral

330

Puebloan region. Firing these shale clay ceramics in a neutral atmosphere allowed for the

establishment of the black-on-white tradition by the 7th century A.D. As Frank Hibben

(1949:199) says, “whatever the exact provenience of the Gallina decorated wares might

be there is no doubt that they are a part of some aspect of the Pueblo pattern.” This

suggests that the Gallina potters were selecting their clays, i.e. clays from shales, as part

of the greater Ancestral Puebloan tradition. The context of pottery production may have

been a significant influence on ceramic resource selection.

But what about social violence influencing resource procurement? A study on the effect of geographic circumscription and conflict on ceramic resource procurement in the

Taos area found a decrease in clay diversity and quality with aggregation, suggesting that the clay sources used prior to aggregation were no longer accessible (Fowles et al. 2007).

Other explanations for ceramic raw material selection could be the Principle of Least

Effort choosing close clays, a logistical foray (Kelly 1983, 1988) to collect clay at a known source, preference for certain performance characteristics or aesthetics in the clays, or consistent use of traditional clay beds.

To compare resource procurement during times of conflict and prior to periods of social strife, archaeological remains from defensive and non-defensive sites were utilized.

A non-defensive site was used as the control to determine the potters’ choices without an atmosphere of social violence. The model examining resource decisions is tested here.

Ho: In an atmosphere of social violence, potters will take risks to procure ceramic

resources with specific qualities.

331

HA: In an atmosphere of social violence, potters will not take risks to procure ceramic resources with specific qualities and instead use clays closer to their habitations regardless of the quality of the clay.

There is no change in diversity of raw materials used at the defensive site. This falls under the null hypothesis. The potters risked violence to collect clays with specific qualities to produce their vessels. Safety concerns do not appear to be the overriding factor in ceramic resource selection. They may have been selecting clays with specific performance characteristics related to color and thermal shock resistance.

The 1000oC firing color groups suggest that the Gallina potters preferred different clays for production of Gallina Gray (buff color group) and Gallina Utility (yellowish red or red color groups). In the oxidation analysis of the ceramics (see Table 8.4), Nogales

Cliff House has sherds in five color groups, while the Davis Ranch Site only has sherds in three color groups. This greater number of “sources” at the cliff dwelling may reflect the larger number of households represented in the Nogales sample, although the colors do not separate by structure at either site. As for the thermal shock resistance, the ability to withstand repeated heating and cooling episodes is most important for the cooking vessels.

From the null hypothesis, the question of distance from each site arises. The petrographic analysis shows clays within one kilometer of the defensive site were not used by the ancient potters for utility pottery, while clays from around the non-defensive site could have been used for utilitarian ceramics from both sites. The painted ceramics could not have been produced from clays around the non-defensive site, but clay for these

332

vessels may have come from the canyon encompassing the defensive site or another

farther unsampled area. I could not definitely demonstrate use of the clays from within

one kilometer of either site based on the X-ray diffraction and chemical data. Even so, the no difference and far distance from the defensive site points to use of traditional sources for specific performance characteristics and/or aesthetics. There is no evidence that conflict influenced ceramic resource procurement in this area.

This is not terribly surprising, since local unspecialized household production of

pottery is not done on a daily basis. At this scale of production, ceramics may be made

only one or two times a year (Rice 1987:180; Sinopoli 1991:99). Undertaking risk once

or twice a year may be acceptable in order to procure clays with known performance

characteristics and with a cultural aesthetic value. In order to truly examine the influence

of social violence on resource procurement, daily activities need to be the focus. The

location of a settlement in relationship to a water supply or agricultural fields would be

more appropriate to this question. The reason water sources and field placement were not

investigated is because of the problems with identification and association of

contemporary fields with certain villages and assuming current water sources were

available prehistorically. At least the ceramics recovered from excavation of an

archaeological site can be presumed to have been used and, in the case of the Gallina, produced at that site.

Indication of clay procurement from the Nacimiento and San Jose Formations points to the importance of performance characteristics over proximity. Both of these formations have kaolin-rich clays, which correspond to lower water of plasticity and drying shrinkage. Some the clay outcrops in the San Jose Formation have less iron and

333

fire to a buff color in an oxidizing environment. In a reducing or neutral firing environment these clays could produce the whites and grays sought after in the Ancestral

Puebloan tradition. The Nacimiento Formation clays had greater thermal shock resistance and would be a good choice for cooking vessels. The clay minerals, firing color, and cooking performance seem to be the deciding factors for selection from these two formations.

IMPLICATIONS

My research emphasizes a holistic approach to technological choice. Both the economic and social constraints must be incorporated into studies of ceramic production.

A combination of materials science techniques and placement in the cultural context allow for a more comprehensive understanding of the influences on a production sequence. Investigations into technological choice are currently moving toward this integrative approach.

An example combining ethnoarchaeological and analytical methods comes from the long term series of studies centered on pottery production by the Kalinga in the

Philippines. Miriam Stark and colleagues (2000) found that potters in the village of

Dalupa collect their clays from terraced rice fields. Personal relations between the potter and the field owner are equally as important as the quality of the clay resource. However, the potters do choose their clays based on workability and performance characteristics in production and use.

The Kalinga are an appropriate exemplar to compare to the Gallina in that the two groups are similar in degree of social complexity, level of ceramic production, and

334

atmosphere of social violence. Conflict among Kalinga villages has “profound

implications for Kalingas’ safety in work and travel” (Stark et al. 2000:303). As

mentioned above, the Dalupa potters use two clay sources in the terraced rice fields

located a 15 minute walk from the village. Potters in the adjacent village of Dangtalan

procure clay from a single source near their school. Clay is collected by potters traveling

in pairs or by a potter with children along to help carry the clay. Enough clay is brought

back to make about 10 medium-sized pots or four large pots (Stark et al. 2000).

The distance figures for these Kalinga potters align with Dean Arnold’s (1985,

2000) one kilometer ceramic procurement threshold. This is contrary to my results

indicating the Gallina traveled farther to gather their clay. Rather, the Gallina potters’

clay selections parallel ceramic resource choices by African potters. Olivier Gosselain and Alexandre Livingstone Smith (2005) document tradition, techno-functional constraints, relationships with other realms of activity, and symbolic conceptions as all affecting potters’ resource selection in Sub-Saharan Africa. Much of the time, clay extraction sites are located in areas already frequented for other purposes, such as areas involved in daily chores, seasonal migrations, family networks, economic exchange, and travel (Gosselain 2008). This “space of experience” plays into individual perceptions and value judgments of ceramic resources as does the nature of social interactions between potters and land owners at the clay extraction sites. One third of the clay procurement locations in southern Niger are within one kilometer of the potter’s home, but resource areas extend significantly when connections exist between the potter and specific places.

The reputation of a clay source for providing quality ceramic products compensates for

335

the added time and energy expended to retrieve clays located up to 25 kilometers away in

Niger (Gosselain 2008).

The Gallina selected clays for specific performance characteristics rather than

basing their choices on distance to clay outcrops. Ceramic production is a conservative

craft (Rice 1987:459), but with the atmosphere of conflict in the Gallina area – one of the

highest documented rates of violence in the prehispanic American Southwest (Stodder

1989:187) – it may be that the Gallina were clinging to tradition during a time of significant disruption. Gallina community structures changed in the thirteenth century

and increasing community integration may be signified (Crown et al. 1996) by the

postulated council house on Huerfano Mesa (Dick 1988) and a possible kiva at Butts

Village (Ellis 1988). Elsewhere in the Southwest during this transitional period, the

collapse of the Chacoan system and environmental degradation led to an increase in

violence (LeBlanc 1999). Population shifts from the Four Corners area to the northern

Rio Grande along with overall aggregation indicates serious social disruption. The

solidification of the kachina ceremonies in the Ancestral Puebloan region (Adams 1991)

and the rise of the Southwest Regional Cult in the Mogollon area (Crown 1994) show an

overall pattern of people clinging to traditions during times of chaos.

The use of multiple clays for production by a single potter is not unheard of in the

American Southwest. Historic and ethnographic observations of Puebloan potters at San

Ildefonso (Guthe 1925) and at Laguna (Olsen 2002) document use of three different clay sources: red, white, and brown. These clays were selected in relationship to the type of vessel to be made with the brown clay used for cooking pots and the red and white clays used for serving or storage vessels. At the Pueblos of Santa Clara (LeFree 1975) and

336

Acoma (Olsen 2002), only a single clay source was noted, but this information comes from more recent inquiries. The Gallina fall comfortably in the pattern of three clay sources (see clay oxidation results in Chapter Eight) shown by the early records from San

Ildefonso Pueblo and current practice at Laguna Pueblo.

The significance of this study to archaeology and anthropology lies mainly in the realm of its methodological contributions. Production intensity or organization has been equated with the level of homogeneity of ceramics (Rice 1992). However, both natural and cultural sources of variation can contribute to heterogeneity in compositional patterning (Stark et al. 2000). The use of multiple techniques is imperative when investigating use of localized and geologically related clay sources. Examination of intra-regional ceramic resource selection necessitates both mineralogical and chemical analyses (Fowles et al. 2007).

The results of the methods utilized here suggest that petrography is the better choice for mineralogical information, while the laser ablation inductively coupled plasma-mass spectrometry allowed for characterization of the clay fraction separate from the aplastics in the ceramics and the collected natural clays. The X-ray diffraction analysis was only useful in its ability to differentiate the clay minerals in the unfired natural clay samples. The loss of clay mineral structure during the firing process in the ceramics negated the effectiveness of this technique on the sherds. Several of the laboratory and performance characteristic tests had an unsatisfying level of precision. If other methods can be found for these tests their use would be advisable.

Some objections to site selection and geologic setting could be raised. Several people have questioned the application of non-defensive to the Davis Ranch Site. The

337

proximity and the close occupation dates for the two sites also may have contributed to

the consistency found in the results between the cliff dwelling and the dispersed village.

As for the geologic setting, the choice of sites along the same drainage in a sedimentary

system complicated the separation of the geologic formations both mineralogically and

chemically. My recommendation for configuring an intra-regional study would be to

select sites farther apart, but still in the same cultural area, and, if possible, in different

geologic settings. This may appear to cause problems with the potters having different

local choices, although within most culture areas the geology tends to be related at a regional scale.

This research has advanced our knowledge of technological choices made by middle-range society potters, through examination of resource selection with respect to general anthropological questions about human behavior and decision-making. In turn, this work provides information important for studying technology and production by documenting some of the variation in resource selection among ancient potters. Also, this research has added vital information to an under-studied culture area in the American

Southwest. Expanding work on the Nogales Cliff House collections, which was excavated by UNM in the 1930s, brings research started by early faculty of the

University of New Mexico Anthropology Department full circle and into the modern academic arena.

For the future, much work is needed to fully synthesize and understand the

Gallina culture area. Additional research using artifacts from the Maxwell Museum

Gallina collections could follow many paths, such as a comparison of the resource selection constraints between ceramic and lithic raw materials. In the case of the

338

ceramics, further research might entail deeper investigation of the application of X-ray diffraction and clay minerals analysis in pottery. Overall, the greater anthropological question of social violence and resource procurement can be examined anywhere in the world where conflict is occurring or has occurred in the past.

339

REFERENCES CITED

Adams, E. Charles 1989 The Case for Conflict during the Late Prehistoric and Protohistoric Periods in the Western Pueblo Area of the American Southwest. In Cultures in Conflict: Current Anthropological Perspectives, edited by D.C. Tkaczuk and B.C. Vivian, pp.103- 111. Archaeological Association of the University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada. 1991 The Origin and Development of the Pueblo Katsina Cult. University of Arizona Press, Tucson. 2002 Homol’ovi: An Ancient Hopi Settlement Cluster. University of Arizona Press, Tucson.

Adams, Rex K. 1980 Salmon Ruin: Site Chronology and Formation Processes. In Investigations at the Salmon Site: The Structure of Chacoan Society in the Northern Southwest, edited by C. Irwin-Williams and P.H. Shelley, I:186-272. Final report. Eastern New Mexico University, Portales.

Adler, Michael (editor) 1996 The Prehistoric Pueblo World, A.D. 1150-1350. University of Arizona Press, Tucson.

Ahlstrom, Richard V. N., Carla R. Van West, and Jeffrey S. Dean 1995 Environmental and Chronological Factors in the Mesa Verde-Northern Rio Grande Migration. Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 14(2):125-142.

Allen, Mark W. and Elizabeth N. Arkush 2006 Introduction: Archaeology and the Study of War. In The Archaeology of Warfare: Prehistories of Raiding and Conquest, Edited by E.N. Arkush and M.W. Allen, pp.1-19. University Press of Florida, Gainsville.

Allen, Wilma H., Charles F. Merbs, and Walter H. Birkby 1985 Evidence for Prehistoric Scalping at Nuvakwewtaga (Chavez Pass) and Grasshopper Ruin, Arizona. In Health and Disease in the Prehistoric Southwest, edited by C.F. Merbs and R.J. Miller, pp.23-42. Arizona State University Anthropological research papers 34. Tempe.

Ambler, J. Richard and Mark Q. Sutton 1989 The Anasazi Abandonment of the San Juan Drainage and the Numic Expansion. North American Archaeologist 10:39-53.

Anderson, Roger Y. 1960 Cretaceous-Tertiary palynology, eastern side of the San Juan Basin, New Mexico. New Mexico Bureau of Mines and Mineral Resources Memoir 6.

340

Anderson, Roger Y. and Douglas W. Kirkland 1960 Origin, varves, and cycles of Jurassic Todilto Formation, New Mexico. American Association of Petroleum Geologists Bulletin 44(1):37-52.

Anderson, Orin J. and Spencer G. Lucas 1996 Stratigraphy and Depositional Environments of Middle and Upper Jurassic Rocks, Southeastern San Juan Basin, New Mexico. In Jemez Mountains Region, Edited by F. Goff, B.S. Kues, M.A. Rogers, L.D. McFadden, and J.N. Gardner, pp.205- 210. New Mexico Geological Society Guidebook, 47th Field Conference. 1997 The Upper Jurassic Morrison Formation in the Four Corners Region. In Mesozoic Geology and Paleontology of the Four Corners Region, Edited by O.J. Anderson, B.S. Kues, S.G. Lucas, pp.139-155. New Mexico Geological Society Guidebook, 48th Field Conference.

Andrefsky, William Jr. 2005 Lithics: Macroscopic Approaches to Analysis. Second edition. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

Anschuetz, Kurt F. 1998 Largo-Gallina Branch. In Archaeology of Prehistoric Native America: An Encyclopedia, edited by G.Gibbon, p.444-446. Garland Publishing, New York. 2006 The Jemez Mountains Subdivision. In A Study of Pre-Columbian and Historic Uses of the Santa Fe National Forest: Competition and Alliance in the Northern Middle Rio Grande. Edited by C.L. Scheick, pp.235-247. USDA Forest Service Southwestern Region Cultural Report No. 18, Southwestern Regional Office, Albuquerque.

Anyon, Roger, Susan M. Collins, and Kathryn H. Bennett 1983 Archaeological Investigations between Manuelito Canyon and Whitewater Arroyo, Northwest New Mexico. Zuni Archaeology Program Report, Number 185. Zuni, NM.

Arnold, Dean E. 1985 Ceramic Theory and Cultural Process. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. 2000 Does the Standardization of Ceramic Pastes Really Mean Specialization? Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory 7(4):333-375.

Arnold, Philip J. III 1991 Domestic Ceramic Production and Spatial Organization: A Mexican Case Study in Ethnoarchaeology. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

Aubrey, William M. 1997 Geologic Framework of Cretaceous and Tertiary Rocks in the Southern Ute Indian Reservation and Adjacent Areas. In Mesozoic Geology and Paleontology of the Four Corners Region, Edited by O.J. Anderson, B.S. Kues, S.G. Lucas, pp.16-17. New Mexico Geological Society Guidebook, 48th Field Conference.

341

Baars, Donald L. 1962 Permian System of Colorado Plateau: American Association of Petroleum Geologists Bulletin 46(2):149-218.

Bahti, Thomas N. 1949 A Largo-Gallina Pit House and Two Surface Structures. El Palacio 56(2):52-59.

Bailey, Vernon 1931 Mammals of New Mexico. North American Fauna No. 53, USDA Bureau of Biological Survey, Washington DC.

Bain, James G. 1976 Field Report on Unit House Bg 20-3 and Possible Reservoir. Part of USFS Report 1980-10-012. On file at the Santa Fe National Forest Supervisor’s Office, Santa Fe.

Baker, Larry L., and Kristin Langenfeld 1990 Living on the Edge: Largo-Gallina Communities along the Continental Divide. Paper presented at the 55th Annual Meeting of the Society for American Archaeology, Las Vegas, Nevada.

Balsom, Janet R. 1984 Application of Heavy Mineral Analysis to Grand Canyon Ceramics. Master’s thesis, Arizona State University, Tempe.

Baltz, Elmer H. 1967 Stratigraphy and Regional Tectonic Implications of Part of Upper Cretaceous and Tertiary Rocks East-Central San Juan Basin New Mexico. U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 552. United States Government Printing Office, Washington DC.

Baltz, Elmer H., Sidney R. Ash, and Roger Y. Anderson 1966 History of nomenclature and stratigraphy of rocks adjacent to the Cretaceous- Tertiary boundary western San Juan Basin, New Mexico. U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 524-D, United States Government Printing Office, Washington DC.

Bamps, Anatole 1883 La céramique américaine au point de vue éléments constitutifs de sa pâte et de sa fabrication. Congrès International des Américanistes 5:274-281.

Barclay, Katherine 2001 Scientific Analysis of Archaeological Ceramics: A Handbook of Resources. Oxbow Books, Oxford, Great Britain.

342

Bargman, Byrd 2003 Chapter 6: Ceramic Analysis. In The Jones Canyon Continental Divide Scenic Trail. By J.M. Elyea. OCA Report 185-730. Office of Contract Archaeology. University of New Mexico, Albuquerque.

Bauer, Clyde M. 1916 Contributions to the geology and paleontology of San Juan County, New Mexico: Stratigraphy of a part of the Chaco River Valley. U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 98-P, pp.271-278. United States Government Printing Office, Washington DC.

Beaglehole, Ernest 1935 Notes on Hopi Warfare. In Hopi of the Second Mesa. Memoirs of the American Anthropological Society 44:17-24. Washington DC.

Beal, John D. 1987 Foundations of the Rio Grande Classic: The Lower Chama River AD 1300-1500. Unpublished manuscript on file at the Office of Cultural Affairs Historic Preservation Division, Santa Fe.

Beaumont, Edward C. and Gretchen K. Hoffman 1992 Interrelationships between the Upper Coal member of the Menefee Formation, the La Ventana Tongue, and the Lewis Shale in the Southeastern San Juan Basin, New Mexico. In San Juan Basin IV, Edited by SG. Lucas, B.S. Kues, T.E. Williamson, and A.P. Hunt, pp.207-216. New Mexico Geological Society Guidebook, 43rd Field Conference.

Becker, Gary S. 1976 The Economic Approach to Human Behavior. University of Chicago Press, Chicago.

Bejnar, Craig R. and R.H. Lessard 1976 Paleocurrent and depositional environments of the Dakota Group, San Miguel and Mora Counties, New Mexico. In Guidebook of Vermejo Park, Northeastern New Mexico. Edited by R.C. Ewing and B.S. Kues, pp.157-163. New Mexico Geological Society Guidebook, 27th Field Conference.

Bell, Robert E. 1940 Measurement and Observation of Gallina Burials. Unpublished Honors Paper, Department of Anthropology, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque.

Bellot-Gurlet, Ludovic, Gerard Poupeau, Oliver Dorighel, Thomas Calligaro, Jean- Claude Dran, and Joao Salomon 1999 A PIXE/fission-track Dating Approach to Sourcing Studies of Obsidian Artifacts in Columbia and Ecuador. Journal of Archaeological Science 26(8):855-860.

343

Bender, Averam B. 1934 Frontier Defense in the Territory of New Mexico, 1846-1853. New Mexico Historical Review 9:1-32.

Benedict, Ruth 1934 Patterns of Culture. Houghton Mifflin Co, New York.

Bennett, John W. 1946 The Interpretation of Pueblo Culture: A Question of Values. Southwestern Journal of Anthropology 2(4):361-374.

Bennison, Allan P. 1990 Geological Highway Map of the Southern Rocky Mountain Region. United States Geological Highway Map Series, Map Number 2. American Association of Petroleum Geologists and the United States Geological Survey, Tulsa.

Berman, David S. 1993 Lower Permian Vertebrate Localities of New Mexico and their Assemblages. New Mexico Museum of Natural History and Science Bulletin 2:11-21.

Bertram, Jack B. 1988 Pinabetal-Pinabetosa Uplands Cultural Resource Survey. USFS Report 1988-10- 108. On file at the Santa Fe National Forest Supervisor’s Office, Santa Fe.

Bice, Richard A. 1980 An Instrument Survey of Gallina Sites on Rattlesnake Ridge. In Collected Papers in Honor of Helen Greene Blumenshein. Papers of the Archaeological Society of New Mexico. 5:141-164. Albuquerque Archaeological Society Press.

Bijker, Wiebe E. and John Law 1992 Introduction. In Shaping Technology/Building Society: Studies in Sociotechnical Change. Edited by W.E. Bijker and J. Law, pp. 1-16. MIT Press, Cambridge.

Bijker, Wiebe, Thomas Hughes, and Trevor Pinch 1987 The Social Construction of Technological Systems: New Directions in the Sociology and History of Technology. MIT Press, Cambridge.

Billman, Brian R. 1997 Cannibalism in Cowboy Wash, Part 3: The Colorado Plateau in the Twelfth Century A.D. Paper presented at the 62nd annual meeting of the Society for American Archaeology. Nashville, Tennessee. 2008 An Outbreak of Violence and Raiding in the Central Mesa Verde Region in the 12th Century AD. In Social Violence in the Prehispanic American Southwest. Edited by D.L. Nichols and P.L. Crown, pp.41-69. University of Arizona Press, Tucson.

344

Bingler, Edward C. 1968 Geology and Mineral Resources of Rio Arriba County, New Mexico. State Bureau of Mines and Mineral Resources Bulletin 91. New Mexico Institute of Mining and Technology, Socorro.

Bishop, Ronald L., Robert L. Rands, and George R. Holley 1982 Ceramic Compositional Analysis in Archaeological Perspective. In Advances in Archeological Method and Theory, vol. 5, ed. M.B. Schiffer, pp.275-330. Academic Press, New York.

Black, Lois Jane and Luther W. Rook 1955 Report of Excavation Bg 88T. Manuscript on file, University of New Mexico, 19th Gallina Field Expedition. Maxwell Museum Archive Catalogue No. 2005.22.50

Blakey, Ron and Wayne Ranney 2008 Ancient Landscapes of the Colorado Plateau. Grand Canyon Association, Grand Canyon, Arizona.

Bleed, Peter 1986 The Optimal Design of Hunting Weapons: Maintainability or Reliability. American Antiquity 51(4):737-747. 2001 Artifice Constrained: What Determines Technological Choice? In Anthropological Perspectives on Technology, ed. M.B. Schiffer pp.151-162. University of New Mexico Press, Albuquerque.

Blinman, Eric 1993 Anasazi Pottery: Evolution of a Technology. Expedition 35(1):14-22.

Block, Jeanne 1983 Differential Premises Arising from Differential Socialization of the Sexes: Some Conjectures. Child Development 54:1335-1354.

Blumenthal, Ernst H., Jr. 1939 Unpublished field notes from the excavation of Nogales Cliff House. Copy on file at the Maxwell Museum of Anthropology, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque.

Bolton, Herbert E. 1936 Rim of Christendom: A Biography of Eusebio Francisco Kino. Macmillan, New York. 1949 Coronado, Knight of Pueblos and Plains. University of New Mexico Press, Albuquerque.

Bourdieu, Pierre 1977 Outline of a Theory of Practice. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. 1984 Distinction: A Social Critique of the Judgment of Taste. Harvard University Press,

345

Cambridge.

Bowdler, Sandra and Jenny Smith 1999 Indentifying Style in Australian Stone Artefacts: An Attempt to Provide a Theoretical Basis. Australian Archaeology 49:1-6.

Bowen, Thomas and Edward Moser 1968 Seri Pottery. Kiva 33:89-132.

Bower, Nathan W. 1986 Preliminary analysis of Rio Grande glazes of the Classic Period using scanning electron microscopy with X-ray fluorescence. Journal of Field Archaeology 13(3):307-315.

Boyd, Jennifer E. and Connie I. Constan n.d. Ceramics on Lower Virgin Mesa, Jemez Mountains, New Mexico. Cultural Resources Report 1999-10-028E, Ms on file at the Santa Fe National Forest Supervisor’s Office, Santa Fe.

Bozanic, Dan 1955 A Brief Discussion of the Subsurface Cretaceous Rocks of the San Juan Basin. In Guidebook to Geology of Parts of Paradox, Black Mesa, and San Juan Basins. Edited by J.C. Cooper, pp.89-107. Four Corners Geological Society, First Field Conference.

Bradley, William F. 1964 X-ray Diffraction Analysis of Soil Clays and Structures of Clay Minerals. In Soil Clay Mineralogy: A Symposium. Edited by C.I. Rich and G.W. Kunze, pp.113- 124. University of North Carolina Press, Chapel Hill.

Bradley, Richard 2000 An Archaeology of Natural Places. Routledge, London.

Bradley, Ronna J. and Jerry M. Hoffer 1985 Playas Red: a preliminary study of origins and variability in the Jornada Mogollon. Artifact 23(1-2):161-177.

Brailsford, Henry N. 1906 Macedonia: Its Races and Their Future. Private publication, London.

Brindley, George W. and Jacques Lemaitre 1987 Thermal, Oxidation and Reduction Reactions of Clay Minerals. In Chemistry of Clays and Clay Minerals, Edited by A.C.D. Newman, pp.319-370. John Wiley and Sons, New York.

346

Brody, Jerry J., and J.J. Lindsey 1955 Report on the Excavation at Bg 92. Manuscript on file, University of New Mexico, Summer Field Sessions, 1955. Maxwell Museum Archive Catalogue No. 2005.22.52

Brody, Jerry J., Catherine J. Scott, and Steven A. LeBlanc 1983 Mimbres Pottery: Ancient Art of the American Southwest. Hudson Hills Press, New York.

Bronitsky, Gordon 1986 The Use of Materials Science Techniques in the Study of Pottery Construction and Use. In Advances in Archeological Method and Theory, vol. 9, ed. M.B. Schiffer, pp.209-276. Academic Press, New York.

Broome, Patricia and Daniel E. Winner 1976 An Archeological Survey of the North Portion of the Rincon Colorado Timber Sale. USFS Report 1976-10-014. On file at the Santa Fe National Forest Supervisor’s Office, Santa Fe.

Browman, David L. 1976 Demographic Correlations of the Wari Conquest of Junin. American Antiquity 41(4):465-477.

Brown, Barnum 1910 The Cretaceous Ojo Alamo beds of New Mexico, with description of the new dinosaur Kritosaurus. American Museum of Natural History Bulletin 28:267-274.

Brown, Gary M. 1991 Archaeological Data Recovery at San Juan Coal Company’s La Plata Mine, San Juan County, NM. Prepared for San Juan Coal Company BHP-Utah International, Inc., vol.1-4

Brugge, David M. 1969 Pueblo Factionalism and External Relations. Ethnohistory 16(2):191-200.

Bubemyre, Trixi and Barbara J. Mills 1993 Clay Oxidation Analyses. In Across the Colorado Plateau: Anthropological Studies for the Transwestern Pipeline Expansion Project, Vol. XVI. Edited by B. Mills, C. Goetze, and M. Zedeno, pp.235-277. Office of Contract Archeology Report 185-461B, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque.

Bullard, William R., Jr. 1962 The Cerro Colorado Site and Pithouse Architecture in the Southwestern United States Prior to A.D. 900. Papers of the Peabody Museum of American Archaeology and Ethnology. XLIV:2. Harvard University, Cambridge.

347

Bullock, Peter, N. Federoff, A. Jongerius, G. Stoops, and T. Tursina 1985 Handbook for Soil Thin Section Description. Waine Research Publications, Wolverhampton, England.

Bullock, Peter Y. 1998 NM 537 – Tapicito Ridge: The Testing of Four Sites Southwest of Dulce, New Mexico. Archaeology Notes 189. Office of Archaeological Studies, Museum of New Mexico, Santa Fe.

Bunker, Cindy J. 1990 Archeology in the Largo-Gallina Region: The Last 70 Years. Paper presented at the 55th Annual Meeting of the Society for American Archaeology, Las Vegas.

Burgh, Robert F. 1934 The Far View Group of Ruins. Mesa Verde Notes 5(2):32-36.

Bussey, Stanley D. 1963 The Llaves Site: Salvage Excavations at LA 5859. Laboratory of Anthropology Note No. 23. Museum of New Mexico, Santa Fe.

Bustard, Wendy 2008 Chaco Horrificus? In Social Violence in the Prehispanic American Southwest. Edited by D.L. Nichols and P.L. Crown, pp.70-97. University of Arizona Press, Tucson.

Byrd, Adam 2010 Intervisibility Among Towers in the Gallina Area of Northern New Mexico. Paper presented at the 75th Annual Meeting of the Society for American Archaeology, St. Louis.

Capone, Patricia Hilton 1995 Mission Pueblo Ceramic Analyses: Implications for Protohistoric Interaction Networks and Cultural Dynamics. Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Anthropology, Harvard University, Cambridge.

Cardew, Michael 1969 Pioneer Pottery. St. Martin’s Press, New York.

Carlson, Roy L. 1964 Two Rosa Phase Pit Houses. Southwestern Lore 29(4):69-76.

Carpenter, Andrea J. 2000 Chapter 6: Petrographic Analysis. In Data Recovery Investigations of Sites LA 111059 and 111061 along NM 537, Jicarilla Apache Reservation. NMCRIS Activity 60787. SWCA Environmental Consultants, Albuquerque.

348

Cartledge, Thomas R. 1988 Gallina Culture Developments in North-Central New Mexico. National Register of Historic Places, Multiple Property Documentation Form on file, New Mexico Historic Preservation Division, Santa Fe.

Ceram, C.W. 1971 Towers of Silence. In The First American, pp. 272-278.

Chagnon, Napolean A. 1968 Yanomamo: The Fierce People. Holt, Rinehart, and Winston, New York.

Chambliss, Stacey K. 2003 Firelogic. Poster presented at the Society for American Archaeology 68th Annual Meeting, Milwaukee.

Chase, James E. 1976 Deviance in the Gallina: A Report on a Small Series of Gallina Human Skeleton Remains. Appendix in Archaeological Excavations in the Llaves Area Santa Fe National Forest, New Mexico 1972-1974. USDA Forest Service Southwestern Region Archaeological Report No. 13, Southwestern Regional Office, Albuquerque. 1978 North Central New Mexico Gallina: Analysis and Comparative Study of their Physical Remains. Master’s thesis. Colorado State University, Fort Collins.

Chevron Texaco Inc. n.d. SYBILLA: Computer Program for X-ray Structure Analysis of Interstratified Minerals. Proprietary Chevron Corporation.

Childe, V. Gordon 1956 Society and Knowledge. Allen and Unwin. London.

Childs, S. Terry 1991 Style, Technology, and Iron Smelting Furnaces in Bantu-Speaking Africa. Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 10:332-359.

Chilton, Elizabeth S. 1998 The Cultural Origins of Technical Choice: Unraveling Algonquin and Iroquoian Ceramic Traditions in the Northeast. In The Archaeology of Social Boundaries, Edited by M.T. Stark, pp.132-160. Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington DC.

Chisholm, Michael 1979 Rural Settlement and Land Use: An Essay in Location, third edition. Hutchinson and Company, London.

349

Christenson, Andrew L. 1982 Maximizing Clarity in Economic Terminology. American Antiquity 47(2):419- 426.

Chronic, Halka 1987 Roadside Geology of New Mexico. Mountain Press Publishing Company, Missoula.

Clark, Jeffery J., J. Brett Hill, and Patrick D. Lyons 2003 Precontact Population Decline and Coalescence in the Southern Southwest. Proposal for Award No. 0342661. National Science Foundation, Washington DC.

Clarke, David L. 1977 Spatial Information in Archaeology. Revista Mexicana de Estudios Anthropologicos 13:31-57.

Clay Minerals Society 2009 CMS Glossary for Clay Science. Clay Minerals Society Nomenclature Committee. Available at http://www.clays.org/GLOSSARY/GlossIntro.html

Cogswell, James, David Abbott, Elizabeth Miksa, Hector Neff, Robert Speakman, and Michael Glascock 2005 A Provenance Study of Hohokam Schist-Tempered Pottery and Raw Materials from the Middle Gila River Valley, Arizona: Techniques and Prospects. In Laser Ablation-ICP-MS in Archaeological Research, ed. R.J. Speakman and H. Neff, pp.105-115, University of New Mexico Press, Albuquerque.

Cohen, Lawrence E. and Marcus Felson 1979 Social Change and Crime Rate Trends: A Routine Activity Approach. American Sociological Review 44:588-608.

Colbert, Edwin H. 1974 The Triassic paleontology of Ghost Ranch. In Ghost Ranch: Central-Northern, New Mexico, edited by C.T. Siemers, pp.175-178. New Mexico Geological Society Guidebook, 25th Field Conference.

Cole, Sally J. 1984 Analysis of a San Juan (Basketmaker) Style Painted Mask in Grand Gulch, Utah. Southwestern Lore 50(1):1-6. 1985 Additional Information on Basketmaker Mask or Face Representations in Rock Art of Southeastern Utah. Southwestern Lore 51(1):14-18. 1989 Iconography and Symbolism in Basketmaker Rock Art. In Rock Art of the Western Canyons. Edited by J.S. Day, P.D. Friedman, and M.J. Tate, pp.85 Colorado Archaeological Society Memoir 3. 1990 Legacy on Stone: Rock Art of the Colorado Plateau and Four Corners Region. Johnson, Boulder.

350

Collier, Arthur J. 1919 Coal South of Mancos, Montezuma County, Colorado. U.S. Geological Survey Bulletin, No. 691-K. United States Government Printing Office, Washington DC.

Colton, Harold S. 1965 Check List of Southwestern Pottery Types. Museum of Northern Arizona Ceramic Series No. 2, Revised. Northern Arizona Society of Science and Art, Flagstaff.

Colton, Ray C. 1959 The Civil War in the Western Territories. University of Oklahoma Press, Norman.

Condie, Kent C. and A.B. Blaxland 1970 Sources of Obsidian in Hogup and Danger Caves. In Hogup Cave, by M. Aikens, University of Utah Anthropological Papers No.93. University of Utah Press, Salt Lake City.

Constan, Connie 2005 X-Ray Diffraction Class Project. Spring Semester, Department of Earth and Planetary Sciences, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque. Ms in possession of author. 2006 Field notes and observations from Gallina Clay Project survey. 2010 Pointed Bottom Pots and Other Gallina Ceramic Quandaries. Paper presented at the 75th Anniversary Meeting of the Society for American Archaeology, St. Louis, Missouri.

Constan, Connie and Marilyn Riggs 2007 San Pedro Parks Continental Divide Trail: Los Pinos, Vacas, and Penas Negras Sections. USFS Report 2008-10-011. On file at the Santa Fe National Forest Supervisor’s Office, Santa Fe.

Cope, Edward D. 1879 Report on the Remains of Population Observed in Northwestern New Mexico. United States Geographical Survey West of the 100th Meridian Vol. III, VII Archaeology. Engineers Department of the United States Army, Washington DC.

Cordell, Linda S. 1978 A Cultural Resources Overview of the Middle Rio Grande Valley, New Mexico. USDA Forest Service Southwestern Region and New Mexico State Bureau of Land Management. Southwestern Regional Office, Albuquerque.

Cordell, Linda S. 1989 Warfare: Some Issues from the Prehistoric Southwest. In Cultures in Conflict: Current Anthropological Perspectives, edited by D.C. Tkaczuk and B.C. Vivian, pp.173-174. Archaeological Association of the University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada.

351

1997 Archaeology of the Southwest. Second edition. Academic Press, Orlando, Florida.

Cortes, Luis L. 1958 Alfarería femenina en Moveros (Zamora). Zephyrus 9:95-107.

Coser, Lewis A. 1956 The Functions of Social Conflict. Free Press of Glencoe, New York.

Cosgrove, Harriet S. and Cornelius B. Cosgrove 1932 The Swarts Ruin: A Typical Mimbres Site in Southwestern New Mexico. Papers of the Peabody Museum of American Archaeology and Ethnology, vol. 15, no. 1. Cambridge.

Costin, Cathy L. 1991 Craft Specialization: Issues in Defining, Documenting, and Explaining the Organization of Production. In Archaeological Method and Theory, vol. 3, Edited by M.B. Schiffer, pp.1-56. University of Arizona Press, Tucson. 2001 Craft Production Systems. In Archaeology at the Millennium: A Sourcebook, edited by G. M. Feinman and T. D. Price, pp. 273–327. Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishers, New York.

Courlander, Harold 1982 The Destruction of Awatovi. In Hopi Voices: Recollections, Traditions, and Narratives of the Hopi Indians. Edited by H. Courlander, pp.55-60. University of New Mexico Press, Albuquerque.

Craig, Lawrence C., C.N. Holmes, Robert A. Cadigan, Val L. Freeman, Thomas E. Mullens, and Gordon W. Weir 1955 Stratigraphy of the Morrison and related formations, Colorado Plateau region, a preliminary report. U.S. Geological Survey Bulletin 1009-E:125-168.

Cross, Charles W. and Ernest Howe 1905 Red beds of southwestern Colorado and their correlations. Geological Society of America Bulletin 16:447-498.

Cross, Charles W., Arthur C. Spencer, and Chester W. Purington 1899 Description of the La Plata quadrangle [Colorado]. U.S. Geological Survey Geological Atlas, Folio 60.

Crotty, Helen Koefoed 1995 Anasazi Mural Art of the Pueblo IV Period, A.D. 1300-1600: Influences, Selective Adaptation, and Cultural Diversity in the Prehistoric Southwest. Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Art History. University of California, Los Angeles. 2001 Shields, Shield Bearers, and Warfare Imagery in Anasazi Art, 1200-1500. In Deadly Landscapes: Case Studies in Prehistoric Southwestern Warfare. Edited by G.E. Rice and S.A. LeBlanc, pp.65-83. University of Utah Press, Salt Lake City.

352

Crouse, David L. 1985 Structure and Stratigraphy of Part of the French Mesa Quadrangle, Rio Arriba County, New Mexico. Master’s thesis, Department of Geology, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque.

Crown, Patricia L. 1980 Understanding Variability in the Utility Wares in the Upper Little Colorado Region. 45th Annual Meeting, Society for American Archaeology, Philadelphia. 1983 An X-Ray Fluorescence Analysis of Hohokam Ceramics, In Hohokam Archaeology Along the Salt-Gila Aqueduct Central Arizona Project, Volume VIII, Material Culture, eds. L.S. Teague & P.L. Crown, pp. 277-310. Archaeological Series No. 150, Arizona State Museum, Tucson. 1987 Water Storage in the Prehistoric Southwest. Kiva 52:209-228. 1994 Ceramics and Ideology: Salado Polychrome Pottery. University of New Mexico Press, Albuquerque. 1995 The Production of the Salado Polychromes in the American Southwest. In Ceramic Production in the American Southwest, Edited by B.J. Mills and P.L. Crown, pp.143-166. University of Arizona Press, Tucson. 2000 Women’s Role in Changing Cuisine. In Women and Men in the Prehispanic Southwest. Edited by P.L. Crown, pp.221-266. School of American Research Press, Santa Fe. 2001 Learning to Make Pottery in the Prehispanic American Southwest. Journal of Anthropological Research 57(4):451-469.

Crown, Patricia L. and Ronald L. Bishop 1987 Convergence in Ceramic Manufacturing Traditions in the Late Prehistoric Southwest. Paper presented at the 52nd Annual Meeting of the Society for American Archaeology, Toronto, Canada.

Crown, Patricia L., Janet D. Orcutt, and Timothy A. Kohler 1996 Pueblo Cultures in Transition: The Northern Rio Grande. In The Prehistoric Pueblo World, AD 1150-1350, Edited by M.A. Adler, pp. 188-204. University of Arizona Press, Tucson.

Cushing, Frank Hamilton 1896 The Mythic World of the Zuni. Reprint 1988, University of New Mexico Press, Albuquerque. 1923 Origin Myth from Oraibi. American Journal of Folklore 36(140):163-170.

Dane, Carle H. 1946 Stratigraphic relations of Eocene, Paleocene, and latest Cretaceous formations of eastern side of San Juan Basin, New Mexico. U.S. Geological Survey Oil and Gas Inventory, Preliminary Chart 24.

Darling, Andrew 1999 Mass Inhumation and Execution of Witches in the American Southwest.

353

American Anthropologist 100:732-752.

Darvill, Timothy 2002 The Concise Oxford Dictionary of Archaeology. Oxford University Press, Oxford.

Davidson, Hugh 1978 Gallina Culture Pit Houses Compared Numerically with Surface Houses and Population Estimates. In Preliminary Report on the 1976-1977 Excavations on Huerfano Mesa and the Hacha Ridge, Cuba Ranger District, Llaves Region. USFS 1978-10-006. On file at the Santa Fe National Forest Supervisor’s Office, Santa Fe.

Davis, Carolyn O’Bagy 1995 Treasure Earth: Hattie Cosgrove’s Mimbres Archaeology in the American Southwest. Sanpete Publications and Old Pueblo Archaeology Center, Tucson.

Dean, Jeffrey S. 1996a Demography, Environment, and Subsistence Stress. In Evolving Complexity and Environmental Risk in the Prehistoric Southwest. Edited by J. Tainter and B.B. Tainter, pp.25-56. Santa Fe Institute Studies in Scientific Complexity 24. Addison-Wesley, Reading, Massachusetts. 1996b Kayenta Anasazi Settlement Transformations in Northeastern Arizona: A.D. 1150-1350. In The Prehistoric Pueblo World, A.D. 1150-1350. Edited by M.A. Adler, pp.29-47. University of Arizona Press, Tucson.

DeAtley, Susanne P. and William G. Melson 1986 Evaluating Prehistoric Ceramic Clays. Society for Archaeological Sciences 9(3):3-7.

DeBoer, Warren R. 1985 Pots and Pans Do Not Speak, nor Do They Lie: The Case for Occasional Reductionism. In Decoding Prehistoric Ceramics, edited by B. A. Nelson, pp. 347-357. Southern Illinois University Press, Carbondale. 1990 Interaction, Imitation, and Communication as Expressed in Style: The Ucayali Experience. In The Use of Style in Archaeology. Edited by M.W. Conkey and C.A. Hastorf, pp.82-104. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

DeBoer, Warren R. and Donald W. Lathrap 1979 The making and breaking of Shipibo-Conibo ceramics. In Ethnoarchaeology: Implications of ethnography for archaeology, ed. C. Kramer, pp. 102-138. Columbia University Press, New York.

Deutchman, Haree L. 1980 Chemical Evidence of Ceramic Exchange on Black Mesa, In Models and Methods in Regional Exchange, ed. R.E. Fry, pp. 119-133. Society for American

354

Archaeology Paper No. 1. Washington DC.

Diaz, May N. 1966 Tonala: Conservatism, responsibility, and authority in a Mexican town. University of California Press, Berkeley.

Dick, Herbert W. 1975 Preliminary Report of 1975 Excavations on Huerfano Mesa in the Llaves Area. USFS Report 1975-10-012. On file at the Santa Fe National Forest Supervisor’s Office, Santa Fe. 1976 Archaeological Excavations in the Llaves Area, Santa Fe National Forest, New Mexico, 1972-1974, Part I - Architecture. USDA Forest Service Southwestern Region Archaeological Report No. 13. Southwestern Regional Office, Albuquerque. 1978 Preliminary Report on the 1976-1977 Excavations on Huerfano Mesa and the Hacha Ridge, Cuba Ranger District, Llaves Region. USFS 1978-10-006. On file at the Santa Fe National Forest Supervisor’s Office, Santa Fe. 1980 Cohesive and Dispersive Configurations in Settlement Patterns of the Northern Anasazi: A Hypothesis. In Collected Papers in Honor of Helen Green Blumenshein, ed. A.H. Schroeder, pp. 57-82. Papers of the Archaeological Society of New Mexico vol. 5. Albuquerque. 1981 Boot Jack Timber Sale Cultural Resources Inventory. USFS Report 1981-10- 100A. On file at the Santa Fe National Forest Supervisor’s Office, Santa Fe. 1988 Anatomy of a Dispersive Gallina Village. In Reflections: Papers on Southwestern Culture History in Honor of Charles H. Lange, ed. A. Van Arsdal Poore, pp. 231- 237. Papers of the Archaeological Society of New Mexico vol. 14. Albuquerque.

Dick, Herbert W. and Hugh Davidson 1985 Comparison of Feature Measurements of Pit Houses and Surface Houses of the Gallina Phase of the Anasazi Culture in North Central New Mexico and the Population Estimates of a Village. In Southwestern Culture History: Collected Papers in Honor of Albert H. Schroeder. Edited by C.H. Lange., pp. 31-42. Papers of the Archaeological Society of New Mexico vol. 10. Albuquerque.

Dietler, Michael and Ingrid Herbich 1989 River-lake Nilotic: Luo. In Kenyan Pots and Potters, Edited by J. Barbour and S. Wandibba, pp.27-40. Oxford University Press, Nairobi. 1994 Ceramics and Ethnic Identity: Ethnoarchaeological Observations on the Distribution of Pottery Styles and the Relationship between the Social Contexts of Production and Consumption. In Terre cuite et société. La Céramique, document technique, économique, culturel. Edited by F. Audouze and D. Binder, pp.459- 472. APDCA, Juan-les-Pins. 1998 Habitus, Techniques, Style: An Integrated Approach to the Social Understanding of Material Culture and Boundaries. In The Archaeology of Social Boundaries, Edited by M.T. Stark, pp.232-263. Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington DC.

355

DiPeso, Charles C. 1974 Casas Grandes: A Fallen Trading Center of the Gran Chichimeca. Amerind Foundation Publications No. 9. Northland Press, Flagstaff.

Dittert, Alfred E., Jr. 1958 Preliminary Archaeological Investigations in the Navajo Project Area of Northwestern New Mexico. Navajo Project Studies Part I, Museum of the New Mexico Papers in Anthropology No. 1, Santa Fe.

Dittert, Alfred E., Jr. and Fred Plog 1980 Generations in Clay: Pueblo Pottery of the American Southwest. Northland Publishing, Flagstaff, Arizona.

Dobbs, Henry R.C. 1897 The Pottery and Glass Industries of the North-west Provinces and Oudh. Journal of Indian Art and Industry 57:1-6.

Dobres, Marcia-Anne 1995 Gender and Prehistoric Technology: On the Social Agency of Technical Strategies. World Archaeology 27(1):25-49. 1999 Technology’s Links and Chaînes: The Processual Unfolding of Technique and Technician. In The Social Dynamics of Technology: Practice, Politics, and World Views. ed. M.A. Dobres & C.R. Hoffman, pp.124-146. Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington DC.

Dobres, Marcia-Anne and Christopher R. Hoffman 1994 Social Agency and the Dynamics of Prehistoric Technology. Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory 1(3):211-258. 1999 Introduction: A Context for the Present and Future of Technology Studies. In The Social Dynamics of Technology: Practice, Politics, and World Views. ed. M.A. Dobres & C.R. Hoffman, pp.1-19. Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington DC.

Dodd, Arthur E. 1964 Dictionary of Ceramics. George Newnes Limited, London.

Dodge, Andrea Ellis 1990 Towers of the Gallina Area and Greater Southwest. Paper presented at the 55th Annual Meeting of the Society for American Archaeology, Las Vegas.

Dongoske, Kurt E., Debra L. Martin, and T. J. (Thomas John) Ferguson 2000 Critique of the Claim of Cannibalism at Cowboy Wash. American Antiquity 65(1):179-190.

Douglass, Amy A. and David M. Schaller 1993 Sourcing Little Colorado White Ware: A Regional Approach to the Compositional Analysis of Prehistoric Ceramics. Geoarchaeology 8(3):177-201.

356

Douglass, William Boone 1917a The Land of the Small House People. El Palacio 4(2):2-23. 1917b The Shrines of the Small House People. El Palacio 4(3):18-29.

Doxiadis, Constantinos A. 1970 Ekistics, the Science of Human Settlements. Science 170:393-404.

Dozier, Edward P. 1954 The Hopi-Tewa of Arizona. University of California Publications in American Archaeology and Ethnology 44(3):259-376. Berkeley. 1970 Pueblo Indians of North America. Holt, Rinehart, and Winston, New York.

Drennan, Robert D. 1984 Long-Distant Transport Costs in Pre-Hispanic Mesoamerica. American Anthropologist 86:105-112.

Dulaney, Alan R. 1986 Petrographic analysis of archaeological potsherds from the Tucson Aqueduct Project, Pinal County, Arizona. Geological Society of America Abstracts with Programs 18:589.

Dunagan, Stan P. and Christine E. Turner 2004 Regional Paleohydrologic and Paleoclimatic Settings of Wetland/Lacustrine Depositional Systems in the Morrison Formation (Upper Jurassic), Western Interior, USA. Sedimentary Geology 167:271-298.

Durand, Stephen R. 2002 Research Design for the Mesa Portales Archaeological Project: Summer 2002 Archaeological Field School. Manuscript on file at the Bureau of Land Management, Albuquerque. 2003 Mesa Portales Archaeological Project Research Design, 2003-2004. Manuscript on file at the Bureau of Land Management, Albuquerque. 2005 Research Design: Mesa Portales Archaeological Project – Summer 2005. Manuscript on file at the Bureau of Land Management, Albuquerque, NM.

Dutton, Bertha P. 1963 Sun Father’s Way: The Kiva Murals of Kuaua, a Pueblo Ruin, Coronado State Monument. University of New Mexico Press, Albuquerque.

Dyer, Jennifer Boyd 2008 Middle Rio Grande Ceramic Reference Manual Volume 1. Bureau of Reclamation, Albuquerque, New Mexico.

Eddy, Frank W. 1966 Prehistory in the Navajo Reservoir District Northwestern New Mexico. Papers in

357

Anthropology No. 15, Part II. Museum of New Mexico Press, Santa Fe.

Eldridge, George H. 1896 Geology of the Denver Basin in Colorado: Mesozoic geology. U.S. Geological Survey Monograph 27. United States Government Printing Office, Washington DC.

Eller, Jack David 2006 Violence and Culture: A Cross-Cultural and Interdisciplinary Approach. Thomson Wadsworth, Belmont, California.

Elliott, Michael L. 1983 The Bootjack Timber Sale Cultural Resources Inventory Part 3. USFS Report 1981-10-100C. On file at the Santa Fe National Forest Supervisor’s Office, Santa Fe. 1998 Coalition Period Adaptations in the Jemez Region: Origins of the Jemez Phenomenon. Paper presented at the 63rd Annual Meeting of the Society for American Archaeology, Seattle.

Elliott, Michael L. and Landon D. Smith 1985 Gallina Settlement Patterns: A Test of a “Predictive Model”. Cultural Resources Report No. 1981-10-100I. Manuscript on file at the Santa Fe National Forest Supervisor’s Office, Santa Fe.

Ellis, Albert 1958 Rational Psychotherapy. Journal of General Psychology 59:35-49. 1976 The Biological Basis of Human Irrationality. Journal of Individual Psychology 32:145-168.

Ellis, Andrea 1991 Towers of the Gallina Area and Greater Southwest. In Puebloan Past and Present, Papers in Honor of Stewart Peckham, ed. M.S. Duran & D.T. Kirkpatrick, pp. 57-70. Papers of the Archaeological Society of New Mexico vol. 17. Albuquerque.

Ellis, Florence Hawley 1951 Patterns of Aggression and the War Cult in Southwestern Pueblos. Southwestern Journal of Anthropology 7(2):177-201. 1956 Anthropological Evidence Supporting the Land Claim of the Pueblos of Zia, Santa Ana, and Jemez. Report prepared for the Indian Land Claims Commission, Washington DC. 1967 Use and Significance of the Tchamahia. El Palacio 74(1):35-43. 1976 Preliminary Report on Excavations and Studies at Rattlesnake Point, 1976 by Ghost Ranch. Cultural Resources Report No. 1976-10-021. Manuscript on file at Santa Fe National Forest Supervisor’s Office, Santa Fe.

358

1977 Required Data Regarding Excavations of Ghost Ranch Archaeological Group at the Butts Site. Manuscript on file at the Ghost Ranch Museum. 1978 Small Structures Used by Historic Pueblo Peoples and Their Immediate Predecessors. In Limited Activity and Occupation Sites. Edited by A.E. Ward, ed. pp. 59–68. Contributions to Anthropological Studies 1. Center for Anthropological Studies, Albuquerque. 1988 From Drought to Drought: An Archaeological Record of Life Patterns as Developed by the Gallina Indians of North Central New Mexico (A.D. 1050 to 1300). Volume I: Canjilon Mountain Hunting and Gathering Sites. Sunstone Press, Santa Fe. 1991 A Gallina Kiva? In Puebloan Past and Present, Papers in Honor of Stewart Peckham, ed. M.S. Duran & D.T. Kirkpatrick, pp. 71-73. Papers of the Archaeological Society of New Mexico vol. 17. Albuquerque.

Ellis, Florence Hawley and Andrea Ellis Dodge 1987 The Early Water Works of Three Jemez Valley Pueblos: Jemez, Zia, Santa Ana. Report prepared for U.S. Attorney’s Office, District of New Mexico, Albuquerque. 1990 Some Distinctive Traits of the Largo-Gallina Culture in the Rattlesnake Ridge Area. Paper presented at the 55th Annual Meeting of the Society for American Archaeology, Las Vegas.

Ellis, Florence H. and Andrea Ellis n.d. From Drought to Drought. Volume II: The Lowland Home Sites, Butts and Other Villages. In preparation. [Cited in Ellis 1991]

Elmore, Francis H. 1938 Food Animals of the Navajo. El Palacio 44:149-154. 1943 Ethnobotany of the Navajo. The University of New Mexico Bulletin, Monograph Series, vol. 1, no. 7. University of New Mexico Press, Albuquerque. 1976 Shrubs and Trees of the Southwest Uplands. Southwest Parks and Monuments Association, Tucson.

Elyea, Janette M. 1994 The Jones Canyon Survey. Office of Contract Archeology, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque. 2003 The Jones Canyon Continental Divide Scenic Trail. OCA Report 185-730. Office of Contract Archaeology, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque. 2004 Across Mesa Portales: An Intensive Cultural Resources Survey of a Portion of the Continental Divide Trail, Sandoval County, New Mexico. OCA Report 185-852. Office of Contract Archaeology, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque.

Ember, Carol R. and Melvin Ember 1992 Resource Unpredictability, Mistrust, and War: A Cross-Cultural Study. Journal of Conflict Resolution 36(2):242-262.

359

Euler, Robert C., George J. Gumerman, Thor N.V. Karlstrom, Jeffery S. Dean, and Richard H. Hevly 1979 The Colorado Plateau: Cultural Dynamics and Paleoenvironment. Science 205(4411):1089-1101.

Eygun, Guilmine 2001 Clays and Early Neolithic Potters. In Archaeology and Clays, ed. I.C. Druc, pp. 55-64. BAR International Series 942, Oxford, England.

Ezell, Paul H. and Alan P. Olson 1955 An Artifact of Human Bone from Eastern Arizona. Plateau 27(3):8-11.

Farmer, James D. 1997 Iconographic Evidence of Basketmaker Warfare and Human Sacrifice: A Contextual Approach to Early Anasazi Art. Kiva 62(4):391-420.

Farmer, Malcolm F. 1957 A Suggested Typology of Defensive Systems of the Southwest. Southwestern Journal of Anthropology 13:249-266.

Fassett, James E. 1966 Geologic Map of the Mesa Portales Quadrangle, Sandoval County, New Mexico. US Geological Survey, Geologic Quadrangle Map GQ-590. 1974 Cretaceous and Tertiary Rocks of the Eastern San Juan Basin, New Mexico and Colorado. In Ghost Ranch: Central-Northern, New Mexico, edited by C.T. Siemers, pp.225-230. New Mexico Geological Society Guidebook, 25th Field Conference. 1977 Geology of the Point Lookout, Cliff House, and Pictured Cliffs Sandstones of the San Juan Basin, New Mexico and Colorado. In San Juan Basin III, Edited by J.E. Fassett, H.L. James, and H.E. Hodgson, pp.193-198. New Mexico Geological Society Guide Book, 28th Field Conference. 2010 Stratigraphic Nomenclature of Rock Strata Adjacent to the Cretaceous-Tertiary Interface in the San Juan Basin. In Geology of the Four Corners Country, Edited by J.E. Fassett, K.E. Zeigler, and V.W. Leuth, pp.113-124. New Mexico Geological Society Guidebook, 61st Field Conference.

Fassett, James E. and Jim S. Hinds 1971 Geology and fuel resources of the Fruitland Formation and Kirtland Shale of the San Juan Basin, New Mexico and Colorado. U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 676. United States Government Printing Office, Washington DC.

Fassett, James E., Russell W. Jentgen, Bruce A. Black, Cornelius M. Molenaar, Lee A. Woodward 1977 Second Day: Red Mountain Oil Field to El Vado Lake via Pueblo Pintado, Star Lake, Torreon, Cuba and Llaves. In San Juan Basin III, editors J.E. Fassett, H.L. James, H.E. Hodgson, p.19-38. New Mexico Geological Society Guidebook, 28th

360

Field Conference.

Fassett, James E., William A. Cobban, and John D. Obradovich 1997 Biostratigraphic and Isotopic Age of the Huerfanito Bentonite Bed of the Upper Cretaceous Lewis Shale at an Outcrop near Regina, New Mexico. In Mesozoic Geology and Paleontology of the Four Corners Region, Edited by O.J. Anderson, B.S. Kues, SG. Lucas, pp.229-232. New Mexico Geological Society Guidebook, 48th Field Conference.

Federal Register 2006 Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants: Determination that Designation of Critical Habitat is not Prudent for the Jaguar. Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service. Federal Register Vol. 71, No 133 pp.39335-39337. Docid: fr12jy06-87

Felson, Richard B. 1997 Routine Activities and Involvement in Violence as Actor, Witness, or Target. Violence and Victims 12(3):209-221.

Fenneman, Nevin M. 1931 Physiography of the Western United States. McGraw-Hill Book Company, New York.

Ferguson, T.J. (Thomas John) and E. Richard Hart 1985 A Zuni Atlas. University of Oklahoma Press, Norman.

Ferriman, Colin 2005 2005 Field School Review. Manuscript on file, Department of Anthropology and Applied Archaeology, Eastern New Mexico University, Portales.

Fewkes, Jesse Walter 1893 A-Wa-To-Bi: An Archaeological Verification of a Tusayan Legend. American Anthropologist 6:363-375. 1919 Prehistoric Villages, Castles, and Towers of Southwestern Colorado. Bureau of American Ethnology Bulletin 70. Government Printing Office, Washington DC. 1921 Field Work on the Mesa Verde National Park (1920). Smithsonian Institution, Miscellaneous Collections, Vol. 72, No. 6, pp. 75-94. Washington, D. C.

Fiero, Kathleen 1978 Archeological Investigations at LA 11850: A Gallina Phase Village on the Continental Divide, Rio Arriba County, New Mexico. Laboratory of Anthropology Notes Series No. 111f. Museum of New Mexico, Santa Fe.

Fiori, Cesare., Daniele Vitali, Erica Camurri, Bruno Fabbri, and Sabrina Gualtieri 2010 Archaeometrical Study of Celtic Ceramics from Monte Bibele (Bologna, Italy). Applied Clay Science dio:10.1016/j.clay.2010.11.008

361

Fish, Paul R. and Susanne K. Fish 1989 Hohokam Warfare from a Regional Perspective. In Cultures in Conflict: Current Anthropological Perspectives, edited by D.C. Tkaczuk and B.C. Vivian, pp.112- 129. Archaeological Association of the University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada.

Fish, Paul R., Suzanne K. Fish, George J. Gumerman, and J. Jefferson Reid 1994 Toward an Explanation for Southwestern “Abandonments.” In Themes in Southwest Prehistory. Edited by G.J. Gumerman, pp.135-163. School of American Research Press, Santa Fe.

Fitzhugh, Ben 2001 Risk and Invention in Human Technological Evolution. Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 20(2):125-167.

FitzPatrick, E.A. 1993 Soil Microscopy and Micromorphology. John Wiley and Sons, New York.

Flesch, Gary A. 1975 Stratigraphy, sedimentology, and environments of the Morrison (Upper Jurassic) Formation, Ojito Spring quadrangle, Sandoval County, New Mexico. Master’s thesis, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque.

Folk, Robert L. 1968 Petrology of Sedimentary Rocks. Hemphill Publishing Company, Austin.

Fontana, Bernard L., William J. Robinson, Charles W. Cormack, and Ernest E. Leavitt Jr. 1962 Papago Indian Pottery. American Ethnological Society, Monograph 37. University of Washington Press, Seattle.

Ford, Richard I., Albert H. Schroeder, and Stewart L. Peckham 1972 Three Perspectives on Puebloan Prehistory. In New Perspectives on the Pueblos. edited by A. Ortiz, pp. 19-39. School of American Research Book. University of New Mexico Press, Albuquerque.

Foster, George M. 1948 Empire’s children: The people of Tzintzuntzan. Institute of Social Anthropology Publication no. 6. Smithsonian Institute, Washington D.C. 1967 Tzintzuntzan: Mexican peasants in a changing world. Little, Brown Publishers, Boston.

Fowles, Severin M., Leah Minc, Samuel Duwe, and David V. Hill 2007 Clay, Conflict, and Village Aggregation: Compositional Analyses of Pre-Classic Pottery from Taos, New Mexico. American Antiquity 72(1):125-152.

362

Friederici, Georg 1907 Scalping in America. Annual Report of the Smithsonian Institution for 1906, pp.423-430. Washington DC.

Friedman, Milton 1953 Essays in Positive Economics. University of Chicago Press, Chicago.

Gallenkamp, Charles B. 1953 New Mexico’s Vanished Tower Dwellers. Natural History Magazine 62(7):312- 319.

Gardner, James H. 1910 The Puerco and Torrejon Formations of the Nacimiento Group. Journal of Geology 18:702-741.

Garrett, Elizabeth M. 1979 A Petrographic Analysis of Black Mesa Ceramics. Manuscript on file. Western Michigan University, Kalamazoo.

Gerald, Rex E. 1990 Report on U.T. El Paso Mini-Grant to Investigate Prehistoric Fortifications in a Primitive Sate in the Casas Grandes Area of Chihuahua. The Artifact 28(3):59-64.

Giddens, Anthony 1984 Constitution of Society: Outline of the Theory of Structuration. University of California Press, Berkeley.

Gilluly, James and John B. Reeside Jr. 1926 U.S. Geological Survey Press Bulletin, No. 6064, March 30.

Gilmore, Charles W. 1919 Reptilian faunas of the Torrejon, Puerco, and underlying Upper Cretaceous formations of San Juan County, New Mexico. U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 119. United States Government Printing Office, Washington DC.

Gladwin, Nora 1937 Petrography of Snaketown Pottery. In Excavations at Snaketown: Material Culture, eds. H.S. Gladwin, E.W. Haury, E.B. Sayles, & N. Gladwin, pp. 230- 233. Medallion Paper No. 25, Gila Pueblo, Globe, Arizona.

Gladwin, Harold S. 1945 The Chaco Branch, Excavations at White Mound in the Red Mesa Valley. Medallion Papers No. 33. Gila Pueblo, Globe.

363

Glennie, Gilbert D. 1983 Replication of an A.D. 800 Anasazi Pithouse in Southwestern Colorado. Master’s thesis, Washington State University, Pullman.

Glennie, Gilbert D. and William D. Lipe 1984 Replication of an Early Anasazi Pithouse. Paper presented at the 49th Annual Meeting of the Society for American Archaeology, Portland, Oregon.

Glowacki, Donna M. 2006 The Social Landscape of Depopulation: The Northern San Juan, A.D. 1150-1300. Ph.D. dissertation, Arizona State University, Tempe.

Glowacki, Donna A., Hector Neff, and Michal D. Glascock 1998 An Initial Assessment of the Production and Movement of Thirteenth Century Ceramic Vessels in the Mesa Verde Region. Kiva 63(3):217-240.

Goldfrank, Esther S. 1945 Socialization, Personality, and the Structure of Pueblo Society. American Anthropologist 47:516-539.

Gomolak, Andrew R. 1987 Archaeological Monitoring #CR87-2 of the Construction of Benson Montin Greer Pipeline to Canada Ojitos Unit B-18. Jicarilla Archaeological Services Report #CR87-2. On file at the Santa Fe National Forest Supervisor’s Office under report 1986-10-124B. 1988 Report of Radiocarbon Dating Analysis for LA 58942. Part of USFS Report 1986- 10-124D. On file at the Santa Fe National Forest Supervisor’s Office, Santa Fe. 1990 Lift Up Thine Eyes unto the Hills: What We Think We Know vs. What We Have to Learn. Paper presented at the 55th Annual Meeting of the Society for American Archaeology, Las Vegas.

Gomolak, Andrew R. and Terry L. Knight 1987 Mitigation Proposal #87-3 for Affects of Benson Montin Greer Pipeline Construction at Sites LA 58942/LA 58943. Jicarilla Archaeological Services Report #CR87-3. On file at the Santa Fe National Forest Supervisor’s Office under report 1986-10-124C. 1988 Report of Radiocarbon Date for LA 58942. Part of USFS Report 1986-10-124D. On file at the Santa Fe National Forest Supervisor’s Office, Santa Fe.

Gonzales-Peterson, Ada, Kerry M. Kramer, Gloria Edwards, and David Hill 1997 Oral History of the Old Coyote Ranger Station and Determination of National Register Eligibility, Coyote, New Mexico. Manuscript on file, Santa Fe National Forest Supervisor’s Office, Santa Fe.

Goodby, Robert G. 1998 Technological Patterning and Social Boundaries: Ceramic Variability in Southern

364

New England A.D. 1000-1675. In The Archaeology of Social Boundaries, Edited by M.T. Stark, pp.161-182. Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington DC.

Gosselain, Olivier P. 1998 Social and Technical Identity in a Clay Crystal Ball. In The Archaeology of Social Boundaries, Edited by M.T. Stark, pp.78-106. Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington DC. 2008 Thoughts and Adjustments in the Potter’s Backyard. In Breaking the Mould: Challenging the Past Through Pottery. BAR International Series 1861, Prehistoric Ceramics Research Group Occasional Paper 6. Edited by I. Berg, pp.67-79. Archaeopress, Oxford.

Gosselain, Olivier P. and Alexandre Livingstone Smith 2005 The Source: Clay Selection and Processing Practices in Sub-Saharan Africa. In Pottery Manufacturing Processes: Reconstruction and Interpretation. BAR International Series 1349. Edited by A. Livingstone Smith, D. Bosquet, and R. Martineau, pp.33-47. Archaeopress, Oxford.

Govoroff, Nicolas C. 1993 The Hunter and His Gun in Haute-Provence. In Technological Choices: Transformation in Material Cultures Since the Neolithic. Edited by P. Lemonnier, pp.227-237. Routledge, New York.

Grant, Keith and Donald E. Owen 1974 The Dakota Sandstone (Cretaceous) of the southern part of the Chama Basin, New Mexico —A preliminary report on its stratigraphy, paleontology, and sedimentology. In Ghost Ranch: Central-Northern, New Mexico, Edited by C.T. Siemers, pp.239-249. New Mexico Geological Society Guidebook, 25th Field Conference.

Grant, M.R. 1999 The Sourcing of Southern African Tin Artefacts. Journal of Archaeological Science 26(8):1111-1117.

Green, Morris W. and Charles T. Pierson 1977 A summary of the stratigraphy and depositional environments of Jurassic and related rocks in the San Juan Basin, Arizona, Colorado, and New Mexico. New Mexico Geological Society Guidebook, 28th Field Conference, p.147-152.

Green, Roger C. 1956 A Pit House of the Gallina Phase. American Antiquity 22(2):188-193. 1957 Summary of Hibben’s work at Nogales Cliff House. Gallina Archives, Maxwell Museum Catalogue No. 2005.22.47 1962 The Hormigas Site of the Largo-Gallina Phase. El Palacio 69(3):142-147. 1964 The Carricito Community. El Palacio 71(2):27-39.

365

Green, Roger C., Maryanne Atherton Danfelser, and R. Gwinn Vivian 1958 Interpretation of Bg 91: A Specialized Largo-Gallina Surface Structure. El Palacio 65(2)42-61.

Gregory, Herbert E. 1916 The Navajo Country: A geographic and geologic reconnaissance of southeastern Utah. U.S. Geological Survey Water Supply Paper 380.

Grim, Ralph E. 1968 Ceramic Mineralogy. Second Edition. McGraw-Hill, New York.

Guernsey, Samuel James and Alfred Vincent Kidder 1921 Basket-Maker Caves of Northeastern Arizona: Report on the Explorations, 1916- 1917. Papers of the Peabody Museum of American Archaeology and Ethnology, Vol. 8, No. 2. Cambridge.

Guthe, Carl E. 1925 Pueblo Pottery Making: A Study at the Village of San Ildefonso. Papers of the Southwestern Expedition No. 2. Yale University Press, New Haven.

Haas, Jonathan and Winifred Creamer 1985 Warfare and Tribalization in the Prehistoric Southwest. School of American Research, Santa Fe. 1993 Stress and Warfare among the Kayenta Anasazi of the 13th Century A.D. Fieldiana, Anthropology New Series No. 21. Field Museum of Natural History, Chicago. 1996 The Role of Warfare in the Pueblo III Period. In The Prehistoric Pueblo World A.D. 1150-1350. Edited by M.A. Adler, pp. 205-213. University of Arizona Press, Tucson. 1997 Warfare among the Pueblos: Myth, History, and Ethnology. Ethnohistory 44(2):235-261.

Hackenberg, Robert A. 1974 Aboriginal Land Use and Occupancy of the Pima-Maricopa Indians, Vol. 1. Garland Publishing, New York.

Hackett, Charles W. 1942 Revolt of the Pueblo Indians of New Mexico and Otermin's Attempted Reconquest, 1680-1682. University of New Mexico Press, Albuquerque.

Hagstrum, Melissa B. 1985 Measuring Prehistoric Ceramic Craft Specialization: a Test Case in the American Southwest. Journal of Field Archaeology 12:65–75. 1995 Creativity and Craft: Household Pottery Traditions in the Southwest. In Ceramic Production in the American Southwest, Edited by B.J. Mills and P.L. Crown, pp.281-299. University of Arizona Press, Tucson.

366

Hall, Edward Twitchell, Jr. 1944 Early Stockaded Settlements in the Governador, New Mexico: A Marginal Anasazi Development from Basket Maker Times to Pueblo I Times. Columbia University Press, New York.

Hammack, Laurens C. 1965 The Lagunitas Highway Salvage Project. Laboratory of Anthropology Note No. 33. Museum of New Mexico, Santa Fe.

Hammond, George P. and Agapito Rey (editors) 1940 Narratives of the Coronado Expedition 1540-1542. University of New Mexico Press, Albuquerque. 1953 Don Juan de Oñate: Colonizer of New Mexico, 1595-1628. University of New Mexico Press, Albuquerque. 1966 The Rediscovery of New Mexico 1580-1594: The Explorations of Chamuscado, Espejo, Castaño de Sosa, Morlete, and Leyva de Bonilla and Humana. University of New Mexico Press, Albuquerque.

Hammond, Norman, Arnold Aspinall, S. Feather, John Hazelden, Trevor Gazard, Stuart Agrell 1977 Maya Jade: Source Location and Analysis. In Exchange Systems in Prehistory, ed. T.K. Earle and J.E. Ericson, pp. 35-67. Academic Press, New York.

Hammond, Philip C. 1971 Ceramic Technology of South-west Asia, Syro-Palestine: Iron Iib, Hebron. Science and Archaeology 5:11-21.

Harrell, James 1984 A Visual Comparator for Degree of Sorting in Thin and Plane Sections. Journal of Sedimentary Petrology 54:646-650.

Harrison, Robert 1973 Warfare. Burgess Publishing Company, Minneapolis.

Hatch, Sinclair, Jr., John Hayden, Cheryl Muceus, Mary Purdy, Pat Trusell and Fred Trussell 1994 The Teacher, the Ghosts, and the Snake: Preliminary Results of Eight Field Seasons at Rattlesnake Ridge. In Artifacts, Shrines, and Pueblos: Papers in Honor of Gordon Page. edited by M.S. Duran and D.T. Kirkpatrick, pp. 113-127. Archaeological Society of New Mexico Vol. 20, Albuquerque.

Haury, Emil W. 1936 The Mogollon Culture of Southwestern New Mexico. Medallion Papers No. 20. Gila Pueblo, Globe. 1956 Speculations on Prehistoric Settlement Patterns in the Southwest. In Prehistoric Settlement Patterns in the New World. ed. G.R. Willey, pp. 3-10. Viking Fund

367

Publications in Anthropology 23. Wenner-Gren Foundation for Anthropological Research, New York.

Hawley, Florence M. 1936 Field Manual of Prehistoric Southwestern Pottery Types. University of New Mexico Bulletin No. 291, Anthropological Series 1(4). University of New Mexico Press, Albuquerque.

Hayden, Brian 2001 Fabulous Feasts: A Prolegomenon to the Importance of Feasting. In Feast: Archaeological and Ethnographic Perspectives on Food, Politics, and Power, Edited by M. Dietler and B. Hayden, pp.23-64. Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington DC.

Hayden, John S. 1978 Field Report on Excavation of BGN-6 – covering Structures 1 and 2, Gallina Unit Houses in Butts Area, but on Crawford Ranch Property. Manuscript on file at the Florence Hawley Ellis Museum of Anthropology at Ghost Ranch, Abiquiu.

Hayes, Alden C., David M. Brugge, and W. James Judge 1981 Archaeological Surveys of Chaco Canyon. Publications in Archeology 18A, Chaco Canyon Studies. National Parks Service, Washington DC.

Hayes, Alden C., Jon Nathan Young, and A. Helene Warren 1981 Excavation of Mound 7: Gran Quivira National Monument, New Mexico. Publications in Archeology No. 16. National Park Service, Washington DC.

Hayes, Alden C. and Thomas C. Windes 1975 An Anasazi Shrine in Chaco Canyon. In Collected Papers in Honor of Florence Hawley Ellis. Edited by T. Frisbie, pp.143-156. Papers of the Archaeological Society of New Mexico No. 2, Albuquerque.

Hegmon, Michelle 1992 Archaeological Research on Style. Annual Review of Anthropology 21:517-536. 1995 Pueblo I ceramic production in southwest Colorado: analysis of igneous rock temper. Kiva 60(3): 371-390. 1998 Technology, Style, and Social Practices: Archaeological Approaches. In The Archaeology of Social Boundaries. Edited by M.T. Stark, pp.264-280. Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington DC.

Hegmon, Michelle, James R. Allison, Hector Neff, and Michael D. Glascock 1997 Production of San Juan Red Ware in the Northern Southwest: Insights into Regional Interaction in Early Puebloan Prehistory. American Antiquity 62(3):449- 463.

368

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, eds. B.J. Mills and P.L. Crown, pp.30-62. University of Arizona Press, Tucson.

Helms, Mary W. 1988 Ulysses’ Sail: An Ethnographic Odyssey of Power, Knowledge, and Geographical Distance. Princeton University Press, Princeton. 1993 Craft and the Kingly Ideal. University of Texas Press, Austin.

Helton-Croll, Claire Kathleen 2010 Why Conical Pots? An Examination of the Relationship among Ceramic Vessel Shape, Subsistence, and Mobility. Ph.D. dissertation, Anthropology Department, University of New Mexico.

Hepburn, Judith R. 1983 Ceramic Petrographic Analysis. In Hohokam Archaeology Along the Salt-Gila Aqueduct Central Arizona Project, Volume VIII, Material Culture, eds. L.S. Teague & P.L. Crown, pp. 341-352. Archaeological Series No. 150. Arizona State Museum, Tucson.

Hester, James J. 1963 Early Navajo Migrations and Acculturation in the Southwest. Museum of New Mexico Papers in Anthropology Number 6, Museum of New Mexico, Santa Fe.

Hester, Thomas R. and Jimmy L. Mitchell 1974 Source Analysis of Obsidian Artifacts from McMullen County, Southern Texas. Lower Plains Archaeological Society Bulletin 4:25-32.

Hibben, Frank C. 1938 The Gallina Phase. American Antiquity 4(2):131-136. 1939 The Gallina Culture of North Central New Mexico. Ph.D. dissertation, Harvard University, Cambridge. [cited as 1940 in much of the literature] 1944 The Mystery of the Stone Towers. Saturday Evening Post, pp. 14-15,68-70 (Dec. 9, 1944). 1948 The Gallina Architectural Forms. American Antiquity 13(1):32-36. 1949 The Pottery of the Gallina Complex. American Antiquity 14(3):194-202. 1951 Murder in the Gallina Country. Southwest Review 36(2):90-96. 1975 Kiva Art of the Anasazi at Pottery Mound. K.C. Publications, Las Vegas.

Hicks, Frederic 1949 A Gallina Unit House of Northwestern New Mexico. Manuscript on file, Maxwell Museum of Anthropology, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque. Catalogue No. 2005.22.60

369

Higgs, Eric S. and Claudio Vita-Finzi 1972 Prehistoric Economies: A Territorial Approach. In Papers in Economic Prehistory, edited by E.S. Higgs, pp.27-46. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

Hill, David V. and Mark D. Willis 1995 The Archaeology of the Piñon-Juniper Cultural Resource Survey Reprocurement Project. USFS Report 1995-10-041. On file at the Santa Fe National Forest Supervisor’s Office, Santa Fe

Hill, R.K. 1975 A Practical System of Clay Evaluation. Journal of the Australian Ceramic Society 11:14-19.

Hoard, Robert J., Michael J. O'Brien, Mohammad G. Khorasgany, and Vellore S. Gopalaratnam 1995 A Materials Science Approach to Understanding Limestone-Tempered Pottery from the Midwestern United States. Journal of Archaeological Science 22:823- 832.

Holbrook, Sally J. 1975 Prehistoric Paleoecology of Northwestern New Mexico. Ph.D. dissertation in Zoology. University of California, Berkeley. 1977 Rodent Faunal Turnover and Prehistoric Community Stability in Northwestern New Mexico. The American Naturalist 111(982):1195-1208.

Holbrook, Sally J. and James C. Mackey 1975 Archeological Report Submitted to Santa Fe National Forest for Work done in 1973-1974. Cultural Resources Report No. 1975-10-011A. Manuscript on file at Santa Fe National Forest Supervisor’s Office, Santa Fe. 1976 Prehistoric Environmental Change in Northern New Mexico: Evidence from a Gallina Phase Archaeological Site. The Kiva 41(3-4):309-317.

Holmes, William H. 1877 Geological report on the San Juan district: U.S. Geological and Geographical Survey Territory [Hayden survey], Ninth Annual Report for 1875. United States Government Printing Office, Washington DC.

Horton, Sarah and Noel Logan 1994 Guadalupita Heritage Resource Survey. USFS Report 1994-10-086. On file at Santa Fe National Forest Supervisor’s Office, Santa Fe.

Hosler, Dorothy 1996 Technical Choices, Social Categories and Meaning Among the Andean Potters of Las Animas. Journal of Material Culture 1(1):63-92.

370

Housley, Lucille 1976 Appendix III: Vegetation in Western Reservoir (Bg 20-2) Area. In Draft Report of 1976 Excavations at Rattlesnake Ridge. Ghost Ranch Archaeological Seminar. Cultural Resources Report No. 1980-10-012. Manuscript on file at Santa Fe National Forest Supervisor’s Office, Santa Fe.

Howard, Julie and Joel C. Janetski 1992 Human Scalps from Eastern Utah. Utah Archaeology 5(1):125-132.

Howry, Jeffrey C. 1976 Fires on the Mountain: Ceramic Traditions and Marketing in the Highlands of Chiapas, Mexico. Ph.D. dissertation. Harvard University, Cambridge.

Hudspeth, William, Anastasia Steffen, and Alysia Abbott 1994 Tapicitos Plateau Survey: UNM 1993 Gallina Archaeological Project. Cultural Resources Report No. 1994-10-075. Manuscript on file at Santa Fe National Forest Supervisor’s Office, Santa Fe.

Hughes, Richard E. and Robert L. Smith 1993 Archaeology, geology, and geochemistry of obsidian provenance studies. Geological Society of America Special Paper 283, p.79-91. Washington DC.

Hughes, Richard E., Thomas E. Berres, Duane M. Moore, and Kenneth B. Farnsworth 1998 Revision of Hopewellian Trading Patterns in Midwestern North America based on Mineralogical Sourcing. Geoarchaeology 13(7):709-729.

Hultgren, Michael C. 1986 Tectonics and Stratigraphy of Part of the Southern Gallina-Archuleta Arch, French Mesa and Llaves Quadrangles, Rio Arriba County, New Mexico. Master’s thesis, Department of Geology, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque.

Hunt, Adrian P. 1992 Sedimentology of a Fossiliferous Fluvial System, Fruitland and Kirtland Formations (Late Cretaceous), Fossil Forest Area, San Juan County, New Mexico. In San Juan Basin IV, Edited by SG. Lucas, B.S. Kues, T.E. Williamson, and A.P. Hunt, pp.47-50. New Mexico Geological Society Guidebook, 43rd Field Conference.

Hunt, Adrian P. and Spencer G. Lucas 1992 Stratigraphy, paleontology and age of the Fruitland and Kirtland Formations (Upper Cretaceous). In San Juan Basin IV, editors S.G. Lucas, B.S. Kues, T.E. Williamson, A.P. Hunt, p.217-239. New Mexico Geological Society Guidebook, 43rd Field Conference. 1993 Taxonomy and Stratigraphic Distribution of Late Triassic Metoposaurid Amphibians from Petrified Forest National Park, Arizona. Journal of the Arizona- Nevada Academy of Science 27:89-95.

371

Hunt, Charles B. 1956 Cenozoic Geology of the Colorado Plateau. Geological Survey Professional Paper No. 279, Washington DC. 1974 Natural Regions of the United States and Canada. W.H. Freeman and Company, San Francisco.

Iacoboni, Michael 2005 Menefee Formation at the Gallina Hogback. In Geology of the Chama Basin, Edited by S.G. Lucas, K.E. Zeigler, V.W. Leuth, and D.E. Owen, pp.28-29. New Mexico Geological Society Guidebook, 56th Field Conference.

Ingold, Tim 1988 Tools, Minds, and Machines: An Excursion in the Philosophy of Technology. Techniques et Culture 12:151-176. 1990 Society, Nature and the Concept of Technology. Archaeological Review of Cambridge 9(1):5-17. 1993 The Reindeerman’s Lasso. In Technological Choices: Transformation in Material Cultures Since the Neolithic. Edited by P. Lemonnier, pp.108-125. Routledge, New York. 2001 Beyond Art and Technology: The Anthropology of Skill. In Anthropological Perspectives on Technology, ed. M.B. Schiffer pp.17-31. University of New Mexico Press, Albuquerque.

Jarman, M.R. 1972 A Territorial Model for Archaeology: A Behavioral and Geographical Approach. In Models in Archaeology, edited by D.L. Clarke, pp.705-733. Methuen, London.

Jarman, M.R., Claudio Vita-Finzi, and Eric S. Higgs 1972 Site Catchment Analysis in Archaeology. In Man, Settlement, and Urbanism, Edited by P.J. Ucko, R. Tringham, and G.W. Dimbleby, pp.61-66. Schenkman, Boston.

Jeançon, Jean A. 1922 Archaeological Research in the Northeastern San Juan Basin of Colorado during the Summer of 1921. State History Society of Colorado and the University of Denver, Denver. 1923 Excavations in the Chama Valley, New Mexico. Bureau of American Ethnology Bulletin No. 81, Washington DC.

Jett, Stephen 1964 Pueblo Indian Migrations. American Antiquity 29:281-300.

Jones, Oakan L. 1966 Pueblo Warriors. University of Oklahoma Press, Norman.

372

Judd, Neil M. 1954 The Material Culture of Pueblo Bonito. Smithsonian Miscellaneous Collections Vol. 124. Smithsonian Institution, Washington DC.

Kamp, Kathryn A. 2001 Prehistoric Children Working and Playing: A Southwestern Case Study in Learning Ceramics. Journal of Anthropological Research 57(4):427-450.

Katzer, Keith 1987 A Geomorphic Evaluation of the Agricultural Potential of Cerros de Trincheras. Journal of the Arizona-Nevada Academy of Science 21:5.

Kauffman, Erle G. 1967 Coloradoan Macroinvertebrate Assemblages, Central Western Interior, United States. In Paleoenvironments of the Cretaceous Seaway: A Symposium. Edited by H.C. Kent and E.G. Kauffman, pp.67-143. Colorado School of Mines, Golden. 1977 Geological and Biological Overview: Western Interior Cretaceous Basin. The Mountain Geologist 14(3):75-100.

Kay, Paul T. 1994 Analysis of five Anasazi mineral paint samples. Pottery Southwest 21(2):1-8.

Keeley, Lawrence H. 1996 War Before Civilization. Oxford University Press, Oxford.

Kelly, Raymond C. 2000 Warless Societies and the Origin of War. University of Michigan Press, Ann Arbor.

Kelly, Robert L. 1983 Hunter-Gatherer Mobility Strategies. Journal of Anthropological Research 39(3):207-306. 1988 The Three Sides of a Biface. American Antiquity 53(4):717-734.

Kendrick, James W. 2001 Archaeological Nature and Extent Testing at Eight Sites along Navajo Route 474(4) in Sandoval County, New Mexico. Zuni Cultural Resource Enterprise Report No. 644. Report on file at ARMS Laboratory of Anthropology, Santa Fe, NM.

Kennett, Douglas J., Sachiko Sakai, Hector Neff, Richard Gossett, and Daniel O. Larson 2002 Compositional Characterization of Prehistoric Ceramics: A New Approach. Journal of Archaeological Science 29:443-455.

Kenzle, Susan C. 1993 Enclosing Walls: A Study of Architectural Function in the American Southwest.

373

Master’s thesis, Department of Archaeology, University of Calgary. Calgary, Alberta, Canada.

Kerby, Robert L. 1958 The Confederate Invasion of New Mexico, 1861-1862. Westernlore Press, Los Angeles.

Kessell, John L. 2008 Pueblos, Spaniards, and the Kingdom of New Mexico. University of Oklahoma Press, Norman.

Kessell, John L. and Rick Hendricks (editors) 1992 By Force of Arms: The Journals of Don Diego de Vargas, New Mexico, 1691- 1693. University of New Mexico Press, Albuquerque.

Kessell, John L., Rick Hendricks, and Meredith D. Dodge 1995 To the Royal Crown Restored : The Journals of Don Diego de Vargas, New Mexico, 1692-1694. University of New Mexico Press, Albuquerque. 1998 Blood on the Boulders : The Journals of Don Diego de Vargas, New Mexico, 1694-1697. University of New Mexico Press, Albuquerque.

Kidder, Alfred Vincent 1924 An Introduction to the Study of Southwestern Archaeology with a Preliminary Account of the Excavations at Pecos. Yale University Press. New Haven, Connecticut. 1932 The Artifacts of Pecos. Paper of the Southwestern Expedition No. 6. Philips Academy and Yale University Press, New Haven, Connecticut.

Kidder, Alfred Vincent and Samuel James Guernsey 1919 Archaeological Explorations in Northeastern Arizona. Bureau of American Ethnology Bulletin No. 65. Washington DC.

Kilikoglou, Vassilis, George Vekinis, Yannis Maniatis, and Peter M. Day 1998 Mechanical Performance of Quartz-Tempered Ceramics, Part 1: Strength and Toughness. Archaeometry 40:261-279.

King, Valerie C. 1992 The Archaeology of the Gallina Area Skeletal Collection. Unpublished manuscript, University of New Mexico.

King, Anthony 2004 Escaping Corruption: Conceptual Metaphor in Mesa Verde Towers. Senior Thesis, Department of Anthropology, Colorado College, Colorado Springs.

Kintigh, Keith W. 1985 Settlement, Subsistence, and Society in Late Zuni Prehistory. University of

374

Arizona Anthropological Papers No. 44. University of Arizona Press, Tucson.

Kintigh, Keith W., Donna M. Golowacki, and Deborah L. Huntley 2004 Long-Term Settlement History and the Emergence of Towns in the Zuni Area. American Antiquity 69(3):432-456.

Kliendienst, Maxine 1956 Gallina Phase Cliffhouses: A Report on Excavations in North-Central New Mexico in 1954-55. Master’s thesis, Department of Anthropology, University of Chicago.

Knight, Terry L. 1990 Largo-Gallina Ceramics: Inter/Intra Site Variability in Cultural and Technological Attributes. Paper presented at the 55th Annual Meeting of the Society for American Archaeology, Las Vegas.

Koehring, Vera 1948 An Analysis of Gallina Painted Pottery Design. Archive Catalog Number 2005.22.64, Maxwell Museum of Anthropology, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque.

Kohl, Philip L., Garman Harbottle, and Edward V. Sayre 1979 Physical and Chemical Analyses of Soft Stone Vessels from Southwest Asia. Archaeometry 21(2):131-159.

Kohler, Timothy A. 1992 Field Houses, Villages, and the Tragedy of the Commons in the Early Northern Anasazi Southwest. American Antiquity 57(4):617-635.

Kovacevich, Brigette, Hector Neff, and Ronald L. Bishop 2005 Laser Ablation-ICP-MS Chemical Characterization of Jade from a Jade Workshop at Cancuen, Guatemala. In Laser Ablation-ICP-MS in Archaeological Research, ed. R.J. Speakman and H. Neff, pp.38-56, University of New Mexico Press, Albuquerque.

Kowalewski, Stephen A. 2001 Coalescent Societies. Paper presented at the 58th Annual Southeastern Archaeological Conference, Chattanooga. 2003 Intensification Under Duress. Paper presented at the 68th Annual Meeting of the Society for American Archaeology, Milwaukee.

Kroeber, Clifton B. and Bernard L. Fontana 1986 Massacre on the Gila: An Account of the Last Major Battle between American Indians, with Reflections on the Origin of War. University of Arizona Press, Tucson.

375

Kruse, Melissa 2007 The Agricultural Landscape of Perry Mesa: Modeling Residential Site Location in Relation to Arable Land. Kiva 73(1):85-102.

Kuckelman, Kristin A. 2000 Architecture. In The Archaeology of Castle Rock Pueblo: A Thirteenth-Century Village in Southwestern Colorado. Electronic document, Edited by K.A. Kuckelman. Available http://www.crowcanyon.org/castlerock. Accessed April 1, 2011. 2002 Thirteenth-Century Warfare in the Central Mesa Verde Region. In Seeking the Center Place: Archaeology and Ancient Communities in the Mesa Verde Region, ed. M.D. Varien and R.H. Wilshusen, pp.233-253. University of Utah Press, Salt Lake City. 2010 The Depopulation of Sand Canyon Pueblo, a Large Ancestral Pueblo Village in Southwestern Colorado. American Antiquity 75(3):497-525.

Kuckelman, Kristin A., Ricky R. Lightfoot, and Debra L. Martin 2000 Changing Patterns of Violence in the Northern San Juan Region. Kiva 66:147- 165.

Kulisheck, Jeremy 2005 The Archaeology of Pueblo Population Change on the Jemez Plateau, A.D. 1200 To 1700: The Effects of Spanish Contact And Conquest. Ph.D. dissertation, Anthropology Department, Southern Methodist University, Dallas. 2006 Population and Settlement Trends in the Jemez Province, A.D. 1250 to 1600. Paper presented at the 71th Annual Meeting of the Society for American Archaeology, San Juan, Puerto Rico.

Kulisheck, Jeremy and Michael L. Elliott 2005 A Proposed Late Prehistoric and Early Historic Phase Sequence for the Jemez Plateau, North-Central New Mexico, USA. Paper and poster presented at the 70th Annual Meeting of the Society for American Archaeology, Salt Lake City.

Kurtz, D.D. and Joseph B. Anderson 1980 Depositional environments and paleocurrents of Chinle Formation (Triassic), eastern San Juan Basin, New Mexico. New Mexico Geology 2(2):22-26.

Kvamme, Kenneth L. 1993 Computer Methods: Geographic Information Systems. In Stress and Warfare among the Kayenta Anasazi of the 13th Century A.D. Appendix B, pp.171-180. Fieldiana, Anthropology New Series No. 21. Field Museum of Natural History, Chicago.

Lackey, Louana M. 1982 The pottery of Acatlan: A changing Mexican tradition. University of Okalahoma

376

Press, Norman.

Lally, James R. 2005 Reconstructing the Cause and Origin of Structural Fires in the Archaeological Record of the Greater Southwest. Ph.D. Dissertation, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque.

Lambert , Patricia M. 1997 Cannibalism in Cowboy Wash, Part 2: The Osteological Evidence. Paper presented at the 62nd annual meeting of the Society for American Archaeology. Nashville, Tennessee.

LaMotta, Vincent M. 1996 The Use of Disarticulated Human Remains in Abandonment Ritual at Homol'ovi. Unpublished M.A. thesis, Department of Anthropology, University of Arizona, Tucson.

Lancaster, James A. and Philip F. Van Cleave 1954 The Excavation of Sun Point Pueblo. In Archeological Excavations in Mesa Verde National Park, Colorado (1950). Edited by J.A. Lancaster, J.M. Pinkley, P.F. Van Cleave, and D. Watson, Archeological Research Series Number Two. National Park Service, U.S. Department of the Interior, Washington DC.

Landis, Edwin R., Carle H. Dane, and William A. Cobban 1974 Cretaceous rocks of the Tierra Amarilla coal field and adjacent areas, Rio Arriba County, New Mexico. In Ghost Ranch: Central-Northern, New Mexico, edited by C.T. Siemers, pp.231-238. New Mexico Geological Society Guidebook, 25th Field Conference.

Lane, Elizabeth A., Daniel Newsome, and Lynn A. Neal 2004 Mesa Poleo Wildland Urban Interface Phase II Heritage Inventory. USFS Report 2003-10-013B. On file at the Santa Fe National Forest Supervisor’s Office, Santa Fe.

Lange, Charles H., Jr. 1940 A Cranial Series from the Gallina Region. Honors Paper, Department of Anthropology, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque. 1941 The Evans Site: A Contribution to the Archaeology of the Gallina Region, Northern New Mexico. Master’s thesis. Anthropology Department, University of New Mexico. 1956 The Evans Site and the Archaeology of the Gallina Region of New Mexico. El Palacio 63(3):72-92.

Lange, Frederick W. and Holly R. Lange 1988 Large Anasazi Sites of the Montezuma Valley, Southwestern Colorado: Definition, Distribution, and Function. In Reflections: Papers on Southwestern

377

Culture History in Honor of Charles H. Lange, Papers No. 14. Edited by A.B. Poore, pp.193-210. Archaeological Society of New Mexico, Albuquerque.

Lange, Richard C. 1992 Pots, People, Politics, and Precipitation: Just Who or What are the Salado Anyway? In Proceedings of the Second Salado Conference, Globe, Arizona. Edited by R.C. Lange and S. Germick, pp.325-333. Arizona Archeological society Occasional Paper, Phoenix.

Langenfeld, Kristin and Larry L. Baker 1988 Site Variability in the Tanques Canyon, New Mexico and its Implications for Largo-Gallina Community Structure. Paper presented at the 53rd Annual meeting of the Society for American Archeology, Phoenix.

Latour, Bruno 1991 Technology is Society Made Durable. In A Sociology of Monsters: Essays on Power, Technology, and Domination. Edited by J. Law, pp.105-131. Routledge Sociological Review Monographs 38, London. 1996 Aramis or the Love of Technology. Harvard University Press, Cambridge.

Law, John 1991 A Sociology of Monsters: Essays on Power, Technology, and Domination. Routledge Sociological Review Monographs 38, London.

LeBlanc, Steven A. 1978 Settlement Patterns in the El Morro Valley, New Mexico. In Investigations of the Southwestern Anthropological Research Group. Edited by R.C. Euler and G.J. Gumerman, pp.45-52. Museum of Northern Arizona, Flagstaff. 1999 Prehistoric Warfare in the American Southwest. University of Utah Press, Salt Lake City.

LeBlanc, Steven A. with Katherine E. Register 2003 Constant Battles: The Myth of the Peaceful, Noble Savage. St. Martin’s Press, New York.

Lechtman, Heather 1977 Style in Technology —Some Early Thoughts. In Material Culture: Styles, Organization, and Dynamics of Technology, ed. H. Lechtman and R. Merrill, pp.3-20. West Publishing, New York. 1979 Issues in Andean Metallurgy. In Pre-Columbian Metallurgy of South America. Edited by E.P. Benson, pp.1-40. Dumbarton Oaks Research Library, Harvard University, Washington DC. 1984 Andean Value Systems and the Development of Prehistoric Metallurgy. Technology Culture 25:1-36. 1999 Afterward. In The Social Dynamics of Technology: Practice, Politics, and World Views. ed. M.A. Dobres & C.R. Hoffman, pp.223-232. Smithsonian Institution

378

Press, Washington DC.

Lechtman, Heather and Arthur Steinberg 1979 The History of Technology: An Anthropological Point of View. In The History and Philosophy of Technology. Edited by G. Bugliarello and D. Doner, pp.135- 160. University of Illinois Press, Urbana-Champaign.

Leckie, R. Mark, James I. Kirkland, and William P. Elder 1997 Stratigraphic Framework and Correlation of a Principal Reference Section of the Mancos Shale (Upper Cretaceous), Mesa Verde, Colorado. In Mesozoic Geology and Paleontology of the Four Corners Region, Edited by O.J. Anderson, B.S. Kues, SG. Lucas, pp.163-216. New Mexico Geological Society Guidebook, 48th Field Conference.

LeFree, Betty 1975 Santa Clara Pottery Today. University of New Mexico Press, Albuquerque.

Legare, David V. 1989 Maintenance and Partial Obliteration of Forest Road 170. USFS Report 1989- 10-045. On file at the Santa Fe National Forest Supervisor’s Office, Santa Fe.

Lekson, Stephen H. 2002 War in the Southwest, War in the World. American Antiquity 67(4):607-624.

Lekson, Stephen H., Curtis P. Nepstad-Thornberry, Brian E. Yunker, Toni S. Laumbach, David P. Cain, and Karl W. Laumbach 2002 Migrations in the Southwest: Pinnacle Ruin, Southwestern New Mexico. Kiva 68(2):73-101.

Lemonnier, Pierre 1983 La Description des systems techniques. Une urgence en technologies culturelle. Techniques et culture 1:11-26. 1984 L’Ecorce battue chez les Anga de Nouvelle-Guinée. Techniques et culture 4:127- 175. 1986 The Study of Material Culture Today: Towards an Anthropology of Technical Systems. Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 5:147-186. 1989 Towards an Anthropology of Technology. Man 24:526-527. 1992 Elements for an Anthropology of Technology. Anthropological Papers No.88. Museum of Anthropology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor. 1993 Introduction. In Technological Choices: Transformation in Material Cultures Since the Neolithic. Edited by P. Lemonnier, pp.1-35. Routledge, New York.

Leonard, Banks L. 1997 Cannibalism in Cowboy Wash, Part 1: The Archaeology of 5MT10010. Paper presented at the 62nd annual meeting of the Society for American Archaeology. Nashville, Tennessee.

379

Leopold, Luna B. 1943 Climatic character of the interval between the Jurassic and Cretaceous in New Mexico and Arizona. Journal of Geology 51(1):56-62.

Lerio-Gourhan, André 1943 Evolution et techniques: L’homme et la matière. Albin Michel, Paris. 1945 Evolution et techniques: Milieu et techniques. Albin Michel, Paris.

Lewarch, Dennis E. and Michael J. O’Brien 1981 The Expanding Role of Surface Assemblages in Archaeological Research. In Advances in Archaeological Method and Theory, vol. 4. editor M.B. Schiffer, pp.297-342. Academic Press, New York.

Liebmann, Matthew 2006 Burn the Churches, Break up the Bells: The Archaeology of the Pueblo Revolt Revitalization Movement in New Mexico, A.D. 1680-1696. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia.

Lightfoot, Kent G. and Roberta A. Jewett 1984 Late Prehistoric Distributions in East-Central Arizona: An Examination of Cibola Whiteware, White Mountain Redware, and Salado Redware. In Regional Analysis of Prehistoric Ceramic Variation: Contemporary Studies of the Cibola Whitewares, eds. A.P. Sullivan & J.L. Hantman, pp. 36-73. Anthropological Research Paper No. 31. Arizona State University, Tempe.

Lightfoot, Ricky R. and Kristin A. Kuckelman 1995 Ancestral Pueblo Violence in the Northern Southwest. Paper presented at the 60th Annual Meeting of the Society for American Archaeology. Minneapolis, Minnesota.

Lindsay, Alexander J., Jr., J. Richard Ambler, Mary Anne Stein, and Philip M. Hobler 1968 Survey and Excavations North and East of Navajo Mountain, Utah, 1959-1962. Museum of Northern Arizona Bulletin 45, Flagstaff.

Linton, Ralph 1944a North American Cooking Pots. American Antiquity 9(4):369-380. 1944b Nomad Raids and Fortified Pueblos. American Antiquity 10(1):28-32.

Livingstone Smith, Alexandre 2000 Processing Clay for Pottery in Northern Cameroon: Social and Technical Requirements. Archaeometry 42(1):21-42.

Lockley, Martin G., Adrian P. Hunt, and Spencer G. Lucas 1996 Vertebrate Track Assemblages from the Jurassic Summerville Formation and Correlative Deposits. Museum of Northern Arizona Bulletin 60:249-254.

380

Logan, Noel 1989 Lagunitas Archaeological Survey. USFS Report 1989-10-114. On file at the Santa Fe National Forest Supervisor’s Office, Santa Fe. 1994 Guadalupita Heritage Resource Survey. USFS Report 1994-10-086. On file at the Santa Fe National Forest Supervisor’s Office, Santa Fe.

Lombard, James P. 1985 Temper Composition of Valencia Site Plainwares. In Excavation at the Valencia Site: A Preclassic Hohokam Village in the Southern Tucson Basin, ed. W.H. Doelle, pp. 297-304. Anthropological Papers No. 3. Institute for American Research, Santa Fe. 1986 Petrographic Results of Point Counts on 40 Ceramic Sherds from AZ BB:13:68. In Archeological Investigations at the Tanque Verde Wash Site: A Middle Rincon Settlement in the Eastern Tucson Basin, ed. M.D. Elson, pp. 473-484. Anthropological Papers No. 7, Institute of American Research, Santa Fe.

London, Gloria 1981 Dung-Tempered Clay. Journal of Field Archaeology 8:189-195.

Longacre, William A. 1964 Sociological Implications of the Ceramic Analysis. In Chapters in the Prehistory of Eastern Arizona II, eds. P.S. Martin, J.B. Rinaldo, W.A. Longacre, L.G. Freeman, J.A. Brown, R.H. Hevly, & M.E. Cooley, pp. 155-170. Anthropology vol. 55. Chicago Natural History Museum, Chicago.

Lucas, Spencer G. 1993 The Chinle Group: Revised Upper Triassic stratigraphy and chronology in the western United States. Bulletin of the Museum of Northern Arizona 59:27-50.

Lucas, Spencer G., Susan K. Harris, Justin A. Spielmann, David S. Berman, Amy C. Henici, Andrew B. Heckert, Kate E. Zeigler, and Larry F. Rinehart 2005a Early Permian Vertebrate Assemblage and its Biostratigraphic Significance, Arroyo del Agua, Rio Arriba County, New Mexico. In Geology of the Chama Basin, Edited by S.G. Lucas, K.E. Zeigler, V.W. Leuth, and D.E. Owen, pp.288- 296. New Mexico Geological Society Guidebook, 56th Field Conference.

Lucas, Spencer G., Adrian P. Hunt, and Justin A. Spielmann 2005c Jurassic Stratigraphy in the Chama Basin, Northern New Mexico. In Geology of the Chama Basin, Edited by S.G. Lucas, K.E. Zeigler, V.W. Leuth, and D.E. Owen, pp.182-192. New Mexico Geological Society Guidebook, 56th Field Conference.

Lucas, Spencer G., Rakehito Ikejiri, Heather Maisch, Thomas Joyce, and Gary L. Gianniny 2005e The Mosasaur Prognathodon from the Upper Cretaceous Lewis Shale near

381

Durango, Colorado and the Distribution of Prognathodon in North America. In Geology of the Chama Basin, Edited by S.G. Lucas, K.E. Zeigler, V.W. Leuth, and D.E. Owen, pp.389-394. New Mexico Geological Society Guidebook, 56th Field Conference.

Lucas, Spencer G. and Raymond V. Ingersoll 1981 Cenozoic continental deposits of New Mexico: An overview. Geological Society of America Bulletin 92(12):917-932.

Lucas, Spencer G., K.K. Kietzke, and Adrian P. Hunt 1985 The Jurassic System in east-central New Mexico. In Santa Rosa-Tucumcari Region. Edited by J. Zidek and S.G. Lucas, pp.213-242. New Mexico Geological Society Guidebook, 36th Field Conference.

Lucas, Spencer C. and Karl Krainer 2005 Stratigraphy and Correlation of the Permo-Carboniferous Cutler Group, Chama Basin, New Mexico. In Geology of the Chama Basin, Edited by S.G. Lucas, K.E. Zeigler, V.W. Leuth, and D.E. Owen, pp.145-159. New Mexico Geological Society Guidebook, 56th Field Conference.

Lucas, Spencer G., Robert M. Schoch, Earl Manning, and Costas Tsentas 1981 The Eocene Biostratigraphy of New Mexico. Geological Society of America Bulletin 92(12):951-967.

Lucas, Spencer G. and Paul L. Sealey 1992 Preliminary report on invertebrate fossils from the Lewis Shale near Mesa Portales, Sandoval County, New Mexico. In San Juan Basin IV, editors S.G. Lucas, B.S. Kues, T.E. Williamson, A.P. Hunt, p.24-26. New Mexico Geological Society Guidebook, 43rd Field Conference.

Lucas, Spencer G., Justin A. Spielmann, Dennis R. Braman, Brian S. Brister, Lisa Peters, and William C. McIntosh 2005d Age of the Cretaceous Menefee Formation, Gallina Hogback, Rio Arriba County, New Mexico. In Geology of the Chama Basin, Edited by S.G. Lucas, K.E. Zeigler, V.W. Leuth, and D.E. Owen, pp.231-235. New Mexico Geological Society Guidebook, 56th Field Conference.

Lucas, Spencer G. and Thomas E. Williamson 1992 Fossil Mammals and the Early Eocene Age of the San Jose Formation, San Juan Basin, New Mexico. In San Juan Basin IV, editors S.G. Lucas, B.S. Kues, T.E. Williamson, A.P. Hunt, p.311-316. New Mexico Geological Society Guidebook, 43rd Field Conference.

Lucas, Spencer G., Kate E. Zeigler, and Andrew B. Heckert 2003 Invertebrate Paleontology of the Upper Triassic Snyder Quarry, Chinle Group, Chama Basin, New Mexico. New Mexico Museum of Natural History and Science

382

Bulletin 24:63-65.

Lucas, Spencer G., Kate E. Zeigler, Andrew B. Heckert, and Adrian P. Hunt 2005b Review of Upper Triassic Stratigraphy and Biostratigraphy in the Chama Basin, Northern New Mexico. In Geology of the Chama Basin, Edited by S.G. Lucas, K.E. Zeigler, V.W. Leuth, and D.E. Owen, pp.170-181. New Mexico Geological Society Guidebook, 56th Field Conference.

Luebben, Ralph A., Jonathan G. Andelson, and Laurance C. Herrold 1986 Elvino Whetten Pueblo and Its Relationship to Terraces and Nearby Small Structures, Chihuahua, Mexico. Kiva 51:165-188.

Luedtke, Barbara E. 1979 The Identification of Sources of Chert Artifacts. American Antiquity 44(4):744- 757.

Lyman, R. Lee, Todd L. Vanpool, and Michael J. O’Brien 2009 The Diversity of North American Projectile-Point Types, Before and After the Bow and Arrow. Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 28(1):1-13.

MacEachern, Scott 1994 Symbolic Reservoirs and Inter-group Relations: West-African Examples. African Archaeological Review 12:205-224. 1998 Scale, Style, and Cultural Variation: Technological Traditions in the Northern Mandra Mountains. In The Archaeology of Social Boundaries, Edited by M.T. Stark, pp.107-131. Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington DC.

Mackay, Ernest 1930 Painted Pottery in Modern Sind: A Survival of an Ancient Industry. Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute of Great Britain and Ireland 60:127-135.

Mackey, James 1976 Archeological Report Submitted to the Smithsonian Institution and the Bureau of Land Management within 90 Days of Termination of First Field Season. Report on file at the Laboratory of Anthropology, Santa Fe. Library Catalog Number P1245. 1977 A Multivariate Osteological Approach to Towa Culture History. American Journal of Physical Anthropology 46:477-482. 1982 Vallecitos Pueblo (A Fourteenth Century AD Ancestral Jemez Site), and LA 12761 (A Late Prehistoric –Early Historic, Jemez Phase Farm House Site) in New Mexico. Journal of Intermountain Archeology 1(2):80-99. 1985 A Thirteenth Century A.D. Example of the Successful Use of Archaeological Corn Collections for Paleoenvironmental Reconstruction: A Reply to Benz. Plains Anthropologist 30(108):149-159.

383

Mackey, James and Roger C. Green 1979 Largo-Gallina Towers: An Explanation. American Antiquity 44(1):144-154.

Mackey, James C. and Sally J. Holbrook 1978 Environmental Reconstruction and the Abandonment of the Largo-Gallina Area, New Mexico. Journal of Field Archaeology 5(1):29-49.

Madsen, David B. 1994 Mesa Verde and Sleeping Ute Mountain: The Geographical and Chronological Dimensions of the Numic Expansion. In Across the West: Human Population Movement and the Expansion of the Numa. Edited by D.B. Madsen and D. Rhode, pp.24-31. University of Utah Press, Salt Lake City.

Mahias, Marie-Claude 1993 Pottery Techniques in India. In Technological Choices: Transformation in Material Cultures Since the Neolithic, ed. P. Lemonnier, pp.157-180. Routledge, New York.

Maker, H.J., James J. Folks, James U. Anderson, and V.G. Link 1973 Soil Associations and Land Classifications for Irrigation, Rio Arriba County, New Mexico. New Mexico State University Agricultural Experiment Station Research Report No. 254.

Maker, H.J., Harold E. Dregne, V.G. Link, and James U. Anderson 1974 Soils of New Mexico. New Mexico State University Agricultural Experiment Station Research Report No. 285.

Malotki, Ekkehart (editor and translator) 1993 The Destruction of Awat’ovi. In Hopi Ruin Legends, by M. Lomotuway’ma, L. Lomotuway’ma, and S. Namingha, Jr., pp.275-297. University of Nebraska Press, Lincoln.

Malyk-Selivanova, Natalia, Gail M. Ashley, Robert Gal, Michael D. Glascock, and Hector Neff 1998 Geological-Geochemical Approach to “Sourcing” of Prehistoric Chert Artifacts, Northwestern Alaska. Geoarchaeology 13(7):673-708.

Mangelsdorf, Paul C. 1974 Corn: Its Origin Evolution and Improvement. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts.

Maniatis, Yannis, Artemis Simopoulos, Robert E. Jones, Ch. Karakalos, Ian K. Whitbread, Charles K. Williams, and A. Kostikas 1984 Punic amphoras found at Corinth, Greece: an investigation of their origin and technology. Journal of Field Archaeology 11:205-222.

384

Maret, Pierre de 1980 Ceux qui jouent avec le feu: La place du forgeron en Afrique Centrale. Africa 50:263-279.

Martin, Debra L., Nancy J. Akins, Bradley J. Crenshaw, and Pamela K. Stone 2008 Inscribed in the Body, Written in Bones: The Consequences of Social Violence at La Plata. In Social Violence in the Prehispanic American Southwest. Edited by D.L. Nichols and P.L. Crown, pp.98-122. University of Arizona Press, Tucson.

Martin, Paul S. 1929 The 1928 Archaeological Expedition of the State Historical Society of Colorado. Colorado Magazine 6(1):1-35. 1930 The 1929 Archaeological Expedition of the State Historical Society of Colorado in Cooperation with the Smithsonian Institution. Colorado Magazine 7(1):1-40.

Martin, Paul S. and John B. Rinaldo 1939 Modified Basket Maker Sites, Ackmen-Lowry Area, Southwestern Colorado, 1938. Fieldiana: Anthropology 23(2).

Martin, Paul S., John B. Rinaldo, and Ernst Antevs 1949 Cochise and Mogollon Sites, Pine Lawn Valley, Western New Mexico. Fieldiana: Anthropology 38(1).

Martinez, Anthony E., David A. Phillips Jr., Gifford Velarde, Laura Paskus 1998 Cultural Resource Survey of SR 44 between SR 4 and SR 537, Sandoval County, New Mexico. NMCRIS Activity 58207. SWCA Environmental Consultants, Albuquerque.

Massouh, Paula A. 2004 An Analysis of the Mohr-Sample Collection from Site L/102, Rio Arriba County, New Mexico. In Ever Westward: Papers in Honor of Elizabeth Kelley. Edited by R.N. Wiseman, T.C. O’Laughlin, C.T. Snow, pp.67-84. Archaeological Society of New Mexico Volume 30, Albuquerque. 2009 The Largo-Gallina Household: A View from the L/102 Site. Ph.D. dissertation. Anthropology Department, American University, Washington DC.

Masucci, Maria and Allison Macfarlane 1997 An Application of Geological Survey and Ceramic Petrology to Provenance Studies of Guangala Phase Ceramics of Ancient Ecuador. Geoarchaeology: An International Journal 12(7):765-793.

Matson, Frederick R. 1975 Technological studies of Egyptian pottery – modern and ancient. In Recent advances in science and technology of materials, ed. A. Bishay, pp.129-139. Plenum Press, New York.

385

Mattson, Hannah V. 2010 A Preliminary Investigation of Prehistoric Clay Use in the Lower Jemez Valley: Results of Ceramic Oxidation and Porosity Analyses. In The MAPL Western Expansion Project, Vol. 5. Edited by P.A. Gerow, pp.171-190. Office of Contract Archeology Report 185-878, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque.

Matthew, A.J., A.J. Woods, and C. Oliver 1991 Spots Before the Eyes: New Comparison Charts for Visual Percentage Estimation in Archaeological Material. In Recent Developments in Ceramic Petrology, Edited by A. Middleton and I. Freestone, pp.211-262. British Museum Research Laboratory, London.

Mauk, Jeffrey L. and R.G.V. Hancock 1998 Trace Element Geochemistry of Native Copper from the White Pine Mine, Michigan (USA): Implication for Sourcing Artifacts. Archaeometry 40(1):97-107.

Mauss, Marcel 1935 Les techniques du corps. Journal de psychologie 32:271-293. 1941 Les techniques et la technologie. Journal de Psychologie 41:71–78.

Maxwell, Timothy D. 1981 The La Jara Site: Archeological Investigations of a Historic Sheepherding Camp and Prehistoric Cultural Remains. Laboratory of Anthropology Note No. 262. Museum of New Mexico, Santa Fe.

McGimsey, Charles R., III 1980 Mariana Mesa: Seven Prehistoric Sites in West Central New Mexico. Papers of the Peabody Museum of Archaeology and Ethnology Vol. 27, Cambridge.

McGookey, D.P., John D. Haun, H.G. Goodell, D.G. McCubbin, Robert J. Weimer, and G.R. Wulf 1972 Cretaceous System. In The Geologic Atlas of the Rocky Mountain Region. Edited by W.W. Mallory, pp.190-228. Rocky Mountain Association of Geologists, Denver.

McGregor, John C. 1965 Southwestern Archaeology. University of Illinois Press, Urbana.

McKenna, Peter J. 1984 The Architecture and Material Culture of 29SJ1360. Reports of the Chaco Center No. 7. Albuquerque Division of Cultural Research, National Park Service. 1995 Cultural Resource Survey of the Puerto Chiquito Timber Sale, Jicarilla Apache Lands. NMCRIS Activity 45739. Bureau of Indian Affairs, Albuquerque Area Office.

386

McKern, Will C. 1937 An Hypothesis for the Asiatic Origin of the Woodland Culture Pattern. American Antiquity 3:138-143.

McPherson, John and Geri McPherson 1990 Primitive Wilderness Containers Book 2: Primitive Pottery. Ag Press, Manhattan, KS.

Meek, Fielding B. and Ferdinand V. Hayden 1861 Descriptions of new Lower Silurian (Primordial) Jurassic, Cretaceous, and Tertiary Fossils. Philadelphia Academy of Natural Science Proceedings 13:415- 447.

Meggers, Betty J. 1979 Prehistoric America: An Ecological Perspective. Aldine Publishing Co., New York.

Meggitt, Mervyn 1977 Blood Is Their Argument: Warfare Among the Mae Enga Tribesmen of the New Guinea Highlands. Mayfield, Palo Alto, CA.

Mera, Harry P. 1935 Ceramic Clues to the Prehistory of North Central New Mexico. Laboratory of Anthropology, Technical Series Bulletin No. 8. Museum of New Mexico, Santa Fe. 1938 Some Aspects of the Largo Cultural Phase, Northern New Mexico. American Antiquity 3(3):236-242.

Messing, Henry J. 1976 Appendix D: Faunal Analysis of LA 11843. In Archeological Investigation on the San Juan-to-Ojo 345 Kv Transmission Line for the Public Service Company of New Mexico, Excavation of LA 11843: An Early Stockaded Settlement of the Gallina Phase. Laboratory of Anthropology Notes Series No. 111g. Museum of New Mexico, Santa Fe.

Meunier, Alain 2005 Clays. Translated by N. Fradin. Springer-Verlag, Berlin.

Meunier, Alain and Bruce Velde 2004 Illite: Origins, Evolution, and Metamorphism. Springer-Verlag, Berlin.

Miethe, Terance D., Mark C. Stafford, and J. Scott Long 1987 Social Differentiation in Criminal Victimization: A Test of Routine Activities/Lifestyle Theories. American Sociological Review 52(April):184-194.

387

Mills, Barbara J. 1985 “North American Cooking Pots” Reconsidered: Some Behavioral Correlates of Variation in Cooking Pot Morphology. Paper presented at the 50th Annual Meeting of the Society for American Archaeology, Denver. 1987 Ceramic Production and Distribution Patterns. In Archeological Investigations at Eight Small Sites in West-Central New Mexico: Data Recovery at the Fence Lake No. 1 Mine. Edited by P.F. Hogan, pp.145-154. Office of Contract Archeology Report 185-271, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque. 1989 Ceramics and Settlement in the Cedar Mesa Area, Southeastern Utah: A Methodological Approach. Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Anthropology, University of New Mexico. Albuquerque. 1995 The Organization of Protohistoric Zuni Ceramic Production. In Ceramic Production in the American Southwest. Edited by B.J. Mills and P.L. Crown, pp.200-230. University of Arizona Press, Tucson. 1999 Ceramics and Social Contexts of Food Consumption in the Northern Southwest. In Pottery and People, edited by J.M. Skibo and G.M. Feinman, pp. 99-114. The University of Utah Press, Salt Lake City.

Mills, Barbara J., Andrea J. Carpenter, and William Grimm 1997 Sourcing Chuskan ceramic production: petrographic and experimental analyses. Kiva 62(3):261-282.

Mills, Barbara J. and Patricia L. Crown 1995 Ceramic Production in the American Southwest: An Introduction. In Ceramic Production in the American Southwest. Edited by B.J. Mills and P.L. Crown, pp.1-29. University of Arizona Press, Tucson.

Milner, George R., Eve Anderson, and Virginia G. Smith 1991 Warfare in late Prehistoric West-Central Illinois. American Antiquity 56(4):581- 603.

Mindeleff, Victor 1891 A Study of Pueblo Architecture in Tusayan and Cibola. In Eighth Annual Report of the Bureau of American Ethnology for the Years 1886-1887, pp.3-228. Washington DC.

Minnis, Paul E. 1981 Economic and Organizational Responses to Food Stress by Non-Stratified Societies: An Example from Prehistoric New Mexico. Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Anthropology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor.

Moench, Robert H. and John S. Schlee 1967 Geology and uranium deposits of the Laguna District, New Mexico. U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 519. United States Government Printing Office, Washington DC.

388

Mohr, Albert and L. Laetitia Sample 1972 Archaeological Excavations at Site L/102, Rio Arriba County, New Mexico. Laboratory of Anthropology Notes Series No. 83. Museum of New Mexico, Santa Fe.

Mohr, Albert and J. Simopoulis 1976 Archaeological Excavations at the T.P. Site, Rio Arriba County, New Mexico- 1974. Preliminary Report submitted to the Museum of New Mexico, Division of Anthropology.

Montgomery, Barbara K. 1992 Pueblo Room Fill and Prehistoric Ritual. In Proceedings of the Second Salado Conference, Globe, Arizona, 1992. Edited by R.G. Lange and S. Germick, pp.125-130. Arizona Archaeological Society, Phoenix.

Moore, Bruce M. 1978 Are Pueblo Field Houses a Function of Urbanization? In Limited Activity and Occupation Sites: A Collection of Conference Papers. ed. A.E. Ward, pp.9-16. Center for Anthropological Studies, Albuquerque. 1979 Pueblo Isolated Small Structure Sites. Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Anthropology, Southern Illinois University, Carbondale.

Moore, Roger A. 1988 The Excavation of a Brush Structure as Gallina Site (LA 52254) near Lindrith in Rio Arriba County, New Mexico. Division of Conservation Archaeology Technical Report No. 1258, Bloomfield, NM.

Moore, Josselyn F. and Richard I. Ford 1978 Appendix B: Paeloethnobotany of LA 11850. In Archeological Investigations at LA 11850: A Gallina Phase Village on the Continental Divide, Rio Arriba County, New Mexico. Laboratory of Anthropology Notes Series No. 111f. Museum of New Mexico, Santa Fe.

Moore, Duane M. and Robert C. Reynolds 1997 X-Ray Diffraction and the Identification and Analysis of Clay Minerals. Second edition. Oxford University Press, Oxford.

Morain, Stan 1979 Soils. In New Mexico in Maps, edited by J.I. Williams and P.E. McAllister, pp.20- 21. Technology Application Center, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque.

Morgan, Gary S. and Spencer G. Lucas 2005 Pleistocene Vertebrates from Rio Arriba and Taos Counties, Northernmost New Mexico. In Geology of the Chama Basin, Edited by S.G. Lucas, K.E. Zeigler, V.W. Leuth, and D.E. Owen, pp.416-424. New Mexico Geological Society Guidebook, 56th Field Conference.

389

Morgan, William N. 1994 Ancient Architecture of the Southwest. University of Texas Press, Austin.

Morris, Earl H. 1939 Archaeological Studies in the La Plata District, Southwestern Colorado and Northwestern New Mexico. Carnegie Institution of Washington Publication No. 519, Washington DC.

Muceus, Cheryl and Bob Lawrence 1990 Here, There, Everywhere: A Site Location Study of Gallina Sites Reported from Surveys for the Boot Jack Timber Sale. Paper presented at the 55th Annual Meeting of the Society for American Archaeology, Las Vegas.

Murray, Mary E. 1978 A Quantitative Analysis of Corn Storage in Gallina Culture Houses. In Preliminary Report on the 1976-1977 Excavations on Huerfano Mesa and the Hacha Ridge, Cuba Ranger District, Llaves Region. USFS 1978-10-006. On file at the Santa Fe National Forest Supervisor’s Office, Santa Fe.

Myers, Nate 2007 A Typological Assessment of the Mesa Portales Ceramics. Master’s thesis. Department of Anthropology, Eastern New Mexico University.

Neff, Hector 2008 Inductively Coupled Plasma-Mass Spectrometry of Gallina Ceramics from the Davis Ranch Site and Nogales Cliff House. Institute for Integrated Research in Materials, Environments, and Societies at California State University, Long Beach. 2011 Inductively Coupled Plasma-Mass Spectrometry of Gallina Ceramics and Clays. Institute for Integrated Research in Materials, Environments, and Societies at California State University, Long Beach.

Neff, Hector, Daniel O. Larson, and Michael D. Glascock 1997 Evolution of Anasazi Ceramic Production and Distribution: Compositional Evidence from a Pueblo III Site in South-Central Utah. Journal of Field Archaeology 24(4):473-492.

Neitzel, Jill E. and Ronald L. Bishop 1990 Neutron Activation of Dogoszhi Style Ceramics: Production and Exchange in the Chacoan Regional System. Kiva 56(1):67-85.

Nelson, Ben A. 1981 Ethnoarchaeology and Paleodemography: A Test of Turner and Lofgren’s Hypothesis. Journal of Anthropological Research 37(2):107-129.

390

Nelson, Ben A. and Steven A. LeBlanc 1986 Short-Term Sedentism in the American Southwest: The Mimbres Valley Salado. Maxwell Museum of Anthropology and University of New Mexico Press, Albuquerque.

Nelson, Greg C. and Felicia C. Madimenos 2010 Obelionic Cranial Deformation in the Puebloan Southwest. American Journal of Physical Anthropology published online by Wiley-Liss, Inc. DOI:10.1002/ajpa.21353

Nelson, Margaret C. 1991 The Study of Technological Organization. In Archaeological Method and Theory Vol. 3. Edited by M.B. Schiffer, pp.57-100. University of Arizona Press, Tucson.

Nelson, Nels C. 1914 Pueblo Ruins of the Galisteo Basin, New Mexico. Anthropological Papers of the American Museum of Natural History, Vol. 15, Part 1. New York.

Nordenskiold, Gustaf E. A. 1895 The Cliff Dwellers of the Mesa Verde, Southwestern Colorado: Their Pottery and Implements. Translated by D.L. Morgan. P.A. Norstedt and Sons, Stockholm.

Norton, Frederick H. 1970 Fine Ceramics, Technology and Applications. McGraw-Hill, New York.

Ogilvie, Marsha D. and Charles E. Hilton 1987 Burial Report for LA 58942 Burial #1. Part of USFS Report 1986-10-124D. On file at the Santa Fe National Forest Supervisor’s Office, Santa Fe. 1993 Analysis of Selected Skeletal Material from Sites 423-124 and -131. In Across the Colorado Plateau: Anthropological Studies for the Transwestern Pipeline Expansion Project, Vol.18: Human Remains and Burial Goods. Edited by N.P. Hermann, M.D. Ogilvie, C.E. Hilton, and K.L. Brown, pp.97-128. Office of Contract Archeology, University of New Mexico. 2000 Ritualized Violence in the Prehistoric Southwest. International Journal for Osteoarchaeology 10:27-48.

Olinger, Bart 1988 Pottery studies using X-ray fluorescence, part 3: the historic pottery of the N. Tewa. Pottery Southwest 15(4):1-6.

Olinger, Bart and Anne I. Woosley 1989 Pottery studies using X-ray fluorescence, part 4: the pottery of Taos Pueblo. Pottery Southwest 16(1):1-8.

Olsen, Nancy H. 2002 Potters' Choices: The Social Construction of Pottery-Making Technologies at

391

Acoma and Laguna Pueblos, New Mexico. Ph.D. dissertation, Anthropology Department, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque.

Oppelt, Norman T. 1994 Petrography of Mesa Verde National Park pottery. Pottery Southwest 21(3):1-3.

Ortman, Scott G. and Bruce A. Bradley 2002 Sand Canyon Pueblo: The Container in the Center. In Seeking the Center Place: Archaeology and Ancient Communities in the Mesa Verde Region. Edited by M.D. Varien and R.H Wilshusen, pp.41-78. University of Utah Press, Salt Lake City.

O’Sullivan, Robert B. 1974 The Upper Triassic Chinle Formation in north-central New Mexico. In Ghost Ranch: Central-Northern, New Mexico, edited by C.T. Siemers, pp.171-174. New Mexico Geological Society Guidebook, 25th Field Conference. 2010 Correlation of the Upper Part of the Middle Jurassic San Rafael Group in Northeast Arizona, Northwest New Mexico, and Southeast Utah. In Geology of the Four Corners Country, Edited by J.E. Fassett, K.E. Zeigler, and V.W. Leuth, pp.91-100. New Mexico Geological Society Guidebook, 61st Field Conference.

Otterbein, Keith F. 1989 The Evolution of War: A Cross-Cultural Study. Third edition. HRAF Press, New Haven.

Owen, Donald E., L.J. Walters, Jr., L.M. Depetro, and J.M. Turmelle 1978 Paleocurrents of Jackpile Sandstone, Burro Canyon Formation, and Dakota Sandstone of San Juan Basin Region, New Mexico, Colorado, and Utah. American Association of Petroleum Geologists Bulletin 62(6):1093.

Owen, Donald E., L.J. Walters, Jr., John R. Kostura, and K. Grant 1976 Paleocurrent Analysis of Dakota and Subsequent Sandstones, San Juan Basin, New Mexico. American Association of Petroleum Geologists Bulletin 60(8):1405.

Owen, Donald E., Angelique M. Forgas, Shawn A. Miller, Ryan J. Stelly, Donald E. Owen, Jr. 2005 Surface and Subsurface Stratigraphy of the Burro Canyon Formation, Dakota Sandstone, and Inter-tongued Mancos Shale of the Chama Basin, New Mexico. In Geology of the Chama Basin, Edited by S.G. Lucas, K.E. Zeigler, V.W. Leuth, and D.E. Owen, pp.218-226. New Mexico Geological Society Guidebook, 56th Field Conference.

Page, Gordon 1986 Field Report on Signaling Possibilities, Using Selenite. On file at the Florence Hawley Ellis Museum of Anthropology at Ghost Ranch, Abiquiu.

392

Parsons, Elsie Clews 1924 The Scalp Ceremonial of the Zuni. Memoirs of the American Anthropological Association No. 31. Menasha, Wisconsin. 1996 Pueblo Indian Religion. Bison Books edition. University of Nebraska Press, Lincoln.

Pattison, Natalie Batchelder 1968 Nogales Cliff House: A Largo-Gallina Site. Master’s thesis, Department of Anthropology, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque.

Pavlů, Ivan 1997 Pottery Origins: Initial Forms, Cultural Behavior, and Decorative Styles. Karolinum, Univerzita Karlova.

Paynter, Sarah and Michael S. Tite 2001 The Evolution of Glazing Technologies in the Ancient Near East and Egypt, In Social Context of Technological Change in Egypt and the Near East, 1650-1550 BC. Edited by A. Shortland, pp.239-254. Oxbow Press, Oxford.

Peckham, Stewart L. 1963a Two Rosa Phase Sites near Dulce. New Mexico Highway Salvage Archaeology, 4:92-115. 1963b A Basket Maker III Site near Tohatchi, New Mexico. Highway Salvage Archaeology Vol. 4. Edited by S. Peckham, pp.73-82. Museum of New Mexico, Santa Fe. 1972 Nogales Cliff House Application for Registration on the New Mexico State Register of Cultural Properties. Copy on file with the New Mexico State Historic Preservation Office, Santa Fe.

Pendleton, La Verna 1952 The Gallina Phase of Northern New Mexico. In Indian Tribes of Aboriginal America: Selected Papers of the XXIXth International Congress of Americanists. Editor Sol Tax, pp. 145-152. Volume 29, Part 2. Cooper Square Publishers, New York.

Perret, William 1976 Field Report on Bg 20-2, The Large Western Reservoir on Rattlesnake Ridge. Part of USFS Report 1980-10-012. On file at the Santa Fe National Forest Supervisor’s Office, Santa Fe.

Peterson, John A., David V. Hill, Alfredo Enriquez, and Tim Graves 1998 The University of Texas at El Paso Wild Horse Canyon Archaeological Project: A Field Report on the 1997 University of Texas at El Paso Archaeological Field School. Department of Sociology and Anthropology, University of Texas, El Paso.

393

Pétrequin, Pierre 1993 North Wind, South Wind: Neolithic Technical Choices in the Jura Mountains, 3700-2400 BC. In Technological Choices: Transformation in Material Cultures Since the Neolithic. Edited by P. Lemonnier, pp.36-76. Routledge, New York.

Pettijohn, Francis J., Paul E. Potter, and Raymond Siever 1987 Sand and Sandstone. Springer-Verlang, New York.

Pfaffenberger, Bryan 1988 Fetichised Objects and Human Nature: Towards an Anthropology of Technology. Man 23(2):236-252. 1992 Social Anthropology of Technology. Annual Review of Anthropology 21:491-516. 1999 Worlds in the Making: Technological Activities and the Construction of Intersubjective Meaning. In The Social Dynamics of Technology: Practice, Politics, and World Views. ed. M.A. Dobres and C.R. Hoffman, pp.147-166. Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington DC.

Plog, Fred 1984 Study Area 4: Cuba Ranger District, Santa Fe National Forest., In Stage 1 Site Locational Modeling in the Southwestern Region, ed. L.S. Cordell and D.F. Green, pp.58-60. USDA Forest Service Southwestern Region Cultural Resources Management Report No. 5. Southwestern Regional Office, Albuquerque.

Poague, Wendy J., Kristin D. Martine, and David A. Phillips, Jr. 1996 Cultural Resource Overview and Class III Survey of El Vado Reservoir, Rio Arriba County, New Mexico. Report on file US Bureau of Reclamation, Albuquerque Area Office. ALB-158 and NMCRIS# 46555

Polk, Harding, Colleen A. Shaffrey, Anthony E. Martinez, and John A. Ware 2000 Data Recovery Investigations of Sites LA 111059 and 111061 along NM 537, Jicarilla Apache Reservation. NMCRIS Activity 60787. SWCA Environmental Consultants, Albuquerque.

Pool, Christopher A. 2000 Why a Kiln? Firing Technology in the Sierra de los Tuxtlas, Veracruz, Mexico. Archaeometry 42(1):61-76.

Portman, Maurice V. 1899 A History of Our Relations with the Andamanese. Office of the Superintendent of Government Printing, Calcutta, India.

Post, Stephen S. 1982 Archeological Testing at LA 12381 (duplicates LA 5860) along State Road 112. Laboratory of Anthropology Note No. 310a. Museum of New Mexico, Santa Fe.

394

Potter, James M. and Scott G. Ortman 2004 Community and Cuisine in the Prehispanic American Southwest. In Identity, Feasting, and the Archaeology of the Greater Southwest. Edited by B.J. Mills, pp.173-191. University Press of Colorado, Boulder.

Powell, Melissa S. 2002 The Organization of Ceramic Production in the Upper Pecos Valley, New Mexico, A.D. 1200–1400. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Anthropology, The University of New Mexico, Albuquerque.

Powers, Margaret A. and Byron P. Johnson 1987 Defensive Sites of Dinetah. Cultural Resources Series No. 2, New Mexico Bureau of Land Management. Albuquerque District, Albuquerque.

Powers, Maurice C. 1953 A New Roundness Scale for Sedimentary Particles. Journal of Sedimentary Research 23(2):117-119.

Preucel, Robert W. 1987 Settlement Succession on the Pajarito Plateau, New Mexico. Kiva 53(1):3-33. 1990 Seasonal Circulation and Dual Residence in the Pueblo Southwest: A Prehistoric Example from the Pajarito Plateau, New Mexico. Garland Publishing, New York.

Prudden, T. Mitchell 1897 An Elder Brother to the Cliff-Dwellers. Harper’s Magazine 95(565):56-62.

Pryce, T. Oliver, Yannis Bassiakos, M. C. Ceapotis, Roger C. Doonan 2007 ‘De Caerimoniae’ Technological Choices in Copper-Smelting Furnace Design at Early Bronze Age Crysokamino, Crete. Archaeometry 49(3):543-557.

Quam, Alvina (translator) 1972 The Zunis, Self-Portrayals by the Zuni People. University of New Mexico Press, Albuquerque.

Radcliffe-Brown, Alfred R. 1964 The Andaman Islanders. Free Press of Glencoe, New York.

Rapp, Jr., George 1985 The provenance of artifactual raw materials. In Archaeological Geology, edited by G. Rapp, Jr. and J.A. Gifford, pp.353-375. Yale University Press, New Haven.

Rapp, Jr., George and Christopher L. Hill 1998 Geoarchaeology: The Earth-Science Approach to Archaeological Interpretation. Yale University Press, New Haven.

Reagan, Albert B. 1917 The Jemez Indians. El Palacio 4:25-72.

395

1931 The Pictographs of Ashley and Dry Fork Valleys in Northeastern Utah. Transactions of the Kansas Academy of Science 34:168-216.

Reed, Chris 2004 Gallina Site Relocation and Documentation. New Mexico Past Projects. Passport in Time website, accessed April 10, 2009.

Reed, Erik K. 1943 Excavations in Mancos Canyon, Colorado. Manuscript National Park Service, Santa Fe. 1956 Types of Village-Plan Layouts in the Southwest. In Prehistoric Settlement Patterns in the New World. Edited by G.R. Willey, pp.11-17. Viking Fund Publications in Anthropology 23. Wenner-Gren Foundation for Anthropological Research, New York. 1963 An Early Gallina Burial from the Jicarilla Country (LA 6163). El Palacio 70(3):24-35.

Reed, Heidi E. and John R. Stein 1998 Testing the Pecos Classification. In Unit Issues in Archaeology: Measuring Time, Space and Material. Edited by A.F. Ramenofsky and A. Steffen, pp.41-51. University of Utah Press, Salt Lake City.

Reed, Lori Stephens and Kathy Hensler 2007 Gallina Clay Study in Association with Site L/102. Manuscript in possession of author.

Reeve, Frank D. 1957 Seventeenth Century Navaho-Spanish Relations. New Mexico Historical Review 32(1):36-52.

Reina, Ruben E. and Robert M. Hill III 1978 The Traditional Pottery of Guatemala. University of Texas Press, Austin.

Reiter, Paul 1938 The Jemez Pueblo of Unshagi, New Mexico. Part I. The University of New Mexico Bulletin No. 326. Monograph of the University of New Mexico and the School of American Research Vol. 1, No. 4. Albuquerque.

Renfrew, Colin 1994 Towards a Cognitive Archaeology. In The Ancient Mind: Elements of Cognitive Archaeology, eds. C. Renfrew & E.B.W. Zubrow, pp.3-12. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

Reynolds, Robert C., Jr. 1985 NEWMOD: A Computer Program for the Calculation of One-Dimensional Diffraction Patterns of Mixed-Layered Clays, Hanover, NH.

396

1993 WILDFIRE: A Computer Program for the Calculation of Three-Dimensional Powder X-ray Diffraction Patterns for Mica Polytypes and Their Disordered Variations. Hanover, NH.

Rhodes, Daniel 1957 Clay and Glazes for the Potter. Chilton Book Company, Philadelphia.

Rice, Glen E. 2001 Warfare and Massing in the Salt and Gila Basins of Central Arizona. In Deadly Landscapes: Case Studies in Prehistoric Southwestern Warfare. Edited by G.E. Rice and S.A. LeBlanc, pp.289-329. University of Utah Press, Salt Lake City.

Rice, Prudence M. 1987 Pottery Analysis: A Sourcebook. The University of Chicago Press, Chicago. 1992 Specialization, Standardization, and Diversity: A Retrospective. In The Ceramic Legacy of Anna O. Shepard, Edited by R. L. Bishop and F. W. Lange, pp. 257–279. University of Colorado Press, Boulder.

Ridgley, Jennie L. 1989 Trace Fossils and Mollusks from the Upper Member of the Wanakah Formation, Chama Basin, New Mexico: Evidence for a Lacustrine Origin. US Geological Survey Bulletin 1808-C (p.C1-C16).

Ridgley, Jennie L. and Martin Goldhaber 1983 Isotopic evidence for a marine origin of the Todilto Limestone, north-central New Mexico. Geological Society of America, Abstracts with Programs 15:414.

Rigby, J. Keith, Jr. and H.A. Clement 1983 A Large Chondrichthian Fauna from the Pictured Cliffs Sandstone, Cretaceous (Campanian), San Juan Basin, New Mexico. Geological Society of America, Abstracts with Programs 15:260.

Rigby, J. Keith, Jr. and Spencer G. Lucas 1977 Fossil Mammals from the Ojo Alamo Sandstone. In San Juan Basin III Supplement, editors J.E. Fassett and H.L. James, p.55-56. New Mexico Geological Society Guidebook, 28th Field Conference.

Riley, Carroll 1987 The Frontier People: The Greater Southwest in the Protohistoric Period. Revised edition. University of New Mexico Press, Albuquerque.

Ringrose-Voase, Anthony J. 1991 Micromorphology of Soil Structure: Description, Quantification, Application. Australian Journal of Soil Research 29:777-813.

Roberts, Frank H. H., Jr. 1940 Archaeological Remains in the Whitewater District, Eastern Arizona: Part II,

397

Artifacts and Burials. Bureau of American Ethnology Bulletin No. 126. Smithsonian Institution, Washington DC.

Robertson, Glen 1979 Territorial Period Conflicts. In New Mexico in Maps, edited by J.I. Williams and P.E. McAllister, pp.38-39. Technology Application Center, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque.

Robinson, William J. and Richard L. Warren 1971 Tree-Ring Dates from New Mexico C-D: Northern Rio Grande Area. Laboratory of Tree-Ring Research, The University of Arizona, Tucson.

Robinson, William J., Bruce G. Harrill, and Richard L. Warren 1974 Tree-Ring Dates from New Mexico B, Chaco-Gobernador Area. Laboratory of Tree-Ring Research, The University of Arizona, Tucson.

Rohn, Arthur H. 1975 A Stockaded Basketmaker III Village at Yellow Jacket, Colorado. Kiva 40(3):113-120. 1977 Cultural Change and Continuity on Chapin Mesa. Regents Press of Kansas, Lawrence. 1989 Warfare and Violence among the Southwestern Pueblos. Cultures in Conflict: Current Anthropological Perspectives, edited by D.C. Tkaczuk and B.C. Vivian, pp.147-152. Archaeological Association of the University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada.

Roll, Tom E., Michael P. Neeley, Robert J. Speakman, and Michael D. Glascock 2005 Characterization of Montana Cherts by LA-ICP-MS. In Laser Ablation-ICP-MS in Archaeological Research, ed. R.J. Speakman and H. Neff, pp.58-74, University of New Mexico Press, Albuquerque.

Roney, John R. 1996 The Pueblo III Period in the Eastern San Juan Basin and Acoma-Laguna Area. In The Prehistoric Pueblo World A.D. 1150-1350. Edited by M.A. Adler, pp. 145- 169. University of Arizona Press, Tucson.

Rottländer, Rolf C. A. 1967 Is Provincial Roman Pottery Standardized? Archaeometry 9:76-91.

Ruscavage-Barz, Samantha 2002 Understanding Santa Fe black-on-white style and technology: an example from the Pajarito Plateau, New Mexico. Kiva 67(3):249-268.

Rushforth, Scott and Steadman Upham 1992 A Hopi Social History. University of Texas Press, Austin.

398

Russell, Frank 1908 The Pima Indians. In Twenty-Sixth Annual Report of the Bureau of American Ethnology, pp.3-289. Smithsonian Institution, Washington DC.

Rye, Owen S. 1976 Keeping Your Temper Under Control: Materials and the Manufacture of Papuan Pottery. Archaeology and Physical Anthropology in Oceania 11:106-137. 1981 Pottery Technology: Principles and Reconstruction. Taraxacum,Washington DC.

Sample, L. Laetitia and Albert Mohr 1975 Archaeological Excavations at Site No. L/102 Rio Arriba, County New Mexico- 1973. Laboratory of Anthropology Note No. 83, Museum of New Mexico, Santa Fe.

Santos, Elmer S. 1970 Stratigraphy of the Morrison Formation and structure of the Ambrosia Lake District, New Mexico. U.S. Geological Survey Bulletin 1272-E. United States Government Printing Office, Washington DC.

Sarkar, Jayanta 1990 The Jarawa. Anthropological Survey of India. Seagull Books, Calcutta.

Saucier, Alva E. 1974 Stratigraphy and uranium potential of the Burro Canyon Formation in the southern Chama Basin, New Mexico. In Ghost Ranch: Central-Northern, New Mexico, edited by C.T. Siemers, pp.211-217. New Mexico Geological Society Guidebook, 25th Field Conference.

Saxe, Arthur 1970 Social Dimensions of Mortuary Practices. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor.

Schaeffer, Bobb and Charles Patterson 1984 Jurassic fishes from the western United States, with comments on Jurassic fish distribution. American Museum Novitates, No. 2796.

Schaller, David M. 1987 Petrology of Archaeological Ceramics from the Gila River Indian Reservation, Arizona. Geological Society of America Abstracts with Programs 19:831.

Scheick, Cherie L. 2006 A Study of Pre-Columbian and Historic Uses of the Santa Fe National Forest: Competition and Alliance in the Northern Middle Rio Grande. USDA Forest Service Southwestern Region Cultural Report No. 18, Southwestern Regional Office, Albuquerque.

399

Schiffer, Michael B. 1972 Archaeological and Systemic Context. American Antiquity 37(2):156-165. 1975 Behavioral Chain Analysis: Activities, Organization, and the Use of Space. Fieldiana 65:103-174. 1983 Toward the Identification of Formation Processes. American Antiquity 48(4):675- 706. 1987 Formation Processes of the Archaeological Record. University of Utah Press, Salt Lake City. 1992 Technological Perspectives on Behavioral Change. University of Arizona Press, Tucson. 2003 Comments II: Properties, Performance Characteristics and Behavioral Theory in the Study of Technology. Archaeometry 45(1):169-172.

Schiffer, Michael B. and James M. Skibo 1987 Theory and Experiment in the Study of Technological Change. Current Anthropology 28(5):595-622. 1997 The Explanation of Artifact Variability. American Antiquity 62(1):27-50.

Schleher, Kari L. 2010 The Role of Standardization in Specialization of Ceramic Production at San Marcos Pueblo, New Mexico. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Anthropology, The University of New Mexico, Albuquerque.

Schriever, Bernard A.. Matthew Taliaferro, Barbara J. Roth 2011 A Tale of Two Sites: Functional Site Differentiation and Lithic Technology During the Late Pithouse Period in the Mimbres Area of Southwestern New Mexico. Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 30(2):102-115.

Schroeder, Albert H. and Dan S. Matson 1965 A Colony on the Move: Gaspar Castano de Sosa’s Journal 1590-1591. School of American Research, Santa Fe.

Schub, Lisa 2002 Gallina Wildland Urban Interface Heritage Resource Survey. USFS Report 2001- 10-070. On file at the Santa Fe National Forest Supervisor’s Office, Santa Fe.

Schulman, Albert 1949 A Gallina Cliff House. El Palacio 56(8):230-234. 1950 Pre-Columbian Tower in the Southwest. American Antiquity 4:288-297.

Schwartz, Douglas W., Richard C. Chapman, and Jane Kepp 1980 Archaeology of the Grand Canyon: Unkar Delta. Grand Canyon Archaeological Series vol. 2. School of American Research Press, Santa Fe.

Sciscenti, James V. 1962 Fragmentary Storage Rooms in the Largo-Gallina District. Laboratory of

400

Anthropology Note 64. Museum of New Mexico, Santa Fe.

Scotese, Christopher R. 2000 PALEOMAP Project. Electronic document. http://www.scotese.com/. Accessed March 1, 2011.

Sealey, Paul L. and Spencer G. Lucas 1997 Paleontology, Stratigraphy and Biostratigraphy of the Upper Cretaceous Lewis Shale near Waterflow, San Juan County, New Mexico. In Mesozoic Geology and Paleontology of the Four Corners Region, Edited by O.J. Anderson, B.S. Kues, SG. Lucas, pp.233-237. New Mexico Geological Society Guidebook, 48th Field Conference.

Seaman, Timothy J. 1976 Archeological Investigation on the San Juan-to-Ojo 345 Kv Transmission Line for the Public Service Company of New Mexico, Excavation of LA 11843: An Early Stockaded Settlement of the Gallina Phase. Laboratory of Anthropology Notes Series No. 111g. Museum of New Mexico, Santa Fe. 1983 An Inventory of Cultural Resources along NM 112, Rio Arriba County, New Mexico. Laboratory of Anthropology Notes Series No. 310. Museum of New Mexico, Santa Fe.

Seymour, Deni J. 2004 A Rancheria in the Gran Apacheria: Evidence of Intercultural Interaction at the Cerro Rojo Site. Plains Anthropologist 49:153-192.

Shackley, M. Steven 1988 Sources of Archaeological Obsidian in the Southwest: An Archaeological, Petrological, and Geochemical Study. American Antiquity 53(4):752-772. 1999 Source Provenance of Archaeological Obsidian from Prehistoric Sites in the Gallina Region Northwest New Mexico. Archaeological X-Ray Fluorescence Spectrometry Laboratory, University of California, Berkeley. Report on file, Maxwell Museum Archive Catalogue No. 2005.22.137

Shepard, Anna O. 1936 Petrology of Pecos Pottery. In The Pottery of Pecos II: The Glaze Paint, Culinary and Other Wares, eds. A.V. Kidder & A.O. Shepard. Yale University Press, New Haven. 1938 Technological Notes on the Pottery from Unshagi. In The Jemez Pueblo of Unshagi, New Mexico, ed. P. Reiter, pp. 205-211. Monograph of the University of New Mexico and the School of American Research, The University of New Mexico Bulletin vol. 1, no. 4. University of New Mexico Press, Albuquerque. 1939 Technology of La Plata Pottery. In Archeological Studies in the La Plata District, ed. E.H. Morris, pp. 249-287. Publication No. 519. Carnegie Institution of Washington, Washington DC. 1942 Rio Grande Glaze Paint Ware. Publication No. 528, Contribution No. 39.

401

Carnegie Institution of Washington, Washington DC. 1965 Rio Grande Glaze Paint Pottery: A Test of Petrographic Analysis. In Ceramics and Man, ed. F.R. Matson, pp. 62-87. Publication in Anthropology No 41. Viking Fund, Chicago. 1976 Ceramics for the Archaeologist. Carnegie Institution of Washington, Washington, DC.

Shipman, Jeff H. 1983 Human Skeletal Remains from the Salmon Ruin (LA 8846), New Mexico. In Investigations at the Salmon Site: The Structure of Chacoan Society in the Northern Southwest. Edited by C. Irwin-Williams and P.H. Shelley, pp.47-58. Final report. Eastern New Mexico University, Portales.

Shomaker, John W., Edward C. Beaumont, and Frank E. Kottlowski 1971 Strippable Low-Sulfur Coal Resources of the San Juan Basin in New Mexico and Colorado. New Mexico Bureau of Mines and Mineral Resources Memoir 25:15- 30.

Sillar, Bill 2000 Dung by Preference: The Choice of Fuel as an Example of How Andean Pottery Production is Embedded within Wider Technical, Social, and Economic Practices. Archaeometry 42(1):43-60.

Sillar, Bill and Michael S. Tite 2000 The Challenge of “Technological Choices” for Material Science Approaches in Archaeology. Archaeometry 42(1):2-20.

Sillitoe, Paul 1978 Big Men and War in New Guinea. Man 13(2):252-271.

Simmel, Georg 1908 Conflict and the Web of Group-Affiliations. Translators K.H. Wolff and R. Bendix. Free Press, New York.

Simpson, David Erik 2008 Architectural Patterning in Residential Structures of the Gallina Phase in Northwestern New Mexico. Master’s thesis, MAP in Anthropology, Prescott College, Prescott.

Simpson, George G. 1948 The Eocene of the San Juan Basin, New Mexico, Part I. American Journal of Science 246(5):257-282.

Sinopoli, Carla M. 1991 Approaches to Archaeological Ceramics. Plenum Press, New York.

402

Skibo, James M. and Michael Brian Schiffer 2001 Understanding Artifact Variability and Change: A Behavioral Framework. In Anthropological Perspectives on Technology, ed. M.B. Schiffer pp.139-149. University of New Mexico Press, Albuquerque.

Sleeter, Richard Stanley 1987 Cultural Interaction of the Prehistoric Gallina: A Study of Settlement Patterns in North-Central New Mexico. Master’s thesis, Department of Anthropology, New Mexico State University, Las Cruces, New Mexico. 1990 New Mexico’s Vanished Tower Dwellers Revisited. Paper presented at the 55th Annual Meeting of the Society for American Archaeology, Las Vegas.

Sliwinski, Zofia 1989 A Report of a Cultural Survey on a Forest Road leading into the Davis Ranch. USFS Report 1989-10-066. On file at the Santa Fe National Forest Supervisor’s Office, Santa Fe.

Smith, Gary A. and Bruce B. Huckell 2005 The Geological and Geoarchaeological Significance of Cerro Pedernal, Rio Arriba County, New Mexico. In Geology of the Chama Basin, Edited by S.G. Lucas, K.E. Zeigler, V.W. Leuth, and D.E. Owen, pp.425-431. New Mexico Geological Society Guidebook, 56th Field Conference.

Smith, Landon D. and Herbert W. Dick 1977 A Preliminary Analysis of Three Sample Surveys in the Golondrino Mesa Area, Santa Fe National Forest, New Mexico. Miscellaneous Paper No. 9 in USDA Forest Service Southwestern Region Archeological Report No. 15. Southwestern Region Office, Albuquerque.

Smith, Larry N. 1992 Stratigraphy, Sediment Dispersal and Paleogeography of the Lower Eocene San Jose Formation, San Juan Basin, New Mexico and Colorado. In San Juan Basin IV, editors S.G. Lucas, B.S. Kues, T.E. Williamson, A.P. Hunt, p.297-309. New Mexico Geological Society Guidebook, 43rd Field Conference.

Smith, Larry N. and Spencer G. Lucas 1991 Stratigraphy, sedimentology, and paleontology of the lower Eocene San Jose Formation in the central portion of the San Juan Basin, northwestern New Mexico. New Mexico Bureau of Mines and Mineral Resources Bulletin 126. Socorro, New Mexico.

Snead, Rodman E. 1979 Landforms. In New Mexico in Maps, edited by J.I. Williams and P.E. McAllister, pp.6-7. Technology Application Center, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque.

403

Snow, Bryan Edward 1978 Owl Point: A Largo-Gallina Site in Billy Rice Canyon, New Mexico. Master’s thesis. Department of Anthropology, University of Toronto.

Snow, David H. and Henry J. Fullbright 1976 Strontium/Rubidium Occurrence Pattern in Apachean Sherds (SAMAC Analytical Notes I). Pottery Southwest 3(2):3-5.

Solometo, Julie P. 2004 The Conduct and Consequences of War: Dimensions of Conflict in East-Central Arizona. Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Anthropology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor. 2010 Conflict in the Prehistoric American Southwest: Using Archaeological Evidence and Ethnographic Insight to Reconstruct the Conduct and Consequences of War. In The SAA Archaeological Record 10(4):50-52.

Speakman, Robert J. and Michael D. Glascock 2006 Instrumental Neutron Activation Analysis of Largo-Gallina Pottery from Site L/102. Archaeometry Laboratory Missouri University Research Reactor, University of Missouri, Columbia.

Spicer, Edward H. 1962 Cycles of Conquest. University of Arizona Press, Tucson.

Spielmann, Katherine A. 1998 Migration and Reorganization: The Pueblo IV Period in the American Southwest. Arizona State University Anthropological Research Papers No. 51. Arizona State University, Tempe. (editor) 2002 Feasting, Craft Specialization, and the Ritual Mode of Production in Small-Scale Societies. American Anthropologist 104(1):195-207.

Spielmann, Katherine A., Margaret J. Schoeninger, and Katherine Moore 1990 Plains-Pueblo Interdependence and Human Diet at Pecos Pueblo, New Mexico. American Antiquity 55(4):745-765.

Spier, Leslie 1933 Yuman Tribes of the Gila River. University of Chicago Press, Chicago.

Spoerl, Patricia M. 1984 Prehistoric Fortifications in Central Arizona. In Prehistoric Cultural Developments in Central Arizona: Archaeology of the Upper New River Region. Edited by P.M. Spoerl and G.J. Gumerman, pp.261-276. Center for Archaeological Investigations Occasional Papers No. 5. Southern Illinois University Press, Carbondale.

404

Stark, Miriam T. 1996 Material Culture Theory and Social Dimensions of Technical Choice. Paper presented at the 61st annual meeting of the Society for American Archaeology, New Orleans. 1998 Technical Choices and Social Boundaries in Material Culture Patterning: An Introduction. In The Archaeology of Social Boundaries, Edited by M.T. Stark, pp.1-11. Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington DC.

Stark, Miriam T., Ronald L. Bishop, and Elizabeth Miksa 2000 Ceramic Technology and Social Boundaries: Cultural Practices in Kalinga Clay Selection and Use. Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory 7(4):295-331.

Stark, Miriam T., Mark D. Elson, and Jeffery J. Clark 1998 Social Boundaries and Technical Choices in the Tonto Basin Prehistory. In The Archaeology of Social Boundaries, Edited by M.T. Stark, pp.208-231. Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington DC.

Steponaitis, Vincas P. 1983 Ceramics, Chronology and Community Patterns: An Archaeological Study at Moundville. Academic Press, New York. 1984 Technological Studies of Prehistoric Pottery from Alabama: Physical Properties and Vessel Function. In The Many Dimensions of Pottery, Edited by S. E. van der Leeuw and A. C. Pritchard, pp.79-127. University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam.

Stevenson, Matilda C. 1904 The Zuni Indians: Their Mythology, Esoteric Fraternities, and Ceremonies. Twenty-third Annual Report of the Bureau of American Ethnology, 189 Smithsonian Institution, 1901-1902. U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C.

Stewart, John H., Forrest G. Poole, and Richard F. Wilson 1972 Stratigraphy and origin of the Chinle Formation and related Upper Triassic strata in the Colorado Plateau region. U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 690. United States Government Printing Office, Washington DC.

Stodder, Ann L.W. 1989 Bioarchaeological Research in the Basin and Range Region. In Human Adaptations and Cultural Change in the Greater Southwest: An Overview of the Archaeological Resources in the Basin and Range Province. Edited by A.H. Simmons, A.L.W. Stodder, D.D. Dykeman, and P.A. Hicks, pp.167-190. Arkansas Archaeological Survey Research Series No. 32. University of Arkansas, Fayetteville.

Stone, Tammy 1994 The Process of Aggregation in the Zuni Region: Reasons and Implications. In Exploring Social, Political, and Economic Organization in the Zuni Region,

405

edited by T.L. Howell and T. Stone, pp. 9-23.Arizona State University Anthropological Research Papers No. 46. Arizona State University, Tempe.

Strobell, J.D. 1964 Sonsela Sandstone Bed in Chinle Formation. Geological Survey Research 1964, Chapter A. U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 501-A. United States Government Printing Office, Washington DC.

Stuart, David E. 1987 Canyon Harbors Secrets of the Ancients. New Mexico Magazine, October:52-56.

Stuart, David E. and Robin Y. Farwell 1983 Out of Phase: Late Pithouse Occupations in the Highlands of New Mexico. In High-Altitude Adaptations in the Southwest. Edited by J.C. Winter, pp.115-158. USDA Forest Service Southwestern Region Cultural Resources Management Report No. 2. Southwestern Region Office, Albuquerque.

Stuart, David E. and Rory P. Gauthier 1981 Prehistoric New Mexico Background for Survey. Historic Preservation Bureau, Santa Fe.

Stubbs, Stanley A. and William S. Stallings, Jr. 1953 The Excavation of Pindi Pueblo, New Mexico. Monographs of the School of American Research and the Laboratory of Anthropology No. 18, Santa Fe.

Stull, Brian P. 2003 The Mesa Poleo Wildland Urban Interface Heritage Resource Survey. USFS Report 2003-10-013. On file at the Santa Fe National Forest Supervisor’s Office, Santa Fe.

Sullivan, Robert M. 1997 A Juvenile Ornithomimus Antiquus (Dinosauria: Theropoda: Ornithomimosauria), from the Upper Cretaceous Kirtland Formation (De-Na-Zin Member), San Juan Basin, New Mexico. In Mesozoic Geology and Paleontology of the Four Corners Region, Edited by O.J. Anderson, B.S. Kues, SG. Lucas, pp.249-253. New Mexico Geological Society Guidebook, 48th Field Conference.

Sullivan, Robert M., Spencer G. Lucas, and Dennis R. Braman 2005 Dinosaurs, Pollen, and the Cretaceous-Tertiary Boundary in the San Juan Basin, New Mexico. In Geology of the Chama Basin, Edited by S.G. Lucas, K.E. Zeigler, V.W. Leuth, and D.E. Owen, pp.395-407. New Mexico Geological Society Guidebook, 56th Field Conference.

Swarthout, Jeanne and Alan R. Dulaney 1978 The Great Cibola Typological Consensus Test. Paper presented at the 2nd Cibola White Ware Conference, Museum of Northern Arizona, Flagstaff.

406

Tabares, A. Natasha, Michael W. Love, Robert J. Speakman, Hector Neff, and Michael D. Glascock 2005 Straight from the Source: Obsidian Prismatic Blades at El Ujuxte, Guatemala. In Laser Ablation-ICP-MS in Archaeological Research, ed. R.J. Speakman and H. Neff, pp.16-26, University of New Mexico Press, Albuquerque.

Tanner, William F. 1974 Mesozoic lake history of northern New Mexico. In Ghost Ranch: Central- Northern, New Mexico, edited by C.T. Siemers, pp.219-224. New Mexico Geological Society Guidebook, 25th Field Conference.

Thompson, Laura 1945 Logico-Aesthetic Integration in Hopi Culture. American Anthropologist 47:540- 553.

Thompson, Raymond H. 1958 Modern Yucatecan Maya Pottery Making. Memoirs of the Society for American Archaeology No. 15.

Tite, Michael S. 1969 Determination of the Firing Temperature of Ancient Ceramics by Measurement of Thermal Expansion: A Reassessment. Archaeometry 11:131-145.

Tite, Michael S., Vassilis Kilikoglou, and George Vekinis 2001 Strength, Toughness and Thermal Shock Resistance of Ancient Ceramics, and Their Influence on Technological Choice. Archaeometry 43(3):301-324. 2003 Reply. Archaeometry 45(1):181-183.

Titiev, Mischa 1944 Old Orabi: A Study of the Hopi Indians of Third Mesa. Papers of the Peabody Museum of American Archaeology and Ethnology Vol.22, Part 1. Cambridge.

Toll, H. Wolcott 1990 A Reassessment of Chaco Cylinder Jars. In Clues to the Past: Papers in honor of William M. Sundt, edited by Meliha S. Duran and David T. Kirkpatrick, pp. 273– 305. vol. 16. The Archaeological Society of New Mexico, Albuquerque.

Toll, H. Wolcott and Peter J. McKenna 1987 The Ceramography of Pueblo Alto. In Investigations at the Pueblo Alto Complex, Chaco Canyon, New Mexico, Vol. 3. Edited by F.J. Mathien and T.C. Windes, pp.19-230. Publications of Archaeology 18f, National Park Service, Santa Fe.

Toulouse, Joseph H., Jr. 1939 Arrow Shaft Tools (with notes on their general distribution). In Preliminary Report on the 1937 Excavations, Bc 50-51, Chaco Canyon, New Mexico, with

407

Some Distributional Analyses. Edited by C. Kluckhohn and P. Reiter, pp.80-89. The University of New Mexico Bulletin No. 345. Anthropological Series, Vol.3, Part 2. Albuquerque.

Triandan, Daniela, Hector Neff, and Michael D. Glascock 1997 An Evaluation of the Archaeological Relevance of Weak-Acid Extraction ICP: White Mountain Redware as a Case Study. Journal of Archaeological Science 24:997-1002.

Turner, Christine E. 2010 Brushy Basin member – “Lake” T’oo’dichi’. In Geology of the Four Corners Country, Edited by J.E. Fassett, K.E. Zeigler, and V.W. Leuth, pp.23-24. New Mexico Geological Society Guidebook, 61st Field Conference.

Turner, Christine E. and Fred Peterson 2004 Reconstruction of the Upper Jurassic Morrison Formation Extinct Ecosystem: A Synthesis Sedimentary Geology 167(3-4):309-355.

Turner, Christy G., II 1983 Taphonomic Reconstructions of Human Violence and Cannibalism Based on Mass Burials in the American Southwest. In Carnivores, Human Scavengers and Predators: A Question of Bone Technology. Edited by G.M. LeMoine and A.S. MacEachern, pp.219-240. Archaeological Association of the University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada.

Turner, Christy G. and Laurel Lofgren 1966 Household Size of Prehistoric Western Pueblo Indians. Southwestern Journal of Anthropology 22(2):117-132.

Turner, Christy G., II and Jacqueline A. Turner 1990 Perimortem Damage to Skeletal Remains form Wupatki National Monument, Northern Arizona. Kiva 55(3):187-212. 1999 Man Corn: Cannibalism and Violence in the Prehistoric American Southwest. University of Utah Press, Salt Lake City.

Turner, Christy G. II, Jacqueline A. Turner, and Roger C. Green 1993 Taphonomic Analysis of Anasazi Skeletal Remains from Largo-Gallina Sites in Northwestern New Mexico. Journal of Anthropological Research 49(2):83-110.

Turney, William F. 1985 Prehistoric Water Reservoirs – The Southwest. . In Southwestern Culture History: Collected Papers in Honor of Albert H. Schroeder. Edited by C.H. Lange., pp. 43- 57. Papers of the Archaeological Society of New Mexico vol. 10. Albuquerque

Tuttle, Orville F. and Norman L. Bowen 1958 Origin of Granite in the Light of Experimental Studies in the System NaAlSi3O8 –

408

KalSi3O8 – SiO2 – H2O. Geological Society of America, Boulder, Colorado.

Twitchell, Ralph E. 1912 The Leading Facts of New Mexico History. Vol. 2. Torch Press, Cedar Rapids, Iowa.

Tyson, Ken 1954 Bg 80, Room 12; Bg 81; Bg 84 Excavations at Gallina Sites on the Largo Canyon, New Mexico. Manuscript on file, University of New Mexico, 18th Gallina Field Expedition. Maxwell Museum Archive Catalogue No. 2005.22.45

Underhill, Ruth M. 1979 Papago Woman. Waveland Press, Prospect Heights, IL.

Upham, Steadman 1982 Polities and Power: An Economic and Political History of the Western Pueblo. Academic Press, New York.

Upham, Steadman and Paul F. Reed 1989 Inferring the Structure of Anasazi Warfare. In Cultures in Conflict: Current Archaeological Perspectives. Proceedings of the Twentieth Annual Conference of the Archaeological Association of the University of Calgary. Calgary, Alberta.

Van de Velde, Paul and Henriette R. Van de Velde 1939 The Black Pottery of Coyotepec, Oaxaca, Mexico. Southwest Museum Papers, No. 13.

Van der Dennen, Johan M.G. 1995 The Origin of War: The Evolution of a Male-Coalitional Reproductive Strategy. Origin Press, Groningen, Netherlands.

Van Der Leeuw, Sander E. 1993 Giving the Potter a Choice: Conceptual Aspects of Pottery Technique. In Technological Choices: Transformation in Material Cultures Since the Neolithic. Edited by P. Lemonnier, pp.238-288. Routledge, New York. 1994 Cognitive Aspects of ‘Technique’. In The Ancient Mind: Elements of Cognitive Archaeology. editors C. Renfrew and E.B.W. Zubrow, pp.135-142. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

Van Dyke, Ruth M. 2006 Chaco Reloaded: Memory and Identity on the Post Chacoan Landscape. Paper presented at the 71st Annual Meeting of the Society for American Archaeology, San Juan, Puerto Rico.

Velde, Bruce and Isabelle C. Druc 1999 Archaeological Ceramic Materials: Origin and Utilization. Springer, New York.

409

Von Huene, Friedrich 1911 Kurze mitteilung uber Perm, Trias, and Jura in New Mexico. Neues Jahrb. Fur Min. Geol., und Palaont., Beilage Bd. 32:730-739.

Voyatzoglou, Maria 1974 The jar makers of Thrapsano in Crete. Expedition 16:18-24.

Wahl, Floyd M. 1965 High-Temperature Phases of Three-Layer Clay Minerals and Their Interactions with Common Ceramic Materials. Bulletin of the American Ceramic Society 44:676.

Wake, Thomas A. 1999 Exploitation of Tradition: Bone Tool Production and Use at Colony Ross, California. In The Social Dynamics of Technology: Practice, Politics, and World Views. Edited by M.A. Dobres and C.R. Hoffman, pp.186-208. Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington DC.

Walker, William H. 1995 Ritual Prehistory: A Pueblo Case Study. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Department of Anthropology, University of Arizona, Tucson. 1996 Ritual Deposits: Another Perspective. In River of Change: Prehistory of the Middle Little Colorado River Valley, Arizona. Edited by E.G. Adams, pp.75-91. Arizona State Museum Archaeological Series No. 185, University of Arizona, Tucson. 1998 Where Are the Witches of Prehistory? Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory 5(3):245-308. 2008 Witches, Practice, and the context of Pueblo Cannibalism. In Social Violence in the Prehispanic American Southwest. Edited by D.L. Nichols and P.L. Crown, pp.143-183. University of Arizona Press, Tucson.

Wallace, Robert M. 1954 Petrographic Analysis of Pottery from University Indian Ruin. In Excavations, 1940, at University Ruin, ed. J.D. Hayden, pp. 209-219. Southwestern Monuments Association, Globe, Arizona.

Walt, Henry J. 1985 The Function of Stockade Structures. In the Excavation of the Cortez CO2 Pipeline Project Sites, 1982-1983. Edited by M.P. Marshall, pp.165-170. Office of Contract Archeology, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque.

Ward, Graeme K. 1974 Comparison of Source and Artifact Characterization Data Using a Generalized Distance Measure. American Antiquity 39:473-477.

410

Ware, John A., Harding Polk II, and David A. Phillips, Jr. 1999 Test Excavations of Eight Sites Along S.R. 537 and a Data Recovery Plan for Sites LA 111059 and LA 111061 Rio Arriba County, New Mexico. NMCRIS Activity 63355. SWCA Environmental Consultants, Albuquerque.

Warr, Mark 1984 Fear of Victimization: Why are Women and the Elderly More Afraid. Social Science Quarterly 65:681-702.

Watson, Patty Jo, Steven A. LeBlanc, and Charles Redman 1980 Aspects of Zuni Prehistory: Preliminary Report on Excavations and Survey in the El Morro Valley of New Mexico. Journal of Field Archaeology 7:201-218.

Weaver, Charles E. 1959 The Clay Petrology of Sediments. Clays and Clay Minerals 6:154-187.

Weaver, David S. 1976 Appendix E: Analysis of Skeletal Remains from LA 11841, LA 11843, and LA 11850. In Archeological Investigation on the San Juan-to-Ojo 345 Kv Transmission Line for the Public Service Company of New Mexico, Excavation of LA 11843: An Early Stockaded Settlement of the Gallina Phase. Laboratory of Anthropology Notes Series No. 111g. Museum of New Mexico, Santa Fe.

Webster’s Dictionary 2001 Webster’s Unabridged Dictionary, Second Edition. Random House, New York.

Weigand, Philip C., Garman Harbottle, and Edward V. Sayre 1977 Turquoise Sources and Source Analysis: Mesoamerica and the Southwestern U.S.A. In Exchange Systems in Prehistory, ed. T.K. Earle and J.E. Ericson, pp.15- 34. Academic Press, New York.

Wentworth, Chester K. 1922 A Scale of Grade and Class Terms for Clastic Sediments. Journal of Geology 30:377-392. 1933 Fundamental Limits to the Sizes of Clastic Grains. Science 77:633-634.

West, Herbert W.H. and R.W. Ford 1967 An Empirical Drying Test. Transactions of the British Ceramic Society 66:511- 521.

Wetterstrom, Wilma 1986 Food, Diet, and Population at Prehistoric Arroyo Hondo Pueblo, New Mexico. Arroyo Hondo Archaeological Series Volume 6, School of American Research Press, Santa Fe.

411

Whatley, William J. 1990 Gallinasazi? Investigating Who on the Basis of What and Where. Paper presented at the 55th Annual Meeting of the Society for American Archaeology, Las Vegas.

Whitbread, Ian K. 1989 A Proposal for the Systematic Description of Thin Sections Towards the Study of Ancient Ceramic Technology. In Archaeometry, Proceedings of the 25th International Symposium, edited by Y. Maniatis, pp.127-138. Elsevier, Amsterdam.

White, Christopher W. 1976 Prehistoric Warfare in the Chevlon Creek Area: An Ecological Perspective. In Chevlon Archeological Research Project. Edited by F.T. Plog, J.N. Hill, and D.W. Read, pp.127-145. Archaeological Survey Monograph No. 2. Department of Anthropology, University of California, Los Angeles.

White, Tim D. 1992 Prehistoric Cannibalism at Mancos 5MTUMR-2346. Princeton University Press, Princeton.

Whiteaker, Ralph J. 1976 Excavation of Potions of LA 11841: A Gallina Phase Pithouse Site. Laboratory of Anthropology Notes Series 111d. Museum of New Mexico, Santa Fe.

Whittaker, John C. 1994 Flintknapping: Making and Understanding Stone Tools. University of Texas Press, Austin.

Wilcox, David R. 1979 The Warfare Implications of Dry-Laid Masonry Walls on Tumamoc Hill. Kiva 45(1&2):15-38. 1981 The Entry of Athapaskan Speakers into the American Southwest: The Problem Today. In The Protohistoric Periods in the North American Southwest. Edited by D.R. Wilcox and W.B. Masse, pp.213-256. Research Paper No. 24. Arizona State University, Tempe. 1991 Changing Contexts of Pueblo Adaptations, A.D. 1200-1600. In Farmers, Hunters, and Colonists: Interaction between the Southwest and the Southern Plains. Edited by K.A. Spielman, pp.128-154. University of Arizona Press, Tucson.

Wilcox, David R. and Jonathan Haas 1994 The Scream of the Butterfly: Competition and Conflict in the Prehistoric Southwest. In Themes in Southwest Prehistory. Edited by G.J. Gumerman, pp.211-238. School of American Research Press, Santa Fe.

Wilcox, David R., Gerald Robertson Jr., and J. Scott Wood 2001a Antecedents to Perry Mesa: Early Pueblo III Defensive Refuge Systems in West-

412

Central Arizona. In Deadly Landscapes: Case Studies in Prehistoric Southwestern Warfare. Edited by G.E. Rice and S.A. LeBlanc, pp.109-140. University of Utah Press, Salt Lake City.

Wilcox, David R., Gerald Robertson Jr., and J. Scott Wood 2001b Organized for War: The Perry Mesa Settlement System and Its Central Arizona Neighbors. In Deadly Landscapes: Case Studies in Prehistoric Southwestern Warfare. Edited by G.E. Rice and S.A. LeBlanc, pp.141-194. University of Utah Press, Salt Lake City.

Wileman, Julie 2009 War and Rumours of War: The Evidential Base for the Recognition of Warfare in Prehistory. Bar International Series 1984, Archaeopress, Oxford.

Wilkinson, Nancy M. 1958 Arts and Crafts of the Gallina Culture. El Palacio 65(5):189-196.

Wilks, Maureen E. 2005 New Mexico Geologic Highway Map. New Mexico Geological Society and the New Mexico Bureau of Geology and Mineral Sources, Socorro.

Williams, J.L.W. and David A. Jenkins 1976 The Use of Petrographic, Heavy Mineral and Arc Spectrographic Techniques in Assessing the Provenance of Sediments Used in Ceramics. In Geoarchaeology, Edited by D.A. Davidson and M.L. Shackley, pp.115-135. Duckworth, London.

Williamson, Thomas E. and Spencer G. Lucas 1992 Vertebrate fauna from the Upper Cretaceous (Campanian) Pictured Cliffs Sandstone, Mesa Portales, New Mexico. In San Juan Basin IV, editors S.G. Lucas, B.S. Kues, T.E. Williamson, A.P. Hunt, p.26-29. New Mexico Geological Society Guidebook, 43rd Field Conference. 1997 The Chico Springs Locality, Nacimiento Formation, San Juan Basin, New Mexico. In Mesozoic Geology and Paleontology of the Four Corners Region, Edited by O.J. Anderson, B.S. Kues, SG. Lucas, pp.259-265. New Mexico Geological Society Guidebook, 48th Field Conference.

Wills, Wirt H. and Patricia L. Crown 2004 Commensal Politics in the Prehispanic Southwest: An Introductory Review. In Identity, Feasting, and the Archaeology of the Greater Southwest. Edited by B.J. Mills, pp.153-172. University Press of Colorado, Boulder.

Wilshusen, Richard H. 1986 The Relationship between Abandonment Mode and Ritual Use in Pueblo I Anasazi Protokivas. Journal of Field Archaeology 13:245-254. 1988 The abandonment of structures. In Dolores Archaeological Program: Supporting Studies: Additive and Reductive Technologies, Edited by E.R. Blinman, C.J.

413

Phagan, and R.H. Wilshusen, pp.673-702. U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Reclamation, Denver.

Wilson, C. Dean 1994 Chapter 5: Ceramic Analysis. In The Jones Canyon Survey. UNM-OCA Report # 185-489. Office of Contract Archaeology, University of New Mexico. Albuquerque. 1998 Ceramic Analysis Chapter. In NM 537 – Tapicito Ridge: The Testing of Four Sites Southwest of Dulce, New Mexico. Archaeology Notes 189. Office of Archaeological Studies, Museum of New Mexico, Santa Fe. 1999 Appendix A: Ceramic Analysis. In Test Excavations of Eight Sites Along S.R. 537 and A Data Recovery Plan for Sites LA 111059 and LA 111061 Rio Arriba County, New Mexico. SWCA Environmental Consultants, Albuquerque. 2000 Chapter 5: Ceramic Analysis. In Data Recovery Investigations of Sites LA 111059 and 111061 along NM 537, Jicarilla Apache Reservation. NMCRIS Activity 60787. SWCA Environmental Consultants, Albuquerque.

Wilson, C. Dean and Eric Blinman 1995 Changing Specialization of White Ware Manufacture in the Northern San Juan Region. In Ceramic Production in the American Southwest, Edited by B.J. Mills and P.L. Crown, pp.63-87. University of Arizona Press, Tucson.

Wilson, Dave 1999 Hiking Ruins Seldom Seen. A Falcon Guide, Morris Book Publishing, Kearney, NE.

Windes, Thomas C. 1977 Typology and Technology of Anasazi Ceramics. In Settlement and Subsistence Along the Lower Chaco River: The CGP Survey. Edited by C.A. Rehrer, pp.279- 358. University of New Mexico Press, Albuquerque.

Winship, George P. 1896 The Coronado Expedition, 1540-1542. In Fourteenth Annual Report of the Bureau of American Ethnography, 1892-1893, Part I:329-613. Washington DC.

Winter, Joseph C. 1981 Anasazi Agriculture at Hovenweep II: The Development and Use of Towers. Contract Abstracts and CRM Archeology 2(2):28-36. 1983 Introduction: High-Altitude Resource Use in the Southwest. In High-Altitude Adaptations in the Southwest. Edited by J.C. Winter, pp.1-11. USDA Forest Service Southwestern Region Cultural Resources Management Report No. 2. Southwestern Region Office, Albuquerque.

Wiseman, Regge N. 2007 On the Relationship between the Largo-Gallina and the Jemez. In Texas and Points West: Papers in Honor of John A. Hedrick and Carrol P. Hedrick, editors

414

R.N. Wiseman, T.C. O’Laughlin, C.T. Snow, p.201-222. The Archaeological Society of New Mexico Vol. 33, Albuquerque. 2008 External Relations of the Southern Gallina: The Lagunitas Example. In Chasing Chaco and the Southwest: Papers in Honor of Frances Joan Mathien, editors R.N. Wiseman, T.C. O’Laughlin, C.T. Snow, C. Travis p.231-254. The Archaeological Society of New Mexico Vol. 34, Albuquerque.

Wisseman, Sarah U., Duane M. Moore, Randall E. Hughes, Mary R. Hynes, Thomas E. Emerson 2002 Mineralogical Approaches to Sourcing Pipes and Figurines from the Eastern Woodlands, USA. Geoarchaeology 17(7):689-715.

Wood, Gordon H., Jr. and Stuart A. Northrop 1946 Geology of the Nacimiento Mountains, San Pedro Mountain, and adjacent plateaus in parts of Sandoval and Rio Arriba Counties, New Mexico. U.S. Geological Survey Oil and Gas Investigation Preliminary Map, No. 57.

Woodbury, Richard 1954 Prehistoric Stone Implements of Northeastern Arizona. Papers of the Peabody Museum of American Archaeology and Ethnology Vol. 34, Cambridge.

Woodson, M. Kyle 1999 Migrations in Late Anasazi Prehistory: The Evidence from the Goat Hill Site. Kiva 65(1):63-84.

Woodward, Lee A. 1974 Tectonics of Central-Northern New Mexico. In Ghost Ranch: Central-Northern, New Mexico, edited by C.T. Siemers, pp.123-129. New Mexico Geological Society Guidebook, 25th Field Conference.

Wormington, H. Marie 1947 Prehistoric Indians of the Southwest. Denver Museum of Natural History, Denver. 1955 A Reappraisal of the Fremont Culture with a Summary of the Archeology of the Northern Periphery. Proceedings of the Denver Museum of Natural History No. 1, Denver.

Wozniak, Frank J., Meade F. Kemrer, and Charles Carrillo 1992 History and Ethnohistory along the Rio Chama. Report for US Army Corps of Engineers, Albuquerque District, New Mexico.

Wright, Barton 1979 Hopi Material Culture: Artifacts Gathered by H.R. Voth in the Fred Harvey Collection. Northland Press and The Heard Museum, Flagstaff and Phoenix, Arizona.

415

Wright-Dunbar, Robyn, Robert S. Zech, Gregg A. Crandall, and Danny Katzman 1992 Strandplain and Deltaic Depositional Models for the Point Lookout Sandstone, San Juan Basin and Four Corners Platform, New Mexico and Colorado. In San Juan Basin IV, editors S.G. Lucas, B.S. Kues, T.E. Williamson, A.P. Hunt, p.199- 206. New Mexico Geological Society Guidebook, 43rd Field Conference.

Wyatt, Bill B. 1992 Cultural Resource Survey for the Mud Springs Prescribed Burn. USFS Report 1992-10-022. On file at the Santa Fe National Forest Supervisor’s Office, Santa Fe. 1995a Cultural Resource Survey for the Golondrino Ecosystem Management Area. USFS Report 1995-10-043. On file at the Santa Fe National Forest Supervisor’s Office, Santa Fe. 1995b Non-Project Cultural Resource Survey of the Chupadero Arroyo. USFS Report 1995-10-078. On file at the Santa Fe National Forest Supervisor’s Office, Santa Fe. 1996a Gallina Cultural Affiliation Assessment. In Cultural Affiliations: Prehistoric Cultural Affiliation of Southwestern Indian Tribes. Technical Guide pp.147-151, USDA Forest Service Southwestern Region, Albuquerque. 1996b Cultural Resource Survey for the Golondrino Ecosystem Management Area Part II. USFS Report 1995-10-043B. On file at the Santa Fe National Forest Supervisor’s Office, Santa Fe. 1996c Cultural Resource Survey of the Turkey Spring Prescribed Burn. USFS Report 1996-10-082. On file at the Santa Fe National Forest Supervisor’s Office, Santa Fe.

Yacobaccio, Hugo D., Patricia S. Escola, Fernando X. Pereyra, Marisa Lazzari, and Michael D. Gloscock 2004 Quest for Ancient Routes: Obsidian Sourcing Research in Northwestern Argentina. Journal of Archaeological Science 31(2):193-204.

Yunker, Brain and Richard Wilshusen (compilers) 1999 The Dolores Legacy: Data From the Dolores Archaeology Program. Dolores Archaeology Program database. In possession of the authors.

Zedeño, María Nieves 1994 Sourcing Prehistoric Ceramics at Chodistaas Pueblo, Arizona: The Circulation of People and Pots in the Grasshopper Region. The University of Arizona Press, Tucson.

Zedeño, María Nieves, Daniela Triadan, and Ronald L. Bishop 2003 Compositional Analysis in American Archaeology. In Patterns and Process. edited by L. van Zelst, pp.26-55. Smithsonian Center for Materials Research and Education, Suitland, Maryland.

416

Zedeño, María Nieves, Hector Neff, and Axel E. Nielsen 2005 Searching for Analytical Alternatives to the Characterization of Copper Minerals. In Laser Ablation-ICP-MS in Archaeological Research, ed. R.J. Speakman and H. Neff, pp.76-83, University of New Mexico Press, Albuquerque.

Zeller, Chris 1990 Comprehensive Structural Stabilization of Nogales Cliff House. Petro Graphics Company, Forest Service Cultural Report Number 1988-10-070H. Manuscript on file at the Santa Fe National Forest Supervisor’s Office, Santa Fe.

Zipf, George K. 1949 Human Behavior and the Principle of Least Effort: An Introduction to Human Ecology. Addison-Wesley Press, Cambridge.

417

APPENDICES

APPENDIX A: ADDITIONAL GEOLOGIC FORMATION DESCRIPTIONS

APPENDIX B: CLAY SAMPLES FIELD AND LABORATORY TESTS DATA

APPENDIX C: CERAMIC AND CLAY SAMPLES PETROGRAPHIC DATA

APPENDIX D: CERAMIC AND CLAY SAMPLES ICP-MS DATA

418

APPENDIX A: Additional Geologic Formation Descriptions

419

APPENDIX A: Additional Geologic Formations

The Gallina region is a resource-rich district with linear clay-bearing deposits

(Baltz 1967; Smith and Lucas 1991). The formations presented in this appendix occur beyond one kilometer from the two sites. A radius of seven kilometers is the upper limit for most ceramic resource procurement, therefore the geology described here represents formations between one and seven kilometers from the selected archaeological sites.

Permian

The supercontinent of Pangea formed during the Permian Period, although three additional landmasses were still separate and located on the opposite side of the Paleo-

Tethys Ocean (Scotese 2000). During the early part of the period, the southern half of

Pangea was covered in glacial ice with rainforests and temperate zones in the equatorial highlands. In the Middle and Late Permian, deserts spread across the central and western portions of the supercontinent. Reptiles inhabited the entire continent. At the end of the

Permian, the largest extinction event ever occurred (Scotese 2000). In the Four Corners area (Figure A.1), the erosion of the central highlands is evidenced in the Cutler

Formation (Lucas and Krainer 2005). The Cutler Formation is the only geologic stratigraphic unit of Permian age in the Gallina culture area. Lucas and Krainer (2005) have proposed a Cutler Group with two formations. For the purposes of this research the

Cutler Formation nomenclature will be retained.

420

Figure A.1 Paleogeography of the Early Permian Period from Blakey and Ranney (2008)

Cutler Formation. The Cutler Formation was named by Cross and Howe (1905) for an exposure along Cutler Creek near Ouray, Colorado. In the Gallina area, this red

bed formation has an average thickness of 630 meters, but only about 210 meters is

exposed. The lithology of the Cutler Formation consists of siltstone, shale, sandstone,

and minor conglomerates. The arkosic sandstones and conglomerates are trough cross-

bedded, but sedimentary structures are not prevalent in the siltstones or shales. The lower

section is arkosic sandstone with conglomeratic lenses, while the upper section is red

shale with orange siltstone beds (Crouse 1985; Hultgren 1986; Lucas and Krainer 2005).

The large reptilian fossil assemblage includes Edaphosaurus novemexicanus,

Ophiacondon mirus, Scoliomus puercensis, Sphenacodon ferox, and Sphenacondon

ferocior, which is consistent with an Early Permian age (Berman 1993; Lucas et al. 421

2005a). Based on the mineralogical composition of the sediments, the trough

crossbedded sandstone and conglomerate, and the transition from coarser to finer-grained

rocks, the Cutler Formation represents alluvial fan and braided stream deposits from the

erosion of highlands (Baars 1962; Hultgren 1986; Lucas and Krainer 2005).

Triassic

With a single continent in the Triassic, fauna diversified and moved across the

landscape and the Tethys Ocean (Scotese 2000). The first dinosaurs appeared and

initiated the “Age of Reptiles.” In this period, the climate in the interior of the continent was hot and dry; warm temperate zones reached to both poles. As can be seen in Figure

A.2, the American Southwest was near the margin of a continent with a warm temperate climate. Streams and marshlands with both reptilian and amphibian fauna occur in the geologic record (Lucas and Hunt 1992). At the end of the Triassic, Pangea began rifting

(Scotese 2000).

Two members of the Chinle Formation are the only Triassic age units in the research area. The Chinle Formation was named by Gregory (1916) for Triassic beds in the Chinle Valley in northeastern Arizona, and Wood and Northrop (1946) divided it into four members: Agua Zarca Sandstone, Salitral Shale, Poleo Sandstone, and Upper Shale.

Only the Poleo Sandstone and Upper Shale Members are found in this area. The Poleo

Sandstone member is the older, while the Upper Shale member is the younger. The nomenclature of the Upper Triassic strata has changed over time (Lucas and Hunt 1992;

Lucas et al. 2005b). Lucas and colleagues (2003) have used biostratigraphy to reformulate the Chinle Group in this area to include the Poleo Formation (Poleo 422

Sandstone Member) and the Petrified Forest and Rock Point Formations (Upper Shale

Member). In order to correspond to the geologic maps presented here, the earlier

nomenclature will be used.

Figure A.2 Paleogeography of the Late Triassic Period from Blakey and Ranney (2008)

Chinle Formation – Poleo Sandstone Member. The Poleo Sandstone was named by von Huene (1911) for exposures on Mesa Poleo to the southeast of Gallina, New

Mexico. In the study area, the Poleo Sandstone ranges in thickness from 18 to 43 meters.

The lithology of the member consists of inter-bedded sandstone, conglomeritic sandstone, and conglomerate with minor shale. Planar cross-bedding is common in this thick sandstone unit. The grayish-yellow sandstones have some laminae, which are characterized by muscovite plates parallel to the individual lamina. The conglomerate and shale beds are thin and lenticular (Crouse 1985; Hultgren 1986; Lucas et al. 2005b; 423

Lucas and Heckert 1996; Lucas and Hunt 1992). The lower part of the Poleo Sandstone

contains fragments of hematitic wood and other petrified plant materials, along with

unidentifiable fragments of vertebrate bone (Lucas et al. 2005b). Based on the laminae,

cross-bedding, soft-sediment deformation in the shale, the presence of wood and plant

fragments, and the large clasts of mud in the conglomerate that were ripped-up and

consolidated when vigorous flow of coarse sediment eroded them, the Poleo Sandstone

represents stream deposits possibly from high-energy streams flowing toward a large lake

located in the Four Corners area (Hultgren 1986; Kurtz and Anderson 1980; Strobell

1964).

Chinle Formation – Upper Shale Member. In the area of research, the Upper

Shale ranges in thickness from 125 to 160 meters. The lithology of the member consists of variegated shales and claystone with some siltstones, sandstones, and arkosic

conglomerate in the lower unit. The siltstone is laminar with alternating light and dark mineral layers, while the micaceous lithic sandstone beds contain shale clasts and have irregular ripples (Crouse 1985; Hultgren 1986; Lucas et al. 2003). Much of the upper

reddish-brown mudstone unit is dominantly smectitic (Lucas et al. 2005b; Lucas and

Hunt 1992; O’Sullivan 1974). Fossil plants and animals commonly found in Upper

Triassic shales in this area include the conifer Araucarioxylon, unionid bivalves

(Antediplodon graciliratus and A. thomasi), vertebrate fauna reptiles (Typothorax,

Pseudopalatus, Rutidion, and Coelophysis), and Metoposaurus amphibians (Colbert

1974; Good 1998; Hunt and Lucas 1993; Lucas and Hunt 1992). This is consistent with

an Upper Triassic age for the Chinle Formation. Based on the shale and claystone

lithology and the laminated siltstone, the rippled shale clasts in the sandstone, and the 424

presence of amphibians, the Upper Shale Member represents deposition in swamps and streams of a wide marshland (Hultgren 1986; Kurtz and Anderson 1980; Lucas and Hunt

1992). Volcanic contributions from the Mogollon Highlands to the south resulted in the smectitic mudstones (Lucas 1993; Stewart et al. 1972).

Jurassic

The breakup of Pangea was a slow process that happened throughout the Jurassic and the following periods (Scotese 2000). Rifting formed the Central Atlantic Ocean and separated Laurasia and the other northern continents from Gondwana. Volcanic eruptions within Gondwana initiated the formation of the western Indian Ocean. With the separation of Pangea, the global climate changed with the interiors of the large continents becoming less dry and seasonal snow and ice started to occur at the poles. A saline lake, Lake T’oo’dichi’ (t’oo’dichi’ is Navajo for “bitter water”), or possibly an extensive floodplain environment dotted with shallow lakes in closed basins (Anderson and Lucas 1997; Turner 2010) covered an extensive part of southwestern Colorado and northwestern New Mexico (Figure A.3).

In the study area the formations of the Jurassic, starting with the oldest, are the

Entrada Sandstone, the Todilto Formation, and the Morrison Formation. Both the

Entrada Sandstone and the Todilto Formation are part of the San Rafael Group. The San

Rafael Group was named by Gilluly and Reeside (1926) for rock units in the San Rafael

Swell area of Utah. Recent research on the Morrison Formation in northern New Mexico has separated out the Summerville Formation and Bluff Sandstone from the Morrison

425

Formation proper (Lucas et al. 2005c). For clarity in connection with the available geologic maps, the Morrison Formation will not be divided here.

Figure A.3 Paleogeography of the Late Jurassic Period from Blakey and Ranney (2008)

San Rafael Group – Entrada Sandstone. The Entrada Sandstone was named by

Gilluly and Reeside (1926) for exposures at Entrada Point in the San Rafael Swell. Also,

it has been known historically in the Chama Basin as the Wingate Sandstone (Darton

1928), but subsequent work followed the Entrada Sandstone nomenclature (e.g. Bingler

1968; Woodward 1987). In the Llaves Valley area, the Entrada Sandstone ranges in

thickness from 54 to 90 meters. The lithology of the formation consists of fine- to

medium-grained sandstone with iron concretions common in the upper horizon. Large-

scale wedge and trough cross-stratifications are present, especially in the lower and

426

middle horizons. There is color banding that cross-cuts original bedding. The yellow,

light brown, and grayish-orange colors are from post-depositional alteration of the sandstone (Crouse 1985; Hultgren 1986; Lucas et al. 2005c; O’Sullivan 2010). This

formation is unfossiliferous, but based on stratigraphy the Entrada Sandstone is

considered to be of Middle Jurassic age (Lucas et al. 2005c; Moench and Schlee 1967;

O’Sullivan 2010). Based on the lithology and the types of large-scale cross-bedding present, the Entrada Sandstone represents deposits in an aeolian environment within a large, arid interior basin (Green and Pierson 1977; Lucas et al. 1985; Lucas et al. 2005c;

Lucas and Anderson 1997; Tanner 1974).

San Rafael Group – Todilto Formation. The Todilto Formation was named by

Gregory (1916) for exposures of limestone near Todilto Park, New Mexico. The

formation ranges in thickness from one to fifteen meters. The lithology of the unit

consists of thinly laminated, dark gray to yellowish-gray limestone and white to light

gray, massive gypsum. The basal portion of the lower limestone contains repeated thin

lamina of evaporitic limestone, clastics, and organics, with each lamina representing one

annual cycle. The upper portion of the lower limestone is massive with vugs and

fractures. Soft-sediment deformation occurs as wavy layers or tight microfolds in the

limestone. The upper gypsum is white hummocks or gray anhydrite dissolving to

gypsum (Crouse 1985; Hultgren 1986; Lucas et al. 2005c; Lucas and Anderson 1997).

Varves also are present in the gypsum consisting of alternating carbonate and evaporative

layers (Anderson and Kirkland 1960). Holostean fossil fish and brakish-water ostracode have been found along the perimeter of the ancient Todilto Basin near fluvial features

427

(Hunt et al. 2005; Kietzke 1992; Schaeffer and Patterson 1984). The San Rafael Group

as a whole is considered to be Middle Jurassic (O’Sullivan 2010). Based on the

evaporate sequence of the lower limestone and upper gypsum, fossil evidence, and

isotopic data, the Todilto Formation represents a gradational period between an arid, aeolian environment and a humid, fluvial and lacustrine environment with deposition in a

vast, saline lake not connected to the Jurassic seaway (Hunt et al. 2005; Kirtland et al.

1995; Lucas et al. 1985; Lucas and Anderson 1997; Ridgley and Goldhaber 1983). Varve

data indicate that the lower limestone was deposited in about 14,000 years and the upper

gypsum in about 6,000 years (Anderson and Kirkland 1960).

Morrison Formation. The Morrison Formation was named by Eldridge (1896) for

sandstone and shale outcrops near Morrison, Colorado. In the current research area, the

formation ranges in thickness from 200 to 275 meters. The lithology consists of

variegated shales and claystones, sandstones, siltstones, and minor conglomerate with a

lower maroon unit, a middle green unit, and an upper conglomerate unit. The lower

maroon unit contains thin, even-bedded siltstone, gypsiferous sandstone (with abundant

kaolinite), shale, claystone, and minor conglomeratic lenses. Cross-bedding and scour

surfaces occur locally. The middle green unit is composed of smectitic shale and

claystone with gypsiferous siltstone and fine-grained sandstone. Sedimentary structures are not prevalent. The upper conglomerate unit includes conglomerate and sandstone with minor shale and claystone. The conglomerates are more abundant than the sandstone and contain chalcedony pebbles, which can be altered to kaolinite when highly weathered. The pebbles are cemented with silica and kaolinite. The sandstone is fine- to

428

medium-grained with kaolinite occurring as flakes within the rock. Cross-beds are common in both the conglomerates and sandstones (Crouse 1985; Hultgren 1986; Lucas et al. 2005c; O’Sullivan 2010). Few fossils occur in the Morrison Formation of this area.

They include fragments of petrified wood, bivalves, theropod dinosaur footprints, and a sauropod dinosaur bone (Anderson and Lucas 1996; Lockley et al. 1996; Lucas et al.

2005c; Ridgley 1989). The Morrison Formation falls within the Upper Jurassic timeframe.

The Morrison Formation represents a continental fluvial deposition in braided streams of sediments from the Mogollon Highlands in west-central New Mexico with much of the shale resulting from weathering of volcanic ash and the kaolin-rich sandstone coming from moist weathering conditions and downward percolation of corrosive solutions (Flesch 1975; Leopold 1943; Moench and Schlee 1967; Santos 1970).

This interpretation is based on the lithology, mineralogy, and sedimentary structures present in this formation, but the source area of the sediments is debated (Bejnar and

Lessard 1976; Craig et al. 1955; and Saucier 1974). Recent study suggests that the lower red siltstone unit was deposited in a marginal marine environment, the middle green sandstone unit is composed of aeolian deposits, and the upper conglomerate unit resulted from deposition in fluvial, flood plain, lacustrine, and aeolian environments (Lucas et al.

2005; O’Sullivan 2010). Additionally, an alkaline, saline, wetland-lacustrine complex called Lake T’oo’dichi’ produced authigenic minerals, including a variety of clay minerals (Anderson and Lucas 1997; Dunagan and Turner 2004; Turner 2010; Turner and

Peterson 2004).

429

Cretaceous

In the Llaves Valley area the formations of the Cretaceous, starting with the

oldest, are the Dakota Sandstone, Mancos Shale, Point Lookout Sandstone, Menefee

Formation, Cliff House Sandstone, Lewis Shale, Pictured Cliffs Sandstone, and the

Fruitland Formation-Kirtland Shale undivided. The Dakota Sandstone has been divided

into several members (Owen et al. 2005), but it will be described at the formation level

here. The Mancos Shale has several members (see Crouse 1985 and Hultgren 1986) that

will be lumped for this study’s purposes. The Cretaceous includes the formations in the

Mesa Verde Group. The Mesaverde Group was named by Holmes (1877), and Collier

(1919) divided it into three formations at the type locality of Mesa Verde National Park:

Point Lookout Sandstone, Menefee Formation, and Cliff House Sandstone. The Lewis

Shale and Kirtland-Fruitland Undivided are presented in Chapter Nine.

Dakota Sandstone. The Dakota Sandstone was named by Meek and Hayden

(1861) for fluvial deposits along the Missouri River Bluffs in Dakota County, Nebraska.

Within the research area, the Dakota Sandstone ranges in thickness from 40 to 70 meters.

It has been divided into a lower sandstone unit, middle shale unit, and an upper sandstone

unit. The lower unit is primarily composed of medium- to fine-grained quartz sandstone, but has black carbonaceous shale with abundant kaolinite. The dark, carbonaceous shale, lignite, and thin siltstones of the middle unit have parallel bedding with some occurrences of bentonite. The upper unit is fine-grained quartz sandstone with some inter-bedded shale. The overall composition is very fine-grained to granule size sandstone that is friable to weakly or well cemented. Carbonaceous shale and siltstone beds occur

430

throughout the formation. The sandstone varies from thin to thick bedded, massive to locally cross-bedded (Crouse 1985; Hultgren 1986; Landis et al. 1974; Owen et al. 2005).

Burrowing trace fossils of Planolites, Thalassinoides, and Ophiomorpha, marine molluscan fossils of Inoceramus, and coaly fossils of plant stems and leaves occur in the

Dakota Sandstone (Grant and Owen 1974; Owen et al. 2005). This fossil assemblage is consistent with a later Early Cretaceous age. The Dakota Sandstone represents fluvial, floodplain, and paludal-paralic deposits in the lower and middle units that grade into strandline and offshore marine deposits in the upper unit. This is evidence of the

Cretaceous sea transgression into the Western Interior Seaway (Aubrey 1997; Kauffman

1977; Owen et al. 1976; Owen et al. 1978; Owen et al. 2005).

Mancos Shale. The Mancos Shale was named by Cross (1899) for marine shale in the Mancos Valley of southwestern Colorado. The Mancos Shale ranges in thickness from 570 to 640 meters in the Llaves Valley area. The lower shaley unit is dark and silty with limestone concretions. Just above this shale is a thin band of white limestone. The remaining units are all shales of dark gray color with some inter-bedded silty limestones, calcareous sandstones, chert nodules, and septarian (containing angular cavities and cracks) concretions. Bentonites, smectite-bearing rocks, and fractures filled with selenite do occur in the middle portion of the Mancos Shale. In general, the formation is composed of limestone and calcareous shales with some thin sandstone and siltstone beds

(Crouse 1985; Hultgren 1986; Fassett 1974; Owen et al. 2005). Sedimentary structures are not prevalent. The marine invertebrate fossils include Inoceramus, Sciponoceras,

Mytiloides, Collignoniceras, Ostrea, Prionocyclus, Scaphites, and Lopha, with

Inoceramus platinus and Pseudoperna congesta predominating (Landis et al. 1974; 431

Leckie et al. 1997). Some selachian (cartilaginous fishes) fauna have been documented

in the upper sandstones (Williamson and Lucas 1992). This fossil bivalve, ammonite,

oyster and cartilaginous fish assemblage suggests an earlier Late Cretaceous age. Based on the foraminifera-rich calcareous shale and the oyster coquina siltstone lithology and the fish scale, ammonite, and inoceramid shell fossils, the Mancos Shale represents deep offshore marine deposits which occurred as the Cretaceous sea shoreline transgressed and

regressed (Aubrey 1997; Fassett 1974; Kauffman 1967; McGookey et al. 1972; Owen et al. 2005; Shomaker et al. 1971).

Mesaverde Group — Point Lookout Sandstone. The Point Lookout Sandstone

derives its name from the location of the same name at Mesa Verde National Park

(Collier 1919). In the study area, the formation ranges in thickness from 20 to 70 meters.

It consists of buff, gray, and tan sandstone beds. The beds vary from thirty centimeters to

nine meters thick and are medium-grained with a few fine-grained sandstone and shale

beds in the lower portion. The massive sandstones form steep cliffs at the base of the

hogbacks. Stringers of black, carbonaceous shale do occur within the massive sandstone

unit. Sedimentary structures are rare in this vicinity, except numerous iron concretions

throughout the formation (Baltz 1967; Crouse 1985; Hultgren 1986; Wright-Dunbar et al.

1992). No fossils are recorded for the Point Lookout Sandstone in this area, but the

Mesaverde Group as a whole is considered to be middle Late Cretaceous. Based on the

lithology, stratigraphic relations, and fossils of the Mesaverde Group, the Point Lookout

Sandstone represents near-shore marine and strandline deposits which occurred with the

regression of the Western Interior Seaway to the northeast (Aubrey 1997; Baltz 1967;

Fassett 1974; Iacoboni 2005; Wright-Dunbar et al. 1992). 432

Mesaverde Group — Menefee Formation. The Menefee Formation is the middle

coal-bearing formation of the Mesaverde Group. In the Gallina Hogback area, the

Menefee Formation ranges in thickness from 45 to 180 meters. The formation is

composed of dark gray carbonaceous shale with inter-bedded fine-grained sandstone,

siltstone, and thin coal beds. The shale includes lenses of coal and coaly shale.

Sedimentary structures are not prevalent, but red to purple jasper nodules do occur (Baltz

1967; Crouse 1985; Hultgren 1986; Iacoboni 2005; Lucas et al. 2005d). No fossils are

noted for the Menefee Formation, although woody material and carbonaceous debris are

present. The Mesaverde Group as a whole is considered to be Late Cretaceous. Based on

the lithology, stratigraphic relations, and palynology, the Menefee Formation represents

back-barrier swamps, bays, and lagoons that occurred when the strandline of the

Cretaceous sea regressed (Aubrey 1997; Iacoboni 2005; Lucas et al. 2005d). The

sandstone beds have been interpreted as stream-channel deposits of fine to coarse quartz sand (Baltz 1967; Fassett 1977).

Mesaverde Group — La Ventana Tongue of the Cliff House Sandstone. The La

Ventana Tongue is named for exposures near the town of La Ventana, New Mexico. The

tongue ranges in thickness from 10 to 420 meters. It is composed of gray, buff, and

orange-brown silty sandstone with inter-bedded thin gray shale and minor amounts of

coal. The lower unit of the La Ventana Tongue has nine meter thick beds of fine- to

medium-grained sandstone with hematite-staining and numerous ironstone nodules. The

middle shale unit consists of gray to brown silty shale iwht some sandstone and coal.

The upper sandstone unit has sandstone similar to the lower unit with additional thin,

carbonaceous shale beds. Sedimentary structures are not prevalent (Anderson et al. 1997; 433

Baltz 1967; Crouse 1985; Hultgren 1986). It is highly fossiliferous in the upper part of

the formation in the study area with sharks teeth, oysters, and other bivalves (Crouse

1985; Hultgreen 1986). Fossils noted in other portions of the La Ventana Tongue include

Baculites perplexus, Baculites maclearni, and Inoceramus species (Landis et al. 1974).

This is consistent with a Late Cretaceous age. Based on lithology, stratigraphic relations,

and fossils, the Cliff House Sandstone represents near-shore littoral marine deposits

which occurred when the Western Interior Seaway transgressed to the southwest (Aubrey

1997; Beaumont and Hoffman 1992; Baltz 1967; Bozanic 1955; Fassett 1974).

Pictured Cliffs Sandstone. The Pictured Cliffs Sandstone was named by Holmes

(1877) for the over 4,000 petroglyphs pecked into the rock of this formation along the

San Juan River west of Farmington, New Mexico. In the Llaves Valley area, the formation ranges in thickness from zero to 80 meters. It is composed of thin to thick bedded sandstone, siltstone, and shale. Sedimentary structures are not prevalent. The rock is inter-bedded sandstone, shaley sandstone, sandy shale, siltstone with shaley siltstone, and claystone. Some carbonaceous material is present in the siltstone with shaley siltstone layers (Baltz 1967; Fassett 1966). The marine vertebrate fossils include

Cretodus arcuata, Protoplatyrhina veae, Batoids species, and Ptychotrygon species

(Rigby and Clement 1983; Williamson and Lucas 1992). The non-selachian vertebrates have both marine and non-marine taxa. Dinosaur and mammal fossils also have been documented (Williamson and Lucas 1992). This fossil assemblage is consistent with a

Late Cretaceous age. Based on the presence of both marine and non-marine fossils, the

Pictured Cliffs Sandstone represents regressive strandline sandstone deposits which

434

occurred during the last retreat of the Western Interior Seaway (Aubrey 1997; Baltz

1967; Fassett 1974; Williamson and Lucas 1992).

Tertiary

In the Llaves Valley area the formations of the Tertiary, starting with the oldest,

are the Ojo Alamo Sandstone, Nacmiento Formation, and San Jose Formation. The

Nacimeinto and San Jose Formations are presented in Chapter Nine.

Ojo Alamo Sandstone. The Ojo Alamo Sandstone was named by Brown (1910)

for exposures along Ojo Alamo Arroyo near Ojo Alamo Spring, San Juan County, New

Mexico. It ranges in thickness from 2 to 60 meters in the study vicinity. The lithology of the formation consists of beds of buff, tan, and brown fine- to very coarse-grained calcareous sandstone with lenses of olive-green to gray shale. The Ojo Alamo Sandstone mainly consists of coarse-grained conglomeritic sandstones. Cross-bedding is the dominant sedimentary structure (Baltz 1967; Crouse 1985). Silicified logs similar to the petrified wood in the Fruitland-Kirtland Formation occur. The palynological evidence has a “Tertiary ecological aspect” (Anderson 1960; Baltz et al. 1966; Fassett 2010;

Fassett and Hinds 1971), and there are mammalian vertebrate fossils of Anisonchus,

Conacodon ectoconus, Oxyclaenus simplex, Hemithlaeus kowalevskianus, Ectoconus ditrigonus, Tetraclaenodon, and Wortmania otariidens (Rigby and Lucas 1977). The pollen and spore flora, along with the fossils, are consistent with an early Paleocene age

(Sullivan et al. 2005). Based on the moderately-sorted sandstone, lenses of shale, and cross-bedding, the Ojo Alamo Sandstone represents an extensive alluvial fan and braided

435

river system with overlapping stream-channel deposits (Baltz 1967; Lucas and Ingersoll

1981).

Quaternary

The Quaternary age units are represented by unconsolidated terrace, alluvial, colluvial, and landslide deposits, but only the terrace deposits and alluvium occur within the project area. Therefore, they are described in Chapter Nine. In order to reflect the

Llaves Valley vicinity specifically; the summaries of these deposits are compiled from

Baltz (1967), Crouse (1985), and Hultgren (1986).

Colluvium. Colluvium, unsorted angular debris, covers slopes associated with the

Poleo Sandstone, Morrison Formation, Dakota Sandstone, Fruitland-Kirtland Formation,

Ojo Alamo Sandstone, and San Jose Formation. It is the result of rocks moved by gravity in combination with overland flow. They also occur as a thin veneer weathered from underlying bedrock. The accumulations range in thickness from one and a half to nine meters. The colluvial material consists of angular fragments and blocks of the parent rock. These deposits are generally of Recent age.

Landslide deposits. Landslide deposits occur at the base of large, steep cliffs or along the lower parts of steep slopes. They are derived from the Poleo Sandstone,

Entrada, Todilto, Morrison, and San Jose formations. These accumulations range in thickness from 12 to 15 meters and result from mass movement. The deposits consist of unsorted, large, angular fragments and blocks of sandstone, limestone, and gypsum.

Landslides are normally of Recent age.

436

APPENDIX B: ClaySamples Field and Laboratory Tests

437

Clay Sample R072 Formation: Kirtland-Fruitland Undivided

Field Tests

Raw Color: 10YR5/3 (brown)

Deposit Setting: east slope near top at high point

Deposit Size: 1' x 2' may occur under all the sandstone pebbles and cobbles

Workability: makes a coil but ruptures when try a ring

Odor: musty when wet

Condition: dry, mud-cracks, homogenous - not silty like other spots along this ridge, top layer is very dry and slightly lighter color

Hardness: Not lithified

Organic Content: sandstone pebbles, small root and tiny rootlets; tiny rootlets upper, small root lower; pebbles in the clay not just on top

Performance Characteristics

Clay Color at 750oC: 5YR5/6 (yellowish red) Clay Color at 1000oC: 5YR5/8 (yellowish red)

Hardness at 750oC: 1.5 Mohs

Apparent Porosity: 35.6%

Thermal Shock Resistance: minor spalling at 10th cycle

Laboratory Tests

Impurities: none

Bentonitic: no

Water of Plasticity: 40.6%

Drying Shrinkage: 28.8% (weight) and 14% (length)

Particle Size Analysis:

No. 10 No. 18 No. 35 No. 60 No. 120 No. 230 No. 325 Filter Total 1.74% 0.58% 2.14% 14.30% 12.52% 18.64% 5.22% 43.02% 98.16%

438 Clay Sample R073 Formation: Kirtland-Fruitland Undivided

Field Tests

Raw Color: 2.5Y5/2 (grayish brown)

Deposit Setting: east slope of boulder strewn ridge

Deposit Size: 2' x 2' but may run underneath boulders for 3 meters across slope

Workability: will make a coil but ruptures when try a ring

Odor: musty when wet

Condition: dry, homogenous, mud-cracked top, clumpy but loose

Hardness: Not lithified

Organic Content: ton of roots, pine cone and needles on top; small medium and tiny roots throughout, grasses growing adjacent

Performance Characteristics

Clay Color at 750oC: 5YR6/6 (reddish yellow) Clay Color at 1000oC: 5YR5/8 (yellowish red)

Hardness at 750oC: 1.5 Mohs

Apparent Porosity: 40.0%

Thermal Shock Resistance:

Laboratory Tests

Impurities: none

Bentonitic: no

Water of Plasticity: 38.4%

Drying Shrinkage: 27.7% (weight) and 12% (length)

Particle Size Analysis:

No. 10 No. 18 No. 35 No. 60 No. 120 No. 230 No. 325 Filter Total 0.36% 0.68% 2.18% 5.66% 20.08% 21.00% 5.66% 42.56% 98.18%

439 Clay Sample R074 Formation: Kirtland-Fruitland Undivided

Field Tests

Raw Color: 5Y5/1 (gray)

Deposit Setting: east slope of boulder strewn ridge

Deposit Size: 2' x 2' but may run underneath boulders for 3 meters across slope

Workability: will make a coil but ruptures when try a ring

Odor: musty when wet

Condition: dry, homogenous, mud-cracked top, clumpy but loose

Hardness: Not lithified

Organic Content: ton of roots, pine cone and needles on top; small medium and tiny roots throughout, grasses growing adjacent

Performance Characteristics

Clay Color at 750oC: 5YR6/8 (reddish yellow) Clay Color at 1000oC: 5YR6/6 (reddish yellow)

Hardness at 750oC: 1.5 Mohs

Apparent Porosity:

Thermal Shock Resistance:

Laboratory Tests

Impurities: none

Bentonitic: no

Water of Plasticity: 42.8%

Drying Shrinkage: 30.0% (weight) and 12% (length)

Particle Size Analysis:

No. 10 No. 18 No. 35 No. 60 No. 120 No. 230 No. 325 Filter Total 0.28% 0.36% 2.04% 13.02% 21.96% 20.36% 6.30% 28.60% 92.92%

440 Clay Sample R083 Formation: Kirtland-Fruitland Undivided

Field Tests

Raw Color: 2.5Y5/2 (grayish brown)

Deposit Setting: knob to west of road, next to Davis property

Deposit Size: 12m x 12m, most of knob but there is color variation

Workability: coils into a pencil size but ruptures just as try ring, maybe with more water

Odor: musty when wet

Condition: dry loose, homogenous; top is drier; very dark; lots of ash (in burned area); top is lighter color and mud-cracked; may be some of the dark shale too

Hardness: Not lithified

Organic Content: lots of fine and small roots due to grasses and forbs; pieces of burned wood mixed in, roots throughout too

Performance Characteristics

Clay Color at 750oC: 7.5YR6/6 (reddish yellow) Clay Color at 1000oC: 5YR6/8 (reddish yellow)

Hardness at 750oC: 1.5 Mohs

Apparent Porosity: 35.0%

Thermal Shock Resistance:

Laboratory Tests

Impurities: none

Bentonitic: no

Water of Plasticity: 39.8%

Drying Shrinkage: 28.5% (weight) and 16% (length)

Particle Size Analysis:

No. 10 No. 18 No. 35 No. 60 No. 120 No. 230 No. 325 Filter Total 2.6% 7.2% 18.2% 27.8% 20.0% 13.8% 5.4% 95.0%

441 Clay Sample R054 Formation: Lewis Shale

Field Tests

Raw Color: 2.5Y5/3 (light olive brown)

Deposit Setting: west of highway on ridge slope

Deposit Size: about 2' x 2'

Workability: coils but ruptures when try ring (may just need more water)

Odor: musty when wet

Condition: Dry, ashier (shale?) to one edge of outcrop but generally homogenous. Not a high degree of color difference between this and rest of clay across area, loose.

Hardness: Not lithified

Organic Content: medium sized roots connected in a system, pieces of wood, elk droppings, twigs on top

Performance Characteristics

Clay Color at 750oC: 5YR5/6 (yellowish red) Clay Color at 1000oC: 2.5YR5/8 (red)

Hardness at 750oC: 1.5 Mohs

Apparent Porosity: 28.2%

Thermal Shock Resistance:

Laboratory Tests

Impurities: no salt, possibly lime

Bentonitic: no

Water of Plasticity: 37.8%

Drying Shrinkage: 27.4% (weight) and 10% (length)

Particle Size Analysis:

No. 10 No. 18 No. 35 No. 60 No. 120 No. 230 No. 325 Filter Total 2.44% 0.74% 0.74% 3.08% 50.14% 16.94% 4.52% 19.30% 97.90%

442 Clay Sample R055 Formation: Lewis Shale

Field Tests

Raw Color: 2.5Y5/1 (gray)

Deposit Setting: side of arroyo between highway and ridge

Deposit Size: 3-4m diameter circle with lenses about 2-6 cm thick

Workability: Rolls into thin coil but ruptures when try ring. Good workability, sticky and pliable.

Odor: musty when wet

Condition: Platelets of dry gray shale eroding out of arroyo side. Lithified, probably Lewis Shale formation, near siltstone and orange/buff sandstone. Sample very eroded, to the point of being loose, and turned into clay when wet.

Hardness: Very soft, low pressure to scratch (lithified)

Organic Content: very few roots mixed in with shale

Performance Characteristics

Clay Color at 750oC: 7.5YR7/4 (pink) Clay Color at 1000oC: 7.5YR6/8 (reddish yellow)

Hardness at 750oC: 1.5 Mohs

Apparent Porosity: 44.4%

Thermal Shock Resistance: minor spalling by 12th cycle

Laboratory Tests

Impurities: none

Bentonitic: no

Water of Plasticity: 52.7%

Drying Shrinkage: 34.5% (weight) and 10% (length)

Particle Size Analysis:

No. 10 No. 18 No. 35 No. 60 No. 120 No. 230 No. 325 Filter Total 4.6% 6.2% 11.6% 19.6% 21.2% 14.2% 3.8% 23.6% 81.2%

443 Clay Sample R079 Formation: Lewis Shale

Field Tests

Raw Color: 10YR4/2 (dark grayish brown)

Deposit Setting: drainage in between toe ridges west of highway

Deposit Size: 2' x 2' pocket in a sandier drainage area

Workability: clay can be rolled into a thin coil and makes a triangular ring

Odor: musty when wet

Condition: dry, homogenous, loose brown clay; top has lighter colored, mud-cracked surface, fine-textured with good workability

Hardness: Not lithified

Organic Content: small roots and tiny rootlets tending towards the top half of the clay; probably 15-20% of sample

Performance Characteristics

Clay Color at 750oC: 5YR6/6 (reddish yellow) Clay Color at 1000oC: 5YR5/8 (yellowish red)

Hardness at 750oC: 1.5 Mohs

Apparent Porosity:

Thermal Shock Resistance:

Laboratory Tests

Impurities: none

Bentonitic: no

Water of Plasticity: 41.1%

Drying Shrinkage: 29.1% (weight) and 12% (length)

Particle Size Analysis:

No. 10 No. 18 No. 35 No. 60 No. 120 No. 230 No. 325 Filter Total 0.98% 0.16% 2.30% 14.82% 30.96% 20.66% 3.48% 20.98% 94.34%

444 Clay Sample R043 Formation: Quaternary Alluvium

Field Tests

Raw Color: 2.5Y5/3 (light olive brown)

Deposit Setting: slope west of Highway 112

Deposit Size: 3' x 1'

Workability: both top layer and below are workable, made a thin coil but not a ring

Odor: very musty

Condition: Dry, homogenous (color difference on top due to dryness?) and loose. Light color tan cap and darker brown underneath – both are clay; sample mixes 2 "layers".

Hardness: Not lithified

Organic Content: lots of little roots from bush and grasses but not pervasive

Performance Characteristics

Clay Color at 750oC: 5YR6/6 (reddish yellow) Clay Color at 1000oC: 5YR5/8 (yellowish red)

Hardness at 750oC: 1.5 Mohs

Apparent Porosity: 43.8%

Thermal Shock Resistance: minor spalling by 12th cycle

Laboratory Tests

Impurities: bit salty, lime present

Bentonitic: no

Water of Plasticity: 36.3%

Drying Shrinkage: 26.6% (weight) and 6% (length)

Particle Size Analysis:

No. 10 No. 18 No. 35 No. 60 No. 120 No. 230 No. 325 Filter Total 0.26% 0.16% 0.48% 0.22% 45.30% 22.96% 5.36% 21.98% 96.72%

445 Clay Sample R109 Formation: Quaternary Alluvium

Field Tests

Raw Color: 10YR5/3 (brown)

Deposit Setting: Casados property, west side

Deposit Size: entire valley area

Workability: makes a thin coil and a nice ring, but hard to try knot in field

Odor: musty when damp

Condition: damp (recent heavy rains), homogenous, brown with lighter mud-cracked top; sprinkle of sand on top (washed across) but not sandy below

Hardness: Not lithified

Organic Content: fine rootlets near top, area of some dead grass and tiny forbs; very few rootlets and plants

Performance Characteristics

Clay Color at 750oC: 7.5YR6/6 (reddish yellow) Clay Color at 1000oC: 5YR6/8 (reddish yellow)

Hardness at 750oC: 1.5 Mohs

Apparent Porosity: 35.6%

Thermal Shock Resistance:

Laboratory Tests

Impurities: no salt, possibly lime

Bentonitic: no

Water of Plasticity: 31.1%

Drying Shrinkage: 23.7% (weight) and 12% (length)

Particle Size Analysis:

No. 10 No. 18 No. 35 No. 60 No. 120 No. 230 No. 325 Filter Total 0.00% 0.24% 1.66% 12.10% 22.40% 21.68% 7.02% 29.98% 95.08%

446 Clay Sample R001 Formation: Quaternary Alluvium

Field Tests

Raw Color: 10YR5/3 (brown)

Deposit Setting: west edge of Llaves Valley

Deposit Size: entire valley edge, general QAL

Workability: coils ok (thick), ring is possible, much better than canyon area

Odor: musty

Condition: dry, fine, homogenous (entire area along valley is relatively homogenous), loose

Hardness: Not lithified

Organic Content: some fine roots, area is grass and sage vegetation

Performance Characteristics

Clay Color at 750oC: 5YR6/6 (reddish yellow) Clay Color at 1000oC: 5YR6/6 (reddish yellow)

Hardness at 750oC: 1.5 Mohs

Apparent Porosity:

Thermal Shock Resistance:

Laboratory Tests

Impurities: no salt, possibly lime

Bentonitic: no

Water of Plasticity: 29.7%

Drying Shrinkage: 22.9% (weight) and 10% (length)

Particle Size Analysis:

No. 10 No. 18 No. 35 No. 60 No. 120 No. 230 No. 325 Filter Total 1.76% 2.72% 7.12% 12.62% 16.38% 17.50% 6.84% 32.30% 97.24%

447 Clay Sample R088 Formation: Quaternary Alluvium

Field Tests

Raw Color: 7.5YR5/3 (brown)

Deposit Setting: Davis property south end

Deposit Size: entire valley, general Qal

Workability: makes a thin coil, good ring, almost knot *very good workability

Odor: musty when wet

Condition: dry top three inches then a bit damp (recent rains), homogenous, light tan dry/brown damp – just color; mud-cracked surface extends a ways, very soft feel

Hardness: Not lithified

Organic Content: very fine rootlets, one small root all throughout; picked a spot with fewer plants growing

Performance Characteristics

Clay Color at 750oC: 5YR6/6 (reddish yellow) Clay Color at 1000oC: 5YR6/6 (reddish yellow)

Hardness at 750oC: 1.5 Mohs

Apparent Porosity:

Thermal Shock Resistance:

Laboratory Tests

Impurities: no salt, possilby lime

Bentonitic: no

Water of Plasticity: 32.1%

Drying Shrinkage: 24.3% (weight) and 8% (length)

Particle Size Analysis:

No. 10 No. 18 No. 35 No. 60 No. 120 No. 230 No. 325 Filter Total 0.00% 0.26% 1.52% 8.38% 14.66% 22.62% 5.34% 43.50% 96.28%

448 Clay Sample R103 Formation: Quaternary Alluvium

Field Tests

Raw Color: 10YR4/2 (dark grayish brown)

Deposit Setting: flats on Davis property

Deposit Size: entire property

Workability: makes a thin coil and does a ring but not a knot

Odor: musty when wet

Condition: dry, homogenous, mud-cracked surface is lighter color (sun bleached); general alluvium, looks and acts similar to other two samples on property

Hardness: Not lithified

Organic Content: fine rootlets throughout from grasses and forbs

Performance Characteristics

Clay Color at 750oC: 7.5YR6/6 (reddish yellow) Clay Color at 1000oC: 5YR6/6 (reddish yellow)

Hardness at 750oC: 1.5 Mohs

Apparent Porosity: 31.4%

Thermal Shock Resistance:

Laboratory Tests

Impurities: none

Bentonitic: no

Water of Plasticity: 33.6%

Drying Shrinkage: 25.2% (weight) and 10% (length)

Particle Size Analysis:

No. 10 No. 18 No. 35 No. 60 No. 120 No. 230 No. 325 Filter Total 1.6% 3.0% 10.6% 31.0% 20.4% 10.8% 6.0% 23.6% 83.4%

449 Clay Sample R030 Formation: Quaternary Terrace Deposits

Field Tests

Raw Color: 2.5Y5/4 (light olive brown)

Deposit Setting: Unit E – large outcrop at south end of Davis Ranch Site ridge

Deposit Size: 1 to 3m high and across the slope

Workability: very soft, sticks to hands; coil pencil size but ruptures when try ring

Odor: faintly musty when wet

Condition: Dry, homogenous, loose; cobbles of yellowish sandstone and chunks of dark gray shale. Mud cracked surface cap layer, loose underneath.

Hardness: Not lithified

Organic Content: a couple of twigs, forbs growing in area

Performance Characteristics

Clay Color at 750oC: 5YR6/6 (reddish yellow) Clay Color at 1000oC: 5YR6/8 (reddish yellow)

Hardness at 750oC: 1.5 Mohs

Apparent Porosity: 44.2%

Thermal Shock Resistance: minor spalling by 14th cycle

Laboratory Tests

Impurities: no salt, possibly lime

Bentonitic: no

Water of Plasticity: 38.4%

Drying Shrinkage: 27.7% (weight) and 8% (length)

Particle Size Analysis:

No. 10 No. 18 No. 35 No. 60 No. 120 No. 230 No. 325 Filter Total 0.62% 0.22% 0.16% 1.06% 5.30% 39.50% 11.20% 41.34% 99.40%

450 Clay Sample R032 Formation: Quaternary Terrace Deposits

Field Tests

Raw Color: 2.5Y5/3 (light olive brown)

Deposit Setting: Unit H – clay outcrop at south end of Davis Ranch Site ridge

Deposit Size: 0.5 to 1m thick, runs length of finger ridge, hard to tell if goes off NW slope, too many pebbles

Workability: pencil thin coil, close to making a ring

Odor: faintly musty when wet, none dry

Condition: Dry, homogenous, loose, and buff colored. Pebbles and cobbles of quartzite and sandstone (at top of rise).

Hardness: Not lithified

Organic Content: small roots, twigs – roots sparse but throughout

Performance Characteristics

Clay Color at 750oC: 7.5YR6/6 (reddish yellow) Clay Color at 1000oC: 5YR6/8 (reddish yellow)

Hardness at 750oC: 1.5 Mohs

Apparent Porosity:

Thermal Shock Resistance:

Laboratory Tests

Impurities: no salt, lime present

Bentonitic: no

Water of Plasticity: 36.7%

Drying Shrinkage: 26.9% (weight) and 10% (length)

Particle Size Analysis:

No. 10 No. 18 No. 35 No. 60 No. 120 No. 230 No. 325 Filter Total 2.28% 0.38% 0.48% 13.22% 27.36% 20.84% 6.72% 25.42% 96.70%

451 Clay Sample R033 Formation: Quaternary Terrace Deposits

Field Tests

Raw Color: 5Y5/3 (olive)

Deposit Setting: Unit I – light gray deposition southern end of Davis Ranch Site ridge

Deposit Size: 4m high, but gets shallower as it slopes upward – very wide

Workability: can roll into thin coil and makes a ring, but ruptured afterwards

Odor: musty when wet

Condition: Dry, homogenous, mud cracked appearance on top; finer-grained particles underneath the surface. Once it absorbed water, clay not gritty at all – very fine.

Hardness: Not lithified

Organic Content: Some roots mixed in with clay, more toward the surface. Twigs resting on top, and quartzite pebbles and sandstone are also mixed in.

Performance Characteristics

Clay Color at 750oC: 5YR6/6 (reddish yellow) Clay Color at 1000oC: 5YR5/8 (yellowish red)

Hardness at 750oC: 1.5 Mohs

Apparent Porosity:

Thermal Shock Resistance:

Laboratory Tests

Impurities: none

Bentonitic: no

Water of Plasticity: 39.4%

Drying Shrinkage: 28.3% (weight) and 8% (length)

Particle Size Analysis:

No. 10 No. 18 No. 35 No. 60 No. 120 No. 230 No. 325 Filter Total 2.6% 1.4% 4.4% 13.4% 32.8% 24.4% 17.8% 22.4% 96.8%

452 Clay Sample R045 Formation: Quaternary Terrace Deposits

Field Tests

Raw Color: 10YR5/4 (yellowish brown)

Deposit Setting: north slope Davis Ranch Site ridge, near northern pithouse

Deposit Size: 2m x 3m (colorwise) – some to west 1m x 2m

Workability: coils well and almost makes a ring before rupturing

Odor: musty when wet

Condition: Dry, homogenous, and loose. Undulating surface and faint color difference from surrounding area.

Hardness: Not lithified

Organic Content: lots of fine roots throughout deposit, a couple of twigs and some burned wood from forest fire

Performance Characteristics

Clay Color at 750oC: 5YR6/6 (reddish yellow) Clay Color at 1000oC: 5YR5/8 (yellowish red)

Hardness at 750oC: 1.5 Mohs

Apparent Porosity: 36.8%

Thermal Shock Resistance:

Laboratory Tests

Impurities: no salt, possibly lime

Bentonitic: no

Water of Plasticity: 32.1%

Drying Shrinkage: 24.3% (weight) and 10% (length)

Particle Size Analysis:

No. 10 No. 18 No. 35 No. 60 No. 120 No. 230 No. 325 Filter Total 0.18% 0.20% 4.48% 22.46% 26.78% 17.90% 8.22% 14.42% 94.64%

453 Clay Sample R051 Formation: Quaternary Terrace Deposits

Field Tests

Raw Color: 2.5Y5/3 (light olive brown)

Deposit Setting: western slope of Davis Ranch Site ridge; close to north end, pockets of clay

Deposit Size: 1' x 1' to 2' x 2' piles, goes down slope at least 6m (20 or more piles)

Workability: can roll into thin coil, ruptures when you attempt a ring

Odor: very musty when wet

Condition: Dry loose with both yellow and brown colors, possibly due to eroding sandstone. Yellow clay is dry, homogenous, loose, and fine-grained. When wet, not gritty and very workable.

Hardness: Not lithified

Organic Content: small amount very fine rootlets, mainly in top layers

Performance Characteristics

Clay Color at 750oC: 7.5YR6/6 (reddish yellow) Clay Color at 1000oC: 5YR6/6 (reddish yellow)

Hardness at 750oC: 1.5 Mohs

Apparent Porosity: 28.9%

Thermal Shock Resistance:

Laboratory Tests

Impurities: none

Bentonitic: no

Water of Plasticity: 39.0%

Drying Shrinkage: 28.1% (weight) and 12% (length)

Particle Size Analysis:

No. 10 No. 18 No. 35 No. 60 No. 120 No. 230 No. 325 Filter Total 4.82% 1.10% 1.82% 4.86% 16.20% 26.00% 7.62% 27.92% 90.34%

454 Clay Sample C013 Formation: Nacimiento Formation

Field Tests

Raw Color: 5Y5/3 (olive)

Deposit Setting: slope off of the side drainage – slightly flat spot

Deposit Size: large deposit, 10m x 7m

Workability: able to roll into thin coil, but ruptured when attempt to make ring

Odor: faintly musty when wet

Condition: Dry, homogenous, with a finer-grained texture and smaller particle size. Possibly due to weathering and distance from shale outcrop compared to last sample.

Hardness: Not lithified

Organic Content: Mostly pine needles resting on top of outcrop, with smaller needles mixed into clay. Only about 25% of the sample. Also some pine cones and sticks lying around, but not really roots.

Performance Characteristics

Clay Color at 750oC: 7.5YR5/6 (strong brown) Clay Color at 1000oC: 5YR5/8 (yellowish red)

Hardness at 750oC: 1.5 Mohs

Apparent Porosity: 55.5%

Thermal Shock Resistance: minor spalling at the 12th cycle

Laboratory Tests

Impurities: no salt, lime present

Bentonitic: no

Water of Plasticity: 31.7%

Drying Shrinkage: 24.0% (weight) and 4% (length)

Particle Size Analysis:

No. 10 No. 18 No. 35 No. 60 No. 120 No. 230 No. 325 Filter Total 0.26% 0.76% 1.68% 7.88% 22.38% 32.82% 8.18% 22.02% 95.93%

455 Clay Sample R018 Formation: Nacimiento Formation

Field Tests

Raw Color: 2.5Y5/3 (light olive brown)

Deposit Setting: bench at base of ridge

Deposit Size: 10m x 6m, maybe more

Workability: pencil thick coil and can be made into ring when add enough water

Odor: slightly musty

Condition: dry, homogenous below top layer, mud cracks, lighter color (tan) on top and darker color (brown) below

Hardness: Not lithified

Organic Content: twigs and needles on top, rootlets and roots in clay; clumped together root clusters

Performance Characteristics

Clay Color at 750oC: 7.5YR6/6 (reddish yellow) Clay Color at 1000oC: 5YR6/6 (reddish yellow)

Hardness at 750oC: 1.5 Mohs

Apparent Porosity:

Thermal Shock Resistance:

Laboratory Tests

Impurities: none

Bentonitic: no

Water of Plasticity: 27.7%

Drying Shrinkage: 21.7% (weight) and 8% (length)

Particle Size Analysis:

No. 10 No. 18 No. 35 No. 60 No. 120 No. 230 No. 325 Filter Total 1.46% 0.94% 5.92% 14.04% 19.82% 22.70% 8.58% 23.80% 97.26%

456 Clay Sample R060 Formation: Nacimiento Formation

Field Tests

Raw Color: 2.5Y5/3 (light olive brown)

Deposit Setting: bench at base of ridge

Deposit Size: 10m x 6m, maybe more

Workability: pencil thick coil and can be made into ring when add enough water

Odor: slightly musty

Condition: dry, homogenous below top layer, mud cracks, lighter color (tan) on top and darker color (brown) below

Hardness: Not lithified

Organic Content: twigs and needles on top, rootlets and roots in clay; clumped together root clusters

Performance Characteristics

Clay Color at 750oC: 7.5YR6/6 (reddish yellow) Clay Color at 1000oC: 5YR5/8 (yellowish red)

Hardness at 750oC: 1.5 Mohs

Apparent Porosity: 40.0%

Thermal Shock Resistance: minor spalling at 14th cycle

Laboratory Tests

Impurities: none

Bentonitic: no

Water of Plasticity: 40.0%

Drying Shrinkage: 28.5% (weight) and 8% (length)

Particle Size Analysis:

No. 10 No. 18 No. 35 No. 60 No. 120 No. 230 No. 325 Filter Total 0.30% 0.26% 1.02% 4.18% 7.96% 11.54% 6.22% 65.88% 97.36%

457 Clay Sample R078 Formation: Nacimiento Formation

Field Tests

Raw Color: 10YR5/4 (yellowish brown)

Deposit Setting: finger ridge in west section, in saddle area (flatter)

Deposit Size: 4m x 1m

Workability: coils into a pencil and makes a ring, just start to crack as ring

Odor: musty when wet

Condition: dry, get reddish bits (from red sandstone?) and pieces of dark gray shale as dig down; mud-cracked surface, similar to others with shale in Nacimiento Formation

Hardness: Not lithified

Organic Content: small roots, fine rootlets throughout sparse pine needles and twigs on top

Performance Characteristics

Clay Color at 750oC: 5YR5/6 (yellowish red) Clay Color at 1000oC: 5YR6/6 (reddish yellow)

Hardness at 750oC: 1.5 Mohs

Apparent Porosity: 37.3%

Thermal Shock Resistance:

Laboratory Tests

Impurities: none

Bentonitic: no

Water of Plasticity: 34.7%

Drying Shrinkage: 25.8% (weight) and 10% (length)

Particle Size Analysis:

No. 10 No. 18 No. 35 No. 60 No. 120 No. 230 No. 325 Filter Total 17.8% 12.6% 11.6% 13.2% 10.2% 17.8% 8.2% 17.0% 91.4%

458 Clay Sample R089 Formation: Nacimiento Formation

Field Tests

Raw Color: 2.5Y5/2 (grayish brown)

Deposit Setting: top of toe ridge near western edge of survey area

Deposit Size: 1' x 3' (lens of shale)

Workability: clay can be rolled into a thin coil, pencil-size; makes a ring, but cannot make a knot

Odor: musty when damp

Condition: dry, homogenous, small outcrop of gray shale pieces weathering out of a much sandier yellow area near the top of the ridge; shale is loose and makes for a slightly coarse textured coil, needs to be lightly smooshed to be useable

Hardness: shale pieces are very soft, can be broken with finger

Organic Content: a mixture of small, medium, and large roots are throughout the clay, partly trying to hold slope together

Performance Characteristics

Clay Color at 750oC: 7.5YR6/6 (reddish yellow) Clay Color at 1000oC: 5YR6/6 (reddish yellow)

Hardness at 750oC: 1.5 Mohs

Apparent Porosity:

Thermal Shock Resistance:

Laboratory Tests

Impurities: no salt, possibly lime

Bentonitic: no

Water of Plasticity: 38.4%

Drying Shrinkage: 27.8% (weight) and 10% (length)

Particle Size Analysis:

No. 10 No. 18 No. 35 No. 60 No. 120 No. 230 No. 325 Filter Total 1.52% 1.70% 5.54% 15.62% 24.30% 15.84% 5.12% 27.08% 96.72%

459 Clay Sample C003 Formation: San Jose Formation

Field Tests

Raw Color: 7.5YR5/4 (brown)

Deposit Setting: west stream bank among boulders

Deposit Size: very small deposit

Workability: will make a coil, but doesn't bend; sandy around deposit

Odor: a bit musty

Condition: Dry, fairly homogenous – compact but not platy or lithified; it comes out in chunks that can be broken up with pressure

Hardness: Not lithified

Organic Content: roots traverse the outcrop, but don't permeate the clay; roots are holding the clay in place

Performance Characteristics

Clay Color at 750oC: 2.5YR5/6 (red) Clay Color at 1000oC: 2.5YR5/8 (red)

Hardness at 750oC: 1.5 Mohs

Apparent Porosity: 44.4%

Thermal Shock Resistance:

Laboratory Tests

Impurities: no salt, lime present

Bentonitic: no

Water of Plasticity: 21.9%

Drying Shrinkage: 18.0% (weight) and 6% (length)

Particle Size Analysis:

No. 10 No. 18 No. 35 No. 60 No. 120 No. 230 No. 325 Filter Total 1.96% 4.06% 9.48% 20.52% 24.16% 18.88% 3.96% 13.60% 96.62%

460 Clay Sample C007 Formation: San Jose Formation

Field Tests

Raw Color: 7.5YR5/3 (brown)

Deposit Setting: west stream bank

Deposit Size: narrow lens, small outcrop

Workability: coiled, but coarse clay – no ring

Odor: musty

Condition: dry, homogenous; seems to be under a sandy layer

Hardness: Not lithified

Organic Content: small roots

Performance Characteristics

Clay Color at 750oC: 2.5YR6/6 (light red) Clay Color at 1000oC: 5YR6/6 (reddish yellow)

Hardness at 750oC: 1.5 Mohs

Apparent Porosity:

Thermal Shock Resistance:

Laboratory Tests

Impurities: no salt, possibly lime

Bentonitic: no

Water of Plasticity: 31.3%

Drying Shrinkage: 23.9% (weight) and 6% (length)

Particle Size Analysis:

No. 10 No. 18 No. 35 No. 60 No. 120 No. 230 No. 325 Filter Total 0.86% 0.56% 2.76% 10.08% 21.38% 21.72% 11.74% 27.00% 96.10%

461 Clay Sample C009 Formation: San Jose Formation

Field Tests

Raw Color: 10YR6/2 (light brownish gray)

Deposit Setting: west stream bank, among sandstone boulders in bank

Deposit Size: small deposit

Workability: rolls into coil, ruptures before ring made; better workability than previous canyon samples

Odor: musty

Condition: dry but does hold a bit of moisture below the surface; homogenous, mud-cracked surface sits below a sandstone boulder outcrop

Hardness: Not lithified

Organic Content: small roots, grasses growing adjacent

Performance Characteristics

Clay Color at 750oC: 7.5YR7/4 (pink) Clay Color at 1000oC: 7.5YR7/4 (pink)

Hardness at 750oC: 1.5 Mohs

Apparent Porosity: 31.6%

Thermal Shock Resistance: minor spalling at 12th cycle

Laboratory Tests

Impurities: none

Bentonitic: no

Water of Plasticity: 27.0%

Drying Shrinkage: 21.3% (weight) and 10% (length)

Particle Size Analysis:

No. 10 No. 18 No. 35 No. 60 No. 120 No. 230 No. 325 Filter Total 2.50% 0.46% 1.50% 5.34% 20.44% 18.30% 6.82% 42.60% 97.96%

462 Clay Sample C011 Formation: San Jose Formation

Field Tests

Raw Color: 5Y5/2 (olive gray)

Deposit Setting: slope along trail to Nogales Cliff House, about 3/4 up the steep section

Deposit Size: about 1' x 1' but occurs various places along trail

Workability: coils, but ruptures when try ring; fairly coarse

Odor: very faintly musty

Condition: dry and homogenous, compacted surface in rill; possible erosional surface or clay lens

Hardness: Not lithified

Organic Content: sparse roots, not much due to compaction

Performance Characteristics

Clay Color at 750oC: 7.5YR5/6 (strong brown) Clay Color at 1000oC: 7.5YR5/6 (strong brown)

Hardness at 750oC: 1.5 Mohs

Apparent Porosity: 45.7%

Thermal Shock Resistance:

Laboratory Tests

Impurities: none

Bentonitic: no

Water of Plasticity: 29.9%

Drying Shrinkage: 23.0% (weight) and 4% (length)

Particle Size Analysis:

No. 10 No. 18 No. 35 No. 60 No. 120 No. 230 No. 325 Filter Total 0.74% 0.72% 2.22% 4.86% 20.66% 36.76% 9.18% 21.90% 97.04%

463 Clay Sample C014 Formation: San Jose Formation

Field Tests

Raw Color: 5Y6/3 (pale olive)

Deposit Setting: ridge below cliffs, on a bit of flat; way up drainage near well well-head

Deposit Size: medium size deposit, about 2m x 2m

Workability: coils fine, but ruptures when try a ring

Odor: musty when wet

Condition: dry and homogenous , sort of mud-cracked

Hardness: Not lithified

Organic Content: sparse pine needles (piñon pine)

Performance Characteristics

Clay Color at 750oC: 7.5YR6/6 (reddish yellow) Clay Color 1000oC: 7.5YR6/6 (reddish yellow)

Hardness at 750oC: 1.5 Mohs

Apparent Porosity:

Thermal Shock Resistance:

Laboratory Tests

Impurities: none

Bentonitic: no

Water of Plasticity: 32.2%

Drying Shrinkage: 24.4% (weight) and 8% (length)

Particle Size Analysis:

No. 10 No. 18 No. 35 No. 60 No. 120 No. 230 No. 325 Filter Total 3.2% 8.2% 3.8% 2.4% 9.8% 36.4% 14.2% 31.6% 78.0%

464 Clay Sample C015 Formation: San Jose Formation

Field Tests

Raw Color: 5Y7/1 (light gray)

Deposit Setting: base of sandstone cliff

Deposit Size: fairly large deposit, 2m x 5m or bigger

Workability: rolls into coil, but ruptures when try ring

Odor: musty when wet, none when dry

Condition: very dry and homogenous, appears to be weathering out of grayer color shale

Hardness: Not lithified

Organic Content: very sparse small roots

Performance Characteristics

Clay Color at 750oC: 7.5YR7/6 (reddish yellow) Clay Color 1000oC: 7.5YR7/6 (reddish yellow)

Hardness at 750oC: 1.5 Mohs

Apparent Porosity:

Thermal Shock Resistance:

Laboratory Tests

Impurities: none

Bentonitic: no

Water of Plasticity: 40.1%

Drying Shrinkage: 28.6% (weight) and 10% (length)

Particle Size Analysis:

No. 10 No. 18 No. 35 No. 60 No. 120 No. 230 No. 325 Filter Total 0.96% 1.30% 6.28% 11.12% 11.12% 14.22% 7.20% 45.00% 97.20%

465

APPENDIX C: Ceramic and Clay Samples Petrographic Data

466

Petrographic Samples clays and ceramics

Sample Fm/House C:f distribution Aplastics % Sorting Optic State qtz size qtz sphericity qtz rounding C03 Tsc close packed 30 poorly mod active F to VC moderate angular C07 Tsc close packed 35 poorly slightly F to C low angular C09 Tsc close packed 30 poorly mod active F to C low angular C11 Tsc close packed 30 mod well mod active fine low angular C13 Tn single spaced 25 mod well mod active F to M high sub-angular C14 Tsc single spaced 20 mod well mod active fine low angular C15 Tsl double spaced 20 mod well mod active VF to M moderate angular R001 Qal single spaced 20 very poorly mod active M to VC moderate very angular R018 Tn close packed 30 very poorly mod active VF to VC low angular

467 R030 Qcg close packed 25 mod well very active VF to C moderate angular R032 Qcg single spaced 15 poorly very active F to C moderate sub-angular R033 Qcg single spaced 15 mod well very active F to C moderate angular R043 Qal close packed 30 well slightly medium moderate sub-rounded R045 Qcg close packed 30 very poorly mod active VF to VC low angular R051 Qcg close packed 30 very poorly mod active M to VC moderate angular R054 Kl close packed 30 well slightly medium low to mod very angular R055 Kl double spaced 5 mod well mod active F to M low sub-angular R060 Tn double spaced 10 poorly very active VF to C high sub-rounded R072 Kkf single spaced 15 poorly very active VF to VC low sub-rounded R073 Kkf single spaced 20 well very active VF to C high sub-angular R074 Kkf double spaced 5 well very active F to C moderate sub-angular R078 Tn single spaced 15 well mod active fine moderate angular R079 Kl single spaced 20 mod well mod active VF to VC low angular R083 Kkf double spaced 10 poorly very active VF to VC low sub-rounded R088 Qal single spaced 20 poorly mod active VF to VC high sub-angular R089 Tn double spaced 7 mod well active medium moderate angular Petrographic Samples clays and ceramics

Sample Fm/House C:f distribution Aplastics % Sorting Optic State qtz size qtz sphericity qtz rounding R103 Qal single spaced 20 poorly very active F to VC moderate very angular R109 Qal single spaced 20 mod well mod active M to C moderate angular DB01 173 close packed 30 well mod active F to M high angular DB17 173 open spaced 10 mod well slightly medium moderate angular DB18 173 open spaced 15 poorly mod active M to C low angular DB19 173 open spaced 10 well inactive VF to M high very angular DB54 174 single spaced 25 well inactive fine high angular DB55 174 single spaced 20 well inactive very fine high sub-rounded DB59 1711 single spaced 20 mod well inactive F to M moderate angular

468 DB60 1711 single spaced 20 mod well slightly medium low angular DB61 1711 open spaced 15 poorly mod active F to M high angular DB107 1711 open spaced 10 well slightly very fine moderate angular DC01 173 single spaced 20 very poorly very active M to VC moderate angular DC02 173 single spaced 15 very poorly inactive C to VC moderate very angular DC03 173 single spaced 20 poorly very active coarse moderate very angular DC26 173 single spaced 20 poorly slightly F to VC moderate very angular DC43 174 single spaced 25 very poorly slightly M to C high angular DC44 174 single spaced 20 poorly inactive M to C moderate angular DC45 174 single spaced 20 poorly inactive C to VC low very angular DC48 174 single spaced 20 very poorly inactive C to VC moderate very angular DC49 174 open spaced 15 very poorly inactive M to VC high very angular DC51 1711 single spaced 20 very poorly slightly M to VC moderate very angular DP01 173 single spaced 20 mod well slightly M to C moderate angular DP02 173 single spaced 20 poorly mod active coarse moderate sub-angular DP04 173 single spaced 20 mod well slightly M to C moderate angular DP19 173 single spaced 20 poorly slightly F to C moderate sub-angular Petrographic Samples clays and ceramics

Sample Fm/House C:f distribution Aplastics % Sorting Optic State qtz size qtz sphericity qtz rounding DP20 173 close packed 25 very poorly slightly M to C moderate sub-angular DP31 174 single spaced 20 mod well mod active F to M moderate sub-angular DP61 174 open spaced 10 well slightly medium moderate sub-rounded DP102 1711 double spaced 15 mod well mod active medium moderate angular DP103 1711 single spaced 20 well slightly medium moderate angular DP104 1711 single spaced 20 poorly slightly medium moderate angular NB01 Cist 7 single spaced 20 poorly inactive coarse low angular NB02 House 8 close packed 30 mod well slightly VF to M moderate angular NB07 House 8 single spaced 20 mod well slightly M to C low sub-rounded

469 NB13 House 7 open spaced 15 mod well mod active coarse high sub-angular NB15 House 7 open spaced 15 mod well mod active M to C moderate sub-rounded NB21 House 6 single spaced 20 well inactive medium low angular NB29 House 6 single spaced 20 mod well inactive F to M moderate sub-angular NB33 House 1 single spaced 20 well inactive M to C moderate sub-angular NB34 House 1 open spaced 10 mod well slightly M to C moderate sub-angular NB39 Cist 7 single spaced 20 poorly very active M to C low sub-rounded NC01 Cist 7 single spaced 20 poorly inactive F to C moderate angular NC06 House 8 single spaced 20 very poorly slightly coarse high sub-angular NC09 House 8 single spaced 20 poorly inactive medium low angular NC14 House 7 single spaced 20 poorly inactive M to C low sub-angular NC20 House 6 single spaced 20 poorly inactive C to VC moderate angular NC23 House 1 single spaced 20 poorly inactive M to C high sub-angular NC24 House 1 single spaced 20 very poorly inactive VF to VC moderate very angular NC27 House 1 single spaced 25 poorly inactive M to C moderate angular NC28 House 3 single spaced 20 poorly inactive medium low very angular NC30 House 3 single spaced 20 poorly inactive very coarse high sub-rounded Petrographic Samples clays and ceramics

Sample Fm/House C:f distribution Aplastics % Sorting Optic State qtz size qtz sphericity qtz rounding NP01 Cist 7 single spaced 20 very poorly slightly coarse moderate sub-rounded NP02 Cist 7 single spaced 25 mod well very active medium high sub-angular NP03 House 9 double spaced 15 very poorly inactive M to C moderate sub-angular NP04 House 8 single spaced 20 poorly slightly M to C moderate sub-angular NP07 House 8 close packed 25 well very active medium high sub-rounded NP11 House 7 double spaced 15 mod well slightly medium moderate sub-rounded NP14 House 6 single spaced 25 poorly slightly M to C moderate angular NP16 House 6 double spaced 10 very poorly slightly medium moderate angular NP18 House 6 single spaced 20 mod well mod active M to C moderate sub-angular

470 NP21 House 6 single spaced 20 poorly mod active M to C moderate angular Petrographic Samples clays and ceramics

Sample kspar size kspar sphericity kspar rounding kspar twinning plag size plag sphericity plag rounding C03 F to C moderate angular Yes F to M low angular C07 F to C low angular Yes F to M low rounded C09 F to C low sub-angular Yes fine high sub-rounded C11 fine moderate sub-angular Yes fine moderate sub-angular C13 F to M low angular Yes fine low sub-angular C14 VF to M moderate sub-angular Yes VF to M low sub-angular C15 VF to M low sub-angular No fine high sub-angular R001 M to VC moderate angular Yes medium moderate sub-angular R018 VF to VC moderate sub-rounded Yes F to M low angular

471 R030 VF to M low angular No very fine low angular R032 M to C moderate sub-angular Yes VF to F moderate sub-angular R033 F to C low very angular Yes medium low angular R043 medium high very angular Yes medium low angular R045 M to VC moderate sub-angular Yes medium low angular R051 M to VC low sub-angular Yes medium low sub-rounded R054 medium high sub-rounded Yes medium high sub-rounded R055 F to M low sub-angular Yes R060 VF to C moderate angular No F to M moderate angular R072 VF to VC low sub-angular Yes fine high angular R073 VF to C moderate sub-angular Yes medium low sub-rounded R074 F to C moderate sub-angular No R078 VF to F moderate angular No fine moderate angular R079 VF to VC low angular No fine low rounded R083 VF to C moderate sub-angular Yes fine low sub-angular R088 VF to VC high sub-angular Yes F to M low angular R089 medium low angular Yes medium low angular Petrographic Samples clays and ceramics

Sample kspar size kspar sphericity kspar rounding kspar twinning plag size plag sphericity plag rounding R103 F to VC moderate very angular Yes M to C low angular R109 VF to VC moderate angular Yes medium low angular DB01 F to VC high sub-angular No DB17 F to M low sub-angular Yes fine low sub-angular DB18 M to C low angular No DB19 F to M high angular No DB54 F to M moderate sub-angular Yes DB55 VF to M moderate angular No DB59 F to M moderate angular No medium low rounded

472 DB60 medium moderate angular No DB61 F to C moderate sub-angular No VF to F low rounded DB107 very fine moderate angular No DC01 M to C moderate angular Yes coarse high very angular DC02 C to VC high sub-angular Yes DC03 coarse moderate angular No M to C moderate sub-rounded DC26 very coarse high very angular Yes coarse moderate angular DC43 M to C high sub-angular No M to C high sub-rounded DC44 M to C moderate sub-angular Yes medium high sub-angular DC45 C to VC low sub-angular Yes DC48 C to VC moderate angular Yes C to VC high sub-rounded DC49 C to VC low angular Yes F to C low sub-rounded DC51 M to VC moderate angular No coarse high very angular DP01 medium high sub-angular No coarse low sub-rounded DP02 medium low rounded Yes M to VC low sub-angular DP04 F to M moderate sub-angular No DP19 M to C moderate sub-rounded No Petrographic Samples clays and ceramics

Sample kspar size kspar sphericity kspar rounding kspar twinning plag size plag sphericity plag rounding DP20 M to C moderate sub-angular No C to VC low rounded DP31 F to M moderate angular Yes DP61 medium moderate sub-angular No DP102 medium high sub-angular No medium moderate sub-rounded DP103 medium low very angular No DP104 coarse moderate sub-angular Yes medium high angular NB01 coarse low sub-angular Yes coarse moderate sub-rounded NB02 medium low sub-angular Yes fine moderate sub-angular NB07 M to C moderate sub-angular No F to M low sub-rounded

473 NB13 coarse high sub-angular No NB15 M to C low sub-angular Yes NB21 F to C low angular No F to M moderate angular NB29 F to M low angular No F to M moderate sub-angular NB33 M to C high sub-angular Yes medium high sub-angular NB34 M to C moderate sub-angular No F to M low sub-angular NB39 M to C low sub-angular No coarse low sub-angular NC01 F to C moderate angular Yes F to C moderate angular NC06 F to C low sub-rounded Yes F to C high sub-angular NC09 M to VC low sub-angular Yes medium low angular NC14 M to C low sub-angular Yes medium low sub-angular NC20 coarse moderate angular Yes coarse moderate angular NC23 F to VC low very angular Yes F to C high sub-angular NC24 F to C high very angular Yes F to M low angular NC27 M to C moderate sub-angular Yes M to C low angular NC28 M to C moderate angular Yes F to M low angular NC30 M to C low sub-angular Yes M to C moderate sub-rounded Petrographic Samples clays and ceramics

Sample kspar size kspar sphericity kspar rounding kspar twinning plag size plag sphericity plag rounding NP01 coarse moderate sub-rounded Yes medium low sub-rounded NP02 medium high sub-angular No medium high sub-rounded NP03 M to C moderate sub-angular Yes fine moderate rounded NP04 M to C moderate sub-angular Yes medium moderate sub-angular NP07 medium moderate angular No fine high rounded NP11 medium moderate sub-angular No fine moderate sub-angular NP14 M to C moderate sub-rounded Yes medium low rounded NP16 medium low sub-rounded No NP18 M to C moderate sub-rounded Yes medium high rounded

474 NP21 M to C moderate sub-angular Yes fine moderate sub-rounded Petrographic Samples clays and ceramics

Sample clast type clast size clast sphericity clast rounding musc size musc sphericity musc rounding C03 quartz C to VC moderate sub-rounded fine low rounded C07 fine low rounded C09 quartz C to VC moderate sub-angular fine low rounded C11 quartz C to VC moderate sub-angular fine low rounded C13 VF to F low rounded C14 fine low rounded C15 quartz medium high angular VF to F low rounded R001 sedimentary C to VC low very angular R018 sedimentary M to C low sub-rounded

475 R030 sedimentary M to C high rounded F to M low rounded R032 sedimentary F to M low sub-rounded R033 sedimentary medium moderate sub-angular R043 sedimentary medium moderate sub-angular R045 sedimentary medium moderate sub-rounded R051 sedimentary M to VC moderate sub-rounded medium low rounded R054 sedimentary medium high rounded R055 sedimentary C to VC low sub-rounded R060 sedimentary C to VC low rounded very fine low rounded R072 sedimentary C to VC low sub-angular fine low sub-rounded R073 sedimentary medium low sub-rounded R074 very fine low rounded R078 sedimentary very coarse low sub-angular fine low rounded R079 sedimentary F to C low angular R083 sedimentary very coarse moderate sub-rounded R088 sedimentary M to C moderate sub-rounded fine low sub-angular R089 sedimentary C to VC low sub-rounded Petrographic Samples clays and ceramics

Sample clast type clast size clast sphericity clast rounding musc size musc sphericity musc rounding R103 sedimentary M to C moderate sub-rounded fine low rounded R109 sedimentary coarse high rounded DB01 DB17 sedimentary M to C low sub-rounded DB18 sedimentary medium moderate very angular very fine low rounded DB19 sedimentary coarse moderate very angular DB54 VF to F low rounded DB55 DB59 sedimentary coarse low angular

476 DB60 DB61 sedimentary F to C high rounded DB107 very fine low rounded DC01 sedimentary M to C high rounded DC02 DC03 sedimentary C to VC moderate sub-rounded F to M low rounded DC26 sedimentary C to VC moderate sub-rounded DC43 sedimentary coarse high angular very fine low rounded DC44 sedimentary M to VC moderate angular fine low rounded DC45 sedimentary coarse high angular DC48 sedimentary M to C low angular DC49 sedimentary coarse low sub-rounded DC51 sedimentary M to VC moderate sub-rounded fine low rounded DP01 sedimentary very coarse high sub-rounded fine low rounded DP02 sedimentary coarse moderate rounded DP04 sedimentary medium high rounded F to M low rounded DP19 sedimentary coarse high rounded Petrographic Samples clays and ceramics

Sample clast type clast size clast sphericity clast rounding musc size musc sphericity musc rounding DP20 very fine low rounded DP31 fine low sub-rounded DP61 F to M low rounded DP102 F to M low rounded DP103 DP104 sedimentary medium low sub-angular fine low rounded NB01 sedimentary very coarse high rounded NB02 sedimentary fine high rounded NB07 sedimentary medium high sub-angular

477 NB13 quartz? fine moderate rounded very fine low rounded NB15 sedimentary F to C moderate rounded NB21 sedimentary F to C low sub-rounded NB29 sedimentary medium low sub-angular NB33 NB34 fine low rounded NB39 sedimentary F to M high sub-angular fine low rounded NC01 NC06 sedimentary medium low sub-rounded NC09 sedimentary very coarse low rounded NC14 sedimentary M to C high sub-angular NC20 sedimentary C to VC low angular NC23 sedimentary M to C low rounded NC24 sedimentary M to VC low angular NC27 sedimentary M to C low sub-angular NC28 sedimentary F to C low sub-rounded F to M low rounded NC30 sedimentary C to VC low sub-angular Petrographic Samples clays and ceramics

Sample clast type clast size clast sphericity clast rounding musc size musc sphericity musc rounding NP01 sedimentary coarse low angular very fine low rounded NP02 sedimentary F to C moderate sub-rounded VF to F low rounded NP03 sedimentary M to C low rounded NP04 sedimentary coarse low sub-rounded NP07 sedimentary M to C moderate sub-rounded NP11 sedimentary medium high sub-rounded NP14 sedimentary granule moderate sub-rounded F to M low rounded NP16 NP18 sedimentary coarse low angular fine low rounded

478 NP21 sedimentary coarse moderate sub-angular

APPENDIX D: Ceramic and Clay Samples ICP-MS Data

479

Inductively Coupled Plasma-Mass Spectrometry Paste Data (Neff 2008)

Sample Na Mg Al Si K Ca Sc Ti V Cr C09-p1 1833.00 87767.40 324486.48 20429.44 1650.12 42.98 4570.69 361.03 282.45 C09-p2 8113.01 1910.07 103331.87 328589.74 37017.95 1668.05 34.17 2877.59 243.98 C09-p3 4519.45 2078.30 97696.89 344076.69 21636.44 1811.14 56.80 3457.40 312.17 C11-p1 3345.04 9873.89 89415.78 308836.08 14207.18 1151.09 38.99 3605.71 254.50 216.97 C11-p2 9812.65 10996.92 133258.75 273665.47 18525.50 994.28 41.17 3435.18 332.50 456.39 C11-p3 3868.60 9402.44 132595.64 287382.75 13193.43 1150.91 50.47 4088.77 329.40 500.76 C13-p1 8154.20 13738.09 110058.68 248198.60 47169.07 3752.76 70.34 4811.08 340.60 62.29 C13-p2 9741.78 129347.57 248436.88 17572.18 5179.74 59.69 6113.29 354.87 169.81 C13-p3 11361.33 149188.61 231442.79 29118.92 7925.30 99.61 5284.63 443.83 351.07 C14-p1 7683.03 7256.99 95228.11 317274.29 18925.30 3796.71 45.42 6821.84 301.74 151.50 C14-p2 5076.02 106896.18 315091.39 31080.75 3640.57 38.61 2518.42 222.89 159.93 480 C14-p3 12679.02 6055.78 98280.54 322085.11 11964.83 4364.14 53.98 3542.55 314.64 87.22 C15-p1 1912.19 82507.84 360415.81 32476.75 1225.77 46.77 1666.68 266.27 15.89 C15-p2 2117.70 91640.23 354714.24 22214.97 1774.83 26.02 2568.53 227.25 65.03 C15-p3 3303.65 138903.15 293816.03 30813.42 2769.71 81.53 8737.55 450.73 73.48 DB01-p1 4291.40 2512.04 103836.61 328662.69 17900.87 2845.22 49.39 6545.84 173.64 108.67 DB01-p2 2156.89 3061.71 131124.90 292311.76 19191.86 3078.77 39.87 14092.46 224.24 193.00 DB01-p3 851.26 3458.10 117812.93 309505.27 17444.85 2460.06 43.33 7120.55 223.81 639.24 DB107-p1 2292.32 7445.57 107149.00 321448.20 20781.96 3999.97 51.18 5108.06 239.85 143.11 DB107-p2 9254.89 124752.33 295794.27 23002.84 3187.28 35.47 13343.15 281.94 228.29 DB107-p3 1070.81 7425.44 148784.90 280483.66 21288.80 3079.87 41.25 5094.27 326.03 803.33 DB17-p1 6132.67 4429.28 91278.69 329268.40 18447.54 2876.30 48.40 5639.32 327.80 145.01 DB17-p2 4364.87 80631.78 355993.06 18189.48 2410.34 32.96 5015.29 218.92 178.56 DB17-p3 2731.61 5676.14 129718.52 304024.77 19090.47 3856.85 41.34 5137.96 275.95 831.92 DB18-p1 11493.61 1942.74 108214.80 320385.86 26867.06 2066.72 66.82 6803.35 295.62 10.95 DB18-p2 2858.95 3099.89 118344.54 310240.34 26949.42 1929.21 42.67 13172.43 293.72 493.04 DB18-p3 2651.03 173146.81 269236.36 27370.82 2026.28 54.76 8275.19 324.26 859.96 DB19-p1 4374.84 5765.95 96466.84 332388.23 23447.71 1807.11 37.15 4268.20 240.07 131.13 DB19-p2 4642.97 7993.42 118426.38 303663.08 22054.92 9950.63 32.83 7909.70 217.65 220.04 DB19-p3 3134.87 7915.06 108788.92 320136.83 22863.10 2033.01 36.65 4862.83 237.24 554.80 DB54-p1 2186.88 110615.11 328725.58 26976.04 2993.88 44.90 4299.89 214.29 Inductively Coupled Plasma-Mass Spectrometry Paste Data (Neff 2008)

Sample Na Mg Al Si K Ca Sc Ti V Cr DB54-p2 7394.20 2200.10 106510.81 329387.85 19494.35 3407.95 37.52 5191.83 232.09 DB54-p3 1470.72 69193.58 378695.95 13464.22 3108.81 47.47 3831.79 152.63 3.98 DB55-p1 6349.60 3308.31 106981.85 324323.97 16985.05 2654.05 41.57 4402.95 217.30 229.35 DB55-p2 1938.99 2386.90 107786.04 332104.19 21663.43 2041.28 40.87 4456.55 217.37 189.65 DB55-p3 4503.17 1817.03 112307.31 335039.77 20028.50 2045.23 41.91 3013.68 201.55 739.19 DB59-p1 5571.21 6741.88 99333.02 333279.77 18808.49 2829.51 42.04 7222.73 267.47 263.60 DB59-p2 2196.32 7686.94 108981.39 321650.00 20592.91 3176.21 49.28 7310.07 280.07 278.18 DB59-p3 10853.27 6936.69 135018.10 284978.67 21340.85 3163.77 51.68 7844.23 368.82 899.59 DB60-p1 5553.11 9454.43 106623.57 312669.82 22726.89 2332.32 45.69 6967.67 285.25 261.15 DB60-p2 1285.16 8869.04 119146.98 306509.06 23598.20 3272.74 43.41 5815.80 270.96 245.91 DB60-p3 16296.39 8469.46 132235.36 292408.80 21273.77 2291.74 44.70 6072.43 275.35 742.43 481 DB61-p1 7257.96 2007.02 118924.49 315639.55 13218.65 4555.55 50.57 4369.89 225.50 195.86 DB61-p2 8284.82 1979.20 124696.49 306702.00 13540.76 4669.20 29.19 3651.45 231.16 DB61-p3 1765.10 125067.53 314738.48 12387.53 4988.17 45.26 4165.12 218.26 256.09 DC01-p1 5048.76 1533.35 71420.68 363598.61 16276.21 7345.83 34.48 4176.77 154.06 100.99 DC01-p2 15400.74 1665.19 92365.47 336421.23 17111.38 7868.93 21.98 2948.50 154.96 DC01-p3 4813.15 1088.42 69411.11 359666.31 13041.47 6218.78 34.36 1482.85 132.13 DC02-p1 7309.74 2835.08 69152.39 347834.21 16102.95 13085.66 55.25 4062.22 246.50 38.92 DC02-p2 10332.57 3461.45 106872.01 317890.07 17817.35 9912.78 38.51 5010.56 242.62 484.26 DC02-p3 2457.18 3283.81 120773.66 308932.00 20081.01 10071.98 39.32 4501.18 250.30 599.52 DC03-p1 2692.19 98452.58 335254.73 15768.58 7094.63 39.66 3655.57 199.38 123.39 DC03-p2 2967.55 104556.41 323762.36 17281.67 8194.43 30.56 4226.09 204.91 192.18 DC03-p3 8616.38 2043.45 93260.78 338033.87 17500.30 6913.33 61.38 3052.81 209.48 152.52 DC26-p1 9894.77 2120.76 67602.91 361378.65 12739.14 8070.16 48.29 2972.92 138.91 54.76 DC26-p1A 7553.66 3023.36 85579.10 336784.37 16163.91 8753.51 39.64 4359.27 158.55 106.88 DC26-p2 6390.16 3692.74 96709.03 326210.32 17343.16 7049.76 36.00 4849.66 155.01 382.56 DC26-p3 11697.04 3243.86 107010.91 317365.93 19614.03 6923.42 32.39 4355.72 163.58 527.34 DC43-p1 15588.31 1850.24 78213.75 353419.91 19824.09 5410.67 55.25 2317.64 121.69 DC43-p2 9390.94 2487.27 110306.57 320657.63 21834.87 4386.29 35.62 8223.08 171.90 341.84 DC43-p3 3746.81 2940.97 119569.21 288883.93 18736.95 5066.53 37.26 4586.81 162.94 427.80 DC44-p1 15134.40 1355.95 131466.29 306388.54 16907.26 6554.55 65.88 4783.50 196.74 102.27 Inductively Coupled Plasma-Mass Spectrometry Paste Data (Neff 2008)

Sample Na Mg Al Si K Ca Sc Ti V Cr DC44-p1A 20263.03 1342.60 140993.51 298279.41 15085.46 3962.31 43.18 7565.02 166.30 110.12 DC44-p2 5363.36 1872.06 143995.37 297532.98 12220.00 11704.22 36.77 6466.23 193.53 353.82 DC44-p3 21874.10 1124.55 137845.54 300149.83 15198.65 2691.55 45.72 10689.33 167.81 336.46 DC45-p1 7835.21 1016.29 56384.57 386018.95 14310.85 3023.18 48.82 2460.21 123.98 28.48 DC45-p2 7013.90 2235.54 112607.02 327988.33 17576.55 3047.12 38.82 4723.33 185.52 382.22 DC45-p3 12035.37 1664.86 114295.23 307351.65 29533.37 2280.50 34.85 8322.39 193.28 476.02 DC48-p1 4506.89 2373.23 67300.48 362482.21 14874.44 3904.28 56.87 3727.70 268.30 58.13 DC48-p2 5251.63 3277.54 109044.88 322051.23 14214.89 3041.87 34.43 4226.65 310.13 592.94 DC48-p3 502.11 2750.73 100027.68 338789.88 17406.78 2792.82 34.89 3380.75 263.47 504.32 DC49-p1 3043.55 94856.44 326799.06 17995.29 4473.53 45.42 3599.38 338.80 211.89 DC49-p2 1919.61 71980.92 372247.08 12194.88 3414.20 21.03 2335.79 216.54 207.47 482 DC49-p3 7905.77 2650.10 108633.29 322442.98 12015.45 5312.03 37.26 7042.67 333.68 DC51-p1 872.90 2049.77 90212.10 348483.62 17490.42 7726.38 44.02 2533.79 162.52 9.00 DC51-p2 2443.30 104876.79 321162.54 24098.68 8483.76 23.43 3625.56 208.61 174.36 DC51-p3 11253.59 2023.88 99970.94 328327.68 21207.48 8760.59 40.44 4395.38 171.77 DP01-p1 8173.57 102771.75 319160.33 23688.33 4244.91 42.30 6911.80 226.49 715.90 DP01-p2 5576.79 9151.20 112765.26 300232.70 23739.16 6310.98 44.01 7355.54 253.22 471.49 DP01-p3 389.59 6512.57 118902.50 305431.89 27734.02 5499.09 37.31 4952.56 246.76 679.40 DP02-p1 11392.96 1484.78 102392.15 330924.75 17614.35 3663.63 41.08 6753.69 180.99 75.02 DP02-p2 3679.62 1112.41 71455.51 364968.37 14407.34 3566.52 35.30 10237.24 115.49 45.87 DP02-p3 6700.10 2324.93 102902.20 329557.90 19211.55 3998.69 30.62 5256.49 178.77 443.04 DP04-p1 6789.54 2292.23 107777.41 326342.30 30658.54 3907.85 38.44 3943.19 188.10 130.51 DP04-p2 3627.93 2878.34 126512.22 313876.95 21246.39 5616.31 41.09 8094.51 211.25 308.89 DP04-p3 1121.36 2752.62 138887.01 305476.71 22209.27 4517.69 42.12 6448.13 237.08 755.01 DP102-p1 15366.64 3391.84 124436.77 299405.32 26394.53 6976.36 110.84 3808.00 273.31 DP102-p2 11127.24 5071.48 168840.56 265545.69 21911.25 4917.63 62.88 5305.28 288.73 716.43 DP102-p3 4884.95 5076.41 164102.96 271518.42 25035.68 3468.89 37.93 9612.35 287.49 786.84 DP103-p1 479.35 4071.81 111082.95 326432.86 20608.73 3087.20 71.69 3741.62 305.45 16.72 DP103-p2 8080.43 6642.78 156727.01 275627.67 21060.98 3025.66 40.43 6092.59 286.92 567.26 DP103-p3 7614.48 5848.58 151631.13 288542.88 20983.30 2617.14 45.63 5942.18 287.11 888.52 DP104-p1 1371.37 2960.00 70408.68 366810.38 20138.42 3036.90 26.49 4327.71 165.79 353.71 Inductively Coupled Plasma-Mass Spectrometry Paste Data (Neff 2008)

Sample Na Mg Al Si K Ca Sc Ti V Cr DP104-p2 5468.21 3216.07 101036.52 311824.16 18456.59 3141.59 37.23 5344.65 222.45 307.47 DP104-p3 8791.12 2482.83 86433.86 356590.09 14593.31 2574.62 34.65 2488.91 170.95 270.26 DP19-p1 5890.54 7138.89 109550.70 316329.81 21675.57 2846.13 42.07 4678.99 252.76 196.71 DP19-p2 2273.08 8768.39 107037.83 321576.75 20755.40 2927.07 41.89 8752.40 236.32 373.83 DP19-p3 7732.75 7852.80 139799.45 294689.27 22815.41 2407.73 42.29 4905.73 266.43 638.81 DP20-p1 3268.63 1515.40 98569.27 332891.98 35283.70 3022.38 37.46 3162.79 181.87 65.10 DP20-p2 6152.22 2905.06 90050.74 330496.42 17418.71 5071.33 34.22 5428.64 202.97 148.19 DP20-p3 3526.91 1524.57 98433.63 345911.38 18189.68 2900.46 51.13 4188.70 150.57 116.77 DP31-p1 11169.99 1364.81 122207.71 319192.62 24739.06 2211.61 43.75 4394.60 148.97 72.24 DP31-p2 4498.53 1431.55 126926.01 317440.38 19762.67 1729.64 38.51 5767.59 181.24 280.12 DP31-p3 1576.00 128771.21 323928.29 16234.14 1785.28 32.14 7296.01 163.57 350.59 483 DP61-p1 9203.76 6675.26 126388.89 296816.15 23800.38 3640.50 84.77 4562.55 274.98 18.60 DP61-p2 4259.61 9742.96 161378.29 266132.38 26001.17 3589.01 45.89 6112.68 261.75 576.39 DP61-p3 10788.30 10999.09 127563.90 280927.11 25995.09 3652.71 49.77 7319.31 313.69 976.24 NB01-p1 6555.58 3179.22 85960.41 342189.33 21690.94 1649.28 44.00 6122.34 211.11 82.43 NB01-p2 10324.30 3876.93 109195.15 315913.87 13348.88 2013.83 34.10 2242.68 205.23 321.98 NB01-p3 7616.35 3046.53 99526.61 332522.89 22067.36 2938.15 21.63 4027.10 209.32 145.65 NB02-p1 4705.82 1921.45 70192.31 357209.78 26384.20 1397.07 37.46 9001.13 162.23 60.84 NB02-p2 7924.89 2136.11 88757.67 355596.24 20085.79 1651.93 31.16 6427.80 177.59 173.69 NB02-p3 7820.58 1991.72 122676.77 326629.12 18819.99 2045.00 38.87 6119.76 201.81 304.26 NB07-p1 9130.43 1090.58 100789.57 348407.03 25557.30 1052.92 47.73 4096.23 127.11 45.88 NB07-p2 4445.64 1017.80 92372.88 355536.26 30190.00 1288.16 36.41 4231.51 131.35 137.95 NB07-p3 256.44 1286.00 107552.38 344754.37 20587.18 2159.63 25.19 7853.92 256.41 319.01 NB13-p1 3526.39 4916.50 78898.79 350998.47 34793.28 774.78 35.05 8076.01 274.13 122.26 NB13-p2 3243.84 6840.72 88883.80 347834.15 28740.94 817.25 34.08 5391.78 324.05 302.10 NB13-p3 0.00 5830.77 81880.23 350470.22 26557.73 925.04 23.35 5300.73 497.16 196.28 NB15-p1 170.82 2704.08 85326.50 356796.35 25419.93 1927.91 40.72 5348.43 215.26 195.22 NB15-p2 5820.54 2986.59 91094.28 348173.01 26071.86 2219.73 36.89 5346.79 211.51 267.79 NB15-p3 211.03 2581.33 102132.74 341824.03 25124.07 3902.73 26.31 5482.33 250.70 366.17 NB21-p1 4604.03 5100.67 87250.19 344265.62 22154.15 1063.39 35.93 3912.15 252.52 114.26 NB21-p2 899.47 6618.78 98000.32 332940.12 23200.99 1181.40 39.14 3290.04 257.81 268.10 Inductively Coupled Plasma-Mass Spectrometry Paste Data (Neff 2008)

Sample Na Mg Al Si K Ca Sc Ti V Cr NB21-p3 1764.15 6288.40 63187.55 362138.36 18013.68 1466.35 23.36 4532.83 275.62 167.82 NB29-p1 3830.24 5319.93 101082.99 334518.43 24199.17 3433.83 42.36 4024.12 247.75 134.17 NB29-p2 9153.47 3976.15 104841.08 333647.38 24813.73 3280.39 44.81 2230.63 211.25 262.79 NB29-p3 8770.67 4329.40 77586.12 356886.87 19378.59 3877.18 26.65 6198.68 241.53 130.10 NB33-p1 978.80 3798.38 88064.04 349504.08 19303.83 1657.70 43.06 5045.09 191.28 128.09 NB33-p2 0.00 4075.49 95486.55 348477.33 20004.29 2094.86 40.60 2819.28 217.01 131.53 NB33-p3 0.00 4791.52 75859.69 354333.60 16032.25 2005.07 27.05 8454.86 269.28 176.75 NB34-p1 6191.53 6485.30 92695.77 339930.85 21551.71 2166.02 36.53 3547.59 235.92 164.76 NB34-p2 718.75 6682.95 111062.66 325635.43 21477.40 2935.06 50.09 6218.37 273.83 267.79 NB34-p3 9279.73 7744.24 117502.67 305940.10 19332.52 1857.60 12.20 5854.98 301.54 193.90 NB39-p1 0.00 6128.43 79416.41 352642.64 25088.25 1001.45 40.83 3528.77 183.72 90.92 484 NB39-p2 269.60 8150.22 87546.72 339544.34 22080.31 1387.59 39.56 7310.15 235.64 262.20 NB39-p3 4411.96 8140.14 71191.86 352525.09 19417.57 1387.05 27.93 5615.32 291.69 330.10 NC01-p1 2899.33 92420.10 343136.63 19169.25 5643.29 36.13 3581.29 244.43 46.39 NC01-p2 7753.65 3063.90 107959.65 316855.55 21194.90 6772.79 36.26 3402.56 232.10 NC01-p3 2387.09 2045.66 71858.34 370006.80 12355.83 4666.10 42.35 1893.47 170.89 108.92 NC06-p1 2197.41 3318.57 85597.21 345308.53 20974.66 4638.15 35.85 2799.18 242.37 38.51 NC06-p2 1628.00 3310.35 101159.19 323752.55 20073.63 5725.43 29.22 3226.31 227.92 63.87 NC06-p3 12876.85 2557.65 95785.71 319112.70 45439.66 5058.23 46.70 2992.73 237.19 259.85 NC09-p1 8778.82 2655.54 84642.50 324925.04 60881.77 2403.58 10.68 3114.98 190.99 100.13 NC09-p2 3294.91 92340.69 334623.67 18361.74 3962.99 40.85 3356.64 226.14 151.42 NC09-p3 4182.94 111281.22 316005.99 25909.36 4068.24 69.36 2858.80 340.53 635.50 NC14-p1 7888.50 3408.06 121811.71 301889.80 22092.43 6725.81 78.33 3959.91 435.68 74.99 NC14-p2 11585.39 2715.21 98104.89 327299.07 21447.81 5144.57 27.53 2319.74 225.21 57.00 NC14-p3 3415.22 121609.01 305327.82 18026.43 8899.18 77.04 3733.46 403.82 269.15 NC20-p1 3740.09 74271.16 350799.15 48103.52 2839.32 89.96 2806.11 168.55 2.99 NC20-p2 3545.35 72889.04 352959.50 45759.51 3715.86 28.93 3628.67 92.68 44.23 NC20-p3 3161.67 75613.93 345873.07 59259.47 2826.74 29.10 2542.21 98.35 NC23-p1 3231.70 2070.29 71127.46 362149.90 20255.28 3625.60 72.12 3158.09 278.79 34.55 NC23-p2 3971.51 2696.97 88956.06 342864.67 13872.87 5523.60 43.47 2668.21 211.29 165.92 NC23-p3 10817.68 1740.15 69704.93 351919.64 35835.36 3695.59 28.31 5190.51 170.77 198.07 Inductively Coupled Plasma-Mass Spectrometry Paste Data (Neff 2008)

Sample Na Mg Al Si K Ca Sc Ti V Cr NC24-p1 2696.67 3222.44 101041.80 330356.76 18071.74 2118.52 47.52 8901.19 242.77 101.56 NC24-p2 5790.21 3233.88 134859.04 306018.28 16406.49 2330.71 35.72 3096.63 255.40 348.71 NC24-p3 3828.08 1907.38 65106.63 365788.31 35511.70 1630.54 16.87 2509.62 186.53 81.68 NC27-p1 15336.31 3136.91 98890.35 279779.91 27429.22 5929.20 85.34 23967.08 390.15 56.67 NC27-p2 10573.71 2117.77 85108.79 343915.44 25029.09 4422.21 44.34 2173.87 178.23 43.03 NC27-p3 26548.31 3334.40 112480.99 297854.08 23904.74 5965.70 65.26 2708.66 304.86 97.33 NC28-p1 21958.24 2927.16 98557.71 317541.67 22895.74 6844.63 68.02 2764.82 284.84 93.88 NC28-p2 4399.23 95503.68 319443.91 38730.44 5827.88 46.37 3045.37 234.23 153.45 NC28-p3 3641.58 109829.73 316685.62 21219.80 6379.89 47.55 3140.28 236.01 251.51 NC30-p1 4705.84 2541.77 95974.07 335373.51 27568.88 2794.27 43.07 8356.77 148.71 56.80 NC30-p2 8049.31 2096.07 110426.10 325962.50 19326.88 2654.03 30.18 11012.75 163.65 253.95 485 NC30-p3 2796.58 2833.77 90502.46 346398.38 18629.53 3997.02 8.53 5029.30 161.69 71.08 NP01-p1 7290.86 2641.27 71902.19 360314.11 16243.76 2414.23 32.82 4271.05 138.31 72.47 NP01-p2 4929.38 2597.57 84533.99 329356.60 14459.93 1954.17 38.54 3704.57 146.23 73.70 NP01-p3 8265.39 2554.77 66250.27 371728.19 14143.79 2499.46 16.08 4332.98 169.04 243.33 NP02-p1 171.74 3660.72 58069.70 382539.39 16206.75 1243.34 36.28 2805.49 162.28 89.09 NP02-p2 2979.70 5642.77 81244.24 350763.86 28580.43 1207.57 23.66 3380.12 207.73 255.28 NP02-p3 4269.33 5087.60 68471.24 365754.77 18659.91 1381.04 30.38 5192.68 247.36 271.55 NP03-p1 5344.28 2333.85 119132.74 321668.01 21406.55 1927.02 52.81 2214.10 191.83 135.02 NP03-p2 8161.07 3223.53 107499.00 320954.36 23161.80 1862.09 26.53 5325.17 240.61 96.76 NP03-p3 8649.91 2545.63 95167.32 344214.02 18801.29 2405.32 13.03 2800.21 207.73 149.39 NP04-p1 5920.90 2098.52 84415.06 357753.93 15900.63 2820.68 40.38 2755.17 129.67 65.73 NP04-p2 5266.06 1725.97 82895.59 356836.20 29262.60 2198.72 19.59 2306.90 116.80 32.90 NP04-p3 9869.43 3074.77 139920.13 297831.18 19834.11 5595.78 37.52 3601.01 184.33 408.42 NP07-p1 1791.46 2301.95 113799.12 327961.66 29251.08 980.50 65.58 4418.48 187.69 135.71 NP07-p2 1030.52 2980.74 108758.49 325225.93 25315.94 1286.89 26.66 16891.84 190.03 128.32 NP07-p3 5553.57 2630.34 85645.31 350910.57 22296.70 911.96 22.04 3826.61 286.39 313.43 NP11-p1 1299.38 7697.82 73360.39 349842.12 24710.63 1679.99 39.01 9928.79 495.20 223.28 NP11-p2 4958.02 8079.70 98694.75 326916.06 29262.16 2069.66 55.32 5982.10 517.58 335.44 NP11-p3 0.00 6876.27 114630.67 319513.38 30537.85 2834.08 50.73 6388.88 459.00 501.81 NP14-p1 17059.78 1749.65 81142.95 326421.48 18640.79 1350.44 37.18 2242.12 89.16 44.33 Inductively Coupled Plasma-Mass Spectrometry Paste Data (Neff 2008)

Sample Na Mg Al Si K Ca Sc Ti V Cr NP14-p2 5482.39 3010.59 87787.03 340034.07 24492.16 2081.02 31.82 3717.08 163.18 62.67 NP14-p3 4178.54 2555.55 69567.36 264996.96 13631.10 1700.59 38.27 3543.46 133.90 43.15 NP16-p1 764.52 7141.31 86158.26 341830.55 19541.28 2321.78 43.56 4779.49 284.61 179.04 NP16-p2 3335.10 7144.15 90491.21 343073.51 21202.38 2045.75 36.35 3663.33 271.98 183.82 NP16-p3 1957.28 6305.93 69295.64 370445.20 18193.00 1941.44 20.08 5353.52 254.04 164.54 NP18-p1 2794.58 2864.15 115889.34 326337.17 19322.60 2965.68 11.89 3078.81 200.13 NP18-p2 3582.68 145896.66 288789.36 17163.01 5605.48 41.00 3477.73 251.08 718.61 NP18-p3 3118.02 1882.50 92071.65 343001.02 33030.82 3553.49 62.60 2214.68 220.96 NP21-p1 305.41 2509.21 85465.56 357669.73 22245.20 3655.05 25.95 2639.32 153.70 NP21-p2 84.51 3227.08 112292.48 326689.69 11252.98 6329.26 19.93 3420.67 222.73 268.22 NP21-p3 15881.07 2644.60 98768.81 319861.75 22152.67 4784.99 17.11 3446.73 270.42 486 R103-p1 805.25 1518.01 81677.57 364165.43 18078.04 1227.34 34.25 5512.01 166.00 60.48 R103-p2 6908.52 1285.77 95078.27 333063.27 54615.68 2205.57 11.56 1657.93 111.07 202.82 R103-p3 11565.72 1578.32 71428.50 368148.70 18228.30 2322.61 16.49 2938.22 151.77 46.58 R109-p1 6816.87 1212.28 67740.39 378471.84 15037.48 2945.46 35.21 2002.02 117.94 R109-p2 5578.24 2489.09 121680.84 306033.26 27762.06 5339.14 32.47 2734.33 196.73 R109-p3 4035.79 2329.82 100570.33 329897.45 13296.32 5358.35 57.39 4114.64 221.44 4.40 R30-p1 1720.13 61971.05 375016.59 21016.46 6387.56 65.15 2471.17 206.98 13.48 R30-p2 8460.25 1744.95 66413.02 370701.27 14873.70 5462.91 35.13 1866.69 100.86 12.42 R30-p3 293.54 2234.30 74889.47 359552.20 22113.17 5426.80 55.14 3440.39 177.04 244.21 R32-p1 2157.53 4250.40 120641.51 297994.42 24126.07 18115.96 44.43 4291.83 213.03 R32-p2 4089.02 101762.08 311770.65 4203.28 15508.48 39.09 2956.19 220.82 1022.53 R32-p2 4283.80 2862.31 105052.11 313202.75 25689.23 11968.54 52.55 4679.37 280.16 R33-p1 1444.62 12196.70 103078.55 290488.97 15562.80 3407.76 29.45 4312.35 155.57 91.14 R33-p2 12112.42 4465.85 115908.43 308125.26 20606.95 3217.14 19.87 1505.81 124.32 267.87 R33-p3 2322.88 5408.78 88716.26 333578.33 25013.67 2861.02 18.59 2830.54 146.08 168.65 R43-p1 10162.45 1457.76 58333.70 383654.82 26649.76 2489.65 29.20 1395.48 98.60 27.09 R43-p2 10990.75 3939.77 58572.69 386270.45 9545.32 2721.56 13.71 1387.53 87.94 164.33 R43-p3 19789.33 3986.18 57862.98 358555.94 33915.25 6024.01 12.96 2049.06 112.88 10.89 R45-p1 14065.79 1700.76 80017.74 349761.00 24930.91 4813.87 74.41 2168.04 217.24 41.90 R45-p2 6430.62 1418.36 66110.01 373221.70 18539.83 3922.31 30.47 1372.95 124.87 Inductively Coupled Plasma-Mass Spectrometry Paste Data (Neff 2008)

Sample Na Mg Al Si K Ca Sc Ti V Cr R45-p3 4245.94 2020.40 92316.20 338209.88 21964.11 5272.01 43.81 2183.76 211.65 245.64 R51-p1 2060.87 5391.40 89092.11 335187.83 25347.04 3750.75 29.70 11053.04 186.57 103.47 R51-p2 4722.87 2676.11 72134.11 373833.01 11428.67 3237.95 28.37 2137.00 127.94 159.02 R51-p3 5279.06 2427.38 115369.95 334748.12 13885.93 3083.65 35.51 3412.39 153.39 338.31 R54-p1 3267.11 1947.76 57482.74 374307.08 18061.32 1858.31 40.60 1614.82 75.44 25.94 R54-p2 33547.46 1824.48 92732.96 338376.25 12091.46 12171.10 4.02 1201.88 68.01 129.52 R54-p3 3060.67 3331.10 72147.97 348372.31 18715.03 3587.42 26.94 3212.51 160.11 11.98 R55-p1 5336.06 5610.57 94135.21 339017.92 21971.79 6748.73 23.52 3862.36 241.00 R55-p2 1987.81 5583.97 87468.85 350307.13 20300.99 6086.55 34.52 3248.57 214.49 R55-p3 4957.14 109850.35 323544.70 26758.40 9977.74 50.53 3387.39 266.77 117.96 R60-p1 3527.02 3490.86 87001.50 339180.74 19738.02 2038.40 39.72 8137.42 165.42 91.76 487 R60-p2 6524.31 2308.41 102956.16 338485.96 17367.29 1741.28 24.63 2599.01 172.10 250.44 R60-p3 6812.57 2597.92 84329.80 348899.04 15502.44 4602.47 9.28 4666.07 198.00 85.99 R72-p1 0.00 1896.59 81167.28 365862.84 12573.63 2430.79 45.54 3610.72 122.17 56.30 R72-p2 2225.49 2262.00 128513.13 319754.70 15653.13 2326.75 6.89 3111.41 155.61 223.17 R72-p3 4539.48 2624.52 85046.04 351501.17 15511.32 3359.85 30.29 4621.26 203.29 189.18 R73-p1 4975.78 3573.63 69835.76 360257.26 11543.40 1888.46 31.45 5248.21 160.77 98.12 R73-p2 11279.98 4484.98 80555.38 330923.63 17470.84 2121.42 29.67 6875.57 191.70 186.71 R73-p3 7535.00 2978.75 67527.93 333970.09 9716.35 2349.01 25.53 40922.96 212.52 184.38 R74-p1 2811.43 81866.36 357834.47 21336.43 3004.98 33.32 3704.12 177.69 R74-p2 3092.14 101387.77 335552.84 16703.15 4290.43 31.99 3419.39 206.86 R74-p3 7150.75 2864.99 97011.70 335925.60 17727.76 4806.05 59.52 4118.18 235.04 234.21 R78-p1 1890.82 3196.19 72576.01 354538.06 22516.38 964.53 32.93 6414.25 178.41 105.98 R78-p2 5350.81 2779.44 80999.79 354598.58 23467.99 801.75 26.77 1999.64 147.37 226.80 R78-p3 3392.47 5043.35 113842.54 258835.96 21657.53 2061.66 44.60 17767.31 242.78 601.26 R79-p1 4633.29 2854.77 93201.07 338761.34 26910.32 5217.54 22.51 3700.03 190.70 R79-p2 4295.32 121045.50 297633.02 13314.05 12170.23 27.76 4082.44 299.66 582.52 R79-p3 5430.51 2909.32 98858.26 322934.14 33496.46 7566.55 66.71 2992.66 223.16 329.95 R88-p1 5988.13 2129.41 80453.26 344721.50 19577.60 3373.23 62.80 2427.08 362.39 67.77 R88-p2 1118.50 2397.25 103116.67 324206.28 17947.11 4073.67 53.32 3502.80 265.29 198.41 R88-p3 1319.86 2337.54 94052.23 329368.49 19827.31 3610.11 55.63 3356.50 351.09 269.92 Inductively Coupled Plasma-Mass Spectrometry Paste Data (Neff 2008)

Sample Na Mg Al Si K Ca Sc Ti V Cr R89-p1 5619.61 1662.19 71643.45 339767.23 12645.95 2576.30 52.10 5655.97 253.62 83.44 R89-p2 9889.72 2817.01 117597.17 318510.70 22771.59 2059.34 33.97 4582.97 182.61 255.25 R89-p3 0.00 2240.18 51958.24 397195.05 10483.60 2641.45 24.31 3886.56 162.67 61.49 488 Inductively Coupled Plasma-Mass Spectrometry Paste Data (Neff 2008)

Sample Mn Fe Ni Co Cu Zn As Rb Sr Y C09-p1 120.21 65473.60 433.57 104.87 76.84 1916.12 161.40 224.10 232.09 121.43 C09-p2 100.33 21318.23 8.77 33.45 33.39 649.80 16.10 350.29 263.04 117.14 C09-p3 124.88 20993.03 16.44 40.76 9.71 271.65 10.43 361.13 245.47 117.23 C11-p1 156.40 63145.85 30.41 69.33 29.95 273.16 28.41 97.29 171.19 641.27 C11-p2 66.95 67852.37 120.71 84.65 28.65 323.74 42.09 98.89 146.40 75.32 C11-p3 160.91 59213.47 143.77 106.15 38.35 556.48 28.19 115.91 191.36 55.57 C13-p1 168.54 105845.72 39.30 115.00 35.67 367.22 40.32 628.76 812.61 113.13 C13-p2 474.76 114779.40 15.80 68.23 16.91 44.46 12.52 249.79 737.76 53.45 C13-p3 636.54 98195.40 90.55 27.29 173.40 47.04 650.58 1190.67 227.16 C14-p1 72.99 51466.03 49.09 39.29 29.94 276.87 6.35 276.73 789.07 106.54 C14-p2 234.51 44471.38 143.66 34.55 11.03 31.45 22.68 314.49 523.06 45.01 489 C14-p3 219.08 45921.54 73.52 39.57 521.16 0.00 222.10 819.24 96.26 C15-p1 26.21 15223.62 4.95 12.86 22.42 224.22 4.27 409.88 236.49 77.64 C15-p2 75.60 19073.80 32.02 7.73 15.01 21.86 12.86 238.04 261.15 53.24 C15-p3 129.49 28773.85 24.45 45.33 491.63 26.32 442.51 417.67 112.02 DB01-p1 217.38 33317.55 25.31 10.72 46.05 132.85 6.89 104.68 231.77 126.87 DB01-p2 193.27 41028.98 48.39 16.05 46.27 209.48 7.17 108.19 291.63 169.35 DB01-p3 237.71 44863.50 54.74 17.13 32.41 153.45 8.70 112.67 311.70 140.58 DB107-p1 196.84 34186.39 275.74 20.90 60.20 197.61 9.15 127.31 163.70 101.11 DB107-p2 254.11 36881.17 918.76 27.08 85.81 322.30 5.92 142.77 151.39 80.43 DB107-p3 196.64 39797.27 1574.05 28.48 57.79 240.75 9.70 142.58 155.31 84.52 DB17-p1 166.05 45931.47 39.72 19.51 57.09 228.45 7.79 124.26 140.83 54.73 DB17-p2 101.55 26130.83 51.36 16.87 35.66 269.49 7.99 114.88 116.74 1357.96 DB17-p3 116.04 31476.53 93.54 25.64 31.81 235.85 9.81 138.65 203.21 62.18 DB18-p1 119.84 27269.29 24.77 17.81 25.93 176.72 3.03 150.06 47.98 69.33 DB18-p2 117.42 27413.53 80.52 16.59 31.14 255.31 6.34 143.21 65.62 88.82 DB18-p3 80.38 24556.03 103.27 21.53 24.43 227.68 11.99 154.78 68.01 286.74 DB19-p1 258.66 34075.55 34.22 28.51 47.98 253.84 8.69 128.16 83.08 61.06 DB19-p2 209.37 33187.32 61.43 26.95 41.59 270.53 13.07 116.92 135.91 75.09 DB19-p3 197.71 32491.08 73.78 26.09 48.65 205.24 10.16 119.53 124.19 1155.71 DB54-p1 21.40 20343.73 19.94 20.41 140.58 0.00 203.85 823.05 274.66 Inductively Coupled Plasma-Mass Spectrometry Paste Data (Neff 2008)

Sample Mn Fe Ni Co Cu Zn As Rb Sr Y DB54-p2 164.44 25191.48 25.28 44.21 384.43 1.54 217.77 738.37 197.84 DB54-p3 54.50 16962.79 16.57 72.58 0.00 42.50 158.20 503.65 174.80 DB55-p1 97.69 25687.55 50.49 19.57 51.43 236.34 15.64 109.41 374.83 204.98 DB55-p2 98.06 22993.17 49.61 34.98 46.36 222.78 8.75 124.38 220.82 134.50 DB55-p3 68.32 16718.74 83.23 17.30 22.15 128.91 9.10 119.84 212.63 131.87 DB59-p1 91.23 26095.30 57.97 15.13 47.67 240.43 5.46 129.60 152.83 56.70 DB59-p2 114.27 30198.07 54.35 18.83 42.29 236.22 7.40 141.60 173.69 77.84 DB59-p3 104.99 41486.30 83.60 22.62 32.59 152.09 13.17 137.66 224.12 74.07 DB60-p1 407.31 40040.62 54.30 21.85 42.25 296.15 5.98 143.03 169.17 100.64 DB60-p2 162.66 35859.64 50.23 22.10 47.53 252.06 309.51 130.95 161.78 1242.11 DB60-p3 139.50 29973.92 44.53 22.95 23.77 178.62 5.04 132.52 177.26 135.09 490 DB61-p1 33.04 35813.75 134.98 11.84 33.32 352.98 19.01 157.43 980.55 74.33 DB61-p2 83.36 41301.88 20.95 13.95 40.05 338.72 9.61 156.76 972.52 56.27 DB61-p3 86.30 37261.14 77.83 11.56 11.22 45.70 10.90 163.15 753.47 49.14 DC01-p1 192.77 21567.22 123.82 13.31 18.39 449.36 27.41 130.76 385.12 48.87 DC01-p2 425.56 26259.13 13.38 27.92 366.33 9.37 142.53 388.78 47.39 DC01-p3 1227.97 17313.07 29.17 6.71 164.54 0.00 136.30 315.83 241.11 DC02-p1 994.15 39160.80 19.95 22.23 38.14 155.99 3.67 98.47 200.67 60.47 DC02-p2 311.00 31961.56 58.04 19.31 37.76 191.31 5.66 96.83 177.49 111.60 DC02-p3 233.82 30739.72 72.13 19.90 26.14 185.60 4.27 108.26 192.67 66.47 DC03-p1 304.44 34799.81 217.02 27.46 38.24 446.07 17.25 156.26 438.27 65.83 DC03-p2 207.64 39932.91 185.55 21.62 25.11 545.64 26.55 192.64 423.04 146.57 DC03-p3 314.26 30159.61 28.99 25.10 407.65 31.99 202.31 360.19 69.04 DC26-p1 655.13 30706.31 34.09 13.81 55.95 116.47 12.72 55.46 119.79 54.94 DC26-p1A 845.12 38379.32 48.38 14.63 35.51 140.57 11.26 64.00 143.08 64.19 DC26-p2 819.99 39633.20 79.22 27.32 34.40 191.99 10.37 59.10 136.24 57.96 DC26-p3 696.11 34443.84 94.48 17.79 21.05 147.31 8.67 66.96 165.43 58.41 DC43-p1 674.23 20742.49 0.00 15.36 17.30 108.00 8.79 88.24 170.36 53.26 DC43-p2 180.79 25108.62 60.88 14.10 17.31 197.00 11.03 101.62 152.71 61.27 DC43-p3 322.39 29879.17 46.47 18.41 15.70 148.93 9.96 83.93 213.45 101.98 DC44-p1 161.45 19518.27 42.42 10.50 12.39 142.11 11.59 110.11 184.54 63.20 Inductively Coupled Plasma-Mass Spectrometry Paste Data (Neff 2008)

Sample Mn Fe Ni Co Cu Zn As Rb Sr Y DC44-p1A 146.77 16116.06 27.81 9.69 18.31 124.45 7.70 95.64 112.78 40.79 DC44-p2 1406.71 18728.82 30.62 37.94 11.17 129.43 9.07 66.53 199.95 64.14 DC44-p3 96.71 12123.52 32.33 11.01 12.52 122.60 11.94 69.11 116.01 34.34 DC45-p1 338.44 18109.75 15.89 10.54 20.37 116.98 8.75 70.72 65.89 105.33 DC45-p2 339.86 23950.25 81.25 16.46 23.46 218.49 12.32 86.47 90.24 44.65 DC45-p3 302.99 24193.92 31.34 14.84 17.72 168.98 1.62 114.17 75.77 10861.09 DC48-p1 191.78 37314.18 28.89 12.93 25.36 211.91 9.68 109.92 193.42 70.03 DC48-p2 302.08 41082.47 75.41 19.99 41.08 275.17 7.91 103.06 183.90 64.15 DC48-p3 67.00 31894.34 61.65 10.78 22.11 215.10 10.40 109.06 171.09 49.42 DC49-p1 67.27 53797.37 193.55 13.31 21.74 562.42 13.17 215.22 496.52 95.61 DC49-p2 58.46 24834.81 34.93 8.35 19.77 396.85 12.22 156.62 316.09 52.77 491 DC49-p3 193.58 35586.42 17.11 25.73 614.72 0.00 243.91 494.67 87.95 DC51-p1 257.52 25119.63 212.50 18.59 56.37 408.88 40.47 143.60 694.38 69.60 DC51-p2 956.22 38377.20 213.46 55.44 24.09 434.06 24.90 237.45 758.63 100.94 DC51-p3 406.65 27349.88 17.29 26.74 0.00 20.47 192.69 675.33 75.81 DP01-p1 233.44 39473.75 71.75 25.06 21.22 207.21 4.05 149.92 191.89 52.14 DP01-p2 262.78 44890.85 92.46 27.27 42.87 279.13 5.93 139.91 217.78 89.89 DP01-p3 310.61 37618.27 99.76 24.92 22.24 215.13 7.86 174.39 192.09 63.39 DP02-p1 788.03 25461.92 56.06 20.00 51.98 200.24 10.81 79.64 78.50 61.53 DP02-p2 349.58 17264.70 48.30 13.12 36.43 176.01 13.62 62.29 161.25 63.16 DP02-p3 706.18 28824.29 61.93 17.79 19.64 135.83 11.24 95.70 110.62 55.62 DP04-p1 57.21 22258.87 43.86 14.49 30.48 144.20 8.91 294.27 53.03 29.00 DP04-p2 42.78 19905.78 65.12 14.05 33.14 194.88 4.12 148.27 65.15 58.11 DP04-p3 48.69 20175.11 110.99 17.45 22.18 146.33 10.24 153.24 67.21 42.41 DP102-p1 262.22 29602.21 22.61 41.07 211.79 8.38 146.13 495.53 60.20 DP102-p2 288.45 27496.45 121.25 34.42 45.55 305.00 16.30 153.23 368.20 56.42 DP102-p3 123.64 25657.44 113.19 26.06 50.13 260.04 10.44 143.64 179.16 50.95 DP103-p1 130.93 31170.74 6.44 17.27 46.40 150.20 5.08 124.59 149.05 63.33 DP103-p2 109.73 27517.49 95.50 21.12 45.08 231.51 32.54 129.02 168.35 3037.01 DP103-p3 106.01 22506.09 65.58 23.93 29.05 174.60 5.36 136.40 156.97 53.36 DP104-p1 146.03 24907.26 50.37 10.53 11.30 110.32 12.57 141.12 58.71 32.24 Inductively Coupled Plasma-Mass Spectrometry Paste Data (Neff 2008)

Sample Mn Fe Ni Co Cu Zn As Rb Sr Y DP104-p2 93.10 61771.38 52.18 10.31 24.10 155.64 16.66 88.07 81.38 54.08 DP104-p3 80.20 20253.66 28.05 10.16 10.48 112.99 19.88 63.40 68.52 32.36 DP19-p1 211.51 32285.82 74.52 27.31 62.13 204.68 10.72 133.42 140.31 112.17 DP19-p2 170.93 29702.00 73.79 25.29 52.68 235.81 7.86 117.08 136.48 73.82 DP19-p3 188.88 25677.80 111.95 29.32 38.07 217.40 11.76 126.42 147.60 110.80 DP20-p1 657.55 25602.78 28.85 17.34 25.63 159.08 13.69 159.87 88.36 48.79 DP20-p2 421.76 45382.88 33.03 18.30 27.18 198.62 16.91 105.92 120.86 64.77 DP20-p3 313.95 18535.02 15.69 21.31 121.90 10.34 89.31 84.13 48.39 DP31-p1 91.45 16841.80 22.80 9.73 14.86 85.44 6.56 153.30 98.69 72.40 DP31-p2 62.49 22357.99 52.46 11.56 35.49 130.14 3.94 112.35 91.28 68.23 DP31-p3 55.35 15297.97 121.02 9.43 12.12 93.17 5.37 111.91 79.63 70.36 492 DP61-p1 425.50 38000.79 18.46 25.80 32.72 182.46 5.77 134.97 186.25 87.32 DP61-p2 169.19 34027.73 89.23 28.42 45.09 277.78 6.63 138.48 192.10 145.71 DP61-p3 257.45 45336.81 109.18 33.04 25.72 202.68 8.56 161.80 237.61 105.88 NB01-p1 599.40 33276.73 10.12 23.94 23.13 176.20 7.24 91.52 69.28 74.95 NB01-p2 165.63 47160.07 85.40 15.54 24.73 258.22 10.41 80.85 87.59 46.57 NB01-p3 273.79 29868.09 45.83 17.13 28.10 92.42 10.38 113.06 113.69 54.89 NB02-p1 20.17 8556.33 3.03 13.59 13.66 177.79 10.34 144.74 41.99 52.85 NB02-p2 30.50 9019.86 25.00 15.00 16.21 206.67 7.81 86.83 65.07 47.39 NB02-p3 26.62 9873.47 100.01 21.88 30.15 260.20 25.90 89.57 65.79 59.38 NB07-p1 11.33 5566.87 1.99 11.35 17.95 182.74 8.66 78.48 26.92 35.06 NB07-p2 10.68 4979.84 30.75 12.48 13.25 224.48 8.83 115.27 33.84 526.46 NB07-p3 20.09 7703.84 76.26 25.46 22.83 320.93 19.70 94.93 59.98 60.53 NB13-p1 76.82 17829.45 33.71 19.31 19.63 157.35 13.13 172.27 31.69 62.58 NB13-p2 67.67 16179.10 84.37 24.33 23.94 235.20 15.45 157.06 36.03 57.02 NB13-p3 81.31 27553.17 87.10 32.18 17.97 236.17 14.24 153.38 36.83 52.02 NB15-p1 34.63 17728.38 20.30 10.70 20.43 150.52 4.87 154.30 31.28 28.19 NB15-p2 30.34 16208.00 89.63 13.97 18.99 187.32 6.97 159.40 45.19 38.78 NB15-p3 41.24 15517.68 91.40 20.74 22.77 234.16 7.76 176.78 64.84 39.01 NB21-p1 98.05 31819.58 18.40 18.28 24.87 187.95 10.35 114.28 69.57 46.73 NB21-p2 126.60 35679.52 58.63 23.44 22.15 254.68 8.81 120.28 101.34 34.51 Inductively Coupled Plasma-Mass Spectrometry Paste Data (Neff 2008)

Sample Mn Fe Ni Co Cu Zn As Rb Sr Y NB21-p3 146.18 40406.93 60.56 30.21 26.14 219.22 7.48 131.12 105.00 116.05 NB29-p1 159.77 23801.35 17.72 24.03 27.84 210.78 8.09 119.28 104.92 43.67 NB29-p2 94.65 17733.46 49.99 22.84 17.28 235.68 6.42 119.29 92.90 64.59 NB29-p3 122.35 19457.72 38.76 30.88 22.46 221.67 1.61 109.18 117.01 32.29 NB33-p1 52.05 24012.72 34.44 16.98 26.49 169.44 4.54 94.75 30.39 107.02 NB33-p2 63.22 22658.77 61.18 19.39 31.15 211.59 4.86 89.08 30.08 42.87 NB33-p3 78.42 35834.98 73.06 25.52 25.97 227.27 3.89 101.65 42.47 44.15 NB34-p1 130.38 27645.90 51.10 20.09 33.96 238.63 12.49 123.43 80.86 47.41 NB34-p2 131.49 25142.62 119.78 26.12 65.41 300.67 19.10 127.02 111.12 69.94 NB34-p3 156.52 40723.59 58.11 29.49 33.17 124.70 7.58 141.53 101.64 44.31 NB39-p1 105.79 30502.90 14.87 17.68 17.16 172.10 5.30 102.63 86.09 37.53 493 NB39-p2 119.12 34037.88 49.63 23.14 19.47 231.52 9.80 97.20 120.19 59.21 NB39-p3 153.88 36409.51 82.15 35.61 21.13 248.31 10.20 115.32 141.98 69.83 NC01-p1 33.72 30985.25 19.53 15.02 81.33 280.69 3.73 197.47 458.01 105.58 NC01-p2 177.18 40421.68 15.47 12.77 32.86 27.61 0.00 274.05 365.89 70.16 NC01-p3 202.50 25949.74 57.70 16.39 33.51 47.40 10.18 161.13 263.45 46.72 NC06-p1 30.64 35671.95 52.49 12.57 23.11 209.49 1.62 156.30 319.91 74.44 NC06-p2 130.71 45444.76 66.88 14.28 8.70 22.28 10.55 203.66 391.27 67.23 NC06-p3 87.76 30070.12 15.09 27.38 375.47 12.97 612.99 320.74 68.12 NC09-p1 69.95 28001.38 5.85 25.57 33.40 178.80 5.92 274.54 470.58 48.48 NC09-p2 674.77 45945.62 173.84 49.03 7.05 27.21 11.62 210.46 266.44 53.48 NC09-p3 334.72 40751.95 81.81 49.27 19.47 338.05 0.00 347.37 373.74 75.00 NC14-p1 41.12 41748.81 4.72 20.50 24.35 274.82 28.46 330.16 497.61 99.36 NC14-p2 197.11 37523.51 50.25 12.03 14.61 26.49 6.03 231.54 264.05 42.85 NC14-p3 262.23 45099.80 232.54 47.11 83.61 257.79 27.23 326.46 448.43 86.80 NC20-p1 122.31 22678.81 31.72 4.67 190.76 44.07 343.63 144.74 83.00 NC20-p2 325.17 21942.12 72.35 13.44 3.27 12.58 6.96 238.45 85.13 43.86 NC20-p3 183.58 19899.75 17.00 36.20 0.00 29.51 352.51 139.25 46.17 NC23-p1 31.41 30306.52 16.77 18.29 12.80 191.68 19.44 246.38 252.86 67.78 NC23-p2 1652.30 36933.32 43.38 61.52 6.78 54.80 31.34 182.77 288.27 56.58 NC23-p3 311.06 24927.19 25.88 53.15 350.66 27.40 283.20 216.27 53.41 Inductively Coupled Plasma-Mass Spectrometry Paste Data (Neff 2008)

Sample Mn Fe Ni Co Cu Zn As Rb Sr Y NC24-p1 72.44 35254.09 13.31 8.91 17.60 223.77 8.97 94.78 81.12 38.31 NC24-p2 97.44 31290.19 71.68 18.06 22.48 281.77 12.93 105.33 103.33 68.61 NC24-p3 49.44 23036.75 20.13 9.02 16.85 154.81 6.23 274.12 72.74 25.95 NC27-p1 441.10 70175.37 24.15 52.15 23.44 278.76 62.66 340.17 394.55 99.50 NC27-p2 214.39 29067.59 79.67 21.98 11.81 39.48 10.24 257.97 225.54 41.91 NC27-p3 844.49 41766.31 384.08 45.08 16.75 317.06 0.00 319.21 754.90 84.54 NC28-p1 93.73 36955.84 48.67 27.13 26.00 290.19 42.75 308.10 331.80 132.20 NC28-p2 140.50 44947.76 97.38 22.05 19.90 58.79 14.08 368.97 273.45 71.94 NC28-p3 290.79 44860.07 81.26 18.55 16.95 74.28 26.24 176.03 286.50 83.60 NC30-p1 412.65 24759.56 9.70 10.03 18.00 180.08 12.02 100.13 92.30 37.52 NC30-p2 225.49 21118.12 37.78 12.58 20.37 221.23 17.55 74.04 85.72 38.94 494 NC30-p3 1210.88 26196.97 22.61 18.99 21.09 95.77 4.60 94.09 116.37 34.21 NP01-p1 2279.73 29528.51 23.13 22.44 11.76 160.21 17.62 75.18 82.35 58.54 NP01-p2 340.58 21344.52 29.50 12.22 15.69 186.60 13.80 67.34 66.90 74.96 NP01-p3 439.12 22466.37 43.90 17.02 11.54 171.10 19.99 83.06 106.33 32.31 NP02-p1 62.76 25300.58 190.19 13.26 116.20 149.75 6.36 72.28 71.67 32.25 NP02-p2 99.07 25403.50 89.06 22.06 92.89 262.09 5.24 133.11 101.64 37.84 NP02-p3 77.48 25632.79 67.42 27.65 24.70 249.71 10.14 101.68 126.72 83.26 NP03-p1 155.22 27444.07 30.90 13.80 21.54 207.86 9.41 97.78 88.12 41.43 NP03-p2 801.45 34131.13 39.36 29.64 33.77 242.29 12.77 112.96 75.98 49.80 NP03-p3 89.04 23578.00 32.88 15.92 40.67 104.90 9.72 123.12 65.39 52.51 NP04-p1 185.18 21076.41 15.07 8.40 16.98 160.29 13.60 74.50 64.40 69.18 NP04-p2 247.60 17269.01 24.28 14.77 41.66 249.27 15.16 80.90 57.96 33.70 NP04-p3 1597.79 23786.22 151.26 32.20 24.10 233.13 49.32 88.36 132.21 69.26 NP07-p1 24.61 21230.12 34.77 9.91 17.53 160.80 9.44 101.17 16.45 34.23 NP07-p2 358.81 19967.05 57.66 12.23 28.71 224.71 9.18 97.19 22.54 30.84 NP07-p3 45.01 26361.12 83.96 19.01 22.72 204.81 8.28 101.92 24.28 27.48 NP11-p1 99.58 31166.18 72.01 24.13 52.77 253.07 17.51 177.30 63.85 68.18 NP11-p2 158.21 27861.29 117.61 30.79 44.58 298.76 33.56 175.30 83.57 90.40 NP11-p3 79.53 21047.29 159.03 33.81 37.11 257.73 31.54 181.33 76.41 128.28 NP14-p1 3530.43 13099.97 12.96 71.84 10.05 94.84 8.07 112.71 53.66 47.35 Inductively Coupled Plasma-Mass Spectrometry Paste Data (Neff 2008)

Sample Mn Fe Ni Co Cu Zn As Rb Sr Y NP14-p2 1056.74 34954.95 24.57 17.14 14.12 160.24 4.67 109.27 54.82 29.09 NP14-p3 118.75 18075.79 8.84 10.84 6.11 120.32 6.82 83.02 71.28 101.57 NP16-p1 138.79 37517.59 50.06 19.95 37.93 226.11 9.32 120.64 108.34 80.70 NP16-p2 126.88 27861.09 83.25 26.24 42.36 326.90 10.53 128.02 96.04 42.41 NP16-p3 62.22 18391.38 47.91 18.98 31.63 267.72 4.05 137.40 104.69 28.68 NP18-p1 42.85 26454.52 22.90 13.27 156.59 0.00 192.77 169.46 107.53 NP18-p2 181.90 40956.59 406.93 34.82 14.39 663.84 26.97 256.54 365.27 69.75 NP18-p3 107.09 22609.46 33.86 11.24 127.81 30.82 512.09 192.87 46.52 NP21-p1 38.79 20578.09 10.91 7.01 98.71 6.86 158.30 169.23 47.31 NP21-p2 189.82 35245.51 218.07 23.18 19.49 518.90 22.91 180.57 228.31 62.84 NP21-p3 221.75 40125.63 21.55 15.20 304.65 15.19 239.10 219.73 72.59 495 R103-p1 367.63 18703.87 3.80 13.45 15.55 108.47 13.58 75.82 49.84 27.66 R103-p2 484.17 13724.95 57.41 12.47 18.92 116.06 12.56 421.48 76.16 32.49 R103-p3 309.51 17985.13 29.28 16.51 22.92 188.37 14.25 102.68 106.01 25.57 R109-p1 130.15 14640.75 19.80 10.30 116.50 0.00 119.71 153.91 46.83 R109-p2 416.99 37842.03 18.85 10.10 21.44 19.30 244.96 207.87 62.80 R109-p3 709.09 41418.30 28.44 43.65 0.00 37.50 166.78 240.98 80.80 R30-p1 38.75 24023.51 4.85 24.78 11.28 111.92 31.81 285.94 1067.05 38.93 R30-p2 234.44 23685.80 54.72 21.61 7.73 13.59 15.77 123.79 813.16 17.83 R30-p3 152.56 27478.63 24.43 25.71 339.73 22.26 233.35 1026.03 39.20 R32-p1 59.40 39793.94 25.02 21.11 156.56 0.00 251.68 1193.66 135.84 R32-p2 206.04 57427.93 647.57 40.85 42.92 722.79 28.56 165.70 806.91 42.51 R32-p2 150.75 42258.82 29.54 14.69 49.09 57.71 359.63 766.01 52.84 R33-p1 363.28 89043.54 14.61 15.70 16.87 221.42 13.49 126.61 189.81 44.51 R33-p2 105.11 43581.85 71.47 13.13 17.12 151.00 21.60 82.87 169.13 29.68 R33-p3 99.30 43649.86 56.37 15.18 18.82 219.12 13.60 152.84 224.76 48.48 R43-p1 151.37 5534.99 2.18 5.95 6.02 57.69 6.74 106.98 70.12 50.94 R43-p2 207.99 14638.12 49.42 13.49 11.39 108.27 14.07 41.58 81.03 14.87 R43-p3 1319.40 21549.22 13.90 28.40 9.41 190.34 16.34 181.64 148.43 21.10 R45-p1 42.84 23759.03 24.96 17.71 20.37 151.72 48.05 252.90 279.50 58.74 R45-p2 84.55 22938.41 0.00 11.43 12.42 21.75 9.91 155.51 159.89 28.91 Inductively Coupled Plasma-Mass Spectrometry Paste Data (Neff 2008)

Sample Mn Fe Ni Co Cu Zn As Rb Sr Y R45-p3 91.16 27038.27 210.80 17.37 27.07 187.99 2.94 237.13 292.55 164.65 R51-p1 289.14 28038.21 11.18 38.10 18.35 138.22 13.44 143.40 158.37 74.62 R51-p2 795.12 18857.50 43.19 31.91 13.48 84.06 13.64 56.27 95.29 38.59 R51-p3 53.38 15694.52 137.80 18.93 22.40 155.43 36.46 110.06 142.06 90.24 R54-p1 368.32 36443.36 1.71 27.27 6.09 95.46 22.99 83.31 91.81 17.62 R54-p2 46.41 10963.90 35.21 16.42 6.50 69.07 7.39 48.83 317.86 20.32 R54-p3 81.21 24994.22 0.81 17.51 10.25 170.51 10.11 83.60 223.69 286.05 R55-p1 27.02 23763.82 12.31 19.06 199.40 0.00 259.23 385.99 58.51 R55-p2 42.32 22039.96 23.37 10.86 17.96 258.56 7.78 273.10 257.32 44.30 R55-p3 104.69 23475.58 42.51 16.24 7.47 39.27 8.23 344.41 424.93 53.34 R60-p1 118.33 38509.49 12.32 12.60 20.82 144.06 7.82 118.72 173.95 134.09 496 R60-p2 63.33 26225.38 62.01 11.01 20.56 143.80 12.44 104.34 141.51 99.18 R60-p3 109.63 30828.24 26.10 11.52 39.92 75.97 5.47 129.35 237.89 123.11 R72-p1 122.78 23403.99 4.32 11.23 13.46 85.56 7.41 71.28 77.44 32.24 R72-p2 472.61 24112.48 67.97 28.09 33.18 150.88 6.73 97.11 115.38 43.88 R72-p3 132.18 29022.96 37.65 20.37 27.24 205.10 13.16 118.96 162.02 46.70 R73-p1 295.64 35734.37 10.30 12.30 18.52 106.42 10.20 73.61 129.49 57.56 R73-p2 3385.31 49942.39 45.66 47.81 23.13 141.81 11.56 118.78 160.63 69.22 R73-p3 124.63 38557.41 45.03 14.14 22.16 171.23 10.61 85.83 177.71 46.05 R74-p1 20.44 24821.22 23.83 19.16 134.66 0.00 215.42 231.62 66.07 R74-p2 68.36 31408.65 12.41 24.12 36.19 416.22 5.82 245.65 283.24 164.12 R74-p3 112.84 30059.35 46.88 37.88 421.54 19.18 297.01 291.80 122.57 R78-p1 61.20 37781.85 8.53 24.25 24.57 199.72 9.96 102.66 66.51 102.10 R78-p2 45.26 27802.47 45.27 20.77 18.69 222.54 6.43 117.34 58.80 88.72 R78-p3 230.77 106912.22 178.06 57.06 50.58 503.71 58.75 103.72 231.43 76.30 R79-p1 84.26 26537.03 21.10 29.00 151.19 9.75 235.80 414.81 43.72 R79-p2 295.05 53474.77 335.66 36.11 127.02 882.98 36.74 251.51 600.02 91.92 R79-p3 183.38 33865.87 308.04 23.99 10.91 224.91 47.84 351.58 466.32 77.00 R88-p1 252.07 41508.97 29.17 45.08 13.74 222.66 50.26 344.41 585.15 241.11 R88-p2 440.72 46976.10 77.20 29.00 10.45 66.94 27.79 251.26 459.36 114.80 R88-p3 634.56 48769.45 322.74 40.85 12.79 266.89 29.02 339.11 500.90 176.06 Inductively Coupled Plasma-Mass Spectrometry Paste Data (Neff 2008)

Sample Mn Fe Ni Co Cu Zn As Rb Sr Y R89-p1 29.12 66867.43 12.54 21.56 68.39 263.93 12.93 75.57 32.81 46.05 R89-p2 42.11 24047.41 76.13 19.09 26.80 207.29 10.44 140.00 34.61 33.18 R89-p3 28.00 16273.87 17.40 11.55 16.45 113.78 2.22 78.70 36.14 21.37 497 Inductively Coupled Plasma-Mass Spectrometry Paste Data (Neff 2008)

Sample Zr Nb Sn Sb Cs Ba La Ce Pr Nd C09-p1 643.31 53.18 5.62 7.24 12.55 616.81 162.46 297.64 29.31 115.75 C09-p2 402.20 36.92 5.83 3.34 14.22 808.19 147.50 274.15 27.00 105.70 C09-p3 439.43 56.32 7.67 5.60 18.01 452.58 158.09 323.84 28.65 119.06 C11-p1 197.98 29.71 3.32 1.79 10.24 339.21 6419.20 14532.45 817.76 3157.13 C11-p2 269.18 36.84 4.56 2.34 6.59 613.67 89.09 158.15 15.61 73.72 C11-p3 214.77 59.78 10.14 1.11 15.19 178.34 76.76 149.99 13.61 64.13 C13-p1 157.98 66.75 4.29 1.68 24.12 608.92 77.56 186.16 18.62 91.67 C13-p2 232.39 143.27 8.65 0.39 12.86 297.97 119.09 215.01 21.17 82.00 C13-p3 272.59 86.95 14.98 2.19 24.60 653.39 281.45 586.61 49.86 216.09 C14-p1 337.18 85.12 7.78 2.60 26.72 434.62 173.10 393.63 35.80 152.04 C14-p2 332.02 36.95 5.00 1.46 13.05 938.41 60.72 140.95 13.50 58.86 498 C14-p3 450.29 49.53 8.75 3.07 16.02 487.34 105.31 180.48 19.05 88.08 C15-p1 278.78 42.23 7.98 5.31 16.15 388.99 162.19 463.12 34.94 158.97 C15-p2 365.10 30.17 4.56 2.36 13.48 419.87 75.40 190.46 16.25 64.42 C15-p3 488.82 127.97 10.44 13.67 26.71 634.86 257.78 537.40 50.88 216.81 DB01-p1 302.58 49.37 14.07 1.49 9.99 887.24 368.61 1128.12 70.17 299.96 DB01-p2 1087.00 113.45 4.98 2.04 9.78 1264.40 517.90 1619.99 97.82 419.00 DB01-p3 219.95 41.77 3.96 2.04 11.42 978.64 409.48 1454.84 77.67 336.08 DB107-p1 481.53 42.90 362.48 3.36 11.23 984.20 159.35 331.17 31.50 140.66 DB107-p2 1094.87 65.38 1169.38 1.92 13.40 980.00 110.86 231.04 21.68 100.53 DB107-p3 319.85 39.57 1342.75 2.63 14.45 908.25 120.73 326.33 28.00 129.41 DB17-p1 799.44 45.00 4.76 1.80 10.74 1598.87 100.68 208.09 17.84 79.69 DB17-p2 269.45 34.46 4.49 1.34 9.08 1992.23 80.97 184.58 16.05 68.51 DB17-p3 281.66 49.11 5.74 1.87 12.97 4189.56 116.75 275.53 22.09 93.06 DB18-p1 936.74 50.08 5.07 3.45 11.65 1144.26 86.27 175.56 17.55 78.29 DB18-p2 492.42 69.19 5.66 3.26 10.79 2608.47 102.16 209.91 20.30 87.63 DB18-p3 606.75 64.21 6.19 12.99 13.43 1779.36 115.30 276.04 23.69 95.95 DB19-p1 251.34 51.23 4.35 2.27 11.12 807.90 116.80 259.76 21.81 95.76 DB19-p2 366.13 58.05 5.17 2.78 10.95 1835.65 109.46 236.14 22.00 93.99 DB19-p3 307.37 38.07 4.31 2.01 10.41 937.38 115.93 332.06 25.09 110.77 DB54-p1 243.77 44.87 6.03 4.03 10.65 1031.42 1284.45 2905.67 201.71 843.01 Inductively Coupled Plasma-Mass Spectrometry Paste Data (Neff 2008)

Sample Zr Nb Sn Sb Cs Ba La Ce Pr Nd DB54-p2 355.88 45.22 6.74 1.90 11.73 1115.46 384.09 944.52 76.58 325.09 DB54-p3 224.51 43.40 4.63 7.76 9.54 1001.27 250.80 601.33 53.02 240.13 DB55-p1 2628.69 38.22 4.64 1.04 12.12 10909.47 438.44 1432.58 78.72 323.20 DB55-p2 165.88 60.79 3.65 1.64 9.81 4241.77 313.86 1091.39 62.28 270.19 DB55-p3 108.79 36.62 5.12 1.40 11.15 772.51 229.89 857.07 48.91 213.65 DB59-p1 391.64 51.78 5.02 3.40 11.09 820.18 86.86 165.63 15.62 62.91 DB59-p2 520.59 51.05 4.94 1.38 12.47 1278.38 123.21 199.81 20.38 91.48 DB59-p3 351.07 64.93 4.41 5.69 13.52 1354.37 129.42 225.40 21.20 96.44 DB60-p1 791.94 55.96 6.03 2.61 13.30 1437.58 146.79 301.89 27.87 124.06 DB60-p2 519.42 47.43 4.85 4.07 12.70 1740.25 169.59 350.32 32.06 141.03 DB60-p3 583.07 46.80 5.07 3.39 13.52 1441.08 117.51 282.56 24.17 117.52 499 DB61-p1 353.49 49.35 6.19 1.62 10.82 1116.88 121.19 222.92 20.67 83.90 DB61-p2 350.27 43.11 5.28 1.72 12.41 1038.52 166.90 261.92 30.73 122.65 DB61-p3 380.48 44.62 6.11 1.88 10.83 969.29 104.32 224.09 20.52 93.30 DC01-p1 220.92 29.24 3.43 0.68 6.00 4232.16 60.69 104.82 12.26 49.12 DC01-p2 187.13 30.26 3.96 1.32 7.34 4097.21 75.75 149.41 16.75 64.00 DC01-p3 23930.69 23.17 2.61 1.28 5.60 2182.71 62.07 179.34 13.36 61.51 DC02-p1 496.72 47.44 3.55 1.17 8.90 4718.91 116.45 191.63 18.68 79.05 DC02-p2 186.02 43.00 3.54 0.87 8.75 4468.70 77.93 147.71 15.46 61.16 DC02-p3 293.31 38.45 4.34 1.21 10.35 7326.67 102.39 190.43 18.11 74.04 DC03-p1 212.34 34.41 4.71 0.96 7.81 2742.43 106.69 201.26 21.22 89.65 DC03-p2 604.40 38.02 4.44 1.32 10.88 2639.11 182.64 328.95 35.61 147.48 DC03-p3 236.45 38.87 4.61 1.47 9.25 2231.02 102.85 199.84 21.09 88.48 DC26-p1 187.55 33.59 3.05 1.02 4.56 2248.82 130.58 216.74 20.75 85.27 DC26-p1A 271.59 30.09 3.46 1.13 4.74 3977.02 112.21 190.62 19.30 80.25 DC26-p2 496.65 34.56 3.57 0.91 5.96 3832.40 84.55 195.58 17.97 79.02 DC26-p3 194.69 30.00 3.91 1.11 5.82 2954.29 117.27 287.19 24.81 105.29 DC43-p1 182.97 42.32 3.58 1.09 5.43 3372.39 90.51 162.05 16.96 71.88 DC43-p2 182.78 44.45 5.19 1.53 7.89 2909.88 111.78 235.79 23.17 88.79 DC43-p3 40418.90 39.69 3.91 1.16 7.70 7080.58 90.62 175.95 16.96 79.78 DC44-p1 200.44 57.84 5.67 1.76 7.86 3920.34 157.57 239.05 30.85 125.72 Inductively Coupled Plasma-Mass Spectrometry Paste Data (Neff 2008)

Sample Zr Nb Sn Sb Cs Ba La Ce Pr Nd DC44-p1A 148.52 56.33 3.70 1.65 6.11 3234.99 103.51 192.24 19.87 80.13 DC44-p2 220.49 42.56 4.26 1.05 6.08 6154.20 145.30 325.34 27.36 106.20 DC44-p3 165.27 43.69 4.44 2.34 5.25 4500.71 61.17 118.27 12.41 51.78 DC45-p1 100.79 24.72 2.61 0.64 5.06 661.03 63.18 130.14 12.99 58.20 DC45-p2 178.10 30.38 4.75 0.99 6.49 1032.12 76.08 171.84 15.87 65.57 DC45-p3 178.67 41.98 2.51 1.01 6.52 1085.58 54.73 133.47 13.17 62.11 DC48-p1 181.90 42.30 4.02 1.06 9.46 896.49 106.68 207.15 20.59 92.98 DC48-p2 180.97 35.92 5.44 1.20 9.76 793.45 91.86 221.72 18.77 76.92 DC48-p3 135.45 31.28 3.13 1.02 8.84 1192.12 76.13 158.57 15.52 65.25 DC49-p1 191.58 37.78 4.34 1.89 11.10 795.98 135.93 248.42 28.60 114.21 DC49-p2 140.32 31.15 3.15 0.80 8.60 585.31 79.12 163.88 16.57 66.66 500 DC49-p3 202.31 175.75 5.27 2.54 14.05 653.82 120.40 230.69 27.42 108.29 DC51-p1 254.54 26.22 4.09 1.35 5.64 1549.97 160.16 248.20 29.34 122.86 DC51-p2 259.16 38.48 4.40 0.62 7.42 2407.98 132.33 275.35 28.48 123.11 DC51-p3 254.37 39.93 4.59 1.43 6.51 1859.56 106.17 178.71 20.96 94.03 DP01-p1 281.83 43.61 5.12 2.02 11.80 2343.83 83.04 184.67 16.12 68.76 DP01-p2 493.77 59.59 4.46 2.96 11.72 2443.77 199.83 489.54 37.79 159.71 DP01-p3 313.71 47.32 5.12 3.38 13.05 2336.62 113.12 287.27 22.26 95.57 DP02-p1 199.04 50.15 65.77 1.38 6.01 2430.13 90.90 177.75 19.28 86.32 DP02-p2 154.72 74.23 132.43 2.28 3.98 2268.28 529.24 1679.24 75.37 289.22 DP02-p3 266.10 32.99 5.04 1.26 5.99 4220.52 80.99 174.11 15.69 64.33 DP04-p1 287.96 38.48 3.30 1.67 12.64 640.84 59.98 110.68 9.95 39.48 DP04-p2 315.02 72.31 4.68 3.41 12.90 1011.57 62.89 117.46 11.90 48.72 DP04-p3 804.34 42.21 4.49 2.19 13.15 652.71 63.21 129.43 11.57 48.64 DP102-p1 268.24 63.50 4.83 2.82 13.10 3366.33 119.19 234.70 24.38 103.81 DP102-p2 375.64 56.10 5.91 3.56 13.98 2490.87 91.62 239.86 20.24 80.03 DP102-p3 299.04 78.38 7.93 6.45 13.01 1416.74 100.18 247.10 21.48 88.01 DP103-p1 503.57 48.30 5.00 1.93 12.96 646.33 102.98 185.23 19.00 77.41 DP103-p2 451.54 51.61 5.01 1.70 13.26 1094.85 789.28 1269.52 121.90 530.56 DP103-p3 288.51 56.15 5.06 2.53 13.31 658.78 88.68 184.39 17.56 80.25 DP104-p1 102.21 25.12 24.07 0.96 6.11 1224.45 39.20 82.82 7.64 34.57 Inductively Coupled Plasma-Mass Spectrometry Paste Data (Neff 2008)

Sample Zr Nb Sn Sb Cs Ba La Ce Pr Nd DP104-p2 173.22 49.82 4.50 6.32 5.79 2029.32 75.11 138.72 15.97 68.52 DP104-p3 91.63 21.18 2.61 1.21 5.04 867.05 71.47 159.92 13.41 61.84 DP19-p1 769.05 45.48 4.41 3.32 12.50 6838.51 148.42 336.48 29.42 130.58 DP19-p2 266.90 53.64 4.13 2.67 9.90 1676.13 92.87 201.66 18.81 84.20 DP19-p3 356.01 41.71 4.91 2.82 11.84 1480.94 90.14 207.43 18.67 82.75 DP20-p1 150.87 30.01 4.45 1.05 5.45 2209.86 71.40 151.66 13.89 56.20 DP20-p2 284.62 38.80 3.36 1.09 7.75 3534.80 96.67 193.32 18.90 81.36 DP20-p3 198.83 39.96 3.56 1.58 6.86 1219.73 104.66 312.30 21.86 87.06 DP31-p1 257.86 36.48 3.69 1.36 8.55 1529.57 115.90 216.46 22.58 98.69 DP31-p2 242.35 43.25 4.94 1.55 8.66 1473.83 104.85 204.24 19.44 81.69 DP31-p3 395.74 54.95 18.33 5.39 8.83 1046.29 157.91 373.48 30.49 129.78 501 DP61-p1 566.44 60.70 7.63 3.66 13.96 2421.46 129.81 224.21 22.82 102.71 DP61-p2 440.15 51.07 5.38 3.47 14.35 3300.87 155.88 273.45 29.26 129.39 DP61-p3 979.68 55.68 5.48 3.23 17.03 4718.87 138.21 250.30 23.71 112.41 NB01-p1 112.28 29.31 2.89 1.47 6.19 1675.45 68.05 134.02 12.41 57.38 NB01-p2 119.65 25.42 2.56 1.43 8.08 2275.60 75.56 150.78 14.55 69.08 NB01-p3 145.66 32.38 3.70 1.45 8.39 1910.98 73.85 163.41 15.36 65.71 NB02-p1 20267.10 44.15 2.90 1.52 6.68 2691.05 66.96 148.30 10.55 48.80 NB02-p2 487.68 37.30 2.73 1.53 8.13 3546.01 84.62 191.70 14.65 61.10 NB02-p3 618.13 49.40 4.19 1.82 10.54 1570.22 114.00 234.73 18.89 84.82 NB07-p1 262.80 34.57 2.95 1.87 6.76 694.19 51.93 122.28 9.22 43.38 NB07-p2 462.72 37.63 2.96 1.62 6.57 1147.20 40.89 94.96 8.31 35.19 NB07-p3 242.65 51.92 5.06 3.27 12.26 1070.91 105.43 306.28 18.71 67.53 NB13-p1 430.77 43.53 3.48 19.42 8.03 1648.76 91.27 159.72 14.99 64.58 NB13-p2 295.23 40.54 4.21 1.51 10.62 575.90 89.60 231.19 14.85 60.11 NB13-p3 298.27 40.33 3.91 2.04 11.89 469.01 81.98 201.62 15.11 59.84 NB15-p1 210.97 34.05 6.51 2.23 8.98 503.80 44.34 91.15 7.58 36.15 NB15-p2 207.78 48.03 8.73 4.23 10.26 640.41 48.59 103.57 8.14 37.33 NB15-p3 266.47 42.98 10.83 1.92 13.50 696.88 53.20 107.60 9.36 36.92 NB21-p1 258.15 34.31 3.43 1.80 8.24 696.56 83.77 155.61 14.33 66.37 NB21-p2 248.33 32.31 3.87 1.84 10.22 740.41 83.91 196.39 14.50 61.52 Inductively Coupled Plasma-Mass Spectrometry Paste Data (Neff 2008)

Sample Zr Nb Sn Sb Cs Ba La Ce Pr Nd NB21-p3 226.14 33.86 3.39 2.00 11.02 541.58 56.54 152.58 11.42 51.17 NB29-p1 335.69 35.23 4.34 2.15 8.02 933.68 119.73 392.66 21.64 98.66 NB29-p2 483.70 26.49 5.84 2.85 8.13 707.15 91.34 309.73 20.86 95.94 NB29-p3 139.83 40.85 6.48 1.59 8.74 921.01 53.25 161.98 12.78 56.28 NB33-p1 5204.22 42.60 3.46 3.93 6.70 326.74 68.08 169.88 13.97 68.58 NB33-p2 232.36 33.63 4.14 0.85 7.76 274.16 59.88 157.04 12.84 61.98 NB33-p3 112.82 35.97 4.67 0.82 9.24 334.26 50.88 147.09 10.91 47.72 NB34-p1 235.26 33.33 11.39 2.23 9.44 773.39 81.28 185.28 13.58 61.63 NB34-p2 346.37 50.02 14.22 3.04 12.65 828.18 87.04 234.49 18.47 82.38 NB34-p3 227.28 46.29 4.35 2.23 12.42 650.41 95.25 326.86 22.96 98.51 NB39-p1 200.73 27.48 3.01 1.89 5.56 1479.39 61.60 108.12 11.37 52.74 502 NB39-p2 249.24 39.35 3.27 3.60 7.30 1420.48 68.83 160.37 13.29 61.52 NB39-p3 335.85 42.33 4.02 6.72 9.78 1084.37 72.93 200.02 14.31 60.76 NC01-p1 307.28 38.68 5.40 1.72 10.81 627.48 170.49 283.01 31.39 139.49 NC01-p2 209.01 40.66 5.14 1.81 12.12 744.19 104.53 184.57 19.04 83.41 NC01-p3 271.06 25.21 4.32 0.98 9.15 482.67 79.66 138.77 15.30 66.75 NC06-p1 192.81 34.87 3.95 1.05 8.26 419.75 94.10 171.80 18.35 78.44 NC06-p2 1360.91 37.50 8.13 1.88 11.14 1016.93 100.14 209.04 21.53 88.49 NC06-p3 177.70 38.70 6.43 2.00 12.20 713.11 73.62 123.16 15.96 66.23 NC09-p1 299.77 38.66 3.59 1.31 9.40 3095.43 51.44 99.64 10.40 46.18 NC09-p2 140.91 39.56 4.42 0.99 12.16 1071.55 65.47 179.11 14.81 60.45 NC09-p3 211.35 45.98 6.46 2.40 17.74 1261.98 110.20 231.66 25.51 99.15 NC14-p1 328.04 85.91 8.29 2.76 18.61 546.08 156.60 317.88 34.08 144.62 NC14-p2 134.56 31.04 6.35 1.91 12.07 724.10 77.30 158.33 16.25 61.29 NC14-p3 488.68 55.83 7.61 3.56 19.12 629.28 144.58 357.78 31.49 122.78 NC20-p1 409.62 83.61 6.91 1.38 8.81 377.78 94.24 156.06 22.16 87.00 NC20-p2 119.01 48.35 5.30 0.96 6.69 798.19 63.21 117.15 13.43 57.62 NC20-p3 162.13 27.40 3.70 1.71 6.34 1191.09 58.34 86.61 11.30 50.67 NC23-p1 841.00 85.26 8.57 1.66 11.03 736.23 73.33 132.34 15.68 63.35 NC23-p2 183.29 29.84 3.96 1.56 10.44 1185.86 96.54 254.35 20.85 93.57 NC23-p3 160.53 40.27 2.94 1.48 8.93 1475.13 62.67 108.32 14.23 58.95 Inductively Coupled Plasma-Mass Spectrometry Paste Data (Neff 2008)

Sample Zr Nb Sn Sb Cs Ba La Ce Pr Nd NC24-p1 144.94 57.45 4.27 1.37 8.03 524.92 61.57 103.60 11.86 55.56 NC24-p2 292.04 33.90 5.20 1.30 10.08 737.01 80.78 144.65 17.08 74.11 NC24-p3 285.29 22.97 2.72 0.90 8.83 754.38 38.13 82.43 7.61 30.02 NC27-p1 621.61 135.59 8.52 2.11 13.11 1282.85 137.36 274.90 27.68 134.91 NC27-p2 107.28 27.71 3.87 1.40 8.88 987.50 70.89 144.09 15.24 61.39 NC27-p3 254.51 42.11 6.79 2.03 15.91 1215.00 134.87 285.78 26.53 116.99 NC28-p1 292.98 69.73 12.26 2.03 11.86 732.88 143.65 242.97 26.59 126.45 NC28-p2 187.65 39.28 4.38 0.92 10.64 982.04 81.55 177.45 17.55 80.25 NC28-p3 245.00 39.32 5.41 1.41 8.80 1070.83 93.61 165.37 18.99 77.50 NC30-p1 166.88 40.38 3.79 2.12 4.01 1096.76 58.42 137.07 11.10 55.01 NC30-p2 162.55 273.38 3.75 0.84 4.64 772.68 54.33 118.39 11.25 53.10 503 NC30-p3 136.85 32.79 2.81 0.62 5.66 1406.62 68.06 188.99 13.23 57.99 NP01-p1 127.58 33.53 2.45 1.75 4.35 1010.27 59.32 169.10 11.29 53.53 NP01-p2 47397.93 35.40 3.43 0.61 4.99 826.83 75.51 184.40 15.84 74.49 NP01-p3 108.78 35.71 3.02 0.98 5.34 989.84 57.01 153.51 12.29 50.11 NP02-p1 149.92 21.40 58.75 2.04 4.41 548.60 50.68 110.57 8.85 41.51 NP02-p2 540.64 31.48 5.97 1.96 7.09 892.87 46.49 111.64 9.97 42.21 NP02-p3 314.91 41.53 4.50 2.83 8.24 751.38 47.40 120.23 10.24 43.15 NP03-p1 131.37 25.30 4.00 1.17 7.15 1212.91 77.31 145.23 13.96 63.01 NP03-p2 153.85 40.36 3.81 1.68 7.94 1597.37 62.66 156.51 13.39 56.17 NP03-p3 107.89 24.98 4.57 1.46 7.71 715.10 66.06 172.74 14.03 64.68 NP04-p1 1761.38 36.32 2.43 0.89 4.55 746.80 88.93 309.45 18.77 88.20 NP04-p2 85.19 28.27 2.83 0.79 4.42 517.30 50.26 129.01 10.76 48.24 NP04-p3 336.13 38.78 3.44 1.44 7.14 1983.24 112.48 241.65 21.19 93.09 NP07-p1 188.77 45.20 3.70 3.95 6.44 302.58 30.58 57.90 6.01 22.72 NP07-p2 230.26 54.90 4.16 2.58 8.23 315.72 38.85 85.15 6.52 26.14 NP07-p3 253.08 32.76 3.87 2.62 8.12 288.42 42.44 117.96 9.21 38.27 NP11-p1 392.79 62.12 4.75 3.67 11.12 647.29 148.96 333.80 21.79 95.89 NP11-p2 560.45 51.18 6.24 2.42 13.56 738.72 156.12 349.76 25.57 118.15 NP11-p3 810.27 59.98 5.65 1.91 15.05 991.93 215.22 400.84 30.78 135.64 NP14-p1 49905.35 18.11 3.21 0.86 4.41 904.46 49.04 205.22 9.04 41.16 Inductively Coupled Plasma-Mass Spectrometry Paste Data (Neff 2008)

Sample Zr Nb Sn Sb Cs Ba La Ce Pr Nd NP14-p2 157.42 26.67 9.15 0.85 5.47 1217.70 64.68 164.50 11.66 51.60 NP14-p3 175674.59 24.56 2.79 0.77 5.54 851.39 61.73 128.90 11.77 51.25 NP16-p1 306.50 46.54 39.46 2.17 9.05 779.66 114.96 234.08 19.78 96.08 NP16-p2 225.26 34.58 16.94 2.27 10.55 710.36 87.52 234.56 16.80 75.89 NP16-p3 206.72 36.29 13.74 1.75 12.00 464.85 67.59 155.15 12.03 51.77 NP18-p1 172.56 35.88 5.67 0.86 8.95 388.71 81.20 188.29 17.16 70.23 NP18-p2 393.41 48.85 5.49 1.90 13.64 1166.79 162.33 373.82 36.46 135.35 NP18-p3 155.86 34.94 7.16 3.27 12.64 676.74 111.88 214.26 21.37 75.74 NP21-p1 206.47 29.04 17.34 1.26 6.42 482.55 81.37 143.35 16.27 68.55 NP21-p2 218.86 40.92 16.93 1.44 9.01 597.13 99.36 180.00 20.85 76.07 NP21-p3 2080.76 46.81 7.58 2.53 9.84 679.93 96.89 174.70 21.10 85.99 504 R103-p1 81.96 23.04 2.15 1.15 5.13 553.41 98.30 378.94 16.57 78.40 R103-p2 80.68 16.38 2.78 1.60 8.52 1628.21 33.55 81.19 6.99 31.13 R103-p3 123.32 24.13 2.54 0.95 6.06 490.98 45.34 131.62 9.74 42.05 R109-p1 124.38 25.11 2.59 1.30 4.47 314.25 70.44 132.67 12.91 63.38 R109-p2 200.21 31.96 3.79 1.91 8.38 720.38 109.36 224.27 22.17 99.70 R109-p3 279.87 38.53 4.91 1.75 9.52 624.98 116.07 228.34 22.20 96.81 R30-p1 294.02 35.95 3.80 1.07 8.54 849.29 70.88 185.03 15.46 61.89 R30-p2 86.22 23.41 3.34 2.52 3.74 1380.45 35.36 81.39 8.32 32.22 R30-p3 144.52 66.53 4.65 1.43 7.10 1391.91 62.23 122.45 12.83 54.43 R32-p1 289.60 50.02 5.28 0.79 9.86 979.82 199.56 409.07 38.24 173.93 R32-p2 210.64 37.20 4.82 0.86 8.23 681.33 87.78 178.07 18.11 68.23 R32-p2 200.94 47.69 8.41 4.19 12.82 901.95 109.73 212.60 22.54 95.30 R33-p1 116.48 17.14 2.47 0.86 6.65 358.74 92.20 232.03 15.83 75.34 R33-p2 115.88 15.57 2.59 0.83 4.75 1122.96 53.82 92.10 10.35 44.48 R33-p3 112.29 27.37 3.88 0.46 9.63 1230.18 185.86 828.95 34.11 138.64 R43-p1 110.86 11.05 1.37 0.57 3.60 4641.69 25.36 58.97 4.35 18.52 R43-p2 120.86 10.38 1.62 0.92 3.05 784.78 24.28 51.75 4.74 21.33 R43-p3 107.47 16.32 1.55 1.26 6.51 2454.38 42.89 149.26 8.95 35.47 R45-p1 189.04 36.59 6.28 1.96 10.50 744.41 132.04 272.90 22.90 99.49 R45-p2 113.50 16.10 2.90 1.36 5.77 497.23 44.70 97.60 9.43 45.97 Inductively Coupled Plasma-Mass Spectrometry Paste Data (Neff 2008)

Sample Zr Nb Sn Sb Cs Ba La Ce Pr Nd R45-p3 200.23 35.66 5.42 2.46 11.63 1498.78 2095.12 6363.39 233.09 810.20 R51-p1 196.76 33.19 2.62 2.08 5.33 2737.34 469.07 1401.82 61.80 280.13 R51-p2 166.89 15.09 1.39 0.75 3.71 688.82 64.85 195.24 10.40 46.34 R51-p3 547.12 27.73 2.97 0.97 6.37 1009.85 163.81 360.83 30.94 130.38 R54-p1 167.41 10.98 1.58 1.61 3.36 1348.27 19.12 46.53 3.72 19.13 R54-p2 135.99 11.26 1.31 0.61 2.44 740.00 86.68 257.51 15.54 69.29 R54-p3 27011.50 24.13 2.48 0.91 6.48 656.02 45.74 149.87 9.44 42.11 R55-p1 386.59 33.68 3.52 1.38 17.69 709.24 58.65 91.59 10.48 40.31 R55-p2 363.20 34.85 4.51 0.72 19.87 334.55 49.26 90.17 9.05 32.47 R55-p3 490.48 39.65 5.27 0.69 24.79 2620.95 62.53 105.23 10.87 43.28 R60-p1 112.01 40.42 3.47 1.16 8.09 1183.68 80.98 189.87 13.93 73.81 505 R60-p2 149.95 27.61 3.75 2.64 8.06 644.19 48.13 105.78 9.68 45.66 R60-p3 117.77 29.52 4.11 0.87 10.25 918.81 65.43 140.83 12.70 59.79 R72-p1 112.78 24.64 2.39 0.64 5.22 530.23 56.73 115.80 9.69 43.71 R72-p2 203.79 33.57 3.61 1.45 8.17 982.39 86.66 207.73 16.41 72.87 R72-p3 177.23 47.58 4.91 1.59 10.34 938.84 89.57 214.52 17.62 71.84 R73-p1 2910.87 30.99 3.62 1.08 5.60 1269.94 111.49 268.34 18.34 86.21 R73-p2 288.45 39.91 3.55 1.27 7.25 1591.76 164.83 504.49 27.33 121.51 R73-p3 207.17 118.98 4.08 1.36 8.29 1091.16 87.38 186.12 15.87 67.78 R74-p1 428.13 37.54 4.51 1.14 9.60 402.47 83.66 178.79 15.48 70.33 R74-p2 779.84 41.93 5.25 2.04 20.16 381.00 810.49 2005.12 124.89 466.27 R74-p3 581.17 49.07 5.91 2.64 14.37 444.59 187.28 442.54 39.13 160.40 R78-p1 118.00 29.64 2.94 1.28 5.49 619.61 75.33 161.49 12.11 59.50 R78-p2 96.83 20.47 2.60 0.76 4.78 1211.28 60.36 148.12 10.81 51.70 R78-p3 174.88 213.31 5.40 1.90 8.18 1309.01 136.13 261.39 21.14 102.16 R79-p1 156.63 49.81 10.25 2.05 8.28 751.83 78.46 172.99 16.28 70.82 R79-p2 2452.66 48.01 10.32 3.09 14.48 862.61 139.85 258.90 29.56 120.27 R79-p3 337.10 38.03 4.84 2.13 11.93 932.33 95.09 176.92 20.53 86.79 R88-p1 864.97 64.66 7.24 3.89 16.49 679.66 241.19 512.90 39.34 176.80 R88-p2 431.00 42.87 6.97 3.11 13.70 570.02 150.43 303.71 28.00 124.68 R88-p3 616.61 53.05 7.53 3.68 17.46 889.09 177.50 366.71 31.23 132.53 Inductively Coupled Plasma-Mass Spectrometry Paste Data (Neff 2008)

Sample Zr Nb Sn Sb Cs Ba La Ce Pr Nd R89-p1 175.94 43.48 5.60 1.73 5.28 147.81 64.41 137.48 12.64 63.04 R89-p2 1928.59 61.66 4.42 1.18 9.27 576.14 87.53 234.81 16.33 71.39 R89-p3 126.89 30.56 2.43 0.75 6.57 227.85 42.44 102.19 8.07 35.43 506 Inductively Coupled Plasma-Mass Spectrometry Paste Data (Neff 2008)

Sample Sm Eu Gd Tb Dy Ho Er Tm Yb Lu C09-p1 17.87 3.19 17.92 2.41 18.64 3.50 10.29 1.50 10.45 1.57 C09-p2 19.35 2.90 19.36 2.54 16.43 3.43 10.63 1.33 10.97 1.31 C09-p3 22.08 3.87 19.18 2.31 19.73 3.86 10.31 1.46 9.54 0.95 C11-p1 313.02 38.23 223.32 19.50 111.13 11.35 23.64 2.26 15.53 1.50 C11-p2 12.06 1.92 11.13 1.24 10.19 1.76 5.95 0.89 7.84 0.95 C11-p3 13.17 2.06 11.21 1.50 8.75 1.72 5.67 0.62 6.70 0.79 C13-p1 19.87 5.66 21.21 3.38 21.46 3.65 10.85 1.45 9.86 1.24 C13-p2 16.48 2.39 11.20 1.89 10.81 2.22 6.72 1.17 6.63 0.95 C13-p3 40.31 9.83 34.23 5.15 35.07 6.16 20.81 2.51 14.51 2.01 C14-p1 29.13 4.50 25.35 3.07 19.96 3.27 9.56 1.40 9.25 1.27 C14-p2 10.47 1.75 7.48 1.37 8.47 1.42 3.64 0.84 4.56 0.74 507 C14-p3 14.62 2.79 14.13 2.10 16.21 2.91 10.32 1.39 10.64 1.44 C15-p1 26.19 4.77 18.44 2.72 17.04 2.57 7.78 0.79 7.41 0.81 C15-p2 11.30 2.00 9.27 1.31 10.44 1.73 5.18 0.93 7.09 0.98 C15-p3 31.66 5.86 21.69 3.76 23.33 3.96 12.82 1.38 11.55 2.01 DB01-p1 56.40 10.11 45.26 5.63 31.50 5.08 14.28 1.67 10.97 1.44 DB01-p2 74.29 12.12 59.73 7.05 42.59 6.16 18.19 2.34 15.26 2.04 DB01-p3 55.52 10.19 42.54 5.64 32.06 5.43 14.61 1.97 13.58 1.39 DB107-p1 26.79 3.84 20.03 2.63 16.97 2.92 10.94 1.37 11.33 1.47 DB107-p2 18.45 2.89 16.71 2.19 14.98 2.98 8.91 1.32 11.49 1.67 DB107-p3 23.83 3.37 19.49 2.68 15.29 2.74 8.53 1.33 9.76 1.51 DB17-p1 15.53 2.40 11.54 1.38 10.67 1.86 6.07 0.86 6.87 1.09 DB17-p2 18.77 2.29 37.47 6.92 83.22 17.74 60.97 8.77 82.71 6.98 DB17-p3 14.11 2.82 13.73 1.43 10.94 2.11 5.57 0.71 7.61 0.76 DB18-p1 14.61 3.20 11.30 1.89 10.95 2.20 6.62 1.15 7.27 1.20 DB18-p2 16.80 3.04 13.55 2.06 13.25 2.86 9.21 1.31 9.73 1.18 DB18-p3 18.13 3.60 24.37 3.97 34.47 6.57 18.50 3.18 40.63 1.90 DB19-p1 16.91 2.56 15.25 1.98 12.35 2.25 6.38 0.96 5.83 0.72 DB19-p2 17.22 2.99 14.51 1.73 12.53 2.31 6.93 0.81 7.46 1.13 DB19-p3 29.27 10.14 121.03 22.72 160.30 21.67 47.81 4.85 39.65 2.42 DB54-p1 126.64 18.69 82.94 9.24 55.93 8.87 24.05 2.99 20.25 2.22 Inductively Coupled Plasma-Mass Spectrometry Paste Data (Neff 2008)

Sample Sm Eu Gd Tb Dy Ho Er Tm Yb Lu DB54-p2 59.76 11.36 54.78 7.05 44.98 6.93 20.05 2.44 18.43 2.21 DB54-p3 41.99 7.61 38.06 4.86 31.11 5.90 16.99 2.62 15.84 2.52 DB55-p1 59.67 10.75 51.43 6.23 40.33 6.55 18.16 2.36 16.15 1.93 DB55-p2 49.61 9.06 45.63 5.38 31.94 4.90 14.41 1.62 12.36 1.34 DB55-p3 39.72 7.68 34.24 4.28 23.73 4.26 13.07 1.69 11.41 1.41 DB59-p1 12.11 1.70 9.85 1.46 9.80 1.76 6.47 0.94 5.61 0.92 DB59-p2 18.35 2.41 15.60 2.02 13.10 2.67 8.18 1.04 8.84 1.22 DB59-p3 17.73 2.65 15.40 2.06 12.92 2.09 7.25 1.11 7.99 1.18 DB60-p1 23.26 3.82 18.08 2.34 17.12 2.91 9.88 1.49 10.33 1.21 DB60-p2 30.62 3.41 39.98 7.28 69.77 14.60 52.30 7.31 61.88 6.94 DB60-p3 21.01 3.82 19.14 2.76 20.83 4.10 12.96 1.82 16.06 2.01 508 DB61-p1 13.99 2.86 12.10 1.82 14.11 2.72 9.46 1.53 16.39 1.18 DB61-p2 22.32 3.34 20.26 2.43 12.53 2.13 5.95 0.83 5.97 0.68 DB61-p3 15.70 2.62 12.34 1.63 10.11 1.98 5.39 0.70 7.69 0.76 DC01-p1 9.41 2.19 9.56 1.41 8.39 1.60 4.70 0.79 4.31 0.60 DC01-p2 14.51 2.55 10.39 1.52 8.76 2.22 4.37 0.95 5.70 0.75 DC01-p3 13.95 2.93 17.44 2.93 27.59 6.34 20.66 3.94 36.73 5.07 DC02-p1 13.49 2.89 10.89 1.67 10.41 2.14 5.93 0.81 6.26 0.82 DC02-p2 11.20 2.54 11.57 1.85 15.37 2.95 9.71 1.16 9.33 0.97 DC02-p3 12.76 2.10 11.50 1.49 10.43 2.00 6.43 1.03 7.80 0.80 DC03-p1 17.24 3.36 14.41 1.93 13.92 2.32 7.66 0.85 5.83 0.78 DC03-p2 27.34 6.64 26.67 3.52 24.07 4.39 12.93 1.76 11.76 1.98 DC03-p3 15.28 3.56 16.04 2.12 13.82 2.23 5.31 1.05 7.09 0.83 DC26-p1 16.50 2.95 12.80 1.56 9.82 1.85 5.08 0.65 5.66 0.70 DC26-p1A 16.14 3.09 13.60 1.88 11.83 2.00 6.83 0.79 4.99 0.93 DC26-p2 15.66 2.70 14.35 1.74 11.32 2.03 5.88 0.74 5.96 0.85 DC26-p3 18.14 3.59 14.30 1.93 10.01 2.08 5.37 0.74 5.66 0.66 DC43-p1 14.34 2.47 11.89 1.49 9.79 1.52 4.82 0.58 6.56 0.59 DC43-p2 15.79 2.88 13.03 1.65 9.30 1.87 6.23 0.84 5.35 0.64 DC43-p3 13.18 2.86 12.10 1.87 14.07 2.83 8.95 1.39 17.00 1.37 DC44-p1 21.30 3.50 14.11 2.12 11.57 2.38 5.76 0.74 4.25 0.63 Inductively Coupled Plasma-Mass Spectrometry Paste Data (Neff 2008)

Sample Sm Eu Gd Tb Dy Ho Er Tm Yb Lu DC44-p1A 14.27 2.81 8.87 1.11 9.68 1.38 3.34 0.60 4.25 0.52 DC44-p2 19.20 3.32 14.42 1.95 12.52 2.06 6.81 0.85 6.20 0.58 DC44-p3 8.12 1.98 7.29 1.03 6.07 1.05 4.10 0.49 3.39 0.56 DC45-p1 12.96 3.54 16.85 2.84 18.15 2.48 6.84 0.74 5.90 0.58 DC45-p2 11.28 2.35 11.14 1.34 7.77 1.32 4.36 0.69 4.26 0.46 DC45-p3 18.18 2.71 57.64 16.28 271.77 83.54 373.06 53.48 623.81 61.67 DC48-p1 15.27 2.96 14.50 1.67 11.63 2.12 6.71 0.75 6.38 0.97 DC48-p2 14.19 2.82 13.06 1.54 10.32 2.05 5.86 0.84 5.26 0.80 DC48-p3 11.54 2.39 10.47 1.25 8.67 1.59 4.74 0.60 4.97 0.71 DC49-p1 22.77 4.52 19.60 2.56 15.84 2.85 7.85 1.00 7.18 1.05 DC49-p2 12.22 2.79 11.67 1.28 9.67 1.84 6.10 0.63 4.64 0.62 509 DC49-p3 19.58 4.49 18.97 2.21 15.66 3.30 8.07 1.17 7.77 1.19 DC51-p1 18.55 4.02 17.33 1.82 10.86 2.51 7.00 0.76 7.02 0.94 DC51-p2 23.58 4.69 19.40 3.08 17.77 3.03 9.46 1.23 8.06 1.11 DC51-p3 16.90 3.78 13.77 2.14 13.48 2.90 8.33 1.33 7.58 1.39 DP01-p1 12.12 1.86 10.12 1.39 8.68 1.74 5.62 0.76 6.66 0.62 DP01-p2 27.54 4.24 21.34 2.57 18.04 2.68 8.44 1.11 10.07 1.19 DP01-p3 17.55 2.87 13.15 1.66 12.11 2.01 5.72 0.85 7.83 0.87 DP02-p1 16.06 2.70 13.06 1.63 10.66 1.88 5.29 0.72 5.69 0.75 DP02-p2 42.78 6.96 25.06 1.98 10.46 1.69 4.18 0.71 4.18 0.81 DP02-p3 10.68 2.39 10.66 1.23 8.50 1.64 5.02 0.80 5.41 0.79 DP04-p1 6.68 1.20 4.54 0.71 4.35 0.98 3.90 0.50 4.64 0.80 DP04-p2 9.25 1.37 7.44 0.91 8.61 1.85 5.36 0.68 5.70 0.90 DP04-p3 8.01 1.43 6.98 1.13 6.11 1.66 4.99 0.76 7.80 1.19 DP102-p1 19.22 3.69 13.89 1.89 12.25 1.84 5.68 0.72 6.75 0.91 DP102-p2 15.12 2.78 11.95 1.38 8.86 1.62 5.38 1.36 8.64 0.82 DP102-p3 14.71 3.36 10.89 1.75 10.22 2.17 6.63 0.78 8.53 0.86 DP103-p1 14.66 2.09 13.05 1.69 13.92 1.92 7.36 1.02 8.62 1.14 DP103-p2 126.73 15.52 254.02 43.06 287.05 36.01 70.88 5.31 33.13 2.96 DP103-p3 12.68 2.14 9.55 1.34 9.80 1.69 5.30 0.74 5.48 0.86 DP104-p1 5.86 1.47 4.80 0.61 5.02 0.93 2.49 0.25 3.01 0.54 Inductively Coupled Plasma-Mass Spectrometry Paste Data (Neff 2008)

Sample Sm Eu Gd Tb Dy Ho Er Tm Yb Lu DP104-p2 12.92 2.74 10.47 1.30 11.09 1.55 4.79 0.66 5.67 0.89 DP104-p3 8.86 2.23 8.93 1.14 5.85 0.99 2.73 0.30 3.03 0.50 DP19-p1 23.38 3.99 22.91 3.81 22.82 4.09 8.53 1.18 11.27 1.38 DP19-p2 15.58 2.25 13.50 1.87 12.06 2.51 5.87 0.70 6.95 0.78 DP19-p3 16.15 3.01 17.12 2.38 16.44 3.33 9.02 1.41 9.06 1.33 DP20-p1 11.86 2.20 11.03 1.33 8.84 1.68 4.60 0.46 4.44 0.47 DP20-p2 15.02 3.11 13.28 1.89 11.82 1.90 5.66 0.82 5.81 0.83 DP20-p3 15.09 3.14 13.23 1.66 10.47 1.54 4.35 0.51 3.70 0.69 DP31-p1 18.58 3.13 17.25 2.37 13.55 2.13 7.58 0.82 5.42 0.80 DP31-p2 13.71 2.97 13.09 1.66 13.48 2.19 7.27 0.95 5.57 0.91 DP31-p3 20.16 3.96 17.01 2.09 14.13 2.46 6.50 0.85 6.73 1.13 510 DP61-p1 21.08 2.94 18.05 2.16 13.71 2.57 8.13 1.45 11.56 1.43 DP61-p2 23.88 3.76 22.21 2.77 21.47 4.42 12.89 2.01 15.85 1.52 DP61-p3 20.60 3.45 20.80 2.54 18.44 3.46 10.61 1.60 11.87 1.42 NB01-p1 10.55 1.94 9.50 1.50 11.03 1.83 5.70 0.63 5.26 0.41 NB01-p2 12.29 1.87 11.93 1.32 9.58 1.49 4.20 0.64 4.12 0.50 NB01-p3 12.43 2.76 9.55 1.38 9.37 1.55 5.52 0.86 5.21 0.75 NB02-p1 8.71 1.62 7.87 1.05 7.47 1.29 5.47 0.75 7.81 1.09 NB02-p2 9.46 2.55 9.16 1.03 8.35 1.44 3.98 0.65 4.92 0.63 NB02-p3 15.47 3.45 14.20 1.54 12.12 2.17 6.19 0.80 5.44 0.91 NB07-p1 7.26 1.54 7.32 0.89 5.83 1.23 3.45 0.51 5.38 0.51 NB07-p2 10.23 2.77 22.70 4.37 50.72 8.98 27.31 2.88 36.88 2.37 NB07-p3 11.76 2.98 11.99 1.43 11.01 1.73 4.69 0.76 6.34 0.58 NB13-p1 9.47 1.54 8.95 1.13 9.57 1.83 5.36 0.71 6.14 0.88 NB13-p2 10.67 1.83 9.19 1.01 7.95 1.38 5.71 0.71 6.68 0.85 NB13-p3 9.48 1.59 7.38 0.97 8.19 1.39 4.65 0.77 5.40 0.61 NB15-p1 5.83 0.94 5.03 0.68 4.90 0.80 2.56 0.39 3.26 0.41 NB15-p2 5.77 1.06 5.48 0.80 6.84 1.19 4.29 0.49 4.14 0.61 NB15-p3 6.95 1.15 4.88 0.71 6.08 1.29 4.46 0.55 5.25 0.54 NB21-p1 10.90 1.78 9.04 1.12 7.42 1.39 4.32 0.67 5.17 0.69 NB21-p2 10.07 1.86 9.05 0.98 7.09 1.02 4.21 0.57 5.31 0.58 Inductively Coupled Plasma-Mass Spectrometry Paste Data (Neff 2008)

Sample Sm Eu Gd Tb Dy Ho Er Tm Yb Lu NB21-p3 10.20 1.67 10.37 1.84 15.21 2.64 7.71 1.08 9.82 0.83 NB29-p1 15.47 2.41 10.86 1.39 8.69 1.39 5.07 0.58 4.80 0.62 NB29-p2 18.76 2.71 14.97 1.68 11.94 1.81 6.03 0.72 5.83 0.82 NB29-p3 8.66 1.59 7.81 0.88 6.72 1.16 3.61 0.37 4.30 0.36 NB33-p1 13.16 2.58 15.73 2.40 16.87 3.06 9.44 1.45 9.63 1.09 NB33-p2 11.60 1.99 10.01 1.45 8.52 1.56 5.37 0.60 5.88 0.69 NB33-p3 8.81 1.61 8.03 1.19 7.48 1.32 4.34 0.43 3.58 0.56 NB34-p1 10.45 1.60 10.03 1.07 8.25 1.49 4.69 0.54 4.72 0.77 NB34-p2 14.73 2.91 12.92 1.62 11.98 2.15 6.95 0.80 7.25 0.80 NB34-p3 17.30 2.94 13.04 1.47 8.90 1.45 5.50 0.61 4.84 0.59 NB39-p1 8.71 1.62 6.32 0.80 6.41 1.09 4.09 0.51 3.77 0.46 511 NB39-p2 10.26 1.95 9.16 1.31 9.32 1.86 5.42 0.89 6.25 0.78 NB39-p3 10.20 1.82 8.93 1.49 10.19 1.70 5.78 0.75 6.19 0.92 NC01-p1 24.96 4.60 19.21 2.76 18.24 3.00 9.37 1.24 11.13 1.16 NC01-p2 16.48 3.28 12.94 1.83 11.96 2.45 6.64 1.16 7.96 1.03 NC01-p3 11.36 1.84 9.21 1.45 8.91 1.51 4.58 0.60 5.06 0.68 NC06-p1 12.43 2.32 11.69 1.85 12.43 2.24 7.06 1.07 6.80 0.92 NC06-p2 16.70 3.47 12.79 1.66 11.04 2.16 6.45 0.92 7.69 1.05 NC06-p3 11.23 2.58 10.97 2.00 11.19 2.31 6.43 0.82 6.59 1.01 NC09-p1 7.98 2.22 7.58 0.85 8.08 1.57 5.15 0.82 5.66 0.57 NC09-p2 11.81 1.91 9.72 1.37 10.09 1.73 5.06 0.84 5.36 0.58 NC09-p3 19.82 5.25 17.66 1.76 17.24 2.10 6.21 0.79 7.58 1.26 NC14-p1 25.94 5.06 20.35 2.74 15.68 3.39 9.28 1.52 11.42 1.13 NC14-p2 10.72 2.44 9.47 1.27 8.92 1.43 4.09 0.71 3.48 0.56 NC14-p3 25.01 4.00 18.42 2.09 15.34 3.11 10.43 1.05 8.27 1.49 NC20-p1 12.17 2.14 8.30 1.60 12.66 2.69 7.46 1.05 9.23 0.47 NC20-p2 9.29 2.09 7.60 1.14 7.91 1.74 4.32 0.75 4.28 0.60 NC20-p3 8.97 1.69 7.67 1.13 7.80 1.48 5.65 0.76 5.19 0.81 NC23-p1 14.63 2.71 11.16 1.83 15.05 2.08 8.13 1.09 9.85 1.03 NC23-p2 13.58 2.91 11.54 1.67 11.72 1.94 5.70 0.91 4.71 0.72 NC23-p3 10.51 2.30 9.83 1.41 10.13 1.83 4.92 0.89 5.72 0.82 Inductively Coupled Plasma-Mass Spectrometry Paste Data (Neff 2008)

Sample Sm Eu Gd Tb Dy Ho Er Tm Yb Lu NC24-p1 9.24 1.63 8.36 1.10 7.05 1.44 4.01 0.36 4.11 0.36 NC24-p2 12.18 2.54 11.93 1.65 9.87 2.03 5.50 1.11 7.31 0.96 NC24-p3 5.24 1.15 5.18 0.60 5.12 0.88 2.46 0.28 2.78 0.40 NC27-p1 23.39 3.98 18.71 2.74 16.89 3.12 10.08 1.23 10.40 1.16 NC27-p2 10.02 2.38 9.01 1.19 8.06 1.37 4.72 0.69 2.76 0.48 NC27-p3 18.62 4.40 19.43 2.41 15.43 3.34 9.23 1.34 8.27 1.31 NC28-p1 22.16 3.44 20.14 2.71 21.29 3.93 12.35 1.73 13.02 1.47 NC28-p2 13.37 2.62 9.98 1.68 11.11 2.40 6.26 0.74 5.42 0.83 NC28-p3 15.60 3.14 11.93 1.96 14.14 2.60 8.43 1.15 8.22 1.09 NC30-p1 9.61 1.91 8.74 0.99 7.26 1.31 3.79 0.47 3.33 0.36 NC30-p2 8.08 2.21 8.24 1.14 6.63 1.33 3.84 0.49 3.78 0.51 512 NC30-p3 10.35 2.27 8.47 1.00 6.32 1.19 3.75 0.47 3.65 0.40 NP01-p1 10.14 2.08 10.36 1.38 11.44 1.81 5.12 0.70 5.41 0.52 NP01-p2 12.98 2.70 11.36 1.53 12.25 2.11 9.05 1.47 16.17 2.35 NP01-p3 8.99 1.95 8.65 0.96 7.67 1.11 3.32 0.51 3.20 0.41 NP02-p1 7.76 1.19 5.84 0.76 6.38 1.05 3.43 0.47 3.19 0.56 NP02-p2 7.29 1.42 8.27 0.92 6.89 1.30 4.61 0.68 5.25 0.77 NP02-p3 8.21 1.55 10.95 1.49 14.12 2.29 8.30 1.01 7.83 1.00 NP03-p1 11.61 2.35 9.70 1.17 8.77 1.49 4.20 0.60 4.83 0.75 NP03-p2 10.81 2.21 9.88 1.24 8.95 1.47 5.56 0.55 4.80 0.55 NP03-p3 9.59 1.80 9.57 1.19 6.35 1.37 3.17 0.42 2.99 0.42 NP04-p1 16.50 3.44 16.26 1.89 14.40 2.25 7.34 0.91 7.68 0.87 NP04-p2 8.75 1.92 7.12 0.74 6.47 1.00 3.40 0.36 3.80 0.42 NP04-p3 18.41 3.59 18.60 2.06 14.12 2.02 7.70 0.85 6.66 0.75 NP07-p1 4.06 0.77 4.28 0.58 5.22 0.82 3.64 0.36 3.93 0.42 NP07-p2 4.35 0.55 3.54 0.54 5.12 0.92 2.16 0.54 3.77 0.43 NP07-p3 6.34 1.00 5.55 0.62 4.76 0.97 3.31 0.47 4.33 0.54 NP11-p1 16.40 2.50 13.64 1.65 11.52 1.96 7.21 0.92 7.37 0.86 NP11-p2 20.27 3.45 17.52 2.47 15.09 2.91 8.45 1.08 8.97 1.09 NP11-p3 23.65 4.19 22.58 2.64 18.82 3.12 10.38 1.41 11.63 1.61 NP14-p1 6.87 1.43 6.73 0.95 6.65 1.56 6.61 1.04 10.79 1.69 Inductively Coupled Plasma-Mass Spectrometry Paste Data (Neff 2008)

Sample Sm Eu Gd Tb Dy Ho Er Tm Yb Lu NP14-p2 9.01 1.74 6.47 0.96 5.68 0.92 3.58 0.38 3.56 0.51 NP14-p3 9.28 1.75 8.89 1.47 12.13 2.41 9.99 1.66 15.15 2.11 NP16-p1 18.53 2.98 16.09 2.19 15.66 2.58 8.10 1.11 8.14 1.10 NP16-p2 12.69 2.43 10.39 1.46 8.38 1.56 4.98 0.60 4.42 0.68 NP16-p3 7.52 1.33 6.70 0.77 4.56 1.02 2.88 0.46 3.36 0.45 NP18-p1 14.19 2.79 12.67 2.12 14.56 3.04 7.50 1.08 6.26 0.79 NP18-p2 24.16 4.45 18.85 2.28 12.03 2.72 8.72 0.76 7.16 1.00 NP18-p3 12.14 2.56 11.97 1.25 6.80 2.04 3.73 0.29 4.77 1.00 NP21-p1 11.33 2.23 8.87 1.41 9.08 1.59 5.06 0.61 4.88 0.68 NP21-p2 15.76 3.45 14.20 1.82 11.70 1.93 6.38 0.74 5.82 0.95 NP21-p3 15.41 3.19 13.51 1.96 15.46 2.88 8.33 1.15 7.72 1.57 513 R103-p1 12.05 2.24 9.69 1.00 6.42 0.88 2.56 0.35 2.49 0.31 R103-p2 6.46 1.31 5.63 0.63 4.64 0.74 3.07 0.45 4.48 0.33 R103-p3 7.29 1.71 5.88 0.72 4.50 0.84 2.51 0.28 3.22 0.33 R109-p1 9.03 1.93 9.44 1.27 6.61 1.37 4.81 0.55 3.54 0.45 R109-p2 17.74 3.87 12.96 1.77 12.06 2.01 4.73 0.83 6.21 0.78 R109-p3 16.89 3.29 13.57 1.80 12.74 2.99 7.64 1.12 7.02 0.93 R30-p1 11.96 2.37 8.27 0.88 8.31 1.17 4.20 0.62 5.95 0.82 R30-p2 6.01 1.40 4.21 0.50 3.49 0.54 1.66 0.24 1.47 0.15 R30-p3 8.66 1.39 6.27 1.18 7.23 1.07 4.24 0.54 4.78 0.54 R32-p1 29.54 7.07 26.91 3.31 20.83 4.10 12.25 1.44 10.33 1.92 R32-p2 8.81 3.39 7.98 1.20 7.66 0.83 5.08 0.57 4.33 0.46 R32-p2 14.08 3.53 14.16 2.31 11.16 2.35 6.17 1.49 6.86 1.54 R33-p1 12.85 2.58 11.14 1.18 8.81 1.37 4.53 0.50 4.62 0.48 R33-p2 6.80 1.08 6.22 0.54 4.78 0.82 2.95 0.34 3.12 0.33 R33-p3 26.33 4.75 17.90 2.05 11.10 1.78 4.44 0.44 3.34 0.32 R43-p1 3.77 1.18 4.80 0.73 6.91 0.88 2.83 0.41 2.73 0.33 R43-p2 4.14 0.91 3.95 0.48 3.33 0.55 1.77 0.19 1.27 0.24 R43-p3 6.64 1.56 5.44 0.59 4.31 0.74 1.90 0.27 2.51 0.21 R45-p1 15.78 3.81 11.53 1.92 12.00 1.45 6.01 0.76 4.95 0.73 R45-p2 7.42 1.78 6.75 0.98 5.78 1.02 2.84 0.43 3.36 0.53 Inductively Coupled Plasma-Mass Spectrometry Paste Data (Neff 2008)

Sample Sm Eu Gd Tb Dy Ho Er Tm Yb Lu R45-p3 110.44 4.34 74.97 7.41 36.20 5.96 12.25 1.63 8.91 1.19 R51-p1 43.10 8.52 31.86 3.13 20.22 2.56 6.70 0.78 5.73 0.47 R51-p2 7.95 1.49 6.21 0.89 6.79 1.13 3.48 0.43 4.22 0.38 R51-p3 21.97 5.04 19.06 2.32 16.17 3.20 9.43 1.05 11.02 1.42 R54-p1 4.54 0.91 3.67 0.48 3.71 0.61 1.42 0.24 1.72 0.20 R54-p2 12.24 3.05 9.82 0.94 3.95 0.67 1.83 0.18 2.19 0.21 R54-p3 9.57 2.26 13.37 2.41 25.56 6.06 24.89 4.55 42.27 5.53 R55-p1 7.87 1.59 7.41 1.36 8.37 1.92 5.53 1.06 5.62 0.89 R55-p2 5.79 1.44 5.85 0.76 7.24 1.49 5.18 0.58 5.76 0.68 R55-p3 7.13 1.32 6.07 0.87 7.41 1.74 6.18 0.72 6.98 0.96 R60-p1 13.38 2.67 14.95 2.00 17.19 2.73 9.63 1.03 12.47 0.93 514 R60-p2 9.42 1.71 9.05 1.19 13.05 2.34 7.42 1.16 8.35 1.16 R60-p3 8.76 2.18 11.36 1.74 11.84 2.95 10.08 1.25 9.93 1.36 R72-p1 7.62 1.42 7.05 0.81 6.42 0.96 3.46 0.44 3.58 0.42 R72-p2 12.62 2.30 11.94 1.25 8.51 1.47 4.27 0.55 4.33 0.42 R72-p3 13.97 2.44 12.60 1.58 9.36 1.85 5.23 0.57 5.14 0.54 R73-p1 13.55 2.43 11.84 1.26 11.26 1.72 5.84 0.67 6.01 0.64 R73-p2 20.58 3.29 17.48 1.96 13.35 2.03 5.99 0.94 7.17 0.60 R73-p3 11.17 2.20 10.15 1.26 9.55 1.58 4.94 0.78 5.08 0.71 R74-p1 13.38 2.36 10.34 1.53 11.48 2.33 7.02 1.00 6.72 1.03 R74-p2 72.33 6.99 52.90 6.05 32.54 5.44 13.88 1.64 12.09 1.53 R74-p3 27.86 5.27 26.02 3.39 22.76 3.69 9.87 1.55 10.04 1.23 R78-p1 10.98 2.11 10.85 1.46 13.89 2.32 7.39 0.98 12.97 0.71 R78-p2 9.02 2.65 11.52 1.33 11.93 2.16 6.02 0.68 5.74 0.69 R78-p3 18.19 3.01 16.03 1.89 13.80 2.41 7.15 0.98 7.07 0.90 R79-p1 12.12 2.33 10.90 1.35 7.91 1.41 4.28 0.44 4.69 0.49 R79-p2 20.27 4.25 18.43 3.09 15.88 3.26 10.86 1.13 8.06 1.32 R79-p3 15.66 3.59 14.07 1.64 13.49 2.74 7.26 0.84 8.03 0.92 R88-p1 30.80 5.15 30.68 4.50 34.04 5.73 18.06 2.68 20.29 2.57 R88-p2 21.41 3.63 19.20 2.65 18.21 3.26 9.32 1.25 11.32 1.36 R88-p3 25.10 4.30 23.67 3.29 22.38 4.28 13.92 2.12 13.96 1.74 Inductively Coupled Plasma-Mass Spectrometry Paste Data (Neff 2008)

Sample Sm Eu Gd Tb Dy Ho Er Tm Yb Lu R89-p1 11.45 1.87 9.50 1.49 9.90 1.97 5.36 0.71 4.76 0.69 R89-p2 13.07 2.19 9.44 1.04 7.02 1.49 4.72 0.64 4.39 0.70 R89-p3 5.73 1.18 4.96 0.63 4.91 0.73 2.42 0.27 2.79 0.36 515 Inductively Coupled Plasma-Mass Spectrometry Paste Data (Neff 2008)

Sample Hf Ta Pb Th U C09-p1 13.16 5.23 97.96 133.23 11.17 C09-p2 7.32 3.63 63.57 66.20 8.44 C09-p3 8.73 4.67 71.54 418.54 10.40 C11-p1 4.47 2.26 33.15 176.51 10.90 C11-p2 6.84 3.11 42.52 28.06 6.45 C11-p3 5.51 5.03 25.18 19.92 10.98 C13-p1 5.22 3.82 56.85 7.64 4.30 C13-p2 6.00 5.78 39.65 20.93 16.08 C13-p3 6.43 7.01 50.73 81.47 6.74 C14-p1 7.57 6.93 50.83 182.40 7.19 C14-p2 8.61 3.54 39.70 173.44 6.03 516 C14-p3 11.65 4.18 39.46 266.94 8.68 C15-p1 6.70 2.85 36.49 28.57 7.30 C15-p2 8.84 2.05 31.65 59.19 8.68 C15-p3 12.43 9.22 45.28 20.50 19.69 DB01-p1 6.99 3.65 34.25 300.79 8.15 DB01-p2 19.23 8.82 38.03 48.66 9.48 DB01-p3 5.42 3.49 25.37 100.12 9.26 DB107-p1 10.33 3.69 46.37 292.32 6.25 DB107-p2 20.33 5.61 57.45 36.39 8.21 DB107-p3 7.82 3.23 38.11 37.09 9.82 DB17-p1 15.09 3.68 33.71 31.98 10.19 DB17-p2 5.85 2.66 29.87 281.09 9.85 DB17-p3 6.73 4.32 24.96 32.59 10.48 DB18-p1 13.82 4.51 7.35 503.05 9.42 DB18-p2 11.76 5.77 48.00 54.47 8.69 DB18-p3 11.63 5.53 30.36 212.04 14.16 DB19-p1 6.73 3.50 37.01 31.61 5.95 DB19-p2 8.86 5.77 42.47 33.89 5.10 DB19-p3 7.52 2.92 29.02 32.70 8.41 DB54-p1 6.67 4.16 53.53 70.36 11.86 Inductively Coupled Plasma-Mass Spectrometry Paste Data (Neff 2008)

Sample Hf Ta Pb Th U DB54-p2 8.30 4.11 43.72 61.74 13.50 DB54-p3 6.88 3.50 34.92 58.25 9.93 DB55-p1 13.42 3.24 44.25 77.96 9.66 DB55-p2 4.64 4.12 31.77 117.17 11.00 DB55-p3 3.08 2.51 24.34 34.08 9.28 DB59-p1 8.94 3.40 37.05 32.35 15.03 DB59-p2 12.02 4.57 39.33 45.28 12.29 DB59-p3 9.19 4.40 27.28 46.30 16.34 DB60-p1 14.74 4.91 44.61 88.89 7.49 DB60-p2 10.61 4.36 34.52 193.01 6.37 DB60-p3 11.72 3.76 28.41 119.23 9.16 517 DB61-p1 8.54 3.59 49.19 53.35 7.89 DB61-p2 8.34 4.49 52.47 104.04 7.99 DB61-p3 9.97 3.85 34.19 43.88 9.19 DC01-p1 5.15 2.73 27.88 1618.88 4.03 DC01-p2 4.79 2.18 28.11 39.93 4.64 DC01-p3 224.55 2.03 19.85 9.44 34.52 DC02-p1 9.70 3.83 6.17 167.53 4.97 DC02-p2 4.97 3.03 26.83 20.87 5.15 DC02-p3 6.57 3.02 25.55 25.39 5.82 DC03-p1 5.23 2.78 38.84 67.02 4.47 DC03-p2 13.20 4.27 42.42 44.75 5.70 DC03-p3 7.12 2.99 25.77 9.32 5.63 DC26-p1 5.61 2.86 6.86 683.15 2.93 DC26-p1A 7.18 2.27 33.72 250.82 3.24 DC26-p2 11.29 2.52 31.54 109.96 3.32 DC26-p3 5.03 2.29 21.10 68.04 3.61 DC43-p1 4.00 3.62 5.51 29.60 2.76 DC43-p2 3.99 2.70 24.19 23.31 4.92 DC43-p3 109.55 3.39 26.26 34.60 7.96 DC44-p1 4.75 5.15 10.76 371.85 5.56 Inductively Coupled Plasma-Mass Spectrometry Paste Data (Neff 2008)

Sample Hf Ta Pb Th U DC44-p1A 3.42 4.79 44.46 193.04 3.42 DC44-p2 5.98 3.80 27.48 115.45 4.76 DC44-p3 4.73 2.90 35.28 915.17 4.77 DC45-p1 2.76 1.83 6.59 502.33 2.64 DC45-p2 4.51 1.56 26.89 111.36 4.41 DC45-p3 4.99 2.17 27.80 39.28 28.82 DC48-p1 4.48 2.88 6.60 66.29 4.43 DC48-p2 5.09 2.34 27.41 19.35 5.61 DC48-p3 3.73 2.19 21.52 21.26 4.60 DC49-p1 5.08 2.97 43.21 31.19 6.19 DC49-p2 4.07 2.16 29.30 1311.42 4.62 518 DC49-p3 5.65 7.66 24.47 9.27 8.17 DC51-p1 6.61 2.23 54.26 960.20 3.93 DC51-p2 7.05 3.15 56.05 32.44 5.42 DC51-p3 6.52 3.29 38.05 52.14 5.12 DP01-p1 6.10 3.57 39.72 49.53 4.26 DP01-p2 10.92 4.69 41.53 43.35 4.62 DP01-p3 7.30 3.43 28.53 55.07 5.02 DP02-p1 5.51 3.22 47.75 60.56 4.51 DP02-p2 4.40 3.23 49.12 4276.73 4.56 DP02-p3 5.85 2.17 18.93 24.30 3.61 DP04-p1 6.93 2.86 64.38 757.76 4.09 DP04-p2 7.55 4.54 40.95 35.19 6.78 DP04-p3 18.56 3.22 30.49 34.97 4.77 DP102-p1 7.44 4.99 8.93 44.18 13.01 DP102-p2 8.06 3.68 39.01 27.71 12.10 DP102-p3 7.29 4.79 36.15 30.33 19.85 DP103-p1 12.39 4.41 8.23 141.82 12.79 DP103-p2 9.88 4.47 41.31 78.32 16.56 DP103-p3 8.20 4.28 25.39 29.41 13.84 DP104-p1 2.56 1.54 56.15 9.55 2.61 Inductively Coupled Plasma-Mass Spectrometry Paste Data (Neff 2008)

Sample Hf Ta Pb Th U DP104-p2 4.06 3.50 23.25 102.87 3.78 DP104-p3 2.87 1.42 17.19 39.67 3.39 DP19-p1 14.11 3.85 39.50 50.12 10.65 DP19-p2 7.10 4.41 36.89 269.05 8.68 DP19-p3 9.74 3.60 34.57 56.64 10.49 DP20-p1 3.61 2.15 38.26 139.75 4.53 DP20-p2 6.20 2.75 33.06 84.37 3.32 DP20-p3 3.95 1.95 24.99 2405.72 4.78 DP31-p1 7.09 3.91 46.76 47.88 3.58 DP31-p2 5.41 3.48 32.40 33.79 3.66 DP31-p3 10.04 4.30 19.36 46.27 6.01 519 DP61-p1 12.74 4.95 9.63 51.23 6.97 DP61-p2 10.22 4.65 47.73 43.26 6.17 DP61-p3 19.26 4.73 30.31 125.17 10.11 NB01-p1 3.09 2.04 28.44 22.57 3.55 NB01-p2 3.22 1.98 25.55 1489.58 3.60 NB01-p3 3.22 1.99 38.40 22.45 5.23 NB02-p1 55.04 3.19 42.16 42.75 4.90 NB02-p2 9.10 3.15 36.67 97.88 3.21 NB02-p3 11.17 4.29 45.37 46.83 3.57 NB07-p1 6.39 3.73 27.78 16.49 2.47 NB07-p2 10.62 2.37 31.34 18.69 9.76 NB07-p3 5.33 3.41 23.46 35.62 5.58 NB13-p1 9.64 2.83 30.89 32.92 2.58 NB13-p2 6.28 2.68 35.44 30.60 3.41 NB13-p3 5.18 2.63 27.35 43.14 4.76 NB15-p1 5.43 2.07 29.38 15.98 2.70 NB15-p2 5.02 3.38 31.30 11.56 3.45 NB15-p3 5.58 2.91 26.43 41.27 5.23 NB21-p1 5.89 2.32 31.32 46.38 2.23 NB21-p2 5.53 2.75 31.56 23.40 2.56 Inductively Coupled Plasma-Mass Spectrometry Paste Data (Neff 2008)

Sample Hf Ta Pb Th U NB21-p3 4.62 2.28 24.97 49.90 3.96 NB29-p1 6.64 2.45 30.14 14.09 3.46 NB29-p2 9.75 1.76 35.60 922.12 4.89 NB29-p3 3.46 2.89 25.72 57.42 5.58 NB33-p1 36.32 3.50 20.89 21.33 5.89 NB33-p2 5.03 2.09 25.38 62.17 3.90 NB33-p3 2.59 2.31 19.30 14.17 4.91 NB34-p1 5.38 2.32 56.97 9.81 4.56 NB34-p2 7.78 3.80 58.42 172.63 7.70 NB34-p3 5.51 3.28 29.60 22.42 10.32 NB39-p1 5.64 1.91 23.61 17.99 3.06 520 NB39-p2 6.43 2.97 26.27 15.32 4.05 NB39-p3 7.38 2.70 17.08 37.31 6.75 NC01-p1 7.34 3.64 70.96 373.40 8.11 NC01-p2 5.47 3.38 60.01 31.42 7.77 NC01-p3 5.95 1.96 35.33 610.56 5.29 NC06-p1 5.43 2.65 28.24 29.28 6.67 NC06-p2 19.26 3.29 25.53 19.61 8.05 NC06-p3 4.22 2.71 59.09 29.55 7.36 NC09-p1 6.60 3.02 44.01 13.68 5.10 NC09-p2 3.23 2.62 27.95 15.03 8.03 NC09-p3 7.01 6.49 0.99 60.87 10.68 NC14-p1 8.98 6.11 50.07 14.65 13.81 NC14-p2 3.63 2.49 31.63 15.31 6.71 NC14-p3 10.26 3.95 28.06 19.68 11.59 NC20-p1 7.30 7.38 43.53 17.74 3.36 NC20-p2 3.23 3.81 29.50 63.69 2.08 NC20-p3 3.82 2.38 53.01 86.42 2.43 NC23-p1 18.20 5.05 36.09 30.93 8.47 NC23-p2 5.17 2.11 26.11 16.88 6.37 NC23-p3 3.90 3.45 37.49 24.00 5.11 Inductively Coupled Plasma-Mass Spectrometry Paste Data (Neff 2008)

Sample Hf Ta Pb Th U NC24-p1 3.69 2.75 29.35 116.33 6.81 NC24-p2 6.08 2.15 36.35 19.94 6.64 NC24-p3 4.00 1.41 29.75 431.39 4.62 NC27-p1 13.67 6.55 52.53 34.69 7.00 NC27-p2 2.87 2.13 26.03 168.15 6.12 NC27-p3 8.02 3.14 30.41 38.05 8.32 NC28-p1 7.48 5.21 43.11 235.53 8.44 NC28-p2 5.23 2.88 39.79 74.79 7.76 NC28-p3 6.81 4.08 28.80 81.49 7.86 NC30-p1 4.57 2.29 34.63 28.80 4.89 NC30-p2 3.95 7.49 24.04 20.45 4.97 521 NC30-p3 3.27 2.08 26.62 8.22 5.80 NP01-p1 3.89 2.55 48.61 75.95 1.77 NP01-p2 162.64 1.93 27.46 14.06 5.59 NP01-p3 2.94 2.16 13.88 18.30 3.26 NP02-p1 3.52 1.76 53.72 113.14 3.63 NP02-p2 9.79 2.37 29.83 12.68 4.35 NP02-p3 6.14 2.16 15.48 16.72 7.47 NP03-p1 4.10 1.95 34.42 107.76 3.96 NP03-p2 4.06 2.68 40.83 68.87 4.47 NP03-p3 2.50 1.76 93.96 56.90 5.43 NP04-p1 17.34 2.48 23.79 10.75 3.12 NP04-p2 2.35 2.09 18.96 107.24 2.10 NP04-p3 7.83 2.71 52.52 31.86 3.56 NP07-p1 4.25 2.97 69.30 83.70 2.83 NP07-p2 6.24 4.22 43.48 34.36 4.29 NP07-p3 5.66 2.03 26.11 18.52 4.81 NP11-p1 7.53 5.93 45.68 24.08 3.63 NP11-p2 10.24 4.05 47.61 48.68 4.46 NP11-p3 16.65 4.78 59.04 35.12 5.69 NP14-p1 143.50 1.29 26.14 91.63 7.10 Inductively Coupled Plasma-Mass Spectrometry Paste Data (Neff 2008)

Sample Hf Ta Pb Th U NP14-p2 4.27 1.90 24.62 482.91 2.25 NP14-p3 703.71 1.94 22.23 59.58 44.53 NP16-p1 7.76 3.42 59.07 15.16 6.63 NP16-p2 5.28 2.46 46.07 16.20 6.64 NP16-p3 5.07 2.57 44.51 19.39 7.78 NP18-p1 4.54 2.22 60.19 710.45 5.07 NP18-p2 10.06 4.23 59.12 69.53 7.70 NP18-p3 4.68 1.76 7.12 99.44 5.74 NP21-p1 5.58 2.09 23.20 51.86 3.49 NP21-p2 5.25 3.49 34.85 32.66 5.01 NP21-p3 28.24 3.32 23.61 10.29 7.75 522 R103-p1 2.19 1.59 21.23 29.59 2.44 R103-p2 1.96 1.23 76.95 111.66 2.61 R103-p3 2.54 1.40 22.64 194.87 4.24 R109-p1 3.15 1.71 72.88 1672.07 2.29 R109-p2 5.15 2.64 29.44 46.86 5.04 R109-p3 7.77 3.10 68.66 505.03 5.82 R30-p1 8.65 2.04 33.27 40.13 4.27 R30-p2 2.34 1.04 133.99 22.10 2.90 R30-p3 4.91 5.95 21.03 14.84 5.75 R32-p1 7.77 5.34 52.22 96.49 6.82 R32-p2 5.26 2.39 54.60 11045.92 5.91 R32-p2 6.68 3.26 5.27 38.32 5.51 R33-p1 3.14 1.03 26.76 13.05 2.45 R33-p2 3.54 1.19 36.36 63.09 2.23 R33-p3 2.97 1.95 29.57 29.36 3.39 R43-p1 2.62 0.78 15.28 12.64 1.75 R43-p2 2.66 0.66 18.11 21.55 1.26 R43-p3 2.96 1.09 28.04 14.26 2.36 R45-p1 6.26 3.30 65.72 163.64 4.69 R45-p2 3.29 1.39 29.22 100.10 3.42 Inductively Coupled Plasma-Mass Spectrometry Paste Data (Neff 2008)

Sample Hf Ta Pb Th U R45-p3 5.26 2.66 38.54 287.82 14.01 R51-p1 4.74 2.35 37.41 67.29 3.91 R51-p2 3.79 1.02 17.81 62.56 1.95 R51-p3 10.38 2.03 39.30 226.37 3.65 R54-p1 3.93 0.75 16.39 37.40 1.16 R54-p2 3.11 0.87 16.72 110.52 1.72 R54-p3 147.67 1.50 21.04 36.76 25.05 R55-p1 8.37 2.64 57.66 25.42 4.20 R55-p2 8.59 2.79 11.55 22.71 4.35 R55-p3 10.39 2.92 16.12 16.47 6.58 R60-p1 3.13 2.77 21.81 16.66 2.59 523 R60-p2 4.86 1.55 16.90 23.14 3.49 R60-p3 2.73 2.12 20.84 9.68 3.46 R72-p1 2.95 1.68 20.19 35.62 2.23 R72-p2 5.05 2.41 29.85 15.51 3.42 R72-p3 4.56 3.26 16.01 27.53 5.46 R73-p1 17.95 2.36 24.24 109.77 3.29 R73-p2 6.36 2.74 47.13 21.20 3.93 R73-p3 4.24 6.22 20.32 33.64 4.50 R74-p1 9.18 2.68 30.77 33.24 5.43 R74-p2 13.97 3.54 48.81 195.30 9.08 R74-p3 15.17 3.60 37.86 19.15 10.74 R78-p1 2.79 1.86 28.25 19.47 3.39 R78-p2 2.47 1.53 22.51 33.30 2.54 R78-p3 4.73 11.36 92.32 36.96 4.36 R79-p1 4.76 4.13 34.85 439.55 5.00 R79-p2 45.01 3.99 60.33 424.10 9.60 R79-p3 8.96 3.01 21.80 10.53 6.11 R88-p1 17.05 5.88 67.61 21.40 12.07 R88-p2 9.17 3.78 40.76 183.22 8.72 R88-p3 12.50 4.48 51.71 34.81 13.31 Inductively Coupled Plasma-Mass Spectrometry Paste Data (Neff 2008)

Sample Hf Ta Pb Th U R89-p1 3.90 1.37 34.15 526.78 3.52 R89-p2 20.05 3.97 22.51 14.82 5.15 R89-p3 2.71 1.92 19.39 15.35 3.23 524 Inductively Coupled Plasma-Mass Spectrometry Temper Data (Neff 2008)

Sample Temper group Na Mg Al Si K Ca Sc Ti C13-T1 Clay aplastic 4730.17 48.92 86255.02 336383.11 83904.70 789.18 15.91 160.69 DB107-T1 Temper-3 0.00 7197.22 122043.21 325203.08 20847.90 2328.87 34.57 4026.69 DB107-T2 Temper-3 3346.60 9568.34 95171.48 322143.99 40614.45 2184.20 27.07 5076.03 DB19-T1 Temper-5 546.98 8587.69 46370.65 216438.85 17011.21 201159.22 32.95 1667.60 DB19-T2 Temper-3 5286.67 8464.44 162461.26 269440.06 22304.64 1737.78 39.97 4431.99 DB19-T3 Temper-3 3567.32 7964.64 132418.41 311890.26 24291.86 2304.83 33.71 4763.78 DB59-T1 Temper-1 4343.49 880.76 48461.26 414143.81 3054.65 1100.77 17.83 1288.85 DB59-T2 Temper-3 4643.46 9542.96 114426.88 322113.53 22250.49 2410.27 26.86 6696.03 DB60-T1 Temper-3 6282.16 6348.37 121187.29 319125.86 23049.18 1887.64 29.67 5518.32 DB60-T2 Temper-3 3774.78 10872.35 99392.43 328497.14 23797.49 2394.90 24.03 8818.69 DB60-T3 Temper-3 4283.94 12921.40 109026.52 300160.80 26521.99 3045.66 44.57 12325.31 525 DB61-T1 Temper-2 2820.41 232.06 22771.18 440456.96 1146.84 1417.98 11.69 865.10 DC01-T1 Temper-1 4851.11 695.76 38162.59 407304.94 6496.19 10327.38 5.35 6969.03 DC01-T2 Temper-1 3013.83 22.21 1380.85 462415.73 47.35 1012.85 14.35 61.32 DC01-T3 Temper-1 2366.16 248.92 18920.50 439628.79 1257.86 3038.41 24.13 895.63 DC02-T1 Temper-1 1857.07 0.00 0.00 464771.66 0.00 1067.96 23.42 3.42 DC02-T2 Temper-1 827.85 0.00 376.92 462277.57 0.00 1172.07 26.88 118.18 DC03-T1 Temper-1 2356.80 70.35 7036.38 457003.63 609.41 1251.33 16.38 186.75 DC26-T1 Temper-2 25941.17 203.61 55698.68 395521.30 6653.03 1359.55 20.53 31.18 DC26-T2 Temper-2 1800.57 23.02 2661.94 461600.62 417.34 1089.99 35.66 36.31 DC26-T3 Temper-1 3182.64 917.76 54906.97 402655.55 4659.38 2887.29 38.74 735.68 DC43-T1 Temper-2 1358.13 51.28 4362.25 460196.61 108.31 1444.73 29.32 604.58 DC43-T2 Temper-2 1167.77 11.15 1308.97 464248.05 0.00 912.71 26.25 136.85 DC43-T3 Temper-1 3.89 155.60 465570.46 0.00 1286.08 28.97 57.76 DC44-T1 Temper-2 8116.51 203.51 61026.53 400532.93 3630.04 2013.07 17.26 1144.33 DC44-T2 Temper-1 1049.43 142.64 24457.66 439040.25 1661.45 2609.18 14.29 1629.47 DC44-T3 Temper-4 30818.54 22.86 93633.53 312953.18 80223.31 768.77 12.99 62.41 DC44-T4 Temper-2 3417.27 138.32 25693.86 431785.80 4247.91 5428.26 20.83 3353.98 DC45-T1 Temper-4 4067.10 19.18 111044.06 307656.59 100564.30 1720.24 30.52 489.82 DC45-T2 Temper-2 1296.05 175.24 18054.89 444665.38 4448.62 1218.21 39.57 620.99 DC45-T3 Temper-1 2517.91 275.69 43517.58 418161.44 5164.17 1384.00 68.13 325.82 Inductively Coupled Plasma-Mass Spectrometry Temper Data (Neff 2008)

Sample Temper group Na Mg Al Si K Ca Sc Ti DC48-T1 Temper-2 775.79 128.40 7672.17 456903.97 461.27 1569.10 5.05 237.47 DC48-T2 Temper-1 1237.14 0.00 129.56 463869.39 0.00 975.24 12.23 29.23 DC48-T3 Temper-1 3924.20 769.25 31289.46 426888.35 3608.51 2278.33 13.60 969.04 DC48-T3A Temper-1 0.00 0.00 464961.15 0.00 1128.43 19.10 19.58 DC49-T1 Temper-1 51.29 58.44 5575.68 458580.18 223.92 1274.90 14.09 181.77 DC49-T2 Temper-1 2528.86 54.07 6405.61 454590.04 1204.58 1511.59 21.29 214.76 DC51-T1 Temper-3 16262.30 5051.59 99231.48 309199.77 24272.13 10959.58 45.83 6006.42 DC51-T2A Temper unassigned 89561.78 218.97 145918.75 276213.77 2193.08 2260.19 3.77 485.62 DP01-T1 Temper-3 3444.81 12326.46 120979.91 273683.89 25112.53 3533.91 26.97 30383.33 DP02-T1 Temper-1 915.91 2.19 2475.20 460716.27 0.00 1079.38 20.63 253.70 DP02-T2 Temper-1 740.89 410.18 42493.65 419026.24 5820.99 1641.24 37.93 1010.39 526 DP02-T3 Temper-3 1993.67 1443.52 80886.39 369109.36 19711.56 1420.82 28.86 2164.87 DP04-T1 Temper-3 3098.72 111762.72 263402.65 18923.41 911.65 37.60 3748.68 DP102-T1 Temper-4 9600.85 873.82 87864.91 343004.04 55371.05 2119.23 24.20 986.50 DP102-T2 Temper-3 2861.34 7011.05 140871.72 294736.37 24451.29 4174.99 36.07 4888.33 DP102-T3 Temper-3 2242.55 5259.94 180254.56 256598.58 27031.51 9517.62 47.84 7501.65 DP103-T1 Temper-1 18.23 593.66 457645.70 0.00 1523.92 20.72 466.46 DP104-T1 Temper-2 7.90 191.60 466105.84 0.00 967.66 9.12 61.20 DP104-T2 Temper-1 130.50 7847.13 458300.96 0.00 1170.68 19.22 100.08 DP19-T1 Temper-3 5457.38 7961.68 113242.11 321457.30 24092.02 1761.53 9.48 4324.50 DP19-T2 Temper-3 5608.17 9762.33 106911.31 327550.56 24448.12 1735.33 11.32 4088.84 DP20-T1 Temper unassigned 55565.80 60.22 71824.48 345276.38 38386.41 1080.15 18.74 159.68 DP20-T2 Temper unassigned 89250.55 15.49 86465.91 333091.77 596.35 643.86 19.77 43.58 DP20-T3 Temper-4 4350.66 4.81 71034.08 345057.89 87325.27 678.37 14.86 81.04 DP31-T1 Temper unassigned 792.96 662.92 51786.71 169934.15 8233.70 1510.07 43.10 2379.70 DP31-T2 Temper unassigned 2832.62 404.30 65699.62 137529.82 4877.59 1202.34 53.27 524.49 DP31-T3 Temper-2 0.00 7.21 649.43 465361.06 142.14 1030.03 3.79 132.46 DP61-T1 Temper-3 4050.90 19283.46 116980.13 234906.87 25344.05 3551.30 29.91 6384.33 NB01-T1 Temper-2 0.00 790.34 64451.15 401340.45 5850.34 664.68 19.14 2579.78 NB02-T1 Temper-3 0.00 3399.33 133688.80 289266.75 46566.96 0.00 34.72 7456.70 NB07-T1 Temper-3 1050.16 7455.93 72419.33 360676.36 14794.02 1857.39 13.64 3469.10 Inductively Coupled Plasma-Mass Spectrometry Temper Data (Neff 2008)

Sample Temper group Na Mg Al Si K Ca Sc Ti NB07-T2 Temper-4 15420.32 0.00 64738.61 369325.79 49740.33 1097.62 10.69 98.95 NB07-T3 Temper-2 2615.96 136.55 46667.37 415786.40 10739.42 1386.87 13.45 312.68 NB13-T1 Temper-3 1366.36 9155.35 142094.80 283470.52 26769.32 3168.66 21.30 8741.66 NB13-T2 Temper-3 0.00 6498.87 134346.21 309416.50 27720.68 2169.24 32.48 8510.49 NB13-T3 Temper-3 3486.51 3394.68 127473.96 293476.94 42491.41 927.08 30.72 7051.79 NB15-T1 Temper-3 0.00 5580.36 153496.74 303132.43 18102.78 235.04 68.22 3625.72 NB15-T2 Temper-5 1504.03 9334.70 36074.09 137042.63 15884.54 411700.91 12.68 3012.11 NB15-T3 Temper-3 799.30 4294.45 105346.42 337316.37 22674.73 3084.86 21.21 5551.99 NB21-T1 Temper-1 0.00 463.39 29944.09 428312.87 4416.32 2832.31 20.61 1267.95 NB21-T2 Temper-3 2298.07 5933.63 109170.11 328781.23 18159.18 2059.85 32.88 4055.54 NB21-T3 Temper-3 4943.79 4106.16 102245.35 345260.66 12975.87 2708.41 29.62 2400.48 527 NB29-T1 Temper-3 2983.38 3799.91 79651.55 370114.44 11946.72 2717.08 21.47 2364.54 NB29-T2 Temper-3 4811.94 6652.70 144634.18 292790.50 26968.82 3102.26 26.85 4648.59 NB39-T1 Temper-1 0.00 879.00 61684.46 399167.84 7360.40 1540.97 12.18 1071.68 NB39-T2 Temper-1 524.41 894.35 20906.40 438614.94 4566.59 1586.04 18.19 536.80 NB39-T3 Temper-5 319.52 453.22 1193.58 8272.35 0.00 608211.43 1.18 75516.34 NC01-T1 Temper-1 2550.92 802.17 27346.69 430093.33 3888.17 3691.29 0.00 758.63 NC01-T2 Temper-3 8501.93 4748.66 108522.21 310391.86 18817.37 4586.31 20.13 5751.19 NC06-T1 Temper-3 488.60 1879.80 48998.10 360947.01 9935.30 2706.93 8.46 1320.65 NC06-T2 Temper unassigned 74814.92 407.89 99143.52 323707.13 3506.16 1231.65 0.00 433.96 NC06-T3 Temper-1 933.99 84.64 4666.36 457530.53 544.84 2048.64 5.82 758.77 NC09-T1 Temper-1 4134.36 798.03 4645.89 449149.57 1259.13 3264.54 0.00 423.06 NC09-T2 Temper-4 3247.57 32.25 76065.90 345071.15 88000.93 1678.25 3.72 227.36 NC09-T3 Temper-3 2300.01 2627.04 108876.77 322799.14 27693.93 4788.43 7.87 3292.49 NC14-T1 Temper-1 3415.15 154.36 7909.15 445070.94 2801.30 1334.22 47.94 513.59 NC20-T1 Temper-1 115.08 274.35 17908.34 443276.04 1860.77 5015.40 27.12 1118.29 NC23-T1 Temper-2 407.76 183.69 19272.38 445877.03 1732.20 1743.83 22.68 280.57 NC24-T1 Temper-2 645.74 34774.82 428858.28 2402.50 1694.46 47.84 2220.72 NC24-T2 Temper-4 8096.75 3033.56 57786.33 323512.91 31152.91 1161.93 29.66 164.88 NC24-T3 Temper-1 466188.76 12.34 903.17 39.27 NC27-T1 Temper-1 191.97 134.78 14206.99 450217.16 1802.87 1761.15 19.53 512.12 Inductively Coupled Plasma-Mass Spectrometry Temper Data (Neff 2008)

Sample Temper group Na Mg Al Si K Ca Sc Ti NC27-T2 Temper unassigned 61049.66 926.09 94917.62 326937.13 8477.90 8096.88 13.21 3021.28 NC28-T1 Temper-3 3495.49 5040.37 116126.94 286941.92 41911.89 14443.26 27.18 13129.53 NC28-T2 Temper-1 3435.01 569.57 40650.01 410505.83 5023.58 12099.14 14.48 4800.73 NC30-T1 Temper-3 10760.89 7835.03 138342.22 261562.79 12489.10 1784.56 26.30 1930.27 NC30-T2 Temper-2 2421.63 1050.13 46140.59 411663.21 3913.84 3385.60 26.46 3627.24 NC30-T3 Temper-1 126.56 7916.89 457350.99 706.26 597.13 30.49 371.15 NP01-T1 Temper-1 49.04 30306.58 437685.33 313.84 1772.68 18.13 72.34 NP01-T2 Temper-1 47.11 1891.35 462209.37 2.39 2441.49 22.87 724.56 NP01-T3 Temper-1 1986.87 398.20 20533.02 439090.08 1472.79 5375.41 28.88 743.66 NP02-T1 Temper-1 1618.11 824.86 3206.22 452752.23 7.07 12126.60 26.91 68.20 NP02-T2 Temper-3 1531.57 2854.43 62098.81 385609.69 14346.51 1992.67 38.42 1467.15 528 NP02-T3 Temper-3 157.15 4676.67 73659.46 363660.89 24842.38 1961.94 37.14 1991.56 NP03-T1 Temper-3 1566.05 3947.83 137425.03 280835.22 41396.27 1449.36 32.98 8119.03 NP03-T2 Temper-1 88.59 6369.66 453104.98 4100.67 2204.35 19.55 210.11 NP03-T3 Temper-3 5257.22 3050.06 127401.19 318065.51 13034.00 2524.70 28.41 3207.55 NP03-T4 Temper-3 2030.16 170.96 113835.56 291712.11 121129.44 1324.46 14.15 358.25 NP04-T1 Temper-3 2599.19 3805.17 209086.66 243139.12 33017.52 1812.63 32.63 2797.37 NP04-T2 Temper-4 22677.28 721.87 79111.47 344353.20 26694.71 14359.03 19.81 3433.02 NP04-T3 Temper-3 13133.34 214.30 97920.91 318792.77 79700.40 1659.49 13.79 633.47 NP07-T1 Temper-1 14.57 2284.23 44928.20 409993.26 7247.78 1944.53 28.02 1205.65 NP11-T1 Temper-3 9945.27 4483.87 126256.41 257104.51 40296.08 24066.52 28.36 11668.06 NP14-T1 Temper-1 2435.32 1596.48 49562.07 407453.91 5221.75 2467.43 13.38 998.44 NP14-T2 Temper-4 10450.59 30.29 69037.92 356286.05 55496.47 1083.19 9.80 527.22 NP14-T3 Temper-4 3559.89 379.05 77631.52 368478.41 25620.58 1246.95 16.45 5477.80 NP14-T4 Temper-3 7508.87 4448.52 130904.55 286503.20 14528.26 9074.21 37.69 14823.88 NP16-T1 Temper-3 0.00 3984.93 127459.11 277558.91 45553.63 4214.10 16.33 9416.80 NP16-T2 Temper-3 4141.60 6959.66 96176.55 340197.67 22381.30 2401.07 24.51 5491.41 NP18-T1 Temper-2 0.00 173.69 26971.78 435887.87 1860.90 1500.68 0.30 4967.36 NP18-T2 Temper-1 0.00 373.68 50633.92 414380.65 3867.55 1759.69 0.00 1792.89 NP21-T2 Temper-1 0.00 49.53 7129.96 455417.62 4881.77 1537.66 7.14 526.86 NP21-T3 Temper-2 0.00 260.28 42604.02 423501.66 2733.25 2735.40 7.81 1035.98 Inductively Coupled Plasma-Mass Spectrometry Temper Data (Neff 2008)

Sample Temper group Na Mg Al Si K Ca Sc Ti NP33-T1 Temper-3 5532.46 7454.04 124347.67 310697.67 20866.50 2162.71 24.43 2813.68 NP33-T2 Temper-3 6130.51 3439.09 168234.72 285582.27 16199.00 1466.51 16.31 3087.27 NP33-T4 Temper-3 6283.11 4210.25 164819.71 249818.16 19485.38 63089.22 12.81 1672.85 NP34-T1 Temper-1 17484.25 499.34 53452.29 401331.68 5173.30 3386.95 366.21 NP34-T2 Temper-3 80759.97 2432.07 180005.07 223466.05 13036.15 1856.16 12228.36 NP34-T3 Temper-3 4186.07 3441.57 84250.17 362598.12 14708.33 2056.91 13.54 1338.52 R103-T1 Clay aplastic 1046.70 7232.59 111665.28 315586.96 10821.44 6713.43 43.43 5929.91 R103-T2 Clay aplastic 466625.18 0.00 488.29 28.69 R32-T1 Clay aplastic 0.00 310.31 16244.98 448170.64 1536.17 1952.59 0.00 601.03 R45-T1 Clay aplastic 952.32 636.25 41005.63 422293.36 3936.71 1585.31 19.02 582.55 R51-T1 Clay aplastic 6712.59 225527.91 219170.12 14304.23 896.54 93.50 5120.82 529 R72-T1 Clay aplastic 115.95 4960.58 461089.40 32.08 651.19 29.51 26.80 R73-T1 Clay aplastic 1945.46 1762.53 74936.59 278634.44 2200.82 2170.77 37.62 55204.54 R79-T1 Clay aplastic 0.00 405.11 20517.25 443088.44 1507.38 2039.86 5.40 1069.11 R79-T1 Clay aplastic 1858.99 188.88 53617.75 412079.23 1294.20 2394.67 0.00 1240.79 R88-T1 Clay aplastic 1939.32 907.26 41874.52 420256.61 4145.84 1521.04 21.11 498.21 R89-T1 Clay aplastic 61661.57 5.57 88663.21 341528.28 10669.60 587.05 59.14 0.00 Inductively Coupled Plasma-Mass Spectrometry Temper Data (Neff 2008)

Sample V Cr Mn Fe Ni Co Cu Zn As Rb C13-T1 3.12 1.27 2.49 472.24 0.00 0.18 1.56 0.80 0.88 611.00 DB107-T1 203.45 132.17 69.36 16394.74 34.35 15.46 23.17 137.90 4.53 104.71 DB107-T2 261.17 135.19 117.51 31492.61 396.39 15.23 70.08 189.23 4.01 136.50 DB19-T1 43.41 104.46 25959.08 23533.15 19.15 171.38 15.87 204.82 65.84 4.45 DB19-T2 326.80 149.91 242.61 38231.02 50.71 22.45 22.46 170.79 8.38 86.46 DB19-T3 187.45 131.80 81.35 14843.91 39.20 20.66 20.80 142.94 6.44 114.71 DB59-T1 34.49 27.70 8.37 1985.87 0.00 3.51 4.50 24.18 0.99 15.03 DB59-T2 190.60 120.81 89.48 19281.38 31.54 13.90 17.56 115.55 7.19 109.79 DB60-T1 201.94 142.82 125.96 17924.42 56.21 64.52 18.49 129.20 8.71 98.51 DB60-T2 279.71 142.24 126.47 23830.28 38.02 17.61 24.10 173.19 4.11 116.26 DB60-T3 262.09 203.58 177.91 40778.26 39.31 15.17 19.27 90.98 3.83 105.72 530 DB61-T1 45.10 3.71 3.48 3120.81 9.02 1.88 16.01 12.98 0.56 6.09 DC01-T1 47.45 41.88 267.62 6407.05 19.17 9.01 35.49 83.95 2.58 13.62 DC01-T2 2.36 6.35 2.83 196.78 11.46 0.38 1.65 3.07 0.74 0.53 DC01-T3 24.92 41.79 133.04 2676.11 51.83 3.63 6.27 22.01 1.40 4.85 DC02-T1 0.61 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.97 0.07 1.98 0.00 0.36 0.10 DC02-T2 1.02 0.00 47.61 41.12 8.42 0.30 11.86 1.81 1.67 0.00 DC03-T1 8.44 10.98 19.48 1033.42 16.00 1.19 13.79 8.56 1.58 3.37 DC26-T1 5.66 17.82 27.36 1060.25 15.46 1.91 2.41 5.34 3.13 8.62 DC26-T2 2.90 25.99 19.02 320.99 18.76 0.69 0.00 0.02 2.08 0.65 DC26-T3 40.11 47.83 175.82 8968.86 26.46 3.81 2.70 21.95 4.47 12.52 DC43-T1 6.20 0.00 8.66 505.88 10.25 2.58 39.07 20.90 2.26 4.97 DC43-T2 2.27 0.00 2.37 156.73 4.78 0.58 9.17 2.75 0.86 1.21 DC43-T3 0.93 0.00 0.77 43.99 5.17 0.18 7.07 0.00 1.20 0.16 DC44-T1 36.91 58.67 50.31 2816.31 20.97 3.99 15.92 29.47 5.95 10.99 DC44-T2 18.08 40.28 22.31 1337.82 22.26 2.32 25.07 26.86 0.89 6.31 DC44-T3 3.08 27.13 4.55 361.49 13.17 4.53 9.14 2.04 4.39 255.82 DC44-T4 15.74 66.58 26.27 1457.52 41.90 2.99 31.19 44.45 3.38 7.10 DC45-T1 3.92 25.95 9.78 232.89 32.63 1.15 2.05 9.79 1.08 218.45 DC45-T2 19.75 33.21 38.98 2007.20 13.15 2.17 47.29 14.52 2.69 9.62 DC45-T3 32.89 51.77 261.31 3870.23 26.91 5.32 3.00 22.76 5.12 12.08 Inductively Coupled Plasma-Mass Spectrometry Temper Data (Neff 2008)

Sample V Cr Mn Fe Ni Co Cu Zn As Rb DC48-T1 16.27 16.77 9.72 1692.88 12.88 0.82 10.93 26.59 3.23 3.40 DC48-T2 1.57 0.00 1.48 159.61 13.43 0.30 6.48 1.74 0.15 0.20 DC48-T3 52.56 23.87 350.15 5926.33 15.44 10.75 8.79 48.08 2.16 11.32 DC48-T3A 0.15 0.00 0.08 0.00 6.70 0.04 2.35 0.00 0.00 0.00 DC49-T1 6.40 14.15 9.17 557.16 10.20 0.56 1.24 7.39 0.94 2.51 DC49-T2 10.98 12.51 15.88 2298.83 19.08 0.47 2.40 8.60 1.66 4.57 DC51-T1 173.52 150.49 1031.77 39360.09 63.63 18.14 70.00 101.85 15.00 198.92 DC51-T2A 29.46 91.57 270.99 2475.75 29.89 39.30 14.20 10.47 9.11 14.66 DP01-T1 338.39 279.75 310.56 46833.14 58.08 28.70 24.63 192.34 5.42 112.76 DP02-T1 5.55 0.00 104.96 705.06 16.53 2.17 5.20 7.34 2.97 3.62 DP02-T2 43.80 34.70 112.20 4915.49 14.21 5.88 9.05 45.95 5.39 23.52 531 DP02-T3 84.74 28.08 183.82 9344.77 15.97 8.39 19.20 75.19 4.33 79.33 DP04-T1 995.75 161.19 75.86 129408.56 71.72 15.96 10.99 161.07 5.09 112.64 DP102-T1 39.81 10.61 54.14 4499.44 8.65 1.74 5.82 126.58 4.28 161.72 DP102-T2 193.00 141.24 192.58 25477.87 50.92 16.03 25.36 165.16 6.71 112.26 DP102-T3 237.03 196.97 223.83 20173.74 236.30 22.20 277.97 417.41 11.56 114.33 DP103-T1 6.30 0.00 8.28 3351.35 0.00 1.07 10.71 1.31 2.34 0.49 DP104-T1 0.70 7.86 0.60 97.56 4.24 0.27 8.23 0.00 0.87 0.49 DP104-T2 7.63 6.36 3.08 867.31 4.85 2.07 23.90 0.00 0.24 1.39 DP19-T1 220.61 208.60 132.49 24082.00 62.94 21.62 36.49 207.54 6.20 124.88 DP19-T2 225.70 191.29 116.49 21311.52 59.91 21.79 31.13 193.35 7.50 131.67 DP20-T1 11.79 8.15 0.00 912.56 5.13 0.00 5.12 11.98 0.72 24.28 DP20-T2 3.03 7.21 38.46 536.30 0.10 3.21 2.73 2.96 8.64 3.85 DP20-T3 2.47 5.96 0.00 115.81 0.00 0.00 3.72 0.00 1.44 310.49 DP31-T1 250.32 79.79 734.05 360034.37 45.39 17.03 72.08 365.22 7.87 25.86 DP31-T2 292.63 98.31 1797.39 392426.10 76.06 29.02 45.41 173.08 11.89 16.01 DP31-T3 1.62 33.99 4.22 301.10 5.91 0.50 1.63 0.00 0.00 0.50 DP61-T1 393.65 186.75 1336.29 126623.03 62.91 40.12 37.44 288.37 8.95 161.16 NB01-T1 65.17 32.37 6.59 2716.14 0.00 7.27 14.90 82.92 2.49 15.43 NB02-T1 470.47 178.55 131.51 35400.10 105.50 30.16 21.33 150.64 20.33 148.37 NB07-T1 181.82 86.89 70.00 32417.23 30.44 13.81 17.69 116.06 4.66 57.12 Inductively Coupled Plasma-Mass Spectrometry Temper Data (Neff 2008)

Sample V Cr Mn Fe Ni Co Cu Zn As Rb NB07-T2 3.72 0.03 4.39 8.76 2.47 152.07 NB07-T3 29.55 1126.04 3.84 14.98 33.77 2.44 24.54 NB13-T1 283.15 121.72 197.40 34049.03 59.29 27.83 29.77 260.42 6.01 94.20 NB13-T2 285.96 171.70 41.52 13264.54 83.06 21.54 63.71 193.21 17.88 92.92 NB13-T3 485.42 161.37 81.97 36981.38 127.44 29.81 18.91 158.35 24.69 148.62 NB15-T1 220.72 81.02 52.34 8607.74 34.48 24.12 52.61 88.56 306.27 47.98 NB15-T2 58.22 88.61 10.37 8316.42 16.34 2.91 35.79 32.55 5.41 24.00 NB15-T3 195.10 127.37 31.31 17468.86 39.78 8.94 29.96 125.06 4.93 95.13 NB21-T1 44.50 36.54 19.63 4207.75 132.19 4.98 1052.39 724.68 2.40 14.68 NB21-T2 185.67 89.84 64.56 27054.13 35.39 13.83 58.97 148.48 117.24 60.62 NB21-T3 128.13 68.69 39.72 16237.70 23.88 10.07 15.21 118.46 6.12 40.55 532 NB29-T1 114.52 66.28 52.19 15329.09 33.31 9.78 31.06 124.97 5.44 40.71 NB29-T2 207.59 133.80 89.09 24079.19 47.86 24.93 38.23 266.27 5.50 82.59 NB39-T1 93.25 34.84 11.19 9149.40 23.26 4.58 27.63 83.30 2.00 28.06 NB39-T2 41.19 21.26 21.25 4747.58 21.63 4.64 10.27 53.83 1.00 18.94 NB39-T3 5.09 40.62 13.52 781.95 108.04 0.39 70.52 38.48 1.97 0.41 NC01-T1 47.35 73.10 18.42 6234.95 53.72 4.34 93.69 27.35 7.82 18.16 NC01-T2 257.99 208.98 196.55 47954.05 45.54 10.49 55.37 54.75 12.08 112.37 NC06-T1 139.86 81.43 85.10 76779.33 69.38 7.53 84.78 95.11 5.93 45.03 NC06-T2 42.26 45.31 45.29 7486.13 12.51 4.38 16.32 13.77 4.96 9.93 NC06-T3 6.95 0.61 13.08 847.21 20.34 0.92 5.01 4.64 1.67 2.30 NC09-T1 12.39 0.00 35.50 1630.53 17.17 7.28 31.09 19.10 1.25 4.27 NC09-T2 4.70 0.00 6.43 366.45 12.13 1.44 6.49 4.01 1.55 479.80 NC09-T3 178.80 96.04 128.97 33141.33 40.71 16.36 64.97 86.40 3.66 111.44 NC14-T1 18.53 25.56 3.47 954.13 1.15 2.79 10.21 1.06 4.33 NC20-T1 29.85 21.42 7.88 2624.55 20.42 2.60 15.69 21.67 1.19 8.70 NC23-T1 23.89 16.58 4.99 1880.67 17.28 2.29 24.77 22.74 1.13 7.39 NC24-T1 21.69 8.30 35.13 3689.23 9.67 0.93 14.98 24.73 0.55 6.61 NC24-T2 164.45 141.92 349.86 96481.91 26.20 18.02 55.46 119.45 4.04 67.95 NC24-T3 0.20 0.23 9.91 2.67 0.01 3.89 1.64 NC27-T1 25.20 15.04 6.95 1177.97 2.11 2.22 26.72 29.00 1.05 8.97 Inductively Coupled Plasma-Mass Spectrometry Temper Data (Neff 2008)

Sample V Cr Mn Fe Ni Co Cu Zn As Rb NC27-T2 63.20 43.19 29.46 6268.88 16.13 5.95 25.76 23.63 1.68 28.71 NC28-T1 432.41 157.44 105.93 39353.05 180.38 39.87 116.22 150.40 19.69 172.96 NC28-T2 42.92 60.55 15.55 3319.49 48.24 6.76 27.30 36.00 1.35 10.76 NC30-T1 241.07 110.15 2050.99 85125.03 49.23 46.06 24.13 205.95 4.98 60.00 NC30-T2 45.66 30.96 486.29 6316.85 55.83 4.06 45.04 89.12 3.59 11.76 NC30-T3 10.26 12.16 16.33 1244.92 13.46 0.34 16.81 55.58 3.15 2.63 NP01-T1 6.54 6.01 10.95 345.71 10.14 0.72 1.89 51.50 1.18 1.49 NP01-T2 3.58 1.73 26.87 237.82 25.22 0.66 95.54 41.36 0.76 0.76 NP01-T3 25.08 8.34 107.19 3166.26 12.77 4.30 9.47 50.86 2.03 5.95 NP02-T1 3.89 0.00 181.57 290.72 8.59 0.62 17.17 16.45 1.02 0.36 NP02-T2 91.42 52.73 120.27 14493.06 84.31 16.63 217.39 95.22 2.02 38.35 533 NP02-T3 118.95 45.44 194.31 24514.66 30.39 12.50 17.86 156.03 3.34 92.64 NP03-T1 452.41 161.87 104.45 43139.42 124.04 34.20 21.29 183.37 23.40 139.88 NP03-T2 13.06 9.71 5.45 3239.90 61.49 0.79 121.31 107.36 1.45 5.05 NP03-T3 166.05 77.85 220.12 26220.29 24.79 12.74 19.70 140.88 8.00 44.63 NP03-T4 16.59 16.08 5.83 1924.29 8.46 1.67 28.74 35.88 2.95 1236.62 NP04-T1 126.83 92.16 31.58 17465.07 47.38 9.17 10.74 59.03 4.92 58.97 NP04-T2 62.35 12.10 6272.34 6532.16 18.92 30.55 9.17 43.00 3.13 60.48 NP04-T3 17.37 0.53 38.49 1544.10 7.34 4.61 29.04 22.76 3.29 484.22 NP07-T1 63.17 27.92 41.28 9572.97 40.84 6.44 69.17 83.91 1.75 22.25 NP11-T1 399.45 149.39 216.14 57226.87 212.64 34.57 444.10 511.15 64.92 136.20 NP14-T1 65.09 40.34 32.29 8795.24 34.45 11.49 1.35 38.97 0.06 17.85 NP14-T2 6.80 0.93 5.65 553.73 11.90 1.69 39.52 9.97 1.52 311.83 NP14-T3 158.81 31.30 152.65 9300.01 9.55 7.13 10.09 55.39 4.08 81.71 NP14-T4 194.36 49.99 213.66 31901.55 11.46 9.31 3.64 83.64 4.77 57.98 NP16-T1 525.97 164.58 161.38 54452.41 129.55 30.04 62.83 193.11 27.07 145.49 NP16-T2 216.17 135.15 78.64 21407.99 36.79 15.22 23.05 172.91 3.54 91.72 NP18-T1 28.03 24.76 7.94 1600.85 30.11 1.38 7.96 9.74 2.51 10.17 NP18-T2 43.35 34.13 13.79 3311.11 29.37 2.53 3.56 13.09 2.57 19.65 NP21-T2 6.03 10.32 2.03 431.67 18.46 0.59 2.77 5.58 0.02 23.50 NP21-T3 46.49 26.16 10.09 1896.21 24.94 4.29 12.76 15.47 5.34 9.45 Inductively Coupled Plasma-Mass Spectrometry Temper Data (Neff 2008)

Sample V Cr Mn Fe Ni Co Cu Zn As Rb NP33-T1 188.24 121.15 162.36 30653.55 34.95 18.15 17.08 106.92 1.98 86.18 NP33-T2 240.37 92.28 27.61 19589.27 59.54 10.00 4.58 69.57 3.30 56.23 NP33-T4 107.87 93.92 68.70 14931.32 40.05 105.88 21.26 38.59 2.84 38.74 NP34-T1 55.83 18.14 31.63 1794.38 4.14 2.88 0.00 7.83 5.30 19.73 NP34-T2 143.32 74.23 72.56 12387.64 71.59 17.88 0.00 57.33 4.60 50.88 NP34-T3 109.99 63.40 119.21 17664.49 30.23 9.92 15.33 77.12 2.17 55.50 R103-T1 311.28 102.53 44.55 45125.54 32.85 12.32 72.76 133.88 7.63 58.85 R103-T2 4.22 2.95 0.68 R32-T1 16.39 17.87 7.40 2209.26 20.76 2.03 4.83 6.78 1.50 9.91 R45-T1 51.60 28.41 11.98 5137.77 12.46 2.61 48.17 16.31 1.34 15.61 R51-T1 202.78 101.30 1277.86 42370.85 1.25 21.68 50.37 88.52 9.91 56.71 534 R72-T1 8.98 98.28 1361.49 5.89 2.61 2.28 9.35 1.56 2.79 R73-T1 150.22 38.06 994.61 108778.29 8.75 16.23 28.50 291.98 9.20 9.55 R79-T1 26.13 21.11 8.95 3327.55 18.31 1.85 2.24 9.32 2.96 8.99 R79-T1 40.70 29.65 131.44 2093.39 30.86 4.23 18.34 15.99 8.20 6.91 R88-T1 41.18 38.16 9.65 5399.08 3.42 2.35 4.30 14.19 1.22 10.56 R89-T1 8.81 0.00 10.57 2169.08 0.30 6.04 34.71 7.20 5.57 9.23 Inductively Coupled Plasma-Mass Spectrometry Temper Data (Neff 2008)

Sample Sr Y Zr Nb Sn Sb Cs Ba La Ce C13-T1 66.06 2.56 4.55 3.09 0.11 0.90 2.09 5525.38 12.64 13.19 DB107-T1 122.70 41.17 192.75 33.47 5.03 0.93 10.70 528.64 60.27 140.38 DB107-T2 166.95 36.67 178.45 36.56 472.18 1.01 12.44 820.77 81.40 235.96 DB19-T1 1576.75 277.55 131.73 12.47 2.94 3.23 0.22 48115.51 157.47 591.05 DB19-T2 110.86 58.19 175.79 31.79 3.66 2.19 9.30 827.54 56.47 153.80 DB19-T3 94.47 22.31 143.68 28.48 3.73 1.15 11.48 413.91 47.30 105.99 DB59-T1 34.09 73.87 372.96 7.87 0.82 0.06 1.72 139.35 27.25 34.49 DB59-T2 145.44 43.12 243.86 33.06 3.43 1.03 10.10 918.82 63.14 103.64 DB60-T1 107.33 32.63 274.29 31.64 7.62 3.58 10.30 1072.35 55.81 119.97 DB60-T2 130.87 51.58 214.61 42.99 6.14 1.26 12.02 2156.67 76.04 182.99 DB60-T3 291.51 119.56 530.76 43.55 5.37 1.51 9.64 4410.28 218.42 339.00 535 DB61-T1 48.35 1.03 21.31 5.48 0.55 0.18 0.95 173.43 3.62 5.99 DC01-T1 59.30 14.89 27.41 6.25 4.53 0.39 1.01 1382.97 37.65 68.36 DC01-T2 3.83 13.99 2.58 0.59 0.00 0.04 0.07 45.04 2.85 8.96 DC01-T3 33.61 26.77 38.18 7.29 0.04 0.42 0.57 971.50 14.04 27.76 DC02-T1 0.27 1.56 0.00 0.06 0.43 0.68 0.11 2.17 0.02 0.28 DC02-T2 0.84 1.49 0.41 0.02 133.75 1.83 0.04 16.59 0.96 1.15 DC03-T1 6.87 5.99 6.38 1.39 1.97 0.45 0.56 72.03 3.21 6.48 DC26-T1 65.81 8.24 6.64 0.23 0.37 0.20 1.34 487.01 27.12 39.66 DC26-T2 8.91 1.26 3.23 0.69 0.01 0.62 0.04 1010.44 3.71 5.10 DC26-T3 52.76 18.04 43.47 8.59 1.24 1.50 2.19 2244.56 33.77 62.95 DC43-T1 6.22 4.33 6.04 2.34 1.10 0.94 0.54 247.92 5.41 14.28 DC43-T2 2.93 2.64 1.39 1.47 0.87 0.20 0.14 75.37 1.76 2.55 DC43-T3 1.15 7.72 0.71 0.62 0.25 0.76 0.06 28.73 2.18 6.63 DC44-T1 58.58 16.69 45.38 10.97 2.12 1.54 1.20 1823.23 30.14 41.13 DC44-T2 28.52 7.89 17.80 6.93 0.85 0.73 0.53 577.76 12.55 15.15 DC44-T3 106.21 24.69 3.72 0.73 0.31 0.12 0.89 10791.21 86.49 150.14 DC44-T4 30.19 8.26 31.39 4.02 3.19 13.12 0.72 1006.20 13.70 23.26 DC45-T1 28.61 1.98 3.44 0.45 28.06 0.67 1.35 565.93 2.75 3.81 DC45-T2 9.43 9.25 34.63 7.76 0.63 0.25 1.06 108.69 14.22 39.86 DC45-T3 19.99 17.46 25.65 4.41 1.05 1.84 1.55 223.53 11.31 27.62 Inductively Coupled Plasma-Mass Spectrometry Temper Data (Neff 2008)

Sample Sr Y Zr Nb Sn Sb Cs Ba La Ce DC48-T1 7.61 8.07 14.81 1.47 0.91 2.20 0.66 26.11 2.68 5.08 DC48-T2 1.60 2.20 6.19 0.05 0.32 1.53 0.14 1.44 0.43 0.56 DC48-T3 32.52 6.67 26.46 8.30 0.92 0.35 1.17 1162.90 9.23 22.58 DC48-T3A 0.62 0.26 0.45 0.00 0.12 0.22 0.00 0.69 0.07 0.03 DC49-T1 7.45 8.45 4.92 2.25 0.30 0.63 0.33 26.20 9.28 27.56 DC49-T2 6.56 9.16 5.67 1.24 0.25 0.28 0.45 22.16 4.98 12.21 DC51-T1 476.87 75.47 158.84 27.39 3.78 1.26 6.01 3842.47 126.29 240.50 DC51-T2A 96.21 5.79 6.16 2.52 0.72 7.45 0.92 456.60 34.88 64.38 DP01-T1 189.30 63.04 451.52 101.50 5.52 3.21 10.10 3324.64 88.82 178.06 DP02-T1 3.72 10.22 853.80 2.41 8.86 0.31 0.38 80.36 2.48 8.47 DP02-T2 35.52 62.92 49.67 8.64 1.25 3.18 1.84 686.59 25.82 53.56 536 DP02-T3 43.52 104.24 2097.90 17.54 5.14 0.11 3.82 3863.24 109.96 345.69 DP04-T1 41.44 17.72 176.76 29.08 3.22 2.60 12.38 884.39 26.21 52.09 DP102-T1 166.62 12.09 74.64 15.06 2.76 1.17 1.90 5489.17 7.07 14.36 DP102-T2 417.92 38.38 159.93 36.65 4.32 2.35 10.93 4234.06 64.12 158.40 DP102-T3 568.66 139.81 218.87 41.25 65.33 2.35 12.15 5627.97 213.82 222.89 DP103-T1 6.24 27.67 5.37 1.32 0.39 0.82 0.13 12.40 124.45 1658.23 DP104-T1 0.83 0.08 0.30 0.14 1.15 1.90 0.09 5.86 0.30 0.45 DP104-T2 6.95 2.16 3.81 0.88 0.37 0.19 0.21 37.32 5.24 10.50 DP19-T1 109.81 29.76 164.92 39.09 4.70 1.57 11.87 1089.03 96.62 426.77 DP19-T2 116.74 25.49 167.35 34.40 5.48 1.48 12.41 1235.99 56.83 195.96 DP20-T1 10.98 0.77 3.79 1.47 0.25 0.78 0.02 437.96 10.13 12.04 DP20-T2 28.03 3.02 1.08 0.19 0.92 0.00 0.41 358.10 12.60 28.38 DP20-T3 239.44 0.54 1.41 0.48 3.03 1.00 0.91 12367.45 3.64 2.15 DP31-T1 75.20 163.81 115.31 14.60 1.27 1.59 1.58 1055.39 148.68 210.86 DP31-T2 42.70 161.70 170.03 8.25 2.07 1.74 1.01 804.85 289.35 661.73 DP31-T3 2.50 1.23 1.28 0.55 0.08 0.47 0.04 21.06 1.07 3.35 DP61-T1 221.02 66.73 364.07 36.18 3.42 2.65 15.52 5437.40 87.65 167.43 NB01-T1 20.84 24.92 167.72 22.49 1.22 0.70 2.80 366.71 39.58 66.98 NB02-T1 18.88 18.46 142.01 37.14 4.21 1.78 9.49 614.96 38.11 95.52 NB07-T1 98.75 26.96 533.69 22.18 2.27 2.06 4.77 962.14 37.56 78.51 Inductively Coupled Plasma-Mass Spectrometry Temper Data (Neff 2008)

Sample Sr Y Zr Nb Sn Sb Cs Ba La Ce NB07-T2 35.50 38.32 224.94 0.55 0.13 0.57 1.67 3389.56 9.28 17.52 NB07-T3 10.03 15.64 71.71 20.06 6.16 5.64 2.08 135.74 21.93 38.47 NB13-T1 112.93 39.41 150.39 43.41 7.94 1.85 9.45 1086.45 395.03 2670.07 NB13-T2 39.57 51.44 376.01 42.68 4.02 0.94 9.11 369.58 99.98 200.72 NB13-T3 19.05 58.62 127.87 31.11 5.27 1.98 9.81 564.59 44.46 141.46 NB15-T1 20.54 5393.00 438.74 20.88 1.11 1.29 5.48 1.81 54.12 74.45 NB15-T2 5881.94 23.56 200.05 13.48 1.48 0.59 1.28 838.33 42.36 78.29 NB15-T3 50.11 52.60 287.26 30.01 3.29 1.56 7.73 557.51 114.12 211.92 NB21-T1 22.16 25.03 27.00 6.19 3.57 1.14 2.12 188.82 26.39 37.17 NB21-T2 102.30 1609.97 288.72 26.55 2.37 1.37 6.56 474.59 447.26 253.16 NB21-T3 83.05 35.27 1612.60 23.16 2.07 2.25 5.06 288.92 52.63 92.29 537 NB29-T1 70.36 33.05 135.38 16.87 2.55 1.11 4.45 289.72 42.70 84.58 NB29-T2 120.68 31.97 213.33 29.47 8.76 1.13 7.89 823.93 53.28 119.77 NB39-T1 11.99 9.27 64.67 9.67 1.40 0.54 2.67 71.30 13.64 24.94 NB39-T2 18.74 26.07 671.34 4.01 0.87 2.44 2.73 94.39 9.94 22.34 NB39-T3 66.85 8.05 8.75 0.58 3.53 0.21 0.05 92.65 3.54 4.73 NC01-T1 66.66 33.96 85.56 5.89 3.42 0.78 2.08 161.50 46.67 78.73 NC01-T2 229.29 90.62 271.61 37.04 3.03 2.31 9.45 622.51 138.08 247.51 NC06-T1 81.38 58.18 287.65 9.98 3.37 0.68 3.43 528.80 52.50 84.68 NC06-T2 23.06 17.39 25.54 4.11 1.03 0.64 1.27 86.35 23.21 49.47 NC06-T3 4.89 40.94 2023.94 5.93 0.54 0.72 0.20 14.69 10.83 17.86 NC09-T1 51.70 54.54 2125.06 5.92 0.82 0.14 0.59 32.14 11.46 10.20 NC09-T2 27.65 14.44 11.84 0.19 0.53 1.89 1.26 1118.45 2.35 3.01 NC09-T3 78.92 24.91 83.25 19.33 4.21 1.08 6.41 942.83 38.27 72.57 NC14-T1 10.73 47.03 19.10 7.15 0.32 0.41 0.47 6.67 3.81 20.50 NC20-T1 20.11 10.61 146.79 2.73 4.99 3.04 1.23 111.50 14.49 10.17 NC23-T1 38.16 5.79 14.39 3.84 0.81 0.26 1.02 50.66 13.48 26.04 NC24-T1 35.83 9.24 23.55 7.44 0.75 0.56 0.49 215.43 11.55 24.03 NC24-T2 61.50 7.13 67.62 0.00 0.70 0.44 1.08 2723.75 2.27 29.81 NC24-T3 2.43 1.03 0.32 0.80 NC27-T1 22.05 5.14 21.73 3.22 0.92 0.34 0.92 64.92 11.69 30.90 Inductively Coupled Plasma-Mass Spectrometry Temper Data (Neff 2008)

Sample Sr Y Zr Nb Sn Sb Cs Ba La Ce NC27-T2 225.98 13.14 40.66 10.20 8.07 1.80 2.85 336.97 21.50 37.62 NC28-T1 47.10 32.59 173.88 65.71 76.63 12.78 11.16 1025.10 68.12 150.57 NC28-T2 30.86 22.72 51.84 9.60 2.55 1.06 1.38 178.85 50.29 59.53 NC30-T1 153.41 34.35 96.88 16.25 3.28 0.95 6.82 3211.13 48.69 171.16 NC30-T2 33.43 17.63 37.16 13.49 30.35 0.16 1.16 120.87 65.17 85.56 NC30-T3 22.42 12.17 58.67 3.81 21.53 0.65 0.00 58.00 59.31 111.48 NP01-T1 109.48 5.05 3.84 0.37 2.59 0.79 0.17 94.54 23.55 50.73 NP01-T2 5.33 5.00 5.80 0.50 1.42 0.23 0.18 29.49 19.98 56.40 NP01-T3 32.84 184.80 14.89 7.68 0.37 0.23 0.81 66.89 16.20 31.79 NP02-T1 65.79 24.66 3.41 0.92 0.20 0.04 0.19 25.63 12.21 13.29 NP02-T2 83.48 32.26 952.14 13.90 23.64 0.96 3.91 464.95 25.25 54.33 538 NP02-T3 94.39 63.49 139.91 17.29 5.52 2.80 5.94 963.03 52.60 127.16 NP03-T1 22.95 46.23 149.47 34.77 4.93 5.20 9.81 563.22 26.77 93.98 NP03-T2 6.94 8.51 4.41 1.01 0.11 0.64 0.47 155.33 1.36 3.11 NP03-T3 70.97 34.68 148.70 26.38 2.38 1.14 5.68 1044.56 41.37 89.74 NP03-T4 53.01 6.56 72.09 3.00 0.26 0.17 13.77 2408.47 7.58 8.60 NP04-T1 41.38 37.39 352.69 25.23 2.98 1.81 6.11 783.45 65.67 76.36 NP04-T2 171.77 214.80 1223.30 67.57 2.78 0.61 1.14 1804.16 61.77 183.78 NP04-T3 110.92 13.65 13.93 3.92 0.64 0.50 7.12 10506.22 12.71 24.65 NP07-T1 59.47 24.41 98.51 8.38 3.81 1.51 2.56 1086.61 25.41 52.21 NP11-T1 57.23 30.05 330.12 49.43 19.06 21.63 9.41 927.48 128.57 258.05 NP14-T1 17.88 21.31 65.23 17.93 1.51 0.70 2.37 85.13 26.86 55.71 NP14-T2 64.76 45.64 9597.85 11.53 4.19 0.21 0.62 7510.15 75.50 124.97 NP14-T3 44.08 16.92 215.83 39.90 7.14 0.50 0.74 2280.63 21.88 35.56 NP14-T4 98.34 186.17 8922.16 53.68 9.39 1.14 4.90 1094.40 113.13 276.21 NP16-T1 29.91 43.59 302.58 39.24 7.17 1.94 11.36 779.54 25.85 76.62 NP16-T2 108.68 31.35 229.63 30.84 3.67 0.99 9.56 547.79 54.28 114.13 NP18-T1 12.86 7.73 63.64 24.68 2.10 0.33 0.93 112.01 21.55 42.59 NP18-T2 15.40 11.39 73.26 14.20 1.98 0.08 1.69 63.72 40.64 73.44 NP21-T2 6.14 5.33 10.25 2.29 12.93 0.29 0.38 24.39 19.99 33.54 NP21-T3 11.69 9.05 20.69 4.23 17.48 1.05 0.90 61.49 37.72 79.37 Inductively Coupled Plasma-Mass Spectrometry Temper Data (Neff 2008)

Sample Sr Y Zr Nb Sn Sb Cs Ba La Ce NP33-T1 117.72 48.93 195.73 38.27 3.21 1.45 7.75 770.32 71.62 148.57 NP33-T2 47.65 35.74 140.18 38.67 4.18 0.78 6.85 150.93 84.54 201.65 NP33-T4 244.96 61.55 120.28 34.38 2.34 1.20 4.21 384.56 86.32 187.15 NP34-T1 62.03 37.64 143.76 6.20 0.85 0.01 2.00 111.29 105.96 179.97 NP34-T2 99.12 158.19 799.48 131.73 2.17 0.67 8.68 450.88 153.57 129.42 NP34-T3 66.33 48.21 103.23 20.53 2.93 0.94 5.03 702.35 42.10 76.80 R103-T1 160.40 43.26 189.60 28.05 3.54 1.25 7.54 301.60 119.45 443.59 R103-T2 15.04 R32-T1 20.75 1.92 13.81 4.54 0.59 0.27 1.51 49.78 4.85 10.59 R45-T1 24.80 14.91 32.07 14.75 1.31 0.53 1.81 216.24 15.64 20.08 R51-T1 229.83 92.19 311.55 35.60 4.11 1.41 7.28 1158.04 152.45 282.85 539 R72-T1 5.35 2.32 1.06 0.54 0.48 0.87 3.95 5.01 15.53 R73-T1 21.40 25.33 56.18 71.20 4.50 0.52 0.90 56.21 25.15 36.65 R79-T1 21.80 5.04 24.41 8.16 1.02 0.57 0.99 57.88 10.76 23.48 R79-T1 8.03 11.44 32.18 9.89 14.53 0.21 0.69 40.20 26.56 42.58 R88-T1 30.38 27.37 114.49 7.14 1.37 3.90 1.47 208.47 29.21 37.86 R89-T1 74.27 21.43 110.91 0.00 0.12 0.93 0.19 612.45 8.93 9.75 Inductively Coupled Plasma-Mass Spectrometry Temper Data (Neff 2008)

Sample Pr Nd Sm Eu Gd Tb Dy Ho Er Tm C13-T1 1.96 9.24 1.44 0.44 0.92 0.04 0.73 0.05 0.18 0.02 DB107-T1 12.13 46.36 8.99 1.16 7.60 1.03 6.50 1.09 3.90 0.62 DB107-T2 17.50 71.75 13.50 1.85 9.77 1.12 7.07 1.53 4.20 0.66 DB19-T1 29.20 133.52 31.17 5.92 31.15 5.14 34.79 5.90 19.12 2.58 DB19-T2 12.33 53.64 9.33 1.26 8.12 1.18 8.32 1.41 3.29 0.50 DB19-T3 8.76 36.40 6.67 1.02 6.15 0.62 4.14 0.87 2.54 0.35 DB59-T1 4.33 18.40 3.97 0.64 5.11 1.05 10.45 2.14 6.83 1.17 DB59-T2 10.74 45.52 8.17 1.00 6.44 1.03 7.50 1.20 4.20 0.72 DB60-T1 10.75 43.91 7.46 0.96 7.17 0.78 5.89 1.02 3.39 0.44 DB60-T2 14.01 58.86 10.04 1.41 8.57 0.95 6.34 1.14 4.50 0.50 DB60-T3 31.51 147.33 26.24 3.27 21.09 2.33 21.33 3.51 11.07 1.61 540 DB61-T1 0.61 1.77 0.51 0.05 0.41 0.03 0.22 0.06 0.16 0.04 DC01-T1 7.69 26.35 3.15 0.73 2.24 0.36 1.47 0.28 0.54 0.12 DC01-T2 1.11 2.63 1.06 0.15 1.34 0.21 1.78 0.25 0.96 0.16 DC01-T3 2.65 9.75 1.96 0.36 3.44 0.21 3.69 0.87 1.89 0.32 DC02-T1 0.05 0.11 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 DC02-T2 0.05 0.14 0.00 0.00 0.23 0.01 0.06 0.00 0.00 0.02 DC03-T1 0.56 2.58 0.81 0.19 0.77 0.11 0.68 0.05 0.11 0.03 DC26-T1 4.17 17.15 3.15 0.45 2.30 0.26 1.74 0.13 0.54 0.02 DC26-T2 0.39 1.79 0.19 0.05 0.53 0.06 0.23 0.08 0.18 0.00 DC26-T3 5.88 28.51 5.51 0.89 4.01 0.59 3.35 0.66 1.42 0.16 DC43-T1 1.24 5.58 0.70 0.12 0.79 0.07 0.95 0.19 0.16 0.04 DC43-T2 0.28 1.35 0.10 0.04 0.21 0.06 0.21 0.05 0.14 0.03 DC43-T3 0.62 1.97 0.34 0.00 0.29 0.03 0.39 0.06 0.22 0.05 DC44-T1 5.09 22.42 4.03 0.73 3.46 0.49 4.59 0.46 1.30 0.21 DC44-T2 2.14 9.26 2.04 0.30 1.00 0.20 1.33 0.22 0.82 0.08 DC44-T3 22.22 85.41 12.12 2.08 7.84 0.44 3.52 0.46 1.53 0.34 DC44-T4 2.89 11.30 2.48 0.35 1.91 0.27 2.39 0.32 0.76 0.15 DC45-T1 0.35 0.98 0.64 0.60 0.61 0.03 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.00 DC45-T2 2.98 12.64 2.03 0.42 2.53 0.23 2.58 0.33 0.68 0.10 DC45-T3 2.21 10.55 2.23 0.43 2.56 0.29 2.61 0.42 1.71 0.29 Inductively Coupled Plasma-Mass Spectrometry Temper Data (Neff 2008)

Sample Pr Nd Sm Eu Gd Tb Dy Ho Er Tm DC48-T1 0.55 1.96 0.50 0.09 0.40 0.17 0.34 0.12 0.22 0.07 DC48-T2 0.07 0.30 0.01 0.00 0.14 0.01 0.30 0.03 0.07 0.00 DC48-T3 1.66 8.61 1.74 0.40 1.73 0.16 1.29 0.24 0.89 0.04 DC48-T3A 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.15 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 DC49-T1 2.24 8.81 1.34 0.21 1.33 0.16 0.52 0.21 0.28 0.04 DC49-T2 1.04 3.91 1.29 0.22 1.20 0.16 0.88 0.19 0.50 0.14 DC51-T1 20.51 82.31 16.55 3.47 14.13 1.75 12.15 2.16 5.30 0.82 DC51-T2A 3.83 17.04 3.27 0.62 3.04 0.31 0.94 0.32 0.93 0.08 DP01-T1 16.97 77.06 13.44 2.77 10.97 1.82 13.13 2.30 7.69 0.80 DP02-T1 0.69 2.74 0.00 0.03 0.67 0.00 1.31 0.21 0.63 0.03 DP02-T2 5.27 21.39 3.87 0.70 3.51 1.08 7.10 1.62 4.94 0.67 541 DP02-T3 21.88 85.09 14.73 2.78 12.43 1.66 15.29 2.38 8.52 1.23 DP04-T1 4.45 16.57 2.50 0.54 2.50 0.22 2.14 0.73 2.16 0.23 DP102-T1 1.54 6.83 1.67 0.39 1.64 0.21 2.00 0.42 1.37 0.17 DP102-T2 13.36 57.01 9.38 1.56 8.85 1.03 6.67 1.31 4.52 0.47 DP102-T3 41.67 156.70 19.45 2.58 16.29 1.75 12.57 2.86 8.63 1.02 DP103-T1 102.83 589.00 153.38 16.91 111.40 7.43 17.72 1.33 1.84 0.11 DP104-T1 0.13 0.37 0.00 0.00 0.16 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.02 0.02 DP104-T2 1.11 5.38 0.72 0.00 0.68 0.06 0.81 0.06 0.11 0.00 DP19-T1 23.21 99.09 15.35 2.62 13.19 1.36 8.56 0.78 2.76 0.45 DP19-T2 13.28 53.05 8.24 1.48 6.59 0.65 4.86 0.80 2.32 0.36 DP20-T1 0.98 2.49 0.30 1.83 0.27 0.03 0.18 0.02 0.12 0.02 DP20-T2 2.09 8.81 1.22 0.09 0.69 0.12 0.50 0.18 0.44 0.08 DP20-T3 0.28 1.09 0.33 1.03 0.02 0.01 0.13 0.01 0.02 0.00 DP31-T1 30.32 163.09 36.63 5.32 26.05 4.33 34.74 5.54 16.84 2.35 DP31-T2 47.87 226.44 48.45 8.60 34.55 4.55 34.49 5.42 13.94 2.11 DP31-T3 0.31 1.22 0.17 0.10 0.43 0.02 0.02 0.05 0.00 0.01 DP61-T1 17.12 78.22 14.02 2.19 12.21 1.82 12.35 2.23 6.45 0.84 NB01-T1 5.26 24.55 3.44 0.87 3.97 0.44 5.20 0.59 1.89 0.27 NB02-T1 6.99 29.09 5.76 1.35 3.73 1.01 3.12 0.62 1.99 0.17 NB07-T1 6.25 27.75 4.81 1.08 6.01 0.55 3.89 0.79 2.56 0.40 Inductively Coupled Plasma-Mass Spectrometry Temper Data (Neff 2008)

Sample Pr Nd Sm Eu Gd Tb Dy Ho Er Tm NB07-T2 1.52 5.05 0.76 0.51 1.10 0.18 2.43 0.68 2.75 0.29 NB07-T3 2.98 14.12 2.24 0.55 1.99 0.12 1.53 0.48 1.46 0.02 NB13-T1 87.32 305.03 35.71 4.88 32.35 1.65 10.84 1.32 3.66 0.67 NB13-T2 16.71 69.40 8.72 1.28 9.46 1.10 5.36 1.32 4.72 0.88 NB13-T3 8.22 33.64 5.17 1.39 7.52 0.71 5.20 0.92 3.48 0.39 NB15-T1 8.04 42.21 23.42 5.97 114.11 30.11 303.47 67.86 247.21 26.93 NB15-T2 5.94 25.06 3.91 0.67 3.89 0.47 3.28 0.61 2.07 0.26 NB15-T3 13.44 49.38 6.69 1.05 7.47 0.76 5.54 1.02 3.27 0.51 NB21-T1 4.11 14.02 1.52 0.21 2.14 0.15 2.04 0.33 0.93 0.14 NB21-T2 65.34 253.25 32.23 4.91 29.54 6.63 90.80 23.54 87.20 10.32 NB21-T3 11.52 44.33 7.46 1.31 6.34 0.55 3.54 0.87 4.73 0.92 542 NB29-T1 6.97 31.18 6.02 1.04 5.35 0.89 4.79 1.03 2.73 0.19 NB29-T2 10.01 38.67 6.65 1.15 7.05 0.49 4.56 0.90 4.43 0.34 NB39-T1 1.93 8.42 1.09 0.09 1.38 0.12 1.42 0.17 0.62 0.25 NB39-T2 1.90 8.24 1.80 0.18 1.67 0.17 1.23 0.50 1.51 0.38 NB39-T3 0.41 2.35 0.45 0.05 0.35 0.04 0.47 0.10 0.34 0.02 NC01-T1 6.38 31.19 4.88 0.98 6.73 0.57 4.54 0.66 2.06 0.47 NC01-T2 21.07 90.25 14.70 2.87 15.06 2.12 13.38 2.42 7.93 1.09 NC06-T1 10.04 42.31 7.15 1.41 8.63 1.42 10.14 1.45 5.18 0.69 NC06-T2 4.23 20.19 3.31 0.63 4.20 0.44 2.07 0.60 1.43 0.18 NC06-T3 2.44 11.04 1.86 0.30 2.00 0.56 4.44 1.23 4.03 0.76 NC09-T1 1.94 9.63 1.93 0.35 2.37 0.55 6.13 1.15 3.83 0.51 NC09-T2 0.40 2.52 0.82 0.85 2.64 0.20 1.98 0.26 0.26 0.04 NC09-T3 7.58 32.00 6.33 0.77 7.50 0.71 4.54 0.89 2.28 0.37 NC14-T1 1.10 4.94 0.63 0.08 0.14 0.03 0.37 0.12 0.08 0.08 NC20-T1 1.20 4.70 1.14 0.23 1.87 0.24 1.89 0.22 0.75 0.11 NC23-T1 2.13 9.10 1.24 0.19 1.48 0.18 0.86 0.07 0.55 0.06 NC24-T1 2.21 12.01 1.68 0.32 1.91 0.28 1.47 0.29 0.66 0.22 NC24-T2 0.63 3.70 1.22 0.32 1.62 0.05 1.41 0.30 1.08 0.18 NC24-T3 NC27-T1 2.25 8.85 1.33 0.34 1.57 0.14 0.85 0.17 0.80 0.03 Inductively Coupled Plasma-Mass Spectrometry Temper Data (Neff 2008)

Sample Pr Nd Sm Eu Gd Tb Dy Ho Er Tm NC27-T2 4.34 20.89 4.45 0.89 2.81 0.39 2.75 0.36 1.73 0.17 NC28-T1 11.89 56.23 9.47 1.90 8.55 0.85 5.13 0.95 2.72 0.47 NC28-T2 8.19 36.93 5.79 1.08 4.05 0.35 2.14 0.53 1.10 0.18 NC30-T1 9.34 37.51 8.92 1.72 9.01 0.81 6.55 0.88 2.93 0.20 NC30-T2 8.55 33.34 4.44 0.96 3.95 0.31 2.91 0.24 1.33 0.07 NC30-T3 8.16 29.17 3.51 0.49 3.67 0.24 2.71 0.30 1.02 0.07 NP01-T1 2.94 9.80 1.26 0.15 1.77 0.06 0.48 0.11 0.58 0.02 NP01-T2 4.29 17.75 2.82 0.45 3.15 0.24 1.58 0.21 0.30 0.02 NP01-T3 4.90 20.70 6.97 0.60 13.76 2.08 18.05 3.37 12.66 1.24 NP02-T1 3.22 15.42 2.73 0.71 3.03 0.67 3.26 0.70 1.66 0.23 NP02-T2 5.39 23.23 4.64 0.87 6.65 0.39 3.79 0.84 2.48 0.45 543 NP02-T3 9.98 40.90 6.36 1.06 10.53 0.99 7.56 1.41 4.01 0.45 NP03-T1 7.19 32.48 5.16 1.49 8.68 1.01 7.33 0.94 2.42 0.41 NP03-T2 0.37 1.13 0.44 0.32 0.79 0.04 0.40 0.04 0.23 0.12 NP03-T3 9.09 37.05 7.30 2.08 9.31 0.70 7.39 1.21 3.20 0.35 NP03-T4 1.54 4.42 1.23 0.50 2.19 0.09 0.74 0.06 0.29 0.05 NP04-T1 9.07 44.56 7.27 1.12 10.56 0.93 7.17 1.13 4.38 0.79 NP04-T2 11.86 53.03 10.29 2.24 15.95 2.07 21.71 4.54 16.13 2.35 NP04-T3 2.24 9.92 1.51 1.30 2.04 0.16 1.70 0.19 0.74 0.10 NP07-T1 5.03 17.55 3.00 0.78 3.13 0.28 1.81 0.54 1.75 0.27 NP11-T1 20.93 95.91 16.24 1.98 18.55 1.08 5.58 0.67 3.36 0.38 NP14-T1 4.79 20.44 4.15 0.66 4.15 0.66 3.38 0.47 2.06 0.22 NP14-T2 10.49 34.93 4.63 1.60 6.90 0.71 5.21 1.12 4.32 0.59 NP14-T3 3.68 19.17 3.49 0.62 3.96 0.48 3.32 0.64 1.55 0.24 NP14-T4 26.67 127.32 26.97 7.93 31.23 3.44 28.13 5.11 15.24 2.39 NP16-T1 6.79 24.13 5.04 1.23 6.45 1.02 7.20 1.12 3.96 0.51 NP16-T2 10.08 45.51 6.07 1.11 9.31 0.74 6.25 0.80 3.14 0.60 NP18-T1 3.15 11.13 2.17 0.24 1.94 0.29 1.03 0.31 0.65 0.06 NP18-T2 4.96 22.62 3.01 0.79 4.54 0.25 2.21 0.50 1.89 0.15 NP21-T2 2.50 10.11 0.96 0.24 0.71 0.10 0.69 0.06 0.44 0.05 NP21-T3 7.11 30.97 4.71 0.54 4.34 0.34 2.68 0.39 0.56 0.10 Inductively Coupled Plasma-Mass Spectrometry Temper Data (Neff 2008)

Sample Pr Nd Sm Eu Gd Tb Dy Ho Er Tm NP33-T1 12.95 60.01 12.42 1.83 12.23 1.24 8.61 1.51 5.42 0.74 NP33-T2 15.26 60.60 9.32 2.44 13.41 1.10 6.99 1.32 3.29 0.57 NP33-T4 16.72 78.48 14.65 2.58 17.53 1.30 10.32 1.85 7.09 0.50 NP34-T1 19.76 88.74 9.22 1.39 9.26 0.42 2.82 1.36 2.68 0.86 NP34-T2 9.50 44.85 6.99 1.39 4.12 1.09 17.25 1.43 8.22 0.81 NP34-T3 7.20 31.81 5.71 0.89 6.76 0.68 4.85 0.86 2.48 0.39 R103-T1 20.71 78.36 12.70 2.22 12.50 1.02 7.45 1.09 3.54 0.51 R103-T2 R32-T1 1.01 4.75 0.34 0.14 0.40 0.03 0.31 0.09 0.15 0.08 R45-T1 2.68 15.20 2.77 0.64 3.52 0.54 2.62 0.61 1.51 0.17 R51-T1 23.23 99.66 17.10 2.08 13.95 1.40 11.66 2.05 9.07 0.92 544 R72-T1 1.15 4.26 0.46 0.16 0.52 0.09 0.34 0.02 0.18 0.05 R73-T1 5.18 26.72 5.29 0.89 4.85 0.61 5.47 0.80 3.99 0.31 R79-T1 2.00 6.97 0.99 0.11 1.26 0.19 1.08 0.19 0.34 0.13 R79-T1 5.01 21.70 3.50 0.46 2.38 0.42 2.37 0.20 0.90 0.04 R88-T1 4.90 30.04 5.40 0.67 6.00 0.63 5.69 0.89 2.98 0.25 R89-T1 1.74 7.94 1.39 0.34 2.29 0.25 3.84 0.61 2.11 0.20 Inductively Coupled Plasma-Mass Spectrometry Temper Data (Neff 2008)

Sample Yb Lu Hf Ta Pb Th U C13-T1 0.08 0.03 0.29 0.55 5.97 128.54 0.10 DB107-T1 4.95 0.59 3.98 2.18 3.69 16.14 4.65 DB107-T2 3.81 0.60 4.25 2.06 4.44 19.46 5.34 DB19-T1 18.85 2.29 2.98 1.03 1.12 33.85 4.14 DB19-T2 5.71 0.73 4.33 2.19 14.08 25.12 4.47 DB19-T3 3.27 0.40 3.84 1.71 18.46 13.12 3.80 DB59-T1 7.86 1.61 10.80 0.80 10.95 2650.47 2.56 DB59-T2 4.14 0.75 5.90 2.45 28.55 21.31 6.92 DB60-T1 4.43 1.26 7.36 2.35 31.99 22.42 4.53 DB60-T2 4.05 0.62 4.99 2.58 23.64 24.40 8.93 DB60-T3 12.38 1.38 11.51 3.38 19.69 261.02 4.64 545 DB61-T1 0.29 0.01 0.46 0.46 4.90 1.82 1.22 DC01-T1 1.40 0.07 1.09 0.38 13.96 2147.01 1.04 DC01-T2 2.86 0.04 0.03 0.02 1.92 1081.20 0.54 DC01-T3 2.04 0.24 0.95 0.35 17.18 5740.74 0.98 DC02-T1 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 9.53 756.47 0.08 DC02-T2 0.00 0.00 0.06 0.00 23.60 5426.21 0.04 DC03-T1 0.00 0.01 0.33 0.10 10.51 357.77 0.17 DC26-T1 0.37 0.06 0.28 0.04 0.64 187.52 0.13 DC26-T2 0.01 0.00 0.40 0.04 0.61 311.05 0.10 DC26-T3 1.31 0.15 1.55 0.68 3.70 1073.84 0.75 DC43-T1 0.21 0.00 0.11 0.12 19.41 128.03 0.28 DC43-T2 0.09 0.02 0.06 0.06 19.40 45.21 0.07 DC43-T3 0.11 0.01 0.04 0.01 21.91 707.05 0.13 DC44-T1 1.65 0.23 1.14 0.71 5.02 0.00 1.33 DC44-T2 0.69 0.11 0.57 0.52 4.17 719.72 0.54 DC44-T3 2.33 0.07 0.29 0.37 9.38 0.00 0.52 DC44-T4 0.59 0.12 0.45 0.16 3.15 71.66 0.41 DC45-T1 0.08 0.00 0.06 0.23 51.32 0.00 0.09 DC45-T2 1.48 0.26 1.25 0.43 1.75 195.95 0.98 DC45-T3 0.61 0.20 0.72 0.35 5.64 2851.74 0.89 Inductively Coupled Plasma-Mass Spectrometry Temper Data (Neff 2008)

Sample Yb Lu Hf Ta Pb Th U DC48-T1 0.17 0.13 0.32 0.13 8.68 169.27 0.22 DC48-T2 0.24 0.01 0.01 0.02 3.22 2835.13 0.13 DC48-T3 0.47 0.09 0.81 0.48 10.33 403.04 1.11 DC48-T3A 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.01 2512.49 0.01 DC49-T1 0.24 0.06 0.13 0.16 14.30 3593.14 0.46 DC49-T2 0.92 0.07 0.04 0.13 7.23 3223.86 0.38 DC51-T1 6.35 1.29 4.18 2.41 46.09 610.34 2.89 DC51-T2A 1.01 0.08 0.28 0.16 47.33 2.08 0.77 DP01-T1 8.37 0.84 10.60 16.20 8.70 37.71 9.41 DP02-T1 2.07 0.26 16.02 0.11 3.28 2799.19 1.16 DP02-T2 5.69 1.06 1.05 0.50 3.53 1077.84 1.22 546 DP02-T3 10.14 1.40 16.41 1.06 1.89 141.09 21.58 DP04-T1 2.20 0.23 3.97 2.22 4.03 25.03 3.50 DP102-T1 2.56 0.23 1.66 2.75 36.36 244.64 2.88 DP102-T2 4.00 0.63 4.05 2.68 25.61 0.00 5.82 DP102-T3 8.68 0.68 3.89 2.80 43.05 0.00 10.95 DP103-T1 1.09 0.09 0.07 0.01 6.96 6947.99 3.44 DP104-T1 0.00 0.00 0.05 0.00 1.47 31.54 0.03 DP104-T2 0.16 0.00 0.24 0.12 0.65 436.49 0.10 DP19-T1 4.14 0.42 4.47 2.36 6.25 23.01 7.99 DP19-T2 2.47 0.36 3.51 1.89 9.28 16.68 7.38 DP20-T1 0.12 0.02 0.10 0.17 1.20 8.86 0.10 DP20-T2 0.09 0.07 0.12 0.08 0.29 0.80 0.19 DP20-T3 0.14 0.00 0.42 0.54 14.53 108.37 0.05 DP31-T1 16.81 1.35 2.20 1.01 28.23 41.68 3.78 DP31-T2 15.66 1.52 3.61 0.40 5.43 62.90 4.10 DP31-T3 0.06 0.00 0.08 0.07 0.45 38.00 0.07 DP61-T1 6.97 1.06 7.87 2.34 4.42 27.57 5.29 NB01-T1 2.38 0.39 2.49 1.12 38.04 110.19 1.75 NB02-T1 2.46 1.10 2.15 2.38 12.92 2.23 2.04 NB07-T1 2.95 0.39 6.92 1.13 30.95 1264.04 3.33 Inductively Coupled Plasma-Mass Spectrometry Temper Data (Neff 2008)

Sample Yb Lu Hf Ta Pb Th U NB07-T2 4.56 0.74 3.92 0.29 2.50 34.69 2.27 NB07-T3 0.56 0.15 0.79 2.28 29.13 179.02 0.88 NB13-T1 3.41 0.49 3.84 2.78 30.56 33.03 3.25 NB13-T2 6.10 0.76 4.67 2.19 27.76 114.75 4.42 NB13-T3 2.03 0.30 3.60 2.11 54.72 11.66 2.16 NB15-T1 211.38 23.30 9.91 1.29 9.95 632.16 2.61 NB15-T2 2.62 0.27 2.25 0.89 10.63 16.10 13.76 NB15-T3 4.84 0.44 4.42 1.92 26.92 1669.75 3.51 NB21-T1 1.08 0.11 0.62 0.61 20.40 4516.76 0.80 NB21-T2 90.62 7.91 4.89 1.91 23.25 525.81 2.20 NB21-T3 8.37 1.18 19.09 1.66 19.60 3257.57 5.28 547 NB29-T1 3.25 0.31 2.76 1.53 17.83 896.54 1.32 NB29-T2 5.01 0.35 4.99 2.28 33.26 95.44 3.03 NB39-T1 1.29 0.14 0.99 0.68 11.89 600.41 1.13 NB39-T2 3.08 0.47 8.53 0.21 33.21 2040.79 1.78 NB39-T3 0.38 0.03 0.12 0.00 9.59 179.39 0.24 NC01-T1 4.89 0.19 1.51 0.37 35.51 1325.66 1.79 NC01-T2 8.69 0.71 5.06 2.21 38.19 34.25 6.44 NC06-T1 5.33 0.73 6.66 0.87 12.59 565.95 3.80 NC06-T2 0.98 0.19 0.88 0.37 8.53 31.33 1.17 NC06-T3 5.72 1.06 26.67 0.41 13.71 1033.83 5.22 NC09-T1 5.29 0.47 29.19 0.16 18.87 8981.70 7.42 NC09-T2 0.20 0.01 0.14 0.18 74.08 1507.04 0.17 NC09-T3 3.05 0.31 2.41 1.33 27.98 38.88 3.38 NC14-T1 0.88 1.09 0.62 0.57 1.95 17133.00 0.65 NC20-T1 1.09 0.20 2.61 0.24 0.82 842.61 0.85 NC23-T1 0.53 0.10 0.46 0.15 0.38 5.47 0.39 NC24-T1 0.87 0.09 0.34 0.28 13.32 88.35 1.21 NC24-T2 0.98 0.10 1.61 0.02 7.91 10.77 0.34 NC24-T3 0.01 4.80 452.92 0.11 NC27-T1 0.20 0.01 0.38 0.13 0.35 1027.78 0.62 Inductively Coupled Plasma-Mass Spectrometry Temper Data (Neff 2008)

Sample Yb Lu Hf Ta Pb Th U NC27-T2 1.27 0.14 1.60 0.70 0.98 17.51 0.89 NC28-T1 3.86 0.47 4.69 5.25 50.17 16.10 2.14 NC28-T2 1.46 0.11 1.21 0.54 1.16 1783.42 1.22 NC30-T1 2.28 0.76 2.05 1.23 12.26 40.01 2.39 NC30-T2 1.04 0.13 0.61 0.85 6.84 162.71 2.10 NC30-T3 0.75 0.20 0.55 0.40 9.18 736.64 2.40 NP01-T1 0.31 0.01 0.15 0.03 1.57 1381.71 0.50 NP01-T2 0.13 0.03 0.24 0.14 1.98 1156.01 0.10 NP01-T3 10.00 1.31 0.56 0.63 0.30 1565.06 2.37 NP02-T1 1.28 0.29 0.00 0.09 0.07 2607.73 0.21 NP02-T2 3.46 0.59 10.59 1.03 5.42 3312.28 3.82 548 NP02-T3 4.02 0.41 3.19 1.14 4.48 283.00 3.05 NP03-T1 3.05 0.64 3.53 2.30 28.56 13.04 2.41 NP03-T2 0.09 0.01 0.19 0.04 13.66 3542.02 0.20 NP03-T3 3.47 0.24 3.75 1.49 22.33 947.25 3.49 NP03-T4 0.68 0.01 1.99 0.47 92.25 1375.38 0.43 NP04-T1 4.71 0.33 8.33 2.79 2.05 1.45 NP04-T2 24.56 2.72 16.53 4.66 0.68 5.93 NP04-T3 0.49 0.27 0.26 0.77 8.82 0.44 NP07-T1 1.92 0.35 2.44 0.80 2.55 3668.88 1.52 NP11-T1 2.81 0.39 6.25 3.48 1003.50 2.23 NP14-T1 1.42 0.19 1.91 1.56 0.22 2864.55 1.69 NP14-T2 5.52 0.65 35.89 0.76 0.77 154.76 3.31 NP14-T3 1.72 0.17 3.96 2.90 0.90 0.00 3.34 NP14-T4 17.46 1.66 72.31 3.89 0.82 4827.93 5.83 NP16-T1 2.80 0.47 6.51 2.33 13.43 2.72 NP16-T2 3.32 0.60 5.63 2.39 2.50 5.13 NP18-T1 0.76 0.08 1.40 1.83 14.05 6.92 2.24 NP18-T2 1.55 0.18 2.16 1.24 23.61 849.92 1.56 NP21-T2 0.30 0.01 0.57 0.14 9.63 1400.60 0.23 NP21-T3 0.68 0.04 0.47 0.32 8.06 148.12 0.63 Inductively Coupled Plasma-Mass Spectrometry Temper Data (Neff 2008)

Sample Yb Lu Hf Ta Pb Th U NP33-T1 5.85 0.51 4.79 2.73 0.79 284.25 4.30 NP33-T2 1.58 0.00 4.27 2.37 0.74 4.26 NP33-T4 4.82 0.65 2.71 1.80 0.15 0.00 3.14 NP34-T1 4.36 0.00 2.39 0.89 0.00 0.00 2.03 NP34-T2 9.83 0.28 18.55 6.64 0.00 7664.17 6.21 NP34-T3 2.89 0.21 1.71 1.82 1.05 2590.53 3.20 R103-T1 3.15 0.40 3.34 1.55 15.56 5.72 3.86 R103-T2 0.45 175.42 0.47 R32-T1 0.16 0.02 0.47 0.32 2.56 209.76 0.53 R45-T1 1.33 0.21 1.17 0.90 0.48 5.38 1.66 R51-T1 9.99 0.83 6.57 2.32 19.74 7.81 3.66 549 R72-T1 0.42 0.03 0.05 0.12 2.49 9.16 0.56 R73-T1 3.24 0.50 1.18 3.54 10.74 56.20 2.24 R79-T1 0.94 0.13 0.57 0.50 4.32 283.79 0.70 R79-T1 1.62 0.19 0.73 0.72 20.76 2547.13 1.00 R88-T1 2.85 0.36 1.79 0.81 0.50 386.12 1.15 R89-T1 2.10 0.36 1.96 0.00 12.68 77.41 0.75