Village formation during the Pueblo III to Pueblo IV period transition: Contextualizing Bryant Ranch Pueblo, Arizona

Item Type text; Thesis-Reproduction (electronic)

Authors Scholnick, Jonathan B.

Publisher The University of Arizona.

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

Download date 06/10/2021 04:26:50

Link to Item http://hdl.handle.net/10150/278808 VILLAGE FORMATION DURING THE PUEBLO III TO PUEBLO IV PERIOD

TRANSITION: CONTEXTUALIZING BRYANT RANCH PUEBLO, ARIZONA

by

Jonathan Ben Scholnick

A Thesis Submitted to the Facuhy of the

DEPARTMENT OF ANTHROPOLOGY

In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements For the Degree of

MASTER OF ARTS

In the Graduate College

THE UNIVERSITY OF ARIZONA

2003 UMI Number: 1414234

UMI

UMI Microform 1414234 Copyright 2003 by ProQuest Information and Learning Company. All rights reserved. This microform edition is protected against unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code.

ProQuest Information and Learning Company 300 North Zeeb Road P.O. Box 1346 Ann Arbor, Ml 48106-1346 2

STATEMENT BY AUTHOR

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

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

SIGNED:

APPROVAL BY THESIS DIRECTOR

This thesis has been approved on the date shown below:

Barbara J. Mills Date Professor of Anthropology 3

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

The guidance of my thesis advisor, Barbara J. Mills and committee members J. Jefferson Reid and Maria Nieves Zedeno was invaluable in the completion of this thesis. I would also like to thank Fraser Neiman for teaching me new ways to formulate and address research questions in creative and critical ways. Scott Van Kuren provided valuable comments and support on various aspects of this project. David Killick helped me understand the geochemical aspects of the dataset. I received financial support from the Apache-Sitgreaves National Forests, Stanley R. Grant Fellowship, The Arizona Archaeological and Historical Society, the University of Virginia Undergraduate Research Grant, and Stephen Plog, without which these analyses would not have been possible. The compositional analyses were performed at the University of Missouri Research Reactor Center with the generous support of Michael Glascock and Hector Neff. The analysis of these compositional data was greatly enhanced with the use of comparable data collected by Maria Nieves Zedeno, Daniela Triadan, and Andrew Duff. I would also like to thank archaeologists who carefully collected the data that I use in this research. I must also thank my parents for their support and encouragement throughout this project and my graduate studies. 4

TABLE OF CONTENTS

LIST OF FIGURES 6

LIST OF TABLES 8

ABSTRACT 9

CHAPTER 1. THE TRANSITION TO AGGREGATED PUEBLOS IN THE WESTERN PUEBLO REGION 10 DEMOGRAPHIC AND SETTLEMENT PATTERN INFORMATION 13 ARCHAEOLOGICAL SETTING 14 RESEARCH DESIGN 19 CHAPTER 11. COMPOSITIONAL ANALYSES 22 THE COMPOSITIONAL DATABASE 24 STATISTICAL ANALYSES 26 MISSING VALUES 26 STANDARDIZATION 27 DATA REDUCTION 27 GROUP REFINEMENT AND COMPARISON 31 COMPARISON WITH RAW MATERIALS 36 SUMMARY 38 CHAPTER III. MULTIVARIATE PERSPECTIVES ON CHANGING CERAMIC COMPOSITIONAL VARIATION 48 CROSS DATING 50 MEAN CERAMIC DATES VS. CERAMIC CROSS DATES 51 SERIATION 54 CORRESPONDENCE ANALYSIS RESULTS 56 DISCUSSION 58 CHAPTER IV. INTERPRETING CIRCULATION AND CONSUMPTION PATTERNS AND CONCLUSIONS 71 COMPOSITIONAL GROUPS AND CIRCULATION PATTERNS 71 TEMPORAL CONTROL OF SAMPLED DEPOSITS 76 BRYANT RANCH CERAMIC CONSUMPTION IN CONTEXT 77 APPENDIX A. JACKKNIFE PROBABILITIES OF GROUP MEMBERSHIP OF SAMPLES BASED ON 21 ELEMENTS 82

APPENDIX B. PROBABILITIES OF OUTLIERS' MEMBERSHIP BASED ON 21 ELEMENTS 85

APPENDIX C. PROVENIENCE DATA OF INAA SPECIMENS 87 5

TABLE OF CONTENTS - Continued APPENDIX D. COMPOSITIONAL DATA OF INAA SPECIMENS 92

APPENDIX E. CERAMIC COUNTS USED IN CORRESPONDENCE ANALYSIS 119

REFERENCES 130 6

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1. Map of the Mogollon Rim region with thirteenth and fourteenth century sites discussed in the text 12

Figure 2. Percent of the total variance accounted for by each eigenvector identified in the R-Q mode factor analysis of the Cibola White Ware dataset 41

Figure 3. Loadings of variables on Principal Components 1 and 2 42

Figure 4. Factor scores of Groups 1 and 2 with Chodistaas Cibola White Ware and elements 43

Figure 5. Chodistaas Cibola White Ware plotted with Group 1 specimens 44

Figure 6. Plot of logarithm base-10 transformed concentrations of Lanthanum and Cesium of groups 1 and 2, and Chodistaas sherds 45

Figure 7. Cibola White Ware outliers plotted with 90 percent confidence ellipses for Groups 1 and 2 46

Figure 8. Plot of raw and archaeological clays plotted against Principal Components 1 and 2 from the original Cibola White Ware database 47

Figure 9. Tree-ring dates from the Silver Creek drainage and the surrounding regions (after Mills and Herr 1999: Figure 8.8) 62

Figure 10. Ceramic cross date ranges calculated with 50 percent confidence intervals (a&er Mills and Herr 1999: Figure 8.1) 63

Figure 11. Graph of the mean ceramic dates versus the midpoints of the ceramic cross dates from Mills and Herr's analysis (1999) 64

Figure 12. Decomposition of correspondence analysis axes by percent of total inertia of the dataset explained by each dimension 65

Figure 13. The first correspondence analysis dimension plotted against the second with context and type scores 67

Figure 14. Correspondence analysis Dimensions 1 and 2 context scores by site 70

Figure 15. Square cosine values of ceramic types for correspondence analysis Dimensions 1 and 2 68 7

LIST OF FIGURES - Continued

Figure 16. Squared cosine values of correspondence analysis Dimensions 1 and 2 for contexts grouped by site 69 8

LIST OF TABLES

Table 1. Compositional database of Cibola "White Ware used in this analysis 25

Table 2. Eigenvectors identified by RQ-mode factor analysis using a subset of the elements so that specimens analyzed at CAL (Zedeno's sherds from Chodistaas Pueblo) could be included 29

Table 3. Zedeno's (1994) groups compared with the group assignments from this analysis. 33

Table 4. Group membership by region and site based on 21 elements 34

Table 5. Cibola White Ware from Point of Pines groups (Zedeno 2002) compared to compositional groups identified in this study 36 9

ABSTRACT

Understanding the mechanisms structuring increasing aggregation during the late- thirteenth century in the Silver Creek drainage in East-Central Arizona has been central to the Silver Creek Archaeological Project's research over the last ten years. Key questions about this pattern of increasing village size and sedentism concern the changing social and economic environment, particularly the emerging Pueblo IV craft and subsistence economies. Excavation and analysis data from a small site that immediately pre-dates the

Pueblo IV-period aggregation, Bryant Ranch Pueblo, allows us to better understand the trends in this transition. This study examines evidence of craft production and circulation through compositional analyses, as well as ceramic consumption patterns through multivariate analyses of the ceramic assemblages to address the changing social and economic contexts in the Silver Creek region and its surroundings during this transition. 10

CHAPTER 1. THE TRANSITION TO AGGREGATED PUEBLOS IN THE

WESTERN PUEBLO REGION

Aggregation of households into large villages is a process that has taken place in many areas of the world, including the American Southwest. During the Pueblo III and IV periods (A.D. 1150-1400), independent households in the American Southwest coalesced into larger, more sedentary and permanent village communities. Although the timing of this process varies, in the Western Pueblo area, it occurs in the late thirteenth century. This was a dynamic period of reorganization when larger, aggregated settlements were constructed, and widespread population movements occurred (Adler etal. 1996; Cordell 1996). The transition to village communities is integral to a wider set of concerns including changing subsistence strategies, craft specialization, social inequality, and sedentism. Many factors have been cited to explain the pattern of increasingly concentrated settlements during this time period.

These factors include the defensive advantages of large settlements in the face of increased conflict, intensification of agriculture, specialization in craft production and its labor requirements, environmental stress, and competition reduction between settlements in densely populated areas (see Adler etal 1996; Cordell 1996). These benefits do not come without social or economic consequences.

The risks that larger village communities face include poorer sanitation and health, higher travel costs to agricultural fields, and resource degradation in the case of agricultural fields (Cordell etal. 1994; Kahldahl etal. 2003). Larger groups face social problems, or

"scalar stress," and have greater difficulty reaching consensus in non-hierarchical settings

(fohnson 1982). Adler etal. (1996:403) point out that these aggregated settlements are not just concentrations of people, but communities, which "shared risks, interdependence and 11 identities." Other archaeologists have cited the importance of cooperation in these contexts

(e.g., Longacre 1966). In many cases, cooperation is not limited to the residents of a single village. Exchange relations between villages and between clusters of villages evidenced by the distribution of non-locally made ceramics (Duff 1999, 2002) point to economic interaction at a much broader scale.

Understanding the processes of aggregation necessitates an examination of both social and economic factors in the context of changing environmental conditions and the distribution of resources at household and community scales. These trends toward larger, more permanent village communities are exemplified above the Mogollon Rim in the Silver

Creek drainage (Mills 1998; Mills etal. 1999) and below the Rim on the Grasshopper Plateau

(Reid etal. 1996; Reid and Whittlesey 1999). Joanne Newcomb's demographic reconstruction models (1999) suggest that while aggregation progressed through the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries, the Silver Creek drainage's population was declining from its peak between A.D. 1050 and 1150. There is also evidence that hunting strategies changed rapidly during the late-thirteenth century (Dean 2003; Horner 1999), from a strategy of small game exploitation (jackrabbits) to communal hunting of large ungulates (pronghorn and deer). In addition to the faunal evidence, larger serving bowl sizes and public roasting features at Bryant Ranch Pueblo (AZ P: 13:133 ASU) suggest that some late Pueblo III communities were engaging in feasts (Dean 2003; Fenn etal. 2002). These trends all point to pronounced changes in the social and economic landscape in the Silver Creek, which raise other questions. What other kinds of social and economic changes were there? When do these changes occur in the Silver Creek area? How do these changes relate to neighboring regions? 12

Figure 1. Map of the Mogollon Rim region with thirteenth and fourteenth century sites discussed in the text.

The Pueblo III to Pueblo IV period transition has been a focus of the University of

Arizona field schools in both areas for decades, which provide a rich database to address the changing social and economic environment during the transition to larger settlements.

These questions guided the research at Bryant Ranch, which is a small site whose occupation spanned the transition to the early-Pueblo IV period in the Silver Creek drainage (see Figure

1). Occupation at this site begins at or just after the abandonment of the medium-sized

Pueblo III sites of Pottery Hill (AZ P:12:12 AS^^ and Roundy Crossing Pueblo (AZ P:12:22

ASM). The occupation of Bryant Ranch coincides with the construction of Bailey Ruin (AZ

P:ll:l ASM), an early Pueblo IV period settlement that had approximately 200-225 rooms 13

(Mills 1998; Mills et al. 1999). This study aims to illuminate the changing craft and subsistence economies by situating the data from Bryant Ranch in the larger context of aggregated village formation. This study addresses the changing social and economic landscape of the Mogollon Rim, by examining concomitant changes in the circulation and consumption of decorated ceramic vessels.

DEMOGRAPHIC AND SETTLEMENT PATTERN INFORMATION

When looking at the changing settlement patterns in the Silver Creek drainage, the overall population trends must be characterized. Joanne Newcomb (1999) conducted a demographic study of the study area, using full coverage survey data. The most relevant and accurate information from this study is from the periods following the pit house to pueblo transition (1999:46). Newcomb's reconstructions suggest earlier population peaks than other models, such as Lightfoot's (1984). Regardless of how the parameters of Newcomb's models were manipulated, they all point to a population peak at A.D. 1100. The population growth before this peak is associated with immigration to this area; the construction of communal great kiva structures; and small, dispersed settlements forming communities focused around these structures (Herr 2001). Jeffery Hantman's population reconstruction model also shows peaks in the 1lOO's in parts of the upper (Pinedale) and lower (Snowflake) portions of the Silver Creek drainage (1983: Table 20). Some of Newcomb's models suggest another peak around A.D. 1325, but an overall decline in population until the abandonment of the area around A.D. 1400 (1999). As population declined in the region, it became more concentrated in larger sites, while fewer and fewer small sites were occupied (1999:50).

Newcomb points out that this pattern conflicts with the hypothesis that large, aggregated 14 sites have associated small, seasonally used struaures (Newcomb 1999:50). The exception is

Grasshopper Pueblo, which appears to have smaller associated sites (Reid and Whittlesey

1999). However, the overall pattern is one of declining population during the transition to the Pueblo IV period and increased aggregation in this region.

This study addresses the relationship between these overall demographic trends by studying ceramic circulation and consumption behavior through this transitional period.

The study draws on data from sites occupied before (Pottery Hill, Roundy Crossing,

Chevelon and Hay Hollow Valley sites) and immediately following (Bailey Ruin) the Pueblo

IV transition, to situate the changes in the Silver Creek drainage that structure the archaeological record at Bryant Ranch. This study looks at the transition above and below the Mogollon Rim. Chodistaas Pueblo, in the Grasshopper area, has many similarities with the Bryant Ranch site, and thus provides an important site for comparison.

ARCHAEOLOGICAL SETTING

The Bryant Ranch site does not fit neatly into the general settlement pattern trends in the Silver Creek drainage. This region witnessed sharp population growth associated with immigration in the eleventh century (Hantman 1983; Herr 1999; Newcomb 1999). The twelfth century settlement patterns are characterized by small, dispersed settlements focused around a site with a communal, great kiva structure. An example of such a settlement is

Hough's Great Kiva and the small one to two room sites surrounding the great kiva site

(Herr 2002; Herr etal. 1999). The Silver Creek Archaeological Projea (SCARP) has studied other sites with great kivas in this region. Other projects have excavated great kiva sites in the Hay Hollow Valley (Longacre 1970), and in the Forestdale Valley (Haury 1985). Silver 15

Creek settlements occupied later, during the thirteenth century, were more concentrated settlements situated on prominent, elevated hilltop locations, or on valley bottoms in adjacent regions like the Forestdale or Hay Hollow valleys (Mills 1998:66). Some of these

Pueblo III sites were abandoned, but others may have grown into the larger pueblos that dominated the Pueblo IV period landscape. More aggregated settlements with increasingly enclosed plazas were constructed after A.D. 1275, many of which had over 100 rooms and fully enclosed plazas and courtyards (Kahdahl etal. 2003; Mills 1998; Mills etal. 1999; Reid et al 1996; Riggs 2001).

During the Pueblo III period (A.D. 1200-1275) settlements decreased in number, but became more concentrated, as several Silver Creek sites occupied during this period had more than 50 rooms. Pottery Hill, the site that defines Haury's Linden phase, is located on an elevated, finger-ridge and has about 45-50 rooms (Mills 1998; Mills etal. 1999). Pottery

Hill's size and length of occupation may be above normal for this time period and region, although Broken K, in the Hay Hollow Valley, had almost 100 rooms, and the Forestdale

Ruin in the Forestdale Valley was also quite large (Haury 1985; Hill 1970; Mills etal

1999:145). University of Arizona Field School excavated 3 rooms, a square kiva embedded in the roomblock, and several extramural features at Pottery Hill (Mills etal. 1999). Roundy

Pueblo is a smaller Pueblo III site situated in an elevated position near Show Low Creek.

The U.S. Forest Service and the Forest Service's Partners in Time program excavated this site, and both sites' ceramic assemblages were analyzed at the University of Arizona. These % assemblages have been included in this study.

To the west, in the Chevelon drainage, many of the sites located during the Chevelon

Archaeological Project and the Cholla Project surveys (Hantman 1983; Plog 1980; Reid and 16

Ciolek-Torrello 1982) have architecture that includes small, one- to two-room three-wall structures sometimes called "carports," located in the pinyon and juniper vegetation zone.

Earlier compositional analyses were conducted on Cibola White Ware from three of the largest Pueblo III sites in this area (Scholnick 1998), and are included below in this analysis.

These sites were dated using tree-ring specimens and because there were few cutting dates, adjustments were made based on ceramic assemblages (Plog 1980). The sampled sites range in size from a four-room structure, called CS 731, to the largest site located in the Purcell-

Larson survey area, called the Chimney Rock Site (CS 690 - AZ P:6:125), which is a U- shaped site comprised of three rows of rooms (two-deep) surrounding a plaza area. CS 412

(seven rooms) and the Chimney Rock site were probably constructed at about A.D. 1200, as wood from these sites yielded non-cutting tree-ring dates of 1195, and 1199, respectively.

Although these were not cutting dates, these sites were probably constructed at the beginning of the thirteenth century. However, CS 731 was likely inhabited at the transition to the Pueblo IV period, as a wood sample provides a non-cutting date of A.D. 1274, which is good evidence that this site was used during this transitional period.

The earlier analyses also included a sample from the Broken K (Hill 1970) and Carter

Ranch (Longacre 1970) sites in the Hay Hollow Valley, located northeast of the Silver Creek drainage. These sites represent both twelfth and thirteenth century communities, but the compositional data are useful as a reference for this study. Tree-ring dates and ceramic evidence point to a lengthy occupation at the Carter Ranch site (39 rooms) from about A.D.

1100 to 1225 (Longacre 1970; Mills and Herr 1999). The great kiva at Carter Ranch suggests considerable overlap with Hough's Great Kiva and Tla Kii; however, the seriation in this analysis places some of the later contexts as contemporary with Pottery Hill. The growth of 17

Broken K followed the abandonment at Carter Ranch, with some overlap. James Hill describes an early and a late phase at Broken K, which last from A.D. 1150-1220 and A.D.

1220 to 1283 (1970). Tree-ring dates suggest that the Joint Site was contemporary with

Broken K, with most of the dates from the A.D. 1230's and 40's. The presence of ceramics with Pinedale styles (Pinto Polychrome and Pinedale-style Cibola White Ware) suggests that occupation at Broken K lasted until at least A.D. 1280 (1970). Broken K (95 rooms) and

HHV 201 (80 rooms) were the largest sites inhabited in the Hay Hollow Valley during the

Pueblo III period (Adler and Johnson 1996:260). The configuration of Broken K is analogous to post-A.D. 1275 sites in the Silver Creek, with a plaza enclosed by four roomblocks. However, the literature does not mention larger sites post-dating A.D. 1275 in the Hay Hollow Valley. Compositional data from both sites serve as valuable reference, but the data from Broken K is more useful because it is contemporary with thirteenth century

Silver Creek sites.

In the late thirteenth century, aggregation continued in the Silver Creek, with fewer, small settlements and with some pueblos surpassing counts of 100 rooms. There is evidence that the slight population growth around A.D. 1275 may be a result of another immigration event from the north (Mills 1998). There is good evidence that the settlements in the region with more than 100 rooms post-date A.D. 1275 (Mills etal. 1999:239), although some of these settlements may have earlier components (Hantman 1983: Table 5; S. Van Keuren personal communication 2002). In this study of the Pueblo IV transition, we are primarily concerned with the sites that were occupied between A.D. 1275 and 1325. At this point, there are at least five sites in the Silver Creek area with more than 100 rooms, which include

Bailey, Flake (AZ P:8:l ASM), Fourmile (AZ P:12:4 ASM), Pinedale (AZ P:12:2 ASM), 18

Shumway (AZ P:12:6 ASM), Tundastusa (AZ P:16:3 ASM), and probably Showlow (AZ

P:12:3 ASM) as well.

In contrast to the Silver Creek area, where the population reached its peak at about

A.D. 1100 (Newcomb 1999), the Grasshopper Plateau had smaller populations during the

Pueblo III period, and witnessed large increases in population during the last quarter of the thirteenth century. This corresponds with the Great Drought (A.D. 1276-1299), which gripped the Four Corners region. Although the population growth of the Grasshopper

Plateau differs from the contraction in the Silver Creek drainage communities, in both areas communities were becoming increasingly aggregated at larger settlements (Reid etal. 1996;

Reid and Whittlesey 1999). For instance, there is evidence that people started living at

Grasshopper Pueblo, the major aggregated settlement in the area, at about A.D. 1275, but the site was reorganized and expanded at about A.D. 1300 (Reid 1989; Reid etal. 1996:78;

Reid and Whittlesey 1999). Bone chemistry studies show that many of the inhabitants of

Grasshopper Pueblo grew up in neighboring regions like the Chevelon and Silver Creek drainages and the area near what is now Payson, Arizona to the west of Grasshopper (Ezzo and Price 2002). Ceramic studies also demonstrate considerable ties with the Silver Creek area (Triadan 1997; Zedeno 1994). As with the inhabitants of Arizona Mountains, this population coalescence also occurred in other adjacent areas including the Anderson Mesa,

Middle Little Colorado River, Puerco River, and Upper Little Colorado River areas.

With site sizes increasing, public spaces within these sites were reconfigured.

Thirteenth century sites, like Pottery Hill consist of one to three roomblocks that define a plaza. At many sites the ritual structures were kivas embedded within these roomblocks. In the Silver Creek drainage, larger roomblocks fully enclosing communal spaces like plazas or 19 courtyards are constructed during the late thirteenth century. Although these larger plaza- oriented sites continued to have kivas within roomblocks, like Room 2 at Bailey Ruin (Mills etal. 1999), some argue that plaza spaces sometimes served secular purposes (Adams 1991).

Reid et al (1996:77) describe a similar pattern south of the Mogollon Rim, with pre-A.D.

1280 settlements clustered around focal sites commonly having a plaza or courtyard.

Between A.D. 1300 and 1330, roomblocks are constructed at Grasshopper, which enclose a large plaza and two other plaza or courtyard spaces (Reid 1989:83; Reid and Montgomery

1999; Riggs 1994, 1999, 2002). These architectural changes parallel shifts in decorated ceramic production (Crown 1994; Kahldahl etal. 2003; Fenn etal 2002; Van Keuren 2001) and circulation (Triadan 1997), and wild fauna exploitation (Dean 2003; Zack-Horner 1999).

RESEARCH DESIGN

The interactions between settlements that structured the social landscape of the fourteenth century Western Pueblo region have been the focus of several recent studies that used ceramic compositional analysis (Crown 1994; Duff 2002; Lyons 2001; Mills etal 1999;

Triadan 1997; Triadan etal 2002; Zedeno 2001). These analyses have led to new understandings of people's strategies of mobility and exchange to account for the movement of materials throughout pre-contact Arizona communities. In addition, these studies have yielded information about the events that structured these periods, with most of their emphasis on the late-A.D. 1300's. These studies contribute much to our knowledge about the large, aggregated settlements of the Pueblo IV period. However, relatively little ceramic production research of this type has been done on the structure of Pueblo III period interaction in this region, with Maria Nieves Zedeno's study (1994) of Chodistaas Pueblo on 20 the Grasshopper Plateau as the notable exception. To more fully understand the pan- regional shift towards larger, aggregated settlement clusters we must understand the structure of this area's dispersed Pueblo III communities. The compositional analysis of decorated ceramics from three thirteenth century Silver Creek settlements will yield insights into the mobility and exchange strategies of their inhabitants. In addition to the production and distributional information that we gain from this provenance study, the patterned consumption of ceramic vessels is another important source of information about these sites' inhabitants.

This study addresses social and economic changes during the late thirteenth century transition to aggregated villages in the Mogollon Rim region by examining the changing ceramic circulation and consumption patterns. Compositional analysis is used to characterize the circulation patterns of Cibola White Ware, a ubiquitous, widely produced decorated ceramic that dominates ceramic assemblages during these periods of Silver Creek prehistory. Instrumental Neutron Activation Analysis (INAA) was used to characterize the trace-elemental compositions of Cibola White Ware samples from Bryant Ranch and two other Pueblo III period sites in the Silver Creek area: Pottery Hill and Roundy Crossing

Pueblo. Analyses of Cibola White Ware from this site are compared with data from earlier and later sites in the Silver Creek drainage, as well as several sites in the Arizona Mountains, particularly the contemporaneous Chodistaas Pueblo (Montgomery 1992; Reid etal. 1996;

Zedeno 1994). These compositional data were added to a growing database from earlier studies (Duff 2002; Mills etal. 1999; Scholnick 1998; Triadan, Mills and Duff 2002; Zedeno

1994, 2002). Analyses of these compositional data help to identify the places that these transitional, circa A.D. 1275, settlements were interacting with, and to make qualitative 21 descriptions of the amount of intra- and inter-regional interaction during the thirteenth and early-fourteenth centuries. These compositional analyses are described in Chapter 2.

The second approach used to study these transitions is tracking trends in ceramic production versus consumption patterns. The succession of temporally sensitive decorative styles is used to generate a fine-grained seriation, which can be used to relate deposits at different sites as well as deposits at a single site. In this study, creating a fine-grained chronology is important to control the relationships between the sampled deposits at multiple sites. A multivariate statistical analysis technique, called correspondence analysis

(CA), is used to situate the sampled assemblages chronologically. However, this technique does not just create a seriation of temporally sensitive decorated ceramics. As will be seen, it also has the potential to identify and isolate non-chronological variation in assemblages of discarded ceramics. While isolating temporal change in ceramic consumption, CA identifies changes in the consumption of serving bowls decorated in the Pinedale style. Although comparable ceramic assemblage data are sparse in the adjacent regions, some more general comparisons may be made with consumption patterns during this transition in areas like the

Grasshopper Plateau. This isolates the rapid spread and initial stages of the widespread adoption of Pinedale style ceramics (Crown 1994; Kahldahl etal. 2003). The results of the

C A including the seriation and the non-chronological dimensions of ceramic consumption are presented in Chapter 3. 22

CHAPTER 11. COMPOSITIONAL ANALYSES

Compositional analyses of decorated ceramics provide information that allows the characterization of changes in ceramic circulation during the transition to larger settlements during the late-thirteenth century. Compositional analyses were used to identify sources of

Cibola White Ware, and to describe their circulation during the Pueblo III and early Pueblo

IV periods. This chapter will discuss the evidence supporting the formation of chemical compositional groups. The analyses that will be discussed are both exploratory multivariate analyses, which reduce the multivariate data into a smaller number of more comprehensible variables, and measures of group dispersion, which were used to refine compositional groups. The quantitative methods will be described in the course of discussing the chemical bases of these groups. More detailed discussions of the quantitative methods used in this compositional analysis may be found elsewhere (see Baxter 1994; Glascock 1992; Neff 1994,

2002).

The database, which is described below, is made up of Cibola White Ware sherds and whole vessels that come from excavated deposits at sites with occupations in the thirteenth century. Most of the sherds sampled for this study were selected because they were large enough to recognize the design style. Care was taken to avoid selecting multiple sherds from the same vessel in order to analyze as many specimens as possible given the funds available. Given the available funding, it was not feasible to analyze enough sherds to create a random sample from each site. The quantitative data are weighted in a sense, because the sample is not random and more sherds were selected from some sites than others. This compositional dataset consists of 123 Cibola White Ware sherds from the

Silver Creek drainage and totals 385 sherds when Cibola White Ware data from other regions 23 are considered. This provides a sizeable database with which the circulation of Cibola White

Ware during the thirteenth and early-fourteenth centuries may be characterized.

The compositional analysis has revealed a general pattern of local production of

Cibola White Ware vessels in the Silver Creek drainage. Although there may have been some circulation of these vessels, the data indicate that these pots were largely produced locally. The analysis reveals three groups, two of which represent production in the eastern and western portions of the Silver Creek drainage and the larger Mogollon Rim region. A third is formed by the Chodistaas Pueblo specimens, which are similar to but compositionally distinct from the western group. These groups are mainly a result of variation in geological raw materials, which is suggested by the differences in chemical composition. The major chemical difference between these groups is in the rare-earth elements, which is representative of the parent clays. These groups can be linked to different areas through comparison with raw materials and an examination of the sites from which the specimens were recovered (Weigand etal. 1977:24).

With this compositional analysis, the goal is to identify chemical differences that represent the different raw material sources and differences in their combination as a ceramic, which will aid in characterizing the circulation of Cibola White Ware vessels.

Compositional patterning is dependent on four factors: the geological variation in the region, technological variation in creating pottery, and chemical alteration during a pot's use-life and after it's deposition in the archaeological context. The primary factor determining a ceramic vessel's elemental composition is the combination of ceramic raw materials used. Because raw materials are structured by the local geology, a compositional study such as this is often limited by the heterogeneity of a region's geology. The effects of chemical alteration during 24 a pot's use-life or after it is deposited can be reduced for the purposes of this analysis by critically inspecting those elements that are mobile (e.g. Na, K, Ca, Rb, Sr, Cs and Ba).

However, several of these mobile, alkali metals are useful in discerning geological differences in raw materials, as potassium and sodium may be enriched due to feldspar inclusions in the clay matrices of ceramics. The other alkali metals substitute for potassium and sodium in weathering processes. Because these elements can represent differences in raw materials, some of these elements are considered in this analysis. In the processes of forming and interpreting compositional groups, we must try to recognize the underlying causes of chemical variation in a database.

THE COMPOSITIONAL DATABASE

The compositional database of Cibola White Ware sherds comes from several regions in east-central Arizona. These Cibola White Ware specimens were recovered from prehistoric sites located in the Silver Creek and Chevelon drainages, the Hay Hollow Valley, and several sites on the Grasshopper Plateau (see Table 1). Because White Mountain Red

Ware and Cibola White Ware from Bailey Ruin were produced with the same raw materials at Bailey Ruin (Mills etal. 1999), the Bailey White Mountain Red Ware data were included in this analysis. Including these samples increases the sample size and allows for a better definition of that compositional group. Because this study is concerned with identifying the production and circulation patterns of Cibola White Ware in the Silver Creek drainage, the majority of the sherds are from sites in this area. However, Cibola White Ware data from other analyses, including Maria Nieves Zedeno's analysis of the ceramic assemblage from

Chodistaas Pueblo (1994,1995) and Point of Pines Pueblo (2002), Andrew Duff's study of 25 interaction between Upper Little Colorado settlements (1999,2002), and Barbara Mills and others analyses of Bailey Ruin ceramics (1999) are included in the database. In addition to these analyses, Daniela Triadan and her colleagues (1997; Triadan, Mills and Duff 2002) have formed compositional groups that have been used for comparison in this analysis.

Table 1. Compositional database of Cibola White Ware used in this analysis. Site Name Region Source Laboratory Count CS412 Chevelon Scholnick 1998 MURR 27 CS690 Chevelon Scholnick 1998 MURR 24 CS731 Chevelon Scholnick 1998 MURR 18 Chodistaas Grasshopper Plateau Zedeno 1994 CAL 47 Grasshopper Grasshopper Plateau Zedeno 1994 CAL 5 Grasshopper Spring Grasshopper Plateau Zedeiio 1994 CAL 2 P:14:197 Grasshopper Plateau Zedeno 1994 CAL 1 Broken K Hay Hollow Valley Scholnick 1998 MURR 10 Carter Ranch Hay Hollow Valley Scholnick 1998 MURR 10 Point of Pines Point of Pines Zedeno 2002 MURR 49 Bailey Ruin Silver Creek Mills et al. 1999 MURR 20 Bryant Ranch Silver Creek This study MURR 23 Pottery Hill Silver Creek This study MURR 26 Roundy Pueblo Silver Creek This study MURR 51 Shumway Pueblo Silver Creek This study MURR 3 Baca Upper Little Colorado Duff 1999, 2002 MURR 20 Casa Malpais Upper Little Colorado Duff 1999, 2002 MURR 9 Hooper Ranch Upper Little Colorado Duff 1999, 2002 MURR 10 Rattlesnake Point Upper Little Colorado Duff 1999, 2002 MURR 20 Table Rock Upper Little Colorado Duff 1999, 2002 MURR 10 Total 385

These data were collected from analyses conducted at both the University of

Missouri Research Reactor (MURR) and the Conservation Analytical Laboratory (CAL) in conjunction with the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) reactor. These laboratories use Instrumental Neutron Activation Analysis (IN A A) to collect elemental 26 concentrations of 31 elements, although Ni and Sr concentrations are frequently below detection limits (Glascock 1992:19). Because these labs periodically analyze the same standards, the data may be compared directly (Glascock 1992:15). Data on Al, Ca, Dy, Mn,

Sr, Ti, V, and Zr were not collected for Zedeno's Chodistaas specimens (1994).

Comparisons with Zedeno's specimens had to be performed using a subset of elements, reduced by these eight elements. To interpret variation in the suite of elemental data collected for each sherd, several multivariate statistical procedures were used.

STATISTICAL ANALYSES

The statistical analyses that were employed in this study follow routines developed by

Hector Neff and Ronald Bishop (Baxter 1994; Bishop and Neff 1989; Glascock 1992; Neff

1994,2002). These techniques of standardization, missing data replacement, data reduction, and group formation have been combined as a set of programs written in the GAUSS language by Hector Neff. My analytical procedures use these GAUSS routines in manners outlined by Michael Glascock (1992) and Neff (2002).

MISSING VALUES

Missing values were removed from the dataset in two ways. First, elements that fell below the detection limits, which are nickel (Ni) and strontium (Sr) at MURK and CAL, were removed from the datasets used for these analyses. Other elemental concentrations with missing values, which may have been present but below detection limits, were replaced with values that minimize the Mahalanobis distance to the centroid of the group. In the case of unassigned specimens, the Mahalanobis distance was calculated to the centroid of their 27 group. These data were then recalculated after inclusion in a compositional group based on the group centroid.

STANDARDIZATION

The elemental concentrations of trace elements in pottery specimens usually vary in orders of magnitude. According to Glascock (1992:16), these compositional data appear to fit a normal distribution after they are transformed using a base 10 logarithm. Differences in orders of magnitude in these parts per million data can occur between major (Al, Fe, and K) and trace elements, such as the rare earth elements. Without transformation, these orders of magnitude differences would have the effect of weighting the more abundant elements over trace elements, which may be just as important in discerning meaningful differences in ceramic composition related to raw material choice.

DATA REDUCTION

In compositional analyses data reduction techniques are used to capture the underlying structure of a dataset (Baxter 1994; Neff 1994, 2002). Cluster analyses help identify the structure of the dataset, and to suggest groupings of similar sherds. Although cluster analyses may be helpful, it is necessary to use other multivariate techniques to interpret the structure of the dataset. Techniques such as principal components analysis

(PCA) or factor analysis may be used to identify the dimensions along which suites of elements covary. Hector Neff considers these methods of pattern recognition enabling display of the data (2002:18), making the large data matrices of trace-element analysis comprehensible. These techniques can produce 2-dimensional plots showing the ways that the elements, specimens, and both elements and specimens are associated (Baxter 1994:49). 28

Covariation of elements can yield clues about the bases of compositional differences in the dataset, like differences in raw materials parent geology, or post-depositional alteration.

PCA extracts major dimensions of variation or eigenvectors, or linear combinations of variables. It creates a set of uncorrelated variables from the original trace elements, which usually covary. Simultaneous R- and Q-mode factor analyses were used to identify the structure of this database, which saves loadings for the variables (R-mode) and the data points (specimens) (Q-mode). Factor analysis differs from PCA because the eigenvectors are rotated, not orthogonal to each other. Before discussing the results of the factor analysis, it is necessary to outline the selection of the dataset used in these data reduction procedures, as the sample used determines the results these procedures use.

The strategy for building the dataset for this factor analysis was to focus on compositional variation within the Silver Creek drainage, so that it would be possible to identify vessel circulation between sites. With this goal in mind, the factor analysis may better isolate compositional differences that are related to differences in raw material sources within the drainage. The sample consists of 292 Cibola White Ware specimens from the

Mogollon Rim area, and the 10 White Mountain Red Ware specimens that are compositionally identical to the Bailey Ruin Cibola White Ware (Mills etal. 1999:311).

Andrew Duff's Cibola White Ware specimens were not included in the factor analysis because he has demonstrated that they were produced in the Upper Little Colorado region.

However, Duff's compositional groups were used as references to determine if ungrouped specimens in this analysis were made in the Upper Little Colorado area. Because the majority of these specimens come from SCARP sites, the factor analysis is biased towards the compositional patterning of this sample. Alternatively, a factor analysis of all 29 compositional samples, including many wares from different time periods and regions of the

Southwest, would identify the eigenvectors that may be more useful in differentiating gross geological differences in raw clay and temper sources. Constructing the analysis in this manner incorporates the assumption that Cibola White Ware specimens with light pastes from the Grasshopper Plateau and Point of Pines Pueblo were made from raw materials found above the Mogollon Rim. Zedeno has showed that Cibola White Ware vessels made with local materials are clearly differentiated from the light-pasted Cibola White Ware made with raw materials from above the Mogollon Rim (1994, 1995, 2002).

Table 2. Eigenvectors identified by RQ-mode factor analysis using a subset of the elements so that specimens analyzed at CAL (Zedeno's sherds from Chodistaas Pueblo) could be included. Cummulative Eigenvalue % Variance % Variance 7.9071 37.6529 37.6529 3.0946 14.736 52.3889 2.6599 12.6662 65.0551 1.561 7.4332 72.4883 1.3181 6.2768 78.7651 0.9725 4.6311 83.3962 0.547 2.6049 86.0011 0.5312 2.5294 88.5306 0.5036 2.398 90.9286 0.4172 1.9868 92.9154 0.3135 1.4927 94.4081 0.2653 1.2632 95.6713 0.2311 1.1006 96.7719 0.1962 0.934 97.7059 0.1924 0.916 98.6219 0.0987 0.4701 99.092 0.0682 0.3248 99.4167 0.0602 0.2868 99.7036 0.0442 0.2103 99.9139 0.0106 0.0507 99.9646 0.0074 0.0354 100 30

The RQ-mode factor analysis identified major axes of variation in the dataset, and how suites of elements structure the variance. It was performed on a subset of the whole dataset, which was made up of the Silver Creek Cibola White Ware specimens (and Bailey

Ruin White Mountain Red Ware), the non-local Chodistaas Cibola White Ware (Zedeno

1994) and all of the Cibola White Ware specimens from Point of Pines. The first two dimensions account for 52 percent (Figure 2, Table 2) of the sample variance. The first dimension represents variance in the concentration of rare-earth elements (Figure 3). The rare-earth elements, which usually covary, are often a signature of the clays' parent materials

(Hector Neff, personal communication 1998). The second dimension appears to capture the chemical differences between these groups. Patterning of the elements' scores represents meaningful geological differences in raw material selection. The second dimension opposes alkali metals (Ce, Rb, and K) and actinide-series, rare-earth elements (U, Th) with transition metals (Fe, Co, Zn and Cr). David Killick has aided in the interpretation of the geological bases of these chemical differences. The concentration of alkali metals may represent potassium and sodium feldspar-rich materials. Sodium and potassium may be substituted for other alkali metals, which can cause this group of elements to covary as they do in this dataset. Uranium and thorium are also quite similar to each other, and are known to be present in some of the highest concentrations worldwide in Colorado Plateau sandstones.

Therefore it is not surprising that these elements covary in the second Principal Component.

The patterning of transition metals represents a different raw material source that is lower

(negative PC 2 scores) in basaltic material (David Killick, personal communication 2003). 31

The first two dimensions identified by the factor analysis separate the sample into two groups, which I have labeled "Group 1" and "Group 2." Most of the variance of these groups is due to concentrations of rare-earth elements. Although the rare-earth elements differentiate a portion of the Chodistaas sherds from Group 1, they do not separate the dataset into geographically patterned groups as previously thought (Scholnick 1998). As is sometimes the case with multivariate analyses such as this (see Triadan etal. 2002), a larger sample changes the structure of the compositional groups' centroids, and eigenvectors in n- dimensional space. With additional data, it is the second dimension, which opposes the alkali metals and uranium and thorium with the transition metals that separate these groups.

A bivariate plot of La and Ce (Figure 4) supports the division that the factor analysis suggests (Figure 3). However, there are two- and three-group solutions, where Group 1 may either include all of the Chodistaas sherds, or only a small subset of them. The majority of the Chodistaas sherds have higher concentrations of rare-earth elements, suggesting slightly different clay sources than the core of Group 1.

GROUP REFINEMENT AND COMPARISON

The groupings identified through the factor analysis were refined on the basis of their Mahalanobis distances from the centroid of a multi-dimensional group. Using the

Mahalanobis distances the probability of a sherd's membership in a group may be calculated using Hotelling's T^ statistic (Glascock 1992; Neff 2002), which is the multi-dimensional equivalent of the Student's t-statistic (Baxter 1994:194). An iterative process was used to refine these groups. In this process jackknife-probabilities of group membership were calculated and sherds with low probabilities of membership were removed from the group. 32

The removed sherds may either be added to another group or reserved as outliers. Because changes in a group's makeup affect the centroid of the group, probabilities must be recalculated after each step. This process was repeated until the misclassification of the sherds in each group was minimized. This method was used to classify specimens in two or more groups, and to project a specimen against a compositional group with removal

(jackknife methods). The groups identified in this analysis were also compared with reference groups from previous analyses (Duff 1999, 2002; Mills etal. 1999; Triadan 1997;

Triadan et al. 2002).

After many iterations of this refinement process, two solutions for the grouping problem were identified. These two solutions are based on the full suite of elements (n=29), and the subset of elements used (n=21) to evaluate the Chodistaas sherds. The subset is necessary because the Chodistaas data was collected at NIST, which does not collect the same suite of elements as MURR. With the full suite of elements a 2-group solution was created. A third group may be formed when the Chodistaas sherds are considered, although it reduces the suite of elements. However, the primary groups (1 and 2) are essentially the same in analyses with the full suite and subset of elements. Many of the Chodistaas sherds appear to be distinct from Groups 1 and 2, which shall be called Group 3. This separation is apparent in scatterplots of the groups along Principal Components 1 and 2 (Figure 4), and

Fe and Eu (Figure 5) as Zedeno showed (1994: Figure 8.1). This can also be seen in a bivariate plot of these groups with respect to La versus Cs concentration (Figure 6).

However, Group 3 is not well defined because it is so small (n=24). This group has considerable overlap with Groups 1 and 2, as sherds from Groups 1 and 2 have significant probabilities of membership in Group 3 (Appendix A). However, Group 3 sherds have 33 higher concentrations of rare earth elements than Group 1 sherds, but have lower concentrations of alkali metals or lower Principal Component 2 scores (Figure 4). Even though the Mahalanobis distances do not suggest a compositional group that is distinct from

Groups 1 and 2, the members of Group 3 were made from raw materials that were different from those used to make Group 1 and 2 sherds. Zedeno's (1994) analysis also recognizes differences between the sherds that make up Group 3 (Zedeno calls these sherds Group 1)

(see Table 3).

Table 3. Zedeno's (1994) groups compared with the group assignments from this analysis.

Zedeno 1994 Grou]ps: Group 1 Group 2 Group 3

Group 1 - 4 2

Group 2 - - -

Group 3 20 - - total 20 4 2

The groups identified using RQ-mode factor analyses, and refined using

Mahalanobis distances, appear to have archaeological significance. Groups 1 and 2 appear to be patterned geographically, with Groups 1 and 2 primarily comprised of specimens from sites in the western and eastern portions of the Silver Creek drainage, respectively. Group 1 is dominated by sherds from Bailey Ruin and Bryant Ranch, and also includes sherds from sites in the Chevelon drainage to the west (see Figure 1, Table 1). The majority of the

Cibola White Ware from the Broken K and Carter Ranch sites, located outside the Silver

Creek drainage in the Hay Hollow Valley, is distinct from Group 2, but two Broken K sherds were assigned to Group 1. This suggests a western Silver Creek origin of these Cibola

White Ware vessels from Broken K. Group 2 is primarily comprised of sherds from Pottery 34

Hill, and Roundy Pueblo, both of which are in the eastern portion of the Silver Creek drainage. Also, two of the three analyzed Cibola White Ware sherds from Shumway Pueblo in the northern part of the Silver Creek drainage were assigned to Group 2. Shumway

Pueblo is located near the confluence of Show Low Creek and the main branch of Silver

Creek. Pottery Hill and Roundy pueblos are located within the catchment of Show Low

Creek. Bryant Ranch and Bailey Ruin are situated in the catchment of Cottonwood Wash, which joins Silver Creek further north, near the modern town of Snowflake.

Table 4. Group membership by region and site based on 21 elements. Region Site Name Group 1 Group 2 Group 3 Outlier Total Silver Creek Bailey Ruin 18 2 20 Bryant Ranch 21 2 23 Pottery Hill 2 19 5 26 Roundy Pueblo 2 39 9 50 Shumway 2 1 3 Hay Hollow Valley Broken K 2 8 10 Carter Ranch 10 10 Chevelon CS412 13 13 26 CS690 18 6 24 CS731 12 6 18 Grasshopper Plateau Chodistaas 3 24 20 47 Grasshopper 1 4 5 Grasshopper Spring 2 2 AZ P:14:197 1 1 Point of Pines Point of Pines 15 33 48 Total 95 75 24 119 313

Compositional analyses using these statistical analysis techniques usually identify a sizeable number of outliers. For instance, Triadan's analyses identify 57 of 331, or 17.2 percent of the ceramic specimens analyzed as outliers (1997: Appendix C). Many of the sherds in the present dataset were not assigned to any of the three groups (Table 4). Some of the outliers identified in these analyses fall within the 90 percent confidence ellipses of 35

Groups 1 and 2 when plotted on Principal Components 1 and 2 (Figure 7). Because the

Mahalanobis distances are calculated using all of the elements in the analysis, outliers are differentiated from Groups 1 and 2 due to probabilities of membership in either 21- or 29- dimensional space (Appendix B). However, many of the outliers are sherds that have already been attributed to locally made Point of Pines groups (Zedeno's Groups 1 and 2).

Without the locally made Cibola White Ware from Point of Pines, this analysis identifies 95 sherds as outliers, which is 32.8 percent of the dataset. Of course, additional analyses with larger sample sizes may identify compositional groupings within the outliers.

Sherds from Zedeno's Point of Pines Groups 1 through 3 and Groups 6 and 7

(2002) do not show significant probabilities of membership in the groups identified in the present analyses. None of the Cibola White Ware outliers from Zedeno's (2002) analysis matched Groups 1 and 2 of this study (Table 5). The sherds that were assigned to the groups identified in this study were from Zedeno's Groups 4 and 5. Although Zedeno

(2002:160) interprets Group 4 as being similar to a reference group derived from Chinle

Formation materials found in Southeastern Utah (Neff et al. 1997), 11 of 12 Cibola White

Ware specimens from this group show membership in Group 2. It should be noted that there are Chinle Formation outcrops in the Upper Little Colorado area, around the Petrified

Forest and Zuni areas, as well (Duff 1993; Mills 1995). These analyses suggest that Cibola

White Ware in Zedeno's Group 5 is compositionally similar to Silver Creek area materials.

Of the twelve Cibola White Ware sherds from Zedeno's Group 5, only three show probabilities of membership in Group 2, while the rest were not assigned to either group.

Interestingly, none of the Point of Pines specimens show significant similarities to the

Group 1 or Chodistaas sherds. 36

Table 5. Cibola White Ware from Point of Pines groups (Zedeno 2002) compared to compositional groups identified in this study. Point of Pines Group: POPO POP 1 POP 2 POP 3 POP 4 POPS POP 6 POP 7 Group 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Group 2 0 0 0 0 11 3 0 0 Outliers 12 5 4 3 1 9 0 0

COMPARISON WITH RAW MATERIALS

Efforts to match raw material samples collected from the Silver Creek drainage with

these compositional groups have been largely unsuccessful. Because it is difficult to locate

geological raw materials that were used in antiquity, probabilities of group membership as

low as one percent are good evidence of source location. However, the absence of a match

is not equivalent to negative evidence of source location. It is possible that the particular

clay sources exploited by the potters making these vessels were not located in the raw

material survey. It is also possible that in processing the raw materials for a pot, the

prepared clays' composition was altered. As expected, only the sherd-tempered

archaeological clay from Bailey Ruin showed probability of membership in either of the

groups. This clay sample (DTC637) was collected from a sealed jar found embedded in the floor of Room 1 at Bailey (Mills et al, 1999). It showed a 2.1 percent probability of

membership in Group 1, which is primarily comprised of Cibola White Ware sherds from

Bryant Ranch and Bailey Ruin. Although the White Mountain Red Ware sherds from Bailey

Ruin were not included in the present analysis, they are compositionally indistinguishable from the Bailey Cibola White Ware (Mills etal. 1999:311). Other archaeological clay and unfired sherd samples from Point of Pines (n=4) (Zedeno 2002), and the Grasshopper 37

Plateau (n=5) (Triadan 1997) were tested against the Cibola White Ware groups, but these samples had little to no probability of membership with these groups.

Raw clay samples were also tested against the Cibola White Ware groups identified in this study. Earlier studies (Mills et al. 1999) showed that the raw clay samples do not match the Bailey Cibola White Ware and White Mountain Red Ware group. However, with the addition of samples to the Bailey group, the centroid of Group 1 should change, which raises the possibility that additional clay specimens may match the group. Also, these raw material specimens were compared with Group 2, with the hope that a match would be found.

However, no samples of raw sedimentary or alluvial clays collected by Mills and her students matched the compositional groups identified in this study.

Because neither the raw clay specimens from the Silver Creek drainage nor the raw and archaeological clays from other regions produced a match with these Cibola White Ware groups, another strategy was embraced. Principal component scores for the raw and archaeological clays were calculated based on the Cibola White Ware database, and compared with the scores for the dataset. The raw material data themselves were not included in the principal components analysis, so that the eigenvectors from the original

RQ-factor analysis would be preserved. By comparing these clays to the Cibola White Ware compositional groups with respect to the original eigenvectors, information about how the clays differ from the compositional groups may be gained. The clay samples have similar

Principal Component 1 scores, indicating that their concentrations of rare earth elements are alike (Figure 8). The clay specimens appear to differ from both Cibola White Ware groups along Principal Component 2. Their negative Principal Component 2 scores indicate that the sampled clays have relatively lower concentrations of alkali metals and higher 38 concentrations of transition metals. If the interpretation of the eigenvectors derived from the principal components analysis is correct, the clay sources utilized in antiquity had larger amounts of sodium or potassium feldspars, and less basaltic material, causing their lower

Principal Component 2 scores. Although several clay specimens appear to fall within the 90 percent confidence intervals of the Cibola White Ware groups (Figure 8), this scatterplot represents the best 2-dimensional representation of the dataset, and the clays must also differ from the compositional groups in other ways as well.

SUMMARY

The compositional analyses suggest several things about the circulation of Cibola

White Ware within the Silver Creek drainage and wider circulation in adjacent areas. They point to local production of Cibola White Ware at Bailey Ruin and Bryant Ranch Pueblo, which is supported by the match between archaeological clay and Group 1 (Mills et al.

1999:Figure 9.5), and the high percentages of Cibola White Ware specimens that are members of Group 1 (Table 3). Although no raw material samples have been found to match Group 2, the percentages of sherds that belong to Group 2 from Pottery Hill and

Roundy Pueblos point to an eastern origin for this group (Table 3). Many of the Chodistaas

Pueblo sherds not made on the Grasshopper Plateau (Zedeno 1994,1995) are distinct from

Group 1 in concentrations of rare earth elements, indicating a separate raw material source for this group.

The memberships of sherds from sites outside the Silver Creek drainage in these compositional groups suggest several patterns of Cibola White Ware circulation. It appears that Chevelon drainage sites had ties with sites in the western portion of the Silver Creek 39 drainage, but many of the specimens from the Chevelon sites were not assigned to either

Groups 1 or 2. Membership of Chodistaas sherds in Group 1 suggests some mechanism of interaction between the inhabitants of Chodistaas Pueblo and those of Bryant Ranch or

Bailey Ruin. However, with over half of the Chodistaas Cibola White Ware forming a group that indicates a distinct geological source, much of the Cibola White Ware used at

Chodistaas Pueblo came from an area outside the western and eastern portions of Silver

Creek drainage where the study sites are located. The membership of Point of Pines Cibola

White Ware sherds in Group 2 also suggests that the inhabitants of this pueblo had some contact with the eastern Silver Creek drainage, and perhaps the inhabitants of Roundy

Pueblo and Pottery Hill. The Hay Hollow Valley Cibola White Ware specimens also show biased membership similar to Point of Pines or Chevelon sites. However, only two of twenty (10%) sherds from these sites were assigned to Group 1, indicating some interaction with the western part of the Silver Creek drainage.

The composition of these reference groups does indicate patterns of interaction within Silver Creek drainage and between the inhabitants in this area and other adjacent areas. But it must be acknowledged that the absence of a match between a specimen and either reference group cannot be taken as negative evidence of interaction between sites.

Although there were definitely mechanisms of Cibola White Ware circulation that transported pots out of the Silver Creek drainage, these analyses suggest that within this region there was little transport of Cibola White Ware vessels. This is probably because the resolution of compositional analyses like these is limited by the geological homogeneity in the study area. For instance, there may have been circulation of Cibola White Ware pots between sites as close together as Bryant Ranch and Bailey Ruin, but due to the similarity of 40 geological raw materials, we are precluded from resolving differences in the composition of the ceramics made at the two sites. Because of the geology in the Silver Creek area and the provenience of our compositional samples, it is not possible to characterize general patterns of exchange or social interaction. However, this analysis suggests that the late thirteenth and early fourteenth century Cibola White Ware was made and consumed locally at Bailey (Mills et al. 1999) and Bryant Ranch. As for the Pueblo III period material, it is difficult to tie our eastern, early compositional group to a specific location in absence of raw material matches.

This analysis also suggests that there was little intra-regional circulation across the Silver

Creek area from east-to-west or vice versa, which has been noted in earlier studies (Hantman

1983). The interpretation of these compositional groups will be discussed further below. 41

10 15 20 25 30 35 40 Percent of Variance Explained

Figure 2. Percent of the total variance accounted for by each eigenvector identified in the R- Q mode factor analysis of the Cibola White Ware dataset. 42

00 c> ?""""" " 1 "1 1'"" i I "" • f

U) o - -

x'° XSE K«.l> d X "

i X Eu

• O • X 1 •1 • . -0,2 -0.0 0.2 0,4 0.6 O.S 1.0 PC01

Figure 3. Loadings of variables on Principal Components 1 and 2. 43

_To -fSe

^.Rb

4.St>

+ Lu • n "> DH _Yb

H-"* & £ + Lfl + Tb^ild'^'=ftd^' .f Sm

+ Fe + zn + EU

Key A Chodist33s Sherds O

-J I I l_ -0.4 -0.2 -0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 PC01

Figure 4. Factor scores of Groups 1 and 2 with Chodistaas Cibola White Ware and elements. Ellipses represent 90 percent confidence intervals. Although they are depicted separately, several of the Chodistaas sherds were assigned to Group 1. 44

Group 1 ^ confidence \ ellipse CM

L±J 4-4- O

a

o I 4.0 4,1 4.3 4.4 4.5 4.6 FE

Figure 5. Chodistaas Cibola White Ware plotted with Group 1 specimens, and a 90 percent confidence ellipse for Group 1 showing that Chodistaas' Group 1 is distinct from this analysis's Group 1 (see Zedeno 1994:Figure 8.1). Only seven sherds from Zedeno's (1994) analysis were assigned membership in Group 1 based on Mahalanobis distances. This graph shows that many more fall within a 90 percent confidence interval. 45

o

ID

m ^ u .

fN

® & ¥y o % Key A Chodistaas Sherds O Groupl • G roup 2 DO 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2.0 2.2 LA

Figure 6. Plot of logarithm base-10 transformed concentrations of Lanthanum and Cesium of groups 1 and 2, and Chodistaas sherds. Several of the Chodistaas sherds were assigned to Group 1, but they have been plotted separately to show the overlap. The ellipses represent conservative 90% confidence intervals. 46

Figure 7. Cibola White Ware outliers plotted with 90 percent confidence ellipses for Groups 1 and 2. Although many of the outliers fall within the confidence ellipses in this two- dimensional graph, when log-transformed elemental concentrations are considered, the outliers do not show high probabilities of membership in the core groups. 47

T <; C* ;U

xRh + + j-Sb

\.VGroup 2 , •^- + afoup ^•^^+ + ) + v+++ + ,Yl> •r ++ ifcrtH++ xLG +J_•+?3+/+4+; ± +++ "ji--*4 + x^^S' jt + + +H-xH-^4- t4.f xSni ++ + +-tt- X ^2n 4- 4.

xCo _l I -1,2 -0.8 -0,4 -0,0 0,4 0.8 1.2 PC01

Figure 8. Plot of raw and archaeological clays with 90 percent confidence ellipses of Groups 1 and 2 plotted against Principal Components 1 and 2 from the original Cibola White Ware database. This indicates that several of the clay samples are similar to the core groups, although Mahalanobis distance probabilities are not significant (except for the prepared clay from Bailey Ruin). 48

CHAPTER III. MULTIVARIATE PERSPECTIVES ON CHANGING CERAMIC

COMPOSITIONAL VARIATION

If we are to evaluate the changing ceramic circulation patterns in the second half of the thirteenth century, a crucial step is to create a chronology that orders these circulation and consumption behaviors. In the case of the compositional analyses, this means establishing a chronology to relate the sampled deposits. The northern Southwest is blessed with a relatively fine-grained chronology, which has been established by dendrochronology and the cross dating of archaeological materials not found in association with tree-ring samples.

Although these methods of chronological control are relatively fine-grained, they are not without their problems. Even though tree-ring dates are fine-grained enough to yield the year and even season a beam was cut, there may be differences between the cutting date of the beam and the dates of the archaeological deposit in which the beam is situated (Dean

1978). Old wood problem further complicates the use of archaeological tree-rings (Schiffer

1986). Many of the events that we wish to date in ceramic compositional analysis are not associated with the construction of architecture. The deposits sampled for such analyses accumulate over a period of time, which may be much later than a construction beam was cut. Moreover, many archaeological deposits and sites do not have wood that can be dated.

Thus, we must employ alternative methods of chronological control to complement tree-ring dates and ceramic cross dates. This chapter explores several quantitative methods of seriating decorated ceramic assemblages, including correspondence analysis.

Why do we need a fine-grained chronology when studying the behaviors associated with the circulation of ceramic vessels? Maria Nieves Zedeno (1994, 1998, 2002) has 49 proposed models that link different migration behaviors with various manufacture and discard patterns of pottery, or the life histories of pots (Schiffer 1992). Models seeking to inform us about the life histories of artifacts require "strict temporal and spatial control"

(Zedeno 1998:467). Identification of different types of migration depends on the relative positioning of non-local goods within a site (1998,2002). Zedeno's models postulate that a migrant group will bring a suite of artifacts with them to their new location, which are likely to reach the end of their use-lives and enter the archaeological record soonest (Haury 1958;

Zedeno 1998:468). She also shows that pots with hybrid combinations of non-local designs and potting techniques start showing up after non-local pots have been discarded. The make-up of these early assemblages may tell us a great deal about who established a settlement in cases of migration events as at Point of Pines. Later deposits may also yield information about the people with whom the inhabitants of a site were interacting. In many cases, stratigraphic relationships alone cannot establish the order of deposition of all of a site's contexts, because these relationships do not always exist between the deposits we are interested in. For example, there are not always stratigraphic relationships between contexts in different portions of sites, such as different rooms or between rooms and extramural deposits. For these reasons, archaeologists (e.g. Duff 1996a) have turned to other methods, such as cross dating or seriation, to discern chronological relationships between assemblages within or between sites. Ideally, both techniques can be used together in order to evaluate the accuracy of a chronology. 50

CROSS DATING

In Arizona, post-Archaic archaeological materials are typically dated either through their association with tree-ring dates, or the well-established dates gleaned from the association of ceramic design styles with these dates. Barbara Mills and Sarah Herr (1999) take the latter approach for the Mogollon Rim region, tying ceramic styles to the corpus of tree-ring dates that have been obtained from within this region. This method of ceramic cross dating identifies associations between absolute dates and the ceramics recovered from these contexts, and identifies date ranges for each chronologically sensitive design style. The original cross dates for the Mogollon region were established through research conducted by

Emil Haury in the 1930's (1985: Table 1). The dates associated with different ceramic design styles have been refined by David Breternitz (1966), and later by Mills and Herr (1999).

These dates are continuously being refined as new tree-ring dates and ceramic data are added to our database, which theoretically have some input into the date ranges assigned to ceramic styles. The distribution of the tree-ring dates has a significant contribution to the resolution with which these date ranges may be assigned.

The database of tree-ring dates from the Mogollon Rim region is quite extensive.

The collection of dates in this region began in the initial years of dendrochronology, when

Haury and Lyndon Hargrave (1931) excavated a number of sites near Show Low to obtain datable specimens as part of the National Geographic Society's Third Beam Expedition.

They dated well over 500 mostly unprovenienced wood specimens from the area, one of which was the famous beam, HH-39, that linked the prehistoric tree-ring chronology with the historic chronology. These tree-ring dates were primarily from architectural wood recovered from the Showlow Ruin, with some additional samples collected from the 51

Pinedale Ruin, which both date primarily to the fourteenth century. Additional dates have been obtained from more recent archaeological research in nearby areas, which include 512 dates from the Grasshopper Plateau, 69 dates each from the Forestdale and Hay Hollow valleys, as well as a 14 dates from sites in the Chevelon Drainage and 569 from other sites in the Silver Creek Drainage (Mills and Herr: Table 8.2). The geographical distribution of these dates centers on the Grasshopper Plateau. The majority of all tree-ring dates are from the thirteenth and fourteenth century (Figure 9), which is probably a result of the excavations done on Pueblo IV period sites. This skewed distribution of tree-ring dates suggests that thirteenth and fourteenth century design styles may be dated more precisely than earlier styles, because earlier sites have fewer independent dates. Even with the 1233 tree-ring dates from this area, many of the sites sampled for this project do not have tree cutting dates.

Regardless, tree-ring dates are used to establish dates of production through cross dating, but they do not provide a means of producing comprehensive intra-site chronologies. In addition, the distribution of tree-ring dates does not allow for regional variation in the dating of ceramic styles, in part because the tree-ring dates are not evenly distributed.

MEAN CERAMIC DATES VS. CERAMIC CROSS DATES

The simplest quantitative method of calculating the mean date of a deposit is to use

Stanley South's (1977) technique. This technique calculates a weighted average of the median production dates for each ceramic type by taking into account the frequencies of each type in an assemblage. This method does not deal well with deposits that represent multiple occupations of a site, and does not resolve the number of years that a deposit accumulates (for other critiques, see Majewski and O'Brien 1987). The mean ceramic dating 52 technique developed by South yields a single point that may be thought of as the chronological center of gravity. Some have adjusted these calculations to account for the length of time over which types were produced, so that types with wide production ranges contribute less to the resultant date (Christenson 1994:304). Because a single point says nothing about the length of time over which an assemblage accumulates, Vincas Steponaitis and Keith Kintigh (1993) developed a method of calculating a point with probability ranges for each assemblage much like a probability distribution for radiocarbon dates. This method treats each type as having a probabilistic distribution, which can be broken down by decade.

Each type is weighted by frequency and summed to create 50 percent and 90 percent confidence intervals. The ceramic types are weighted by each type's length of production in order to maximize the short-lived types' contribution.

Peter McCartney and others (1994) developed a computer program to determine these confidence intervals based on the Steponaitis and Kintigh (1993) method. This program also takes into account the presence and absence of certain types in assigning dates to an assemblage. Mills and Herr (1999) used this program to calculate date ranges for each distinct depositional unit of the excavated SCARP sites, and several others in this region.

The date ranges of the ceramic types used in the dating experiment by Mills and Herr (1999;

Table 8.4) are based on the cumulative refinements made by many archaeologists dating back to Emil Haury's early 1930's chronology (Haury 1985). Very few of the sites with copious tree-ring dates were included in Mills and Herr's (1999) cross dating because they lack published counts of sherds, or because the ceramics were not systematically collected.

Very few absolute dates were gleaned from the sites the SCARP project excavated. Only three sites with tree-ring dates were included in their cross date calculations, and it is not 53 clear if these sites had any explicit contribution to the production dates used for the cross dating. Because of the lack of tree-ring dates from SCARP sites, the ceramic cross dates were evaluated against the archaeological stratigraphy. At Bailey Ruin, the stratigraphic relationships showed that the ordering of beginning dates based on the cross dating results usually were in accordance with the stratigraphic data.

A significant advantage of calculating date ranges for the deposits is that they represent the duration of a depositional event. However, they do not identify the chronological "center of gravity" of the deposit. The traditional South (1977) formula provides the date of this point, allowing the ordering of deposits along a temporal axis.

These measures of beginning and end dates introduce some difficulty in producing a relative chronology within a site, because many of the assemblage date ranges share beginning and/or end dates. This problem is particularly prevalent when large numbers of contexts are involved, as in the graphical representation of the cross-date ranges (with 50 percent confidence intervals) obtained by Mills and Herr (1999: Figure 8.8) (Figure 10). The same beginning and end dates of a deposit may mean that they are contemporaneous, when there may be slight differences in their chronological "centers of gravity." As Mills and Herr

(1999:284) point out, one reason for these overlapping beginning and end dates may have to do with McCartney et al. 's (1994) adjustments for the presence and absence of ceramic types.

Another reason may have to do with the resolution of the beginning and end production dates entered into McCartney's program (McCartney etal. 1994; Mills and Herr 1999:284).

Because these date ranges only resolve decadal differences, it is not possible to create fine­ grained chronology both within and between sites. 54

In order to evaluate the effects of McCartney etal's (1994) method, the midpoints of these date ranges were compared with mean dates calculated using South's formula. The dates estimated by the ceramic cross dating and the mean ceramic dating methods are quite consistent in their assignment, but their values are quite different. The two results of the two formulas are well correlated (Spearman's 9 = 0.760). The residual values of the ceramic cross dates (MCD-Ceramic Cross date) show a consistent bias in their midpoint estimation when compared to the mean ceramic dates (Figure 11). It appears that the McCartney method consistently estimates the midpoints above the midpoints of the mean ceramic dates as the residual values show, although there is quite a bit of noise in the residual values. The difference in the two midpoints may be a constant used to reduce the effects of heirloom ceramics. It is unclear which of these techniques produces a better relative order on the basis of their midpoints. To discern a fine-grained chronology, we must turn to techniques of ceramic micro-seriation (e.g., Duff 1996a) using correspondence analysis.

SERIATION

What advantage does seriation provide over traditional methods of chronological control? Seriation enables us to place deposits from sites into a relative chronology, using the assumption that artifact types or styles show unimodal frequencies over time, producing the familiar battleship-shaped curves. This technique can be used to order deposits within sites and to order depositional events of different sites. In this case, the ceramic frequencies may be used to order the deposits, which provide better resolution than occurrence and phyletic seriation (O'Brien and Lyman 1999). Frequency seriation has come a long way since

James Ford's seminal experiment (Philips etal. 1951), often depicted in the literature on 55 seriation with reproductions of Ford's (1962;Figure 8) thumbs and paper chps technique.

The Ford technique produces a relative order that involve subjective judgments by the archaeologists and it is not always able to provide a single solution that is the best ordering

(Marquardt 1978). In addition, when using a large number of types it is difficult for the archaeologist to process such large amounts of information (Marquardt 1978). The SCARP ceramic database consists of 172 contexts with 16 ceramic types, an impossible task for thumbs and paperclips alone! These reasons have led archaeologists to propose a number of other quantitative methods for ordering these matrices of artifact categories and assemblages

(for a detailed discussion of these see Marquardt 1978). Interestingly, more recent variants of the thumb-and-paperclip technique are still endorsed because they allow subjective judgments (Lipo et al. 1997). A powerful multivariate technique that has recently been used to produce seriation chronologies (without paperclips) is correspondence analysis (CA) (see

Baxter 1994).

Recently, Fraser Neiman has used CA to seriate historic documents and ceramic assemblages (Neiman and Alcock 1995; Scholnick etal. 2000). CA has also been used to seriate prehistoric artifact assemblages in the Southwest (Duff 1996a). Andrew Duff used

CA to order deposits based on frequencies of decorated ceramic types, creating a chronology that orders excavated deposits at Pueblo de Los Muertos near Zuni, New Mexico. The advantage of CA is that it captures the multidimensional variation of the data matrix and reduces it to a smaller number of dimensions, which can be represented graphically. For seriation, a single axis that captures the temporal variation is desirable. Another advantage of this approach is that it displays both the variables and the cases graphically, easing interpretation of the ordering of assemblages along (the first) correspondence analysis 56 dimension (Duff 1996a:90). CA scores each assemblage and each type along each identified eigenvector. The first dimension scores are proportional to the mean of the period over which the assemblage accumulated (Scholnick etal. 2000; ter Braak 1986); therefore, the mean ceramic dates of the assemblages can be used to evaluate the seriation order. This is important because in different areas there may be slightly different production (and circulation) dates for each ceramic type included in the analysis (Deetz and Dethlefsen 1965;

Lipo etal. 1997). This seriation approach will isolate local or regional chronologies that may not be represented by mean ceramic dates or ceramic cross dates established for the larger area. In addition, correspondence analysis has the potential to isolate chronological variation, thereby allowing us to identify additional axes of meaningful variation, represented in higher order representations of the data matrix (two or more dimensions).

CORRESPONDENCE ANALYSIS RESULTS

The important question about the results of this correspondence analysis concerns the capture of a temporal dimension that allows us to order contexts on the basis of their scores. Another question about the correspondence analysis results is whether or not higher order representations capture meaningful variation in the ceramic assemblages. In this analysis, the first dimension of the correspondence analysis captures the major axis of variation (29.4 %) in the data matrix (Figure 11). The first dimension does capture temporal variation, which a plot of the first and second context and type scores demonstrates (Figure

12). Because correspondence analysis, mean ceramic dating, and ceramic cross dates measure the chronological center of gravity of each type, the first dimension correspondence analysis scores may be compared with these other dating measures to evaluate the 57 chronological signature of the first axis (Figure 13). Dimension 1 is highly correlated with the mean ceramic dates for the contexts (Spearman's q = 0.6985, p < 0.0001). Therefore, with good cross dating, a chronology could be constructed using one of these other methods, like mean ceramic dating. However, the potential of correspondence analysis is that other dimensions of variation may be identified. If the first dimension represents temporal variation, what do other correspondence analysis dimensions represent?

The literature on correspondence analysis (Baxter 1994; Madsen 1988) discusses instances where two-dimensional representations of non-linear multivariate data produced using principal components analysis or correspondence analysis yield a characteristic arch.

This is caused by the non-linear, battleship-shaped distributions of the types; however, the chi-squared distances correspondence analysis uses tend to straighten out these arcs to some degree (F. Neiman, personal communication 2002). Correspondence analysis does produce a good one-dimensional representation of Duff's (1996a) data set, while only one type,

Tularosa Black-on-white, contributes to the second correspondence analysis dimension. Is the arch present in this study's Mogollon Rim region data matrix? Variation along the second correspondence analysis dimension is primarily accounted for by concentrations of

Pinto Polychrome (negative scores), and White Mountain Red Ware types (positive scores).

According to Eraser Neiman (personal communication 2002), the degree to which a ceramic type varies with respect to a particular axis may be measured. The squared cosine is a measure of the angle between the correspondence analysis eigenvector and the line segment between a point the centroid of the data. Squared cosine measurements may be calculated for both observations or contexts, and variables or ceramic types. The cosine scores for 58 ceramic types are useful in identifying how well that dimension captures its position in multidimensional space. In this case, the second correspondence analysis dimension captures variation in both Pinto and Pinedale Polychrome types, which are Roosevelt Red Ware and

White Mountain Red Ware types with analogous Pinedale style designs (Figure 15). The second correspondence analysis dimension captures much of the variation within the late

(Bryant Ranch Pueblo and Bailey Ruin) contexts, which the squared cosine values show

(Figure 16). The second dimension accounts for 13.73 percent of the variation in the data matrix, while the first and second dimensions account for 42.98 percent of the variation in the data set. This pattern suggests that there is non-chronological variation during this time period.

DISCUSSION

The correspondence analysis succeeded in capturing the temporal variation in the ceramic assemblages, ordering the 170 contexts that comprise the data set. Performing such a feat using the traditional thumb and paperclips method is a daunting proposition. The number of possible orderings of this data matrix is approximately 7.257 x 10^°^! Because correspondence analysis uses relative frequencies of ceramic types, it is possible to compare an ordering based on the first dimension with other measures like ceramic cross dates or mean ceramic dates. One then asks: why perform a correspondence analysis if other measures like ceramic cross dates are capable of ordering the assemblages? A major reason is that mean ceramic dating and ceramic cross dating cannot be used alone to identify areas in which the production dates for certain artifacts differ (Deetz and Dethlefsen 1965; Lipo et 59 al 1997). Another potential benefit of correspondence analysis is that it can isolate chronological variation from other axes of variation in the data set.

Based on the correspondence analysis of this data set, it appears that there is some sort of non-chronological variation in the later contexts. Many of the late contexts appear to have greater than expected frequencies of Pinto Polychrome, while others appear to be enriched in Pinedale Polychrome. It is interesting that the Bryant Ranch contexts are separated from the Bailey Ruin assemblage in the two-dimensional representation of the data set (Figure 17). How is this variation to be interpreted?

Some plausible explanations of this variation concern either different consumption preferences in the past or that we are comparing deposits that are unlike (sampling error). It is possible that the inhabitants of Bryant Ranch Pueblo were preferentially consuming Pinto

Polychrome over White Mountain Red Ware or Cibola White Ware alternatives, which were also decorated in the Pinedale style. The higher than expected frequencies of Roosevelt Red

Ware sherds has been observed by others (Fenn etal 2002). It is clear that Pinto

Polychrome is the dominant decorated ceramic type occurring at Bryant Ranch, comprising over 50 percent of the decorated assemblage, a higher percentage than Bailey Ruin (Fenn et al. 2002). This difference in decorated ceramic consumption may signal that the inhabitants of Bryant Ranch had a different identity from residents of other sites, consuming a particular type of decorated pottery.

One method of testing this possibility is to perform the same correspondence analysis without types that are suspect, in order to see if a better representation of time can be identified. This will help us determine if the removed types contribute to the temporal 60 dimension, or whether a more parsimonious model of time can be expressed with fewer types. To do this, another set of correspondence analyses was performed on the Silver Creek

Pueblo III and Pueblo IV period sites in the database (Bailey Ruin, Bryant Ranch, Pottery

Hill, and Roundy Pueblo). Three analyses were performed in order to look at the key measure (Spearman's q) of whether or not Dimension 1 produces an ordering of the contexts that matches the mean ceramic dates. One analysis was performed with all of the ceramic types well represented by these assemblages (n= 14), which yielded a good representation of time with the first dimension, and which accounted for 34 percent of the variation (q= 0.74854). Other correspondence analyses were performed with just Cibola

White Ware, and just red wares, which produced different rank-order correlations with

Pearson's q. These analyses show that the Cibola White Ware samples capture temporal variation extremely well (Q = -0.93606). The red wares also appear to capture the chronology well (q = -0.58582), but there appears to be non-temporal patterning in the red ware assemblages. These additional correspondence analyses support our interpretation that

Dimension 2 represents differential red ware consumption patterns.

Bryant Ranch was not occupied for a long period of time (probably about 15 years), and was probably only comprised of one or two households, while Bailey Ruin had a larger population and was occupied over about 50 years. Thus, a preference for a single decorated ceramic type would be more apparent at such a small site. This pattern also suggests that the earlier assemblages were much more homogenous than the late assemblages, which may be due to more dispersed settlements which participated in much more spatially distributed social networks (Hantman 1983). 61

Alternatively, the contexts from which the samples were collected may have introduced some error into the data set. The Bryant Ranch site's assemblages selected for this analysis come from a wide range of contexts, including room floors, trash deposited within rooms, trash deposited in middens, and materials deposited in the plaza spaces of these sites. A large portion of the Bryant Ranch site was excavated, including four rooms, a large area of the plaza, and portions of the midden. The Bailey assemblage is similarly diverse, with a room, midden, and plaza assemblages represented. Although no clear pattern emerges when we inspect the ordering of each context, different formation processes could be introducing error in the late contexts. This cannot be ruled out, but it is clear that the

Bryant Ranch site is unusual with such a large proportion of Pinto Polychrome. Although the concentrations of Pinto Polychrome and other Pinedale style types (Cedar Creek

Polychrome and Pinedale Polychrome) are normally distributed over time in Bailey Ruin assemblages, they represent some variation other than time. The early Bailey Ruin contexts this analysis identifies are not scored as low on Dimension 2 as Bryant Ranch deposits, or the reconstructible vessel assemblage from Chodistaas Pueblo. Perhaps the earliest Bailey

Ruin assemblages have not been included in the correspondence analysis. Although sampling error may be contributing to the variation along the second correspondence analysis dimension, it is clear that the consumption preferences of the Bryant Ranch and

Chodistaas communities were different from their neighbors at Bailey Ruin. 62

150

200 600 1000 1400 Date (A.D.)

Figure 9. Tree-ring dates from the Silver Creek drainage and the surrounding regions (after Mills and Herr 1999: Figure 8.8). 63

TKPIT KKIVA S160M

m o 1RFFALL FH19331

m

lU

O DC. Q. CRKIVA CKR6T CKR4RF CKK1RFF,

CKGK CKGKF LL

RR6SUBFL

BRR1 BFLOOR

DATE (A.D.)

Figure 10. Ceramic cross date ranges calculated with 50 percent confidence intervals (after Mills and Herr 1999: Figure 8.1). 64

1500

D, 1300

s 1100

900 1000 1100 1200 1300 1400 MCD

Figure 11. Graph of the mean ceramic dates versus the midpoints of the ceramic cross dates from Mills and Herr's analysis (1999). 65

29.24

15 20 Percent

Figure 12. Decomposition of correspondence analysis axes by percent of total inertia of the dataset explained by each dimension. 66

1350

1300 + + +"*"+++

+ + + 1250 + Q U 1200 "H- S

1150

1100 + + t

1050 T -1 -0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 CA Dim 1

Figure 13. Correspondence analysis Dimension 1 scores for contexts versus mean ceramic dates. The relationship is not linear, but the correlation between the rank-orders produced by the two measures is high (Spearman's Q = 0.6985). 67

pinedaleWMRW Aj. + + ^wakina

-1 -0.5 0.5 1 1.5 2.5 CA Dim 1

Figure 14. The first correspondence analysis dimension plotted against the second with context and type scores, showing the ordering of ceramic types and contexts that these axes produce. 68

0.45

0.4 pinedaleWMRW

0.35

0.1

0.05

0 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 Sq. Cos. Dim 1

Figure 15. Square cosine values of ceramic types for correspondence analysis Dimensions 1 and 2, which show the red ware bowls styles (St. Johns Polychrome, Pinto Polychrome, and Pinedale-style White Mountain Red Ware) account for much of the non-chronological variation. 69

0.6

0.5

0.4

• a*N Q • Bailey Ruin <« 0.3 • Bryant Ranch o U A Chodistaas RV's 0.2 O Other Sites • • o • 0.1 o*

*• 0( 0 to .

0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Sq, Cos. Dim 1

Figure 16. Squared cosine values of correspondence analysis Dimensions 1 and 2 for contexts grouped by site. This shows that Bryant, Bailey and Chodistaas contexts account for much of the variation along Dimension 2. O Bailey Ruin

-1 1 CA Dim 1

Figure 17. Correspondence analysis Dimensions 1 and 2 context scores by site. 71

CHAPTER IV. INTERPRETING CIRCULATION AND CONSUMPTION

PATTERNS AND CONCLUSIONS

The primary objective of this study is to situate the Bryant Ranch settlement on the

dynamic social and economic landscape of the Mogollon Rim during the transition between

the Pueblo III and IV periods. The patterns of decorated ceramic production and consumption help us compare the patterning we see from Bryant Ranch analyses with early

and later settlements in the Silver Creek drainage, like Pottery Hill, Roundy Pueblo, and

Bailey Ruin. It is also possible to look at larger geographic patterning in the movement of

decorated ceramics with these analyses of Cibola White Ware sherds from the Silver Creek,

Hay Hollow, Grasshopper, and Chevelon areas. Although all of the sites included in this

study could not be included in the correspondence analysis because comparable data has not

been collected, the CA yields a multidimensional perspective on the rapidly changing ceramic

consumption patterns within the Silver Creek drainage. This chapter examines the results of

the compositional and correspondence analyses to address the circulation and consumption

of ceramics during the Pueblo III to Pueblo IV period transition in the Mogollon Rim

region, which may yield insights about the processes of village formation at about A.D. 1275.

COMPOSITIONAL GROUPS AND CIRCULATION PATTERNS

The compositional analysis allows us to characterize two aspects of Cibola White

Ware circulation. This sample allows us to identify and refine the core Silver Creek groups.

With these core groups, it is possible to recognize circulation patterns within the Silver Creek

drainage and look at how they changed over time. The other benefit of this analysis is that it 72 enables us to refine the source areas of non-local pottery in the surrounding regions. With a

better idea of where the late thirteenth century Cibola White Ware found in other regions was made, we may better describe the population reorganization of this transitional period.

The trace-element analysis of the Cibola White Ware sample from the greater

Mogollon Rim region yielded two robust compositional groups, with good indication that

there may be a third group. As earlier studies showed (Mills etal. 1999:311), most of the

Cibola White Ware and White Mountain Red Ware from Bailey Ruin are chemically similar

to the prepared clay recovered archaeologically. This study shows that the Cibola White

Ware sherds analyzed from Bryant Ranch may be attributed to the same raw material sources

used by Bailey Ruin potters, although the pots were probably not made at Bailey. The two

sites are located near each other, and share access to similar raw material sources. Although

only members of Group 1 can be tied to a spatially discrete area, it is probable that Group 2

also represents local manufacture as well. Local manufacture of vessels in this group is a

reasonable interpretation to make given the spatial distribution of Group 2 members

between Pottery Hill and Roundy. However, the local geology precludes us from identifying

a source with any more precision than this. Also, two of the three sherds from Shumway

Pueblo that were included in this analysis were members of Group 2, which may have to do

with the geological similarities with Pottery Hill and Roundy, but the sample is too small to

make any conclusions. Small numbers of sherds from the Roundy (n = 2 or 4%) and Pottery

Hill (n=2 or 7.69%) samples were assigned membership in the Group 1, which indicates that

there was a small amount of pottery that was brought from the western to the eastern

portion of the Silver Creek drainage. However, no sherds from the Bryant Ranch or Bailey

Ruin samples were assigned to Group 2. 73

As the seriation shows, Bailey and Bryant Ranch are later than Pottery Hill and

Roundy Pueblo, and there may not have been significant overlap in their occupations.

Therefore, we cannot argue that the Pottery Hill and Roundy residents were interacting with

Bailey or Bryant Ranch. More likely, they were interacting with residents of earlier sites in the western part of the Silver Creek drainage. However, the compositional homogeneity of the Cibola White Ware from Bryant Ranch and Bailey point to local manufacture, circulation, and consumption of this ware, or at least circulation within this geologically similar area. The homogeneity of the Bailey and Bryant Cibola White Ware group suggests that there was not extensive circulation of Cibola White Ware vessels across the Silver Creek area, but this is not to say that there was no exchange or residential movement within the

region. It should be recognized that other wares or forms could have been circulated more frequently during the late-thirteenth and early-fourteenth centuries. We know that Cibola

White Ware and White Mountain Red Ware pots were being circulated outside the Silver

Creek drainage into adjacent areas like the Grasshopper Plateau (Mills etal. 1999; Triadan

1997; Triadan etal. 2002; Zedeno 1994, 1995).

In some cases, the circulation between Silver Creek sites and sites outside the region was more significant than Cibola White Ware circulation across the region. The identification of core Silver Creek compositional groups allows us to pin down the origins of

Cibola White Ware circulated outside the Silver Creek to sites in neighboring regions, like

Chodistaas Pueblo, Point of Pines, Broken K, and sites in the Chevelon drainage. These compositional groupings indicate that these neighboring sites had relationships with distinct portions of the Silver Creek drainage. For instance, all of the Point of Pines Cibola White

Ware made above the Rim can be attributed to the eastern portion of the Silver Creek 74 drainage. There were no sherds that were assigned to Group 1, even though there were several large communities in the western part of the Silver Creek drainage, like the Bailey and

Pinedale sites, when immigrant communities moved to Point of Pines during the Great

Drought (A.D. 1276-1299) (Haury 1989). All of the Point of Pines sherds that were compositionally similar to Silver Creek Cibola White Ware were assigned to Group 2.

The large proportion of non-local decorated reconstructible vessels from the floor assemblage of Chodistaas Pueblo may be the result of intensive reciprocal exchange

relationships with people living above the Mogollon Rim to the north (Zedefio 1994:92).

More than half of the decorated ceramics from this assemblage were Cibola White Ware, and of these, only two of these vessels were made locally (1994:76). Many of these vessels form a group (Group 3: n=24 or 51 %) that indicates at least one source, which is similar to the western group (Group 1). But as discussed in Chapter 2, these ceramics were made from

raw materials that were geologically distinct. This study did not identify any Cibola White

Ware from Silver Creek sites that was compositionally similar to these vessels, and suggests a different geological provenance for the raw materials, although they could have been made in an area of the Silver Creek that was not investigated. Three of the Chodistaas vessels were assigned membership in Group 1, and may have been made at or near Bailey or Bryant

Ranch. Additionally, the transitional Tularosa/Pinedale styles used to decorate the Bryant

Ranch Cibola White Ware jars are very similar to those used on Chodistaas jars. In many other respects, Chodistaas material culture is very similar to Bryant Ranch, as will be discussed below.

There is also some evidence that people brought Cibola White Ware from the western part of the Silver Creek to the Chevelon drainage and to the Hay Hollow valley. 75

Sherds analyzed from the sites that were occupied until about A.D. 1275 in these regions show compositional affiliation with the Bailey and Bryant group (Group 1). The sample of analyzed sherds from Broken K Pueblo was quite small, but 2 out of 10 were attributed to this group. In the Chevelon drainage, 18 of 24 sherds (75 %) from Chimney Rock Pueblo

(CS690) could be attributed to the western group. However, this may just indicate geological heterogeneity, because other Chevelon sites had similarly high proportions of Group 1

Cibola White Ware.

The Cibola White Ware circulation patterns during the Pueblo III and early Pueblo

IV periods may be characterized as local manufacture with limited, informal exchange within the Silver Creek drainage. However, these vessels were circulated in a more substantial

manner outside of the Silver Creek drainage to neighboring areas in the Arizona Mountains to the south. Both eastern and western parts of the Mogollon Rim country should be counted as origins for some of the groups moving into this region in the last quarter of the thirteenth century, which supports recent bone chemistry data from Grasshopper (Ezzo and

Price 2002). This study has shown that part of the initial population at Point of Pines came from or had ties with the eastern portion of the Silver Creek drainage. However, after these immigrants departed the Silver Creek and regions further north on the Colorado Plateau and settled at Point of Pines, a new repertoire of ceramics was forged there (Haury 1958; Zedeno

2002). The case in the Grasshopper Plateau was quite different, in that after people settled the region, contact with the adjacent settlements to the north may have continued in some capacity.

In addition, the community at Chodistaas derived a small number of their CWW vessels from the area around Bailey or Bryant Ranch, if not the early settlements at these 76 sites. However, the majority of vessels is dissimilar from this group, and probably represents some other locus of manufacture that has yet to be tracked down. Triadan and Zedeno

(2003) also argue that the topography of this region had a significant role in structuring the movement of people from north to south, and consequently the defensive posture of the settlement patterns (see Tuggle and Reid 2001). With these data it is hard to evaluate the nature of the interaction from north to south; however, it is clear that residents of both the late-Pueblo III and Pueblo IV period settlements on the Grasshopper Plateau had significant contact with the Silver Creek drainage, and shared much in the way of material culture.

TEMPORAL CONTROL OF SAMPLED DEPOSITS

The seriation allows us to refine the chronology for the Pueblo III to Pueblo IV transition in the Silver Creek drainage. In particular, this analysis allows us to integrate the

Bryant Ranch site into the chronology constructed before the site's excavation (Mills etal.

1999), and to identify overlapping occupations during this transition. The beginning of the

Bryant Ranch site's occupation span has been placed at A.D. 1270, which is based on ceramic data and non-cutting tree-ring dates. Pottery Hill was occupied until about A.D.

1275, and possibly into the early A.D. 1280's, based on the presence of a small amount of

Pinto Polychrome style Roosevelt Red Ware (Mills and Herr 1999:290). The CA orders the chronological center of gravity of each deposit, and does not yield any information on the beginning or end dates of the period over which a deposit was formed. However, the overlap of deposits on CA dimension 1 would provide good evidence that there was some overlap in these sites' occupation spans. The initial occupation at Bryant Ranch did not have significant overlap with the end of the Silver Creek Pueblo Ill-period sites in our database 77

like Pottery Hill or Roundy Pueblo. However, the CA points to the contemporaneous establishment of Bryant Ranch and Bailey Ruin. It had been thought that Bryant was only

occupied for approximately 15 years, as the latest tree-ring date is A.D. 1280 (non-cutting)

(w3.arizona.edu/"scarp/sites/bryant). Mills and Herr have also placed the initial

occupation of Bailey Ruin at A.D. 1275 (1999:291). The CA shows that several of the

deposits were accumulated over the same periods. The seriation places deposits from

Rooms 2 and 4 later than several Bailey Ruin assemblages, including trash fill of rooms

bordering the plaza as well as lower plaza deposits. The most significant finding of the

correspondence analysis is how different the decorated ceramic assemblages at these two

sites are.

BRYANT RANCH CERAMIC CONSUMPTION IN CONTEXT

Correspondence analysis has great potential in ordering archaeological assemblages,

both within sites (Duff 1996a; Scholnick etal. 2000) and between sites. Seriation based on

CA complements chronologies based on cross dates or mean ceramic dates, because it has

the potential to recognize local variations in chronologies (ter Braak 1985), producing an

ordering of the sites based on local consumption patterns. The seriation enables the samples

selected for compositional analysis to be situated in the regional chronology. But it does

more than this. The analysis also suggests that CA can isolate non-chronological differences,

which are a result of more subtle consumption preferences, from chronological variation.

The challenge is to interpret this non-temporal variation in terms of the research questions

central to this study. 78

Ceramic consumption practices changed drastically during the early Pueblo IV period, sometimes within the occupation of a single site (Montgomery and Reid 1990). This represents more than just the unimodal or battleship-shaped curves usually exhibited by temporally sensitive ceramic types. The multivariate analyses with and without red wares demonstrate that the red ware consumption patterns at Bryant Ranch and Chodistaas are very similar, although the Cibola White Ware compositional data are not. This suggests that these communities had some sort of shared consumption preferences, but these were not

just the norm at the time they were occupied. Other contemporary assemblages in the

Mogollon Rim region had different ceramic consumption preferences, particularly red ware preferences. Bailey Ruin has temporally similar deposits, but these were not as high in

Roosevelt Red Ware (see also Fenn etal. 2002). It appears that the later contexts at Bailey

Ruin also represent changing preferences for red ware bowl styles, and became dominated

by Pinedale-style White Mountain Red Ware bowls. But what does this say about the emergence of Pueblo IV social and economic patterns?

The analyses show that during the transition to the Pueblo IV period, there was differentiation in ceramic consumption patterns within a small portion of the Silver Creek drainage. Both Bailey and Bryant Ranch inhabitants exploited very similar raw material sources to make Cibola White Ware vessels. These vessels were also technologically similar.

In addition, the adoption of new hunting strategies can be tracked with the Bailey and Bryant

Ranch faunal assemblages and the large roasting features found at Bryant Ranch (Dean 2003;

Fenn et al. 2002; Zack-Horner 1999). During the late thirteenth century these sites may have even shared similar architectural configurations. The large Pueblo IV sites with fully 79 enclosed plazas grew in an agglomerative manner. Before reaching the configurations we recognize after their abandonment, these sites may have had similar beginnings as sites like

Bryant Ranch or Chodistaas. However, these transitional sites did not make it, and there is evidence that both were burned in a ritual abandonment (Mills personal communication,

2000; Montgomery 1992,1993). It is clear that at these sites, people were heavily engaged in using Pinto-style red ware bowls, and may have been producing them. And like other communities in the region, the people who lived at Chodistaas and Bryant Ranch were embracing the widespread Pinedale-style decorations that began at this time. But for some reason, after these transitional sites were abandoned, ceramic consumption turned dramatically away from this style, towards the production and consumption of White

Mountain Red Ware at Silver Creek sites like Bailey Ruin. These White Mountain Red Ware bowls came to dominate the ceramic assemblages of Silver Creek aggregated villages of the early Pueblo IV period (Kahldahl et al. 2003). They were also brought to the Grasshopper

Plateau in considerable numbers (Triadan 1997). Although the meaning of these changes are quite complex, the patterns that this study identifies suggest that Bryant Ranch was similar to contemporary settlements in may ways, like decorated ceramic production, access to raw materials, and hunting practices. But for some reason, the site was abandoned in the early

Pueblo IV period, and its inhabitants did not embrace White Mountain Red Ware analogues to the Pinto Polychrome that was being consumed preferentially.

The introduction of Pinto Polychrome bowls at Bryant Ranch suggests that along with the changes in hunting strategies and increased artiodactyl consumption, there were concomitant changes in serving vessels. These polychrome bowls are more elaborately 80 decorated than their earher red ware precedents (Showlow Red Ware) (Stinson 1996). The introduction of this new style of bowl, which have often been interpreted as serving bowls, and the increased artiodactyl consumption suggest that there were major changes in the foodways of the Bryant Ranch inhabitants. The presence of large roasting features in the

Bryant Ranch plaza, which contained high concentrations of deer (Dean 2003; Fenn etal.

2002), suggests that food preparation practices may have changed during this time. These are not just changes in diet, but also changes in overall domestic practice, reflected in the

preferential consumption of Pinto Polychrome. The diet of people at Bailey Ruin was very similar to Bryant Ranch, with similar consumption of artiodactyls relative to lagomorphs,

(Dean 2003); however, these analyses identify different preferences for red ware serving

bowls, with a greater use of White Mountain Red Ware styles. These differences between red

ware serving bowls between Bailey and Bryant are not as striking as the dramatic changes in

decorated bowls from the Pueblo III period. The shifts away from domestic assemblages

with more McDonald Painted Corrugated and Showlow Red Ware bowls to Pinto

Polychrome bowls at Bryant Ranch along with the changes in diet and food preparation

indicate dramatic changes in domestic practice or cuisine at about A.D. 1280 in the Silver

Creek.

The complementary analyses of ceramic circulation and consumption revealed

interesting social and economic dynamics during the late thirteenth century when larger,

aggregated villages were being established in the Silver Creek drainage. The analyses

presented here provide substantive evidence that allows the characterization of this

transition through the decorated white ware production and circulation patterns with 81 compositional evidence and changes in decorated ceramic consumption patterns with regard to time. The compositional patterns allow us to narrow our speculations on the origins of

Cibola White Ware pots outside the Silver Creek. This study also demonstrates the utility of seriation, which enables temporal control of the individual deposits that were sampled, preventing the confusion of temporal changes with compositional patterning. In addition, these types of multidimensional analyses using ceramic assemblage data can separate chronological variation, which is caused by temporally sensitive ceramic types, from other dimensions of variations that represent non-chronological variation. In this case, we see how these transitional communities in the Mogollon Rim area had divergent ceramic consumption patterns, which are associated with changes in the larger realm of domestic practices. 82

APPENDIX A. JACKKNIFE PROBABILITIES OF GROUP MEMBERSHIP OF SAMPLES BASED ON 21 ELEMENTS. Probabilities were calculated using Hotelling's T^ statistic on Mahalanobis distances based on log base 10 values of elemental concentrations. Group 1: Group 1: ID. NO. Group 1 Group 2 Group 3 ID. NO. Group 1 Group 2 Group 3 B]M140 16.017 0 11.782 IBS048 35.899 0 11.497 B.TM141 31.994 0 4.575 TBS061 67.268 0 19.691 BTM143 99.456 0 5.544 TBS063 21.896 0 4.42 BJM144 25.798 0 2.102 IBS072 52.847 0 18.393 BTM146 36.972 0 3.568 TBS074 53.729 0 2.474 BJM147 3.284 0 3.899 TBS075 45.208 0 19.85 BJM148 3.288 0 1.606 IBS076 93.436 0 16.826 BJM149 63.307 0 14.272 TBS077 19.081 0 5.383 BJM150 8.614 0 7.728 TBS078 74.075 0 3.09 BTM151 6.828 0 1.998 TBS079 85.278 0 7.087 BTM152 20.239 0.001 2.499 IBS080 31.116 0 2.349 BTM153 3.712 0 3.097 JBS081 37.351 0 5.101 B.TM154 6.675 0 33.083 TBS082 63.355 0 7.116 BJM155 48.098 0 6.034 TBS083 17.886 0 3.235 B,TM156 73.986 0 9.546 TBS085 99.989 0 8.904 BJM157 48.971 0 4.796 JBSlOO 81.164 0 4.411 B.TM158 17.648 0 1.324 JBSlOl 20.829 0 13.607 BTM159 79.379 0 6.887 IBS102 43.078 0 4.576 TBS003 25.038 0 14.852 TBS103 91.865 0 26.225 TBS004 28.851 0 33.463 TBS104 41.8 0 35.217 TBS005 24.736 0 46.261 TBS105 92.963 0 4.535 IBS006 33.341 0 16.351 TBS106 89.559 0 2.77 IBS008 70.426 0 35.6 TBS107 97.581 0 7.449 TBS009 97.623 0 57.591 TBS108 99.798 0 3.669 TBSOll 68.381 0.026 37.406 TBS109 99.707 0 3.91 JBS012 89.894 0.001 53.23 TBSllO 5.879 0 16.735 TBS013 97.406 0 26.439 TBSlll 77.939 0.006 30.703 TBS015 7.81 0 7.42 IBS114 29.061 0 29.483 TBS016 38.487 0 6.815 TBS115 48.964 0 2.286 JBS017 43.805 0 23.334 TBS117 86.743 0 8.537 IBS018 58.117 0 4.328 IBS118 54.883 0 2.035 JBS019 10.505 0 10.783 TBS119 97.799 0 7.779 TBS021 13.995 0 48.276 TBS120 98.648 0 2.205 83

ID. NO. Group 1 Group 2 Group 3 ID. NO. Group 1 Group 2 Group 3 TBS022 93.983 0 18.76 IBS121 59.332 0 2.024 TBS024 9.308 0 2.396 TBS122 77.314 0 8.952 TBS025 62.172 0 24.602 TBS123 6.434 0 1.578 TBS027 29.6 0 43.519 TBS125 59.214 0 2.35 IBS028 18.858 0 29.755 IBS147 73.477 0 2.369 TBS031 86.491 0 58.096 IBS164 24.166 0 4.846 TBS032 94.799 0 33.914 TBS185 22.516 0.195 7.386 TBS033 68.735 0 2.618 PC2010 24.265 0 16.899 TBS034 28.3 0 7.664 PCG206 22.917 0 10.09 JBS040 50.118 0 2.616 PCN006 26.152 0 18.406 TBS041 30.371 0 2.803 PCN080 50.834 0 3.36 TBS042 56.388 0 2.098 PCN253 44.95 0 2.855 IBS044 11.697 0 2.525 PCN310 9.9 0 2.177 TBS045 10.251 0 8.882 PCN891 43.673 0 2.365 TBS047 9.204 0 2.774

Group 2: Group 2: ID. NO. Group 1 Group 2 Group 3 ID. NO. Group 1 Group 2 Group 3 IBS014 0 4.225 5.766 IBS174 0 46.71 47.54 IBS124 0 74.64 5.069 IBS175 0 13.507 0.575 TBS126 0 54.237 5.993 IBS177 0 50.933 9.51 IBS127 0 96.353 2.821 IBS178 0 5.615 7.268 IBS128 0 78.241 35.507 IBS179 0 52.076 2.81 IBS129 0 73.473 5.509 IBS181 0 33.154 1.138 IBS130 0 10.821 3.358 IBS182 0 40.672 1.986 IBS131 0 98.638 3.241 IBS183 0 99.312 44.342 IBS132 0 4.32 24.719 IBS 184 0 1.117 3.412 IBS133 0 23.154 5.269 IBS186 0 90.545 20.216 IBS 134 0 76.927 1.742 IBS187 0 49.256 3.415 IBS 135 0 26.845 1.426 IBS188 0 82.587 7.84 IBS 136 0 24.059 8.526 IBS189 0 18.894 2.231 TBS137 0 1.9 19.759 IBS190 0 92.189 17.961 TBS139 0 58.77 1.355 TBS191 0 72.534 20.996 IBS140 0 80.597 10.787 IBS193 0 99.878 33.504 IBS144 0 17.659 1.594 IBS194 0 58.119 2.389 IBS145 0 23.707 58.899 IBS195 0 26.745 5.264 IBS146 0 3.929 6.957 IBS197 0 11.804 9.421 84

ID. NO. Group 1 Group 2 Group 3 ID. NO. Group 1 Group 2 Group 3 TBS148 0 45.745 6.641 TBS199 0 2.292 8.632 IBS149 0 86.498 12.321 TBS201 0 70.536 18.188 TBS150 0 76.803 0.748 TBS202 0 89.328 9.157 TBS151 0 15.153 24.063 POP006 0 95.12 4.892 TBS152 0 95.97 46.364 POP007 0 83.993 4.427 TBS 153 0 3.165 1.44 POP017 0 34.281 2.809 TBS 154 0 42.449 8.227 POP018 0 77.931 2.113 TBS155 0 47.228 1.173 POP023 0 44.513 0.808 TBS158 0 64.576 1.884 POP061 0 89.264 2.165 TBS159 0 78.201 54.444 POP064 0 14.606 1.024 TBS161 0 89.646 25.434 POP075 0 35.999 1.936 TBS162 0 83.237 34.474 POP076 0 73.703 4.745 TBS 163 0 82.597 34.605 POP082 0 88.147 5.66 TBS 165 0 87.467 7.415 POP092 0 13.527 2.41 TBS167 0 69.326 8.109 POP093 0 7.455 0.935 TBS169 0 12.89 1.396 POP279 0 3.064 0.479 TBS 170 0 19.401 0.702 POP281 0 40.754 0.904 TBS172 0 69.757 1.009 POP286 0 27.322 1.179 TBS173 0 54.551 15.162

Group 3: Group 3: ID. NO. Group 1 Group 2 Group 3 ID. NO. Group 1 Group 2 Group 3 PCN074 0 1.467 7.493 PCN385 0 0 60.827 PCNIOO 0 0 56.981 PCN390 0 0 2.267 PCN134 0 0 56.674 PCN392 0 0 2.893 PCN139 0.001 0 20.004 PCN393 0 0 32.441 PCN157 0 0 96.807 PCN535 0 0 17.621 PCN158 0 0 73.67 PCN595 0 0 71.584 PCN172 0 0 53.996 PCN667 0 0 32.416 PCN173 0 0 11.513 PCW130 0 0 68.793 PCN175 0 0 91.193 PCX310 0 0 99.233 PCN237 0 0 54.933 PCX392 0 0 72.875 PCN265 0 0 40.093 PCN301 0 0 57.829 PCN346 0 0 66.488 PCN350 0 0 27.351 85

APPENDIX B. PROBABILITIES OF OUTLIERS' MEMBERSHIP BASED ON 21 ELEMENTS. Note: Probabilities were calculated using Hotelling's T^ statistic on Mahalanobis distances based on log base 10 values of elemental concentrations.

ID. NO. Group 1 Group 2 ID. NO. Group 1 Group 2 BTM142 0.215 0 TBS 192 0 0 BTM145 0.487 0 TBS196 0 0.004 TBSOOl 0 0 TBS198 0 0.12 TBS002 0.001 0 TBS200 0 0 TBSOlO 0.003 0 PCN026 0.001 0 TBS020 0.008 0 PCN063 0.012 0 IBS023 0 0.361 PCN097 0.001 0 TBS026 0 0 PCNIOI 0 0 TBS029 0.573 0 PCN107 0 0 TBS030 0.014 0 PCN108 1.225 0 TBS035 0 0 PCN131 0.206 0 TBS036 0 0 PCN135 0 0 TBS037 0 0 PCN177 0 0 TBS038 0 0 PCN183 0 0 JBS043 0.012 0 PCN236 0 0 TBS046 0 0 PCN256 0 0 TBS049 0 0 PCN260 0 0 IBS050 0 0 PCN263 0.349 0 JBS051 0 1.204 PCN301 0 0 TBS052 0 0 PCN304 0 0 TBS053 0 0 PCN308 0 0 TBS054 0 0 PCN313 0 0 JBS055 0 0 PCN338 0 0 TBS056 0 0 PCN339 0 0 TBS057 0 0 PCN425 0.983 0 TBS058 0 0 POPOOl 0 0 IBS059 0 0 POP002 0 0 TBS060 0 0 POP003 0 1.01 IBS062 0 0 POP004 0 0 TBS064 0 0.005 POP008 0 0 JBS065 1.314 0 POP013 0 0 TBS066 0 0 POP014 0 0 IBS067 0 0 POP019 0 0 ID. NO. Group 1 Group 2 ID. NO. Group 1 Group 2 TBS068 0 0 POP022 0 0.032 TBS069 0 0 POP026 0 0 TBS070 0 0.081 POP027 0.003 0 TBS071 0 0 POP031 0 0 TBS073 0.007 0 POP039 0 0 TBS084 0.336 0 POP045 0 0 TBS086 0.001 0 POP058 0 0.108 TBS087 1.142 0 POP059 0 0 TBS088 0.068 0 POP069 0 0 TBS089 0 0 POP070 0 0 TBS090 0 0 POP077 0 0.21 IBS112 0 0 POP078 0 0 IBS113 0 0 POP083 0 0 TBS116 1.231 0 POP087 0 0 TBS 138 0 0.108 POP089 0 0 TBS141 0 0.117 POP273 0 0 TBS142 0 0.213 POP274 0 0.469 TBS156 0 0 POP275 0 0 TBS 157 0 0 POP276 0 0 TBS160 0 0.666 POP278 0 0 TBS166 0 0 POP280 0 0 TBS168 0 0.853 POP282 0 0.001 TBS171 0 2.174 POP285 0 0 TBS176 0 2.505 POP287 0 0 IBS180 0 0 POP290 0 0 87

APPENDIX C. PROVENIENCE DATA OF INAA SPECIMENS

AMD Site Name Site Provenience Ceramic Type TBSOOl CS690/Chimney Rock AZ P:6 125(ASU) TBS002 CS690/Chimney Rock AZ P:6 125(ASU) TBS003 CS690/Chimney Rock AZ P:6 125(ASU) TBS004 CS690/Chimney Rock AZ P:6 125(ASU) TBS005 CS690/Chimney Rock AZ P:6 125(ASU) TBS006 CS690/Chimney Rock AZ P:6 125(ASU) TBS008 CS690/Chimney Rock AZ P:6 125(ASU) TBS009 CS690/Chimney Rock AZ P:6 125(ASU) TBSOlO CS690/Chimney Rock AZ P:6 125(ASU) TBSOll CS690/Chimney Rock AZ P:6 125(ASU) TBS012 CS690/Chimney Rock AZ P;6 125(ASIJ) TBS013 CS690/Chimney Rock AZP:6 125(ASU) TBS014 CS690/Chimney Rock AZ P:6 125(ASU) TBS015 CS690/Chimney Rock AZ P:6 125(ASU) TBS016 CS690/Chimney Rock AZ P:6 125(ASU) TBS017 CS690/Chimney Rock AZ P:6 125(ASU) TBS018 CS690/Chimney Rock AZ P:6 125(ASU) TBS019 CS690/Chimney Rock AZ P:6 125(ASU) TBS020 CS690/Chimney Rock AZ P:6 125(ASIJ) TBS021 CS690/Chimney Rock AZ P:6 125(ASU) TBS022 CS690/Chimney Rock AZ P:6 125(ASU) IBS023 CS690/Chimney Rock AZ P;6 125(ASU) TBS024 CS690/Chimney Rock AZP:6 125(ASU) TBS025 CS690/Chimney Rock AZP:6 125(ASU) TBS026 CS412 AZP:6 165(ASU) TBS027 CS412 AZ P:6 165(ASU) TBS028 CS412 AZ P:6 165(ASU) TBS029 CS412 AZ P:6 165(ASU) TBS030 CS412 AZ P:6 165(ASIJ) TBS031 CS412 AZ P:6 165(ASU) TBS032 CS412 AZ P:6 165(ASU) TBS033 CS412 AZ P:6 165(ASU) TBS034 CS412 AZ P:6 165(ASU) TBS035 CS412 AZ P:6 165(ASU) TBS036 CS412 AZ P:6 165(ASU) TBS037 CS412 AZ P:6 165(ASU) TBS038 CS412 AZ P:6 165(ASU) TBS039 CS412 AZ P:6 165(ASU) TBS040 CS412 AZ P:6 165(ASU) TBS041 CS412 AZ P:6 165(ASU) TBS042 CS412 AZ P:6 165(ASU) TBS043 CS412 AZ P:6 165(ASU) 88

AMD Site Name Site Provenience Ceramic Type TBS044 CS412 AZ P:6:165(ASU) TBS045 CS412 AZ P:6:165(ASU) TBS046 CS412 AZ P:6:165(ASIJ) TBS047 CS412 AZ P:6:165(ASIJ) TBS048 CS412 AZ P:6:165(ASU) TBS049 CS412 AZ P:6:165(ASU) TBS050 CS412 AZ P:6:165(ASU) TBS051 Carter Ranch TBS052 Carter Ranch TBS053 Carter Ranch TBS054 Carter Ranch TBS055 Carter Ranch TBS056 Carter Ranch TBS057 Carter Ranch TBS058 Carter Ranch TBS059 Carter Ranch TBS060 Carter Ranch TBS061 Broken K TBS062 Broken K TBS063 Broken K TBS064 Broken K TBS065 Broken K TBS066 Broken K TBS067 Broken K TBS068 Broken K JBS069 Broken K TBS070 Broken K TBS071 CS731 AZ P:6:102 (ASU) IBS072 CS731 AZ P:6:102 (ASU) TBS073 CS731 AZ P:6:102 (ASU) TBS074 CS731 AZ P:6:102 (ASU) TBS075 CS731 AZ P:6:102 (ASU) TBS076 CS731 AZ P:6:102 (ASU) TBS077 CS731 AZ P:6:102 (ASU) TBS078 CS731 AZ P:6:102 (ASU) TBS079 CS731 AZ P:6:102 (ASU) TBS080 CS731 AZ P:6:102 (ASU) TBS081 CS731 AZ P:6:102 (ASU) TBS082 CS731 AZ P:6:102 (ASU) TBS083 CS731 AZ P:6:102 (ASU) TBS084 CS731 AZ P:6:102(ASU) TBS085 CS731 AZ P:6:102 (ASU) IBS086 CS731 AZ P:6:102 (ASU) TBS087 CS731 AZ P:6:102 (ASU) 89

ANID Site Name Site Provenience Ceramic Type TBS088 CS731 AZ P:6:102 (ASU) TBS089 CS412 AZ P:6:165(ASU) TBS090 CS412 AZ P:6:165(ASU) TBS100 Bryant Ranch AZ P:ll:133 (ASU) Room 4, S3, L2 TULAROSA B/W TBSlOl Bryant Ranch AZP:11:133 (ASU) Room 2, SI,LI TULAROSA B/W TBS102 Bryant Ranch AZ P:ll:133 (ASU) Room 4, Floor PINEDALE B/W TBS103 Bryant Ranch AZ P:ll:133 (ASU) Room 4, Floor PINEDALE B/W TBS104 Bryant Ranch AZ P:ll:133 (ASU) Room 2, PINED ALE B/W TBS105 Bryant Ranch AZ P:ll:133 (ASU) Room 1, Floor SNOWFLAKEB/W IBS106 Bryant Ranch AZ P:ll:133 (ASU) Room 1, Floor TULAROSA B/W TBS107 Bryant Ranch AZ P:11:133 (ASU) Room 4, S3,L2 SNOWFLAKEB/W TBS108 Bryant Ranch AZ P:11:133 (ASU) Room 1, Floor PINED ALE B/W TBS109 Bryant Ranch AZ P:ll:133 (ASU) Room 1, Floor PINED ALE B/W TBSllO Bryant Ranch AZ P:ll:133 (ASU) Room 4, S3,L2 SNOWFLAKEB/W TBSlll Bryant Ranch AZ P:ll:133 (ASU) Room 4, Floor PINEDALE B/W TBS112 Bryant Ranch AZ P:ll:133 (ASU) Room 3, Floor PINEDALE B/W IBS113 Bryant Ranch AZP:11:133 (ASU) Room 4, S3,L2 PINEDALE B/W TBS114 Bryant Ranch AZ P: 11:133 (ASU) Room 3, S5,L5 TULAROSA B/W TBS115 Bryant Ranch AZ P:11:133 (ASU) Room 3, S4,L2 PINEDALE B/W TBS116 Bryant Ranch AZ P:ll:133 (ASU) Room 3, S2,L1 SNOWFLAKEB/W TBS117 Bryant Ranch AZ P:ll:133 (ASU) Room 4, Floor TULAROSA B/W TBS118 Bryant Ranch AZP:11:133 (ASU) Room 3, S2,L1 TULAROSA B/W TBS119 Bryant Ranch AZ P:11:133 (ASU) Room 4, Floor TULAROSA B/W TBS120 Bryant Ranch AZ P:ll:133 (ASU) Room 4, Floor PINEDALE B/W TBS121 Bryant Ranch AZ P:11:133 (ASU) Room 3, PINEDALE B/W TBS122 Bryant Ranch AZ P:11:133 (ASU) Room 3, SNOWFLAKEB/W TBS123 Bryant Ranch AZ P:11:133 (ASU) Room 3, PINEDALE B/W TBS124 Pottery Hill AZ P:12:12 (ASM) Room 3, PINED ALE B/W TBS125 Pottery Hill AZ P:12:12 (ASM) Room 3, S3,LI PINEDALE B/W TBS126 Pottery Hill AZ P:12:12 (ASM) Room 1, Floor PINEDALE B/W TBS127 Pottery Hill AZ P:12:12 (ASM) Room 1, S2,L4 PINEDALE B/W TBS128 Pottery Hill AZ P:12:12 (ASM) Room 1, S3,LI TULAROSA B/W TBS129 Roundy Pueblo AZ P: 12:22 (ASM) Room 3, Floor SNOWFLAKEB/W TBS130 Roundy Pueblo AZ P: 12:22 (ASM) Room Kiva, Floor SNOWFLAKEB/W TBS131 Roundy Pueblo AZ P:12:22 (ASM) Room 3, subfloor TULAROSA B/W TBS132 Roundy Pueblo AZ P: 12:22 (ASM) Room Kiva, Floor TULAROSA B/W TBS133 Roundy Pueblo AZ P: 12:22 (ASM) Room 3, Floor SNOWFLAKEB/W TBS134 Roundy Pueblo AZ P: 12:22 (ASM) Room Kiva, Bulk TULAROSA B/W TBS135 Roundy Pueblo AZ P: 12:22 (ASM) Room 1, Floor SNOWFLAKEB/W TBS136 Roundy Pueblo AZ P: 12:22 (ASM) Room 3, Floor SNOWFLAKEB/W TBS137 Roundy Pueblo AZ P: 12:22 (ASM) Room 2, Floor Tularosa/snowflake TBS138 Roundy Pueblo AZ P: 12:22 (ASM) Room 3, Floor SNOWFLAKEB/W TBS139 Roundy Pueblo AZ P: 12:22 (ASM) Room Kiva, Floor SNOWFLAKEB/W IBS140 Roundy Pueblo AZ P: 12:22 (ASM) Room Kiva, Roof TULAROSA B/W 90

ANID Site Name Site Provenience Ceramic Type TBS141 Roundy Pueblo AZ P: 12:22 (ASM) Room Kiva, Roof PINEDALE B/W TBS142 Roundy Pueblo AZ P: 12:22 (ASM) Room Kiva, Floor TULAROSA B/W TBS143 Roundy Pueblo AZ P: 12:22 (ASM) Room Kiva, Floor SNOWFLAKEB/W TBS144 Roundy Pueblo AZ P: 12:22 (ASM) Room Kiva, Floor SNOWFLAKEB/W TBS145 Roundy Pueblo AZ P: 12:22 (ASM) Room Kiva, Floor SNOWFLAKEB/W TBS146 Roundy Pueblo AZ P: 12:22 (ASM) Room 4, Floor SNOWFLAKEB/W TBS147 Roundy Pueblo AZ P: 12:22 (ASM) Room 4, Floor SNOWFLAKEB/W TBS148 Roundy Pueblo AZ P: 12:22 (ASM) Room Kiva, Floor SNOWFLAKEB/W TBS149 Roundy Pueblo AZ P: 12:22 (ASM) Room 3, Floor TULAROSA B/W TBS150 Roundy Pueblo AZ P: 12:22 (ASM) Room Kiva, Bulk SNOWFLAKEB/W TBS151 Roundy Pueblo AZ P: 12:22 (ASM) Room Kiva, Floor TULAROSA B/W TBS152 Roundy Pueblo AZ P: 12:22 (ASM) Room 3, SNOWFLAKEB/W TBS153 Roundy Pueblo AZ P: 12:22 (ASM) Room Kiva, Floor SNOWFLAKEB/W TBS154 Roundy Pueblo AZ P:12:22 (ASM) Room 5, L4 SNOWFLAKEB/W TBS155 Roundy Pueblo AZ P: 12:22 (ASM) Room 5, L4 TULAROSA B/W TBS156 Roundy Pueblo AZ P: 12:22 (ASM) Room 4, TULAROSA B/W TBS157 Roundy Pueblo AZ P: 12:22 (ASM) Room 3, SNOWFLAKEB/W TBS158 Roundy Pueblo AZ P: 12:22 (ASM) Room Work Area, TULAROSA B/W TBS159 Roundy Pueblo AZ P: 12:22 (ASM) Room 3, Floor TULAROSA B/W TBS160 Roundy Pueblo AZ P: 12:22 (ASM) Room 3, Floor SNOWFLAKEB/W TBS161 Roundy Pueblo AZ P: 12:22 (ASM) Room 3, PINEDALE B/W TBS162 Roundy Pueblo AZ P: 12:22 (ASM) Room 3, Floor SNOWFLAKEB/W TBS163 Roundy Pueblo AZ P: 12:22 (ASM) Room 3, Floor SNOWFLAKEB/W TBS164 Roundy Pueblo AZ P: 12:22 (ASM) Room 2, Floor TULAROSA B/W TBS165 Roundy Pueblo AZ P: 12:22 (ASM) Room 1, Floor TULAROSA B/W TBS166 Roundy Pueblo AZ P: 12:22 (ASM) Room 1, Floor TULAROSA B/W TBS167 Roundy Pueblo AZ P: 12:22 (ASM) Room 5, TULAROSA B/W TBS168 Roundy Pueblo AZ P: 12:22 (ASM) Room 3, Floor SNOWFLAKEB/W TBS169 Roundy Pueblo AZ P:12:22 (ASM) Room 2, Floor SNOWFLAKEB/W TBS170 Roundy Pueblo AZ P: 12:22 (ASM) Room 3, Floor SNOWFLAKEB/W TBS171 Roundy Pueblo AZ P: 12:22 (ASM) Room 3, Floor SNOWFLAKEB/W TBS172 Roundy Pueblo AZ P: 12:22 (ASM) Room 3, SNOWFLAKEB/W TBS173 Roundy Pueblo AZ P: 12:22 (ASM) Room 3, SNOWFLAKEB/W TBS174 Roundy Pueblo AZ P: 12:22 (ASM) Room 3, SNOWFLAKEB/W TBS175 Roundy Pueblo AZ P: 12:22 (ASM) Room 3, SNOWFLAKEB/W TBS176 Roundy Pueblo AZ P: 12:22 (ASM) Room 3, Floor SNOWFLAKEB/W TBS177 Roundy Pueblo AZ P: 12:22 (ASM) Room 6, SNOWFLAKEB/W TBS178 Roundy Pueblo AZ P: 12:22 (ASM) Room 4, SNOWFLAKEB/W TBS179 Roundy Pueblo AZ P: 12:22 (ASM) Room Ramada, SNOWFLAKEB/W TBS180 Pottery Hill AZ P:12:12 (ASM) Room 1, S2,L1 TULAROSA B/W TBS181 Pottery Hill AZ P:12:12 (ASM) Room 1, SI,LI SNOWFLAKEB/W TBS182 Pottery Hill AZP:12:12 (ASM) Room 3, SI,LI, F 6 TULAROSA B/W TBS183 Pottery Hill AZ P:12:12 (ASM) Room 3, Floor SNOWFLAKEB/W TBS184 Pottery Hill AZ P:12:12(ASM) Room 1, S2,L3 F1 SNOWFLAKEB/W 91

ANID Site Name Site Provenience Ceramic Type TBS185 Pottery Hill AZ P:12:12 (ASM) Room 1, Floor TULAROSA B/W TBS186 Pottery Hill AZ P:12:12 (ASM) Room 1, S3,LI TULAROSA B/W TBS187 Pottery Hill AZP:12:12(ASM) Room 1, 82,L3 TULAROSA B/W TBS188 Pottery Hill AZ P: 12:12 (ASM) Room 3, Floor TULAROSA B/W TBS189 Pottery Hill AZ P: 12:12 (ASM) Room 3, S3,L1 TULAROSA B/W TBS190 Pottery Hill AZ P:12:12 (ASM) Room 3, S3,L1 TULAROSA B/W TBS191 Pottery Hill AZ P:12:12 (ASM) Room 3, Floor TULAROSA B/W TBS192 Pottery Hill AZ P: 12:12 (ASM) Room 1, S2,L4 SNOWFLAKEB/W TBS193 Pottery Hill AZ P:12:12 (ASM) Room 1, Floor SNOWFLAKEB/W TBS194 Pottery Hill AZ P:12:12 (ASM) Room 1, S2,L3 SNOWFLAKEB/W TBS195 Pottery Hill AZP:12:12(ASM) Room 1, S3,SI SNOWFLAKEB/W TBS196 Pottery Hill AZ P:12:12 (ASM) Room 3, S3,SI SNOWFLAKEB/W TBS197 Pottery Hill AZ P: 12:12 (ASM) Room 3, Floor SNOWFLAKEB/W TBS198 Pottery Hill AZ P:12:12 (ASM) Room 3, S2,L5 SNOWFLAKEB/W TBS199 Pottery Hill AZ P:12:12 (ASM) Kiva, S6,L2 SNOWFLAKEB/W TBS200 Shumway AZ P:12:6 (ASM) PINEDALE TBS201 Shumway AZ P:12:6 (ASM) PINEDALE TBS202 Shumway AZ P:12:6 (ASM) PINEDALE APPENDIX D. COMPOSITIONAL DATA OF INAA SPECIMENS

ANID As La Lu Nd Sm U Yb TBSOOl 9.226 40.255 0.4682 37.239 6.946 6.615 2.531 IBS002 6.021 49.022 0.4127 43.725 8.516 4.509 2.678 TBS003 1.816 42.873 0.4056 27.236 5.641 5.56 2.442 TBS004 4.062 45.265 0.4199 36.697 6.905 3.71 2.655 TBS005 5.934 45.174 0.4248 36.426 6.851 3.845 2.679 TBS006 5.547 35.279 0.3821 26.257 5.115 4.026 2.337 TBS007 3.07 55.36 0.4808 53.552 8.784 6.214 3.14 TBS008 2.294 43.44 0.4808 36.925 7.405 5.687 2.839 TBS009 2.972 44.621 0.4285 36.893 7.085 5.352 2.681 TBSOlO 3.67 43.996 0.4746 38.608 7.767 7.968 2.72 TBSOll 5.43 38.777 0.4221 29.09 5.576 5.239 2.636 TBS012 5.015 42.321 0.4405 32.034 6.56 5.222 2.714 IBS013 2.165 44.976 0.4546 39.957 7.679 5.766 2.871 TBS014 5.141 55.214 0.6378 46.219 9.442 8.662 3.815 TBS015 1.752 40.182 0.4422 36.942 6.678 7.036 2.424 TBS016 2.371 40.115 0.3665 23.462 5.227 5.502 2.215 TBS017 3.256 66.785 0.5195 60.69 11.348 4.873 3.355 TBS018 2.187 36.646 0.4065 28.334 5.442 5.792 2.442 JBS019 5.452 35.717 0.4111 27.771 5.133 5.349 2.583 TBS020 3.811 27.79 0.3143 18.512 3.697 3.723 1.874 TBS021 7.239 34.447 0.3131 21.588 4.463 3.986 1.957 IBS022 6.465 34.843 0.3822 24.9 5.413 5.617 2.227 JBS023 2.939 74.336 0.5564 60.234 10.986 5.869 3.682 TBS024 3.442 32.225 0.3543 27.062 4.892 4.431 2.27 TBS025 3.081 60.357 0.4573 54.357 10.322 4.082 3.069 TBS026 5.066 52.644 0.4269 31.976 5.98 3.868 3.189 JBS027 5.185 33.284 0.356 24.085 5.003 4.264 2.187 JBS028 4.381 33.185 0.3282 26.172 4.98 4.158 2.149 TBS029 8.767 40.495 0.3285 29.745 5.55 4.945 1.92 TBS030 8.898 42.324 0.4012 27.314 5.267 4.371 2.902 IBS031 5.537 35.881 0.351 28.313 5.367 4.802 2.037 TBS032 5.708 42.816 0.3983 37.994 7.029 3.77 2.61 TBS033 4.83 38.35 0.4228 29.656 5.858 6.711 2.532 TBS034 3.592 32.311 0.3513 25.716 5.332 5.13 2.318 JBS035 12.804 43.086 0.4553 37.511 7.233 7.002 2.709 IBS036 10.17 41.762 0.4529 35.485 7.092 5.972 2.721 ANID As La Lu Nd Sm U Yb JBS037 4.269 37.432 0.4467 31.735 6.547 7.245 2.685 TBS038 6.953 40.794 0.4796 34.629 7.573 9.106 2.786 TBS039 11.73 43.683 0.4414 35.329 7.292 4.791 2.707 TBS040 3.603 34.648 0.3756 24.116 4.674 5.472 2.395 TBS041 3.174 38.936 0.4641 32.383 6.292 4.774 2.866 TBS042 4.517 33.679 0.3693 21.372 4.675 5.915 2.409 TBS043 0 42.049 0.4121 40.487 7.521 5.198 2.551 TBS044 2.786 34.432 0.389 23.087 5.159 7.497 2.299 TBS045 5.293 35.214 0.3756 25.934 5.025 5.966 2.293 TBS046 3.318 38.115 0.4653 23.583 5.204 8.627 2.607 IBS047 3.085 43.393 0.3954 32.803 6.003 5.287 2.448 JBS048 0 50.454 0.4489 42.233 8.188 5.688 3.117 JBS049 0 38.14 0.466 35.809 6.614 9.534 2.775 TBS050 0 49.001 0.5895 42.819 9.158 10.131 3.282 TBS051 4.75 42.889 0.5384 38.342 7.471 8.401 3.23 TBS052 3.871 83.48 1.191 70.431 14.52 45.817 5.468 JBS053 7.233 45.939 0.5142 34.429 6.444 5.248 3.542 TBS054 3.325 39.017 0.4824 32.185 5.883 4.568 3.02 TBS055 4.267 32.744 0.4155 25.644 5.277 7.779 2.293 TBS056 2.227 58.244 0.6035 51.955 10.402 7.432 3.923 TBS057 2.238 30.509 0.4503 34.037 4.883 6.803 2.778 TBS058 10.743 35.787 0.4715 26.639 5.423 6.213 2.833 TBS059 6.368 47.404 0.5751 31.339 6.028 5.682 3.721 TBS060 6.879 47.043 0.5268 36.603 6.382 5.161 3.917 JBS061 3.192 57.006 0.4592 55.271 10.285 4.805 3.196 TBS062 2.911 59.091 0.532 40.451 8.133 7.215 3.338 JBS063 2.259 36.176 0.4096 28.568 5.425 5.739 2.499 TBS064 3.148 79.853 0.6506 66.583 12.958 9.422 4.795 TBS065 7.655 33.341 0.3394 27.074 5.052 3.717 2.321 IBS066 4.236 55.781 0.6054 45.236 9.101 7.463 4.098 TBS067 0 149.526 1.1126 132.031 23.785 13.664 7.854 TBS068 0 66.371 0.8113 60.631 11.941 8.08 6.378 JBS069 2.314 24.926 0.4714 16.704 4.771 7.715 2.746 IBS070 4.948 71.657 0.6522 55.483 10.952 12.185 4.402 TBS071 1.942 55.383 1.156 42.878 9.239 10.264 7.227 IBS072 4.211 41.442 0.3961 35.522 6.596 4.869 3.007 IBS073 0 58.618 0.4278 73.198 10.15 5.674 3.469 ANID As La Lu Nd Sm U Yb TBS074 4.789 31.653 0.334 19.394 4.486 5.699 1.878 TBS075 4.717 42.227 0.3941 37.303 6.584 4.738 2.571 TBS076 5.01 45.054 0.3987 38.465 7.027 5.143 2.787 TBS077 4.037 43.774 0.4742 41.481 7.891 5.329 2.999 TBS078 2.172 30.108 0.3774 21.814 4.115 5.715 1.966 IBS079 2.34 32.008 0.3413 29.586 4.65 5.079 2.223 JBSOSO 1.766 30.034 0.3601 22.025 4.174 5.571 2.015 TBS081 1.925 31.9 0.3067 23.763 4.162 4.805 1.974 IBS082 2.148 32.708 0.3038 22.75 4.272 4.97 1.943 TBS083 0 33.501 0.383 38.169 5.267 5.48 2.338 TBS084 2.886 40.269 0.4151 61.581 6.427 4.729 2.719 TBS085 3.269 31.128 0.3447 23.332 4.386 5.265 2.213 TBS086 5.808 49.989 0.4609 40.65 7.552 4.25 2.901 TBS087 0 31.202 0.3563 36.806 4.273 6.602 2.165 TBS088 4.309 37.162 0.3363 33.677 6.809 4.358 2.409 IBS089 0 53.849 0.4987 44.004 8.281 9.758 3.086 JBS090 4.779 35.089 0.378 32.775 6.812 4.378 3.125 JBSlOO 4.5573 37.1151 0.4711 23.8166 6.0737 6.0481 2.9766 TBSlOl 3.7314 31.6661 0.4009 19.5546 4.6571 5.5495 2.622 JBS102 5.214 39.5591 0.4102 27.3507 6.4772 4.593 2.7563 TBS103 2.515 57.0552 0.5 48.7106 10.1335 5.5513 3.5266 TBS104 2.1961 37.7366 0.3913 28.4892 5.6557 4.6428 2.6038 TBS105 2.7285 40.6737 0.398 32.2579 6.5772 5.8535 2.7899 IBS106 2.0199 33.9984 0.4453 22.9461 5.6012 6.5572 2.791 JBS107 4.3765 39.8415 0.4109 28.7142 6.4554 5.0196 2.8082 TBS108 3.9305 41.3319 0.4265 32.5678 6.6215 5.4474 2.8171 IBS 109 4.4465 39.2348 0.3972 28.3039 6.2555 4.6119 2.749 TBS 110 4.348 48.7111 0.4065 34.6181 6.7945 3.7126 2.8263 JBSlll 5.974 49.1358 0.4302 39.1591 8.4838 4.4767 3.102 TBS112 3.3197 53.9437 0.5586 30.7619 7.1375 7.4755 3.9004 TBS113 2.377 39.4925 0.3958 26.0061 5.8921 4.3616 2.739 TBS 114 2.1239 62.3881 0.5239 65.8206 11.8249 6.2982 3.7922 TBS115 5.6956 41.6971 0.4371 30.4607 6.5498 5.4902 2.8621 TBS 116 3.9912 56.7734 0.5192 42.9215 9.2927 6.109 3.3368 TBS 117 3.5966 51.4508 0.435 40.1149 8.441 4.9719 3.0639 TBS 118 2.2814 43.5741 0.4381 38.4866 7.2556 5.6128 3.0042 TBS 119 3.381 39.8789 0.4157 28.1806 6.4777 4.5923 2.8016 AMD As La Lu Nd Sm U Yb TBS120 2.4848 38.2791 0.4181 26.7596 5.646 5.6465 2.808 TBS121 5.1961 37.3312 0.3839 22.2893 5.4933 4.9433 2.5552 TBS122 3.1565 55.6974 0.4514 47.4088 9.9957 4.9481 3.1862 TBS123 5.8367 42.6642 0.4504 27.4374 6.7172 6.2773 3.1018 TBS124 2.0851 51.2985 0.564 31.1592 7.2857 7.4499 3.6936 TBS125 4.434 41.7135 0.4371 27.7995 6.5735 6.9469 2.7533 IBS126 7.517 45.0437 0.4848 28.9461 5.9968 5.879 3.2165 TBS127 5.1076 39.4025 0.5824 25.1685 6.3706 8.0964 3.6702 TBS128 1.8913 90.265 0.6673 74.4833 14.7634 10.1328 4.6662 TBS129 3.7783 76.9275 0.4928 35.7016 7.5583 7.504 3.1799 TBS130 9.0827 50.8849 0.7092 43.8797 9.9095 12.3451 4.8273 TBS131 2.9733 41.3895 0.5514 32.8839 7.1933 9.9254 3.3024 TBS132 4.0964 74.9979 0.5753 49.8352 11.7768 7.2205 4.2732 TBS133 0 67.0029 0.5875 32.1193 7.3287 7.76 4.0382 TBS134 4.6065 62.6392 0.6517 47.6534 10.9544 10.3385 3.9634 TBS 135 3.6318 47.0202 0.6637 33.9168 8.1 13.8991 4.2387 TBS136 7.5633 56.2918 0.5277 38.7432 8.1139 6.0292 3.7946 TBS137 5.8539 73.8292 0.5471 54.8404 10.1716 6.0169 3.8189 TBS138 2.6383 88.0903 0.6016 60.6929 12.4748 9.1148 4.2915 TBS 139 4.9061 29.8392 0.4577 19.4312 4.7497 6.3376 2.8915 TBS140 2.2932 54.185 0.4618 29.0893 6.3446 7.1303 3.2014 TBS141 5.324 87.672 0.6527 58.0638 12.2236 6.9338 4.5425 TBS142 4.0883 67.0572 0.7464 54.3844 12.2369 6.6686 5.9918 TBS 143 0 44.6557 0.4534 23.9367 4.575 7.2075 3.0635 TBS 144 7.0639 35.2706 0.3772 22.7172 5.1843 5.1621 3.0512 TBS 145 4.8097 69.0287 0.6574 61.3801 11.9395 8.3599 5.1585 TBS 146 5.6933 59.485 0.6224 48.5523 10.393 7.2902 4.2919 TBS 147 4.1467 37.974 0.4372 23.8212 5.4343 5.4429 2.7767 TBS 148 3.0272 54.2995 0.4445 24.3464 4.9765 7.3248 3.1004 TBS 149 7.3481 63.4561 0.5705 42.2332 9.5947 7.5937 4.0964 TBS 150 3.985 32.1148 0.5404 25.035 4.7117 6.6987 4.0887 TBS151 6.0062 55.0816 0.5434 43.8685 7.1564 5.8471 3.8449 TBS 152 3.8747 53.0803 0.4737 35.7006 5.552 5.3716 3.3815 TBS 153 6.0623 27.8143 0.4975 17.2232 4.0005 7.988 2.4618 TBS 154 1.9755 59.6309 0.5236 44.2296 8.0745 7.4343 3.7536 TBS 155 5.0473 31.8449 0.4942 22.3422 4.3515 6.0658 3.4766 TBS 156 4.3187 82.699 0.7234 69.8266 13.488 6.793 5.316 ANID As La Lu Nd Sm U Yb IBS157 3.3676 50.5448 0.5171 45.7593 7.717 4.9305 3.533 TBS158 2.3308 53.4432 0.7779 57.1489 10.8346 12.3342 4.9435 TBS 159 3.7433 54.2121 0.5455 38.6111 5.9575 6.0489 3.1957 TBS160 7.7868 43.4026 0.5214 32.5909 6.3664 7.9536 3.7008 TBS161 3.3201 49.0448 0.4625 30.2543 4.9969 5.7446 3.0831 TBS162 3.9488 56.5488 0.535 29.8542 5.2498 6.48 3.5151 TBS163 6.3028 54.1157 0.5244 43.3477 7.3427 5.9018 3.7196 TBS164 3.872 47.3457 0.4052 40.4464 6.8959 4.6824 3.084 TBS165 1.7889 70.5959 0.5944 53.1146 10.2235 8.3925 4.3247 TBS166 3.3459 38.3939 0.5997 34.099 7.3965 19.4541 2.7001 TBS167 7.8482 39.1001 0.5027 30.9013 5.9506 7.6007 3.3612 TBS168 2.723 82.762 0.823 58.4514 11.5469 5.1404 6.2742 TBS169 6.0716 47.9482 0.8096 42.498 8.6874 13.9389 4.4351 TBS170 5.5048 26.729 0.4445 20.6421 3.611 4.4788 3.1776 TBS171 4.9813 49.7892 0.4341 30.3676 5.2577 4.96 3.9675 TBS172 3.7731 25.6404 0.4214 24.3308 4.3849 6.8138 2.6297 TBS173 4.6466 76.1329 0.5817 43.4017 7.2094 6.3207 3.5558 TBS174 3.5292 54.0919 0.4423 31.3534 5.1827 6.0172 3.1323 TBS175 6.0206 23.1897 0.4865 20.706 3.8726 6.374 2.6491 TBS176 3.1014 46.1806 0.4013 29.5586 4.6355 7.4574 3.1066 TBS177 1.9607 59.7564 0.6525 43.6294 7.9298 8.4607 3.9918 TBS178 4.7374 58.4836 0.6165 51.5377 9.8772 6.6032 4.6275 TBS 179 4.4802 58.8176 0.6163 58.4282 10.1988 10.5745 4.2207 TBS 180 1.8055 53.6561 0.547 43.6075 8.5724 8.5696 3.7977 TBS181 2.1592 44.7848 0.7934 38.2509 7.555 13.9763 4.5937 TBS182 6.2505 142.8513 0.7488 120.8039 20.549 9.0642 6.1302 TBS183 0 81.1598 0.6493 71.6749 12.283 9.6558 5.0149 TBS184 1.7448 51.6842 0.5543 40.0812 7.809 7.5358 3.9909 TBS185 2.3016 42.873 0.453 42.7879 6.7815 6.213 3.1082 TBS186 4.9272 69.7354 0.6284 62.8743 10.5415 9.2614 4.3978 TBS187 3.5192 52.6294 0.5792 36.8629 6.4725 6.8232 3.8935 TBS188 0 108.1276 0.6688 88.5841 15.4268 8.0588 5.1951 TBS 189 4.7562 143.5505 0.744 126.0119 20.4786 8.7385 6.3016 TBS190 4.8492 71.5818 0.7045 58.6154 11.1908 9.4595 4.5757 TBS191 3.1009 73.2817 0.6519 71.1699 11.2981 10.3055 4.5461 TBS192 0 37.3325 0.6863 42.0029 7.7701 20.187 2.8724 TBS193 2.5788 82.5292 0.7351 68.9159 12.5849 9.519 5.1149 97

ANID As La Lu Nd Sm U Yb TBS194 3.4951 33.2456 0.4529 24.5402 4.8551 6.3695 3.4425 TBS195 5.2239 50.5193 0.592 51.1468 8.1794 6.3149 4.4944 TBS196 7.0581 62.2433 0.5829 46.3858 9.6326 7.7922 3.801 TBS197 5.1754 71.4829 0.7771 60.8115 11.6654 10.639 5.0179 TBS198 3.4725 72.6923 0.6074 63.4045 10.5701 6.398 4.4947 TBS 199 3.4725 72.6923 0.6074 63.4045 10.5701 6.398 4.4947 TBS200 4.9532 42.5887 0.5155 29.0336 5.4838 4.8951 3.4527 TBS201 0 74.7607 0.6895 64.1437 11.328 8.7326 4.4617 TBS202 0 76.0099 0.6821 63.0943 11.4496 8.6336 5.3918

APPENDIX D. - Continued

ANID Ce Co Cr Cs Eu Fe Hf TBSOOl 83.489 10.886 55.328 9.921 1.3124 34420 5.86 TBSQ02 104.298 4.456 44.385 7.924 1.7365 16280.7 7.456 TBS003 76.297 4.861 60.056 13.024 1.0795 17851.3 7.001 TBS004 88.908 4.751 59.055 14.202 1.4334 23266.5 6.6 TBS005 89.807 8.537 58.12 13.433 1.3691 23798.6 6.371 TBS006 64.535 5.496 49.834 11.567 1.0677 21889.7 7.285 TBS007 111.501 3.053 57.675 29.303 1.5632 16062.9 6.7 TBS008 89.163 5.207 58.296 16.563 1.5562 20920.8 7.884 TBS009 88.372 5.031 59.73 16.523 1.4001 22485.1 6.481 TBSOlO 84.043 7.413 63.687 16.223 1.4799 20199.1 6.996 TBSOll 73.065 4.686 55.672 16.179 1.0754 19525.9 6.83 TBS012 82.192 4.481 56.377 14.649 1.2853 22097.7 7.017 TBS013 92.678 5.034 60.893 18.534 1.5557 20891.6 6.838 IBS014 114.825 3.018 51.387 35.07 1.6876 24942.8 6.333 TBS015 79.486 6.02 56.236 15.634 1.3566 18328.5 7.138 TBS016 74.608 4.72 54.388 11.954 1.0214 18302.5 7.172 TBS017 141.141 5.614 61.058 15.563 2.3445 20085.8 7.736 TBS018 71.241 4.245 61.436 19.438 1.0504 16691.6 6.87 TBS019 69.667 5.335 58.64 16.075 1.0229 21305.2 8.097 TBS020 48.444 5.108 41.037 7.008 0.7261 22123.3 7.363 TBS021 60.457 6.924 50.236 10.541 0.8673 20067 6.115 TBS022 64.913 5.488 55.227 14.79 1.0399 20402.8 6.037 TBS023 152.753 5.266 64.494 32.467 2.0239 19700.6 6.074 TBS024 61.618 4.38 54.318 16.751 0.9634 16379.9 6.675 TBS025 128.214 5.376 56.035 14.31 2.1422 18689.3 7.019 98

ANID Ce Co Cr Cs Eu Fe Hf TBS026 93.941 5.071 41.08 10.936 1.2113 24423.1 6.106 TBS027 65.846 7.224 50.267 11.376 1.0384 20649.8 6.479 TBS028 62.86 7.09 47.731 10.896 0.9997 19882.5 6.515 TBS029 72.25 3.92 53.158 10.419 1.111 22802.4 6.056 TBS030 74.664 5.554 42.552 10.89 1.0866 23400.5 6.781 TBS031 67.441 4.93 54.325 13.156 1.0504 21853.3 6.345 TBS032 82.643 5.45 55.296 13.812 1.406 22598.9 7.3 IBS033 73.453 3.859 63.304 20.375 1.1475 16742.3 6.937 IBS034 63.896 4.779 57.009 12.274 1.071 20568.1 6.486 JBS035 90.184 9.732 57.785 10.836 1.3414 31732.3 6.259 TBS036 84.327 11.078 56.093 10.955 1.3157 38797.5 5.728 IBS037 77.41 8.846 48.137 9.039 1.215 28723.7 5.562 TBS038 83.764 10.025 55.834 9.737 1.3382 30396.4 5.57 IBS039 89.329 10.472 57.77 9.292 1.37 33264.7 5.966 TBS040 62.423 4.269 65.311 14.991 0.8715 19433.5 8.995 JBS041 73.934 6.413 59.832 17.919 1.3138 16995.3 6.265 JBS042 60.307 4.093 62.766 14.648 0.8626 18950.8 9.022 TBS043 89.498 4.336 45.869 9.901 1.5866 16396.6 7.575 TBS044 59.754 5.302 63.985 19.308 0.9551 18884.5 6.873 IBS045 58.772 5.225 55.589 15.208 0.9766 19890.1 6.53 JBS046 69.91 10.466 77.944 3.405 1.0069 18810.4 5.718 TBS047 83.886 3.83 59.984 15.063 1.1764 17726.7 6.49 TBS048 103.794 7.275 62.932 16.356 1.6527 17388.9 6.8 IBS049 76.217 4.566 48.927 21.551 1.1539 17928.1 7.588 JBS050 110.156 4.957 37.994 11.938 1.7351 17524.7 8.309 TBS051 87.546 4.314 46.49 24.456 1.3285 22743.2 6.364 TBS052 174.537 6.05 40.368 22.092 2.0846 19968.8 8.488 TBS053 93.238 7.06 68.296 12.303 1.2254 18605.4 8.333 TBS054 74.82 7.145 68.041 11.51 1.1233 13930.1 8.21 IBS055 71.001 3.856 40.174 25.238 0.9451 17360.6 6.089 TBS056 119.297 5.116 53.049 15.49 1.9419 15651.6 7.423 IBS057 58.814 11.024 45.788 16.536 0.8748 28034.6 7.333 TBS058 62.259 5.055 45.687 8.454 0.9902 19073.1 7.38 JBS059 88.065 35.106 75.425 11.645 1.1944 17426.7 8.482 TBS060 91.403 12.577 75.831 11.277 1.2422 20262.1 7.873 TBS061 119.992 5.087 62.701 18.377 2.0597 18307.9 7.176 TBS062 109.553 3.887 57.558 12.387 1.4636 17681.6 7.629 99

ANID Ce Co Cr Cs Eu Fe Hf JBS063 67.723 4.709 59.917 18.543 1.0543 17490.7 7.312 TBS064 155.429 7.08 67.735 59.672 2.2634 18340.7 5.723 TBS065 61.374 5.786 54.747 17.335 0.9933 27376.5 5.867 JBS066 115.94 5.63 55.664 14.388 1.6378 16563.4 7.934 JBS067 327.114 5.383 49.025 14.018 4.9242 14599.7 7.65 JBS068 132.605 6.364 54.692 24.952 2.2835 19088.3 6.551 IBS069 49.655 5.934 41.272 14.193 0.8278 19891.5 8.431 TBS070 138.957 4.947 42.761 25.683 1.8131 21518.4 8.654 TBS071 113.927 7.642 53.147 5.24 1.547 14169.8 16.326 TBS072 80.462 5.66 56.558 16.3 1.2685 19533.1 6.791 TBS073 132.185 4.242 56.549 13.65 2.0135 17918.5 6.539 JBS074 57.414 4.592 61.71 14.361 0.8227 17983.8 6.923 TBS075 83.149 4.105 58.014 16.553 1.2886 19933.4 7.446 JBS076 87.096 3.863 57.403 14.672 1.368 21420.6 6.979 TBS077 86.476 6.055 60.736 20.294 1.648 20423.6 6.552 TBS078 53.465 4.483 63.119 14.608 0.7662 17670.8 7.788 TBS079 58.874 4.759 61.871 15.759 0.8658 18849 7.513 JBS080 53.078 4.907 64.782 15.496 0.7568 16228 7.923 JBS081 53.168 4.292 58.593 12.727 0.8198 19832.2 7.097 TBS082 55.192 4.057 57.801 12.769 0.8217 19749.9 6.893 TBS083 64.667 4.295 66.458 16.846 0.9936 15783.8 8.509 JBS084 76.404 4.786 61.662 16.76 1.3094 17788.3 6.63 JBS085 56.668 4.691 58.458 13.779 0.8432 18647.2 7.755 JBS086 86.263 4.104 51.583 14.823 1.3981 17980.6 8.118 TBS087 55.088 4.599 63.01 14.646 0.7596 17486.1 7.931 JBS088 81.512 5.361 54.928 9.543 1.3617 21219.4 5.858 JBS089 104.297 7.019 52.831 14.672 1.268 21527.6 6.043 TBS090 82.027 3.75 40.985 6.935 1.3421 17173.3 7.526 JBSlOO 67.6497 4.7001 59.3351 16.7113 1.1348 20230.7305 7.0337 TBSlOl 57.5772 7.1275 59.0658 16.071 0.8967 23904.0098 6.9048 TBS102 75.7903 5.3218 59.2116 17.1927 1.2339 24831.7832 7.3975 TBS103 115.3702 4.7915 64.7571 19.0378 2.0789 19358.502 8.026 TBS104 72.5347 4.4957 50.2682 11.3106 1.1156 18778.0293 7.2205 TBS105 74.238 4.312 63.2374 18.911 1.2426 18882.8086 7.1237 TBS106 63.8913 4.5091 60.8642 17.8872 1.0652 18826.3145 7.0934 TBS107 76.7658 5.0944 58.3386 17.3657 1.2241 24118.4727 7.0646 TBS108 75.9653 5.0011 61.3251 18.3627 1.2813 17400.9043 7.0324 100

ANID Ce Co Cr Cs Eu Fe Hf TBS109 73.2857 4.508 57.8543 16.7338 1.2126 21404.2715 6.7554 TBS 110 95.0293 5.8715 59.5756 15.7247 1.3287 29663.7461 7.4626 TBSlll 99.9805 4.5087 57.7109 15.8697 1.6394 19641.5605 6.9134 TBS112 91.7202 6.4577 63.1966 61.1224 1.254 22336.0059 6.9375 TBS 113 73.0859 4.564 49.8537 11.2202 1.1379 18460.2109 7.0382 TBS 114 136.6768 4.9625 65.0643 18.5276 2.4009 16816.5156 8.3435 TBS 115 76.747 4.6725 58.3591 17.5587 1.2057 17415.543 8.4084 TBS116 114.2128 6.577 54.6216 15.6774 1.7907 26266.4863 5.6269 TBS 117 98.958 4.4281 60.1873 17.2905 1.6008 24780.3633 7.5439 TBS 118 80.6553 6.0749 62.8552 22.0685 1.3717 16342.8291 6.3311 TBS119 76.8809 5.073 57.8847 17.2564 1.2332 24161.0391 7.05 TBS120 70.9278 4.4878 62.0917 18.5184 1.0662 17335.8555 6.8383 TBS121 70.0752 4.4236 60.3435 18.0892 0.9919 17005.9414 7.0798 TBS122 118.233 4.0102 63.8695 18.9821 2.0539 19913.5371 7.6104 TBS123 77.8503 4.6506 58.3555 17.8253 1.2274 17426.8516 8.9703 TBS124 90.521 5.7269 60.4148 59.5904 1.1741 20177.7773 6.4095 TBS125 80.3644 4.1519 63.7738 20.0379 1.2096 16058.7461 6.6854 TBS126 75.5188 5.8965 56.0281 53.5059 1.0269 23329.5273 5.9598 TBS127 74.2984 3.3996 48.4943 33.1459 1.0766 24514.2676 6.3251 TBS128 179.8055 6.9669 68.7957 55.1332 2.523 19141.7773 6.4759 TBS129 130.664 2.6606 64.3799 31.4241 1.2294 17445.1504 5.6671 TBS130 109.7539 3.8607 45.9899 22.4111 1.7209 20526.4043 7.71 TBS131 83.0046 4.4497 43.8168 27.3329 1.1853 21729.2637 7.5816 TBS132 145.0994 3.9713 66.0956 33.5944 1.9654 16338.5068 6.8375 TBS133 114.0807 2.1975 60.4627 28.8948 1.1683 13737.0811 6.5776 TBS134 133.0829 3.2585 45.2966 30.1039 1.764 19821.5039 7.7036 TBS135 93.8566 3.5234 47.4807 28.3546 1.3178 21217.6699 7.4074 TBS136 98.361 3.8628 60.3543 30.2305 1.2967 18192.8164 6.8907 TBS137 138.7916 2.8832 59.3505 27.5802 1.7796 16299.4102 6.5651 TBS138 179.9605 4.1272 70.6338 34.2963 2.3092 14324.3477 6.1832 TBS 139 57.1969 3.1128 48.1744 40.7774 0.7841 25377.2754 6.188 TBS140 93.9234 3.174 59.5323 32.5453 1.0586 19303.8496 6.0964 TBS141 158.7316 2.3132 57.9104 31.2062 1.998 24267.3848 7.209 TBS142 121.5132 5.6997 63.8924 37.5886 2.1822 19261.082 6.4336 TBS143 74.53 2.4461 55.2424 30.3433 0.7294 14712.9951 6.9684 TBS144 63.7877 2.7159 50.4683 40.1716 0.8799 22635.6465 5.9824 TBS145 140.2963 5.0868 59.1081 23.9444 2.1143 16752.9707 7.0653 101

ANID Ce Co Cr Cs Eu Fe Hf IBS146 121.9661 7.0186 42.5786 32.9085 1.7688 23923.6465 8.0162 TBS 147 69.9094 5.1559 59.3544 18.9457 0.9944 18702.125 6.836 TBS148 88.4661 2.6907 57.9606 31.0382 0.7841 16195.4258 6.2823 TBS149 115.1166 3.5816 60.5032 32.5679 1.5678 18153.4297 6.2676 TBS150 58.1149 2.9397 50.1162 42.4712 0.8305 22652.2383 5.8912 TBS151 98.4438 3.5741 58.3844 27.5047 1.2984 21717.7988 5.5257 TBS152 93.1128 3.1363 58.4199 28.7497 0.966 19250.834 6.1113 TBS153 49.228 2.9433 46.7085 24.5695 0.6582 19992.4316 6.48 TBS 154 109.104 2.8278 61.2502 27.668 1.3608 14770.0869 6.9721 TBS 155 56.434 2.9235 46.7869 45.6855 0.7909 24296.2656 6.2236 TBS156 161.1746 7.2214 56.3277 43.9171 2.4731 20061.8711 7.2046 TBS157 103.9476 5.9596 63.5134 13.5018 1.4263 18015.4746 8.2066 TBS158 118.5767 3.0826 47.3686 25.0305 1.8598 18156.1855 7.8308 TBS159 94.8305 3.0642 58.1502 27.7277 1.0177 20125.8086 6.1575 TBS160 85.3369 4.7985 62.6279 40.8108 1.1152 17503.6367 5.6693 TBS 161 82.7925 2.9412 59.9004 31.0952 0.8581 18429.6738 5.9886 TBS 162 93.3088 2.9387 60.329 29.4463 0.9341 19008.8945 5.9401 TBS163 103.0331 3.8626 62.3756 30.7733 1.2913 18153.0938 6.858 TBS164 94.6044 4.7341 62.4862 20.3731 1.3825 19007.2031 6.9193 TBS165 135.3248 2.7689 64.4023 32.1576 1.7504 14298.5176 6.8919 TBS166 78.066 3.3469 36.087 22.1031 1.0609 21980.625 8.793 TBS167 74.4906 3.6689 49.2289 30.8261 1.0946 27173.043 6.0506 TBS168 154.3654 3.2526 61.086 33.4045 2.053 17910.375 6.4945 TBS169 97.0317 3.7197 48.0874 22.8997 1.4158 17869.9102 8.539 TBS170 46.4537 2.9639 53.6363 43.5032 0.6835 27962.5371 5.8189 TBS171 86.4402 3.5183 66.3157 26.6486 0.9706 20224.2246 6.3654 TBS172 49.4104 2.923 46.1023 27.549 0.7678 22769.7832 6.7054 TBS173 129.3415 2.7705 64.3952 31.3316 1.2363 17499.7344 5.7002 TBS174 91.5843 2.865 61.1438 28.4252 0.8919 19774.5156 5.701 TBS175 43.7908 2.3856 48.6973 32.3842 0.6617 25245.4727 5.995 TBS176 79.6621 2.9894 59.7015 29.3249 0.7807 16847.1797 6.8554 TBS177 110.5805 2.7616 61.3861 28.0449 1.3825 14382.1094 7.0684 TBS178 119.0892 7.2765 42.4566 32.8071 1.781 24366.6836 7.7067 TBS179 127.8924 3.17 46.7508 28.2428 1.717 19361.7598 7.8019 TBS180 105.8091 5.381 54.9652 10.2876 1.5727 19165.9883 7.689 TBS181 88.3874 3.1632 46.99 28.0448 1.2166 19469.4141 7.6056 TBS182 284.5391 7.3353 59.0704 54.0863 3.7354 25207.1387 7.2985 102

ANID Ce Co Cr Cs Eu Fe Hf TBS183 159.3186 5.6964 65.8808 56.04 2.1299 19939.5352 6.8091 TBS 184 98.2921 2.9209 61.8402 35.8392 1.3116 12893.6494 5.9035 TBS 185 83.8008 4.3252 60.927 20.3645 1.2534 16724.1953 7.1427 TBS186 133.5506 5.532 68.6787 59.6476 1.8102 18306.293 6.6276 TBS187 90.1709 5.8925 66.9634 77.2496 1.1265 21073.2891 6.3984 TBS188 209.575 7.2034 58.9744 63.8159 2.7012 24546.543 7.1299 TBS189 285.4161 7.2971 59.7885 52.98 3.6578 25146.4629 7.1865 TBS 190 134.3365 6.8756 66.5311 59.4662 1.8997 19151.4961 6.352 TBS191 140.1105 7.0089 67.9732 60.7589 1.9564 19966.8086 6.1672 TBS192 81.3172 3.3924 34.5584 18.5074 1.1049 18578.8398 9.8408 TBS193 159.7171 5.8203 64.81 57.3307 2.1426 20029.9375 6.8432 TBS194 60.822 4.4621 51.2764 39.5634 0.8773 25176.2988 5.953 TBS195 99.6654 4.7196 47.4283 51.5039 1.4501 22374.8438 6.6004 TBS196 126.9249 4.4843 64.9275 27.0175 1.6832 19268.5332 7.4214 TBS197 142.0747 3.4659 46.4682 42.5468 2.0071 19797.6738 7.5199 TBS198 141.3892 4.545 47.1962 37.8155 1.8332 22928.0332 7.1276 TBS199 141.3892 4.545 47.1962 37.8155 1.8332 22928.0332 7.1276 TBS200 78.4793 3.1 47.3951 13.7099 1.0034 13471.0195 9.4898 TBS201 146.5519 6.7424 69.1611 62.2817 1.9971 19306.2598 6.2578 TBS202 147.5568 7.1129 70.8311 63.5046 2.0116 19551.4492 6.4538

APPENDIX D. - Continued

ANID Ni Rb Sb Sc Sr Ta Tb Th TBSOOl 0 126.5 1.0842 12.309 0 1.1151 0.8726 14.332 TBS002 0 33.9 0.985 13.742 0 1.6858 0.9445 14.416 TBS003 0 56.1 0.8315 14.413 0 1.6531 0.7054 16.834 TBS004 0 78.1 0.8531 15.222 0 1.5281 0.8067 16.479 TBS005 0 75.2 0.7738 14.216 0 1.4327 0.7833 15.774 TBS006 0 52.5 0.8157 13.687 0 1.4716 0.6293 13.756 TBS007 0 78.2 1.1925 14.426 0 2.0329 1.0263 34.019 TBS008 0 79.6 0.7387 14.159 0 1.5458 0.919 16.7 TBS009 0 81.6 0.7949 15.085 0 1.4184 0.7993 18.042 TBSOlO 0 52.7 1.0365 20.427 0 1.5985 0.8896 21.378 TBSOll 0 82.5 0.8199 13.545 0 1.4184 0.696 17.559 TBS012 0 77 0.8712 13.25 0 1.3485 0.7474 17.332 TBS013 0 87.2 0.736 15.421 0 1.565 0.9404 17.077 TBS014 0 103.6 1.1176 16.466 0 1.5852 1.0846 21.241 103

ANID Ni Rb Sb Sc Sr Ta Tb Th IBS015 0 40.9 0.8454 16.698 0 1.7309 0.8645 18.86 TBS016 0 47.9 0.6857 14.559 0 1.7046 0.6164 15.826 TBS017 0 80.5 0.8666 14.56 0 1.5275 1.242 19.509 TBS018 0 77.5 0.8704 14.827 0 1.5866 0.6988 15.882 IBS019 0 82.6 0.8249 14.379 0 1.3629 0.7417 16.879 TBS020 0 35.7 0.6865 12.587 0 1.4751 0.4927 12.317 TBS021 0 48.4 0.8455 12.571 0 1.4354 0.5526 15.131 TBS022 0 57.8 0.8191 14.392 0 1.4537 0.5801 17.04 TBS023 0 145.7 0.8562 16.612 0 1.6893 1.1881 20.84 TBS024 0 70.5 0.8508 14.681 0 1.335 0.5955 15.161 IBS025 0 75.5 0.7537 13.524 0 1.4613 1.184 17.942 TBS026 0 51 0.6915 13.521 0 1.3334 0.7448 12.006 TBS027 0 55.6 0.7503 13.726 0 1.337 0.6246 14.762 TBS028 0 53.1 0.7889 13.198 0 1.2613 0.6419 14.089 IBS029 0 60.6 0.7419 13.979 0 1.4473 0.6434 18.196 TBS030 0 51.8 0.9714 13.236 0 1.266 0.5571 11.293 TBS031 0 52.8 0.6948 13.506 0 1.5089 0.6084 17.848 TBS032 0 75.1 0.8024 13.146 0 1.3366 0.8155 15.335 TBS033 0 77.9 0.7763 16.116 0 1.6635 0.7465 16.645 TBS034 0 54.1 0.7182 14.752 0 1.5084 0.6255 16.353 IBS035 0 119.3 1.2243 13.16 0 1.3868 0.8551 16.278 IBS036 0 144.2 1.1037 12.468 0 1.1648 0.9156 14.923 JBS037 0 109.4 0.9906 11.729 0 1.129 0.8398 13.246 TBS038 0 115.3 0.9218 12.116 0 1.1196 0.8023 14.478 IBS039 0 114.9 1.3245 12.328 0 1.2566 0.8641 14.721 TBS040 0 57.4 0.7753 14.268 0 1.6587 0.6042 19.47 TBS041 0 71.4 0.9513 17.116 0 1.5788 0.8408 16.51 TBS042 0 53.6 0.7046 13.869 0 1.6245 0.546 19.033 TBS043 0 47.6 0.5872 14.12 0 1.6178 0.8948 14.244 TBS044 0 50 0.7885 15.843 0 1.7329 0.628 19.146 TBS045 0 48.1 0.6413 15.31 0 1.4656 0.6364 17.695 IBS046 0 24.8 0.6901 16.401 0 1.3518 0.5945 16.503 TBS047 0 66.4 0.7667 17.809 0 1.5477 0.6466 16.001 TBS048 0 72.2 0.9052 17.003 0 1.6569 0.8693 17.424 JBS049 0 63.6 0.8244 13.19 0 1.9829 0.8187 30.367 TBS050 0 32.8 1.0565 17.762 0 2.2985 1.1049 18.076 TBS051 0 91 1.0798 14.422 0 1.489 1.6519 19.058 104

ANID Ni Rb Sb Sc Sr Ta Tb Th TBS052 0 95.4 0.8175 15.388 0 2.0092 1.6909 24.436 TBS053 0 69.2 0.8107 16.588 0 1.4118 1.7039 18.814 TBS054 0 50.9 0.6384 13.786 0 1.269 1.5332 15.483 TBS055 0 83.6 0.7109 14.095 0 1.5991 0.5205 24.76 TBS056 0 118.8 0.7289 16.737 0 1.7417 1.2233 22.29 TBS057 0 112.4 0.8304 12.838 0 1.5606 0.5757 20.384 TBS058 0 49 1.3735 12.811 0 2.8591 1.0014 21.913 TBS059 0 53.9 0.751 16.978 0 1.4362 0.6693 18.285 TBS060 0 53.8 0.9785 18.44 0 1.3619 0.755 17.731 TBS061 0 87.3 0.7364 16.294 0 1.5879 1.8113 18.154 TBS062 0 97 0.9978 18.405 0 2.2379 2.0574 28.595 TBS063 0 78.5 0.8053 15.212 0 1.566 1.2395 15.858 TBS064 0 150.4 0.9085 18.136 0 1.5217 2.5691 23.835 IBS065 0 76.7 0.854 16.347 0 1.3194 1.1144 15.193 TBS066 0 109.4 0.7982 17.695 0 1.8944 1.9175 24.189 TBS067 0 98.5 1.0051 14.539 0 1.4414 4.269 19.464 JBS068 0 126.5 1.0217 19.053 0 1.7226 2.2156 24.201 TBS069 0 70.9 0.8817 13.281 0 2.125 0.5945 32.151 TBS070 0 96.1 1.1894 15.137 0 1.8227 2.1851 24.627 TBS071 0 56.8 1.0304 15.19 0 3.8932 2.5448 29.055 IBS072 0 77.8 0.7798 13.818 0 1.3601 0.567 15.918 TBS073 0 60.4 0.6662 14.42 0 1.5059 2.196 19.137 TBS074 0 46.6 0.9008 15.744 0 1.6895 0.803 18.943 TBS075 0 80.2 0.7857 14.048 0 1.4526 0.5996 16.18 TBS076 0 75.1 0.7701 14.951 0 1.5279 0.9034 16.109 JBS077 0 87.6 1.0423 16.612 0 1.3645 0.7899 17.621 TBS078 0 50.5 0.7473 14.61 0 1.7268 0.8922 19.209 IBS079 0 62.6 0.6326 14.105 0 1.5694 0 17.733 IBS080 0 46.7 0.6665 14.631 0 1.794 0.9702 19.815 TBS081 0 48.6 0.7187 14.069 0 1.5789 0.9662 17.865 TBS082 0 49.7 0.6961 13.91 0 1.5674 0.8996 17.434 TBS083 0 58.5 0.6085 14.558 0 1.6933 0 19.163 TBS084 0 73.9 0.7831 15.756 0 1.4477 1.6596 18.676 TBS085 0 53.3 0.7253 13.434 0 1.5491 0.666 17.972 TBS086 0 77.3 0.8034 12.552 0 1.4531 1.8448 19.872 TBS087 0 50.1 0.6657 14.463 0 1.6798 0 19.394 TBS088 0 51.2 0.7961 14.726 0 1.5922 0.6579 15.47 105

ANID Ni Rb Sb Sc Sr Ta Tb Th TBS089 0 104.4 0.8834 13.919 0 2.0014 0.7195 25.289 IBS090 0 46.2 0.6678 11.913 0 1.6121 1.0467 14.383 TBSlOO 0 78.2793 0.777 14.733 0 1.455 0.7399 15.6592 TBSlOl 0 85.3484 0.7565 13.7303 0 1.4094 0.6285 15.0005 TBS102 0 87.9162 0.6356 16.3549 0 1.5523 0.86 15.0368 TBS103 0 92.6911 0.7223 15.5598 0 1.6916 1.2252 18.8492 TBS104 0 49.6098 0.6637 11.5651 0 1.3895 0.7934 14.9268 TBS105 0 76.7003 0.6004 15.9819 0 1.5476 0.8011 16.9332 TBS106 0 80.9716 0.7523 15.2642 0 1.5324 0.694 16.0081 TBS1G7 0 91.1524 0.6688 15.8721 0 1.4732 0.8141 14.8649 TBS108 0 79.8058 0.789 16.4487 0 1.5507 0.8839 16.1067 TBS109 0 82.3831 0.7878 16.4528 0 1.4464 0.7949 15.1089 TBS110 0 87.8035 0.7308 16.3492 0 1.4447 0.7611 16.3653 TBSlll 0 82.5403 0.6866 14.2169 0 1.427 1.0732 17.6565 TBS112 0 173.212 0.8256 18.0845 0 1.7915 0.9877 23.8677 TBS113 0 48.6125 0.5013 11.5609 0 1.3556 0.8604 14.6634 TBS 114 0 93.0806 0.8097 14.8057 0 1.739 1.3462 19.2033 TBS115 0 82.4684 0.9699 15.064 0 1.5066 0.8178 16.2358 TBS116 0 94.0899 0.8562 15.2769 0 1.327 1.123 17.5664 TBS 117 0 87.2626 0.7732 15.9726 0 1.5812 0.9843 17.2908 TBS 118 0 82.2877 0.842 18.8783 0 1.5261 0.824 16.5379 TBS119 0 89.6328 0.658 15.9322 0 1.4575 0.7831 15.0367 TBS 120 0 79.8834 0.736 17.386 0 1.5231 0.6927 16.4516 TBS 121 0 78.7162 0.7457 16.6411 0 1.4727 0.5883 16.4041 TBS122 0 94.4487 0.6727 16.4285 0 1.6224 1.1357 18.5816 TBS123 0 83.079 1.0075 15.2914 0 1.5006 0.84 16.6278 TBS124 0 172.1021 0.8488 17.9771 0 1.7669 0.9284 24.1519 TBS125 0 76.2805 1.0358 17.5779 0 1.6049 0.8493 19.0353 TBS126 0 159.6383 0.856 15.6275 0 1.5705 0.8491 21.3266 TBS 127 0 105.8003 0.9013 15.8012 0 1.487 0.8986 19.6846 TBS 128 0 164.6919 0.9652 17.8591 0 1.6298 1.7281 23.4465 TBS129 0 138.2202 1.0341 16.8258 0 1.7777 0.9524 23.8634 TBS 130 0 82.7717 0.8541 14.3213 0 1.5633 1.3818 19.6625 TBS131 0 91.6022 0.9229 14.3606 0 1.6062 0.9219 20.6281 TBS132 0 136.7768 0.8316 16.8918 0 1.8339 1.4571 29.543 TBS133 0 138.6196 1.0162 16.8278 0 2.1287 1.001 26.9668 TBS134 0 95.5889 0.865 15.3798 0 1.7231 1.3302 21.1735 106

ANID Ni Rb Sb Sc Sr Ta Tb Th IBS135 0 89.1997 1.2402 16.3567 0 1.7772 1.0509 21.6959 TBS136 0 127.8421 0.7758 15.3795 0 1.6586 1.0375 20.2261 TBS 137 0 130.644 1.0986 15.326 0 1.7649 1.2655 20.8947 TBS138 0 141.8479 0.8266 18.9821 0 1.8549 1.5481 34.6339 TBS139 0 123.3278 0.9364 15.7301 0 1.4877 0.7106 19.2221 TBS140 0 133.8943 0.8827 16.2099 0 1.7394 0.8423 19.8184 TBS141 0 136.2179 1.311 15.9409 0 1.8299 1.5968 20.4172 TBS142 0 151.3448 1.0687 15.661 0 1.6621 1.7011 22.0808 TBS143 0 124.1748 0.6578 15.7181 0 2.0409 0.619 22.3522 TBS144 0 118.9282 0.9623 15.2884 0 1.4919 0.7037 19.319 TBS145 0 125.0573 1.026 15.7738 0 1.8071 1.6289 24.4726 TBS146 0 168.667 0.8527 13.2071 0 1.5151 1.4152 19.7355 TBS147 0 89.7947 0.8452 17.9131 0 1.5223 0.721 16.1924 TBS148 0 134.1446 0.902 15.7746 0 1.8818 0.6087 21.3343 TBS 149 0 134.517 0.7922 16.2304 0 1.6604 1.1753 22.5092 TBS 150 0 141.5108 1.024 16.7712 0 1.5877 0.6308 20.76 TBS 151 0 126.1718 1.1734 16.0229 0 1.5604 0.964 22.9298 TBS 152 0 125.2636 0.9488 15.4416 0 1.7375 0.6788 21.0386 TBS 153 0 72.2583 0.8877 15.11 0 1.6085 0.5057 22.4533 TBS154 0 116.05 0.8841 16.9054 0 1.9186 0.9639 25.1634 TBS155 0 147.1454 1.0333 16.1712 0 1.5039 0.7217 20.1034 TBS 156 0 138.7371 0.9552 18.6491 0 1.7054 1.9392 22.9807 TBS 157 0 108.729 0.7564 14.3258 0 1.2252 0.892 15.468 TBS 158 0 75.5874 1.0582 15.605 0 1.7458 1.2405 21.769 TBS159 0 127.5292 0.8386 15.0017 0 1.719 0.7544 19.5123 TBS160 0 121.499 1.1525 16.9751 0 1.7434 1.0801 24.1107 TBS161 0 132.2169 0.8195 15.9051 0 1.8907 0.626 20.7698 TBS162 0 133.4367 0.8879 15.8711 0 1.749 0.6495 20.7729 TBS 163 0 127.0203 0.7273 15.5915 0 1.7399 0.8935 20.517 TBS 164 0 89.9562 0.8587 18.2907 0 1.5072 0.8445 16.7387 TBS165 0 129.7844 0.9633 17.6043 0 1.9682 1.0976 27.6771 TBS166 0 70.0584 0.867 15.0456 0 2.0158 0.759 23.0194 TBS167 0 105.4072 1.0594 15.033 0 1.4849 0.7723 20.3601 TBS 168 0 137.9299 1.0543 15.8207 0 1.7461 1.7537 20.4279 TBS169 0 67.9002 1.065 15.1237 0 1.7631 1.0985 21.6034 TBS 170 0 139.3966 0.9854 15.9329 0 1.43 0.5244 18.0741 TBS171 0 121.8258 0.8882 14.897 0 1.599 0.6303 18.8084 107

ANID Ni Rb Sb Sc Sr Ta Tb Th TBS172 0 78.8313 0.9418 14.7161 0 1.6225 0.7876 20.9996 TBS173 0 137.0874 1.0802 16.774 0 1.7582 0.8082 23.8875 IBS174 0 134.2867 1.0345 15.2083 0 1.7314 0.7424 20.5276 TBS175 0 89.6437 1.0535 15.3244 0 1.5859 0.677 19.137 TBS176 0 124.0864 0.9189 15.4023 0 1.8976 0.8958 20.8983 TBS177 0 121.4414 0.8862 16.9917 0 1.8946 0.8862 25.3428 TBS178 0 165.0884 0.8454 13.2127 0 1.6718 1.2309 19.7815 TBS179 0 83.2578 0.9401 15.2494 0 1.6702 1.2644 21.3979 TBS180 0 81.8263 0.8055 14.7834 0 1.7969 0.9702 20.4167 TBS181 0 83.3569 0.8779 16.7635 0 1.8608 0.8546 21.908 TBS182 0 159.3555 1.0983 16.3414 0 1.817 2.1559 26.7854 TBS183 0 161.2198 0.9779 17.9119 0 1.8032 1.409 26.4086 TBS 184 0 124.2878 0.7955 17.7793 0 1.9541 0.9579 27.5052 TBS185 0 84.1714 0.6958 15.2252 0 1.6329 0.9774 17.5595 TBS 186 0 158.6103 0.9973 18.1514 0 1.8002 1.2912 27.1195 TBS 187 0 184.6116 0.7911 18.5474 0 1.884 0.8872 24.8883 TBS188 0 163.9025 1.015 16.7469 0 1.837 1.6806 27.2286 TBS189 0 159.4068 1.2335 16.1817 0 1.8822 2.3351 26.754 TBS190 0 168.3393 0.9194 18.3571 0 1.677 1.333 23.7858 TBS191 0 172.6508 0.9652 18.7745 0 1.7513 1.3209 24.3466 TBS192 0 53.224 0.7944 15.1953 0 2.2268 0.796 23.2182 TBS193 0 169.3778 0.9597 18.21 0 1.89 1.4717 26.1524 TBS194 0 140.0936 0.7498 16.3155 0 1.4753 0.6596 19.9137 TBS195 0 162.0224 0.7092 15.2232 0 1.6755 1.0219 21.0616 TBS196 0 109.7382 1.6324 18.1673 0 1.9697 1.3964 25.9814 TBS197 0 160.4718 0.8801 16.1385 0 1.7926 1.3597 25.1178 TBS198 0 173.2619 0.5868 14.825 0 1.6147 1.2713 19.623 TBS199 0 173.2619 0.5868 14.825 0 1.6147 1.2713 19.623 TBS200 0 50.6772 0.7723 12.6473 86.147 2.1692 0.7559 23.1755 TBS201 0 168.0863 0.9846 18.5999 0 1.7502 1.3011 24.8622 TBS202 0 170.7329 1.0236 18.9057 0 1.7883 1.2211 25.6483

APPENDIX D. - Continued

ANID Zn Zr A1 Ba Ca Dy TBSOOl 100.7 0 83270.5 835 50768.3 4.618 TBS002 39.6 0 145586.7 1077.2 6879.8 5.34 TBS003 34.6 0 143544.1 1497.2 19488.2 4.199 108

ANID Zn Zr A1 Ba Ca Dy TBS004 35.4 0 128189.7 630.9 19022.6 4.895 TBS005 42 0 132803.5 437.9 26057.1 4.778 TBS006 48.1 0 124925.8 549.7 11478.6 3.431 TBS007 31.7 0 144831.9 508.1 15948.5 6.28 TBS008 44.3 0 131477.8 459.8 10762.6 5.592 TBS009 39.9 0 126596.6 617 9420.3 4.953 TBSOlO 54.4 0 148117.1 304 7027 5.327 TBSOll 39.6 0 123984.5 688.9 10109.4 3.969 TBS012 35.6 0 116092 755.8 10326.4 4.455 TBS013 38.8 0 127791.6 434 10368 5.269 TBS014 34.9 0 138921.9 376.9 6351.1 6.797 TBS015 64.2 0 156048.7 377.9 15394.8 4.948 TBS016 30.2 0 140904.9 751.9 24801.8 3.817 TBS017 33.4 0 126312.2 654 8620.6 6.87 TBS018 35.4 0 133391.9 425.1 16742.4 4.16 TBS019 35.2 0 128754.3 405.3 7844.1 4.22 JBS020 39.9 0 134731.5 658.9 24216.4 3.008 TBS021 41.5 0 130067.7 928.4 36180.7 3.446 TBS022 52.7 0 132401.8 428.6 9248.2 3.888 TBS023 39.6 0 108454.3 497.9 16203.7 6.947 JBS024 30 0 126117.7 641.1 24441.9 3.944 TBS025 35 0 121871.9 764 21642.1 6.658 TBS026 30.2 0 129954.1 737.8 6227.3 4.527 TBS027 46.9 0 129344.2 390.8 17778.2 3.48 TBS028 45.7 0 125391.5 408.6 27697.3 4.222 JBS029 36.5 0 143101.6 807.9 8381.2 3.903 TBS030 29.8 0 129348 711.4 12302.1 4.358 IBS031 47 0 132523.2 416.1 17265.3 3.654 IBS032 36.9 0 107111.3 804.3 19865.6 5.513 JBS033 34.7 0 147659.6 383.2 7142.5 4.192 TBS034 40.5 0 130262.3 279.6 12975.9 4.033 TBS035 94.3 0 92894.4 403.5 37319.3 5.718 JBS036 99 0 83519.9 626.2 34152.3 5.071 IBS037 76.8 0 80497.1 623.9 86575.4 4.69 IBS038 83.7 0 81363 590.3 70316.7 4.949 TBS039 103.6 0 84116.4 462.2 38031.2 5.126 TBS040 31.8 0 130749.2 314.8 0 3.719 109

ANID 2n Zr A1 Ba Ca Dy TBS041 58.1 0 139700.4 493.5 11550.7 5.092 TBS042 31.1 0 128543.5 313.6 12661.3 3.58 TBS043 32.8 0 146999.6 437.3 8374 4.868 TBS044 44.4 0 149501.5 258.8 8608 3.984 TBS045 53.1 0 138867.6 349.9 6146.1 3.682 TBS046 28.6 0 127715.5 285.4 6901 4.387 TBS047 40.4 0 147502.5 312.6 10895 4.182 TBS048 41.1 0 146409.3 410.2 16522.5 5.119 IBS049 49 0 139991 317.9 8496 5.246 TBS050 34.6 0 158992 224.1 8445.4 6.602 TBS051 63.8 0 117956.6 733.5 9686 5.454 TBS052 65.9 0 133914 1058.6 14929.3 8.54 JBS053 63.1 0 102716.8 507.8 9302.5 6.175 TBS054 48.8 0 91237.6 906.5 18937 5.014 TBS055 55.1 0 124082.6 487.3 6368 3.805 TBS056 73.4 0 120390.2 865.3 15857.9 7.144 TBS057 76.2 0 100108.4 834.3 20888.9 4.599 TBS058 53.7 0 153759.3 803.4 6057.8 4.794 TBS059 78.5 0 107816.6 668.4 11675.7 5.828 TBS060 68.5 0 106443.4 785.3 17567.4 5.878 JBS061 61.8 0 138003.4 591.9 8455 6.303 TBS062 70.4 0 141595.5 368.3 12125.2 6.386 TBS063 66.3 0 138195.9 416.5 7302.6 4.393 JBS064 87.9 0 132980 752.5 16248.9 8.328 IBS065 67.7 0 122786.9 1042.5 19346.8 4.017 TBS066 70.5 0 135397.7 383.6 8356.3 6.711 TBS067 72.1 0 112793.7 633.7 15338.3 18.396 TBS068 82.6 0 141860.1 309.6 2739.1 10.85 TBS069 60.8 0 121076.2 203.1 3784.9 4.679 TBS070 56.5 0 128293 850.1 11845.2 7.848 TBS071 67.1 0 117297.9 525.9 6455.6 9.279 IBS072 57.5 0 122042.8 659.4 8840.9 4.163 IBS073 36.6 0 134975.9 523.9 7099.3 6.108 TBS074 61.5 0 157197.5 247.3 4944.6 3.631 TBS075 57.8 0 122709.1 495.7 7169.1 4.598 TBS076 59.1 0 129822.3 337.6 8637.2 4.862 TBS077 65.2 0 135467.7 518.6 14142.1 6.655 110

ANID Zn Zr A1 Ba Ca Dy JBS078 57.4 0 141324 244.2 4729.3 3.391 TBS079 57.4 0 131968.7 316.7 6354.5 3.54 TBS080 58 0 145092.4 224.4 3689.4 3.462 TBS081 52.7 0 135330.5 398.2 91110.5 3.304 IBS082 57.7 0 131665.9 417.5 4854.5 3.304 TBS083 55.2 0 127937.5 247.6 8501.5 4.303 TBS084 63 0 149361.3 411.6 10052.9 5.621 TBS085 56.1 0 123880.6 409 8554.9 3.47 IBS086 47.9 0 100106 664.2 7902.3 5.648 TBS087 57.3 0 139140.9 227.9 4229.7 3.478 TBS088 67.6 0 133805.7 446.3 6882.1 4.503 JBS089 77.4 0 129694.2 305.3 12081.3 5.381 JBS090 50 0 133185.5 356.6 5731.2 4.523 JBSlOO 47.3125 0 137479.1563 556.2571 7617.395 5.5968 JBSlOl 59.9793 0 134044.0938 642.1772 6237.9253 4.9515 JBS102 49.691 0 135918.1719 585.9898 5119.8892 5.2442 JBS103 50.9578 0 137965.0938 349.3273 6456.8188 7.4255 TBS104 42.4333 0 110379.8828 458.4985 7414.5503 5.3521 IBS105 54.8752 0 146192.7031 488.2193 6696.6519 5.4024 TBS106 44.9611 0 145675.7188 370.3132 7503.5718 5.1212 IBS107 50.1373 0 133598.8906 573.7042 5700.5864 5.8844 TBS108 55.8529 0 144054.3281 558.069 6124.4087 5.6708 JBS109 50.9854 0 135140.8906 659.6298 5956.4082 5.5423 JBSllO 62.2071 0 127282.6953 514.1029 6585.6528 5.1451 IBSlll 41.0125 0 125424.9688 1042.8994 8137.9385 5.9642 JBS112 67.3456 0 110946.5156 512.9651 7466.7534 5.2719 IBS 113 43.4484 0 128011.8281 411.8933 5633.2217 6.687 IBS114 45.6187 0 130830.8125 338.9195 5101.5508 8.0111 IBS115 50.5195 0 127910.1094 575.218 7488.3706 5.3662 IBS116 59.1706 0 126073.0469 471.6681 6811.8398 7.5818 TBS117 49.8583 0 137518.7813 721.2783 4847.6338 6.174 JBS118 62.333 0 150675.375 553.4778 8810.7939 5.9864 IBS119 49.3592 0 132085.8281 571.2112 6685.4331 4.4869 TBS120 45.9256 0 143830.1875 497.1258 7000.7769 4.2442 IBS121 48.8437 0 146264.1875 524.4747 6142.3008 3.9995 IBS 122 38.9481 0 132206.5469 416.4482 5578.7056 6.5877 IBS123 48.5359 0 123678.0859 548.7264 7326.6968 4.5184 Ill

ANID Zn Zr A1 Ba Ca Dy TBS 124 60.3343 0 126509.4531 324.1015 5469.9727 5.332 TBS125 54.9613 0 145973.9531 404.2728 9768.3457 4.4638 TBS 126 60.47 0 111839.4219 397.7439 4398.5752 4.7549 TBS127 51.2353 0 131532.6406 378.1538 5313.8589 5.1613 TBS128 76.115 0 132622.2656 691.9327 12553.5166 8.6764 TBS129 42.3107 0 131551.4844 541.8224 7939.3184 5.2765 TBS130 54.3849 0 120728.8203 434.5101 4461.9546 7.5056 TBS131 53.6777 0 122561.9141 465.3214 5190.2817 5.3201 TBS132 50.8521 0 132360.9375 1176.6222 6315.8076 6.9501 TBS133 37.9415 0 120464.0547 350.3607 3506.0759 5.9438 TBS134 49.0205 0 129447.7188 323.1747 4288.7051 6.535 TBS135 47.1383 0 143764.8125 307.6301 4974.6675 5.9407 TBS136 54.0626 0 128005.0313 382.0526 6534.1543 5.8652 TBS137 42.7835 0 114760.3203 465.9897 4490.9932 6.7946 TBS138 44.847 0 137778.4688 577.1301 10702.583 8.1983 TBS 139 50.5705 0 123221.6484 305.6544 4436.7085 4.0797 TBS140 41.5184 0 120826.1406 598.2234 8575.248 4.5916 TBS141 37.7415 0 110176.4375 566.6592 4227.0664 8.3295 TBS142 58.2539 0 115033.375 731.312 4570.4043 9.1033 TBS143 35.6336 0 127319.9688 243.3018 3828.0308 4.128 TBS144 42.5641 0 117043.5938 248.1216 4818.374 4.0187 TBS145 64.6307 0 121564.1953 569.5947 5727.752 8.7078 TBS146 67.4193 0 107594.7188 384.9017 4080.228 7.3884 TBS147 52.2668 0 143706.4063 451.6357 5820.2319 4.3446 TBS 148 36.1136 0 123199.3984 413.0266 4066.4888 4.1534 TBS 149 48.032 0 128655.2266 526.2847 5842.2373 6.3799 TBS 150 50.0644 0 132391 197.9146 3868.5913 4.9028 TBS151 52.9083 0 125105.8125 397.6715 5559.2891 5.7618 TBS152 46.4186 0 118318.3828 472.7687 6318.8501 4.7576 TBS153 49.3194 0 127204.7344 226.7996 4730.0688 3.3709 TBS 154 59.7545 0 130119.6172 317.4139 4746.4248 6.062 TBS 155 51.1881 0 124674.1406 214.7094 4029.1855 4.7042 TBS156 76.4418 0 124701.1094 413.589 4685.1626 10.0651 TBS157 44.0319 0 85435.6797 417.9807 5255.5605 5.5281 TBS 158 47.2755 0 135828.3594 242.9712 3898.6272 7.0062 TBS 159 43.4013 0 116971.5 556.6981 6550.457 4.6584 TBS 160 59.6082 0 121107.0156 328.3286 5529.1748 5.4688 112

ANID 2n 2r A1 Ba Ca Dy TBS161 46.7023 0 124230.8828 429.031 7362.7163 4.4191 TBS162 43.3998 0 121269.8203 499.4484 5769.6782 5.0007 TBS163 54.6648 0 129305.7656 426.353 6357.9746 5.7004 TBS164 58.9248 0 144015.1563 392.9786 9907.1797 5.1641 TBS165 44.8797 0 132459.0313 388.365 5331.8511 6.6832 TBS166 50.7618 0 144017.7813 436.6978 4174.5952 4.8318 TBS167 53.3294 0 122720.4297 391.4649 3936.0374 5.0159 TBS 168 48.8842 0 113429.0469 591.6673 12850.4121 9.4459 TBS169 45.8169 0 134276.5938 270.3137 4200.6187 6.4365 TBS170 50.9634 0 120096.625 240.0868 4225.2314 3.8988 TBS171 47.6978 0 113882.2188 832.0042 6624.1128 4.1893 TBS172 52.7452 0 127955.6719 260.6622 5398.3257 4.1555 TBS173 49.4523 0 131416.6094 537.744 8558.0869 5.2217 TBS174 51.6971 0 121695.9063 653.3171 6218.6313 4.6464 TBS175 43.8039 0 128167.8516 185.8394 4518.1875 3.6062 TBS176 46.0435 0 122168.0156 326.6631 9110.3477 3.922 TBS 177 45.754 0 131674.1406 342.9732 4232.4795 6.0568 TBS 178 71.3214 0 107853.5391 400.1062 4043.7576 7.5309 TBS179 49.97 0 128476.9844 267.4944 4116.5078 6.8105 TBS180 60.0383 0 121422.4375 696.5369 8193.2334 6.3398 TBS181 47.7706 0 153893.0156 442.7985 4415.5493 6.1629 TBS 182 75.3572 0 136845.2813 1056.8763 6460.208 12.0662 TBS 183 69.6525 0 131685.1875 532.8256 4860.8296 8.3704 TBS 184 55.1937 0 118896.2578 367.4019 5281.0488 5.9411 TBS185 47.5557 0 138822.2813 383.1821 7227.6387 4.9614 TBS186 65.7408 0 130902.7891 566.4899 5441.3882 7.3588 TBS187 67.8097 0 131906.5156 457.8613 4017.6311 5.2951 TBS188 73.9274 0 133563.2344 650.2988 5396.4561 9.4367 TBS189 75.581 0 141672.9219 1107.1035 6500.3726 12.5371 TBS190 81.5212 0 132539.5625 505.2033 5958.5723 7.5692 TBS191 79.3217 0 138615.5313 490.789 5849.625 7.7026 TBS192 44.7116 0 161713.125 657.2667 4755.1748 4.9243 TBS193 70.6046 0 131042.9297 390.3393 5037.8726 8.3297 TBS194 53.3156 0 130567.5313 322.304 4840.2461 4.6422 TBS195 62.1326 0 115289.4375 386.4778 5099.0249 6.8868 TBS 196 56.0291 0 138167.4219 1152.3544 5650.2427 6.6675 TBS 197 50.641 0 130951.4297 275.4309 4157.8594 8.1986 ANID Zn Zr A1 Ba Ca Dy TBS198 60.7054 0 101869.25 345.8188 4906.2446 4.8305 TBS199 60.7054 0 107174.4063 370.533 3308.6619 7.676 TBS200 37.0175 180.392 122131.5859 715.0798 12229.0244 5.0484 TBS201 80.5874 166.981 137900.1563 516.2292 8608.0264 7.6564 TBS202 78.0709 175.941 140251.375 568.7234 9216.4023 7.8629

APPENDIX D. - Continued

ANID K Mn Na Ti V TBSOOl 28917.2 486 7096.6 4028.9 110.3 TBS002 11031 69 883 6768 112.2 TBS003 10039.9 105 1266.9 5796.8 101.6 TBS004 12225.5 138 1442.2 4913.3 128.7 TBS005 15277.9 120 1191 5254.4 135.4 TBS006 9872.1 114 1142.8 5059.9 107.9 TBS007 10112.8 53 772.7 5183.5 95.2 IBS008 12337.6 89 786.1 5613.7 133.4 JBS009 15696.7 87 1048.3 5332 132.8 TBSOlO 10651 97 1133.6 5301.6 127.2 JBSOll 15234 79 869.8 5429.6 134.4 TBS012 14206.1 94 1926.3 5036.8 121 TBS013 15528.7 146 1451.9 5810.8 130 TBS014 17219.1 62 657.7 4580.4 123 TBS015 8028.5 83 731.6 5494.8 113.6 TBS016 8648 75 905.3 5838.5 99.4 JBS017 15627.3 81 1427.3 6052.9 129.6 TBS018 12536.4 111 685.5 5814.2 131.7 JBS019 13259.9 100 1057.3 5642.2 124.9 TBS020 5970.9 87 1163.6 5738.8 109.5 JBS021 11909.6 254 3322.5 4390.4 93.4 IBS022 11779.3 88 872.7 5117.2 103.6 JBS023 22462.7 88 930.2 5183.1 103.9 TBS024 10514.7 73 850.1 5131.1 115.9 IBS025 13483.6 92 721.7 4993.4 117.8 IBS026 8990.8 78 1109.6 5082.1 107.5 IBS027 9562.4 133 1494.1 5211.2 108.4 TBS028 12213.4 108 1455.1 5389.8 97.4 TBS029 10365.5 64 805.9 4621.7 101.6 114

ANID K Mn Na Ti V TBS030 9811.5 91 1777.7 5029.5 106.4 TBS031 10523.7 111 935.5 5411.2 103.5 TBS032 13723.5 131 1114.2 5164.9 105.2 TBS033 13957.2 77 1260.9 6353.3 146.6 TBS034 10669.7 102 1031.2 5305.2 89.9 TBS035 28797.6 376 5814.2 4281 136.7 TBS036 31871.2 452 6084.3 3440.6 138 IBS037 24644 611 8244 3135.8 89.8 TBS038 29409.4 579 7570.1 3885.8 115.5 TBS039 30710.9 422 6236.1 3372 112 TBS040 9860.5 83 765.4 5652.3 98.4 IBS041 11657.9 98 934.1 5623.3 134.9 TBS042 10470.9 80 804.3 5251.3 93.7 TBS043 8432.6 98 1073 6698 110.3 JBS044 9385.7 75 915.2 5939.4 113.5 IBS045 8655.3 80 930 5006.4 101.7 JBS046 8564.8 226 2684.1 5499.3 96.4 TBS047 13987.2 72 1197.1 5888.1 114.7 TBS048 13520.5 120 925.3 5817 132.3 TBS049 10258.5 94 1218.7 5220.6 75.5 TBS050 7035.4 79 1063.4 6479.5 102 TBS051 14417.3 93 901.5 4574.5 93 JBS052 16375.5 86 587.1 4093.2 103 JBS053 11894.3 74 881.7 4849.3 124.2 IBS054 8084 83 726.4 5334.8 116.2 TBS055 15338.5 86 1152.7 3967 95.5 JBS056 19651.7 97 1488.2 5185.4 94.7 TBS057 18361.2 114 850.7 4067.7 88.3 JBS058 9828.6 81 1324.2 4865.6 96.6 O JBS059 9272 89 797.6 5221.1 O TBS060 9461.6 104 850.4 5512.6 139.7 JBS061 14190.3 103 916 5987.7 119.2 JBS062 14189.3 91 1460 6783.3 116 TBS063 14871.5 80 1802.2 5895.8 130.7 TBS064 20898.4 80 991.9 4587.8 109.6 TBS065 14430.2 136 1575.8 4601 117 TBS066 18501 82 1644.9 5184.3 107.1 ANID K Mn Na Ti V TBS067 16006.1 126 1015.1 4011.7 111.7 IBS068 21905.4 67 1553.3 5343.7 139.7 TBS069 11342.4 70 713.9 5981.4 87.1 TBS070 16746.7 59 660.7 4935.3 91.3 TBS071 8656.7 126 1278.2 9024.3 105.3 TBS072 13401.7 111 1005.4 5383.5 123.8 TBS073 11327.1 86 909.6 5440.8 105.1 TBS074 9319.7 85 788.3 6180.4 108.6 JBS075 13483.3 88 1090.2 5030.1 119.6 IBS076 14333.2 79 1175 5408.3 114.8 TBS077 16017.5 126 848.2 5081.8 142.3 TBS078 9853.9 58 930.5 6341.2 98 JBS079 12614.3 93 944.5 6199.2 105.7 TBS080 7849.7 72 705.3 6376.2 105.7 TBS081 9628.5 76 840.3 5712.3 102.2 TBS082 9035.8 61 865.2 4908.1 103.8 TBS083 10640.2 79 1021.3 6022.4 105.6 TBS084 13348.8 64 879.3 5535.6 132.3 TBS085 9474.8 100 1163.9 5659 96.9 TBS086 11612.3 84 702.6 5024.5 98.3 TBS087 9022.6 62 926.5 5958.1 105.7 TBS088 11968.5 101 1518.8 4824.7 101.7 TBS089 15125.7 91 1640.4 5298.7 103.6 TBS090 8598.4 96 839.2 6182 92.1 JBSlOO 14857.2002 78 934.3376 6035.855 136.6144 TBSlOl 14918.6289 91 948.2202 5796.0747 121.1646 TBS102 17323.7051 84 4521.9814 6186.585 130.5054 IBS103 14084.6631 64 860.7763 6668.6665 114.4792 TBS104 9248.4141 84 741.5958 5567.0122 88.5583 TBS105 13367.5234 79 1231.5979 6721.0693 154.2022 TBS106 12366.9121 65 1000.1549 6611.5083 137.3102 IBS107 15810.8623 106 1103.7156 6237.1987 122.3548 TBS108 14508.165 71 994.5024 6088.2905 131.3083 TBS109 14558.5879 74 1138.0427 6095.3267 129.0057 JBSllO 16602.293 89 1409.712 5722.1006 119.0307 JBSlll 14552.6768 100 1105.7595 6169.8838 111.9077 TBS112 9192.6426 81 694.9626 5741.5278 92.0636 116

ANID K Mn Na Ti V TBS113 21925.1641 73 1011.9086 5835.3711 110.4777 TBS114 13955.957 69 900.5688 6919.4741 112.6871 TBS 115 15365.5039 76 1364.5181 5925.7939 132.4472 TBS116 16224.9395 193 947.164 4868.7397 115.0417 TBS 117 14179.999 70 1004.353 6254.7139 119.8918 TBS 118 13562.9229 89 1206.8749 6170.7036 148.2473 TBS119 14964.7656 109 1118.0211 5970.5444 123.8903 TBS 120 14765.3389 65 989.4877 5681.5161 134.5579 TBS121 14404.2852 67 965.3408 5641.0078 132.6003 TBS122 14531.252 54 788.3196 5942.3447 115.3776 TBS 123 14242.4141 71 1239.9082 5532.9253 132.2285 TBS124 23381.9316 70 790.5002 5169.4609 106.4836 TBS 125 12578.7803 69 1137.9227 6293.0566 145.7203 TBS 126 22701.0449 68 778.6139 4989.9907 101.7469 TBS127 16921.7637 67 702.3542 4481.1919 107.2633 TBS128 21044.1855 85 804.5559 5058.5034 115.1062 TBS129 21625.1992 64 1071.2081 5068.2651 109.6175 TBS130 12866.4863 75 598.9525 4867.0195 100.8811 TBS131 15749.7207 84 824.757 4455.6211 94.548 TBS132 20363.0254 82 1032.6173 5044.7539 107.1595 TBS133 20535.6602 57 945.7954 5812.2822 94.6587 TBS 134 15505.6123 55 539.629 4668.8105 101.6745 TBS135 15956.3955 63 735.4503 5075.7559 105.5496 TBS136 18449.2969 77 1110.2704 4719.9814 94.5813 TBS 137 21498.2813 60 944.269 4939.5244 104.5197 TBS138 19743.3887 67 1090.541 5299.1069 111.0486 TBS139 20020.2461 69 815.1503 4531.8384 102.785 TBS140 19795.8965 77 881.8729 5116.0342 102.9469 TBS141 21642.2305 47 788.684 5310.7163 109.8969 TBS142 23217.6152 84 1003.8226 4980.0015 98.2629 TBS143 18621.6934 61 861.8118 5443.9766 99.4343 TBS144 19873.8379 50 882.485 4433.4663 97.4316 TBS145 19375.4395 83 928.9214 5276.6733 105.557 TBS146 25322.793 87 773.8429 4359.645 86.3156 TBS147 15398.7275 74 2428.3623 5584.4116 135.7186 TBS148 20205.3008 62 890.2775 5415.2246 97.6801 TBS149 20013.959 86 1004.9619 4930.8604 108.7324 117

ANID K Mn Na Ti V TBS150 22036.9883 63 900.7151 4643.8945 107.0555 TBS151 19992.9043 86 930.6639 4729.6689 116.1732 TBS152 20466.1582 71 955.7783 5041.7988 99.5713 TBS153 12389.249 55 709.1748 4537.3823 100.651 TBS154 16163.501 65 1007.129 5474.3208 107.0395 TBS155 22689.6113 53 898.4178 4330.0176 103.3027 TBS156 20681.3867 71 698.555 4853.9209 102.6444 TBS157 18546.3828 80 935.5026 4964.7178 110.9691 TBS158 11763.1064 55 798.2084 4611.0474 101.6993 TBS159 20238.6328 88 1048.6703 4493.1211 101.3222 TBS160 17394.0625 63 849.5765 5247.1997 110.5072 TBS161 20687.9492 70 926.5398 5268.3804 99.5643 TBS162 20249.3906 68 1253.5691 5084.8721 105.3072 TBS163 18859.6406 87 1090.614 4804.1343 104.1855 TBS 164 14117.8975 65 2349.8096 5705.4609 144.6985 TBS165 17932.5605 72 1110.9958 5643.4824 109.6385 TBS166 11468.3232 41 661.8495 4514.6523 99.2503 TBS167 16141.5098 57 764.8107 4335.3696 109.4856 TBS168 21171.6348 101 1055.1217 4765.6836 97.179 TBS169 11926.4746 63 824.2817 4985.1846 89.7035 TBS170 21742.8164 58 736.8445 4478.0508 101.808 TBS171 19702.1191 77 833.2694 5161.1665 99.22 TBS172 12465.4414 52 595.7662 4283.2441 98.1646 TBS173 21505.4414 67 1091.8204 4953.3052 108.1456 TBS174 19868.6953 66 1027.6892 4975.5273 106.2674 TBS175 15422.4014 43 607.8157 4501.1255 102.2981 TBS176 19529.6074 83 1115.0518 5270.0693 97.606 TBS177 16230.0635 63 1023.2811 6138.9805 102.0986 TBS178 24954.0332 98 753.1113 4154.4443 86.6391 TBS179 14197.8584 58 534.1227 4647.894 103.9067 TBS180 16169.8555 105 1519.9655 5210.4805 93.2637 TBS181 14243.3623 59 505.8027 5145.6665 113.2225 TBS182 22570.334 83 934.8677 5073.0313 102.0802 TBS183 21834.9297 68 862.7136 5045.5903 115.9249 TBS184 20323.1934 60 909.873 5739.4692 107.2056 TBS185 15047.1543 75 964.3614 5607.4282 128.2099 TBS186 21785.0488 78 1012.4193 5318.4419 114.6117 ANID K Mn Na Ti V IBS 187 24011.5469 79 667.3541 5376.208 111.2735 TBS188 22973.1602 79 1058.249 4828.6226 96.6404 TBS189 21550.5957 78 850.1622 4881.8076 100.5251 TBS190 23301.1152 66 850.4377 4994.8472 112.6284 TBS191 23683.498 64 898.4272 4846.9639 118.2156 TBS192 10194.1777 43 728.2942 5237.3672 88.6848 IBS193 22765.4785 73 923.6406 5099.1997 111.3547 IBS194 22332.0859 79 924.502 4473.7734 102.5187 IBS195 23444.6191 77 749.544 4572.8896 95.7805 IBS196 16226.666 90 706.0613 5567.1543 99.2979 IBS197 21221.9355 58 697.9529 4437.8989 97.6015 IBS198 19622.877 75 805.6622 5024.0034 97.4522 IBS 199 27080.7363 73 885.4729 4952.9336 88.1251 IBS200 7520.1694 85.477 1606.033 5480.4434 80.7308 IBS201 20780.9258 57.4824 1681.7708 4914.9888 117.3239 IBS202 22573.793 66.3716 1710.6404 4993.3315 120.7929 119

APPENDIX E. CERAMIC COUNTS USED IN CORRESPONDENCE ANALYSIS

PQ u

U • CwH Snowflake Tularosa Escavada Reserve McDonald Puerco Context Red Mesa eu 160,Midden 1 5 2 0 9 0 0 0 BR, Midden 3 1 0 2 5 4 11 7 2 BR, Midden1 0 0 0 1 0 0 8 1 BR, Midden2 1 5 4 3 2 7 1 1 BR, Plaza, GS 1, UF 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 BR, Plaza, T4, Sub 0 0 0 1 0 1 11 0 BR, Plaza, T5, Sub 0 0 0 0 0 0 38 0 BR, Rm 1, Roof 0 0 1 2 0 1 46 4 BR, Rm 1, Sub 0 0 0 1 1 9 22 2 BR, Rm 1, Trash 0 0 1 12 3 23 229 5 BR, Rm 2, Surf 2 0 0 0 1 0 0 131 0 BR, Rm 3, Roof 0 0 0 6 0 1 68 0 BR, Rm 3, Surfl 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 BR, Rm 3, Trash 0 0 0 1 0 1 12 0 BR, Rm 4, Roof 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 BR, Rm 4, Surfl 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 BR, Rm 4, Trash 0 0 0 0 0 0 13 0 BR, Rm 5, Roof 0 0 0 0 0 1 3 0 BR, Rm 5, Trash 0 0 0 13 0 7 114 0 BR, Rm 6, Feature 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 BR, Rm 6, Roof 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 BR, Rm 6, Trash 0 0 0 9 0 0 113 1 BR, Rm 7, Surface 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 BRY, Midden 2 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 BRY, plaza 1 0 1 4 4 4 2 5 0 BRY, plaza 3 0 0 0 9 4 0 5 0 BRY, rm 1, surface 1 0 0 0 12 0 0 15 0 BRY, rm 2, strat 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 57 0 BRY, rm 2, strat 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 99 0 BRY, rm 2, strat 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 0 BRY, rm 3, strat 1 0 0 0 23 0 4 17 0 BRY, rm 3, strat 2 0 0 0 12 0 0 8 0 120

u pq 13 « rt c s uO o % o Q G a u Reserve Context Puerco C/5 Oh BRY, rm 3, strat 3/5 0 0 0 5 1 0 6 0 BRY, rm 4, strat 1 0 0 0 9 0 0 1 1 BRY, rm 4, strat 2 0 0 1 2 3 6 4 1 BRY, rm 4, strat 3 0 0 0 3 0 1 14 0 BRY, rm 4, surface 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 134 0 chodistaas rvs 1 3 0 7 0 16 5 0 CK, GKiva, Fill 0 0 1 7 12 3 0 0 CK, Great Kiva, Floor 2 0 0 3 4 0 0 0 CK, Midden 18 9 8 11 38 0 0 0 CK, Rm 1, Rooffall 18 27 9 11 27 1 0 0 CK, Rm 4, Rooffall 12 4 0 0 19 0 0 0 CK, Rm 6, Transect 0 0 1 5 5 0 0 0 CR, Great Kiva II 2 3 16 122 5 0 0 0 CR, Kiva I 16 5 31 3 1 35 0 13 CR, Plaza 4 5 7 94 35 7 0 27 CR, Rm 10 1 2 6 31 17 3 1 12 CR, Rm 10, Fill 0 0 1 3 1 0 0 0 CR, Rm 10, SubFloor 1 1 1 13 12 3 0 1 CR,Rm 11 0 0 3 18 8 0 0 2 CR, Rm 12, Ashpit 1 0 0 5 25 2 0 0 CR, Rm 12, Fill 1 0 3 44 27 2 0 83 CR, Rm 12, Floor 2 1 2 2 0 0 0 7 CR, Rm 13 0 0 0 14 2 0 0 1 CR, Rm 15, Fill 0 0 2 2 0 0 0 29 CR, Rm 15, Floor 0 0 0 5 0 0 0 13 CR, Rm 16, Fill 0 0 0 8 3 0 0 2 CR, Rm 17 0 0 0 3 1 0 0 3 CR, Rm 18, Ash Level 7 0 3 74 41 9 0 58 CR, Rm 18, Below Ash 1 1 0 6 4 0 0 0 CR, Rm 18, Floor 0 0 0 14 34 0 0 12 CR, Rm 18, Level A 2 0 0 4 2 3 0 1 CR, Rm 18, Level E 0 0 0 4 5 0 0 7 CR, Rm 18, Low Ash 0 0 0 1 3 1 0 15 CR, Rm 18, Low Clay 1 0 0 2 1 0 0 4 "O u c Snowflake Tularosa Reserve McDonald Puerco Context Red Mesa Escavada Ki CR, Rm 18, Sand/Clay 6 0 0 8 7 0 0 9 CR, Rm 19, Fill 0 0 0 13 1 0 0 3 CR, Rm 19, Level A 1 0 1 7 5 0 0 0 CR, Rm 19, Level B 2 0 1 19 11 1 0 8 CR, Rm 19, Level E 2 0 0 26 21 0 0 17 CR, Rm 19, Level G 0 0 0 5 5 0 0 0 CR, Rm 19, Level K 2 0 1 1 1 0 0 3 CR, Rm 2, Fill 1 0 2 2 1 0 0 3 CR, Rm 2, SubFloor 0 2 2 13 2 0 0 7 CR, Rm 21 0 0 3 4 4 0 0 0 CR, Rm 22, Level A 3 0 0 4 3 0 0 1 CR, Rm 22, Level B 0 1 0 9 4 0 1 0 CR, Rm 23 15 0 18 175 81 5 2 46 CR, Rm 23, Above Floor 0 0 2 29 4 0 0 1 CR, Rm 23, Floor 5 0 5 36 2 0 0 1 CR, Rm 23, Level A 0 0 3 34 18 2 1 1 CR, Rm 23, Level B 5 0 2 37 31 0 0 16 CR, Rm 3, Fill 2 2 9 44 21 5 0 61 CR, Rm 3, Floor 2 3 22 41 5 0 0 13 CR, Rm 4, Floor 0 0 2 1 6 0 0 2 CR, Rm 4, SubFloor 0 0 1 13 8 0 0 4 CR, Rm 5, Fill 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 CR, Rm 5, Floor 1 1 0 0 4 2 0 0 11 CR, Rm 5, Floor 2 3 1 2 47 3 0 1 2 CR, Rm 6 0 0 0 2 3 0 0 3 CR, Rm 7 2 1 2 194 37 1 0 12 CR, Rm 8 2 1 6 59 13 2 0 4 CR, Rm 9 0 0 0 5 5 0 0 0 FH, 18177 4 0 1 22 2 0 0 0 FH, 18343 42 55 0 15 23 4 0 5 FH, 18345 5 9 0 31 2 0 0 6 FH, 18346 5 3 0 46 35 0 0 1 FH, 18350 12 6 0 92 49 23 0 48 FH, 19330 24 11 2 31 16 0 0 19 K) K) McDonald Tularosa Puerco Escavada Reserve PinedaleBW Red Mesa t xet no C Snowflake K> N> K> 4^ SO on O Ui , HF1 3391 o •—k OS o o o o , HF33 391 O 00 o o , HF4 3391 o o o K> 4^ O O O 1—^ , GHt aer G, avi K l li F o ON Ui 4^ , GneH ddi M o o o H-k K> 4x H—^ 1—k O , GH ml lR aff, o1o R 1 O o 4^ Ln 00 o o o o , HP, avi eKc afr uS o K) h-k sO 4^ , HP, avi Kr epp U l li F •—k 1—k OS 1—^ Un UJ VJ OS -1^ •—k , nHe Pddi M 4^ NJ ho t—k ON , HP mR e ca,f r1uS 1 o J—k Ui K) ON OS , HP mR r e,p 1p U l li F OS OS h—k o o o o , HP mr oR olf, b3uS 1 o N> t—k K> OO J—k , HP mR r e,p 3p U ll i F 00 K> K> OO OO O ON e, r HutPcurt S 1 o 4^ ho o O ON o 1 L, 6T, 060SF, CR o 1—k o o o 3 L, 6T, 470SF, CR o 4>^ 1—>• 00 o kl ubavi k, YDNR 6 5 o h-k t—k on l Lavi k. YDNR 94 so 4"^ (—k Ln Ui \| 2 Lavi k, YDNR O ON K) o ON o o 3 Lavi k, YDNR o <* p 4^ r N> t—* O O O O so o § V

N> h-^ VO K) OO OO o f ooravi k, YDNR •— o oz oz K> ON t—k K> o 00 o LDa NdaRmar, Y 1 o K> t—k O so K> o r oolfl MR, YDNR O K> O O ON U1 O 1 L1 MR, YDNR o t—k Ui O Ln K> 2 L1 MR, YDNR O h-k O o ON o o 3 L1 MR, YDNR o O h-k ui K> o o o o r oolf 2 MR, YDNR o KJ 4^ K> O Ln O oo 1 L2 MR, YDNR o K> h-i O Ln so Ln ON o r oolf 3 MR, YDNR \o K> K> 4^ H-A o o 00 O 1 L3 MR, YDNR o K> H-k 4^ O ON -1^ 2 L3 MR, YDNR o 0 5 t—k o O o o 1—k 1—k 3 L3 MR, YDNR o K> o O O O O 4 L3 MR, YDNR o K) McDonald Puerco Reserve PinedaleBW Tularosa Red Mesa Escavada

t xet no C Snowflake ho N) \l O so 1—^ o o 5 L3 MR, YDNR o ON LP 00 o o o O 6 L3 MR, YDNR o K) LP o o o o o r oolf 4 MR, YDNR o H-k 4^ O o o o DL 4 MR, YDNR o H-k LP LP o o o ? esuohti p4 MR, YDNR o LP LP OO O 3 L5 MR, YDNR O O O H-k (—* O o 4 L5 MR, YDNR o o o I—>• Ln 4^ o O o r oolf 6 MR, YDNR o ho K> Ln Ln 4^ O O 1 L6 MR, YDNR o K) Ln OO Ln O o 2 L6 MR, YDNR o

K) O OO o o r oolf, BL9 MR, YDNR o 33 33 H-k K> LP LP O O K) La er akr o w, YDNR 1 O N> K> ON H-k Ln LP K) o O 2 Laerakr o w, YDNR o ON VJ o o o o 3 Laer akr o w, YDNR o I—k ON K> 1— o o , KTa vi K 1 o ON t-n K) LP so o , KTa vi K 2 o K> ON 4^ so O mR , KT 1 o K> t—k 4^ 4^- o o O , KT mR 1 1 o K> •—k SO OO O OO o , KT mR 21 o •—* 4^ \o K) K) 4^ ON O , KT mR 31 O N) ON LP o o , KT mR 41 o K> h-k O 1—k •—k , KT mR 5 1 O t-n U1 Ln o o , KT mR 7 1 o ON N> ON 1—k o o , KT mR 81 o N> N> H-k K> o SO , KT mR 2 o o 4^ K> 4^ O O , KT mR 0 2 o O H-k o o ON , KT mR 3 o o h-k ui U1 1—k , KT mR 4 o o H-* 4^ v>> h-* o o , KT mR 5 o o t—A K) -U H-k o Ln o o , KT mR 6 o 4^ U1 O , KT mR 7 o o Ui U1 1—k o so o , KT mR A7 o o N> t— ON

, KT mR 8 o o K> Ln O -1^ O OO , KT6l mR o o 124

PQ u •au c Snowflake Tularosa Puerco Reserve McDonald Context Red Mesa Escavada TK, Storage Pit 1 1 2 2 0 11 0 0 0 TK, Storage Pit 2 3 0 1 12 7 0 0 0 TK, Storage Pit 3 5 0 0 3 4 0 0 0

APPENDIX E. - Continued

v bA (3 Johns Showlow Cibicue St. Cedarcreek

Context PinedaleRed Kwakina Pinto Holbrook 1 Walnut 160,Midden 0 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 BR, Midden 3 0 99 0 2 2 0 0 0 0 18 BR, Midden 1 0 15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 BR, Midden2 0 241 1 6 3 0 0 0 0 27 BR, Plaza, GS 1, UF 8 0 0 0 7 4 1 0 0 8 BR, Plaza, T4, Sub 6 2 0 0 7 12 0 0 0 31 BR, Plaza, T5, Sub 4 4 0 0 16 14 0 0 0 0 BR, Rm 1, Roof 0 10 0 0 68 9 0 0 0 5 BR, Rm 1, Sub 23 35 0 4 12 4 0 1 0 72 BR, Rm 1, Trash 0 39 0 3 32 38 2 0 0 17 BR, Rm 2, Surf 2 0 0 0 0 13 3 0 0 0 14 BR, Rm 3, Roof 51 1 0 2 147 72 28 0 0 52 BR, Rm 3, Surfl 0 0 0 0 13 0 0 0 0 0 BR, Rm 3, Trash 6 1 0 0 43 0 1 0 0 15 BR, Rm 4, Roof 0 2 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 21 BR, Rm 4, Surfl 1 0 0 0 144 0 0 0 0 2 BR, Rm 4, Trash 2 0 0 0 69 2 0 0 0 11 BR, Rm 5, Roof 5 3 0 0 8 0 3 0 0 44 BR, Rm 5, Trash 25 4 0 0 16 7 0 0 0 90 BR, Rm 6, Feature 1 1 0 0 0 6 0 0 0 0 0 BR, Rm 6, Roof 4 5 0 0 15 5 0 0 0 0 BR, Rm 6, Trash 23 54 0 5 90 24 2 0 0 3 BR, Rm 7, Surface 1 2 15 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 1 125 Johns St. Pinto Cedarcreek Walnut showlow PinedaleRed Kwakina Holbrook Cibicue Context Wngate BRY, Midden 2 0 6 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 28 BRY, plaza 1 0 1 0 6 0 0 0 0 0 23 BRY, plaza 3 0 5 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 18 BRY, rm 1, surface 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 BRY, rm 2, strat 2 0 3 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 5 BRY, rm 2, strat 3 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 9 BRY, rm 2, strat 4 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 7 BRY, rm 3, strat 1 0 13 0 12 0 0 0 0 0 78 BRY, rm 3, strat 2 1 4 0 7 0 0 0 0 0 38 BRY, rm 3, strat 3/5 0 4 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 22 BRY, rm 4, strat 1 0 1 0 3 4 0 0 0 0 18 BRY, rm 4, strat 2 0 1 0 12 0 0 0 0 0 33 BRY, rm 4, strat 3 0 0 0 6 2 0 0 0 0 45 BRY, rm 4, surface 1 0 1 0 25 6 0 0 0 0 17 chodistaas rvs 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 38 CK, GKiva, Fill 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 CK, Great Kiva, Fir 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 CK, Midden 0 13 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 CK, Rm 1, Rooffall 0 39 0 0 0 0 0 75 0 0 CK, Rm 4, Rooffall 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 CK, Rm 6, Transect 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 CR, Great Kiva II 0 35 2 14 0 0 0 11 2 0 CR, Kiva I 0 58 21 207 0 0 0 31 10 0 CR, Plaza 0 70 3 3 0 0 0 2 5 0 CR, Rm 10 0 21 3 1 0 0 0 4 2 0 CR, Rm 10, Fill 0 9 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 CR, Rm 10, SubFloor 0 4 3 0 0 0 0 3 2 0 CR, Rm 11 0 12 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 CR, Rm 12, Ashpit 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 CR, Rm 12, Fill 0 81 1 28 0 0 0 2 2 0 CR, Rm 12, Floor 0 5 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 CR, Rm 13 0 1 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 CR, Rm 15, Fill 0 27 0 12 0 0 0 0 0 0 126

4-) 3 CS Johns showlow St, Cibicue Cedarcreek Kwakina Holbrook Wngate Context PinedaleRed Pinto CR, Rm 15, Floor 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 CR, Rm 16, Fill 0 4 2 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 CR, Rm 17 0 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 CR, Rm 18, Ash Level 0 45 3 6 0 0 0 18 8 0 CR, Rm 18, Below Ash 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 CR, Rm 18, Floor 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 CR, Rm 18, Level A 0 14 0 4 0 0 0 1 0 0 CR, Rm 18, Level E 0 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 CR, Rm 18, Low Ash 0 5 2 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 CR, Rm 18, Low Clay 0 0 0 11 0 0 0 5 0 0 CR, Rm 18, Sand/Clay 0 9 0 0 0 0 0 5 0 0 CR, Rm 19, Fill 0 22 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 CR, Rm 19, Level A 0 4 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 CR, Rm 19, Level B 0 9 1 3 0 0 0 2 0 0 CR, Rm 19, Level E 0 16 2 0 0 0 0 8 0 0 CR, Rm 19, Level G 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 CR, Rm 19, Level K 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 CR, Rm 2, Fill 0 5 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 CR, Rm 2, SubFloor 0 15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 CR, Rm 21 0 8 0 2 0 0 0 0 1 0 CR, Rm 22, Level A 0 0 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 CR, Rm 22, Level B 0 0 0 6 0 0 0 0 1 0 CR, Rm 23 0 46 0 15 0 0 0 6 15 0 CR, Rm 23, Above Fl 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 4 0 CR, Rm 23, Floor 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 2 0 CR, Rm 23, Level A 0 14 0 6 0 0 0 0 5 0 CR, Rm 23, Level B 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 2 1 0 CR, Rm 3, Fill 0 60 3 16 0 0 0 1 0 0 CR, Rm 3, Floor 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 CR, Rm 4, Floor 0 6 1 28 1 0 0 0 0 0 CR, Rm 4, SubFloor 0 9 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 CR, Rm 5, Fill 0 1 0 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 CR, Rm 5, Floor 1 0 30 0 1 0 0 0 2 0 0 K> Johns Walnut Pinto PinedaleRed Kwakina Holbrook Cedarcreek Cibicue Wngate

t xet no C St. Showlow t—^ o o o o o o o , RC mR r ,o 5ol F 2 o H-k H-^ ON 1—^ o o o o 3 o o o o ?=* H-* h-k o o 00 o o o , RC mR 7 o Ln Ln O OO o o o o , RC mR 8 o K> O o o o o o o o , RC mR 9 o o o o o o o o o o , HF77 181 o Ln O o o o o o o o , HF34 381 o o o o o o o o o o , HF54 381 o o o o o o o o , HF64 381 o t—^ K> H-^ o o o o o , HF05 381 o K> ho O 4^ o o o o , HF03 391 o 00 o o o o o o o , HF13 391 o o o o o o o o o o , HF33 391 o o o o o o o o o o , HF4 3391 o Un 1—k O O O O O o O O , GHt aer G, avi K l li F O t—k O o o o o o o , GneH ddi M o \l o o o o o o o , GH ml lR aff, o1o R o o

o o o o o o o o , HP, avi eK cafr uS o LZ LZ Ui t—^ K) o o o , HP, avi Kr epp U l li F o o K> K> O O o o o , nHe Pddi M 29 O 4^ O o o o o o , HP mR e ca,f r1uS 1 o ON OO K> f—^ o o o o , HP mR r e,p 1p U l li F o o ^

N> 4^ Ln 4^ o O O o o , HP mr oR olf, b3uS 1 o 09 09 H-^ N> o O O o o o

, HP mR r e,p 3p U l li F o K> o o o O O e, r HutPcurt S 1 o o o o O o o o o o o 1 L, 6T, 060SF, CR o h-A o O o o o o o 3 L, 6T, 470SF, CR o Ln O o o o o o

kl ubavi k, YDNR o ho f—k so O K) o o o o l Lavi k, YDNR o K> K> O K> o O O 2 Lavi k, YDNR o o O O o o o o o o 3 Lavi k, YDNR o t-n K) O O O O o o o 4 Lavi k, YDNR o K> o o o o o o o f ooravi k, YDNR 92 o K) OO Johns PinedaleRed Kwakina Holbrook Walnut Pinto Wngate Cedarcreek Cibicue

t xet no C Showlow St. Ln L>J O O o o o o o LDa N daRmar, Y 1 o 4^ O o o o o o o O r oolfl MR, YDNR O

t—^ Ln o o o o o o o 1 L1 MR, YDNR o pz pz LP O 2 L1 MR, YDNR o o o o o o 1—k o o o o o O 3 L1 MR, YDNR o o o t—k O LP o o o o O r oolf 2 MR, YDNR o o o K) LP O so O O O O o 1 L2 MR, YDNR o o H-^ OO o o o o o o o r oolf 3 MR, YDNR o LP LP O O O O O O O 1 L3 MR, YDNR o 4^ O o o o o 2 L3 MR, YDNR o o o o o o o o o o 3 L3 MR, YDNR o o o o o o o o o 4 L3 MR, YDNR o o o o LP o o o o o 5 L3 MR, YDNR o o o o o o o o o 6 L3 MR, YDNR o o o O o o o o o r oolf 4 MR, YDNR o o o t—^ O o o o o o o o DL 4 MR, YDNR o OO O ho o o o o o 4 MR, YDNR HP o o 00 r-> O I—^ o o o o o 3 L5 MR, YDNR o •—k O ho o o o o o 4 L5 MR, YDNR o o ho o o o o o o r oolf 6 MR, YDNR o o o K) o o o o o o o 1 L6 MR, YDNR o O o o o o o 2 L6 MR, YDNR o o o O o o o o o o o r oolf, BL9 MR, YDNR o 4^ O o o o o o D NLaR era,k rYo w 1 o H-k o o o o 1—k 2 Laerakr o w, YDNR o o o o o o o o 3 Laer akr o w, YDNR o o o o o o o o o o o , KTa vi K 1 o o o o o o o o o

, KTa vi K 2 o o o o o o o o o o mR , KT 1 o o o H-^ t—k o o o o o , KT mR 1 1 o o o o o o o o o o , KT mR 2 1 o o O o o o o o , KT mR 31 o N> 1—^ O o o o o o o , KT mR 41 o 129

u Johns Cedarcreek St. Pinto showlow PinedaleRed Holbrook Walnut Context Cibicue Kwakina TK, Rm 15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TK, Rm 17 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 TK, Rm 18 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TK, Rm 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TK, Rm 20 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TK, Rm 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TK, Rm 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TK, Rm 5 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TK, Rm 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TK, Rm 7 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TK, Rm 7A 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 TK, Rm 8 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 TK, Rml6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 TK, Storage Pit 1 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 TK, Storage Pit 2 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 TK, Storage Pit 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 130

REFERENCES

Adams, E. Charles 1991 The Origin and Development of the Pueblo Katsina Cult Tucson: The University of Arizona Press.

Adler, Michael A., Todd Van Pool, and Robert D. Leonard 1996 Ancestral Pueblo Population Aggregation and Abandonment in the North American Southwest. Journal of World Prehistory 10(3): 375-438.

Adler, Michael A., and Amber Johnson 1996 Mapping the Puebloan Southwest. In The Prehistoric Pueblo World A.D. 1150-1350, edited by Michael A. Adler, pp. 255-272. Tucson: The University of Arizona Press.

Baxter, Michael J. 1994 Exploratory Multivariate Analysis in Archaeology. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.

Breternitz, David A. 1966 An Appraisal of Tree-ring Dated Pottery in the Southwest. Anthropological Papers of the University of Arizona 10. Tucson: The University of Arizona Press.

Christenson, Andrew I. 1994 A Test of Mean Ceramic Dating Using Well-Dated Kayenta Anasazi Sites. Kiva: 59:304-317.

Cordell, Linda 1996 Big Sites, Big Questions: Pueblos in Transition. In The Prehistoric Pueblo World, A.D. 1150-1350, edited by Michael A. Adler, pp. 228-240. Tucson: The University of Arizona Press.

Cordell, Linda, David Doyel, and Keith Kintigh 1994 Processes of Aggregation in the Prehistoric Southwest. In Themes in Southwest Prehistory, edited by G. Gumerman, pp. 109-134 Santa Fe: School of American Research Press.

Crown, Patricia L. 1994 Ceramics and Ideology: Salado Polychrome Pottery. Albuquerque: University of New Mexico Press.

Dean, Jeffery 1978 Independent Dating in Archaeological Analysis. In Advances in Archaeological Method and Theory, Vol. 1, edited by Michael B. Schiffer, pp. 223-255. New York: Academic Press.

Dean, Rebecca 131

2003 Social Change and Large Mammal Hunting: Understanding the Pueblo III to Pueblo IV Transition in East-Central Knzonz.. Journal of Field Archaeology. In press.

Deetz, James and Edwin Dethlefsen 1965 The Doppler Effect in Archaeology: A Consideration of the Spatial Aspects of Seriation. Southwestern Journal of Anthropology 21:196-206.

Duff, Andrew I. 1993 An Exploration ofPost-Chacoan Community Organization Throu^ CeramicSourcing. M.A. thesis, Department of Anthropology, Arizona State University, Tempe, AZ.

1996a Ceramic Micro-Seriation: Types or Attributes. American Antiquity 61:89-101.

1996b The Process of Migration in the Late Prehistoric Southwest. In "Migration and Reorganization: The Pueblo IV Period in the American Southwest," edited by Katherine A. Spielmann, pp. 1)1-52. Arizona State University Anthropolo^alResearch Papers 51. Tempe: Arizona State University.

1999 Regional Interaction and the Transformation ofWestem Pueblo Identities, A.D. 1275-1400. Ph.D. dissertation. Anthropology Department, Arizona State University, Tempe, AZ.

2002 Western Pueblo Identities: Regional Interaction, Migration and Transformation. Tucson: University of Arizona Press.

Ezzo, Joseph A., and T. Douglas Price 2002 Migration, Regional Reorganization, and Spatial Group Composition at Grasshopper Pueblo, Arizona. Journal of Archaeological Science 29:499-520.

Fenn, Thomas, Barbara J. Mills, and Maren Hopkins 2002 The Social Contexts of Glaze Paint Ceramic Production and Consumption in the Silver Creek Area. In preparation.

Ford, James A. 1962 A Quantitative method for deriving cultural chronology. Pan American Union, Technical Manual 1. (^epnnted'as University ofMissouri,Musmm of Anthropology, Museum Brief 9).

Glascock, Michael D. 1992 Characterization of Archaeological Ceramics at MURR by Neutron Activation Analysis and Multivariate Statistics. In Chemical Characterization of Ceramic Pastes in Archaeology, edited by Hector Neff, pp. 11-26. Monographs in World Archaeology No. 7. Madison: Prehistory Press.

Hantman, Jeffery L. 132

1983 Social Networks and Stylistic Distributions in the Prehistoric Plateau Southwest. Ph.D. Dissertation, Arizona State University, Tempe, AZ.

Haury, Emil W. 1958 Evidence at Point of Pines for a Prehistoric Migration from Northern Arizona. In Migrations in New World Culture History, Edited by Raymond H. Thompson, pp 1-8. The University of Arizona Bulletin 29(2), Social Science Bulletin 27:2-8. Tucson: University of Arizona.

1985 Mogollon Culture in the Forestdale Valley. Tucson: The University of Arizona Press.

Haury, Emil W. and Lyndon Hargrave 1931 Recently Dated Pueblo Ruins in Arizona. Smithsonian Miscellaneous Collections 82(11). Washington, D.C.: Smithsonian Institution.

Herr, Sarah A. 2002 Beyond Chaco: Great Kiva Communities on the Mogollon Rim Frontier. Anthropological Papers ofthe University ofArizona,'No. 66. Tucson: University of Arizona Press.

Herr, Sarah A., Elizabeth M. Perry, and Scott Van Keuren 1999 Excavations at Three Great Kiva Sites. In Living on the Edge ofthe Rim: Excavation and Analysis ofthe Silver Creek Archaeolo^al Research Project 1993-1998, edited by B.J.Mills, S. A. Herr, and S. Van Keuren, pp. 53-117. Tucson: Arizona State Museum Archaeological Series. No. 192.

Hill, James N. 1970 Broken K Pueblo: Prehistoric Social Organization in the American Southwest. Anthropological Papers of the University of Arizona 18. Tucson: The University of Arizona Press.

Johnson, Gregory A. 1982 Organization Structure and Scalar Stress. In Theory and Explanation in Archaeology, edited by Colin Renfrew, pp. 389-421. New York: Academic Press.

Kahldahl, Eric J., Scott Van Keuren, and Barbara J. Mills 2003 Migration, Factionalism, and the Trajectories of Pueblo IV Period Clusters in the Mogollon Rim Region. In Cluster Analysis: The Organization ofPuehlo IVPeriod Settlement Clusters in the Greater Southwest, edited by E. Charles Adams and Andrew I. Duff. Tucson: University of Arizona Press. In Press.

Lipo, Carl P., Mark E. Madsen, Robert C. Dunnell and Tim Hunt 1997 Population Structure, Cultural Transmission, and Frequency Seriation. foumal of Anthropological Archaeology 16:301-333. 133

Longacre, W. A. 1966 Changing Patterns of Social Integration: A Prehistoric Example from the American Southwest. American Anthropologist 68(1): 94-102.

1970 Archaeology as Anthropology: A Case Study. Anthropological Papers of the University of Arizona 17. Tucson: The University of Arizona Press.

McCartney, Peter H., Owen Lindauer, Glen E. Rice, and John C. Ravesloot 1994 Chronological Methods. In A rchaeology ofthe Salado in the Livingston Area ofthe Tonto Basin, Roosevelt Platform Mound Study, edited by David Jacobs, pp. 21-50. Roosevelt Monograph Series 3, Office of Cultural Resource Management Anthropological Field Studies 32. Tempe: Arizona State University.

Madsen, Thorsten 1988 Multivariate Statistics and Archaeology. In Multivariate Archaeology, Numerical Approaches to Scandinavian Archaeology, edited by Thorsten Madsen, pp. 7-27. Jutland Archaeological Society Publications XXI. Aarhus University Press, Aarhus, Denmark.

Majewski, T and Michael J. O'Brien 1987 The Use and Misuse of Nineteenth-Century English and American Ceramics in Archaeological Analysis. In Advances in Archaeological Method and Theory, edited by Michael B. Schiffer. 11: 97-209.

Marquardt, William H. 1978 Advances in Archaeological Seriation. Advances in Archaeological Method and Theory 1, edited by Michael B. Schiffer. 1: 257-314.

Mills, Barbara J. 1995 The Organization of Protohistoric Zuni Ceramic Production. In Ceramic Production in the American Southwest, edited by Barbara J. Mills and Patricia L. Crown, pp. 200-230. Tucson: University of Arizona Press.

1998 Migration and PIV Community Reorganization in the Silver Creek Area, East- Central Arizona. In Migration and Reorganization: The Pueblo IVPeriod in the American Southwest, edited by Katherine A. Spielmann, pp. 65-80. Arizona State University Anthropological Research Papers 51. Tempe: Arizona State University.

Mills, Barbara J., and Sarah A. Herr 1999 Chronology of the Mogollon Rim Region. In Living on the Edge of the Rim: Excavation and Analysis of the Silver Creek Archaeological Research Project 1993-1998, edited by Barbara J. Mills, Sarah A. Herr, and Scott Van Keuren, pp. 269-291. Tucson: Arizona State Museum Archaeological Series. No. 192.

Mills, Barbara J., Sarah A. Herr, and Scott Van Keuren, editors 134

1999 Living on the Edge ofthe Rim: Excavations and Analysis ofthe Silver Creek Archaeological Project 1993-1998. Tucson: Arizona State Museum Archaeological Series. No. 192.

Mills, Barbara J., Sarah A. Herr, Susan L. Stinson, and Daniela Triadan 1999 Ceramic Production and Distribution. In Livingon the Edge ofthe Rim: Excavation and Analysis ofthe Silver Creek Archaeological Research Project 1993-1998, edited by Barbara J. Mills, Sarah A. Herr, and Scott Van Keuren, pp. 31-52. Tucson: Arizona State Museum Archaeological Series. No. 192.

Mills, Barbara J., Scott Van Keuren, Susan L. Stinson, William M. Graves, III, Eric J. Kahldahl, and Joanne M. Newcomb 1999 Excavations at Bailey Ruin. In Living on the Edge ofthe Rim: Excavation and Analysis of the Silver Creek Archaeological Research Project 1993-1998, edited by Barbara J. Mills, Sarah A. Herr, and Scott Van Keuren, pp. 149-242. Tucson: Arizona State Museum Archaeological Series. No. 192.

Montgomery, Barbara K. 1992 Understanding the Formation ofthe Archaeolo^cal Record: Ceramic Variability at Chodistaas Pueblo, Arizona. Ph.D. dissertation. Department of Anthropology, University of Arizona, Tucson.

1993 Ceramic Analysis as a Tool for Discovering Processes of Pueblo Abandonment. In A bandonment ofSettlements and Regions: Ethnoarchaeolo^cal and ArchaeoloffodApproaches, edited by Catherine M. Cameron and Steve A. Tomka, Pp. 157-164. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

Montgomery, Barbara K., and J. Jefferson Reid 1990 An Instance of Rapid Ceramic Change. American Antiquity 55(l):88-97.

Neiman, Fraser D., and N. W. Alcock. 1995 Archaeological Seriation by Correspondence Analysis: An Application to Historical Documents. History and Computing 7(1):1-21.

Neff, Hector 1994 RQ-Mode Principal Components Analysis of Ceramic Compositional Data. Archaeometry 36:115-130.

2002 Quantitative Techniques for Analyzing Ceramic Compositional Data. In Ceramic Production and Circulation in the Greater Southwest: Source Determination by INAA and Complementary Mineralogiccd Investigations,edited by Donna Glowacki and Hector Neff, pp 15-36. University of California Monographs in Archaeology.

Neff, Hector, Daniel O. Larson, and Michael D. Glascock 135

1997 The Evolution of Anasazi Ceramic Production and Distribution: Compositional Evidence from a Pueblo III Site in South-Central XJidh. Journal of Field Archaeology 24:473-92.

Newcomb, Joanne 1999 Silver Creek Settlement Patterns and Paleodemography. In Living on the Edge of the Rim: Excavation and Analysis ofthe Silver Creek Archaeolo^cal Research Project 1993-1998, edited by Barbara J. Mills, Sarah A. Herr, and Scott Van Keuren, pp. 295-324. Tucson: Arizona State Museum Archaeological Series. No. 192.

O'Brien, Michael J., and R. Lee Lyman 1999 Seriation, Stratigraphy, and Index Fossils: The Backbone ofArchaeologkal Dating. New York: Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishing.

Phillips, Phillip A., James A. Ford and James B. Griffin 1951 Archaeological Survey in the Lower Mississippi Alluvial Valley, 1940-1947. Harvard University, Peahody Museum of American Archaeology and Ethnology 25.

Reid, J. Jefferson 1989 A Grasshopper Perspective on the Mogollon. In Dynamics of Southwest Prehistory, edited by Linda Cordell and George Gumerman, pp 65-97. Santa Fe: School of American Research Press.

1995 Four Strategies After Twenty Years: A Return to Basics. In Expanding Archaeology, edited by James M. Skibo, William H. Walker, and Axel E. Nielsen, pp. 15-21. Salt Lake City: University of Utah Press.

Reid, J. Jefferson, and Richard Ciolek-Torrello, editors 1982 Cholla Project Archaeology. Tucson: Arizona State Museum Archaeological Series: No. 161.

Reid, J. Jefferson, and Barbara K. Montgomery 1999 Ritual Space in the Grasshopper Region, East-Central Arizona. In Sixty Years of Mogollon Archaeology: Papers from the Ninth Mogollon Conference, Silver City, NewMexico, 1996 9: 23-29. Tucson: SRI Press.

Reid, J. Jefferson, John R. Welch, Barbara K. Montgomery, and M. Nieves Zedeno 1996 A Demographic Overview of the Late Pueblo III Period in the Mountains of East- central Arizona. In The Prehistoric Pueblo WorldA.D. 1150-1350, edited by Michael A. Adler, pp. 73-85. Tucson: The University of Arizona Press.

Reid, J. Jefferson, and Stephanie Whittlesey 1999 Grasshopper Pueblo. Tucson: The University of Arizona Press.

Riggs, Charles R., Jr. 136

1994 DatingConstruaion Events at Grasshopper Pueblo: New Techniques for ArchitecturalAmlysis. M.A. Thesis, Department of Anthropology, University of Arizona, Tucson.

1999 The Architecture ofGrasshopper Puehlo: Dynamics of Form, Function, and Use of Space in a Prehistoric Community. Ph.D. Dissertation, Department of Anthropology, University of Arizona, Tucson.

2001 The Architecture of Grasshopper Pueblo. Salt Lake City: University of Utah Press.

Schiffer, Michael B. 1986 Radiocarbon Dating and the "Old Wood" Problem: the Case of the Hohokam QhronoXo^y. Journal of Archaeological Science 13:13-30.

1992 Technological Perspectives on Behavioral Change. Tucson: University of Arizona Press.

Scholnick, Jonathan 1998 Examininglnteraction in the Apache-Sitgreaves Region: A Compositional Analysis ofCibola Whiteware. Honors Thesis, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, VA.

Scholnick, Jonathan, Fraser Neiman and Derek Wheeler 2000 Mulberry Row Reassessment: The Building I Site. Monticello Technical Report Series 3. Charlottesville: Thomas Jefferson Memorial Foundation. < http:// www.monticello.org/icjs/archaeology/downloads >

South, Stanley 1977 Method and Theory in Historical Archaeology. New York: Academic Press.

Speth, John D., and Susan L. Scott 1989 Horticulture and Large Mammal Hunting: The Role of Resource Depletion and the Constraints of Time and Labor. In Farmers as Hunters: The Implications of Sedentism, edited by Susan Kent, pp. 71-79. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Steponaitis, Vincas, and Keith W. Kintigh 1993 Estimating Site Occupation Spans from Dated Artifact Types: Some New Approaches. In Archaeology of Eastern North America: Papers in Honor of Steven Williams, edited by James B. Stoltman. Archaeological Report 25. Jackson: Mississippi Department of Archives and History

Stinson, Susan L. 1996 Roosevelt Red Ware and the Organization ofProduction in the Silver Creek Drainage. M.A. Thesis, Department of Anthropology, University of Arizona, Tucson. ter Braak, Cajo J. F. 1985 Correspondence Analysis of Incidence and Abundance Data. Biometricka4hS59-S73. 137

Triadan, Daniela 1997 CeramkCommoditiescmdQmmon Omtainers:PwductkmandDistrihutimofWhiteM(>Hntain Red Ware in the Grasshopper Region, Arizona. Anthropological Papers of the University of Arizona, No. 61. Tucson: University of Arizona Press.

Triadan, Daniela, Barbara J. Mills, and Andrew I. Duff 2002 From Compositional to Anthropological: Fourteenth Century Red Ware Circulation and Its Implications for Pueblo Reorganization. In Neutron Activation Analysis of Prehistoric Potteryfrom the Greater Southwest, edited by Donna M. Glowacki and Hector Neff, pp. 85-97. Los Angeles: The Institute of Archaeology, University of California.

Triadan, Daniela, and M. Nieves Zedeno 2003 The Political Geography and Territoriality of the Fourteenth Century Settlements in the Mogollon Highlands of East-central Arizona. In Cluster Analysis: The Organization of Pueblo IV Period Settlement Clusters in the Greater Southwest, edited by E. Charles Adams, and Andrew I. Duff. Tucson: University of Arizona Press. In Press.

Tuggle, H. David, and J. Jefferson Reid 2001 Conflict and Defense in the Grasshopper Region of East-Central Arizona. In Deadly Landscapes: Case Studies in Prehistoric Southwestern Warfare, edited by Glen Rice and Steven A. LeBlanc, pp. 85-108. Salt Lake City: The University of Utah Press.

Weigand, Phil C., Garmon Harbottle, and Edward V. Sayre 1977 Turquoise Sources and Source Areas: Mesoamerica and the Southwestern U.S.A. In Exchange Systems in Prehistory, edited by Timothy K. Earle and Jonathan E. Ericson, pp. 15-32. New York: Academic Press.

Van Keuren, Scott 1994 Design Structure Variation in Cibola White Ware Vessels from Grasshopper and Chodistaas Pueblos, Arizona. M.A. Thesis, Department of Anthropology, University of Arizona, Tucson.

2001 Ceramic Style and the Reorganization of Pueblo Communities in East-Central Arizona, A.D. 1275-1400. Ph.D. Dissertation, Department of Anthropology, University of Arizona, Tucson.

Zack-Horner, Jenny 1999 Aggregation and the Silver Creek Faunal Record. In Living on the Edge of the Rim: Excavation and Analysis ofthe Silver Creek Archaeolo^cal Research Project 1993-1998, edited by Barbara J. Mills, Sarah A. Herr, and Scott Van Keuren, pp. 433-457. Tucson: Arizona State Museum Archaeological Series. No. 192.

Zedeno, M. Nieves 1994 SourcingPrehistoric Ceramics at Chodistaas Pueblo, Arizona. Anthropological Papers of the University of Arizona, No. 58. Tucson: University of Arizona Press. 138

1995 Population Movement and Technology Transfer. In Ceramic Production in the American Southwest, edited by Barbara J. Mills and Patricia L. Crown, pp. 115-141. Tucson: University of Arizona Press.

1998 Defining Material Correlates for Ceramic Circulation in the Prehistoric Puebloan Southwest. Journal of Archaeological Research 54:461-576.

2002 Artifact Design, Composition, and Context: Updating the Analysis of Ceramic Circulation at Point of Pines, Arizona. In Neutron Activation Analysis of Prehistoric Pottery from the Greater Southwest, edited by Donna M. Glowacki and Hector Neff pp. 74-84. Los Angeles: The Institute of Archaeology, University of California.