Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Solid Earth Discussions 2 332 331 ce of Contract Archeology in 2007 along the , and P. Hogan 2 ffi , A. Kurota 2 , C. Hughes 1 erence between Archaic, Formative and Protohistoric sites. Additionally, a ff ce of Contract Archeology, MSC 07 4230, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, ffi This discussion paper is/has been under review for the journal Solid Earth (SE). Please refer to the corresponding final paper in SE if available. Zeigler Geologic Consulting, 14500 OakwoodO Place NE, Albuquerque, NM, USA peoples are local siliceousfrom volcanic obsidian materials. were transported However, several intozona, artifacts the indicating constructed region long-distance from northernpattern travel Mexico and/or di and trade eastern routes.dramatic Ari- change in We distribution alsopre-Spanish of examine site sources and useage for one geologic post-Spanish materials site occurs that are between adjacent one to one another. Guadalupe Pass in theColumbus. southern Peloncillo We Mountains identified togroundstones, the and the lithologies then Carrizalillo of constructed Hills material artifacts,procurement west movement sites ranging of maps (“quarries”) from based or on projectilesite either outcrops for points known each identified to lithology. as Not unexpectedly, the the majority closest of source the rock to types a utilized by given native of geologic processes andbroader understanding the of human-Earth materials interaction. availabledisciplinary Here we for project present that human data uses from use a aanthropological cross- common in and dataset, order geologic archeological to artifacts, implicationstions to gain of explore and useage a the surveys patterns. conductedroute by Archeological of the the excava- proposed O internationalterials border by fence reveal Archaic, patterns Formative ofsouthwestern use and New of Protohistoric Mexico. geologic Thousands Native ma- of Americans artifacts were in recorded the in Boot multiple sites Heel from of Multidisciplinary field projects can beof very useful the to world a around moreIn fundamental us, understanding though particular, these the projects combinationing are of of not human archeology as behavior common and and as geology human they combines should use our be. of understand- the landscape with an intimate knowledge Abstract 1 2 NM, 87131, USA Received: 5 November 2010 – Accepted: 16Correspondence November to: 2010 K. – E. Published: Zeigler 1 ([email protected]) DecemberPublished 2010 by Copernicus Publications on behalf of the European Geosciences Union. Native American lithic procurement along the international border in theregion boot of heel southwestern New Mexico K. E. Zeigler Solid Earth Discuss., 2, 331–374,www.solid-earth-discuss.net/2/331/2010/ 2010 doi:10.5194/sed-2-331-2010 © Author(s) 2010. CC Attribution 3.0 License. 5 15 20 10 Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | erences ff 334 333 ce of Contract Archeology (OCA) for the proposed tactical barrier fence to ffi erent settings. All of HV 5-8 were recorded in the field during pedestrian survey. The geologic base map for the Boot Heel region was constructed by scanning in A representative sample of specimens was selected and examined by a professional Nearly all of the lithic materials on the sites were likely procured from the major geo- The artifacts under analysis in this chapter were compiled from three separate project ff lectively applied to the recorded artifactin data order mentioned to in fix the observed previous two errors paragraphs in the database. geologic maps of ArizonaMexico (Reynolds, and 1988), redrafting New the Mexico units(1:24 000 (Wilks, into scale) 2005) a were and used consistent to1966, northern map. modify 1970; High the Soule, base resolution 1972; map geologicplified, where Seager maps especially needed and for (Zeller, Clemmons, 1959, sedimentary 1988). 1962, packages that Many include units multiple have rock been types. sim- geologist (KZ) and described insamples detail. that These were included analyzedfrom recovered artifacts survey. in-hand and and source Munsell specimensSociety colors of in for America high-resolution recovered Rock-Color specimens photographs resolution Chart. are photographs from are Items the describedthese that 1991 specimens only are are Geological by tentatively estimated. basic identified lithotype Inferences from made and high from Munsell these colors examinations for were se- Approximately 10 recorders (including CH) madeartifacts designations based of material on type for theirresource lithic accumulated survey. knowledge, The aphase and common remaining were practice recorded artifacts in duringtoothbrushes were the OCA upon cultural recovered laboratory. their Artifacts during return were toindividuals washed the lab. with with data water Material some and recording recovery level wasthe of then aid lithic conducted of analysis by a three training low-powered microscope. (including CH), occasionally with 2.1 Material recording The artifacts and raw materialsdi used here were recorded by several individuals in two 2 Methods Tertiary-aged silicic igneous flows and domes. eastern border of thehere, Boot from Heel west to (Figs. east, 1, as 2). HV 5-8, The Three broad Siteslogic features project and of Nineteen areas the Canyon. are region.zona referred The and Boot to Heel northern of Mexico New areAmerica, Mexico, part as which well of as the is southeastern Basin Ari- characterizedPaleozoic and and by Range Mesozoic Province extensional strata of faulting, and westernsediments. intervening producing North basins uplifted In with blocks addition, predominantlyMexico of Quaternary border the from San northern Juan Mexico volcanic into field southwestern extends Colorado and along is the comprised Arizona-New of poral periods in questionamong are them. then analyzed to determine similarities andareas di related to the bordertains in fence the project. southeastern These Boot projects Heel ranged to from the Carrizalillo the Hills Dog in Moun- the east and included the provide a description ofinformation the lithic to resources examine in patternsand and Protohistoric of around periods lithic the of Boot procurement theby Heel area. among the and Data the O were use collected Archaic, this frombe Formative sites constructed recently on recorded the US-MexicoSecurity. international border Lithic by the material Departmentscribed types of in Homeland that detail were and utilizedrelative possible at proportions source these that localities these sites for sources are these were identified materials utilized and are on de- the identified. sites The assigned to the tem- Lithic procurement strategy inlargely the gone Boot untreated Heel in region thehas of archaeological been southwestern literature. relatively New This little Mexico is archaeologyto has primarily done a because in there lack this area of in documentation recent years, of but the is lithic also due raw material sources in the area. Here we 1 Introduction 5 5 25 15 20 10 25 15 20 10 Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | liation are ffi 336 335 erent groups appearing, disappearing and becoming assimilated ff erent times. These groups included the Apache, Suma and Manso. People ff erent temporal periods to contribute to any site assemblage regardless of recogniz- Protohistoric period designations were primarily based on radiocarbon dates ob- Formative period designations were primarily based on the presence of diagnostic Archaic period designations were primarily based on the presence of diagnostic pro- ff at di belonging to thesedwellings groups and were used agriculture typically and highly ceramics far nomadic, less built than Formativetained largely period from impermanent people. thermal featuresnostic and projectile lithic points. analysis results but were also based on diag- The NMCRIS guidelinesFor do the not purposes provide ofFormative dates this period study, for that it a had ishistories distinctive (i.e. assigned not Europeans). Protohistoric to yet The cultural period. beento maximum groups assimilated AD extent that of into 1850 existed this with cultural after period di groups spanned the from with AD written 1400 archaeological record. Around AD 1400be constructed large and villages traditional and ceramics agriculturaltransition were plots no to ceased longer the manufactured. to Protohistoric This period. signals the ceramics but were alsoobtained based from thermal on features. diagnostic projectile points and2.2.3 radiocarbon dates Protohistoric The Formative period for southwesternthe New Mimbres Mexico Mogollon is tradition regarded betweencharacterized as AD being by 200 occupied and sedentism by AD atthe 1400. the This presence period village of is level ceramics. typically and higher, This intensive period agriculture ends and when these sedentary people exit the 2.2.2 Formative tools. The Archaic isof generally ceramics, distinguished permanent from village the structures lateroften substantial Formative and overlap period intensive between by agriculture. the athe periods However, lack there transition regarding to is these sedentism characteristics was because a very gradual process. jectile points but were alsobon based dates obtained on from groundstone thermal assemblage features. analysis and radiocar- The Archaic period spannedas from being 5500 a BC time to during 200were which slowly AD. This transitioning people to period were a primarily islier more mobile typically Paleoindian sedentary period hunters defined by lifestyle. and an It gatherers increasedily is that emphasis hunting-based distinguished on subsistence. gathering from This as the opposed is ear- to reflected a by primar- increased utilization of groundstone ered in this study.longing Sites to more with than multiple onenot recognizable temporal included. Native period and American It sites is components ofdi understood be- unknown that temporal there a is alwaysable potential components. for However, multiple for components thefrom of a purpose site of assigned making to this a study given feasible, period all are2.2.1 artifacts considered to belong Archaic to that period also. The temporal periods usedMexico in Cultural this Resource analysis Informationsystem System follow (NMCRIS) guidelines used in established by 1993. for mostMexico. the This Only Cultural New sites is Resource with a Management components standard belonging (CRM) to firms a throughout single temporal New period are consid- 2.2 Temporal period designations 5 5 15 20 10 15 20 10 Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | erent ff 338 337 erent time periods. Distances to source areas and ff For the purposes of creating calculable distances for material travel, site clusters are Exact provenances for most of the materials in this study are largely unknown. The Three Sites cluster consists of three sites on the international border approxi- The Dog Mountains cluster consists of sites located between Eagle Mountain in the on the maps (Figs. 4–6). human mobility patterns, but itare allows defined for a as basis eitheror of the comparison. known geologic source Sources units localities for materials in identified identified each during during cluster survey. the is The construction thentance source of defined to for the as the each geographic the map material center potentialwith type of source calipers the that cluster. to has Distances the thekilometers. were shortest nearest A estimated radial few hundredth by of dis- measuring the ofmap longer a were distances calculated millimeter that with could on Google not Earth. the be accurately These map estimated distances and on are the converting represented with to arrows center of each cluster. These coordinatesand were plotted then on converted to the latitude map and to longitude the nearest minuteTherefore, (Figs. sources 4–6). for materials weresimonious selected with options the (i.e. assumptionclusters that the under the closest study. most par- sources) It is were understood utilized that by this is inhabitants highly of unrealistic given the the site nature of local geology and geology mapsareas to of examine the potential Boot procurement Heel patterns andassemblage in during proportions di di are the primary data that are usedsimplified to to conduct single this points on analysis. theof maps. These all are sites calculated asTransverse within the Mercator geographic (UTM) a centers coordinates cluster forwere the belonging averaged site to to datums, obtained the create with same a GPS single temporal units, set period. of coordinates The that Universal represents the geographic of the Carrizalillo Hills approximately 200 m north of2.4 the international border. Procurement strategy analysis In this contribution, we utilize the information gathered from the material descriptions, Mountains and the Nineteen Canyon site located along drainage on the eastern slopes mately 3 km west of the Carrizalillo Hills and 4 km south of the foothills of the Cedar are located primarilySierra in Rica the Mountains. Hachitathat Valley This between is area in the is the BigValley approximately United confined Hatchet 4 States. km to Mountains west the of The and northwestern the southeastern Upper Sierra Big part Hatchita Rica Hatchet Mountains Valley of Mountains. and siteare 6 the located km The is along northeast valley Doyle located a of Peak stretch in the cluster ofthe the access Sierra includes road Rica Hachita four approximately Mountains sites 10 and kmof the that long Apache this that Hills. stretch. runs Doyle between Peak is located near the middle Mountains and south andare southeast of located the near BigHueco the Hatchet and Mountains. foot Big Hatchet The ofto Mountains. Archaic Little one sites The Hat another Formative approximately sites Top 7from are Butte km Little located to on Hat immediately the Top the next east Butte. along ridge an The that unnamed Lower drainage Hachita joins that Valley the cluster leads is Alamo comprised of sites that sites would create datapotential comparisons sets would be that unfeasibly large. arethat Instead, consist sites too are of divided small aerially into associated for clusters This sites allows comparisons and for and are larger distinctly the dataclusters separated are sets number from defined while of below one retaining from another. some west association to with east. location.west These and the easternButte foothills cluster of consists the of Dog four Mountains sites in located the north east. and northeast The of Little the Hat Alamo Top Hueco The sites used inlithic this source study materials. arealone located would Therefore, over not an a betravel analysis broad from able of area source to the that to roughly is combined destination. model interspersed data the Breaking with set down direction by the and period assemblage distance into that the materials individual 2.3 Site cluster localities 5 5 25 15 20 10 25 15 20 10 Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | = p types. This provides s 340 339 is the distance in kilometers to nearest potential i d -th material type in the assemblage containing i i d i p is the proportion and cult to identify because most of them are covered with thick layers of char. i X ffi p = s 1 Samples of rhyolite from the Three Sites area are pale red in color and show less The distance and proportion data were also combined to form the Average Minimum Proportions of material types were analyzed statistically among the assemblages 05. These analyses were carried out with MINITAB and SPSS statistical software = = . crystals. Because these materialsdetermine were which examined type in of photographs, feldspar it is is present. not possible to color, with little colorfoliated, variation. with small phenocrysts Samples ofOne are euhedral sample porphyritic quartz, contains aphanitic, plagioclase sanidine feldspar and sometimes and plagioclase faintly small feldspar. amphibole needles. 3.1.2 Andesite Andesite specimens examined infine-grained photographs porphyritic. from the Porphyritic HV specimens 5-8 exhibit area small, are aphanitic white, to opaque feldspar color variation than rhyolites from theand other included areas. rounded Some of pumice theas and samples siltstone. are fragments Rhyolite pyroclastic samples of are whatsmall porphyritic have phenocrysts aphanitic, been sometimes of faintly tentatively euhedral foliated, identified rhyolite with quartz, recovered sanidine from and plagioclase the feldspar. Nineteen Samples Canyon of area are pale red to moderate red in Many of the projectileporphyritic point with specimens large are euhedral, paletransparent crystals pink transparent tentatively to quartz identified pinkish crystalsarea as gray were and sanidine. in constructed lesser Some color from lathe-shaped, projectile pyroclastic andmarily rhyolite points are with pumice) from fragments included the of in othermore rock a di types fine-grained (pri- groundmass.However, some The that were roasting chipped pitroclastic and rhyolite cobbles show fragments. are fresh surfaces appear to be primarily py- 3.1.1 Rhyolite Rhyolite specimens in thelarge cobbles HV commonly found 5-8 in the area centers of were roasting pits examined and some in projectile points. photographs and include 3.1 Igneous rocks: extrusive material type contributions to the assemblage in 25% intervals. Distance (AMD) of transportis for calculated all with materials the to following the formula: individual sitei clusters. This figure AMD i where source for the a figure that accounts fortravelled the contribution from of source each artifactconducted to to among destination the time distance periods (site that both cluster). materials within site clusters Comparisons and for of the entire this assemblage. 3 figure were Material descriptions Samples characteristic of each areaare of divided the Boot into Heel appropriate are rock described type in categories. detail below and using Homogeneity of Proportion testsFurther based on analysis the was chi-square conducted probabilityTwo-Proportion distribution. on tests the with individual Bonferroni material error0 types rates. using Significance Fisher’s was Exact programs. determined at Proportions are represented on the map with shaded arrows indicating 5 5 25 15 20 10 10 15 20 Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | aceous materials used to con- ff s that are harder and less obviously ash-rich. 342 341 ff . One sample of andesite recovered from the area may be ◦ ff specimens from the HV 5-8 area were identified in photographs and are ff A single obsidian fragment was recovered from the Three Sites area that is grayish Specimens of basalt in the Three Sites area are dark gray and occasionally weath- Andesite specimens from the Nineteen Canyon excavations are medium gray to pale Specimens of andesite from the Three Sites excavations, examined in the laboratory marily of projectileblack. points that are either opaque black orblack in translucent color, olive opaque greenobsidian with recovered to a from waxy the luster Nineteenwhere Canyon and the are with black rock radial and is fracture opaque.tinge, thin lines. similar Near to the enough Fragments obsidian edges, to of flakes be from the translucent, Antelope the Wells material obsidian field. exhibits an olive green struct lithic artifacts were semi-welded tu 3.1.6 Obsidian Obsidian objects from the HV 5-8 area were examined in photograph and consist pri- phenocrysts, as would be expectedas in pyroxene) a are dacite not or present abe in rhyolite, the more termed mineral mafic an assemblage, minerals such andesite, (such flow that in banding, this with spite rock at should of least not its one darker band defined color. by3.1.5 a One siliceous specimen layer. Ash-flow collected tu displays Ash-flow tu pale gray in color and appear ash rich. Most of the tu In the HV 5-8 area,has a been dark collected gray from aphaniticgrained a dacite possible to with quarry rare identify site. sanidine itsbiotite and The composition, or biotite groundmass crystals very but is generally has small too local pyroxene fine crystals. areas of While larger this crystals material with does either not contain quartz 3.1.4 Dacite positively identified. ered to a pale yellowishcles, brown. some They of are whichOne aphanitic are sample and long has locally rare, and contain very thin, abundantvisible. small vesi- Specimens lending feldspar from lathes, a the although “burrowed” Nineteen phenocrystscontain appearance Canyon are abundant area to usually are vesicles not the dark that gray, rock. arebasalt, aphanitic phenocrysts and aligned locally are along not flow visible. bands. As with the Three Sites Basalt from the HV 5-8 areawere was constructed examined in from photographs and aphanitic,weathered several projectile nonvesicular to points an basalt orange-brown. thatalso Manos is black were black in constructed color in from and colorin vesicular weathered photographs, and basalt to so that a often the pale presence is or gray. These composition of specimens any were small all phenocrysts examined could not be pervasively thermally altered asgrayish red all color. phenocrysts and the groundmass arebrown and the are same porphyriticpyroxene, feldspar, aphanitic, and rare with biotite. mottled Nocrystals appearances. quartz was of identified Phenocrysts biotite in (and include hand possibly sample. very Individual small magnetite) have3.1.3 red oxidation halos. Basalt and ranging in colorand from have grayish a red distinctive mottled to(commonly appearance. light twinned) Phenocrysts brownish and include gray, quartz. are pyroxene,crystals amphibole porphyritic No tend aphanitic to biotite be wascleavage weathered identified planes out in of hand at the sample. 90 host Pyroxene rock, leaving small holes that show two 5 5 20 15 10 25 15 20 10 Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | erent texture. ff 344 343 to purple in color and range from coarse grained ff use and silicic rinds have developed on the outer surfaces. Four samples ff Chert from the Three Sites area are brown, black, red and ivory in color and seams Quartzite samples from the Nineteen Canyon area are pale red to grayish orange Specimens of quartzite from the Three Sites area range in color from pale purple to Chert samples from the Nineteengray Canyon varieties. area include Textures black, observed red in blue, these white, specimens pink and include lacy, massive, coarsely ors and textures, including thegray, red, distinctive golden-brown white, color pink, black of and Eagle yellow. Mountain Textures chert, range from brecciatedof to pale massive. blue or white-blueinclude lacy, are massive, coarsely common. crystalline, Textures mottled, observeddendritic. brecciated, in distorted All laminated the and specimens chert areothers. from opaque Weathering this rinds area with (cortex) a arecrystals. waxy common luster, as Two are though samples pores some filled are are with red-orange duller prismatic quartz than to red-brown in color with brecciated texture. 3.4 Chert and chalcedony 3.4.1 Chert Chert from the HV 5-8 area was examined in photographs and includes a variety of col- samples include pebbles of quartzite of a di and very fine to fine-grained.though Several samples all include samples 10 are to predominantly 15and quartzose. per some Many cent samples display lithic have relict grains, been cross-laminations al- metamorphosedcome enough di that grain boundariesare have be- arkosic to subarkosic with pyriteThe crystals pyrite or and pyrite goethite replaced are with enclosed botryoidal in goethite. red oxidation halos. laminations, cross-laminations and occasional pebbles of other lithologies. moderate orange. All are finethat grained are with transparent. occasional medium-grained Thesegrees quartz larger, of crystals very metamorphism clear than quartz samples crystals without may these indicate crystals higher were de- subjected to. Two relict sedimentary structures and grains can be identified in the quartzites and include to very finecoarsely grained. crystalline chert Some without of examination the under a very binocular fine-grained microscope. quartzites Usually can be mistaken for a distinctive red andalteration. yellow mottling that probably reflects diagenetic mottling3.3 prior to Metamorphic Quartzite Quartzite from the HV 5-8 area are bu and pink color. Nosamples range sedimentary in structures color were frommorphosed moderate observed fully red to in to slate, hand-sample. pale but showhigher olive. signs Siltstone pressures. Few of of very Most the low are samples temperatureSome quartzose heating are with samples and/or meta- slightly relict are cross-laminations micaceous orgree and tabular that bedding. others they have are been very metamorphosed silicic to and such almost a chert-like de- in appearance. One sample has stone samples from the Threein Sites color. area are Samples paleundergone are red or too very grayish fine low-grade orange metamorphism. grained torelict light to cross-laminations brown Sedimentary identify and structures mineral identified composition planarteen include Canyon and laminations. area may are have Sandstonerocks arkoses are samples that medium from to are coarse grayish the grained,are red moderately Nine- subangular. well to sorted They grayish and contain orange therare up in grains lithic themselves to color. grains. 80% These feldspar Hematite and cement approximately coats 20% the quartz grains, with giving these rocks a mottled red Sandstone and siltstone HV 5-8 sandstone samplesmedium to are coarse dark grained, brown poorly to sorted purple and with brown angular volcaniclastics to that subangular are grains. Silt- 3.2 Sedimentary rocks 5 5 25 15 20 10 25 15 20 10 Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | ff s and andesitic basalts (Zeller, 1959; ff 346 345 The Little Hatchet Mountains are comprised of fault blocks of a variety of lithologies. The Big Hatchet Mountains are primarily Paleozoic limestone of Pennsylvanian and Chalcedony fragments from the Three Sites excavations are a variety of colors, in- Lower Cretaceous Hell-to-Finish, Mojado, U-Bar Formations and Upper Cretaceous limestone unit. The Bliss Sandstonecontain contains some arkosic Precambrian sandstones, quartzite conglomerates boulders,of that thick a sandy white dolomite orthoquartzite (Zeller, and 1965). a sequence The southern Little Hatchetgranite, Mountains upper Cretaceous include to outcrops lowervanian of Tertiary carbonates, Precambrian diorite Lower and and Cretaceous monzonite limestone Tertiary jado intrusions, and Formations Pennsyl- sandstone of and the UpperThe U-Bar Cretaceous central and Little Mo- basalt Hatchets (Ringbone are Formation) primarily (Zeller, Cretaceous 1970). sedimentary rocks, including the Mississippian to Devonian carbonatesPaleozoic along limestone the is margins a ofgray, potential lavender, the red, source range brown area (Zeller, andthe for 1965). black). only chert unit Specifically, of that the has a Permian(Zeller, been Concha variety 1965). documented Limestone of that is produces colors Other red (white, and colors lavender of chert nodules chert cannot be specifically linked to any Paleozoic posited chalcedony: LA 162029 isa a faulted local outcrop. procurement area There for arethe chalcedony local that northwest outcrops is of near of and Cretaceouscline in limestone plunging and the to sandstone northern the to southeast. AlamoFormation, U-Bar Huecos forms Ridge, that the the describe area hinge for theMountain the of Chert hinge type the procurement of section sites, syncline. of a lie the syn- on U-Bar Sites small LA remnants 161106 ofPermian this and age, syncline. LA with 161996, smaller Eagle outcrops of the Cambrian-Ordovician Bliss Sandstone and ern Animas Mountains, is comprised ofmaterials boulders and and cobbles includes of locally significant derived(Zeller, amounts volcanic 1962; Shackley, of 1995). obsidian The Alamo weatheringmostly Hueco from and Tertiary Dog volcanics, the Mountains including Park are rhyolites, comprisedWilks, Tu of tu 2005). In some places, local faults are excellent sources of hydrothermally de- and Bryan, 2000). The OK-Bar Conglomerate, which covers large areas of the south- eruptive suites found throughout the Boot Heel (35.2–32.7 Ma, 27.6–26.8 Ma; McIntosh 4 Local geology 4.1 HV 5-8 In the eastern BootMountains, Heel, the geologic Big source andoutcrops areas in Little include northern Hatchet the Mexico Mountains,Animas Alamo and the Mountains. possibly Hueco Sierra minor and The sources Ricarhyolitic Dog southern in units and and the that Apache are eastern southern Hills, Eocene and Animas to eastern Mountains Oligocene are in age dominated and by these flows are related to both weathering rind (cortex) present thatteen is Canyon nodular. excavations Chalcedony are fragments lightare from gray, massive, the pale with Nine- orange, few light variationsis yellow in the and texture. occurrence bluish of Cortex gray, small is and clusters common of on prismatic most quartz specimens, crystals. as Chalcedony found in the HVfield 5-8 and area were is examined a inpink translucent photographs, and as to pale well near-opaque red as coloring.color. white in the and The weathered bluish exterior brown or material rind with is some usuallycluding ivory yellow, white, or pale brown blue, in gray, andcent pale brown, with pink and semi-waxy orange, andmottles to are (2–3 translu- dull cm luster. in diameter), Textures streaking identified and include massive. concentrically Some zoned specimens still have a of more translucent materialare are pores common. filled with Weathering prismatic rinds quartz (cortex) crystals. are Two samples3.4.2 common are as orange mottled Chalcedony chert. crystalline, mottled, distorted laminated, banded (faint) and concentrically zoned. Veins 5 5 25 15 20 10 20 15 10 Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | , basalt, ff 348 347 The Tres Hermanas are a Tertiary monzonite and Upper Eocene to Lower Oligocene Lithic source materials in the southern HV 5-8 area include rhyolite and tu The Sierra Rica are primarily composed of the Lower Cretaceous Mojado Formation, pyrite, though the occurrenceDisseminated of pyrite pyrite has in these beenhas quartzites found not in has been the not reported as been Tres Hermanas being documented. found in in fissure a veins, quartzite though (McLemore, 2000a). it teen Canyon excavations iszonite most outcrops (as likely opposed to to the haveThe granite come present northern in from Burro the the southernmost Mountains, LittleQuartzite, Tres north Hatchets). Hermanas which of mon- contains Lordsburg, contain verypossibility outcrops small that of cubes quartzites the of from Beartooth pyrite the (McLemore, Lower 2000b). Cretaceous Mojado There Formation is may a contain domes, flows and rhyoliteinclude AFTs. minor Sedimentary outcrops strata ofare present Lower probably in Cretaceous not the strata an Cedar (Wilks,tively immediately Mountains well-preserved 2005). useful sequences procurement of The source Paleozoic Klondikehave limestone, but served Hills dolostone they as and do a shale chert contain that source may rela- (Armstrong, 1970). andesite complex with minorand outcrops Clemons, of 1988; Pennsylvanian McLemore, and 2000a; Permian Wilks, strata 2005). (Seager Granite identified in the Nine- Carrizalillo Hills are aApache Lower Hills Oligocene and Sierra rhyolite Rica and areern a AFT source Mexico complex for may quartzite (Wilks, be and 2005). Paleozoicinclude a outcrops upper procurement in The north- Oligocene area to for lowerPliocene a Miocene variety basalts basalts of to and cherts. andesites, basaltic The andesites, upper Miocene Cedar Oligocene to Mountains rhyolites and lower Oligocene silicic being procured from the Sierra Fresnal secondary field in northernmost Mexico. The possibly Sierra Rica), Paleozoicthe Tres outcrops Hermanas and in the northern northern Burro Mexico, Mountains. the In addition, Cedar obsidian Mountains, is probably sources (from limestone),rhyolite, as diorite, well granite, basalt, as sandstone, quartzite, quartzite.lithic chert source and materials. The chalcedony as northern possible HV 5-84.2 area includes Three Sites and Nineteen Canyon The Three Sites andern Nineteen Carrizalillo Canyon Hills, excavation southeast areasource of is areas the situated for Cedar in these the Mountains. two southwest- sites Potential include lithic the procurement Carrizalillo Hills, the Apache Hills (and outcrop of Paleozoic limestone. Thischert outcrop types for is both a the potential northernarea source (see HV area 5-8 below). for area and a for variety the of Nineteen Canyon-Three Sites obsidian, quartzite, chert and chalcedony. The central HV 5-8 area includes chert latite (Zeller, 1965). A localThe peak, Apache Doyle Peak, Hills has are been alsoceous identified comprised as to a of lower source Mojado Tertiary of Formation latite,flows chert. quartzite and (Zeller, and 1965). include upper lower These Creta- posits Oligocene andesitic of to flows chalcedony upper are at Eocene the theHills andesitic procurement likely are site the source LA most of likely 161989. the sourcetified The area secondary in Sierra of site de- Rica the clusters distinctive and pale inthe Apache purple the southeast to Nineteen of gold Canyon, quartzite the Hachita iden- the Valley and Sierra Doyle Rica Peak and area. Apache To Hills, in northern Mexico, is a large nor lower Oligocene rhyolite andThe AFTs northern and part Cretaceous of to thewith Tertiary Little minor volcaniclastic Hatchets outcrops units. is of a Ringbone lower Formation Oligocene basalt rhyolite and and andesite AFTmetamorphosed (Zeller, complex 1970). to quartzite, with minor Paleozoic limestone and Cretaceous-Tertiary Ringbone Formation (Zeller, 1970). This region of the Little Hatchets also includes mi- 5 5 15 20 10 25 15 20 10 Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | , ff that was used to make lithic ff 350 349 to dark gray in color. Andesite is dark green or ff dacite (LA 161105) A chert (LA 161106) of the internationalsoutheast border across (Fig. the rise 3).diate and hundreds vicinity. of Low, The artifacts dacite narrowand have is ridges been biotite. aphanitic observed of The and in site pale dacite theis occurs gray imme- a trend along with the localized rare northwest- western phenocrysts occurrencenot edge of common of of sanidine in dacite a the band thatmaterial Boot of was is Heel rhyolite worked and a extensively. outcrop this and primary procurement procurement locality source. is the only Dacite are is where this the hinge of this syncline). This outcrop is5.1.3 a primary source for Dog Eagle Mountains Mountain procurement chert. site descriptions: Eagle Mountain The Eagle Mountain dacite procurement site occurs on a low rise immediately north massive, brecciated or mottled textures,irregularly occurs shaped as beds nodules within and laterally agray discontinuous limestone wackestone that to is packstone. ation laminated The and to laminations fossils hummocky often have laminated beenthe exhibit replaced soft-sediment fossil chert. deforma- material In couldlimestone field be outcrop samples to positively and be identified. photographs,on Lower none the Cretaceous of We trace U-Bar interpret of Formation the becauseby the southwestern mapped the Eagle outcrops limb outcrop of Mountain of lies U-Bar a A Formation southeastward to plunging the syncline north described and east (U-Bar Ridge describes The Eagle Mountain Aof chert the Lower procurement Cretaceous site U-BarZeller, Formation is 1959; that Fig. located had 3). along not The previously a chert, been very a mapped small distinctive (e.g., orange-brown outcrop in color with red flecks and 5.1.2 Dog Mountains procurement site descriptions: Eagle Mountain weathers to a dark brown, and can be tan or lavender in fresh sample. aphanitic, though somewhich fragments has contain been rare altered phenocrystsand to generally of a aphanitic, sanidine bronze thoughthe and some color. U-Bar biotite, fragments Formation Basalt contain can isa feldspar be either lathes. distinctive a vesicular orange-brown, variety Chert or of mottledChert. from nonvesicular colors or Chalcedony, which and brecciated forms textures, as chert,fault though a zones, this termed hydrothermal is unit deposit the translucent along contain Eaglepale flow to boundaries Mountain semi-opaque blue and and or ranges black. in color Quartzite, from ivory present to in pale the red, Lower Cretaceous Mojado Formation, and has moderately large pumicefiamme fragments for that their are shape), flattenedartifacts which and is elongated show usually (termed flow weldedhas foliation. and a Tu black bu andfeldspar. green Dacite speckled from appearance the northern and Dog contains Mountains very is small pale gray phenocrysts in of color and is generally The geology of theis northern dominated Dog by silicic Mountains, igneous andandesite units, southern and including Alamo porphyritic dacite Hueco and withoutcrops Mountains, pyroclastic of some rhyolite, Lower tu basalt Cretaceous (Zeller, sedimentaryFormations, as strata, 1959; well that Wilks, as include younger 2005).bedrock. the fan U-Bar deposits and There The that Mojado include are rhyolitepart cobbles minor in and of pebbles the the of older DogBryan, local eruptive Mountains 2000). suite is found Rhyolite Eoceneand in from usually to the includes these Oligocene Boot phenocrysts flows in of Heel ranges quartz age (35.2–32.7 Ma; in and and sanidine. McIntosh color is and Some from rhyolite light is gray pyroclastic to pale red 5.1 Northern Dog Mountains procurement sites 5.1.1 Northern Dog Mountains local geology 5 Procurement site descriptions 5 5 15 20 10 25 15 20 10 Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | erent igneous units with the contact ff /rhyolite bedrock (Fig. 3). The chalcedony ff 352 351 B chert (LA 161996) chalcedony (LA 89049) chalcedony (LA 162029) chalcedony (LA 161108) of U-Bar Formation that has since been eroded away, leaving only the chert nodules. in the Eagle Mountain Bciation chert between is color not and as texture diverseThe type and than there Eagle seems is Mountain to observed be B infacing a the chert stronger slope Eagle asso- occurs Mountain near A as Dog chert. of nodules Springs limestone littering near Ranch the the (Fig. landTertiary site, surface 3). fanglomerates indicating on containing that a There Paleozoic thethe north- limestone are chert site, to no and nodules the are are documented east unlikelyexplanation a outcrops to is are secondary be that down-slope deposit. the the of chert source for nodules the represent Eagle erosional Mountain remanents B of chert. a local A outcrop plausible The Eagle Mountain B procurement siteture contains to chert the Eagle nodules Mountain similar A indish chert. color brown. and The Golden-brown tex- Eagle pieces Mountain tend Bspecimens chert to have is have golden-brown lacey lacey to to to red- massiveas brecciated textures, discrete whereas textures. blebs red or Blue disseminated translucent through the chalcedony red is varieties. present The range of textures seen flow units and is immediatelyrhyolite outcrop north and of the a chalcedony thrust isflow probably fault. units weathering The out or of surface from the of fractures contactsand the within between is site the therefore is units a primarily that primaryin may source. be colors Chalcedony and related from textures to this to the procurement that fault locality of to is other the similar chalcedony south 5.1.7 procurement sites. Dog Mountains procurement site descriptions: Eagle Mountain The Dog Springs chalcedonythe site is northern located Dog on Mountainssmall the and valley eastern between the flank two Alamo of ridge Hueco the lines Mountains of pass rhyolite (Fig. between and 3). is on It or occurs near in two contacts a between 5.1.6 Dog Mountains procurement site descriptions: Dog Springs B chalcedony is probably weatheringigneous out unit of and the is contact ais zone primary pale or chalcedony blue fractures source. within orchalcedony The either Middle found pale Mountain loose brown B on in chalcedony nodules the than color surface at with Middle of Mountain primarily the A. site massive occurs or as nodular much textures. larger blocks The and The Middle Mountain B procurementDog site is Mountains in and the Alamo easternthe Hueco part toes of (Fig. the of 3). pass two between Thebetween hills the site the meet. is two These on occurring hills a in are south-facing the two slope saddle di where between the two hills. The Middle Mountain is ivory, pale blue orcurs pale in very red dense in concentrations color,hydrothermally on is deposited the often mineral surface phase laminated of in to theand areas site. nodular Corwin, with in 1961). Chalcedony silicic is texture The igneous a andthat Middle rocks common oc- probably Mountain (e.g. originated White A in siteately fractures is to within a the the secondary north andesite deposit and and of has rhyolite chalcedony weathered outcrops out immedi- 5.1.5 onto the modern land Dog surface. Mountains procurement site descriptions: Middle Mountain B The Middle Mountain Abetween chalcedony the procurement site, Dog in Mountainsvalley the and on western the a part Alamo low of Hueco hill the Mountains, pass of is exposed located welded in tu a broad 5.1.4 Dog Mountains procurement site descriptions: Middle Mountain A 5 5 25 15 20 10 15 20 10 Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | 354 353 Doyle Peak chalcedony (LA 161989) Hachita Valley banded chert (LA 161991) quartzite (LA 85792) The Doyle Peak chalcedony procurementridge site that is overlooks on anto a incised west-facing three arroyo slope to miles west the tocentimeter of south. the diameter a nodules low west-southwest Doyle on Peak (Fig.The the is 3). modern approximately original land two The source surface andfracture chalcedony of zones is occurs in the a as the secondary chalcedony andesite two deposit. in is to the probably ten southern Apache from Hills. flow contacts or within-unit procurement site is a secondaryof deposit outctops of in this the material Big afterHachita Hatchet the drainage. Mountains chert and was redeposited eroded as out terrace gravels within the 5.2.3 Hachita Valley and Doyle Peak procurement site descriptions: The Hachita Valley banded chert procurementchert-bearing site rock, is and not so close is tothe prominent tentatively high identified outcrops density of as of a raw procurement bandednortheast site chert on trending nodules the found gravelly basis (Fig. terrace of 3). thatThe The overlooks Big site the is Hatchet on Hachita a Mountains Valleythis southwest- to site are the is about a southeast. distinctive twohave lavender come miles and from reddish to pink the the bandedin Permian material southwest. the Concha that center Limestone. is and Chert most southwestern The likely flank utilized Concha to of Limestone at the is Big exposed Hatchet Mountains. The Hachita Valley is a fault block of Paleozoic limestone (Wilks, 2005). 5.2.2 Hachita Valley and Doyle Peak procurement site descriptions: are a mixture of silicified Mojado Formation and extensive andesite flows. Doyle Peak so silicified that the sandstoneof units are Paleozoic limestone now quartzite occur (Zeller, on 1966). the Minor western fault end blocks of the Sierra Rica. The Apache Hills and east. Doyle Peak isthe located Apache in the Hills valley to betweenprimarily the the of Sierra north-northeast. Paleozoic Rica to limestoneFormation the at units The south the with Big and northern extensive end Hatchetcontain of outcrops Mountains the a of range are variety (Zeller, the of 1966). composed lithologies Cambrian Thesouthern that Little Bliss end Hatchet range Mountains of from Precambrian theCenozoic and mountains igneous Tertiary to outcrops granite in at Paleozoic the theSierra and central Rica Cretaceous and are sedimentary northern composed strata of mountains and the (Zeller, 1970). Lower Cretaceous The Mojado Formation that has been 5.2 Hachita Valley and Doyle Peak5.2.1 procurement sites Hachita Valley and Doyle PeakThe local Hachita geology Valley is bounded by theHatchet Big Mountains Hatchet to Mountains to the the west southwest, the and Little the Sierra Rica and Apache Hills to the northeast is a primary sourceHuman for System the Resources artifacts in atsurvey 1991 this undertaken and site. they in identifiedbedrock. the This the However, site summer geologic bedrock maps was of as of originally the quartzite. 2007site described area as reclassified describe Site Lower by the Cretaceous the hills Mojado immediately site(Zeller, Formation east 1959; and as of Wilks, do the 2005). resting not document Therefore, onis basalt it most near basalt is likely this the unlikely site “brown-weathered that sandstone” the or bedrock quartzite here observed is by basalt, Zeller but (1959). The Dog Springs quartzitethe procurement Dog area Mountains is to locatedoccurs the on on west the the and north alluvial Haystack side plain Mountain of between to a the low east rise (Fig. formed 3). by a The weathered site outcrop of bedrock that 5.1.8 Dog Mountains procurement site descriptions: Dog Springs 5 5 20 15 10 20 25 15 10 Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | are ff are also ff and chalcedony came ff erences appear to be a direct result ff 356 355 erence that is not statistically significant is the higher ff 000). The Fisher’s Tests indicate that the Archaic assemblage has a . 0 p < The majority of artifacts in the Archaic assemblage are Eagle Mountain chert, other The AMDs for the Archaic and Formative assemblages are 4.00 and 1.73 km, re- The Homogeneity of Proportions test between the two assemblages was highly sig- The Formative assemblage is dominated by chalcedony. This chalcedony is abun- Exactly 50% of the Archaic assemblage is made up of Eagle Mountain chert and from less than a kilometerSandstone away in could volcanic flows be north procured of the immediately Alamo Hueco to Mountains. the south in the Emory Canyon area. around the base of Littlethe Hat east, Top about Butte approximately and one the mile Formative west sites of are the international groupedcherts farther border. and to rhyolite.however The these nearest sites known are Eagle locatedcould potentially Mountain very yield chert near other sources a source ofately large is Eagle available outcrop Mountain in LA chert. of the 161996, Quartzite U-Bar U-Barfrom is Formation. Formation, nearby also in Other which immedi- the cherts, southern including Big Hatchet Permian Mountains. cherts, Rhyolite, arrived tu 6.2 Little Hat Top Butte Similar to the Dog MountainsHat site Top Butte cluster, cluster the group Archaic separately and in Formative distinct sites areas. for The the Archaic Little sites are grouped Mountain chert source and theoutcrop. Formative sites Another are interesting sitting di onproportion an of expansive obsidian chalcedony in the Archaic assemblage. spectively. These are theare lowest immediately near values sources in of materials thisIn that fact, study. were the most only This utilized reason in ismative the their because is assemblages. Archaic the these AMD higher is clusters proportion more than of twice obsidian as from large the as Antelope that Wells of obsidian the field. For- nificant ( significantly higher proportion of Eagleand Mountain and chert that (24% the morecedony Formative of (39% assemblage the more assemblage) has of a theof assemblage). significantly the These higher locations di proportion of of the site chal- clusters. The Archaic sites are located very near an Eagle dant in this region,exactly outcropping at at the both geographicimmediately LA center 161108 available. and for Basalt, LA theMountains. 162029, once Formative Eagle which again, sites. Mountain is arrivedavailable chert located in from Rhyolite came the and the from southern southern tu Dog LAoutcrop Mountains. Alamo 161996 east The of and Hueco nearest the other quartzite Dogthe cherts Mountains. Big is Hatchet are a Permian Mountains chert small again and the Cretaceous isfield obsidian coming 22 is from km coming to from the the the southern Antelope west. end Wells obsidian of sites in the cluster, LAalso immediately 89049, available. is Basalt a is available chalcedonyalso in procurement very the nearby. southern site. Other Alamo cherts Hueco Rhyolite Mountains, andChihuahua. are available tu The in most the distant southern source Dog Mountains is in for northern obsidian, at the Antelope Wells field. 6.1 Dog Mountains This cluster consists oflocation Archaic separate from and one Formative another. The sites.of Archaic the sites Each Dog are Mountains set located and on ofan the the area eastern sites Formative flanks south sites has are of a west Middle of distinct Mountain. the Dog Mountains centered chalcedony. The nearest EagleLA Mountain 161996. chert The source site is cluster approximately lies 1 km on away a at chalcedony producing fault zone and one of the The results below are visuallyStatistical represented results in are the summarized maps infrom (Figs. west the 4–6) to text. and east. Once Table 1 again, below. site clusters are presented 6 Analysis results 5 5 25 15 20 10 25 15 20 10 Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | erence of these values ff erences that are not signifi- are available in the volcanic ff ff 358 357 erences among the assemblages. It has significantly ff erences. The proportions among the assemblages are very similar. ff 000). The Fisher’s tests clearly indicate that the Protohistoric assem- . 0 644). Fisher’s tests were also run to confirm this result and they too showed . 0 p < = p The Homogeneity of Proportions test between the two assemblages was highly sig- The AMDs for the Archaic, Formative and Protohistoric assemblages are 15.25, The single site that makes up Protohistoric portion of this cluster is dominated by The Formative assemblage is primarily comprised of chert and basalt. The sources The Archaic assemblage is comprised mostly of quartzite, basalt and chert. The Homogeneity of Proportions test between the two assemblages was not signifi- The AMDs for the Archaic and Formative assemblages are 7.43 and 9.37 km, re- The Formative assemblage is very similar to the Archaic assemblage in terms of ma- largest contributor to all of these figures is basalt because of its distant source and blage is the primary sourcehigher of proportions di of basaltblages, and a rhyolite significantly than lower both proportionlower the of proportion Archaic chert of and than quartzite Formative thecant than assem- Formative, are the and that Archaic. a the Notable Formative significantly high di has proportions a of fairly quartzite high proportion and chert Permian chert. and the Archaic13.82 has and fairly 20.12 km, respectively.above The average, Archaic but and the Formative Protohistoric figures figure are is only the slightly highest among all the clusters. The also makes up substantial proportionremaining of materials the are the assemblage. same Thea as sources single those for piece for this of the and andesite other the that periods. likely The comes only from exception thenificant is southern ( Apache Hills. of materials are identicalnearest to obsidian those source of for the theeral, Archaic Formative it is assemblage appears the that with Antelope the onesource geographic Wells exception: center areas obsidian of than field. the the that In Formative of sites gen- the is Archaic slightly sites. closer to the basalt. The nearest source area24 km. in the It Alamo could Huecosbeen very is identified. well fairly This distant be at is that approximately further there elaborated is on a in much the nearer discussion source section of below. basalt Rhyolite that has not from the Bliss member ofthe the single northern piece of Big granite Hatchet isknown Mountains. in source the The of southernmost Eagle nearest Little Mountain source Hatchetthe chert for Mountains. Sierra is The Fresnal at nearest secondary LA obsidian 161996. field Obsidian in is northern likely Chihuahua. coming from flows north of the Alamo Hueco Mountains. The single piece of sandstone likely came is once again availableis in LA the 161989 central in the Big Doyle Hatchets. Peak region. The Rhyolite nearest and chalcedony tu source Nearly all of the sitesbasin. are located As in a avery result, tight close group the near to geographic the one centersmative center another site of of near located the the closer the Hachita Archaic to Valley internationalgeographic and the center border. foot Protohistoric of of the sites There the Formative are Big is, sites Hatchet however, a Mountains. one few This miles For- site toQuartzite draws the the is west. available inAlamo Hueco, the and southern chert (and Sierra limestone) Rica in the Mountains, Big basalt Hatchet Mountains. in Permian the chert northern of being fairly close to multipleis, procurement again, areas. the The result slight di of the Formative sites being6.3 slightly farther from Lower the Hachita source Valley areas. This cluster contains sites from the Archaic, Formative and Protohistoric periods. general, the sites are slightly further from the sourcescant than ( the Archaic sites. no significant di The only noticeable anomalyassemblage is which the had to presence be of procured one from piece a relatively of longspectively. obsidian distance. These in are the relatively low Archaic and, like the Dog Mountains figures, are the result farthest potential source is the Antelope Wells obsidian field 33terial km proportions. to Furthermore, the the southwest. nearestception sources is of the materials presence are ofsource identical. limestone of The in ex- which the is Formative assemblage, the the same nearest as known for chert, in the southern Big Hatchet Mountains. In Basalt is available in the northern and central Alamo Hueco Mountains. By far, the 5 5 25 15 20 10 25 15 20 10 Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | erent names to better describe their ff erence between the Formative and Archaic 360 359 ff erences between these periods/culture groups. ff are available just to the east in the Carrizalillo Hills, though there is a ff The Three Sites assemblage is primarily made up of chert and rhyolite. Chert is im- Nineteen Canyon is dominated by a distinctive grey-to-purple fine-grained quartzite All statistical tests on proportions were not significant. The FormativeThe assemblage AMDs is for the assemblages are very similar at 13.87 km for the Archaic assem- The Formative assemblage at LA 161080 was limited to 5 lithics. The two pieces The Archaic assemblage is mostly made up of equal parts basalt, Permian chert from the northern Sierra Ricas. Many of the other sources are identical to that of Rhyolite and tu possibility that rhyolite was beingand procured immediately, chalcedony at were LA 85779. procuredtains Andesite, a and basalt northern little further Carrizalilloin Hills. away the from Mojado The the Formation nearestobsidian southern of siltstone was and the Cedar likely quartzite northern Moun- toknown outcrops Sierra have source are Rica of come Mountains. Permian from chertMountain the The is chert in Sierra single at the Fresnal piece LA Big 161996. secondary of Hatchets. The field. furthest source The is only for Eagle indicating that Nineteen Canyon,proposed which occupation is range the betweenis eastern AD suggested cluster, 1420 to is and slightly dateexplore any older 1540. from potential with AD di a Three 1620 Sites, to to 1800. themediately These west, available from assemblages a are Paleozoic compared outcrop to that extends southward into Chihuahua. the clusters. Basalt and,contributors for to the these values Archaic because assemblage,the of Permian long their chert distances high to were proportions sources. the in largest the assemblages and 6.5 Three Sites and Nineteen Canyon The Three Sites and Nineteen Canyonabout assemblages are 6 both km Protohistoric from and located each other. Radiocarbon dates were obtained from both clusters were likely procured from the central Little Hatchets. simply too small to derive any inferences about it. blage and 13.01 km for the Formative. These values are average among all values for same as the Archaic. The two pieces of basalt and single piece of rhyolite, however, of quartzite likely came from the Mojado Formation of the Sierra Rica Mountains, the Mountains. Other cherts andDoyle limestone Peak. are Quartzite immediately and availableSierra sandstone around are Rica the very Mountains. base nearby of inis The the located nearest Mojado within known Formation the of chalcedonyHatchet Archaic the Mountains. source site The is cluster closest LA rhyolite area.is is 161989, LA found which Diorite 161996, in the is the Cedar nearestsecondary available Mountains. field known in is More source the the distant of nearest central Eagle sourceidentified Little of Mountain in obsidian, chert. the but assemblage. Antelope The Wells Sierra obsidian Fresnal was also locations. This needspread arose across. because of the large expanse thatand the other cherts. Archaic sitestown The are nearest of source Hachita. of basalt Permian is chert at once Flat again Hill immediately is east coming of from the the central Big Hatchet the sources and theassemblage. higher proportions of quartzite and Permian chert in6.4 the Archaic Upper Hachita Valley and DoyleThe Peak Formative site inthe the geographic upper center of Hachita theanalytical Valley Doyle cluster lies Peak and approximately Archaic are 7 sites. km only These southwest presented sites of with comprise di a single semblage, basalt accounts for morevalue. than three-quarters If of there the is exceptionallyprovides high a most AMD nearer of basalt the source,bution remainder these to of AMDs that the would assemblage. Protohistoric beAMDs figure appears much The to because lower. slight be of Rhyolite the di its slightly large closer proximity contri- of the Formative geographic center to substantial contribution to all the assemblages. In the case of the Protohistoric as- 5 5 25 15 20 10 25 15 20 10 Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | erence. erences ff ff ecting these ff erences. In the case ff 362 361 erence between the assemblages. Quartzite ff 000). Fisher’s tests indicated multiple significant erences in the other three materials because of its . ff 0 p < 000). The Fisher’s tests indicated that the Nineteen Canyon assemblage . 0 p < 403). This appears to be primarily because of the small number of values. . 0 erences. The Archaic assemblage has significantly higher proportions of andesite, = The Formative assemblage has significantly higher proportions of basalt, chalcedony AMDs among all periods were examined using a standard one-way ANOVA. The The Homogeneity of Proportions test between the Archaic and Formative assem- The AMDs for Three Sites and Nineteen Canyon are 8.91 and 18.10 km, respectively. The Homogeneity of Proportions test between the two assemblages was highly sig- ff p Formative samples are similarProtohistoric at is 10.65 higher and atProtohistoric 10.53 15.72 km, km. AMDs respectively, to One while be mightstead that have higher the of expected than similar the the the valuespatterns mean Formative for and, Archaic because the perhaps, and of similar Archaiclikely higher levels reflects and of higher mobility. Formative mobility mobility. suggest during In- The this similar period. larger procurement mean Protohistoric AMD Again, this is because those sites sit in avalues chalcedony procurement used “zone”. for this( test are foundThe in means Table for 1. these samples There are were interesting no though. significant The di means for the Archaic and large contribution to the overallproportion assemblage. in In the fact, Formative chert assemblages often of has other a clusters. similar orand higher Eagle Mountain chert.large role Once in again, these thethat results. western assemblage The site are low cluster the proportions primary assemblageof of reasons plays the basalt for a chalcedony, and those however, Eagle significant ittains Mountain di is Formative chert the in assemblage extraordinarily that high proportion provides in the the largest Dog contribution Moun- to the di blages was highly significantdi ( obsidian, rhyolite and chert.ing The only only andesite local is usealso from primarily of western responsible this site for the material clusters, di suggest- by Archaic populations. Western site clusters are assemblages, including (but not limitedartifacts to) by sorting nonarcheologists by and geologic “recycling” processes, of collection material of by Apache groups. The Three Sites andfor Nineteen excavation Canyon without assemblages, sampling however, any wereof sites directly the around targeted them. Protohistoric artifacts These sites andof represent are the the located sites. bulk somewhat separatelyresults. The from distinct It the location remainder is for ofproportion this the analysis reason Protohistoric below. that sites the Ittance would Protohistoric is, to likely assemblage source however, influence was included is any not inIt a included is the general in phenomenon important AMD the that to analysis should note because be that dis- less there influenced are in significant this taphonomic case. processes a 6.6 Entire assemblage A final analysis wassemblages of conducted the among entire data thecomparable, set. Archaic, because The Archaic the Formative and sites and Formative were assemblages Protohistoric are sampled as- directly in the same fashion at all site clusters. significantly higher proportionsand of Permian rhyolite, chert. chalcedony, Clearlyassemblage chert, the is Eagle large the abundance Mountain largest ofmakes chert source up quartzite 63% of in more di the of Nineteen its Canyon assemblage than it doesThe in Three Three Sites Sites. figurehighest. is The relatively largest low proportions and oflocally, materials while the for the Nineteen Three quartzite Sites Canyon at could figure Nineteen have is been Canyon procured had one to of have the traveled at least 22 km. rizalillo Hills, a piece ofBeartooth granite quartzite from from the the Tres Burro Hermanas, Mountains Antelope southwest Wells of obsidian Silvernificant City. and ( has a significantly higher proportion of quartzite and the Three Sites assemblage has the Three Sites assemblage. The exceptions are basalt from domes east of the Car- 5 5 25 15 20 10 25 15 20 10 Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | erences ff Viewing pro- are there substantial di ers from some unavoidable inade- ff erent temporal periods? ff and (b) 364 363 are there noticeable patterns of lithic procurement within erences would be reflected in lithic procurement patterns. The ff erent temporal periods? ff Preferences for individual material types appear to be heavily influenced by site lo- A major assumption that was made going into this analysis was that Archaic and Obviously, the model being used in this study su source for obsidian. This could reflect onetions or may have more been slightly of more three willing(2) to Archaic conceivable travel populations phenomena: greater were distances indeed to (1) more acquirepopulations mobile Archaic obsidian, were and more popula- (3) focused vectors to of thesidian mobility north field for and Archaic east than away were from159188 the the in Antelope other Wells the ob- populations. Guadalupe Mountains,vector The another away large Archaic from the abundance site, Antelope could of Wellsin indicate obsidian field the a on or southern movement that LA Peloncillo the Mountainstiple unsubstantiated do, obsidian outcrops in sources fact, in exist. the Shackley southern (1995) Peloncillo examined mul- Mountains, but was unable to locate a point associations of material typeshave with preferred to temporal use periods.bution obsidian of Archaic slightly Antelope more populations Wells than appeareast obsidian Formative to and to populations. north all The of assemblagesHowever, the contri- the decreases rate procurement with of field this distance drop (as to appears noted the to by be Findlow slightly lower and in Bolognese, the 1980). Archaic assemblages. levels in the Archaicthe and Protohistoric. Formative that Alternatively, wereand it much lithic could lower procurement, reflect than or aservation mobility possibly disconnect that levels the during between only inherent overall oneassemblage inadequacies mobility of and of several the the are artifacts in model.high from the mobility The Archaic in very assemblage the ob- distant provides Archaic. sources potential support is for in thecation Formative and proximity to lithic sources. That being said, there are some interesting Protohistoric populations were fargion more and mobile that than these Formativeresults di populations of in this analysis this do re- imum not distance entirely of support transport this for assumption.the the Archaic While Protohistoric the and assemblage average Formative is min- assemblages relatively are high, similar. those This of could reflect similar mobility lecting phenomena, sites infact, this be study Protohistoric identified or as have mixed being components. of one component could, in artifact(s) of a givenbe component recognized. on Additionally, it a is sitefrequently suspected be scavenged that removed, Protohistoric artifacts that populations oftheir of component own the previous will sites, region temporal likely potentially periods causing not mour, Protohistoric 2010: and components 12). deposited to be them Recenthave misidentified produced research on (Sey- evidence on supporting the thisa Three Clovis claim. Sites point and Several were diagnostic recovered Nineteenanalyses from Archaic Canyon these strongly points projects sites, suggest and but predominantly radiocarbon Protohistoric dates occupations. and As lithic artifact a result of col- deposits including gravel beds. Unfortunately, thisat type the of information time was of notral this available periods study. of Another sites. potentialThe These presence problem identifications or lies rely absence in heavily of multiple on theby occupations observed collecting identification is diagnostic highly activity. of susceptible artifacts. tempo- In toagnostic being this masked area, projectile it points is and known ceramics that local on residents private frequently land. collect di- Should the only diagnostic in lithic procurement patternscurement between in the terms di ofnearest material sources, the type analysis proportions provided some within intriguing assemblages observations. and distancesquacies. to For instance, ideally itsources would and be have desirable to exactAlso, have identifications for the and exact the locations provenances mostwhile of of part, lithic it the is this artifacts known study that in only many question. materials recognizes for primary lithic sources artifacts were of procured raw from materials secondary The preceding analysis iscurement a strategies of first Native attempt Americantions at populations under of understanding the study and Boot are:and quantifying Heel among area. lithic (a) the pro- The di ques- 7 Summary and discussion 5 5 25 20 10 15 25 15 20 10 Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | 366 365 The preceding discussion provides some preliminary observations regarding lithic A further distinction noted in the analysis is the greater AMD of the Nineteen Canyon As a final note on material types, basalt is found in unusually high abundance for all The distinctive gray-to-purple quartzite identified solely in the Nineteen Canyon as- Eagle Mountain chert also shows a pattern of diminishing abundance away from the methods, etc. Artifact assemblage analysis also has the potential to provide informa- techniques are destructive andfully, archeologist’s future technology are will hesitant allow for to moreysis. destroy non-destructive The methods artifacts. of issue microscopic Hope- of anal- discussed, temporal completing component this assignation process isThe based a trickier on exact subject. diagnostic extent materials As tonever alone previously be which is precisely known unreliable. diagnostic because materials itSome is occupations have a do been process not that removed can leaveshould occur from diagnostic always over markers a several be behind. millennia. site usedabsolute Multiple can in lines dates the of of evidence assignation occupation of should temporal be components obtained to from a radiometric, site. archaeomagnetic Ideally, ment sources in the region.both foreign The greatest and obstacle domestic.Mexican to this Much territory obviously of presents is New landsis greater Mexico’s ownership, of Boot complications. both Heel artifacts is Mineralogicsources and privately with and source the owned molecular materials final and provenience would analy- of help artifacts to in the better archeological link record. exact Most procurement current ther be a smallMexico, unnoticed or a primary secondary source, sourceDoyle a in Peak larger area. the gravels undocumented of primary the source Hachita Valley in or drainagesprocurement in strategy the in awest. relatively poorly There understood region isdetailed of great descriptions the potential of American for rock South- units,deposits, improvement specific particularly of outcrops, in understanding and Mexico, of lithic would this materials greatly in topic. improve secondary our More understanding of procure- 1994: 181–186, 201) and onenated of by the basalt sites in that theThe was recovered subsequently authors lithic excavated was suggested assemblage domi- (Kirkpatrick theTheir et project possibility al., located of 1994: very few a 176–177). artifactsWe source in agree the in that Hachita the Valley there area nearby (Sechrist, is volcanic 1994: likely mountains. 185). an undocumented basalt source nearby. This would ei- revealed a noteable abundance of basalt in the Sierra Rica Mountains area (Sechrist, the average distance is 20.68 km. The only other recent project in the Boot Heel also assemblage than that ofappear Three to Sites. predate Notably Coronado most andSites of the dates the Spanish to colonization dates the of forflect New period Nineteen a Mexico Canyon during while change European Three from presence.movement highly patterns mobile The due populations change to to inneighbors. populations the AMDs that threat could had of re- more conquest restricted and raids fromtemporal increasingly periods hostile in the Hachitabasalt sources Valley in and the Doyle area. Peak The areas. nearest source There for any are of no the clusters observed is 15 km away and and rhyolite, the nearestare sources related, the of combined which pictureeast are suggests away from a to the group the Alamo ofconfirm south Hueco people any Mountains. moving and link to Further west. between the evidence these would north sites. If be and necessary these to sites the Formative assemblage at Cloverdale Playa.for This this could population indicate heading a west movement from vector the Dog and Alamosemblage Hueco was Mountains. observed bymation one of of the the Sierra authorsmaterial Rica (KZ) in at Mountains the an 22 km assemblage outcropeast. to could in This the indicate the information a west. Mojado is rapid For- semblage even The movement more from large of interesting abundance this the when of population considering Lower this the to Hachita Protohistoric the Valley. as- This assemblage is dominated by basalt source area. The largethat abundances there in are the undiscovered Little sources Hatern of Top margin Eagle Butte of Mountain assemblages the chert Big suggests as Hatchetabundance far Mountains, of north likely this as in the the material U-Bar south- Dog drops Formation Mountains limestones. rapidly The area. north of The Little exception Hat is Top a Butte high and abundance west of of Eagle the Mountain chert in 5 5 25 15 20 10 25 15 20 10 Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | 368 367 We thank Gulf South Research Corporation for hiring OCA to conduct the Bureau of Mines and Mineral Resources Bulletin, 96, p. 22, 1970. Mines and Mineral Resources Memoir, 16, p. 128, 1966. Mineral Resources Map, 1:1 000 000 scale, 2005. of Mines and Mineral Resources, Geologic Map 8, 1:62 500of scale, Miners 1959. and Mineral Resources, Geologic Map 17, 1:62 500 scale, 1962. 46, 112–119, 1961. region, Hidalgo County, southwest2009. New Mexico, Berkeley Archaeological Lab report, p.New 7, Mexico, New Mexico15, State 1972. Bureau of Mines and Mineral Resources Circular, 125, p. update and quantitative analysis, Am. Antiquity, 60, 531–551, 1995. US/Mexico Border: Road9114A, from Human Systems Anapra Research, to Inc., Tularosa, Antelope 1994. Wells, Newspicuous Occupational Mexico, Events, Report Am. Antiquity, No. 75(1), HSR 158–176, 2010. Geological Society Guidebook, 51, 40–41, 2000a. tains, Grant County, New Mexico, New2000b. Mexico Geological Society Guidebook, 51, 254–252, New Mexico Bureau of Mines and Mineral Resources GM, 63, 1:24 000 scale, 1 sheet, 1988. Animas Valley, New Mexico, Quaternary Res., 50, 283–289, 1998. Mexico, New Mexico Geological Society Guidebook, 51, 157–174, 2000. Arizona, edited by: Jenney, J.1988. and Reynolds, S., Arizona Geological Society, Tucson, p. 866, Task Force-Six Project, SouthernResearch, Inc., New Tularosa, Mexico, 1994. Report No. HSR 9114B, Human Systems vestigations Series Map I-1109, 2 sheets, scale 1:125 000, 1980. dalgo County New Mexico, Kiva, 45, 227–251, 1980. oncillo Mountains, Hidalgo County, NewResources Circular, Mexico, 158, New p. Mexico 19, Bureau 1978. of Mines and Mineral Zeller, R.: Geology of the Little Hatchet Mountains, Grant and Hidalgo Counties, New Mexico Zeller, R.: Stratigraphy of the Big Hatchet Mountains area, New Mexico, New Mexico Bureau of Zeller, R.: Reconnaissance geologic map of southern Animas Mountains, New Mexico Bureau Zeller, R.: Reconnaissance geologic map of Dog Mountains quadrangle, New Mexico Bureau Wilks, M. (compiler): New Mexico Geologic Highway Map, New Mexico Bureau of Geology and White, J. F. and Corwin, J. F.: Synthesis and origin of chalcedony, The American Mineralogist, Soule, J.: Structural geology of the northern part of the Animas Mountains, Hidalgo County, Shackley, M. S.: Source provenance of obsidian artifacts from Prehistoric sites in the Bootheel Shackley, M. S.: Sources of archaeological obsidian in the greater American Southwest: An Seymour, D.: Contextual Incongruities, Statistical Outliers, and Anomalies: Targeting Incon- Sechrist, M.: The Joint Task Force-Six Border Survey: Archaeological Survey Along the McLemore, V.: The Tres Hermanas mining district,McLemore, Luna V.: County, Geology New and Mexico, mineral New resources Mexico of the Wild Horse Mesa area, Burro Moun- Seager, W. and Clemons, R.: Geology of the Hermanas quadrangle, Luna County, New Mexico, McIntosh, W. and Bryan, C.: Chronology and geochemistry of the Boot Heel volcanic field, New Krider, P. R.: Paleoclimatic significance of Late Quaternary lacustrine and alluvial stratigraphy, Reynolds, S.: Geologic Map of Arizona (1:1 000 000 scale), in: The Geologic Evolution of Knauth, L. P.: A model for the origin of chert in limestone, Geology, 7, 274–277, 1979. Kirkpatrick, D. T., Mendez, S., and Sechrist, M.: Archaeological Testing on 12 Sites for the Joint Findlow, F. and Bolognese, M.: An initial examination of prehistoric obsidian exchange in Hi- Drewes, H.: Tectonic map of southeastern Arizona, US Geological Survey Miscellaneous In- Border Fence Archeological Research Project.of We the also US Customs gratefully and acknowledgeBrian the Border Protection, assistance Garnsey Department as of well Homelandneers. as Security, especially the Most Agent Bureau of ofgraciously all, allowing Land we us Management access kindly and to thank the their the properties. US private Army land Corps owners of in Engi- southwesternReferences New Mexico for Armstrong, A., Silberman, M., Todd, V., Hoggatt, W., and Carten, R.: Geology of the central Pel- the future allowing for betterHeel of understanding New of Mexico, lithic but globally. procurement,Acknowledgements. not only in the Boot tion on the period of occupation. Hopefully, all of these issues can be improved on in 5 5 30 25 20 15 10 30 25 20 15 10 Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Formative, = o Archaic, F

2

3

=

) . t c e S n r e h t u o S

Nineteen Canyon P 107 10.5 5 0.5 18 1.8 33 3.2 – 1 0.1 – 3 0.3 3 0.3 – 31 3.0 101 9.9 12 1.2 12 1.2 – – 5 0.5 19 1.9 662 65.0 7 0.7 1019 (

n

a

t f i R e d n a r G o i R m s z t a s d u n 1 m G 2 Three Sites P 228 29.8 7 0.9 6 0.8 18 2.4 – – 1 0.1 – – – 69 9.0 298 38.9 35 4.6 86 11.2 – – - 5 0.7 13 1.7 – 766 o l 1 a n

n P 1 o o e n i y g s p a i n o n 2 n u r i l a l s e o A 9 4.9 – – 44 24.0 2 1.1 – 6 3.3 2 1.1 – 1 0.6 11 6.0 39 21.3 7 3.8 43 23.5 – 3 1.6 1 0.6 – 15 8.2 – 183 Doyle Peak l a C

t m c d d s 9 o c e o i a 8 1 A / D n V 0 u g s 1 e a G t o l i S

y h a 3 y y M r a F 1 20.0 – – 2 40.0 – – – – – – – – – – – – – – 2 40.0 – 5 Upper Hatchita Valley w a - h w g d r g h l 8 n i i g s - y u e i i H

o t H 5 e e v

i

t b t l l

H e a i t e V t C g a a c S a t S r

n s H r i g s r v o u

e e l o

P 13 25.5 1 2.0 1 1.96 32 62.8 – – – – – – 1 2.0 1 2.0 – – – – – – 2 3.9 – 51

t o 1 i S r D n b P I U

m 8

N s 5 2 d

. 9 r h o i 0 L 8 h F 2 3.3 – – 16 26.2 – – 2 3.3 – – – 5 8.2 21 34.4 4 6.6 3 4.9 – – – – 8 13.1 – 61 1 n C o t

. 8 j e n

c

i 3 e r a e c u

c

r 3 T s e r o u c s u r

o a o 0 s Lower Hatchita Valley u n A 8 4.7 2 1.2 – 38 22.2 – 1 0.6 8 4.7 – – – 12 7.0 33 19.3 8 4.7 19 11.1 – 1 0.6 1 0.6 – 40 23.4 – 171

s o 370 369

e a o n i l s n 7 9

M a d i a i e i P 0

e s d t i i d b i s z 1 N s t

c o b

r b s o a l

o l l

n u e a n Z Q n

i o W s

y h e e t A n F 7 10.9 8 12.5 – 3 4.7 – – – – – – 3 4.7 13 20.3 20 31.3 6 9.4 – 3 4.7 – – 1 1.6 – 64 v r p o

e a F

o o 0 C l e t a

r r e c o r t w a h 1 e n o e r i - c A C S B

n 1 I a i P

9 p 0 a

v t 1

e A 8 Little Hat Top Butte A 6 13.6 3 6.8 1 2.3 – 1 2.3 – 1 2.3 – 44 3 6.8 – 3 6.8 – – 1 2.8 – – – 4 9.1 8 18.2 13 29.6 e i o g r

r P

n

P a

a u x

u o R g

c 1 A l

a F 30 14.4 – – 127 61.1 13 6.3 8 3.85 3 1.4 – – – – 1 0.5 – 208 80 2.71 20 9.6 – – 2 1.0 1 0.5 3 1.4 l

d i 9

e 1

n W

t

d a

a r

l o o n f 0

P f i A 3 16. 7 – – 2 11.1 – – 4 22.2 1 5.6 5 27.8 – – – – – – – 18 – 2 11.1 – Dog Mountains 1 5.6 1

a

s 1 S

o

0 a e a n 7

d B e 2 e o b s n

a o 0 s i c n a

r 8 a e B n

o a B N

l a a C r t r s

o i e i V

C S ff Prismatic quartz Chalcedony Material Rhyolite Diorite Granite Obsidian Antelope Wells Obsidian Sierra Fresnal Obsidian Chert Eagle Mtn. Chert Permian Chert Gypsum Limestone Sandstone Siltstone Quartzite Beartooth Quartzite Total Count Tu Andesite Basalt Count and percentage of assemblage of geologic materials documented in the eastern Boot Heel region. Location of the study area in regional context. Known locations for distinct geologic Protohistoric. = materials are indicated by shaded areas. Fig. 1. Table 1. Upper number in cellP is the count, lower number is the percentage of the assemblage. A Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | s u b

m x

u

s .

+ l +

s

+

u

+

x b l

b + o

a m

O x

s

u + C

n l e

y

+ + s

a

x t

o + r

i + .

e +

C n S a r

s

+ x

s + F t a d

n e n n a t

r x e r m d P o r

l + r P c

T

x

x x m e e M

e

i + i e

. e e S S F

r x

x

t x i H u

e

M S

c x

t o

N

M r d n

l

x + P

e +

e

x + i t r F m l

.

e

+ + e a s r h n b

u

+

+ + x C s

c +

O x e

n + o r i r y

t

+ + F a r

r P t

a e a

y +

n +

r + h r n u m c i

e o o r i n d S P

r x M a e

i e c t e t

l x l r m n o a g e r l e h e a h

l x

C x c P E C i

l x c s i l

a x

h

l x z i p i P a

r x H r o r g

a o o

8 o

e 8

C

8

x +

0 0

G

x 0

r 1

1 1

. e +

s t + e

s

x n + e

n

u x + n t l t

i o + e a C t z

i t s t M i y

e + d r

d + i t n

r i a s n a

S a x u r b

a

x + q o d g s

e +

C x

x + ls 9 il 8 9

H 1 x 6

e ,

. x t 1

k , e , s

. i . t n t d e

s 6 x s A t d o n t t l i d

a i 9 L s n l , n s s t l 9 a i o e o

l s s t 1 y i l

K 6

h x e o r t 1

s a i

y a t

l e r s g l

l t A h c r i e

i n r

a x L i r

f f d s e u f f o H d i 372 371

a i n l + o R

u u x

a d b y t o t x

e S

x +

ch x

a

x * x x t a +

i x

a . p y

t s

h

+

x x x a

.

i *

x + A + x o y n c o t

t +

s x

h x i a P

e + c

c

x

x

n x

l + x

m +

x

M x

x h x + H e a

t

l +

t x a .

c x

6 u + a

e + +

l x H P

s x

0 x

a h x e e

e + M

1 x V

c n x

H x A P g g g 1

t x x t H

a 6 a a

a

x + l l l 1

x H x b b b M A

e

g L x

i x m m m c )

g x r s e e

B e + o t s s s u o t s s

s + x n 5

o

x

* * x . c a a a s D u

.

s + a f f f 8

n t

t o

t

* + e e

M o o

o + + n 0

t

t s

e n p x m

s l +

h a x l o c 1

l o +

t o a t l % % a %

l i +

y c s

H e

0 5 e 5 i e

e e l r o t H

t s y t c 5 7 2

i c d W p i

e s n

L C a e - - - a l o g

s A l l r l p y m t l

1 1 x o 1 e e e

. . l p l a o t 0

a

x

x x

t

i x n 5 0 . r o

l x

l x i W n

r x s y d 2 5 F ( 0

U

x

h V x

l

x x u x

P

x x t e m e a e A i i

a

x .

l

x

x x F l

F L x y

s l . 0 l , w

e

x x l t

s x

l t x a

a x e 1 a b o n s

l x r a

A W O x

x x b

V x .

e e ,

L P

x x t t t

i x

r

x

x

x

s x x e s . e a

h

x x x d s c

.

n x

w x

C a

n x

n

x x

t

x x

e x

t

x x

t

x x

i

x

x

x

x x

M

x x

h

x

x

x

x x

M x x y W

x x y

P

x

x

x

y x x s

y x

s

x

x

x

x

x x s

a x

y x

a

x x

i x

.

x x u

s x m

i x n m L n t i

n A

x

x x M a n S A Geologic map of the Boot Heel of southwestern New Mexico with locations of site Physiographic map of southwestern New Mexico. Fig. 3. clusters and minimum distance movement of geologic materials for sites identified as Archaic. Fig. 2.

Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | x

x .

.

s

s + s

s

+

+

+

u +

+

+

u

+

x x l l

b b

b

b

+ + a

a m

O

m O x

x u

n

n

+ u

+

l l y y

s

s

+

+

+

+

x

o x r

r

o

+

+ +

e

e

+

+

+ C a r a

r C

e

+ x

+ x

F F + d d

t +

i e n n a a t S

i

r r

x x d d o o P t r r l l

S

+ + c c

P x

e e

n x

e x e

x x x t e e i i

i i

+ + e

.

. n

S S F S S F

x x

x

x

e

x x m

e

e

M e

M

x x m e r t e i

N d u

N d

M

M e r l l t S

c

x

+ x + i u e

e

+

+

x

t x

i

+ o i + S c r

F F n l l

t

o . . P

e

+

+ +

r + a a s n s t P e r n n

b b

m

+

+

+ +

x

+ + t x s s e

e

+ r + O O m e r

e

x

x

h

e +

r + r e u y y C r F F h

r

+ +

+ r + c

u C n a a o a a

i c

r + + r

r

+ +

t

+ + n r a r o r m P m i t

i r i e t e e r i a r i y r n P t

h S P S P e n u

y

x

c x n

h o o n u c n

d

x x

o r o M a e

n i e d c r t e t M l a e l

r

i x h x

e

x x m n c a t e t g t e r l l

e

x x r h m e o a n h a g e r

C

x x C c P E e

o h e a e

h

t x x c C t i r c P E C

i c h

z a

x x i t p e h P a

B Q

o o p

r

o o P

a 8 8

g

8

x

8

x

+ +

r

0

0

x

x o

0 0 g

e

1

1

1 1

o

+ + G e

+ + r

G

x

+

x e +

x

x

+ + r t e

s

+ + e t e n u e n s l y

t

y

+ +

i o

+ + e e a n u C t z

i n l t t s t i i o

e x

e x d a C r t z d

i t i

t n

x

+

x + s i t i a s e n d a r S

d

i t

+ + n u r b i a a s n a q o g s S

u r b

x x

a

+ x x

g s q o

+ + 9 9 8 8 9 9 1 1

,

x x . 6 6 t

,

x x s

. x . 1 1 t t

d

e e , , s s . . . n t t n n

t

t

d x x l A A s a i s s o o n t s s , t t l L d d L a i s s n n s s e t t l l t a i a i , i s s s s

l e ,

t 6

x x e o i

l t 9 , y i l e o 9 h e t y o r i 1 t

x

l x i y h t 6 e e s g o l r t t h

1 + i

i

e + 374 373 y n r

a t

e x r

s

g x l f f d s

t h x

u

x x A f f i e

o d + n

r + a a i l n r o

L x

f f u u x d s u f f d b y t o t a o d a

a x

a i l n x o u u t t y t o t a d b

i

6 x

i x

9 * x h

x

+

x h x

+ +

x x

9

x

+

x + c c

y * x 1

x

+

x

+ +

x

x x a

x

P + 6

a

P

* + y

+

x

x x x

6 x x

+ x

1

x x +

+ x

x

x +

x x

+ x

x x

x + H

H * 9 +

x

+

x

+

x A

9 x

x

+

+ +

L

+

+

x

+ x

P

1 x

P

x

x

x

x

x

+ + 6

6

x

x

x x

1 x

P

x x P

0

x x

x x

1 x

A

+

x + e e e 1 L

e e e

x x

x x 6 g g g

g g g x 1 a a

a

x

x x a a a l l

l x l l l

A

x x b b b

L +

b b b + e

e +

m m x m c

)

+ x

m m m x c

)

* *

x x

r

* * x s e e e r s e e e

t + s s

s u + t s s s

u

* + s s s

n

* + o s s s e

n

+ + e

o

+ + a a a s

u x a a a

p

t

x

s +

p u

s

x +

s x f f f t

l + t o l c

o

f f f + l o

t + o l

l + c l o o o a n e o o o

e e n e

a t m t a m t t a W a t n W % % % n a t

n % % % n s

0 5 5 s o i A e A 5 0 5 i

e o x c 5 7

2 x c d

2 5 7

c c

d

x - -

-

a x x

c

x x

x x

- - -

x a

x x

i

r x

c

x

r x m i

t x 1 1

d x 1 x d

m

x x x x t g l

. . 1 1 1 x

l x x

x

x x

x . .

o x g 0 e e o n o 5 0

0 x . i r

i

x

x

x x . n . 5 0

i l

x

x r . x

o x F s l F i

l x 2 5 F (

s 0 l

s , .

t . x l s

, 0 2 5 F ( x e t l

o

x e

x x l l t l s

l

x x t e s l t

t

x o x a

l x e a l e e s h

b x b n u s

n x i a l h t

a x

u

x x b

i

A W O

x i x

a x x

A W O b t

e , x

x e x , t t i

a

x x i

t t x r

F L

i x

x

x x

s x r x

m x x

e

x

s x x F L e e

e h

m

x x x

d

h

x x

c x d

c . n

x . n

0

x x

C a

x

x x

C a

x x

0

x

x

x

x

x

x x

1

x

x

x

x

x

x x

1 x

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

x x

x

x

x

x x

x

x

x x

y

x x

x x

y

x

x

x x y

P x y

P

x

x

x

y x

x

x

x

y x x

y x

y x

s x

s

x

x

x x

x

x

x

x

x

x x

y x x

a

x x x

y

x x

a

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

x m x m i

i

x x n n A

A

x

x

x

x

x x Geologic map of the Boot Heel of southwestern New Mexico with locations of site clus- Geologic map of the Boot Heel of southwestern New Mexico with locations of site clus- ters and minimum distance movement of geologic materials for sites identified as Protohistoric. Fig. 5. ters and minimum distance movement of geologic materials for sites identified as Formative. Fig. 4.