Open Burgett Thesis.Pdf

The Pennsylvania State University

The Graduate School

College of the Liberal Arts

EL PASO POLYCHROME IN THE CASAS GRANDES REGION, CHIHUAHUA,

MEXICO: CERAMIC EXCHANGE BETWEEN PAQUIMÉ AND THE

JORNADA MOGOLLON

A Thesis in

Anthropology

Jessica Prue Burgett

Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of

Doctor of Philosophy

May 2006

The thesis of Jessica Prue Burgett was reviewed and approved* by the following:

Kenneth Hirth Professor of Anthropology Thesis Advisor Chair of Committee

Frances Hayashida Assistant Professor of Anthropology

Dean Snow Professor of Anthropology

Ann Killebrew Associate Professor of Classical Archaeology and Mediterranean Studies & Jewish Studies

George Milner Professor of Anthropology Head of the Department of Anthropology

*Signatures are on file in the Graduate School

iii ABSTRACT

El Paso Polychrome was the second most common non-local ceramic type at Paquimé, a 13th-15th century pueblo in northwestern Chihuahua, Mexico. Paquimé was one of the largest sites in the prehistoric Southwest. Most models of this center’s development and regional role focus on trade, and El Paso Polychrome is one of the most common non-local ceramic types at Paquimé. Researchers have generally assumed that El Paso Polychrome originates in the Jornada Mogollon culture area, centered in west Texas and southern New Mexico. This ceramic type’s status as a trade ware in northern Mexico has never before been tested, though the exchange of ceramic vessels is not the only possible explanation for El Paso Polychrome’s presence. The focus of this dissertation is testing this assumption that El Paso Polychrome is a trade ware at Paquimé and other sites in northwest Chihuahua. For this purpose a large sample of late El Paso Polychrome from Paquimé was systematically compared to samples from Villa Ahumada, Chihuahua, at the very southern extent of the Jornada Mogollon culture area, and to samples from several sites at Fort Bliss Army Air Artillery Range in the Jornada Mogollon heartland. Technological and design attributes were recorded for over 1600 El Paso Polychrome sherds from these three locations, and 300 of these samples were also thin-sectioned for petrographic analysis. This petrographic analysis provided information on mineral components, ceramic body recipe and grain-size distribution. When compared statistically, El Paso Polychrome from the Chihuahuan sites is not significantly different from samples from west Texas and south-central New Mexico. In addition, all El Paso Polychrome samples subjected to petrographic analysis were tempered with crushed granite, and there are no sources of granite within 30 kilometers of Paquimé or Villa Ahumada. This is well beyond the distance potters are willing to travel for raw materials in ethnographic studies. The frequency of El Paso Polychrome at Paquimé and its associated communities can be entirely accounted for by the movement of ceramic vessels rather than other causes, such as migration of potters or stylistic emulation.

iv TABLE OF CONTENTS

LIST OF FIGURES ...... vii

LIST OF TABLES...... xiv

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS………………………………………………………….xvi

Chapter 1 Introduction...... 1

Research Objectives ...... 7 Research Methodology...... 7 Results ...... 12 Thesis Organization...... 13

Chapter 2 Regional Systems and Ceramic Exchange in the Southwest ...... 15

Distinguishing between Migration, Emulation, and Exchange...... 18 Migration ...... 22 Exchange of Ideas (Emulation) ...... 26 Ceramic Exchange...... 29 Distribution of Ceramic Styles in the Casas Grandes Regional System ...... 33 El Paso Polychrome: pots, people or ideas?...... 35

Chapter 3 Overview: the Casas Grandes Culture Area...... 38

Early Accounts and the First Period of Activity ...... 39 The Second Period of Activity: The 1930s ...... 41 The Joint Casas Grandes Expedition: 1958-61 ...... 42 Social Complexity and Exchange at Paquimé...... 55 The Regional System: Beyond Paquimé ...... 58 The Importance of El Paso Polychrome in the Casas Grandes Culture Area ...... 62 Local Geology ...... 66 Conclusion...... 68

Chapter 4 Prehistory of the Jornada Mogollon Region ...... 69

Defining the Jornada Branch in Time and Space ...... 70 Jornada Mogollon Ceramics of the El Paso Area...... 75 El Paso Area Geology ...... 83 The Jornada Mogollon and Casas Grandes ...... 87

Chapter 5 Methods: sample selection and petrographic analysis ...... 90

Site and Ceramic Sample Selection...... 90 v Paquimé...... 92 Villa Ahumada...... 97 Fort Bliss...... 99 Petrographic Analysis in Archaeology...... 104 Petrographic methods used in this study ...... 110

Chapter 6 Results & Statistical Analysis ...... 114

Whole Sherd Analysis ...... 115 Rim Diameter ...... 115 Sherd Thickness...... 118 Cross-Section and Firing ...... 119 Inclusion Sorting ...... 124 Inclusion Roundness...... 127 Design: Line Width ...... 131 Petrographic Comparisons...... 134 Ceramic Body “Recipe” ...... 135 Grain Size Analysis ...... 139 Minerals...... 141 Paquimé ...... 143

χ2 value ...... 145

Significance (p)...... 145

Chapter 7 Conclusion...... 147

Was El Paso Polychrome a trade ware at Paquimé? ...... 151 Was Paquimé deriving its El Paso Polychrome directly from the Jornada Mogollon? ...... 152 Why carry El Paso Polychrome 200 kilometers?...... 157 Conclusion...... 162

Bibliography ...... 164

Appendix A...... 184

El Paso Polychrome Type Description and Photomicrographs ...... 184

El Paso Polychrome (Late or “Classic” variant) Type Description ...... 184 Photomicrographs...... 188 Sample 29...... 189 Sample 40...... 192 Samples 79 & 81...... 194 Sample 90...... 196 Sample 135...... 198 vi Sample 145...... 199 Sample 164...... 201 Sample 201...... 203 Sample 235...... 205

Appendix B Petrographic Analysis: Point Counting ...... 207

Appendix C Petrographic Analysis: Low Frequency Minerals...... 261

vii LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1-1: The location of Paquimé. The dotted line indicates maximum distribution of Chihuahuan Polychrome ceramic types, a proxy measure of the extent of Paquimé’s sphere of influence (after Schaafsma and Riley 1999)……………………….….....… 3

Figure 1-2: The Casas Grandes Interaction Sphere (after Schaafsma and Riley 1999), as defined by the distribution of Chihuahuan polychromes, which are ceramic types associated with the Casas Grandes Culture area………………….……..………..…… 9

Figure 2-1: Locations of the three main cultural traditions of the prehistoric Southwest

(redrawn from Fagan 2005)………………………………………………………….… 16

Figure 2-2: Locations discussed in Chapter 2……………………………………….… 23

Figure 2-3: Maximum Salado Polychrome distribution (redrawn from Crown 1994)…25

Figure 2-4: Ramos Polychrome from near Paquimé………………………………….. 33

Figure 3-1: Archaeological sites and regions important to discussions of the Casas

Grandes Culture area……………………………………………………..…………… 41

Figure 3-2: Paquimé as mapped by the JCGE, with excavated and unexcavated portions of the site marked (redrawn from Di Peso 1974)………………………..……………. 44 viii Figure 3-3: One of the multi-story room blocks at Paquimé. The T-shaped doorway visible in the center of the picture was between second-floor rooms. (The walls in the foreground were recently re-plastered for protection from rain erosion.)…….……. 45

Figure 3-4: The Mound of the Offerings at Paquimé. An interior chamber contained secondary burials of two cremated individuals in large polychrome vessels. (partially reconstructed by INAH)…………………………………………………….……… 46

Figure 3-5: Sites excavated in the del Carmen and Santa Maria river valleys (Ciudad

Juarez and Ciudad Chihuahua are modern cities)…………………..………………. 61

Figure 3-6: Gila Polychrome bowl fragments from sites in the Casas Grandes river valley……………………………………………………………………..…………. 62

Figure 4-1: Location of the Jornada Branch within the larger Mogollon subtradition

(Mogollon redrawn from Fagan 2005; Jornada redrawn from Lehmer 1948)……….. 71

Figure 4-2: The basins of the Jornada Mogollon heartland. (crosshatched areas are mountain ranges)………………………………………………………..…………... 76

Figure 4-3: Late variant El Paso Polychrome jar from Fort Bliss with everted rim.…78

Figure 4-4: El Paso Polychrome bowl from Fort Bliss……………………………… 80 ix Figure 4-5: El Paso Polychrome rim sherds from Fort Bliss (left) and Paquime (right), showing typical interlocking triangle/rectangle designs…………….………………81

Figure 4-6: Top row: early El Paso Polychrome jar rim profiles (redrawn from Whalen

1981) Bottom row: late El Paso Polychrome rim profiles from Fort Bliss sites used in this study………………………………………………………………………..………82

Figure 4-7: The mountain ranges defining the east and west margins of the Hueco Bolson and Northern Tularosa Basin…………………………………..……………………84

Figure 4-8: The Jornada Mogollon culture area (redrawn from Lehmer 1948) in relation to the extent of the Casas Grandes interaction sphere (defined by the distribution of

Chihuahuan Polychrome ceramic types, redrawn from Schaafsma and Riley

1999)………………………………………………………………………..………..88

Figure 5-1: Location of Villa Ahumada relative to the Jornada Mogollon culture area and

Paquimé’s far periphery…….………………………………………..…...………….91

Figure 5-2: Locations of El Paso Polychrome sample proveniences within

Paquimé……………………………………………………………….…..…………. 96

Figure 5-3: Fort Bliss sample site locations (map courtesy of Gary Hebler)………..101

x Figure 5-4: Fort Bliss El Paso Phase sites with Chihuahuan ceramic types (map courtesy of Gary Hebler)…………………………………………………………………….102

Figure 6-1: El Paso Polychrome Rim Diameters…………………………………..116

Figure 6-2: Vessel wall thickness…………………..………………………………119

Figure 6-3: Cross-section categories………………………………………………..121

Figure 6-4: Cross-section category distributions, Paquimé…………………………121

Figure 6-5: Cross-section category distribution, Fort Bliss…………………………122

Figure 6-6: Cross-section category distribution, Villa Ahumada...…………………123

Figure 6-7: Inclusion sorting distribution, Paquimé………………………………...125

Figure 6-8: Inclusion sorting distribution, Fort Bliss……………………………….126

Figure 6-9: Inclusion sorting distribution, Villa Ahumada……………………...….126

Figure 6-10: Inclusion roundness distribution, Paquimé…………………………...129

xi Figure 6-11: Inclusion roundness distribution, Fort Bliss………………………….129

Figure 6-12: Inclusion roundness distribution, Villa Ahumada…………………….130

Figure 6-13: A typical selection of sherds from a Fort Bliss context (site: McGregor

Pueblo, FB 10533)……………..……………………………………………..…….131

Figure 6-14: Boxplot of minimum red and black line width……………………….132

Figure 6-15: Percentage of thin section area accounted for by inclusions, all types………………………………………………………….………………..…….137

Figure 6-16: 3-D scatter plot of relative frequencies of matrix, silt, and inclusions in El

Paso Polychrome samples………………………………………………..………… 138

Figure 6-17: Mean grain size distribution, El Paso Polychrome.……………………140

Figure 7-1: Distances from Paquimé to Villa Ahumada and the El Paso area…..….156

Figure 7-2: El Paso area surface salt sources (locations from Bentley 1991). Hatched areas are mountains, triangles are salt sources, and circles are modern towns.……..160

Figure A-1: Fort Bliss Bowl Rim Profiles…………………………………………...185 xii

Figure A-2: El Paso Polychrome jar forms found at Paquimé (redrawn from Di Peso et al.

1974, vol. 8)………………………………………………………………………….185

Figure A-3: Sample 29, El Paso Polychrome from Paquimé, at 40X magnification. Top:

Plane light, Bottom: Crossed polars…………………………………………………189

Figure A-4: Sample 40, El Paso Polychrome from Paquimé, at 40X magnification. Top:

Plane light, Bottom: Crossed polars………………………………………………….191

Figure A-5: Sample 79, Casas Grandes Plain from Paquimé, at 40X magnification. Top:

Plane light, Bottom: Crossed polars………………………………………………….193

Figure A-6: Sample 81, Casas Grandes Plain from Paquimé, at 40X magnification. Top:

Plane light, Bottom: Crossed polars…………………………………………………..194

Figure A-7: Sample 90, Ramos Polychrome body sherd from Paquimé at 40X magnification. Top: Plane light, Bottom: Crossed polars……………………….…….196

Figure A-8: Sample 135, El Paso Polychrome from Fort Bliss (site FB 5000), at 40X magnification. Top: Plane light, Bottom: Crossed polars……………………………..197

xiii Figure A-9: Sample 145, El Paso Polychrome from Fort Bliss (site FB 6281), at 40X magnification. Top: Plane light, Bottom: Crossed polars……………………………199

Figure A-10: Sample 164, Undifferentiated Brown Ware from Fort Bliss (site FB 6363), at 40X magnification. Top: Plane light, Bottom: Crossed polars……………………201

Figure A-11: Sample 201, El Paso Polychrome from Villa Ahumada, at 40X magnification. Top: Plane light, Bottom: Crossed polars……………………………203

Figure A-12: Sample 235, El Paso Polychrome from Villa Ahumada, at 40X magnification. Top: Plane light, Bottom: Crossed polars…………………………...205 xiv LIST OF TABLES

Table 2-1: Mechanisms for the Distribution of “Non-Local” Ceramic Styles……….. 19

Table 3-1: Comparative chronology of Medio Period Paquimé and its northern neighbors in New Mexico……………………..…………………………………….………….… 52

Table 3-2: Polychrome ceramic types as percentages of total ceramic assemblage.…… 64

Table 4-1: Chronology of the Jornada Mogollon………………………………………. 73

Table 4-2: El Paso Series Ceramic Chronology (from Miller 1995; Miller and Kenmotsu 2004; Way 1979)…………………………………………………...………….………. 75

Table 5-1: Attributes recorded in visual inspection of El Paso Polychrome samples….. 94

Table 5-2: Paquimé Sample Proveniences………………………………….……………95

Table 5-3: Villa Ahumada Sample Proveniences………...…………………….………..99

Table 5-4: Fort Bliss Sites and Samples for Petrographic Analysis…………..…….…104

Table 5-5: Inclusion Size Classes……………...………………………………………112

Table 6-1: El Paso Polychrome Sample Sizes…………………………………..……..114

Table 6-2: Mean Rim Diameters…………………………………………………..…..116

Table 6-3: El Paso Polychrome mean sherd thickness…………...……………..……..118

xv Table 6-4: Relative frequency of core position categories at each location………….124

Table 6-5: El Paso Polychrome mean line widths (in cm)……………………………133

Table 6-6: Mean relative proportions of matrix, silt, sand, and tempering materials...136

Table 6-7: Mean proportion of inclusions in each size category, El Paso Polychrome, by sample location……………………………………………………………..….………140

Table 6-8: Mean relative proportions of most common mineral inclusions…….……142

Table 6-9: Frequency of El Paso Polychrome sherds in each sample containing the most common accessory minerals……………………………………………………………143

Table 6-10: Chi-square values: presence/absence counts of accessory minerals……..145

Table 7-1: Summary of sample comparison results………………………………….. 150 xvi ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

There are many people without whom this project would have been impossible, not the least of these are my esteemed and patient committee members: Drs. Ken Hirth,

Dean Snow, Frances Hayashida, and Ann Killebrew. Also at Penn State, Dr. David

Eggler of the Earth and Mineral Sciences program provided the training in optical mineralogy that was the cornerstone of this research.

In Chihuahua, INAH archaeologists Eduardo Gamboa Carrera and Rafael Cruz

Antillón, were instrumental to the project by kindly allowing access to the Paquimé and

Villa Ahumada collections, respectively. The staff of the Museo de las Culturas del

Norte was also of great assistance. José Luis Punzo, the director of the museum while I was conducting fieldwork, graciously provided workspace and permit assistance, and the guards from both the museum and the surrounding Paquimé Archaeological Zone smilingly helped me move dozens of heavy boxes in the search for El Paso Polychrome.

In El Paso, Peter Bullock and Jim Bowman were kind enough to give me access to, and assistance with, the collections housed at the Ft. Bliss Army Air Defense Artillery

Center. Gary Hebler provided GIS data and maps of the base’s archaeological resources, and the entire archaeological staff of the Ft. Bliss D.O.E. provided much-appreciated moral support and entertainment for their visitor from Pennsylvania.

I would also like to thank Dr. Mike Whalen of the University of Tulsa for the inspiration for my dissertation topic, and for his patient and obliging responses to my inevitable questions. Similarly, Dr. Tim Maxwell has been helpful above and beyond the call of duty to a complete stranger, even to the extent of carrying the Villa Ahumada samples across the border for me. xvii Last, but not least, I must thank my fellow students: my loyal editor, Scott

Hammerstedt; my translator, María Inclan, and my map guru, Matt McKnight.

Funding for this research project has been provided by the Pennsylvania State

University Research and Graduate Studies Office in the form of a dissertation research grant, and also by the Department of Anthropology’s Hill Grant and William T. Sanders

Award programs.

Chapter 1

Introduction

The aim of this dissertation is to determine whether the El Paso Polychrome ceramics found at the late prehistoric site of Paquimé, or Casas Grandes, are trade goods or locally produced copies. Between AD 1250-1450, El Paso Polychrome, a distinctive brown ware painted with red and black, is thought to have been traded to Paquimé from the Jornada Mogollon region centered on modern-day El Paso, Texas (see Figure 1-1), but El Paso Polychrome’s status as a trade ware has never been tested. It is also possible that, like other contemporaneous trade wares, copies of El Paso Polychrome could have been locally produced at Paquimé or other sites in northwest Chihuahua. This project is the first systematic comparison of Chihuahuan and Jornada Mogollon versions of El Paso

Polychrome in order to test the assumption that the type was traded 135-200 km to

Paquimé and other associated communities in Northern Mexico.

Paquimé was the primary center of the Casas Grandes culture area in northwest

Chihuahua, Mexico. The site contained more than 2,000 rooms, making it one of the largest pueblos in the prehistoric Southwest. At its height in the 13th-15th centuries AD,

Paquimé functioned as the ceremonial focus of its region, with up to 18 non-habitational

mounds and three ballcourts (Whalen and Minnis 2000). The distinctive Chihuahuan

polychrome ceramic types associated with Paquimé and its larger surrounding culture

area are found hundreds of kilometers away in Texas, New Mexico, Arizona and Sonora,

indicating that Paquimé participated in far-flung trade networks. 2 The original excavator of Paquimé, Charles C. Di Peso, portrayed the site as a

Mesoamerican mercantile outpost that extracted exotic goods from a large swath of the greater Southwest and sent them south to West and Central Mexico (Di Peso 1974). In

Di Peso’s interpretation, elites at Paquimé held political and economic control over much of the southern Southwest. More recent fieldwork shows, though, that Paquimé did not have a strong influence over communities more than a day’s walk from the center, and that Paquimé’s elites were participants in prestige goods networks, rather than receivers of tribute (see Chapter 3).

If El Paso Polychrome was truly a trade ware at Paquimé and in the rest of the

Casas Grandes culture area, another important issue is whether El Paso Polychrome vessels were transported all the way from the Jornada heartland in western Texas and southern New Mexico, or if they were produced in an intermediate area closer to the eastern edge of Paquimé’s regional system. The relationship between Paquimé and its far eastern hinterland, the area intermediate between the Casas Grandes and Jornada

Mogollon culture areas, is very poorly understood. Communities in this area may have acted as intermediaries in trade between the two culture areas, or they may have traded their own products to Paquimé and it’s Casas Grandes heartland. Description of the eastern hinterland’s role in interregional trade is necessary for reconstructing Paquimé’s regional system, and for learning about the roles played by liminal communities at the boundaries between systems.

Paquimé lies nestled in the foothills of the Sierra Madre Occidental, a major mountain range that is difficult to cross even today. Much of Paquimé’s sphere of influence extends to the north and east of the site (see Figure 1-1). The extent of 3 Paquimé’s sphere of influence is based on the distribution of a suite of polychrome ceramic types originating in the Casas Grandes culture area. The actual limits of

Paquimé’s economic or political sphere are much more restricted. The site of Paquimé itself is well excavated and oft-studied, but the center’s relationships with its more distant

Paquimé are much more difficult to draw than the artifact distributions.

The distinctive Casas Grandes ceramics, known as Chihuahuan Polychromes, are found from northeastern Sonora across to the La Junta de los Rios area along the Rio

Grande, and from central Chihuahua north to the Animas and Black Mountain Phases of

New Mexico and the Jornada Mogollon. This distribution is not necessarily the result of direct contact with Paquimé, though. At least for the well-studied Animas Phase sites, relations with Paquimé are shown to be based more on emulation of styles than direct movement of goods (see Chapter 2). That is, many of the Chihuahuan Polychromes found in these sites are local copies. However, there has been almost no research at all done on the movement of pottery or pottery styles between the Casas Grandes culture area and the Jornada Mogollon, it is possible that this, also, was not a direct trade relationship.

Trade between these regions is an important issue because Paquimé’s original excavator, Charles C. Di Peso, portrayed the site as a major mercantile center for the

Greater Southwest. Gila and El Paso Polychromes were the two most common non-local ceramic types found at Paquimé, and, therefore, central to the argument that the site was drawing resources in from a large region to the north. While Gila Polychrome originates as a style from eastern Arizona to the northwest, El Paso Polychrome is linked to the

Jornada Mogollon region to the northeast of the Casas Grandes culture area.

As the name implies, El Paso Polychrome is thought to originate in west Texas and southeastern New Mexico, in the vicinity of El Paso, Texas and the Rio Grande.

This region belongs to the Jornada Mogollon, which, like the Casas Grandes culture, is a 5 branch of the larger Mogollon cultural tradition. The Jornada Mogollon are different from their other Mogollon relatives in that they developed large pueblos slightly later, and even then maintained a less sedentary lifestyle than their pueblo neighbors to the west and southwest (LeBlanc and Whalen 1980; Lehmer 1948). El Paso Polychrome is associated with Jornada Mogollon sites dating between AD 1100-1450 (Miller 1995;

Whalen 1978, 1981).

Sites in the northern Rio del Carmen valley are in a zone Michael Whalen and

Paul Minnis (2001) have defined as a “far periphery” of Paquimé. This means their artifact assemblages show significant differences from Paquimé, but still indicate contact with the large regional center. These eastern sites sit directly between the Jornada

Mogollon and Casas Grandes regional systems. Villa Ahumada (see Figures 1-1 and 1-

2), in particular, has been used to define both the southern extent of the Jornada

Mogollon (Lehmer 1948), and the eastern edge of Paquimé’s interaction sphere (Whalen and Minnis 2001). Such boundary communities hold a unique economic position.

The eastern “far periphery” sites may have participated in either the Jornada Mogollon or

Casas Grandes regional systems, or, more probably, in both. One possibly economic tie the eastern hinterland/far periphery may have had with the two larger regional systems was the production and distribution of El Paso Polychrome ceramics.

El Paso Polychrome is the second most common non-local pottery style at

Paquimé, accounting for 38.2% of the identified trade pottery (Di Peso, et al. 1974). The most common “trade ware” at Paquimé is Gila Polychrome from southeast Arizona.

However, the site’s excavators suspected that many of the Gila Polychrome vessels at

Paquimé were local copies, which leaves El Paso Polychrome as the leading trade pottery 6 in the Casas Grandes Culture area (Di Peso, et al. 1974; Douglas 1992), though this non- local status has not been tested. El Paso Polychrome is easily identified in Medio Period assemblages by its coarse white temper and friable paste, and, though bowls, ladles, and other forms occur in the Jornada Mogollon area, globular jars are by far the most common vessel shape at Chihuahuan sites. El Paso Polychrome is found at all excavated sites in the central, northern, and eastern portions of Paquimé’s sphere of influence. The type was so common that Di Peso referred to it as “tin cans” in his description of Medio

Period ceramic imports at Paquimé, implying that El Paso Polychrome was a ubiquitous container in the southern Southwest (Di Peso, et al. 1974, vol. 8:141). All of these factors combine to make El Paso Polychrome ideal for studying economic relationships between Paquimé, its eastern hinterland, and the Jornada Mogollon region.

Interestingly, though the distribution of El Paso Polychrome south into Chihuahua was first observed by early excavators in the 1930s, no one has ever compared samples of the type from Chihuahua with El Paso Polychrome from the Jornada Mogollon heartland.

This means that the status of El Paso Polychrome as a trade ware has never been tested.

Since some other trade wares in the Greater Southwest have been demonstrated to be locally copied rather than transported long distances (see Chapter 2), it is possible that El

Paso Polychrome may have been locally produced in and around Paquimé during the

Medio Period. Alternately, even if El Paso Polychrome was being traded to Paquimé, it may not have come from the Jornada Mogollon area. The type is found in very high frequencies at sites along the eastern edge of Paquimé’s sphere of influence, in the northern Rio del Carmen valley. If El Paso Polychrome was being produced at these 7 peripheral sites, it is likely that Paquimé derived this ceramic type from them rather than the more distant El Paso Phase communities of west Texas and southern New Mexico.

Research Objectives

This research project was designed to test three alternative mechanisms for the presence of large quantities of El Paso Polychrome at Paquimé:

1) El Paso Polychrome was produced in the Jornada Mogollon area around

El Paso, Texas and traded roughly 200 km to Paquimé.

2) El Paso Polychrome was copied and locally produced at sites in the Casas

Grandes culture area, including Paquimé.

3) El Paso Polychrome was copied and produced at sites on the eastern edge

of Paquimé’s sphere of influence, and traded 130-140 km to Paquimé

None of these situations are mutually exclusive, however. It is possible that a combination of two, or even all three, of these economic behaviors accounts for the high frequency of El Paso Polychrome at Paquimé.

Research Methodology

Two types of analysis were used to systematically compare El Paso Polychrome samples from the Jornada Mogollon heartland with samples of the same type from

Chihuahua. First, whole sherds were examined and several attributes recorded for statistical comparison. Second, a subset of samples was subjected to petrographic 8 analysis to compare mineral composition, grain size distribution, and ceramic body composition between locations.

To analyze the potential trade relationships between Paquimé, its far eastern hinterland and the Jornada Mogollon, ceramic samples were collected from sites in each of the three regions. The Casas Grandes heartland is represented by Paquimé itself, since it is the central economic node in Di Peso’s (1974) depiction of the Casas Grandes mercantile system. Di Peso’s excavations with the Joint Casas Grandes Expedition (see

Chapter 3) produced an enormous ceramic collection from which to select samples.

The eastern periphery, on the other hand, presents a very limited number of excavated Medio Period sites. The sample used in this study to represent the eastern periphery comes from Villa Ahumada, a site on the northern Rio del Carmen in

Chihuahua (see Figure 1-2) that was excavated in the early 1990s by a joint project between INAH, the Museum of New Mexico, and the University of New Mexico. Villa

Ahumada has been used to define both the eastern extent of the Casas Grandes culture area and the southern extent of the Jornada Mogollon, effectively sitting astride the boundary between the two regional systems. Villa Ahumada was a moderately-sized pueblo housing between 100-500 people (Cruz Antillón, et al. 2004), and its ceramic assemblage was composed of both Chihuahuan and Jornada Mogollon ceramic types in high frequencies (Cruz Antillón and Maxwell 1999). Both Paquimé and Villa Ahumada will be described in greater detail in Chapter 3. 9

The Jornada Mogollon heartland in west Texas and southern New Mexico is represented in this study by 10 sites located on the Fort Bliss U.S. Army Air Defense

Artillery Center. Fort Bliss covers a very large geographic area extending north from El

Paso, Texas into Otero and Doña Ana counties in New Mexico, and encompasses large parts of the Hueco Bolson and southern Tularosa Basin. Fort Bliss’ archaeological resources are quite well-documented due to the demands of cultural resource management on military installations. Unfortunately, few of the El Paso Phase, AD

1200-1450 (Miller and Kenmotsu 2004), pueblos on the military reserve have been 10 excavated, so some of the samples for the 10 Fort Bliss sites come from surface collections. The 10 sites were selected based on their size and the presence of

Chihuahuan Polychrome ceramics in their assemblages.

Larger pueblo sites were chosen for sampling under the assumption that they would have been more likely to engage in long-distance trade frequently enough to leave evidence in the archaeological record, and because larger sites have larger ceramic inventories that provide more representative samples. It was also important that

Chihuahuan Polychromes be present at these sites, both because it represents some form of contact with Casas Grandes-affiliated communities, and because it demonstrates that the site is of the correct time period. While El Paso Polychrome has a time span between

AD 1100-1450 (Lehmer 1948; Miller 1995; Whalen 1981), the Medio Period in the Casas

Grandes cultural sphere began slightly later, lasting between AD 1200-1450 by recent estimates (Dean and Ravesloot 1993; Whalen and Minnis 2001). The background of the

Jornada Mogollon region is discussed in more detail in Chapter 4.

For each area a sample of plain ware was selected along with a sample of El Paso

Polychrome. It is frequently assumed in ceramic analysis that plain wares are locally produced, and so these were used as a control sample representing pottery that was of local origin within each area. In the Fort Bliss sites, this local control was undifferentiated brown ware, which may be either from plain El Paso Brown vessels or lower body sherds from El Paso Polychrome jars. In the Paquimé and Villa Ahumada samples the local control was Casas Grandes Plain, though a few of the sherds classified as this type at Villa Ahumada closely resemble undifferentiated brown ware from the

Jornada Mogollon area. 11 The samples of pottery from Paquimé, Villa Ahumada and Fort Bliss were compared in two ways. First the sherds were visually examined and a number of stylistic and technological attributes recorded, and then a smaller sub-sample was thin-sectioned and examined via petrographic analysis. The visual inspection focused on measurements such as wall thickness, rim diameter, line thickness in the painted designs, and various temper characteristics.

As a more in-depth characterization of the El Paso Polychrome samples, a subset of the sherds was also thin-sectioned and subjected to petrographic analysis. In petrographic analysis very thin slices of the ceramic material are examined with a polarizing light microscope. This allows identification of the mineral inclusions within the ceramic body based on their responses to plane or polarized light. The technique also allows measurement of temper grain size distribution and of the proportions of clay, sand and silt used in making the pottery. A more detailed description of these procedures is found in Chapter 5.

The data collected via these techniques were subjected to basic statistical analyses, including chi-square and t-tests, and analysis of variance (ANOVA), in order to determine whether the samples came from the same or different populations. The raw materials cataloged during petrographic analysis were compared between samples and also with geological maps of the three regions to determine whether manufacture in each area was possible. The results of these analyses are discussed in detail in Chapter 6. 12 Results

What the comparison of samples from the three locations demonstrates is that El

Paso Polychrome at Paquimé was entirely the result of trade. There was no local production of the type, which is not surprising, given the superior durability of both

Paquimé’s locally produced plain and polychrome wares. What is more interesting is the apparent pattern of this trade. Villa Ahumada’s El Paso Polychrome, while resembling the other two samples, is significantly different in several variables, but the samples from

Paquimé and the Fort Bliss sites are almost identical. The one major difference between

El Paso Polychrome at Paquimé and Fort Bliss is that the Chihuahuan center tends towards larger rim diameters.

Paquimé was deriving its El Paso Polychrome, or whatever these vessels contained, directly from the Jornada Mogollon heartland 200 kilometers away. Villa

Ahumada, though it sat on the juncture between the two culture areas, did not play a role in this exchange relationship. Also, while both Paquimé and Villa Ahumada had significant frequencies of El Paso Polychrome, the intervening sites in the Rio Santa

Maria valley did not. The trade between the Casas Grandes and Jornada Mogollon culture areas was direct between the Chihuahuan primary center and communities in the basins around modern-day El Paso. The communities in the closer spheres of interaction around Paquimé were bypassed, possibly receiving the Jornada goods that had been transported in El Paso Polychrome in some repackaged form from their primary center.

13 Thesis Organization

Not all ceramics with a reputation as trade wares have distributions entirely explained by trade. The distribution of pottery styles can be the product of exchange of actual vessels, but also could be the result of an exchange of ideas, or the migration of potters. Chapter 2 presents these possible mechanisms in greater detail and gives examples of all three from various locations in the 13th-15th century Greater Southwest.

Explanation of what is or is not trade within and between the Casas Grandes and

Jornada Mogollon cultures areas also requires background information on the

archaeology of these regions. Chapter 3 discusses how the prehistory of the Casas

Grandes region has been shaped by its archaeological history, particularly the

interpretations of Paquimé’s influential excavator, Charles C. Di Peso. Trade has played

a substantial role in all subsequent reconstructions of Paquimé and its regional system.

What little is known of the relationship between Paquimé and its hinterlands is also

discussed in Chapter 3. Much simple research into the culture history of the Casas

Grandes system still remains to be done, however, as it has long been the forgotten

portion of the Greater Southwest.

The Jornada Mogollon region, on the other hand, is well-excavated but relatively

poorly published, as the archaeology is perceived as drab and uninteresting compared to

its more complex neighbors, like Paquimé. Chapter 4 gives an outline of the definition

and prehistory of the Jornada Mogollon region. El Paso Polychrome and the other

closely related ceramic types of the El Paso series are defined in the context of Jornada

Mogollon chronology and culture history. 14 Chapter 5 covers the selection of samples from the three locations, as well as describing the methods used in both the whole sherd and petrographic analyses. The results of these analyses are compared statistically in Chapter 6, and interpretations of the results are included in the conclusions in Chapter 7.

Chapter 2

Regional Systems and Ceramic Exchange in the Southwest

This chapter summarizes the possible mechanisms by which pottery styles move between sites and regions in the prehistoric Southwest. These mechanisms consist of the movement of potters, the movement of ideas, and the movement of ceramic vessels.

Examples of each of these three mechanisms, as they can be seen in the prehistoric record of the greater Southwest, will be discussed. Two styles specific to the Casas Grandes culture area are also discussed in order to demonstrate the mixture of mechanisms that can operate on the same pottery types.

The distribution of ceramic styles has been a topic of great interest to

Southwestern archaeologists since the very beginning of research in the area. Ceramic styles are used for relative dating, the definition of culture areas both large and small, and the study of economic and social relationships between sites and regions. For example, archaeologists have long divided the Greater Southwest into three major cultural traditions (see Figure 2-1), the Hohokam, Mogollon and Ancestral Puebloan (or Anasazi) on the basis of differences in material culture. One of the more significant differences between these traditions is their ceramic technologies. For instance, the geographic distribution of the Mogollon, in spite of small regional differences, is partially defined by their use of utilitarian brown ware ceramics, which involves different clay choices than the red, white, or buff wares found in Ancestral Puebloan or Hohokam areas. 16

Figure 2-1: Locations of the three main cultural traditions of the prehistoric Southwest (redrawn from Fagan 2005).

Within these larger cultural traditions ceramic styles play a major role in defining smaller regional systems. For instance, the Chihuahuan Culture Area originally defined by early investigators such as Donald Brand (1935; 1943), Henry Carey (1931) and

Robert Lister (1946) was based on the distribution of the distinctive Chihuahuan polychrome types. The most common and visible of these types are Ramos, Babicora, and Villa Ahumada Polychromes. However, ceramics are just one way of defining a regional system. The distributions of different types of material culture do not 17 necessarily coincide, even if they belong to the same cultural tradition. Some traits or objects associated with a specific culture will have wider distributions than others.

Patricia Crown and W. James Judge (1991) define a regional system as an area within which there was more intensive interaction and exchange between populations than between those same populations and groups outside. This definition is necessarily vague because it is difficult archaeologically to identify genuine economic dependency vs. low-level interaction, and the many shades of gray between these poles. What the regional system label effectively means is that there was demonstrable contact between groups within a geographic area. The type of interaction contained by the boundaries of that area will depend on the characteristics used to define the extent of the system.

The type of material culture used to define it will also affect the size of a regional system. Because ceramics are relatively lightweight and portable, their use to define a regional system will result in a larger geographic entity than would more permanent features, or unwieldy material culture. Both ballcourts (Whalen and Minnis 1996) and groundstone artifacts associated with macaw cages (Minnis, et al. 1993) have been used to define regional levels of interaction with Paquimé, for instance, and the zones containing these features are much more constricted than the wide distribution of ceramic types specifically associated with the Casas Grandes culture area.

The subset of populations within a regional system that are economically dependent upon one another will be significantly smaller than a regional system defined by ceramic distributions. This is an important point to note, since Di Peso (1974) interpreted the wide distribution of the Chihuahuan polychromes as evidence of a very large region over which the elites of Paquimé held direct economic dominion. 18 The wide distribution of a ceramic style, though, only demonstrates interaction. It does not necessarily result from the physical exchange of ceramic vessels, and it shows neither economic dependence between communities nor economic dominance of one community over others. Wide distribution of a ceramic style can be the result of several mechanisms: the movement of potters, the movement of ceramic vessels, or the movement of ideas about how to make or decorate pottery (see Table 2-1). There are examples of all of these mechanisms in the prehistory of the greater Southwest.

Distinguishing between Migration, Emulation, and Exchange

The spread of ceramic styles in prehistory can be accounted for by three mechanisms: migration, emulation, and exchange. These mechanisms can operate singly or in combination to account for any individual style’s distribution, and different prehistoric situations will, no doubt, show different combinations of the movement of people, things or ideas. Fortunately, though, these three mechanisms can be distinguished from each other in the archaeological record. To tell the difference between migration, emulation and exchange requires examination of three facets of ceramic vessels: decorative style, technological style, and raw materials (see Table 2-1).

When discussing ceramic styles, it is necessary to distinguish between decorative

styles and technological styles. There has long been debate over the definition of style in

archaeology, and the difference between style and function (see Dunnell 1978; Hegmon

1995; Hodder 1990; Plog 1995; Sackett 1977, 1986; Wiessner 1990; and Wobst 1977,

for some of the major contributions to this debate). In many ways this is a false 19

Table 2-1: Mechanisms for the Distribution of “Non-Local” Ceramic Styles Signature Examples Migration • New ceramic styles White Mountain Red incorporating a blend of Ware (Triadan 1997; stylistic and Zedeño 1994), Point of technological attributes Pines, AZ (Zedeño 2002), from both resident and Origin of Salado immigrant traditions Polychromes (Crown • Vessels use local 1994) raw materials, but both decorative and technological attributes resemble those of immigrants’ home area

Exchange of Ideas • Vessels share a The Pinedale Style common style, but Horizon (Crown 1994, production in multiple 1996), Playas Red regions can be detected (Bradley and Hoffer 1985), with sourcing or Ramos Polychrome compositional studies (Woosley and Olinger • Vessels are 1993) constructed of local raw materials, technological attributes are shared with local wares, but decorative style is non- local

Exchange of pottery • Vessels differ from Galisteo Basin (Shepard local products in 1942, 1965), Chaco decorative, style, Canyon (Neitzel, et al. technological attributes 2002; Stoltman 1999), and raw materials Phoenix Basin Hohokam • Vessels can be (Abbott and Schaller traced to nonlocal 1994), production location, or be classified as nonlocal by sourcing or compositional studies

dichotomy, since functional attributes can be achieved in different ways, resulting in different technological styles, and even elements that seem to be purely decorative can have a function, such as signaling group membership. The important difference for demonstrating ceramic trade, emulation and/or migration is not style vs. function, but, rather, decorative style vs. technological style.

Decorative style is what is being depicted: geometric or realistic designs, motifs, color combinations, etc. It is the subject matter of painted decoration. Technological style encompasses the ceramic production sequence, from raw material choice and preparation through building the vessel to firing (see Dietler and Herbich 1989; Gosselain

1992; Lechtman 1977; Lemonnier 1986; Pfaffenberger 1992; Sackett 1977, 1986). This includes the technological choices involved in how a vessel is decorated. In a general sense, decorative style can be though of as providing the what, while technological style provides the how.

Ceramic styles that spread via the movement of potters can be distinguished from styles that spread via emulation based on the decorative and technological styles of vessels. Migrating potters will bring decorative and technological styles learned in their place of origin to new locations. In situations of potters migrating, vessels produced by these immigrants will differ from locally produced wares in both decorative and technological styles. The immigrant potters will use different decorative styles, but there will also be small differences from local potters in the choices made during ceramic production. These differences can be quite fundamental, such as one group producing pots by coiling and another group by the paddle and anvil technique, or the differences 21 can be minor, such as the choice of differently sized brushes for applying paint.

Emulation of ceramic styles will also result in the presence of non-local decorative styles.

This can be distinguished from migration because vessels produced by local potters copying a non-local style will still show local technological style.

Both migration and emulation will result in vessels produced from local raw materials. Ethnographic studies of indigenous potters indicate that, in most cases, clay and tempering materials are obtained from within 1 kilometer of the production location

(Arnold 1980). It should be expected, then, that immigrant potters will adopt local raw materials. Emulators, being local potters to begin with, will also use local materials.

The simplest way to distinguish exchange from migration and emulation is to use the difference between local and non-local raw material sources Both migration and emulation will produce vessels that may diverge from local decorative or technological styles, but the vessels will still be constructed of local materials. Vessels whose presence can be accounted for by exchange, however, will differ from locally produced pottery in all three facets of production. They will be different from local vessels in decorative style, technological style, and in raw materials. When the ceramic vessel itself is of non-local origin, rather than just the style, it will be constructed from non-local clay and temper. This allows exchange to be relatively easily identified via sourcing or chemical characterization studies of non-local stylistic types. 22 Migration

In a situation of population movement and migration, ceramic styles travel with potters to new locations. This can occur on a regular basis as part of seasonal movements across the landscape, over short distances as communities periodically relocate, or as part of large-scale population movements triggered by drought or conflict. All of these scenarios have occurred in the Greater Southwest at some time in prehistory. The 13th

and 14th centuries in particular demonstrate the movement of populations south from the

northern Southwest. One of the best documented cases of migration that can be seen in

ceramic assemblages that come from the Grasshopper region, just south of the Mogollon

Rim in east-central Arizona (see Figure 2-2). Migration into the Grasshopper region is supported by multiple lines of evidence, such as architecture and studies of burial populations, but it could also be seen in the ceramic assemblages through highly detailed study of design elements, large-scale chemical sourcing, and good chronological control.

Both Daniela Triadan (1997) and María Nieves Zedeño (1994; 1995) have done extensive sourcing studies on decorated pottery types in the Grasshopper region. White

Mountain Red ware, in particular, had long been assumed to originate to the north on the southern Colorado Plateau. What Triadan and Zedeño’s research has shown is that White

Mountain Red ware was not just a trade ware. Its wide distribution in 13th-14th century

central Arizona was accounted for by a number of mechanisms, including production in

multiple parts of the region where migrants had settled (Triadan 1997) and reciprocal

exchange among seasonally mobile communities (Zedeño 1994, 1995). 23

Figure 2-2: Locations discussed in Chapter 2.

Both the movement of potters and the movement of ideas about how to make pots can produce a situation of non-local styles being produced with locally available raw materials. Without unusually well-controlled contexts, there is no way to separate out the initial group of non-local ceramics that the migrants first brought with them. One way to distinguish between these situations is by examining the technological attributes of the pottery. Though immigrant potters will be forced to use locally available raw materials, they may continue to decorate pots in their traditional fashion, and the choices they make in pottery construction will differ in small ways from the local producers. Therefore, a 24 non-local style’s presence can be attributed to the movement of potters when compositional or sourcing studies indicate local raw materials, but both decorative and production techniques more closely resemble the nonlocal tradition associated with the immigrants’ homeland.

There is also evidence that in some cases the movement of potters does not result so much in the movement of traditional pottery styles as it does in the creation of entirely new hybrid pottery types. In the 13th-15th century Southwest, the appearance of new

ceramic styles that borrow traits from multiple traditions have been shown to accompany

the large-scale movement of potters (Zedeño 2002). One place where this can be seen is

the Point of Pines site in southeastern Arizona. This site is unusual in the clarity of its

evidence for in-migration. Emil Haury (1958) established the coresidence at this site of

local populations and Kayenta immigrants from the north through multiple lines of

evidence, including human remains and architecture. These Kayenta migrants arrived in

the mid 13th century AD. At the Point of Pines site, Zedeño (2002) has shown the

progression from ceramic styles carried long distances by migrants to new ceramic types

developed locally that combined elements of both local and northern ceramic design.

One of Zedeño’s conclusions from her study of the ceramic assemblage at this site is that

coresidence of ethnic groups in the region produced visible changes in structure of

ceramic assemblages within a generation or less. The interaction of potters from different

groups resulted in exchange of information and triggered development of new combined

ceramic technologies.

Another example of hybrid ceramic styles arising from large-scale population

movement is the Salado Polychromes (see Figure 2-3) . This family of painted ceramic 25 types originated in east-central Arizona and west-central New Mexico during the late 13th century AD. During this time period Tusayan/Kayenta Anasazi populations from the

Figure 2-3: Maximum Salado Polychrome distribution (redrawn from Crown 1994). northern Southwest, including the Mesa Verde area, were migrating east to the Northern

Rio Grande region of New Mexico and south to the Mogollon Rim region of east-central

Arizona and west-central New Mexico. The Salado Polychromes originated during this time of population upheaval in east-central Arizona. In her characterization study of the

Salado Polychromes, Patricia Crown (1994) predicted that pottery produced by migrant 26 populations would differ technologically from that produced by indigenous groups. What she found, however, was that the early Salado Polychromes are a unique combination of technological and design traits from both the Tusayan/Kayenta tradition and the indigenous ceramic types of central Arizona, such as the Cibola and White Mountain traditions. As at Point of Pines, a mixing of immigrant and indigenous potters produced new styles incorporating both decorative and technological traits of both traditions.

The spread of later variants of the Salado Polychromes, however, is a slightly different story. One of the most interesting aspects of the Salado Polychromes, is that, although they originated from the movement of potters into the Mogollon Rim region, the ultimate distribution of these types went far beyond areas where there was evidence of northern Anasazi migrants. Much of the distribution of the later Salado Polychromes can be attributed to the transmission of the style itself. This raises the interesting issue of how transmission of ideas differs archaeologically from the movement of potters.

Exchange of Ideas (Emulation)

As Zedeño (2002) demonstrated at Point of Pines, the transfer of knowledge that accompanies migration produces new hybrid styles as well as the spread of styles from the migration’s point of origin. In situations where there is continuity of a specific decorative style or technological attribute over a large geographic area, it is more likely that ideas of ceramic manufacture were being spread, rather than the potters themselves.

Stylistic emulation can be distinguished from the migration of potters by examining 27 choices made in the process of ceramic manufacture. When decorative styles are copied by local potters, the local technological style will still be evident.

Technological styles can be just as distinctive as the packages of decorative design attributes that usually define ceramic styles for painted pottery in the Southwest.

Each step in the ceramic production process involves a choice on the part of the potter.

These choices involve selecting and preparing raw materials, how pots are constructed and decorated, and how they are fired. At every step along the way there is potential for differentiation from other potters or from other pottery-producing groups. These small differences in choices in the production sequence allow the detection of different production locations for vessels that are decoratively similar.

In situations where ceramic styles are being emulated across large distances, colors, design, and decorative motifs may resemble vessels from far away, but there should be technological attributes that give away a vessel’s local origin. For instance, in

Medio Period northwest Chihuahua a local type, Escondida Polychrome, strongly resembles Gila Polychrome from southeast Arizona in its decorative attributes. Bowls of both types have white interiors decorated with black painted designs. However, the white interior surface is achieved with a slip in nonlocal Gila Polychrome, but it is the natural color of the fired clay in the local Chihuahuan Escondida Polychrome. Though the types are decoratively similar, they can be distinguished by the different technological paths taken to achieve a white background surface. Not all technological differences between outwardly similar design styles will be quite so easy to detect, however.

Shared ideas about how to make or decorate pottery can occur at widely varying geographic scales. During the late 13th century AD in the Grasshopper region in east- 28 central Arizona, technological traits in the manufacture of corrugated ceramics were shared only between small groups of strongly interacting communities (Zedeño 1995).

However, during the same time-period, the Salado Polychromes discussed above were being produced over much of the southern Southwest, including east-central Arizona

(Crown 1994). While this style originated with the movement of northern migrants into the Mogollon Rim area, the style rapidly spread beyond this region.

At an even wider scale, the Salado Polychromes belong to a much larger family of pottery types that all shared one overarching horizon style referred to as Pinedale. Patricia

Crown (1994; 1996) believes the designs on the Pinedale style ceramics were tied to the iconography of a regional cult. She suggests that ceramic styles spread as the religious ideology was adopted by new groups. These shared design icons include lightning, wind, clouds, and the sun, among other motifs that seem tied to weather control and fertility.

Pottery types demonstrating the Pinedale style are found over much of the southern

Southwest during the late 13th and early 14th centuries, and they include types from the

Northern Rio Grande, central Arizona, and also the Chihuahuan Polychromes. (Crown

1994)

It is not just the fancy painted polychrome styles that were transferred between

groups, however. Utilitarian ceramic styles could also spread widely without the

movement of potters or exchange in pottery. At least one of these widely distributed

utilitarian types existed within the Casas Grandes regional system. This type is Playas

Red, a partially red-slipped brown ware that sometimes exhibits textured decoration

under bowl rims and around jar necks. 29 Playas Red is distributed widely across northwest Chihuahua, northeast Sonora, southeast Arizona, southwest New Mexico, and into west Texas. It is very common at

Medio Period Chihuahuan sites, and at some Animas Phase sites in the boot heel of New

Mexico. It is also found at El Paso Phase sites in the Jornada Mogollon region further to the east. In an attempt to determine whether Playas Red was a Chihuahuan trade ware,

Bradley and Hoffer (1985) undertook an X-Ray Fluorescence (XRF) analysis of ceramic samples from the Casas Grandes and Jornada Mogollon regions. Using discriminant function analysis of the chemical signatures, they found two distinct Chihuahuan groups among the Playas Red samples, one representing the vicinity of Paquimé, and one slightly to the northeast near the modern town of Janos. In the Jornada Mogollon region, on the other hand, the Playas Red samples could be divided into three somewhat muddier statistical groups. No sherds with the Paquimé chemical signature were found in the

Jornada Mogollon region. Therefore, Playas Red was not a trade ware being manufactured in Chihuahua and exchanged into the Jornada area, but, rather, was manufactured independently in southern New Mexico and west Texas. This local emulation of non-local ceramic types results from shared ideas about how to make and decorate ceramic vessels rather than the actual exchange of pottery.

Ceramic Exchange

The exchange of ceramic vessels should be the easiest to detect of the three mechanisms that account for the spread of non-local ceramic styles. If vessels were produced at distant locations, their decorative style, technological style and raw materials 30 should all differ from locally produced ceramics. Sourcing and chemical characterization studies of ceramic materials are usually the techniques of choice for discerning trade in the archaeological record, and sourcing, in particular via petrography, has a very long history in the Southwest.

The most direct and common-sense explanation of widespread ceramic style distributions for much of Southwestern Archaeology’s history was, naturally, the exchange of the pottery itself. It was not until Anna O. Shepard’s pioneering work with petrography in New Mexico(Shepard 1942, 1965) that assumptions of ceramic exchange could actually be tested empirically. By analyzing the tempering materials of Galisteo

Basin ceramics and comparing them to raw materials available near various groups of sites, Shepard was able to demonstrate exchange between these sites and even relative proportions of pottery coming in to individual sites from different production locations.

This was the first case of “sourcing” archaeological pottery.

Again, using petrography, Shepard was also one of the first to suggest that the

Great Houses of Chaco Canyon (see Figure 2-2) were importing large amounts of utilitarian ceramics from the Chuska Mountains (see Figure 2-2) near the New Mexico-

Arizona border (Stoltman 1999). While Shepard looked only at the temper of the

Chuskan Gray ceramics found in Chaco Canyon, James Stoltman (1999) later reexamined the issue with a different petrographic approach. He compared ceramic and soil samples from Chaco Canyon to ceramics from a site in the Chuska Mountains, and examined the distribution of particle sizes within the clay body as well as identifying temper characteristics. What Stoltman found was that the clay fraction of Chuskan-style gray wares found at Chaco closely resembles the ceramics from the Chuskas, but is very 31 different from the clay fraction of local Chacoan ceramics and soil samples. This strongly supports Shepard’s suggestion that the 10th-12th century AD inhabitants of

Chaco were importing utilitarian ceramics over 75 kilometers, from the Chuska

Mountains. At it’s peak, between AD 1040-1200, Chuskan Gray Ware import accounted

for almost a third of Chaco Canyon’s ceramics (Neitzel, et al. 2002).

After AD 1200, Chaco Canyon also received a significant percentage of its

ceramics from even further away. Sites along the northern and eastern tributaries of the

San Juan River, more than 100 kilometers north of Chaco Canyon, produced pottery with

easily identified igneous rock tempers. These northern San Juan imports accounted for

approximately 16% of Chaco Canyon’s ceramic assemblage after AD 1200. (Neitzel, et

al. 2002)

It was not just utilitarian pottery that the inhabitants of Chaco Canyon were

importing, however. The distinctively painted Dogoszhi-style vessels, connected with

Chacoan ritual behaviors, were made in multiple locations within the regional system and

traded both to Chaco Canyon itself and to outlying Great Houses. Instrumental Neutron

Activation Analysis (INAA) has demonstrated at least 6 different compositional groups

in samples of Dogoszhi-style ceramics, and these groups can be tied to geographic areas

within the Chacoan Regional System. Most of the Dogoshzhi-style ceramics found in the

Canyon itself were, again, probably produced in the Chuska Mountains. (Neitzel, et al.

2002)

One of the problems of sourcing ceramics via petrography, though, is the

difficulty of narrowing raw temper materials to specific sources. We know that Chaco’s

gray wares were produced in the Chuska Mountains, but it is almost impossible to narrow 32 the production area to specific sites with that area (Mills, et al. 1997). In some unusual cases like the Galisteo Basin, however, pinpointing which specific sites produced different ceramic types by studying tempering materials is an attainable goal. The trick is that the temper must be either sand or crushed rock, and the raw material sources must be both highly variable and confined to discrete areas.

One place where this is possible is the Phoenix Basin in Arizona. This example comes from the Hohokam region of the Southwest. Classic Period (AD 1100-1450)

Hohokam were desert farmers living in communities distributed along extensive canal systems in river valleys in central and Southern Arizona. Along the Salt River in the

Phoenix Basin (see Figure 2-2), geological conditions are just right for the identification of ceramic exchange within and between canal systems. David Abbott and David

Schaller (1994) conducted petrographic and electron microprobe analyses of sand tempered pottery from multiple canal systems along the Salt River. They were able to identify vessels produced at specific sites because sand types in this portion of the

Phoenix Basin were variable and occurred in spatially discrete areas. The electron microprobe analysis confirmed a correlation between clay types and temper-based groups. With this study, Abbott and Schaller demonstrated that the largest site in the

Phoenix Basin, Pueblo Grande, regularly received pottery from outside its own canal system, while smaller sites mainly exchanged ceramics only with other sites on the same canal system. Similarly, in these canal systems, plain ware ceramics from the earlier

Sedentary Period (AD 950-1100) can be pinpointed accurately to source communities to demonstrate specialization in specific vessel forms at different sites (Van Keuren, et al.

1997). 33 Distribution of Ceramic Styles in the Casas Grandes Regional System

Of course, not all cases of widespread style distribution will tidily follow just one mechanism of transmission. The spread of Salado Polychromes, after all, was the result of both the movement of potters and the movement of ideas. The distribution of

Paquimé’s most famous ceramic type, Ramos Polychrome (see Figure 2-4), also straddles

two types of mechanisms. It is the result of transmission of ideas of ceramic manufacture

and the physical exchange of Ramos Polychrome vessels, but in this case different

mechanisms operate at different distances from Paquimé.

Figure 2-4: Ramos Polychrome from near Paquimé. 34 Di Peso (1974) believed that Ramos Polychrome was manufactured at Paquimé and distributed outwards from the site to its hinterlands. This would certainly have entailed a vast distribution network indeed, since Ramos Polychrome was one of the types used originally to define the entire Casas Grandes Culture Area (see Figure 1-1).

This idea of centralized production and distribution of Ramos Polychrome has been disputed by those working in the northern periphery of the regional system, particularly the Animas Phase sites of southwest New Mexico (see Figure 2-2). The excavators of the

Joyce Well site in the New Mexico boot heel believed that Ramos Polychrome was produced locally at the site rather than traded in (Skibo, et al. 2002), and others propose that interaction between Paquimé and its northern frontier was weak at best (De Atley and Findlow 1982; Minnis 1989).

The question of whether Ramos Polychrome was only produced and distributed by the inhabitants of Paquimé was examined via an XRF study by Anne Woosley and

Bart Olinger (1993). They tested samples of Ramos Polychrome from several locations in Chihuahua, the New Mexico boot heel, and the southeast corner of Arizona. What they learned from this study was that within 70-80 km of Paquimé, other communities did seem to acquire their Ramos Polychrome primarily from Paquimé and/or other sites nearby. There is also evidence that some vessel forms of Ramos Polychrome were produced by part-time specialists at Paquimé itself (Sprehn 2003).

However, outside the 70-80 km radius samples of Ramos Polychrome do not have the same “Paquimé” chemical signature and were probably locally produced copies. This demonstrates that Ramos Polychrome spread by exchange of ceramic vessels within a certain radius of its main production center, but that further geographic spread of the style 35 occurred by way of transmission of ideas of how to make and decorate some types of pottery.

El Paso Polychrome: pots, people or ideas?

As can be seen from both the Playas Red and Ramos Polychrome cases, within the Casas Grandes Regional System ceramic styles were spread both by physical exchange of vessels and by sharing ideas of ceramic manufacture. It is possible that either one, or both of these mechanisms were responsible for the ubiquitous presence of

El Paso Polychrome at Medio Period (AD 1200-c.1450) sites. Migration, however, is an unlikely contributor to the distribution of El Paso Polychrome, as there is no evidence of population movement or ethnic co-residence at Chihuahuan sites during the Medio

Period.

Di Peso (1974) and most subsequent researchers in Northwest Chihuahua have assumed that El Paso Polychrome was a trade ware. In this view it was produced in the

Jornada Mogollon region around El Paso, Texas and traded into Chihuahuan communities. Chihuahuan examples of the type have never been systematically compared to El Paso Polychrome from its supposed place of origin, though. The type’s sourcing is unsubstantiated.

The distance between Paquimé and communities of the Jornada Mogollon heartland is between 190-200 km. This is a long distance to be transporting bulky ceramic jars overland on foot, especially jars of a friable ceramic type like El Paso

Polychrome. El Paso Polychrome could be another case, like Playas Red, of a type being 36 independently manufactured in different locations over much of the southern Southwest, or, like Ramos Polychrome of a type that is traded over a limited distance from a main source and copied locally beyond a certain radius. Alternately, El Paso Polychrome vessels may truly have been traded into the Casas Grandes heartland, but they did not necessarily come all the way from the traditional Jornada Mogollon core near El Paso.

The type occurs in high frequencies at Chihuahuan sites to the east of Paquimé in the Rio del Carmen Valley, which is outside Whalen and Minnis’ (2001) proposed radius of direct influence from Paquimé (see Chapter 3).

El Paso Polychrome is the most common ceramic trade ware during the Medio

Period, and trade is central to Di Peso’s (1974) depiction of Paquimé as a merchant center. It is unlikely that economic relationships in the Casas Grandes Regional System were as hegemonic as Di Peso claimed. El Paso Polychrome can play an important role in a more accurate characterization of relationships between Paquimé and its eastern peripheries. If the type was being produced locally or being acquired from communities much closer to Paquimé on its eastern periphery, then mechanisms other than long- distance trade must account for the wide distribution of this pottery type. In particular, shared ideas of ceramic manufacture could account for the extensive distribution of El

Paso Polychrome.

Petrography, the tried and true sourcing technique of Southwestern archaeologists, can be used to shed light on this question. Following Stoltman’s (1989;

1991) methodology for characterizing clays as well as temper material, we can expect different profiles of grain size, composition, and minerals from different production areas

(see Chapter 5), especially if they are far apart as Paquimé and El Paso. Also, although 37 whole vessels are rare, the morphological and decorative characteristics of El Paso

Polychrome sherds alone may also show statistical differences between areas as widely separated as Paquimé, the Rio del Carmen, and the Jornada Mogollon. In combination, these characterizations should be sufficient to determine whether El Paso Polychrome ceramics at Paquimé were the result of the movement of pots or of ideas about manufacturing them.

This chapter has explained the different mechanisms that can result in the distributions of non-local pottery styles: the movement of people, pots, or ideas. The archaeological evidence that indicates the action of each of these mechanisms was surveyed through examples from various parts of the Southwest. Migration was responsible for ceramic distributions in east-central Arizona at Point of Pines and in the

Grasshopper region. Significant trade in pottery took place between Chaco Canyon and the Chuska Mountains, and also between Hohokam communities in the Phoenix Basin.

Emulation of styles could be seen in the spread of the Salado Polychromes.

More importantly, however, both trade and imitation can account for the distribution of at least two styles in the Casas Grandes culture area and its hinterlands.

Both Playas Red and Ramos Polychrome were both traded and locally copied. It is also possible that both of these mechanisms account for the frequencies of El Paso

Polychrome in the Casas Grandes culture area. Whether the type was traded in to

Paquimé or locally produced in Chihuahua can be tested by comparing the raw materials used in manufacture between locations.

Chapter 3

Overview: the Casas Grandes Culture Area

For many decades Northwest Chihuahua has received far less attention from archaeologists than the rest of the Southwest. The international border has been an obstacle to American archaeologists who do not relish the unfamiliar bureaucracy of a foreign country, and many Mexican archaeologists prefer to concentrate on the more colorful central and southern portions of their country where the prehistoric inhabitants ultimately attained state-level societies. What this means is, until recently, the literature on the prehistory of Northwest Chihuahua has been sparse and greatly dominated for years by the monumental excavations at Paquimé by the Joint Casas Grandes Expedition

(JCGE) and Charles C. Di Peso’s (1974) interpretations of them.

There have, of course, been exceptions to this broad depiction, such as Mexican archaeologist Eduardo Noguera’s surveys of the Casas Grandes area in the 1920s

(Bradley 2000). However, research in Chihuahua seems to come in waves separated by several decades. Jane Kelley and María Elisa Villalpando (1996) suggest that this pattern is tied to waxing and waning enthusiasm for seeking Mesoamerican connections in the

Southwest. This chapter gives a brief overview of this undulating history of archaeology in the Casas Grandes region. In particular, it discusses the work at Paquimé and Villa

Ahumada, since these two sites are the Chihuahuan sources of the samples used in this study. 39 To avoid confusion, it is worth noting that Casas Grandes is used interchangeably as another name for Paquimé. The site lies partially under the modern town of Casas

Grandes, which, along with the river, the valley, and the Culture Area, derive their shared name from the large, multi-storied architecture at the site. Paquimé is a relatively recent appellation and is commonly used as the site’s name only in writings from the late 1980s onward. Paquimé is also the name under which it is registered as a UNESCO World

Heritage site. For the purposes of this research project, however, the site itself will be addressed as Paquimé, and the term Casas Grandes will be reserved for speaking of the larger culture area of which Paquimé is a part..

Early Accounts and the First Period of Activity

The first written account of Paquimé came from Baltazar de Obregón, who visited the site in the 1560s as part of Francisco de Ibarra’s early exploratory force. The

Spaniards found the site abandoned, and the local hunting and gathering groups informed them that Paquimé’s inhabitants had moved north after an unsuccessful war with people from the other side of the Sierra Madre Occidental. (Hammond and Rey 1928) This first

European visit took place roughly 100 years after the abandonment of Paquimé as currently dated. Subsequent missionaries and Spanish settlers remained largely mute on the subject of antiquities, being more concerned with the souls and rebellions of living

Native Americans.

The first flurry of archaeological interest in Chihuahua and Sonora occurred at the turn of the 20th century. Much of the attention paid to Northern Mexico by American 40 scholars during this time period was focused on defining the southern limits of the native

Southwestern cultures. Adolph Bandelier reported on the ruins of Paquimé (Bandelier

1890) and on the pottery varieties, cliff-dwellings, and agricultural features found in the

Sierra Madre (Bandelier 1892). Other explorers such as A. Hooton Blackiston (1906;

1909) and Carl Lumholtz (1902) conducted small scale excavations at cliff dwellings and sites in the Casas Grandes river valley. At the same time, Edgar Hewett was conducting his PhD research on the largely unknown Casas Grandes culture area, trying to define the limits of this Chihuahuan culture and tie it to Aztlan, the mythical origin place of the

Aztecs (Bradley 2000; Kelley and Villalpando C. 1996). One of the great figures of early

Southwestern archaeology, Alfred Kidder, also visited northwest Chihuahua, conducting small excavations in the Babicora area (see Figure 3-1 ) south of Paquimé in 1916

(Kidder 1939). This resulted in Kidder cataloging Paquimé, although he called it Casas

Grandes, as a southern pueblo in his 1924 synthesis, An Introduction to the Study of

Southwestern Archaeology (Bradley 2000; Lister 1960). 41

Figure 3-1: Archaeological sites and regions important to discussions of the Casas Grandes Culture area.

The Second Period of Activity: The 1930s

Another burst of archaeological activity in Chihuahua took place in the 1930s.

Many projects focused on defining the Casas Grandes Culture Area in time and space to determine the origin of the culture and its relationships to other parts of the Southwest and/or Mesoamerica. This is the period when Donald Brand (1935; 1943) first mapped out the distribution of the Chihuahuan Polychromes (see Figure 1-2).

In the Casas Grandes heartland, both Brand and Edwin B. Sayles conducted large- scale surveys of the drainages in northwest Chihuahua surrounding Paquimé (Whalen and 42 Minnis 2001b). Sayles concluded from his work that the Chihuahuan culture, like the rest of the Puebloan Southwest, was an indigenous development (Sayles 1936).

Others focused on the peripheries of Paquimé’s influence, with Henry Carey

(1931) working in the Corralitos area (see Figure 3-1) to the north of Paquimé and the

Babicora area at the very southernmost extent of the Casas Grandes Culture Area. Robert

Lister, meanwhile, explored sites in the Carretas drainage (see Figure 3-1), also north of

Paquimé (Lister 1946). In the 1930s, research was also conducted at sites in the New

Mexico boot heel on the northern periphery. Donald Brand conducted projects at the

Joyce Well and Culberson sites (Bradley 2000), while Kidder worked at Pendleton Ruin

(Kidder, et al. 1949). Although this 1930s fieldwork continued to produce publications

for many years, most of these researchers moved on to other parts of the Southwest in the

1940s. Chihuahua would have to wait almost two more decades for another flurry of

archaeological activity.

The Joint Casas Grandes Expedition: 1958-61

For many reasons, including the difficulty of international research and the local

focus of growing anthropology departments in Southwestern universities (Kelley and

Villalpando C. 1996), there was a hiatus in Chihuahuan archaeology during the 1940s

and 50s. During the 1930s many of the big names in Southwestern archaeology had

sought the origins and boundaries of the Casas Grandes Culture Area, but it was not until

the ground-breaking work of the Joint Casas Grandes Expedition (JCGE) between 1958- 43 1961 that a comprehensive, in-depth study was undertaken of the Casas Grandes heartland itself.

The JCGE was a cooperative cross-border effort. It was headed by Charles C. Di

Peso of the Amerind Foundation and Eduardo Contreras of the Instituto Nacional de

Antropología e Historia (INAH). Di Peso supervised excavation of a large portion of the western half of Paquimé, while Contreras oversaw mapping, stabilization and reconstruction efforts at the site. A handful of neighboring sites were also excavated to define the cultural sequence before and after Paquimé’s occupation, but Paquimé was the main focus of the multi-year project.

The entire site contains approximately 2000 rooms, and up to 18 mounds, none of which were habitational (Whalen and Minnis 2000). However, only the western portion of the site was investigated by the JCGE (see Figure 3-2), because the eastern half of

Paquimé’s architecture lies under the modern town of Casas Grandes. At the beginning

of excavations in 1958 several families who had even refurbished prehistoric rooms on

the edges of the site had to be relocated. 44

Figure 3-2: Paquimé as mapped by the JCGE, with excavated and unexcavated portions of the site marked (redrawn from Di Peso 1974). Interior walls within the excavated room blocks have been omitted for the sake of clarity.

The excavated portion of Paquimé contains the ceremonial precinct of the site, which probably functioned as a ceremonial focus for the surrounding region. Paquimé’s time of greatest population, architectural extent and trading activity took place during the

Medio period, between approximately AD 1200-1450. The exact timing of the Medio

Period has been a matter of debate, as will be discussed later in this chapter. During this period, however, Paquimé’s excavated western half had large architectural room blocks of multiple stories (see Figure 3-3) with an integrated water distribution system involving

stone-lined channels that brought water from reservoirs into the room blocks. One room

block was also constructed with stairs down to a subterranean well. Monumental

architecture included three ballcourts and many mounds, one of which contained 45

Figure 3-3: One of the multi-story room blocks at Paquimé. The T-shaped doorway visible in the center of the picture was between second-floor rooms. (The walls in the foreground were recently re-plastered for protection from rain erosion.) secondary burials (see Figure 3-4 ) and two of which were effigy mounds of a feathered

serpent and a headless bird (Di Peso 1974).

Di Peso published the results of the JCGE excavations, and his analysis of them,

in 1974. While the set contains five volumes of data, it is the three volume synthetic

overview that has dominated discussion of the Casas Grandes region ever since its

publication. These volumes contain a vast amount of information, but it is three main

aspects of Di Peso’s interpretations that have drawn the most attention. These are: 1) 46 dating the Medio Period occupation, 2) the proposed Mesoamerican origin of Paquimé and its elites, and 3) the degree of social organization and political control of the surrounding region by these elites.

Figure 3-4: The Mound of the Offerings at Paquimé. An interior chamber contained secondary burials of two cremated individuals in large polychrome vessels. (partially reconstructed by INAH)

1) Dating Paquimé

Lacking carbon dating, most of the early archaeologists in Chihuahua had divided the area’s prehistory broadly into ceramic and preceramic periods. Using cross-dating of ceramic types from better-known portions of Arizona and New Mexico, Carey, Kidder and others had concluded that the apex of the Chihuahuan culture area occurred around

AD 1350 (Whalen and Minnis 2001b). Di Peso, focusing on the ceramic era, refined the 47 previous chronologies and developed a culture historical framework that divided the prehistoric ceramic era into three main periods, the Viejo, Medio, and Tardio, with a fourth period, the Españoles, covering the time of Spanish contact and early missionization. Di Peso’s chronological sequence, however, relied on tree-ring dates from beams used in the construction of Paquimé, and produced earlier dates for the fluorescence of the site than previously proposed. Di Peso dated the Medio Period, intended to bracket the height of Paquimé’s power and influence, to between AD 1060-

1340 (Di Peso 1974).

Dissent against these dates appeared very shortly after the publication of the

Casas Grandes volumes in 1974. The biggest problem was the discrepancy between Di

Peso’s Medio Period dates and the accepted dates for Gila and El Paso polychrome ceramics, which were common in Medio Period contexts at Paquimé (Doyel 1976;

Lekson 1984). In addition, Beatriz Braniff Cornejo (1986) demonstrated that southwestern ceramics co-occurring with Chihuahuan Polychromes at Ojo de Agua, a site in northwest Sonora, Mexico, also indicated a later date for the Medio Period.

The likely cause of Di Peso’s early dates for Paquimé’s peak are the beams he used for tree-ring dates. Several authors have pointed out that much of the outer portion of the tree was removed in preparation of the beams, and so Di Peso’s dates were significantly earlier than the actual cutting of the tree (Dean and Ravesloot 1993; Lekson

1984; Ravesloot, et al. 1995). It is also possible that Di Peso was willing to trust his anomalously early tree-ring dates because they supported his belief that Paquimé, in his chronology peaking between AD 1060-1340, was partially contemporaneous with the heights of the Classic Period Mimbres, the Sedentary Period Hohokam and Classic 48 Bonito Phase Chaco Canyon, all of which ended between AD 1100-1140 (Wilcox

1986:27). Revised versions of Di Peso’s chronology, however, place the Medio Period significantly later, beginning between AD 1130-1200 and ending between AD 1400-1450

(see Dean and Ravesloot 1993 for the more commonly accepted later dates; Lekson 1984 for the earlier dates; Ravesloot, et al. 1995).

2) Mesoamerican Origins.

One of the reasons Di Peso preferred to think of Paquimé as contemporary with

Chaco Canyon, the Mimbres, and Sedentary Period Hohokam, is that he saw the entire southwest as a periphery of Mesoamerica. In Di Peso’s view, these complex manifestations of Southwestern cultures were the direct result of merchants from

Mesoamerica organizing and exploiting the local populations for more efficient production of turquoise, slaves, salt, shell and other goods that could be sent back to West and Central Mexico. (McGuire 1993; Riley 1993; Wilcox 1986)

Di Peso referred to these agents of Mesoamerican mercantilism as “puchteca”, though the time frame he defined for the Medio Period was far too early for these to be genuine pochteca from the Aztec empire. Rather, Di Peso posited the arrival in

Chihuahua around AD 1060 of groups of merchants from West Mexico who inspired the initial construction of Paquimé, and several later massive construction efforts at the site

(Di Peso 1974; McGuire 1993). The idea of the Southwest receiving cultural traits from further south was, of course, not new. The presence of ballcourts, copper bells, and feathered serpent and Tlaloc imagery all indicate that there was some contact with

Mesoamerica. It is also probable that these traits were transported by mobile merchants 49 of some sort. This position is argued most prominently by J. Charles Kelley, who contends a trade route/network existed linking the Mixteca-Puebla of central Mexico with

West Mexico and continuing up the coast and Sierra Madre Occidental all the way into

Arizona and New Mexico (Kelley 1966, 1986, 1995). In later writings Kelley adds, however, that it was unlikely that individual merchants made this extraordinarily long journey, and it is better to think of this trade route as a linked chain of merchants transporting goods and information in a down-the-line fashion (Kelley 1995, 2000).

Since the advent of world systems theory in archaeology, it is also quite common to see the Southwest relegated to being a periphery of Mesoamerica (Braniff Cornejo 1993,

2002; Pailes and Whitecotton 1979, 1995; Weigand, et al. 1977).

Thus, the controversy surrounding Di Peso’s “puchteca” theory derives not from

Mesoamerican connections, traveling merchants, or even the definition of the Southwest as a periphery (but see McGuire 1980; 1993 for a summary of the debate and arguments against a strong Mesoamerican connection). Instead, the biggest point of dissent against

Di Peso’s Mesoamerican merchant model is not contact or trade with West Mexico, but the powerful role he gives outsiders in the origin of Paquimé and the Casas Grandes

Culture centered upon it. This exogenous development model relies on the assumption that there was little population present in northwest Chihuahua before the Medio Period, and that there was no significant local culture from which Paquimé could have developed. Di Peso himself demonstrated the presence of a preceding ceramic period he named Viejo, so there was a cultural presence in the area. The perceived lack of population, however, was an artifact of the lack of archaeological fieldwork conducted in

Chihuahua. Viejo Period sites are not as visible as Medio Period ones because they 50 consist mainly of pithouses rather than surface adobe architecture. Recent surveys and field projects during the 1990s demonstrated significant Viejo period habitation in the river valleys of northwest Chihuahua, and it is likely that Viejo Period components underlie many of the Medio Period settlements that have drawn so much more attention

(Whalen and Minnis 2003). Ceramic assemblages also maintain a great deal of continuity between the two periods. The plain and textured utilitarian wares are virtually identical, and the Chihuahuan Polychrome types that appear during the Medio Period have clear antecedents in the simpler painted types of the Viejo Period. Michael Whalen and Paul Minnis (2003) maintain that the ceramics and other artifact types differ between the Viejo and Medio periods only in elaboration, rather than in essential nature.

Given that there was an existing population prior to the Medio Period, and this population’s material culture seems to be antecedent to that of the later residents, it is far more likely that Paquimé and the Medio Period are indigenous cultural developments.

The Casas Grandes culture area was not established by migratory merchants from West

Mexico, although it was almost certainly influenced by sporadic contact with that region.

3) Political & Economic Hegemony.

Though he called them “puchteca”, it is not only the geographic origin of

Paquimé’s leaders that is central to Di Peso’s interpretation of Paquimé. The level and type of power of these elites, how they maintained that power, and how far their direct politico-economic influence extended from Paquimé are also integral to the model. In particular, production and exchange of goods are central to Di Peso’s idea of Paquimé’s role within the southern Southwest and the role of elites within Paquimé itself. 51 In Di Peso’s model, trade was the very reason for Paquimé’s existence. Using a

Mesoamerican religious cult to legitimize their power, merchant elites at Paquimé controlled the political and economic system of the site and the region. According to Di

Peso’s formulation, these elites dominated an area of roughly 88,000 km2, roughly a

radius of 170 km around Paquimé (Di Peso 1974; Whalen and Minnis 2001b:52). At the

regional scale, the Paquiméan elites extracted agricultural tribute and trade goods from

communities in this large surrounding area, and used northwest Chihuahua as a staging

area for extraction of goods from other parts of the Southwest (Di Peso 1974). The types

of goods being extracted from the broader region included turquoise, salt, and shell.

These elites also extracted specialized trade goods from artisans within Paquimé.

Inside the site itself, Di Peso envisioned a guild-like system of craft specialists,

warehouses, and a marketplace. These specialists produced goods from raw materials

extracted from farther afield, especially shell and turquoise, and also produced

Polychrome pottery, macaw feathers, and copper objects locally (Di Peso 1974).

This picture of a powerful, politically and economically integrated polity run by

merchant elites has come under a great deal of fire in the last few decades. Many

archaeologists have disputed Paquimé’s direct influence over its peripheries. To the

north, those who work in southwest New Mexico argue that the Animas and Black

Mountain Phases (see Table 3-1 for chronology) were influenced by their Chihuahuan

neighbor, but this influence may not have been particularly strong, and the northern area

remained politically autonomous (Creel 1999; De Atley and Findlow 1982; Douglas

1995; Skibo, et al. 2002). In central Chihuahua, the southern periphery of the Casas

Grandes Culture area is much less elaborate than the heartland. Its lack of public 52

Dates Source Medio Period AD 1200-1450 (Dean and Ravesloot 1993) Animas Phase AD 1150-1450 (Douglas 2004) Black Mountain Phase AD 1150-1300 (Creel 1999) El Paso Phase AD 1250-1450 (Miller and Kenmotsu 2004) Table 3-1: Comparative chronology of Medio Period Paquimé and its northern neighbors in New Mexico architecture like ballcourts and mounds may indicate a less complex level of social organization (Kelley, et al. 2004; Kelley, et al. 1999). To the east, excavators at Villa

Ahumada in the Rio del Carmen valley, also claim autonomy from the economic domination of Paquimé, citing a blending of characteristics borrowed from both the

Casas Grandes Culture and the El Paso Phase Jornada Mogollon (Cruz Antillón, et al.

2004; Cruz Antillón and Maxwell 1999).

In keeping with these arguments from the peripheries, Michael Whalen and Paul

Minnis (Whalen and Minnis 1996c, 1999, 2001b) have proposed a nested set of rings around Paquimé, in which influence grows weaker as one travels further from the center.

The site probably only had direct influence over communities within a day’s walk, or approximately 30 km. A second zone up to 90 km away marginally participated in

Paquimé’s ritual and exchange activities, and contains the outward limit of Paquimé’s political economy. A further periphery, including Villa Ahumada and the west-central

Chihuahuan sites, still has some contact with Paquimé, but shows distinctive local differences in material culture. Finally, the most distant connections with Paquimé include neighboring regions where Chihuahuan ceramics appear as a tiny fraction of local 53 assemblages. This outer fringe includes the Animas Phase of southern New Mexico and the El Paso Phase of the Jornada Mogollon region.

The mercantile nature of Paquimé proposed by Di Peso has also been successfully disputed. The site’s proposed role as a trade outpost of West Mexico is unlikely, since

99.9% of the intrusive ceramics excavated by the JCGE were from northern (i.e.

Southwestern) sources (Di Peso, et al. 1974, vol. 8:141), indicating little significant exchange with the south. There is also little or no evidence that a formal marketplace along the Mesoamerican model envisioned by Di Peso existed at Paquimé (Whalen and

Minnis 2001b).

Specialized production has also been a focus of critiques of Di Peso’s mercantilist perspective. At least two of the commodities Di Peso saw as being produced by specialists at Paquimé for exchange purposes are unlikely to have played this role.

Victoria Vargas (1995) disputes the evidence for copper artifact production at Paquimé, instead maintaining that the copper bells found in Chihuahua and elsewhere in the southwest are products of trade with West Mexico. It is also probable that turquoise was not used as an exchange commodity at Paquimé. Though significant quantities were found, the majority of turquoise was recovered from contexts indicating religious and domestic consumption at Paquimé rather than production or exchange (Bradley 1993;

Minnis 1988), and turquoise was dispersed throughout the site, indicating no restriction of access to certain segments of society (Whalen and Minnis 1996b).

There are, however, several types of goods which were definitely produced at

Paquimé and some may have been produced by at least part-time specialists. However, rather than production for elite consumption, these goods seem to be part of a prestige 54 goods economy, with labor organized within kin-groups (Bradley 1993; Minnis 1989;

Sprehn 2003; Whalen and Minnis 1996b, c, 2001b) Among the prestige goods manufactured at Paquimé were shell jewelry (Bradley 1993; Minnis 1988), macaw feathers (Minnis 1988; Minnis, et al. 1993), and painted ceramics of the Chihuahuan

Polychrome series (Sprehn 2003; Woosley and Olinger 1993). Of these three types of goods, only two vessel forms of polychrome ceramics have evidence of specialized production (Sprehn 2003). However, it has also been argued that standardization of square-cornered metate forms at Paquimé may indicate specialized production of some utilitarian objects (VanPool, et al. 2002).

Both macaw pens and shell artifact manufacture do not seem to have been restricted spatially within, or limited to, Paquimé (Bradley 1993; Minnis, et al. 1993).

There were, however, a few large stockpiles of unworked shell in some of the room blocks at Paquimé, which have been used as evidence for a prestige goods model of the site’s political economy (Bradley 1993).

Even though many of his interpretations have been challenged. Di Peso’s initial analysis of his groundbreaking work at Paquimé has had a huge influence on subsequent research in Chihuahua. Because of his focus on Mesoamerica, traders, and trade goods, much discussion of the nature of Paquimé and its surrounding region has been couched in economic terms. 55 Social Complexity and Exchange at Paquimé

Paquimé is one of the most socio-politically complex archaeological sites in the

Greater Southwest. Determination of the character of social and economic integration of the Casas Grandes regional system is essential to a description of the full range of societies to be found in the prehistoric Southwest. The more commonly accepted picture of Paquimé’s political economy today is that of a kinship-based, prestige goods economy.

Prestige goods systems are a type of political economy based on wealth finance

(Brumfiel and Earle 1987), in which political power is connected to the manipulation of foreign goods that can only be obtained through interregional exchange (Frankenstein and Rowland 1978; Gledhill 1978; McGuire 1986). Elites acquire goods or knowledge from outside the local region and build reputation, power, and obligation by controlling access to these goods in their own community. Often these goods are necessary for major life events, rituals or rites of passage. Within prestige goods economies long distance trade plays an essential role in establishing and maintaining elite, or incipient elite, societal roles. Therefore, the study of trade remains an essential component of describing the internal social structure and role of Paquimé within its regional system.

The distribution of rare goods at Paquimé, within the Casas Grandes regional system, and in the northern peripheries has been used by several researcher to support the model of Paquimé as a prestige goods economy. At Paquimé itself, for instance, Ronna

J. Bradley (1993) points out that 96% of the millions of pieces of shell found at the site was found in just two rooms in Unit 8 (the House of the Well). These same two rooms also contained other non-local materials classed as prestige goods, such as a cache of 50 56 Gila Polychrome bowls (Di Peso 1974, vol. 2). Bradley (1993) argues that controlled access is key to a prestige goods economy, and the extremely constricted distribution of shell indicates that this item was used as a prestige good at Paquimé. Similarly, David R.

Wilcox (1995) has described a system of exchange of ceremonial goods that links elites at Paquimé with the elites of neighboring local systems. Wilcox argues that Paquimé had monopolistic control over the regional distribution of several types of goods, especially copper bells, macaws and shell. These materials, particularly copper bells and macaws, are rarely found further north than the Jornada Mogollon and southern Salado areas from which Paquimé is assumed to have acquired El Paso and Gila Polychromes.

Interestingly, the origin of some of the shell (Bradley 1993) and all of the copper bells

(Vargas 1995) found within Paquimé’s regional system was West Mexico, while macaws ultimately originated even farther south in Mexico or Central America. It is doubtful that the actual elites of Paquimé came from Mesoamerica, but they seem to have derived some of their regional prestige by trafficking in goods from the south.

By far the most unusual and important aspect of Paquimé in the grand scheme of

Southwestern prehistory is its evidence for elites and production of prestige goods. These are not complex elites along the lines of the Classic Maya by any stretch of the imagination. Nonetheless, for the American Southwest, with its ethnographic history of egalitarian pueblos, and its long-standing debate over whether social complexity existed prehistorically (see Brandt 1994; Cordell and Plog 1979; Feinman, et al. 2000; Lightfoot and Upham 1989; Mathien 1993; McGuire and Saitta 1996; Neitzel 1999; Plog 1995 for just a few of the many reinterpretations of prehistoric pueblo social organization), 57 Paquimé stands out as the one Southwestern site with unequivocal evidence of social differentiation.

With its large size and architectural complexity, Paquimé was inarguably a primate center during the 13th-15th centuries AD. It is between 8-10 times larger than the next biggest site in the region (Whalen and Minnis 2000, 2001b). Within the Casas

Grandes regional system there is only one site that has a mound outside Paquimé

(Whalen and Minnis 2004), and Paquimé’s multiple I-shaped ballcourts are unusual in number, as well as being of the most complex ballcourt type in Chihuahua (Whalen and

Minnis 1996a). Paquimé and several other contemporaneous sites in Chihuahua are also unusual among prehistoric pueblos because the residents were breeding and raising turkeys and macaws in small adobe pens, though Paquimé was participating in this activity at a larger scale than its neighboring communities (Di Peso 1974; Minnis, et al.

1993).

Along with monumental architecture and the production of prestige goods, analysis of the mortuary population at Paquimé also seems to support some level of social differentiation. One of the mounds in the western portion of the site contained the remains of three cremated individuals interred in large polychrome vessels. This is a very unusual burial treatment that stands out from the rest of the population. Other unusual mortuary treatments include several graves containing primary burials of multiple adults, and a handful sub-floor burials more elaborately prepared and accompanied by more burial goods than most of the mortuary population. (Di Peso, et al. 1974:8; Ravesloot

1988). The majority of burials at Paquimé were quite simple and lacked grave goods, but in an analysis of the burials which did contain grave goods John C. Ravesloot (1988) 58 concluded that “symbols of authority” were present in graves of both genders and all ages, indicating a system of ascribed rank. Ravesloot also agreed with Di Peso (1974:8) that burials within the western half of Paquimé, since it is the ceremonial portion of the site, likely represented the upper social stratum of the population.

On the other hand, Whalen and Minnis (Whalen and Minnis 2000; 2001b) mildly dispute Ravesloot’s interpretation of ascribed status at Paquimé. They point out that most of the grave goods are of local manufacture, and some of the artifact types Ravesloot regards as symbols of authority could just as easily be interpreted as ritual paraphernalia.

It is likely that there was a system of ranking at Paquimé, but it was not necessarily very elaborate, and it was not necessarily hereditary.

There is no doubt that Paquimé is archaeologically complex, but debate remains about what level or type of sociopolitical organization these material remains represent.

There is evidence of prestige goods production and differential burial of some individuals, and monumental ritual architecture, so there is some form of ranked society.

It is also most likely that the political economy extended beyond the boundaries of

Paquimé itself. Although debating the extent of this system has been popular since publication of the Casas Grandes volumes in 1974, only recently have field projects begun that use sites beyond Paquimé to research the system as a whole.

The Regional System: Beyond Paquimé

It is common in most parts of the world that the largest archaeological sites receive the most attention and the earliest research. Northwest Chihuahua, with its 59 Paquimé-centric prehistory is no different. Earlier researchers in the area like Brand and

Sayles conducted surveys and small-scale test excavations, but until the 1990s the Joint

Casas Grandes Expedition was the only large scale excavation of any individual site.

Recent archaeological projects have focused on defining the extent of Paquimé’s political, social and economic influence as part of their research goals. During the 1990s two major projects conducted large-scale surveys and subsequently excavated several sites. The Canadian Proyecto Arqueológico Chihuahua (PAC), run by Jane Kelley of the

University of Calgary and Joseph Stewart of Lakehead University, focused on west- central Chihuahua, and characterizing the Viejo and Medio Period habitation of the southern extent of the Casas Grandes Culture area (see Burd Larkin, et al. 2004; Kelley, et al. 2004; Kelley, et al. 1999; MacWilliams and Kelley 2004; MacWilliams, et al.

2002). In the Casas Grandes heartland, the Reconocimiento Regional de Paquimé (RRP), run by Paul Minnis of the University of Oklahoma and Michael Whalen of the University of Tulsa, surveyed the Casas Grandes river valley and several other nearby drainages in northwest Chihuahua (Minnis and Whalen 1989; Whalen and Minnis 1996a, b, c, 1999,

2000, 2001b). Subsequent to their surveys, Whalen and Minnis have also excavated at several sites in the core zone around Paquimé, mostly to the southwest and west of the center, including sites 204 and 242, respectively the second largest site in the Casas

Grandes core and the only other site possessing a mound (Whalen and Minnis 2001a,

2004).

To the east of Paquimé, and directly of interest to trade in El Paso Polychrome, a handful of sites in the Rio Santa Maria and Rio del Carmen river valleys have been excavated by a joint projects between the Instituto Nacional de Antropología e Historia 60 (INAH), the University of New Mexico, and the Museum of New Mexico (Figure 3-5).

The sites along the Rio Santa Maria are Galeana and Casa Chica. Galeana, estimated to

have housed between 500-1,000 people, is the largest of the eastern sites excavated, while

Casa Chica represents the opposite end of the spectrum with just one or two households

in residence (Cruz Antillón, et al. 2004). Both are Medio Period in age, and are

approximately 50-60 km southeast of Paquimé. This lies within Whalen and Minnis’

(2001b:194) “near periphery” sphere of interaction, meaning they represent the outer

limit of participation in Paquimé’s political economy.

The easternmost site excavated by the INAH/UNM/MNM projects, Villa

Ahumada, lies approximately 140 km east-northeast of Paquimé. Also, Medio Period in

age, Villa Ahumada probably housed between 100-500 people (Cruz Antillón, et al.

2004). In Whalen and Minnis’ (2001b:194) model of nested spheres, this site is a “far

periphery” with material culture differences from the Casas Grandes heartland, though it

still maintained some contact with Paquimé. After his surveys in the 1930s, Donald

Brand (1943) used Villa Ahumada, or Loma Moctezuma, as he called it, to define the

easternmost extent of the Casas Grandes culture area. This decision was based on

theceramic assemblage at the site, which Brand (1935) characterized as having the

pottery of two cultures, the Chihuahuan and the El Paso. More recent excavations have

determined that El Paso Polychrome represents 16.6% of the total ceramic assemblage at

Villa Ahumada. If sherds classified as “El Paso Plain”, which represent body sherds of

El Paso Polychrome vessels are included, Jornada Mogollon ceramic types account for 61

Figure 3-5: Sites excavated in the del Carmen and Santa Maria river valleys (Ciudad Juarez and Ciudad Chihuahua are modern cities).

48.9% of the Villa Ahumada’s ceramic assemblage (Cruz Antillón, et al. 2004). This is quite a contrast to Galeana, a larger site, where only about 0.6% of the ceramic assemblage is composed of El Paso types (Cruz Antillón, et al. 2004), and is why Villa

Ahumada was selected as one of the sites for this comparative study of El Paso

Polychrome. 62 The Importance of El Paso Polychrome in the Casas Grandes Culture Area

The subject of this study, El Paso Polychrome pottery, plays a large role in the

Prehistory of northwest Chihuahua. El Paso Polychrome, though it is not considered a local ceramic type in the Casas Grandes culture area, is ubiquitous at 13th-15th century

AD sites in Chihuahua. The only more common non-local type in the Casas Grandes

culture area is Gila Polychrome (see Figure 3-6 ), a Salado ware that originated in east-

central and southeast Arizona. Gila Polychrome is red-slipped on the exterior of jars and

bowls, but bowls are white-slipped on the interior. On top of these slips banded designs

are painted in black.

Figure 3-6: Gila Polychrome bowl fragments from sites in the Casas Grandes river valley. 63 In ceramic assemblages at Medio Period Casas Grandes sites El Paso Polychrome and Gila Polychrome are by far the most common “imports”. There is some question, however, as to just how much Gila Polychrome was genuinely imported at Paquimé. The paste of at least some pieces of Gila Polychrome at Paquimé closely resembled local wares (Di Peso, et al. 1974).

Some Casas Grandes culture sites have more El Paso Polychrome than others, of course (see Table 3-). As discussed above, almost half of Villa Ahumada’s Medio Period

ceramic assemblage falls into Jornada Mogollon ceramic types. At Paquimé, El Paso

Polychrome represents only 2.2% of the total ceramic assemblage (Di Peso, et al. 1974,

vol. 6:543), but this small percentage is deceptive for several reasons. The JCGE

recovered more than 17,000 sherds from Paquimé, so even a mere 2.2% of this

assemblage is far more sherds of El Paso Polychrome than were recovered at Villa

Ahumada, just from the relative sizes of the sites and excavation projects. Also, although

El Paso Polychrome is swamped by the volume of local wares found at Paquimé, it still

represents 38% of the nonlocal ceramic assemblage (Di Peso, et al. 1974, vol. 8:156).

The only more common nonlocal type was Gila Polychrome, which comprised 3 % of the total ceramic assemblage and 52% of the nonlocal ceramics. Together, these two polychromes represent the vast majority of nonlocal wares at Paquimé. They are much more significant “imports” than any other ceramic type. 64

Table 3-2: Polychrome ceramic types as percentages of total ceramic assemblage Paquimé Galeana Villa Ahumada

Trade polychromes

El Paso 2.2 0.1 16.6

Gila 3.0 0.0 0.0

Chihuahuan polychromes

Ramos 11.6 2.8 2.1

Babicora 1.5 1.5 0.9

Villa Ahumada 1.3 1.7 2.9

Carretas 0.8 1.1 0.0

Escondida 0.8 NA NA

Corralitos 0.6 2.4 0.3

Huerigos 0.2 NA NA

Paquimé frequencies are from (Di Peso, et al. 1974: vol. 6). Galeana and Villa Ahumada frequencies are from (Cruz Antillón, et al. 2004).

It is also worth noting that El Paso Polychrome was more common at Paquimé than any of the local Chihuahuan Polychrome types except Ramos, the one type most closely identified with Paquimé itself (see Table 3-2). Sourcing the precise clays used in manufacture of the Chihuahuan Polychromes has proven difficult (Triadan, et al. 2005), and the question of which areas were producing which types remains murky, but it is still assumed that the Chihuahuan Polychromes were all being produced in Chihuahua. While

El Paso Polychrome represents a mere 2.2% of Paquimé’s total ceramic assemblage, most of the polychromes with nearer production sources within the Casas Grandes culture area itself are found at even lower frequencies, between 0.2-1.5% of the assemblage. The 65 fact that El Paso Polychrome is more common at Paquimé than most of the polychrome wares produced in Chihuahua could mean one of three things:

1) El Paso Polychrome, if a genuine “trade ware”, was imported in larger

amounts than painted ceramics from more near-by production sources,

which implies Paquimé had stronger interaction with the Jornada Mogollon

area than with closer hinterlands.

2) El Paso Polychrome was locally produced in Chihuahua, either at

Paquimé, in the core, or in one of the near or far hinterlands. Its frequency

at Paquimé can be explained by the same mechanisms responsible for the

distributions of the Chihuahuan Polychrome types: trade with near-by

communities and emulation by more distant ones.

3) El Paso Polychrome was supplied to Paquimé by both local Chihuahuan

and distant Jornada Mogollon producers, and its distribution is produced by

exchange both within the Casas Grandes system and between that system

and its regional neighbors to the northeast.

To determine which of these scenarios is most likely, a broad systematic comparison must be made between El Paso Polychrome samples from Chihuahua and samples from the Jornada Mogollon region. The aim of this comparison is to determine whether El Paso Polychrome is genuinely a trade ware, as it has been long assumed.

Then, if the type was being traded long-distance, was Paquimé’s supplier the distant

Jornada Mogollon heartland, or intermediate sites in Paquimé’s far hinterland? 66 Such a comparison is a valuable contribution towards characterizing the level of economic interaction between Paquimé, its peripheries and its regional neighbors. For at least one type of exchange item, it will be possible to determine whether Paquimé had stronger interactions with its far eastern hinterland than with another nearby regional system, or vice versa. In turn, description of the ties, or lack thereof, between Paquimé and its hinterlands is further evidence against Di Peso’s model of Paquimé’s vast hegemonic domain.

Local Geology

One way to clarify the economic relationships in which El Paso Polychrome played a role is to determine where the vessels of this ceramic type found in Chihuahua were originally produced. Raw materials are key to such attempts, and, therefore, knowledge of the local geology around Paquimé and Villa Ahumada is necessary.

Both of these Chihuahuan sites sit atop deep alluvial soil deposits in river valleys

– Paquimé near the Rio Casas Grandes, and Villa Ahumada near the Rio del Carmen.

These river valleys are separated by many small, compact mountain ranges which are foothills of the Sierra Madre Occidental, the long north-south continental mountain chain, which straddles the Chihuahua-Sonora state border. The bedrock of these many small mountain ranges, and the Sierra Madre, are the ultimate source of the sand and rock with which the local pottery is tempered.

Paquimé sits at the edge of the widest portion of the Casas Grandes river valley, nestled against foothills of the Sierra Madre which are composed largely of extrusive 67 volcanic rock and volcanic tuffs. The major rock types of these mountains surrounding the Casas Grandes river valley are rhyolite, ignimbrite, and basalt, but there are also large segments composed of conglomerate cemented by calcium carbonate (INEGI 1983b).

There is slightly more variety in the bedrock of the mountains bordering the Rio del Carmen valley to the east. Villa Ahumada sits in the middle of the river valley. To its west lie the Sierras San Ignacio and San Rafael, which are largely composed of volcanic tuff, basalt, and conglomerate, much like the mountains around Paquimé (INEGI

1983b). Mountains to the south of Villa Ahumada have much the same rock composition, with the addition of small amounts of limestone and one small granite outcrop approximately 30 kilometers to the south. The mountains bordering the western edge of the Rio del Carmen valley also contain volcanic tuff and conglomerate, but these are accompanied by significant quantities of limestone and lutite, or shale (INEGI

1983b).

In the Jornada Mogollon area where the type originates, El Paso Polychrome is tempered with crushed granite or syenite (Hill 1988, 1996; Miller 1995). It is worth noting that the closest outcrop of granite to Paquime is 45-50 km north-north-east, and the closest granite to Villa Ahumada is 30 km south. There is also a small outcrop of syenite in the Sierra los Arados 65-70 km south of Villa Ahumada. All of these are well outside the distance, by at least an order of magnitude, that potters are willing to travel for tempering materials in ethnographic studies (Arnold 1980; Arnold, et al. 1991; Deal

1998; DeBoer and Lathrap 1979; Dietler and Herbich 1989). Therefore, if El Paso

Polychrome as a style is being copied locally in the Chihuahuan sites, it should not be 68 tempered with the same materials found in samples from the Jornada Mogollon area because they are not locally available.

Conclusion

This chapter has summarized the history of archaeological research in the Casas

Grandes culture area. Most of what is known about the region comes from the JCGE’s large-scale excavations at Paquimé. For much of the last 30 years the interpretations published by the JCGE’s lead excavator, Charles C. Di Peso, have strongly influenced all discussion of the economics and political structure of the Casas Grandes system.

Much of Di Peso’s interpretation centered on the role Paquimé played in interregional trade, and because of this emphasis, most subsequent critiques of his model necessarily must include trade, as well. A more popular view of Paquimé today portrays the elites at this site participating in regional exchange in prestige goods. However, to truly characterize trade within the Casas Grandes system and between it and other regions, it is necessary to examine the supposed trade goods closely. El Paso Polychrome is one of two types that represent almost all of Paquimé’s nonlocal ceramic assemblage, and it also appears in high frequencies in Paquimé’s far hinterland. As such, this type is an essential piece in reconstructing trade networks in the Casas Grandes culture area.

Chapter 4

Prehistory of the Jornada Mogollon Region

Though the economic and political role of Paquimé is of central interest to this research project, there is a second culture area that must also be considered: the Jornada

Mogollon. The Jornada Mogollon area, centered on modern day El Paso, Texas, is the source of El Paso Polychrome ceramics, and is essential to discussion of their production and distribution whether this was accomplished via trade or emulation. Chapter 3 gave an overview of the history of archaeology and culture history of the Casas Grandes culture area, and this chapter presents a similar treatment of the Jornada Mogollon. The chronology and culture history of the Jornada Mogollon are explained, and the small number of ceramic types unique to this culture area are described, including El Paso

Polychrome.

Both the Casas Grandes and Jornada Mogollon culture areas are part of the larger

Mogollon subtradition. The Mogollon is one of the three major cultural subtraditions of the prehistoric Southwest (see Figure 2-1). It is distinguished from the other subtraditions, the Hohokam and the Ancestral Puebloan (formerly known as Anasazi), by characteristics of architecture, environmental adaptation and differing pottery traditions.

Mogollon territory covers most of the southern half of New Mexico and eastern Arizona, and a small part of west Texas, and also extends south into Chihuahua where it includes the Casas Grandes Culture area. 70 The different branches of the Mogollon share a common developmental trajectory, shifting over time from temporary camps to pithouse villages to above-ground contiguous room blocks.. This architectural path is associated with the gradual change from mobile hunting and gathering, through semi-sedentism, to permanent, agriculturally dependent pueblos. Mogollon cultures also share a ceramic tradition of plain or corrugated brown wares, though some of the painted types, like the famous Mimbres

Black on White bowls, are exceptions to the general ceramic rule.

Defining the Jornada Branch in Time and Space

In 1948, Donald Lehmer singled out the Jornada Mogollon as a separate branch of the main Mogollon subtradition (see Figure 4-1). At that time the Mogollon as a whole was very poorly understood, and definition of the Jornada branch was an endeavor to understand the larger classificatory unit through study of its regional variants (Haury

1948).

The Jornada branch occupied a territory centered in the vicinity of modern day El

Paso Texas. Lehmer used the El Paso region’s signature pottery style, El Paso

Polychrome, to define the limits of Jornada Mogollon territory. The southern limit of the

Jornada branch was defined by the town of Villa Ahumada in Chihuahua, based on the same surveys by Donald Brand (1935; 1943) that defined the extent of the Casas Grandes

Culture area (Lehmer 1948:71).

Figure 4-1: Location of the Jornada Branch within the larger Mogollon subtradition (Mogollon redrawn from Fagan 2005; Jornada redrawn from Lehmer 1948).

Lehmer’s work remains a definitive source on Jornada archaeology, even after almost six decades, because most archaeology in the area has been conducted by amateurs or as CRM projects related to road construction in the El Paso area or military maneuvers at Fort Bliss. There are many published reports of excavations, but little synthesis of the region’s prehistory. The handful of broader summaries include surveys 72 of the vast areas covered by Fort Bliss’ firing ranges (Carmichael 1986; Whalen 1977,

1978), published papers from regional archaeology conferences (in Beck 1985; Beckett and Silverbird 1982; Beckett and Wiseman 1979) and a recent overview of the archaeology of the Trans-Pecos and Jornada regions of Texas (Miller and Kenmotsu

2004).

Part of Lehmer’s concern as the first synthesizer of Jornada archaeology was to develop a chronological framework, and most of the phases he defined are still used today (see table 4-1). His earliest distinctly Jornada Mogollon period was termed the

Hueco Phase. This phase is pre-ceramic, and was defined based on excavations in caves

and rock shelters. More recent chronologies reclassify this first phase as part of the

generalized Late Archaic (Miller and Kenmotsu 2004) covering much of the Southwest.

In Lehmer’s chronology the Hueco Phase was replaced around AD 900 by a

ceramic producing pithouse period, termed the Mesilla Phase (Lehmer 1948). This is

almost 1,000 years later than the appearance of pottery and pithouse villages elsewhere in

the Southwest. Michael Whalen (1981) has challenged this portion of the Jornada

chronology, maintaining that Lehmer caught only the tail-end of a much longer pithouse

period, and that ceramics appeared in the region “…at the beginning of the Christian era,

or in its early centuries” (Whalen 1981:216). Dates for the beginning of the pithouse

period and ceramic production now range between AD 200-400 (Miller 1995; Miller and

Kenmotsu 2004).

Regardless of its beginning date, the Mesilla phase was characterized by plain

brown ware ceramics and villages of 10 or fewer pithouses (Shafer, et al. 1999; Whalen

1994). The villages were only partially dependent on agriculture and partially sedentary 73 (Carmichael 1986; Whalen 1978). The inhabitants continued to utilize the resources of multiple environmental zones on a seasonal basis. The dominant ceramic type in the

Mesilla Phase was El Paso Brown, the plain ware component of the El Paso ceramic tradition, but the painted types also appear late in this pithouse period (Lehmer 1948).

(see below for a description of the El Paso ceramic types) Though non-local ceramics do appear at Mesilla Phase sites, they occur in very small numbers (Lehmer 1948).

Table 4-1: Chronology of the Jornada Mogollon

Phase Time Period El Paso AD 1250/1300-1450

Doña Ana AD 1100-1250/1300

Mesilla AD 200-1100

Hueco/Late Archaic 1200 BC - AD 200

Following the Mesilla Phase, Lehmer (1948) identifies the Doña Ana Phase between AD 1100-1200. This phase contains the Pithouse-to-Pueblo Transition for the

Jornada region. Sites contain both pithouses and contiguous above-ground rooms. All three El Paso tradition ceramic types are present and exhibit the same vessel forms

(Miller 1995). A wider variety of non-local ceramic types are also found during the Doña

Ana Phase, indicating links with communities in central New Mexico, the Mimbres

Valley to the northwest (Lehmer 1948; Miller and Kenmotsu 2004), and with Viejo

Period communities in Chihuahua (Miller 1995). 74 According to Lehmer, the final step in the Jornada sequence, the El Paso Phase, began around AD 1200, though more recent revisions push this date forward to between

AD 1250-1300 (Miller and Kenmotsu 2004). All of the hallmarks of traditional pueblo societies are found in this phase. Sites consisted primarily of above-ground contiguous room blocks, and settlement mobility was restricted and focused on parts of the landscape with relatively permanent water sources (Carmichael 1986; Miller and Kenmotsu 2004;

Whalen 1978). Ceramic production was dominated by El Paso Polychrome (Miller

1995), though there is some evidence of limited local production of Playas Red, a utilitarian Chihuahuan type, in southern New Mexico (Bradley and Hoffer 1985).

Decorated pottery types from much of the eastern Southwest are found in small numbers, but the more common non-local ceramic types primarily indicate exchange with central

New Mexico and the Paquimé-affiliated communities of northwest Chihuahua (Miller

1995).

The El Paso Phase came to an end around AD 1450, when the pueblo settlements were abandoned (Miller 1995). The broad abandonment of agricultural settlements in the southern Southwest during the late 15th century AD may have been caused by extended

droughts, coupled, in the case of western Texas, with overspecialized agricultural

economies (Miller and Kenmotsu 2004; O'Laughlin 1980; Upham 1984). Some also

believe that the abandonment of the Jornada Mogollon region, and of the Animas and

Black Mountain phases in southwest New Mexico were tied directly to the decline of

Paquimé (Schaafsma 1979). Regardless of what caused or connected the abandonment of

the Casas Grandes and Jornada Mogollon pueblos, both areas were occupied by mobile 75 hunter-gatherer groups, not agricultural village-dwellers, at the time of Spanish contact in the late 16th century (Miller 1995; Miller and Kenmotsu 2004).

Jornada Mogollon Ceramics of the El Paso Area

The entire Jornada Mogollon region produced brown ware ceramics. The ceramic

types diagnostic of the Jornada Mogollon, and used by Lehmer (1948) to define the

boundaries of the Jornada branch, are the El Paso series. The El Paso series consists of

three types, El Paso Brown, El Paso Bichrome, and El Paso Polychrome. El Paso Brown

first appears around AD 200, and both of the other types developed from this first plain ware. Ultimately, both plain El Paso Brown and El Paso Bichrome are replaced by El

Paso Polychrome at around AD 1250 (Miller 1995). A chronology for the three El Paso

series types is presented in Table 4-2. For a formal type description of El Paso

Polychrome see Appendix A.

The heartland of production for the El Paso types was the broad basins and lower piedmonts surrounding El Paso, Texas (Miller 1995). The largest of these are the Hueco

Table 4-2: El Paso Series Ceramic Chronology (from Miller 1995; Miller and Kenmotsu 2004; Way 1979) Type Dates El Paso Brown AD 200-1100 El Paso Bichrome AD 800-1250 Early El Paso Polychrome AD 1000-1250 Late El Paso Polychrome AD 1250-1450

Figure 4-2: The basins of the Jornada Mogollon heartland. (crosshatched areas are mountain ranges)

Bolson and southern Tularosa Basin (see Figure 4-2). A large portion of the Hueco

Bolson is now encompassed by the Fort Bliss Army Air Defense Artillery Range.

To some degree, the three El Paso types are a chronological series. Plain El Paso

Brown is the dominant type at Mesilla Phase sites, the bichrome appears in small

amounts during the pithouse Mesilla phase and becomes prominent during the Doña Ana 77 phase, and El Paso Polychrome first appears in the mid-Doña Ana phase at around AD

1000 (Lehmer 1948; Miller 1995). There is considerable overlap of these types between

AD 1000-1250, but El Paso Polychrome almost completely replaces the other two types after this time (Miller 1995). Because El Paso Polychrome is only painted on the upper

1/3 to 2/3 of jars, there are still undecorated brown sherds present after AD 1250. Due to the difficulty of classifying or dating plain body sherds, these are often referred to as

“undifferentiated brown ware” by analysts (e.g. Browning, et al. 1993; Foster 1993;

Lowry and Bentley 1997; O'Laughlin 1979, 1980)

The three El Paso pottery types differ primarily in surface decoration. El Paso

Brown is a plain ware, while El Paso Bichrome and Polychrome are painted. The two decorated wares suffer from misnaming: El Paso Bichrome is really a monochrome, with either red or, rarely, black paint on the brown surface, and El Paso Polychrome is the true bichrome, with both black and red paint on brown. The vessel surfaces can be wiped, smoothed, or self-floated (Miller 1995), but the El Paso series types are not slipped. All paint is applied over the natural brown color of the clay.

The most common vessel forms for all three El Paso types are jars and hemispherical bowls (Runyan and Hedrick 1973; Stallings 1931). In all three El Paso series types, jars significantly outnumber bowls (Whalen 1978). Rare El Paso

Polychrome effigy vessels, ladles, and unusual bowl and jar shapes do appear in later sites (Brook 1982; Jackson and Thompson 2005; Miller 1995). There are also changes in jar forms over time, with neckless tecomates being the dominant jar form before AD

1250, while classic Late El Paso Polychrome jars (see Figure 4-3) are characterized by

restricted necks and everted rims (Miller 1995; Whalen 1981). The size range of El Paso 78 Polychrome jars also increases after AD 1250, with some examples being almost a meter high and 35 cm in orifice diameter (Miller 1995).

Figure 4-3: Late variant El Paso Polychrome jar from Fort Bliss with everted rim.

All three of the El Paso ceramic types share common color, paste, temper and form characteristics. All El Paso series vessels are buff to medium brown in surface color and have a granular, friable paste (Runyan and Hedrick 1973). The paste contained a great deal of carbon, and the internal color of the sherds varies depending on firing conditions, but in general, firing was at temperatures below 600 degrees (Runyan and

Hedrick 1973; Stallings 1931). This paste is distinctive among contemporaneous 79 ceramics in the southern Southwest (Jackson and Thompson 2005), and is easily recognized by its crumbly texture and large, angular white temper.

The temper shared by the El Paso types is coarse-grained, crushed igneous rock

(Miller 1995), and comprises between 25-50% of the ceramic body (Runyan and Hedrick

1973). The most common type of rock used for tempering was granite (Brown, et al.

2004), though some examples tempered with syenite have also been identified (Miller

1995). The two rocks are easily distinguished, as syenite contains no quartz, while quartz is a major constituent of granite. Previous petrographic studies of El Paso series sherds from the Hueco Bolson and Mesilla Bolson identify the temper source as two granite outcrops in the Franklin Mountains, which form the boundary between these two basins

(Brown, et al. 2004; Hill 1988, 1996; Shafer, et al. 2001).

Clay sources, however, remain elusive. Michael Whalen (pers. comm., 2005) has tested several clays from the Hueco Bolson for workability, and their shrinkage is too high for use as ceramic material. Members of the El Paso Archaeological Society, though, feel that the clay sources for the local pottery types lie closer to the Rio Grande

(Whalen, pers. comm., 2005). Though the exact clay sources remain unknown, compositional study has shown the paste to be relatively uniform. Samples of El Paso series pottery from Fort Bliss have been subjected to Instrumental Neutron Activation

Analysis as part of a study of exchange patterns in southern New Mexico lead by Darrell

Creel (Creel, et al. 2002). Though a handful of sherds of other types were included, samples of the early variant of El Paso Polychrome were compared primarily to

Chupadero Black-on-White, a trade ware whose production is attributed to central New

Mexico, and Playas Red, which was likely produced in several locations (Bradley and 80 Hoffer 1985), including southern New Mexico. Samples were compared among and between sites on Fort Bliss and Black Mountain Phase sites in the Mimbres Valley further to the northwest (see Figure 2-2 for location). The conclusion drawn about El

Paso Polychrome was that the type is compositionally relatively uniform. It was chemically distinct from the other types sampled, and there were no specimens of other ceramic types within the El Paso Polychrome compositional group. (Creel, et al. 2002)

Figure 4-4: El Paso Polychrome bowl from Fort Bliss.

El Paso Polychrome is also distinct from both the plain El Paso Brown and the simpler El Paso Bichrome. The polychrome first appears around AD 1000 (Miller 1995).

It is distinguished from the earlier El Paso Bichrome by the use of both black and red paint on the same vessel instead of just one color. El Paso Bichrome usually only has red 81 paint on the brown background (Miller 1995). The vessel surface was prepared by wiping or “floating”. Bowls were painted on the interior, sometimes with a black stripe just below the rim on the exterior (see Figure 4-4). Jars were painted on the upper 1/3 to

2/3 of the vessel exterior (see Figure 4-3), and sometimes had a thin black stripe painted

just below the rim on the interior.

Paint was applied in a thin wash. Both colors can be quite fugitive on some

sherds. The red paint was mineral in origin (Runyan and Hedrick 1973), while the black

paint was carbon-based (Stallings 1931). Decoration was applied in broad, imprecise

strokes, with the colors sometimes overlapping. Designs usually consist of alternating

lines of red and black, “massing” of either color, or stepped fret motifs (Runyan and

Hedrick 1973; Stallings 1931), but also zigzags, diamonds, interlocking rectangles or

triangles (see Figure 4-5 and Figure 4-3), filled-in circles, or ticking along the rim can be found on some vessels (Jackson and Thompson 2005).

Figure 4-5: El Paso Polychrome rim sherds from Fort Bliss (left) and Paquime (right), showing typical interlocking triangle/rectangle designs 82

Figure 4-6: Top row: early El Paso Polychrome jar rim profiles (redrawn from Whalen 1981) Bottom row: late El Paso Polychrome rim profiles from Fort Bliss sites used in this study

El Paso Polychrome was made continuously between AD 1000 and approximately AD

1450, at which time the El Paso Phase pueblos were abandoned. Based on jar shape, and painting style, however, the type can be divided into early and late, or “classic”, variants.

Early El Paso Polychrome was produced between AD 1000 and AD 1250 (Way 1979).

The early variant is distinguished by straight, almost vertical jar necks (see Figure 4-6), and there are unpainted brown spaces visible between the red and black lines of which the painted design is composed (Whalen 1978, 1981). Late, or classic, El Paso

Polychrome was produced from AD 1250 until abandonment in the mid 15th century AD

(Way 1979). It differs from the early variant in that late jars have constricted necks and 83 everted rims, while the paint is continuous across the design band, with no brown surface showing (Whalen 1978, 1981). The El Paso Polychrome present at Paquimé and Villa

Ahumada is almost entirely this post-1250 variant, which means the type became more common in Chihuahua during the Medio Period, which began at approximately the same time.

El Paso Area Geology

For any study based upon the technology and raw materials involved in pottery production, the geology of the region of origin is also essential. The raw materials used in manufacture are limited by what is locally available, and in the case of grit tempered pottery like El Paso Polychrome, the sources of tempering materials in particular are an important line of evidence in studying production and distribution.

The Jornada Mogollon heartland is characterized by basin and range topography.

Several linear mountain ranges run directly north from the Rio Grande river valley, separating broad alluvial desert basins (see Figure Figure ). The Fort Bliss El Paso phase

archaeological sites used to represent the Jornada Mogollon heartland in this study are all

located in the Hueco Bolson and northern Tularosa Basin directly north of the city of El

Paso (see Figure 4-2). The Hueco Bolson (or Basin) is defined on the west side by the

Franklin and Organ mountain ranges and on the east by the Hueco Mountains. Directly

north of the Hueco Bolson, the Northern Tularosa Basin is defined on the west by the San

Andres mountains and on the east by the Sacramento Mountains. Essentially, the

Figure 4-7: The mountain ranges defining the east and west margins of the Hueco Bolson and Northern Tularosa Basin. Hatched areas are mountains, dots are modern cities.

Franklin, Organ, and San Andres mountains form one range running north-south, with small passes separating them.

The basins of the Jornada heartland, including the Hueco Bolson and Northern

Tularosa Basin, are filled with alluvial sediments. The northern end of the Northern 85 Tularosa Basin is largely covered by gypsum dunes, gypsiferous basin floor deposits and lake bed deposits (Seager, et al. 1987). The southern end of the Northern Tularosa Basin also contains large swaths of basin floor sediments, but also ancestral fluvial deposits left by the Rio Grande referred to as the Camp Rice Formation (Seager, et al. 1987). Closer to the modern path of the river, the Hueco Bolson contains lacustrine deposits of silt, sand, and clay, but is largely covered by windblown sand (Barnes 1983). The lower slopes of the mountains on both sides of the Hueco Bolson and Northern Tularosa Basin consist of piedmont slope deposits (or colluvium) containing unconsolidated gravels and gravelly loam (Barnes 1983; Seager, et al. 1987).

The source of these gravels is, naturally, the upper exposed bedrock of the mountain ranges. The Franklin-Organ-San Andres chain bounding the west side of the

Hueco and Northern Tularosa Basins has long, thin strips of various rock formations running north-south, parallel to the crests of the mountains. This strip of ranges has significantly different rock types on its east and west flanks. The eastern flank, facing the

Hueco and Northern Tularosa basins, is largely composed of granite (Red Bluff

Formation and others), quartzite (Lanoria Formation and others), and sandstone (Hazel

Formation and Bliss sandstone (Barnes 1983; Seager, et al. 1987). The eastern face of the Organ Mountains also has a significant presence of mixed intrusive igneous rocks including granite, syenite, and quartz-monzonite porphyry (Seager, et al. 1987). The western face of this same series of ranges is largely composed of limestone, dolomite, shale, siltstone, and sandstone in many different named formations (Barnes 1983; Seager, et al. 1987). The Organ Mountains, again, differ slightly in that their western slope is 86 largely covered by volcanic tuff containing rhyolite and large quantities of volcanic ash

(Seager, et al. 1987).

On the eastern edge of the Hueco and Northern Tularosa basins, the Hueco and

Sacramento mountains contain many of the same rock formations, but their outcrops are much more irregularly distributed than the tidy linear formations of the Franklin-Organ-

San Andres chain. These eastern mountains also contain much limestone, and shale, but also granodiorite and several different formations of dolomite (Seager, et al. 1987).

There are also deposits of mixed intrusive igneous rock, like those found in the Organ mountains, containing granite and syenite, but on the western margin of the basins these occur in many small, isolated patches instead of the large swaths of plain granite found along the flanks of the Franklin, Organ, and San Andres mountains.

El Paso series pottery is tempered with either crushed granite or, more rarely, syenite (Miller 1995). The ultimate source of this tempering material is the bedrock outcrops of the mountain ranges, but potters could also have collected colluvial gravels washed down from the higher outcrops into the piedmont zone. Tempering material for samples of El Paso Series and later contact period ceramics from locations in the Hueco

Bolson have previously been sourced to outcrops of Red Bluff Granite and an unnamed granite porphyry on the eastern flanks of the Franklin Mountains (Brown, et al. 2004; Hill

1988, 1996). Granite is much more prominent, widespread, and easily obtained on the eastern side of the Hueco and Northern Tularosa Basins, but it was also available in small patches on the western margin of the basins. Regardless, the only sources of granite or syenite are found on the U.S. side of the Rio Grande. The nearest granite outcrop to 87 Ciudad Juarez, just to the south of El Paso, on the Mexican side of the border is 75-80 kilometers to the southwest (INEGI 1983).

The Jornada Mogollon and Casas Grandes

All of the cultures of northern Chihuahua, west Texas, and southern New Mexico are related to some degree. They all, including the Jornada branch, belong to the larger

Mogollon subtradition, which means they share a large number of traits. But the question of what these shared traits mean about the type of relationships between the regional subtraditions remains unanswered. Making similar buildings and pottery, or having similar ecological adaptations, do not mean communities were strongly related in any way.

If the boundaries of the Casas Grandes Culture Area are defined by the maximum distribution of Chihuahuan Polychromes, as per Brand’s (1943) original description, then this culture area almost entirely subsumes the Jornada Mogollon (see Figure 4-8). Some

have suggested that the Mogollon cultures of southern New Mexico are mere peripheries

of Paquimé (Di Peso 1974; LeBlanc 1989; Wilcox 1995). However, for any culture the

maximum extent of exchange and emulation is much larger than the extent of real

political influence. It is better to think of the maximum distribution of the Chihuahuan

Polychromes as being Paquimé’s interaction sphere, not its polity. As discussed in

Chapter 3, Paquimé probably did not have any direct sociopolitical influence over areas 88

Figure 4-8: The Jornada Mogollon culture area (redrawn from Lehmer 1948) in relation to the extent of the Casas Grandes interaction sphere (defined by the distribution of Chihuahuan Polychrome ceramic types, redrawn from Schaafsma and Riley 1999). more than a day or two’s walk from that center. The Jornada Mogollon were a regional neighbor, and they may have been influenced by Paquimé, but they were not integrated directly into its economic or political system.

The Jornada Mogollon remained quite distinct from their southern neighbors, in both their artifact assemblages and in the traits that Casas Grandes sites possess but the 89 Jornada Mogollon area lacks, such as ballcourts. Given the quantity of El Paso

Polychrome to be found at Paquimé and Villa Ahumada, however, there was definitely interaction between the culture areas. This relationship could have been purely economic, or there could have been some kind of ideological affiliation between the regions. Whether the ties between the Jornada Mogollon and Paquimé can be characterized as trade or emulation, or both, depends on whether purported trade items, like El Paso Polychrome, were being traded directly from the Jornada Mogollon region or produced locally in Chihuahua.

Chapter 5

Methods: sample selection and petrographic analysis

The methods described in this chapter fall into two categories: the selection of the sites and pottery samples used in the analysis, and the techniques of petrographic analysis itself. Both of these involve sampling at several levels, and they must be described in order to allow evaluation of the project and its results. Petrographic analysis procedures, in particular, need to be stated explicitly, as the choices made in how ceramic fabrics are analyzed determines the efficacy of quantitative analysis methods.

Site and Ceramic Sample Selection

The goal of the project is to determine whether El Paso Polychrome found at

Paquimé, and also on the eastern edge of Paquimé’s sphere of influence, was genuinely a trade ware from the Jornada region. This requires comparison of samples of the type from Paquimé, its eastern hinterland, and the Jornada Mogollon heartland. In this study,

Paquimé itself represents the Casas Grandes heartland, since this site contained so much non-local material and represents the hub of long-distance trade in the region.

Villa Ahumada was selected to represent Paquimé’s far hinterland. It is the farthest east of the handful of sites to have been excavated to the east of Paquimé (see

Chapter 3). Also, Villa Ahumada traditionally marks the southern extent of the Jornada

Mogollon region, and the site has very high frequencies of El Paso Polychrome compared 91 to other excavated sites in Chihuahua. It lies at the southern boundary of El Paso series pottery production and on the “far periphery” of Paquimé’s interaction sphere as defined by Michael Whalen and Paul Minnis (2001), so Villa Ahumada sits at the intersection of these two connected regional systems (see Figure 5-1).

Figure 5-1: Location of Villa Ahumada relative to the Jornada Mogollon culture area and Paquimé’s far periphery. 92 A much larger number of 13th-15th century AD sites has been excavated in the

Jornada Mogollon region, albeit mostly on the northern side of the international border.

This makes it possible to characterize this region using more than a single site. The

collections selected to represent the El Paso Phase Jornada Mogollon for this project

come from 10 sites in the maneuver areas of the Fort Bliss Army Air Defense Artillery

Center. The base’s firing ranges cover a large proportion of the Hueco Bolson and

southern Tularosa Basin, which are the heartland of El Paso series pottery production

(Miller 1995). Archaeological materials from survey and/or excavation of hundreds of

sites on the base’s firing ranges are curated by the Fort Bliss Directorate of Environment

(DOE) at a centralized collections facility. These include collections from projects run

by DOE staff and contractors, contract archaeology companies, and the amateur El Paso

Archaeological Society. Hence, the Fort Bliss collections offered a large number of sites from which to select ceramic samples in the very center of the Jornada Mogollon heartland.

Paquimé

Much of the material excavated by the Joint Casas Grandes Expedition remains in storage in the modern town of Casas Grandes, in a warehouse administered by the

Centro Regional Chihuahua - INAH (the state branch of the Instituto Nacional de

Antropología e Historia) and the Museo de las Culturas del Norte. The ceramic collections are tidily organized in large wooden crates, roughly 1 meter long by a ½ meter wide, labeled by ceramic type. The dozens of crates themselves, though, are not 93 organized in any particular fashion beyond all of the ceramics being stored in one large room.

In the Casas Grandes volumes that record the results of the JCGE excavations (Di

Peso, et al. 1974), it is reported that over 17,000 pieces of El Paso Polychrome were found at Paquimé. A very small number of these left Chihuahua as part of type collections that Charles C. Di Peso sent to museums and educational institutions in the

U.S. Unfortunately, in 2002 when the Paquimé samples were being collected for this project, it was possible to find only two crates of El Paso Polychrome after a full day of searching in the INAH warehouse. These crates contained 921 sherds large enough for analysis, which is only 5.4% of the total excavated pieces of El Paso Polychrome.

In a stroke of good luck, however, these two crates did contain sherds from a large number of different proveniences across the excavated portion of the site . There also seemed to be no bias as to which El Paso Polychrome pieces had gone into different crates. The crates contained sherds ranging in size between a ½ inch and 6 inches in maximum width, and both rim and body pieces were present. There was also a handful of sherds which the JCGE analysts had labeled as “El Paso Polychrome obscure”, which conform to the Undifferentiated Brown Ware category as applied in the Jornada region.

The entire contents of both El Paso Polychrome crates were examined, and a small number of pieces erroneously classified as El Paso Polychrome were removed. The remaining definite El Paso Polychrome pieces were used for analysis of sherd attributes.

For this larger sample of 921 El Paso Polychrome sherds, a variety of ceramic attributes were recorded for each piece. These variables are listed in Table 5-1. Groups of sherds

that came from the same vessel were treated as a single entity during this procedure. 94 Throughout this process, all of the painted sherds over 2 cm in size were also digitally photographed.

Table 5-1: Attributes recorded in visual inspection of El Paso Polychrome samples Rim and body sherd attributes: Additional rim sherd attributes: sherd thickness thickness of interior lip stripe, if present cross section/firing atmosphere rim diameter exterior body color rim profile drawing interior body color temper percentage temper roundness temper sorting minimum painted line width, black and red maximum painted line width, black and red

A much smaller subset of the El Paso Polychrome sherds, amounting to a total of

76 pieces, was selected for thin-sectioning and petrographic analysis. Care was taken to ensure that each sherd represented a separate vessel. No two have the same combination of firing, body color, paint color and design. The thin-sectioning sample was also chosen to represent a variety of proveniences, but with emphasis on those with the largest quantities of El Paso Polychrome in the larger 900+ sherd sample. The proveniences of the thin-sectioned pieces are listed in Table 5-2, and the locations of these proveniences

within Paquimé are shown in Figure 5-2. The majority of them come from the multi-

story roomblocks comprising the main part of the excavated pueblo. It is worth recalling,

however, that the JCGE only examined the western half of Paquimé, 95

Table 5-2: Paquimé Sample Proveniences Unit # Provenience # of Samples 8 House of the Well: Well 23 8 House of the Well: Plaza 3 38 8 House of the Well: “misc.” 1 11 House of the Serpent: E. Plaza trench 1 11 House of the Serpent: Room 11-36 1 14 House of the Pillars: Room 14-44 7 14 House of the Pillars: Room 14-45 1 16 House of the Skulls: Plaza 1 9 16 House of the Skulls: Room 16-30 3 16 House of the Skulls: Room 16-19 1 16 House of the Skulls: BL 105 2 17 South Ballcourt complex: trench 1 20 trench in isolated room south of main mound 2 22 trench in NE corner of main mound 7 - East Plaza 2 - South Plaza 1 Total: 100

Figure 5-2: Locations of El Paso Polychrome sample proveniences within Paquimé . and the multi-storied section of the site may represent the ceremonial precinct and/or elite section of the community. The most commonly represented proveniences are Units 8 and 16. These are large portions of the main pueblo referred to by the JCGE as the

House of the Well and the House of the Skulls, respectively. Notably, Unit 8, the House of the Well, is also the location of two rooms that contained more than three million shell beads, the majority of Paquimé’s unworked shell, and more types of exotic goods than any other context on the site, including a stockpile of 50 Gila Polychrome vessels

(Bradley 1993; Di Peso 1974, vol. 2). This particular room block was obviously involved in long distance trade. 97 Along with the samples of El Paso Polychrome chosen for thin-sectioning, two white ware sherds and a control sample of 22 plain ware sherds from the same contexts was also selected for comparison. The white ware sherds are body sherds of Ramos

Polychome, but were packaged with the plain wares by the JCGE analysts because of their lack of paint. Ramos Polychrome at Paquimé was locally produced (Sprehn 2003;

Woosley and Olinger 1993) The plain wares believed to be local products, under the assumption that plain ware ceramics are not usually the subject of trade. While there are exceptions to this supposition, the results of the petrographic analysis ultimately support the assumption that the plain wares sampled from Paquimé were locally produced. Thus, in total, 100 sherds from Paquimé were exported to the U.S. for thin-sectioning and petrographic analysis. These consisted of 76 El Paso Polychrome pieces, 22 plain ware pieces and two white ware pieces that are body sherds of Ramos Polychrome.

In the statistical analysis and results that follow in Chapter 6, the comparison of the larger samples of sherds, involving macroscopic variables such as body color or line thickness, will be referred to as the whole sherd analysis. This is in contrast to the petrographic analysis of the smaller sample of thin sections.

Villa Ahumada

Excvations at Villa Ahumada, also known as Loma de Moctezuma, were conducted over several field seasons between 1993 and 1999 (Cruz Antillón, et al. 2004;

Cruz Antillón and Maxwell 1999). These projects involved INAH Chihuahua, the 98 Museum of New Mexico and the University of New Mexico. Collections are still in the process of analysis, and are curated by Rafael Cruz Antillón of INAH Chihuahua.

The entire ceramic collection from Villa Ahumada was not available for examination, as it is still in the process of being analyzed. However, to characterize El

Paso Polychrome from the site, a sample of 94 sherds from the 1998 and 1999 excavation seasons was selected by Sr. Cruz Antillón and Dr. Timothy Maxwell of the

Museum of New Mexico. This sample consisted of 83 pieces of El Paso Polychrome and

11 pieces classified as “Casas Grandes Plain” under the JCGE type system used at

Paquimé. Three of these plain wares had the characteristic El Paso series texture and temper, and were re-classified as undifferentiated brown ware for this project. The proveniences of the Villa Ahumada samples, following the excavators’ designations, are presented in Table 5-3. These 94 sherds represent both the thin-sectioning and whole

sherd attribute samples for Villa Ahumada. All of the same characteristics that were

recorded for the 900+ Paquimé El Paso sherds (see Table 5-1) were also recorded for this

much smaller selection from Villa Ahumada. 99

Table 5-3: Villa Ahumada Sample Proveniences Provenience # of samples # of samples 1998 Pozo 6N, Nivel 2 11 El Paso Polychrome 1999 Pozo 8N, Nivel 1 6 El Paso Polychrome surface collection, north zone 8 El Paso Polychrome 1999 Pozo 3A, Nivel 1 10 El Paso Polychrome 1999 room N4 9 El Paso Polychrome 1999 Nivel 2N, Pozo 1 14 El Paso Polychrome STP 2, N 1 3 El Paso Polychrome Pozo 1N, Nivel 1 2 El Paso Polychrome Pozo 34, Nivel 1 4 El Paso Polychrome 1999 Pozo 2N, Nivel 1 14 El Paso Polychrome 1999 Room N3 5 Casas Grandes Plain 1998 Pozo 1N, Nivel 1 3 Casas Grandes Plain 1998 Pozo 1N, Nivel 1 3 undifferentiated brown ware

Fort Bliss

A total of eleven sites were selected for sampling from the Fort Bliss directorate of Environment archaeological collections, 10 of which contributed samples to the petrographic analysis. The criteria for selecting sites for this project were:

1) Contemporeneity with the Medio Period in Chihuahua. The site must

have been occupied at some time between the mid-13th and mid-15th

centuries AD. This effectively means only sites with an El Paso Phase

component were considered (see Table 4-1 for Jornada Mogollon

chronology).

2) Evidence of contact with Casas Grandes affiliated communities. Only

sites whose ceramic assemblages contained Chihuahuan Polychrome types

were considered. All 10 sites used for the analysis had Ramos and/or Villa 100 Ahumada Polychromes present in low frequencies. This is assumed to

represent contact and trade in ceramics between these Jornada sites and the

Casas Grandes interaction sphere, making these sites potential sources for

the El Paso Polychromes found in Chihuahua.

3) Excavation. There are many surface collections from El Paso Phase

sites contained within Fort Bliss. However, many of these collections are

small, and the ceramics highly fragmented by military activities on the

firing ranges (i.e. the sherds tend to be smaller than 1.5cms in most cases).

Therefore, only excavated ceramic collections were considered because

they presented larger samples to work with and larger sherds for analysis.

4) Sherd Size. Of the excavated sites available, only those with more than

30 recognizable El Paso Polychrome sherds greater than 2 cm in maximum

width were considered. The 30 sherd minimum is an arbitrary cut-off point

designed to minimize the effect of very small population sizes on

sampling.

The 11 sites that fulfilled all of these criteria include all of those listed in Table 5-4, and also site FB 5027. A map of their locations is provided in Figure 5-3, and a map of all the El Paso Phase sites with Chihuahuan ceramic types present is presented in Figure 5-4.

The majority of El Paso Phase sites are located in the foothills of the mountains, in this

case along both sides of the Hueco Bolson. 101

Figure 5-3: Fort Bliss sample site locations (map courtesy of Gary Hebler).

102

Figure 5-4: Fort Bliss El Paso Phase sites with Chihuahuan ceramic types (map courtesy of Gary Hebler). 103 The 11 sites used for the larger sample provided a total of 836 El Paso Polychome sherds larger than 2 cm. All of the same measurements were made on these sherds as on the larger 900+ piece sample from Paquimé (see Table 5-1 for attributes recorded). All

sherds with recognizable painted elements were also digitally photographed. That is, of

the painted pieces, only those whose surface was all red or all black were not included in

the photographic record.

The smaller sample chosen for thin sectioning and petrographic analysis is

summarized in Table 5-4. No samples were included from FB 5027 because, although

they passed the greater than 2 cm criteria, the majority of the sherds from this site were

too small and friable to hold up to the thin-sectioning process. As with Paquimé and

Villa Ahumada, a control sample of plain ware sherds was also included in the

petrographic analysis. In this case, the plain wares fall into the category of

undifferentiated brown ware. They are undecorated and brown, but cannot be assigned

definitively to El Paso Brown because they are from sites with components dating to after

AD 1250 and may be lower body sherds of El Paso Polychrome vessels. In total, 70

sherds from Fort Bliss were selected for thin-sectioning. Of these, 47 were El Paso

Polychrome and 23 were undifferentiated brown ware. 104

Table 5-4: Fort Bliss Sites and Samples for Petrographic Analysis Fort Bliss # Alternate # of type names/numbers samples FB 53 LA 72859, LA 91051 7 El Paso Polychrome 3 undifferentiated brown FB 1640 LA 92614, 2 El Paso Polychrome Oro Grande 1 undifferentiated brown FB 5000 LA 95955 2 El Paso Polychrome 1 undifferentiated brown FB 6281 LA 97128 8 El Paso Polychrome 3 undifferentiated brown FB 6363 41EP5, EPAS 3, 5 El Paso Polychrome Hot Wells 4 undifferentiated brown FB 6772 41EP1602, 7 El Paso Polychrome 375 Loop project 3 undifferentiated brown FB 6873 41EP18, EPAS 60, 4 El Paso Polychrome Sgt. Doyle 4 undifferentiated brown FB 9657 LA 97768 2 El Paso Polychrome 1 undifferentiated brown FB 9788 41EP2724, 8 El Paso Polychrome 375 Loop Project 2 undifferentiated brown FB 10533 LA 98049, EPAS 4, 2 El Paso Polychrome McGregor Pueblo 1 undifferentiated brown Total: 47 polychrome, 23 brown (FB: Ft Bliss, EPAS: El Paso Archaeological Society, LA: NM Laboratory of Anthropology)

Petrographic Analysis in Archaeology

Petrography is based on the principles of optical mineralogy. At its most basic, the theory behind optical mineralogy is that different minerals have different crystalline structures, and each will reflect plane and polarized light slightly differently, allowing identification of minerals with a polarizing light microscope. Types of rock can also be identified because minerals are the building blocks of rock. Each rock type is constructed of a combination of different minerals with a specific structure. It is, of course, necessary 105 for the sample of interest to be sliced very thinly so that it will be translucent. The standard petrographic thin section is .03 mm thick. This is a matter of comparability, as the same mineral will behave differently at one thickness than it will at another (Gribble and Hall 1992; Nesse 1986). To further complicate matters, some minerals, such as hematite, will remain opaque no matter how thinly they are sliced, and these cannot be definitively identified using petrography.

The use of petrographic methods in archaeological ceramic studies has focused on three related aspects of ceramic fabrics. These are the mineralogy of inclusions (usually temper), textural analysis, and the study of non-temper components of the ceramic fabric.

Of these three, mineralogy has the greatest time depth, and widest application in archaeology.

The identification of minerals via petrography has a long history in archaeological ceramic studies, beginning with Anna Shepard’s (1942; 1965) work on Rio Grande Glaze

Paint Ware. Petrographic analyses that identify minerals are now a common part of archaeological ceramic studies in the U.S. Southwest (see Abbott and Schaller 1994;

Habicht-Mauche 1995; Hegmon, et al. 2000; Hill 1988, 1996; Oppelt 2001; Robinson

2004; Triadan 1997, to give a small sample). Though it is a geological technique, it can be applied to ceramics because pottery, in effect, mimics a sedimentary rock. It has inclusions of minerals within a matrix of silt and clay. Silt and clay are also composed of minerals, of course, but these terms refer to size classes, and they are too small to be identified via petrography. From personal experience, while some highly distinctive minerals can occasionally be identified in silt sized particles, most are difficult to identify reliably at such a small scale. Some analysts, such as James Stoltman (1991), assume 106 that silt-sized particles are natural inclusions rather than materials added to the ceramic body.

The application of petrography to archaeological pottery was pioneered by Anna

O. Shepard in the 1930s and 40s in her studies of the technology of Rio Grande Glaze-

Paint ware along the Upper Rio Grande in northern New Mexico (Shepard 1942, 1965).

Rio Grande Glaze Paint ware is sand tempered, and by identifying the minerals present in this in various ceramic samples Shepard was able to match pottery types to temper sources using geological maps. Importantly, petrographic analysis allowed discrimination between local and non-local raw materials, and also showed changes in tempering strategies over time.

The identification of minerals and association with geologic source areas remains a major function of ceramic petrography. Most petrographic analyses associated with site reports give detailed descriptions of different tempers (e.g. sand, grog, shell, grit) and identifications of any mineral or rock components. Some minerals are very common, even ubiquitous, like Quartz, and their presence or absence is not terribly useful in distinguishing one source of raw materials from another (unless quartz is completely absent, as in syenite). However, sometimes it is the rock that those minerals come from that is distinctive rather than the minerals themselves. A sherd tempered with granite grit is easily distinguished from a sherd tempered with basalt grit from the structure of the rock, though both will contain large amounts of quartz and feldspars. In addition, even different sources of the same rock type can sometimes be distinguished on the basis of relatively low frequency minerals that occur in one outcrop and not another. For example, at least two different granite sources occur in the Franklin Mountains, a very 107 small range near El Paso, Texas. The two sources can be told apart both by the structure of the granite (how weathered the feldspars are) and by whether perthite, microcline, or sphene are present (Brown, et al. 2004; Hill 1988, 1996).

Petrographic identification of tempers is also commonly a first step in chemical characterization studies in order to determine what elements will be of use in distinguishing compositional groups (Schubert 1986; Stoltman, et al. 1992), and as a complementary data set for distinguishing local and non-local ceramics (see papers in

Glowacki and Neff 2002).

There is, however, a wider variety of characterizations that can be made using petrographic techniques than just identification of minerals. Petrographic studies can also include textural analysis. Rather than just identifying the type of inclusions, their sizes, shapes and distributions can also be recorded, providing a more detailed characterization of the ceramic fabric. The majority of textural analyses focus solely on grain size distributions to achieve this purpose (Freestone 1991; Middleton, et al. 1985).

Further expanding the use of petrography in ceramic studies, James Stoltman

(1989; 1991; 1999) has used the technique to study the proportions of non-temper materials in grit-tempered ceramic fabrics. This is in contrast to the usual focus of petrography on tempering materials. Stoltman uses comparison of the proportions of silt, sand and matrix in the ceramic body to distinguish between ceramic groups. His methods, and definitions of these petrographic classes, are discussed in more detail in the description of methods used in the El Paso Polychrome project, later in this chapter. At its most basic level, however, Stoltman’s petrographic technique quantifies the proportions of different ingredients that form the ceramic fabric. Stoltman has applied 108 this technique to reclassification of pottery types (Stoltman 1989), and to the identification of trade between pottery producing areas (Stoltman 1991, 1999).

In summary, petrography is used in ceramic studies for three purposes: mineral identification, textural analysis, and the study of non-temper components. All three have been used to distinguish locally and non-locally produced ceramics. Each of these three foci can also be approached either qualitatively or quantitatively. The difference is whether the ceramic characteristic of interest is merely being described or if it is being measured and counted. A simple list of minerals present, for instance, may be qualitative, but recording the relative proportions of the different minerals within the ceramic body in quantitative.

All three of the topics approached via ceramic petrography (mineralogy, textural analysis, and non-temper characterization) use similar quantitative techniques. The most commonly used quantitative technique in ceramic petrography is point counting. This involves superimposing a grid over the thin-section and moving across the microscope slide systematically recording information about what falls under each grid intersection point. The number of points counted of each category (size class, mineral type, etc) is a measure of the relative area that category represents in the thin section (Chayes 1954;

Middleton, et al. 1985). This is just one sampling technique that can be used to determine relative proportions. Other techniques exist that involve measurements of units of area instead of points, but these are enormously time consuming (Middleton, et al. 1985).

As with all sampling techniques, point-counting does have complications. In comparison to areal techniques, point counting tends to slightly over-represent very large 109 grains, as these have a better chance of being intercepted by a grid point (Middleton, et al. 1985). Some analysts try to compensate for this by only counting large grains once, regardless of how many grid points fall on the grain. Also, it is not the proportions of grains of different types that are being measured by point counts, but, rather, the surface area occupied by each class of grain. This due to the two-dimensional nature of a thin section. While the original sherd had length, width, and thickness, a thin section made from it is only a thin slice across that larger piece. What is being sampled by the point counting grid over a thin section is an area, not a volume.

Even to estimate relative areas with any level of accuracy requires a very large number of point counts. Most ceramic thin sections allow between 100-300 points, depending on grid spacing. They are, after all, only a few square centimeters in size, at best. This is only an adequate sample for accurately determining relative areas of abundant components. To estimate the relative areas of classes present in small amounts, such as infrequently occurring minerals, with high confidence requires numbers of points impossible to achieve in the small size of a ceramic thin section (see Freestone 1991 for estimates of points necessary). Hence the classes that can be characterized with the least confidence are also the classes of greatest interest, the unusual low frequency objects that distinguish between similar pastes.

In addition, it must be kept in mind that the results of point counting are but a sample of a sample. That is, the points are a sample of the area of a plane, and that plane is just one of many potential slices through a piece of pottery. Thin section analysis in general assumes that the material being examined is of uniform consistency. This is, of course, not always true, even in geology from whence the technique is borrowed. 110 However, Stoltman (1991:151) included multiple slides prepared from the same ceramic vessels in his initial testing of petrographic techniques, and found an average sampling error of only 1.5% between them.

In spite of its sampling issues, petrography has two major advantages over chemical characterization techniques. First, it is comparatively inexpensive, which is a significant consideration when large sample sizes are desired. Secondly, there is a large comparative database available in most regions, including previous petrographic analyses and geologic maps. One of the problems in ceramic analyses in Chihuahua, for example, is that different chemical characterizations studies have used different techniques and the results are not comparable between them. The results of this study, however, can be directly compared to any other petrographic characterization of ceramics in either the

Jornada Mogollon or northwest Chihuahua.

Petrographic methods used in this study

One thin-section was made from each of the sherds selected for petrography.

Four sherds crumbled during the process of thin section manufacture, and could not be further processed, which left a total of 260 samples from all three locations combined.

Small slices were taken from these sherds, parallel to the longest axis, using a diamond- bladed rotary wet saw. These slices were sent to Vancouver GeoTech Labs for professional preparation. At the laboratory, the samples were impregnated with epoxy resin to prevent losses from crumbling, and were then mounted on microscope slides and 111 ground down to the standard petrographic thickness of .03 mm. The resin is clear in plane light and black in polarized light, making voids easy to distinguish from components of the ceramic material.

The equipment used for the analysis was a binocular Carl Zeiss polarizing light microscope, with a total combined magnification of 80X with the eyepieces and lens combined. The microscope was also accessorized with a graduated, metric stage for moving the slide in precise increments, and particle sizes were measured with a graticule in one eyepiece.

Points were counted using a 1mm x 1mm grid. This spacing is a compromise between the size of the inclusions being counted and the need to count as many points as possible on each slide to minimize sampling error. The spacing of points should be equal to or greater than the average particle size (Freestone 1991). The particles present in El

Paso Polychrome range between silt and over 2mm in size.

Each point was categorized as matrix, sand, silt, temper or void according to the methods used in James Stoltman’s (1989; 1991) analyses. The size classes for sand and temper grains (Table 5-5) were also borrowed from Stoltman (1989; 1991), and are a

modification of the Wentworth scale (Shepard 1956:118). Matrix consists of clay

minerals too small to be identified or even visually distinguished. Silt includes visible

grains less than .0625 mm in maximum width. All inclusions larger than silt were

classified as either sand or 112

Table 5-5: Inclusion Size Classes Class Size range Silt < .0625 mm Fine .0625-.25 mm Medium .25-.5 mm Coarse .5-1.0 mm Very coarse 1.0-2.0 mm Gravel > 2.0 mm

temper and assigned to the size classes in Table 5-5. Sand was distinguished from temper based on the tendency for sand naturally present in clays to be smaller, rounder, and simpler in composition than grit particles added as part of the ceramic recipe (Stoltman

1989:149). This distinction is very subjective, but the crushed rock added to El Paso

Polychrome as temper is generally sub-angular to angular, making the larger particles easy to categorize. Any muddiness in differentiating between sand and grit will fall primarily in the “fine” size category.

Both sand and temper grains were assigned to a mineral type as well as a size category. For the most part each mineral category was exclusive. For instance, a grain cannot be classified as both biotite and hornblende, it is either one or the other. However,

many rock grains contain more than one mineral. Granite, for instance, contains quartz,

multiple types of feldspar, and many potential low frequency accessory minerals, so large

grains of granite temper can have several of these minerals present together. By far the

most common of these poly-mineralic grains were combinations of quartz mixed with

feldspar or a combination of potassium and alkali feldspars in a single grain, and these

two combinations of multiple minerals warranted separate mineral categories. The 113 minerals encountered in the three samples of El Paso Polychrome and their associated plain ware control samples are listed in Chapter 6.

As a thin section was point counted, each grain falling under a grid point was counted only once regardless of how many grid points intersected it, in what is termed a single-intercept technique (Middleton, et al. 1985). This is an attempt to eliminate the bias of point-counting towards over-representing large grains, and also ensures that the counts are independent (Stoltman 1989). Most of the 260 slides allowed between 100-350 points, excluding voids. A small subset provided counts of under 100 points due to a large numbers of voids, a very small sherd, or mis-preparation of the thin section. These slides were turned 180 degrees and counted a second time (as per Stoltman 1991:107) to achieve a total count of over 100 points, with an effort to reposition the grid so that the linear transects covered were not identical to the first counting.

The data collected from point counting was entered into a database using SPSS v.

12. All counts were standardized before data analysis by changing raw point counts into a percentage of total points counted from each sherd. This gives the relative areas covered by each class, and makes counts from different samples comparable. Chapter 6 presents the data analysis of both the point counts and the macroscopic examination of the larger samples from each of the three areas. These analyses were also made using

SPSS software.

Chapter 6

Results & Statistical Analysis

The analysis of the three El Paso Polychrome samples can be divided into two sections: comparison of whole sherds, and the results of the petrographic analysis. The petrographic analysis can be further separated into qualitative identification of minerals and the quantitative results of point counting.

The sample sizes between the whole sherd and petrographic analyses are very different, since point counting is such a time consuming process. Paquimé, for example provided 845 pieces for most of the whole sherd statistical comparisons, but only 76 were thin-sectioned. The whole sherds sample size from Villa Ahumada (N=83) is also much smaller than from the other two locations (N > 800), because the only sherds available for examination were those ultimately destined for thin-sectioning. These differences in sample size (see Table 6-1) are important to consider, especially the huge discrepancy between Villa Ahumada and the other locations in the whole sherds analysis, since they may affect the statistical results.

Table 6-1: El Paso Polychrome Sample Sizes Whole sherds Thin-sections Paquimé 845 76 Fort Bliss 836 47 Villa Ahumada 83 83

115 Whole Sherd Analysis

Rim Diameter

When dealing with collections that do not include whole vessels, the only way to

estimate vessel size is by measuring rim diameter. The majority of the whole sherd

samples from each of the three locations was body sherds, which cannot provide this

information. In the small Villa Ahumada sample there were only seven rims. While the

Fort Bliss sites provided many more rims, sherd size at these sites tended to be small, and

only 88 rims were large enough to take diameter measurements from. Paquimé supplied

the largest rim diameter sample with 163 measurable rim sherds.

The full range of rim diameters is presented in boxplot form in Figure 6-1. Villa

Ahumada’s tiny sample size is not strictly comparable with the other two larger samples, but it can be seen that all of the Villa Ahumada rim diameters fall within the range of values defining the Fort Bliss “box”, which represents the central 50% of that sample’s data points. There is also significant overlap in the ranges of the Paquimé and Fort Bliss samples. However, the boxplot visually demonstrates the tendency for El Paso

Polychrome vessels at Paquimé to be slightly larger.

The mean rim diameters for the samples, and their standard deviations, are presented in Table 6-2. The difference in means between Paquimé and Fort Bliss is 6.18

cm. This difference in means can be statistically tested with a simple Student’s T-test,

which, in this case, 116

Figure 6-1: El Paso Polychrome Rim Diameters.

Table 6-2: Mean Rim Diameters Sample Location Mean Rim Diameter (cm) Standard Deviation Paquimé (N=163) 31.02 6.57 Fort Bliss (N=88) 24.84 7.03 Villa Ahumada (N=7) 24.43 4.54

provides a t value of 6.9. This value of t is significant at a level of .000, meaning there is almost no chance that these two samples came from the same population. The mean rim diameter for El Paso Polychrome vessels at Paquimé is significantly larger than the mean 117 rim diameter at the Fort Bliss sites. The vessels at Paquimé tend to be larger than in the

Jornada heartland.

The mean of the tiny Villa Ahumada rim sample is also significantly different from the mean rim diameter at Paquimé (p=.009), but it is not significantly different from the mean of the Fort Bliss sample (p=.879). These results may be tied to the difference in sample sizes, however.

Another sampling bias may also exist between the Fort Bliss and Paquimé rim sherds. It is common practice at archaeological sites in central Mexico to rebury a significant portion of the artifacts excavated, saving only those of most significance. If the Joint Casas Grandes Expedition followed this practice, the ceramic analysts may have selectively saved only the larger diameter rim sherds. However, it is unlikely that the missing quantities of El Paso Polychrome at Paquimé can be accounted for by reburial of artifacts. The culture of archaeology itself is different in Northern Mexico, where so few sites have been excavated, and all artifacts are precious. Materials from modern archaeological projects in Chihuahua are stored in warehouses rather than reburied.

Also, even if a large portion of the Paquimé ceramics were reburied, there seems to have been no differential selection of larger rims, because the same range of rim diameter sizes is present in both the Paquimé and Fort Bliss samples. There were both very large and very small diameter vessels present in the Paquimé sample, so it does not appear that the

JCGE analysts were saving or packaging sherds according to vessel size. 118 Sherd Thickness

Though El Paso Polychrome has a highly friable, crumbly texture, vessel walls still tend to be very thin, with an average body sherd thickness of 4-5 millimeters for all the samples used in this project. Most El Paso Polychrome vessels tend to be thickened around the rim, so variation in wall thickness is to be expected even within a single vessel. In fact, some of the sherds measured in this study varied visibly in thickness just across two or three centimeters of surface area, in which case the measurement was taken somewhere between the two extremes. In spite of this variation, however, the three samples are remarkably consistent in terms of vessel wall thickness. The mean sherd thicknesses for the three samples are presented in Table 6-3 , while the full range of

variation is presented as a boxplot in Figure 6-2.

The largest difference in mean thickness is a mere 0.06 cm between Fort Bliss and Villa

Ahumada. As these measurements were taken with calipers that only measured down to

half millimeter increments, the differences in mean thickness are within the expected

range of measurement error. As can be seen in the overlapping ranges in the boxplot, the

variation in thickness is also consistent across samples, although the outliers and

extremes create a wider range in the Fort Bliss sample. With little real difference in

means or ranges, there is effectively no difference between the samples for this variable.

Table 6-3: El Paso Polychrome mean sherd thickness Sample location Thickness (cm) Standard Deviation Paquimé (N=844) 0.46 .09 Fort Bliss (N=805) 0.44 .10 Villa Ahumada (N=81) 0.50 .09

119

Figure 6-2: Vessel wall thickness.

Cross-Section and Firing

The color of pottery is affected by several variables. One of these is the type of clay selected by the potter, which, in the case of the El Paso series ceramic types is always brown. The expression of that clay’s color is affected during firing by several additional variables, though. These include the amount of carbon in the ceramic body, the firing temperature, and the firing atmosphere (Orton, et al. 1993; Shepard 1956). A 120 reducing atmosphere, where oxygen is not allowed to reach the firing vessel, will produce a dark gray or black vessel from most clays. Similarly, a very dark ceramic fabric can be produced if clays with a high organic content are not fired at high enough temperatures to burn off the carbon. Varying combinations of organic content, firing temperature, and firing atmosphere will produce different zones of coloration within the cross-section of a ceramic sherd.

It is possible that El Paso Polychrome potters in different locations may have had different preferences for firing conditions. Variations in these firing regimens may also produce vessels of different hardness. There are no kilns in the prehistoric Southwest.

All of the El Paso Polychrome vessels would have been fired in open pit firings, but it is certainly possible to control firing atmosphere under these conditions, and even firing temperature to some degree. The position of an reduced core, or lack thereof, was recorded for each of the whole sherds examined to ascertain if there were different firing preferences expressed between the samples from Paquimé, Villa Ahumada and the Fort

Bliss sites.

The categories used for classifying cross-section are presented in Figure 6-3 . All

of the El Paso Polychrome sherds were either completely reduced, had reduced cores, or,

more uncommonly, were completely oxidized. Figures 6-4, 6-6, and 6-5 show the

number of sherds within the different locations’ samples that fall into each cross-section

category. 121

Figure 6-3: Cross-section categories.

Figure 6-4: Cross-section category distributions, Paquimé.

122

Figure 6-5: Cross-section category distribution, Fort Bliss.

123

Figure 6-6: Cross-section category distribution, Villa Ahumada.

At all three locations the most common cross-section categories were 0, fully reduced; 1, centered reduced core; and 6, exterior-skewed reduced core. The relative proportions of each of these categories differ between the locations, however, with Fort

Bliss sherds more likely to be fully reduced, while both Chihuahuan samples show a strong bias towards centered reduced cores. The frequencies of each cross-section category within the samples are presented in Table 6-4. 124

Table 6-4: Relative frequency of core position categories at each location Category Paquime Fort Bliss Villa Ahumada 0 21.7% 36.5% 30.9% 1 46.5% 24.1% 44.4% 5 4.7% 13.7% 8.6% 6 24.7% 18.9% 11.1% 7 2.4% 6.9% 4.9%

A chi-square test of the sherd counts within the cross-section categories at each location produces a χ2 value of 154.9. This is significant at a level of .000. Chi -square

tests are designed to assess whether an observed distribution is significantly different

from an expected one. In this case, “expected” was equal representation of the categories

at the three locations. The very high statistical significance level of the test demonstrates

that the cross-section categories are unevenly represented at the three locations.

Inclusion Sorting

“Sorting” refers to the distribution of sizes of inclusion grains visible within the

ceramic fabric. Well-sorted grains are all of the same size range, while poorly sorted

materials vary greatly in size from grain to grain.

These classifications were made using a 30X hand lens and a pebble sorting

reference chart from Pottery in Archaeology (Orton, et al. 1993). The scale used in this

chart has five classes ranging from “Very Good” to “Very Poor”. Very good indicates

that the inclusion grains are almost all the same size, while, at the opposite end of the

spectrum, classification as very poorly sorted indicates that the inclusion grains vary

widely in size. The vast majority of El Paso Polychrome sherds from all three locations 125 fell into the fair, poor, and very poor sorting categories. The only exceptions being 20 sherds from Paquimé that fell into the good category. The counts of fair, poor and very poor sherds are presented for each location in Figures 6-7, 6-9, and 6-8. As the unusual

“good” category sherds from

Figure 6-7: Inclusion sorting distribution, Paquimé.

126

Figure 6-8: Inclusion sorting distribution, Fort Bliss.

Figure 6-9: Inclusion sorting distribution, Villa Ahumada. 127 Paquimé represent only 2% of that site’s sample, they have been left out of the bar chart to make the visual data presentations more clearly comparable between sites.

The distributions of sherds across inclusion sorting categories are very similar between Fort Bliss and Paquimé. Both of these samples are composed predominantly of sherds that fall into the poor and very poor sorting categories, with the poor category being only slightly better represented than very poor. Villa Ahumada, however, differs greatly from the other two samples because of its strong representation of the fair sorting category. A chi-square test of this distribution within the sorting categories from fair to very poor, with the expected values being an even distribution across sites, produces a χ2

value of 84.5. Again, this is significant at the .000 level, meaning the sherd counts do not

match the expected distribution. If another chi-square test is performed that includes the

20 good sorting category sherds from Paquimé, the χ2 value increases to 107.4, which is

still significant at a level of .000. The inclusion sorting categories are not equally

represented between the Paquimé, Fort Bliss and Villa Ahumada samples.

Inclusion Roundness

Another measurable characteristic of ceramic tempering materials and natural

inclusions is the roundness of the grains. This variable considers whether the grains have

sharp edges or have a smoother surface texture. El Paso Polychrome is known for it’s

large white, angular temper grains, but there is some variation between the samples with

regards to inclusion roundness. 128 Sherds were classified as to inclusion roundness using a 30X hand lens and the

Power’s Scale of Roundness (visual reference chart provided in Orton, et al. 1993). This scale gives six numbered categories ranging from 1, very angular, to 6, well rounded.

Each sherd was assigned to a roundness category based on the angularity of the majority of grains visible under the hand lens. The distribution of sherds across these roundness categories for each sample location is presented in Figures 6-10, 6-11, and 6-12.

The El Paso Polychrome sample from Paquimé shows a wide spread across these

roundness categories, with only 6, well rounded, being unrepresented. However, the

majority of sherds from this sample fall into categories 1-3, or very angular to sub-

angular. The Fort Bliss sample, on the other hand, possesses only sherds that fall into the

categories of 2, 3, and 4, or angular, subangular, and subrounded. Villa Ahumada’s

distribution closely resembles that of the Fort Bliss sites, except for the addition of a

handful of sherds in the 1, or very angular, category. 129

Figure 6-10: Inclusion roundness distribution, Paquimé.

Figure 6-11: Inclusion roundness distribution, Fort Bliss.

130

Figure 6-12: Inclusion roundness distribution, Villa Ahumada.

Unfortunately, a chi-square test cannot be used to test the distribution of sherds across these roundness categories between sample locations because there would be too many cells in the tabulation matrix with counts of less than 5. Even without statistical testing, however, it can be seen that the most common roundness categories at all three locations are 2 and 3, angular and sub-angular. Visually estimating inclusion roundness is a subjective endeavor, though, and there is little practical difference between angular and subangular grains. Both categories have relatively sharp margins. Therefore the only potentially significant difference between samples in terms of inclusion roundness is the wider representation of roundness classes at Paquimé. 131 Design: Line Width

Being a painted ware, one of the important comparisons between El Paso

Polychrome vessels in terms of determining place of origin should be a study of decorative design style. Unfortunately, however, most of the pieces used in this study, especially from the Fort Bliss collections, are far too small for this type of analysis.

What may once have been part of a complicated interlocking triangle design on the original vessel looks like only a few red and black stripes on a sherd a few centimeters across. The vast majority of sherds showed only stripes of red or black paint. Figure 6-

13 shows several of the larger sherds from McGregor Pueblo, part of the Fort Bliss

Figure 6-13: A typical selection of sherds from a Fort Bliss context (site: McGregor Pueblo, FB 10533). 132 sample. These are fairly typical of the painted elements present on sherds in all three sample locations.

The width of red and black paint lines were measured whenever possible in an effort to collect at least some information on painting style. As can be seen from the photo of the McGregor Pueblo sherds, line width was not constant even over a few centimeters. For this reason, at least two measurements were taken for each line, a minimum and a maximum line width, of either black or red. Figure 6-14 shows the

distribution of minimum red and black line widths by sample.

Figure 6-14: Boxplot of minimum red and black line width. 133 It can be seen that red lines are consistently wider than black lines across samples.

Also, it appears from the boxplot that the range and distribution of line widths is very similar between Paquimé and Fort Bliss, while both minimum red and minimum black lines on sherds from Villa Ahumada are consistently wider than in the other two samples.

The mean minimum and maximum line widths are presented in Table 6-5 . The difference in means between minimum and maximum red line width is less than half a millimeter at all three locations. This is more precise than the calipers used to take the measurements in the first place, and therefore, the mean is not meaningfully different between minimum and maximum red line widths at any of the three locations. In contrast, the difference in means between the minimum and maximum black lines

Table 6-5: El Paso Polychrome mean line widths (in cm) Paquimé (N=115) Fort Bliss (N=154) Villa Ahumada (N=38) Standard Standard Standard mean mean mean deviation deviation deviation Red (min) .77 .35 .75 .33 .95 .38 Red (max) .76 .22 .74 .29 1.00 .32 Black (min) .44 .32 .49 .26 .76 .37 Black (max) .56 .31 .57 .28 1.01 .34 differs by almost a full millimeter or more at each location. This indicates that, on average, red lines maintain a more constant width while black lines are more variable even across just the few centimeters represented on most sherds.

Comparison of the mean line widths between locations is also illuminating. The differences in mean line widths between Paquimé and Fort Bliss are all less than the accuracy of the calipers used for measurement. Therefore, these differences in averages cannot be meaningful, and the mean line widths are essentially the same between these 134 two samples. Villa Ahumada, on the other hand, has means that are several millimeters larger than both of the other samples.

The distributions of line widths between Villa Ahumada and the other two locations can be tested statistically. T-tests pairing Villa Ahumada with either Paquimé or Fort Bliss, both show significance levels of .000 for the differences in minimum black line width. T-tests comparing minimum red line width also give these extreme significance levels. For these variables, the widths of red and black lines in the painted designs, the Villa Ahumada sample does not statistically come from the same population as the the Fort Bliss and Paquimé samples.

Petrographic Comparisons

The petrographic analysis included control samples of local plain wares along with the El Paso Polychrome samples from each of the three locations. Photographs of a representative sample of El Paso Polychrome thin sections, as well as comparative photos of Casas Grandes Plain ware and Ramos Polychrome body sherd thin sections can be found with the El Paso Polychrome type description in Appendix A.

In thin-section the plain wares at the Chihuahuan sites could be clearly distinguished from El Paso Polychrome at those sites by two variables: the amount of tempering material added to the ceramic paste, and the presence or absence of certain volcanic rock types. Each of these will be discussed separately below. The undifferentiated brown wares selected from the Fort Bliss sites, however, were not significantly different from El Paso Polychrome in any way. This is to be expected, as 135 brown ware sherds from El Paso Phase contexts largely represent unpainted body sherds from El Paso Polychrome jars.

Ceramic Body “Recipe”

James Stoltman (1989; 1991) has demonstrated that it is sometimes possible to use relative proportions of different materials in the ceramic body to distinguish between outwardly similar ceramic groups. Stoltman’s studies relied on the non-temper components of the ceramic body, that is, the clay matrix and the natural sand and silt inclusions that were part of the clay before the addition of tempering materials.

By Stoltman’s criteria sand and crushed rock temper can be distinguished by sand’s tendency to be smaller, more rounded and consisting of fewer minerals (Stoltman

1989:149). In practice, with El Paso Polychrome this distinction is quite difficult to make. It is quite common to find small rounded pieces of granite or quite large angular pieces composed only of quartz. Grains that are both rounded and composed of only one mineral are very few and far between. Hence, the utility of distinguishing between sand and temper is compromised by the subjective nature of the classification. For the purposes of this study, in all statistical comparisons sand and temper are condensed into one category and referred to together as inclusions. However, the mean relative proportions of sand are included with the other body components in Table 6-6. The

proportions of matrix, silt and inclusions together give a picture of the average “recipe” used to make the ceramic body at each sample location. 136

Table 6-6: Mean relative proportions of matrix, silt, sand, and tempering materials Paquimé Fort Bliss Villa Ahumada El Paso poly plain El Paso poly brown El Paso poly plain matrix 48.8% 56.8% 50.9% 46.3% 51.6% 57.4% silt 16.7% 14.4% 16.9% 17.4% 17.7% 17.8% sand 5.7% 5.7% 6.9% 6.8% 5.7% 6.9% temper 28.8% 23.1% 25.4% 29.5% 25.0% 17.9%

By Stoltman’s assessment, estimating these broad categories of material type from thin sections carries an error of 3-5%, though usually in the smaller end of this range (Stoltman 1989:153). This error consists of the difference that should be expected between multiple counts of the same thin section or between multiple thin sections made from the same vessel. To test the expected error range of point counts in this study, half of the Paquimé thin sections were counted twice and the two results compared. For well- represented categories like matrix, silt, and temper, the difference between counts was well within the 3-5% range. More infrequently encountered categories like sand, however, were subject to larger estimation errors.

The estimates in Table 6-6, however, are only central tendencies. The actual body recipes vary widely within each site. The percentage of inclusions for all petrographic samples is presented as a boxplot in Figure 6-15. Two “white body” sherds, which are unpainted body sherds of Ramos Polychrome jars, have been included to represent locally-made Chihuahuan polychromes at Paquimé. Such a tiny sample size, along with the three undifferentiated brown ware and 8 plain ware sherds from Villa Ahumada, is not large enough for statistical tests, but does have some comparative value. 137

Figure 6-15: Percentage of thin section area accounted for by inclusions, all types. Brown: undifferentiated brown ware, epp: El Paso Polychrome, plain: Casas Grandes plain, white: unpainted Ramos Polychrome body sherds

What can be seen from the boxplot of relative inclusion frequency is that El Paso

Polychrome tends to have a larger proportion of temper than the plain wares at the

Chihuahuan sites. The ranges overlap, so this is not an absolute discriminator between ceramic types. However, a T-test of the percentage of inclusions between El Paso

Polychrome and local plain ware at Paquimé shows the types to be significantly different at a level of .000. These types are two different entities when it comes to ceramic body 138 recipe. Chihuahuan plan wares can also be distinguished readily from El Paso

Polychrome on the basis of mineral inventories, which will be discussed further below.

While El Paso Polychrome differs from plain wares at both of the Chihuahuan sites, a comparison of the body recipe for El Paso Polychrome alone across the three samples shows far less differentiation. The scatter plot in Figure 6-16 provides a visual representation of relative proportions of matrix, silt, and inclusions for all of the El Paso

Polychrome thin sections. While there are a few outliers, for the most part this ceramic

Figure 6-16: 3-D scatter plot of relative frequencies of matrix, silt, and inclusions in El Paso Polychrome samples. type forms a relatively tight cluster. The three samples almost entirely overlap. The mean relative frequencies of the body recipe components are also not different between the samples. The El Paso Polychrome means for all of the body components, presented 139 in Table 6-6, differ between samples by less than the 3-5% expected estimation error.

The El Paso Polychrome samples from Paquimé, Fort Bliss and Villa Ahumada

effectively possess the same ceramic body recipe, and that recipe is different from that of

the Chihuahuan plain wares.

Grain Size Analysis

Another potential variable that can discriminate between ceramics that are

indistinguishable at a macroscopic level is the distribution of grain sizes within the

ceramic body. Each grain that fell under the crosshairs during point counting was

classified by size according to the Wentworth scale (see Table 5-5) as fine, medium,

coarse, very coarse or gravel. The mean grain size distribution for each of the three El

Paso Polychrome samples is presented in Figure 6-17. The means represented in the

chart are shown in Table 6-7 . The distribution is displayed as relative proportion of

inclusions that fell into each size category.

Gravel sized inclusions, those over 2 mm in maximum dimension, occurred in a

relatively large number of the El Paso Polychrome sherds, but there were so few of these

grains in any individual thin section that their representation as a size class is too small

for statistical comparison. The other size classes, however, illustrate an interesting

contrast between Fort Bliss and Paquimé on the one hand and Villa Ahumada on the

other. The grain size distributions at Paquimé and Fort Bliss are remarkably similar. 140

Figure 6-17: Mean grain size distribution, El Paso Polychrome.

Table 6-7: Mean proportion of inclusions in each size category, El Paso Polychrome, by sample location Paquimé Fort Bliss Villa Ahumada fine 46.2% 46.3% 39.6% medium 24.1% 23.6% 24.5% coarse 19.7% 20.2% 24.1% very coarse 7.8% 7.5% 11.0% gravel 0.24% 0.5% 0.77%

While the mean frequency of medium sized grains is fairly constant across samples, the fine, coarse and very coarse size classes vary. Villa Ahumada has, on average, a lower proportion of fine sized inclusions and larger proportions of coarse and 141 very coarse inclusions than the other two samples. An Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) test shows that the distribution of relative grain sizes is significantly different between the three samples at a level of .000 for the fine, coarse and very coarse grain size categories.

There is no significant difference in proportion of medium sized grains, however.

Further T-tests on the samples in pairs demonstrate no significant difference between

Paquimé and Fort Bliss for the relative proportion of any grain size category. However, both Paquimé and Fort Bliss are significantly different from Villa Ahumada in their relative proportions of fine, coarse and very coarse grain sizes at significance levels between .000 and .003. For grain size distribution, the Paquimé and Fort Bliss samples come from the same original population, while the Villa Ahumada El Paso Polychrome is significantly different.

Minerals

The earliest use of petrography in archaeology was in the identification of minerals and their use to discriminate between tempering materials. The presence and absence of certain minerals has also proven to be the clearest distinction between the tempers of El Paso Polychrome and the Chihuahuan plain wares. Table 6-8 shows the mean relative proportions of quartz, feldspars, and other minerals in the temper component of El Paso Polychrome and the plain ware samples from the three locations.

The most common minerals in almost all ceramics are quartz and feldspars. These are present in all sands and almost all rocks, with only a handful of exceptions. They are also the two main constituents of granite, which was the tempering agent preferentially used 142 for El Paso series ceramics. In fact, because the temper was granite, many grains in the

El Paso Polychrome samples contained both quartz and feldspars, and these were classified separately to prevent being double-counted.

Table 6-8: Mean relative proportions of most common mineral inclusions Paquimé Fort Bliss Villa Ahumada EPP plain EPP brown EPP plain quartz 32.2% 28.5% 30.7% 26.0% 29.1% 37.2% feldspar 42.1% 30.6% 40.6% 43.9% 36.6% 20.4% quartz & feldspar 22.4% 13.4% 25.9% 27.4% 31.8% 12.5% other 3.4% 27.5% 2.8% 2.7% 2.4% 29.9% EPP: El Paso Polychrome

The relative proportions of minerals in the plain and El Paso Polychrome samples show that quartz and feldspar are, as expected, the largest contributors to the temper composition. There are some important distinctions to be weeded out beyond the shared wealth in these minerals, however. There are two major differences between the El Paso

Polychrome samples and the Chihuahuan plain wares. First, the Chihuahuan plain wares have much lower proportions of grains composed of both quartz and feldspar. The more common presence of these rock fragments is a distinguishing feature of granite grit temper. Second, the Chihuahuan plain wares have much higher proportions of minerals falling in the “other” category. There are other minerals present in granite besides quartz and feldspars, and these accessory minerals, in fact, distinguish one granite source from another. However, there are far more “other” minerals in the plain wares than in the El

Paso Polychromes.

Not only are there more “other” minerals in the plain wares, but they are also different types. The most common minerals in El Paso Polychrome beyond quartz and feldspars are listed in Table 6-9. Of these, hornblende, epidote, biotite and sericite are 143 seen in many of the plain wares, but the Chihuahuan plain ware samples also contain volcanic rock grains in the form of basalt and devitrified glass. These volcanic components are never found in the El Paso Polychrome samples. A qualitatively different temper source is used for the plain wares.

Table 6-9: Frequency of El Paso Polychrome sherds in each sample containing the most common accessory minerals

Paquimé Villa Ahumada Fort Bliss

hornblende 89.5% 96.3% 93.6%

epidote 96.1% 98.8% 97.9%

biotite 81.6% 79.0% 72.3%

perthite 71.1% 96.3% 70.2%

sericite 42.1% 25.9% 53.2%

sphene 39.5% 74.1% 66.0%

microcline 26.3% 42.0% 51.1%

muscovite 13.2% 38.3% 63.8%

Table 6-8 also gives the percentage of El Paso Polychrome sherds at the three

sample locations that contain each of the most common accessory minerals. These are

common in the sense that they are found in a large proportion of the samples, but most of

these minerals appear at very low frequencies within individual thin sections. They are

seldom caught by the point counting grid, and so the data on their occurrence is restricted

to presence or absence in each thin-section. These are also not the only accessory 144 minerals found in the samples. Zoisite, chert, pyroxene, and oxybiotite were also observed in a handful of thin sections.

Almost every thin section of El Paso Polychrome contained hornblende and epidote. Biotite is also very common, as is perthite, a zebra-striped exsolution pattern of alkali and plagioclase feldspars. It is the four less common accessory minerals where difference can be found between El Paso Polychrome samples.

Sericite is actually a textural name rather than a separate mineral. Both sericite and muscovite are types of mica, and both can be end products of the weathering of plagioclase feldspars (Nesse 1986). Microcline, however, is a specific type of alkali feldspar, easily distinguished by its unique tartan twinning pattern when rotated under polarized light. Alkali feldspars are much less susceptible to weathering than their plagioclase relatives. Sphene, also known as titanite, is an orthosilicate mineral common in many igneous rocks (Gribble and Hall 1992; Nesse 1986).

Interestingly, there are two granite types from the Franklin Mountains identified in the tempers of El Paso series pottery from the El Paso area. One of these is a granite porphyry with weathered feldspars and sphene as one its common accessory minerals, while the other is the Red Bluff Granite Complex, which is distinguished by the presence of microcline and perthite. (Brown, et al. 2004; Hill 1988, 1996) It is precisely these minerals associated with the two El Paso area granite sources that show significant differences in frequency between Paquimé, Villa Ahumada and the Fort Bliss sites.

The distribution of these more common accessory minerals can be tested using chi-square. The observed presence/absence values are compared to an expected even representation across sample locations. If the chi-square value is significant, the 145 frequency of that mineral is not equivalent between samples. The results of these chi- square tests are presented in Table 6-10.

Table 6-10: Chi-square values: presence/absence counts of accessory minerals

χ2 value Significance (p)

hornblende 2.4 .304

epidote n/a n/a

biotite .27 .874

perthite 26.0 .000

sericite 8.7 .013

sphene 33.1 .000

microcline 57.2 .000

muscovite 33.57 .000

p values in bold indicate a significant difference between observed and expected values

A valid chi-square test for epidote was not possible because the mineral is so

common. Most of the “absent” cells in the chi-square matrix would have had a value of

less than 5. Both hornblende and biotite are also very common amongst all three

samples, and their χ2 values are not significant. These two minerals are equally well represented at the three sample locations. All five of the other common accessory minerals, though, differ significantly from an expected even distribution. All of these are

the specific mineral associated with the two different Franklin Mountains granite sources.

However, if the frequencies of sherds containing these accessory minerals in

Table 6-9 is examined closely, the minerals do not pattern together as one would expect if 146 their distribution resulted from differential representation of the two El Paso area granite sources. If the high frequency of perthite at Villa Ahumada resulted from differential use of the Red Bluff granite complex, then Villa Ahumada should also have the highest frequency of microcline, but it does not. Also, some of the frequencies are much more similar between Fort Bliss and Paquimé (perthite and sericite), some are more similar between Fort Bliss and Villa Ahumada (sphene and microcline), and the muscovite frequency is different in all three sample locations. All in all the distribution of accessory minerals among the El Paso Polychrome samples is highly complicated. This suggests that the composition of the granite temper sources is quite variable, even though there are very few granite outcrops available for exploitation in this part of the southwest.

Chapter 7

Conclusion

El Paso Polychrome, because it is found in such high frequencies for a non-local type, is an essential part of deciphering the economic relationships between Paquimé, its associated communities, and its regional neighbors. Trade has been, and remains, fundamental to describing the sociopolitical system of the Casas Grandes regional system. Di Peso’s (1974) early model depicted Paquimé as an outpost of Mesoamerican merchant overlords, wringing goods from the surrounding communities to support the city and extracting exotic raw materials from the Greater Southwest to send south to western and central Mexico. More recently, depictions of Paquimé have shifted to an indigenous prestige goods economy with economic control only over the region within a day’s walk of the center (Bradley 1993; Whalen and Minnis 2001). The outer zones of the Casas Grandes regional system were not directly controlled by Paquimé, but merely influenced, perhaps through a shared ritual and symbolic system. Trade goods, however, are central to both of these models, either as the raison d’etre for Paquimé’s existence or as the tool with which elites and their kin groups competed for power within the site.

Several classes of artifacts at Paquimé have been firmly demonstrated to be trade goods, and many of these are prestige goods as well. Prestige goods tend to be objects from distant enough origins to be exotic (Helms 1988, 1993), with a high ratio of value to weight. That is, they are lightweight, but highly valuable (Brumfiel and Earle 1987).

Paquimé received shell and turquoise come from distant locations (Bradley 1993), and 148 may have supplied macaw feathers in exchange. The Casas Grandes system was the nearest source for the macaws occasionally found in other southwestern sites to the north

(Minnis, et al. 1993). Copper, also, was being traded in to Paquimé (Vargas 1995).

During the 13th-14th centuries the southern southwest as a whole was a hotbed of

traveling ceramic styles, which could indicate ceramics were being used as an important

trade good as well. El Paso Polychrome, though, is an unlikely candidate for a prestige

good. As a ceramic, it is heavy, and, since it usually took the form of jars, it is bulky,

with none of the nested packing potential of the bowls often seen as trade wares in the

prehistoric Southwest. There are multiple possible explanations for the presence of non-

local ceramic styles, like El Paso Polychrome at Paquimé, however. The vessels could be

traded, or the people who make the vessels could have been migrating, or the ceramic

style may have been copied locally for some reason. All of these occurred during this

time period in the Greater Southwest.

The most common non-local pottery type at Paquimé, Gila Polychrome, was

likely a product of both trade and emulation. The JCGE ceramic analysts certainly

thought some of the Gila Polychromes were made locally (Di Peso, et al. 1974) and local

production of the Salado types, including Gila Polychrome, was not uncommon

elsewhere (Crown 1994).

The aim of this research project, however, has been to determine which

mechanisms account for the presence of the second most common non-local type at

Paquimé, El Paso Polychrome. Was the type really only produced in it’s Jornada

Mogollon heartland? This is the first study to systematically compare El Paso

Polychrome from the Casas Grandes culture area with El Paso Polychrome from the 149 Jornada Mogollon heartland, the style’s assumed place of origin. El Paso Polychrome’s status as a trade ware has never before been tested.

The issue of where the Chihuahuan El Paso Polychromes were produced is particularly important in characterizing the relationship between Paquimé and its eastern hinterland. Sites like Villa Ahumada sit astride the murky boundary between the Casas

Grandes and Jornada Mogollon regional systems. Villa Ahumada, in particular, has been used to define the outer limits of both culture areas, as it possesses ample representation of both areas’ ceramic types. Does Paquimé, as the primary center of the Casas Grandes regional system derive its El Paso Polychrome directly from the type’s heartland in the

Jornada Mogollon, or do communities in the eastern hinterland act as intermediaries?

These questions can be successfully addressed using samples of El Paso

Polychrome from Paquimé, Villa Ahumada and the Jornada heartland. These samples were characterized and compared based on examination of whole sherds, and by petrographic analysis of a smaller sample of thin-sections. A summary of these results is presented in Table 7-1. This summary gives the very basic outline of results for each

variable examined. Several variables indicate that El Paso Polychrome is a highly

consistent type, technologically and stylistically, within and between the Jornada

Mogollon and Casas Grandes culture areas. Other variables, however, indicate that,

though the Paquimé and Fort Bliss samples are almost identical, Villa Ahumada’s El

Paso Polychrome is a slightly different entity. Each of these issues will be discussed

below in the framework of the research questions. 150

Table 7-1: Summary of sample comparison results Variable Results Rim diameter Although the ranges overlap, Paquimé tends to have larger rim diameters than the Fort Bliss sites. Villa Ahumada’s very small sample followed the central tendency of the Fort Bliss sample. Sherd thickness The ranges were very similar across all three samples. The means differed by less than expected measurement error. The samples are not meaningfully different. Cross-section All three locations show an inclination towards fully reduced sherds and sherds with a centered reduced core. Variation is between samples is within that expected from open pit firing. Temper roundness The Paquimé sample contains a wider range of temper roundness classes, but the majority of sherds in all three samples contain angular and subangular temper grains. Temper sorting Most of the sherds in the Paquimé and Fort Bliss samples fall into the poor and very poor temper sorting categories. Villa Ahumada is different from the other two samples in that it has a much larger proportion of sherds falling in the fair sorting category. Painted line width The mean red and black line widths in the Paquimé and Fort Bliss samples differ by less than the expected measurement error. All of Villa Ahumada’s mean line widths are significantly different from the other two samples. Body recipe El Paso Polychrome tends to have a larger proportion of temper than the Chihuahuan plain wares. Mean proportions of matrix, silt, sand and temper in the three El Paso Polychrome samples, however, differ by less than the expected estimation and counting error. The three samples do not differ significantly in ceramic recipe. Grain size analysis The mean grain size distributions of the Paquimé and Fort Bliss samples are very similar. Villa Ahumada, though, has a smaller proportion of fine grains and larger proportions of coarse and very coarse grains than the other two samples. Minerals present The Chihuahuan plain wares contain volcanic rock fragments not found in El Paso Polychromes. Between themselves, all three El Paso Polychrome samples significantly differ in the relative frequency of sherds with the minerals perthite, microcline, sericite, muscovite, and sphene.

151 Was El Paso Polychrome a trade ware at Paquimé?

The simple, direct answer to the question of what mechanism is responsible for the frequency of El Paso Polychrome at Paquimé is trade. While the most common non- local type, Gila Polychrome, was the subject of both trade and emulation at Paquimé, El

Paso Polychrome was not manufactured locally. The status of the type as entirely a trade ware is supported by its significant differences from the local types, its great similarity to samples of El Paso Polychrome from the Jornada Mogollon heartland, and the lack of sources for granite tempering materials within 30 km of Paquimé and Villa Ahumada.

Some Gila Polychrome is said to be locally produced at Paquimé specifically because it has a paste that closely resembles local wares (Di Peso, et al. 1974, vol. 8).

The same cannot be said for El Paso Polychrome. The latter type is easily visually distinguished from local Chihuahuan polychrome types by its style of painting and its brown base color. It can be visually distinguished from both the local polychromes and the local textured or plain wares based on its distinctive crumbly paste and large white temper grains.

These differences are confirmed at the petrographic level. El Paso Polychrome tends to have a larger proportion of temper in its ceramic body recipe than local plain wares at both Paquimé and Villa Ahumada. The local plain wares also contain volcanic rock fragments in their temper that are not found in the El Paso Polychrome samples. El

Paso Polychrome is technologically different than the local Chihuahuan plain wares.

This technological difference could result from different tempers being used for different types of pottery at Paquimé, but this explanation is unlikely because the Fort Bliss and 152 Paquimé samples have virtually identical granite tempers, as will be discussed later in this chapter.

If the El Paso Polychrome at Paquimé was a local emulation or produced by relocated Jornada Mogollon potters the raw materials should resemble locally produced wares even if the external style differs. All of the El Paso Polychrome thin sections contained granite grit temper, however, and granite is not a locally available raw material. There are no granite sources within 30km of either Paquimé or Villa Ahumada.

This is well beyond the distance potters are willing to travel for raw materials ethnographically (Arnold 1980; Arnold, et al. 1991). An influx of migrant potters could also be expected to create new hybridized ceramic styles, a phenomenon which is not seen in the Casas Grandes culture area, nor are any other signs of population movement.

When combined with the strong resemblance between the Paquimé and Fort Bliss samples of El Paso Polychrome, the technological differences from local Chihuahuan wares indicate non-local origin for the type.

Was Paquimé deriving its El Paso Polychrome directly from the Jornada Mogollon?

The sites sampled from Fort Bliss were but ten out of hundreds of El Paso Phase communities that could have been producing the El Paso Polychrome that made its way to Paquimé. This handful of sites, though, was producing El Paso Polychrome that was virtually identical to Paquimé’s, even though each of them by itself was unlikely to be the

Chihuahuan community’s supplier. In some respects the Villa Ahumada El Paso

Polychrome also very closely resembles both the Fort Bliss and Paquimé samples. This 153 ceramic type is quite uniform across its distribution area. However, several variables indicate that Paquimé derived its El Paso Polychrome directly from the Jornada Mogollon heartland.

El Paso Polychrome is one uniform ceramic type between the El Paso area and the northwestern Chihuahuan sites. The samples from Paquimé and Villa Ahumada are almost identical to the Fort Bliss sample in ceramic body recipe, sherd thickness, and in the accessory minerals present in their granite tempering materials.

However, there are several variables in which the Paquimé and Fort Bliss samples are identical, while Villa Ahumada is significantly different. These include the grain size distribution of the temper within the ceramic body, the degree of temper sorting, and the width of both red and black lines in the designs painted on the El Paso Polychrome. The samples from Paquimé and Fort Bliss have larger proportions of fine sized temper grains but more poorly sorted tempers than the Villa Ahumada sample. The Villa Ahumada sample is also decorated with significantly wider lines than El Paso Polychrome from the other locations.

While the Paquimé and Fort Bliss samples were similar to each other in most variables, there were still some differences between them. The largest significant difference between the Paquimé and Fort Bliss samples was in rim diameter. Both samples share the same range of vessel sizes, but Paquimé had higher mean and median rim diameters, meaning it had more vessels of a larger size. This is interesting evidence of a bias towards using larger vessels for trade. The Paquimé and Fort Bliss samples also differ in the proportion of sherds belonging to different cross-section categories related to firing atmosphere and temperature. All three ceramic samples show similar firing 154 preferences, with a heavy representation of both fully reduced sherds and sherds having a centered reduced core at all three locations. Of these two dominant categories, however,

Paquimé had a higher frequency of the centered reduced core category, while the Fort

Bliss sites had a higher frequency of fully reduced cross-sections. This could be the result of slightly different approaches to firing vessels in a reduced atmosphere.

However, in open pit firing there is often high variability in the cross-section of otherwise similarly treated vessels simply because of the difficulty of maintaining consistent temperature and atmosphere between firing events.

The samples from all three locations differ from each other in their frequencies of accessory mineral presence. While all El Paso Polychrome samples show the minerals expected from the two Franklin Mountains granite sources in El Paso, the minerals that are expected to appear together in each source are patterned independently of each other.

This may be the result of variability within the two Franklin Mountains sources, or the use of other granite outcrops in Chihuahua. This latter possibility is unlikely, because the bedrock in northwest Chihuahua is predominantly extrusive volcanic rock, with few if any intrusive granite outcrops (see papers in Clark and Goodell 1983; Córdoba, et al.

1969; Kettenbrink 1984).

For every variable, if there was one sample that significantly differed from both others, it was always Villa Ahumada. Paquimé and Fort Bliss, however, have virtually identical El Paso Polychromes. This supports a Jornada Mogollon origin for Paquimé’s

El Paso Polychrome. Meanwhile, the economic relationships between Villa Ahumada and the two culture areas it is sandwiched between remain murky. The frequencies of El

Paso Polychrome at Villa Ahumada are high enough, at 16.6% of the sites total ceramic 155 assemblage (Cruz Antillón, et al. 2004), that the site either produced El Paso Polychrome itself or had very strong trade relationships with somewhere that did.

It is unlikely that Villa Ahumada was a large-scale producer of El Paso

Polychrome. As at Paquimé, the El Paso Polychrome sample differs significantly from

Villa Ahumada’s plain wares in temper proportion, and, again, the local plain wares contain volcanic rock fragments, like basalt, not found in the El Paso Polychrome. Also, the Villa Ahumada El Paso Polychrome was tempered with granite, like the other samples, but granite outcrops are rare in the otherwise extrusive volcanic bedrock of northwest Chihuahua. The closest identified granite formation is in two very small mountain groups approximately 30-40 kilometers due north of Villa Ahumada (Ochoa and Cortes 1983). This is outside the range potters are usually willing to travel to obtain temper. According to Dean Arnold’s (1980) ethnographic survey, 97% of potters collect tempering materials within 5 kilometers of their production location. Other studies give maximum temper collection distances of 1.5 km (Arnold, et al. 1991), 2 km (Dietler and

Herbich 1989) and 8 km (Deal 1998).

However, if Villa Ahumada did not produce its own El Paso Polychrome, it does not appear to have been deriving El Paso Polychrome directly from the Jornada Mogollon heartland as Paquimé was. Villa Ahumada’s source of this pottery type may have been as peripheral to the Jornada heartland as Vila Ahumada itself. Villa Ahumada also did not supply El Paso Polychrome to Paquimé. It functioned neither as a production location nor as a middleman, though it was a closer potential source of El Paso Polychrome for the Chihuahuan communities (see Figure 7-1). It appears from the distribution of El Paso

Polychrome that Villa Ahumada did not have strong economic ties to either Paquimé or 156

Figure 7-1: Distances from Paquimé to Villa Ahumada and the El Paso area. the Jornada Mogollon heartland, rather, this community sat astride the boundary between the two culture areas and picked and chose traits from both as its residents saw fit.

An identification of more precise production locations for the Chihuahuan El Paso

Polychromes will require a more precise method than petrography, such as chemical characterization. Another researcher, Daryl Creel, has submitted samples of El Paso

Polychrome from Jornada Mogollon sites to the University of Missouri Research Reactor 157 (MURR) for chemical characterization through INAA (Creel, et al. 2002; Michael

Glascock, personal communication 2001). Initial results indicate that El Paso

Polychrome from Jornada Mogollon sites is compositionally fairly uniform, or at least groups together well statistically (Michael Glascock, personal communication 2001).

Therefore, for further research, it should be simple to determine whether Paquimé and

Villa Ahumada’s El Paso Polychrome also belongs to this compositional group.

Why carry El Paso Polychrome 200 kilometers?

One great mystery to modern connoisseurs of prehistoric southwestern pottery is why anyone in Paquimé would want to acquire El Paso Polychrome. The locally produced painted ware, Ramos Polychrome, was more durable, the designs were better executed and more elaborate, and the end result generally much more attractive with its contrast between the white body color and bright red and black paints. Also, pottery that was being traded long distance for its own intrinsic value would be more likely to come in the form of bowls rather than jars. Bowls are stackable for more efficient transport, and less likely to break in transit. One room in the House of the Well at Paquimé, for instance, contained a stack of more than 50 Gila Polychrome bowls (Di Peso 1974, vol.

2:383). This Gila Polychrome, horded in specific locations at Paquimé, was likely a prestige good, but, in contrast, access to El Paso Polychrome was not restricted at all. El

Paso Polychrome is found in contexts spread across the entire excavated portion of the site (see sample list in Chapter 5). This Jornada Mogollon ceramic type was not a prestige good. 158 So why were El Paso Polychrome jars, easily breakable and not particularly attractive, being transported at least 200 kilometers from the El Paso area to Paquimé?

There are no navigable rivers in northwest Chihuahua and no pack animals. Each and every one of the El Paso Polychrome jars had to be carried to Paquimé on someone’s back. There are multiple potential explanations for all of this effort, including the use of

El Paso Polychrome as a container for transporting other goods. Alternately, the high frequency of the type at Paquimé could result from social relationships between this central place and Jornada Mogollon individuals and communities, with the ceramics either playing a direct role in creating bonds between trading partners or accompanying visitors to Paquimé.

If El Paso Polychrome was being transported for the sake of some commodity contained inside the jars, rather than for the pottery itself, one of the most likely candidates is salt. Charles C. Di Peso, Paquimé’s excavator, referred to El Paso

Polychrome vessels as “tin cans” (Di Peso, et al. 1974, vol. 8:141), because they were so common among the non-local pottery. He suggested that the large jars had been used to bring salt from the El Paso area. This is the best candidate for a commodity available from the Jornada Mogollon that was valuable enough, yet also light enough, to carry so far in bulk. Much further south, in Mesoamerica, there is ethnohistoric evidence of salt occasionally being traded in jars (Charlton 1971). However, these jars were connected to industries that manufactured salt from brine, and the jars were the containers that the brine had been boiled in. This is quite different from the salt industry seen in the prehistoric American Southwest. 159 While prehistoric groups with access to salt water could easily extract salt through evaporation techniques, this was not possible in the Jornada Mogollon or Casas Grandes culture areas. In many parts of the southwest, including the Jornada Mogollon heartland, salt had to be mined or collected from sometimes distant mineral deposits. At the beginning of the 20th century, Hopi salt gathering expeditions would travel for two or

three days each way to gather salt from a location near the Grand Canyon (Titiev 1937).

These 20th century salt collectors transported their goods in sacks, not pottery.

The Jornada Mogollon heartland contains several surface deposits (see Figure 7-

2) where salt can be collected. These are located in the north Tularosa Basin, the East

Tularosa Basin, and along the Rio Grande where it now separates the urban sprawls of El

Paso and Ciudad Juárez (Bentley 1991). All of these were being exploited by local

groups when the Spanish arrived. The prehistoric artifact assemblages associated with

these surface salt sources include pottery jars along with stone tools for breaking up or

collecting salt deposits (Bentley 1991). It is possible, if the surface deposits or final

product were fine and powdery enough, that ceramic containers would be as practical as

sacks or baskets.

Alternately, the high frequency of El Paso Polychrome at Paquimé and Villa

Ahumada may be the result of regional social relationships as much, or more than, simple

exchange of commodities. Casas Grandean individuals traveling to the northeast may

have received El Paso Polychrome vessels as gifts from their trading partners and carried

the pottery home with them, or, in a reversed situation, Jornada Mogollon individuals 160

Figure 7-2: El Paso area surface salt sources (locations from Bentley 1991). Hatched areas are mountains, triangles are salt sources, and circles are modern towns. may have brought ceramics with them as gifts for their hosts in Casas Grandean communities. Gifts are a strategy for cementing social bonds at all levels of social complexity. It is likely that El Paso Polychrome vessels were one type of object used to create obligation between regional trading partners. 161 It is also possible that the frequency of El Paso Polychrome, at least at Paquimé, is a by-product of the site’s regional drawing power as a cultural and religious center.

In describing the regional role of Chaco Canyon in the Anasazi area, Colin Renfrew

(2001) refers to the cluster of sites in the canyon as a “Location of High Devotional

Expression”, periodically drawing large numbers of visitors, or “pilgrims” from a large surrounding region. Pilgrims would have arrived bearing their own local ceramics, merely as luggage, as gifts, or as ritual offerings, which concentrations of broken non- local pottery at some Chaco Canyon locations seem to support (Toll 2001).

Paquimé is much larger than any individual Chacoan Great House, and has an unusually high concentration of monumental architecture for any individual site in the

Southwest. It is highly likely that, like Chaco Canyon, Paquimé functioned as a religious center for a much larger region than the community had any real political control over.

David Wilcox (1995) has proposed that Paquimé exerted regional influence through a system of ceremonial exchange centered on some variant of the Mesoamerican ballgame, and that Chihuahuan painted ceramics were a vehicle for expression of the ideology of

Paquimé’s elites. Visitors traveling to Paquimé to observe or participate in ballgames or religious observations would have come bearing their own pottery, which would have been El Paso Polychrome in the case of Jornada Mogollon guests. In this scenario, the El

Paso Polychrome at Paquimé would represent frequent visitors from the Jornada area, and therefore strong ideological ties between the two culture areas.

It is most likely that El Paso Polychrome is a manifestation of both economic and ideological ties between the Casas Grandes and Jornada Mogollon culture areas. Trade in materials contained within the pots and the bearing of pots to Paquimé by visitors with 162 non-economic goals in mind are not mutually exclusive. The vessels likely reached

Chihuahuan sites through both mechanisms.

Conclusion

El Paso Polychrome is certainly a trade ware at Paquimé, and jars of this ceramic type were being transported approximately 200 kilometers from communities in the desert basins around modern day El Paso, Texas. Small amounts of El Paso Polychrome are reported over a very wide area of the Southwest indeed, with a few sherds being reported from sites 500 km northwest of El Paso in Arizona (Lehmer 1948), 160 km east in Texas and even occasionally in the Texas panhandle (Miller and Kenmotsu 2004).

However, sites with more than just a few sherds are limited in distribution to the Jornada

Mogollon as defined by Donald Lehmer (1948) (see Figure 4-1). Paquimé seems to be an exception to this distribution, as is the La Junta de Los Rios region near Ojinaga, parts of which are 320 kilometers from El Paso downstream on the Rio Grande. The critical difference however, is that El Paso Polychrome was possibly being manufactured at La

Junta de los Rios sites by El Paso Phase migrants (Kenmotsu 2005), while Paquimé was deriving its El Paso Polychrome directly from the Jornada heartland. The economic relationship between Paquimé and the Jornada Mogollon seems to have been unique in the quantity of vessels transported, though not in the distance these vessels traveled from their stylistic place of origin.

El Paso Polychrome jars probably traveled as containers for other goods, possibly surface salt collected from deposits in the Tularosa Basin and along the Rio Grande in the 163 El Paso area. The El Paso Polychrome at Paquimé is almost identical to samples from sites on the Fort Bliss maneuver areas, except that rim diameter of the vessels tends to be larger at Paquimé. This means Paquimé was deriving it’s supply of El Paso Polychrome, and whatever goods it contained, directly from the Jornada Mogollon region, and that larger vessels were selectively chosen for this long-distance trade.

Interestingly, the intermediate communities between Paquimé and the Jornada

Mogollon heartland did not play a significant role in this trade route. Villa Ahumada, defining the outside limit of both culture areas, had large quantities of El Paso

Polychrome. However, the site was not a source of El Paso Polychrome for Paquimé, nor does it appear to have derived it’s own supply of the type from the same communities that did supply Paquimé. There are also very low frequencies of El Paso Polychrome found at sites along the northern Rio Santa Maria between Villa Ahumada and Paquimé.

The trade was direct between Paquimé and the Jornada Mogollon, and whatever commodity was being transported more than 200 kilometers on foot, it was going directly to the primary center, and not to Paquimé’s associated surrounding communities.

Bibliography

Abbott, D. R. and D. M. Schaller 1994 Ceramics Among the Hohokam: Modeling Social Organization and Exchange. In Archaeometry of Pre-Columbian Sites and Artifacts, edited by D. A. Scott and P. Meyers, pp. 85-109. The Getty Conservation Institute, Los Angeles.

Arnold, D. E. 1980 Localized Exchange: An Ethnoarchaeological Perspective. In Models and Methods in Regional Exchange, edited by R. E. Fry, pp. 147-150. SAA Papers No. 1. Society for American Archaeology, Washington, D. C.

Arnold, D. E., H. Neff and R. L. Bishop 1991 Compositional Analysis and "Sources" of Pottery: An Ethnoarchaeological Approach. American Anthropologist 93(1):70-90.

Bandelier, A. F. 1890 The Ruins of Casas Grandes. Nation 51:185-187.

1892 Final Report of Investigations Among the Indians of the Southwestern United States Carried On Mainly in the Years from 1880-1885. Papers of the Archaeological Institute of America, American Series 4. Cambridge University Press, New York.

Barnes, V. E. 1983 Geologic Atlas of Texas, Van Horn-El Paso Sheet. University of Texas at Austin, Bureau of Economic Geology, Austin.

Beck, C. (editor) 1985 Views of the Jornada Mogollon: Proceedings of the Second Jornada Mogollon Archaeology Conference. Eastern New Mexico University Press, Portales.

Beckett, P. H. and R. Wiseman 1979 Jornada Mogollon Archaeology: Proceedings of the First Jornada Conference. New Mexico State University and New Mexico State Historic Preservation Officer's Office, Las Cruces.

Beckett, P. H. and K. Silverbird (editors) 1982 Mogollon Archaeology: Proceedings of the 1980 Mogollon Conference. Acoma Books, Ramona, CA.

165 Bentley, M. 1991 Early Salt Mining in the El Paso del Norte Region. The Artifact 29(2):43- 55.

Blackiston, A. H. 1906 Ruins of the Cerro de Moctezuma. American Anthropologist 8:257-261.

1909 Recently Discovered Cliff-Dwellings of the Sierra Madres. Records of the Past 8:20-32.

Bradley, R. J. and J. M. Hoffer 1985 Playas Red: A Preliminary Study of Origins and Variability in the Jornada Mogollon. The Artifact 2(1 & 2):161-177.

Bradley, R. J. 1993 Marine Shell Exchange in Northwest Mexico and the Southwest. In The American Southwest and Mesoamerica: Systems of Prehistoric Exchange, edited by J. E. Ericson and T. G. Baugh, pp. 121-151. Plenum, New York.

2000 Recent Advances in Chihuahuan Archaeology. In Greater Mesoamerica: the Archaeology of West and Northwest Mexico, edited by M. S. Foster and S. G. Gorenstein, pp. 221-239. University of Utah Press, Salt Lake City.

Brand, D., D. 1935 The Distribution of Pottery Types in Northwest Mexico. American Anthropologist 37:287-305.

1943 The Chihuahua Culture Area. New Mexico Anthropologist 6-7(3):115-158.

Brandt, E. A. 1994 Egalitarianism, Hierarchy, and Centralization in the Pueblos. In The Ancient Southwestern Community: Models and Methods for the Study of Prehistoric Social Organization, edited by W. H. Wills and R. D. Leonard, pp. 9- 23. University of New Mexico Press, Albuquerque.

Braniff Cornejo, B. 1986 Ojo de Agua, Sonora, and Casas Grandes, Chihuahua: A Suggested Chronology. In Ripples in the Chichimec Sea: New Considerations of Southwestern-Mesoamerican Interactions, edited by F. J. Mathien and R. H. McGuire, pp. 70-80. Center for Archaeological Investigations. Southern Illinois University Press, Carbondale.

1993 The Mesoamerican Northern Frontier and the Gran Chichimeca. In Culture and Contact: Charles C. Di Peso's Gran Chichimeca, edited by A. I. Woosley and J. C. Ravesloot, pp. 65-82. Amerind Foundation, Dragoon, Arizona 166 and University of New Mexico Press, Albuquerque.

Braniff Cornejo, B. 2002 Fronteras e Intercambio: Mesoamérica, el "Southwest" y La Gran Chichimeca. In Boundaries and Territories: Prehisotry of the U.S. Southwest and Northern Mexico, edited by M. E. Villalpando C., pp. 107-115. Anthropological Research Papers No. 54. Arizona State University, Tempe.

Brook, V. R. 1982 Some Effigies of the Jornada Branch. In Mogollon Archaeology: Proceedings of the 1980 Mogollon Conference, edited by P. H. Beckett and K. Silverbird, pp. 211-255. Acoma Books, Ramona, CA.

Brown, R. B., P. Fournier, D. V. Hill, J. A. Peterson and M. Willis 2004 Settlement and Ceramics in New Spain: A Case Study of Brown Ware Pottery and Historical Change. In Surveying the Archaeology of Northwest Mexico, edited by G. E. Newell and E. Gallaga, pp. 265-288. University of Utah Press, Salt Lake City.

Browning, C., M. Sale, D. T. Kirkpatrick and K. W. Laumbach 1993 MOTR Site: Excavation at Site LA 72859, an El Paso Phase Structure on Fort Bliss, Otero County, New Mexico. The Artifact 31(3).

Brumfiel, E. M. and T. K. Earle 1987 Specialization, exchange, and complex societies: an introduction. In Specialization, Exchange, and Complex Societies, edited by E. M. Brumfiel and T. K. Earle, pp. 1-9. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

Burd Larkin, K., J. H. Kelley and M. J. Hendrickson 2004 Ceramics as Temporal and Spatial Indicators in Chihuahua Cultures. In Surveying the Archaeology of Northwest Mexico, edited by G. E. Newell and E. Gallaga, pp. 177-204. University of Utah Press, Salt Lake City.

Carey, H. A. 1931 An Analysis of the Northwestern Chihuahua Culture. American Anthropologist 33(3):325-374.

Carmichael, D. L. 1986 Archaeological Survey in the Southern Tularosa Basin of New Mexico. Historic and Natural Resources Report No. 3. Environmental Management Office, Fort Bliss, Texas.

Charlton, T. H. 1971 Texcoco Fabric-Marked Pottery and Salt-Making: A Further Note. American Antiquity 36(2):217-218. 167

Chayes, F. 1954 The Theory of Thin-Section Analysis. Journal of Geology 62:92-101.

Clark, K. F. and P. C. Goodell (editors) 1983 Geology and Mineral Resources of North-Central Chihuahua: Guidebook for the 1983 Field Conference. El Paso Geological Society, El Paso.

Cordell, L. S. and F. Plog 1979 Escaping the Confines of Normative Thought: A Reevaluation of Puebloan Prehistory. American Antiquity 44(3):405-429.

Córdoba, D. A., S. A. Wengerd and J. Shomaker (editors) 1969 Guidebook of the Border Region: Twentieth Field Conference of the New Mexico Geological Society. The New Mexico Geological Society, Socorro, NM.

Creel, D. G. 1999 The Black Mountain Phase in the Mimbres Area. In The Casas Grandes World, edited by C. F. Schaafsma and C. L. Riley, pp. 107-120. University of Utah Press, Salt Lake City.

Creel, D. G., M. Williams, H. Neff and M. D. Glascock 2002 Black Mountain Phase Ceramics and Implications for Manufacture and Exchange Patterns. In Ceramic Production and Circulation in the Greater Southwest: Source Determination by INAA and Complementary Mineralogical Investigations, edited by D. M. Glowacki and H. Neff, pp. 37-46. Monograph 44. Cotsen Institute of Archaeology, University of California, Los Angeles.

Crown, P. L. and W. J. Judge 1991 Introduction. In Chaco and Hohokam: Prehistoric Regional Systems in the American Southwest, edited by P. L. Crown and W. J. Judge. SAR Press, Santa Fe.

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

1996 Change in Ceramic Design Style and Technology in the Thirteenth- to Fourteenth-Century Southwest. In Interpreting Southwestern Diversity: Underlying Principles and Overarching Patterns, edited by P. R. Fish and J. J. Reid, pp. 241-247. Anthropological Research Papers No. 48. Arizona State University, Tempe.

Cruz Antillón, R. and T. D. Maxwell 1999 The Villa Ahumada Site: Archaeological Investigations East of Paquimé. 168 In The Casas Grandes world, edited by C. F. Schaafsma and C. L. Riley, pp. 43- 53. University of Utah Press, Salt Lake City.

Cruz Antillón, R., R. D. Leonard, T. D. Maxwell, T. L. VanPool, M. J. Harmon, C. S. VanPool, D. A. Hyndman and S. S. Brandwein 2004 Galeana, Villa Ahumada, and Casa Chica: Diverse Sites in the Casas Grandes Region. In Surveying the Archaeology of Northwest Mexico, edited by G. E. Newell and E. Gallaga, pp. 149-176. University of Utah Press, Salt Lake City.

De Atley, S. P. and F. J. Findlow 1982 Regional Integration of the Northern Casas Grandes Frontier. In Mogollon Archaeology: Proceedings of the 1980 Mogollon Conference, edited by P. H. Beckett and K. Silverbird, pp. 263-277. Acoma Books, Ramona, California.

Deal, M. 1998 Pottery Ethnoarchaeology in the Central Maya Highlands. University of Utah Press, Salt Lake City.

Dean, J. S. and J. C. Ravesloot 1993 The Chronology of Cultural Interaction in the Gran Chichimeca. In Culture and Contact: Charles C. Di Peso's Gran Chichimeca, edited by J. E. Reyman, pp. 83-104. Amerind Foundation, Dragoon, Arizona University Of New Mexico Press, Albuquerque.

DeBoer, W. R. and D. W. Lathrap 1979 The Making and Breaking of Shipibo-Conibo Ceramics. In Ethnoarchaeology: Implications of Ethnography for Archaeology, pp. 102-138. Columbia University Press, New York.

Di Peso, C. C. 1974 Casas Grandes: A Fallen Trading Center of the Gran Chichimeca. Amerind Foundation Publications 9 1-3. Amerind Foundation, Dragoon, Arizona.

Di Peso, C. C., J. B. Rinaldo and G. J. Fenner 1974 Casas Grandes: A Fallen Trading Center of the Gran Chichimeca. Amerind Foundation Publications 9 4-8. Amerind Foundation, Dragoon, Arizona.

Dietler, M. and I. Herbich 1989 Tich Matek: The Technology of Luo Pottery Production and the Definition of Ceramic Style. World Archaeology 21(1):148-164.

Douglas, J. E. 1992 Distant Sources, Local Contexts: Interpreting Nonlocal Ceramics at Paquimé (Casas Grandes), Chihuahua. Journal of Anthropological Research 48(1):1-24. 169

1995 Autonomy and Regional Systems in the Late Prehistoric Southern Southwest. American Antiquity 60(2):240-257.

2004 A Reinterpretation of the Occupational History of the Pendleton Ruin, New Mexico. Journal of Field Archaeology 29(3-4):425-436.

Doyel, D. E. 1976 Salado Cultural Developments in the Tonto Basin and Globe-Miami Areas. Kiva 42(1):5-16.

Dunnell, R. C. 1978 Style and Function: A Fundamental Dichotomy. American Antiquity 43(2):192-202.

Earle, T. K. 1997 How Chiefs come to Power: The Political Economy in Prehistory. Stanford University Press, Stanford.

Fagan, B. M. 2005 Ancient North America. Fourth edition ed. Thames & Hudson, New York.

Feinman, G. M., K. Lightfoot and S. Upham 2000 Political Hierarchies and Organizational Strategies in the Puebloan Southwest. American Antiquity 65:449-470.

Foster, M. S. 1993 Archaeological Investigations at Pueblo Sin Casas (FB6273), a Multicomponent Site in the Hueco Bolson, Fort Bliss, Texas. Historic and Natural Resources Report 7, Cultural Resources Branch, Environmental Management Division, Directorate of Environment, United States Army Air Defense Artillery Center, Fort Bliss, Fort Bliss, Texas.

Frankenstein, S. and M. J. Rowland 1978 The Internal Structure and Regional Context of Early Iron Age Society in South-Western Germany. London University Institute of Archaeology Bulletin 15:73-112.

Freestone, I. C. 1991 Extending Ceramic Petrology. In Recent Developments in Ceramic Petrology, edited by A. P. Middleton and I. C. Freestone. Occasional Paper No. 81. The British Museum, London.

1995 Ceramic Petrography. American Journal of Archaeology 99(1):111-115.

170 Gledhill, J. 1978 Formative Development in the North American Southwest. British Archaeological Reports 47:241-284.

Glowacki, D. M. and H. Neff (editors) 2002 Ceramic Production and Circulation in the Greater Southwest: Source Determination by INAA and Complementary Mineralogical Investigations. University of California at Los Angeles.

Gosselain, O. P. 1992 Technology and Style: Potters and Pottery Among Bafia of Cameroon. Man 27(3):559-586.

Gribble, C. D. and A. J. Hall 1992 Optical Mineralogy: Principles and Practice. UCL Press, London.

Habicht-Mauche, J. A. 1995 Changing Patterns of Pottery Manufacture and Trade in the Northern Rio Grande Region. In Ceramic Production in the American Southwest, edited by B. J. Mills and P. L. Crown, pp. 167-199. University of Arizona Press, Tucson.

Hammond, G. P. and A. Rey 1928 Obregón's History of Sixteenth Century Explorations in Western North America Entitled: Chronicle, Commentary, or Relation of the Ancient and Modern Discoveries in New Spain, New Mexico, and Mexico, 1584. Translated by G. P. Hammond and A. Rey. Wetzel, Los Angeles.

Haury, E. W. 1948 Foreword. Social Science Bulletin 17. University of Arizona Bulletin 19(2):2-3.

1958 Evidence at Point of Pines for Prehistoric Migration from Northern Arizona. In Migrations in New World Culture History, edited by R. H. Thompson, pp. 1-8. University of Arizona Bulletin 29, Social Science Bulletin 27. University of Arizona, Tucson.

Hegmon, M. 1995 The Social Dynamics of Pottery Style in the Early Puebloan Southwest. Occasional Paper No. 5. Crow Canyon Archaeological Center, Cortez, Colorado.

Hegmon, M., M. C. Nelson and M. J. Ennes 2000 Corrugated Pottery, Technological Style, and Population Movement in the Mimbres Region of the American Southwest. Journal of Anthropological Research 56:217-240.

171 Helms, M. C. 1988 Ulysses' sail : an ethnographic odyssey of power, knowledge, and geographical distance. Princeton University Press, Princeton.

1993 Craft and the Kingly Ideal: Art, Trade and Power. University of Texas Press, Austin.

Hill, D. V. 1988 Petrographic Analysis of El Paso Polychrome Pottery from Pickup Pueblo. The Artifact 26(2):75-78.

1996 Petrographic Analysis of Brown Ware Sherds from LA 86774 and LA 86780. In Archaeological Investigations in the Southern Mesilla Bolson: Data Recovery at the Santa Teresa Port-of-Entry Facility, edited by J. L. Moore, pp. 307-311. Archaeology Notes 188. Museum of New Mexico Office of Archaeological Studies, Santa Fe.

Hodder, I. 1990 Style as Historical Quality. In The Uses of Style in Archaeology, edited by M. W. Conkey and C. A. Hastorf, pp. 44-51. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

Instituto Nacional de Estadistica, Geografía y Informatica (INEGI) 1983 Ciudad Juarez H13-1. Geologic map, 1:250,000 scale. INEGI, Mexico, D.F.

1983 Nuevo Casas Grandes H13-4. Geologic map, scale 1:250,000. INEGI, Mexico, D.F.

Jackson, L. and M. Thompson 2005 Form and Function: A Reassessment of El Paso Polychrome. In Archaeology Between the Borders: Papers from the 13th Biennial Jornada Mogollon Conference, edited by M. Thompson, J. Jurgena and L. Jackson. El Paso Museum of Archaeology, El Paso.

Judge, W. J. 1991 Chaco: Current Views of Prehistory and the Regional System. In Chaco & Hohokam: Prehistoric Regional Systems in the American Southwest, edited by P. L. Crown and W. J. Judge, pp. 11-30. SAR Press, Santa Fe.

Kelley, J. C. 1966 Mesoamerica and the Southern United States. In Handbook of Middle American Indians, edited by G. F. Ekholm and G. R. Willey, pp. 95-110. vol. 4. University of Texas Press, Austin.

172 1986 The Mobile Merchants of Molino. In Ripples in the Chichimec Sea: New Considerations of Southwestern-Mesoamerican Interactions, edited by F. J. Mathien and R. H. McGuire, pp. 81-104. Southern Illinois University Press, Carbondale.

Kelley, J. C. 1995 Trade Goods, Traders and Status in Northwestern Greater Mesoamerica. In The Gran Chichimeca: Essays on the Archaeology and Ethnohistory of Northern Mesoamerica, edited by J. E. Reyman, pp. 102-145. Avebury, Brookfield.

Kelley, J. H. and M. E. Villalpando C. 1996 An Overview of the Mexican Northwest. In Interpreting Southwestern Diversity: Underlying Principles and Overarching Patterns, edited by P. R. Fish and J. J. Reid, pp. 69-77. Arizona State University Anthropological Research Papers No. 48, Tempe.

Kelley, J. H., J. D. Stewart, A. C. MacWilliams and L. C. Neff 1999 A West-Central Chihuahuan Perspective on Chihuahuan Culture. In The Casas Grandes World, edited by C. F. Schaafsma and C. L. Riley, pp. 63-77. University of Utah Press, Salt Lake City.

Kelley, J. C. 2000 The Aztatlan Mercantile System: Mobile Traders and the Northwestward Expansion of Mesoamerican Civilization. In Greater Mesoamerica: the Archaeology of West and Northwest Mexico, edited by M. S. Foster and S. G. Gorenstein, pp. 137-154. University of Utah Press, Salt Lake City.

Kelley, J. H., J. D. Stewart, A. C. MacWilliams and K. R. Adams 2004 Recent Research in West-Central Chihuahua. In Identity, Feasting, and the Archaeology of the Greater Southwest, edited by B. J. Mills, pp. 295-310. University Press of Colorado, Boulder.

Kenmotsu, N. A. 2005 Insights from INAA About Possible In-migration of Groups to La Junta de los Rios, Texas. Paper presented at the 70th Annual Meeting of the Society for American Archaeology, Salt Lake City, UT.

Kettenbrink, E. C. (editor) 1984 Geology and Petroleum Potential of Chihuahua, Mexico. West Texas Geological Society, El Paso.

Kidder, A. V. 1924 An Introduction to the Study of Southwestern Archaeology. Papers of the Southwest Expedition, No. 1. Phillips Academy, Andover, NH. 173

1939 Notes on the Archaeology of the Babicora District, Chihuahua. In So Live the Works of Men. Seventieth Anniversary Volume Honoring Edgar Lee Hewett, edited by D. Brand, D. and F. E. Harvey, pp. 221-230. University of New Mexico Press, Albuquerque and School of American Research, Santa Fe.

Kidder, A. V., H. S. Cosgrove and C. B. Cosgrove 1949 The Pendleton Ruin, Hidalgo County, New Mexico. Contributions to American Anthropology and History, Vol. 10, No. 50. Carnegie Institution, Washington, D.C.

LeBlanc, S. A. and M. E. Whalen 1980 Archeological Synthesis of South-Central and Southwestern New Mexico. Office of Contract Archaeology, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque.

LeBlanc, S. A. 1989 Cultural Dynamics in the Southern Mogollon Area. In Dynamics of Southwestern Prehistory, edited by L. S. Cordell and G. J. Gumerman, pp. 179- 207. Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington, D. C.

Lechtman, H. 1977 Style in Technology: Some Early Thoughts. In Material Culture: Style Organization, and Dynamics, edited by H. Lechtman and T. S. Merrill, pp. 3-20. West Publishing Co., St. Paul.

Lehmer, D. J. 1948 The Jornada Branch of the Mogollon. Social Science Bulletin 17. University of Arizona Bulletin 19(2):9-99.

Lekson, S. H. 1984 Dating Casas Grandes. Kiva 50(1):55-60.

Lemonnier, P. 1986 The Study of Material Culture Today: Toward an Anthropology of Technical Systems. Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 5:147-186.

Lightfoot, K. and S. Upham 1989 Complex Societies in the Prehistoric American Southwest: A Consideration of the Controversy. In The Sociopolitical Structure of Prehistoric Southwestern Societies, edited by S. Upham, K. Lightfoot and R. Jewett, pp. 3-32. Westview Press, Boulder.

Lister, R. H. 1946 Survey of Archaeological Remains in Northwestern Chihuahua. Southwestern Journal of Anthropology 2:443-452. 174

1960 History of Archaeological Fieldwork in Northwestern Mexico. Palacio 67(4):118-124.

Lowry, C. and M. Bentley 1997 Archaeological Investigations at Tobin Well: Adaptation in the Transition Zone - Archaeological Survey and Testing at the Hawk Radar Facility, Fort Bliss, Texas. Conservation Division, Directorate of Environment, United States Army Air Defense Artillery Center, Fort Bliss, Texas.

Lumholtz, C. 1902 Unknown Mexico. 2 vols. Charles Scribner's Sons, New York.

MacWilliams, A. C., J. D. Stewart and J. H. Kelley 2002 Past Boundaries and Frontiers in Chihuahua. In Boundaries and Territories: Prehistory of the U.S. Southwest and Northern Mexico, edited by M. E. Villalpando C., pp. 117-128. Arizona State University Anthropological Research papers No. 54. Arizona State University, Tempe.

MacWilliams, A. C. and J. H. Kelley 2004 A Ceramic Period Boundary in Central Chihuahua. In Surveying the Archaeology of Northwest Mexico, edited by G. E. Newell and E. Gallaga, pp. 247-264. University of Utah Press, Salt Lake City.

Mathien, F. J. 1993 Exchange Systems and Social Stratification Among the Chaco Anasazi. In The American Southwest and Mesoamerica: Systems of Prehistoric Exchange, edited by J. E. Ericson and T. G. Baugh, pp. 27-63. Plenum, New York.

McGuire, R. H. 1980 The Mesoamerican Connection in the Southwest. The Kiva 46(1-2):3-38.

1986 Economies and Modes of Production in the Prehistoric Southwestern Periphery. In Ripples in the Chichimec Sea: New Considerations of Southwestern- Mesoamerican Interactions, edited by F. J. Mathien and R. H. McGuire, pp. 243- 269. Southern Illinois University Press, Carbondale.

1993 Charles Di Peso and the Mesoamerican Connection. In Culture and Contact: Charles C. Di Peso's Gran Chichimeca, edited by A. I. Woosley and J. C. Ravesloot, pp. 23-38. The Amerind Foundation, Dragon, AZ.

McGuire, R. H. and D. J. Saitta 1996 Although They Have Petty Captains, They Obey Them Badly: The Dialectics of Prehispanic Western Pueblo Social Organization. American Antiquity 61(2):197-216. 175

Middleton, A. P., I. C. Freestone and M. N. Leese 1985 Textural Analysis of Ceramic Thin Sections: Evaluation of Grain Sampling Procedures. Archaeometry 27(1):64-74.

Miller, M. R. 1989 Archaeological Excavations at the Gobernadora and Ojasen Sites: Dona Ana Phase Settlement in the Western Hueco Bolson. CAR Report No. 673. Center for Anthropological Research, New Mexico State University, Las Cruces.

1995 Ceramics of the Jornada Mogollon and Trans-Pecos Regions of West Texas. Bulletin of the Texas Archaeological Society 66:210-235.

Miller, M. R. and N. A. Kenmotsu 2004 Prehistory of the Jornada Mogollon and Eastern Trans-Pecos Regions of West Texas. In The Prehistory of Texas., edited by T. K. Perttula, pp. 205-265. Texas A & M University Press, College Station.

Mills, B. J., A. J. Carpenter and W. Grimm 1997 Sourcing Chuskan Ceramic Production: Petrographic and Experimental Analyses. Kiva 62(3):261-282.

Minnis, P. E. 1988 Four examples of specialized production at Casas Grandes, northwestern Chihuahua. Kiva 53:181-193.

1989 The Casas Grandes Polity in the International Four Corners. In The Sociopolitical Structure of Prehistoric Southwestern Societies, edited by S. Upham, K. Lightfoot and R. Jewett, pp. 269-305. Westview Press, Boulder.

Minnis, P. E. and M. E. Whalen 1989 El Sistema Regional de Casas Grandes, Chihuahua. In Boletín, pp. 86-90. Consejo de Arqueología, México, D.F.

Minnis, P. E., M. E. Whalen, J. H. Kelley and J. D. Stewart 1993 Prehistoric macaw breeding in the North American southwest. American Antiquity 58(2):270-276.

Neitzel, J. E. 1999 Examining Societal Organization in the Southwest: An Application of Multiscalar Analysis. In Great Towns and Regional Polities in the Prehistoric American Southwest and Southeast, edited by J. E. Neitzel, pp. 183-213. The Amerind Foundation, Dragoon, AZ.

176 Neitzel, J. E., H. Neff, M. D. Glascock and R. L. Bishop 2002 Chaco and the Production and Exchange of Dogoszhi-Style Pottery. In Ceramic Production and Circulation in the Greater Southwest: Source Determination by INAA and Complementary Mineralogical Investigations, edited by D. M. Glowacki and H. Neff, pp. 47-65. Cotsen Institute of Archaeology, Monograph 44. University of California, Los Angeles.

Nesse, W. D. 1986 Introduction to Optical Mineralogy. Oxford University Press, New York.

O'Laughlin, T. C. 1979 Excavations at the Transmountain Campus, El Paso Community College, El Paso, Texas. El Paso Centennial Museum Publications in Anthropology, No. 7. University of Texas at El Paso, El Paso.

1980 The Keystone Dam Site and Other Archaic and Formative Sites in Northwest El Paso, Texas. El Paso Centennial Museum Publications in Anthropology, No. 8. University of Texas at El Paso, El Paso.

Ochoa, M. R. and I. R. Cortes 1983 Geology of the Sierra la Candelaria, Chihuahua, Mexico. In Geology and Mineral Resources of North-Central Chihuahua: Guidebook for the 1983 Field Conference, edited by K. F. Clark and P. C. Goodell, pp. 233-238. El Paso Geological Society Publication No. 15. El Paso Geological Society, El Paso.

Oppelt, N. T. 2001 Seeking the Red Ware Potters of the Northern San Juan: Petrographic Analysis of Bluff Black-on-Red. Kiva 66(4):447-465.

Orton, C., P. Tyers and A. Vince 1993 Pottery in Archaeology. Cambridge Manuals in Archaeology. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

Pailes, R. A. and J. W. Whitecotton 1979 The Greater Southwest and the Mesoamerican World System: An Exploratory Model of Frontier Relationships. In The Frontier: Comparative Studies, edited by W. W. Savage Jr. and S. I. Thompson, pp. 105-121. University of Oklahoma Press, Norman.

1995 The Frontiers of Mesoamerica: Northern and Southern. In The Gran Chichimeca: Essays on the Archaeology and Ethnohistory of Northern Mesoamerica, edited by J. E. Reyman, pp. 13-45. Avebury, Brookfield.

Pfaffenberger, B. 1992 Social Anthropology of Technology. Annual Review of Anthropology 177 21:491-516.

Plog, S. 1995 Approaches to Style. In Style, Society, and Person: Archaeological and Ethnological Perspectives, edited by C. Carr and J. E. Neitzel, pp. 369-387. Plenum Press, New York.

1995 Social Dynamics in the Pueblo Southwest. In Foundations of Social Inequality, edited by T. D. Price and G. M. Feinman, pp. 190-206. Plenum, New York.

Ravesloot, J. C. 1988 Mortuary Practices and Social Differentiation at Casas Grandes, Chihuahua, Mexico. University of Arizona Press, Tucson.

Ravesloot, J. C., J. S. Dean and M. S. Foster 1995 A New Perspective on the Casas Grandes Tree-Ring Dates. In The Gran Chichimeca: Essays on the Archaeology and Ethnohistory of Northern Mesoamerica, edited by J. E. Reyman, pp. 240-251.

1995 A Reanalysis of the Casas Grandes Tree-Ring Dates: A Preliminary Discussion. In Arqueología del Norte y del Occidente de México: Homenaje al Doctor J. Charles Kelley, edited by B. Dahlgren and D. Soto de Arechavaleta, pp. 325-332. UNAM, Mexico City.

Renfrew, C. 2001 Production and Consumption in a Sacred Economy: The Material Correlates of High Devotional Expression at Chaco Canyon. American Antiquity 66(1):14-25.

Riley, C. L. 1993 Charles C. Di Peso: An Intellectual Biography. In Culture and Contact: Charles C. Di Peso's Gran Chichimeca, edited by A. I. Woosley and J. C. Ravesloot, pp. 11-22. The Amerind Foundation, Dragoon, AZ.

Robinson, D. G. 2004 Appendix VI: Petrographic Analysis of Prehistoric Ceramics from Two Sites in the La Junta Archaeological District, Presidio County, Trans-Pecos Texas. In The Arroyo de la Presa Site: A Stratified Late Prehistoric Campsite Along the Rio Grande, Presidio County, Trans-Pecos Texas, edited by W. A. Cloud, pp. 227-235. Archaeological Studies Program Report 56. Environmental Affairs Division, Texas Department of Transportation, Austin.

Runyan, J. W. and J. A. Hedrick 1973 Pottery Types of the Southwest Federation of Archaeological Societies. In 178 Transactions of the Eight Regional Archaeological Symposium for Southeastern New Mexico and Western Texas, pp. 19-45. Lea County Archaeological Society, Hobbs, New Mexico.

Sackett, J. 1977 The Meaning of Style in Archaeology: A General Model. American Antiquity 42(3):369-380.

1986 Isochrestism and Style: A Clarification. Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 5:266-277.

Sayles, E. B. 1936 An Archaeological Survey of Chihuahua. Medallion Papers, no. 22. Gila Pueblo, Globe, AZ.

Schaafsma, C. F. 1979 The "El Paso Phase" and its Relationship to the "Casas Grandes Phenomenon". In Jornada Mogollon Archaeology: Proceedings of the First Jornada Mogollon Conference, edited by P. H. Beckett and R. Wiseman, pp. 383- 388. New Mexico State University and New Mexico State Historic Preservation Officer's Office, Las Cruces.

Schaafsma, C. F. and C. L. Riley 1999 Introduction. In The Casas Grandes World, edited by C. F. Schaafsma and C. L. Riley. University of Utah Press, Salt Lake City.

Schubert, P. 1986 Petrographic Modal Analysis: A Necessary Complement to Chemical Analysis of Ceramic Coarse Ware. Archaeometry 28(2):163-178.

Seager, W. R., J. W. Hawley, F. E. Kottlowski and S. A. Kelley 1987 Geology of East Half of Las Cruces and Northeast El Paso 1ox2o Sheets (scale 1:125,000), New Mexico. Geologic Map 57, Sheet 1. New Mexico Bureau of Mines and Mineral Resources.

Shafer, H. J., J. E. Dockall and R. L. Brewington 1999 Archaeology of the Ojasen (41EP289) and Gobernadora (41EP321) Sites, El Paso County, Texas. Reports of Investigations No. 2. Center for Ecological Archaeology, Texas A&M University, College Station.

Shafer, H. J., S. Judjahn, W. D. James, D. G. Robinson and R. P. Lyle 2001 Ceramic Analysis and Interpretation. In The El Paso Loop 375 Archaeological Project: Phase II Testing and Phase III Mitigation, edited by P. J. Dering, H. J. Shafer, R. P. Lyle, A. V. Thomas and D. A. Burden, pp. 311-360. Texas Department of Transportation Archaeological Studies Program, Report No. 179 28, Austin and Center for Ecological Archaeology, Reports of Investigations No. 3, College Station.

Shepard, A. O. 1942 Rio Grande Glaze Paint Ware: A Study Illustrating the Place of Ceramic Technological Analysis in Archaeological Research. Publication No. 528. Carnegie Institution of Washington, Washington, D.C.

1956 Ceramics for the Archaeologist. Publication 609. Carnegie Institution of Washington, Washington, D. C.

1965 Rio Grande Glaze-Paint Pottery: A Test of Petrographic Analysis. In Ceramics and Man, edited by F. R. Matson, pp. 62-87. Viking Fund Publications in Anthropology No. 41. Wenner Gren Foundation for Anthropological Research, New York.

Skibo, J. M., E. B. McCluney and W. H. Walker 2002 The Joyce Well Site: On the Frontier of the Casas Grandes World. University of Utah Press, Salt Lake City.

Sprehn, M. S. 2003 Social Complexity and the Specialist Potters of Casas Grandes in Northern Mexico. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Anthropology, University of New Mexico.

Stallings, W. S., Jr. 1931 El Paso Polychrome. Laboratory of Anthropology, Santa Fe, Technical Series Bulletin (3):1-13.

Stoltman, J. B. 1989 A Quantitative Approach to the Petrographic Analysis of Ceramic Thin Sections. American Antiquity 54(1):147-160.

1991 Ceramic Petrography as a Technique for Documenting Cultural Interaction: An Example from the Upper Mississippi Valley. American Antiquity 56(1):103-120.

1999 The Chaco-Chuska Connection: In Defense of Anna Shepard. In Pottery and People: A Dynamic Interaction, edited by J. M. Skibo and G. M. Feinman, pp. 9-24. University of Utah Press, Salt Lake City.

Stoltman, J. B., J. H. Burton and J. Haas 1992 Chemical and Petrographic Characterizations of Ceramic Pastes: Two Perspectives on a Single Data Set. In Chemical Characterization of Ceramic 180 Pastes in Archaeology, edited by H. Neff, pp. 85-92. Prehistory Press, Madison, WI.

Titiev, M. 1937 A Hopi Salt Expedition. American Anthropologist 39(2):244-258.

Toll, H. W. 2001 Making and Breaking Pots in the Chacoan World. American Antiquity 66(1):56-78.

Triadan, D. 1997 Ceramic Commodities and Common Containers: Production and Distribution of White Mountain Red Ware in the Grasshopper Region, Arizona. Anthropological Papers of the University of Arizona No. 61. University of Arizona Press, Tucson.

Triadan, D., M. J. Blackman, E. Gamboa Carrera and R. L. Bishop 2005 Sourcing Casas Grandes Polychrome Ceramics. Paper presented at the 70th Annual Meeting of the Society for American Archaeology, Salt Lake City, UT.

Upham, S. 1984 Adaptive Diversity and Southwestern Abandonment. Journal of Anthropological Research 40(2):235-256.

Van Keuren, S., S. L. Stinson and D. R. Abbott 1997 Specialized Ceramic Production of Hohokam Plain Ware Ceramics in the Lower Salt River Valley. Kiva 63(2):155-175.

VanPool, T. L., R. D. Leonard and C. S. VanPool 2002 Leadership and the Organization of Production in the Casas Grandes Region, Chihuahua, Mexico. Paper presented at the V Conferencia de Arqueología de la Frontera Norte, Casas Grandes, Chihuahua, Mexico.

Vargas, V. D. 1995 Copper Bell Trade Patterns in the Prehispanic U.S. Southwest and Northern Mexico. Arizona State Museum Archaeological Series 187. Arizona State Museum and the University of Arizona, Tucson.

Way, K. L. 1979 Early Puebloan Occupation in the Southern Tularosa Basin, New Mexico. In Jornada Mogollon Archaeology: Proceedings of the First Jornada Conference, edited by P. H. Beckett and R. Wiseman, pp. 41-52. New Mexico State University and New Mexico State Historic Preservation Officer's Office, Las Cruces.

181 Weigand, P. C., G. Harbottle and E. V. Sayre 1977 Turquoise Sources and Source Analysis: Mesoamerica and the Southwestern U.S.A. In Exchange Systems in Prehistory, edited by T. K. Earle and J. E. Ericson, pp. 15-34. Academic Press, New York.

Whalen, M. E. 1977 Settlement Patterns of the Eastern Hueco Bolson. Anthropological Paper No. 4. El Paso Centennial Museum, University of Texas at El Paso.

1978 Settlement Patterns of the Western Hueco Bolson. Anthropological Paper No. 6. El Paso Centennial Museum, University of Texas at El Paso.

1981 Origins and Evolution of Ceramics in Western Texas. Bulletin of the Texas Archaeological Society 52:215-229.

1994 Moving Out of the Archaic on the Edge of the Southwest. American Antiquity 59(4):622-638.

Whalen, M. E. and P. E. Minnis 1996a Ballcourts and Political Centralization in the Casas Grandes Region. American Antiquity 61(4):732-746.

1996b The Context of Production In and Around Paquimé, Chihuahua, Mexico. In Interpreting Southwestern Diversity: Underlying Principles and Overarching Patterns, edited by P. R. Fish and J. J. Reid, pp. 173-182. Arizona State University, Tempe.

1996c Studying Complexity in Northern Mexico: The Paquimé Regional System. In Debating Complexity: Proceedings of the 26th Annual Chacmool Conference, edited by D. A. Meyer, P. C. Dawson and D. T. Hanna, pp. 282-289. Archaeological Association of the University of Calgary, Calgary.

1999 Investigating the Paquimé Regional System. In The Casas Grandes World, edited by C. F. Schaafsma and C. L. Riley, pp. 54-62. University of Utah Press, Salt Lake City.

2000 Leadership at Casas Grandes, Chihuahua, Mexico. In Alternative Leadership Strategies in the Prehispanic Southwest, edited by B. J. Mills, pp. 168-179. University of Arizona Press, Tucson.

2001 Casas Grandes and its Hinterland: Prehistoric Regional Organization in Northwest Mexico. University of Arizona Press, Tucson.

2001 Architecture and Authority in the Casas Grandes Area, Chihuahua, Mexico. American Antiquity 66(4):651-668. 182

2003 The Local and the Distant in the Origin of Casas Grandes, Chihuahua, Mexico. American Antiquity 68(2):314-332.

2004 After the Survey: Further Research Around Paquimé, Chihuahua, Mexico. In Identity, Feasting, and the Archaeology of the Greater Southwest: Proceedings of the 2002 Southwest Symposium, edited by B. J. Mills, pp. 311-325. University of Colorado Press, Boulder.

Wiessner, P. 1990 Is There a Unity to Style? In The Uses of Style in Archaeology., edited by M. W. Conkey and C. A. Hastorf, pp. 105-112. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

Wilcox, D. R. 1986 A Historical Analysis of the Problem of Southwestern-Mesoamerican Connections. In Ripples in the Chichimec Sea: New Considerations of Southwestern-Mesoamerican Interactions, edited by F. J. Mathien and R. H. McGuire, pp. 9-44. Center for Archaeological Investigations. Southern Illinois University Press, Carbondale.

1995 A Processual Model of Charles C. Di Peso's Babicomari Site and Related Systems. In The Gran Chichimeca: Essays on the Archaeology and Ethnohistory of Northern Mesoamerica, edited by J. E. Reyman, pp. 281-319. Avebury, Brookfield.

Wilcox, D. R. and L. O. Shenk 1977 The Architecture of Casa Grande and its Interpretation. Arizona State Museum Archaeological Series No. 115. University of Arizona, Tucson.

Wobst, H. M. 1977 Stylistic Behavior and Information Exchange. In Papers for the Director: Research Essays in Honor of James B. Griffin, edited by C. E. Cleland, pp. 317- 342. Anthropological Papers, No. 67. Museum of Anthropology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor.

Woosley, A. I. and B. Olinger 1993 The Casas Grandes Ceramic Tradition: Production and Interregional Exchange of Ramos Polychrome. In Culture and Contact: Charles C. Di Peso's Gran Chichimeca, edited by A. I. Woosley and J. C. Ravesloot, pp. 105-132. Amerind Foundation, Dragoon, AZ, and the University of New Mexico Press, Albuquerque.

Zedeño, M. N. 1994 Sourcing Prehistoric Ceramics at Chodistaas Pueblo, Arizona: The 183 Circulation of People and Pots in the Grasshopper Region. Anthropological Papers of the University of Arizona No.58. University of Arizona Press, Tucson.

1995 The Role of Population Movement and Technology Transfer in the Manufacture of Prehistoric Southwestern Ceramics. In Ceramic Production in the American Southwest, edited by B. J. Mills and P. L. Crown, pp. 115-141. University of Arizona Press, Tucson.

2002 Artifact Design, Composition, and Context: Updating the Analysis of Ceramic Circulation at Point of Pines, Arizona. In Ceramic Production and Circulation in the Greater Southwest: Source Determination by INAA and Complementary Mineralogical Investigations, edited by D. M. Glowacki and H. Neff, pp. 74-84. Cotsen Institute of Archaeology Monograph 44. University of California at Los Angeles.

Appendix A

El Paso Polychrome Type Description and Photomicrographs

El Paso Polychrome (Late or “Classic” variant) Type Description Description includes both Jornada Mogollon and Chihuahuan samples.

Time Period: AD 1250-1450

Construction technique: Coiling.

Vessel forms: Jars, bowls, and ladles (Miller 1995; Runyan and Hedrick 1973; Stallings 1931). Jars are much more common than bowls in both Chihuahuan and Jornada Mogollon assemblages. Ladles are rare in the Jornada Mogollon area and not reported from Chihuahuan sites. Rare effigy vessels, both jars and bowls, are also found in the Jornada Mogollon area (Brook 1982). No ladles or effigy vessels were encountered in any of the samples used for this study. This study also does not include whole or reconstructed vessels, therefore the following descriptions of vessel shape are compiled from previous type descriptions. - Bowls are hemispherical (Miller 1995), and deep, with rounded bases. The form is described in as “a ball truncated slightly above the equator” (Stallings 1931:4), or “similar to a ball truncated slightly from the equator” (Runyan and Hedrick 1973:34). Only a handful of bowl sherds were encountered in any of the samples used for this study. Profiles of the larger bowl rims found in the Fort Bliss collections used for this study are shown in Figure A-1 . - Late El Paso Polychrome jars have globular bodies and everted rims. Orifice diameter is constricted at the juncture of body and neck..(Miller 1995; Runyan and Hedrick 1973; Stallings 1931) At their maximum size, with orifice diameters of more than 35mm and a vessel height of almost a meter, Late El Paso 185 Polychrome jars can be some of the largest vessels produced in the prehistoric Southwest (Miller 1995). Typical Late El Paso Polychrome jar forms can be seen in Figure A-2.

Figure A-1: Fort Bliss Bowl Rim Profiles

Figure A-2: El Paso Polychrome jar forms found at Paquimé (redrawn from Di Peso et al. 1974, vol. 8) 186 Wall thickness: 2-10 mm, with an average of 4 mm, according to Stallings (1931). In this study the range of wall thickness was 2-9 mm with an average between 4-5 mm depending upon sample location.

Paste: The paste color of El Paso Polychrome sherds varies from black to brown to oranges and reds depending on the clay source and the temperature and atmosphere of firing (Runyan and Hedrick 1973). There is a significant amount of carbon present in the clays used, as is evidenced by the frequent presence of a “carbon streak” or black core in cross section (Miller 1995; Stallings 1931). El Paso Polychrome vessels were fired at low temperatures, usually below 600 degrees Fahrenheit, and in a reducing atmosphere (Runyan and Hedrick 1973).

Temper: Although in the original type description Stallings (1931) describes El Paso Polychrome’s temper as sand, it is actually crushed rock, or grit. Grit temper is identified by the angularity of the temper grains, many of which contain several different minerals, and also by the presence of minerals that weather too quickly to be found in sand deposits. All of the El Paso Polychrome samples subjected to petrographic analysis in this study were tempered with crushed granite. The primary mineral components of this granite temper were quartz and feldspars, while hornblende, mica/muscovite, epidote and biotite also appeared in a large proportion of the sample. Miller (1995) also lists syenite, another igneous rock like granite, as a temper source for some El Paso Polychrome sherds. Syenite is easily distinguished from granite by its complete lack of quartz. Temper content can vary between 10-50% of the vessel fabric in El Paso Polychrome (Runyan and Hedrick 1973). Though showing a similar range of variation, the average temper content in the samples subjected to petrographic analysis for this study was between 25-29% of the ceramic body.

Surface finish: Exteriors of jars are smoothed, wiped, or self-floated (self-slipped) (Miller 1995; Runyan and Hedrick 1973). Surfaces that were simply smoothed without further treatment are identified by visible temper grains, temper pits and drag marks (Miller 187 1989). In examples of the Early variant of El Paso Polychrome, Myles Miller (1989) has noted a correlation between surface treatment and durability or retention of red paint. Surfaces that were smoothed, but not floated, led to easily eroded red paint and, therefore, faint designs, while floated surfaces were much less subject to erosion of the painted design. Miller (1989) also notes that the sherds with floated surfaces were also frequently polished after the application of paint.

Surface color: Both interior and exterior surface color varies from black to brown to pale brownish oranges or brownish reds. The most common exterior colors at Paquimé, Fort Bliss and Villa Ahumada were 5 YR 5/4 and 5/3 (both reddish brown). The most common interior colors in the three samples were 2.5 YR 5/4 and 5/5 (both weak red), with a high frequency of 5 YR 5/4 (reddish brown), as well.

Paint: El Paso Polychrome is actually a bichrome, showing only black and red paint on the natural brown surface of the fired ceramic body. The red paint is an iron-based mineral pigment (Runyan and Hedrick 1973). There is disagreement about the source of black paint, however, with Stallings (1931) citing tests by a colleague that show the black pigment is carbon-based, while Runyan and Hedrick (1973) state that it is another iron- based mineral paint. Both paints were applied before firing (Miller 1989). The red paint is more inclined to erosion than the black, and is often referred to as “fugitive” (Miller 1989; Runyan and Hedrick 1973; Stallings 1931). Both paints tend to be sloppily applied, often slightly overlapping each other in the Late El Paso Polychrome designs. Bowls were decorated on the interior, and jars had 2 bands of painted designs extending down from the neck to cover the upper ½ to /3 of the vessel (Miller 1995; Stallings 1931). The lower portions of vessels were undecorated.

Photomicrographs

The following pages contain photos and descriptions of six thin sections of El

Paso Polychrome (two each from the Paquimé, Villa Ahumada, and Fort Bliss samples).

The six samples were chosen to represent the range of variation present within the El

Paso Polychrome samples in terms of the size, degree of weathering, and percentage of inclusions, and the degree of oxidation of the sherd. Several of the most common accessory minerals, such as hornblende and epidote are also illustrated in these samples.

Photos of two thin sections of Casas Grandes Plain from Paquimé, one thin section of

Undifferentiated Brown ware from Fort Bliss, and one thin section from a Ramos

Polychrome body sherd are also provided for comparison, to illustrate the difference between El Paso Polychrome and the locally manufactured Chihuahuan wares. 189

Figure A-3: Sample 29, El Paso Polychrome from Paquimé, at 40X magnification. Top: Plane light, Bottom: Crossed polars.

Sample 29

Like many of the El Paso Polychrome samples from all three locations, sample 29

exhibits very weathered feldspars. The large grain in the center, showing faint striping 190 under cross-polarized light, is plagioclase feldspar, with its distinctive bipolar twinning pattern masked slightly by sericitic texture as the grain weathers into mica. Though this

particular grain is rounded, plagioclase feldspars weather into other minerals very quickly, and its presence indicates that this grain was introduced as grit rather than being

sand originally present in the clay. Most of the other surrounding grains of quartz and

alkali feldspar are angular, also indicating their addition as grit temper. Many of the larger grains in all of the El Paso Polychrome samples consist of more than one mineral, as can be seen by the presence of quartz in the upper left corner of the plagioclase grain, and by the pairing of quartz and alkali feldspar in the smaller grain slightly below and to

the right of the plagioclase grain.

Minerals present in small amounts in this thin section include hornblende, biotite,

epidote, sphene, muscovite, and many sericitic grains resulting from the weathering of

plagioclase feldspar into mica and muscovite. Some of the alkali feldspar grains were microcline, identified by its tartan twinning pattern under cross-polarized light. Perthite, which is a distinctive exsolution pattern of zebra-like stripes of intermingled plagioclase and alkali feldspars, is also found in this sample. Perthite is quite common in most of the

El Paso Polychrome samples.

Sample 29 comes from a sherd that, in cross-section, had a black unoxidized core

but lighter brown edges toward the exterior and interior of the vessel. The photos in

Figure A-3 exhibit the very dark matrix from the central core of the sherd. As can be

seen from the many silt-sized particles (< 0.0625 mm) in the photos, either the original

clay contained relatively significant quantities of silt, as would be expected in a 191 preindustrial context, or silt sized particles were added as a separate constituent of the

ceramic body recipe.

Figure A-4: Sample 40, El Paso Polychrome from Paquimé, at 40X magnification. Top: Plane light, Bottom: Crossed polars. 192 Sample 40

Sample 40 was chosen show the large grain sizes present in most of the El Paso

Polychrome samples, as well as the occasional mixture of weathered and relatively unweathered feldspars within the same sherd. The large grain partially captured at the top right corner of both photos in Figure A-4 is over 1.5 mm in total length. All El Paso

Polychrome samples had at least a handful of inclusions this size or larger, and sometimes these very coarse grains comprised up to 12-13% of the inclusions in a sample. This large grain contains weathered feldspar (the darker, grainy right half). In contrast, the microcline grain in the bottom center of the photos (identified by its tartan twinning pattern under cross-polarized light) is quite crisp and unweathered.

Other minerals found in this sample, beyond the usual quartz and feldspars, were hornblende, epidote, and mica. A very small grain of epidote can be seen close to the lower left margin of the tartan microcline grain. In the cross-polarized view the epidote is a mix of very dark green and orange. Notably, there was no perthite in sample 40. The matrix is very dark and contains fair amounts of silt, as is quite common in all three El

Paso Polychrome samples. 193

Figure A-5: Sample 79, Casas Grandes Plain from Paquimé, at 40X magnification. Top: Plane light, Bottom: Crossed polars.

194

Figure A-6: Sample 81, Casas Grandes Plain from Paquimé, at 40X magnification. Top: Plane light, Bottom: Crossed polars.

Samples 79 & 81

Samples 79 and 81 illustrate some of the characteristics that distinguish Casas

Grandes Plain ware from El Paso Polychrome. As can be seen in the pictures taken under 195 plane light, the matrix of these plain wares is a significantly lighter color of brown than can be seen in most of the El Paso Polychrome photomicrographs shown in this appendix. While some of the plain ware samples showed a dark core in cross section, as is common in El Paso Polychrome, the matrix in the darker portion of the plain ware thin sections was always lighter than the almost black color found in the core of El Paso

Polychrome sherds.

Other differences shown in Casas Grandes Plain are the amount of inclusions, and the types of minerals that can be found among those inclusions. In general, Casas

Grandes Plain has a smaller proportion of thin section surface area accounted for by inclusions (see Figure 6-15), and it lacks the significant proportion of very coarse (1-2 mm) grains found in El Paso Polychrome samples.

Also, Casas Grandes Plain ware contains grains of extrusive volcanic origin that are not found in the El Paso Polychrome samples from the same sites. The opaque black grains containing white crystalline laths seen in both Samples 79 (upper left and lower right) and 81 (center) are either basalt or dacite. Both of these samples also contained grains of devitrified volcanic glass, as did most of the Casas Grandes Plain thin sections.

Basalt and devitrified glass are quite common in the mountain bedrock around both

Paquimé and Villa Ahumada. 196

Figure A-7: Sample 90, Ramos Polychrome body sherd from Paquimé at 40X magnification. Top: Plane light, Bottom: Crossed polars.

Sample 90

Ramos Polychrome can be easily distinguished from El Paso Polychrome by the naked eye. While El Paso Polychrome is brown with large chunky white temper, Ramos 197 Polychrome is white with little or no temper visible without magnification. The easy distinction also holds true at the petrographic level. The inclusions in Ramos Polychrome are all smaller than 0.25 mm, with most of them consisting of silt sized particles

(<0.0625 mm). Also, biotite was the only identifiable mineral other than quartz and feldspars found in the two Ramos Polychrome thin sections.

Figure A-8: Sample 135, El Paso Polychrome from Fort Bliss (site FB 5000), at 40X magnification. Top: Plane light, Bottom: Crossed polars. 198 Sample 135

Sample 135, from Fort Bliss site FB 5000, shows the common very dark matrix, angular quartz and feldspar grains and high inclusion density of El Paso Polychrome.

Some of the feldspars take the form of microcline and perthite. This sample from the

Jornada Mogollon heartland does not appear significantly different than Sample 29 from

Paquimé.

Minerals found in small amounts in this thin section include hornblende, biotite, epidote, and muscovite. Both biotite and epidote can be seen in the photos in Figure A-8.

The long, thin orange-brown lath directly above the scale is biotite. The central grain with high relief, that looks somewhat like stained glass under cross-polarized light, is epidote. This particular epidote grain is well-rounded and may have been a natural inclusion the raw clay used for vessel manufacture. However, in many El Paso

Polychrome samples from all three locations epidote is found within large, angular grains composed of quartz and feldspars. This indicates it is a characteristic mineral of the granite temper source as well. 199

Figure A-9: Sample 145, El Paso Polychrome from Fort Bliss (site FB 6281), at 40X magnification. Top: Plane light, Bottom: Crossed polars.

Sample 145 200 Though the matrix in most of the El Paso Polychrome thin sections was very dark brown or black, there was some variability present. Sample 145 shows the matrix coloration of a more fully oxidized sherd. This particular sample did not possess the dark core common to El Paso Polychrome. It resembles the other El Paso Polychrome samples closely, however, with its angular quartz and feldspar grains of widely varying size.

Some of the feldspar grains in this sample take the form of microcline and perthite, both commonly found in the El Paso Polychrome thin sections from all three locations. Other minerals found in small amounts in this thin section include hornblende, epidote, biotite, muscovite, and sphene. The small bright blue grain at the middle right of the cross-polarized light photo is epidote 201

Figure A-10: Sample 164, Undifferentiated Brown Ware from Fort Bliss (site FB 6363), at 40X magnification. Top: Plane light, Bottom: Crossed polars.

Sample 164 202 This sample is of undifferentiated brown ware from Hot Wells Pueblo (FB 6363) on Fort Bliss. It is most likely a body sherd from the unpainted portion of an El Paso

Polychrome vessel. This thin section exhibits the very coarse (1-2 mm) grain size of inclusions in the El Paso series wares, as well as a high density of inclusions. The larger grains in these photos are composed largely of weathered feldspars. Some grains of alkali feldspar were identifiable as microcline. The minerals other than quartz and feldspar in this sample are hornblende, biotite, epidote, muscovite, and sphene. 203

Figure A-11: Sample 201, El Paso Polychrome from Villa Ahumada, at 40X magnification. Top: Plane light, Bottom: Crossed polars.

Sample 201

This sample is El Paso Polychrome from Villa Ahumada. The long diagonal stripes that appear white in the upper picture and dark in the lower are voids in the 204 ceramic body caused by preparation of the thin section. The sample contains significant amounts of quartz, highly weathered feldspars and sericite, a grainy texture produced by the weathering of plagioclase feldspars into micas. Microcline and perthite are other forms of feldspar found in this thin section. Sample 201 has a very dark matrix and a high silt content. Accessory minerals found in small amounts include hornblende, epidote, biotite, sphene, muscovite, and mica. 205

Figure A-12: Sample 235, El Paso Polychrome from Villa Ahumada, at 40X magnification. Top: Plane light, Bottom: Crossed polars.

Sample 235

Sample 235 is El Paso Polychrome from Villa Ahumada. Again, the diagonal strips that appear white in the upper picture and dark gray to black in the lower are voids 206 in the thin section caused by the preparation process. This thin section exhibits a dark brown matrix, slightly more oxidized than the dark color of sample 201. The feldspars are also less weathered than those in the previous sample. The largest grain in the photos is perthite, with stripes of alternating plagioclase and alkali feldspars faintly visible in the cross-polarized view. Minerals other than quartz and feldspars found in this thin section were hornblende, epidote, biotite, and sphene.

Appendix B

Petrographic Analysis: Point Counting

Raw Point-Count Data epp: El Paso Polychrome, white: whiteware, plain: plainware

temper, temper, temper, temper, quartz, Points Temper quartz, quartz, quartz, v. Sample # Site Type counted Type Matrix Silt Opaques fine medium coarse coarse 1 Paquime epp 191 granite 99 20 1 6 3 2 0 2 Paquime epp 155 granite 65 28 2 14 4 1 0 3 Paquime epp 150 granite 64 23 1 15 3 2 0 4 Paquime epp 144 granite 74 24 0 9 3 5 0 5 Paquime epp 162 granite 70 26 1 9 7 2 0 6 Paquime epp 144 granite 51 26 2 7 2 6 2 7 Paquime epp 103 granite 56 16 1 9 2 1 0 8 Paquime epp 144 granite 83 17 0 7 3 1 1 9 Paquime epp 148 granite 65 26 0 8 5 2 1 10 Paquime epp 194 granite 94 24 4 13 4 2 1 11 Paquime epp 137 granite 72 22 1 2 2 1 0 12 Paquime epp 133 granite 63 17 1 17 5 1 0 13 Paquime epp 185 granite 83 25 0 5 2 4 1 14 Paquime epp 129 granite 69 28 0 15 2 1 0 15 Paquime epp 117 granite 52 26 0 11 1 1 0 16 Paquime epp 162 granite 82 40 1 11 0 2 0 17 Paquime epp 104 granite 60 15 0 4 1 0 0 18 Paquime epp 160 granite 76 31 0 7 2 0 0 19 Paquime epp 170 granite 84 28 1 13 7 2 0 20 Paquime epp 121 granite 51 22 1 12 4 2 0 21 Paquime epp 145 granite 66 22 0 8 3 0 0 22 Paquime epp 176 granite 84 21 2 6 6 7 3 23 Paquime epp 158 granite 72 35 1 6 1 5 0 24 Paquime epp 119 granite 65 16 0 10 6 0 0 25 Paquime epp 115 granite 59 19 0 7 0 0 0 26 Paquime epp 158 granite 66 19 0 11 8 6 0 27 Paquime epp 174 granite 79 18 1 15 4 0 0 28 Paquime epp 205 granite 78 37 2 9 5 2 2 29 Paquime epp 132 granite 70 15 0 2 3 1 2 30 Paquime epp 116 granite 54 18 1 3 2 4 1 31 Paquime epp 172 volcanic 83 45 1 0 4 0 0 32 Paquime epp 116 granite 53 19 0 12 6 1 0 33 Paquime epp 160 granite 64 32 2 14 5 4 0 34 Paquime epp 192 granite 154 11 1 4 2 0 1 35 Paquime epp 131 granite 68 18 1 4 4 2 0 36 Paquime epp 187 granite 97 23 1 11 3 4 0 37 Paquime epp 167 granite 67 34 3 15 4 3 1 37 Paquime epp 161 volcanic 75 28 2 19 4 0 0 38 Paquime epp 218 granite 79 40 4 12 6 4 1 40 Paquime epp 138 granite 78 20 0 8 5 7 1

208

temper, temper, temper, temper, quartz, Points Temper quartz, quartz, quartz, v. Sample # Site Type counted Type Matrix Silt Opaques fine medium coarse coarse 41 Paquime epp 176 granite 87 30 2 14 5 2 0 42 Paquime epp 204 granite 84 38 2 17 7 2 0 43 Paquime epp 100 granite 51 16 0 2 2 3 2 44 Paquime epp 164 granite 73 25 2 10 3 3 1 45 Paquime epp 131 granite 52 28 0 10 2 3 0 46 Paquime epp 127 granite 55 24 0 11 10 4 0 47 Paquime epp 127 granite 81 11 0 7 1 0 0 48 Paquime epp 165 granite 100 22 0 6 2 2 0 49 Paquime epp 115 granite 61 14 0 6 4 4 1 50 Paquime epp 129 granite 60 18 1 6 4 2 0 51 Paquime epp 176 granite 80 36 1 9 4 4 0 52 Paquime epp 141 granite 75 26 2 7 1 0 0 53 Paquime epp 252 granite 107 37 4 11 3 4 0 54 Paquime epp 133 volcanic 64 26 1 2 2 0 0 55 Paquime epp 135 granite 62 22 0 8 2 3 0 56 Paquime epp 101 granite 50 18 2 5 0 0 0 57 Paquime epp 136 granite 55 26 1 11 1 5 0 58 Paquime epp 130 granite 62 28 2 6 3 2 0 59 Paquime epp 141 granite 87 16 2 2 3 0 0 60 Paquime epp 160 granite 67 21 1 14 1 0 0 61 Paquime epp 155 granite 70 36 2 1 2 1 0 62 Paquime epp 176 granite 97 19 0 3 5 0 1 63 Paquime epp 150 granite 79 30 0 4 1 0 0 64 Paquime epp 171 granite 92 24 3 5 4 3 1 65 Paquime epp 135 granite 73 17 3 4 0 2 0 66 Paquime epp 105 granite 52 14 0 7 3 2 0 67 Paquime epp 106 granite 59 16 1 2 2 0 0 68 Paquime epp 208 granite 88 37 1 4 6 3 0 69 Paquime epp 140 granite 68 27 0 6 0 1 1 70 Paquime epp 169 granite 83 33 2 3 2 0 0 71 Paquime epp 135 granite 68 17 0 2 7 5 2 72 Paquime plain 152 volcanic 94 18 1 2 3 2 1 73 Paquime plain 194 volcanic 91 24 5 4 4 6 3 74 Paquime white 148 rhy ash 77 51 0 1 0 0 0 75 Paquime plain 183 volcanic 98 27 2 0 0 0 0 76 Paquime plain 130 granite 57 22 1 8 5 8 1 77 Paquime plain 163 volcanic 95 27 0 7 2 0 0 78 Paquime plain 187 volcanic 122 20 2 6 3 1 0 79 Paquime plain 151 volcanic 78 21 2 7 1 0 1 80 Paquime plain 128 volcanic 84 17 0 1 2 0 0 81 Paquime plain 189 volcanic 114 34 0 1 1 1 0 82 Paquime plain 189 volcanic 123 21 2 3 1 1 0 83 Paquime plain 146 volcanic 80 28 1 2 2 0 0 84 Paquime plain 240 volcanic 137 38 0 7 7 1 0 85 Paquime plain 175 volcanic 101 19 3 7 4 0 0 86 Paquime plain 167 volcanic 84 32 3 5 1 0 1 87 Paquime plain 183 volcanic 123 19 0 12 7 0 0 88 Paquime plain 167 volcanic 93 31 3 7 4 0 0 89 Paquime plain 301 volcanic 144 52 5 15 14 1 0 90 Paquime white 165 rhy ash 73 54 1 10 3 1 0 91 Paquime plain 142 volcanic 78 14 4 8 7 0 0 92 Paquime plain 136 volcanic 64 20 2 5 3 1 1 93 Paquime plain 159 volcanic 65 26 1 12 3 2 1 94 Paquime plain 201 volcanic 108 22 13 13 2 0 0

209

temper, temper, temper, temper, quartz, Points Temper quartz, quartz, quartz, v. Sample # Site Type counted Type Matrix Silt Opaques fine medium coarse coarse 95 Paquime plain 234 volcanic 153 17 4 7 4 1 1 96 Paquime epp 133 granite 58 34 0 6 5 0 0 97 Paquime epp 156 granite 65 27 2 8 3 0 0 98 Paquime epp 110 granite 38 19 0 5 6 2 0 99 Paquime epp 190 granite 95 47 0 9 0 0 1 100 Paquime epp 218 granite 87 35 6 10 0 1 0 101 FB53 epp 106 granite 54 18 0 5 2 0 0 102 FB53 epp 152 granite 51 20 2 10 3 2 2 103 FB53 epp 153 granite 80 29 2 8 4 1 0 104 FB53 epp 144 granite 84 24 0 6 2 1 0 105 FB53 epp 133 granite 65 20 0 5 4 1 0 106 FB53 epp 131 granite 67 13 0 6 3 0 0 107 FB53 epp 151 granite 78 17 2 8 2 2 1 108 FB53 epp 163 granite 83 38 1 3 4 1 0 109 FB53 brown 155 granite 81 25 1 6 2 0 0 110 FB53 brown 123 granite 57 24 2 7 3 0 0 111 FB9785 epp 121 granite 57 23 0 7 6 0 0 113 FB9788 epp 200 granite 93 53 2 6 2 2 0 114 FB9788 epp 118 granite 50 27 0 2 2 0 0 115 FB9788 brown 124 granite 48 32 2 8 2 0 0 116 FB9788 epp 129 granite 71 17 0 5 3 4 2 118 FB9788 epp 118 granite 72 21 0 4 2 1 0 119 FB9788 epp 189 granite 104 28 1 1 2 3 0 120 FB9788 epp 128 granite 67 27 0 6 1 1 0 121 FB6772 epp 127 granite 56 29 2 8 3 2 0 122 FB6772 epp 256 granite 123 51 0 18 8 2 1 123 FB6772 epp 160 granite 77 36 3 4 2 2 1 124 FB6772 epp 186 granite 86 42 1 6 5 4 0 125 FB6772 epp 181 granite 111 20 5 2 1 0 0 126 FB6772 epp 151 granite 82 31 0 11 0 0 0 127 FB6772 brown 231 granite 126 31 1 16 9 1 0 128 FB6772 epp 112 granite 49 25 2 6 1 1 1 129 FB6772 brown 137 granite 68 29 0 4 0 2 0 130 FB6772 brown 192 granite 97 38 1 7 3 2 1 131 FB9657 brown 96 granite 38 1 3 10 4 5 1 132 FB9657 epp 129 granite 72 23 0 4 3 1 1 133 FB9657 epp 108 granite 54 18 0 8 3 0 0 134 FB5000 brown 232 granite 136 23 0 8 2 5 0 135 FB5000 epp 127 granite 66 12 0 5 3 1 0 136 FB5000 epp 298 granite 125 59 0 20 4 0 0 137 FB1640 brown 129 granite 44 26 1 5 2 1 0 138 FB1640 epp 158 granite 83 31 0 10 1 2 0 139 FB1640 epp 250 granite 132 44 3 5 2 0 0 140 FB6281 brown 197 granite 74 53 0 14 1 0 0 141 FB6281 epp 195 granite 102 35 1 7 6 0 2 142 FB6281 epp 173 granite 83 32 2 6 6 5 1 143 FB6281 brown 134 granite 79 31 0 8 0 0 0 144 FB6281 epp 118 granite 55 24 0 3 3 0 1 145 FB6281 epp 216 granite 119 26 0 10 5 6 1 146 FB6281 brown 160 granite 80 21 2 7 5 1 0 147 FB6281 epp 216 granite 116 26 2 4 2 5 0 148 FB6281 epp 122 granite 67 21 0 3 5 2 1 149 FB6281 epp 173 granite 102 8 0 14 6 0 1 150 FB6281 epp 175 granite 85 24 5 12 5 0 1 151 FB6873 epp 124 granite 62 23 1 8 0 2 0

210

temper, temper, temper, temper, quartz, Points Temper quartz, quartz, quartz, v. Sample # Site Type counted Type Matrix Silt Opaques fine medium coarse coarse 152 FB6873 brown 207 granite 112 32 1 9 3 4 0 153 FB6873 brown 131 granite 46 21 1 7 1 1 0 154 FB6873 epp 125 granite 62 9 0 11 7 3 0 155 FB6873 brown 126 granite 57 33 1 6 1 1 1 156 FB6873 epp 111 granite 59 20 0 6 1 0 1 157 FB6873 brown 120 granite 53 24 1 5 1 0 0 158 FB6873 epp 92 granite 54 15 0 3 1 1 0 159 FB6363 brown 190 granite 102 32 1 8 1 3 1 160 FB6363 epp 162 granite 73 28 1 6 2 0 0 161 FB6363 brown 206 granite 82 32 2 13 3 0 0 162 FB6363 epp 182 granite 72 27 0 11 5 3 0 163 FB6363 epp 332 granite 170 30 3 16 3 3 0 164 FB6363 brown 339 granite 155 49 3 12 5 6 1 165 FB6363 epp 181 granite 101 30 1 7 2 1 1 166 FB6363 brown 200 granite 108 25 1 5 3 3 0 167 FB6363 epp 145 granite 66 29 2 10 4 2 0 168 FB10533 epp 259 granite 196 56 1 17 6 7 0 169 FB10533 brown 161 granite 53 33 2 5 4 2 0 170 FB10533 epp 153 granite 72 23 2 2 1 0 0 200 V. Ahumada epp 138 granite 80 18 0 3 2 2 2 201 V. Ahumada epp 133 granite 62 23 1 5 1 4 0 202 V. Ahumada epp 162 granite 73 40 0 5 6 2 0 203 V. Ahumada epp 154 granite 69 34 0 6 0 2 2 204 V. Ahumada epp 158 granite 69 33 0 4 9 4 0 205 V. Ahumada epp 154 granite 88 23 0 4 3 3 2 206 V. Ahumada epp 147 granite 80 30 1 4 1 0 0 207 V. Ahumada epp 154 granite 68 34 0 6 3 3 0 208 V. Ahumada epp 142 granite 72 30 0 4 2 0 0 209 V. Ahumada epp 113 granite 53 27 0 5 5 1 0 210 V. Ahumada epp 175 granite 82 46 0 2 6 0 0 211 V. Ahumada epp 176 granite 75 26 2 6 3 1 0 212 V. Ahumada epp 114 granite 52 23 1 5 6 1 0 213 V. Ahumada epp 157 granite 58 9 2 5 1 1 0 214 V. Ahumada epp 178 granite 81 26 0 6 4 0 0 215 V. Ahumada epp 180 granite 93 28 0 3 3 1 2 216 V. Ahumada epp 172 granite 94 27 0 3 2 6 1 217 V. Ahumada epp 173 granite 82 27 0 7 6 1 0 218 V. Ahumada epp 161 granite 91 26 0 5 4 1 0 219 V. Ahumada epp 122 granite 61 25 0 3 0 0 1 220 V. Ahumada epp 111 granite 49 23 0 5 1 0 0 221 V. Ahumada epp 179 granite 83 33 2 3 4 1 0 222 V. Ahumada epp 168 granite 87 26 0 9 5 1 0 223 V. Ahumada epp 219 granite 95 36 0 7 3 2 1 224 V. Ahumada epp 103 granite 43 23 0 1 3 4 0 225 V. Ahumada epp 158 granite 83 21 1 6 6 4 0 226 V. Ahumada epp 190 granite 87 21 1 12 6 3 1 227 V. Ahumada epp 181 granite 91 27 0 11 4 4 0 228 V. Ahumada epp 130 granite 69 27 0 3 5 0 0 229 V. Ahumada epp 126 granite 69 24 0 4 3 1 0 230 V. Ahumada epp 144 granite 79 25 0 2 2 1 1 231 V. Ahumada epp 150 granite 65 32 0 2 8 4 0

211

temper, temper, temper, temper, quartz, Points Temper quartz, quartz, quartz, v. Sample # Site Type counted Type Matrix Silt Opaques fine medium coarse coarse 232 V. Ahumada epp 138 granite 72 29 3 5 4 0 0 233 V. Ahumada epp 146 granite 73 20 0 6 7 2 0 234 V. Ahumada epp 132 granite 65 21 0 4 3 0 0 235 V. Ahumada epp 126 granite 58 22 0 6 4 1 0 236 V. Ahumada epp 110 granite 62 17 0 3 2 1 0 237 V. Ahumada epp 127 granite 56 21 1 4 3 2 2 238 V. Ahumada epp 129 granite 68 21 0 4 5 2 0 239 V. Ahumada epp 123 granite 62 18 0 3 2 5 0 240 V. Ahumada epp 160 granite 87 25 0 5 4 5 1 241 V. Ahumada epp 136 granite 82 24 0 3 1 0 1 242 V. Ahumada epp 204 granite 114 35 0 4 7 5 1 243 V. Ahumada epp 182 granite 112 34 0 5 2 3 1 244 V. Ahumada epp 114 granite 57 22 1 2 2 1 0 245 V. Ahumada epp 135 granite 66 22 0 2 1 1 1 246 V. Ahumada epp 162 granite 102 21 0 3 3 3 1 247 V. Ahumada epp 155 granite 76 27 0 3 3 2 0 248 V. Ahumada epp 169 granite 88 41 0 5 2 5 0 249 V. Ahumada epp 116 granite 64 16 0 3 0 0 1 250 V. Ahumada epp 163 granite 101 31 1 2 2 2 0 251 V. Ahumada epp 143 granite 87 18 0 6 2 1 1 252 V. Ahumada epp 132 granite 70 22 0 5 1 0 0 253 V. Ahumada epp 169 granite 83 41 1 7 2 0 0 254 V. Ahumada epp 141 granite 92 6 0 0 3 3 0 255 V. Ahumada epp 169 granite 81 31 0 7 3 0 0 256 V. Ahumada epp 151 granite 90 29 0 1 5 0 0 257 V. Ahumada epp 218 granite 108 38 0 7 6 4 1 258 V. Ahumada epp 134 granite 65 26 0 5 2 2 1 259 V. Ahumada epp 132 granite 73 21 0 2 0 4 3 260 V. Ahumada epp 141 granite 67 24 0 7 0 0 0 261 V. Ahumada epp 112 granite 60 15 0 4 1 4 0 262 V. Ahumada epp 127 granite 68 17 0 3 3 2 1 263 V. Ahumada epp 157 granite 67 36 0 3 2 1 1 264 V. Ahumada epp 193 granite 78 46 1 5 5 0 0 265 V. Ahumada epp 136 granite 61 27 2 4 2 1 0 266 V. Ahumada epp 138 granite 58 22 0 3 1 4 0 267 V. Ahumada epp 146 granite 72 27 0 1 10 1 0 268 V. Ahumada epp 144 granite 69 28 0 7 6 2 0 269 V. Ahumada epp 193 granite 101 28 0 12 8 1 0 270 V. Ahumada epp 116 granite 61 29 0 4 1 3 0 271 V. Ahumada epp 131 granite 71 20 1 2 2 0 3 272 V. Ahumada epp 177 granite 85 31 0 6 9 4 0 273 V. Ahumada epp 159 granite 80 27 0 6 1 1 0 274 V. Ahumada epp 200 granite 116 31 0 9 3 4 0 275 V. Ahumada epp 109 granite 63 20 0 4 0 0 0 276 V. Ahumada epp 184 granite 107 29 0 4 2 3 2 277 V. Ahumada epp 136 granite 85 28 0 1 1 0 1 278 V. Ahumada epp 147 granite 93 22 0 5 4 2 0 279 V. Ahumada epp 156 granite 97 29 0 4 2 1 0 280 V. Ahumada epp 483 granite 244 65 4 20 11 12 1 281 V. Ahumada plain 205 volcanic 108 40 4 12 2 0 0 282 V. Ahumada plain 155 volcanic 95 26 3 6 6 0 0

212

temper, temper, temper, temper, quartz, Points Temper quartz, quartz, quartz, v. Sample # Site Type counted Type Matrix Silt Opaques fine medium coarse coarse 283 V. Ahumada plain 188 volcanic 97 39 1 1 1 3 0 284 V. Ahumada plain 181 volcanic 107 24 0 11 2 1 0 285 V. Ahumada plain 233 volcanic 150 32 2 8 9 11 2 286 V. Ahumada plain 130 granite 78 20 2 3 3 0 1 287 V. Ahumada plain 330 granite 174 63 4 6 5 4 1 288 V. Ahumada plain 257 volcanic 138 61 2 8 2 1 0 289 V. Ahumada plain 153 granite 79 36 1 5 2 4 0 290 V. Ahumada plain 178 volcanic 108 18 1 5 6 3 0 291 V. Ahumada plain 153 volcanic 91 29 2 3 1 0 0 213

temper, temper, K temper, K temper, K temper, K temper, K temper, temper, quartz, feldspar, feldspar, feldspar, feldspar, feldspar, plagioclase, plagioclase, Sample # gravel fine medium coarse v. coarse gravel fine medium 10 4 2 1 0 0 0 0 20 5 2 1 0 0 0 0 30 3 2 3 1 0 1 1 40 3 4 6 1 0 1 0 50 4 2 3 1 0 1 0 60 7 2 0 1 0 2 2 70 3 0 1 0 0 0 1 80 3 6 3 0 0 0 0 90 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 10 0 7 2 0 0 0 1 0 11 0 11 2 2 0 0 2 1 12 0 4 2 0 0 0 2 1 13 0 4 2 2 0 0 1 1 14 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 15 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 16 0 5 0 1 0 0 0 0 17 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 18 0 6 0 0 1 0 0 1 19 0 4 0 2 0 0 0 0 20 0 5 2 0 0 0 1 1 21 0 3 0 0 0 0 3 1 22 0 7 2 0 0 0 1 0 23 0 3 2 0 0 0 1 0 24 0 6 2 0 0 0 1 0 25 0 5 0 1 0 0 0 0 26 0 3 4 1 0 0 1 0 27 0 7 0 1 0 0 1 0 28 0 13 3 3 0 0 2 0 29 0 1 1 2 0 0 0 0 30 0 3 0 0 0 0 1 0 31 0 0 3 1 0 0 3 0 32 0 5 3 0 0 0 0 0 33 0 5 2 0 0 0 1 0 34 0 1 1 1 1 0 0 1 35 0 10 5 2 0 0 1 0 36 0 7 3 1 0 0 0 2 37 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 37 0 3 2 0 0 0 2 0 38 0 5 1 1 1 0 3 2 40 0 0 2 6 1 0 1 0 41 0 2 4 0 2 0 2 0 42 0 1 4 2 1 0 0 0 43 0 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 44 0 3 5 0 0 0 2 1 45 0 1 2 0 0 0 1 1 46 0 3 1 0 0 0 3 0 47 0 1 3 0 0 0 1 0

214

temper, temper, K temper, K temper, K temper, K temper, K temper, temper, quartz, feldspar, feldspar, feldspar, feldspar, feldspar, plagioclase, plagioclase, Sample # gravel fine medium coarse v. coarse gravel fine medium 48 0 1 3 0 0 0 2 1 49 0 2 3 4 0 0 1 1 50 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 2 51 0 1 2 0 1 0 0 0 52 0 1 2 0 0 0 2 0 53 0 7 3 1 1 0 0 0 54 0 3 1 3 0 0 0 1 55 0 2 2 1 0 0 1 1 56 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 57 0 4 2 0 0 0 0 1 58 0 2 0 0 0 0 1 1 59 0 3 1 4 0 0 0 0 60 0 11 2 0 0 0 0 1 61 0 7 1 3 0 0 5 1 62 0 4 3 1 0 0 3 2 63 0 1 0 2 0 0 1 3 64 0 6 1 0 0 0 4 2 65 0 6 1 2 0 0 2 2 66 0 7 1 0 0 0 4 1 67 0 3 1 1 1 0 1 1 68 0 5 5 0 0 0 3 1 69 0 3 1 0 1 0 1 0 70 0 5 2 1 0 0 5 2 71 0 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 72 0 3 1 0 0 0 0 0 73 0 4 0 0 0 0 3 0 74 0 3 1 0 0 0 2 0 75 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 76 0 1 4 4 0 0 0 0 77 0 12 3 1 0 0 7 1 78 0 4 1 0 0 0 1 0 79 0 7 1 0 0 0 1 5 80 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 81 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 1 82 0 3 2 0 0 0 3 1 83 0 2 1 0 0 0 2 0 84 0 3 3 1 0 0 4 1 85 0 3 0 0 0 0 4 0 86 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 87 0 5 4 2 0 0 0 1 88 0 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 89 0 8 4 0 0 0 2 5 90 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 91 0 7 4 2 0 0 5 1 92 0 5 2 0 0 0 0 3 93 0 11 4 1 0 0 3 4 94 0 3 3 0 0 0 8 1 95 0 5 4 1 0 0 2 1 96 0 0 3 2 0 0 0 1

215

temper, temper, K temper, K temper, K temper, K temper, K temper, temper, quartz, feldspar, feldspar, feldspar, feldspar, feldspar, plagioclase, plagioclase, Sample # gravel fine medium coarse v. coarse gravel fine medium 97 0 6 2 4 0 0 2 0 98 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 1 99 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 100 0 5 5 3 0 0 2 0 101 0 3 2 0 0 0 0 0 102 0 0 0 2 1 0 0 1 103 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 1 104 0 1 4 0 0 0 2 0 105 0 3 3 0 0 0 2 1 106 0 1 3 2 0 0 1 2 107 0 2 6 0 1 0 0 0 108 0 1 2 0 0 0 1 0 109 0 2 2 0 0 0 0 2 110 0 3 2 0 0 0 1 0 111 0 2 3 0 0 0 0 1 113 0 3 2 3 0 0 0 1 114 0 3 3 2 0 0 1 1 115 0 2 4 2 1 0 1 0 116 0 2 2 0 0 0 2 0 118 0 4 0 0 0 0 1 0 119 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 120 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 1 121 0 1 2 2 0 0 0 0 122 0 5 1 0 0 0 2 1 123 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 124 0 1 3 0 0 0 0 2 125 0 3 4 4 2 0 0 0 126 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 127 0 4 3 0 0 0 0 0 128 0 2 2 1 0 0 0 0 129 0 1 0 2 1 0 0 0 130 0 1 6 0 0 0 0 1 131 0 4 3 1 0 0 1 1 132 0 2 0 0 1 0 2 0 133 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 134 0 6 1 0 0 0 3 0 135 0 3 2 1 0 0 1 0 136 0 7 4 4 3 1 2 0 137 0 2 2 1 2 0 1 0 138 0 2 0 0 1 0 1 0 139 0 4 5 0 0 0 4 1 140 0 4 1 4 2 0 1 1 141 0 2 1 1 0 0 1 1 142 0 2 4 2 0 0 0 1 143 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 144 0 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 145 0 5 1 1 1 0 1 0 146 0 1 1 0 0 0 2 2 147 0 3 2 1 0 0 0 1 148 0 0 1 3 0 0 2 0 149 0 1 1 0 0 0 2 0 150 0 4 3 0 1 0 0 0 151 0 1 1 2 0 0 0 0

216

temper, temper, K temper, K temper, K temper, K temper, K temper, temper, quartz, feldspar, feldspar, feldspar, feldspar, feldspar, plagioclase, plagioclase, Sample # gravel fine medium coarse v. coarse gravel fine medium 152 0 0 3 2 1 0 2 1 153 0 3 2 3 1 0 2 1 154 0 3 4 0 0 0 0 2 155 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 156 0 1 2 1 0 0 0 0 157 0 1 2 1 0 0 1 0 158 0 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 159 0 5 2 2 0 0 0 1 160 0 2 1 1 0 0 1 0 161 0 5 2 1 2 0 2 2 162 0 3 4 0 0 0 0 3 163 0 6 4 4 0 0 0 0 164 0 3 5 3 2 0 4 3 165 0 2 3 0 0 0 1 0 166 0 2 5 0 0 0 2 0 167 0 2 2 2 0 0 0 0 168 0 5 3 1 0 0 3 2 169 0 3 3 1 1 0 0 2 170 0 2 3 2 0 0 2 4 200 0 2 2 1 1 0 1 0 201 0 0 1 2 0 0 1 0 202 0 1 2 4 1 0 2 1 203 1 2 3 0 0 0 2 1 204 0 2 2 1 0 0 2 0 205 0 1 4 3 0 0 0 0 206 0 3 5 1 1 0 1 0 207 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 2 208 0 1 3 0 0 0 0 0 209 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 210 0 3 0 1 0 0 1 0 211 0 5 4 1 0 0 2 0 212 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 213 0 4 4 0 0 0 0 0 214 0 1 3 2 0 0 4 0 215 0 0 3 1 1 0 2 3 216 0 0 2 3 0 0 0 1 217 0 4 0 0 0 0 1 0 218 0 1 3 1 0 0 0 1 219 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 1 220 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 221 0 2 2 1 0 0 0 0 222 0 3 1 4 0 0 0 1 223 0 4 3 0 0 0 0 1 224 0 4 0 1 0 0 1 1 225 1 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 226 0 3 5 0 0 0 1 0 227 0 3 0 0 1 0 1 0 228 0 0 2 2 0 0 1 0 229 0 3 0 0 0 0 3 0 230 0 1 0 2 3 0 1 0 231 0 2 0 3 0 1 1 0

217

temper, temper, K temper, K temper, K temper, K temper, K temper, temper, quartz, feldspar, feldspar, feldspar, feldspar, feldspar, plagioclase, plagioclase, Sample # gravel fine medium coarse v. coarse gravel fine medium 232 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 233 0 2 0 0 0 0 2 0 234 0 2 3 0 1 0 2 1 235 0 2 0 1 0 0 1 0 236 0 0 1 1 2 0 1 0 237 0 1 0 2 0 0 0 0 238 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 239 0 0 2 1 0 0 1 0 240 0 1 2 2 5 0 0 0 241 0 2 0 1 0 0 0 1 242 0 0 1 4 0 0 2 0 243 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 244 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 245 0 2 0 1 0 0 1 1 246 0 2 2 1 0 0 1 1 247 0 1 2 2 0 0 1 2 248 0 1 2 1 0 0 0 1 249 0 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 250 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 251 0 3 1 0 1 0 0 0 252 0 2 2 0 0 0 1 0 253 0 1 2 0 2 0 1 0 254 0 0 1 0 3 0 0 0 255 0 0 3 1 0 0 0 0 256 0 3 1 0 0 0 0 0 257 0 1 0 4 0 0 0 0 258 0 2 0 0 1 0 0 1 259 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 260 0 3 3 0 1 0 0 0 261 0 1 2 5 1 0 1 0 262 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 263 0 1 2 1 1 0 0 0 264 0 6 2 0 0 0 0 0 265 0 2 2 3 1 0 1 0 266 0 4 5 1 0 0 0 0 267 0 3 2 0 0 0 1 0 268 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 1 269 0 2 3 0 0 0 0 0 270 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 271 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 272 0 2 2 1 0 0 0 0 273 0 2 1 2 0 0 2 0 274 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 275 0 0 1 3 0 0 0 1 276 0 0 0 3 1 1 0 0 277 0 0 1 2 0 0 0 0 278 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 279 1 2 0 2 0 0 0 0 280 0 4 7 4 0 0 5 1 281 0 3 2 0 0 0 5 1 282 0 2 0 0 0 0 2 2

218

219

temper, temper, temper, temper, temper, temper, temper, multi multi multi multi multi temper, temper, plagioclase, plagioclase, feldspar, feldspar, feldspar, feldspar, feldspar, perthite, perthite, Sample # coarse v. coarse fine medium coarse v. coarse gravel fine medium 1002340002 2004210014 3000010012 4000000000 5000010012 6001210001 7002110002 8000101011 9001210012 10 0 0 3 4 6 0 0 0 4 11 3 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 2 12 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 13 0 0 2 2 4 3 0 0 1 14 0 0 1 2 0 0 0 0 2 15 0 0 1 0 1 1 1 0 0 16 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 17 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 18 0 0 1 4 0 1 0 0 1 19 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 2 20 0 0 2 0 1 0 0 0 3 21 0 0 1 3 2 1 0 0 0 22 1 1 3 3 1 2 0 0 0 23 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 2 6 24 0 0 2 1 3 0 0 0 0 25 0 0 0 1 4 2 0 0 0 26 1 0 4 4 3 1 0 0 1 27 0 0 3 3 3 2 0 0 0 28 0 0 2 2 3 6 0 1 2 29 0 0 0 1 2 1 0 0 2 30 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 4 3 31 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 7 32 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 33 0 0 0 1 1 1 0 2 1 34 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 35 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 36 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 2 1 37 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 37 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 38 0 0 1 2 2 1 1 3 3 40 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 41 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 2 0 42 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 5 43 1 0 1 2 2 1 0 0 0 44 2 0 1 3 1 1 0 1 0 45 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 4 46 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 47 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0

220

temper, temper, temper, temper, temper, temper, temper, multi multi multi multi multi temper, temper, plagioclase, plagioclase, feldspar, feldspar, feldspar, feldspar, feldspar, perthite, perthite, Sample # coarse v. coarse fine medium coarse v. coarse gravel fine medium 48 2 0 3 3 1 0 0 0 0 49 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 50 0 0 0 3 2 0 0 0 0 51 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 3 52 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 53 0 0 1 2 2 1 0 4 5 54 0 0 1 2 2 0 0 0 2 55 0 0 0 3 1 1 0 0 0 56 0 0 1 3 0 0 0 1 2 57 1 0 1 4 1 0 0 0 0 58 0 0 4 1 0 0 0 1 2 59 0 0 1 3 1 2 0 0 1 60 1 0 0 1 2 0 0 2 1 61 2 0 3 2 3 0 0 0 1 62 1 0 1 4 4 1 0 0 0 63 1 0 1 3 1 0 0 1 1 64 0 0 2 3 3 0 0 0 0 65 1 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 66 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 67 0 0 2 1 1 0 0 0 0 68 1 0 6 5 4 1 0 0 3 69 0 0 3 1 1 1 0 0 4 70 0 0 3 0 1 3 0 0 2 71 1 0 1 3 1 0 0 0 0 72 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 73 0 0 10 3 0 0 0 0 0 74 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 75 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 76 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 77 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 78 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 79 0 0 0 0 2 1 0 0 0 80 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 81 0 0 2 1 1 0 0 0 0 82 0 0 7 6 1 0 0 0 0 83 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 84 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 85 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 86 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 87 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 88 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 89 0 0 2 3 0 0 0 0 0 90 0 0 3 1 0 0 0 0 0 91 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 92 2 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 93 0 0 2 3 1 3 0 0 0 94 0 0 1 2 1 0 0 0 0 95 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 96 0 0 0 2 1 0 0 0 0

221

temper, temper, temper, temper, temper, temper, temper, multi multi multi multi multi temper, temper, plagioclase, plagioclase, feldspar, feldspar, feldspar, feldspar, feldspar, perthite, perthite, Sample # coarse v. coarse fine medium coarse v. coarse gravel fine medium 97 0 0 0 2 2 1 0 0 0 98 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 8 99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 100 3 0 1 8 3 1 0 0 0 101 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 102 1 0 0 2 4 0 0 1 2 103 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 3 104 0 0 1 1 3 0 0 0 0 105 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 2 2 106 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 1 107 1 0 0 1 4 1 0 0 1 108 0 0 3 3 1 0 0 1 0 109 0 0 1 0 0 2 0 0 2 110 0 0 1 3 1 0 0 1 0 111 0 0 1 0 2 1 0 0 0 113 0 0 2 4 4 0 0 0 0 114 0 0 2 4 2 0 0 0 0 115 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 116 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 2 118 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 119 1 0 1 7 4 2 1 1 4 120 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 3 121 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 122 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 2 3 123 1 0 1 5 4 1 0 0 0 124 0 0 1 2 0 0 0 1 8 125 0 0 1 1 3 1 1 0 0 126 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 127 0 0 1 2 3 1 0 0 0 128 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 129 0 0 2 1 3 0 0 2 2 130 1 0 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 131 1 0 0 4 0 1 0 0 3 132 0 0 1 2 0 0 0 0 1 133 1 0 0 2 0 1 0 0 0 134 0 0 2 2 1 1 0 0 1 135 0 0 1 2 2 1 0 0 5 136 0 0 1 0 4 4 0 0 0 137 0 0 4 1 1 0 0 1 4 138 1 0 0 7 0 0 0 0 1 139 0 0 4 10 3 1 0 0 1 140 0 0 2 3 4 5 0 0 0 141 1 0 0 2 5 6 1 0 0 142 1 1 1 3 2 0 0 0 0 143 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 144 0 0 1 2 1 1 0 0 0 145 1 0 0 1 3 6 0 0 0 146 1 0 0 2 2 0 0 0 0 147 0 0 2 3 3 1 0 0 0 148 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 149 0 0 0 3 2 1 0 1 1 150 0 0 0 1 2 0 0 1 1 151 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 1 0

222

temper, temper, temper, temper, temper, temper, temper, multi multi multi multi multi temper, temper, plagioclase, plagioclase, feldspar, feldspar, feldspar, feldspar, feldspar, perthite, perthite, Sample # coarse v. coarse fine medium coarse v. coarse gravel fine medium 152 0 0 0 4 2 2 0 1 0 153 0 0 4 6 4 0 0 0 0 154 0 0 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 155 1 0 0 2 1 1 0 3 2 156 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 157 0 0 1 3 2 1 0 0 2 158 0 0 1 0 2 0 0 0 0 159 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 1 160 1 0 1 5 3 1 0 0 0 161 1 0 3 9 5 0 0 1 0 162 0 0 5 9 5 1 0 0 3 163 1 2 2 7 7 1 0 0 1 1642 123109000 165 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 2 166 0 0 1 1 2 0 0 0 3 167 1 0 0 2 2 0 0 0 0 168 1 0 0 3 5 1 0 0 0 169 1 0 1 8 5 3 0 0 0 170 0 0 4 4 7 0 0 0 0 200 1 0 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 201 1 0 0 1 3 2 0 0 2 202 0 2 1 0 6 1 0 0 1 203 0 0 0 0 1 4 0 0 1 204 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 3 0 205 1 0 0 0 3 1 0 0 0 206 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 2 207 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 2 3 208 0 0 3 1 2 0 0 0 1 209 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 210 0 0 1 2 2 4 0 0 1 211 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 2 6 212 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 4 213 0 0 0 1 2 0 0 1 3 214 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 2 3 215 0 0 0 2 2 1 0 0 2 216 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 2 217 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 2 218 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 5 5 219 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 2 2 220 0 0 2 5 3 0 0 1 0 221 0 0 3 0 1 1 0 3 2 222 0 0 1 4 3 1 0 0 2 223 1 1 1 7 4 0 0 3 5 224 0 0 2 2 1 0 0 2 4 225 0 0 1 1 3 1 0 2 0 226 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 3 2 227 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 2 5 228 0 0 1 2 0 3 0 0 1 229 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 2 230 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 231 0 0 0 3 1 2 0 0 1

223

temper, temper, temper, temper, temper, temper, temper, multi multi multi multi multi temper, temper, plagioclase, plagioclase, feldspar, feldspar, feldspar, feldspar, feldspar, perthite, perthite, Sample # coarse v. coarse fine medium coarse v. coarse gravel fine medium 232 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 233 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 3 6 234 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 2 235 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 3 236 0 0 0 4 1 0 0 0 0 237 0 0 2 1 0 0 0 2 5 238 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 2 3 239 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 240 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 241 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 242 0 0 0 3 2 0 0 0 1 243 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 2 244 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 2 0 245 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 3 246 0 0 1 0 2 0 0 0 0 247 0 0 0 1 3 0 0 0 0 248 0 0 0 2 0 1 0 2 2 249 1 1 0 2 1 0 0 1 2 250 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 251 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 252 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 1 3 253 0 0 3 1 1 0 0 0 4 254 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 255 0 0 2 0 2 0 0 2 3 256 0 0 2 0 0 1 0 0 2 257 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 258 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 4 259 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 1 260 0 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 261 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 4 262 0 0 3 2 4 1 0 0 0 263 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 1 2 264 0 0 1 3 4 1 0 2 4 265 0 0 2 0 1 1 0 2 2 266 0 0 1 2 6 0 0 0 0 267 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 268 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 269 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 270 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 271 0 0 1 2 0 0 0 1 1 272 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 273 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 1 274 0 0 0 3 1 0 0 0 1 275 1 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 276 0 0 1 3 2 1 0 0 0 277 1 0 0 1 3 1 0 0 0 278 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 279 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 280 0 0 3 3 2 1 0 4 8 281 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 282 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

224

225

temper, temper, temper, temper, temper, temper, temper temper, quartz- quartz- quartz- quartz- quartz- temper, perthite, perthite, perthite, feldspar, feldspar, feldspar, feldspar, feldspar, sphene, Sample # coarse v. coarse gravel fine medium coarse v. coarse gravel fine 11 2 0 2 3 158 0 0 25 2 0 0 5 2 2 0 0 36 0 0 1 3 2 4 0 0 40 0 0 1 2 3 3 0 0 52 4 0 2 4 3 2 0 1 60 2 0 4 4 3 6 0 0 71 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 82 0 0 1 0 5 0 0 0 93 0 0 1 1 1 1 0 0 10 2 1 0 3 7 2 5 0 0 11 3 0 0 0 1 3 0 0 0 12 0 0 0 0 4 6 0 0 0 13 2 0 0 0 11 7 3 1 1 14 2 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 15 0 2 0 0 2 2 4 0 0 16 0 2 0 2 0 2 4 0 0 17 0 0 0 2 4 4 1 0 0 18 1 1 0 2 3 8 3 0 0 19 5 1 0 1 4 5 1 0 0 20 3 1 0 0 3 3 0 0 0 21 0 0 0 5 7 6 3 0 0 22 3 0 0 1 2 4 5 0 0 23 10 1 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 24 0 0 0 1 4 1 0 0 0 25 1 1 0 0 1 8 2 0 0 26 1 1 0 1 4 2 2 0 0 270006 6112 00 28 3 7 0 0 4 6 2 0 0 29 4 4 0 1 3 4 2 0 0 30 3 1 0 1 2 0 1 0 0 31 4 1 0 0 1 2 2 0 0 32 0 0 0 0 5 1 1 0 0 33 1 0 0 1 5 5 2 0 0 34 0 0 0 1 2 1 0 0 0 35 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 36 1 0 0 2 7 7 3 0 0 37 0 0 0 5 2 8 2 1 0 37 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 384001 4147 00 40 0 0 0 1 1 2 4 0 0 41 4 1 0 1 1 4 1 0 0 42 6 4 1 1 4 7 1 0 0 43 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 44 0 1 0 1 2 7 3 0 0 45 4 0 0 2 0 2 1 0 0 46 0 0 0 0 1 2 1 0 0 47 0 0 0 1 3 4 2 0 0

226

temper, temper, temper, temper, temper, temper, temper temper, quartz- quartz- quartz- quartz- quartz- temper, perthite, perthite, perthite, feldspar, feldspar, feldspar, feldspar, feldspar, sphene, Sample # coarse v. coarse gravel fine medium coarse v. coarse gravel fine 48 0 0 0 2 2 3 4 0 0 49 0 1 0 1 0 3 1 0 0 50 0 0 0 3 2 5 5 0 0 51 4 1 1 1 0 2 2 1 1 52 1 3 0 1 3 4 3 0 0 53 9 1 0 6 10 9 6 0 0 54 3 0 0 3 5 1 5 0 0 55 0 0 0 0 2 5 1 0 0 56 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 57 0 0 0 2 1 6 2 0 0 58 4 1 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 59 2 0 0 0 5 2 0 0 0 60 0 1 0 3 9 4 7 0 0 61 0 0 0 1 2 1 1 0 0 62 0 2 0 0 2 5 5 1 0 63 3 1 0 2 1 3 3 0 0 64 0 0 0 2 3 1 1 0 1 65 0 1 0 1 5 2 0 0 0 66 0 0 0 1 1 3 0 0 0 67 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 0 0 68 4 2 0 3 6 7 1 0 0 69 6 4 0 2 1 2 3 0 0 70 2 1 0 2 1 4 3 0 0 71 2 1 0 0 0 4 2 0 0 72 0 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 73 0 0 0 5 8 6 3 0 0 74 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 75 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 76 0 0 0 0 1 2 1 0 0 77 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 78 0 0 0 0 1 2 0 0 0 79 0 0 0 3 5 4 1 1 0 80 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 81 0 0 0 2 3 1 0 0 0 82 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 83 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 84 0 0 0 0 1 2 0 0 0 85 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 86 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 87 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 88 0 0 0 1 3 4 0 0 0 89 0 0 0 2 6 6 0 0 0 90 0 0 0 8 4 0 0 0 0 91 0 0 0 3 1 0 0 0 0 92 0 0 0 4 4 5 2 0 0 93 0 0 0 2 2 2 2 0 0 94 0 0 0 2 4 4 0 0 0 95 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 96 0 0 0 2 2 5 1 0 0

227

temper, temper, temper, temper, temper, temper, temper temper, quartz- quartz- quartz- quartz- quartz- temper, perthite, perthite, perthite, feldspar, feldspar, feldspar, feldspar, feldspar, sphene, Sample # coarse v. coarse gravel fine medium coarse v. coarse gravel fine 97 0 0 0 5 4 7 3 0 0 98 6 1 1 2 2 2 0 0 0 99 5 4 0 0 2 1 1 0 0 1000004 4113 00 101 0 2 0 1 2 7 0 0 0 102 5 8 0 1 7 9 9 1 0 103 4 0 0 3 3 0 0 0 0 104 0 0 0 0 3 1 1 0 0 105 4 1 0 1 2 6 0 0 0 106 3 2 0 2 3 5 2 0 0 107 1 0 0 1 2 9 4 0 0 108 3 0 0 3 4 0 0 0 0 109 4 4 0 3 5 2 0 0 0 110 1 1 0 2 1 6 0 0 0 111 0 0 0 3 2 3 1 0 0 113 0 0 0 4 1 0 0 0 0 114 1 0 0 0 4 3 0 0 0 115 5 0 0 2 3 1 0 0 0 116 4 1 1 1 2 0 2 0 0 118 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 119 4 1 0 0 1 4 6 0 0 120 0 0 1 0 0 2 1 0 0 121 0 1 0 2 2 5 2 0 0 122 5 2 0 6 0 5 2 1 0 123 1 0 0 1 3 6 2 0 1 124 3 0 0 2 5 1 0 0 0 125 0 0 0 1 2 3 2 0 0 126 1 2 0 0 4 3 1 0 0 127 2 2 0 1 10 3 2 0 0 128 1 2 0 0 3 2 2 0 0 129 4 2 0 1 2 0 4 0 0 130 2 0 0 5 7 1 0 0 0 131 0 0 0 1 7 8 4 0 0 132 2 2 0 1 0 3 1 0 0 133 0 0 0 1 3 5 1 0 0 134 3 1 0 2 2 9 4 0 0 135 4 2 0 3 3 4 1 0 0 136 0 0 0 2 5 8 5 2 0 137 5 1 0 2 4 3 3 0 0 138 1 0 0 0 0 2 4 0 0 139 0 0 0 5 4 5 2 0 0 140 0 0 0 2 5 5 6 0 0 141 0 0 0 0 5 5 1 0 0 142 0 0 0 0 1 4 1 0 1 143 1 2 0 2 1 1 2 0 0 144 1 0 0 2 2 8 2 0 0 145 2 0 0 0 4 7 6 0 0 146 0 0 0 2 6 8 2 0 1 1470004 8118 00 148 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 149 2 1 0 1 4 6 1 0 0 150 3 0 0 3 4 4 1 0 2 151 2 1 0 3 0 1 3 0 0

228

temper, temper, temper, temper, temper, temper, temper temper, quartz- quartz- quartz- quartz- quartz- temper, perthite, perthite, perthite, feldspar, feldspar, feldspar, feldspar, feldspar, sphene, Sample # coarse v. coarse gravel fine medium coarse v. coarse gravel fine 152 3 2 0 0 2 2 6 0 2 153 0 0 0 1 3 4 9 1 0 154 0 0 0 1 3 3 0 0 0 155 3 1 0 1 1 3 1 0 0 156 2 1 0 1 0 3 0 0 0 157 1 1 0 0 1 4 3 0 0 158 0 0 0 1 0 3 1 0 0 159 4 0 0 2 6 4 3 0 1 160 1 1 0 2 5 5 3 1 0 161 0 0 0 5 11 6 3 0 0 162 0 0 0 3 4 5 2 0 0 163 3 4 0 4 9 16 11 0 0 164 1 0 0 0 3 13 18 2 0 165 7 0 0 2 4 2 1 0 0 166 4 7 0 2 1 6 2 0 0 167 1 0 0 5 2 4 0 0 0 168 2 0 1 6 13 9 3 0 0 169 5 1 0 3 2 6 3 0 0 170 0 0 0 3 3 7 2 0 0 200 4 1 0 0 1 5 0 0 0 201 1 3 0 1 1 3 2 0 1 202 1 0 0 0 1 2 1 0 0 203 1 0 0 2 2 8 3 0 0 204 2 1 0 2 5 3 0 0 2 205 1 1 0 0 1 3 2 0 0 206 0 3 0 1 0 3 0 0 0 2072100 2102 00 208 4 3 0 1 1 1 4 0 0 209 0 0 0 3 3 5 2 0 0 210 1 1 0 2 0 4 4 2 0 211 8 6 1 4 2 8 4 0 1 212 2 1 0 0 2 5 4 0 0 213 3 2 0 5 7 7 1 0 0 2146412 4116 00 215 3 2 1 1 2 3 2 0 0 216 4 3 0 0 3 9 4 1 0 217 5 2 0 1 7 3 1 0 0 218 5 0 0 2 1 1 0 0 0 219 2 2 0 6 4 1 0 0 1 220 0 0 0 3 4 4 3 1 0 221 6 4 2 3 3 5 4 0 0 222 1 1 0 2 2 6 4 0 0 2236203 3105 10 224 1 1 0 0 1 1 2 0 0 225 4 1 1 0 2 4 4 0 0 226 11 5 0 1 10 9 1 0 0 227 3 1 0 3 10 1 0 0 0 228 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 0 229 1 0 0 1 0 5 1 0 0 2300400 2102 00 231 4 2 0 3 1 3 0 0 0

229

temper, temper, temper, temper, temper, temper, temper temper, quartz- quartz- quartz- quartz- quartz- temper, perthite, perthite, perthite, feldspar, feldspar, feldspar, feldspar, feldspar, sphene, Sample # coarse v. coarse gravel fine medium coarse v. coarse gravel fine 232 0 0 0 3 5 6 1 0 0 233 2 2 0 1 3 2 2 0 0 234 1 3 0 2 0 7 1 0 0 235 6 1 0 1 4 5 4 1 0 236 0 1 0 0 2 1 2 0 1 237 1 3 1 1 1 6 5 0 0 238 3 0 0 1 5 4 0 0 0 239 1 1 0 1 2 2 4 0 0 240 3 1 0 2 3 1 1 0 0 241 1 2 0 1 2 3 1 0 0 242 0 0 0 2 2 5 6 0 0 243 2 2 0 0 4 3 2 0 0 244 5 2 0 2 6 3 0 0 1 245 1 0 0 2 6 7 5 0 0 246 1 1 0 1 1 1 2 0 0 247 3 2 0 2 2 5 4 3 0 248 1 2 0 1 4 4 4 0 0 249 1 1 0 1 0 5 2 1 0 250 2 0 0 1 1 3 1 0 0 251 2 1 0 2 1 3 4 0 0 252 2 1 0 1 4 3 1 0 0 253 3 1 0 1 1 4 2 0 0 254 4 0 0 2 0 7 1 0 0 255 7 3 0 2 5 7 2 0 0 256 1 1 0 1 2 5 1 0 0 257 6 5 0 1 4 5 4 1 0 258 7 1 0 1 1 1 2 0 0 259 7 3 0 0 3 0 2 0 0 260 1 0 0 2 5 4 1 0 0 261 2 1 0 0 0 3 1 0 0 262 1 0 0 1 3 5 3 2 0 263 7 1 0 0 8 5 7 0 0 264 5 0 0 3 8 5 2 0 1 265 2 0 0 0 10 4 1 0 0 266 0 0 0 5 6 6 3 0 0 267 0 1 0 4 5 5 1 0 1 268 0 1 0 1 5 5 0 0 0 269 0 0 0 5 5 9 3 0 1 270 0 1 0 2 0 1 1 0 0 271 1 2 0 0 1 7 5 0 0 272 4 3 0 3 9 6 2 0 1 273 3 3 0 1 8 7 0 0 1 274 6 0 0 0 3 6 2 2 0 275 1 0 0 0 0 4 3 0 0 276 0 0 0 1 3 5 3 0 0 277 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 278 0 1 0 0 2 4 3 1 0 279 0 2 0 1 1 2 2 0 0 280 6 3 1 6 19 17 6 0 0 281 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 282 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

230

231

temper, temper, temper, temper, temper, temper, temper, temper, temper, sphene, sphene, sphene, hornblende, hornblende, hornblende, hornblende, epidote, epidote, Sample # medium coarse v. coarse fine medium coarse v. coarse fine medium 1000 0 0 0 000 2000 0 0 0 010 3000 0 0 0 001 4000 0 0 0 000 5000 0 0 0 010 6000 0 0 0 000 7000 0 0 0 000 8000 0 0 0 000 9000 0 0 0 000 10000 0 0 0 000 11000 0 0 0 000 12000 0 0 0 000 13000 2 0 0 000 14000 0 0 0 000 15000 0 0 0 000 16000 0 0 0 000 17000 1 0 0 000 18000 1 0 0 000 19000 0 0 0 000 20000 0 0 0 000 21000 0 0 0 000 22000 0 0 0 000 23000 0 0 0 000 24000 0 0 0 000 25000 0 0 0 000 26000 0 0 0 000 27000 0 0 0 000 28000 0 0 0 000 29000 0 0 0 000 30000 0 0 0 000 31000 0 0 0 000 32000 1 0 0 000 33000 0 0 0 010 34000 0 0 0 000 35000 0 0 0 000 36000 0 0 0 000 37000 0 0 0 010 37000 0 0 0 000 38000 0 0 0 000 40000 0 0 0 000 41000 1 0 0 000 42000 0 0 1 000 43000 5 0 1 000 44000 0 0 0 000 45000 0 0 0 000 46000 0 0 0 000 47000 0 0 0 000

232

temper, temper, temper, temper, temper, temper, temper, temper, temper, sphene, sphene, sphene, hornblende, hornblende, hornblende, hornblende, epidote, epidote, Sample # medium coarse v. coarse fine medium coarse v. coarse fine medium 48000 0 0 0 000 49000 0 0 0 000 50000 1 0 0 000 51000 0 0 0 000 52000 0 0 0 000 53001 0 0 0 000 54000 0 0 0 010 55000 0 0 0 000 56000 1 0 0 000 57000 0 0 0 000 58000 0 1 0 000 59000 0 0 0 000 60000 0 0 0 000 61000 0 0 0 010 62000 0 0 0 000 63000 1 0 0 000 64000 0 0 0 000 65000 0 0 0 001 66000 0 0 0 000 67000 0 0 0 000 68000 0 0 0 001 69000 0 0 0 000 70000 0 0 0 000 71000 0 0 0 000 72000 1 0 0 000 73000 0 0 0 000 74000 0 0 0 000 75000 0 0 0 000 76000 1 0 0 000 77000 0 0 0 000 78000 1 0 0 000 79000 0 0 0 000 80000 0 0 0 000 81000 1 0 0 000 82000 1 0 0 000 83000 0 0 0 000 84000 0 0 0 000 85000 1 0 0 000 86000 0 0 0 000 87000 1 0 0 000 88000 1 0 0 000 89000 0 0 0 000 90000 0 0 0 000 91000 0 0 0 000 92000 0 0 0 000 93000 1 0 0 000 94000 3 0 0 010 95000 0 0 0 000 96000 2 2 0 010

233

temper, temper, temper, temper, temper, temper, temper, temper, temper, sphene, sphene, sphene, hornblende, hornblende, hornblende, hornblende, epidote, epidote, Sample # medium coarse v. coarse fine medium coarse v. coarse fine medium 97000 0 0 0 000 98100 0 0 0 000 99000 0 0 0 000 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 101 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 102 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 103 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 104 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 105 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 106 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 107 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 108 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 109 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 110 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 111 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 113 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 114 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 115 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 116 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 118 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 119 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 120 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 121 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 122 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 123 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 124 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 125 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 126 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 127 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 128 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 129 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 130 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 3 0 131 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 132 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 133 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 134 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 135 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 136 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 137 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 138 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 139 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 140 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 141 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 142 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 143 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 144 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 145 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 146 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 147 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 148 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 149 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 150 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 151 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

234

temper, temper, temper, temper, temper, temper, temper, temper, temper, sphene, sphene, sphene, hornblende, hornblende, hornblende, hornblende, epidote, epidote, Sample # medium coarse v. coarse fine medium coarse v. coarse fine medium 152 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 153 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 154 1 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 155 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 156 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 157 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 158 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 159 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 160 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 161 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 162 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 163 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 164 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 165 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 166 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 167 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 168 2 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 169 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 170 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 200 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 201 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 202 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 203 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 204 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 205 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 206 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 207 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 208 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 209 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 210 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 211 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 212 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 213 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 214 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 215 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 216 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 217 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 218 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 219 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 220 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 221 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 222 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 223 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 224 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 225 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 226 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 227 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 228 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 229 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 230 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 231 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0

235

temper, temper, temper, temper, temper, temper, temper, temper, temper, sphene, sphene, sphene, hornblende, hornblende, hornblende, hornblende, epidote, epidote, Sample # medium coarse v. coarse fine medium coarse v. coarse fine medium 232 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 233 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 234 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 235 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 236 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 237 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 238 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 239 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 240 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 241 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 242 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 243 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 244 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 245 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 246 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 247 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 248 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 249 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 250 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 251 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 252 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 253 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 254 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 255 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 256 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 257 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 258 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 259 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 260 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 261 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 262 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 263 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 264 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 265 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 266 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 267 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 268 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 269 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 270 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 271 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 272 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 273 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 274 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 275 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 276 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 277 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 278 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 279 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 280 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 281 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 282 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

236

237

temper, temper, temper, temper, temper, temper, temper, temper, temper, temper, epidote, sericite, sericite, sericite, sericite, sericite, biotite, biotite, basalt, basalt, Sample # coarse fine medium coarse v. coarse gravel fine medium fine medium 1 0000000000 2 0000000000 3 0000000100 4 0000000000 5 0100000000 6 0000000000 7 0000000000 8 0000000000 9 0000000000 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 13 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 14 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 16 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 17 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 19 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 20 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 21 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 22 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 23 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 24 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 25 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 26 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 27 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 28 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 29 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 30 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 31 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 32 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 33 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 34 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 35 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 36 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 37 0 0 1 3 2 0 0 0 0 0 37 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 38 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 40 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 41 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 42 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 43 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 44 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 45 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 46 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 47 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

238

temper, temper, temper, temper, temper, temper, temper, temper, temper, temper, epidote, sericite, sericite, sericite, sericite, sericite, biotite, biotite, basalt, basalt, Sample # coarse fine medium coarse v. coarse gravel fine medium fine medium 48 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 49 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 50 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 51 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 52 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 53 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 54 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 55 0 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 56 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 57 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 58 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 59 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 60 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 61 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 62 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 63 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 64 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 65 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 66 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 67 0 2 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 68 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 69 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 70 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 71 0 0 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 72 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 73 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 74 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 75 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 14 14 76 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 77 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 78 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 79 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 80 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 81 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 82 0 7 4 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 83 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 2 84 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 85 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 2 1 86 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 87 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 88 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 89 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 90 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 91 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 92 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 93 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 94 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 95 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 96 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

239

temper, temper, temper, temper, temper, temper, temper, temper, temper, temper, epidote, sericite, sericite, sericite, sericite, sericite, biotite, biotite, basalt, basalt, Sample # coarse fine medium coarse v. coarse gravel fine medium fine medium 97 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 98 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 100 0 1 2 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 101 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 102 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 103 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 104 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 105 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 106 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 107 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 108 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 109 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 110 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 111 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 113 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 114 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 115 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 116 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 118 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 119 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 120 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 121 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 122 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 123 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 124 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 125 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 126 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 127 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 128 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 129 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 130 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 131 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 132 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 133 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 134 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 135 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 136 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 137 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 138 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 139 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 140 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 141 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 142 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 143 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 144 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 145 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 146 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 147 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 148 0 2 1 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 149 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 150 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 151 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0

240

temper, temper, temper, temper, temper, temper, temper, temper, temper, temper, epidote, sericite, sericite, sericite, sericite, sericite, biotite, biotite, basalt, basalt, Sample # coarse fine medium coarse v. coarse gravel fine medium fine medium 152 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 153 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 154 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 155 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 156 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 157 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 158 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 159 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 160 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 161 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 162 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 163 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 164 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 165 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 166 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 167 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 168 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 169 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 1 0 0 170 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 200 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 201 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 202 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 203 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 204 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 205 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 206 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 207 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 208 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 209 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 210 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 211 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 212 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 213 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 214 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 215 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 216 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 217 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 218 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 219 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 220 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 221 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 222 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 223 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 224 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 225 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 226 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 227 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 228 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 229 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 230 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 231 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

241

temper, temper, temper, temper, temper, temper, temper, temper, temper, temper, epidote, sericite, sericite, sericite, sericite, sericite, biotite, biotite, basalt, basalt, Sample # coarse fine medium coarse v. coarse gravel fine medium fine medium 232 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 233 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 234 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 235 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 236 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 237 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 238 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 239 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 240 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 241 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 242 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 243 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 244 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 245 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 246 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 247 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 248 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 249 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 250 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 251 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 252 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 253 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 254 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 255 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 256 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 257 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 258 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 259 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 260 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 261 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 262 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 263 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 264 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 265 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 266 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 267 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 268 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 269 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 270 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 271 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 272 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 273 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 274 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 275 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 276 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 277 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 278 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 279 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 280 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 281 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 282 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

242

243

temper, temper, temper, temper, temper, temper, temper, temper, basalt, basalt, v. basalt, phenocryst, phenocryst, phenocryst, phenocryst, devitrified Sample # coarse coarse gravel fine medium coarse v. coarse glass, fine 10 00 0 0 0 0 0 20 00 0 0 0 0 0 30 00 0 0 0 0 0 40 00 0 0 0 0 0 50 00 0 0 0 0 0 60 00 0 0 0 0 0 70 00 0 0 0 0 0 80 00 0 0 0 0 0 90 00 0 0 0 0 0 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 13 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 14 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 16 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 17 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 19 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 20 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 21 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 22 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 23 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 24 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 25 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 26 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 27 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 28 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 29 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 30 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 31 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 32 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 33 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 34 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 35 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 36 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 37 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 37 0 0 0 6 4 1 0 0 38 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 40 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 41 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 42 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 43 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 44 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 45 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 46 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 47 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

244

temper, temper, temper, temper, temper, temper, temper, temper, basalt, basalt, v. basalt, phenocryst, phenocryst, phenocryst, phenocryst, devitrified Sample # coarse coarse gravel fine medium coarse v. coarse glass, fine 48 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 50 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 51 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 52 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 53 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 54 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 55 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 56 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 57 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 58 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 59 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 60 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 61 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 62 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 63 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 64 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 65 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 66 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 67 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 68 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 69 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 70 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 71 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 72 1 1 0 4 2 2 1 1 73 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 74 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 75 16 3 1 0 0 0 0 0 76 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 77 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 78 1 0 0 1 1 2 0 0 79 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 80 0 0 0 2 3 1 0 1 81 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 82 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 83 0 0 0 3 3 4 0 1 84 1 1 0 3 7 8 0 0 85 0 0 0 5 8 3 0 0 86 0 0 0 13 9 2 1 1 87 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 88 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 89 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 90 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 91 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 92 0 0 0 3 3 0 0 0 93 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 94 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 95 0 0 0 4 5 1 0 0 96 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

245

temper, temper, temper, temper, temper, temper, temper, temper, basalt, basalt, v. basalt, phenocryst, phenocryst, phenocryst, phenocryst, devitrified Sample # coarse coarse gravel fine medium coarse v. coarse glass, fine 97 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 98 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 101 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 102 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 103 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 104 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 105 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 106 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 107 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 108 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 109 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 110 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 111 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 113 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 114 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 115 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 116 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 118 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 119 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 120 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 121 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 122 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 123 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 124 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 125 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 126 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 127 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 128 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 129 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 130 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 131 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 132 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 133 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 134 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 135 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 136 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 137 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 138 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 139 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 140 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 141 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 142 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 143 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 144 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 145 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 146 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 147 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 148 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 149 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 150 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 151 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

246

temper, temper, temper, temper, temper, temper, temper, temper, basalt, basalt, v. basalt, phenocryst, phenocryst, phenocryst, phenocryst, devitrified Sample # coarse coarse gravel fine medium coarse v. coarse glass, fine 152 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 153 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 154 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 155 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 156 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 157 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 158 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 159 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 160 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 161 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 162 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 163 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 164 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 165 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 166 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 167 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 168 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 169 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 170 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 200 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 201 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 202 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 203 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 204 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 205 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 206 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 207 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 208 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 209 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 210 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 211 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 212 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 213 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 214 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 215 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 216 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 217 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 218 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 219 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 220 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 221 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 222 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 223 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 224 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 225 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 226 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 227 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 228 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 229 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 230 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 231 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

247

temper, temper, temper, temper, temper, temper, temper, temper, basalt, basalt, v. basalt, phenocryst, phenocryst, phenocryst, phenocryst, devitrified Sample # coarse coarse gravel fine medium coarse v. coarse glass, fine 232 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 233 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 234 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 235 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 236 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 237 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 238 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 239 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 240 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 241 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 242 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 243 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 244 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 245 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 246 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 247 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 248 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 249 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 250 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 251 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 252 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 253 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 254 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 255 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 256 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 257 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 258 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 259 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 260 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 261 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 262 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 263 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 264 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 265 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 266 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 267 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 268 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 269 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 270 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 271 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 272 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 273 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 274 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 275 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 276 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 277 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 278 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 279 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 280 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 281 2 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 282 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0

248

249

temper, temper, devitrified devitrified sand, sand, sand, sand, sand, sand, sand, K glass, glass, quartz, quartz, quartz, quartz, v. feldspar, feldspar, feldspar, Sample # medium coarse fine medium coarse coarse fine medium fine 1003000305 2001000111 3009000000 4003200000 50011000101 6003000302 7001000003 8004000004 9004000001 10 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 2 11 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 12 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 2 13 0 0 6 2 0 0 4 0 4 14 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 15 0 0 7 0 0 0 0 0 2 16 0 0 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 17 0 0 6 0 0 0 1 0 0 18 0 0 6 0 0 0 3 0 0 19 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 3 20 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 21 0 0 4 0 0 0 1 0 3 22 0 0 8 0 0 0 1 0 1 23 0 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 2 24 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 25 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 26 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 27 0 0 6 0 0 0 2 0 1 28 0 0 6 0 0 0 0 0 3 29 0 0 2 2 0 0 2 0 1 30 0 0 3 1 1 0 4 0 3 31 0 0 10 1 0 0 0 0 1 32 0 0 6 1 0 0 0 0 0 33 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 2 34 0 0 1 2 0 0 3 1 2 35 0 0 5 1 0 0 3 0 3 36 0 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 2 37 0 0 3 0 0 0 4 0 0 37 0 0 5 2 0 0 4 0 3 38 0 0 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 40 0 0 5 0 0 0 1 0 3 41 0 0 7 0 0 0 2 0 0 42 0 0 6 1 0 0 3 1 0 43 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 44 0 0 6 1 0 0 1 0 1 45 0 0 1 0 0 0 2 1 0 46 0 0 3 2 0 0 1 0 2 47 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0

250

temper, temper, devitrified devitrified sand, sand, sand, sand, sand, sand, sand, K glass, glass, quartz, quartz, quartz, quartz, v. feldspar, feldspar, feldspar, Sample # medium coarse fine medium coarse coarse fine medium fine 48 0 0 3 0 0 0 1 0 0 49 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 50 0 0 8 0 0 0 1 0 2 51 0 0 8 1 0 0 3 0 2 52 0 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 1 53 0 0 4 2 0 0 7 1 2 54 0 0 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 55 0 0 9 0 0 0 3 0 2 56 0 0 4 2 1 0 3 0 2 57 0 0 6 1 0 0 4 0 1 58 0 0 6 0 0 0 2 0 1 59 0 0 3 0 0 0 2 0 1 60 0 0 1 0 0 0 3 0 4 61 0 0 3 0 0 0 2 0 2 62 0 0 3 1 0 0 1 0 3 63 0 0 2 1 0 0 1 0 2 64 0 0 4 0 0 0 1 0 2 65 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 4 66 0 0 3 0 0 0 1 0 2 67 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 68 0 0 4 1 0 0 0 0 4 69 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 70 0 0 3 1 0 0 0 0 2 71 0 0 5 2 1 0 1 0 0 72 0 1 3 0 0 0 2 2 1 73 0 0 4 0 0 0 10 0 0 74 0 0 3 0 0 0 2 0 2 75 0 0 4 0 0 0 1 0 0 76 0 0 7 3 0 0 0 0 2 77 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 78 0 0 10 1 0 0 2 0 2 79 0 0 3 1 0 0 2 0 1 80 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 1 81 0 0 4 1 0 0 10 4 1 82 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 83 2 0 8 2 0 0 2 0 0 84 0 0 5 1 1 0 1 0 4 85 0 0 6 0 0 0 3 0 2 86 0 0 6 0 0 0 4 0 0 87 0 0 1 1 0 0 2 0 0 88 0 0 4 0 0 0 5 0 2 89 0 0 5 0 0 0 2 4 2 90 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 91 0 0 3 0 0 0 1 0 0 92 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 2 0 93 0 0 2 1 0 0 2 1 2 94 0 0 3 1 0 0 1 1 0 95 0 0 7 1 2 0 2 2 4 96 0 0 4 0 0 0 3 0 0

251

temper, temper, devitrified devitrified sand, sand, sand, sand, sand, sand, sand, K glass, glass, quartz, quartz, quartz, quartz, v. feldspar, feldspar, feldspar, Sample # medium coarse fine medium coarse coarse fine medium fine 97 0 0 7 0 0 0 1 0 3 98 0 0 8 1 1 0 2 0 0 99 0 0 18 1 1 0 1 0 0 100 0 0 14 0 0 0 5 1 2 101 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 1 0 102 0 0 4 0 0 0 1 0 1 103 0 0 8 0 0 0 3 0 0 104 0 0 4 0 0 0 2 0 1 105 0 0 8 0 0 0 1 0 2 106 0 0 5 0 0 0 4 0 1 107 0 0 2 0 0 0 2 0 1 108 0 0 5 0 0 0 2 0 3 109 0 0 9 0 0 0 1 0 1 110 0 0 6 0 0 0 0 0 1 111 0 0 3 0 0 0 2 1 1 113 0 0 10 0 0 0 6 1 0 114 0 0 6 0 0 0 4 0 2 115 0 0 7 0 0 0 0 0 1 116 0 0 4 0 0 0 2 0 1 118 0 0 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 119 0 0 4 1 0 0 3 0 2 120 0 0 10 0 0 0 0 0 2 121 0 0 6 0 0 0 0 0 1 122 0 0 13 0 1 0 1 0 3 123 0 0 3 0 1 0 1 0 0 124 0 0 5 0 0 0 3 0 1 125 0 0 6 0 0 0 2 0 4 126 0 0 6 0 0 0 2 0 4 127 0 0 5 1 0 0 2 0 3 128 0 0 8 0 0 0 3 0 0 129 0 0 2 0 0 0 3 0 0 130 0 0 6 0 0 0 1 0 2 131 0 0 5 1 0 0 5 0 2 132 0 0 6 0 0 0 1 0 0 133 0 0 6 0 0 0 1 0 1 134 0 0 8 1 0 0 4 0 4 135 0 0 1 0 0 0 2 0 1 136 0 0 19 0 0 0 4 0 11 137 0 0 4 0 0 0 3 0 4 138 0 0 7 0 0 0 3 0 1 139 0 0 4 0 0 0 6 0 3 140 0 0 5 0 0 0 2 0 2 141 0 0 3 0 0 0 4 1 0 142 0 0 3 2 0 0 4 0 2 143 0 0 9 0 0 0 2 0 1 144 0 0 6 0 0 0 1 0 0 145 0 0 5 0 0 0 3 2 0 146 0 0 8 1 0 0 1 0 2 147 0 0 7 0 0 0 4 0 1 148 0 0 5 0 0 0 3 0 1 149 0 0 7 1 0 0 0 0 4 150 0 0 6 1 0 0 0 0 5 151 0 0 4 0 1 0 1 0 2

252

temper, temper, devitrified devitrified sand, sand, sand, sand, sand, sand, sand, K glass, glass, quartz, quartz, quartz, quartz, v. feldspar, feldspar, feldspar, Sample # medium coarse fine medium coarse coarse fine medium fine 152 0 0 9 0 0 0 2 0 0 153 0 0 6 0 0 0 5 0 0 154 0 0 4 1 0 0 1 0 2 155 0 0 2 0 0 0 1 0 0 156 0 0 8 0 0 0 3 0 2 157 0 0 7 0 0 0 2 0 3 158 0 0 2 0 0 0 1 0 2 159 0 0 5 0 0 0 1 0 1 160 0 0 1 7 0 0 7 0 3 161 0 0 8 0 0 0 4 1 2 162 0 0 10 1 0 0 5 0 0 163 0 0 16 0 0 0 5 1 3 164 0 0 12 1 0 0 5 1 3 165 0 0 8 0 0 0 1 1 2 166 0 0 7 1 0 0 3 0 3 167 0 0 4 0 0 0 1 0 4 168 0 0 5 0 0 0 1 0 6 169 0 0 3 0 0 0 4 1 2 170 0 0 3 0 0 0 5 0 2 200 0 0 3 1 0 0 1 0 1 201 0 0 7 0 0 0 1 0 2 202 0 0 6 1 0 0 0 0 1 203 0 0 5 1 0 0 1 0 3 204 0 0 6 0 0 0 1 0 3 205 0 0 5 1 0 0 1 1 1 206 0 0 4 1 0 0 1 0 3 207 0 0 5 0 0 0 1 1 3 208 0 0 1 1 0 0 3 0 1 209 0 0 5 1 0 0 0 0 2 210 0 0 6 0 0 0 2 0 1 211 0 0 2 0 0 0 2 0 0 212 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 1 213 0 0 5 0 0 0 1 0 2 214 0 0 7 0 0 0 1 0 3 215 0 0 10 0 0 1 2 0 1 216 0 0 2 0 0 0 1 1 0 217 0 0 8 2 0 0 4 0 0 218 0 0 2 0 0 0 2 0 2 219 0 0 4 0 0 0 1 0 1 220 0 0 2 0 0 0 2 0 1 221 0 0 5 1 0 0 4 0 0 222 0 0 2 0 0 0 1 0 1 223 0 0 5 0 1 0 3 0 4 224 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 2 225 0 0 5 1 0 0 2 0 0 226 0 0 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 227 0 0 8 0 0 0 1 0 1 228 0 0 5 0 0 0 2 1 0 229 0 0 3 1 1 0 2 0 0 230 0 0 5 0 0 0 2 0 0 231 0 0 9 1 0 0 0 0 0

253

temper, temper, devitrified devitrified sand, sand, sand, sand, sand, sand, sand, K glass, glass, quartz, quartz, quartz, quartz, v. feldspar, feldspar, feldspar, Sample # medium coarse fine medium coarse coarse fine medium fine 232 0 0 2 0 0 0 2 0 0 233 0 0 7 1 0 0 0 0 2 234 0 0 6 1 0 0 2 0 1 235 0 0 4 0 0 0 1 0 0 236 0 0 7 0 0 0 1 0 0 237 0 0 7 0 0 0 0 0 1 238 0 0 6 0 0 0 1 0 0 239 0 0 8 0 0 0 3 0 1 240 0 0 6 1 0 0 3 0 0 241 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 3 242 0 0 5 1 0 0 1 0 1 243 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 1 0 244 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 1 245 0 0 4 0 1 0 1 0 2 246 0 0 5 1 0 0 2 1 2 247 0 0 7 0 0 0 2 0 2 248 0 0 6 0 0 0 1 0 2 249 0 0 4 0 0 0 1 0 2 250 0 0 7 1 0 0 0 0 2 251 0 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 252 0 0 5 0 0 0 2 0 1 253 0 0 4 0 0 0 2 0 2 254 0 0 2 0 0 0 1 0 2 255 0 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 1 256 0 0 5 1 0 0 0 0 0 257 0 0 12 0 0 0 5 0 3 258 0 0 8 0 0 0 1 0 1 259 0 0 6 0 0 0 1 0 2 260 0 0 11 0 0 0 5 0 2 261 0 0 2 1 0 0 0 0 1 262 0 0 5 1 0 0 1 0 0 263 0 0 6 0 0 0 0 0 1 264 0 0 6 1 0 0 2 0 2 265 0 0 3 1 0 0 1 0 0 266 0 0 7 1 0 0 3 0 0 267 0 0 7 1 0 0 0 0 1 268 0 0 11 0 0 0 2 0 2 269 0 0 9 0 0 0 1 0 1 270 0 0 6 0 0 0 1 0 0 271 0 0 4 1 0 0 3 0 0 272 0 0 6 0 0 0 0 1 0 273 0 0 6 1 0 0 0 0 0 274 0 0 9 0 0 0 2 0 1 275 0 0 3 0 0 0 1 0 0 276 0 0 8 0 0 0 2 0 1 277 0 0 7 0 0 0 1 0 1 278 0 0 4 1 0 0 0 0 1 279 0 0 6 0 0 0 2 0 0 280 0 0 15 2 0 0 3 0 5 281 0 0 23 2 0 0 4 0 1 282 0 0 8 2 0 0 1 0 0

254

255

sand, K sand, K sand, sand, feldspar, feldspar, plagioclase, plagioclase, Sample # medium coarse fine medium 100 0 0 200 0 0 300 0 0 400 0 0 500 0 0 600 0 0 700 0 0 800 0 0 900 0 0 10 0 0 1 0 11 0 0 3 1 12 0 0 0 0 13 1 0 1 0 14 0 0 1 0 15 0 0 0 0 16 0 0 1 0 17 0 0 0 0 18 0 0 0 0 19 0 0 0 0 20 0 0 0 0 21 1 0 1 0 22 0 0 0 0 23 0 0 0 0 24 0 0 0 0 25 0 0 0 0 26 1 0 0 0 27 0 0 0 0 28 1 0 0 0 29 0 0 0 0 30 1 0 0 0 31 1 0 0 0 32 0 0 0 0 33 0 0 1 0 34 0 0 0 0 35 1 1 0 0 36 1 0 1 0 37 1 0 0 0 37 0 0 0 0 38 1 1 1 0 40 1 0 1 0 41 0 0 0 0 42 1 0 1 0 43 0 0 0 0 44 1 0 0 0 45 0 0 0 0 46 0 0 1 0 47 0 0 1 0

256

sand, K sand, K sand, sand, feldspar, feldspar, plagioclase, plagioclase, Sample # medium coarse fine medium 48 0 0 1 0 49 0 0 0 0 50 0 0 1 0 51 1 0 0 1 52 2 0 0 0 53 0 0 0 0 54 0 0 0 0 55 0 0 0 0 56 0 0 0 0 57 0 0 0 0 58 0 0 0 0 59 0 0 0 0 60 0 0 0 0 61 0 0 0 0 62 0 0 0 0 63 0 0 1 0 64 0 0 1 0 65 0 0 2 0 66 0 0 1 0 67 1 0 0 0 68 0 0 0 0 69 0 0 0 0 70 1 0 0 0 71 0 0 0 0 72 0 0 0 0 73 0 0 1 0 74 0 0 0 0 75 0 1 0 0 76 1 0 0 0 77 0 0 0 0 78 0 0 0 1 79 0 0 1 0 80 1 0 1 0 81 1 2 1 0 82 0 0 0 0 83 0 0 0 0 84 0 0 2 0 85 1 0 0 0 86 1 0 0 0 87 0 0 0 0 88 0 0 0 0 89 0 0 0 1 90 0 0 0 0 91 0 0 0 0 92 0 0 1 0 93 0 0 0 0 94 1 0 0 0 95 0 1 1 0 96 0 0 0 0

257

sand, K sand, K sand, sand, feldspar, feldspar, plagioclase, plagioclase, Sample # medium coarse fine medium 97 0 0 0 0 98 0 0 0 0 99 0 0 0 0 100 0 0 0 0 101 1 0 1 0 102 0 0 0 0 103 0 0 0 0 104 1 0 0 0 105 0 0 0 0 106 0 0 0 0 107 0 0 1 0 108 0 0 0 0 109 0 0 0 0 110 0 0 0 0 111 0 0 2 0 113 0 0 0 0 114 0 0 0 0 115 0 0 0 0 116 0 0 0 0 118 0 0 0 0 119 0 0 0 0 120 0 0 0 0 121 0 0 0 0 122 0 0 1 0 123 0 0 0 1 124 0 0 0 1 125 0 1 0 0 126 0 0 0 0 127 1 0 1 0 128 0 0 1 0 129 0 0 0 0 130 0 0 1 0 131 0 0 0 0 132 0 0 0 0 133 0 0 0 0 134 0 0 2 0 135 0 0 0 0 136 1 0 3 0 137 0 0 0 0 138 0 0 0 0 139 0 0 2 0 140 0 0 0 0 141 0 0 0 0 142 0 0 0 0 143 0 0 0 0 144 0 0 0 0 145 0 0 0 0 146 0 0 0 0 147 1 0 0 0 148 0 0 0 0 149 1 0 1 0 150 0 0 0 0 151 0 0 0 0

258

sand, K sand, K sand, sand, feldspar, feldspar, plagioclase, plagioclase, Sample # medium coarse fine medium 152 0 0 0 0 153 0 0 0 0 154 2 0 0 0 155 0 0 0 0 156 0 0 0 0 157 0 0 0 0 158 0 0 0 0 159 0 0 0 0 160 1 0 0 0 161 0 0 0 0 162 0 0 0 0 163 1 0 0 0 164 1 0 0 1 165 0 0 0 0 166 0 0 1 0 167 0 0 0 0 168 1 0 1 0 169 0 0 0 0 170 0 0 0 0 200 1 0 0 0 201 1 1 0 0 202 0 0 0 0 203 0 0 0 0 204 0 0 1 0 205 0 0 0 0 206 0 0 0 0 207 0 0 0 0 208 0 0 0 0 209 0 0 0 0 210 0 0 0 0 211 0 0 0 0 212 0 0 0 0 213 1 0 0 0 214 0 0 0 0 215 0 0 0 0 216 1 0 0 0 217 0 0 0 0 218 0 0 0 0 219 0 0 0 0 220 0 0 0 0 221 0 0 0 0 222 0 0 0 0 223 0 0 0 0 224 0 0 0 0 225 0 0 0 0 226 0 0 0 0 227 0 0 0 0 228 0 0 0 0 229 0 0 0 0 230 0 0 0 0 231 1 0 0 0

259

sand, K sand, K sand, sand, feldspar, feldspar, plagioclase, plagioclase, Sample # medium coarse fine medium 232 0 0 0 0 233 0 0 0 0 234 1 0 0 0 235 0 0 0 0 236 0 0 0 0 237 0 0 0 0 238 0 0 0 0 239 0 0 0 0 240 0 0 0 0 241 0 0 0 0 242 0 0 0 0 243 0 0 0 0 244 0 0 0 0 245 0 0 0 0 246 1 0 0 0 247 0 0 0 0 248 0 0 1 0 249 0 0 0 0 250 0 0 0 0 251 0 1 0 0 252 0 0 0 0 253 0 0 0 0 254 0 0 1 0 255 1 0 0 0 256 0 0 0 0 257 0 0 0 0 258 0 0 0 0 259 0 0 0 0 260 0 0 0 0 261 1 0 0 0 262 0 0 0 0 263 0 0 0 0 264 0 0 0 0 265 0 0 0 0 266 0 0 0 0 267 1 0 0 0 268 0 0 0 0 269 0 0 0 0 270 0 0 0 0 271 0 0 0 0 272 0 0 0 0 273 1 0 0 0 274 0 0 0 0 275 0 0 0 0 276 0 0 0 0 277 0 0 0 0 278 0 0 0 0 279 0 0 0 0 280 0 0 1 0 281 0 0 0 0 282 0 0 0 0

260

sand, K sand, K sand, sand, feldspar, feldspar, plagioclase, plagioclase, Sample # medium coarse fine medium 283 0 0 0 0 284 0 0 1 0 285 0 0 0 0 286 0 0 0 0 287 1 0 0 0 288 0 0 0 0 289 0 0 0 0 290 0 0 1 1 291 0 0 0 0

Appendix C

Petrographic Analysis: Low Frequency Minerals

Accessory Mineral Presence/Absence Data 0:absent, 1: present epp: El Paso Polychrome, white: whiteware, plain: plainwares Sample Muscovite/ # Site Type Hornblende Epidote Biotite Sericite Sphene Mica Microcline Zoisite Chert 1 Paquime epp 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 Paquime epp 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 0 0 3 Paquime epp 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 4 Paquime epp 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 5 Paquime epp 0 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 6 Paquime epp 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 7 Paquime epp 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 Paquime epp 0 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 9 Paquime epp 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 Paquime epp 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 11 Paquime epp 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 12 Paquime epp 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 13 Paquime epp 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 0 14 Paquime epp 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 15 Paquime epp 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 16 Paquime epp 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 17 Paquime epp 1 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 18 Paquime epp 1 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 19 Paquime epp 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 20 Paquime epp 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 21 Paquime epp 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 22 Paquime epp 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 23 Paquime epp 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 24 Paquime epp 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 25 Paquime epp 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 26 Paquime epp 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 27 Paquime epp 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 28 Paquime epp 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 29 Paquime epp 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 30 Paquime epp 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 0 0 31 Paquime epp 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 0 0 32 Paquime epp 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 33 Paquime epp 1 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 34 Paquime epp 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 35 Paquime epp 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 36 Paquime epp 1 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 37 Paquime epp 1 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 37 Paquime epp 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 38 Paquime epp 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 40 Paquime epp 1 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 41 Paquime epp 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 42 Paquime epp 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 43 Paquime epp 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 44 Paquime epp 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 0

262

Sample Muscovite/ # Site Type Hornblende Epidote Biotite Sericite Sphene Mica Microcline Zoisite Chert 45 Paquime epp 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 46 Paquime epp 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 47 Paquime epp 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 48 Paquime epp 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 49 Paquime epp 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 50 Paquime epp 1 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 51 Paquime epp 0 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 52 Paquime epp 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 53 Paquime epp 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 54 Paquime epp 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 55 Paquime epp 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 56 Paquime epp 1 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 57 Paquime epp 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 58 Paquime epp 1 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 59 Paquime epp 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 60 Paquime epp 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 61 Paquime epp 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 62 Paquime epp 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 63 Paquime epp 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 64 Paquime epp 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 65 Paquime epp 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 66 Paquime epp 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 67 Paquime epp 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 68 Paquime epp 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 69 Paquime epp 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 70 Paquime epp 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 71 Paquime epp 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 72 Paquime plain 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 73 Paquime plain 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 74 Paquime white 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 75 Paquime plain 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 76 Paquime plain 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 77 Paquime plain 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 78 Paquime plain 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 79 Paquime plain 1 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 80 Paquime plain 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 81 Paquime plain 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 82 Paquime plain 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 83 Paquime plain 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 84 Paquime plain 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 85 Paquime plain 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 86 Paquime plain 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 87 Paquime plain 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 88 Paquime plain 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 89 Paquime plain 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 90 Paquime white 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 91 Paquime plain 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 92 Paquime plain 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 93 Paquime plain 1 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 94 Paquime plain 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 95 Paquime plain 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 96 Paquime epp 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 97 Paquime epp 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 98 Paquime epp 1 1 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 99 Paquime epp 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 0 0 100 Paquime epp 0 1 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 101 FB53 epp 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 102 FB53 epp 1 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 103 FB53 epp 1 1 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 104 FB53 epp 0 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 105 FB53 epp 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0

263

Sample Muscovite/ # Site Type Hornblende Epidote Biotite Sericite Sphene Mica Microcline Zoisite Chert 106 FB53 epp 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 107 FB53 epp 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 108 FB53 epp 1 1 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 109 FB53 brown 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 110 FB53 brown 1 1 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 111 FB9785 epp 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 113 FB9788 epp 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 114 FB9788 epp 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 115 FB9788 brown 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 0 0 116 FB9788 epp 1 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 118 FB9788 epp 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 119 FB9788 epp 1 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 120 FB9788 epp 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 121 FB6772 epp 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 122 FB6772 epp 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 123 FB6772 epp 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 124 FB6772 epp 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 125 FB6772 epp 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 126 FB6772 epp 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 127 FB6772 brown 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 128 FB6772 epp 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 129 FB6772 brown 0 1 1 0 1 1 1 0 0 130 FB6772 brown 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 131 FB9657 brown 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 132 FB9657 epp 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 0 0 133 FB9657 epp 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 134 FB5000 brown 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 0 0 135 FB5000 epp 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 136 FB5000 epp 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 137 FB1640 brown 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 0 0 138 FB1640 epp 1 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 139 FB1640 epp 0 1 1 1 0 1 1 0 0 140 FB6281 brown 1 1 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 141 FB6281 epp 1 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 142 FB6281 epp 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 143 FB6281 brown 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 0 0 144 FB6281 epp 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 0 0 145 FB6281 epp 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 0 0 146 FB6281 brown 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 0 0 147 FB6281 epp 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 148 FB6281 epp 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 149 FB6281 epp 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 0 0 150 FB6281 epp 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 151 FB6873 epp 1 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 152 FB6873 brown 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 153 FB6873 brown 0 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 154 FB6873 epp 1 1 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 155 FB6873 brown 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 0 0 156 FB6873 epp 1 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 157 FB6873 brown 1 1 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 158 FB6873 epp 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 159 FB6363 brown 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 160 FB6363 epp 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 161 FB6363 brown 1 1 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 162 FB6363 epp 0 1 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 163 FB6363 epp 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 164 FB6363 brown 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 0 0 165 FB6363 epp 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 0 0 166 FB6363 brown 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 0 0 167 FB6363 epp 1 1 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 168 FB10533 epp 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0

264 Sample Muscovite/ # Site Type Hornblende Epidote Biotite Sericite Sphene Mica Microcline Zoisite Chert 169 FB10533 brown 0 1 1 0 1 1 1 0 0 170 FB10533 epp 1 1 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 200 V. Ahumadaepp 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 201 V. Ahumadaepp 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 202 V. Ahumadaepp 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 0 0 203 V. Ahumadaepp 1 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 204 V. Ahumadaepp 1 1 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 205 V. Ahumadaepp 1 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 206 V. Ahumadaepp 1 1 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 207 V. Ahumadaepp 1 1 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 208 V. Ahumadaepp 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 209 V. Ahumadaepp 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 210 V. Ahumadaepp 1 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 211 V. Ahumadaepp 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 212 V. Ahumadaepp 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 213 V. Ahumadaepp 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 214 V. Ahumadaepp 1 1 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 215 V. Ahumadaepp 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 216 V. Ahumadaepp 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 0 0 217 V. Ahumadaepp 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 218 V. Ahumadaepp 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 219 V. Ahumadaepp 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 220 V. Ahumadaepp 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 221 V. Ahumadaepp 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 222 V. Ahumadaepp 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 223 V. Ahumadaepp 1 1 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 224 V. Ahumadaepp 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 225 V. Ahumadaepp 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 226 V. Ahumadaepp 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 227 V. Ahumadaepp 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 228 V. Ahumadaepp 0 1 1 0 1 1 1 0 0 229 V. Ahumadaepp 1 1 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 230 V. Ahumadaepp 1 1 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 231 V. Ahumadaepp 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 232 V. Ahumadaepp 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 233 V. Ahumadaepp 1 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 234 V. Ahumadaepp 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 235 V. Ahumadaepp 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 236 V. Ahumadaepp 1 1 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 237 V. Ahumadaepp 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 238 V. Ahumadaepp 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 239 V. Ahumadaepp 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 0 0 240 V. Ahumadaepp 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 241 V. Ahumadaepp 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 242 V. Ahumadaepp 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 243 V. Ahumadaepp 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 244 V. Ahumadaepp 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 245 V. Ahumadaepp 1 1 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 246 V. Ahumadaepp 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 247 V. Ahumadaepp 1 1 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 248 V. Ahumadaepp 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 249 V. Ahumadaepp 1 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 250 V. Ahumadaepp 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 251 V. Ahumadaepp 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 252 V. Ahumadaepp 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 253 V. Ahumadaepp 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 254 V. Ahumadaepp 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 255 V. Ahumadaepp 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 256 V. Ahumadaepp 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 257 V. Ahumadaepp 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 258 V. Ahumadaepp 0 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 0

265

Sample Muscovite/ # Site Type Hornblende Epidote Biotite Sericite Sphene Mica Microcline Zoisite Chert 259 V. Ahumadaepp 1 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 260 V. Ahumadaepp 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 261 V. Ahumadaepp 1 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 262 V. Ahumadaepp 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 263 V. Ahumadaepp 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 264 V. Ahumadaepp 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 265 V. Ahumadaepp 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 266 V. Ahumadaepp 0 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 267 V. Ahumadaepp 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 268 V. Ahumadaepp 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 269 V. Ahumadaepp 1 1 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 270 V. Ahumadaepp 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 271 V. Ahumadaepp 1 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 272 V. Ahumadaepp 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 0 0 273 V. Ahumadaepp 1 1 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 274 V. Ahumadaepp 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 0 0 275 V. Ahumadaepp 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 276 V. Ahumadaepp 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 0 0 277 V. Ahumadaepp 1 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 278 V. Ahumadaepp 1 1 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 279 V. Ahumadaepp 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 280 V. Ahumadaepp 1 1 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 281 V. Ahumadaplain 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 282 V. Ahumadaplain 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 283 V. Ahumadaplain 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 284 V. Ahumadaplain 1 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 285 V. Ahumadaplain 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 286 V. Ahumadaplain 1 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 287 V. Ahumadaplain 1 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 288 V. Ahumadaplain 1 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 289 V. Ahumadaplain 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 290 V. Ahumadaplain 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 291 V. Ahumadaplain 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

VITA

Jessica Prue Burgett

Education: M.A. Anthropology 1999, The Pennsylvania State University B.A. Anthropology 1997, University of Washington, Seattle

Employment History: Teaching Assitant/Research Assistant, Dept. of Anthropology, The Pennsylvania State University. Fall Semester 1997- Spring Semester 2003, and Fall Semester 2005 – Spring Semester 2006 Graduate Lecturer, Dept. of Anthropology, The Pennsylvania State University Summer Semester 2003 Field and Laboratory Technician, Proyecto Arqueológico Chihuahua, Colonia Júarez, Chihuahua, Mexico, June 1 – August 1, 2000-2002. Supervisors: Dr. Paul Minnis, University of Oklahoma, [email protected], and Dr. Michael Whalen, University of Tulsa, [email protected]. Field Technician, Proyecto Arqueológico Paquimé, Casas Grandes Chihuahua, Mexico, June 15-August 1, 1999. Supervisor: Eduardo Gamboa Carrera, Centro INAH Chihuahua, [email protected]. Field Technician, Proyecto Arqueológico Chihuahua, Oscar Soto Maynes, Chihuahua, Mexico. May 30 – June 15, 1999. Supervisor: Dr. Jane Kelley, University of Calgary (emeritus), (403) 220-6363 Field Technician, Proyecto Acatzingo-Tepeaca, Puebla, Mexico. May 15 – August 5, 1998. Supervisor: Dr. Kenneth Hirth, 409 Carpenter Bldg., Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA 16802, (814) 863-9647. Laboratory Assistant, Archaeology Division, Thomas Burke Memorial Washington State Museum, Seattle, October 1996- June 1997. Supervisor: Dr. Julie Stein, University of Washington, [email protected].

Field School: 1996 University of Arizona Silver Creek Archaeological Research Project. Barbara Mills, Director.

Professional Presentations: o Petrography and the Production of El Paso Polychrome in the International Four Corners, Poster presented at the 2005 Society for American Archaeology Meetings, Salt Lake City. o Just Like That, But Different: El Paso Polychrome in the Casas Grandes Region, Chihuahua, Mexico, Paper presented at the 2005 Jornada Mogollon Conference, El Paso, Texas.