Testing the provenance of Patayan pottery at Las Colinas: chemical and petrographic analyses of phyllite-temper fragments

Journal of Archaeological Science 39 (2012) 984e993

Contents lists available at SciVerse ScienceDirect

Journal of Archaeological Science journal homepage: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/jas

Testing the provenance of Patayan pottery at Las Colinas: chemical and petrographic analyses of phyllite-temper fragments David R. Abbott a, *, Sophia E. Kelly a, Andrew D. Lack a, Margaret E. Beck b a b

School of Human Evolution and Social Change, Arizona State University, Tempe, AZ 85287-2402, USA Department of Anthropology, University of Iowa, Iowa City, IA 52242-1322, USA

a r t i c l e i n f o

a b s t r a c t

Article history: Received 4 March 2011 Received in revised form 21 November 2011 Accepted 23 November 2011

Mobile Patayan foragers of the interior desert of southwestern Arizona were makers of Lower Colorado Buff Ware ceramics. These containers were sometimes traded to Hohokam irrigation agriculturalists at the western margin of the Hohokam territory. By A.D. 1100, the distribution of Patayan Buff Wares shifted to the east, penetrating the Hohokam heartland. Some theorists have suggested the ceramic distribution implies a migration of Patayan people, who joined agricultural communities in the Hohokam core area. One way to assess this idea is to identify the production of Patayan material culture within the Hohokam territory. We test for the local manufacture of Lower Colorado Buff Ware at the Hohokam village of Las Colinas, where Patayan pottery was found in abundance, and a Patayan enclave has been inferred. Using petrographic analysis and SEM-EDS assays of the phyllite temper fragments in the Patayan wares, we conclude that the Patayan pottery was made elsewhere and was not fabricated with local materials at Las Colinas. Ó 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Keywords: Patayan Hohokam Ceramic provenance SEM-EDS Phyllite

1. Introduction Around A.D. 900e1100 in southwestern Arizona, Patayan interior desert foragers were interacting with Hohokam irrigation agriculturalists on the western edge of the Hohokam territory (Fig. 1; Beck, 2006a, 2008, 2009; Beck and Neff, 2007). Such relationships have been documented between foragers or other relatively mobile groups and adjacent sedentary food producers worldwide, although the nature and intensity of these relationships varies (Beck, 2009; Headland and Reid, 1989; Spielmann, 1986). By A.D. 1100, the distribution of materials from Patayan lands, such as Lower Colorado Buff Ware ceramics and Sauceda obsidian, shifted eastward into the Hohokam core area (Bayman, 1994; Deaver, 1990; Doyel, 1996: p. 54; Mitchell and Shackley, 1995; Waters, 1982). Beck and Neff (2007) speculate that this pattern reflects the extended movement of not only objects but also people when some Patayan individuals and groups joined Hohokam communities farther east. One way to assess this idea is to identify the production of Patayan material culture within the Hohokam territory (Beck, 2006b). For example, Patayan potters living in Hohokam villages may have produced Lower Colorado Buff Ware using local materials. The best documented case for resident Patayans in the Hohokam core area is at Las Colinas, located near the western border of the

* Corresponding author. E-mail address: [email protected] (D.R. Abbott). 0305-4403/$ e see front matter Ó 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. doi:10.1016/j.jas.2011.11.017

lower Salt River valley, where Lower Colorado Buff Ware appeared in contexts dating approximately to A.D. 1000e1150 (Beckwith, 1988). An enclave of Patayan inhabitants may have occupied House Group XVII, on the edge of the village, based on the unusual concentration of Lower Colorado Buff Ware sherds and reconstructible vessels in that part of the site (Beckwith, 1988: p. 224). The ceramic analyst for the Las Colinas project, Kim Beckwith, suggested that the Patayan pottery may have been traded from distant sources to the west, in the Patayan heartland. Beck and Neff (2007: p. 298) alternatively argued, on the basis of oxidation, chemical, and petrographic analyses of Patayan and Hohokam ceramics, that “Patayan potters at Las Colinas could have made Lower Colorado Buff Ware from the local riverine clays, a possibility that should have been considered in the original analysis.” In the present study, we evaluate local production of Lower Colorado Buff Ware at Las Colinas using petrographic and chemical analyses of the phyllite temper particles. Hohokam potters at Las Colinas fabricated huge quantities of plain ware vessels with phyllite from a nearby bedrock source. We ask if the same phyllite material was used by Patayan potters to make Lower Colorado Buff Ware pots at Las Colinas. Our results do not support local production; instead, they show that the phyllite fragments in the Patayan samples differed petrographically and chemically from the locally available phyllite used to manufacture the Las Colinas Hohokam plain ware. As a result, there is no evidence that Patayan potters occupied Las Colinas, although other evidence does suggest an enclave of Patayan residents.

D.R. Abbott et al. / Journal of Archaeological Science 39 (2012) 984e993

985

Fig. 1. Patayan and Hohokam territory.

2. Background Native Americans throughout the U.S. Southwest engaged in widespread interactions, exchanges, conflicts, and population movements during prehistory (Bernardini, 2005; Cameron, 1995; Clark, 2001; Clark et al., 2003; Duff, 2002; Glowacki and Neff, 2002; Lyons, 2003; Spielmann, 1998). The interpretative models developed for explaining the interactions among these middle-range agricultural populations may not be appropriate when considering the relationship between Hohokam and Patayan groups on the Hohokam western frontier. Instead, HohokamePatayan interactions may have had more in common with the connections between farmers and foragers in other parts of the world (e.g., Fortier, 2001; Gregg, 1988; Headland and Reid, 1989; Spielmann, 1991; Wilkie and Curran, 1993). The Hohokam inhabitants along the lower Salt and middle Gila river valleys grew to be the largest and densest populations in the ancient Southwest (Hill et al., 2004), and were anchored to their landscape by their huge investments in irrigation infrastructure e some of the largest and most extensive hydraulic works in the prehistoric New World (Howard, 1993; Masse, 1976; Nicholas and Feinman, 1989). In contrast, Patayan residents of the interior desert in southwestern Arizona foraged widely and practiced seasonal non-riverine horticulture (Altschul and Rankin, 2008; Hill et al., 2008; McGuire and Schiffer, 1982; Rogers, 1945). PatayaneHohokam relationships are anthropologically interesting as another potential case of interaction, interdependence, and kinship ties between two groups with visibly different settlement patterns and economies. The contact zone between the Patayan and Hohokam territories stretches north to south from the White Tank Mountains area to the western margins of the lower Salt and middle Gila river valleys to the Gila Bend area along the lower Gila River (see Fig. 1). Throughout that zone, archaeological sites bear mixtures of Lower Colorado Buff Ware of Patayan manufacture and Hohokam red-on-buff pottery (Abbott, 1997; Ahlstrom and Chenault, 2000; Beck, 2008; Brown and

Crespin, 2009; Dart et al., 1989; Gregonis, 2000a, 2000b; Homberg et al., 1994; Teague, 1981; Wasley and Johnson, 1965; Watkins et al., 2006; Wilson, 2000). In at least one portion of this contact zone e the Gila Bend area e both Hohokam Buff Ware and Lower Colorado Buff Ware were produced locally from similar riverine clays, probably from the lower Gila River (Beck and Neff, 2007). Previous ceramic compositional analyses suggest that vessels moved between riverine and interior desert environments, reflecting in at least some cases the seasonal movements of Patayan groups (Beck and Neff, 2007: Table 4; Hill et al., 2008). In the Gila Bend area, Patayan groups resided in close proximity to the Hohokam settlements, providing frequent opportunities for interaction. Indeed, Lower Colorado Buff Ware was produced with the same raw materials used by Hohokam potters. Similarly, Patayan potters who lived among the Hohokam in the lower Salt River valley may have found the local materials there to be suitable for the manufacture of Lower Colorado Buff Ware as well. We explore the possibility of local Lower Colorado Buff Ware production at Las Colinas, a large Hohokam village on the western margin of the lower Salt River valley where substantial quantities of Patayan pottery were found. The village was established around A.D. 1000 and consisted of a central plaza and ceremonial ballcourt surrounded by residential clusters of pithouses, work areas, family cemeteries, and trash dumps. Somewhat later, a platform mound was built on the eastern edge of the central plaza, and was subsequently expanded on several occasions (Gregory and Abbott, 1988; Teague, 1988). A linear portion of the site was excavated during 1982e1984 by the Arizona State Museum in preparation for the construction of Interstate Highway 10 (Fig. 2). Hundreds of structures, pits, and mortuary features were unearthed and more than 500,000 pottery pieces were recovered. Plain ware specimens accounted for the majority, and about 20 percent of the total was Hohokam red-on-buff ceramics imported from the middle Gila River valley some 40 km to the south (Abbott, 2006; Abbott et al., 2001, 2007a). In addition, there

986

D.R. Abbott et al. / Journal of Archaeological Science 39 (2012) 984e993

Fig. 2. Excavation project area at Las Colinas.

were 4066 sherds and 12 reconstructible vessels of Lower Colorado Buff Ware. These Patayan ceramics represented a small but widely dispersed part of the overall pottery inventory. They were recovered from throughout the residential areas of the settlement in 161 features, but they accounted for less than 4 percent of the total ceramics in each of those contexts. In addition, however, they constituted between 4 and 17 percent of the ceramics associated with six pits and two pithouses, all of which were located in House Group XVII, near the western margin of the settlement. The notable number of Patayan pieces, their spatial concentration, and a wide range of vessel forms distinguished the Lower Colorado Buff Ware, leading Beckwith (1988) to conclude that a Patayan population was in residence, which is now commonly referred to as the “Patayan enclave at Las Colinas.” According to the excavators, the enclave included two or more nuclear households probably totaling less than 20 people (Beckwith, 1988: p. 224; Layhe, 1988: pp. 231e233). Hohokam red-on-buff ceramics, including those at Las Colinas, were characterized by elaborately painted designs executed with red, iron-rich pigments applied to a buff-colored background (Haury, 1976). These wares were tempered with crushed fragments of coarse-grained mica schist, which, in many cases, was supplemented with added sand (Miksa, 2001). The Patayan Buff Ware found in the contact zone was also characterized by a buff-firing paste, but unlike the Hohokam cases, were often tempered with grog mixed with other angular particles and were rarely painted (Colton et al., 1958; Schroeder, 1958). In the Las Colinas specimens, the temper fraction included angular fragments of phyllite, which Beckwith (1988: pp. 204, 210) described as “opaque dark rock.” As discussed below, a petrographic thin section analysis verified that the dark rock particles were phyllite, which accounted for equal or greater proportions of the temper as compared to the grog in the sherds we analyzed. Despite the conclusion that Patayan people were in residence at Las Colinas, Beckwith (1988: p. 216) surmised that the Patayan pottery was transported to Las Colinas from somewhere along the Colorado River in the low desert area between Yuma and Parker,

Arizona (see Fig. 1), located at least 140 miles (225 km) from Las Colinas. Beckwith’s inference was based on her comparison of the Las Colinas Lower Colorado Buff Ware to previously reported type distributions. Other lines of evidence, including the vessel forms and the presence of phyllite temper in the Lower Colorado Buff Ware at Las Colinas, instead suggest that Patayan pottery was locally made at the Hohokam settlement. Typically, in the Hohokam area, the vessel forms of pottery that originated outside the Hohokam territory were restricted to small bowls and jars. This pattern certainly pertained to non-Hohokam, non-Patayan “intrusive” wares at Las Colinas, which represented 0.3 percent of the total pottery assemblage. Based on rim sherd measurements, nearly all of the non-Patayan intrusive bowls measured 24 cm in diameter or smaller (compare to Fig. 3). Clearly, the size factor correlated with the transportation costs associated with trade over long distances. The size factor seemed to be much less evident for the Lower Colorado Buff Ware bowls. Based on rim-sherd measurements of bowl diameters and compared to Hohokam Buff Ware bowls at Las Colinas, the Patayan cases represented a full range of sizes, although, on average, they were somewhat smaller (Fig. 3). Patayan jars were also present in considerable numbers, although they tended to have smaller aperture diameters than Hohokam Buff Ware jars (Fig. 4). Some of the small apertures may have corresponded to undersized pots, but the pronounced neck and acutely angled upper vessel wall of other rim sherds probably pertained to moderate-sized jars with narrow apertures for secure containment, which was a common Patayan vessel form that reflects their mobile lifestyle (see Fig. 5). In summary, the large range of vessel forms, including medium and large-sized containers, did set the Patayan pottery apart from the other non-Hohokam wares at Las Colinas. The temper in the Lower Colorado Buff Ware at Las Colinas also appeared to be similar to raw materials in the immediate area. As was the case for some Patayan pottery types (Colton et al., 1958; Schroeder, 1958), the Lower Colorado Buff Ware at Las Colinas typically contained grog temper mixed with angular rock fragments. In the Las Colinas specimens, the angular fragments were

D.R. Abbott et al. / Journal of Archaeological Science 39 (2012) 984e993

987

BUFF WARE BOWLS 12

Lower Colorado Hohokam

10

Percentage

8

6

4

2

0 2

4

6

8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 42 44 46 48 50

Diameter (cm)

Fig. 3. Maximum diameters of Patayan and Hohokam Buff Ware bowls (after Beckwith, 1988: Figure 5.7).

phyllite. Hohokam pottery specialists at Las Colinas also used angular phyllite fragments to manufacture large quantities of plain ware jars for widespread distribution (Abbott, 2009; Abbott et al., 2007b). As was shown with previous chemical assays, the raw phyllite was procured from low bedrock units on the western flank of the Phoenix Mountains about 10 km to the north (Abbott and Watts, 2010; see also Schaller, 1994). Interestingly, phyllite is not a rock type mentioned in any of the published descriptions of the Patayan pottery types (Colton et al., 1958; Schroeder, 1952, 1958; Waters, 1982; see also Beckwith, 1988: Tables 5.2e5.3). It therefore seemed possible that the grog and phyllite temper in the Las Colinas Patayan wares were a case of Patayan craftsmanship executed with locally available materials. Preliminary results from a larger compositional study using instrumental neutron activation analysis (INAA) (Beck et al., 2009) indirectly supported local manufacture of Lower Colorado Buff Ware by ruling out several other source areas. Although a few samples of Lower Colorado Buff Ware from Las Colinas may represent vessels traded from the area of the Barry M. Goldwater Range in southwestern Arizona, the vast majority of Lower Colorado Buff Ware at Las Colinas was apparently not made there or in southeastern California, as represented by existing INAA data (Hildebrand et al., 2002). Although manufacture at Las Colinas was suggested in the absence of

BUFF WARE JARS 30

Lower Colorado Hohokam

Percentage

20

10

Fig. 5. Constricted forms of Patayan Buff Ware jars.

evidence to the contrary, no data linked these ceramics specifically to the site area. 3. Research strategy Our research strategy to test for local production of the Patayan wares at Las Colinas relied on the compositional analyses of the phyllite fragments in five Lower Colorado Buff Ware sherds. We started with the petrographic analysis to verify that the “opaque dark rocks” noted by Beckwith (1988) were, indeed, phyllite fragments, and those fragments were described in detail. SEM-EDS analyses then yielded chemical data for individual phyllite fragments in the pottery, and these data were compared to the chemical makeup of raw phyllite from a nearby bedrock unit in the Phoenix Mountains and to other phyllite sources to the north and west. Our SEM-EDS analyses built upon previous phyllite studies, which have demonstrated source-related chemical variation in various bedrock exposures and fragments of phyllite temper in Hohokam pottery (Abbott, 2004, 2007; Abbott et al., 2007b, 2008; Abbott and Watts, 2010). In the lower Salt River valley, phyllite outcrops are exposed on the western flank of the Phoenix Mountains, and in the broad upland zone to the north at other bedrock units in numerous locations (Fig. 6). More than 150 hand samples of raw phyllite have been collected from various places and analyzed with SEM-EDS, revealing that the source rocks are chemically differentiated (Table 1, see online supporting material). To date, the bedrock units in the eastern portion of the upland zone, including the Phoenix Mountains and along Cave Creek, have been particularly well sampled, with more spotty coverage further to the west. The phyllite fragments in many plain ware ceramics from sites in the upland zone have been sourced to particular bedrock units, and the phyllite temper in the Las Colinas plain ware pottery has been tied to the Phoenix Mountains outcrops. The chemical data from the phyllite particles in the Buff Ware sherds were compared to the previous results to determine if there were chemical similarities among them. 4. Analytical methods

0 2

4

6

8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 42 44 46 48 50

Aperture (cm)

Fig. 4. Aperture diameters of Patayan and Hohokam Buff Ware jars (after Beckwith, 1988: Figure 5.8).

Five sherds of Lower Colorado Buff Ware from Las Colinas were chosen for analysis. We selected the five specimens from among a sample set previously analyzed with Instrumental Neutron

988

D.R. Abbott et al. / Journal of Archaeological Science 39 (2012) 984e993

Ve

rde

Ri

ve

r

Grapevine Wash Camp

Creek

Cr

ee

k

Black Mountain

ve

Union Hills

Ag

ua

Fri a

Riv e

r

Ca

Hieroglyphic Mountains

k

ree

kC

ive

r

un

wR

Sk

Ne

McDowell Mountains

Phoenix Mountains

Arizona

r

Rive

Salt

0

Gi

la

in

nta

Ri

ve

r

uth

u Mo

10 km

Prehistoric Canal Recorded Archaeological Site

So

Phyllite Source

Fig. 6. Phyllite bedrock sources.

Activation Analysis (Beck et al., 2009). Only six cases in the INAA sample set were sufficiently large to produce a thin section, and the five sherds that contained the most phyllite were chosen for the present study. Obviously, additional sampling will be required to verify our findings with this small sample. Nevertheless, we perceive nothing in our sample to indicate a biased subset of the phyllitetempered Patayan wares. The thin sections were prepared by slicing each sherd perpendicular to the vessel wall to produce three slices subsequently mounted on a glass slide to provide maximum surface area for observation. The sections were polished to a thickness of 30 microns and stained with sodium cobalt nitrate to aid in the identification of potassium feldspars. These specimens were then inspected under plane and cross- polarized light to identify the mineralogy and estimate the frequency of the sand-sized particles embedded in the clay matrix. Analyses were conducted using SEM imaging and EDS chemical assays on the JEOL JXA-8600 Superprobe. Each potsherd was cut to extract a thick slice of its cross section that was then mounted on a circular glass slide. The thick section was then ground, polished, and coated with a 400-Å-thick layer of carbon. The superprobe directs a stream of high-energy electrons onto a small spot on the sample’s surface and analyzes the wavelengths of emitted x-rays produced by the bombardment. The relative intensities of the x-rays created at each wavelength indicate the

relative abundance of each chemical element in the sample (Birks, 1971). Its advantage for ceramic studies over similar but bulk type techniques, such as x-ray fluorescence analysis and neutron activation analysis, is the equipment’s capacity to select tiny areas of a sherd’s cross section for study, permitting, for instance, the assay of just the temper particles without contamination from the clay fraction (Freestone, 1982). Phyllite is a fine-grained rock type that is composed of microscopic crystals of different minerals but, at the scale for the SEM-EDS assays, the phyllite fragments were relatively uniform. Spots approximately 0.1 mm2 in area were assayed using 300 magnification. Exceptions to this rule pertained to the tiny fragments of phyllite in sherd sample MEB-391, which were too small to be analyzed at 300 without including some of the surrounding clay matrix. Consequently, the phyllite particles in that sample were assayed using 600. In addition, phyllite particles were rare in the cross section of that sherd, and only six pieces were analyzed with SEM-EDS. All samples were analyzed using 15-kV filament voltage and a 10-nA defocused beam current. The x-ray detector was mounted at a take-off angle of 40 . Matrix effects were corrected with a ZAF algorithm, and the equipment was calibrated with a Kakanui hornblende standard (Mason and Allen, 1973). The certified and our measured values of the standard were quite similar (Table 1). Ten phyllite fragments were assayed for each sherd. The detector

D.R. Abbott et al. / Journal of Archaeological Science 39 (2012) 984e993 Table 1 Kakanui hornblende standard.

Certified Measured

Na2O

MgO

Al2O3

SiO2

CaO

K2O

TiO2

FeO

2.60 2.6

12.80 12.7

14.90 14.6

40.37 41.6

10.30 10.3

2.05 2.1

4.38 4.2

10.90 10.7

live-counting time was 50 s. The percentages of eight chemical elements (Na, Mg, Al, Si, Ca, K, Ti, and Fe) were determined. The percentages of four other minor elements were also measured, but those data were not used because the precision of their measurement was insufficient for statistical analysis. All of the assays were performed by the authors in the Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry at Arizona State University, Tempe. 5. Petrographic results All of the samples contained phyllite characterized by finegrained mixtures of opaques, muscovite, and quartz, not unlike the phyllite found on the western flank of the Phoenix Mountains. The phyllite fragments were exclusively angular or subangular in form, implying that they had not been transported by natural forces, and, thus, were procured at or near a bedrock source. Nevertheless, two types of procurement were probably represented. Three samples (MEB-389, 391, 393) were characterized by

989

a “clean” paste that contained only clay, grog, and phyllite fragments. Within each sherd, the phyllite pieces were all of the same size, relatively large, and angular (Fig. 7). The lack of other rock and mineral particles indicated that the phyllite was procured at or immediately adjacent to the phyllite bedrock. The second group (MEB-196, 390) also contained grog and phyllite, but grains of basalt, quartz, feldspar, schist, and particles of both muscovite-rich phyllite and biotite-rich phyllite were also present. The mixture of other particle types probably implied the exploitation of a sand deposit with a mixed composition. The abundance and angularity of the phyllite particles, however, probably indicated a source proximate to phyllite bedrock. The Hohokam plain ware potters at Las Colinas utilized pure amounts of phyllite to manufacture their pots, not unlike the first group of Patayan specimens. However, adjacent or interbedded units of different phyllite varieties and schist, which probably produced the temper mixtures in the second Patayan group, are not known for the Phoenix Mountains (see Miksa et al., 2004; Schaller, 1994). In addition, sample MEB-391 was particularly interesting because it contained only rare and tiny fragments of phyllite, which seemed too few and too small to have been added intentionally to the ceramic paste. One idea to explain their presence presumed that the phyllite inclusions were “prior” temper particles in the pottery crushed to make the grog temper. A check of the grog pieces in MEB391 did, in fact, reveal the presence of phyllite in some grog cases,

Fig. 7. Micrographs of the five Lower Colorado Buff Ware samples.

990

D.R. Abbott et al. / Journal of Archaeological Science 39 (2012) 984e993

supporting the idea that the free-floating phyllite was once part of the pulverized pottery. We further explored the phyllite temper origins using SEM-EDS chemical assays. 6. SEM-EDS results In our analysis of the chemical data from the temper assays (Table 2), we began with box plots for each of the eight chemical elements measured with SEM-EDS (Na, Mg, Al, Si, K, Ca, Ti, and Fe). The box plots revealed several outliers, which were excluded from the remainder of the analysis. All of the outliers were constituents of two sherds, MEB-196 and 390. Interestingly, these are the two Buff Ware specimens tempered with a mixture of different phyllite varieties. We think it likely that the chemical outliers reflect the phyllite diversity in those two cases. We then added to the database the chemical data from 21 raw phyllite samples from the western flank of the Phoenix Mountains (see Table 1, online supporting material). We entered the temper and raw sample data into a factor analysis. Those factors associated with an eigenvalue greater than 1.0 were extracted and rotated with a varimax procedure (Table 3). There was a clear separation Table 2 Chemical assays of phyllite-temper fragments. Na2O

MgO

Al2O3

SiO2

CaO

K2O

TiO2

FeO

1.4 2.0 1.7 1.9 2.0 1.2 1.6 2.0 2.0 1.5 1.6 1.5 0.3 1.4 1.9 1.7 1.1 1.6 4.2 0.8 1.3 0.8 1.4 1.4 1.1 1.4 1.6 0.9 2.8 1.1 1.7 2.3 0.2 1.9 2.4 1.6 1.7 1.9 1.6 2.3 1.9 1.3 1.8 1.9 1.5 1.8 1.3

1.5 2.0 2.0 1.7 1.6 1.7 1.2 1.6 2.1 1.9 2.3 2.2 0.5 1.7 2.0 1.5 1.4 3.0 1.8 1.2 2.9 2.4 2.0 2.5 1.3 1.4 1.3 2.6 0.4 1.4 1.0 1.2 0.6 1.2 0.5 1.7 1.7 2.1 1.2 1.3 2.5 2.2 1.4 0.7 1.8 1.4 1.5

21.2 22.8 21.2 24.2 22.1 19.9 21.7 23.3 23.2 20.2 25.7 27.9 16.8 24.4 22.5 21.5 22.5 24.0 14.5 15.4 17.2 19.9 18.3 20.0 24.6 25.1 22.2 21.7 22.9 24.0 22.9 27.9 29.5 23.4 29.0 20.7 24.1 21.2 23.2 28.3 23.2 17.7 22.4 25.5 20.5 21.8 19.2

66.5 63.8 65.9 61.8 64.1 67.7 64.7 63.5 63.2 66.7 57.9 52.3 73.8 58.3 61.4 62.6 62.5 57.2 69.4 72.0 65.4 63.0 65.5 60.1 59.9 56.2 63.0 61.9 63.8 60.2 63.7 58.9 53.5 62.7 56.5 66.8 62.2 65.0 64.2 55.3 62.7 67.5 62.9 61.1 66.3 64.4 68.5

3.2 3.5 3.1 3.9 3.6 3.5 3.9 3.7 3.7 2.9 4.4 5.8 4.9 4.9 4.9 4.1 4.5 4.9 2.2 3.1 3.0 4.0 2.6 3.5 4.7 6.1 4.9 5.4 3.8 4.7 3.8 4.3 8.9 3.6 4.5 3.2 3.7 3.5 3.8 4.2 3.3 2.5 3.8 4.4 3.6 3.7 3.1

0.3 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.3 0.1 0.4 0.1 0.5 0.2 0.4 0.7 0.1 0.5 0.4 0.4 0.2 1.0 1.2 1.2 4.2 3.0 3.1 4.6 0.2 0.3 0.1 0.0 0.3 0.0 0.2 0.3 0.1 0.3 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.4 0.3 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.4 0.3 0.3 0.5 0.1

0.2 0.3 0.5 0.5 0.4 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.3 0.6 0.5 1.0 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.5 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.5 0.3 0.5 0.6 0.6 0.5 0.0 0.6 0.3 0.4 0.4 0.7 0.4 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.5 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.7 0.3 0.9 0.5 0.5 0.2 0.4 0.5

5.5 5.2 5.0 5.5 5.6 4.5 5.3 5.1 4.8 5.5 6.7 7.8 2.9 8.0 5.5 7.1 6.7 7.3 5.4 5.1 4.5 6.0 6.0 7.0 7.2 9.2 6.0 6.5 5.4 7.8 5.9 4.6 6.2 5.8 6.3 4.9 5.5 5.5 5.1 7.4 5.7 7.3 6.0 5.0 5.1 5.6 5.4

Comment

Outlier Outlier

Variable

Factor 1

Factor 2

Factor 3

Factor 4

Na Mg Al Si K Ca Ti Fe Percent of variance

0.032 0.212 0.917 0.945 0.792 0.039 0.021 0.648 35.37

0.114 0.804 0.172 0.288 0.190 0.787 0.030 0.538 21.48

0.969 0.225 0.093 0.106 0.337 0.037 0.023 0.068 14.12

0.031 0.056 0.048 0.025 0.167 0.017 0.995 0.010 12.82

between the two groups, demonstrating that temper particles in the Lower Colorado Buff Wares from Las Colinas did not originate in the nearby Phoenix Mountains (Fig. 8). Finally, we gauged the similarity between the phyllite temper particles and all of the raw phyllite specimens that have been analyzed to date. They number over 150 samples from various places in the upland zone (see Table 1, online supporting material). To measure the similarity of each raw phyllite sample with the phyllite temper, we relied on a factor analysis and the calculation of Mahalanobis distances. Prior to the factor analysis, the multivariate distribution of the temper data was checked for normality with univariate and bivariate plots. The univariate distribution of Fe was found to be skewed, and was made quasi-normal with a log10 transformation. The temper data alone were entered into the factor analysis to establish the multidimensional factor space. Three factors with eigenvalues greater than 1.0 were extracted and, together, accounted for nearly 75 percent of the original variation (Table 4). The rawphyllite data were then mapped into that three-dimensional factor space and the Mahalanobis distance of each raw-phyllite data point was measured from the centroid of the temper fragments. The squared distances follow a chi-square distribution with degrees of freedom equal to the number of factors (Tabachnick and Fidell,1983: p. 336). Only four raw samples were included in the 20% confidence

Outlier Outlier Outlier

TYPE ROCK TEMPER

3.00

2.00

1.00

FACTOR 2

Sample MEB-389 MEB-389 MEB-389 MEB-389 MEB-389 MEB-389 MEB-389 MEB-389 MEB-389 MEB-389 MEB-390 MEB-390 MEB-390 MEB-390 MEB-390 MEB-390 MEB-390 MEB-390 MEB-390 MEB-390 MEB-391 MEB-391 MEB-391 MEB-391 MEB-391 MEB-391 MEB-391 MEB-391 MEB-391 MEB-391 MEB-196 MEB-196 MEB-196 MEB-196 MEB-196 MEB-196 MEB-196 MEB-393 MEB-393 MEB-393 MEB-393 MEB-393 MEB-393 MEB-393 MEB-393 MEB-393 MEB-393

Table 3 Factor analysis of phyllite temper and raw phyllite from the Phoenix Mountains.

0.00

Outlier -1.00

-2.00

-3.00 -3.00

-2.00

-1.00

0.00

1.00

2.00

3.00

FACTOR 1 Fig. 8. Factor plot of phyllite temper and raw phyllite from the Phoenix Mountains.

D.R. Abbott et al. / Journal of Archaeological Science 39 (2012) 984e993 Table 4 Factor analysis of phyllite temper only. Variable

Factor 1

Factor 2

Factor 3

Na Mg Al Si K Ca Ti Log Fe Percent of variance

0.182 0.166 0.652 0.879 0.882 0.021 0.136 0.806 33.80

0.892 0.669 0.657 0.398 0.009 0.485 0.084 0.273 26.87

0.116 0.246 0.080 0.108 0.205 0.440 0.891 0.097 14.14

ellipsoid (i.e., relatively close to the centroid of the temper data), and all four were collected from Black Mountain in the middle Cave Creek district about 45 km from Las Colinas (see Fig. 6). On this basis, Black Mountain might be considered a possible source, although we strongly doubt it because Patayan pottery has never been found in the Black Mountain area. Another provenance idea is the White Tanks Mountains area about 35 km northwest of Las Colinas (see Fig. 1). Recent excavations near the southern edge of the range investigated 20 ephemerally occupied sites containing mixtures of Lower Colorado and Hohokam Buff Wares. Typically, between 20 and 30 percent of the total ceramic assemblages was Patayan pottery. However, most of the sites dated to the late Colonial and early Sedentary periods e before the occupation at Las Colinas began. And, although the Patayan pottery at these sites was tempered with grog, none of the sherds included phyllite (Watkins et al., 2006). In summary, despite our confidence that the Patayan ceramics at Las Colinas were not made there, we still do not know where they originated. 7. Discussion and conclusions Even though Lower Colorado Buff Ware was probably not made at Las Colinas, the Las Colinas case remains particularly interesting for studying the interaction between Patayan foragers and Hohokam agriculturalists. The evidence remains strong for a small Patayan enclave at the Hohokam village. We can only speculate why Patayan pots were not made locally at Las Colinas. For instance, perhaps not all Patayan households, including those in House Group XVII, made their own pottery. Another possibility is the households in the Las Colinas enclave were not typical households at all, but rather consisted of only males who provided labor on a seasonal basis for maintaining the irrigation works. We concur with Beckwith (1988) that the Patayan pots were brought from elsewhere to the settlement although we suspect the source(s) was likely more proximate to Las Colinas than the Colorado River area between Parker and Yuma, Arizona. The pottery’s conveyance seems to defy the transportation costs usually associated with trade and exchange over long distances (Malville, 2001). Such costs are manifested by small vessel sizes, such as those of the nonPatayan intrusive wares at Las Colinas. Large Patayan bowls and jars, as well as the large number of Lower Colorado Buff Wares in general, imply an exchange process unconstrained by typical economic and social parameters, but in a manner which we do not yet understand. Indeed, the large numbers of Patayan wares at Las Colinas and throughout the contact zone is especially interesting when we consider that residential mobility does not lend itself to pottery manufacture. For instance, Arnold (1985) notes that less than 30 percent of mobile small-scale societies engage in pottery making, and those that do typically produce low numbers of containers (e.g., Eerkens et al., 2002). In addition, the widespread distribution of Patayan pottery across Las Colinas exemplifies exchange connections involving much of the village, perhaps funneled through the enclave. The local Patayan

991

residents, as indicated by their ceramic possessions, were clearly accepted and integrated members of the larger community. Despite the concentration of Patayan pottery, most of the pots owned by the households in House Group XVII were plain ware and decorated ceramics made by and obtained from Hohokam artisans. In that way, the Patayan households were no different from other residence groups at the settlement. Exchange rather than local manufacture appears to us to be the better model for explaining the presence of Lower Colorado Buff Ware at Las Colinas. What remains to be done is finding the production source for the Patayan pottery. Tracing the movement of this ware can illuminate the interaction between the pottery makers and the pottery consumers, and establishing the production source is obviously essential for interpreting the exchange transactions. For instance, determining if the Patayan pottery at Las Colinas was made elsewhere in the contact zone or in more distant lands to the west is vital information for reconstructing the organization of Patayan Buff Ware production, for tracking the transhumance of Patayan foragers, and investigating their relationship with Hohokam farmers. As we better understand the provenance of the Patayan pottery, we better understand PatayaneHohokam interaction. Acknowledgments We greatly appreciate the assistance from several individuals and organizations. Financial support was provided by NSF grant BCS-0830269 to Margaret Beck. The electron microprobe in the Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry was purchased with the aid of NSF grant EAR-8408163. Help with the SEM-EDS assays was provided by Joshua Watts and Gordon Moore. Assistance for gathering field samples was provided by Mark Hackbarth, J. Scott Wood (Tonto National Forest), T. Kathleen Henderson, and the late Charley Gilbert, as well as members of the Desert Foothills Chapter of the Arizona Archaeological Society, including Larry Morehouse, Mike Hoogendyk, Bob Cook, Judy Darbyshire, Robyn Davidson, Glen Dotson, Mary Kearney, Roger Kearney, Carl Kueltzo, Trudy Mertens, Kathy Morehouse, Dick Mueller, Sue Mueller, Judy Rounds, and Lynda Zaffino. Access to curated collections was provided by the Arizona State Museum, with thanks to Arthur Vokes. We extend special thanks to Kim Beckwith, who pioneered the work with Patayan ceramics at Las Colinas. Appendix. Supplementary material Supplementary material associated with this article can be found, in the online version, at doi:10.1016/j.jas.2011.11.017. References Abbott, D.R., 1997. Prehistoric ceramics from sites AZ T:14:21(ASM) and AZ T:14:65(ASM). In: Bilsbarrow, M.H. (Ed.), The Lewis Southwest Regional Prison Archaeological Data Recovery Project: Historical and Hohokam Land Use Patterns in the Little Rainbow Valley, North of Gila Bend, Maricopa County, Arizona. Project Report No. 97:48. Archaeological Research Services, Tempe, AZ, pp. 73e80. Abbott, D.R., 2004. Electron microprobe analyses of raw phyllite and phyllitetempered pottery from the Veres site. In: Marshall, J.T. (Ed.), Prehistoric Occupation Along Middle Cave Creek Archaeological Investigations of the Veres Site (AZ U:1:159[ASM]): the AM Ranch Project. Anthropological Papers No. 04-01. Northland Research, Flagstaff, AZ, pp. 119e138. Abbott, D.R., 2006. Hohokam Ritual and economic transformation: ceramic evidence from the Phoenix Basin, Arizona. North American Archaeologist 27, 285e310. Abbott, D.R., 2007. Microprobe analysis of ceramic clay, temper, and Slips from Palo Verde Ruin. In: Hackbarth, M.R., Craig, D.B. (Eds.), Archaeological Investigations at Palo Verde Ruin, AZ T:8:68(ASM): The Terramar Project. Anthropological Papers No. 02-02, vol. 2. Northland Research, Flagstaff, AZ, pp. 37e54. Abbott, D.R., 2009. Extensive and long-term specialization: Hohokam ceramic production in the Phoenix Basin, Arizona. American Antiquity 74, 531e557.

992

D.R. Abbott et al. / Journal of Archaeological Science 39 (2012) 984e993

Abbott, D.R., Watts, J., Lack, A.D., 2007a. The provenance and Concentrated production of Hohokam red-on-buff pottery: implications for an ancient Arizona economy. Journal of Anthropological Research 63, 331e357. Abbott, D.R., Lack, A.D., Moore, G., 2007b. Chemical assays of temper and clay: modeling pottery production and exchange in the uplands north of the Phoenix Basin, Arizona, USA. Archaeometry 50, 48e56. Abbott, D.R., Lack, A.D., Hackbarth, M.R., 2008. Provenance and microprobe assays of phyllite-tempered ceramics from the uplands of central Arizona. Geoarchaeology: An International Journal 23, 213e242. Abbott, D.R., Stinson, S.L., Van Keuren, S., 2001. The economic implications of Hohokam Buff Ware exchange during the early sedentary period. Kiva 67, 7e29. Abbott, D.R., Watts, J., 2010. Identical rock types with different chemistry: sourcing phyllite-tempered Hohokam pottery from the Phoenix Basin, Arizona. Journal of Archaeological Science 37, 1612e1622. Ahlstrom, R.V.N., Chenault, M.L., 2000. A site-database approach to themes in the prehistory of the western Papagueria. In: Ahlstrom, R.V.N. (Ed.), Living in the Western Papagueria: An Archaeological Overview of the Barry M. Goldwater Air Force Range in Southwestern Arizona. Report No. 98e186. SWCA Environmental Consultants, Tucson, pp. 217e263. Altschul, J.H., Rankin, A.G. (Eds.), 2008. Fragile Patterns: The Archaeology of the Western Papagueria. SRI Press, Tucson. Arnold, D.E., 1985. Ceramic Theory and Cultural Process. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK. Bayman, J.M., 1994. Craft Production and Political Economy at the Marana Platform Mound Community. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Anthropology, Arizona State University, Tempe. Beck, M.E., 2006a. Lowland Patayan-Hohokam interaction: a view from southwestern Arizona. In: Slaughter, M.C., Seymour, G.R., Perry, L.M. (Eds.), Beginnings: Proceedings of the Three Corners Conference. Nevada Archaeological Association, Las Vegas, pp. 33e50. Beck, M.E., 2006b. Linking finished ceramics to raw materials: oxidized color groups for Lowland desert clays. Kiva 72, 95e120. Beck, M.E., 2008. Ceramic use in the western Papaguería. In: Altschul, J.H., Rankin, A. (Eds.), Fragile Patterns: Perspectives on Western Papaguería Archaeology. SRI Press, Tucson, pp. 493e505. Beck, M.E., 2009. Residential mobility and ceramic exchange: ethnography and archaeological implications. Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory 16, 320e356. Beck, M.E., Neff, H., 2007. Hohokam and Patayan interaction in southwestern Arizona: evidence from ceramic compositional analyses. Journal of Archaeological Science 34, 289e300. Beck, M.E., Schwartz, D.K.H., Glascock, M.D., 2009. Interaction and migration in the Sonoran desert: a view from ceramic compositional analysis. Paper Presented at the 74th Annual Meeting of the Society for American Archaeology, Vancouver. Beckwith, K.E., 1988. Intrusive wares and types. In: Abbott, D.R., Beckwith, K.E., Crown, P.L., Euler, R.T., Gregory, D.A., London, J.R., Saul, M.B., Schwalbe, L.A., Bernard-Shaw, M. (Eds.), The 1982e1984 Excavations at Las Colinas: Material Culture. Archaeological Series No. 162, vol. 4. Arizona State Museum, Tucson, pp. 199e256. Bernardini, W., 2005. Hopi Oral Tradition and the Archaeology of Identity. University of Arizona Press, Tucson. Birks, L.S., 1971. Electron Probe Microanalysis. In: Chemical Analysis, second ed., vol. 17. Wiley Interscience, New York. Brown, K.L., Crespin, S., 2009. The Transwestern Phoenix Expansion Project, Bureau of Reclamation (Central Arizona Project, Arizona State, and Private Lands, Maricopa and Pinal Counties, Arizona Sites in the Sonoran Desert, Pipeline Mile Posts (MP) 110.8 to 138.8), vol. 4. TRC, Albuquerque. Part b. Report No. 48936-C123. Cameron, C.M., 1995. Migration and movement of southwestern Peoples. Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 14, 104e124. Clark, J.J., 2001. Tracking Prehistoric Migrations: Pueblo Settlers Among the Tonto Basin Hohokam. Anthropological Papers No. 65. University of Arizona Press, Tucson. Clark, J.J., Doelle, W.H., Hill, J.B., Lyons, P.D., 2003. Precontact Population Decline and Coalescence in the Southern Southwest. National Science Foundation Grant Proposal, on File. Center for Desert Archaeology, Tucson. Colton, H.S., Euler, R., Dobyns, H., Schroeder, A.H., 1958. Pottery Types of the Southwest: Wares 14, 15, 16, 17, 18. Ceramic Series 3D. Museum of Northern, Arizona, Flagstaff. Dart, A., Lekson, S.H., Wallace, H.D., 1989. Historic Properties Management Plan for the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Painted Rock Reservoir Project, Southwestern Arizona. Technical Report No. 88-6. Institute for American Research, Tucson. Deaver, W., 1990. Native American ceramics. In: Gasser, R.E., Robinson, C.K., Breternitz, C.D. (Eds.), Archaeology of the Ak-Chin Indian Community West Side Farms Project: Material Cultural and Human Remains. Publications in Archaeology No. 9, vol. 4. Soil Systems, Phoenix, pp. 15.1e15.21. Doyel, D.E., 1996. Resource mobilization and Hohokam society: analysis of obsidian artifacts from the Gatlin site, Arizona. Kiva 62, 45e60. Duff, A., 2002. Western Pueblo Identities: Regional Interaction, Migration, and Transformation. University of Arizona Press, Tucson. Eerkens, J.W., Neff, H., Glascock, M.D., 2002. Ceramic production among small-scale and mobile hunters and gatherers: a case study from the southwestern Great Basin. Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 21, 200e229. Fortier, J., 2001. Sharing, hoarding, and theft: exchange and resistance in forager and farmer relations. Ethnology 40, 193e211.

Freestone, I.C., 1982. Applications and potential of electron probe micro-analysis in technological and provenance investigations of ancient ceramics. Archaeometry 24, 99e116. Glowacki, D.M., Neff, H. (Eds.), 2002. Ceramic Production and Circulation in the Greater Southwest: Source Determination by INAA and Complimentary Mineralogical Investigations. Monograph No. 44. Costen Institute of Archaeology, University of California, Los Angeles. Gregg, S.A., 1988. Foragers and Farmers: Population Interaction and Agricultural Expansion in Prehistoric Europe. University of Chicago Press, Chicago. Gregonis, L.M., 2000a. Ceramics: analysis of collected sherds. In: Slaughter, M.C., Tucker, D.B., Lascaux, A. (Eds.), Trade Corridors and Ethnic Boundaries: an Archaeological Survey of 12,089 Acres Along the Growler and San Cristobal Washes on the Barry M. Goldwater Range in Southwestern Arizona. Cultural Resource Report No. 98e181. SWCA, Environmental Consultants, Tucson, pp. 465e479. Gregonis, L.M., 2000b. Indigenous ceramics. In: Lyon, J.D. (Ed.), Procurement, Processing, and Passing Through: An Archaeological Survey of 14,390 Acres in the Central Sauceda Valley (East TAC) on the Barry M. Goldwater Range in Southwestern Arizona. Cultural Resource Report No. 98e267, vol. II. SWCA Environmental Consultants, Tucson, pp. 517e531. Gregory, D.A., Abbott, D.R., 1988. Stages of mound construction and architectural details. In: Gregory, D.A. (Ed.), The1982e1984 Excavations at Las Colinas: The Mound 8 Precinct. Archaeological Series No. 162, vol. 3. Arizona State Museum, Tucson. Haury, E.W., 1976. The Hohokam: Desert Farmers and Craftsmen. University of Arizona Press, Tucson. Headland, T.N., Reid, L.A., 1989. Hunter-gatherers and their neighbors from prehistory to present. Current Anthropology 30, 43e66. Hildebrand, J.A., Gross, G.T., Schaefer, J., Neff, H., 2002. Patayan ceramic variability: using trace elements and petrographic analysis to study Brown and Buff Wares in southern California. In: Glowacki, D.M., Neff, H. (Eds.), Ceramic Production and Circulation in the Greater Southwest: Source Determination by INAA and Complementary Mineralogical Investigations. Monograph 44. The Costen Institute of Archaeology, University of California, Los Angeles, pp. 121e139. Hill, M.E., Bruder, J.S., Beck, M.E., Phillips, B.G., 2008. Mobile horticulturalists in the western Papagueria. Kiva 74, 33e69. Hill, J.B., Clark, J.J., Doelle, W.H., Lyons, P.D., 2004. Prehistoric demography in the southwest: migration, coalescence, and Hohokam population decline. American Antiquity 69, 689e716. Homberg, J.A., Altschul, J.H., Vanderpot, R., 1994. Intermontane Settlement Trends in the Eastern Papaguería: Cultural Resources Sample Survey in the Northeastern Barry M. Goldwater Range, Maricopa County, Arizona. Technical Series 37. Statistical Research, Tucson. Howard, J.B., 1993. A paleohydraulic approach to examining agricultural intensification in Hohokam irrigation systems. In: Scarborough, V.L., Issac, B.L. (Eds.), Research in Economic Anthropology, Supplement 7. JAI Press, Greenwich, CN, pp. 263e324. Layhe, R.W., 1988. The analysis of site structure: house groups and house clusters. In: Gregory, D.A., Deaver, W.L., Fish, S.K., Gardiner, R., Layhe, R.W., Nials, F.L., Teague, L.S. (Eds.), The 1982e1984 Excavations at Las Colinas: The Site and Its Features, Archaeological Series No. 162, vol. 2. Arizona State Museum, Tucson, pp. 191e242. Lyons, P.D., 2003. Ancestral Hopi Migrations. Anthropological Papers No. 68. University of Arizona Press, Tucson. Malville, N.J., 2001. Long-distance transport of bulk goods in the pre-hispanic American southwest. Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 20, 230e243. Mason, B., Allen, R.O., 1973. Minor and trace elements in augite, hornblende, and pyrope megacrysts from Kakanui, New Zealand. New Zealand Journal of Geology and Geophysics 16, 935e947. Masse, W.B., 1976. The Hohokam Expressway Project: a Study of Prehistoric Irrigation in the Salt River Valley, Arizona. Contributions to Highway Salvage in Arizona No. 43. Arizona State Museum, Tucson. McGuire, R.H., Schiffer, M.B. (Eds.), 1982. Hohokam and Patayan: Prehistory of Southwestern Arizona. Academic Press, New York. Miksa, E.J., 2001. Temper provenance studies. In: Henderson, T.K., Abbott, D.R. (Eds.), The Grewe Archaeological Research Project, Ceramic Studies. Anthropological Papers No. 99-1, vol. 2(1). Northland Research, Tempe, pp. 7e46. Miksa, E.J., Castro-Reino, S.F., Lavayen, C., 2004. A combined petrofacies model for the middle Gila and Phoenix Basins, with application to pottery from the Dutch Canal Ruin. In: Henderson, T.K. (Ed.), Hohokam Farming on the Salt River Floodplain: Refining Models and Analytical Methods. Anthropological Papers No. 43. Center for Desert Archaeology, Tucson, pp. 7e44. Mitchell, D.R., Shackley, M.S., 1995. Classic period Hohokam obsidian studies in southern Arizona. Journal of Field Archaeology 22, 291e304. Nicholas, L.M., Feinman, G.M., 1989. A regional perspective on Hohokam irrigation in the lower Salt River Valley, Arizona. In: Upham, S., Lightfoot, K.G., Jewett, R.A. (Eds.), The Sociopolitical Structure of Prehistoric Southwestern Societies. Westview Press, Boulder, pp. 199e236. Rogers, M.J., 1945. An outline of Yuman prehistory. Southwestern Journal of Anthropology 1, 167e198. Schaller, D.M., 1994. Geographic sources of temper in central Phoenix Basin ceramics based on petrographic analysis. In: Abbott, D.R. (Ed.), The Pueblo Grande Project: Ceramics and the Production and Exchange of Pottery in the Central Phoenix Basin. Publications in Archaeology No. 20, vol. 3. Soil Systems, Phoenix, pp. 17e90.

D.R. Abbott et al. / Journal of Archaeological Science 39 (2012) 984e993 Schroeder, A., 1952. A Brief Survey of the Lower Colorado River from Davis Dam to the International Border. U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, Reproduction Unit. Region Three, Boulder City, NV. Schroeder, A., 1958. Lower Colorado Buff Ware: a descriptive revision. In: Colton, H.S. (Ed.), Pottery Types of the Southwest. Ceramic Series No. 3D. Museum of Northern Arizona, Flagstaff. Spielmann, K.A., 1986. Interdependence among Egalitarian societies. Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 5, 279e312. Spielmann, K.A., 1991. Interdependence in the Prehistoric Southwest: An Ecological Analysis of Plains-Pueblo Interaction. Garland, New York. Spielmann, K.A. (Ed.), 1998. Migration and Reorganization: The Pueblo IV Period in the American Southwest. Anthropological Research Papers No. 51. Arizona State University, Tempe. Tabachnick, B.G., Fidell, L.S., 1983. Using Multivariate Statistics. Harper & Row, New York. Teague, L.S., 1981. Test Excavations at Painted Rocks Reservoir: Sites AZ Z:1:7, AZ Z:1:8, and AZ S:16:36. Archaeological Series No. 143. Arizona State Museum, Tucson. Teague, L.S., 1988. The History of occupation at Las Colinas. In: Gregory, D.A., Deaver, W.L., Fish, S.K., Gardiner, R., Layhe, R.W., Nials, F.L., Teague, L.S. (Eds.),

993

The 1982e1984 Excavations at Las Colinas: The Site and Its Features, Archaeological Series No. 162, vol. 2. Arizona State Museum, Tucson, pp. 121e152. Wasley, W.W., Johnson, A.E., 1965. Salvage Archaeology in Painted Rocks Reservoir, Western Reservoir. Anthropological Papers No. 9. University of Arizona Press, Tucson. Waters, M.R., 1982. The Lowland Patayan ceramic typology. In: McGuire, R.H., Schiffer, M.B. (Eds.), Hohokam and Patayan: Prehistory of Southwestern Arizona. Academic Press, New York. Watkins, C.N., Watts, J., Abbott, D.R., Lack, A.D., 2006. Pottery Production, Utilization and Networks of Interaction in the White Tank Mountains: Analysis of the Caterpillar Ceramic Assemblage. Report Submitted to Soil Systems Inc Phoenix. Wilkie, D.S., Curran, B., 1993. Historical trends in forager and farmer exchange in the Ituri rainforest of Northeastern Zaire. Human Ecology 21, 389e417. Wilson, M.A., 2000. Ceramic analysis. In: Hill, M.E., Bruder, S. (Eds.), Farmers and Foragers or Cultivators and Collectors?: Opportunistic Occupation in the Interior Desert of the Western Papagueria. Intermountain Cultural Resource Services Research Paper No. 57. Dames and Moore, Phoenix.