The concept of a disembedded capital is viewed as a specious construct. The logical foundations of disembeddedness of political authority from local commerical hierarchies are viewed as largely untenable, at least in prehispanic Mesoamerica, and the close parallels between Monte Albán and Teotihuacán in terms of general site location, access to prime agricultural land, level of craft specialization required to meet local needs, and local market patterns suggest that both sites had similar roles with respect to local central-place support hierarchies. An alternative evolutionary model is then offered, one which relates developments manifest in the Basin of Mexico and in the Valley of Oaxaca to an economic and political strategy which seeks to minimize labor input and amount of systemic risk.

Prehistoric boundary walls are associated with the three walled northern Maya sites of Chacchob, Cuca, and Dzonot Aké. All were probably built for defensive purposes, but have wider implications concerning the delimitation and use of space in Maya centers. Each center represents a fortified elite enclave, but each has experienced a very different pattern of growth resulting in distinctive settlement configurations.

Barnes et al. raise a number of points relating to the National Register of Historic Places, only some of which are relevant to our initial discussion of archaeological significance in 1977. Archaeological significance can be supported by any of the four Register criteria, not only by the single criterion presented by Barnes et al. The role and initiative of all archaeologists in the decision-making process leading to significance determinations cannot be underestimated.

This is a response to Santley's criticisms of my suggestions concerning Monte Albán, the ancient Zapotec capital. It consists of first questioning his cultural ecological theoretical base, then showing that his interpretation of the nature of Monte Albán and its hinterland is faulty.

Plumbate, a distinctive ceramic of the Early Postclassic, has been thought to have been manufactured in the Pacific region of Guatemala and traded throughout Mesoamerica and Central America. Two aberrant types of Plumbate found in Late Classic contexts in Veracruz and Early Postclassic contexts in central El Salvador suggest that the origins and spread of Plumbate or Plumbate techniques may be more complex.

The case made by Thomas (1978) for avoiding the use of multivariate techniques is critically reviewed. The purpose of these techniques and the nature of archaeological data are argued to be quite different from what he proposed.

One type of evidence which Sanders has used to show the excessive nature of the population estimates proposed for central Mexico by Borah, Cook, and Simpson is an estimation of the agricultural productivity of the Teotihuacan Valley. This estimation assumes an equivalence of contemporary with preconquest agricultural productivity, but such an assumption may be too optimistic since sixteenth-century crop yields from tribute fields in five towns in the Valley of Mexico indicate a curiously low level of maize productivity. These yields are presented and discussed, and Sanders’ population estimates are seen to be more accurate than those of Borah, Cook, and Simpson.

The implications of speculative "population pressure" models are checked against the archaeological record in the Valley of Oaxaca, Mexico, by means of a detailed comparison of maize potentials and ancient populations, as both change over time. There is virtually no fit. Santley's evolutionary model, inasmuch as it is operationalizable, should therefore be drastically rethought.

Four methods of edge angle measurements, including one developed by the authors, are applied to a sample of unretouched flakes in order to determine their relative accuracy, reliability, and economy. The authors discuss various statistical analyses which are available and essential in evaluating the significance of variability between and within the different measuring techniques, applying them to the results obtained from this study.

Rhoades’ critique of the ecotone and edge effect concepts is discussed. While his conclusions about archaeological misuse of these terms are insightful, the assessment of their status in ecology and wildlife management is challenged. These constructs can be put to better use if substantive limits of their definitions are clear. More importantly, archaeologists should decide which aspects of environmental variability are meaningful to human adaptation before using them.

Bray's interpretation of an eighteenth century reference to a lithic implement in Guatemala as describing a fluted projectile point is challenged on the grounds that semantic variations of the translation may well fit the attributes of a late period-style obsidian prismatic blade. Problems in distinguishing between genuinely fluted points and "pseudofluted" points are also noted. The possibility of widespread pseudofluted points in Central and South America raises questions of their relationship to North American paleo-Indian industries.

New data from the South American lowland tropics are used in support of a recent argument extolling the potential of fish utilization in major floodplains. The discussion will cover five points: (1) major floodplains in general, and the Amazon and Orinoco floodplains in particular, have similar characteristics that make them biologically productive regions; (2) high fish productivity and the use of mass-fishing techniques in floodplain regions are characteristics of lowland South America; (3) the ecological dynamics of the seasonally inundated savanna are particularly productive and propitious for seasonal exploitation using mass-fishing techniques; (4) differences in species composition and fish size may have implications for seasonal and spatial variations in fish exploitation; and (5) substantial biases are apparent against the retrieval of small fish remains using traditional archaeological recovery techniques.

Salmon (1978) has discussed the role of systems theory and systems explanation in archaeology. Her article raises several salient points, such as the difficulties inherent in depending upon general systems theory to solve all archaeological problems. We would argue, however, that her conclusion, to wit, that general systems theory and mathematical systems theory are of no relevance to archaeologists, is overdrawn and that systems explanations offer archaeologists a valuable means of examining complex cultural phenomena.

In a recent report, Michael Smith proposes that the primary determinant of the settlement pattern of the southeastern Basin of Mexico during the Late Horizon (A.D. 1350-1520) was marketplace exchange. This assumption, and the use of the central place market model in analyzing the pattern, are critically evaluated and found to be unwarranted. A review of data and theory leads to the conclusion that environmental and political factors outweigh commerce in shaping the settlement pattern in this area.

Contrary to Rovner's assertion, an account by Francisco Ximénez in 1772 most probably refers to a fluted point, though other interpretations are possible. Surface finds admittedly have limitations, and it is possible that some individual specimens were made on flakes or blades rather than prepared blanks; nevertheless there seems to be a relationship between Isthmian points and paleo-Indian forms from North and South America.

Although Davy has defended the ecotone concept, it remains open to question on ecological grounds. A number of weaknesses in Davy's arguments are discussed. Davy's comments are themselves an illustration of the greater problem—the abuse of concepts borrowed from ecology.