Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-b6zl4 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-26T04:48:05.316Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Electron Microprobe and Petrographic Analyses of Prehistoric Hohokam Pottery to Deter. Mine Ceramic Exchange Within The Salt River Vallty, Arizona

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 February 2011

David R. Abbott  and
David M. Schaller
David R. Abbott
Affiliation:
Soil Systems, Inc., 1121 N. 2nd St., Phoenix, AZ, 85004
David M. Schaller
Affiliation:
Soil Systems, Inc., 1121 N. 2nd St., Phoenix, AZ, 85004
Get access

Abstract

Ceramic analysis with an electron microprobe and thin-section petrography are used to investigate prehistoric exchange among the Hohokam of the Salt River valley, Arizona. These complimentary techniques can be useful for resolving the special problems that arise when studying ceramic exchange over short distances.

Type
Research Article
Information
MRS Online Proceedings Library (OPL) , Volume 185: Symposium G – Materials Issues in Art and Archaeology II , 1990 , 441
Copyright
Copyright © Materials Research Society 1990

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

References Cited

1. Downing, Theodore E., Gibson, McGuire, Anthropological Papers of the University of Arizona 25 (University of Arizona, Tucson, 1974); Jerry B. Howard, MA thesis, Arizona State University, 1990; Karl A. Wittfogel, Oriental Despotism: A Comparative Study of Total Power, (Yale University, New Haven, 1957).Google Scholar
2. Bohannan, Paul, American Anthropologist 57, 60–70 (1955); Marcel Mauss, The Gift: Forms and Functions of Exchange in Archaic Societies, (W. W. Norton, New York, 1967); Marshall D. Sahlins, Stone Age Economics, (Aldine, Chicago, 1972); R. F. Salisbury, From Stone to Steel, (Cambridge University, Cambridge, 1962); Paul Sillitoe, Mankind 11, 265-275, 1978); Andrew Strathern, The Rope of Moka, (Cambridge University, Cambridge, 1971); Wayne Suttles, American Anthropologist 62, 296-305 (1960).Google Scholar
3. Abbott, David R. in Arizona State Museum Archaeological Series 162, (University of Arizona, Tucson, 1988) pp. 73–198; T. Kathleen Henderson, Anthropological Field Studies 18, (Office of Cultural Resource Management, Arizona State University, Tempe, 1987); Anne Marie Lane in Soil Systems Publications in Archaeology 12, edited by Douglas R. Mitchell, (Soil Systems, Phoenix) pp. 249-294.Google Scholar
4. Rands, Robert L., Bishop, Ronald L. SAA Papers 1, edited by Fry, Robert E., (Society for American Archaeology, Washington D. C., 1980) pp. 19–46.Google Scholar
5. Arnold, Dean E., Ceramic Theory and Cultural Process, (Cambridge University, Cambridge, 1985), pp. 50–55.Google Scholar
6. Rice, Prudence M., Pottery Analysis: A Sourcebook, (University of Chicago, Chicago, 1987), p. 425.Google Scholar
7. Birks, L. S., Chemical Analysis 17, (Wiley-Interscience, New York, 1971).Google Scholar
8. Freestone, I. C., Archaeometry 24 (2), 99–116 (1982).Google Scholar
9. Poole, A. B., Finch, L. R., Archaeometry 14 (1), 79–91 (1972); A. Tubb, Parker, A. J., J. Nickless, Archaeometry 22 (2), 153-171 (1980); F. Widemann, M. Picon, F. Asaro, H. V. Michel, I. Perlman, Archaeometry 17 (1), 45-59 (1975).Google Scholar
10. Bruck, Glenn R., MS thesis, Arizona State University, 1983; Fabian Hoyos-Patifio, MS thesis, Arizona State University, 1985.Google Scholar
11. Pettijohn, F. J., Sedimentary Rocks, 3rd ed. (Harper and Row, Now York, 1975), p. 273.Google Scholar
12. Fisher, R. A., Annals of the Eugenics Society 7, 179–188 (1936).Google Scholar
13. Johnson, Richard A., Wichern, Dean W., Applied Multivariate Statistical Analysis, (Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ, 1982) pp. 480–485.Google Scholar
14. Jones, R. E., Occasional Paper 1, (British School at Athens, Fitch Laboratory, London, 1986) pp. 9,65.Google Scholar