Society for American Archaeology

Grinding-Tool Design as Conditioned by Land-Use Pattern

Author(s): Margaret C. Nelson and Heidi Lippmeier
Source: American Antiquity, Vol. 58, No. 2 (Apr., 1993), pp. 286-305
Published by: Society for American Archaeology
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/281971
Accessed: 24/09/2008 09:08

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless
you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you
may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use.

Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at
http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=sam.

Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed
page of such transmission.

JSTOR is a not-for-profit organization founded in 1995 to build trusted digital archives for scholarship. We work with the
scholarly community to preserve their work and the materials they rely upon, and to build a common research platform that
promotes the discovery and use of these resources. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Society for American Archaeology is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to
American Antiquity.

http://www.jstor.org
286 AMERICANANTIQUITY [Vol. 58, No. 2, 1993]

Sears, P. B., and K. H. Clisby

1952 Two Long Climatic Records. Science 116:176-178.
Shafer, H., and R. Holloway
1979 Organic Residue Analysis in Determining Stone Tool Function. In Lithic Use-Wear Analysis, edited
by B. Hayden, pp. 385-399. Academic Press, New York.
Stockmarr, J.
1971 Tablets with Spores Used in Absolute Pollen Analysis. Pollen et Spores 13:615-621.
Sobolik, K. D.
1988 The Importance of Pollen Concentration Values from Coprolites: An Analysis of Southwest Texas
Samples. Palynology 12:201-214.
Traverse, A.
1989 Paleopalynology. Unwin Hyman. Boston.
Tschudy, R.
1969 Relationship of Palynomorphs to Sedimentation. In Aspects of Palvnology, edited by R. Tschudy and
R. Scott, pp. 79-96. John Wiley and Sons, New York.
Williams-Dean, G.
1986 Pollen Analysis of Human Coprolites. In Archeological Investigations at Antelope House, by D. P.
Morris, pp. 189-205. Publications in Archeology No. 19. National Park Service, Washington, D.C.

Received December 13, 1991; accepted February 15, 1993

GRINDING-TOOL DESIGN AS CONDITIONED BY LAND-USE PATTERN

Margaret C. Nelson and Heidi Lippmeier

The form in which archaeologists recover artifacts is the product of intentional design, use modification, and
postdepositional alteration. Analysis of grinding tools, from small prehistoric sites in southwestern New Mexico,
indicates the effects of intentional design and use modification on artifact form. These variables of technological
behavior are considered in relation to anticipated, regular occupation of sites. Distinguishing the extent to which
site visits are anticipated and regular can enhance our understanding of how places and resources were used and
how land use was organized. Because grinding tools commonly remain on sites, their anticipated reuse signals
anticipated reuse of the places where they occur. While characteristics of intentional design positively correlate
with regularity of site occupation, the effects of use modification do not.
La morfologia de los artefactos recuperados por arqueologos es el producto de diseho intencional, modificacion
de uso y alteraciones occurridas despues de que los artefactos fueron depositados. El andlisis de piedras para moler
provenientes de pequefios sitios prehistoricos en el sudoeste de Nuevo MAexicoindica los efectos del diseno intencional
y modificacfon de uso en la morfologia de los artefactos. Estas variables de conducta tecnologica son examinadas
en relacion a la ocupacion regular y anticipada de los sitios. Al entender hasta que punto las visitas a los sitios
eran anticipadas v regulares podremos aumentar nuestro conocimiento acerca de la manera como los sitios y los
recursos fueron usados y de como el uso de la tierra estaba organizado. Puesto que las herramientas para moler
son generalmente dejadas en los sitios en vez de ser transportadas de un lugar a otro, su reuso anticipado indica
el reuso anticipado de los sitios en los cuales dichas herramientas son halladas. Se ha encontrado una correlacion
positiva entre las caracteristicas de diseno intencional y la regularidad de ocupacion de sitios. Sin embargo tal
correlaccion no existe entre este ultimo factor y los efectos de modificacion de uso.

Artifact form is the product of numerous, complex influences. The most fundamental condition
influencing tool design is the task for which a tool is expected to be used; all tools must be minimally

Margaret C. Nelson, Department of Anthropology, State University of New York, Buffalo, NY 14261
Heidi Lippmeier, Department of Anthropology, State University of New York, Buffalo, NY 14261

American Antiquity, 58(2), 1993, pp. 286-305.

Copyright C 1993 by the Society for American Archaeology
 REPORTS 287

effective at the task for which they were produced (Bamforth and Bleed 1992; Horsfall 1987). This
dimension of design has strongly influenced functional analyses of artifacts. The most common
question asked of tools is "What were they used for?," and this question dominates the literature
of prehistoric stone technology (Adams 1988; Hayden 1979; Keeley 1974, 1980; Odell 1981; Se-
menov 1964). Thus, archaeologists have explored, in detail, various ways of identifying the use to
which prehistoric tools were applied.
However, the form in which we find a tool in the archaeological record is the product of intentional
design (Bleed 1986; Horsfall 1987; Kleindienst 1975; Torrence 1983, 1989), use modification (Hay-
den 1979; Keeley 1982), and postdepositional alteration (Schiffer 1987). We are concerned with
intentional design and use modification, in particular the effect of anticipated, regular site occupation
on the form of grinding stones. Regularity of site occupation is identified using data independent
of grinding-tool form; its effect on intentional design and use modification of grinding implements
is then assessed.
The mano (handstone) and metate (table stone) form a basic grinding-tool set in the prehistoric
Southwest, as elsewhere in the world. Many people who study grinding stones consider their man-
ufacture and use to be a fairly static procedure. Stone is quarried and grinding tools are shaped
according to utilitarian needs (see Horsfall [1987] for a discussion of the effects of social variables).
Schlanger (1991), referring to ethnographic reviews of mano and metate manufacture by puebloan
people, summarizes the process of procurement and manufacture of manos and metates in this
fairly static way, noting that people tended to use local materials and that acquisition may have
been organized at the household level (Schlanger 1991). Our analysis explores variation in the initial
design of grinding tools and in the patterns of their reuse. Following from Schlanger's work, we
argue that the way in which people use different localities should influence how grinding tools are
made and used. This is our basic premise. If locations where grinding stones were used had been
occupied in different ways, we expect different strategies of manufacture to have been employed
and different patterns of use modification to have affected grinding-stone form.
Manos and metates from two kinds of sites are examined: (1) those that were regularly and perhaps
continuously occupied, and (2) those that were occupied more fortuitously, not as part of an antic-
ipated cycle of site use. We are not referring to the duration of occupation, but to the extent that
site occupation is a regular part of the land-use pattern. It is possible that many sites, especially
those classified as limited-activity sites, were not part of a regular system of landscape use but were
the product of occasional, unscheduled, or unanticipated reuse. In our study area in the eastern
Mimbres region, southwestern New Mexico (Figures 1 and 2), many of the upland sites appear to
have been fortuitously used.
Distinguishing the extent to which site visits were anticipated and regular enhances our under-
standing of how places and resources were used and how land use was organized. We believe that
grinding-tool form, both initial (intentional) design and modification through use, is sensitive to the
regularity of site use because grinding tools are often left in their places of use. Having established
differences in the regularity of site occupation at two kinds of sites, we evaluate the notion that
investments should be made in the production of grinding tools toward improving their use life and
use efficiency under conditions of anticipated reuse. Investment in design is measured by material
selection, shaping, standardization, and size. Further, we consider the idea that under conditions
of anticipated reuse, grinding tools would be used to the point where they were expended, whereas
those selected more expediently and not intended for reuse would exhibit less effect from use.
Thickness and breakage are considered characteristics of use and reworking. We found that char-
acteristics of intentional design (material selection, shaping, length, and standardization) do appear
sensitive to intended regular use of a site and, therefore, the artifacts on it. Use modification (thickness
and breakage), however, does not vary with the regularity of site occupation.

THE RELATION BETWEEN LAND USE AND ARTIFACT FORM

Grinding stones are site furniture; they stay at a place and are used by those who occupy that
place (Binford 1979; Camilli 1989). Therefore, the form of grinding stones and the composition of
288 AMERICANANTIQUITY [Vol. 58, No. 2, 1993]

Figure 1. The Mimbres area in southwestern New Mexico.

the grinding-tool assemblage should be influenced by the extent to which site reuse is planned and
regular. This is the premise that we examine in our study. We evaluate two ways in which land use
may influence grinding-tool form. The first is that with anticipated regular or extended site occu-
pation, manufacturing investments would be made toward improving the use life and use efficiency
of site furniture, in this case grinding tools. The second is that with anticipated regular use, grinding
tools or other site furniture would be used to the point where they were expended, whereas items
acquired and used expediently and not intended for extended or regular use would exhibit less
reduction and wear.
Most research on ground stone gives primary attention to aspects of use, and, consequently, has
refined our inferences about how various grinding tools were employed. Anthropologists associate
grinding stones with plant-processing activities (Bartlett 1933; Pennington 1963; Rinaldo 1943),
grinding clay and temper for pottery (Cushing 1920; Whittlesey and Reid 1982a:154), pigment
grinding, and more recently with the processing of hides (Adams 1988). The occurrence of manos
and metates on sites has been used as an index of food processing and to infer patterns of food
selection (Hard 1990; Lancaster 1986; Mauldin 1991); their presence has been considered an index
of residential occupation (Hayden 1987; Lancaster 1986; McAllister and Plog 1976). Most food
processing, after all, is a domestic activity. However, food grinding and the use of grinding tools to
process pigments, hides, and perhaps other materials may have occurred in a variety of settings
(Whittlesey and Reid 1982a)-at resource-acquisition sites, at short-term camps, at ritual locations,
as well as at residences. There is ethnographic evidence for the use of ground stone in both the
defleshing and dehairing tasks at kill sites (Kewanwytewa and Bartlett 1946). At short-term camps
further hide preparation may have taken place using hide stones as described by Adams (1988).
The grinding of pigments, medicinal items, and minerals for ceremonial use may have occurred at
ritual sites. While these studies improve our understanding of the contexts and substance of resource
use, concern for the structure of land use, which includes the regularity and continuity of land-use
patterns, has received less attention.
Much recent attention has been paid to how chipped-stone-tool design is influenced by the structure
and strategy of land-use patterns (Bamforth 1986, 1991; Binford 1979; Bleed 1986; Kelly 1988;
 REPORTS 289

Figure 2. The project area along the eastern slope of the Black Range, southwestern New Mexico.

Nelson 1991; Shott 1986; Torrence 1983). Of particular importance to this study are discussions
of the effects of anticipated reuse and of use efficiency on tool form. Tools that are intended for
reuse are those characterized as curated (Bamforth 1986; Binford 1979; Nelson 1991). The term
"curation" has been defined in many ways, and misused to define classes of tools rather than
technological behavior (see Nelson [1991] for a discussion of these points). In the archaeological
literature, curation refers to "a strategy of caring for tools and tool kits that can involve advanced
manufacture, transport, reshaping, and caching . . . [but] need not include all of these dimensions
[of behavior]" (Nelson 1991:62). Key to our discussion is the aspect of anticipated use and reuse.
Curation assures that tools will be available when and where they are needed (Bamforth 1986;
Kelly 1988; Torrence 1983, 1989). Most discussions of advanced preparation and maintenance of
tools (e.g., Bamforth 1986; Bleed 1986; Kelly 1988; Shott 1986) involve those that Binford (1979)
has referred to as personal gear, items that people transport with them and use themselves. Site
furniture may also be curated. Binford (1979) defines site furniture as those items that stay at a
place and are used by whomever occupies that place. Grinding tools have often been classified as
site furniture or assumed to have been left on sites because of their bulk (e.g., Camilli 1983, 1989;
Reid 1982). Curation of site furniture would be expected when reuse of the site on which they occur
is anticipated. At reused places grinding tools should be manufactured in advance of need, reused,
290 AMERICANANTIQUITY [Vol. 58, No. 2, 1993]

and maintained. Thus, the distribution and form of grinding tools, as site furniture, should provide
information on the regularity and continuity of the use of these artifacts and, thus, the localities at
which they occur.
Use efficiency, the cost in time and effort of using a tool to perform a task, is a second aspect of
technological design relevant to our study. In technological terms, use efficiency is but one of many
considerations that include the cost of acquiring materials, cost of manufacture, and cost of use and
reuse. This array of costs can be measured in a number of currencies: time, energy, material (Bamforth
1986; Binford 1979; Ebert 1979; Parry and Kelly 1987). Thus, evaluating efficiency is enormously
complicated. Different conditions cannot all be responded to optimally (Horsfall 1987; Nelson 1992;
Torrence 1989). We emphasize use efficiency suggesting that for grinding tools, use efficiency is
relevant when users expect to use these tools for an extended period of time (Hard 1990) or on a
regular basis. It is less relevant when their use is infrequent, of short duration, or ad hoc. Whittlesey
and Reid (1982a:158) suggest that unshaped manos (handstones) were used for ad hoc processing.
Our study assesses the notion that grinding-stone design is responsive to anticipated regularity of
reuse.
A few recent studies have incorporated analysis of grinding tools into assessments of land-use
practices (Camilli 1989; Reid 1982; Schlanger 1991; Whittlesey and Reid 1982b). These studies
emphasize the distribution and frequency of grinding tools in different contexts rather than specifics
of form, although some discussion of form is offered.
Based on analysis of archaeological material from the Cholla Project area in Arizona, Reid (1982:
193) explores how the composition of tool assemblages, including grinding tools, can be used to
make inferences about the function and longevity of occupations. Contrary to suggestions by others
that the presence of grinding tools indicates permanent residential occupation, Whittlesey and Reid
(1982b:213) argue that grinding tools are common in special-use settlements. Abundance of grinding
tools is considered to be an indicator of abundant plant processing, but the form of the grinding
tools suggests the extent to which their use was ad hoc (Whittlesey and Reid 1982b:205). Part-time
(seasonal?) habitations are identifiable in part by the presence of expediently used grinding tools,
those that are unshaped or "casually shaped" river cobbles (Whittlesey and Reid 1982b:206). Our
research explores further the relation between grinding-tool form and site-occupation patterns.
Camilli (1983, 1989) assesses occupational history at prehistoric artifact scatters on Cedar Mesa,
in southeastern Utah through analysis of the composition, density, and distribution of surface
assemblages. As one aspect of her analysis she argues that the relative frequency of site furniture
on sites should decline with intensity of site use because of the more rapid accumulation of artifacts
with shorter use lives. The frequency of site furniture on a regional scale should be related to the
number of locations where site furniture is placed (Camilli 1989:23). Camilli finds that the frequency
of site furniture, including grinding tools, does correlate with the number of site locations and
suggests that these artifacts are stored for reuse. Our study builds on Camilli's by examining two
considerably different kinds of occupations at which grinding stones occur and emphasizes form,
where she emphasizes frequency and distribution.
Schlanger (1991) addresses the effects of site function, occupation duration, and abandonment
patterns on the composition of grinding-tool assemblages in various contexts within sites and at
different sites, in the Dolores Project area of the northern Southwest. Using excavation data, she
discusses the effect of occupation duration on assemblage composition, arguing that as a site is
occupied longer, the composition of the assemblage from secondary contexts are increasingly con-
ditioned by the use lives of tools. The composition of assemblages in activity contexts are determined
more directly by the activities of the site occupants. Assemblages that are generalized for sites must
be cautiously compared, with attention to the effect of occupation duration on some of the depo-
sitional contexts. This finding is important to the comparisons made in our analysis. We include
material from a variety of contexts both surface and excavated. Schlanger also evaluates the effect
of prehistoric scavenging on assemblage composition, finding that whole artifacts are substantially
more frequent in the sites with short-term postabandonment access. Thus, Schlanger's concern is
primarily with use and abandonment contexts and with abandonment processes. We would like to
complement this contribution by focusing on artifact form rather than distribution and by giving
 REPORTS 291

attention to the potential for variation in form that exists in the manufacture and use of grinding
stones.
Regularity of site occupation is an important dimension of land-use pattern occasionally referred
to in these studies, but not examined. The structure of land use includes not only the distribution
of activities over an area, but the regularity and anticipation of those activities at specific locales.
Regular reoccupation of localities implies planned dependence on resources; fortuitous or unplanned
use of a place implies opportunistic exploitation of resources. Land-use systems surely include both
kinds of strategies. We wish to contrast two resource areas, one that appears to have been fortuitously
or at least less regularly used and the other, which appears to have been regularly occupied and
reoccupied. The impact of these different land-use strategies on the form of artifacts deposited on
the sites can then be addressed.

OCCUPATION PATTERNS
In order to assess ideas about how grinding-stone form is influenced by the regularity of its use,
we must first establish the regularity of site use independeependently
of the grinding-tool data.
Many studies of artifact assemblage composition are concerned with the organization of a settle-
ment system framed in terms of site classes. The terms "habitation" and "special activity" are
often dichotomized as interpretive options (see Reid [1982] for a critique of this approach). As Reid
(1982) argues, there are a variety of ways sites were occupied, which combine dimensions of activities,
permanency, and regularity of use among other variables. The dimension that we are concerned
with in this paper is regularity of use or anticipated use. Regularity refers to the extent to which
use of a place is a repetitive or entrenched part of the land-use pattern of a group. Binford (1983:
109-143) reports on the entrenched pattern of Nunamiut hunters, who use the same camping
localities repeatedly during the year and over many years, producing palimpsets of archaeological
material. Yellen (1977) describes a wet-season pattern for the Dobe San where few residential sites
are regularly reused or are established with the anticipation of reuse, a pattern that is not entrenched.
Regularity of use is as important a dimension of land-use pattern as is site function. We cannot
understand strategies of land use unless we can incorporate information about the regularity with
which people use particular resource areas. Models of seasonal movements by hunter-gatherers or
horticulturists or the ways in which more sedentary groups use the resources in various zones depend
on knowledge of the extent to which different resource zones were part of an established pattern of
land use. In the prehistoric Southwest, the use of multiple resource zones is especially relevant
because the Southwest is environmentally quite diverse yet has no resource, including cultivable
land, that is both especially productive and concentrated.
The presence of architectural sites may indicate some continuity or regularity of use, although
Whittlesey and Reid (1982b:207-208) have cautioned against assuming that architecture alone is
indicative of residential use or that the lack of architecture indicates nonresidence. For our study,
two kinds of sites are examined, both of which have shelters that would focus activities: small
architectural sites and rockshelters. The former have built shelter while the latter have natural
shelter. Excavation and surface data indicate that both classes of sites were reused, but we argue
that the architectural sites were regularly reused, while the rockshelters were occupied as ad hoc
shelters.
The sites are located along the eastern slope of the Black Range, southwestern New Mexico (Figure
2), which is in the eastern periphery of the Mimbres branch of the Mogollon culture area. The
Mimbres branch was a heartland of prehistoric Mogollon population aggregation and agricultural
development in southwestern New Mexico from the seventh to the twelfth centuries A.D. By the
seventh century A.D. agriculturists were aggregated in large pithouse villages in a variety of envi-
ronmental zones along the major rivers, the Mimbres and the Gila (LeBlanc and Whalen 1980;
Lekson 1989). Heavy dependence on cultigens was supplemented by both hunting and wild food
collecting (Anyon and LeBlanc 1984; Herrington 1979; Minnis 1985; Nelson 1981; Nelson and
LeBlanc 1986). By the eleventh century upland and low desert areas adjacent to the major rivers
were also occupied or regularly used by Mimbres people.
The periphery of the Mimbres area, away from the Mimbres and Gila rivers (Figure 1) in all
292 AMERICANANTIQUITY [Vol. 58, No. 2, 1993]

directions, is less productive, and was less heavily and continuously occupied. Areas around the
periphery are excellent settings for examining prehistoric land-use strategies of agriculturists that
differ from the longer occupations of more productive areas. For this reason, the periphery is an
excellent setting for evaluating formal variation in grinding tools that is conditioned by different
land use strategies.
The peripheries of the Mimbres branch of the Mogollon are just beginning to be systematically
examined (Gilman 1991; Laumbach and Kirkpatrick 1983; Lekson 1990; Nelson 1984, 1986, 1993a,
1993b). The eastern slope of the Black Range is one such area stretching from the crest of the Black
Range (which borders the Mimbres Valley on its east side) to the Rio Grande in southern New
Mexico (Figure 2). Numerous architectural sites cluster along the Rio Grande and its tributaries to
the west that drain the eastern slope (Nelson 1993b). Prehistoric occupation of the area has been
documented as extending from Late Archaic until at least A.D. 1400 (Laumbach and Kirkpatrick
1983; Nelson 1984).
The most intensively and systematically studied drainage in the area is Palomas Creek (Nelson
1984, 1986, 1993a, 1993b). Systematic surface survey has been conducted along all accessible low
terraces and ridges above Palomas Creek and the remainder of the drainage was surveyed in quadrats
selected by a systematic-random-sampling procedure (Hunt 1990; Lekson 1984; Mills and Lekson
1983). Extensive surface survey revealed that architectural sites, occupied during the period A.D.
650-1400, consistently occur along landforms adjacent to flood plains and alluvial fans, the best
agricultural land in the region. Further, the architectural sites occur only rarely above ca. 1860 m,
where the number of frost free days is no more than 120. This pattern suggests a strong agricultural
focus in the study area, an inference supported through analysis of excavation data (Nelson 1993a).
Prehistoric sites along the mountain slopes (above 1,860 m) consist of stone-artifact scatters, oc-
casionally with sherds, and of rockshelters (Hunt 1990; Mills 1983; Nelson 1989). These shelters
could have served as temporary camps or storage locales for groups using upland game and nut
resources. Apache living in the southern Southwest regularly used caves and shelters, storing food
and equipment in them (Young 1992:10). Short-term residential and storage functions have been
inferred for rockshelters in other parts of the Mogollon area (Dick 1965; Johnson and Upham 1985;
Martin et al. 1952; Wills 1988) and in other portions of the North American Southwest (Burgett et
al. 1985; Jennings 1957; Johnson and Upham 1985) and Desert West (Dalley 1977; Shutler et al.
1960; Thomas 1985).
For our study, we examine assemblages from four of the architectural sites on low terraces along
Palomas Creek and six rockshelters from the mountain area on the eastern slope of the Black Range.
The four architectural sites (from the total of 77 datable architectural sites in the sample) are those
at which some excavation or extensive surface mapping has been conducted. The six rockshelters
include all of those in our sample at which grinding tools were present; all have been extensively
mapped on the surface and three have been tested.
The architectural sites are all small clusters of structures with ceramics that indicate occupation
between A.D. 600 and 1200, which is when most architectural sites on Palomas drainage were
occupied (Nelson 1986, 1993a, 1993b). Reoccupation is indicated by the presence of temporally
distinct ceramics and by modification of the architectural features. The rockshelters have no ar-
chitectural features; reoccupation of one is indicated by the presence of ceramics indicative of
different time periods and by stratified deposits. Ceramics from some shelters indicate use between
A.D. 650 and 1200, although two of the shelters have no painted ceramics. Most of the architectural
and rockshelter sites have some degree of looter disturbance, which is most severe in the rockshelters.
All of the sites have had surface artifacts collected from them for many decades. Although the
rockshelters are less accessible to looters, they are a known source of prehistoric artifacts and have
been extensively "mined."
While both kinds of sites may have been reoccupied, our concern is with the regularity of this
reoccupation, or the extent to which it is fortuitous or ad hoc. Regularity or continuity of occupation
is indicated at the architectural sites by the presence of constructed shelters including pit structures
and masonry architecture. In addition, many room interiors have evidence of features constructed
to process food (mealing features and hearths). While some of these are ephemeral or ad hoc features,
 REPORTS 293

many are substantially formed and were reused. Detailed architectural evidence from one of the
sites indicates remodeling of the walls, the roof, and the hearth, and storage in interior pits is also
indicated (Nelson 1993a). At rockshelters, there is no evidence of constructed features for dwelling,
processing food, or storage. While dry shelters often yield evidence of woven or wooden artifacts
cached for reuse, none were found in these shelters (Nelson 1989). In fact, examination of pack-rat
midden did not yield one shred of cloth, or worked wood. Even with extensive looting we expected
to find fragments of such items in the soil that was screened through '/6-inch mesh.
The rockshelters and architectural sites contained a similar range of artifact classes including
painted and plain ceramics, chipped-stone cores, flakes, and shaped tools, hammerstones, manos,
and metates. Some of the architectural sites also yielded shell, turquoise, bone artifacts, and stone
axes. While many classes of items are found at both sites, they differ in ways that indicate lack of
anticipation in the use or reuse of the rockshelters. The tools and flakes from the rockshelters are
nearly exclusively volcanic, which is the dominant locally available stone, and the easiest to acquire
from immediately available cobbles. Raw material used at the architectural sites includes a much
wider range than at the rockshelters, although availability is roughly the same at both kinds of sites.
Most notable is the high frequency of obsidian flakes and tools at the architectural sites. Obsidian
is not locally available, but is present in flake forms from decortication to bifacial retouch.
Cores vary between the two kinds of sites. At the rockshelters, cores are large and minimally
reduced indicating that they were not used over much time nor were they cached and reused during
subsequent occupations. It is possible that activities at the rockshelters favored decortication flakes,
those initial flakes from the outer surface of a cobble, but these are the flakes that are most difficult
to remove and over which the knapper has least formal control. If site reuse was anticipated, we
expect that cores would have been cached for subsequent reuse and, therefore, some should have
more flake scars and be smaller as a product of greater reduction over time. Even the cryptocrystalline
cores, which are made from material much more difficult to find in the immediate area, are large.
Cores on the architectural sites range in size from large minimally reduced forms to small expended
forms, indicating a range of reduction stages. Regularity of reuse or continuity of use is evident in
the chipped-stone samples from the architectural sites but not in the samples from the rockshelters.
The difference in environmental setting between the rockshelters and architectural sites supports
our inference about the regularity of occupation. Architectural sites are located adjacent to the most
productive cultivatable land in the region: spring-watered flood plains and alluvial fans. The riparian
zone offers other wild resources and is an attraction for game. Paleoethnobotanical samples from
excavated contexts yield evidence of an agricultural focus (Nelson 1993a). The rockshelters are
located in upland settings where the growing season is too short for cultivation. Pinyon and other
wild foods are available, although none are concentrated or especially productive. We suspect that
the pinyon were not a dependable or productive resource because the winter snow and spring rain
are relatively light on the eastern slope of the Black Range and summer thunderstorms are spatially
unpredictable.
On the basis of architectural, artifactual, and environmental contrasts between the two classes of
shelters, we argue that the rockshelters were not regularly reused by the people occupying the eastern
slope of the Black Range. Incidents of reoccupation were fortuitous or ad hoc. By contrast, the sites
with built shelters were regularly reoccupied or reused.

THE ANALYSIS OF FORMAL VARIATION AS CONDITIONED BY LAND USE

From the six rockshelters, 32 manos and 15 metates were recovered primarily from surface
contexts, looters' backdirt piles, and test excavations (Table 1). From the architectural sites, 39
manos and 19 metates were recovered from surface contexts and from excavation within and outside
of dwelling structures. The frequency of manos and metates included in the samples varies from
one analysis to the next because not all variables could be recorded for each piece of ground stone.
Two aspects of technological behavior and their formal implications for ground stone are eval-
uated. The first is that investment should be made in the production of grinding tools toward
improving their use life and use efficiency when reuse is anticipated. The second is that use mod-
294 AMERICANANTIQUITY [Vol. 58, No. 2, 1993]

Table 1. Frequencies of Manos and Metates by Site Class.

Architectural
Type Measure Rockshelter Site
One-hand mano observed 20 30
column % 42.6 51.7
Two-hand mano observed 12 9
column % 25.5 15.5
Metates observed 15 19
column % 31.9 32.8

ification should be most extensive with anticipated reuse; grinding tools should have been used to
the point where they are expended. Thus two dimensions influencing the form of grinding tools are
considered: production and use modification.

Artifact Design
Tools intended for reuse should be made to last long and to work effectively. These design ideas
have been suggested for chipped- and ground-stone tools (Bleed 1986; Horsfall 1987:342-344;
Nelson 1991). Manufacturing items that will last for a long time guarantees the producers that they
need not frequently set aside time for manufacturing new tools and that tools will be available for
use when needed (Horsfall 1987:342-344, also see Bleed's [1986] discussion of reliability). However,
manufacturing items that are durable may take greater time per item for material acquistion and
production. As Nelson (1981) has noted for chipped stone and Horsfall (1987) has noted for ground
stone, the durability of material is often inversely related to workability. Further, some of the other
features that contribute to the long use life of a tool may require extra production time. With reuse
of the same tools anticipated over time, production efforts toward efficiency in use are repaid (Binford
1979). While investment in manufacturing time can be costly, efficient designs will save in use time.
If tool reuse is not anticipated, investing extra time in production of the most efficient tools may
not be worthwhile unless there is considerable time stress associated with their use (Torrence 1983,
1989), which we do not anticipate for grinding stones.
Based on these design notions we have three expectations: (1) that the most durable materials
should be selected for manufacture of grinding tools at the sites where regular use is anticipated
(the architectural sites) and should be absent at the fortuitously occupied locations (the rockshelters);
(2) that the grinding stones from the regularly reused sites (architectural sites) should be more
extensively shaped and more standardized than those from the fortuitously occupied sites (rock-
shelters); and (3) that the grinding stones from the regularly reused architectural sites should be
larger than those from the fortuitously occupied rockshelters.
Material Selection. Nearly all of the stone prehistorically selected for manos and metates (Tables
2 and 3) is available in boulder and cobble form in the natural conglomerate, and volcanic and
metamorphosed sediments that outcrop to form the terraces and slopes of the study area. The most
durable stones are the metasediments (quartzite) and granitic rocks because they are most dense.
The volcanics (basalt, vesicular basalt, rhyolite) are considerably more durable than the sandstone.
Horsfall (1987:342) summarizing ethnographic data, reports that metates made from granitic and
volcanic stone last considerable longer than do those made from sandstone. Texture is also important
to the durability of a stone. If it lacks texture or smoothes readily when used, repecking is necessary,
which is primarily responsible for wearing out and breaking grinding tools (Bartlett 1933:4; Schlanger
[1991:462] referencing the work of Wright [1990] and Shelley [1983]). According to Horsfall, ve-
sicular basalt has the best texture and sandstone the worst; sandstone dulls easily by "glazing"
(Horsfall 1987:341). Basalt and rhyolite would need considerably more repecking than would ve-
sicular basalt because of their relatively smoother surfaces. In short, the material that would produce
 REPORTS 295

Table 2. Stone Material of Manos from Both Site Classes.

Architectural
Raw Material Measure Rockshelter Site

Sandstone observed 4 2
column % 12.5 5.5
Rhyolite observed 23 18
column % 71.8 50.0
Basalt observed 5 5
column % 15.7 13.9
Vesicular basalt observed 0 4
column % 0 11.1
Quartzite observed 0 6
column % 0 16.7
Granite observed 0 1
column % 0 2.8
Note: Grouping vesicular basalt, quartzite, and granite the x2 = 12.20; p <
.05; df= 3.

Table 3. Stone Material of Metates from Both Site Classes.

Architectural
Raw Material Measure Rockshelter Site

Sandstone observed 7 2
expected 4.1 4.9
column % 46.7 11.1
Rhyolite observed 6 6
expected 5.5 6.5
column % 40.0 33.3
Basalt observed 2 7
expected 4.1 4.9
column % 13.3 38.9
Vesicular basalt observed 0 3
expected 1.4 1.6
column % 0 16.7
Note: x2 = 8.46; p < .05; df= 3.

grinding tools with the longest use lives would be vesicular basalt, and perhaps quartzite and granite.
Sandstone tools would have the shortest use lives.
Selection of material is influenced not only by the durability of stone but by its availability
(Horsfall 1987; Nelson 1981). Volcanics are ubiquitous; they dominate the outcrops and gravel
slopes and washes in the study area, although vesicular basalt is localized. Quartzite, granitic rock,
and sandstone are less common. Therefore, the easiest material to acquire would be nonvesicular
basalt and rhyolite.
We expect the most durable materials (vesicular basalt, granite, and quartzite) to have been selected
for production of grinding tools at the architectural sites and the most easily attainable materials
(basalt and rhyolite) to have been used at the rockshelters. While the most readily attainable materials
were used at both sites, those that are durable, but more difficult to obtain, occur only at the
architectural sites. This difference is statistically significant (p < .05) for both manos (Table 2) and
metates (Table 3), although only 16 percent of the metates at the architectural sites are made from
296 AMERICANANTIQUITY [Vol. 58, No. 2, 1993]

vesicular basalt (for the manos, the categories "vesicular basalt," "quartzite," and "granite" are
combined in calculation of chi square to reduce the number of cells with few or no observed values).
A number of other functional variables may influence selection of material including the kinds
of materials ground at the sites. Vesicular basalt, finer-textured volcanics, and sandstone represent
three textures of grinding implements that may have been selected at different stages in the grinding
process. Vesicular basalt may be absent from the rockshelter sites because the first stages of grinding
are not performed there. If most of the use of grinding stones is for mashing or fine grinding then
a smooth stone may be more appropriate. Schlanger (personal communication 1992) has suggested
that vesicular basalt is best suited to grinding wet grain or green corn rather than dried grain. It is
possible that the activities at the rockshelters involved fine grinding or mashing of transported dry
meal or of pigments that could be effectively accomplished with the smoother-textured sandstone,
basalt, and rhyolite. Sandstone metates are more frequent at rockshelter sites than would be expected
due to chance.
While the selection of durable stones for production of grinding tools at the architectural sites is
consistent with expectations about regularity of site use, differences between the materials ground
at rockshelters and architectural sites may also influence this selection.
Artifact Design and Manufacturing Input. Our second expectation is that tools intended for reuse
should evidence more attention toward production of use-efficient forms. This is expected because
time invested in manufacturing efforts is returned in the time saved using tools that work well.
While this may not be true for some artifact classes, grinding involves a considerable amount of
time and effort and is a task in which people were regularly engaged (Horsfall 1987). Investment in
design can be seen at the most general level in the extent to which items are shaped. In our samples,
all of the manos from the architectural sites and over 90 percent (26 of 28) from the rockshelters
are shaped. Shaping manos may be important, regardless of how fortuitously they are picked up
and used, because of the way in which they rub against the users' hands. A more substantial difference
is evident for the metates; 93 percent (14 of 15) of the metates from rockshelters are not shaped
while this is true for only 53 percent (8 of 15) of those from the architectural sites. In fact, only one
metate from the rockshelters is shaped. This difference is statistically significant (x2 = 6.14; p <
.05).
Prehistoric scavenging may affect the composition of these samples, and, thus, the proportion of
shaped grinding tools. The longer artifacts remain exposed the more likely they are to be taken
(Schlanger 1991). Schlanger (1991:470-471) has argued that burning of rooms shortens access to
those items left in the rooms. She also argues that shaped trough metates are most likely to be used
in sheltered areas such as rooms. Thus, these should be more frequent in samples from burned
rooms than in samples from unburned sheltered contexts. In our sample some of the excavated
rooms had evidence of burning, but this was not significant enough to make room contents inac-
cessible. However, trough metates are present only in the sample from architectural sites, which
had some burned sheltered areas.
The second expectation can also be evaluated through assessment of standardization in artifact
form. Torrence (1989:61) has argued that the most efficient tools are those that most closely suit
the task for which they are used. Tools that are designed to suit specific tasks should be more
standardized toward optimal dimensions than those made and used ad hoc. Metates could not be
compared because most of those from the rockshelters are unshaped. The shaped manos were
divided into general shape categories and their length and width dimensions compared between the
two classes of sites (Table 4). The standard deviation for each mean of length and width indicates
how widely the sizes of items vary within each shape category. Unfortunately sample sizes are small.
Manos from both sites have similar standard deviations around the mean for length, but the mean
lengths are considerably greater for manos from the architectural sites. The coefficient of variation
(C.V.) adjusts the standard deviation to compensate for difference in mean values. For these samples,
two measures on manos from the architectural sites are more standardized than for manos from
the rockshelters. The coefficient of variation is much smaller for the length of circular manos and
for the width of rectangular manos from the architectural site collection.
Standardization may also be influenced by social concerns and specialization in production (e.g.,
 REPORTS 297

Table 4. Lengthand Width Values for Manos.

Length (mm) Width (mm)

Architec- Architec-
Rock- tural Rock- tural
Shape Measure shelter Site shelter Site

x 96.2 152.7 84.8 102.5

Circular s.d. 27.9 27.1 27.3 29.6
n 5 7 6 4
C.V. .29 .18 .32 .29
x 119.0 130.9 92.7 98.0
Oval s.d. 32.4 32.8 11.0 17.2
n 6 9 9 5
C.V. .27 .25 .12 .17
x 129.0 207.6 97.8 113.3
Rectangular s.d. 14.7 24.3 23.9 2.9
n 3 5 5 3
C.V. .11 .12 .24 .03
Note: Circular length t = 3.5, p < .05, df= 10; oval length t = .69, p > .05,
df= 13; rectangular length t = 5.7, p < .05, df= 6; circular width t = .96, p
> .05, df = 8; oval width t = .62, p > .05, df = 12; and rectangular width t =
1.43, p > .05, df= 6.

Morrow 1987), but neither of these behavioral variables seems applicable to our samples. None of
the metates or manos is decorated in any way nor is there any evidence of specialized loci of
manufacture.
Tool Size. The final characteristic of grinding-tool design examined for this analysis is size. If
use efficiency is emphasized in the initial design of grinding tools that are made in anticipation of
reuse, we expect the grinding tools from the architectural sites to have larger grinding faces than
those from the rockshelters. Hard (1990) and Lancaster (1986) have shown that the size of the
grinding face is positively correlated with the efficiency of grinding; with larger grinding surfaces,
grinding can be performed more quickly. While measurements of the area of grinding faces are not
available, length and width are useful indexes of potential grinding area. Among the shaped manos,
as noted above, all shape categories from the architectural sites are consistently longer and wider
(Table 4). The difference is significant only for the length of circular manos and rectangular manos.
Sample sizes are small and may be influencing the evaluation of statistical significance.
Use life may be increased in manos and metates by producing thicker, heavier forms. However,
thickness and weight decrease with use. In the assemblage of grinding tools recovered from the
archaeological record, thickness and weight should vary to a great degree depending on the stage of
each tool within its use life.
Some of the information on production design of manos and metates indicates that their form
may be influenced by anticipation of their reuse, among other variables. As site furniture, the
anticipated reuse of manos and metates indicates anticipated reuse of the places where they remain.
Selection of durable material for manos and metates, shaping of metates, standardization of mano
form, and production of larger manos are all patterned as expected for grinding tools that occur in
contexts of regular and anticipated reuse. Other variables also influence form and contribute to the
patterns described above including differences in the materials processed and the influence of scav-
enging (for a detailed discussion, see Schlanger [1991]) and looting.

Use Modification
The second idea that we wish to evaluate involves the relation between anticipated reuse of sites
and the modification of grinding-tool form as a product of reuse. Tools that remain at regularly
298 AMERICANANTIQUITY [Vol. 58, No. 2, 1993]

Table 5. Thickness(in mm) of GroundStone from Both Site

Classes.

Architec-
Ground-Stone Rock- tural
Type Measure shelter n Site n
One-hand manos x 41.68 19 51.22 27
s.d. 12.28 17.52
Two-hand manos x 46.82 11 42.66 9
s.d. 15.84 18.73
All metates x 36.00 11 47.47 17
s.d. 18.63 17.64
Slab metates x 32.80 10 41.13 8
s.d. 16.14 15.55
Note: One-hand mano t = 2.17, p < .05, df= 44; two-hand mano t = .53,
p > .05, df= 18; all metates t = 1.62, p > .05, df= 26; and slab metate t =
1.1,p > .05, df= 16.

reused places (site furniture) would eventually be reduced to an expended state. As site furniture,
the composition of the grinding-tool assemblage at a regularly reused place would be composed of
a range of forms including many in an expended state. Alternatively, grinding tools that were selected
expediently would not have been used to the extent of their potential use life. Two variables are
examined as indexes of the extent of grinding-tool use: thickness and breakage.
Thickness. The thickness of manos and metates should decline with use as a result of wear
between the grinding surfaces and repecking of those surfaces. Bartlett (1933:4) and Schlanger (1991:
462) suggest that repecking is responsible for most of the wear on manos and metates (Barlett 1933:
4; Schlanger 1991:462 referencing Wright [1990] and Shelly [ 1983]). Those that are used and repecked
most extensively should be thinnest. We expect that the manos and metates from the architectural
sites should have a smaller mean thickness than those from the rockshelters. Although grinding
stones in various stages of use may occur on architectural sites, their more extended use during
regular site reoccupation should result in a lower mean, especially for manos, which have a con-
siderably shorter use life than metates (Schlanger 1991:461).
This pattern is not evident in our samples. The manos and metates at architectural sites are not
thinner than those from the rockshelters (Table 5). On the contrary, they tend to be thicker, but
only significantly so for one-hand manos. We separated slab metates from all metates to examine
whether the metates on architectural sites have a slightly greater mean thickness simply because
there are more troughs. However, the pattern is the same for slab metates as for all metates. Mean
thickness is not significantly different between the samples from the two sites (Table 5), although
the mean thickness of metates is slightly greater in the sample from the architectural sites. If grinding-
tool reuse was more extensive at the architectural sites than at the rockshelters, it is not evident in
the comparison of mean mano and metate thickness.
Breakage. The composition of the samples with respect to breakage should be influenced by the
extent of reuse. Grinding tools have a greater chance of breaking the more they are reused. Also,
Shelley (referenced in Schlanger [1991:462]) suggests that breakage occurs most often during re-
sharpening, which of course increases with use and reuse. We expect the sample of manos and
metates from the architectural sites to exhibit a higher proportion of broken manos and metates
than does the sample from the rockshelters. However, a higher proportion at the architectural sites
may also result from the use of broken manos and metates as construction stone (Schlanger 1991:
463).
The pattern of breakage is not consistent with an argument for more extended use of grinding
tools at the architectural sites. Instead, fewer whole manos and metates comprise the rockshelter
sample than the architectural sites sample, although the difference is not statistically significant
 REPORTS 299

Table 6. Whole Ground Stone from Each Site Class.

Manos Metates
Site Class n % Whole n % Whole
Rockshelter 32 34.4 15 6.7
Architectural site 39 48.7 19 21.1
Note: Manos z = 1.21; Metates z = 1.14.

(Table 6). This pattern, however, may be explained by several factors unrelated to land use. First,
more extensive modern looting of rockshelters may have resulted in removal of most of the whole
manos and metates. Fewer intact deposits were excavated from the rockshelters; thus modern looting
may account for the higher proportion of broken items. Second, the length of access to deposits
following abandonment, Schlanger argues, influences the proportion of whole items in assemblages
(1991:470, Figure 5; see also Schiffer 1987). However, absence of items as the result of prehistoric
looting or scavenging should not be substantially different between the two site classes because in
both contexts there would have been extended access to discarded and abandoned objects, as we
discussed earlier. Third, rockshelters may have been provisioned with grinding tools broken on the
architectural sites and transported to the shelters. Schlanger (1991:463) discusses this possibility.
This explanation assumes anticipated reoccupation of the shelters, otherwise provisioning them
with grinding tools or any other artifacts would be unnecessary. Also, if provisioning rockshelters
from the assemblages at architectural sites accounts for the higher proportion of broken items in
the rockshelter sample, we might expect the stone material composition of the two samples to be
the same.
The size effect may also influence the extent of use modification on grinding tools. As Baker
(1978) observed, the size of objects influences the extent to which they are visible and could have
been scavenged prehistorically for reuse. Manos and metates are relatively large artifacts, and would
be less likely to have been covered by deposits, especially in rockshelters (barring major roof fall
events), than would other classes of artifacts. Thus, whether intended for reuse or expediently
discarded, manos and metates would be accessible to scavengers recycling abandoned items. If places
are reused, whether anticipated or not, the grinding tools, as large, visible items, may be reused.
The lack of difference between the samples with respect to both breakage and thickness of manos
and metates is consistent with this interpretation. Thus, use modification is not a sensitive index
of the regularity of use of places in the samples from the eastern slope of the Black Range.
Use Wear. The composition of grinding-stone collections on these sites may be influenced by
a variety of variables other than regularity of use: differential context of recovery in archaeological
samples, prehistoric scavenging, modern looting, differences in the time-space systematics' of the

Table 7. Dominant Wear on Manos and Metates.

Manos Metates
Degree of Wear Degree of Wear
Moder- Moder-
Site Type Light ate Extreme n Light ate Extreme n
observed 11 15 5 2 6 5
Rockshelter expected 10.0 13.2 7.8 31 .8 5.9 6.3 13
row % 35.5 48.4 16.1 15.4 46.1 38.5
observed 11 14 12 0 8 10
Architectural site expected 12.0 15.8 9.2 37 1.2 8.1 8.7 18
row % 29.7 37.8 32.5 0 44.4 55.6
Note: For manos, x2 = 2.48, p > .05, df= 2; and for metates, x2 = 3.46, p > .05, df= 2.
300 AMERICANANTIQUITY [Vol. 58, No. 2, 1993]

Table 8. Amount of Wear on Each Mano and Metate Face.

Manos Metates
Degree of Wear Degree of Wear
Moder- Moder-
Site Type Light ate Extreme n Light ate Extreme n
observed 21 17 10 8 9 5
Rockshelter expected 19.5 18.1 10.5 48 5.7 9.2 7.0 22
row % 43.8 35.4 20.8 36.3 41.0 22.7
observed 20 21 12 5 12 11
Architectural site expected 21.5 19.9 11.5 53 7.3 11.8 9.0 28
row % 37.7 39.6 22.7 17.9 42.8 39.3
Note: Light wear is indicated by less than 25% of the grinding surface of the implement worn to a smooth,
flattened surface; moderate wear is identified as approximately 50% of the contact area smoothed and flattened;
extreme wear refers to the occurrence of these conditions over 75% of the grinding face. For mano faces, x2 =
.39, p > .05, df= 2; for metate faces, x2 = 2.66, p > .05, df= 2.

Table 9. Directionality of Striations on Manos from Each Site

Class.

Architectural
Type Measure Rockshelter Site
Linear observed 10 4
expected 11.1 3.1
column % 38.5 57.1
Circular observed 11 1
expected 9.5 2.5
column % 42.3 14.3
Random observed 5 2
expected 5.4 1.4
column % 19.2 28.6
Note: x2 = 1.79; p > .05; df= 2.

use of architectural sites and rockshelters, and most importantly, the activities for which grinding
tools were used. Most of these have been discussed above. Consideration of the characteristics of
wear patterns indicates little difference between the grinding tools from the two sites.
Wear patterns and pollen data are the most direct indexes of what was ground. No pollen data
are available, but wear patterns are recorded (Tables 7-10). First, the amount of wear is considered
as an index of the intensity of grinding as well as differences in what was ground. Table 7 is a record
of the dominant wear on each piece and Table 8 includes wear on all grinding faces (many manos
and metates were ground on both faces). The composition of the two collections is strikingly similar;
there are no statistically significant differences in the amount of wear between the collections.
Similarity between the collections supports the inference that grinding tools were used on the same
kinds of materials and with the same intensity at both kinds of sites. This result is consistent with
the lack of difference in mano (except one-hand mano) and metate mean thickness between the
collections.
Directional characteristics of striations were also recorded, as these can indicate types of use (see
Adams 1988, 1989). Evidence of striations is limited, but again, the collections are similar except
that circular wear is nearly absent on the manos from the architectural sites (Tables 9 and 10).
Schlanger (1991:461) notes the association between circular wear and one-hand mano form, but in
the rockshelter sample half of the eight two-hand manos with striations have a circular wear pattern.
Many one-hand manos from both collections have a linear pattern. Grinding accomplished with a
 REPORTS 301

Table 10. Directionalityof Striationson Metatesfrom Each Site

Class.

Architectural
Type Measure Rockshelter Site

Linear unidirectional observed 5 3

column % 45.4 60.0
Linear perpendicular observed 3 2
column % 27.3 40.0
Circular observed 3 0
column % 27.3 0
Note: No x2 calculated due to small sample size.

short circular motion, perhaps seed grinding (Lancaster 1983) or hide working (Adams 1988), may
have been more common at the rockshelter sites. This could account for the lack of trough metates,
although as argued above, trough metates may be absent from the rockshelters because of a lack of
investment in shaping grinding tools that was conditioned by the lack of intention to reuse them
regularly. The possibility of more circular grinding at rockshelters does not seem to have influenced
selection between one- and two-hand manos.
No statistically significant differences exist in the characteristics of use wear on grinding tools
between the two samples. Although this assessment of wear is limited, it indicates little difference
in the kinds of materials ground and the intensity of grinding-tool use.

DISCUSSION
We have evaluated the influence of land-use patterns on the form of grinding tools and, thus, the
composition of grinding-tool samples. As site furniture, grinding tools remain on sites and are reused
by site occupants. We argue that anticipation of regular reuse should influence the form of grinding
tools. Using site and artifact information other than the grinding tools, we establish two classes of
sites: architectural sites that were regularly reused and rockshelters that were fortuitously reused.
We then evaluate two ideas about how the regularity of site use influences grinding-tool form.
The first idea concerns artifact design. We suggest that items made with the intention of regular
reuse should receive greater investment in production toward durability and use efficiency. This
notion is evaluated by comparing the selection of material, presence of shaping, standardization of
form, and size of manos and metates between the two sitWelasses. We find that some of these
characteristics are sensitive to the difference in land-use pattern; in the sample from the regularly
reoccupied architectural sites, manos and metates are made from more durable stone, metates are
more often shaped, manos are more standardized in form, and circular and rectangular-shaped
manos are longer than in samples from the rockshelters. Although other factors, including modern
looting, differences in materials ground, and the temporal extent of occupation may account for
these patterns, our analysis indicates that the regularity of site occupation should be considered as
an important conditioner of grinding-tool form.
The second result involves use modification of artifact form. We evaluate whether use modification
influences the discarded form of grinding tools to a greater extent at regularly reused sites (the
architectural sites) than at fortuitously occupied sites (the rockshelters). Mano and metate thickness
and breakage are examined as indexes of use modification. We did not find the pattern expected;
the manos and metates from architectural sites were not thinner and more broken (expended) than
those from the rockshelters. Grinding tools are large enough to have been quite visible on sites
making them accessible to recycling and reuse whether this reuse is anticipated or not; at the
rockshelters, grinding tools may have been recycled from discard contexts. Thus, use modification
on grinding tools is not a sensitive index of the regularity of site occupation. This result does not
rule out any effect of the regularity of site use on use modification to other artifact classes, especially
302 AMERICANANTIQUITY [Vol. 58, No. 2, 1993]

smaller items. Also, other factors influence the composition of grinding-stone samples with respect
to thickness and breakage including their durability, the contexts of recovery, removal of whole
items by looters, and secondary uses of grinding tools. Our analysis indicates that regularity of site
use does not have a substantial impact on grinding-tool thickness and breakage.
Analysis of prehistoric land-use pattern often addresses occupation function or length, both im-
portant variables in understanding the dynamics of prehistoric economy and society. We add an
additional important variable to consideration of land-use patterns. Regularity and anticipation of
site occupation or use indicates an entrenched pattern of movement. It also indicates that the reasons
for using a particular locality or resource area are important to the regular functioning of the economy
and society. Thus distinguishing the extent to which site visits are anticipated and regular can
enhance our understanding of how places and resources were used and how land use was organized.
While archaeologists have outlined a number of approaches to the analysis of chipped stone that
to tounderstanding
contribute unpaderstanding past land-usewe thatte,wefeel
land-use
past feel that analysis of grinding tools is uniquely
suited to assessing the anticipated regularity of site use. Unlike most chipped-stone tools, grinding
tools commonly remain on sites. Anticipated reuse of the grinding tools signals anticipated reuse
of the place. Investments in the design of grinding tools are shown in our sample to be sensitive to
anticipated reuse. Further application of these ideas will contribute to better understanding of both
technology and land use.

Acknowledgments. Fieldwork was made possible through the generosity of m an downers and by
the diligence of many graduate and undergraduate students at the University of New Mexico, University of
Louisville, and State University of New York at Buffalo. Logistical support and permission for the mountain
slope survey was provided by the USDA Forest Service, Gila National Forest. Financial support was provided
by the U.S. Department of Education, FIPSE Program grant #G008730598, United University Professions grant
#067103-07, State University of New York Faculty Research Development Funds, the National Geographic
Society grant #4551-91, and a private grant from a local land owner. We thank Raymond Mauldin, Sarah
Schlanger, Brian Hayden, J. Jefferson Reid. Teresita Majewski, and anonymous reviewers for their comments.

REFERENCES CITED
Adams, J. L.
1988 Use-Wear Analyses on Manos and Hide-Processing Stones. Journal of Field Archaeology 15:307-315.
1989 Methods for Improving the Analysis of Groundstone Artifacts: Experiments in Mano Wear Pattern
Analysis. In Experiments in Lithic Technology, edited by D. S. Amick and R. P. Mauldin, pp. 259-276.
BAR International Series 528. British Archaeological Reports, Oxford.
Anyon, R., and SA. LeBlanc
1984 The Galaz Ruin: A Prehistoric Mimbres Village in Southwestern New Mexico. University of New
Mexico Press, Albuquerque.
Baker, C.
1978 The Size Effect: An Explanation of Variability in Surface Artifact Assemblage Content. American
Antiquity 43:288-293.
Bamforth, D. B.
1986 Technological Efficiency and Tool Curation. 4AmericanAntiquity 51:38-50.
1991 Technological Organization and Hunter-Gatherer Land Use: A California Example. American Antiquity
56:216-235.
Bamforth, D. B., and P. Bleed
1992 The Concept of Risk and the Organization of Flaked Stone Technology. Paper presented at the 57th
Annual Meeting of the Society for American Archaeology, Pittsburgh.
Bartlett, K.
1933 Pueblo Milling Stones of the Flagstaff Region and Their Relation to Others in the Southwest: A Study
in Progressive Efficiency. Bulletin No. 3. Museum of Northern Arizona, Flagstaff.
Binford, L. R.
1979 Organization and Formation Processes: Looking at Curated Technologies. Journal of Anthropological
Research 35:255-273.
1983 In Pursuit of the Past. Thames and Hudson, New York.
Bleed, P.
1986 The Optimal Design of Hunting Weapons: Maintainability or Reliability. American Antiquity 51:737-
747.
Burgett, G. R., A. Rautman, J. K. Feathers, and M. M. Bargielski
1985 Arizona D:7:2085. In Excavations on Black Mesa 1983: A Descriptive Report, edited by A. Christenson
 REPORTS 303

and W. J. Parry, pp. 87-124. Research Paper No. 46. Center for Archaeological Investigations, Southern
Illinois University, Carbondale.
Camilli, E. L.
1983 Site Occupation History and Lithic Assemblage Structure: An Example from Southeastern Utah. Un-
published Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Anthropology, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque.
1989 The Occupational History of Sites and the Interpretation of Prehistoric Technological Systems: An
Example from Cedar Mesa, Utah. In Time, Energy and Stone Tools, edited by R. Torrence, pp. 17-26.
Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Cushing, F. H.
1920 Zuni Breadstuff. Indian Notes and Monographs No. 9. Heye Foundation Museum of the American
Indian, New York.
Dalley, G. F.
1977 Swallow Shelter and Associated Sites. University of Utah Press, Salt Lake City.
Dick, H. W.
1965 Bat Cave. Monograph No. 27. School of American Research, Santa Fe.
Ebert, J. I.
1979 Alternative Strategies for the Transport, Curation, and Use of Lithic Materials and Implements:
"Discontinuous" Assemblages and Their Analytic Implications. Paper presented at the 46th Annual Meeting
of the Society of American Archaeology, San Diego.
Gilman, P. A.
1991 Changing Land Use and Pit Structure Seasonality Along the San Simon Drainage in Southeastern
Arizona. In Mogollon V, edited by P. H. Beckett, pp. 11-27. COAS Publishing and Research, Las Cruces,
New Mexico.
Hard, R. J.
1990 Agricultural Dependence in the Mountain Mogollon. In Perspectives on Southwestern Prehistory, edited
by P. E. Minnis and C. L. Redman, pp. 135-149. Westview Press, Boulder, Colorado.
Hayden, B.
1979 Lithic Use- Wear Analysis. Academic Press, New York.
1987 Traditional Metate Manufacturing in Guatemala Using Chipped Stone. In Lithic Studies Among the
Contemporary Highland Maya, edited by B. Hayden, pp. 8-119. University of Arizona Press, Tucson.
Herrington, S. L. C.
1979 Settlement Patterns and Water Control Systems of the Mimbres Classic Phase, Grant County, New
Mexico. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Anthropology, University of Texas, Austin.
Horsfall, G.
1987 A Design Theory Perspective on Variability in Grinding Stones. In Lithic Studies Among the Highland
Maya, edited by B. Hayden, pp. 332-378. University of Arizona Press, Tucson.
Hunt, N.
1990 Black Range Archaeological Survey: Preliminary Report of the 1989 Field Season. Submitted to the
U.S. Forest Service, Gila National Forest Supervisor's Office, Silver City, New Mexico. Copies available
from the supervisor's office, Silver City, New Mexico.
Jennings, J. D.
1957 Danger Cave. Anthropological Papers No. 27. University of Arizona, Tucson.
Johnson, M., and S. Upham
1985 Approaches to Adaptive Diversity: A Preliminary Report on Archaeological Investigations in the
Southern Organ Mountains, New Mexico. Paper presented at the 4th Jornada Mogollon Conference, Tu-
larosa, New Mexico.
Keeley, L. H.
1974 Technique and Methodology in Microwear Studies: A Critical Review. World Archaeology 5:323-336.
1980 Experimental Determination of Stone Tool Uses: A Microwear Analysis. University of Chicago Press,
Chicago.
1982 Hafting and Retooling: Effects on the Archaeological Record. American Antiquity 47:798-809.
Kelly, R.
1988 The Three Sides of a Biface. American Antiquity 53:717-734.
Kewanwytewa, J., and K. Bartlett
1946 Hopi Moccasin Making. Plateau 19(2):21-28.
Kleindienst, M. R.
1975 Comment. Current Anthropology 16:382-383.
Lancaster, J. W.
1983 An Analysis of Manos and Metates from the Mimbres Valley, New Mexico. Unpublished Master's
thesis, Department of Anthropology, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque.
1986 Ground Stone. In Short-Term Sedentism in the American Southwest: The Mimbres Valley Salado,
edited by B. A. Nelson and S. A. LeBlanc, pp. 177-190. University of New Mexico Press, Albuquerque.
Laumbach, K. W., and D. T. Kirkpatrick
1983 The Black Range Survey. Report of the Cultural Resource Management Division No. 56. Department
of Anthropology, New Mexico State University, Las Cruces.
304 AMERICANANTIQUITY [Vol. 58, No. 2, 1993]

LeBlanc, S. A., and M. E. Whalen

1980 An Archaeological Synthesis of South-Central and Southwestern New 1Mexico. Office of Contract Ar-
chaeology, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque.
Lekson, S. H.
1984 Prehistoric Settlement in the Middle Palomas Drainage, Southern New Mexico. In Ladder Ranch
Research Project: A Report of the First Season, edited by M. C. Nelson, pp. 15-24. Technical Series No. 1.
Maxwell Museum of Anthropology, Albuquerque.
1989 An Archaeological Reconnaissance of the Rio Grande Valley in Sierra County, New Mexico. The
Artifact 27(2): 1-87.
1990 Mimbres Archaeology of the Upper Gila, New Mexico. University of Arizona Press, Tucson.
McAllister, S. P., and F. Plog
1976 Small Sites in the Chevelon Drainage. In Limited Activity and Occupation Sites: A Collection of
Conference Papers, edited by A. E. Ward, pp. 17-23. Contributions to Anthropological Studies No. 1. Center
for Anthropological Studies, Albuquerque.
Martin, P. S., J. B. Rinaldo, E. Bluhm, H. Cutler, and R. Grange, Jr.
1952 Mogollon Cultural Continuity and Change. Fieldiana: Anthropology No. 40. Field Museum of Natural
History, Chicago.
Mauldin, R.
1991 Agricultural Intensification in the Mogollon Highlands. In Mlogollon V, edited by P. H. Beckett, pp.
62-74. COAS Publishing and Research, Las Cruces, New Mexico.
Mills, B. J.
1983 Black Range, Gila National Forest, Archaeological Surveyl. Submitted to the U.S. Forest Service, Gila
National Forest Supervisor's Office, Silver City, New Mexico. Copies available from the supervisor's office,
Silver City, New Mexico.
Mills, B. J.. and S. H. Lekson
1983 The Ladder Ranch Surveys: An Evaluation of Methods. Paper presented at the Society of Independent
Anthropologists, Albuquerque.
Minnis, P. E.
1985 Social Adaptation to Food Stress. A Prehistoric Example. University of Chicago Press, Chicago.
Morrow, C. A.
1987 Blades and Cobden Chert: A Technological Argument for Their Role as Markers of Regional Identi-
fication During Hopewell Period in Illinois. In The Organization of Core Technology, edited by J. K.
Johnson and C. A. Morrow, pp. 119-150. Westview Press, Boulder, Colorado.
Nelson, B. A., and S. A. LeBlanc
1986 Short-TermnSedentism in the American Southwest: The Mimbres Valley Salado. University of New
Mexico Press, Albuquerque.
Nelson, M. C.
1981 Chipped Stone Analysis in the Reconstruction of Prehistoric Subsistence Practices: An Example from
Southwestern New Mexico. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, University of California, Santa Barbara.
1984 Ladder Ranch Research Project. Technical Series No. 1. Maxwell Museum of Anthropology, Albu-
querque.
1986 Occupational History of Palomas Drainage, Western Sierra County, New Mexico. In Mogollon Vari-
ability, edited by C. Benson and S. Upham, pp. 157-168. Occasional Papers No. 15. New Mexico State
University and the University Museum, Las Cruces, New Mexico.
1989 Black Range Rockshelter Study: Preliminary Report of the 1988 Field Season. Submitted to the U.S.
Forest Service, Gila National Forest Supervisor's Office, Silver City, New Mexico. Copies available from
the supervisor's office, Silver City, New Mexico.
1991 The Study of Technological Organization. In Archaeological Method and Theory, vol. 3, edited by M.
B. Schiffer, pp. 57-100. University of Arizona Press, Tucson.
1992 Technological Strategies Responsive to Subsistence Stress. Paper presented at the workshop entitled
"Resource Stress, Economic Uncertainty, and Human Responses in the Prehistoric Southwest." Santa Fe
Institute, Santa Fe.
1993a Changing Occupational Pattern Among Prehistoric Horticulturalists in SW New Mexico. Journal of
Field Archaeology 20:43-57.
1993b Classic Mimbres Land Use in the Eastern Mimbres Region, Southwestern New Mexico. Kiva 58:
264-279.
Odell, G. H.
1981 The Morphological Express at Function Junction: Searching for Meaning in Lithic Tool Types. Journal
of Anthropological Research 37:319-342.
Parry, W. J., and R. L. Kelly
1987 Expedient Core Technology and Sedentism. In The Organization of Core Technology, edited by J. K.
Johnson and C. A. Morrow, pp. 285-304. Westview Press, Boulder, Colorado.
Pennington, C. W.
1963 The Tarahumara of Mexico: Their Environment and Material Culture. University of Utah Press, Salt
Lake City.
 REPORTS 305

Reid, J. J.
1982 Analytic Procedures for Interassemblage-Settlement System Analysis. In Introduction and Special
Studies, edited by J. J. Reid, pp. 193-216. Cholla Project Archaeology, vol. 1. Archaeological Series No.
161. Arizona State Museum, University of Arizona, Tucson.
Rinaldo, J. B.
1943 Artifacts. In The SU Site, Excavations at a Mogollon Village, Western New Mexico, Second Season,
edited by P. S. Martin, pp. 171-235. Field Museum of Natural History Anthropological Series 32. Chicago.
Schiffer, M. B.
1987 Is There a "Pompeii Premise" in Archaeology? Journal of Anthropological Research 29:18-41.
Schlanger, S. H.
1991 On Manos, Metates, and the History of Site Occupations. American Antiquity 56:460-474.
Semenov, S. A.
1964 Prehistoric Technology. Barnes and Noble, New York.
Shelley, P. H.
1983 Lithic Specialization at Salmon Ruin, San Juan County, New Mexico. Unpublished Ph. D. dissertation,
Department of Anthropology, Washington State University, Pullman.
Shott, M.
1986 Technological Organization and Settlement Mobility: An Ethnographic Examination. Journal of An-
thropological Research 42:15-51.
Shutler, D., M. E. Shutler, and J. S. Griffith
1960 Stuart Rockshelter: A Stratified Site in Southern Nevada. Anthropological Papers No. 3. Nevada State
Museum, Las Vegas.
Thomas, D. H.
1985 The Archaeology of Hidden Cave. Anthropological Papers Vol. 61, Pt. 1. American Museum of Natural
History, New York.
Torrence, R.
1983 Time Budgeting and Hunter-Gatherer Technology. In Hunter-Gatherer Economy in Prehistory: A
European Perspective, edited by G. Bailey, pp. 11-22. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
1989 Re-Tooling: Towards a Behavioral Theory of Stone Tools. In Time, Energy and Stone Tools, edited
by R. Torrence, pp. 57-66. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Whittlesey, S. M., and J. J. Reid
1982a Analysis of Interassemblage Variability and Settlement System Reconstruction. In The Chevelon
Region, edited by J. J. Reid, pp. 151-179. Cholla Project Archaeology, vol. 2. Archaeological Series No.
161. Arizona State Museum, University of Arizona, Tucson.
1982b Cholla Project Settlement Summary. In Introduction and Special Studies, edited by J. J. Reid, pp.
205-216. Cholla Project Archaeology, vol. 1. Archaeological Series No. 161. Arizona State Museum, Uni-
versity of Arizona, Tucson.
Wills, W. H.
1988 Early Agriculture and Sedentism in the American Southwest: Evidence and Interpretations. Journal
of World Prehistory 2:445-488.
Wright, M. K.
1990 Sandstone and Cornmeal: Experimental Use of Early Pueblo Maize Grinding Tools From Southwestern
Colorado. Unpublished Master's thesis, Department of Anthropology, Washington State University, Pull-
man.
Yellen, J. E.
1977 Archaeological Approaches to the Present. Academic Press, New York.
Young, L.
1992 Pits, Rooms, Baskets, Pots: Storage Among Southwestern Farmers. Paper presented at the 3rd South-
west Symposium, Tucson.

NOTE
The temporal and spatial relations among the rockshelters and among the architectural sites, and between
both classes and other occupations in the region are not examined in this study. For some of the rockshelters
we have no evidence that allows us to date their use. In addition, our temporal controls are not strong enough
to allow us to assume that the occupations at the rockshelters and the architectural sites were contemporaneous
or that they were used by the same people. We argue only that during their incorporation into the activities of
prehistoric people, the architectural sites and the rockshelters were used differently because the regions in which
they occur were used differently. It is possible that one of the site classes was used over a longer period of time
or was exposed to more intensive prehistoric "mining" for artifacts, but we have no evidence to indicate which
would be more affected.

Received June 25, 1991; accepted February 16, 1993