Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-c47g7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-23T08:41:55.286Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Refocusing the Role of Food-Grinding Tools as Correlates for Subsistence Strategies in the U.S. Southwest

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

Jenny L. Adams
Jenny L. Adams*
Affiliation:
Desert Archaeology, Inc., 3975 N. Tucson Blvd., Tucson, AZ 85716
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Food-grinding tools in both the New World and the Old World have long been used as subsistence indicators. Previously, variations in tool size and material texture were presumed to have been related to processing differences between wild and domestic foods. However, recent research conclusions from both the U.S. Southwest and the Levant indicate that tool morphology is more closely related to differing processing strategies than to the food procurement system. Ethnographic accounts of food preparation techniques and tool design experiments provide a foundation for new methods of assessing prehistoric food processing techniques. Food-processing techniques from eight distinct cultural groups in the U.S. Southwest provide examples of how foods might have been incorporated into the prehistoric diet. Experiments with prehistoric food-grinding tool types demonstrate their effectiveness for reducing assorted seeds and maize kernels and helping to identify criteria for a technological analysis of grinding tool types. Archaeological assemblages from selected sites in the U.S. Southwest are evaluated with these criteria and used to discuss the relationship between grinding technology and the introduction of and increasing dependency on agriculture. It is proposed that developments in food-grinding technology are related to processing strategies for incorporating flour into prehistoric diets.

Résumé

Résumé

Las herramientas de moler en el Nuevo y Viejo Mundos nan sido utilizados como indicadores de subsistencia. Anteriormente, se presumió que las variaciones en el tamaño, material, y textura estuvieron relacionados con las diferencias en el procesamiento de plantas silvestres y domesticadas. Sin embargo, estudios recientes en el suroeste norteamericano y en el Levante indican que la morfología de estas herramientas está relacionada más cercamente con diferentes estrategias de procesamiento. Datos etno gráficos sobre técnicas de preparación de comida y experimentos con el diseño de las herramientas ayudan a desarrollar una nueva metodología para el estudio de técnicas de procesamiento de comida. Nuestro estudio incluye técnicas de procesamiento de comida en ocho grupos culturales en el suroeste norteamericano. Los experimentos con artefactos de moler demuestran su efectividad para moler semillas y granos de maíz y ayudan a identificar criterios para analizar herramientas encontradas arqueologicamente. Estos criterios se aplican a los conjuntos artefactuales seleccionados de sitios en el suroeste. Se discuten las relaciones entre tecnología de moler e introducción y uso de plantas domesticadas. Se propone que el desarrollo de esta tecnología está relacionado con la necesidad de incorporar harina en la dieta prehistórica.

Type
Reports
Information
American Antiquity , Volume 64 , Issue 3 , July 1999 , pp. 475 - 498
Copyright
Copyright © The Society for American Archaeology 1999

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

Adams, J. L. 1979 Groundstone from Walpi. In Walpi Archaeological Project, Phase 2: Vol. 4. Stone Artifacts from Walpi, Part II, by Adams, J.L. and Greenwald, D., pp. 1–220. Museum of Northern Arizona, Flagstaff.Google Scholar
Adams, J. L. 1988 Use-Wear Analysis of Handstones Used to Grind Corn and Process Hides. Journal of Field Archaeology 15: 307–315.Google Scholar
Adams, J. L. 1989a Methods for Improving Ground Stone Analysis: Experiments in Mano Wear Patterns. In Experiments in Lithic Technology, edited by Amick, D. S. and Maudlin, R.P. pp. 259–276. BAR International Series No. 528. British Archaeological Reports, Oxford.Google Scholar
Adams, J. L. 1989b Experimental Replication of the Use of Ground Stone Tools. Kiva 54: 261–271.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Adams, J. L. 1993a Technological Development of Manos and Metates on the Hopi Mesas. Kiva 58: 331–344.Google Scholar
Adams, J. L. 1993b Mechanism of Wear on Ground Stone Surfaces. Pacific Coast Archaeological Society Quarterly 29(4): 60–73.Google Scholar
Adams, J. L. 1994 The Development of Prehistoric Grinding Technology in the Point of Pines Area, East-Central Arizona. University of Michigan Microfilms, Ann Arbor.Google Scholar
Adams, J. L. 1996 Manual for a Technological Approach to Ground Stone Analysis. Center for Desert Archaeology, Tucson.Google Scholar
Adams, K. R. 1994 ARegional Synthesis of Zea mays in the Prehistoric American Southwest. In Corn and Culture in the Prehistoric New World, edited by Johannessen, S. and Hastorf, C.A. pp. 273–302. Westview Press, Boulder.Google Scholar
Agenbroad, L. D. 1970 Cultural Implications from the Statistical Analysis of a Prehistoric Lithic Site in Arizona. Unpublished Master's thesis, Department of Anthropology, University of Arizona, Tucson.Google Scholar
Bamforth, D. B. 1986 Technological Efficiency and Tool Curation. American Antiquity 51: 38–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bamforth, D. B. 1991 Technological Organization and Hunter-Gatherer Land Use: ACalifornia Example. American Antiquity 56: 216–235.Google Scholar
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.Google Scholar
Beaglehole, P. 1937 Foods and Their Preparation. In Notes on Hopi Economic Life by Beaglehole, E., pp. 60–71. Yale University Publications in Anthropology 15. Yale University, New Haven.Google Scholar
Bennett, W. C, and Zingg, R. M. 1935 The Tarahumara: An Indian Tribe of Northern Mexico. University of Chicago Press, Chicago.Google Scholar
Bleed, P. 1986 The Optimal Design of Hunting Weapons: Maintainability and Reliability. American Antiquity 51: 737–747.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Breternitz, D. A. 1959 Excavations at Nantack Village, Point of Pines, Arizona. Anthropological Papers No. 1. University of Arizona Press, Tucson.Google Scholar
Ciolek-Torrello, R. 1995 The Houghton Road Site, The Agua Caliente Phase, and the Early Formative Period in the Tucson Basin. Kiva 60: 531–574.Google Scholar
Clark, J., and Vint, J. (editors) 1998 Archaeological Investigations along Tonto Creek, Vol. 1. Anthropological Papers No. 22. Center for Desert Archaeology, Tucson. In preparation.Google Scholar
Cushing, F. H. 1920 Zuni Breadstuff. Indian Notes and Monographs No. 8. Museum of the American Indian, Heye Foundation, New York.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dart, A. 1986 Archaeological Investigations at La Paloma: Archaic and Hohokam Occupations at Three Sites in the Northeastern Tucson Basin, Arizona. Anthropological Papers No. 4. Institute for American Research, Tucson.Google Scholar
Dick, H. W. 1965 Bat Cave, Catron County, New Mexico. Monograph No. 27. School of American Research, Santa Fe.Google Scholar
Diehl, M. W. 1996 The Intensity of Maize Processing and Production in Upland Mogollon Pithouse Villages A.D. 200-1000. American Antiquity 61: 102–115.Google Scholar
Di Peso, C. C, Rinaldo, J. B., and Fenner, G. J. 1974 Casas Grandes: A Fallen Trading Center of the Gran Chichimeca, Vol. 7: Stone and Metal. Amerind Foundation Series No. 9. Northland Press, Flagstaff.Google Scholar
Dobres, M., and Hoffman, C. R. 1994 Social Agency and the Dynamics of Prehistoric Technology. Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory 1: 211–258.Google Scholar
Doebley, J., and Bohrer, V. L. 1983 Maize Variability and Cultural Selection at Salmon Ruin, New Mexico. Kiva 49: 19–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Elson, M. D., Stark, M.T, and Gregory, D. A. (editors) 1995 The Roosevelt Community Development Study: New Perspectives on Tonto Basin Prehistory. Anthropological Papers No. 15. Center for Desert Archaeology, Tucson.Google Scholar
Euler, R. C, and Dobyns, H. F. 1983 The Ethnoarchaeology of Pai Milling Stones. In Collected Papers in Honor of Charlie Steen Jr., edited by Fox, N. L., pp. 253–267. Papers of the Archaeological Society of New Mexico No. 8. Albuquerque Archaeological Society Press, Albuquerque.Google Scholar
Flenniken, J. J., and Ozbun, T. L. 1988 Experimental Analysis of Plains GroovedAbraders. Plains Anthropologist 33: 37–52.Google Scholar
Fontana, B. 1983 Pima and Papago: Introduction. In Handbook of North American Indians, Southwest 10, edited by Ortiz, A., pp. 125–136. Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C. Google Scholar
Fratt, L., and Biancaniello, M. 1993 Homol'ovi III Ground Stone in the Raw: A Study of the Local Sandstone Used to Make Ground Stone Artifacts. Kiva 58: 373–391.Google Scholar
Freeman, A. K. L. 1998 Archaeological Investigations at the Wetlands Site, AZ AA: 12: 90 (ASM). Technical Report No. 97-5. Center for Desert Archaeology, Tucson.Google Scholar
Gilman, P. A. 1988 Sedentism/Mobility, Seasonality, and Tucson Basin Archaeology. In Recent Research on Tucson Basin Prehistory: Proceedings of the Second Tucson Basin Conference, edited by Doelle, W. H. and Fish, P. R., pp. 411-117. Anthropological Papers No. 10. Institute for American Research, Tucson.Google Scholar
Greenwald, D. M. 1993 Ground Stone Artifacts from La Ciudad de los Hornos. In In the Shadow of South Mountain: The Pre-Classic Hohokam of La Ciudad de Los Hornos, 1991-1992 Excavations. Part I, edited by Chenault, M.L., Ahlstrom, R.V.N., and Motsinger, T.N., pp. 317–358. Archaeological Report No. 93-30. Arizona Department of Transportation, Phoenix.Google Scholar
Gregory, D. A. (editor) 1999a Excavations in the Santa Cruz River Floodplain: The Middle Archaic Component at Los Pozos, edited by Gregory, D.A.. Anthropological Papers 20. Center for Desert Archaeology, Tucson, Arizona.Google Scholar
Gregory, D. A. (editor) 1999b The Early Agricultural Occupation at Los Pozos, AZ AA: 12: 91 (ASM). Anthropological Papers No. 21. Center for Desert Archaeology, Tucson.Google Scholar
Guernsey, S. J., and Kidder, A. V. 1921 Basketmaker Caves of Northeastern Arizona. Papers of the Peabody Museum of American Archaeology and Ethnology No. 8(2). Harvard University, Cambridge.Google Scholar
Halbirt, C. D. 1989 Modeling Prehistoric Behavior from the Analysis of Groundstone Assemblages. In Hohokam Archaeology along Phase B of the Tucson Aqueduct Project, Central Arizona, edited by Czaplicki, J.S. and Ravesloot, J.C.. Archaeological Series No. 178. Arizona State Museum, Tucson.Google Scholar
Hard, R. J. 1990 Agricultural Dependence in the Mountain Mogollon. In Perspectives on Southwestern Prehistory, edited by Minnis, P. E. and Redman, C.L. pp. 135–149. Westview Press, Boulder.Google Scholar
Hard, R., Mauldin, R. P., and Raymond, G. R. 1996 Mano Size, Stable Isotope Ratios, and Macrobotanical Remains as Multiple Lines of Evidence of Maize Dependence in the American Southwest. Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory 3(4): 253–318.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Haury, E. W. 1943 A Possible Cochise-Mogollon-Hohokam Sequence. Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society 86(2): 260–263.Google Scholar
Haury, E. W. 1950 The Stratigraphy and Archaeology ofVentana Cave. University of Arizona Press, Tucson.Google Scholar
Haury, E. W. 1976 The Hohokam: Desert Farmers and Craftsmen, Excavations at Snaketown, 1964-1965. University of Arizona Press, Tucson.Google Scholar
Haury, E. W. 1989 Point of Pines, Arizona: A History of the University of Arizona Archaeological Field School. Anthropological Papers No. 50. University of Arizona Press, Tucson.Google Scholar
Hayden, B. 1995 A New Overview of Domestication. In Last Hunters First Farmers: New Perspectives on the Prehistoric Transition of Agriculture, edited by Price, T.D. and Gebuer, A.B., pp. 273–299. School of American Research Press, Santa Fe.Google Scholar
Hernandez, E. X. 1985 Maize and Man in the Greater Southwest. Economic Botanv 39: 416–430.Google Scholar
Holden, W. C. 1936 Household Economy. In Studies ofYaqui Indians ofSonora Mexico, by Holden, WC., Seltzer, C.C., Studhalter, R.A., Wagner, C J., and McMillan, W.G., pp. 67–71. Bulletin Vol. 12, No. 1. Texas Technological College, Lubbock.Google Scholar
Horsfall, G.A. 1987 Design Theory and Grinding Stones. In Lithic Studies among the Contemporary Highland Maya, edited by Hayden, B., pp. 332–377. University of Arizona Press, Tucson.Google Scholar
Hough, W. 1915 The Hopi. The Torch Press, Cedar Rapids, Iowa.Google Scholar
Huckell, B. 1984 The Archaic Occupation of the Rosemont Area, Northern Santa Rita Mountains, Southeastern Arizona. Archaeological Series No. 147, Vol 1. Arizona State Museum, Tucson.Google Scholar
Huckell, B. 1995 Of Marshes and Maize: Preceramic Agricultural Settlements in the Cienega Valley, Southeastern Arizona. Anthropological Papers No. 59. University of Arizona Press, Tucson.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Huckell, B. B., Huckell, L. W, and Fish, S. K. 1995 Investigations at Milagro, a Late Preceramic Site in the Eastern Tucson Basin. Technical Report No. 94-5. Center for Desert Archaeology, Tucson.Google Scholar
Irwin-Williams, C. 1968 Archaic Culture History in the Southwestern United States. In Early Man in Western North America, edited by Irwin-Williams, C., pp. 48–54. Eastern New Mexico University Contributions in Anthropology No. 1(4). Portales.Google Scholar
Irwin-Williams, C, and Haynes, C. V. Jr. 1970 Climatic Change and Early Population Dynamics in Southwestern United States. Quaternary Research 1: 59–71.Google Scholar
Keeley, L. H. 1980 Experimental Determination of Stone Tool Uses: Microwear Analysis. University of Chicago Press, Chicago.Google Scholar
Kidder, A. V. 1932 The Artifacts of Pecos. Yale University Press, New Haven.Google Scholar
Kingery, D. W. 1989 Ceramic Materials Science in Society. Annual Review of Materials Science 19: 1–20.Google Scholar
Ladd, E.J. 1979 Zuni Social and Political Organization. In Handbook of North American Indians, Southwest 9, edited by Ortiz, A., pp. 482–491. Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C. Google Scholar
Lancaster, J. 1984 Groundstone Artifacts. In The Galaz Ruin: A Prehistoric Mimbres Village in Southwestern New Mexico, edited by Anyon, R. and LeBlanc, S.A. pp. 247–262. University of New Mexico Press, Albuquerque.Google Scholar
Lemonnier, P. 1986 The Study of Material Culture Today: Towards an Anthropology of Technical Systems. Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 5: 147–186.Google Scholar
Lindeman, M. 1997 Results of Archaeological Testing at Nine Sites in the Central Avra Valley, the CAVSARPProject. Technical Report No. 97-15. Center for Desert Archaeology, Tucson. American Archaeology 6: 190–198.Google Scholar
Lowell, J. C. 1991 Prehistoric Households at Turkey Creek Pueblo, Arizona. Anthropological Papers No. 54. University of Arizona Press, Tucson.Google Scholar
Mabry, J. B. 1998a Archaeological Investigations at Early Village Sites in the Middle Santa Cruz Valley: Analyses and Synthesis, edited by Mabry, J.. Anthropological Papers No. 19. Center for Desert Archaeology, Tucson.Google Scholar
Mabry, J. B. 1998 Paleoindian and Archaic Sites in Arizona. Arizona State Historic Preservation Office, Phoenix.Google Scholar
Mabry, J. B., Swartz, D. L., Wocherl, H., Clark, J. J., Archer, G. H., 1997 Archaeological Investigations of Early Village Sites in the Middle Santa Cruz Valley: Descriptions of the Santa Cruz Bend, Square Hearth, Stone Pipe, and Canal Sites. Anthropological Papers No. 18. Center for Desert Archaeology, Tucson.Google Scholar
Martin, P. S. 1943 The SU Site: Excavations at a Mogollon Village, Western New Mexico, Second Season, 1941. Anthropological Series Vol. 32, No. 2. Field Museum of Natural History, Chicago.Google Scholar
Martin, P. S., and Rinaldo, J. 1947 The SU Site, Excavations at a Mogollon Village, Western New Mexico, Third Season, 1946. Anthropological Series Vol. 32, No. 3. Field Museum of Natural History, Chicago.Google Scholar
Martin, P. S., and Rinaldo, J. 1950 Sites of the Reserve Phase, Pine Lawn Valley, Western New Mexico. Fieldiana: Anthropology 38: 3.Google Scholar
Mauldin, R. P. 1993 The Relationship between Ground Stone and Agricultural Intensification in Western New Mexico. Kiva 58: 317–330.Google Scholar
Mills, P. R. 1993 An Axe to Grind: A Functional Analysis of Anasazi Stone Axes from Sand Canyon Pueblo Ruin (5MT765), Southwestern Colorado. Kiva 58: 393–113.Google Scholar
Mindeleff, V. 1891 A Study of Pueblo Architecture in Tusayan and Cibola. Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C. Google Scholar
Minnis, P. 1985 Domesticating People and Plants in the Greater Southwest. In Prehistoric Food Production in North America, edited by Ford, R.I., pp. 309–339. Anthropological Papers 75. Museum of Anthropology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor.Google Scholar
Montero, L. G., and Henderson, T. K. 1993 Groundstone Implements from the Tatar Hills Archaeological Project. In Archaic Occupation on the Santa Cruz Flats: The Tatar Hills Project, edited by Halbirt, CD. and Henderson, T.K., pp. 253–278. Northland Research, Flagstaff.Google Scholar
Morris, D. H. 1990 Changes in Groundstone Following the Introduction of Maize into the American Southwest. Journal of Anthropological Research 46: 177–194.Google Scholar
Neely, J. A. 1974 The Prehistoric hunt and Stove Canyon Sites, Point of Pines, Arizona. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Anthropology, University of Arizona, Tucson.Google Scholar
Nelson, M.C. 1991 The Study of Technological Organization. In ArchaeologicalMethod and Theory, vol. 3, edited by Schiffer, M.B., pp. 57–100. University of Arizona Press, Tucson.Google Scholar
Nelson, M.C. 1996 The Value of a Technological Strategies Approach: Introductory Remarks. In Interpreting Southwestern Diversity: Underlying Principles and Overarching Patterns, edited by Fish, PR. and Reid, J.J., pp. 185–187. Anthropological Research Paper No. 48. Arizona State University, Tempe.Google Scholar
Olson, A. P. 1959 An Evaluation of the Phase Concept in Southwestern Archaeology: As Applied to the Eleventh and Twelfth-Century Occupations at Point of Pines, East-Central Arizona. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Anthropology, University of Arizona, Tucson.Google Scholar
Pennington, C W. 1963 The Tarahumara of Mexico: Their Environment and Material Culture. University of Utah Press, Salt Lake City.Google Scholar
Pennington, C W. 1969 The Tepehuan of Chihuahua: Their Material Culture. University of Utah Press, Salt Lake City.Google Scholar
Plog, F. T. 1974 The Study of Prehistoric Change. Academic Press, New York.Google Scholar
Rinaldo, J. 1940 Artifacts. In The SU Site, Excavations at a Mogollon Village, Western New Mexico, by Martin, P.S., Rinaldo, J.B., and Kelly, M., Chapter 3. Anthropological Series Vol. 32, No. 1. Field Museum of Natural History, Chicago.Google Scholar
Rinaldo, J. 1943 Artifacts. In The SU Site, Excavations at a Mogollon Village, Western New Mexico, Second Season, 1941, by Martin, P.S., Chapter V. Anthropological Series Vol. 32, No. 2. Field Museum of Natural History, Chicago.Google Scholar
Rinaldo, J. 1952 Specimens of Stone, Bone, and Clay. In Mogollon Cultural Continuity and Change: The Stratigraphic Analysis of Tularosa and Cordova Caves, by Martin, P.S., Rinaldo, J.B., Bluhm, E., Cutler, H.C., and Grange, R. Jr. Fieldiana: Anthropology 40: 102–204.Google Scholar
Rinaldo, J. 1957 Artifacts. In Late Mogollon Communities, Four Sites of the Tularosa Phase, Western New Mexico, by Martin, P.S., Rinaldo, J.B., and Barter, E.. Fieldiana 49: 1: 39–88.Google Scholar
Rinaldo, J. 1989 Late Archaic Settlement and Subsistence in the Tucson Basin. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Anthropology, University of Arizona, Tucson.Google Scholar
Rinaldo, J. 1992 Sedentary Agriculturalists or Mobile Hunter-Gatherers? Recent Evidence on the Late Archaic Occupation of the Northern Tucson Basin. Kiva 57: 291–314.Google Scholar
Russell, F. 1975 The Pima Indians. University of Arizona Press, Tucson. Originally published 1908, 26fh Annual Report, Bureau of American Ethnology, Smithsonian Institution. U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C. Google Scholar
Sayles, E. B. 1983 The Cochise Cultural Sequence in Southeastern Arizona. Anthropological Papers No. 42. University of Arizona Press, Tucson.Google Scholar
Sayles, E. B., and Antevs, E. 1941 The Cochise Culture. Medallion Papers No. 29. Gila Pueblo, Globe, Arizona.Google Scholar
Schiffer, M. B. 1992 Technological Perspectives on Behavioral Change. University of Arizona Press, Tucson.Google Scholar
Schiffer, M. B., and Skibo, J. M. 1987 Theory and Experiment in the Study of Technological Change. Current Anthropology 28: 595–622.Google Scholar
Shott, M. 1986 Technological Organization and Settlement Mobility: An Ethnographic Examination. Journal of Anthropological Research 42: 15–51.Google Scholar
Simpson, R. D. 1953 The Hopi Indians. Southwest Museum Leaflets 25.Google Scholar
Spier, L. 1933 Yuman Tribes of the Gila River. University of Chicago Press, Chicago.Google Scholar
Stephen, A. M. 1936 Hopi Journal of Alexander M. Stephen. edited by Parsons, E. C.. Columbia University Press, New York.Google Scholar
Stone, T. 1994 The Impact of Raw-Material Selection of Ground-Stone Manufacture and Use: An Example from the Phoenix Basin. American Antiquity 59: 680–694.Google Scholar
Underhill, R. M. 1979 Social Organization of the Papago Indians. Originally published 1939. Contributions to Anthropology Vol. 30. Columbia University, New York.Google Scholar
Vaughan, P.C. 1985 Use-Wear Analysis of Flaked Stone Tools. University of Arizona Press, Tucson.Google Scholar
Weatherwax, P. 1954 Indian Corn in Old America. Macmillan, New York.Google Scholar
Wheat, J. B. 1954 Crooked Ridge Village (Arizona W: 10: 15). Bulletin 25(3)/Social Science Bulletin No. 24. University of Arizona, Tucson.Google Scholar
Whiting, A. F. 1939 Ethnobotany of the Hopi. Museum of Northern Arizona Bulletin No. 15. Flagstaff.Google Scholar
Whittlesey, S. M. 1995 Mogollon, Hohokam, and O'otam: Rethinking the Early Formative Period in Southern Arizona. Kiva 60: 465–180.Google Scholar
Wills, W.H. 1988 Early Prehistoric Agriculture in the American Southwest. School of American Research Press, Santa Fe.Google Scholar
Wills, W. H., and Huckell, B. 1994 Economic Implications of Changing Land-Use Patterns in the Late Archaic. In Themes in Southwest Prehistory, edited by Gumerman, G.J., pp. 33–52. School of American Research Press, Santa Fe.Google Scholar
Woodbury, R. 1954 Prehistoric Stone Implements of Northeastern Arizona. Papers of the Peabody Museum of American Archaeology and Ethnology Vol. 34. Harvard University, Cambridge.Google Scholar
Wright, K. 1994 Ground-Stone Tools and Hunter-Gatherer Subsistence in Southwest Asia: Implications for the Transition to Farming. American Antiquity 52: 238–262.Google Scholar