By Mike Smith, with comments from the peanut gallery by Angela Huster
After a rather involved set of phone conversations and emails among various project members trying to establish the frequency of green obsidian at the site during each phase, we realized that half our problem was the we were working with different samples. We had defined the Domestic Context Sample of lots strongly associated with dated houses several years ago, but any analyses that wanted to work with a larger sample were a free-for-all.
Based on Mike's previous projects in Morelos, we defined five samples based on their value for the analysis
of domestic artifacts and conditions. These run from the Domestic Context
Sample, (now called Domestic Sample 1, or DS-1), which consists only of well-dated
midden deposits, to DS-5, which is the entire sample of all excavated contexts
at the site. In addition there are other samples of lots that make sense for
particular analyses or materials. Most of these samples are nested; e.g., all
other samples include DS-1, and DS-5 includes all other samples. Samples DS-3
and DS-4 intersect in a non-nesting fashion, however.
DS-1
(the Domestic Context Sample). 178
lots.
This sample consists of well-dated midden
deposits associated with houses. It can be subdivided into domestic components;
that is, deposits from a single phase in a single unit. It was designed to
provide a robust sample of materials from contexts with abundant artifacts for
optimal quantification. This sample is used for:
Household comparisons of ceramic type
frequencies.
·
Ceramic type frequencies for the Aguas
Celestiales chapter
It is also the source of sub-samples for particular technical analyses, including:
Ceramic attribute recording
·
Obsidian source samples
·
Ceramic petrographic samples
·
Angela’s NAA samples
DS-2
(the Extended Domestic Context Sample).
340 lots.
This
sample extends the domestic context sample to include other lots dating to the
same phases at individual units. Units without representation in the domestic
context sample are not included in DS-2. The advantage of a larger sample is
offset by the inclusion of contexts such as fill and colluvial overburden whose
association with the occupation of a house is less secure. This is used for:
·
Interhousehold comparisons of rarer items in
Angela’s dissertation analyses – ground stone, copper, jewelry, whorls, and
molds
DS-3
(the all-Phased sample) 1,146 lots.
This
sample consists of all lots phased to a particular period. It includes the
transitional or uncertain phases (3, 5, and 44*) and phase 1 (pre-Postclassic).
This is a much larger sample than DS-1 or DS-2, and its value lies in the fact
that it includes the maximal number of lots that can be phased. Many of the
lots have not had their ceramics classified; they are phased through
stratigraphic position or associations with lots dated from their classified
ceramics and/or radiocarbon dates. Its disdvantage is the inclusion of many
lots whose direct association with the house occupation of each unit is more
tenuous (fill, overburden, etc.). Its primary use is for comparing frequencies
of rare artifacts. It is used for:
·
Rare artifact types by phase for the general
project
DS-4
(the Classified Sample) 664 lots.
This
is the sample of lots whose ceramics have been classified. It has two related
disadvantages compared to sample DS-2: many of the lots have not been phased;
and many of the lots have only a few sherds. It is not used in any analyses.
DS-5 (all Excavated Lots). 1,668 lots.
This
is the total number of lots that were excavated. It includes many tiny lots
from Alex’s soil sampling, lots from architectural excavations, and other small
lots whose value for artifact analysis is minimal. It’s primary use is to
generate inventories of all excavated artifacts of a given type, irrespective
of phasing or quality of context. This is useful for descriptive purposes
(i.e., we want to describe all of the figurines, not just the ones that fall
into a more restricted sample), but not for making comparisons among units or parts
of the site.
The following diagram shows the relationship among these samples.
If anyone needs to know which samples
their data fall into, please contact Angela.
