Examining the formation histories of single-component prehistoric villages is difficult using only radiocarbon dating. This study investigates such a case with the added considerations of two relative dating techniques, artifact accumulation and fluoride dating, at the Guard site (12D29), an early (ca. AD 1000–1300) Fort Ancient/Mississippian village located in southeast Indiana. The goal was to assess the depositional history of the individual house basins and, if possible, to determine a relative sequence of construction within the village. The observed relationship between relative artifact frequencies and fluoride levels was statistically examined with the expected result being that fluoride concentrations and artifact frequencies are significantly correlated. Houses built initially contained lower relative artifact frequencies, whereas houses built more recently contained higher relative artifact frequencies. This pattern is further explored with artifact and fluoride distinctions in vertical stratigraphy, which show that some structures were slowly filled with midden trash, whereas others were more likely rapidly filled during the latter part of the village occupation, perhaps at the time of site abandonment. Overall, the results are very promising and consistent with the SunWatch site, the only other Fort Ancient culture site with a defined construction sequence, establishing a general pattern of village development in the study region.

Liebmann's (2017) essay on the relationship between Jemez Pueblo and the Valles Caldera of northern New Mexico seems to imply that the Jemez Pueblo had an exclusive relationship with the caldera, particularly Redondo Peak, and the major obsidian source Cerro del Medio (CDM). This is curious given that abundant obsidian provenance studies from the region exhibit equal to or nearly equal proportions of Cerro del Medio obsidian that are not considered ancestral to Jemez Pueblo. Liebmann's regional perspective based on landscape theory appears flawed by a lack of regionally specific data.

Shackley and Moore's Comment misrepresents the focus of my 2017 article, which is not “regional” in nature but rather attempts a focused study of one community's relationship with the Valles Caldera; furthermore, the vast majority of the data they present do not correspond temporally with my study.