CHAPTER 6 Pot Conveyance, Design Characteristics, and Precontact Adaptations to Arid Envi ronments Jelmer W. Eerkens All human societies convey goods across the landscape. As discussed by Hughes (this volume), we know from ethnographic and his- torical studies that people invest considerable time and effort into moving goods and t hat the reasons they do so vary greatly. Convey- ance varies along several dimensions including space, time, technology, and social context. For example, some conveyance takes place wit hin families across short spatial distances, com- monly referred to as “ sharing, ” while other con- veyance crosses long distances in state-level so- cieties between individuals who may not even know one another, commonly called “transport” or “ trade. ” Considerable theorizing on the part of anthropologists and others has generated a ro- bust literature on conveyance to help tease apart some of these factors (e.g., Axelrod 1984; Boyd and Richerson 1992; Davis 1973; Gregory 1982; Gurven 2004; Mauss 1990; Polanyi 1968; Sahlins 1972; Smith 1937; Winterhalder 1986, 1997; Yengoyan 1968). Archaeologists have developed sophisticated methods to detect the movement of goods in the record, often using geochemical methods with colleagues in geology, chemistry, and physics. Through this work we know that ancient societies conveyed a range of materials, including food, raw materials to produce craft items, and fin- ished items themselves. We have documented both long-distance (e.g., Glascock 2002) and intracommunity movement of goods (e.g., Enloe 2003) and have assembled vast databases t hat document relative changes in the direction and intensity of the movement of goods. As Hughes (this volume) alludes to, assign- ing behavioral meaning to such patterns, such as trade vs. direct access, is difficult. We need better theoretical contexts for understanding the social conditions that prompt conveyance in different cases and middle-range theory that predicts how such conveyance manifests itself in the archaeo- logical record. Indeed, many of the chapters in this book make a substantial contribution toward that end. This essay attempts to do so as well, but rather than trying to tease apart direct access vs. trade or exchange, the focus is on conveyance as an indicator of interregional “interaction ” and the factors that motivate such interaction. I build on a model described by Earle (1994) and generate hypotheses regarding the form of pots in the southwestern Great Basin moved under various conditions. I focus specifically on subsistence, technological, and political motivations for con- veying goods. In the end, I arrive at hypotheses about whether those pots were traded or directly accessed. 135