ABSTRACT
Archaeologists have long been aware of the necessity to consider scale as they model settlement systems . Although there is no consensus on the particular spatial scales at which settlement studies might be investigated, there are common themes . In early work, Clarke ( 1 977) used the terms "micro", "semi-micro", and "macro" to refer to studies at the structure, within-site, and intersite levels . Butzer ( 1 982) used "micro" (within-structure ) and "semi-micro" (within-site in a limited or multiple-activity area) and added terms lor larger spatial areas. "Mesoscale" was used for within-site structure aggregation arcas and "macroscale" for intersite patterning related to environ mental features in or around a node of administrative, economic, or ceremonial purpose (Butzer 1 982 : 232-3) . Although there is some differencc in the terminology employed, both Clarke and Butzer emphasized patterning at the local level . More recently, the increase in regional settlement pattern studies has provoked renewed emphasis on the broader spatial patterni ng of settlements at both the regional and larger levels .
