CHAPTERS IN THE PREHISTORY OF EASTERN ARIZONA, I PAUL S. MARTIN JOHN B. RINALDO WILLIAM A. LONGACRE CONSTANCE CRONIN LESLIE G, FREEMAN, JR. JAMES SCHOENWETTER FIELDIANA: ANTHROPOLOGY VOLUME 53 Published by CHICAGO NATURAL HISTORY MUSEUM SEPTEMBER 19, 1962 ne nae — ~ y : on ae Cr in a es wihins cree _ a 7 > = > ea ee * a om E - a c - - a 7 e a ~ ~_ => = ~ 4 ‘ “ae x ~ J i) & FIELDIANA: ANTHROPOLOGY A Continuation of the ANTHROPOLOGICAL SERIES of FIELD MUSEUM OF NATURAL HISTORY VOLUME 53 IB Te EDUCATION CHICAGO NATURAL HISTORY MUSEUM CHICAGO, U.S.A. 1962 Digitized by the Internet Archive in 2011 with funding from Biodiversity Heritage Library http://www. archive.org/details/fieldiana531962fiel CHAPTERS IN THE PREHISTORY OF EASTERN ARIZONA, I COLORADO @ACKMEN CORTEZ J CHIN LEE@ \ we ARIZONA @ GALLUP eFLAGBTAFF NEW MEXICO WINSLOW® TABLE ROCK PUEBLO s CONCHO CHILCOTT SITES— =f coesins SITE 1957 gi ae @ QUEMADO SHOW Low's ea TUMBLEWEED CANYON MINERAL CREEK SITE ee a HOOPER RANCH PUEBLO THODE SITE | @CASA GRANDE @SILVER CiTy MEXICO MAP SHOWING EASTERN ARIZONA AND WESTERN NEW MEXICO CHAPTERS IN THE PREHISTORY OF EASTERN ARIZONA, I PAUL S. MARTIN JOHN B. RINALDO WILLIAM A. LONGACRE CONSTANCE CRONIN LESLIE G. FREEMAN, JR. JAMES SCHOENWETTER FIELDIANA: ANTHROPOLOGY VOLUME 53 Published by CHICAGO NATURAL HISTORY MUSEUM SEPTEMBER 19, 1962 Edited by Lrtu1an A. Ross Library of Congress Catalog Card Number: 62-21153 PRINTED IN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA BY CHICAGO NATURAL HISTORY MUSEUM PRESS Preface Field Season of 1960 The field research of the 1960 season was remarkably interesting. Several projects were undertaken, the results of which are described in this report. The National Science Foundation extended financial aid (Grant No. G-13039) to the expedition and this permitted us to carry on an archaeological] reconnaissance; to embark on a palaeo-ecological inquiry by means of pollen analysis; and to dig a pre-ceramic site (Tumbleweed Canyon Site) of pithouses. These ventures could not have been under- taken without this aid. In addition, with Museum funds, five other sites were excavated, making, with the pre-pottery village, a total of six. These are (in alpha- betical order): 1. Chilcott Sites (3), near Mesa Redondo and about seven miles southwest of Concho, Arizona (Sec. 5, Twp. 11 N., R. 25 E., G. and S.R.M.). 2. Goesling Site, located about two miles east of St. Johns, Arizona, and overlooking the valley of the Little Colorado River (NE 4, Sec. 2, Twp. 12 N., R. 28 E., G. and S.R.M.). 3. The Great Kiva, Hooper Ranch Pueblo (see Martin, Rinaldo and Longacre, 1961), near Springerville, Arizona, on the banks of the present channel of the Little Colorado River (NE 14, SW 4, Sec. 8, Twp. 9 N., R. 29 E., G. and S.R.M.). 4. Rim Valley Pueblo, on the Hooper Ranch, situated high up on the edge of a mesa overlooking the valley of the Little Colorado River and the Hooper Ranch Pueblo (SE 144, NE 4, Sec. 18, Twp. 9N., R. 29 E., G. and S.R.M.). 5. Thode Site, on the west bank of the east fork of Mineral Creek, near Highway 60 (SW \%4, NE \, Sec. 13, Twp. 10 N., R. 25 E., G. and S.R.M.). 6. Tumbleweed Canyon Site, on the west bank of the Little Colorado River, about halfway between St. Johns and Springerville, Arizona, far from a highway; high up on an “island”? mesa of lava, overlooking 3 4 PREFACE Lyman Dam Reservoir (NE 14, SE 4, Sec. 17, Twp. 11 N., R. 28 E., G. and S.R.M.). Financial aid supplied by funds from the National Science Foundation. The sites are on ranches owned by: 1. Mr. D. Chilcott, managed by Mr. Frank Stradling, Concho, Arizona. 2. Mr. Al. H. Goesling, St. Johns, Arizona. 3 and 4. Mr. Rob Hooper, Springerville, Arizona. 5. Mr. Earl Thode, Vernon, Arizona. 6. Mr. Pacer Wiltbank, Eagar, Arizona. I have listed these public-spirited gentlemen separately so that their names will stand forth prominently and everyone will recognize their contribution to archaeological research. I hope more will follow their example. It is a pleasure to record here the thanks of the Museum and of the members of the expedition and to state that our goals have been greatly advanced by their unselfish help. We were permitted to dig without hindrance and to bring back to the Museum, for research and exhibition purposes, all of the specimens recovered. Many thousands of people will benefit directly and indirectly from this arrangement and will derive educational and cultural stimulation as well as satis- faction of a common curiosity about man’s past. In addition, I want especially to thank the members of the expedition for the aid that they rendered in digging, in processing and cataloging artifacts, in mending and restoring pottery, in housekeeping and in maintaining an enviable record of spontaneity, of good will and co- operation, of cheerfulness, of harmony, and of zest for all phases of the work, whether glamorous or dull: Mr. William Alschuler, Miss Ellen Chase, Mr. David Herod, Mr. Gardner Lane, Mr. William A. Longacre, Mrs. Martha Perry, Mr. Pat Romane, Mrs. John B. Rinaldo, Mr. John Saul, Mr. Roland Strassburger, and Mr. John Wells. Assisting also were several neighbors and helpers of other seasons: Mr. Wilfred Barreras, Mr. Joe Goodman, Mr. Genaro Nuarez, Mr. Gilbert Padilla and Mr. Kenneth Penrod. The palynological project was a new venture for us and was financed entirely by the grant from the National Science Foundation. Mr. James Schoenwetter was in charge of this project and has written an excellent - report that appears in this volume. I find it suggestive and informative. Without the advice of and the frequent consultations with Terah L. Smiley and Paul S. Martin of the Geochronology Laboratories of the University of Arizona, Schoenwetter’s objectives could not have been attained. PREFACE 5 The archaeological reconnaissance, made possible by a grant from the National Science Foundation, was undertaken by Mr. Longacre. It was successfully accomplished because of Mr. Longacre’s skill in estab- lishing cordial rapport with neighboring ranchers, some of whom were hostile due to past actions of prospectors. In the preliminary work, Mr. Longacre was given admirable assistance by Mr. Leigh Richey of St. Johns, Arizona. I also take pleasure in thanking for their assistance: Mrs. Elizabeth Brawley, St. Johns; Mr. and Mrs. Wayne Brinkerhoff, Snowflake; Mr. and Mrs. J. R. Carter, Snowflake; Mr. Vernon Frazier, Snowflake; Mr. and Mrs. Jake Kittle, Show Low; Mr. and Mrs. John D. Leverton, Concho; Mrs. Leola Mineer, St. Johns; Mr. Verl Rhoton, Lakeside; Mrs. Merle Thomas, Concho; Mr. and Mrs. Harvey Wilhelm, Snowflake; Mr. and Mrs. Ira Willis and Mr. Kelley Willis, Snowflake; Mr. Ozie Wilson, Pinetop; and Mr. and Mrs. Richard Wilson, Pinetop. Our work is slowly becoming known in the Vernon area and more and more people are beginning to respect archaeology as opposed to pot-hunting. Last summer we held an open house one Sunday afternoon to show our friends how we wash and classify pottery; how we restore smashed and incomplete pottery (and demonstrate that we recover mostly sherds and broken pots—rarely a whole one); what we recover in the way of artifacts and how we catalogue them; how we record architectural details; and what we ‘“‘do”’ with these data. More than a hundred people came, in spite of one of the heaviest rainfalls of the summer. Analyzing and preparing our data for publication are large tasks that have to be wedged into a crowded Museum schedule. Realizing that I alone could not do full justice to the analysis of the pottery that we recovered, I enlisted the help of Mr. Walter Boyer, sometime artist in the Department of Anthropology, and of two advanced student- assistants from the Department of Anthropology of the University of Chicago, Miss Constance Cronin and Mr. Leslie Freeman. The possible origin of a pottery type called Snowflake Black-on- White—as yet really not too well known and not described—has been examined by Miss Cronin and Mr. Boyer. The examination pursued two trails: one admittedly subjective; and the other (hopefully) ‘‘objective.” I placed approximately 2500 black-on-white painted (decorated) sherds from five sites at the disposal of Miss Cronin. These sherds represented several pottery types ranging in time from about a.p. 750 to about 1200. Miss Cronin (assisted in the preliminary stages of the study by Mr. Boyer) grouped the sherds into lots bearing identical or similar elements 6 PREFACE of designs, but without regard to type, site, or chronology; for example, all sherds bearing squiggly hatch, or ticked lines or pendent triangles were put into separate piles and then counted. Then she re-sorted the same sherds by site, by type, and by chronology and then separated these groups into lots bearing similar or identical elements of design. These were counted, percentages derived, and graphs drawn. Thus the study was “‘quantified.”” Miss Cronin’s report is included in this volume. The following civic-minded and generous persons have thought well enough of our work to contribute financially to the expedition: Mr. C. E. Gurley, Gallup, New Mexico; Mr. and Mrs. Maxwell Hahn, Scars- dale, New York; Dr. Charles W. Keney, Gallup, New Mexico; and Mr. Judd Sackheim, Chicago. The gifts of these thoughtful people reach far beyond the materialistic side of things; they reach into our hearts and cheer us. I hope the results of the expedition, embodied in this report, will bring them pleasure. Our immediate neighbors in Vernon continued to help us in manifold ways and to be enthusiastic about our work. I am happy to thank Mr. and Mrs. Tom Cox, Mr. and Mrs. Donald Goodman, Mr. and Mrs. Charles Gillespie, Mr. and Mrs. Leon Gillespie, Mr. and Mrs. Milton Gillespie, Mr. and Mrs. Cecil Naegle, Mr. and Mrs. Leonard Penrod, Kenneth Penrod, Mr. and Mrs. Floyd Penrod, Mr. and Mrs. Claude Phipps, and Mr. and Mrs. Eben Whiting for all favors, large and small. Miss Lillian Ross, Associate Editor of Scientific Publications, has earned our gratitude for help in seeing this report through the press and for catching errors of omission and commission. Mr. Bertram J. Woodland, Associate Curator, Petrology, identified the materials from which the stone artifacts were made; Dr. Albert Forslev, sometime Associate Curator, Mineralogy, and now on the staff of the College of William and Mary in Norfolk, Virginia, made mineral- ogical analyses of two samples of clay; and Dr. Fritz Haas, Curator Emeritus, Lower Invertebrates, checked the shell specimens. We are grateful to these gentlemen for their help. Dr. Frederick J. Dockstader, Dr. Fred Eggan, Mr. Byron Harvey III, and Mrs. Marjorie F. Lambert were kind enough to examine photographs and data of our sacred stone image and to aid us in our attempts to identify it. We appreciate their assistance. Mrs. Agnes McNary Fennell, my secretary, and Miss Lillian Novak typed the manuscript and tables and deserve great thanks for their work. Mrs. Fennell also made the index. Again it is my pleasure and privilege to thank the administration for its support of the Vernon project. President Stanley Field, Dr. Clifford C. PREFACE i Gregg, Director, and our Board of Trustees once more provided us with funds for the expedition. I hope they will derive as much pleasure and satisfaction from the results of our work as I do in expressing my appreciation and indebtedness to them for their sustained interest and assistance. PAUL S. MARTIN January 1, 1961 List of ILLUSTRATIONS . . Contents I. ARCHITECTURAL DETAILS. . Tumbleweed Canyon Site House A . Shape . Walls Floor Firepit. . Lei aaeak ty ae Postholes . Roof re: Milling Area . . General Comments House B . Shape . Walls Floor Firepit . Pits = Postholes. . Roof : General Comments House D. . Shape. . Walls Floor Firepit . Postholes . Roof : Milling Area . General Comments Storage Pits(?) Goesling Site . Shape . Walls Floors . Firepits Entrance . Pit ay Postholes . PAGE 15 11) 19 19 19 19 19 19 ils 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 22 22 22 22 22 22 22 22 23 23 25 25 25 25 25 25 26 26 26 28 28 28 29 29 10 CONTENTS Roof : General Comments Chilcott Sites . Chilcott Site 1 Number of Rooms Dimensions of Rooms Walls Floors . Firepits Postholes Ventilator Roof General epacde Chilcott Sites 2 and 3 Number of Structures Walls Floors . Firepit Postholes Roof Shape . Thode Site . ; Number of Rooms Walls Floor Firepit . Entrances Pitse. Postholes . Roof General Gonieieare Rim Valley Pueblo : Arrangement of Pueblo Bare ; Number of Rooms Dimensions of Rooms Walls : Ventilators and Niches: Floors . Firepits f Ladder pits(?) Vault Bin Ceiling General Catimnenta The Great Kiva, Hooper Ranch Pueblo Shape . Dimensions . Walls Pictographs PAGE 29 29 29 32 32 a2 32 33 34 34 36 37 37 aii ai ai 37 ai By, 37 iyi 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 43 43 43 43 46 48 48 48 48 48 50 50 53 53 53 53 54 CONTENTS Niche . Recessed Posts Floor Bint a) Firepit . Deflector . Vaults . Crypt Pits: Ramp Pniyway Posts and Postholes Roof Comparisons ; Summary of Secular Aicuitestine II. Some CONVERGENCES AND CONTINUITIES The Great Kiva . ‘ee: The Sacred Stone Image . III. Porrery. eae General Remarks . ans Whole or Restorable Pots ee eer Relative Popularity of Several of the Significant Pane Boden ie - IV. SrarTisTIcCAL ANALYSIS OF PAINTED POTTERY TyPEsS FROM UPPER LITTLE CoLoRADO DRAINAGE Introduction : Choice of Materials : Some Methodological anedecenone : Basic Procedure . Inter-Site Seriation Interpretation Intra-Site Seriations . Goesling Site . ‘ Rhoton and Thode Sites ; Chilcott Site Rim Valley Pueblo Hooper Ranch Pueblo . Conclusions V. ANALYsIs OF PoTTERY DeEsIGN ELEMENTS Sorting. . Analysis . Conclusions. ; : Kiatuthlanna ee -on- -White 3 Red Mesa Black-on-White Snowflake Black-on-White VI. ARTIFACTS Introduction . Tools Used in Preparation and Storaze of Food . Manos . Rubbing Saas’ 102 oP RLOS . 106 107 107 109 109 110 115 115 115 116 119 12 CONTENTS PAGE Pestles.. g. $c a % es ee Gat eae Re, Sg Se ge Mietates’ <> = sug Fal com oe OE RIS ie nS Small Metate- like Grindine tones fea x sae Mortars <3 of nee car ee Ca et Pot Covers. she qh - 8 So ee ee Plaimmerstonés: =. 500s 1s) fee ee 8 eS we cece Soe jeter IESE gg Rr es se Ay HS Tools Used in pone: elias eerie ec Tools Used-in Construction of Houses . =... 5 <*. . 5% =) eee We ee ee he a ee ee een Rid se ets as bac tey ed) Te NS oc Axe-Grinding Slabs 5 ea te od Ah ca Me Ag Ste oly Ge Roe Choppers . . Nad 24 Caan Oh ‘Tools and ice mene aed in iaasie — Warts ok eae Projectile, Points” «©... ke. 46> Sy ee oO Summary 2060 is ge Oe lo da pcg ee ey ee ag VII. ARCHAEOLOGICAL RECONNAISSANCE IN EASTERN ARIZONA ..... . . 148 Introdwetion! (0 oe. Mn eh a et ee Le Organizations 25 ve. ce, veh of wee stoi sO, den, Pema ah) -v got Field Procedure. .. . of eA go eo Temporal-Spatial Gbaipation of Surveyed Resion 5 hs it ee eee Site*Liocations: =. 3s. maw “eas 6) bora Oe eee Le GeneraliSummary:. ¢.. 7... % ace Ge ee Gonelusions#...)6 ss Be sy ee a, ee ed ee CO VIII. Potten ANAtysis or EIGHTEEN ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITES IN ARIZONA AND INE W, MEEXIGO?.:) cue! te dan Os Pek. aes a eee Acknowledgments 2.) 6: a. 0k: oh We acl Ee aces Untroduchion *.21 45) s¢- a; Ao Sowers, oa: ee ee LS CONTENTS 13 PAGE Methodscand Eechmiques® Ur e.4 met sos ere se ss Ss ae oe LO fSLZuaahoubUOV=E® outa” Go wes Oya & a0) SB Sey ine sa Lon ace Dama eDeMetesae ame piarseemane! (27/0) Pea COM ge area sere ye eRe We wy St Ug At, wal as ie ne a ea ee LL JAWALVSISN st) cue ee on arnt Pome Mees Gy Common Names of Pollen Te A Beales aes? Baha cay hee LS Resulister erties Vics ee RY eee te oh casi aukents! cae et aoULeE AGEOVONSLLES Ee cman ee +: EPC anny Te Pee MeRB ae, co tia Aaah ay vey SINE Reach sitesien siecs ss Sy ths GM tay eerste) Be tlwe eites woe wion Seth. ey ay eenkehe Pithouse Village Sites PoE RA. aetna. Pet tt =, ome eAlT8 IRUGDIOUSIEES Ia ps gales hips ES gon meet ieo) ue nies sy weed a oe me SL Surface Samples: gs. by eeee acts) sip eee. cared cl Sere ee tee lB Conclusions .. . Re WORN ses, Somen se fa, he oente es BIA Interpretations and Tnferendes Me eG eee eh tet lity a os ee Ol Climatic Change .. . eee er LOM The Nature of Pre- Being Ragteoteeoral Gacdiiens Pet oporme se lols: Relationship of Prehistoric Environments to Prehistory . . .. . . 198 Appendix A: sample Collection’ Technique .< . : s+). « «+ = » 206 Appendix B: Pollen Extraction Technique ........... . 207 IX. SumMAaRyY .. . Set Ok Oe ca Re RES ES ser, ees 210 Tumbleweed Cau ait Site eae aA to ot hein ao ey elo Goeslincssitera me re) oe te ee een Oe be ad BAG 212 OMI COTASILCS ie en NRO, a Re Peete AP alee 5) ens ak Gh we eke a ea penile MORE Sic at pens Se Pe he Pee Ie Rr. See eT a eh 2 Rim Valley Pueblo ... . CEE eet ee Gor ao, oe Sheet eh “alae Pa Great Kiva, Hooper Ranch Pueblo Ss Rae eke Ec RCRA en, Stes ge ae I) Settlement Patterns .. . Eat On Geese, tte ee ey Sake os ee ReaD Tumbleweed Canyon Site SPP Ser iets ee os hugh Pay eae ke Pa etee se eat tian i but is) su any, de Sekar Giese COHMGGEE SULCS ar ohare cue cna ale cad opel botanic! ct aeeeuees LO Sihodewitesravien me) em rn Che) i565) 4, oe Sim Uetaes er ms ae we CULE, Rim Valley Pueblo ... . Ne aC oe Lee cin Ie ON ae Cee al ss Great Kiva, Hooper Ranch Puchla, eS a ees Oke 220 Ainalystsior blements Of cottery WOGSIPMe sos) a se we ee eee Arcuaeclesical Meroumdisgance . + ; bed eK hed ou Peo ee 7 =e 5S ae . ae mete i 7 a =" ad eS 7 my Aeateis’. eae tge Wei rE =), eee aes i - hcl List of Illustrations Map showing eastern Arizona and western New Mexico Frontispiece Text Figures PAGE 1. Panoramic view of Tumbleweed Canyon Site and mesa from across the canyon 20 2. Sketch map of Tumbleweed Canyon Site and environs oe 21 House A, Tumbleweed Canyon aks aca manos, broken metates, and roof beam fragments . : i Bact sine sole ote es Pare ; 22 4. Plans and sections of houses and pits, Tumbleweed Canyon Site 23 5. Milling area, House A, Tumbleweed Canyon Site, showing manos and broken metates CORP inas Akrcen hepa ts PT Rahat for cteake bra, | LLY a 24 6. House B, Tumbleweed Canyon se see curb around edge of house and firepit ; use Su rons States a, oe : 24 7. House D, Tumbleweed Canyon Site, showing broken metate fragments near center of house and rocks piled up as walls around edge of house . se 25 8. Pithouse A, Goesling Site, showing postholes, firepit in center and southern recess in background . SOE a, ETRE BO RPA het NSS 26 9. Plans and sections of Pithouses A and B, Goesling Site Ai, 10. Veneer masonry which reinforced north wall of Pithouse A, Goesling Site . 28 11. Pithouse B, Goesling Site, showing shallow pit in northeast corner and quad- rangular arrangement of postholes . Sat RN ie eae Petes. 20 12. Rooms 1 and 5 in foreground and Structure 2 in background, Chilcott Site 1, showing alignment of postholes in rooms, and relationship of rooms with masonry walls to larger structure 30 13. Plans and sections of Chilcott Site 1 31 14. Rooms 3 and 4, Chilcott Site 1, showing reduction in entryway . 32 15. Detail of firepit, deflector, ventilator opening and damper slab, Room 4, Chilcott Site 1 “A tae eo eins tar Pe ak pe er meer Fe a sao 16. View of Room 1, Chilcott Site 2, showing uneven floor and area of burned post and rocks near center of structure ; : 34 17. Plans and sections of Chilcott Site 2 (left) and Site 3 3 (right) : ck ah. 18. Room 1, Chilcott Site 3, SORE: basalt boulder walls and general se i of structure . ‘ i Eee a ist rate Rees tepl oko Se aS | 19. Room 2, Chilcott Site 3, oie rectangular firepit 38 20. Thode Site . ah Tad 38 21. Plan and sections of Thode Site . 39 22. Rim Valley Pueblo, looking south . 41 23. Plan and sections of Rim Valley Pueblo 42 24. Outer wall of Room I, Rim Valley Pueblo 43 15 LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS PAGE Rectangular doorway in north wall of Room G, Rim Valley Pueblo 44 Oval ventilator in south wall of Room C, Rim Valley Pueblo 45 Niche in north wall of Room A, Rim Valley Pueblo Ae 46 Ring slab from Room C, Rim Valley Pueblo, possibly frame for vent 47 Flour receptacles and corner bin in southeast corner of Room B, Rim Valley Pueblo . 47 Firepit, ladder-pit, ventilator, and ane slab, Room A, Rim sie Pueblo 49 Room C, Rim Valley Pueblo, with Room B at left and Room H at right . 50 Hooper Ranch Pueblo, showing Great Kiva in foreground and dwelling rooms in background Pre) Plan and sections of Great Kiva and adjacent rooms at Hooper Ranch Pueblo 52 Great Kiva, Hooper Ranch Pueblo, from the west. Ramp entryway and deflector in background; postholes and vaults in foreground . te Detail of masonry in face of bench on north side of Great Kiva, Hooper Ranch Pueblo 54 Detail of niche in face of bench on south side of Great Kiva, Hooper Ranch Pueblo . me hanks 55 Deflector, Great Kiva, Hooper Ranch Pueblo, viewed from ramp entryway . 56 South vault, Great Kiva, Hooper Ranch Pueblo . 56 Ramp entryway, Great Kiva, Hooper Ranch Pueblo, showing ‘‘vestibule”’ area and narrower portion beyond; deflector slab in foreground 57 View through ring slab cover of crypt, Great Kiva, monet Ranch Pueblo, showing stone image and miniature jar . : os hg ie) ee OS Crypt in Great Kiva, Hooper Ranch Pueblo, with covers removed, showing construction detail of interior and objects in position . aye) Painted sacred stone image, Great Kiva, Hooper Ranch Pueblo 70 Snowflake Black-on-White pottery . 78 Brown indented corrugated pottery . 7) McDonald Corrugated bowl wf. Schematic illustration of relative similarity between samples of pottery. (a) Chilcott Sites; (6) Rim anes Pueblo; ) See Ranch Pueblo; and (d) site totals . = 91 Percentages of three pottery types by I levels at Goesling Site . 92 ‘Trends in oe a er a oS eo from Chilcott Sites and Rim Valley Pueblo . . er ho eye a dee cl AM A cs BOT Trends in painted pottery types: — from sae Ranch Pueblo . 101 One-hand manos, Tumbleweed Canyon Site : Bali Intermediate and late ees of manos, Rim ue Pucblo, Thode Site, Chil- cott Site 1 ; : See = ks Rubbing stones, miscellaneous types, Gosling Site, Thode Site, Rim Valley Pueblo, Hooper Ranch Pueblo Seb: ride 120 Pestles, miscellaneous types, and pee re Tumbleweed ee Site, Rim Valley Pueblo : : 121 Metates: left specimen basin type, center specimen with trough open at one end only, right specimen with through trough . 123 Mortar, Thode Site . 2 a5 Pe PNanaAYN = LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS 17 PAGE Maul, axe and pot cover, Rim Valley Pueblo, Hooper Ranch Pueblo . . . 127 Medicine cylinders and pot polishing stones, Hooper Ranch Pueblo, Rim Walleye OG OeS Ie IEC ie saad eek yt crete RS, beg ecek. ce ce dar pcan) Wee Axe-grinding slab, Hooper Ranch Pueblo... . . Nee <1 Choppers and large scraper, Tumbleweed eanarine Site, Rim Valley Pueblo, Chilcott Site 1, Goesling Site . ... 131 Projectile points, miscellaneous types. . . . De eR ey 1hS)>. Blades, Tumbleweed Canyon Site, Hooper Ranch Pueblo. ...... . 134 Abrading stones, arrow-shaft tool and smooth saw, Hooper Ranch Pueblo . 135 Flake knives and small scrapers, Tumbleweed chiles iaig Chilcott Site 1, Goesling Site, Hooper Ranch Pueblo... . . = ay, Drills, punches, saws and blades, Soe Ranch Pueblo, Goesting site, Chil- cott Site 1, Rim Valley Pachle k! , 138 Bone awls, incised bone fragment, bodkin tip and ring Pitesay eeutnag Site, Rim Valley Pueblo, Hooper Ranch Pueblo, Thode Site .... . 141 Spindle whorls, worked sherds and miniature jar, Chilcott Site 1, Goesling Site, looper mance buebloy ese 04 4: = Bee al ce ieee Me ae Pendants, bracelet fragments, and ring fragment, Goesling Site, Hooper ReeaeTE LE pee een Ye ees eG, ae Ge inet a hgedeeey ey eka Map showing area of archaeological survey, east-central Arizona. . . . . 149 Projectiio pomits fromopre-potiery sites 2405. 2s ee kd ee TS Misceliadcous tools from pre-pottery sites’... . 2 i.) ee Se TB Scrapers and utilized flakes from pre-pottery sites . . ........ . 159 Gerapen Wore peepatrrmutes oor. a ee eS eee ye TOO Large bifacially percussion-flaked scrapers/choppers from pre-pottery sites . 161 Choppers and manos from pre-pottery sites .........:. «4+ + 162 Pollen diagrams of archaeological sites in Vernon, Arizona, area . facing page 168 Analyses of three samples of pollen from modern surface and pollen diagrams of two archaeological sites in Pine Lawn, New Mexico, area. . facing page 172 Important palynological features of samples of pollen from occupation levels at archaeological sites in Vernon, Arizona, area. .......... 175 Samples of pollen from modern surface at various elevations in Vernon, Ari- ilig Hine Roce ty Es Gy Be See Su oy Mata plik tee haan Oe me A Ser ane en BPs LY f° List of Tables iin Ge eer seocrearer mee Pe FSW. Say eRe ate eee hs at ST aE OLSEN Cat Cat COT a ECR ine bec eh,. eee te ia Skog) Ole ei ie ebay Re Cm Or MURR CCIE MRE ee aes we ee A tm ee Se Totals of sherds, Rim Valley Pueblo... . . daca We Eig et olay Are Totals of sherds, Great Kiva, Hooper Ranch Pueblo ....... . . 85, 8% Sample size of sherds and final matrix for inter-site seriation. . . . . . . 93 Sample size of sherds from Goesling Site ..... 5 .+ +s «se «+ +) OF Sample size of sherds and final matrix, Chilcott Site .......... 95 Sample size of sherds and final matrix, Rim Valley Pueblo... . . . . 98 LIST OF TABLES PAGE Sample size of sherds and final matrix, Hooper Ranch Pueblo . . . . . . 100 Percentages of given types by design elements at given sites . . . . . 112,113 Brainerd-Robinson ratios, showing similarity in single types at sites of different horizons) 4.4. 2. = Seale “A ee) ae i Brainerd-Robinson ratios, showing similarity in pottery types at single sites . 114 Site locations; pre=-pottery.| Groupee 2a) en sree ret Sitewocations) Plain Ware, Group) lilies se eee ci eee Site locations, early black-on-whites, Group EIT = = 32. =] 2. 2) see Site locations, Reserve-Snowflake Black-on-White, Group IV... . . . 153 Site locations, Tularosa Black-on-White, Group V .......... .. 154 Sitelocations,;ZuniGlazes Group) Vilee. 5) s es eee een Summary of locational preferences for entire surveyed area . .... . . 154 Comparison of pollen chronologies from southern Arizona and from eastern Arizona andswesterns News VlexiGOl smn o) ule Ai nen enn ae I. Architectural Details By Joun B. Rinatpo Associate Curator, Department of Anthropology Chicago Natural History Museum TUMBLEWEED CANYON SITE The Tumbleweed Canyon site is located in east-central Arizona ten or eleven miles southeast of St. Johns and sixteen miles northwest of Springerville (Sec. 17, Twp. 11 N., R. 28 E., G. and S.R.M.). It is situated on a small mesa just below the west rim of the Little Colorado River valley (figs. 1, 2) and overlooks Lyman Reservoir. The sides of the mesa are precipitous cliffs and the entire mass of rock which forms the tableland appears to have split off from the higher rim rock to the west. This geological fault forms a small canyon about 90 feet deep and 150 feet wide. The canyon received its name from the masses of tumbleweed that drift up the slope of the west wall. On top of the mesa were several depressions, some, in a centrally located group, outlined with basalt boulders. At either end of the oval- shaped mesa double lines of basalt boulders are piled up in what were probably walls, and other wall-like structures appear along the edge of the mesa wherever the rock talus affords a possible means of access. Numerous stone tools were found on the surface but not a single potsherd. House A (Figures 3 and 4) Shape.—Roughly circular; greatest diameter, 5.4 meters. Walls.—Basalt boulders and gravelly light gray earth. Floor.—Gravelly light gray earth; uneven, with rocks protruding through the surface; depth below present ground level, 20 to 45 cm. Firepit.—Roughly circular; sides and floor were of gravelly earth; diameter, 30 cm.; depth, 10 cm. Pit.—Shallow, oval; sides and floor were of light-colored clay; con- tents, rocks; length, 42 cm.; width, 27 cm. 19 20 PREHISTORY OF EASTERN ARIZONA, I Fic. 1. Panoramic view of Tumbleweed Canyon Site and mesa from across the canyon; looking north. Postholes—Were spaced at irregular intervals around the edge of the house; 18 in number; average diameter, 20 cm.; average depth, 17 cm. Roof.—Heavy roof timbers radiated from a point near the center of the house toward the edge of the house and toward the burned butts of posts; a layer of brush was built up on top of the rafters (thick charcoal layer), then a layer of clay. Milling Area (fig. 5).—A cluster of metate fragments and manos was found near the firepit. General Comments.——This house burned. An area on the south side between some of the wall rocks appears to have been an entrance. House B (Figures 4 and 6) Shape-—Roughly “‘D” shape with flat side of ‘‘D”’ on south; greatest inside diameter, 2.1 meters. Walls.—Light gray gravelly earth for three walls; basalt boulders were piled up on the north side; the earthen walls sloped steeply, the north wall was Closer to vertical; a lip or curb was situated at the top of the wall, 25 to 30 cm. wide, 10 cm. high. ‘suOIIAUS pue 931g UOAURT) podMoyquIny jo deur yI}9049 SY31L3W juiod wnjoqg VT Sjid pud sasnoujiq 4-V S|J]OM Japjnog apnin p-| c ‘Oly in) bo PREHISTORY OF EASTERN ARIZONA, I Fic. 3. House A, Tumbleweed Canyon Site, showing manos and broken metates zn situ and roof beam fragments radiating toward the center of the house from the edge. Floor.—Of gravelly earth like walls but brown in color; the surface was uneven; depth below present ground level, 32 to 65 cm. Firepit.—Quadrant-shaped; lined with rocks and with a rim consisting of a row of rocks; diameter, 80 cm.; depth, 8 cm. Pits —None found. Postholes—None found. Roof.—Height and exact character unknown; charcoal was in the fill and some burned mud but there were no impressions of roofing on the lumps of mud. General Comments.—House B was partly burned. Malpais rocks piled up on the north side may indicate that this house was partly excavated into the bed-rock of the mesa. House D! (Figures 4 and 7) Shape.—Roughly circular; greatest diameter, 3.6 meters. 1 Symbol “C”’ used for storage pit (fig. 2). ARCHITECTURAL DETAILS 23 HOUSE A HOUSE D d Firepit met Metate ma Mono E43 Roofing poles or timbers UM, \sndisturded clay 2 HOUSE B METERS Fic. 4. Plans and sections of houses and pits, 'umbleweed Canyon Site. Walls.—Large and small basalt cobbles and boulders were piled up around the edge of the floor; a narrow shelf of light-colored gravelly earth was located on the south side of the house. Height of rock wall, 67 cm. Floor.—Light gray gravelly earth and rocks; surface very uneven; depth below present ground level, 40 cm. Suo] “Wd IG MOI “yqiou oneuseu s}utod *soUO}S YIM pouTpNO (MOLL MOT -0q) doazy pue ssnoy jo aspo punoje qano Surmoys ‘au1G uoAURT) PooM 27quiny, ‘gq e8snoFT “9 “SIy u2 soye}ouWI U peemeyquin “a tou sjyurod Suoy “Ud YG MOLY “npis ayoiq pue sourw Surmoys ‘931g uOAURr) aie BSUTTTIPY °S “OL ie ry. osnoyy ‘e 24 ARCHITECTURAL DETAILS 25 Fic. 7. House D, Tumbleweed Canyon Site, showing broken metate fragments near center of house and rocks piled up as walls around edge of house. Arrow 50 cm. long points north; meter stick in background. Firepit.—Roughly oval; the floor was of burned gravelly earth; rocks on the north and east sides formed a rim; length, 44 cm.; width, 33 cm.; depth, 7 cm. Postholes—None found. Roof.—Poles and branches crossed the angles between the larger rocks of the wall. The roof framework was covered with a layer of brush. Milling Area.—Fragments of a metate and one mano were found by the firepit. General Comments.—This house burned. The entrance may be indi- cated in the southeast quadrant by a gradual upward slope of the floor and a lower wall in this area. STORAGE Pirs(?) Three roughly circular pits with vertical walls and basin-shaped bot- toms were trenched, but we did not discover any definite indication as to how they were used. ‘Two were partly excavated and one was com- pletely excavated. All contained flint chippings, flint artifacts, and a small amount of charcoal. They were more than 190 cm. in greatest 26 PREHISTORY OF EASTERN ARIZONA, I diameter and from 47 cm. to 70 cm. in depth. ‘Two were with the cen- tral group of houses and within 5 meters of Pithouse A, but the third was ci ee io at ge 2 Fic. 8. Pithouse A, Goesling Site, showing postholes, firepit in center and southern recess in background. Arrow 50 cm. long points north; meter stick in background. more than 20 meters to the north. We have called them storage pits but this designation is simply a guess. GOESLING SITE (Figures 8-11) The Goesling Site is situated on a bluff above the valley of the Little Colorado River about one mile east of the river and south of the St. Johns— Salt Lake Highway. Shape.—The pithouses were roughly ‘“‘D’’-shaped, with the flat side to the south. Greatest inside diameter: Pithouse A, 5.2 meters; Pithouse B, 3.2 meters. Walls.—Excavated into gravelly earth. A veneer of slabs laid in abun- dant mortar reinforced the north and east walls of Pithouse A (fig. 10) and pebble veneer may have strengthened the north wall of Pithouse B. A single coat of plaster 0.5 cm. thick was laid on the north wall of Pit- house A. PITHOUSE A a ' a = = -E oO uw Pn ey ‘e7 S Pu heey: Fic. 20. Thode Site. Arrow 50 cm. long points magnetic north and to firepit in Room E; meter stick at left. 38 Asuosow paysabins Anjo pequnjsipun Asuosow sjolung jideut4 yw WooYy | Ys 79-9 NOILD3S ‘AUG 2Bpoy,y, JO 4 wooy N-¥ NOILD3S y wooy SWOOY Pa}DADOXauU/) HHA. ty 4-8 NOILD3S 39 40 PREHISTORY OF EASTERN ARIZONA, I THODE SITE (Figures 20 and 21) This small site is situated on the west bank of the east fork of Mineral Creek about 24% miles east of Vernon, Arizona, on U. S. Highway 60 (Sec. 13, Twp. 10 N., R. 25 E., G. and S.R.M.). Before excavation the site appeared as a low mound of rocks about 200 yards south of the high- way and west of a grove of oaks that grow in the creek bottom. Number of Rooms.—Eleven rooms were excavated. ‘Two or three more may be present in the north end of the ruin. Several of the rooms are adjacent but not contiguous (see fig. 21). Walls.—Crude masonry composed of assorted sizes of unshaped cobbles and boulders all of igneous rock and ranging in length from 8 cm. to 20 cm. The thinner walls contain some through stones. The greatest height of the standing wall, including the earthen base, was 67 cm.; the base of the masonry was on the old ground surface, 25 to 55 cm. above the floor. The mortar was mud; some stone-to-stone contact was observed in the bedding planes; no plaster was found. Floor —Generally dark red clay native to the locality; light-colored soil in some areas; the surface was fairly even but sloping. The floor levels were semi-subterranean. Firepit—One in Room E. ‘“‘D”-shaped with flat (east) side made of a stone slab set on edge; length, 45 cm.; width, 40 cm.; depth, 35 cm. It was lined with native clay. Small areas of burned floor and light gray ashes (not contained in pits) were found in two other rooms (Rooms C and F). These may have been hearth areas. Entrances.—None found. Pits—None found. Postholes—None found. Roof.—Exact character unknown. Charred pole fragments were found. The roofing poles may have been supported by the walls. General Comments.—This site has the appearance of a series of shallow pithouses or deep sub-surface rooms clustered about a nucleus (Room E). RIM VALLEY PUEBLO (Figure 22) Situated on a mesa above the west bank of the Little Colorado River about four miles north of Springerville, Arizona. Rim Valley Pueblo was built on a little flat about four-fifths of the distance from the rim-rock Room A contains arrow 50 cm. long north and meter stick standing against the south wall. lley Pueblo, looking south. a r Rim V IG. 22. pointing magnetic 41 SECTION A-A’ i RmG a o E a Bf Room K fi RmH & Room C Up a wy 5 fl MV Yj Y/ SECTION B-B’ Y Yj YY Firepit Ladder pit Vault Ventilator Flour receptacles Bin Niche Doorway Wall abutment Wall bond Suggested masonry Undisturbed clay Datum point METERS Fic. 23. Plan and sections of Rim Valley Pueblo. ARCHITECTURAL DETAILS 43 Fic. 24. Outer wall of Room I, Rim Valley Pueblo. Meter stick in foreground. of the cliff to the top of the mesa (NE 4, SW 4, Sec. 8, Twp. 9 N., R. 29 E., G. and S.R.M.). The Hooper Ranch Pueblo (see p. 53) lies a few hundred yards below to the northeast on the opposite bank of the river. Arrangement of Pueblo Parts—Rooms are grouped in two units of one story each, on opposite sides of a plaza (fig. 23). The unit on the east side is small, has only four rooms, is roughly L-shaped and only one room wide. A larger unit on the west side is rectangular in form and two or three rooms wide. Number of Rooms.—Eleven rooms were excavated and fourteen more were indicated by the outlines of fallen walls; an estimated twenty-one rooms are in the larger unit. Dimensions of Rooms.—Roughly rectangular in shape; length, 2.40- 5.65 meters, average, 3.83 meters; width, 1.50-4.50 meters, average, 2.74 meters. Walls.—No prepared foundations; walls were based on bedrock, on native soil a few centimeters above bedrock, or, in one instance, on trashy fill. Masonry started a few centimeters below floor level. Types of Masonry: Some through stones were used, but most walls were a product of two facings, each of a different type of masonry built up one against the other and with some stones interlocking inside the wall. 44 PREHISTORY OF EASTERN ARIZONA, I Type 1 was similar to vertical slab masonry. A course of large stones (average 36 cm. long, 24 cm. wide, 2 or 3 cm. less thick than wide) alter- yw Rae a. q3 . Tun 7 ae Se ‘ va sen Fic. 25. Rectangular doorway in north wall of Room G, Rim Valley Pueblo. Meter stick at right. nated with several courses of smaller stones including some small slabs (average 10 cm. long, 8 cm. wide, 6 cm. thick). Small slabs and stones were used as chinking in the vertical joints between the larger stones. The outer surface of the exterior walls was generally of this type (fig. 24). Type 2 was random rubble masonry of cobble-sized stones laid up in abundant mud mortar. ‘The courses sloped, the stones used were only ARCHITECTURAL DETAILS 45 Fic. 26. Oval ventilator in south wall of Room C, Rim Valley Pueblo. Meter stick at right. roughly matched for size, and the general product was crude in appear- ance. ‘This type of masonry was generally used for the surfaces of walls visible from the interior of the room; usually they were covered by plaster. With the exception of one smaller room (Room G), each room had two walls with each type of masonry. Generally the south and west walls were of Type 1, the north and east walls of Type 2. Dimensions: Walls ranged in thickness from 25 to 38 cm. (average, 31 cm.); present wall heights ranged from 30 to 110 cm. (average, 75 cm.). Most often basalt boulders and cobbles from local outcroppings were used as stones in the wall. Many were angular in shape, some rounded. Less often walls were constructed of laminated sandstone slabs and angu- Jar chunks of sandstone probably quarried from nearby cliffs. Small flat or angular pebbles were infrequently inserted in the mud mortar of the walls to fill voids. The mortar was soft gray mud of fine texture, occasionally containing larger particles. The plaster was gray or brown in color, undecorated, quite thick. It was applied in a single coat and smoothed over irregularities in the sur- face of the masonry. 46 PREHISTORY OF EASTERN ARIZONA, I Fic. 27. Niche in north wall of Room A, Rim Valley Pueblo. Meter stick at left. Doorways (fig. 25): Both doorways were rectangular: neither had been sealed and both were through interior (partition) walls. Width, 36 and 45 cm.; probable height (lintel fallen in), 59 and 60 cm.; sills were adobe plaster or stone slabs; the sides were masonry and the lintel (one lost) was a stone slab. Ventilators and Niches (figs. 26, 27).—Six ventilator openings were found, all in the centers of walls and opposite firepits. Five were rectangular in shape and with their sills near floor level and one was oval in shape and with its sill 20 cm. above the floor. Four had lintels of stone slabs set on end. The others had sides of Type 1 masonry on one side of the wall with large boulders forming the sides of the opening. The sill of the oval opening between Rooms H and C was formed by a semicircular arc carved(?) in a thick slab-like boulder (fig. 28). The sills of the rectangular openings were adobe clay or slabs covered with adobe. The openings ranged in width from 20 to 35 cm. (average, 29 cm.), in height from 20 to 33 cm. (average, 29 cm.). "you 1)0U -Seur s}urod Suoy “uid QE MOLY “OTgong AaT[eEA Wry ‘gq WooY jo I9UIOD JSB9YINOS UI UIG I9UIOD Pu sazdR}Jd9991 NOT “67 ‘OY “JUOA 1oj eure ly ATqISs -sod ‘ojqeng AaTeA wry ‘D WoOOY wos qeis Suny “gz 48 PREHISTORY OF EASTERN ARIZONA, I One niche was found in the west wall of Room A, 50 cm. above the floor near the southwest corner. The height of the opening was 22 cm.; the width, 24 cm.; the depth, 24 cm. ‘The lining was stone slabs except the back, which is adobe plaster. Floors.—Material: A layer of smooth adobe clay was laid 2.0 to 6.0 cm. thick over gray basalt bedrock or gravelly earth. The adobe curved up to meet the wall plaster. Alterations: The vault in Room C was covered with plaster matching the floor. Part of the floor in Room A was refinished with a thin layer of adobe. Flour receptacles: Three flour receptacles (fig. 29) were found in the southeast quadrant of Room B near the bin. Lengths, 34, 30, 40 cm.; widths, 28, 30, 33 cm.; depths, 12, 10,6 cm. ‘They have bottoms made of stone slabs, one of which was smooth and was used as a metate; they were separated by walls of slabs or manos set on edge or by rows of stones. Manos and hammerstones were found nearby. Firepits (fig. 30).—Rectangular in shape, with stone-slab-lined sides and bottoms; the slabs on the sides projected above the floor level. The slab on the side toward the ventilator was slightly higher (example, Room F) than the others. The firepits have gravel or bedrock bottoms (examples, Rooms B and C). The firepit in Room C was made of rough slabs; in Room B the slabs were finished more smoothly. Firepits were generally located in line with the ventilators near the centers of the rooms. Length, 42-75 cm. (average, 49 cm.); width, 33-62 cm. (average, 40 cm.); depth, 20-25 cm. (average, 20 cm.). Some firepits have notches in their sides and gaps at their corners. All the firepits contained fine white ash and a small amount of charcoal. ‘The one in Room B held a pot rest stone standing at the center of the south side. Ladder-pits(?).—Rectangular ladder pits(?) (fig. 30) lined with adobe plaster and in one instance rimmed with slabs adjoined the firepits in Rooms A, C, F and J. They are on the side toward the ventilator (east side). Lengths, 69, 45, 40, 45 cm.; widths, 45, 44, 40, 35 cm.; depths all 20 cm; Vault—A vault (fig. 31) was found near the west wall of Room C in line with the firepit, the ventilator and the door; it had been excavated into bedrock and lined with two courses of masonry on the west side, one slab at each end, and one at the east side below floor level. Rectangular in shape. Length, 75 cm.; width, 36.0 cm.; depth, 25cm. It had been covered with a later floor. It contained an awl-sharpening stone. Bin.—A large slab set on edge projected from the south wall of Room B, making a bin (fig. 29) with three sides in the southeast corner. Fic. 30. Firepit, ladder-pit, ventilator, and damper slab, Room A, Rim Valley Pueblo. Arrow 30 cm. long points magnetic north. 49 50 PREHISTORY OF EASTERN ARIZONA, I Fic. 31. Room C, Rim Valley Pueblo, with Room B at left and Room H at right. Arrow 50 cm. long points north; meter stick in background. Ceiling —Height not known. On the basis of maximum height of walls yet standing, and fallen wall stones it is estimated to have been about 2 meters high. The method of construction is unknown except by infer- ence. Fragments of wooden roof members (beams, poles) cross the shorter dimension of the room. General Comments.—Rim Valley Pueblo was a small pueblo village con- sisting of two units both of one story and totaling perhaps twenty-five rooms. The majority of the larger rooms were equipped with firepits, ventilators and other features usually associated with dwelling rooms. A few smaller rooms lacked these features and were probably storage rooms. The masonry in general seems quite comparable to that of other pueb- los of roughly the same period and culture (late Reserve Phase, early Tularosa Phase) both in the upper Little Colorado drainage and farther to the south and east. Although the particular type of masonry in which rows of large rocks alternate with several courses of smaller rocks is less neat here than it appears in later ruins, it is consistent enough in con- struction so that its position seems definitely to be in that tradition of banded masonry which may have been remotely inspired by a style origi- nating in the area of Chaco Canyon. ARCHITECTURAL DETAILS 51 Some of the features of Room C seem to indicate that it was used for ceremonial as well as secular functions. ‘The association of ventilator, firepit and vault, the elaboration of the ladder-pit(?) with arm-like stone Fic. 32. Hooper Ranch Pueblo, showing Great Kiva in foreground and dwelling rooms in background. Meter stick stands against north wall of Great Kiva. slabs on each side, and the position of the vault in the normal location in a kiva for a foot-drum type of vault or sipapu seem particularly suggestive. There is also the possibility that the secondary wall through which the ventilator opening passes could have been the face of a platform or bench. However, because it seems a little high for this purpose and was filled be- hind with very large boulders it seems more probable that this boulder- filled area served as a buttress to strengthen the earlier primary east wall. These features of Room C when coupled with those from other rooms— a possible ‘‘kachina’”’ niche in the wall across from the firepit, a ladder-pit and ventilator in Room A (the southwest corner), and evidence for con- siderable (ritual?) red paint grinding in the southwest corner of Room B across from the firepit and ventilator in that room—seem to hint that at least these rooms were more than ordinary dwelling rooms, ‘Throughout much of the upper Little Colorado drainage and in the Reserve area up to the end of the Tularosa Phase small kivas of the Anasazi type seem to ( Unexcavoted Area Unexcavated Area SECTION B-B s Ym s //, Y WIIS44 Crypt ; SECTION 4-4’ Bench Firepit ‘ Posthole oss Flagstones Post Vault fr Bin Platform Deflector ¢ YU, Undisturbed clay Sealed doorway Upper habitation level Pit Lower habitation level Wall abutment w Step Wall bond T Ventilator tunnel Bedrock meee Niche Fic. 33. Plan and sections of Great Kiva and adjacent rooms at Hooper Ranch Pueblo. wn ho ARCHITECTURAL DETAILS 53 Fic. 34. Great Kiva, Hooper Ranch Pueblo, from the west. Ramp entryway and deflector in background; postholes and vaults in foreground. Access road runs diagonally through kiva. Arrow 50 cm. long at left; meter stick in background. be lacking. These dwelling rooms with more than the common features possibly could have been used for small group ceremonies as well as for normal dwelling purposes. THE GREAT KIVA, HOOPER RANCH PUEBLO (Figures 32—41) Hooper Ranch Pueblo is located on the east bank of the Little Colorado River approximately four miles below Springerville (Sec. 8, Twp. 9 N., R. 29 E., G. and S.R.M.). The kiva itself is situated on the south end of this ruin, which con- tained perhaps sixty rooms along with two small kivas of the more conven- tional Western Pueblo type. It is, moreover, a much larger kiva and is not surrounded by rooms as the others are. Shape.—Rectangular and fairly symmetrical except that the north wall was constructed to follow the orientation of the rooms adjoining the kiva on the north rather than being parallel to the south wall. Dimensions.—15.5 meters east to west and 14.5 meters north to south. Walls (fig. 35).—Of masonry. Sandstone slabs, some laminated, mostly as quarried or rough hewn, were laid up as a veneer against the 54 PREHISTORY OF EASTERN ARIZONA, I Fic. 35. Detail of masonry in face of bench on north side of Great Kiva, Hooper Ranch Pueblo. Meter stick at right. wall of the excavation into the native clay or trash. The north wall is composed of two facings, and the stones interlock in the interior; the west wall was built of random rubble; the other walls had large slabs set on edge or end at the base and regularly coursed rubble walls above. The vertical joints between the large vertical slabs were filled with a chinking of stone laid either horizontally or vertically. ‘Thickness: Face of bench, 18 cm.; upper north wall, 45 cm.; other walls, 20 cm. A single layer of undecorated, dark gray mud plaster was noted but only on the lower walls. Pictographs.—Pecked areas were uncovered: (1) on a large vertical slab set in the face of the bench near the middle of the south wall and west of the niche; (2) on a stone at the corner of the ramp entrance. Niche (fig. 36).—Near the middle of the face of the bench, in the south wall. Rectangular in shape and lined with slabs. Width, 50 cm.; height, 28 cm.; depth, 28 cm. Recessed Posts—One near each of three corners, northwest, southwest and northeast; these were roof support posts. Their lower sections were covered by masonry in the face of the bench. Floor.—Dark gray adobe clay was applied as a single layer; it was smooth and fairly level. A pit near the northwest corner had been floored over. ARCHITECTURAL DETAILS 55 - u i ~ at. oi Fic. 36. Detail of niche in face of bench on south side of Great Kiva, Hooper Ranch Pueblo. Meter stick at right. Bin.—Five large slabs set on edge crossed the northeast corner diag- onally on a level with the floor of the bench. Firepit.—Circular shape, flat bottom; diameter, 50 cm.; depth, 30 em. It was lined with adobe clay burned red and contained much charcoal in the form of small fragments, including those of charred corncobs and walnuts. ‘The surrounding floor west of the deflector was burned. Fic. 37. Deflector, Great Kiva, Hooper Ranch Pueblo, viewed from ramp entry- way. Masonry base and masonry-rimmed trough to east. Arrow 30 cm. long points magnetic north. Fic. 38. South vault, Great Kiva, Hooper Ranch Pueblo. Arrow 30 cm. long points magnetic north. 56 ARCHITECTURAL DETAILS 57 Fic. 39. Ramp entryway, Great Kiva, Hooper Ranch Pueblo, showing wider ‘vestibule’ area and narrower portion beyond; huge deflector slab in foreground. Meter stick at right. . Deflector (fig. 37).—A large slab had been set on edge between the firepit and the ramp entryway; it is partially supported by masonry on the east side and at the ends. Length, 240 cm.; height, 72 cm.; thick- ness, 15 cm. Vaults (fig. 38).—Rectangular in shape. One is located on each side of the floor area. The south vault was lined with stone masonry and par- titioned into two sections; the north vault was lined with adobe clay and had a floor of stone slabs. Length: south vault, 133 cm. (total); north vault, 85 cm. Depth: south vault, 40 cm.; north vault, 30 cm. Crypt (figs. 40, 41).—A square box, with floor and walls of stone slabs, has a roof of a ring slab and a rectangular stone slab for a cover. Length, 38 cm.; width, 36 cm.; depth, 28cm. It contained a painted sacred stone 58 PREHISTORY OF EASTERN ARIZONA, I image (see pp. 69-74), a decorated miniature jar, and black and white beads. Some of the beads were found inside the jar, others on the floor of the crypt. Fic. 40. View through ring slab cover of crypt, Great Kiva, Hooper Ranch Pueblo, showing stone image and miniature jar in situ. Arrow 30 cm. long points magnetic north. Pits —One is oblong, wider at one end, and another is circular, with walls and floor of native clay; these walls curve to a basin-shaped bottom. Length of oblong pit, 110 cm.; diameter of circular pit, 38 cm.; depths, 50 cm. and 28 cm. Both pits contained many rocks. Ramp Entryway (fig. 39).—Oriented to the east, and lined with stone masonry. Its floor slopes up gradually. A low adobe step is in line with the upper east wall of the kiva proper. The entrance widens from 110 to 250 cm. at this point, forming a vestibule between the ends of the bench and the deflector. Width, 100 cm. at outer end; length (outside Kiva proper), 285 cm. ARCHITECTURAL DETAILS 59 Posts and Postholes—Nine principal ones, two of them double. The diameters range from 35 to 100 cm. The posts, 22—30 cm. in diameter, decayed and/or charred, were wedged in with slabs set on edge around nam nA Die a“ ba! Ay ho, aharna Fic. 41. Crypt in Great Kiva, Hooper Ranch Pueblo, with covers removed, showing construction detail of interior and objects in position. them. Depths of the postholes ranged from 60 to 100 cm. ‘Three were located across the west end, two at the east end, and four in a quadri- lateral arrangement in the main floor area east and west of the vaults. Two of these postholes were double. Roof.—Top layers were clay over brush; the exact character of the lower layers is unknown. The alignment of the principal posts and holes suggests that four large beams crossed the shorter dimension of the kiva. The maximum height of the standing upper wall (130 cm.) added to the maximum height of the veneer masonry for the bench (85 cm.) indicates a vertical distance from the main floor to the roof of over 2 meters. 60 PREHISTORY OF EASTERN ARIZONA, I Comparisons—The rectangular shape of the Great Kiva seems to be most like that of Mogollon Great Kivas such as those described by Hough (1907, pp. 53, 55-57) on the Blue River, and three kivas closer to Reserve, New Mexico: that at the Sawmill Site (Bluhm, 1957, pp. 15-27), another at Higgins Flat Pueblo (Martin, Rinaldo, and Barter, 1957, pp. 13-22), and one at Casa Malpais near Springerville (Danson, 1957, pp. 82-83). In this feature, if the ramp entryway is left off it also has obvious relation- ships to earlier Mogollon small and big kivas (Bluhm, 1957, p. 26) as well as to contemporary and later western pueblo kivas (Smiley, 1952, p. 20). In size it compares with the Nantack Village Great Kiva (Breternitz, 1959, p. 16) and the other larger kivas mentioned above although it is smaller than the courtyard Great Kiva at Kinishba. On the basis of size —the paramount criterion—it can certainly be classified as a Great Kiva. The vertical slab masonry is unlike that of any of the other Mogollon Great Kivas. It is more nearly comparable to that of Kiva I, Arizona W :10:52, at Point of Pines (Smiley, 1952, p. 40), or Kiva I at Table Rock Pueblo (Martin and Rinaldo, 1960b, p. 158). In this feature it appar- ently reflects the current style of wall construction rather than a tradi- tional style, although the early Anasazi Great Kivas on Basket Maker III and Pueblo I sites contain somewhat similar masonry; for example, the face of the bench in Kiva I of the Cahone Canyon sites (Martin, 1939, p.230e The arrangement of the sub-floor vaults on either side of the Great Kiva has its parallels both in the Mineral Creek Pueblo Great Kiva (Martin, Rinaldo, and Longacre, 1961, p. 26) and in Anasazi Great Kivas on Pueblo III sites (Martin, P. S., 1936, pp. 48-49; Morris, E. H., 1921, p. 119; Roberts, F. H. H., Jr., 1932, pp. 88-89). The use of a small sub- floor circular firepit rather than a raised hearth or a large rectangular masonry fireplace has its closest parallels in Anasazi small kivas. The vaults on the south side of the Great Kivas at the Hooper Ranch Pueblo and Mineral Creek Pueblo were lined with masonry, whereas the north vaults were less elaborate. An analogous situation was observed by Roberts (1932, p. 88) at the Village of the Great Kivas, where the west vault of the Great Kiva was more complex. SUMMARY OF SECULAR ARCHITECTURE The secular structures excavated during the 1960 season present a hypothetical sequence of architectural development which is complete in itself and yet roughly parallels that of other areas. The first step in this ARCHITECTURAL DETAILS 61 sequence is highly conjectural. It is compounded of bits of evidence en- countered at Laguna Salada, in some of the pit structures at Tumbleweed Canyon, and from the floor areas at the Chilcott Sites. This postulated earliest type of structure may have been a light brush shelter erected over a compacted floor area, or, on occasion, over a shallow excavation. This stage has its parallel in the Wet Leggett Cochise dwelling area (Martin and Rinaldo, 1950b, p. 430). Sometimes (as at Tumbleweed Canyon) the nature of the building site necessitated the excavation of rocks to secure a smooth floor and a deeper area more sheltered from the wind. In these instances the rocks were simply piled up around the edge of the excavation. In at least one in- stance these piles of rocks appear to have been used for the base of a crib- like roof structure. This stage has a rough parallel in some of the Pine Lawn Phase sites in the Reserve area such as the Promontory Site (Mar- tin, Rinaldo, and Antevs, 1949) where in some rare instances rocks re- moved in the process of digging a pithouse floor had been piled up around the perimeter. A more definite parallel is evident at the Bluff Site in Houses 6 and 15 of the Hilltop Phase (Haury and Sayles, 1947, pp. 24, 38), which had walls of rubble piled up to hold back the trash out of which they were excavated. It is conjectural whether these piled-up rocks formed walls that might be typologically and sequentially related to the next development (repre- sented in the Chilcott and Thode sites), which is actual masonry of a crude rubble type. These walls in the Thode and Chilcott sites were built up between adjacent rooms of a series of dwellings clustered together. Although pueblos begin to take form at this stage, there is as yet no pre- conceived plan. Villages have the form of a series of pithouses or sub- surface rooms clustered together in an amorphous group, with only an occasional room tacked on. Floors were excavated below ground level to various depths and the walls were continued upward above the ground surface of the excavation by means of crude rubble masonry of unshaped field stones and cobbles. In some instances, particularly in the later sites such as Site 31, at Vernon, the earthen wall of the excavation was faced with a veneer of rubble masonry of a single thickness, and continued upward above the ground surface with larger through stones or masonry of a double thickness of stones (Martin and Rinaldo, 1960a, p. 56). Similar developments in- volving rooms transitional between pithouses and surface houses with crude masonry walls have been noted in the Reserve Phase both in the Reserve area and in the Point of Pines area (Martin, Rinaldo, and Antevs, 62 PREHISTORY OF EASTERN ARIZONA, I 1949, p. 126; Martin and Rinaldo, 1950b, pp. 416-417; Peckham, 1958, pp. 91-93; Breternitz, 1959, pp: 56-57). The possibility that these crude masonry walls had extensions of jacal construction has been suggested. The quantities of wall stones excavated from these structures in the Vernon area favor the conjecture that the masonry walls built there were sufficiently high without a jacal extension for a person to stand upright. No remains of posts have been found inside the walls to suggest more than a minimum of roof support—nothing like the rows of postholes indicating jacal walls that were found at Three Pines Pueblo (Martin and Rinaldo, 1950b, p. 432), and have been postu- lated for Ruin B at the Nantack Village (Breternitz, 1959, p. 55). This does not mean that jacal walls were not used in the Vernon area, but rather that evidence for their existence has not yet been found. Although the rooms are spaced separately for the most part, at this stage they tend to approach a rectangular shape, with the exception of those at the Thode Site. There are apparently very few contiguous rooms at sites contemporary with this site (Martin, Rinaldo, and Longacre, 1961). However, in the next phase both Mineral Creek Site and Rim Valley Pueblo are composed of rooms that are contiguous and for the most part rectangular in shape. The interior furnishings of the earlier houses are very simple and even the later rooms have few. In the earlier houses the milling stones and firepits constitute virtually the only interior furnishings. The firepit is located near one wall or, less often, in a corner. Ordinarily these fire- pits are simple shallow depressions excavated into the native soil and are not lined with plaster. They are more frequently oval or circular in shape than rectangular. One was outlined with rough stones. Typo- logically more developed and occurring in later sites are circular firepits which are located near the centers of the pithouses. These are usually somewhat deeper and are lined with adobe plaster. The later houses, such as those at Site 30 (Martin and Rinaldo, 1960a), are sometimes furnished with storage pits in addition to the milling cen- ters and firepits. A still later development was the construction of rec- tangular firepits; some of these are plaster-lined, and others are lined on the side with rough stone slabs. These occur in the earlier pueblos such as Chilcott Sites 1 and 3, the Thode Site, and occasionally in the later pueblos such as the Mineral Creek Site and Rim Valley Pueblo. These crude stone fireboxes are frequently associated with ventilators and in at least one instance with a ladder-pit. The next stage in this development of interior architectural features is found only at the latest sites excavated in the area. It occurs at Table ARCHITECTURAL DETAILS 63 Rock Pueblo (Martin and Rinaldo, 1960b), Hooper Ranch Pueblo, and Rim Valley Pueblo, but not at the Mineral Creek Site. This develop- ment is represented by centrally located fireboxes with sides and bottoms lined with nicely worked stone slabs. ‘These fireboxes are often associ- ated directly with ashpits or ladder-pits and are set so as to be furnished with fresh air through some form of ventilator. They are also occasion- ally found in the same rooms with furnishings such as bins and flour re- ceptacles, which have walls made of stone slabs. This trend toward the construction of somewhat more elaborate interior furnishings has its par- allels in the later phases, such as the Tularosa Phase, both in the Reserve area (Martin et al., 1956; Martin, Rinaldo and Barter, 1957; Rinaldo, 1959) and at Point of Pines (Wendorf, 1950; Breternitz, 1959; Olson, 1960). In short, the developments in architecture throughout the upper Little Colorado drainage appear to parallel a similar evolution in the neighbor- ing areas to the south such as the Reserve area and the Point of Pines area. Inasmuch as most of these developments involve some form of stone or masonry construction it seems likely that they had their ultimate source in the Chaco tradition of the Anasazi culture to the north, where these arts reached such a high point. Il. Some Convergences and Continuities By Joun B. RinALpo Associate Curator, Department of Anthropology Chicago Natural History Museum THE GREAT KIVA The Great Kiva at the Hooper Ranch Pueblo contains a number of elements of construction that appear to be modifications of features found in earlier Great Kivas both in the Mogollon and the Anasazi traditions. So many of the principal features of this kiva, such as shape of floor plan, type of entrance, arrangement of roof supports, and primary orientation, are Mogollon in derivation that the character of the entire structure is of a distinctly Mogollon cast. Yet some of its furnishings, such as a deflector, a particular type of vault, a masonry-faced bench, and a wall niche, seem to indicate that the builders must have been at least influenced in their planning by the Anasazi tradition. Finally, it contains a few features— a type of bench, a form of crypt, and an arrangement of roof beams— which strongly suggest parallel features in historic Western Pueblo kivas. The rectangular shape of the floor plan (fig. 33) is almost certainly of Mogollon derivation. Many of the earlier Mogollon ceremonial struc- tures from the Circle Prairie Phase on up through the Three Circle and Nantack Phases are rectangular (Wheat, 1954, p. 62; Haury, 1936a, p. 62; Martin and Rinaldo, 1950a, p. 284; Breternitz, 1959, p. 18; Bluhm, 1957, p. 15). Moreover, almost all of the later Mogollon Great Kivas are rec- tangular (Bluhm, loc. cit.; Olson, 1960, p. 199; Martin, Rinaldo, and Barter, 1957, p. 13). Some of the exceptions, such as the earlier structure at Higgins Flat Pueblo (Martin, Rinaldo, and Barter, loc. cit.) and the Mineral Creek Site (Martin, Rinaldo, and Longacre, 1961, p. 23), may represent examples of either cultural lag or stronger Anasazi influence. The entrance (fig. 39) was of the ramp type with a short step as one entered the ‘‘vestibule.’ This type of entrance is considered typical of Mogollon Great Kivas. It is generally similar to those excavated in the Reserve area (Martin, Rinaldo, and Barter, 1957, p. 18; Bluhm, loc. cit.; Rowe, 1947) and to those described for the Blue River area (Hough, 1907, pp. 53, 55-57) and for Point of Pines (Breternitz, 1959, p. 17; Olson, 1960, 64 i SOME CONVERGENCES AND CONTINUITIES 65 p. 192). Itis both shorter and narrower than most of these, although it is almost as wide where it widens out into the “‘vestibule.” In common with the entrance of the Great Kiva at the Dry Prong Site it has a step, as do the entrances of several other Great Kivas (Nantack Village, Saw- mill Site, Higgins Flat Pueblo). Somewhat similar lateral entryways with steps have been found in earlier Mogollon pithouses (Haury, 1936a, figs. 6, 21-23; Martin and Rinaldo, 1950a, p. 276), and the concept may be de- rived from these or ultimately from the Hohokam (Gladwin, Haury, and Sayles, 1937, p. 61). The use of roof support posts in groups of three pillars in some rows and two in others also seems to have parallels in the earlier Mogollon Great Kivas. This arrangement is most clearly seen in the later Great Kiva structure at the Sawmill Site (Bluhm, 1957, fig. 3). A similar group- ing may be separated out at Higgins Flat Great Kiva (Early) if rows of posts oriented parallel to the front and rear walls are selected from the pattern (Martin, Rinaldo, and Barter, 1957, fig. 2; Olson, 1960, fig. 6). Furthermore, the plaza at Foote Canyon Pueblo (which may have func- tioned as a Great Kiva) presents a similar arrangement of large posts (Rinaldo, 1959, fig. 66). In this connection the positions of the posts and the distance between them suggest that in the Hooper Ranch Great Kiva sets of beams or girders crossed the kiva at right angles to the ramp entrance and across the shorter dimension of the kiva, possibly with two beams side by side across the middle section, where there are double postholes. However, we did not find enough of the roof structure to know whether the main beams actually followed this orientation and positioning—as was the usage in historic lesser kivas such as that at Shipaulovi (Mindeleff, 1891, fig. 23) or at Hawikuh (Hodge, 1939, fig. 3) and therefore was an innovation when this Great Kiva was built—or instead followed some other arrangement in continuation of the customs in earlier Great Kivas such as that at the Dry Prong Site (Olson, 1960, p. 192). The primary orientation of the entire Great Kiva, with its long axis through the hearth and firepit area, the deflector, and the lateral entrance running from west to east, is another Mogollon characteristic. This general orientation is typical of Mogollon pithouses and Great Kivas as contrasted with those of the Anasazi, which are generally oriented north to south. Deflectors (fig. 37), even of the most rudimentary sort, are relatively rare in Mogollon structures, although they do occur at the Harris Village (Haury, 1936a, fig. 22) and at Turkey Foot Ridge (Martin and Rinaldo, 1950a, p. 389). As they are a customary furnishing of Anasazi lesser kivas 66 PREHISTORY OF EASTERN ARIZONA, I and pithouses and are found even in Chaco Great Kivas (Vivian and Reiter, 1960, p. 90) it would appear that the huge slab set in a masonry base between the entrance and the hearth area in the Hooper Ranch Pueblo Great Kiva is a feature that probably was derived from the Ana- sazi tradition. The benches found in Anasazi Great Kivas have been discussed by Vivian and Reiter (1960, p. 88). Like these, the bench (fig. 34) of the Hooper Ranch Great Kiva is faced with masonry, is relatively level, and surrounds a lower floor area. Although the concept of a bench, its loca- tion (surrounding a main floor area), and its masonry facing seem to be derived from the Anasazi tradition, in dimensions and certain details of construction the bench in this latter Great Kiva is more like the bench in the Great Kiva at the Dry Prong Site (Olson, 1960, p. 190), which this Great Kiva resembles in other features as well. This bench is both higher and wider than the benches in Anasazi Great Kivas (Morris, 1921, p. 115; Martin, 1936, p. 50; Roberts, 1932, pp. 91-92; Vivian and Reiter, 1960, pp. 12, 29, 39, 44, 56, 63, 67), and the masonry veneer covers a native gravelly clay rather than a rubble core. The benches in these two Mogollon Great Kivas appear to have par- allels in the banquettes of lesser Hopi kivas both at Awatovi (Smith, W., 1952b, pp. 5-6) and at the other Hopi towns (Mindeleff, 1891, pp. 122- 129). In fact, the width and general arrangement of the bench in the Hooper Ranch Great Kiva suggest that this area may have been used by spectators and participants who sat or stood, as they do in the Hopi kivas, on the banquette and the elevated portion or platform (Voth, 1901, pp. 92-93). The rectangular slab-lined niche (fig. 36) in the center of the face of the south bench would seem to be another example of a feature in the Anasazi tradition. Niches, or, as Vivian calls them, “‘wall crypts,” are generally lacking in Mogollon pithouse-kivas and Great Kivas, but they have been found relatively often in Anasazi lesser kivas and Great Kivas (Vivian and Reiter, 1960, p. 84). Also suggestive of Anasazi inspiration is the fact that the niche and the north and south vaults form a southward oriented row or secondary axis of features across the short dimension and through the center of the Great Kiva. This ‘“‘axis’? seems to link up directly with the row of fea- tures in Kiva I (ventilator, ashpit, firepit, vault and kachina-kihu) with which it is roughly in line (fig. 33, section B—B’). The north to south orientation of this row is the traditional arrangement found in the ma- jority of kivas in the Zuni, Acoma and Hopi villages (Mindeleff, 1891, pp. 115, 116) and in most Anasazi pithouses and kivas (Kidder, 1958, SOME CONVERGENCES AND CONTINUITIES 67 p. 246), whereas generally in the earlier Mogollon culture an eastward orientation prevails. The niche seems to constitute the focus for the sec- ondary north to south axis in the same way that the lateral entrance does for the primary eastward orientation. The north vault, which was not lined with masonry, seems to be analo- gous to the simple resonator pits found in some earlier Mogollon Great Kivas (Bluhm, 1957, p. 18; Olson, 1960, p. 193; Martin, Rinaldo and Longacre, 1961, pp. 29, 58,59). But the south vault (fig. 38), which had masonry lining, division into two compartments, and general complexity, and was also contiguous to a primary roof support posthole, resembles the vaults in Anasazi Great Kivas to a considerable degree. The greater com- plexity of the western vaults in Anasazi Great Kivas has been noted by Roberts (1932, p. 88) and Vivian and Reiter (1960, p. 93). At Hooper Ranch and at Mineral Creek Site the analogous southern vaults were the more complex, and they included the use of stone masonry, a feature which does not appear in the grooves and resonators of the earlier Mogollon Great Kivas to the south, and which is probably derived from the Ana- sazi. It is probably no mere coincidence that the crypt containing the sacred stone image was in this area of the Great Kiva floor and was asso- ciated with this vault. It is interesting to observe that this crypt (fig. 40) had a double cover, the lower part consisting of a perforated slab or ring slab, the upper, a rectangular worked slab. This appears to be another instance in which the perforated slab for a small structure such as a niche formed a frame similar to that used for the doors or hatchways of dwellings, as at Kin- tiel (Mindeleff, 1891, pp. 192-194), at Four Mile Ruin (Fewkes, 1904, pp. 160-161), and at Table Rock Pueblo (Martin and Rinaldo, 1960b, pp. 157, 174). Once again, as in the kachina-kihu at Table Rock Pueblo, the concept seems to be that of a spirit’s entrance, but in this case the idea is reinforced by the occurrence of the stone image within the crypt. According to Stephen (Parsons, Editor, 1936, p. 261) there was a niche-cache (his term) which contained an image in the Wikwalobi kiva at Sichomovi. This he records as follows: ‘‘Tihkuyiki (Childbirth water house) or Tuwabontumsiki, the phallic niche-cache in this kiva.. . is an oblong rectangle, say six by eight inches. It contains one object, an image. The cavity is about fifteen inches deep. Tuwabontumsi, Sand altar woman, is the wife of Masauwu, and the sister of Muriyinwu. She gave birth to all kachina. She is also called Muriyinmana, also called Tihkuyi, Childbirth water.” Stephen does not say whether this ‘“‘niche- cache” is in the floor, the bench or the wall, but there is an obvious re- semblance in shape and function. 68 PREHISTORY OF EASTERN ARIZONA, I There was no direct evidence as to the use of the vaults in the Hooper Ranch Great Kiva. As neither of them showed signs of fire or contained ashes, they were certainly not auxiliary firepits. Although they could have been used as foot-drums there is no evidence for it other than the parallels mentioned above, and they are too small for use as sudatories, as Vivian and Reiter have suggested (1960, p. 93). The division of the south vault into two compartments has its parallel in Great Kiva I at Pueblo Bonito (op. cit., p. 67) and this seems to lend credence to another suggestion Vivian and Reiter have made concerning their use as containers for growing beans, corn or other plants as part of a hypothetical ceremony possibly ancestral to Powamu. It is suggested that one compartment could have been used for growing beans and the other for growing either beans or corn. However, if such were the case, the diminutive size of the firepit (diameter, 50 cm.; depth, 30 cm.) relative to the air space to be heated (estimated at over 500 cubic meters) within the Great Kiva presents a problem, assuming of course that the postulated ancestral Powamu cere- mony was much like the contemporary ceremony in which plants are forced during the coldest month of the year. The huge size of the fire screen provides a possible answer. When excavated, the firepit contained mostly charcoal, but the area surrounding the firepit for some distance was burned red. This suggests the possibility that the burned area was used for a hearth, as in the earlier Great Kivas at the Dry Prong Site, the Sawmill Site and Higgins Flat Pueblo, and that the small circular firepit was used primarily for the storing of hot coals, as in the firepits at Site 481 in the Quemado area (Smith, W., 1950, p. 396). On the whole, the Hooper Ranch Great Kiva seems to constitute an example of converging traditions, formed as it is of architectural features stemming from both the Anasazi and the Mogollon ceremonial structures. The deflector, the masonry lining and division into compartments of the south vault, the masonry veneer, and the general concept of the bench and the wall niche are parallel to features which have been found more frequently in Anasazi lesser kivas and Great Kivas. But the rectangular shape of the floor plan, the lateral stepped entrance, the general arrange- ment of the roof supports, and the primary orientation of the structure toward the east are elements represented more strongly in Mogollon pit- houses and Great Kivas. Thus the Great Kiva contains within it the elements of a convergence of the Chaco tradition of the Anasazi and the Tularosa tradition of the Mogollon, a convergence which is more clearly exemplified in the ceramics which the kivas contained. SOME CONVERGENCES AND CONTINUITIES 69 THE SACRED STONE IMAGE Before we discuss this stone figure a word of caution is perhaps needed. In our attempt to probe the relationships of the stone image to possible present-day counterparts we have tended to emphasize Hopi rather than Zuni similarities. This is not because the culture at Hooper Ranch Pueblo appears to be more closely related to Hopi culture. Quite to the con- trary, we feel that the architectural and ceramic traditions, the settlement patterns and other traits provide a more definite link with the Zuni cul- ture. However, the literature on the Hopi is in general more complete, particularly on those subjects with which we are concerned here, so that it is much easier to draw parallels in the direction of Hopi culture. Of course, there are also other traits, both in ceramics and architecture, which might link this culture in that direction, but they tend to be repre- sented to a lesser extent than the Zuni traits. The sacred stone image (fig. 42) is sufficiently specialized in form and decoration to enable us to examine it with more assurance than was possi- ble with the similar figures that appear in the pictographs on the walls of the pueblo rooms (Martin, Rinaldo and Longacre, 1961, pp. 55-56). The posture of the arms and legs is similar to that of the pictographs, but the sculpturing of the hands and feet of the image was done with greater precision, and the features of the face and the decoration in colors which are found on the effigy do not appear at all in the pictographs. This is clearly an anthropomorphic figure. The left arm is upraised and bent at the elbow. The right arm is missing, broken off in ancient times. The legs are spread out and bent at the knees. The nose, chin, hands and feet are carved in relief, and the mouth and possible vulva ap- pear as small cavities. The hair and eyes are painted black, and the left eye is lower than the right and roughly diamond-shaped rather than oval. The front of the body, the face, and the limbs are painted yellow. The hands are black, bordered by a red stripe at the wrist, and the feet are bordered by red stripes and possibly by black stripes(?) at the ankles. The body is decorated on the front by a series of vertical stripes in the following sequence (proceeding from the figure’s left side): yellow, blue- green, red, black, yellow, blue-green, black (center stripe), blue-green, yellow, black, red. Except for white (east), which is omitted, these are the directional colors of both Hopi and Zuni (Parsons, 1939, pp. 186, 218, 172; Bunzel, 1932, pp. 670, 714; Voth, 1901, p. 75). It may be pure chance that the first few color-directions of this series happen to be in the same sequence that the Hopi use in their ritual circuit—yellow (north),' blue-green ! Actually northwest, southwest, southeast, etc.—points of sunrise and sunset at the solstices. Fic. 42. Painted sacred stone image, Great Kiva, Hooper Ranch Pueblo. 70 SOME CONVERGENCES AND CONTINUITIES 71 (west), red (south), black (zenith), but omitting white (east). The factor which suggests that this particular sequence might be Hopi rather than Zuni is that among the Hopi the color for zenith is black, whereas among the Zuni it is “‘all colors” or ‘‘speckled’”’ (Parsons, op. cit., pp. 172, 365; Voth, loc. cit.; Bunzel, loc. cit.). Zenith is always named after east and before nadir by both Zuni and Hopi. Although the series in the direc- tional circuit is the sequence followed in the colors of some ceremonial objects and paintings (Voth, 1901, pls. 42, 47, 53; Stevenson, 1904, pls. 74, 108) it is not used on the majority; so this clue as to the cultural identity of the image is weak. However, there are some additional clues which seem to corroborate this color-directional symbolism among the former occupants of Hooper Ranch Pueblo. (1) The figure was accompanied in the crypt by a minia- ture narrow-mouth jar containing six black beads, five white beads, one blue-green bead, and a red chip of stone. These objects might be inter- preted to represent the directions zenith (or nadir), east, west and south respectively (omitting north). (2) Yellow pigment in quantity and yellow bone beads were found in the north vault of Kiva I. (3) Painted stones on which green was the dominant color were found near the center of the west wall of the Great Kiva. Aside from the obvious clues to its religious character provided by the position of the stone image in a large ceremonial structure, the associated sacred objects in the crypt and the lavish use of the directional colors sug- gest that this represents a supernatural being. But the question arises as to what kind of a supernatural being—a proto-kachina, a cult deity, or a clan wuya? The wuya (a clan protector, clan symbol, or clan ancient) finds so little expression in the literature (Titiev, 1944, p. 155) that we found nothing specific to tie to and felt at a loss to pursue the matter further. A search was made through the literature pertaining to kachinas and through our museum collections for a figure closely resembling this image but we were unable to find any. Except that one eye is lower than the other and of different shape (cf. Smith, W., 1952b, p. 123, note 45) and there is possibly a straight throat line with a black band underneath (which creates the impression of a half-mask) there are no facial features of the image suggestive of a mask. The nose and mouth are generally naturalistic in form and there is no evidence of headdresses, horns, feath- ers, beaks, tubular mouths, “‘beards,” special face painting, or other attri- butes ordinarily found on kachina figures (Colton, 1959; Fewkes, 1903). Furthermore, there were no kachinas in the same posture as the image— arms raised and elbows bent, legs spread out and knees bent, etc. How- ever, some were found which were similar in one or two details. For 72 PREHISTORY OF EASTERN ARIZONA, I example, a few have yellow masks with black eyes (Citulilu, Fewkes, 1903, pl. 44), but are unlike the image in other details. Vertical stripes on the body are seen on Patun or Squash (op. cit., pl. 52, p. 116) and on Rainbow (Stevenson, 1904, pl. 74). They also appear on a number of dolls of the older flat type in our collections, but on these the stripes are almost always in fewer colors. There is a closer degree of likeness between the stone image and the figurines of cult deities which appear on the altars in the Marau and Wuwutcim ceremonies of the Hopi. ‘This seems to be particularly true of versions of Talatumsi and Marau-mana (Parsons, Editor, 1936, pp. 883, 964, figs. 467, 484, pl. 23; Fewkes and Stephen, 1892, p. 196, pl. 1, fig. 2; Fewkes, 1894, p. 69; Voth, 1912, pls. 5, 10, 13). These are usually repre- sented with flat yellow faces, black hair and eyes, and yellow torsos of roughly the same proportions as those of the image. On at least two of the figurines the feet are rendered in some detail and have flat soles like those of the figurine, so that they can be stood alone on the altar floor or tied to the “rainbow” bar. Their feet are usually spread apart a small dis- tance and they have their arms upraised in a pose similar to that of the image. Talatumsi is clad in cotton garments on occasion and there is the possibility that the stone image was similarly clothed at one time (Parsons, Editor, 1936, p. 964), so that the vertical stripes or body-painting may be irrelevant to identification. The posture with arms upraised and feet spread apart with knees bent is occasionally seen in depictions of other cult deities, Alosaka, for example (Fewkes, 1903, pl. 59), and there is a striking resemblance in several attri- butes to the figures of anthropomorphic supernatural beings seen in some Navaho sand paintings. The somewhat elongated form of the torso, the position of the arms and legs, the longitudinal multi-colored stripes on the body and the yellow face are found on these figures in some instances (Wyman, 1952, fig. 38, for example). Because these sand paintings are thought to have retained some of the archaic features of the older Pueblo dry paintings (from which they were derived) these Navaho figures may indirectly corroborate our identification of the image as a representation of a supernatural being, possibly a cult deity. It is therefore suggested that in particular the posture is symbolic of cult deities as differentiated from kachinas although it could equally well be a conventionalized atti- tude representing childbirth, sexual intercourse (Cosgrove, 1932, pl. 225, f; Smith, W., 1952b, figs. 53, b, 92, a) or any one of several other alternatives. There is further evidence for the female character of the stone image in its dominant yellow color, which among contemporary Pueblo Indians is symbolic of females (Parsons, 1939, pp. 102, 275) and there is also some SOME CONVERGENCES AND CONTINUITIES Fis archaeological confirmation for yellow being a “‘female”’ color. Six fig- ures in the Awatovi murals and one in a Mimbres Polychrome bowl—all definitely female—are painted yellow (Smith, W., 1952b, figs. 51, c, 53, b, 67, d, 78, a, b, 81, b; Nesbitt, 1931, pl. 23, 6). Moreover, they are similar in other attributes. Five of the Awatovi figures have upraised yellow arms (Smith, W., 1952b, figs. 51, c, 53, 6, 78, 6, 81, 6) and two of them have black hands like the stone figure (op. cit., figs. 53, b, 81, 6). There are other archaeological parallels; the similarity in posture between that of the stone image and those of the anthropomorphic figures in certain Four Mile Polychrome bowls is inescapable (Martin and Willis, 1940, pl. I; Fewkes, 1904, pl. 25, a); and, as mentioned above, the posture is much like that of the anthropomorphic pictographs found on the walls of the dwelling rooms at the Hooper Ranch Pueblo. A figure in this pos- ture was also found painted on a stone slab at Kinishba (Cummings, 1940, pl. 34). Taken together, the data favor the identification of the image as a female cult deity related to the underworld rather than as a proto- kachina. The resemblances of the image to cult deity figurines of the present-day Hopi are particularly important in this connection and have been discussed in detail. The location of the image in a crypt in the Great Kiva floor bears out the relationship to the underworld. The crypt is analogous (on a small scale) to the kiva itself, with the aperture apparently representing the kiva entrance. The aperture is also prob- ably symbolic of the entrance to the underworld, and the crypt of the underworld itself. As such it must have been a particularly sacred place. The location of the image in this crypt seems to indicate that the deity represented by the image was related to the underworld. In Stephen’s time the figure of Tuwabontumsi (a cult deity) was kept in a “‘niche- cache” in the kiva (see p. 67), and while today the figure of Talatumsi (another female cult deity) is kept in a shrine on the cliffs (Titiev, 1944, p. 131, pl. 3, 6), this may be a relatively recent custom. More specifically, the image may be identified as representing a female cult deity belonging to a group that is concerned with childbirth, repro- duction and fertility (particularly fecundity in men and animals rather than in vegetation). Included in this group are those female deities men- tioned above: Talatumsi, Tuwapongtumsi and Marau-mana. These may have been differentiated from a single ancestral deity. There is a possibility that the image represented the ancestral deity from which the three (or more) present-day deities (Talatumsi, Tuwa- pongtumsi and Marau-mana) were differentiated long ago. ‘There is also the possibility that it represented simply another deity, also of the 74 PREHISTORY OF EASTERN ARIZONA, I same group, who has been forgotten; and no doubt there are other pos- sibilities. Most of the data seem to support the theory that the image represents a cult deity rather than a proto-kachina, although we cannot rule out that possibility either, for the asymmetrical eyes and the lower face have mask-like qualities, and the vertical striping resembles that of some of the older kachina dolls. However, resemblances in hands, feet, head, general torso form and posture are closer to those of both ancient and modern representations of cult deities. Its position in the Great Kiva crypt—a particularly sacred place—bears this out and also its relationship to the underworld. Its sexual parts and dominant yellow color indicate that it is a female. As might be expected, it is most like the older repre- sentations of supernatural beings, particularly those yellow central figures in the Awatovi murals who stand with their arms upraised as if bestow- ing blessings. Dr. Fred Eggan (verbal communication) has suggested that this dif- ferentiation may have occurred through the addition of new population groups with similar beliefs and rituals, with subsequent partial equating of the deities involved, or through later development of parallel cults consequent on population increase, and with different versions of cult deities and rituals. III. Pottery By Paut S. MartTIN Chief Curator, Department of Anthropology Chicago Natural History Museum GENERAL REMARKS The study of prehistoric pottery from a given area is a vast under- taking and one could devote an infinite amount of time to it. Not only does one have the materials of manufacture—clays, tempering materials, slip-clay and pigments—to comprehend but also the decoration on the pottery, analysis of design-elements, temporal and spatial relationships of types and “horizon styles’? to pursue and to grasp. Small wonder that one can become involved and bogged down in minutiae and perhaps lose his way in a maze of technological and esthetic problems. Thus, it is difficult to persuade oneself not to make the study of pottery an end in itself. One can avoid this danger by integrating the ceramic data with all other available data and making interpretations from this combined information. In this brief section I shall present the data that might conceivably be useful to other students who may wish to use this information for mak- ing other and different interpretations. To supplement my remarks, I persuaded Miss Cronin and Mr. Free- man, graduate students in the Department cf Anthropology, the Univer- sity of Chicago, to pursue two investigations and to report on their efforts. Miss Cronin’s investigation dealt with possible derivation of Snowflake Black-on-White pottery through the analysis of elements of designs. Mr. Freeman’s study was concerned with statistical analysis of the painted pottery types recovered from the excavations and an ordering of the sites based on this analysis. The reports of Miss Cronin and Mr. Freeman follow this chapter. I have not discussed the method of manufacture—securing and pre- paring clays, shaping, polishing or finishing—inasmuch as this problem has been well ventilated several times. Also omitted are such items as origins (except for the chapter on the lineage of Snowflake Black-on- 75 76 PREHISTORY OF EASTERN ARIZONA, I White pottery), paste, tempering, paints, shapes, and decoration. A dis- cussion of these would seem superfluous since all the types mentioned in the alphabetically arranged lists at the end of this chapter have been described and illustrated (see citations in Martin, Rinaldo, and Longacre, 1961, pp. 143-144). The exceptions are Gila Polychrome, for which I cite Haury (1945, pp. 63-80), and Snowflake Black-on-White, a type that we are not yet ready to describe. The uses to which pottery was put may briefly be listed: in the prepa- ration, cooking and serving of foods (the practice of providing separate containers or plates for each individual was unknown to these people); in the storage of water, foods, and seeds; and in ceremonial and mortu- ary rituals. In other reports, we have frequently mentioned “‘trade”’ or “‘intrusive”’ pottery; in this chapter there is no such subdivision. If I possessed data derived from the technological methods of analysis (petrographic and other laboratory results obtained from thin sections) and if I could com- bine these with information regarding style and general appearances of pottery derived from direct inspection, I should be happy to make lists of possible intrusives. These data I do not have. Rare, unique or un- familiar types may be possible intrusives, but I prefer to list them as unknowns until such time as I can avail myself of analytical methods of identifying ceramic materials. Such identification, however, may be slow and costly and it requires special laboratory equipment and a trained ceramist. These, unfortunately, are not always at hand. In Freeman’s report (chapter IV) the author leaned heavily on pottery for relative dating of sites. The pottery types chosen for this purpose had already been dated elsewhere, for the most part by dendrochronology, and have a relatively short time span. This inferential method was chosen because (1) pottery possesses a variety of features and richness of development; and (2) it was the only one open to us for creating a chrono- logical frame of reference, since we lacked absolute dates for any of the sites. The ordering of the sites is probably correct; assigning estimated dates to them is a complex matter, depending as it does on intangible factors, the prejudices of the authors, and unrecorded impressions gained from the excavations. The assignment of dates will be deferred to the last chapter. Miss Cronin found herself involved in the question of ceramic change. Did the changes in design elements come about gradually or suddenly? Long experience in sorting and classifying sherds leads me to believe that pottery represents a continuous stream of development and that changes in design elements and style occurred gradually, for the most part, and PODPTERY We that the potters were not aware that they were taking place. The mech- anisms for producing changes in pottery designs are not well understood. It is often assumed that there is manipulation of designs resulting in fresh- ness and variety of treatment (Bunzel, 1929, p. 57). Rands (1961, p. 333) suggests that in some traditions stylistic changes are made up of small innovations that are cumulative; or that minor changes are in the nature of substitutions rather than accumulations. Whatever may have been the mechanisms for changes in pottery de- signs, one can sense a general drift throughout a larger area. Indeed, even though I can not document it, I advance the speculation that the trend in ceramic designs throughout much of the Southwest may have been “‘drifting’’ along the same general path at roughly the same time levels. In other words, we may have horizon styles (Willey, 1948, p. 8) in the Southwest. A total of 15,243 sherds of all types was recovered from six sites. In chronological order, early to late, the frequencies are as follows: (Coesiinpsoite (earliest) pterant or mrceos sta: soe ao ks ete 4,988 PPNOLOMMSILLE RT Ieee ee clk eee tates 2 FERAL Te cA vee 136 Gane CREATE SEA) ete tard eat Mey Mere RE ce sual hl ay lov Pn ol egal 2,602 Senet Aad cree. ee poe CIA I iss aN" ae acaranel WOM 765 ACTEM Wille vue DO ore erie ioe PES Lee fae cic x io tae y aces 2,188 Great Kiva, Hooper Ranch Pueblo (latest)............. 4,564 PGA eer tee eter ea ae rene ek tie ie-t dete pe ee 15,243 Tables showing total sherd tabulations and percentages for all sites (except Rhoton Site) are presented at the end of this chapter. We have not included any remarks on the pottery types or the architectural de- tails of the Rhoton Site (a very small one) because one day’s digging produced only a few sherds and not much else. Cronin and Freeman wanted, however, to include the Rhoton sherds in their analyses because the designs and types seemed pertinent. Complete sherd counts for all rooms and levels have been published (Martin, Rinaldo, Longacre, and Freeman, 1961). Someone may observe that the total number of sherds for the Hooper Ranch Pueblo (Great Kiva) as given here (4,564) does not agree with the number (4,998) of sherds for the Hooper Ranch Pueblo as given by Freeman in his chapter. Mr. Freeman used the sherd count from the Great Kiva and also from some of the rooms of the Pueblo (dug in pre- vious season, 1959; Martin, Rinaldo and Longacre, 1961). 78 PREHISTORY OF EASTERN ARIZONA, I Fic. 43. Snowflake Black-on-White pottery. WHOLE OR RESTORABLE POTS RECOVERED! 1. Red Mesa Black-on-White bowl (incipient Snowflake Black-on- White?); cat. no. 280955; found in fill 2 of Pithouse A, Goesling Site (fig. 43, right). 2. Snowflake Black-on-White bowl (cat. no. 280954); found on floor of Room 1, Chilcott Site 1 (fig. 43, left). 3. Snowflake Black-on-White pitcher (cat. no. 280935); found near House 2, Chilcott Site 1. 4. Snowflake Black-on-White(?) pitcher (cat. no. 280936); found with burial no. 1, Room A, Thode Site (fig. 43, center). 5. Brown indented corrugated, smudged interior, bowl (cat. no. 280937); found with burial no. 1, Room A, Thode Site (fig. 44, right). 6. Brown indented corrugated, smudged interior, bowl (cat. no. 280938); found with burial no. 1, Room A, Thode Site. 7. Brown indented corrugated jar (cat. no. 280939); found with burial no. 1, Room A, Thode Site (fig. 44, left). 8. McDonald Corrugated bowl (cat. no. 280940); found on floor of Room B, Rim Valley Pueblo (fig. 45). . 9. Woodruff Smudged bowl (cat. no. 280941); found on floor of Room G, Rim Valley Pueblo. 1 Listed in approximate chronological order of sites; earliest sites given first and latest, last. vi ‘DN Fic. 44. Brown indented corrugated pottery. #4h\ : ‘ie Hialer, } McDonald Corrugated bowl. 45. Fic. 19 80 PREHISTORY OF EASTERN ARIZONA, I 10. Heshota-uthla Polychrome(?) jar, miniature (cat. no. 280953); found in floor crypt with sacred stone image; Great Kiva, Hooper Ranch Pueblo. RELATIVE POPULARITY OF SEVERAL OF THE SIGNIFICANT PAINTED POTTERY TYPES These sites are listed according to the seriation or ordering as worked out by Freeman (Chapter IV). 1. Goesling Site; two pithouses dug: oO / oO Red Mesa Black-on-Wihiten. «5.4004 665. 6 eee DA aes KiatuthlannayBlack-on-=\Wihites 7. ae ee eee ae 4.63 2. Chilcott Sites; pithouses, early type surface rooms, and brush shelters: % Snowlakerblack-on=VVnites ae eee eee 19.39 Réserve Black-on=Wihite sito. cen ertion) ecient ie oe 4.11 dtularosasBlack-on-Whiterrs- eee eee eee 225 Kiatuthlanna Black-on-Wihites. .2e)) 45 see eee eee 1.61 Out of total of 2602 sherds, 6 were Wingate Black-on-Red. 3. Thode Site; ‘‘incipient pueblo”’; surface rooms with masonry walls and sub-surface floors, each room close to another but not contiguous: O7. /0 Snowllake: Black-on=VWihiten. ce © ie ee eee 23.00 (TularosaBlack-on=Wihites).. 33), eee ee eee 4.18 Reserve Black-on=White.... 602s eee 2.61 Out of total of 765 sherds, 3 were Wingate Black-on-Red. 4. Rim Valley Pueblo; small pueblo consisting of two units, each of one story, totaling about 25 rooms. No kiva was located. Built near rim of canyon of Little Colorado River: % Red: Mesa: Black-on-Wihites S30 ee hte ee ee oe ee 7.59 Snowtlake/Black-on-=Wihiten eo fs fe ee 6.03 ‘Tularosa: Black-on=Wihitee) 2.3..tes ae ee ee ee 4.62 Wingate Black-on=Nediianace ice cei serie rare 2:29 Out of total of 2,188 sherds, 3 were Houck Polychrome and 2 were St. Johns Polychrome. 5. Great Kiva, Hooper Ranch Pueblo (for description of architec- tural and ceramic details of pueblo, see Martin, Rinaldo and Long- acre, 1961). POTTERY 07 /O iewlarosa: Black-on-WVinite roars cr > heats et. ct cl oe wis a shee 11.00 Mranipete IAB e OMG EG OU sac hsin akc eed pwd See pes 6.77 ips POlmirnea es 2)2 om aden Sa ts sss view oe os LORE 343 Heshota-utblavbolychrome = 4. 5 2:24 saewae ales oie « 2.08 Hours VitlesPolyehrame cin s. sex @ tei aay fe ene ata tee § 2.02 Kawakinasbolyenromen a din ayte Gis en a,3 OGIO an icc 1.88 Taste 1.—TOTALS OF SHERDS, GOESLING SITE No. % Decorated Wares Kiatuthlanna Black-on-White........................... 231 4.63 Ween eda Idee OR-VV DINE: oo oe i i lm he ede ens 1364 27.35 Mite Mound Black-on-Whites.....- 9h sass ance ae 10 .20 Rami BidcR-ON- Wed o,f oh a eos be eee we eS ee 1 .02 Indeterminate Black-on-White.: 2.5.2... .222----c:s+ Bye) ilalteitl Hotalfor Decorated Waressoe o.com uci oe ee eee 2185 43.81 Textured Wares ree plats corrupted (52 oom ese os oon ood wei Pei ns, aad 2 04 Browusndented corvuvated: oa 66% «sca ndae ene ee eee 3 .06 Gray. plat COLL PALE” a oyepeconedsi 2.5 eve aie) 6 ap cele we aed Bre wih Bape 185 Shih iSraveindented COnmupatedia ss) sreile csr c eet ee eee 110 PPA Gray corrugated, wavy or exuberant..................... 61 E22 INTAG IRE CONC ALC wae cient ea eh Fe ah cee sashes a) ole sub Shh Goines 28 56 SAN A-ha Vs eee ree eer ene eke Ash onthe tee ro, dochaysinasleke 460 9.22 needs CORmMIp Ate Ge 1.6): cee SPp eisai edi terecicrs) 5 va Bie) ans Sec ah eee 11 ae IRERSELVE COMMU P ALCO. Crete cic. s irae Ha. eeetbar teks TAB Re acaemE 2 04 Cray cormirdted: DOtLOMIS hia) oem asco entities kus Selous 155508 Sies WotalitorelexturedVWViaKress in. vim fee ow adore nee wets 2417 48.46 Plain Wares J AVPTE VAL Eo. otweiies WCRSRRNG sin Rich Oki ete aie eats ean Pe 120 2.41 UG Teta MELE se as a ie AOE 84 ens te Oat eat a ee eee eI eRe 43 .86 ONO MERI og 69 gc chan 5 Sheet ef Ee vie Soe De ee 145 2.91 San Francisco Red, Smudged Interior.................... 1 02 Titel) DA Ca Tap Soy aes cle c sr payee AY Ee RD Dea wT 1.54 NOtAMOlmeLAlteVVAUES ene i eit an heh ek adie ¢ ns tes 386 7.74 RAITT IRIE nen rye 515 iG ck kee AA pe Skee ee 4988 100.01 81 PREHISTORY OF EASTERN ARIZONA, I Taste 2.—TOTALS OF SHERDS, CHILCOTT SITES Decorated Wares Kiatuthlanna Black-on-=VVibites se eee ere eerie: Red¢Mesa Black-on-Whtter 2... = Sate ccs ee ee eee ee Reserve Black-on=Wihite. . 2c sos oe ete ee een ee Snowllake’ Black-on-White® << 2 ~ cine ee ees erste ete ‘iularosa, Black=-on=Whiter. .2oor Ge Lee ee Ca eee ee Wingate Black-on-Redivu: 22% sja%s cee Wie ieee eee es oi Indeterminate: black-on-red.%. co Gs os ares eee Gee OD sD Indeterminate black-on-white: «.- - 2.5.40 +00 ee eee eee ‘Rotalsfor- Decorated uyViares soe. oe eee eee eee Textured Wares Brown plain corrupatede.... 5 25) ss)-.ce eo fee ee eee Brown plain corruga tec. smudpedsintenor ss) oe eee Brown indentedicormipatede sc ee ase nel ete eee Brown indented corr ugated, smudged anterior. 2.12 2) 4a es (Grayap lai corrupateder oy tans seas are See eee = ee ee (Grayandented comusatede era te er eek ne (Grayapatterned:coumpatede amin.) ers eee eee oe ere MeDonaldi@ornmucated indenteda. a5 or 4-6 eee eee Patterned vorcusated 239 oon b ay vin Ge, oe rie ingen 2 apie, Seen Ailarosa ve aNet Welt Oe Soe idee kar foe igs eee eee ee Indeterminate..... Indented corrugated, red slip interior and exterior......... Indented corrugated Brown indented corr exterior, black-on-white interior....... ugated, fugitive red paint interior...... ‘TotaliiorRextureduWianesianan since eee Cee eee Plain Wares Alma Plaine 2) 7.5 2. Forestdale Smudged Reserve Smudged. . SansPrancwscor eda ois he oh Oe ee eee Woodruff Smudged. Indeterminate..... 1277 Oo i) | PNANNYeR POTTERY Taste 3.—TOTALS OF SHERDS, THODE SITE No. Decorated Wares miatuthianna, Black-on-VW bite, «mies: ids isean oe.4 6 ee ee 16 VES envy tol ACK Olt VW MICE fee ao tap taley orescence wr et a 20 PAPI id ieee AIO VV Che ace Ses 2a nn byte ace Goa ete, MRS 176 Pars a sae -Oiti WNC x. ons dc gost onan Sx paki bat RS a OR Goa 32 Vt ae ARETE cS sieve Wie Saya ey are Cavs Ole 3 indeterminate |plack-on-wiiten 5 crscti ass) citi). aia Be 230 SGV UP ECERG LEE VV AEES sx pwel ocx et 45! po) os + Bee Maek at hee 477 Textured Wares PARES GINA POR UtA DUIALE O Me w '5. 4". se sisice a teks we se ee ee eee «Os 15 Brown plain corrugated, smudged interior................ 1 BVOWivitd enLeGkCORnUGated. a cui acer yes ok n oar ale © cleo ge) Brown indented corrugated, smudged interior............. 2 rity MACE COIDMRATEC Sia iced Haan bg Kee 8 ee mim FD 2 ATEe REC GCOGIU PALE Cet mye a ctonoy-3 ys reReKeiene oat anche tee) < orl ne 8 MGLStErTOMM Atel os Nera ees ees A ceva me ee ae ett ore 3 MoaraliformbexturedaWiaresin nay ytares Sevens ae sie pom ate ae 210 Plain Wares PRUE Mek tetrs eam Wei es ia Stee ce meg wa be ss 51 Smee EINER GEE cA tl Oe wed ten oe Meee ee oe nae es as ee 2 4 NV ERIE TER eT cm se cl te ee Sb Wie ec nese wien ne Oe Oe 4 MIGLERELIIM ALE rae ate See ain ley ye cee tee no RS 20 83 84 PREHISTORY OF EASTERN ARIZONA, Taste 4.—TOTALS OF SHERDS, RIM VALLEY Decorated Wares FigucksPolyGhrome se mo oe cree eer eee ne eee Kratuthlanna Black-on-VWibite- +e oe oe eee Red Mesa: Black-oneWhites =<: cas oe ee cee Reserve) Black-on-W Hite: & <2. ss tees ee ee Sex) ohns7Polychrome. cu tecc terion ee ae Snowflake Black-on-Whites > 2. 2... s+ +s ade eee ek Wnlarosatblack=-on=VVibites ot. cee eee ae eee ‘TularosayWhite-on-Reds okie. 22 ee ee ee Wingate Dlack-on-R edi 5. ieee eae ne Oe ete Indeterminate black-on-red.- 2 2): os ee ee eee Textured Wares Brown plaimcorupated ey.) oh cree ee ree ee eee Brown plain corrugated, smudged interior................ Brownvindentedscormicated crear 2 ery ees eee Brown indented corrugated, smudged interior............. Gray indented corrumated aoe ct oie. Ae ee ee eee Imeisedicormuratedttne a> cuspueil oto. aren ae eee McDonaldeCorcugated Plaine. 6 eo ion ee ae ee McDonald Corrugated indented. = 3c. pee pees cee ee McDonald! CorrmeatedsPatterned’ 1157. ae oe ee Patternedcorrupated <2) cere ee ee oe eee ee Bunchedtcornmugated arcu oy... sav a Ce A ee ee Mularosavtallet Rim 3: 2 esi. tae. eee ee ee AONnedi corrugated’. (8. ey. ceva r ee ee eo, eee Lee eee ee indeterminate: )oe . 2.005.202 22-4 4. Woodrth Smudredi= cee melee eee ee ee eee Sricleteqaaniate ss Jcis aioli hohe Go ee eee hee Oe ee I PUEBLO No. % 3 .14 6 PPea | 11 50 166 (Pew 2 .09 132 6.03 101 4.62 2 .09 50 2.29 8 Bs if 169 Tat 650 329.71 76 3.47 107 4.89 528 24.13 506 25-02 1 .05 3 14 6 .27 19 .87 10 -46 58 2.65 4 .18 5 .23 > .14 35 1.60 33 125 2 09 2 09 1 05 1355 6.17 4 18 177 8.09 POTTERY Taste 5.—TOTALS OF SHERDS, GREAT KIVA, HOOPER RANCH PUEBLO No. Decorated Wares Pause Nilev Poly chromers.eacncwre cy.ieore ok eee 92 KGila PP OlVEnrOMiG ris mete ne ee aes es en a 11 Eleshota-uthlask Oly Gorome ware treo. ora eee ee ce o5 PREVA ge VACUO INNES oA Se ce ee aa x ee 10 Rowaktnagbolychromern. cto ce eee een ae 86 Koyatuthianna: Black-on- White. 5.:,¢-62 cic ee ae ee 3 Pinos Black-on- Gray. tae nt Sete Seen) oe eee ce 3 inedale BlACk-GNeNedn oes eer ern ee Semis enh sien oe i) PiMmedaleyEOlyGHLOMle wey rane see eens ee ee WS) PinnawaLGlaze-on-VWhiteter: eyelget nnd ak ie eos eeu 7 Pintawarblack-on-Red 05 <2). -.as tae su tive, eee oe 6 Pinnawasl Oly CATOMe=). te soyd ei cess es Ae See eee 1 Binnawarked-Ou=VViOitee a cic ere eoce ace ie A atte atten a 3 rerio sholvehronie se aata.s ioe. cca is ae aan ess ek Se ake 5 edi Mesa Black-on-W.initen ser cs. Geoscns ae ise a ee iS RESeLve; DlaGCk=On=V VINE: cp eaec evar ht autiey Rees & eee oe = 12 Be ORs NITRATE Fie ok cas A a ee ee ee ae i we 143 puGwelowsblack-au=Ied ici. ace aa ten oats eas oe oe oe 3 snowllakevblaek-on-VWiiite: cys. 4 se tudes nei ee ee ee 15 BPUMeeeVine A GLYCHIGEME : sic cc fcc w Ycin RR ee oe els wed Be 11 luslarosa Black-Gn-VWilitel. 26.) nee One nae oe ae Lh ee 502 Winn aie rie OiReN otis: Sats adie ane nee es Las 309 indeterminate: black-on-red)..c aa ee ee 288 indeterminate bDlack-ou-whites..)r-as te a eee nee 178 PcErerminate wiite-On-Led yet ea err ie ee oe 6 Indeterminate polycnnomen na. ashes ay eee) ai ee a 31 Motal torDecorated Wares: 9 ciao es Geese 1925 Textured Wares UTS Ae GT Ga ile gpa Be Beal eb Delo eet ly See GN Eee 2 Ort M Ah COTEMEALE rc ices eee as we ok 676 Brown plain corrugated, smudged interior................ 172 BLOWHIMOENLCCCOLUMP ALEK a aie enter sone cians ote cies ora ied es 786 Brown indented corrugated, smudged interior............. 408 RUC ISE COLIN PALER itt a isteach a Aarons une ols 22 McDonald Corrugated Madented . 0... 66g. os sc cee des 13 RMeDaraid Comugated Patterned oie dc ee eee eee ee 1 AT eLMeC COLUM Aten: Wie aie Mei tery ide Ours oes ala epee 91 PETES BS he ge 2 RR Poe oy a ee a ge ile Pee E AI REE RING 5 oe Sn oo vin auth eck Cle nad <8 or ea eR me 4 PEO COVE MALEK a Steere aiken La eR ie 2 ees 4 Be ENN a iti Pye tus ie ok aa Bae ee eicaie Cae 4 xn nish yall 153 85 86 PREHISTORY OF EASTERN ARIZONA, I TaBLE 5.—TOTALS OF SHERDS, GREAT KIVA, HOOPER RANCH PUEBLO (continued) Plain Wares No. AlmasPlain ye a eee bd cohol eae oye incon ee ee 142 Horestdale;Smmnd ped ys mee. earels o eusgera se er ae 12 IeYeL(E aiforey tel blelefo0 logis Aries Meic Meee Newer Ann awelse Soe 19 DA HELANCISCO URECiwer: ela yes ensea cup renee se nee Omer oie ee as 42 Sau) brancisco Red, smudred Interior... 245 anne ens I Wioodriib smudgedh pac. wierac ccc, oe oererr ee aed oeetrrae 53 Irie Eterminate sah ae soe es clors crepe es ee ee 19 Burnished interior, brown ware; not smudged............. 1 Wotalhtor lami aresion vette te ie eine oe ele eee ey eres 295 Total for’Great Kiva) Hooper Ranch Pueblo... .... 2244-252 4564 IV. Statistical Analysis of Painted Pottery Types from Upper Little Colorado Drainage By LEsuiE G. FREEMAN, JR. Research Assistant, Department of Anthropology University of Chicago INTRODUCTION This study was designed to discover whether interpretations more far-reaching than those yielded by our former methods of analysis could be derived from the data at hand from our six sites, without incurring prohibitive expenditures of time and money. The ideal tool for the study had to be one which did not require the intervention of many operations between the raw data as represented by our archaeological collections and the conclusions which could be expected to result. For this reason, a statistical study immediately suggested itself. The par- ticular method chosen as best suited to the task and the data was the Robinson-Brainerd seriation technique (Robinson, 1951; Brainerd, £951). Some criticism of the Robinson-Brainerd method was offered by Lehmer (1951), when the technique was proposed. The Robinson- Brainerd technique does not correct for differences in sample size, and Lehmer proposed that this could be remedied by operating with mean standard errors, instead of the original ‘‘coefficients of similarity.”’ Both the original method as presented by Robinson (1951) and the revision proposed by Lehmer have inherent advantages and disadvantages, which I shall not attempt to evaluate. I have chosen to use the method as originally presented, since Lehmer’s method requires random sampling, or at least a definition of the universe from which the samples are drawn. Our data do not meet these requirements, so the use of parametric statistics in their analysis cannot be justified. In addition, the calculations involved in the original Robinson-Brainerd technique are simpler than those proposed by Lehmer, and the rationale behind the operations is easier for the non-statistician to follow. 87 88 PREHISTORY OF EASTERN ARIZONA, I CHOICE OF MATERIALS It was determined that the materials which best fitted the Robinson- Brainerd method were the painted wares. The types of painted pottery represented in our collections are fairly numerous, and the types them- selves are well enough fixed for the purposes of a seriation. Further, individual types have a temporal existence so limited that one can ex- pect some change in popularity of a given type over a fairly short time period. Some types are well established as horizon markers, and one can date their appearance and disappearance from an assemblage quite well, so that they provide an internal check on the results of any sup- posedly chronological ordering imposed upon them. Limiting the analysis to painted wares had some drawbacks for I was forced to use small samples in the seriations, but I felt that the ad- vantages inherent in the consideration of painted wares alone out- weighed the disadvantages of so doing. Had time permitted, it would have been desirable to reseriate the materials, including some at least of the available utility wares. Since this was not done, I have no idea whether or not it would have yielded the same results, or better or worse ones. It would certainly be worth while to undertake such a study in the future. SOME METHODOLOGICAL CONSIDERATIONS The temporal sequence of the sites themselves could be closely approxi- mated by inspection, but though the ends of the sequence were easily recognizable, the relative temporal order of the Rhoton, Thode, and Chilcott sites was not as evident. I hoped that the seriation would estab- lish a finer chronological sequence than could be drawn by eye, and that once this sequence had been established our attention would be drawn to other factors causing differences between samples. Ideally, if the seriation of a number of samples is correct, any abrupt discontinuity in the materials of one sample compared to the rest, if it is inexplicable by considerations of stylistic change in a single tradition over time, can be due to other factors. Some of these factors are known. The intrusion of a tradition foreign to the area concerned is one. The looting of abandoned sites by culturally dissimilar groups, for example, to pro- cure potsherds for tempering materials, is another. The preservation of obsolete materials as heirlooms, and the mere collection of curiosities _ have also been suggested (Martin and Rinaldo, 1960b, pp. 206-208). While realizing that all the possible factors are not yet known, I hoped that once temporal considerations are controlled, the nature of some such discontinuities would point out one or more possibilities as the more likely causal factor. STATISTICAL ANALYSIS OF PAINTED POTTERY 89 My main interest, then, lay first, in establishing the relative chrono- logical order of the sites; second, in establishing the relative chronological order of the rooms within each site. Therefore, I seriated not only the sites, but the floor materials from each site. Each seriation yielded a probable temporal order of materials, but to determine which end of the sequence was late and which early, the seriation had to include some samples whose relative chronological position was known. Where it was possible, collections from superimposed floors were used, but often I had to include material from a floor and the fill above it to get direction from the seriation. I tried to avoid using fill samples, since they might have accumulated over long periods of time and for that reason might have proven difficult to fit into the seriation. Collections from fills were purposely used in cases where the number of floor samples was so small that the trends in pottery popularity through time based on floor materials alone would have appeared meaningless. My lower working limit of size of sample in this study was 23 sherds. Besides the fact that sample size was limited when I restricted consider- ation to painted wares, large samples often had to be ignored because they behaved as mixed samples in the seriation. In some cases, this may have been due to the continued occupation of a floor throughout the time period represented by the rest of the samples, so that materials from every period were represented in the floor in anomalous proportions. Also, my desire to consider as much floor material as possible often caused me to accept small samples, as the excavated material from floors included fewer sherds than that from fills. Since the samples were so small, I feel that the results of the seriations alone should not be used as anything other than possible corroborating evidence for interpretations drawn from other data, and clues to further investigation. The seriations in themselves do not warrant even the statement of probability of correct- ness usually made in statistical studies. The conclusions drawn in this study refer primarily to the seriated materials. The study would be of little value, however, if the results of the seriation had no reference except to the seriated materials. We must assume that the painted ware samples from floors, at least, are part of pottery assemblages which are correlated with assemblages of other cultural materials. We assume, then, that inferences drawn from the painted ware samples hold generally true for the occupations they represent. The same assumption cannot be made about fill materials. They may, of course, represent more than one occupation. However, the chronological position of these occupations will be that of the mixed painted ware collection representing them. Still, one cannot extend 90 PREHISTORY OF EASTERN ARIZONA, I the inferences drawn from the seriated materials to statements about the occupation of the sites as a whole; they are directly applicable only to the structures and areas excavated. Before proceeding to the actual seriation, I made use of a method which was first developed by Arthur J. Jelinek (1960) for indicating graphically the relative positions of the samples. This method consists in the construction of a ‘“‘map”’ on which the relative similarity among the samples is indicated by their position and the nature of the lines joining them (fig. 46). The location of the samples and the nature of their connections are determined by the respective sizes of the Robinson- Brainerd coefficient of similarity between any two samples. The maps allow one to see at a glance the inter-relationships among samples, and are amenable to both temporal and non-temporal interpretation. With- out this method my task would have been materially more difficult. I relied on it to yield a first approximation to the seriations. (See Martin, Rinaldo, Longacre and Freeman, 1961, for analysis of sherds on which seriations are based.) BASIC PROCEDURE The percentage of each type of painted pottery in each sample was calculated. Only sherds which could be definitely classified were used in this calculation. Each sample was then compared with every other sample. The differences in percentage of each type between the two samples were added, giving a total difference between the two samples. Now the maximum possible difference between two samples is 200. Two samples would be this different if 100 per cent of the pottery in sample 1 were of different types than 100 per cent of the pottery in sample 2. The calculated total difference was subtracted from the maximum possible difference to give the coefficient of similarity. The coefficients of similarity were then placed in a symmetrical matrix. In this matrix, the diagonals, left blank, are relationships of identity, so that the blanks represent coefficients of 200 (the maximum similarity). The ideal arrangement of samples in this matrix shows the highest coefficients on the diagonal, and decreasing coefficients to the upper right and lower left corners. This ideal was approached as closely as possible. The temporal direction of the inter-site seriation was determined by the presence or absence of early and late painted ware types in the end samples. The direction of the intra-site seriations was determined by the positions of one or more floor samples relative to their respective fill samples, or by the relative positions of superimposed floors from the same room. Lastly, graphs of the popularity of each pottery type 63 Key Coefficient of Similarity (d) 180 - 199 170 —179 Sennen 160 -169 ¢Rim Valley Thode SC Chilcott e Rhoton ¢ Goesling Key to (b),(c), & (d) Symbol Coefficient of Similarity 170) = ASI. Iso — 169 150' = 159 ae 140 - 149 1 = Floor $ = Below Floor A= Fill K=Kiva KiL1 = Kiva 1, Floor 1 5At1= Room 5A, Below Floor |} Fic. 46. Schematic illustration of the relative similarity between samples of pot- tery. (a) Chilcott sites; (6) Rim Valley Pueblo; (c) Hooper Ranch Pueblo; and (d) site totals. 91 100 % Red Mesa Black on White 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 Kiatuthlanna Black on White 20 White Mound Black on White Al2 Atl All A Trench Sample 1=Floor {= Below Floor Al2=RoomA, Floor 2 A Trench = Trench through room A Fic. 47. Percentages of three pottery types by levels at the Goesling Site. 92 STATISTICAL ANALYSIS OF PAINTED POTTERY 93 based on the percentage of each type in the total painted ware assemblage in each sample were constructed, so that the fluctuations in popularity of each type through time could be observed. THE INTER-SITE SERIATION The map shows the relationships of the site samples (fig. 46, d). Sample sizes and the final seriation matrix for this ordering appear below. TaB_e 6.—SAMPLE SIZE OF SHERDS AND FINAL MATRIX FOR INTER-SITE SERIATION Sample Size Number of Site sherds WRG an as a Cia a et a Mg cana coe amino 1587 SEENON LGN ees terse ote cht We oer ee nee een cream et eye nak tence 41 REM BE iar. 1-6 cone pe eg OEE ERT oh LO es bE ay 695 in (oYe Coe aaets take cis Speer tcl ETRE: Coo Ca ane ee ee 233 sPevaaTat WAU spi 9 Sic See RCO aie ere sa et cna ea Men ta cote etree re we oe 418 Heed OIE Ne neeeg er eter el Neran fee Meat cot eee RSA GIT eC ds oo eo 4998 Final Matrix Goesling Rhoton Chilcott Thode Rim Valley Hooper Goesling.... 2... = 24 15 12 5 oi Riboton..256)¢ 24 = 167 165 84 17 PO ds» a 15 167 — 183 108 20 PEEING) as Ge eas 12 165 183 = 105 49 Rim Valley.... 5 84 108 105 = 7 PAGOVER: S50 x x < : y 17 20 49 Tl = Due to the appearance of late pottery types at the Hooper Ranch, the order is from Goesling (early) to Hooper (late). INTERPRETATION The Goesling Ranch Site and the Hooper Ranch Site are at opposite ends of the seriational scale, and both show little similarity in painted ware collection to the rest of the sites or to each other. The Chilcott Ranch Site and the Rhoton and Thode Ranch Sites show much more similarity among themselves than any of them shows to any other site. We seem to have an early site, Goesling, separated widely in time and cultural affiliations from a group of three sites, Rhoton, Chilcott, and Thode. Separated from them by relatively great divergences in sherd collection is the Rim Valley Site, which, however, resembles them more than it does Hooper. This is the more striking since the geographic 94 PREHISTORY OF EASTERN ARIZONA, I distance from the Hooper Ranch Site to the Rim Valley Site is very short, and one might have expected that the Rim Valley Site and Hooper Ranch Site could have been occupied coterminously by people with much the same cultural apparatus. How much such differences are due to non-random representation of the total settlement at each site in the excavated material is impossible to determine, but the gap exists between the excavated portions of the two settlements. THE INTRA-SITE SERIATIONS The Goesling Site.—This site was not seriated internally, as only three unmixed samples were available and all three were from Room 1A: material from Floor 2, a collection of sherds from the fill between Floors 2 and 1, and the later material from Floor 1 itself. The percentages of each of the three major types of painted ware are shown in figure 47; one type, Wingate Black-on-Red, was excluded, since it is represented by only one sherd, which was found in a mixed collection from Room A, level 2, including both floor and fill material. Of the remaining three pottery types, Red Mesa Black-on-White forms early a large percentage of the total assemblage of painted wares and this percentage declines somewhat in time. Kiatuthlanna Black-on-White makes up only 7 per cent of the total painted ware assemblage on Floor 2, increasing to 16 per cent on Floor 1. White Mound Black-on-White constitutes an al- most negligible percentage of the assemblage throughout time (less than 1 pervcent). TABLE 7.—SAMPLE SIZE OF SHERDS FROM GOESLING SITE Number of Room sherds AN AEMGOT Dir ecstasy stays che Ae dere tone uk aR Te A ee 307 A: belowsBloor Des 42 eee), Ae oe ea eo ee 466 AS IGG Be coos eh oh Sat RS suey er Benes oe ees 233 Trench through: Room Ay 604+ ss 4 sly be Stem ma eet ee a pute ee 454 (Floor 1 is the upper floor) The Goesling Site is relatively homogeneous, but it must be remem- bered that only two floors in one room are represented in the Goesling samples, and the materials represent a single, short cultural horizon. The Rhoton and Thode Sites——Material from these two sites was not amenable to seriation, except in the inter-site comparisons. It is largely surface and fill materials, which could not be ordered well, alone. The Thode Ranch Site materials are all from room fills, with no large samples STATISTICAL ANALYSIS OF PAINTED POTTERY 25 from floors and thus do not possess the internal stratigraphic relationships necessary to determine the direction of the seriation. The Chilcott Site—This is actually three sites. Since Site 3 and Site 2 show a much greater degree of similarity in painted ware assemblage than either does to Site 1, it was determined to treat Sites 3 and 2 as units, mixed though they are, in the seriation of the materials from Site 1. In Site 1, the only definitely unmixed sample is that of Room 6, below the floor. However, since it was felt that graphs of pottery popu- larity were desirable for the Chilcott Site, fills from both Room 6 and all other rooms were seriated. The results and sample size are shown below. TasLe 8.—SAMPLE SIZE OF SHERDS FROM CHILCOTT SITE AND FINAL MATRIX Sample Size Number of Room sherds GaNElOWAHOOL Set oii rie te ee ein aes Lee 49 Gis ll ee RE ae PA oie te Ae OM nen ekg or an DTC Cer ENe caer 35 AOE) Meee Bh tea a Ear ALIN hg seas MCG a atloy es sity Diol wp acae. eee ota 119 Hr dTLicmreeeaetoe: , Mme cre Rots tame aes ieteae Se te oa Me ete Pate wee 55 Dhalilionety. sea avin amet tet. tame ee Re rok ito ME ode aunt Ay, 2 214 AeA eae Ae ye pe con RE ee ee PU A ane cide th a, eae Bee 103 2580 THN Goer Peete, NORE SE Me aah Re ee tani ec Re ee Ea ie Pe Ree RR Ree Ce 25 Stat an ee LIN e te ade, haa ate tre Nes PR Re Es Geb ae oo 29 Syren es +e Wms ates op Tere tene cote Detter hy ORAL ee ae ene roars eh ROOM. sho « 6 5 1 6 2. 4 3 Site Site below floor fill fill fill fill fill fill 3 2 6, below fiSOr'...: « - 169 153 134 133 122 122 110 104 Bettie ee 169 - 184 161 159 145 1152 134 130 hase ae get bs 153 184 - 177 175 161 156 138 135 (9 Ue ae 134 161 WAT, ~ 190 179 171 159 150 a TD ais ees 133 159 7s, 190 180 169 154 150 - 161 163 148 Dy tll shies 122 152 156 171 169 161 = 181 178 RPS ie sien 110 134 138 159 154 163 181 = 178 BUGS vers. 104 130 135 150 150 148 178 178 = It will be noted that there is a high degree of similarity between each sample and the samples immediately adjacent to it. The excavated areas represented in the seriation seem to show a rather uniform direction of change in painted ware assemblage, which one would expect, if a single cultural group had occupied the three sites during the time period here represented. The uniformity of change, it must be remembered, 96 PREHISTORY OF EASTERN ARIZONA, I may be non-temporal, and a function solely of the representation of the assemblages we have from the excavation. It is, however, hard to see why any other factor beyond temporal change need be called upon to explain the seriation results. Further, the fact that this uniformity is shown on the pottery graphs, with all types changing in quite regular fashion, adds weight to the significance of the results and makes it less likely that they are purely accidental. The position of the materials from Room 6, below the floor, and the fill in Room 6 in the seriation make it reasonable to assume that the materials below the floor in Room 6 are early, and those in the fill of Room 3 are late in Site 1. The seriation also places materials from Site 3 and Site 2 as later than any from Site 1 and justifies the conclusion that Site 2 is later than Site 3. We also note that all the excavated rooms on Site 1 had filled or been filled before the materials from Sites 3 and 2 accumulated. Since the collections from Sites 3 and 2 are all fill or surface materials it is possible that late Site 1 and Site 3 were occupied contemporaneously. Figure 48, a and 6, shows the percentage of each type of painted ware in the total painted ware assemblage in each sample. The per- centage of Wingate Black-on-Red has been omitted, since it occurs sporadically, late, and in very small quantities (only 4 sherds on the whole site). The graph shows the increase of Snowflake Black-on-White from 46 per cent to 90 per cent, the decrease over time of Reserve Black- on-White from 44 per cent to only 2 per cent, and the appearance of Kiatuthlanna Black-on-White, its climb in popularity to 11 per cent of the total late in Site 1, and its absence from Sites 3 and 2. Tularosa Black-on-White is present in small proportions of the total assemblage throughout the sites. The presence of Kiatuthlanna Black-on-White here is problematical. It is chronologically out of place. Arguments that it appears due to the discovery of an abandoned site, whence it was brought to the Chilcott Site to serve as tempering material, seem to me unconvincing. If sherd temper were being used, enough broken local material should have been available for use by the time Kiatuthlanna Black-on-White appears on the site. Furthermore, one would expect that the curve for Kiatuthlanna Black-on-White would not show the gradual increase that it does, but rather either a fairly uniform percentage _ or a random increase and decrease, if for some reason it were a popular tempering material and constantly available. I would be able to reconcile an isolated peak or two on the graph with the discovery of small quan- tities of Kiatuthlanna Black-on-White by one or two fortunate Chilcott residents, but it seems to me that an explanation of the present curve 100 100 %o % 90 90 ae — Red Mesa Bicck on White —— 80 80 / —-— Tularosa Black on White / 70 70 os As —-—-— Kiatuthlanna Black on oe = 60 White 60 par / 50+7 —-—-— Snowflake Black on White 40 — Reserve Black on White GN on. IA OA 2A Os Sa 1S3. S2 Sample (b) 100 100 %o % 90 —— Red Mesa Black on White 90 —-— Reserve Black on White 80 —-— Tularosa Black on White 80 —— Wingate Black on Red 70 —-— Kiatuthlanna Black on 70 ——-— Snowflake Black on White White AIeGL 26 CAE. RE ee ede ya are ae Pec ree ee eee 1B: Bs HOOP: fk es chs es oes Aas sade Pa eee aE RLS a ee 70 Neg 11 OA ee eee ee Re See Ae Ar eee er ee aa ee 45 Breil Ceres Merete ee brn teas sac ae ae ae eC oo Oe ne te 29 Ds HOOT: Seth a keto ie ae oho hend, SSeS her ra eG eR OT «ee ee ore 30 FAS HloOr.... Somtateon shoals Qiceaeve Mos he Pa eRe ee ee ee eee 50 Final Matrix ROOM 2A eee ue A G CG B A B F H floor floor fill floor fill fill floor floor Ae HOOTH Gs ates hee - 134 140 111 100 76 61 112 Coors see ce LS: - 174 174 143 129 5 gh 119 Cl ofl 2 ies eee ee IAD 174 - 164 154 129 111 99 ibs floors) occ. ee eel 174 164 - 140 132 120 98 AMA eric oan ee 100 143 154 140 - 174 153 97 Beil 6 ee ee 76 129 129 132 174 — 149 86 POO) aba 61 117 111 120 153 149 - 118 He floor usa cheats nll 119 99 98 97 86 118 - As can be seen, the sample from Room H, floor is more similar in the assemblage of painted wares to samples at the ends of the represented _ time range than it is to any of the middle material. This may be because it is a “mixed sample.’ This would be the case if H, floor had been occupied throughout the time period represented, and if, in addition, more pottery had been broken and trampled into the floor during both early and late times than during the middle period. STATISTICAL ANALYSIS OF PAINTED POTTERY 99 As can be seen from figure 46, 5, where the relationships between the samples are presented graphically, all but H, floor are related in a more or less linear temporal manner, but H, floor is a “flyer,” and the reasons for its differences from the other samples must be due to something other than chronologically based change in an isolated cultural assemblage, if the seriation is correct. However, the samples are so small that speculation on this point based on the seriation alone may lead to fallacious conclusions. It is worth mentioning that if more than one sample like H, floor had been included in the seriation, seriating the data would have been well-nigh impossible. Figure 48, c, d, shows the increase of Kiatuthlanna and Tularosa Black-on-White through time, the decline of Reserve Black-on-White from a large percentage of the total painted ware assemblage (neglecting H, floor), and the increase and subsequent decline of Snowflake Black- on-White and, to a lesser extent, Wingate Black-on-Red. It is interesting that the direction of change in popularity is diametrically opposed between Snowflake and Wingate, at least until the sample from F, floor is reached. I am tempted to speculate on very tenuous grounds again. If at least two clans occupied this site during the represented time range, and if they differed in the manufacture of pottery so that one clan made a higher percentage of Snowflake Black-on-White in proportion to Wingate Black-on-Red than the others, then perhaps alternating clan dominance would account for the appearance of this curve. The sample from H, floor, as expected, behaves anomalously, the percentage of Reserve Black-on-White in particular being very high. Once again, Kiatuthlanna Black-on-White is present in a late setting. The Hooper Ranch Pueblo.—This site afforded the most dubious seriation of any constructed with these materials. As can be seen from figure 46, c, the positions of samples in relation to one another scatter widely. Three samples, Kiva 3, floor, 5B, floor, and 3A, floor 2, bear little resemblance to the other samples, and little to each other. There is not a single pottery type in common between 3A, floor 2 and 5B, floor. As mentioned earlier, without the aid of the graphic presentation afforded by Chart 2 there would have been no indication of which sample should start the seriation, or in what direction it would proceed. Even the chart does not show the discrepancies between 3A, floor 2 and 5B, floor, and between them and the rest of the samples as well, as both the aforementioned samples actually cannot be placed on the chart. They have only been so placed for ease in comprehending the overall picture. The seriation itself was based on 11 samples. Sample size and the final seriation matrix are shown below. 100 PREHISTORY OF EASTERN ARIZONA, I Tas_e 10.—SAMPLE SIZE OF SHERDS FROM HOOPER RANCH PUEBLO AND FINAL MATRIX Sample Size pes oO Room sherds BA MOOV Diva coo ate tre Se Ca IEE ane, ee eT car a ee ens 27 1 OAS SH OOR2 hin ko hoe nhs Siete eee CR I ne ee aa 64 AAT HOOK is fst "dood S sdycte sere RAS, CRIT Pee o> ohh MMs pee AE ea taeca e 584 SAC below hoor Leys «eee vio oe cae eh ear cee cen ee eee 3M) DASE GOL, races ste eqorstaccrcierere Sree TONE eT eRe CE ee neg 38 DA SHOORM TPs iit. Sid. ated LE Le RA Cas OE iS ete ne eee mR 30 NI DAN MOOT: carteye a +s PRO RA OREO oe oe Ta ce ee 28 civ doors Tite, eeetoeee pone tens Mere ee ore Peete ieee ee ee a 113 ST Vah SAH OOR? Veeco Ne hee den eater ee preaiclees rents em meee ae 515 ovat KOO) Gs, een ee ee RE eeE Te eR, Senn) S Cio ead eee erate 43 £)) B59 6 COTO) cea baat pil eRe Shan ore! Ae Nat we Ms eh ene aad. bien i ee OE 2 es 83 Final Matrix Room see eels ZAY 1OAy 4Ay SA 9A 9A 112A) Kiva Kiva (GAs floor floor floor below floor floor floor 1 3 floor floor 2 2 Dee OOT: a2 1 floor1 floor SAG HOOr 2a. 44a co.. - Be eo tA?) CAD) Oe AA 47 Sy eon 0 OAS Moore cease. ihe = ile 98 83 112 114 86 106 96 48 AAW LOOT nis aiiea eh oe By Ale — eS 2 eel OS een ee SAN belowloor 1a. 42 98 SL Re 345 328128) i See DACHOOT Wt. sis ae AD) + 83h Wi A173) © 143 1361345 OS h D4 eee OA HOOTe aera c eva fe 87 At?” W210 145) 1437 = 1445 136 onl O eee IDASHoorssse. sce | 44 4 Sy 182 S68 144 GS) 135 4s Keivaels loons mceiya e AD 86) SA Oet289 DSA 1366S — 29a Ome Keivaes HOO eer 37 LOG) SOS 397 9 0S GG: SiS Si 20 — eS SAMHOOr ase) saree. ol = Ome OS a O50 O4e 20a 4 se wO se oe 49 5SBetloorres anes OMIEAST GAD 2 ies ol 260. 3379939) 53250 The direction of the seriation is probably from 3A, floor 2 (early) to 5B, floor (late), as shown by the relative positions of floor 2 and floor 1, Room 9A. It would not be wise to base any conclusions on the results of this seriation alone. Figure 49, a-d, shows the percentage of the total decorated ware sample constituted by each of the major types represented in the sample. The anomalous character of the samples of 3A, floor 2 and 5B, floor can be seen well. There is a seeming similarity between the assemblage of 3A, floor 2, at the Hooper Ranch, and that of H, floor, at the Rim Valley site (fig. 48, c, d). On this very tenuous basis the suggestion is ventured that there may be some sort of cultural similarity between the late settlers at Rim Valley and the early ones at the Hooper Ranch, and that the settlers of both sites during this common period of occupation, if such it be, belong to a tradition divorced from that of the main settlement at either site. Still, it is best to remember that the data here presented are insufficient to warrant these speculations. Attention is also called to the fact that two sherds of Kiatuthlanna Black-on-White 100 — Tularosa Black on White Tele) % fo — Reserve Black on White 90 —-— Pinedale Polychrome 30 --— Querino Polychrome —-- Red Mesa Black on White —-— Snowflake Black onWhite JOAL2 SAt 9A1LI KIL1 BAL 1OAL2 SAt 9A1L1 Kil BAL Sample Sample (a) (b) 100 100 So %o 90 — St. Johns Polychrome 90 — Wingate Black on Red 80 --- Kwakina Polychrome 80 —--— Heshotauthla Polychrome 70 Pinedale Black on Red 70 —-— Springerville Black on White 60 60 50 50 40 40 30 ee 20 20L A Oo Jeg ie a3 = Oo ZAL2 | 4AL2 | SAL2 12AL 5BL 3AL2 | 4AL2 | 9AL2 12AL 5BL 1OAL2 5SAt 9A1I Ki! BAL 10A1L2 5At SALI Kill BAL Sample Sample (c) (d) 1 = Floor += Below Floor K = Kiva ZA12 = Room 3A, Floor2 KiL1= Kival, Floor 1 Fic. 49. Trends in painted pottery types illustrated by samples from Hooper Ranch Pueblo. 101 102 PREHISTORY OF EASTERN ARIZONA, I (not shown on the graph) were found on Kiva 1 floor, and two on Kiva 3 floor. This may be accidental, but it also suggests an earlier provenience for the materials in those samples than is indicated in the seriation. Evidently Tularosa Black-on-White was the dominant ware at the Hooper Ranch Site, and it seems to have increased in popularity until the terminal occupation of Room 9, floor 2; then it decreased. Wingate Black-on-Red has a late “‘vogue”’ and then decreases, being at its highest peak of popularity earlier than Heshota-uthla Polychrome, which does not reach its peak until we reach the material from the floor of Room 8A. Both types have disappeared from the floor of Room 5B. Room 5B is an anomaly, much different in cultural content from the rest of the rooms. In it, St. Johns Polychrome has taken the dominant position held by Tularosa Black-on-White in the rest of the excavated materials. Room 5B, floor gives the appearance of being a mixed sample, if the rest of the seriated materials are in their proper place. The “‘pottery popularity’> curves make it seem more probable that the seriation is not entirely correct, as their fluctuations have less the appearance of normal curves than is the case on the other sites. CONCLUSIONS (A) The site materials studied in this section seem to fall into three distinct groups, each with some temporal duration, to which I shall refer as periods 1 through 3. The earliest period seems to be that represented by the materials from the Goesling Site. This period is characterized, in the seriated material, by 80-92 per cent of Red Mesa Black-on-White, from 7-19 per cent of Kiatuthlanna Black-on-White, and a trace of White Mound Black-on-White. Period 2, represented by the materials from Rhoton, Chilcott, and Thode, is much different in painted ware assemblage from the first. At Chilcott, Snowflake Black-on-White has appeared and dominates the painted wares, becoming more popular while Reserve Black-on-White becomes less popular, until at last Snowflake Black-on-White makes up 90 per cent of all the painted wares. Tularosa is ever present, but only from 2 to 9 per cent of the total painted wares. Kiatuthlanna Black-on- White appears early, climbs to 11 per cent and then disappears. Red Mesa Black-on-White constitutes a small but increasing percentage (to 6 per cent of total painted wares) until the end of our represented period. Though Rim Valley is different from the earlier sites, it bears some remarkable similarities to the Chilcott Site. The earlier portion of the Rim Valley Site shows a quite similar increase of Snowflake and decrease STATISTICAL ANALYSIS OF PAINTED POTTERY 103 of Reserve, though Snowflake does not seem to have attained the popu- larity at Rim Valley that it had at Chilcott. The outstanding differences in the excavated collections from the Rim Valley and Chilcott sites seem to be three in number. First, Tularosa Black-on-White makes up a high percentage of the painted wares of Rim Valley quite ‘‘early,” and con- tinues to increase in popularity through time. Second, there is between 5 and 20 per cent of Wingate Black-on-Red until quite “late”? at Rim Valley. Third, the late portion of the seriated materials from Rim Valley shows the decline in popularity of Snowflake Black-on-White ware. Rim Valley seems to me assignable in part to Period 2, in part to Early Period 3, both parts showing new cultural influences. ce There may be a cultural stage temporally intermediate between Rim Valley and Hooper, as mentioned in the discussion of the Hooper Ranch seriation, and during which both Hooper and Rim Valley were occupied at more or less the same time. However, the evidence for this, from the floor of Room H at Rim Valley, and floor 2, Room 3A, at Hooper, is dubious. At the Hooper Ranch Site, which represents Period 3, the excavated material is distinguished from the previous materials by the appearance of late types of painted wares, among them Heshota-uthla Polychrome, Pinedale Polychrome and Black-on-Red, and St. Johns Polychrome. Tula- rosa Black-on-White increases in popularity until Room 9, floor 2, and from then onward it declines. The presence of both early and late ma- terials in the Hooper Ranch collections suggests that the duration of occu- pation represented by the Hooper materials is a long one in comparison with the materials from the other sites. The presence of Red Mesa in this context seems strange. I strongly question the fixing of Room 5B, floor as “‘late’’ at the Hooper Ranch. Although the seriation ‘‘works” best with Room 5B, floor in that position, the sample is so anomalous that were the sample from Room 3A, floor 2 not included in the seriation, Room 5B, floor would seriate equally well at either the late or the early end of the se- quence. I am less inclined to doubt the early position of Room 3A, floor 2, though there are good grounds for so doing. Chief among the reasons it has been included is its resemblance to Room H, floor, at Rim Valley. If I had no more than the data included in this chaper, I should be inclined to derive from them an initial cultural phase represented by the Goesling Ranch Site; a ‘‘gap”’ in the cultural record; and a new phase represented by the materials from Chilcott. The early portion of Rim Valley would then seem to me to be a blend of the Chilcott and another 104 PREHISTORY OF EASTERN ARIZONA, I phase, including an increasing amount of Tularosa Black-on-White and the continuation of Wingate Black-on-Red in the painted ware assem- blage. I should be tempted to see the further development of the Rim Valley phase in the early materials at Hooper Ranch, and either the development or adoption of a number of late painted wares there. After the “abandonment” of Rim Valley, I should be tempted to postulate the intrusion into the Rim Valley-Hooper area of a group of “‘foreigners”’ with a distinct material culture and their subsequent withdrawal or amalgamation with natives of the area. These speculations are, of course, not seriously offered as any kind of culture-historical scheme for the area. I realize that most of them may well prove totally erroneous, but their presentation may enable the vis- ualization of further problems, or corroboration of results from other lines of research. (B) From the position of the samples from Room 3, fill, at Chilcott (25 sherds), Room F, floor (30 sherds) and Room H, floor (50 sherds), at Rim Valley, and Room 3A, floor 2, at Hooper (27 sherds) in the seriation, it is obvious that such samples are not suited to the Robinson- Brainerd seriation method. A swift glance at the Hooper Ranch seriation will show that even larger samples don’t always seriate well with this method. This is probably because such samples have been accumulated over long periods of time. Because of the unsatisfactory nature of some of our samples and the limitations of the method, I again stress two statements previously made. First, no inference made above applies to any site as a whole. These statements apply only to the materials from which they are drawn. Second, the evidence from the seriation is to be taken as suggestive, and in some cases, it is hoped, corroborative, but never as conclusive. How- ever, I do feel that techniques like the Robinson-Brainerd seriation method are now and will increasingly become of utility in studies like the present one. I hope I have demonstrated some of the utilitarian aspects of such methods in archaeological analysis, while realizing still more that I have demonstrated some of their limitations. I have been encouraged rather than discouraged by the results of the applications of the Robinson-Brainerd method to our data. The method should yield much more dependable results when applied to large random samples of surface materials or to large scale excavations. V. An Analysis of Pottery Design Elements, Indicating Possible Relationships Between Three Decorated Types By CONSTANCE CRONIN Research Assistant, Department of Anthropology University of Chicago During the summer of 1960 members of the archaeological staff of Chicago Natural History Museum excavated seven sites in the Little Colorado drainage of eastern Arizona. When the pottery was classified in the field, five established types were separated—Kiatuthlanna Black- on-White, Red Mesa Black-on-White, Reserve Black-on-White, Tularosa Black-on-White and Snowflake Black-on-White. The first four types have been relatively well studied, but Snowflake Black-on-White was less well known. It was first named by W. and H. S. Gladwin (1934, p. 22) and described by Colton (1941, pp. 62-63); however, it had never been completely analyzed from a large sample and the descriptions tended to be too general for use in a detailed study of relationships with other pottery types. The present study was undertaken in an effort to analyze the con- stituent elements of the designs found on Snowflake Black-on-White pottery and also to inquire into the degree of relationship among the five types. The basic factor chosen for analysis was the design element. Each sherd was classified by its design element, and in this way small discrete units were separated and then recombined so as to reveal basic units and groups of designs which enable the worker in this field to recog- nize any one pottery type as a distinctive entity and which set it off from all other pottery types. Somewhat similar but not identical studies had been undertaken in the past. Beals, Brainerd and Smith (1945, pp. 87-137) compared Kana-a, Black Mesa, Sosi and other pottery type designs (but not elements) from a series of sites. Martin (1939, pp. 431- 445) studied, by element, Abajo Red-on-Orange as compared with La Plata Black-on-Orange. Therefore the present project was a pilot study to ascertain the lineage of Snowflake Black-on-White pottery, and its 105 106 PREHISTORY OF EASTERN ARIZONA, I subsequent growth through time, thereby adding to the general fund of theory concerning the relationships and changes of pottery types in any given area. Since so much archaeological reconstruction relies heavily on ceramics, not only in the Southwest but also in Central and South America and the Near East, systematic studies are vital as aids in these reconstructions. A cursory study of the sherds in the field suggested that Snowflake Black-on-White might have evolved from earlier ceramic types, perhaps specifically from Kiatuthlanna Black-on-White and Red Mesa Black-on- White. A superficial inspection of illustrations of sherds and whole pieces of Kana-a Black-on-White and Black Mesa Black-on-White suggested that these types might also have influenced the development of Snowflake Black-on-White. One should bear in mind, however, that the Snowflake Black-on-White found by the Museum staff was nearly always associated with Kiatuthlanna and Red Mesa Black-on-White. The work was divided into two phases: the first, undertaken by Walter Boyer, formerly a ceramic restorer at the Museum, and myself, involved the actual sorting and setting up of the inventory of design elements present in all five pottery types; the second, that of interpreting the results, was primarily my own work, but a number of people aided me greatly by their criticisms and advice. This group includes Dr. Paul S. Martin, Dr. John B. Rinaldo, Dr. Elaine A. Bluhm, Mr. William A. Longacre and especially Dr. Arthur J. Jelinek, all of whom have my heartfelt thanks. This paper follows the two-fold division used in the study itself. SORTING The 2188 sherds were sorted on the basis of design elements only, regardless of type. The elements were delineated as each new combina- tion was observed for the first time. No attempt was made to fit a new and slightly different element into an existing category, for it was felt that some of these apparently minor differences might become important when the changes in one pottery type were followed through time. In this way, 45 categories of design elements were finally separated. The sherds were then re-sorted into types by sites. Thus the Rim Valley group was sorted into ‘‘Kiatuthlanna at Rim Valley,” ‘“‘Snow- flake at Rim Valley” and ‘“‘Red Mesa at Rim Valley.”’ This sorting was done by using the generally accepted criteria for pottery type recognition: presence or absence of slip; whiteness of slip; intensity of paint; temper; ANALYSIS OF POTTERY DESIGN ELEMENTS 107 proportion of black to white; fineness and blockiness of elements; posi- tioning of design on a pot; and the general ‘“‘feel”’ of the total design and technique of manufacture on each sherd. The last step in the sorting process subdivided each of the groups by design elements of pottery types at sites. Each of the numerous groups then contained ‘‘X design element of Y type at Z site.’ The chart (Table 11) of total design elements, prepared after the first step, was utilized here so that the number of elements remained the same. ANALYSIS In order to regularize the vast amount of data and the numerous variables in this study, a series of graphs and bar charts was utilized. These suggested a closer relationship between Kiatuthlanna and Snow- flake than between Red Mesa and Snowflake, as had first been con- jectured, and clearly showed that the relationship between these types was much closer at earlier sites than at the later sites, since fewer design elements were shared through time. (Since the Tularosa and Reserve types proved too divergent in elements shared with the other three types, we decided to omit them from the analysis. Our main concern was with establishing relationships, and these two types, though perhaps related to the rest, were sufficiently dissimilar to justify exclusion.) To clarify further the relationships between Kiatuthlanna, Red Mesa and Snowflake, the data were quantified by applying the Brainerd- Robinson method (Brainerd, 1951; Robinson, 1951) to the percentages of each design element, both for each type and for each site (Tables 12 and 13). (For an explanation of the Brainerd-Robinson method, see p. 87.) Two series of coefficients of similarity were arrived at, one of which showed degree of similarity within types at different time levels: Red Mesa at Chilcott 1, with Red Mesa at the earlier site, Goesling, and at the later site, Chilcott 2 (Table 12). These figures confirmed and agreed with our previous impressions regarding relationships between types and also revealed some additional unexpected correlations which are set forth below. CONCLUSIONS It is apparent that no firm conclusions can be drawn from this study, but some possible correlations can be suggested on both a specific and a general theoretical level. By the use of the processes described above, our initial hypothesis concerning the relationships between Red Mesa and Snowflake was not 108 PREHISTORY OF EASTERN ARIZONA, I confirmed—Red Mesa and Snowflake are not closer to each other than either is to Kiatuthlanna—but a different relationship is apparent (Table 13). In the earliest site (Goesling) Snowflake Black-on-White is probably not present and the coefficient of similarity between Kiatuthlanna and Red Mesa is 121.2, pointing out a definite but not extremely close rela- tionship between the two types. In the next later site (Chilcott 1) Snow- flake appears for the first time, along with Kiatuthlanna and Red Mesa. Here the similarity between Kiatuthlanna and Red Mesa has dropped to 94.4 and the relationship of Kiatuthlanna to Snowflake is 137.6, while the ratio of Red Mesa to Snowflake is 98.0. At this time level, then, Snowflake is closer to Kiatuthlanna than Red Mesa is to Kiatuthlanna or to Snowflake. At Rim Valley, another site where all three pottery types occur to- gether but at a later time level than at Chilcott 1, the figures (Table 13) reveal greatly attenuated relationships between the three types. The relationship between Kiatuthlanna and Red Mesa has dropped to 57.0, that of Kiatuthlanna and Snowflake has decreased to 97.9, and the Red Mesa-Snowflake ratio is now 68.1. The decreasing degree of closeness of all three types to each other is clearly evident here, but the figures also show that Snowflake is still closer to Kiatuthlanna than it is to Red Mesa or Red Mesa to Kiatuthlanna. One might postulate that Snowflake began as a 2-1 blend of Kiatuth- lanna and Red Mesa design elements not long after Red Mesa had grown out of Kiatuthlanna. It is perhaps naive to say that pottery types change through time but the question here is, how do they change? If we can demonstrate that one type came about as the result of a blending of manufacturing principles of two existing types, then we should be able to demonstrate the ‘“‘drift’? of each. The concept of linguistic drift was formulated by Sapir (1921) but it may be equally applicable here. An initial unity between Kiatuthlanna as the parent and Red Mesa and Snowflake as daughter types does not necessarily imply the same line of development for each through time. And, indeed, this study shows that the very close similarity of types near the time of origin may give way to quite individual and specific evolutionary lines as stylistic trends impel each type in a different direction from its source. _ Even if the suggestion given above is true, we still expected to find the same regular though decreasing set of relationships of a type through time as we found between types at a site. For instance, if the coefh- cient of similarity of Kiatuthlanna to Snowflake at Chilcott 1 was 137.6, we assumed that the coefficient of similarity of Snowflake at Chilcott 1 ANALYSIS OF POTTERY DESIGN ELEMENTS 109 and Snowflake at Chilcott 2 would be higher, since a type should be closer to itself than it is to another type. But such is not the case, for generally speaking there is a greater degree of similarity (shared design elements) between types at one site (e.g., Kiatuthlanna and Snow- flake at Chilcott 1) than between different time levels of one type (e.g., Kiatuthlanna at Chilcott 1 and Kiatuthlanna at Rim Valley). Red Mesa in particular exhibits an extremely erratic course, jumping from 76.8 at Goesling to 107.5 at Chilcott 1 and then back down to 67.9 at Chilcott 2. Since any coefficient of similarity below 100 is all but meaningless for showing relationships, are we to assume that Red Mesa is more Red Mesa at Chilcott 1 than it is at the other sites? Snowflake is more regular in its passage through time, but even here the divergence at the latest time period, Rim Valley, is greater than its similarity at the point of origin, Chilcott 1. Kiatuthlanna is difficult to assess here since it is found at only three sites, but even so the figures seem meaningful, since the extremely low coefficient of similarity is not what one would expect to find in one pottery type. With respect to the design elements themselves, several trends are apparent in our limited sample both with regard to uses of elements in the decoration of the three types, and with respect to the overall distribution of the elements through time. The observations for the three types are as follows: Kiatuthlanna Black-on-White——Fine line and checkerboard decoration occurred in all samples and the distribution of ticked fine lines and ticked triangles suggests continuous use throughout the distribution of this type in this study. Earlier Kiatuthlanna seems to have been characterized by the use of squiggle-hatched elements and triangular solids. Later Kiatuthlanna was apparently characterized by the use of wider lines, diagonal hatching or none at all, sawtoothed solids, and the rec- tangular scroll. Absent elements include squiggle lines and spirals and medium line. Red Mesa Black-on-White-—Fine line decoration is common to all samples and the distribution suggests that checker elements were also universally used, as were spirals and ticking. There appears to be a trend of less frequent usage of fine lines in combination with solid elements through time. Squiggle lines characterize earlier Red Mesa, but no squiggle hatching was encountered. 110 PREHISTORY OF EASTERN ARIZONA, I Later Red Mesa is characterized by the use of sawtoothed solids, greater use of solids in general, and diagonal hatching.! Snowflake Black-on-White-—Wide line and opposed solids are in fre- quent use through the whole range of our samples. The distribution sug- gests that fine line and solids were used through the whole range. Early Snowflake seems characterized by the use of squiggle hatching and perhaps checkered elements. Later Snowflake makes use of diagonal hatching and occasionally ticking, checker and spiral-scroll elements. Thus we can see that the methodology used in this study is a valuable technique both to set out a detailed pottery type description and to trace genetic relationships between types. This method lends itself to both graphic and statistical presentation and may prove a useful aid in future ceramic research. This study was undertaken in an attempt to delineate intertype relation- ships and also to discover the worth of this technique for further expanded studies. The latter aim we feel has been well demonstrated and we can only hope that the results of and the questions raised by the first stated purpose will be followed up and expanded by other workers in this field. NAMES OF DESIGN ELEMENTS REFERRED TO IN TABLE 11 Code no Wide Line 3 Medium Line . 2 Fine Line . 5 ee, pre cee Cae ae PORT Oh ey ve ae | Fine Line and Solids Be lates Lo Sin hee ay a. oe eta, uta ~ See ie ok ice | oy alee eee Fine Line and Triangles Heel hl ceet See a eS Bine Wine and Wlickedslriangles! ss, 7 3) i a 2c is CEA Le) Line and Dot 5 mates) Me prio) Shuag heise a atodae ce Keak awa can 6. eine cone ae Line and Single Terrace . . rer area | Clare ae ase ets ee 8 Single and Double Ticked anes no! ss AS tee ee Ve Single and Double Ticked Lines and Ticked Rtasiole saa Solids oy Se abl ike ae 1The sample from Chilcott 1 Site is peculiar in missing a number of elements common to Red Mesa at the Goesling and Thode Sites. These absent elements include ‘ticking, checker and squiggle lines and suggest that the Chilcott 1 sample may be later than indicated by other means or perhaps indicates that several trends were initiated here. These would include the use of diagonal hatching on Kiatuthlanna and Red Mesa while squiggle-hatching distinguished Snowflake. Other techniques unique here include complete lack of use of ticked elements on all types and the only instance of the use of opposed solids on Kiatuthlanna. ANALYSIS OF POTTERY DESIGN ELEMENTS 111 NAMES OF DESIGN ELEMENTS (continued) Code no eked ime and jsolidsrand Plamrbine "2s es wi a, ee ees oe 8 ducked dime anudinianglerand Plaintliney. 9% fia fh) eae Se see, 14 Breer ine "2: 2 rit ooo ah ON eR ee eee Ble Gy) aoe ek Squiggle Hatch .. . SR ger eh Ra tee co ter ant ey a ar ar a eee! Squiggle Hatch and Fine en, hee aie ra OS GS sy ae Wien LS 7.) oe reg aD, Squiggle Hatch and Narrow Hands Te Roa Rei tM NN, Bek Cy Ae a meee Hatch and Ciryilmear Bands {0.460 % 2. F & Pe BA ee TD Beuiecie Hatchand Angular Bands 9 65.055. 6 « ee he Pay ee 5 ab 26 Peete ACRE AMIEL ACD GS Te ic is “aa oe ees Ee Ws 8 os esd) 8 Casal LAME UME SIO 2 i Oe gd cae se ls SR ae le y ae WinvonvalshlatcoperagimMcntss eee he tas ee eta eee ee Cae ONL oda erg ate 8 Interlocking Spiral. . .. . BAS ae act, SM Re GY ot OR Simple Spiral and Circle and Cewei F aneenis pes eee ace eh as ee eee Od Doticdeand plate heserollsy Metra tee ee ee eas nee oh TH oe Sg ees ee OO PRCCPALCTT AIS SCLO Mien 54 11k Aco 9s, ey ayes et Mert epee oe, Ue, ee he ee iiianeuar Scerolims . 2: ana oe te ey ee oe AL) Interlocking Rectangular Scroll with Key Badines hace et ee ee Interlocking Solid and Hatch Rectangular Scrolls and Solid Seralls Pe eee eo Res Dieplicle Masiclta pera ee ue Ae eh eaN yg ed ie renee ed een i eta ce Mes Gee ie oS es boas AD Haicheunanple 9, - Se ee eR ey ee cate een Ofte lS Ticked Triangle and Single fecace: FO Nil ks SUR 5 ee ED, ote By a eas 5 ickedwunaAnole ander aCMentt a6 lee a cede eh Ps es cc ay ed a ee en iste ew M2 PC MARSA ICING AMEE Sart oe UE oo A ee tes Mele gk Wg, PL hy abc el ke Opposed Solids ... . Ge GY ot ice At GE Ce ar ee ee ee ne Opposed Solids and Baniegle Batch’ EL lnc ot Re eee ee Opposing Solid Step Triangle . . . Ne any Sc ee Irae me Ge Wert aor ee | Opposed Solid and Hatch Step Tianele SC) aya een) Fed ee eee eae Gi Mrpcsedeltaten and moldy Merracess.) . ao. eo ge Se ee ew ss OO PCat eu IAI pam. era h Meet) cae: cebean 3) By Se ver ek can Sar ORs ns ae Nepaivevtaralelopranise.. seed. saws. awienle cA ee oe ee aD RIE ois, aod Ae SCM ca rae SOA to eet wey 9 DIST eMC CC CtmE ments ts tame tbe celui cay, a vote LE ww ns Go ee DN AMIOME MANGE Kein atte fut er lay an ae VS Sees Ben ei So) Se Saw Rae A Ae Rees ete: Ge eae swe Oa es ea ee oe VIRGO LE ATICOYIS( 5 Gene Cente ET hae sok ef RI, oe ke MA ce he a 2 Peng 112 PREHISTORY OF EASTERN ARIZONA, I TasLe 11.—PERCENTAGES OF GIVEN TYPES BY DESIGN ELEMENTS No. of sherds Design no.! i.) is) — AaANRPACAURP ND ieee) - 0 45 Goesling 360 554 K RM a # aii 13.6 Tat WARN are 10-3. ~ 232 jl) Rs me Ee GO 19 22.0 8 250 nO) Bes 6.4 4 tA 14 1:8 Php lets: a0) aut Pas 4 3.6 4 2B, “z3 POS S128 25 3 Sih £6 Atal oS 2.5 35 4-7 ae4 126 25 ee) 29) 8 4.5 1.3 ib emg Or 4 LG we 22a OFS meee 4 ih a2, 3 8) iat = Ses 1A= Kiatuthlanna; RM= Red Mesa; AT GIVEN SITES 31 Kk 22 6. NNDDN 16. ae 2) 6. Chilcott 1 Chilcott 2 105 294 ils 17 RM iS RM S On oe esoes 237-5 Sih aie hed 4 4.8 a TOSS 15.4 Ai) Theil a9 as 1.0 <3 55 1.0 Auf 5.9 2, A Oy eed 11.8 4 4 5.4 Bao) A 4.8 44:8 (540 la 6 4 8.6 5 2.9 Bes aS 1.0 25 a7, 130) ee ao I om en kal) Tet 1.9 1.9 2.9 Well 1 Ano 1359 Te, Li aS 2 AS Ore =e O Sots A 10 1: On Stes Tesi 2 2 Ae) ja, AVG 2 BeS1e3: 23:1 D8 S= Snowflake. Chilcott 3 19 15 RM iS 3126 53-3 26:25 Sy 575 Ono Rr be oo See Se = — Tal =) Core} vavivs vNnov7 lz — W —— 6-007 *|-nase1p —— pe ——— zz = avoionp — 3LIS NOANVD Ga3M378WnL 61iz— 1-AWwa —— SS =. DE ~o2 oe Sw hae eee 5 —t_N_¢ G& @ 3SNOHLId :bE-'S7 80z— | — 1-#n000nD Ss ~-tov9 — Y —————_ 5 ——— 1 — g -— —— > — p— on os 2125 | eases (DG, a eee ae EL — =—— 4 —A = orz ~ ee _ Ene SS. - e —_— —-o 82-S1 2) EE 3LIS W33YD TVYaNIW as — = ———— gs — -o8 DO q =q & ] <3 == SS ——_ ] — 3-2 = — SSS a =F O183Nd ASTIVA WI i @ — en07006 "}-"Lov5 —_— - = ‘oun, $1 ane = "Ba -4Ad"y~oun9 'e-219) 5 = == => = 2 =P mNs8 3" -Lovo —_—_—_— 127 BV IOVLIVO "j-enviy —— (— sai~ I- 3¥39¥Lov9 os sez" —— bze- ~ 1 = 3vadvLov9 = = soz | _ ; — Z12~@ 1-avad9vu3adAd ‘|- snosenp- c | 802 — — 902 ~ SS >>= viz — { -4{ 61z~ 102 ~ — =— fez ~f — £2 - Ud) xn06 ‘)-snas0n9 — mae |= Net (= ( — — zs —— szz~ a — —_ Us) | im_t a oe —_ —_— 9iz-] —— |-3v30vL9v0 — —— ( — |— — — 602 ————— —— si27 — = e0z ~ = —— ei27f st snap — Y —————_ ———— ae ie Wa7 | - £12 = O12 7 —_ ——! £127 = — O183Nd HONVY YadOOH S62 ~ perl -x11S 1 sn24000'2-gaq —— | ——————— | — | — = —= vez ~ (ena Ads ||| Sa ae ee Se ee — —- olz |-— — 9s2 ~ | —— — 961 122 i caw S2z ~ @oi-*10s ‘2-49 'I~Lav9 —— ses 9e2— = osz~@ - _ 9 = 922 ‘t=dAo Le “dAD ‘I-8nuiy 12 *) —snoveno O183and HOON 31GVL aoe BOG Oo hf hte ane of ° °o ° 3 4 ie ont oS wos no at he: “ot Bu er POLLEN ANALYSIS 169 the past few years. The results of some such pollen studies, however, are as yet unpublished, since they can best be interpreted only after thorough analysis of the accompanying archaeological materials. When this project was being formulated it was realized that pollen studies undertaken upon archaeological sites which were already well described would yield information which could be more quickly disseminated and perhaps most relevant to the question of the nature of the relationships between culture and environment. Over the past twenty years Chicago Natural History Museum has excavated and reported upon an impressive number of sites in eastern Arizona and western New Mexico. These sites encompass a respectable span of time and allow a rather substantial basis for discussing the single culture they represent: the Mogollon. It was natural, then, to attempt the pollen analysis of such well-known sites as the SU Site, Wet Leggett arroyo, the Promontory Site and Higgins Flat Pueblo in the Pine Lawn, New Mexico, area; and also to investigate Site 30, Table Rock Pueblo and others in the area around Vernon, Arizona. The major objective of this research project was the development of a pollen chronology for the eastern Arizona—western New Mexico area north of the Mogollon Rim. We hoped that this would date and allow a comprehension of such environmental fluctuations as may have occurred. This objective has been essentially fulfilled, for the pollen analyses of many archaeological sites showed sufficient regularity to sup- port the construction of such a pollen chronology. A close degree of fit can be shown between this chronology and other pollen and dendro- logical chronologies from the arid Southwest. When the pollen chronology is fully developed, a valuable stratigraphic tool will be available to the archaeologist interested in this region. The final objective of the study was the investigation of whatever aspects of the relationship between culture and environment were made manifest in the course of the work. As an adequate reconstruction of the environment of the area investigated can be made for different time levels, a discussion of the relationships between the environmental changes evident in the pollen record and the cultural changes evident in the archaeological record will be presented. It is recognized that this is an interpretation of the evidence, but the result is considered as a testable hypothesis for future research. Some of the interpretations in the following pages may be chal- lenged, and further work may uncover errors, gaps and misorientations. I have attempted to demarcate clearly evidence, conclusions from the evidence, and interpretations based on these conclusions. However, I 170 PREHISTORY OF EASTERN ARIZONA, I hope that the work will be regarded only as a step forward. Comments, suggestions and, especially, future development of palynological research along these lines are welcome. METHODS AND TECHNIQUES SAMPLING As pollen analysis is a relative, rather than an absolute, dating tech- nique, it was first imperative to collect sediment samples which could be dated with some degree of certainty. Most of the archaeological sites could be, or had already been, absolutely dated by radiocarbon, tree-rings, or ceramic typology. When test pits were dug into a site of known date, sediment samples could be collected which were assumed to be of the same age as the period of construction generally recognized for the site. It was necessary to collect the samples from previously unexcavated rooms or areas, however, to insure the collection of un- disturbed sediments. To increase the likelihood of gathering sediment samples which dated from the period of construction, samples were taken from the floors of rooms in the sites. A stratigraphic series of samples was then taken from the profile of the test pit, and such sub-floor features as pits were also sampled. This technique yielded one sample which could be regarded as the same age as the site (the floor sample), a series of samples which could be regarded as younger than the date of site construction by an unknown number of years (the fill samples), and one sample which might date either from the period of construction or some time earlier (the sub-floor sample). After archaeological sites of known date had been sampled, some sampling was also undertaken on newly surveyed, unexcavated, archaeo- logical sites. Since these could be roughly dated by associated pottery types, they served to fill in certain gaps in the chronology. In this report the initials ““LS” precede the survey number given to sites of this type. They are identical with those described by Longacre (Martin, Rinaldo, and Longacre, 1960; Martin, Rinaldo, Longacre and Freeman, 1961). Sediment samples were also collected in stratigraphic sequence from the banks of arroyo cuts. In some instances these arroyo sites were selected for their provenience to archaeological materials; in other instances it was hoped that though the samples were undated they could be tied into the dated series and would serve as a control that was uncontaminated by ‘‘cultural preference” for certain pollen types. POLLEN ANALYSIS 171 A few samples were also taken from the muck or silt in cattle (stock) tanks. The open water surfaces of tanks act as natural pollen traps for the surrounding floral complex (Martin, Schoenwetter and Arms, 1961). Pollen recovered from such locales can be considered representative of the ecological conditions in the immediate area. The total number of samples collected during the summer of 1960 was 263. Samples from five arroyos accounted for 100 of these—four arroyos in the Vernon, Arizona, area and one in the Pine Lawn, New Mexico, area. Four samples were collected from cattle (stock) tanks. Of the 159 samples taken from archaeological sites, 35 were from five sites in the Pine Lawn area and the rest were from 13 sites in the Vernon area. Sampling technique was based on the principle that stratigraphic information was of vital and primary importance. The major limiting factor in palynological sampling is that pollen grains are microscopic and easily wind-blown. Efforts must therefore be made to avoid con- tamination of the samples by recently disseminated pollen or ancient pollen from other samples. Under ordinary field conditions it is nearly impossible to avoid every source of contamination, but if reasonable caution is exercised large amounts of contamination are not expected and small amounts will not alter main conclusions drawn from the data. The sampling technique used in the present study may help to guide other workers, and so is described in detail in Appendix A (p. 206). EXTRACTION The procedure followed for extracting fossil pollen was that in general use at the Geochronology Laboratories of the University of Arizona for post-glacial arid land sediment samples. Because of time limitations, and because the types of sediment involved varied widely in texture, amount of organic material, etc., it was deemed unprofitable to ex- periment with a selected series of samples to determine the best extraction technique or techniques that could be utilized. In the interests of ex- pediency and uniformity, all of the samples were processed by the same technique. The extraction technique consists of three basic steps. In the initial step, the non-silicious fraction of the sample is separated from the silicious fraction (Arms, 1960). In the second step, the non-silicious fraction is subjected to a series of well-known procedures which dissolve much of the organic and non-organic materials from the pollen-bearing matrix (Erdtman, 1954; Faegri and Iverson, 1950; Wodehouse, 1935). In the final step, that fraction of the matrix which has a lighter specific WZ. PREHISTORY OF EASTERN ARIZONA, I gravity is captured by flotation (Frey, 1955) and is then prepared for viewing under the microscope. In Appendix B (p. 207) the extraction technique is described and discussed in greater detail. ANALYSIS Though some of the samples resulting from the extraction process were given cursory inspection at the Geochronology Laboratories to ascertain that pollen had been recovered, the bulk of the analysis was undertaken at Southern Illinois University. This involved preparing and examining the microscope slides, recording their contents, and pre- paring the text and figures of this report. Certain limitations affected this phase of the project. No laboratory facilities were available to process the samples. Therefore, samples which needed further chemical treatment before their pollen content could be adequately evaluated had to be ignored. Sometimes the amount of pollen that could be found on a slide was so small that many slides had to be examined before a statistically useful count was accumulated for a given sample. It seemed best to analyze first those samples which were least difficult to work with; then to go back, if necessary, to the more difficult ones to fill in such chronological or spatial gaps as were found. Since most of the samples from archaeological sites were productive of pollen, it was decided to concentrate upon them rather than upon the arroyo samples. A group of ten sediment samples was analyzed by the Geochronology Laboratories as a check on my counting and identification. Their results were generally consistent with mine, though some differences did occur. It was found that counts made by the Geochronology Laboratories tended to show greater amounts of arboreal pollen, while my own tended to find greater frequencies of economic pollen, especially Cleome. In major pollen features, such as the dominance of cheno-am pollen, etc., however, the counts were in agreement. Counting and identification of pollen was done at 440 magnifications. A count of 200 pollen grains from each level, exclusive of unknowns, was the goal but it could not always be obtained without a great deal of difficulty. The 200-grain count was selected because its statistical reliability has been investigated for arid land sediments (Martin, Schoen- wetter and Arms, 1961), but counts between 150 and 200 grains were also considered usable. The figures accompanying this report are of two types. Figure 75 is a composite pollen diagram showing the results of the pollen counts from a group of archaeological sites in the Vernon, Arizona, area, with the youngest at the top and the oldest at the bottom. Figure 76 shows the TAI MALV.-3 sU Ss CACT.— 1 TURKEY FOOT MODERN SURFACE CACT-I, Plantago-—1 M MALV.- 2 A_ MALV.- 2 s Q_cacT-1 CACT-! J a = ao ww “ e 4 MAT. mes tne iT al MY rie Ue: that many ali int * S accu inal’ BH atic 1002 RAN which wal i Ld - cessar tp 2g, th@more EFISE, rEmy us ore und. redin® » at ve of hem pepper th: aie = ae th did accur, rate “S te ndggl : svn gendthd a } forget ea. etch hoger, Rss because its statistical Gpbhassoshue ambom aun) ssiieq lo miqmes soulfieeseyisal Meeithettts (Martin. Schoen- und 200 grains were ¢ of twe types. Figure 75 of the pollen counts roan, Ari®ona, area, with — ~ ' gure 76 shows the - a POLLEN ANALYSIS 173 results of the pollen counts of three surface samples as well as the pollen diagrams from two archaeological sites in the Pine Lawn, New Mexico, area. Figures 77 and 78 are graphic arrangements of selected information. Figure 77 shows selected data from the analyses of the best dated samples from archaeological localities in the Vernon, Arizona, area, arranged chronologically according to time estimates provided by the archaeologists. The samples are from the floors of dwelling units or from well-dated occupation levels and so are definitely from the period to which they are attributed. It must be emphasized that the dating in most cases is not absolute; it is only a reasonable estimate. Figure 78 shows certain signifi- cant palynological features from the analysis of sediment samples from the modern surface at archaeological and cattle tank localities in the Vernon area. These samples were thoroughly investigated, but only selected data are shown in the text figure. COMMON NAMES OF POLLEN TYPES AND ECOLOGICAL NOTES In this report three main structural categories are utilized when dis- cussing conditions of plant ecology: grasslands, parklands, and forest. Short grasslands (Nichol, 1952, pp. 203-205) are today evident in the Vernon, Arizona, area above 1800 meters elevation. In this zone Juniperus and Pinus edulis (pinyon) occur sporadically in favorable micro- environments, but arboreal vegetation is predominantly absent. The parkland begins (ca. 2050 meters elevation) where Pinus and Juni- perus become common, but the trees are relatively low and the canopy is very open. At higher elevations (above 2120 meters) the forest zone exists where arboreal vegetation is dominant; P. edulis and Juniperus give way to P. ponderosa and the canopy becomes more closed. Deep shade is found only at higher elevations than the localities sampled in this study. Three other categorizations of plants are also used: hygric, arboreal and economic. Hygric plants are those which only grow in a very moist environment (Dansereau, 1957, p. 206). In this report, only Typha and Cyperaceae are included in this group. Salix, Juglans and Alnus might also have been included, but since their water requirements are not so limited they are placed with the arboreal plants. Arboreal plants are those commonly recognized as trees. In this report the category includes Pinus, Juniperus, Quercus, Salix, Juglans and Alnus. Economic plants are those which are either cultigens or wild plants considered economically important to man. This group includes ea, 174 PREHISTORY OF EASTERN ARIZONA, I Cucurbita and Cleome. Cleome is included because pollen attributable to Cleome serrulata has been found in very high percentages in sediments taken from Pueblo III rooms at Wetherill Mesa (Schoenwetter, 1960b) and Chaco Canyon (Martin and Schoenwetter, Manuscript b) as well as alluvial sediments presumed to date from Pueblo III at Binne-Ettini Canyon (Martin and Schoenwetter, Manuscript a). It is assumed that high percentages of this zoogamous pollen type in cultural contexts are the re- sult of its selection by man for some economic purpose. Today the plant is used by Indian groups in the Southwest as a pot herb, a subsistence food, and a source of pigment. It is usually gathered or allowed to grow as a tolerated weed in agricultural fields (Robbins, e¢ al/., 1916; Whiting, 1939): Since many may be unfamiliar with the scientific names of the plants for which pollen types have been identified in this study, the following list of common names is included. Notes on the ecological contexts in which these plants are usually found are added to facilitate interpretation. Alnus: Alder. A shrub or low tree common to the flood plains of permanent streams in the upper parkland and forest zones. Cactaceae: All plants in the cactus family. Most of the pollen found is probably referable to the prickly pear group (Platyopuntia). In the study area these plants typify arid and semi-arid micro-environments. Cheno-am: Pollen types referable to the Chenopodiaceae (goosefoot family) and the genus Amaranthus (pigweeds). This is an artificial pollen category necessary be- cause the pollen of the two plant groups cannot be presently distinguished with greater accuracy. ‘The designation “‘cheno-am’’ follows the precedent of Martin, Schoen- wetter and Arms (1961). A common member of the Chenopodiaceae is Cheno- podium album (lamb’s quarters) and a common member of the genus Amaranthus is Amaranthus palmeri (pigweed). ‘These plants are typical of disturbed sediment condi- tions such as occur today in arroyos, along roadsides, and along the dissected flood plains in the grassland zone. Cleome: Probably Rocky Mountain bee weed, Cleome serrulata. Identification of this pollen type is not positive because the pollen grain is very small. The plant today is found in the parkland and grassland zones and is known to be gathered and semi- cultivated by Indian groups. Compositae: All plants in the sunflower family. Smaller divisions of this group can be made on palynological grounds but with the equipment available these would have been uncertain. Plants of this family occur under an extremely wide range of environ- mental conditions. Cucurbita: Squash. Though the cultivated and wild species of this genus are not separable on the basis of pollen type the context in which the pollen was found implies that this is the cultivated form. Cyperaceae: All plants in the sedge family. Typically, sedges are found under conditions of hygric environment such as the margins of ponds, marshes, cienagas, etc. Ephedra: Mormon tea. Though this is not a very common plant in the area it is occasionally found in the parkland and grassland zones. Ee | Ss §$@« PM WANN ARBORE AL CHENO-AM COMPOSITE ME SIC ECONOMIC AGE SITE fo) 20 40 60 80 ioo N A.D. 1350 Table { sane Rock Pueblo CRm.X VLL LLL LS JAAN de Kiva ALLL LL ILL EN aes - Hooper ae Ranch Pueblo 1100 Rim Valley Pueblo 1100 Mineral Creek Site 900 ES="28 800 site --20 700 Ls ~4 275 Tumbleweed Canyon ee Laguna Salada ? Little Ortega Fic. 77. Important palynological features of samples of pollen from occupation levels at archaeological sites in the Vernon, Arizona, area. ERRATUM: For Mesic read Hypric. yg 175 Elev. in Meters i860 I860 i885 I990 2006 2100 2100 2240 2250 2250 2250 2255 2300 2300 2300 Fic. ARBOREAL Site Cattle Tank No. | Table Rock Pueblo LS-4 LS-34 Pithouse | LS-34 Pithouse 2 Cattle Tank No.3 [$-28 Rim Valley Pueblo Hooper Ranch Kiva Room |8 209 Room I6 7 Mineral Creek Site 30-31 Arroyo Site - 30 Cattle Tank No.4 78. Samples of pollen from modern surface at various elevations in the Ver- non, Arizona, area. POLLEN ANALYSIS Ley Gramineae: All plants in the grass family with the exception of ea. Grasses occur under a wide range of environmental conditions. Juglans: Walnut. Found today along the flood plains of permanent streams below the parkland border. Juniperus: Juniper, locally called cedar. Typically, this is a plant of the parkland and lower forest zones, but it may extend onto the grasslands. Malvaceae: All plants in the mallow family. Most of the pollen grains are prob- ably referable to the genus Sphaeralcea (globe mallow). Pollen of the genus Gossypium (cotton), which belongs in this family, was not observed though its pollen is distinctive. Sphaeralcea grows under a variety of environmental conditions. Pinus: Pine. Smaller groupings than those on the generic level can be made on the basis of pollen statistics (Martin, Schoenwetter and Arms, 1961) but the data and the equipment did not lend themselves to this type of analysis. Pines are primarily park- land and forest plants, but a few may invade the grassland zone. uercus: Oak; typically found under forest and upper parkland conditions in this yP yf pper p area. Salix: Willow. Pollen identification is not positive in all instances. Typically, this plant is found along shallowly dissected flood plains in the lower parkland and grassland zones. T»pha: Cattail; a plant of hygric conditions, like Cyperaceae. Kea: Corn; exclusively a cultivated plant. RESULTS ARROYO SITES Series of sediment samples were collected and processed from five arroyo localities. One series, that from Wet Leggett arroyo in the Pine Lawn area, is directly relevant to this paper since this area was the locale of a group of archaeological finds which are considered of Cochise cul- tural affinity (Martin, Rinaldo and Antevs, 1949). The description of the alluvial sediments by Antevs allowed placement in time of certain strata, but because of the intervening years of active erosion at Wet Leg- gett arroyo Rinaldo and I had some difficulty in relocating the strati- graphic sections described by Antevs. It was thought that the samples collected from the strata which con- tained Cochise artifacts would be the most ancient in the prospective pollen chronology. Unfortunately, none of the 15 sediment samples col- lected produced enough pollen for analysis. None of the other series of samples taken from arroyo sites were directly related to the archaeology of the Vernon area, where they were collected. Little work was done on them, since the archaeological samples were mostly productive and a pollen chronology could be recovered. All of the samples were processed, however, and some will be used in the future as part of another report on pollen studies in the Mogollon area. 178 PREHISTORY OF EASTERN ARIZONA, I BEACH SITES Two ancient beaches on the shores of playas in the Vernon area have yielded artifacts and other evidence of human occupation (Martin and Rinaldo, 1960a). At the Laguna Salada Site charcoal was recovered which was radiocarbon dated at 1420+60 B.c. (Gro 1614). The Little Ortega Site, on a nearby playa, could not be dated directly but the artifact assemblage contained more chipped and fewer ground stone implements than were observed at Laguna Salada, suggesting an older occupation if this culture developed in a manner similar to that of the culture found in Ventana Cave (Haury, 1950, pp. 543-544). The occupational debris and the artifacts are embedded in the com- pacted lake silts. The sedimentary types are uniform, no stratigraphy is apparent in the walls of the trenches, and artifacts and charcoal beds occur from the surface to a depth of 75 cm. It is highly unlikely that the cultural materials were washed into their present position or that they were lowered from some upper level by deflation. The sedimentary de- posit, and the pollen it contains, appear to date in each case from the period of cultural activity. The pollen spectra of the Little Ortega Site are distinct from those of the Laguna Salada Site (fig. 75). At Little Ortega, pollen from Com- positae is the dominant microfossil throughout all samples, averaging 38 per cent, and Juniperus pollen frequencies are consistently higher than those of Pinus. At the Laguna Salada Site cheno-am pollen is the domi- nant microfossil throughout all samples, averaging 53 per cent, and Pinus pollen frequencies are consistently higher than those of Juniperus. The difference in the pollen spectra cannot be attributed to differences in the local environment, since both sites are situated in approximately the same environment; both are on ancient beaches at approximately the same elevation. It seems certain that the differences in the pollen spectra reflect en- vironmental conditions at different periods of time: that at the Laguna Salada Site at approximately 1420 B.c. and that at the Little Ortega Site at some other time. The artifacts collected appear to indicate that the Little Ortega Site is earlier in time, and investigation of later sites in the Vernon area reveals no palynological evidence contradictory to this view. PiTHOUSE VILLAGE SITES The oldest pithouse sampled was the Tumbleweed Canyon Site in the Vernon area. This site contained charcoal from which a radiocarbon date of A.D. 360-+50 has been obtained by the Groningen Laboratory. POLLEN ANALYSIS 179 The pollen spectrum of the sediment sample taken from the floor of the pithouse is unlike those found at the earlier beach sites (figs. 75 and 77). There is about as much cheno-am pollen (27 per cent) as Com- positae pollen (34 per cent) and about 18 per cent of arboreal pollen. Nine pollen grains of Zea were recovered. Two samples from the pithouse fill show results dissimilar to those of the floor sample. The sample at 15 cm. depth has a higher percentage of cheno-am pollen, but otherwise there is no essential change except that DwARD 1921. Language. Harcourt, Brace & Co., New York. SAv es, E. B. 1945. The San Simon Branch. Excavations at Cave Creek and in the San Simon Valley. I. Material culture. Gila Pueblo, Medallion Papers, no. 34. Globe, Arizona. Say es, E. B., and ANTEvs, ERNST 1941. The Cochise culture. Gila Pueblo, Medallion Papers, no. 29. Globe, Arizona. BIBLIOGRAPHY 235 SCHOENWETTER, JAMES 1960a. Pollen analysis of sediments from Matty Wash. Thesis for degree of Master of Arts, Department of Botany, University of Arizona. 1960b. Pollen stratigraphy of the Wetherill Mesa region. MS. Report to the National Park Service. SCHROEDER, A. H. 1948. Montezuma well. Plateau, vol. 20, no. 3, pp. 37—40. 1960. The Hohokam, Sinagua and the Hakataya. Archives of Archaeology, no. 5 (4 microcards), Society for American Archaeology and the University of Wis- consin Press, Madison. ScHULMAN, EDMOND 1956. Dendroclimatic changes in semiarid America. University of Arizona Press, Tucson. Scuwartz, DoucLas W. 1956. The Havasupai 600 a.p.-1955 a.p.: a short culture history. Plateau, vol. 28, no. 4, pp. 77-85. 1957. Climatic change and culture history in the Grand Canyon region. American Antiquity, vol. 22, no. 4, pp. 372-377. SMILEY, TERAH L. 1952. Four late prehistoric kivas at Point of Pines, Arizona. University of Arizona Bull., vol. 23, no. 3 (Social Science Bull., no. 21). Smitu, H. V. 1956. The climate of Arizona. University of Arizona Agricultural Experimental Station, Bull. 279. SmitH, WATSON 1950. Preliminary report of the Peabody Museum Upper Gila Expedition, Pueblo Division. El Palacio, vol. 57, no. 12, pp. 392-399. 1952a. Excavations in Big Hawk Valley, Wupatki National Monument, Arizona. Museum of Northern Arizona, Bull. 24. 1952b. Kiva mural decorations at Awatovi and Kawaika-a, with a survey of other wall paintings in the Pueblo Southwest. Papers, Peabody Museum of American Archaeology and Ethnology, vol. 37. Sprer, LEsLie 1917. An outline for a chronology of Zuni ruins. American Museum of Natural History, Anthropological Papers, vol. 18, pt. 3. 1918. Notes on some Little Colorado ruins. American Museum of Natural History, Anthropological Papers, vol. 18, pt. 4. STEPHEN, ALEXANDER M. 1936. See Parsons, Exste C. (Editor) STEVENSON, MatTILpA C., 1904. The Zuni Indians; their mythology, esoteric fraternities, and ceremonies. Bureau of American Ethnology, 23rd Ann. Rept., 1901-02, pp. 13-604. Stewart, G. R., and DONNELLY, MAuRICE 1943. Soil and water economy in the Pueblo Southwest: I, Field studies at Mesa Verde and northern Arizona; II, Evaluation of primitive methods of conservation. Scientific Monthly, vol. 56, nos. 1 and 2, pp. 31-44, 135-144. Tuomas, Tutty H. 1953. The Concho complex: a popular report. Plateau, vol. 25, pp. 1-10. 236 PREHISTORY OF EASTERN ARIZONA, I Titrev, MiscHa 1944. Old Oraibi, a study of the Hopi Indians of Third Mesa. Papers, Peabody Museum of American Archaeology and Ethnology, vol. 22, no. 1. TREWARTHA, GLENN T. 1954. An introduction to climate. McGraw-Hill Book Co., New York. ViIvIAN, GORDON, and REITER, PAUL 1960. The Great Kivas of Chaco Canyon and their relationships. Monographs of the School of American Research and the Museum of New Mexico, no. 22. Santa Fe. Votn, H. R. 1901. The Oraibi Powamu ceremony. Field Museum of Natural History, Anthr. Ser., vol. 3, no. 2, pp. 61-158. 1912. The Oraibi Marau ceremony. Field Museum of Natural History, Anthr. Ser., vol. 11, no. 1. WENDORE, FRED 1950. A report on the excavation of a small ruin near Point of Pines, east central Arizona. University of Arizona Bull., vol. 21, no. 3 (Social Science Bull., no. 19). 1953. Archaeological studies in the Petrified Forest National Monument. Museum of Northern Arizona, Bull. 27. WENDoRE, FRED, and THomas, Tutty H. 1951. Early Man sites near Concho, Arizona. American Antiquity, vol. 17, pp. 107-114. Wueat, Joe B. 1954. Crooked Ridge Village (Arizona W:10:15). University of Arizona Bull., vol. 25, no. 3 (Social Science Bull., no. 24). Wuitine, A. F. 1939. Ethnobotany of the Hopi. Museum of Northern Arizona, Bull. 15. WILLEy, GorpDon R. 1945. Horizon styles and pottery traditions in Peruvian archaeology. American Antiquity, vol. 12, pp. 132-134. 1948. Functional analysis of “horizon styles” in Peruvian archaeology. Jn BENNETT, WENDELL C. (Editor), 1948. WopeEHousE, R. D. 1935. Pollen grains. McGraw-Hill Book Co., New York. Woopsury, RICHARD 1954. Prehistoric stone implements of northeastern Arizona. Papers, Peabody Museum of American Archaeology and Ethnology, vol. 34 (Reports of the Awatovi Expedition, no. 6). 1961. Prehistoric agriculture at Point of Pines, Arizona. Memoirs, Society for American Archaeology, no. 17 (American Antiquity, vol. 26, no. 3, pt. 2). Woopsury, RICHARD B., and NATHALIE, F. S. 1956. Zuni prehistory and El Morro National Monument. Southwestern Lore, vol. 21, no. 4, pp. 56-60. Wyman, LELAND C. 1952. ‘The sand paintings of the Kayenta Navaho. University of New Mexico Publications in Anthropology, no. 7. Index Abajo Red-on-Orange, 105 Abrading stones, 135; grooved, 132 Acoma kivas, 66 Adobe, 28; calking, 214; clay, 48, 54; plaster, 46, 62 Agogino, George, 155 Agriculturalists, 201, 204, 205, 206 Agriculture, 200, 215, 217; beginnings of, 164, 165; dry farming, 202; economy, 196; expanding, 166; Mogollon area, 191; see also Irrigation Alder, 174 Alma Plain, 150, 159 Alnus, 173, 174 Alschuler, William, 4 Altars, Hopi (Marau, Wuwutcim, Tala- tumsi and Marau-mana ceremonies), 72 Amaranthus, 174, 186, 200 Amargosa II points, 155 Anasazi, 160, 166, 167, 227; Chacoan, 214; culture, 63, 144, 201, 202; Great Kivas, 60, 66, 67, 68, 214; irrigation system, 203; lesser kivas, 65, 66, 68; tradition, 64, 66; traits, 163; see also Pueblo III sites *“Antechamber,”’ 36, 37 Antevs, Ernst, 122, 196 Anthropomorphic figure; see Image Apaches, 224, 227; Western, 205 Arboreal plants, 173; pollen, 179, 181, 183, 185, 186, 188, 189, 191, 194, 195, 196, 206 Archaeological Reconnaissance, 224; re- search, 4; survey area, 149; survey pro- gram, 222 Architectural, development, Mogollon, 221; traditions, 69 Arizona W:10:51, 144, 145 Arizona W:10:52, 60, 124 Armillas, Prof. P., 168 Arms, Bernard C., 171, 177, 185, 197 Arrow-shaft, smoother, 132; straightener, ‘352 tools, 132,155; 147 Arroyo-cutting hypothesis, 196, 197, 198 Arroyo bank, 206 Arroyo sites, 177 Artifacts, 115-147; stone, 210, 211 Ash pits, 63, 66 Athapascan-speakers, 205, 206, 227 Awatovi, 66; murals, 73, 74 Awls, bone, 139, 141; bone splinters, 139; split long-bone type, 139; ulna type, 139, 147 Awl-sharpening stone, 48 Axe-grinding slab, 129, 131 Axes, stone, 115, 127, 129, 130; full- grooved, 115; three-quarter grooved, 129, 147; tabular, 129 Axis, secondary, of kiva, 66 Aztec Ruin, 145 Babocomari Village, 140 Baker, O. E., 201 Baldwin, Gordon C., 145 Banquettes, 66 Barreras, Wilfred, 4 Bartlett, Katherine, 146 Basalt, boulders, 20, 32, 45, and cobbles, 25, 56 Basket Maker III sites, 60 Beach sites, 116, 122, 155, 156, 163, 164, 178 Beads, 58, 71, 214; olivella, truncate, 144; stone and shell, 140 Beals, Ralph L., 105 Beams, 50, 59, 64, 65; main, 37 Beans, 68 Bench, 51, 54, 58, 60, 64, 66, 68, 213 Bin, 55, 63; corner, 47, 48 Binne-Ettini Canyon, 174 Black Mesa Black-on-White, 105, 106 Blades, 130, 132, 134, 138; fragments, 158 Blue River, 60, 64 Bluff Site, 61, 116 Bluhm, Elaine A., 64, 106, 164; see also Sawmill Site Bodkins, 139, 140; tip, 141 Bone, awls, 139; effigy pendant, 140; frag- ment, incised, 141 Boreal economy, 205, 206 Boyer, Walter, 5, 106, 223 Bracelets, shell, 140, 144; fragments, 143 Brainerd, George W., 87, 105, 107 Brainerd-Robinson, method, 107; ratios, 114; see also Robinson-Brainerd tech- nique Brand, D. D., 126 Brawley, Elizabeth, 5 Breternitz, David A., 60, 62, 63, 64, 124, 125,132, 138; 139, 157 237 238 Brinkerhoff, Mr. and Mrs. Wayne, 5 Brown indented corrugated, 79 Bryan, Kirk, 205 Bunzel, Ruth L., 69, 71, 77 Buttress, 51 Cactaceae, 174 Cactus family, 174 Cahone Canyon sites, 60 Canyon Creek Ruin, 129, 145 Carbon-14 dating, 211, 221; see also Charcoal Carter, Mr. and Mrs. J. R., 5 Casa Malpais, 60 Cattail, 177, 195; pollen of, 221 Caywood, Louis R., 140, 146 Cedar, 177 Ceiling, 50; see also Roof Ceramics, 68; materials, 76; traditions, 69; see also Chacoan ceramics *“Ceramic Group,” 150; see also Pre- ceramic site Ceremonial, objects, 145; use, Room C, Rim Valley, 51, 53, 220; room, 217 Ceremonies, group, 220 Ceremony, contemporary, 68; hypotheti- cal, 68 Chaco Canyon, 50, 174; Great Kivas, 66 Chaco district, 115; tradition of Anasazi culture, 63, 68 Chacoan Anasazi, 214 Chacoan ceramics, early, 223, 224 Charcoal, 178, 211, 215 Chase, Ellen, 4 Cheno-am, 178, 179, 180, 181, 183, 185, 186, 188-191, 194-198, 206; definition of, 174 Chenopodiaceae, 174, 186 Chilcott, D., 4 Chilcott Site 1, 30, 31, 32-34, 36-37, 62, 7185295, 1072 108. M09 11S s1to> St. 136, 137, 138, 140, 142, 145, 146, 216, 217 Chilcott Site 2, 35, 37, 95, 107, 109, 146, 216 Chilcott Site 3, 35-38, 62, 95, 216 Chilcott Sites, 3, 29-38, 61, 116, 119, 124, 218; intra-site seriation, 95; pottery of, 77, 80, 102; settlement pattern, 216; summary, 212; totals of sherds, 82; trends in painted pottery types, 97 Childbirth water house, Tihkuyiki, 67 Chinking, 44, 54 Chiricahua Apache, 205 Chiricahua Stage, Cochise culture, 122 Choppers, 129, 130, 131, 147, 161, 162; biface type, 130; included with axes, 130; uniface type, 130 Cienaga Site, 116 Cienaga soils, 197 Circle Prairie Phase, 64, 132 PREHISTORY OF EASTERN ARIZONA, I Cleome, 172, 174, 182, 183, 184; serrulata, 174 Climatic changes, 191-194 Climate, clues to, 224; shift in micro-, 226 Cochise, Wet Leggett, 61; culture, 116, 122, 177; industries, 156 Coefficients of similarity, 90, 107, 108 Cohonina, population movements, 203, 227 Collecting season, 163 Colorado Plateau, 148 Colton, H. S., 71, 105, 150, 204 Compositae, 174, 178-181, 183, 185, 186, 188, 191, 194-198 Concho, Arizona, 29, 138 Concho Complex, 156, 157, 165 Construction of house, tools for, 128 Contamination of soil samples, 171 Cooking, 215, 220, 221 Corn, 68, 165, 177, 215, 216; growing sea- son, 201; pollen, 215, 221 Cosgrove, H. S. and C. B., 72 Cotton, 177 Counting and identification of pollen, 172 Cox, Mr. and Mrs. Tom, 6 Crooked Ridge Village, 121 Crushing tools, 120 Crypt, 57-58, 59, 64, 67, 71, 73, 74, 214; wall, 66; double cover, 67; meaning of aperture, 73 Cucurbita, 174, 182, 183 Cult deity, 71, 74; Alosaka, 72; female character of, 73; Hopi figurines, 73; re- lation to underworld, 73, 74; Tuwapong- tumsi, 73; Talatumsi, 73; concerned with childbirth, 73 Cultigens, 173, 183, 184, 200 Cultural influences (pottery), 103 Cultural lag, 115 Culture and environment, relationship between, 169 Cummings, Byron, 73, 218, 220 Curb (or lip), 20, 24 Cylinder stones, 145, 147 Cyperaceae, 173, 174, 183, 185, 190, 195, 196 D-shaped pithouses, 26 “Damper,” 36; slab, 49 Danger Cave, 156 Danson, E. B., 60, 164, 212 Defense systems, 210 Deflector, 34, 56, 57, 58, 64, 65, 68, 115, 21 Deity, cult, 71; see also Cult deity Desert Culture, 155, 156, 163, 164, 165 Design elements, analysis of, 105-114, 223; pottery, 75, 105, 163, sorted by, 106, 107; at given sites, 112-113; names and code numbers of, 110-111; trends in, 109 INDEX Dimensions of rooms, 32, 43 Di Peso, Charles C., 140, 144, 145 Directional colors, 69 Dockstader, Dr. Frederick J., 6 Dolls, 74; older flat type, 72 Donnelly, Maurice, 203 Doors (at Kintiel), 67 Doorways, 46 Drainages, clues to, 224 Drift, general, in pottery design changes, 77, 108; linguistic, 108 Drills, 135, 138, 139, 147; in very early levels, 139 Dry farming, 202, 204 Dry Prong Site, Great Kiva, 65, 66, 68 Dwelling rooms, 53 Economic plants, 173, 181, 182, 185, 190 Economy, Tumbleweed Canyon Site, 215; Chilcott Sites, 217; Thode Site, 217-218; Rim Valley Pueblo, 220; Hooper Ranch Pueblo, 221 Effigy pendant, bone, 140 Effigy; see Image Eggan, Dr. Fred, 6, 74 Elden Pueblo, 145 Entrance, 20, 25, 28, 66; spirit’s, 67; type of, 64, 65 Entryways, lateral, 65, 67, 68; ramp, 57, 58, 213 Environmental, change, definition of, 194; conditions, pre-existing, 194; periods, 190, 191; shifts, 202, 203, 204, 225, 227 Environments, prehistoric, 198-206 Ephedra, 174, 185 Erdtman, Gunnar, 171 Erosion controls, 204 Exogamous clans, 217, 218 Extended families, 218 Extraction techniques (pollen analysis), 171 Faegri, Knut, 171 Female symbol, yellow, 22 Fennell, Agnes McNary, 6 Fewkes, J. Walter, 67, 71, 72, 73, 146 Field, President Stanley, 6 Figurine; see Image, 214 Fireboxes, 62, 63 Firepits, 19, 20, 22, 24, 25, 28, 34, 37, 38, 40, 46, 48, 49, 51, 55, 57, 62, 66, 68, 126, 220, 221; area, 65; circular, 60, 62; small, 68 Fireplace, 60 Fire screen, 68 Flagstaff area, 140, 145, 146, 204 Flakes, utilized, 135 Flattop Site, 157 Floor plan, shape of, 64, 68 Floors, 19, 22, 23, 28, 32, 33, 37, 40, 48, 54, 61 Flour receptacles, 47, 48, 63, 122 Food preparation, tools, 115-126 Foot drums, 68; see also Vaults Foote Canyon Pueblo, 126, 129, 218; plaza, 65 Forest, 174, 188, 189, 191, 195, 200, 205, 206; re-growth, 206 Forestdale Phase, 138 Forestdale Site, 116, 138 Forslev, Dr. Albert, 6 Four Mile Polychrome, 214; bowls with anthropomorphic figures, 73 Four Mile Ruin, 67 Frazier, Vernon, 5 Furnishings, interior, 62 Geochronology Laboratories, 168, 171 Gila River, upper, 134 Gillespie, Mr. and Mrs. Charles, 6 Gillespie, Mr. and Mrs. Leon, 6 Gillespie, Mr. and Mrs. Milton, 6 Girders, 37, 65; see also Beams Gladwin, Harold S., 65, 105, 140, 144, 145 Globe mallow, 177 Goesling, Al. H., 4 Goesling Site, 3, 26-29, 131, 137-143, 146, 223; intra-site seriation, 94; pot- tery of, 77, 78, 80, 102, 107, 108, 109, 120, 122, 125, 128, types by levels, 92, totals of sherds, 81; settlement pattern, 216; summary, 212 Goodman, Mr. and Mrs. Donald, 6 Goodman, Joe, 4 Goosefoot family, 174 Gramineae, 177 Grand Canyon area, 203, 204 Grass family, 177 Grasslands, 173, 188, 196 Great Kiva, Higgins Flat, early, 65; Hooper Ranch Pueblo, 3, 52, 53-60, 64-68, 115, pottery of, 77, 80, totals of sherds, 85-86, stone discs, 125, west wall, 71; see also Hooper Ranch Pueblo Great Kivas, 161, 162; comparisons of, 60; Mogollon, 67; Village of the, 60 Gregg, Dr. Clifford C., 7 Grinding stones, small metate-like, 124 Groningen Laboratory, 178, 211, 212, 2155221 Gurley, C. E., 6 Haas, Dr. Fritz, 6 Hahn, Mr. and Mrs. Maxwell, 6 Hammer, grooved, 129; see also Maul Hammerstones, 48, 126 Hargrave, L. L., 145 Harvest cycle, 163 Harvey, Byron, III, 6 Hastings, James R., 205 Hatchways (at Kintiel), 67 Haury, Emil W., 61, 64, 65, 76, 116, 122, 129, 130, 138, 140, 145, 155, 178, 212 240 Hawikuh, 65, 145 Hawley, F. M., 126 Hearth, 68; area, 65, 66; raised, 60 Herod, David, 4 Heshota-uthla Polychrome, 80, 214 Hester, E. D., 155 Hibben, F. C., 126 Higgins Flat Pueblo, 60, 65, 124, 181, 186; Great Kiva, 65, 68, 169, 185, 188, 190, 119i Hilltop Phase, 61, 122 Hodge, F. W., 65, 145 Hohokam, 65, 145 Hoijer, Harry, 205 Hooper Ranch Pueblo, 3, 52, 60, 63, 103, 119) 120) 125-131e 134-1445 146.82; 184-190, 219, 221; intra-site seriation, 99; trends in painted pottery types, 101; Great Kiva, 65-68, 125, 132, 136, 138, 140, 145, 182, 183, 187; settlement pat- tern, 220-222; summary, 213-215 Hooper, Rob., 4 Hopi, culture, 167; Indians, 227; cult deity figurines, contemporary, 73; kivas, lesser, 66; similarities, image, 69, 71; towns, 222 Horizon markers (pottery), 88 ‘‘Horizon styles’? (pottery), 75 Houck Polychrome, 80, 213 Hough, Walter, 60, 64, 130 Household utility tools, 135-139 pores see Construction of Houses, tools or Human effigy; see Image Hunting, and gathering, 198, 200, 201, 215; and warfare, tools, 130-139 Hygric plants, 173, 181, 182, 183, 185, 190, 195 Image, stone, 57—58, 59, 67, 69-74, 145-— 146, 214; description of, 69; female character, 72 Interdisciplinary co-operation, 225 Irrigation, 201, 202, 203, 205 Iverson, Johannes, 171 Jacal construction, 62 Jar, miniature; see Miniature jar Jeddito area, 119, 146 Jelinek, Arthur J., 90, 106 Jennings, Jesse D., 155, 156, 201, 203 Jewett Gap Pueblo, 218 Judd, Neil M., 115, 132, 146 Juglans, 173, 177, 184 Juniper, 177, 179 Juniperus, 173, 177, 178, 179, 180 Kachina-kihu, 66 **Kachina”’ niche, 51 Kachina, proto-, 71, 73, 74 Kachinas, mother of, 67; Citulilu, 72; Patun (Squash), 72; Rainbow, 72 PREHISTORY OF EASTERN ARIZONA, I Kana-a Black-on-White, 105, 106 Kayenta pottery types, early, 223, 224 Keney, Dr. Charles W., 6 Kent, Kate Peck, 139 Kiatuthlanna Black-on-White, 102, 105- 109, 150, 212, 213, 2235 design ‘ele- ments, 109 Kidder, A. V., 66, 119, 146 Kinishba, 60, 73, 144, 218, 220 Kintiel, 67 Kittle, Mr. and Mrs. Jake, 5 Kiva, 51, 220; -building, 219; entrance, 73; lesser, Anasazi, 65; Zuni, 66 Kivas, Anasazi type, 51, 60; circular, 162, 163; Western Pueblo type, 53, 60, 64 Knives, 132; flake, 135, 137, 147, 158 Kwakina Polychrome, 85, 214 Ladder pits(?), 48, 49, 51, 62, 63, 220 Laguna Salada, 61, 155, 178, 186, 191, 198 Lambert, Marjorie F., 6, 146 Lane, Gardner, 4 La Plata Black-on-Orange, 105 Lehmer, Donald J., 87 Leverton, Mr. and Mrs. John D., 5 Lexico-statistics, 205 Lino Gray, 150, 159 Lintel, 36, 46 Little Colorado River, drainage, 50, 51, 105, 145, 147; upper, 63, 115, 120, 130, 157, 184;"Valley;, 195265 40,5355: 134, 148, 151, 161, 162, 164, 182, 210, 219, 221, 224 Little Ortega Lake, 116, 155, 178, 186, LOT 9s Los Muertos Site, 140, 145 Lyman Dam, 210 Lyman Reservoir, 19 Malde, H. E., 60 Mallow family, 177 Malpais rocks, 22 Malvaceae, 177 Manos, 20, 48, 116-119, 122, 126, 147; beveled, 147, 177; grinding surface, 119; flat-tabular, 117; loaf-shaped, 117; on earlier sites, 116; one-hand, 116, 117, 118, 146; two-hand, 116, 117, 147 Marau ceremony, 72 Marau-mana ceremony, 72 Martin, Paul S. (Arizona), 4, 168, 174, 177, 185, 197, 204 Masauwu, 67 Mask, 71 Masonry, 32, 43, 50, 56, 67, 68, 210, 212; banded, 50, 115; composite construc- tion, 33; jacal construction, 62; rubble, 61, crude, 36, 61, random type, 32, 37, 44, 54, regularly coursed, 54; through stones, 33, 40, 43; Type I, 44, 45, 46; Type II, 44, 45; veneer, 59, 66, 68; vertical slab, 44, 54, 60 INDEX Matrilineal descent, 217, 218, 222 Matrilocal families, 222; residence, 217, 218 Maul, 127, 129, 147; full grooved, 129; tabular, 129; three quarters grooved, 129 McDonald Corrugated, 78, 79 McGregor, John C., 140, 145, 146 Medicine cylinders, 128 Mesa Redondo, 148, 162 Mesa Verde, 203 Metate, 48; fragments, 20 Metates, 122-124, 126, 147; troughed, 116; 1185 122)123,1475 basin, 116,122, 123, 147; slab, 118, 124; flat, 122 Microclimate, shift in, 226 Migrations, 224-227 Milling area, 20, 24, 25, 62 Milling stones, 62, 126 Mimbres Polychrome, bowl, female fig- ures in yellow, 72 Mindeleff, Victor, 65, 66, 67 Mineer, Mrs. Leola, 5 Mineral Creek, 40, 217 Mineral Creek Pueblo, 60, 62, 63, 67, 162, 182, 186, 187, 190, 218 Miniature jar, 58, 59, 71, 142, 214 Modified Basket Maker period, 124 Mogollon, agriculture, 191; architectural development, 221; area, 126, 130, 132; culture, 129, 144, 163, 166, 167, 191; Great Kivas, 65, 67, 68, 214; ideas, 166; migration, 160; pithouses, 65; pithouse kivas, 66; San Simon Branch, 120; techniques, 164; tradition, 64, 161; Tularosa, 214; villages, 218, 219 Mogollon Rim, 169, 204 Mormon tea, 174 Morris, E. H., 60, 66, 144, 145 Mortars, 26, 33, 37, 40, 45, 124-125, 126 Movement of peoples, 227; see also Mi- grations Muriyinmana, 67 Muriyinwu, 67 Naegle, Mr. and Mrs. Cecil, 6 Nantack Phase, 64 Nantack Village, Great Kiva, 60; Ruin B, 62, 65, 124 National Science Foundation, 3, 5, 148, 210, 222, Navahos, 227 Navaho sand paintings, 72 Nesbitt, Paul H., 73, 132, 144 Niches, 46, 48, 54, 55, 64, 66, 67, 68; -cache, 67, 73; “‘Kachina,”’ 51; phallic, 67; wall, 68 Novak, Lillian, 6 Nuarez, Genaro, 4 Nuclear families, 216 Oak, 177, 179 Olson, Alan P., 63, 64, 65, 66, 67, 212 Open house, 5 241 Opler, Morris E., 205 Orientation, eastward, 67, 68, 213; north- south, 66, 67; primary, of Great Kiva, 64, 65, 68; village, 220 Ornaments, 140 Padilla, Gilbert, 4 Paint grinding, 126; red, 51 Palynological laboratory, 168; inquiry, 225 Parklands, 173, 188, 189, 191, 195, 196, 200 Parsons, Elsie C., 67, 69, 71, 72 Passageway, 37 Peckham, Stewart, 62 Pecos, 146; Classification, 150 Penasco Phase, 122 Pendant, bone, 143, effigy, 140; bone and shell, 140; clam shell, 143; limestone, white, 143; turquoise, 143 Pendants, tinkler, conus, 147; unfinished, 140, 143 Penrod, Mr. and Mrs. Floyd, 6 Penrod, Kenneth, 4, 6 Penrod, Mr. and Mrs. Leonard, 6 Pepper, George H., 144 Percussion flaking, 126; chipping, 130, 136 Perry, Martha, 4 Pestles, 120-122, 126; cylindrical, 120; multiface, 120, 122; pear-shaped, 120, 122 Phipps, Mr. and Mrs. Claude, 6 Pictographs, 54, 69, 73 Pigments, grinding of, 126 Pigweeds, 174, 200 Pillars, 65 Pinedale, 145 Pinedale Black-on-White, 151 Pinedale Polychrome, 151 Pine Lawn, area, 164, 169, 180, 181, 185, 186, 188, 191, 196, 227; Phase, 61, 122, 132; Valley, 161 Pinnawa series, 214 Pinto Basin, 156 Pinto Point, 155 Pinus, 173, 177-180; edulis, 173; ponderosa, 173 Pinyon, 173 Pithouses, 212; D-shaped, 26 Pithouse village sites, 178, 200 Pits, 19, 22, 29, 34, 54, 58; resonator, 67; storage, 25, 26; sub-floor, 180 Plaiting, 140 Plants, common names, 174 Plaster, 26, 33, 45, 54, 62; adobe, 46, 62 Plateau, 203, 204 Platform, 51, 66 Platyopuntia, 174 Plaza, 43, 65, 218, 220 Point of Pines, 60, 61, 63, 64, 122, 124, 125, 132, 139, 204, 206; people, 227; region, 224 Polishing stones, 126 242 Pollen analysis, 3, 168-208, 221, 225; pro- gram, 222; chronology, 169, 189, 190, 198; extraction technique of, 207-208; types, common names, 173, frequencies On 227 Population, 200, 201, 215, 216, 218, 221; density of, 224, 225; increase, 204; movements, Cohonina, 203, 227 Postholes; 20; 22;°25,295 33534, 37459) 675 double, 59 Posts, 37, 65; recessed, 54, 59 Pot covers, 125, 127, 147 Pot rest stone, 48 Pot rests, 126, 147 Pottery, black-on-white, 115; hachured, 115; lack of, 116 Pottery-making, tools, 126 Pottery, design elements, 75, changes in, 76, 77; “horizon styles,’ 75, 77; ‘‘intru- sive,’ 76; methodological considerations (statistics), 88; miniature jar, 58, 59; painted, statistical analysis of, 75; petro- graphic analysis, 76; relationships be- tween types, 107, 108; relative positions of samples, 90; seriation, 80, 87, 88, 93, 94; size of sample, 89; stylistic changes, 77, drift in, 77; temporal sequence of sites, 88, 89; ‘‘trade,” 76; trade, Ana- sazi, 201; trends in design elements, 109, in painted pottery types, 97; whole (or restorable ), 78; see also Design Elements Pottery types, Abajo Red-on-Orange, 105; Alma Plain, 150, 159; Black Mesa Black-on-White, 105, 106; brown in- dented corrugated, 79; Four Mile Poly- chrome, 73, 214; Heshota-uthla Poly- chrome, 80, 214; Houck Polychrome, 80, 213; Kana-a Black-on-White, 105, 106; Kiatuthlanna Black-on-White, 102, 105-109, 150, 212, 213, 223; Kwa- kina Polychrome, 85, 214; La Plata Black-on-Orange, 105; Lino Gray, 150, 159; McDonald Corrugated, 78, 79; Mimbres Polychrome, 72; Pinedale Black-on-White, 151; Pinedale Poly- chrome, 151; Red Mesa _ Black-on- White, 78, 102, 105-110, 150, 212, 223, later, 110; Reserve Black-on-White, LOZ OS Of WSO. 212. 215 AOaSt: Johns Polychrome, 80, 151, 213, 214; Snowflake Black-on-White, 5, 75, 78, LOZ, VOS-MO NSO N 2125 20S 2195 225° design elements, 110, lineage of, 75, 224; Sosi Black-on-White, 105; Tula- rosa Black-on-White, 102, 103, 105, LO7,, 151, 2125 213-214. 219 ularosa White-on-Red, 213; Tusayan White Ware, 163; White Mound Black-on- White, 102, 150; Wingate Black-on- Red, 103, 150, 213, 214, 219; Woodruff Smudged, 78 PREHISTORY OF EASTERN ARIZONA, I Powamu, ancestral to, 68 Prayer sticks, 134 Pre-ceramic site, 211 Precipitation pattern, 193; winter, 225, 226; see also Rains Procedure, field, 151; statistical pottery analysis, basic, 90 Projectile points, 130-132, 133, 147, 158; diagonal notched, 132; barbed, 147; triangular, small, 147 Promontory Site, 61, 169, 179, 180, 181, 185, 186, 188-191, 206 Proto-kachina, 71, 73, 74 Pueblo, dwelling units, 200, 201; early example of, 218; farmers, 227; sites, 181-185; true, 220 Pueblo I sites, 60; III sites, 60, 119, 174; IV sites, 119 Pueblo Bonito, 68, 144, 146 Pueblo Indians, contemporary, 72 Punches, 135, 138 Quemado area, 68 Quercus, 173, 177, 179 Quiburi, 144 Rafters, 20; see also Roof supports Rain farmers, 201, 203 Rains, summer, 193, 196, 197, 198, 201- 205, 226; winter, 193, 197, 198, 201; see also Precipitation Rands, Robert L., 77 Red Mesa Black-on-White, 78, 102, 105— 109, 150, 212, 223; design elements, 109, 110; later, 110 Red paint, grinding, 51 Reed, Erik K., 201, 203 Reiter, Paul, 66, 67, 68 Relative chronological order of sites and rooms, 89 Reserve area, 51, 60, 61, 63, 64, 119, 120, 1225 1245 1125513251385 1395227 Reserve Black-on-White, 102, 105, 107, 150,212 213219 Reserve Phase, 61; late, 50 Reserve-Tularosa series, pottery, 163 Resonators, 67 Rhoton site, intra-site seriation, 94; pot- tery of, 77, 102 Rhoton, Verl, 5 Richey, Leigh, 5 Riley, Carroll L., 205 Rim Valley Pueblo, 3, 40-53, 62, 63, 117— 122, 124-131, 136, 138-141, 143, 146, 182, 190, 213, 218, 221; intra-site seria- tion, 98; pottery of, 77, 78, 80, 102, 103, 106, 108, 109; Room C, 51, 220; settle- ment pattern, 218; summary, 213; totals of sherds, 84; trends in painted pottery types, 97 Rinaldo, Mrs. John B., 4, 106 INDEX Ring, bone and shell, 144, 147; fragment, 143; material, 141; slab, 47, 57, 214 Rio Grande area, 119, 134 Ritual circuit, directional colors, 69 Robbins, Wilfred William, 174 Roberts, F. H. H., Jr., 60, 66, 67, 124, 129° 152.203 Robinson, W. S., 87, 107 Robinson-Brainerd seriation technique, 87; criticism of, 87; choice of, 87; co- efficient of similarity, 90; basic pro- cedure, 90 Romane, Pat, 4 Roof, 20, 22, 25, 29, 37, 40, 59; crib-like, 61; supports, 64, 65, 68; timber, 130 Room shape, 62 Rubbing stones, 119-120, 147 Rubble; see Masonry Sackheim, Judd, 6 Sacred stone image; see Image St. Johns, 19, 148, 224 St. Johns Polychrome, 80, 151, 213, 214 St. Johns-Salt Lake Highway, 26 Salix, 173, 177 San Cayetano, 144, 145 San Francisco levels, Tularosa Cave, 140 San Francisco Phase, 138 San Francisco River, 181, 186 San José, 156 San José Point, 155 San Simon Branch, 120; Village, 144 Sapir, Edward, 108 Saul, John, 4 Sawmill Site, 60, 65, 68 Saws, 135, 136-139; smooth, 138 Sayles, E. B., 61, 65, 116, 120, 122, 144 Schroeder, A. H., 204, 205 Schulman, Edmond, 206 Schwartz, Douglas W., 203, 204 Scraper-planes, 136 Scrapers, 131, 132, 135, 136, 147, 158- 161; gourd, 126; large, 136; oval biface, 130; small, 136, 137 Secular structures, 60; use, Room C, Rim Valley, 51, 220 Sedge family, 174, 195 Sediment samples, 170 Seriation, pottery, 80; inter-site, 93; intra- site, 94; technique, 87 Settlement patterns, 69, 164, 200, 215-222 Shell, beads, 140; bracelets, 140; pendant (with bone), 140; ring, 140, 147 Shells, Pacific Coast, 115 Shelter, light brush, 61 Shipaulovi, kivas, 65 Show Low, 29, 148, 224, 227; area, 152 Show Low Black-on-Red, 150 Show Low-Silver Creek drainage, 224 Sichomovi, 67 Sills, 46 243 Silver Creek, 166; see also Show Low- Silver Creek Similarity; see Coefficients of Similarity Sinagua, 204, 227 Sipapu, 51, 220 Site 481, 68; Site LS-4, 180, 187, 191; Site LS-24, 185; Site LS-28, 181, 190, 191; Site LS-34, 185, 187, 190; Site LS-50, 180; Site 30, 62, 169, 180, 186, 188, 191, 206; Site 30-31 arroyo, 186; Site 31, 61 Site locations, 152, 164, 200, 201, 216, 218, 220; favorite, 224; pre-pottery, 224 Slabs, 54, 55, 59, 65, 122; image, 58; per- forated, 67; ring, 47, 57, 67; sandstone, 455,55; 215; stone, 51, 5, 02,.0550240. worked, 67 Smiley, Terah L., 4, 60, 168 Smith, Watson, 66, 68, 71, 72, 73, 105, 146 Snaketown, 140, 144, 145 Snowflake, 148, 162; region, 163, 227 Snowflake Black-on-White, 5, 75, 78, 102, 105-110, 150, 212, 213, 219, 223; de- sign elements, 110; lineage of, 75, 224 Snowflake-Mesa Redondo, 152, 221 Social history, 211; organization, 216, 217, 218, 220, 222 Soil zones, 197 Sosi Black-on-White, 105 Southern Illinois University, 168 South Leggett Site, 181 Spicer, Edward H., 140, 146 Spindles, 134 Spindle whorls, 139, 140, 142, 147; of Mexican derivation, 140 Springerville, 19, 40, 53, 60, 148, 224, 227 Squash, 174; kachina, 72; pollen of, 221 Statistics, lexico-, 205 Stephen, Alexander M., 67 Steppe zone, 192, 194, 202-205 Stevenson, Matilda C., 71 Stewart, G. R., 203 Stone, bowls, 125; discs, 125 (see Pot cov- ers); tools at pithouse village, 210, 211 Storage pits(?), 25, 26, 62, 215; tech- niques, 164 Stradling, Frank, 4 Strassburger, Roland, 4 Sudatories, 68 Summer rains, 193, 196-198, 201, 203, 204, 205, 226 Sunflower family, 174 Sunset Crater, 204 Supra-village organization, 222 SU Site, 116, 121, 146, 169, 179, 185, 188 Table Rock Pueblo, 60, 63, 67, 124, 126, 145, 169, 184, 185, 190 ‘Talatumsi ceremony, 72 Taylor, Dr. Walter W., 168 244 Technique, of pollen extraction, 207—208; of sample collection, 206 Te’ewi, 146 Temporal sequence of sites (pottery), 88 Terracing systems, 204 Thode, Earl, 4 Thode Site, 3, 38, 39, 40, 61, 62, 118, 120, 125; 13051356, 139, 140, 1415 1455219; pottery of, 77, 78, 80, 102; settlement pattern, 217; summary, 212-213; totals of sherds, 83 Thomas, Tully H., 156, 157 Thompson, Raymond H., 212 Three Circle Phase, 64 Three Pines Pueblo, 62, 124 Tihkuyi, 67 Tihkuyiki, Childbirth water house, 67 Tinkler, conical, 145, 147 Titiev, Mischa, 71, 73 Trade, evidence of, 115; pottery, Anasazi, 201 Trait unit intrusions, 115 Trewartha, G. T., 192 **Triangle,”’ 151, 166 Tseh Tso, 126 Tularosa Black-on-White, 102, 103, 105, 107, Tote 212 1s 214209 Tularosa Cave, 140, 155 Tularosa Mogollon, 214 Tularosa Phase, 63, 132; early, 50; end of, 51; tradition of the Mogollon, 68 Tularosa White-on-Red, 213 Tumbleweed Canyon Site, 3, 19-26, 61, ji Ws es eo is Ws nd 2 es hae is ps ls Ye ley 136, 137, 157, 164, 165, 166, 178, 188, 190, 191; settlement pattern, 215-216; summary, 210-211 Turkey Foot Ridge, 65, 180, 185 Tusayan White Ware, 163 Tuwabontumsi, sand altar woman, 67 Tuwabontumsiki, phallic niche-cache, 67 Tuwapongtumsi (a cult deity), 73 Tuzigoot Ruin, 140, 146 Twin Butte site, 124 Typha, 173, 177, 183, 184, 185, 190, 195, 196 Underworld; see Cult deity Urbanization, 219 Vaults, 48, 51, 56, 57, 60, 64, 66, 67; foot- drum type, 51, 220; masonry-lined, 115, 214; north (yellow pigment), 71; south- ern, 67, 68; use of, 68; western, 67 Ventana Cave, 116, 156, 178 Ventilator, 36, 37, 46, 48, 49, 51, 59, 62, 63, 66, 220 PREHISTORY OF EASTERN ARIZONA, I Verde Valley, 205 Vernon, 61; area, 5, 169, 178, 180, 186, 189, 191, 196; project, 6 Vestigial architecture, 219 Village control, 221 Villages, form of, 61, 212 Vivian, Gordon, 66, 67, 68 Voth, H. R., 66, 69, 71 Waard, Dr. H. de, 211 Walnut, 177, 182 Walls, 19, 20, 23, 26, 32, 37, 40, 45746; 53, 217; defense systems, 210; exten- sions of jacal construction, 62 Warfare and hunting, tools, 130-139 Wasley, William W., 212 Water, standing, 195, 196, 202; tables, 197, 198, 200, 201, 204, 226 Weaving tools, 139-140 Weed, tolerated, 174 Welch, Dr. Walter B., 168 Wells, John, 4 Wendorf, Fred, 63, 124, 125, 132, 139, 144, 145, 146, 157, 158, 212 Western Pueblo kivas; see Kivas Wetherill Mesa, 174 Wet Leggett arroyo, 169, 177 Wet Leggett Cochise, dwelling area, 61 Wet Leggett site, 116 Wheat, Joe Ben, 64, 121, 122, 132, 139 White Mound Black-on-White, 102, 150 White Mountains, 148, 152, 224 Whiting, A. F., 174 Whiting, Mr. and Mrs. Eben, 6 Wikwalobi kiva, 67 Willey, Gordon, 77 Willis, Mr. and Mrs. Ira, 5 Willis, Kelley, 5 Willow, 177 Wilson, Ozie, 5 Wilson, Mr. and Mrs. Richard, 5 Wiltbank, Pacer, 4 Wingate Black-on-Red, 103, 150, 213, 214, 219 Wodehouse, R. D., 171 Woodbury, Richard, 119, 146, 204, 206 Woodland, Bertram J., 6 Woodruff Smudged, 78 Wuwutcim ceremony, 72 Wuya, clan, 71 Wyman, Leland C., 72 Kea, 173, 177, 179-184, 190; 191, 196 Zoogamous pollen type, 174 Zuni area, 145; culture, 167; Indians, 227; kiva, 66; similarities, image, 69, 71; towns, 22, pre-Spanish, 218 Ving a 7 i ‘ : 2s tart”