3 Historical and Analytical Perspectives on Architecture and Social Integration in the Prehistoric Pueblos

William D. Lipe and Michelle Hegmon

Archaeologists working in prehistoric Southwestern pueblos have frequently used architectural evidence as the basis for inferences about social organization and social integration. The history and basic logic of several major approaches are reviewed: ethnographic analogy,· assignment of functions or uses to architecturally defined spaces; and interpretation of community organization from analysis of differentia­ tion and spatial patterning among structures. Because artifactual and architectural data are generally employed together, the chapter closes with a review ofthe use ofartifacts in the study of social organization and integration in pueblo archaeology.

elow, we review the history of some of the analytic cultural remains. Analogical interpretation in archaeol­ Bapproaches widely used in studying social integra­ ogy has frequently been uncritical and narrowly based, tion among the prehistoric pueblos. The emphasis is on however-in the Southwest and elsewhere. The similar­ architectural evidence, but since architecture is often ities between archaeological and historic Pueblo mate­ interpreted with the aid of associated artifacts, and vice rial culture and architecture were noted early, and they versa, it seems appropriate to include a section on ap­ served to establish what often has been a facile and proaches that emphasize how social integration can be uncritical reading of the present into the past. studied with artifactual data. The review that follows is Much of the early systematic archaeological work in designed to help provide a historical context for the the Southwest was based on the assumption that all the other papers in this volume. It is selectively biased prehistoric settlements there represented an undifferen­ toward work done in the northern part of the Pueblo tiated Pueblo culture much like that known from history Southwest, and especially in the San Juan drainage. It and ethnography. Taylor (1954) called this the "Cush­ does not pretend to be a comprehensive or complete ing-Fewkes" period. Subsequent research documented historical treatment of the several topics that it ad­ substantial temporal and geographic variability in the dresses. These topics include functional classification archaeological record, and led to the development of of architecturally defined spaces, community pattern cultural taxonomies (e.g., Colton 1939) that reflected analysis, inferences from properties of artifacts, and variation in the formal aspects of architecture and ma­ ethnographic analogy. Since ethnographic analogy is an terial culture. Behavioral interpretations of prehistoric issue in all the analytic approaches that are treated architecture and material culture did not begin to un­ below, we begin with a brief discussion of this topic. dergo explic:it reassessment until somewhat later (e.g., Hawley 1950; Anderson 1969; Hil11966, 1968, 1970a, Ethnogqtphic Analogy 1970b). Only in the last few years have questions been raised about some of the major tenets of the analogical Despite archaeologists' "chronic ambivalence" about model of prehistoric Pueblo life-in particular, there ethnographic analogy (Wylie 1985: 107), it remains a have been serious challenges to the assumption that major source of behavioral interpretation of prehistoric both the contact period and prehistoric Pueblos were

3: HISTORICALPERSPECTIVES 15 classic tribal, egalitarian societies (e.g., Wilcox 1981; and played the same functional roles in their prehistoric Upham 1982; Lightfoot 1984). communities as historic period kivas in historic pueblo As Lekson has recently argued (1985, 1988), the communities. In other words, the analogical question interpretation of prehistoric Pueblo kivas by genera­ was posed in either-or terms. Either a prehistoric pit tions of Southwestern archaeologists exemplifies the structure was a kiva in the same sense as a historic kiva, largely unexamined analogies on which many behav­ or it was interpreted as something else entirely-ordi­ ioral interpretations of prehistoric Pueblos have been narily as a domestic pit house, the primary residence of and often continue to be based. Indeed, the inference a household (Lekson 1988). Furthermore, the prevail­ that prehistoric kivas functioned in the same way as ing view of ethnographic kivas emphasized their role as historic ones was made by several influential early specialized ceremonial structures (e.g., Kidder observers even without the aid of excavations. For ex­ 1927:490) despite considerable ethnographic evidence ample, in 1849, Lieutenant James H. Simpson wrote of that at least Western Pueblo kivas often housed a variety Pueblo Pintado, the first Chacoan site he encountered: of activities only indirectly related to ceremonies. Al­ though there have been notable exceptions (e.g., Brew At different points about the premises were three circu­ lar apartments sunk in the ground, the walls being of 1946; Ambler and Olson 1977; Cater and Chenault masonry. These apartments the Pueblo Indians call es­ 1988), Southwestern archaeologists have tended to ac­ tuffas [sic], or places where the people held their polit­ cept the either-or form of the analogical question, and ical and religious meetings [Simpson 1964:37]. to assume that the prehistoric structures that they iden­ tify as kivas in fact functioned as specialized ceremo­ Simpson had, within the previous two weeks, visited the nial spaces. estufas (kivas) of both Santo Domingo and Jemez in the In an "attempt to be provocative rather than conclu­ company of Pueblo informants. sive," Lekson (1988) suggests an alternative either-or J. W. Powell also knew immediately what he was interpretation: that Anasazi pit structures functioned looking at when he viewed a depression adjacent to a primarily as domiciliary pit houses until the end of the small ruin in the Glen Canyon of the Colorado River, Pueblo III period at about A.D. 1300, and that "true" during his pioneering exploration of the Colorado River kivas displaying the ethnographic pattern of activities canyons in 1869. He remarks: and organizational functions emerged only in the In the space in the angle [formed by the masonry rooms], Pueblo IV period. His presentation of this view at the there is a deep excavation. From what we know of the 1985 Society for American Archaeology meetings (Lek­ people in the province of Tusayan, who are, doubtless, son 1985) was one of the stimuli for the 1988 SAA of the same race as the former inhabitants of these ruins, session that included the initial versions of most of the we conclude that this was a 'kiva' or underground cham­ papers in this volume. ber, in which their religious ceremonies were performed [Powell 1875 :68]. The functional interpretation of prehistoric kivas and protokivas is a theme that connects all the papers in the So far as we can determine, Powell was the first to volume. Collectively they represent a reassessment, use the Hopi word kiva in print, instead of the Spanish using various lines of evidence and argument, of the estufa, a term that had gained popularity on the mis­ analogical identification of prehistoric with historic taken presumption that these Pueblo structures were Pueblo kivas-that is, of the inference that prehistoric sweatbaths (Mindeleff 1891: 111). The ruin Powell vis­ kivas functioned in the same way that historic ones did. ited was partially excavated in 1958 and 1959 during In the pages that follow this chapter, Adler (Chapter 4) the Glen Canyon reservoir salvage project (Lipe surveys a cross-cultural sample to develop some gener­ 1960: 114-135). alizations about structures used for integrative ritual, The early uncritical supposition that prehistoric thus establishing a basis for general, rather than spe­ Pueblo kivas all functioned like historic ones became cific, analogies. Lipe (Chapter 5) and Adams (Chapter "fossilized" in the early twentieth century when South­ 11) examine changes in architectural form and site western archaeologists such as Edgar Hewett made the structure as bases for recognizing changes in the ways demonstration of continuities between historic and pre­ kivas and protokivas served community integrative historic Pueblos the cornerstone of a political battle to needs. Wilshusen (Chapter 7) traces continuities in fea­ establish Pueblo land claims (Lekson 1988). As a result, ture types and their contexts in pit structures from the if any formal similarities in architecture or features A.D. 600s to the ethnographic period. Varien and Light­ could be demonstrated between prehistoric structures foot (Chapter 6) employ a detailed intrasite distribu­ and historic kivas, the former were to be called kivas tional analysis of both features and artifacts to show also. Accompanying this kind of formal identification functional differences between protokivas and surface was the generally unstated implication that by analogy rooms in an early pueblo. Blinman, Hegmon, and Plog the prehistoric kivas housed the same kinds of activities (Chapters 8-10) all use distributional analyses of arti-

16 LIPE AND HEGMON fact types and attributes across a number of sites to test tectural characteristics may indicate the primary in­ the notion that socially integrative behaviors were dif­ tended use of a structure or space; features and import­ ferentially associated with Great Kivas, small kivas, or able artifacts may reflect its primary actual use during protokivas. its lifetime, and portable items or remodeling evidence The papers in this volume thus use several lines of may represent its last use or may be thoroughly condi­ evidence and several types of investigation to address tioned by the events surrounding the final abandonment the problem of interpreting prehistoric pit structures. In of the space (Schiffer 1976, 1985, 1987; Ciolek-Tor­ combination, the approaches employed strengthen the rello 1985). Furthermore, most architectural spaces assessment of analogies by "expanding the base of in­ probably housed numerous activities, and they may not terpretation and elaborating the fit between source and have been limited to particular architectural types. subject" (Wylie 1985: 101). Although these issues all provide opportunities for The overall result of the studies reported below is to productive and informative research, they are far from show that either-or forms of the analog question are being well-understood at this point. Despite the limita­ probably too simple. There are similarities and differ­ tions of functional classifications of architecture, the ences in form and function between prehistoric and approach is time-honored in Southwestern archaeology, historic protokivas and kivas, and the forms and func­ and hence has had a significant effect on how tions of these structures changed substantially through Southwester:nists have used architectural evidence to time. Lekson's suggestion that kivas may commonly make inferences about social integration, and espe­ have had domiciliary functions through the Pueblo II cially about the character and role of religious ritual in and III periods is given tentative support, but it is also the social integration of prehistoric pueblos. shown that the use of a pit structure to house ritual In Southwestern archaeology there is a long history activities that integrated at least small multihousehold of inferring ritual and integrative uses for kivas and groups can be traced back to the Pueblo I period. In various other architectural forms, as noted above in the summary, a flexible use of ethnographic analogy, cou­ discussion of ethnographic analogy. The following pled with the examination of several lines of archaeo­ comments survey some of the main kinds of evidence logical evidence, can shed new light on an old question and logic used to make these assignments; a thorough and help reformulate it in a more productive way. historical treatment is not attempted. Once again, the functional interpretation of kivas occupies the bulk of Functional Classifications of the relevant literature and serves as a model of the Architectural Spaces approaches that have been used. The earliest identifications and interpretations of A long-standing pursuit in Southwestern archaeology is prehistoric kivas were strongly conditioned by the ex­ the "functional" classification of architectural spaces pectation that prehistoric Pueblo cultures were gener­ into types such as "habitation room," "storage room," ally similar to those observed historically and "ceremonial room," "kiva," "Great Kiva," "plaza," etc. ethnographically. Since historic pueblos had kivas that For example, Fewkes' report (1909) on his work at were used for important ceremonies, late prehistoric Spruce-Tree House employed categories such as "pla­ pueblos would be expected to have these too. How were zas and courts," "secular rooms," and "kivas," under the prehistoric examples to be identified? Victor the heading "major antiquities." This approach depends Mindeleff (1891: 111) suggests a general interpretive on classifying architectural units on the basis of activ­ principle: ities inferred to have taken place in them. Strictly speaking, such a classification would seem to be based General use of kivas.-Wherever the remains of pueblo on use rather than function, unless the organizational architecture occur among the plateaus of the southwest role of the structure in some larger configuration is there appears ... throughout all changes of form ... the evidence of chambers of exceptional character ... dis- emphasized. On the other hand, "functional classifica­ tinguishable from the typical dwelling rooms by their tion" has long been used to refer to this procedure size and position, and, generally, in ancient examples, (Ciolek-Torrello 1985:41). by their circular form [V. Mindeleff 1891:111]. Such classifications depend on the inference of past activities from architectural characters, and/or from In other words, the architectural distinctiveness of associated features or artifacts. Assigning a single one type of structure set it apart from another type; the "function" or use to an architectural space assumes that formal difference presumably implied a functional dif­ a general type of use-e.g., "habitation" was predomi­ ference (for a similar argument, see Smith 1952: 162). nant. Archaeologists are increasingly becoming aware It then took but a short jump to assign the expected of the limitations of these simple monothetic classifica­ "kiva" function to the prehistoric "chambers of excep­ tions of architectural spaces. For example, gross archi- tional character."

3: IDSTORICALPERSPECTIVES 17 To the extent that an empirical demonstration was from residential pit house to specialized ceremonial considered necessary, it took the form of showing that chamber: "ritual features" were associated with distinctive "kiva The findings on Alkali Ridge, considered in conjunction architecture." For example, Mindeleff examined sur­ with the work of others, notably Morris, Roberts, and face evidence of a prehistoric circular kiva in the Hopi Martin in the San Juan drainage, permit us now to area, and noted a wall niche, which he identified as a present a more complete story than has ever before been kat chin kihu or kachina house (V. Mindeleff 1891: 117). possible of the steps by which the earth lodge of the Because this was a ritually important feature that he had early agriculturalists on the Colorado Plateau has been observed in functioning Hopi kivas (V. Mindeleff transformed into the sacred temple of their modern de­ scendants [Brew 1946:203]. 1891: 121), he inferred that the prehistoric structure was also used for ceremonial purposes. Mindeleff In this scenario, the problem became one of deter­ (1891: 117) went on to suggest that his observation pro­ mining how much architectural change was required vided a link between the rectangular kivas common in before a residential pit house could be considered a the historic Western Pueblo area and the earlier circular ceremonial kiva. Hence, a focus on the formal details form, which was rare at Hopi, though common in the of architecture (e.g., Lancaster and Pinkley 1952) was San Juan drainage. appropriate to pursuing the problem, in addition to Fewkes (1908) also used the presence of a ritual being consistent with the prevailing taxonomic interests feature-the sipapu-to confirm the ceremonial func­ of the 1930s through early 1960s. The concept of the tion of circular kivas in the San Juan drainage. He was protokiva (Morris 1939:30-31;72) also helped resolve aware from his own ethnographic observations and his the issue of "When is a kiva?" (Smith 1952) by locating excavations at Awatovi (Fewkes 1898: 613), as well as in the Pueblo I period a form architecturally and pre­ from the work of V. Mindeleff (1891:117), that sipapus sumably functionally transitional between pit house regularly occur in various forms in both historic and and kiva. The circular San Juan kivas of the Pueblo II prehistoric Hopi kivas. Reporting on the excavations of and III period were generally considered full-fledged kivas at Spruce Tree House in Mesa Verde National ceremonial structures (Brew 1946:213), despite their Park, he remarks about Kiva G: substantial differences in size, shape, and position when compared with ethnographically described kivas (cf. There is a small circular openiiw in the floor represent­ Lekson 1988). ing symbolically the entrance to the underworld, called The "ethnographic model" of room function that de­ by the Hopi the sipapu. . . . The sipapu is the most revered place in the kiva, and about it are performed veloped from these nineteenth and early twentieth cen­ some of the most sacred rites .... This is the first tury studies posited that at least habitation, storage, and recognition in print of a sipapu in a circular kiva ceremonial structures should be present in prehistoric [Fewkes 1908:391]. pueblos (Ciolek-Torrello 1985). This model has often led to the uncritical assignment of structures to these In his seminal 1891 publication on Pueblo architec­ predetermined functional classes on the basis of a cur­ ture, Victor Mindeleff had also suggested another inter­ sory analysis of gross architectural characteristics. pretive principle-that of survivals-that proved In the last several decades, archaeologists have at­ influential in later functional interpretations of kiva, tempted in a number of studies to examine this model protokiva, and pit house architecture. Mindeleff critically by treating gross formal variation in architec­ thought that kiva construction would be likely to dis­ ture as a starting point for functional analysis. That is, play variations in the size and form of structures are used as ... survivals of early methods of arrangement that have the primary indicators of functional differentiation, but long ago become extinct in the constantly improving art the resulting classification is tested against variability of housebuilding, but which are preserved through the in associated architectural details, features, artifacts, well-known tendency of the survival of ancient practice and/or ecofacts. The presumption is that robust func­ in matters pertaining to the religious observances of a primitive people [V. Mindeleff 1891:111-112]. tional patterning should be expressed in the covariation among some or all of these kinds of phenomena. This established an expectation that, if they were The best-known example of this approach is Hill's indeed used for religious purposes, kivas should retain work at Broken K Pueblo in Arizona (Hill 1966, 1968, architectural characteristics of earlier residential struc­ 1970a, 1970b). Hill (1970a) subdivided the population tures (see also C. Mindeleff 1897:174). The notion of of excavated rooms at Broken K into three groups, on survivals in religious architecture provided a context in the basis of size and distinctive morphology. After which documentation of the gradual appearance of the showing that each group also displayed non-random attributes of "kiva architecture" was implicitly seen as associations of features such as mealing bins, hearths, documenting a correspondingly gradual functional shift and ventilators, he hypothesized that there were three

18 LIPE AND HEGMON functional room classes: habitation, storage, and cere­ Ciolek-Torrello (1978, 1985) used an inductive mul­ monial, as in the historic Western Pueblos. On the basis tivariate pattern-seeking approach to define functional of activities reported to occur in these classes of rooms room types by recurrent associations of various floor in Western Pueblo settlements, he developed a list of features and floor artifacts at Grasshopper Pueblo, a "test expectations" for archaeological associations of large Pueblo IV period site in Arizona. An R-mode artifacts and ecofacts with these room classes. The factor analysis was used to define five (later reduced to archaeological record showed generally good agree­ four) factors representing groups of spatially associated ment with the expectations, and he concluded that the variables (i.e., the artifacts and features as distributed functional room types at Broken K were similar to those across rooms), and these factors were interpreted as at historic Western Pueblo villages. Although the statis­ representing sets of related activities (e.g., manufactur­ tical methods used to reach this conclusion can be ing, food storage, food preparation, etc.). A Q-mode criticized (cf. Ciolek-Torrello 1985), our interest here factor analysis was then used to group the rooms in is in the basic logic of the approach. terms of the pattern of occurrence of the same variables Adams (1983) has recently assembled evidence to used in the R-mode analysis. The six room groups thus show that gross architectural variation in room size and obtained were interpreted as functional types (e.g., lim­ location correlate well with functional differentiation ited activity rooms, habitation rooms, etc.). Each room among rooms in historic and protohistoric Western type could be characterized in terms of the proportional Pueblo settlements. Hence, he strengthens the ethno­ representation of the activity sets that comprised the graphic side of the "ethnographic model." R-mode factors (Ciolek-Torrello 1985:54). In a recent study of the social use of space at Turkey One result of the analysis was that no special class Creek Pueblo in east central Arizona, Lowell (1988) of "ceremonial structures" emerged. Variables that showed that a room's hearth type was a good predictor could be interpreted as indicating ritual activities of its size and of other architectural and artifactual tended to occur within one room type (Limited Activ­ ity) but only in about a third of these cases. These variables as well. On this basis, she argued that rooms variables also were not confined to the three rooms in with rectangular hearths were habitations; rooms with this class that had "kiva-like" benches (Ciolek-Torrello circular hearths were "miscellaneous activity" spaces; 1985: 53-55). and rooms lacking hearths were used for storage. Addi­ The value of this approach is that the resultant group­ tionally, two small clusters of rooms were inferred to ings are multivariate and polythetic, and hence can be be "kiva room groups" on the basis of their spatial based on a fuller use of the data than can monothetic association with the site's Great Kiva as well as their approaches, which must by definition be based on only distinctive pattern of architectural, feature, and artifact a few variables-usually gross architectural characters. characteristics. Lowell (1988) did not argue that these The polythetic room types can each be characterized in variables specifically indicated ritual activity, only that terms of the relative strength of the several activity their pattern of co-occurrence was distinctive. She sug­ factors, rather than having to be considered as the ex­ gested that the two kiva room groups may have helped clusive province of a single kind of activity. Because link the two main residential divisions of the settlement floor artifacts and features were used in Ciolek­ with the centrally-located Great Kiva, where village­ Torrello's analysis, the functional interpretations refer wide integrative activities presumably were carried out. to the late or last uses of the rooms, rather than to The paper by Varien and Lightfoot (this volume) also intended uses, which might still be recoverable from uses gross variation in architectural form (pit structure, variation in gross architectural features. The reliance on front surface room, back surface room) as the starting floor artifacts also makes the analysis subject to the point for analysis, and uses the associations of features difficulties of determining how site abandonment might and artifacts to test a null hypothesis that there was no have affected the patterns of use and discard which functional difference among the three types of struc­ created most of the portions of the archaeological re­ ture. The artifacts and features do in fact vary strongly cord that were analyzed (cf. Schiffer 1985, 1987). among the three structure types, and the null hypothesis Ciolek-Torrello ( 1985) has attempted to control for is rejected. Functional interpretation of the associated these effects, but much remains to be understood about artifact and feature assemblages employs a mix of gen­ these assemblage formation processes. eral and specific analogies. The authors conclude that There are other studies of prehistoric pueblos which the data are consistent with use of the back rooms have creatively addressed the question of functional primarily for storage and of the front rooms for domes­ room types (e.g., Dean 1969; Jorgenson 1975; tic activity, but that the pit structures show the greatest DeGarmo 1976; Shafer 1982), and countless studies evidence of both domestic/residential and ritual activi­ have used the concept in one form or another. The ties. examples discussed above provide a sampling of the

3 : IDSTORICALPERSPECTIVES 19 range of approaches that have been and continue to be is a "functional" or use-based classification of architec­ used. tural units. Inferences about the integration of commu­ Regarding architectural indicators of social integra­ nities or social segments have often depended on the tion, the "functional type" discussions are dominated frequency and spatial distribution of structures such as by the issue of interpreting "ordinary" or "regular­ Great Kivas that were presumably used for ceremonies sized" kivas. Other potentially important structures, or other socially integrative activities (e.g., Longacre such as Great Kivas, plazas, shrines, tri-walls, and hi­ 1966; Lipe 1970). walls, have received less attention. It seems generally This approach depends in part on an underlying as­ to be assumed that plazas in prehistoric pueblos func­ sumption that humans use space efficiently, if not opti­ tioned much the same as they do in historic ones-some mally. That is, it assumes that humans locate their critical examination is obviously needed here. The mul­ activities to provide easy and regular access to impor­ tiple-walled buildings, which lack obvious ethno­ tant resources or social interactions. Which social ac­ graphic analogs, have been interpreted in a great variety tivities and relationships they considered important can of ways. Rohn (1977) proposes that these structures therefore· be inferred from the spatial relationships were involved in some way in rituals that helped inte­ among their architectural facilities and artifact assem­ grate dispersed communities; Plog (1974) hypothesizes blages, viewed as products of patterned behavior. Spa­ that they included storerooms, and were used in ritu­ tial inferences of this sort are of course strengthened ally-mediated food distribution; Vivian (1959) argues when they serve as the basis for hypotheses which are that they were domiciles of a "developing priestly then tested against other types of data, or alternatively, class"; while Reyman (1986) suggests some were actu­ when proximity relationships are used as the tests, and ally platform mounds, with the multiple chambers giv­ the hypotheses are generated elsewhere. ing stability to the structure. Another assumption of the spatial/configurational There seems to be general agreement that Great approach is that the frequency and distributional regu­ Kivas served as places of assembly for sizable groups, larity of integrative structures is inversely correlated and that they must have housed activities that helped with the scale or level of integration they are associated integrate several social segments, commonly from sev­ with. That is, if kivas are both common and regularly eral settlements. Credible analyses that attempt to go distributed, they must have been used by relatively beyond this very general kind of functional character­ small and redundant social segments. Great Kivas, on ization are rare, though Lightfoot (1988) has recently the other hand, are not only large but relatively rare­ analyzed the scale of work and cooperation required to evidence that they served large numbers of people. This build a Great Kiva. Fritz (1978, 1987) explored the argument is stronger if it can also be shown that the layout and features of Chacoan Great Kivas as an ex­ Great Kiva in question was centrally located with re­ pression of aspects of world view, while Plog (1974) spect to a number of habitations (i.e., that the structure discussed the possibilities that Great Kivas were in­ was located so that it could be efficiently accessed by a volved in ritually-mediated redistribution. These leads relatively large population). remain largely unfollowed, however. Inference of social organization from community pattern in the Pueblo Southwest was pioneered by Community Pattern Analyses Lewis H. Morgan in Houses and House-Life of the American Aborigines (Morgan 1965 [1881]). In this Historically, and to some extent logically, related to the work, he used both archaeological and ethnographic functional classification of architectural spaces are ap­ data on domestic architecture, much of it from the proaches that base inferences about prehistoric organi­ Southwest, to support his ideas about the evolution of zation on the relative frequency and spatial position of society that had been developed in Ancient Society structures in and among settlements. At intermediate (Morgan 1985 [1877]): levels of scale, this has been called "community pattern House architecture, which connects itself with the form analysis" (Chang 1958:299) and at larger scale, it of the family and the plan of domestic life, affords a merges with settlement pattern studies (Willey 1953, tolerably complete illustration of progress from sav­ 1956). Today, relational analysis of architectural units agery to civilization. Its growth can be traced from the at an intrasite scale may often be referred to as part of hut of the savage, through the communal houses of the "site structure analysis." barbarians, to the house of the single family in civilized nations ... [Morgan 1975 (1877):6]. Spatial/configurational analyses of architecture have generally been used to identify and characterize the size Documenting "communal houses" was important to and composition of social or socioeconomic group­ Morgan because they reflected "gentile society," a key ings-e.g., households, residence units, communities, element of the stage of barbarism. Families related and the like. The starting point for this kind of analysis through the intermarriage of gentes (a gens was similar

20 LIPE AND HEGMON to a unilineal descent group) were expected to display configuration of architectural elements could serve as "communism in living" through application of the "law a basis for inferring aspects of social organization. of hospitality." They should "make common stock of T. Mitchell Prudden (1903, 1914, 1918) elaborated ... provisions [and erect] joint tenement houses large this approach and provided empirical documentation enough to accommodate several families" (Morgan for his inferences in the form of both excavation (1914, 1965 [1881]: 63). He thought that structures such as the 1918) and survey (1903) maps and descriptions. On the Iroquois longhouse and the historic pueblo clearly re­ basis of extensive reconnaissance in the San Juan drain­ flected gentile organization. age (Prudden 1903:234-239) he noted the recurrent as­ Though he was aware of "estufas" (Morgan 1965 sociation of an estufa or kiva, a small rectilinear block [1881]:174) and the subdivision of both historic and of contiguous surface rooms (usually located north of prehistoric pueblos into discrete apartments (Morgan the kiva), and a burial or burial-and-trash mound (usu­ 1965 [1881]:154-155; 175), Morgan focused primarily ally located south of the kiva). Adjacent rooms in the on the size and degree of aggregation of the settlement surface pueblo or "house" were often connected by as evidence of Pueblo social integration. He believed doorways. This architectural complex he called the that even though families might have separate living "unit type pueblo." quarters, the "law of hospitality" would require com­ These small "units" frequently stood alone, but mon stores or at least the free sharing of food and other tended to occur "in community groups" (Prudden goods (Morgan 1865[1881]:42-62). In order to further 1918:47). Not uncommonly, however, they were joined test his theories, Morgan proposed a program of archae­ together into larger pueblos, though without losing their ological and ethnographic research extending from the structural discreteness (Prudden 1903:234). These American Southwest through Mexico to Peru (Wilcox small house ruins were often spatially associated with 1976:32-33) and Adolf Bandelier was soon commis­ "a larger and more commanding house," and also oc­ sioned by the Archaeological Institute of America to curred close to "the great community houses" on Squaw, Bug, and Goodman Points (Prudden 1918:47). carry it out (Wilcox 1976:32-34). On the basis of his work in the Pueblo Southwest, Bandelier (1884, cited Prudden interpreted unit type pueblos as the residen- in Wilcox 1976) argued that Morgan's evolutionary tial facilities of a basic social group: theory could account for the archaeological presence of ... if these simplest residences be recognized as mark­ both small and large pueblo settlements. Early small­ ing family or clan units, as well as being structural units, house settlements, occupied by perhaps one or two the practices and traditions of the Pueblo people of today, which center in and are so largely determined by clans, gave way to the larger communal houses as part clan or other social relationships, make clear enough the of the evolution of society from Upper-level Savagery impulse which led small groups of these earlier people, to Lower-level Barbarism (Wilcox 1976:35). ·cushing even in the near neighborhood of others, to maintain not (1886, 1888; summarized in Wilcox 1975:35-36) also only their separate houses, but also their separate cere­ supported the theory with arguments that the "small monial chambers and places of burial [Prudden houses" were each occupied by a single gens or clan, 1914:34]. and that the large communal house or pueblos proper Prudden was aware that the prevailing theory of the represented a gathering together of several clans. time required that the small houses be the predecessors This developmental sequence is reflected in aspects of the "communal" ones, but he ultimately decided of the Pecos Classification (Kidder 1927) and has had (Prudden 1918) that this proposed sequence could be profound, persistent, and often quite constraining ef­ neither proved nor disproved on the basis of evidence fects on Southwestern archaeology. In addition to diffi­ at hand. He concluded, however, that culties that derive from the improbable identification of there is evidently a close relationship between the larger small houses as clan residences (Parsons 1940; Aberle and smaller forms, as well as between the artifacts 1970), this sequence also led to a reluctance to accept which the excavations of both have disclosed. The mo­ contemporaneity among these different settlement tive for the different types of building seems, in part at types (cf. Wilcox 1976). Eventually, work at Chaco least, to have been determined by the difference in site made it clear that even the Great Houses there were and some as yet undisclosed community requirements contemporary with nearby small houses (Kluckhohn [Prudden 1918:49]. 1939), while Brew (1946) documented the occurrence Considered in the abstract, Prudden's work estab­ of large multiunit pueblos in the Pueblo I period, earlier lished that the smallest commonly recurrent architec­ than the small single-unit pueblos he excavated in the tural unit was not a single structure, but a small spatial same area. The main point to be made here, however, is cluster of structures and other elements (e.g., the burial that the rudimentary early work of Morgan, Bandelier, mound). This complex or "unit" was composed of a and Cushing established the principle that the spatial redundant set of functionally different elements, which

3: HISTORICALPERSPECTIVES 21 showed consistent spatial/relational patterning within Defensive needs, indigenous population growth, or the unit. Functional interpretation of the unit as a whole movement of new groups into an area could cause mul­ led to the conclusion that it represented the space and tiple lineages to settle together. If these kin groups facilities used by a basic social segment. These social attempted to maintain real or fictive kinship ties and segments were not isolates, but were parts of communi­ exogamy, clans would automatically result, and these ties. The architectural and spatial expression of these would rapidly become nonlocalized. (Parsons [1940] communities might be a loose cluster of units, a cluster discusses how difficult it would be for a growing kin of units centered on a larger pueblo, or just a large group to maintain residential proximity, especially in an pueblo. Most of the large pueblos themselves could be aggregated settlement). The development of clans is not analyzed as being aggregates of the basic social/archi­ inevitable, as illustrated by their weakness or absence tectural units. That the structural integrity of the archi­ in the Eastern Pueblos (Steward 1937:99). tectural unit was preserved within the larger aggregate Steward (1937) interpreted the unit pueblo kiva as an indicated that the social integrity (and independence?) important element in the ceremonial integration of the of the basic social segment was probably preserved localized lineage. Accepting the generally favored view also. The relationship between the small house units that communal pueblos post-dated the small houses, he and the larger pueblos might be sequential, but did not suggested that "the formerly separated small groups ... have to be; site-specific environmental factors, or do not lose their social and ceremonial integrity" when "community requirements" might result in both types they begin to amalgamate in the Pueblo II period. In being present concurrently. Pueblo III and especially in Pueblo IV, however, the Fewkes (1911:79-80; 1919:69-76) used the pre­ decreasing ratio of kivas to rooms is interpreted as the sumed sequence from small house to communal house result of clan growth, perhaps by absorption of unre­ in the San Juan drainage as the basis for a theory of lated lineages, and eventually by the severing of the organizational change that accounted for changes in the clan-kiva link (though he recognizes that vestiges of ratio of kivas to rooms from the prehistoric to the such a linkage remain ethnographically at Hopi). Stew­ historic pueblos: ard does not specifically address the function of kivas in historic Pueblo villages, but it is implied that the ... we necessarily have in the growth of the community reduction in kiva frequency and the severing of their house the story of the social evolution of the Pueblo ties with descent groups is part of a general process by people. Clans or social units at first isolated later joined which integration and political autonomy of the village each other.... The inevitable outcome would be a breaking down of clan priesthoods or clan religions and is enhanced at the expense of kin groups. the formation of fraternities of priesthoods recruited Rohn (1965, 1971) used the spatial patterning of from several clans. This in turn would lead to a corre­ architectural elements to infer several levels of social sponding reduction and enlargement of ceremonial integration at Mug House, in Mesa Verde National Park. rooms remaining. Two kivas suffice for the ceremonies Unlike previous workers, he specifically attempted to of a majority of the Rio Grande pueblos; but Cliff Palace avoid inferring kinship-based groupings such as "clan" with a population of the same size had 23 ... [Fewkes and "lineage" from the spatial arrangements of facili­ 1919:75-76]. ties that he observed. He argued that the archaeological patterns reflected not kinship patterns per se, but Community pattern analysis and, in particular, the changing ratios of kivas to rooms were employed by the durable remains of domestic cooperation .... It is Steward (1937, 1955:151-172) as part of a theoretical this sharing of material goods and the cooperation in­ study of how bands based on single lineages might have volved in satisfying the needs and wants of all the individuals concerned that may be reflected in archaeo­ evolved into multilineage societies having non-local­ logical remains. Thus the prehistorian may discern ized clans. Steward reviewed the "unit type pueblos" of traces of groups that can be called socioeconomic, that the San Juan area, and concluded that is, their cohesion probably rests on sociological factors, but their recognition by the archaeologist depends on ... it is difficult to reconcile the division of the early cooperative economic behavior [Rohn 1965:65]. villages into small house clusters with any other social unit than a unilateral lineage or band. Each house cluster Rohn (1965:65) used "the juxtaposition of rooms is so large that it must have sheltered several families. with different functions, building sequences, patterns But there would be no motive for unrelated families to of movement indicated by doorway locations, and the band together instead of living in houses located at placement of hearths and other domestic features" to random .... A rule of residence, however, would pro­ duce lineages whose houses would fit the archaeological establish different levels of interaction and hence of facts. Archaeologists have frequently called these 'clan inferred grouping. The smallest unit was the room suite, houses,' but this must not be understood to mean clan in considered to be the facilities used by a household. the Hopi sense [Steward 1937:99]. Room suites were clusters of walled spaces that in-

22 LIPE AND HEGMON eluded at least one dwelling room, several storage ships between kivas and subvillage residence units," rooms, a small outdoor work area, and sometimes a i.e., specific room clusters (Dean 1970: 165). From this, sleeping or work room. The functional classification of he inferred that kivas "must have been associated with spaces depended on patterned differences among struc­ some sort of nonlocalized social unit that included tures in size, location, and floor and wall features. members of a number of households" (Dean 1970: 165). Specific groupings of spaces into suites were based on The involvement of such dispersed groups in ritual proximity, interconnections inferred from doorway ori­ would have strengthened village-level integration entations, evidence that structures were built or remod­ (Dean 1970:166), as it does in ethnographically known eled together; and in some cases, on formal similarities Western Pueblo communities. in details of construction. Other arohitectural data, used in conjunction with The second level of grouping was the "habitation tree-ring dates on structural beams, provided evidence unit," a term used by Bullard (1962) to refer to the of patterns of integration: association of a small number of surface rooms with a Dendrochronological analyses show that tree-cutting at pit house or kiva. Rohn (1965:67) notes that this unit Betatakin was a communal rather than an individual or equates roughly to Prudden 's "unit-type pueblo" and to household activity [Dean 1969:80]. The construction of Fewkes' (1909) "courtyard unit." Rohn did not corre­ large community structures ... [also] required the coor­ late a specific kind of socioeconomic unit with this dinated efforts of large groups of people [Dean architectural/archaeological unit, but suggested that 1970:168]. ... whatever sort of kin grouping occupied the old Differences in patterns of integration between the habitation units, it was undergoing modification during two large cliff dwellings-Betatakin and Kiet Siel­ the Pueblo III occupation of Mug House, and has either were also noted. The stockpiling of timbers prior to passed out of existence since then, or has been modified construction, the pattern of its growth, and the homoge­ further so it no longer affects site layout [Rohn neity of its architecture indicated that Betatakin "was a 1965:68]. unified 'community' throughout its history, whereas A third level of grouping was recognized on the basis Kiet Siel was a frequently changing assemblage of his­ of aligned doorless house walls that separated Mug torically unrelated households or fragments of other House into two parts. Rohn (1965:69) suggests that this communities" (Dean 1970: 168). The lack of Great may reflect "some form of dual social division" but Kivas or of formal spatial relationships among sites does not elaborate on this idea. A final level of social indicated to Dean that there were no strong structural grouping is the community, which consists of Mug relationships among villages. However, the Tsegi vil­ House, several nearby smaller sites, and facilities such lages "were probably linked into a loosely defined as a water catchment that was probably used jointly by 'community' by a network of informal ties based on the residents of the several settlements that comprised trade, interpersonal relations, intermarriage, and conti­ the community. guity" (Dean 1970:169). Rohn's study of Chapin Mesa, which was completed In the analysis of Turkey Creek Pueblo discussed as a dissertation in the early 1960s but not published above, Lowell (1988) used wall construction events and until1977, also includes some pioneering Southwestern patterns of redundant association among functionally applications of community pattern analysis. Rohn de­ different room types to infer the presence of both house­ lineates communities on the basis of clusters of contem­ hold and suprahousehold residential groups. Further­ poraneous sites, most of which also display evidence of more, the settlement could be divided into two main shared economic facilities (e.g., water catchment/distri­ architectural blocks, both of which adjoined a Great bution systems) and/or ceremonial facilities (e.g., a Kiva and plaza. The two previously-discussed groups Great Kiva or bi-wall structure). Large sites, such as of "kiva rooms" were positioned so as to link each of Cliff Palace, are interpreted as having provided some of the two main roomblocks with the Great Kiva. Lowell the ceremonial facilities used by smaller outlying set­ (1988) interpreted this configuration as indicating a tlements that were part of the community. possible dual division of the settlement as well as a Dean (1969, 1970) also analyzed the spatial pattern­ village level of social integration. ing of functionally different structures in Pueblo III As discussed above, artifactual data have generally cliff dwellings to arrive at inferences about community been used to develop functional classifications of archi­ organization and integration. Unlike the Mesa Verde tectural spaces in pueblos, or to infer the activities that sites studied by Rohn, the Tsegi Phase Kayenta cliff took place in these spaces. In the 1960s, Hill (1966, dwellings Dean studied displayed no intermediate level 1970) and Longacre (1964, 1966, 1970) launched an of grouping between the room cluster (household) and ambitious attempt to use the distributions of artifacts the settlement (village). Kivas were relatively rare, and and ecofacts as direct indicators of the distribution and there was a "lack of spatial or architectural relation- composition of social groups at prehistoric pueblos, in

3 : HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVES 23 conjunction with spatial analysis of variation in archi­ Pueblo III and IV periods (e.g., Upham 1982, 1985; tecture and features. The basic approach was to distin­ Upham and Plog 1986; Plog 1983; Graves et al. 1982; guish various blocks of rooms within the pueblos by the Whittlesey 1984; Reid 1985). There is general agree­ occurrence in them of distinctive constellations of vari­ ment, however, that in the Pueblo II and early Pueblo ables that ranged from ceramic types and design ele­ III period, the "Chaco Phenomenon" (Cordell ments to other artifact or feature types. The room 1984:246-274; Judge 1979) exhibited a more complex clusters thus defined were then interpreted as the areas social organization than either earlier or later Pueblo occupied by residence groups (Hill 1966) or localized societies. Schelberg, for example, recognizes a three­ descent groups (Longacre 1964). Comparison of organ­ tiered administrative hierarchy among settlements hav­ izational patterns at the Carter Ranch Pueblo (Longacre ing Chacoan "Great Houses," and proposes a level of 1964, 1970) with those at the later Broken K Pueblo sociopolitical complexity "similar to that of the chief­ (Hill1966, 1970) plus consideration of other settlement dom" (Schelberg 1984). Much of the discussion of data from the region led to inferences about changes in Chacoan social organization revolves around the social modes of social integration (Longacre 1966; Hill1966). implications of the Great House architecture. These Increasing aggregation of the population into larger buildings differ markedly in scale, planning, labor in­ villages, the appearance of Great Kivas, the decreasing vestment, and ostentation from the smaller, more typi­ ratio of kivas to rooms, increased size of residence cal Anasazi settlements that are generally associated groups, the tendency for architectural style to become with them (Marshall et al. 1979; Lekson 1984; Powers more homogeneous, and the possibility that Broken K 1984; Schelberg 1984; Toll 1985; Sebastian 1988). Al­ artifact distributions indicated some degree of localized though the evidence for actual social stratification ap­ production and exchange of goods all were taken to pears weak (Johnson 1984) this was clearly "not an indicate an increasing scale and intensity of social inte­ acephelous society" (Sebastian 1988:59). Sebastian gration, both within and between villages, perhaps in (1988) argues that Chacoan Great House architecture response to increasing climatic variability and subsis­ was developed by emerging leaders in the tenth century tence risk (Longacre 1966; Hill 1966). This work has A.D. as part of a competitive strategy to attract followers been challenged repeatedly on the basis of the adequacy by sharing stored food in times of low agricultural of the statistical methods employed (Lischka 1975; production. The increasingly monumental Great Dumond 1977) and of the concepts used to model social Houses of the eleventh century, on the other hand, were organization and link it to archaeological variables part of a strategy by which leadership groups institu­ (Allen and Richardson 1971; Stanislawski 1973, 1977). tionalized their positions, perhaps by asserting control Hill and Longacre also do not appear to have taken of the relationship between society and the supernatural sufficient account of the patterning introduced by pro­ world. cesses of roomblock growth and remodeling (Wilcox Another aspect of the Chacoan built environment 1988) and assemblage formation (Schiffer 1987:323- with implications for social integration is the system of 338). Nevertheless, the ambitious and imaginative na­ roads that evidently linked "Chacoan Outlier" sites with ture of the work, and the attempt to apply new Chaco Canyon, and to some extent with one another, quantitative methods to the study of social organiza­ over an area nearly 200 km. in diameter (Marshall et al. tion, had a powerful and largely positive effect on a 1979; Kincaid 1983; Powers et al. 1983; Betancourt et generation of archaeologists in the Southwest and else­ al. 1986; Nials et al. 1987). The roads provide the most where. convincing evidence that Chacoan social organization Southwestern archaeologists also have attempted to had a regional dimension. Evidence that thousands of use differences in architectural scale or elaboration building timbers were transported more than 75 km. among buildings as an indicator of the degree of status from highland areas to Chaco Canyon (Betancourt et al. differentiation or sociopolitical hierarchy in pueblo 1986) also convincingly documents the scale of communities. As compared with the structures used by Chacoan regional organization and a degree of work "ordinary" households or communities, the facilities of planning and control not found in earlier or later An­ leaders and high status groups are expected to display asazi developments. more living and storage space per capita, higher invest­ ment in construction, and more ostentatious facades Artifacts and Social Integration (Lightfoot and Feinman 1979; Lightfoot 1984; Lipe 1986; Kane 1986; Lipe and Kane 1986; Orcutt and Artifacts are used in the interpretation of almost all Blinman 1987; Wilson 1989). archaeological sites; in this sense, of course, any dis­ Recent Southwestern literature presents widely dif­ cussion of social organization and integration includes fering interpretations of the sociopolitical complexity the study of artifacts. However, at least five general of prehistoric Southwestern pueblo groups in the classes of artifactual evidence can be identified that are

24 LlPE AND HEGMON used more directly in research on social organization a ted with oversized pit structures) suggest that food was and integration in the Southwest. These are grave prepared elsewhere and brought to gatherings at the goods, ceramic vessel form and disposal pattern, ritual oversized pit structures. objects, style, and exchange. With the exception of Archaeologists have long identified special or ritual grave goods, all are used in the analytical papers in this objects in their collections. Despite the time-honored volume. joke-if it looks weird and it's not obviously func­ Mortuary analysis is often an excellent means of tional, it must be a ritual object-many researchers studying various aspects of prehistoric social organiza­ have used great care in their interpretations. Ellis tion. Although burial descriptions are standard in many (1967) in her study of tcamahias, and Vivian et al. Southwestern site reports, studies of burial treatment (1978) in their study of wooden artifacts used very and grave goods in relation to social organization have careful and detailed ethnographic analogy in their argu­ been limited. The Pueblo III burials at the Rainbow ments. Vivian et al. concluded that the wooden artifacts Bridge Site 568 were interred with a relatively rich were probably not altars but were used in some sort of assemblage of artifacts. In her reanalysis of the mate­ public dramatization, and Ellis argued that at least some rial, Crotty (1983:60) argued that the "preferential of the tcamahias were symbolic of the supernatural. treatment accorded senior women almost certainly de­ Others emphasize the need for contextual information notes social organization based on tracing descent in interpretations of unusual objects (see Bradley through the maternal line," and that differential treat­ 1988). The special nature of Chaco cylinder jars is ment within age and sex categories indicates a degree suggested not only by their shape but also by their of stratification not necessarily unlike that of the West­ distribution-most were found in unique contexts in ern Pueblo clan system. Using mortuary data from Pueblo Bonito (Neitzel 1985). Finally, archaeologists Chaco Canyon, Akins (1986) argued that three levels of have noted <2ertain attributes that may indicate the spe­ burials (differentiated on the basis of location as well cial, possibly ritual, roles of certain artifacts. These as grave goods) indicate three levels of social rank. attributes include the labor invested in the production Mortuary data are also used in the debate over sociopo­ and painting and/or the symbolic meaning of certain litical complexity in the Mogollon area. In her analysis wares and design styles (e.g., polychromes [Feinman et of the large and well-preserved burial population of al. 1981] or fine hachure [Neitzel1985; Windes 1984]). Grasshopper Pueblo, Whittlesey (1984, summarizing In this volume Varien and Lightfoot (Chapter 6) exam­ her 1978 dissertation) argues that differential mortuary ine the distribution of possible special artifacts across treatment can be attributed to age and sex differences the Duckfoot site, Wilshusen (Chapter 7) examines the and to membership in religious societies such as those marks left by the use of ritual objects (prayer sticks and known from ethnographic pueblos. However, her con­ altars like those known ethnographically from rituals), clusions are disputed by F. Plog (summarized in Upham while Hegmon (Chapter 9) and Plog (Chapter 10) both and Plog 1986). He and other researchers working at consider the attributes of ceramics that might indicate Nuvakwewtaqa argue that the mortuary remains at that a special role in ritual. site, though badly disturbed, support their model of a A historical review of style studies shows that re­ society in which access to resources was restricted and searchers are developing increasingly detailed under­ controlled by a decision-making elite (Upham 1982; standings of why people make and use style and how Upham and Plog 1986). style relates to social organization. Early studies in the The use and disposal of certain sizes and forms of Southwest and elsewhere basically equated groups of ceramic vessels can provide information about the con­ similar traits-including ceramic style and technology text of use, including the size of the group and the as well as architectural forms-with cultures or ethnic occasion. Toll (1985) interprets the enormous quantity affiliations. Kidder (1924:343), observing contractions of ceramics in the trash mound at Pueblo Alto in Chaco in zones of architectural and ceramic similarity, con­ Canyon as the remains deposited by large gatherings, cluded that Pueblo culture "passed through an early possibly at harvest feasts. Turner and Lofgren (1966) phase of wide territorial expansion marked by great use serving bowl and cooking jar sizes to estimate uniformity of culture. It then drew in upon itself and prehistoric household size, and they suggest that very enjoyed a period of efflorescence characterized by large jars, common only after A.D. 900, were made for strong specialization in different branches." Colton gatherings of more than one household and therefore used ceramics as primary evidence in his work to delin­ were associated with the evolution of kivas. Blinman eate Prehistoric Culture Units and Their Relationships uses both lines of evidence here to support his model of in Northern Arizona (Colton 1939). For example, a prehistoric "potlucks." Bowl:jar ratios (there are rela­ phase-recognized in large part on the basis of ceram­ tively more bowls at sites with oversized pit structures) ics-"is a concept of the culture of an Indian tribe and cooking jar size (large cooking jars are not associ- during a short period of its history" (Colton 1953:68).

3: IDSTORICALPERSPECTIVES 25 In the 1960s researchers began looking in more detail strengthening of the socially integrative network. She at stylistic similarities and differences (primarily in uses similar reasoning in her paper in this volume painted designs on ceramics), and thus were able to (Chapter 9), where she argues that the relatively great make more detailed inferences about social organiza­ stylistic diversity in ceramics associated with oversized tion. In the tradition of the New Archaeology these pit structures can be attributed to information exchange researchers rejected the equation of traits with culture. at gatheri.ngs of socially distant persons. However, their explanation of stylistic variation was As style came to be used to address more and more little changed from earlier decades, except that style detailed questions about prehistoric social organiza­ was equated with interaction instead of culture-"the tion, more attention was given to methods for classify­ smaller and more closely tied the social aggregate, the ing and analyzing style. The studies are voluminous, more details of design would be shared" (Longacre and here we give only examples at either end of the 1970:28). Clusters of design elements were used to spectrum. Some researchers advocate a hierarchical at­ identify uxorilocal residence units (if women were the tribute-based approach that can be systematically ap­ potters) within a community, and at Carter Ranch these plied to sherds (Plog 1980a; Redman 1978; Hantman et units were associated with kivas (Hill1970b; Longacre al. 1984). This approach is used in the paper by 1970). Studies of stylistic similarity and homogeneity Hegmon. In contrast, Washburn (1977; Washburn and were also used to study interaction between communi­ Matson 1985) advocates the analysis of design struc­ ties (Leone 1968; Tuggle 1970). ture, particularly symmetry, which often can only be Following soon after were other studies that found analyzed on whole vessels, but is argued to be more fault with nearly every aspect of the early attempts at culturally sensitive than separate elements. Another ap­ "ceramic sociology," including the assumption that proach, explicitly focused on social processes, is the styles were passed from mother to daughter production step measure of Feinman et al. (1981). This (Stanislawski 1973), the statistical methods used (Plog measure does not analyze design style as such, but it 1978a, 1978b), and lack of control of factors such as provides a means of quantifying the effort entailed in ceramic exchange that could affect the distribution of making different kinds of ceramics and thus identifying styles (Plog 1980a, 1980b). However, the initial studies more highly valued (generally more elaborate) ceram­ and the criticisms that followed prompted further re­ ics. In this volume neither Plog nor Hegmon use the search that focused on two general classes of questions. production step measure, but they do attempt to identify First, why do people paint their pottery and create these special ritual-associated ceramics based on design attri­ different styles? Second, what are the variables of style butes (the Dogozshi style, and design formality and most appropriate for study? neatness). The first question represented a fairly radical theo­ Finally, in what we regard as a very encouraging retical change from the earlier studies. Drawing from development, researchers have begun to agree that there the information exchange theory of Wobst (1977) re­ are many correct answers to both the above questions. searchers considered style to have a function as a means of transmitting information (Plog 1980a). That is, pre­ That is, people make and use style for different reasons, historic people did not just passively accept the style of some more active than others; and many kinds of stylis­ those around them; rather, they actively used style to tic analyses can be used to answer a variety of ques­ convey information about their social position and tions. Plog (1989) found that some patterns of stylistic group affiliation. Thus, style could actually be used to variation could be best explained as the product of rote establish social networks and increase social integra­ learning (isochrestic variation [see Sackett 1985; tion. Braun and Plog (1982:514-515) interpreted the Wiessner 1985:161]) while other patterns indicate more development of regional stylistic traditions, increasing active use of stylistic symbols in information exchange. stylistic similarity between communities, and increas­ Kintigh (1985) suggested that some stylistic attributes ing community homogeneity as evidence for "increas­ might be produced by intentional symbolism and others ing supralocal cooperation and social integration" (possibly more subtle attributes) produced by shared indicative of the development of regional tribal social learning contexts. F. Plog (1983) argued that some at­ networks. Graves (1982) found that Plog's model of tributes (including ceramic technology and corrugation style change based on the information exchange theory styles) distinguish small localities while others (types did not fully explain design style variation in White and wares as well as architectural styles) distinguish Mountain Red Ware; however, Graves also posited an provinces and sometimes social alliances that drew rel­ active role for style in symbolizing group affiliation in atively autonomous villages "into a larger, overarching exchange networks. Hegmon (1986) argued that in­ social and economic organization" (1983:323; see also creases in stylistic diversity on Black Mesa indicated Cordell and Plog 1979; Upham 1982). Hegmon's paper an increase in information exchange, and thus a in this volume examines different aspects of style (de-

26 LIPE AND HEGMON sign diversity, formality, and neatness) as indications of Valley suggests that there may have been some Chaco­ both information exchange and ritual use of ceramics. based organization of, or control over, ceramic manu­ Exchange and style are closely interrelated in studies facture in the Chuska Valley" (Toll et al. 1980). Upham of social organization. Not only must exchange be un­ and others (Upham et al. 1981; Upham 1982) argue that derstood or controlled for in stylistic analyses, but both certain relatively labor-intensive ceramic wares (deter­ are part of the same general social processes. That is, mined according to the production step measure) were both play a role in social interaction; style can be seen centrally produced and tend to be found only on larger as information exchange, and material exchange can sites, suggesting restricted access to the material and help to disseminate stylistic information. Beginning control by a managerial elite. They suggest that this with the pioneering work of Shepard (1942, 1965) ceramic exchange may have symbolized political alli­ Southwestern archaeologists have studied the material ances in the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries (Upham properties of artifacts to determine where they were 1982:157). However, at least for the Jeddito Alliance, produced (or at least to identify groups of artifacts that evidence for centrally controlled production is ques­ appear to have been produced in the same place) and tionable, since clay composition analysis shows that thus to investigate patterns of prehistoric exchange and Jeddito Yellow Wares (in the Hopi Mesas area) were their relationship to social organization and economy. produced at several villages, and there is no evidence Not all such studies find evidence for exchange, how­ of centrally controlled resources within the villages ever. In their analysis of obsidian in New Mexico, (Bishop et al. 1988). Findlow and Bolognese (1982) concluded that much of Artifacts are powerful evidence in studies of social the archaeological distribution could be explained by integration and other topics. The studies in this volume direct access procurement rather than exchange. Anal­ demonstrate this power and also demonstrate the impor­ yses of Salado Polychromes (widespread in 14th Cen­ tance of interpreting the artifacts in context. Study of tury Mogollon sites) indicate that the style and vessel form, exchange, and style are all closely linked, manufacturing technology were shared over a large as is shown in the papers by Blinman, Hegmon and area, but the vessels themselves were not widely ex­ Plog. Furthermore, interpretations of artifacts and the changed; instead, evidence indicates they were locally architectural contexts where they are found are closely produced (Crown and Bishop 1987; Danson and Wal­ linked, as is shown most directly by Varien and Light­ lace 1956). foot and generally by all the papers in this volume. In two areas widely separated by time and space, evidence of exchange demonstrated that communities were not as isolated as some had thought. Shepard References (1942, 1965) and later Warren's (1969) work with Pueblo IV Rio Grande Glaze Wares demonstrated a high Aberle, David degree of productive specialization, exchange, and eco­ 1970 Comments. In Reconstructing Prehistoric Pueblo nomic interdependence between villages. Chipped Societies, edited by William A. Longacre, pp. 214- stone and ceramic evidence similarly demonstrated 223. University of New Mexico Press, Albuquer­ inter- and intraregional exchange in central and north­ que. ern Arizona (Plog 1980b; 1986). Braun andPlog (1982) suggest that an increase in exchange intensity (greater Adams, E. Charles volume, shorter distance), in conjunction with the de­ 1983 The Architectural Analogue to Hopi Social Organi­ velopment of zones of stylistic similarity, indicates an zation and Room Use, and Implications for Prehis­ increase in regional integration. In Chapter 10 of this toric Northern Southwestern Culture. American volume, Plog draws from these studies of exchange and Antiquity 48(1):44-61. finds that imported red and orange wares are strongly associated with sites with ceremonial structures. Blin­ man (Chapter 8) similarly finds an association of im­ Akins, Nancy J. ported red wares and sites with oversized pit structures. 1986 A Biocultural Approach to Human Burials from Finally, the exchange and movement of goods have Chaco Canyon, New Mexico. Reports of the also been used in interpretations of political organiza­ Chaco Center No.9. National Park Service, Santa tion and arguments for prehistoric social complexity. A Fe. large proportion of ceramics in Chaco Canyon during the Classic Bonito Phase were tempered with sanidine Allen, William L. and James B. Richardson III basalt from the Chuska area approximately 80 km. west 1971 The Reconstruction of Kinship from Archaeologi­ of Chaco Canyon. "The co-occurrence of Chuska ce­ cal Data: The Concepts, the Methods, and the Pos­ ramics in Chaco Canyon and Chaco sites in the Chuska sibility. American Antiquity 36(1):41-53.

3: illSTORICALPERSPECTIVES 27 Ambler, J. Richard and Alan P. Olson 1985 A Typology of Room Function at Grasshopper 1977 Salvage Archaeology in the Cow Springs Area. Mu­ Pueblo, Arizona. Journal ofField Archaeology seum of Northern Arizona Technical Series No. 12:41-63. 15. Flagstaff, Arizona. Colton, Harold S. Anderson, Keith M. 1939 Prehistoric Culture Units and Their Relationships 1969 Ethnographic Analogy and Archaeological Interpre­ in Northern Arizona. Museum ofNorthem Ari­ tation. Science 163:133-138. zona Bulletin No. 17. Flagstaff.

Bandelier, Adolf 1953 Potsherds. Museum of Northern Arizona Bulletin 1884 Reports by A. F. Bandelier on His Investigations in No. 25. Flagstaff. New Mexico During the Years 1883-84. Archaeo­ Cordell, Linda S., and Fred Plog logical Institute of America, Fifth Annual Re­ 1979 Escaping the Confines of Normative Thought: A port:55-98. Boston. (Cited in Wilcox 1976) Re-evaluation of Puebloan Prehistory. American Antiquity 44:405-429. Betancourt, Julio L., JeffreyS. Dean, and Herbert M. Hull 1986 Prehistoric Long-Distance Transport of Construc­ Cordell, Linda S. tion Beams, Chaco Canyon, New Mexico. Ameri­ 1984 .Prehistory of the Southwest. Academic Press, Or­ can Antiquity 51(2):370-375. lando, Florida.

Bishop, Roland L., Veletta Canouts, Suzanne P. DeAtley, Crotty, Helen K. Alfred Qoyawayama, and C. W. Aikins 1983 Honoring the Dead: Anasazi Ceramics from the 1988 The Formation of Ceramic Analytical Groups: Rainbow Bridge-Monument Valley Expedition. Hopi Pottery Production and Exchange, A. c. 1300- Museum of Cultural History, Monograph Series 1600. Journal of Field Archaeology 15:317-337. No. 23. University of California at Los Angeles.

Bradley, Bruce Crown, Patricia L. and Ronald L. Bishop 1988 Unusual Vessel Forms from Sand Canyon Pueblo, 1987 The Manufacture of Salado Polychrome. Pottery Colorado. Pottery Southwest 15(2):1-2. Southwest 14(4):1-3.

Braun, David P. and Stephen Plog Cushing, Frank H. 1982 Evolution of "Tribal" Social Networks: Theory and 1886 A Study ofPueblo Pottery as Illustrative of Zuni Prehistoric North American Evidence. American Culture Growth. Fourth Annual Report of the Bu­ Antiquity 47:504-525. reau of Ethnology to the Secretary of the Smithsonian Institution 1883-1884: pp. 467-521. Brew, John Otis Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C. 1946 The Archaeology ofAlkali Ridge, Southeastern 1888 Preliminary Notes on Origin, Working Hypothesis, Utah. Papers of the Peabody Museum of Ameri­ and Primary Researches of the Hemenway South­ can Archaeology and Ethnology No. 21. Harvard western Archaeological Expedition. Congres Inter­ University, Cambridge, Massachusetts. national des Americanistes, Berlin. (cited in Wilcox 1976) Cater, John and Mark Chenault 1988 Kiva Use Reinterpreted. Southwestern Lore Danson, E. B., and R. M. Wallace 54(3): 19-32. 1956 A Petrographic Study of Gila Polychrome. Ameri­ can Antiquity 22:180-182. Chang, Kwang-Chih 1958 Study of the Neolithic Social Grouping: Examples Dean, Jeffrey from the New World. American Anthropologist 1969 Chronological Analysis ofTsegi Phase Sites in 60:298-334. Northeastern Arizona. Papers of the Laboratory of Tree-Ring Research No. 3. University of Arizona, Ciolek-Torrello, Richard Tucson. 1978 A Statistical Analysis ofActivity Organization: Grasshopper Pueblo, Arizona. Unpublished Ph.D. 1970 Aspects of Tsegi Phase Social Organization: A dissertation, Department of Anthropology, Univer­ Trial Reconstruction. In Reconstructing Prehis­ sity of Arizona, Tucson. toric Pueblo Societies, edited by William A.

28 LIPE AND HEGMON Longacre, pp. 140-174. University of New Mex­ 1987 Chaco Canyon and Vijayanagara: Proposing Spa­ ico Press, Albuquerque. tial Meaning in 1\vo Societies. In Mirror and Met­ aphOr: Material and Social Constructions of DeGarmo, Glen D. Reality, edited by D. W. Ingersoll, Jr. and G. 1975 Coyote Creek, Site 01: A Methodological Study of Bronitsky, pp. 313-349. University Press of Amer­ a Prehistoric Pueblo Population. Unpublished ica, Landham, Maryland. Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Anthropology, University of California at Los Angeles. Graves, Michael W. 1982 Breaking Down Ceramic Variation: Testing Models 1977 Identification of Prehistoric Intrasettlement Ex­ of White Mountain Redware Design Style Devel­ change. In Exchange Systems in Prehistory, edited opment. Journal ofAnthropological Archaeology by Timothy K. Earle and Jonathan Ericson, pp. 1:305-354. 153-170. Academic Press, New York. Graves, Michael W., William A. Longacre, and Sally J. Dumond, Don Holbrook 1977 Science in Archaeology: The Saints Go Marching 1982 Aggregation and Abandonment at Grasshopper In. American Antiquity 42(3):330-348. Pueblo. Journal ofField Archaeology 9:193-206. Ellis, Florence Hawley Hantman, Jeffrey L., Kent G. Lightfoot, Steadman Upham, 1967 Use and Significance of the Tcamahia. El Palacio Fred Plog, Stephen Plog, and Bruce Donaldson 74:35-43. 1984 Cibola Whitewares: A Regional Perspective. In Re­ gional Analysis ofPrehistoric Ceramic Variation: Feinman, Gary M., Steadman Upham, and Kent G. Lightfoot Contemporary Studies of the Cibola Whitewares, 1981 The Production Step Measure: An Ordinal Index of edited by A. P. Sullivan and J. L. Hantman, pp. 17- Labor Input in Ceramic Manufacture. American 35. Anthropological Research Papers No. 31. Ari­ Antiquity 46:871-882. zona State University, Tempe. Fewkes, J. Walter 1898 Archeological Expedition to Arizona in 1895. Sev­ Hawley, Florence enteenth Annual Report of the Bureau of Ameri­ 1950 Big Kivas, Little Kivas, and Moiety Houses in His­ can Ethnology to the Secretary of the Smithsonian torical Reconstruction. Southwestern Journal of Institution 1895-1896: pp. 519-744. Government Anthropology 6:286-302. Printing Office, Washington, D.C. Hegmon, Michelle 1908 Ventilators in Ceremonial Rooms of Prehistoric 1986 Information Exchange and Integration on Black Cliff-Dwellings. American Anthropologist, n.s., Mesa, Arizona, A.D. 931-1150. In Spatial Organi­ 10:387-398. zation and Exchange: Archaeological Survey on Northern Black Mesa, edited by S. Plog, pp. 256- 1909 Antiquities of the Mesa Verde National Park: 281. Southern Illinois University Press, Carbon­ Spruce-Tree House. Bureau of American Ethnol­ dale. ogy Bulletin 41. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C. Hill, James N. 1966 A Prehistoric Community in Eastern Arizona. Findlow, Frank J., and Marissa Bolognese Southwestern Journal of Anthropology 22(1):9-30. 1982 Regional Modeling of Obsidian Procurement in the American Southwest. In Contexts for Prehistoric 1968 Broken K Pueblo: Patterns of Form and Function. Exchange, edited by J. E. Ericson and T. K. Earle, In N.ew Perspectives in Archeology, edited by pp. 53-81. Academic Press, New York. Sally R. Binford and Lewis R. Binford, pp. 103- 142. Aldine Publishing Co., Chicago. Fritz, John 1978 Paleopsychology Today: Ideational Systems and 1970a Prehistoric Social Organization in the American Human Adaptation in Prehistory. In Social Arche­ Southwest: Theory and Method. In Reconstruct­ ology: Beyond Subsistence and Dating, edited by ing Prehistoric Pueblo Societies, edited by Wil­ Charles L. Redman et al., pp. 37-59. Academic liam A. Longacre, pp. 11-58. University of New Press, New York. Mexico Press, Albuquerque.

3: HISTORICALPERSPECTIVES 29 1970b Broken K Pueblo: Prehistoric Social Organiza­ edited by Clyde Kluckhohn and Paul Reiter, pp. tion in the American Southwest. Anthropological 151-190. University of New Mexico Bulletin, An­ Papers of the University of Arizona No. 18. Tuc­ thropological Series, vol.3, No. 2. Albuquerque, son. New Mexico.

Johnson, Gregory A. Lancaster, James A. and Jean M. Pinkley 1989 Dynamics of Southwestern Prehistory: Far Outside­ 1952 Excavation at Site 16 of Three Pueblo II Mesa-Top Looking In. In Dynamics of Southwestern Prehis­ Ruins, in Archeological Excavations in Mesa tory, edited by Linda S. Cordell and George J. Verde National Park, Colorado, 1950, by James Gumerman. Smithsonian Institution Press, Wash­ A. Lancaster, Jean M. Pinkley, Philip F. Van ington, D.C., in press. Cleave, and Don Watson, pp. 23-86. Archeologi- cal Research Series No.2. National Park Service, Jorgenson, Julia Washington, D.C. 1975 A Room Use Analysis of Table Rock Pueblo, Ari­ zona. Journal ofAnthropological Research Lekson, Steve 31:149-161. 1984 Great Pueblo Architecture of Chaco Canyon, New Mexico. Publications in Archeology No. 18B,Na­ Judge, W. James tional Park Service, Albuquerque, New Mexico. 1979 The Development of a Complex Cultural Ecosys­ (Reprinted 1986 by the University of New Mexico tem in the Chaco Basin, New Mexico. In Proceed­ Press, Albuquerque) ings of the First Conference on Scientific Research in the National Parks, edited by R. M. 1985 The Idea of the Kiva in Anasazi Archaeology. Linn, vol. 2, pp. 901-906. U.S. National Park Ser­ Paper presented at the 50th Annual Meeting of the vice Transactions and Proceedings Series No. 5. Society for American Archaeology, Denver, Colo­ Washington, D.C. rado.

Kane, Allen E. 1988 The Idea of the Kiva in Anasazi Archaeology. The 1986 Social Organization and Cultural Process in Dolo­ Kiva 53(3):213-234. res Anasazi Communities, A.D. 600-900. In Dolo­ res Archaeological Program: Final Synthetic Leone, Mark Report, compiled by David A. Breternitz, Chris­ 1968 Neolithic Economic Autonomy and Social Dis­ tine K. Robinson, and Timothy G. Gross, pp. 633- tance. Science 162:1150-1151. 661. Bureau of Reclamation, Engineering and Research Center, Denver, Colorado. Lightfoot, Kent G. 1984 Prehistoric Political Dynamics: A Case Study from Kidder, Alfred V. the American Southwest. Northern illinois Univer­ 1924 An Introduction to the Study of Southwestern Ar­ sity Press, DeKalb. chaeology. Yale University Press, New Haven. Lightfoot, Kent G. and Gary M. Feinman 1927 Southwestern Archaeological Conference. Science 1982 Social Differentiation and Leadership Develop­ 66(1716):489-491. ment in Early Pithouse Villages in the Mogollon Region of the American Southwest. American An­ Kincaid, Chris (editor) tiquity 47(1): 64-86. 1983 Chaco Roads Project, Phase I: A Reappraisal of Prehistoric Roads in the San Juan Basin, I983. Lightfoot, Ricky R. Bureau of Land Management, Albuquerque. 1988 Roofmg an Early Anasazi Great Kiva: Analysis of an Archaeological Model. The Kiva 53(3):253- Kintigh, Keith W. 272. 1985 Social Structure, the Structure of Style, and Stylis­ tic Patterns in Cibola Pottery. In Decoding Prehis­ Lipe, William D. toric Ceramics, edited by B. Nelson, pp. 35-74. 1960 1958 Excavations, Glen Canyon Area. University Southern Illinois University Press, Carbondale. of Utah Anthropological Papers No. 44. Salt Lake City, Utah. Kluckhohn, Clyde 1939 Discussion. In Preliminary Report on the 1937 Ex­ 1986 Modeling Dolores Area Cultural Dynamics. In Do­ cavations, Be 50-51, Chaco Canyon, New Mexico, lores Archaeological Program: Final Synthetic Re-

30 LIPE AND HEGMON port, compiled by David A. Bretemitz, Christine Press (originally published in 1881 as Contribu­ K. Robinson, and G. Timothy Gross, pp. 439-467. tions to North American Ethnology, vol. 4. Gov­ Bureau of Reclamation, Engineering andRe­ ernment Printing Office, Washington, D.C.). search Center, Denver, Colorado. 1985 Ancient Society. University of Arizona Press, Tuc­ Lipe, William D. and Allen E. Kane son (originally published 1877). 1986 Evaluation of the Models with Dolores Area Data. In Dolores Archaeological Program: Final Syn­ Morris, Earl H. thetic Report, compiled by David A. Breternitz, 1939 Archaeological Studies in the La Plata District, Christine K. Robinson, and G. Timothy Gross, pp. Southwestern Colorado and Northwestern New 703-707. Bureau of Reclamation, Engineering and Mexico. Carnegie Institution of Washington Publi­ Research Center, Denver, Colorado. cation No. 519. Washington, D.C.

Lischka, Joseph J. Neitzel, Jill 1975 Broken K Revisited: A Short Discussion of Factor 1985 Regional Styles and Organizational Hierarchies: Analysis. American Antiquity 40:220-227. The View from Chaco. Paper presented at the 50th Annual Meeting of the Society for American Ar­ Longacre, William A. chaeology, Denver. 1964 Archaeology as Anthropology: A Case Study. Sci­ ence 144:1454-1455. Nials, Fred, John Stein, and John Roney 1987 Chacoan Roads in the Southern Periphery: Results 1966 Changing Patterns of Social Integration: A Prehis­ of Phase II of the BLM Chaco Roads Project. Cul­ toric Example from the American Southwest. tural Resources Series No. 1. Bureau of Land American Anthropologist 68(1 ):94-102. Management, Albuquerque, New Mexico.

1970 Archaeology as Anthropology: A Case Study. An­ Orcutt, Janet D. and Eric Blinman thropological Papers of the University of Arizona 1987 Leadership and the Development of Social Com­ No. 17. Tucson. plexity: A Case Study from the Dolores Area of the American Southwest. Manuscript in posses­ Lowell, Julie sion of the authors, Santa Fe, New Mexico. 1988 The Social Use of Space at Turkey Creek Pueblo: An Architectural Analysis. The Kiva 53(2):85-lOp. Ortiz, Alfonso Marshall, Michael, John R. Stein, Richard W. Loose, and 1969 The Tewa World: Space, Time, Being and Becom­ Judith Novotny ing in a Pueblo Society. University of Chicago 1979 Anasazi Communities of the San Juan Basin. Pub­ Press, Chicago. lic Service Company of New Mexico and the State Historic Preservation Bureau, Santa Fe. Parsons, Elsie Clews 1940 Relations Between Ethnology and Archaeology in Mindeleff, Cosmos the Southwest. American Antiquity 5(3):214-220. 1897 Cliff Ruins of Canyon de Chelly, Arizona. Sixteenth Annual Report of the Bureau of American Ethnol­ Plog, Fred ogy to the Secretary of the Smithsonian Institution 1974 The Study of Prehistoric Change. Academic Press, 1894-1895: pp. 73-198. Government Printing Of­ New York. fice, Washington, D.C. 1983 Political and Economic Alliances on the Colorado Mindeleff, Victor Plateaus, A.D. 600-1450. In Advances in New 1891 A Study of Pueblo Architecture, Tusayan and Ci­ World Archaeology No.2, edited by F. Wendorf bola. Eighth Annual Report of the Bureau of Eth­ and A. E. Close, pp. 289-330. Academic Press, nology to the Secretary of the Smithsonian New York. Institution, 1886-1887: pp. 13-228. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C. Plog, Stephen 1978 Social Interaction and Stylistic Similarity: ARe­ Morgan, Lewis Henry analysis. In Advances in Archaeological Method 1965 Houses and House-Life of the American Aborigi­ and Theory, vol. 1, edited by M. B. Schiffer, pp. nes. Reprinted by The University of Chicago 143-182. Academic Press, New York.

3 ; HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVES 31 1980a Stylistic Variation in Prehistoric Ceramics: De­ Redman, Charles L. sign Analysis in the American Southwest. Cam­ 1978 Multivariate Artifact Analysis: A Basis for Multidi­ bridge University Press, Cambridge, England. mensional Interpretations. In Social Archaeology: Beyond Subsistence and Dating, edited by C. L. 1980b Village Autonomy in the American Southwest: An Redman et al., pp. 349-372. Academic Press, New Evaluation of the Evidence. In Models and Meth­ York. ods in Regional Exchange, edited by R. E. Fry, pp. 135-146. SAAPapers No. 1. Society for American Reid, J. Jefferson Archaeology, Washington, D.C. 1985 Measuring Social Complexity in the American Southwest. In Status, Structure, and Stratification: 1986 Change in Regional Trade Networks. In Spatial Or­ Current Archaeological Reconstructions, edited ganization and Exchange: Archaeological Survey by Marc Thompson, Maria Teresa Garcia, and on Northern Black Mesa, edited by S. Plog, pp. Francois J. Kense, pp. 167-173. Proceedings of 282-309. Southern Illinois University Press, Car­ the Sixteenth Annual Chacmool Conference. The bondale. Archaeological Association of the University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta. 1989 Sociopolitical Implications of Southwestern Stylis­ tic Variation. In The Use of Style in Archaeology, Reyman, Jonathan edited by M. Conkey and C. Hastorf. Cambridge 1986 A Reevaluation ofBi-Wall and Tri-Wall Structures University Press, Cambridge, England, in press. in the Anasazi Area. In Contributions to the Ar­ chaeology and Ethnohistory of Greater Powell, John Wesley Mesoamerica, edited by William J. Folan, pp. 293- 1875 Explorations of the Colorado River of the West and 334. Southern Illinois University Press, Carbon­ Its Tributaries. Explored in 1869,1870,1871, and dale. 1872, Under the Direction of the Secretary of the Smithsonian Institution. Government Printing Of­ Rohn, Arthur fice, Washington, D.C. 1977 Cultural Change and Continuity on Chapin Mesa. The Regents Press of Kansas, Lawrence, Kansas. Powers, Robert P. 1984 Regional Interaction in the San Juan Basin: The Sackett, James R. Chacoan Outlier System. In Recent Research on 1985 Style and Ethnicity in the Kalahari: A Reply to Chaco Prehistory, edited by W. James Judge and Wiessner. American Antiquity 50:154-159. John Schelberg, pp. 23-36. Reports of the Chaco Center No. 8. Division of Cultural Research, Na­ Schiffer, Michael B. tional Park Service, Albuquerque, New Mexico. 1976 Behavioral Archeology. Academic Press, New York.

Powers, Robert P., William B. Gillespie, and Stephen H. 1985 Is There a "Pompeii Premise" in Archaeology? Lekson Journal ofAnthropological Research 41 (1 ): 18-41. 1983 The Outlier Survey: A Regional View of Settlement in the San Juan Basin. Reports of the Chaco Cen­ 1987 Formation Processes of the Archaeological Re­ ter No. 3. Division of Cultural Research, National cord. University of New Mexico Press, Albuquer­ Park Service, Albuquerque, New Mexico. que.

Prudden, T. Mitchell Sebastian~ Lynne 1903 The Prehistoric Ruins of the San Juan Watershed in 1988 Leadership, Power, and Productive Potential: A Po­ Utah, Arizona, Colorado, and New Mexico. Ameri­ litical Model of the Chaco System. Unpublished can Anthropologist, n.s., 5(2):224-288. Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Anthropology, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque. 1914 The Circular Kivas of Small Ruins in the San Juan Watershed. American Anthropologist, n.s., Schelberg, John D. 16(1):33-58. 1984 Analogy, Complexity, and Regionally-based Per­ spectives. In Recent Research on Chaco Prehis­ 1918 A Further Study of the Prehistoric Small House tory, edited by W. James Judge and John D. Ruins in the San Juan Watershed. Memoirs of the Schelberg, pp. 5-21. Reports of the Chaco Center American Anthropological Association, vol. 5, No. 8. National Park Service, Albuquerque, New No.1. Mexico.

32 LIPE AND HEGMON Shafer, Harry Toll, H. Wollcott, Thomas C. Windes, and Peter J. McKenna 1982 Classic Mimbres Phase Households and Room Use 1980 Late Ceramic Patterns in Chaco Canyon: The Prag­ Patterns. The Kiva 48(1-2):17-37. matics of Modeling Ceramic Exchange. In Models and Methods in Regional Exchange, edited by R. Shepard, Anna 0. E. Fry, pp. 95-118. SAAPapers No.1. Society for 1942 Rio Grande Glaze Paint Ware. Contributions to American Archaeology, Washington, D.C. American Anthropology and History, vol. 7, No. 39. Carnegie Institution of Washington, Washing­ Tuggle, H. David ton, D.C. 1970 Prehistoric Community Relations in East-Central Arizona. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Ari­ 1965 Rio Grande Glaze-Paint Pottery: A Test of Petro­ zona. University Microfilms, Ann Arbor, Michi­ graphic Analysis. In Ceramics and Man, edited by gan. F. R. Matson, pp. 62-87. Viking Fund Publications in Anthropology No. 41. Aldine, Chicago. Turner, Christy G., II, and Laurel Lofgren 1966 Household Size of Prehistoric Western Pueblo Indi­ Simpson, James H. ans. Southwestern Journal of Anthropology 1964 Navajo Expedition: Journal of a Military Recon­ 22:117-132. naissance from Santa Fe, New Mexico, to the Nav­ ajo Country, Made in 1849, Frank McNitt, editor. Upham, Steadman University of Oklahoma Press, Norman. 1982 Polities and Power: An Economic and Political History of the Western Pueblo. Academic Press, Smith, Watson New York. 1952 Excavations in Big Hawk Valley, Wupatki National Monument, Arizona. Museum of Northern Ari- 1985 Interpretations of Prehistoric Complexity in the zona Bulletin No. 24. Flagstaff, Arizona. Central and Northern Southwest. In Status, Struc­ ture, and Stratification: Current Archaeological Stanislawski, Michael B. Reconstructions, edited by Marc Thompson, 1973 Review of Archaeology as Anthropology: A Case Maria Teresa Garcia, and Francois J. Kense, pp. Study, by William A. Longacre. American Antiq­ 175-180. Proceedings of the Sixteenth Annual uity 38:117-121. Chacmool Conference. The Archaeological Asso­ ciation of the University of Calgary, Calgary, Al­ 1977 Ethnoarchaeology of Hopi Pottery Making: Styles berta. of Learning. In Experimental Archeology, edited by Daniel Ingersoll, John E. Yellen, and William Upham, Steadman and Fred Plog MacDonald, pp. 378-408. Columbia University 1986 The Interpretation of Prehistoric Political Complex­ Press, New York. ity in the Central and Northern Southwest: To- ward a Mending of the Models. Journal of Field Steward, Julian H. Archaeology 13:223-238. 1937 Ecological Aspects of Southwestern Society. An­ thropos 32:87-104. Upham, Steadman, Kent G. Lightfoot, and Gary M. Feinman 1981 Explaining Socially Determined Ceramic Distribu­ Swentzell, Rina tions in the Prehistoric Plateau Southwest. Ameri­ 1988 Bupingeh: The Pueblo Plaza. El Palacio 94(2):14- can Antiquity 46:822-833. 19. Vivian, Gordon Taylor, Walter 1959 The Hubbard Site and Other Tri-Wall Structures in 1954 Southwestern Archeology, Its History and Theory. New Mexico and Colorado. National Park Service American Anthropologist 56(4) Part 1:561-575. Archeological Research Series No.5. Washington, D.C. Toll, H. Wolcott 1985 Pottery, Production, Public Architecture, and the Vivian, Gordon and Paul Reiter Chaco Anasazi System. Ph.D. dissertation, Univer­ 1960 The Great Kivas of Chaco Canyon and Their Rela­ sity of Colorado. University Microfilms, Ann tionships. Monographs of the School of American Arbor, Michigan. Research No. 22. Santa Fe, New Mexico.

3 : HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVES 33 Vivian, R. Gwinn, Dulce N. Dodgen, and Gayle H. Hartmann Masse, pp. 378-409. Arizona State University An­ 1978 Wooden Ritual Artifacts from Chaco Canyon, New thropological Research Papers No. 24. Tempe, Ari­ Mexico: The Chetro Ketl Collection. Anthropolog­ zona. ical Papers of the University of Arizona No. 32. Tucson. 1988 Developmental Cycles at Broken K Pueblo. Paper presented at the 21st Chacmool Conference, Warren, Helene "Households and Communities," Department of 1969 Tonque, One Pueblo's Glaze Pottery Industry Dom­ Archaeology, University of Calgary, Alberta, Can­ inated Middle Rio Grande Commerce. El Palacio ada. 76:36-42. Willey, Gordon R. Washburn, Dorothy K. 1953 'Prehistoric Settlement Patterns in the Viru Valley, 1977 A Symmetry Analysis of Upper Gila Area Ceramic Peru. Bureau of American Ethnology Bulletin Design. Papers of the Peabody Museum of Archae­ 155. Washington, D.C. ology and Ethnology, vol. 68. Harvard University, Cambridge. Willey, Gordon R., editor 1956 Prehistoric Settlement Patterns in the New World. Washburn, Dorothy K., and R. G. Matson Viking Fund Publications in Anthropology No. 23. 1985 Use of Multidimensional Scaling to Display Sensi­ Wenner-Gren Foundation for Anthropological Re­ tivity of Symmetry Analysis of Patterned Design search, Inc., New York. to Spatial and Chronological Change: Examples from Anasazi Prehistory. In Decoding Prehistoric Wilson, Peter J. Ceramics, edited by B. A. Nelson, pp. 75-101. 1989 The Domestication of the Human Species. Yale Uni­ University of Southern Illinois Press, Carbondale. versity Press, New Haven, Connecticut.

Whittlesey, Stephanie M. Windes, Thomas C. 1984 Uses and Abuses of Mogollon Mortuary Data. In 1984 A View of the Cibola Whitewares from Chaco Can­ Recent Research in Mogollon Archaeology, edited yon. In Regional Analysis ofPrehistoric Ceramic by S. Upham, F. Plog, D. G. Batcho, and B. E. Variation: Contemporary Studies of the Cibola Kauffman, pp. 276-284. Occasional Papers No. Whitewares, edited by A. P. Sullivan and J. L. 10, New Mexico State University, Las Cruces. Hantman, pp. 94-119. Anthropological Research Papers No. 31. Arizona State University, Tempe. Wiessner, Polly 1985 Style or Isochrestic Variation? A Reply to Sackett. Wobst, H. Martin American Antiquity 50:160-166. 1977 Stylistic Behavior and Information Exchange. In Papers for the Director: Research Essays in Wilcox, David R. Honor of James B. Griffin, edited by C. E. Cle­ 1976 How the Pueblos Came to Be the Way They Are: land, pp. 317-342. Anthropological Papers No. 67. The Problem Today. Paper presented in partial ful­ Museum of Anthropology, University of Michi­ filment of the preliminary exam, Department of gan, Ann Arbor. Anthropology, University of Arizona, Tucson. Wylie, Alison 1981 Changing Perspectives on the Protohistoric Pueb­ 1985 The Reaction Against Analogy. In Advances in Ar­ los, A.D. 1450-1700, in The Protohistoric Period chaeological Method and Theory, vol. 8, edited by in the North American Southwest, AD. 1450- Michael B. Schiffer, pp. 63-111. Academic Press, 1700, edited by David R. Wilcox and Bruce New York.

34 LIPE AND HEGMON