Salt River Valley, Arizona
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
A stratigraphic survey of pre-Spanish trash mounds of the Salt River valley, Arizona Item Type Thesis-Reproduction (electronic); text Authors Schroeder, Albert H. Publisher The University of Arizona. Rights Copyright © is held by the author. Digital access to this material is made possible by the University Libraries, University of Arizona. Further transmission, reproduction or presentation (such as public display or performance) of protected items is prohibited except with permission of the author. Download date 04/10/2021 08:10:02 Link to Item http://hdl.handle.net/10150/191395 I / 3 .1-S I- , ,_ 4 4 0 + 'S S. a "5, 3 _4___ a 'a. 4 (S 0 4 S. ''S a. 7 LI. 01 OI. 'a I ''S THE SALT RIVER VALLEY IIaaV,ON ARIZONA U UI. .45 Is' -I' I. I U SI / > I. 0 I. SALT Rv(S INDIAN 5(3(RVAIION az .4. ,.., -- --- I. C. I C' 0 'S. II .4 IN )AN QE.(4VAT ION V YtI.aIda,eazti Ci. I - tI..._.. Li.AiA4AIJjgJ,. .4. SEND THE 'SI SALTRIVER VALLEY St $1 5V4051 4=J= ARIZ ONA u.( I A STRATIGRAPHIC SURVEY OF PRE-SPANISH TRASH MOUNDS OP THE SALT RIVER VALLEY ARIZONA by Albert Henry Sobroeder A Thesis submitted to the faculty of the Department of Anthropology in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts in the Graduate College University of Arizona 1940 Approved: Date ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The writer is indebted to the faculty of the Department of Anthropology of the University of Axizona for a critical reading of the text and for valuable suggestions. I wish to express my appreciation to Dr. Harold S. Colton and Dr. Emil W. Haury for their time spent on the identification of the intrusive pottery. I also wish to thank Mr. Julian Hayden for his criticisms and for putting his notes concerning the architecture of the compound at my disposal. I am indebted to Mr. T. A. Hayden, Asa't. Chief Engineer of the Water ser8 Association for his critical analysis and suggestions pertaining to the canals. I also want to express my gratitude to Mr. Frederick Scantling for his time and aid with the photography. ii TABLE OF CONTENTS Page ILLUSTRATIONS. , . V INTRODUCTION . S S S 1 THE SALT RIV VALLEY I I 2 Topography. 2 Geology. 2 Climate. 3 Fauna . 4 Flora . S S S I S S 5 Environment in the late 19th century . 6 Archaeological history 8 APPROACH AND IvIEThODS I I S 12 FIELD SURVEY S 18 Canals . S . 19 Ceremonial grottos S S S S S 35 Ball courts . 38 Compounds I I I 5 53 Stone structures S I I 60 Trash mounds S S S I 4 67 FEATURES S S S I I 72 Tests I I I 5 . 72 Houses I S I 74 Roasting pits S I I I 76 Pottery heap . 78 Cremations I 79 Burials I I S I I 84 Rock clusters S I S S I I 85 STONE WORK . S S 87 Abrading tools . I S I I I 87 Ground implements S I S 89 Carved stone I S I S 93 Chipped stone I 5 94 Stone ornaments I S I S 96 SHELL WORK . S I I S I I 5 100 Ground 8hell I I I 5 100 Carved shell S I I I S I S 5 103 Etched shell S I S I 104 CLAY OBJECTS S I I I I 5 106 Secondary uses S S - S S I 107 iii Page POTTERY 110 General iio Time range 110 Percent of wares 119 Vessel relationships , , . 120 Finish 122 Vessel forms 124 Design layout 127 INTRUS IVF 129 BONE WORK 131 METALS AND MINERAI.S 133 FOOD 134 CONCLUSIONS 136 Pioneer Period 136 Colonial Period 139 Sedentary Period 142 Classic Period 147 APPENDIX 155 IResults of survey 155 IIComparative data on the prehistoric canals 160 IIIMean measurements of Southwestern courts 161 IVTimeassociations of Southwestern courts 162 VCompound data in the Salt River Valley 163 VIAnalysis of pier test 165 VIIData on ball courts in the Southwest 166 VIII Percent of phasesrepresented in trash mounds tea ted 182 DCDescription of new pottery types . 183 .X Percent of occurrence of shell 187 XI Fauna 188 XII Flora 190 BIBLIOGRAPHY 193. iv ILLUS ThAT IONS Following Plates page I Canal in T2N,R5 . 34 IICanal in T1N,R5E . 34 III Casa Grande type of ball court . 52 IV Upper levels of compound . 52 VWest wall of boulder site . 62 VIBoulder site on top of hill . 62 VII Remnants of walls of a fort . 66 VIII Trash mound . 66 IXHouse 87, Site ]. 75 XHouse 1, Site 12 . 75 XI Top of roasting pit . 77 XIICross-section of roasting pit . 77 XIII Roasting pit after contents were removed . 77 XIVContents of roasting pit . 77 XVTkiree rocks at base of roasting pit 77 XVITop of pottery heap . 78 XVIIBase of large pit cremation 78 XVIII Inverted bow], cremation . 83 XIXExtended burial , , 83 XXReaiuers, whetstones, and arrow straightenex'a . 88 XXI Pecking stones, polishing stone, haimnerstones, and stone ball . 88 XXIIStone bowls and axes 90 XXIIIManos . , . 90 XXIVPhalli, rings, and basin stones . 92 XXV palettes . 92 XXVIKnives, saw, chopper, and hoes . 96 XXVII row points and drill . 96 XXVIIIStone pendants, beads, ornaments, and discs. , , , 9? XXIXGround shell bracelet and ornaments 101 XXXShell pendants . 101 XXXIShell beads and rings 102 XXXIICarved shell bracelets, pendants, and ornaments 102 XXXIIIEtched shell XXXIVFigurines . 107 XXXV Clay discs, beads, and. whorls . 108 XXXVI Pottery scrapers and pendants . $ 108 XXXVII Gus Red and Salt Red sherds . 112 XXXVIII Tonto Polyobrome bowl . 112 V Following Plates page XXXIXBone awls and rings . 132 XL Copper bells . , . , . 132 Figures around plans of Mayanand Southwestern balleourts . ... 42 Ground plans of boulder sites .. 63 Soil stratigraphy in trench 1, Site 1 69 cround plans of houses .. .. 74 Crosssections ofroasting pits . 76 Developmental chart of stone work 99 Developmental chart of shell work 105 Occurrence of pottery types 110 Development of red ware in the Salt River Valley . 119 Evolutionof thedecorative treat- inent of the Red-on-buff ware. 128 asociations of the intrusives . 130 Maps The SaltRiverValley,Arizona . Frontispiece Distribution of ball courts in Arizona . 51 vi INTRODUCTION In October 1938, a state-wide Works Progress Admin- istration archaeological project was set in motion with the University of Arizona acting as sponsor. Sub-project B, located in Phoenix, was one of the five agencies involved in gathering archaeological data throughout the state and was set up with the express purpose of conducting a stratigraphic survey of the Salt River Valley in order to record all re- maining sites, determine their chronological affinities, and make a study of the artifacts removed in an effort to gather as much evidence as possible pertaining to the prehistory of the valley before it was destroyed by vandalism or leveled by agricultural activities. The area concerned was the Salt River Valley proper, which lies east of and adjacent to the Gi].a-Salt meridian directly bisected by the base line (Map 1). All work was carried on in and from Pueblo Grande Lab- oratories, a city-owned park area, under the direction of Mr. Odd 5. Halseth, situated four miles east of Phoenix on Washinton Street, where the city of Phoenix supplied the project with the necessary working facilities and equipment. -1- -2- THE SALT RIVEIi VALLEY Topography The Salt River Valley of south central Arizona, 1108 feet above sea level, is an alluvial plain, nearly level but with a slight dip to the west, Its approximate length from the eastern ranges to the western end is 35 miles, and it averages 15 miles in width. The Salt River enters from the east and meanders in a westsouth-wester1y direction tbrough the valley, emptying into the Gila River 13 miles west of Phoenix, The valley proper is flat and rises slightly along its peripheries as it reaches the foothills of the surrounding mountains. On the north are the Phoenix Mountains, to the northeast the Camelback Mountains, on the south the South Mountains,to the southwest the Estrella Mountains, and on the west the White Tank Mountains (Map 1). Geology The oldest geological formations are two outcrops of Archaen granite, one occurring north of Tempe and theother in theCamelbackMountains. There are occasional exposures ofAlgonkeanmetamorphosed sediments along thesouthwestedge of the Phoenix Mountains. Tertiary sandstones and brecelas occur in the mountains north of Tempo as well as in the Camelbacks, andlavas of the same age are found in Bell Butte, Tempo Butte, and ina dike in the mountains north of Tempo. Otherwise, the valley is covered with a Quaternary detrital fill. Better grades of pro..Cambrian metamorphosed sedimentary quartzites and argillitea of a less disturbed nature are found in the Tonto Basin east of Salt River Valley. The Superstitions contain the main supply of rhyolite, white tuff and ash, also a result of Tertiary eruption. At present, deposition of a detrital nature is takingplace.1 TOthe aboveresourcesmay be added diorite and dacite boulders that clutter up the local stream beds; magnetite occurring in desert washes; garnets and obsidian from the mountains, the latter around Superior; mica in the Horse- thief Basin area; hematite and slate in the Cave Creek Station region; mica sehist in the vicinity of the Shaw Mountainsnorthof Phoenix; soapstone on the western range of the Estrellas along the north slope; and in evidence almost anywhere in the valley is the most abundant raw material 2 caliche. 3 Climate The yearly temperature range is great, varying from 16 to 118 degrees Fabrethieit, having a mean of 69.7 degrees, and a daily temperature range in January of 25.8 and in June of 32.2 degrees.