An archaeological reconnaissance of the southeastern portion of the Navajo reservation
Item Type text; Thesis-Reproduction (electronic)
Authors Lee, Thomas A.
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 10/10/2021 14:01:29
Link to Item http://hdl.handle.net/10150/551860 AN ARCHAEOLOGICAL RECONNAISSANCE OF THE SOUTHEASTERN
PORTION OF THE NAVAJO RESERVATION
by
Thomas A. Lee, Jr.
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
THE UNIVERSITY OF ARIZONA
19 6 6 STATEMENT BY AUTHOR
This thesis has been submitted in partial fulfillment of requirements for an advanced degree at The University of Arizona and is deposited in the University Library to be made available to borrowers under rules of the Library,
Brief quotations from this thesis are allowable without special permission, provided that accurate acknowledgment of source is made* Requests for permission for extended quotation from or reproduction of this manuscript in whole or in part may be granted by the head of the major department or the Dean of the Graduate College when in his judgment the proposed use of the material is in the interests of scholarship. In all other instances, however, permission must be obtained from the author.
SIGNED: I
APPROVAL BY THESIS DIRECTOR
This thesis has been approved on the date shown below:
Assistant Professor of Anthropology PREFACE
The basis for this thesis was a program of archaeological reconnaissance formulated by Dr. Brail W. Haury, then Director of the
Arizona State Museum and Head of the Department of Anthropology,
University of Arizona. This reconnaissance was conducted during the months of June, July, and August, 1961, in the general vicinity of the Black Creek drainage on the Navajo Indian Reservation. The pur
pose of the survey was to determine the nature and extent of the archaeological resources within the limits of the selected area. The
knowledge obtained was of interest to the University of Arizona as an
aid in planning its future archaeological research.
I readily accepted Dr. Haury* s offer in the fall of i960 to
undertake the field work with the possibility of using the data
gathered as a basis for this thesis.
The original area was outlined to include the major portion
of the Black Creek drainage basin plus the area around Tohatchi and
Mexican Springs, New Mexico. It was subsequently expanded to the
northwest to include the region between Ganado and Chinle, Arizona,
through the financial assistance of the Wetherill Mesa Archaeological
Project, Mesa Verde National Park, Colorado. The Wetherill Mesa Pro
ject was particularly interested in the nature of any Mesa Verde"like
remains for aid in the development of the "Mesa Verde away from Mesa
Verde" section of their project.
iii ir
The survey was accomplished with the permission of the Navajo
Tribe (Tribal Memorandum, dated May 22, 1961, to the General Superin tendent Navajo Agency) and under permit from the Department of In terior Bureau of Indian Affairs, Navajo Agency, Window Rock, Arizona, dated June 5, 1961, to the Arizona State Museum and Department of
Anthropology of the University of Arizona, Tucson,
The field season began on June 1, 1961 and ended August 27,
1961, As was important, a half ton pickup was used for transportation and the somewhat delux accomodations of a small fifteen foot house trailer made up the field headquarters. This combination resulted in maximum mobility and security of supplies and equipment through the field season.
The beginning seven weeks of the field season were spent in the Black Greek and Rio Puerco drainages. One week was spent in the
Tohatchi-Mexican Springs area. Except for a day spent in the Luka- chukai-Tohatso-Greasewood drainage near Lukachukai, Arizona, the final month was divided between the Kin-li-chee Creek and Nazlini Wash drainages.
The presentation of any archaeological report brings to the author the duty and the pleasure of calling attention to the many individuals whose advice and assistance made it possible#
To Dr. Bail W. Haury, then committee chairman, go my sincere . I thanks for giving so freely of his time, criticism, encouragement, and the financial support necessary for the successful beginning of this thesis. Dr. William A. Longacre, thesis committee chairman and Dr. Raymond H. Thompson and Mrs. Clara lee Tanner, members of ray thesis committee, who gave willingly of their time to help clarify some of my
ideas and much of my writing, are most gratefully thanked.
Many members of the Arizona State Museum staff were helpful
throughout the field work and Thesis writing, especially Dr. William H.
Wasley, Archaeologist, who checked some of my pottery identifications.
Dr. Alfred E. Johnson spent several afternoons with me dis
cussing and criticizing my attempt to estimate prehistoric populations
and I benefited greatly from his remarks. His aid and encouragement
are happily acknowledged here. Phil Hobler, then Museum photographer
took the artifact photographs used in this thesis, for which I am
grateful.
My sincere thanks go to the members of the 1961 University of
Arizona Geological Field School, St. Michaels, Arizona, to the director.
Dr. Robert L. DuBois, and his assistant, Mr. Dean Pilkinton, for sharing
its facilities when they were most needed. Dr. DuBois and Mr. Pilkin
ton's intimate knowledge of the reconnaissance area of which they gave
unhesitantly was very useful.
Go-workers in the general area of the 1961 reconnaissance have
shown a high level of cooperation and willingness to share their own,
sometimes unpublished, data. To Mr. Dave Brugge, Mr. George T. Guramer-
man, Mr. Martin Link, Dr. Alan P. Olson, and Dr. Reynold J. Ruppe go
my sincere thanks for the time and effort which each spent in my behalf.
Dr. and Mrs. Richard B. Woodbury most willingly allowed me
access to their own survey results. Their aid in the Zuni pottery
identification and survey information is greatly appreciated. vi
To the Department of Interior, Bureau of Indian Affairs, Navajo
Agency's general superintendent, Mr* Glenn R* Landbloom and personnel
of the Reality Branch I owe my thanks for expediting the issuing of
the survey permit*
Among the Navajo Tribal officials who received me graciously
and facilitated my work are: Paul Jones, then Chairman; Scott Preston,
then Vice Chairman; John C* McBee, then Administrative Assistant to
the Tribal Chairman; Edward 0. Plummer, Office of Land Use and Surveys;
J. Lee Correl, and David Brugge, Land Claims; Sam Day III, Chairman of
the Parks Commission; Martin A* Link, Tribal Archaeologist; and George
Sutton, Tribal Construction Yard. These gentlemen introduced me to
local residents, helped familiarize me with the area, and in all cases
took considerable interest in ray work* Their cooperation was inval
uable, and contributed no small part to whatever success the survey
may have enjoyed* I remain greatly in their debt* I wish to thank all
the Navajo people with whom I came in contact, those who ran as well
as those who stood their ground to face my onslaught of questions, for
a most pleasant and rewarding summer*
The Indian traders of Arizona who offered me the hospitality
of their homes, acted as interpreters and assisted me in a variety of
ways are: Mr* and Mrs. T. E. Vann, Cross Canyon; Mr. Griswald and the
late Mrs. Griswald, Nazlini; Mr. and Mrs. Stanley Smith, Burnt Water*
It is a pleasure to acknowledge their friendship and services here.
The constant encouragement and aid which Mr. Gareth W. Lowe,
Field Director of the BIU-New World Archaeological Foundation, Brigham
Young University, Provo, Utah has extended to me since my association vii with the Foundation have been essential factors in the completion of this study. His quiet understanding way and warm friendship will always. be remembered and esteemed.
Finally to my wife, Eileen, who willingly sacrificed her own studies to provide part financial support for my college education and to maintain a well balanced home life, I owe my deepest appreci ation. Without her constant cooperation and encouragement it is difficult to see how this thesis would ever have been written. TAKT.rc OF CONTENTS
Page
LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS...... x
LIST OF TABLES ...... xi
ABSTRACT ...... xiii
INTRODUCTION...... 1 orw>-H c— Problem • • . • • Area Surveyed . . Environment . . . Physiography Climate ...... 12 Flora and Fauna ...... lit History of Archaeological Work in the Reconnaissance Area . 18
THE S A M P L E ...... 33
Methods of Approach to Data C o l l e c t i n g ...... 3k Site Terminology ...... • ...... 36 Chronological Framework...... kB Pottery Types ...... 51 Plan of Presentation ...... 56
COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS ...... 60
The Six Localities ...... 60 Ceramics ...... • • ...... 6l Community Pattern ...... ?6 Settlement Pattern ...... 105 Population ...... 113 External Relationships ...... • . . • 131 Ceramics ...... ••• .••• ..••• 132 Community Pattern ...... 137 Settlement Pattern ...... 152 Population ...... 155
CONCLUSIONS...... 1S8
Hypotheses Developed...... 158 Recommendations for Testing Hypotheses ...... 165
viii ix
TABLE OF CONTENTS — Continued
Page
APPENDIX A. Tabulations of Structural Da t a ...... 168
APPENDIX B. Pottery Tabulations 233
APPENDIX C. Artifacts, Burials, arid Non-Artifactual Material...... 313
REFERENCES 333 LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS
Figure Page
1. Map of the eastern portion of the Navajo Indian Reservation and surrounding area ...... In Pocket
2. Map of the southeastern portion of the Navajo Indian Reservation ...... In Pocket
3. Map of the Lukachukai-Tohotso-Greasewood locality .... $
k. Stylized Front-oriented type of pueblo community pattern • 37
5. Stylized dwelling and surface storage structure form and layout ...... Ii3
6. Correlation of various ceramic group chronologies .... 1*9
7. Population fluctuation as expressed by site components by period for each of the six localities ...... Tn Pocket
8. Population fluctuations based on the number of site components and mean number of rooms per component by period for each of the six localities ...... In Pocket
9. Some population patterns from different areas of the Puebloan Southwest ...... •••• In Pocket
10. Whole and partial ceramic vessels • . . • . . . • • . • • 315
11. Worked sherds and unfired clay handle ...... 318
12. Stone axes and maul ...... 319
13. Chipped stone and metal artifacts ...... 325
lit. Bone and shell artifacts ...... 327
15. Artifacts of perishable vegetable material ...... 330 {LIST OF TABLES
Table Page
1. Comparison of several Ceramic Group Constituents . . • • uo
2, Four life zones in the southeastern portion of the Navajo Indian Reservation and their major characteristics ...... •••• ...... 15
3.. Frequency of Organic and Inorganic Painted ELack-on- white pottery by locality through time ...... 65
U. White Mountain Red Ware and San Juan Red Ware pottery by locality through time ...... 70
5. Tsegi Orange Ware pottery by locality through time . . . 73
6. Hopi, Zuni-Acoma and Navajo pottery by locality through time ...... 75
7. Component and site totals by locality and Ceramic Period ...... 78
8. Period Five pueblo-kiva ratio ...... 88
9. Period Five community unit combinations and their orientation irrespective of specific direction . . . 91
10. Period Six pueblo-kiva ratio ...... 92
11. Period Six community unit combinations and their orientations irrespective of specific direction . . 96
12. Period Seven pueblo-kiva r a t i o ...... 98
13. Period Seven community unit combinations and their orientation irrespective of specific direction . . . 101
ill. Physiographic situation of components by period for the Tohatchi-Mexican Springs locality ...... 108
15. Physiographic situation of components by period for the Black Creek Locality ...... 108 LIST OF TABLES — Continued
Table Page
16. Physiographic situation of components by period for the Rio Puerco locality ...... 109
17. Physiographic situation of components by period for the Kih-li-chee Creek locality ...... 109
18. Physiographic situation of components by period for the Nazlini Wash locality...... 110
19. Physiographic situation of components by period for the Lukachukai-Tohotso-Greasetrood locality ..... 110
19a. Room-to-kiva ratio by locality and ceramic period • • . • 1U2
20. Structural data of the Tohatchi-Mexican Springs l o c a l i t y ...... 171
21. Structural data of the Black Creek locality...... 181
22. Structural data of the Rio Puerco locality ...... 208
23. Structural data of the Kin-li-chee Creek locality . . . . 222
2U. Structural data of the Nazlini Wash l o c a l i t y ...... 227
25. Structural data of the Lukach ukai-Tohotso-Greasewood . l o c a l i t y ...... 232
26. Pottery of the Tohatchi-Mexican Springs locality .... 236
27. Pottery of the Black Creek locality...... 21*9
28. Pottery of the Rio Puerco l o c a l i t y ...... 282
29. Pottery of the Kin-li-chee Creek locality ...... 299
30. Pottery of the Nazlini Wash locality ...... 306
31. Pottery of the Lukachukai-Tohotso-Greasewood locality . • 312
32. Type and occurrence of m a n o s ...... 320
33. Type and occurrence of metates 321 ABSTRACT
A description of 799 sites of past human habitation located during 1961 on the Navajo Indian Reservation by the writer is used as a universe to define the outlines of the culture history of a rela tively unknown region. The area is divided into six geographical sections. A framework of nine ceramic periods orders the data chrono logically, beginning about A.D. 500 and continuing to the present day.
The comparative analysis reveals a cultural development closely re lated to the Puebloan tradition in all six areas up to about 1300.
A hiatus of about 200 years occurs after which Navajo peoples slowly begin to reoccupy the region. The Defiance Plateau is suggested as a boundry between an eastern and western variation of the Puebloan culture.
Trends in population based on site frequency and relative site size independently confirm a different demographic pattern for the eastern and western localities.
Hypotheses are constructed which may explain similarities and differences of cultural evolution among the six districts and the surrounding area.
The method of stratified sampling is recommended to select a random sample of sites to test the culture history, the hypotheses developed, and to bring new information to light.
xiii •INTRODUCTION
Problem
For some time problem-oriented research has demonstrated its utility in all, scientific fields. This two-stepped approach consists of, first, the development of a problem or model and, second, the testing of its various hypotheses. In the definition and formulation of a specific research problem one must outline the hypothetical per cepts, recognize and state personal biases, plan procedure for analy sis, and establish goals. Approaching the unknown through the known by way of a formulated plan of attack with expressed objectives, is more economical, a most important aspect to this type of approach.
The very nature of formulating a procedure and setting up limits to a problem means that a certain amount of organization has been neces sary and that apparent less direct routes to the goals have been elim inated. All this adds to the economy. Like it or not, finance is a vital problem that every researcher must face.
The same facets which make this approach economical also help to guide the researcher along a path of investigation less likely to be complicated by time-wasting diversions. This is not to deny the innovations resulting directly from the investigation and their pos sible importance, only deferring their study until the problem at hand has been exhausted.
1 2
Many research projects have wasted valuable time, money, and talent because of the lack of specific guidelines.
No sophisticated research program, however, can be drafted without background information from which to formulate a model or research design. Procedures for testing the program that guarantee
as much as possible some measure of success must also be planned. To
gain the necessary background information to plan effective research,
archaeologists depend almost entirely on the reconnaissance or survey
method.
Whether it be called a reconnaissance or a survey, as Ruppe
(1966: 313) has insisted, the initial archaeological exploration of an
unknown area should be a systematic attack aimed at the preliminary
recording of the basic outlines of the cultural development present
in the area under consideration. The reconnaissance is not a substi
tute for detailed excavation. The order of completeness of the ar
chaeological record which the survey achieves can directly influence
the final programs developed. It is important, therefore, to be mind
ful of the vagaries of preservation and collection, and the resulting
limitations and inadequacies of the data.
Second, the various cultural elements observed must be ana
lyzed and compared to bring into focus the nature and range of the
archaeological manifestations present in the area concerned. External
relationships must be recognized and their influence on the local
development traced.
Third, hypotheses must be developed concerning the stability
and change of cultural systems which will anticipate the full temporal 3 and spatial range of the cultural history of the area under considera tion. The primary interest here is a brief preliminary synthesis that would suggest both the general cultural development of a particular area and at the same time suggest some specific problems to be tested*
Fourth, and finally, it remains the final function of recon naissance to recommend a reliable sample of sites for excavation that would both test the hypotheses suggested and at the same time contain the distinct probability that some new information might come to light.
Since the archaeological reconnaissance does nothing more than present the barest culture historic outlines of the area concerned, it is of a tentative nature and subject to a rather wide margin of error in detail* It can never take the place of planned excavation, nor should it. But it does do archaeology a valuable service by being the first organized step in the systematic study of an unknown area. A reliable problem-oriented research program may be formulated for an unknown area only after a successful archaeological reconnaissance has been made*
The problem here, then, is to report the findings of an ar chaeological reconnaissance made in the southeastern portion of the
Navajo Indian Reservation during the summer of 1961, in the manner just outlined.
Area Surveyed
The area outlined to be studied lies primarily in the south eastern corner of the Navajo Reservation (Fig. 1). The only section
surveyed not on the Navajo Reservation was north of U.S. Route 66 for k two miles between the Arizona-New Mexico State line and Manuelito, New
Mexico, a mile to the east.
Those areas intensively surveyed include the major drainages
of the Black Creek, from Red Lake, New Mexico, south to the Rio Puerco, except for the ten mile section of deep narrow canyon below Oak Springs;
Bonito Creek, from Sawmill, Arizona, south to its junction with Black
Creek at Ft. Defiance, Arizona; Lupton Wash, from its head to the Rio
Puerco; the northern hogbacks and ridges parallel to U.S. Route 66,
from Lupton Wash west to the Pine Springs turn off; an area east of
Lupton Wash to Manuelito, New Mexico, from U.S. 66 to about two miles
north; Kin-li-chee Creek from Ganado east to about the 7,300 foot con
tour on all its major tributaries; Nazline Wash, from Chinle south to
about three miles east of Teegitoe Spring, including all major eastern
tributaries; the several washes and creeks draining the eastern flanks
of the Chuska Mountains; between Tohatchi, New Mexico and Tohlikai,
New Mexico, from the mountains proper east to U.S. Route 666 (Fig. 2).
Areas less intensively studied were: the Defiance Plateau,
Beautiful Valley, Ganado Plateau, and Lukachukai-Tohotso-Greasewood
area below Lukachukai, Arizona. The Lukachukai-Tohotso-Greasewood
area (Fig. 3) is shown separate from the other areas of study because
of the wide intervening region not surveyed.
The southeastern portion of the Navajo Indian Reservation was
selected for archaeological reconnaissance primarily because it occu
pied a strategic position in the Southwest and is an area about which
little is known prehistorically. Scale Hundred# of Meters
M e x i c oA r i z o n a N e w M e x i c oA
Figure 3# Map of the Lukacbukal-Tohofcso-Qreasewood locality. 6
The Black Creek drainage and the other nearby drainages within the section surveyed are located in the Puebloan cultural area that may be divided into the Southern Anasazi: Gladwin's Chaco and Cibola
Branch 5; Danson 1957: 21), and the Northern Anasazi, Colton’s
Kayenta Branch of the San Juan Anasazi (1939a: 13, Table II). A good deal of excavation has been accomplished in both the Southern and
Northern Anasazi areas and the general cultural development is known.
The Southern area has undergone a greater degree of synthesis than the Northern and for that reason is easier to characterize. What has not been accomplished is the way in which these two similar regional expressions are interrelated. The expanse between them may contain the evidence clarifying these interrelationships.
Similarly, the region might be used to answer specific ques tions such as just how far north the early brown ware pottery, rela tively common in the Rio Puerco (Wendorf 1953: 113; Wasley I960: 33), extended. The area may also contain evidences of influences from the
Mesa Verde. DeHarport (1959) found considerable evidence for Mesa
Verde influence in Canyon Be Chelly just to the north. It would be of more than passing interest to know the limits of these influences in order to better ascertain the position they played in the develop ment of the local culture history and just how the affect the rela tionship between the Southern and Northern Anasazi area. 7
' Environment
Physiography:
The area surveyed by the reconnaissance is in the Navajo sub
division of the Colorado Plateau Province (Fenneman 1928: 338-U2)*
Here the plateau surface is not so dissected by canyons as the areas
farther north. "Mesa, butte, volcanic neck, canyon, wash, repeated
indefinitely, are characteristic features of the country" (Gregory
1916: 21). locally, drainages are deeply incised into the rocks (Hunt
1956: 2). The basin-folded Tertiary formations are bordered by val
leys which follow the strike of the uplifted formation as character
ized by the Defiance upwarp and Black Creek. The structures are open,
and the drainages are well adjusted to them. The Navajo section is
characterized by an abundance of volcanic necks, dikes and remnants
of volcanic cones, and small lava flows (Htmt 1956: 6). The Navajo
subdivision has alcove arches in the sandstone formations as large
as many of those in the Canyon Lands subdivision further north. Some
of these alcoves were used as areas of human habitation from the
earliest period right up to the present day.
The two most important topographic features of the Navajo
section are the Defiance Plateau and the Chuska Mountains. These
two high structures, more than anything else, determine the character
of the natural environment of the southeastern corner of the Navajo
Indian Reservation. As major features of relief, they influence in
in a veiy decisive way the climate, soil, flora, fauna, and extent
and courses of perennial streams. 8
The eastern border of the Defiance Plateau is the Black Creek
Valley* Its western borders are the Rio Pueblo Colorado and Chinle
Valley. From Round Rock to Sanders, Arizona, the Defiance Plateau is
100 miles long (Gregory 1916: 3U). Its average width is about UO miles, except along the Rio Puerco, where it is 60 miles. The plateau is essentially an elongated done rising above a rim which stands at an altitude of 7,000 feet on its eastern border and at 6,000 feet on its western border. The dome flattens both north and south in a gradual descent to between 5,500 and 5*200 feet. About 20 square miles of the flat summit northwest of Ft. Defiance is bounded by the 7,800 foot contour (Gregory 1916: 3U). Its highest point is Fluted Rock (8,600 feet). The general slope of the plateau is toward the west where wide, flat-floored valleys are trenched by narrow, shallow canyons. The eastward-flowing streams tributary to Black Creek are, accordingly, short and carry little water, the most important of which are Buell
Wash, Bonito and Cienega Creeks. The streams trending westward are long, and many of them are perennial. The largest streams on the plateau, and the ones which have cut the deepest canyons, occupy the famous Canyon de Chelly and its tributary, Canyon del Muerto. These streams carry a large portion of the run-off from the Chuska and
Tunitcha Mountains; this insures a permanent flow. The most important streams of the western edge of the Defiance Plateau are Chinle Wash,
Nazline Wash, Rio Pueblo Colorado and Kin-li-chee Creek and its tribu tary Ruin Wash.
The Rio Pueblo Colorado and its major tributary Kin-li-chee Creek, which drain south into the Little Colorado River, head a few miles south of the head of Chinle Wash and its major tributary Nazlini
Wash which drain north into the San Juan River* These widely diverging
drainages are a function of the topography which prehistorically, even
as today, may have had considerable influence on population movements.
The Rio Pueblo Colorado and Kin-li-chee Creek and its tribu
taries drain a stepped upland area which is tilted gently downward to
the southwest. Near the northern edge of this upland is a divide about
12 miles in length running between the top of the Defiance Plateau and
Ganado Mesa to the west. The elevation here ranges between 6,650 feet
in the west to 7,200 feet in the east. The northernmost edge of the
divide ends in a steep escarpment which falls dramatically to the floor
of Nazlini Wash and Beautiful Valley. The elevation at the foot of the
escarpment ranges from 1,000 feet to 1,600 feet less than at the top.
It is not surprising, in light of this magnitude in elevation differ
ence, to find wide-ranging variations in flora, fauna, soils, and even
water availability between the Kin-li-chee and the Nazlini Wash
locality.
Chinle, Arizona, the northernmost point in the whole area of
the 1961 survey (See Fig. l), except for the Lukachukai-Tohotso-Grease-
wood Creek area, is about 5>00 feet lower in elevation than the south
ernmost point of the survey where U.S. 66 crosses Black Creek one half
mile north of the Puerco.
The Chuska Mountains and their southern extension, the Manuel
ito Plateau, are the other major features of the natural landscape 10 lying across the Arizona-New Mexico state boundary. The eastern flank of the Chuska Mountains rises gradually from the Chuska Valley to about the 8,000 foot contour above which steep cliffs extend to the rim.
Small short streams which frequently cut deeply into the mountain side contain water on their upper courses, but they soon disappear into the
valley floor as they move away from the mountain proper. The Red
Willow, Mexican Spring, and Figueredo washes are of importance because
of their almost year-round supply of water. Unlike the eastern edge
of the Chuska Mountains, the western border presents an almost vertical
escarpment, continuous except for the few canyons which are deeply
carved into it. Because of the large drainage area these canyons tap,
most of the streams they contain are perennial. Important streams
contributing to the Black Creek drainage from this area are Tohdildonik
Wash and Simpson Creek.
The summit of the Chuska Mountains is in reality a plateau with
some local relief. Two large areas on the Chuska Mountains present
flat surfaces at 8,800 feet. These elevations mark the summit. Beyond
the canyon heads, the mountain top is imperfectly drained, resulting
in numerous small lakes and lush grassy meadows, a rather common
feature for these altitudes in the arid Southwest.
A series of flat-topped hills, outlined by the 7,000 foot con
tour and lying between the Rio Puerco and the Chuska Mountains, may be
grouped under the name Manuelito Plateau (Gregory 1916: 26). Due to
its lower relief the Manuelito Plateau does not exert as much influence
on this area as does the Defiance Plateau and Chuska Mountains. It is 11 an area cut by broad valleys and within them deeply eroded arroyos.
While modern development of the surface and underground water supply has allowed greater use of this area for sheep grazing, in prehistoric times water was at a minimum and greatly limited the population expan sion, Only the larger valleys to the eastern and western edges were backed by large enough drainage basins to insure a limited but stable year-round water supply. Between Gallup, New Mexico, and Ft, Defiance,
Arizona, along the most generally used route of some miles, only one permanent water supply. Rock Spring, is to be found (Gregory 1916:
26).
During prehistoric times these high areas of relief, even as now, must have served as important sources of natural resources. Cer tainly as the sole origin of the somewhat meager but permanent water supplied to the major river valleys, they contributed the very life blood to the early peoples of the area. Agriculture would have been impossible in this area without a stable water supply. Harshbarger,
Repenning and Callahan (1953s 126) state, "There is little question that the availability of water was the controlling factor in the loca tion of ancient Indian habitations and encampments." But because of their height and the resulting lower annual mean temperature and shorter growing season these plateaus and mountains only secondarily supported agriculture. There is no prehistoric evidence to date that suggests that these sections were primaiy areas of farming and culti vation. Instead they were probably used as summer retreats and natural sources of forest and wildlife produce. 12
The larger drainages which in prehistoric times supported con siderable human populations are Figueredo Wash, Black Creek, Cienega
Creek, Rio Puerco, Kin-li-chee Creek, and Ruin Wash. Somewhat smaller populations were supported by Nazlini Wash, Tse Deeshzhaai Wash, Tiis
Ndiitsooi Wash, Lukachukai Creek, Greasewood Creek, and Tohotso Creek.
With the exception of Tse Deeshzhaai Wash, Tiis Ndiitsooi Wash, parts of upper Nazlini Wash, and upper Kin-li-chee Creek the drainages con tained flat alluvial bottoms now deeply cut by arrqyos. The resulting benches, once the valley bottoms, were the areas most suitable for cultivation through flood-plain farming and simple irrigation. Even the drainages which are confined to the often narrow limits of deep sandstone canyons now and again will contain remnants of small flood plains upon which simple agriculture could have been practiced.
Climate:
The climate of the Navajo Indian Reservation can be best char
acterized by its extreme variability. As the area is outside the usual
path of cyclonic storms, the accompaning procession of high and low
barometer, warm and cold "spells," and wet and dry periods which char
acterizes most other parts of the United States is absent in this
region (Gregory 1916: U9)» In the absence of cyclonic storms and be
cause of the varied topography, which is the most dominant factor, the
region may be said to have a group of local climates of widely dissim
ilar aspects. The daily range of temperatures is over UO degrees, con
sequently cool or even uncomfortable cold nights follow the heated day.
Canyons adjoining a plateau, two adjoining valleys, the opposite sides 13 of mountains and mesas, and even opposing canyon walls may have dif ferent climates.
The description of these micro-climatic conditions are beyond the scope of this study. Since micro-climates are, to a large degree the function of temperature, and as Gregory (1916: 63-7) has a good discussion of the range of temperature variation found throughout the
Navajo Indian Reservation, only a limited statement will be made here.
At Ft. Defiance and St. Michaels, near the geographic center of the reconnaissance area, a mean annual temperature of 1*7.6 degrees
F. (Gregory 1916: 66) has been recorded. The annual temperature range of these two towns of near-7,000 foot elevation is 122 degrees (98 degrees F. to -2l* degrees F.) (Gregory 1916), The average date of the last killing frost of spring at St. Michaels is June 15 and the average date of the first killing frost of autumn is September 13 (Gregory
1916: 67). The resulting growing season of 90 days is an extremely
short one. The growing season at Ft. Defiance is 98 days while at
Chinle, further north but at a lower elevation, it is 12l* days. Kil ling frost may occur every month of the year at Ft. Defiance except
August (Gregory 1916: 67).
Corn, the basic crop in prehistoric times, requires a growing
season from 90 to l£0 days (Gregory 1916: 67). Hack (19h2: 19) re
ports that the Hopi, 5>0 miles to the west of the reconnaissance area,
have a 130 day growing season but that it is short enough to permit
considerable damage from frost. Comparing the latest spring frost
and the earliest autumn frost over a 1*2 year period Hack (191*2: Fig. 9) iu
'clearly shows that in the Hopi area the growing season available is seldom longer than the time necessary to ripen corn and be assured of a good crop.
It is clear that the area under consideration is a marginal one with reference to present day agriculture. Hack (I9h2: 80), has suggested that the climate of the first millennium A.D. was perhaps a little wetter or a little cooler but that little change can be seen in the climate of the last two millenia, and further, if so, the dif ference was slight and was not enough to affect farming practices. He
suggests (Hack 19U2: 80) that it is doubtful if crops could have been
grown successfully by rainfall alone, but that the climate may have been more equable, creating floodwater in areas nor unfavorable to such
conditions.
It would appear that in prehistoric times horticultural pur
suits were in a continual crisis and most importantly affected by the
length of the growing season. To an economy dependent primarily on a
one-crop subsistence, the consequences of a shortened growing season,
if only by a few days, would have had very drastic effects on the
human population.
Flora and Fauna:
The plants and animals of the southeastern portion of the
Navajo Indian Reservation can be classified into four of the life zones
Merriam outlined for North America (1898). The four zones which per
tain to this area and a brief characterization of each is given in
Table 2. A detailed list of the floral species on the Navajo Indian TABLE 2
Four Life Zones in the Southeastern Portion of the Navajo
Indian Reservation and Their Major Characteristics,
(after Merriam 1893 and Allen and Balk 19k5)
Zone Elevation Characteristic Flora Area
Hudsonian 9,000* - 12,000* Alpine fir, Engelman spruce, and Chuska Mt. Corkbark fir
Canadian 8,000* - 9,000* Douglass fir. White fir. Blue Chuska Mt. spruce, and Aspen
Transitional 7,000* - 8,500* Ponderosa Pine Manuelito and Defiance Plateau
Upper U,000« - 7,500* Pinon, Juniper, Oak, Sagebrush, Black Creek, Sonoran Sacaton, Blue grama and Galleta Kin-li-chee, Puerco and Naziini Valley rhvjLvL<. X)v*"- 17 Reservation occurring in Merriam* s life zones can be found in Clark (19U5: 165-73). A short summary list of plants in the vicinity of Window Rock, Arizona, may be found in Bohrer and Bergseng (1963). A good general discussion of both the.flora and fauna of this area may be found in Gregory (1916: 71-5). There has been, to my knowledge, only one rather limited faunal study of this area of the Reservation specifically (Halloran 19610; therefore Merriam*s (1890) study of the nearby Little Colorado River Valley and the San Francisco Peaks, which describes the species found within his various life zones, remains a good general statement. The characteristic faunal species of the San Francisco Peak life zones and comparable zones in the southeastern portion of the Navajo Indian Reservation were probably the same in prehistoric times. However, aboriginal conditions have been modified for some time, as suggested by Simpson’s (1850: 111) statement that the area was the "most wretched country for game of any kind since leaving Santa Fe." Their party killed one deer during a round trip from Santa Fe to Canyon de Chelly and return via Zuni. Only very recently has the Navajo Parks Commission restocked parts of the Chuska Mountains and Defiance Plateau with deer, turkey, and antelope. Undoubtedly these game animals and others, along with predators such as coyotes, wolves, bear, and mountain lions, were once part of the local aboriginal environment. Without extensive prehistoric osteologies! samples to use as a guide, a faunal list of the species present in the area today would 18 be misleading for analogy with the prehistoric situation. History of Archaeological Work in the Reconnaissance Area Since the time of Coronado's conquest of Hawikuh on July 7, l5U0 (Winship 1896: 3h3), the southeastern portion of what is today the Navajo Indian Reservation, has received increasing attention from historical writers and explorers concerned primarily with the Navajo people who occupied the region. Few writers have chosen the task of describing the prehistory of this area. One of the first references to the prehistory of the area comes from Simpson (l8£0; 103) some 300 years after the Spanish ap pearance at Hawikuh. In 181*9 he served as topographical engineer for the military reconnaissance, led by Brevet Lieutenant Colonel John M. Washington, that explored the lower reaches of Canyon de Chelly and Canyon del Muerto. He mentions the masonry walls present in cliff alcoves which were impossible to reach without several lad ders. A particular wall exhibiting some curvature draws the remark that it may be part of an estufa or kiva. A lengthy description and an. illustration depict what is now called White House pueblo in Canyon de Chelly (Simpson 1850: 10l*, PI. 53). Two fragments of pottery that were collected at this same site are illustrated in color in Simpson's Plate The route of the Washington reconnaissance, as described in Simpson's journals when he left Canyon de Chelly for Zuni pueblo, is of interest here because there is no mention of prehistoric remains 19 by Simpson until the party reached the Rio Puerco. Nonetheless, he describes the landscape in such detail that one is able to retrace their route. Upon leaving the mouth of Canyon de Chelly the party turned east along the south rim of the canyon (Simpson 1850: 109). This direction was followed for two days, during which they made one dry camp. The second day out the party detoured north, entering Monument Canyon in order to obtain water. Turning almost due south they trav eled past Sawmill, Arizona, and began following Bonita Creek. The lower reaches of Quartsite and Bonita Canyons with their talus-strewn slopes are described accurately. Camp was made about one quarter of a mile upstream from the present town of Ft. Defiance, Arizona (Simp son 1850: 110). The next day the party continued out into and down Black Creek Valley during which time Simpson vividly details the geo logical structures that form Black Rock (Simpson 1850: 110) and Hunters Point. Hunters Point, he said, is “. . . a beautiful exhibition of horizontal stratification terminating in one of a bent, semicircular character— the strata (red stone) in the last case being concentric . . . and like layers of an onion” (Simpson 1850: 111). Camp was made near Oak Springs and the next morning Simpson mentions the deep canyon to the right of their route into which Black Creek flows. The party continued south crossing the low but rugged divide separating Black Creek from Lupton Wash. The locally well known geological feature of the "Coffee Pot” in the Lupton Wash drainage is mentioned and illustrated (Simpson 1850: 112, PI. 58). The party continued 20 south to the Rio Puerco where again they made camp. Simpson remarks that pottery could be seen on both sides of the route the entire way from that camp on the Rio Puerco until they reached Zuni days later (Simpson 18£0: 113). Some seven years later, on November 30, 1856, Whipple (1856:73), while making a survey to ascertain the practicability of building a railroad from the Mississippi River to California, camped at Navajo Springs, a few miles southwest of the present day town of Sanders, Arizona. The camp was amid extensive "relics of ruins." Small frag ments of pottery painted in stripes lay around the spring. Upon a nearby hill Whipple located a circular depression U0 paces in diameter and around it were pieces of "glaze" pottery and arrowheads of obsidian, agate and jasper. Whipple (1856: 73) said the structures "were prob ably of adobe" leaving little trace of any walls. A few years later Beal (1858: 39) on his now famous camel trip across the Southwest also camped at Navajo Springs. His guide pointed out the "curious ancient Indian town," but since it was dark he did not visit it. Jackson (1878: 14.20-5), sometime prior to the date of his publi cation, visited Canyon de Chelly on his way to the Hopi mesas. Although he describes and illustrates some of the ruins there, he adds nothing new to Simpson's description. Possibly one of the reasons for the lack of archaeological interest in what is now the southeastern portion of the Navajo Indian Reservation is reflected in a statement published by Adolph Bandolier 21 in 1892 (386). He says that the country north of the Zuni River was not for . . Indian tillers of the soil and consequently no ruins need be looked for in that region." However, only a few years later Cosmos Mindeleff (1897) de scribed about 70 ruins in Canyon de Chelly, giving floor plans of many sites. He also developed a simple typology of ruins in the Southwest of which two. Type II, Home villages on bottom lands, and Type H I , Home villages located for defense, were found in Canyon de Chelly (Mindeleff 1897: 93)• Little White House (Arizona E:lli:8), located not in Canyon de Chelly but instead in Little White House Canyon, is described and a floor plan is given (Mindeleff 1897: 1U5-7, Fig. $2-3)• In 1903, Prudden published an article on his research in the prehistoric ruins of the San Juan drainage. During his field work he explored Nazlini Creek (Nazlini Wash) almost to its source (Prudden 1903: 280). Close to its head he located two or three small buildings on the cliff edge and two small cliff dwellings. He also found several cliff dwellings in ". . . a canyon opening into the Chinle a short distance south of the mouth of Canyon de Chelly" (Prudden 1903: 280). This canyon was undoubtedly Little White House Canyon and by Chinle he was probably referring to Nazlini Wash. In April, 1903, Stewart Gulin, Curator of Ethnology at the Brooklyn Institute of Arts and Sciences (now the Brooklyn Museum), purchased some 1U7 pottery vessels from J. B. Foley and Joe White who had collected them from the ruins east of Hunters Point (Rosenthal 1962). Among Gulin's notes of his Museum Expedition Report, 1903, is 22 a reference to a visit he made accompanied by Foley and White, to ruins on a ridge overlooking Black Creek near Hunters Point. Here he mentions the numerous rectangular house outlines and an "estufa" or kiva some UO feet in diameter. He is probably referring to Arizona K:8:135, the only site with a Great Kiva in the vicinity. It was not until 1923 that any controlled excavation was car ried out, and this was not within the area of the 1961 reconnaissance but immediately to the north, in Canyon del Muerto. In that year and the year following, Earl H. Morris, working for the American Museum of Natural History, began the studies of Canyon del Muerto at Mummy Cave (Morris 192$). During the first season's work in an eighty-room three story high pueblo, Morris and party located a desiccated man, several stone pipes, baskets, rabbit fur-wrapped cord blankets, stone storage bins with over 700 ears of corn, hundreds of cloth sandals, arrows, knives, and many agricultural implements (Morris 192$: 26U, 270). Un fortunately the material has not been published in detail and there fore its exact position within the cultural development of the South west is unknown. Frank H. H. Roberts, who had been working in the Southwest for several years, began excavations in 1931 in the Whitewater District, a few miles southwest of Lupton, Arizona (Roberts 1939, 19U0). Three field seasons, spent mainly at one site, located some materials of Basketmaker III and early Pueblo III age. Most work, however, re sulted in the recovery of Pueblo I and II. ranges of material. Only a year later, 1932, Harold S. Gladwin settled at Red Mesa and began to study what he later called the Chaco Branch (Gladwin 19U5). 23 Gladwin’s work began with a wide-ranging reconnaissance which included some 100 sites in the Rio Puerco drainage alone. As most of the sites Gladwin located in the Rio Puerco are south of U.S. 66, the southern boundary of the 1961 reconnaissance, there has been a duplication of some site material by the latter survey. It was impossible to corre late these two collections because of the brief description of the site locations given by Gladwin. In 193U Gladwin sent Russel Hastings into the field on a recon- nissance, in part into the area of the 1961 survey. Approximately sites were located, which again have probably been duplicated because of the original inadequate site descriptions. In 1936 Gladwin began to excavate at White Mound (Arizona K:12:l; Gladwin 19li5>: 10). The report describes the phases he recog nized in the Chaco Branch, which are, from early to late: White Mound, Kiatuthlanna, Red Mesa, Wingate, Hosta Butte, and Bonito (Gladwin 19hS)» Colton in 1938 led an expedition into Tse Deeshzhaai Wash to record and map Three Turkey House (Arizona E:lf>:llj Colton 1939b). This cliff ruin, the largest recorded during the Arizona State Museum survey, consists of 19 rooms and one kiva located some 60 feet above the wash and surrounded by sheer cliffs. The name comes from one of several interpretations of three controversial brown-and-white figures painted on the back wall, presumably turkeys. The kiva also contained some paint in the form of a white zigzag band on the wall encircling the room, with a bordering row of dots on either side of the band. 2k -The Sherd material indicates a thirteenth-century occupation by Mesa Verde peoples. Two tree-ring dates of 1226 and 12?6 obtained from dendrochronological samples taken from the site also agree with the ceramic evidence (Colton 1939c), Beginning in 1950, the El Paso Natural Gas Company began the construction of the first of three pipelines which were to cross the Navajo Indian Reservation from east to west, dissecting the 1961 area of survey. These pipelines, which paralleled the main cross-Reserva- tion thoroughfare (Navajo 3), held the possibility of bringing to light a transect of an area archaeologically unknown; therefore it was planned that all prehistoric sites crossed were to be excavated and published. This was the awakening of a historically interested con science on the part of big business, and the beginnings of salvage archaeology in the Southwest, Ten miles to the east of the Tohatchi- Mexican Springs area, the salvage operation excavated eight sites with in the right of way (Wendorf, Fox and Lewis 1956: XII). The time range represented by the eight sites was from Basketmaker III to Pueblo III. Two tree-ring dates were obtained from one site, LA. 2505, whose outer ring ended at A.D. 1020c and A.D. 10h7b (Smiley 1951: 26). The letter symbol 11 c" means the last ring on the specimen was constant around the circuit and that few or no rings were lost. The letter symbol "b" in dicates the presence of bark cells and a probable cutting date. Only the salvage project connected with the first of the three pipelines has been published so far (Wendorf, Fox and Lewis 1956), but as far as I know none of the three salvage projects located any sites 25 within the area of the Arizona State Museum’s 1961 reconnaissance. In 1953 Dr. and Mrs. Richard B. Woodbury, then of Columbia University, spent the summer concentrating on an archaeological re connaissance of the Zuni Indian Reservation. In order to throw more light on their collections in the Zuni area, their survey ranged out side the Reservation. Some ten sites were located near Manuelito, New Mexico. Site cards from their survey, deposited at the Arizona State Museum, indicate that the sites located ranged from Basketmaker III to Pueblo IV. The latest sites were large-walled masonry pueblos located in defensive positions; they contain late White Mountain Red Wares and early Zuni ceramics characteristic of the Pueblo IV time range. The Navajo Archaeological Society, now inactive, was organized in 1956 by Richard Van Valkenburg and other interested individuals at Window Rock, Arizona, to further the archaeological study of Black Creek Valley and nearby areas (Brugge 1962). Sporadic week-end work continued for a few years, and finally ended almost entirely with the death of Mr. Van Valkenburg, the principal force behind the organiza tion. A limited amount of material gathered by the organization's members is now stored at the Office of Land Use and Surveys, The Navajo Tribe, Window Rock, Arizona. In 1959 the Arizona State Museum, under the field direction of Dr. William W. Wasley and assisted by Messrs. Alfred E. Johnson and David A. Breternitz, conducted an archaeological salvage program ineconnection with the realignment of U.S. 66 near Lupton, Arizona. 26 As a result of this salvage project, ten sites were excavated dating from Basketmaker III to Pueblo III, with no Pueblo I representation, and including an early Basketmaker III village with Mogollon affil iation (Wasley I960), During the summer of i960, the Museum of Northern Arizona again sent an expedition into Tse Deeshzhaai Wash,Lthis time at the request of the Navajo Tribe. The Tribe’s concern was the arroyo cut ting in process on a large alcove (Arizona E:lf>:13) about one-fourth mile down stream from Three Turkey House. The purpose of this expe dition was to ascertain the nature and amount of material about to be destroyed in the alcove. A small two-storied, two-roomed pueblo in the east end, which was cleared, produced very little cultural material. A stratigraphic test, 1 by h by U meters, was made, in the west end where burials were beginning to appear in the arroyo bank. Four bur ials and a few sherds of an undetermined type were located, as well as several dozen beads of some Olivella sp. (Olson and Lee 196U). A doctoral dissertation presented to Harvard University by David DeHarport in 1959 was the result of his comprehensive archae ological site survey in Canyon de Chelly. This survey resulted in the location and study of 369 sites from which was traced the cultural development of a prehistoric pueblo community for 1800 years (DeHar port 1959)* Another archaeological salvage program, financed by Arizona Public Service, surveyed a power line right-of-way from Shiprock, New Mexico, to Phoenix, Arizona, by helicopter in i960. A site (Arizona K:3:3) located by the survey on the south bank of Kin-li-chee Creek 27 was subsequently excavated by Dr. Alan P. Olson and Jeffrey S. Dean of the Museum of Northern Arizona during the summer of 1961. The site consisted of a cluster of pithouse villages and pueblos, many of which were in good stratigraphic relationship (Olson 1962). Remains from Basketmaker III to Pueblo III were located, except that no Pueblo I architecture was found. Two Great Kivas and five small kivas were also excavated. Since the Arizona State Museum survey was made, considerable archaeological research has been done in the area, primarily by the Arizona State University Archaeological Field School directed by Dr. Reynold J. Ruppet In 1962 the School excavated in one site (Arizona K:3i5>) about 100 yards east of Olson's Cross Canyon Group (Ruppe> 1962). There are three components present at this site: a very large Pueblo I unit underlying a five room Pueblo III masonry pueblo, and a separate Pueblo I jacal village. The Pueblo III unit has an associated plaza with fireplaces and a D-shaped kiva with no bench. The jacal Pueblo I unit also has a ceremonial room also con structed of jacal. The pottery ranges from Kana-a Black-on-white to KLageto and Jeddito Black-on-white. Only a small amount of polychrome pottery was present. That same year a second site, located in a sandstone overhang two miles up the Kin-li-chee Creek from the previous site, was excava ted by the School. This pueblo had a minimum of lU masonry rooms and was occupied at least from Basketmaker III to Pueblo III times. Trenches were extended to 12 feet below the surface where slab lined 28 cists’'were found, but due to the capillary action of the water from the stream bed working up the underlying canyon wall, the lower five feet of the deposit were wet. As a consequence, little cultural material was fojond. The major pottery types from higher levels are Kana-a Black-on-white, Dogoszhi Black-on-white, Sosi Black-on-white and a con fusing series of Black-on-white types which have affinities to Jeddito, Kiet Biel, and KLageto. St. Johns Polychrome is present in small amounts as well as some varieties of this same type. The Museum of Northern Arizona in the fall of 1962 began a high way salvage project on U.S. 66, near Houck, Arizona, under the direction of Alan P. Olson (1963). This densely occupied area in the triangle formed by U.S. 66, Rio Puerco and Black Creek, produced roughly the same sequence that Wasley (I960) obtained a few miles farther east, with some rather startling exceptions. The earliest phase found by Wasley was not present in Olson's excavations. The Pueblo III range produced not only pueblos (over $0 rooms were excavated) and kivas but also contemporaneous pithouses. The late Pueblo H I development of Chacoan masonry, very well represented at this site, was not present in Wasley's (i960) series of excavations except in one kiva. Olson (1965) also excavated 2 kivas in the Kin-li-chee ruin (Arizona K:3:l) which produced material of the Pueblo III time range. In 1963 the Arizona State University continued its Kin-li-chee Creek Field School by excavating a late Pueblo III-IV open site down stream from the Cross Canyon Group and directly north across the arroyo from the Kin-li-chee school. This pueblo, originally D-shaped and later 29 rebuilt as a square, appears to have ended in destruction which left two individuals sprawled face down on the floors of two rooms. Medi cine bags had been left hanging in the kiva while whole pots had been left sitting on the floors and roofs when the structures burned (Ruppe 196U). Three Turkey House (Arizona E:l5:ll) was also visited by the 1963 Arizona State Field School and some mapping and testing were carried out. Eighteen rooms and one kiva are still present in the structure. Evidence indicates that another five rooms have slid out of the alcove and into the arroyo below. The pottery is reported as being Mesa Verde-like by Ruppe' (196U), which agrees with Colton's (1939b) earlier observations. In I96U the Arizona State University Archaeological Field School again under the direction of Reynold J. Ruppd' was moved to the north of Chinle, Arizona, near the Lukachukai Mountains. The summer was devoted primarily to reconnaissance of the Middle Chinle Wash and accompanied by limited excavation at two sites. The search in this area turned up some f>6 sites in an area six miles north and six miles south of Rock Point. The data collected suggest the area was occupied from Basketmaker I H to middle Pueble III in open sites in the valley. Basketmaker III materials were not found in caves or rockshelter sites as were later materials (Ruppe/ 196k). Two rooms dug in a Pueblo III village produced a preponder ance of early Pueblo I H Black-on-white pottery of the San Juan White Ware tradition. This Mesa Verde pottery was associated with 30 some plain red and Tusayan Polychrome sherds. All occupation of the area definitely ceased by the middle of the Pueblo H I period (Ruppe 196U). During the summer of 196U the Museum of Northern Arizona under the direction of Alan P. Olson continued work on the sites at Houck, excavating materials from the White Mound, KiatutMLana, Red Masa, Wingate, Houck and Chaco phases. New data were found in all phases but the most important result of the work, perhaps, was the identi fication of a possible Houck phase consisting of linear or 1-shaped pueblos of up to 25 rooms with kivas, usually multiple, scattered along the southern side. Another feature found a year earlier, but which appeared again repeatedly this 1961; season, were the rectangular, small and deep pithouses with southeastern corner vents. These pit- houses are of the Houck phase and are associated with St. Johns Poly chrome (Olson 196$). Later in the fall and winter of 1961; and 1965 the Museum of Northern Arizona continued its salvage work in the Houck area under the direction of Alexander J. Lindsay, Jr., and under the actual field supervision of George Gummerman (1965). A Basketmaker II village of nine pithouses was excavated across U.S. 66 from Gladwin's (19U5) Whitemound Village. In the immediate area of Houck itself eight or nine Whitemound Phase pithouses were also excavated, plus seven or eight Kiatuthlanna Phase pithouses. Gummerman reports that about 20 Pueblo II pithouses (probably Wingate Phase) were excavated one mile west of Black Creek, and about 35 surface rooms in several late 31 Pueblo II villages (probably Hosta Butte Phase) were also excavated near Houck, This material is so recent that no more than preliminary cleaning has been accomplished up to this writing so that the exact nature of these data will not be known for some time. During the summer months of 1965 the Arizona State University Archaeological Field School has concentrated its activities in a large sandstone alcove in the upper reaches of Little White House Canyon. This same site was visited in 1961 by the present archaeological recon naissance and carries the designation of Arizona E:l5:10 under the Arizona State Museum system. As this is being written, the excavations are underway, so there is no opportunity to include their findings here. Here the history of the archaeology of the southeastern portion of the Navajo Indian Reservation must come to an end. In view of the increasing amount of attention that has been given in the last few years to the southeastern part of the Navajo Reservation in terms of developing its cultural history, it would not appear to be idle speculation to suggest that before another decade passes it will become one of the better known sections of the South west. Three major institutions in the Southwest, the Arizona State Museum, Museum of Northern Arizona, and Museum of New Mexico have worked in each other’s archaeological backyard and have crossed each other's paths for many years. It is not surprising, therefore, to 32 find collections in each institution from the same sites. It is beyond the scope of this study to correlate all sites located by these three institutions within the 1961 area of reconnaissance; however, two of these sites with multiple collections are known and are given below. One site, south of Oak Springs, and variously called Arizona K:12:2U, NA 5010, or LA 1521, has been excavated, but no pub lications relative to it have appeared. While the Arizona State Museum's collection from this site is limited to a ceramic sample collected during the 1961 survey, the other institutions have both sherds and textiles. The Arizona State Museum and the Museum of New Mexico share collections from the Coffee Pot site (Arizona K:12:7h), a Basketmaker III site in the Lupton Wash. Undoubtly other examples exist, but it is not practicable at this time to attempt a complete cross-institutional correlation. THE SAMPLE The total sample consists of data gathered from 799 sites of past human habitation. In the areas where the reconnaissance was intensive (Fig. 2, 3), an estimated 80 to 90 percent of the sites present were visited. The reason for the somewhat high estimate is because the search was begun at creek or arroyo bottoms and was pushed further and further back until the sites "petered out." Although rough settlement patterns were soon recognized in the field, and in deed guided the survey, spot checks were continued in areas well away from the drainages and site concentrations, just as a precaution. Structural data were gathered at all of the 799 sites. This class of information consisted of observation on the physical presence of such features as domiciles, possible ceremonial units, and trash accumulations. Of interest also was the spatial relationship of these units to one another and to the immediate physiography. A total of 766 individual ceramic samples was collected from as many sites to add a temporal dimension to the study and to aid in the definition of inter-locality relationships. At the same time the ceramic samples served, of course, as another means of comparing the area under study to the Southwest in general. "While individual sherd samples varied widely with reference to the total number of sherds per sample (range one to 60), an effort was made to gather a representative collection from each site. At a few sites every sherd seen was 33 3k "collected, but this was rarely done as it was necessary only at sites with extremely limited trash. As stated earlier, artifacts and prehistoric non-artifactual materials were collected when time permitted and as they were found. The size of the artifact was of primary concern as the reconnaissance was accomplished primarily on foot, thus collection was limited to small portable objects. This was a necessary if undesirable restric tion. Notes were recorded in the field on the shape of manos and metates present at sites, but none was collected for incorporation into any permanent collection. Description and provenience of collected artifacts and non-artifactual material are given in Appendix C. In keeping with the Navajo Tribal Reservation policy of re moving from sight any osteological evidence of past human remains, any burials encountered during the reconnaissance were re-covered with rock and dirt. In areas where this was not feasible the remains were collected. The locality and site provenience and other specific burial data of recovered human remains are recorded in Appendix 0. Methods of Approach to Data Collecting The basic unit of archaeological survey is the site, which, for the purposes of this study, may be defined as the smallest observable area exhibiting evidence of past human occupation which appears to com prise a unit. The qualification 11 which appears to comprise a unit," in the foregoing definition might be objected to by some on the grounds that it is in part a subjective judgment. While this is quite so and would be of utmost importance in a completely unknown area, this can 35 hardly be objected to here. Prior excavation has already demonstrated that in the Southwest such units as pueblos, kivas, and trash mounds are often contemporaneous and are part of integrated cultural systems. Most other kinds of Southwestern sites have also been investi gated, so one does not have to begin a study of a related area com pletely on one's own. In collecting any type of sample for study, small meaningful units are a sound objective. They allow easy handling during analysis, and comparison with a minimum of complicating factors. It is important, therefore, at the data-collecting level of the survey to define the smallest possible unit of past human occupation. The method of survey followed was one recommended by the Arizona State Museum. All sites were recorded in detail on individual 5 by 8 inch site cards. Sites were given a code designation according to the Arizona State Museum Archaeological Site Survey system (Wasley 1957)# In areas where maps of adequate scale (15' or series) were available, sites were plotted in their respective positions. Repre sentative samples of surface ceramics were collected and individually bagged and labeled. Other portable artifacts and non-artifactual material were collected as time permitted. Photographs were not taken of every site. The aim of the photographic portion of the survey was to supplement other recorded data and to represent the range of the site's environmental location, architectural forms, and community pattern. Photographs taken of architectural form and settlement pattern in open sites were almost total failures as sage brush has a great leveling effect on even the 36 s" deepest kiva depressions and highest standing walls. The location of sites was accomplished primarily on foot, al though a horse was used for transportation several times in checking some of the longer and narrower canyons in the Kin-li-chee Greek and Nazlini Wash drainages. Site Terminology Within the basic unit, the site, four general categories of information were looked for: details of the structures, ceramics, community pattern, and physiographical location. Certain basic as sumptions were in operation in the collection of the first three groups of data and these need some explanation. The structural data recorded for each site reflect the assump tion that once one recognizes the form one can infer the function or use. The functions arrived at inferentially for these data are cer tainly not new innovations with this study. Each reflects the more or less known general cultural pattern which has been laboriously worked out in the past half century of Southwestern archaeology. Remnants of masonry walls or extensive piles of rock suggestive of contiguous rooms were identified as pueblos. Usually both criteria were present. The main reliance for pueblo identification was placed on a complex of traits which has collectively been labeled, front- oriented villages (Reed 1956). The occurrence of pueblos, kiva depres sions, and trash mounds in a general southeastern alignment (Fig. U) were repeated ad infinitum throughout the area under study, and served as prime site index traits 37 KIVA DEPRESSION ■MOUND TRASH Figure U, Stylized Front-oriented type of pueblo community pattern. 38 Depressions associated with pueblos were labeled kivas. Their identification was based on their form, association, and orientation. The Southwestern prehistoric trait of front-oriented pueblos has been amply documented, and as pointed out above was the primary basis for most kiva identification. It must be kept in mind that the absence of a kiva at a particular site may be more apparent than real. Quite often kivas have been located at sites in nearby areas only after ex tensive trenching was carried out specifically to locate them. Blown sand and water deposited materials have in many instances completely filled in and leveled off former kiva depressions. Nor can one discount the possibility that seme depressions may be pithouses, either earlier than or contemporaneous with the pueblo. The latter now appears to be known, but still a relatively uncommon situation. The former is possible, but the chance occurrence of pueblo and pithouse in the well-known front-oriented community patterns would seem quite unlikely. The kivas have been broken down into two types, small ones always referred to as kivas and large ones always labeled Great Kivas. There appears to be no overlapping in size between these two types, the smaller averaging three to six meters in diameter and the larger ranging from 1$ to 25 meters in diameter. The Great Kiva occurred only rarely and always with one or more small kivas. Depressions with associated trash, but not in association with a pueblo, were labeled pithouses. Often the pithouses were backed by a series of rectangular, concentrically arranged contiguous rooms. 39 Only the wall base of these structures was present, being represented by only one course of stone slabs set on edge in the ground. The small size of these units suggests they may have been primarily storage rooms or served only occasionally as an emergency shelter for pro tection from the elements. The walls of these houses were probably constructed of a lower course of stone slabs set on edge, as just de scribed, and an upper wall and roof of wattle and daub. This assump tion is based on the fact that there was never enough fallen stone present to build a wall of normal height. Rarely, in fact, was any other building stone present, except for the slab wall itself. Simi lar structures have been recorded in nearby areas to which the jacal construction postulation has been applied (Roberts 1931t 86-90; Dittert, Hester and Eddy, 1961: 1(2). If this reconstruction is true, then any domestic activity within them would be limited to the milder portions of the year as the wattle and daub walls would afford little protection from the biting cold, which in this area lasts from early fall until late spring, a considerable portion of the year. Gists differ from the storage units only in their size and mode of occurrence. While, both were structurally similar, slab foun dations set on edge, the cists rarely exceed half a meter in diameter, whereas the storage structures averaged two by two meters. The cists never shared a common wall, while the storage units were nearly always contiguous. Sherd areas consisted of sites with no visible architectural structures. These always included scattered sherds and often one or Uo more other forms of evidence of human endeavor such as isolated hearths, chipping detritus, stone or bone artifacts, and non-artifactual mate rial. There was usually evidence of fire in the form of widely scat tered charcoal and ash associated with the sherd areas. Navajo structures were found, as could be expected, to be both numerous and in varied states of repair. The continuum ran from hogans vacated "yesterday," to those whose walls had long since eroded away, with only an occasional saucer-shaped floor and scattered trash to mark their passing. Since the prime interest of the reconnaissance was in the earlier ranges of cultural material, only those structures with Navajo or Pueblo ceramics were catalogued. The three different forms of hogans recognized were the forked pole, the cribbed log, and the masonry hogan. A fourth type, still lived in by the Navajos in the area today, a squarish lean-to covered with sod, was not found asso ciated with ceramics. Sweat lodges and their omnipresent dual piles of rock, one fire-cracked and smoken, the other of clean and unused rock were numerous and easily identifiable. Navajo stock corrals and storage bins occurred most often in sandstone alcoves. While both features were found in the larger al coves at the valley floor level, storage bins were also located higher up in the cliffs in hard-to-get-to large cracks and crevices. Storage bins were identified as being Navajo on the basis of associated pottery and distinctive architecture. Once recognized, bins cannot be confused with their Anasazi counterparts. Navajo-constructed bins, in the area under study, were either single crude block masonry, beehive-shaped units with a hole in the top or large rectangular slab partitioned bins, in alcoves high up in sandstone cliffs# Both forms were liber ally covered with plaster, done, perhaps, to make the unit blend into the sandstone background by doing away with the contrast present in unplastered stone masonry, a desirable feature for anyone wishing to hide stockpiles of food and equipment. Trash from a Navajo habitation always occurs within ten meters of the hogan doorway, which nearly always faces east. Given either the trash or the hogan, the other is easily located. Trash consisted almost entirely of pottery sherds, charcoal, and occasionally a few bits of broken glass or recent china and metal. Other Navajo structures located were a flood-water diversion dam to protect a spring still in use today and stock trails built to allow use of certain areas of deep and otherwise inaccessible canyons. The other categories of structural data observed are specific site characteristics which also need some explanation. Size is the least objective of the structural characteristics. Here it refers to an estimate of the number of rooms a pueblo contains or the number of pithouses, as the case may be. A rough standard of two by three meters was used as a rule for ascertaining the number of rooms in a pueblo. Where possible, visible wall alignments, and abutments were also used in determining the approximate number of rooms present. Where there appeared to be evidence of two stories, which was rare, this was also taken into account. Room or unit estimates are also given for pit- houses, cists, surface storage, and Navajo structures. It was not U2 always possible to assign room estimates because often sites were covered over by sand or obliterated so as to obscure wall alignments, shapes and general size. The layout patterns for pueblos, pithouses, cists, surface storage units, and Navajo structures are defined in order to refine that portion of the community pattern. Pueblo and surface storage structures occur as single isolated rooms, a straight line of two or more contiguous rooms, and in other variations of these basic forms (Fig. f>a-g). The layout for pithouses, cists, and Navajo structures is simpler and seldom contiguous. They occur randomly scattered, ar ranged in a straight line or in a crescent (Fig. $h-j). The architectural construction is limited primarily to masonry techniques present in open sites which by far outnumber the sheltered sites. Therefore, the construction categories are limited to those features that may be recognized in both situations. Where only a jumble of localized rock remains, only the presence of masonry can be safely suggested. Where wall alignments are present, there is a division into three general masonry types: block masonry of unshaped stones, coursed masonry of shaped stones, and slab masonry where stones are set on edge. Where there appears to be enough stone remaining to build two stories, this is indicated. The orientation refers to the direction of a line parallel to the short axis of the general center of the domestic surface structure (Fig. U). The orientation of pithouses is given only if it is backed by a row of surface structures or if there is an associated trash U3 a c b d e < f °o ° _ 0 QQQQ oo a OQ O o i i h Figure 5« Stylized.dwelling and surface storage structures form and .layout* a-g, pueblo .and surface storage structures; h-j, pithouses, cists, and Navajo structures. mound; in either case the orientation is given as the direction of a line running through the general center of all units. The Navajo site orientation is given as the direct line of sight from the hogan doorway. When hogan doorways could not be identified no orientation was given. Kiva orientation is defined in relation to the domestic struc ture. Kivas are also enclosed within the room block and have been so recorded. Trash is divided into two general types: non-localized sheet trash and mounds or localized trash. Trash mounds are further charac terized by their general compass heading taken from the general center of the pueblo, pithouse, surface storage units or hogans. The somewhat rare trait of walled-in plazas has also been re corded. Often this forms nothing more than a retaining wall between the kiva and trash mound. The usual result is a raised terrace be tween the wall and pueblo. The amount of rock present in some instances was, however, enough to construct walls of a height equal to that of the original pueblo; these could have been defensive in nature. The term community pattern is used here as originally defined by Chang (i960: 229), w. • • the manner in which the inhabitants arrange their various structures within the community and their com munity within the aggregate.11 Social relationships operating within the community may be quite distinct from those which may bind com munities into larger wholes; therefore they are considered as separate from the settlement pattern in this study. Settlement pattern, on the other hand, is used here as the manner in which human settlements, communities, or larger aggregates, are arranged over the landscape in relation to the physiographical environment. The physiographic situations in which sites have been found are narrow valley or canyon bottoms, valley floor or broad valleys, open hillsides flanking the slopes of a valley, ridges or hilltops overlooking washes or streams, low rolling bills and sand dunes, rock- shelter alcoves at the foot of sandstone bluffs, and alcove cliff lo cations off the ground. The physiographic surroundings have had a very important and definite limiting effect on the cultural develop ment in areas nearby at various periods of time (Back 19U2), Whether the physiographic situation has had any noticeable effect on the settlement pattern through time in the southeastern corner of the Navajo Indian Reservation was one problem to be tested. Chronological Framework It was known before the field work began that the area chosen to study lies across the boundry or common frontier of the organic and inorganic pigment paint areas (Hawley 1929)♦ The need for a single chronological model that would encompass and order all, ceramic data was recognized. Because of this requirement, Gladwin’s (191*5) phase sequence for the Chaco Branch was rejected. His phases were developed within the inorganic paint tradition area and consequently do not apply outside it. Other phase sequences (Foci) contemporaneous in part with Gladwin’s (l9U£) phases exist within the area of organic paint tradi tion, but they have been worked out in detail and are based on exca vation a good distance to the west of the area in question (Gladwin 193U: Fig. 7; Colton 1939a: 52). For this reason and by virtue of the fact that they would not apply to portions of the 1961 reconnais sance area further east, these phases or Foci, established by Colton, have also been rejected. The Pecos cultural classification developed in the Southwest has come to mean a sequence of historical development stages with definite temporal limits (KLuckhohn and Reiter 1939: 15>l-5). While this system works remarkably well throughout the Colorado Plateau in general, some inconsistencies have been recognized: witness the Robert’s (1939) modification of the classification and Gladwin’s (19U$: k3-W date change for Pueblo I. It is almost impossible to use the Pecos classification in a strictly temporal sense without bringing to mind the overtones of the developmental stages aspect. Since the area in question is concerned with at least two major paint traditions in pottery decoration and possibly many other cultural traits, as it is a large area, I felt that something other than the Pecos classification should be used to order the data chronologically. Any attempt to establish new phases here could only lead to disaster as such spatial-temporal-cultural units require a wealth of detail impossible to collect without excavation. I have decided, therefore, to order chronologically the individual site data within the six localities according to Ceramic Periods (See Table H ) established on the basis of prior archaeological excavation in nearby areas. These Ceramic Periods are indicative of time only, as they crosscut and not infrequently blur some rather different cultural traditions. The Ceramic Periods developed for the purpose of ordering these data chronologically are composed primarily of the Ceramic Groups set up on excavation by Olson and Wasley (I9f?6: 257-8) (See Table I), These Ceramic Groups were used instead of the Ceramic Periods devised by Wendorf (1956: 6) because there were more groups; hence a more re fined analysis could be made. A second reason for rejecting Wendorf*s Ceramic Periods is based on a preliminary check which suggested that the types included by Olson and Wasley more nearly equated with those in the 1961 reconnaissance's ceramic sample. Although Olson and Wasley did not give each Ceramic Group a range of dates, they did correlate them with Gladwin's (19U5) phase sequences and with the Pecos cultural stages of development. In Fig. 6 I have correlated Olson and Wasley's Ceramic Groups with a subjective balancing of Gladwin's phase dates, generally accepted dates for the Pecos Classification, and Colton's Ceramic Group dates. Wendorf's Ceramic Groups are included for comparison. To Olson and Wasley* s Ceramic Groups I have added, from Colton's Ceramic Groups (I9I16: 18-20, 2U9-5U), those organic pigment painted types which are pertinent. The pottery types added from Colton's Ceramic Groups have the special advantage of being de scribed in an area in which extensive tree-ring dating has been ac complished, consequently many of these types are the most securely dated types in the Southwest. Table I Comparison of Some Ceramic Group Constituents POTTERY CERAMIC GROUPS LEE OLSON -WASLEY COLTON TYPES (1962) (1956 257-8) (1946 18-20) ifflgr I 2i3l4'5l6i7l8!9 iT2 2 3 l 4 5 61718 91011112 Brown Ware E. .. i i Lino Gray______--4- xjx .Woodruff Brown i : _ !" ; -.1. Lino B/G xix;..r.: jj. - t - La Plato B/W X X ' : XJX Twin Trees PI. : *rr Twin Trees B/W ! ! Kana-a Gray AX. Kana-a B/W x White Mnd B/W !x: u _ K'[anna_ B/W x.x.x. ! Piedra" B/W Red Mesa B/W x jx lx lx ix -X X Escavada B/W ! * ! r I I 'X X _Black Mesa B/W ■ . ;x..inx|X- xixl r JDeadmans B/R X xi • • ' i ' : 1 ! Narrow Coil Cor. ; ! ; • Sosi B/W ! .X.x;x,x X X x u Dqgoszhi B/W I : |X.XjX;x xlx Xi La Plata B/R X X Tohotchi Banded i ! x Exubrant Corr. X Coolidge Corr. - * - » - 1 -1 - XIX Puerco B/W | X|X1X Gallup B/W r -t . X :X Indent Gr. Corr. ; X XjX Holbrook B /W Tusayan B/R ; ix t jX X| I Me Elmo B/W XX. North Plains B/R X Puerco B/R !.i: X. Wingate B/R ,, |X:X: , ..... X St. Johns B/R ! !X.: Mesa Verde B/V, i : ! X- ; t ■— Flagstaff B/W i-X Walnut B/W Reserve B/W Chaco B/W Socorro B/W Wupatki B/W X Kayenta B/W X; X Wingate Poly. St.Johns Poly. lx1 St. J. P, Spring var. i i Northern G. Ccrr. !!! » Citadel Poly. XjX Tusayan Poly. IX Klcgeto B/W i • ! Jeddito B/0 i X Jeddito B/Y XX XX Sityatki Poly. X Navajo Utility J: Gcberhador Poly. Ashiwi Poiy. I : I I I : I :x U9 TIME LEE OLSON a COLTON WENDORF WASLEY (1956: (1956:6) A. D. (1962) 257-8) (1946:254) 500 700- -900- 1100 1 - 1300- ~ 8 -1500- -1700 - -1900- Figure 6. Correlation of various ceramic group chronologies. There has been no attempt to assign each and every pottery type recognized in the sample to a ceramic period. What is more, it is not to be expected that each type named to a particular period conforms exactly to the temporal limits ascribed for the group as a whole. The ceramic period outlined in Table I are, however, units that can be recognized in the collected data. A single exception to this statement is Ceramic Period 8 taken from Colton's Ceramic Groups to fill a hiatus which exists between the late Pueblo III polychrome wares and the ceramics of the Pueblo V time period. No sites were located by this reconnaissance which could conceivably date to this time period, Pueblo IV in the Pecos Classification. In the main, however, the ceramic periods have born up under analysis of excavated material and for my purposes have been expanded, and I think, strength ened by including other well-dated contemporaneous types. In Appendix B, Table 26-31, an assignment is made indicating which ceramic period or periods are present at each site. An attempt has been made to indicate gaps between different ceramic periods in those sites in which they seem to exist. Caution must be exercised in this regard, however, as the surface evidence can not be relied upon completely to contain elements of all ceramic periods present at the site. All the different pottery types recognized in the material collected during the 1961 reconnaissance are given below in alphabet ical order with the bibliographic references to the description I used in their identification. When pertinent, notes are also made concerning differences recognized from the type description and other points of interest* Not all sherds could be typed according to a published description, however* In these instances, a brief charac terization is attempted and a temporary name applied. Pottery Types Ashiwi Polychrome. (Woodbury and Woodbury 1962 MS) Black Mesa Black-on-white. (Colton 19 # , Ceramic Series No. 3, Ware SB, Type 2). Brown Ware, early. Paste pale buff or dark brown to red. Fine quartz sand temper. Some smoothing and polishing. Appears to be constructed by the paddle and anvil method. Similar to Brown Ware at Arizona K:12:6 (Wasley I960: 32-35)* Brown Ware, late. Paste dark, surface light brown. Temper minute quartz sand grains. Well polished on exteriors. Some sherds have fugitive red slip on interiors. Flat rims. Brown Ware, mica tempered. Soft light buff paste with large quantities of golden mica temper. Brown Ware, smudged. Paste red brown to buff. Smudged in teriors. Interiors and exteriors well polished. Polish marks often show on exterior. Appears to be constructed by coil and scraped method. Temper sand and many minute white fragments. Rims are flat. Citadel Polychrome. (Colton 1956, Ceramic Series No. 30, Ware 5>B, Type U). Corrugated: Plain, Indented, Patterned and Tooled. Gray corrugated ware appears in many variations. Plain, indented, patterned $2 and tooled corrugated occur most frequently. Most of the plain and indented sherds are similar to Tusayan and Moencopi Corrugated (Colton 1955# Wares 8A, Types 11 and 12), but because corrugated wares are not too distinctive and the sample is limited types were not assigned. Deadmans Black-on-red. (Colton 1956, Ceramic Series No. 3C, Ware 5A, Type 6). Dogoszhi Black-on-white. (Colton, 1955, Ceramic Series No. 3, Ware 8B, Type U). Flagstaff Black-on-white. (Colton 1955, Ceramic Series No. 3, Ware 8B, Type 6). Gobernador Polychrome. (Keur 19l|l). Holbrook Black-on-white. (Colton 1955, Ceramic Series No. 3, Ware 9B, Type 2). Hopi Polychrome Ware. The sherds representing this ware have the typical yellow-orange fine grained paste of the Hopi tradition. Polychrome decoration occurs as pale red geometric designs outlined with a thin watery black on the buff-to-orange unslipped paste. Jeddito Black-on-yellow. (Colton 1956, Ceramic Series No. 3C, Ware 7B, Type 6). Kana-a Black-on-white. (Colton 1955, Ceramic Series No. 3, Ware 8B, Type 1). Kana-a Gray. (Colton 1955, Ceramic Series No. 3# Ware 8A, Type 5). Kiatuthlanna Black-on-white. (Anonymous 1958, Cobola White Ware Conference). 53 Kiet Siel Polychrome* (Colton 1956# Ceramic Series No. 3C, Ware 5>B, Type 12). Kin Tiel Black-on-orange. (Colton 1956, Ceramic Series No. 3C, Ware 5B, Type 18). Klageto Black-on-white. (Colton and Hargrave 1937: 2U2-2lth). Klageto Black-on-yellow. (Colton 1956, Ceramic Series No. 3C, Ware $B, Type 16). Klageto Polychrome. (Colton 1956, Ceramic Series No. 30, Ware 5B, Type 17). La Plata Black-on-white. (Cibola White Ware Conference, Anonymous 1958). La Plata Black-on-red. (Colton 1955, Ceramic Series No. 3, Ware J?A, Type 5). Lino Black-on-gray. (Colton 1955, Ceramic Series No. 3, Ware 8A, Type U). Lino Fugitive-red. (Colton 1955, Ceramic Series No. 3, Ware 8A, Type 3). Lino Gray. (Colton 1955, Ceramic Series No. 3, Ware 8A, Type 2). This type is a convenient catch-all for not only all Lino Gray sherds but all unpainted sherds of Lino Black-on-gray and La Plata Black-on-white, body sherds of Kana-a Gray and sherds of Lino Fugitive Red from which the color has disappeared. For this reason. Lino Gray by itself is of little value as a temporal indicator. Little Colorado Corrugated. (Colton 1955, Ceramic Series No. 3, Ware 9A, Type 5). In the interest of further refinement the variations 5k of plain, indented, and patterned corrugated were counted separately. Patterning consists of geometric designs and bands made from the combination of the plain and indented corrugations on a single vessel. Little Colorado Gray. (Colton 1955f Ceramic Series No. 3, Ware 9A). The same as Little Colorado Corrugated except exterior surface is not corrugated. Maneos Black-on-white. (Abel 1955t Ceramic Series No. 3, Ware 12A, Type £). McElmo Black-on-white. (Abel 1955# Ceramic Series No. 3, Ware 10B, Type 1). Medicine Black-on-red. (Colton 1956, Ceramic Series No. 3C, Ware 5B, Type 1). Mesa Verde Black-on-white. (Abel 1955, Ceramic Series No. 3, Ware 10B, Type 2). Navajo Utility Ware. (Keur.l9ljl: U6-7). Padre Black-on-white. (Colton and Hargrave 1937: 2l|l-2). Pinedale Black-on-white. (Colton and Hargrave 1937: 2bl-2). Puerco Black-on-red. (Carlson 1961: 33-Wl). Puerco Black-on-white. (Cibola White Ware Conference, Anonymous 1958). Limited to broad line decoration. Puerco Black-on-white; Gallup Variety. (Hawley 1936: h2-U3). Called Dogoszhi style Puerco Black-on-white by Cibola White Ware Conference, 1958. Red Mesa Black-on-white. (Cibola White Ware Conference, Anonymous 1958). Reserve Black-on-white. (Cibola White Ware Conference, Anonymous 19^8)• Slipped Red (?). Perhaps this is not a valid type, but it is used as a catch-all for those red-slipped sherds which lack any painted decoration. These pieces closely resemble the sherds of HLack-on-red or Polychrome, and they may represent the parts of these vessels which received no painted decoration. St. Johns Black-on-red. (Carlson 1961: 88-9U). St. Johns Polychrome. (Carlson 1961: 97-11)• St. Johns Polychrome, Springerville variety. (Carlson 1961: 127-133). Shato Black-on-white. (Colton 1955# Ceramic Series No. 3, Ware 8B, Type 5). Sosi Black-on-white. (Colton 1955# Ceramic Series No. 3, Ware 8B, Type 3). Tularosa Black-on-white. (Cibola White Ware Conference, Anonymous 1958). Tusayan Black-on-red. (Colton 1956, Ceramic Series No. 30, Ware 5B, Type 2). Tusayan Black-on-white. (Colton 1955# Ceramic Series No. 3# Ware 5B, Type 9). Tusayan Polychrome. (Colton 1956, Ceramic Series No. 30, Ware 5B, Type 9). Walnut Black-on-white. (Colton 1955, Ceramic Series No. 3, Ware 9B, Type 5). 'White Mound Black-on-white, (Cibola White Ware Conference, Anonymous 1958). Wingate Black-on-red. (Carlson 1961: 1:8-66). Wingate Polychrome. (Carlson 1961: 66-83). Zuni-Acoma Polychrome Ware. These sherds are definitely of the historic Zuni-Acoma tradition but are so indistinctive and occur so infrequently that a finer subdivision is not attempted here. Plan of Presentation The data collected from the sites visited are presented in tabular form (Appendices A, B, and C). This type of presentation is preferred over a detailed discussion of each site, primarily because of the limitations inherent in the data collected during reconnaissance. As stated earlier, no excavation was undertaken. Without this aid, the deceiving nature of erosion and the vagaries of preservation make any such detailed discussion of the individual site meaningless. The large sample size was also a major factor in the decision for this type of presentation. Appendix A consists of all structural data, type of site, site characteristics and physiographic situation of each site located by the reconnaissance. In Appendix B is found a sherd count with an assignment to a ceramic period for each site. The other artifacts, non-artifactual material, and burials located and recorded by the 1961 reconnaissance are presented in — Appendix C. $1 The total sample is broken down into six major subdivisions or localities as Willey and Phillips (1958: 18) have called them. This division has been necessitated primarily by the size of the sample. During the preliminary analysis the total sample was found to be much too large to handle, and there was always the possibility of glossing over or completely missing differences and/or similarities with such a volume of data. Another factor, however, was that during the preliminary analysis, there seemed to be a good measure of cultural homogeneity within several of the localities. After the first subdivision was accomplished, one area, the Black Creek locality, was still too large to handle with facility and so was divided into two parts. A convenient place to do this was the point where Black Creek enters a canyon two miles below Oak Springs. Here it enters a ten-mile-long, narrow canyon deeply cut through the south end of the Defiance Plateau, finally joining with the Rio Puerco some 20 miles further downstream. As the canyon is narrow and rough, and practically never traveled today, little use is thought to have been made of it in prehistoric times. It therefore marks a convenient, if not real, southern limit to the Black Creek locality. Each of the six localities is described as follows: Tohatchi-Mexican Springs: Red Willow Wash, Muddy Wash, Norcrbss Wash, Chuska Wash, Mexican Springs Wash, North and South Forks of Catron Wash itself, Black Springs Wash, and Black Creek (a tributary of Chaco Wash). 58 Black Greek: Black Creek (a tributary of the Rio Puerco) from Red Lake to the deep canyon two miles south of Oak Springs and its primary tributaries Simpson Creek, Tohdildonih Wash, Zilditloi Wash, Buell Wash, Twin Buttes Wash, White. Clay Springs Wash, Bonito Creek, Slick Rock Wash, Tohsohotso Wash, Cienega Creek, and Tse Bonito Wash. Rio Puerco: the hilly flanks north of U.S. 66 from Manuelito, New Mexico, to the Pine Springs turn-off and including its tributaries, Lupton Wash and Black Creek, from the point where it issues forth from the canyon below Oak Springs. Kin-li-chee Creek: Kin-li-chee Creek from Ganado east to its head atop the Defiance Plateau and its major tributaries. Lone Tule Wash, Sage House Wash, Black Soil Wash, Scattered Willow Wash, and Bear Canyon. Nazline Wash: Nazlini Wash, Beautiful Valley, Seachi Canyon, Tse Deeshzhaai Wash (Three Turkey Canyon), and Tse Ndiitsooi Wash (Little White House Canyon). Lukachukai-Tohotso-Greasewood: an area one mile in diameter centered on the confluence of Tohotso Creek and Greasewood Wash and overlapping Lukachukai Creek (See Fig. 3). To reduce repetition of the term locality, in future reference it will be understood that the name of the locality refers to the en tire area with its several drainages and not just to the drainage from which the locality name was taken. The Tohatchi-Mexican Springs, Black Creek, and Rio Puerco make up the eastern localities. The western localities are formed by the Kin-li-chee Creek, Nazlini Wash, and Lukachukai-Tohotso-Greasewood. 59 Frequent use of eastern and western localities will be made later in inter-area comparisons* COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS The Six Localities It is desirable to compare and contrast the archaeological evidence gathered during the 1961 Reconnaissance to the general scheme of Southwestern prehistory. This will bring into focus the elements necessary to construct sound hypotheses concerning the cultural de velopment and delimit specific problems of the area in general. It is first necessary to find out to what extent the area under consideration is a homogeneous unit of cultural traditions. The interests at this level of synthesis are: (l) to establish the cultural traditions found throughout the historical development of the six localities under con sideration, and (2) to learn to what extent the six separate localities share similar traditions. It can not be assumed a priori that the area as a whole participated in the development of a common cultural history. Our task here, then, is to find out to what extent the six localities differ and how they are similar. If significant differences do occur, then the different cultural traditions must be isolated and their boundaries defined, both in time and space. Only then can we pass to the next level of synthesis which is to consider the area as a whole and its place within the cultural-historical development shared through out the Southwest. The synthesis will be attempted in terms of trends observable in the. ceramic, community, settlement, and population pattern data 60 61 presented by ceramic periods as defined earlier. In this study the relationships between the various localities are based primarily on ceramic similarities and differences. This is due more to the lack of detailed data in other categories than to the sensitiveness and cultural importance of ceramics. Comparable details of the community pattern and its units and mode of construction are not usually available from data collected during survey. Although specific pottery types were identified in the site collections, they will not be used as specific units for tracing re lationships. The ceramic concept of the affiliation of one or more particular Wares with a Branch or "Culture" has largely been rejected in the Southwest. While a particular pottery type has been adequately dated, more-or-less, little detailed information is available concerning its specific area of manufacture. It is not difficult to say for in stance, that a particular pottery type is like that made in one area, but it is difficult to quantify these data in terms that are more than just taxonomically valid. Nevertheless, certain long standing ceramic traditions do have general spatial limitations and it is within these that a comparison will be made. Ceramics Plain Brown and Plain Gray Ware There are no remains which can be dated with certainty earlier than Ceramic Period 1. There is some indication that an earlier period exists but no conclusive proof is available. Two sites which have a wide range of ceramics also include unfired sherds (Arizona K:h:l8, 62 Arizona E:l^:10) (Fig. 10, j). While similar unfired pieces of pot tery are characteristic of Basketmaker H materials in the Prayer Rock district of the Lukachukai Mountains and other more distant areas in the Southwest, it is not inconceivable that people in later periods of time could also have made use of this type of container. As unfired sherds occur at only two sites, one in Black Greek and the other in Nazlini Wash, no inferences concerning affiliations are attempted here. One trait which suggests that there may still be a period prior to Ceramic Period 1, but subsequent to the time of the unfired sherds, is the occurrence of a plain brown ware with Lino Gray. These two kinds of pottery occur alone at four sites, and are in association with types clearly much later in four other locations. In all other contexts, which number ten, they are associated with types character istic of Ceramic Periods 1 and 2. A separate period has not been established for these two types when unaccompanied by other wares, primarily because the evidence is inconclusive but also because of a reluctance on my part to relax a conscious conservative frame of reference when dealing with data collected by reconnaissance. Earlier I have noted that Line Gray is a catch-all for several types which have similar paste diagnostics. Only when rim sherds are present is it possible to identify this type with certainty. Its uni formity over such an area is quite remarkable, however, as it appears in all six localities. The brown ware, on the other hand, is quite variable. It ranges from a light red paste with large quantities of fine sand 63 temper to gray-buff paste with little or no sand temper. The red paste variety has little polishing, while the gray-buff is well polished. There is some evidence that red paste ware variety was finished by the paddle and anvil method, but the sherds are so small that the surface irregularities may be only part of the normal rough ness encountered in scraped-finished wares. The red paste variety occurs generally in the more south easterly portion of the area while the gray-buff variety is more northwesterly is distribution. Brown ware is limited to the Black Creek, Rio Puerco, and Nazlini Wash localities. This ware is most frequent in the Rio Puerco, with Black Creek next, and it is limited in occurrence in Nazlini Wash. In view of the physical and distributional difference found in the brown ware, it appears quite likely, that on the basis of more evidence, it will be possible to subdivide it into several varieties. Organic and Inorganic Painted Black-on-white Pottery Lino Black-on-gray and La Plata Black-on-white, the other components of Ceramic Period 1, constitute the beginning of two general trends which continue through Ceramic Period 7. This trend of inorganic paint decoration on pottery in the east and organic paint decoration in the west is crosscut temporally and spatially by similar design styles. The pastes are not too dissimilar either. At least the range of vari ation in paste does not extend beyond what one would expect from the use of local materials in different but closely adjoining areas. The organic versus inorganic pigment is not a dichotomy limited to Black-on-white pottery. It is in this color class of ceramics, however, that the opposed pigment types were first defined (Hawley 1929) and is still best exemplified. The dichotomy is not always maintained, and some sherds of a single type will show both types of pigment. These occurrences, however, are not the norms. Excavation and survey in the Southwest have made little change in the geographic distribution of each type ftom its original definition. Inorganic paint is thought to be localized in the eastern and southern portions of the Anasazi area, while organic paint is primarily western and northern in distribution. As I noted earlier, the survey area under consideration lies across the common boundary of the organic and inorganic paint. To find out to what degree the several localities participate in one or the other paint traditions, and how this might have changed through time, I have counted the number of sherds present of each type of Black-on-white paint pigment within each site containing a single ceramic period component (Table 3)» The tabulation is limited to those sites with only one ceramic period component because the multi- component site ceramic samples are not divisible into several parts. A finer division would require the placement of each and every pottery type into a specific ceramic period. This requires a depth of know ledge beyond what is presently possessed for the area. This, of course, tells one nothing about the relative importance of a single type which is of small consequence for, as I have pointed out before, there is probably little validity in a small sample for reference to details. 65 Table 3 Frequency of Organic and Inorganic Pointed Black-on-white pottery by Locality Through Time. Locality C E 1R AMIC F> E 1R 1 0 D S Pigment 9 Type i 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 T o h a t c h i- Mexican Spr. Organic _ 1 3 5 7 26 Inorg anic 4 95 14 395 142 185 —* Block Creek Organic — — • — 4 24 14 57 — — Inorganic 10 36 17 12 1509 537 357 — Rio Puerco Organic — — 17 1 3 3 1 — — Inorganic 4 110 14 6 586 347 1261 - — Kin-li-chee Creek Organic 1 1 9 51 21 Inorganic — 26 1 — 6 37 9 — — Nazlini Wash Organic — 8 3 2 16 — 2 —— Inorganic — 32 4 — 12 — 0 — — Luk.-Toh.-Gr ea. Organic 9 5 4 Inorganic 66 e-. During Ceramic Period 1 inorganic painted pottery is found only in Tohatchi-Mexican Springs, Black Creek, and Rio Puerco (Table 3). No organic painted types occur at this time in any area. A wide distribution of inorganic painted Black-on-white pottery is seen during Ceramic Period 2 times, in all but one locality; its absence in Lukachukai-Tohotso-Greasewood at this time level is undoubt edly a reflection of the small sample size. Organic paint occurs only once in Tohatchi-Mexican Springs, but is in significant quantity in Nazlini Wash, where it is found on a fourth of the Black-on-white sherds. A considerable reduction in both pigment types is encountered during the 3rd Ceramic Period. While both types are almost equally represented in two localities, the Kin-li-chee Creek and Nazlini Wash, the organic sherds show a slight increase in proportion to the inorganic sherds. Although the sample is so small as to cast doubt on their im portance, they are consistent with a general trend toward the reduction of inorganic pigment and an increase in organic pigment after Ceramic Period 2 in these two areas. In Black Creek no organic pigment was noted and a reduction in inorganic painted Black-on-white pottery is recorded during this period. An interesting development occurs in the Rio Puerco at this time. Organic painted remains outnumber inorganic, but all organic painted Black-on-white sherds occur at a single site (Arizona K:ll:20). This site possibly represents outside intrusion into an otherwise homogeneous area. The reduction in organic painted Black-on-white pottery in this locality is consistent with the same trend noted for the Black Creek and with a general reduction noted in 67 all areas on this same level. No single component sites with painted Black-on-white pottery were found during this time in Tohatchi-Mexican Springs and Lukachukai-Tohotso-Greasewood. In Ceramic Period U, an increase in both types is recorded in the Tohatchi-Mexican Springs, but organic paint sherds represent about a fifth of the sample. Both Black Creek and Rio Puerco reveal a con tinued reduction in inorganic painted Black-on-white types, while there is a slight increase in the former area and a reduction in the latter area in organic types. Kin-li-chee Creek and Naziini Wash roughly maintain their level of organic painted pottery. A reduction in in organic types is noted in both areas. The Lukachukai-Tohotso-Grease- wood sample is of little importance because of its size, but there is nothing contrary to the trends established by Kin-li-chee Creek and Nazlini Wash. Ceramic Period 5 is a time of extreme expansion in numbers of inorganic painted Black-on-white sherds in Tohatchi-Mexican Springs, Black Creek, and Rio Puerco, a very slight increase recorded for or ganic painted types. A general increase in organic paint is also noted in Kin-li-chee Creek and Nazlini Wash, and in both areas organic outnumbers inorganic painted sherds. In Lukachukai-Tohotso-Greasewood no painted types were recorded. During Ceramic Period 6 a general overall reduction is evidenced in the inorganic painted sherds of the Tohatchi-Mexican Springs, Black Creek, and Rio Puerco localities. Their numbers are one-half to two- thirds less than recorded during Ceramic Period $. Organic painted 68 Black-on-white sherds decrease or remain relatively constant, but are present in small quantities except in Kin-li-chee Creek. Here, on the other hand, organic painted Black-on-white sherds outnumber inorganic painted ones by a third. No sherds of either type were noted in the Nazlini Wash. Lukachukai-Tohotso-Greasewood sites reflect the general western trend, with no inorganic painted sherds and only five organic painted ones present. In Black Creek and Rio Puerco during Ceramic Period 7 the trend of reduction continues in the number of inorganic painted Black- on-white sherds. However, in Tohatchi-Mexican Springs and Black Creek a significant twenty-five percent increase in organic paint is noted, with a comparable increase in inorganic painted Black-on-white sherds in the former area only. Reduction is the most important trend in Kin-li-chee Creek, Nazline Wash, and Lukachukai-Tohotso-Greasewood in both paint types, although the latter two areas are so weakly repre sented that their counts are of doubtful importance. Note in Table 3, however, that the organic paint pigments are still dominant. Ceramic Period 7 is the last time in which Black-on-white organic and inorganic painted pottery is found in single component sites. As stated earlier, no sites in any of the six localities were located by the 1961 Survey which could be placed within Ceramic Period 8. Only a few Black-on-white sherds were found in single com ponent Ceramic Period 9 sites but these were undoubtedly collected 69 and brought in by Navajos for use as tempering material in the local Navajo pottery. It seems clear, even though conclusive proof is lacking, par ticularly in the western areas, that on the basis of organic versus inorganic paint pigment there appear to be two different style zones involved in the localities under study. Early in time there appears to be wide-spread use of inorganic paint in all localities. Later in Tohatchi-Mexican Springs, Black.Greek, and Rio Puerco this trend ex pands to a maximum in Ceramic Period 5 after which it decreases grad ually, except in Tohatchi-Mexican Springs where it again reasserts itself in Ceramic Period ?• Organic paint is never found in important quantities in the aforementioned areas, although there is an increase from early to late in Tohatchi-Mexican Springs and Black Creek. In the Rio Puerco organic painted Black-on-white sherds are rare except for one site in which they equal about 55 percent of that sample. Organic painted Black-on-white sherds occur infrequently during the earlier ceramic periods of Kin-li-chee Creek, Nazline Wash, and Lukachukai-Tohotso-Greasewood. Beginning in Ceramic Period U and continuing through Ceramic Period 7, there is a definite predominance of organic painted sherds over inorganic painted Black-on-white types. No Black-on-white sherds occur in a meaningful context after Ceramic Period 7. Red Wares Several types of the White Mountain Red Ware series make up the principle portion of the Black-on-red and Polychrome sherds in the various localities during Ceramic Period 6 and 7 (see Table It). Each 70 Table 4 White Mountain Red Wore and San Juan Red Ware Pottery by Locality Through Time. White Mountain Red Ware S.J.R.W. T ypes Localities Tohatchi- Mexican Spr. Block Creek Rio Rue r c a Kin-li-chee Creek Nazlini Wash Luk.-Toh.-Grea. Ceramic P.6 Ceramic P.2 Ceramic P.5 Ceramic P.7 Ceramic P.6 71 of the three eastern localities and Kin-li-chee Creek exhibit a similar pattern, that is, the White Mountain Red Ware series is com mon to all and appears in significant proportions. During Period 6 and 7 Puerco Black-on-red, Wingate Black-on-red, and St. Johns Black- on -red are found in all localities, except there is no Puerco Black- on-red in Period 7 in Kin-li-chee Creek and no St. Johns Black-on-red in Period 6 in the Rio Puerco. The trend is unchanged for Puerco Black-on-red with a slight decrease witnessed by Wingate Black-on-red from Period 6 to 7. St. Johns Black-on-red increases significantly from Period 6 to 7* Wingate Polychrome and St. Johns Polychrome are both sig nificantly present during Period 7 but neither is found in Period 6 in the eastern localities and in Kin-li-chee Creek. St. Johns Poly chrome, Springerville variety, is present only in Tohatchi-Mexican Springs. The White Mountain Red Wares are almost entirely absent in Nazlini Wash and Lukachukai-Tohotso-Greasewood. Wingate Black-on- red occurs in each locality during Period 6 but in very small quan tities. St. Johns Polychrome occurs in Nazlini Wash only once in Period 7. These two northwestern localities did not participate in the acceptance and use of the White Mountain Red Wares as did the other areas. The only San Juan Red Ware (See Table U) type found in this survey was La Plata Black-on-red which occurred only in Tohatchi- Mexican Springs in sites of Period 2, 5, and 6 dates. Its presence in this area is not unexpected, and where it occurs in sites of Period 2 and 6 it must be evidence of a multi-component site. The 72 data concerning this type are so limited, however, that by itself they negate any hypotheses made concerning it. Orange Ware The Tsegi Orange Ware data (Table 5) suggests much less con clusive inter-locality cultural relationship than the White Mountain Red Wares because the former occur in such restricted quantities. With this word of caution it may be pointed out that the Tsegi Orange Ware appears earlier in Kin-li-chee Creek and Nazlini Wash than in the eastern localities of the Black Creek and Rio Puerco. It appears only during Period 7 in the eastern localities and in Periods 6 and 7 in the western localities. This ware occurs in its highest frequency in Nazline Wash. Its Kin-li-chee Creek pattern of occurrance more closely resembles the eastern localities than it does the Nazlini Wash. No examples of this ware were found in Tohatchi-Mexican Springs or Lukachukai-Tohotso-Greasewood. The lack of this ware in the latter areas is perhaps the result of an inadequate sample. Historic Puebloan and Navajo Pottery The problematical occurrence of historic puebloan pottery in site samples which are by all other criteria anything but Ceramic Period 9, is easily resolved by turning to Navajo ethnology. Specific instructions are set forth in Blessing Way, a Navajo Ceremony, for the care and final disposition of any pottery vessel which is broken while in use by its Navajo owners (DeHarport 1962). The precautions consist, among other things, of the careful collection of all the broken pieces which are then deposited on a nearby Anasazi ruin. It is a well-known 73 Toble 5 Tsegi Orange Wore Pottery by Locality Through Time TSEGI ORANGE WARE Types i o X. Kin Tiel B/O Localities Citadel Poly. Medicine B/R Tusoyon B/R Kiel Sitl Poly. Klogeto B/Y Tusoyon Poly. 5 Deodmons B/R Block Creek 1 3 Rio Puercb 4 1 Kin-1 i-chee Creek 1 2 4 Nazlini Wash 1 1 2 3 Ceramic P.5 — C e r omic P.6 Ceramic P.7 7U fact that Navajos bought and bartered for pueblo pottery, as well as made their own. I think the result of this Navajo custom can be seen in Table 6, where Ceramic Period 9 trade ceramic components are found on sites of Ceramic Periods 5 and 7 as well. The distribution of Navajo utility pottery is universally found in all localities. In terms of sample size per area, there appears to be, significantly, more Navajo pottery in Kin-li-chee Creek and Nazlini Wash than in any other. Gobemador Polychrome occurs widely but in frequently dispersed. Based on the evidence available, little more can be added concerning this type. Hopi and Zuni-Acoma wares occur about as one would expect, with the Hopi types more prevalent in western localities closer to their place of origin, and the Zuni-Acoma types most frequent in the eastern localities close to their home area of manufacture. One Hopi type, Jeddito Black-on-yellow, and the Zuni-Acoma wares have the widest dis tribution; each occurs in two localities nearest their place of manu facture and extends into another area common to both, the Rio Puerco, some distance away (Table 6). During Ceramic Period 9 there appears to be a wide-spread Navajo occupation of all areas. The data presented in Table 6 suggest a heavier occupation of Black Creek and Nazline Wash than the other four localities. This suggestion may be more apparent than real, for there is a definite overlapping of the physiographic situation of these sites. Since the primary interest of this survey was Puebloan occupation, Navajo remains were collected and recorded only when they 75 Table 6 Hopi, Zuni-Acoma and Navajo Pottery by Locality Through Time. Types Zuni Acomo Poly. Zuni Acomo Ashiwi Ashiwi Poly. Navajo utility Hopi Poly. Gobernodor Gobernodor Poly. Localities x\ Jeddito B/Y T o h a t c h i- Mexican Spr. 7 - 9 5 - 2 9 - 1 3 Block Creek 9 - 3 9 -3 7 9 - 4 9-171 9 - 2 5 - 1 Rio Puerco 5 - 7 9 -1 1 9 -2 3 7 - 1 Kin-li-chee Creek ' 9 -5 0 Nozlini Wash 9 - 9 9 - 4 9 -8 0 9 - 3 Ceramic Period-Sherd Frequency 76 coincided with the location of Puebloan materials. This situation happened most frequently in areas where large natural cliff shelters were available. Both Black Creek and Nazlini Wash have many large sandstone cliff shelters which were occupied by both Puebloan and Navajo peoples, one after the other. Possibly this accounts for the higher frequency of Navajo sites in these two areas. Navajo trade for Puebloan ceramics appears to be divided into a southeastern and western tradition, each leaning toward a preference for ceramics produced "close-at-home." The dividing line between these two coincides with the top of the Defiance Plateau. Whether the De fiance Plateau served as an actual barrier to trade is questionable in the light of the occurrence of both Hopi and Zuni-Acoma ceramics in Black Greek. The apparent preference for Hopi and Zuni-Acoma ceramics in the western and eastern localities, respectively, probably is due to nothing more than convenience, although preference may have been a factor also. Community Pattern The discussion of inter-locality community pattern is limited, quite naturally, to the structures in single component sites and the ultimate structural evidence of two different time periods visible on the surface at any one site. Only in the large sandstone alcoves, where some illicit digging had been done and where Navajos had reoccu pied or built to one side of earlier structures, were several structural components observable. In these cases there was only enough of the structure exposed to reveal minor features of the community pattern, 77 “such as type of wall construction or corner abutment. Never were the structures sufficiently exposed to indicate routes of communication or other community patterns. During the Navajo reoccupation of more ancient ruins during the Ninth Ceramic Period there was rarely any structural evidence of their presence. The quantity and regularity of the structural evidence ob served will demonstrate a high level of reproducibility. This sug gests that the general overall modes of community patterning would be changed slightly, if at all, were structural data available for con sideration through excavation. In order that the reader may be in a better position to judge the reliability of my interpretation of the data presented here, I have given the site component totals by period for every locality (Table 7). A total site count is also given at the bottom of the Table by locality. The difference between total components and total sites in the Table is the result of reoccupation of ancient pueblos by Navajos, the original structure being changed, if at all, only very slightly by the later occupants. Period One Structural Units. Evidence for pithouses is found in all six localities except that of the Kin-li-chee where no single component sites were found dating in this period. The absence of evidence of sites of this period in Kin-li-chee is undoubtedly due to the small sample size and the problem of recognizing pithouses. As the area's subsequent development was contemporaneous with and parallel to that of the other localities, pithouses were probably present in Kin-li-chee. 78 'TABLE 7 Component and Site Totals by Locality and Ceramic Period Ceramic Eastern Localities Western Localities Period T-MS BC RP K NW L-T-G* 1 3 10 7 0 2 2 2 19 12 15 9 It 0 3 1 12 5 6 2 0 k 5 . 5 3 3 6 1 5 51* 189 101 1* 6 0 6 16 51 33 19 6 2 7 21* la 12 12 9 3 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 9 2 16 2 It 17 0 Unknown 7 22 It 9 15 1 Total Components 131 359 181 66 66 9 Total Sites#* 131 355 181 65 58 9 * T-MS, Tohatchi-Mexican Springs; BC, Black Creek; RP, Rio Puerco; K, Kin-li-chee Creek; NW, Naziini Wash; T-T-G, Lukachukai- Tohotso-Greasewood. ■JBt Total sites are the actual number of sites located by the reconnaissance and differ from the Total Components in that the Puebloan sites with Navajo reoccupation have been counted twice. 79 Surface storage structures are limited to Tohatchi-Mexican Springs, Black Creek, Rio Puerco, and Nazlini Wash, while cists are limited to the latter two and Lukachukai-Tohotso-Greasewood. No surface structures were located in Lukachukai-Tohotso-Greasewood. Size. The number of individual pithouses varies widely through out the different localities. Communities within a given locality range in size from one to three pithouses to as many as five to ten units, but the mode is from three to four. Layout. Within Tohatchi-Mexican Springs, Black Creek, and Rio Puerco, the preferred community layout is lineal with the cresentic or u-shaped pattern also present in the latter two. A scattered and unorganized layout plan is found in both Naz- lini and Lukachukai-Tohotso-Greasewood. Construction. In all localities cist and storage structures are made only of sandstone slabs set on edge, except in Rio Puerco, where this technique is augmented, but rarely, by crude low masonry walls. Orientation. There appears to be only one item of uniformity among the various localities with reference to domiciliary orienta tion: that is a negative one. Although structures are never oriented north or northeast, they are oriented to all other points of the com pass. However, a western orientation occurs only once. The preferred alignment is with the east in Tohatchi-Mexican Springs, and southeast in Black Creek and possibly Lukachukai-Tohotso-Greasewood. South ap pears as the preferred direction in Rio Puerco and Nazlini Wash. v.. 80 Trash. Unlocalized or scattered refuse is the mode in all localities, but in Black Creek and Rio Puerco it is also found in small mounds to the south, southwest, and east of the structural units. Period Two Structural Units. During Period Two the pithouse and surface storage structures are found in all localities except in Lukachukai- Tohotso-Greasewood where no single component sites of this period were located. Sample size, in Lukachukai-Tohotso-Greasewood, surely has effected the picture of this locality as it appears to follow the sub sequent overall development seen in other areas. Cists appear to be waning in popularity in Period Two as they are rare in all localities except Nazlini Wash where they are entirely absent. A new architectural form (one to be so important later on) sees its beginning during this Period. Small pueblos of crude masonry were found in Tohatchi-Mexican Springs and Kin-li-chee Creek. Size. A wider range in number of individual structural units per site is present during Period Two than was the case in Period One. While there are still many sites of from one to three pithouses, the upper limit has climbed to eight, twelve, and even twenty. The model size ranges, however, between four to six or slightly smaller. These statements apply only in Tohatchi-Mexican Springs, Black Creek, and Rio Puerco, for in the Kin-li-chee Creek and Nazline Wash a different pattern is exhibited. In these latter two areas, there appears to be a slight reduction in site size. 81 Layout. In the eastern localities the community plan is also more diversified than during the preceding Period. Besides the most important, the lineal form, are the crescent, the 11 uM, and other variations, as the "L" or "V". The lineal arrangement, however, by far exceeds all the other minor variations together. The only plan found in Kin-li-chee Creek and Nazlini Wash is the lineal form. Construction. Surface storage structures are constructed of both sandstone slabs set on edge and crude mortared masonry. The slab-to-mortaredrmasonry proportion is, on the average, more than 5$1# Cists are always made of sandstone slabs set on edge while pueblos are always made of mortared masonry. Orientation. Orientations to the south and southeast are pre ferred in 75 to 8? percent of all sites in Tohatchi-Mexican Springs and Rio Puerco, respectively. In Black Creek the sites are almost evenly divided between east, south, and southeast. In Kin-li-chee Creek and Nazlini Wash, the preferred orientations are south and south east, the former being predominant. Trash. Two thirds of all trash on sites in Tohatchi-Mexican Springs and Black Creek is scattered. The remaining is located in small thin mounds located to the south, southeast, and east of the surface structural units. The orientation of these units and of the trash mounds do not agree exactly in all cases, but they are generally within one-quarter of the compass heading. In the Rio Puerco, localized or mounded trash occurs more fre quently than scattered or unlocalized trash, although the percentage for each is even. 82 Kin-li-chee Creek and Nazlini Wash show a complete reversal of the trend described for the two eastern most localities. In the Kin-li-chee Creek trash occurs in mounds three and one half times as often as it does in a scattered fashion. The preferred orienta tion is southeast, although some lie directly south. In Nazlini Wash all trash occurs in mounds and is either to the south or southeast of the domestic structure with equal frequency. Sherd Areas. These trash deposits are not associated with any other feature indicative of a site as defined by this study. Sherd areas appear for the first time in Period Two and only in Tohatchi- Mexican Springs. They may represent buried sites of a permanent nature, such as pithouse villages, etc., of which the sherds are the only visible evidence, or they may represent a site of less permanent nature. These areas could have been seasonal camping spots, being occupied only a short time in connection with agricultural, hunting, or commercial activities. At least the localization of a small amount of trash suggests the area was used intensively, but for only a short period of time, not long enough to invest the energy necessary to con struct more or less permanent buildings. Period Three Structural Units. There are fewer sites of this Period than any other time and yet there is a great deal of diversity and complexity in all but two localities. In one of these areas, Tohatchi-Mexican Springs, only one single component site, a small pueblo, was located by the survey. In the other area, Lukachukai-Tohatso-Greasewood, no single component sites of this period were noted. 83 In Black Creek, pueblos and pithouse sites occur with equal frequency. There were, however, only two of each type located. No cists or surface storage structures were found. In Rio Puerco the same types and numbers of structures were found as in Black Creek. The only difference was that one pithouse in the Rio Puerco was backed by a row of surface storage structures. In Kin-li-chee Creek and Nazlini Wash, however, each pithouse was backed by a row of surface storage units. Four pithouse sites were found in Kin-li-chee Creek while only two were located in Nazlini Wash. Pueblos occurred only in Kin-li-chee Creek and are only half as frequent as pithouses. The single kiva in Tohatchi-Mexican Springs is located to the east of the domestic structures and between them and the trash mound. In Kin-li-chee Creek, kivas also occur in the same orienta tion as the domestic structure and the trash mounds, that is, to the southeast. One pueblo also has a second kiva at its "back" or on the northwest side of the pueblo. Sherd Areas. While this type of site occurs in only two localities, the Black Creek and the Rio Puerco, it is of importance in the former alonej there it is found twice as often as sites with structures. Only one sherd area was recorded in the Rio Puerco locale. Size. Pueblos range in size up to about nine rooms. The largest pueblo is found in the Tohatchi-Mexican Springs, while the smal lest, a one to two room unit, is found in Black Creek, Pueblos of the 8U Rio Puerco range between these two limits, averaging around three to four rooms each. Interestingly enough, the pueblos of Kin-li-chee Creek range from six to eight rooms. Pithouses appear to be less important at this time in Black Creek and Rio Puerco than in Kin-li-chee Creek and Nazlini Wash to the east and north. While the number of individual units per site in the first two locales is small, the opposite holds true for the latter two areas. Pithouses are equal to or surpass the pueblos in terms of rooms available. Layout. Pueblos in Tohatchi-Mexican Springs are built in the form of an "L". In all other areas, they occur in a straight lineal form. Pithouses appear to be non-distinctive as to layout in Black Creek and Rio Puerco, but occur most often in a lineal pattern in Kin- li-chee Creek and Nazlini Wash. They also occur in a crescentic and an "F" pattern, in the Kin-li-chee Creek. Construction. Mortared masonry is found throughout the area except in Nazline Wash, while slab-on-end masonry is limited to this area and Kin-li-chee Creek. Orientation. Pueblos are oriented to the east in Tohatchi- Mexican Springs to the northeast and east in Black Creek, to the south . in Rio Puerco and to the southeast in Kin-li-chee Creek. Pithouses are not regularized as to orientation in Black Creek and Rio Puerco, but in Kin-li-chee Creek and Nazlini Wash they are oriented almost entirely to the south. 85 Trash. In Tohatchi-Mexican Springs, Black Creek and Rio Puerco the trash is almost always spread over the entire site as a thin mantle. In the western and northern localities of the Kin-li-chee Creek and Nazlini Wash, trash occurs in mounds to the south or rarely to the southeast of the surface structures. Period Four Structural Units. This period saw the dramatic change in the eastern localities from diversity to standardization. Pithouses no longer occur with pueblos, as a shift to a pattern of above-ground living seems to have been completed at this time. In Kin-li-chee Creek and Nazline Wash, diversified domestic structures still appear. Pueblos are the most numerous, but pithouse, cists and surface storage structures also are found. The single pueblo located in Lukachukai-Tohotso-Greasewood offers little to the pattern of structural units among the western localities. Sherd areas are important features of Tohatchi-Mexican Springs, Black Creek and Rio Puerco. Only one sherd area occurs in Nazlini Wash One kiva occurs in Rio Puerco east of the domestic buildings, while two occur in Kin-li-chee Creek to the southeast and east of simi lar structures. One kiva occurs in Nazlini Wash and Lukachukai-Tohotso Greasewood, to the east of surface units. Size. The number of rooms per pueblo ranges from two to 12 in Tohatchi-Mexican Springs, two to six in Black Creek, andfbur to eight in Rio Puerco. A single pithouse occurs with a pueblo at one site in Kin-li- chee while one pithouse site occurs unassociated with pueblo units in 86 •Nazlini Wash. In the western localities pueblos are all small, less than 10 rooms in size, except in Kin-li-chee Greek where at least one village has 15 rooms. Layout. Pueblos during this period are predominantly lineal in layout in all localities except in Lukachukai-Tohotso-Greasewood where the single pueblo occurs in the l,LM form. There is some varia tion in Black Creek and Rio Puerco where "L11 and 11U" shaped pueblos also appear infrequently. The pithouse type of site in this period occurs in Nazlini Wash and has a lineal layout. Construction. Horizontally laid masonry is used exclusively in all pueblo sites in all localities. It is combined with vertically laid slabs in the construction of a pithouse in Kin-li-chee Creek. The pithouse site in the Nazlini Wash has vertical slab construction. Orientation. In the eastern localities, east, southeast, and south pueblo orientation occurs with equal frequency; in the western localities there is a tendency to prefer a southeastern orientation for pueblos, but southern, eastern, and even northern alignments also occur. The pithouse site in Kin-li-chee Creek has an eastern orienta tion. Trash. The orientation and type of trash deposits in the eastern localities ranges from scattered unlocalized sheet trash to small mounds lying to the east or southeast of the surface structures. In the western localities less uniformity is present. Kin-li- chee Creek pueblos favor a southeastern area for trash deposit while the pithouse site uses an eastern location. All Nazlini Wash pueblos 87 have scattered sheet trash over the entire site. In Lukachukai- Tohotso-Greasewood east is the preferred direction for trash disposal. Period Five Structural Units. Throughout the entire area covered by this study, pueblos have become so important by Period Five that to all intents and purposes they are the only type of domestic dwelling. There are single occurrences of pithouses in both Tohatchi-Mexican Springs and Black Creek. Sherd areas are still present, but are of importance only in the Black Creek where they account for something less than one-fourth of the sites. Sherd areas do not occur in the western localities during this period. Cists occur at only one site in Nazlini Wash and are absent in all other localities. No sites of this period were located in Lukachukai-Tohotso-Greasewood. Within the eastern localities from about one half to one- third of the pueblos occur without kivas (Table 8). Pueblos with kivas are found in a one to one relationship in from one half to seven eighths of the total. Two or more kivas per pueblo occur in all areas but they reach important proportions only in Black Creek. In this area the occurrence of more than one kiva at a site slightly surpass ten percent of the total kivas found and represent one seventh of the pueblos with kivas. One Great Kiva is found which belongs to this period and it is in Black Creek. The western localities exhibit quite different patterns of kiva dispersal as compared with the eastern localities. The rather uniform 1:1 ratio of pueblo to kiva in the eastern localities is in 88 TABLE 8 Period Five - Pueblo-Kiva Ratios Locality Pueblo Kiva 1 Pueblo: 1 Pueblo Great Pueblo Total Total 1 Kiva 2+ Kivas Kiva w/o Kiva Toh.-Mex. Spr. $3 39 35 2 0 16 Black Creek 170 103 7h 13 1 83 Rio Puerco 97 65 57 U 0 36 Kin-li-chee Cr. h 5 0 1 2 3 Nazlini Wash 5 h 0 2 0 3 Luk.-Toh.-Gr. 0 0 0 0 0 0 contrast to a complete absence of this ratio in the western localities. In Kin-li-chee Creek and Nazlini Wash, kivas are always found in a ratio of two or more per pueblo. But, pueblos lacking kivas outnumber multi-kiva pueblos almost two to one. Admittedly the sample is small in both of these areas, but it presents a uniform picture. Size. For classificatory purposes, the sites have been di vided into three groups based on their size. The size range for the three types are: small: one to ten rooms; medium: eleven to twenty rooms; large: twenty-one or more rooms. Within the eastern localities 80 to 90 percent of the pueblos fall into this small pueblo type. Only eight to 16 percent of the pueblos can be assigned to the medium style, while the large category accounts for only two to four percent. No large pueblos are found in 89 Black Creek. In the western areas, the sample is much smaller, but the ratios are very different. Small pueblos account for 60 to 75 percent of the sites, while the medium and large types account for 2£ to hO percent of the total. Layout. In Period Five, the lineal type is by far the most preferred layout pattern in all of the eastern localities, ranging between h3 and 73 percent of all pueblos. Types "L" and "U" are next in importance, and account for around ten percent only of the pueblos in Black Creek and Rio Puerco. In Tohatchi-Mexican Springs, the "L” and "IP1 types of layout are more important than in other areas. Here they represent 23 to 31 percent of the total respectively. Types "T” 0 - and "F" occur only rarely, except in the Rio Puerco where type "T" is almost equal to "L" and "UM. In the western localities there are data only from Kin-li-chee Creek, and there the lineal and "L" type are equal in occurrence. No other types occur. Construction. Horizontally laid masonry occurs exclusively through the eastern and western localities. Only in the eastern sections of Tohatchi-Mexican Springs and Black Creek, where the only pithouses of this period are found, does vertical or slab-on-end masonry occur. Orientation. Within the eastern localities the preference for kiva-pueblo orientation is about equally divided between south and southeast. In Tohatchi-Mexican Springs and the Rio Puerco, southeast is more important, while in Black Creek south is the favored direction. 90 Orientation to the east occurs in a significant number of instances, but only in Tohatchi-Mexican Springs does this orientation approach the frequency of the other two directions. Orientations to the south west, west, north, and northeast also occur, but these are very limited. In the western localities, south appears as the favored orien tation followed by a single occurrence each of east and west. The sample here is very small, however. Trash. Localized trash is the mode of rubbish disposal in the eastern group; here the preference ranges from about three to one in Black Creek to over eight to one in the Rio Puerco. Cultural debris still occurs in unlocalized sheet deposits over the whole site, in a few sites in all areas, but it is only in the western groups that it becomes relatively important. However, it is only in Nazlini Wash that it is the mode of trash disposal. Community Unity. Community unity is indicated by the degree of homogeneity in orientation of domestic and ceremonial structures and the rubbish deposits (Table 9). In the eastern localities almost twice as many sites have a similar orientation for the three major units of the community as do the next closest or partial groupings (pueblo and kiva or pueblo and trash). It is of no small interest to note that among the partial groupings there is more similarity between the orientation of pueblo and trash than between pueblo and kiva. This fact may, however, be misleading as it is almost certain that , some kivas were so well filled in that they went unrecorded. In the western localities, there appears to be an emphasis on the relationship between the pueblo-kiva orientation rather than any 91 of the other possibilities. The sample is very small and probably of little value, thus precluding any reliable generalizations. TABLE 9 Period Five - Community Unit Combinations and Orientation Irrespective of Specific Direction Same Eastern Localities Western Localities Orientation T-MS BC RP K-l-c NW L-T-G Pueblo-Kiva-Trash 26 60 #1 1 - - Fueblo-Kiva 7 19 U 1 2 - Pueblo-Trash 9 36 2k - 1 - All Orientations Different 12 - 3 -- - Period Six Structural Units. Pueblos and kiva depressions are the only two forms of surface structural evidence found in the eastern locali ties. In the western localities, pueblos and kivas are also the most numerous structural components of a site and can be considered the basic site units. At one site in Kin-li-chee Creek a pithouse does occur. The ratio of pueblos to kivas during this period is given in detail in Table 10. In general, in the eastern localities it is 1:1. In Tohatchi-Mexican Springs, the ratio is not exactly 1:1, but it is closer to this ratio than 2:1. These ratios are based on 92 TABLE 10 Period Six - Pueblo-Kiva Ratios Locality Pueblo Kiva 1 Pueblo: 1 Pueblo Great Pueblo Total Total 1 Kiva 2+ Kivas Kiva w/o Kiva Toh.-Mex. Spr. 17 12 10 1 0 6 Black Creek a U2 30 5 2 9 Rio Puerco 33 33 25 h 0 h Kin-li-chee Cr. 18 8 6 i 0 11 Nazlini Wash 5 1 1 0 0 U Luke—Toh.—Gr. 7 2 2 0 0 5 total pueblos and kivas per locality. Almost one half of the pueblos in Tohatchi-Mexican Springs have no kivas. In Black Greek and Rio Puerco pueblos without kivas make up only one fourth and one sixth of the total, respectively. An interesting difference between Tohatchi- Mexican Springs and Black Creek and Rio Puerco is the much higher percentage of pueblos with two or more kivas in the latter two regions. Two Great Kivas are assignable to this period and occur in Black Creek. In the western localities the ratio of pueblo to kiva is much greater than in the eastern localities, ranging from 2:1 to U:l. In all areas pueblos without kivas exceed those that do have them. Where kivas are present the predominate pattern is one pueblo-one kiva. Only one site has two ceremonial structures and these are both Great Kivas. 93 Size. Within the eastern localities, the small pueblo, one to ten rooms, is the preferred size except in lohatchi-Mexican Springs where the medium pueblos, ten to 20 rooms, outnumbers the small types. Large pueblos, 21 rooms or more occur only once or twice in each of the three areas. The small pueblo is the most frequent size in the three western localities. Medium-sized pueblos were found only in Kin-li-chee Creek, while a single large pueblo occurred only in Luka- chukai-Tohotso-Greasewood. Layout. Only in Tohatchi-Mexican Springs do the lineal "L" and 11UM layout patterns occur with equal frequency. In the other two localities of the eastern group, the lineal type is much more important than the other styles. Of limited occurrence in the eastern groups are the block »E», "T", "T2" and "F". The patterning of pueblo layout in the western localities of Kin-li-chee Creek and Naziini Wash is much affected by the topography. Confined primarily to narrow sandstone-walled canyons, the buildings are constructed and fitted into and against these walls so as to occupy as little of the valley bottom as possible. Because the cliffs are naturally formed and therefore rather irregular, the layout pat tern of the individual pueblo reflects this condition. There seems to be little uniformity of plan in sites occupying the sandstone canyons, and these make up the greater proportion of sites in the two larger localities. The pueblo layout in these sites is generally a contiguous single or double row of rooms and storage bins built to take advantage of the sandstone canyon wall as their fourth or back 9k wall. Often annexes or accessory structures are placed upon the cliff wall if space is available and usable. A few sites in the wider and broader valleys and on nearby low ridges exhibit similar layout patterns as defined for the eastern lo calities. The lineal type usually dominates, appearing in all three western localities. The llLM form of pueblo is found in both Kin-li-chee Creek and Lukachukai-Tohotso-Greasewood, while the •'IP1 type is limited to the former only and then in a limited quantity. Construction. In all localities, horizontally laid masonry is by far the most important. Coursed masonry is found at only one site in Black Creek, while vertical slabs set on edge appear in the same area and in Tohatchi-Mexican Springs and Black Creek. Orientation. A southeastern pueblo exposure is the preferred one in all localities except Naslini Wash and Lukachukai-Tohotso- Greasewood: south is the dominate orientation in these two. In all other localities, south ranks second except in Tohatchi-Mexican Springs where east is in second place. In Black Creek, Rio Puerco, and Kin-li- chee Creek, east is in third place for preference. Other orientations which occur, but rarely, is that of southwest, west, north, or north east. Kiva orientation in all areas except Lukachukai-Tohotso-Grease- wood is predominately to the southeast of the pueblos. Kivas are found to the south of the pueblos in Lukachukai-Tohotso-Greasewood. The next two orientations in order of importance, south and east, occur at about half the frequency of the preferred form, southeast, in all areas ex cept Lukachukai-Tohotso-Greasewood. 95 Trash. The mode for rubbish disposal is in the form of local ized trash in all localities except two, Nazlini Wash and Lukachukai- Tohotso-Greasewood. Mounds of cultural debris occur three times as often as the scattered or unlocalized form in Tohatchi-Mexican Springs. The ratio is even higher in Black Creek but reaches its apogee in Rio Puerco where no sites of this period were found with unlocalized rubbish. Trash still occurs in unlocalized sheets over the surface of some sites in all localities, except as noted earlier in the Rio Puerco, but it is of importance only in Nazlini Wash and Lukachukai-Tohotso- Greasewood where it is recorded as occurring fifty percent of the time. The orientation of trash mounds in the eastern localities is predominately southeast with south and east positions appearing about one half as many times as the dominate southeast direction. In these areas single examples of north and northeast orientations are also present. Low mounds of trash in the western localities are to the east, southeast, south and north. In Kin-li-chee Creek the most common alignment is to the southeast followed closely by the eastern arrange ment. Single orientations of southeast and south occur in Nazlini Wash while only the south alignment occurs in Lukachukai-Tohotso- Greasewood. Community Unity. Within the eastern localities similarity of arrangement among the three surface units of the site is always the mode (Table 11). An absence of alignment coincidence never accounts for more than 25 percent of the total, in any one area. The mode of 96 TABLE 11 Period Six - Community Unit Combinations and Their Orientation Irrespective of Specific Direction Same Eastern Localities Western Localities Orientation T-MS BC RP K-l-c NW Li—T—G Pueblo-Kiva-Trash 9 27 28 5 1 0 Pueblo-Kiva 0 0 2 0 1 Pueblo-Trash 3 5 U h 1 1 All Orientations Different k 3 0 6 • 3 0 similarity runs as high as 8? percent in Rio Puerco. Again, as during Period Five, there is more similarity of alignment in regards to partial site units between the pueblo and trash than between pueblo and kiva# The lack of homogeneity in the western localities that is evi dent in the eastern group may be a result of sample size, but the data suggest that the alignment of the three surface units of the site is not the preferred pattern. Only in Kin-li-chee Creek does it nearly equal the most common pattern of complimentary distribution. Here, too, the common line arrangement of pueblo and trash occurs more often than pueblo and kiva. Period Seven Structural Units. In all localities the most common struc tural units are the pueblo and kiva. Sherd areas occur only once in 97 each locality. Pithouses are still found, but only rarely, in Luka- chukai-Tohotso-Greasewood. The total number of kivas equal or exceed the number of pueblos in the eastern localities during this period (Table 12). About 10 to 30 percent of the pueblos occur without kivas. In Rio Puerco and Black Creek, however, there is a high percentage, 20 to 30 percent respectively, of the pueblos which have two or more kivas. The pat tern of a one to one ratio of pueblo to kiva reaches the high per centage of 90 to 90 percent. Two Great Kivas are found during this period, one each in Tohatchi-Mexican Springs and Black Creek. The western localities as a group present a quite different pattern of pueblo-kiva occurrence, although the sample size is rather small. Here, total numbers of kivas may equal but are usually lower than the total number of pueblos. Pueblos without kivas represent from 30 to 85 percent of the sample. The dominate one to one ratio found between pueblos and kivas in the eastern areas is in contrast to the western areas where only 8 to 30 percent of the sites have this ratio. The ratio of one pueblo to two or more kivas occurs from zero to 30 percent of the sites throughout the localities. No Great Kivas that date to this Period were located in the western areas. Size. Small pueblos are by far the most popular size of domestic structures in the east. Medium sized pueblos still are very important in Tohatchi-Mexican Springs where they occur nearly as often 98 TABLE 12 Period Seven - Pueblo-Kiva Ratio Locality Pueblo Kiva 1 Pueblo: 1 Pueblo Great Pueblo Total Total 1 Kiva 2+ Kivas Kiva w/o Kiva Toh.-^Iex. Spr. 23 2U 20 1 1 2 Black Creek 38 38 21 7 .1 10 Rio Puerco lit 16 7 It 0 3 Kin-li-chee Cr. 12 9 It 2 0 6 Nazlini Wash 8 1 1 0 0 7 Luk.-Toh.-Gr. 2 2 1 1 0 0 as the small pueblos. Medium pueblos are more important now in Black Creek than during Period Six and account for about one-third of the sites. In the Rio Puerco, however, medium sized pueblos are no longer as important as they were during the preceding Period. Large pueblos are still of little importance in Tohatchi-Mexican Springs and Black Creek, but account for almost half the sites recorded in Rio Puerco. Unlike those in the previous Period, small and medium pueblos in Period Seven occur equally in Kin-li-chee Creek. Large pueblos are of importance only in Kin-li-chee Creek where they rank just be hind the small pueblos. One large and one small pueblo appear in Lukachukai-Tohots o-Greasewood• Layout. Pueblo layout in the eastern localities shows a great amount of variation. Type I is the most important in all areas except 99 „ in Tohatchi-Mexican Springs where the L type exceeds the former type. The U type become increasingly important in this period, representing from 12 to 20 percent of the sites in the eastern sections. The greatest diversity of pueblo layout is found in Black Creek and Rio Puerco. In these areas types E, F, and T are also found, but never more than twice in each area which is less than one percent of the sample. Pueblo layout Type I is the universal of all patterns and occurs in all of the western localities. This type is of numerical importance only in Kin-li-chee Creek where it is preferred. The B and U types each occur once in Kin-li-chee Creek and Lukachukai- Tohotso-Greasewood respectively. In Nazlini Wash the pueblos share no common layout pattern as nearly all are located in cliff alcoves. This severly restricts their layout to the local conditions of space and floor footing with no two situations much alike. Construction. In all localities the mode of building pueblos is by horizontal masonry. A single occurrence of fine coursed masonry is found in Tohatchi-Mexican Springs. Orientation. The most universally preferred pueblo orienta tions throughout the eastern localities are southeast and south. Only in Tohatchi-Mexican Springs is the southeast alignment preferred greatly over the southern; here also east is the second most desirable orientation. An eastern positioning occurs but rarely in Black Creek and Rio Puerco. In Black Creek a divergence is shown from the patterns outlined above by the occurrence of one northeast and one southwest- -oriented pueblo. 100 Throughout all western localities, south is the most common pueblo orientation. Southeast is the next most important, but never occurs more than 1*0 percent of the time. East and north alignments also occur, but these appear to reflect more the local physiographic situation than any cultural norm with reference to orientation. This appears to be particularly applicable to the latter orientation. Kiva orientation in eastern localities is dominated by south east and south alignments. Usually southeast is more important, but in Rio Puerco a southern orientation is preferred. In Tohatchi- Mexican Springs east is more important than south but remains well below the popularity level of the southeastern orientation. North eastern alignments are of minor importance in Black Greek where one southwestern orientation also occurs. A southern exposure is the only one found in Nazlini Wash and Lukachukai-Tohotso-Greasewood of the western group. In Kin-li-chee Greek the orientation outside the pueblo is always southeast, although kivas occur at least 30 percent of the time within the pueblo itself rather than being separated from it by an open space of informal plaza. Trash. Localized trash in irregular mounds is found throughout the three eastern localities as the preferred form of rubbish disposal. Scattered trash occurs in Black Creek and Rio Puerco but never exceeds JjO percent of the total. The orientation of the localized trash deposits is predomi nantly southeast, with east and south receiving high percentages of occurrence in Tohatchi-Mexican Springs and Black Creek respectively. 101 Trash is also found to the northeast and southwest of pueblos at the low incidence of one instance each in Black Creek, Mounded trash with a southern orientation is the preferred disposal pattern in the western localities except for Naziini Wash where unlocalized trash also occurs frequently. Unlocalized trash occurs only once in the Kin-li-chee Creek, A southeast orientation is found in both Kin-li-chee Creek and Nazlini Wash although it is of importance only in the former area. East is represented by a single occurrence in Kin-li-chee Creek. Community Unity. The concurrence of a similar orientation of the three site units in the three eastern localities exceeds by more than twice the nearest partial site unit grouping with a common orientation (Table 13). TABLE 13 Period Seven - Community Unit Combinations and Orientation Irrespective of Specific Direction Same Eastern Localities Western Localities Orientation T-MS BC RP K-l-c NW L-T-G Pueblo-Kiva-Trash Hi 21 7 3 0 2 Pueblo-Kiva 3 7 ii 0 1 0 Pueblo-Trash 3 8 1 8 U 0 All Orientations Different 3 2 2 1 3 0 102 The pueblo-kiva-trash combination has a similar alignment in over 5)0 percent of the sites in Tohatchi-Mexican Springs, Black Creek, and Bio Puerco. Sites which have a complementary distribution with reference to orientation of the three surface units never account for more than 20 percent in any eastern locality. In Tohatcbi-Mexican Springs and Black Creek, the pueblo-kiva and the pueblo-trash combina tions occur with equal frequency, representing 28 and UO percent of the total in each area, respectively. In Rio Puerco, are two com munity combinations, one a pueblo-kiva orientation, and a second in which there is total diversity. The first occurs with twice the fre quency of the second or varied orientation. In the western localities of Kin-li-chee Creek and Nazlini Wash the pueblo-trash partial site combination with similar orienta tions is the dominant pattern, closely followed by all being dis similar in the latter area. A common alignment between all three surface units is found only in Kin-li-chee Creek and Lukachukai-To- hotso-Greasewood; it occurs at 30 percent of the sites in the former area and is the only type of grouping found in the latter. The pueblo- kiva partial grouping is found only in Nazlini Wash. Here it repre sents 20 percent of the sample, but the sample is very small and per haps not reliable because of its size. The same criticism should apply to the Lukachukai-Tohotso-Greasewood sample. Period Eight As was stated earlier, there are no archaeological remains that could conceivably be relegated to this period. 103 Period Nine Structural Units. Navajo habitational structures in the east ern localities consist of hogan depressions, forked-pole hogans, cribbed log hogans, and masonry hogans. A non-permanent type of shelter for seasonal use may be inferred from the sherd areas which now have no structures present. This non-permanent type of structure is the most frequent type of settlement in the east. Equal occupation of older puebloan structures in cliff alcoves and masonry hogans comes next in terms of importance as habitations. Cribbed log and forked- pole hogans are found only in Black Creek and Rio Puerco in small quantities. Another possible Period Nine structure were several diagonal check dams found in Black Creek. Water would have flowed over these one course rock alignments with little effort, but they appeared to be quite effective to divert the flood water current, with its heavy load of sand and silt, away from a downstream well. In the west, in Kin-li-chee Creek and Nazlini Wash, the Navajo habitations include forked-pole and cribbed-log hogans, possible non permanent seasonal structures, and masonry pueblos built on defensive cliff and butte locations. No Period Nine sites were located in Luka- chukai-Tohotso-Greasewood. The modal residence is the reoccupied puebloan structure, after which the possible non-permanent structures and defensive pueblos are next in importance. Other Navajo structures include isolated storage bins, often located far up the reaches of some side canyon, and stock corrals. ioU Size* Navajo communities in the eastern localities, on the basis of this reconnaissance, tended to be very small in terms of habitational units present. The sites ranged from one to four or more in size, but the norm was nearer the former figure than the latter. Reoccupied pueblos ranged in size from one to 20 or more rooms, but whether all rooms of the large units were occupied at one time by Navajos, cannot be said. A guess would be that they were all occupied at one time. There is no reliable way to judge the size of the possible non-permanent seasonal structures suggested by the sherd areas. Their presence is indicated to complete the community pattern, but their relative importance to the Navajo way-of-life is impossible to assess with the data available here. In the western localities, as in the eastern, the Navajo resi dence pattern tends to be small . Hogans occur as individual units; reoccupied pueblo sites and Navajo-built fortified pueblos have from one to 17 rooms for the former and from four to five rooms for the latter. Storage bins and stock corrals all occur as individual units. Layout. In all localities, eastern and western, there is no uniformity of layout. The habitations and other structures appear to be scattered over the landscape in a rather random manner, with local adjustments being made to take advantage of some natural feature of the environment. Orientation. In every instance where the location of the hogan door could be ascertained the Navajo habitations faced the east. 105 In all other types of residence and structures, orientation was a dependent variable of the natural topography. Trash. The trash deposit pattern in all localities was scat tered in a thin sheet over the whole site. When this mantle of trash was so located, making possible an assignment of plan, the orientation was found to be more a function of the natural topography than a Navajo cultural norm. Only three instances of localized trash were recorded by the reconnaissance. Localized trash never accumulated to the extent that actual mounds were formed. In Rio Puerco trash is found to the east and southwest of the hogan doorway. In Kin-li-chee Creek the same disposal pattern has a southeast alignment. Community Unit. There appear to be no two structures which have a patterned positional relationship in a Navajo community. There is only a hint of some unity between hogans and trash disposal, but whether this is a mere convenience or part of a cultural norm of pat terned behavior, I cannot say. Settlement Pattern As pointed out earlier, settlement pattern is used here to mean the arrangement of communities over the natural landscape and their position within larger social aggregations, if definable. In order to elicit any possible patterning of any area it is first neces sary to consider the extent to which the communities are limited by natural land forms. This is particularly important in the area of the 1961 reconnaissance because of the limited lands available for 106 agriculture • It must also be remembered that it was primarily valley bottoms in which the agriculture was probably practiced, if we use the modern day western pueblo Indian practices as guide lines. The complementary distribution of residences and what is thought to be formal agricultural lands is universal to the area under consideration. The environment inhabited human occupation of the land in pre historic times more than during recent and current years. Successful m o d e m day agriculture, through the use of hybrid seeds, has conquered only slightly the limits imposed by altitude and temperature over those present during prehistoric times. The crucial problem of water is to us today, however, only a matter of economics. To the early farmer, water, when beyond a shallow subsurface depth, was unavailable at any price. He simply had no means to reach the water nor to return it to the surface and to bis fields. Nor was dry land farming on upland slopes available to him if the present day conditions are accurate with reference to the past. The farmer in prehistoric times was limited, even as his present day descendants are, to a great extent, to the cultivation of bottom flood lands and sandy arroyos and those areas where subsurface moisture could be reached by the plants themselves. Of course certain areas, such as Chaco Canyon to the east, appeared to have an extensive irrigation system (Vivian and Mathews 1965: 13-1U) which created an artificial ecological niche in the nat ural environment, but this seems at this writing to be a rather limited development when the region known as the puebloan province as a whole 107 is taken into consideration. While the possibility cannot be ruled out that the evidence for wide scale irrigation has been destroyed by the modern day use of valley bottoms, there is nothing to suggest that prehistoric irrigation had any effect on the development of settlement patterns in the area of the 1961 reconnaissance. The various physiographic locations in which sites are found have been grouped into eight different types. The physical geography is not, however, as simple as the eight types would tend to indicate. These areas summarize the individual local site situations into classes of occurrences as a matter of convenience for this study. They do, however, have a validity on a higher level of generalization. The following typology of the physical geography is used to order the data presented here. Type-A: narrow valley or canyon bot tom locations, sites found away from valley sides. Type B: hillside locations, flanking the valleys, floral cover usually low. Type C: ridge or hilltop locations, low to medium tall floral cover. Type D: low rolling hills or dunes, usually well out in the valley floor. Type E: center of broad valley floor, on relatively flat terrain. Type F: alcove in cliff or at foot of sandstone buttes or bluffs. Type FI: alcove in sheer cliff, off the flat ground. Type F2: com bination of Type F and FI. A summary of the number of site components per Ceramic Period found in each physiographic situation for all localities may be found in Tables ll|-19e The most important single physiographic situation throughout all areas and all time periods is the ridge or hilltop location. In 108 TABLE lit Physiographic Situation of Components by Period for the Tohatchi-Mexican Springs Locality Ceramic Physiographic Situation Period A BC D E TOTAL 1 0 0 6 0 1 7 2 3 3 2lt 12 0 lt2 3 0 0 2 3 0 5 It 1 1 6 6 0 lit 5 1 6 18 28 1 5U 6 0 0 8 8 0 16 7 0 0 6 18 0 2lt 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 9 0 0 1 1 0 2 TOTAL 5 10 71 76 2 l61t TABLE 15 Physiographic Situation of Components by Period for the Black Creek Locality Ceramic Physiographic Situation Period A B C D E F FI F2 TOTAL 1 0 0 15 0 0 2 0 0 17 2 0 0 35 0 1 3 0 0 39 3 0 1 11 0 3 5 0 0 20 It 0 1 15 o 1 1 0 0 18 * 0 n Ut2 1 22 13 o 0 189 6 0 U U3 0 5 3 0 0 55 7 0 2 31 1 5 2 0 0 Iti 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9 2 It 2 2 i 5 o 0 16 TOTAL 2 23 29U It 38 3U 0 0 395 109 TABLE 16 Physiographic Situation of Components by Period for the Rio Puerco Locality Ceramic Physiographic Situation Period A B C DE F FI F2 TOTAL 1 0 2 8 0 0 0 0 0 10 2 0 a 2a 0 1 0 0 0 29 3 0 i 6 0 2 0 0 0 9 a 0 i 10 0 1 1 0 0 13 5 0 3 91 1 a 2 0 0 101 6 0 3 27 0 3 0 0 0 33 7 0 0 8 2 2 0 0 0 12 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 2 TOTAL 0 ia 176 3 13 3 0 0 209 TABLE 17 Physiographic Situation of Components by Period for the Kin-li-chee Creek Locality Ceramic Physiographic Situation Period A B C D E FFI F2 TOTAL 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 2 2 0 0 22 0 0 0 0 0 22 3 0 0 11 0 0 2 1 1 15 a 0 0 6 0 0 1 1 1 9 5 0 0 3 0 0 1 1 2 7 6 0 0 9 0 0 0 5 3 21 7 0 0 a 0 0 a 0 a 12 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9 0 0 0 0 . 1 0 3 0 a TOTAL 0 0 56 0 1 13 11 11 92 110 TABLE 18 Physiographic Situation of Components by Period for the Nazlini Wash Locality Ceramic Physiographic Situation Period A B c DE F FI F2 TOTAL 1 0 0 3 0 0 7 2 0 12 2 0 0 7 0 0 1 1 0 9 3 0 0 u 0 0 6 3 1 1U U 0 0 h 0 0 k 2 0 10 5 0 0 0 0 0 6 0 1 7 6 0 0 1 0 0 2 2 1 6 7 0 0 1 0 0 h U 0 9 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9 0 0 1 0 0 7 9 0 17 TOTAL 0 0 21 0 0 37 23 3 81t TABLE 19 Physiographic Situation of Components by Period for the Lukachukai-Tohotso-Greasewood Locality Ceramic Physiographic Situation Period C TOTAL 1 2 2 2 0 0 3 1 1 1 li 3 3 5 2 2 6 3 3 7 3 3 8 0 0 9 0 0 TOTAL lit lit Ill Tohatchi-Mexican Springs the type D is more important than type C location, although only slightly more so. Also in Nazlini Wash, type 0 situations are less important than F and FI. The very fact that type C is but slightly surpassed in only two localities and is the mode in four others indicates the desirability of such residence lo cations. The 100 percent occurrence of components in type C situa tions in Lukachukai-Tohotso-Greasewood is the direct result of sampling procedure, it being the only physiographic situation in which the recon naissance was made. Trends through time in a shifting of residential preference are surprisingly absent in all areas. Consequently the eastern and western localities, as separate units, do not differ much. In the eastern localities from early to late there is a prefer ence for ridge or hilltop locations for habitations. In Tohatchi- Mexican Springs this preference alternates almost by period with a preference for a location on low rolling hills well out into the valley. In Black Creek and Rio Puerco, there appears to be more diversity throughout the sequence than found in most areas, but the preferred location of residence in both areas is the type C or ridge or hilltop location* While the ridge or hilltop residence pattern is also the most important one in the western localities, the frequent use of cliff- associated habitations diows a close adjustment to the rugged canyons through which all perennial streams flow. The cliff location or type FI is of importance in the Nazlini Wash throughout the total sequence. 112 It becomes even more important in Period Six and Seven. Finally it is the preferred location of habitations during Period Nine. In Kin-li-chee Creek the cliff types of location, F, FI, and F2, are most important during Periods Three through Seven. It is interesting that no Period Nine sites were found in this residence location, while the cliff type location is the popular pattern in nearby Naziini Wash. This may perhaps be explained by the deeper canyons and generally more rugged nature of Nazlini Wash. In summary there appears to be little change from period to period in site locations during prehistoric times, except in Nazlini Wash where a complete retreat to the canyons during Period Five began a trend which continued to increase in importance until Period Nine. Throughout the rest of the localities, both western and eastern, resi dential location preferences established during Period One continued with only temporary local shifts through time to Period Nine. The diversity of site physiographic location from period to period may be explained by demographic adjustments to the availability of land, both farming and residential. ° As we have seen, the prehistoric adjustment of communities to the physical environment has suggested little as to their arrangement into larger social aggregates. It would be unrealistic to expect such complex and sophisticated systems to be induced only from data col lected during reconnaissance. It might be possible with better con trolled data to establish extra-community alliances or social group ings, on the basis of the special and numerical relationships of the 113 communities to limited religious structures such as the Great Kivas. A preliminary analysis of the Great Kivas and relation both spacially and chronologically to the known communities resulted in no recognizable patterns suggestive of a social organization larger than that of the community to which the Great Kiva was obviously an integral unit. Population Estimates of the prehistoric population of the southeastern portion of the Navajo Indian Reservation may be approached from sev eral points of view. There has been to date no one method for ar riving at past population statistics which has satisfied most histor ians as being completely reliable. The long-standing controversy over the size of the aboriginal population of the Americas at the time of the arrival of Columbus is well known. Widely varying popu lation figures have been proposed by many historians, using a variety of different means for arriving at their respective figures for the New World. First hand observers have left accounts and have been roundly attacked by later workers for having one or more biases which affected their judgment (Robertson 1777). Schemes using archaeological material (Colton I960, DeHarport 1959, Dittert, Hester and Eddy 1961, Pierson 1959, Schwartz 1956, Spinden 1929, Turner and Lofgren 1966), studies of climate, resources, and technology (Sapper 192b, Kroeber 1939), and a new approach of the statistical treatment of fiscal and missionary reports (Cook and Simpson 19b8, Borah and Cook i960 and 1963, Cook lilt and Borah i960) have all aimed at establishing demographic patterns and figures in the New World. As late as 196it Borah (I96U: 379) complained that 11. . . a s yet there are too few studies for well-based generalizations covering large portions of the planet." She also suggested that she was limited to conjectures concerning the form of probable New World demographic patterns. Valid generalizations can be made only when based on secure preliminary studies at the local level. My interest here is to out line a methodology for archaeological materials which may allow one to arrive at perhaps more secure population figures than has been possible previously. At least an attempt has been made to outline what appears to be the minimal steps necessary to establish a pre historic population figure. Here one will want to suggest perhaps, that to expect to obtain a representative archaeological sample, to control the many dependent and independent variables, and to find a genetically re lated ethnographic analogy necessary to arrive at valid demographic figures, results from sheer naivety. Indeed to talk of actual numbers of persons at some remote time in the past may require an ideal situ ation which in fact may never be available. However, the outlining of the basic requisites necessary to postulate prehistoric population figures induces an element of caution, formulates an ideal to which we can strive, and establishes guide lines from which we may con tinually orientate ourselves when confronted with this particular problem. 115 In further considering the kind of data available we find they fall along a graded continuum. Ideally one would want to use only excavated sites for one's basic data. The identification of basic family residence patterns may be derived from excavated sites where inter-room routes of communication, storage facilities, and living areas (both indoors and out-of-doors) are definable. With this quality of data one would be dealing with a complete universe and feel confident of the reproducibility of the results of the analysis and the inferences derived from it. The cost of insisting upon this quality of data as a prerequisite to population studies on a scale larger than a single site is appaling, however, and could never be seriously suggested as a necessary condition prior to initiating such studies. The other extreme is, of course, the complete reliance upon data collected through reconnaissance only where no excavation was undertaken. What the realist would accept as adequate data would be per haps that in which the cultural-historical continuum was well docu mented by excavated sites. One would expect at least one site in each phase although more would be desirable. With the excavated sites to aid in the chronological control and community patterning, the reconnaissance-collected data might be added to give further perspec tive. Upon all of this a quite reliable prehistoric demographic study could be attempted. As will be explained later (for the use of this particular set of data) the methodology outlined here for population estimation cannot be fruitfully followed to its logical conclusion. It is hoped, however. 116 -that by outlining the complete process of analysis, others with better controlled data may successfully utilize it* It will become apparent that it is not necessary to complete the whole methodological procedure to benefit from it. It can be shown that figures derived at each step have a certain internal validity and express proportional relation ships which may be handily utilized in the interpretation and synthesis of the cultural history of the area under consideration. Important features of this methodology are the different kinds of inferences that are possible from the figures derived for each step in the procedure and the comparison of the products of the various steps. What I will try to do here is to briefly outline the method ology I have developed concerning the basic steps presented by Colton (1936) and point out some possible sources of error. To aid in clari fying this methodology, a hypothetical Southwestern study will be pre sented. Only after this rather long and roundabout introduction will the 1961 reconnaissance data be presented. Methodology There appear to be at least five procedural steps in the com plete process of defining a human population in terms of actual numbers at any one point during prehistoric times. The first step in this methodology is to order the archaeolo gical material chronologically and compute the total number of sites or components per chronological period. Here a need for a series of phases or other cultural units with an absolute chronology is manda tory. Besides providing a basic chronological framework to be used 117 through all following steps, it would be impossible later on in the analysis to establish generations if the phase duration was unknown. Second, the average community or component size must be com puted in number of rooms and then multiplied by the number of occur rences to obtain the total structural population or the total number of rooms per chronological unit. Third, the structural population must be divided by the number of generations, from 20 to 25 years each, which will fit within the chronological unit. Fourth, the mean number of rooms occupied by a nuclear family must be established and then divided into the generational population to obtain the number of fam ilies per generation. The fifth and last step in the calculation of a prehistoric population is the multiplication of the average nuclear family size by the number of families per generation. Possible Sources of Error Any archaeological study is dependent upon the quality and quantity of data available. Quite naturally the lack of a represen tative sample will adversely affect any study undertaken. Certain physical factors of preservation or natural concealment such as ero sion, falling talus, or seasonal plant growth will affect any archae ological study and therefore need not detain us here. That is not to say that these problems are of any less importance, but only that they are common to any archaeological situation and are ones which every worker should have in mind before beginning the initial field work. Of immediate interest here are the possible sources of error which are related to the study of prehistoric populations. In 118 following the methodology just presented we find that the errors be come more significant as we advance step by step. Errors compound themselves, for as one deals with smaller and smaller units, the magni tude of error is even greater. The various factors affecting step one limit a demographic study to some point in time after which considerable work has been done in the area under consideration and the characteristics of these factors are known. Valid phases can be established only after exten sive work has been accomplished. The magnitude of the errors possible from an ill conceived or premature chronological sequence is only too obvious. A population study, then, may be safely pursued when the individual worker is satisfied that his chronology is firmly anchored at several points throughout the continuum. The length of the phase will naturally affect the number of sites that occur in it; for purposes of demographic studies one might want to argue for phases of equal temporal length, if only for the ease of handling the data. The relationships, if verifiable, should show the same pattern trends. All practical problems of field observation are brought to bear when the second step of the procedure is reached. The community size assessment depends on the extent to which the community may be observed and herein impinge all the vagaries of preservation, as out lined earlier. Certain cultures have adjusted to special environmental con ditions in such ways that their community pattern may be particularly difficult if not impossible to define. Adaptations to an ecological 119 situation characterized by a mild and regular climate but rather limited resources, might result in little or no visible evidence of either domestic or ceremonial structural units if they were present. Present day groups such as the Digger Indians of California, Yumans of Arizona, the Australian Aborigine, and the African Bushman have community patterns which would not last even a few centuries. More often these groups use naturally-occurring shelters and naturally delimited areas with little or no modification for either secular or sacred functions, increasing the problem of community pattern defi nition. In areas such as those occupied by the above peoples, the error of calculation on archaeological evidence alone would result in an underestimation of the total population through time. Conceiv ably, the reverse could be true. In areas where preservation was excellent and a group or groups practiced a seasonal shifting type of economy resulting in two or more communities per year, a larger popu lation than was actually present would be indicated. The number of times the group moved would also be significant. This would become even more problematical if the group returned to use roughly the same area again and again over a period of years. A special problem that arises at this point is the possibility of multistoried structures in which the upper stories are no longer standing. A relatively low frequency of unrecognized multistoried communities could result in an error considerably underestimating the past population. This is a very real problem, particularly in the P 120 Southwest. There appears to be no way beyond excavation to settle this matter. In considering an earlier time period when pithouses were the preferred domestic structures, the possibility of underestimating the population becomes even more likely because of the difficulty with which these sites are usually detected. Not only do they occur com pletely covered over so as to leave no trace, but when visible they may be confused with kivas of nearby pueblo sites. On an early time level the division between pithouses and kivas is not entirely clear even when excavated, as witnessed by the evidence at Alkalai Ridge (Brew 19U6). This is another very real problem in the Southwest. Later, when architectural patterns become better established and domestic and religious structures begin to take on their respective different and characteristic features, the situation is no longer critical. It indicates, however, that there is an inherent weakness in the study of prehistoric demography during the time span of the pithouse to pueblo transition in the Southwest. So far, in discussing possible problems involved in demographic studies, we have considered primarily complications of a physical or environmental nature. In step three we encounter factors from another source, that is, from the society itself. The product of step three results from the division of the number of generations per chronolo gical period, into the community population or all the structural units present for each chronological period. The problem here is of course the definition of the average generation length. 121 Social mores establish the ideal age limits on marriage, and this, indeed, varies from group to group and area to area. It un doubtedly has varied from one time period to another and consequently the same standard generational values may not be applicable over a long period of time. The people in one area may change territories for reasons of warfare, climatic changes, or internal social causes. A group may change through acculturation. The end result of all this change may be a longer or shorter generational length than before. Any one of the above factors may change the actual population, of course, but here I am concerned with a possible secondary effect which may be just as important in the long run as an actual population increase or decrease. The length of the generation to be used as a standard should be obtained by ethnographic analogy. Naturally if related or descend ant peoples are still living in the area under consideration so much the better. Even though it would not be expected that the generational standard would be less than If? years or exceed 30 years among even radically different peoples, this is still an error of one third. While it would not affect the general overall relationship of the population fluxuations, it would give rise to some very misleading demographic totals. Both social and economic factors become most important in the fourth step of this methodology as one attempts to establish the average number of rooms used by a basic family. The term basic family is used here to include both the nuclear and some type of extended family. 122 The social organization of any group is interrelated with its residence requirements, and may change either gradually by accultura tion or dramatically by pressure from hostile peoples or a rapidly changing ecology. These are potential factors which may affect the structural unit ratio per family. In more complex societies, class or status may affect the ratio of rooms utilized by a family. The wealthy may occupy a great many more rooms than the poor, and certainly slaves would be quartered in a minimum amount of space. Another com plicating situation would be the presence of a system such as the Aztecs used in quartering young boys in special dormitories during certain periods of their lives for educational purposes. While these examples seem to be a far cry from known South western ethnographic patterns, it is possible that similar situations in a diluted form might be present. In view of the Southwest’s cul tural debt to Mesearnerica, this might affect any demographic study and should be taken into consideration. The residence unit ratio probably will change from area to area as climate restricts or permits the use of outside areas such as ramadas, patios, and roof tops as integral parts of the basic family domestic structural unit. Therefore, not only must attention be paid to the present climate, but considerable effort must be made to dis cover if the climate changed through time. The climate for each phase is an ideal goal. The vital point in the fifth step is defining the size of the basic family. If possible, ethnographic analogy should be used, and 123 while the most reliable source would be descendant peoples, as stated earlier, it is not an absolute necessity. For instance, if no direct historical connection between peoples of the ethnographic present and the prehistoric cultures concerned can be established, one may turn to the ethnography of peoples occupying a similar environmental situation somewhere else in the world. For example, demographic and social adjustments of the Australian Aborigine may be applicable to the pre historic situation in the Great Basin of the western United States. As already discussed under step four, the residence pattern may be the nuclear family or some variation of the extended family. Here social patterns or mechanisms of social control affecting marriage and residence are all-important in the demography of any peoples, pre historic or present. A clear understanding of these factors as they function in the society used as an analogy may help to eliminate errors in postulating the size of a prehistoric basic family and possibly give rise to inferences concerning heretofore unexplainable sets of data. Hypothetical Example This exercise will concern itself with a hypothetical study of a small region of indefinite size somewhere within the puebloan cultural area of the Southwestern United States. The archaeological data used will be considered to have been gathered both by excavation and reconnaissance, excavation to give detail, and reconnaissance to add a wider geographical perspective. To begin with, we find that some prior study has been accom plished: the chronology has been developed and each site (or in the 12U case of multi-phase sites, each component) has received a phase desig nation. In step one we select a particular phase and find that there are 10 sites or components hereafter called communities that pertain to this phase. Our data for step two indicate that all communities have 100 rooms. Multiplying community size by the number of communi ties, 10, we find the total structural units for the phase is 1000 rooms. After having established the generation length at 20 years through ethnographic analogy, and knowing the phase to be 100 years long, we find in step three that this phase contains five generations. This, divided into 1000 structural units, gives a maximum of 200 structural units occupiable during any one generation. Step three is based on the assumption of a stable population. Research in step four leads us to believe that the basic family in the puebloan Southwest occupies three rooms (Steward 1937). The division of three into 200, the maximum structural units per generation, gives a figure of 66 2/3 or 6? families per generation during this phase. Applicable to step four is the estimate that five individuals per family is an average among these people (Steward 1937). Step five consists in multiplying the number of families by the average size of family, with the result of a total population figure of 335 people per generation during this phase. Phase totals may then be computed by multiplying the latter by the number of generations present, in this case 5. I have chosen to ignore this last step here. 125 The final population figure represents a controlled estimate of the basic or resident human population. I suggest that data col lected by reconnaissance alone are not indicative of rapid and drastic changes in population due to catastrophic events such as drought, con quest, slave raiding, or decimation by a newly introduced disease, except where these were final and complete* This formula, then, is one which may be most effectively used when these dramatic events are not thought to have affected a steady and regular rate of cultural change* 1961 Reconnaissance Demographic Data Population estimates based on data collected by reconnaissance alone should be considered tentative because of the severe limitation imposed by this method. At best only a tentative estimate of the size of a particular site or community may be attempted. However, wall alignments and abutments when present on open sites aid significantly in this estimation. When the complete village remains available for observation, as is often the case in the larger sandstone canyon rock- shelters, an absolute community size may be given. The data presented here represent a combination of all stages of preservation. All data are not based on absolute room counts of cliff dwellings, nor are they based on a wholly arbitrary assessment of the size of completely buried villages. From the data collected in 1961 the number of components per chronological period may be derived, an average of village size com puted, and the product of these first two steps established. However, there seems little point in going through the third step of defining 126 the structural average by generation, beyond the above hypothetical situation, for the increased possibilities of error outweigh the re sults gained. It is at this last methodological point that I have stopped with the demographic study of these data. Without excavated data, going beyond this point progressively through the steps just outlined above, each with its new sources for error, could only lead to disaster. Not only would the results be unreliable, but for the unsuspecting they might suggest an order of confidence which could not be justified. The results of this study are presented in Figures 7 and 8. Each of these figures illustrates one step in the methodology outlined above, and presents the fluctuation in population within "their inherent limitations through time and by locality. Their maximum utility is reached, however, by the comparison of both together. This is a higher order of abstraction and will be discussed later. Our first concern is the graphic portrayal of absolute com ponent counts found in Figure 7 and the interpretation of its patterns. For every locality the occurrence of each ceramic period component at a site has been plotted, at the mid-point of the corresponding ceramic period, along a line parallel to the ordinate of the chart so that the total is in balance on this line. Lines drawn from mid-point to mid point graphically indicate inter-period oscillations of population. Perhaps it is well to remind the reader that "population" as used here does not refer to actual numbers of people but only to their presence or absence as a group of unknown size and represented only by the ceramic evidence for a component at a site. 127 As can be seen in Figure 7, within the three eastern localities a remarkably similar pattern developed through time. Prior to Period One it is hazardous to suggest the nature of the population. The dra matic fluctuations to be noted between Periods Two and Three and the absence of a general trend through time make speculations unsound beyond the limits of the data. During Period Two, in all three eastern localities, sites are much more numerous than before, only to become less abundant during Period Three. A gradual increase in component frequency during Period Four foreshadows the almost unbelievable popu lation explosion in Period Five. Period Six presents a picture of considerable reduction over the former Period, but there is still a considerable population. During Period Seven there is a continued re duction which ends abruptly at the beginning of Period Eight in all except Tohatchi-Mexican Springs. In this latter locality, site fre quency increases over that for the proceeding period, also to end abruptly at the beginning of Period Eight. A gap of about 200 years separates the disappearance of puebloan peoples from this area and the appearance of Navajos during Period Nine. In the eastern localities, Navajos are most numerous in Black Creek; their entrance into all three localities begins an expansion of population which has continued almost unchanged to this very day. The overall population patterning in Tohatchi-Mexican Springs shows less abrupt oscillation through time than in Black Creek and Rio Puerco. This suggests perhaps, that the populations throughout all periods used to a greater degree the potentialities of the former area than did the people of the latter two regions. 128 Among the western localities there is less uniformity of popu lation patterning through time than in the eastern areas, but there are also similarities in the patterns. The correspondences within the Western sections produce a patterning markedly different from that found for the eastern localities. The Lukachukai-Tohotso-Greasewood sample is so small that it can hardly be expected to represent reliably the population changes in that area, and therefore need not concern us here. It is presented on the chart solely to maintain uniformity. The changes manifested by Kin-li-chee Creek were always one period earlier and they are more pronounced than in Nazlini Wash. The increase of site frequency in Period Two over Period One seen in Kin-li-chee Creek does not appear in Nazlini Wash until Period Three. The general trend toward fewer sites in Kin-li-chee Creek during Periods Three, Four and Five is paralleled by a similar pattern in Nazlini Wash, but here it is found in Periods Four, Five, and Six. The sudden burst of population during Period Six in Kin-li-chee Creek is reflected in a general trend of increasing frequency of sites to a maximum in Period Seven in Nazlini Wash. The end of Period Seven is also the end of the Puebloan tradition in these two localities. These areas appear to have been uninhabited until the arrival of the Navajo which is rather arbitrarily set at A.D. IJjOO. The Navajo population in Nazlini Wash shows the highest frequency found in any of the six localities. The western localities mirror in a general way the major fluc tuation present in the population patterns of the eastern localities, although there is a delay of from one to two hundred years as one moves 129 west and north of the Defiance Plateau. The change of site frequency between different periods in the Western localities is relatively minor, however, when compared to those of the eastern localities. It appears that from the very beginning the population of the western localities extended almost to the limits of the environment potenti alities. This statement appears to be more applicable to the Nazlini Wash than the Kin-li-chee Creek, although I feel it is just a matter of degree rather than a significant difference between the two areas. A description of the population or site frequency has just been presented which suggests that a certain chain of events has followed and that this represents a relatively accurate picture of the expansion and contraction of the human population. However, nothing has been presented to suggest that while the sites themselves became more or less numerous, depending on the locality and period involved, the actual site size may have increased or decreased. This factor could conceivably outweigh any change were it sufficiently large and in an inverse relationship. That is, sites might become more numerous but so much smaller than before that there were actually fewer total rooms available for living. Or the reverse could happen, where sites become much less frequent, but of such size individually that there would be much more total living area available than before. It is of no small interest, then, to see that in the 1961 sample where site size has been taken into consideration there is no significant difference over the patterns developed solely on frequency (Fig. 8). This graph illustrates quite effectively that when compared 130 with Figure 7 the ratio of site size to site frequency did not change very much in any area during any period. Sizes of villages remained roughly the same throughout all periods within each locality, except in Kin-li-chee Creek; where pueblos became so large that this was more important than a decrease in absolute numbers of sites. The only other change in village size through time is seen in Black Creek during Period Four; here it is only a change toward slightly larger pueblos than before. When considering the results of steps one and two of the methodology (as presented in Figures 7 and 8) on a higher level of abstraction, we have confirmation of the demographic patterns that each individually represents, for they are the same. Not only does it give us more confidence in our patterns but also it suggests that we are dealing with a phenomenon which represents the shifts and fluctu ations of actual human populations. It is not inconceivable that with a sufficient increase of wealth a prehistoric group might also increase their structural unit ratio while the basic family remained the same or even diminished. If this possibility occurred, then certainly our site size would not reflect actual human population changes but rather the groups affluence. We, of course, would be unable to ascertain this from the date available here. There is, however, little reason to believe that in the prehistoric Southwest human groups had such a command over their subsistence base to allow for this degree of wealth to accumulate. As a matter of fact, the opposite appears to be true. 131 The development in the Southwest in a rather severe ecological situation, was possible only because of the acceptance and elaboration of an agricultural system based primarily on corn. While it did allow for such a sophisticated accomplishment as compacted communal dwelling, it did not permit extensive craft specialization nor an elaborate full time religious or secular hierarchy. I think one must conclude that whether or not the figures for the 1961 reconnaissance are exact is of little importance; what is im portant is the reproducibility which tends to confirm the patterns obtained. While the details may not be exactly correct, the overall view certainly does seem to be. It is, after all, the patterns which illustrate most graphi cally the fluctuations from period to period and which give rise to inferences suggestive of working hypotheses to explain the differences found. External Relationships Although a conscious effort was made to locate materials in dicative of an early pre-ceramic occupation of the survey area, none was found. Early Han remains are known to occur in the lower and more broadly developed valleys further to the south and west (Bartlett 19^2), (Bretemitz 1957, and Martin, et al 1962), but to date no known com plex has been identified in the area of the 1961 survey. The lack of evidence suggests that pre-ceramic hunting and gathering groups did not occupy this section. Utilization of the area was not intensive enough to have left much evidence. Perhaps because of its higher 132 altitude it was rather marginal and, therefore, less attractive to early hunters and gatherers. Ceramics Plain Brown and Plain Gray Ware Unfired clay container fragments have been found at two sites, as was pointed out earlier, suggesting that an occupation of the area by Basketmaker II peoples may have been an actuality. Similar unfired clay vessels are known to occur in the material culture assemblage for Basketmaker II in the Prayer Rock area only a few miles to the north (Morris 1959) and in the Navajo Reservoir district to the northeast during the Los Pinos Phase (Eddy 1961: 12). It seems unlikely that the unfired clay containers found in the area under consideration might not represent beginnings of ceramics, even though the data collected during 1961 are inconclusive. Surely it is recognized that the unfired clay vessels could have been products of haste, lack of interest, or simply inexperience at any point in time, and therefore need not necessarily represent a primitive beginning of pottery making. Plain brown pottery, in association with Lino Gray, has been reported from several sites in the Rio Puerco, at one site near Lupton (Wasley i960: 33-5) and at several sites in the Petrified Forest area (Wendorf 1953: 19). Wasley (i960: 3U-5) has commented on the range of strong Mogollon influence indicated, among other things, by plain brown pottery. He suggests that the Rio Puerco was a frontier area where Mogollon and Anasazi peoples lived side by side in an essentially peaceful atmosphere. 133 In the 1961 survey, sites with plain brown ware are most fre quent in Rio Puerco, Black Creek, and Nazlini Wash. This ceramic trait is not found in the other three areas. The diminishing pattern from south to north agrees with Wasley*s hypothesis of a southern origin for this pottery. Where along this pottery continuum will be found the change from multi-ethnic sites to uni-ethnic sites with a high level of cultural borrowing? This is an important historical question, but one which cannot be answered here. Nor can the 1961 survey data shed any light on the appearance of seemingly isolated pure brown ware sites, which may be coequal in time to sites with pure gray ware assemblages (Olson and Wasley 1956: 55-6). The occurrence of pure brown ware sites at an earlier time period (Eddy 1961) further north only complicates the picture. Pigment Type Frontier in Puebloan Black-on-White Pottery As originally defined by Hawley (1929) and later checked and restated by Roberts (1935), then expanded by Abel (1955: 2), organic pigment is found in a large area stretching from the San Juan and the Colorado Rivers southward to the Mogollon Rim in Arizona. Its dis tribution includes a small "island" just west of the Continental Divide and south of the Jan Juan, along the drainages of the Gobernador and Largo Rivers. The distribution continues north of the Colorado and west of its junction with the Jan Juan to include the Arizona Strip, southwestern Utah, and southern Nevada. The occurrence of organic pigment painted pottery in isolated areas in New Mexico, on the Pajarito Plateau and around Mt. Taylor, x ■ 13U has been suggested as evidence of Mersa Verde colonists or influences (Hera 1935)• Inorganic pigment on the other hand is limited to the eastern San Juan, Little Colorado, Rio Grande, and the Himbres districts. The evidence (see Table 3) suggests that the boundary between these two pottery paint types coincides with the Defiance Plateau. The whole picture, however, is not as simple as that. The boundary does not appear until Period Two, and then only in a limited fashion. Inorganic pigment is found in all localities except the northernmost - the Lukachukai-Tohotso-Greasewood. Inorganic pigment appears first in all localities or is accompanied by organic pigment at a lower fre quency. In the eastern localities there is no organic pigment until Ceramic Period Four, except for a single site intrusion in the Rio Puerco during Period Three. Organic pigment increases in popularity through time in the west at the expense of inorganic pigment, and late in the sequence replaces it entirely, except in Kin-li-chee Creek - the western locality closest to the eastern districts. Organic pigment begins to appear in Ceramic Period Four in T oh atchi-Mexic an Springs and Black Creek, beginning a trend toward higher frequencies which ends only with the abandonment of the area. The low frequencies of organic pigment do not suggest an actual mi gration or movement of peoples into these localities, but they do suggest that there was more and more contact through time. Except for the Period Three influx of pottery with organic pigment paint in the Rio Puerco, already suggested as a special cir cumstance, this paint type is always rare. What little does appear 135> - undoubtedly came by trade from the west or north over the Defiance Plateau, which in this area is a low and ineffective natural barrier. Red Wares The 'White Mountain Red Wares are by far the most important in the entire area. The three eastern localities in which types of this series reach their highest frequency coincide closely with the area of highest concentration as defined by Carlson (1961). Undoubtedly, here we are dealing with locally made pottery, not trade ware. The Kin-li-chee Creek shares with the eastern localities the occurrence of rather significant quantities of this ware; this area is completely out of harmony with the other western localities in this respect. The quantities present suggest that the ware was probably locally made in Kin-li-chee Creek. In Tohatchi-Mexican Springs Wingate Polychrome is more frequent than St. Johns Polychrome, a complete reversal of the situation found in the other three localities in which both of these types occur. The few sherds of Wingate Slack-on-red and St. Johns Polychrome found in Nazlini Wash and Lukachukai-Tohotso-Greasewood must be the result of trade with the Kin-li-chee Creek peoples. While it is admittedly of low frequency the presence of La Plata HLack-on-red in Tohatchi-Mexican Springs parallels a situation which was pointed up by the appearance of organic painted pottery in Period Four. This situation suggests a cultural contact to the north. The San Juan area is the most likely origin of this new influence. 136 Orange Ware The Tsegi Orange Ware illustrates a neat, logical, and reason able pattern in the adoption of trade goods. The Rio Puerco and Black Greek received Klageto Black-on-white, Kintiel Black-on-orange, and Klageto Polychrome, while the Nazlini Wash and Kin-li-chee Creek received Medicine Black-on-red, Tusayan Black-on- red, Tusayan Polychrome, Kiet Siel Polychrome, Citadel Polychrome, and Deadmans Black-on-red. In view of this rather neat bipolar distri bution of types, it seems a foregone conclusion that the western lo calities were in contact with the Tsegi-Marsh Pass area, while the eastern localities traded with an area much further to the south. Perhaps the present-day community of Klageto, not many miles to the west of the two eastern localities, represents the center of the source area for the Orange Ware trade. Historic Puebloan and Navajo Pottery Based on the description and definition offered by Brugge (1963), Navajo pottery collected during the 1961 reconnaissance should be called Pinyon Utility. The universal occurrence of this type in all localities during Period Nine is as should be expected. This area lies within the boundaries Brugge (1963: 12) defined for the range of Pinyon Utility, except for its presence in Tohatchi-Mexican Springs. It seems likely that a portion of Navajo cooking pottery found outside the Pinyon Utility geographic range is in reality Brugge’s (1963: 8-10) Navajo Utility type; if this is the case, the data here would then be consistent with the published geographical distribution. 137 The high frequency of Navajo Utility in Slack Creek and Nazlini Wash is undoubtedly due to the higher frequency in those two areas of large sandstone rock shelters. Quite naturally, a basically pastoral people with a long history of extreme tribal mobility would take advantage of any natural shelter that might be present. The Navajos had these characteristics and undoubtedly such factors have affected the sample. The fact that Gobernador Polychrome is found only in these same two localities emphasizes, perhaps, the intensity to which these shelters were occupied. The distribution of Gobernador Polychrome suggests no significant historical pattern. The distribution of Hopi and Zuni-Acoma pottery in Period Nine sites illustrates again the common rule. Trade is conducted more fre quently between groups in close proximity than between groups more distantly located. The Hopi types are most prevalent in the Western localities, while the Zuni-Acoma types are almost entirely limited to the eastern localities. While the Defiance Plateau appears to be a boundary between the southeastern and western traditions of Navajo- Puebloan trade, it seems unlikely that it was an effective barrier to this trade. The complementary distribution of Puebloan pottery probably is due primarily to convenience. Community Pattern Since reconnaissance data do not afford a rich and detailed description of the community pattern, any comparison of them with the literature— primarily excavated material— is necessarily brief. The problem is one of trying to compare two groups of data of differing 138 qualities. This results in a slighting of the literature by the very lack of concrete details in the survey-collected data. A more general scheme than either phases or ceramic periods will be used here to compare the community pattern of all localities to adjacent areas as they are known in the literature. The use of ceramic periods has yielded a finer time division than is possible on the basis of architecture and its cultural system— the community pattern. The differences in community pattern between certain ceramic periods are few. Where this is the case, related ceramic periods will be compared as a unit. The Pecos cultural classification has been the most universally used construct for comparing archaeological data in the Puebloan culture area, and it is within that scheme that community pattern interrelationships will be viewed. Periods One and Two These two periods are the rough equivalent of the Basketmaker III stage of the Pecos system, the earliest for which we have community pattern data. This writer feels that Period Two lasts 50 years longer than the often-accepted ending date of A.D. 700 for Basketmaker III. Structural Units. Throughout the Puebloan area pithouses, sur face storage units, and cists are the most important elements in the community pattern during Basketmaker III (Rouse 1962: 38; McGregor 196^: 207-10). The lack of evidence of pithouses in the sample from Kin-li-chee Creek may be attributed to limited sample size. Surface storage units are lacking in Kin-li-chee Creek and Lukachukai-Tohotso- Greasewood, and this may also be attributed to the small sample. There 139 are fewer cists in Nazlini Wash and Lukachukai-Tohotso-Greasewood during Period Two than earlier. Sample size explains the lack of occurrence in the latter locality, but not in the former. Size. The actual number of domestic living units varies widely during Basketmaker III from one (Wasley I960, Fig. 2) to eighteen (Roberts 1929: 10), with even larger communities known. Juniper Cove, dug by Byron Cummings in 1912 (Turner 1962: 2), but never published, is reported to have over 100 units. The community size in the eastern localities during Period One has a mode from three to four units. While the mode in Period Two shifted slightly from four to six units, there are larger sites containing as many as 20 units. In the western localities there is a reduction in site size during Period Two. Layout. A lineal community organization is the preferred pattern in the areas adjoining the 1961 localities at this stage of development. In all sections of the reconnaissance, the modal layout is lineal. Naturally, larger sites do not show the neat, uncompli cated pattern exhibited by the small sites, but in general they too tend to show a lineal arrangement of the community. Orientation. Data in the literature are weak on this point, but Reed (1956: 11) says that 11 (l) storage cists, (2) pithouses, and (3) refuse area— generally arranged, in that order, /are/ usually on an approximately northwest-southeast axis, though irregular and scat tered." While we have seen that there is much more variation in the community pattern orientation in the localities of the 1961 survey than Reed * s statement suggests, my data support a summazy comment by lUo him on the same page, "that the difference conspicuous in later pe riods, is foreshadowed in early Anasazi sites." Trash. The mode of refuse disposal is in thin sheets over the entire site, supplemented by the appearance of mounded refuse in the Rio Puerco and Black Greek in Period Two. Period Three The cultural development found in Period Three times is equivi- lent to Pueblo I of the Pecos system or the Kiatuthlanna phase of Gladwin’s classification (19U5)» Occupation of the 1961 survey area was at its lowest during this period, with the exception of Period Eight. The time span repre sented by this period is one of the longer ones in this chronological construct, and yet it is the least well-known. Structures. The original definition of Pueblo I (Kidder 192?: 1*90) characterized it as the stage in which a transition was made from living below the ground in pithouses to masonry pueblos on the surface. The still widespread belief that the primary domestic structures during Pueblo I are masonry pueblos (McGregor 1965: 237) needs to be modified considerably. Pueblos occur, as noted in the data presented for the 1961 survey area, but pithouses are found with at least equal frequency in nearly all of the southeastern portion of the Navajo Indian Reserva tion. Pithouses and surface storage units are the only architectural structures representative of this stage of development at Kiatuthlanna (Roberts 1931), in the Whitewater District (Roberts 1939)> and at Jeddito 261* (Daifuku 1961). It would seem that the structural unit iia " mode for this stage is less advanced along the pithouse-pueblo devel opmental continuum than originally thought. This is readily recognized by many current workers and has been mentioned without emphasis in print (Reed 1956: 11). While at least one local sequence has been worked out in detail, Pueblo I still does not emerge in a clear pattern (Brew 19lt6). Since Pueblo I is the least well-known and understood of the Pecos stages of development, it is not surprising that a rather muddled picture results when comparing the community pattern development at this level. Suffice it to say that it is a stage of great change and apparently a time of small population, as indicated by the paucity of remains and general heterogeneity. The 1961 survey data compares favorably with this heterogeneous, if poorly known stage. Kivas, although problematical, appear for the first time during this period in the area of the 1961 reconnaissance. Their presence in the Tohatchi-Mexican Springs and Kin-li-chee Creek, at a domestic- foom-to-kiva ratio of 8:1 and 5:1 respectively (Table 19a), suggests no particular inter-locality patterning. The ratio of rooms to kivas roughly matches the ratio summarized by Steward (1955, Table 3) for southwestern Colorado. More specific community pattern relationships and sources of influence may be defined only after considerably more excavation in the area has taken place. Size. Perhaps it is due to uneven work in the Puebloan areas that the following different patterns emerge. Small pithouse com munities in Rio Puerco and Black Creek match the small, three-to .TABLE 19a Room-to-Kiva Ratio by Locality and Ceramic Period Localities Ceramic Tohatchi- Black Rio Kin-li- Nazlini Lukachukai Period Mex. Spr. Creek Puerco chee Cr. Wash Tohot.-Gr. 1 2 3 8:1 —— 5:1 — - b —— 7:1 3:1 7:1 7:1 5 8:1 5:1 6:1 5:1 10:1 — 6 12:1 7:1 8:1 7:1 1 5:1 12:1 7 8:1 8:1 11:1 15:1 10:1 8:1 8 ------• 9 •* — twelve-unit villages known at Whitewater Draw (Roberts 1939) and Kia- tuthlanna (Roberts 1931)• Nazlini Wash and Kin-li-chee Creek show a closer parallel to the development seen to the north at Alkali Ridge (Brew I9I46) and in the Piedra district of southwestern Colorado (Roberts 1930). Layout. Patterns are lacking in this Period Three stage. Villages side by side have different architectural-special arrangements; this is paralleled throughout most of the 1961 survey area. Construction. . Techniques of building, too, show diversity of form. Pueblos are made of mortared horizontally laid masonry. Sur face storage units are constructed in this way and also by the slab- on-end masonry technique, the latter often indicative of jacal-type construction. These two techniques plus a combination of them at the same site are typical features of the architecture of this stage. 1U3 Orientation and Trash. Reed (1956: 11) states that through out the Puebloan area surface rooms, pithouses, and refuse areas have a front-to-back relationship, in the order mentioned. He does not spell out, however, the specific directional orientations found associ ated with this community pattern. The sample of this survey exhibits much less uniformity than Reed's statements suggest for this stage. Pueblos often occur iso lated, as do pithouses, and in most instances the trash is found in a thin mantle over the entire site. Only in Kin-li-chee Creek and Nazlini Wash is trash found in mounds. The orientation of pithouses in these two localities is rather uniformly to the southeast. Periods Four, Five, and Six These three ceramic periods coincide with the Pueblo II stage of the Pecos classification and with the Red Mesa and Wingate phases set up by Gladwin (19L5). Structures. During this stage the basic units of the com munity are the pueblo, the kiva, and trash mounds throughout the Puebloan culture area. Pithouses and earlier types of structures are present but rare. In the eastern localities the transition from pithouses to pueblos is completed at the beginning of this stage. Diversity still appears in the western localities early in this stage. Pueblos are the most numerous, but pithouses, surface storage units, and cists sometimes occur. Later the shift is completed to a pueblo-kiva- trash pattern. Pithouses are still present, but only rarely so. Sherd areas, perhaps indicative of temporary seasonal com munities, are important features of the early part of this stage in the eastern localities. The lack of kivas in Tohatchi-Kexican Springs and Black Creek during the early part of the Pueblo II stage may best be explained as a sampling error. Kivas are present in all other areas throughout this stage except during middle Pueblo II in Lukachukai-Tohotso- Greasewood, certainly another sampling inadequacy. The general trend seen throughout all localities is toward a higher ratio of domestic rooms to kivas (Table 20, page 1U2). The only noticeable difference between east and west is a wider range of variation in the domestic room-kiva ratio among the western sections than is found among the eastern localities. Speaking generally for the Puebloan area, the room-to-kiva ratio remained about the same or dropped just a little during the Pueblo II stage (Steward 1955i Table U). Great Kivas appear for the first time in about the middle of this stage in Black Creek. Toward the end of this stage two Great Kivas occur again at Black Creek. Two more Great Kivas are known for the later part of this stage in Kin-li-chee Creek. The origin and development of the Great Kiva complex is still not completely understood. To date its earliest occurrence is in the Mogollon culture area at Bluff Ruin (Haury 1950, Fig. 1), some 50 miles southwest of the 1961 reconnaissance. In the Mogollon tradition there are at least six other Great Kivas which pre-date the earliest examples in the Puebloan area (Vivian and Reiter I960: 98)* Great Kivas are not usually thought of as characterizing the Pueblo II stage of de velopment, but they should be expected for Great Kivas make their appearance at least as early as A.D. £00 during the Basketmaker III stage at Shabik'eshchee Village (Roberts 1929: lU7)» Size. Small pmbios are the preferred community aggregation throughout this stage in the eastern localities. Only rarely is a site found with over 20 rooms. In the western localities small pueblos are also the dominant village size, but medium and large pueblos repre sent from to U0 percent of the total. This pattern of community size is similar to what has been suggested for the Chaco Anasazi (Wendorf 195)6: 19) which consists of a few fairly large villages located in particularly favorable areas and many widely scattered small pueblos adjacent to small plots of arable land. Layout. The population explosion which can be seen throughout the Puebloan area during this stage is expressed in a great variety of architectural ground plans. Generally the lineal pueblo is predominant, while L-shaped and other more complex forms appear in greater frequency as the stage develops. Diversity also increases through time. If generalized patterns of layout have appeared in the Puebloan area during this stage, they have not been recognized. The details of this development have been spelled out earlier, and there is nothing but agreement with the foregoing general state ments concerning the Puebloan area as a whole. Construction. The opening of this stage in the Pueblo culture area sees the beginning of intensified use of masonry construction at the expense of jacal and slab-rock building techniques. Jacal walls are relatively common early in the stage, but fade in popularity and are soon almost completely replaced by solid masonry walls. It has been pointed out previously in this study that early- appearing architectural forms never are completely forgotten but con tinue to recur throughout later stages, along with newer forms. These older-style structures are rare, however, and their occurrence suggests no significant cultural pattern. Orientation, Trash, and Community Unity. Reed (1956: 11) has suggested that the front-to-back village plan continues on with ever- increasing rigidity, even when the pueblos have become larger and have kivas incorporated in the room blocks (late Pueblo I H and Pueblo IV). The 1961 data confirm Reed's idea. This writer has referred to the front-to-back relationship as a reflection of community unity. This means that not only are the several village units in a general alignment, but their individual orientation coincides more often with all the rest than with any partial grouping. By far the most dominant orientations are to the south and southeast. Almost all other pos sible orientations occur but they never figure as dominant patterns. The east orientation is the only one which occurs with a significant frequency. Although of less importance numerically, the partial grouping of pueblo-trash orientation occurs more often than the pueblo-kiva grouping. Whether this fact has any cultural validity may be open to question, since kiva identification can never be 100 percent correct when based on survey data alone. Period Seven This period is equated with Pueblo III of the Pecos classifi cation, and with the Hosta Butte Phase as revised by Vivian and Mathews (1965: 108-11) from Gladwin’s original definition (19L5). For this period Vivian and Mathews, cited above, present three contemporaneous, culturally distinct phases, each representing a different community pattern. The large, multi-roomed pueblos such as Pueblo Bonito, Chetro Ketl, Una Vida, and many others which are usually called to mind when the Pueblo III stage is mentioned, represent the Bonito Phase. Along with these larger towns coexist smaller villages such as Bc-50 and Bc-5l (Kluckhohn and Reiter 1939) which represent the Hosta Butte Phase. A third phase, the McElmo, represented by Kin Kletso and at least three other sites in Chaco Canyon, is viewed as a site intrusion of Mesa Verde peoples into the area and is contemporaneous with the other two phases. Structures. As just described above, the community structures for the Hosta Butte Phase in the Puebloan area are the pueblo and the kiva. This pattern is found in both the eastern and western localities. Whether the Hosta Butte Phase can be used with any validity, as it has been redefined, beyond the eastern localities to include the western localities, only further work will tell. Kivas and pueblos are constant companions throughout all areas during this stage. The trend of increasing room-to-kiva ratio 1U8 established during Pueblo II times continues in this stage also. The increase appears to be one of less magnitude than it was earlier. There is a decrease in this ratio in Tohatchi-Mexican Springs and Lukachukai-Tohotso-Greasewood. The reversal of the increasing trend in the latter locality is probably due to sampling error, but not in the former. Western localities have a significantly higher room-to- kiva ratio:than the eastern areas. The summary presented by Steward (1955# Table 3) suggests that the room-to-kiva ratio more than tripled during Pueblo III. A few pueblos are still found with nearly the same ratio as before. Pueblos to the west and north of the 1961 survey area have a higher room-to-kiva ratio than those to the northeast and southeast. This fits the two patterns seen in the localities studied here, making the Defiance Plateau a dividing line between them. Great Kivas in the Chaco Canyon are architectural units of the Bonito Phase (Vivian and Mathews 196$: 109). In the 196l survey area Great Kivas occur only once each in Tohatchi-Mexican Springs and Black Creek. The possibility that single Bonito Phase villages exist in an area surrounded by Hosta Butte Phase communities is an interesting one. Immediately it suggests questions of social and ceremonial re lations, trade, and land-ownership. Of course, there is a second possibility and that is that these sites which have Great Kivas are nothing more than partially acculturated Hosta Butte villages. But if this is so, why are the two sites so widely separated? One would expect the pattern to be present in Chaco Canyon if this were true. This is not the pattern in Chaco Canyon where as many as two Great Kivas occur in the same pueblo. More problems arise than are solved by this possibility. Size. Small pueblos are the hallmark of Hosta Butte Phase villages. This is also the preferred community size throughout both eastern and western localities. Only in Rio Puerco and Kin-li-chee Creek do pueblos of over 21 rooms reach significant proportions. One pueblo of this size also appears in Lukachukai-Tohotso-Greasewood. Nearby, to the south, at sites reported by Roberts (1931, 1932), the number of rooms per pueblo range from five to 53• To the north, in Chinlee Wash, Morss (1927) reports six villages of this stage ranging from 15 to 30 rooms in size. Layout. Hosta Butte pueblos of Bc-5>0, Bc-5l and Be-59 have a "T", open "IP1, and "L" layout respectively (Bannister 1965, Figs. It, 6 and 7). All these layouts occur in the eastern localities, "L" and "U" both being numerically important but "T" much less so. The pre dominant layout, however, is the lineal or "I" type. In the western localities "I" is universal to all, but important only in Kin-li-chee Creek. Little other uniformity in layout can be seen in western lo calities. Kivas are incorporated within the room blocks, but there are no enclosed or formal plazas (Vivian and Mathews 1965: 109). Internal kivas are found in both eastern and western localities during this stage. 150 Orientation. Bc-50 and Bc-5l both have an eastern orientation and exhibit some community unity (Bannister 1965, Figs. U and 6). Bc-50 has all its kivas on the east side of the room block, while Bc-5l has only three of its six kivas on the east side of the pueblo. An eastern orientation pattern is found in all eastern lo calities but is important only in Tohatchi-Mexican Springs. The most universally preferred orientations in the eastern localities are south and southeast while in the western, south is the most frequent ori entation. Trash. In Chaco Canyon at Bc-50 and Bc-5l (Kluckhohn and Reiter 1939, Map 1), sites typical of the Puebloan community pattern for this period, the trash is mounded up between the two narrowly- spaced pueblos. Trash occurs in localized, irregular mounds in the eastern localities much more often than the scattered rubbish disposal pattern. Trash mounds are the most popular disposal pattern in the western localities also. Community Unity. As seen earlier in the Pueblo II stage, com munity unity in the eastern localities is high. The concurrence of similar orientation of all three community units is more than twice as popular as any other partial unit. The partial site grouping of pueblo-trash with a similar orientation is the most important theme in the western localities. Period Eight No communities assignable to this period were located by the 1961 reconnaissance. 151 Period Nine In the Pecos classification this period is represented by the Pueblo V stage. In the area of the 1961 reconnaissance, the Puebloan tradition has come to an end and no longer appears. Its place is taken over by a completely new and different cultural tradition— the Navajo. Whether the Navajos were the cause of the Puebloan withdrawal from this area as part of more widespread phenomena is still debated (Jett 196U, Ellis, 196U, Davis 1965, Vivian and Mathews 1965: 111-2). Most students of Southwestern prehistory consider the matter still open to question. It appears that sometime soon after A.D. 1500 (Hester 1962), Navajos occupied the area of the 1961 survey. One Navajo site in Nazlini Wash (Arizona K:3:5l), has at least four tree-ring dates which suggest that it was constructed about 1?65 (Hannah 1965). Structures. Most of the Navajo habitations located in the 1961 survey area can be found in the Navajo culture trait list compiled by Hester (1962, Table III). Hester does not mention, however, the re occupation by Navajos of earlier Puebloan cliff houses or masonry hogans within rockshelters, as habitation types. Both of these habi tation types are common throughout the eastern and western localities. The occurrence of a fortified butte site (Arizona K:3$5l)> with tree-ring dates, suggests that this architectural development, probably representing fortification against Shoshonean-speaking peoples, lagged about I4O to 50 years behind its beginning in the Gobernador district to the northeast (Carlson 1965: 100). 152 Size. The modal Navajo community is from one to four habita- tional structures, although UO-room pueblitos are known (Hester 1962: 31). The community size in the 1961 survey area is well within the limits suggested by Hester, although the norm is closer to the lower limit than the higher. Layout. In both the description by Hester (1962: 31) and the sample presented here, habitations are freely combined and tend to be scattered over the landscape rather informally. Local adjustments were made to take advantage of some natural feature of the environment. Orientation. The doorway of forked-stick hogans opens to the east, southeast, and sometimes the northeast (Hester 1962: UO). In other hogan types doorways were not always positively identified. Where identification was possible the doorway always opened to the east. Trash. Low mounds of trash lying three to 30 feet from the hogan is given by Hester (1962: kl) as the preferred rubbish disposal pattern. No orientation from the hogan is given. In the data collected during the 1961 survey, Navajo refuse disposal pattern was found to be a thin mantle or sheet over the whole site. Rarely was trash localized. Community Unity. Navajo villages show very little structural intercommunity relatedness in terms of special position as the term has been utilized here. Settlement Pattern In the Southwest, as Haury (1956: L-5) has pointed out, human populations have settled themselves over the ground primarily in I 153 response to water resources. This arid land does not allow for a casual or random settlement. Regardless of the physiographic situa tion, the availability of a dependable water source is the first requisite for human settlement and occupation. Land for cultivation, of course, is a second indispensable factor for the effective establishment and maintenance of an agri cultural people such as the puebloans. Good lands throughout this area must have been at a premium, particularly during periods of greater population. Adequate lands for cultivation are not overly abundant in the Puebloan area even today. Large-scale agriculture has failed to develop here in spite of modern technology. It would seem that early in Puebloan history the people learned or discovered how to most effectively cultivate their land and then expanded under more favorable environmental conditions into areas which today are unexploitable for agricultural purposes. There are other factors which must also be considered when discussing cultivation in the Puebloan area. One of the most im portant of these is temperature. A recent study at Mesa Verde (Fritts, Smith and Stokes 1965) has demonstrated that growth in trees is most affected by changes in available moisture and temperature, the former being more important than the latter. Among the climatic conditions listed by these same authors which produce less growth in Douglas-fir is a dry, cool spring (Fritts et al 196$: 120). It seems a reasonable hypothesis to suggest that flora other than trees may be affected in the same way trees are by similar climatic conditions. In any case 15U the effect of less moisture and a more limited growing season would be hazardous to any cultivated crop. The relationship between temperature and altitude and their effect on the length of the growing season has already been spelled out in more detail in the section on Environment. To reiterate, throughout most of the 1961 survey area the growing season is very short, so short that there is practically no assurance that crops sill mature. This entire area is close to the limit beyond which agriculture is not dependable. Water, land, and temperature appear to be the three critical factors which influenced prehistoric demography. What reflection of these factors can be seen in the sample gathered in 1961? First, communities are located along the sides of long, broad river valleys which have a large catchment basin or have perennial streams passing through them. Villages are also found near the mouths of both large and small sandstone canyons, where the water supply was constant. Secondly, communities are built on hills and ridgetops, next to but not occupying lands favorable for cultivation. Perhaps just as im portant a reason for the occupation of natural rockshelters in the narrow sandstone canyons was the need for every available portion of the canyon bottom for agricultural pursuits. Thirdly, permanent pre historic habitations are not regularly found above the contour level of 7,000 feet above sea level. Above this point the latest frost of the spring and earliest frost of the fall season so shorten the growing season that agriculture is not possible. Population In the chapter on population in this study the utility of demographic patterns for limited areas was pointed out. It was also shown that the results of the analysis of data collected by means of an archaeological survey has a fair amount of reproducibility. The patterns appear consistent and therefore valid. One is still unable at this point to speak of fluctuations of actual numbers of individu als. However, this is no deterrent to making inferences about demo graphic trends. Many archaeologists in the Southwest have developed population methodologies (Colton 1936, I960; DeHarport 1959; Dittert, Hester and Eddy 1961; Longacre 196U; Pierson 1959, unavailable for use in this summary; Schwartz 1956; Turner and Lofgren 1966). Most of these at tempts at prehistoric population reconstruction are based on a method ology similar to the one used here, with slight variations. Schwartz (1956) presents the simplest analysis based on site frequency alone. Turner and Lofgren1s (1966) complex formula is based in part on Col ton's (i960) archaeological data and in part on their own determina tion of the nuclear family size based on prehistoric puebloan pottery vessel volume. The population trend each author proposes will be used without making a critique of his demographic study. Each is accepted as a working hypothesis for the area concerned, to be compared with the population trends of the 1961 reconnaissance area. The interest here is not with the fluctuations of actual population totals through time, but with the general patterns formed by changes in the population. 156 The comparison of some population patterns available in the literature of the Puebloan area of the Southwest with that presented here for the eastern localities of my reconnaissance area shows one distinct difference (Fig. 9)» The population peak, found in Pueblo II in the eastern areas appears only in the Tsegi Canyon and Cohonina area according to Colton (i960: 105) and Schwartz (1956). Dean (1966) states that this is not the actual case for the Tsegi Canyon. The population peaks occur there during the Basketmaker Ill-Pueblo I transition and in the late Pueblo III stage. The Cohonina figures do not take community size into account; therefore, the similarity of them to the trend of the eastern sections, although apparent, may not be an actuality. In all areas where continuous occupation has been suggested, the trend of increasing population reaches a peak during Pueblo III or later. Only in the Central and Western Arizona area (Fig. 9), is there a similar trend. Colton’s use of figures obtained from a rough calculation of population density probably invalidate these results. The decline in population in the eastern localities during early Pueblo III coincides neatly with a decline of more than 25 per cent of the population during the same period in Chaco Canyon (Vivian and Mathews 1965: 108). It appears certain that the reduction of population to almost zero by A.D. 1300 in the eastern areas is inti mately connected with the more general abandonment of a much larger area to the east, including Chaco Canyon. The western localities exhibit a trend of increasing popula tion up to and including Pueblo III, although the increase is not as 157 dramatic as in the adjacent areas. All areas of comparison adjoining the western border of the western localities, except the Vernon district to the south, show more similarity with the western sections than with the eastern districts. This is expectable in view of the areas geographical proximity. The western districts were also aban doned by at least A.D. 1300. In view of the reaffirmation of the "Great Drought" from A.D. 1273 through 1285 (Fritts et al 1965: 121) and the companion effect of a shortened growing season, there seems to be ample reason to recon sider the hypothesis that a climatic change greatly influenced the abandonment or reduction of the Puebloan culture area at this time. CONCLUSIONS Hypotheses Developed The general overall pattern of Puebloan culture history has been established for many years. The first formal recognition of this distinctive pattern was in 1927 at the original Pecos conference (Kidder 1927). Knowledge concerning the evolution of Puebloan history has grown yearly as more excavation and reconnaissance has been accom plished. Since the area of the 1961 survey is not surrounded by an archaeologically unknown region, a general synthesis will not be pre sented here. Today many details of Puebloan cultural growth and development are known, but even more problems remain to be solved. Multiple working hypotheses (Chamberlin 1965) can be defined which have as their goal the explanation of certain problems in Puebloan history. The hypotheses have been developed from inferences which arose in the discussion of the data in the Comparative Analysis section of this study. Hypotheses resulting from an analysis of these data will be stated briefly and will not be accompanied by further documentation. The following is not intended to be an exhaustive list of hypotheses concerning Puebloan evolution, but only some which may be profitably tested in the southeastern portion of the Navajo Indian Reservation. 158 1 # The hypotheses are organized under the categories of Ceramics, Community Pattern, Settlement Pattern, and Population. Ceramics Plain Brown and Plain Gray Ware 1. The association of Lino Gray pottery with plain brown pottery represents a trade situation between two prehistoric groups. 2. The association of Lino Gray pottery with plain brown pottery represents a peaceful coexistence in close proximity of two prehistoric groups. Organic and Inorganic Painted Black-on-white Pottery 1. The ceramic attribute of inorganic pigment is a trait which occurred first in the eastern localities and diffused northward slowly to the western localities. 2. The people of the western sections were conservative and resisted the introduction of inorganic pigment. 3. Inorganic painted pottery was the impetus for organic painted pottery. U. Peoples using organic pigment did not successfully reside among peoples using inorganic pigment in the Pio Puerco area because of inter-community strife. 5>. The influx of small quantities of organic pigment painted pottery into eastern areas is explained by trade with the western localities. 6. The influx of small quantities of organic pigment painted pottery into the eastern localities can be explained by trade with l6o former Mesa Verde peoples present in Chaco Canyon. 7. The prehistoric peoples from the eastern areas began to accept the organic pigment tradition from the western localities. 8. The southern movement of the organic pigment tradition is intimately linked to a similar movement of Mesa Verde and eastern San Juan peoples. Red Wares 1. The area in which the White Mountain Red Ware series pottery was made includes all eastern localities and Kin-li-chee Creek of the west. 2. All eastern localities and Kin-li-chee Creek received White Mountain Red Ware pottery as trade from a nearby area. 3. Wingate Polychrome has a different chronological occurrence than St. Johns Polychrome. U. Peoples in the Tohatchi-Mexican Springs had a preference for Wingate Polychrome over St. Johns Polychrome. Orange Ware 1. Black Creek and Rio Puerco maintained trade relations to the west during Period Seven. 2. Kin-li-chee Greek and Nazlini Wash maintained trade rela tions to the north during Periods Five through Seven. Historical Puebloan and Navajo Pottery 1. Navajo peoples in the western localities were less re ceptive to foreign influences than Navajo peoples in eastern areas. 2. Navajo peoples in the western areas were in more limited contact with foreign influences than Navajo peoples in eastern localities. 161 3. Navajo peoples in the western localities had more limited means with which to acquire Puebloan goods than Navajos in the eastern localities. Community Pattern Period One and Two Structures. 1. Pueblo architecture did not originate within the area of the 1961 survey. 2. Surface storage units did not originate with in the southeastern portion of the Navajo Indian Reservation. 3. Surfact storage units were probably an in novation of peoples in a region to the south or east of the area of the 1961 reconnaissance. U. The acceptance of surface storage units was resisted by people in the western localities. Trash. 1. The trait of disposing of trash in a mound is of southern origin, outside the area of the 1961 reconnaissance. Period Three Structures. 1. The shift of domestic structures from a below-ground location to an above-ground position occurred at the end of this period, not at the beginning. Size. 1. The introduction of pueblo architecture was first into Tohatchi-Mexican Springs from an unidentified source farther east or south. 2. People in the western localities resisted the introduction of pueblo architecture. 162 3. The maximum kinship unit on the community level is the extended family. Orientation and Trash. 1. This is a period of great change in the eastern localities. 2. The western localities show considerable social cohesion, resisting innovations. Period Four, Five, and Six Structures. 1. The shift of domestic architecture from a position below the ground to a position above the ground was completed early in this period. 2. Social cohesion is at a maximum in spite of the population explosion characteristic of most of this period. 3. The source area for the introduction of the Great Kiva complex was to the southwest of the 1961 reconnaissance area. Size. 1. Small village units are the typical community size for this period in all localities. 2. The social environment of the community was rural rather than urban in nature. Layout. 1. Cultural patterns have not stabilized. 2. Community plan or layout does not reflect the level of social integration in this period. Construction. 1. Jacal has been replaced by masonry as a preferred building technique. Orientation, Community Unity and Trash. 1. The people of the eastern localities had a high level of social integration. 163 2. The people of the western localities had a high level of social integration but topography confused the situation by conditioning the community pattern. Period Seven Structures. 1. All sites in the eastern localities are of the Hosta Butte phase as newly defined by Vivian and Mathews (196$). 2. Great Kivas are characteristic architectural units of the Bonita Phase as defined by Vivian and Mathews (196$). 3. Small Bonita Phase communities exist widely scattered among contemporaneous Hosta Butte communities. U. Small communities with Great Kivas are partially acculturated Hosta Butte Phase communities. Size. 1. Small villages are the typical community size for all localities during this period, although larger pueblos begin to appear in Kin-li-chee Creek. 2. The social environment of the community was rural rather than urban in nature in all areas. Layout. 1. Lack of homogeneity in the western locales is a function of the topography and not of social disorganization. Period Eight 1. All localities are abandoned by Puebloan peoples during this period. 2. The first appearance of Navajos in both eastern and western localities is during this period 16U Period Nine Structures. 1. Navajos moved into the eastern and western localities as a result of pressure by other hostile groups. 2. The Navajo adopted Puebloan architecture and combined it with a geographical position of difficult access for pro tection. Size. 1. The Navajo socio-religious system did not reach its present level of complexity and integration until late in " this period. Settlement Pattern 1. Temperature, water resources, and productive farm land are three interrelated environmental factors which limited and conditioned prehistoric human occupation of all localities through time. Population 1. The environment restricted human expansion in the western localities much more than it did in the eastern sections. 2. The environment of the eastern localities had a potential which allowed the expansion of human populations, sometimes drasti cally, when triggered by a special set of factors. 3. The population explosion which occurred in Period Five in the eastern localities was triggered by more favorable climatic con ditions. iu The abandonment of the southeastern portion of the Navajo Indian Reservation in the Thirteenth century by Puebloan peoples is 165 part of the abandonment or reduction of the Puebloan culture generally throughout the Southwest. 5. A prime factor in the abandonment of the 1961 area of survey was a drought and an accompanying growing season which occurred between A.D. 1273 and 1285. Recommendations for Testing Hypotheses The ultimate function of a reconnaissance, as suggested in the introduction of this study, is to recommend sites to be investigated in detail. The series of sites to be recommended for more intensive work should fill these three requisites: (l) the series must present the full temporal and spatial range of the culture history of the area under consideration; (2) they must contribute to the testing of hy potheses developed during the analysis of the survey data; (3) they must contain the possibility of discovering a new set of data. There are, of course, practical aspects of selecting sites for excavation, such as finance, accessibility, and practicality, which are just as important as the research design to be used. For the sake of simplicity the practical factors will be ignored here. The physical impossibility of excavating all 799 sites located by the 1961 survey must be apparent. We must select out of this uni verse, then, a sample which will fulfill, in its entirety, the three requirements outlined above. This sample must be a reliable one, one which has reproducibility. In order for the sample to be statistically reproducible it must be a random sample. 166 It has been shown throughout the analysis of the 1961 survey data that the southeastern portion of the Navajo Indian Reservation can be divided into at least two parts. These two regions have been constantly referred to as the eastern and western localities or areas. This is only one example of the. heterogeniety of the region involved. A recent critique of archaeological methodology (Binford 196L) has suggested a technique of sampling which increased the reliability of a random sample from a heterogeneous universe. This is known as the method of stratified sampling (Binford 196L: U29). The manner in which this is accomplished is to divide the universe into classes, each of which is treated as a separate and independent sampling uni verse from which a simple random sample is collected. The application of stratified sampling to the 1961 survey data may be carried out in the following manner. The universe may be di vided into six classes, one for each locality defined above. Each of these localities was shown to have some internal geographical unity. This is another good reason for considering them separately. The re sulting six populations may then be sub-divided into nine classes on the basis of the Ceramic Periods. Every component located by the survey is then assigned to one of the 5U different populations. The procedure is to select in a random manner, one-by-one, each component from one population, identifying it serially from one to (n). Next the desired size of the component sample must be determined for the population. Last, using a table of random numbers, select a number of components equal to the desired sample size. This, then, can be repeated for each of the remaining 53 populations. 167 The random sample extracted from the universe in this manner can be expected, within a range of probability, to: (l) express the full temporal and spatial range of the culture history of the south eastern portion of the Navajo Indian Reservation; (2) test any and all hypotheses developed in the analysis of the survey data; (3) con tain the possibility of discovering a new set of data. Due to the limitation of my time, I am unable here to follow through the technique of stratified sampling for the lp6l data as just recommended. This final step is one which anyone could do and its results would be of interest only to someone who is actually contem plating further research in the southeastern portion of the Navajo Indian Reservation. The limitations of the archaeological reconnaissance as a tool for the study of culture history have been emphasized throughout this report. This does not mean, however, that this tool is untrustworthy nor useless. Recognizing biases and methodological limitations is a key factor in any objective study and has been pointed out here to caution against a false sense of security. An archaeological reconnaissance should not be considered just a way of becomming familiar with an unknown area. This methodology has potentialities which far out-weigh its limitations, if the original research design is formulated not as an end in itself, but as a systematic beginning to the study of an unknown area. APPENDIX A Tabulation of Symbols used in Tables 20-25 Type of Site Pueblo: x Presence of a multi-room contiguous-walled masonry structure, x* Presence of plaza wall separating the pueblo from a kiva or trash mound. Navajo: B Storage bin CD Check dams F Fortified crag H Hogan depression (?) HI Forked pole hogan H2 Crib log hogan H3 Masonry hogan S Stock corral Site Characteristics Size: (n) Numbers refer to the approximate number of rooms per domestic living unit. Layout: B Contiguous room arrangement with a depth from front to back of two or more rows. 168 169 C Pithouses or surface storage units arranged in a crecentic arrangement. E Contiguous room series in a form of an "E*. Open side always faces the orientation. I Lineal arrangement of either contiguous rooms, pithouses or surface storage units. L Contiguous room series in the form of an "L" or "V". 3 Single scattered units irregular as to layout. T Contiguous room series in the shape of a nTrt. U Contiguous room series in the shape of an in verted •’U". Construction: M Dressed sandstone masonry,,often coursed. S Slab masonry, slabs always on edge Orientation: Letters refer to the direction the domestic unit is facing. Letters give general compass bearings. Kiva: Letters HE, E, SB, S, SW when alone refer to the general compass position of the small kiva depression (3 to 6 meters in diameter) to its associated domestic structure. When the same letters are prefixed by the letters GK they refer to the orientation of a Great Kiva (15 to 25 meters in diameter). C refers to kiva located within the room-block. Trash: x Presence of non-localized sheet trash. 170 Letters refer to the general compass heading the mound has in relation to the domestic structure. Physiography: A Narrow valley or canyon bottom, sites away from valley sides. B Hillsides flanking the valleys, cover usually low. C Ridge or hilltops, low to medium t a ll cover. D Low rolling hills or dunes, usually well out on the valley floor. E Valley floor, over flat terrain. F Alcove in c lif f or at the foot of sandstone bluffs. FI Cliff location, off the ground. F2 A site combination of both F and F I. TABLE 20 • Structural Data of the Tohatchi-Mexican Springs Locality Sites in New Mexico G:l: 2 3 U 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 ia 15 Type of Site Pueblo X X X XX Pithouse XXX X X Cists XXX X X X Surface Storage XX X X X Sherd Area Navajo H3 Size 1-2 1 2 1 1 6-8 3-5 3-5 2-U 3-k U-5 1 2-3 2-U Layout I ? I??C I I I C i II Construction MS M S S S M SS S s M M M Orientation S E E ? SB S s B E SB E SW E Kiva ? Trash X XX XX X SB XX XX XX X Physiography A A A A A A B c CC c D D D TABLE 20 — Continued Structural Data of the Tohatchi-Mexican Springs Locality Sites in New Mexico 0:1: 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 2k 25 26 27 28 29 Type of Site Pueblo X X X X XX 2 XX Pithouse X X Cists Surface Storage X Sherd Area X X X Navajo Size 2 1-3 3-h 3-h 2-3 6 7 Uo-5o 6-8 ? 6-8 Layout I . I I I I U L L,U I ? I Construction M s M M MM MM S M M Orientation E B EEE SB SE E,SE SE ? SE Kiva SB SB E E,SE SE Trash X XX XX X X X SB SB E,SE XX SB Physiography D C C G CC GBDD D DDD TABLE 20 — Continued Structural Data of the Tohatchi-Mexican Springs Locality Sites in New Mexico 0:1: ______30 31 32 33 3k 35 36 37 39 39 ho hi 1:2 U3 Type of Site Pueblo xxxxxx*xxxxxxxx Pithouse Cists Surface Storage Sherd Area Navajo Size 12-16 6-8 6-8 6-8 3-U 6-8 10-12 2-3 I4-6 2-7 6-8 6-9 10-12 U-6 Layout L U ?IIUL I II I II U Construction MMMMMMMMM M MM MM Orientation SB SB ? SB SB SB SB S SB SB SB SB SB SB Kiva SB S X SB S SB SB SB SB SB S SB Trash SB s X SB SB E X SB SB SB SB SB SB Physiography DDD DDDD DDD D DDD TABLE 20 — Continued Structural Data of the Tohatchi-Mexican Springs Locality Sites in New Mexico G;l: au U6 a? aa a? so si 52 53 5a 55 56 57 Type of Site Pueblo X X* X X X XXXX Pithouse XX X X X Cists Surface Storage X XXX X Sherd Area Navajo Size 10-12 10-12 6-8 12-lU 12-ll| 7-8 9-U 8-10 6-8 6-7 5-6 3-5 a-6 2-a Layout L U U u u U L LI C l . I i i Construction H HM MMMMMM s s S s S Orientation E SB SB B SB SB SB E SB SB s E SB SB Kiva E SB? E SB SB SB E SB Trash E SB SB E SB SB SB E SB SB s X X X Physiography DD DDDD D D D C c E C c TABLE 20 — Continued Structural Data olf' the Tohatchi-Mexican Springs Locality Sites in New Mexico Gil: 58 59 60 61 62 63 6h 6$ 66 67 68 69 70 71 Type of Site Pueblo X X XXXXX X X XX* Pithouse X X Cists Surface Storage XX X Sherd Area Navajo Size 10-12 6-8 3 6-8 U-6 7-8 10-12 6-8 8-10 2-3 16-18 10-12 10-12 10-12 Layout IU I I L L U UU II u LL Construction S M S MMM MM M S s M M M Orientation s? s s SB E E SB SB E SB SB NE NE E Kiva ?E SB SB E MB NE E Trash X s X SB E E SB SB E SB SB NE NE NE Physiography c c c DDD D D D D DDDD TABLE 20 — Continued Structural Data of the Tohatchi-Mexican Springs Locality Sites in New Mexico G:l: Sites in New Mexico 0:2: 72 73 7k 7$ 76 1 2 Type of Site Pueblo X X X X X Pithouse Cists Surface Storage Sherd Area Navajo Size k-6 10-12 k-6 3-k 6-7 2 Layout L L I I L I Construction MMMMM S M Orientation E SB S S E S S Kiva E SB S S NE GK Trash E SE s SB SE X X Physiography D D D ’ D D c C TABLE 20 — Continued Structural Data of the Tohatchi-Mexican Springs Locality Sites in New Mexico G:5: 1 2 3 h 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 i a Type of Site Pueblo % X X X X X XX X X Pithouse XX Cists Surface Storage Sherd Area XX X Navajo Size 25-3$ 10-lU 10-12 15-18 5 7? 2 2-U 1-2 6-8 10-12 Layout L u I L i I I I-S I U L Construction MMM M M S S M-S M M M Orientation SB SB SB SB S S S S B Kiva 3SE SB SB ? Trash E SB SB SB X X X X X SB SB Physiography C CC C c B B DDC B c D D TABLE 20 — Continued Structural Data of the Tohatchi-Mexican Springs Locality- Sites in New Mexico G:5>: 1$ 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 2k 2$ 26 27 28 Type of Site Pueblo x x x x x X X XXX X Pithouse XX X - Cists X Surface Storage X X Sherd Area Navajo Size 10-12 16-18 6-7 1 6-8 6-8 lt-5 3-U 7-9 2-lt 3-lt U-6 6-8 10-12 Layout C LL 7 L ILIL I L u U I Construction M M M M M SS S M S M M M M Orientation EEBE SB S S E S E B NE SE Kiva E NE E NE SE B E NE SE Trash B B E X E SB SS E s X E NE SE Physiography DDCC D CC c C c E c B D TABLE 20 — Continued Structural Data of the Tohatchi-Mexican Springs Locality Sites in New Mexico G:5>: 29 30 31 32 33 3U 3$ 36 37 38 39 UP kl U2 Type of Site Pueblo x x* x x x X* % X X* X X X X X Pithouse Cists Surface Storage Sherd Area Navajo Size 2-3 10-12 15-20 6-8 ? 13-15 U-6 18-22 20-26 8-10 6-8 15-20 3-U 10-12 Layout I V I U u I I L F LE L L Construction M M S MM MMM MM MM M M Orientation B SB S SB E E SE E SE S SE E E Kiva SB SB E SE 3SE 2SE S 2SE SB Trash E SB s SE X E E SE NE,SE SE SE SE E B Physiography D D D BC CCDD C C C C C LT 6 TABLE 20 — Continued Structural Data of the Tohatchi-Kexican Springs Locality- Sites in New Mexico G:5>: ______U3 hh h5 h6 hi U8 h9 5o 5l 52 53 58 Type of Site Pueblo xxxxxxxxxxxx* Pithouse Cists Surface Storage Sherd Area Navajo Size 6-8 6-8 6-8 lt-6 3-k 3-£ U-6 6-8 U-6 10-12 10-12 5-7 Layout I L L L I l I I U I u U Construction M MMM M MMMM MM M Orientation S S SSSS SB SB S SB SB E Kiva s SS s S S SB SB s SB SB E Trash s SB S s SB SB SB SB s SB SB E Physiography c c C CC 0 CC C C C B TABLE 21 Structural Data of the Black Creek Locality Sites in Arizona K:U: 1234267 8 910 11 12 13 1U Type of Site Pueblo Pithouse Cists Surface Storage Sherd Area x X X X X X X X X Navajo CD H3 H3 H2 Size Layout Construction MM M s Orientation EEE w Kiva Trash X Physiography A A BD D F F F A F F E C C TABLE 21 — Continued Structural Data of the Black Creek Locality Sites in Arizona KzU: 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 2k 25 26 27 28 Type of Site Pueblo X X X Pithouse X X Cists Surface Storage • Sherd Area XX XXX XX X Navajo S H Size 3-U 7 3 2 3? 2+ Layout I ? I I S Construction HM M Orientation SB s SB E E E7 Kiva Trash SB 7 XX X Physiography F CE F E E E FF FI C C F B TABLE 21 — Continued Structural Data of the Black Creek Locality Sites in Arizona K:ii: 29 30 31 32 33 3U 35 36 37 38 39 Uo a U2 Type of Site ' .... Pueblo X X XXX X Pithouse X X Cists Surface Storage • Sherd Area X XX X X Navajo H Size U+ 6-7 9-10 9 1 5 1 1 3? 2-3 Layout S I L I I Construction M H M M M M Orientation E? SB SE S SS • S Kiva SE E Trash XX SE S XX XX X H Physiography BBBB E FI FI 0 C p B F CC 8 TABLE 21 — Continued Structural Data of the Black Creek Locality Sites in New Mexico G:£: Sites in Arizona K:8: 5U $6 57 59 1 2 3 U Type of Site Pueblo Pithouse ? Cists Surface Storage Sherd Area X X X X Navajo Size 1-2 U 8-10 it-6 6-8 2-3 2 8-10 3? Layout I i L I L I L I Construction SM MMMMMM Orientation E S S BBS SE S Kiva 2S E SE Trash X SE S S SE S S S Physiography C C C D £ E FI £ FFCC TABLE 21 — Continued Structural Data of the Black Creek Locality Sites in Arizona K:8: 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 1U 15 16 17 18 Type of Site Pueblo X XX XXX X Pithouse ?? ? 7 Cists Surface Storage Sherd Area XXXXX XX Navajo Size 1-3 8-9 -u 2? 2? 1? 6 3-6 1-3 2-3 Layout T I I I I I I Construction MM HMM M Orientation SB S s E £ S s • SS Kiva SB 3S 7 ? SS Trash SB s SB S s X Physiography C c CCCDF F E E FI C c C TABLE 21 — Continued Structural Data of the Black Creek Locality Sites in Arizona K:8: 21 22 23 2h 2$ 26 27 Type of Site Pueblo X X X X X X X Pithouse Cists Surface Storage Sherd Area Navajo Size 2-3 2-3 U-6 2-3 6-7 3 7-10 It-S h 2-3 1-2 3-U 1 2-3 10-12 Layout IIIILI U L IIII,L I Construction M M MMMM MM MM MMM M Orientation S SB S S s SS SB S S SB SB Kiva SS S 2? S SB S S SB SB Trash S SB S sw XX S SB X s XE,SE X NB Physiography c C E F FB C C C c C CEC TABLE 21 — Continued Structural Data of the Black Creek Locality Sites in Arizona K:8: 33 3U 35 36 37 38 39 liO Ui U2 U3 UU U5 U6 Type of Site Pueblo X X X . X X X X X XX X Pithouse Cists Surface Storage Sherd Area XXX Navajo Size 12-16 5 14-5 5-7 3-U u 3-U 10-12! 20 8-10 3 Layout T i I u II I LL I I Construction M • MM H M MM M M M M Orientation E S S SB SB SB S B SB SB SB Kiva 3E s S SB SB B SB 2SE 2GK,SE Trash ME s S SB SB SB XX B X X Physiography C c c C C CCC B C C CCC 3 TABLE 21 — Continued Structural Data of the Black Creek Locality Sites in Arizona K:8: U7 U8 U9 5o 51 52 53 5U 55 56 57 58 59 60 Type of Site Pueblo X X XX XXXXXX 3 Pithouse Cists Surface Storage Sherd Area X X X Navajo Size 1-3 3-U 2-3 h 7 2-3 3 2-3 3-ii 3-U 10 Layout I I II I X I I L Construction M MHMM M M M M MM Orientation S S SE SE E SE SE S S Kiva SB s 28 Trash X S S SE S SE E SE SE SE S Physiography C C CC CC CC EE c c c C § TABLE 21 — Continued Structural Data of the Black Creek Locality Sites in Arizona K:8: 61 62 63 6U 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 7h Type of Site Pueblo X X X XX X X Pithouae X X Cists Surface Storage X Sherd Area X X X X X Navajo Size 10-lli 2-3 8-10 h 3—h 1 2-7 2-3 12-lb Layout u I U II I I Construction MMMM H S MM M Orientation SB S SB SB SB W SB SB Kiva SB SB SB SB SB SB Trash SB S SB SB SB X SB SB Physiography C 0 C C E CCC PI CC C 0 C TABLE 21 — Continued Structural Data of the Black Creek Locality Sites in Arizona K:8: 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 8U 85 86 87 88 Type of Site Pueblo X XXX X 2 XX Pithouse ? ? ? Cists Surface Storage X XX Sherd Area XXX Navajo Size 2-3 2-3 7-8 8-12 2-k 1 2-5 2-3? 1-2 2-3 1 Layout I I u U I I? I? Construction M M MMMHM H M Orientation B SBS S S? S W SB Kiva s E 2S ? ? Trash X B s ES XNE,E S E X Physiography CB BC APECCC CC FI FI 061 TABLE 21 — Continued Structural Data of the Black Creek Locality Sites in Arizona K:8: 89 90 91 92 93 9U 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 Type of Site Pueblo . X X X XX XXXXXX Pithouse Cists Surface Storage • Sherd Area X XX Navajo GO Size 3-U 1-2 10-12 10+ ? 5-6 2-3 U-6 8 2-3 Layout I I I L I L? II Construction M H MMHMM M M M M Orientation SB SB S N E SB SB E B Kiva SB S SB E E,NB Trash XXX S XXX SB SB E SB 191 Physiography EECC A EC C C CC CC C 'TABLE 21 — Continued Structural Data of the Black Creek Locality Sites in Arizona K:8: ______103 10U 10$ 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 H U 115 Type of Site Pueblo x xxxxxxxxxxxx Pithouse Cists Surface Storage Sherd Area Navajo Size 2-3 7 h-7 8-10 1U-16 l*-6 6-8 3-6 7-9 1-2 6-8 8-10 1-3 Layout I 7 II U I UI?U X IT I Construction M MM MM M M M M MMHM Orientation S 7 SW SB SB S S E SB B SB S B Kiva 7 2SB S 3E SB SB S Trash S S SW SB SB SS E SB X E SB Physiography c ECC C c c C E C E B C TABLE 21 — Continued Structural Data of the Black Creek Locality Sites in Arizona K:8: 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 12k 125 126 127 128 Type of Site ‘ Pueblo X X X X X XX X X XX X Pithouse Cists Surface Storage Sherd Area X Navajo Size 3 2 8-12 8-10 10-12 k-6 10-lk k-6 3-k 6-8 2-k 2-3 Layout II II u I L I I I I I Construction M M M M M M M M MMM M Orientation S S SB SBSSS SB SB SB 3 B Kiva SB S s B,S SB SB 2SE S Trash S B SB SB s X S XX SB S E Physiography c BF C C c C CC C C C C s TABLE 21 — Continued Structural Data of the Black Creek Locality Sites in Arizona K:8: ______129 130 131 132 133 13k 135 136 137 138 139 UtO llO- Type of Site Pueblo XX XX X XXX XX X XX Pithouse Cists Surface Storage Sherd Area Navajo Size 6-8 8-10 18-20 2-3 li-5 5-7 2-3 1 1-2 3-U 1-2 5-6 10-12 Layout III I ITI I I I I I Construction M M M MM M M M M MMMM Orientation S S S SE SE SE SE S S SE •s ? SB Kiva -S S 28 SE SE SE S N,S SE Trash SS SSE SE SE S SE E X SE Physiography c C C CCCC c c C C C C TABLE 21 — Continued Structural Data of the Black Creek Locality Sites in Arizona K:8: ______1U2 1U3 U 6 lh5 1U6 1U7 1U8 lh9 ISO 151 152 1 # 15U Type of Site Pueblo x*xxxx2xxxxxxx Pithouse Cists Surface Storage Sherd Area Navajo Size U-6 8 1-3 1-2 3-U 6-8 1-2 It 5-6 3-lt 3-6 25-35 U-6 Layout III I II I I L I I LD Construction M H H M MMMM M M M : M H Orientation SB S SB E SB SE,W SS S S SB S SB Kiva s SE,W s S SB 2S,GKS Trash X s SB SB SB S X S s S SB S SB Physiography C c BCC C CB c C C c c TABLE 21 — Continued Structural Data of the Black Creek Locality Site in Arizona K:8: 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 16U 165 166 167 Type of Site Pueblo XXX X X X X X 2 Pithouse ? X ? 7 Cists X Surface Storage X 7 7 Sherd Area Navajo Size 6-8 3-U lt-6 8-12 7 6-8 k 8-12 10-12 8-10 3? 97 8-10 Layout IIL US L I L u IU I T,I Construction MMM M M S M M MS MM Orientation SE S SE SE SE S SE SE SE ES S Kiva SB S SE SE SE SE SE NE,E Trash SE s ESE X SE X SB SB SE X X SB Physiography C C CCCC C C 0 C C CB TABLE 21 — Continued Structural Data of the Black Creek Locality Site in Arizona K:8: 168 169 170 171 172 173 17k 172 176 177 178 179 180 Type of Site Pueblo X X X X X X XXXX Pithouse XX ? Cists Surface Storage X XX Sherd Area Navajo Size 3-i* 3~U 8-10 1 3-U 8-10 3-U 2-6 2 - i t U-6 6-8 2-3 6-8 Layout I II I I I u U II II Construction M MM M M M S S s M M M M Orientation E SB SE S NE E E E SE E E SE E Kiva SE SB E,W,GKS SE E Trash X SE X NE E EE X E E SE E Physiography EB C FI C C C C CC C CC TABLE 21 — Continued Structural Data of the Black Creek Locality Site in Arizona K:8: l8l 182 183 18U 185 186 18? 188 189 190 191 192 193 Type of Site Pueblo XXX X XX XX X Pitbouse ? ? ? Cists Surface Storage XXX Sherd Area X Navajo Size 3-U w 7-10 14-6 6-7 3-5 8-10 5 U-6 5-7 6-8 2-U Layout II T IL .u I I u L L U Construction M MM H MM M M S M M s Orientation B SB S S SB E S E SB SB SB S Kiva E SB 28 s SB 28 N SB SB Trash B SB S s SB B S NE XX SB X Physiography C C C c C CCF CC C C 0 TABLE 21 — Continued Structural Data of the Black Creek Locality Sites in Arizona K:8: 19k 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 20U 205 206 Type of Site Pueblo XXX X XX X X X X Pithouse ? ? ? Cists Surface Storage XX ? Sherd Area - Navajo Size 3-U 2+ 2-3 1 1-2 6-8 2-U 2+ U 8-10 10-12 6-8 3-U Layout I U III I U II LLI Construction M S H MM MM s HH M H M Orientation S S SB ? B E SB E SB S E SB SB Kiva S SB S? E SB SE S E SB SB Trash 3 X S XX SB SE X SE SB E SB SB Physiography 0 CCC CCC C CC 0 CC TABLE 21 — Continued Structural Data of the Black Creek Locality Sites in Arizona K:8: 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 21U 21$ 216 217 218 219 Type of Site Pueblo X X X X X Pithouse Cists Surface Storage Sherd Area Navajo Size 8-10 10 8-10 1-2 7 3-U 1 3-U 3-U 1 7-10 6-8 Layout I UU I UU Construction MMMMHMM M M M M M Orientation S EES SB E Kiva E E SB B Trash SEE XXX S X X SB E Physiography CCC CCCC C C B E C C TABLE 21 — Continued Structural Data of the Black Creek Locality Sites in Arizona K:8: 't ■ 220 221 222 22U 225 226 221 228 229 230 231 232 Type of Site Pueblo x x x x 2 x x XXX Pithouse Gists Surface Storage Sherd Area Navajo Size 1 20-25 10-lU 6-8 10-lU 8-10 10-12 ? 3-5 6-10 3 1-2 Layout I I I I L I III • I Construction M M M M M M . M s M MMM Orientation B S E ? E,S S S SB E S B Kiva S s SB Trash X S,E E,W X X S s s SB E X X 201 Physiography EBBBB C c c C E C 0 C TABLE 21 - Continued Structural Data of the Black Creek Locality Sites in Arizona K:8: 233 23U 235 236 237 238 239 2li0 2ia 2U2 2U3 2Wi 2h5 Type of Site Pueblo X X X X X X X XXXX X Pithouse Cists Surface Storage Sherd Area X Navajo Size 6-8 3-5 20 10-12 U-6 8 8-10 5-7 5-7 2-U 3 3-5 Layout L I TL II L II II I Construction M M MMMMM M H H MM Orientation SE E S S S E SE S W? S SS Kiva SE E 2S S SE S SS 2NE Trash SE X SS XX SES sw S s s 202 Physiography CCC c CC C C C c C c c TABLE 21 — Continued Structural Data of the Black Creek Locality Sites in Arizona K:12: 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 2k 25 26 27 28 29 30 Type of Site Pueblo X X XX XX X X XXXX Pithouse ? Cists Surface Storage Sherd Area X Navajo H3 Size 3-U U-6 6-9 U-6 1-2 20-25 15-20 2? 3 8? 5* U-6 Layout I I u LLI? I Construction MHM M MHM M M M M M Orientation ? S sw SE E W W W W W S Kiva S S Trash X S sw SE XX W w SW? W W w S Physiography C CCC P E CF F c FF F c [TABLE 21 — Continued 'Structural Data of the Black Creed Locality Sites in Arizona K:12: 3k 35> 36 37 38 39 Uo ig U2 U3 UU Type of Site Pueblo x x x xxxxxxxx Pithouse Cists Surface Storage Sherd Area Navajo Size 2-3 U-6 6-8 2 10-lU 2-3 U-6 12-16 6-8 8-12 12-lU Ii—jJ 16-18 5-6 Layout I I L S L I ITILF L L u Construction HMM M M M M M M M M MMM Orientation SS ME? ? S S? NE S svr SB NESS SE Kiva S s NE 2S 2SW SB 2NE S s SB Trash XX X X S X NE S S SB NE SB SB SE Physiography c c C c c c c CC CCCCC TABLE 21 — Continued Structural Data of the Black Creek Locality Sites in Arizona K:12: ______US U6 U7 U8 U9 $0 51 $2 53 5U 55 S6 57 58 Type of Site Pueblo xxxxxxxxx xxxx Pithouse x Cists Surface Storage Sherd Area Navajo Size 5-6 1U-16 U-5 b-6 6-8 3-U U-5 3 3 ? 10-12 6-8 lt-5 8-10 Layout U L i u I I L II ? II i L Construction M M MMMHM M M s M H MM Orientation SB ::S S SBNB SB SB SB S¥ ? SS S S Kiva SB S s SBNE SB SB SB SW SS s 23 Trash SB s s SB NE SB SB SB sw X S SB X S ro Physiography C c c C CC CC c c C C c C % TABLE 21 — Continued Structural Data of the Black Creek Locality r Sites in Arizona K:12: $9 60 6l 62 63 6U 65 66 6? 68 69 70 71 72 Type of Site Pueblo XX X X X Pithouse Cists Surface Storage Sherd Area Navajo Size 6-7 10-lU 10-12 1-2 3-U 2-3 6 -8 2 6 -8 6 -8 6 -8 u 10-12 U-5 Layout L L u II III L I I I U i Construction M H M H H MM MM M M MM M Orientation SB SE SE SS SE SB S S SE S S SB SE Kiva SB SE s SE S SE Trash X SE SE X s X SE S S SE S s X SE Physiography CCCC E EEE E C c c c c TABLE 21 — Continued Structural Data of the Black Creek Locality Sites in Arizona K:12: 73 23$ 236______• Type of Site Pueblo x XX Pithouse Cists Surface Storage Sherd Area Navajo Size ? 9-11 1-2 Layout I I Construction M,S M M Orientation SS Kiva S Trash s X Physiography C E E TABLE 22 Structural Data of the Rio Puerco Locality Sites in Arizona K:12: 7U 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 8U 85 86 87 Type of Site Pueblo X X X 2 X XXX X XX Pithouse X X Cists XX Surface Storage ? Sherd Area X Navajo Size ? ??? a? 10-13 2 6-7 6-8 7-9 a-6 a-6 10-12 Layout ? ? I? 7 17 I I IU L i I u Construction s ? M 7 MM M M M MMM M Orientation S? 7 S? S S S s SB S SB SB Kiva 3S? S SS s SB S SB SB Trash XXXX S s S s s SB s SB SB Physiography c CBDDD c c c c C c 0 C TABLE 22 — Continued Structural Data of the Rio Puerco Locality Sites in Arizona K:12: ______88 89 90 91 92 93 9h 9$ 96 97 98 99 100 101 Type of Site Pueblo x x xxxxxxxxxxxx Pithouse Cists x Surface Storage Sherd Area Navajo Size 2 U-5 iU-18 a-6 a-5 U-5 a-6 a-6 8-10 a-5 a-6 a-6 2-3 8-10 Layout If i T i i I i i U i i L I u Construction M MMMHMM M M M MH HH Orientation Sf S SB SB SB SB SB S SB E SB SB B SB Kiva S SB SB SB S SB SB SE Trash XX SB SB SB SB SB s SB E SB SB B SB Physiography 0 C C C C C CCC CCCC C TABLE 22 — Continued (Structural Data of the Rio Puerco Locality Sites in Arizona Kil2: 102 103 10U 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 Type of Site Pueblo Pithouse Cists Surface Storage Sherd Area Navajo Size 3 5-7 30 7-9 2-3 2 6 1 1 U-5 2-3 7 Layout I U 21,T ' L II U 1? I 7 Construction HMMMM M MH M s H 7 Orientation SB SB 23, SE SB SB S SB 7 S s SB 7 Kiva SB SB 28 SB SB Trash SB SB SB SB SB S SB X S s SE 210 Physiography CC 0 C C C C C CB BB C TABLE 22 — Continued Structural Data of the Rio Puerco Locality Sites in Arizona K:12t 11$ 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 12b 12$ 126 127 Type of Site Pueblo x* x Pithouse X Cists X Surface Storage Sherd Area Navajo Size 6 9-11 8 2-3 7-9 2-3 2-3 3-U 1-2 2-U w Layout I US I U X I u I II Construction MMMHMM MM M M M Orientation S SE E SE SE S S S S S Kiva SE SE SE SE Trash S SE X SE SE X S S X S X Physiography CC CCC C c c c c C C TABLE 22 — Continued Structural' Data of the Rio Puerco Locality Sites in Arizona Kzl2: 128 129 130 131 132 133 13U 135 136 137 138 139 lUo Type of Site Pueblo X XXX XX X X X X XX Pithouse Cists X Surface Storage Sherd Area X Navajo Size 2-3 20-2U ? 9-11 6-8 1-2 2 2-3 2-3 10-12 5-6 6-8 Layout I T ? II IIII I L I Construction MMM M M MM H * M MHH Orientation SB SB S S SB S S SB SB SB SB Kiva 2SE 28 S S SB SB SB SB Trash X SB S s SB X S SB SB SB SB 212 Physiography 0 C c CC c CC CC C CC ;TABUS 22 — Continued sStructural Data of the Rio Puerco Locality Sites in Arizona K:12: U q 1U2 1U3 1UU 1U5 1U6 1U7 1U8 1U9 1^0 IgL 102 153 Type of Site Pueblo X X X X X Pithouse X X X X Cists Surface Storage X X X X Sherd Area Navajo Size 6-8 2-3 10-12 3 ? 2+ U-5 3 2U-28 6-8 3-U 2-3 3-U Layout T I T I u I 1 I E L I I I Construction MMM M s s s s MM MMM Orientation SB SB SB S s s s SBSSS S S Kiva SB SB S 2S ? Trash SB SB SB S s X s X SB SB X S S Physiography C CC C c c c CE BE C B e TABLE 22 — Continued Structural Data of the Rio Puerco Locality Sites in Arizona K:12: 15k 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 16k 165 166 Type of Site Pueblo X X X X X XX Pithouse XXX ? 7 Cists Surface Storage X X X X Sherd Area Navajo Size 2-3 6-8 8-12 12-lk 18-22 k-6 U”6 20~2k k-8 k 4-6 10-12 3 Layout II U i L I i F II i i I Construction M M MMM s s M S M s s S Orientation SB SB E SB SB s E? E E SB E SB SE Kiva SB,W E SE SB E SE Trash NW SB E SB S s X E X SE E SE SE Physiography C CC C c c C C C C C CC TABLE 22 — Continued Structural Data of the Rio Puerco Locality Sites in Arizona K:12: 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 17U 175 176 177 178 179 Type of Site Pueblo XXX X X X X X X X X Pithouse X Cists Surface Storage XX Sherd Area Navajo Size U-6 U-6 U-5 3-U 10-12 6-8 3 10-13 3-U U-6 2-3 19-21 12-lU Layout I I u I u I 1 u II IF L Construction MMM M M MM M M M M M M Orientation E SE EE SE SE E E SE E SB SE Kiva E SB SE B E SB 2SE SE Trash SE E SE E E SE SE E E SB E SE SE Physiography CCCC C C .C C C CC CC TABLE 22 — Continued Structural Data of the Rio Puerco Locality Sites in Arizona K:12: 180 181 182 183 18U 18$ 186 18? 188 189 190 191 192 Type of Site Pueblo Pithouse Cists Surface Storage Sherd Area Navajo Size 6 U-6 U-6 8-10 U-6 2-3 2-3 3-U 10-12 U-6 8-10 U-6 6-8 Layout I L I I* IIIIL I U l L Construction MMM MM M MM M M H MM Orientation SB S SB S SB ?S SB B S SB S SB Kiva SB s SB s SB B S SB SB Trash SB S SB s SB X S SB E s SB S S Physiography C CC c C C c CC c C c C I TABLE 22 — Continued Structural Data of the Rio Puerco Locality Sites in Arizona K:12: 193 19U 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 20U 205 Type of Site Pueblo X X XX XXX X X X Pithouse X X 7 Cists Surface Storage XXX Sherd Area Navajo Size 2-3 3-h 10-12 8-10 6-8 6-8 6-8 6-8 2-3 1-2 12-11; U-6 3-U Layout I ITI U U? U U I I L II Construction MM M MMMMM M H M M M Orientation S SB SB S S S B E E 7 S NE Kiva SB 2 SB S E B NB Trash S SB SB s S s E BB X S X SB physiography C C BBB B B;.. BB 0 EEE TABLE 22 — Continued Structural Data of the Rio Puerco Locality Sites in Arizona K:12: 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 2lU 215 216 217 218 Type of Site Pueblo Pithouse Cists Surface Storage Sherd Area Navajo Size lt-6 k-7 3-h 6-8 1 U-6 2-3 6 6-7 16-18 5-7 Layout I IL II I L LI Construction M M H M M M MM MHH Orientation N N S? SB SBS E SB SB S Kiva SB SB S B SB SB S Trash XX S SB S B SB SB S Physiography B FI F2 FI C B F2 CC C C CC TABLE 22 — Continued Structural Data of the Rio Puerco Locality Sites in Arizona K:12: ______219 220 221 222 223 22k 22g 226 227 228 229 230 231 Type of Site Pueblo xxxxxxxxx xxx? Pithouse ? Cists Surface Storage Sherd Area Navajo Size U-6 6-8 6-8 U-6 2-3 1-2 6 U-6 6-8 35-Uo 6-8 1 7 Layout III I I I U I I F I Construction M MM M MMMM M MM M Orientation S S S SB SE E SB SE SB SE SS Kiva SSSSE SE SE SE 2SB S Trash s S s SE SE E SE SE SE SE S Physiography c c c C c C CC CC C F2 C 8 TABLE 22 — Continued Structural Data of the Rio Puerco Locality Sites in Arizona K:12: Sites in Arizona K:ll: 232 233 23k 3 U 5 6 7 8 Type of Site Pueblo Pithouse Cists Surface Storage Sherd Area Navajo Size U-6 h-6 6-8 13-15 6-8 lt-6 5-7 1 1 16-18 3-5 Layout I I U F I I l V I Construction HMM HMM M MM Orientation S s s SB SB ESB B E SB E Kiva S s S SB 2SE B SB SB E Trash S s S B SB B SB E SW SB B 220 Physiography c c c c c CC CCCC ITABLE 22 — Continued [Structural Data of the Rio Puerco Locality . Sites in Arizona K:ll: 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 Type of Site Pueblo Pithouse Cists 7 Surface Storage ? Sherd Area Navajo Size 6-8 10-12 16-18 10-12 5-9 3-U U U-6 7 8-10 U-6 Layout II L I B I i II I Construction M M M MMMMM M M Orientation S SB SB S? S S s S7 S SW Kiva S 2SB SB NS s s NS SW Trash s 2SE SB S S s s S X S S Physiography c CCC C c c CCC C TABLE 23 Structural Data of the Kin-li-chee Greek Locality Sites in Arizona K:3: 1 2 3 h 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Type of Site Pueblo 3 x 7 XXXX X X X Pit ho use XXX Cists Surface Storage X X X Sherd Area Navajo H2 Size 7-5 2 Uo-5o 3 3-5 6-8 6-8 3 h-6 lU-16 16-18 2-3 1 Layout ISI,T,LI X U II L LI Construction M M M M s MMHS H MM Orientation S s 5E,s,? sw SB ? SB E SB E SB SB E Kiva C 2GK,SE NW,SE SB E SB B 2SB SB Trash S x E XX XX ES E SB X SB 222 Physiography F2 El 0 c C C C CC C C C E TABLE 23 — Continued Structural Data of the Kin-li-chee Creek Locality Sites in Arizona K:3: ______1U 15 16 17 18 1? 20 21 22 23 2U 2$ 26 27 Type of Site Pueblo xxxxxxxxxxxxxx Pithouse . Cists Surface Storage Sherd Area Navajo Size k~& 10—12 6-8 5-7 5-10 25-35 6-7 1U-18 1 U-7 6-8 1 2-3 8-10 Layout i I L Construction M M H M M M MM H M MMM M Orientation SB SE SB SB S s N S Stf E W SE E SE Kiva 2SE SE ? Trash SE SB SE X S s NS X E X X SB Physiography CC C F • F F2 F2 F2 FF FFI FL F TABLE 23 — Continued Structural Data of the Kin-li-chee Creek Locality Sites in Arizona K:3: Sites in Arizona K:6: 28 29 30 31 32 33 3h 2 3 h 5 6 7 Type of Site Pueblo X X X X X X XXX Pithouse ? ?? X Cists X Surface Storage X XX X Sherd Area Navajo Size 10-15 1 20-25 1-2 8-10 1 U-6 3-U U-5 2-1* 6-8 6-7 3-U Layout ? I i CII I Construction M M M M M MM s S S s S,M M Orientation S SB S E S S S? SB S s s SB SB Kiva c SB SB Trash XXX ES S X SB S s s SB SB Physiography FI FI F2 FF FI F C c c c C 0 TABLE 23 — Continued Structural Data of the Kin-li-chee Creek Locality Sites in Arizona K:6: 8 9 10 11 12 13 lit 15 16 17 18 Type of Site Pueblo X X X X XXX Pithouse %X XX X Cists X XX Surface Storage X X Sherd Area Navajo Size 3-U ? U-5 1U-16 3 3 lt-6 2-3 6-8 12-lU a-6 Layout I 1 1 I I II F L? Construction H M S,MMM S s MS,M H M Orientation SB E SE SE SE SE S S S Kiva SB E 3SE SE Trash SB X E SE SE SE SE X S X X Physiography C c CCCCCC C c c (TABLE 23 — Continued ;Structural Data of the Kin-li-chee Creek Locality Sites in Arizona K:7: 1 2 3 u 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 1U Type of Site Pueblo X XX XX X XX X XX Pithouse X XX X X Cists Surface Storage X XX Sherd Area Navajo Size 3 2 2 1 10-15 11-15 1 8-10 6-7 3-U 3-U 2-3 2-3 2-3 Layout 1 B I I II I Construction M M M M M M M H H H s S S,M S Orientation S S SSSSSS s S SE. SE SE SE Kiva C SE Trash XXX X s s X s X S SB SE SE SE Physiography SI SI FIFI F F El c FI FI C CC C TABLE 2U Structural Data of the Nazline Wash Locality Sites in Arizona K:2: Sites in Arizona K:3: 1 2______35 36 37 38 39 UP iq U2 U3 Type of Site Pueblo X X X X X X Pithouse XX Cists Surface Storage X X Sherd Area x X X Navajo S Size 1-2 2 3 1-2 10-11 1U-18 2-3 U-6 Layout I I I Construction M MMM M M S S Orientation S NNWSSS S s Kiva S Trash X X S X X X s Physiography F FIFI FI C FI FI FI c 0 c TABLE 2h — Continued ,Structural Data of the Nazlini Wash Locality Sites in Arizona K:3$ Sites in Arizona E:lU: Wi U5 U6 hi U8 1*9 5o 51 52 1 2 3 U 5 Type of Site . Pueblo X X Pithouse X X X X X Gists Surface Storage X X XXX Sherd Area XXX XX Navajo B,S FF Size' 2-3 3-5 U-6 5-6 2 U-6 U-6 5+ u 3 Layout I II III c S Construction S s s s M S H M M M Orientation SB 5,SB s s N s SB SW SB S Kiva SB Trash SB 5,SB s s X s SB X X X Physiography C 0 c c F c 0 FI FI FC FFFI TABLE 2h — Continued Structural Data of the Nazi ini Wash Locality Sites in Arizona Bill*: Sites in Arizona E:l£: 6 7 8 9 11 12 13 3 U 5 6 7 8 Type of Site - Pueblo X X X X X XXXX X Pithouse X? X Cists X Surface Storage Sherd Area X Navajo B B BB Size 1-U 10-20 9-10 i-U 3 6-10 1 1 10-12 U-6 1 3-U Layout Construction M M M M H M M M M M M M Orientation S s s ES NN N ' N E E SB Kiva E7 Trash S s s XXXX XX X SE CM Physiography FI FI FIF FI FIF CF FIF TABLE 2h - Continued Structural Data of the Nazlini Wash Locality Sites in Arizona E:15>: ______9 10 II 12 13 Hi 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 Type of Site Pueblo x x x x x xxxxxxxx Pithouse Cists Surface Storage x Sherd Area Navajo Size 2-3 20-30 ? 6-8 2 6-8 3 6-10 k 1 10-12 6-7 3-7 2 Layout Construction M MM M M S M MM M M M M M Orientation E S SSS S BS N S S S W 1 Kiva 28 S Trash X XX X X S X X X X X Physiography FI F FIF FIF FI F2 FI El F FI FI El TABLE 2h — Continued Structural Data of the Nazlini Wash Locality Sites in Arizona Eil3>: ::______23 2U 25 26 27 28 Type of Site Pueblo X XX X Pithouse XX Cists X X Surface Storage Sherd Area Navajo H2,3 Size 6-10 2 2 11-17 h-$ It-6 Layout Construction M M M s S Orientation S E S S Kiva 2S Trash XXX X X X Physiography FFFF FF TABLE 2$ Structural Data of the Lukochukai-Tohotso-Greasewood Locality Sites in Arizona E:ll: 2 3 U 5 6 7 8 9 10 Type of Site Pueblo XX X 6 XXX Pithouse X X XX Gists X X Surface Storage Sherd Area Navajo Size 3 20-22 3-5 U-6 U-5 20-30 6-10 2 6-8 Layout I U S I S 5l,L S IL Construction M M MM M M M Orientation SS SB SB S S S B Kiva 2S SB 2S S E Trash S S s X X X X s E Physiography c C G C C C 0 c C APPENDIX B Pottery Tabulations need in Tables 26 through 30 Symbols - variety Table 26. Pottery of the Tohatchi-Mexiean Springs locality. a. Navajo Utility b. Sludged brown ware c. Lino Black-on-gray d. Kana-a Black-on-white e. Black Mesa Black-on-white f • Maneos Black-on-white • g# St* Johns Polychrome: Springerville variety h. Kana-a Neck Banded i. Ashiwi Polychrome j. Acoma Polychrome (?) Table 27* Pottery of the Black Creek locality a. Brown ware, early be Little Colorado Corrugated c. Lino Black-on-gray d. Kana-a Black-on-white e. Black Mesa Black-on-white f. KLageto Black-on-white 233 - g. Dogoszhi Black-on-white h. Sbato Black-on-nbite 1. Padre Black-on-white j. Pinedale Black-on-white k. Kin Tiel Black-on-orange l. Gobemador Polychrome m* KLageto Polychrome n. Zuni-Acoma Polychrome ware o. Unfired sherd p. Brown ware, mica tempered q. Jeddito Black-on-yellow Table 28, Pottery of the Rio Puerco locality a. KLageto Black-on-yellow b. Jeddito Black-on-yellow c. Kana-a Black-on-white d. St, Johns Polychrome: Springerville variety e. KLageto Polychrome f. Zuni-Acoma Polychrome ware Table 29, Pottery of the Kin-li-chee Creek locality a. little Colorado Gray b. Navajo Utility c. Smudged brown ware d. Brown ware, late e. Mesa Verde Black-on-white f. Lino Black-on-gray g. Shato Black-on-white h. Citadel Polychrome 1# Ashivi Polychrome j# Gobemador Polychrome Table 30# Pottery of the Naalini wash locality a# Lino Fugitive Red b. Unfired sherd c# Brown ware, unknown de La Plata Black-on-white e. Kiatuthlanna Black-on-white f# Holbrook Black-on-white g. Padre Black-on-white he Kiet Siel Polychrome i# Hop! Polychrome ware j# Gobemador Polychrome k# 2, Sitkyatki Polychrome; 3, Zuni Black-on-white; 3, Zuni-Acoma, thick slipped red ware; 9, Jeddito HLack-on-yellow 1# 2, Ashiwi Polychrome; 2, Polished brown ware m# Jeddito HLack-on-yellow 236 TABLE 26 Pottery of the Tohatchi-Mexican Springs Locality Ceramic Types Sites in New Mexico G:l: 2 3 U 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Plain Lino Gray 1 2 5 17 1 12 10 12 11 Lino Fug. Red 1 1 3 1 1 Slipped Red Corrugated Indent k 9 1 7 1 Plain 1 Patterned Tooled Black-on-white La Plata White Md. 1 1 6 1 1 7 K ’lanna 1 1 Red Mesa 3 1 Puerco 1 3 Puerco Gallup 1 2 Tularosa Klageto McEImo Mesa Verde Unknown 5 Black-on-red La Plata Puerco Wingate St. Johns Polychrome Wingate St. Johns Other 3f 2c Ceramic Period 2,5 ? U ? 2 2 5 2 ? 2 1,2 237 TABLE 26 — Continued Pottery of the Tohatchi-Mexican Springs Locality Ceramic Types Sites in New Mexico G:l: 13 Ut 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 Plain Lino Gray 8 5 lit It 12 13 Lino Fug. Red Slipped Red Corrugated Indent It 1 2 2 1 2 Plain 1 1 Patterned Tooled 1 Black-on-white La Plata White Md. 1 1 K ‘lanna 3 Red Mesa 3 1 1 1 Puerco 1 1 Puerco Gallup 1 2 2 Tularosa KLageto McElmo 2 Mesa Verde Unknown 1 2 2 1 3 Black-on-red La Plata Puerco Wingate 3 St. Johns Polychrome Wingate St. Johns Other 8a 1c 3a Ceramic Period 9 ? ? 5 1? 6 2-U 2 2 9 5 238 TABLE 26 — Continued Pottery of the Tohatchi-Mexican Springs Locality Ceramic Types Sites in New Mexico G:l: 2U 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 3L Plain Lino Gray 3 1 1 Lino Fug. Red Slipped Red 1 1 1 1 1 Corrugated Indent 2 2 1 1 1 2 1 2 1 Plain 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 Patterned 1 2 1 1 Tooled , 2 1 3 1 Black-on-white La Plata 2 White Kd. L K'lanna 1 6 Red Mesa 5 6 18 L 2 L U 3 2 Puerco - 3 1 1 L 3 3 Puerco Gallup 6 9 3 5 2 7 10 9 6 Tularoaa 1 Klageto McElmo 1 3 Mesa Verde 5 Unknown 3 1 Black-on-red La Plata 1 Puerco , 6 1 Wingate St. Johns 3 2 i 2 Polychrome Wingate 3 5 1 St. Johns It U 1 Other lb Ic.ld Ceramic Period 5 5 6 2 6 7 7 6 5 5 3,7 239 (TABLE 26 — Continued [Pottery of the Tohatchi-Mexican Springs Locality Ceramic Types Sites in New Mexico G:l: 35 36 37 38 39 Uo Itl U2 lt3 Itlt U5 Plain ILino Gray 1 1 1 Lino Fug. Red Slipped Red 2 1 1 1 3 Corrugated Indent 1 1 1 1 It 2 It 1 Plain 1 1 1 1 Patterned 1 1 2 1 Tooled 1 1 Black-on-white La Plata White Md. K'lanna Red Mesa 1 u 1 3 9 It 8 It Puerco 6 2 2 2 7 It 1 3 1 5 Puerco Gallup 8 3 5 6 6 k 10 It 5 Tularosa 1 1 1 KLageto 2 1 McElmo 2 2 3 Mesa Verde 1 3 Unknown 3 2 1 Black-on-red La Plata Puerco 1 2 Wingate St. Johns 3 1 2 3 1 Polychrome Wingate 2 k u 2 5 2 1 St. Johns 3 6 7 2 2 Other If Id if Ceramic Period 7 7 5 7 7 7 5 It 3,5 7 7 : 2U0 .TABLE 26 — Continued Pottery of the Tohatchi-Mexican Springs Locality Ceramic Types Sites in New Mexico G:l: L6 U7 U8 19 50 51 52 53 51 55 56 Plain Lino Gray 1 1 5 11 5 Lino Fug. Red 2 Slipped Red Corrugated Indent 1 3 1 3 2 5 Plain 1 3 1 Patterned 3 2 1 Tooled 1 1 Black-on-white La Plata 1 1 1 White Md. 1 17 3 15 K'lanna 3 Red Mesa Puerco 1 3 5 1 Puerco Gallup 8 11 12 11 3 9 7 Tularosa KLageto McElmo 3 Mesa Verde Unknown 1 1 Black-on-red la Plata 1 Puerco Wingate St. Johns 1 Polychrome Wingate St. Johns 1 Other Ceramic Period 5 5 5 2,5 6 7 5 2 1-2 1 2 TABLE 26 — Continued Pottery of the Tohatchi-Mexican Springs Locality Ceramic Types Sites in New Mexico G:l: 27 58 59 60 61 62 63 6k 65 66 67 Plain Iiiho Gray 8 9 1 8 30 Lino Pug* Red it Slipped Red 2 Corrugated Indent 3 1 It 1 3 5 2 1 Plain 1 1 Patterned 1 Tooled 2 Black-on-white La Plata 2 White Md. 2 1 2 K'lanna 3 Red Mesa 3 Puerco 13 3 1 2 It 2 Puerco Gallup 9 6 9 5 3 6 2 Tularosa KLageto McElmo. 2 Mesa Verde 5 1 Unknown 1 2 1 1 Black-on-red La Plata 1 Puerco 5 Wingate 1 3 3 St. Johns Polychrome Wingate 1 1 St. Johns Other Ceramic Period 2?525577552 2k2 TABLE 26 — Continued Pottery of the Tohatchi-Mexican Springs Locality Ceramic Types Sites in New Mexico Gil: 68 69 70 71 72 73 7U 75 76 Plain Lino Gray 1 2 1 2 1 Lino Fug. Red Slipped Red 1 1 3 1 Corrugated Indent 2 2 1 U 2 3 2 k 3 Plain 2 1 1 Patterned 1 1 1 Tooled 2 2 Black-on-white . La Plata White Md. U K'lanna 3 2 2 1 Red Mesa 1 1 u 1* 5 Puerco 7 2 1 1 5 1 Puerco Gallup U 10 8 5 7 9 U 13 10 Tularosa 1 1 Klageto McElmo 1 Mesa Verde 1 Unknown 1 3 1 Black-on-red . La Plata Puerco 1 2 1 1 Wingate St. Johns Polychrome Wingate 1 2 St. Johns 1 1 Other 2h Ceramic Period 6 6 6 2,5 7 5 3,5 7 h,7 TABLE 26 — Continued Pottery of the Tohatchi-Mexican Springs Locality Ceramic Types Sites1 in New Mexico G:2: Sites in New Mexico G:5: 12 12 3 L5 6 Plain Lino Gray 10 12 12 Lino Fug* Red 1 Slipped Red 7 1 Corrugated Indent k 2 1L 3 1 Plain 3 1 Patterned 1 Tooled 1 Black-on-white La Plata - White Kd. 117 7 K ’lanna 2 Red Mesa 3 5 2 Puerco 2 8 3 6 7 Puerco Gallup 5 117 2 1L Tularosa Klageto McElmo 1 7 Mesa Verde k Unknown 1 1 11 Black-on-red La Plata Puerco 2 12 1 Wingate 6 1 1 St. Johns Polychrome Wingate 1 St. Johns 1 Other 9i Ceramic Period 1? 7 7 2,7 2,6 2,5 6 2 TABLE 26 — Continued Pottery of the Tohatchi-Mexican Springs Locality Ceramic Types Sites in New Mexico G:$: •• 78 9 10 11 12 13 lit 15 16 17 Plain Lino Gray 7 L 3 5 6 1 Lino Fug. Red h Slipped Red 1 Corrugated Indent 1 7 1 3 3 1 1 1 3 Plain 1 1 1 Patterned 1 Tooled 1 It Black-on-white La Plata 2 1 1 White Md. 3 1 1 1 K'lanna 1 Red Mesa 1 2 1 1 3 1 Puerco 1 1 6 3 3 6 Puerco Gallup 2 2 7 2 k 6 6 3 Tularosa 1 KLageto 1 McElmo 1 2 3 Mesa Verde Unknown 1 1 1 1 2 Black-on-red La Plata Puerco It Wingate 1 5 2 2 1 St. Johns Polychrome Wingate 3 2 St. Johns Other I f Ceramic Period 2,5 L 2,5 1,5 L 6 5 7 2,7 2,6 2,6 2U5 \ . . TABLE 26 — Continued Pottery of the Tohatchi-Mexican Springs Locality Ceramic Types Sites in New Mexico G:5: 18 19 20 21 22 23 2L 25 26 27 28 Plain Lino Gray 8 1 3 h 5 2 9 h 3 2 Lino Fug. Red Slipped Red 1 2 2 Corrugated Indent 3 1 2 1 5 Plain Patterned 3 Tooled Black-on-white La Plata 2 7 2 White Md. 1 6 5 2 2 1 K'lanna 1 2 3 L 1 Red Mesa, L 1 L Puerco Z 1 5 5 6 3 Puerco Gallup 2 2 7 5 5 L Tularosa Klageto McElmo Mesa Verde Unknown 1 1 3 Black-on-red La Plata Puerco k Wingate 3 St. Johns Polychrome Wingate St. Johns Other If if Ceramic Period ? 2,5 2,5 2 2 2 1-3 5 2,6 5 L-5 21*6 TABLE 26 — Continued Pottery of the Tohatchi-Mexican Springs Locality Ceramic Types Sites in New Mexico G$5$ 29 30 31 32 33 3h 35 36 37 38 39 Plain Lino Gray 17 1 2 1 1 Lino Fug. Red Slipped Red Corrugated Indent 1 1 2 3 2 1 3 1 1* 2 Plain 3 i 1 1 1 Patterned 1 Tooled 3 2 1 Black-on-white La Plata 1 1 i White Md. 9 2 1 K'lanna 3 2 Red Mesa 3 $ 2 3 7 5 1* 5 5 Puerco 5 i 2 3 k 9 i Puerco Gallup 12 6 18 11 8 5 10 11* 9 8 Tularosa KLageto McElmo 1 Mesa Verde Unknown 1 Black-on-red La Plata Puerco Wingate k St. Johns Polychrome Wingate 1 St. Johns Other 3d2h Iblh Ceramic Period 2,5 2,5 2 2,5 L-5 5 2,5 L-5 L-5 5 7 2U7 TABLE 26 — Continued Pottery of the Tohatchi-Mexican Springs Locality Ceramic Types Sites in New Mexico G:£: Uo lil la Ii3 a U5 w 1*7 1*8 1*9 5o Plain Lino Gray l 1 i Lino Fug. Red 1 Slipped Red i Corrugated Indent i 2 2 3 1 3 2 3 2 Plain 3 2 1 1 Patterned 1 Tooled 1 1 2 2 Black-on-white La Plata l White Kd. 1 1 1 K'lanna 2 1 6 3 1 Red Mesa 6 1 2 2 5 1 1 7 3 Puerco 3 U 2 5 2 3 1 7 Puerco Gallup 8 3 7 3 5 5 5 6 6 2 8 Tularosa KLageto McElmo 1 Mesa Verde Unknown 1 2 Black-on-red - La Plata 1 1 Puerco 1 U Wingate 1 St. Johns Polychrome Wingate k St. Johns Other 2h *4 lb,lh Ceramic Period 2,6 2,5 2,7 5 5 U-5 5 5 l*-5 5 U-5 2U8 TABLE 26 — Continued Pottery of the Tohatchi-Mexican Springs Locality Ceramic Types Sites in New Mexico G:f>: 51 52 53 58 Plain lino Gray 1 U Lino Fug, Red Slipped Red k 1 Corrugated Indent 2 1 3 Plain 1 1 1 Patterned Tooled Black-on-white La Plata White Md, K'lanna 1 1 Red Mesa Puerco U 9 7 9 Puerco Gallup U 3 5 1 Tularosa Klageto McElmo Mesa Verde 1 Unknown 2 Black-on-red La Flata Puerco 2 Wingate h St. Johns Polychrome Wingate k St. Johns Other Ceramic Period 5 7 6 U-5 2k9 TABLE 27 Pottery of the Black Creek Locality Ceramic Types Sites in Arizona K:lt: 1 2 3 U 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Plain Iiino Gray 2 U 1U Kana-a Gray 5 Navajo Utility 13 Slipped Red Corrugated Indent 3 2 Plain 3 Black-on-white La Plata White Md. 1 K'lanna 3 Red Mesa h 1 Puerco Puerco Gallup 1 Reserve Tularosa Sosi Flagstaff Tusayan Holbrook Walnut Unknown 1 1 2 2 Black-on-red Puerco Wingate St. Johns Unknown Polychrome Wingate St. Johns Ashiwi Other 3q Ceramic Period 2-3 2-3 250 TABLE 27 — Continued Pottery of the Black Creek Locality Ceramic Types Sites in Arizona K:L: 12 13 lit 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 Plain Lino Gray 9 U 3 1U 1 2 8 Kana-a Gray 2 Navajo Utility lit Slipped Red Corrugated Indent 2 8 1 It 5 It It Plain 3 3 2 Black-on-white La Plata White Md. K'lanna 2 3 Red Mesa 1 5 5 Puerco 1 1 5 1 Puerco Gallup It 19 10 9 Reserve Tularosa Sosi It Flagstaff Tusayan Holbrook Walnut Unknown 2 2 3 It Black-on-red Puerco Wingate St. Johns Unknown Polychrome Wingate St. Johns Ashiwi 7 Other la lo,lp Ceramic Period k 3 3 5 1,5,9 5 5 5 5 251 TABLE 27 — Continued Pottery of the Black Creek Locality Ceramic Types Sites in Arizona K:U: CM cr\ w 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 Plain Lino Gray U U 1 5 1 Kana-a Gray i 3 2 k - Navajo Utility U3 36 Slipped Red 1 5 Corrugated indent i k 1 9 8 U Plain 3 Black-on-white La Plata White Md. K'lanna 2 k 3 Red Mesa 3 k Puerco 1 3 1 13 1 Puerco Gallup 13 1 1 6 20 Reserve Tularosa Sosi 9 Flagstaff Tusayan Holbrook 1 Walnut Unknown 1 h l Black-on-red Puerco 1 Wingate 1 5 1 St. Johns Unknown Polychrome Wingate 8 St. Johns Ashiwi 15 Other 11 lb lb Ceramic Period 3 ? 3,5 2,5 2 9 6,9 5 5 7 6 252 TABLE 27 — Continued Pottery of the Black Creek Locality Ceramic Types Sites in Arizona K:U: ______3U 35 36 37 38 39 UP W. U2 Plain Lino Gray 1 Kana-a Gray Navajo Utility Slipped Red Corrugated Indent 3 3 9 7 8 2 Plain 2 1 2 7 1 Black-on-white La Plata White Md. K ’lanna U Red Mesa 1 Puerco Puerco Gallup 2 Reserve Tularosa Sosi Flagstaff T us ay an Holbrook Walnut Unknown 3 L 2 2 1 Black-on-red Puerco Wingate St. Johns Unknown Polychrome Wingate St. Johns Ashiwi Other Ceramic Period ? 5 2,3 5 5 ? 3 2-3 5 253 TABLE 27 **** Continued Pottery of the Black Creek Locality Ceramic Types Sites in New Mexico G:5>: ______5U 55 56 $7 59 60 61 62 Plain Lino Gray 12 3 2 Kana-a Gray 2 Navajo Utility Slipped Red 2 Corrugated Indent 3 2 3 12 12 Plain 2 1 2 2 Black-on-white La Plata 2 White Md. K'lanna 1 Red Mesa 1 6 2 5 6 Puerco 3 5 1 3 Puerco Gallup 3 2 2 10 5 8 Reserve Tularosa Sosi Flagstaff Tusayan Holbrook Walnut Unknown U 12 2 13 Black-on-red Puerco k Wingate 1 St. Johns Unknown Polychrome Wingate 1 St. Johns Ashiwi Other Ceramic Period l 5 6 7 3,5 ? 5 6 25U !TABLE 27 — Continued Pottery of the Black Creek Locality Ceramic Types Sites in Arizona K:8: 1 2 3 u 5 6 7 8 9 10 n Plain Lino Gray 3 2 20 Kana-a Gray 2 Navajo Utility r Slipped Red 1 1 Corrugated Indent k 1 7 k 8 9 3 k 8 6 Plain 3 2 h 3 3 2 3 Black-on-white La Plata White Md. 1 K'lanna 3 Red Mesa 2 3 Puerco 1 5 3 7 9 5 U 10 Puerco Gallup 16 5 7 12 12 2 13 Reserve Tularosa 1 Sosi 2 1 Flagstaff Tusayan Holbrook 1 Walnut Unknown 5 2 5 2 3 Black-on-red Puerco Wingate 1 St. Johns Unknown Polychrome Wingate St. Johns Ashiwi Other 2a Ceramic Period 1,6 ? 5 5 2 3-5 6 6 2,6 5 5 255 TABLE 27 — Continued Pottery of the Black Creek Locality Ceramic Types Sites in Arizona K:8: 12 13 1U 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 Plain Lino Gray Kana-a Gray Navajo Utility Slipped Red Corrugated Indent It 6 5 2 6 5 6 2 1 1 6 Plain 1 1 3 1 7 8 7 3 Black-on-white La Plata White Md. It K'lanna 1 It Red Mesa 1 5 5 12 2 Puerco 1 It 9 6 l 3 1 2 It Puerco Gallup 5 16 11 12 10 9 It 7 8 Reserve Tularosa Sosi 2 It Flagstaff Tusay an Holbrook Walnut Unknown Black-on-red Puerco Wingate St. Johns Unknown Polychrome Wingate St. Johns Ashiwi Other Ceramic Period 5 3,5 6 ? 5 5 5 2,5 5 5 5 2 # TABLE 27 — Continued Pottery of the Black Creek Locality Ceramic Types Sites in Arizona K:8: 23 2U 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 Plain Lino Gray 3 Kana-a Gray Navajo Utility Slipped Red 1 Corrugated Indent 5 7 2 6 1 2 2 5 9 5 Plain U 7 1 2 3 9 1 3 Black-on-white La Plata 1 White Md. K'lanna 3 Red Mesa $ 1 13 12 1 1 6 a i a Puerco 2 2 2 5 2 3 k 3 10 Puerco Gallup 10 5 2 8 U 7 17 3 8 Reserve Tularosa Sosi Flagstaff Tusayan Holbrook Walnut Unknown Black-on-red Puerco Wingate St. Johns Unknown Polychrome Wingate St. Johns Ashiwi Other Ceramic Period 5 2,5 5 ? $ 5 257 TABLE 27 — Continued Pottery of the Black Creek Locality Ceramic Types Sites in Arizona K:8: 3U 35 36 37 38 39 UP la U2 U3 lOi Plain Lino Gray 9 1 2 1 Kana-a Gray 1 Navajo Utility Slipped Red 1 Corrugated Indent 3 5 L 2 6 8 6 6 7 1 Plain 2 2 1113 1 Black-on-white La Plata White Md# K'lanna L Red Mesa 1 L 1 2 2 3 2 Puerco 2 1 3 L 5 U k 3 15 1 1 Puerco Gallup 1 9 9 9 6 10 7 11 9 It L Reserve Tularosa 1 Sosi 1 Flagstaff Tusayan Holbrook Walnut Unknown 6 1 2 3 1 Black-on-red Puerco 1 Wingate 2 St. Johns Unknown Polychrome Wingate St. Johns Ashiwi Other 1c Ceramic Period 3,5 5 5 6 5 5 5 5 6 5 5 258 -TABLE 27 — Continued Pottery of the Black Creek Locality Ceramic Types Sites in Arizona K:8: U5 U6 U7 U8 U9 50 5L 52 53 51* 55 Plain Lino Gray 3 1 Kana-a Gray 1 Navajo U tility Slipped Red 1 2 Corrugated Indent U 3 2 3 8 6 U 8 10 U It Plain u 5 3 1 2 2 1 Black-on-white La Plata White Md. K'lanna Red Mesa 11 1 2 3 2 2 1 3 Puerco 2 6 1 3 6 It 7 1 2 3 2 Puerco Gallup 8 6 2 7 9 6 10 11 12 7 10 Reserve Tularosa Sosi Flagstaff Tusay an Holbrook Walnut Unknown Black-on-red Puerco Wingate St. Johns Unknown Polychrome Wingate St. Johns Ashiwi Other Ceramic Period 2,5 5 2 # TABLE 27 — Continued Pottery of the Black Creek Locality Ceramic Types Sites in Arizona K:8: 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 6U 65 66 Plain Lino Gray 2 Kana-a Gray Navajo Utility Slipped Red Corrugated Indent 8 3 11 5 8 9 9 3 5 8 2 Plain 2 1 1 U 3 1 3 U Black-on-white La Plata White Md. K'lanna Red Mesa 3 2 3 5 3 1 Puerco 2 3 3 2 1 1 5 5 Puerco Gallup 6 k 3 8 11 9 7 10 8 8 U Reserve Tularosa 1 Sosi 1 Flagstaff Tusayan Holbrook 2 Walnut Unknown 2 2 2 1 1 1 Black-on-red Puerco 1 Wingate « St. Johns Unknown Polychrome Wingate St. Johns Ashiwi Other Id 1c Ceramic Period 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 6 5 1,5 260 TABLE 27 — Continued Pottery of the Black Creek Locality Ceramic Types Sites in Arizona K:8: 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 7U 75 76 77 Plain lino Gray 3 7 3 5 1 3 3 Kana-a Gray Navajo Utility Slipped Red 1 2 1 Corrugated Indent 1 5 1 5 7 a 2 1 2 a Plain k 3 3 3 Black-on-white La Plata 2 2 White Md. 2 K'lanna 3 Red Mesa 1 1 3 Puerco 1 1 1 1 1 3 Puerco Gallup 2 10 5 5 5 Reserve Tularosa 2 1 Sosi 5 2 Flagstaff Tusayan Holbrook 1 Walnut 3 Unknown 2 1 1 1 2 1 Black-on-red Puerco 2 Wingate 1 St. Johns i Unknown Polychrome Wingate l 1 St. Johns 1 Ashiwi Other 17a 26a 26a lb Ceramic Period 1 1 1 5 5 6 5 7 2 3,5 7 261 TABLE 27 — Continued Pottery of the Black Creek Locality Ceramic Types Sites in Arizona K:8: 78 79 80 81 82 83 8U 85 86 87 88 Plain Lino Gray k Kana-a Gray 2 Navajo Utility u 20 1 Slipped Red 1 Corrugated Indent 2 1 9 8 12 Plain 1 3 5 3 Black-on-white La Plata White Md. K ’lanna 1 2 Red Mesa 1 2 Puerco 3 i k Puerco Gallup 5 2 6 Reserve Tularosa Sosi Flagstaff Tusayan Holbrook Walnut Unknown 3 5 Black-on-red Puerco Wingate 1 St. Johns Unknown Polychrome Wingate St. Johns Ashiwi 5 Other le,lg le Ceramic Period U,6 ? ? U 5 5 5 9 9 ? 9 262 'TABLE 27 — Continued Pottery of the Black Creek Locality Ceramic Types Sites in Arizona K:8: 89 90 91 92 93 9k 95 96 97 98 99 Plain Lino Gray 1 2 1 8 3 Kana-a Gray 1 Navajo Utility Slipped Red 2 3 2 1 Corrugated Indent 7 2 6 7 8 It 8 3 1 Plain 2 2 2 Black-on-white La Plata White Md. 3 K'lanna Red Mesa 7 Puerco 2 2 1 It 6 1 Puerco Gallup 2 2 2 1 Reserve Tularosa 1 1 Sosi Flagstaff 2 Tusayan Holbrook 1 1 Walnut 2 Unknown 2 2 3 2 5 Black-on-red Puerco 2 1 1 2 Wingate St. Johns Unknown Polychrome Wingate 2 St. Johns 2 3 Ashiwi Other 212h # 3 m Ceramic Period 5 U 6 5 ? 2,6 263 TABLE 27 — Continued 'Pottery of the Black Creek Locality Ceramic Types Sites in Arizona K:8: 100 101 102 103 lOlt 105 106 107 108 109 Plain Lino Gray Kana-a Gray Navajo Utility Slipped Red 1 2 3 1 Corrugated Indent 3 3 It 7 6 2 6 5 It 6 Plain 1 1 1 1 2 1 Black-on-white • La Plata White Md. K ’lanna 1 Red Mesa Puerco 7 h 2 20 1 3 2 6 Puerco Gallup 3 1 2 10 1 3 1 2 Reserve 1 Tularosa S 1 5 1 Sosi 1 Flagstaff 1 It Tusayan 1 1 1 Holbrook 5 Walnut 3 Unknown 1 3 2 It 6 3 Black-on-red Puerco 1 2 It Wingate 1 1 1 St. Johns 2 1 Unknown It Polychrome Wingate 2 1 3 3 1 3 St. Johns 2 h 3 1 Ashiwi Other 1m Ceramic Period 7 7 7 It,7 5 7 5 7 7 5 26U ’TABLE 27 — Continued Pottery of the Black Creek Locality Ceramic Types Sites in Arizona K:8: no in 112 113 iiA 11$ 116 n? ns n? 120 • Plain liino Gray 2 Kana-a Gray Navajo Utility Slipped Red 1 1 3 Corrugated Indent 3 u 3 3 3 it 2 it z 3 6 Plain 1 1 2 Black-on-white . La Plata 1 White Md. K'lanna Red Mesa u 2 2 3 it Puerco 10 1 5 7 10 2 2 5 3 6 Puerco Gallup $ 2 6 11 2 7 8 3 Reserve Tularosa 1 1 3 Sosi Flagstaff Tusayan Holbrook 1 i 2 Walnut 3 Unknown k 3 2 2 Z Black-on-red . Puerco 1 1 1 1 Wingate 1 St. Johns it Unknown Polychrome Wingate 1 St. Johns 3 2 • Ashiwi Other 2m Ceramic Period 2-3 7 265 TABLE 27 — Continued Pottery of the Black Creek Locality Ceramic Types Sites in Arizona K:8: 121 122 123 12U 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 Plain Lino Gray 2 Kana-a Gray 1 Navajo Utility Slipped Red 1 1 2 3 1 Corrugated indent 2 6 2 3 U 2 3 1 2 3 2 Plain 1 1 1 1 Black-on-white , L a ftLata White Md* K'lanna Red Mesa 2 3 U Puerco 10 5 5 7 2 7 U 7 5 5 5 Puerco Gallup 8 1 7 6 8 5 5 7 9 1 0 Reserve Tularosa 2 1 1 Sosi Flagstaff Tusayan Holbrook l Walnut Unknown 1 3 2 1 2 1 Black-on-red . Puerco 5 Wingate 1 St. Johns Unknown Polychrome Wingate St. Johns Ashiwi Other Ceramic Period 6 3-5 5 266 TABLE 27 — Continued Pottery of the Black Creek Locality Ceramic Types Sites in Arizona K:8: 132 133 13L 135 136 137 •138 139 iLo lid 1L2 Plain Lino Gray Kana-a Gray Navajo Utility Slipped Red 2 1 2 Corrugated Indent 1 3 k 1 2 2 1 2 1 u Plain 1 U 1 1 Black-on-white La Plata "White Md. K'lanna 1 Red Mesa 3 Puerco 5 U 8 1 U 5 7 5 5 9 k Puerco Gallup 10 7 6 k 3 2 3 2 5 3 k Reserve Tularosa 1 Sosi 7 1 Flagstaff Tusayan Holbrook 2 Walnut Unknown 1 1 1 1 3 2 Black-on-red Puerco 2 1 1 Wingate 2 2 2 St* Johns Unknown Polychrome Wingate St. Johns Ashiwi Other Ceramic Period 6 6 6 5 L-5 5 6 5 5 6 6 26? 3AELE 27 — Continued Pottery of the Black Creek Locality Ceramic Type Sites in Arizona K:8: 1U3 i a 1U5 1U6 U 47 1U8 -1U9 150 151 152 153 Plain Lino Gray 3 1 Kana-a Gray 1 Navajo Utility Slipped Red 3 Corrugated Indent 2 2 6 k 2 2 5 2 3 1 5 Plain 2 2 1 1 1 2 2 3 3 Black-on-white . La Plata White Md. 1 K'lanna It Red Mesa 6 2 6 5 5 2 Puerco 9 7 h 3 3 1 2 2 5 1 lit Puerco Gallup 6 5 3 2 9 1 10 7 6 5 21 Reserve Tularosa 5 Sosi Flagstaff Tusayan Holbrook Walnut Unknown 1 l l Black-on-red . Puerco 3 1 1 Wingate St. Johns Unknown Polychrome Wingate' St. Johns 2 Ashiwi Other If Ceramic Period 6 5 5 2,5 5 5 5 6 5 L-5 7 268 TABLE 27 — Continued Pottery of the Black Creek Locality Ceramic Types Sites in Arizona K:8: 15U 155 156 157 158 159 l6o 161 162 163 16U Plain Lino Gray 3 9 3 6 13 1 7 2 1 2 Kana-a Gray Navajo Utility Slipped Red 1 Corrugated Indent 3 3 5 1 1 1 3 1 3 Plain 3 3 2 2 1 2 1 1 2 Black-on-white . La P l a t a ..... White Md. 2 1 1 1 K'lanna 1 3 6 3 1 Red Mesa 7 1 2 u 3 1 8 6 Puerco 6 1 1 1 3 7 8 Puerco Gan up 5 5 1 10 a 10 1 10 7 a Reserve Tularosa Sosi Flagstaff Tusayan Holbrook Walnut Unknown Black-on-red Puerco Wingate St. Johns Unknown Polychrome ; Wingate 1 St. Johns 1 i Ashiwi Other Ceramic Period $ $ 2,5 U-5 5 2 5 2,5 5 2-5 3,7 269 TABLE 27 — Continued Pottery of the Black Creek Locality Ceramic Types Sites in Arizona K:8: 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 17U Plain Lino Gray 6 6 2 8 12 Kana-a Gray 1 1 Navajo Utility Slipped Red Corrugated Indent 2 2 U 3 3 1 1 Plain 2 1 2 Black-on-white La Plata 1 1 White Md. 2 6 3 K'lanna 5 1 h 3 Red Mesa 3 1 k 3 7 Puerco 3 1 k - 3 Puerto Gallup 9 2 h 6 8 Reserve 2 1 Tularosa Sosi Flagstaff Tusayan Holbrook Walnut Unknown Black-on-red fuerco “ Wingate St. Johns Unknown Polychrome Wingate St. Johns Ashiwi Other Ceramic Period 1-2 U-5 5 5 $ 7 3 $ 2 2 270 TABLE 21 — Continued Pottery of the Black Creek Locality Ceramic Types Sites in Arizona K:8: 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 181* 185 186 Plain .... Lino Gray 1U 1 6 1 9 Kana-a Gray Navajo Utility Slipped Red 2 1 1 Corrugated Indent . 2 h 1 k u 2 2 2 Plain 3 1 3 2 1 2 1 Black-on-white . La Plata 3 White Md. 3 6 K ’lanna 1 2 Red Mesa 3 1 5 1 2 Puerco 7 U k 2 It 3 3 5 Puerco Gallup 7 2 3 2 It It 9 1 U Reserve 1 3 3 1 i Tularosa 2 3 Sosi Flagstaff Tusayan Holbrook Walnut 2 Unknown 1 1 2 1 1 Black-on-red . Puerco 1 Wingate 1 St. Johns Unknown Polychrome Wingate St. Johns Ashiwi Other Ceramic Period 1 $. 5 6 2 5 $ 2 2,6 U-5 2 271 TABLE 27 — Continued Pottery of the Black Creek Locality Ceramic Types Sites in Arizona K: 8: $ 5 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 19U 195 Plain ifno Gray 8 1 13 1 10 Kana-a Gray Navajo Utility Slipped Red 1 1 Corrugated Indent 1 5 k 2 2 5 2 Plain 1 1 2 1 Black-on-white . La Plata 2 White Md. 3 1 2 1 k 2 K'lanna Red Mesa 1 1 2 Puerco 7 6 9 k 10 5 6 Puerco Gallup 2 3 3 3 3 3 Reserve 1 1 Tularosa Sosi Flagstaff Tusayan Holbrook Walnut Unknown 1 1 1 2 1 Black-on-red . Puerco 1 Wingate St. Johns 5 Unknown Polychrome Wingate St. Johns 3 Ashiwi Other la 1c lj Ceramic Period $ 7 $ 1-2 6 2,5 2 2,5 2 2,7 5 272 TABLE 27 — Continued Pottery of the Black Creek Locality Ceramic Types Sites in Arizona K:8$ 198 199 200 201 202 203 20U 205 206 207 208 Plain Lino Gray 11 U K&na-a Gray Navajo Utility Slipped Red 2 Corrugated Indent 2 2 3 k 2 3 2 2 2 2 Plain 1 1 2 1 2 2 Black-on-white . La ELaia 1 White Md. 2 K'lanna 1 2 Red Mesa 2 1 2 2 Puerco 2 3 5 n 5 5 6 It U Puerco Gallup $ U h 10 6 5 2 7 5 Reserve 1 Tularosa Sosi 2 2 Flagstaff Tusayan Holbrook Walnut Unknown 3 2 1 1 Black-on-red Puerco 1 3 Wingate 1 St* Johns 1 Unknown Polychrome Wingate St. Johns 1 Ashiwi Other Ceramic Period 2 5 5 » 5 5. 7 5 6. U,6 1,5 273 TABLE 27 — Continued Pottery of the Black Creek Locality Ceramic Types Sites in Arizona K:8: 209 210 211 212 213 21k 21$ 216 217 218 219 Plain Lino Gray 7 Kana-a Gray 1 1 Navajo Utility 7 Slipped Red 1 1 1 1 Corrugated Indent $ 2 k 1 2 $ 2 3 6 Plain 2 2 Black-on-white . La Plata White Md, K'lanna Red Mesa 3 1 2 2 2 Puerco 7 8 2 8 11 $ 1 h 3 k Puerco Gallup 8 3 1 6 3 2 1 2 2 Reserve 2 Tularosa U 1 Sosi 3 Flagstaff Tusayan Holbrook Walnut 1 Unknown 3 2 2 1 $ 3 7 Black-on-red . Puerco U 1 Wingate 1 St. Johns 2 2 Unknown Polychrome Wingate k St. Johns 2 Ashiwi 10 ' Other lg Ceramic Period 27U TABLE 27 — Continued Pottery of the Black Creek Locality Ceramic Types Sites in Arizona K:8: ______220 221 222 223 22U 22$ 226 227 228 229 230 Plain Lino Gray 13 Kana-a Gray Navajo Utility Slipped Red 1 Corrugated Indent 5 13 2 2 1 U 3 3 Plain 3 1 2 2 1 Black-on-white La Plata 1 White Hd. K'lanna Red Mesa 2 3 1 5 3 3 Puerco 3 5 6 2 5 Puerco Gallup 3 i i i i ° 3 3 2 3 Reserve 5 Tularosa 1 2 1 Sosi Flagstaff Tusayan Holbrook Walnut Unknown $ 112 8 2 2 3 Black-on-red Puerco 1 1 Wingate 2 St. Johns Unknown Polychrome Wingate St. Johns 1 Ashiwi Other Ceramic Period 5 6 5 5 5 5 5 1 5 6 7 275 TABLE 27 — Continued Pottery of the Black Creek Locality Ceramic Types Sites in Arizona K:8: 231 232 233 23U 235 236 237 238 239 2k0 2ltl Plain Lino Gray 1 3 2 Kana-a Gray Navajo Utility Slipped Red 1 1 Corrugated Indent 1 3 It 3 2 3 6 1 1 7 Plain 1 3 2 1 It Black-on-white , La KLata White Md. K'lanna 1 Red Mesa 1 6 1 5 2 Puerco 1 2 1 6 It 1 3 Puerco Gallup 2 2 3 3 3 13 Reserve 1 3 1 1 Tularosa 2 Sosi 2 1 1 3 Flagstaff 2 Tusayan 1 Holbrook 2 3 Walnut 5 2 Unknown 2 2 1 3 Black-on-red . fcuerco 3 7 It Wingate 2 1 3 3 1 St. Johns 3 6 Unknown Polychrome Wingate 1 7 St. Johns It Ashiwi Other Ig Ug Ceramic Period 5 7 U, 6 6 7 7 5 6 6 5 5 276 TABLE 27 — Continued Pottery of the Black Creek Locality Ceramic Types Sites in Arizona K:8: Sites in Arizona K:12: 2l|2 21*3 214* 21*5 17 18 19 20 21 22 Plain . Lino Gray 1 1 3 Kana-a Gray 1 Navajo Utility 2 Slipped Red 1 Corrugated Indent 7 1 9 6 3 3 1* 3 i u Plain 1 1 1 2 1 Black-on-white . La £lata... 1 White Md. K'lanna 1 Red Mesa 2 U 1 Puerco 1 3 1 7 1* It 1 Puerco Gallup 11 7 6 12 3 5 5 U 2 Reserve 2 2 Tularosa Sosi 1 Flagstaff Tusayan Holbrook 1 Walnut Unknown k 1 U i 1 U 1 Black-on-red . Puerco 1 1 Wingate St. Johns Unknown Polychrome Wingate St. Johns 2 Ashiwi Other Ceramic Period 5 U-5 5 $ 5 6 1,5 5 7 6,9 277 TABLE 27 — Continued Pottery of the Black Creek Locality Ceramic Types Sites in Arizona K:12: 23 2k 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 Plain !Lino Gray 17 2 2 1 1 Kana-a Gray Navajo Utility k 18 9 Slipped Red . 1 1 Corrugated Indent 3 7 $ 1 3 u 7 2 2 5 2 Plain h 1 1 2 1 1 1 Black-on-white . L a Plata 1 White Md. K*lanna Red Mesa 1 1 Puerco 6 6 1 5 2 2 2 Puerco Gallup 1 3 2 3 2 Reserve 1 2 1 Tularosa 3 Sosi 1 1 1 Flagstaff Tusayan Holbrook 2 Walnut Unknown 2 3 1 2 2 1 3 1 5 1 Black-on-red Puerco Wingate St. Johns Unknown Polychrome Wingate St. Johns Ashiwi Other la 2e.li. 2m 2m Ceramic Period $ 6,9 $ 1? U,9 6 5,9 1,5 U 5 5 ' . 278 TABLE 27 — Continued Pottery of the Black Creek Locality Ceramic Types Sites in Arizona K:12: 3l» 35 36 37 38 39 ItO la 1*2 1*3 1*1* Plain Lino Gray 2 1 1 3 1 5 Kana-a Gray Navajo U tility Slipped Red 1 l 1 2 1 2 Corrugated Indent 3 2 2 3 3 1 2 2 1 2 Plain U 2 1 2 Black-on-white . La Plata 1 2 White Md. 1 2 9 K'lanna 1 1 Red Mesa 2 Puerco 6 3 U 1* 6 1 Puerco Gallup 5 3 3 2 Reserve 2 Tularosa 3 U L 3 Sosi 1 Flagstaff Tusayan Holbrook 1 Walnut 2 Unknown 3 1 5 1 2 1 1 1 3 1 Black-on-red . Puerco 1 Wingate 1 1 St* Johns 1 1 1 Unknown Polychrome Wingate 1 u 1 2 1 St, Johns 1 2 li 5 1* 2 1 Ashiwi Other 5f lb,7f I f I f I f Ceramic Period ? 5 ? 5 2,7 7 2,7 7 7 7 2,7 279 TABLE 27 — Continued 'Pottery of the Black Creek Locality Ceramic Types Sites in Arizona K:12: ______;______U£. k6 U7 U8 U9 5o 52 53 5U 5$ Plain Lino Gray 2 i U 1 2 1 1 10 Kana-a Gray 1 1 Navajo U tility Slipped Bed 2 1 1 Corrugated Indent 3 2 2 k 2 3 152 k Plain 1 2 1 1 2 Black-on-vhite La Plata — 1 1 2 White Md. 1 5 1 K’lanna 1 Red Mesa Puerco 3 u 3 3 U 3 3 U Puerco Gallup 11 8 5 1 1 3 7 Reserve 1 2 Tularosa Sosi . 1 1 Flagstaff Tusayan Holbrook 1 Walnut Unknown 1 1 1 1 1 Black-on-red . t'uerco . 2 Wingate 1 1 St. Johns 1 1 Unknown Polychrome Wingate 1 k St. Johns 2 1 5 Ashiwi Other 5f 7f.lk lb,If Ig Id.le Ceramic Period 1,7 2,7 2,5 U,5 6 5 2,7 5 5 ? 6 280 TABLE 27 — Continued Pottery of the Black Creek Locality Ceramic Types Sites in Arizona K:12: 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 61* 65 66 Plain Lino Gray 7 Kana-a Gray Navajo U tility Slipped Red 2 1 Corrugated Indent 2 1 2 1 2 2 3 5 2 L Plain 3 k 1 2 2 2 Black-on-white . La Plata White Md. K’lanna Red Mesa Puerco 7 5 9 1 9 7 8 1 11 3 Puerco Gallup 2 3 2 7 7 2 5 6 8 3 Reserve 1 L Tularosa Sosi 2 . 1 Flagstaff Tusayan Holbrook Walnut Unknown 1 3 1 2 1 2 Black-on-red . Puerco Wingate St, Johns Unknown 1 1 1 Polychrome Wingate St. Johns 1 Ashiwi Other lb Ceramic Period . $ 5 6 5 6 5 5 5 5 7 5 281 TABLE 27 — Continued Pottery of the Black Creek Locality Ceramic Types Sites in Arizona K:12: 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 235 236 Plain Lino Gray 1 Kana-a Gray Navajo U tility Slipped Red Corrugated Indent 2 2 5 h 5 3 U Plain 3 3 1 1 3 Black-on-white . La Plata White Md. 1 1 K'larina Red Mesa 2 1 1 Puerco 1 5 3 k 3 12 2 7 Puerco Gallup 1 5 U 2 1 3 Reserve Tularosa Sosi Flagstaff Tusayan Holbrook i Walnut Unknown 1 1 1 1 2 Black-on-red . Puerco 1 Wingate St* Johns Unknown Polychrome Wingate 1 St. Johns 1 1 Ashiwi Other Ceramic Period 2,5 7 5 5 2,6 5 5 7 ? 282 TABES 28 V, Pottery of the Rio Puerco Locality Ceramic Types Sites in Arizona K:12z 7L 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 81* Plain Lino Gray 1L 18 1 Lino Pug, Red 1 Kana-a Gray Navajo Utility Broun W, E. 27 1 Brown ¥. Sag. 1 Brown W, L, Slipped Red 2 2 1 Corrugated Indent 3 1 2 2 2 1 3 1 Plain 1 1 2 Black-on-white La Plata White Md. 1 K ,lanna Red Mesa 2 2 1 6 2 Puerco 1 2 3 11 6 6 8 7 Puerco Gallup k L 8 7 6 8 2 3 Tularosa 3 L Reserve 2 Holbrook Kana-a Black Mesa 1 Sosi KLageto n 2 2 Unknown i Black-bn-red Puerco 1 1 3 1 1 1 Wingate 1 1 3 1 St, Johns Unknown Polychrome Wingate L k St, Johns k Other ha,ld,le Ceramic Period 1 1-2 6 7 7 5 6 6 5 6 6 283 TABLE 28 — Continued Pottery of the Rio Puerco Locality Ceramic Types Sites in Arizona K:12: 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 9h 9$ Plain Lino Gray Lino Fug* Red Kana-a Gray Navajo Utility Brown W* E* Brown W* Smg. Brown W. L. Slipped Red Indent U 3 1 1 3 it 2 5 2 3 1 Plain 1 1 2 Black-on-white La Plata White Md. K ’lanna 1 1 Red Mesa 1 6 3 1 Puerco 3 5 6 3 2 3 3 Puerco Gallup It k 6 1 2 5 8 8 3 it Tularosa Reserve 1 1 3 2 Holbrook Kana-a Black Mesa Sosi Klageto Unknown 1 1 It Black-on-red . Puerco Wingate 1 • St* Johns Unknown Polychrome Wingate St* Johns Other Ceramic Period 5 5 U-5 U-5 U 5 5 28U TABLE 28 — Continued Pottery of the Rio Puerco Locality Ceramic Types Sites in Arizona K:12: 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 ioU 102 106 Plain — lino Gray 3 2 6 1 2 Lino Fug. Red Kana-a Gray 2 Navajo Utility Broun W. B. Broun W. Smg. Broun W. L. Slipped Red 1 2 Corrugated Indent 1 2 1 3 2 1 1 1 2 3 2 Plain 1 3 1 2 1 1 2 Black-on-white . La Plata White Md. 1 1 K ’lanna Red Mesa 1 13 9 2 6 Puerco 1 3 10 7 It 1 3 2 2 3 Puerco Gallup 8 5 5 3 1 3 2 2 3 3 Tularosa 1 Reserve 2 U U Holbrook Kana-a Black Mesa Sosi Klageto 2 Unknown 1 2 2 2 1 Black-on-red . Puerco 2 Wingate St. Johns 3 Unknown Polychrome Wingate 2 2 St. Johns 1 3 Other Ceramic Period 5 5 5 7 5 5 7 6 2,7 2 2,2 285 .TABLE 28 — Continued Pottery of the Rio Puerco Locality Ceramic Types Sites in Arizona K?12i ______107 108 109 210 111 112 113 lilt 115 116 117 Plain Lino Gray U 1 12 1 2 Lino Fug* Red" Kana-a Gray 2 Navajo Utility Brown W. E. Brown W. Smg. 3 Brown W, L. Slipped Red Corrugated indent 2 2 11* It 1 U 2 Plain 3 1 Black-on-white . La Plata " 2 White Md. K'lanna Red Mesa 9 1 Puerco 2 6 2 3 1 6 5 6 It Puerco Gallup 1 1 1 9 5 5 Tularosa Reserve 3 2 It It l Holbrook 1 Kana-a Black Mesa Sosi KLageto Unknown 1 1 It 2 Black-on-red . Puerco 1 Wingate St* Johns Unknown Polychrome Wingate St. Johns Other Ceramic Period 5 2 3 S 2 1,5 5 3 5 6 5 286 rTABLE 28 — Continued Pottery of the Rio Puerco Locality Ceramic Types Sites in Arizona K:12: 118 119 120 121 122 123 12b 12$ 126 127 128 Plain Lino Gray 9 5 7 2 1 Lino Fug. Red Kana-a Gray Navajo Utility Brown W. E. 27 17 18 Brown W. Smg. Brown W. L. 3 Slipped Red Corrugated Indent U $ 3 2 5 3 Plain 1 12 1 Black-on-white . La Plata White Md. K ’lanna Red Mesa 3 Puerco 5 1 1 Puerco Gallup 6 2 7 1 Tularosa Reserve 1 Holbrook Kana-a Black Mesa Sosi KLageto Unknown 1 2 111 3 Black-on-red . Puerco Wingate St. Johns Unknown Polychrome Wingate St. Johns Other If lb Ceramic Period 5 5 5 1 1 5 5 5 2,5 1 5 28? TABLE 28 — Continued Pottery of the Rio Puerco Locality Ceramic Types Sites in Arizona K:12t ______129 130 131 132 133 13k 135 136 137 138 Plain Lino Gray Lino Fug, Red Kana-a Gray Navajo Utility Broun W. E. Brown W. Sag, Brown W, L. Slipped Red Corrugated Indent Plain Black-on-white . La ?lata White Md. K'lahna Red Mesa Puerco Puerco Gallup Tularosa Reserve Holbrook Kana-a Black Mesa Sosi Klageto Unknown u 1 2 3 Black-on-red Puerco Wingate 1 St, Johns Unknown Polychrome Wingate St. Johns Other Ceramic Period 65555 5 55 ? 5 288 TABLE 28 — Continued Pottery of the Rio Puerco Locality Ceramic Types Sites in Arizona K:12: 139 lliO u a 11*2 11*3 U*lt 11*5 11*6 11*7 11*8 11*9 Plain Lino Gray 1 9 6 7 12 1 Lino Fug. Red Kana-a Gray 1 Navajo Utility Brown W. E. Brown W. Stag* Brown ¥. L. S Slipped Red 3 1 Corrugated Indent 5 3 2 2 It 3 1 5 Plain 1 1 Black-on-white . La Plata White Md. 2 3 1 13 2 K ’lanna 1 Red Mesa 1 1 Puerco U 6 7 2 6 1 6 Puerco Gallup 2 2 7 3 5 3 5 Tularosa 1 1 Reserve 1 1 Holbrook Kana-a Black Mesa Sosi KLageto Unknown 1 2 3 1 3 Black-on-red ... Puerco Wingate 1 2 6 St. Johns Unknown Polychrome Wingate 2 5 St. Johns Other Ceramic Period 5 2,6 6 3,7 289 VIABLE 28 — Continued Pottery of the Rio Puerco Locality / Ceramic Types Sites in Arizona Kil2: 1 # 151 152 153 15U 155 156 157 158 159 l6o Plain Lino Gray 5 8 16 1 L 1 7 1 5 Lino Fug. Red 1 1 Kana-a Gray 1 1 Navajo Utility Brown W. E. Brown W. Sag. 1 Brown W. L. Slipped Red 1 Corrugated Indent 3 1 2 1 1 3 3 5 1 Plain 2 1 1 2 Black-on-white . La Plata 2 3 White Md. U 2 2 i 19 6 K ’lanna 1 ' 1 5 Red Mesa 2 1 2 2 1 1 2 Puerco 8 2 2 1 1 L 1 Puerco Gallup 2 1 7 L 9 5 5 ll Tularosa Reserve 2 1 Holbrook Kana-a Black Mesa Sosi KLageto Unknown 2 1 1 Black-on-red Puerco Wingate St. Johns Unknown Polychrome Wingate St. Johns Other lb Ceramic Period fc-5 3 2,5 2,2 5 6 2,5 5 5 2 2 290 TABLE 28 — Continued Pottery of the Rio Puerco Locality Ceramic Types Sites in Arizona K;12: ______161 162 163 16U 16$ 166 16? 168 169 170 171 Plain Lino Gray 7 1 12 6 1U 6 2 Lino Fug. Red Kana-a Gray Navajo Utility Brown ¥. E. Brown W. Sag. 1 Brown W. L. Slipped Red 1 Corrugated Indent 3 $ 1 1 3 3 1 Plain 1 Black-on-white . La Plata 1 U White Md. 2 7 3 2 19 1 K ’lanna 1 2 Red Mesa 1 1 Puerco 7 1 6 1 2 Puerco Gallup U 8 3 u 7 tularosa Reserve 2 1 Holbrook Kana-a Black Mesa Sosi KLageto Unknown Black-on-red . Puerco Wingate St. Johns Unknown Polychromejlychx Isangogate St. Johns 2 Other Ceramic Period 5 2 5 2 2 2 5 2 2 $ 7 291 TABLE 28 — Continued Pottery of the Rio Puerco Locality Ceramic Types Sites in Arizona Kil2: • ______172 173 17U 17$ 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 Plain Lino Gray 1 Lino Fug. Red Kana-a Gray Navajo Utility Brown W. E. Brown W. Smg. Brown W. L. Slipped Red Corrugated Indent 1 2 1 2 3 2 1 7 3 1 1 Plain 2 1 3 2 Black-on-white . la Plata White Md. 2 1 K'lanna Red Mesa 1 2 3 Puerco 3 1 5 2 3 2 7 8 2 Puerco Gallup 6 h 6 2 8 6 5 16 k 1 U Tularosa Reserve 1 Holbrook Kana-a Black Mesa Sosi Klageto Unknown 1 2 Black-on-red . Puerco 1 1 Wingate 1 1 St. Johns Unknown Polychrome tw.ngate St. Johns Other______ Ceramic Period $ 6 6 *> 2,5 5 6 6 5 5 5 292 TABLE 28 — Continued Pottery of the Rio Puerco Locality Ceramic Types Sites in Arizona K:12t 183 18U 18$ 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 Plain Lino Gray Lino Fug. Red Kana-a Gray Navajo Utility Broun W. E. Brown W. Sag. Brown W. L. Slipped Red 1 1 Corrugated Indent 2 U 1 2 3 3 2 1 2 Plain 3 2 1 1 1 Black-on-white . La Plata White Md. 2 K'lanna 1 2 Red Mesa 10 2 2 1 3 1 3 Puerco h 1 h 6 3 2 2 U L Puerco Gallup 2 7 L 6 6 6 8 7 5 2 Tularosa Reserve 2 2 1 3 2 1 Holbrook 1 Kana-a Black Mesa Sosi KLageto Unknown 1 Black-on-red Puerco Wingate 1 St. Johns Unknown Polychrome Wingate St. Johns Other Ceramic Period S U-5 7 h,S 5 6 $ 293 7TABLE 28 — Continued Pottery of the Rio Puerco Locality Ceramic Types Sites in Arizona K:12: 19k 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 20k Plain Lino Gray k 11 5 12 1 Lino Fug. Bed Kana-a Gray 1 Navajo Utility Brown V. E. Brown ¥. Sag, Brown W. L. Slipped Red 1 2 1 Corrugated ■ • Indent h 2 1 6 5 3 Plain L 1 1 1 Black-on-white . La Plata 1 1 White Md. 3 7 6 h K'laima 1 Red Mesa 1 7 5 k 1 Puerco 3 2 6 6 7 9 7 Puerco Gallup 5 6 3 h 3 5 Tularosa Reserve 1 Holbrook Kana-a Black Mesa Sosi KLageto Unknown 2 2 Black-on-red Puerco Wingate 1 St. Johns Unknown 1 1 Polychrome Wingate St. Johns 1 Other Ceramic Period 5 6 2,6 2 2 6 2-L 1 5 6 7 2 9 k TABLE 28 — Continued Pottery of the Bio Puerco Locality Ceramic Types .. Sites in Arizona K:12: . ______20^ 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 2lU 21$ Plain Lino Gray 3 U 1 2 1 Lino Fug# Red Kana-a Gray 2 Navajo Utility Broun W# E, 5 Brown W* Sing. Brown W. L* Slipped Bed Corrugated Indent U 2 1 2 2 Plain 1 1 1 Black-on-white . La Plata White Md. K'lanna 1 Red Mesa 3 1 2 2 2 Puerco 10 5 1 3 3 6 Puerco Gallup 2 2 1 2 9 6 1 5 Tularosa Reserve Holbrook Kana-a Black Mesa Sosi 1 Klageto Unknown 1 1 1 1 3 Black-on-red . Puerco 1 Wingate St. Johns Unknown Polychrome Wingate St. Johns Other Ceramic Period 5 6 U 5 5 5 5 ? 3,51,2,5 6 iTABLE 28 — Continued iPottery of the Rio Puerco Locality Ceramic Types Sites in Arizona K:12: 216 217 218 219 220 221 -222 223 22a 225 226 Plain Lino Gray 3 1 i 3 a 8 2 13 3 Lino Fug* Red Kana-a Gray 1 Navajo Utility Brown W. B* Brown W. Smg. i Brown W, L* Slipped Red 1 Corrugated Indent k 3 2 3 a 5 3 2 Plain 3 3 1 2 i 1 1 1 Black-on-white La Plata 1 3 3 White Md. a 1 K'lanna 2 1 3 1 Red Mesa 1 u a 2 1 a Pcerco 5 6 a 2 a 12 8 2 Puerco Gallup 3 9 a 5 2 a 1 1 9 a Tularosa Reserve 1 1 i Holbrook Kana-a Black Mesa Sosi KLageto Unknown 6 i 1 2 Black-on-red . Puerco 2 Wingate St. Johns Unknown 3 Polychrome Wingate St. Johns Other Ceramic Period 5 2-5 a-5 5 6 a-5 2,5 2,5 1 5 a-5 296 TABUS 28 — Continued Pottery of the Rio Puerco Locality Ceramic Types Sites in Arizona K:12: 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 23U Plain Lino Gray U 1 1 Lino Fug* Red Kana-a Gray Navajo Utility Brown W. B. 1 Brown W. Smg* 1 Brown ¥. L. Slipped Red 2 Corrugated Indent 1 1 3 2 2 1 Plain it 2 1 1 1 Black-on-white La Plata White Md. K'lanna Red Mesa 10 5 5 3 2 3 Puerco 2 13 3 3 1 3 Puerco Gallup 1 8 8 2 it 3 Tularosa Reserve Holbrook Kana-a Black Mesa Sosi KLageto Unknown 7 1 1 Black-on-red " Puerco ’ 7 2 1 Wingate 1 2 1 St, Johns k 1 it Unknown Polychrome Wingate 1 1 St, Johns 9 1 1 Other_____ Id Ceramic Period 6 7 7 ? 3 6 1,6 7 297 TABLE 28 — Continued Pottery of the Rio Puerco Locality Ceramic Types Sites in Arizona Kill: ______3 U 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Plain Lino Gray 1 1 2 2 Lino Fug. Red Kana-a Gray Navajo Utility n Brown V. E. B r o w W. Stag. Brown W. L. Slipped Red i Corrugated indent 2 3 L L 2 3 5 Plain 1 2 1 Black-on-white La Plata White Kd. K'lanna 1 1 Red Mesa 1 1 1 1 8 2 Puerco 5 L L 8 6 2 Puerco Gallup 3 3 3 3 L 7 2 8 Tularosa Reserve Holbrook Kana-a Black Mesa 1 Sosi Klageto Unknown 2 5 Black-on-red . Puerco 1 Wingate St. Johns Unknown Polychrome Wingate St. Johns Other l8f Sf Ceramic Period 6 5 2 5 9 9 5 5 5 L-3 L-5 298 TABLE 28 — Continued Pottery of the Rio Puerco Locality Ceramic Types Sites in Arizona Kill: Ik 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 Plain Lino Gray 1 9 1 Lino Fug, Red Kana-a Gray 3 Navajo Utility Brown W, E, Brown W, Smg. 3 Brown W, L. ' 1 Slipped Red 1 Corrugated Indent 6 3 2 2 2 k 2 3 Plain 2 3 1 1 Black-on-white La Plata White Md. K ’lanna Red Mesa 1 2 2 k 5 Puerco 7 1 2 k 6 k 8 1 Puerco Gallup 2 7 7 5 3 9 15 8 Tularosa Reserve 2 Holbrook Kana-a Black Mesa Sosi 2 1 Klageto Unknown 2 1 Black-on-red Puerco 1 1 2 Wingate 2 l St, Johns Unknown Polychrome Wingate St. Johns Other lb lib 17c Ceramic Period 6 6 6 5 5 5 3 6 5 299 TABLE 29 Pottery of the Kin-li-chee Creek Locality Ceramic Types Sites in Arizona K$3: 1 2 3 L 5 6 7 8 9 10 Plain Lino Gray 7 1 13 7 10 11 Kana-a Gray 2 2 Slipped Red Corrugated Indent 3 7 1 5 L Plain 1 1 L Lit, Colo. C.I. 8 XiXt#e CoXOe C»Pe 1 1 IiXi/e Colo# C#P"b# 1 Blaek-on-white . White Md. 2 1 2 2 K'lanna 3 1 Red Mesa 3 L 5 1 Puerco 1 Puerco Gallup L i 1 3 Holbrook 2 2 1 1 1 Walnut 6 2 3 Kana-a 8 1 Black Mesa 2 L 2 Sosi 6 2 2 Dogaszhi 2 Flagstaff Tusayan 1 Unknown 7 1 3 Black-on-red . Puerco Wingate St. Johns 5 Deadmans Unknown Polychrome Wingate 2 St. Johns 3 Other Le Lb 1c la. 2c lg Ceramic Period 5-7 1,9 2-5 6 2 3 2,6 2-6 2 6 >00 TABES 29 — Continued Pottery of the Kin-li-chee Creek Locality Ceramic Types Sites in Arizona K: 3$ 11 12 13 Ik If 16 17 18 19 20 Plain Lino Gray 2 5 Kana-a Gray 5 Slipped Red 1 2 l Corrugated Indent 6 5 1 1 6 k li 8 9 Plain 2 1 2 1 2 Lit* Colo# Cel# 2 1 Lit. Colo. C.P. 1 Lit. Colo. C.Pt. 2 Black-on-white . White Md, K ’lanna 1 2 Red Mesa 2 1 1 2 Puerco u 2 1 It Puerco Gallup 11 8 1 2 Holbrook 1 2 1 Walnut 3 Kana-a 2 1 3 Black Mesa 1 2 1 - It 1 Sosi 2 h 6 h 1 3 1 Dogasztii 2 Flagstaff Tusayan Unknown 1 1 1 2 3 2 3 Black-on-red . Puerco 2 Wingate St. Johns Deadmans Unknown 2 Polychrome Wingate St. Johns 3 Other Id lg UUh Ic.le Ceramic Period 2,6 6 9 3-Ji 3-U,7 6 6 6 3-7 6 301 TABLE 29 — Continued Pottery of the Kin-li-chee Creek Locality Ceramic Types Sites in Arizona K:3$ ______;______21 22 23 2k 2$ 26 27 28 29 30 Plain lino Gray L 5 2 i Kana-a Gray Slipped Red 2 Corrugated Indent s 2 5 9 5 2 11 Plain 1 1 1 3 Lit. Colo. C.I. 1 2 L Lit. Colo. C.P. 1 1 Lit. Colo. C.Pt. Black-on-white White Kd. K'lanna Red Mesa Puerco 2 Puerco Gallup 1 l 1 1 3 Holbrook 1 2 Walnut 2 2 Kana-a Black Mesa 1 2 5 Sosi 1 2 5 1 2 Oogaszhi Flagstaff 2 Tusayan 1 Unknown h u 2 2 L Black-on-red . Puerco 1 1 Wingate - • St. Johns 1 2 Deadmans Unknown Polychrome Wingate St, Johns 2 2 Other 2b li Ceramic Period -7 ? 6 5 ? ? 6 9 ? 7 302 TABLE 29 — Continued 'Pottery of the Kin-li-chee Creek Locality Ceramic Types Sites in Arizona K:3$ Sites in Arizona K:6: 31 32 33 *3U 2 3 U 5 6 7 Plain Lino Gray , 2 15 21 13 8 17 10 Kana-a Gray 2 Slipped Bed Corrugated Indent 3 5 3 2 Plain 1 3 k 1 Lit. Colo. C.I. » i Lit. Colo. C.P. 1 1 1 Lit. Colo. C.Pt. 1 Black-on-white . White Md. 5 k U 3 K'lanna 1 Red Mesa Puerco Puerco Gallup 1 7 Holbrook 1 2 Walnut 1 Kana-a 1 16 19 3 Black Mesa 1 1 1 Sosi 2 Dogaszhi 1 Flagstaff 1 T us ay an Unknown 2 1 2 1 Black-on-red Puerco Wingate St. Johns Headmans Unknown Polychrome Wingate St. Johns 1 Other Ih Ceramic Period 7 7 $ 3,6 2 2 3 2-3 2-3 k 303 TABLE 29 — Continued Pottery of the Kin-li-chee Creek Locality Ceramic Types Sites in Arizona K:6: 8 9 10 11 12 13 Ik 15 16 17 18 Plain lino Gray , 9 6 8 6 6 7 11 17 Kana-a Gray Slipped Red 1 1 Corrugated Indent 1 u 1 9 8 2 Plain 8 3 8 3 11 Lit. Colo. C.I. Lit. Colo. C.P. Lit. Colo. C.Pt. 1 Black-on-white . White Md. 5 1 2 1 3 2 7 K'lanna 1 1 Red Mesa Puerco 5 Puerco Gallup 2 1 1 5 Holbrook h b Walnut 1 Kana-a 1 1 Black Mesa k 2 1 Sosi 2 2 1 5 Dogaszhi 3 2 Flagstaff 1 Tusayan 2 Unknown 2 2 2 5 3 1 Black-on-red Puerco . Wingate 1 St. Johns Headmans Unknown Polychrome Wingate St, Johns Other If Ceramic Period 2 2 2,U 2-3,7 1-2,7 ? 2 5 2-3 6 6 30U 'TABLE 29 — Contimed Pottery of the Kin-li-chee Creek Locality Ceramic Types Sites in Arizona K:7: 1 2 3 U 5 6 7 8 9 10 Plain Lino Gray . Z 1 U 12 Kana-a Gray Slipped Red 2 2 3 2 Corrugated Indent 7 1 2 9 U 9 Plain 1 2 1 U 1 Lit* Colo# C#X# 3 2 1 Lit# Colo# C.P* 1 Lit# Colo# C#Pt# Black-on-^bite White Md. 1 1. K'lanna 1 2 Red Mesa Puerco 5 Puerco Gallup 1 1 Holbrook 1 1 Walnut 1 2 1 Kana-a 3 3 Black Mesa 2 2 2 Sosi 5 1 Dogaszhi Flagstaff T us ay an Unknown 3 1 2 1 1 Black-on-red Puerco 2 Wingate 3 8 1 St. Johns Deadmans 1 Unknown 1 1 Polychrome Wingate St. Johns 2 Other le Ih lg Ceramic Period 6 ? ? ? U,7 2-3,7 7 7 6? 3-U,6,9 305 TABES 29 — Continued Pottery of the Kin-li-chee Creek Locality Ceramic Types Sites in Arizona K:?i 11 12 13 1U Plain Lino Gray , 11 19 6 % Kana-a Gray 1 Slipped Bed Corrugated Indent 2 Plain Lit. Colo. C.I. 1 Lit. Colo. C.P. Lit. Colo. C.Pt. Black-on-white CM . White Md. K'lanna Red Mesa Puerco 5 Puerco Gallup i Holbrook Walnut Kana-a i Black Mesa Sosi Dogaszhi i Flagstaff Tosayan 2 Unknown Black-on-red . Puerco Wingate 2 St. Johns Deadmans Polychrome Wingate St. Johns Other Ceramic Period 2 2 2,6 2,3 306 •TABLE 30 •Pottery of the Nazlini Wash Locality Ceramic Types Sites in Arizona K:2: Sites in Arizona K:3: 1 2 35 36 37 38 39 UO Itl Plain Lino Gray 3 2 1 lit 3 Kana-a Gray 2 Navajo Utility 8 10 Brown W. E. Brown W. S. Slipped Red 1 Corrugated Indent 5 11 5 2 3 It Plain 1 8 1 Black-on-white . White Md. Red Mesa 3 Puerco Puerco Gallup 3 Walnut 2 Lino Bl.-on-gr, Kana-a 5 Black Mesa 2 Sosi Dogaszhi 3 Flagstaff Tusayan 1 1 1 Unknown 1 2 lit 3 6 Black-on-red . Wingate Medicine 1 Tusayan Unknown 1 Polychrome St* Johns 1 Tusayan 1 Other 3a 2d 2m Ceramic Period 5 ? 7 ? lt,7 1? 7 3,7 9,9 307 T A M E 30 — Continued Pottery of the Nazi ini Wash Locality Ceramic Types Sites in Arizona K:3: U2 li3 hh L5 L6 L7 1:8 lt9 50 51 52 Plain Lino Gray 19 11 9 13 8 7 It 1 1 2 Kana-a Gray 2 Naval jo Utility 7 Lo 6 Brown W. E. 3 1 2 Brown W. S, 1 1 Slipped Red Corrugated Indent 1 3 It Plain 3 1 Black-on-white . White Md. 11 5 13 Hi 13 1 Red Mesa 1 1 Puerco 1 Puerco Gallup 3 Walnut Lino Bl.-on-gr. 8 3 Kana-^a 2 k 2 2 Black Mesa 1 Sosi Dogaszhi Flagstaff Tusayan Unknown 2 1 It 1 Black-on-red . Wingate Medicine Tusayan Unknown 1 Polychrome St. Johns Tusayan Other la Ld lie lie k 1 Ceramic Period 3-U 1-2 2 2 2 1-3 1,9 3 l-!t,6 9 9 308 TABLE 30 — Continued Pottery of the Nazlini Wash Locality Ceramic Types Sites in Arizona EslR: 1 2 3 U S 6 7 8 9 11 12 Plain Lino Gray 1 U 6 1 3 1 1 Kanaka Gray 3 1 Navajo Utility 23 2 1 5 Broun W* B. Brown W. S. Slipped Red 5 1 Corrugated Indent 1 5 3 3 7 5 2 3 Plain 1 2 2 2 1 3 Black-on-white White Mti. 2 Red Mesa 1 1 Puerco k 1 2 Puerco Gallup 5 1 3 $ Walnut 1 1 a 1 Lino Br.-on-gr. Kana-a 1 1 3 i 2 Black Mesa 1 6 i $ 6 Sosi 6 3 9 1 1 2 Dogaszhi 1 1 2 3 Flagstaff 1 1 Tusayan 2 1 Unknown U 1 U 1 7 1 1 Black-on-red . Wingate 1 2 Medicine 5 Tusayan 1 Unknown 1 Polychrome St. Johns 1 1 Tusayan 1 Other he 6m 2f.lm Ceramic Period 6? 2,U 3,7 3-6,9 9 3,7,9 3,7 5 a,9 3,6,9 a,9 309 ; TABLE 30 — Continued Pottery of the Nazlini Wash Locality Ceramic Types Sites in Arizona E:lU: Sites in Arizona E:15>: 13 3 U 5 6 7 8 9 Plain Lino Gray 2 11 23 6 Kana-a Gray Navajo U tility 11 U Brown W. E. Brown W. S. Slipped Red Corrugated Indent 1 5 3 Plain 1 U 1 Black-on-white . White Md. Red Mesa Puerco Puerco Gallup Walnut 2 Lino Bl.-on-gr. Kana-a 1 Black Mesa 3 Sosi Dogaszhi 2 Flagstaff 1 Tusay an Unknown 1 3 1 Black-dh-red Wingate Medicine Tusayan Unknown Polychrome St. Johns Tusayan Other 3c, Ui 3H - la Ceramic Period ?,9 9 1,7,7 7 1,9 7 3,7 ? 310 TABLE 30 — Continued Pottery of the Nazlini Wash Locality Ceramic Types Sites in Arizona E:l5$ 10 11 12 13 1U 15 16 17 18 19 20 Plain - Lino Gray 6 9 10 9 7 Kana-a Gray 3 Navajo U tility Brown W. E. 1 Brown W, S. 3 Slipped Red 2 Corrugated Indent k 13 3 2 6 Plain 1 5 Black-6n-white . White Md, 1 Red Mesa Puerco Puerco Gallup Walnut Lino Bl.-on-gr., 1 Kana-^a h 2 Black Mesa 2 Sosif ; 1 2 3 Dogaszhi Flagstaff Tusayan Unknown 1 1 Black-on-red . Wingate Medicine Tusayan Unknown Polychrome St. Johns Tusayan Other la ,lb ,lg l a , I f Ceramic Period 1-3,5 ? ? t 1? ? 3,6 ? U ? 1-2,6 TABLE 30 — Continued Pottery of the Nazlinl Wash Locality Ceramic Types Sites in Arizona E:l$: 21 22 23 2k 25 26 27 28 Plain Lino Gray 3 8 7 Kana-a Gray Navajo U tility 1 7 1 Brown ¥• E. Brown W. S. Slipped Red 1 Corrugated Indent 5 2 2 lit 1 Plain 2 2 2 Black-on-white . White Md. Red Mesa Puerco Puerco Gallup 1 2 Walnut Lino Bl*-on-gr. 1 1 Kanaka 1 Black Mesa 2 1 It Sosi It Dogaszhi Flagstaff Tusayan 2 Unknown 1 5 1 5 Black-on-red - . Wingate Medicine Tusayan Unknown Polychrome x St. Johns Tusayan Other 3g Ceramic Period ? ? kf9 1, 5,9 i?,5 3-5,9 ? ? 312 TABLE 31 Pottery of the Lukachukai-Tohotso-Greasewood Locality Ceramic Types Sites in Arizona B ill: 2 3 U 5 6 7 8 9 10 Plain Lino Gray 22 23 9 U 10 Kana-a Gray 2 Slipped Red 2 h Corrugated Indent U 5 2 Plain 1 3 3 2 Black-on-white Kana-a 17 Black Mesa 1 2 3 1 5 Sosi 3 2 2 6 U Dogaszhi 1 1 1 Flagstaff 1 Tusayan 1 3 Mancos 1 Unknown 2 2 2 1 Black-on-red . Wingate 1 Ceramic Period 6 7 1 ? 1 3-6 U-7 7 U APPENDIX C Artifacts, Burials, and Non-Artifactual Material The artifactual material is divided into groups based on material and is listed by localities* Artifacts are further sub divided into categories based on mode of manufacture or inferred use* Except for ceramics the sample is limited and no finer divi sions into specific types w ill be attempted* Ceramics By far the most numerous artifacts collected were those in the ceramic category. This came about as a natural function of the effort to collect the widest range of pottery possible on any par ticular site. Several restorable or partially restorable vessels were collected. Vessels Tohatchi-Mexican Springs. One Lino Black-on-gray bowl from New Mexico F il:67. Approximate diameter ca. 17.0 cm; height ca. 6.0 cm. Black Creek. One gray patterned corrugated ja r from Burial 1, Arizona K:8?2l8. Maximum body diameter 12.U c r., height 9.3 cm. Fig. 10, e. 313 One Puerco Black-on-red bowl from Burial 1, Arizona K$8:2l8, Diameter at rim 12.1* cm., height 6.7 cm. Fig. 10, d. One Bitahoebe Black-on-white dipper with loop handle from Burial 1, Arizona K:8:2l8. Diameter at rim of bowl 10.3 cm., bowl depth 5.3 cm. Fig. 10, b. Bio Puerco. One Kiatuthlana Black-on-white ladle from Arizona Krl2:l£9. Diameter 11.h x 9.5 cm., bowl depth U cm. Fig. 10, a. One gray patterned corrugated ja r from Arizona K:12:lU3» Not restored. Kin-ki-chee Creek. One Gobernador Polychrome dish found on open, sage covered ridge 500 yds. NE of Arizona K :3:l. Diameter at rim 16.9 cm, bowl depth 5#8 cm. Fig. 10, c. Nazlini Wash. One Navajo U tility jar found on low sandstone ledge on the north side of Nazlini Wash 1 mile east of Tsegito Spring. No site, typical Navajo disposition of broken vessel. Specimen broken into pieces too small to restore, consequently size is unknown Scrapers Tohatchi-Mexican Springs. 1 Gallup Black-on-white. New Mexico Oti:75. 1 Red Mesa Black-on-white. New Mexico G:5*Wi. Fig. 11, h. 1 Gallup Black-on-white. New Mexico G:*>:50. Figure 10. Whole and partial ceramic vessels, a, Kiatuthlanna Black-on-white ladle; b, Bitahoche Black-on-white dipper; c, Gobernador Polychrome dish; Puerco Black-on-red bowl; e, gray pattern corrugated ja r. a, width 9.5 cm. 31f> 316 Black Creek# 1 Holbrook Black-on-white. Arizona K:8:?6# Fig. 11, i. Rio Puerco# 1 Gallup Black-on-white. Arizona K:12:60. 1 Puerco Black-on-white. Arizona K:12:6l. 1 Gallup Black-on-white. Arizona K:12:199. Spindle 'Whorls Kin-li-chee Creek. 1 Sosi Black-on-white. Arizona K:3$27. Fig. 11, e. Spindle ^horl Blanks Tohatchi-Mexican Springs. 1 Unknown Black-on-white. New Mexico G:5:62. Fig. 11, £. Black Creek. 1 Soai Black-on-white. Arizona K:lu31. 1 Unpainted portion of Black-on-iAite vessel. Arizona K:8:102. 1 Puerco Black-on-white. Arizona K:8:l87. Fig. 11, f . Sherd Pendants and Blanks Tohatchi-Mexican Springs. 1 Jeddito Black-on-yellow pendant. New Mexico G:l:72. Fig. 11, a. Black Creek. 1 Smudged brown ware pendant. Arizona K:8:127. Fig. 11, c. 1 Wingate Black-on-red pendant blank. Arizona K:8:236. Fig. 11, b. 1 Unknown Black-on-red pendant blank. Arizona K:12:$8. Fig. H , d. 317 Miniature Effigy vessel fragment Kin-li-chee Creek. 1 Plain Gray "duck" or effigy vessel. Arizona K:3$30. Handle of unfired vessel Nazllni Wash. 1 Unfired clay handle tempered with juniper bark. Basket impression on lower edge of vessel wall. Arizona E:l5:10. Fig. 11, j . Stone Metates See Table 32. Type and occurrence of metates. Manos See Table 33. Type and occurrence of manos. Axes ' Black Creek. 1 Full groved gray sandstone. Pecked but not polished. Width 10 cm., height 11.U cm., thickness U.5 cm. Arizona K:U$l8. Fig. 12, b. 1 Full groved basalt. Pecked but not polished. Width 8.5 cm., length 11.3 cm., thickness 3.7 cm. No site association, found on ridge on west side of Oak Springs Valley. Fig. 12, a. Maul Black Creek. 1 Full groved, coarse red sandstone. Pecked and chipped but neither ground or polished. Height 19 cm., width 1£> cm., thickness 7 cm. Arizona K:U:32. Fig. 12, c. Figure 1 1 . Worked sherds and unfired clay handle, a, Jeddito Black-on-yellow pendant; b, Wingate Black-cn-red pendant blank; c. Smudged brown ware pendant; d, Black-on-red pendant, type unknown; e, Sosi Black-on-white spindle whorl; f , Puerco Black-on-white spindle whorl blank; £, Black-on-white spindle whorl blank, type unknown; h. Red Mesa Black-on-white scraper; i , Holbrook Black-on-white scraper; unfired clay handle, a, Diameter 3.5 cm. Figure 12. Stone axes and maul, a-b, fu ll grooved axes; c, f u ll grooved maul, a, Length 11.3 cm. 319 320 TABLE 32 Type and Occurrence of Matates Locality and Site Trough Slab Basin Tohatchi-Maxican Springs Hew Hex. G:f>: x Black Creek Ariz* Kilt: 26 x 27 X K:8: 61 X 102 X 133 x 158 x 182 X 185 X K:12: 2k X 26 X ‘ 28 X U9 X 58 Rio Puerco Ariz. K:12t ?U u x 2 x 1U7 u, 157 x 160 x 162 2 169 X 190 2 193 x X K ill: 13 X 1U 2 20 x Kin-li-chee Creek Ariz. K:3: 1 x Nazline Wash Ariz. E:lli: 6 x 321 'TABIS 33 Type and Occurrence of Manoa Locality and Site Rectangular Rectangular Round Round Uniface Biface Uniface Biface Black Creek Aria# K:U$ 23 X K:8i 33 X L9 x 50 x X X 96 X 100 X X 101 X X 121 X 153 2 160 X 163 2 183 x X 199 X 225 X K:12 2k X 27 X 29 X U9 X X 50 X 57 X 65 X 66 X 70 X Rio Puerco Ariz. K:12: 7k x z Vs X 82 X 8k X 3 s X 87 X 90 3 91 x 98 X 120 X 322 TABLE 33 — Continued Type and Occurrence of Manos Locality and Site Rectangular Rectangular Round Round Uniface Biface Uniface Biface Rio Puerco Ariz. K:12: 127 X 157 2 162 x 187 X K:ll: 9 X 3 S 3 18 x 20 X 21 X Kin-li-chee Creek Ariz. K:3$ 1 X 23 X Nazlini Wash Ariz* Eil^i 11 2 Luk.-Tohatso-Gr# Ariz. E:ll: 7 X 323 Pendant Blank Nazlini Wash. 1 Rectangular pendant blank of hard siltatone. Pendant has been ground thin (2 nrnu) to take advantage of the natural contact between a red and buff strata, which now gives the appearance of the lamination of two different colored stones. Projectile Points Tohatcbi-Mexican Springs. 1 Blade fragment, sides convex. Chert. New Mexico G:l:17. Black Creek. 2 Side notched, one complete, one fragment, base flaring and flat, sides straight, blade long. Size of complete point 26 mm. long, 12 mm. wide. Both of welded tuff, one pink the other white. Arizona Kil;:22, 8:69. Fig. 13, a, b. 1 Side notched, base flaring and flat, side convex, blade long. Jasper fragment. Arizona K: 8:106. Fig. 13, & 5> Projectile blade fragments. Three convex sided, 2 straight Sided. One is made of chert, one of obsidian, 2 of chalcedony and one unknown. Arizona K:U:U, 12, 22, 39, Arizona K:8:99« Rio Puerco. 1 Side notched, base flared and concaved, blade sides convex and long. Length k cm., width 2 cm. Material is petrified wood. Arizona K:12:228. Fig. 13, f. 32li Kln-li-chee. 1 Side notched, base flared and flat, blade sides concave. Material is smokey quartz. Arizona K:3:21. Fig. 13, c. 2 Fragments. Side notched, blade sides straight. One is made of smokey quartz, the other of banded chert. Worked Hakes Rio Puerco. 1 Flaked blade. Triangular in cross sections. Use scars on both blade edges. Gray chert. Arizona K:12i23U. Fig. 13, d. Kin-li-chee Creek. 1 Large reworked quartz flake. Possible reuse of broken projectile point. Arizona K:3$U5« Fig. 13, e. Nazlini Wash. 1 Large flake with edges reworked. Arizona E:15>:10. Material unknown, same as projectile point from Arizona K:U$lte Bone Awls Rio Puerco, 1 Tip fragment, sawed froa long bone, six long converging facets ground to form point. Arizona K:8:ll. Fig. lit. a. Kin-li-chee Creek. 1 Tip fragment, sawed from long bone. Four converging facets ground to form the point. Arizona K:3:17. Fig. lit, b. Figure 13* Chipped stone and metal artifacts, a-c, side notched projectile points; d, flaked blade; e, reworked quartz flake; f-£, side notched projectile point; h, concho blank; i, rifle car tridge, a, Width IS mm. 325 } e 326 Shell Beads Tohatchi-Mexican Springs. 2 Cresentic fragments of shell with two faces ground flat. One has serrated edges, hole in center with “hourglass" profile. New Mexico 0:1:26. Fig. lU, d. One bead with small straight hole in one end. New Mexico 0:1:26. Fig. 1U» e. Species unknown. Black Creek. 1 Tubular bead, hole in center has straight sides. Arizona K:8:127• Fig. lit, c. Species unknown. Bracelet Tohatchi-Mexican Springs. 1 Thin narrow bracelet fragment. Species probably Glycimeris. New Mexico 0:1:26. Metal Brass Cartridge Tohatchi-Mexican Springs. 1 Caliber of cartridge unknown. New Mexico 0:1:13. Fig. 13, i. Concho Blank Rio Puerco. 1 Rectangular sheet of aluminum stamped with typical Navajo concho design. One tool used to create the small outer cresentic sun burst elements, while a chisel-like tool was used to create the center circle of radiating wedge shaped elements. Sheet cut by metal shears. Arizona K:ll:8. Fig. 13, h. Figure lit. Bone and shell artifacts, a-b, bone awls; tubular shell bead; d-e, flat shell beads. a. Length 10.5 cm. 327 328 Perishable Material All perishable material came from a large sandstone rockshelter (Ariz. Eil$:10), Cords Nazlini Wash. 6 Single strand two ply cords with remnants of fine down or feathers twisted in. Cord material un known. Diameter range 3 mm. to 2mm. "Z" twist. Fig. 15, e. 2 Single strand one ply loosly twisted cord. Cord material unknown. Diameter 7 mm. nZn twist. Fig. 15, b. 2 Single strand two ply cord. Cord material unknown. 11S" twist. Portions of feathers twisted in. Diameter 2 mm. Knots Nazlini Wash. 1 Square knot of yucca. Two elements knotted ' with a single element. Fig. 15, a. 1 Unidentifiable knot of yucca, made from three sepa rate elements. Fig. 15, d. Quids Nazlini Wash. 3 Vegetable fiber quids. Plant specimens un known. Paho Nazlini Wash. 1 Two black feathers with quill ends bent over and wrapped with small red single strand, two ply cord fastened around and through bent ends. Feathers 8 cm. 329 long, cord f> cm. long, 2 mm. in diameter. Fig. 1$, c. Pad Nazlini Wash. 1 Six separate reeds folded over in the middle and tied together on the bent end by a one strand, two ply, "SH twist fiber cord. Pad begins with a folded reed tied with an overhand knot, then another folded reed tied with another overhand knot and so on. The cord has three empty loops indicating the pad at one time was at least nine elements in width. Maximum length 16 cm., maximum width 6.5> cm. Cord 1 mm. diameter. Fig. 15, f. Figure 15* Artifacts of perishable vegetable materials, a, yucca square knot; b, loosely twisted cord; c, paho; d, yucca knot; e, two ply cord, twisted in feathers; f, pad. b, Diameter 7 mm. f 331 Burials Black Creek locality Aria. K:8:218 The skull of one male adult was recovered at this site. The body appeared to be in a flexed position and lying on its left side facing the northwest. Burial furniture included a Bitahoche Black- on-white dipper (Fig. 10, b), a Puerco Black-on-red bowl (Fig. 10,d), and a gray patterned corrugated jar (Fig. 10, e). Ariz. K:12:6l The skull, mandible, two humeri, two femora, one tibia, and two vertebrae were collected from this burial. These bones appear to be those of an adolesent female (?)• No other details are available as the burial was on the surface when found. Nazlini Wash locality Ariz. B:lf>:25 Two femora, the left tibia and the right ilium were collected in the western most storage room of this site. Remains are those of an adult female. As the bones appear to be quite recent they are probably Navajo. Non-Artifactual Material Vegetable Corn Cobs A tabulation of the occurrence and characteristics of c o m cobs is presented in Table 3U* 332 TABLE 3k Occurrence and Characteristics of Corn Cobs Locality-Site Number Rows Diameter Length Black Creek Aria. K:8:l5 3 8,10,12 2-2.5 cm. U.3-13 cm. Aria. K:12:2h 2 10,1k 2-2.7 cm. 5*8-9 cm. Aria. K:12:29 2 8,10 2-2.1 cm. 5.L-7.9 cm. Kin-li-chee Creek Aria. K:7:l 6 8,10,12 1,8-2.3 cm. 5.2-12.5 cm. Aria. K:3:39 3 10,12 1.7-3*6 cm. U.8-1U.0 cm. Nazlini Wash Aria. E:l$:10 2 9,12 1.6-2.6 cm. 7.U cm. Squash In the Kin-li-chee Creek locality four pieces of squash rind were found at Ariz. K:3:39» At Aria, in the Naxlini Hash district the squash remains found consisted of four pieces of rind, one seed, and one stem. Animal Evidence of turkeys was found at Aria. E:l5zl0 in the form of droppings and the distal tip of a feather. A small bank of coarse black hair was also found at this site. — REFERENCES ABEL, ISLAND J. 1955 Pottery Types of the Southwest, Museum of Northern Arizona, Ceramic Series, No, 3* Flagstaff ALLEN, JOHN E. AND ROBERT BALK 195U Mineral Resources of Fort Defiance and Tobatchi Quadrangles, Arizona and New Mexico. State Bureau of Mines and Mineral Resources, Bulletin No. 36. Socorro. ANANYMOUS 1958 Cibola White Ware Conference. Mimeograph copy, Museum of Northern Arizona. Flagstaff. BAILEY, VERNON 1913 Life Zones and Crop Zones of New Mexico: North American Fauna. United States Department of Agriculture, Bureau o7~Biological Survey, Bulletin No. 35. Washington. BANDELIER, ADOLPH F. 1892 Final Report of the Investigations Among the Indians of the Southwestern United States, Part H . Papers of the Archaeological Institute of America, American Series Tu Cambridge. BANNISTER, BRYANT 1965 Tree-Ring Dating of the Archaeological Sites in the Chaco Canyon Region, New Mexico. Southwestern Monuments Association, Technical Series, V o l . 6. Part 2. Globe. BARTLETT, KATHERINE 19h2 A Primitive Stone Industry on the Little Colorado Valley, Arizona. American Antiquity, Vol. 8. No. 3 pp. 266-8. Menashiu --- 333 1858 Wagon Road from Fort Defiance to the Colorado River. House of Representatives Executive Document, No. 12k. 35thCongress, 1st Session! Washington. BINFORD, LEWIS R. I96I4. A Consideration of Archaeological Research Design. American Antiquity, Vol. 29, No. U. Salt Lake City. BOHRER, VORSILA L. AND MARGARET EERGSENG 1963 An Annotated Catalogue of Plants from Window Rock, Arizona. Navajoland Publications, August. Window Rock. BORAH, WOODROW 196k America as Model: The Demographic Impact of European Expansion Upon the Non-European World. XXXV Congresso Intemacional de Americanist as (Mexico, 1962), Act as Y Memories, Vol. 3, PP. 379-8?. Mexico. BORAH, WDODROW AND SHERBURNE F. COOK i960 The Population of Central Mexico in I5k8. Ibero- Americana, Vol. k3, pp. 109-115. Berkeley and Los Angeles. 1963 The Aboriginal Population of Central Mexico on the Eve of the Spanish Conquest. Ibero-Americana, Vol. k5. Berkeley and Los Angeles. HRETERNITZ, DAVID A. 1957 Additional Tool Types from Concho. Plateau, Vol. 29, No. k, pp. 78-80. Flagstaff. BREW, JOHN 0. 19k6 Archaeology of Alkali Ridge, Southeastern Utah. Papers of the Peabody Museum of Archaeology and Ethnology. VolTTl. CambrldiS: ------SsL BRUGGE, DAVID M. 1962 Personal communication. 335 BRUGGE, DAVID M. 1963 Navajo Pottery and Ethnohistory. Navajoland Publications, Series 2 (October). Window Rock. CARLSON, ROY L. 1961 White Mountain Red Ware: A Stylistic Tradition in the Prehistoric Pottery of East Central Arizona. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. University of Arizona. Tucson. 1965 Eighteenth Century Navajo Fortresses of the Gubemador District. Earl Morris Papers No. 2. University of Colorado Series in Anthropology, No. 2l Boulder. CHAMBERLAIN, THOMAS C. 1965 The Method of Multiple Working Hypotheses. Reprinted from Science. Vol. 11*8, pp. 751-759 (May 7, 1965). • Washington. CHANG, KWANG-CHIH I960 Study of the Neolithic Social Grouping: Examples from the New World. American Anthropologist, n.s., Vol. 60, No. 2, Part 1, pp. 296-331*. Menasha. CLARK, DON W. 195U MA List of Vegetation on the Navajo Indian Reservation Occuring in Merriam's Life Zones." In Mineral Resources of Fort Defiance and Tohatchi Quadrangles, Arizona and New Mexico, by J. E. Allen and R. Balk. State Bureau of Mines and Mineral Resources, Bulletin No. 36, pp. 155-173. Socorro. COLTON, HAROLD S. 1936 The Rise and Fall of the Prehistoric Populations of Northern Arizona. Science, Vol. 81*, pp. 337-31*3. Washington. 1939a Prehistoric Culture Units and Their Relationships in Northern Arizona. Museum of Northern Arizona, Bulletin No. 17. Flagstaff. 1939b Three Turkey House, Plateau, Vol. 12, No. 2, pp. 20-31. Flagstaff. ,COLTON, HAROLD S. 1939c The Date of Three Turkey House. Tree-Ring Bulletin, Vol. 5# No. U, p. 26. Tucson. 19U2 Archaeology and Reconstruction of History. American Antiquity, Vol. 8, No. 1, pp. 33-UO. Menasha. I9I46 The Sinagua: A Summary of the Archaeology of the Region of Flagstaff, Arizona. Museum of Northern Arizona, Bulletin No. 22. Flagstaff 1955 Pottery Types of the Southwest. Museum of Northern Arizona, Ceramic Series, No. 3. flagstaff. 1956 Pottery Types of the Southwest. Museum of Northern Arizona, Ceramic Series, No. 30. flagstaff. I960 Black Sand: Prehistory in Northern Arizona. Albuquerque. COLTON, HAROLD S. AND LYNDON L. HARGRAVE 1937 Handbook of Northern Arizona Pottery Wares. Museum of Northern Arizona, Bulletin No. 11. Flagstaff. COOK, SHERBURNE F. AND LESLEY B. SIMPSON 19U8 The Population of Central Mexico in the Sixteenth Century. Ibero-Americana, Vol. 31, pp. 17-38. Berkeley and Los Angeles. COOK, SHERBURNE F. AND WOODROW BORAH 1960 The Indian Population of Central Mexico 1531-1610. Ibero-Americana, Vol. Wi, pp. 33-56. Berkeley and Los Angeles. DAIFUKU, HIROSHI 1961 Jeddito 261*. Papers of the Peabody Museum of Archaeology and Ethnology, Vol. 35, No. 1. ""Cambridge. HANSON, E. B. 1957 An Archaeological Survey of West Central Mexico and East Central Arizona. Papers of the Peabody Museum of Archaeology and Ethnology, Vol. NU. No. 1. Cambridge. DAVIS, EMMA LOU 1965 Small Pressures and Cultural Drift as Explications for Abandonment of the San Juan Area, New Mexico and Arizona. American Antiquity, Vol. 30, No. 3, pp. 353-5. Salt Lake City. DEAN, JEFFERY S. 1966 Personal Communication. DB HARPORT, DAVID L. 1959 An Archaeological Survey of Canyon de Chelly, North eastern Arizona: A Puebloan Community Through Time. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. Harvard University Cambridge. 1962 Personal Communication. DITTERT, ALFRED E., J. J. HISTER, AND F. W. EDDY 1961 An Archaeological Survey of the Navajo Reservoir District Northeastern New Mexico. Monographs of the School of American Research and the Museum of New Mexico, No. 23. Santa Fe. EDDY, FRANK ¥. 1961 Excavations at Los Pinos phase sites. Museum of New Mexico Papers in Anthropology, No. L. Santa Fe. ELLIS, FLORENCE HAWLEY I96I1 Comment on Jett's "Pueblo Indian Migration." American Antiquity, Vol. 30, No. 2, pp. 213-15. Salt Lake City FENNEMAN, NEVIN M. 1928 Physiographic Divisions of the United States. Third edition, revised and enlarged. Annals of the Association of American Geographers, VoTT 18, No. lu Albany. 338 FRITTS, HAROLD C., DAVID G. SMITH, AND MARVIN A. STOKES 1965 “The Biological Model for Paleoclimatic Interpretation of Mesa Verde Tree-Ring Series*“ In Contributions of the Wetherill Mesa Archaeological Project, assembled by Douglass Osborne and edited by Bernard S, Katz. Memoirs of the Society for American Archaeology, No. 19. Salt Lake City. GLADWIN, HAROLD S. 193U A Method for the Designation of Cultures and Their Variations. Medallion Papers, No. 8. Globe. 19h$ The Chaco Branch: Excavations at White Mound and in the Red Mesa Valley. Medallion Papers. No. 33. Globe. GREGORY, HERBERT E. 1916 The Navajo Country: A Geographic and Hydrographic Reconnaissance of Parts of Arizona, New Mexico, and Utah. United States Geological Survey, Water-supply Paper No. 380. Washington. GUMMERMAN, GEORGE 1965 Personal Communication. HACK, JOHN T. 19U2 The Changing Physical Environment of the Hopi Indians of Arizona. Papers of the Peabody Museum of American Archaeology and Ethnology, Vol. 35, No. 1. Cambridge. HALLORAN, ARTHUR F. 196U The Mammals of Navajoland. Navajoland Publications, Series U (June). Window Rock* HARSHBARGER, JOHN W., C. A. REPENNING, AND J. T. COLLAHAN 1953 “The Navajo Country." In The Physical and Economic Foundation of Natural Resources, IV Sub-Surface facilities of Water Management ancTPattems of Supply - Type Area Studies, pp. 105-129. Interior and Insular Affairs Committee, House of Representatives, United States Congress. Washington. t'HAURY, EMIL W. 19^0 A Sequence of Great Kivas in the Foresdale Valley, Arizona. In For the Dean, edited by Erik K. Reed and Dale S. King. Tucson and Santa Fe. 195>6 Speculations on Prehistoric Settlement Patterns in the Southwest. In 11 Prehistoric Settlement Patterns in the New World,H edited by Gordon R. Willey, Viking Fund Publications in Anthropology, No. 23, pp. 3-10. New York City. HANNAH, JACK W. 1965 Personal communication. HAWLEY, FLORENCE M. 1929 Prehistoric Pottery Pigments of the Southwest, American Anthropologist, n.s., Vol. 31, No. U, pp. 731-$r. Menasha. 1936 Field Manual of Prehistoric Southwestern Pottery Types. University of New Mexico, Bulletin, Whole number 291, Anthropological Series, Vol. 1 , No. It. Santa Fe. HESTER, JAMES J. 1962 Early Navajo Migrations and Acculturation in the Southwest. Museum of New Mexico Papers in Anthropology, N o . 6. Santa Pe. HUNT, CHARLES B. 1956 Cenozoic Geology of the Colorado Plateau. United States Geological Survey, Professional Papers No. 279. Washington. JACKSON, W. H. 1878 Report on Ancient Ruins Examined in 1875 and 1877$ United States Geological and Geographical Survey of the Territories, Tenth Annual Report (for 1876), pp. itll-itSO. Washington. JETT, STEPHAN C. 196U Pueblo Indian Migrations: An Evaluation of the Possible Physical and Cultural Determinants, American Antiquity, Vol. 29, No, 3. Salt Lake City. KEUR, DOROTHY L. 19i*l Big Bead Mesa: An Archaeological Study of Navajo Acculturation, 17hi>-l8l2. Memoirs of the Society for American Archaeology, No. 1. Menasha. KIDDER, ALFRED V. 1927 Southwest Archaeological Conference. Science, Vol. 66, No. 1716, pp. 1*89-91. New York. 1962 An Introduction to the Study of Southwestern Archaeology. 2nd edition. New Haven, KLUCKHOHN, CLYDE AND PAUL RITER (editors) 1939 Preliminary Report on the 1937 Excavations, Bc£0-5l, Chaco Canyon, New Mexico, University of New Mexico Bulletin, Whole number 3U5j Anthropological Series, Vol. 3, No, 2. Albuquerque, KROEBER, ALFRED A. 1939 Cultural and Natural Areas of Native North America. Berkeley. LONGACRE, WILLIAM A. 1961* A Synthesis of Upper Little Colorado Prehistory, Eastern Arizona, Chapter 9 in Chapters in the Pre history of Eastern Arizona, II, by Paul S. Martin et al, Fieldiana: Anthropology, Vol. 5f>. Chicago. MARTIN, PAUL S., ET AL 1962 Chapters in the Prehistory of Eastern Arizona, I. Fieldiana: Anthropology, Vol. f>3. Chicago. McGr e g o r , Jo h n c . 1965 Southwestern Archaeology. Urbana, HERA, HARRY P 1935 Ceramic Clues to the Prehistory of North Central New Mexico. Laboratory of Anthropology, Technical Series, Archaeological Survey Bulletin,' No, b. Santa Fe. MERRIAM, C. HART 1890 Results of a Biological Survey of the San Francisco Mountain Region and Desert of the Little Colorado, Arizona. Division of Biological Survey, North American Fauna, No. 3, United States Department of Agriculture. Washington. I898 Life Zones and Crop Zones of the United States. Division of Biological Survey, Bulletin 10. United States Department of Agriculture! Washington. MNDELEFF, COSMO 1897 Cliff Ruins in Canyon de Chelly. Sixteenth Annual Report of the Bureau of American Ethnology, pp. 73-198 Washington. MORRIS, EARL H. 1925 Exploring in the Canyon of Death. National Geo graphic Magazine, Vol. XLVII, No. 3, pp. 2&3-300. Washington. MORRIS, ELIZABETH ANN 1959 Basketmaker Caves in the Prayer Rock District North eastern Arizona. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. University of Arizona. Tucson. MORSS, NOEL 1927 Archaeological Explorations in the Middle Chinle, 1925. American Anthropological Association, Memoir No. 3lw Mehasha. OLSON, ALAN P. 1962 The Cross Canyon Group. Unpublished manuscript. 1963 Personal communication. 1965 Personal communication. OLSON, ALAN P. AND THOMAS A. LEE, JR 196U NA 7696, a Stratified Site in Three Turkey Canyon, Northeastern Arizona. Plateau, Vol. 36, No. 3, pp. 73-82. Flagstaff. PIERSON, LLOYD M. 1959 The Prehistoric Population of Chaco Canyon, New Mexico: A Study in Methods and Techniques of Prehistoric Population Estimation. Unpublished M.A. thesis. University of New Mexico. PRUDDEN, T. MITCHELL 1903 The Prehistoric Ruins of the San Juan Watershed in Utah, Arizona, Colorado, and New Mexico. American Anthropologist, n.s., Vol. f>. No. 2, pp. 22h-28d. Menasha. REED, ERIK K. 1956 Types of Village-Plan Lay-Outs in the Southwest. In “Prehistoric Settlement Patterns in the New World,11 edited by Gordon R. Willey. Viking Fund Publications in Anthropology, No. 23, pp. 11-17. New York. ROBERTS, FRANK H. H., JR. 1929 Shabik'eschee Village, A Late Basketmaker Site in the Chaco Canyon, New Mexico. Bureau of American Ethnology, Bulletin No. 92. Washington. 1930 Early Pueblo Ruins in the Piedra District, South western Colorado. Bureau of American Ethnology, Bulletin, No. 96. Washington. 1931 The Ruins at Kiatuthlanna Eastern Arizona. Bureau of American Ethnology, Bulletin No. 100. Washington. 1932 The Village of the Great Kivas on the Zuni Reserva tion, New Mexico. Bureau of American Ethnology, Bulletin No. 111. Washington. 1935 A Survey of Southwestern Archaeology. American Anthropologist, n.s., Vol. 37, No. 1, pp. I-35. Menasha. ROBERTS, FRANK H. H., JR. 1939 Archaeological Remains in the Whitewater District, Eastern Arizona, Part I. House Types. Bureau of American Ethnology, Bulletin No. 121. Washington. 19l|0 Archaeological Remains in the Whitewater District, Eastern Arizona, Part II. Bureau of American Ethnology, Bulletin No. 126. Washington. ROBERTSON, WILLIAM 1777 The History of America, 2 volumes. London. ROSENTHAL, JANE P. 1962 Personal communication. ROUSE, IRWIN 1962 An Introduction on Southwestern Archaeology Today. In An Introduction to the Study of Southwestern Archaeology, by Alfred V. Kidder. New Haven and London. RUPPE, REYNOLD J. 1962 A Preliminary Report of the Arizona State University Summer Session at Kin-li-chee Wash, Arizona. Mim eographed copy. I96U Personal communication. SAPPER, KARL 192U Die Zahl und die Volksdichte der indianischen Bevolkerung in Amerika vor der Conquista und in der Gegenwart. Proceedings of the International Congress of Americanists, 21st Session, pp. 9U-10U. The Hague. SCHWARTZ, DOUGLAS W. 1956 Demographic changes in the early period of Cohonina prehistory. In 11 Prehistoric Settlement Patterns in the New World," edited by Gordon R. Willey. Viking Fund Publications in Anthropology. No. 23, pp. 26-31% New fork. — SIMPSON, J. H. 18^0 Report of Lieutenant J. W. Simpson of an Expedi tion into the Navajo Country in 181*9 • . . In Reports of the Secretary of War, 31st Congress, 1st session, Senate Executive document No. 61*, pp. 55-61*. Washington. SMILEY, TERAH L. 1951 A Summary of Tree-Ring Dates from some Southwestern Archaeological Sites. Laboratory of Tree-Ring Research, Bulletin No. 3% Tucson. SPINDEN, HERBERT J. 1929 The Population of Ancient America. Annual Reports of the Smithsonian Institution, 1929, pp. 1*51*471. Washington. STEWARD, JULIAN H. 1937 Ecological Aspects of Southwestern Society, Anthropos, Vol. 32, pp. 87-101*. Vienna. 1955 Theory of Cultural Change - The Methodology of Multilinear Evolution. Urbana. TURNER, CHRISTY G., II 1962 A Summary of the Archaeological Explorations of Dr. Byron Cummings in the Anasazi Culture Area. Museum of Northern Arizona. Technical Series, No. 5. Flagstaff. TURNER, CHRISTY G., II AND LAUREL LOFGREN 1966 Household Size of Prehistoric Western Pueblo Indians. Southwestern Journal of Anthropology, Vol. 22, No. 2 (Summer). Albuquerque. VIVIAN, GORDON AND TOM W. MATHEWS 1965 Kin KLetso, A Pueblo III Community in Chaco Canyon, New Mexico. Southwestern Monuments Association, Technical Series, Vol. 6 - Part 1. Globe. 3U5 VIVIAN, GORDON AND PAUL REITER i960 The Great Kivas of Chaco Canyon and Their Re lationships. Monographs of the School of American Research and Museum of New Mexico, No. 22. Santa Fe. WASLEY, WILLIAM W. 195)7 The Archaeological Survey of the Arizona State Museum. Tucson. i960 Salvage Archaeology on Highway 66 In Eastern Arizona. American Antiquity, Vol. 26, No. 1, pp. 30-U2. Salt Lake City. WENDORF, FRED 195)3 Archaeological Studies in the Petrified Forest National Monument. Museum of Northern Arizona, Bulletin, No. 27. FlagstafTT 195)6 Some Distributions of Settlement Patterns in the Pueblo Southwest. In 11 Prehistoric Settlement Patterns in the New World,” edited by Gordon R. Willey. Viking Fund Publications in Anthropology, No. 23, pp. 18-25)1 New York. WENDORF, FRED,: N. FOX, AND 0. L. LEWIS (editors) 195)6 Pipeline Archaeology. The Laboratory of Anthropology and the Museum of Northern Arizona. Santa Fe and Flagstaff. WHIPPLE, A. W. 185)6 Reports of Explorations and Surveys to Ascertain the Most Practical and Economical Route for a Railroad from the Mississippi River to the Pacific Ocean, Vol. III. Senate Executive Document No. 78, 33rd Congress, 2nd session. Washington. WILLEY, GORDON R. AND PHILIP PHILLIPS 1958 Method and Theory in American Archaeology. University of Chicago Press. “Chicago. WINSHIP, G. P, 1896 The Coronado Expedition, 15UO-15U2. Fourteenth Annual Report of the Bureau of American Ethnology pt. 1, pp. 329-513• Washington WOODBURY, RICHARD B. AND NATALIE F. S. WOODBURY 1962 Zuni Pottery. Unpublished manuscript. e n t / tfu Ceramic Pecos 1961 Localities Canyon Central Vernon Periods Navajo Tsegl San Francisco S an Francisco Stages de and Cohonina System Eastern Western District Chelly Canyon Peaks Area I Peaks Area 2 Arizona • 1900- Pueblo V •1700 ■1500 Pueblo IV Pueblo III Pueblo II Pueblo I -7 0 0 - 5 00 £ ? 7 f / St l Figure 9» Sq m population patterns from different areas of the Puebloan Southwest. Navajo District (Dittert, Hester and Eddy 1961 Fig. 32), Canyon de Cbelly (De Harport 1959), Taegi Canyon (Colton 1960$ 105), Hopi Area (Colton I960: 105), San Francisco Peaks 2 (Turner and Lofgren 1966), Central and Western Arizona (Colton 1960$ 106), Cobonina (Schwartz 1956), Vernon Area (Longacre 1961$ Fig. 71$). Figure 2. Map of the southeastern portion of the Navajo Indian Reservation# CERAMIC PERIODS Tohotchi-Mexicon Block Creek P u e r c o N o zI ini TIME Springs A.D. 1/2 Scale 1/2 Scale 1/2 Scale Creek Wash -1900- 5 Components,plotted at Ceramic Period mid-point. 1700 1500- 1300- -1100 9 0 0 - - 7 0 0 - -5 0 0 - t f U 3 # / Figure 7. Population fluctuation as expressed by site components by period for each of the six localities. s ? f / Figure 1. Map of the eastern portion of the Navajo Indian Reservation and surrounding area. CERAMIC PERIODS Tohotchi-Mexicon Kin-li-chee Noz lini Lu k.—T oh.— Block Creek R io P u e r c o Springs Creek Wo$h Gr eo. ■ *IO rooms,plotted ot Ceromic Period mid-point. •1700 E 9 7 ff j e / Figure 8. Population flu ctu atio n s based on the number of s ite components and mean number of rooms per component by period for each of the six localities.