THE BASKETMAKER II PERIOD IN THE FOUR CORNERS AREA William D. Lipe INTRODUCTION of Southwestern and American archaeology, and provides important new data regarding he Basketmaker II period is important. this history. Third, the conference shows how T The archaeological remains of this period much can be learned from systematic study of document the emergence of the Anasazi the older museum collections, photographs, cultural tradition and a consolidation of the and records, and hence justifies the effort and dependence on farming that shaped the expense that has gone into maintaining these tradition from then on. The Anasazi materials over the years. (Some of the papers experience is a unique and valuable strand in also show how much work it is to glean new human history, one worth studying and information from this kind of material.) understanding for its own sake. It also can Finally, it shows that amateur archaeologists stand as one example of the general kinds of (amateurs in the best sense) can take a economic, demographic, and social changes leadership role in an important study such as that swept through most of the world after the the Wetherill-Orand Gulch Project, and can end of the last Ice Age, as ancestral patterns of come up with new, invaluable information that food collecting were replaced by food is important and of interest to the general producing, and as populations grew, became public, to amateur or avocational more sedentary, and developed more complex archaeological groups, and to the professional social organizations. Because the archaeological community. archaeological record from the Four Corners area is so good, the Basketmaker II period can he symposium paper by Julia Johnson serve as a case study, or series of case studies, T chronicles the fascinating history of this that can inform us about general issues in unique project. The Wetherill-Orand Gulch human prehistory, as well as about the roots of Project in turn provides the backdrop for this the Anasazi culture. unique symposium, which has brought together people from different backgrounds n a more regional level, this conference and types of interest, but who are united by O makes an important contribution to their love for the study of the past, and by Southwestern archaeology for a number of their concern for the fragile archaeological reasons. First, it provides an opportunity to sites and materials upon which this study is discuss and digest some of the exciting new based. The Wetherill Project and this work on the Basketmaker period that has conference may well be the model for similar taken place in the Southwest over the last few efforts in the future, in the Southwest and years-and presents some additional new elsewhere. research, which will be reported here for the first time. Second, it recognizes the importance of the Basketmakers in the history -1- NEW DEVELOPMENTS IN BASKETMAKER Basketmaker Period, and that are stimulating STUDIES new interest in Basketmaker studies. Not all these new developments are represented in the would like to review some recent papers delivered here, but many are. As I I developments and trends in research that briefly summarize these developments, and are providing new perspectives on the note a few of the recent contributors to them, I shall also try to draw attention to the Table 1.1: Chronology, Greater Four Comers Area Dates Periods Distinctive Characteristics A.D. 1350-1600 Pueblo IV Large plaza-oriented pueblos in Rio Grande and Western Pueblo areas; low kiva to room ratio; kachina cult widespread; corrugated replaced by plain utility types; B/W pottery declines relative to red, orange or yellow types. A.D. 1150-1350 Pueblo III Large pueblos and/or "revisionist great houses" in some areas, dispersed pattern in others; high kiva to room ratios; cliff dwellings; towers; triwalls; corrugated gray and elaborate B/W pottery, plus red or orange pottery in some areas; abandonment of the Four Corners by 1300. A.D. 900-1150 Pueblo II Chacoan florescence; "Great Houses", great kivas, roads,etc. in many but not all regions; strong differences between Great Houses and surrounding "unit pueblos" composed of a kiva and small surface masonry room block; corrugated gray and elaborate B/W pottery, plus decorated red or orange types in some areas. A.D. 750-900 Pueblo I Large villages in some areas; unit pueblos of"proto-kiva" plus surface roomblock of jacal or crude masonry; great kivas; plain and neckbanded gray pottery with low frequencies of B/W and decorated red ware. A.D. 500-750 Basketmaker III Habitation is deep pithouse plus surface storage pits, cists, or rooms; dispersed settlement with occasional small villages and occasional great kivas; plain gray pottery, small frequencies of B/W pottery; bow and arrow replaces atlatl; beans added to cultigens. A.D. 50-500 Basketmaker II (late) Habitation is shallow pithouse plus storage pits or cists; dispersed settlement with small low density villages in some areas; campsites important as well (?); no pottery; atlatl and dart; corn and squash but no beans; upland dry­ farming in addition to floodplain farming. A.D.50-B.C.1500 Basketmaker II (early) Long-term seasonal(?) use of caves for camping, storage, burial, rock art; San Juan Anthropomorphic style pictographs and petroglyphs; camp and limited activity sites in open; no pottery; atlatl and dart; corn and squash but no beans; cultivation primarily floodplain or runoff based(?). B.C. 6500-1500 Archaic Subsistence based on wild foods; high mobility; low population density; shelters and open sites; atlatl and dart; no pottery. -2- contributions that the symposium participants including stemmed projectile points and are making in these areas. This is by no ground stone tools; and they evidently means intended to be a thorough review of the occupied smaller territories than did the recent literature on the Basketmaker II period earlier Paleoindians. in the Four Corners area-only a brief and subjective selection of what seem to me to be n the other end of the time period, the important and active categories of research. O dates for the Basketmaker II to Basketmaker III transition appear to be erhaps the most striking development in holding firm at about A.D. 450 or 500, which Pthe past few years is the emergence of a we have recognized as the "starting point" for new "long chronology" for Basketmaker II. BM III for many years. In many parts of the This is covered by Kim Smiley in his paper. Four Corners area, Basketmaker III sites don't Largely as a result of work done by Kim (see actually become common until about A.D. 600. also Smiley 1984, 1992), we have more dates Whether this was because there was a hiatus and better interpreted dates thari we did a few in occupation between Basketmaker II and III years ago. Instead of a relatively brief in many areas (see Matson et al. 1988) or Basketmaker II period that occupies the first whether non-ceramic late Basketmaker II 450 or 500 years of the Christian era, we now occupations continued later in some areas than have evidence that BM II complexes in the in others is not clear. northern Southwest, with substantial dependence on maize farming, extend back to n order to clearly distinguish Basketmaker between 1000 and 1500 B.C. In my chronology I III from Basketmaker II, I will digress here (Table 1.1) I placed the late Archaic,;_BM II with a few comments on what makes boundary at 1500 B.C. We now have early or Basketmaker III distinctive as a culture­ "rockshelter" BM II, dating largely to B.C. historical period. The clearest marker the times, and late or "pithouse" BM II, dating to start of Basketmaker III, of course, is the the early centuries A.D.-I've placed it at A.D. appearance of plain gray ceramics, ordinarily 50 to 500. That means that many of the in considerable abundance. There are some perishable items such as basketry, etc. that occurrences of brown wares in what appear to we think of as typical Basketmaker II actually be very late Basketmaker II and very early come from the earlier part of a rather long Basketmaker III contexts in the eastern part period-one as long as or longer than the rest of the Four Corners area, but it is well-made of the Anasazi sequence put together. plain gray jars, accompanied by black-on-gray decorated bowls and other forms, that f any of you are wondering what became of characterize Four Corners Basketmaker III in I Basketmaker I (a hypothetical pre­ general. This period also has deeper, more agricultural stage proposed at the Pecos substantially built pithouses, often with Conference of 1927 [Kidder 1927]), it became antechambers; surface storage structures are the Late Archaic. That is, by the time more common and larger than previously; archaeologists began recognizing pre­ beans are added to the agricultural complex; agricultural sites in the Southwest, the terms the bow and arrow replaces the atlatl and "Archaic" and "Paleoindian" had come into dart; the community pattern includes hamlets wide use in American archaeology. The latter and villages of closely-spaced houses in some refers to the early Holocene period cultures areas as well as loose clusters of very widely that are characterized by large lanceolate dispersed houses in others; and great kivas spear points (e.g., Clovis, Folsom, Plano). make their appearance, probably serving as "Archaic" refers to hunting-gathering cultures the locations for rituals that drew membership that depended on a considerable variety of from more than one social segment in the wild plants and an1mals, usually exploiting community.