SITE NM-H-46-55

DATA RECOVERY AT FIVE ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITES ALONG US 491 NORTH OF SHEEP SPRINGS, SAN JUAN COUNTY, NEW MEXICO

Submitted to

Albert M. Thomas, P.E. BOHANNAN HUSTON, INC.

Courtyard I 7500 Jefferson Street, NE

Albuquerque, New Mexico 87109 Telephone: (505) 823-1000; Fax (505) 798-7988

Submitted by

SWCA ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTANTS 5647 Jefferson Street, NE

Albuquerque, New Mexico 87109 Telephone: (505) 254-1115; Fax: (505) 254-1116

www.swca.com

Edited by

Jim A. Railey, Ph.D.

With contributions by

Mindy Bonine Christopher Carlson Andrea Carpenter Linda Scott Cummings Erik Barry Erhardt Dennis Gilpin

Janet Hagopian Liangya Jia Lance Lundquist F. Michael O’Hara, III Thomas O’Laughlin Jim A. Railey

Adam Sullins R. A. Varney Cherie Walth

NMDOT Project Number FLH-666-1(49)17 Control Number 2357

Navajo Nation Cultural Resources Investigation Permit No. C0608

Archeological Resources Protection Act Permit ARPA-NAO-06-002

SWCA Project No. 10775-175 SWCA Cultural Resources Report No. 2007-93

September 2008

http://www.swca.com/

http://www.swca.com/

US 491 field crew in Feature 3 at the Sandy Rise site. From left to right: Jim Railey, Liangya Jia,

Tim Antonio, Carlos Railey, Cullom, and Chris Carlson. US 491 field crew in pit house Feature 12A at the Sandy Rise site. From left to right: Liangya

Jia, Quinton Daigre, Tim Antonio, Jeanne Welch, Patrick McKnight, Tony Brown, Lilly Greenawald, Adam Sullins, Cullom, and Courtney Platero.

Contributors iii List of Contributors

Jim A. Railey, SWCA-Albuquerque

Dennis Gilpin, SWCA-Flagstaff

F. Michael O'Hara, III, SWCA-Flagstaff*

Thomas C. O’Laughlin, Albuquerque Museum

Janet Hagopian, SWCA-Flagstaff

Cherie Walth, SWCA-Albuquerque Mindy Bonine, SWCA-Austin

Christopher C. Carlson, SWCA-Albuquerque

Adam Sullins, SWCA-Albuquerque

Liangya Jia, SWCA-Albuquerque*

Linda Scott Cummings, Paleo Research Institute

R. A. Varney, Paleo Research Institute

Lance Lundquist, SWCA-Albuquerque*

Andrea Carpenter (Independent Analyst)

Erik Barry Erhardt, University of New Mexico, Department of Mathematics and Statistics *Indicates affiliation has changed since the individual’s contribution to this volume

Contents iv

Table of Contents

List of Figures .......................................................................................................................... viii List of Tables ............................................................................................................................ xii Acknowledgments.................................................................................................................... xiv Abstract ..................................................................................................................................... xv

CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................. 1

Background ................................................................................................................................. 1 Document Organization .............................................................................................................. 4

CHAPTER 2 ENVIRONMENT AND CULTURAL BACKGROUND................................ 5

Environment................................................................................................................................ 5 Environmental Setting.......................................................................................................................... 5 Environmental Change ......................................................................................................................... 8

Research Background and Cultural Setting .............................................................................. 10 Previous Research in the General Project Area.................................................................................. 10 Culture History ................................................................................................................................... 14

CHAPTER 3 RESEARCH DESIGN ..................................................................................... 29

Cultural Historical Issues .......................................................................................................... 29 Paleoindian Tradition ......................................................................................................................... 29 Archaic Tradition ............................................................................................................................... 30 Origins of Agriculture ........................................................................................................................ 34 The Transition to Settled Village Life................................................................................................ 35 The Chacoan System .......................................................................................................................... 36 The Nature of Post-Chacoan Occupation of the Chuska Valley ........................................................ 39 Navajo Occupation of the Chuska Valley Prior to A.D. 1868 ........................................................... 39 Navajo use of the Valley during the Reservation Period, A.D. 1868 to Present ................................ 40

General Research Topics .......................................................................................................... 41 Chronology......................................................................................................................................... 41 Paleoenvironmental Reconstruction................................................................................................... 41 Technology......................................................................................................................................... 42 Subsistence ......................................................................................................................................... 42 Social Organization ............................................................................................................................ 42 Prehistoric Settlement Patterns........................................................................................................... 43 Exchange and Regional Interaction.................................................................................................... 43

CHAPTER 4 FIELD AND ANALYTICAL METHODS..................................................... 44

Provenience, Mapping, and Geomorphic Recording ................................................................ 44 Trenching and Machine Scraping ............................................................................................. 45 Hand Excavation Units ............................................................................................................. 46 Treatment of Features ............................................................................................................... 46 Collection of Field Samples...................................................................................................... 47 Field Records ............................................................................................................................ 47 Analysis of Archaeological Materials....................................................................................... 47 Treatment of Human Remains .................................................................................................. 48 Curation..................................................................................................................................... 48

Contents v CHAPTER 5 THE SANDY RISE SITE (NM-H-51-55) ....................................................... 49

Site Description......................................................................................................................... 49 Previous Investigations ............................................................................................................. 50

Survey and Recording ........................................................................................................................ 50 Archaeological Testing ...................................................................................................................... 52

Data Recovery Activities .......................................................................................................... 55 Site Stratigraphy and Geomorphology...................................................................................... 63 Overview of Features ................................................................................................................ 71

Condition of Features ......................................................................................................................... 71 Basin-shaped Pit Features .................................................................................................................. 79

Site Components ....................................................................................................................... 82 Early Late Archaic Component .......................................................................................................... 83 Basketmaker II Component................................................................................................................ 86 Pueblo II Component ....................................................................................................................... 109 Surface Component .......................................................................................................................... 118

Site Summary.......................................................................................................................... 118 Recommendations................................................................................................................... 123

CHAPTER 6 HISTORIC NAVAJO SITES (NM-H-46-55 & NM-H-46-62) ................... 124

NM-H-46-55 ........................................................................................................................... 124 Site Description ................................................................................................................................ 124 Previous Investigations .................................................................................................................... 125 Site Stratigraphy and Geomorphology ............................................................................................. 128 Data Recovery .................................................................................................................................. 128 Site Interpretation and Summary...................................................................................................... 155 Recommendations ............................................................................................................................ 155

NM-H-46-62 ........................................................................................................................... 155 Site Description ................................................................................................................................ 155 Previous Investigations .................................................................................................................... 157 Site Stratigraphy and Geomorphology ............................................................................................. 157 Data Recovery Activities ................................................................................................................. 160 Site Interpretation and Summary...................................................................................................... 170 Recommendations ............................................................................................................................ 170

CHAPTER 7 OTHER PREHISTORIC SITES (NM-H-35-17 AND NM-H-35-19) ........ 171

NM-H-35-17 ........................................................................................................................... 171 Site Description ................................................................................................................................ 171 Previous Investigations .................................................................................................................... 172 Site Stratigraphy and Geomorphology ............................................................................................. 176 Data Recovery Activities ................................................................................................................. 176 Materials Recovered......................................................................................................................... 178 Ceramic Artifacts (by Janet Hagopian) ............................................................................................ 179 Site Chronology ............................................................................................................................... 179 Site Summary ................................................................................................................................... 180 Recommendations ............................................................................................................................ 180

NM-H-35-19 (The Little Water Village Site) ......................................................................... 180 Site Description ................................................................................................................................ 180 Previous Investigations .................................................................................................................... 181 Data Recovery .................................................................................................................................. 184 Materials Recovered......................................................................................................................... 190

Contents vi

Site Chronology ............................................................................................................................... 193 Summary and Recommendations ..................................................................................................... 193

CHAPTER 8 LITHIC ARTIFACTS ................................................................................... 194

Introduction............................................................................................................................. 194 Background and Research Potential ....................................................................................... 194

Diachronic Patterns in Flaked Stone Technologies.......................................................................... 194 Approaches to Flaked Stone Classification and Analysis ................................................................ 197

Comparative Sources for the Lithic Analysis ......................................................................... 204 Goals of the Lithic Analysis ................................................................................................... 206 Classification Scheme and Statistical Methods ...................................................................... 207

Classification .................................................................................................................................... 207 Statistical Methods (Chi-square and Adjusted Residuals) ............................................................... 209

Lithic Raw Materials............................................................................................................... 209 Material Types ................................................................................................................................. 209 Analysis of Material Types .............................................................................................................. 213

Analysis of Artifact Classes.................................................................................................... 217 Flakes ............................................................................................................................................... 217 Cores ................................................................................................................................................ 239 Lithic Tools ...................................................................................................................................... 239 Projectile Points ............................................................................................................................... 244 Ground Stone ................................................................................................................................... 246 Other Stone....................................................................................................................................... 248 Chunks.............................................................................................................................................. 248

Comparison of Activity Indices .............................................................................................. 249 Summary and Conclusions ..................................................................................................... 254

CHAPTER 9 CERAMIC ANALYSIS ................................................................................. 256

Methods................................................................................................................................... 257 Wares and Types..................................................................................................................... 257

Tusayan White Ware ........................................................................................................................ 257 Cibola White Ware........................................................................................................................... 258 Chuska White Ware ......................................................................................................................... 258 Indeterminate Whiteware ................................................................................................................. 259 Tusayan Gray Ware.......................................................................................................................... 259 Chuska Gray Ware ........................................................................................................................... 260 Tallahogan Red ................................................................................................................................ 260

Chronology ............................................................................................................................. 260 Production, Distribution, and Exchange ................................................................................. 262 Conclusions............................................................................................................................. 263

CHAPTER 10 MACROBOTANICAL AND FAUNAL REMAINS FROM FLOTATION SAMPLES AT THE SANDY RISE SITE (NM-H-51-55) ..................................................... 265

Methods................................................................................................................................... 265 Materials Recovered ............................................................................................................... 266

Plant Remains................................................................................................................................... 266 Faunal Remains ................................................................................................................................ 273

Feature Distribution of Floral and Faunal Remains................................................................ 274 Early Late Archaic Feature .............................................................................................................. 274 Basketmaker II Features ................................................................................................................... 274

Contents vii

Discussion ............................................................................................................................... 276 CHAPTER 11 FAUNAL REMAINS FROM SCREENED EXCAVATIONS ................... 279

Methods................................................................................................................................... 279 Faunal Remains Recovered..................................................................................................... 280

Sandy Rise Site (NM-H-51-55)........................................................................................................ 280 Site NM-H-46-55 ............................................................................................................................. 286 Site NM-H-35-19 ............................................................................................................................. 288

CHAPTER 12 POLLEN AND PHYTOLITHS FROM THE SANDY RISE SITE........... 289

Methods................................................................................................................................... 289 Pollen................................................................................................................................................ 289 Phytoliths.......................................................................................................................................... 290

Background ............................................................................................................................. 290 Phytoliths.......................................................................................................................................... 290 Ethnobotanic Review ....................................................................................................................... 291

Results and Discussion ........................................................................................................... 293 Summary and Conclusions ..................................................................................................... 301

CHAPTER 13 SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS ............................................... 303

Investigated Sites .................................................................................................................... 303 The Sandy Rise Site (NM-H-51-55) ................................................................................................ 303 NM-H-46-55 .................................................................................................................................... 305 NM-H-46-62 .................................................................................................................................... 306 NM-H-35-17 .................................................................................................................................... 306 Little Water Village (NM-H-35-19)................................................................................................. 306

Addressing the Research Issues .............................................................................................. 307 Cultural-Historical Issues ................................................................................................................. 307 General Research Issues ................................................................................................................... 312

Recommendations................................................................................................................... 314

References .............................................................................................................................. 315

Appendix A Sandy Rise Site (NM-H-51-55) Backhoe Trench Profile Descriptions ....... 353 Appendix B Beta Sheets........................................................................................................ 357 Appendix C Lithic Data ....................................................................................................... 369 Appendix D Ceramics Code Sheets ..................................................................................... 431 Appendix E Ceramics Petrography .................................................................................... 439 Appendix F Faunal Data ...................................................................................................... 447

Contents 8

LIST OF FIGURES 1.1. US 491 project corridor, showing the five sites treated during SWCA's data recovery

investigations. ......................................................................................................................2 2.1. The western San Juan Basin, showing the US 491 project corridor. ...................................6 2.2. Satellite image showing the US 491 project corridor in the western San Juan Basin. ........7 5.1. NM-H-51-55, general view during the testing phase.........................................................49 5.2. Contour map of sand dune in northern portion of the Sandy Rise site.. ............................50 5.3. NM-H-51-55 survey map...................................................................................................51 5.4. NM-H-51-55 testing map showing extent of investigations..............................................53 5.5. NM-H-51-55, Test Unit 2, looking east.............................................................................54 5.6. The Sandy Rise site, showing location of data recovery activities....................................56 5.7. The Sandy Rise site, showing backhoe trenches, hand excavations, and features

within the sand dune in the northern portion of the site. ...................................................57 5.8. The Sandy Rise site, showing machine scraping in progress. ...........................................58 5.9. The Sandy Rise site, showing hand excavation of feature-unit blocks on the machine-

scraped surface...................................................................................................................59 5.10. The Sandy Rise site, Feature 17, in the west wall of BHT 10. ..........................................60 5.11. The Sandy Rise site, looking west-northwest toward the Chuska Mountains, showing

backhoe trenches and edge of stabilized sand dune in northern portion of site.................64 5.12. The Sandy Rise site, oblique rendering of sand dune looking southwest, showing

backhoe trenches excavated into surface of site. ...............................................................64 5.13. The Sandy Rise site, Feature 4 profile, looking north.. .....................................................65 5.14. The Sandy Rise site, BHT 1 profile, portion of south wall................................................66 5.15. The Sandy Rise site, BHT 9 profile, south wall. Feature 7 is an early Late Archaic pit,

and Feature 24 is a Basketmaker II pit house. ...................................................................68 5.16. The Sandy Rise site, profile at the south end of Backhoe Trench 10, looking west..........69 5.17. The Sandy Rise site, profile at south end of Backhoe Trench 11, looking east (photo

shows roughly the northern half of the profile drawing).. .................................................70 5.18. The Sandy Rise site, plan and profiles of Features 10A–10C.. .........................................78 5.19. The Sandy Rise site, Feature 17A, below pit house Feature 17 in the Basketmaker II

midden................................................................................................................................78 5.20. The Sandy Rise site, size distribution of basin-shaped pit features. ..................................81 5.21. The Sandy Rise site, Feature 14A in the Basketmaker II midden.. ...................................81 5.22. The Sandy Rise site, Feature 31, a large basin-shaped pit.................................................82 5.23. The Sandy Rise site, oblique rendering and partial cutaway of the northern portion of

the sand dune, showing horizontal and vertical relationships between Feature 3 and the Basketmaker II component. .........................................................................................83

5.24. The Sandy Rise site, early Late Archaic features. .............................................................84 5.25. The Sandy Rise site, Feature 7, partially excavated.. ........................................................85 5.26. The Sandy Rise site, Basketmaker II features.. .................................................................87 5.27. Basketmaker II pit houses at the Sandy Rise site. .............................................................88 5.28. The Sandy Rise site, pit house Feature 10D plan view......................................................89 5.29. The Sandy Rise site, Feature 10D west-facing profile.. ....................................................90 5.30. The Sandy Rise site, Features 12A and 12B plan view.. ...................................................91 5.31. The Sandy Rise site, Features 12A and 12B south-facing profile.. ...................................91

Contents 9 5.32. The Sandy Rise site, pit house Feature 17 plan view. .......................................................92 5.33. The Sandy Rise site, pit house Feature 18 plan and profile...............................................93 5.34. The Sandy Rise site, pit house Feature 24 plan view. .......................................................94 5.35. The Sandy Rise site, Feature 24 south-facing profile, along south wall of east-west

hand trench.........................................................................................................................94 5.36. The Sandy Rise site, pit house Feature 10D plan view, eastern portion, showing the

floor-surface hearth, Feature 10D-1...................................................................................95 5.37. The Sandy Rise site, basin-shaped hearths in Basketmaker II pit houses: left, plan

view of Feature 12B-1; right, Feature 12A-1.....................................................................95 5.38. The Sandy Rise site, pit house Feature 14E south-facing profile.. ....................................97 5.39. The Sandy Rise site, north-facing profile showing sheet midden extending eastward

from pit house Feature 10D. ..............................................................................................99 5.40. The Sandy Rise site, Feature 10 area showing flaked stone artifact density. ..................100 5.41. The Sandy Rise site, Feature 10 area showing rock density............................................101 5.42. Scatterplot showing maximum diameter by depth, for pit houses from the Sandy Rise

site and NM-H-26-56. ......................................................................................................106 5.43. The Sandy Rise site, Pueblo II features. ..........................................................................111 5.44. The Sandy Rise site, Feature 3, looking north. ................................................................112 5.45. The Sandy Rise site, Feature 3: left, distribution of mapped-in rocks; right, density

distribution of all rocks by weight. ..................................................................................113 5.46. The Sandy Rise site, remnant mortar within Feature 3....................................................114 5.47. The Sandy Rise site, Feature 8, a Pueblo II pit, looking south.. ......................................114 5.48. The Sandy Rise site, density map, all surface artifacts....................................................119 5.49. The Sandy Rise site, density map, surface ceramics. ......................................................120 5.50. The Sandy Rise site, density map, surface lithic artifacts................................................121 6.1. NM-H-46-55, Feature 1, establishing a grid. ...................................................................125 6.2. NM-H-46-55 survey map.................................................................................................126 6.3. NM-H-46-55 testing map.................................................................................................127 6.4. NM-H-46-55, proposed data recovery activities. ............................................................129 6.5. NM-H-46-55, Feature 1, pre-excavation, looking south..................................................131 6.6. NM-H-46-55, Feature 1, post-excavation, looking south. ...............................................131 6.7. NM-H-46-55, Feature 1 excavation block plan view. .....................................................132 6.8. NM-H-46-55, Feature 1 excavation block.. .....................................................................133 6.9. NM-H-46-55, Feature 1A cross section, looking south ...................................................134 6.10. NM-H-46-55, Feature 1A profile close-up, looking south.. ............................................134 6.11. NM-H-45-55, Feature 2, looking south.. .........................................................................136 6.12. NM-H-46-55, Feature 2, stratigraphic profile of north wall of Unit 17. .........................137 6.13. NM-H-46-55, Feature 2, portion of the Unit 17 north wall profile. ................................137 6.14. NM-H-46-55, Feature 3, looking northwest. Test Unit 1 is visible on top of the

midden-covered dune.......................................................................................................139 6.15. NM-H-46-55, Feature 5, following clearing of scrub that was growing in the feature. ..141 6.16. NM-H-46-62, Feature 1, looking southwest. ...................................................................156 6.17. NM-H-46-62, view of Feature 1, looking east.................................................................156 6.18. NM-H-46-62, view of Feature 1, looking north.. ............................................................157 6.19. NM-H-46-62 survey map.................................................................................................158 6.20. NM-H-46-62 testing map.................................................................................................159

Contents 10 6.21. NM-H-46-62, LiDAR imaging of Feature 1 prior to excavation, looking east. ..............160 6.22. NM-H-46-62, proposed data recovery activities. ............................................................161 6.23. NM-H-46-62, LiDAR-generated shaded-relief plan view of the structure ruin and

surrounding area...............................................................................................................162 6.24. NM-H-46-62, LiDAR-generated elevation map of the structure ruin, looking east........163 6.25. NM-H-46-62, LiDAR-generated elevation map of the structure ruin, looking north. ....163 6.26. NM-H-46-62, Feature 1, showing the block of four 2 × 2–m excavation units. .............164 6.27. NM-H-46-62, Feature 1, post-excavation, showing the base course of foundation

stones left in place............................................................................................................166 6.28. NM-H-46-62, Feature 2, looking north: top, pre-excavation; bottom, post-excavation..167 6.29. NM-H-46-62, Feature 3 and Feature 7.. ..........................................................................169 7.1. NM-H-35-17 during testing phase, looking east..............................................................172 7.2. NM-H-35-17 survey map.................................................................................................173 7.3. NM-H-35-17 testing map.................................................................................................174 7.4. NM-H-35-17, Feature 1, looking north............................................................................175 7.5. NM-H-35-17, proposed data recovery investigations......................................................177 7.6. NM-H-35-17, Feature 1, following machine scraping.....................................................178 7.7. NM-H-35-19 survey map.................................................................................................182 7.8. NM-H-35-19, excavation blocks from the 1979 data recovery project: top, north

block; bottom, south block...............................................................................................183 7.9. Little Water Village, aerial image showing previous excavations, surface artifacts,

and surface collection units..............................................................................................185 7.10. Little Water Village, density map, all surface-artifacts. ..................................................186 7.11. Little Water Village, density map, surface ceramic artifacts...........................................187 7.12. Little Water Village, density map, surface lithic artifacts. ..............................................188 7.13. Little Water Village, location and extent of data recovery excavations. .........................189 7.14. Little Water Village, overview looking north along the machine-scraped surface. ........190 7.15. Little Water Village site, sandstone-slab deflector just outside of the western right-of-

way fence.. .......................................................................................................................192 8.1. US 491 data recovery, two cores of petrified wood from the Sandy Rise site

Basketmaker II component. .............................................................................................211 8.2. An example of petrified wood that is indistinguishable from chalcedony, except for

the bark cortex..................................................................................................................212 8.3. US 491 data recovery, percent of flaked stone material type by material class, artifact

count, and artifact weight.................................................................................................215 8.4. US 491 data recovery, plot of adjusted chi-square residuals on material types

compared to size classes. .................................................................................................215 8.5. US 491 data recovery, plot of adjusted chi-square residuals on petrified wood and all

other materials, by material texture. ................................................................................217 8.6. US 491 data recovery, frequency distribution of flake sizes. ..........................................218 8.7. US 491 data recovery, distribution of flake frequencies by weight group, Sandy Rise

site Basketmaker II component........................................................................................219 8.8. US 491 data recovery, percent cortex plotted against flake size. ....................................220 8.9. Adjusted chi-square residuals on flake material texture for the three analyzed

assemblages......................................................................................................................224

Contents 11 8.10. Adjusted chi-square residuals on flake completeness for the three analyzed

assemblages......................................................................................................................225 8.11. Adjusted chi-square residuals on exterior cortex for the three analyzed assemblages. ...226 8.12. Adjusted chi-square residuals on platform type for the three analyzed assemblages. .....227 8.13. Adjusted chi-square residuals on flake weight for the three analyzed assemblages........228 8.14. Adjusted chi-square residuals on flake weight for the three analyzed assemblages,

with the 0–0.2 g weight category eliminated. ..................................................................228 8.15. Adjusted chi-square residuals on flake size for the three analyzed assemblages. ...........230 8.16. Adjusted chi-square residuals on flake size for the three analyzed assemblages, with

the smallest flake-size category removed ........................................................................230 8.17. Adjusted chi-square residuals on flake thickness for the three analyzed assemblages....231 8.18. Adjusted chi-square residuals on flake thickness for the three analyzed assemblage,

with the thinnest flakes eliminated. .................................................................................231 8.19. Adjusted chi-square residuals on flake size, Sandy Rise and Little Water Village. ........233 8.20. Adjusted chi-square residuals on flake weight, Sandy Rise and Little Water Village

sites. .................................................................................................................................233 8.21. Adjusted chi-square residuals on flake size for one household midden and six pit

houses at the Sandy Rise site. ..........................................................................................234 8.22. Adjusted chi-square residuals on flake weight for one household midden and six pit

houses at the Sandy Rise site. ..........................................................................................234 8.23. US 491 data recovery, plot of adjusted chi-square residuals on debitage and edge-

modified flakes by size. ...................................................................................................236 8.24. Plot of adjusted chi-square residuals on debitage and edge-modified flakes for the

Little Water Village and Sandy Rise sites. ......................................................................237 8.25. Adjusted chi-square residuals on debitage and edge-modified flakes for the Little

Water Village, Sandy Rise, LA 457, and Aqueduct sites. ...............................................238 8.26. Sandy Rise Basketmaker II component, frequency of bifaces (including fragments) by

stage. ................................................................................................................................241 8.27. Hammerstone made from a solid block of petrified wood.. ............................................242 8.28. Knife made from a thin, tabular spall of petrified wood..................................................243 8.29. Drill made from a petrified wood flake. ..........................................................................243 8.30. US 491 data recovery, fine bifaces and projectile points.................................................246 8.31. US 491 data recovery, basin metate in situ in the fill of pit house Feature 14E at the

Sandy Rise site. ................................................................................................................249 8.32. Plot of activity indices, Sandy Rise, Aqueduct, LA 457, and NM-H-26-56 sites. ..........252 10.1. The Sandy Rise site, maize cob fragment from Feature 24. ............................................271 11.1. Bone beads, probable bone-bead blanks, and Olivella shell bead. ..................................285 11.2. Bead manufacturing process. ...........................................................................................285 11.3. Location of cut marks observed on sheep/goat elements from Feature 2........................288 12.1. Pollen diagram for the Sandy Rise site. ...........................................................................296 12.2. Phytolith diagram for the Sandy Rise site........................................................................297

Contents xii

LIST OF TABLES 1.1. US 491 Archaeological Sites North of Sheep Springs Tested by SWCA in 2004 ..............3 5.1. NM-H-51-55, Backhoe Trench Data from the Testing Phase ...........................................55 5.2. The Sandy Rise Site, Feature Data ....................................................................................73 5.3. The Sandy Rise Site, Radiocarbon Dates from the Basketmaker II Component.............104 5.4. Comparison of Pit House Measurements, the Sandy Rise Site and NM-H-26-56 ..........106 5.5. The Sandy Rise Site , Ceramics Collected during the Testing Phase ..............................116 5.6. The Sandy Rise Site , Ceramics Collected during the Data Recovery Phase ..................116 6.1. NM-H-46-55, Feature Data..............................................................................................130 6.2. NM-H-46-55, Feature 2, Surface Artifacts Recorded during Testing .............................136 6.3. NM-H-46-55, Feature 3, Artifacts Recorded on the Surface during Testing ..................140 6.4. NM-H-46-55, Feature 5, Artifacts Recorded on the Surface during Testing ..................141 6.5. Site NM-H-46-55, Prehistoric Ceramics..........................................................................154 6.6. NM-H-46-62, Feature Data..............................................................................................162 7.1. NM-H-35-17, Lithic Artifacts Collected .........................................................................179 7.2. Little Water Village, Recovered Artifacts .......................................................................191 7.3. Little Water Village, Ceramics Collected during Data Recovery....................................191 8.1. US 491 Data Recovery, Distribution of Lithic Classes by Site, Recovered

Assemblage ......................................................................................................................194 8.2. Example of a Stage Reduction Model used for Flake Classification...............................198 8.3. Flake-type Classifications from a Selection of Projects in the Four Corners Area .........201 8.4. US 491 Data Recovery, Lithic Artifact Classification Scheme .......................................207 8.5. US 491 Data Recovery, Frequency Distribution of Lithic Types and Subtypes by

Component, Recovered Assemblage ...............................................................................208 8.6. US 491 Data Recovery, Distribution of Lithic Material Types by Site, Analyzed

Assemblage ......................................................................................................................210 8.7. US 491 Data Recovery, Distribution of Lithic Material Types by Lithic Class,

Analyzed Assemblage......................................................................................................210 8.8. US 491 Data Recovery, Flaked Stone Artifact Counts and Average and Total Weights

by Material Type, Analyzed Assemblage ........................................................................214 8.9. US 491 Data Recovery, Lithic Material Texture by Material Type ................................216 8.10 US 491 Data Recovery, Samples from Selected Proveniences in the Sandy Rise Site

Basketmaker II Component Chosen for Debitage Analysis ............................................221 8.11. US 491 Data Recovery, Characteristics of the Three Sites Examined in the Debitage

Comparison Study............................................................................................................222 8.12. Total Analyzed Flakes from Each of the Three Site Assemblages..................................222 8.13. Results of Chi-square Analyses on Debitage Variables for the Sandy Rise, Aqueduct,

and LA 457 Assemblages ................................................................................................223 8.14. US 491 Data Recovery, Average Weight in Grams of Debitage and Edge-Modified

Flakes by Size Class.........................................................................................................236 8.15. US 491 Data Recovery, Lithic Tool Types by Raw Material Type.................................240 8.16. Stages of Biface Manufacture ..........................................................................................240 8.17. Projectile Point Data ........................................................................................................245 8.18. US 491 Data Recovery, Distribution of Mano Shapes ....................................................248 8.19. Site Activity Indices.........................................................................................................250

Contents xiii 8.20. Comparison of Activity Indices .......................................................................................253 9.1. Ceramic Frequencies by Site ...........................................................................................256 9.2. Date Ranges for Temporally Sensitive Types .................................................................261 9.3. Mean Ceramic Dates, Mean Ceramic Date Range, and Minimum Use Dates for US

491 Sites...........................................................................................................................262 9.4. Sherds Selected for Petrographic Analysis ......................................................................263 10.1. The Sandy Rise Site , Data from Flotation Samples........................................................267 11.1. The Sandy Rise Site , Faunal NISP and MNI Counts......................................................281 11.2. Bone Beads and Bead Blanks ..........................................................................................284 11.3. Site NM-H-46-55, Faunal NISP and MNI Counts ..........................................................286 12.1. The Sandy Rise Site , Provenience Data for Fill Samples ...............................................294 12.2. The Sandy Rise Site , Pollen Types Observed in Samples ..............................................295

Acknowledgements 14

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Many people contributed to the success of this project. In the field, the hand excavations were carried out by a very capable and dedicated crew: Tim Antonio, Tony Brown, Cullom, Chris Carlson, Quinton Daigre, Lilly Greenawald, Liangya Jia, Patrick McKnight, Courtney Platero, Carlos Railey, Adam Sullins, and Jeanne Welch. 20X Excavations and Fuhs Trucking of Gallup provided heavy equipment and skillfully carried out the machine excavations.

Back in the lab, Liangya Jia processed all artifacts and flotation samples, created and maintained the project database, and handled the transmittal of all samples and artifacts to and from the various analysts. Under the supervision of Jim Railey, she also analyzed the lithic artifacts, coded their attributes in the analysis database, and assisted in the statistical manipulation of the lithic artifacts data. She put in many long hours, especially at the end, to ensure that the report- deliverable schedule was met.

A skilled team of analytical specialists extracted important data from various material classes and samples. Janet Hagopian analyzed the ceramics, and Andrea Carpenter conducted the petrographic analysis of the sherds. Tom O’Laughlin analyzed the macrobotanical remains, and Linda Scott-Cummings and R.A. Varney of Paleo Research Institute in Golden, Colorado, analyzed the microflora (pollen and phytoliths). Cherie Walth analyzed the faunal assemblage, and Mindy Bonine analyzed the historical artifacts. Lance Lundquist’s pioneering approach to debitage analysis was employed for this project, and Erik Barry Erhardt of the University of New Mexico’s Department of Mathematics and Statistics provided consultation, valuable advice, and a very handy chi-square spreadsheet that aided in the lithic analysis. Rebecca Schwendler and Chris Carlson crunched lithic numbers from their respective SWCA projects, providing valuable comparative data for our understanding of the Sandy Rise debitage assemblage.

This is a graphics-rich report, and many thanks go to Burt McAlpine, SWCA’s multi-talented GIS guru, for many of the maps and figures that appear here. Laser Geomatics (Bohannan Huston, Inc.) created the LiDAR-based images of the structure at NM-H-46-55. The profile drawings, feature plans, and other maps were produced by Jim Railey and Carlos Railey. Jim also produced the 3D renderings of the Sandy Rise site and the artifact illustrations and photos, and shot most of the field photos used in this report.

SWCA’s Document Production team worked feverishly at the end to get this report out. Jean Ballagh and Justin Elza applied their exceptional editing skills to polish up the finished report, and Cheryl Gordon compiled the bibliography and checked to ensure that the bib was complete. Sheri Waldbauer contributed to the final formatting of the document.

Finally, many thanks to Bert Thomas of Bohannan Huston and to Blake Roxlau and Jeff Fredine at the New Mexico Department of Transportation for providing us the opportunity to conduct this fun and exciting project, and to Ron Maldonado of the Navajo Nation Historic Preservation Department for providing the necessary permits to carry out this work and for reviewing the data recovery plan and final report.

Abstract 15

ABSTRACT This report describes data recovery investigations and discoveries at five archaeological sites along US 491 (formerly US 666), north of Sheep Springs, San Juan County, New Mexico. The investigations were prompted by the New Mexico Department of Transportation’s (NMDOT’s) plans to widen US 491 from two to four lanes (NMDOT project number FLH-666-1(49)17, CN 2357). Because the project involves federal funds and is occurring on the Navajo Nation, it falls under the purview of federal laws requiring that effects to cultural resources be considered before construction takes place. These laws include the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as amended (PL 89-665), as well as Navajo Nation regulations and guidelines: the Navajo Nation Cultural Resources Protection Act (Tribal Council Resolution CMY-19-88), the Navajo Nation Historic Preservation Department's (NNHPD) Interim Fieldwork and Report Standards and Guidelines (1991), and the Navajo Nation Policy for the Protection of Jishchaa': Gravesites, Human Remains, and Funerary Items (revised, 1996). Bohannan Huston, Inc., is providing design-engineering services to NMDOT for this project and contracted with SWCA to conduct both the archaeological testing (carried out in 2004) and the data recovery investigations that are reported here.

The major focus of the data recovery investigations was on the Sandy Rise site (NM-H-51-55). Following excavation of Feature 3, a small Pueblo II structure, machine scraping uncovered the remains of a small but intensively occupied Basketmaker II settlement, buried under a meter of eolian sediments within a stabilized sand dune. Seven radiocarbon dates (all on annuals or woody twigs) pinned down the age of this component at circa 400–200 B.C. The investigations identified and excavated 54 features in this component, seven of which were pit houses. Over 7,000 lithic artifacts were recovered from the site, about 85 percent of it petrified wood, which occurs locally. Botanical remains indicate that the Basketmaker II occupants of the site cultivated maize but also relied on a wide variety of wild plant foods. Faunal remains had not preserved well, but what was present suggested that rabbits were the main source of animal protein in the diet. The absence of bones of medium and large mammals and the dearth of projectile points suggested that hunting of deer, antelope, and other large animals was unimportant.

The investigations at Sandy Rise also uncovered a more deeply buried, early Late Archaic component with two features. These features occurred in alluvial deposits that underlay the northern end of the sand dune, approximately 0.5 m below the Basketmaker II component. One radiocarbon date placed this occupation at circa 1750–1500 B.C., at the very beginning of the Late Archaic period. No durable artifacts, nor any maize or other cultigens, were discovered in association with this component.

To the north, two historic Navajo sites were also investigated as part of this effort. NM-H-46-55 was occupied in the early twentieth century and contained the damaged remains of a residential hogan (Feature 1), several midden piles, and a surface scatter of mostly historic artifacts. The hogan contained a central hearth that probably marked the former location of a stove fashioned from a 55-gallon drum. Excavations into one of the midden piles (Feature 2) revealed that this trash overlay a layer of livestock manure that may have marked the former location of a lamb pen. The few diagnostic prehistoric ceramics recovered indicated a very ephemeral Pueblo II presence at this site.

Abstract 16 The other historic Navajo site, NM-H-46-62, contained the well-preserved remains of a small, dry-laid stone structure (Feature 1), a rock concentration that was assumed to be the remains of a bread oven (Feature 2), and several other features, including purported ash stains and rock alignments. Excavations did not reveal any artifacts, ash, or organic midden staining, or any oxidation in Features 1 or 2. Feature 1, originally thought to be a hogan, was more likely the remains of a windbreak or some other non-residential structure. The function of Feature 2 remains unknown. The other features at this site all turned out to be of natural origin, including the “ash stains,” which were actually natural, dark carbonaceous stains of Cretaceous age.

At NM-H-35-17, testing investigations had uncovered a dark-stained feature that was exposed by mechanical excavation during data recovery. Although charcoal introduced by human activity had been recovered from this feature (and radiocarbon-dated) during the testing phase, machine scraping during data recovery revealed that this feature, like the “ash stains” at NM-H-46-62, actually consisted of a large, amorphous carbonaceous lens dating from Cretaceous times. No cultural feature could be isolated within this stain, and so after additional scraping that failed to uncover any archaeological remains, investigations at this site were terminated. No artifacts were collected from this site during data recovery, as it had been completely surface collected during the testing phase.

The Little Water Village site (NM-H-35-19) was the only one of the five data recovery sites that was not investigated during the testing phase in 2004. Extensive excavations had been carried out at this site in 1979, but it was unclear whether or not significant archaeological remains were still present within the right-of-way. Accordingly, investigations including surface collection, backhoe trenching, limited hand excavation, and machine scraping were carried out during data recovery. These efforts did not uncover any additional intact subsurface archaeological remains at the site.

CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION

Jim A. Railey

BACKGROUND

The New Mexico Department of Transportation (NMDOT) has initiated plans for a construction project to improve a segment of U.S. Highway 491 (US 491) 69.4 miles (111.7 km) long in San Juan and McKinley Counties, New Mexico (Figure 1.1). The south end of the project corridor is 0.1 mile (0.2 km) north of the junction with Navajo Highway 9, and the north end is 5 miles (8 km) south of Shiprock, New Mexico (Figure 1.1). The project will entail grading and backfilling within the highway right-of-way, installation of drainage culverts and bridges, and lane expansion and repaving of the highway surface. The project corridor lies completely within Navajo Nation lands, in unplatted areas illustrated on various U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) 7.5 minute quadrangle maps covering northwestern New Mexico. The NMDOT project number is FLH-666-1(49)17, Control Number 2357. The Federal Highway Administration is providing funds for the project.

Because this project is a federal undertaking, assessments of environmental resources that will be affected were carried out, including cultural resources investigations in multiple phases. These investigations complied with federal legislation protecting cultural resources, including the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as amended (PL 89-665), as well as Navajo Nation regulations and guidelines: the Navajo Nation Cultural Resources Protection Act (Tribal Council Resolution CMY-19-88), the Navajo Nation Historic Preservation Department's (NNHPD) Interim Fieldwork and Report Standards and Guidelines (1991), and the Navajo Nation Policy for the Protection of Jishchaa': Gravesites, Human Remains, and Funerary Items (revised, 1996). SWCA Environmental Consultants’ (SWCA’s) work was performed under an annual cultural resources permit from the Navajo Nation, as well as a Navajo Nation Cultural Resources Investigation Class C permit (Permit # C0608) and an Archaeological Resources Protection Act permit (ARPA-NAO-06-002).

The first phase of archaeological investigations involved Class I and III cultural resources surveys of the project corridor, carried out in the summer of 2003 by archaeologists from the Navajo Nation Department of Transportation (NNDOT) (Walkenhorst and John 2003). The survey was performed on behalf of NMDOT and NNDOT.

Of the 145 cultural resources identified during the survey, the NNHPD determined that 99 were eligible for the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP); the other 46 sites were determined to be ineligible. Twenty-five of the NRHP-eligible sites had the potential to be affected by the proposed construction project, as it was originally designed. Nineteen of these sites required nature and extent testing, as they had a demonstrated high potential for intact subsurface archaeological remains, including architectural remains, within the limits of the construction area. Only surface collection, trenching, and avoidance were recommended for the other six sites, as they evidenced no potential for subsurface remains.

Chapter 1 Introduction 2

2 4 6 Miles

0 -- Kilomet

2 4 ers

0 -- 8

e Cultural Site

Project Location N

A --- - 1:200,000

---

Figure 1.1. US 491 project corridor (north of Sheep Springs), showing the five sites treated during SWCA's data recovery investigations.

Chapter 1 Introduction 3 In 2004 Bohannan Huston, Inc. (BHI), requested that SWCA conduct archaeological testing at the 25 potentially affected sites. This effort began with preparation of a testing plan (Gilpin and Railey 2004). Upon approval of the testing plan by the NNHPD, SWCA conducted the archaeological testing fieldwork April 28–May 19, 2004, and completed a testing report and data recovery plan document (Railey 2004). The report/data recovery plan, approved by the NNHPD in September 2004, called for data recovery at 14 of the 25 tested sites.

Following approval of the testing report/data recovery plan, the design plans for the US 491 improvement project changed. One result of this change was that sites that were not originally subject to impact were now potentially within the construction corridor. Subsequently, in July 2005, BHI asked SWCA to submit a bid for data recovery investigations at archaeological sites north of Sheep Springs only, as data recovery at sites south of Sheep Springs was to be conducted by another cultural resources consultant, under a separate contract. At the instruction of NMDOT, the data recovery plan was revised (Railey 2006) to assume potential impacts extending the entire width of the right-of-way (i.e., between the two right-of-way fences).

Five of the 25 sites tested by SWCA were north of Sheep Springs (Table 1.1). Four of these— NM-H-35-17, NM-H-46-62, NM-H-46-55, and NM-H-51-55—were recommended for data recovery. As a result of the redesign of the proposed improvement project, and following consultation between the NNHPD and NMDOT, one additional site that was not investigated during the testing phase was included in the data recovery effort. This site, Little Water Village (NM-H-35-19), extended across the US 491 right-of-way and had been extensively excavated by the Museum of New Mexico during a previous construction project along US 491 (US 666 until May 2003) (Condon 1988).

Table 1.1. US 491 Archaeological Sites North of Sheep Springs Tested by SWCA in 2004

(listed north to south)

Site Testing Activities Recommendation NM-H-35-17 Nature and extent Data recovery NM-H-46-62 Site mapping only Data recovery NM-H-46-55 Nature and extent Data recovery NM-H-51-56 Mapping, surface collection, and trenching only No further work NM-H-51-55 Nature and extent Data recovery

SWCA carried out data recovery investigations at these five sites between June 21 and August 20, 2006. Most of the effort focused on the Sandy Rise site (NM-H-51-55), the southernmost of the five sites, which contained stratified archaeological remains on and within a stabilized sand dune. At and near the surface of the dune was a Pueblo II component that included a very small masonry structure and two pit features outside the structure. North of the Pueblo II structure and approximately 1 m (3 feet) below the dune surface was a Basketmaker II component that was discovered in a backhoe trench during the testing phase. Investigations uncovered 49 eatures associated with this component, seven of which were pit houses, along with a rich lithic and botanical assemblage. Finally, northeast of the main concentration of Basketmaker II features, at a depth of 1.6 m (5.2 feet) below the surface, was an earlier component dating from the early Late Archaic period.

Chapter 1 Introduction 4 Two of the sites investigated as part of this project were historic Navajo. NM-H-46-55, within the town of Newcomb, contained the badly damaged remains of a large, octagonal hogan with two associated ash/coal piles, one of which was within a former corral area on the site. The hogan at NM-H-46-55 contained a well-preserved central hearth, and a small amount of debris was on the floor. NM-H-46-62 contained the well-preserved remains of a small masonry structure, and another stone feature that was thought to be a collapsed bread oven. Excavation of these two structures revealed no subsurface features, staining, or artifacts.

Investigations at the remaining two sites did not uncover any cultural features or intact subsurface archaeological remains. At NM-H-35-17, machine stripping revealed that Feature 1, designated during the testing phase in 2004, was actually part of a natural carbonaceous stain dating from Cretaceous times. No other features were discovered at this site during machine scraping during the data recovery effort. At Little Water Village (NM-H-35-19), machine scraping did not uncover any intact subsurface archaeological remains and confirmed that the previous data recovery efforts at the site had excavated all of the features within the NMDOT right-of-way.

All five data recovery sites were in San Juan County, on unplatted land.

DOCUMENT ORGANIZATION

Following this introduction, Chapter 2 provides project environmental and cultural background information. The research design that guided the investigations is presented in Chapter 3, and the field methods used are provided in Chapter 4. Chapter 5 presents the findings at the Sandy Rise site (NM-H-51-55), including the results of the lithic, ceramic, faunal, botanical, and other analyses. The results of investigations at the two historic Navajo sites (NM-H-46-55 and NM-H- 46-62) are presented in Chapter 6, including the analyses of materials recovered from these two sites. The findings at the two other sites (NM-H-35-17 and the Little Water Village [NM-H-35- 19]) are presented in Chapter 7. Chapters 8 and 9 present the results of the lithic and ceramic analyses, respectively, and the analyses of biotic remains are provided in Chapters 10 (macrobotanical and faunal remains from flotation), 11 (faunal remains from screened excavations), and 12 (pollen and phytoliths). Chapter 13 summarizes the data recovery findings, revisits the research issues presented in Chapter 3, and provides recommendations for the five sites. Six appendices provide data sheets for the various analyses, and a report on the ceramic petrographic analysis.

CHAPTER 2 ENVIRONMENT AND CULTURAL BACKGROUND

Dennis Gilpin, Jim A. Railey, and F. Michael O'Hara, III

ENVIRONMENT

ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING

The project area is in the Navajo Section of the Colorado Plateau (Fenneman 1931; Patton et al. 1991:373). This region encompasses two basins—the San Juan Basin in New Mexico and the Black Mesa Basin in Arizona—separated by the Defiance Upwarp, which formed the Chuska Mountains (Patton et al. 1991:374). The San Juan basin stretches from the Zuni Mountains on the south to the La Plata Mountains on the north, and from the Jemez Mountains on the east to the Defiance Uplift (including the Chuska Mountains) on the west (Kelley 1950, 1951). The US 491 project runs through the western portion of the San Juan Basin, specifically Tohatchi Flats and the Chuska Valley (Figure 2.1; Figure 2.2). The Chuska Valley is actually the lower, eastern slope of the Chuska Mountains, north of the Dutton and Manuelito Plateaus, west of the Chaco Plateau, and south of the San Juan River. Lying in the rain shadow of the Chuska Mountains, this area is extremely arid, and prehistoric settlements tend to be concentrated along the major drainages coming off the mountains. Tohatchi Flats, which encompasses the southernmost portion of the project area, is actually an extension of the Chuska Valley, but it receives more precipitation and thus has supported a comparatively dense population, at least during Anasazi times. Archaeological remains indicate that during that time these areas can be viewed as cultural districts where interaction among resident groups was distinctly more intensive than interaction among outside groups.

Cooley et al. (1969:26) characterize the San Juan Basin as expanses of open country bounded by narrow hogback cuesta ridges. The area is semiarid, and until wells were drilled and stock tanks were constructed in the twentieth century, surface water was almost totally absent. Soils in the project area are mostly eolian sands that may have first been deposited as much as 40,000 years B.P. The floor of the San Juan Basin and most of the project area can be characterized as Great Basin scrub and desert grassland (as defined by Dick-Peddie 1993) or desert scrub and plains grassland (as defined by Lowe 1964) or desert scrub and Great Basin grassland (as defined by Brown 1994). Most of the project area supports a desert scrub plant community.

Most of the exposed pre-Quaternary sediments in the San Juan Basin are Cretaceous and Tertiary shales and sandstones. The upper Cretaceous Dakota Sandstone represents the last major marine flood in the area, along an irregular and time-transgressive sea edge. The advance and retreat of shorelines, marine waters, and coastal areas produced formations of different lithology. Mancos Shale was deposited at the time the sea reached its maximum extent. As the sea receded, the continental Mesa Verde Group (also upper Cretaceous) was deposited in its wake. The Menefee Formation of the Mesa Verde Group comprises the surface lithology throughout the project area. Important among these formations are those that produced clays, which were used by prehistoric peoples for pottery manufacture, and gravels of chert and silicified wood that were used for flaked stone tools.

Chapter 2 Background 6

Miles 0 2.5 5 10 15 20

5 1

0 30

Kilometers 0 --0 2

US 491Project Area

-------

SWCA

Low: 1400 --- -

f:.MVIlONM£NTAl COHSOUANTS

Figure 2.1. The western San Juan Basin, showing the US 491 project conidor.


Figure 2.2. Satellite image showing the US 491 project corridor in the western San Juan

Basin.

Chapter 2 Background 8 The project area ranges in elevation from 1,585 to 1,950 m (6,390–5,200 feet). A number of major channels drain the area. From south to north they are Black Creek, Deer Springs Wash, Figueredo Wash, Muddy Wash, Red Willow Wash, Tocito Wash, Buffalo Spring, Salt Springs, Naschitti Wash, Sheep Springs Wash, Tunstal Wash, Captain Tom Wash, Tse-nas-chii, Blanca Arroyo, Sanostee Wash, Dead Mans Wash, and Sulphur Spring, as well as several major unnamed drainages. Nevertheless, the greatest limiting factors of the environment are the scarcity of water and the short growing season. With an average growing season of 139 days and an average of less than 255 mm (10 inches) of annual precipitation, the project area is marginal for growing maize (which requires a 130-day growing season and 250 mm [9.8 inches] of precipitation). Otherwise, the project area contains extensive areas of soils with agricultural potential and a range of microenvironments in which prehistoric peoples practiced agriculture.

Various types of wild food plants were available to Native American groups living in the project area. Wild game in the immediate area was apparently restricted to small mammals such as rabbits, hares, mice, rats, and other rodents, although larger mammals may have been available in the grasslands to the north (pronghorn) or in the woodlands and forests of the Dutton Plateau to the south (deer), and turkeys (either domesticated or wild) were used throughout the prehistoric period of village farming in the project area, circa A.D. 750–1200.

A number of the available resources would have been important to people who lived in the vicinity of the project area during the Basketmaker, Pueblo, and early Navajo periods, as documented by archaeological surveys and excavations along US 491. Chief among these resources were water, agricultural land, plants, animals, stone, and clay.

ENVIRONMENTAL CHANGE

Botanical and faunal remains from previously excavated sites near US 491 indicate little change in the native plant and animal species over the past several thousand years. Nevertheless, at least three types of change have undoubtedly affected the project area since humans first arrived here. First, the end of the Pleistocene epoch would have resulted in upward movement of life zones and the development of desert scrub communities in the project area. Second, climatic fluctuations throughout the Holocene would have affected the environment in myriad ways, including changes in amount and types of surface water, distribution of plant communities, and plant density and composition within plant communities. Third, the environment has undoubtedly changed in historic times as a result of grazing.

The environmental record of the Pleistocene and early and middle Holocene epochs (Paleoindian and Archaic archaeological periods) is best documented in studies of eolian deposits, pollen remains, tree-ring data, and packrat middens. While tree-ring data provide records of annual changes going back to about A.D. 1, they reflect the environment of the surrounding forests more than that of the grasslands of the project area.

Smith and McFaul (1997) have identified six periods of deposition for the central and southwestern San Juan Basin:

• Tohatchi I (>13,055–7,800 14C years B.P.) • Tohatchi II (7,800–4,500 14C years B.P.)


• Tohatchi III (4,500–3,100 14C years B.P.) • Tohatchi IV (3,100–2,100 14C years B.P.) • Tohatchi V (2,100–660 14C years B.P.) • Tohatchi VI (660 14C years B.P. to present)

Smith and McFaul (1997:133) further hypothesize a very recent period of deposition (Tohatchi VII) that may still be in progress. During Tohatchi I times (the late Pleistocene and early Holocene geological epochs, which includes the Paleoindian tradition), the San Juan Basin was probably covered by grasslands and mixed woodlands of piñon, juniper, and sage. During Tohatchi II times (the Jay, Bajada, and early San Jose phases of the Archaic tradition), the piñon- juniper woodlands gave way to more arid environments, and archaeologically excavated campfires of this period yield less pine and juniper charcoal and more charcoal of arid plants. During Tohatchi III (late San Jose and early Armijo phases) and Tohatchi IV (late Armijo, En Medio, and Basketmaker II phases), the San Juan Basin became wetter, resulting in the formation of playas (seasonal ponds) and the use of more cottonwood and willow in campfires. The Tohatchi V period, which corresponds with the Puebloan occupation of the San Juan Basin, was drier than the Tohatchi III and IV periods. The Tohatchi VI period corresponds to the period after about A.D. 1300, when year-round Puebloan residence in the San Juan Basin ended.

Wright et al. (1973) examined pollen cores from lakes in the Chuska Mountains and identified five pollen zones. Zone 1, the uppermost deposit, contained modern distributions of pollen and dated to the Holocene. Zones 2–5 dated to the Pleistocene and were dominated by sagebrush. Changing distributions of spruce, ponderosa, piñon, and limber pine indicate changing conditions during this time; Zones 2 and 4 had high percentages of spruce and ponderosa, indicating more alpine conditions, while Zones 3 and 5 had high percentages of piñon and limber pine, indicating drier conditions.

McVickar (1996) has summarized reconstructions of past climates in the southern Chuska Valley, based on tree-ring studies, palynology, hydrology, and analysis of packrat middens. Although she briefly summarizes the Archaic tradition, she focuses on the agricultural period (900 B.C. to present). Continuing warm and wet conditions characterized the end of the Archaic tradition during this period, from about 900 B.C. to A.D. 200. The period from A.D. 200 to 500 brought drought and erosion. Improvement from about A.D. 500 to 550 allowed farmers to use the Chuska Valley year-round, but several droughts occurred in the late A.D. 500s. Optimal conditions, wet and stable, prevailed from about A.D. 600 to 725. From about A.D. 725 to 900/920 the region experienced drought, dropping water tables, and erosion. The period from about A.D. 900/920 to 1120 was another optimal period, warm, wet, and stable. Severe drought struck from A.D. 1120 to 1150. Conditions improved again from about A.D. 1150 to 1215. The period from A.D. 1215 to 1285 was characterized by highly unpredictable conditions, culminating in the severe cooling of the Little Ice Age beginning about A.D. 1250 and the Great Drought from about A.D. 1269 to 1299. Conditions did not improve again until about A.D. 1475, when the water table began to rise. The next 400 years were characterized by fairly regular 50- to 100-year oscillations in water tables. Around A.D. 1900 the area experienced another period of lower water tables and erosion. The twentieth century was a time of relatively low moisture and low water tables, until precipitation increased again in the 1980s, but conditions have been drier since then.

Chapter 2 Background 10 RESEARCH BACKGROUND AND CULTURAL SETTING

PREVIOUS RESEARCH IN THE GENERAL PROJECT AREA

The Chuska Slope has been a focus of archaeological interest since at least the 1920s, when pioneer Southwestern archaeologist Earl Morris conducted investigations here (Lister and Lister 1968). When Morris conducted his research, the principal objective of Southwestern archaeology was the classification of sites by date of occupation and cultural affiliation. Morris therefore excavated a series of sites in the Chuska Valley that—based on stratigraphic relationships, ceramics, and architecture—appeared to date from different time periods. Morris attended the first Pecos Conference in 1927, where he joined A. V. Kidder and other Southwestern archaeologists in devising the Pecos Classification, a sequence of cultural development in the Southwest (Kidder 1927). In 1929 the development of tree-ring dating allowed sites to be dated to the Gregorian calendar (Haury and Hargrave 1931). Thus, the pit house villages in the natural alcoves of the Prayer Rock District in the northern portion of the Chuska Valley were tree-ring dated to A.D. 500–700, the Basketmaker III period in the Pecos Classification (Morris 1980). South of Bennett Peak, Morris excavated an arc of aboveground rooms fronted by pit houses that was dated to between A.D. 795 and 857, during the Pueblo I period in the Pecos classification (Morris 1959). Morris also excavated at Mitten Rock (at the north end of the Chuska Valley) and at Newcomb (which he called Cemetery Ridge), sites that were similar in architecture, ceramics, and date to the immense ruins in Chaco Canyon. These sites date between about A.D. 1050 and 1180—the late Pueblo II and early Pueblo III periods of the Pecos Classification.

Archaeological research in the Chuska Valley began again in the 1950s with salvage archaeology projects. The archaeology of the El Paso Natural Gas Company (EPNG) pipeline (Wendorf et al. 1956), the first such project to be conducted in the Southwest, included excavations of sites in the northern part of the Chuska Valley, in the Naschitti area, and in the Tohatchi area. Subsequently, throughout the 1960s, 1970s, and 1980s, archaeological excavations were conducted in the rights-of-way for additional pipelines (Brugge et al. n.d.), power transmission lines (Sciscenti and Grebinger 1962), and roads (Allan 1972; Benham 1966; Broilo and Allan 1973; Chapman 1967; Condon 1977, 1988; Drollinger and Marek 1991; Farwell 1980; Granger 1977; Hammack 1963, 1964[?]; Henderson 1980; Huber 1984; James 1976a; Koczan 1981; Maxwell and Post 1981 Peckham and Allan 1972; Wiseman 1980). These and other projects (Ambler 1983; Anderson and Gilpin 1983; Clements 1982; Gilpin 1990a; Jeffers 1981; Kakos 1991; Martin 1989; McEnany 1987; Peckham 1963; Warburton and Simplicio 1987; Watson 1987; Yeatts 1990) have resulted in the excavation of over 150 archaeological sites. In the 1960s, Peckham and Wilson (1967) conducted a reconnaissance of most of the major drainages in the Chuska Valley in anticipation that the Navajo Indian Irrigation Project (NIIP) would be built there (an alternative project area on the northern Chaco Plateau was later selected). Peckham and Wilson (1967) examined over 700 square miles of land and recorded 1,697 sites (Harris et al. 1967). Furthermore, Peckham and Wilson (1967) identified a pottery tradition unique to the region, centered around Newcomb and characterized by the use of a dark igneous rock (trachyte or basalt) for temper. Although still unpublished, Peckham and Wilson's study is the most comprehensive archaeological survey of the region.

In 1971 the National Park Service and the University of New Mexico established the Chaco Center to conduct a comprehensive study of the archaeology of Chaco Canyon. One of the most

Chapter 2 Background 11 remarkable discoveries of the Chaco Center was the system of prehistoric roads that radiated out from Chaco Canyon to prehistoric communities throughout the San Juan Basin and beyond. In each of these communities was a "great house" with architecture similar to that of the large ruins in Chaco Canyon. Much archaeological research during the 1970s and later focused on identifying and documenting all of the outlying communities that were connected to Chaco Canyon by the road system and trying to understand the organization of these communities and the relationships between the outlying communities and the sites in the canyon. Marshall et al. (1979) provided the first published description of this "Chacoan system." Within the Chuska Valley, Marshall et al. (1979) identified great house communities, including Newcomb, Skunk Springs, Crumbled House, Great Bend, Willow Canyon, Whirlwind House, Gray Hill Spring, Hogback, Toh La Kai, Peach Springs, and Standing Rock. Their work was augmented by that of Powers et al. (1983), who provided a detailed study of the Peach Springs great house and community. The Bureau of Land Management later sponsored studies of some of the major prehistoric roadways; Nials et al. (1987) described the Coyote Canyon Road that runs through Standing Rock and Peach Springs toward the US 491 project area.

In the 1970s and 1980s, archaeological work in proposed coal mines in the northern portion of the Chuska Valley, particularly the Coal Gassification Project (CGP) study of the lower Chaco River (Hogan and Winter 1983; Moore and Winter 1980; Reher 1977), was extremely influential in suggesting new directions for future research. The CGP study (Reher 1977) was important for, among other contributions, (1) describing a large assemblage of Archaic (preceramic) sites in detail, (2) presenting the first published description of Chuskan ceramics, and (3) discussing historical Navajo manifestations.

At the 1990 Pecos Conference, Gilpin (1990b) presented a paper attempting to summarize statistically the archaeological research done in the Navajo country. To estimate site density and the total number of sites present in this region, Gilpin compiled a list of over 100 large, nonlinear survey projects, ranging in survey area from 80 acres to 216,000 acres (the NIIP) and totaling 680,000 acres. These survey projects documented nearly 18,000 archaeological sites, for an average density of one site per 37.78 acres, suggesting that the 17,000,000 acres of the Navajo country contain approximately 450,000 sites. Site density in the large survey projects ranged from one site every 40 acres (in an 80-acre unit on the Dutton Plateau) to one site every 4,000 acres (north of Shiprock Peak). Revising geologist Herbert Gregory's (1916) classification, Gilpin subdivided the Navajo country into 22 physiographic provinces and calculated the site density in each province, finding that the range of variation within each province was greater than the range among provinces. In terms of cultural affiliation of the sites represented in the large survey projects, 20 percent of all reported components were Archaic/lithic, 35 percent were Anasazi, and 45 percent were Historic. Once again, variation within each physiographic province was greater than the variation among provinces. Finally, Gilpin compiled a list of 1,436 sites at which some sort of excavation had been conducted. Seventy percent of these were Anasazi sites, 10 percent were Archaic/lithic, and 20 percent were Historic. Gilpin (1990b) concluded that the distribution of surveys was not representative of physiographic provinces and that the distribution of excavated sites was not representative of the population of sites that had been identified.

Gilpin identified only four large-area surveys in the Chuska Valley (Fehr and Enloe 1981; Gilpin et al. 1985; Reher 1977; Rudecoff 1980), all of them in the northern Chuska Valley. These

Chapter 2 Background 12 surveys inventoried 58,861 acres and identified 870 sites with 894 components, for an average site density of one site per 68 acres (compared to one site in 4,000 acres for Rudecoff's survey). Of these, 149 components (17%) were Archaic/lithic, 256 (29%) were prehistoric Pueblo, and 489 (55%) were Historic. Gilpin also attempted to estimate the total number of excavated sites in each of the physiographic provinces. Remarkably, excavations have been conducted at 177 sites in the Chuska Valley, constituting an immense database for comparison. Eighteen of these sites are Archaic, 121 are prehistoric Puebloan, and 29 are Historic; nine are undated.

The small number of large-area surveys in the Chuska Valley and the location of all of them in the northern portion of the valley render the applicability of Gilpin's results to the valley as a whole questionable. We might add the survey of the El Paso Coal Company Lease (EPCC) (Sessions 1979) and the Peach Springs Anasazi community (Powers et al. 1983) to the list. Sessions, though, places the EPCC survey, which covered 1,530 acres (620 ha) and recorded 258 sites, on the northern Chaco Plateau. Powers et al. (1983) surveyed a 1.35-square-mile (3.5 km2) area around the great house and recorded 52 additional sites (37 small houses, 7 special-activity sites, 2 field houses, 1 nonhabitation structure, 3 scatters, and 2 other sites). The community was occupied from about A.D. 500 to 1300. Even with the addition of these two surveys, the number of large-area surveys is small, and they are overwhelmingly located in the northern portion of the valley. Nonetheless, Gilpin's general approach provides some estimate of site density and site population and allows results of other surveys to be placed in the context of the general distribution of sites in the valley.

Since Gilpin's study, two archaeological studies for large pipeline projects have provided additional information on the Chuska Valley. In conjunction with the construction of the Transwestern Pipeline, the Office of Contract Archeology (OCA) of the University of New Mexico conducted excavations at six prehistoric Pueblo sites in the Standing Rock (Anasazi) community and one prehistoric Pueblo site south of Standing Rock (Bradley and Sullivan 1994), and at seven Archaic sites in the southern San Juan Basin (Burchett et al. 1994). In addition, OCA conducted ethnographic research on the Navajo community in the vicinity of Standing Rock and excavated two historic sites in this area (Winter et al. 1993). Replacement of the 1950s EPNG pipeline, the locus of the first pipeline archaeology project (Wendorf et al. 1956), was preceded by archaeological excavations at a number of sites in the southern Chuska Valley, including some in the Whirlwind House community and some in Tohatchi Flats. Reports on this project are in preparation.

Several significant excavation projects have recently been completed on roads adjacent to the US 491 corridor, including Zuni Cultural Resource Enterprise (ZCRE) excavations along Navajo Route 30-31 through Mexican Springs (Damp 1999); ZCRE excavations along Navajo Route 5001 through the Newcomb Chacoan community (not yet published); Office of Archaeological Studies excavations along US 491 south of SWCA’s project area (Lakatos 1998); excavations by SWCA along Navajo Route 9 between its junction with US 491 and Standing Rock (Gilpin 1998; Gilpin et al. 2000); and excavations by the Navajo Nation Archaeology Department (NNAD) along Navajo Route 5000(2), which parallels US 491 near Tocito (Reed and Hensler 2002).

Prior to construction of Navajo Route 30-31 from Navajo, New Mexico, to US 491, ZCRE conducted data recovery at 21 sites, 17 of which were in the Chuska Valley (the other four were

Chapter 2 Background 13 in the Black Creek Valley). The Chuska Valley sites comprised six single-component Anasazi sites, three single-component Navajo sites, and eight multi-component Anasazi-Navajo sites (Damp 1999). Most of the Anasazi components dated to the Basketmaker III period. Improvement of US 491 south of the western end of Navajo Route 9 was preceded by data recovery at five sites with 12 components: three Archaic/Basketmaker III components, three Basketmaker III components, two Pueblo II components, three Pueblo II–III components, and one Navajo component (Lakatos 1998).

The Navajo Route 9 project was divided into two segments: N9(2-1), from U.S. Highway 666 (now 491) to east of Coyote Canyon (11 miles [18 km]); and N9(5-1), from east of Coyote Canyon to west of Standing Rock (9 miles [15 km]). The survey (Skinner and Gilpin 1997) identified 36 sites, 12 in Segment 5-1 and 24 in Segment 2-1. In addition, test excavations were conducted within the right-of-way adjacent to a previously recorded site (LA 6448) outside the right-of-way, and one site adjacent to the right-of-way was recorded. Testing was conducted at 33 sites (12 in Segment 5-1 [Phillips et al. 1997] and 21 in Segment 2-1 [Gilpin 1999]), including LA 6448. Data recovery was conducted at 17 sites (eight in Segment 5-1 [Gilpin 1998] and nine in Segment 2-1 [Gilpin et al. 2000]). The 38 sites identified during the project contained 59 components ranging in date from Paleoindian to twentieth-century Navajo: 1 Paleoindian, 3 Archaic, 1 Archaic/Basketmaker II, 3 Basketmaker II, 32 Anasazi, 18 Navajo, and 1 twentieth century (unknown cultural affiliation). Anasazi sites dated primarily to the Chacoan era, and the project area crossed two Chacoan communities (Peach Springs and Grey Ridge). In addition, post-Chacoan occupation of the area was represented at several sites.

The Navajo Route 5000(2) project included excavations at three sites within the Tocito great house community, two other prehistoric sites, and the historic Tocito trading post (Reed and Hensler 2002). The earliest excavated component was a Basketmaker II food processing and storage area. Most of the excavated prehistoric features dated to the Pueblo II period and were contemporaneous with the occupation of the great house structures. The excavations at the three sites in the Tocito great house community included a one-room field house at one site, a kiva and a pit house at a second site, and a four-room masonry room block at the third site. The other prehistoric site consisted of three surface masonry rooms and a kiva.

SWCA's archaeological testing of 25 sites along US 491 (Railey 2004) produced new data on Archaic, Anasazi, and Navajo occupations in Tohatchi Flats and the Chuska Valley. A possible Early Archaic Bajada phase presence was indicated by a radiocarbon-dated feature at NM-H-62- 112. Late Archaic and Basketmaker II radiocarbon dates were obtained from five sites (NM-H- 51-55, NM-H-62-105, NM-Q-15-51, and NM-Q-15-49), all but one of which came from buried alluvial or eolian contexts (the exception is the Late Archaic date from NM-Q-15-51, which came from a feature partially exposed at the surface). A buried feature at NM-Q-15-49 contained maize macrobotanical remains, with an associated radiocarbon date of 1000–820 B.C., making this some of the earliest-dated maize in the San Juan Basin.

Among the Anasazi components investigated during the US 491 testing project was a Basketmaker III/Pueblo I component, which included a jacal wall stub and several other features, buried under more than a meter of alluvium at NM-Q-15-51 and exposed in a backhoe trench. Carbon samples from two of these features yielded identical radiocarbon dates of A.D. 660–790 (two-sigma, calibrated). At nearby site NM-Q-15-29, maize and squash remains from test units

Chapter 2 Background 14 within the right-of-way yielded one radiocarbon date falling within the Basketmaker III/Pueblo I time frame and another from Pueblo II–III times. Ceramics from the project reflect the heavy Pueblo II presence along US 491, with numerous Pueblo III remains and very occasional Pueblo IV sherds as well.

Two historic Navajo components were re-documented during the US 491 testing phase, at NM- H-46-62 and NM-H-46-55. Both were early twentieth-century occupations and both were proposed for data recovery as part of this project.

CULTURE HISTORY

Archaeological research in the San Juan Basin has documented some 12,000 years of essentially continuous occupation. Overviews of the culture history of the region can be found in Cordell (1979), Plog and Wait (1982), Pratt and Scurlock (1990), Stuart and Gauthier (1981), and Vivian (1990). In general, the culture history is divided chronologically by four traditions: Paleoindian, Archaic, Anasazi, and Historic.

PALEOINDIAN TRADITION

By the end of the Pleistocene epoch, approximately 12,000 years ago, human populations were present in the American Southwest. These earliest inhabitants and their lifeway, referred to as the Paleoindian, left archaeological remains dating from roughly 10,000 to 6000 B.C., which spans the climatic and environmental transition from the Pleistocene to the Holocene. Climatic conditions were generally cooler and moister than today, but were also rapidly changing as the vast ice sheets of the north retreated and the climate approached the warmer and more arid conditions of the Holocene. Lanceolate projectile points are the most characteristic artifacts of this period. The earlier lanceolate points exhibit distinct flutes, large flake scars that extend up from their bases. Paleoindian assemblages also include unifacial and bifacial scrapers, and single-, double-, and even multiple-spurred gravers and other flake artifacts have been found in Paleoindian tool kits.

Although Paleoindians are frequently characterized as nomadic hunters whose subsistence economy was focused on now-extinct megafauna and other big game, the Paleoindian occupants of northwestern New Mexico probably pursued relatively diverse subsistence strategies that included utilization of wild plant resources. Low population densities prevailed among these early regional inhabitants, who were probably organized as small-scale, residentially mobile, and socially fluid groups. These groups maintained wide-ranging exchange and interaction networks that worked to homogenize projectile point styles and other cultural features over vast areas. These demographic and cultural patterns resulted in comparatively sparse archaeological sites with low visibility, and few Paleoindian sites are known in northwestern New Mexico.

The Paleoindian tradition is usually divided into the Clovis (Llano) (9500–9000 B.C.), Folsom (8800–8000 B.C.), Plano (8000–7000 B.C.), and Cody (7000–6500 B.C.) complexes. The Clovis complex was characterized by hunting of mammoth with Clovis projectile points. Folsom complex hunting focused on long-horned bison (Bison antiquus) using Folsom points. Late Paleoindian (Plano and Cody complex) hunting focused on both long-horned bison and modern bison (Bison bison) using Midland, Plainview, Scottsbluff, Eden, Angostura, and Belen projectile points and Cody knives. Paleoindian resources are extremely rare on Navajo Nation lands and

Chapter 2 Background 15 consist mostly of isolated projectile points. Only a few sites have been recorded, and none have been excavated. Concentrations of Paleoindian materials have been documented in the northern and southwest San Juan Basin, the Chambers-Sanders Trust Lands, and the Cow Springs– Inscription House region. Any Paleoindian finds are important, and sites with intact subsurface cultural deposits are extremely significant.

Although only one site attributed to the Paleoindian tradition has been recorded in the Chuska Valley, isolated projectile points from throughout the valley suggest that Paleoindians used the entire area. The Peach Springs Paleoindian site is one of the few known on the Navajo Indian Reservation and the only one in the Chuska Valley. It has never been fully described but apparently has Folsom and Plano components (Stuart 1985; Stuart and Gauthier 1981). Perhaps the best description of this site is a popular account in Stuart (1985:28–31), who describes the site as Folsom, with most artifacts (including a projectile point and a scraper) made from Narbona Pass (formerly Washington Pass) chert. This site needs to be better documented.

Projectile point types found in the Chuska Valley include Clovis (1 point), Folsom (5), Midland (2), and Eden (2). Clovis, Folsom, and Midland points were found on three Archaic sites and in a Navajo hogan on the CGP (Reher 1977). On the EPCC project, three Paleoindian projectile points were identified: a Folsom point and an Eden point as isolated occurrences and an Eden point on a multi-component site (Sessions 1979). Peckham and Wilson (1967) reported finding three Folsom points in their survey of the Chuska Valley: an "unfluted Folsom" (Midland?) base from Site LA 7871 in the Rocky Ridge locality in the northern part of the valley, a fluted Folsom base from Site LA 7128 in the Chuska locality in the central part of the valley, and another from Naschitti. Cronk (1982:Figure 22c, 55) recovered a Midland or Belen projectile point made of fossiliferous chert from Site LA 31677, a multi-component site near Pinabete Arroyo. The specimen from the Red Rock Valley (Morris 1959) is described as a Hell Gap projectile point but might be better interpreted as a Jay phase point. Anderson and Gilpin (1983) reported a radiocarbon date of 6560±100 B.C. from Site AZ-I-25-17 near Red Rock. Jeff Wharton of the Farmington Office of NNAD recovered two Paleoindian projectile points from Site AZ-I-25-42 in the Red Rock Valley (Wharton 1990).

Vogler (1993a:111) summarized the Paleoindian materials on the NIIP on the northern Chaco Plateau and noted that they seemed fairly extensive (eight Paleoindian components and at least 21 isolated projectile points or knives) in comparison with what had been recorded elsewhere in the San Juan Basin (Vogler 1993b:289–294). When he examined the distribution of Paleoindian materials in terms of the area surveyed on each project, though, Vogler found a fairly uniform but low density of Paleoindian materials. This suggests that analysis of Paleoindian materials on the scale of the San Juan Basin, or perhaps an even larger region, would be the best method for understanding the Paleoindian occupation of the Chuska Valley.

ARCHAIC TRADITION

The termination of major glacial activity marks the beginning of the Holocene epoch, around 10,000 years ago. The retreat of the glaciers was accompanied by a widespread extinction of the Pleistocene megafauna, and the climate became increasingly warmer and drier. Concurrent with these changes, the peoples of the Southwest gradually developed new lifeways, referred to by archaeologists as the Archaic tradition. Spanning roughly 6,000 years, the Archaic tradition is

Chapter 2 Background 16 marked by several salient trends. One is ongoing population growth, evidenced by the much greater number of sites relative to those known from Paleoindian times, and increasing numbers of sites for each successive Archaic tradition and phase. Another trend involves a progressive decrease in residential mobility, indicated by the appearance of structures and other facilities (including storage pits) that suggest a more substantial and long-term commitment to at least certain settlements and localities. Evolutionary forces over the course of the Archaic led to increasingly larger sociopolitical units inhabiting progressively smaller, more sharply defined territories, with the archaeological outcome of an increasing regionalization of artifact styles over time.

In contrast to what were probably more opportunistic subsistence strategies during Paleoindian times, Archaic hunter-gatherers (especially those of later Archaic times) probably participated in a more logistical economy, in which a wider variety of wild plant and animal resources was exploited seasonally across the landscape (Judge 1982:49). These new strategies were developed in part to feed larger groups circumscribed by ever-smaller territories. Such strategies included subsistence intensification and complex exchange networks, as well as seasonal mobility. Increasing population densities and shrinkage of group territories are also typically tied to sociopolitical dynamics involving escalating social conflict, which probably further motivated intensified subsistence production. Archaeologically, the intensification of subsistence practices is best reflected in the appearance, and gradually increasing abundance, of ground stone over the course of the Archaic, and the eventual appearance and spread of domesticated plant remains. Fairly specialized milling tools appeared long before the advent of domestic plant cultivation, which took place during the Late Archaic and Basketmaker II periods. Hunting continued to provide a significant part of the subsistence economy throughout the Archaic sequence, since food-producing domesticated animals were absent. Contrary to prevailing notions, Archaic peoples may not have exploited a broader range of resources than their Paleoindian predecessors, although they clearly employed less opportunistic, more planned strategies.

Besides ground stone implements, Archaic tool assemblages include numerous large, stemmed and notched projectile point types, as well as knives, scrapers, drills, and perforators. Awls, handles, and flakers were fashioned from bone and antler. Although typically poorly preserved, wood was also utilized for a variety of implements, including spear throwers, or atlatls.

Lifeways were not static over the course of the Archaic tradition, however, and notable trends are evident in the archaeological record for this long span of time. To characterize these changes, archaeologists typically employ a three-period division of the Archaic—Early, Middle, and Late—that is generally applicable to the entire American Southwest, with local phase sequences that either equate to one or more of these periods, or subdivide them. Irwin-Williams's (1973) Oshara tradition sequence of five phases is widely used to subdivide the Archaic tradition in the San Juan Basin. The sequence consists of: (1) the Jay phase (5500–4800 B.C.), (2) the Bajada phase (4800–3200 B.C.), (3) the San Jose phase (3200–1800 B.C.), (4) the Armijo phase (1800– 800 B.C.), and (5) the En Medio phase (800 B.C.–A.D. 400). The En Medio phase subsumes the Basketmaker II period of the Pecos Classification. Each phase of the Oshara tradition is characterized by a distinctive projectile point style, none of which is well dated. Based on her work at sites along the Rio Puerco of the east, Irwin-Williams (1973) argued that Archaic peoples were progressively more sedentary and that site area and the number of features at each site increased over time. She maintained that maize was introduced during the Armijo phase.

Chapter 2 Background 17 On the NIIP, however, Archaic trends appeared to depart somewhat from those described for the Oshara tradition. In particular, large, stratified "base camps" (sites with dense artifact concentrations and anthropogenic midden deposits) date from as early as the Jay phase in the western San Juan Basin (Vogler 1984). Each cultural stratum at these base camps consisted of dense deposits, up to 30 cm thick, of charcoal-stained soil, fire-cracked rock, flaked stone and ground stone, and the bones of rabbits and other small game. The appearance of such sites, at so early a time period, suggests that Early and Middle Archaic peoples in this region may have been less mobile, with perhaps higher population densities, than their contemporaries in many other parts of the Southwest.

There are also many undated lithic sites in the region, and these present interpretive problems because they may represent Paleoindian, Archaic, Anasazi, or even Protohistoric sites. Lithic technology studies, involving characterization of debitage assemblages, can provide useful temporal information throughout the American Southwest, and such studies may aid in the assessment of these otherwise non-datable sites. Gilpin (1990b) estimates that 20 percent of all sites recorded on the Navajo Nation are Paleoindian/Archaic/lithic, but that only 10 percent of excavated sites fall into this category.

The distribution of Archaic sites in the Chuska Valley has not been summarized, but the best- known sites are in the northern portion of the valley. Gilpin (1990b) identified only 18 Archaic sites in the Chuska Valley where excavations have been conducted, and 16 of them were on the lower Chaco (Hogan and Winter 1983; Moore and Winter 1980; Powers 1988:862–863). The CGP (Reher 1977), EPCC (Sessions 1979), and Consol (Fehr and Enloe 1981; Gilpin and Fowler 1985) surveys recorded numerous Archaic sites, and Archaic sites were excavated on the CGP project (Hogan and Winter 1983; Moore and Winter 1980; Powers 1988:862–863).

Several Archaic radiocarbon dates from Chuska Valley sites were obtained during the US 491 testing project (Railey 2004). A calibrated (two-sigma) date of 4490–4350 B.C., which falls in the Bajada phase, was obtained from a feature at NM-H-62-112. This project also produced Late Archaic and Basketmaker II radiocarbon dates from three other sites in the Chuska Valley, all in buried eolian or alluvial contexts. At NM-H-51-55, a stabilized sand dune contained a buried midden stratum with features, from which were obtained three nearly identical radiocarbon dates collectively spanning 410–200 B.C. Two features at NM-H-62-99, both buried under alluvial sediments, produced Late Archaic and Basketmaker II dates of 1020–830 B.C. and 400–350 B.C. The two features occurred at depths that are consistent with the relationship of their associated dates. At NM-H-62-105, a date of A.D. 80–250 was obtained from a feature buried under alluvium that appeared to have a caliche-plaster lining and may have been an irrigation ditch. No diagnostic artifacts were associated with any of these dates, though all were from aceramic contexts. Charred squash seed fragments were recovered from a buried feature at NM-H-51-55, but flotation samples from these sites did not provide much clear evidence of subsistence remains.

In the Tohatchi Flats area, there is an apparent occupational hiatus from circa A.D. 150 to 500 (i.e., the late En Medio phase/late Basketmaker II), as there are no datable archaeological remains from this time frame (Kearns 1996a, 1996b; Kearns et al. 2000:118). The findings of the US 491 testing project did not provide any evidence to contradict this inferred hiatus; both of the Late Archaic/Basketmaker II radiocarbon dates, obtained from features at two sites within

Chapter 2 Background 18 Tohatchi Flats, fell before the inferred hiatus. One of these dates, 1000–820 B.C., came from an aceramic feature buried under slopewash alluvium at NM-Q-15-49. This same feature also produced maize macrobotanical remains, and the associated radiocarbon date suggests that this maize is among the earliest known in the San Juan Basin.

Archaic materials are common in the Red Rock Valley (see, for example, McEnany 1985:Table 3.1). Peckham and Wilson (1967:6–10) reported that concentrations of Archaic sites have been found 5 to 8 miles (8–13 km) east of Red Rock Trading Post. A radiocarbon date of 6560±100 B.C. came from the lowest level of Site AZ-I-25-17 near Red Rock; it was beneath two undated occupation levels and a San Jose phase Archaic component radiocarbon-dated to 1980±110 B.C. (Anderson and Gilpin 1983).

As noted above, it was during Archaic times that Southwestern peoples first began farming, growing maize and, later, beans and other crops. Limited data exist on when agriculture was first practiced in the Chuska Valley, but evidence from surrounding areas is refining the chronology for the introduction of maize horticulture to the Southwest. Bat Cave, in the Mogollon Highlands of west-central New Mexico, produced the first dates for the introduction of maize to the Southwest. Dick (1965:95) suggested that the earliest maize from Bat Cave dated between about 3000 and 4000 B.C. In 1981 and 1983 the University of Michigan conducted additional excavations at Bat Cave, recovering maize that was radiocarbon-dated to as early as about 3000 B.P. (Wills 1988:127). Radiocarbon dates for maize recovered by Martin et al. (1952) from Tularosa Cave, some 25 miles (40 km) northwest of Bat Cave, indicate the presence of maize at this site between about 2000 and 2500 B.P. (Wills 1988:129). More recently, a site in the Quemado area of west-central New Mexico has yielded maize that has been radiocarbon-dated to 2000 B.C., marking the earliest directly dated maize on the Colorado Plateau (Huber and Miljour 2004).

Irwin-Williams (1973) argued that maize was introduced to the Arroyo Cuervo area during the Armijo phase, between about 1800 and 800 B.C. Simmons (1986) has directly dated carbonized maize from the Chaco Canyon area to 770 B.C. Two sites in the Chinle Valley of northeastern Arizona, Lukachukai and Salina Springs, provide evidence that Basketmaker subsistence and settlement characteristics—including maize horticulture, shallow pit dwellings, and storage pits—were widespread at least by the beginning of the first millennium B.C. (Gilpin 1994). Maize and charcoal from the Lukachukai site (AZ-I-39-53) produced five radiocarbon dates ranging from 3445±45 to 3040±90 B.P., with four of these dates clustered in a 95-year period from 3135±45 to 3040 B.P. Maize and charcoal from a Late Archaic/Basketmaker component at Salina Springs produced six radiocarbon dates ranging from 2810±80 to 2100±60 B.P. Radiocarbon dates from the Marsh Pass area and from Three Fir Shelter on northern Black Mesa document the presence of maize in this area by at least 1000 B.C. (Smiley 1993, 1994). Data from coprolites, carbon isotope studies, and middens on Basketmaker II sites on Cedar Mesa suggest that maize constituted most of the Basketmaker II diet and that the importance of maize in the diet did not change from the Basketmaker II period to later Anasazi periods (Matson and Chisholm 1991). In a review of the introduction of agriculture to the Southwest, Matson (1991:309–310) argues that maize was being grown on the Colorado Plateau by about 1000 B.C. and had become the major staple of Basketmaker II subsistence by about 500 B.C. Despite these studies, however, radiocarbon dates for Southwestern maize from the Preceramic period are rare,

Chapter 2 Background 19 and isolated examples of early maize can contribute much to understanding the origin of agriculture in the Southwest.

While much research into the Archaic tradition has focused on environmental reconstruction, subsistence, and settlement patterns, more work needs to address issues such as population; sedentism, seasonality, and mobility; territoriality; social organization; and site organization. Vogler (1982, 1983a, 1983b, 1984) has attempted to reconstruct Archaic populations and demographic structure using Jochim's (1976) model of hunter-gatherer subsistence and settlement. Jochim's model attempts to arrive at hunter-gatherer diet, schedule, settlement pattern, and demography based on the distribution and carrying capacity of wild foods in the environment. It would also be worthwhile to approach this question based on site density and site function, taking into account seasonal and specialized use of sites.

Distribution of lithic raw material types may provide information on territoriality. Archaic sites in the San Juan Basin commonly contain obsidian (presumably from the Jemez Mountains), Narbona Pass chert (from the Chuska Mountains), and yellow-spotted chert (presumably Oso Ridge chert from the Zuni Mountains), reflecting use of virtually all of the adjacent mountain ranges. Archaic sites in the Blanding Basin essentially never contain obsidian or Narbona Pass chert, suggesting lack of exchange between Archaic peoples of the Blanding and San Juan basins. In similar fashion, two tested Late Archaic/Early Basketmaker sites in the Chinle Valley (Lukachukai and Salina Springs) did not contain Narbona Pass chert or obsidian (Gilpin 1994), again suggesting a lack of exchange between Archaic groups in adjacent basins. These patterns underscore the more localized mosaic of Archaic populations relative to their Paleoindian predecessors, and were probably associated with a process of increasing ethnic divergence.

On the other hand, Late Archaic/Early Basketmaker exchange of marine shell is documented. Olivella shell was recovered from the Lukachukai site in association with maize and charcoal that were radiocarbon-dated to 3040–3445 B.P. (Gilpin 1994). At Navajo, New Mexico, in the Black Creek Valley, Site LA 16825 (NA 15723) was a Basketmaker burial site consisting of a pit 2 m (6.6 feet) in diameter and 50 cm (20 inches) deep that contained at least 32 human burials (Gaines 1983:853). The pit was used at least three times: three or four primary inhumations were followed by a large number of bundle burials, followed by three more primary burials. Charcoal from the level of the bundle burials was radiocarbon-dated to 1965±80 B.P. (Gaines 1983:853). Several hundred Olivella shells were associated with the bundle burials (Gaines 1983:853; Hartman 1978). Apparently, items used for ceremonial functions and social exchanges, such as shell, were traded more widely among groups than were more utilitarian goods such as flaked stone raw materials.

In terms of organizational complexity, Archaic groups in northwestern New Mexico were very small scale and similar to what Johnson and Earle (1987) refer to as "family groups" and "local groups," which are evolutionary-taxonomic reincarnations of Service's (1962) "band" and "tribal" levels of organization. The presence of sites with dense artifact concentrations, pit houses, and anthropogenic midden deposits appears to signal an intensification of territorial behavior more typical of local groups than of family groups. An escalation of formalized, ceremonial behavior (such as could be inferred from the large number of Olivella shells at LA 16825, for example) is also more consistent with local-group behavior.

Chapter 2 Background 20 Terms such as "family group" and "local group," however, provide at best only gross analogies for the sociopolitical organization of long-extinct human societies, and what is most interesting is how the behavioral patterns ascribed to these organizational taxa played out on historically unique stages. Yet the sociopolitical aspects of Archaic peoples in the San Juan Basin have not been studied in detail; instead, most researchers have based interpretations of Archaic social organization on the social organization of Historic period hunter-gatherers. Studies of site organization (including number of hearths per site, distance between hearths within a site, and distribution of artifacts) might provide some evidence for social organization. Anderson and Bearden's (1992) study of lithic scatters at Antelope Point on Lake Powell exemplifies the methodology that can be used to illuminate social organization. In addition, a number of recent excavations of Archaic tradition sites in the San Juan Basin have identified dwellings, and examining these, including their spacing, size, and so forth, could shed new light on the social and political life of Archaic peoples in the region.

ANASAZI TRADITION

The Anasazi tradition marks a time of accelerating population growth, greater residential sedentism, the appearance of ceramic technology (ca. A.D. 400–500 in the San Juan Basin), increasing dependence on and storage of cultivated plant foods, and remarkable developments in architecture, sociopolitical organization, and cultural markers. With its spectacular pueblo ruins, dating from the latter half of this time span, the Anasazi is the cultural tradition for which the archaeology of the American Southwest is best known. The appearance and rapid proliferation of pottery makes sites of this time period much easier to place within a chronologically specific sequence than preceramic sites. The Anasazi tradition is usually described in terms of the Pecos Classification (Kidder 1927), but regional chronologies have been developed for several areas, including the Chaco region (Gladwin 1945). The Pecos Classification divides Anasazi history into seven periods: Basketmaker II (400 B.C.–A.D. 400), Basketmaker III (A.D. 400–700), Pueblo I (A.D. 700–900), Pueblo II (A.D. 900–1100), Pueblo III (A.D. 1100–1300), Pueblo IV (A.D. 1300–1600), and Pueblo V (A.D. 1600 to present). Basketmaker II is preceramic and overlaps temporally with the later portion of the Late Archaic period, and pueblo sites are absent in the San Juan Basin after A.D. 1300, leaving the Pueblo IV and V periods unrepresented. Thus, the span of the Anasazi tradition in this region is A.D. 400–1300. Gilpin (1990b) estimates that 35 percent of the sites recorded on the Navajo Nation are Anasazi, but that these sites constitute 70 percent of all excavated sites on the reservation.

During the Basketmaker II period (which equates to the middle and later portions of the Late Archaic En Medio phase), maize is present but pottery is not. Pit houses were the most common form of permanent dwelling, in association with interior and extramural storage pits (Guernsey and Kidder 1921; Matson 1991). Toward the end of the Basketmaker II period, circa A.D. 450, people throughout the Southwest began producing plain, often polished brownware pottery. For many years this pottery was considered evidence of influence from the Mogollon Highlands of southern New Mexico and Arizona, where brownware pottery has a long tradition. In recent years, however, archaeologists have documented a widespread occurrence of brownware pottery throughout the Colorado Plateau and are therefore questioning whether early brownware should be considered the result of Mogollon influence or simply the earliest pottery manufactured in the northern Southwest.

Chapter 2 Background 21 During the Basketmaker III period, plain grayware pottery appeared. Pit houses continued to be the most permanent form of dwelling, and clusters of pit houses often included a large pit structure or great kiva, typically 15 m (49 feet) in diameter, which apparently served as a locus for community ceremonies (Morris 1980; Roberts 1929). In the San Juan Basin, Shabik'eschee, excavated by Roberts (1929), is perhaps the best-known site for this period.

A phase sequence for the Basketmaker III period has been proposed for the Tohatchi Flats area (Kearns 1996a; Kearns et al. 2000). This sequence consists of two phases: Muddy Wash (A.D. 500–600) and Tohatchi (A.D. 600–725), with the latter further subdivided into two components, Early Tohatchi (A.D. 600–630/640) and Late Tohatchi (A.D. 630/640–725). The Muddy Wash phase is thought to represent an influx of new people, as current evidence suggests that Tohatchi Flats was unoccupied during the interval A.D. 150–500, when deleterious climatic conditions prevailed in the area. Marker traits of the Muddy Wash phase include shallow, circular pit houses, a predominance of plain gray-brown and grayware ceramics, the earliest decorated ceramics (Tohatchi Red-on-brown), and small-stemmed arrow points. Improved environmental conditions encouraged settlement of Tohatchi Flats, including the interior portions of the basin, by early Basketmaker III groups.

Material hallmarks of the Tohatchi phase (A.D. 600–725) include sub-square to D-shaped pit houses with antechambers (which largely replace the simpler, circular pit houses of the Muddy Wash phase), plain graywares dominating ceramic assemblages (although more decorated types also appear, e.g., Lino style black-on-white), and corner-notched arrow points replacing the earlier, small-stemmed forms. Less optimal climatic conditions circa A.D. 630/640 led to a withdrawal of settlements from the basin interior to the better-watered basin margins, and this settlement shift is the basis for splitting the Tohatchi phase into early and late divisions.

With very few exceptions, Basketmaker III residential sites in Tohatchi Flats are perched on elevated landforms adjacent to alluvial areas well suited to farming. Sites range from small, single-household, residential compounds to clusters of multiple pit houses with numerous surface storage structures and extramural pit features; the latter appear to represent accretionary growth of small hamlet sites through time. Loose aggregations of such sites, some with "great kiva"–like pit structures, apparently represent local communities that grew over time. There are no known stockades or other evidence of overriding defensive concerns in the Basketmaker III sites in the Tohatchi Flats area.

The unexcavated Tohatchi Village site (LA 3098) departs from this pattern, as it is a densely aggregated site situated on a high, steep-sided butte, which suggests defensive concerns. The site reportedly contains approximately 35 pit houses, one great pit structure, and 41 surface storage rooms with stone foundations. Although typically considered a Basketmaker III site, Kearns et al. (2000:124) suggest that Tohatchi Village dates from the Basketmaker III–Pueblo I transition (A.D. 725–775). This issue will remain largely unresolved unless and until excavations are conducted at this important site.

The late Basketmaker III/early Pueblo I remains documented at NM-Q-15-51 during the US 491 testing project (Railey 2004) included both surface artifacts and features, as well as a dark- stained midden buried under more than a meter of alluvium on the east side of the road. The subsurface remains included a jacal wall stub and several other features. Two different features

Chapter 2 Background 22 in this buried stratum produced identical radiocarbon dates of A.D. 660–790 (calibrated, two- sigma).

During the Pueblo I period, the density of communities in the Chuska Valley increased, and the typical village organization consisted of one or more pit houses in front of an arc of aboveground storage and workrooms constructed of jacal. Great kivas continued to be the preferred structures for community ceremonies. Large depressions that are probably great kivas are present at several sites in the Chuska Valley, including Beth’s Great Kiva (immediately adjacent to the US 491 project corridor), Naschitti, Skunk Springs, Newcomb, and To-dil-hil (Dykeman 2003:91). Potters began to produce black-on-white pottery (and, along the San Juan River, redware) in addition to utility ware, which in this period was a gray, neck-banded pottery (Brew 1946; Gladwin 1945). Trachyte-tempered pottery began to be produced in the Chuska Valley about A.D. 800. Perhaps the best-known example of an excavated Pueblo I site in the Chuska Valley is the Bennett Peak site, excavated by Earl Morris and reported by his daughter, Elizabeth Morris (Morris 1959).

Gilpin (1990a) and Wiseman (1980) have found Anasazi irrigation ditches on the east slope of the Chuska Valley that date to the Pueblo I period. Gilpin (1990a) found an irrigation ditch and associated ramadas at a site near Toadlena that dated to about A.D. 900. Wiseman (1980) reported rock alignments dating to roughly the same period in the Naschitti area. Anasazi peoples also may have originally built at least some of the modern ditches in the Black House Valley (Dykeman 1987). These ditches suggest that much of the east slope of the Chuska Valley was covered by irrigation systems at least as early as about A.D. 900. While not elaborate, the irrigation ditches do suggest a level of effort that has only rarely been attributed to the San Juan Basin at this time (Vivian 1970). The extent of these types of features has only begun to be documented, however.

During the Pueblo II period, the typical residential site consisted of a masonry room block with a small kiva in front of it. Beginning perhaps as early as the A.D. 900s, the people of Chaco Canyon began to construct "great houses," planned, multistoried structures of core-veneer masonry, often with interior kivas and typically associated with great kivas and prehistoric roadways. By the early A.D. 1000s a regional system of communities had emerged, organized around great houses and great kivas, connected by roads that extended into northeastern Arizona (Gilpin 1989; Lekson et al. 1988).

Several great house communities are present in the Chuska Valley (Dykeman 2003; Gilpin et al. 1996; Reed 2003). Along the base of the Dutton Plateau in the southern San Juan Basin, great houses were spaced approximately 4.5 miles (7.0 km) apart (Marshall et al. 1979). From east to west, communities clustered around great houses included Blue Water Spring, Kin Ya'a, Muddy Water, Section 8, Dalton Pass, Standing Rock, Peach Springs, Grey Ridge, Dye Brush Wash, and Toh La Kai. At the southern end of the US 491 corridor, Tohatchi Flats has an extremely high site density with numerous great houses and isolated great kivas. Great houses in Tohatchi Flats include Twin Lakes, Deer Springs, Black Creek Flats, Figueredo, and Red Willow, and isolated great kivas include Mexican Springs and Beth’s Great Kiva. Because of the high site density and lack of site voids between communities in the Tohatchi Valley, the community structure of this area is not well understood. The Coyote Canyon Road, one of the major ancient roads from Chaco Canyon, ran toward the Tohatchi Valley (Nials et al. 1987). More great houses are found

Chapter 2 Background 23 along US 491 farther to the north along the east Chuska Slope. From south to north, these great houses include Naschitti, Skunk Springs, Newcomb, To-dil-hil, Tocito, and Sanostee.

In his study of the Tocito great house community, Reed (2003) found differences in masonry construction between this community and Chaco Canyon architecture, leading him to conclude that the Tocito community was probably founded by local people (as opposed to migrants from Chaco Canyon) whose leaders sought to identify with the Chacoan center by imitating great house architecture.

Ceramics of the Pueblo II period included black-on-white pottery and utility ware. Black-on- white pottery was most commonly decorated with solid or hachured designs; utility ware was usually corrugated. Numerous lines of evidence demonstrate exchange of pottery, Narbona Pass chert, construction timbers, and maize between communities in the Chuska Valley and Chaco Canyon. Trace-element analysis of strontium isotopes has been applied to construction timbers and maize from Chaco Canyon to determine their sources. The results demonstrate that wood was imported into Chaco Canyon from the Chuska Mountains 55 miles (90 km) west of Chaco Canyon and the San Mateo Mountains 52.5 miles (85 km) to the south for use in the construction of the great houses (English et al. 2001). Similarly, maize was imported from the Chuska Valley 50 miles (80 km) west of Chaco Canyon and from the San Juan Valley 55 miles (90 km) to the north, perhaps to feed work forces involved in the construction of the great houses (Benson et al. 2003). Significant quantities of trachyte-tempered Chuska Gray Ware (Mills et al. 1997; Stoltman 1999) and Narbona Pass chert (Cameron 1984, 2001) were also imported into Chaco Canyon from the Chuska Valley and the Chuska Mountains.

During the Pueblo III period, great houses and great kivas began to be replaced by plaza-oriented pueblos (Gilpin 1989), or what Stein calls compounds (Stein and Fowler 1996:122). Examples of plaza-oriented pueblos in the Chuska Valley include Grey Ridge Compound, Crumbled House, and Shash Haayahi (Gilpin et al. 1989). In the Tohatchi Flats area, large sites with Pueblo III occupations include Tohatchi Well, Red Willow/Los Rayos, Deer Springs, and Twin Lakes. After A.D. 1180, some sites in the San Juan Basin were constructed in defensive locations and had ceramic assemblages dominated by Mesa Verdean pottery. Examples in the Chuska Valley include The Pillar (Gilpin et al. 1989), CGP-54-1 (Reher 1977:79, Fig. 2.37, Fig. 2.38), and CGP-56 (Allan et al. 1977:584, Fig. X.1). During the Pueblo III period, black-on-white pottery was usually decorated with combined solid and hachured designs or dense solid designs, polychrome pottery was first produced, and utility ware continued to be corrugated (Smith 1971). The presence of polychrome pottery at great houses and small houses in the Chuska Valley indicates that Chacoan sites continued to be used well into the A.D. 1100s.

During the Pueblo IV period, permanent occupation ended in most areas of the Navajo country as people continued to aggregate into ever-larger pueblos. By A.D. 1300, permanent settlements were present only in the Homol'ovi, Hopi, Hopi Buttes (Bidahochi), and Zuni areas, and by A.D. 1400, only the Hopi and Zuni areas had permanent villages (Upham 1982). However, one Jeddito Corrugated sherd was found at Site NM-Q-13-50, a multi-component site in the southern Chuska Valley with an Anasazi component dated in the Pueblo I to Pueblo III period range.

Chapter 2 Background 24 HISTORIC PERIOD

During the Historic period, the project area has been inhabited primarily by members of the Navajo Nation. According to some Navajo traditions, the Navajo are descended from the Anasazi. Navajo sites dating prior to 1868 (the Reservation period) are usually described according to Hester's (1962) sequence, which divides Navajo culture history into five major periods and phases: the Dinétah phase (1500?–1696), the Gobernador phase (1696–1772), the Cabezon (eastern) and De Chelly (western) phases (1772–1863), the Bosque Redondo period (1864–1868), and the Reservation period (1868 to present). Reservation period chronologies have been developed by James (1976b), Kelley (1986), and Bailey and Bailey (1980, 1982, 1983, 1986). In some parts of the Navajo Nation (notably the Checkerboard area in New Mexico, the Chambers-Sanders Trust Lands, and the Tuba City area), Euro-American sites are present; trading posts (Kelley 1985) and government facilities (Threinen 1981) found widely scattered across the Navajo Nation are additional evidence of Euro-American presence in the region. Gilpin (1990b) estimates that Historic period sites constitute 45 percent of the sites recorded on the Navajo Nation but only 20 percent of excavated sites. The under-representation of historic sites in archaeological excavation results from a number of factors. In many cases, ethnohistoric research may document the most significant information about these sites; in other cases, local people may consider such research to be inappropriate. Kelley (1986) and Bailey and Bailey (1982) have shown that ethnohistoric research can provide land histories that are much more complete than the Eurocentric histories that result from documentary research alone. Downer's (1989) dissertation and Kelley and Francis's (1994) study have demonstrated that traditional cultural properties (TCPs) are by far the most important historic sites in the eyes of many if not most Navajos.

Bailey and Bailey (1986) have written the most general history of the Navajo, and their research focus on the northern Chaco Plateau makes their work especially applicable to the San Juan Basin. The history and archaeology of the Navajos of the Chaco region are summarized by Brugge (1980, 1986). Kelley (1986) has studied the archaeology and history of the Navajo of the Manuelito Plateau. Ritts-Benally (1993a, 1993b, 1993c) and Winter (1993a, 1993b) discuss Navajo archaeology and history in the Standing Rock vicinity.

Dinétah phase sites have not been reported in the Chuska Valley or the southern San Juan Basin, but sites of the Gobernador phase are relatively common. The CGP Project (Reher 1977) identified a Navajo Pueblito on the lower Chaco. Ed Huber (1984) recovered Gobernador Polychrome on the Buffalo Pass Road in the Red Rock Valley. Dinétah Gray was identified at AZ-E-8-10 near Cove, at Site NA20,826 in the Prayer Rock District (Hays 1991), at two sites on the Consolidated Coal Company Lease at Burnham (Consol 9 [Fehr and Enloe 1981; Gilpin and Fowler 1985:30] and NM-H-37-8 [Gilpin 1986]), and at one of Cronk's (1982) sites along Pinabete Arroyo. Early Navajo sites with Zuni pottery and Dinétah Gray have been found in the Tohatchi area. Winter (1993b:77–81) describes 15 Gobernador phase sites on the Dutton Plateau (Mesa de los Lobos), seven identified during the Navajo Land Claims research and eight identified during the Transwestern Pipeline studies. These sites include two pueblitos, villages of up to 10 hogans, isolated hogans, and rock art sites.

Europeans first encountered Navajos in the San Juan Basin in 1823, when Governor Jose Antonio Vizcarra led an expedition from Santa Fe to Hopi (Brugge 1964). Vizcarra went to Jemez, then up the Rio Puerco of the east as far as present-day Cuba, New Mexico, then turned

Chapter 2 Background 25 west to Pueblo Pintado, a Chacoan ruin at the head of Chaco Wash. From Pueblo Pintado his expedition followed the wash through Chaco Canyon and across the San Juan Basin. They then went over the Chuska Mountains and the Defiance Plateau to the mouth of Canyon de Chelly, then on to Hopi. After chasing Navajos as far west as Elephant's Feet and as far north as Oljeto, they returned to Santa Fe following their original route. Vizcarra was the first European to travel through Chaco Canyon.

Van Valkenburgh (1941:165) says that early nineteenth century Navajo hogans are present in the Toyee (Tuye) Spring area, west of Standing Rock. Site LA 2547, excavated by Hammack (1964[?]), appears to have had an early Navajo component. The polished brownware ceramics from the site now appear to be late Basketmaker II brownwares. Navajo culinary pottery and Ashiwi Polychrome were also found, however, indicating that some of the features may have been Navajo.

New Mexico came under United States control in 1846, when Steven Watts Kearny seized Santa Fe at the beginning of the Mexican War. One of the first challenges facing the U.S. military was Navajo raiding of settlements along the Rio Grande. In October of 1846, Captain John W. Reid met with the Navajos at Red Lake, in the Black Creek Valley just north of present-day Fort Defiance. Later that month, Colonel Alexander William Doniphan signed a peace treaty with the Navajos at Bear Springs (present-day Fort Wingate, east of Gallup). The Bear Springs treaty did not bring peace, however, and military action against the Navajos continued. In August of 1849, Colonel John M. Washington led an expedition from Fort Marcy in Santa Fe to the Navajo country (Simpson 1964). The Washington Expedition followed Vizcarra's route as far as the mouth of Canyon de Chelly. On August 31 Washington met with Navajo headmen Narbona, José Largo, and Archulette at Two Grey Hills. When an argument erupted over a stolen horse, the American troops opened fire, killing the elderly Narbona and six others. From Two Grey Hills the expedition went over what today is called Narbona Pass (they named it after Col. Washington), descended into the Black Creek Valley, and then crossed the Defiance Plateau, skirting the heads of Canyon de Chelly and Canyon del Muerto. They ascended Canyon de Chelly from its mouth only as far as White House ruin, then crossed back over the Defiance Plateau south of Canyon de Chelly to the Black Creek Valley, which they followed to the Puerco River of the west. From the Puerco they went to Zuni, then back to Santa Fe (Simpson 1964).

In subsequent years, the U.S. military increased its presence in the Navajo country, though not all military posts survived. Fort Defiance was established in 1851 but was abandoned in 1861, at the start of the Civil War. Fort Fauntleroy was established at Bear Springs in 1860 but was abandoned soon after. In 1862 Fort Wingate was established near San Rafael, New Mexico (Trafzer 1982:73). In 1863 Christopher (Kit) Carson was ordered to subjugate the Navajos. Carson regarrisoned Fort Defiance and established Fort Lyon at the Bear Springs site of Fort Fauntleroy (renamed because Colonel Thomas Fauntleroy had joined the Confederacy). During the winter of 1863–1864, Carson conducted a scorched-earth campaign, destroying Navajo houses and fields, and forced most of the Navajos to surrender and to make the "Long Walk" to Fort Sumner on the Pecos River in eastern New Mexico (Trafzer 1982).

Not all of the Navajos surrendered immediately, however; some did not ever surrender. Manuelito, born near the Bears Ears in southern Utah (Benally 1982:115), was living in the San Juan Basin by the 1820s. In January of 1865 Manuelito announced that he would farm in Cañon Bonito at Fort Defiance, in spite of Kit Carson's roundup of the Navajos (Trafzer 1982:216).

Chapter 2 Background 26 However, after being twice attacked near Black Mesa, first by Utes, then by Hopis, Manuelito finally surrendered at Fort Wingate on September 1, 1866 (Trafzer 1982:221). The government policy to concentrate the Navajos at Fort Sumner (which the Navajos called Hwééldi) and force them to farm the desolate plains was unsuccessful. In 1868, after most of the Navajos had been at Fort Sumner for four years, the government allowed them to return to a newly established reservation in their old homeland in the Chuska Mountains and on the Defiance Plateau.

Few archaeological sites of the mid 1800s, the time of the wars, have been identified in the Chuska Valley or surrounding areas. The difficulty of distinguishing these sites from earlier and later sites may have contributed to this lack of archaeology.

As mentioned above, a number of chronologies have been developed for the Reservation period. The Bailey and Bailey and Kelley chronologies are based on the histories of the Farmington and Gallup areas, respectively. The Baileys have developed several chronologies for the northern San Juan Basin and the Navajo Reservation as a whole (Bailey and Bailey 1980, 1982, 1983, 1986). They (Bailey and Bailey 1982) divide the history of the northern San Juan Basin during the Reservation years into five periods: the post-Bosque Redondo period (1868–1892), the Early Transitional period (1893–1906), the Trading Post period (1907–1932), the Late Transitional period (1933–1950), and the Contemporary period (1950–1979). Kelley (1986) divides the Reservation years into four eras: the Early Navajo era (1864–1881), the Railroad era (1881– 1930), the Great Depression and era of Grazing Regulation (1930–1950), and the Industrial era (1950–1979). Both the Baileys and Kelley recognize that Navajo history has been influenced by the same major events: the Treaty of 1868, the arrival of the railroad (Gallup in 1881, Farmington in 1905), the establishment of trading posts (in the southern San Juan Basin soon after the arrival of the railroad in 1881, on the northern Chaco Plateau in 1896), stock reduction in the 1930s, and post–World War II industrial expansion onto the Navajo Reservation.

In the early years after the Navajos returned to the reservation, government policy focused on rebuilding the herds that had supported the Navajos prior to the Fort Sumner internment. Ritts- Benally (1993a) identified three Navajo "communities" in the vicinity of Standing Rock. (Most students of Navajo social organization [Aberle 1961; Kluckhohn and Leighton 1974; Lamphere 1977; Witherspoon 1975] recognize three levels of social organization: the household or single- hogan unit, the camp, extended family, residence group, or subsistence-residential unit, and the outfit. Ritts-Benally's "communities" seem to correspond to "outfits.")

The Pine Tree Canyon "community," which uses an area southwest of Standing Rock, consists primarily of Táchíi'nii (Red Streak Running into Water) Clan people. This group has been living in the area since at least 1880, but Gobernador phase sites in the vicinity suggest that the outfit could have been established as early as the 1700s (Ritts-Benally 1993b). The Toyee Spring "community," which used the area west of Standing Rock, consisted mostly of members of the 'Áshiihí (Salt) Clan, who have been using the area since at least about 1900. The Sitting Yé'ii Mesa "community" was the outfit of Jesus Arviso, born in Sonora about 1830 and captured by Apaches when he was 12. By about 1850 he had been traded to a group of Navajos living near Mariano Lake, on the Dutton Plateau. During the Fort Sumner internment, Arviso served as interpreter for the principal Navajo headman, Barboncito. Arviso's use area extended from the Tohatchi Valley to White Rock (just west of Chaco Canyon) and the upper Puerco Valley on the

Chapter 2 Background 27 Dutton Plateau. Manuelito was also a resident of the southern San Juan Basin and had a vast use area. In 1873 he was living on Mesa de los Lobos on the Dutton Plateau (Brugge 1980:63).

In 1881 the railroad was completed as far west as Gallup. To pay for railroad construction, the Atlantic and Pacific Railroad was granted every other section of land for a distance of 40 miles (64 km) north and south of the railroad, and where this land was already taken, the railroads could select "in lieu" lands from a strip 40 to 50 miles (64–80 km) north and south of the railroad route. The railroad land grant was the origin of the Checkerboard area of the Navajo country, a region east of the Navajo Indian Reservation, where Indian lands are interspersed with federal, state, and private lands in a complex ownership pattern. Another effect of the extension of the railroad into the Navajo country was the establishment of trading posts. With the railroad, it became possible to transport livestock and livestock products to the east, and the Navajos became integrated into the national commercial economy for the first time.

The first trading post in the southern Chuska Valley was built at Naschitti by Thomas C. Bryan and Charlie Virden in 1880. Bryan sold the post to C. C. Manning in 1902, and Manning hired Charlie Newcomb to manage it (McNitt 1962:303–304). In 1889 James W. Bennett and Volney P. Edie established a trading post at Tuye Springs, which was a landmark for the Navajos, indicating the southeast corner of the 1868 reservation. This post later came to be known as Tohlakai (McNitt 1962:249; Van Valkenburgh 1941:165). In 1890 George Washington Sampson established the Tohatchi trading post (McNitt 1962:251). In 1897 Joe Wilkin, an experienced but itinerant trader, partnered with Frank and Henry Noel to found the Two Grey Hills trading post. Wilkin moved on in 1899, establishing a trading post at Sanostee that he sold to Frank Noel in 1905 (McNitt 1962:257–259). Toadlena trading post was established in 1909 by Merritt and Bob Smith, who shortly sold the post to George Bloomfield. Bloomfield and Joe Reitz, a later owner and operator of the Two Grey Hills trading post, encouraged the development of the Two Grey Hills style of Navajo weaving (McNitt 1962:259–260).

John L. Oliver established the trading post at Newcomb in 1904. First called Crozier, the post was renamed Nava when Arthur J. Newcomb purchased it. While Newcomb and his wife Franc were operating the post, the Navajo called it Pezh-doclish-dezii, or Trader at the Blue Point. Later the post was known as Drolet, for its controlling absentee owner Marshall Drolet (McNitt 1962:304). Franc Newcomb, who had originally come to the Navajo country as a teacher and later married Newcomb, was fascinated by Navajo culture. She became a confidant of Hosteen Klah, a local Navajo weaver and medicine man, and worked closely with anthropologists such as Mary C. Wheelwright and Gladys A. Reichard to document Navajo religious practices, publishing several important volumes on Navajo culture (Lange 1998; Newcomb 1940, 1964, 1967, 1970; Newcomb, Fishler, and Wheelwright 1956; Newcomb and Reichard 1937). The Sheep Springs trading post was founded in 1932 as part of the Foutz family’s Progressive Mercantile Company chain of trading posts in Utah, Arizona, and New Mexico (Eddington and Makov 1995; McNitt 1962:300). This post was recorded as an archaeological site (NM-H-51-50) in the NNDOT survey for the US 491 project (Walkenhorst and John 2003).

The first day school on the Navajo Indian Reservation was established at Fort Defiance in 1869, but a classroom was not constructed at this location until 1882 (Threinen 1981:44). The Tohatchi day school, established in 1895 as the second reservation school, became a boarding school in 1900 (Threinen 1981:47). In 1909 the Indian Service (later the Bureau of Indian Affairs) created

Chapter 2 Background 28 the Pueblo Bonito Agency. The agency moved to Crownpoint in 1910 but retained the name Pueblo Bonito Agency until the 1920s, when it was designated the Eastern Navajo Agency. In 1912 the Pueblo Bonito school was established at Crownpoint (Threinen 1981:37).

In conjunction with construction of government facilities, the Indian Service began establishing coal mines throughout the Navajo Reservation to provide power for agencies and schools. These mines were usually turned over to Navajo miners once they were operational. Tohatchi and other schools and government offices in the southwestern San Juan Basin were provided with coal from the Big Rock Hill Mining District, on the southern escarpment of the Dutton Plateau a few miles south of Navajo Route 9, at the end of Coal Mine Road. Among the workings in this area were the Jack Johnson, Wooly Tommy, Big Rock Hill, and Tohatchi Mines. They were in use from about 1932 to 1945, when the government switched to fuel oil (Gilpin 1985, 1987).

The Great Depression era had profound effects on the Navajo, ushering in the stock reduction program, the creation of tribal government, and numerous federal programs and jobs. Overgrazing and erosion on the Navajo Reservation had long been a concern of federal officials, and in 1931 the Indian Service began a voluntary program to reduce the number of livestock on the Reservation; mandatory stock reduction soon followed. Navajo sheep and goat herds were reduced by half. To compensate the Navajos for the destruction of their herding economy, the Civilian Conservation Corps and Public Works Administration created conservation and construction projects on the reservation, including the construction of the Navajo tribal headquarters complex in Window Rock and 46 day schools. One of these projects was the school built at Standing Rock in 1935 (Threinen 1981:71, 111). The replacement of their herding economy with federal jobs made the Navajos almost completely dependent on the federal government (White 1983). In 1953 David Aberle interviewed 32 people in Mexican Springs, a few miles west of US 491 (Aberle 1982). Aberle selected this community for study because it was readily accessible by paved road (in contrast to Aneth, Utah, which he selected based on its remoteness). Aberle found that just 15 years before, approximately 38 percent of the families had more than the 250 sheep needed for a subsistence-level herd (Henderson and Levy 1975:48). By 1953, no families had that many sheep. Although virtually everyone owned some livestock, and some families did a little farming, most were dependent on wage work and welfare.

World War II brought even more changes to the Navajo Reservation. Many Navajos went into the armed forces; others took jobs in war-related industries. After the war, large multinational energy companies began extracting minerals from the reservation, providing some jobs and economic development but taking most profits away from the reservation (Reno 1981). The poverty and dependency established during the 1930s continued.

In 1965 and 1966 Louise Lamphere (1977) studied kinship systems and social organization at Sheep Springs (referred to as Copper Canyon in her work). Lamphere noted that Navajo kinship systems and social organization emphasized both autonomy and consensus, and entailed egalitarian rather than hierarchical authority relations. While 28 percent of the camps were composed of traditional uxorilocal extended families (see Levy et al. 1989), 42 percent consisted of nuclear families. Lamphere confirmed Aberle’s earlier findings of a decline in the pastoral economy and a dependence on wage work and welfare for income, which may account for the decline of the extended family residential groups that had served as larger labor pools for pastoral and agricultural pursuits.

CHAPTER 3 RESEARCH DESIGN

Dennis Gilpin and Jim A. Railey

The research questions for the US 491 project can be viewed as a matrix with two axes: cultural- historical research and various processes that crosscut different chronological periods. From the culture history of the Chuska Valley, we have defined eight significant research topics:

1) the nature of the Paleoindian occupation of the valley 2) the nature of the Archaic occupation of the valley 3) the origins of agriculture 4) the transition to settled village life, a topic that incorporates two technological

research issues: the introduction of the bow and arrow and the introduction of pottery

5) the participation of Chuska Valley residents in the Chacoan system 6) the nature of post-Chacoan occupation of the valley 7) Navajo occupation of the valley prior to the Carson Campaign of 1863–1864 8) Navajo use of the valley during the Reservation period (A.D. 1868 to present)

Seven research issues were identified that crosscut cultural-historical questions: (1) chronology, (2) paleoenvironmental reconstruction, (3) technology, (4) subsistence, (5) social organization, (6) prehistoric settlement patterns, and (7) exchange and regional interaction. The goals of this section are to summarize the key questions of archaeological research in the Chuska Valley and to indicate how to identify sites that would contribute to answering these questions. It was anticipated that many of these questions could not be fully explored during either the testing or data recovery phases of the US 491 project; nonetheless, they are identified here to provide a research approach to this multi-phase project. In addition, the testing results provided an opportunity to refine or modify the research questions posed here, as well as a more explicit research focus for the data recovery phase.

CULTURAL HISTORICAL ISSUES


The documented use of the Chuska Valley during Paleoindian times is restricted to three sites and approximately 10 isolated projectile points (Clovis, Folsom, and later Paleoindian types). The Peach Springs site was a post-Clovis surface artifact scatter. The other two sites consisted primarily of charcoal stains that were radiocarbon-dated to the late Paleoindian tradition. Site NM-Q-18-143, in the southern Chuska Valley, was a charcoal stain with three associated artifacts (including a tool of Narbona Pass chert). Site AZ-I-25-17, in the northern Chuska Valley, was a charcoal stain with no artifacts. Despite this limited record of Paleoindian occupation of the Chuska Valley, diagnostic artifacts of Narbona Pass chert have been found in nearby regions, indicating that Paleoindian groups were passing through the valley. At the Boca Negra Wash site in the Rio Grande valley, for example, the presence of Narbona Pass chert and other nonlocal lithic materials indicates that Paleoindian interaction networks incorporated the

Chapter 3 Research Design 30 Chuska Mountains, the San Juan Basin, the Zuni Mountains, the Jemez Mountains, the Middle Rio Grande valley, and the southern Great Plains (B. Huckell 1999, 2000). The current limited state of knowledge about the Paleoindian occupation of the Chuska Valley is such that isolated projectile points and small assemblages can contribute much to our knowledge of how the Chuska Valley was used during Paleoindian times, and simply recording the point type and material of a Paleoindian projectile point can add to our understanding of Paleoindian interaction networks.

No Paleoindian materials were identified during the survey or testing work along US 491, and no geological contexts that might contain Paleoindian archaeological remains were positively identified. Nevertheless, the Paleoindian deposits at Sites AZ-I-25-17 and NM-Q-18-143 were identified while testing sites with Anasazi surface manifestations. Thus, the data recovery program for US 491 incorporated an effort to identify soil horizons and features that might date from the Paleoindian tradition, including backhoe trenching to explore for buried remains.

ARCHAIC TRADITION

The mobile populations of the Archaic tradition engaged in subsistence systems based on hunting and gathering of wild foods. Matson (1991:184) defines the Archaic as "a way of life without reliance on domesticated crops." Previous studies of Archaic tradition sites in the San Juan Basin have focused on environmental reconstruction, subsistence, and settlement patterns. While much work remains to be done on these topics, future work should also address population, territoriality, social organization, site organization, and sedentism, seasonality, and mobility.

Archaic tradition peoples were first and foremost hunter-gatherers, and archaeological research has documented the Archaic subsistence base in much of the San Juan Basin, but archaeologists still debate how subsistence practices were organized. How were seasonal rounds orchestrated? What types of task groups were involved in different subsistence activities? What subsistence practices occurred at specific sites, during what season or seasons, and by what type or types of social units? How large were the territories of different groups? What environments did these territories include? To what extent were societies and territories bounded or porous? What kind of interaction occurred between and among social groups at different scales?

Ethnographic accounts of hunter-gatherers and the distribution of resources in the San Juan Basin led several researchers (Elyea and Hogan 1983a, 1983b; Eschman 1983; Simmons 1982; Toll and Cully 1983; Vierra 1994a) to propose that the open grasslands of the northern Chaco Plateau may have been used primarily in the spring, summer, and fall for collecting wild plants. Winter base camps might be expected in the piñon-juniper woodlands at the base of the mountains and plateaus at the edge of the San Juan Basin, and around Chaco Canyon or in riparian environments along the San Juan River and a few major tributaries. Elyea and Hogan (1983a, 1983b) identified Middle Archaic winter camps in the San Juan Breaks, the woodlands between the San Juan River and the open grasslands of the northern Chaco Plateau. These sites had pit structures with interior hearths and storage pits, and yielded the same vegetal resources (Indian ricegrass and Cheno-ams) as sites of the Chaco Plateau. However, unlike the faunal assemblages of Chaco Plateau Archaic sites, which were dominated by rabbit-size mammals, the winter camps yielded more ungulate-size mammal bones. The Cheek et al. (1977) application of

Chapter 3 Research Design 31 the Beardsley et al. (1956) model of settlement noted that middens are characteristic of base camps in central-based wandering systems. On the NIIP, several sites, including NM-H-26-161 (Armijo phase), NM-H-39-36 (Jay phase), and NM-H-39-47 (Jay phase), mostly along Gallegos Wash, had midden-like deposits (thick, broad deposits of charcoal-stained sediment containing flaked stone, ground stone, burned bone [mostly from rabbit-size mammals], and fire-cracked rock) and were interpreted as base camps that were probably in use during the late fall rabbit drives (Vogler 1982). These sites may also represent riparian winter base camps.

Archaic subsistence technology in the San Juan Basin has been well studied. A number of lithic analysts working in the San Juan Basin have demonstrated that Archaic tradition lithic technology was primarily biface production. Hunting technology consisted of atlatls and darts, which were tipped primarily with Oshara tradition projectile points, although a few side-notched points more typical of Basin and Range groups have been found. Grinding was primarily on basin metates with one-hand manos. As discussed below, more data are needed on artifact associations to identify social groups based on tool kits, rates of discard, and so forth.

Most researchers have used accounts of the social organization of Historic period hunter- gatherers to interpret Archaic tradition social organization. In an extremely influential article based on his research with the Nunamiut of the Canadian Arctic, Lewis Binford (1980) argued that hunter-gatherers can be classified as either foragers or collectors. Foragers move seasonally, and the size of their social groups fluctuates with resource availability. They use two types of sites: base camps and locations (procurement and processing areas). Collectors send out task groups to collect particular resources. They do use base camps and locations, just as foragers do, but they also use field camps (where resource processing occurs), stations (such as hunting blinds or overlooks, where resource procurement activities are planned and prepared), and caches (where equipment for and products of various expeditions are stored). Archaeologists working in the San Juan Basin have debated for years whether the Archaic peoples of the San Juan Basin should be classified as foragers or collectors (Moore 1980; Reher 1977; Vierra 1985; Vogler 1982). The core issue in the debate has been whether the task-specific field camps, stations, and caches can be recognized archaeologically or whether, instead, the smallest archaeological sites actually represent base camps of groups so small that only a few artifacts can be identified. Although Reher (1977) and Vogler (1982) tended to interpret small, apparently specialized artifact assemblages as the field camps and stations of collectors, Moore (1980) and Vierra (1985) argued that during a brief stop, a foraging household would discard only a portion of its artifact assemblage, and the resulting site would then appear to be the camp or station of a task group. Only after long-term or repeated use would a site begin to manifest the full range of activities that occurred there.

The debate is important, because over time Southwestern peoples evolved from foragers to farmers, caching agricultural products rather than gathered resources, a transformation that led to settled village life. Did foraging hunters and gatherers become collectors and then adopt agriculture, and if so, when did this occur? Or did foraging lead directly to agriculture, and if so, how did this occur? For the US 491 project, SWCA proposed to examine the function and spatial distribution of features and other remains in an attempt to determine (1) whether a single occupation or multiple occupations took place in the project area, (2) the activities performed during each occupation, and (3) the composition of Archaic social groups. Specifically, SWCA proposed to investigate (1) the activities represented in the flaked stone and ground stone

Chapter 3 Research Design 32 assemblages, (2) the size of the sites, and (3) the number of contemporaneous fire pits (based on the distances and the differences in elevation between fire pits). It was anticipated that data from the testing phase relevant to this inquiry would be limited, and that this question would be explored more fully during the data recovery phase.

Gilpin (1999) has analyzed previous research on site function, episodes of use, and the structure of Archaic and Basketmaker II artifact assemblages at 68 Archaic and Basketmaker II sites excavated during 14 different projects in the central San Juan Basin. He found that the average Archaic tradition camp in this sample probably consisted of a fire pit and 29.4 flaked stone artifacts. Since there were, on average, 58 flaked stone artifacts per ground stone artifact, one would expect only one piece of ground stone per two hearths. It was also expected that one utilized piece would be associated with one of every 1.4 fire pits, a retouched piece with one of every 2.3 fire pits, and a formal tool with one of every 2.6 fire pits. A biface would be expected with one of every 6.7 fire pits, a projectile point with one of every 11.1 fire pits, and a uniface with one of every 14.7 fire pits. Put this way, the "average" artifact assemblage associated with a fire pit would not be expected to contain the full range of artifact types known to exist in the average Archaic tool kit, and identifying the tasks that occurred around specific fire pits is probably not possible. On the other hand, regional deviations from the average may point to resources targeted in those regions. For example, a higher-than-average ratio of projectile points to fire pits might suggest more emphasis on hunting and faunal resources. Vogler’s (1982, 1983a, 1983b, 1984) efforts based on Jochim's (1976) hunter-gatherer subsistence and settlement model demonstrates one approach to reconstructing Archaic tradition population and demography. Data on site density and site function, taking into account seasonal and specialized use of sites, might offer another avenue.

Simmons (1982:Table 235) and Vierra (1994a:Table 90) provide ethnographic data for estimating the population of the central San Juan Basin (essentially the Chuska Valley and the Chaco Plateau, an area of approximately 6,650 square miles or 17,225 km² [Simmons says 18,000 km²]). Simmons (1982:Table 235) used Hassan's (1981) estimates of hunter-gatherer population densities—0.035 person per km² in semidesert and 0.17 person per km² in grasslands—to estimate that the central San Juan Basin could have supported between 630 and 3,060 people at any given time (which would be between two and twelve reproductively self- sustaining groups, in this area alone). Vierra (1994a:Table 90) gives annual ranges of hunter- gatherer groups (apparently dialect bands [Birdsell 1968] or reproductively self-sustaining groups) of 755 square miles (1,960 km²) and 3,030 square miles (7,850 km²). Applied to the central San Juan Basin, these figures would yield between two and nine reproductively self- sufficient groups within the central San Juan Basin. Thus, estimates of the population of the central San Juan Basin based on two types of data from ethnographic analogy yield similar results. How can archaeological data be used to evaluate these estimates?

Based on available estimates in site reports, or on-site plans in the above-mentioned projects, Gilpin (1999) estimated that the average Archaic-tradition site in the San Juan Basin had 39.7 fire pits. It appears that the average Archaic site density on the Chaco Plateau and in the Chuska Valley is one site per 187 acres (75.7 ha). Given that the Chaco Plateau and the Chuska Valley cover approximately 6,650 square miles (17,223 km²), the total number of Archaic tradition sites in the two physiographic provinces may be estimated to be 22,759, and the total number of Archaic tradition fire pits may be estimated at 903,457. If the estimated number of fire pits is

Chapter 3 Research Design 33 divided by the 5,000 years of the Archaic tradition, then only about 180 fire pits would be in use in the two provinces per year. A single task group would be able to create this many fire pits by spending two days around each one. If a task group spent two weeks at each fire pit (a figure that seems plausible as the amount of time needed to exploit a stand of plants), on average only seven task groups would have been present in the two physiographic provinces at any given time during the Archaic tradition, not enough people to form a reproductively stable community. Vierra (1994a:385) notes that foragers in temperate zones move, on average, 10–20 times per year, thus spending three to five weeks at a site. If each task group spent five weeks at each site, we would estimate 35 task groups in the central San Juan Basin in any given year, a number that approaches one reproductively self-sufficient community. These estimates, then, suggest that during the Archaic tradition, either (1) the territories occupied by hunter-gatherer bands were larger than the Chaco Plateau and Chuska Valley combined, (2) the Chaco Plateau and Chuska Valley were not continuously occupied, or (3) both. For example, if most of the winter was spent at a winter base camp, as suggested by Elyea and Hogan (1983a, 1983b), Eschman (1983), Simmons (1982), Toll and Cully (1983), and Vierra (1994a), then the population estimates might be increased by 25 percent. There is still, however, a disparity between the population sizes suggested by the archaeological record (no more than one reproductively stable population) and what is suggested by ethnographic analogy (between two and twelve groups).

Given the huge numbers discussed above (6,650 square miles [17,223 km²], tens of thousands of sites, hundreds of thousands of fire pits) and the extremely small size of the existing sample (37 sites with fire pits), the above exercise is obviously not a realistic estimate of Archaic population and demography in the San Juan Basin. The exercise does demonstrate, however, (1) the kinds of data and types of reasoning that would allow archaeologists to estimate Archaic population and demography from archaeological evidence, and (2) the chronological and geographical scales of hunter-gatherer lifeways that need to be considered in interpreting specific sites. Again, these questions were considered especially relevant for the data recovery findings at NM-H-51-55, which contained a discrete habitation surface—with features—buried within a stabilized sand dune.

The distribution of lithic raw material types may provide information on territoriality as well as exchange networks. Archaic sites in the San Juan Basin commonly contain obsidian (presumably from the Jemez Mountains), Narbona Pass chert (from the Chuska Mountains), and yellow- spotted chert (presumably Oso Ridge chert from the Zuni Mountains), reflecting use of virtually all of the adjacent mountain ranges (Gilpin 1999). Kearns (1996a) notes that Archaic sites in the southern Chuska Valley often have Jemez Mountains obsidian and Narbona Pass chert, but lack Grants Ridge obsidian, Red Hill obsidian, and Zuni Mountain chert, suggesting limited ties to the south. Archaic sites in the Blanding Basin essentially never contain obsidian or Narbona Pass chert, suggesting little exchange between Archaic tradition peoples of the Blanding Basin and the San Juan Basin. In similar fashion, two tested Late Archaic/Early Basketmaker sites in the Chinle Valley (Lukachukai and Salina Springs) did not contain Narbona Pass chert or obsidian, again suggesting a lack of exchange between Archaic tradition groups in adjacent basins (Gilpin 1994, 1999). Moreover, an analysis of nonlocal raw materials at Archaic sites within the San Juan Basin suggested the presence of two exchange networks, one in the northern half of the basin and one in the southern half (Gilpin 1999). On the other hand, Late Archaic/Early Basketmaker exchange of marine shell is documented, indicating a much larger scale of interaction for shell than for lithic raw material.

Chapter 3 Research Design 34 Testing of undated lithic sites on the US 491 project focused on answering several questions. Are there soil horizons or strata demarcating intact cultural deposits? Are there features with datable charcoal and evidence of subsistence practices and technology? Are there artifact assemblages that are large enough to identify tool kits, task groups, site function, nonlocal lithic raw materials, and so forth? Testing of undated lithic sites entailed site mapping, collection of all surface artifacts within the right-of-way, excavation of backhoe trenches to expose subsurface stratigraphy, and excavation of test units to ascertain artifact density in different levels of the site.

After the discovery of a buried, preceramic occupation layer at NM-H-51-55 during the testing phase, it was thought that this site would produce evidence relevant to Archaic-tradition research issues. However, data recovery excavations demonstrated that this occupation layer was not left by highly mobile, Archaic hunter-gatherers, but rather by less mobile, part-time farmers of the Basketmaker II period. However, underlying the Basketmaker II layer was an earlier, Late Archaic component including one shallow pit feature.

ORIGINS OF AGRICULTURE

In the Pecos classification, the Basketmaker II period is characterized by the presence of maize and the absence of pottery. Pit houses, the most common form of permanent dwelling, were associated with interior and extramural storage pits (Guernsey and Kidder 1921; Matson 1991). As recently as the 1980s (Berry 1982), the introduction of maize was thought to date circa A.D. 1, but increasing numbers of studies have demonstrated that maize was being grown on the Colorado Plateau at least as early as 2000 B.C. (Huber and Miljour 2004).

The earliest evidence for food production in the San Juan Basin is Simmons's (1986) radiocarbon- dated maize from east of Chaco Canyon, which yielded an uncalibrated date of 2720 B.P. During the US 491 testing (Railey 2004), a calibrated radiocarbon date of 1000–820 B.C. was obtained from a buried feature that contained charred maize and squash, although the date was obtained from charred wood. Abundant evidence of maize is present by 400 B.C. (Gilpin et al. 2000; Henderson 1983; Kearns 1996a; Vierra 1985). By this time, pit houses were present at Sites NM- H-26-56 (Henderson 1983) and 423-158 (Vierra 1994b), storage structures were present at Site LA 6448 (Kearns 1996a), and fire pits were present at Sites NM-Q-19-66 (Kilburn 1999; 2007), NM- Q-12-71 (Purcell et al. 1998), 423-141, and 423-156 (Vierra 1994b). During the US 491 testing, shallow pit features were identified in late preceramic contexts at several sites, and charred squash seeds were recovered in a buried, post–500 B.C. context at NM-H-51-55.

In light of the newly documented length of the history of maize in the Southwest, Huckell (1996:343–344) has suggested calling the period from about 3500 to 2000 or 1500 B.P., when maize was first being introduced into the Southwest, the Late Archaic/Early Agricultural period, and Lipe (1999:133) concurs. In the southern Chuska Valley, Kearns (1996a, 1996b) designates the Late Archaic/Early Agricultural period the Ear Rock phase and dates it from 1300 to 500 B.C. Kearns (1996a, 1996b) also recognizes a Figueredo phase (800/500 B.C.–A.D. 150) and an occupational hiatus lasting from about A.D. 150 to 500.

A number of key questions remain regarding the introduction of agriculture to the Southwest. When was maize introduced into different areas of the Southwest? Did maize arrive as part of a migration of proto–Uto-Aztecan speakers or did it diffuse northward among indigenous

Chapter 3 Research Design 35 populations? Was it evenly distributed across the landscape, or did some groups adopt it while others remained hunter-gatherers? How was it incorporated into the subsistence practices of Archaic tradition peoples? What were the early agricultural crop complexes? Were there any significant cultural changes during the long transition (nearly 3,000 years in some areas) from early agriculture to settled village life?

No archaeological remains dating specifically to the Late Archaic/Early Agricultural period were identified in the US 491 site sample prior to the testing phase, but several components—most of them buried under alluvial or eolian deposits—were identified and dated during testing. One was NM-H-51-55, which was investigated during the data recovery effort reported here. Radiocarbon dates for Southwestern maize from the preceramic periods are rare in the San Juan Basin, and isolated examples of early maize can contribute much to understanding the origin of agriculture in the Southwest. Therefore, any features or sealed strata with the potential for information on early agriculture were especially targeted for recovery of botanical remains.

THE TRANSITION TO SETTLED VILLAGE LIFE

Some 1,500 years after the earliest introduction of maize to the San Juan Basin, occupants of the basin increasingly became less mobile and more sedentary. As early as about 500 B.C.–A.D. 150, the occupants of Site LA 6448 had constructed 53 storage pits, though no dwellings were identified (Kearns 1996a). At roughly the same time, formal pit houses were being constructed in the San Juan Basin (Henderson 1983). From about A.D. 1 to 700, habitation sites commonly consisted of arcs of circular storage bins with pit houses in front of them. Around A.D. 800, the arcs of circular storage bins had been replaced by arcs of tub-shaped, semi-subterranean, slab- lined storage bins. By about A.D. 850, many habitation sites in the San Juan Basin consisted of arcs of habitation and storage rooms with one or more pit houses or proto-kivas in front of them, and long-term, year-round occupation of sites became common. Although this pattern is well documented for the San Juan Basin generally and the Chuska Valley specifically, questions remain regarding the technological changes and social and demographic implications of the transition to settled village life.

Important technological changes concomitant with the transition to settled village life included changes in processing (specifically grinding), changes in storage facilities and storage capacity, a change from biface reduction to core/flake tool reduction, the introduction of the bow and arrow, and the introduction of pottery. These changes were interrelated in complex ways that are not completely understood, and relate to changes in subsistence, also not completely understood. What was the ratio of hunted foods to vegetable foods? How did changes in hunting technology affect subsistence strategy? Did hunting strategies change during this period, and if so, how? What was the ratio of cultigens to gathered foods? What changes occurred in subsistence technology, and why did they occur? How did grinding technology and processing facilities change and why? How did storage facilities and capacity change? When was pottery introduced and by what process? Why was brownware replaced by grayware, and how did the tradition of trachyte-tempered pottery develop? How did the forms of pottery vessels change and why?

Social and demographic changes associated with the transition to settled village life were equally complex. What were the dynamics of social organization during this period and how did they change? Is there a settlement hierarchy of limited-use sites, farmsteads, hamlets, and villages at

Chapter 3 Research Design 36 this time, and if so, when did it appear, how did it develop, and what were the relationships among different site types? How were villages organized? How large were sites and site clusters, and were they large enough to have housed reproductively self-sustaining populations? If not, what groups of sites would have been large enough to house such populations? What kinds of interaction occurred between and among sites, site clusters, and larger groups of sites?

Some of the sites investigated during the US 491 testing project date from the period of transition to settled village life, and sites dating to the following period (the Chacoan era, A.D. 890–1130) can also contribute to the understanding of this transition. However, none of these sites are included in the SWCA data recovery project. One site not tested by SWCA in 2004, the Little Water Village (NM-H-35-19), contained Basketmaker III and Pueblo I components, but it remained to be seen if any intact subsurface archaeological remains were still present at this site. Extensive excavations have already occurred at NM-H-35-19, and NM-H-46-60 is reportedly outside the right-of-way fence.

To address this research domain in a meaningful way, the investigations would need to recover temporally relevant data from features and/or middens (including ethnobotanical and faunal data), or large artifact assemblages (more than 100 artifacts), or some combination of these attributes. Sites with features are generally more likely to provide information on feature and site date and function, as well as ethnobotanical, faunal, and artifact evidence, or some combination of these data. Artifact assemblages would need to be large enough to provide data on site date, subsistence practices, technology, site function, trade, or some combination of these research issues. (Even an artifact scatter can provide data on such questions as the distribution of Narbona Pass chert and Chuskan pottery, but it would have to include enough artifacts to lend itself to statistical summarization and comparison.)

THE CHACOAN SYSTEM

Probably the most significant research issue in the San Juan Basin is the origin and nature of the Chacoan system. Between about A.D. 890 and 1130, the people in Chaco Canyon, most of whom lived in Prudden units (or, in Chacoan terms, small houses), constructed approximately a dozen large buildings called great houses. These structures were well planned, with long, straight walls, and typically were rectangular, D-shaped, U-shaped, or even E-shaped; one was circular. They were multistoried, containing as many as 650 rooms, often arrayed in suites connected by aligned doorways, and they incorporated kivas in the room blocks and great kivas in the plazas. They were constructed with massive walls of core-veneer masonry, which were needed to support the upper stories. Beginning about A.D. 1050, the Chacoans cut stairways into the walls of Chaco Canyon and constructed roads radiating out of the canyon to outlying settlements, which consisted of clusters of Prudden units around smaller versions of the Chaco Canyon great houses.

Explaining this system has been one of the greatest challenges of Southwestern archaeology. On a map, the system looks much like a nation state, with its capital in Chaco Canyon and regional centers scattered across the Four Corners region, and a number of scholars have interpreted it in this way (see Tainter 1988; Wilcox 1993, 1996). States, however, are characterized by the "institutionalization of political authority" (Adams 1966:10); in other words, political authority is held by institutions, not individuals. Moreover, the function of the state is to "maintain an order of stratification" (Fried 1967:235). In identifying state-level societies, then, archaeologists look

Chapter 3 Research Design 37 for evidence of (1) social classes with differential degrees of access to basic resources and (2) institutions for maintaining social stratification and authority (Adams 1966; Childe 1950; Fried 1967). In Chaco Canyon and its outliers, one finds great kivas and oversized residential structures (great houses), as well as a concentration of prestige goods (copper bells, macaws, and turquoise) in the great houses. However, the great houses typically consist of suites of rooms for a number of different groups of equal status, the social groups closest to the concept of class were great-house dwellers and small-house dwellers, and basic resources seem to have been equally available to both groups. Thus, as Cordell and Judge (2000) note, the Chacoan system may represent a social organization that is rare, if not unique, in world history.

A number of interpretations have been proposed to explain the system of Chacoan communities. One earlier explanation was that small houses were earlier than great houses (Gladwin 1945). When it was shown that small houses and great houses were contemporaneous, Kluckhohn (1939:151–162) raised the possibility that different ethnic groups built and occupied the different types of sites (see Vivian 1970, 1990). Another explanation is that commoners occupied the small houses and elites occupied the great houses (Grebinger 1973, 1978; Schelberg 1984). Struck by the numbers of trade goods at many Chacoan sites, a number of researchers viewed the Chacoan system as an extension of Mesoamerican trade systems (Di Peso 1968, 1974; Frisbie 1978, 1980; Kelley and Kelley 1975; Whitecotton and Pailes 1986), an interaction sphere (Altschul 1978), or a redistribution system (Judge 1979; Judge et al. 1981; Powers et al. 1983). In this scenario, in times of prosperity communities would bank copper bells, macaws, turquoise, flaked stone, pottery, and so forth, which could be exchanged for food in times of hardship. The primary criticism of this explanation is that transportation of food over the great distances of the Chacoan system would have used more calories than were delivered, but strontium isotope analysis indicates that at least some of the maize found in Pueblo Bonito in Chaco Canyon was grown in the Chuska Valley and in the San Juan River valley (Benson et al. 2003). As noted above, Wilcox (1993, 1996) has suggested that Chaco was a state-level society with tribute and war parties. Finally, some researchers have viewed the Chacoan system as one of shared ideology, ritual, and community organization (Stein and Lekson 1992).

Given these widely variant and competing interpretations, most students of the Chacoan system have emphasized focusing on individual sites and communities and attempting to document how life was actually lived at those sites. Current research on Chacoan "outlier" communities (see Kantner and Mahoney 2000) is concerned with four basic questions: (1) how did the communities develop, (2) how were the communities organized, (3) how did the communities relate to Chaco Canyon, and (4) what happened to the communities after construction ceased in Chaco Canyon about A.D. 1130?

One of the common interpretations of the Chaco Phenomenon is that it involved ritual. Stein (Fowler, Stein, and Anyon 1987; Stein and Lekson 1992) and others (Van Dyke 2000, for example) interpret Chacoan architecture as constituting ritual landscapes. According to Kluckhohn (1942:78), "Ritual is an obsessive repetitive activity—often a symbolic dramatization of the fundamental 'needs' of the society, whether 'economic,' 'biological,' 'social,' or 'sexual.' Mythology is the rationalization of these same needs, whether they are all expressed in overt ceremonial or not." Even though one may question the use of the word "obsessive," Kluckhohn's definition of ritual is important in recognizing the importance of repetitive action rationalized by mythology and the recognition that rituals are not just religious or related to the supernatural, but

Chapter 3 Research Design 38 occur in a wide range of situations. Most archaeologists, and most people who talk about ritual landscapes or ritual use of Chacoan buildings, are talking about religious ritual, as in Wallace's (1966:102) "Ritual is religion in action." He defines religion as "a set of rituals, rationalized by myth, which mobilizes supernatural powers for the purpose of achieving or preventing transformations of state in man and nature" (Wallace 1966:107) (emphasis in original). This seems to be the sense in which most archaeologists talk about Chacoan ritual: as repetitive action, rationalized by myth, to mobilize supernatural powers. Defined in this way, ritual is notoriously difficult to recognize in the architectural record, and archaeologists are often accused, and often accuse themselves, of interpreting as ritual or ceremonial everything they cannot explain. Moreover, in many, if not most, societies, the sacred and secular distinction, if it is recognized at all, is defined differently and is not marked as strongly as it is among social scientists in the United States. Much of what we interpret as ritual is based on modern Pueblo ceremonialism, and features and artifacts that are used in ceremonies are assumed to have had the same or similar functions in the past. Among the features and artifacts often seen as evidence of Chacoan ritual are kivas, great kivas, features within kivas and great kivas (particularly sipapus), macaws (birds and feathers), copper bells, fetishes, articles of shell and turquoise, painted wood and stone, rock art, and so forth. Lekson (1988) has criticized the idea that kivas were used primarily for ceremonies before about A.D. 1275.

Since the idea that Chacoan architecture should be interpreted in terms of ritual has become so prominent in discussions of Chaco (Durand 2003; Stein 1987; Stein and Lekson 1992; Yoffee 2004), SWCA wanted to investigate the context of features and artifacts commonly interpreted as ritual in nature within pre-Chacoan sites, Chacoan-era small houses, and late- and post-Chacoan small houses. Architectural evidence of ritual includes kivas and the antecedents to features and orientations of features commonly found in kivas. Artifacts commonly considered evidence of ritual include pipes, decorated stone, fetishes, implements used for grinding pigments, and pigments themselves. Burials may suggest the existence of beliefs about the afterlife. It was recognized that few such features and artifacts would be found during the testing phase, but testing data were evaluated to assess the likelihood of finding them during data recovery.

The key questions relate to Chacoan economics, social organization, ideology, and exchange. Questions about economics in the Chacoan era are similar to questions about economics in the preceding period. What was the ratio of hunted foods to vegetable foods? Did hunting strategies change during this period, and if so, how? What was the ratio of cultigens to gathered foods? What changes occurred in subsistence technology, and why did they occur? How did grinding technology and processing facilities change and why? How did storage facilities and capacity change? How did the forms of pottery vessels change and why? Questions about social and demographic changes in the Chacoan era are also similar to questions about social and demographic changes in the preceding period. What was the social organization during this period and how did it change? Is there a settlement hierarchy of limited-use sites, farmsteads, hamlets, and villages at this time, and if so, when did it appear, how did it develop, and what were the relationships among different site types? How were villages organized? How large were sites and site clusters, and were they large enough to house reproductively self-sustaining populations? If not, what groups of sites would have been large enough to house such populations? What kinds of interaction occurred between and among sites, site clusters, and larger groups of sites? In addition to these kinds of questions, the Chacoan system raises important questions about identity, ideology, and exchange. The Chuska Mountains and the Chuska Valley were the source of a large number of

Chapter 3 Research Design 39 goods found in Chaco Canyon, including maize, construction timbers, trachyte-tempered pottery, and Narbona Pass chert. The role of the Chuska Valley settlements in the acquisition, production, and transport of these goods is a significant issue.

Of course, many of the questions posed are beyond the scope of the US 491 project. Moreover, among the sites within the highway right-of-way that were included in the data recovery phase, only one (NM-H-51-55) had a known component dating from the Chacoan era, and that one appeared (and proved) to be a very small-scale occupation. Still, given that most of the prehistoric sites along the US 491 project area dated to the Chacoan era (A.D. 890–1130), it remained possible that the investigations described here could gather evidence that would ultimately contribute to a better understanding of the broader Chacoan system. Sites selected for data recovery would need to have the same general attributes as sites selected to represent the previous period: features, ethnobotanical and faunal data, large artifact assemblages, or some combination of these attributes.

THE NATURE OF POST-CHACOAN OCCUPATION OF THE CHUSKA VALLEY

Tree-ring dating of beams in Chaco Canyon sites indicates that new construction in Chaco Canyon ceased about A.D. 1130, leading many researchers to talk about the "collapse" of the Chacoan system (Judge 1989; Lekson 1999:140; Sebastian 1992:138–139; Tainter 1988; Vivian 1990:333). It is probably more correct to say that the Chacoan system was reorganized during this period (see especially Fowler, Stein, and Anyon 1987; Stein and Fowler 1996). Sites dating after the Chacoan era are relatively common in Tohatchi Flats and are also present at Naschitti, Crumbled House, The Gap, The Pillar, and in the CGP area. A number of these sites (but not the ones in Tohatchi Flats) are in defensive locations, and they typically have large quantities of White Mountain Red Ware. Sites dating between A.D. 1130 and 1300 provide important information on the latest Anasazi occupation of the Chuska Valley and on changes in economy, technology, social organization, ideology, and trade relations in post-Chacoan times. No components dating to this period, however, were among the sites within the highway right-of- way that were targeted for the data recovery project reported here. Still, the possibility that artifacts dating to this period might be identified at data recovery sites was considered. Post- Chacoan sites selected for data recovery would need to have the same general attributes as sites selected to represent the previous two periods: features, ethnobotanical and faunal data, large artifact assemblages, or some combination of these attributes.

NAVAJO OCCUPATION OF THE CHUSKA VALLEY PRIOR TO A.D. 1868

Sites and artifacts dating to the Navajo occupation of the Chuska Valley, prior to the Carson Campaign of 1863–1864, have been identified in the Prayer Rock District, the Burnham area, and Tohatchi Flats. Early Navajo sites are also known from the Manuelito Plateau, the South Chaco Slope, and the Dutton Plateau. These sites provide significant information on the date of Navajo presence in the San Juan Basin, on Navajo adaptations to the region, and on Navajo social and political organization prior to the acquisition of the Southwest by the United States. Although no sites dating to this period were among the group of sites tested by SWCA, the possibility that remains dating from this time period would be encountered during data recovery was considered. Sites of this period selected for data recovery would need to have the same general attributes as sites selected to represent the four prehistoric periods: features, ethnobotanical and faunal data, large artifact assemblages, or some combination of these.

Chapter 3 Research Design 40 NAVAJO USE OF THE VALLEY DURING THE RESERVATION PERIOD, A.D. 1868 TO PRESENT

A number of researchers studying historic sites in the Navajo country have explored the ways that material remains on archaeological sites (including architecture, artifacts, and botanical and faunal remains) reflect historical events and cultural processes (Bailey and Bailey 1980, 1982, 1983, 1986; Gilpin 1993; James 1976b; Kelley 1986). Among the most significant changes that occurred historically in the Navajo country are:

1) the Carson Campaign of 1863–1864 2) the Bosque Redondo internment of 1864–1868 3) the establishment of the Navajo Indian Reservation in 1868 4) the return to the San Juan River valley and the Little Colorado River valley in 1876 5) the arrival of the railroad in Gallup in 1881 and the resulting establishment of the trading

post system 6) the arrival of the railroad in Farmington in 1905 7) stock reduction in the 1930s 8) World War II and military service by some Navajos and wage work in war industries by

others 9) post–World War II industrialism.

One of the first archaeological studies of twentieth-century Navajo sites (James 1976b) was conducted north of Chinle. James (1976b) took a classificatory approach, developing a four- phase chronology for the Reservation period based on historic events and then describing the archaeological characteristics of sites dating to each phase in terms of architecture, burial patterns, ceramics, clay artifacts, stone, wood, historic Euro-American artifacts, and subsistence.

On the NIIP, the architecture and organization of historic sites reflected a number of cultural and social variables, including date, subsistence strategy, social organization, ethnicity, and world view (Gilpin 1993). Dwelling styles and the types of fireplaces in dwellings were markers of ethnicity and degree of acculturation. As might be expected, houses were the only dwellings on the sites of Euro-Americans. Both houses and hogans were present on Navajo sites, and the ratio of houses to hogans increased throughout the twentieth century. Ash piles were present only on Navajo sites, and the organization of Navajo sites—with the doorway facing east, the ash pile northeast of the dwelling, the wood-chopping area east of the dwelling, and bread ovens to the southeast—was not duplicated on Euro-American sites, which had a more diverse arrangement of features. The number of dwellings on each Navajo site indicated whether the site was the residence of a nuclear or extended family, and the size of the family reflected stages in the developmental cycle of domestic groups, which in turn were related to each family's strategy for subsistence and for utilizing the northern Chaco Plateau. In similar fashion, historic artifact assemblages reflected date, subsistence strategy (including degree of involvement in commercial trading networks), ethnicity, and world view. Surface collections and excavations of features, especially ash piles, yielded artifacts, botanical remains, and faunal remains. Prior to about 1914, most families practiced subsistence herding, which was reflected in limited assemblages of commercially produced artifacts and faunal remains that indicated a strategy of maintaining herd size (butchering of lambs and of rams and ewes of all ages). From about 1914 to 1930, families practiced commercial herding, which was reflected in larger numbers of commercially produced

Chapter 3 Research Design 41 artifacts and faunal remains that indicated a strategy of increasing herd size (butchering only of rams and older ewes). During the stock reduction era, families had to abandon herding and rely more on wage work, a change that was reflected in artifact assemblages that included increasing numbers of commercially produced artifacts and fewer faunal remains.

The US 491 testing and data recovery projects sought to recover information indicating whether two historic Navajo sites—NM-H-46-62 and NM-H-46-55—could provide data comparable to that from the NIIP historic sites. During the testing phase, NM-H-46-55 was mapped, surface artifacts within the right-of-way were recorded using the system employed on the NIIP (Gilpin 1982; McKeown 1983), and one ash pile was tested with 1 × 1–m hand-excavation units. Testing of ash piles provided information on the number and types of artifacts, botanical remains, and faunal remains within them, and this information was used to develop a sampling strategy for data recovery. At NM-H-46-62, the site was mapped during the testing phase but no further work was conducted, as it was understood that this site was an automatic candidate for data recovery.

GENERAL RESEARCH TOPICS

Addressing the research questions posed above required the collection of baseline data on each of the sites. Such baseline data crosscut all of the cultural-historical questions and provided data on general research questions, including chronology, paleoenvironmental reconstruction, technology, subsistence, social organization, prehistoric settlement patterns, and exchange and regional interaction. As for the specific themes discussed above, full exploration of some of these topics was beyond the scope of the data recovery effort, and it was anticipated that the data recovered during this project would be very uneven in terms of their relevance to the various research topics.

CHRONOLOGY

Proposed methods for dating sites and features included both chronometric (archaeomagnetic, tree-ring, and radiocarbon) and relative (stratigraphy and superposition, projectile point analysis, and ceramics) dating techniques. The best dating method for most preceramic sites in the project area was presumed to be radiocarbon analysis, although soil or stratigraphic horizons and projectile points can provide relative dates. Analysis of debitage assemblages also provided potentially time-sensitive data. Most Ceramic period sites can be dated by ceramic seriation, although archaeomagnetic dating, radiocarbon dating, and tree-ring dating were proposed to the extent warranted by the excavation findings.

PALEOENVIRONMENTAL RECONSTRUCTION

Paleoenvironmental reconstruction is based on geomorphological studies, tree-ring analysis, botanical analysis, and faunal analysis. Geomorphological studies have provided information on eolian and alluvial processes extending back to the Pleistocene epoch (Smith and McFaul 1997). McVickar (1996) has summarized reconstructions of past climates in the southern Chuska Valley, based on tree-ring studies, palynology, hydrology, and analysis of packrat middens. Although she presents a brief summary of the Archaic tradition, she focuses on the agricultural period (900 B.C. to present). Botanical and faunal remains collected from the US 491 sites provided information on the plants and animals present in the project area at different times.

Chapter 3 Research Design 42 TECHNOLOGY

Studies of technology are used to address the materials and manufacturing techniques used for each artifact class (flaked stone, ground stone, ceramics) and activity. Among the activities analyzed were hunting, gathering, farming, processing, and storage. Faunal remains and flaked stone provided information on hunting; botanical remains and ground stone provided information on gathering and farming; botanical remains, ground stone, and processing facilities provided information on processing; and storage facilities provided information on storage.

SUBSISTENCE

The reconstruction of subsistence practices is based on direct evidence (ethnobotanical studies and faunal remains) and indirect evidence (flaked stone, ground stone, and ceramic assemblages; facilities for production, processing, and storage; and site types and settlement patterns). Ethnobotanical studies for the US 491 data recovery project included analysis of pollen, flotation samples, and individually collected macrobotanical specimens.

SOCIAL ORGANIZATION

Research on social organization and interaction can be considered in terms of three related problems: (1) identifying what social groups at what scales are represented at sites in the project area, (2) reconstructing communities, and (3) investigating regional interaction. Moreover, in studying social organization and interaction, each period and lifeway pattern presents slightly different aspects of these problems. Research on Archaic tradition social organization and interaction focuses on trying to identify the kinds of social groups that used the region and on how Archaic tradition peoples across the San Juan Basin participated in acquisition and use of lithic raw materials from known sources from the periphery of the basin and beyond. Research on Anasazi social organization and interaction is focused on site clusters and their relationships to community, exchange between site clusters, exchange with groups outside the San Juan Basin, and whether exchange networks that can be identified in the archaeological record relate to participation in the Chacoan system. Research on early Navajo social organization focuses on identifying the types of social groups that were represented, how these social groups related to the people of Dinétah, and how they related to non-Navajo groups. Research on Reservation period Navajo social organization is focused on identifying the number of households represented by dwellings at each site, as well as the potential social indicators in artifact assemblages (e.g., status items).

Although settlement systems were expected to be the most important source of information on social organization for this data recovery effort, artifacts also constitute a significant dataset, particularly in defining site types. In addition, changes in ceramic vessel form and ware suggest social change. Most notable in the San Juan Basin are (1) the shift from spherical "seed" jars to more cylindrical corrugated jars that occurred between about A.D. 750 and 950, (2) increases in the numbers of bowls between about A.D. 750 and 1200, and (3) the influx of White Mountain Red Ware (almost exclusively bowls) beginning about A.D. 1090. Data from the US 491 project was expected to contribute to clarification of the broader issues involving the social aspects of these changes.

Chapter 3 Research Design 43 PREHISTORIC SETTLEMENT PATTERNS

The study of social organization is closely related to the study of settlement patterns. In identifying social groups, SWCA focused on analysis of site types and settlement patterns at several different scales, asking, "How do the sites in the project area fit into the regional settlement patterns of each era?" The analysis of artifact assemblages also contributes to the understanding of settlement patterns.

Social organization and settlement pattern in this region are best analyzed at different scales of analysis: (1) dwellings, (2) sites, (3) site clusters, (4) communities, and (5) regional systems. In attempting to reconstruct the settlement patterns of different groups occupying the southwest San Juan Basin, slightly different strategies were used for the preceramic period and the later Anasazi period.

For the preceramic period, the numbers and types of features, the structure of artifact assemblages, and the distribution of lithic raw materials from known sources were the most important sources of data. The analysis of later Anasazi settlement patterns drew on previous studies and attempted to (1) see whether, and to what extent, previous reconstructions apply to the sites of the project area, (2) reconstruct settlement systems based on site attributes, and (3) consider the economic and social implications of Anasazi settlement systems in the southwest San Juan Basin. The investigation of Anasazi social groups also considered the economic and social implications of changes in ceramic vessel forms and wares. For each period, but especially for the Anasazi period, settlement system and social organization were considered at three different scales: site, site cluster, and regional system.

EXCHANGE AND REGIONAL INTERACTION

The methods used in the study of regional interaction also varied with the time period under consideration. The distribution of lithic raw materials from known sources constituted the most important dataset in the study of regional interaction during the Archaic and Basketmaker II periods, though the organization of subsistence and settlement was also important. In studying regional interaction during the Basketmaker III and Pueblo I periods (the transition to settled village life), imported ceramic wares and types constituted an important dataset, in combination with the data on lithic raw material, subsistence, and settlement. In studying regional interaction during the Pueblo II period, the concept of the Chacoan regional system needed to be considered, entailing analysis of architecture, the organization of settlements, imported lithic raw materials and pottery, subsistence practices (particularly the identification of surplus), and ritual.

Methods used in the study of subsistence and settlement have been discussed above. The study of lithic raw materials from known sources can entail X-ray fluorescence sourcing of obsidian when adequate samples are available and visual identification of Narbona Pass chert, Zuni Mountain chert, Cerro Pedernal chert, Brushy Basin chert, Owl Rock chert, the rainbow variety of Chinle formation chert, and petrified wood. One of the main goals of the ceramic analysis was to identify what was imported and what was locally produced. In addition to identifying wares known to have been produced outside the project area, the identification of imported ceramics was based on refiring of Cibola White Ware and Gray Ware sherds, and petrographic analysis of Chuskan pottery.

CHAPTER 4 FIELD AND ANALYTICAL METHODS

F. Michael O’Hara, III

For this project, SWCA followed the NNHPD's Fieldwork and Report Standards Guidelines (2001), as summarized here. Archaeological data recovery often involves both hand and mechanical excavations, and this was the case for the data recovery effort reported here. Backhoes were used to dig trenches to assess the potential for, the presence of, and the depth and integrity of subsurface cultural deposits. Trenches varied considerably in length and depth, exposing the surface and stratigraphy in a contiguous area that was large enough, both horizontally and vertically, to provide an accurate evaluation of a specific area. Machine scrapers were also employed to explore for, and uncover, buried archaeological middens and features.

Hand test units, usually 1 × 1 m, 1 × 2 m, or 2 × 2 m, were excavated in situations where use of a backhoe would be too destructive, and where accurate data concerning subsurface artifacts or densities were desired, or where masonry architecture remains were present. Accordingly, it was more feasible to test surface architectural features with hand units than with a backhoe trench because the latter would cause undue damage in proportion to the amount of data that would be obtained. Hand units are also used to obtain a sample of artifacts from different levels of a site and to determine the depth of cultural deposits. By screening excavated fill, a quantifiable sample of artifacts could be recovered that would indicate the range and density of artifacts in the different levels of the site.

PROVENIENCE, MAPPING, AND GEOMORPHIC RECORDING

During the testing phase, SWCA used electronic distance measurement (EDM) total station instruments to produce a map of each of the four sites that were treated during that phase. To maintain horizontal and vertical control at each site, a datum point was established and assigned coordinates of N1000 E500 and an arbitrary elevation of 100 m. From this datum point, a metric grid system was established and used to lay out surface collection units. The ends of each backhoe trench and the southwest and northeast corners of each excavation unit were mapped using the EDM. Non-feature mapping—that is, plotting the extent of artifact scatters—was also done using the EDM. Subdatums for use in the mapping of architectural features such as walls were also established and shot in using the EDM, and the features were mapped by hand using the subdatums as horizontal and vertical reference points.

During the data recovery phase, site-mapping activities varied from site to site. At the Sandy Rise site (NM-H-51-55), mapping was accomplished through the combined use of an optical transit, a Trimble GeoXT handheld global positioning system (GPS) unit, taped measurements from a temporary baseline established following the initial round of scraping, and a geo- referenced, high-resolution aerial overlay provided by BHI. The EDM-produced site map from the testing phase was also used as a layer in the final site map. At NM-H-46-55, the EDM- produced map from the testing phase was used for the site map; surface artifacts were point- plotted using the GPS unit, and an optical transit was used to maintain elevations and record the horizontal positions of excavation units and blocks. At NM-H-46-62, the EDM-produced map

Chapter 4 Field and Analytical Methods 45 from the testing phase was used for the site map, and a three-dimensional image of Feature 1 (a partially collapsed hogan) was produced using Light Detection and Ranging (LiDAR). An optical transit was also used to locate excavation units in relation to each other at this site. At NM-H-35-17, the only data recovery activities were machine scraping (which uncovered no cultural features) and mapping of the scraped area using the GPS unit. Finally, at Little Water Village (NM-H-35-19), which was not treated during the testing phase, all site mapping was accomplished by GPS.

During the testing phase NM-H-35-17 and NM-H-51-55 were surface collected, selected artifacts were collected at NM-H-46-55, and no artifacts were collected from NM-H-46-62. During the data recovery phase, surface artifacts were collected at NM-H-46-55 and at Little Water Village (NM-H-35-19), which was not treated during the testing phase. No surface artifacts were present at NM-H-46-62. Surface collection was accomplished using both grid units and point location during the testing phase, depending on the density of surface artifacts. If collection was by grid unit, 5 × 5–m grid squares were established across at least a portion of the site within the right- of-way. Where artifact density was low (generally fewer than 100) within the right-of-way, some collected artifacts were point located. In the data recovery phase, all-surface collected artifacts were point-plotted using the handheld GPS unit.

Selected plan and profile maps were drawn for hand excavation units, and feature maps were produced for all excavated features as part of standard recording procedures. Excavated features were illustrated in both plan view and cross section (for some larger features, multiple profiles were drawn). Photographs were taken of all surface features.

A field inventory system was used to track the provenience of each artifact, sample, or other material collected. Types of proveniences that were assigned numbers were backhoe trenches, surface-collection units, levels in an excavation unit, and so forth. The field supervisors kept a field bag inventory and record of each feature number that was assigned. The bag list recorded the FS (Field Specimen) number, the description of the provenience, and the numbers and types of artifacts, samples, and other collections that came from that provenience.

TRENCHING AND MACHINE SCRAPING

Backhoe trenching was an integral part of the testing phase, and during data recovery additional backhoe trenches were excavated at the Sandy Rise site (NM-H-51-55) and at Little Water Village (NM-H-35-19). During the data recovery phase, backhoe trenches were excavated in selected areas to inspect for the presence or absence (and if present, the extent) of buried archaeological remains. Trenches were closely monitored during excavations to prevent unnecessary damage to features identified during the trenching process (e.g., structures, pits, ash stains, burials, etc.). A backhoe-trench monitoring form was used to record data such as trench depth, a brief description of stratigraphic units, the presence of features or anomalies, and types and quantities of cultural materials. The backhoe operator was instructed as to the procedures required and was stopped to check the trench whenever the monitor observed soil color changes, increased numbers of artifacts, or other indications of subsurface archaeological remains.

Each excavated backhoe trench was immediately examined for cultural features or anomalies. All profiles exhibiting features were drawn to provide a record of the association between the

Chapter 4 Field and Analytical Methods 46 feature and natural or other cultural deposits. Profiles of culturally sterile trenches (or trench segments that were sterile) were at least described in stratigraphic detail. Detailed descriptions of the stratigraphic units at each site provided important information for interpreting geomorphological context and site formation processes.

Machine scraping was carried out at all sites except NM-H-46-62, which had a deflated surface. Belly-loading pan scrapers were used at four of the sites; at NM-H-46-55, site conditions precluded the use of the belly-loader, and a bulldozer was employed instead. At the Sandy Rise site (NM-H-51-55), machine scraping was carried out with a specific objective in mind: to uncover a buried preceramic midden deposit that was discovered during backhoe trenching in the testing phase, and to uncover a deeper feature discovered in a backhoe trench during the data recovery phase. At NM-H-46-55, scraping was used to explore for subsurface features in an area containing prehistoric pottery (no features were uncovered). At NM-H-35-17, scraping was used to uncover Feature 1, which was discovered during the testing phase, and its vicinity (Feature 1, however, proved to be a Cretaceous-age carbonaceous deposit, and no cultural features were located at this site). At Little Water Village (NM-H-35-19), scraping was employed extensively across the site, as previous investigations had uncovered and excavated two concentrations of features, including pit houses. However, SWCA's investigations uncovered no additional cultural features at this site.

HAND EXCAVATION UNITS

Hand excavation units were dug to provide stratigraphic profiles, information on the depth and content of cultural features or midden deposits, and subsurface densities of various artifact classes. Units 1 × 1 m or 2 × 2 m in size were typically used to uncover surface-exposed features, suspected features, and areas with surface artifacts and concentrations, or simply to test areas with an eolian mantle that might conceal subsurface archaeological remains. Hand excavation units were excavated in 10-cm arbitrary levels; natural strata were often evident, but the degree of bioturbation made excavation of natural levels untenable. Deposits from hand excavation units were screened through hardware cloth with mesh no larger than 1/4 inch; 1/8-inch mesh was most commonly used. Information regarding feature/deposit depth, feature type, and preservation was documented on excavation unit recording forms. All four profiles of hand excavation units were examined for cultural features. A stratigraphic profile was drawn of at least one wall of each hand excavation unit, and multiple profiles were drawn in units that contained discrete features or exhibited notable variation among the exposed walls.

TREATMENT OF FEATURES

All features encountered within the construction corridor were documented, and the vast majority (excluding only a few small features uncovered toward the end of the investigations at NM-H-51-55) was completely excavated (see Chapter 5 for more on this). Features investigated by hand units during the testing phase (such as Feature 3 at NM-H-51-55) were easily relocated during the data recovery phase, as the backfilled units were readily visible on the site surface. Features uncovered during backhoe trenching (during both the testing and data recovery phases) were relocated during machine scraping and hand excavated. No damage to features after the testing phase (by erosion, vandalism, or backfilling) was observed.

Chapter 4 Field and Analytical Methods 47 COLLECTION OF FIELD SAMPLES

Samples were collected for both chronometric dating and recovery of botanical remains, primarily to help in establishing dates for the investigated sites and to aid in evaluating the potential of each site to provide information to address the various research questions. All samples processed were charcoal for radiocarbon dating or fill for botanical analysis. No samples suitable for archaeomagnetic dating and no wood or charcoal potentially suitable for tree-ring analysis were encountered during either the testing phase or the data recovery phase.

Because of sampling and budget considerations, not every feature was selected for sample processing. Sampling decisions were based on numbers of features at a particular site or site component, the nature of the feature fill (i.e., whether or not there was visible charcoal in the fill), and horizontal and vertical distribution of features.

For potential radiocarbon analysis, a large sample of available charcoal was collected from both screening in the field and sediment samples. Most materials submitted for radiocarbon dating during both the testing and data recovery phases came from the flotation samples. Each charcoal sample collected during screening in the field was placed in foil or a vial to prevent contamination. To the extent possible, wood samples from plants other than trees were submitted for radiocarbon dating to minimize potential error stemming from the "old wood" problem.

For flotation processing, a minimum of 2 liters of fill was collected from each feature (or the total feature volume if it was 2 liters or less) to collect macrobotanical remains and other artifacts, and for pollen and phytolith recovery. The results were used to reconstruct paleoenvironmental conditions and identify potentially significant economic resources. All samples were placed in either plastic bags or heavy-duty paper bags in the field. Samples of approximately 4 to 6 tablespoons were extracted from the bags for pollen and phytolith recovery and placed in self-sealing plastic bags and sealed to prevent contamination. These plastic bags are the preferred containers because they are less likely to come open or tear than paper bags, reducing the possibility of sample contamination.

FIELD RECORDS

Field records included feature and architecture forms, stratum record forms, provenience records, field specimen logs, feature assignment/identification logs, photographic records, and narratives. All investigated features were drawn to scale in plan and profile, and specific information concerning dimensions, shape, fill sequence, and artifact and spatial associations was recorded. A photographic record was kept of all images shot in the field.

ANALYSIS OF ARCHAEOLOGICAL MATERIALS

Laboratory methods for SWCA archaeology projects are described in SWCA's Flagstaff Cultural Resources Laboratory Manual (SWCA 2002). This manual covers processing, conservation, washing, and labeling of artifacts and other archaeological materials, processing of samples, management of records and photographic data, database management, and curation. Laboratory

Chapter 4 Field and Analytical Methods 48 processing of the materials recovered from the data recovery phase was carried out in SWCA's Albuquerque office, following the procedures outlined in the manual.

Analyses were completed on all material culture classes collected during the data recovery phase. The analyses maximized the data potential of each class of materials to address the research questions. Ceramics, flaked stone, ground stone, shell, faunal remains, and historic artifacts were analyzed according to accepted professional standards. Analysis of ceramics for the testing phase focused on identification by type so that the sites could be dated. During data recovery, the analysis was expanded to include mineralogical studies of the ceramic pastes, vessel analyses, and other studies. Analysis of flaked stone followed the methods used during the testing phase (Lundquist 2004a), which focused on the range and frequencies of different material types, technological variables, and the types of flaking activities carried out at the respective sites. Very little obsidian was recovered during either the testing or the data recovery phase, and no obsidian sourcing was carried out. Specific analysis methods are discussed in the relevant chapters in this report.

TREATMENT OF HUMAN REMAINS

No human remains were encountered during either the testing or the data recovery phase. CURATION

All materials and records will be curated at the Museum of New Mexico, Santa Fe, with which SWCA has a current curation agreement. Both SWCA and the Museum of New Mexico recognize that the materials recovered will remain in the ownership of the Navajo Nation.

CHAPTER 5 THE SANDY RISE SITE (NM-H-51-55)

Jim A. Railey (with contributios by Janet Hagopian and Dennis Gilpin)

County: San Juan Elevation: 5,860 feet Landowner: Navajo Nation Tribal Trust Navajo Chapter: Sheep Springs Cultural Affiliation and Age: Early Late Archaic (ca. 1720–1520 B.C.); Basketmaker II (ca. 400–200 B.C.); Anasazi, Pueblo II (A.D. 1000–1150) Site Type: Artifact scatter with features Size: 6,657.5 m2

NRHP Eligibility Status: Eligible SITE DESCRIPTION

NM-H-51-55 (Figure 5.1) is a prehistoric site that includes both Archaic and Anasazi components. The site lies north of Sheep Springs, New Mexico. Vegetation on the site includes four-wing saltbush, rabbitbrush, Russian thistle, grasses, and shadscale.

Figure 5.1. NM-H-51-55, general view during the testing phase. Test Unit 1, in the fore-

ground, was excavated into the sand dune that covers the northern part of the site.

Chapter 5 Sandy Rise Site 50 The site lies on a gently sloping surface of weathered Cretaceous sediments of the Mesaverde Group, with a prominent erosional remnant of these sediments preserved less than 200 m (655 feet) southeast of the site. The southern half of the site is lower in elevation than the northern half and is covered in a thin veneer of fine-grained sediment (silts and clays), with extremely weathered pre-Holocene sediments present just below the surface. The higher, northern half of the site is covered by more recent eolian sands, to a thickness of more than 2 m (6.5 feet), and buried archaeological remains are present in this stabilized dune deposit (Figure 5.2). Most of the dune is underlain by weathered Cretaceous bedrock, but at the northern margins of the site the dune rests on stratified Holocene alluvium associated with an unnamed wash that flows to the east, approximately 180 m (591 feet) north of the site's northern boundary. A road cut along US 491 does not appear to have impacted the sand dune; backhoe trenching revealed that the dunal sediments pinch out just east of the top edge of the road cut, with Cretaceous bedrock and residuum sloping upward and occurring just below the surface at the top of the cut.

Figure 5.2. Contour map of sand dune in northern portion of the Sandy Rise site. Contour

interval is 10 cm. PREVIOUS INVESTIGATIONS

SURVEY AND RECORDING

This site was recorded during the NNDOT survey for the present US 491 project (Walkenhorst and John 2003:199–200). It was described as a lithic and ceramic artifact scatter with two small features (Figure 5.3) on an alluvial flat in the Sheep Springs area. The surveyors noted that the site surface was covered with gray-brown sandy silt. Most of the site area was within the survey corridor.

Chapter 5 Sandy Rise Site 51

/

Plan Map for Site NM-H-51-55

\ /' ......

(_.,I

MN 7f or )20m -SURVEY CORRIDOR

.-v

\

\

leaend: \ £ Slledalum

-•- Site boundary ,:,") Artifact concentration

Fencellne -:::::::::::::: U.S. HWY 491/666 r- Contour line

r--·· Drainage

Figure 5.3. NM-H-51-55 survey map (from Walkenhorst and John 2003).


Two features were observed at the site during the initial survey. Feature 1 appeared to be a 1-m2

(3.3 × 3.3–foot) slab-lined hearth. Feature 2 also appeared to be a hearth, associated with recent use of this locality (specifically, a tire burn). The prehistoric component was interpreted as a specialized activity area containing at least one thermal feature and three artifact concentrations. Two Gallup Black-on-white sherds and Chuskan indented corrugated and plain grayware sherds were noted during the survey. Lithic materials observed included Narbona Pass chert, petrified wood, and chalcedony.

ARCHAEOLOGICAL TESTING

SWCA carried out archaeological testing at NM-H-51-55 in 2004 (Railey et al. 2004). Testing activities included mapping of the entire site with a total station, surface collection within the right-of-way fence, hand excavation, and backhoe trenching (Figure 5.4). The testing investigations began with flagging artifacts with pink pin flags, flagging features with crossed pink pin flags, and flagging site boundaries with blue pin flags. To facilitate surface collecting, a grid of 5 × 5–m surface collection units, based on the site survey datum (designated E 500, N 1000), was established across the site surface. The surface collection units were labeled by their southwest corners. Surface artifacts west of the right-of-way fence were collected and bagged.

Three 1 × 1–m hand excavation units were placed within the site to explore for subsurface archaeological remains. All units were excavated in 10-cm arbitrary levels and screened through 1/4-inch mesh.

Test Unit 1, placed in the northern portion of the site within the stabilized sand dune (see Figure 5.1), revealed a uniform profile of loose to friable eolian sand. No archaeological remains were recovered from this unit, although from the results of the subsequent excavation of nearby Backhoe Trenches (BHTs) 1 and 2, it was surmised that intact cultural deposits could be present below the final level of Test Unit (TU) 1.

Test Unit 2 was excavated to explore Feature 3, a concentration of stones observed on the surface that was suspected (and eventually proved, during data recovery) to be the remains of a masonry structure. TU 2 uncovered a masonry alignment along the eastern wall of the unit, at 5– 17 cm below ground surface, along with associated wall fall scattered elsewhere throughout the unit from 10 to 32 cm below ground surface (bgs). Excavation of this unit continued in 10-cm levels to a final depth of 70 cm below ground surface (Figure 5.5). One or two artifacts were found in each of the seven levels, with the exception of Level 5, which yielded no artifacts. Ceramics were recovered to a depth of 30 cm bgs. The sediments in this unit were all eolian in nature and geologically recent in age. It appears likely that the more deeply buried artifacts, especially those in Levels 4–7, were displaced to these depths via bioturbation.

Chapter 5 Scmdy Rise Site 53

r f

--

Q)

I

NM-H-51-55 Testing Legend

Datum

• • I IL • •Site Boundary

e Feature . Test Unit

Subdatum EB BHT Profile Subdatum

111\.t

Feature 4

TU1

BackhoeTrench

r=J Collection Unit --+r-- Proposed Slope Limits Fence

_ , - Pavement Edge 1 -- ---- -- Sand Dune Edge

rJ-L..J... TU2/ O.Sm Contour A - 1 Feature 3 .·

I

0 4 8 12 16 20 Meters

SWCA ENVUONMENTAL CONSULTANTS

m 1../1..

BHT ; /'Approximate Edge . ./ of Sand Dune

./ ... = :0-1-t ../

m a. (Q (1)

v<:m ../··-'BHT 4

/ ../···

::00

/ Featu reS

Feature 5

Feature 2

BHT8

Figure 5.4. NM-H-51-55 testing map showing extent of investigations.

Chapter 5 Sandy Rise Site 54 Figure 5.5. NM-H-51-55, Test Unit 2 (excavated in 2004), looking east. The masonry wall

alignment in the east wall of the unit is a portion of Feature 3. The large stones on the surface outside the unit are pieces of associated wall fall removed during excavation. Feature 3 was fully excavated during the data recovery phase.

Test Unit 3 was excavated within the southern portion of the site, outside of the stabilized sand dune that covers the site's northern half. This unit revealed a 3-cm-thick mantle of eolian sand, underlain by culturally sterile pre-Holocene silty clays. Two sherds were recovered in the upper eolian sands in this unit.

Following completion of hand excavation at NM-H-51-55, eight 40-m-long backhoe trenches were excavated. The trenches were oriented east-west and spaced at roughly 20-m intervals across the site. Table 5.1 summarizes the results; trench profile descriptions are provided in Appendix A.

The testing field crew relocated the two features recorded during the survey, and flagged and recorded four new features. Three of the new features were on or near the surface, and one (Feature 4) was deeply buried in BHT 2. In addition, a buried charcoal-flecked stratum of likely cultural origin was uncovered in BHT 1, with apparent features extending below this stratum. None of these features was assigned a feature number during the testing phase, but some were later correlated to features uncovered and fully investigated during the data recovery phase.


Table 5.1. NM-H-51-55, Backhoe Trench Data from the Testing Phase

Trench Trench Length (m) Features Located 1 40 Stratum II (cultural midden with features) 2 40 Feature 4 3 40 None 4 40 None 5 40 None 6 40 None 7 40 None 8 40 None

Total 320 2+

DATA RECOVERY ACTIVITIES

SWCA carried out data recovery fieldwork at the Sandy Rise site between June 21 and August 20, 2006. The field investigations involved excavation of hand units and trenches, backhoe trenching, machine scraping, and feature excavations, along with associated mapping and photography. Figure 5.6 shows the extent of data recovery activities at the site, and Figure 5.7 shows the excavations and features within the sand dune, where almost all of the data recovery activities at this site were focused. Seventy-nine 1 × 1–m hand units were excavated at the site, three new backhoe trenches were opened, and the subsurface of the sand dune, along with five transects in the southern part of the site, were exposed by the machine scrapers.

The investigations began with the establishment of a transit station and sub-datum along the summit of the sand dune in the northern portion of the site. The subsurface investigations began with hand excavation of Feature 3, which proved to be a small, Pueblo II masonry structure. The structure and its associated wall fall were uncovered within a gridded block of 22 1 × 1–m hand excavation units. These units were numbered sequentially rather than according to a coordinate grid system. Because multiple passes of the machine scraper were anticipated, no attempt was made to establish (or re-establish) a uniform grid system across the site. The Feature 3 units were excavated in 10-cm arbitrary levels, a transit was used to record depths, and all fill was dry- screened through 1/4-inch hardware mesh. All rocks removed from these units were weighed for each individual unit/level. The feature was completely devoid of any associated midden staining or internal features, artifacts were extremely scarce, and charcoal was even more scarce. Still, one sediment sample was collected for potential recovery of botanical remains.

While excavation of Feature 3 was in progress, investigations into Features 5 and 6, south of the sand dune, were carried out (Feature 2, the recent tire burn, was not investigated). Hand excavation into these two surface/near-surface features revealed dark-stained, blocky, clayey sediment that was completely devoid of charcoal or ash, and no clear feature boundaries could be defined. These characteristics are consistent with the natural carbonaceous deposits that occur intermittently as lenses within the Cretaceous substratum in the project area (sometimes below still-lithified sediments). When these dark, carbonaceous lenses are exposed at the surface and become desiccated and pulverized, they superficially resemble dark, ash-stained archaeological- feature matrix. But the lack of charcoal and the clayey, blocky structure of these deposits distinguish them from the anthropogenic midden sediments typical of this area. Features 5 and 6 were thus determined to be non-cultural, and investigation of these features was terminated.


5 1

eters 0 30

M 0 --0 2

- 40

Area of "Intensive Data Recovery.Activities·

(see Figure 5.8}

·----. 1 Foot Contours •

Fence

Site Boundary

Feature

NM-H-51-55 N

A --- -

Sand Dune Edge

c:::J Machine Scrape

Figure 5.6. The Sandy Rise site (NM-H-51-55), showing location of data recovery activities.


,,

•

' '

r···············.·...

'

'. Right-of-Way ' --- Fence .

\ Fea.28 ...

tl> • oU>'. \ ,

• Fea.8

'%'.. rJst Unit 1 ... !(2004)

Key \. l

:

EEB Excavation Units

Hand Trenches

¢>) '.j ,, ::..

e Pit House

Other Cultural Feature

. ·,_-- j--- c:=:=J Backhoe Trench

Surface Contour (50-cm inteNal)

Figure 5.7. The Sandy Rise site (NM-H-51-55), showing backhoe trenches, hand excavations,

and features within the sand dune in the northern portion of the site (internal subfeatures are not shown). (Note: BHTs 1-3 were excavated during the testing phase in 2004; dashed red line indicates extent of machine-scraped area).

Chapter 5 Sandy Rise Site 58 While the investigations at Feature 3 were in progress, BHT 9 was excavated, approximately 10 m (33 feet) north of, and parallel, to BHT 1. This trench was opened to investigate whether the buried Basketmaker II stratum observed in BHT 1 extended this far north, and if so, to get an idea of the kinds of archaeological remains to expect here. The trench revealed that the Basketmaker II stratum did indeed extend at least this far to the north. This trench revealed some notable stratigraphic variation within the site; whereas in BHT 1 the Basketmaker II midden both overlaid and underlaid eolian sands, in BHT 9 the midden overlaid stratified alluvial deposits associated with an unnamed wash that today is about 180 m (591 feet) north of the site's northern boundary. The eastern portion of BHT 9 also cut through Feature 7, which was wedged between layers of stratified alluvium and was notably deeper (1.6 m bgs) than the Basketmaker II midden.

The next step in investigating the Sandy Rise site was machine scraping to remove the culturally sterile, sandy overburden down to the top of the Basketmaker II midden stratum (Figure 5.8). Two small, near-surface features (Features 8 and 9) were encountered during this initial round of scraping, which was temporarily halted in these locations to hand excavate these features. The midden was evidenced by a widespread scatter of rocks (mostly fire-cracked), petrified wood flaking debris, and localized dark and/or charcoal-stained sediment. Scraping was halted once several more-or-less distinct dark stains became evident on the scraped surface.

Hand excavation of the Basketmaker II midden followed the initial round of machine scraping. Four comparatively large areas exhibiting dark staining were given feature numbers (Features 10, 11, 12, and 14), and excavation blocks consisting of multiple 1 × 1–m units were set up over these stains (Figure 5.9). One other stained area (designated Feature 16) was investigated with a narrow (30-cm-wide) hand trench and a single 1 × 1–m hand unit. Two smaller features (Features 13 and 15) did not require hand-excavation blocks and were treated using the feature- specific excavation method (see Chapter 4).

Figure 5.8. The Sandy Rise site (NM-H-51-55), showing machine scraping in progress.

Chapter 5 Sandy Rise Site 59 Figure 5.9. The Sandy Rise site (NM-H-51-55), showing hand excavation of feature-unit

blocks on the machine-scraped surface. As with Feature 3, the units comprising the blocks over Features 10, 11, 12, and 14 were numbered sequentially within each block rather than according to a coordinate grid system. A temporary north-south baseline was established, and the four excavation blocks were laid out in relation to this baseline (and otherwise were located using an optical transit and handheld GPS unit). Uniform horizontal levels were established independently for each excavation block, and individual units were excavated according to the level system established for each block. Accordingly, Level 1 was established in the highest-elevation unit in each block, and excavation in some units lying downslope began at Level 2, 3, or even 4 (as was the case in the Feature 10 block).

All excavated matrix from the hand-excavation blocks was dry-screened through 1/8-inch mesh. Plan and profile maps were drawn whenever appropriate (i.e., wherever staining patterns revealed the extent and depth of sheet-midden deposits). Sediment samples (for flotation processing and recovery of botanical remains) were collected on an opportunistic basis, depending upon presence and density of macroscopic charcoal. Discrete features encountered within these excavation blocks were designated with alphabetical suffixes that maintained the overall feature number; for example, Features 10A, 10B, and 10C were all basin-shaped pits encountered within Feature 10. One pit structure, Feature 10D, was discovered within the hand- excavation blocks and was partially excavated at this stage of the fieldwork (the western part of this feature was still covered by a substantial overburden of culturally sterile dune sand, which was removed during the second round of machine scraping).

While hand excavation of the feature blocks was winding down, two additional backhoe trenches, BHTs 10 and 11, were excavated. These trenches were oriented roughly north-south to

Chapter 5 Sandy Rise Site 60 help delimit the northernmost extent of midden staining and the features associated with the buried Basketmaker II component (this information was then used to help guide the next round of machine scraping). BHT 10 extended from BHT 1, just north of the Feature 11 hand- excavation block, over 30 m (98 feet) to the north, cutting through BHT 9. This trench uncovered Feature 17 (which proved to be a pit house, associated with the Feature 11 sheet midden) at its southern end (Figure 5.10). (The associated feature designated 17A during data recovery was exposed in BHT 1 during testing but was not identified or given a feature designation at that time.) No other buried archaeological remains were exposed in this backhoe trench. A profile was drawn for Feature 17 (which appeared only in the west wall of the trench), and representative stratigraphic columns were described along the remaining length of the trench.

Figure 5.10. The Sandy Rise site (NM-H-51-55), Feature 17, in the west wall of BHT 10. BHT 11 extended approximately 25 m (82 feet) north from just north of the Feature 14 hand- excavation block, also cutting through BHT 9. BHT 11 exposed features and midden staining south of BHT 9 (eventually designated Features 24 and 34), but encountered a hiatus containing only scattered charcoal and no feature staining extending approximately 5 m (16 feet) north of BHT 9. At this point the trench uncovered Feature 18, which proved to be a small pit house with associated sheet midden and smaller features. No other buried archaeological remains were encountered in BHT 11.

Following the excavation of these two trenches, Features 17 and 18 were hand-excavated. However, Feature 17 was not completely excavated at this point, given that its western portion was still covered by a substantial thickness of culturally sterile, sandy overburden; the excavation of this feature was completed following the second round of machine scraping. The fill in Features 10D and 17 was similar and distinctive in that it contained substantial amounts of culturally sterile, unstained dune sands that were indistinguishable from the sediments both over- and underlying the Basketmaker II midden stratum. This meant that the boundaries of pit house features were rarely evident in plan view at their level of origin and affected how pit houses were

Chapter 5 Sandy Rise Site 61 investigated and identified during the data recovery fieldwork. In the case of the Feature 12 unit block, hand excavations actually extended into deposits that eventually proved to be portions of pit house fill (e.g., Feature 12A; see Figure 5.7). Because of the extent of the "clean," culturally sterile sand encountered here in the hand-unit excavations, it appeared that the excavations had already encountered dune sands underlying the midden. Only after subsequent machine scraping was it determined that the Feature 12 block actually included some fill from the upper portion of a large pit house (Feature 12A).

The second round of machine scraping was carried out to remove the Basketmaker II midden stratum and uncover any discrete features extending below this deposit. This round also extended the scraped area to the axis of the sand dune summit ridge1, which had not been removed during the initial round of scraping, as well as to the area at the southern end of the dune that included the Feature 3 block. Round 2 of machine scraping also removed the shallow sediments south of the dune, in several parallel strips (see Figure 5.6). Although the original data recovery plan called for complete scraping of the entire site within the right-of-way, the decision was made to use parallel transects once it was determined that the southern part of the site contained no known cultural features of any antiquity2. No other features were uncovered in these transects, and it was judged that the probability of discovering cultural remains here was sufficiently unlikely that machine scraping in the southern part of the site was terminated at this point.

In the northern portion of the site, within the sand dune, this second round of machine scraping exposed both discrete, identifiable features, and more extensive areas with variegated staining where clear feature boundaries were not discernible. Identifiable features were treated using the feature-specific excavation strategy, whereas the areas with variegated staining were initially investigated by digging narrow (30-cm-wide) hand trenches of varying lengths. These trenches were excavated, and the fill from each was screened, as single levels, to sterile subsoil. This round of machine scraping and hand trenching led to the identification of four additional pit house features (Features 12A, 12B, 14E, and 24), as well as an area containing a cluster of smaller pit features (Feature 25 and neighboring features). The second round of machine scraping also led to the rediscovery and uncovering of Feature 7, the small, deeply buried pit feature originally discovered near the eastern end of BHT 9.

Following this round of machine scraping and hand trenching, exposed features were hand excavated. As with Features 10D and 17, most of the pit houses uncovered at this stage of the investigations contained substantial amounts of culturally sterile sand in their fill, with archaeological debris occurring only in localized pockets of stained midden, and typically a charcoal-rich layer just above the floors. Given these conditions, the fill of each pit house was excavated according to the feature-specific excavation strategy: the features were either bisected or quartered, the fill was excavated as a single level, and any floor features uncovered (such as hearths) were treated as individual features in terms of excavation and documentation. With few exceptions, all excavated fill from the pit houses and other features uncovered at this stage of the

1 Along the summit ridge of the sand dune, bedrock sloped upward and was buried at a relatively shallow depth (as revealed by the backhoe trenches). Immediately west of the summit ridge, however, bedrock was exposed along the road-cut surface, and there was no need to machine scrape west of the ridge. 2 As discussed above, only three features had been recorded inside the US 491 right-of-way within the southern part of the site during the previous survey and testing phases: Feature 2 was a recent tire burn, and early in the data recovery phase Features 5 and 6 were determined to be non-cultural.

Chapter 5 Sandy Rise Site 62 investigations was screened through 1/8-inch mesh. For Feature 12A, because of time and budget constraints, and given that most of the fill in this largest of the pit houses was "clean," culturally sterile sand, only a sample of its fill was screened.

While this round of feature excavation was in progress, the third and final round of machine scraping was carried out. This task was conducted to investigate remaining areas where buried archaeological remains might still occur, including areas where machine scraping had been halted so that exposed features could be hand excavated, and the more deeply buried deposits around Feature 7. This final round of scraping exposed five new features (Features 28, 30, 31, 32, and 33) and led to the rediscovery of Feature 4, which was originally discovered in BHT 2 during the testing phase. In addition, Feature 17A was discovered below the floor level of the Feature 17 pit house. Feature 17A was originally exposed in the south wall of BHT 1 during the testing phase but was not given a feature-number designation at that time.

Because the number of sediment samples and artifacts collected at this point far exceeded what would eventually be processed and analyzed, not all of these "latecomer" features were fully excavated or sampled. During the testing phase a profile of Feature 4 was drawn, a sediment sample was collected, and the macrobotanical contents of the sample were identified and radiocarbon dated. Accordingly, upon rediscovery during the data recovery phase this feature was mapped in plan view only and not further excavated. Features 30 and 33 were sheet-like scatters of charcoal with no clear boundaries or integrity; both features were investigated with hand trenches, and mapped in plan and profile. Feature 33 was deeply buried and near Feature 7, and a sediment sample was collected from this feature for recovery of carbon-datable material to investigate its chronological relationship to Feature 7. Feature 28 was a small, circular stain that, when cross-sectioned, exhibited <1 cm of depth; therefore, this feature was not drawn in profile, nor were any samples collected. Feature 31 was a basin-shaped pit that was mapped in plan and profile and fully excavated; although a sediment sample from a charcoal-rich portion of this feature was collected, the remaining portion of the feature fill was discarded without screening (and few artifacts were observed in the process). Feature 32 appeared as an irregular area with variegated staining; it was explored with a narrow hand trench that revealed a small, basin- shaped pit extending beneath the thin midden deposit, which was treated according to the feature-specific strategy.

In summary, the data recovery investigations at the Sandy Rise site accomplished the following:

• complete excavation of the small Pueblo II masonry structure (Feature 3) • acquisition of additional stratigraphic information through excavations of BHTs 9–11,

including the discovery of stratified alluvial deposits underlying the Basketmaker II stratum north of BHT 1

• complete exposure of the Basketmaker II midden stratum through machine scraping • sampling of the Basketmaker II midden stratum through hand excavation of blocks

composed of 1 × 1–m units • hand excavation and documentation of seven Basketmaker II pit houses, as well as other

features exposed by machine and hand excavations • discovery of a component predating the Basketmaker II stratum, represented by Features

7 and 33), in the underlying stratified alluvial deposits


• recovery of a large assemblage of durable artifacts and botanical remains (mostly from the Basketmaker II features and middens)

The data recovered provided the basis for the analysis and interpretation of the geomorphology and prehistoric occupational history at this site, as detailed in the remainder of this chapter.

SITE STRATIGRAPHY AND GEOMORPHOLOGY

Sandy Rise (NM-H-51-55) lies on the gently sloping surface of the Chuska Valley floor, just east of a break in the terrain where the more rugged foothills of the Chuska Mountains rise to the west. This present-day landscape is carved into Upper Cretaceous deposits of the Menefee Formation, which consists primarily of mudstones, shale, and sandstone deposited along coastal marshes, swamps, river deltas, and lagoons, and in shallow marine environments (New Mexico Bureau of Geology and Mineral Resources 2003). These ancient sediments include localized carbonaceous deposits (which can superficially resemble archaeological features when exposed at or near the modern ground surface), along with fossilized organisms including petrified wood, which became an important raw material for making flaked stone tools. Although no local source was identified, petrified wood must occur very close to the Sandy Rise site (or perhaps was even present at the site in the past), as the flaked stone assemblage from the site consisted almost exclusively of this material. Along with the eroded Upper Cretaceous deposits, the local landscape also includes geologically recent (Pleistocene and Quaternary) alluvial sediments along the major washes flowing down from the nearby Chuska Mountains, along with more extensive deposits of alluvial fans and outwash. Finally, eolian deposition of silt and sand has formed localized accumulations of dunal sediments.

All of these geological processes have contributed to the formation of the Sandy Ridge site. As revealed by the backhoe trenches, the entire site is underlain by Cretaceous bedrock, which consists mostly of highly fractured, fine-bedded accumulations of siltstone and sandstone. Within the site itself, still-lithified Cretaceous bedrock crops out only along the road cut on the east side of US 491. At and near the surface (and below the sand dune), the Cretaceous bedrock has weathered to a residuum composed of fine-grained sediments with abundant rock fragments. Accumulations of both carbonates and iron (limonite and hematite) are present in these ancient sediments, which in residuum exhibit a blocky structure. Some localized concentrations of black, carbonaceous sediment were also observed within some of the backhoe trenches. In the southern portion of the site, Cretaceous sediments are present at a depth of only 2–3 cm bgs, and decomposing (but still lithified) sandstone was present at a depth of 20 cm in the west end of BHT 5. Thus, archaeological remains in the southern portion of the site all occur at, or very close to, the present ground surface.

In the northern portion of the site, the ancient Cretaceous deposits are covered by a stabilized sand dune up to 2 m thick (Figure 5.11; Figure 5.12). The sand was deposited on the east slope of a low, erosional remnant of weathered Cretaceous rock (now truncated by, and exposed in, the US 491 road cut), which projected above the pre-dunal ground surface. Forming on the lee side of this erosional remnant, the dune thickens and slopes downward, from west to east. These sands exhibit little or no sign of weathering (they are only very minute carbonate mottles at depth, and only in some localities) and no stratification indicative of alluvial deposition or stabilized surfaces. These characteristics suggest that the dune formed too rapidly for any

Chapter 5 Sandy Rise Site 64 appreciable pedogenesis to take place, and that it stabilized sufficiently late that a notable level of carbonate precipitation has not had time to form.

Figure 5.11. The Sandy Rise site (NM-H-51-55), looking west-northwest toward the Chuska

Mountains, showing backhoe trenches and edge of stabilized sand dune in northern portion of site. Note color difference between dunal and non-dunal sediments in backfilled trenches.

Figure 5.12. The Sandy Rise site (NM-H-51-55), oblique rendering of sand dune looking

southwest, showing backhoe trenches excavated into surface of site (contour interval 10 cm). The labeled trenches exposed stratigraphically buried archaeological remains.

Chapter 5 Sandy Rise Site 65 During the testing phase, BHTs 1 and 2 exposed the features and a charcoal-laden stratum that mark the Basketmaker II midden within the sand-dune deposits (Figure 5.13; Figure 5.14). The Basketmaker II midden was designated Stratum II, to differentiate it from Stratum I (the overlying dune sands) and Stratum III (the underlying sands). These sand deposits date from Holocene times and are much more recent than the underlying ancient, weathered sediments, with an erosional disconformity marking the boundary between the two.

Figure 5.13. The Sandy Rise site (NM-H-51-55), Feature 4 profile, looking north. This pit, and

the charcoal flecking extending beyond it, mark the Basketmaker II occupation buried within the sand dune.

.


Figure 5.14. The Sandy Rise site (NM-H-51-55), BHT 1 profile, portion of south wall.

Chapter 5 Sandy Rise Site 67 The lack of cultural materials above and below the Basketmaker II stratum and the absence of any indicators of paleosol development suggest that the dune formed rather rapidly. The Basketmaker II stratum appears to mark a depositional hiatus of sorts, when the dune surface may have stabilized for a time. Based on radiocarbon dates, the Basketmaker II occupation lasted from circa 410 to 200 B.C. Interpretations of various indicators of climatic change differ in terms of how wet or dry, relatively speaking, northwestern New Mexico was at this time. Viau et al. (2002) point to a variety of data sources to argue that a global cooling trend ensued around 2,800 B.P. Berry and Berry (1986:318) see evidence for a “fairly drastic reduction in effective moisture” during the Sub-Boreal/Sub-Atlantic transition (1000 B.C.–A.D. 500). Likewise, based on his geomorphological investigations at the Mariposa Development near Albuquerque, Hall (2005) sees the interval 3,900–1,900 B.P. (ca. 1950 B.C.–A.D. 50) as comparatively dry, with less plant cover. Conversely, for the southwestern San Juan Basin, Smith and McFaul (1997) identify the Tohatchi IV interval (ca. 3,100–2,100 B.P.) as a comparatively wet period, and McVickar (1996) sees the period 900 B.C.–A.D. 200 as warm and wet (see Chapter 2). Tree-ring data from El Malpais National Monument also show the period A.D. 81–257 as one with above normal precipitation (Grissino-Mayer 1995), and otherwise this sequence seems to agree with McVickar’s. The evidence seems to suggest some degree of local variation in terms of climate change, but the abundance and ubiquity of sites dating from the first millennium B.C.—including sites in areas with no surface water today—would seem to indicate relatively high effective moisture levels. Such conditions would have fostered more luxuriant vegetation growth across the region, which in turn would have stabilized surface sediments and slowed the rate of eolian erosion and deposition. Insofar as this is true, the dune surface at Sandy Rise may have been relatively stable at the time of the Basketmaker II occupation.

At any rate, following the abandonment of the site sometime around 200 B.C., active deposition of eolian sands resumed (or simply continued), resulting in accumulations of up to a meter of additional sediment. The dunal surface eventually attained a level equal to, or slightly higher than, the top of the Cretaceous erosional remnant. At this point, the sheltering effect of the erosional remnant may have become sufficiently negated that prevailing winds likely carried eolian sand and silt particles beyond the dune surface, and as a result the dune surface stabilized. Unless continued deposition has since been erased by erosional scouring, final stabilization of this dune occurred around a millennium ago, when a small Pueblo II masonry structure (Feature 3) was constructed on the dune, very close to the present surface. Paleoclimatic evidence suggests the Pueblo II period was another warm and wet time (e.g., McVickar 1996), and these conditions may have contributed to the ultimate stabilization of this dune formation.

During the data recovery phase, additional backhoe trenching north of BHT 1 revealed another dimension to the site's geomorphology. Backhoe Trench 9 (Figure 5.15) and the middle and northern portions of BHTs 10 and 11 (Figure 5.16; Figure 5.17) revealed highly stratified alluvial deposits underlying the upper dunal sediments, partially interfingering and forming a facies with the lower dune sands. The alluvial deposits overlay the Cretaceous residuum, the top of which quickly plunged out of sight below the floors of BHTs 10 and 11, toward the north. These alluvial deposits are associated with an unnamed wash that now flows approximately 150 m (492 feet) north of the site's northern boundary and include a variegated mix of strata and sediments ranging from very hard, fine-grained clay and silt to very coarse, friable sand. A remnant gravel bar of water-worn cobbles exposed by machine scraping at the north end of the Sandy Rise site indicated that the active channel of this wash once flowed much closer to the edge of the site.


Figure 5.15. The Sandy Rise site (NM-H-51-55), BHT 9 profile, south wall. Feature 7 is an early Late Archaic pit, and Feature 24 is a Basketmaker II pit house.


Figure 5.16. The Sandy Rise site (NM-H-51-55), profile at the south end of Backhoe Trench

10, looking west. This trench cut into the eastern margin of Feature 17, a pit house (see Figure 5.10 for a photograph of this profile).


Machine scraped surface Feature 24 Feature 34

XIV

I I

· ;_.:·

XV Rock

Charcoal XVI

Description: I Dune sand:light yellowish brown to yellowish brown (10YR6/4-5/4, dry); fine sand; friable; no charcoal. II Feature 24 & 34 fill: same as I, but contains charcoal flecking (uneven). Ill Feature 24 fill: same as I, but very slightly darker and more charcoal than II. IV Feature 24 fill:light yellowish brown to brown (10YR6/4-5/3, dry); fine sand; friable; moderately dense concentration of

charcoal. V Feature 24/34 fill: brown (10YRS/3, dry); fine sand; friable; very little charcoal. VI Feature 24 fill: dark grayish brown to grayish brown (10YR4/2-5/2, dry); fine sand; very friable to loose; dense charcoal. VII Feature 34 fill: dark grayish brown to grayish brown (10YR4/2-5/2, dry), becoming very dark gray (10YR3/1, dry) at base;

fine sand; very loose; abundant charcoal. VIII Feature 24 fill: same as I (no charcoal), but only slightly friable. IX Feature 24 fill:light yellowish brown (10YR6/4, dry); fine sand; loose; no charcoal. X Feature 34 fill:pocket of abundant small rock fragments. XI Eolian subsoil: light yellowish brown (10YR6/4, dry); fine sand; friable; no charcoal. XII Alluvial subsoil: very pale brown (10YR7/3, dry); silt; slightly firm; no charcoal. XIII Eolian(?) subsoil: light yellowish brown (10YR6/4, dry); fine sand; slightly firm; no charcoal. XIV Eolian subsoil: light yellowish brown (10YR6/4, dry); fine sand; friable; no charcoal. XV Bedrock residuum:light yellowish brown (2.5Y6/4, dry); sand w/ abundant small rock fragments; some harder, clayier

pockets. XVI Cretaceous bedrock, partially lithified and finely bedded.

AlluvialSilt Lens (XII in Profile Drawing)

Bottom of Trench

Base of Pit House (Feature 24)

Figure 5.17. The Sandy Rise site (NM-H-51-55), profile at south end ofBackhoe Trench 11,

looking east (photo shows roughly the northern half of the profile drawing). The complex fills of Features 24 (a pit house) and 34 (an extramural pit) are evident. Note also the interbedded eolian and alluvial sediments underlying Feature 24.

Chapter 5 Sandy Rise Site 71 An examination of the area's topography shows that this wash emerges from the more broken terrain flanking the Chuska foothills just west of the site. In the past (and perhaps intermittently), the wash probably splayed out in a fan-like formation as the energy level of flowing water transporting sediments was drastically reduced when it encountered the relatively level basin floor east of the Chuska foothills. This fan-like alluvial formation abuts the north end of the Sandy Rise site. Within this fan-like formation, the active channel of the wash probably shifted its position frequently, and at times the channel itself may have assumed a braided and/or distributary configuration.

Two features, Features 7 and 33, were wedged in the alluvial strata that lap up against, and partially underlie, the sand dune at the northern end of the site. These features represent the earliest known occupation(s) at Sandy Rise, and a radiocarbon date of 1720–1520 B.C. (calibrated, two-sigma) from Feature 7 confirms that the alluvial sediments enclosing these features were still actively accumulating in this locality during the early Late Archaic period. These earliest occupations at the site predate the formation of the sand dune, or at least its formation in this particular part of the site.

OVERVIEW OF FEATURES

Sixty features were recorded at Sandy Rise. Six were discovered and recorded during either the survey or the testing phase. The other 54 features were discovered and documented during data recovery, all within or beneath the sand dune in the northern portion of the site (Table 5.2). All but Feature 1 were inside the US 491 right-of-way. Four features (Features 5, 6, 14D, and 19) proved to be non-cultural, and Feature 2 was a recent tire burn. Feature 3, the small Pueblo II masonry structure, was investigated with a single 1 × 1–m hand unit during the testing phase and was uncovered and excavated in its entirety during data recovery. Feature 4, a small, discrete pit within the Basketmaker II stratum that was exposed by BHT 2 during the testing phase in 2004, was uncovered by machine scraping and mapped in plan view during data recovery, but was not investigated further because samples and a radiocarbon date were previously obtained from this feature during testing.

CONDITION OF FEATURES

Almost all of the features were impacted by rodent disturbance and other sources of bioturbation, regardless of depth. More than a few very recent burrows were found in the Basketmaker II features, which were generally one meter below the present ground surface. In some cases, the impacts were so severe that it was difficult to precisely determine the boundaries of smaller pit features. One example is Feature 9, a near-surface feature whose surviving signature appeared to be completely redeposited feature fill in a rodent burrow. In the case of Feature 10B, rodent disturbance had so thoroughly disturbed the northern half of this feature that its horizontal boundaries could not be estimated with any certainty; the southern half of this feature was much more intact (Figure 5.18).

A notable exception to this general pattern was Feature 17A, which surprisingly showed no evidence of having been impacted by rodents or other sources of natural disturbance. This feature (which had been cut by BHT 1 during the testing phase) had very clear, abrupt boundaries in both plan and profile (Figure 5.19). Why this feature escaped the ravages of

Chapter 5 Sandy Rise Site 72 bioturbation is not clear. It may have been a storage pit dug beneath the floor of the Feature 17 pit house, and thus filling of the pit house (with both midden debris and eolian sand), followed by continued deposition of dune sands on top of the Basketmaker II midden, may have left the underlying feature buried at a depth beyond which rodents regularly tunnel.


Table 5.2. The Sandy Rise Site (NM-H-51-55), Feature Data

Feat

ure

No.

Pl

an V

iew

Pr

ofile

Ty

pe /

Func

tion

O

rigin

Dep

th

(cm

bgs

)

Pe

rcen

t Ex

cava

ted

M

ax L

engt

h (c

m)

M

ax W

idth

(c

m)

Max

Dep

th /

Thic

knes

s (c

m)

D

isco

very

M

etho

d

C

ultu

ral

Affi

liatio

n

1 Circular unknown Slab-lined feature 0 0 100 100 unknown Surface Prehistoric 2 Circular unknown Modern hearth 0 0 141 121 52 Surface Recent Historic

3

Rectangular

Linear

Masonry structure

5

5–15

> 250

unknown

≥ 12

1 × 1 unit Prehistoric (Pueblo II)

4

Circular Shallow basin

Thermal pit

90

0

60

unknown

≥ 15 BHT 2 / machine scraping

Prehistoric (BM II)

5

Irregular

Irregular

Natural stain

1–3

0

280

270

3 Surface (uncovered by backhoe tracks)

None

6

Irregular

Irregular

Natural stain

1–3

0

n/a

unknown

< 5

Surface (uncovered by foot traffic)

None

7

Circular

Basin

Hearth or small roasting pit

160

~ 50

65

unknown

14

BHT 9 / machine scraping

Prehistoric (early Late Archaic

8

Circular

Basin Hearth or small roasting pit

~ 5

100

80

80

17

Machine scraping Prehistoric (Pueblo II)

9

Crescent

Irregular Small pit, completely rodent-disturbed

~ 30

100

40

40

4

Machine scraping Prehistoric (Pueblo II)

10

Irregular Irregular lens

Sheet midden and pit features

~ 100

~ 85

~ 500

unknown

~ 20

Machine scraping Prehistoric (BM II)

10A

Oval Shallow basin

Roasting pit

~ 100

100

122

80

12


10B Oval – circular*


~ 100

100

67

unknown

18 Hand excavation (Feature 10 block)

Prehistoric (BM II)

*Plan shape not entirely clear due to extensive rodent disturbance.


Table 5.2. The Sandy Rise Site (NM-H-51-55), Feature Data, continued

Feat

ure

No.

Pl

an V

iew

Pr

ofile

Ty

pe /

Func

tion

O

rigin

Dep

th

(cm

bgs

)

Pe

rcen

t Ex

cava

ted

M

ax L

engt

h (c

m)

M

ax W

idth

(c

m)

Max

Dep

th /

Thic

knes

s (c

m)

D

isco

very

M

etho

d

C

ultu

ral

Affi

liatio

n

10C

Oval Shallow basin


~ 100

100

75

40


Prehistoric (BM II)

10D

Circular

Basin

Pit house

~ 100

100

275

255


Prehistoric (BM II)

10D-1

Oval

Lens

Floor hearth

~ 150

100

50

40

2 Hand excavation (in Feature 10D)

Prehistoric (BM II)

10E

~ Oval*


~ 110

100

34

20


Prehistoric (BM II)

11


Sheet midden associated with pit house

~ 100

~ 80

unknown

unknown

25


12


Sheet midden and pit house fill

~ 70–90

~ 60

unknown

unknown

~ 20


12A

Sub-square Basin with flat floor

Pit house

~ 90–100

100

490

430

~ 30 Machine scraping / hand trench

Prehistoric (BM II)

12A-1

Circular

Basin

Floor hearth

~ 130

100

50

50

18 Hand excavation (in Feature 12A)

Prehistoric (BM II)

12A-2

Circular

Basin

Floor hearth

~ 130

100

25

25

10 Hand excavation (in Feature 12A)

Prehistoric (BM II)

12A-3

Circular

Lens Dark stain on pit house floor

~ 130

100

190

170

~ 10–20 Hand excavation (in Feature 12A)

Prehistoric (BM II)

12A-4 Circular?†

Shallow basin


~ 90

~ 50

43

unknown

4


12B

Oval Basin with flat floor

Pit house

~ 90

100

425

370

~ 50 Machine scraping / hand trench

Prehistoric (BM II)

12B-1 Circular?†

Basin Floor hearth or storage bin

~ 130

~ 50

58

unknown

30+ Hand excavation (in Feature 12B)

Prehistoric (BM II)

*Plan shape not entirely clear due to extensive rodent disturbance. †Plan shape not entirely clear because feature was impacted by machine or hand-trench excavation before it was documented.



Feat

ure

No.

Pl

an V

iew

Pr

ofile

Ty

pe /

Func

tion

O

rigin

Dep

th

(cm

bgs

)

Pe

rcen

t Ex

cava

ted

M

ax L

engt

h (c

m)

M

ax W

idth

(c

m)

Max

Dep

th /

Thic

knes

s (c

m)

D

isco

very

M

etho

d

C

ultu

ral

Affi

liatio

n

13

Irregular

Lens

Unknown—thin sheet midden, or deflated midden or pit feature(s) remnant

~ 80

100

160

144

2

Machine scraping

Prehistoric (BM II)

14


Sheet midden associated with pit house

~ 80

~ 75?

> 500

> 400

~ 20


14A

Oval

Basin Rock-lined hearth or small roasting pit

~ 90

100

62

50


Prehistoric (BM II)

14B

Oval

Lens

Hard-packed floor

~ 100

~ 50

250

110

< 5 Hand excavation (Feature 14 block)

Prehistoric (BM II)

14C

Circular


~ 100

100

64

64


Prehistoric (BM II)

14D

Irregular

Irregular

Natural disturbance

~ 100 Hand excavation (Feature 14 block)

None

14E

Oval Shallow basin

Pit house

~ 90

100

400

200

30 Machine scraping/ hand trench

Prehistoric (BM II)

15

Circular Shallow basin


~ 95

100

53

50

8


16 Irregular / amorphous

Lens Sheet midden associated with pit house

~ 95

~ 10?

400

100

~ 20


17

Oval

Basin

Pit house

~ 100

100

360

250+

40-50

BHT 10 Prehistoric (BM II)

17A Circular†

Basin Roasting pit or sub- floor storage cist

~ 30

~ 50

85

unknown

≥ 15 cm BHT 1 / Machine scraping

Prehistoric (BM II)

18

Oval Shallow basin

Shallow pit house

~ 80

~ 60

190

160+

10

BHT 11 Prehistoric (BM II)

†Plan shape not entirely clear because feature was impacted by machine or hand-trench excavation before it was documented.



Feat

ure

No.

Pl

an V

iew

Pr

ofile

Ty

pe /

Func

tion

O

rigin

Dep

th

(cm

bgs

)

Pe

rcen

t Ex

cava

ted

M

ax L

engt

h (c

m)

M

ax W

idth

(c

m)

Max

Dep

th /

Thic

knes

s (c

m)

D

isco

very

M

etho

d

C

ultu

ral

Affi

liatio

n

18A

Circular

Cylindrical

Post hole

~ 80

100

13

12

23 Hand excavation (in Feature 18)

Prehistoric (BM II)

18B

Oval


~ 80

100

48

35


Prehistoric (BM II)

18C

Oval

Basin

Floor hearth

~ 90

100

28

25


Prehistoric (BM II)

19 Irregular Irregular Rodent burrow Machine scraping None

20

Circular

Basin

Roasting pit

~ 80

100

113

106

20


21

Circular

Lens Hearth (oxidized base)

~ 80

50

36

29

2


22

Oval


~ 110

100

44

34

5


23

Circular

Basin

Roasting pit

~ 100

100

212

210

12


24

Circular

Basin with flat floor

Pit house

~ 80

100

380

315+

62

BHT 11 / machine scraping / hand trenching

Prehistoric (BM II)

24A

Oval

Irregular

Unclear – possibly rock-chinked post hole, or simply rock concentration on pit house floor

~ 130

100

120

85

not clear

Hand excavation (in Feature 24)

Prehistoric (BM II)

24B

Oval

Lens

Floor hearth

~ 140

50

50

30


Prehistoric (BM II)

25

Circular

Basin

Roasting pit

~ 100

100

110

70+

23 Machine scraping / hand trenching

Prehistoric (BM II)



Feat

ure

No.

Pl

an V

iew

Pr

ofile

Ty

pe /

Func

tion

O

rigin

Dep

th

(cm

bgs

)

Pe

rcen

t Ex

cava

ted

M

ax L

engt

h (c

m)

M

ax W

idth

(c

m)

Max

Dep

th /

Thic

knes

s (c

m)

D

isco

very

M

etho

d

C

ultu

ral

Affi

liatio

n

25A

Circular


~ 100

50

49

48


Prehistoric (BM II)

25B

Circular


~ 100

50

45

45


Prehistoric (BM II)

26

Circular


~ 100

~ 80

55+

55+

~ 10 Machine scraping / hand trenching

Prehistoric (BM II)

27

Circular

Basin

Roasting pit

~ 100

100

116

72+


Prehistoric (BM II)

28

Circular

Lens

Hearth

~ 100

0

35

35

< 1


29

Oval

Basin

Roasting pit

~ 100

100

150+

130 not recorded

Machine scraping / hand excavation

Prehistoric (BM II)

30

Irregular / amorphous

Lens

Charcoal scatter with hearth or small roasting pit

70–80

< 10?

575

400

~ 10

Machine scraping

Prehistoric (BM II)

31

Circular

Basin Roasting pit (with some oxidation)

~ 70

100

130

130

12


32

Oval

Basin

Roasting pit

~ 80

100

94

80


Prehistoric (BM II)

33

Irregular / amorphous

Lens

Charcoal scatter (possibly natural)

~ 150

< 10

242

33+

19

Machine scraping

Prehistoric (early Late Archaic)

34

Oval

Basin

Roasting or storage pit

~ 80

~ 80

150

150

35

BHT 11 / machine scraping / hand trenching

Prehistoric (BM II)


Figure 5.18. The Sandy Rise site (NM-H-51-55), plan and profiles of Features 10A–10C.

These features illustrate especially well the extensive disturbance from rodent burrowing.

Figure 5.19. The Sandy Rise site (NM-H-51-55), Feature 17A, below pit house Feature 17 in

the Basketmaker II midden. This feature stood out from the rest in that it exhibited no evidence of impact from rodent burrowing or other bioturbation.

Chapter 5 Sandy Rise Site 79 BASIN-SHAPED PIT FEATURES

As with most prehistoric sites, the most common feature category at Sandy Rise was the basin- shaped pit (n=31, 51.7% of all features at the site). These features ranged in size from 25–210 cm in maximum diameter (mean = 77.1 cm), and 4–35 cm in depth (mean = 13.1 cm). The diameter:depth/thickness ratio (a measure of profile morphology) was quite variable, ranging from 1.9 to 17.7, with a mean of 6.4. Most, if not all, of the pit features at Sandy Rise probably functioned as cooking or heating facilities and can be collectively referred to as "thermal pits." Thermal pits are often divided into "hearths" and "roasting pits" (see Railey et al. 2002:748– 749).

Hearths are thermal features used for space heating, heating of rocks for stone boiling or use in a roasting pit, and/or any cooking technique that does not involve covering with earth. Hearth cooking includes roasting of skewered foods directly over a fire, or grilling, smoking, or drying of food placed either directly on a flame or open bed of coals or on an elevated rack or spit. The key attribute of a hearth is that it is not covered with earth, and the fire or hot coals are allowed to burn in a largely oxidizing atmosphere. The degree of oxidization may vary within the hearth, especially in one involving a thick pile of coals, within which oxidation would be progressively reduced toward the base of the pit or pile. As a result, hearths tend to produce large quantities of ash and comparatively little charcoal (see Doleman 1997:164). Note that hearths can also be non- pit features, in which a fire is built directly on an unprepared surface, as was the case with some of the interior hearths in pit houses at NM-H-51-55 (the hearths in pit house Features 10D and 17A were of this type).

Roasting pits are earth ovens (also referred to as pit ovens or Dutch ovens) designed specifically for slow, long-term cooking. Pit roasting was a common cooking method among post- Pleistocene, pre-industrial societies the world over, and the prehistoric American Southwest was no exception. In a roasting pit, the food is typically wrapped in some type of vegetal matter (such as maize husks) and placed in the pit, along with heating elements (heated rocks, hot coals, and/or hot ash), then covered with earth. Water may also be introduced into the pit-cooking process by soaking the vegetal wrapping or pouring water into the pit through one or more holes in the earth covering, producing steam that helps cook the wrapped food. Ellis (1997) describes a wide range of pit-cooking techniques and configurations, some of which involve heated rock. When hot coals are used for the heating element (frequently in conjunction with heated rock), the reducing atmosphere maintained within a covered roasting pit results in significantly more charcoal and less ash than are produced in an open hearth (Doleman 1997:164). Upon completion of a cooking episode, roasting pits must be opened to remove the prepared food, thus disrupting and potentially removing the heating elements and charcoal, or at least those thermal materials (if any) covering the food. Because they are typically larger than hearths and their digging requires a greater initial energy investment, roasting pits are often used repeatedly. To facilitate reuse, roasting pits are frequently cleaned out. Doleman (1997) found that an experimental roasting pit produced abundant charcoal and heated-rock debris ("fire-cracked rock," or FCR) that needed to be cleaned out before the pit oven could be used again. Cleaned- out thermal materials are usually dumped on the surface next to the pit oven, and even after repeated, thorough cleanings, at least some of the removed charcoal and FCR may find its way back into the pit as "secondary" fill. Over time, FCR debris may accumulate both in abandoned

Chapter 5 Sandy Rise Site 80 pits and across an occupational surface, and this was indeed the case in the Basketmaker II midden at NM-H-51-55.

Cross-cultural observations and experimental studies suggest that roasting pits tend to be larger than hearths (see Bell and Castetter 1941; Castetter et al. 1938; Cushing 1920; Dering 1999; Doleman 1997; Wandsnider 1997). These studies suggest that roasting pits are large features with dimensions that vary from slightly less than a meter to several meters in length and 50 cm to a meter in depth. Elsewhere, 70 cm has been used as a general size threshold to distinguish hearths from roasting pits (Railey et al. 2002:748–749), although this should not be taken as a rigid, stand-alone measure for inferring the function of thermal pit features. Certain other considerations need to be accounted for as well. For example, the type of food being roasted would obviously make a difference; one or two rabbits would not require as large a roasting pit as would even portions of a deer or larger mammal. The type of meal event for which a roasting pit is employed would also matter—preparation of a feast involving several families might require a larger roasting pit than would a meal for a single family or similarly small number of mouths to feed.. At Sandy Rise, 19 basin-shaped pit features (61.3% of all such features) measured less than 70 cm in maximum observed dimension (Figure 5.20). Note that the size category with the most pits comprises features in the 36–70 cm range, features that would be classified as large hearths if the 70-cm size threshold is applied. Given that rabbits were an important food source by later preceramic times, some of the features in this size range were probably small roasting pits used to cook one or two rabbits, or other small food packages.

Feature 14A, one of the Basketmaker II pits in the 36–70 cm size range, retained an intact pavement of cooking stones at its base (Figure 5.21). This configuration suggests that this feature probably served as a roasting pit in which a pavement of hot rocks was placed beneath the food package(s), then left in place after the food was removed for consumption. Another possibility is that Feature 14A was an uncovered cooking or heating facility (and thus, technically, a hearth), although the heating function seems doubtful given that this feature was outside any of the recognizable structures at the site. Feature 31 was one of the large pit features (at 130 cm, it was presumably a roasting pit), but it exhibited some oxidization along a portion of its base (Figure 5.22), suggesting that at least some uncovered heating occurred within this pit. Feature 31 was somewhat complex in structure, with at least one small pit within the larger basin, and the oxidation occurred at the base and along the margins of this smaller pit.

Notably absent among the pit features at Sandy Rise were any bell-shaped storage facilities or other pits that were clearly used for storage. Such features are known at other early agricultural sites in New Mexico (see Woodbury and Zubrow 1979), and their absence here suggests that long-term storage was not one of the functions of this site, or that storage took place within pit structures or in aboveground facilities.

All of the features at NM-H-51-55 are discussed in detail below, under the site components in which they occurred.


Freq

uenc

y

18

16 14

12

10 8

6

4 2

0 0-35 36-70 71-105 106-140 141-175 176-210 211-245

Maximum Pit Length (cm) Figure 5.20. The Sandy Rise site (NM-H-51-55), size distribution of basin-shaped pit features.

Figure 5.21. The Sandy Rise site (NM-H-51-55), Feature 14A in the Basketmaker II midden.

This small pit contained a pavement of flat cooking stones at its base, seen in the excavated half of the feature in the foreground.

Chapter 5 Sandy Rise Site 82 Figure 5.22. The Sandy Rise site (NM-H-51-55), Feature 31, a large basin-shaped pit. The

image on the left shows the feature profile, including the smaller pit where the oxidation occurred; the image on the right is a close-up of some of the oxidation.

SITE COMPONENTS

The results of field investigations at the Sandy Rise site, and the analyses of the recovered materials, are organized here by the site’s four temporal components:

1) The early Late Archaic component, the earliest and most deeply buried at the site,

containing Features 7 and 33 2) The buried Basketmaker II (later Late Archaic) component, which contained by far the

most features and largest quantity of artifact debris at the site, and is the focus of this chapter

3) The Pueblo II component, which included Feature 3 (the small masonry structure), two small pits (Features 8 and 9) a short distance north of the structure, and surface artifact debris on the sand dune and surface ceramic sherds in the southern, non-dunal portion of the site

4) The surface lithic artifacts south of the sand dune, which may have included debris from multiple occupations of the site

The Pueblo II component was the southernmost of the four, although Features 8 and 9 overlapped (and overlay) the horizontal distribution of the Basketmaker II features. The early Late Archaic component was the northernmost, lying along (and below) the northern fringe of the Basketmaker II component. Figure 5.23 shows the horizontal and vertical relationships of the Pueblo II structure (Feature 3) and the Basketmaker II features.

Chapter 5 Sandy Rise Site 83 Figure 5.23. The Sandy Rise site (NM-H-51-55), oblique rendering and partial cutaway of the

northern portion of the sand dune, showing horizontal and vertical relationships between Feature 3 and the Basketmaker II component (contour interval 10 cm).

EARLY LATE ARCHAIC COMPONENT

This component (Figure 5.24) was discovered in 2006 during data recovery, when Feature 7 was uncovered in BHT 9 (see Figure 5.15). Wedged within stratified alluvium at a depth of 1.6 m below the present ground surface, Feature 7 was a small (65-cm diameter), basin-shaped pit (Figure 5.25). It had been disturbed by rodent burrowing and contained a dense concentration of charred plant remains. Two sediment samples were collected from this feature, one during the profile recording of BHT 9 and the other during hand excavation of the feature after the 1.6 m of overburden had been removed. The remainder of the feature was screened through 1/8-inch mesh. No durable artifacts were recovered from Feature 7.

When processed for flotation recovery, the second sediment sample yielded 30.7 g of undifferentiated saltbush/greasewood (Atriplex/Sarcobatus) charcoal and 3.4 g of saltbush/greasewood twigs, along with < 0.05 g of mixed burned seeds including goosefoot (Chenopodium) and unknown taxa. Sediment from this feature was also processed for recovery of pollen and phytoliths. These microbotanical remains included species native to the area, although they indicated that pine cones may have been burned in this feature (see Chapter 12). The charred saltbush/greasewood twigs from this feature were submitted for AMS radiocarbon analysis. This sample (Beta-222193) yielded a two-sigma calibration of 1720–1520 B.C. (see


: :) \ \\

\

Appendix B for full radiocarbon report). There were no diagnostic materials that would have allowed a better assessment, but this date is stratigraphically consistent with other site evidence.

(//······················· ······.·.. ········.·..

·······.....

\, .···········....

·•··.......................... ···•············••·······••···•···•········...

... e.- Fea.7

........ -

Right-of-Way -- Fence

•· ········.... ·············... Fea.33

·····•·····••···... ·········... ·····...

····... '····

. ' . ' ·•·········.·..•

•·······....\.... \...,\ ........

'······· ·····

...·.

)

..·.····•·

...················

.···

....///·/··

0 10m

Figure 5.24. The Sandy Rise site (NM-H-51-55), early Late Archaic features.

Chapter 5 Sandy Rise Site 85 Figure 5.25. The Sandy Rise site (NM-H-51-55), Feature 7, partially excavated. This early

Late Archaic pit feature was encountered 1.6 m below the present ground surface in BHT 9 (profile cut is south wall of trench). Charred scrub twigs from Feature 7 yielded a two-sigma, calibrated radiocarbon date of 1720–1520 B.C.

A second feature—Feature 33—was also assigned to this component, based on its proximity to Feature 7 and its similar (although slightly shallower) depth below the present ground surface. Feature 33 was exposed by machine scraping and consisted of a very amorphous, light scattering of charcoal with no associated staining. It is not clear if Feature 33 was of cultural or natural origin. If cultural, it may represent scattered charcoal from cooking activities (perhaps associated with nearby Feature 7), or the charred remains of a brush structure.

Judging by the stratigraphic context of Features 7 and 33, the early Late Archaic occupation at Sandy Rise occurred when flooding and alluvial sedimentation in this part of the site were still very active. It may have been that the main channel of the unnamed wash was located closer to the site at this time, or perhaps it was a braided channel that distributed fluvial sediments over a wide area. At any rate, the early Late Archaic occupation occurred on the edge of an active floodplain, and the occupation was thus probably a very brief one involving a limited range of activities. This inference is supported by the absence of lithic debris, burned rock, or other durable artifacts in the stratum containing this component. The charred plant remains recovered from Feature 7 suggest that seeds from goosefoot and perhaps other weedy taxa were collected and/or processed at this site, although the small amount of seeds could just as easily have been

Chapter 5 Sandy Rise Site 86 introduced into this feature by non-human agency. At any rate, these weedy plants were likely growing wild on the active floodplain surface, and these and other riparian resources would have attracted people to this fluvial microenvironment. Maize pollen was also identified in the sediment sample from this feature, but its significance remains unknown; this feature pre-dates the currently known arrival of maize in the northern Southwest, and it is possible that the maize pollen was vertically displaced from the overlying Basketmaker II midden, and introduced into Feature 7, by burrowing rodents.

BASKETMAKER II COMPONENT

Following the early Late Archaic presence at the site, there was an occupational hiatus that lasted for more than a millennium. The sand dune was actively forming during this interval. Sometime around the 400–200 B.C. time frame, people returned to the site and established a camp on the northern portion of the dune surface. The remains of this Basketmaker II (late Late Archaic) occupation at Sandy Rise were contained within Stratum II (and features that originated in this stratum), roughly 1 m below the present dune surface (Figure 5.26). This was the largest component of the site and reflected the most intensive occupation: it included 49 numbered features, 89.1 percent of the 55 documented prehistoric cultural features, and yielded the vast majority of durable artifacts recovered.

The occupational remains marking the Basketmaker II component covered approximately 879 m² of Stratum II and varied in density and character. Some areas exhibited distinctly dark staining, charcoal flecking, and/or higher numbers of burned rock and flaked stone debris than other areas. Dark-stained or charcoal-flecked areas were not always clearly bounded, and some of these were accorded feature numbers and others were not. Some of the dark-stained "patches" were spatially associated with pit houses, and they are discussed further below.

BASKETMAKER II PIT HOUSES

The remains of seven pit houses were discovered and excavated at the Sandy Rise site: Features 10D, 12A, 12B, 14E, 17, 18, and 24 (Figure 5.27 through Figure 5.35). The size of these structures ranged in maximum diameter from 1.9 to 4.9 m (mean 3.6 m), and in observed depth from 10 to 62 cm (mean 39.6 cm). The five largest pit houses (Features 12A, 12B, 14E, 17, and 24), averaging 4.11 m in maximum diameter, formed what is referred to here as the central group. Features 10D and 18 were smaller outliers, peripheral to the central group (to the south and north, respectively). Feature 18 was noticeably smaller and shallower than the rest of the structures. At only 1.8 m in diameter and 10 cm in pit depth, it resembled the small, dish-shaped Late Archaic pit structures that are common throughout much of the Southwest (Figure 5.33).


_·;.·...

.--------------... _ ',

Fea.18 Right-of-Way ..-- Fence

108\.......

... .

. . .

.

Key

EEB Excavation Units

Hand Trenches

e Pit House


c::::=l Backhoe Trench

. . .

_/ .//_./_ ..·.·······

.. .·...··

...·······

Surface Contour (50-cm interval)

0 10m

1"""""'1 --- -iiiiiiiiill"""""''

Figure 5.26. The Sandy Rise site (NM-H-51-55), Basketrnaker II features. The dashed red line shows the limit of the machine-scraped area.

Chapter 5 Sandy Rise Site 88 The other six pit houses at Sandy Rise were, in comparison to Feature 18, much more substantial structures; they were not only larger, but also deeper, and exhibited more-or-less definable breaks between their pit walls and floors. Moreover, several of the pit houses contained large, thin stone slabs in their fill. Feature 10D contained the most of these slabs, in the greatest density. Large slabs were also observed in Features 12A, 14E, 17, and 24, but not in Features 12B and 18. The function(s) of these slabs is unclear; all were randomly dumped in the structure fill. They may originally have been placed upright along the interior walls of the house pits (as is the case with some structures in the region dating from later periods), but if so, none of the slabs remained in their original positions. Perhaps the slabs (or at least some of them) were placed against the exterior of the superstructure, helping to stabilize the pit houses against the high winds that frequently occur in this area. It is also entirely possible that the slabs are unrelated to pit house construction at this site, and their presence in the house pits may simply reflect secondary deposition. At any rate, the precise function of these large slabs remains unclear.

Figure 5.27. Basketmaker II pit houses at the Sandy Rise site.


Figure 5.28. The Sandy Rise site (NM-H-51-55), pit house Feature 10D plan view. Note that

there were more stone slabs in this feature than are shown here.


Figure 5.29. The Sandy Rise site (NM-H-51-55), Feature 10D west-facing profile. Note the large slabs in the fill of the structure, and the "clean" sand filling much of the pit house basin. All soil colors are dry. The photo shows the structure's floor-surface hearth.


Figure 5.30. The Sandy Rise site (NM-H-51-55), Features 12A and 12B plan view. These were the two largest pit houses at the site.

Figure 5.31. The Sandy Rise site (NM-H-51-55), Features 12A and 12B south-facing profile.

Note the darker fill along the floor of each structure. All soil colors are dry.


Figure 5.32. The Sandy Rise site (NM-H-51-55), pit house Feature 17 plan view.


Figure 5.33. The Sandy Rise site (NM-H-51-55), pit house Feature 18 plan and profile. This pit house was distinctly smaller and shallower than the others at the site. Interestingly, though, it was the only pit house with a recognizable post hole (Feature 18A).


Figure 5.34. The Sandy Rise site (NM-H-51-55), pit house Feature 24 plan view.

Figure 5.35. The Sandy Rise site (NM-H-51-55), Feature 24 south-facing profile, along south wall of east-west hand trench.

Chapter 5 Sandy Rise Site 95 PIT HOUSE FLOOR HEARTHS AND OTHER INTERIOR FEATURES

Two types of interior hearths were found within the pit houses: (1) a simple surface hearth constructed directly on the pit house floor, and (2) a slightly more formal floor hearth set in a small, basin-shaped pit. Simple floor-surface hearths were present in Features 10D (Figure 5.36; see also Figure 5.29, above), 17, and 24, while basin-pit hearths were found in Features 12A, 12B, and 18 (Figure 5.37). Features 12A and 24 each contained two hearths, and in both cases the hearths were within a broader area of dark staining on the structure floor. Feature 12B-1 contained several manos and may have been a small storage pit rather than a hearth. No recognizable remains of a house-floor hearth were found in Feature 14E. In Features 12A, 12B, and 24—involving both of these floor-hearth types—a concentration of small slabs, unmodified rocks, and/or ground stone was associated with the hearth.

Figure 5.36. The Sandy Rise site (NM-H-51-55), pit house Feature 10D plan view, eastern

portion, showing the floor-surface hearth, Feature 10D-1.

Figure 5.37. The Sandy Rise site (NM-H-51-55), basin-shaped hearths in Basketmaker II pit

houses: left, plan view of Feature 12B-1; right, Feature 12A-1 (see Figure 5.30).

Chapter 5 Sandy Rise Site 96 PIT HOUSE FILL SEDIMENTS

The sediments that filled in the house pits provide some indication of post-abandonment processes at the site. As noted above, the variegated fill in most of the pit houses made them difficult to delineate in initial plan view, requiring hand trenching in some cases to locate the feature edges. A major reason for this is that most of the pit houses contained a substantial amount of “clean” sand that was often indistinguishable from Strata I and III, the culturally sterile dunal sands above and below the Basketmaker II midden. In most cases, the "clean" sand overlay a darker-stained matrix with abundant charcoal that extended down to the structure floor and was of uneven thickness both within and between pit houses. Sometimes the “clean” sand and darker-stained midden fill were partially interbedded, with some discontinuous dark staining in the upper, lighter-colored fill. In at least two cases (Features 10D and 17) the dark staining sloped up on the eastern side of the house pit and lapped up and over the pit edge to merge with an extramural midden stain. The same may have been the case with Feature 14E, though this is not entirely clear, as this pit house could not be delineated until after a round of machine scraping (and hand trenching) subsequent to the excavations of Features 10D and 17. Feature 18, the smallest and shallowest of the pit houses, was an exception to this general pattern, as its fill exhibited no internal stratification.

The character of the fill sediments in the pit houses suggests the following plausible scenario concerning depositional processes. During occupation of the pit structures, some organic sediments, charcoal flecks, and (in at least some cases) lithic debris may have accumulated on the structure floor. Upon abandonment, the superstructures may have burned (whether by design or not is unclear) and collapsed into the house pit, introducing the darker-stained sediments that mark the lower fill in most of the pit houses. In some cases the thickness of these lowermost strata suggests that the superstructures may have been at least partially covered with earth, with a high sand content.

At any rate, in at least two of the pit houses (Features 10D and 17, and possibly 14E as well), this initial stage of house-pit infilling deposited dark, charcoal-stained sediments that sloped up on the east side and to the upper surface of the house pit. Why this is the case is not entirely clear; Features 10D and 17 (and perhaps most or all of the other pit houses) may have had an entryway on the east side, opening up onto their associated extramural midden areas (see below). If so, these east entryways may have been extended and thus would have encompassed a higher volume of superstructure material relative to the rest of the superstructure. Insofar as this is true, post-abandonment collapse of the superstructure may have left a thicker deposit of dark, charcoal-filled sediments within the eastern portion of the house pit. Continued activities in the adjacent household midden areas, on the east side of the now-abandoned pit house, may have contributed to (or have been the primary cause of) the thicker deposits of dark-stained, charcoal- laden soil within the eastern portions of the house pits. Excavation of pit features into the pit house fill sediments may also account for some of this pattern, although no recognizable pit outlines were discerned in any of these cases.

After partial filling of the abandoned house pits by collapsed superstructures and, perhaps, midden deposition from continued activities nearby, most of the house pits began filling with eolian sand. In some cases, this eolian sand fill is "clean," that is, devoid of artifacts and charcoal (e.g., Features 10D and 17), but in other cases some charcoal flecking and at least occasional

Chapter 5 Sandy Rise Site 97 artifacts occurred within these otherwise non-stained sediments (e.g., Features 14E and 24). Feature 24 had perhaps the most complex and variegated fill, with a high density of artifacts and some exceptionally dark stained lenses in the upper portion of the house-pit fill. Feature 14E had a large metate in the fill, lying at an angle 17–30 cm above the structure floor, and a large, thin slab more than 30 cm above the floor (Figure 5.38). The presence of archaeological debris within the upper fill of Features 14E and 24, for example, suggests continued occupation of the site after these structures were abandoned. Such evidence may hint at an abandonment sequence among the excavated structures: i.e., the structures with midden debris in the upper portion of their fill— Features 14E and 24—were abandoned first, with continued occupation of one or more neighboring pit houses. On the other hand, the debris in the fill may simply reflect continued occupation at the site after all of the pit houses had been abandoned, involving structures that did not leave an archaeological trace. The radiocarbon dates (see below) do not provide any clear evidence to assess any of these data more critically. At any rate, the evidence from the pit houses suggests that the Sandy Rise site was occupied for an appreciable length of time—long enough for pit houses to be constructed, used, and abandoned, with continued occupation and deposition of artifacts and charcoal even after some abandoned house pits had filled with several decimeters of sediment.

Figure 5.38. The Sandy Rise site (NM-H-51-55), pit house Feature 14E south-facing profile.

Note the disturbed condition of the fill in the eastern portion of the pit house.

Chapter 5 Sandy Rise Site 98 BASKETMAKER II HOUSEHOLD MIDDENS

In backhoe trench profiles and on machine-scraped surfaces, it was clearly evident that dark staining of sediments, as well as density of artifacts and charcoal flecking, was highly uneven within the Basketmaker II midden (Stratum II). Some of the darker-stained areas were more clearly delineated than others, and some had very amorphous boundaries. During the excavations, it became evident that some of these areas (which typically also contained relatively high densities of burned rock and charcoal flecking) were spatially associated with pit houses. Even before this association was recognized, however, and before any pit house features had been positively identified, five of the stained areas were investigated with hand-excavation blocks designated Features 10, 11, 12, and 14 (see Data Recovery Activities, above). Adjacent to each of these blocks, one or more pit houses were eventually uncovered (Feature 10D with Feature 10, Feature 17 with Feature 11, Features 12A and 12B with Feature 12, and Feature 14E with Feature 14). A lightly stained area, designated Feature 16 and investigated with a trench and one 1 × 1–m unit only, turned out to be immediately east of pit house Feature 24.

Feature 30, an area with light charcoal flecking but no dark sediment staining on the southeast periphery of the Basketmaker II component, was not spatially associated with any houses. A single trench through this area uncovered no artifacts and no discernible pit features. Apparently Feature 30 was a locus where charcoal (perhaps from cleaned-out hearths and pit ovens) was deposited, either intentionally or incidentally.

Not all dark-stained areas observed were given feature designations or investigated with hand units. One especially dark stain uncovered southwest of Feature 17 and east of Feature 12A, during the second round of machine scraping, did not have clearly discernible boundaries at that point, and an attempt to define the boundaries with a second pass of the scraper completely removed the stain. This stain was clearly a thin sheet midden, similar to those investigated with hand excavation blocks and trenches elsewhere on the site.

The area between Feature 24 and Features 12A/12B was also heavily (but unevenly) stained with dark sediments and contained high artifact densities. This concentration of debris and organic material was obviously associated with the pit houses in the central feature area. However, not all of this area was included within formally defined features, and not all of it was investigated with hand-dug units.

Thus, as least four of the pit house middens exhibited an interesting spatial pattern in that they were situated on the east or southeast side of an adjacent pit house. Feature 10 extended east and southeast of the Feature 10D pit house, Feature 11 was southeast of adjacent pit house Feature 17, Feature 14 was on the east side of the Feature 14E pit house, and Feature 12 extended southeast of the largest pit house, Feature 12E. In the case of Features 10 and 14, extramural cooking pits were located within these middens, although no such pits were identified in Features 11 or 12. A lightly stained midden area (Feature 16) was immediately east of pit house Feature 24, although dark staining occurred adjacent to this structure on the south and west sides as well. Extramural pits also occurred between pit house Features 12A/12B and 14E. Still, in some cases at least—Features 10D and 17 in particular—the associated household midden was on the east and/or southeast side of the structure, suggesting the possibility of east- or southeast-facing

Chapter 5 Sandy Rise Site 99 entrances for these structures, with “yard” activities occurring primarily in an area beyond the structure doorway.

Intensive occupation within the central feature group probably occurred throughout most of the Basketmaker II time span at the site, and insofar as this is true, the archaeological remains here may reflect a palimpsest of activity areas whose spatial locations shifted over time. This inference is potentially supported by the mosaic of sediment coloration in this area, which made any feature definition difficult short of excavating hand trenches to obtain profile views. The stratigraphic disposition of Feature 14A, which was excavated into already-deposited midden and whose base did not even penetrate to the lighter-colored subsoil, also suggests intensive and prolonged occupation and activity within the central part of the Basketmaker II settlement. Pit house Features 10D, 17, and 18 were located closer to the periphery of the Basketmaker II settlement, but Features 17 and 18 had, at best, only very light middens associated with them, with low densities of artifact debris and no associated extramural features. On the other hand, Feature 10D had an associated sheet midden that was clearly delineated, contained several extramural pit features, and appeared to have resulted from a more discrete, relatively unmixed, shorter-duration occupation than the one that produced the middens in the central portion of the Basketmaker II settlement.

A stratigraphic profile through a portion of the Feature 10D pit house and its adjacent midden is shown in Figure 5.39. Figure 5.40 and Figure 5.41 show the extent of the Feature 10 midden in relation to the pit house, Feature 10D, the extramural features, and density of flaked stone and rock (mostly burned). Features 10A, 10B, and 10C may well have been roasting pits used by the occupants of the pit house, with the surrounding sheet midden resulting from household activities in the house’s “front yard.” Feature 23, a large roasting pit, was probably not contemporary with the Feature 10D pit house, as these two features abutted each other.

Figure 5.39. The Sandy Rise site (NM-H-51-55), north-facing profile showing sheet midden

extending eastward from pit house Feature 10D.

Chapter 5 Sandy Rise Site 100 Note also the high density peak of both flaked stone and rock within the pit house, most of which was deposited after the structure was abandoned. Whether this was material from the Feature 10D occupation that was “pushed” back into the house pit, debris from nearby activities that occurred after the pit house was abandoned, or both, is unknown.

Figure 5.40. The Sandy Rise site (NM-H-51-55), Feature 10 area showing flaked stone artifact

density (count/m2).

Chapter 5 Sandy Rise Site 101 Figure 5.41. The Sandy Rise site (NM-H-51-55), Feature 10 area showing rock density

(kg/m2).

Chapter 5 Sandy Rise Site 102 BASKETMAKER II EXTRAMURAL PITS

Extramural pits within the Basketmaker II settlement at Sandy Rise were, for the most part, shallow basins that probably served as hearths and roasting pits (Feature 34 was notably deeper than the rest, but still a basin-shaped pit). A detailed discussion of these features was presented above under Overview of Features.

Conspicuously absent within the Basketmaker II component at Sandy Rise were bell-shaped or cylindrical storage pits, or slab-lined storage cists and other pits (unless some of the slabs in the pit houses were from slab-lined pits that were dug into the pit house fill). Well-constructed storage pits are common at Late Archaic/Early Agricultural/Basketmaker II sites with evidence of agriculture in many parts of the Southwest (Huckell 1996; Woodbury and Zubrow 1979:52), and their absence at Sandy Rise is intriguing. It may be that maize and other foods were stored in facilities other than underground pits, or that foods were not stored here long term but were transported elsewhere. This seems unlikely, though, given that the Basketmaker II inhabitants were probably living at the site during at least some of the colder months, given the presence of floor hearths within the pit houses. It is possible that the sandy dune sediments were not well- suited to the excavation of bell-shaped pits, as the overhanging “necks” of such pits may have been prone to collapse, as the sandy matrix tends to be dry and loose at the surface. If so, then it is possible that bell-shaped storage pits are present nearby, but are located outside the US 491 right-of-way.

BASKETMAKER II MATERIALS RECOVERED

The data recovery excavations collected 7,002 lithic artifacts from the Basketmaker II component at Sandy Rise. Fewer floral and faunal remains were recovered.

BASKETMAKER II LITHIC ARTIFACTS

Typical of Archaic sites, flaked stone was, by far, the largest artifact class recovered from the Basketmaker II component. Ninety-seven percent (n=6,816) of the assemblage was flakes. Petrified wood appeared to be the only local source material and dominated the flaked stone assemblage from the Basketmaker II component. This material is scattered in low densities across the landscape, and its utilization required a dispersed acquisition strategy. This probably involved some initial reduction of petrified wood away from the site, with partially chipped items brought back for tool production and maintenance. This material tended to be very thoroughly reduced at the site; the vast majority of flakes were <0.05 g in weight and <2 cm in size, and very little cortex was present.

Nonlocal raw materials were rare in the flaked stone assemblage, accounting for only about 15 percent of the analyzed artifacts. The rarity of Narbona Pass chert was surprising, given that the source for this high-quality material is less than 12 miles (20 km) due west of the Sandy Rise site.

Also surprisingly, very few projectile points or point fragments (n=13) were present in the Sandy Rise flaked stone assemblage, and most of these were fragmentary. However, a variety of point styles were represented, including side-notched and leaf-shaped forms.

Chapter 5 Sandy Rise Site 103 Bifaces (and fragments thereof) also were not very numerous, numbering only 30 items. The dearth of projectile points and bifaces is intriguing, given that the debitage assemblage was dominated by small pieces. Hammerstones, used for flintknapping, shaping metates (by pecking), and other tasks, were also not very common (n=11).

Ground stone artifacts from the Basketmaker II component numbered 38. Fifty-five percent (n=21) were manos or mano fragments. All manos appeared to be of the “one-hand” form typical of Archaic times. Two basin metates (only one complete) and two slab metate fragments were also recovered. Chapter 8 provides more information and detailed analysis results for the lithic assemblage from this site.

BASKETMAKER II BOTANICAL REMAINS

The presence of maize, while not surprising, is nonetheless the most prominent finding within the Basketmaker II macrobotanical assemblage. Though not abundant, maize was rather ubiquitous, occurring in over half of the analyzed flotation samples. A variety of other wild plants, including goosefoot, amaranth, bugseed, winged pigweed, purslane, tansy mustard, beeweed, sunflower, dropseed, Indian ricegrass, and other grass seeds were also represented. Many of these plants would have thrived in disturbed soils such as cultivated fields and recent floodplain sediments in the nearby wash. Fuels in the assemblage included saltbush and/or greasewood, juniper, sage, piñon, cottonwood, corncobs, and corn stalks. The post hole in pit house Feature 18 was packed with juniper charcoal. Interestingly, piñon nuts were not identified in the flotation samples. More detailed information on the macrobotanical remains from this component is provided in Chapter 10.

Microfloral remains (pollen and phytoliths) from the Basketmaker II component essentially reflected the natural environment, although some maize pollen was identified in a sample from Feature 10D. The microfloral remains are described in Chapter 12.

BASKETMAKER II FAUNAL REMAINS AND BONE ARTIFACTS

Faunal remains were rare (n=199, including one piece of shell), fragmentary, and almost exclusively from small mammals such as rabbits and rodents, some of which were probably post- occupational intrusions. It appears that, in general, bone did not preserve well in the Basketmaker II midden sediments, although in some contexts (probably localized areas with comparatively favorable soil chemistry) some delicate bone elements and artifacts were preserved, including tiny bone ring beads and ring-bead preforms. The dearth of bones, including the complete lack of any medium-mammal and large-mammal elements, suggests that hunting large game was not an important activity associated with this site occupation.

The presence of beads and probable bead-manufacturing debris was a significant finding, providing evidence that the occupation of the site involved sufficient leisure time to engage in the production of ornamental objects. The complete analysis of faunal remains from this component is presented in Chapter 11.

BASKETMAKER II COMPONENT CHRONOLOGY

Eight radiocarbon dates were obtained for the Basketmaker II component, three in 2004 during the testing phase and five more following data recovery. Following standard procedure, the “old

Chapter 5 Sandy Rise Site 104 wood” problem was avoided by selecting only annuals or twigs for radiocarbon processing. As a result, all were small and were therefore analyzed by the AMS method. The results were exceptionally consistent (Table 5.3); the 2-sigma calibrated dates collectively span 410–180 B.C., while the 2-sigma ranges vary by only 20 years (410 and 390 B.C.) at the older end and by a maximum of 130 years (310 and 180 B.C.) at the younger end. Assuming that the Basketmaker II occupation occurred within a span of time that at least partially contained all of the 2-sigma calibrations, then we are looking at an 80-year period, 390–310 B.C. Still, the occupation could potentially span the maximum collective range of 410–180 B.C., or any number of years within this range. At any rate, the dates indicate a very narrow time frame for the Basketmaker II component—no more than 230 years and perhaps less than a century.

Table 5.3. The Sandy Rise Site (NM-H-51-55), Radiocarbon Dates from the Basketmaker II

Component

Beta No.

FS No.

Feature/ Context

Material

Measured Age (B.P.)

13C/12C Ratio

Conventional Age (B.P.)

2-Sigma Calibration

(B.C.)

193421

99*

Fea. 4 BHT 2

Saltbush/ greasewood

charcoal

2030±40

–11.8 o/oo

2250±40

390–200

193422

100*

BHT 1†


charcoal

2070±40

–11.6 o/oo

2290±40

400–350; 300

193445

101-A*

BHT 1†


charcoal

2060±40

–11.7 o/oo

2280±40

400–350; 310

222192

59 Fea. 13A

Maize

2120±40

–13.7 o/oo

2310±40 410–360; 280–240

222194

228

Fea. 24 maize cob fragment

2050±40

–10.9 o/oo

2280±40 400–350; 310–210

222195

249

Fea. 31


twigs

2010±40

–11.7o/oo

2230±40

390–190

222196 257 Fea. 24 Maize 1990±40 –10.7 o/oo 2220±40 390–180

222197

268

Fea. 12A-1

Mixed burned seeds

2100±40

–12.9 o/oo

2300±40

410–360; 290–230

Note: All samples were processed using the AMS method *FS numbers from the testing phase †See Figure 5.14 for sample location

The narrow time horizon of the Basketmaker II component provides a potentially good chronometric index for the diagnostic artifacts recovered, although exceedingly few notched projectile points (and no stemmed points) were found during the investigations.

BASKETMAKER II COMPONENT LOCAL ADAPTATION AND SEASONALITY

In terms of the local environmental factors that attracted people to this particular site, there are two obvious ones. First, the sand dune presented a well-drained surface that would have been quite attractive to human occupation. During the exceptionally rainy summer of 2006, water drained quite rapidly through the dune sands, which dried out quickly. The consistence of the

Chapter 5 Sandy Rise Site 105 dune sediments made it a relatively easy matrix into which to dig pits and pit houses (although bell-shaped pits may have been a problem—see above).

Second, the unnamed wash north of the site, with a small alluvial floodplain that extended to the north end of the dune, probably provided a reliable water source (at least seasonally) and a higher biotic diversity than the surrounding desert basin floor. It is entirely possible that the active channel of this wash was closer to the site during the Basketmaker II occupation than at present, perhaps just north of the dune edge. The site occupants may have taken advantage of the runoff emanating across this alluvial surface to cultivate maize and other crops. Garden plots and fields could have been located at different elevations above the stream bed of the nearby wash to divide the risk between potential drought years, when crops planted on lower floodplain surfaces would have been less at risk, and devastating floods during particularly wet years, when crops planted in more elevated areas could have survived. The prevailing climatic regime in this area at 400–200 B.C. may also have made the elevation zone that includes the Sandy Rise site an optimal one for farming, with precipitation levels and growing-season length both sufficient for successfully growing and harvesting maize.

If maize was indeed cultivated on or near the site during the Basketmaker II occupation, then at least some of the site inhabitants were residing here during the warmer months of the year. Note, however, that no maize pollen or phytoliths were identified in the samples from this site, indicating that maize may not have been grown in the immediate vicinity. Moreover, the presence of substantial pit houses—virtually all of which had one or more interior hearths— suggests that this settlement was occupied during at least some of the colder months of the year. It seems likely that the site’s Basketmaker II inhabitants occupied this base camp during multiple seasons, and some may have stayed here year-round. Changes in the seasonal use of the site over time, and variation in site-occupation seasonality from year to year, also cannot be ruled out.

Any further discussion of the settlement system(s) that the Basketmaker II component at Sandy Rise was a part of is necessarily limited, given that the investigations present but an isolated “window” into the local area’s archaeological remains. It seems likely that at least some of the site’s occupants moved seasonally into the higher-elevation zones to the west, for harvesting of piñon and other resources not available on the desert floor. (However, no piñon macrofloral remains were present in flotation samples, although piñon pollen was present.) At any rate, further archaeological investigations beyond the site would be required to flesh out the detail necessary for a fuller discussion of settlement patterns in this area.

BASKETMAKER II COMPONENT IN REGIONAL CONTEXT (WITH A CONTRIBUTION BY DENNIS GILPIN)

Looking beyond its local context, the Basketmaker II occupation at Sandy Rise was part of a broader pattern of developments occurring throughout the San Juan Basin and beyond. This occupation occurred at a time when maize-based food production was becoming well-established across the Colorado Plateau (see Huckell 1997). The intensity of agricultural production varied among different groups, however, and hunting, gathering, foraging, and logistical mobility remained important aspects of subsistence economies and settlement systems. There is an appreciable degree of variability in terms of Basketmaker II site types in the San Juan Basin,

Chapter 5 Sandy Rise Site 106 with some sites containing structure remains and others consisting of lithic scatters with or without pit features.

Perhaps the site most similar to Sandy Rise is NM-H-26-56, excavated as part of the Navajo Indian Irrigation project on Gallegos Mesa (Vogler et al. 1983). NM-H-26-56 is approximately 40 miles (64 km) northeast of the Sandy Rise site, and like Sandy Rise is situated on a sand dune and adjacent to a wash that probably provided fresh water and a narrow riparian zone. The Basketmaker II component at NM-H-26-56 included the remains of four pit houses. These structures were, on average, much larger and deeper than those at Sandy Rise, even when Feature 18 (the unusually small, shallow structure at Sandy Rise) is excluded (Table 5.4; Figure 5.42). In addition to being larger and deeper, the pit houses at NM-H-26-56 contained multiple post holes and, in general, more interior features, including small storage pits, a stone slab deflector in one of the structures, and a clay-collared hearth in another.

Table 5.4. Comparison of Pit House Measurements, the Sandy Rise Site (NM-H-52-55) and

NM-H-26-56

Pit House Measurements (m)

NM-H-26-56

Sandy Rise, All Pit

Houses

Sandy Rise, Excluding Feature 18

Maximum Diameter

Average 5.23 3.60 3.88 Range 4.0–7.2 1.9–4.9 2.75–4.9 Standard Deviation 1.41 0.99 0.71

Depth

Average 1.04 0.40 0.45 Range 0.6–1.7 0.1–0.62 0.3–0.62 Standard Deviation 0.47 0.18 0.13

Figure 5.42. Scatterplot showing maximum diameter by depth, for pit houses from the Sandy

Rise site and NM-H-26-56.

Chapter 5 Sandy Rise Site 107 Like Sandy Rise, NM-H-26-56 also yielded bone beads and bead-manufacturing debris, and had a low incidence of maize (actually lower than at Sandy Rise) and no large storage pits. Radiocarbon dates suggest that the Basketmaker II component at NM-H-26-56 was clearly later than the one at Sandy Rise, dating primarily within the first two centuries A.D.

Looking to the south, excavated Basketmaker II sites either lack structure remains or contain structures that appear to be much less substantial architecturally than those at Sandy Rise and NM-H-26-56. Nine Basketmaker II sites are reported in the southwest San Juan Basin. Two of these (one at Tohatchi and one near Tohlakai) are located on or near streams, but the other seven are on ridges. One is on the ridge between Black Creek and Figueredo Wash, five are on the ridge between Black Creek and Dye Brush Wash, and one is on the ridge between Grey Ridge Wash and Window Rock Wash. Excavations have been conducted at seven of these sites: LA 6448 (Kearns 1996a), NM-Q-18-123/LA 32964 (Lakatos 1998), NM-Q-18-130/LA 104106 (Lakatos 1998), LA 116035 (Lakatos 1998), NM-Q-19-66 (Kilburn 2007), NM-Q-14-47 (Goodman 2007), and NM-Q-12-71 (Gilpin 1998).

Site LA 6448, excavated during the El Paso Natural Gas Pipeline Project (Kearns 1996a:4–10, Fig. 4.18, Fig. 4.19), comprised 53 storage pits, 3 hearths, 2 other pits, 2 charcoal stains, and 12 burials. Maize was recovered from 32 features. The site also contained jewelry made from imported stone, Pacific coast shell, juniper seeds, and puccoon (Lithospermum sp.) seeds. Because no dwellings were identified, Kearns regarded LA 6448 as a storage site, not a habitation, but the large amount of storage and the presence of so many burials suggest that temporary structures might have been used.

Lakatos (1998) excavated three Basketmaker II components. Since no chronometric data had been received at the time he wrote his preliminary report, he provisionally dated the earliest component at Site NM-Q-18-123 (LA 32964) to the Late Archaic/Early Basketmaker II period. This component consisted of 13 features, including a midden, thermal features, storage structures, and multiple metate caches. Imported lithic raw materials included Zuni Mountain chert, Narbona Pass chert, and obsidian. Although smaller than Site LA 6448, Site NM-Q-18- 123 had a similar range of features, and, specifically, had storage features but no dwellings. At Site NM-Q-18-130 (LA 104106), two features were provisionally dated to the Basketmaker II period; at Site LA 116035, one feature was provisionally dated to the Basketmaker II period.

One site (NM-Q-19-66), and possibly a second site (NM-Q-14-47), investigated during the N9(2- 1) data recovery project (Gilpin et al. 2007) provide evidence of the Basketmaker II occupation of that project area. A suite of five radiocarbon dates indicates that Site NM-Q-19-66 was occupied minimally from about 365 to 170 B.C. The only chronometric date from Site NM-Q- 14-47 was an obsidian hydration date of A.D. 83±154.

The Basketmaker II component at NM-Q-19-66 consisted of a possible burned structure, four pits with burning, and three other pits. A suite of five radiocarbon dates from this site ranged from 755 B.C. to A.D. 245, but 365–170 B.C. is the minimum period that incorporates the latest beginning date and the earliest ending date, which would place it in the Figueredo phase, defined by Kearns. Two pieces of obsidian from the site were dated by obsidian hydration analysis to 445±174 B.C. and A.D. 271±147. Maize was recovered from four of the features (from three of eight flotation samples and as one macrobotanical sample). Seven (17.9%) of 39 flaked stone

Chapter 5 Sandy Rise Site 108 artifacts were made of nonlocal stone, including obsidian (three artifacts), Owl Rock chert (two artifacts), and Cerro Pedernal chert (two artifacts), indicating trade with or travel to the Chinle Valley of Arizona and the Chama River valley and Jemez Mountains of northern New Mexico. Ground stone from the site included two stone balls, two unmodified concretions, one modified concretion, one jar lid (probably from the Pueblo II period artifact scatter on the site), and one ground stone fragment of indeterminate function. The nonutilitarian nature of almost all of the ground stone from the site suggests gaming or ritual activities. Items such as concretions, fossils, rocks with unusual shapes, and nonutilitarian ground stone are not common on Archaic sites, but seem to have become common by Basketmaker II times (see Gilpin 1989:127–128). Speaking of the Formative period on the Hopi Mesas, Woodbury (1954 [1968]:188) reported that concretions have been associated with ceremonial use, although Adams (1979:106) documented their occurrence in storage and habitation contexts, as well as ceremonial ones.

Site NM-Q-12-71 (LA 115740) was a multi-component site with Basketmaker II and Pueblo II– III (A.D. 1050–1125) components. SWCA excavated two pits with burning at this site, both of which had originally been excavated into bedrock shale and later covered by Quaternary eolian deposits. Feature 1, which was radiocarbon dated to 2140±60 B.P. (calibrated 370–5 B.C.), contained charcoal from juniper, cliffrose, and saltbush; pollen indicated that maize, Cheno-ams, grasses, and possibly Mormon tea had been processed in or near this feature. Feature 2 contained juniper and pine charcoal, 11 charred juniper berries, and 6 fragments of charred PET fruity tissue; pollen indicated that Cheno-ams and grass seeds were processed at this location. The 3 flaked stone artifacts, 28 plainware sherds, 34 whiteware sherds, and 1 redware sherd collected from this site during testing all dated to the Pueblo II–III component.

Another Basketmaker II site in the general area that should be mentioned is LA 88526, at the mouth of Pinetree Canyon near Standing Rock. This site was excavated during the Transwestern Pipeline project (Vierra 1994b) and contained three structures, each of which was half excavated. The oldest, which dated from about 900 to 800 B.C., was a shallow, circular structure containing five basin-shaped pits in the half that was excavated. The other two structures dated from about 500 B.C. to A.D. 100 and were also circular and shallow, one containing four basin-shaped pits in the half that was excavated and the other containing 12. Maize pollen, kernels, and cupules were recovered from the site, as well as squash pollen.

Based on the growing number of excavations at Basketmaker II sites in the western San Juan Basin, it appears that sites of this period show a variety of pit-house forms. Substantial pit houses similar to those at Sandy Rise and NM-H-26-56 do not seem to be present (or remain as-yet- undiscovered) in the southwest San Juan Basin. Here, structures seem to be primarily of the shallow, dish-shaped forms so common in Archaic sites across many parts of the Southwest. Further north, though, along the Chuska Front and toward the Farmington area, architectural developments tell a somewhat different story. Based on the findings at Sandy Rise and NM-H- 26-56, by at least the second half of the first millennium B.C., and continuing into the final centuries of the period, pit houses were becoming larger, deeper, and more substantial architecturally, and contained a more diverse and complex array of interior features. The architectural developments exemplified by these two sites seem to establish the trend that continued with the even larger, deeper, and more substantial pit houses of the Basketmaker III and Pueblo I periods.

Chapter 5 Sandy Rise Site 109 The patterns evident in these various sites also raise intriguing questions concerning maize-based food production and the organization of storage. Although foraging and collecting of wild plant foods remained important everywhere, maize cultivation was widespread by the first millennium B.C. The absence of large storage pits at the two sites with substantial pit houses (Sandy Rise and NM-H-26-56) and the presence of so many storage pits with no structural remains at LA 6448 suggest the possibility that, in some cases at least, foods may have been stored some distance away from the actual base camp. The desire to conceal storage may have been especially important for seasonally mobile populations (see Blitz 1993; DeBoer 1988). The association of burials with storage pits at LA 6448 may also relate to an increasing sense of territoriality at this time. The use of burials as territorial "markers" may seem incompatible with the concealment strategy suggested by the associated storage pits. Yet the burials themselves may have had no visible, aboveground markers, and if that is so, a concealment strategy may have been associated with the graves as well. Insofar as this is true, the burial ground may have helped reinforce a link between those related to the buried deceased and the territory in which they lived, died, and were buried, with no attempt to visually "signal" this link to any "outsiders." At any rate, across the Southwest, the numbers of Late Archaic and Basketmaker II sites are vastly greater than those of earlier periods, suggesting a level of population growth that may have impinged on mobility options and prompted local groups to more sharply define—and defend—their territories. The paucity of Narbona Pass chert in the Sandy Rise lithic assemblage, and the complete absence of obsidian, may indicate increasing restrictions on mobility and increased costs of trade and exchange at this time (the Olivella shell bead from the site notwithstanding).

PUEBLO II COMPONENT

In contrast to the Basketmaker II component at Sandy Rise, the Pueblo II presence was a very small, low-intensity occupation (Figure 5.43). Of the archaeological remains marking the Pueblo II component, the most prominent was Feature 3, a very small masonry structure that was first investigated during the testing phase and completely excavated during data recovery. Scattered surface ceramics at the site dated from the Pueblo II period, and two small extramural features (Features 8 and 9) were uncovered during machine scraping.

PUEBLO II MASONRY STRUCTURE (FEATURE 3)

Feature 3 was a very small masonry structure that was partially exposed at the surface in the central portion of the sand dune. It was first recorded during the testing phase in 2004, and a single 1 × 1–m unit was excavated into the feature at that time (see Figure 5.5). During data recovery, the feature was completely excavated within a local grid of 1 × 1–m units (Figure 5.44; Figure 5.45).

Feature 3 measured only 2.3 × 2.0 m in its outside dimensions, and contained no interior features or recognizable floor, nor any dark ash, charcoal, or organic staining. The lower-course stones indicated three masonry walls, with no apparent intact wall on the west side. Whether or not the structure was actually open on this side, or if the gap was the result of post-abandonment scavenging for building material, remains unclear. The entire feature was contained within the loose-to-friable upper sands of the stabilized dune. This small structure was built using the local sandstone, the vast majority of which was highly shattered, having fractured primarily along bedding planes, and it therefore broke easily into smaller pieces during excavation and removal.

Chapter 5 Sandy Rise Site 110 A few stones along the base course of the structure walls were larger and more solid than the otherwise poor-quality building stone. Feature 3 contained 688.25 kg (1,517.3 pounds) of rock, most of which was wall fall that had collapsed outward from the north and south walls (see Figure 5.45). Scattered traces of decomposed mortar were observed during the excavations (Figure 5.46), and it seems likely the structure walls were less rock and more mortar in the upper courses. In any event, Feature 3 was not an especially sound structure.

Very few artifacts were encountered during the Feature 3 excavations. Only 29 ceramic sherds were recovered, three of them from the testing-phase excavation unit. All of these sherds were from Pueblo II pottery types (see below). Twenty-one lithic artifacts were recovered, one of which was a core of Narbona Pass chert.

Feature 3 was obviously a rather frail structure, and its precise function remains unknown. Its minute size and lack of interior features and ash/organic staining would seem to preclude its use as a field house where people regularly stayed overnight. Most likely it was used as a small shelter for respite from inclement weather, or a temporary storage facility for agricultural products, tools, or provisions for people working in nearby agricultural fields. Another possibility is that Feature 3 served as a sort of “rest stop” for people traveling through this part of the Chacoan world.


.•.······ ··....

...

•

..................... .···· ······· ····.·....

·······.·....

·•···••·•··••·•·.••.

Right-of-Way --- Fence

·······....

···········-...

···········.·..

····... ·

············.·•...

\•..........•.•....•••..

•"····-···········-....••.. ·····... ··.·..

·•···•·····•···.·•·.••..•.•.......

·········.·...

··..

···.·...

··..

···.-... \ ... (?

··.·.,..._ .Fea9 (\

Key EEB Excavation Units

Hand Trenches

e Pit House


c:=::J Backhoe Trench

Surface Contour (50-cm inteNal)

Fea.•8

Fea.3

.............

Figure 5.43. The Sandy Rise site (NM-H-51-55), Pueblo II features.


Figure 5.44. The Sandy Rise site (NM-H-51-55), Feature 3, looking north.


Figure 5.45. The Sandy Rise site (NM-H-51-55), Feature 3: left, distribution of mapped-in rocks; right, density distribution of all

rocks by weight.


Figure 5.46. The Sandy Rise site (NM-H-51-55), remnant mortar within Feature 3. PUEBLO II EXTRAMURAL PITS

Two extramural basin-shaped pits were uncovered within 20 cm of the present-day ground surface during mechanical scraping: Feature 8, approximately 7 m (23 feet) north of Feature 3; and Feature 9, nearly 6 m (20 feet) northeast of Feature 8. Feature 8 was a well-defined basin- shaped pit (Figure 5.47). Feature 9, however, was either a badly disturbed small pit or a rodent disturbance containing redeposited fill from an already-destroyed feature.

Figure 5.47. The Sandy Rise site (NM-H-51-55), Feature 8, a Pueblo II pit, looking south. This

feature yielded maize (which was radiocarbon dated) and other charred plant remains, but no ceramics or other artifacts.

Chapter 5 Sandy Rise Site 115 Although no ceramics or other diagnostic artifacts were recovered from either of these features, their near-surface context suggested that they might be associated with Feature 3, or at least date from a post-Archaic time frame, and charred maize from Feature 8 was submitted for radiocarbon processing. This sample returned a 2-sigma calibrated radiocarbon date of A.D. 890–1030, consistent with a Pueblo II temporal affiliation. Feature 9 was not chronometrically dated but is included here because of its shallow depth below the surface, essentially the same as that of Features 3 and 8, and it was thus assumed to be a Pueblo II feature as well.

Besides the charred maize, Feature 8 also yielded charred wood and twigs from desert scrub (Atriplex/Sarcobatus) and mixed burned seeds. The sediment sample from Feature 9 was not flotation-processed, given the severe rodent disturbance evident within this feature.

PUEBLO II MATERIALS RECOVERED

Durable artifacts associated with the Pueblo II component included both sherds and lithic debris. The ceramics from the site, most of which were collected from the surface during the testing phase, were all of Pueblo II affiliation. The lithic artifacts included flaked stone debris from Feature 3, which by association was dated to Pueblo II, but also likely included at least some of the surface-collected artifacts (including some ground stone items), as well as artifacts from non- feature excavation units. Because the surface-collected lithic artifacts may have included some debris from the site's Archaic occupation(s), and because the previous analysis of these materials suggested a mixed assemblage (Archaic and Pueblo), the surface lithic artifacts are discussed separately below.

PUEBLO II CERAMICS (by Janet Hagopian)

During the testing phase, 159 ceramic sherds were recovered from NM-H-51-55 (Table 5.5), 154 (96.9%) of which were from the controlled surface collection. The remaining five were from test excavation units.

Data recovery at Sandy Rise yielded 29 sherds, representing Cibola White Ware, Chuska White Ware, and Chuska Gray Ware (Table 5.6). All of the sherds were from jars, and all were collected from excavation units. Puerco Black-on-white and Naschitti Black-on-white were the diagnostic sherds used for the mean date calculations. The mean ceramic date for Sandy Rise is A.D. 1019, the mean ceramic date range is A.D. 984–1053, and the minimum use date is A.D. 1000. If the diagnostic sherds recovered from testing efforts are included in the calculations (five each of Naschitti and Brimhall Black-on-white), the dates are slightly earlier: the mean ceramic date, including the sherds from testing, is A.D. 972, the mean ceramic date range is A.D. 940– 1004, and the minimum use date is A.D. 1000. The presence of plain, clapboard, and indented corrugated grayware vessels supports these dates, which indicate that this site was occupied during the Pueblo II period.


Table 5.5. The Sandy Rise Site (NM-H-51-55), Ceramics Collected during the Testing Phase

Ceramic Ware/Type Total Indeterminate whiteware 1 All Indeterminates 1 Indeterminate painted Cibola White Ware 1 All Cibola White Ware 1 Indeterminate Chuska White Ware 17 Indeterminate mineral-painted Chuska White Ware 18 Indeterminate carbon-painted Chuska White Ware 1 Naschitti Black-on-white 5 Brimhall Black-on-white 5 All Chuska White Ware 46 Indeterminate Tusayan Gray Ware 4 Indeterminate plain Tusayan Gray Ware 3 Indeterminate clapboard corrugated wide Tusayan Gray Ware 1 Kana-a Gray 1 All Tusayan Gray Ware 9 Indeterminate Cibola Gray Ware 1 All Cibola Gray Ware 1 Indeterminate Chuska Gray Ware 10 Indeterminate plain Chuska Gray Ware 33 Indeterminate wide clapboard Chuska Gray Ware 11 Indeterminate narrow clapboard Chuska Gray Ware 14 Indeterminate indented corrugated Chuska Gray Ware 30 Blue Shale Corrugated 3 All Chuska Gray Ware 101 Total 159

Table 5.6. The Sandy Rise Site (NM-H-51-55), Ceramics Collected during the Data Recovery Phase

Ceramic Ware/Type NM-H-51-55 Puerco Black-on-white 1 All Cibola White Ware 1 Indeterminate PII–PIII mineral-painted Chuska White Ware 1 Naschitti Black-on-white 1 All Chuska White Ware 2 Indeterminate Chuska Gray Ware 6 Indeterminate plain Chuska Gray Ware 1 Indeterminate corrugated Chuska Gray Ware 1 Indeterminate narrow clapboard Chuska Gray Ware 7 Indeterminate indented corrugated Chuska Gray Ware 10 Captain Tom Corrugated 1 All Chuska Gray Ware 26 Total 29

Chapter 5 Sandy Rise Site 117 PUEBLO II LITHIC ARTIFACTS

Feature 3 yielded only 21 lithic artifacts: 12 flakes, 2 metate fragments, 2 “other” stones, and one specimen each of core, core tool, biface, hammerstone fragment, and mano. The small quantity of lithic materials is consistent with the ephemeral use of this structure, although the variety of lithic artifact types suggests the possibility of multiple tasks associated with the use of Feature 3. Interestingly, one small core of Narbona Pass chert—a material moved to Chaco Canyon in large quantities during Pueblo II times (Cameron 2001)—was recovered from Feature 3. No lithic artifacts were present in Features 8 or 9. Many of the surface lithic artifacts were also likely associated with the Pueblo II presence at this site.

PUEBLO II BOTANICAL REMAINS

Because only very occasional, small flecks of charcoal were encountered during the excavation of Feature 3, no flotation samples were processed for this feature. A microbotanical sample from Feature 3 yielded only the remains of wild plant pollen and phytoliths. A flotation sample was processed for Feature 8, however, and it yielded charred maize cob and kernel fragments, seeds from wild plants (goosefoot, bugseed, winged pigweed, grass, and saltbush fruits), and saltbush/ greasewood charcoal (see Chapter 10). Maize pollen was found in a sediment sample from Feature 3, but no maize phytoliths were identified (see Chapter 12).

PUEBLO II COMPONENT CHRONOLOGY

Ceramics from Feature 3 suggest a Pueblo II occupation in the tenth and/or eleventh centuries A.D. This interpretation is supported by the maize from Feature 8, which yielded a calibrated 2- sigma AMS radiocarbon date of A.D. 890–1030 (see Appendix B).

PUEBLO II COMPONENT IN LOCAL AND REGIONAL CONTEXT

The Pueblo II presence at the Sandy Rise site was a very ephemeral one, involving one or a few very short occupations. What attracted the Pueblo II people to this site was probably the same combination of factors that brought the Basketmaker II occupants here—a well-drained sand dune surface highly suited to human occupation, and a nearby drainage and its associated outwash floodplain that may have been suited to maize agriculture. The Feature 3 masonry structure was nothing more than a temporary shelter and/or storage facility. The absence of maize pollen or phytoliths argues against the use of this structure for storing harvested maize. Perhaps it was used as sort of “rest stop” for persons traveling between Chacoan great house communities along the Chuska Front.

The tiny Pueblo II presence at Sandy Rise was part of a broad, extensive use of the landscape during the Pueblo II period. This was the time of the Chacoan phenomenon, and Pueblo II sites seem to occur “everywhere.” A string of Pueblo II communities was constructed along the Chuska Valley, and Sandy Rise was situated roughly halfway between two of these site clusters, Naschitti to the south and Skunk Springs to the north (Dykeman 2003:91–92).

Chapter 5 Sandy Rise Site 118 SURFACE COMPONENT

Collection of surface artifacts at the Sandy Rise site was carried out in 2004 during the testing phase. The surface component is treated separately here for two reasons. First, the surface artifacts at Sandy Rise covered a much larger area than the excavated cultural features. Second, the surface artifacts were most likely a combination of Archaic and Pueblo occupation debris. Figure 5.48, Figure 5.49, and Figure 5.50 show the distribution of all surface artifacts, surface ceramic artifacts, and surface lithic artifacts, respectively.

These maps show that overall surface artifact density at this site was very low, totaling only 154 sherds and 77 lithic artifacts. A distinctive “peak” of ceramic sherds in the southern portion of the site may represent one or more “pot drops” at this locality. The lithic artifacts show multiple density peaks, with the highest peak occurring on the sand dune in the northern portion of the site. This highest lithic density peak is probably made up of Pueblo II materials, as it is located in the area of Features 3, 8, and 9, and the Basketmaker II component was deeply buried in this area.

As discussed above, all of the ceramics at this site—including the surface sherds—are attributable to the Pueblo II period, and some or all were probably associated with the occupation episode(s) that left the three Pueblo II features. Analysis of the surface lithic artifacts, on the other hand, suggested that these materials were probably a mix from the Archaic and Pueblo occupations (Lundquist 2004). The “Archaic” portion of this mixed assemblage should be restricted primarily or wholly to the southern part of the site, as Archaic tradition remains were deeply buried within and under the sand dune in the north part of the site. Given the absence of diagnostic lithic artifacts on the surface, it is impossible to say whether the surface “Archaic” artifacts were associated with the buried Archaic components in the northern portion of the site.

SITE SUMMARY

The Sandy Rise site was, by far, the most productive of the five sites investigated during this project. The excavations revealed a site with a complex geomorphic history and a stratified succession of three components—early Late Archaic, Basketmaker II, and Pueblo II—in and beneath the sand dune in the northern portion of the site. In the southern portion of the site, surface materials occurred as a palimpsest on a surface that was previously eroded down to the Cretaceous bedrock. Within the site, the stratigraphically buried Basketmaker II midden was, by far, the most substantial and archaeologically rich of the three identified components. This component, buried by up to a meter of eolian sediments in the sand dune, was completely uncovered by machine scraping, and 54 features were excavated. Seven of those features were the remains of pit structures, ranging in diameter from less than 2 m to nearly 5 m. Most of the structures had one or more large stone slabs in their fill, the use of which remains unknown, but they seemed to be architectural elements. Pit house floors were unprepared, natural earthen surfaces, and interior hearths were informal, either flat charcoal stains or shallow basins. Household middens were associated with most of the pit houses, and four of these were investigated with blocks of hand units. Besides these sheet middens, extramural features consisted mostly of basin-shaped pits that were probably hearth and pit ovens.


Meters 0 5 10 20 30

- 0.15 - 0.2 Fence 0.2 <

l - I Site Boundary

- Search Radius 10 meters ------

S[NVII

WON Jro ,twlAl CCC ONS\i lANTS

A

Artfiacts/Meter

c::J o - 0.1 c:J o.1 - 0.15

Right-of-Way

Artifacts Density N

Figure 5.48. The Sandy Rise site (NM-H-51-55), density map, all surface artifacts.


Meters 0 5 10 20 30

- 0.1 - 0.15 Fence - - I 0.15 < l Site Boundary

Search Radius 10 meters ------

S[NVI IO

WN Jro ,twlAl CCC ONS\i lANTS

A

Ceramics/Meter

c::J o - o.o5 c:J o.o5-0.1

Right-of-Way

Ceramic Density N

Figure 5.49. The Sandy Rise site (NM-H-51-55), density map, surface ceramics.


Meters 0 5 10 20 30

- 0.05-0.1 Fence 0.1 <

l - I Site Boundary

- Search Radius 10 meters ------

S[NVI IO

WN Jro ,twlAl CCC ONS\i lANTS

A

Lithics/Meter

c::J o-0.025

Do.o25- o.o5

Right-of-Way

Lithic Density N

Figure 5.50. The Sandy Rise site (NM-H-51-55), density map, surface lithic artifacts.

Chapter 5 Sandy Rise Site 122 The occupants of this site gathered pieces of petrified wood on the surrounding landscape and fabricated a wide range of flaked stone tools from this material. Although occurring locally, petrified wood was scattered across the landscape, with no known concentrated sources or “quarries,” and so its utilization required an extensive pattern of procurement, with the finer grades selected for stone tool manufacture. As a result, it was rather thoroughly reduced by the site occupants, who left thousands of flakes that were mostly small, lightweight, and lacking cortex. Nonlocal materials were conspicuous by their rarity, including Narbona Pass chert, a high-quality material whose source is less than 12 miles (20 km) west of the Sandy Rise site. Also rare were projectile points, suggesting that warfare and hunting of larger game were not important activities for the Basketmaker II occupants of the site, but the presence of ground stone milling implements and abundant burned rock testify to the importance of plant-food processing.

Although not abundant, charred maize was present in more than half of the analyzed flotation samples from the Basketmaker II component, along with a variety of wild plants. The findings suggest that, while gathering and foraging were still important activities, low-level food production based on maize was a crucial component of the subsistence economy. Interestingly, little maize pollen and no maize phytoliths were identified in analyzed sediment samples, suggesting that maize was probably grown some distance from the site. Faunal remains were rare and apparently did not preserve well in the sand-dune sediments. Many of the recovered animal bones probably represented the remains of burrowers who tunneled into the sand dune long after the Basketmaker II abandonment of the site, although some probably did represent subsistence remains associated with this component. Tiny bone ring beads and bead-manufacturing debris suggested leisure-time activities typical of a base camp.

Seven radiocarbon samples from the Basketmaker II component returned dates that were all very consistent, pinning down the age of this occupation to the interval 400–200 B.C. During the first millennium B.C. and into the first centuries of the following millennium, effective precipitation levels and seasonal patterns were apparently sufficient for successful maize production. Basketmaker II populations across the San Juan Basin were engaged in low-level, maize-based food production, while still engaging in hunting, gathering, and foraging to a substantial degree. In the southwestern corner of the San Juan Basin, several excavations have unveiled an intriguing variety of Basketmaker II sites. Substantial pit houses do not seem to have been part of the structural repertoire in that area, but one site contained numerous storage pits. Interestingly, storage pits were absent at Sandy Rise, and at NM-H-26-56, a late Basketmaker II site (dating from the early first millennium A.D.) that contained remains of even larger and more substantial pit houses. These patterns suggest the possibility that these still-mobile groups may have stored maize and other dry goods in pits located away from the main base camps, perhaps to conceal these stores from potential competitors and enemies.

The other two components at Sandy Rise were much less substantial, and represented brief and low-intensity occupations of the site. The early Late Archaic component was discovered as a result of backhoe trenching, and two features were uncovered by machine scraping. One of these, Feature 7, was a small basin pit that contained a high density of charred plant remains. No maize or other cultigens were present, but a radiocarbon sample consisting of charred greasewood/ saltbush twigs returned a calibrated radiocarbon date of 1720–1520 B.C. The other early Late Archaic feature was an amorphous charcoal scatter near Feature 7. No stone artifacts were present in these features.

Chapter 5 Sandy Rise Site 123 Marking the Pueblo II occupation at Sandy Rise was a scatter of surface sherds that spanned nearly the full length of the site, and a small masonry structure and two extramural pit features on the sand dune. The data recovery investigations focused on the excavation of the structure, Feature 3. This was a tiny structure, constructed from poor-quality, easily fractured sandstone and mortar. No interior features or ash or organic staining were present, and only very occasional flecks of charcoal were encountered during the excavations. No maize pollen or phytoliths were identified in the analyzed sediment sample from Feature 3, suggesting that it probably was not used to store harvested corn, even temporarily. Only a light scatter of sherds and lithic artifacts was found in Feature 3, although a variety of stone artifact types was present, including a core of Narbona Pass chert, large quantities of which were moved to Chaco Canyon during the Pueblo II period. Sandy Rise is located roughly halfway between two of several Chacoan communities strung along the Chuska front. It may have served as a sort of “rest stop” shelter for individuals traveling through this part of the Chacoan world, perhaps by individuals transporting Narbona Pass chert, construction timbers, or other materials down from the Chuska Mountains.

The two extramural features were small pits uncovered just below the dune surface by the machine scraper. Neither of these features contained durable artifacts, although one yielded charred plant remains from a flotation sample, including corn that was submitted for radiocarbon analysis and returned a calibrated date falling in the Pueblo II period.

RECOMMENDATIONS

As a result of data recovery investigations at the Sandy Rise site, a considerable amount of data was collected, and the proposed project will have no effect on known cultural resources within the US 491 right-of-way. It is distinctly possible, however, that buried archaeological remains are present in alluvial deposits that extend north of the known site limit. Monitoring by a professional archaeologist should be carried out during construction to determine whether such remains are present, and if any are found, to mitigate the effects of the construction on these resources. At least one feature is present on the surface beyond the right-of-way fence, and buried archaeological remains may extend outside the right-of-way as well. Accordingly, any future ground-disturbing activities, covered by appropriate regulations, should be preceded by preparation and execution of a data recovery plan.

CHAPTER 6 HISTORIC NAVAJO SITES (NM-H-46-55 & NM-H-46-62)

Jim A. Railey, Adam Sullins, F. Michael O’Hara, III, Mindy Bonine, and Cherie Walth

Two historic Navajo sites, NM-H-46-55 and NM-H-46-62, were investigated as part of this data recovery project. NM-H-46-55 had the poorly preserved remains of a stone residential hogan and several coal/ash-pile features, as well as a concentration of prehistoric sherds. The site yielded a large quantity of historic artifacts and debris, including items in situ and a central feature on the hogan floor. NM-H-46-62 contained the aboveground remains of a hogan that was much better preserved than the structure at NM-H-45-55, but virtually no artifacts, no packed floor surface, and no interior features were encountered here. Excavation into a bread-oven feature at NM-H- 46-62 also did not yield any artifacts or staining. Other features identified at NM-H-46-62 during the survey and testing phases proved to be natural carbonaceous stains and rock outcrops.

NM-H-46-55

County: San Juan Elevation: 5,553 feet Landowner: Navajo Nation Tribal Trust Navajo Chapter: Newcomb Cultural Affiliation and Age: Historic Navajo (A.D. 1920s–1938) Site Type: Habitation Size: 2,976 m² NRHP Eligibility Recommendation: Eligible

SITE DESCRIPTION

NM-H-46-55 (Figure 6.1) was a historic Navajo habitation site with the partial remains of a stone hogan foundation and four associated ash piles. In addition, a surface concentration of prehistoric sherds was discovered in the center of the site during SWCA's testing work. The site measured approximately 68 × 50 m (223 × 164 feet), with an area of 2,976 m2 (0.74 acre). NM-H-46-55 was north of Newcomb, New Mexico, near Captain Tom Wash, on a floodplain of sandy alluvium with numerous coppice dunes. Vegetation included saltbush, rabbitbrush, Russian thistle, and a variety of grasses and forbs. Five archaeological features had been recorded at this site, although one located outside of the right-of-way appeared to have been removed during construction of an access road to a nearby church.

Chapter 6 Historic Navajo Sites 125

Figure 6.1. NM-H-46-55, Feature 1, establishing a grid (looking northeast). PREVIOUS INVESTIGATIONS

This site was first recorded as LA 7300 by a survey for a power line corridor (Wilson 1973). It was then re-recorded as LA 14895 during a survey for construction of a new corridor for US 666 (Condon and Koczan 1977), and ethnohistoric data were collected during a later phase of that project (Swadesh 1981). The site was subsequently revisited during the NNDOT survey for the present US 491 project (Walkenhorst and John 2003:219–220). At that time it was described as consisting of a stone hogan ring and three piles of coal ash approximately 100 m (328 feet) north of Captain Tom Wash (Figure 6.2). The ash piles were described as several meters across and 1 m high. The only artifacts noted were historic glass and historic Pueblo pottery. Ethnohistoric data indicated that the hogan was built in the 1920s by Jim John on land that he had acquired jointly with Clyde Beal and Hosteen Grayhair. The three men grew hay and alfalfa in irrigated fields north of the site. The site was abandoned in 1938 when Mr. John moved to Two Grey Hills (Swadesh 1981:118).

SWCA undertook archaeological testing at NM-H-46-55 in 2004. The testing effort included mapping of the entire site with a total station, recording of surface artifacts, collection of selected artifacts from the surface, and excavation of one 1 × 1–m hand excavation unit (TU 1) in one of the ash piles (Feature 3). The testing investigations discovered an additional ash-pile feature at the site, Feature 5, south of the hogan remains (Figure 6.3), and a soil probe test was conducted in each of the two ash piles within the right-of-way (Features 2 and 5).


I

Plan Map for Sites NM H-46-55/LA 14895 (Adapted from C011don 1976)

MN o,_r

.110m

SURVEY CORRIDOR

legend: · lb. Site datum -•- Site boundary

_a Hogan depression :[lJj Ash/trash pile

- - - Two track US HWY 49.1/666

1t Fence llne



I .

'

I

Feature

t '

I

l I l l

\

\

f t t l

,, ... --*.r --... ,' f \

,',' Feature 2- \

J II * I

I Feature 1 I

I I I

I I I I \

us 491

''' lf* \

t 3 \

I t Feature 5

' t &

', \ ,.--N-- M H-46-55---T--es ..t_ing-, '"..... \ _

Legend N \

& Datum .A_ · ':Site Boundary w ye - Feature s \

- Prehistoric Sherd Concentration \ OJIJ Berm

I' I

Feature 4

100

·-++-· Proposed Slope Limit ?.,'1:!,f;;,b:, --------..J---l..--loos *-"?<Fence - Pavement Edge

O.Sm contour 0 Meters 20

Driveway

Figure 6.3. NM-H-46-55 testing map.



NM-H-46-55 is on the floodplain of Captain Tom Wash, and the soils are primarily alluvial in origin, with some eolian sediment. Captain Tom Wash is approximately 100 m (328 feet) to the south, and geomorphological observations of drainages of similar size in the area indicate that overbank deposition was common prior to the entrenchment of the drainage (see Railey 2004). Several stabilized coppice dunes are present within the site boundaries, and the ash piles that were noted in the survey report as up to 1 m in height (Features 2 and 3) are actually thin cultural deposits mantling the tops of coppice dunes. A 30-cm-deep soil auger test in the center of the hogan ring revealed loose eolian sand (Condon and Koczan 1977:13). Data recovery activities documented the sediments as consisting of loose, eolian sand grading to a more compacted, brown (7.5YR5/3, dry) sandy loam, interspersed with occasional sandstone cobbles. Below this layering is a dark yellowish brown (10YR4/4, moist) loam that appears to be of alluvial origin. No archaeological remains were encountered in this underlying alluvium. The prehistoric sherds on the surface suggested the possibility that subsurface prehistoric features might be present at the site, but this was not confirmed during data recovery.

DATA RECOVERY

Walkenhorst and John (2003:279) concluded that the site had research potential, and SWCA's testing findings supported this assessment. Because the proposed highway construction project will impact this site, a data recovery strategy was devised and implemented (Figure 6.4).

SWCA carried out data recovery activities at the site between June and August 2006. The fieldwork began with documentation of surface artifacts within the highway right-of-way. Pieces of rusted metal that had no potential for identification were recorded but not collected. Also, during data recovery only one prehistoric sherd was visible on the surface within the area of the ceramic surface concentration that was recorded (but not collected) during the testing phase; only one other prehistoric sherd was located and collected from the surface. All surface artifacts were point-plotted using a sub-meter GPS unit. Meanwhile, a local 8 × 8–m grid of 16 excavation units (2 × 2 m) was laid out over Feature 1, and all of these units were eventually excavated to or below the floor level of the structure. A single 2 × 2–m unit was excavated within Feature 2, one of the ash piles. Although the data recovery plan called for a 2 × 2–m unit to be excavated within Feature 5, a soil probe within this ash stain revealed no subsurface archaeological remains, and no hand unit was placed here (although the surface artifacts within this feature were collected). Machine excavation within the prehistoric sherd concentration proceeded directly to scraping, as it was judged that scraping would better confirm the presence or absence of subsurface features than would the proposed backhoe trench. The scraping did not uncover any additional features.


t of Feature 1

t

'

c=J

Full hand excavation

-- .t- -- .... t ' ''I

us I'

12-m machine trench, machine scrape if any features are encountered

491 I I I

Featur

f f t

' I

'I I

'' 2'X2 m Test Units in Features 2 and 5

''' NM-H-46-55 Legend N

· Datum w

'·.Site Boundary 5

- Feature - Prehistoric Sherd

Concentration Machine Scrape Backhoe Trench

[1J] Berm ·-+ --· Proposed Slope Limit Fence -Pavement Edge

O.Sm Contour

I I I

'' ........ .... _

'• I'

\,' --'\ Feature 4

100

0 Meters 20

SWCA lN YitO-tM(I\IIA(0J4SUl,AJoiTS

Driveway

I t

Figure 6.4. NM-H-46-55, proposed data recovery activities.


FEATURES

The five features recorded at NM-H-46-55 were the hogan (Feature 1) and four associated ash piles (Features 2–5) (Table 6.1). A previously unrecorded surface concentration of prehistoric sherds in a 10 × 5–m area was identified during the testing phase but was not assigned a feature number because there was no associated staining. Eleven sherds were recorded within this concentration: 6 plain Chuska Gray Ware, 3 Chuska Gray Ware obliterated corrugated, 1 Puerco Black-on-white, and 1 indeterminate sand-tempered grayware. Three isolated prehistoric sherds were identified elsewhere on the site surface: 2 unpainted sherds of Cibola White Ware and 1 sherd of Chuska Gray Ware indented corrugated.

Table 6.1. NM-H-46-55, Feature Data

Feature No. Feature Type Dimensions 1 stone hogan foundation (ts4 beehooghan7) 6.2 × 5.8 m 2 ash pile ([eeshch'iih nehekaah) 7.5 × 7.5 m 3 ash pile ([eeshch'iih nehekaah) 6.5 × 6.5 m 4 ash pile ([eeshch'iih nehekaah) 5 × 5 m 5 ash pile ([eeshch'iih nehekaah) 10 × 8 m

HOGAN REMAINS (FEATURE 1)

Feature 1 was the foundation for a stone hogan (ts4 beehooghan7). The feature was partially covered by a very thin layer of eolian sand but was visible on the surface as a discontinuous alignment of rocks with associated historical metal and glass (Figure 6.5; Figure 6.6). The exposed surface debris covered an area of 6.2 × 5.8 m (20.3 × 19.0 feet). The north and east walls, or portions thereof, were clearly distinguishable before excavation, and the northeast corner suggested that the structure was hexagonal or octagonal in shape. A gap in the east wall suggested a possible entrance. The south wall was not clearly discernible, but a few scattered rocks on and beneath the surface were along its likely alignment. The west wall was also not easily discerned, although a discontinuous scatter of stones here suggested its location as well.

The entryways of Navajo hogans are traditionally oriented toward the east or northeast (Jett and Spencer 1981:17–18). The interiors of the structures are traditionally divided into different areas based on gender or honorific criteria. The north side of the hogan, n1hooksj7 ]ts7['ah, is the female side, where women’s activities take place and the items used in women’s activities are stored. The south side, sh1di'11hj7 ]ts7['ah, is the male side, where men’s activities take place and the items used in men’s activities are stored. The rear, 'e'e'ahj7 ]ts7['ah, is the place of honor in front of the mask recess, jish bin1st['ah, where ceremonial bundles (jish), Y4'ii bicheii masks, or other ceremonial items would be stored (Jett and Spencer 1981:22–23). Excavation of the entire hogan allowed SWCA to test assumptions about the traditional division of space.

Ethnohistoric data indicate that Jim John built this hogan in the 1920s and occupied the site with his family until 1938, when he moved to Two Grey Hills. The hogan was subsequently salvaged for construction materials, leaving nothing but the lower courses of the masonry foundation (Swadesh 1981:118). A set of two incised tracks caused by heavy machinery was discovered during excavation, suggesting that a portion of the hogan had been mechanically impacted following salvaging activities (Figure 6.7). The tracks ran north-south, parallel to the highway.

Chapter 6 Historic Navajo Sites 131 Some remaining architectural stones within the tracks had been displaced by the mechanical disturbance. It appeared that the only remaining intact portion of the hogan's foundation prior to data recovery was in the northeastern part of the structure.

Figure 6.5. NM-H-46-55, Feature 1, pre-excavation, looking south.

Figure 6.6. NM-H-46-55, Feature 1, post-excavation, looking south. The structure was overlaid with a grid of sixteen 2 × 2–m units to establish horizontal spatial control during excavation. Some of these units were then subdivided into four 1 × 1–m units. Each of the 2 × 2–m units was mapped using a transit, and the relative elevations were recorded. All units were excavated in 10-cm levels and screened through 1/8-inch mesh. Shovels, trowels, and brushes were used during excavation. Excavation was initiated by removing the loose sand

Chapter 6 Historic NaYajo Sites 132

..

-.._ r - -

0

from the north half of Units 10 and 11 to locate the floor of the hogan. The floor was encmmtered 5-20 ern below ground surface, where flat-lying artifacts, compacted sediment, and an oxidized charcoal stain (Feature 1A) were encountered. A frying pan was present 60 ern west of Feature 1A (Figure 6.7; Figure 6.8, see also Figure 6.6).

33LP Fragment

can opener key ,

metal

i snuff can

. .

brown stain fTOm botllecap

.·::::.- c:han:oal -'

ash

\ na\·:···_.·."-:· \ inetal -- -0

flying pan

ash 0

metal

.........0.

can key on floor metal

0'"@ ! 0 "-Compac:tad sediment w/ rust

0

Bulldoze tracks

N

P<"b Rocks

Figure 6.7. NM-H-46-55, Feature 1 excavation block plan view.

Chapter 6 Historic Navajo Sites 133 Figure 6.8. NM-H-46-55, Feature 1 excavation block. The bright, oxidized stain is Feature

1A (partly excavated); the frying pan on the hogan floor is visible at the bottom right. Units 1–4, at the south margin of the excavation block, were excavated to help determine where the southern edge of the feature lay. While this portion of the feature had likely been disturbed by mechanical processes and its associated architectural stones had likely been scavenged, the excavation determined the probable location of the hogan’s south wall, as evidenced by differential compaction of floor and non-floor sediments.

Feature 1A was a highly oxidized central thermal feature within the hogan. The feature was circular to oval in plan view and measured 96 × 86 cm. In profile, the feature was basin-shaped and had a maximum depth of 15 cm (Figure 6.9; Figure 6.10). In the center of the top of the feature (at the level of the hogan floor), a white (5YR 8/1, dry) ash deposit was encountered. Underlying the ash layer was an intensely oxidized zone that was mostly dark red (2.5YR 4/8 dry), with reddish brown (2.5YR 4/3, dry) along a portion of the feature's perimeter. Feature 1A likely marked the former location of a metal barrel used as a central heating stove for the structure. Repeated use and intense heat (from burning coal) resulted in the layer of ash on the hogan floor at the base of the stove and the intensively oxidized sub-floor matrix below. The size and shape of Feature 1A were consistent with this inference. Many twentieth-century hogans made use of barrels as central heating fixtures (Timothy Antonio, personal communication 2006; Nabakov and Easton 1989:337), and it is likely that the stove incorporated a vent pipe that would have extended vertically through the hogan’s roof. The barrel and vent pipe were probably removed—along with architectural stones—when the site was scavenged for materials. A snuff can, numerous metal shoe eyelets, a round lid for a metal or cardboard can (another snuff can?), nail and tack fragments, an aluminum button, and about 30 aluminum grommets were found in

Chapter 6 Historic Navajo Sites 134 association with Feature 1A. Much of the coal dumped in the other features at this site was probably burned in this stove, and the frying pan 60 cm to the west was probably used on it.

Figure 6.9. NM-H-46-55, Feature 1A cross section, looking south Figure 6.10. NM-H-46-55, Feature 1A profile close-up, looking south. Note traces of ash

deposit at top and intensely oxidized sub-floor matrix below.

Chapter 6 Historic Navajo Sites 135 Artifacts dating within the last 30 to 40 years were discovered in the first level of many of the Feature 1 excavation units. These artifacts may have been associated with activities or debris from nearby US 491, or they may have been deposited during occasional reuse of the structure. Artifacts that were likely most closely associated with the original occupation of the hogan were found in Level 2 of each of the units. Most were glass or metal, and all appeared to be typical household remains. Building materials, such as flat window glass and metal fasteners (nails, screws, etc.), were recovered, and domestic utility items such as a metal frying pan, an enamel- coated bucket, tin-can fragments, glass containers (including canning jars), and part of a possible tablecloth were also present. Several clothing items, including buttons, fabric fragments, and a belt, were also part of the assemblage. Interesting medicinal items recovered from Feature 1 included a bottle of toothache drops and a Vicks “VapoRub” jar. However, very few ceramic artifacts were present, and all were soft paste or bone china, which is unusual given that generally several varieties of ceramic vessels (earthenware, stoneware, etc.) were used in the average household, and all would have equal potential to be broken or discarded.

A brief analysis of the distribution of artifacts within the excavation units at Feature 1 did not reveal any patterns that might hint at specific activity areas based on gender, or any specific activities areas at all within the hogan walls or between the inside and outside of the hogan. Artifacts that could be grouped into related activities were found scattered throughout the excavation units, and fragments that might be part of the same vessel or bottle were scattered around in different areas (e.g., the blue “VapoRub” jar). Artifact fragments were even found scattered across different features, as in the pieces of a pair of sunglasses that were recovered from both Features 1 and 2. Given the sparse, scattered nature of the artifact assemblage in Feature 1, post-depositional impacts, including the salvage of building materials and bulldozing of at least part of the site, may have permanently altered any clearly defined artifact patterning.

"ASH PILES" (FEATURES 2, 3, 4, AND 5)

Features 2, 3, 4, and 5 were all ash piles ([eeshch'iih nehekaah), located northeast, east, southeast, and south of the hogan, respectively (see Figure 6.4). Features 2, 3, and 4 were identified when the site was originally recorded, and Feature 5 was identified during the testing phase of the project. Feature 4 was outside the right-of-way and appeared to have been completely removed by the grading of an access road to a church. According to the survey report, it was a mounded feature 5 m (16 feet) in diameter. The mounded ash stain features were thought to be thick, potentially stratified ash piles, similar to others investigated elsewhere on the Navajo Nation (see Gilpin 1993). However, excavations demonstrated that Features 2 and 3, at least, were rather thin middens deposited on natural coppice dunes.

Feature 2 This feature, 16 m (52.5 feet) northeast of the hogan, was the second largest of the ash stains, at 7.5 m (24.6 feet) in diameter. Glass, metal, ceramic, leather, rubber, plastic, and bone artifacts were recorded on the surface of this feature during the testing phase (Table 6.2). The bone was in small fragments, and much of it was calcined. During data recovery, a 2 × 2–m unit was hand excavated from the top of the feature (Figure 6.11) to a maximum depth of 20 cm. A shovel test was excavated an additional 15 cm along the north wall to better document the feature's stratigraphy. The excavated levels were screened through 1/8-inch mesh.

Chapter 6 Historic Navajo Sites 136 Table 6.2. NM-H-46-55, Feature 2, Surface Artifacts Recorded during Testing

Artifact Class Count Bone 42 Calcined bone 10 Hand-painted porcelain (underglaze) 1 Soft-top pull-tab can 1 Can fragments 3 Brown glass 46 Clear glass 27 Green glass 1 Window glass 1 Natural (light green) glass crown finish 5 Leather 1 Unidentified cast metal 1 Galvanized metal tub 1 Wire 3 Wire nail 8 Crown cap 1 Sheet-metal strap 1 Metal fragments 21 Riveted buttons 2 Plastic 2 Gasket 1 Rubber shoe heel 1 Corncob 1 Total 181

Figure 6.11. NM-H-45-55, Feature 2, looking south. The 2 × 2–m unit is being laid out on the top of the feature. The dark-colored debris on the surface is mostly coal clinkers.

Chapter 6 Historic Navajo Sites 137 Hand excavation into Feature 2 revealed shallow but well-stratified deposits overlying the coppice dune sediments. The upper part of the feature fill consisted of layers and lenses of densely packed coal clinkers and other cultural debris, interbedded with eolian sand (Figure 6.12; Figure 6.13). Below these interbedded strata was a solid, 4-cm-thick layer of dried livestock feces (probably sheep droppings), and below this was another 4-cm-thick layer of feces that resembled cattle manure, although it could have been sheep droppings that were compacted by wetting and trampling. This lower layer of feces was sandwiched between thin (<1 cm) laminae of fine silt, which could have been manure that was completely decomposed from reaction to intense saturation with uric acid. Below the lowermost silt lamina were the natural coppice dune sediments.

Figure 6.12. NM-H-46-55, Feature 2, stratigraphic profile of north wall of Unit 17.

Figure 6.13. NM-H-46-55, Feature 2, portion of the Unit 17 north wall profile.

Chapter 6 Historic Navajo Sites 138 Following excavation of the 2 × 2–m unit in Feature 2, 20 auger tests were excavated around the feature to determine whether the underlying layers of livestock manure extended beyond the margins of the coal-clinker midden. None of these augers revealed any subsurface cultural deposits, and the surface manifestation of Feature 2 apparently marked its full horizontal extent.

The stratigraphy within Feature 2 suggested that the low coppice dune was initially used as a livestock (most likely sheep) enclosure, probably a holding pen or lamb pen (dibé yázhí bighan). Lamb pens are small structures that “serve to confine and to shelter newly delivered lambs, especially in bad weather, and to keep ewes who reject their offspring together with their lambs” (Jett and Spencer 1981:163). They may be constructed of brush, rocks, or vertical or horizontal logs or planks. Jett and Spencer (1981:163) note that lamb pens “sometimes have excavated floors,” unlike Feature 2, which was directly on the coppice dune. Still, Timothy Antonio, a Navajo member of the SWCA excavation team, reported that he has seen lamb pens on low dunes and hilltops elsewhere on the Navajo Nation. During the data recovery excavation in the summer of 2006, heavy rains left standing water on the site's surface, and the elevation of Feature 2 above the surrounding site area may have made the dune an attractive spot for constructing a lamb pen.

Following its use as a livestock pen, the mound was used as a dump for coal clinkers and other domestic debris. It is likely that the debris was deposited primarily in the colder months, and assuming that each layer/lens of this debris represented a single season, then the clinker-midden deposit covered a three-year time span. If this inference is true, the intervening layers of eolian sand probably represented deposition during the warmer (mostly spring) months of the year.

Feature 3 Feature 3 was 18 m (59 feet) east of the hogan and was 6.5 m (21.3 feet) in diameter (Figure 6.14). Glass, metal, ceramic, rubber, plastic, enamelware, and bone artifacts were found on the surface (Table 6.3). The bone was in small fragments and much of it was calcined. Two refitting sherds of historic pottery and two pieces of plastic jewelry were collected. Interesting metal artifacts included a pair of scissors, pieces of an alarm clock, a harmonica plate, and a cast-iron hook or handle. The only temporally diagnostic artifact was a clear glass bottle base with a Hazel-Atlas Glass Company mark indicating manufacture between 1920 and 1965.

The subsurface of Feature 3 was investigated during the testing phase with a unit placed in the center of the feature and excavated in four 10-cm levels. All excavated fill was screened through 1/4-inch mesh. No further excavation of this feature was carried out during data recovery.

The Level 1 fill from the test unit was all ashy sand with coal clinkers and some wood charcoal. Items recovered from Level 1 were 39 faunal remains, 4 glass shards, 107 pieces of metal, 10 piñon shell fragments, and 1 squash or pumpkin seed. The top 2–5 cm of the Level 2 fill consisted of ashy sand with coal clinkers and some wood charcoal, becoming sterile sand in the bottom half of the level. In all, 17 faunal remains, 56 glass shards, 3 piñon shell fragments, and 1 squash or pumpkin seed fragment were recovered from Level 2. The fill from Levels 3 and 4 was also sand, but some artifacts were recovered, including 14 pieces of metal and 3 faunal remains from Level 3 and 7 pieces of metal and 2 faunal remains from Level 4.

Chapter 6 Historic Navajo Sites 139 Figure 6.14. NM-H-46-55, Feature 3, looking northwest. Test Unit 1 (backfilled) is visible on

top of the midden-covered dune. As the fill in the test unit was otherwise sterile, the artifacts likely fell in from the upper sidewalls of the unit, which were slumping in because of the loose consistence of the sandy matrix. The test unit demonstrated that the Feature 3 mound was not an accumulation of cultural material but a pre-existing coppice dune covered by 12–15 cm of cultural deposits.

Feature 5 Feature 5, discovered during the testing phase, was the southernmost feature at the site, 20 m (66 feet) south of the hogan. The feature measured 10 × 8 m and consisted of a thin scatter of coal ash and clinkers, some wood charcoal, and associated historical artifacts. The assemblage was recovered and fully analyzed during data recovery and included glass, metal, leather, and bone (Table 6.4).

Unlike Features 2 and 3, Feature 5 was on a deflated surface (Figure 6.15). Although the data recovery plan called for placement of an excavation unit in Feature 5, a soil probe test in the center of the feature demonstrated that it was a surface manifestation only, with no subsurface deposits. Accordingly, no excavation unit was placed here.

Chapter 6 Historic Navajo Sites 140 Table 6.3. NM-H-46-55, Feature 3, Artifacts Recorded on the Surface during Testing

Artifact Class Count Bone 3 Calcined bone 25 Chuska Gray Ware indented corrugated sherd 1 Historic sherds 2 Sanitary can 2 Soft-top pull-tab can 1 Slide-on lid 1 Key and key strip 1 Can fragments 3 Brown glass 11 Clear glass 36 Green glass 4 White milk glass 3 Natural (light green) glass 15 Window glass 3 Brown glass bottle base (74) 1 Clear glass bottle base (Owens scar) 1 Clear glass bottle base (Hellman’s Blue Ribbon) 1 Clear glass bottle base (Hazel-Atlas Glass Company) 1 Brown glass crown finish 1 Clear glass finish 2 Clear canning jar finish 2 Cast metal hook or handle 1 Cast metal cap 1 Indeterminate cast metal 1 Enamelware bowl 1 Scissors 1 Clock parts 3 Harmonica plate 1 Wire 4 Wire nail 6 Fence staple 1 Sheet metal 3 Stove pipe 1 Metal fragments 6 Blue plastic triangle 1 Red plastic bead 1 Black plastic 2 Rubber shoe heel 1 Quartz crystal 1 Total 156

Chapter 6 Historic Navajo Sites 141 Table 6.4. NM-H-46-55, Feature 5, Artifacts Recorded on the Surface during Testing

Artifact Class Number Bone 1 Spot hole-in-top can 1 Clear glass 6 Clear glass with ridges (Nehi?) 4 Leather 1 Wire 1 Yellow plastic 1 Total 15

Figure 6.15. NM-H-46-55, Feature 5, following clearing of scrub that was growing in the

feature (looking south). Unlike Features 2 and 3, Feature 5 was not on a dune and contained only a thin surface scatter of debris, with no subsurface deposits.

MATERIALS RECOVERED

HISTORIC ARTIFACTS

Bottle Glass Complete glass bottles are somewhat rare in archaeological contexts. Most often only parts of these artifacts are found, and what can be determined about the whole form depends on what parts are recovered. With small pieces of bottle glass, color appears to be the primary method of identifying the type of bottle and its potential age. Until the mid-nineteenth century, the majority of glass bottles were dark colored, because wines and spirits kept better in dark containers. By

Chapter 6 Historic Navajo Sites 142 about 1880, the desire for clear glass containers so the contents would be visible was generated by new techniques for food preservation in glass containers (Munsey 1970:37). To produce a colorless clear glass, manufacturers began to add manganese to their glass mixtures to counteract the reddish tint produced by iron in the sand. However, with exposure to ultraviolet rays, manganese in glass changes color to a shade of amethyst. Analysis of the production ranges of manganese-induced clear bottle glass determined that the dates of manufacture for this type of glass were between the mid 1870s and 1920 (Lockhart 2006). The other colors of glass found in the NM-H-46-55 excavation units do not provide an equally diagnostically narrow timeframe, but some generalities are possible. Particular shades of dark green were typically not seen in the twentieth century, although they were much more common in earlier centuries (Bureau of Land Management [BLM] 2006a). Aqua was a predominant glass color until the 1920s, when much of that glass was replaced with clear, with the exception of some soda bottles, which continue to be made of aqua glass (Miller and McNichol 2002). The height of popularity of milk glass (an opaque white glass) was 1895–1910, but this glass was made as early as 1870 and as late as the mid-twentieth century (Newbound 1995; University of Utah 1992).

If a glass fragment is a bottle base shard or a neck/lip shard, or contains embossed lettering or a maker’s mark, quite a bit more can be determined about that bottle. The large majority of bottles produced from the 1800s to the mid-twentieth century were produced in some type of metal mold (BLM 2006a). These molds left telltale traces on the outside of the bottle, particularly at the base and neck, which can be identified. In addition, the base, neck, lip, and markings can also indicate whether the bottle was hand-blown, mold-made, or machine-made.

Of the 83 pieces of bottle glass analyzed from the NM-H-46-55 assemblage, 35 could not be identified beyond color, and 8 could not be identified beyond color and method of manufacture. The colors identified were clear (n=32), amber (n=1), pink tint (n=1), and cobalt blue (n=1). All were body shards, with the exception of one very small clear glass lip fragment (FS 50). All eight of the shards identifiable by color and method of manufacture were machine-made clear glass. One was the lip fragment (FS 33), and the other seven were body fragments: two with embossed decoration (FS 30 and 32), one with embossed “C.O.” (FS 39), two that fit together (FS 51), and two other fragments (FS 36 and 41). These eight fragments would have been produced no earlier than 1903, when the Owens automatic bottle-making machine was perfected, but more likely after 1917, when large quantities of automatic bottle-making machines were making most of the bottles in the United States (Kendrick 1966; University of Utah 2002).

The remaining 40 pieces of glass are described below by type. Five fragments of modern (after 1950) beer bottles were part of the assemblage (FS 2, 32, 35, and 52). Two of them had Budweiser labels, one with a “born on” date of March 29, 2002. Several machine-made soda bottles were part of the assemblage, including an unknown soda bottle with “1968” on the base (FS 26), a Coca-Cola bottle body (FS 41), and three 7-Up shards (two bottle body, one neck/lip) (FS 41, 47, and 50). Four clear machine made shards were from medicine bottles—three body shards and one neck/lip shard (FS 51 and 12). One clear machine-made glass fragment was from a lid or stopper (FS 30). One fragment was from the rim of a pink glass plate (FS 67). FS 67 also included a clear machine-made base fragment with the numbers “5503” on the base and a valve mark. A valve mark is an indentation in the center of a glass base, usually perfectly round and roughly 1/2 inch in diameter. Valve marks are almost exclusively found on wide-mouth

Chapter 6 Historic Navajo Sites 143 containers, such as food jars, milk bottles, and canning jars; all these types of containers were made by press-and-blow machines, most often in the 1930s and 1940s (Toulouse 1969).

A machine-made medicine bottle base fragment in the assemblage had a suction scar from an Owens automatic bottle-making machine. Part of FS 30, this base shard appeared to be part of the same bottle as the three other artifacts in that field sample (two clear machine-made body fragments, one with embossed decoration and one without, and a machine-made lid or stopper). A suction scar is a fine line of glass, more or less round, that is either incised into or raised above the glass surface. It is made by a metal “knife” that cuts off the glass being drawn upward into the mold in the Owens automatic bottle-making machine once there is enough glass to produce the desired bottle (BLM 2006b). A dull knife produces a feathered or splotchy edge. Suction scars are usually not perfectly centered, particularly on square and oval bottles, as is the case here. Bottles with suction scars date no earlier than 1905, and typically date after 1910 when the Owens machine began to dominate the bottle market. Gob feeder machines surpassed the Owens machines by the end of the 1920s, and by 1947 only about 30 percent of bottles were being made with Owens machines (Miller and Sullivan 1981).

An unusual collection of nine shards from four excavation units (EU 1, 4, 5, and 16) all appeared to be part of the same jar (FS 33, 34, 36, and 37). All of the shards were deep cobalt blue, and one of the base fragments identified the object as a Vicks “VapoRub” jar. Vicks “VapoRub” is a brand of ointment, a mentholated topical cream intended to relieve minor medical conditions that temporarily impair breathing, including the common cold. It is applied to the chest, often immediately before sleeping. “VapoRub” was created and introduced in 1894 by Lunsford Richardson in North Carolina, as a salve for treating colds and pneumonia. The company name, Vicks Family Remedies Company, became Vick Chemical Company in 1912. In 1985, the company was sold to Procter & Gamble. Based on a general timeline for the product, the now- signature blue jar was introduced in the 1930s or 1940s (P&G Health Sciences Institute 2006).

At least five glass shards of one or more Kerr Economy mason jars were part of the NM-H-46-55 assemblage (FS 54, 56, and 61). Alexander H. Kerr began as a jobber, a seller of fruit jars that had been made for him. His first partnership was with Illinois Pacific Glass Co. in 1903, which produced the famous “Economy” jar. He later turned to the Hazel-Atlas Glass Co. in 1906, and eventually purchased his own glass manufacturing plant in 1909. The “Kerr” embossed label was introduced in 1912 and continued throughout the twentieth century. The “Kerr Economy” jar was made until the 1950s (Toulouse 1971:306).

A glass base fragment with an “A” inset in an “H”, the mark of the Hazel-Atlas Glass Co. of Wheeling, West Virginia, was in the assemblage. The Hazel-Atlas Glass Co. was a merger of several smaller companies in 1899, and the “H over A” monogram was used beginning in 1920. In 1957 the company became part of the Continental Can Co., but the brand eventually faded out by 1965 (Toulouse 1971:239–242).

Only two artifacts were complete containers. One (FS 16) was a small, amber-colored machine- made jar, with screw threads at the lip. On the bottom was a “W” within a circle, the mark of the T.C. Wheaton Company of Millville, New Jersey. In 1880 Dr. Theodore Corson Wheaton moved his practice to Millville and opened a drugstore. He founded T.C. Wheaton Company to manufacture glassware and laboratory and scientific glass (Toulouse 1971:527). The mark on the

Chapter 6 Historic Navajo Sites 144 bottom of the amber bottle was used from 1946 to the present, and the number “74” on the bottom may represent either the year it was manufactured (1974) or the code for the particular plant where it was produced.

The other complete specimen (FS 58) was a small pharmaceutical bottle with a black Bakelite (see Plastics, below) screw cap and the contents still inside. This bottle contained “Perrigos Toothache Drops,” made by the L. Perrigo Company, founded in 1887 in Allegen, Michigan, by Luther Perrigo. Today this company is the largest maker of private-label over-the-counter pharmaceuticals in the United States. Luther Perrigo, the proprietor of a general store and apple- drying business, had the idea of packaging and distributing patented medicines and household items for country stores. His company enjoyed steady growth, and by the early 1920s as many as 50 Perrigo salesmen were calling on rural stores throughout the Midwest (Perrigo 2006). The company continued to grow in size over the last 80 years and is now a multinational concern. The recovered toothache-drop bottle was a machine-made vial with the cap still attached, containing a smaller glass vial with a paper label and cork stopper, three wooden toothpicks, and wads of cotton in the top and bottom holding in the contents. The label read: “Perrigos Toothache Drops/Alcohol 75%/Each Fluid Ounce Contains/20 Minims Chloroform/20 Minims Ether/L. Perrigo Co./Allegen, Michigan” and “DIRECTIONS/Clean Cavity and Saturate a/Little Cotton and Insert/Repeat in a few minutes/if necessary.” Although the vial had no distinguishing marks to indicate when it was manufactured, the Bakelite cap and the history of the L. Perrigo Company indicate that this artifact was most likely produced between 1907 and the mid twentieth century.

Window and Flat Glass By the time European-style objects arrived in the West, window glass technology had advanced to include two methods of making flat glass: the plate glass method, in which molten glass was poured onto a table, left to cool, and ground down with a fine abrasive; and the cylinder or broad glass method, which consisted of drawing out a long cylinder of glass on a blowpipe and cutting it open to make a flat plate. In 1870, the Chance brothers developed a rolled glass method, in which molten glass was pressed between rollers much as sheet metal is produced. Some imperfections were still present in the glass, but the method was much faster. Another innovation came in 1905 when a Belgian named Fourcault managed to vertically draw a continuous sheet of glass of a consistent width. This method made possible the production of flat sheet glass, which was produced by drawing molten glass vertically from a furnace in a thin stream that was then flattened and cooled by pulling it between asbestos rollers. If the rollers were textured, then the glass itself could be textured, leading to the introduction of patterned glass. Commercial production of sheet glass using the Fourcault process eventually got under way in 1914. The float glass method is most often used today. Molten glass is poured from the furnace onto molten metal in a vat; the glass distributes itself evenly, resulting in perfectly flat glass with no defects. The float glass method was invented in 1959 by Alistair Pilkington of the Pilkington Glass Company (Glass Online 2007; Tangram Technology Ltd. 2001; Warinner 1997).

Sixteen pieces of window glass were part of the analyzed artifact assemblage from NM-H-46-55, none of sufficient size to detect defects that would identify the method of manufacture. The shards were from 1.85 mm to 4.81 mm thick; this range and the small assemblage prevented an analysis of the window glass using the window thickness formula developed by Moir (1987, 1988). Unfortunately, nothing more could be determined from the window glass assemblage.

Chapter 6 Historic Navajo Sites 145 One set of artifacts was not technically window glass (or bottle glass, for that matter). Four pieces of flat amber glass from sunglasses (FS 36, 41, 42, and 67) were recovered from Features 1 and 2. These shards may have been from the same pair of sunglasses, and appeared to be a mass-produced type that first appeared in 1929 and remains popular today (Johnston 2006).

Porcelains The first porcelains to arrive in the Americas were from China, where the technique of creating these beautiful vitrified translucent ceramics was perfected. The Chinese began a regular trade with the Portuguese in 1557 (Deagan 1987:96), and the Far East dominated the porcelain market, as European and English potters could not duplicate the closely guarded recipe until the early eighteenth century (Birks 2006; Makay 2002:13–14). Porcelain was not manufactured in America until the late eighteenth century, when Gouse Bonnin and George Anthony Morris conducted experiments to produce porcelain in Philadelphia and manufactured a small quantity (Noël Hume 1970:100). The European and American porcelains were not “true” porcelain, but were fully vitrified and often stronger. Later, around 1797, English potter Josiah Spode introduced a new form of porcelain, called “bone china” pottery (Birks 2006). This was to prove the English solution to the quest for “true” porcelain.

Chinese and Japanese porcelain, generally called “hard paste” porcelain, is made from a mixture of china clay (kaolin), china stone (petuntse), and flint (Birks 2006; Cushion and Cushion 1992). This type of porcelain has a “grayish” appearance and is extremely hard. The ingredients fuse in the high temperatures and create a dense body that appears glassy and translucent when put before a bright light, with no differentiation between the glaze and the body in profile.

The first attempt at porcelain by European potters is generally referred to as “soft paste” porcelain, as they used white clay and “frit,” a glassy substance that was a mixture of white sand, gypsum, soda, salt, alum, and nitre (Birks 2006). Lime and chalk were used to fuse the clay with the frit, and the ceramics were fired at lower temperatures than hard-paste porcelain. The result is a more granular body, with a clear differentiation between the clear glaze and the paste in profile, and no translucent properties. Soft-paste porcelain has been described as more “warm” in color than hard-paste porcelain, and it is less prone to chipping. Despite the granularity in the paste, the body is still vitrified and can be differentiated from earthenwares by its lack of porosity (University of Utah 1992).

The first true hard-paste porcelain to be developed in Europe and America was called “bone china,” as it contains bone ash in the paste instead of flint. Bone china is stronger and easier to manufacture than traditional hard-paste porcelain, has an ivory-white appearance, and thin pieces can be translucent when set against a bright light (Birks 2006; Hughes and Hughes 1960). The paste is smoother than soft-paste porcelain, but the glaze can still be seen in profile (Florida Museum of Natural History 2006). After its creation by Josiah Spode, bone china was quickly replicated by other English potters, including Minton, Coalport, Devenport, Derby, Worcester, and Herculaneum (Birks 2006; Cushion and Cushion 1992). Bone china is generally more expensive than similar earthenware vessels, and it and other porcelains have been used as an economic marker in the analysis of other ceramics assemblages (Miller 1991).

All eight of the analyzed ceramic sherds from site NM-H-46-55 were porcelain. No complete vessels were present, and only small to medium-sized sherds were recovered. Three of these

Chapter 6 Historic Navajo Sites 146 artifacts were bone china (FS 32, 33, and 67), while the remainder were soft-paste porcelain. The three fragments of bone china appeared to have similar decoration: all had thin (~1 mm) black stripes, and two (FS 32 and 33) also had wider stripes of another color. The fragments were thin (2–3 mm) and may have come from a cup or bowl. Two of the soft-paste porcelains are also likely dinnerware or domestic utility ware. FS 48 was clearly a plain glazed bowl rim, and FS 44 was a 5.25-mm-thick fragment with exterior leaf decoration. FS 43 and FS 45 were fragments of another kind, possibly from a bathroom or kitchen fixture. FS 43 was quite thick (14.88 mm) and was glazed tan on one side. The fragments in FS 45 were unglazed and appeared to be chips from a much larger vessel.

Nails and Other Building Materials The earliest nails in America were hand wrought, which was the only type available in the seventeenth century and into the eighteenth century (Noël Hume 1970:252). Around 1790, machine-made cut nails appeared, made from rectangular strips of iron plate and tapered to a point by a single cut across the plate. The thickness and height of the plate determined the thickness and length of the nail, while the breadth of the nail at its head and point depended on the amount of taper applied in cutting and the strength of the blow used in forming the head (Fontana and Greenleaf 1962). Between 1830 and 1890, cut nails were produced in machines that cut and headed them uniformly, but the machine-made cut nail was soon to be replaced by the wire nail. Wire nails were developed as a cheaper and lighter nail when wire-making technology was refined, and this is the most common type today. The transition between machine-made cut nails and wire nails in building construction began about 1886. By 1892 about half of all the nails manufactured in the United States were wire (Adams 2002:72), and by 1898, over 80 percent of nails were wire. Machine-made cut nails were still used for special tasks, such as attaching wood to concrete, but in general, the wire nail dominated the construction market after the 1890s.

Nails are often one of the more common metal artifacts at historic archaeological sites, and NM- H-46-55 was no exception. Thirty-seven common nails and tacks were part of the analyzed assemblage, as well as 15 fence staples. Other identifiable metal building materials included fragments of two washers (FS 42 and 48), an eyebolt with two flanges and screw holes (FS 56), and a large hook with a threaded end (FS 76). All of the nails were steel wire nails, which would indicate they were used at the site after 1890.

Tin Cans In 1795 the French government offered a prize of 12,000 francs to anyone who could invent a method of preserving food, which Napoleon needed for his march across Europe. Frenchman Nicholas Appert experimented with an idea for several years to partially cook foods, seal them in glass containers, and dip them in boiling water to expel the air inside. He eventually perfected the idea, and was awarded the prize in 1810 (Can Manufacturers Institute [CMI] 2006). Englishman Peter Durand was issued a patent for the same purpose, but he thought tinplate (iron plate coated with tin to prevent rusting and corrosion) would do a better job. Later, Bryan Donkin and John Hall took Durand’s idea and set up the first commercial factory using tinplate cans in Bermondsey, England, in 1812. In the same year, English immigrant Thomas Kensett set up a small canning plant in New York and began producing salmon, lobster, oysters, meats, fruits, and vegetables in hermetically sealed glass jars, but he soon switched to tin as well. The patent for preserving food in vessels of tin was issued to Kensett in 1825 (CMI 2006).

Chapter 6 Historic Navajo Sites 147 In the 1820s, tinplate cans were manufactured completely by hand. To make the body, a piece of tinplate was bent into shape on a roller and the overlapping edges were soldered together. For the ends, two round disks were cut, the edges were bent down, and the top and bottom were soldered to the body. The top could be soldered on after the can was filled, but the hole-in-top can was much more common. In this type, the can top has a circular hole about an inch in diameter, which was used to fill the can with food. The top was soldered on, food was pushed through the hole, and a cap with a small vent hole was soldered over the opening. When a sufficient amount of steam had escaped during the cooking process, the vent hole was closed with a drop of solder (Buckles 1978:410; Busch 1981:95).

Between 1901 and 1904, several companies merged to become the American Can Company and the Sanitary Can Company. These companies participated in the most significant change in the canning industry through the development of the sanitary can. Rather than leaving a hole in the top to fill the can, the sanitary can’s top was left off while the can was being filled and was then attached using a crimped, double-end seam. These seams were soon used for the sides and bottoms of the cans as well (Collins 1924:36–38; May 1938:438–439). The first sanitary cans were soldered on the outside, but eventually the crimped seam was proven to be quite stable, and solder was no longer used (CMI 2006; Collins 1924:35; Fontana and Greenleaf 1962:70). The sanitary can had entirely replaced the hole-in-cap can by the 1920s and is used almost exclusively today.

Sixty-two cans and can fragments were in the NM-H-46-55 assemblage. All but two were either sanitary cans or were unidentifiable fragments with no seam. The three can lids in the assemblage appeared to be from metal or cardboard cylindrical containers, perhaps snuff cans. No labels or other markings were preserved on the cans. Of the two non-sanitary cans, one was a hole-in-cap can and the other was a condensed milk can.

The hole-in-cap specimen was the top portion of a rectangular can with soldered lapped seams (FS 13). The cap was still attached, and the cuts underneath the top indicated that the can was opened by slicing off the top with a sharp knife or scissors. The cap also had a round flange soldered on the inside, a type that was apparently used exclusively in the salmon-canning industry (Bitting 1912:67–68). This can would have been manufactured between 1820 and 1920.

The condensed milk can was patented in 1856 by Gail Borden, who would become the most recognizable and largest producer of condensed milk in the United States (Busch 1981:103). Condensed milk cans are common at historic archaeological sites in the West, and Don Simonis has developed a table to accurately date condensed/evaporated milk cans by size (IMACS 2002). The single complete condensed milk can (FS 31) recovered at NM-H-46-55 was a Simonis Type 12, 2-1/2 inches in diameter and 2-3/8 inches high, with crimped side seams, four embossed rings on the top, and a dab of solder on a raised circle on the bottom. This type of can dates to 1931–1945. Two nail-sized holes had been punched in the top of the can for pouring out the contents.

Harmonica (counted under Miscellaneous Metal) One steel harmonica reed plate was in the assemblage (FS 44). This is the part of the harmonica that holds the free reeds (thin metal strips that are attached only on one end) that vibrate to produce a sound. There are two reed plates per harmonica, separated by air chambers in the

Chapter 6 Historic Navajo Sites 148 comb—one to produce notes when the player exhales, and one that sounds when the player inhales. German inventor Christian Ludwig Buschmann is often cited as the inventor of the harmonica, in 1821, but the instrument was not mass produced until 1857, by Matthias Hohner, a clockmaker from Trossingen. He delivered the first harmonica to the United States in 1868 (Wikipedia 2006a). The instrument immediately became popular, and the Civil War found many a harmonica providing entertainment and solace on the battlefield. Today, the reed plates are generally made of brass rather than steel (Wikipedia 2006a).

Crown Caps (Bottle Caps) The almost universally used closure for bottles containing carbonated beverages was first produced in 1891. Called the crown cap or crown cork (and now generally known as the bottle cap), the fastener was introduced by William Painter, an inventor from Baltimore. Painter’s crown cap was a single-use fastener, simple in design, economical to produce, and absolutely leak proof. The cap had a corrugated-flange edge to grip the bottle and was lined with a thin cork disc and a special paper backing to seal the bottle. After some convincing, the crown cap eventually made all other beverage closures obsolete. By 1912, most carbonated beverages were sealed with a crown cap, and the cork was replaced with PVC around 1955 (Berge 1980; Rock 1981). With that slight modification, the crown caps in use today are essentially the same as those first used (Munsey 1970:105).

Seven crown caps were part of the analyzed artifact assemblage at NM-H-46-55. Two had cork liners on the interior, but the liners were missing from the rest. All but one were very rusty and had no visible label. The crown cap that still retained its label, and its cork lining as well, was for Nehi soda, a flavored soda line introduced in 1924 (Wikipedia 2006b). The company that made Nehi, first called the Chero-Cola Company, changed its name to Nehi Corporation in 1928, then to Royal Crown (RC) Company in 1955 (Wikipedia 2006b). The cap read “NEHI / REG.US.PAT.OFF / ARTIFICIAL FLAVOR AND COLOR / IMITATION LEMON LIME SODA.” This artifact was likely produced between 1924 and 1955, when plastic seals were introduced (IMACS 2002).

Ammunition The technological progression of ammunition has occurred over several centuries and in numerous countries, but the period of development most appropriate for this discussion is the introduction of the self-contained metallic cartridge. Innovations to centerfire cartridges (with the primer in the center of the case rim) and rimfire cartridges (with the priming compound placed around the entire inside of the rim) occurred almost simultaneously, between 1856 and 1858 (Barnes 1972:69). Smokeless powder, another innovation in cartridge development, was introduced in the 1890s, as were high velocity cartridges (Barnes 1972:3). Rifle, shotgun, and handgun cartridges have been continually refined over the years, but several of the older designs are still in use. Cartridges are generally stamped with the name of the manufacturer and the type of ammunition, and are sometimes good indicators of dates of occupation at historic sites.

Two types of cartridges were in the artifact assemblage at NM-H-46-55. Eight .22 short pistol cartridges were identified (FS 32, 34, 36, and 79) with the headstamp “Peters HV.” This stamp identifies the artifacts as high-velocity cartridges from the Peters Cartridge Company, which manufactured ammunition from 1887 to 1934—at which time they were absorbed by the Remington Union Metallic Cartridge Company (IMACS 2002). The other type of cartridge,

Chapter 6 Historic Navajo Sites 149 represented by a single specimen, was also a Peters high-velocity casing (FS 67), but had a longer case length than the others, and was classified as a “long” cartridge.

Beads Beads have been part of historic artifact assemblages from the earliest days of European exploration and settlement in America. What began with glass trade beads from Venice or Amsterdam grew into a local manufacturing industry as early as the nineteenth century (Noël Hume 1970:53). Beads are generally hard to date, because of the extremely wide variety of materials and styles, and only the most specialized beads can be traced to a manufacturer. In addition, some beads are made by hand from natural local materials. Beads come in a wide variety of shapes and sizes, and general descriptive terms have been developed to identify them. The type that was traditionally used as trade beads in the New World is currently known as seed beads. Seed beads are squat, fat beads with rounded edges and are generally of a single color. Mechanized production of seed beads has resulted in standard size classes, ranging from 1.5 mm (15/0) to 3.7 mm (6/0). Seed beads are still made of glass. Barrel beads, generally defined as tubular beads with an oval barrel, come in the greatest variety of shapes. The oval can be thin and tapered, or fat and angular. Bugle beads are alto tubular beads, but the tubes are straight. Disc beads are flat, pancake-like beads that can be drilled either in the center or from edge to edge. Generally, the holes in disc beads are quite small. Donut beads are similarly shaped discs, but the holes are very large, making the bead look more like a ring. Sphere, teardrop, cube, and cushion beads are shaped much like their descriptive names.

Seven beads were analyzed in the NM-H-46-55 assemblage. All were made of glass, and some exhibited clear mold seams. One bead (FS 48) was similar to a medium blue seed bead, but it was too large for that category and was classified as a barrel bead with an angular aspect. Another barrel bead was more curved, light blue, and had two hand-painted brown lines around the body (FS 47). This bead was only a fragment, but it did exhibit a mold seam throughout. A third barrel bead (FS 41), also a fragment, was green with no decoration. A disc bead found with the green barrel bead was a large, complete, bright red bead with the hole drilled end to end. This bead appeared to be malformed, as none of the surfaces were smooth. A red sphere bead (FS 59), much smaller than the disc bead, had visible seams and six small indentations as decoration on both sides. Two beads (FS 56 and 74) were exactly the same: small bugle beads in a salmon color with no decoration.

Buttons Buttons, used as clothing fastener for hundreds of years, were most likely imported into the New World from Europe through the eighteenth century (IMACS 1992; Noël Hume 1970:92). Buttons were made from metal, glass, bone, shell, wood, and porcelain, and were manufactured in a variety of shapes and sizes. The particular materials used went in and out of fashion as types and styles of clothing changed and new technologies were developed. Four buttons were in the assemblage from site NM-H-46-55: a shell button with two through-holes (FS 32), a bone button with four through-holes (FS 41), an aluminum button with two through-holes (FS 83), and a steel jeans button (FS 37). The shell button was small, likely a shirt button. The bone and aluminum buttons were larger, perhaps for coats or jackets. The jeans button was a rivet type with two ends that joined to attach it to the fabric. All four specimens appeared to be utilitarian, as none had decorative aspects or maker’s marks. Bone buttons have been found at sites dating throughout the nineteenth century but are most common at sites predating 1850 (IMACS 1992).

Chapter 6 Historic Navajo Sites 150 Commercially made shell buttons, as this artifact appeared to be, have been imported from France only since 1855, and have been made in America since 1891 (IMACS 1992; Scarpino 1985:85). Shell buttons were eventually replaced with plastic buttons after World War II, and they are very rare today (Lopinot 1968). The aluminum button appeared to be of mid to late twentieth century manufacture, when the production of aluminum items increased significantly (International Aluminium Institute 2000). Blue jeans, originally designed as workwear, also became popular in the mid to late twentieth century as an everyday clothing item.

Grommets Grommets are small pieces of sheet metal that have been formed into little rings that surround holes in fabric or leather. Grommets allow string or rope to be pulled through the holes without damaging the fabric, and are commonly used in sails, tarpaulins, clothing, shower curtains, and shoes. They have been around for centuries. The grommets in the artifact assemblage from NM- H-46-55 were all small, of the size typically used for clothing or lighter fabrics. Forty-four grommets were found at the site, 30 of them in Feature 1A, and all were made of aluminum. The aluminum indicates that these grommets may have been of mid to late twentieth century manufacture, when the production of items made of aluminum increased (International Aluminium Institute 2000), but they may also have dated to earlier in the century.

Cardboard Cardboard has been a common packaging material for several hundred years, since the Industrial Revolution and the subsequent rise of packaged cereal (Hook and Heimlick 2006). The cardboard found at site NM-H-46-55 (FS 54, 64, 73, and 74) appeared to have been used as an insert to stiffen clothing or line the inside of an object. All of the fragments in the assemblage were dyed deep purple, and were non-rectilinear. They could not be reconstructed into a definitive shape.

Fabric and Leather Fabrics and leather objects are considered quite rare in archaeological contexts, despite the large quantity of these materials in use throughout history. These items are usually the first to decay, and special environmental conditions are typically a major factor in their preservation. Fourteen fabric and leather fragments making up 10 items were analyzed. All were in some state of decay, particularly the fabrics, limiting the analysis, and their material type and possible function could only be guessed at. The time period of manufacture could not be determined for any of the specimens. The identifiable leather items were one belt end with three holes (FS 69) and two leather straps with stitch holes on either side (FS 42 and 44). A piece of brown leather in a roughly triangular shape (FS 42) may have been an upper part of a shoe. Four specimens of fabric appeared to be cotton, all dyed black. Two (FS 52 and 69) were woven on a loom, and two (FS 42) were knitted. One of the knitted fabrics appeared to be in a 2 × 2 ribbing stitch, generally used for socks and sleeve cuffs. The other was a regular multipurpose knit stitch. Two fabric specimens were canvas (FS 47 and 48). One was a canvas strip that may have been cut from a larger piece consisting of two heavy canvas sheets stitched together, with a heavy, tar-like coating on the exterior surface (for waterproofing?). A puncture on the inside may have been what remained of an eyelet or rivet. The other canvas sample could not be further identified.

Chapter 6 Historic Navajo Sites 151 Cork Cork comes from the cork tree (Quercus suber), which grows in Spain and Portugal. Cork is typically used for bottle stoppers and historically has been the preferred bottle enclosure for its ability to expand to fit in irregular neck finishes as well as its ability to seal the bottle contents from the outside air. Cork was an extremely popular stopper for medicine, beer, soda, mineral water, and perfume bottles until the 1930s, when man-made materials began to replace it (IMACS 1992). If the bottle contents were carbonized, the stopper generally had a wire looped around the top and secured to the bottle. In 1892 William Painter patented the crown cork, which would eventually replace all the corks used to secure carbonated beverages. The crown cork (also called the crown cap), the precursor to the modern plastic-lined bottle cap, was lined with a thin cork disc (IMACS 1992; Munsey 1970:105).

Both of the two cork artifacts in the assemblage from NM-H-46-55 were related to bottle closures. FS 76 was a typical cork stopper, slightly tapered, with no indentation for a wire or loop. This stopper was probably used for a medicine bottle or some other narrow-necked bottle. FS 43 was most likely a cork insert for a crown cork fastener; the artifact was approximately the right size and shape but appeared to have expanded from long-term contact with water, altering its form slightly.

Plastic Natural polymers (amber, tortoiseshell, horn) have been known and used for some time, but the class of polymers we know as plastic began as a semi-synthetic material called Parkesine (cellulose nitrate), invented in the late 1850s by Alexander Parkes (American Plastics Council [APC] 2006). In 1866, John Wesley Hyatt invented celluloid, the first thermoplastic: a substance that can be molded under heat and pressure into a shape, and retain that shape after the heat and pressure have been removed. This material was used most commonly as film. The first completely synthetic man-made polymer was developed in 1907 by Leo Baekeland, a New York chemist, who called his liquid resin Bakelite. This substance was different in that it would not burn, boil, melt, or dissolve in any commonly available acid or solvent. Bakelite was used extensively in World War II, and is still used today for electrical insulators (APC 2006). Cellophane and nylon were next, developed in 1913 and 1939, respectively. Polyvinyl chloride (PVC) was developed in the 1930s, but really took off in the 1950s (like most plastics) with the end of World War II and the birth of the “Modern Age.” PVC is used in items as diverse as water and wastewater pipes and vinyl records. Polyethylene, the most widely produced plastic of the twentieth century, was initially developed in 1933, but like PVC, secured its place in the world by playing a key role during World War II. This plastic is by far the most common encountered by modern consumers, and is used to make such common items as soda bottles, milk jugs, and grocery bags, in addition to plastic food storage containers (APC 2006).

Eleven pieces of polyethylene plastic were in the analyzed artifact assemblage from NM-H-46- 55 (FS 33, 34, 40, 43, 74, and 78). Seven of these fragments (FS 40, 74, and 78) appeared to be of the same type of plastic and may have been part of the same object. All were semi-circular fragments of a salmon color and had either evidence of screw threads in the interior surface or a curled rim. FS 34 was the same salmon color, but the artifact had been burned and melted beyond recognition. Another sample was off-white and appeared to have been partially melted (FS 43). The only other easily identifiable polyethylene plastic artifact was a small doll head with plastic hair, only 9.6 mm in height (FS 33).

Chapter 6 Historic Navajo Sites 152 Twelve fragments of PVC plastic were also part of the assemblage. One fragment (FS 33) may have been a fragment of flooring or some other type of flat surface material. The fragment was black with a slightly textured surface. Three fragments of a vinyl tablecloth or other furniture fabric had a flower-and-leaf design in brownish tones (FS 43). The remaining PVC artifacts were vinyl record fragments (FS 54 and 56), possibly from the same item.

Wood and Stone One identifiable stone artifact was analyzed. It was a granite bottle stopper, about 1-1/4 inches long, with a slightly tapered end. The stopper appeared to be complete, but nothing more could be determined from this artifact.

Six fragments of wood were also present in the assemblage. Two small fragments of dimensional lumber (FS 43), identified as 1 × 1s (actual size 3/4 × 3/4 inches), fit together end-to-end to make a 4-inch-long piece. One other fragment (FS 41) appeared to be part of a round post that had been burned. The remaining wood fragments (FS 37 and 41) were not identifiable.

Miscellaneous Metal Very little could be discovered about the items in this category, though they were in some cases unique and fascinating. Very often metal fragments cannot be dated, as the item from which they came has been made of the same material and used for the same purpose for several centuries. Other artifacts are not recognizable without some associated material that is not present in the assemblage.

FS 63 was a sheet-steel frying pan that may have once been coated with enamel. As most frying pans were made of copper, stainless steel, or cast iron, a sheet-steel frying pan is unusual, and it may have been a less expensive item than its stainless steel or cast iron counterparts. The pan was apparently made of one piece of sheet metal, with the addition of another piece of sheet metal attached around the handle with twisted wire for extra protection. Frying pans have been used in domestic cooking for centuries, and little could be determined from this artifact other than it had decayed significantly (from exposure to the elements?).

Other artifacts in this category were: a steel twist knob with a triangular gauge arrow (FS 33), a lead turnkey lock faceplate (FS 35), a steel toy shaped like a little boat (FS 35), a large sheet- steel bucket that had been covered with white enamel (FS 35), an aluminum cover plate with hinges and a small window (FS 46), a small aluminum gear with a shank (FS 46), a steel and aluminum air pump (FS 48), an aluminum rivet, possibly from a pair of jeans (FS 52), a sheet- steel round pin with an embossed flower design (FS 54), a steel semi-circular strap and loop (FS 54), a steel and lead tie-down (FS 62), a steel hook with an oblong hole for a strap (FS 64), an aluminum safety pin (FS 69), barbed-wire fragments (FS 69), and an iron spring bar (FS 69).

The remainder of the metal artifacts from NM-H-46-55 were steel, cast iron, lead, or aluminum items that could not be identified, either because they were too rusty or had melted, or because they had a completely unknown function. A total of 50 artifacts fell into this category.

Other Miscellaneous Items Seventeen artifacts from eight field samples were classified as miscellaneous: five fragments that might be tar paper (FS 41 and 42), two metal artifacts (aluminum foil [FS 59] and a lead glob

Chapter 6 Historic Navajo Sites 153 [FS 65]), and several fragments of unknown material with fabric imprints (FS 50 and 83). The other artifacts were either burned beyond recognition or otherwise unidentifiable.

Chronological Indicators from Historic Artifacts Ethnohistoric data indicate that the hogan was built in the 1920s and the site was occupied until 1938 (Swadesh 1981:118). The artifacts recovered from the site excavations largely support this occupation period. Those with the best temporal markers were bottle glass fragments. Of the bottle glass that could be identified by method of manufacture, all was from machine-made bottles, supporting an occupation after 1917, or at the very earliest 1903. One bottle fragment with an Owens suction scar dated to around 1910–1947, and a wide-mouth jar fragment from a press-and-blow machine dated to the 1930s or 1940s. Other bottles, such as the Vicks VapoRub jar (1930s to present), the Kerr Economy jar (1912–1950s), the Hazel-Atlas Glass Co. bottle (1920–1965), and the L. Perrigo Toothache Drops medicine bottle (1907–1950s), easily fall within the range of the ethnohistorically derived occupation dates. The T.C. Wheaton medicine bottle (1946 to present) was one of the few bottles clearly made just after the ethnohistorically derived terminus date of 1938.

One tinplate can in the assemblage also fell within the ethnohistorically derived occupation dates: the condensed milk can dated squarely to 1931–1945. The other sanitary can fragments had a wider production range (1920s to present), but included the occupation dates of the site. However, one can was an anomaly, in both production range and location. The hole-in-cap can was generally out of production by the 1920s, and the probable contents of the can, salmon (likely from the Pacific Northwest), is a somewhat unusual item to be found in the Southwest. The fact that the can has been opened by slicing off the top was also unusual. This may have been a unique and special item for the inhabitants of the hogan, which may explain its presence at a site that dates after 1920.

The crown caps found at the site with the cork lining still attached and the one with the label still remaining point to a solid 1920s–1938 occupation range as well. Cork-lined crown caps date to around 1912–1955, and Nehi lemon-lime soda was produced from 1924 to 1955. Crown caps, almost exclusively used for carbonated beverages, indicate that the inhabitants of the site enjoyed a relatively new product in the early twentieth century—mass produced and widely distributed beer and soda. Likewise, the Peters high-velocity centerfire pistol cartridges were manufactured from 1887 to 1934, the later end of that production range falling within the ethnohistorically derived occupation dates.

The other artifact types at the site had much wider temporal markers, including the bone china and soft paste porcelain (late eighteenth century to present), wire nails (1890s to present), the harmonica (1857 to present), beads (European exploration to present), shell buttons (1891 to World War II), aluminum buttons and grommets (mid-twentieth century to present), and polyethylene and PVC (1930s to present). All of these artifacts could have been manufactured and used between 1920 and 1938, but they were not useful in determining the exact dates of occupation. Likewise, the fabric and leather pieces, cardboard, wood and stone artifacts, and miscellaneous artifacts, while hinting at twentieth-century manufacture (possible cotton socks, frying pan, enamel coated bucket, safety pin, leather belt, etc.), were not clearly identifiable to the point where they could be used as temporal markers. Only the bone button was anomalous, as buttons of this material are typically seen at sites predating 1850. The presence of this artifact is

Chapter 6 Historic Navajo Sites 154 unexplainable, save for the possibility that a garment with bone buttons was either made after this period or had survived as an heirloom.

In addition to the historic artifacts described above, several artifacts present in the assemblage indicate that the site was visited, although not likely occupied, after the hogan was dismantled. Several modern soda and beer bottles, two with dates of 1968 and 2002, were part of the assemblage collected from the top levels of the excavation units. Such artifacts are common to areas where people congregate temporarily or are just “passing through,” and are generally not indicators of long-term occupation.

HISTORIC FAUNAL REMAINS

The 103 faunal specimens from this site represented a minimum of three individuals. The identified remains were all either sheep or goat, and most of the unidentified elements probably were as well. See Chapter 11 for the full analysis of faunal remains from this site.

PREHISTORIC ARTIFACTS

Prehistoric Lithic Artifacts Six lithic artifacts were collected during data recovery at NM-H-46-55: two pieces of debitage, two stone balls, one handstone, and one piece of pigment. The assemblage was too small for any meaningful analysis, and it is unclear whether these items were associated with the prehistoric ceramics from this site.

Prehistoric Ceramics Nine prehistoric sherds were collected from the surface and from excavation units at NM-H-46- 55 (Table 6.5): two conjoining Gallup Black-on-white sherds, an indeterminate plain Tusayan Gray Ware sherd, three indeterminate plain Chuska Gray Ware sherds, and three indeterminate indented corrugated Chuska Gray Ware sherds. All were from jars. The production dates for Gallup Black-on-white, the only diagnostic type recovered, are A.D. 1000–1125, suggesting a Pueblo II period occupation for the prehistoric component of this site. This dating is supported by the presence of plain and indented corrugated utility sherds.

Table 6.5. Site NM-H-46-55, Prehistoric Ceramics

Ceramic Type Count Gallup Black-on-white 2 All Cibola White Ware 2 Indeterminate plain Tusayan Gray Ware 1 All Tusayan Gray Ware 1 Indeterminate plain Chuska Gray Ware 3 Indeterminate indented corrugated Chuska Gray Ware 3 All Chuska Gray Ware 6 Total 9

Chapter 6 Historic Navajo Sites 155 SITE INTERPRETATION AND SUMMARY

NM-H-46-55 was an early twentieth century Navajo habitation site with a light prehistoric artifact scatter. Diagnostic ceramics from the prehistoric component indicate an ephemeral Pueblo II presence at the site. The historic component consisted of a stone hogan foundation and three associated ash piles. Ethnohistoric data suggest that Jim John, who raised alfalfa in nearby irrigated fields, occupied the site between the 1920s and 1938, and the recovered historic artifacts largely support this period of occupation.

RECOMMENDATIONS

The 2006 investigations at NM-H-46-55 fulfilled the goals of the data recovery plan, and the proposed project will have no effect on cultural resources at this site. However, it is possible that archaeological remains that could contribute additional significant information are located outside the right-of-way. Accordingly, any future ground-disturbing activities within the site but outside the right-of-way, and that fall under appropriate regulations, should be preceded by preparation and execution of a data recovery plan.

NM-H-46-62

County: San Juan Elevation: 5,610 feet Landowner: Navajo Nation Tribal Trust Navajo Chapter: Newcomb Cultural Affiliation and Age: Navajo, probably Reservation Period Site Type: Habitation Size: 916 m² NRHP Eligibility Recommendation: Eligible Archaeological Testing Activities: Mapped site using an EDM total station Archaeological Data Recovery Activities: Three-dimensional mapping of structure ruin using LiDAR technology; full excavation of structure; hand excavation of Feature 2 (bread oven) and shovel scraping a buffer around this feature; hand excavation of half of each ash stain (Features 3, 4, 7, and 8); shovel scraping a 5 × 5–m area around each of two rock alignments (Features 5 and 6)

SITE DESCRIPTION

NM-H-46-62 (Figure 6.16) was a historic Navajo habitation site measuring approximately 45 × 25 m (148 × 82 feet) and 916 m2 (0.23 acre) in area. The site was north of Newcomb, New Mexico, on a slight ridge sloping toward a wash located 540 m (0.3 mile) to the south. Eolian deposits covered portions of the site. Vegetation included saltbush and a variety of grasses and forbs. Eight features had been recorded at this site prior to data recovery; the most prominent feature was the well-preserved remains of a stone structure that was assumed to be a small hogan (Figure 6.16; Figure 6.17; Figure 6.18). Other features previously identified at the site were the collapsed remains of what was assumed to be a stone bread oven, an ash pile, two rock alignments, and three charcoal stains. Only the structure and bread oven proved to be cultural

Chapter 6 Historic Navajo Sites 156 features; during data recovery investigations the other six features were found to be non-cultural manifestations.

Figure 6.16. NM-H-46-62, Feature 1 (structure ruin), looking southwest.

Figure 6.17. NM-H-46-62, view of Feature 1 (structure ruin), looking east.

Chapter 6 Historic Navajo Sites 157 Figure 6.18. NM-H-46-62, view of Feature 1 (structure ruin), looking north. The entrance is

visible in the right-center of this image. PREVIOUS INVESTIGATIONS

This site was first recorded for a realignment of what was then US 666 (Oakes 1979:23–24) and was revisited during the NNDOT survey for the present US 491 project (Walkenhorst and John 2003:233). It was described as the masonry foundation of a circular structure, an ash pile, and a collapsed oven (Figure 6.19). No artifacts were observed on the surface, but Oakes (1979:24) noted that eolian deposits might have covered surface artifacts.

Archaeological testing at NM-H-46-62 consisted of mapping the entire site with a total station (Figure 6.20). During mapping, five additional features were identified: three “charcoal” stains and two rock alignments. These five features, along with the ash pile recorded during previous investigations, were all found to be natural phenomena during data recovery. Because it was anticipated that the structure ruin would be completely excavated during data recovery, and that the other features would be investigated as well, no excavations were conducted during the testing phase.


The site sat on an eroding surface immediately underlain by Cretaceous-age deposits. Eolian sediments had accumulated on portions of the site, including in and around the structure ruin (Feature 1), especially to the north, east, and south of the feature. Most of the area to the west is deflated, and Cretaceous rock and residuum are exposed at the surface. Much of the sandy eolian sediment was likely transported to the site from the wash to the south.

Chapter 6 Historic Navajo Sites 160 DATA RECOVERY ACTIVITIES

Due to the lack of archival information and diagnostic artifacts, little was known about this site's history, the age of its Navajo occupation, its function and seasonality, and the kinds of activities carried out there. The identified bread-oven feature suggested the kind of investment in a cooking facility that one would expect within a residential site. But the structure itself was puzzling in that it was too small to have housed a family or to have been easily divided into the male and female activity areas, along with interior ritual space, that have been documented in larger hogans (Jett and Spencer 1981:17–18; Nabakov and Easton 1989). Its small size suggested that it was perhaps the residence (probably seasonal) of an unmarried individual, a storage feature, or some other kind of non-residential structure. At any rate, the primary goal of the data recovery investigation was to attempt to understand the age and function of this site and its features. Accordingly, the focus of the proposed data recovery was to produce a detailed map of the stone structure, using LiDAR scanning and image rendering (Figure 6.21), and excavate this feature in its entirety. In addition, the data recovery plan called for sample excavations in and around the other features at the site (Figure 6.22).

During data recovery fieldwork, the structure was LiDAR-mapped and completely excavated, and this main component of the plan was completed. However, the proposed excavations into the other features were modified or curtailed, primarily because of the absence of any subsurface staining or archaeological remains within Feature 2 (other than the stone concentration), and the fact that all of the other features at the site were quickly determined to be natural phenomena.

Figure 6.21. NM-H-46-62, LiDAR imaging of Feature 1 (the structure ruin) prior to

excavation, looking east.

Chapter 6 Historic Navqjo Sites 161

---

Hand scrape 5 x 5-m areas around rock

alignments/possible ramadas

\ r \

\ \

Feature 8

Feature 7

LiDAR map and fully excavate

ogan

Hand excavate

bread oven, hand scrape surrounding 5 x 5-m area

Hand excavate half of each

charcoal stain

NM-H-46-62 N

101 5 Legend

& Datum E

.-.Site Boundary s

- Feature

·-H-· Proposed Slope Limit SWCA

Fence -Pavement Edge

O.Sm contour 0 Meters 10

Figure 6.22. NM-H-46-62, proposed data recovery activities.

Chapter 6 Historic Navajo Sites 162 FEATURES

Previous investigations had identified eight features at NM-H-46-62 (Table 6.6). As it turned out, the data recovery fieldwork revealed that six of these (Features 3–8) were natural phenomena.

Table 6.6. NM-H-46-62, Feature Data

Feature No. Feature Type Dimensions 1 stone structure foundation (ts4 beehooghan7) 5.8 × 4.0 m 2 extramural bread oven 3.0 × 2.5 m 3 charcoal stain 2.3 × 1.0 m 4 charcoal stain 1.0 × 1.0 m 5 rock alignment, possible ramada (chaha'oh) foundation 3.3 m long 6 rock alignment, possible ramada (chaha'oh) foundation 2.9 m long 7 charcoal stain 3.0 × 3.0 m 8 charcoal stain 1.0 × 1.0 m

FEATURE 1 (STRUCTURE RUIN)

Because Feature 1 was so well preserved, prior to excavation the structure was scanned in the field using LiDAR technology to produce high-resolution, three-dimensional renderings of the feature (Figure 6.23; Figure 6.24; Figure 6.25). A block of four 2 × 2–m hand-excavation units was then laid out over Feature 1 (Figure 6.26). These units divided the interior space of the structure into quarters. Hand excavations proceeded within these units, and the loose eolian sand that filled the structure interior was removed down to the firmer, underlying subsoil. Within the feature’s interior the loose sand was typically 10 cm thick, but ranged from 7 cm to over 20 cm. No hearth or any other interior features were uncovered, no staining was evident, nor were any artifacts encountered during the excavation. Moreover, no floor could be positively identified; the firmer matrix below the loose sand was simply the natural underlying subsoil.

Figure 6.23. NM-H-46-62, LiDAR-generated shaded-relief plan view of the structure ruin (in the center of the image) and surrounding area. Most of the smaller features are vegetation.


Figure 6.24. NM-H-46-62, LiDAR-generated elevation map of the structure ruin, looking east. Figure 6.25. NM-H-46-62, LiDAR-generated elevation map of the structure ruin, looking

north.


Extent olRocks Exposed at Surlace

0- -- Figure 6.26. NM-H-46-62, Feature 1, showing the block offom 2 x 2-rn excavation units (in

red).

Chapter 6 Historic Navajo Sites 165 In addition to the interior excavation, the rock rubble of the structure walls was removed down to the base course of the stone foundation (Figure 6.27). As with the interior excavation, no artifacts or associated staining were encountered, and the interstices between the rocks were either empty or filled with loose sand. Because all of the sediments observed during excavation appeared unaltered by human activities, no sediment samples were collected from Feature 1.

Although Feature 1 was originally identified as the remains of a hogan, no roof beams were encountered during excavation. Navajo hogans traditionally have their entryways oriented toward the east or northeast (Jett and Spencer 1981:17–18), so this building with its southeastern entrance was somewhat atypical for a hogan. In addition, this structure was very small (3.8 × 3.25 m), and the D-shape is also unusual for a hogan. Moreover, the lack of any associated complete lack of artifacts, staining, and interior features suggests that this was probably not a dwelling, leaving both its historical age and function uncertain. Potential interpretations of the structure features are presented in the site and chapter summaries, below.

FEATURE 2

Feature 2 was originally identified as the remains of a collapsed bread oven (Figure 6.28). Navajo bread ovens, or hornos, are aboveground facilities constructed of a combination of stones and adobe, with an opening at the top and a larger one at the base, preferably facing east. They are typically dome or beehive shaped, although several variations exist. Arabs originally introduced hornos to Spain, and the Spanish introduced them to the New World, where they were adopted by Pueblo Indians. The Navajos may have adopted hornos either directly from the Spanish, or from their Pueblo neighbors, or both, but in any event, Navajo bread ovens tend to be smaller than their Spanish and Pueblo counterparts (Jett and Spencer 1981:180–182).

Prior to excavation, Feature 2 was visible on the ground surface as a low mound of tightly concentrated rock slabs measuring 2.32 × 2.09 m (7.6 × 6.9 feet) (maximum), with a main concentration of rocks measuring 1.88 × 1.1 m (6.2 × 3.6 feet). The investigations into this feature began by placing soil probes within the feature area to explore for subsurface deposits. Because no such deposits were detected, the 2 × 2–m unit proposed for this feature was placed over the densest concentration of rocks exposed on the surface (Figure 6.28). As with Feature 1 (the structure), this excavation removed the upper, loose sand as one level, exposing the lower, firmer subsoil at the base of the unit. The Feature 2 unit did not uncover any artifacts or associated discoloration of the enclosing and underlying sediments. The hand excavation and soil probing revealed that the rocks comprising this feature were contained within two discrete concentrations, the larger one uncovered by the excavation unit and a smaller one less than 1 m to the northwest. None of the rocks showed any clear evidence of having been burned.

The negative findings from both the soil coring and the excavation unit indicated little or no probability of recovering subsurface archaeological remains in association with this feature. Accordingly, it was decided not to proceed with the 5 × 5–m hand scraping of the surrounding area that was called for in the data recovery plan. Rather, a small trench (1.2 m long × 25 cm wide × 20 cm deep) was excavated adjacent to the smaller of the two rock clusters (i.e., the one not exposed by the hand excavation unit). This excavation also did not encounter any artifacts or expose any associated subsurface soil discoloration. Because all of the sediments observed during excavation appeared unaltered by human activities, no sediment samples were collected.


Figure 6.27. NM-H-46-62, Feature 1, post-excavation. showing the base course of foundation stones left in place (top, looking north; bottom, looking south).


Figure 6.28. NM-H-46-62, Feature 2, looking north: top, pre-excavation; bottom, post- excavation.

Chapter 6 Historic Navajo Sites 168 As at Feature 1, the negative findings in Feature 2 were puzzling and left the age and function of this feature essentially unknown. If this feature was indeed a bread oven, it would seem that some ash staining, charcoal, or at least traces of burning on the rocks would be evident. The data recovery excavations seemed to leave more doubt about the function of this feature than was the case prior to the field investigation. One possible explanation is that the feature was burned but was not intensively used.

NATURAL FEATURES

The original survey had identified an “ash dump” (Feature 3), and five additional features were documented during the testing phase. Three of these (Features 4, 7, and 8) were identified as “charcoal stains,” and the other two (Features 5 and 6) were seen as rock alignments that possibly served as ramada foundations. For the ash/charcoal stains, SWCA recommended excavating half of each feature, with 5 × 5–m hand stripping units to be excavated around Features 5 and 6 to clarify the function of these purported rock alignments. Flotation samples were also to be collected from the charcoal stains to identify subsistence practices and fuel use. If no temporally diagnostic artifacts were recovered, samples were to be collected for radiocarbon dating to confirm the hypothesized twentieth-century date. If the rock alignments were found to be associated with ramadas, post holes would be present, and the associated activity surface might have had additional features.

At the beginning of the data recovery fieldwork, no rock alignments could be clearly recognized at the locations of Features 5 and 6. Natural rocks cropped out in this area, but none formed any recognizable alignments. No evidence of disturbance of these “features” since the testing phase was evident, and it was concluded that their identification as rock alignments resulted from overly cautious recording during the testing investigations at the site. Accordingly, the 5 × 5–m hand scrapes proposed for Features 5 and 6 were not carried out.

Investigations into the purported ash/charcoal stains began with formal excavations within Features 3 and 7, as proposed in the data recovery plan (Figure 6.29). Soon after these excavations commenced, it became clear that dark-stained sediments marking these features contained no ash or charcoal, that they contained abundant fragments of decomposing rock, and that neither exhibited a clear boundary (either horizontally or vertically). As with other natural features investigated by this project, it became clear that these “charcoal stains” were, in fact, natural carbonaceous sediments of Cretaceous age. At NM-H-46-62, the pulverized condition of these sediments at the surface made them appear superficially similar to archaeological dark stains, but their subsurface matrices exhibited the blocky structure characteristic of the natural carbonaceous stains documented elsewhere. Accordingly, once this determination was made the excavations within Features 3 and 7 were terminated. Suspecting that Features 4 and 8 were also natural stains, the field crew simply shovel scraped a portion of each of these, confirming their natural origin. Feature 8, in fact, appeared to be dark sediment from Feature 7 that was redeposited downslope within a small drainage.

MATERIALS RECOVERED

No cultural materials were recovered from NM-H-46-62 during either the testing phase or data recovery.


Figure 6.29. NM-H-46-62, Feature 3 (top, looking northwest) and Feature 7 (bottom, looking east). These and other "charcoal stains" at the site proved to be natural carbonaceous sediments of Cretaceous age.

Chapter 6 Historic Navajo Sites 170 SITE INTERPRETATION AND SUMMARY

The site could not be dated because no temporally diagnostic artifacts were identified on the site surface, but it was probably occupied during the early part of the twentieth century, or slightly earlier. The lack of any commercially manufactured artifacts may indicate that the site was occupied prior to 1914, based on evidence from the Navajo Indian Irrigation Project (NIIP) to the east (Gilpin 1993). The railroad arrived in Farmington in 1905, stimulating changes in the local Navajo economy that led to a shift from subsistence to commercial livestock husbandry after 1914, and a sharply increased use of manufactured items among the Navajo.

Interpretations of NM-H-46-62 are hampered by the complete absence of artifacts or archival information. Although Feature 1 was originally assumed to be a hogan, its small size, south- facing entrance, and complete lack of associated artifacts, internal features, or any organic or ash staining suggest a non-habitation structure of limited use. Jett and Spencer (1981:34–35) describe rare occurrences of stone windbreaks among the Navajo that are (1) constructed of dry- laid stone masonry, (2) are arc-shaped, circular, or rectangular, and (3) have either no roofs or flimsy roofs constructed with available material. Navajo windbreaks vary in width from a few feet up to 25 feet (7.6 m). Windbreak walls may stand as low as hip height, and entrances do not necessarily face east. Windbreaks serve as “temporary shelters for use on journeys and on other occasions (such as herding, hunting, pinyon gathering, or temporarily occupying a farm), when more permanent shelter is unavailable” (Jett and Spencer 1981:35). Fire hearths are sometimes built within windbreaks. Feature 1 at NM-H-46-62 seemed much more like one of Jett and Spencer’s windbreaks than a hogan.

The original identification of Feature 2 as a bread oven (or “beehive” oven [Jett and Spencer 1981:180–182]) was also somewhat problematic. The complete absence of ash, charcoal, or any evidence of burning within this feature would seem to argue against its being the remains of an oven, although Jett and Spencer (1981:181) note that, east of the Chuska Mountains, Navajo bread ovens oven have a raised, sand-capped masonry floor. If this was the original configuration of Feature 2, it is possible that erosion has erased any traces of the original oven floor. Even so, the association of a bread oven—a rather high-investment cooking facility—with a rather expedient structure (Feature 1) seems unusual. It is possible that the two features are not directly related or contemporary, and that Feature 2 was a bread oven associated with a dwelling whose remains have either been destroyed or are outside the US 491 right-of-way, but no such remains are known in the vicinity of this site.

RECOMMENDATIONS

The 2006 investigations at NM-H-46-62 fulfilled the goals of the data recovery plan, and the proposed project will have no effect on cultural resources at this site. However, it is possible that archaeological remains that could contribute additional significant information about this site are located outside the right-of-way. Accordingly, any future ground-disturbing activities within the site but outside the right-of-way, and that fall under appropriate regulations, should be preceded by preparation and execution of a data recovery plan.

CHAPTER 7 OTHER PREHISTORIC SITES (NM-H-35-17 AND NM-H-35-19)

Jim A. Railey, Christopher A. Carlson, and Adam Sullins (with contributions by Janet Hagopian, Lance Lundquist, and Mindy Bonine)

NM-H-35-17

County: San Juan Elevation: 5,610 feet Landowner: Navajo Nation Tribal Trust Navajo Chapter: Sanostee Cultural Affiliation and Age: Archaic, Anasazi (Pueblo II, A.D. 900–1300) Site Type: Artifact scatter with feature Size: 1,154 m2

NRHP Eligibility Status: Eligible Data Recovery Activities: Complete excavation of Feature 1, machine stripping of the southern portion of site, and hand excavation of any uncovered features. Site surface collection was undertaken during the project’s testing phase.

SITE DESCRIPTION

NM-H-35-17 (Figure 7.1) was a small prehistoric site measuring 57 × 27 m (187 × 89 feet), with an area of 1,154 m2 (0.29 acre). Located on the east side of US 491, NM-H-35-17 was north of Newcomb, New Mexico, on an upland surface underlain by eroded and decomposing sedimentary deposits of Cretaceous age. Vegetation in this area includes shadscale, Russian thistle, and grass. A thin layer of eolian sand covered the southern end of the site. Cretaceous deposits were exposed on the surface in the northern portion of the site and just below the present ground surface in the southern portion of the site. These deposits consist of extremely weathered, fine-grained sediments of silts and clays. On the site’s surface was a small, sparse lithic scatter with one observed whiteware sherd. All archaeological remains were either on or very close to the present ground surface. One thermal feature (Feature 1) partially exposed at the surface was discovered during testing.

Disturbances to the site appeared to be minimal. The site was bracketed on the east by modern US 491 and on the west by a former alignment of US 666 and roadside activity may have impacted the site. A barbed-wire fence ran north-south through the center of the site. Light wind and water erosion and bioturbation were the only other impacts.

Chapter 7 Other Prehistoric Sites 172 Figure 7.1. NM-H-35-17 during testing phase, looking east. Old Highway 666 and Ford Butte

are visible in the distance. PREVIOUS INVESTIGATIONS

This site was recorded during the NNDOT survey for the present US 491 project (Walkenhorst and John 2003:238–240) as a lithic and ceramic scatter with no observed features (Figure 7.2). The surveyors noted that the site surface was covered with yellow-brown sandy silts and sandstone outcrops and recorded the site inside the eastern right-of-way fence line. The reported artifact assemblage consisted of a fairly low density scatter of lithic materials with one sherd. The lithic assemblage was primarily secondary and tertiary flakes of Narbona Pass chert and petrified wood. The ceramic artifact was an unidentified late Pueblo whiteware jar sherd. SWCA carried out testing investigations at the site in 2004 (Railey 2004:5.1–5.11). The testing effort included collection of all artifacts on the site surface, backhoe trenching, and excavation of hand units (Figure 7.3). Just a few meters south of the site boundary (as defined by the surface artifact scatter) foot traffic uncovered a dark stain, recorded as Feature 1. A 1 × 1–m unit was hand excavated within this stain. The site was then recommended for data recovery investigations.

Chapter 7 Other Prehistoric Sites 173

i

=== ==::::::.

/

Plan Map for Sites NM-B-35-17

MN OL..{ _.120m

I l

I· I SURVEY CORRIDOR

I '/ I l

l l OldGravel

Storage Area

l

'

Siledalum -• - Site boundary

US HWY 491/666 ,. Fence line

-..Drainoge OldUS HWY 666

lififid Cattle guard


.t

- Q.

-.

I


"'":t "'" --- EJI

J· ' t ; I

I I

T j

I T I I 1 l , I

I - _... I I f I TU2 I I BHT 3 I

m f

-'-,'( I I I

,I I

I» 1/1

'1 TU3 • l I

m ' ! I cc ' f I (I) BHT1 1 BHT2

t I

NM-H-35-17 Testing Legend

-& Datum

TU1 \..,.. f Feature 1

f f ± i T

1 ••

i

Site Boundary 7

. Feature 1

. Test Unit

Backhoe Trench 0

C::J Surface Collection Units

·-++-·- Proposed Slope Limit *"-* Fence - Pavement Edge

O.Sm contour

s

4 8 12 16

Meters

SWCA


Chapter 7 Other Prehistoric Sites 175 Feature 1 was initially observed as a 30-cm-diameter surface stain. The stain was shovel-scraped to remove the 1–2 cm of eolian sediment covering the feature, revealing an amorphous dark stain measuring approximately 4 × 3 m. Test Unit (TU) 3 was placed in the center of the shovel- scraped area and excavated to a depth of 30 cm below ground surface (Figure 7.4). This unit revealed two strata of black and gray clay, underlain by the sterile Cretaceous residuum. No artifacts were encountered, either on the surface of the feature or within TU 3. Bulk soil, flotation, pollen, and radiocarbon samples were taken from the feature itself.

Figure 7.4. NM-H-35-17, Feature 1, looking north. The pollen sample contained two maize pollen grains. Charred macrobotanical remains recovered from the two flotation samples were juniper charcoal, unidentified charcoal, grass stems, and squash rind. A sample consisting of 0.06 g of Atriplex/Sarcobatus (saltbush/greasewood) charcoal from the feature submitted to Beta Analytic Inc. for AMS radiocarbon dating yielded a calibrated (2-sigma) date of A.D. 650–700. The absence of any artifacts in Feature 1 left this date in doubt, as well as the origin of the feature itself.

Chapter 7 Other Prehistoric Sites 176 SITE STRATIGRAPHY AND GEOMORPHOLOGY

NM-H-35-17 was on an upland surface underlain by eroded, decomposing Cretaceous sedimentary deposits. These ancient deposits, present at or just below the present ground surface, consist of extremely weathered, fine-grained sediments (silts and clays) exhibiting strong iron (hematite and limonite) staining and strongly developed, angular and platy structure. Lithified sandstone is locally present within these deposits, beginning at 20 cm below the present ground surface. Overlying these ancient sediments is a very thin veneer of recently deposited eolian sand, which is virtually absent in the northern portion of the site and somewhat thicker (up to 4 cm+) toward the southern end of the site. Due to these characteristics, all archaeological remains are located either on, or very close to, the present ground surface.

DATA RECOVERY ACTIVITIES

Feature 1 lay within the proposed construction limits, and because it was only partially investigated during SWCA's archaeological testing at the site, it was recommended that the remaining portion of this feature be hand excavated during data recovery (Figure 7.5). In addition, because Feature 1 was discovered inadvertently during testing, it was recommended that the southern half of the site (i.e., south of N 980) be scraped using mechanical equipment to determine if any additional features might still be present beneath the thin mantle of eolian sand covering this portion of the site. Any features uncovered were to be hand excavated. The southern portion of the site was mechanically stripped during data recovery using a pan scraper to determine if intact subsurface cultural deposits were present.

Because Feature 1 was partially covered by eolian sands, data recovery at NM-H-35-17 began with shallow machine scraping to uncover this stain. Soon after scraping of this area commenced, it became clear that the stain identified as Feature 1 extended over a much larger area than was originally documented during the testing phase, and its boundaries were not easily delineated (Figure 7.6). Moreover, a close examination of this stain following scraping showed that its matrix consisted almost exclusively of non-ashy, carbonaceous soil with a strong blocky structure and no charcoal. Elsewhere in this region, these same soil characteristics are found in carbonaceous stains of Cretaceous age. Although superficially resembling dark stains of anthropogenic origin, the matrix characteristics of these Cretaceous stains are not the same as those of archaeological feature fill and midden stains.

Because of the apparent natural origin of at least most of the dark staining within Feature 1, the absence of any discrete portion of this stain that was clearly anthropogenic in origin, and its very irregular shape and amorphous boundaries, no further investigation of Feature 1 was carried out following machine scraping. Although no ceramic or lithic artifacts were recovered from, or observed within, this feature during either the testing or data recovery phases, the recovered charred plant remains (including squash) and maize pollen were clearly not of Cretaceous origin and suggest human activity in and around the feature. Accordingly, the feature may have been the combined product of natural and cultural processes. The charred plant material may have represented the remains of cultural activity that had become incorporated into the Cretaceous stain, by either natural or cultural processes. The possibility that some of the charcoal was the product of a natural burn event also cannot be ruled out, although this would not easily explain the presence of charred squash rind. If the charcoal was culturally derived, it may have become introduced into naturally occurring sediments through bioturbation, such as rodent activity.


i I

I I

!

--

SWCA

N

\ l

' ,,,,,r'\

--- "" \

'' I

,' t I I

I I I I I "'-... I I

1o;z I &.. I

5 I ........ I t I

t

\\ .j I

BHT1\, • ; ,/ BHT 2

F - .. \ (;;; /

'- ......,t complete hand

excavation of Feature 1

Legend NM-H-35-17

&. Datum WE

.- 1Site Boundary s . Feature

. Test Unit

Backhoe Trench 0 4 8 12 16

L:2f Machine Scrape

·-++-·- Proposed Slope Limit Fence - Pavement Edge

0.5m Contour

Meters ENVIRONMUUA L CONSULTAtllS

Figure 7.5. NM-H-35-17, proposed data recovery investigations.

Chapter 7 Other Prehistoric Sites 178 Figure 7.6. NM-H-35-17, Feature 1, following machine scraping. Most of the feature proved

to be a natural carbonaceous stain of Cretaceous age. Charcoal collected during the project’s testing phase yielded a (2-sigma) calibrated radiocarbon date of A.D. 650–700, suggesting a Basketmaker III affiliation for this feature. The absence of associated ceramics—or any other artifacts—leaves this date in doubt. The sherd recovered from the site surface appeared to be associated with the later Pueblo II period, further complicating our understanding of Feature 1. Many features are the product of intensive cultural activities and commonly, as a result, include artifacts in association. Features that do not contain associated artifacts are either non-cultural in origin or the product of limited cultural use. If Feature 1 was the product of cultural activity, all relevant data, including a radiocarbon date and botanical information, had already been recovered during the testing phase.

No other features (natural or cultural) were uncovered during machine scraping at NM-H-35-17, and data recovery was terminated at this point.

MATERIALS RECOVERED

Only 17 artifacts were collected from NM-H-35-17, all during the testing phase. One was a ceramic sherd, and the rest were flaked stone debitage.

LITHIC ARTIFACTS (by Lance Lundquist)

Sixteen lithic artifacts were collected at NM-H-35-17, all from a 100 percent surface collection carried out during the testing phase (Table 7.1). The density of surface lithic artifacts was low for the project area, at 0.33 per 25 m2. The assemblage consisted entirely of flakes, 14 (88%) of


which were Narbona Pass chert. One specimen was of an unknown chert type and one was quartzite. Narbona Pass chert was recovered in low quantities during the US 491 testing phase, with only 49 pieces identified from all 25 tested sites. That 29 percent of these were in a single site assemblage of 16 flakes indicates that the overall distribution of Narbona Pass chert is quite sparse within the project area.

Table 7.1. NM-H-35-17, Lithic Artifacts Collected

Material Type Core Flaked Stone

Ground Stone

Projectile Point Tool Total

Narbona Pass chert 14 14 Other chert 1 1 Quartzite 1 1 Total 0 16 0 0 0 16

None of the surface flakes from this site were 3 cm or more in length or retained any cortex. In comparison, for the project area as a whole, roughly one-third of the surface flakes were 3 cm or more in length, and the same proportion retained more than 33 percent cortex. In summary, the flakes from this site were small, were without cortex, and were in general of the highest-quality materials, a pattern consistent with tool production.

Overall, the high-quality lithic materials, uniformity of lithic material types, lack of tools or ground stone, and small assemblage size at NM-H-35-17 are indicative of short-term tool production, possibly during a one-time event. The single sherd recovered from the site could have been intrusive, as the lithic assemblage was generally consistent with an aceramic age. In sum, the lithic artifacts from NM-H-35-17 indicate short-term use of the site.

CERAMIC ARTIFACTS (by Janet Hagopian)

A single indeterminate Chuska White Ware bowl sherd was collected from the surface of this site. It had a trace of mineral paint on its interior, and the design appeared to have been a broad band (7–8 cm thick) encircling the bowl about 8 cm below the rim. This sherd may have been Taylor Black-on-white, which dates to A.D. 900–1000, suggesting a Pueblo II period association for this site.

BOTANICAL REMAINS

A pollen sample and two flotation samples were collected from Feature 1. The pollen sample contained two maize pollen grains. Charred macrobotanical remains recovered from the flotation samples were juniper and unidentified charcoal, grass stems, and squash rind. The maize and squash remains suggest that these cultigens were cultivated and/or consumed at this site.

SITE CHRONOLOGY

Chronological information from NM-H-35-17 derived from both chronometric and relative dating. A sample of Atriplex/Sarcobatus (saltbush/greasewood) charcoal from Feature 1 yielded a calibrated (2-sigma) AMS radiocarbon date of A.D. 650–700. However, the absence of associated ceramics (or any other durable artifacts) leaves this date in doubt as an indicator of the age of this feature. Relative dating was based on the debitage assemblage and the single ceramic sherd. The debitage assemblage displayed attributes generally typical of preceramic patterns,

Chapter 7 Other Prehistoric Sites 180 suggesting that the lithic debris may have been left by either Archaic or Paleoindian flintknappers. If so, the lithic artifacts at this site (or at least most of them) were unrelated to the ceramic sherd, which was probably Pueblo II in age. However, the debitage assemblage could have dated to the period of ceramic use and may have represented a tool-making event in this period.

SITE SUMMARY

NM-H-35-17 marked the remains of a small, ephemeral occupation or multiple brief occupations. The earliest occupation may have occurred during preceramic times and may have involved nothing more than a temporary stopover (or multiple stopovers) that included non- intesive tool-production episode(s). Sometime during the occupation of this site, charred plant remains were deposited and became incorporated into Feature 1, a natural carbonaceous stain of Cretaceous age. The presence of squash rind and maize pollen within sediment samples collected from Feature 1 suggests that some of these botanical specimens, at least, were introduced into the site through human activity, although some of the charred wood could have been the result of natural burning. Radiocarbon processing of saltbush/greasewood charcoal from the feature yielded a Basketmaker III period date, but it is not clear whether this date reflects cultural activity at the site during this time. No diagnostic artifacts from this time period were recovered. The last episode of use at this site was also very ephemeral and apparently occurred during the Pueblo II period, as evidenced by the single whiteware sherd.

RECOMMENDATIONS

Site NM-H-35-17 has been stripped of its sediments with no intact subsurface cultural deposits remaining, and testing and data recovery have recovered all potential archaeological data. Although a portion of the site extends outside the US 491 right-of-way, that portion is thoroughly deflated, with no eolian deposits and no potential for intact subsurface deposits. Therefore, no further treatment is recommended for this or any future projects that might affect the site.

NM-H-35-19 (THE LITTLE WATER VILLAGE SITE)

County: San Juan Elevation: 5,610 feet Landowner: Navajo Nation Tribal Trust Navajo Chapter: Sanostee Cultural Affiliation and Age: Anasazi (Basketmaker III–Pueblo I, A.D. 645–830) Site Type: Habitation/permanent Size: 74,400 m² NRHP Eligibility Recommendation: Eligible

SITE DESCRIPTION

NM-H-35-19 originally consisted of multiple habitation structures with associated extramural features and an artifact scatter of 10,000+ ceramic, flaked stone, and ground stone items. According to Walkenhorst and John’s (2003) survey report (Figure 7.7), this site


was recorded by G. S. Condon in 1979 as “An extensive sherd scatter as well as slab foundations…visible on portions of the site. Three main areas of sherd concentrations are evidenced-each with small rubble mounds.” This site is also known as the Little Water Village Site. The site was excavated in 1979…and yielded 4 pit houses, 7 detached rooms, 2 ramadas, 53 extramural features, and numerous artifacts.

A pit house (Str-l), 5 rubble concentrations (F-l thru 5), 5 artifact concentrations (F-7 thru 11), and one historic trash dump (F-6) were noted with this re-investigation. Str-l is a BM III pit house eroding out of a newly formed arroyo. Due to the modern disturbances it is hard to ascertain what the other features represent. (Walkenhorst and John 2003)

The site was located on both sides of US 491, within and outside of the highway right-of-way, along the south bank of Sanostee Wash. Site dimensions were approximately 310 × 240 m (1,017 × 787 feet), with an area of 74,400 m² (18.3 acres). Sediments consisted of gray-brown sandy silts interspersed with friable sandstone outcrops. Vegetation present included shadscale, Russian thistle, four-wing saltbush, willow, greasewood, and bunch grasses.

The unexcavated portions of the site appeared to be in fair to good condition. The site was crossed north-south by modern US 491 and a former alignment of US 666, east-west by two roads, and north-south by two barbed-wire fences and a power line. A 20-m-diameter pile of asphalt had been dumped on the site. Other impacts included light wind and water erosion and bioturbation. A 100 × 40–m borrow pit had been excavated on the site, but outside of the highway right-of-way. The largest impact to the site was the 1979 excavation activities, when 100 percent of the observed features within the current US 491 right-of-way were excavated. The 1979 excavation project also mitigated features outside of the current US 491 right-of-way (Figure 7.8).

PREVIOUS INVESTIGATIONS

The New Mexico Laboratory of Anthropology recorded the site in 1977 (Oakes 1979) and conducted large-scale excavations in 1979 (Condon 1982) for an earlier construction project along what was then US 666. In 1980, the site was revisited during a survey (Condon 1980). The ARMS database does not list the report recipient. Tree-ring data from Condon’s excavations were analyzed as part of the University of Arizona’s inventory of tree-ring-dated prehistoric sites in the American Southwest. In 2003, Roger Walkenhorst and Olsen John of the NNDOT revisited the site as part of the present US 491 project (Walkenhorst and John 2003:240–241).


I

I I, -

I

I

I

FIGURE 120: Plan .Map for Sites NM-H-35-19/LA 16029

(· F-10 ( 1

MN . 0 )0 l'l'lt ltts

I

.. ' ::..-

. /: ..- / 7

F-1

'\

\. - \

' F-2 \ ' l F- )

SURVEY CORRIDOR

I ·.·

,I_

/ F -5 F-4

- J Legend:

e, Site datum - • - Site boundary

c:J Pit house ?.J Rubble concenlralion

C:) Artifact concentration .Q_ Excavated area (Condon 198') .::::..=...= US HWY 491/666 . Fence line

,..._, Contour line

/"-----

v

/r t "-------'

J - -

I SURVEY CORRIDOR

Qld US HWY 666 Cattle guard

,........Drainage f::= :J Borrow Pit

I

Figure 7.7. NM-H-35-19 survey map (from Walkenhorst and John2003).


Figure 7.8. NM-H-35-19 (Little Water Village), excavation blocks from the 1979 data

recovery project: top, north block; bottom, south block. See subsequent figures for locations of these blocks within the site.

Chapter 7 Other Prehistoric Sites 184 DATA RECOVERY

Because it was not entirely clear whether the 1979 excavations had exhausted the site's research potential, and given the possibility that human remains might still be present within the right-of- way, SWCA conducted data recovery activities at the Little Water Village site as part of the current project. The fieldwork was carried out between June and August 2006. The site was mapped using a Trimble XT GPS unit with sub-meter accuracy. Surface artifacts were then systematically collected, either as individual artifacts or within 5 × 5–m units where artifact densities were relatively high (Figure 7.9). Individual artifacts and surface collection units were plotted using the GPS unit. The high-density areas proved to be artifacts concentrated within backdirt piles from the 1979 excavations (Figure 7.10; Figure 7.11; Figure 7.12). Following surface collection, three 30-m-long backhoe trenches—two on the east side of the site (just west of the eastern right-of-way fence) and one on the west side (just east of the western right-of-way fence)—were then excavated to determine the nature, location, and context of subsurface cultural materials (Figure 7.13). The backhoe trenches revealed complex stratigraphy (both alluvial and eolian, as well as backfill from the previous excavations) and soil development, but no intact subsurface archaeological remains.

Following surface collection and backhoe trenching, two hand excavation units were placed in an area of high lithic-artifact density marked by dark staining on the surface, just north of the large excavation block from 1979. These units were excavated to 40 cm below the present ground surface in 10-cm levels, and the fill was screened through 1/8-inch mesh. Fifty-six artifacts were recovered from these units, 46 (82.1%) of which were flakes, most of them <0.5 cm in size. Following excavation of these units and examination of their profiles, it was determined that they were located within backdirt from the 1979 excavations. The profiles exhibited alternating layers and lenses of dark, midden-stained, ashy sediment and lighter-colored sediment (probably subsoil), all of which had been redeposited. The recovery of so many flakes in such a small size range suggests that most or all of the backdirt here had been previously screened, probably through 1/4-inch and/or 1/2-inch mesh (the report on the previous excavations [Condon 1982] does not specify what screen sizes were used).

Following the backhoe trenching and hand excavations, the site was machine scraped to determine if any intact subsurface features remained. Machine scraping was restricted to the area within the existing highway right-of-way fences, excluding areas covered by road embankments and debris piles from previous road construction (Figure 7.13; Figure 7.14). SWCA archaeologists monitored all scraping activities, which occurred in rounds, with each round involving up to 5 cm of sediments being scraped from the site’s surface. Although some stains were exposed during the scraping, none were recognizable as cultural features, and all were probably rodent burrows or root casts. Artifacts and mottled sediments were observed in the southern portion of the site near the location of the previous excavations, but hand shovel scraping within this anomaly revealed it to be archaeological backdirt.


Meters no 15 30 60

\1 Ceramic

e Historic

+ Lithic

0 Shell

-- Right of Way

Fence

1 Foot Contour

c=J Collection Unit

Previous Excavatio

NM-H-35-19 N

A ----- SWCA

Figure 7.9. Little Water Village (NM-H-35-19), aerial image showing previous excavations, surface artifacts, and surface collection units.


Meters no 15 30 60

A

Datum Artifacts/Meter Oo -o.1 c::J o.1-0.2

Fence

1 Foot Contour

0 Collection Unit

Artifact Desnity N

0.3 <

Search Radius 12.8m

Previous Excavatio ----- SWCA

Figure 7.10. Little Water Village (NM-H-35-19), density map, all surface-artifacts.


60

C r

.0.1-0.2 1 Foot Contour

.0.2-0.3 Meters

0.3 <

Search Radius 12.8m

Previous Excavationo 15 30

I"""'....W- I SWCA

Figure 7.11. Little Water Village (NM-H-35-19), density map, surface ceramic artifacts.


A 60

.1. Datum

Lithics/Meter r=J o-0.025

- 0.025- 0.05

-- Right of Way

Fence

1 Foot Contour

DCollection Unit

NM-H-35-19 Licthic Desnity N

- 0.05 - 0.075 0.075 <

Search Radius 12.8m

Meters Previous Excavationo 15 30

I"""'....W-

I SWCA

Figure 7.12. Little Water Village (NM-H-35-19), density map, surface lithic artifacts.


60

.1> Datum = Backhoe Trench

Fence 1 Foot Contour NM-H-35-19 N -- Right of Way

OrestUnit

c::::J Mechanical Scraping A Meters

Previous Excavation

0 15 30 l""''o..M- I SWCA

Figure 7.13. Little Water Village (NM-H-35-19), location and extent of data recovery

excavations.

Chapter 7 Other Prehistoric Sites 190 Figure 7.14. Little Water Village (NM-H-35-19), overview looking north along the machine-

scraped surface. MATERIALS RECOVERED

SWCA's data recovery investigations recovered 324 artifacts from Little Water Village, 78.1 percent from surface collections (Table 7.2). These artifacts included 194 prehistoric ceramic sherds, 116 flaked stone artifacts, two ground stone items, nine pieces of fire-cracked rock, one piece of “other” stone, one shell item, and one piece of metal. The ceramics assemblage, lithic artifacts, and the single historic artifact are summarized here.

PREHISTORIC CERAMICS (by Janet Hagopian)

Over 90 percent of the 194 sherds collected from NM-H-35-19 were from surface collections; the rest were from excavation units (Table 7.3). Little Water Village was initially excavated in the early 1980s by the Museum of New Mexico. The paucity of sherds confirmed that previous excavations were thorough.

The ceramic assemblage was dominated by Tusayan Gray Ware, notably plain Tusayan Gray Ware. Tusayan White Ware, Cibola White Ware, Chuska Gray Ware, and Tallahogan Red were also present. The indeterminate whiteware sherds were tempered with crushed rock and may have been associated with northern Chuska ceramics. Nearly all of the grayware sherds were from jars; one Lino Gray seed jar sherd was present. The whiteware sherds were from both bowls and jars. The Tallahogan Red sherds were probably from the same jar. The production dates for Tallahogan Red are A.D. 575–780, suggesting a Basketmaker III–early Pueblo I period occupation for this site, a supposition supported by the presence of Lino Gray, Lino Polished, plain Tusayan and Chuska graywares, and early Tusayan and Chuska whitewares.

Chapter 7 Other Prehistoric Sites 191 Table 7.2. Little Water Village (NM-H-35-19), Recovered Artifacts

Material Surface Excavation Units Totals Biface 1 1 Core 2 2 Core fragment 2 2 Core tool 1 1 Debitage 52 45 97 Edge modified Flakes 6 1 7 FCR 2 7 9 Flake tool 4 4 Hammerstone fragment 1 1 Mano 1 1 Metal 1 1 Metate fragment 1 1 Other stone 1 1 Projectile point 1 1 Shell 1 1 Sherd 177 17 194 Totals 253 71 324

Table 7.3. Little Water Village (NM-H-35-19), Ceramics Collected during Data Recovery

Ceramic Type Count Indeterminate whiteware 11 All Indeterminate 11 Indeterminate Tusayan White Ware 1 Indeterminate BMIII–PI Tusayan White Ware 2 All Tusayan White Ware 3 Indeterminate BMIII–PI painted Cibola White Ware 2 All Cibola White Ware 2 Tallahogan Red 5 All Early Basketmaker Redware 5 Indeterminate Tusayan Gray Ware 3 Indeterminate plain Tusayan Gray Ware 156 Indeterminate plain fugitive red Tusayan Gray Ware 4 Lino Gray 2 Lino Polished 1 All Tusayan Gray Ware 166 Indeterminate Chuska Gray Ware 4 Indeterminate plain Chuska Gray Ware 2 Indeterminate narrow clapboard Chuska Gray Ware 1 All Chuska Gray Ware 7 Total 194

Chapter 7 Other Prehistoric Sites 192 LITHIC ARTIFACTS

Although the recovered lithic assemblage was small, it contained a variety of artifact classes and types. Most of the lithic assemblage was collected from the surface of the site, and the debitage exhibited characteristics reflecting both the core-flake tool technology of the Anasazi tradition and the larger flake sizes typical of surface-collected material (see Chapter 8). The debitage assemblage from the two excavation units consisted of small thinning flakes, and the high proportion of these specimens was most likely the result of the 1/8-inch-screened hand excavations within backdirt piles from the 1979 excavation, which were likely screened through 1/4-inch and/or 1/2 inch mesh. The single projectile point, from the surface, was a late prehistoric type and was consistent with the Basketmaker III–Pueblo I affiliation of the site's occupation. See Chapter 8 for more data on the lithic artifacts from this site.

One lithic item observed at the site, but not collected, was a large slab deflector of sandstone (Figure 7.15). This item was just outside of, and leaning against, the western right-of-way fence, not far from an arroyo. It had been shaped by circumferential flaking, and was probably from the remains of a pit house in the western part of the site, outside the right-of-way. Slab deflectors are common in Basketmaker III–Pueblo I pit houses, and thus this item appears to have been part of the main occupation at the site. Its presence further suggests that more pit-house remains are present at the site and have likely been impacted by arroyo erosion.

Figure 7.15. Little Water Village site (NM-H-35-19), sandstone-slab deflector just outside of

the western right-of-way fence. Note the large arroyo in the background, in an area where the US 491 survey identified artifact concentrations. Erosion along the arroyo probably exposed this large artifact.

Chapter 7 Other Prehistoric Sites 193 HISTORIC ARTIFACTS (by Mindy Bonine)

One metal cartridge was recovered from the surface of NM-H-35-19. The technological progression of ammunition has occurred over several centuries and in numerous countries, but the period of development most appropriate for this discussion is the introduction of the self- contained metallic cartridge. Innovations to centerfire cartridges (where the primer is located in the center of the case rim) and rimfire cartridges (where the priming compound is located around the entire inside of the rim’s outer diameter) occurred almost simultaneously, between 1856 and 1858 (Barnes 1972:69). Smokeless powder, another innovation to cartridge development, was introduced in the 1890s, as were high-velocity cartridges (Barnes 1972:3). Rifle, shotgun, and handgun cartridges have been continually refined over the years, but several of the older designs are still in use. Cartridges are generally stamped with the name of the manufacturer and the type of ammunition, and are sometimes good indicators of dates of occupation at historic sites.

The cartridge in the assemblage at NM-H-35-19, stamped “WRA Co. 44 WCF,” was for a .44-40 Winchester handgun. This type of cartridge is a centerfire, and was originally developed for the Winchester Model 1873 lever-action repeating rifle. It was so popular that a handgun version was developed as well. The ammunition was discontinued for rifles around 1937, but handguns used the caliber until about 1942 (Barnes 1972:61, 169).

SITE CHRONOLOGY

Chronological information from NM-H-35-19 derives from diagnostic artifacts and the results of previous investigations. The ceramic sherds and a single diagnostic arrow point recovered by SWCA both indicate a Basketmaker III–Pueblo I time frame for the site, consistent with the findings of the large-scale excavations at this site in 1979 (Condon 1982). The large slab deflector observed outside the right-of-way is also consistent with this cultural/temporal affiliation. The single cartridge suggests early twentieth-century activity at this site, but there was no evidence of historic occupation.

SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS

The Little Water Village site had been excavated in 1979, and current investigations suggest that no intact cultural deposits remain within the US 491 right-of-way. Accordingly, the proposed project will have no effect on cultural resources. However, it is very likely that intact subsurface archaeological remains are still present outside the right-of-way, especially on the west side of the site. Accordingly, any future ground-disturbing activities within the site boundaries outside the right-of-way, that fall under appropriate regulations, should be preceded by a data recovery plan.

CHAPTER 8 LITHIC ARTIFACTS

Jim A. Railey, Lance Lundquist, Liangya Jia, and Erik Barry Erhardt

INTRODUCTION

The data recovery investigations along US 491 collected 7,157 lithic artifacts: 7,082 flaked stone, 47 ground stone, 25 “other” stone, and 3 chunks of raw material. Ninety-eight percent of the lithic artifacts were recovered from the Sandy Rise site (NM-H-51-55), all but 21 of them from that site’s Basketmaker II component; the remainder of the assemblage came from the Little Water Village site (NM-H-35-19), dating to the Basketmaker III–Pueblo I periods, and NM-H-46-55, a historic Navajo site (Table 8.1). Materials from the Sandy Rise site were all from excavations, whereas those from Little Water Village were from surface collection and excavation, and the six specimens from NM-H-46-55 were collected from the surface.

Table 8.1. US 491 Data Recovery, Distribution of Lithic Classes by Site, Recovered

Assemblage

Site Flaked Stone Ground Stone Other Stone Chunk Total NM-H-51-55 6,964 42 14 3 7,023 NM-H-35-19 116 2 10 128 NM-H-46-55 2 3 1 6

Total 7,082 47 25 3 7,157 BACKGROUND AND RESEARCH POTENTIAL

Flaked stone is often the most abundant artifact class on prehistoric sites in the Southwest. Unlike ceramics, metals, or textiles, the fabrication of flaked stone tools involves a reductive technology (Collins 1975:16; Deetz 1967:48-49). As a result, the production of flaked stone implements generates large amounts of waste debris, as well as tools. Through the analysis of flaked stone, there is a tremendous potential for generating explicit data relevant to questions surrounding mobility and sedentism, intensity of occupation, the range of activities carried out on a site or at a group of sites, variation in use of raw materials, and chronology and technological change over time.

DIACHRONIC PATTERNS IN FLAKED STONE TECHNOLOGIES

In the Southwest and other parts of North America, research has revealed a broad shift from a technology emphasizing formal tool production (primarily bifaces) in the Paleoindian and Archaic traditions to one focused on a more expedient, core-flake tool technology in later prehistoric times (Andrefsky 1991; Brown 1986; Chapman 1977:447; Cowan 1999; Irwin- Williams 1973:5-14; Jeske 1992; Kelly 1988; Nelson 1994; Parry and Kelly 1987; Vierra 2005). The overall trend seems to be related, in part, to a sharp decrease in residential mobility from pre-agricultural to agricultural times. This trend may be a bit more complicated, as some researchers in the Southwest (e.g., Sullivan and Rozen 1985:767) have observed what appears to be a reduction in soft-hammer biface manufacture during earlier Archaic times, with a

Chapter 8 Lithic Artifacts 195 resurgence of biface production during the Late Archaic and Basketmaker II periods. At any rate, the broad technological shift from Archaic to Puebloan times reportedly involved:

(1) the long-term replacement of bifacial knives with simple flake tools, (2) a shift from the use of higher-quality materials like cherts and chalcedonies for biface production to lower-quality materials like silicified wood and basalt for expedient flake production, (3) an increase in the variety of lithic materials being worked, and (4) the increased use of marginally retouched and unretouched flakes. (Vierra 2005:188)

Explanations for this broad pattern of change rest mostly on assumptions about conditions faced by highly mobile Paleoindian and Archaic hunter-gatherers on the one hand, and the emphasis on farming and corporate group activities in the Puebloan time frame on the other. For highly mobile hunters and gatherers, it has been assumed that bifaces served both as blanks for spear and dart points and as light-weight cores (for flake-tool production) that can be more easily transported than heavier (and bulkier) globular cores (Parry and Kelly 1987; Vierra 2005:187). Bifaces also offer the advantage of increasing tool life through resharpening (Kelly 1988). A recent experimental study, however, calls into question the assumption that bifaces served effectively as cores for the production of flake tools because the amount of usable flake edge produced is considerably lower for bifacial cores than for amorphous ones, even in relation to weight differences between these two core types (Prasciunas 2007).

With intensification of agriculture and increased sedentism, which in the northern Southwest occurred during the Early Puebloan tradition, whatever advantages biface production may have conferred on highly mobile groups were apparently no longer as important as before. Labor allocation and skill development shifted away from a precision-based, flaked-stone technology focused on biface production, and toward developments in the production of ground stone milling implements, ceramics, masonry and adobe construction, corporate group activities involved in agricultural production, and elaboration of ceremonial life (including the production of prestige goods) involved in the maintenance of larger-scale societies. The introduction of the bow-and-arrow in Early Puebloan times also allowed for production of smaller projectile points, which could be easily made from flakes much smaller than those selected for the manufacture of larger bifaces and projectile points.3 One archaeological result was a reduction in biface thinning and shaping flakes in Puebloan times. Debitage produced by the shaping of arrow points consists mostly of small pressure flakes that are often not observed or collected in standard excavation recovery methods, and these are expectedly fewer in number than the bifacial thinning and shaping flakes produced during the manufacture of spear points and other larger bifaces. Thus Puebloan lithic assemblages are expected to have flakes that are, on average, larger, thicker, and heavier than those found in preceramic assemblages.

The purported increased variety of utilized lithic materials apparently stems from a more intensive focus on locally available materials in late prehistoric times. This region-level trend that probably resulted from a combination of population growth, reduced mobility, and tighter territorial circumscription, all of which would have encouraged more frequent use of whatever materials were locally available, regardless of variety or quality. This trend was demonstrated, for example, on a large data recovery project in the Jornada Mogollon region of southern New

3 In effect, small arrow points could be considered an elaborate version of the retouched flake tools that become more common in Puebloan times; indeed, some smaller arrow points are, in fact, marginally retouched flakes.

Chapter 8 Lithic Artifacts 196 Mexico (Van Hoose and Lundquist 2002). For that project, debitage analysis indicated a willingness on the part of Archaic peoples to travel some distance (or go through exchange networks) to obtain higher-quality materials, whereas late prehistoric groups were willing (or had little choice other than) to settle for whatever raw material was locally available, often rather poor quality stone. The pattern does not always hold up, however; in the data recovery results from the La Plata Mine in northwestern New Mexico (Acklen et al. 1991), nonlocal materials were actually more frequent than local materials on Puebloan sites, whereas the opposite was true for Archaic sites in the area, and the differences were significant (χ2 = 7.31, p=0.0069).4 The investigators suggested the unexpected pattern may be due to the kinds of sites investigated; whereas the Archaic sites encompassed a wide range of site types including base camps, the Puebloan sites were all small, limited-activity loci.

The La Plata Mine case alerts us to the potential for variation in flaked stone assemblages between different kinds of sites, as well as those from different periods. Studies have indeed revealed differences in chipped stone assemblages between sites varying in occupational intensity and/or kinds and ranges of activities. For example, Sullivan and Rozen (1985:763) interpret flake assemblages at several sites in the Upper Colorado River of Arizona as showing a general correlation between intensity of occupation and intensity of core reduction. More recently, Lundquist (2002, 2004a, 2004b; Van Hoose and Lundquist 2002) has demonstrated statistically significant differences in debitage assemblages between large and small sites, regardless of time period. Specifically, large sites tend to have more fragmented flakes than small sites (perhaps a combined result of more intensive flaking activities and repeated trampling at the large sites), average flake size is larger at small sites, and large sites have significantly more faceted platforms while small sites have more plain platforms. In other words, small sites reflect more expedient flake-tool production and less intensive core reduction, whereas larger sites witnessed a higher frequency of intensive core reduction and/or formal tool manufacture, again regardless of time period. These patterns signal a potential for estimating whether sites with large assemblages are the result of intensive occupation or many, less intensive, occupations.

The effects of raw material availability on lithic-technological variability have also been the subject of lithic analyses, inspired by Binford's (1977, 1979) comparison of curated and expedient components of lithic technology (Andrefsky 1994; Bamforth 1986). Specifically, these studies predict “(1) a greater emphasis on the curated component…in lithic resource poor areas and (2) a greater emphasis on the expedient aspect…in lithic resource-rich areas” (Vierra 2005:188). However, data do not always clearly support this hypothesis. For example, a lithics study for a large data recovery project in the Tularosa Valley of southern New Mexico yielded mixed results with respect to this prediction (Van Hoose and Lundquist 2002:621–631). In that project area, a focus on high-quality materials during Archaic times led to a relative standardization of assemblage characteristics, regardless of local lithic resource availability. Among the late prehistoric sites, on the other hand, debitage characteristics varied much more, apparently a result of differences in locally available material types.

Comparing lithic assemblages at a gross level of analysis can also aid in the examination of variation between sites in a particular area, which in turn can potentially shed light on local and

4 This statistic was not reported in Acklen et al. (1991), but was calculated from Table 8.2 in that report.

Chapter 8 Lithic Artifacts 197 regional settlement patterns and reveal variation in site function. For the Gallegos Mesa project in northwest New Mexico, for example, Moore (1983) used a series of “activity indices” to place site components within a tripartite classification of site types (base camps, satellite sites, and isolated occurrences) and provide a quantitative measure of inferred site function and range of activities. Moore's indices involved very gross groups of artifact categories, however, and when making inferences about site function, lines of evidence other than lithic data must be considered, including site size, numbers and types of features, presence or absence of recognizable structure remains, and so forth. Lithic artifacts constitute but one of several data sources that must be viewed in concert when constructing interpretations of archaeological sites.

APPROACHES TO FLAKED STONE CLASSIFICATION AND ANALYSIS

Appropriate characterization and precise and replicable tools of measurement are essential to any attempt to clearly identify patterns, and extract behavioral meaning, from flaked stone assemblages, such as the purported shift in flaked stone technologies from preceramic to ceramic times (see above). Despite the tremendous potential for quantitative analysis of flaked stone artifacts, today there is very little standardization among classification schemes and analysis methods. This is so despite (or perhaps as a result of) several decades of focused research, debate, and on-going analysis of flaked stone for hundreds of archaeological projects in the United States alone every year. This lack of standardization is especially evident among analyses of debitage, which almost always constitutes the most abundant category of flaked stone artifacts in a given assemblage.

DEBITAGE CLASSIFICATIONS AND RESEARCH POTENTIAL

Analyses of debitage usually involve elements from one or more of two classification approaches: reduction-stage models and technology-based types. These roughly equate to what Sullivan and Rozen (1985:576-578) refer to as nontool and tool debitage categories. A third classification system, based on flake condition (complete versus various states of fragmentation) was proposed by Sullivan and Rozen (1985), but despite the much more objective critieria employed by this system, most lithic analysts in the Four Corners area and elsewhere continue to use classifications based on stage- and/or technology-based types. Flake attributes, including both metric and mutually exclusive nominal ones (the latter includes the Sullivan and Rozen typology) offer multiple dimensions of data that are very useful for characterizing and comparing flake assemblages, and lend themselves very well to statistical analysis. Sometimes attribute data are used in conjunction with type classifications, sometimes not. The following sections describe these various approaches to debitage analysis, and discuss their relative advantages and disadvantages.

REDUCTION STAGE MODELS AND TECHNOLOGY-BASED FLAKE TYPES

Reduction stage models were originally formulated with a focus on the manufacture and classification of bifaces (Callahan 1979; Collins 1975; Crabtree 1973; Frison and Bradley 1980; Muto 1971; Newcomer 1971; Sharrock 1966). Because flaking stone into usable tools (bifaces or not) produces waste flakes that tend to decrease in size, thickness, and weight, and retain less and less cortext, the further along the flaking process proceeds, reduction stage models have been applied to debitage assemblages as well. Reduction stages are often applied to flakes rather

Chapter 8 Lithic Artifacts 198 loosely, but some debitage analysts have adapted specific reduction stage models to flake assemblages (e.g., see Table 8.2).

Table 8.2. Example of a Stage Reduction Model (Collins 1975) used for Flake Classification

Stage Flake Characteristics Initial Reduction

• Relatively large • Somewhat amorphous in shape (although flakes removed from river pebbles tend to

have rounded rather than angular sides) • Thick, plano-convex cross-section • Usually > 50% exterior cortex • Few exterior flake scars • Cortical or plain platforms

Primary Flaking

• Usually intermediate in size between initial reduction and secondary flakes (but includes a wide range of flake sizes)

• Angular outline • Angular or rounded terminations • Hinge fracturing is common • Higher width:thickness ratios than seen in initial reduction flakes • Cross sections variable but mostly angular or flattened • Cortex either absent or occurring in lower proportions than in initial reduction flakes • Prepared platforms (single, double, or multifaceted)

Secondary Flaking

• Almost always small • Longer and narrower than primary flakes • Feathered terminations; hinge fracturing less common • Thin and lenticular cross-sections • Cortex virtually absent • Small, multifaceted or ground platforms

Adapted from Boisvert 1979:125–126. Reduction stage models are problematic for several reasons. First, the identified stages, and the criteria used to identify them, are inconsistent between individual schemes. Regardless of the scheme involved, the criteria themselves are difficult or impossible to define objectively, and this condition can produce a large degree of inter-observer variation. Moreover, terminology is inconsistently employed; for example, many analysts do not use the term "initial reduction," but rather start the sequence with "primary" flaking, and in these typologies "tertiary" flakes are roughly equivalent to "secondary" flakes in, for example, the Boisvert (1979) system.

These problems are symptomatic of the highly arbitrary nature of stage models themselves; as Sullivan and Rozen (1985:758) point out, the process of flaking stone is, in many respects, a continuous one, and dividing this process into discrete stages is a largely artibrary excercise. Another problem is that close similarities may exist between flakes from widely separated “stages.” For example, pressure flaking may be used to shape a platform during core reduction and biface shaping or thinning, as well as executing the final shaping or resharpening of a finished tool.

In many cases, percent of cortex on a flake is the sole indicator for placement in one stage or another, usually primary, secondary, and teritiary (see Sullivan and Rozen 1985:576). Using percent of cortex is a potentially more objective stage indicator, as flakes from early stages of reduction do tend to have more cortex than those removed during later stages. But the

Chapter 8 Lithic Artifacts 199 relationship between amount of cortex and a reduction sequence is not a straightforward one (see Sullivan and Rozen 1985:756-757). The type of raw material; the size and shape of the parent flake, flat cobble, or tabular piece; and amount and distribution of cortex on the parent piece from which a biface is manufactured can all affect how much cortex might be present on flakes from a given "stage." Under rare circumstances, even the last flakes removed from a finished projectile point can be up to 100% cortical. Moreover, there is no standardization in the classification of reduction stages by percent of cortex, again inhibiting comparisons between assemblages from different analyses.5 In any event, percent of cortex on a flake (or core, or any other flaked stone artifact) is best recorded as an independent variable without making any assumptions as to reduction stage.

Another common approach to the analysis of debitage involves the identification of technology- based flake “types,” which relies on inferences concerning the specific kind of flaking activity that generated a particular flake. Such technological types include core flake, bipolar flake, percussion flake, bifacial thinning flake, hinge termination, blade, channel flake, notching flake, etc. When accurate type identifications are made, this approach can reveal particular kinds of flaking activities at a site or locus, and this can be important information for behavioral interpretations.

However, as with reduction stages there are also fundamental problems with this approach. First, while some flake types are defined according to rather clear-cut criteria (e.g. bipolar flakes, defined by two opposing points of percussion impact) most are not explicitly or objectively defined. In many analyses, the flake types are not defined at all, rendering the data of limited use for comparative purposes. This opens the door to a large degree of inter-observer variation, and even incorrect identifications. Consider the following observations.

Although the [bifacial thinning flake] is one of the most common tool debitage categories employed in the analysis of chipped stone assemblages, it has not been consistently defined and used. Often, no attributes are provided for the category ... There is little agreement, furthermore, as to which attributes or set of attributes are necessary to designate a piece of debitage as a [bifacial thinning flake]. (Sullivan and Rozen 1985:757)

Contrary to expectations and assumptions, individual flake attributes and flake types often are not good discriminators of variation in human behavior … Flakes that might appear to be technology-specific such as bifacial thinning flakes and bipolar flakes, can be produced by multiple technologies (Ahler 1989:87)

Regardless of the technological ambiguity of a category such as "bifacial thinning flake," we can probably assume rather safely that the analyst(s) working within any individual project applied classification criteria consistently (even if the criteria are largely subjective). To the extent that this is true, comparisons of flake-type data between contexts within a given project can be considered reliable. But the lack of explicit, objective, and consistently applied criteria between different projects limits the usefulness of such types for broader comparisons. Such comparisons can be made, but the results should be viewed with great caution.

5 Sullivan and Rozen (1985:757, Figure 1) provide a graphic illustration of the wide discrepancies between analyses that have used percent cortex to assign flakes to specific reduction stages.

Chapter 8 Lithic Artifacts 200 The difficulty of assigning many flakes to a specific type often results in the creation of a residual category such as “generalized,” “indeterminate,” “unclassified,” etc. When such a residual category is used, it often contains the vast majority of flakes in an analyzed assemblage. Consequently, flakes assigned to specified types often constitute a low proportion of an analyzed assemblage, rendering them of little use for meaningful statistical analysis. Another problematic catch-all is the commonly used category of “shatter.” As with many other flake-type categories, “shatter” suffers from a lack of either clearly defined criteria, or inconsistencies in the definitional criteria among different analysts. For example, Bradbury and Carr (2004:71) equate “shatter” to “blocky debris,” which they define as “angular flakes with no discernible ventral or dorsal face.” However, flaking debris identified as “shatter” may not always be “blocky” or “angular,” but can include flakes that simply lack the distinctive characteristics that would allow the observer to identify interior (“ventral”) and exterior (“dorsal”) surfaces.

Along with the general lack of explicit criteria for defining individual flake types, another problem lies in the lack of standardization in flake-type classifications between different projects (in some cases analyzed by the same individual). Consider Table 8.3, for example, which shows flake-type classifications from a sample of several projects in the Four Corners area. Note the diversity of flake-type categories employed, and note also that some schemes rely on reduction stage typologies while other rely on more technological-based flake types, and some use a combination of both. Some categories within a given scheme are mutually exclusive, while others are not. Several of these reports cited in Table 8.3 did not specify the criteria used to assign flakes to a particular category. The net result of this inconsistency is that replication and comparisons of flake assemblages between different projects are difficult at best, and invalid at worst.

Finally, it is often the case that the identification of technology-based flake types is restricted to complete flakes, or fragments retaining a platform. Smaller flakes may also be excluded from analysis in favor of larger ones whose attributes are easier to observe. These selective procedures introduce biases that may limit or skew data and inferences concerning the range of knapping activities reflected in a given assemblage (see Ahler 1989:86–87; Sullivan and Rozen 1985:756). The use of different screen sizes between different projects also inhibits valid comparisons.

Chapter 8 Lithic Artifacts 201

Table 8.3. Flake-type Classifications from a Selection of Projects in the Four Corners Area

Project / Analysis

Flake Types

Acklen et al. 1991

Core

Biface

Retouch Shatter / Angular Debris

Hammerstone Spall

Unclassifiable Fragments

Brown et al. 1992

Core

Biface

Retouch

Pecking Stone Spall

Indeterminate Fragments

Shatter Drake 2007

Stages Primary (> 76% cortex)

Secondary (1-75% cortex)

Tertiary (no cortex)

Technol. Types

Percussion

Biface Thinning

Pressure

Blade

Over- shot

Burin Spall

Bi- polar

Core

Rejuvena - tion

Hinge

Termina- tion

Frag.

Indeterm. Late Stage

Elstien 1991, 1999, 2000

Cortical (some cortex on dorsal surface)


Fetterman and Honeycutt 1982; Honeycutt and Fetterman 1994

Primary

Secondary

Tertiary

Fetterman & Honeycutt 1995

Core vs. Biface Thinning

Primary, Secondary, & Tertiary

Fetterman et al. 2001

Biface Thinning,

Late Stage Pressure

Core

Reduction

Core

Rejuvenation

Completely Cortical

Natural Platform

Partially Cortical Natural Platform

Partially Cortical Platform Absent

Noncortical Natural Platform

Noncortical Platform Absent

Moore 1983 Microflake Blade Length > Width Width > Length

Potter and Gilpin 2007

Level 1 Percussion Thinning Pressure Core Rejuvination

Level 2 Primary Decortication (> 75% exterior cortex)

Secondary Decortication (some exterior cortex + non-cortical flake scars


Chapter 8 Lithic Artifacts 202 SULLIVAN AND ROZEN'S FLAKE TYPOLOGY

A much more objective and replicable approach to flake classification was proposed by Sullivan and Rozen (1985). Their method is based on flake completeness categories and uses a binary hierarchical decision tree to assign flakes to one of four mutually exclusive debitage types: debris, flake fragment, broken flakes, and complete flakes. Their method employs three dimensions of flake variability: (1) identifiable exterior and interior surfaces, (2) point of applied force, and (3) margins. Each flake is first examined to see if exterior/interior surfaces can be identified (i.e. ripples and/or bulb of percussion marking the interior surface). If exterior/interior surfaces cannot be identified, the flake is categorized as debris (equivalent to what is often referred to as “shatter”). All flakes with identifiable surfaces are then examined for the presence of a point of applied force, which occurs where the bulb of percussion intersects the striking platform. If a flake does not have a point of applied force, it is classified as a flake fragment (i.e., medial/distal fragment). Finally, flakes with a point of applied force are examined for presence or absence of intact margins. Intact margins exist when the original width and length of the flake can be reasonably determined. Broken flakes (i.e., proximal fragments) do not have intact margins, while complete flakes do.

The Sullivan and Rozen method offers a key advantage over the reduction stage and other flake- type classifications in that it steers clear of making a priori interpretations about flakes in the process of classifying them. Moreover, because the flake categories and attributes measured are mutually exclusive, and more objectively and explicitly defined than methods using reduction stages or technological flake types, the Sullivan and Rozen method is much more replicable, and inter-observer variation is minimized. As a result, debitage assemblages analyzed using the Sullivan and Rozen method can be more directly and confidently compared, using straightforward statistical methods (such as adjusted chi square residuals) than those analyzed using the more subjective methods. Finally, using the Sullivan and Rozen method means that comparable attribute data are collected from every flake in an assemblage (or analyzed sample), not just complete flakes or those retaining a platform. As a result, there is no need for creating residual categories for "unidentifiable" flakes.

While the Sullivan and Rozen system offers the most objective set of criteria for defining specific flake types, there is on-going debate over the relationship between their typology and actual knapping behaviors. As Ahler (1989:87) pointed out, "(w)hile [Sullivan and Rozen's] classification may be objective, they offer no theoretical basis for the typology … it has little power for assessing variation in knapping behavior." Like many lithic analysts, Sullivan and Rozen were interested in distinguishing core reduction versus tool production. They inferred that core reduction produces high numbers of flakes and debris, while tool production yields more flake fragments and broken flakes. But they offered no supporting experimental evidence. Subsequent experimental investigations have failed to consistently support Sullivan and Rozen's inferences (Amick and Mauldin 1997; Bradbury and Carr 2004; Prentiss 1998; Prentiss and Romanski 1989), and have demonstrated that material type has a big effect on the frequency patterning of their flake types (Morrison 1994). With few exceptions (e.g. Acklen et al. 1991), archaeological investigations in the Four Corners area have not incorporated Sullivan and Rozen's typology in their lithic analyses.

Chapter 8 Lithic Artifacts 203 To better evaluate the interpretive potential of the Sullivan and Rozen method, Prentiss (1998) undertook a systematic study that involved experimental production of flake assemblages, which he then classified according to Sullivan and Rozen's typology and subjected to statistical analysis. Prentiss found that the Sullivan and Rozen method is reliable, in that it provides "the same or nearly the same results in applications … to the assemblages generated by repeated behaviors" (Prentiss 1998:638). However, his experiment also found that the Sullivan and Rozen system was not a good predictor of the behavioral inferences (i.e., core reduction versus tool production) that they drew in their original study (Sullivan and Rozen 1985). Whereas, Sullivan and Rozen concluded that high frequencies of debris and complete flakes signaled core reduction activities (with increasingly higher frequencies of debris reflecting more intensive core reduction), and large proportions of flake fragments and broken flakes indicated manufacture of bifaces and other formal tools, Prentiss found in his experiment that examining flake completeness categories alone was not a good predictor of core reduction versus tool production. Specifically, his experiment produced the following:

• Large numbers of small flake fragments (i.e., medial/distal fragments) during all reduction

activities;

• Higher numbers of small, broken flakes (i.e., proximal fragments) during core reduction involving preparation of striking edges than with reduction involving unprepared cores;

• High numbers of small, complete flakes only during hard-hammer biface reduction; and

• High numbers of medium-sized flake fragments and few medium-sized broken flakes and debris when the production goal was large flakes for use as expedient tools.

Prentiss' experiment also produced much higher frequencies of small pieces of debris during core reduction than during biface production, providing some potential support for Sullivan and Rozen's inference that core reduction produces more debris than does biface production. He also found that hard-hammer flaking (usually employed most frequently during core reduction) also produced more complete flakes in the larger flake-size categories (Prentiss 1998:647), lending potential support to Sullivan and Rosen’s inference that core reduction produces more complete flakes than does biface production. At any rate, an important result of Prentiss' experiment is that flake size had an important influence on the predictive potential of Sullivan Rozen's completeness categories.

One potential problem of Prentiss' critique is that he used only obsidian in his flaking experiment. Obsidian is exceptionally fragile; obsidian flakes will often break more readily than those of more durable sedimentary (e.g., chert) or igneous (e.g., rhyolite and basalt) rocks (see Amick and Mauldin 1997). Sullivan and Rosen, however, based their study on assemblages consisting largely of chert rather than obsidian, and so it should perhaps not be a surprise that the results of Prentiss' experiment did not provide full support for the behavioral inferences that Sullivan and Rozen drew. Thus, a critical reading of Prentiss’ study highlights a little-discussed but important caveat in using the Sullivan and Rozen system, namely, that material type plays an important role in the distribution of flake completeness categories in a given assemblage. Prentiss himself seemed to be aware of this potential problem, but left "the effects of raw material variation … for future studies" (Prentiss 1998:640). Nevertheless, rather than identifying an inherent problem with the Sullivan and Rozen system, Prentiss' finding suggests

Chapter 8 Lithic Artifacts 204 that behavioral inferences using their method needs to account for the effects of raw material variability, and that further experiments similar to Prentiss'—but using raw materials less fragile than obsidian—need to be conducted. Still, Prentiss' study suggests that Sullivan and Rozen's completeness categories be analyzed in conjunction with other variables, especially flake size.

Despite the effects of raw material variation on flake completeness patterns (and other variables such as flake size, weight, and thickness, as well as platform types and amount of cortex), the Sullivan and Rozen system remains the most objective and replicable method for characterizing debitage assemblages. It offers the advantage of individually examining every piece of debitage, versus the quicker mass-analysis system proposed by Ahler (1989). Sullivan and Rozen’s technique offers controls for inter-observer error with its mutually exclusive flake categories; although, proper training in the system is required (see Van Hoose and Lundquist 2002).

Using the Sullivan and Rozen completeness categories, along with other measures such as flake size, weight, thickness, numbers of flake scars, platform type, amount of cortex, and material type, produces data sets that are well-suited to straightforward statistical analyses. Using the modified Sullivan and Rozen method, combined with statistical analysis based on adjusted chi- square residuals, has already provided interesting, explicitly measurable, and replicable results for a growing number of projects in New Mexico (Lundquist 2002, 2004a, 2004b; Railey 2007; Van Hoose and Lundquist 2002). Specifically, the method reveals not only differences between assemblages but the degree of differences as expressed by the chi squares residuals.

COMPARATIVE SOURCES FOR THE LITHIC ANALYSIS

The lithic analysis focused overwhelmingly on the Basketmaker II component at the Sandy Rise site (NM-H-51-55). This component contained all but 11 of the lithic artifacts recovered from the site and was contained within a stratigraphically sealed stratum with a narrow time horizon. The few pieces recovered from the Pueblo II component at Sandy Rise contained were all lithic debitage, and no lithic artifacts were recovered from the early Late Archaic component at that site. At the Little Water Village site, the recovered lithic assemblage consisted mostly of the displaced “leftovers” from a previous large-scale data recovery project, and the materials from hand excavations at that site during the present project came from what proved to be backdirt from the previous effort.

Beyond classification of an assemblage’s contents, lithic analysis is, necessarily, a comparative exercise. Because the analysis here focused on a single site component, to provide a comparative context for this assemblage and thus better exploit its research potential, it was necessary to look elsewhere. Accordingly, lithic data from three other projects were compared with the data from the Basketmaker II component at Sandy Rise.

Two of these are on-going projects conducted by SWCA, using essentially the same analytical methods and database design, and thus lend themselves well to direct statistical comparison at a detailed level of analysis. At the Aqueduct site (LA 103049), fieldwork was carried out in the summer of 2006 while the US 491 excavations were in progress. Aqueduct is the largest of three sites investigated during the initial phase of the Quail Ranch data recovery project on Albuquerque’s West Mesa (Muller and Lundquist 2006; Schwendler in preparation). This site contains the remains of Middle and Late Archaic occupations, and SWCA’s 2006 fieldwork

Chapter 8 Lithic Artifacts 205 recovered a large lithic assemblage (n=4,057). Because the Sandy Rise Basketmaker II and Aqueduct assemblages both date from the Archaic tradition, it was anticipated that they would be broadly comparable in terms of technological attributes (i.e., debitage assemblages reflecting an emphasis on biface production). The sites are also similar in that the inhabitants of both had access to locally occurring lithic raw materials, although at Aqueduct the local material occurred as pebbles in ancient (Tertiary age) alluvium, with chalcedony the most common flakable material, whereas petrified wood was the common local material at Sandy Rise. However, unlike Sandy Rise, the Aqueduct site is a palimpsest of occupation debris from multiple occupations over a long period of time and contains no recognizable structure remains. Another difference is that the archaeological remains at Aqueduct are restricted to surface and near-surface contexts; however, excavations in locally dense concentrations of lithic debris at this site yielded a substantial sample of lithics from screened subsurface contexts. Overall, the Aqueduct assemblage is sufficiently large for meaningful statistical analysis and detailed comparisons with the Basketmaker II assemblage from Sandy Rise, and this prospect was enhanced by use of the same analysis methods, classification scheme, and database format.

The other SWCA project assemblage used in the comparative analysis described here comes from the data recovery excavations at LA 457 in Alamogordo (Carlson in preparation). Like the Basketmaker II component at Sandy Rise, the main component at LA 457 was contained within a stratigraphically sealed context, in this case beneath alluvial fan deposits. Unlike the Sandy Rise site, however, the main component at LA 457 dates from Puebloan times, specifically the Doña Ana and El Paso phases of the Jornada Mogollon Formative tradition (radiocarbon dates from LA 457 indicate occupation ca. A.D. 1190–1440). The site is the remains of a comparatively sedentary village with substantial structures, burials, and botanical evidence of intensive farming. Much of the variety of lithic material types in the LA 457 assemblage was probably present within the local alluvial-fan gravels, with limestone the most common flaked stone material. The lithic assemblage from this site was also analyzed using the same methods and database format as the US 491 analysis. Thus, the LA 457 excavations provide a Puebloan period assemblage that could be used for direct and detailed comparison and contrast with the Archaic assemblages from Sandy Rise and Aqueduct, each of which is dominated by different kinds of lithic materials.

To summarize, Sandy Rise, Aqueduct, and LA 457 are three different kinds of sites, each from a different part of New Mexico, and cover two broad time frames. The assemblages from these sites provide an opportunity to test assumptions about broad technological changes from Archaic to Puebloan times, and also to investigate aspects of lithic technology and variation from three different site types:

• the Basketmaker II pit house settlement at Sandy Rise, with evidence of low-intensity,

maize-based food production • the series of hunter-gatherer camps at Aqueduct, covering a long span of time and lacking

structure remains or any evidence of agriculture • the comparatively sedentary, late prehistoric farming village at LA 457

Still, it was considered desirable to compare the Basketmaker II lithic assemblage from Sandy Rise with an assemblage from at least one project in the same region—the San Juan Basin—and preferably from a data recovery project that excavated at least one Basketmaker II pit house site. The Gallegos Mesa project (Vogler et al. 1983) meets these criteria; the project area was

Chapter 8 Lithic Artifacts 206 approximately 60 km northeast of the Sandy Rise site, and the data recovery effort there involved excavations at numerous Archaic/Basketmaker II sites, including NM-H-26-56, which contained a Basketmaker II component with pit houses similar in size to those at Sandy Rise. As one might expect, the lithic analysis (Moore 1983) used different methods and a different data recording format than the US 491, Quail Ranch, and LA 457 projects, and so direct and detailed comparisons of the Gallegos Mesa lithic assemblage—especially debitage—with those from Sandy Rise and the two other SWCA projects was necessarily limited. However, the activity indices employed in the Gallegos Mesa effort (see above) provided a useful measure for comparison with the Sandy Rise, Aqueduct, and LA 457 assemblages, and this measure is employed in this analysis.

GOALS OF THE LITHIC ANALYSIS

The research goals of the lithic analysis were focused on obtaining a detailed understanding of the Sandy Rise Basketmaker II assemblage in terms of (1) its technological attributes and (2) indicators of site function and activities, and how these compare and contrast with the site assemblages derived from the three comparative projects. In addition, comparisons of debitage assemblages between different spatial contexts within the Sandy Rise Basketmaker II component were undertaken to investigate the possibility of intra-site patterning. The analysis also included a comparison of the Sandy Rise and Little Water Village assemblages. Accordingly, the following five problem domains were posed for this analysis:

1) How do the Sandy Rise lithic artifacts—especially the debitage assemblage—differ from,

or resemble, those from the Aqueduct site, and what do the differences indicate in terms of (a) variability among different kinds of Archaic sites and (b) sites with different raw material sources?

2) How do the Sandy Rise and Aqueduct lithic assemblages—especially the debitage— differ from the LA 457 lithic materials, and do the differences follow the widespread shift from the focus on biface production of the Archaic tradition to the expedient, core/flake tool technology of late prehistoric times?

3) What can a comparison of activity indices from the Sandy Rise, Aqueduct, LA 457, and Gallegos Mesa sites indicate about (a) variability among Archaic sites and (b) differences between Archaic sites and a late prehistoric farming settlement?

4) What differences and similarities exist between the Sandy Rise Basketmaker II and Little Water Village lithic assemblages, and what might these differences and similarities indicate in terms of raw material utilization, changes in lithic technology over time, and the effects of previous excavations at Little Water Village?

5) Is there significant variation among different proveniences within the Sandy Rise Basketmaker II component in terms of debitage assemblages that might shed light on intra-site variability, activity patterning, usage of different raw materials, or division of labor between households?

To address Problem Domains 1, 2, 4, and 5, the analysis focused primarily on detailed comparisons of the various debitage assemblages, using the statistical method developed by Lundquist (2002, 2004a, 2004b, 2005; Van Hoose and Lundquist 2002), based in part on Sullivan and Rozen’s (1985) debitage classification. Lundquist’s method provides a relatively

Chapter 8 Lithic Artifacts 207 objective debitage classification system, as it is based on completeness categories involving a decision tree, quantifiable measures such as flake length and thickness, and other attributes such as percent of cortex, platform type, and so forth. The statistical analysis of these variables relies on observation of adjusted chi-square residuals, a fairly straightforward technique. The method is described more fully in the introduction to the debitage analysis, below.

Addressing Problem Domain 3 relied on comparisons of activity indices, which are defined above. Potential problems were recognized for this portion of the analysis with respect to different field methods employed, such as screen size. Nevertheless, the activity index measures are useful for inter-site comparisons, and were employed for that purpose in this study.

CLASSIFICATION SCHEME AND STATISTICAL METHODS

CLASSIFICATION

All recovered lithic artifacts were separated into seven types: flakes, cores, tools, projectile points, ground stone, other stone, and chunk. These, in turn, were divided into anywhere from two to 15 subtypes (Table 8.4; Table 8.5). Definitions of the respective types and subtypes are provided in the analysis results sections later in this chapter. Note that flakes, cores, tools, and projectile points are occasionally referred to collectively as “flaked stone” for purposes of this analysis.

Table 8.4. US 491 Data Recovery, Lithic Artifact Classification Scheme

Artifact Type Subtypes Flake Debitage, Edge-modified Flake Core Tested Cobble, Globular, Single Platform, Double Platform, Core Fragment

Tool Biface (Stages I–VI), Chopper, Core Tool, Drill, Flake Tool, Graver, Hammerstone, Hammerstone Fragment, Knife, Scraper

Projectile Point Diagnostic, Non-diagnostic

Ground Stone Mano, Basin Metate, Slab Metate, Metate Fragment, Handstone, Ball, Ground Stone Fragment, Unknown

Other Stone Pigment, Fire-cracked Rock, Unidentified Object Chunk None

In total, 1,995 lithic artifacts from the three US 491 sites were selected for analysis. With the exception of flakes, all lithic artifacts recovered were analyzed, and their relevant attributes were recorded in a lithic analysis database. The analysis included all lithic artifacts from Little Water Village (NM-H-35-19), NM-H-46-55, and Feature 3 at NM-H-51-55 (a Pueblo II structure), but only a sample of the 6,826 flakes from the Basketmaker II component at NM-H-51-55. Furthermore, not all flakes from the Basketmaker II component were checked for edge modification or intentional retouch. All other lithic artifacts from this component were analyzed. For the comparative debitage analysis (which includes the Aqueduct site and LA 457 assemblages) and comparison of activity indices (which includes these sites plus those from the Gallegos Mesa project), only artifacts from the Basketmaker II component at Sandy Rise were included. Descriptions of all other artifact classes include all lithic-bearing sites and components.


Table 8.5. US 491 Data Recovery, Frequency Distribution of Lithic Types and Subtypes by Component, Recovered Assemblage

Artifact Type

Subtype

NM-H-51-55 (BM II)

NM-H-51-55 Feature 3

(P II)

NM-H-35-19 (BM III–P I)

NM-H-46-55 (Historic Navajo)

Total

Flake

Debitage 6,810 12 96 2 6,920 Edge Modified 6 8 14

Core

Tested Cobble 1 1 Globular 14 1 15 Single Platform 3 3 Double Platform 4 1 1 6 Core Fragment 18 2 20

Tool

Biface 30 1 1 32 Chopper 1 1 Core Tool 12 1 1 14 Drill 2 2 Flake Tool 17 4 21 Graver 1 1 Hammerstone 9 9 Hammerstone Fragment

2

1

1

4

Knife 2 2 Scraper 3 3

Projectile Point

Diagnostic 5 5 Non-diagnostic 8 1 9

Ground Stone

Mano 22 1 1 24 Basin Metate 2 2 Slab Metate (fragments)

2

2

Metate Fragment (form unknown)

4

2

1

7

Handstone fragment

1

1 2

Ball 2 2 Ground Stone Fragment (with grinding surface)

3

3

Ground Stone Fragment (no grinding surface visible)

5

5

Other Stone

Pigment 4 1 5 Fire-cracked Rock 6 1 9 16 Unidentified Object

2

1

1 4

Chunk Unmodified Petrified Wood

3

3

Total 7,002 21 128 6 7,157


Liangya Jia recorded the lithic attributes (with assistance from Jim Railey), entered the information into a master lithic artifacts database (in Microsoft Access), and ran sorts and statistical analyses in Microsoft Excel. Because analysis of the debitage employed aspects of the method developed by Lance Lundquist (2002, 2004a, 2004b, 2005; Van Hoose and Lundquist 2002), and much of the discussion of these methods is taken directly from Lundquist's previous studies, he is included as a coauthor.

STATISTICAL METHODS (CHI-SQUARE AND ADJUSTED RESIDUALS)

For the analyses reported here, the variables recorded were compared to one another using a chi- square test of significance. Since its first archaeological application by Spaulding (1953), chi- square has been one of the most frequently used statistical techniques in archaeology. The results of a significant chi-square indicate differences between rows and columns of counts of categorical data at a given confidence level, by convention 95 percent. It is a valuable statistical method for addressing many questions in lithic artifact analysis, where counts of artifacts are being compared to different variables.

A basic chi-square does not identify the specific cell(s) in a contingency table that is (are) causing the significant result(s). For example, when examining five material types to determine whether there are differences in the types of material selected, a significant chi-square will confirm that there are differences, but will not allow one to say which material type is over- or under-represented (by level or by some other variable). Examination of the adjusted chi-square residuals is useful for understanding which specific variables are responsible for causing a chi- square to return a significant result. For each cell in a chi-square table, the adjusted chi-square residual provides a value ranging from –∞ to +∞. Values above +2 or below –2 indicate significant deviations from the expected value and can be read roughly as standard deviation units. For this analysis, chi-square values were calculated and deemed significant at the 0.05 level. For significant chi-square results, plots of adjusted chi-square residuals were produced to tease out the significant variables.

LITHIC RAW MATERIALS

MATERIAL TYPES

Sixteen raw material types were identified in the lithic assemblage: black banded chert, Brushy Basin chert, chalcedony, ferrous siltstone, hematite, limestone, mudstone, Narbona Pass chert, petrified wood, quartzite, rainbow petrified wood, sandstone, shale, Zuni Buttes spotted chert, unidentified chert, and unidentified igneous; an “unknown” category was used for unidentifiable specimens. To aid in the identification of raw material types, Helene Warren’s lithic material type collection at the Museum of New Mexico’s Museum of Indian Arts and Culture in Santa Fe was examined. Note that both source-specific and generic types are identified. No chemical characterization analyses were carried out as part of this effort, and the identifications of some specific material types, such as Brushy Basin chert and Zuni Buttes spotted chert, are tentative. The distribution of material types in the analyzed assemblage from the three US 491 sites yielding lithic artifacts is shown in Table 8.6.


Table 8.6. US 491 Data Recovery, Distribution of Lithic Material Types by Site, Analyzed Assemblage

Material

NM-H-35-19

NM-H-46-55

NM-H-51-55

Total

Black Banded Chert 1 1 Brushy Basin Chert 7 7 Chalcedony 16 37 53 Chert 9 67 76 Ferrous Siltstone 1 1 Hematite 1 5 6 Igneous 9 9 Limestone 3 3 Narbona Pass Chert 1 38 39 Petrified Wood 62 2 1,584 1,648 Quartzite 16 27 43 Rainbow Petrified Wood 5 13 18 Sandstone 2 3 38 43 Shale 7 1 8 Zuni Buttes Spotted Chert 1 38 39 Unknown 1 1 Total 128 6 1,861 1,995

Most material types were restricted to either the flaked stone or the ground stone class, although some (such as petrified wood and igneous materials) were used for both kinds of implements. Some materials occurred only in the miscellaneous “other” class (Table 8.7).

Table 8.7. US 491 Data Recovery, Distribution of Lithic Material Types by Lithic Class,

Analyzed Assemblage

Material Type Flaked Stone Ground Stone Other Total Black Banded Chert 1 1 Brushy Basin Chert 7 7 Chalcedony 53 53 Ferrous Siltstone 1 1 Hematite 6 6 Limestone 2 1 3 Narbona Pass Chert 39 39 Petrified Wood 1,648 1,648 Quartzite 34 8 1 43 Rainbow Petrified Wood 18 18 Sandstone 37 6 43 Shale 1 7 8 Zuni Buttes Spotted Chert 39 39 Unidentified Chert 75 1 76 Unidentified Igneous 8 1 9 Unknown 1 1 Total 1,923 47 25 1,995

Chapter 8 Lithic Artifacts 211 PETRIFIED WOOD

Petrified wood was, by far, the most abundant material type in the lithic assemblage. Petrified wood was used most commonly for producing flaked stone implements, but was also occasionally used for hammerstones. This material is widespread in the San Juan Basin, occurring as scattered fragments in the local Cretaceous sediments. It is the only locally occurring flaked stone raw material within the project corridor. Although no natural occurrences of petrified wood were observed on or in the vicinity of the Sandy Rise site, the presence of cores and other large fragments (Figure 8.1) suggests that a local source was readily available to the site’s inhabitants.

Figure 8.1. US 491 data recovery, two cores of petrified wood from the Sandy Rise site

Basketmaker II component. The presence of cores and other large fragments of petrified wood at this site suggests that there must have been a local source of this material in the immediate vicinity.

Specimens in this category were almost all from conifer wood and were typically partially translucent and reddish brown in color, although both translucence and color varied. The wood grain was usually visible, and bark cortex was common. A few specimens of possible palm wood were observed, although these were not separated out for analytical purposes. Rainbow petrified wood, a more colorful variety that is common in eastern Arizona, was treated as a separate category for the analysis. The quality of this material also varied considerably, ranging from poorly silicified, tabular, or splintery materials that did not break with a conchoidal fracture, to much more easily flaked material. Planar flaws were common, leading to frequent splintering and shattering during flintknapping attempts.

Although it is assumed that petrified wood was locally available within the project area, this material tends not to occur in concentrations, but rather is scattered in low densities across the landscape. A non-systematic reconnaissance east of the Sandy Rise site (including the beds of the two closest washes to the north and south) did not locate any of this material. It may be that

Chapter 8 Lithic Artifacts 212 the inhabitants of the site had to venture some distance to obtain suitable pieces of petrified wood, but the current lack of this material in the site vicinity may also indicate that it was severely depleted locally by the site’s prehistoric inhabitants, or that the source was to the west of the site.

CHALCEDONY

Chalcedony is a siliceous material that is typically whitish, cream or various shades of gray in color, fine grained, and translucent. It forms under various conditions and in various contexts, and occurs in many parts of New Mexico. Some chalcedony forms as siliceous nodules or beds that precipitate out within and beneath basalt flows. Petrified wood sometimes exhibits a siliceous fill that is indistinguishable from chalcedony formed under other conditions (Figure 8.2), and some of the material classified as chalcedony in this analysis may actually have been portions of silicified wood.

Figure 8.2. An example of petrified wood that is indistinguishable from chalcedony, except

for the bark cortex. CHERTS

BLACK BANDED CHERT

The Warren collection includes some specimens identified by this generic designation, and her notes suggest this material may come from the Upper Cretaceous Mancos shale, which crops out discontinuously around the margins of the San Juan Basin. This is a medium- to fine-grained, opaque chert that is dark gray to black in color.

BRUSHY BASIN CHERT

The Brushy Basin member occurs at the top of the upper Jurassic Morrison formation and crops out discontinuously along the fringes of the San Juan Basin, and in other parts of New Mexico as well. Warren's collection includes a variety of chert specimens that she identified as coming from the “Brushy Basin formation” of the San Juan Basin. Outcrop sources of this chert may occur as close as 9 miles (15 km) northwest of the Sandy Rise site. This material is opaque and medium

Chapter 8 Lithic Artifacts 213 to coarse grained. It varies in color, including shades of green, cream, and pinkish. Some specimens have darker inclusions. Given the variability in this material, the identification of specimens as Brushy Basin chert is considered tentative.

NARBONA PASS CHERT

Formerly known as Washington Pass chert, this material occurs in Pliocene basalt flows within Narbona Pass in the Chuska Mountains, approximately 15 km directly west of the Sandy Rise site (Cameron 2001:85; Moore 1983:561). The chert is distinctive by virtue of it highly vitreous luster and typically bright, pinkish color that grades to cream and white. It is usually translucent, but opaque specimens also occur. This is a high-quality material that shows up in lithic assemblages throughout the San Juan Basin.

ZUNI BUTTES SPOTTED CHERT

This chert originates in the Zuni Mountains, south of the San Juan Basin (Cameron 2001:86–87). The specimens in the Warren collection are opaque, usually medium-grained material with a dull luster, although some cherts in this collection identified as “Zuni” have a more vitreous luster. In any event, what distinguishes this material is a low to moderate density of inclusions that give it its “spotted” appearance. Colors vary but are generally dull beige or gray, with some pink varieties as well.

UNIDENTIFIED CHERT

Chert-like materials that could not be even tentatively identified as a specific type were placed into this catch-all category. It is possible that some of the specimens coded as unidentified chert were actually petrified wood that lacked the usual indicators such as visible wood grain.

QUARTZITE

Quartzite was identified within both the flaked stone and ground stone assemblages. Most or all of the quartzite in the assemblage appeared to be orthoquartzite (i.e., silica-cemented sandstone, a sedimentary rock) rather than the metamorphic variety, metaquartzite.

OTHER LITHIC RAW MATERIALS

Other materials present in the lithic assemblage included limestone, sandstone, shale, ferrous siltstone, mudstone, hematite, unidentified igneous, and unknown. These types occurred mostly as ground stone and “other” artifacts. Most of the ground stone artifacts were made from a carbonate-cemented sandstone that occurs locally within the project area.

ANALYSIS OF MATERIAL TYPES

Material type was recorded for all analyzed lithic artifacts. Besides the simple counts (Table 8.6 and Table 8.7, above), another means for determining rare versus common material types is to look at the total weight of artifacts. In all, 74.18 kg (163.54 pounds) of lithic artifacts from the US 491 excavations were analyzed. Of this total weight, 84.92 percent was attributed to ground stone, of which almost 84.19 percent was sandstone.


By weight, flaked stone amounted to 12.40 percent of the analyzed assemblage, and other stone was 2.68 percent; ground stone accounted for the bulk of the assemblage. Table 8.8 shows average and total weights, in grams, of the analyzed flaked stone artifacts. Petrified wood accounted for 86.43 percent of flaked stone artifacts by weight; quartzite, at 5.58 percent, and unidentified chert, at 4.11 percent, were the only other materials representing more than 1 percent of the assemblage.

Table 8.8. US 491 Data Recovery, Flaked Stone Artifact Counts and Average and Total

Weights by Material Type, Analyzed Assemblage

Material

Count

Total Weight (g)

Average Weight (g) Percent of Total

Assemblage Weight Petrified Wood 1,648 7,948.09 4.82 86.43 Quartzite 34 513.38 15.10 5.58 Unidentified Chert 75 377.77 5.04 4.11 Igneous 8 162.48 20.31 1.77 Zuni Buttes Spotted Chert 39 55.24 1.42 0.60 Narbona Pass Chert 39 48.30 1.24 0.53 Chalcedony 53 38.87 0.73 0.42 Rainbow Petrified Wood 18 34.53 1.92 0.38 Brushy Basin Chert 7 10.49 1.50 0.11 Shale 1 6.58 6.58 0.07 Black Banded Chert 1 0.10 0.10 0.00 Total 1,923 9,195.83 4.78 100.00

As shown in Figure 8.3, flaked stone weight and artifact count are closely related. Petrified wood, by far the most common artifact type by count, was also by far the most common artifact type by weight. For all material types, the percent count and percent weight were similar. For example, for petrified wood, unidentifiable chert, quartzite, and igneous, percent of total weight was slightly higher than percent of total count, whereas the opposite was true for Zuni Spotted chert, Narbona Pass chert, and chalcedony. This result suggested that the latter material types were occurring more in the smaller flake size ranges, so an analysis of chi-square residuals comparing material types with flake size categories was conducted. Because such a small number of nonlocal materials was present in the assemblage, these artifacts were combined as one category and compared to petrified wood. A chi-square test revealed significant differences (χ2 = 12.0, p = 0.017). Looking at the chi-square adjusted residuals (Figure 8.4), the only significant difference between material types in terms of debitage size occurs in the 3+ cm size range. Here, there are more nonlocal materials than expected, which is somewhat surprising, as one would expect a higher than normal incidence of nonlocal materials among the smaller flake sizes, given the effects of transportation costs. Apparently, however, the abundance of very small petrified wood flakes in the US 491 assemblage was sufficient to counter the expected trend, and it appears that all materials were represented mostly by tool production and refurbishment debris.


Perc

ent

100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10%

0%

Percent of Total Weight (g) Percent of Total Count

Figure 8.3. US 491 data recovery, percent of flaked stone material type by material class,

artifact count, and artifact weight.

4

3

2

1 All Other Materials

0 Petrified Wood

-1

-2

-3

-4 0-.5 0.5-1 1-2 2-3 3+

Flake Size Class (cm) Figure 8.4. US 491 data recovery, plot of adjusted chi-square residuals on material types

compared to size classes.


The quantity of very small flakes of petrified wood reflects the intense reduction ofthis relatively abundant local material. The higher-than-expected numbers of non-local materials in the 3+ cm size range may also reflect the presence of durable materials (such as quartzite, igneous, shale, and some cherts) that tend to fragment less readily than more brittle materials (such as the local petrified wood) and thus leave comparatively large pieces of debitage.

Material texture was recorded as fine, medium, or coarse. In fine materials, individual grains are not visible to the unaided eye and the surface feels smooth. Medium-grained materials look and feel rough, but grains are not easily visible. Coarse materials feel quite rough, and the individual grains are clearly visible to the unaided eye. In the US 491 assemblage, texture varied both between and within particular material types, although some material types occurred within one texture class only (Table 8.9).

Table 8.9. US 491 Data Recovery, Lithic Material Texture by Material Type

Material Texture Total

Fine Medium Coarse Black Banded Chert 1 1 Brushy Basin Chert 7 7 Chalcedony 53 53 Chert 51 24 1 76 Ferrous Siltstone 1 1 Hematite 5 1 6 Igneous 2 7 9 Limestone 2 1 3 Narbona Pass Chert 39 39 Petrified Wood 1,437 211 1,648 Quartzite 17 26 43 Rainbow Petrified Wood 17 1 18 Sandstone 2 41 43 Shale 1 7 8 Zuni Buttes Spotted Chert 24 14 1 39 Unknown 1 1 Total 1,633 291 71 1,995

For flaked stone manufacture, fine materials are usually preferred for their flaking qualities, especially for biface production, although coarser materials may be selected for certain kinds of tools (such as the expedient flake tools employed for some tasks). Considering flaked stone only, the texture frequencies adjust to 1,631 fine, 272 medium, and 20 coarse. Obviously, prehistoric flintknappers in the project area were selecting fine over medium-textured petrified wood, and nonlocal materials that were mostly fine textured as well. But the preference for fine-textured materials was stronger for petrified wood than for other materials (χ2 = 22.28, p = 0.001). Figure 8.5 is a plot of the adjusted chi-square residuals of petrified wood versus all other materials plotted against fine and medium texture, for flaked stone artifacts only. Chi-square residuals were not calculated for coarse-textured material because of the small sample size and absence of coarse petrified wood.


6

4

2

0

-2

-4

-6 Fine Medium

Petrified Wood All Others

Figure 8.5. US 491 data recovery, plot of adjusted chi-square residuals on petrified wood and

all other materials, by material texture. ANALYSIS OF ARTIFACT CLASSES

FLAKES

Flakes are the waste byproducts from the production of flaked stone cores and tools. For this analysis, flakes included both debitage and edge-modified flakes. Debitage is defined as flakes that show no evidence of use and are thus considered unrecycled waste byproducts of flintknapping. Edge-modified flakes show evidence of utilization but no intentional retouch; they are essentially waste and were only incidentally utilized. Intentionally retouched flakes are classified as a subtype, flake tool, and are included here within the tools type.

METHODOLOGY

The flake analysis recorded the following attributes: 1) Sullivan and Rozen’s (1985) categories (see discussion of their classification, above); 2) material type and texture; 3) metric attributes including maximum length, thickness, and weight; 4) flake completeness; 5) platform type; 6) percent of cortex; and 7) edge modification. Platform type was restricted to complete and broken flakes (i.e., flakes and fragments retaining platforms). All other variables were recorded for all analyzed debitage, as described below. Complete debitage data are attached in Appendix C.

Flake Size was recorded for each flake based on maximum dimension of each specimen. The specimens were then grouped according to six different size categories: (1) 0–0.5 cm (<0.5), (2) 0.5-1 cm (<1 cm), (3) 1–2 cm (<2 cm), (4) 2–3 cm (<3 cm), (5) 3–4 cm, and (6) >4 cm (flakes longer than 4 cm). Flake thickness was subdivided into six categories: 1 mm, 2 mm, 3 mm, 4–5 mm, 6–9 mm, and ≥10 mm. The frequency distribution of flake size groups within the project assemblage is shown in Figure 8.6; note that the vast majority of flakes were <2 cm in size, reflecting the high incidence of tool production and refurbishment in the Basketmaker II component at the Sandy Rise site.


900

800

700

600

500

400

300

200

100

0

0-.5 0.5-1 1-2 2-3 3-4 4+

Flake Size Group (cm) Figure 8.6. US 491 data recovery, frequency distribution of flake sizes.

Flake size is highly dependent on collection strategy. For example, flakes in the 0–1 cm size class are rarely recovered, except with the aid of a 1/8-inch screen. For the US 491 excavations, 1/8-inch screen was used for virtually all excavations, and surface collection was conducted only at the Little Water Village site (NM-H-35-19) and NM-H-46-55. One method of controlling for differences in collection techniques is to limit comparisons of lithic artifacts to a given size class, for example, studying flakes only in the 1–2 cm size class (e.g., Lundquist 2004a, 2004b).

Weight was recorded to the nearest 0.01 g on a digital scale. For the analysis, flakes were divided into seven weight groups: 0.01–0.09 g, 0.1–0.2 g, 0.21–0.4 g, 0.41–1.0 g, 1.1–2.0 g, 2.1–5.0 g, and >5 g. For flakes from the Sandy Rise site Basketmake II component, which dominate the assemblage, thin, light-weight flakes were much more numerous than heavier ones (Figure 8.7). Most flakes in the lightest weight group (0.01–0.09 g) would not have been recovered if the excavators had used 1/4-inch rather than 1/8-inch screen.

Flake Completeness categories were based on Sullivan and Rozen’s (1985) method, which includes complete flakes, broken flakes, flake fragments, and debris, as defined above. Tabular wood was added as an additional category to account for the particular properties of petrified wood, and an additional extraneous category, geofact, that comprised two pieces of edge- modified igneous material. By percentage, the flake assemblage consisted of flake fragments (78.0 percent), followed by debris (13.7 percent), complete flakes (5.7 percent), and broken flakes (2.1 percent), with tabular wood and geofacts accounting for the remaining 0.4 percent.


800 700 600 500 400 300 200 100

0

Weight Groups (g) Figure 8.7. US 491 data recovery, distribution of flake frequencies by weight group, Sandy

Rise site (NM-H-51-55) Basketmaker II component. Platform Type was recorded for flakes with striking platforms or the remnants of striking platforms. Three complete platform types were recorded: (1) cortical striking platforms, with cortex at the point of impact; (2) plain striking platforms, which are flat; and (3) faceted striking platforms, with more than one facet. In addition, crushed platform types were recorded. Of the 1,762 analyzed flakes, only 140 (7.9 percent) retained platforms. Of these, 52 (37.1 percent) were crushed, 43 (30.7 percent) were plain, 34 (24.3 percent) were faceted, and 11 (7.9 percent) were cortical. One-third of the flakes were faceted, one-third had a plain platform, and one- quarter of the platforms were crushed; only 10 percent were cortical. Faceted and crushed platforms are associated with formal tool production. Cortical flakes are associated with core reduction.

Exterior Cortex was recorded in six categories: none, 1–10 percent, 11–49 percent, 50–89 percent, 90–99 percent, and 100 percent. Larger flakes, as a general rule, retain more cortex than smaller flakes. The presence of cortex can assist in ascertaining material availability and quality as well as provide information about lithic technology. In the analyzed flake assemblage, 87.5 percent had no cortex. A simple way to compare debitage between sites is to look at both the flake size and the amount of cortex on each flake. Small flakes with little or no cortex are associated with tool production, while larger flakes with more cortex are associated with core reduction or simple tool use. Figure 8.8 shows percent cortex plotted against flake size for the US 491 data recovery assemblage. Note that flakes with no cortex are the most frequent in every size class. This finding suggests that, while flaked stone raw material (petrified wood) was locally available, it may not have been abundant, leading to intensive reduction of the material that was collected.


Freq

uenc

y

800

700

600

500

400

300

200

100

0

0-.5 0-1 1-2 2-3 3-4 4+

Flake Size Group (cm)

Percent Cortex

0 1-10 11-49 50-89 90-99 100

Figure 8.8. US 491 data recovery, percent cortex plotted against flake size. Edge Modification was recorded for each flake showing regular edge damage but no intentional retouch. Not all flakes with edge damage were included in this category, only those that exhibited damage to some but not all margins. Three types of edge modification were recorded based on shape: (1) convex edge damage, recorded for flakes with edge damage restricted to a convex edge; (2) flat edge damage, recorded when the damage was restricted to a flat edge; and (3) concave edge damage, when the damage was restricted to a concave edge. In the rare cases when more than one type of edge damage was present on a single flake, the dominant shape was subjectively recorded. Only 0.8 percent of the analyzed assemblage exhibited edge modification. This extremely low percentage is explained in part by recovery methods. The vast majority of the lithic assemblage was recovered through 1/8-inch screening, yielding a large number of small flakes, which are rarely edge-modified. Although edge-modified flakes were included with debitage for the flake analysis, they are discussed separately below.

DEBITAGE

SAMPLE SELECTION

All flakes recovered from NM-H-35-19, NM-H-46-55, and Feature 3 (the Pueblo II structure) at Sandy Rise (NM-H-51-55) were fully analyzed. The debitage recovered from the Basketmaker II component at Sandy Rise, however, numbered 6,810 specimens (plus 6 edge-modified flakes), and a sampling strategy was employed to obtain a population suitable for addressing the goals of the analysis through statistical manipulation (Table 8.10). The sample selected provided good representation across the horizontal extent of the component, as well as samples from individual contexts that were large enough for meaningful intra-site comparisons. If a given bagged collection of flakes contained more than 200 items, then roughly 100 were selected for analysis. First, each of the >200 samples was divided into two piles, with care taken to ensure that each pile had a roughly equal representation of flake sizes, presence and amount of cortex, non–


petrified wood material types, and so forth. To further avoid potential bias, a coin was tossed to select one of the piles. If necessary, the procedure was repeated until approximately 100 flakes had been selected for analysis.

Table 8.10 US 491 Data Recovery, Samples from Selected Proveniences in the Sandy Rise

Site (NM-H-51-55) Basketmaker II Component Chosen for Debitage Analysis

FS

Feature

Provenience

Total Debitage* Number Selected for Analysis

Percent Analyzed

54 12 EU 1 4 4 † 156 14 EU 10 155 155 † 139 10 EU 13 3 3 † 152 10 EU 14 21 21 † 183 14 EU 16 30 30 † 209 14 EUs 16 and 17 105 105 † 205 14 EU 17 45 45 † 133 14 EU 2 378 101 26.72 201 10-D EU 21 455 102 22.42 136 10 EU 22 27 27 † 148 14 EU 7 25 25 † 112 14 EU 9 53 53 † 263 12-A SW 1/4 132 132 † 262 12-B SE 1/4 37 37 † 259 12-B SW 1/4 23 23 † 198 14-C within EU 7 26 26 † 225 14-E N 1/2 628 104 16.56 240 14-E SE 1/4 77 77 † 182 17 Feature 17 109 109 † 193 18 N 1/2 107 107 † 219 24 N 1/2 672 99 14.73 248 24-A SW 1/2 10 10 † 250 25 SE 1/4 4 4 † 244 27 SE 1/4 22 22 † 266 32 S 1/2 8 8 † 265 34 E 1/2 174 174 † 43 8 Feature 8 11 11 †

264 32-A Hand trench 3 3 † 233 12-A Test trench 37 37 †

Totals from Selected Proveniences 3,381 1,654 48.92

*Including edge-modified flakes †100 percent analyzed

Chapter 8 Lithic Artifacts 222 This procedure yielded a total sample size that was more than sufficient for the external comparisons with the Aqueduct and LA 457 lithic assemblages. Note that, for the remainder of this discussion of the debitage analysis, all reference to the Sandy Rise site refers to the Basketmaker II component only.

COMPARATIVE ANALYSES

Comparison of Sandy Rise, Aqueduct, and LA 457 Debitage Assemblages As explained above, one of the main goals of the analysis was to compare the debitage assemblages from Sandy Rise site, the Aqueduct site, and site LA 457. This comparative analysis explores debitage assemblages from three different kinds of sites, whose characteristics are summarized in Table 8.11. Table 8.12 shows the number of flakes analyzed from each site.

Table 8.11. US 491 Data Recovery, Characteristics of the Three Sites Examined in the

Debitage Comparison Study

Variable Sandy Rise Aqueduct LA 457

Time Period(s)

Basketmaker II Middle, and Late Archaic

Late Prehistoric (Doña Ana to El Paso phases of the

Jornada Mogollon tradition) Occupation

Span

200 years or less

± 4,000 years

300 years or less

Geomorphic Context

Buried within a sand dune

Upland surface and near- surface

Stratified within alluvial fan deposits

Subsistence Economy

Hunting-gathering, low- level maize-based

agriculture

Mobile hunting-gathering- foraging

Intensive maize-based agriculture supplemented

by wild foods

Site Type

Base camp Palimpsest of many

campsites (most probably small)

Relatively sedentary village

Structures and Features

Pit houses with non-formal features

None preserved Square houses with adobe walls, formal

Dominant Raw Material

Petrified wood Chert, petrified wood, and chalcedony

Siliceous limestone

Table 8.12. Total Analyzed Flakes from Each of the Three Site Assemblages

Site Count of Analyzed Debitage and Edge-Modified Flakes

Sandy Rise 1,654 Aqueduct 399

LA 457 398 As discussed above, previous research has shown that Archaic assemblages tend to include more flakes resulting from bifacial tool production, with proportionately more small and thin flakes, while late prehistoric assemblages reflect a more expedient core-flake technology, with debitage assemblages that have more large, thick, heavy flakes with more cortex present. Additional studies have also shown that large and small sites tend to differ in that large sites exhibit more tool-reduction and maintenance debitage, while small sites feature more expedient technologies, regardless of time period. The properties of the dominant raw material types are also reflected in

Chapter 8 Lithic Artifacts 223 flake assemblages. The three sites studied had different kinds of local raw material: petrified wood at Sandy Rise; a mix of chert, petrified wood, and chalcedony at Aqueduct; and siliceous limestone at LA 457. The purpose of the debitage analysis presented here was to determine whether, long-term, there should be an observable difference between Archaic and later prehistoric lithic assemblages.

For this study, only flakes from excavated contexts were used (which excludes the analyzed surface flakes from Aqueduct), but the analysis was hampered somewhat by differences in recovery methods. At LA 457 and Sandy Rise, all subsurface excavations used 1/8-inch screens, but at Aqueduct only a few “control” units were screened through 1/8-inch mesh, and all analyzed flakes come from 1/4-inch-screened contexts. Thus, it was expected that the assemblage from Aqueduct would be biased against the smallest and lightest flakes, and this factor was taken into account when examining and interpreting the analysis results.

The results of chi-square tests on seven flake variables showed highly significant differences between the assemblages (Table 8.13). Thus, adjusted residuals were examined for each variable.

Table 8.13. Results of Chi-square Analyses on Debitage Variables for the Sandy Rise,

Aqueduct, and LA 457 Assemblages

Variable Chi-square Value Probability Significant Results

Material Texture 512.1 <0.001 Highly significant Flake Completeness 1,084.9 <0.001 Highly significant Exterior Cortex 247.0 <0.001 Highly significant Platform Type 1,059.3 <0.001 Highly significant Weight Group 647.8 <0.001 Highly significant Size Group 512.6 <0.001 Highly significant Thickness Class 513.9 <0.001 Highly significant

Figure 8.9 shows the chi-square adjusted residuals for material texture of flakes in the three analyzed site assemblages. As is clearly evident, Sandy Rise had significantly more fine-textured materials than expected, and less medium and coarse materials. LA 457 had essentially the opposite pattern from Sandy Rise—far fewer fine materials and more medium and coarse materials, with the high proportion of medium materials extremely significant. The Aqueduct site assemblage displays no significant variations.

One of the behavioral correlates reflected by these results probably relates to the properties of the available raw material. At Sandy Rise, petrified wood was the only local material, and although it ranges from fine to medium in texture, the Basketmaker II inhabitants of this site obviously selected for the finer grades. This is consistent with an Archaic lithic technology, focused on bifacial production. At LA 457, the dominant material in the assemblage was a siliceous limestone, which is predominantly medium textured. This material probably occurred locally, and this durable material would have well-suited it to the production of the relatively heavy flake tools typical of later prehistoric lithic technologies. At Aqueduct, the most frequently used local materials were chert and petrified wood, of which 30.5 percent and 15.7 percent, respectively, were medium textured (the rest were fine), followed by chalcedony, typically a fine-textured material. The small-site activities that probably predominated at this site may also have involved a more expedient lithic technology than was the case at the more sedentary Sandy Rise,

Chapter 8 Lithic Artifacts 224 encouraging more frequent use of medium and coarse materials. Another factor influencing the analytical results was the use of 1/4-inch screen at Aqueduct, biasing the assemblage against smaller flakes, which tend to exhibit higher proportions of fine-textured materials.

24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10

8 6 4 2 0

-2 -4 -6 -8

-10 -12 -14 -16 -18 -20 -22 -24

Fine Medium Coarse

Material Texture

Sandy Rise Aqueduct LA 457

Figure 8.9. Adjusted chi-square residuals on flake material texture for the three analyzed

assemblages. The next variable examined was flake completeness. As seen in Figure 8.10, there were extreme differences among the three site assemblages. Specifically, Sandy Rise had significantly more debris and flake fragments than both LA 457 and Aqueduct, a pattern that was reversed for broken and complete flakes. Again, these results reflect both raw material properties and behavioral patterns. The petrified wood at Sandy Rise was among the most fragile of the materials, resulting in high rates of flake fragmentation during flintknapping. It is also a flaw- ridden material, resulting in high incidences of debris, including non-conchoidal tabular and platy pieces. The occupants of Sandy Rise also intensively reduced their raw material, perhaps in part because it was not abundant on and immediately around the site, but also because many tools were produced and refurbished at this base camp. Finally, repeated trampling within this intensively occupied settlement also probably contributed to high rates of flake fragmentation.


28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0

-2 -4 -6 -8

-10 -12 -14 -16 -18 -20 -22 -24

Debris Fragment Broken Complete

Flake Completeness


Figure 8.10. Adjusted chi-square residuals on flake completeness for the three analyzed

assemblages. Intense occupation and trampling also likely occurred at LA 457, although materials may have been more quickly buried by natural sedimentation here than was the case during the occupation at Sandy Rise. More important, though, the most abundant material at LA 457—siliceous limestone—is more durable than the petrified wood of the western San Juan Basin and less prone to fragmentation. Moreover, the preference for heavier, more expedient flake tools at this site would have created a higher rate of larger, thicker, and heavier debitage (more on this shortly), and bigger flakes—of whatever material type—are also less prone to fragmentation. At Aqueduct, the observed results probably reflect raw material availability, behavioral patterns, and the use of 1/4-inch screens. This site’s assemblage resembled that of LA 457 in many respects, although the differences in relation to the Sandy Rise flake assemblage were not as stark.

Percent of exterior cortex also showed significant variation (Figure 8.11). Specifically, Sandy Rise had many more flakes with no cortex than expected, and fewer with >10 percent cortex, while Aqueduct and LA 457 showed the opposite pattern.


16 14 12 10

8 6 4 2 0

-2 -4 -6 -8

-10 -12 -14 -16

0 1-10 11-49 50+

Percent Cortex

Sandy Rise

Aqueduct LA 457

Figure 8.11. Adjusted chi-square residuals on exterior cortex for the three analyzed

assemblages. The pattern for platform type was similar (Figure 8.12), with extreme differences between Sandy Rise and LA 457, Aqueduct and LA 457 somewhat similar, and Aqueduct not as different from Sandy Rise as LA 457. Specifically, LA 457 had many more cortical platforms than expected, Aqueduct had slightly more, and Sandy Rise had substantially fewer. The differences between these assemblages with respect to plain platforms and no platforms (lack of platforms is closely related to flake fragmentation) were even more extreme. For faceted platforms, the differences between Sandy Rise and LA 457 were far less extreme, but still significant. There were no significant differences with respect to crushed platforms. Again, these differences reflect variation in both technology and the kinds of raw material that were locally available—and selected for.

For flake weight, once again there were clear differences between the Sandy Rise and LA 457 assemblages, with the Sandy Rise assemblage containing many more lightweight flakes and LA 457 many more heavy ones (Figure 8.13). Aqueduct did not vary from the expected pattern, except that it contained slightly fewer flakes than expected in the next-to-lightest group. Thus, although Aqueduct resembled LA 457 more than Sandy Rise in terms of flake completeness and platform type, in regard to flake weight the Aqueduct assemblage was more squarely intermediary between the other two.


30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10

8 6 4 2 0

-2 -4 -6 -8

-10 -12 -14 -16 -18 -20 -22 -24 -26 -28

Cortical Crushed Plain Faceted None

Platform Type


Figure 8.12. Adjusted chi-square residuals on platform type for the three analyzed

assemblages. Still, the extent to which the use of 1/4-inch screening at Aqueduct was affecting these patterns was unknown. Unlike the previously examined attributes, with flake weight one has the opportunity to at least attempt to control for differences in screen size, in this case by eliminating the lightest-weight category (0–0.2 g) from the analysis. The results are shown in Figure 8.14. In this data run, the extremes between Sandy Rise and LA 457 were suppressed somewhat, but the pattern remained essentially the same, with Aqueduct more closely resembling LA 457, but still more or less intermediate between that site’s assemblage and the one from Sandy Rise.


0-0.

2

0.21

-0.4

0.41

-1.0

1.01

-2.0

2.01

-5.0

5.01

+

22 20 18 16 14 12 10

8 6 4 2 0

-2 -4 -6 -8

-10 -12 -14 -16 -18 -20

Sandy Rise

Aqueduct

LA 457

Flake Weight (g)

Figure 8.13. Adjusted chi-square residuals on flake weight for the three analyzed assemblages.

12

10

8

6

4

2

0

-2

-4

-6

-8

-10

-12

0.21-0.4 0.41-1.0 1.01-2.0 2.01-5.0 5.01+

We ight Group (g)

Sandy Rise

Aqueduct

LA 457

Figure 8.14. Adjusted chi-square residuals on flake weight for the three analyzed assemblages,

with the 0–0.2 g weight category eliminated.

Chapter 8 Lithic Artifacts 229 Flake size is perhaps the variable most sensitive to screen size, and eliminating the smallest flake-size category can help control for this problem. Accordingly, the first chi-square test on flake size was run for all size categories, while the second eliminated the 0–1 cm size range. The results are shown in Figure 8.15 and Figure 8.16. As is evident from these two graphs, removal of the smallest flake-size group had little effect on the overall patterning. In either case, once again the Aqueduct assemblage more closely resembled that from LA 457, although the differences between Aqueduct and Sandy Rise were less pronounced than those between Sandy Rise and LA 457. Specifically, Sandy Rise had more small flakes, while Aqueduct and, especially, LA 457 had more flakes in the larger size categories, with the differences greatest at either end of the size spectrum. Overall, the differences between the assemblages for this variable were less pronounced than they were for material texture, flake completeness, and platform type, although they were still highly significant.

The final variable examined was flake thickness. Here, once again an attempt was made to control for different screen sizes by running the data both with and without the thinnest flake category (although flake thickness may be less sensitive to variation in screen size than flake weight or, especially, flake size). The results are shown in Figure 8.17 and Figure 8.18. In both cases, the prevailing stark differences between Sandy Rise and LA 457 were still evident— Sandy Rise contained more thin flakes and LA 457 contained more thick ones—although as expected the differences were suppressed somewhat when the thinnest flakes were removed. The Aqueduct assemblage was somewhat of a mixed bag; with the 1-mm flakes included, it generally followed the LA 457 pattern, with fewer than expected flakes in the thinnest category, and more than expected (although just slightly so) in the group of thickest flakes. With the 1-mm flakes removed from the analysis, however, there were no significant chi-square residuals for the Aqueduct assemblage in any of the remaining thickness categories. In any event, the characteristics of the Aqueduct assemblage in terms of flake thickness were largely intermediate between the extremes exhibited by Sandy Rise and LA 457.

The statistical comparisons between Sandy Rise, Aqueduct, and LA 457 provide an explicit measure and characterization of the stark differences between an Archaic assemblage (Sandy Rise) and a late prehistoric one (LA 457), but also point to significant differences between different kinds of Archaic sites (Sandy Rise and Aqueduct). In terms of every variable, the differences between Sandy Rise and LA 457 were exceedingly clear; while the former site had an assemblage that featured more fine materials, more fragmentation, few cortical platforms and in fact little cortex, and flakes that were significantly lightweight, small, and thin, the LA 457 assemblage was an extreme opposite of this pattern. Interestingly, the flake assemblage from Aqueduct—an Archaic site—more closely resembled the late prehistoric LA 457 assemblage than the Basketmaker II Sandy Rise assemblage, although the differences were not as stark, and in one isolated instance (the 2-mm thickness group), Aqueduct was dissimilar from LA 457. Still, the dissimilarities between Sandy Rise and Aqueduct seem to underscore the differences between these two kinds of Archaic sites in terms of function, mobility, and settlement context. Differences in the dominant local material at Sandy Rise and Aqueduct might help account for some of these behavioral differences. However, superficially at least, the chalcedony at Aqueduct did not appear to be notably more durable than the petrified wood at Sandy Rise (although verifying this suggestion would require systematic experimentation, which is beyond the scope of this project).


12

10

8

6

4

2

0

-2

-4

-6

-8

-10

-12

-14

0-1 1-2 2-3 3-4 4+

Flake Size (cm)


Figure 8.15. Adjusted chi-square residuals on flake size for the three analyzed assemblages.

16.00 14.00 12.00 10.00

8.00 6.00 4.00 2.00 0.00

-2.00 -4.00 -6.00 -8.00

-10.00 -12.00 -14.00 -16.00

1-2 2-3 3-4 4+

Flake Size (cm)


Figure 8.16. Adjusted chi-square residuals on flake size for the three analyzed assemblages,

with the smallest flake-size category removed


16 14 12 10

8 6 4 2 0

-2 -4 -6 -8

-10 -12 -14 -16

1 2 3 4-5 6-9 10+

Thickness Group (mm)

Sandy Rise

Aqueduct

LA 457

Figure 8.17. Adjusted chi-square residuals on flake thickness for the three analyzed

assemblages.

10.00

8.00

6.00

4.00

2.00

0.00

-2.00

-4.00

-6.00

-8.00

-10.00

2 3 4-5 6-9 10 +

Flake Thickness (mm)


Figure 8.18. Adjusted chi-square residuals on flake thickness for the three analyzed

assemblage, with the thinnest flakes eliminated.

Chapter 8 Lithic Artifacts 232 The analysis also provided additional evidence in support of Lundquist’s findings that large and small sites tend to be different, regardless of time period, with large sites featuring more formal- tool production and small ones more expedient flake technologies (Lundquist 2002, 2004a, 2004b; Van Hoose and Lundquist 2002).

The differences between Sandy Rise and Aqueduct would not be so great if 1/8-inch screening had been employed at the latter site. Although it remains unknown to what extent these differences may have been suppressed by use of consistent screen size, attempts to control for this difference in field method (by eliminating the smallest categories for weight, size, and thickness) did not eliminate the pattern, suggesting that the observed differences between Sandy Rise and Aqueduct were due more to behavioral patterns than to any biases introduced by variations in screen size.

In summary, use of an attribute-based system of flake analysis, in conjunction with a straightforward statistical method (adjusted chi-square residuals), provides a robust means for explicitly characterizing flake assemblages and the differences between them. The results clearly and quantitatively spell out the differences between Archaic and late prehistoric flake assemblages, and also between those of two very different Archaic sites. This method has tremendous analytical potential, and should be used more regularly in lithic analyses in the American Southwest and elsewhere.

Comparison of Sandy Rise and Little Water Village Debitage Assemblages

The Sandy Rise (NM-H-51-55) and Little Water Village (NM-H-35-19) debitage assemblages would, under more typical circumstances, provide a good opportunity to further investigate the technological changes from Archaic to later prehistoric times, as Little Water dates from the Basketmaker III–Pueblo I time frame. However, a meaningful comparison of these assemblages is hampered by two factors: (1) most of the materials collected from Little Water Village came from the site surface, whereas those from the Basketmaker II component at Sandy Rise were from a stratigraphically buried context and recovered through 1/8-inch screening; (2) large areas of Little Water Village were previously excavated. One effect of the latter factor is that the flakes recovered (from 1/8-inch screen) during SWCA’s excavations at Little Water were mostly small and appeared to be the re-deposited “leftovers” from the 1979 excavation’s back dirt, including items that likely had previously passed through 1/4-inch and/or 1/2-inch screen.

Still, it seemed potentially useful to conduct some comparisons between the Sandy Rise and Little Water assemblages, especially in light of the variety of raw materials recovered from both sites and the fact that Sandy Rise was primarily an Archaic site and Little Water an Anasazi site. For this analysis, flakes from all components of the Sandy Rise site were included. Given the predominance at Little Water Village of surface-collected flakes over those recovered from 1/8 inch screen, and the Anasazi time frame for this site (which would imply an expedient, core- flake technology), it was expected that overall this site would likely exhibit larger flake sizes than Sandy Rise. Potentially countering this, however, were the screen-recovered flakes from Little Water Village, most of which were small (again, because they had probably passed through coarser screen sizes during the previous excavation). As seen in Figure 8.19, there were significant differences between these two assemblages (χ2 = 104.2, p< 0.001), with flake sizes at Little Water Village larger overall than those at Sandy Rise.


10

8

6

4

2

0

-2

-4

-6

-8

-10

0-1 1-2 2-3 3+

Flake Size Groups (cm)

Little Water Sandy Ris e

Figure 8.19. Adjusted chi-square residuals on flake size, Sandy Rise and Little Water Village.

There were also significant differences between the two sites in terms of flake weight (χ2 = 75.3, p<0.001), with the same general pattern, although there were no significant differences in the 0.1–1.0 g range (Figure 8.20). In summary, at Little Water Village the combination of an Anasazi occupation, with its expedient core-flake technology, and the predominance of surface- collected flakes appears to have produced an assemblage dominated by flakes that tended to be larger and heavier than those from Sandy Rise. To what extent this is the result of different recovery methods versus different technologies, however, remains unclear.

8

6

4

2 Little Water

0 Sandy Rise

-2

-4

-6

-8 0.01-0.09 0.1-0.2 0.3-0.4 0.5-1.0 1.1-2.0 2.1-5.0 5+

Weight Groups (g) Figure 8.20. Adjusted chi-square residuals on flake weight, Sandy Rise and Little Water

Village sites.

Chapter 8 Lithic Artifacts 234 Comparative Flake Analysis within the Sandy Rise Site Basketmaker II Component

Flake assemblages from different proveniences within the Basketmaker II component at Sandy Rise were examined to see if differences existed between household areas. For this analysis, analyzed flakes from the fill and floors of six of the seven pit houses (Features 10D, 12A, 14E, 17, 18, and 24) and one household midden (Feature 14) were compared. Highly significant differences existed for both flake size (χ2 = 71.8, p<0.001) and flake weight (χ2 = 68.4, p<0.001).

The chi-square residuals show that, overall, the flakes from these selected household proveniences were similar, with significant deviations in the flakes from Features 10D, 12A, 18, and 24 (Figure 8.21; Figure 8.22). Feature 18 differed in having flakes that were distinctly smaller and lighter than the others. Feature 24 had more large and heavy flakes. Feature 12-A had fewer small and light flakes, and more small/light-medium flakes. Though Feature 10D had fewer flakes in the 0.3–0.4 g range, its assemblage was within the expected ranges of variability.

8 6 4 2 0 -2 -4 -6

F.14 F.17 F.18 F.24 F.10-D F.12-A F.14-E

Features

Flake Sizes

(cm)

0-1 1-2 2+

Figure 8.21. Adjusted chi-square residuals on flake size for one household midden (Feature

14) and six pit houses at the Sandy Rise site.

6 4 2 0 -2 -4

14 17 18 24 10-D 12-A 14-E

Feature

Weight Groups (g)

0.01-0.09 0.1-0.2 0.3-0.4 0.5+

Figure 8.22. Adjusted chi-square residuals on flake weight for one household midden (Feature

14) and six pit houses at the Sandy Rise site.

Chapter 8 Lithic Artifacts 235 What these differences mean in terms of behavior is not immediately self-evident, but some potential factors can be suggested. Feature 18 was the smallest pit house, was located on the periphery of the settlement, and of the seven houses at the site contained the fewest artifacts and had the lowest artifact density. Given its distinctive character, it may not have been contemporary with the other pit houses (although there is no chronometric evidence to directly support this possibility). Contemporary or not, the occupation of Feature 18 and this particular locality may have been relatively brief, and the occupant(s) may have been slightly disadvantaged relative to others who occupied this site. If so, the occupants of Feature 18 may have been motivated to get the most out of whatever lithic raw material they managed to acquire, thoroughly reducing it in the process. Moreover, if Feature 18 was occupied late in the life span of this settlement, then it is possible that much of the petrified wood in the immediate vicinity of the site had been exhausted. Insofar as this is true, the latest occupants of the site (be they the occupants of Feature 18 or not) would have had to venture farther away to obtain suitable petrified material, which in turn would likely have encouraged more reduction away from the base camp, with more finished bifaces and tools brought back to the site. For whatever combination of reasons, the occupants of Feature 18 produced a flake assemblage that was characterized by a higher-than-expected proportion of tool shaping and refurbishment flakes, and less-than-expected frequencies of initial and primary reduction waste.

In contrast, Feature 12-A had a lower-than-expected frequency of small/light flakes and more flakes of medium size and weight, and Feature 24 contained more large/heavy flakes than expected. These two pit houses were among the larger structures at the site (Feature 12-A was the largest), and both were within the Central Group. As such, their occupants (contemporary with Feature 18 or not) may have enjoyed preferred access to quality pieces of petrified wood, and if so could perhaps have afforded to be slightly more extravagant and comparatively “wasteful” in their flintknapping.

These observations hint at the possibility of differential access to local raw material, variable flintknapping skill, or some other factor(s), the end result of which was different flaking patterns at certain households within this small settlement. Whether this is a function of temporal differences (involving the depletion of local source material over time) or some measure of incipient social inequality remains unknown. Of course, the suggested interpretations of these observed patterns assume that the flake assemblages recovered from these pit houses are actually associated with the occupations of these structures, but this may not be true, given the potential complexity of site formation processes producing the fill within these structures.

EDGE-MODIFIED FLAKES

Edge-modified flakes are flakes that were utilized but do not exhibit any evidence of intentional retouch or shaping. Thus, the observed edge modification (microflaking, crushing, edge polishing, etc.) are simply artifacts of the use of flakes that are otherwise waste debris. Larger flakes, especially, are well suited for expedient use. However, it is difficult if not impossible to separate out flakes knapped specifically for expedient use from pieces of waste product (i.e., debitage) that have been expediently used. Therefore, edge-modified flakes and debitage were grouped together for the debitage analysis (above), but were also examined separately to see if there were significant differences in any of the recorded attributes.

Chapter 8 Lithic Artifacts 236 Edge-modified flakes differ from unutilized debitage in that they tend to be heavier, even within the same size class. Table 8.14 shows the average weight, in grams, of waste debitage and edge- modified flakes in the analyzed US 491 assemblage by size class. Edge-modified flakes are also different from debitage in that larger flakes are more frequently edge-modified than smaller flakes. This makes intuitive sense; smaller flakes are more often the byproduct of tool production and are easily lost, while large flakes are easy to locate on the landscape and can be adapted to numerous tasks with no modification. As seen in Figure 8.23, edge-modified flakes were significantly more frequent among the larger flakes in this assemblage, and less so in the smallest flake-size category (χ2 = 90.8, p <0.001). Flakes in the 0–1 cm size class are apparently too small to be effectively used as expedient tools; they are almost never edge-modified.

Table 8.14. US 491 Data Recovery, Average Weight in Grams of Debitage

and Edge-Modified Flakes by Size Class

Weight Group (g)

Debitage

Edge Modified All Waste Flakes

0.01–0.09 0.05 N/A 0.05 0.1–0.2 0.14 0.15 0.14 0.3–0.4 0.29 0.30 0.29 0.5–1.0 0.63 0.65 0.63 1.1–2.0 1.39 1.59 1.39 2.1–5.0 2.91 N/A 2.91 5+ 11.86 35.42 16.44 Average, Each Category 0.57 17.97 0.71

15

10

5

Debitage 0

Edge-modified

-5

-10

-15

0-2 2-3 3+

Flake Size (cm) Figure 8.23. US 491 data recovery, plot of adjusted chi-square residuals on debitage and edge-

modified flakes by size.

Chapter 8 Lithic Artifacts 237 Edge modification can be identified by the shape of the modified edge, which may be related to intended function. For this project, there was no significant difference between the modified edge shapes and the flake size categories (χ2 = 5.0, p=0.674), nor between edge-modification shape and material type (χ2 = 6.1, p=0.689). Although the relevant research has yet to be conducted, there is likely a relationship between the qualities of different materials and the types of activities they would have been selected for (e.g., Lundquist 2004a:272). For example, quartzite is more durable and may be more appropriate for tasks involving pulling, for which the convex shape seems ideal. That there is no difference in edge-modification type among material types in the US 491 project assemblage is likely due to the small number of utilized flakes and the small frequencies of material types other than petrified wood.

Edge-modified flakes were very rare in this lithic assemblage, accounting for less than one percent of the total analyzed flakes (14 out of 1,762, or 0.8%). Interestingly, 8 of the 14 modified flakes came from Little Water Village (NM-H-35-19), a Basketmaker III–Pueblo I site, while the other six came from the analyzed flake assemblage from the Sandy Rise site (NM-H-51-55), the major component of which was Basketmaker II in age. Given the much smaller size of the lithic assemblage at Little Water Village, the percentage differences in the number of edge-modified flakes between these two assemblages is highly significant (χ2 = 67.1, p<0.001; Figure 8.24). Given that Puebloan assemblages are typically dominated by an expedient core-flake tool technology (see above discussion), one would expect to find more edge-modified flakes in a Puebloan assemblage than in an Archaic one, and this was indeed the case for Little Water Village and the Sandy Rise site.

10 8 6 4 2 0

-2 -4 -6 -8

-10

Debitage Edge Modified

Little Water Sandy Rise

Figure 8.24. Plot of adjusted chi-square residuals on debitage and edge-modified flakes for the

Little Water Village and Sandy Rise sites. This observation was tested further with data from the Early–Late Archaic Aqueduct site (LA 103049) and LA 457, a late prehistoric village. As seen in Figure 8.25, the expectation that more edge-modified flakes should occur in late prehistoric than in Archaic sites is not consistently borne out. Interestingly, the Aqueduct site had a higher-than-expected frequency of edge- modified flakes, even higher than Little Water Village. LA 457, chronologically the latest site in this sample, was the only one of the analyzed sites that showed no significant differences from the total sample population. Thus, the most significant differences were between Sandy Rise and Aqueduct, the two Archaic sites in this sample.


10.00 8.00 6.00 4.00 2.00 0.00

-2.00 -4.00 -6.00 -8.00

-10.00

Little Water Sandy Rise LA 457 Aqueduct

Site

Debitage Edge Modified

Figure 8.25. Adjusted chi-square residuals on debitage and edge-modified flakes for the Little

Water Village, Sandy Rise, LA 457, and Aqueduct sites. Three factors might explain, or contribute to explaining, these stark differences. First, inter- observer variability may be at play here; these projects involved two different lithic analysts who likely employed somewhat different criteria in identifying edge-modified flakes, although the same analyst who identified so few at Sandy Rise also identified the much higher proportion of utilized flakes at Little Water Village. Second, different screen sizes during fieldwork undoubtedly affected the proportion of utilized flakes to total flakes in the two assemblages. Whereas 1/8-inch mesh was consistently employed during the Sandy Rise excavations, the entire analyzed assemblage from the Aqueduct site was recovered using 1/4-inch mesh, not only reducing the total number of flakes recovered, but undoubtedly introducing a consistent bias against small flakes (which almost never show evidence of utilization). Still, even if one were to eliminate the smallest flake-size category from the Sandy Rise assemblage (0–0.5 cm, n=25), the differences would remain nearly identical. This leaves the third potential factor, which relates to differences in site function (i.e., intensity and duration of occupation, kinds and ranges of activities carried out). Other lines of data (including debitage; see above) suggest that Sandy Rise and Aqueduct, while both dating from the Archaic tradition, were indeed different kinds of sites, and this may explain, in part, the starkly different frequencies in the utilization of flakes as expedient tools.

In other studies, however, Lundquist (2002, 2004a, 2004b, 2005) found that, given a large enough sample size of sites, the general pattern is that large flakes are just as likely to have been utilized at sites with a large assemblage as at sites with a small assemblage. He further concluded that, in general, edge modification is significantly less frequent at Archaic period sites than at Puebloan period sites. However, the results here suggest that patterns of utilized flake frequency are perhaps more complicated than this, and further research into this issue is needed to better understand this complexity.

Chapter 8 Lithic Artifacts 239 CORES

Forty-five cores were recovered during the US 491 data recovery project, 40 from the Basketmaker II component at Sandy Rise and the others from the Little Water Village site. By type, the cores were 15 globular, 3 single-platform, 6 double-platform, 20 fragments, and 1 tested cobble. Definitions of these core types derive in part from Huckell (1973:189). Single- platform cores have one major striking platform. Double-platform cores have two major platform surfaces, usually opposed to each other. Bifacial cores (absent in the US 491 assemblage) are worked on two faces from a common edge or platform. Globular cores have no consistently used platform; the flakes have been removed randomly. Cobbles with a single flake removed are defined as test cobbles.

Thirty-five of the 45 cores were local petrified wood, and the remainder were three Narbona Pass chert, three unidentified chert, two rainbow petrified wood, and one each quartzite and igneous. In addition to material type, each core was individually weighed to the nearest hundredth of a gram and measured (maximum length, width, and thickness) to the nearest millimeter. Other recorded attributes included percent cortex (none, ≤10 percent, 11–89 percent, 90–99 percent, and 100 percent), and completeness. By weight, cores and core fragments totaled 997.3 g, or 10.8 percent of the total weight of the analyzed flaked stone assemblage. Complete cores averaged 4.5 cm in length (range 2.6–7.7 cm), 3.3 cm in width (range 2.4–5.4), 1.9 cm in thickness (range 1.9–3.4 cm), and weighed 32.3 g (range 4.1–137.6 g). Complete data for the cores is provided in Appendix C.

The frequency of cores in the Basketmaker II component at Sandy Rise is consistent with the range of flintknapping activities that occurred there, from initial reduction of local sources of petrified wood, through tool finishing and refurbishing. The cores were small, though, suggesting that local raw materials were not abundant and were rather thoroughly reduced on-site. The majority of the specimens (n=39, or 86.7 percent of all cores) had less than 50 percent cortex, suggesting that cores were well worked to “squeeze” as much flake and tool production out of them as possible.

LITHIC TOOLS

For this analysis, all lithic tools were flaked stone items: bifaces (Stages I–VI), a chopper, core tools, drills, flake tools (i.e., intentionally retouched flakes), a graver, hammerstones (and fragments thereof), knives, and scrapers. The recovered assemblage totaled 89 specimens, 79 of which came from the Basketmaker II component at Sandy Rise (NM-H-51-55). Table 8.15 shows the distribution of lithic tools by raw material.

For all tools, maximum length, width, and thickness were measured with dial calipers to the nearest millimeter. Weight was recorded on a digital scale to the nearest tenth of a gram. Material type and material texture were recorded, as for the debitage analysis. Completeness categories were complete, broken, base (for bifaces), tip, and flake fragment (for projections, flake tools, and scrapers). Cortex was recorded (none, ≤10 percent, 11–89 percent, and ≥90 percent), and any edge modification was noted. Complete data on lithic tools are provided in Appendix C. A chi-square test of tool subtypes versus raw materials (petrified wood vs. everything else) was conducted, but no significant relationships were found (χ2 = 8.3; p = 0.991).


Table 8.15. US 491 Data Recovery, Lithic Tool Types by Raw Material Type

Material B

iface

C

hopp

er

Cor

e To

ol

Dril

l Fl

ake

Tool

G

rave

r H

amm

erst

one

Kni

fe

Scra

per

Total by Material

Chalcedony 1 2 1 4 Chert 4 1 1 6 Narbona Pass Chert 2 1 1 4 Petrified Wood 24 1 10 1 17 10 1 3 67 Quartzite 1 3 1 5 Rainbow Petrified Wood 1 1 2 Zuni Buttes Spotted Chert

1

1

Total by Tool Type 32 1 14 2 21 1 13 2 3 89

BIFACES

Bifaces are a hallmark of preceramic lithic technology in the Americas. These tools are identified by marked bifacial thinning or deep bifacial retouch. Roxlau et al. (1997:61–70) created an idealized six-stage typology (Table 8.16) for categorizing bifaces based on flaking patterns, intensity of reduction, and overall form. This method provides a useful heuristic for comparative purposes; it does not imply that all bifaces fit a standard trajectory from Stage I to Stage VI.

Table 8.16. Stages of Biface Manufacture

Stage Characteristics I Blank morphology is still evident ; primary retouch has taken place, but no thinning

II Artifact exhibits coarse flaking and the beginnings of thinning, most blank morphology obliterated

III Artifact shows regular margins and has undergone initial thinning, none of original blank form remains

IV Platform preparation and coarse thinning are apparent

V Artifact exhibits regular margins and some marginal retouch, with some pressure flaking possible

VI Final shaping; artifact shows fine marginal retouch

Adapted from Roxlau et al. (1997)

The recovered tool assemblage included 32 bifaces (36.0%), 31 from the Basketmaker II component at Sandy Rise and the other from the Little Water Village site. The bifaces from Sandy Rise reflected on-site flaking activities that covered the entire range of the bifacial- reduction trajectory, with highest frequencies in the middle stages of reduction (Figure 8.26). Only seven bifaces were complete: four Stage I, one Stage III, and two Stage VI (the two complete Stage VI bifaces are shown in Figure 8.30 A, B).


10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0

Stage I Stage II Stage III Stage IV Stage V Stage VI Figure 8.26. Sandy Rise (NM-H-51-55) Basketmaker II component, frequency of bifaces

(including fragments) by stage. FLAKE TOOLS

Flake tools were the second most frequent lithic tool type in the project assemblage, totaling 21 of the 89 tools (23.6%). Like edge-modified flakes, flake tools represent minimal investment; the difference between them is that intentional retouch is visible on flake tools. Any flake that exhibited intentional retouch but did not fit into any of the more intuitive tool categories was classified as a flake tool. Unlike most formal tools, flake tools have easily observable characteristics. In this assemblage, the average complete flake tool (n=7) was 4.3 cm long (range = 2.8–5.7 cm), 3.1 cm wide (range = 2.5–3.8 cm), and 1.0 cm thick (range = 0.5–1.5 cm), and weighed 16.7 g (range = 2.9–36.2g).

CORE TOOLS

Cores that have been retouched and/or exhibit use are classified as core tools. The assemblage contained 14 core tools (15.7%), 13 from the Sandy Rise site. Their average dimensions were, length, 5.7 cm (range = 5.0–7.3 cm), width, 4.0 cm (range = 3.1–5.3 cm), and thickness 2.3 cm (range = 1.8–3.4 cm), and their average weight was 67.6 g (range = 22.6–158.7 g).

HAMMERSTONES

Hammerstones were used for flintknapping, for shaping ground stone metates, and probably for other tasks as well. The assemblage included 13 hammerstones and hammerstone fragments (14.6%), all but one of which came from the Sandy Rise site. Seven of these were cores that were used as hammerstones, two were cobble hammerstones, and four were hammerstone fragments. Ten of the 13 hammerstones were petrified wood, including the one shown in Figure 8.27. The other three were quartzite, a hard material well suited for use as stone hammers, but apparently rare within the project area. The average complete hammerstone (n=4) was 11.1 cm

Chapter 8 Lithic Artifacts 242 long (range = 6.0–14.2 cm), 8.0 cm wide (range = 5.1–11.3 cm), and 5.8cm thick (range = 4.2– 9.1 cm), and weighed 835.3 g (range = 173.0–1,871.0 g).

Figure 8.27. Hammerstone made from a solid block of petrified wood. Note the intense

battering wear on the top and side edges. SCRAPERS

Using a modified version of Rozen's (1984) system of tool analysis, a scraper was defined as any tool with continuous invasive retouch, usually unifacial. Continuous retouch consists of at least three contiguous flake scars; unifacial retouch appears on either or both sides but may not overlap the same edge. In invasive retouch, the length of the longest scar exceeds 10 percent of the artifact's maximum dimension. All three specimens were made from petrified wood.

Only three scrapers were identified in the US 491 lithic assemblage, all from the Basketmaker II component at Sandy Rise. Two of these were side scrapers and the other had retouch on multiple sides. The dearth of scrapers seems consistent with the lack of other evidence for hunting and processing of faunal remains at the site. The average complete scraper (n=3) was 5.1 cm long (range = 3.4–6.3 cm), 2.5 cm wide (range = 1.8–2.8 cm), and 1.2 cm thick (range = 0.8–1.5 cm), and weighed 14.1 g (range = 5.2–22.5 g).

KNIVES

Two knives were identified within the assemblage, both from the Basketmaker II component at Sandy Rise. Both were broken. One was made from a thin, tabular spall of petrified wood, and had an intentionally retouched edge with a “handle” portion behind (Figure 8.28). This specimen measured 8.2 × 4.7 × 0.7 cm and weighed 35.0 g. The other item was a spall of metaquartzite

Chapter 8 Lithic Artifacts 243 with a natural sharp edge but no intentional retouch, measuring 10.8 × 4.2 × 1.3 cm and weighing 67.3 g.

Figure 8.28. Knife made from a thin, tabular spall of petrified wood. DRILLS

Drills are used for drilling or punching holes into or through various materials. Two drills were identified in the lithic assemblage, both from the Basketmaker II component at Sandy Rise. One was fashioned from a flake of petrified wood (Figure 8.29) and measured 5.1 × 2.8 × 0.9 cm and weighed 10.7 g. The other was a thick, tetrahedral splinter of Narbona Pass chert that exhibited retouch and use wear along two of its four edges. This specimen measured 4.0 × 2.4 × 1.5 cm and weighed 13.3 g.

CHOPPER

Figure 8.29. Drill made from a petrified wood flake.

Choppers are large flakes or pieces of stone that have been retouched along a single margin, often bifacially, and show subsequent battering along the edge formed by the intersection of the

Chapter 8 Lithic Artifacts 244 flake scars. One chopper of petrified wood, from the Basketmaker II component at Sandy Rise, was identified within the lithic assemblage. It measured 8.6 × 6.6 × 2.7 cm and weighed 193.4 g.

GRAVER

Gravers are tools, usually with a slight projection, used for engraving or scoring various materials. The lithic assemblage contained one graver end fragment of chalcedony, from the Basketmaker II component at Sandy Rise. It measured 1.5 × 1.0 × 0.3 cm and weighed 0.6 g.

LITHIC TOOL SUMMARY

Bifaces and flake tools dominated the tool assemblage, but lithic tools accounted for a very small percentage of the total lithic assemblage. This is somewhat surprising, given the occupational intensity of the Basketmaker II component at Sandy Rise and the various lines of evidence for multiple seasons of use at this site.

PROJECTILE POINTS

Somewhat surprisingly, only 14 projectile points (including non-diagnostic fragments) were collected during the US 491 data recovery investigations (Table 8.17). Ten of the 14 specimens were made from petrified wood, including all six of those coded as diagnostic. The other material types identified were chalcedony, quartzite, Narbona Pass chert, and unidentified chert (one specimen each). Five of the diagnostic projectile points were from the Basketmaker II component at Sandy Rise (NM-H-51-55), and one was from Little Water Village (NM-H-35-19).

The points from the Basketmaker II component included one unnotched point with a leaf shape that was the most finely flaked of the points recovered (Figure 8.30, C). Superficially this point resembled the Jemez type, although specimens of that type typically exhibit crude workmanship and preserve part of the original flake surface (Turnbow 1997:196–197). Unnotched leaf-shaped points apparently occur as minority types in Late Achaic contexts throughout the Southwest (Turnbow 1997:198). The other four diagnostic points from this component (Figure 8.30, D–G) were corner- or side notched types that are rather typical of Late Archaic/Basketmaker II points (see Moore 1983:663, Figure 9.7). All of the points from the Basketmaker II component at Sandy Rise are assumed to have been used to tip spears or darts propelled by atl-atls.

The dearth of projectile points in the Basketmaker II component was surprising, and underscores the lack of importance of hunting or warfare-related activities at this site, or at least those that would have involved the use of projectiles propelled by atl-atls. The data recovery findings do provide very explicit temporal data for these points, since the Basketmaker II component was stratigraphically sealed and chronometrically well dated to circa 400–200 B.C.

One side-notched arrow point was recovered from the surface of Little Water Village, a Basketmaker III–Pueblo I component. This specimen was somewhat similar to the Broken Side- notched type, which spans the time frame from A.D. 500 to 1230 (Turnbow 1997:207). The point was similar to several of those illustrated in the report on the previous excavations at this site (Condon 1982:78–79); although most of the previously recovered arrow points at Little Water Village exhibited stronger shouldering than the one recovered by SWCA in 2006.


Table 8.17. Projectile Point Data (including Fragments)

Site

(NM-H)

FS

Illustration

(Figure 8.30)

Material

Length

Width

Thickness

Weight (g)

Completeness

Neck

Thickness

Neck/ Stem Width

Stem

Length

Basal Width

35-19

8

H Petrified Wood

1.63

1.04

0.22

0.46

Broken

0.22

0.66

0.23

0.85

51-55 108 Quartzite 2.41 1.89 0.58 2.94 Midsection N/A N/A N/A N/A

51-55

113 Petrified Wood

3.11

2.19

0.35

2.77

Midsection

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

51-55

133

D Petrified Wood

2.26

1.81

0.30

1.47

Midsection

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

51-55 182 Chalcedony 0.94 0.16 0.09 Distal N/A N/A N/A N/A

51-55

188 Narbona Pass Chert

1.25

0.87

0.43

0.43

Base

0.43

1.09

N/A

N/A

51-55

193 Petrified Wood

1.04

0.85

0.32

0.24

Distal

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

51-55 219 C Petrified Wood 4.02 1.57 0.44 2.78 Complete N/A N/A N/A N/A

51-55

219

F Petrified Wood

2.24

1.09

0.40

0.96

Base

0.38

1.41

0.75

1.82

51-55

225

E Petrified Wood

3.95

2.25

0.71

4.27

Complete

0.43

1.83

0.76

2.48

51-55

225 Petrified Wood

2.16

1.95

0.40

1.14

Distal

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

51-55

241

G Petrified Wood

2.03

1.82

0.43

1.51

Complete

0.35

1.32

0.68

1.52

51-55

263 Petrified Wood

1.67

1.40

2.68

0.67

Base

0.29

0.96

0.63

1.30

51-55 270 Chert 1.47 1.39 0.30 0.43 Distal N/A N/A N/A N/A

All dimensions in millimeters.


Figure 8.30. US 491 data recovery, fine bifaces and projectile points (all are petrified wood): (A, B) Stage VI bifaces; (C) leaf-shaped projectile point; (D) shouldered, corner- notched (stem missing); (E, F) weakly shouldered, corner/side-notched; (G) reworked side-notched point; (H) side-notched/expanded-stem arrow point. A–G are from the Basketmaker II component at the Sandy Rise site, H is from the Little Water Village site. (Drawings, photographs, and layout by Jim A. Railey).

GROUND STONE

Forty-seven ground stone artifacts were recovered, all of which were fully analyzed. As with the rest of the lithic assemblage, the majority of ground stone items came from the Basketmaker II component at Sandy Rise (n=39, or 83.0 percent of all ground stone). Ground stone is first and foremost associated with food processing, specifically the grinding of seeds and grain, although pigments and other items can be ground as well. Given the small sample size and primarily Archaic time frame of the US 491 ground stone assemblage, questions relating to changes in food processing over time (e.g., Hard 1990; Lancaster 1983, 1984; Mauldin 1993) could not be directly addressed using data from this project alone.

Chapter 8 Lithic Artifacts 247 To analyze the ground stone artifacts, a system of recording adapted from Van Hoose and Lundquist (2002) was employed in which ground stone artifacts are divided into eight subtypes: mano, basin metate, slab metate, metate fragment, handstone, ball, ground stone fragment, and unknown. Ground stone types used for this analysis were manos, handstones, metates, balls, and fragments of unknown artifact type. Metric measurements of maximum length, width, and thickness (to the nearest tenth of a millimeter) were recorded with digital calipers for all complete attributes. Weight was recorded to the nearest hundredth of a gram on a digital scale for objects under 500 g, to the nearest gram for objects between 500 g and 5 kg, and to the nearest 5 g for objects over 5 kg.

Nominal and ordinal attributes recorded for all pieces of ground stone were completeness (broken, whole); degree of intentional shaping (none, slight, moderate, heavy); number of grinding surfaces; presence or absence of pecking; striation directionality (uni-directional or multi-directional); and grinding surface curvature. Roughing a surface by pecking was used to rejuvenate a worn, smooth grinding surface. Striation directionality indicates the primary direction of motion on ground stone. Grinding surfaces were recorded as flat (no noticeable curvature), uniaxially concave (concave relative to a single axis, but flat relative to the perpendicular axis), biaxially concave (concave relative to two perpendicular axes), uniaxially convex (convex relative to a single axis, but flat relative to the perpendicular axis), and biaxially convex (convex relative to two perpendicular axes). In general, handstones are convex-to-flat and grinding slabs are flat-to-concave.

MANOS AND HANDSTONES

Manos were the most common type of ground stone artifact in this assemblage, totaling 24 specimens (51.1 percent of all ground stone). Nineteen were sandstone, and the others were quartzite. Fifteen (62.5%) were complete. Manos were classified based on overall shape, suitability of size for holding in the hand, and presence of a convex-to-flat grinding surface characteristic of handheld grinding stones. Most manos were of the “one-hand” form. The 15 complete manos averaged 11.1 cm in length (range 8.0–17.4 cm), 8.8 cm in width (range 6.9– 12.0 cm), 4.3 cm in thickness (range 2.6–8.6 cm), and 637.0 g in weight (263.2–1,813.0 g). Complete data on manos are provided in Appendix C.

Two shape attributes were recorded for manos, plan view and cross section. The plan-view shape could be ovate (relatively symmetrical with a long axis), sub-rectangular (highly symmetrical, with four highly rounded corners), rectangular (symmetrical, with four slightly rounded corners), irregular (often ovate, but lacking symmetry), and unknown (too fragmentary for identification). The cross-sectional shape refers to the orientation of the faces relative to one another, and has been used by some researchers to infer grinding practices (Adams 1993, 1999) and temporal affiliation (Carmichael 1986). Shapes include uniface (one grinding surface, with a relatively flat overall shape), parallel faces, wedge (faces oriented at a marked angle to one another in a wedge shape), and triangular (three grinding faces oriented at pronounced angles to one another). Table 8.18 shows the distribution of mano forms in the US 491 assemblage.

Two items, both incomplete, were identified as handstones. One was sandstone and one was limestone. They were smaller than the manos and appeared to have been used for purposes other than grinding food on a metate.

Chapter 8 Lithic Artifacts 248 Table 8.18. US 491 Data Recovery, Distribution of Mano Shapes

Plan View Cross Section Count

Irregular Uniface 3 Wedge 1

Ovate

Biconvex 3 Parallel 9

Triangular 1 Uniface 4

Sub-rectangular Biconvex 2 Unknown Parallel 1

Total 24 METATES

Metates are large, shaped stones with a flat-to-concave grinding surface for processing seeds and maize, and are stationary while in use. The US 491 lithic artifact assemblage included 11 metates, only one of which was complete. The metates in this assemblage were divided into three subtypes: basin metate (n=2), slab metate (n=2), and metate fragments (n=7). All were made were from carbonate-cemented sandstone except one, which was a metaquartzite. Little Water Village and Feature 3, the Pueblo II structure at Sandy Rise, each contained one metate fragment. All other metate specimens were from the Basketmaker II component at Sandy Rise. Complete data on metates are provided in Appendix C, Table C.5.

The one complete metate was a basin form of sandstone that was 59 cm long, 40.5 cm wide, and 7.7 cm thick, and weighed 22.9 kg. The margins of the basin area were pecked; the basin interior was well-smoothed from intensive use (Figure 8.31).

BALLS

Two roughly spherical sandstone objects, one slightly larger than the other, were recovered from NM-H-46-55. The larger one measured 4.0 × 3.4 × 3.1 cm and weighed 52.7 g; the smaller one measured 3.3 × 3.2 × 2.8 cm and weighed 30.7 g. The function of these objects and whether they were associated with the historic or prehistoric component at this site could not be determined.

OTHER STONE

This residual category included nine items: pieces of pigment, several pieces that were determined in the laboratory to be fire-cracked rock, and objects of unknown use. Six were hematite, and there was one specimen each of sandstone, igneous, and an unknown material.

CHUNKS

Chunks are pieces of unmodified raw material, often flaw-ridden. Three chunks of petrified wood were collected at the Sandy Rise site, ranging from 5.2 to 10.1 cm in maximum dimension (average 7.0 cm) and 29.3 to 132.6 g in weight (average 75.8 g).

Chapter 8 Lithic Artifacts 249 Figure 8.31. US 491 data recovery, basin metate in situ in the fill of pit house Feature 14E at

the Sandy Rise site (NM-H-51-55). This was the only complete metate uncovered during the project. It was probably fractured under the weight of the machine scraper. The material was a carbonate-cemented sandstone. Note the pecking marks along the margins of the grinding basin.

COMPARISON OF ACTIVITY INDICES

One of the goals of the lithic analysis was to compare total assemblages in terms of the activity indices defined by Moore (1983:573–574). Activity indices are one potential measure for examining function of sites and variation in the range and relative intensity of activities carried out at different sites. However, the indices rely on lithic data only, and there are certainly other relevant indicators, such as types and diversity of features, the presence or absence of ash- and organic-stained midden deposits, floral and faunal assemblages, and seasonality indicators. Moreover, ideally the indices should take into account the length of occupation at a site; for example, Sandy Rise and Aqueduct are both Archaic sites, but Sandy Rise was inhabited for a maximum of about 200 years (and probably less than that), while Aqueduct was occupied intermittently for a period perhaps 20 times longer. Finally, problems related to lack of standardization in recording and analysis influence the activity ratios (more on this shortly).

In his study of the Gallegos Mesa sites, Moore (1983:573–574) defined eight activity indices (Table 8.19). Some clarifications and additional caveats are in order at this point. First, two of

Chapter 8 Lithic Artifacts 250 the indices (vegetal resource processing and vegetal resource procurement) rely on quantities of fire-cracked rock (FCR) as part of the numerator. Although it was not clear from the Gallegos Mesa report how FCR was enumerated in that study, it was assumed here that it was based on counts, consistent with other artifact categories included in the indices. But herein lies a two- headed problem. First, the kinds of rocks used as cooking stones in the past depended on local availability, and the particular properties of rocks available in the local lithology can influence FCR numbers in archaeological sites. The most important property here is durability; rocks that are more prone to fragmentation will result in higher counts of FCR than an equal weight of FCR involving more durable rocks.

Table 8.19. Site Activity Indices

Index Numerator Denominator Hunting Projectile points Total Site Assemblage Faunal Resource Processing

Projectile points + knives + scrapers

Total Site Assemblage

Vegetal Resource Processing

Manos + metates + mortars + pestles + utilized flakes + retouched flakes + fire-cracked rock


Vegetal Resource Procurement

Utilized flakes + retouched flakes + fire-cracked rock


Lithic Resource Procurement

Cores + cortical flakes + hammerstones


Lithic Secondary Reduction

Cores + flakes with <50% dorsal cortex + hammerstones


Lithic Flaked Tool Manufacturing

Noncortical flakes + hammerstones + retouched flakes + unifacial and bifacial tools


Hunting Camp / Flaked Tool Maintenance

Retouched flakes + unifacial and bifacial tools + microflakes*


Tool Diversity Number of tool types†

Number of Tools on Site

Based on Moore 1983:573–574. *Microflakes are defined as complete flakes ≤ 10 mm long. †Tool types in the Gallegos Mesa analysis were retouched flakes, unifaces, bifaces, projectile points, composite tools (core tool, etc.), and ground stone tools

Second, there is little standardization in terms of recording FCR during archaeological excavations (sometimes even within the same project). Some projects weight FCR, some use counts, some use both, and some projects do not bother to record FCR at all. Furthermore, the presence of naturally occurring rock within archaeological sites may inflate or deflate actual FCR counts, depending on how cautious and careful the investigators are in attempting to discriminate natural from thermally altered rock (which is often not easy, since cooking stones do not always exhibit obvious signs of burning). At Sandy Rise, because the site was buried within the eolian sediments of a sand dune, it was assumed that all rock within the dune sediments had been transported to the site by humans. Because most of the rock at the site was easily fractured, with a large quantity of small fragments, and larger rocks often breaking into multiple pieces during excavation and screening, rock was weighed but not counted during these


excavations.6 But because the two activity indices that include FCR rely on counts, an extrapolation was employed to provide rock counts for the Sandy Rise site. This was accomplished by taking the 17 pieces of FCR that made it to the laboratory, computing an average weight for them, and dividing the total rock weight from the Basketmaker II component by the average weight of those 17 pieces.

At Aqueduct and LA 457, geomorphic conditions that potentially influence FCR numbers were very different from those at Sandy Rise. Specifically, both Aqueduct and LA 457 were located on surfaces formed by high-energy alluvial sedimentation,7 resulting in the deposition of abundant natural cobbles. This meant that FCR had to be sorted out from an abundance of natural rock at those sites. In addition, the natural cobbles at these sites were much more durable than the fracture-prone rock at Sandy Rise, making field counting of FCR an easier task. At Aqueduct, FCR was both counted and weighed, and counts were recorded at LA 457, so the FCR data from these sites could be used directly for computing the relevant activity indices.

Another problem with using FCR as an indicator of activity indices relates to variation in cooking technologies and changes in these technologies over time. FCR was used primarily in pit cooking and, in preceramic times at least, for hot-rock boiling (wherein heated rocks were placed in water-tight baskets to bring water to a boil). But pit-cooking techniques varied considerably, including use of pit ovens containing hot coals and ashes rather than heated stones (see Ellis 1997). Moreover, the advent of pottery meant that water could be boiled without the use of heated stones, and ceramic vessels also potentially mitigated the use of hot rocks in baking pits (Railey 1987). Thus, in the past there was a good deal of cooking of plant foods without the use of burned rocks, especially in late prehistoric times, and this needs to be kept in mind when looking at the ratios for the “vegetal resource processing” index.

Another problem relates to the assumed function of various tools. For example, note that the “faunal resource processing” index implicitly assumes that any artifact identified as a “scraper” was used for processing hides or other animal products. However, “scrapers” can potentially include a wide morphological range of artifacts suited to different uses, including plant processing or manufacturing of tools from wood. Hammerstones, assumed in the activity index definitions to be used primarily for flaked stone manufacture, may also be used to shape ground stone implements, and this may well have been the primary purpose of the hammerstones recovered at the Sandy Rise site.

Keeping these various caveats in mind, this discussion proceeds with a comparison of activity indices for the three sites examined in the debitage analysis (Sandy Rise Basketmaker II, Aqueduct, and LA 457), along with the Gallegos Mesa sites, with a focus on NM-H-26-56, a site with a Basketmaker II component that was similar to Sandy Rise. Note that, for all but one of the ratios, the denominator is the total assemblage size. This includes FCR, and also requires extrapolation of numbers for artifact categories for which counts are available only from an analyzed subsample of the total assemblage. With respect to the activity index ratios, this

6 Note that, although architectural slabs were not counted here, some of the rock included in the general rock weight undoubtedly was architectural stone. 7 In the case of Aqueduct, the alluvial deposits are of Tertiary age and thus long predate human presence (and in fact are now on an upland surface). At LA 457, alluvial fan deposition was still on-going during the prehistoric human occupation of this site, resulting in burial and stratification of the archaeological deposits.

Chapter 8 Lithic Artifacts 252 includes cortex categories for flakes, edge-modified flakes, and microflakes. For the Sandy Rise Basketmaker II assemblage, for example, 24.2 percent of all flake types were analyzed, and thus a multiplier was used to extrapolate these numbers to the entire assemblage.

The activity indices for Sandy Rise, Aqueduct, LA 457, and the Gallegos Mesa sites are shown in Table 8.20. The first thing to note is that the hunting index is always lower than any of the others, and that the faunal resource processing and hunting camp/flaked tool maintenance indices are also typically low for all sites. These low numbers are almost certainly more an indicator of how these indices are measured than of the actual importance of the inferred activities for any one site occupation.

Looking at Figure 8.32, the trends suggest potential variation in activity patterns at the focal sites. Note that both Aqueduct and LA 457 show higher ratios than Sandy Rise for lithic resource procurement and lithic secondary reduction, which is potentially consistent with the results of the comparative debitage analysis (see above). The difference between LA 457 and Sandy Rise for lithic secondary reduction is only slight, however, and certainly less than one might expect given the very different debitage assemblages at these sites. Again, what is evident here is more the way in which the ratio is measured than the actual behaviors associated with the index.

0.9

0.8

0.7

0.6

0.5

0.4

0.3

0.2

0.1

0

Sandy Rise

Aqueduct

LA 457

NM-H-26-56

Figure 8.32. Plot of activity indices, Sandy Rise, Aqueduct, LA 457, and NM-H-26-56 sites.


Table 8.20. Comparison of Activity Indices

Site

Cultural/ Temporal Affiliation

Activity Index

H

untin

g

Faun

al R

esou

rce

Proc

essi

ng

Vege

tal R

esou

rce

Proc

essi

ng

Vege

tal R

esou

rce

Proc

urem

ent

Lith

ic R

esou

rce

Proc

urem

ent

Lith

ic S

econ

dary

R

educ

tion

Lith

ic F

lake

d To

ol

Man

ufac

turin

g

Hun

ting

Cam

p / F

lake

d To

ol M

aint

enan

ce

To

ol D

iver

sity

Sandy Rise (NM-H-51-55)

Basketmaker II

0.002

0.002

0.063

0.059

0.111

0.101

0.801

0.028

0.099

Aqueduct (LA 103049)

Early, Middle, Late Archaic

0.000

0.002

0.341

0.337

0.227

0.437

0.356

0.134

0.078

LA 457 Late Prehistoric 0.001 0.002 0.204 0.202 0.437 0.146 0.547 0.002 0.333 Gallegos Mesa Sites (NM-H-)

39-39 Early Archaic 0.005 0.010 0.229 0.248 0.629 0.491 0.052 0.7

39-47A Early Archaic 0.002 0.025 0.118 0.089 0.436 0.574 0.345 0.065 0.3

39-36A Early Archaic 0.005 0.036 0.052 0.034 0.157 0.785 0.735 0.120 0.3

39-53A Early/Middle Archaic 0.005 0.212 0.148 0.201 0.587 0.471 0.090 0.6

39-36B Middle Archaic 0.013 0.040 0.040 0.173 0.827 0.733 0.160 0.7

27-20 Middle/Late Archaic 0.005 0.021 0.033 0.033 0.178 0.850 0.743 0.245 00

39-123 Late Archaic– Basketmaker II

0.002

0.019

0.036

0.033

0.144

0.865

0.801

0.287

0.0

27-53 Late Archaic 0.004 0.030 0.064 0.058 0.145 0.842 0.776 0.117 0.2

26-56 Basketmaker II– Pueblo III

0.001

0.011

0.061

0.054

0.469

0.668

0.366

0.064

0.0

39-53B Anasazi (Basketmaker?)

0.143

0.843

0.786

0.514

0.0

39-126 Pueblo I 0.003 0.022 0.046 0.045 0.507 0.634 0.359 0.051 0.3

39-118 Late Pueblo III 0.003 0.016 0.088 0.079 0.539 0.595 0.261 0.044 0.4

27-121 Early–Late Archaic 0.011 0.043 0.053 0.036 0.090 0.808 0.798 0.193 0.4

39-36 Early/Middle Archaic 0.004 0.037 0.050 0.035 0.180 0.781 0.713 0.122 0.3

27-8 Archaic 0.013 0.169 0.143 0.338 0.636 0.442 0.104 0.8

39-47 Early Archaic– Basketmaker

0.008

0.042

0.109

0.082

0.363

0.645

0.424

0.072

0.3

26-132 Early/Middle Archaic– Basketmaker

0.008

0.026

0.042

0.031

0.413

0.694

0.481

0.125

0.4

39-53 Early Archaic–

Anasazi 0.001

0.016

0.193

0.168

0.197

0.647

0.526

0.097

0.4

39-110

Middle Archaic, Basketmaker II,

Pueblo II

0.001

0.014

0.034

0.033

0.256

0.822

0.674

0.167

0.1

Chapter 8 Lithic Artifacts 254 The high flaked tool manufacturing index for Sandy Rise is largely attributable to the extremely high proportion of noncortical flakes at this site. Note that Sandy Rise and NM-H-26-56—the two Basketmaker II sites included in this comparison—follow a very similar trajectory for hunting, faunal resource processing, vegetal resource processing, and vegetal resource procurement, then diverge considerably through the remaining indices. Note also that Aqueduct has the highest indices for vegetal resource processing and vegetal resource procurement, and scores higher than Sandy Rise for all but four indices (hunting, faunal resource processing, flaked tool manufacturing, and tool diversity). This is interesting, given that Aqueduct is probably a composite of many small (and presumably limited-activity) occupations, while Sandy Rise was obviously a base camp, where a wide range of activities was likely carried out.

In summary, the activity indices provide a potential measure for variation in on-site activities, but this technique appears to suffer from assumptions about the uses of specific items that probably do not match the actual behavioral patterns they were intended to examine. Further work is needed to improve this model, including bringing in non-lithic indicators of on-site activity patterns, but such a task is beyond the scope of this project.

SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS

The analysis of lithic artifacts from the US 491 project was focused overwhelmingly on the Basketmaker II component at the Sandy Rise site, from which the vast majority of the project's lithic assemblage was recovered. The inhabitants of Sandy Rise relied almost exclusively on petrified wood that occurred locally but was scattered across the landscape in low densities. This relative scarcity encouraged intensive reduction of whatever lithic materials were obtained at this site. At least some initial reduction probably occurred away from the settlement, with partially finished products brought back to the base camp. Nonlocal flaked stone raw materials were rare at this site, including Narbona Pass chert, the infrequency of which was surprising given that this was a highly prized material and the source is only about 15 km away from the location of the Sandy Rise site. Completely absent at the site was obsidian, which otherwise tends to occur in at least low frequencies at Archaic sites in the San Juan Basin (Gilpin 1999; see Chapter 3). These patterns suggest the possibility that mobility had been sufficiently reduced at this particular point in time (ca. 400–200 B.C.) that people were beginning to be “squeezed” within comparatively small territories, and that the flow of materials within exchange networks was sufficiently low that such prized materials show up in only very low frequencies—or not at all—at sites even a short distance from some of these material sources.

The use of the Sullivan and Rozen (1985) classification system, coupled with straightforward, statistical-based comparisons of different site and feature assemblages, provides a very robust and explicit means for characterizing patterns of lithic technology, both over time and between different kinds of sites from the same cultural-temporal traditions. Statistical comparisons of flake assemblages from Sandy Rise, Aqueduct, and LA 457—three sites whose lithic assemblages were analyzed by the same methods—showed significant (and expectable) differences between an Archaic assemblage (Sandy Rise) and a late prehistoric one (LA 457). Perhaps more interesting were the differences between the two Archaic assemblages (Sandy Rise and Aqueduct) and the fact that the flake assemblage from Aqueduct more closely resembled that from LA 457 rather than the one from Sandy Rise. This finding points out the need to continue

Chapter 8 Lithic Artifacts 255 paying as close attention to the variation in lithic technologies among different kinds of sites from the same general time period, as to the Archaic-to-Pueblo trend involving the shift from biface production to a more expedient core–flake tool technology.

CHAPTER 9 CERAMIC ANALYSIS

Janet Hagopian

SWCA archaeologists recovered 232 ceramic artifacts from three sites during data recovery associated with the US 491 project (Table 9.1). The objectives of this analysis were to identify the ceramic artifacts by ware and type, to develop a chronological framework based on identification of ceramic styles and types with known production dates, and to consider the ceramic assemblage in a regional context and address social ties with neighboring groups based on patterns of ceramic production and distribution. Descriptions of individual site assemblages are provided in the site descriptions.

Table 9.1. Ceramic Frequencies by Site

Ceramic Ware/Type Site NM-H-

Total 35-19 46-55 51-55

Indeterminate Whiteware 11 11 All Indeterminate Whiteware 11 11 Indeterminate Tusayan White Ware 1 1 Indeterminate BMIII–PI Tusayan White Ware 2 2 All Tusayan White Ware 3 3 Indeterminate BMIII–PI painted Cibola White Ware 2 2 Gallup Black-on-white 2 2 Puerco Black-on-white 1 1 All Cibola White Ware 2 2 1 5 Indeterminate PII–PIII mineral-painted Chuska White Ware 1 1 Naschitti Black-on-white 1 1 All Chuska White Ware 2 2 Indeterminate Tusayan Gray Ware 3 3 Indeterminate plain Tusayan Gray Ware 156 1 157 Indeterminate plain fugitive red Tusayan Gray Ware 4 4 Lino Gray 2 2 Lino Polished 1 1 All Tusayan Gray Ware 166 1 167 Indeterminate Chuska Gray Ware 4 6 10 Indeterminate plain Chuska Gray Ware 2 3 1 6 Indeterminate corrugated Chuska Gray Ware 1 1 Indeterminate narrow clapboard Chuska Gray Ware 1 7 8 Indeterminate indented corrugated Chuska Gray Ware 3 10 13 Captain Tom Corrugated 1 1 All Chuska Gray Ware 7 6 26 39 Tallahogan Red 5 5 All Early Basketmaker Redware 5 5 Total 194 9 29 232

Chapter 9 Ceramic Analysis 257 METHODS

All sherds were washed in tap water and rebagged in polyethylene bags prior to analysis. Bag tags with provenience information were placed within the bag. All sherds were examined and included in the analysis, regardless of size, and several attributes were recorded. The code sheets used are provided in Appendix D.

To begin the analysis, a small nip was removed from each sherd with pliers, producing a fresh break that was examined with a 10−30X binocular microscope. All sherds with the same attributes (i.e., that could be identically coded) were assigned a single Item Number (Item), which was sequentially assigned within each field sample. Conjoining sherds with fresh breaks were counted as a single sherd. For each Item, the attributes recorded were ware/type, temper, vessel form, vessel part, presence of soot, total count (number of identically coded sherds within the Item), and aggregate weight in grams. A Comments field was also included. Microsoft®

Access 2000 and Excel 2000 programs were used for data entry and data manipulation. WARES AND TYPES

Defined criteria were used in typing ceramics recovered during this project. The ceramics from the sites were classified as Tusayan White Ware, Cibola White Ware, Chuska White Ware, Tusayan Gray Ware, Chuska Gray Ware, and Tallahogan Red (an Early Basketmaker redware). Descriptions and chronologies of the wares and types were based primarily on Goff and Reed (1998) and Goetze and Mills (1993) because of the proximity of their work to the US 491 project area, but also included Hays-Gilpin and van Hartesveldt (1998), Peckham (1989), Windes (1977), and Windes and McKenna (1989). These wares, and the types recovered, are described below.

In the project area, classifying Basketmaker III and Pueblo I period ceramics according to ware is problematic. Tusayan White Ware vessels were sand-tempered and decorated with organic paint. Cibola White Ware was initially made with sand temper, but during the early Pueblo I period a mix of sherd and sand was used. A defining characteristic of the early sand-tempered Cibola White Ware vessels is use of mineral paint, and without its presence, early sand-tempered Cibola White Ware vessels are indistinguishable from Tusayan White Ware vessels. In this analysis, unpainted sand-tempered whiteware sherds were classified as Tusayan White Ware, with the caveat that they may be from either Tusayan White Ware or Cibola White Ware vessels.

The same holds true for the Tusayan and Cibola Gray Wares. Early on, sand temper was used for both wares, and the early vessels are indistinguishable. In this analysis, sand-tempered grayware sherds were classified as Tusayan Gray Ware, and grayware sherds with any amount of sherd included as temper were classified as Cibola Gray Ware, again with a caution, that the sand- tempered sherds may be from either Tusayan Gray Ware or Cibola Gray Ware vessels.

TUSAYAN WHITE WARE

Tusayan White Ware was described by Colton and Hargrave (1937) (the description was later updated by Colton [1955]) as the whiteware produced in the northern Black Mesa and Kayenta regions. It is characterized as having fine to medium, rounded to subangular quartz sand temper, a light gray paste, and organic paint. A carbon streak is common. Only indeterminate Tusayan

Chapter 9 Ceramic Analysis 258 White Ware and indeterminate Basketmaker III (BMIII)–Pueblo I (PI) Tusayan White Ware sherds were noted, at SiteNM-H-35-19. Sand-tempered whiteware sherds without paint were classified as indeterminate Tusayan White Ware. Sherds with organic paint and with sand temper showing on the surface were classified as indeterminate BMIII–PI Tusayan White Ware.

CIBOLA WHITE WARE

Cibola White Ware has a wide distribution across the Southwest (Goetze and Mills 1993; Zedeño 1994:72–73). It was manufactured in northwestern New Mexico within the San Juan Basin (Windes and McKenna 1989) and in at least several other areas to the south, including Pinedale, Snowflake, the Upper Puerco Valley, and Chevelon (Zedeño 1994:72). Cibola White Ware from the San Juan Basin, which was represented in the US 491 assemblage, has a light gray to white paste with a smoothed, polished, and often slipped surface. It has sand, sherd, or sand-and-sherd temper, and (with few exceptions) mineral paint. Mineral paint was used exclusively prior to A.D. 1100. The use of carbon paint beginning about A.D. 1100 characterizes Chaco-McElmo Black-on-white, which was not found in the study area. Cibola White Ware was collected from all three sites in the project area. Sherds with mineral paint and sand temper were classified as indeterminate BMIII–PI painted Cibola White Ware. Two types were noted in the assemblage: Gallup Black-on-white and Puerco Black-on-white.

GALLUP BLACK-ON-WHITE

Gallup Black-on-white is distinguished by diagonal hatching that is the same width as the framing lines. Surfaces are polished and slipped. It is equivalent to the Dogoszhi style seen in the Tusayan White Ware. Squiggle hatching can occur, oblique to the framing line. Two conjoining sherds of Gallup Black-on-white were collected from NM-H-46-55. The design on this sherd consisted of a checkerboarded square area inset within a hatched area. This type is dated at A.D. 1025–1200 by Windes and McKenna (1989) and at A.D. 1000–1125 by Goetze and Mills (1993) and Goff and Reed (1998). A date range of A.D. 1000–1125 was used in this study for mean ceramic dating.

PUERCO BLACK-ON-WHITE

Puerco Black-on-white is characterized by checkerboard areas or vertical parallel lines that divide the design into a panel layout and separate areas of solid elements. Surfaces are polished and slipped. One sherd of this type was recovered from Site NM-H-51-55. Puerco Black-on- white is dated at A.D. 1000–1200 by Goetze and Mills (1993), A.D. 1000–1175 by Goff and Reed (1998), A.D. 1030–1200 by Windes and McKenna (1989), and A.D. 1030–1150 by Hays- Gilpin and van Hartesveldt (1998). A date range of A.D. 1000–1175 was used in this study for mean ceramic dating.

CHUSKA WHITE WARE

Chuska White Ware has been described by Windes (1977), Peckham (1989), Goetze and Mills (1993), and Goff and Reed (1998). It is characterized by a gray to brownish-gray paste with a thick white or yellow-white slip and trachyte temper. Later types may also contain finely crushed sherd as temper. Chuska White Ware is divided into a mineral series with five types and a carbon series with nine types. The two types have analogous design styles. This ware appears to have been widely traded throughout the San Juan Basin and is prevalent in Chaco Canyon.

Chapter 9 Ceramic Analysis 259 Following Goetze and Mills (1993), any sherd with trachyte visible in its paste was classified as Chuska White Ware. Some sherds had trachyte and crushed sherds as independent temper elements, with some of the crushed-sherd temper also containing trachyte. Specimens of Chuska White Ware were collected only from Site NM-H-51-55—one indeterminate PII–PIII mineral- painted sherd and one Naschitti Black-on-white sherd.

NASCHITTI BLACK-ON-WHITE

This type incorporates Red Mesa/Black Mesa design styles in mineral paint, with medium-width lines and solid elements (primarily triangles). Lines and solids are elaborated with pendant dots, and interlocking scrolls are common. Surfaces are polished or slipped. The proposed dates for this type are A.D. 875/900−1050 (Peckham 1989) and A.D. 900−1000 (Goetze and Mills 1993; Goff and Reed 1998; Windes 1977). A date range of A.D. 900−1000 was used in this study for mean ceramic dating.

INDETERMINATE WHITEWARE

Eleven sherds classified as indeterminate whiteware were recovered from Site NM-H-35-19. Four similar indeterminate whiteware sherds recovered during testing from sites NM-Q-3-68, NM-H-51-55, and NM-H-51-56. All these sherds were tempered with crushed quartz and with mafic minerals that were found to be hornblende. Two sherds were submitted for petrograhic analysis (see below).

TUSAYAN GRAY WARE

Tusayan Gray Ware has iron-poor clay and coarse quartz sand temper (Colton and Hargrave 1937; Colton 1955). Colors range from dark gray to white, and from light yellow to tan when (rarely) oxidized. Tusayan Gray Ware was the utility ware pottery of the Kayenta Anasazi, but the term can be used to describe nearly all the earliest (sand-tempered) grayware ceramics of the Colorado Plateau. Type assignments are based on surface treatment (Colton and Hargrave 1937; Colton 1955). Lino Gray jars have plain rims and straight necks. Bowl rim sherds may also be classified as Lino Gray. Lino Gray Fugitive Red has a red pigment on its exterior surface that was applied after firing. A variety of neck-corrugated styles appeared in the A.D. 900s. Body sherds of any of these types were simply termed "plain gray body sherds." Kana-a Gray jars are neckbanded, that is, have neck fillets and a plain body. Medicine Gray jars have indented corrugated necks and a plain body. Vessels with all-over corrugation, which appeared in the mid A.D. 1000s, are termed Tusayan Corrugated. Designs were tooled or incised into the surface of Tusayan Gray Ware vessels during the A.D. 900s, and possibly into the A.D. 1000s. The three defined tooled types are Coconino Gray, O’Leary Tooled, and Honani Tooled. Coconino Gray has neck coils that are emphasized by tooling. O’Leary Tooled has punctate designs around the neck. Honani Tooled has incised designs on the neck, usually in a herringbone pattern.

All but one of the Tusayan Gray Ware sherds were recovered from Site NM-H-35-19; one indeterminate plain Tusayan Gray Ware was recovered from Site NM-H-46-55. Types such as Lino Gray and Lino Polished, in addition to indeterminate plain and fugitive red sherds, were collected from Site NM-H-35-19.

Chapter 9 Ceramic Analysis 260 CHUSKA GRAY WARE

Windes (1977), Peckham (1989), and Goff and Reed (1998) have described Chuska Gray Ware. This ware is characterized by a gray to brownish-gray paste and trachyte temper. Some sand or crushed sherd can occur with the trachyte. Eight types have been recognized: Bennett Gray, Sheep Springs Gray, Tocito Gray, Gray Hills Banded, Captain Tom Corrugated, Newcomb Corrugated, Blue Shale Corrugated, and Hunter Corrugated. These types are generally defined by rim and neck styles, so only rim or neck sherds could be assigned to these categories. Body sherds are identified only by surface treatment style. Captain Tom Corrugated is the only type that can be identified by body sherds, from the distinctive incised or punctate designs throughout the vessel body. In this analysis, all body sherds with incised or punctate designs were classified as Captain Tom Corrugated, the only identifiable type noted. Chuska Gray Ware sherds were collected from all of the sites in the project area. Surface treatments identified included plain, clapboard, and indented corrugated.

TALLAHOGAN RED

Tallahogan Red is characterized as Lino Gray with a red slip. First recognized at Jeddito 264 on the Hopi Mesas (Daifuku 1961), Tallahogan Red is defined as having a gray paste, coarse quartz sand for temper, and a thick red slip that is sometimes polished. In the San Juan Basin, crushed sandstone temper is occasionally used. Five Tallahogan Red sherds were recovered from Site NM-H-35-19, all tempered with crushed sandstone, quartz sand, and unidentified subrounded lithic fragments. The lithic inclusions were probably in the clay, suggesting that the clay came from a secondary deposit. Proposed dates for this type are A.D. 575−780 (Goff and Reed 1998) and A.D. 660−780 (Daifuku 1961). A date range of A.D. 575−780 was used in this study for mean ceramic dating.

CHRONOLOGY

Issues relating to chronology can be addressed through temporally sensitive ceramic types. Ceramic chronologies are constructed by classifying all sherds according to the traditional ware/type system and then using the type frequencies of the temporally sensitive types to build a relative chronological ordering of the sites within the project area. Relative quantities of specific ceramic types are very sensitive time indicators.

The relative chronological order of each site is examined by calculating a mean ceramic date, a mean ceramic date range, and a minimum use date. Only temporally sensitive types with a time span of less than 300 years were used in these calculations, as shown in Table 9.2.

The methods used to calculate the mean ceramic date and mean ceramic date range follow Reed and Hensler (1999). Count percentages for each type are calculated by dividing the total number of sherds by the number of each type present. Basically, the count of each type is statistically weighted by the total number of diagnostic sherds recovered. These percentages are then multiplied by the beginning date and ending date for each type. All of the calculations for the beginning dates and the ending dates are summed, then divided by the total count. The date derived is reported as the mean ceramic date for each type in the text and tables.

Chapter 9 Ceramic Analysis 261 Table 9.2. Date Ranges for Temporally Sensitive Types

Ceramic Ware/Type Date Range (A.D.) Cibola White Ware

Gallup Black-on-white 1000–1125 Puerco Black-on-white 1000–1175 Chuska White Ware

Naschitti Black-on-white 900–1000 Tallahogan Red 575−780

The averaged mean date range spans from the beginning date to the ending date for count. The averaged mean date range is then halved to produce a "best range," which represents "the 50 percent portion of the range closest to the mean" (Reed and Hensler 1999:56). This result is reported as the mean ceramic date range in the text and tables. By providing a mean ceramic date and a mean ceramic date range by count for each site and component, comparisons can be made among all sites and components within the project area.

The minimum use date is useful for estimating the minimum time span during which a site or component was in use. It is not as accurate as other quantitative methods but can be used on small assemblages. The minimum use date is derived by noting the earliest ending date and the latest beginning date for each assemblage (Gilpin 1995; Hays-Gilpin et al. 1999:462). Temporally sensitive decorated types with a time span of less than 300 years were also used in this calculation.

Table 9.3 shows the temporal period, mean ceramic date, mean ceramic date range, and minimum use date for the each of the three US 491 sites that yielded ceramics. These dates should be viewed with caution, because sites NM-H-35-19 and NM-H-46-55 had just one diagnostic type each, and NM-H-51-55 had only two diagnostic types (three if sherds recovered during testing are included). The dates for NM-H-51-55 were calculated twice, once using the diagnostic sherds recovered during data recovery, and again combining the sherds from testing and data recovery. Overall, the analysis results indicate that the Ceramic period sites in the project area were occupied during the Basketmaker III–early Pueblo I and Pueblo II periods.

A Basketmaker III–early Pueblo I period occupation at Site NM-H-35-19 is supported by the presence of Lino Gray, Lino Polished, and fugitive red Tusayan Gray Ware, as well as the large number of plain Tusayan Gray Ware sherds. Pueblo II period occupations at Sites NM-H-46-55 and NM-H-51-55 are supported by the presence of indented corrugated Chuska Gray Ware sherds.

Chapter 9 Ceramic Analysis 262 Table 9.3. Mean Ceramic Dates, Mean Ceramic Date Range, and Minimum Use Dates for

US 491 Sites

Site No.

Period

Mean Ceramic Date (A.D.)

Mean Ceramic Date Range

(A.D.)

Minimum Use Date (A.D.)

NM-H-35-19 Basketmaker III– Early Pueblo I

678

575–780

575–780

NM-H-46-55 Pueblo II 1063 1000–1125 1000–1125 NM-H-51-55 Data Recovery

Pueblo II

1019

984–1053

1000

NM-H-51-55 Testing/Data Recovery

Pueblo II

972

940–1004

1000

PRODUCTION, DISTRIBUTION, AND EXCHANGE

One of the key research topics for the US 491 data recovery project was how the people in the project area participated in shifting networks of ceramic production, distribution, and exchange. Twenty sherds from the US 491 assemblage were selected for petrographic analysis to address this issue by examining the trachyte temper in a sample of Chuskan sherds and the crushed igneous rock in a sample of the indeterminate whiteware sherds. One goal of this analysis was to source the trachyte in the Chuskan sherds and determine whether they were from one or several sources. The sherds were compared with known trachyte sources in the Chuska Mountains (Mills et al. 1997). A second goal was to identify the indeterminate whiteware sherds.

Dr. Andrea Carpenter analyzed 18 Chuskan sherds with trachyte temper and two indeterminate whiteware sherds with crushed igneous rock temper. Her report appears in its entirety in Appendix E. Thin sections were made from 16 Chuska Gray Ware sherds, 2 Chuska White Ware sherds, and the 2 indeterminate whiteware sherds; all three sites yielding pottery were sampled (Table 9.4).

Carpenter’s results show that 17 of the Chuskan samples were tempered with trachyte from the Chuska Mountains. Of these, four sherds were sourced to Beautiful Mountain near Sanostee, New Mexico, and 13 were sourced to Narbona Pass near Sheep Springs, New Mexico. The four sherds sourced to Beautiful Mountain were from NH-H-35-19 and contain a fine-grained trachyte. Those sourced to Narbona Pass, with a coarser-grained trachyte, were from sites NM- H-46-55 and NM-H-51-55.

Carpenter also examined the pastes of the 17 sherds with trachyte temper and identified them by color and silt content. Several groups were identified for both the Beautiful Mountain tempered sherds and the Narbona Pass tempered sherds, indicating that multiple clay sources were used in the production of the vessels in these assemblages.

One sherd from NM-H-35-19 with temper that was originally identified as trachyte was found to contain sand temper or be self-tempered with sandstone. Unfortunately, this sherd was destroyed during the thin-sectioning process and could not be re-examined.

Chapter 9 Ceramic Analysis 263

Table 9.4. Sherds Selected for Petrographic Analysis

Petrographic Sample No.

Site No.

FS

Item

Ceramic Type

1 NM-H-46-55 32 1 Indeterminate indented corrugated Chuska Gray Ware 2 NM-H-46-55 65 1 Indeterminate plain Chuska Gray Ware 3 NM-H-35-19 4 1 Indeterminate Chuska Gray Ware 4 NM-H-35-19 10 1 Indeterminate plain Chuska Gray Ware 5 NM-H-35-19 16 1 Indeterminate narrow clapboard Chuska Gray Ware 6 NM-H-35-19 28 2 Indeterminate whiteware 7 NM-H-35-19 48 1 Indeterminate whiteware 8 NM-H-35-19 50 1 Indeterminate plain Chuska Gray Ware 9 NM-H-35-19 54 2 Indeterminate Chuska Gray Ware

10 NM-H-51-55 4 1 Naschitti Black-on-white 11 NM-H-51-55 5 1 Indeterminate narrow clapboard Chuska Gray Ware 12 NM-H-51-55 6 1 Indeterminate narrow clapboard Chuska Gray Ware 13 NM-H-51-55 7 1 Indeterminate indented corrugated Chuska Gray Ware 14 NM-H-51-55 10 1 Indeterminate narrow clapboard Chuska Gray Ware 15 NM-H-51-55 12 1 Indeterminate PII–PIII mineral-painted Chuska White Ware 16 NM-H-51-55 16 1 Indeterminate plain Chuska Gray Ware 17 NM-H-51-55 20 1 Indeterminate indented corrugated Chuska Gray Ware 18 NM-H-51-55 34 2 Captain Tom Corrugated 19 NM-H-51-55 110 1 Indeterminate corrugated Chuska Gray Ware 20 NM-H-51-55 158 1 Indeterminate indented corrugated Chuska Gray Ware

The two indeterminate whiteware sherds were tempered with crushed diorite porphyry. These shereds were probably associated with the Northern San Juan tradition, north and east of the project area.

Results of the petrographic analysis suggest that limited trade networks existed for the three sites in the project area. Sources for the trachyte temper were relatively close to the sites; however, multiple clay sources may have been used to manufacture the Chuskan vessels. The indeterminate whiteware sherds from the Northern San Juan tradition suggest ties to the north and northeast.

CONCLUSIONS

The goals of this analysis were to identify ceramic artifacts by ware and type, to develop a chronological framework based on identified types with known production dates, and to consider the ceramic assemblage in a regional context and address social ties with neighboring groups based on ceramic production and distribution.

Excavations during the US 491 data recovery project yielded 232 sherds from three sites within the project area. Site NM-H-35-19 was occupied during the Basketmaker III–early Pueblo I period and sites NM-H-46-55 and NM-H-51-55 were occupied during the Pueblo II period. Wares recovered were Tusayan White and Gray Wares, Chuska White and Gray Wares, Cibola White Ware, and Tallahogan Red.

Limited trade networks may have existed for the three sites in the project area. Petrographic analysis of the trachyte temper in Chuskan sherds was conducted to source the trachyte and

Chapter 9 Ceramic Analysis 264 determine where the sherds were manufactured. Two sources were identified for the trachyte: the sherds from Site NM-H-35-19 were sourced to Beautiful Mountain, and those from Sites NM-H- 46-55 and NM-H-51-55 were sourced to Narbona Pass. Multiple clay sources were identified for the production of vessels at each of the sites. The indeterminate whiteware sherds were found to be of the Northern San Juan tradition, suggesting ties to the north and northeast.

CHAPTER 10 MACROBOTANICAL AND FAUNAL REMAINS FROM FLOTATION SAMPLES AT THE SANDY RISE SITE (NM-H-51-55)

Thomas C. O’Laughlin

The Sandy Rise site (NM-N-51-55) was a multicomponent site with principal occupation during Basketmaker II times, at about 400–200 B.C. A few features of earlier or later occupation were documented, but the Basketmaker II remains were the focus of attention for this analysis. Few Basketmaker II sites in northwestern New Mexico have produced archaeobotanical remains that provide much information on plant use during this period (see Hammett and McBride 1993). Faunal remains are variably but generally better represented (Akins 1985; Brown and Brown 1993). For the Sandy Rise site, 13 flotation samples from data recovery and four from site testing were analyzed. While a small quantity of bone was recovered, the value of this project is in the relative abundance and diversity of plant remains from features of the Basketmaker II occupation.

The site is located just north of Sheep Springs, New Mexico, at an elevation of 1,786 m (5,860 feet). Sand dunes cover much of the site area and overlie alluvial sediments of the Chuska Valley. The vegetation includes four-wing saltbush, shadscale, rabbitbrush, and dropseed and other grasses. To the west, the lower fringes of the Chuska Mountains rise above the site and support open juniper woodland.

METHODS

SWCA staff prepared the samples by water flotation, with recovery efficiency monitored by the addition of 100-count poppy (Papaver sp.) seeds to four samples. The apparatus for the flotation process was an approximately 8-gallon container fitted with coiled copper tubing in the bottom, a removable 1-mm screen at mid depth, and a spout at the rim. The copper tubing was connected to a pressurized water source and had numerous small ports or jets. The container was filled with some 5 gallons of water, and a soil sample was then added slowly. Water was again added to the container through the copper tubing, resulting in turbulence and mixing of water and soil. Dense particles such as rocks, flakes, and large pieces of charcoal settled on the screen and constituted the heavy fraction of the sample. Lighter materials such as roots, insect parts, and small pieces of charcoal or burned seeds floated to the top, passed through the spout, and were captured in a chiffon square resting on a screen. The screen with the heavy fraction was removed from the flotation chamber, and the heavy fraction was cleaned with sprayed water. Light and heavy fractions were air dried, packaged, and labeled. Soil-sample volume and volume of the processed or light fraction were also recorded.

All materials from both the light and heavy fractions were viewed at 10–40X with a binocular microscope. Notes were taken of contaminants such as roots, rodent/insect feces, insect parts, and snails, and counts of insect parts and snails were recorded. Burned and unburned seeds, charcoal, unburned plant parts other than roots, and bones were separated from the light fraction for identification. The heavy fraction was similarly treated; however, little was retrieved other than wood charcoal and a few bones.

Chapter 10 Remains from Flotation Samples 266 Charcoal retrieved from the light and heavy fractions was snapped to reveal a fresh transverse section and viewed at 10–40X for identification in comparison to reference specimens. When possible, 20 pieces of charcoal were identified to characterize a sample. The remaining pieces were then scanned to ensure that other taxa were not present. Burned and unburned seeds and other plant parts from the flotation samples were examined at 10–60X and identified by comparison to the analyst's reference collection and standard published sources. In cases where identification was uncertain but reasonable on morphological grounds, "cf" (compares favorably) was used with the taxon in question.

Mammal and bird bones recovered were identified to the lowest possible taxonomic level and in comparison to modern material in possession of the analyst. A number of the bones could be identified only to class, order, or family. Most of these were mammal bones, which were recorded by body size. Bones the size of those from a cottontail or smaller mammal were defined as small mammal, and bones jackrabbit to coyote size were defined as medium mammal. Bones that could fit in either size class were identified as small-medium mammal. No large-mammal bones (larger than coyote) were recovered.

Attributes recorded for the faunal material included anatomical part or element, portion, side, and length (longest dimension). The fusion of epiphyses was monitored for information possibly pertinent to an understanding of seasonality of site occupation and to assist the identification of individual animals. However, the small samples of bones provided too few examples of fused or unfused epiphyses to be useful. Burned, calcined, or possibly cooked (brown) bone was noted. Butchering marks, rodent-gnawed bone, and other modifications were looked for but not observed. Given the small sample of faunal remains, the number of identified specimens (NISP) is the only statistic reported here.

MATERIALS RECOVERED

PLANT REMAINS

Detailed results of the flotation analyses are provided in Table 10.1. Both burned and unburned plant materials are listed. While burned remains are associated with the archaeological evidence of past occupation, the unburned seeds and other plant parts are believed to be recent in origin. Certainly, the condition of the unburned plant material would point to a modern source. The efficiency of recovery of small seeds in the flotation samples appeared to be good, with 87 percent of the added poppy seeds retrieved during sorting of the processed samples.

For many of the taxa, both burned and unburned remains were identified, including seeds of herbaceous annuals and perennials, grass seeds, and saltbush fruits. Together, these remains indicate that the present vegetation of the site area is comparable to that of the times represented by the samples. In addition, the represented herbaceous species were dominated by agrestal or ruderal species that reflect present and past disturbance of the area and an active eolian and alluvial environment. Prehistoric alteration of the natural vegetation and the promotion of agrestal species as a result of agricultural activities are supported by the occurrence of corn cupules and kernel fragments in the samples.

Chapter 10 Remains from Flotation Samples 267

Table 10.1. The Sandy Rise Site (NM-H-51-55), Data from Flotation Samples

FS

Fea.

Taxon/Part

Weight Liters

Processed Charcoal (wood) Counts

Seeds/Fruits

Bones

38

8 Atriplex/Sarcobatus charcoal

4.6g

6.75

saltbush/greasewood 20

38 8 Atriplex/Sarcobatus twigs 0.5g 6.75 saltbush/greasewood

38

8

corn

1.0g

6.75 corncob fragments 379, corn kernel fragment 1

38

8

mixed burned seeds

0.1g

6.75

seeds: goosefoot 1, bugseed 5, winged pigweed 1, unidentifiable fragments 3, grass 1; saltbush fruits 25 whole and 40 fragments

59

13A

mixed charcoal

0.7g

3.6 saltbush/greasewood 6,

juniper 14

59

13A

corn

0.01g

3.6

seeds: winged pigweed 1, dropseed 1, unidentifiable fragments 2; grass stem 1, corncob fragment 6, corn kernel fragment 5

2 small mammal long bone splinters, 1 small-medium mammal long bone splinter

69

10A

mixed charcoal

14.6g

9 saltbush/greasewood 4,

juniper 10, piñon 6

69 10A Atriplex/Sarcobatus twigs 0.3g 9 saltbush/greasewood 69

10A

mixed burned seeds

0.1g

9

seeds: bugseed 16, winged pigweed 1, beeweed 1, dropseed 1, goosefoot 5, goosefoot/amaranth 5, unidentifiable fragments 2; saltbush fruit 1; corn kernel fragments 4

171


0.05g

8.75


lagomorph tooth fragment

194 18A juniper charcoal, post 15.0g 1.95 juniper 20 212

10D

mixed charcoal

11.7g


juniper 8, piñon 2

212 10D Atriplex/Sarcobatus twigs 2.5g 11.75 saltbush/greasewood 20


Table 10.1. The Sandy Rise Site (NM-H-51-55), Data from Flotation Samples (continued)

FS Fea. Taxon/Part Weight Liters Processed

Charcoal (wood) Counts Seeds/Fruits Bones

212

10D

mixed burned seeds

0.2g

11.75

seeds: Indian ricegrass 48, other grass 5, bugseed 41, goosefoot 4, amaranth/goosefoot 18, tansy mustard 3, mustard family 3, mallow family 1, winged pigweed 1, aster family 1, unknown fragment 1; unknown peduncle 1; saltbush fruits 3; grass stems 25

6 small mammal bones: 1 tibia midshaft, 2 metapodial midshafts, 2 long bone splinters, 1 flat bone fragment

226

14E

mixed charcoal

10.8g


juniper 1

226

14E

mixed burned seeds

0.03g

10.75

seeds: bugseed 12, ground cherry 1, tansy mustard 2, goosefoot 7, goosefoot/amaranth 60, purslane 37, dropseed 79, other grass 52, knotweed 1, unidentifiable fragments 11, unknown 3, cf chokecherry 1; corn kernel fragment 1, cucurbit rind 2, grass stems 2, juniper twig w/scales 1

1 small-medium mammal long bone splinter, 1 medium mammal rib fragment

227


30.7g

7.5


227 7 Atriplex/Sarcobatus twigs 3.4g 7.5 saltbush/greasewood 227

7

mixed burned seeds

<0.05g

7.5 seeds: goosefoot/amaranth

3, unknown (spurge?) 4

228

corncob fragment

0.1g

N/A 1 corncob fragment, hand collected

249

31

mixed charcoal

4.6g


juniper 3

249 31 Atriplex/Sarcobatus twigs 0.3g 3.25 saltbush/greasewood





249

31

mixed burned seeds

<0.05g

3.25

seeds: goosefoot 58, goosefoot/amaranth 5, Indian ricegrass 1, other grass 1, winged pigweed 1; saltbush fruit 1; corn kernel fragments 6

251

24A

mixed charcoal

9.9g


sage 4

251

24A

corn

0.1g

7.37 corncob fragments 4, corn kernel fragments 43

251

24A

mixed burned seeds

0.1g

7.37

seeds: goosefoot 14, goosefoot/amaranth 6, dropseed 22, other grass 2, tansy mustard 2, rush 1, tobacco 1, beeweed 1, bugseed 1, cf chokecherry 2, unidentifiable fragments 5; grass stems 3; saltbush fruit 2

small mammal: 2 long bone splinters, 2nd phalanx; bird flat bone fragment; bluebird, robin or thrush carpometacarpus

257

24

mixed charcoal

20.6g


juniper 6, sage 4

257

24

Atriplex/Sarcobatus twigs

1.9g

11.75 saltbush/greasewood, a little sage

257

24

corn

0.2g

11.75 corncob fragments 32, corn kernel fragments 53

257

24

mixed burned seeds

0.1g

11.75

seds: dropseed 185, other grass 17, bugseed 26, winged pigweed 6, goosefoot 20, goosefoot/amaranth 8, purslane 1, unidentifiable fragments 12; saltbush fruit 1; grass stems 12, tomato family? fruit fragment 1, yucca fruit? fragments 3

small mammal: 2 long bone splinters; small-medium mammal: 8 long bone splinters, 6 flat bone fragments, 3 skull fragments; 1 rodent mandible fragment; 1 jackrabbit atlas fragment

273

12B

mixed charcoal

11.0g

11 saltbush/greasewood 6,

juniper 12, piñon 2





273

12B

corn

<0.05g

11 corncob fragments 9, corn kernel fragments 13

273

12B

mixed burned seeds

<0.05g

11

seeds: goosefoot 3, amaranth 1, goosefoot/amaranth 12, dropseed 16, bugseed 3, sunflower 1, winged pigweed 1

small mammal: 12 long bone splinters, 2 flat bone fragments, 1 vertebra frag, 1 podial midshaft; small- medium mammal, 1 flat bone fragment; cottontail: 1 radius midshaft, 1 pelvis fragment

274

12A-1

mixed charcoal

11.7g


cottonwood 1

274 12A-1 Atriplex/Sarcobatus twigs 1.0g 7.75 saltbush/greasewood 274

12A-1

mixed burned seeds

0.35g

7.75

seeds: bugseed 1126, goosefoot 185, amaranth 3, goosefoot/amaranth 66, purslane 3, plain's sunflower 4, winged pigweed 4, beeplant 3, dropseed 10, other grass 4, unidentifiable fragments 37; grass stems 9; corn kernel 2, corn cob 1, cf corn stalk 5, cf common bean 1

small mammal: 6 long bone splinters, 2 flat bone fragments; small-medium mammal, 3 long bone splinters; rodent tibia midshaft; lagomorph incisor fragment

Chapter 10 Remains from Flotation Samples 271 The remains of corn were in poor condition. Kernels were fragmented, and cupules of cobs lacked glumes and rarely were complete enough to identify their form (Figure 10.1). A single cob fragment collected by hand from Feature 24, a Basketmaker II pit house, may have had eight rows of kernels and had several cupules averaging 6.3 × 3.6 mm. Only cupules of rectangular form and corresponding kernels with a relatively soft endosperm were observed. Cupule or kernel fragments with characteristics of the earliest corn for the region were not recorded (see Vierra and Ford 2006).

Figure 10.1. The Sandy Rise site (NM-H-51-55), maize cob fragment from Feature 24. No corn was found in the sample from Feature 7, a pit that was the only feature associated with an early Late Archaic occupation of the site. The two flotation samples from the Pueblo II masonry structure did not yield evidence of corn, but the sample from a hearth or small roasting pit, Feature 8, of Pueblo II age did contain corn cupules and a kernel fragment. For the 13 samples from Basketmaker II features, 38 percent contained corn cupules and 62 percent yielded corn kernels. These percentages are comparable to others reported for Basketmaker II sites of the western San Juan Basin (McBride 1993; Vierra and Ford 2006).

As with corn, burned seeds and fruits of native plant species were variably and poorly represented in the non-Basketmaker II flotation samples. The early Late Archaic hearth or roasting pit contained seeds of goosefoot and/or amaranth (Cheno-am) and squawberry. The samples from the Pueblo II masonry structure contained no burned seeds. These results, along with the absence of corn and low weights of charcoal, reflect the shallow soils and weathered condition of the structure. The sample from the Pueblo II hearth or roasting pit, Feature 8, contained a number of burned plant parts in addition to corn, including seeds of goosefoot, bugseed, winged pigweed, and grass, and fruits of saltbush. Goosefoot, amaranth, bugseed, and winged pigweed have edible spring to early summer greens and late spring to early fall seeds (Dunmire and Tierney 1995; L. Huckell 2000; Knight 1982; Toll 1985). Seeds of these plants could also have been stored for use in other seasons. The late summer to early fall berries of squawberry are also edible, can be made into a drink, and can be dried and stored for later use (Dunmire and Tierney 1995; Knight 1982). The grass seed in the Pueblo II feature may represent a subsistence activity or incidental burning, perhaps from use of grass stems as tinder. Similarly, the numerous saltbush fruits in this feature are most probably the result of the use of saltbush

Chapter 10 Remains from Flotation Samples 272 stems with attached fruits for fuel from late summer to spring. Only saltbush/greasewood charcoal was identified for this feature, supporting the contention that the fruits were included with fuel wood; however, a medicinal use for these fruits is also known (Dunmire and Tierney 1995; Knight 1982). Although relatively few taxa were represented in the samples from the early Late Archaic and Pueblo II occupations, the same taxa were also represented in the Basketmaker II samples. That some taxa found in the Basketmaker II samples were not in the samples from earlier and later features may simply be a result of sample size, as many more samples were analyzed for the Basketmaker II occupation. Thus, a temporal shift in the inventory of subsistence items is not demonstrated by the burned wild plant seeds and fruits.

Nine of the 13 flotation samples from Basketmaker II features contained a variety of burned seeds and fruits. As noted previously, burned fruits of saltbush and seeds of goosefoot, amaranth, goosefoot and/or amaranth, bugseed, winged pigweed, grass, and squawberry were recovered from the Basketmaker II samples. A small fragment of what has tentatively been identified as rind of a probable cultivated cucurbit was present in the sample from Feature 14E. Among the burned seeds were purslane and beeweed, which have edible spring to early summer greens and late spring to late summer seeds (Dunmire and Tierney 1995; Huckell 2000; Knight 1982; Toll 1985). Beeweed was also used in the Puebloan periods to paint pottery (Dunmire and Tierney 1995). Tansy mustard seeds were found in a few features. These plants are noted as having edible spring to summer greens and summer to fall seeds that were used for food and seasoning (Dunmire and Tierney 1995; Huckell 2000; Knight 1982). A seed that could be identified only to the mustard family may have been tansy mustard or another species used in a similar way. A single mallow family seed, recovered from Feature 10D, may represent a medicinal plant of minor importance. Wild sunflower seeds were retrieved from two features; these small seeds were gathered in the summer for food (Dunmire and Tierney 1995; Huckell 2000; Knight 1982; Toll 1985). Dropseed, Indian ricegrass, and other grass seeds were present in many of the features that yielded burned seeds and would have been an available food source in summer and fall (Dunmire and Tierney 1995; Huckell 2000; Knight 1982). However, grasses may also have been used in construction, as tinder, and as part of such objects as mats and baskets, and the presence of seeds and stems in some features may not be related to subsistence activities. The use of groundcherry is indicated by a seed from Feature 14E and possibly a berry fragment from Feature 24. The fruits of groundcherry ripen in mid to late summer and were eaten fresh or dried and ground (Dunmire and Tierney 1995; Huckell 2000). A possible piece of a yucca fruit from Feature 24, a sunflower family achene from Feature 10D, and a smartweed seed from Feature 14E could have been remains of minor subsistence items (Dunmire and Tierney 1995; Harrington 1967; Huckell 2000; Knight 1982). Finally, a possible rush seed was found in the sample from Feature 24A may represent the use of rushes in construction or matting.

Many of the burned seeds and fruits from the Basketmaker II occupation were of food plants and herbs that have seeds and/or greens that can be stored for use during the non-growing season. Though the useful parts of these taxa may have been gathered between spring and fall, year- round occupation could be supported by the storage properties of these taxa, the good representation of corn in flotation samples, and the presence of pit structures at this site. In addition, nearly all of the wild plant taxa could have been found in the site vicinity. Squawberry, however, may have been restricted to protected talus or arroyo areas. Some taxa were likely encouraged in agricultural fields, especially goosefoot, amaranth, purslane, bugseed, winged pigweed, and smartweed.

Chapter 10 Remains from Flotation Samples 273 While many native taxa were documented in the flotation samples, only a small number occurred in more than one feature and can be said to have been of some importance. Goosefoot, goosefoot and/or amaranth, bugseed, winged pigweed, and dropseed were found in over 50 percent of the samples, and other grass seeds and saltbush fruits were found in 38 percent. With the exception of saltbush, likely burned as fuel with fruits attached, these taxa would appear to have been the more important wild plant foods at Sandy Rise. Of lesser importance were Indian ricegrass, purslane, tansy mustard, beeweed, sunflower, and amaranth, each of which was present in two or three of the nine samples with burned seeds and fruits. In general, the species recorded for the Sandy Rise Site are comparable to those recorded for Late Archaic and later sites of the San Juan Basin, though few Basketmaker II sites exhibit the preservation and diversity of the Sandy Rise site (Hammett and McBride 1993; McBride 1993; Toll 1985; Toll and Cully 1994). Nevertheless, it is noteworthy that neither cacti nor piñon were found in the flotation samples. Hedgehog, cholla, and prickly pear cacti are often found in samples from the San Juan Basin, and their absence in the samples from this site may be attributed either to sampling factors or their poor representation in the site vicinity. Piñon occurs to the west in the Chuska Mountains, and the absence of piñon hulls may again reflect a sampling factor, or perhaps a growing dependence on corn in preference to piñon nuts during Basketmaker II times (see Hogan 1994).

Wood charcoal of juniper, piñon, cottonwood, sage, and saltbush/greasewood was identified in the flotation samples. As only saltbush fruits were recovered, it is likely that saltbush made up most of the saltbush/greasewood category. Saltbush/greasewood was the only type of charcoal identified for the early Late Archaic and Pueblo II features, and ot was present in all but one of the Basketmaker II samples. This finding would suggest that saltbush/greasewood was the dominant vegetation of the area in prehistoric times, as it is today.

Cottonwood was found in a floor hearth, Feature 12A-1, and sage came from two samples from the same pit house, Feature 24, one from the structure floor and one from a floor subfeature, 24A. Sage is common to the area today, and cottonwood may have come from a nearby wash or spring during the Basketmaker II occupation.

Juniper charcoal and a little piñon charcoal were recorded for a number of Basketmaker II features. Both were found in Feature 10A, a roasting pit, and on the floor of a pit house, Feature 10D. Juniper was also noted for a midden area, Feature 13A, for another roasting pit, Feature 31, and for four other pit houses. The definite use of juniper for construction is apparent in the presence of burned and unburned juniper in Feature 18A, identified as a post hole. Although other taxa may have been used in construction of the pit houses, the flotation samples did not furnish good evidence for this, and their contents did not differ significantly between structures and other features and deposits. Juniper is sparse today in the general area of the Sandy Rise site, and both juniper and piñon are better represented in the foothills and on the lower slopes of the Chuska Mountains to the west. The occurrence of juniper in nine of 13 of the Basketmaker II samples could indicate that juniper was more common in the site vicinity at that time.

FAUNAL REMAINS

Seventy-three pieces of bone were retrieved from the light and heavy fractions of nine of the flotation samples. The majority of the bone was from the Basketmaker II occupation; a single rabbit or hare tooth fragment was associated with the Pueblo II masonry structure. The small

Chapter 10 Remains from Flotation Samples 274 number of bones from this site may indicate extensive processing or, more likely, poor preservation of bone.

As might be expected for flotation samples, the recovered bones were small, averaging only 4.9 mm in length. Diversity and body size were also restricted—nothing larger than a medium-sized mammal was recorded. Identified taxa included a rabbit or hare, a jackrabbit, a cottontail, two small rodents, and a blue bird, thrush, or robin. No deer or pronghorn remains were recovered from the Sandy Rise samples, but these large mammals form a small part of most assemblages in the San Juan Basin (Akins 1985; Brown and Brown 1993). Turkey can be common in some post- Archaic sites (Akins 1985), but its absence in samples from the Pueblo II occupation at Sandy Rise would not be unexpected for what seems to have been an ephemeral or seasonal occupation. Although the assemblage was small, it was somewhat surprising that prairie dog was not among the remains, as this taxon is frequently a principal part of prehistoric faunal assemblages (Akins 1985). Otherwise, the assemblage from the Sandy Rise site was similar to assemblages from many different time periods for the region.

FEATURE DISTRIBUTION OF FLORAL AND FAUNAL REMAINS

EARLY LATE ARCHAIC FEATURE

Feature 7 was the only feature representing a limited occupation during the early Late Archaic. No faunal remains were associated with this thermal feature, and saltbush/greasewood was used as a fuel. Goosefoot/amaranth and squawberry seeds recovered from this feature suggest gathering and consumption of local resources between summer and early fall.

BASKETMAKER II FEATURES

Two of the 13 samples from this occupation were from a deflated midden or remnants of pit features, and neither sample contained much in the way of faunal or floral remains. Only a small amount of saltbush/greasewood charcoal was recovered from the sample from Backhoe Trench 1. Juniper and saltbush/greasewood charcoal was identified for Feature 13A, as well as corn kernels and cupules, a grass stem, and one seed each of winged pigweed and dropseed. Two burned small-mammal long bone splinters and one small-medium mammal long bone splinter were also recovered from this feature.

Features 4, 10A, and 31 were exterior hearths or roasting pits. They contained the general range of plant remains but in lesser quantities than pit houses, and little in the way of bone. Feature 4, a thermal pit, yielded saltbush/greasewood charcoal and an unidentifiable seed fragment. A calcined bone of a small mammal, a burned bone of a small-medium mammal, juniper, piñon, and saltbush/greasewood charcoal, corn kernel fragments, a saltbush fruit, and seeds of goosefoot, goosefoot/amaranth, bugseed, winged pigweed, beeweed, and dropseed were retrieved from the flotation sample from Feature 10A, a roasting pit. Feature 31, a roasting pit, contained saltbush/greasewood and juniper charcoal, corn kernel fragments, a saltbush fruit, numerous seeds of goosefoot, and a few seeds of goosefoot/amaranth, winged pigweed, Indian ricegrass, and other grass. The diversity of subsistence remains from the roasting pits implies that these features had very general uses or that trash had accumulated within them.

Chapter 10 Remains from Flotation Samples 275 Most of the flotation samples from the Basketmaker II occupation were collected from pit houses. Feature 18A was identified in the field as a probable post hole, and the burned and unburned juniper wood that were the only contents of the flotation sample from this feature, possibly post remnants, support this interpretation. Feature 12A-1 was a pit house hearth containing a variety of faunal and floral remains. Faunal remains included one element each from a small rodent and a rabbit or hare, eight bones of small-mammal size, and three bones of small-medium mammal. Four of the 13 bones had also been burned. Plant remains identified for this feature included a few corn kernels and cupules, many seeds of bugseed, goosefoot, and goosefoot/amaranth, small numbers of seeds of amaranth, purslane, winged pigweed, beeweed, plains sunflower, Indian ricegrass, dropseed and other grass, grass stems, corn stalk, and charcoal, mostly of saltbush/greasewood with a little cottonwood.

Most flotation samples from the floors of pit houses also exhibited a diversity of subsistence remains. Feature 17 is the exception, yielding only a small amount of juniper and saltbush/greasewood charcoal. Feature 10D yielded one cooked, two burned, and three thermally unmodified small-mammal bones, charcoal of saltbush/greasewood, juniper, and piñon, numerous seeds of Indian ricegrass and bugseed, small numbers of seeds of goosefoot, goosefoot/amaranth, winged pigweed, tansy mustard, mustard family, mallow family, and sunflower family, a few saltbush fruits, and grass stems. Unlike most of these features, Feature 10D did not have any remains of corn in the floor sample. Feature 12B contained two cottontail bones, 13 small-mammal bones, and 4 small-medium mammal bones. Three bones were burned, and three others appeared to have been altered by cooking. Among the plant remains from the floor of this pit house were corn kernel and cupule fragments, seeds of goosefoot, goosefoot/amaranth, amaranth, bugseed, winged pigweed, sunflower and dropseed, and juniper, saltbush/greasewood, and piñon charcoal. Feature 14E yielded two pieces of bone, one small- medium mammal and one medium mammal. Identified plant remains from this structure were saltbush/greasewood and juniper charcoal, a corn kernel, a possible cucurbit rind, numerous dropseed, other grass, purslane, and goosefoot/amaranth seeds, small numbers of goosefoot, bugseed, tansy mustard, groundcherry, squawberry and smartweed seeds, and grass stems. Feature 24 contained charcoal of saltbush/greasewood, juniper, and sage. This flotation sample also yielded numerous corn kernels and cupules and seeds of dropseed, bugseed, and goosefoot, as well as seeds of other grasses, winged pigweed, goosefoot/amaranth, and purslane, a saltbush fruit, possible yucca fruit fragments, and a possible tomato family berry fragment. Faunal material from this sample consisted of one small rodent element, one jackrabbit bone, two small- mammal long bone splinters, and 18 medium-mammal bones. Twelve pieces of bone were calcined, and one was burned. The sample from Feature 24A, an area of rock concentration on the floor of Feature 24, contained saltbush/greasewood and sage charcoal, corn kernel and cupule fragments, goosefoot, goosefoot/amaranth, bugseed, beeweed, dropseed, other grass, tansy mustard and possibly rush seeds, saltbush fruits, and grass stems. Faunal remains noted were one burned bird bone, a burned bluebird, thrush, or robin element, and three small-mammal bones, two of them burned.

PUEBLO II FEATURES

Two flotation samples were processed from Feature 3, a masonry structure representing an ephemeral or seasonal occupation. No burned plant materials were found in one of the samples, and the other contained only a small amount of saltbush/greasewood charcoal. A single rabbit or

Chapter 10 Remains from Flotation Samples 276 hare tooth fragment was recovered from the second sample. A flotation sample was also taken from Feature 8, a hearth or roasting pit. This sample contained saltbush/greasewood charcoal, a corn kernel fragment, a large number of corn cupule fragments, numerous saltbush fruits, and a small number of seeds of goosefoot, bugseed, winged pigweed, and a grass.

DISCUSSION

Three separate periods of occupation were represented by the flotation samples from the Sandy Rise site. The first dates to the early part of the Late Archaic and appears to have been limited and ephemeral. The single flotation sample from a hearth or roasting pit dating to this occupation indicated the use of local saltbush and/or greasewood for fuel, subsistence resources that included goosefoot/amaranth and squawberry, and probable occupation in the summer or early fall. The most recent occupation was dated to the Pueblo II period and also appears to have been limited and probably seasonal for agricultural pursuits. The remains of this occupation were exposed and weathered, and the three flotation samples from features of this occupation contained varying amounts of burned plant material. Saltbush and/or greasewood were used as fuels, and burned corncob cupules probably also reflect the use of cobs as fuel. Corn cupules and a kernel fragment suggest that agriculture was an activity of this occupation. The presence of burned seeds of goosefoot, bugseed, winged pigweed, and a grass indicate the gathering of wild resources as well, the growth of many of which may have been encouraged by disturbance associated with agricultural fields. Hunting does not seem to have been of much importance for this component, as only a single tooth fragment of a cottontail or jackrabbit was found in the flotation samples.

The principal occupation at the Sandy Rise Site dated to the Basketmaker II period. The 13 flotation samples from this occupation exhibited a more diverse assemblage of plant and animal remains than those from the other occupations, probably a reflection of the larger number of samples and more intensive occupation. Thus, the inventory of native plants used for subsistence is not demonstrably different for the various components when these other factors are considered. Furthermore, the kinds of native subsistence plants reported for other Archaic, early agricultural, and Formative period sites of the San Juan Basin follow this pattern as well (see Hammett and McBride 1993; McBride 1993; Toll 1985). Even though maize and other cultigens were added to the subsistence base in the Late Archaic, they did not supplant a base of wild resources. In this respect, there was not much difference between foragers and early farmers, and the decision to cultivate maize in the Southwest was mostly expedient and uneven rather than transformative (see Vierra and Ford 2006; Wills 2006).

The more important wild plant foods recorded in the Basketmaker II flotation samples from Sandy Rise were goosefoot, amaranth, bugseed, winged pigweed, purslane, tansy mustard, beeweed, sunflower, dropseed, Indian ricegrass, and other grass seeds. Saltbush fruits could also be added to this list, but their occurrence in samples is attributed primarily to the presence of fruits on branches used for fuel. Another five identified taxa were few in number and of limited food or medicinal value. The fair number of flotation samples analyzed for this occupation contributes to the known diversity of plant remains, but contemporaneous sites with the preservation and diversity of floral materials recorded for the Sandy Rise site are rare for the San Juan Basin (see Hammett and McBride 1993).

Chapter 10 Remains from Flotation Samples 277 The native plants represented in the flotation samples and presumed to have been used for food could have been obtained in the vicinity of the site, and a number of them are agrestal species that would have done well in agricultural fields. Most have seeds that are easily stored, and a number have greens or fruits that can be dried and stored. Thus, at least from the vantage of the flotation results, the Basketmaker II occupation could have been year-round with storage of foodstuffs, including native plant foods available from early spring to fall.

Saltbush and/or greasewood, juniper, sage, piñon, cottonwood, corncobs, and corn stalks were used for fuel, and grasses were likely utilized for tinder. Although all of these materials may have been used in construction, only juniper was specifically identified, as a post in one structure. Piñon and some juniper were likely obtained west of the site and in the lower elevations of the Chuska Mountains. Otherwise, most woods could have been obtained in the site vicinity. Given the presence of piñon charcoal in two flotation samples from the Basketmaker II occupation, it is somewhat surprising that piñon nuts were not identified. If occupation was indeed year-round, logistical provisioning of the settlement might have included fall and winter trips to the Chuskas to collect piñon nuts.

Faunal remains associated with the Basketmaker II occupation were not numerous and were limited to cottontail/jackrabbit-size remains. The small amount of bone from this site could be ascribed to poor preservation, but a larger sample might have been anticipated given the number of excavated structures and extramural features. The absence of artiodactyl bone in this small assemblage is also noteworthy, but artiodactyl remains are often a small part of assemblages for the San Juan Basin (see Akins 1985). Nevertheless, deer bones would be expected if there was year-round occupation involving winter hunting in woodlands to the west.

Corn kernels or cupules from cobs were present in 62 percent of the Basketmaker II flotation samples. This percentage is comparable to the presence of maize at other sites of this time in the western part of the San Juan Basin (McBride 1993; Vierra and Ford 2006). Cupule shape also compares with that of more productive, less environmentally restricted varieties of maize than those associated with the earlier Archaic tradition in the region. The relative abundance of corn remains combined with the diversity of native plants probably used for food further supports the suggestion of year-round occupation. Burned corn remains and seeds and fruits of native species occurred in relatively high densities of 14.6 items per liter for structure floors and 11.0 items per liter for extramural features. Even so, the identification of only two small and questionable storage pits, both within structures, provides little evidence for the storage of corn and other food stuffs to accommodate year-round occupation. Then again, corn storage may also have been in pits near fields.

While the subsistence remains identified at the Sandy Rise site are equivocal with respect to demonstrating through-winter occupation, they do reflect a mixed foraging and farming economy for the Basketmaker II occupation. This varied subsistence base and the upland, basin-edge location of the site are characteristics of a variety of scenarios for the early agricultural period that posit upland farming locations adjacent to woodlands that corresponded with temporal shifts in effective precipitation (Hogan 1994; Vierra and Ford 206), proved suitable for early varieties of maize (Vierra and Ford 2006; Wills 1988), provided ready access to piñon and other resources (Hogan 1985; Minnis 1985), minimized scheduling conflicts between farming and collecting activities through proximity of resource areas (Hogan 1985; Vierra and Ford 2006), and

Chapter 10 Remains from Flotation Samples 278 minimized effects of resource shortfalls in either maize or wild plant foods be reliance on a mixed economy and adjacent resource areas (Minnis 1985; Vierra and Ford 2006). It is to be hoped that the description of subsistence remains from this site will prove useful in the development by researchers of more complete considerations of subsistence and settlement patterns during the early agricultural period in northwest New Mexico. At the least, congruence can be demonstrated for the Sandy Rise site among subsistence, settlement, and environment that may be relevant to interpretations of this period.

CHAPTER 11 FAUNAL REMAINS FROM SCREENED EXCAVATIONS

Cherie K. Walth

Faunal remains, including bone and shell, were recovered in screened contexts from three US 491 sites: the Sandy Rise site (NM-H-51-55), a historic Navajo site (NM-H-46-55), and the Little Water Village site (NM-H-35-19). The Sandy Rise site yielded 198 bones and bone fragments and one shell. These remains were collected from pit houses, middens, and roasting pit features, all related to the Basketmaker II component. Another 73 faunal remains were recovered from flotation samples (see Chapter 10), a total of 271 faunal specimens from this site. The historic Navajo site (occupied ca. 1920–1938) yielded 103 pieces of bone, some from the hogan feature but most from an ash pile. The remains recovered represented domesticated animals that were butchered and used for food. At the Little Water Village site, dating to the Basketmaker III– Pueblo I period, one shell fragment was recovered from a surface collection unit.

METHODS

Each faunal specimen (bone, fragment of bone, shell) was examined and recorded on a Faunal Analysis Data Form (see Appendix F). The Shaffer and Baker (1992) faunal analysis coding system was used, with a few minor alterations. Fragments that might refit were looked for within features and analytic units and were noted when present. Several written and illustrative texts were used as aids in the identification of faunal remains: Gilbert (1980, 1985); Hillson (1993); Lawrence (1951); Olsen (1980, 1990); Schmid (1972). Comparative collections from the analyst’s private collection were also referenced.

Ideally each taxon is recorded to the species or genus level. When this was not possible, the specimen was identified to the next lowest level of taxonomic precision (genus, family, suborder, order). If identification to any of these levels was not possible, the bone was categorized by general vertebrate class and size, as described in Shaffer and Baker (1992).

A similar hierarchical procedure was used for identification of the skeletal element. The specific element was recorded when possible (i.e., metacarpal 3). Otherwise, a general description was used (i.e., metapodial). Small fragments that retained no distinguishing characteristics were classified according to the general bone type that they appeared to represent (i.e., long, flat, or compact bone). Fragments that were too small to identify were classified as “indeterminate.” The portion of the skeletal element (proximal, distal, etc.) and the side were also recorded. Age of a specimen was recorded when possible; age is usually indicated by epiphyseal fusion or wear on the teeth. No age was recorded if there was any doubt. Measurements were recorded on all elements complete enough to be measured, following the system developed by von den Driesch (1976). In addition, maximum length of all bone fragments was recorded to provide a means of assessing degree of fragmentation of the collection.

The Shaffer and Baker system uses three weathering stages—0, 1, and 2. These stages were used in this analysis but were associated with the visible taphonomic changes documented by Behrensmeyer (1978) to add a basis of comparability. In the Shaffer and Baker system, “0”

Chapter 11 Remains from Screened Excavations 280 (absent) is considered equivalent to Behrensmeyer's stages 0 and 1; “1” (slight) is equivalent to Behrensmeyer’s 2 and 3; and “2” (marked) is equivalent to her 3 and 4. Other morphological indications recorded when present included breakage pattern, burning, gnawing, cut marks, polishing, sawing, and grinding. Worked bone and bone tools were also noted.

An “intrusive” category was added to flag those species that could have been present naturally rather than due to cultural activities. Determining whether faunal remains are present because of cultural activities is not a simple procedure. Characteristics such as weathering, heat alteration, and gnawing can help to in these identifications. Heat-altered remains are usually assumed to be cultural because the degree and duration of heat required to blacken or calcine bone is indicative of longer contact with a heat source than would occur with most natural wildfires. Weathering and gnawing can help to suggest that bone is intrusive but does not absolutely prove non-cultural origin. Weathering of bone occurs when bone is exposed to the elements—heat, cold, rain, and snow—and is a natural process of decomposition. The longer a piece of bone is exposed, the greater the degree of weathering. Bone that becomes part of an archaeological site is often buried fairly rapidly. Complications arise with bone that is exposed for varying amounts of time prior to becoming buried. Bone can also be re-exposed, depending on the depositional history of the site. Gnawing can be problematic because both naturally occurring bone and bone from cultural origins can attract rodents and carnivores. It is assumed that bone that exhibits marked weathering or bone with extensive rodent or carnivore gnawing originates from a natural rather than a cultural source. For this analysis, bone that was most likely present due to natural processes was categorized as intrusive. Bone that might represent either a natural or a cultural process was classified as indeterminate.

Both NISP and minimum number of individuals (MNI) were used to quantify the bone. To minimize the over-estimation of bone count that can occur using NISP, bone fragments that were (or were likely) to be from the same element were tallied as one, no matter the number of pieces from that bone. MNI was calculated from the most numerous sided element, taking into account the age of the animal if known, as well as portion of the bone. For this calculation, axial elements are considered, but they are seldom the most numerous element.

FAUNAL REMAINS RECOVERED

SANDY RISE SITE (NM-H-51-55)

All faunal remains from the Sandy Rise site were from the Basketmaker II component, from Features 10, 10D, 11, 12, 12A, 12B, 14, 17, 18, 24, 25, and 26. In all, 198 pieces of bone and one piece of shell were analyzed. An additional 73 bone specimens were recorded as part of the flotation analyses (see Chapter 10). The bone from each of the site features is discussed below; detailed data are provided in Appendix F.Table 11.1 shows the NISP and MNI counts for this faunal collection.

Chapter 11 Remains from Screened Excavations 281 Table 11.1. The Sandy Rise Site (NM-H-51-55), Faunal NISP and MNI Counts

Taxon

NISP Percent of Total

MNI

Bone Jackrabbit (Lepus sp.) 7 3.5 1

Cottontail (Sylvilagus sp.)

35

18 3 (2 adults, 1 subadult)

Small Vertebrate 30 15 Small Bird 2 1 1 Small Rodent 3 1.5 1 Micro Mammal 3 1.5 Small Mammal 113 57 Small/Medium Mammal 1 .5 Medium Mammal 1 .5 Medium/Large Mammal 1 .5 Large Mammal 2 1 Total Bone 198 100 6 Shell Olive Shell (Olivella sp.) 1 100 1

CONDITION OF FAUNAL REMAINS

Of the bone recovered, 91 pieces (46 percent) were heat altered. The weathering patterns indicated that about half of the bone had been exposed to the elements long enough to show at least some effect from exposure to wind, rain, and sun: 95 pieces (48 percent) of the bone had no weathering, 41 pieces (21 percent) had slight weathering, and 62 pieces (31 percent) showed marked weathering. The excavators noted that almost all the features had some degree of bioturbation, and some of the faunal remains could therefore represent natural rather than cultural processes. The small rodent bone was likely intrusive. The small mammal, cottontail rabbit, and jackrabbit bone may have included intrusive remains—many of the cottontail and jackrabbit remains recovered were metapodials and phalanges and could have been intrusive. This evidence is not conclusive, given that the faunal collection comprised almost exclusively small mammal, cottontail, and jackrabbit remains, and that cottontails and jackrabbits were a staple food source for the prehistoric inhabitants. The metapodials and phalanges may have represented the offal, or discarded remains, from these food sources. The recovered remains were highly to moderately fragmented.

The faunal remains collected from this site included the following animals or general categories:

• Small Vertebrate: remains too fragmented to assign a more specific category; medium

bird or small mammal size • Small Bird: small perching bird size • Small Rodent: mouse size • Micro Mammal: mouse to gopher size • Small Mammal: rabbit to dog size • Small/Medium Mammal: indeterminate, either small or medium size • Medium Mammal: dog to sheep size

Chapter 11 Remains from Screened Excavations 282

• Medium/Large Mammal: indeterminate, either medium or large • Large Mammal: deer or antelope size

Identified animals included Lepus sp. (jackrabbit) and Sylvilagus sp. (cottontail rabbit). Of the jackrabbits, only the black-tailed jackrabbit (Lepus californicus) currently inhabits the project area, living in burrows in open prairies and sparsely vegetated deserts at up to 2,135 m (7,000 feet) elevation. Jackrabbits are extremely common in southwestern archaeological sites, as they were exploited prehistorically primarily for their meat and secondarily for their hides, and for bones for tools and ornaments.

Of the cottontail rabbits, the desert cottontail (Sylvilagus auduboni) and the mountain cottontail (Sylvilagus nuttalli) currently inhabit the project area. Although they share much of their range, the mountain cottontail is found at higher altitudes, while the desert cottontail is most familiar in the valleys of the Southwest. Both are valuable for their meat and were exploited throughout prehistory. They are also very difficult to distinguish from one another from faunal remains.

One nearly complete Olivella sp. shell was identified. The presence of this item suggests trade with groups that acquired coastal resources.

FAUNAL REMAINS FROM FEATURES

FEATURE 10, SHEET MIDDEN AND PIT FEATURES

Twelve specimens (6 percent of the site sample) were collected, from FS 42, 57, 117, 130, and 144: two cottontail rabbit, one micro mammal, six small mammal, and three small vertebrate. Seven were heat altered, and 10 were weathered. Most of this bone was fragmented and unidentifiable to element. Three pieces of bone were ornaments or bead blanks. Two pieces were small-mammal long bone shafts that were possibly raw material used to make small bone ring beads. One piece, a small ring of bone ground on the ends, was a finished bead. Worked bone is discussed in more detail below.

FEATURE 10D, PIT HOUSE

Eight pieces of bone (4 percent of the sample) were collected from this feature, from FS 127 and 201. All eight were small-mammal bone. Seven of the specimens were heat altered with no weathering, and one showed marked weathering but no heat alteration.

FEATURE 11, SHEET MIDDEN

The nine specimens (5 percent of the sample) collected from this feature, from FS 49, 50, 56, 63, 73, and 77, were one jackrabbit bone, six small-mammal bones, one small/medium-mammal bone, and one small-vertebrate bone. Six were heat altered, and four were weathered.

FEATURE 12, SHEET MIDDEN AND PIT HOUSE FILL

The bone assemblage from this feature, collected from FS 45, 68, 70, 75, 80, 109, 114, 120, 125, 135, and 137, totaled 44 (23 percent of the sample): 6 cottontail rabbit, 2 micro mammal, 32 small mammal, 1 medium mammal, and 3 small vertebrate. Thirty-four of these specimens (77%) were heat altered, and 28 (64%) were not weathered. Heat-altered bone is often not as weathered as non–heat altered bone, possibly because it has been buried in thermal features and

Chapter 11 Remains from Screened Excavations 283 not been as exposed to wind, sun, and rain as bone recovered from non-thermal features. One shell bead was recovered from this feature, made from an olivella shell with the spire lopped for stringing (illustrated under Worked Bone, below). The morphology of the shell compared favorably with the Olivella baetic species (Baetic dwarf olive) found in marine waters from Alaska to Baja California (Rehder 1981). Shell was widely traded throughout many southwestern sites, likely through the Gila or Salt River basins.

FEATURE 12A, PIT HOUSE

The 18 pieces of bone (9 percent of the sample) collected from this feature, from FS 233, 236, 260, and 263, consisted of 2 jackrabbit bones, 2 cottontail rabbit bones, 12 small-mammal bones, and two large-mammal bones. Ten specimens were not heat altered and showed no weathering.

FEATURE 12B, PIT HOUSE

The bone sample from this feature, collected from FS 259, 261, 262, and 269, totaled 14 (7 percent of the site sample): four jackrabbit, one cottontail rabbit, eight small mammal, and one small bird (sparrow size). Six specimens were heat altered, four were slightly weathered, and four showed marked weathering.

FEATURE 14, SHEET MIDDEN

One piece of bone was collected from this feature, from FS 196. It was a small-mammal bone that was heat altered but not weathered.

FEATURE 17, PIT HOUSE

Of the four pieces of bone (2 percent of the sample) collected from this feature, from FS 144 and 213, one was cottontail rabbit and three were small mammal. One of the small-mammal bones was a bead blank, possibly from a jackrabbit humerus shaft. The bone has been cut and snapped, but the ends were not ground. One small-mammal bone fragment was heat altered but not weathered. The other specimens showed marked weathering.

FEATURE18, PIT HOUSE

All three pieces of bone from this feature (1.5 percent of the sample) were collected from FS 184, and all were small-mammal bone. None of the bone was weathered; one piece was heat altered.

FEATURE 24, PIT HOUSE

Forty-one percent of the bone collected from this site, 82 specimens, were from FS 219, 241, and 255 from this feature. In this assemblage, 22 specimens were cottontail rabbit, 3 were small rodent, 1 was small bird, 35 were small mammal, 1 was medium/large mammal, and 20 were small vertebrate. Cottontail rabbit elements identified were metapodials, phalanges, and two right distal humeri. The small rodent, possibly kangaroo rat, was likely intrusive. The bird bone was a heat-altered proximal humerus from a sparrow-size bird. Fifty-four of the 82 bones and bone fragments showed no heat alteration. Nineteen specimens showed slight weathering and 29 showed marked weathering. Three specimens were small bone beads made from thin rings cut

Chapter 11 Remains from Screened Excavations 284 from a long bone, with the ends ground. One bead may have been made from a cottontail tibia, and the other two were small-vertebrate bone, probably from a small mammal.

FEATURE 25, ROASTING PIT

One bone (0.5 percent of the sample) was collected from FS 222 at this feature. This specimen was a small-mammal bone that was heat altered but not weathered.

FEATURE 26, HEARTH OR SMALL ROASTING PIT

The two bones from this feature (1 percent of the sample) were collected from FS 230. One specimen was cottontail rabbit and one was small-vertebrate bone. Neither piece was heat altered; one was lightly weathered, and the other showed marked weathering.

WORKED BONE

In addition to the shell bead, seven pieces of bone from the Sandy Rise site were worked (Table 11.2; Figure 11.1). Three of these specimens may have been long bone shafts, or blanks, used for making small ring beads, and four were complete small rings that could have been threaded or otherwise used for ornaments. The characteristics of the bone wall indicated that most of these artifacts were probably made from small-mammal bone. One may have been jackrabbit, and one may have been cottontail. There were three pieces of bone that. One of the possible bead blanks had four parallel cuts around the shaft, apparently in preparation for bead making. To make beads, the shafts of long bones were cut around the entire shaft almost all the way through. Each bead was then snapped off the shaft and finished by grinding the rough edges. The broken end of the shaft would then be ground in preparation for removing the next bead. Figure 11.2 shows the main steps in the manufacturing of these beads.

Table 11.2. Bone Beads and Bead Blanks

Feature Taxon Element Measurements (mm) Comments 10 Small Mammal Long bone L= 9.41 Blank for bead making 10 Small Mammal Long bone L= 19.83 Blank for bead making

10

Small Mammal

Long bone

Th= 1.77 Dia= 5.80 (minimum) Dia= 6.32 (maximum)

Ring bead complete

17 Small Mammal Long bone L= 14.77 Blank for bead making 24

Small Mammal

Long bone


Ring bead complete

24

Small Vertebrate

Long bone


Ring bead complete

24

Small Vertebrate

Long bone


Ring bead complete

L=length; Th=thickness; Dia=diameter


Figure 11.1. Bone beads, probable bone-bead blanks, and Olivella shell bead (all from the

Basketmaker II component at the Sandy Rise site): (A) bone shaft “blank”; (B) two halves of a bone shaft “blank,” prepared for detachment of multiple beads; (C–F) bone ring beads; (G) Olivella shell.

Figure 11.2. Bead manufacturing process.

Kidder’s (1932) typology for worked bone is often cited for typing worked bone. However, his ornament typology includes bone tube beads made from a segment of the bone shaft, but not these small bone ring beads. Though not as common as tube beads, the ring beads are made using the same process.

SUMMARY, SITE NM-H-51-55

In general, this site had a paucity of faunal remains, given the number of pit houses, thermal features, and middens present. It is possible that the bone representing food resources did not survive because it was not rapidly buried or because of the chemistry of the sediment. Most of the recovered bone was from small mammals, cottontail rabbits, and jackrabbits, indicating that the inhabitants were utilizing these small mammals as a main food resource. The animals may have been taken through opportunistic hunting. In addition to the food remains, there was evidence that bone-bead manufacturing occurred on site.

Chapter 11 Remains from Screened Excavations 286 SITE NM-H-46-55

Faunal remains from this historic Navajo site were collected from Feature 1 (a hogan) and Feature 2 (a, ash pile or midden). In all, 117 pieces of bone were analyzed, 14 from Feature 1 and 103 from Feature 2, and are summarized in Table 11.3. The detailed data are presented in Appendix F.

Table 11.3. Site NM-H-46-55, Faunal NISP and MNI Counts

Taxon

NISP Percent of Total

MNI

cf Goat (Capra hircus) 1 1 1 cf Sheep (Ovis aries) 6 5 1 (6–12 mo) Sheep/Goat (Ovis/Capra) 31 26 1 (>4 yr) Jackrabbit (Lepus sp.) 1 1 1 Indeterminate Mammal 9 8 Small Mammal 3 3 Medium Mammal 59 50 Medium/Large Mammal 1 1 Very Large Mammal 6 5 Total 117 100 4

cf = compares favorably

CONDITION OF FAUNAL REMAINS

Twenty-eight (24%) of the recovered bones were heat altered, 51 (44 percent) were slightly weathered, and 6 (5 percent) showed marked weathering. The weathering patterns indicate that a little more than half of the bone had been exposed to the elements long enough to show at least some effect from exposure to wind, rain, and sun. The recovered remains were moderately to highly fragmented.

The faunal remains collected from this site included the following animals or general categories:

• Indeterminate Mammal: mammal remains too fragmented to assign a size category • Small Mammal: rabbit to dog size • Medium Mammal: dog to sheep size • Medium/Large Mammal: indeterminate, either medium or large • Very Large Mammal: cow, elk, or horse size

Identified animals included Lepus sp. (jackrabbit), Ovis aries (domestic sheep), Capra hircus (domestic goat), and Ovis/Capra (indeterminate sheep or goat).

Of the jackrabbits, only the black-tailed jackrabbit (Lepus californicus) currently inhabits the project area. These animals live in open prairies and sparsely vegetated deserts at elevations to 2,135 m (7,000 feet), where they burrow. Jackrabbits are extremely common in southwestern archaeological sites, as they were exploited for their meat, as well as for their hides and for bones for tools and ornaments.

Chapter 11 Remains from Screened Excavations 287 The domestic sheep is an Old World species that was brought to the New World in historic times and today inhabits much of North America. Remains of the domestic sheep are common in historic archaeological sites.

As with the domestic sheep, the goat is a recently introduced species to the area that arrived in historic times. The remains of sheep and goats are often difficult to separate, but a few skeletal elements are indicative of one or the other species. The goat does not graze on the same plant species as the sheep, and they are compatible grazing companions.

FAUNAL REMAINS FROM FEATURES

FEATURE 1, HOGAN

The 14 bone specimens from this feature were collected from FS 36, 45, 47, 52, 68, and 80. These remains consisted of one jackrabbit bone, three small-mammal bones, four medium-size mammal bones, one medium/large-mammal bone, and five indeterminate-size mammal bones. None of the bone from this feature was heat altered. Nine specimens were slightly weathered, and two were markedly weathered. Most of this bone was highly fragmented and unidentifiable to element. It is likely that it was exposed and fragmented during the dismantling of the hogan.

FEATURE 2, ASH PILE

The 103 pieces of bone recovered from this feature, collected from FS 41 and 42, represent 88 percent of the bone recovered from the site. Only 28 bones and bone fragments (24 percent of the site total) from this feature were heat altered. Feature 2 remains included one cf goat (Capra hircus) metacarpal, one (a mandible and five teeth) cf sheep (Ovis aries) specimen, and 31 pieces that were indeterminate between sheep and goat (Ovis/Capra). The goat bone was a distal fragment of a fused metacarpal that was gracile in comparison to a sheep metacarpal. Sheep metacarpal distal breadth (Bd, following von den Driesch [1976]) is 30.02 mm, versus the Bd of the goat at 24.45 mm. The sheep element was a left mandible, nearly complete, but broken in four pieces. In the Shaffer and Baker (1992) system, teeth are scored individually, even if they are in situ in a mandible, and there were five teeth in situ. According to Payne (1985, cited in Hillson 1993:97–101), there are morphological differences between Ovis and Capra teeth in the deciduous lower third premolar, deciduous lower fourth premolar, and permanent lower first molar. These teeth were present in the specimen collected, and all exhibited morphological similarity to sheep rather than goat. The degree of wear and eruption of this specimen indicated an age at death of 6–12 months. Other elements identified as Ovis/Capra were carpals, metacarpals, a radius, an ulna, a pelvis, a femur, a tibia, a thoracic vertebra, a cervical vertebra, and ribs. The epiphyseal fusion of the elements indicated one specimen one year or less in age and one specimen over 4 years of age. These data would give an MNI of one for goat and one for sheep, in addition to one sheep/goat adult specimen. A single unidentified jackrabbit bone gives an MNI of one for this taxon as well. An additional 55 specimens were identified as medium mammal. These were likely sheep or goat remains, but were too fragmented for a more positive identification. Most of these elements were long bone fragments with both spiral (green-bone) fractures and dry-bone fractures. Three pieces had indications of butchery. One pelvis fragment had been cleaved (Figure 11.3, left) and two ribs had knife or cleaver marks near the vertebral end (Figure 11.3, right). Other bone specimens from this feature included six fragments from of a very large mammal, likely cow, and four of indeterminate-size mammal.


Portion of element recovered indicated in gray.

Cleaver or

axe cut

Two knife cuts Three knife cuts

Figure 11.3. Location of cut marks observed on sheep/goat elements from Feature 2. The faunal remains from this site are consistent with those from other historic sites in this area. The remains represent domestic animals that were butchered and used for food. The remains that were heat altered were burned after the meat was consumed as a means of disposing of and reducing trash.

Observations on changes in artifact assemblages from research on Navajo sites for the Navajo Indian Irrigation Project (NIIP) relate to economic changes in the early twentieth century. For instance, the frequency of butchered livestock bone in trash assemblages decreased and the frequency of commercially manufactured artifacts increased as people shifted from a subsistence economy to commercial livestock husbandry. Dependence on packaged and prepared foods increased as herds were managed to maximize wool production. Furthermore, the age and sex ratios of butchered livestock changed during the transition from subsistence to commercial livestock husbandry and again after the initiation of the stock reduction program (Gilpin 1993). There quantity of faunal remains was insufficient to discuss husbandry practices. In general, it appears that lamb was likely butchered in late summer or early fall. The lamb and the ewe were used as food resources. The remains from this site do not represent packaged or commercially butchered bone and were likely livestock that was raised locally.

SITE NM-H-35-19

One fragment of shell was collected from FS 16, collection unit 11 in Artifact Concentration 1. The shell was a thin fragment, 13 mm in maximum size. This specimen was likely an exfoliated piece from the inside of a bivalve, possibly a mussel. The fragment was not diagnostic and showed no cultural modifications.

CHAPTER 12 POLLEN AND PHYTOLITHS FROM THE SANDY RISE SITE

Linda Scott Cummings and R. A. Varney

Seven sediment samples from features at the Sandy Rise site (NM-H-51-55) were examined for pollen and phytoliths. Sandy Rise was a multicomponent site with occupations dating from the early Late Archaic, Basketmaker II, and Pueblo II periods. Pollen and phytolith samples were examined to obtain information on use of the features and the paleoenvironment of the project area.

METHODS

POLLEN

A chemical extraction technique based on flotation is the standard preparation technique used in this laboratory for the removal of pollen grains from the large volume of sand, silt, and clay with which they are mixed. This particular process was developed for extraction of pollen from soils where preservation has been less than ideal and pollen density is lower than in peat.

Hydrochloric acid (10%) is used to remove calcium carbonates present in the soil, after which the samples are screened through 150 micron mesh. The samples are rinsed until neutral by adding water, letting the samples stand for 2 hours, then pouring off the supernatant. A small quantity of sodium hexametaphosphate is added to each sample once it reaches neutrality, then the samples are allowed to settle according to Stoke’s Law in settling columns. This process is repeated with ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid (EDTA). These steps remove clay prior to heavy liquid separation. The samples are then freeze dried. Sodium polytungstate (SPT) (density 1.8) is used for the flotation process. The samples are mixed with SPT and centrifuged at 1,500 rpm for 10 minutes to separate organic from inorganic remains. The supernatant containing pollen and organic remains is decanted. Sodium polytungstate is again added to the inorganic fraction to repeat the separation process. The supernatant is decanted into the same tube as the supernatant from the first separation. This supernatant is then centrifuged at 1,500 rpm for 10 minutes to allow any silica remaining in the sample to be separated from the organics. Following this step, the supernatant is decanted into a 50-ml conical tube and diluted with distilled water. These samples are centrifuged at 3,000 rpm to concentrate the organic fraction in the bottom of the tube. After rinsing the pollen-rich organic fraction obtained by this separation, all samples receive a short (20–30 minute) treatment in hot hydrofluoric acid to remove any remaining inorganic particles. The samples are then acetolated for 3–5 minutes to remove any extraneous organic matter.

A light microscope is used to count the pollen to a total of approximately 100 to 200 pollen grains at a magnification of 500X. Pollen preservation in the Sandy Rise samples varied from good to very poor. Comparative reference material collected at the Intermountain Herbarium at Utah State University and the University of Colorado Herbarium was used to identify the pollen, when possible to family, genus, and species level.

Chapter 12 Pollen and Phytoliths 290 Pollen aggregates were also recorded during the identification process. Aggregates are clumps of a single type of pollen that may be interpreted to represent pollen dispersal over short distances, or the introduction of portions of the plant represented into an archaeological setting. Aggregates were included in the pollen counts as single grains, as is customary. The presence of aggregates is noted by an "A" next to the pollen frequency on the pollen diagram. A plus (+) on the pollen diagram indicates that the pollen type was observed outside the regular count while scanning the remainder of the microscope slide, even if that pollen was not present in a sufficient concentration to obtain a full count. Pollen diagrams were produced using Tilia, a program developed by Dr. Eric Grimm of the Illinois State Museum. Total pollen concentrations are calculated in Tilia using the quantity of sample processed in cubic centimeters (cc), the quantity of exotics (spores) added to the sample, the quantity of exotics counted, and the total pollen counted, and are expressed as pollen per cc of sediment.

Indeterminate pollen consists of pollen grains that are folded, mutilated, and otherwise distorted beyond recognition. These grains were included in the total pollen count, as they are part of the pollen record. The charcoal frequency registers the relationship between pollen and charcoal. To derive charcoal frequency, the total number of microscopic charcoal fragments is divided by the pollen sum, yielding a figure that reflects the quantity of charcoal observed, normalized per 100 pollen grains.

PHYTOLITHS

Extraction of phytoliths from these sediments also was based on heavy liquid flotation. Sodium hypochlorite (bleach) was first used to destroy the organic fraction in 50 ml of sediment. Once this reaction was complete, the samples were rinsed to remove the bleach. If the samples contained calcium carbonates, they were reacted with hydrochloric acid, then rinsed until neutral. A small quantity of sodium hexametaphosphate was added to each sample once it reached neutrality, the samples were allowed to settle according to Stoke’s Law in settling columns, and this process was repeated with EDTA. These steps remove clay prior to heavy liquid separation. Next the samples were freeze dried. The dried silts and sands were then mixed with sodium polytungstate (density 2.3) and centrifuged to separate the phytoliths, which will float, from the other silica, which will not. Phytoliths, in the broader sense, may include opal phytoliths and calcium oxalate crystals. Calcium oxalate crystals are formed by Opuntia (prickly pear cactus), Yucca, and other plants. If these forms have survived in the sediments, they are separated, rather than destroyed, using this extraction technique. Any remaining clay is floated with the phytoliths and is further removed by mixing with sodium hexametaphosphate and distilled water. The samples are then rinsed, first with distilled water, then with alcohols to remove the water. After several alcohol rinses, the samples are mounted in cinnamaldehyde for counting with a light microscope at a magnification of 500X. Phytolith diagrams were produced using Tilia.

BACKGROUND

PHYTOLITHS

Phytoliths are silica bodies produced by plants when soluble silica in the groundwater is absorbed by the roots and carried up to the plant via the vascular system. Evaporation and metabolism of this water result in precipitation of the silica in and around the cellular walls. Opal

Chapter 12 Pollen and Phytoliths 291 phytoliths, which are distinct, decay-resistant plant remains, are deposited directly in the soil as the plant or plant parts die and break down. They are, however, subject to mechanical breakage, and to erosion and deterioration in high pH soils. Transportation of phytoliths occurs primarily by animal consumption, gathering of plants by humans, or by erosion or transportation of the soil by wind, water, or ice.

Phytoliths tabulated to represent “total phytoliths” include the grass short-cell, buliform, trichome, elongate, and dicot forms. Frequencies for all other bodies recovered are calculated by dividing the number of each type recovered by the “total phytoliths.” The three major types of grass short-cell phytoliths are festucoid, chloridoid, and panicoid. The festucoid class of phytoliths is ascribed primarily to the Subfamily Pooideae, which occurs most abundantly in cool, moist climates. However, Brown (1984) notes that festucoid phytoliths are produced in small quantities by nearly all grasses. Therefore, while they are typical phytoliths produced by the Subfamily Pooideae, they are not exclusive to this subfamily. Chloridoid phytoliths are found primarily in the Subfamily Chloridoideae, warm-season grasses that grow in arid to semi-arid areas and require less available soil moisture than the Pooideae. Chloridoid grasses are the most abundant types in the American Southwest (Gould and Shaw 1983:120). Panicoid phytoliths occur in warm-season or tall grasses that frequently thrive in humid conditions. “According to Gould and Shaw (1983:110) more than 97% of the native US grass species (1,026 or 1,053) are divided equally among three subfamilies—Pooideae, Chloridoideae, and Panicoideae” (Twiss 1987:181).

Bilobates and polylobates are produced mainly by panicoid grasses, although a few of the festucoid grasses also produce these forms. Twiss (1987:181) notes that some members of the Subfamily Chloridoideae produce both bilobate (panicoid) and festucoid phytoliths. Buliform phytoliths are produced by grasses in response to wet conditions and are to be expected in floodplains and other wet habitats. Trichomes represent silicified hairs, which may occur on stems, leaves, and the glumes or bran surrounding grass seeds. Elongate phytoliths are of no aid in interpreting either paleoenvironmental conditions or the subsistence record because they are produced by all grasses. Long diatoms are cosmopolitan, occurring in many sediments, and do not provide further opportunities for interpretation.

ETHNOBOTANIC REVIEW

It is a commonly accepted practice in archaeological studies to reference ethnographically documented plant uses as indicators of possible or even probable use in prehistoric times. The ethnobotanic literature provides evidence for the exploitation of numerous plants in historic times, by both broad categories and specific example. Evidence for exploitation from numerous sources can suggest widespread utilization and strengthens the possibility that the same or similar resources were used in prehistoric times. Ethnographic sources outside the US 491 study area have been consulted to permit a more exhaustive review of potential uses for each plant. Ethnographic sources document that with some plants, the historic use was developed in and transmitted from the past. Plants with medicinal qualities very likely were discovered in prehistoric times, with their usage persisting into historic times. There is, however, likely to have been a loss of knowledge concerning the utilization of plant resources as cultures moved from subsistence to agricultural economies and/or were introduced to European foods during the historic period. The ethnobotanic literature serves only as a guide indicating that the potential for

Chapter 12 Pollen and Phytoliths 292 utilization existed in prehistoric times—not as conclusive evidence that the resources were used. Pollen and macrofloral remains, when compared with the material culture (artifacts and features) recovered by the archaeologists, can become indicators of use. Plants represented by pollen from the Sandy Rise site are discussed in the following paragraphs to provide an ethnobotanic background for discussing the recovered remains.

BRASSICACEAE (MUSTARD FAMILY)

Ethnographic records indicate that several members of the Brassicaceae (mustard) family, such as Arabis (rockcress), Descurainia (tansy-mustard), Dithyrea (spectacle-pod), Draba (whitlowgrass), Erysimum (western-wallflower), Lepidium (pepperweed), Rorippa (cress), and Thlaspi fendleri (wild-candytuft) were exploited for food, medicinal resources, and ceremonial purposes. Fresh greens were used as potherbs, and the parched and ground seeds were used to make a flour, thicken soup, and make pinole. Brassicaceae seeds ripen in early summer (Fernald 1950; Harrington 1967; Kearney and Peebles 1960; Kirk 1975; Vestal 1952:28–29).

CHENO-AMS

The term “Cheno-am” refers to a group representing the Chenopodiaceae (goosefoot) family and the genus Amaranthus (pigweed). These plants are weedy annuals or perennials, often growing in disturbed areas such as cultivated fields and site vicinities. Cheno-ams, including a variety of plants such as Amaranthus, Atriplex (saltbush), Chenopodium (goosefoot), Monolepis (povertyweed), and Suaeda (seepweed), were used as food and for processing other foods. These plants were exploited for both their greens (cooked as potherbs) and their seeds. The seeds were eaten raw or ground, used to make pinole, and sometimes mixed with cornmeal to make a variety of mushes and cakes. The seeds usually were parched prior to grinding. The greens are most tender in the spring, when young, but can be used at any time, and can be harvested and cooked either alone or with other foods. Various parts of Cheno-am plants were gathered from early spring through the fall (Castetter and Bell 1942:61; Curtin 1984:47–71; Kearney and Peebles 1960; Kirk 1975; Robbins, et al. 1916; Vestal 1952:24–26).

CYLINDROPUNTIA (CHOLLA CACTUS)

Cylindropuntia is an antiquated term for cholla cactus that has been applied in palynology to distinguish cholla from prickly pear cactus (Opuntia). Cholla buds are collected during the spring and roasted. The buds are available in May, and the fruit ripens later in the summer. The cooked buds can be dried and later ground. Cholla fruits and joints also were collected for consumption. The spineless, yellow cholla fruits were worn around the neck as a charm or placed around a dwelling to keep away diseases. Boiled cholla roots are reported to have been used as an infant laxative (Buskirk 1949:320–321; Gallagher 1972:92; Greenhouse et al. 1981; Hrdliçka 1908:231; Kearney and Peebles 1960:581–586).

OPUNTIA (PRICKLY PEAR CACTUS)

Opuntia (prickly pear) have broad, flattened joints and large, red to purple, juicy, pear-shaped fruits called tunas. All species of prickly pear cactus produce edible fruit. The fruits were eaten raw, stewed, roasted, or dried for winter use. Dried fruits could be ground into a meal. Young stems or pads were peeled and eaten raw or roasted. Peeled stems also can be used as a dressing on wounds. The seeds were eaten in soups, or dried, parched, and ground into a meal to be used

Chapter 12 Pollen and Phytoliths 293 in gruel or cakes. The process of removing the spines from the cacti usually involves roasting or baking in a pit, and rubbing the spines off. Prickly pear plants are noted to be the most widely distributed cacti in the Southwest and are found on arid, rocky, or sandy soils (Beaglehole 1937:70; Ebeling 1986:513-516; Harrington 1964:382-384; Kearney and Peebles 1960:581-586; Kirk 1975:50-52; Muenscher 1980:317; Nequatewa 1943:18-19; Robbins, et al. 1916:62; Stevenson 1915:69; Whiting 1939:85-86).

ZEA MAYS (MAIZE, CORN)

Zea mays (maize, corn) has been an important New World cultigen, originating from a wild grass called teosinte. Maize has long been a staple of the Southwest inhabitants, and in the Four Corners area it first appears in the Late Archaic/Basketmaker II period. Innumerable ways of preparing maize exist. Green corn was widely used, and ears were collected from the regular fields. Mature ears were eaten roasted or wrapped in corn husks and boiled. The kernels may be parched, soaked in water with juniper ash, and boiled to make hominy. Dried kernels may be ground into meal, which is used as a staple. Cornmeal may be colored with Atriplex ashes. Black corn is used as a dye for basketry and textiles and as a body paint. Maize may be husked immediately upon harvesting. Clean husks are saved for smoking and other uses, such as wrapping food. The Pima (Akimel O'odham) and Papago (Tohono O'odham) harvested corn by pulling up the entire stalk after it was dry and piling them at the edges of the fields. Women and children removed unhusked ears from the stalks and then threw them into piles, which were ultimately carried to the dwelling in burden baskets. Unhusked ears of corn were frequently roasted by piling up corn and mesquite brush and setting this pile on fire. The fire burned much of the husk away and the ears were pulled from the fire and dried on top of the house. The roasted, unhusked corn then was stored for later use. Corn also was sometimes shelled prior to storage. Ears also may be allowed to dry on the roof, and ristras of maize may be hung inside from the roof.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

The Sandy Rise site (NM-H-51-55) was situated in a stabilized sand dune directly overlying Cretaceous residuum/bedrock, except in the northern portion where it overlay stratified alluvium of Holocene age. A Late Archaic (Basketmaker II) midden, dating to approximately 400–200 B.C., contained occupation debris and the remains of seven pit houses. Smaller prehistoric pit features dated from the early Late Archaic, Basketmaker II, and Pueblo II periods, and a small Pueblo II structure was present as well.

Table 12.1 provides provenience data for the seven analyzed samples, each of which was examined for both pollen and phytoliths. Table 12.2 summarizes the plants identified in the pollen and phytolith remains, and Figure 12.1 and Figure 12.2 show the pollen and phytolith presence in each analyzed sample.

Chapter 12 Pollen and Phytoliths 294 Table 12.1. The Sandy Rise Site (NM-H-51-55), Provenience Data for Fill Samples

FS No. Feature Provenience/Description Radiocarbon Age (Cal)

227

7 Deeply buried hearth or small roasting pit, older than Basketmaker II stratum

1720–1520 B.C.

274

12A-1 Small, basin-shaped hearth on floor of Basketmaker II pit house

410–360 and 290–230 B.C.

257

24

Darkest stained area within a pit house 390–180 B.C. 410–350 and 310–210 B.C.

212

10D Hearth and dense charcoal surrounding the hearth on Basketmaker II pit house floor

226 14E Basketmaker II pit house 171 3 Pueblo II masonry structure

38

8 Hearth/small roasting pit just below surface, possibly associated with Feature 3

A.D. 890–1030

Sample 227 was collected from fill in Feature 7, a deeply-buried hearth or small roasting pit located in stratified alluvium along the northeast margin of the Basketmaker occupation. Atriplex/Sarcobatus twigs from this feature yielded a radiocarbon age of 1720–1520 B.C. The pollen record from sample 227 was dominated by Pinus pollen. One possible implication of the high percentage of Pinus pollen in this sample is that pine branches with the smaller male cones may have been used during the active pollination season, which usually occurs in mid to late May. Another potential interpretation is that the feature was abandoned prior to the pine pollination season and subsequently filled with post-occupation sediment carrying the pine pollen. The small quantities of Artemisia, Low-spine Asteraceae, and High-spine Asteraceae pollen represent sagebrush and members of the sunflower family growing on the local landscape, although charred Asteraceae fibers indicate that a member or members of this family were burned in the feature. Opuntia pollen noted in the sample represents prickly pear cactus, which would have been a resource available to the people using this feature, though this pollen was not noted in a frequency that indicated prickly pear was utilized. The presence of Cheno-am pollen, accompanied by aggregates, represents amaranth and/or local members of the Chenopodiaceae family, including saltbush, goosefoot, and others. Plants producing Cheno-am type pollen are generally considered to be indicators of disturbed ground and arid conditions, and many are used world-wide as a food resource. The presence of Cheno-am pollen in this sample indicates the availability of, though not necessarily the use of, these resource plants. Cyperaceae pollen indicates sedges in the local landscape. Although sedges are often found in moist areas, some species also occur among grasses in very arid localities. The general interpretation of the pollen record from sample 227 is of an arid to semi-arid associated plant assemblage in the natural landscape and perhaps the burning of male-cone-tipped pine branches along with a member or members of the Asteraceae family. Zea mays pollen was observed while scanning the remainder of the microscope slide, indicating that maize was cooked in this pit.

Chapter 12 Pollen and Phytoliths 295

Table 12.2. The Sandy Rise Site (NM-H-51-55), Pollen Types Observed in Samples

Scientific Name Common Name ARBOREAL POLLEN Juniperus Juniper Pinus Pine Quercus Oak NON-ARBOREAL POLLEN Asteraceae: Sunflower family

Artemisia Sagebrush Low-spine Includes ragweed, cocklebur, sumpweed High-spine Includes aster, rabbitbrush, snakeweed,

sunflower, etc. Brassicaceae Mustard family

Erysimum-type Wallflower Caryophyllaceae Pink family Cheno-am Includes the goosefoot family and amaranth

Sarcobatus Greasewood Cylindropuntia Cholla cactus Cyperaceae Sedge family Ephedra nevadensis-type (includes E. clokeyi, E. coryi, E. funera, E. viridis, E. californica, E. nevadensis, and E. aspera)

Ephedra, jointfir, Mormon tea

Ephedra torreyana-type (includes E. torreyana, E. trifurca, and E. antisyphilitica)

Ephedra, jointfir, Mormon tea

Eriogonum Wild buckwheat Fabaceae Bean or Legume family Onagraceae Evening primrose family Opuntia Prickly pear cactus Phlox Phlox Poaceae Grass family Polygonum aviculare-type Smartweed Rosaceae Rose family Sphaeralcea Globe mallow Indeterminate Too badly deteriorated to identify OTHER Concentricyste Algal spore—indicator of wet, oxidized conditions Charred Asteraceae tissue fragment Charred tissue fragment from a member of the

sunflower family


8· 38

3· 171

10 0· 212

14·E· Z26

24· 257

12·AI · 274

3859 200 6271 200

16723 200

<1561 200 1320 100

2787 100

6585 105

20 40 60 20 40 60 20 20 20 20 40 60 200400600800 20

Figure 12.1. Pollen diagram for the Sandy Rise site (NM-H-51-55).


Figure 12.2. Phytolith diagram for the Sandy Rise site (NM-H-51-55).

Chapter 12 Pollen and Phytoliths 298 The phytolith record from Feature 7 was dominated by large, bulky forms with a “scalloped” surface texture. These forms are similar to those noted in conifers or gymnosperms, such as Pinus ponderosa (ponderosa pine). These types of phytoliths have been observed in the needles, suggesting the possibility that pine branches with adhering needles were burned as fuel and/or that pine needles alone were burned. It is also possible that the large, bulky “dicot” forms with a “scalloped” surface were present in the post-occupation sediments that filled the pit. Grass short- cell phytoliths represent festucoid (cool season), chloridoid (short grasses), and bilobate (panicoid–tall grasses) forms, indicating that grasses represented in the sediments that filled this hearth included cool season, short, and tall grasses. These grasses probably grew in the sediments that were transported into the Feature 7 pit as it filled. Other forms representing grasses include buliforms, reflecting the cells responsible for leaf rolling in response to drought stress, trichomes, which are silicified hairs, and elongates, which are typically produced by all grasses. Silicification of the cells that control leaf rolling in response to drought is thought to happen either late in the life of the grass leaves or when grasses are growing under conditions of sufficient moisture to meet their needs. Spiny spheroids were observed, perhaps representing a member of the Euphorbiaceae (spurge) family, in which these forms are produced. A full taxonomic study has not been completed on these forms, so they are not considered to be diagnostic of any particular family.

Pollen and phytolith sample 274 was collected from the fill of Feature 12A-1, a small, basin- shaped hearth filled with charcoal on the floor of the largest Basketmaker II pit house at the site. A mix of burned seeds was radiocarbon dated and yielded ages of 410–360 B.C. and 290–230 B.C. The pollen record was overwhelmingly dominated by microcharcoal fragments, indicating that the sample was recovered from the fuel layer of the feature. Combustion is chemically an oxidation process and pollen is destroyed by oxidation; therefore, it is likely that pollen associated with the use of this feature would have been destroyed in the precise context from which this sample was recovered. The pollen that was observed in sample 274 is very likely to be primarily the result of sediment filling the feature after abandonment. Having noted that, and in light of the interpretations from the phytolith record, it is likely that the Pinus pollen in sample 274 indicates burning pine branches as fuel in the feature. Artemisia, Low-spine Asteraceae, and High-spine Asteraceae pollen indicate the presence of sagebrush and members of the sunflower family in the local landscape, while the presence of Cheno-am pollen accompanied by aggregates indicates Atriplex and other members of the Chenopodiaceae (goosefoot) family and/or amaranth growing in the vicinity. Ephedra nevadensis-type pollen represents joint-fir or Mormon tea, which is expected in the area, although pollen from these plants is capable of traveling very long distances (hundreds of miles) on the wind. Onagraceae pollen indicates members of the evening primrose family in the local area. Several members of this family have the common name “fireweed” because of their tendency to flourish following a fire. Poaceae pollen indicates grasses growing on the local landscape. Rosaceae pollen indicates growth of a member or members of the diverse rose family among the local plants. Sphaeralcea pollen in the sample indicates growth of globe mallow nearby. Globe mallow is an indicator of disturbed ground. The general interpretation of the pollen record from sample 274 is of an arid to semi-arid associated plant community in the sediments filling the feature after abandonment.

The phytolith record from Feature 12A-1 was very similar in content to that from Feature 7. Large, bulky forms with a “scalloped” surface dominated the record, again suggesting the possibility that pine needles were burned. Grass short-cells observed in this sample include

Chapter 12 Pollen and Phytoliths 299 festucoid, chloridoid, and panicoid, representing cool season, short, and tall grasses. Buliforms, trichomes, and elongates also were present. Dicots represented in this record include those that produce a thin phytolith with sharp ridges and spiny spheroids. A single long diatom was recorded. These diatoms are considered to be cosmopolitan and do not contribute to an interpretation of the sediments.

Feature 24 was a pit house with artifact-rich fill and a dark stain in its central portion (Feature 24A). Two corn samples from this feature yielded radiocarbon ages of 390–180 B.C., and 400– 350 and 310–210 B.C. Pollen/phytolith sample 257 was collected from fill to the south of Feature 24A, which appeared to have less rodent disturbance than the stained area. The pollen record contained no indication for the economic use of plants. Juniperus, Pinus, and Quercus pollen noted in the sample reflect a pine/juniper/oak scrub-land on the slopes of the Chuska Mountains. Artemisia and Low- and High-spine Asteraceae pollen represent sagebrush and other members of the sunflower family among the local vegetation. Charred Asteraceae fibers indicate that at least one member of this family was burned in Feature 24. Cheno-am pollen, accompanied by aggregates, indicates a member or members of the Chenopodiaceae family and/or amaranth. Sarcobatus pollen is differentiable from the rest of the Cheno-am types and indicates the presence of greasewood in the local plant community. Eriogonum, Fabaceae, Phlox, and Poaceae pollen represent buckwheat, a member or members of the pea/bean family, phlox, and grasses growing in the local plant community. Concentricystes are algae spores that indicate stagnant water. This type of algae is adventitious on very small and short-lived water bodies, and the concentricystes may represent algae in puddles in the nearby wash or rainwater contained within the feature itself. The general interpretation of the pollen record from sample 257 is an arid to semi-arid plant community without evidence for the economic use of plants. Resources that would have been available to the occupants of Feature 24 include amaranth and/or members of the goosefoot family and pine, possibly piñon.

The phytolith record from Feature 24 exhibits more of the large, bulky forms with a “scalloped” surface than did Features 7 and 12A-1. Few grass short-cells were present, although all three types of grasses (festucoid, chloridoid, and panicoid) were represented. Buliforms, trichomes, and elongates were observed as well. No forms specific to dicots were recorded in this sample.

Samples from the floors of Features 10D and 14E, both Basketmaker II pit houses, were examined for pollen and phytoliths. No radiocarbon dates were obtained for these features. Sample 212 was collected from fill of a floor hearth and from dense charcoal surrounding the hearth on the floor of Feature 10D. The floor was on Cretaceous bedrock. The pollen record from sample 212 contained small quantities of Juniperus and Quercus pollen and larger quantities of Pinus pollen, representing the pine/oak juniper scrub-land on the foothills of the Chuska Mountains. Artemisia and Low- and High-spine Asteraceae pollen again reflect the presence of sagebrush and members of the sunflower family in the local plant community. Caryophyllaceae pollen indicates a member of the pink family growing in the local area. Cheno-am pollen indicates members of the goosefoot family and/or amaranth. Ephedra nevadensis- and torreyana- types indicate at least two species of joint-fir or Mormon tea within the greater Southwest. As noted above, Ephedra pollen is capable of being transported hundreds of miles on the wind. Fabaceae, Poaceae, and Rosaceae pollen reflect a member or members of the pea/bean, grass, and rose families in the local plant community. Polygonum aviculare-type pollen is produced by several members of the buckwheat family, and the presence of this pollen type in the sample

Chapter 12 Pollen and Phytoliths 300 indicates that a member of the group grew in the local plant community. The general interpretation from the pollen record of sample 212 is of an arid to semi-arid plant community. Recovery of Zea mays pollen while scanning the remainder of this slide indicates that maize was processed in this structure. Potential resources available to the people who occupied Feature 10D include Cheno-ams, possibly piñon, and maize.

The phytolith record for sample 212 again was dominated by large, bulky forms with “scalloped” surfaces. Grasses were represented by recovery of festucoid, chloridoid, and panicoid short cells, indicating local growth of cool-season, short, and tall grasses. Buliforms, trichomes, and elongates were present in small quantities. A single spiny spheroid also was recorded.

Feature 14E was represented by pollen and phytolith sample 226, collected from dark fill in the northwest portion of the pit house. The pollen record from sample 226 contained small amounts of Pinus and Quercus pollen, representing oaks and pines from the pine/juniper/oak scrub-land; Juniperus pollen was not noted in the sample. Artemisia and Low- and High-spine Asteraceae pollen indicate sagebrush and other members of the sunflower family in the local plant community. Charred Asteraceae fibers indicate that at least one of the members of the Asteraceae family was burned. A small amount of Brassicaceae pollen in the sample indicates the presence of a member or members of the mustard family in the local plant community and the availability of this food resource to the pit house occupants. Erysimum-type pollen is produced by several members of the mustard family and is differentiable from the bulk of Brassicaceae pollen. A large quantity of Cheno-am pollen accompanied by aggregates indicates the presence and possible use of Cheno-am plants by the occupants of the structure. Other plants found in the local vegetation community were represented by Phlox, Poaceae, Rosaceae, and Sphaeralcea pollen. The general interpretation for sample 226 is that of an arid to semi-arid plant community with the potential for use of members of the mustard family, Cheno-ams, and possibly piñon.

The phytolith record for pit house Feature 14E was very similar to that from Feature 10D. Differences include recovery of smaller quantities of festucoid and chloridoid grass short-cells, as well as the absence of spiny spheroid forms.

Feature 3 was a small Pueblo II masonry structure that exhibited a light scatter of pottery and a few lithic artifacts but no staining. Pollen and phytolith sample 171 was collected from general fill in this structure. The pollen record contained very little microcharcoal. The presence of small quantities of Juniperus, Pinus, and Quercus pollen indicates a distant pine/juniper/oak scrub- land. Artemisia and Low- and High-spine Asteraceae pollen indicate growth of sagebrush and members of the sunflower family in the local plant community. A small amount of Brassicaceae pollen indicates the presence of a member of the mustard family and the availability of this resource to the structure occupants. Opuntia and Zea mays pollen were noted during a scan for cultivars and represents the growth of prickly pear cactus and its availability as a food resource, as well as processing or storing maize in this structure. Recovery of Onagraceae pollen while scanning this sample probably represents nothing more than local growth of a member of the evening primrose family. A large quantity of Cheno-am pollen accompanied by aggregates again indicates the presence of Cheno-am plants in the local plant community and possible use in the structure. Ephedra nevadensis-type pollen represents the regional occurrence of joint-fir, while Phlox, Poaceae, and Rosaceae pollen indicate the local growth of phlox, grasses, and a member

Chapter 12 Pollen and Phytoliths 301 of the rose family. The general interpretation from the pollen record of sample 171 is that of an arid to semi-arid plant associated plant community. Resources available to the Pueblo II occupants of this structure include a member of the mustard family, Cheno-am plants, and prickly pear cactus.

The phytolith record for sample 171 consisted primarily of the large, bulky forms with a “scalloped” surface. Only a very few festucoid grass short-cells and elongate smooth forms were recorded. No chloridoid, bilobate, or dicot forms were observed.

Feature 8 was a small pit feature located just below the surface to the north of Feature 3. Corn from this feature yielded a radiocarbon age of A.D. 890–1030, indicating that the feature was used during the Pueblo II occupation of the site and therefore might be associated with Feature 3. Pollen and phytolith sample 38 was collected from the pit fill. The pollen record included Pinus and Juniperus pollen, reflecting a pine/juniper scrub-land on the foothills of the Chuska Mountains. Although Quercus pollen was not observed in the sample, oaks would be expected to have been part of the scrub-land plant community. Artemisia and Low- and High-spine Asteraceae pollen indicate sagebrush and members of the sunflower family in the local plant community. Charred Asteraceae fibers suggest that a member of the sunflower family was burned in this feature. Brassicaceae and Erysimum-type pollen represent members of the mustard family in the local plant community. Cylindropuntia pollen is produced by the cylindrical members of the prickly pear cactus group such as cholla and staghorn cactus. These cacti produce edible fruits that would have been available to the Pueblo II people using this feature. Cheno-am, Cyperaceae, Eriogonum, Phlox, Poaceae, Rosaceae, and Sphaeralcea pollen reflect the presence of members of the goosefoot family and/or amaranth, sedges, a member of the buckwheat family, phlox, grasses, a member of the rose family, and globe mallow in the local plant community. Ephedra nevadensis-type pollen represents the regional growth of joint-fir. The overall interpretation from the pollen record from sample 38 shows an arid to semi-arid plant community with no direct evidence for the economic use of plants. Plant resources that would have been available include members of the mustard family, cactus fruits, and members of the goosefoot family and/or amaranth.

The phytolith record for Feature 8 was similar to that for Feature 3, although slightly more grass short-cells were present. Festucoid and chloridoid phytoliths were noted, but no panicoid forms were observed. A few dicot forms were recorded, including the dicot thin form with sharp ridges and spiny spheroids. The two samples representing Pueblo II occupation exhibit very few grass phytoliths, suggesting the possibility that grasses did not grow in the vicinity of the features sampled as a result of disturbance of the ground and trampling of the local vegetation.

SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS

Pollen and phytolith samples were collected from seven features at the Sandy Rise site (NM-H- 51-55). The pollen record indicates that the Basketmaker II peoples had prickly pear cactus, Cheno-ams, and perhaps piñon pine as potential native plant resources. Recovery of Zea mays pollen in two of the Basketmaker II samples indicates that they cultivated and processed maize, as well. The environmental signature for this time period is that of an arid to semi-arid lower scrub land. Basketmaker II peoples would have had at their disposal economic plants in the

Chapter 12 Pollen and Phytoliths 302 mustard family and the Cheno-am group, and possibly piñon pine. The environmental indications showed no significant difference from the early Late Archaic samples. Resources available to the Pueblo II site occupants included members of the mustard family, Cheno-ams, cacti, and possibly piñon pine. Unsurprisingly, maize pollen was also present in the sediment sample from Feature 3. The environmental signature showed no significant differences between the Pueblo II, early Late Archaic, and Basketmaker II samples. No definitive evidence for the economic use of plants was noted in this analysis.

The phytolith record indicates that the sediments filling the features examined, and probably blowing across the site in general, contained large, bulky forms with “scalloped” surfaces as their primary opal silica component. It is possible these forms were present either through deterioration of vegetation growing in the vicinity of the site, or perhaps as a result of deterioration of local bedrock that contained them. Evidence for grasses was rare in these samples, and no other phytoliths considered to be diagnostic were recorded. Phytoliths typically produced by Zea mays and Cucurbita were striking in their absence from these samples.

CHAPTER 13 SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Jim A. Railey

SWCA carried out archaeological data recovery at five sites along US 491 north of Sheep Springs, in San Juan County, New Mexico. The large-scale excavations at the Sandy Rise site (NM-H-51-55) have considerably expanded our knowledge of the Basketmaker II period in the Chuska Valley, and excavations at NM-H-46-55 and NM-H46-62 have added new dimensions to historic Navajo archaeology in the area. Work at the Little Water Village site (NM-H-35-19) and at NM-H-35-17 did not uncover any intact subsurface archaeological remains, and the 2006 data recovery investigations essentially demonstrated that previous work at these sites had exhausted their research potential. In this chapter, the results of the investigations are summarized and assessed in terms of (1) site-by-site results, (2) the specific research issues outlined in Chapter 3, and (3) recommendations.

INVESTIGATED SITES

THE SANDY RISE SITE (NM-H-51-55)

The Sandy Rise site was by far the most productive of the five sites investigated during this project (see Chapter 5). Sandy Rise lies near the juncture of the Chuska foothills and desert floor of the San Juan Basin. A nearby wash, and its associated outwash floodplain, provided a critical resource that attracted small groups of people to this site for more than 2,500 years. The other critical landscape element was a stabilized sand dune that occupied the northern part of the site and provided an elevated, well-drained surface suited to human habitation. The site hosted small- scale occupations during early Late Archaic and Pueblo times, but the major component dated from the Basketmaker II period. This component, buried by up to a meter of eolian sediments in the sand dune, was completely uncovered by machine scraping, and 54 features were exposed and hand excavated. Seven of those features were the remains of pit structures, ranging in diameter from less than 2 m to nearly 5 m. Most of the structures had one or more large stone slabs in their fill, the use of which remains unknown, but they seem to have been architectural elements. Pit house floors were unprepared, natural earthen surfaces, and interior hearths were informal, either flat charcoal stains or shallow basins. Household middens were associated with most of the pit houses, and four of these were investigated with blocks of hand units. Besides these sheet middens, extramural features consisted mostly of basin-shaped pits that were probably hearths and pit ovens.

The occupants of this site gathered pieces of petrified wood on the surrounding landscape and fabricated a wide range of flaked stone tools from this material. Petrified wood is scattered across the local landscape, with no known concentrated sources or “quarries,” so its utilization probably required an extensive pattern of procurement, with the finer grades selected for stone tool manufacture. As a result of these conditions, the site occupants rather thoroughly reduced this raw material, leaving thousands of flakes that were mostly small, lightweight, and lacking cortex. Nonlocal materials were conspicuous by their rarity, including Narbona Pass chert, a high-quality material whose source is less than 12 miles (20 km) west of the Sandy Rise site.

Chapter 13 Summary and Recommendations 304 Also rare were projectile points, suggesting that warfare and hunting of larger game were not important activities for the Basketmaker II occupants of the site. The presence of ground stone milling implements and abundant burned rock testifies to the importance of plant-food processing.

Although not abundant, charred maize was present in more than half of the analyzed flotation samples from the Basketmaker II component, along with a variety of wild plants. The findings suggest that, while gathering and foraging were still important activities, low-level food production based on maize was a crucial component of the subsistence economy. Interestingly, little maize pollen and no maize phytoliths were identified in analyzed sediment samples, suggesting that maize was probably grown some distance from the site. Faunal remains were rare and apparently did not preserve well in the sand-dune sediments. Many of the recovered animal bones probably represented the remains of burrowers who tunneled into the sand dune long after the Basketmaker II abandonment of the site, although some probably did represent subsistence remains associated with the Basketmaker II component. Tiny bone ring beads and bead- manufacturing debris suggested non-subsistence activities typical of a base camp.

Seven radiocarbon samples from the Basketmaker II occupation returned dates that were all very consistent, pinning down the age of this occupation to the 400–200 B.C. interval. During the first millennium B.C. and into the first centuries of the following millennium, effective precipitation levels and seasonal patterns were apparently sufficient for successfully growing maize, and Basketmaker II populations across the San Juan Basin were engaged in low-level maize-based food production, while still engaging in hunting, gathering, and foraging to a substantial degree. In the southwestern corner of the San Juan Basin, several excavations have unveiled an intriguing variety of Basketmaker II sites. Substantial pit houses do not seem to be part of the repertoire in that area, but one site contained numerous storage pits. Interestingly, storage pits were absent at Sandy Rise, and at NM-H-26-56, a late Basketmaker II site (dating from the early first millennium A.D.) that contained remains of even larger and more substantial pit houses. These patterns suggest the possibility that these still-mobile groups may have stored maize and other dry goods in pits located away from the main base camps, perhaps to conceal these stores from potential competitors and enemies.

The other two components at Sandy Rise were much less substantial, representing brief, low- intensity occupations of the site. The early Late Archaic component was discovered as a result of backhoe trenching, and two features were uncovered by machine scraping. One of these, Feature 7, was a small basin pit that contained a high density of charred plant remains. No maize or other cultigens were present in the recovered macrobotanical remains, but maize pollen was identified. A radiocarbon sample consisting of charred greasewood/saltbush twigs returned a calibrated radiocarbon date of 1720–1520 B.C. This is earlier than any known maize in the San Juan Basin, but it is unclear if the maize pollen from this feature was in a primary context or was introduced by rodent burrowing. The other early Late Archaic feature was an amorphous charcoal scatter near Feature 7. No stone artifacts were present in these features.

Marking the Pueblo II occupation at Sandy Rise was a scatter of surface sherds that spanned nearly the full length of the site, and a small masonry structure and two extramural pit features on the sand dune. The data recovery investigations focused on the excavation of the structure, Feature 3. It was a tiny structure, made from poor-quality, easily fractured sandstone and mortar.

Chapter 13 Summary and Recommendations 305 No ash, organic staining, or interior features were present, and only very occasional flecks of charcoal were encountered during the excavations. Little maize pollen and no maize phytoliths were identified in the analyzed sediment sample from Feature 3, suggesting it probably was not used to store harvested corn, even temporarily. Only a light scatter of sherds and lithic artifacts was present, representing a variety of stone artifact types that included a core of Narbona Pass chert. Large quantities of this material were moved to Chaco Canyon during the Pueblo II period. Sandy Rise was located roughly halfway between two of several Chacoan communities strung along the Chuska front. The small structure may have served as a sort of “rest stop” shelter for individuals traveling through this part of the Chacoan world, perhaps including those transporting Narbona Pass chert, construction timbers, or other materials down from the Chuska Mountains to Chaco Canyon.

The two Pueblo II extramural features at Sandy Rise were small pits uncovered just below the dune surface by the machine scraper. Neither of these features contained durable artifacts, although one yielded charred plant remains from a flotation sample, including corn that was submitted for radiocarbon analysis and returned a calibrated date falling in the Pueblo II period.

NM-H-46-55

This historic Navajo site lies in the village of Newcomb. Archival records show that Jim John occupied this site in the early twentieth century, built a residential hogan in the early 1920s, and reportedly abandoned the site in 1938. The hogan was later salvaged for construction materials and the remains were partially damaged by heavy machinery, probably during an earlier construction project along US 491. The data recovery effort began with surface collection, followed by hand excavations. A 256-m2 hand excavation block was placed over the hogan remains, and a scatter of historic artifacts was recovered and a central thermal feature was exposed and excavated. Marking the central feature was an intensely oxidized, roughly circular stain with some ash and charcoal on its surface. The configuration suggested the remains of a stove fashioned from a metal barrel with a stovepipe affixed to the top, a type commonly used on the Navajo Nation during the early twentieth century.

A large quantity of coal has been burned in the stove and deposited outside the hogan, forming several “ash pile” features. One of these, Feature 3, was investigated during the testing phase and proved to be a thin concentration of burned coal and other debris on top of a small coppice sand dune rather than a thick midden deposit. During the data recovery phase, two additional “ash pile” features were investigated, Features 2 and 5. Feature 5 proved to be another thin concentration of debris, this one on a deflated surface. Feature 2, however, was a comparatively thick coal-dump midden with internal stratification suggesting multiple seasons of use. Faunal remains (mostly sheep and goat) and historic artifacts were recovered from the midden layers. Underlying the midden were two strata of desiccated livestock manure, perhaps marking the former location of a lamb pen.

The historic artifacts from the site consisted of a variety of household and other debris typical of twentieth-century rural residential sites. Diagnostic artifacts supported the archival records that placed the occupation at circa 1920–1938. The faunal remains were too few in number to make any definitive statements concerning butchering patterns. A few prehistoric artifacts on the

Chapter 13 Summary and Recommendations 306 surface marked an ephemeral Pueblo II presence at the site; machine scraping did not uncover any features associated with this prehistoric component.

NM-H-46-62

The most prominent feature at this historic Navajo site was the well-preserved ruin of a small stone structure (Feature 1), originally thought to be a hogan. Nearby, another concentration of stones, Feature 2, was assumed to be a bread oven associated with the hogan. Several other features had been identified in the survey and testing phases, including purported rock alignments and “ash stains.”

The Feature 1 ruin was so well preserved, with several courses of the dry-laid stone wall still intact, that data recovery efforts began with three-dimensional scanning of the feature using a LiDAR unit. Excavation of Feature 1 did not uncover any artifacts, interior features, ash, organic staining, or even charcoal flecking. No definable floor could be identified, either. Given these findings, it was concluded that Feature 1 was not a residential hogan, but some kind of more limited use structure, probably a windbreak. Under this interpretation, the small size and south- facing entrance—unusual for Navajo hogans, which customarily have east-facing doorways—is less of a puzzle.

Excavation of Feature 2 also did not uncover any associated artifacts or staining, casting in doubt its presumed function as a “bread oven.” The other features at this site all turned out to be of natural origin, including the “ash stains,” which actually were natural, dark carbonaceous stains of Cretaceous age.

NM-H-35-17

At this site, testing investigations had uncovered a dark-stained feature that was exposed by mechanical excavation during data recovery. Although charcoal introduced by human activity had been recovered from this feature (and radiocarbon dated) during the testing phase, machine scraping during the data recovery revealed that this feature, like the “ash stains” at NM-H-46-62, actually consisted of a large, amorphous carbonaceous lens dating from Cretaceous time. No cultural feature could be isolated within this stain, and so after additional scraping that did not uncover any archaeological remains, investigations at this site were terminated. No artifacts were collected from this site during data recovery, as it had been completely surface collected during the testing phase.

LITTLE WATER VILLAGE (NM-H-35-19)

This was the only one of the five data recovery sites that was not investigated during the testing phase in 2004. Extensive excavations had been carried out at this site in 1979, opening two large blocks and investigating three areas of the site (two on the east side of the highway and one the west side) (Condon 1982). Among the features uncovered by these excavations were four pit houses, all dating from the Basketmaker III–Pueblo I time frame. The survey for the present US 491 project (Walkenhorst and John 2003) indicated that intact archaeological remains were still present outside the right-of-way, but it was unclear whether significant remains were still present within the right-of-way. Accordingly, during the data recovery investigations, surface collection, backhoe trenching, limited hand excavation, and machine scraping were carried out. These

Chapter 13 Summary and Recommendations 307 efforts collected both ceramic and lithic artifacts but did not uncover any additional intact subsurface archaeological remains. The two hand excavation units were placed in an area marked by dark midden deposits and a high density of cultural materials, but these remains proved to be backdirt from the previous excavation. The recovered materials were small in size, suggesting they had passed through 1/4- or 1/2-inch mesh screens, which probably were used in the 1979 excavations.

ADDRESSING THE RESEARCH ISSUES

The research issues, identified in Chapter 3, were predicated in part upon current understanding of the cultural history of the Chuska Valley, and the particular characteristics of the investigated sites themselves. Both specific cultural-historical and more generalized research issues were identified. The specific issues include:

• the nature of the Paleoindian occupation of the valley • the nature of Archaic occupation of the valley • the origins of agriculture • the transition to settled village life, a topic that incorporates two technological

research issues: the introduction of the bow and arrow and the introduction of pottery • the participation of Chuska Valley residents in the Chacoan system • the nature of post-Chacoan occupation of the valley • Navajo occupation of the valley prior to the Carson Campaign of 1863–1864 • Navajo use of the valley during the Reservation period (A.D. 1868 to present)

The more generalized research issues, which crosscut cultural-historical question includes:

• chronology • paleoenvironmental reconstruction • technology • subsistence • social organization • prehistoric settlement patterns • exchange and regional interaction

These issues were formulated for the entire US 491 project area. For some of the cultural- historical issues (e.g., the Paleoindian and Navajo research issues), no remains dating from these time frames were known for the project area, and addressing these issues was contingent upon the possible discovery of such remains during testing or data recovery. Given that the current project was restricted to five sites in the northern portion of the project area, the ability to address most of these issues was necessarily limited.

CULTURAL-HISTORICAL ISSUES


Although the prospect of encountering Paleoindian remains was considered remote, the already- known buried context of archaeological remains at the Sandy Rise site suggested the possibility

Chapter 13 Summary and Recommendations 308 of such remains at this location. However, no Paleoindian materials were uncovered during the data recovery effort, so this issue could not be explored further.

ARCHAIC TRADITION

Archaeologists working in the Colorado Plateau region often make a conceptual distinction between the Archaic and Basketmaker traditions, with the former focused on highly mobile hunting and gathering and the latter marked by maize-based food production, more substantial pit houses, and use of stone slabs in pit-house architecture and storage pits—all of which established some of the precursors for the Anasazi tradition. The Basketmaker II period falls overlaps chronologically with the Late Archaic period as it is defined across much of the Southwest. The Late Archaic period begins sometime around 1800 B.C. and usually ending with the introduction of pottery, which occurred around A.D. 400 on the Colorado Plateau. As framed for this project, the Archaic tradition research issue focused on the stricter definition and concerned the archaeology of highly mobile hunter-gatherers, who left lithic sites with features consisting primarily or exclusively of thermal pits. Accordingly, the Basketmaker II period remains from Sandy Rise are considered under the subsequent research issues concerning the origins of agriculture and settled village life.

Several specific questions about the Archaic tradition were posed in the research design. How were seasonal rounds orchestrated? What types of task groups were involved in different subsistence activities? What subsistence practices occurred at specific sites, during what season or seasons, and by what type or types of social units? How large were the territories of different groups? What environments did these territories include? To what extent were societies and territories bounded or porous? What kind of interaction occurred between and among social groups at different scales? The discovery of early Late Archaic remains at the Sandy Rise site contributed only one minor bit of evidence on the more mobile, hunting-gathering dimension of the Archaic tradition, and so our ability to explore these specific research questions in detail, based on the results of this project, was rather limited.

The early Late Archaic component at Sandy Rise consisted of a single thermal pit, Feature 7 (probably a small roasting pit), and a nearby amorphous charcoal scatter, Feature 33. These features occurred in stratified alluvium that underlay the northern edge of the sand dune and were buried by more than 1.5 m of sediment. Although it is possible that additional features from this occupation remain undiscovered beyond the machine-scraped area at the site, or were destroyed by fluvial cut-and-fill erosion in the distant past, the features nonetheless seem to mark a very brief, limited-task occupation that left no lithic debris (or at least not any within or near the two uncovered features). Botanical remains from Feature 7 suggest the presence of wild plant foods that were probably collected and perhaps processed at this site. Maize pollen from this feature suggests the possibility of maize cultivation at an unprecedented early date, but it seems equally possible that the maize pollen from this feature was displaced from the overlying Basketmaker II stratum as a result of rodent burrowing.

The early Late Archaic features occurred on what was at that time an actively accumulating floodplain, where the biodiversity was probably higher than that of the surrounding desert floor, and thus offered a more diverse array of biotic resources. These resources likely would have

Chapter 13 Summary and Recommendations 309 included weedy plants that thrive on disturbed surfaces (including active floodplains), and charred seeds from one such weedy species—goosefoot—were in fact recovered from Feature 7.

Given the limited discoveries associated with the early Late Archaic component at the Sandy Rise site, little more can be said at this point concerning the specific research questions relating to the Archaic tradition. The data could contribute to a broader study of Archaic settlement, subsistence, and land-use patterns, but such a study is well beyond the scope of this project.

ORIGINS OF AGRICULTURE AND THE TRANSITION TO SETTLED VILLAGE LIFE

This research issue reaches back to the Basketmaker II period of the Archaic tradition, and the discoveries at the Sandy Rise site provided a wealth of new information. It was anticipated that the investigations at the Little Water Village site might also recover data relevant to this research domain, but no intact subsurface remains were uncovered at that site, and so the discoveries there are, at best, of limited relevance here.

With respect to the origins of agriculture, the following specific questions were posed in the research design. When was maize introduced into different areas of the Southwest? Did maize arrive as part of a migration of proto–Uto-Aztecan speakers or did it diffuse northward among indigenous populations? Was it evenly distributed across the landscape, or did some groups adopt it while others remained hunter-gatherers? How was it incorporated into the subsistence practices of Archaic tradition peoples? What were the early agricultural crop complexes? Were there any significant cultural changes during the long transition (nearly 3,000 years in some areas) from early agriculture to settled village life?

The data from Sandy Rise are only indirectly relevant to these questions, but they could contribute to a broader investigation into these problems. As for the timing of maize introduction into the San Juan Basin, the Sandy Rise site appears to have been occupied several centuries after corn first arrived here. Whether or not the part-time farmers who resided at Sandy Rise were living in a landscape shared with more mobile hunter-gatherer groups is an intriguing question. In the Albuquerque area to the east, investigations suggest the possibility that part-time Late Archaic farmers were residing in the Puerco Valley, while the adjacent West Mesa may have been occupied by marginalized hunter-gatherers who did not cultivate maize (Railey 2006). Exploring whether a similar scenario played out in the San Juan Basin at this time will require additional work, including a fuller examination of the data already collected across the region.

As for the integration of maize into an existing hunter-gatherer subsistence economy, it was obviously a gradual process, and at 400–200 B.C. at Sandy Rise, foraging for and collecting wild plant foods was obviously still very important, and the amount of maize at the site was rather modest by later prehistoric standards. Even at NM-H-26-56, a Basketmaker II site that dated at least a couple of centuries later than Sandy Rise, maize still appeared to be one component of a very mixed subsistence strategy. As Wills and Huckell (1994; see also Huckell 1996) have argued, the adoption of maize in the Southwest may have actually helped make hunting- gathering strategies more efficient, and insofar as this is true, the mixed strategy apparently continued throughout the Basketmaker II time frame.

Concerning settlement trends associated with the adoption of maize-based food production, and the transition to settled village life, the research design posed the following specific questions:

Chapter 13 Summary and Recommendations 310 What was the ratio of hunted foods to vegetable foods? How did changes in hunting technology affect subsistence strategy? Did hunting strategies change during this period, and if so, how? What was the ratio of cultigens to gathered foods? What changes occurred in subsistence technology, and why did they occur? How did grinding technology and processing facilities change and why? How did storage facilities and capacity change? When was pottery introduced and by what process? Why was brownware replaced by grayware, and how did the tradition of trachyte-tempered pottery develop?

The ceramic-related questions are obviously not relevant to the Sandy Rise Basketmaker II component, but the other questions potentially are. The ratio of hunted foods to vegetal foods was somewhat difficult to measure, given the poor preservation of faunal remains at the site. Still, the dearth of projectile points certainly suggests that hunting of medium and large game was not an especially important part of this site occupation. The presence of ground stone milling implements, and of hammerstones that were probably used to fashion these implements on-site, seems to underscore the importance of plant foods and their processing. The absence of storage pits at both Sandy Rise and NM-H-26-56—two Basketmaker II sites with substantial pithouses—is intriguing, especially considering that there were over 50 storage pits at a site in the southwest San Juan Basin that lacked any structural remains. Of course it is premature to draw sweeping conclusions from such a small sample of sites, but the pattern hints at the possibility that these still-mobile groups may have stored their surplus foods away from the main base camps, perhaps to conceal them from potential enemies and competitors.

The findings at Sandy Rise suggest the possibility that group territories were becoming more circumscribed at this time. The low incidence of Narbona Pass chert, a high-quality, highly prized material whose source is less than 12 miles (20 km) to the west, may indicate that the site's inhabitants did not enjoy the kind of access to this material that one might expect for residentially mobile groups occupying a large territory. The complete absence of obsidian at the site also potentially supports this scenario, and further suggests that regional exchange networks did not involve a very high volume of goods at this time (the Olivella shell bead notwithstanding). Insofar as this is all true, the pattern may be the combined result of population growth and a lack of development of social mechanisms that would allow for larger and more complexly integrated groups. If so, the net effect of population growth would have been an increasing fragmentation of groups, shrinkage of individual group territories, and poorly developed exchange networks between groups.

Architectural differences between the Basketmaker II occupations at Sandy Rise and NM-H-26- 56 may signal a broader trend in the evolution of Anasazi material traits. The occupations at these two sites occurred at least two centuries apart, and the structures at NM-H-26-56 (the later of the two sites) were larger, deeper, and contained more features and evidence of greater architectural investment than those at Sandy Rise. If these differences do indicate a broader trend, then these two sites represent important sign posts on the road leading to more impressive architectural developments of the later Anasazi periods.

THE CHACOAN SYSTEM

Although the research issues surrounding the development of the Chacoan system are potentially relevant to the US 491 project area as a whole, results of the 2006 investigations have only

Chapter 13 Summary and Recommendations 311 limited bearing on this research domain. The Pueblo II component at Sandy Rise was small, and the one at NM-H-46-55 was even smaller. The small masonry structure at Sandy Rise (Feature 3) was initially thought to be a field house constructed in support of agricultural activities, possibly including temporary storage of harvested maize and other crops. But not only did the excavations reveal a very small number of lithic and ceramic artifacts in this structure, there was a complete lack of midden staining or interior features, and the structure itself was so tiny that it would have been ill-suited for use as an overnight shelter for any extended period of time. Moreover, very little maize pollen and no maize phytoliths were present in the analyzed sediment sample from this site, and so the use of this structure as a temporary storage facility seems unlikely.

In Chapter 5, it was suggested that Feature 3 may have been a sort of “rest stop” shelter for people moving through this portion of the far-flung Chacoan regional network. The nearby extramural pits, one of which contained charred maize, may have been ovens where a meal or two was cooked during brief stops at this shelter. Interestingly, within the paltry lithic assemblage from Feature 3 was a core of Narbona Pass chert, whose source lies less than 20 km west of the Sandy Rise site. At Chaco Canyon, Narbona Pass chert was imported in large quantities during Pueblo II times, and it is possible that one function of the Feature 3 structure was to provide a stopover for individuals transporting this material down from the Chuska Mountains to Chaco Canyon.

POST-CHACOAN AND EARLY NAVAJO OCCUPATION OF THE CHUSKA VALLEY

No evidence pertaining to these research issues was uncovered during the 2006 data recovery investigations. There is thus no cause to elaborate on it here, except perhaps to say that the absence of Pueblo III remains at any of the sites is probably symptomatic of the sharply contracted pattern of land use in the Anasazi world following the collapse of the Chacoan system.

NAVAJO USE OF THE VALLEY DURING THE RESERVATION PERIOD (A.D. 1868 TO PRESENT)

Two of the sites investigated in 2006, NM-H-46-55 and NM-H-46-62, date from this period, but the two are very different kinds of sites. NM-H-46-55 was a residential site occupied in the early twentieth century (early 1920s to 1938), and the hogan ruin, artifacts, and middens at the site underscore the intensive nature of this occupation and the wide range of activities carried out there. Occupied following the arrival of the railroad in Gallup and Farmington, the site was littered with debris from manufactured packaged goods. Faunal remains reflected the raising and butchering of sheep and goats, but the remains were too few to make any definitive statements about butchering patterns or the effects of the stock reduction program on this particular farm. The presence of a single hogan suggests this was a nuclear-family residence, and the probable use of a central stove fashioned from a metal barrel and stovepipe is typical of Navajo dwellings from this time period. Overall, the site reflected both a degree of material acculturation as Navajos were being drawn into the national economy, as well as the preservation of important cultural traditions and rules governing the layout of architecture and the organization of on-site activities.

NM-H-46-62 was a very different site. The well-preserved stone ruin of Feature 1 turned out to be not a hogan, as was initially assumed, but rather a more limited use structure such as a

Chapter 13 Summary and Recommendations 312 windbreak. Its very small size, the complete lack of either artifacts or associated midden staining or interior features, and its south-facing entryway are all inconsistent with a residential hogan. Like Feature 1, Feature 2, which was thought to be a bread oven, also lacked any associated archaeological remains except for the concentration of stone rubble. The other features at the site, which were initially thought to be ash piles and rock alignments, all turned out to be of natural origin. The lack of any manufactured goods at this site suggests it may have been used earlier than NM-H-46-55, prior to the accessibility to such goods made possible by the arrival of the railroad in Gallup and Farmington.

GENERAL RESEARCH ISSUES

CHRONOLOGY

Pinning down the age of archaeological remains is a prerequisite for addressing most research issues, and chronological data come from several potential sources. For the US 491 project, the Basketmaker II remains at Sandy Rise were well-dated by the radiocarbon method. Projectile points and the characteristics of the debitage assemblage provided an indirect means of dating the site as well, but it was the radiocarbon dates that pinned down the occupation to the circa 400–200 B.C. time span. The ages of ceramic-bearing occupations, including the Pueblo II components at Sandy Rise and NM-H-46-55, and the Basketmaker III–Pueblo I component at Little Water Village, were determined primarily by cross-dating the recovered sherds, although the radiocarbon method was needed to date a Pueblo II extramural feature at Sandy Rise, which lacked ceramics. Appendix B provides full data on the radiocarbon dates from the project, all of which came from the Sandy Rise site.

PALEOENVIRONMENTAL RECONSTRUCTION

Conditions at Sandy Rise seemed potentially ripe for recovering data relevant to reconstructing past environments, and to an extent this was the case. Geomorphic evidence from the site provided a fairly clear picture of how the sand dune developed over time, as well as its proximity to a still-active floodplain that probably provided an important suite of resources for the site's various occupants. Botanical evidence was not very enlightening, however; both macro- and microbotanical remains reflected plant communities that are present in the area today, and the evidence was not sufficient to flesh out temporal changes in the biotic environment.

TECHNOLOGY

The Sandy Rise Basketmaker II component and, to a much lesser extent, the Little Water Village site, yielded material assemblages that allowed for a detailed study of flaked stone technological patterns. Petrified wood was the local flaked stone raw material in the project area, and it dominated the lithic assemblage at both sites, though it was scattered intermittently across the landscape. At Sandy Rise, petrified wood was collected and rather thoroughly reduced on-site, resulting in a flake assemblage dominated by small, lightweight pieces that lacked cortex. The much smaller assemblage from Little Water Village looked very different, with larger, thicker, and heavier flakes. The difference appears to have been due in part to long-term changes in flaked stone technologies, which shifted from an emphasis on biface production in Archaic times to a more expedient, core-flake tool pattern in the Anasazi tradition. The differences were also influenced by different collection strategies, with the Little Water Village assemblage obtained

Chapter 13 Summary and Recommendations 313 primarily through surface collection, which tends to produce larger, thicker, and heavier flakes than those recovered from fine-screened excavations, as was the case at Sandy Rise.

Comparison of the Sandy Rise assemblage with two other sites outside the project area underscores the explicit characterization of debitage assemblages made possible by the analysis method employed for this study (see Chapter 8). All three of these assemblages, derived from two different kinds of Archaic sites (Sandy Rise and Aqueduct) and one late prehistoric site (LA 457), all analyzed using the same method, involving a modified version of the Sullivan and Rozen (1985) classification scheme coupled with examination and interpretation of chi-square residuals. The results not only underscored the expected differences between an Archaic site (Sandy Rise) and a late prehistoric one (LA 457), but also revealed surprising differences between the two Archaic sites in the sample, and the results are explained primarily by functional differences between the two: Sandy Rise was an intensively occupied base camp, while the Aqueduct assemblage accumulated from many smaller occupations over thousands of years.

SUBSISTENCE

Potential subsistence remains were recovered from all three components at Sandy Rise and from the historic occupation at NM-H-46-55 (see Chapters 10–13). At Sandy Rise, the one analyzed early Late Archaic feature contained maize pollen, but no macrobotanical remains of cultigens. The age of this feature (1720–1520 B.C.) pre-dates any known occurrences of maize in the San Juan Basin, and so it seems likely that the maize pollen is a contaminant. The Basketmaker II component contained both maize and wild plant foods, suggesting a mixed collecting-foraging- farming economy. Not unexpectedly, maize was recovered from a Pueblo II flotation sample at Sandy Rise, although that sample also contained edible seeds from wild plants. At NM-H-46-55, the faunal and floral remains reflected the use of fully domesticated species (especially sheep and goats) typical of a twentieth-century rural site.

SOCIAL ORGANIZATION

The complete exposure of the Basketmaker II settlement at Sandy Rise provided an opportunity to explore the social-organizational dimensions within this small community. Differences in the sizes and contents of pit houses, along with significant variation in debitage assemblages between certain structures, hint at the possibility of some degree of social differentiation among the site's inhabitants (see Chapters 5 and 8). The pit houses at the center of the community were the largest, while the two smallest structures were located on the periphery. The smallest pit house also had a debitage assemblage that reflected especially thorough reduction, possibly indicating that the inhabitants of this structure may have been a bit disadvantaged in terms of access to the choicest raw materials. Still, whatever measure of social inequality may have existed in this tiny community, it almost certainly was not one based on a strongly formalized, hierarchical order, but was rather on the order of the differences one might expect within a local group or “big-man” society (see Johnson and Earle 1987).

PREHISTORIC SETTLEMENT PATTERNS

The US 491 data recovery project was not designed to investigate prehistoric settlement patterns. Still, the discoveries provide at least a hint of some of the changes in settlement types and organization over time. The early Late Archaic component at Sandy Rise suggests the kind of

Chapter 13 Summary and Recommendations 314 small, ephemeral camp that one would expect of highly mobile hunter-gatherers. The Basketmaker II occupation, with its substantial pit houses, occurred at a time when populations in the region, while still seasonally mobile, were beginning to settle down and engage in food production, and may have been feeling the effects of being squeezed into increasingly smaller territories. The Pueblo II structure at Sandy Rise was a limited-use shelter that served as a mere point on a cultural landscape dominated by Chacoan great houses and an extensive pattern of land use.

EXCHANGE AND REGIONAL INTERACTION

This research issue cannot be addressed in great detail with the data gathered by this project, but some tid bits of evidence are suggestive of patterns that are relevant here. For the Basketmaker II occupation at Sandy Rise, the paucity of nonlocal flaked stone raw materials—including a dearth of the high-quality Narbona Pass chert and the complete absence of obsidian—suggest that exchange networks in the region at 400–200 B.C. were poorly developed and the volume of goods circulated throughout the region was relatively low. Insofar as this was true, Basketmaker II settlements such as the one at Sandy Rise may have been rather isolated and provincial.

The Pueblo II period could not have been more different. At this time, the Chacoan system integrated the entire San Juan Basin within an interaction sphere that featured widespread similarities in religious, architectural, and iconographic elements, and involved a high-volume movement of goods, including Narbona Pass chert and construction timbers from the Chuska Mountains to Chaco Canyon. These materials would have moved across the present-day US 491 project area, and the small Pueblo II structure at Sandy Rise may have served as a shelter for travelers and transporters of goods moving through this part of the vast Chacoan world.

RECOMMENDATIONS

This report is offered as fulfillment of the data recovery plan. A great deal of data was collected during this effort, and those data have shed new light on the history and prehistory of the western San Juan Basin, and the Chuska Valley in particular. The investigations were sufficiently thorough that the field-data potential of these sites is essentially exhausted. Given the discovery of buried archaeological remains during both the testing and data recovery phases, the uncovering of additional buried remains beyond the boundaries of known sites cannot be ruled out. Any such discoveries during construction should be evaluated, and significant buried cultural resources should be treated prior to their final destruction. In addition, significant archaeological remains are known to exist outside the right-of-way at the Little Water Village site, and such remains may occur at any of these sites. Accordingly, should any ground- disturbing activities that fall under appropriate regulations be planned at any of these sites in the future, such work should be preceded by preparation and execution of a testing and/or data recovery plan.

REFERENCES

Aberle, David F. 1961 Navajo. In Matrilineal Kinship, edited by David M. Schneider and Kathleen Gough, pp. 96–

201. University of California Press, Berkeley and Los Angeles. 1982 The Peyote Religion among the Navajo. 2nd ed. University of Chicago Press, Chicago and

London.

Acklen, John C., Gary M. Brown, and G. Robert Phippen 1991 Lithic Debitage Analysis. In Archaeological Data Recovery at San Juan Company's La Plata

Mine, San Juan County, New Mexico, edited by Gary M. Brown, pp. 561-592. Technical Report No. 355, Mariah Associates, Inc., Albuquerque, New Mexico.

Adams, J. L.

1993 Toward Understanding the Technological Development of Manos and Metates. Kiva 58(3):331–344.

1999 Refocusing the Role of Food-Grinding Tools as Correlates for Subsistence Strategies in the U.S. Southwest. American Antiquity 64(3):475–498.

Adams, Robert McC.

1966 The Evolution of Urban Society: Early Mesopotamia and Prehispanic Mexico. Aldine Publishing, Chicago.

Adams, W. H.

2002 Machine Cut Nails and Wire Nails: American Production and Use for Dating 19th-Century and Early-20th-Century Sites. Historical Archaeology 36(4):66-88.

Ahler, Stanley A.

1989 Mass Analysis of Flaking Debris: Studying the Forest Rather than the Tree. In Alternative Approaches to Lithic Analysis, edited by D. O. Henry and G. H. Odell, pp. 85–118. Archeological Papers of the American Anthropological Association No. 1. Arlington.

Akins, N.J.

1985 Prehistoric Faunal Utilization in Chaco Canyon Basketmaker III through Pueblo III. In Environment and Subsistence of Chaco Canyon, edited by F.J. Mathien, pp. 305-445. Publications in Archeology 18E, Chaco Canyon Studies, National Park Service, Albuquerque.

Allan, William C.

1972 The Red Rock Project: Final Report. Laboratory of Anthropology Note No. 81. Museum of New Mexico, Santa Fe.

Allan, William C., John Beardsley, and Dan C. Witter

1977 Survey of the 1,600-Acre Addition. In Settlement and Subsistence along the Lower Chaco River: The CGP Survey, edited by Charles A. Reher, pp. 583–601. University of New Mexico Press, Albuquerque.

References 316 Altschul, Jeffrey H.

1978 The Development of the Chacoan Interaction Sphere. Journal of Anthropological Research 34:109–146.

Ambler, J. Richard

1983 Letter to Navajo Area Archaeologist, Bureau of Indian Affairs, Window Rock, Arizona. On file, Navajo Nation Historic Preservation Department, Window Rock, Arizona. (Case File BIA-NAO-NTM-83-404)

American Plastics Council [APC]

2006 “The History of Plastic,” AmericanPlasticsCouncil.org. Electronic document, http://www.americanplasticscouncil.org/s_apc/sec.asp?CID=310&DID=920 [accessed December 1, 2006].

Amick, D. S., and R. P. Mauldin

1997 Effects of Raw Material on Flake Breakage Patterns. Lithic Technology 22:18–32.

Anderson, Joseph K., and Dennis Gilpin

1983 Testing of Two Prehistoric Sites in the Red Rock Valley, Apache County, Northeastern Arizona: Final Report. Navajo Nation Cultural Resource Management Program Report No. 83-073. Window Rock, Arizona.

Anderson, Joseph K., and Susan E. Bearden

1992 Data Recovery at Nine Archaeological Sites at Antelope Point, Coconino County, Arizona. Navajo Nation Papers in Anthropology No. 27. Navajo Nation Archaeology Department, Window Rock, Arizona.

Andrefsky, William Jr.

1991 Inferring Trends in Prehistoric Settlement Behavior from Lithic Production Technology in the Southern Plains. North American Archaeologist 12:129-144.

Bailey, Garrick A., and Roberta Glenn Bailey

1980 Ethnohistory. In Prehistory and History of the Ojo Amarillo: Archaeological Investigations of Block II, Navajo Indian Irrigation Project, San Juan County, New Mexico, edited by David T. Kirkpatrick, pp. 1389–1523. Cultural Resources Management Division Report No. 276, Vol. 4. Department of Sociology and Anthropology, New Mexico State University, Las Cruces.

1982 Historic Navajo Occupation of the Northern Chaco Plateau. University of Tulsa, Tulsa. 1983 Ethnographic and Ethnohistoric Notes Concerning the Gallegos Mesa Navajo with Special

Emphasis on Those Families Living on Block III of the Navajo Indian Irrigation Project. In Human Adaptation and Cultural Change: The Archaeology of Block III, N.I.I.P., edited by Lawrence E. Vogler, pp. 1861–1926. Navajo Nation Papers in Anthropology No. 15, Vol. 4. Navajo Nation Cultural Resource Management Program, Window Rock, Arizona.

1986 A History of the Navajos: The Reservation Years. School of American Research Press, Santa Fe.

http://www.americanplasticscouncil.org/s_apc/sec.asp?CID=310&DID=920

http://www.americanplasticscouncil.org/s_apc/sec.asp?CID=310&DID=920

References 317

Bamforth, Douglas B. 1986 Technological Efficiency and Tool Curation. American Antiquity 51:38-50.

Beardsley, Richard K., Betty J. Meggars, Preston Holder, Alex D. Krieger, John Rinaldo, and Paul Kutche

1956 Functional and Evolutionary Implications of Community Patterning. In Seminars in Archaeology: 1955, organized and edited by Robert Wauchope, pp. 129–157. Society for American Archaeology Memoir No. 11. Salt Lake City.

Bell, W.H. and E.F. Castetter

1941 The Utilization of Yucca, Sotol, and Beargrass by the Aboriginies in the American Southwest. Biological Series 5(5). University of New Mexico Bulletin 372, Albuquerque.

Benally, Clyde

1982 Dineji Nakee Naahane’: A Utah Navajo History. San Juan School District, Monticello, Utah.

Benham, Blake L.

1966 Excavations of La Plata Phase Pithouses near Tohatchi, New Mexico. Laboratory of Anthropology Note No. 35. Museum of New Mexico, Santa Fe.

Benson, Larry, Linda Cordell, Kurt Vincent, Howard Taylor, John Stein, G. Lang Farmer, and Kiyoto Futa

2003 Ancient Maize from Chacoan Great Houses: Where Was It Grown? Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 100(2):13,111–13,115.

Berge, D. L.

1980 Simpson Springs Station: Historical Archaeology in Western Utah, 1974-1975. Bureau of Land Management Cultural Resource Series Publication Number 6. Utah State Office.

Berry, Michael S.

1982 Time, Space, and Transition in Anasazi Prehistory. University of Utah Press, Salt Lake City.

Berry, C.F., and M.S. Berry 1986 Chronological and Conceptual Models of the Southwestern Archaic. In Anthropology of the

Desert West, edited by C. Condie and D. Fowler. University of Utah Press.

Binford, Lewis R.

1977 Forty-seven Trips. In Stone Tools as Cultural Markers, edited by R.V.S. Wright, pp. 24-36. Australian Institute of Aboriginal Studies, Canberra.

1979 Organization and Formation Processes: Looking at Curated Technologies. Journal of Anthropological Research 35:255-273.

1980 Willow Smoke and Dog’s Tails: Hunter Gatherer Settlement Systems and Archaeological Site Formation. American Antiquity 45:4–20.

References 318

Birdsell, J. B. 1968 Some Predictions for the Pleistocene Based upon Equilibrium Systems among Recent

Hunters. In Man the Hunter, edited by Richard B. Lee and Irven DeVore, pp. 229–240. Aldine Publishing, Chicago.

Birks, Steve

2006 “Types and Examples of Pottery,” The Potteries: the Local History of Stoke-on-Trent, England. Electronic document, http://www.thepotteries.org/types/ [accessed November 29, 2006].

Bitting, A. W.

1912 The Canning of Foods: A Description of the Methods Followed in Commercial Canning. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Bureau of Chemistry, Bulletin No. 151. Washington: Government Printing Office.

Blitz, John H.

1993 Ancient Chiefdoms of the Tombigbee. University of Alabama Press, Tuscaloosa.

Boisvert, Richard A. 1979 Analysis of Debitage from Selected Sites. In An Archaeological Assessment of a Proposed

Transmission Line, Railroad Spur, and New Plant Site in Western Kentucky, by Cynthia Jobe, Roger C. Allen, and Richard A. Boisvert, pp. 124-130. Archaeological Report No. 22. Department of Anthropology, University of Kentucky, Lexington.

Bradbury, Andrew P. and Philip J. Carr

2004 Combining Aggregate and Individual Methods of Flake Debris Analysis: Aggregate Trend Analysis. North American Archaeologist 25(1):65-90.

Bradley, Ronna J., and Richard B. Sullivan

1994 A Study of Two Anasazi Communities in the San Juan Basin. Across the Colorado Plateau: Anthropological Studies for the Transwestern Pipeline Extension Project, Vol. 9. Office of Contract Archeology and Maxwell Museum of Anthropology, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque.

Brew, John Otis

1946 Archaeology of Alkali Ridge, Southeastern Utah. Papers of the Peabody Museum of American Archaeology and Ethnology No. 21. Harvard University, Cambridge.

Broilo, Frank J., and William C. Allan

1973 An Archaeological Salvage Excavation of a Basketmaker III Site on U.S. Highway 666, near Naschitti, New Mexico. Laboratory of Anthropology Note No. 82. Museum of New Mexico, Santa Fe.

Brown, David E. (editor)

1994 Biotic Communities: Southwestern United States and Northwestern Mexico. University of Utah Press, Salt Lake City.

http://www.thepotteries.org/types/

References 319

Brown, Gary M. 1986 Lithic Resource Acquisition, Exchange, and Production in the American Southwest. In The

Social and Economic Contexts of Technological Change, edited by Sander van der Leeuw and Robin Torrence, pp. 1-48. The World Archaeological Congress, Southampton.

Brown, Gary M., John A. Evaskovich, Richard G. Holloway, and C. Dean Wilson

1992 Archaeological Investigations at Grassy Canyon: A Gobernador Phase Navajo Habitation in the Navajo Reservoir District. Technical Report No. 535, Mariah Associates, Inc., Albuquerque, New Mexico.

Brown, M.E. and K.L. Brown

1993 Subsistence and other Cultural Behaviors as Reflected by the Vertebrate Faunal Remains. In Across the Colorado Plateau: Anthropological Studies for the Transwestern Pipeline Expansion project, Vol. 15, Subsistence and Environment, edited by J.C. Winter, pp. 327-381. Office of Contract Archaeology and Maxwell Museum of Anthropology, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque.

Brugge, David M.

1964 Vizcarra's Navajo Campaign of 1823. Arizona and the West 6:223–244. 1980 A History of the Chaco Navajos. Reports of the Chaco Center No. 4. USDI National Park

Service and U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C. 1986 Tsegai: An Archaeological Ethnohistory of the Chaco Region. USDI National Park Service,

Washington, D.C.

Brugge, David M., Wesley L. Bliss, and Robert H. Crabtree n.d. An Archaeological Traverse of the Four Corners Pipeline. Ms. on file, Museum of Northern

Arizona, Flagstaff.

Buckles, W. G. (editor) 1978 Anthropological Investigations Near the Crest of the Continent, 1975-1978, Vol. II, Chapters

7-11. Manuscript on file Department of Anthropology, University of Southern Colorado, Pueblo, Colorado.

Burchett, Tim W., Bradley J. Vierra, and Kenneth L. Brown

1994 Excavation and Interpretation of Aceramic and Archaic Sites. Across the Colorado Plateau: Anthropological Studies for the Transwestern Pipeline Expansion Project, Vol. 14. Office of Contract Archeology and Maxwell Museum of Anthropology, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque.

Busch, J.

1981 An Introduction to the Tin Can. Historical Archaeology, 15(1):95-104.

Callahan, Errett 1979 The Basics of Biface Knapping in the Eastern Fluted Point Tradition: A Manual for

Flintknappers and Lithic Analysts. Archaeology of Eastern North America 7(1):1-80.

References 320

Cameron, Catherine M. 1984 A Regional View of Chipped Stone Raw Material Use in Chaco Canyon Based Perspectives.

In Recent Research on Chaco Prehistory, edited by W. James Judge and John D. Schelberg, pp. 137– 153. Reports of the Chaco Center No. 8. Division of Cultural Research, USDI National Park Service, Albuquerque.

2001 Pink Chert, Projectile Points and the Chacoan Regional System. American Antiquity 66:79– 102.

Can Manufacturers Institute (CMI)

2006 “History of the Can.” Electronic Document, http://www.cancentral.com/hist_overview.cfm [accessed December 28, 2006].

Carlson, Christopher A. (editor)

In preparation Monitoring and Data Recovery Excavations at LA 457, Alamogordo, New Mexico. SWCA Environmental Consultants, Albuquerque.

Carlson, Roy L.

1970 White Mountain Redware: A Pottery Tradition of East-Central Arizona and Western New Mexico. Anthropological Papers of the University of Arizona No. 19. University of Arizona Press, Tucson.

Carmichael, D. L.

1986 Archaeological Survey in the Southern Tularosa Basin of New Mexico. Historic and Natural Resources Report No. 3. Environmental Management Office, Directorate of Engineering and Housing, U.S. Army Air Defense Artillery Center, Fort Bliss, Texas. Publications in Anthropology No. 10. El Paso Centennial Museum, University of Texas, El Paso.

Castetter, Edward F., and Willis H. Bell

1942 Pima and Papago Indian Agriculture. University of New Mexico Press, Albuquerque.

Castetter, E.F., W.H. Bell, and A.R. Grove

1938 The Early Utilization and the Distribution of Agave in the American Southwest. University of New Mexico Press, Albuquerque.

Chamberlin, Ralph V.

1911 The Ethno-botany of the Gosiute Indians of Utah. Memoirs of the American Anthropological Association, Vol. II, Part 5. Menasha, Wisconsin.

Chapman, Richard C.

1967 Toadlena Highway Salvage, Final Report. Laboratory of Anthropology Note No. 102. Museum of New Mexico, Santa Fe.

1977 Analysis of the Lithic Assemblages. In Settlement and Subsistence Along the Lower Chaco River, edited by Charles A. Reher, pp. 371-452. The University of New Mexico Press, Albuquerque.

http://www.cancentral.com/hist_overview.cfm

References 321

Cheek, Charles D., Annetta L. Cheek, Steven Hackenberger, and Kevin Leehan 1977 Settlement Patterns and Contract Archaeology: An Oklahoma Example. In Conservation

Archaeology: A Guide for Cultural Resource Management Studies, edited by Michael B. Schiffer and George J. Gumerman, pp. 379–389. Academic Press, New York.

Childe, V. Gordon

1950 The Urban Revolution. Town Planning Review 21:3–17.

Clements, James

1982 Archaeological Testing at NM A-14-22, Naschitti, New Mexico. Ms. on file, Department of Anthropology, Northern Arizona University, Flagstaff (Project No. 471-NM-A), and Navajo Area Indian Health Service, Window Rock, Arizona (Project No. NA 77-703).

Collins, J. H.

1924 The Story of Canned Foods. E.P. Dutton & Company, New York.

Collins, Michael B. 1975 Lithic Technology as a Means of Processual Inference. In Lithic Technology, Making and

Using Stone Tools, edited by Earl Swanson, pp. 14-334. Mouton, The Hague.

Colton, Harold S. 1955 Pottery Types of the Southwest, Wares 8A, 8B, 9A, and 9B, Tusayan Gray and White Ware,

Little Colorado Gray and White Ware. Museum of Northern Arizona Ceramic Series No. 3A. Flagstaff.

Colton, Harold S., and Lyndon L. Hargrave

1937 Handbook of Northern Arizona Pottery Wares. Museum of Northern Arizona Bulletin No. 11. Flagstaff.

Condon, Glenn S.

1977 Excavations at Site LA 14893, San Juan County, New Mexico: Mitigation of a Pueblo Period Site along U.S. 666, New Mexico State Highway Department Project FLH-12(17). Laboratory of Anthropology Note No. 163. Museum of New Mexico, Santa Fe.

1980 Investigation near Sanostee for Nielsons, Inc. Laboratory of Anthropology Report No. 161. Museum of New Mexico, Santa Fe.

1982 The Little Water Project: Archaeological Investigation of Seven Sites in the Chuska Valley of Northwestern New Mexico. Laboratory of Anthropology Note No. 295. Museum of New Mexico, Santa Fe.

1988 Little Water Project: An Archaeological Investigation of Seven Sites in the Chuska Valley, Northwestern New Mexico. Laboratory of Anthropology Note No. 295. Museum of New Mexico, Santa Fe.

Condon, Glenn S., and Steven A. Koczan

1977 Cultural Resource Investigation and Recommendation Report, New Mexico State Highway Department Project FLH-12(17), FLH-12(18) 2.9 Miles North of Sheep Springs-North.

References 322

Laboratory of Anthropology Note No. 209. Contract Archeology Section, Museum of New Mexico, Santa Fe.

Cooley, M. E., J. W. Harshbarger, J. P. Akers, and W. F. Hardt

1969 The Regional Hydrogeology of the Navajo and Hopi Indian Reservations, Arizona, New Mexico, and Utah. Geological Survey Professional Paper No. 521-A. U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C.

Cordell, Linda S.

1979 Prehistory: Eastern Anasazi. In Southwest, edited by Alfonso Ortiz, pp. 131–151. Handbook of North American Indians, Vol. 9, William C. Sturtevant, general editor. Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C.

Cordell, Linda S., and W. James Judge

2000 Society and Polity. Archaeology Southwest 14(1):18–19.

Cowan, Frank L.

1999 Making Sense of Flake Scatters: Lithic Technological Strategies and Mobility. American Antiquity 64:593-607.

Crabtree, Don E.

1973 Experiments in Replicating Hohokam Points. Tebiwa 16:10-45.

Cronk, Lynn E. 1982 Archeological Testing at LA 31675, LA 31677, LA 31678, and LA 31679 near Pinabete

Arroyo, Northwestern New Mexico. Laboratory of Anthropology Note No. 293. Museum of New Mexico, Santa Fe.

Curtin, L. S. M.

1984 By the Prophet of the Earth. University of Arizona Press, Tucson.

Cushing, F.H.

1920 Zuni Breadstuff. Indian Notes and Monographs Vol. 8, Museum of the American Indian, Heye Foundation, New York.

Cushion, John and Mary Cushion

1992 A Collector’s History of British Porcelain. Antique Collectors’ Club, Ltd., Woodbridge, Suffolk.

Daifuku, Hiroshi

1961 Jeddito 264: A Report on the Excavation of a Basket Maker III/Pueblo I Site in Northeastern Arizona with a Review of Some Current Theories in Southwestern Archaeology. Reports of the Awatovi Expedition No. 7, Papers of the Peabody Museum of American Archaeology and Ethnology Vol. 33, No. 1. Harvard University, Cambridge.

References 323

Damp, Jonathan 1999 Chuska Chronologies, Houses, and Hogans: Archaeological and Ethnographic Inquiry along

N30-N31 between Mexican Springs and Navajo, McKinley County, New Mexico. 4 vols. Zuni Cultural Resource Enterprise Report No. 466, Series No. 10. Pueblo of Zuni, New Mexico.

Deagan, Kathleen

1987 Artifacts of the Spanish Colonies of Florida and the Caribbean, 1500-1800, Volume I: Ceramics, Glassware, and Beads. Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington, D.C.

DeBoer, Warren R.

1988 Subterranean Storage and the Organization of Surplus: The View from Eastern North America. Southeastern Archaeology 7(1):1-20.

Dering, P.

1999 Earth Oven Plant Processing in Archaic Period Economies: An Example from a Semi-arid Savannah in South-Central North America. In American Antiquity 64(4):659-674.

Dick, Herbert W.

1965 Bat Cave. School of American Research Monograph No. 27. Santa Fe.

Dick-Peddie, William A.

1993 New Mexico Vegetation: Past, Present, and Future. University of New Mexico Press, Albuquerque.

Di Peso, Charles C.

1968 Casas Grandes and the Gran Chichimeca. El Palacio 75(4):45–61. 1974 Casas Grandes: A Fallen Trading Center of the Gran Chichimeca. 8 vols. (Vols. 4–8

authored with John B. Rinaldo and Gloria J. Fenner). Amerind Foundation, Dragoon, Arizona, and Northland Press, Flagstaff.

Doleman, W. H.

1997 Analysis of Fire-cracked Rock from LA 37450. In Prehistoric Occupations Near the Lower Placitas Arroyo: Excavations Along State Road 26 West of Hatch, New Mexico, edited by W.H. Doleman, pp. 157-177. Office of Contract Archaeology, University of New Mexico Report No. 185-511. Albuquerque, New Mexico

Downer, Alan S.

1989 Anthropology, Historic Preservation, and the Navajo: A Case Study in Cultural Resource Management on Indian Lands. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Anthropology, University of Missouri, Columbia.

Drake, Doug

2007 Flaked Stone Analysis. In Archaeological Investigations Near Canyon de Chelly: Excavation of Four Sites Along Navajo Rout 27, Chinle-Nazlini, Apache County, Arizona, edited by Dennis Gilpin, Joshua Edwars, and Doug Drake, pp. 395-425. Prepared for the Navajo Nation

References 324

Historic Preservation Department Roads Planning Program. SWCA Cultural Resources Report No. 04-01, Phoenix.

Drollinger, Harold, and Marianne Marek

1991 Archaeological Testing of Six Prehistoric Sites along Navajo Route 37, McKinley County, New Mexico. Zuni Archaeology Program Report No. 334. Pueblo of Zuni, New Mexico.

Dunmire, W.W. and G.D. Tierney

1995 Wild Plants of the Pueblo Province. Museum of New Mexico Press, Santa Fe.

Durand, Kathy Roler

2003 Function of Chaco-Era Great Houses. Kiva 62(2):141–169.

Dykeman, Douglas D.

1987 An Archaeological Survey of the Navajo Tribal Utility Authority's Proposed Black House Valley Power Line, near Two Grey Hills, San Juan County, New Mexico (NTUA W.O. #11- 620-2277.1). Navajo Nation Cultural Resource Management Program Report No. 87-079. Window Rock, Arizona.

2003 Chuskan Community in the Anasazi World. In Anasazi Archaeology at the Millennium: Proceedings of the Sixth Occasional Anasazi Symposium, edited by Paul F. Reed, pp. 89–96. Center for Desert Archaeology, Tucson.

Eddington, Patrick, and Susan Makov

1995 Trading Post Guidebook. Northland Press, Flagstaff.

Ellis, Linda Wooden 1997 Hot Rock Technology. In Hot Rock Cooking on the Edwards Plateau: Four Burned Rock

Midden Sites in West Central Texas, edited by Linda W. Ellis, Darrell G. Creel, and Glenn T. Goode, pp. 43-81. Texas Archaeological Research Laboratory, The University of Texas at Austin, Studies in Archeology 22; Texas Department of Transportation, Environmental Affairs Department, Archeology Studies Program, Report 2.

Elstien, Elizabeth R.

1991 A Lithic Analysis of Six Anasazi Sites on the Hovenweep Laterals. In Hovenweep Laterals, edited by James N. Morris, pp. 763-918, Complete Archaeological Service Associates (CASA 90-16), Cortez, Colorado.

1999 Lithic Analysis: Dove Creek Canal Reach III Project. In Dove Creek Canal Reach III, edited by William D. McNamee and Nancy S. Hammack, pp. 325-394. Complete Archaeological Service Associates (CASA 92-72), Cortez, Colorado.

Elyea, Janette M., and Patrick Hogan

1983a Ground Stone Tools. In Economy and Interaction along the Lower Chaco River, edited by Patrick Hogan and Joseph Winter, pp.393–402. Office of Contract Archeology and Maxwell Museum of Anthropology, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque.

1983b Regional Interaction: The Archaic Adaptation. In Economy and Interaction along the Lower

Chaco River, edited by Patrick Hogan and Joseph C. Winter, pp. 393–402. Office of

References 325

Contract Archeology and Maxwell Museum of Anthropology, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque.

English, Nathan B., Julio L. Betancourt, Jeffrey S. Dean, and Jay Quade

2001 Strontium Isotopes Reveal Distant Sources of Architectural Timber in Chaco Canyon, New Mexico. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 98:11,891–11,896.

Eschman, Peter N.

1983 Archaic Site Typology and Chronology. In Economy and Interaction along the Lower Chaco River, edited by Patrick Hogan and Joseph C. Winter, pp. 375–384. Office of Contract Archeology and Maxwell Museum of Anthropology, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque.

Farwell, Robin E.

1980 Excavations at LA 12563: A Nineteenth and Twentieth Century Navajo Site, San Juan County, New Mexico. Laboratory of Anthropology Notes No. 142. Museum of New Mexico, Santa Fe.

Fehr, Russell T., and James G. Enloe

1981 The Burnham Mine Archaeological Survey: Human Occupation in the Lower Chaco Region, Northwestern New Mexico. Navajo Nation Cultural Resource Management Program Report No. 81-139. Window Rock, Arizona.

Fenneman, N. M. 1931 Physiography of the Western United States. McGraw Hill, New York.

Fetterman, Jerry and Linda Honeycutt

1982 Testing and Excavation Report: MAPCO's Rocky Mountain Liquid Hydrocarbons Pipeline, Southwest Colorado. Woodward-Clyde Consultants, San Francisco, California.

1995 Excavations at Northwest Pipeline Corporation's Pleasant View Compressor Station, Southwestern Colorado. Woods Canyon Archaeological Consultants, Yellow Jacket, Colorado.

Fetterman, Jerry, Jannifer Gish, Linda Honeycutt, Lisa Huckell, Lori Reed, Marian Rohman, Deb

Silverman, Paul Stirniman, and John Torres 2001 Data Recovery of Three Sites Aong El Paso Field Services' Trunk N Loop Pipeline, San Juan

County, Colorado. Woods Canyon Archaeological Consultants, Yellow Jacket, Colorado.

Florida Museum of Natural History 2006 “Porcelain, Bone China,” Historical Archaeology Digital Type Collection. Electronic

document, http://www.flmnh.ufl.edu/histarch/gallery_types/ [accessed November 29, 2006].

Fontana, B. L., and J. C. Greenleaf 1962 Johnny Ward’s Ranch: A Study in Historic Archaeology. The Kiva 28(1-2):1-115.

Fowler, Andrew P., John R. Stein, and Roger Anyon 1987 An Archaeological Reconnaissance of West-Central New Mexico: The Anasazi Monuments

Project. Ms. on file, Zuni Cultural Resource Enterprise, Pueblo of Zuni, New Mexico.

http://www.flmnh.ufl.edu/histarch/gallery_types/

References 326

Fried, Morton H. 1967 The Evolution of Political Society: An Essay in Political Anthropology. Random House,

New York.

Frisbie, Theodore R. 1978 High Status Burials in the Great Southwest: An Interpretive Synthesis. In Across the

Chichimec Sea: Papers in Honor of J. Charles Kelley, edited by Carrol L. Riley and Basil C. Hedrick, pp. 202–227. Southern Illinois University Press, Carbondale.

1980 Social Ranking in Chaco Canyon, New Mexico: A Mesoamerican Reconstruction. Transactions of the Illinois State Academy of Science 72(4):60–69.

Frison, George C. and Bruce A. Bradley

1980 Folsom Tools and Technology at the Hanson Site, Wyoming. University of New Mexico Press, Albuquerque.

Gaines, Sylvia W.

1983 Current Research, Southwest. American Antiquity 48:850–853.

Gallagher, Marsha V. L.

1972 Contemporary Ethnobotany among the Apache of the Clarkdale, Arizona Area. Unpublished Master's thesis, Northern Arizona University, Flagstaff.

Gilpin, Dennis

1982 Historic Sites Research Design. In Gallegos Mesa Settlement and Subsistence: A Set of Explanatory Models for Cultural Resources on Blocks VIII, IX, X, and XI, Navajo Indian Irrigation Project, by Lawrence E. Vogler, Dennis Gilpin, and Joseph K. Anderson, pp. 549– 589. Navajo Nation Papers in Anthropology No. 12, Vol. 2. Navajo Nation Cultural Resource Management Program, Window Rock, Arizona.

1985 Archaeological and Ethnohistoric Investigations at the Jack Johnson Mine Area, Coyote Canyon, McKinley County, New Mexico. Navajo Nation Cultural Resource Management Program Report No. 85-375. Window Rock, Arizona.

1986 An Inspection of a Possible Pre–Nineteenth-Century Navajo Burial near Burnham Trading Post, San Juan County, New Mexico. Navajo Nation Cultural Resource Management Program Report No. 86-153. Window Rock, Arizona.

1989 Great Houses and Pueblos in Northeastern Arizona. Paper presented at the 1989 Pecos Conference, Bandelier National Monument, Los Alamos.

1990a Site Description, NM-H-47-40, Toadlena, San Juan County, New Mexico. Ms on file, Navajo Nation Archaeology Department, Window Rock, Arizona.

1990b Statistics from 40 Years of Salvage Archaeology in the Navajo Country. Paper presented at the 1990 Pecos Conference, Blanding, Utah.

1993 Historical Archaeology on the Navajo Indian Irrigation Project. In Dáá'ák'eh Nitsaa: An Overview of the Cultural Resources of the Navajo Indian Irrigation Project, Northwestern New Mexico, pp. 191–281. Navajo Nation Papers in Anthropology No. 29. Navajo Nation Archaeology Department, Window Rock, Arizona.

References 327

1994 Lukachukai and Salina Springs: Late Archaic/Early Basketmaker Habitation Sites in the Chinle Valley, Northeastern Arizona. Kiva 60:203–218.

1995 Chronology. In Late Pueblo II Settlement and Subsistence on Puerco Ridge: Archaeological Data Recovery along Navajo Route 2007 Extension, Chambers-Sanders Trust Lands, Apache County, Arizona, edited by Dennis Gilpin and David H. Greenwald, pp. 611–625. SWCA Archaeological Report No. 95-63. Flagstaff.

1998 Archaeological Investigations in the Peach Springs Chacoan Community: Data Recovery on Navajo Route 9, Segment 5-1, McKinley County, New Mexico. SWCA Archaeological Report No. 98-15. Flagstaff.

1999 Archaeological Testing on Navajo Route 9, Segment 2-1, McKinley County, New Mexico. SWCA Archaeological Report No. 98-153. Flagstaff.

2007 Social Transformations and Community Organization in the Southwest San Juan Basin, New Mexico: Archaeological Investigations along Navajo Route 9, Twin Lakes to Standing Rock, McKinley County, New Mexico. Draft Final Report, SWCA, Flagstaff.

Gilpin, Dennis, Douglas D. Dykeman, and Paul F. Reed

1996 Anasazi Community Architecture in the Chuska Valley. New Mexico Archaeological Council, Albuquerque.

Gilpin, Dennis, and Andrew P. Fowler

1985 A Proposed Plan for Mitigating Adverse Effects of Coal Mining on Cultural Resources in a Portion of the Consolidation Coal Company Burnham Mine, San Juan County, New Mexico. Ms. on file, Navajo Nation Cultural Resource Management Program, Window Rock, Arizona.

Gilpin, Dennis, Randal R. Fox, and Nicole L. Kilburn (compilers and editors)

2000 Archaeological Investigations in the Southwest San Juan Basin: Data Recovery along Navajo Route 9, Segment 2-1, Tohatchi Flats to Coyote Canyon, McKinley County, New Mexico. SWCA Cultural Resources Report No. 00-49. Flagstaff.

2007 Archaeological Investigations in the Southwest San Juan Basin: Data Recovery along Navajo

Route 9, Segment 2-1, Tohatchi Flats to Coyote Canyon, McKinley County, New Mexico. SWCA Cultural Resources Report No. 00-49. Flagstaff

Gilpin, Dennis, Rena Martin, Tim McEnany, Clifford Werito, and Antoinette Anderson

1985 An Archaeological Survey of 783 Acres on the Lower Chaco Wash and Northern Chaco Plateau, San Juan County, New Mexico, for the Arizona Public Service Company's Proposed Four Corners Generating Station Fly Ash Pond Expansion Project. Navajo Nation Cultural Resource Management Program Report No. 85-44. Window Rock, Arizona.

References 328

Gilpin, Dennis, and Jim A. Railey 2004 Archaeological Testing Plan for 25 Sites along U.S. 491, McKinley and San Juan Counties,

New Mexico. SWCA Cultural Resources Report No. 2004-25. Albuquerque.

Gladwin, Harold S. 1945 The Chaco Branch: Excavations at White Mound and in the Red Mesa Valley. Medallion

Papers No. 33. Gila Pueblo, Globe, Arizona.

Glass Online 2007 “A Brief History of Glass,” Glass Online. Electronic Document,

http://www.glassonline.com/infoserv/history.html [accessed December 28, 2006].

Goetze, Christine E., and Barbara J. Mills

1993 Classification Criteria for Wares and Types. In Across the Colorado Plateau. Anthropological Studies for the Transwestern Pipeline Expansion Project: Interpretation of Ceramic Artifacts, vol. 16, edited by Barbara J. Mills, Christine E. Goetze, and Maria Nieves Zedeño, pp. 21– 185. Office of Contract Archeology and Maxwell Museum of Anthropology, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque.

Goff, Joell, and Lori Stephens Reed

1998 Classification Criteria for Temper, Generic Ceramic Types, and Specific Ceramic Types. In Exploring Ceramic Production, Distribution, and Exchange in the Southern Chuska Valley: Analytical Results from the El Paso Natural Gas North System Expansion Project. Pipeline Archaeology 1990–1993: The El Paso Natural Gas North System Expansion Project, New Mexico and Arizona, vol. 11, edited by L. S. Reed, J. Goff, and K. N. Hensler, pp. 2-1–2-74. Report WCRM(F)074. Western Cultural Resource Management, Inc., Farmington, New Mexico.

Goodman, John

2007 NM-Q-14-47/LA 32989. In Archaeological Investigations in the Southwest San Juan Basin: Data Recovery along Navajo Route 9, Segment 2-1, Tohatchi Flats to Coyote Canyon, McKinley County, New Mexico, Volume 1: Introduction, Setting, and Site Descriptions, edited and compiled by Dennis Gilpin, Randal R. Fox, and Nicole L. Kilburn, pp. 371-386. SWCA Cultural Resources Report No. 00-49. SWCA, Inc., Environmental Consultants, Flagstaff.

Granger, A. Stanley

1977 Archaeological Clearance Investigations, BIA, Branch of Roads, Route N30, Mexican Springs, Navajo Indian Reservation, Land District 14, McKinley County, New Mexico. Final Report for Excavation of Site NA 10,764 (A-75-146). Museum of Northern Arizona, Flagstaff.

Grebinger, Paul

1973 Prehistoric Social Organization in Chaco Canyon, New Mexico: An Alternative Reconstruction. The Kiva 39:3–23.

http://www.glassonline.com/infoserv/history.html

http://www.glassonline.com/infoserv/history.html

References 329

1978 Prehistoric Social Organization in Chaco Canyon, New Mexico: An Evolutionary Perspective. In Discovering Past Behavior: Experiments in the Archaeology of the American Southwest, edited by Paul Grebinger, pp. 73–100. Gordon and Breach, New York.

Gregory, Herbert E.

1916 The Navajo Country: A Geographic and Hydrographic Reconnaissance. U.S. Geological Survey Water Supply Paper No. 380. Washington, D.C.

Grissino-Mayer, Henri D.

1995 Tree-Ring Reconstructions of Climate and Fire History at El Malpais National Monument, New Mexico. Ph.D. Dissertation, Department of Geosciences, University of Arizona, Tucson.

Guernsey, Samuel J., and Alfred Vincent Kidder

1921 Basketmaker Caves of Northeastern Arizona. Papers of the Peabody Museum of American Archaeology and Ethnology Vol. 8, No. 2. Harvard University, Cambridge.

Hagberg, Elizabeth Boies

1939 Southwestern Indian Burial Practices. Unpublished Master’s thesis, Department of Anthropology, University of Arizona, Tucson.

Hall, Stephen A.

2005 Geomorphology and Geoarchaeology. In Final Report on Data Recovery at Phase 1 of the Mariposa East Property Development in Rio Rancho, Sandoval County, New Mexico. pp. 102-115. SWCA Cultrual Report number 2005-69.

Hammack, Laurens C.

1963 LA 5539: The Tohatchi School Site. Laboratory of Anthropology Note No. 18. Museum of New Mexico, Santa Fe.

1964[?] The Tohatchi Road Salvage Project: 1963–64. Laboratory of Anthropology Note No. 28. Museum of New Mexico, Santa Fe.

Hammett, J. E., and P. J. McBride

1993 Paleoethnobotanical Evidence from Aceramic Sites. In Across the Colorado Plateau: Anthropological Studies for the Transwestern Pipeline Expansion Project, Vol. 15, Subsistence and Environment, edited by J.C. Winter, pp. 429-442. Office of Contract Archeology, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque.

Hard, R. J.

1990 Agricultural Dependence in the Mountain Mogollon. In Perspectives on Southwestern Prehistory, edited by P. E. Minnis and C. L. Redman, pp. 135–149. Westview Press, Boulder, Colorado.

Harrington, H. D.

1967 Edible Native Plants of the Rocky Mountains. University of New Mexico Press, Albuquerque.

References 330 Harris, Arthur H., James Schoenwetter, and A. Helene Warren

1967 An Archaeological Survey of the Chuska Valley and the Chaco Plateau, Part I: Natural Science Studies. Museum of New Mexico Research Records No. 4. Museum of New Mexico Press, Santa Fe.

Hartman, Dana

1978 NA 15723 Progress Report. Ms. on file, Museum of Northern Arizona, Flagstaff (Project A- 78-107).

Hassan, Fekri

1981 Demographic Archaeology. Academic Press, New York.

Haury, Emil W., and Lyndon L. Hargrave

1931 Recently Dated Pueblo Ruins in Arizona. Smithsonian Miscellaneous Collections Vol. 82, No. 11. Washington, D.C.

Hays, Kelley Ann

1991 Rock Art of the Prayer Rock District, Apache County, Arizona: Report to the Navajo Nation Historical Preservation Department and Arizona State Museum. Ms. on file, Navajo Nation Historical Preservation Department, Window Rock, Arizona.

Hays-Gilpin, Kelley, Joell Goff, and Kathy Niles Hensler

1999 Analysis of Ceramics. In Anasazi Community Development in Cove-Redrock Valley: Investigations along the N33 Road in Apache County, Arizona, by P. Reed and K. Niles Hensler, pp. 445–550. Navajo Nation Papers in Anthropology No. 33. Navajo Nation Archaeology Department, Window Rock, Arizona.

Hays-Gilpin, Kelley, and Eric van Hartesveldt (editors)

1998 Prehistoric Ceramics of the Puerco Valley: The 1995 Chambers-Sanders Trust Lands Ceramic Conference. Museum of Northern Arizona Ceramic Series No. 7. Flagstaff..

Henderson, Eric B., and Jerrold E. Levy

1975 Survey of Navajo Community Studies, 1936–1974. Lake Powell Research Project Bulletin No. 6. Institute of Geophysics and Planetary Physics, University of California, Los Angeles.

Henderson, Ruth W.

1980 Testing and Evaluation of Site AZ-E-8-10, Apache County, Arizona. New Mexico State University, San Juan Campus, Cultural Resource Management Program Report No. 80-SJC- 146. Farmington, New Mexico.

1983 Site H-26-56. In Cultural Resource Investigations on Gallegos Mesa: Excavations in Blocks VIII and IX, and Testing Operations in Blocks X and XI, Navajo Indian Irrigation Project, San Juan County, New Mexico, by Lawrence E. Vogler, Dennis Gilpin, and Joseph K. Anderson, pp. 338–408. Navajo Nation Papers in Anthropology No. 24, Vol. 1. Navajo Nation Cultural Resource Management Program, Window Rock, Arizona.

References 331

Hester, James J. 1962 Early Navajo Migrations and Acculturation in the Southwest. Museum of New Mexico

Papers in Anthropology No. 6. Albuquerque.

Hogan, Patrick

1985 Prehistoric Settlement Patterns in West-Central New Mexico: The Fence Lake Coal Lease Surveys. Office of Contract Archeology and Maxwell Museum of Anthropology, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque.

1994 Foragers to Farmers: The Adoption of Agriculture in the Northern Southwest. In Archaic Hunter-Gatherer Archaeology in the American Southwest, edited by B. Vierra, pp. 155-184. Contributions in Anthropology No. 13, Eastern New Mexico University, Portales.

Hogan, Patrick, and Joseph C. Winter (editors)

1983 Economy and Interaction along the Lower Chaco River: The Navajo Mine Archeological Program, Mining Area III, San Juan County, New Mexico. Office of Contract Archeology and Maxwell Museum of Anthropology, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque.

Honeycutt, Linda, and Jeffy Fetterman, editors

1994 Excavations Along the Arkansas Loop Pipeline Corridor, Northwestern New Mexico. Woods Canyon Archaeological Consultants, Yellow Jacket, Colorado.

Hook, Paula, and Joe E. Heimlick

2006 “A History of Packaging,” Ohio State University Fact Sheet. Electronic document, http://ohioline.osu.edu/cd-fact/0133.html [accessed December 1, 2006].

Huber, Edgar K.

1984 Archaeological Data Recovery at Three Sites along Route N-13, South of Red Valley, Arizona. Navajo Nation Cultural Resource Management Program Report No. 83-352. Window Rock, Arizona.

Huber, Edgar K., and Heather J. Miljour

2004 Early Maize on the Colorado Plateau: New Dates from West-Central New Mexico. Paper presented at the Ninth Biennial Southwest Symposium, Chihuahua City, Chihuahua, Mexico.

Huckell, Bruce B.

1973 The Hardt Creek Site. The Kiva 39(2):171–197. 1996 The Archaic Prehistory of the North American Southwest. Journal of World Prehistory

10(3):305–373. 1999 Test Excavations at a Folsom Site in the Middle Rio Grande Valley. Paper presented at the

1999 Pecos Conference, Pinedale, Arizona. 2000 The Boca Negra Wash Site: A New Folsom Site in the Middle Rio Grande Valley.

NewsMAC 2000(1):5–7.

Huckell, L.W. 2000 Paleoethnobotany. In A Highway through Time: Archaeological Investigations along NM 90,

in Grant and Hidalgo Counties, New Mexico, pp. 509-564. TRC, Albuquerque.

http://ohioline.osu.edu/cd-fact/0133.html

http://ohioline.osu.edu/cd-fact/0133.html

References 332

Hughes, Bernard and Therle Hughes 1960 English Porcelain and Bone China, 1743–1850. 2nd ed. Lutterworth Press, London. (First

published 1955.)

International Aluminium Institute 2000 “The History of Aluminium,” World-Aluminium.org History. Electronic document,

http://www.world-aluminium.org/history/index.html [accessed December 28, 2006].

Irwin-Williams, Cynthia

1973 The Oshara Tradition: Origins of Anasazi Culture. Eastern New Mexico University Contributions in Anthropology No. 5, Vol. 1. Portales.

James, Charles D., III

1976a Archaeological Clearance Investigations, Bureau of Indian Affairs, Branch of Roads, Route N30, Mexican Springs, Navajo Indian Reservation, Land District 14, McKinley County, New Mexico. Preliminary Report for Excavation of Sites NA 10,763 and 10,764. Museum of Northern Arizona, Flagstaff.

1976b Historic Navajo Studies in Northern Arizona. Museum of Northern Arizona Research Paper No. 1, Anthropology Research Report No. 1. Museum of Northern Arizona, Flagstaff.

Jeffers, Ulie H., Jr.

1981 Monitoring of Construction Activities on the Sanostee North Water Line. Archaeological Report No. 469-NM-A. Department of Anthropology, Northern Arizona University, Flagstaff.

Jeske, Robert J.

1992 Energetic Efficiency and Lithic Technology: An Upper Mississippian Example. American Antiquity 57:467-481.

Jett, Stephen C., and Virginia E. Spencer

1981 Navajo Architecture: Forms, History, Distributions. University of Arizona Press, Tucson.

Jochim, Michael A.

1976 Hunter-Gatherer Subsistence and Settlement: A Predictive Model. Academic Press, New York.

Johnson, Allen W., and Timothy Earle

1987 The Evolution of Human Societies: From Foraging Group to Agrarian State. 2nd ed. Stanford University Press, Stanford.

Johnston, Sam

2006 “Sunglasses: The History of Sunglasses,” A 2 Z of Health, Beauty, and Fitness. Electronic Document, http://health.learninginfo.org/history-of-sunglasses.htm [accessed December 5, 2006].

http://www.world-aluminium.org/history/index.html

http://www.world-aluminium.org/history/index.html

http://health.learninginfo.org/history-of-sunglasses.htm

References 333 Judge, W. James

1979 The Development of a Complex Cultural Ecosystem in the Chaco Basin, New Mexico. In Proceedings of the First Conference on Scientific Research in the National Parks, edited by R. M. Linn, pp. 901–906. USDI National Park Service Transactions and Proceedings Series No. 5, Vol. 2. Washington, D.C.

1982 The Paleo-Indian and Basketmaker Periods: An Overview and Some Research Problems. In The San Juan Tomorrow: Planning for the Conservation of Cultural Resources in the San Juan Basin, edited by Fred Plog and Walter Wait, pp. 5–57. USDI National Park Service, Southwest Region, and School of American Research, Santa Fe.

1989 Chaco Canyon, San Juan Basin. In Dynamics of Southwest Prehistory, edited by Linda S. Cordell and George J. Gumerman, pp. 209–262. Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington, D.C.

Judge, W. James, William B. Gillespie, Stephen H. Lekson, and Henry W. Toll

1981 Tenth Century Developments in Chaco Canyon. In Collected Papers in Honor of Erik Kellerman Reed, edited by Albert H. Schroeder, pp. 65–98. Papers of the Archaeological Society of New Mexico No. 6. Albuquerque.

Kakos, Peter J.

1991 Monitoring Report. Navajo Nation Cultural Resource Management Program Report No. 86- 353 (Addendum 4). Window Rock, Arizona.

Kantner, John, and Nancy M. Mahoney (editors)

2000 Great House Communities across the Chacoan Landscape. Anthropological Papers of the University of Arizona No. 64. University of Arizona Press, Tucson.

Kearns, Timothy M.

1996a Hunter-Gatherers and Early Agriculturalists: Paleoindian, Archaic, and Basketmaker II Occupation of the Southern Chuska Valley. In Time, Place, and Society: Project Synthesis, by Timothy M. Kearns and Janet L. McVickar, pp. 4-1–4-51. Pipeline Archaeology 1990– 1993: The El Paso Natural Gas North System Expansion Project, New Mexico and Arizona, Vol. 13. Western Cultural Resource Management, Inc., Farmington, New Mexico.

1996b A Proposed Phase Sequence for Tohatchi Flats and the Southern Chuska Valley, Northwest New Mexico. In Time, Place, and Society: Project Synthesis, by Timothy M. Kearns and Janet L. McVickar, pp. 3-1–3-31. Pipeline Archaeology 1990–1993: The El Paso Natural Gas North System Expansion Project, New Mexico and Arizona, Vol. 13. Western Cultural Resource Management, Inc., Farmington, New Mexico.

Kearns, Timothy M., Janet L. McVickar, and Lori Stephens Reed

2000 The Early to Late Basketmaker III Transition in Tohatchi Flats, New Mexico. In Foundations of Anasazi: The Basketmaker-Pueblo Transition, edited by Paul F. Reed, pp. 115–142. University of Utah Press, Salt Lake City.

References 334 Kelley, J. Charles, and Ellen A. Kelley

1975 An Alternative Hypothesis for the Explanation of Anasazi Culture History. In Collected Papers in Honor of Florence Hawley Ellis, edited by Theodore R. Frisbie, pp. 178–223. Papers of the Archaeological Society of New Mexico No. 2. Albuquerque.

Kelley, Klara B.

1985 Ethnoarchaeology of Navajo Trading Posts. The Kiva 5:19–37. 1986 Navajo Land Use: An Ethnoarchaeological Study. Academic Press, Orlando.

Kelley, Klara B., and Harris Francis

1994 Navajo Sacred Places. Indiana University Press, Bloomington and Indianapolis.

Kelley, Vincent C.

1950 Regional Structure of the San Juan Basin. In Guidebook of the San Juan Basin, New Mexico and Colorado, compiled and edited by Vincent C. Kelley, pp. 101–108. First Field Conference, New Mexico Geological Society, Albuquerque.

1951 Tectonics of the San Juan Basin. In Guidebook of the South and West Sides of the San Juan Basin, compiled and edited by Clay T. Smith, pp. 124–131. Second Field Conference, New Mexico Geological Society, Albuquerque.

Kelly, Robert L.

1988 The Three Sides of a Biface. American Antiquity 53:717-734. Kendrick, Grace

1966 The Antique Bottle Collector. Western Printing and Publishing Company, Sparks, Nevada.

Kidder, Alfred Vincent

1927 Southwestern Archeological Conference. Science 66:489–491.

1932 The Artifacts of Pecos. Yale University Press, New Haven, and Oxford University Press,

Oxford. Kilburn, Nicole

1999 Site NM-Q-19-66/LA 36302: The Prairie Dog Site. In Archaeological Investigations in the Southwest San Juan Basin: Data Recovery along Navajo Route 9, Segment 2-1, Tohatchi Flats to Coyote Canyon, McKinley County, New Mexico, prepared and compiled by Dennis Gilpin, Randal R. Fox, and Nicole Kilburn, pp. 255–282. SWCA Cultural Resources Report No. 00-49. Flagstaff.

2007 NM-Q-19-66/LA 36302. In Archaeological Investigations in the Southwest San Juan Basin: Data Recovery along Navajo Route 9, Segment 2-1, Tohatchi Flats to Coyote Canyon, McKinley County, New Mexico, Volume 1: Introduction, Setting, and Site Descriptions, edited and compiled by Dennis Gilpin, Randal R. Fox, and Nicole L. Kilburn, pp. 203-226. SWCA Cultural Resources Report No. 00-49. SWCA, Inc., Environmental Consultants, Flagstaff.

References 335

Kluckhohn, Clyde 1939 Discussion. In Preliminary Report on the 1937 Excavations: Bc50-51, Chaco Canyon, New

Mexico, edited by C. Kluckhohn and P. Reiter, pp. 151–162. University of New Mexico Bulletin No. 345, Anthropological Series No. 3, Vol. 2. Albuquerque.

1942 Myths and Rituals: A General Theory. Harvard Theological Review 35:45–79.

Kluckhohn, Clyde, and Dorothea Leighton

1974 The Navaho. rev. ed. Harvard University Press, Cambridge.

Knight, P.J. 1982 Ethnobotany and Agriculture on the McKinley Mine Lease. In Anasazi and Navajo Land Use

in the McKinley Mine Area near Gallup, New Mexico, edited by C.G. Allen and B.A. Nelson, pp. 668-711. Office of Contract Archeology, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque.

Koczan, Steven A.

1981 Cultural Resources Investigations at Bis Deezahi, Newcomb Flats, Jim John, and Bush Mound Sites near Newcomb, New Mexico. Laboratory of Anthropology Note No. 273. Museum of New Mexico, Santa Fe.

Lakatos, Steven A.

1998 Preliminary Data Recovery Results for Five Archaeological Resources along U.S. 666, near Twin Lakes, McKinley County, New Mexico. Office of Archaeological Studies, Santa Fe.

Lamphere, Louise

1977 To Run after Them: Social and Cultural Bases of Cooperation in a Navajo Community. University of Arizona Press, Tucson.

Lancaster, J. W.

1983 An Analysis of Manos and Metates from the Mimbres Valley, New Mexico. Unpublished Master’s thesis, Department of Anthropology, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque.

1984 Groundstone Artifacts. In The Galaz Ruin: A Prehistoric Mimbres Village in Southwestern New Mexico, by R. Anyon and S. A. LeBlanc, pp. 247–262. University of New Mexico Press, Albuquerque.

Lange, Patricia Fogelman

1998 The Spiritual World of Franc Johnson Newcomb. New Mexico Historical Review 73:253– 273.

Lekson, Stephen H.

1988 The Idea of the Kiva. The Kiva 53:213–234. 1999 The Chaco Meridian: Centers of Political Power in the Ancient Southwest. AltaMira Press,

Walnut Creek, California.

Lekson, Stephen H., Thomas C. Windes, John R. Stein, and W. James Judge 1988 The Chaco Canyon Community. Scientific American 259(1):100–109.

References 336 Levy, Jerrold E., Eric B. Henderson, and Tracy J. Andrews

1989 The Effects of Regional Variation and Temporal Change on Matrilineal Elements of Navajo Social Organization. Journal of Anthropological Research 45:351–377.

Lipe, William D.

1999 Basketmaker II (1000 B.C.–A.D. 500). In Colorado Prehistory: A Context for the Southern Colorado River Basin, edited by William D. Lipe, Mark Varien, and Richard H. Wilshusen, pp. 132–165. Colorado Council of Professional Archaeologists, Denver.

Lister, Florence C., and Robert H. Lister

1968 Earl Morris and Southwestern Archaeology. University of New Mexico Press, Albuquerque. Lockhart, Bill

2006 The Color Purple: Dating Solarized Amethyst Container Glass. Historical Archaeology 40:2. Lopinot, A. C.

1968 "Illinois Fresh-Water Mussel Shell Industry," Special Fisheries Report Number 24. Division of Fisheries, Illinois Department of Conservation, Springfield, Illinois.

Lowe, C. H.

1964 Arizona’s Natural Environment: Landscapes and Habitats. University of Arizona Press, Tucson.

Lundquist, L.

2002 Lithic Artifacts. In The Box: Archaeological Testing at Ten Rockshelters near Socorro, New Mexico, edited by J. Railey, pp. 97–121. TRC Project No. 01234. Albuquerque.

2004a Lithic Artifacts. In Across the Chuska Front: Archaeological Investigations at 25 Sites along US 491, McKinley and San Juan Counties, New Mexico, edited by Jim A. Railey, pp. 29.11– 30.33. SWCA Cultural Resources Report No. 2004-283 Albuquerque.

2004b Prehistoric Lithic Artifacts. In, Archaeology of Albuquerque's Ceja Mesa and the Middle Rio Puerco Valley, Bernalillo and Sandoval Counties, New Mexico, edited by Howard Higgins and Lance Lundquist. TRC Project No. 37992. Albuquerque.

Makay, James

2002 Antiques at a Glance: Ceramics. PRC Publishing Ltd., London.

Marshall, Michael P., John R. Stein, Richard W. Loose, and Judith E. Novotny

1979 Anasazi Communities of the San Juan Basin. Public Service Company of New Mexico and USDI Historic Conservation and Recreation Service, Albuquerque.

Martin, Paul S., John B. Rinaldo, Elaine Bluhm, Hugh C. Cutler, and Roger Grange, Jr.

1952 Mogollon Cultural Continuity and Change: The Stratigraphic Analysis of Tularosa and Cordova Caves. Fieldiana: Anthropology No. 40. Field Museum of Natural History, Chicago.

References 337

Martin, Rena 1989 Preliminary Testing Report for Site LA 3223. Navajo Nation Cultural Resource Management

Program Report No. 86-353 (Addendum 2). Window Rock, Arizona.

Matson, R. G.

1991 The Origins of Southwestern Agriculture. University of Arizona Press, Tucson.

Matson, R. G., and Brian Chisholm

1991 Basketmaker II Subsistence: Carbon Isotopes and Other Dietary Indicators from Cedar Mesa, Utah. American Antiquity 56:444–459.

Mauldin, R. P.

1993 The DIVAD Archaeological Project. Historic and Natural Resources Report No. 8. Cultural Resources Management Program, DOE, U.S. Army Air Defense Artillery Center, Ft. Bliss, Texas.

Maxwell, Timothy D., and Stephen S. Post

1981 The Cathedral Cliff Site: A Multicomponent Lithic Scatter in the Chuska Valley. Laboratory of Anthropology Note No. 303. Museum of New Mexico, Santa Fe.

May, E. C.

1938 The Canning Clan: A pageant of Pioneering Americans. The MacMillan Company, New York.

McBride, P.J.

1993 Description of Anasazi Archeobotanical Remains. In Across the Colorado Plateau: Anthropological Studies for the Transwestern Pipeline Expansion Project, Vol. 15, Subsistence and Environment, edited by J.C. Winter, pp. 443-457. Office of Contract Archeology, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque.

McEnany, Tim

1985 An Archaeological Survey of the Northern Portion of the Red Rock Valley, Apache County, Arizona. Navajo Nation Cultural Resource Management Program Report No. 84-460. Window Rock, Arizona.

1987 An Emergency Excavation of an Exposed Storage Pit near Mitten Rock, New Mexico. Navajo Nation Cultural Resource Management Program Report No. 87-146. Window Rock, Arizona.

McKeown, C. Timothy

1983 Historic Artifacts: Materials and Manufacturing Technology. In Human Adaptation and Cultural Change: The Archaeology of Block III, N.I.I.P., edited by Lawrence E. Vogler, pp. 1219–1368. Navajo Nation Papers in Anthropology No. 15, Vol. 3. Navajo Nation Cultural Resource Management Program, Window Rock, Arizona.

McNitt, Frank

1962 The Indian Traders. University of Oklahoma Press, Norman.

References 338

McVickar, Janet L. 1996 The Changing Environment of the Southern Chuska Valley, Northwestern New Mexico. In

Time, Place, and Society: Project Synthesis, edited by Timothy M. Kearns and Janet L. McVickar, pp. 2-1–2-48. Pipeline Archaeology 1990–1993: The El Paso Natural Gas North System Expansion Project, New Mexico and Arizona, Vol. 13. Western Cultural Resource Management, Inc., Farmington, New Mexico.

Miller, George L.

1991 A Revised Set of CC Index Values for Classification and Economic Scaling of English Ceramics from 1787 to 1880. Historical Archaeology 25:1-23.

Miller, George L., and Catherine Sullivan

1981 Machine-Made Glass Containers and the End of Production for Mouth-blown Bottles. Research Bulletin #171. Parks Canada, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada.

Miller, George L., and T. McNichol

2002 Dates for Suction Scarred Bottoms: Chronological Changes in Owens Machine-Made Bottles. Paper presented at the 2002 SHA meetings, Mobile, Alabama.

Mills, Barbara J., Andrea J. Carpenter, and William Grimm

1997 Sourcing Chuskan Ceramic Production: Petrographic and Experimental Analyses. Kiva 62(3):261–282.

Minnis, P.E.

1985 Domesticating People and Plants in the Greater Southwest. In Prehistoric Food Production in North America, edited by R.I. Ford, pp. 309-340. Museum of Anthropology, Anthropological Papers No. 75, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor.

Moir, R. W.

1987 Socioeconomic and Chronometric Patterning of Window Glass. In Historic Buildings, Material Culture, and People of the Prairie Margin, edited by David H. Jurney and Randall W, Moir, pp. 73-82. Richland Creek Technical Series, Vol. V. Archaeology Research Program, Institute for the Study of Earth and Man, Southern Methodist University, Dallas.

1988 Window and Window Glass. In Historic Farming on the Hogwallow Prairies; Ethnoarchaeological Investigation of the Mountain Creek Area, North Central Texas, compiled by David H. Jurney, Susan A. Lebo, and Melissa M. Green, pp. 263-272. Joe Pool Lake Archaeological Project, Vol. II. Archaeology Research Program, Institute for the Study of Earth and Man, Southern Methodist University, Dallas.

Moore, James L.

1980 Archaic Settlement and Subsistence. In Human Adaptations in a Marginal Environment: The UII Mitigation Project, edited by James L. Moore and Joseph C. Winter, pp. 358–380. Office of Contract Archeology, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque.

Moore, James L., and Joseph C. Winter

1980 Human Adaptations in a Marginal Environment: The UII Mitigation Project. Office of Contract Archeology, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque.

References 339

Moore, Roger A. 1983 Patterns in Synchronic and Diachronic Variation in the Prehistoric Lithic Assemblages. In

Cultural Resource Investigations on Gallegos Mesa: Excavations in Blocks VII and IX, Navajo Indian Irrigation Project, San Juan County, New Mexico, edited by Lawrence E. Vogler, Dennis Gilpin, and Joseph K. Anderson, pp. 549–691. Navajo Nation Papers in Anthropology No. 24, Vol. 1. Navajo Nation Cultural Resource Management Program, Window Rock, Arizona.

Morris, Elizabeth Ann

1959 A Pueblo I Site near Bennet’s Peak, Northwestern New Mexico. El Palacio 66:169–175. 1980 Basketmaker Caves in the Prayer Rock District, Northeastern Arizona. Anthropological

Papers of the University of Arizona No. 35. University of Arizona Press, Tucson.

Muller, Deann, and Lance Lundquist 2006 Interim Results of Data Recovery at LA 103049, in Partial Fulfillment of MOA Requirements

for the Quail Ranch Regional Retention Facility, Bernalillo County, New Mexico. SWCA Project No. 11635-211. Albuquerque.

Munsey, Cecil

1970 The Illustrated Guide to Collecting Bottles. Hawthorn Books, Inc. Publishers, New York.

Muto, Guy R. 1971 A Technological Analysis of the Early Stages in the Manufacture of Chipped Stone

Implements. M.A. thesis, Department of Anthropology, Idaho State University.

Nabakov, Peter, and Robert Easton 1989 Hogan, Ki, and Ramada, Southwest I. In Native American Architecture. Oxford University

Press.

Nelson, R. J.

1994 Basketmaker II Lithic Technology and Mobility Patterns on Cedar Mesa, Southeast Utah. Kiva 60:239-256.

Newbound, B. and B.

1995 Collector’s Encyclopedia of Milk Glass, Identification and Values. Collector Books, Paducah, Kentucky.

Newcomb, Franc Johnson

1940 Navaho Omens and Taboos. Rydal Press, Santa Fe. 1964 Hosteen Klah, Navaho Medicine Man and Sandpainter. University of Oklahoma Press,

Norman. 1967 Navaho Folk Tales. Museum of Navaho Ceremonial Art, Santa Fe. 1970 Navaho Bird Tales Told by Hosteen Clah Chee. Theosophical Publishing House, Wheaton,

Illinois.

References 340

Newcomb, Franc Johnson, Stanley Fishler, and Mary C. Wheelwright 1956 A Study of Navajo Symbolism. Papers of the Peabody Museum of American Archaeology

and Ethnology Vol. 32, No 3. Harvard University, Cambridge.

Newcomb, Franc Johnson, and Gladys A. Reichard 1937 Sandpaintings of the Navajo Shooting Chant. J. J. Augustin, New York.

Newcomer, M.H.

1971 Some Quantitative Experiments in Hand-Ax Manufacture. World Archeology 3:85-94.

Nials, Fred, Jonathan Stein, and John Roney 1987 Chacoan Roads in the Southern Periphery: Results from Phase II of the BLM Chaco Roads

Project. BLM Cultural Resource Series No. 1. USDI Bureau of Land Management, Albuquerque District, Albuquerque.

Noël Hume, Ivor.

1970 A Guide to Artifacts of Colonial America. Alfred A. Knopf, New York, NY.

Notah, Lawrence T.

1989 An Archaeological Survey of a Dump Site at Tohatchi, McKinley County, New Mexico. Navajo Nation Archaeology Department Report No. 89-332. Ms. on file, Navajo Nation Historic Preservation Department, Window Rock, Arizona.

Oakes, Yvonne Roye

1979 A Cultural Resource Investigation and Recommendation Proposal, New Mexico State Highway Department Project FLH-12(19), Toadlena Turnoff–Little Water, San Juan County, New Mexico. Laboratory of Anthropology Note No. 136. Contract Archeology Section, Museum of New Mexico, Santa Fe.

P&G Health Sciences Institute

2006 “History,” Respiratory Science Center. Electronic Document, http://www.pghsi.com/respiratory/medicine_history.html. [accessed December 28, 2006].

Parry, William J., and Robert L. Kelly

1987 Expedient Core Technology and Sedentism. In The Organization of Core Technology, edited by Jay K. Johnson and Carol A. Morrow, pp. 285-304. Westview Press, Boulder .

Patton, Peter C., Norma Biggar, Christopher D. Condit, Mary L. Gillam, David W. Love, Michael N. Machette, Larry Mayer, Roger B. Morrison, and John N. Rosholt

1991 Quaternary Geology of the Colorado Plateau. In Quaternary Nonglacial Geology: Coterminous U.S., edited by Roger B. Morrison, pp. 373–406. The Geology of America, Vol. K-2. Geological Society of America, Boulder.

Peckham, Stewart

1963 The Red Willow Site: A Bi-Walled Kiva near Tohatchi, New Mexico. In Highway Salvage Archaeology, vol. 4, assembled by Stewart Peckham, pp. 56–72. New Mexico State Highway Department and Museum of New Mexico, Santa Fe.

http://www.pghsi.com/respiratory/medicine_history.html

http://www.pghsi.com/respiratory/medicine_history.html

References 341

1989 Pottery Types Indigenous to the Chuska Province. Paper presented at the New Mexico Archaeological Council Ceramics Workshop, Northwestern New Mexico Region, Red Rock State Park, Gallup.

Peckham, Stewart L., and William C. Allan

1972 Rescue Archaeology at Mitten Rock Pueblo: LA 8243 and LA 10703, Navajo Nation, New Mexico. Laboratory of Anthropology Notes No. 81. Museum of New Mexico, Santa Fe.

Peckham, Stewart, and J. P. Wilson

1967 An Archaeological Survey of the Chuska Valley and the Chaco Plateau, Part II. Laboratory of Anthropology Note No. 216B. Ms. on file, Museum of New Mexico, Santa Fe.

Perrigo

2006 “History,” Perrigo Company. Electronic document http://www.perrigo.com/company/history.aspx?id=3 [accessed December 28, 2006].

Phillips, David A., Jr., Dennis Gilpin, and Richard A. Anduze

1997 Report on Archaeological Testing and Proposal for Data Recovery along Navajo Route 9 (5-1), McKinley County, New Mexico. SWCA Report No. 97-50. Flagstaff.

Plog, Fred, and Walter Wait (editors)

1982 The San Juan Tomorrow: Planning for the Conservation of Cultural Resources in the San Juan Basin. USDI National Park Service, Southwest Region, Santa Fe.

Potter, James M. and Dennis Gilpin

2001 Flaked Stone Analysis. In Archaeological Investigations in the Southwestern San Juan Basin: Data Recovery Along Navajo Route 9, Segment 2-1, Tohatchi Flakts to Coyote Canyon, McKinley County, New Mexico (Volume 2: Analyses and Discussion), edited by Dennis Gilpin, Randal R. Fox, and Nicole L. Kilburn, pp. 511-541. SWCA Cultural Resources Report No. 00-49, Flagstaff.

Powers, Margaret A. (editor)

1988 Current Research, Southwest. American Antiquity 53:857–864. Powers, Robert P., William B. Gillespie, and Stephen H. Lekson

1983 The Outlier Survey: A Regional View of Settlement in the San Juan Basin. Reports of the Chaco Center No. 3. USDI National Park Service, Division of Cultural Research, Albuquerque.

Prascuinas, Mary M.

2007 Bifacial Cores and Flake Production Efficiency: An Experimental Test of Technological Assumptions. American Antiquity 72(2):334–348.

Pratt, Boyd C., and Dan Scurlock

1990 The Northwest New Mexico Regional Overview. 2 vols. New Mexico State Historic Preservation Division, Santa Fe.

http://www.perrigo.com/company/history.aspx?id=3

http://www.perrigo.com/company/history.aspx?id=3

References 342

Prentiss, William C. 1998 The Reliability and Validity of a Lithic Debitage Typology: Implications for Archaeological

Interpretation. American Antiquity 63:635–650.

Prentiss, William C., and E. J. Romanski

1989 Experimental Evaluation of Sullivan and Rozen's Debitage Typology. In Experiments in Lithic Technology, edited by D. S. Amick and R. P. Mauldin, pp. 89-100. BAR International Series 528.

Railey, Jim A.

2004 Across the Chuska Front: Archaeological Investigations at 25 Sites along US 491, McKinley and San Juan Counties, New Mexico. pp. 9.1-9.16, SWCA Cultural Resources Report No. 2004-283 Albuquerque.

2006 Middle and Late Archaic sites on Albuquerque's West Mesa: Seasonal Camps or Marginalized Hunter-gatherers? Paper presented at the Seventy-first Annual Meeting of the Society for American Archaeology, San Juan.

2007 Lithic Artifacts from the Buckman Road Site. In Cultural Resources Data Recovery Along

the Proposed Buckman Direct Diversion, Including Excavations at the Buckman Road Site (LA 137068), Santa Fe County, New Mexico, edited by Jim A. Railey, pp. 71–99. SWCA Cultural Resources Report No. 2007-312, Albuquerque, New Mexico.

Railey, Jim A., Richard M. Reycraft, Jonathan E. Van Hoose, and Timothy B. Graves

2002 Pit Features. In Across the Desert Floor Cultural Resource Investigation Along US 54, Otero County, New Mexico. pp. 747–763. TRC project number 33639. Albuquerque.

Reed, Paul F.

2003 In the Footsteps of Earl Morris: Recent Work at the Tocito Community, New Mexico. In Anasazi Archaeology at the Millennium: Proceedings of the Sixth Occasional Anasazi Symposium, edited by Paul F. Reed, pp. 59–69. Center for Desert Archaeology, Tucson.

Reed, Paul F., and Kathy Niles Hensler

1999 Anasazi Community Development in Cove-Redrock Valley: Archaeological Investigations along the N33 Road in Apache County, Arizona. Navajo Nation Papers in Anthropology No. 33. Navajo Nation Archaeology Department, Window Rock, Arizona.

2002 Two Millennia at Tocito: Archaeological and Ethnographic Investigations along the N5000(2) Road, San Juan County, New Mexico. Navajo Nation Papers in Anthropology No. 37. Window Rock, Arizona.

Reher, Charles A. (editor)

1977 Settlement and Subsistence along the Lower Chaco River: The CGP Survey. University of New Mexico Press, Albuquerque.

Reno, Philip

1981 Mother Earth, Father Sky, and Economic Development: Navajo Resources and Their Use. University of New Mexico Press, Albuquerque.

References 343

Ritts-Benally, Karen 1993a Jesus Arviso: From Hweeldi to Sitting Yeii Mesa. In Navajo Country–Dine Bikeyah, by

Joseph C. Winter, Karen Ritts-Benally, and Orit Tamir, pp. 291– 307. Across the Colorado Plateau: Anthropological Studies for the Transwestern Pipeline Expansion Project, Vol. 8. Office of Contract Archeology and Maxwell Museum of Anthropology, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque.

1993b Setting Limits: The Impact of Formal and Informal Boundaries on Navajo Land Use,

Historic and Contemporary Perspectives. In Navajo Country–Dine Bikeyah, by Joseph C. Winter, Karen Ritts-Benally, and Orit Tamir, pp. 265–282. Across the Colorado Plateau: Anthropological Studies for the Transwestern Pipeline Expansion Project, Vol. 8. Office of Contract Archeology and Maxwell Museum of Anthropology, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque.

1993c Navajo Properties along the San Juan Lateral. In Navajo Country–Dine Bikeyah, by Joseph C. Winter, Karen Ritts-Benally, and Orit Tamir, pp. 129–181. Across the Colorado Plateau: Anthropological Studies for the Transwestern Pipeline Expansion Project, Vol. 8. Office of Contract Archeology and Maxwell Museum of Anthropology, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque.

Roberts, Frank H. H., Jr.

1929 Shabik'eschee Village: A Late Basket Maker Site in the Chaco Canyon, New Mexico. Bureau of American Ethnology Bulletin No. 92. Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C.

Rock, Jim

1981 Glass Bottles: Basic Identification. Ms. on file with Klamath National Forest, Region 5, U.S. Department of Agriculture.

Roxlau, R. B., G. M. Brown, and R. Loehman

1997 Lithic Typology for the Jemez Mountains. In, OLE Volume II: Artifacts, edited by John C. Acklen, pp. 31–90. TRC Mariah Associates, Albuquerque.

Rozen, K. C.

1984 Flaked Stone. In Hohokam Habitation Sites in the Northern Santa Rita Mountains, vol. 2, part 1, edited by A. Ferg, K. C. Rozen, W. L. Deaver, M. D. Tagg, D. A. Phillips, Jr., and D. A. Gregory, pp. 421–604. Archaeological Series No. 147. Arizona State Museum Cultural Resource Management Division, University of Arizona, Tucson.

Rudecoff, Christine A.

1980 An Archaeological Survey of the Shiprock and Chinle Areas, Navajo Nation. Navajo Nation Papers in Anthropology No. 3. Navajo Nation Cultural Resource Management Program, Window Rock, Arizona.

Scarpino, Philip V.

1985 Great River: An Environmental History of the Upper Mississippi, 1980-1950. University of Missouri Press, Columbia, Missouri.

References 344

Schelberg, John D. 1984 Analogy, Complexity, and Regionally Based Perspectives. In Recent Research on Chaco

Prehistory, edited by W. James Judge and John D. Schelberg, pp. 5–21. Reports of the Chaco Center No. 8. USDI National Park Service, Division of Cultural Research, Albuquerque.

Schwendler, Rebecca H.

In preparation Final Results of Archaeological Data Recovery at Ten Sites in the Quail Ranch Phase I Regional Retention Facility, Bernalillo County, New Mexcio. SWCA Cultural Resources Report Albuquerque (in preparation).

Sciscenti, James V., and Henry C. Grebinger

1962 Archaeology of the Four Corners Power Project. Museum of New Mexico Papers in Anthropology No. 5. Santa Fe.

Sebastian, Lynne

1992 The Chaco Anasazi: Sociopolitical Evolution in the Prehistoric Southwest. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

Service, Elman R.

1962 Primitive Social Organization. Random House, New York.

Sessions, Steven E.

1979 The Archaeology of Southwest Gallegos Mesa: The EPCC Survey Project. Navajo Nation Papers in Anthropology No. 1. Navajo Nation Cultural Resource Management Program, Window Rock, Arizona.

Shaffer, Brian S., and Barry W. Baker

1992 A Vertebrate Faunal Analysis Coding System. Museum of Anthropology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor.

Sharrock, F.W.

1966 Prehistoric Occupation Patterns in S.W. Wyoming and Cultural Relationships with the Great Basin and Plains Culture Areas. University of Utah Anthropology Papers 77, Salt Lake City.

Simmons, Alan H. 1982 Modeling Archaic Adaptive Behavior in the Chaco Canyon Region. In Prehistoric Adaptive

Strategies in the Chaco Canyon Region, Northwestern New Mexico, edited by Alan H. Simmons, pp. 881–932. Navajo Nation Papers in Anthropology No. 9. Navajo Nation Cultural Resource Management Program, Window Rock, Arizona.

1986 New Evidence for the Early Use of Cultigens in the American Southwest. American Antiquity 51:73–89.

Simpson, James H.

1964 Navajo Expedition: Journal of a Military Reconnaissance from Santa Fe, New Mexico, to the Navaho Country Made in 1849 by Lieutenant James H. Simpson, edited by Frank McNitt. University of Oklahoma Press, Norman.

References 345

Skinner, Elizabeth, and Dennis Gilpin 1997 Cultural Resources Investigations along Navajo Route 9 (N9), U.S. Highway 666 to Standing

Rock, McKinley County, New Mexico. SWCA Report No. 96-144. Flagstaff.

Smiley, Francis E.

1993 Early Farmers in the Northern Southwest: A View from Marsh Pass. In Anasazi Basketmaker: Papers for the 1990 Wetherill–Grand Gulch Symposium, edited by V. M. Atkins, pp. 243–254. BLM Cultural Resource Series No. 24. USDI Bureau of Land Management, Salt Lake City.

1994 The Agricultural Transition in the Northern Southwest: Patterns in the Current Chronometric Data. Kiva 60:165–189.

Smith, Grant D., and Michael McFaul

1997 Paleoenvironmental and Geoarchaeologic Implications of Late Quaternary Sediments and Paleosols: North-Central to Southwestern San Juan Basin, New Mexico. Geomorphology 21:107–138.

Smith, Watson

1971 Painted Ceramics of the Western Mound of Awatovi. Papers of the Peabody Museum of American Archaeology and Ethnology No. 38. Harvard University, Cambridge.

Spaulding, A. C.

1953 Statistical Techniques for the Discovery of Artifact Types. American Antiquity 17:305–313.

Stein, John R.

1987 Architecture and Landscape. In An Archaeological Reconnaissance of West-Central New Mexico: The Anasazi Monuments Project, by Andrew P. Fowler, John R. Stein, and Roger Anyon, pp. 71–103. Submitted to the State of New Mexico, Office of Cultural Affairs, Historic Preservation Division, Santa Fe.

Stein, John R., and Andrew Fowler

1996 Looking beyond Chaco in the San Juan Basin and its Peripheries. In The Prehistoric Pueblo World, A.D. 1150–1350, edited by Michael A. Adler, pp. 114–130. University of Arizona Press, Tucson.

Stein, John R., and Stephen H. Lekson

1992 Anasazi Ritual Landscapes. In Anasazi Regional Organization and the Chaco System, edited by David E. Doyel, pp. 101–122. Anthropological Papers No. 5. Maxwell Museum of Anthropology, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque.

Stevenson, Matilda Cox

1915 Ethnobotany of the Zuni Indians, pp. 35–102. Thirtieth Annual Report of the Bureau of American Ethnology. U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C.

References 346

Stoltman, James B. 1999 The Chaco-Chuska Connection: In Defense of Anna Shepard. In Pottery and People: A

Dynamic Interaction, edited by James M. Skibo and Gary M. Feinman, pp. 9–24. University of Utah Press, Salt Lake City.

Stone, Glenn D., and Christian E. Downum

1999 Non-Boserupian Ecology and Agricultural Risk: Ethnic Politics and Land Control in the Arid Southwest. American Anthropologist 101:113–128.

Stuart, David E.

1985 Glimpses of the Ancient Southwest. Ancient City Press, Santa Fe.

Stuart, David E., and Rory P. Gauthier

1981 Prehistoric New Mexico: Background for Survey. New Mexico State Historic Preservation Bureau, Santa Fe.

Sullivan, Alan P., III, and K. C. Rozen

1985 Debitage Analysis and Archaeological Interpretation. American Antiquity 50:755–779.

Swadesh, Frances Leon

1981 Ethnohistorical Investigations of the Jim John and Bush Mound Sites. In Cultural Resource Investigations at Bis Deezahi, Newcomb Flats, Jim John, and Bush Mound Sites, New Mexico, prepared by Steven A. Koczan, pp. 112–122. Laboratory of Anthropology Note No. 272. Contract Archeology Section, Museum of New Mexico, Santa Fe.

SWCA Environmental Consultants

2002 Flagstaff Cultural Resources Laboratory Manual: A Reference Guide for Employees, Clients, Agencies. SWCA Environmental Consultants, Flagstaff.

Tainter, Joseph A.

1988 The Collapse of Complex Societies. Cambridge University Press, New York.

Tangram Technology, Ltd. 2001 Glass Timeline, Tangram Technology, Ltd. Electronic document,

http://www.tangram.co.uk/TI-Glazing-Glass_Timeline.html [accessed December 28, 2006].

Threinen, Ellen

1981 The Navajos and the BIA: A Study of Government Buildings on the Navajo Reservation. American Indian Engineering, Inc., Phoenix, and Architectural Research Consultants, Inc., Albuquerque.

Toll, M.S.

1985 An Overview of Chaco Canyon Macrobotanical Materials and Analyses to Date. In Environment and Subsistence of Chaco Canyon, edited by F.J. Mathien, pp. 247-277. Publications in Archeology 18E, Chaco Canyon Studies, National Park Service, Albuquerque.

http://www.tangram.co.uk/TI-Glazing-Glass_Timeline.html

http://www.tangram.co.uk/TI-Glazing-Glass_Timeline.html

References 347

Toll, Mollie S., and Anne C. Cully 1982 Archaic Subsistence in the Four Corners Area: Evidence for a Hypothetical Seasonal Round.

In Economy and Interaction along the Lower Chaco River, edited by Patrick Hogan and Joseph C. Winter, pp. 385–391. Office of Contract Archeology and Maxwell Museum of Anthropology, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque.

1994 Archaic Subsistence and Seasonal Population Flow in Northwest New Mexico. In Archaic Hunter-Gatherer Archaeology in the American Southwest, edited by B. Vierra, pp. 103-120. Contributions in Anthropology No. 13, Eastern New Mexico University, Portales.

Toulouse, Julian

1969 A Primer on Mold Seams. The Western Collector, Part 1 - Vol. 7, no. 11, pp. 526-35; Part 2 - Vol. 7, no. 12, pp. 578-87, (Nov. & Dec. 1969), San Francisco, CA.

1971 Bottle Makers and Their Marks. Thomas Nelson, Inc., New York.

Trafzer, Clifford E.

1982 The Kit Carson Campaign: The Last Great Navajo War. University of Oklahoma Press, Norman.

Turnbow, C.

1997 Chapter 16: Projectile Points as Chronological Indicators. In OLE, Volume II: Artifacts, edited by John C. Acklen. TRC Mariah Associates and Public Service Company of New Mexico, Albuquerque.

University of Utah

1992 Intermountain Antiquities Computer System (IMACS) Guide. Electronic document, http://www.anthro.utah.edu/imacs.html [accessed November 29, 2006].

Upham, Steadman

1982 Polities and Power: An Economic and Political History of the Western Pueblos. Academic Press, New York.

U. S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management (BLM).

2006a “Bottle/Glass Colors,” In Historic Glass Bottle Identification & Information Website. Electronic document, http://www.blm.gov/historic_bottles/dating.htm, [accessed December 4, 2006].

2006b Bottle Bases, In Historic Glass Bottle Identification & Information Website. Electronic document, http://www.blm.gov/historic_bottles/dating.htm, [accessed December 4, 2006].

Van Dyke, Ruth M.

2000 Chacoan Ritual Landscapes: The View from Red Mesa Valley. In Great House Communities across the Chacoan Landscape, edited by John Kantner and Nancy M. Mahoney, pp. 91–100. Anthropological Papers of the University of Arizona No. 64. University of Arizona Press, Tucson.

http://www.anthro.utah.edu/imacs.html

http://www.anthro.utah.edu/imacs.html

http://www.blm.gov/historic_bottles/dating.htm

http://www.blm.gov/historic_bottles/dating.htm

References 348

Van Hoose, J. E., and L. Lundquist 2002 Prehistoric Lithic Artifacts. In Across the Desert Floor: Cultural Resource Investigations

along US 54, Otero County, New Mexico, edited by J. Railey, pp. 577–651. TRC Technical Report No. 2002-1, Project No. 33639. Albuquerque.

Van Valkenburgh, Richard F.

1941 Diné Bikéyah, edited by L. W. Adams and John C. McPhee. USDI Office of Indian Affairs, Navajo Service, Window Rock, Arizona.

Vestal, Paul A.

1952 Ethnobotany of the Ramah Navajo. Papers of the Peabody Museum of American Archaeology and Ethnology Vol. 40, No. 4, Harvard University, Cambridge.

Viau, A.E., K. Gajewski, P. Fines, D.E. Atkinson, and M.C. Sawada

2002 Widespread evidence of 1500 yr climate variability in North America during the past 14000 yr. In Geological Society of America 30(5):455-458.

Vierra, Bradley J.

1985 Hunter-Gatherer Settlement Systems: To Reoccupy or Not to Reoccupy, That Is the Question. Unpublished Master's thesis, Department of Anthropology, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque.

1994a Archaic Hunter-Gatherer Mobility Patterns in the American Southwest. In Excavation and Interpretation of Aceramic and Archaic Sites, by Tim W. Burchett, Bradley J. Vierra, and Kenneth L. Brown, pp. 385–397. Across the Colorado Plateau: Anthropological Studies for the Transwestern Pipeline Expansion Project, Vol. 14. Office of Contract Archeology and Maxwell Museum of Anthropology, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque.

1994b Aceramic and Archaic Research. In Excavation and Interpretation of Aceramic and Archaic Sites, by Tim W. Burchett, Bradley J. Vierra, and Kenneth L. Brown, pp. 375–384. Across the Colorado Plateau: Anthropological Studies for the Transwestern Pipeline Expansion Project, Vol. 14. Office of Contract Archeology and Maxwell Museum of Anthropology, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque.

2005 Late Archaic Stone Tool Technology Across the Borderlands. In The Late Archaic Across the Borderlands, edited by Bradley Vierra, pp. 187-218. University of Texas Press, Austin.

Vierra, B.J., and R.I. Ford

2006 Early Maize Agriculture in the Northern Rio Grande Valley, New Mexico. In Histories of Maize, edited by J.E. Staller, R.H. Tykot and B.F. Benz, pp. 497-510. Academic Press, New York.

Vivian, R. Gwinn

1970 An Inquiry into Prehistoric Social Organization in Chaco Canyon, New Mexico. In Reconstructing Prehistoric Pueblo Societies, edited by William A. Longacre, pp. 59–83. University of New Mexico Press, Albuquerque.

1990 The Chacoan Prehistory of the San Juan Basin. Academic Press, San Diego.

References 349

Vogler, Lawrence E. 1982 A Test of a Model of Prehistoric Subsistence and Settlement. In Gallegos Mesa Settlement

and Subsistence: A Set of Explanatory Models for Cultural Resources on Blocks VIII, IX, X, and XI, Navajo Indian Irrigation Project, by Lawrence E. Vogler, Dennis Gilpin, and Joseph K. Anderson, pp. 339–405. Navajo Nation Papers in Anthropology No. 12. Navajo Nation Cultural Resource Management Program, Window Rock, Arizona.

1983a Prehistoric Subsistence and Settlement on Block III. In Human Adaptation and Cultural Change: The Archaeology of Block III, N.I.I.P., edited by Lawrence E. Vogler, pp. 773–791. Navajo Nation Papers in Anthropology No. 15, Vol. 2. Navajo Nation Cultural Resource Management Program, Window Rock, Arizona.

1983b A Model for Prehistoric Use of Gallegos Mesa. In Cultural Resource Investigations on Gallegos Mesa: Excavations in Blocks VIII and IX, Testing Operations in Blocks X and XI, Navajo Indian Irrigation Project, San Juan County, New Mexico, by Lawrence E. Vogler, Dennis Gilpin, and Joseph K. Anderson, pp. 897–964. Navajo Nation Papers in Anthropology No. 24, Vol. 2. Navajo Nation Cultural Resource Management Program, Window Rock, Arizona.

1984 Early Archaic Subsistence and Settlement. In Archaeological Survey and Excavation on Blocks I, X, and XI, Navajo Indian Irrigation Project, San Juan County, New Mexico, edited and compiled by Dennis Gilpin, Lawrence E. Vogler, and Joseph K. Anderson, pp. 543–569. Navajo Nation Papers in Anthropology No. 25, Vol. 1. Navajo Nation Cultural Resource Management Program, Window Rock, Arizona.

1993a The Archaeological Record of the NIIP. In Dáá'ák'eh Nitsaa: An Overview of the Cultural Resources of the Navajo Indian Irrigation Project, Northwestern New Mexico, by Lawrence E. Vogler, Kristin Langenfeld, and Dennis Gilpin, pp. 79–190. Navajo Nation Papers in Anthropology No. 29. Navajo Nation Archaeology Department, Window Rock, Arizona.

1993b NIIP Data in a Regional Context. In Dáá'ák'eh Nitsaa: An Overview of the Cultural Resources of the Navajo Indian Irrigation Project, Northwestern New Mexico, by Lawrence E. Vogler, Kristin Langenfeld, and Dennis Gilpin, pp. 283–423. Navajo Nation Papers in Anthropology No. 29. Navajo Nation Archaeology Department, Window Rock, Arizona.

Vogler, Lawrence E., Dennis Gilpin, and Joseph K. Anderson (editors)

1983 Cultural Resource Investigations on Gallegos Mesa: Excavations in Blocks VIII and IX, Testing Operations in Blocks X and XI, Navajo Indian Irrigation Project, San Juan County, New Mexico. Navajo Nation Papers in Anthropology No. 24, Vol. 2. Navajo Nation Cultural Resource Management Program, Window Rock, Arizona.

Walkenhorst, Roger N., and Olsen John

2003 A Cultural Resource Inventory for the Proposed Improvement of 69.4 Miles of United States Highway 491/666 from Milepost 15.6 to Milepost 85, McKinley and San Juan Counties New Mexico. DCD3 02-108. Navajo Nation Department of Transportation, Window Rock, Arizona.

Wallace, Anthony F. C.

1966 Religion: An Anthropological View. Random House, New York.

References 350

Wandsnider, L. 1997 The Roasted and the Boiled: Food Composition and Heat Treatment with Special Emphasis

on Pit-Hearth Cooking. Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 16(1):1-49.

Warburton, Miranda, and Dan Simplicio 1987 Human Remains of Two Individuals Exposed by Arroyo Cutting near Tohlakai Trading Post,

New Mexico. Navajo Nation Archaeology Department Report No. 87-264. Window Rock, Arizona.

Warinner, R.

1997 “Glass Flows!” Glassmaking. Electronic Document, http://tafkac.org/science/glass.flow/glassmaking.html [accessed December 28, 2006].

Watson, Richard P. (editor)

1987 Archaeological Investigations at Newcomb, New Mexico. San Juan College Research Papers in Anthropology No. 2. Farmington, New Mexico.

Wendorf, Fred, Nancy Fox, and Orian L. Lewis (editors)

1956 Pipeline Archaeology: Reports of Salvage Archaeology in the Southwest on El Paso Natural Gas Company Projects, 1950–1953. Museum of New Mexico, Laboratory of Anthropology, Santa Fe, and Museum of Northern Arizona, Flagstaff.

Wharton, Jeff

1990 An Archaeological Survey of NTUA Line B near Red Valley in Apache County, Arizona. Navajo Nation Archaeology Department Report No. 90-332. Window Rock, Arizona.

White, Richard

1983 The Roots of Dependency: Subsistence, Environment, and Social Change among the Choctaws, Pawnees, and Navajos. University of Nebraska Press, Lincoln and London.

Whitecotton, Joseph W., and Richard A. Pailes

1986 New World Precolumbian World Systems. In Ripples in the Chichimec Sea, edited by Frances Joan Mathien and Randall H. McGuire, pp. 183–204. Southern Illinois University Press, Carbondale.

Whiting, Alfred E.

1939 Ethnobotany of the Hopi. Museum of Northern Arizona Bulletin No. 15. Flagstaff.

Wikipedia 2006a “Harmonica,” Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. Electronic document,

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harmonica [accessed December 27, 2006]. 2006b “Nehi,” Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. Electronic document,

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nehi [accessed December 28, 2006].

Wilcox, David R.

1993 The Evolution of the Chacoan Polity. In The Chimney Rock Archaeological Symposium, October 20–21, 1990, Durango, Colorado, edited by J. McKim Malville and Gary Matlock,

http://tafkac.org/science/glass.flow/glassmaking.html

http://tafkac.org/science/glass.flow/glassmaking.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harmonica

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harmonica

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nehi

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nehi

References 351

pp. 76–90. General Technical Report No. RM-227. USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station, Fort Collins.

1996 Pueblo III People and Polity in Relational Context. In The Prehistoric Pueblo World, A.D. 1150–1350, edited by Michael A. Adler, pp. 241–254. University of Arizona Press, Tucson.

Wills, W. H.

1988 Early Prehistoric Agriculture of the American Southwest. School of American Research Press, Santa Fe.

Wilson, John P.

1973 Archeological Clearance Investigations, Tucson Gas & Electric Company San Juan–Vail Transmission Line,, New Mexico–Arizona. Ms. on file, Museum of New Mexico, Santa Fe, and Museum of Northern Arizona, Flagstaff.

Windes, Thomas C.

1977 Typology and Technology of Anasazi Ceramics. In Settlement and Subsistence along the Lower Chaco River: The CGP Survey, edited by Charles A. Reher, pp. 279–370. Office of Contract Archeology, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque.

Windes, Thomas C., and Peter J. McKenna

1989 Cibola White Ware and Cibola Grayware: The Chaco Series. Paper presented at the New Mexico Archaeological Council Ceramics Workshop, Northwestern New Mexico Region, Red Rock State Park, Gallup.

Winter, Joseph C.

1993a Navajo Farm Fields. In Navajo Country–Diné Bikéyah, by Joseph C. Winter, Karen Ritts- Benally, and Orit Tamir, pp. 213–264. Across the Colorado Plateau: Anthropological Studies for the Transwestern Pipeline Expansion Project, Vol. 8. Office of Contract Archeology and Maxwell Museum of Anthropology, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque.

1993b History of Navajo Land Use Studies along the Transwestern Expansion Route. In Navajo Country–Diné Bikéyah, by Joseph C. Winter, Karen Ritts-Benally, and Orit Tamir, pp. 39– 113. Across the Colorado Plateau: Anthropological Studies for the Transwestern Pipeline Expansion Project, Vol. 8. Office of Contract Archeology and Maxwell Museum of Anthropology, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque.

Winter, Joseph C., Karen Ritts-Benally, and Orit Tamir

1993 Navajo Country–Diné Bikéyah. Across the Colorado Plateau: Anthropological Studies for the Transwestern Pipeline Expansion Project, Vol. 8. Office of Contract Archeology and Maxwell Museum of Anthropology, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque.

Wiseman, Regge N.

1980 The Naschitti-North Project: The Excavation of Two Small Pueblo II Sites near Sheep Springs, San Juan County, New Mexico. Laboratory of Anthropology Note No. 143. Museum of New Mexico, Santa Fe.

References 352

Witherspoon, Gary 1975 Navajo Kinship and Marriage. University of Chicago Press, Chicago.

Woodbury, Richard B. and Ezra B.W. Zubrow

1979 Agricultural Beginnings, 2000 B.C.-A.D. 500. In Handbook of North American Indians, Volume 9: Southwest, edited by Alfonzo Ortiz, pp. 43-60. Smithsonian Press, Washington, D.C.

Wright, H. E., Jr., Anne M. Bent, Barbara S. Hansen, and L. J. Maher, Jr.

1973 Present and Past Vegetation of the Chuska Mountains, Northwestern New Mexico. Geological Society of America Bulletin 84:1155–1179.

Yeatts, Michael

1990 Addendum 1: Clearance Work at Newcomb Preschool Site Burials for Navajo Communications Development. Laboratory of Anthropology Report No. 90-306A. Museum of New Mexico, Santa Fe.

Yoffee, Norman

2004 The Chaco “Rituality” Revisited. In Chaco Society and Polity: Papers from the 1999 Conference, edited by Linda S. Cordell, W. James Judge, and June-el Piper, pp. 63–78. Special Publication No. 4. New Mexico Archaeological Council, Albuquerque.

Zedeño, María Nieves

1994 Sourcing Prehistoric Ceramics at Chodistaas Pueblo, Arizona: The Circulation of People and Pots in the Grasshopper Region. Anthropological Papers of the University of Arizona No. 58. University of Arizona Press, Tucson.

APPENDIX A SANDY RISE SITE (NM-H-51-55)

BACKHOE TRENCH PROFILE DESCRIPTIONS

Appendix A Sandy Rise Site Profile Descriptions 354 Table A.1. Backhoe Trench 3 profile description, approximately 22 m west of east end of trench (all colors are dry to slightly moist).

Stratum/ Horizon

Depth BGS Description

I 0–3 cm Yellowish brown (10YR5/4); fine sand; loose; abundant, fine roots; no structure; clear boundary.

II 3–25 cm Yellowish brown (10YR5/4); fine to medium sand; slightly friable to slightly firm; no structure; occasional white, carbonate mottles (these are very firm); diffuse boundary.

III 25–46 cm Yellowish brown (10YR5/4); same as II, but more friable. IV 25–50 cm Light yellowish brown to yellowish brown (10YR6/4-5/4); fine sand; otherwise

same as III. V 50+ cm Decomposing bedrock & caliche.

Note: friable, sandy deposits continue to the east end of this trench, at same depth (i.e., to 50 cm below ground surface).

Table A.2. Backhoe Trench 3 profile description, 10.5 m east of west end of trench (all colors are dry to slightly moist).

Stratum/ Horizon



II 3–36 cm Light yellowish brown (10YR6/4); fine to medium sand; very- to extremely friable; few, fine roots; no structure; gradual boundary.

III 36–60 cm Light yellowish brown to yellowish brown (10YR5/4); fine to medium sand; friable; no structure; clear boundary

IV 60–100 cm Pale yellow (2.5Y7/3); fine sand, partially cemented w/ discontinuous chunks of carbonate; very friable (sand) to slightly firm (carbonates); weak, subangular, blocky structure to no structure; gradual boundary.

V 100–110+ cm

Decomposing bedrock – discontinuous lithified sandstone and sand; Pale yellow (2.5Y7/3).

Appendix A Sandy Rise Site Profile Descriptions 355 Table A.3. Backhoe Trench 4 profile description, 4.5 m east of west end of trench. This profile is at the summit of the ridge that parallels US 491; the surface here is approximately 1.5 m higher than the west end of the trench (all colors are dry to slightly moist).

Stratum/ Horizon



II 4–12 cm Yellowish brown (10YR5/4); fine silty sand friable; no discernable structure; clear boundary.

III 12–28 cm Yellowish brown (10YR5/4); silty fine sand; slightly friable to slightly firm; some extremely fine carbonate mottles; few small pieces of rock; weak, no discernable structure; gradual boundary.

IV 28–38+ cm Light yellowish (10YR6/4); fine sand; slightly friable, becoming more firm with depth; some extremely fine carbonate mottles; few small pieces of rock; no discernable structure.

Note: Top-to-bottom sand deposit (up to 30 cm thick) continues in Backhoe Trench 4 profile until approximately 10 m from the east end of the trench, where the dune sand deposit pinches out. From here eastward, the profile begins to resemble those seen in Backhoe Trenches 5–8. Includes lithified caliche(?) at the eastern end of the trench, at a depth of approximately 25 cm. At the west end of Backhoe Trench 5, there is decomposed and partially lithified sandstone at 20 cm bgs, along with scattered, thin, tabular sandstone present on the surface at this locality. There is also heavy iron staining (hematite and limonite) a few meters to the east. Toward the east end of Backhoe Trench 5, iron staining abates somewhat in favor of more carbonate staining, similar to that observed in the profile at the east end of BHT 6 (see below).

Table A.4. Backhoe Trench 6 profile description, approximately 3 m west of east end of trench.

Stratum/ Horizon


I 0–3 cm Pale brown (10YR6/3, dry); silt; friable; granulated structure; clear boundary.

II 3–11 cm Dark yellowish brown (10YR4/4, slightly moist); sandy silt; firm; strong, coarse, angular blocky structure (peds > 6 cm in diameter); gradual boundary.

III 11–24 cm Yellowish brown (10YR5/4, slightly moist); silty sand; slightly friable; weak, angular blocky structure; mottled iron staining toward base; clear boundary.

IV 24–35+ cm Yellowish brown to dark yellowish brown (10YR5/4-4/4, slightly moist); sandy silt; heavily mottled with very fine flecks of carbonates and iron; very firm; white carbonate filaments; weak, subangular blocky structure; darker (to dark gray [10YR4/1]), firmer, and stonger structure toward base.

Appendix A Sandy Rise Site Profile Descriptions 356 Table A.5. Backhoe Trench 6 profile description, approximately 15 m east of west end of trench.

Stratum/ Horizon


I 0–3 cm Brown (10YR5/3, dry); silt loam; friable; granulated structure; clear boundary.

II 3–17 cm Dark yellowish brown (10YR4/4, slightly moist), stained with grayish brown (2.5Y5/2) along ped surfaces; clayey silt; slightly friable; medium to strong, fine, angular blocky structure; abrupt boundary.

III 17–31+ cm Yellowish brown (10YR5/4, slightly moist); silty sand; slightly friable; weak, angular blocky structure; mottled iron staining toward base; clear boundary.

Table A.6. Backhoe Trench 7 profile description, approximately 13 m east of west end of trench (all colors are dry to slightly moist).

Stratum/ Horizon


I 0–3 cm Brown (10YR4/3); silt loam; friable; granulated structure; clear boundary.

II 3–20 cm Brown to dark yellowish brown (10YR4/3-4/4); clayey silt; slightly firm; weak, subangular blocky structure; clear boundary.

III 20–25 cm Dark yellowish brown (10YR4/4) w/ carbonate filaments; otherwise, same as II.

IV 25–45+ cm Brown (10YR5/3); clayey silt; extremely firm to hard; white carbonate filaments; weak, subangular blocky structure.

Note: approximately 10 m west of the east end of this trench is a black stain on the trench floor, w/in Stratum IV. This stain exhibits the same, hard consistence as IV, and appears to be a natural carbonaceous stain within the Cretaceous sediments.

APPENDIX B BETA SHEETS

Appendix B Beta Sheets 358

. ., .......

BETH . Beta Analytic Inc. 4985 SW 74 Court Miam,i Florida 33155 USA Tel: 305 667 5167 Fax: 305 663 0/97 [email protected] www.radlocarbon.com

Mr.Darden Hood Director

Mr.Ronald Hatfield

Mr.Christopher Patrick Deputy Directors

Consistellf Accura(l' ... De/i11ered On Time.

Final Report

The final report package includes the final date report, a statement outlining our analytical

procedures, a glossary of pretreatment terms, calendar calibration information, billing documents (containing balance/credit information and the number of samples submitted within the yearly discount period), and peripheral items to use with future submittals. The final report includes the individual analysis method, the delivery basis, the material type and the individual pretreatments applied. The final report has been sent by mail and e-mail {where available).

Pretreatment

Pretreatment methods are reported along with each result. All necessary chemical and

mechanical pretreatments of the submitted material were applied at the laboratory to isolate the carbon which may best represent the time event of interest. When interpreting the results, it is important to consider the pretreatments. Some samples cannot be fully pretreated, making their 14C ages more subjective than samples which can be fully pretreated. Some materials receive no pretreatments. Please look at the pretreatment indicated for each sample and read the pretreatment glossary to understand the implications.

Analysis

Materials measured by the radiometric technique were analyzed by synthesizing sample

carbon to benzene (92% C), measuring for 14C content in one of 53 scintillation spectrometers, and then calculating for radiocarbon age. If the Extended Counting Service was used, the 14C content was measured for a greatly extended period of time. AMS results were derived from reduction of sample carbon to graphite (100% C), along with standards and backgrounds. The graphite was then detected for 14C content in one of 9 accelerator-mass-spectrometers (AMS) .

The Radiocarbon Age and Calendar Calibration

The "Conventional 14C Age (*)" is the result after applying 13C/12C corrections to the measured age and is the most appropriate radiocarbon age. If an "*" is attached to this date, it means the t3Cf12C was estimated rather than measured (The ratio is an option for radiometric analysis, but included on all AMS analyses.) Ages are reported with the units "BP" (Before Present). "Present" is defined as AD 1950 for the purposes of radiocarbon dating.

Results for samples containing more 14C than the modern reference standard are reported as "percent modern carbon" (pMC). These results indicate the material was respiring carbon after the advent of thermo-nuclear weapons testing (and is less than - 50 years old).

Applicable calendar calibrations are included for materials between aboul100 and 19,000 BP. If calibrations are not included with a report, those results were either too young, too old, or inappropriate for calibration. Please read the enclosed page discussing calibration.

mailto:[email protected]


REPORT OF RADIOCARBON DATING ANALYSES

Dr. Steven Carothers/Jim Railey Report Date: 11/9/2006

SWCA. Incorporated Material Received: 10/11/2006

Sample Data Measured Radiocarbon Age

13C/12C Ratio

Conventional Radiocarbon Age(*)

Beta - 222191 840 +/- 50 BP -I1.3 o/oo SAMPLE: NM-11-51-55 FS38 ANALYSIS: AMS-Standard delivery MATERIAL/PRETREATMENT: (charred material): acid/alkal/iacid 2 SIGMA CAI.InRATION : Cal AD 890 to 1030 (CalBP 1060 to 920)

I060 +/- 50 BP

Beta- 222192 2120 +/- 40 BP -13.7 o/oo 2310 +/- 40 BP SAMPIE: NM-11-51-55 FS59 ANALYSIS: AMS-Standard delivery MATERIAJIPRETREATMENT: (charred material): acid/alkali/acid 2 SIGMA CALIBRATION : Cal BC 410 to 360 (Cal BP 2360 to 2310) AND Cal BC 280 to 240 (Cal BP 2230 to 2190)

Beta- 222193 3120 +/- 40 BP -11.5 o/oo SAMPLE : NM-11-51-55 FS227 ANALYSIS: AMS-Standard delivery MATERIAIJPRETREATMENT : (charred material):acid/alkali/acid 2 SIGMA CALIBRATION Cal BC 1720 to 1520 (CalBP 3670 to 3470)

3340 +/- 40 BP

Beta - 222194 2050 +/- 40 13P -10.9 o/oo 2280 +I- 40 BP SAMPLE : NM-11-51·55 FS228 ANALYSIS . AMS-Standard delivery MA TF.RIAUPRETREATMENT : (charred material): acid/alkail/acid 2 SIGMA CALlBRATION : CalBC 400 to 350 (Cal BP 2350 to 2300) AND Cal BC 310 to 210 (Cal BP 2260 to 2160)

Beta-222195 2010 +/-40BP -11.7o/oo SAMPLE : NM-H-51-55 F$249 ANALYSIS: AMS-Standard delivery MATERIAL/PRETREATMENT : (charred material):acid/alkalifacid 2 SIGMA CALIBRATION : Cal BC 390 to 190 (Cal BP 2340 to 2140)

2230 +/- 40 RP

Dates are reported as RCYBP (raduicarbon years before present, ·present"= 1950A.D.). By International convention, the modern

reference standard was 95% of the C14 content of the National Bureau of Standards' Oxalic Acid & calculated using the Libby C14 half life (5568 years). Quoted errors represent 1 standard deviation statistics (68% probability) & are based on comb1ned measurements of the sample,background,and modern reference standards.

Measured C13/C12 ratios were calculated relative to the PDB-1 international standard and the RCYBP ages were normalized to -25 per mil. If tine rao and age are accompanied by an ("), then the C13/C12 value was estimated, based on values typical of the materialtype. The quoted results are NOT calibrated to calendar years.Calibration to calendar years should be calculated using the Conventional C14 age.


BETA ANALYTIC INC UNIVERSITY BRANCH • 4985 S.W. 74 COURT

MIAMI, FLORIDA,USA 33155 DR.M.A.TAMERS and MR. D.G. HOOD PH: 305/667-5167 FAX: 305/663-0964

E-MAIL:[email protected]

REPORT OF RADIOCARBON DATING ANALYSES

Or. Steven Carothers/Jim Railey Report Date: I I /9/2006

Sample Data Measured Radiocarbon Age

13C/12C Ratio

Conventional Radiocarbon Age(*)

Beta - 222196 SAMPLE: NM-H-51-55 FS257 ANALYSIS: AMS-Standard delivery

1990 +/- 40 BP -10.7 o/oo 2220 +/- 40 BP

MATERIAUPRETREATMENT: (charred material): acid/alkali/acid 2 SIGMA CALIBRATION : Cal BC 390 to 180 (Cal BP 2340 to 2130)

Beta- 222197 2100 +1- 40 BP -12.9 o/oo 2300 +/- 40 BP SAMPLE: NM-H-51-55 FS268 ANALYSIS: AMS-Standard delivery MATER I A I.JPRETREATM ENT : (charred material): acid/alkali/acid 2 SIGMA CALl BRATION : Cal BC 410 to 360 (Cal BP 2360 to 2310) AND Cal DC 290 to 230 (Ca l BP 2240 to 2180)

Dates are reponed as RCYBP (raduicarbon years before present, •presenr = 1950A.D.). By International convention, the modern reference standard was 95% of the C14 content of the National Bureau of Standards" Oxalic Acid & calculated using the Libby C14 half life (5568 years}. Quoted errors represent 1 standard deviation statistics (68% probabtlrty) & are based on combined measurements of the sample,background,and modem reference standards.

Measured C13/C12 ratios were calculated relative to the PDB-1 Internationalstandard and the RCYBP ages were normalized to -25 per mil If the ratio and age are accompanied by an ("}, then the C13/C12 value was estimated, based on values typicalof the material type.The quoted results are NOT calibrated to calendar years.Calibration to calendar years should be calculated using the ConventionalC14 age.

Appendb; B Beta Sheets 361

CALIBRATION OF RAD IOC ARBON AGE TO CALENDA R Y EA R S

(Variables: C 13/C 12=-1 1.3:lab. mult= I )

La bo r atory nu m ber: B et a-2221 91

Con ventio n a l rad ioca rbon age: 1060±50 BP

v

2 Si gma ca lib r ate d r esult: Cal AD 890 to 1030 (Ca l BP 1060 to 920) (95% p ro b abili ty)

Int ercept of radiocarbon age

Intercept data

with calibrati on curve: Ca l AD 990 (Cal BP 960)

I Sigma calibra ted result: Cal AD 960 to I 020 (Cal BP 990 to 930) (68% prob::bility)

1250

1200

1150

tei: 1100

"!i' c: 1050 e0

... ""'' 1000

950

1060±50 BP

900

850 ' 860 880 900 920 940 960 980 1000 1020 1040

CalAD

References: Dalabauused

1\"TCl/.98 Cal/bralioll Dalabau Et/1/0ria/ Co mm •11t

Stull'c'r..\f . l'tlltdu Pltcflt, II .1998. RatliOC'<Irbett 4flfJ). p.w·llii f'\TCAL 98 Radiocarbon AgCalibralion

Stun r. M , t1 al. 1998, Ratltocarbon 40{3), p/04/-/(}83 M ath•matics A Stmp/ijit!d Approac/tiD Calibraling C/4 Dales

Talma. A.S.. l'ogel, J C. /993, Ratltocarbon JS{]), pJ/7-311

B e ta Analytic Radio carbo n D atin g Laborat ory 98J S W lltlt Court..\fwmt, Florida JJ /JJ • T•l (J OJ)66 7-J/67 • F a.v (3OJ )66J ·0964 • F-Mml btlact radtarurban.com


CALIBRATION OF RADIOCARBON AGE TO CALENDAR YEARS

(Variab l es: CI3/C I 2 -13.7:1ab. mult- I)

Laboratory number: Beta -222192

Conve n tiona l radiocarbon age: 2310± 40 BP

'

2 Sigma calibrated resu lts: (95% probabili ty )

Int erce pt of radiocarbon age

Ca l DC 41 0 to 360 (Cal BP 2360 to 2310) a n d Ca l B C 280 to 240 (Cal BP 2230 to 2190)

In tercept dati

with calibration curve: Cal BC 390 (Ca l BP 2340 )

I Sigma calibrated result: Cal BC 400 to 380 (Cal BP 2350 to 2330) (68% probabilit))

fe.L.: ll

i

2440 2420 2400 2380 2360 2HO 2320 2300 2280

231Ot40 BP Charred m atenal

a: 2260

2HO

2220

2200

2180 , 2160

300

280

280 240

420 400 380 380 340 320

CIIBC

R eferences: Damhose u setl

IVTC.4L 9S Calibration Databau Editorial Comm Ml

Strtl>· r. If . nmdu Plic/11, If 1998. Rodt«arbon 40()), p. ll·.f/11 lt\"TC,II. 98 Rudlorurbo n AgC ttlibrution

Stui•w. M, et. nl., 1998, Rtultocorbon 4fi(J J. piO.fi-108J M ntlremutiC$ A Slmplijid Appro«II to Calibrating CU Datr•

Talmo, A S l'og l. J C. 199J. Rodtororbon Jj{]J, pJf7.J11

Beta Analytic Radiocarbon Dating Laboratory 498 S S If Ntlt Co11rt, Mtallll, f'lorlda JJ ISS • Ttl (J 05)66 7-S/67 • F o.<: (J OS)66J -1196.J • E·M(/tf b IIIYiilrodtocorbon w nr


CALIBRATION OF RADIOCARBON AGE TO C ALENDAR YE ARS

(Variables: CI3/CI2"'-II.S:Iab. mult==l)

Labo r a t ory number: B etn-222 1 93

Co n ven tiona l ra d ioca rbon age: 33-40± 40 BP

2 Sigma ca lib r a ted r esu l t: Ca l B C 1720 to 1520 (Ca l BP 3670 t o 3470) (95% probab ili ty)

Intercept of radiocarbon age

In tcrccp t data

with calibration cu r ve: Ca l BC 1620 (Ca l BP 3580)

I Sigma calibrated result: Cal BC 1680 to 1540 (Cal BP 3630 to 3490) (68% probability)

fe::

.,

H60 H80 3HO 3420 3400 11110 3360 3340 3320 3300 3260 3260 3240 3220 3200

3340140BP

' 1740 1no 1700 1680

References:

Database u sed INTC AL 98

Calibration Databau Editorial Comm nt

1660 1640 1620 leQO CaiBC

1580 1500

Stu11w, M , vn11der Plkht, 11.1998, Rr ltocarbo11 .f(}{J). pxii-xiii I NTCA L98 Radiocnrboll AgColibratlo11

Stu11·.r .11. n a/., 1998. Rad1ocarbon 4(}(J). pJnn.f08J M athe mntics 11 Simplified Approtll.'h to Cn/ibratl11g C /4 Dates

Talmo, A S. l'og l. J C. /99) RadiOl'arbon Jj(}), pJ/7-322

Beta Analytic Radiocarbon Dating Laboratory J9SJ S.ll 7Jih Co•rt. """"' Flor1da JJ/JJ • Trl (J0J)661.Jt61 • Fax (JOJ)66J-096J • £-\loll· hr oi].radlocorboll curn


CALIBRATION OF RADIOCARBON AGE TO CALENDAR Y EARS

( Variables: C I 3/CI 2 -10.9:lab. mulr-1 )

La bora tory ou m ber: Bet a-222194

Co nvcntio n:1l radiocarbo n age: 2280±40 BP

0

2 Sigma ca librated res ults: (95% probabili ty)

Inter cept of radi ocarbon age

Cal B C 400 to 350 (Cal BP 2350 to 2300) and Cal B C 310 to 210 (Cal BP 2 260 t o 2160)

In te rcep1 data

with calibration cu r ve: Cal BC 380 (Ca I BP 2330 )

igma calibrated result: Cal BC 390 t o360(Cal BP 2340 to 2320) (68% p r o bability)

1a.5.:: li

2420 2400 2380 2380 2340 2320 2300

228 40 BP ChMred matenll

c 2280 €g ., a":'

2260 2240 2220 2200 2180 2160 2140

v J '¥

420 400 380 360 340 320 300 280 260 CaiBC

240 220 200

R e fe rc nces:

Databauuud 11\' /C AL 98

Calibration Database Editorial Comm lit

Stutrtr, ,\1., •·andu Pltcllf , H 1998, Ruchocarb011 .J{)(JJ , pxu "" I N TCAL98 Radiocarbon 1l gt Cnlibratlo11

Stllll'tr, AI, u of.. /998, Rndt ocarbon ./O(J). p/0./ /- / {)83 /1/atltt matic:s A Simp/ifittd A pproac/1 to Cal/brati11g CU DatttS

Talmn, A S , l'ogtl, J C.. 1993. Ratf10mrbo11 J5(J). p J/7-J]]

Beta Analytic Radiocarbon Dating Laboratory ./98 5 :> If 7 41h Cu11r1, .If tom<, f'londa JJ /j5 • T<l (J05)66 7-J/ 67 • Fax (J OJ)66J $6./ • E-.llotl b<laratllt)<arbDn com


CALIBRATION OF RADIOCARBON AGE TO CALENDAR YEARS

(Va riabl es: C I 3/C I 2=-11.7:1ab. mulr-1)

Laborato ry nu mbc •·: B eta -222195

Co n ven t io na l rad iocarb o n a ge: 2230± 40 BP

..

2 ig m a calibra ted r es ult: (95% pro b a bili ty)

I nter ce pt s or radiocarbon age

Ca l B C 390 to 190 (Cal BP 2 340 t o 2 1 40)

Intercept data

with calibration curve: Cal BC 360 (Cal OP 23 10)and Cal BC 280 (Cal BP 2230)and Cal BC 240 (Cal BP 2190)

ISigma calibrated results: (68% probability)

Cal BC 380 to 34 0 (Cal BP 2330 to 2290) and Cal BC 320 to 210 (Cal BP 2270 to 2160)

6e:. "

2360 2340 2320 2300 2280 2260 2240

2230.40BP

Charred malenal

I2220

,2200

0: 2180

2160

2140

2120

2100

T ' , 2080

400 380 Rererences:

360

340 320

300 280

CaiBC

260 240 220 200 180

Dotabau uud "'rc •L 9S

Calibration Database Editorial Comm elll

Swll'l'r. M, ••andtr Plic/rt, II , /998, Rto:ftocorbon tn(J). p.rrr-.wi INTCAL 98 Rtrtllocarbon Age Ctlllbrntlon

Stuiwr, ,\1. n nl., /998, Radromrbon 40(3), p/0.//-/(),SJ t.f othtmatics A Sinrplifi d Approaclr to Calibrating CU Data

Tnlma A S f 'ogd.J C. /99J. Radrororban Jj(]), pJ 17-J21

Beta Analytic Radiocarbon Dating Laboratory H$JS.W 74rh Courr Mtumt, FlortduJJ/SJ • Ttl (JOJ)661·Jt67 · Ft»t (JfiJJ66J·0964 • E·Matl bttuttrudtonrr uncom


CALIBRATION OF RADIOCARBON AGE TO CALENDAR Y EARS

(Variables: C13/CI2=-10.7:1ab. mulrl)

La bora tory numbe r: B ct a-222196

Co n vent io n al ra di oca rb o n a ge: 2220± 40 BP

2 S ig ma calihrated r es ult: Ca l B C 390 t o 180 (Cal BP 2340 t o 2 130) (95% pro ba bili ty)

Intercepts of radiocarbon age

In tc rcep t da Ia

with ca l ibration curve: Cal BC 360 (Cal BP 2310)a nd Cal BC 290 (Cal BP 2240)and Cal BC 230 (Cal BP 2180)

I Sigma calibrated result: Cal BC 370 to200(Cal OP 2320 to 2150) (68% probability)

2220BP Ch•red materill

2360 ,-----,----- ---- ---- ---- ----r-----r---r--- r----,---- _,

2340

2320

2300

2280

Ie.S..: S'

2260 2HO

c: 2220

.e0.,. 2200 a: 2180

2160

2HO

2120

2100

2080 400 380 360 3 320 300 280 260 240

CaiBC

220 200 180 160

References: Dotabau 11Ud

I\TC.4L9 Calibration Databu u Editorial Comm cmt

Swt•·er, M , ••onder Plfcht, 11.1998, Rt "ocarbOit .fii(J), p:m·.flll 1NT C;tL98 Radlot:arbon Age Ccllibrotion

Stun·u. 1/ rt al.. 1998, Rlldtot:orbon .fii(J), plfl.f/.J08J Matlr matics A Simplified Approoch to Calibrating CU Data

Talmo, A. S.. l'ogel.J (', 1993, Rad111corbon 35{]), fiJ f 7-312

Beta Analytic Radiocarbon Dating Laboratory -19$$ S IJ' Uth Coort, \ltunu Flortdll JJ ISS • Ttl (J0$)66 •.jf 61 ·Far ()0$)66) -996-1 • E·.lfllrl bmru mdtocarbon to•


CALIBRATION OF RAD IOCARBON AGE TO CALENDAR Y EARS

( Variable s: C 1 3/C 12--12.9:1ab. mui r I )

Labo ratory nu mber:

Co n ven tio na l ra d ioca rb o n a ge: 2 Sig m a calib r ated r es ults:

(95% p rob a bili ty)

Intercep t or radiocarbon age

Bct :J -222197

2300± 40 B P Cal BC 410 t o 360 (Cal DP 2 360 t o 2310) and Cal BC 290 to 230 (Cal llP 2 240 t o 2180)

I n tc rcep t data

wi th cal ibrati on cur ve: Ca l BC 390 (Ca l B P 2340)

I Sigma calibrated result: Cal BC 400 t o 370 ( Cal BP 2350 to 2320) (68% probabilit) )

6:'

2HO 2HO 2400 2380 2360 2310

2300HO BP Charre d malerlal

!.!!.. 2320 P. c: 2300

g 2280 'C fi 2280

2240

2220

2200

2180

l .. 2160

420 400 380 360 340 320 300 260 260 CaiBC

240 220 200

R efere nces:

Databasused I \ TC.I.

Calibration D atabau Editorial Comm ent

S tu l ••er, M.. v ande r 1'/ icllt. fl. 1 998, R fll fl ocarbon 10(1). pXII ·.< II I N 1'CAL98 Radioca rbon Age Cirlibratio n

Stum•r. \ (. u a/.. /998, fl.adrororbon 40(3), p/041-1083 M athmatics 11 Sim plified A pproaclrto Calibrating CU D ottS

T almo, A. S .. l'ogel, J C. 1993, Radrocarbon JS{l),fJ J /i-J ZZ

Beta Analyt ic Radiocarbon Dating Laboratory 49.YJSW •.1rh Co•rt \(rami. Fl«rdaJJ/SS • T.t (JOJ)M1.j/67 · Fax (Jflj)66J41964 · E·.llorl brtn a radJocarlo>• <o•


BETA ANALVYTIC INC • 4985 SW 74 Court,Miami. FIOnda 33155 USA·Tel 305·667·5167 ·Fax 305·663·0964 • betaOradoocaroon.com

PRETREATMENT GLOSSARY Standard Pretreatment Protocols at Beta Analytic

(Continued)

"collagen e1tractio n: with alkali o r collagen extraction:"lthout alkali

The matenal was first tested for friab1hty ("softness"). Very soil bone material is an mdication oflhc po1cnt1al absence of the collagen fraction (basal bone protcon nc11ng as n "remforcing agent" withm the cryMalhne apatite structure). It was lhen washed in dc·ionued water. tbe surface scraped free of the outer most layers and then gently crushed. Dolute, cold HCI acid was repeatedly apphcd and replenished untillhe mineral fraction (bone apalltc) was eliminated.The collagen was then dissected and inspected for rootlets. Any rootlets present were also removed when replenishing the acid solutions. "With alkal i" refers to additional pretrcatmenl wuh sodmm hydroxide (NaOH) to ensure the absence of secondary organic acids. "Without alkali" refers to the NaOH step being skipped due to poor preser\'ation conditions, which could result in rerno,•al of all available organics if performed.

Typically applied to bone,

"acid etrb"

The calcareoumatcnal was first washed m de-ionized water.remo\ang associated organic sediments and dcbns (where present).The material was then crushcdid1spcrsed and repeatedly subjected to HCI etches to elmrinate secondary carbonate components. In the case of thick shells. lhc surfaces were phy51cally abraded prior to etchmg down to a hard. pnmary core remamcd In the case of porous carbonate nodules and cahches. very long exposure timewere apphed to allow infLitrarioo of the actd. Acid exposure times. concentrations.and number ofrepeuuons, were applied accordingly with the uniqueness of the sample.

Typically applied to: shell, caliches, and calcareous nodules

"neutralized"

Carbonates precrpnoted from ground water arc usually submmcd m an alkahne coodmoo (ammonium llydroxide or sod1um hydroxrde soluuon).Typically th1s solut1on 1neutrah1ed m the original sample contamer. usmg dc1onized "'ater lflarger \Oiumc d1luuon "as requ red. lhe precipitate and 'Oiution were tranSferred to a sealed < eparatory Oask and nnsed to neuualtty E posurc to atmo,phcre wa., m1rumal.

Typ•cally apphed to: Strontium carbonate, Barium carbonate (1.c:. precipitated ground water amples)

"carbonate precipltollon"

Dissol\'ed carbon d1ox1de and carbonnte spec1es are prcc1p11atcd from submitted water by complexing them as nmmomum carbonate. Strnntium chlondc " added to the arnmomum carbonate -olutttm and tronuum carbonate is precipitated for the analysis.The result is representative of the d"wlvcd morgamc carbon w1lhin the water Result> arc reported as "water DIC"

Apphed to:water

"soheot extraction"

The sample wa;, subJeCt 'd to"sene'> of solvent baths typ1cally con\I Ung of benzene. toluene. hexane, pentane, and/or acetone. This is usually performed pnor to acid/alkali/acid pretreatments.

Appl ied to: textiles, prcvnlcnl or suspcc1cd cases of pilchltar contarnonation.conserved materials.

"none"

No laboratory pretreatments were applied. Special requests and prel·aboratory pretreatment usually account• for lh1s

APPENDIX C LITHIC DATA

Appendix C Lithic Data 384

Table C.1. Lithic Debitage Data

Site (NM-H-)

FS

Material

Texture Length

(cm) Thickness

(cm) Weight

(g) Completeness Percent

Cortex Platform

35-19 4 Petrified Wood Fine 2.64 0.51 1.35 Flake Fragment 11 None

35-19 5 Chert Medium 2.07 0.47 1.34 Flake Fragment 0 None

35-19 5 Igneous Medium 3.24 0.61 3.62 Flake Fragment 0 None

35-19 8 Chert Medium 2.56 0.88 2.87 Debris 1 None


35-19 8 Narbona Pass Chert Fine 2.63 0.47 1.33 Flake Fragment 0 None


35-19 8 Quartzite Coarse 4.40 0.45 6.80 Flake Fragment 0 None

35-19 8 Quartzite Medium 2.93 0.52 2.89 Broken 0 Crushed

35-19 9 Igneous Fine 3.08 0.72 3.40 Flake Fragment 0 None



35-19 11 Chert Fine 2.62 0.56 1.44 Flake Fragment 0 None


35-19 14 Chalcedony Fine 1.96 0.33 0.61 Flake Fragment 1 None





35-19 15 Chert Fine 2.20 0.21 0.51 Complete 0 Faceted





35-19 15 Petrified Wood Fine 1.85 0.21 0.58 Broken 0 Crushed


35-19 15 Petrified Wood Fine 2.29 0.34 0.91 Broken 0 Faceted

35-19 15 Quartzite Medium 1.96 0.18 0.49 Debris 0 None

35-19 15 Rainbow Petrified Wood Fine 2.01 0.27 0.53 Flake Fragment 0 None






35-19 19 Quartzite Coarse 2.21 0.30 1.14 Complete 0 Plain



35-19 27 Quartzite Coarse 5.10 1.51 27.91 Complete 0 Crushed

35-19 30 Petrified Wood Fine 3.39 0.69 4.85 Debris 11 None

35-19 36 Quartzite Medium 3.29 0.90 3.36 Flake Fragment 0 None






Site (NM-H-)

FS

Material

Texture Length

(cm) Thickness

(cm) Weight


Cortex Platform


















35-19 61 Petrified Wood Fine 1.35 0.25 0.25 Complete 1 Cortical




35-19 61 Petrified Wood Fine 1.01 0.13 0.05 Broken 0 Plain









35-19 61 Rainbow Petrified Wood Fine 0.88 0.12 0.05 Complete 0 Faceted



35-19 62 Chert Fine 0.61 0.13 0.03 Broken 0 Plain


35-19 62 Petrified Wood Fine 1.37 0.17 0.14 Complete 0 Faceted

35-19 62 Petrified Wood Fine 0.78 0.10 0.04 Complete 0 Crushed






35-19 62 Zuni Buttes Spotted Chert Fine 2.47 0.39 0.94 Flake Fragment 1 None





Site (NM-H-)

FS

Material

Texture Length

(cm) Thickness

(cm) Weight


Cortex Platform















51-55 27 Petrified Wood Medium 2.21 0.43 1.05 Flake Fragment 1 None

51-55 33 Petrified Wood Medium 3.07 0.43 2.72 Broken 1 Crushed

51-55 34 Petrified Wood Medium 3.31 0.39 2.35 Debris 11 None
















51-55 54 Petrified Wood Medium 7.62 0.80 12.39 Tabular Wood 100 None















Site (NM-H-)

FS

Material

Texture Length

(cm) Thickness

(cm) Weight


Cortex Platform












































51-55 133 Chalcedony Fine 0.56 0.08 0.02 Complete 0 Plain




Site (NM-H-)

FS

Material

Texture Length

(cm) Thickness

(cm) Weight


Cortex Platform






51-55 133 Narbona Pass Chert Fine 0.75 0.10 0.05 Complete 0 Faceted










































Site (NM-H-)

FS

Material

Texture Length

(cm) Thickness

(cm) Weight


Cortex Platform



51-55 133 Petrified Wood Fine 0.68 0.05 0.02 Complete 0 Plain













































Site (NM-H-)

FS

Material

Texture Length

(cm) Thickness

(cm) Weight


Cortex Platform

51-55 133 Zuni Buttes Spotted Chert Medium 1.21 0.16 0.11 Flake Fragment 0 None













51-55 136 Petrified Wood Medium 1.34 0.16 0.15 Broken 0 Plain


































Site (NM-H-)

FS

Material

Texture Length

(cm) Thickness

(cm) Weight


Cortex Platform

































51-55 156 Brushy Basin Chert Fine 2.58 0.34 1.13 Complete 11 None




51-55 156 Chert Medium 1.45 0.36 0.37 Complete 1 Plain


51-55 156 Chert Fine 0.93 0.16 0.08 Broken 0 Crushed









Site (NM-H-)

FS

Material

Texture Length

(cm) Thickness

(cm) Weight


Cortex Platform































51-55 156 Petrified Wood Fine 1.45 0.18 0.27 Broken 1 Cortical














