| By Author | [ A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z | Other Symbols ] |
| By Title | [ A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z | Other Symbols ] |
| By Language |
|
Download this book: [ ASCII ] Look for this book on Amazon Tweet |
Title: Prehistoric villages, castles, and towers of southwestern Colorado
Author: Fewkes, Jesse Walter
Language: English
As this book started as an ASCII text book there are no pictures available.
*** Start of this LibraryBlog Digital Book "Prehistoric villages, castles, and towers of southwestern Colorado" ***
CASTLES, AND TOWERS OF SOUTHWESTERN COLORADO ***
Transcriber’s Notes:
Underscores “_” before and after a word or phrase indicate _italics_
in the original text.
Small capitals have been converted to SOLID capitals.
Illustrations have been moved so they do not break up paragraphs.
Old or antiquated spellings have been preserved.
Typographical and punctuation errors have been silently corrected.
SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION
BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY
BULLETIN 70
PREHISTORIC VILLAGES, CASTLES, AND
TOWERS OF SOUTHWESTERN
COLORADO
BY
J. WALTER FEWKES
[Illustration]
WASHINGTON
GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
1919
LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL
SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION,
BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY,
_Washington, D. C., January 23, 1919_.
SIR: I have the honor to transmit the accompanying manuscript,
entitled “Prehistoric Villages, Castles, and Towers of
Southwestern Colorado,” by J. Walter Fewkes, and to recommend its
publication, subject to your approval, as Bulletin 70 of this Bureau.
Very respectfully,
J. WALTER FEWKES,
_Chief_.
DR. CHARLES D. WALCOTT,
_Secretary of the Smithsonian Institution_.
CONTENTS
Page
Introduction 9
Historical 10
Classification 14
Villages 16
Rectangular ruins of the pure type 16
Surouaro 16
Goodman Point Ruin 17
Johnson Ruin 18
Bug Mesa Ruin 19
Mitchell Spring Ruin 19
Mud Spring (Burkhardt) Ruin 20
Ruin with semicircular core 22
Wolley Ranch Ruin 22
Blanchard Ruin 23
Ruins at Aztec Spring 23
Great open-air ruins south and southwest
of Dove Creek post office 28
Squaw Point Ruin 28
Acmen Ruin 29
Oak Spring House 29
Ruin in Ruin Canyon 30
Cannonball Ruin 30
Circular ruins with peripheral compartments 31
Wood Canyon Ruins 32
Butte Ruin 32
Emerson Ruin 33
Escalante Ruin 36
Cliff-dwellings 37
Cliff-dwellings in Sand Canyon 38
Double cliff-house 38
Scaffold in Sand Canyon 38
Unit type houses in caves 39
Cliff-houses in Lost Canyon 40
Great houses and towers 40
Masonry 40
Structure of towers 42
Hovenweep district 44
Ruin Canyon 44
Square Tower Canyon 45
Classification of ruins in
Square Tower Canyon 46
Hovenweep House (Ruin 1) 46
Hovenweep Castle 47
Western section of Hovenweep Castle 47
Eastern section of Hovenweep Castle 48
Ruin 3 48
Ruin 4 49
Ruin 5 49
Ruin 6 49
Eroded bowlder house (Ruin 7) 49
Twin Towers (Ruin 8) 50
Ruin 9 50
Unit type House (Ruin 10) 50
Stronghold House (Ruin 11) 51
Ruins in Holly Canyon 52
Ruin A, Great House, Hackberry Castle 52
Towers [C and D] 52
Holly House 53
Ruins in Hackberry Canyon 53
Horseshoe House 53
Towers in the Main Yellow Jacket Canyon 54
Davis Tower 55
Lion (Littrell) Tower 55
McLean Basin 55
Tower in Sand Canyon 57
Towers in Road (Wickyup) Canyon 57
Towers of the Mancos 58
Holmes Tower 58
Towers on the Mancos River below the bridge 59
Tower A 59
Tower B 59
Megalithic and slab house ruins at McElmo Bluff 60
Grass Mesa Cemetery 64
Reservoirs 64
Pictographs 65
Minor antiquities 66
Historic remains 68
Conclusions 68
Index 77
ILLUSTRATIONS
PLATES
1. _a_, Butte Ruin.
_b_, Aztec Spring Ruin.
_c_, Surouaro, Yellow Jacket Spring Ruin.
2. _a_, Blanchard Ruin.
_b_, Blanchard Ruin, Mound 2.
_c_, Surouaro, Yellow Jacket Spring Ruin.
3. _a_, Acmen Ruin.
_b_, Mud Spring Ruin.
4. _a_, Building on rock pinnacle, near Stone Arch, Sand Canyon.
_b_, Stone Arch, Sand Canyon.
5. _a_, Tower in Sand Canyon.
_b_, Unit type House in Sand Canyon.
6. _a_, Stone Arch House, Sand Canyon.
_b_, Cliff-house, showing broken corner.
7. _a_, Scaffold in Sand Canyon.
_b_, Storage cist in Mancos Valley.
_c_, Pictographs near Unit type House in cave.
8. Double cliff-dwelling, Sand Canyon.
9. _a_, Cliff-dwelling under Horseshoe Ruin.
_b_, Cliff-dwelling, Ruin Canyon.
10. _a_, Kiva of cliff ruin, Lost Canyon.
_b_, Cliff ruin, Lost Canyon.
11. _a_, Square Tower in Square Tower Canyon.
_b_, Tower in McLean Basin.
_c_, Ruin in Hill Canyon, Utah.
12. Head of South Fork, Square Tower Canyon.
13. North Fork of Square Tower Canyon, looking west.
14. _a_, Hovenweep House and Hovenweep Castle, from the south.
_b_, Hovenweep Castle, from the west.
_c_, Hovenweep Castle, from the south.
15. _a_, West end of Twin Tower, showing small cliff-house.
_b_, Twin Towers, Square Tower Canyon, from the south.
_c_, Tower 4, junction of North and South Forks,
Square Tower Canyon.
16. _a_, Hovenweep Castle, with Sleeping Ute Mountain, South Fork,
Square Tower Canyon.
_b_, Entrance to South Fork, Square Tower Canyon.
17. Stronghold House, Square Tower Canyon.
18. _a_, Head of Holly Canyon.
_b_, South side of Hovenweep Castle, Square Tower Canyon.
19. _a_, Holly Canyon group, from the east.
_b_, Great House at head of Holly Canyon, from the north.
_c_, Unit type Ruin, from the east.
20. _a_, Great House at head of Holly Canyon, from the south.
_b_, Ruin B at head of Holly Canyon, from the west.
_c_, Great House at head of Holly Canyon.
21. _a_, Great House, Holly Canyon.
_b_, Stronghold House and Twin Towers, Square Tower Canyon.
22. _a_, Hovenweep Castle.
_b_, Southern part of Cannonball Ruin, McElmo Canyon.
23. _a_, Square tower with rounded corners, Holly Canyon.
_b_, Holly Tower in Holly Canyon.
_c_, Horseshoe House.
24. _a_, Horseshoe Ruin.
_b_, Bowlder Castle, Road (Wickyup) Canyon.
25. _a_, Closed doorway in Bowlder Castle, Road (Wickyup) Canyon.
_b_, Broken-down round tower, Square Tower Canyon.
26. _a_, North side of tower, Square Tower Canyon.
_b_, D-shaped tower near Davis ranch, Yellow Jacket Canyon.
_c_, Model of towers in McLean Basin.
27. Round tower and D-shaped tower in McLean Basin.
28. _a_, D-shaped tower in McLean Basin,
showing cross section of wall.
_b_, Round tower in McLean Basin, showing standing stone slab.
29. _a_, Holmes Tower, Mancos Canyon.
_b_, Lion Tower, Yellow Jacket Canyon.
30. _a_, Tower above cavate storehouses, Mancos Canyon,
below bridge.
_b_, Tower on mesa between eroded cliffs and bridge over Mancos
Canyon, on Cortez Ship-rock Road.
31. _a_, Tower above cavate storehouses, Mancos Canyon,
below bridge.
_b_, Eroded shale formation in which are small walled cavate
storehouses.
32. _a_, Reservoir near Picket corral, showing retaining wall.
_b_, Kiva, Unit type House, Square Tower Canyon.
33. Pictographs, Yellow Jacket Canyon.
TEXT FIGURES
Page
1. Ground plan of Aztec Spring Ruin 26
2. Ground plan of Wood Canyon Ruin 32
3. Metes and bounds of Emerson Ruin 34
4. Schematic ground plan of Emerson Ruin 35
5. Ground plan of Unit type House in cave 39
6. Square Tower Canyon 45
7. Ground plan of Hovenweep House 46
8. Ground plan of Hovenweep Castle 47
9. Ground plan of Twin Towers 50
10. Ground plan of Unit type House 51
11. Holly Canyon Ruins 52
12. Horseshoe (Hackberry) Canyon 53
13. Ground plan of Horseshoe House 54
14. Ground plan of Davis Ruin 55
15. Ground plan of Lion House 55
16. Ground plan of ruin with towers in McLean Basin 56
17. Doorway in Round Tower, McLean Basin 57
18. Megalithic stone inclosure, McElmo Bluff 61
PREHISTORIC VILLAGES, CASTLES, AND TOWERS OF SOUTHWESTERN COLORADO
By J. WALTER FEWKES
INTRODUCTION
The science of archeology has contributed to our knowledge some of
the most fascinating chapters in culture history, for it has brought
to light, from the night of the past, periods of human development
hitherto unrecorded. As the paleontologist through his method has
revealed faunas whose like were formerly unknown to the naturalist, the
archeologist by the use of the same method of research has resurrected
extinct phases of culture that have attained a high development and
declined before recorded history began. No achievements in American
anthropology are more striking than those that, from a study of human
buildings and artifacts antedating the historic period, reveal the
existence of an advanced prehistoric culture of man in America.
The evidences of a phase of culture that had developed and was on the
decline before the interior of North America was explored by Europeans
are nowhere better shown than in southwestern Colorado, New Mexico,
Arizona, and Utah, the domain of the Cliff-dwellers, or the cradle of
the Pueblos. There flourished on what is now called the Mesa Verde
National Park, in prehistoric times, a characteristic culture unlike
that of any region in the United States. This culture reached its
apogee and declined before the historic epoch, but did not perish
before it had left an influence extending over a wide territory, which
persisted into modern times. Through the researches of archeologists
the nature of this culture is now emerging into full view; but much
material yet remains awaiting investigation before it can be adequately
understood. The purpose of this article is to call attention to new
observations bearing upon its interpretation made by the author, under
the auspices of the Bureau of American Ethnology, on brief trips to
Colorado and Utah in 1917 and 1918.
The peculiar cliff-dwellings and open-air villages of the Mesa Verde
are here shown to be typical of those found over a region many miles
in extent. They indicate a distinct culture area, which is easily
distinguished from others where similar buildings do not exist, but
not as readily separated from that of adjacent regions where the
buildings are superficially similar but structurally different. In
order to distinguish it from its neighbors and determine its horizon,
we must become familiar with certain architectural characteristics. As
our knowledge of the character of buildings in this area is incomplete,
the intention of the author is to define the several different types of
buildings that characterize it.
When, in 1915, there was brought to light on the Mesa Verde National
Park, Colorado, the mysterious structure, Sun Temple, the author
recalled well-known descriptions of towers and other related buildings
that have been recorded from other localities in southwestern Colorado
and Utah. The published descriptions of these structures did not seem
to him adequate for comparisons, and he planned an examination of these
great houses and towers, hoping to gather new data that would shed some
light on his interpretation of Sun Temple. During the field work in
1917, thanks to an allotment from the Bureau of American Ethnology for
that purpose, he undertook a reconnoissance in the McElmo district,
where similar buildings are found and where he believed cultural
relatives of the former inhabitants of Mesa Verde once lived. In 1918
he extended his field work still farther. He investigated ruins as far
as the western tributaries of the Yellow Jacket Canyon, penetrating a
short distance beyond the Colorado border into Utah. The object of the
following pages is to make known the more important results of this
visit, and interpret the evidence they present as a contribution to
our knowledge of the extension in prehistoric times of the Mesa Verde
culture area.
HISTORICAL
Attention was first publicly called, about 40 years ago (1875-1877),
by Messrs. Jackson,[1] Holmes, Morgan, and others, to some of the
ruins here considered. It is difficult to identify all of the ruins
mentioned or described by these pioneers. Their “Hovenweep Castle” is
supposed to lie in about the center of the district here considered,
possibly on Square Tower (Ruin) Canyon, although the large castellated
building[2] in Holly Canyon would also fulfill conditions equally
well. Their “Pueblo” may have been situated on the McElmo near the
mouth of Yellow Jacket Canyon. Early writers rather vaguely refer to
a cluster of castles and towers as situated some distance from the
“Burial Place,” which is readily identified on the promontory at the
mouth of the McElmo, as probably those in Square Tower (Ruin) Canyon,
but the cluster may be either at Square Tower or Holly Canyon, both
of which are about the same distance from this site. As “Pueblo” is
not indicated on the map accompanying the Hayden report, the sites of
rock shelters “some 7 miles from ‘Pueblo’ and 3 miles from the McElmo”
remain doubtful. The author retains the name “Hovenweep Castle” for the
ruin in Square Tower Canyon.
[1] Ancient Ruins in Southwestern Colorado. Rept. U.S. Geol. Surv.
Terr. (Hayden Survey) for 1874, Washington, 1876.
[2] The situation of a spring near Hovenweep Castle indicates that the
Great House may be the Hovenweep Castle of early writers.
In his account of ruins in the region visited, Prof. W. H. Holmes[3]
considers several other ruins, as “the triple-walled tower” (here
called Mud Spring village, p. 20), ruins at Aztec Spring (p. 23),
cliff-dwellings and towers of the San Juan and Mancos, the “slab cysts”
or burial places on the Dolores, and the promontory at the junction
of the Hovenweep and McElmo (p. 60). The best preserved towers and
castellated buildings which his article considers occur on the San Juan
and Mancos Canyons, districts on the periphery of the region covered by
this account.
[3] Report on the ancient ruins of Southwestern Colorado. Tenth Ann.
Rept. U. S. Geol. Surv. Terr. (Hayden Survey) for 1876, Washington,
1879.
These pioneer reports of Jackson and Holmes not only called attention
to a new archeological field, but also introduced to the archeologist
several new types of prehistoric American architecture of which nothing
was previously known. They have been repeatedly quoted and are still
constantly referred to by writers on southwestern archeology.
Although Jackson made many photographs of the castles and towers of
the Hovenweep, none of these were published in his reports, possibly
because halftone methods of reproduction were then unknown. The
illustrations that appear in the text of early reports are mainly
reproductions of sketches. These reports, in which the discovery of
the tower type of architecture and its adjacent cliff-dwellings were
announced, should thus rightly rank as the first important steps in the
scientific investigations of the stone-house builders of this district
of our Southwest; although the allied “Casas Grandes” or great houses
of the Chaco had been described a few years before by Gregg, Stimpson,
and others.
We have, in addition to these pioneer reports, several magazine
articles of about the same date, the material for which was largely
drawn from them. One of the most important newspaper articles of that
date was written by Mr. Ernest Ingersoll, published in the New York
Tribune, and another, of anonymous authorship, is to be found in the
Century Magazine for the year 1877. New forms of towers and castellated
buildings were added in these accounts to those of the earlier authors.
One of the most important contributions to the antiquities of the
region about Mesa Verde was made by the veteran ethnologist, Morgan,
who published notes contributed by Mr. Mitchell on a cluster of mounds
near his ranch. As no name was given this village it is here called
the Mitchell Spring Village. Morgan likewise mentions the ruin at Mud
Spring and a tower in the ruin near his spring. Professor Newberry was
the first author to affix the name Surouaro to a ruin situated at the
head of the Yellow Jacket Canyon.
Several of these ruins were described and figured by Mr. Warren K.
Moorehead as “The Great Ruins of Upper McElmo Creek” in the Illustrated
American for July 9, 1892, the sixth of a series of articles under a
general title “In search of a Lost Race.” He gives descriptions of a
“cave shelter” found near Twin Towers, Square Tower in “Ruin Canyon,”
a building (Hovenweep Castle), and the tower at the junction of the
North and South Forks of Ruin Canyon. This paper is accompanied by a
map of Ruin Canyon by Mr. Cowen. In Moorehead’s discussion of these
remains, individual towers and other ruins are designated by capital
letters, A-V, to some of which are also affixed the names “Hollow
Boulder,” “Twin Towers,” “Square Tower,” etc. Details of structure and
measurements of the more striking buildings and a discussion of certain
features of structure, some of which will be considered later under
individual ruins, are likewise given.
The most important general article yet published on the prehistoric
remains of the region here considered is by Dr. T. Mitchell Prudden,[4]
who also mentions several of the ruins here treated. His most important
contribution is a description of what he calls the “unit type,” which
he recognized as a fundamental structural feature in the pueblos of
this region. He also showed that the kiva in Montezuma Valley villages
is identical with that of cliff-dwellings in the Mesa Verde, and
emphasized, as an important feature, the union of the tower and the
pueblo, a characteristic of the highest form of pueblo architecture.
Doctor Prudden has followed his comprehensive paper above mentioned
with an account[5] of the excavation of one of the mounds at Mitchell
Spring in which he adds to our knowledge of the structure of his “unit
type.”
In “A Further Study of Prehistoric Small House Ruins in the San Juan
Watershed,”[6] Doctor Prudden has furnished important additional data
which shows the uniformity of the unit type over a large area of the
San Juan drainage.
[4] The Prehistoric Ruins of the San Juan Watershed in Utah, Arizona,
Colorado, and New Mexico., Amer. Anthrop., n. s. vol. v, no. 2, 1903.
[5] The Circular Kivas of Small Ruins in the San Juan Watershed. Amer.
Anthrop., n. s. vol. xvi, no. 1, 1914.
[6] Memoirs Amer. Anthrop. Asso., vol. v, no. 1, 1918.
The following among other prehistoric remains in the district
mentioned or described by Doctor Prudden are covered by the author’s
reconnoissance:
1. Ruins at Dolores Bend (Escalante Ruin).
2. Wolley Ranch Ruin.
3. Burkhardt Ruin (Mud Spring Village).
4. Goodman Point Ruin.
5. Unnamed ruin west of Goodman Lake.
6. Ruin at junction of McElmo and Yellow Jacket.
7. Group on Yellow Jacket nearly opposite mouth of Dawson Canyon
(Davis or Littrell Tower).
8. Surouaro.
9. Cannonball Ruin.
10. Towers and buildings of Ruin and Bridge Canyons.
11. Pierson Spring Ruin.
12. Bug Spring Ruins.
The following towers can be identified from his figures:[7]
1. “Square building opposite mouth of Dawson Creek.”
Prudden, pl. xviii, fig. 2. (This building is not
square, but semicircular.)
2. Cannonball Ruin. Prudden, pl. xxi [xxii].
3. “Small tower-like structure ... at the head of Ruin
Canyon, in the Yellow Jacket group.” Prudden, pl.
xxiii, fig. 2. (This building is not in Ruin Canyon,
but in Holly Canyon.)
4. “Tower ... about the head of Ruin Canyon.” Prudden,
pl. xxiii, fig. 1. (This is the most eastern of the
Twin Towers, but not about the head of the canyon.)
5. Sand Canyon Tower. Prudden, pl. xxiv, fig. 2.
Although mainly devoted to descriptions of the cliff-houses of the
Mesa Verde, Baron G. Nordenskiöld’s “Cliff-Dwellers of the Mesa Verde”
discusses in so broad a manner the relationship of pueblo ruins and
cliff-houses that no student can overlook this epoch-making work. In
fact, Nordenskiöld laid the foundations for subsequent students of
pueblo morphology, although some of his comparisons and generalizations
were premature because based on imperfect observations which have been
superseded by later investigations.
The partial excavation of the excellent ruin at the head of Cannonball
Canyon by S. G. Morley[8] sheds considerable light on the morphology
of prehistoric buildings in the McElmo district. Unfortunately
no attempt was made by him to repair the walls of this ruin for
permanent preservation, but it is not too late still to prevent
their further destruction and preserve them for future students and
visitors. Morley’s description of the buildings is accompanied by
good photographs and a ground plan. He brought to light in this ruin
examples of the characteristic unit type kiva.
[7] Amer. Anthrop., n. s. vol. v, no. 2, 1903.
[8] The Excavation of the Cannonball Ruins in Southwestern Colorado.
Amer. Anthrop., n. s. vol. x, no. 4, 1908.
The latest work on the McElmo Ruins, one part of which has already
appeared, is a joint contribution by Morley and Kidder.[9] In this
publication accurate dimensions and sites of ruins in the McElmo and
Square Ruin Canyons are given, with other instructive data. Morley
and Kidder have designated the ruins by Arabic numbers, and in a few
instances by names. The author has preserved these numbers so far as
possible in his account.
The following ruins in Ruin Canyon and neighboring district covered by
this reconnoissance are described by Morley and Kidder:
No. 1. Wickyup Canyon, Ruin 1 and Ruin 2, “Boulder Castle.”
No. 2. Two towers in Ruin Canyon: 1ᵃ, near the mouth; 1ᵇ,
Towers on or near forks, No. 1 [Hovenweep Pueblo],
No. 2 [Hovenweep Castle.]
No. 3. [Square Tower.]
No. 4. [Oval Tower.]
No. 5. [Tower.]
No. 6. [6.]
No. 7. [Boulder Cliff-house.]
No. 8. Twin Towers.
No. 9. [9.]
No. 10. [Unit type House.]
No. 11. Gibraltar House and ruin. [Stronghold House.]
No. 12. [12.]
The pueblos and cave dwellings of the “Pivotal group” (those on or near
the promontory at the junction of the McElmo and Yellow Jacket Canyons)
were also studied by the authors.
Almost the whole article by Morley and Kidder, which the editor
announces will be completed in a future number of “El Palacio,” is
devoted to descriptions of buildings[10] in Ruin and Road (Wickyup)
Canyons and the ruins of the “Pivotal group” at the base of a
promontory between the junction of the Yellow Jacket and McElmo.
[9] The Archaeology of McElmo Canyon, Colorado. El Palacio, vol. iv,
no. 4, Santa Fe, 1917.
[10] The dimensions of buildings and towers given in this article are
welcome additions to our knowledge, but from lack of ground plans
one can not fully determine the arrangement of rooms designated in
individual ruins.
CLASSIFICATION
In the classification by Morley and Kidder and the majority of writers,
sites rather than structural features are adopted as a basis although
all recognized that large cliff-dwellings like Cliff Palace are
practically pueblos built in caves. In the following classification
more attention is directed to differences in structure than to
situation, notwithstanding the latter is convenient for descriptive
purposes.
1. Villages or clusters of houses, each having the form of the pure
pueblo type. The essential feature of the pure type is a compact
pueblo, containing one or more unit types, circular kivas of
characteristic form, surrounded by rectangular rooms. These units,
single or consolidated, may be grouped in clusters, as Mitchell Spring
or Aztec Spring Ruins; the clusters may be fused into a large building,
as at Aztec or in the community buildings on Chaco Canyon.
2. Cliff-houses. These morphologically belong to the same pure type as
pueblos; their sites in natural caves are insufficient to separate them
from open-sky buildings.
3. Towers and great houses. These buildings occur united to
cliff-dwellings or pueblos, but more often they are isolated.
4. Rooms with walls made of megaliths or small stone slabs set on edge.
In reports on the excavation of Far View House[11] on the Mesa Verde,
the author called attention to clusters of mounds indicating ruined
buildings in the neighborhood of Mummy Lake, a little more than 4 miles
from Spruce-tree House. This cluster he considers a village; Far View
House, excavated from one of the mounds, is regarded as a prehistoric
pueblo of the pure type. The forms of other buildings covered by the
remaining mounds of the Mummy Lake site are unknown, but it is probable
that they will be found to resemble Far View House, or that all members
of the village have similar forms.
[11] A Prehistoric Mesa Verde Pueblo and its People. Smithson. Rept.
for 1916, pp. 461-488, 1917. Far View House—a Pure Type of Pueblo Ruin.
Art and Archaeology, vol. vi, no. 3, 1917.
This grouping of small pueblos into villages at Mummy Lake on the Mesa
Verde is also a distinctive feature of ruins in the Montezuma Valley
and McElmo district. In these villages one or more of the component
houses may be larger and more conspicuous, dominating all the others,
as at Goodman Point, or at Aztec Spring. The houses composing the
village at Mud Spring were about the same size, but at Wolley Ranch
Ruin only one mound remains, evidently the largest, the smaller having
disappeared.
The third group, towers and great houses, includes buildings of oval,
circular, semicircular, and rectangular shapes. Morphologically
speaking, they do not present structural features of pueblos, for they
are not terraced, neither have they specialized circular ceremonial
rooms, kivas with vaulted roofs surrounded by rectangular rooms,
or other essential features of the pueblo type. The group contains
buildings which are sometimes consolidated with cliff-houses and
pueblos, but are often independent of them. In this type are included
castellated buildings in the Mancos, Yellow Jacket, McElmo, and the
numerous northern tributary canyons of the San Juan.
VILLAGES
RECTANGULAR RUINS OF THE PURE TYPE
As the word is used in this report, a village is a cluster of houses
separated from each other, each building constructed on the same plan,
viz, a circular ceremonial room or kiva with mural banquettes and
pilasters for the support of a vaulted roof, inclosed in rectangular
rooms. When there is one kiva and surrounding angular rooms we adopt
the name “unit type.” When, as in the larger mounds, there are
indications of several kivas or unit types consolidated—the size
being in direct proportion to the number—we speak of the building as
belonging to the “pure type.” Doctor Prudden, who first pointed out the
characteristics of the “unit type,”[12] has shown its wide distribution
in the McElmo district. The Mummy Lake village has 16 mounds indicating
houses. Far View House, one of these houses, is made up of an
aggregation of four unit types and hence belongs to the author’s “pure
type.”
[12] The situation of the cemetery, one of the characters of Prudden’s
“unit type,” appears constant in one kiva buildings, but is variable
in the pure type, and, as shown in the author’s application of the
unit type to the crowded condition in Spruce-tree House and other
cliff-houses, does not occur in the same position as in pueblos of the
pure type open to the sky.
While villages similar to the Mummy Lake group, in the valleys near
Mesa Verde, have individual variations, the essential features are
the same, as will appear in the following descriptions of Surouaro,
and ruins at Goodman Point, Mud Spring, Aztec Spring, and Mitchell
Spring. Commonly, in these villages, one mound predominates in size
over the others, and while rectangular in form, has generally circular
depressions on the surface, recalling conditions at Far View mound
before excavation. These mounds indicate large buildings in blocks,
made up of many unit forms of the pure type, united into compact
structures. One large dominant member of the village recalls those
ruins where the village is consolidated into one community pueblo.
The separation of mounds in the village and their concentration in
the community house may be of chronological importance, although the
relative age of the simple and composite forms can not at present
be determined; but it is important to recognize that the units of
construction in villages and community buildings are identical.
SUROUARO
The cluster of mounds formerly called Surouaro, now known as Yellow
Jacket Spring Ruin, is situated near the head of the canyon of the same
name to the left of the Monticello road, 14 miles west of Dolores. This
village (pls. 1, _c_; 2, _c_) contains both large and small houses of
the pure pueblo type, covering an area somewhat less than the Mummy
Lake group, on the Mesa Verde. The arrangement of mounds in clusters
naturally recalls the Galisteo and Jemez districts, New Mexico, where,
however, the arrangement of the mounds and the structure of each is
different. The individual houses in a Mesa Verde or Yellow Jacket
village were not so grouped as to inclose a rectangular court, but were
irregularly distributed with intervals of considerable size between
them.[13]
The largest mound in the Surouaro village, shown in plate 1, _c_,
corresponds with the so-called “Upper House” of Aztec Spring Ruin, but
is much larger than Far View or any other single mound in the Mummy
Lake village.
Surouaro was one of the first ruins in this region described by
American explorers, attention having been first called to it by
Professor Newberry,[14] whose description follows: “Surouaro is the
name of a ruined town which must have once contained a population of
several thousands. The name is said to be of Indian (Utah) origin,
and to signify desolation, and certainly no better could have been
selected.... The houses are, many of them, large, and all built of
stone, hammer dressed on the exposed faces. Fragments of pottery are
exceedingly common, though like the buildings, showing great age....
The remains of _metates_ (corn mills) are abundant about the ruins. The
ruins of several large reservoirs, built of masonry, may be seen at
Surouaro, and there are traces of acequias which led to them, through
which water was brought, perhaps from a great distance.”
[13] In his valuable study, Pueblo Ruins of the Galisteo Basin, New
Mexico (Anthrop. Papers of the Amer. Mus. Nat. Hist., vol. XV, pt. 1,
1914), Mr. Nelson figures (Plan I, _B_) an embedded circular kiva in
what he calls the “historic part” of the Galisteo Ruin, but does not
state how he distinguishes the historic from the prehistoric part of
this building. The other kivas at Galisteo are few in number and not
embedded, but situated outside the house masses as in historic pueblos.
[14] Report of the exploring expedition from Santa Fe, New Mexico,
to the Junction of the Grand and Green Rivers of the Great Colorado
of the West in 1859, under the command of Capt. J. N. Macomb, p. 88,
Washington, 1876.
GOODMAN POINT RUIN
This ruin is a cluster of small mounds surrounding larger ones,
recalling the arrangement at Aztec Spring. They naturally fall into two
groups which from their direction or relation to the adjacent spring
may be called the south and north sections.
The most important mound of the south section, Block A, measures 74
feet on the north, 79 feet on the south, and 76 feet on the west side.
This large mound corresponds morphologically to the “Upper House” at
Aztec Spring (fig. 1, _A_). About it there are arranged at intervals,
mainly on the north and east sides, other smaller mounds generally
indicating rectangular buildings. The southeast angle of the largest
is connected by a low wall with one of the smaller mounds, forming
an enclosure called a court, whose northern border is the rim of
the canyon just above the spring. A determination of the detailed
architectural features of the building buried under Block A is not
possible, as none of its walls stand above the mass of fallen stones,
but it is evident, from circular depressions and fragments of straight
walls that appear over the surface of the mound, that the rooms were
of two kinds, rectangular forms, or dwellings, and circular chambers,
or kivas. This mound resembles Far View House on the Mesa Verde before
excavation.
A large circular depression, 56 feet in diameter, is situated in the
midst of the largest mounds. A unique feature of this depression,
recognized and described by Doctor Prudden, are four piles of stones,
regularly arranged on the floor. The author adopts the suggestion
that this area was once roofed and served as a central circular kiva,
necessitating a roof of such dimensions that four masonry pillars
served for its support. The mound measures about 15 feet in height,
and has large trees growing on its surface, offering evidence of
a considerable age. Several other rooms are indicated by circular
surface depressions, but their relation to the rectangular rooms can be
determined only by excavation.
JOHNSON RUIN
This ruin, to which the author was conducted by Mr. C. K. Davis, is
about 4 miles west of the Goodman Point Ruin near Mr. Johnson’s ranch
house, in section 12, township 36, range 18. It is said to be situated
at the head of Sand Canyon, a tributary of the McElmo, and is one of
the largest ruins visited. The remains of former houses skirt the rim
of the canyon head for fully half a mile, forming a continuous series
of mounds in which can be traced towers, great houses, and other types
of buildings, and numerous depressions indicating sunken kivas. The
walls of these buildings were, however, so tumbled down that little
now remains above ground save piles of stones in which tops of buried
walls may still be detected, but not without some difficulty. In a cave
under the “mesa rim” there is a small cliff-house in the walls of which
extremities of the original wooden rafters still remain in place.
In an open clearing, about 3 miles south and west of Mr. J. W. Fulk’s
house, Renaraye post office, there is a small ruin of rectangular form,
the ground plan of which shows two rectangular sections of different
sizes, joined at one angle. The largest section measures approximately
20 by 50 feet. It consists of low rooms surrounding two circular
depressions, possibly kivas. Although constructed on a small scale,
this section reminds one of the Upper House of Aztec Spring Ruin. The
smaller section, which also has a rectangular form, has remains of
high rooms on opposite sides and low walls on the remaining sides.
In the enclosed area there is a circular depression or reservoir,
corresponding with the reservoir of the Lower House at Aztec Spring
Ruin.
BUG MESA RUIN
The author was guided by Mr. H. S. Merchant to a village ruin, one of
the largest visited, situated a few miles from his ranch house. This
village is about 10 miles due south of the store at the head of Dove
Creek, and consists of several large mounds, each about 500 feet long,
arranged parallel to each other, and numerous isolated smaller mounds.
Not far from this large ruin there is a prehistoric reservoir estimated
as covering about 4 acres. Many circular depressions, indicated
kivas, and lines of stones showed tops of buried rectangular rooms.
Excavations in a small mound near this ruin were conducted by Doctor
Prudden.[15]
The canyon which heads near the corral on the road to Merchant’s house
revealed no evidence of prehistoric dwellings.
MITCHELL SPRING RUIN
This ruin takes its name from the earliest known description of it by
Morgan,[16] which was compiled from notes by Mr. Mitchell, one of the
early settlers in Montezuma Valley. Morgan’s account is as follows:
“Near Mr. Mitchell’s ranch, and within a space of less than a mile
square, are the ruins of nine pueblo houses of moderate size. They are
built of sandstone intermixed with cobblestone and adobe mortar. They
are now in a very ruinous condition, without standing walls in any
part of them above the rubbish. The largest of the number is marked
No. 1 in the plan, figure 44, of which the outline of the original
structure is still discernible. It is 94 feet in length and 47 feet
in depth, and shows the remains of a stone wall in front inclosing a
small court about 15 feet wide. The mass of material over some parts of
this structure is 10 or 12 feet deep. There are, no doubt, rooms with a
portion of the walls still standing covered with rubbish, the removal
of which would reveal a considerable portion of the original ground
plan.”
The author paid a short visit to the Mitchell Spring village and by
means of Morgan’s sketch map was able to identify without difficulty
the nine mounds and tower he represents. The village at Mitchell Spring
differs from that at Mud Spring and at Aztec Spring mainly in the small
size and diffuse distribution of the component mounds and an absence
of any one mound larger than the remainder. It had, however, a round
tower, but unlike that at Mud Spring village, this structure is not
united to one of the houses. The addition of towers to pueblos, as
pointed out by Doctor Prudden[17] several years ago, marks the highest
development of pueblo architecture as shown not only in open-air
villages but also in some of the large cliff pueblos, like Cliff
Palace. Isolated towers are as a rule earlier in construction.
[15] Memoirs Amer. Anthrop. Asso., vol. V, no. 1, 1918.
[16] Houses and House-life of the American Aborigines. Cont. N. Amer.
Ethn., vol. IV, pp. 189-190, 1831.
[17] Prudden excavated a unit type ruin from one of the Mitchell Spring
mounds. (Amer. Anthrop., vol. XVI, no. 1, 1914.)
The unit type mound uncovered by Doctor Prudden is one of the most
instructive examples of this type in Montezuma Canyon, but the author
in subsequent pages will call attention to the existence of the same
type in Square Tower Canyon. All of these pueblos probably have kivas
of the pure type, practically the same in structure as Far View House
on the Mesa Verde National Park.
MUD SPRING (BURKHARDT) RUIN
The collection of mounds (pl. 3, _b_), sometimes called Burkhardt
Ruin, situated at Mud Spring, belongs to the McElmo series. This
ruin, in which is the “triple-walled tower” of Holmes, for uniformity
with Mitchell Spring Ruin and Aztec Spring Ruin, is named after a
neighboring spring. Like these, it is a cluster of mounds forming a
village which covers a considerable area. The arroyo on which it is
situated opens into the McElmo, and is about 7 miles southwest from
Cortez, at a point where the road enters the McElmo Canyon.
The extension of the area covered by the Mud Spring mounds is
east-west, the largest mounds being those on the east. These latter
are separated from the remainder, or those on the west, by a shallow,
narrow gulch. There are two towers united to the western section
overlooking the spring, the following description of one of which, with
a sketch of the ground plan, is given by Holmes.[18]
[18] Op. cit., pp. 398-399.
“The circular structures or towers have been built, in the usual
manner, of roughly hewn stone, and rank among the very best specimens
of this ancient architecture. The great tower is especially
noticeable.... In dimensions it is almost identical with the great
tower of the Rio Mancos. The walls are traceable nearly all the way
round, and the space between the two outer ones, which is about 5 feet
in width, contains 14 apartments or cells. The walls about one of these
cells are still standing to the height of 12 feet; but the interior can
not be examined on account of the rubbish which fills it to the top.
No openings are noticeable in the circular walls, but doorways seem to
have been made to communicate between the apartments; one is preserved
at _d_.... This tower stands back about 100 feet from the edge of the
mesa near the border of the village. The smaller tower, _b_, stands
forward on a point that overlooks the shallow gulch; it is 15 feet in
diameter; the walls are 3½ feet thick and 5 feet high on the outside.
Beneath this ruin, in a little side gulch, are the remains of a wall
12 feet high and 20 inches thick.... The apartments number nearly a
hundred, and seem, generally, to have been rectangular. They are not,
however, of uniform size, and certainly not arranged in regular order.”
Morgan[19] gives the following description of the same ruin which seems
to the author to be the Mud Creek village:
“Four miles westerly [from Mitchell ranch], near the ranch of Mr.
Shirt, are the ruins of another large stone pueblo, together with an
Indian cemetery, where each grave is marked by a border of flat stones
set level with the ground in the form of a parallelogram 8 feet by 4
feet. Near the cluster of nine pueblos shown in the figure are found
strewn on the ground numerous fragments of pottery of high grade in the
ornamentation, and small arrowheads of flint, quartz, and chalcedony
delicately formed, and small knife blades with convex and serrated
edges in considerable numbers.
“This is an immense ruin with small portions of the walls still
standing, particularly of the round tower of stone of three concentric
walls, incorporated in the structure, and a few chambers in the north
end of the main building. The round tower is still standing nearly
to the height of the first story. In its present condition it was
impossible to make a ground plan showing the several chambers, or to
determine with certainty which side was the front of the structure,
assuming that it was constructed in the terraced form.... The Round
Tower is the most singular feature in this structure. While it
resembles the ordinary _estufa_, common to all these structures, it
differs from them in having three concentric walls. No doorways are
visible in the portion still standing, consequently it must have been
entered through the roof, in which respect it agrees with the ordinary
_estufa_. The inner chamber is about 20 feet in diameter, and the
spaces between the encircling walls are about 2 feet each; the walls
are about 2 feet in thickness, and were laid up mainly with stones
about 4 inches square, and, for the most part, in courses. There is a
similar round tower, having but two concentric walls, at the head of
the McElmo Canyon, and near the ranch of Mr. Mitchell [Mitchell Ruin].”
As the name Mud Spring is locally known to the natives, especially
to employees of livery stables and garages, the ruin is here called
Mud Spring. The tower and the other circular buildings are united to
other rooms as in similar groups of mounds. The presence of surface
depressions, thought to indicate circular kivas,[20] shows that the Mud
Spring mounds are remains of a village of the same type as the Mummy
Lake group, but with towers united to the largest mounds.
[19] Op. cit., p. 190.
[20] Although the kivas of Mud Spring Ruin have not been excavated
there is little doubt from surface indications that they belong to the
unit type.
The time the author could give to his visit to the Mud Spring Ruin
(pl. 3, _b_) was too limited to survey it, but he noticed in addition
to the two circular buildings already recorded, a large mound situated
on the west side of the gulch, and numerous small mounds on the
east side of the same, each apparently with a central depression
like a kiva. All these mounds have been more or less mutilated by
indiscriminate digging, but many mounds, still untouched, remain to
be excavated before we can form an adequate conception of the group.
The “triple-walled tower” is now in such a condition that the author
could not determine whether it was formerly circular or D-shaped; the
“small tower” is in even worse condition and its previous form could
not be made out. The Mud Spring mounds cover a much larger area than
descriptions or ground plans thus far published would indicate.
Originally Mud Spring Ruin consisted of a cluster of pueblos of various
sizes, each probably with a circular kiva and rectangular rooms,
combined with one or more towers at present too much dilapidated to
determine architectural details without excavations. Like the other
clusters of pueblos in the McElmo and Montezuma Valley, the cemetery
near Mud Spring Ruin has suffered considerably from pothunters, but
there still remain many standing walls that are well preserved.
RUIN WITH SEMICIRCULAR CORE
This ruin is situated on the San Juan about 3 miles below the sandy
bed of the mouth of the Montezuma, on a bluff 50 feet above the river.
The ground plan by Jackson[21] indicates a building shaped like a
trapezoid, 158 feet on the northeast side, 120 on the southeast, and
32 on the northwest side. The southwest side is broken midway by a
reentering area at the rim of the bluff over the river.
[21] Tenth Ann. Rept. U. S. Geol. Surv. Terr. (Hayden Survey) for 1876,
pl. xlviii, fig. 2, 1879.
In the center of this trapezoidal structure there is represented a
series of rooms arranged like those of Horseshoe House, but composed
of a half-circular chamber surrounded by seven rooms between two
concentric circular walls. Thus far the homology to Horseshoe House is
close but beyond this series of rooms, following out the trapezoidal
form, at least five other rooms appear on the ground plan. The position
of these recalls the walls arranged around the tower at Mud Spring
village. In other words, the ruin resembles Horseshoe House, but has
in addition rectangular rooms added on three sides, forming an angular
building. So far as the author’s information goes, no other ruin of
exactly this type, which recalls Sun Temple, has been described by
other observers.
WOLLEY RANCH RUIN
Wolley Ranch Ruin, situated 10 miles south of Dolores, is one of the
largest mounds near Cortez. There are evidences of the former existence
of a cluster of mounds at this place, only one of which now remains.
This is covered with bushes, rendering it difficult to trace the
bounding walls.
BLANCHARD RUIN
Several years ago private parties constructed at Manitou, near Colorado
Springs, a cliff-dwelling on the combined plan of Spruce-tree House and
Cliff Palace. The rocks used for that purpose were transported from
a large mound on the Blanchard ranch near Lebanon, in the Montezuma
Valley, at the head of Hartman’s draw, about 6 miles south of Dolores.
Two mounds (pl. 2, _a_, _b_), about three-quarters of a mile apart,
are all that now remain of a considerable village; the other smaller
mounds, reported by pioneer settlers, have long since been leveled by
cultivation. As both of these mounds have been extensively dug into to
obtain stones, the walls that remain standing show much mutilation.
The present condition of the largest Blanchard mound, as seen from its
southwest angle, is shown in plate 2, _b_. About half of the mound, now
covered with a growth of bushes, still remains entire, exposing walls
of fine masonry, on its south side. The rooms in the buried buildings
are hard to make out on account of this covering of vegetation and
accumulated débris; but the central depressions, supposed to be kivas,
almost always present in the middle of mounds in this district, show
that the structure of Blanchard Ruin follows the pure type.
RUINS AT AZTEC SPRING
The mounds at Aztec Spring (pl. 1, _b_), situated on the eastern flank
of Ute Mountain, at a site looking across the valley to the west end
of Mesa Verde, were described forty years ago by W. W. Jackson[22] and
Prof. W. H. Holmes.[23] The descriptions given by both these pioneers
are quoted at length for the reason that subsequent authors have added
little from direct observation since that time, notwithstanding they
have been constantly referred to and the illustrations reproduced.
[22] Rept. U. S. Geol. Survey Terr. (Hayden Survey) for 1874,
Washington, 1876.
[23] Op. cit.
As a result of a short visit, the author is able to add the few
following notes on the Aztec Spring mounds. The ruin is a village
consisting of a cluster of unit pueblos of the pure type in various
stages of consolidation. No excavations were made, but the surface
indications point to the conclusion that the different mounds indicate
that these pueblos have different shapes and sizes.
The author’s observations differ in several unimportant particulars
from those of previous writers, and while it is not his intention to
describe in detail the Aztec Spring village he will call attention to
certain features it shares with other villages in the Montezuma Valley.
The best, almost the only accounts of this village are the following
taken from the descriptions by Jackson and Holmes published in 1877.
Mr. Jackson gives the following description:[24]
“Immediately adjoining the spring, on the right, as
we face it from below, is the ruin of a great massive
structure [Upper House?] of some kind, about 100
feet square in exterior dimensions; a portion only
of the wall upon the northern face remaining in its
original position. The _débris_ of the ruin now
forms a great mound of crumbling rock, from 12 to 20
feet in height, overgrown with artemisia, but showing
clearly, however, its rectangular structure, adjusted
approximately to the four points of the compass. Inside
this square is a circle, about 60 feet in diameter,
deeply depressed in the center. The space between
the square and the circle appeared, upon a hasty
examination, to have been filled in solidly with a
sort of rubble-masonry. Cross-walls were noticed in
two places; but whether they were to strengthen the
walls or divided apartments could only be conjectured.
That portion of the outer wall remaining standing is
some 40 feet in length and 15 in height. The stones
were dressed to a uniform size and finish. Upon the
same level as this ruin, and extending back some
distance, were grouped line after line of foundations
and mounds, the great mass of which is of stone but
not one remaining upon another.... Below the above
group, some 200 yards distant, and communicating by
indistinct lines of _débris_, is another great
wall, inclosing a space of about 200 feet square [Lower
House?].... This better preserved portion is some 50
feet in length, 7 or 8 feet in height, and 20 feet
thick, the two exterior surfaces of well-dressed and
evenly laid courses, and the center packed in solidly
with rubble-masonry, looking entirely different from
those rooms which had been filled with _débris_,
though it is difficult to assign any reason for its
being so massively constructed.... The town built about
this spring is nearly a square mile in extent, the
larger and more enduring buildings in the center, while
all about are scattered and grouped the remnants of
smaller structures, comprising the suburbs.”
The description by Professor Holmes[25] is more detailed and
accompanied by a ground plan, and is quoted below:
[24] Op. cit., pp. 377-378.
[25] Op. cit., p. 400.
“The site of the spring I found, but without the least appearance of
water. The depression formerly occupied by it is near the center of a
large mass of ruins, similar to the group [Mud Spring village] last
described, but having a rectangular instead of a circular building as
the chief and central structure. This I have called the _upper house_
in the plate, and a large walled enclosure a little lower on the slope
I have for the sake of distinction called the _lower house_.
“These ruins form the most imposing pile of masonry yet [1875] found
in Colorado. The whole group covers an area about 480,000 square
feet, and has an average depth of from 3 to 4 feet. This would give
in the vicinity of 1,500,000 solid feet of stonework. The stone used
is chiefly of the fossiliferous limestone that outcrop along the base
of the Mesa Verde a mile or more away, and its transportation to this
place has doubtless been a great work for a people so totally without
facilities.
“The upper house is rectangular, measuring 80 feet by 100 feet, and is
built with the cardinal points to within a few degrees. The pile is
from 12 to 15 feet in height, and its massiveness suggests an original
height at least twice as great. The plan is somewhat difficult to make
out on account of the very great quantity of _débris_.
“The walls seem to have been double, with a space 7 feet between; a
number of cross-walls at regular intervals indicate that this space has
been divided into apartments, as seen in the plan.
“The walls are 26 inches thick, and are built of roughly dressed
stones, which were probably laid in mortar, as in other cases.
“The enclosed space, which is somewhat depressed, has two lines of
_débris_, probably the remains of partition-walls, separating it into
three apartments, _a_, _b_, _c_ [note]. Enclosing this great house is a
network of fallen walls, so completely reduced that none of the stones
seem to remain in place; and I am at a loss to determine whether they
mark the site of a cluster of irregular apartments, having low, loosely
built walls, or whether they are the remains of some imposing adobe
structure built after the manner of the ruined pueblos of the Rio Chaco.
“Two well-defined circular enclosures or _estufas_ [kivas] are situated
in the midst of the southern wing of the ruin. The upper one, A, is on
the opposite side of the spring from the great house, is 60 feet in
diameter, and is surrounded by a low stone wall. West of the house is a
small open court, which seems to have had a gateway opening out to the
west, through the surrounding walls.
“The lower house is 200 feet in length by 180 in width, and its walls
vary 15 degrees from the cardinal points. The northern wall, _a_, is
double and contains a row of eight apartments about 7 feet in width by
24 in length. The walls of the other sides are low, and seem to have
served simply to enclose the great court, near the center of which is a
large walled depression (_estufa_ B).”
The number of buildings that composed the Aztec Spring village (fig. 1)
when it was inhabited can not be exactly estimated, but as indicated
by the largest mound, the most important block of rooms exceeds in
size any at Mitchell Spring Ruin. While this village also covered more
ground than that at Mud Spring, it shows no evidence of added towers,
a prominent feature of the largest mound of the latter. Two sections
(fig. 1, _A_, _B_) may be distinguished in the arrangement of mounds
in the village; one may be known as the western and the other as the
eastern division.
[Illustration: FIG. 1.—Ground plan of Aztec Spring Ruin.]
The highest and most conspicuous mound of the western section (_A_)
is referred to by Professor Holmes as the “Upper House.” Surface
characteristics now indicate that this is the remains of a compact
rectangular building, with circular kivas and domiciliary rooms of
different shapes, the arrangement of which can not be determined
without extensive excavations. The plan of this pueblo published
by Holmes[26] shows two large and one small depression, indicating
peripheral rectangular chambers surrounded by walls of rectangular
rooms.
[26] Op. cit., pl. xl.
The author interprets the depressions, _K_, as kivas, but supposes
that they were not rectangular as figured by Holmes, but circular,
surrounded on all four sides by square secular chambers, the “Upper
House” being formed by the consolidation of several units of the pure
pueblo type. Although Aztec Spring Ruin is now much mutilated and its
walls difficult to trace, the surface indications, aided by comparative
studies of the rooms, show that Holmes’ “_a_,” “_b_,” and “_c_,” now
shown by depressions, are circular, subterranean kivas. They are the
same kind of chambers as the circular depressions in the mounds on
the south side of the spring. The height of the mound called “Upper
House” indicates that the building had more than one story on the
west and north sides, and that a series of rooms one story high with
accompanying circular depressions existed on the east side.
The “Upper House” is only one of several pueblos composing the western
cluster of the Aztec Spring village. Its proximity to the source of
water may in part account for its predominant size, but there are
evidences of several other mounds (_E-H_) in its neighborhood, also
remains of pueblos. Those on the north (_C_) and west sides (_E-H_) are
small and separated from it by intervals sometimes called courts. The
most extensive accumulation of rooms next the “Upper House” is situated
across the draw in which the spring lies, south of the “Upper House”
cluster already considered. The aggregation of houses near the “Upper
House” is mainly composed of low rectangular buildings among which are
recognized scattered circular depressions indicating kivas. The largest
of these buildings is indicated by the mound on the south rim of the
draw, where we can make out remains of a number of circular depressions
or kivas (_K_), as if several unit forms fused together; on the north
and west sides of the spring there are small, low mounds, unconnected,
also suggesting several similar unit forms. The most densely populated
part of the village at Aztec Spring, as indicated by the size of the
mounds clustered on the rim around the head of the draw, is above the
spring, on the northwest and south sides.
There remains to be mentioned the eastern annex (_B_) of the Aztec
Spring village, the most striking remains of which is a rectangular
inclosure called “Lower House,” situated east of the spring and lower
down the draw, or at a lower level than the section already considered.
The type of this structure, which undoubtedly belonged to the same
village, is different from that already described. It resembles a
reservoir rather than a kiva, inclosed by a low rectangular wall,
with rows of rooms on the north side. The court of the “Lower House”
measures 218 feet. The wall on the east, south, and west sides is only
a few feet high and is narrow; that on the north is broader and higher,
evidently the remains of rooms, overlooking the inclosed area.
Perhaps the most enigmatical structures in the vicinity of Aztec Spring
village are situated on a low mesa south of the mounds, a few hundred
feet away. These are circular depressions without accompanying mounds,
one of which was excavated a few years ago to the depth of 12 feet; on
the south there was discovered a well-made wall of a circular opening,
now visible, by which there was a communication through a horizontal
tunnel with the open air. The author was informed that this tunnel
is artificial and that one of the workmen crawled through it to its
opening in the side of a bank many yards distant.
No attempt was made to get the exact dimensions of the component
houses at Aztec Spring, as the walls are now concealed in the mounds,
and measurements can only be approximations if obtained from surface
indications without excavation. The sketch plan here introduced (fig.
1) is schematic, but although not claimed as accurate, may serve to
convey a better idea of the relation of the two great structures and
their annexed buildings than any previously advanced.
The author saw no ruined prehistoric village in the Montezuma Valley
that so stirred his enthusiasm to properly excavate and repair as that
at Aztec Spring,[27] notwithstanding it has been considerably dug over
for commercial purposes.
[27] Mr. Van Kleeck, of Denver, has offered this ruin to the Public
Parks Service for permanent preservation. It is proposed to rename it
the Yucca House National Monument.
GREAT OPEN-AIR RUINS SOUTH AND SOUTHWEST OF DOVE CREEK POST OFFICE
In the region south and southwest of Dove Creek there are several large
pueblo ruins, indicated by mounds formed of trimmed stone, eolean sand,
and clay from plastering, which have certain characters in common.
Each mound is a large heap of stones (pl. 3, _a_) near which is a
depression or reservoir, with smaller heaps which in different ruins
show the small buildings of the unit type. These clusters or villages
are somewhat modified in form by the configuration of the mesa surface.
The larger have rectangular forms regularly disposed in blocks with
passageways between them or are without any definite arrangement.
SQUAW POINT RUIN
This large ruin, which has been described by Doctor Prudden as Squaw
Point Ruin and as Pierson Lake Ruin, was visited by the author, who has
little to add to this description. One of the small heaps of stone or
mounds has been excavated and its structure found to conform with the
definition of the unit type. The subterranean communication between one
of the rectangular rooms and the kiva could be well seen at the time of
the author’s visit and recalls the feature pointed out by him in some
of the kivas of Spruce-tree House. The large reservoir and the great
ruin are noteworthy features of the Squaw Point settlement.
It seems to the author that the large block of buildings is simply a
congeries of unit types the structure of one of which is indicated by
the small buildings excavated by Doctor Prudden, and that structurally
there is the same condition in it as in the pueblo ruins of Montezuma
Valley, a conclusion to which the several artifacts mentioned and
figured by Doctor Prudden also point.
The same holds true of Bug Point Ruin, a few miles away, also excavated
and described by Doctor Prudden. Here also excavation of a small mound
shows the unit type, and while no one has yet opened the larger mound
or pueblo, superficial evidences indicate that it also is a complex of
many unit types joined together. Until more facts are available the
relative age of the small unit types as compared to the large pueblo
can not be definitely stated, but there is little reason to doubt that
they are contemporaneous, and nothing to support the belief that they
do not indicate the same culture.
ACMEN RUIN
Following the Old Bluff Road and leaving it about 5 miles west of
Acmen post office, one comes to a low canyon beyond Pigge ranch. The
heaps of stone or large mounds cover an area of about 10 acres, the
largest being about 15 feet high. East of this is a circular depression
surrounded by stones, indicating either a reservoir or a ruined
building.
The top of the highest mound (pl. 3, _a_)—no walls stand above the
surface—is depressed like mounds of the Mummy Lake group on the Mesa
Verde. This depression probably indicates a circular kiva embedded
in square walls, the masonry of which so far as can be judged
superficially is not very fine. There are many smaller mounds in the
vicinity and evidences of cemeteries on the south, east, and west
sides, where there are evidences of desultory digging; fragments of
pottery are numerous.
These mounds indicate a considerable village which would well repay
excavation, as shown by the numerous specimens of corrugated, black and
white, and red pottery in the Pigge collection, made in a small mound
near the Pigge ranch.
The specimens in this collection present few features different from
those indicated by the fragments of pottery picked up on the larger
mounds a mile west of the site where they were excavated. They are the
same as shards from the mounds in the McElmo region.
OAK SPRING HOUSE
About 15 miles southwest of Dove Creek on Monument Canyon there is a
good spring called Oak Spring, near which are several piles of stones
indicating former buildings, the largest of which, about a quarter of a
mile away, has a central depression with surrounding walls now covered
with rock or buried in soil or blown sand. Very large piñon trees grow
on top of the highest walls of this ruin, the general features of which
recall those at Bug Spring, though their size is considerably less. In
the surface of rock above the spring there are numerous potholes of
small size. One of these, 4 feet deep and about 18 feet in diameter, is
almost perfectly circular and has some signs of having been deepened
artificially. It holds water much of the time and was undoubtedly a
source of water supply to the aborigines, as it now is to stock in that
neighborhood.
RUIN IN RUIN CANYON
One of the large rim-rock ruins may be seen on the left bank of Ruin
Canyon in full view from the Old Bluff Road. The ruin is an immense
pile of stones perched on the very edge of the rim, with no walls
standing above the surface. The most striking feature of this ruin is
the cliff-house below, the walls and entrance into which are visible
from the road (pl. 9, _b_). It is readily accessible and one of the
largest in the country. On either side of the Old Bluff Road from Ruin
Canyon to the “Aztec Reservoir” small piles of stone mark the sites
of many former buildings of the one-house type which can readily be
seen, especially in the sagebrush clearings as the road descends to the
Picket corral, the reservoirs, and the McElmo Canyon.
CANNONBALL RUIN
One of the most instructive ruins of the McElmo Canyon region is
situated at the head of Cannonball Canyon, a short distance across
the mesa north of the McElmo, at a point nearly opposite the store.
This ruin is made up of two separate pueblos facing each other, one of
which is known as the northern, the other as the southern pueblo (pl.
22, _b_). Both show castellated chambers and towers, one of which is
situated at the bottom of the canyon. The southern pueblo was excavated
a few years ago by Mr. S. G. Morley, who published an excellent plan
and a good description of it, and made several suggestions regarding
additions of new rooms to the kivas which are valuable. Its walls were
not protected and are rapidly deteriorating.
This pueblo, as pointed out by Mr. Morley,[28] has 29 secular rooms
arranged with little regularity, and 7 circular kivas, belonging to
the vaulted-roofed variety. It is a fine example of a composite pueblo
of the pure type, in which there are several large kivas. Morley has
pointed out a possible sequence in the addition of the different kivas
to a preexisting tower and offers an explanation of the chronological
steps by which he thinks the aggregation of rooms was brought about.
Occasionally we find inserted in the walls of these houses large
artificially worked or uncut flat stones, such as the author has
mentioned as existing in the walls of the northwest corner of the court
of Far View House. This Cyclopean form of masonry is primitive and may
be looked upon as a survival of a ruder and more archaic condition best
shown in the Montezuma Mesa ruins farther west, a good example of which
was described by Jackson.[29]
[28] Amer. Anthrop., n. s. vol. x, no. 4, pp. 596-610, 1908.
[29] Op. cit., pp. 428-429.
CIRCULAR RUINS WITH PERIPHERAL COMPARTMENTS
It has long been recognized that circular ruins in the Southwest differ
from rectangular ruins, not only in shape but also in structural
features, as relative position and character of kivas. The relation
of the ceremonial chambers to the houses, no less than the external
forms of the two, at first sight appear to separate them from the pure
type.[30] They are more numerous and probably more ancient, as their
relative abundance implies.
[30] It is premature to declare that the kivas in circular ruins do
not belong to the vaulted-roofed type simply from want of observation
to that effect. In Penasco Blanco and other ruins of the Chaco Canyon
group, as shown in ground plans, they appear to be embedded in secular
rooms. Additional studies of the architectural features of circular
pueblos are desirable.
These circular ruins, in which group is included certain modifications
where the curve of one side is replaced (generally on the south) by a
straight wall or chord, have several concentric walls; again, they take
the form of simple towers with one row of encircling compartments, or
they may have a double wall with inclosed compartments.
Many representations of semicircular ruins were found in the region
here considered, some of which are of considerable size. The simplest
form is well illustrated by the D-shaped building, Horseshoe House,
in Hackberry Canyon, a ruin which will be considered later in this
article. Other examples occur in the Yellow Jacket, and there
are several, as Butte Ruin, Emerson, and Escalante Ruins, in the
neighborhood of Dolores.
In contrast to the village type consisting of a number of pueblos
clustered together, but separated from each other, where the growth
takes place mainly through the union of components, the circular
ruin in enlarging its size apparently did so by the addition of new
compartments peripherally or like additional rings in exogenous trees.
Judging from their frequency, the center of distribution of the
circular type lies somewhere in the San Juan culture area. This type
does not occur in the Gila Valley or its tributaries, where we have an
architectural zone denoting that a people somewhat different in culture
from the Pueblos exists, but occurs throughout the “Central Zone,” so
called, extending across New Mexico from Colorado as far south as Zuñi.
Many additional observations remain to be made before we can adequately
define the group known as the circular type and the extent of the area
over which it is distributed.
The following examples of this type have been studied by the author:
WOOD CANYON RUINS
Reports were brought to the author of large ruins on the rim of Wood
Canyon, about 4 miles south of Yellow Jacket post office, in October,
1918, when he had almost finished the season’s work. Two ruins of size
were examined, one of which, situated in the open sagebrush clearing,
belongs to the village type composed of large and small rectangular
mounds. The other is composed of small circular or semicircular
buildings with a surrounding wall. The form of this latter (fig. 2)
would seem to place it in a subgroup or village type. Approach to the
inclosed circular mounds was debarred by a high bluff of a canyon on
one side and by a low defensive curved wall (_E_), some of the stones
of which are large, almost megaliths, on the side of the mesa. From
fragmentary sections of the buried walls of one of these circular
mounds (_A_, _B_), which appear on the surface, it would seem that the
buildings were like towers (_C_, _D_). This is one of the few known
examples of circular buildings in an area protected by a curved wall.
In the cliffs below Wood Canyon Ruin is a cliff-dwelling (_G_, _H_,
_J_) remarkable mainly in its site.
[Illustration: FIG. 2.—Ground plan of Wood Canyon Ruin.]
BUTTE RUIN
The so-called Butte Ruin, situated in Lost Canyon, 5 miles east of
Dolores, belongs to the circular type. It crowns a low elevation,
steep on the west side, sloping more gradually on the east, and
surrounded by cultivated fields. The view from its top looking toward
Ute Mountain and the Mesa Verde plateau is particularly extensive. The
butte is forested by a few spruces growing at the base and extending up
the sides, which are replaced at the summit by a thick growth of sage
and other bushes which cover the mound, rendering it difficult to make
out the ground plan of the ruin on its top.
From what appears on the surface it would seem that this ruin was
a circular or semicircular building about 60 feet in diameter, the
walls rising about 10 feet high. Like other circular mounds it shows
a well-marked depression in the middle, from which radiate walls or
indications of walled compartments. Like the majority of the buildings
of the circular form, the walls on one side have fallen, suggesting
that a low straight wall, possibly with rectangular rooms, was annexed
to this side.
In the neighborhood of Butte Ruin there is another hill crowned with a
pile of stones, probably a round building of smaller size and with more
dilapidated walls. Old cedar beams project in places out of the mounds.
The cliff-houses below the largest of these mounds show well-made walls
with a few rafters and beams. There are pictographs on the cliff a
short distance away.
EMERSON RUIN
This ruin crowns a low hill about 3 miles south of Dolores (fig.
3). The form of the mound is semicircular with a depression in the
middle around which can be traced radiating partitions suggesting
compartments. Its outer wall on the south side, as in so many other
examples of this type, has fallen, and the indications are that here
the wall was straight, or like that on the south side of Horseshoe Ruin.
The author’s attention was first called to this ruin by Mr. Gordon
Parker, supervisor of the Montezuma Forest Reserve, it having been
discovered by Mr. J. W. Emerson, one of his rangers. The circular or
semicircular form (fig. 4) of the mound indicates at once that it does
not belong to the same type as Far View House; the central depression
is surrounded by a series of compartments separated by radiating
walls like the circular ruins in the pueblo region to the south. Mr.
Emerson’s report, which follows, points out the main features of this
remarkable ruin.[31]
[31] The letter referring to the circular ruin near Dolores was
prepared by Mr. Emerson, the discoverer of this ruin, and was
transmitted to the Smithsonian Institution as part of a phase of
cooperative work with the Forest Service, by Mr. Gordon Parker,
superintendent of the Montezuma Forest Reserve.
[Illustration: FIG. 3.—Metes and bounds of Emerson Ruin. (After
Emerson.)]
DOLORES, COLORADO, _July 7, 1917_.
In August, 1916, I visited Mesa Verde National Park.
While there Doctor Fewkes inquired in regard to
ruins in the vicinity of the Big Bend of the Dolores
River. He informed me that the log of two old Spanish
explorers of 1775 described a ruin near the bend of the
Dolores River as of great value.
Later, during October, 1916, I visited a number of
ruins in this vicinity, including the one which (for
the want of a better name) I have mapped and named Sun
Dial Palace. Later, last fall, I again visited these
ruins with Mr. R. W. Williamson, of Dolores, Colorado.
On July 5, 1917, I again visited these ruins, which
I have designated as Reservoir Group and Sun Dial
Palace.[32] For location and status of land on which
they lie see map of sec. 17, T. 37 N., R. 15 W., N. M.
P. M. (fig. 3).
While examining Sun Dial Palace I noted the “D-shaped
construction, also that the south wall of the building
ran due east and west.” Also please note the regularity
of wall bearings from the approximate center of the
elliptical center chamber. I also noted that a shadow
cast by the sun apparently coincides with some of these
walls at different hours during the day. This last gave
suggestion to the name. Also please note that the first
tier of rooms around the middle chamber does not show
a complete set of bearings but seems to suggest that
these regular bearings were obtained from observation
and study of a master builder. The result of his study
was built as the next circular room tier was added. The
two missing rooms on the western side of the building
seem to suggest that this building was never completed,
and also bear out my theory of an outward building of
room tiers from the middle chamber.
On the ground this building is fully completed on the
south side and forms a due east and west line. An error
in mapping the elliptical middle chamber has given the
south side an incomplete appearance.
I believe that the excavation and study of this ruin
will recall something of value, as Father Escalante
wrote in his log in 1775.
Respectfully submitted.
(Signed) J. WARD EMERSON,
_Forest Ranger_.
[Illustration: FIG. 4.—Schematic ground plan of Emerson Ruin. (After
Emerson.)]
[32] Also see detailed map of construction of Sun Dial Palace (fig. 4).
A personal examination of the remains of this building leads the author
to the conclusion that while it belongs to the circular group, with a
ground plan resembling Horseshoe House, and while the central part had
a wall completely circular, the outer concentric curved walls did not
complete their course on the south side, but ended in straight walls
comparable with the partitions separating compartments. The author
identifies another ruin as that mentioned by the Catholic fathers in
1775.
ESCALANTE RUIN
The name Escalante Ruin, given to the first ruin recorded by a white
man in Colorado, is situated about 3 miles from Dolores on top of a low
hill to the right of the Monticello Road, just beyond where it diverges
from the road to Cortez. The outline of the pile of stones suggests a
D-shaped or semicircular house with a central depression surrounded by
rooms separated by radiating partitions. The wall on the south or east
sides was probably straight, rendering the form not greatly unlike the
other ruins on hilltops in the neighborhood of Dolores.
This is supposed to be the ruin to which reference is made in the
following quotation from an article in Science:[33]
“There is in the Congressional Library, among the documents collected
by Peter Force, a manuscript diary of early exploration in New Mexico,
Colorado, and Utah, dated 1776, written by two Catholic priests, Father
Silvester Velez Escalante and Father Francisco Atanacio Dominguez. This
diary is valuable to students of archeology, as it contains the first
reference to a prehistoric ruin in the confines of the present State of
Colorado, although the mention is too brief for positive identification
of the ruin.[34] While the context indicates its approximate site,
there are at this place at least two large ruins, either of which might
be that referred to. I have no doubt which one of these two ruins
was indicated by these early explorers, but my interest in this ruin
is both archeological and historical. Our knowledge of the structure
of these ruins is at the present day almost as imperfect as it was a
century and a half ago.
“The route followed by the writers of the diary was possibly an Indian
pathway, and is now called the Old Spanish Trail. After entering
Colorado it ran from near the present site of Mancos to the Dolores.
On the fourteenth day from Santa Fe, we find the following entry: ‘En
la vanda austral del Vio [Rio] sobre un alto, huvo anti-quam (te) una
Poblacion pequeña, de la misma forma qᵉ las de los Indios el Nuevo
Mexico, segun manifieran las Ruinas qᵉ de invento registramos.’
“By tracing the trip day by day, up to that time, it appears that
the ruin referred to by these early fathers was situated somewhere
near the bend of the Dolores River, or not far from the present town
Dolores, Colo. The above quotation indicates that the ruin was a small
settlement, and situated on a hill, on the south side of the river or
trail, but it did not differ greatly from the ruined settlements of the
Indians of New Mexico with which the writers were familiar, and had
already described.”
[33] Fewkes, J. W., The First Pueblo Ruin in Colorado Mentioned in
Spanish Documents. Science, vol. xlvi, Sept. 14, 1917.
[34] Diario y Dereotero de las nuevas descubrimientos de tierras a los
r’bos N. N. OE. OE. del Nuevo Mexico por los R. R. P. P. Fr. Silvester
Velez Escalante, Fr. Francisco Atanacio Dominguez, 1776. (Vide Sen. Ex.
Doc. 33d Congress, No. 78, pt. 3, pp. 119-127.)
CLIFF-DWELLINGS
There are numerous cliff-houses in this district, but while, as a
rule, they are much smaller than the magnificent examples in the Mesa
Verde, they are built on the same architectural lines as their more
pretentious relatives. Both large and small have circular subterranean
kivas, similarly constructed to those of Spruce-tree House, and
have mural pilasters (to support a vaulted roof, now destroyed),
ventilators, and deflectors.
There are also many rooms in cliffs, possibly used for storage or for
some other unknown purposes, but too small for habitations. It is
significant that these are identical so far as their size is concerned
with the “ledge houses,” near Spruce-tree House, indicating similar or
identical uses.
The kivas of cliff-dwellings of size in the region considered have the
same structural features as those of adjacent ruins, but very little
resemblance, save in site, to those of cliff-dwellings in southern
Arizona, as in the Sierra Ancha or Verde Valley, the structure of which
resembles adjacent pueblos.
The absence in the McElmo region of very large cliff-houses is due
partly but not wholly to geological conditions, the immense caves of
the Mesa Verde not being duplicated in the tributaries of the McElmo;
but wherever caverns do occur, as in Sand Canyon, we commonly find
diminutive representatives. While differences in geological features
may account for the size of these prehistoric buildings, the nature of
the site or its size is not all important.[35]
[35] Attention may be called to the fact that often we find very
commodious caves without correspondingly large cliff-houses, even in
the Mesa Verde.
Here and there one sees from the road through the McElmo Canyon a few
small cliff-houses, and if he penetrates some of the tributaries, he
finds many others. The canyon is dominated by the Ute Mountain on the
south, but on the north are numerous eroded cliffs in which are many
caves affording good opportunities for the construction of cliff-houses.
These buildings do not differ save in size from the cliff-houses of the
Mesa Verde. Their kivas resemble the vaulted variety and the masonry is
identical.
Although the existence of cliff-dwellings in the tributaries of the
McElmo has long been known, the characteristic circular kivas which
occur in the Mesa Verde had not been recognized previous to the present
report.
The relative age of the pueblos and great towers and the same
structures in caves can not be decided by the data at hand, but the
indications are that they were contemporary.
On account of the similarity in structure of the McElmo cliff-dwellings
to those on Mesa Verde, only a few examples from the former region are
here considered. It may be worthy of note that while McElmo
cliff-dwellings are generally accompanied by large open-air pueblos
and towers or great houses on the cliffs above, in the Mesa Verde
open-air buildings[36] are generally situated some distance from the
cliff-dwellings.
CLIFF-DWELLINGS IN SAND CANYON
Several small cliff-houses occur in Sand Canyon, one of the northern
tributaries of the McElmo. Stone Arch House, here figured (pl. 6, _a_),
so-called from the eroded cliff (pl. 4, _b_) near by. It is situated in
the cliff, about a mile from where the canyon enters the McElmo Canyon
near Battle Rock. Abundant piñon trees and a few scrubby cedars grow
in the low mounds of the talus below the ruin, near which, on top of a
neighboring rock pinnacle, still stand the well-constructed walls of a
small house (pl. 4, _a_).
DOUBLE CLIFF-HOUSE
The formerly unnamed cliff-house shown in plate 8[37] is one of the
best preserved in Sand Canyon. It consists of an upper and a lower
house, the former situated far back in the cave, the latter on a
projecting terrace below. Unfortunately it is impossible to introduce
an extended description of this building as it was not entered by the
author’s party, but from a distance the walls exhibit fine masonry.
It is unique in having double buildings on different levels, an
arrangement not rare in a few examples of cliff-dwellings on the Mesa
Verde. As shown in plate 8, the character of the rock on which the
lower house stands is harder than that above in which the cave has been
eroded. The upper house is wholly protected by the roof[38] of the cave
and occupies its entire floor. The lower house shows from a distance at
least two rooms, the front wall of one having fallen.
[36] Sun Temple, however, is a seeming exception and follows the McElmo
rule of proximity; several large cliff-dwellings occur under the cliff
on which this mysterious building stands.
[37] Taken from a point across the canyon, the only one from which both
houses can be included in the same photograph.
[38] For a good example of cliff-houses at different levels, see
Cliff-Dwellings in Fewkes Canyon, Mesa Verde National Park, Holmes
Anniversary Volume.
From a distance the walls of both the lower and the upper house seem to
be well preserved, although many of the component stones have fallen to
the base of the cliff.
SCAFFOLD IN SAND CANYON
One of the cliffs bordering Sand Canyon has an inaccessible cave in
which is an artificial platform or lookout shown in plate 7, _a_.
Although this structure is not as well preserved as the scaffold in
the neighborhood of Scaffold House in Laguna (Sosi) Canyon, on the
Navaho National Monument, it seems to have had a similar purpose. It
is constructed of logs reaching from one side of the cave to the other
supporting a floor of flat stones and adobe. Its elevated situation
would necessitate for entrance either holes cut in the cliffs or
ladders.
UNIT TYPE HOUSES IN CAVES
In subsequent pages the author will describe a ruin called the Unit
type House, situated in the open on the north rim of Square Tower
Canyon. A similar type of unit type house is found in a cave in Sand
Canyon. The reader’s attention may first be called to the definition
of a unit type, which is a building composed of a circular kiva,
with mural banquettes and pedestals supporting a vaulted roof, with
ventilator, reflector, and generally a ceremonial opening near a
central fire hole in the floor. This kiva (fig. 5) is generally
embedded in or surrounded by rectangular rooms. The single-unit type
has one kiva with several surrounding rooms; the so-called pure type is
composed of these units united.
[Illustration: FIG. 5.—Ground plan of Unit type House in cave.]
In an almost inaccessible cave (pl. 5, _b_) in Sand Canyon a few miles
from the McElmo road near the scaffold already mentioned there is a
cliff ruin, so far as known the first described single-unit house in
a cave. It covers the whole floor of the cave (fig. 5) and its walls
are considerably dilapidated, but the kiva shows this instructive
condition: The walls are double, one inside the other, with two sets
of pedestals, the outer of which are very much blackened with smoke
of constant fires; the inner fresh and untarnished, evidently of late
construction. A similar double-walled kiva known as “Kiva A” exists
in Spruce-tree House, as described in the author’s account of that
ruin.[39] On the perpendicular wall of the precipice at the right hand
of the ruin in the cave above mentioned are several pictographs shown
in plate 7, _c_.
[39] Antiquities of the Mesa Verde National Park: Spruce-tree House.
Bull. 41, Bur. Amer. Ethn., 1909.
The rectangular rooms about the kiva are in places excavated out of the
cliffs, but show standing walls on the front. These were not, however,
constructed with the same care as those of the kiva.
The cliff-house in Hackberry Canyon (pl. 9, _a_) is one of the most
instructive. It lies below Horseshoe House and appears to be a second
example of a unit type kiva and surrounding rooms.
The cliff-dwelling in Ruin Canyon[40] visible across the canyon from
the Old Bluff City Road is well preserved. On the rim of the canyon are
piles of stone indicating a very large pueblo, with surface circular
depressions indicating unit type houses.
[40] The name Ruin Canyon, often applied also to Square Tower Canyon,
is retained for this canyon.
CLIFF-HOUSES IN LOST CANYON
Lost Canyon, a southern tributary of the Dolores River, contains
instructive cliff-houses to which my attention was called by Mr. Gordon
Parker, superintendent of the Montezuma Forest Reserve, who has kindly
allowed me to use the accompanying photographs. This cliff-house
(pl. 10, _a_, _b_) belongs to the true Mesa Verde type and shows
comparatively good preservation of its walls, some of the beams being
in place. It is most easily approached from Mancos.
There are small cliff-houses in the same canyon not far from Dolores,
but these are smaller and their walls very poorly preserved.
An interesting feature of these cliff-houses in Lost Canyon is that
they mark the northern horizon of cliff-dwellings of the Mesa Verde
type, having kivas similarly constructed.
GREAT HOUSES AND TOWERS
Great houses and towers differ from pueblos of the pure type but may
often be combined with them, forming composite houses arranged in
clusters called villages. Castles and towers may be isolated structures
without additional chambers, or may have many annexed rooms which
are rectangular, round, or semicircular in form. Semicircular towers
surrounded by concentric curved walls connected by radial partitions
forming compartments are shown in Horseshoe Ruin, to which attention
has been called in preceding pages, and possibly in the circular or
semicircular ruins on hilltops near Dolores.
MASONRY
The masonry of the great house and tower type (pl. 11, _a_, _b_) varies
in excellence, not only in different examples but also in different
portions of the same building. Some of the walls contain some of the
best-constructed masonry north of Mexico; others (see pl. 6, _b_) are
crudely made. In the Great House of the Holly group, where the walls
show superior construction, the lowest courses of rock are larger than
those above, but in Hovenweep Castle small stones are found below those
of larger size; the Round Tower in McLean Basin shows small and large
stones introduced for ornamentation.
The ambitious constructors of several towers have built the foundations
of these towers on bowlders sloping at a considerable angle, and it
is a source of wonder that these walls have stood for so many years
without sliding from their bases. Although so well constructed in many
instances, the courses were weak from their want of binding to the
remaining wall. As a consequence many corners have fallen, leaving
the remaining walls intact. The builders often failed to tie in the
partitions to the outer walls, by which failure they lost a brace and
have sprung away from their attachment.
In a general way we may recognize masonry of two varieties.
1. That in which horizontal courses are obscure or absent. This has
resulted from the use of stones of different sizes, the intervals
between which are filled in with masses of adobe. These stones are
little fashioned, or dressed only on one side, that forming the face of
the wall.
2. That constructed of horizontal courses, constituting by far the
larger number of these buildings. Each course of this masonry is made
of well-dressed stones, carefully pecked, and of the same size. In this
horizontal masonry the thickness of stones used may vary in different
courses (pl. 11, _b_). They may be alternately narrow or thick, or
layers of thick stones may be separated by one or more layers of
tabular or thin stones. This method of alternation may be so regular
as to please the eye and thus become decorative, a mode of decoration
that reached a high development in the Chaco Ruins. The stones in the
horizontal style of masonry are equal in size throughout the whole
building in some cases, and show not only care in choice of stones but
also in dressing them to the same regulation size. In these cases the
joints fit so accurately that chinking has not been found necessary and
a minimum use of adobe was required.
The inner walls of kivas are much better constructed than the outer
walls of the same or of the walls about them. The masonry here is
regular horizontal. The sides, lintels, and thresholds of doorways
are among the finest examples of construction. With the exception of
walls sheltered by overhanging cliffs, the plastering has completely
disappeared, but there is no reason to doubt that the interiors of all
the great houses and towers were formerly plastered.
It is instructive to compare the masonry of the great houses and
towers of the Mancos with that of the towers in Hill Canyon (pl. 11,
_c_) in Utah, the most northern extension of these two types. In Eight
Mile Ruin, one of the largest of these buildings in Hill Canyon, we
have a circular tower with annexed great houses, all constructed of
well-dressed stones, the masonry in the walls showing on one side of
the tower. No excavations, however, have yet been undertaken in Hill
Canyon Ruins, and it is not known whether the unit type of kiva is
found there, but the combination of great houses and towers is evident
from the ground plans elsewhere published.[41]
The feature of the towers in Hill Canyon is the clustering into groups,
somewhat recalling the condition in Cannonball Ruin, where, however,
they are united. In the Eight Mile Ruin one of the towers is separated
from the remaining houses.
Several towers have accompanying circular depressions with surrounding
mounds. This association can well be seen in Holmes Tower on the
Mancos Canyon and in Davis Tower and one or two others on the Yellow
Jacket. These depressions, sometimes called reservoirs, have never been
excavated, but from what is known of rooms accompanying towers in the
western section of Hovenweep Castle it may be that they indicate kivas.
Some towers have no sunken area in the immediate vicinity, especially
those mounted on rocky points or perched on bowlders. At Cannonball
Ruin there are several kivas side by side in one section and towering
above them is a massive walled tower and other rooms.
STRUCTURE OF TOWERS
None of the towers examined have evidences of mural pilasters to
support a roof or recesses in the walls as in vaulted-roofed kivas.
They are sometimes two stories high, the rafters and flooring resting
on ledges of the inner wall. Lateral entrances are common and windows
are absent.[42]
While the author has found no ruin of the same ground plan as Sun
Temple on the Mesa Verde, D-shaped towers or great houses from several
localities distantly recall this mysterious building, and there may be
an identity in use between Sun Temple and the massive walled structures
of the McElmo and Yellow Jacket; what that use was has not thus far
been determined.[43] If they were constructed for observatories we can
not account for the square tower in the South Fork of Square Tower
Canyon, from which one can not even look down the canyon, much less in
other directions, hemmed in as it is by cliffs. Isolated towers are
often too small for defense; and they show no signs of habitation.
[41] Smithson. Misc. Colls., vol. 68, no. 1, 1917.
[42] Our knowledge of the entrances into kivas of the vaulted-roofed
type is not all that could be desired. Kiva D of Spruce-tree House has
a passageway opening through the floor of an adjacent room, and Kiva A
of Cliff Palace has the same feature. Doctor Prudden has found lateral
entrances from kivas into adjoining rooms in his unit type pueblo. The
majority of cliff-dwellers’ kivas show no evidence of lateral entrances.
[43] Mr. Jackson, op. cit., p. 415, regarded it likely that the towers
were “lookouts or places of refuge for the sheep herders who brought
their sheep or goats up here to graze, just as the Navajos used to and
as the Utes do at the present time.” This explanation is impossible,
for there is no evidence that the builders of the towers had either
sheep or goats, the Navajos and the Utes obtaining both from the
Spaniards.
Are they granaries for storage of corn or places for rites and
ceremonies? Do they combine several functions—observation, defense, and
storage of food? Thus far in studies of more than 30 towers and great
houses not one has been found so well preserved that enough remains
to determine its use, and yet their walls are among the best in all
southwestern ruins. Some future archeologist may find objects in towers
that will demonstrate their function, but from our present knowledge no
theory of their use yet suggested is satisfactory.
It is impossible from the data available to determine the century in
which the towers and great houses of the region were constructed. Thus
far a few were seen with great trees growing in them, but none with
roofs; the state of preservation of the walls does not point to a great
age. Several writers have regarded them as occupied subsequently to
the Spanish conquest, while others have ascribed to them a very remote
antiquity. It can hardly be questioned that the cliff-dwellers, and by
inference their kindred, the tower builders, were superior in their
arts to modern Pueblos.
It is important to determine first of all the forms of these towers;
whether their ground plans are circular, oval, square, rectangular, or
semicircular. The northern wall of many is uniformly curved and the
last to fall, which might lead to the belief that the southern side,
generally straight, was poorly made, but one can not determine that by
direct observation, since the latter has fallen. As a matter of fact
the south wall was generally low and straight, over 50 per cent of
the “round” towers being semicircular, D-shaped, or some modification
of that form; but we also have square and rectangular towers. It is
also important to determine whether these had single or multiple
chambers and the arrangement of the rooms in relation to them. This is
especially desirable in towers with concentric compartments.
It is also instructive to know more of the association of towers with
pueblos and cliff-dwellings or to analyze component architectural
features. The tower type often occurs without appended rooms. At Cliff
Palace and Square Tower House it is united with a pueblo village under
cliffs; in Mud Spring Ruin it has a like relation to rooms of a pueblo
in the open. Has its function changed by that union? What use did the
tower serve when isolated and had it the same use when united with
other kinds of rooms in cliff-dwellings and pueblos?
No writer on the prehistoric towers of Colorado and Utah has emphasized
the fact that a large number of these buildings are semicircular or
D-shaped, but it has been taken for granted that the fallen wall on
the south side was curved, rendering the tower circular or oval.[44]
In most cases this wall was the straight side of a D-shaped tower.
Doctor Prudden, who first recognized the importance of a union of
towers with other types of architecture in the McElmo district,
says:[45] “Towers of various forms and heights occasionally form a part
of composite ruins of various types.” He says also: “Several of the
houses are modified by the introduction of a round tower.” And again:
“At the head of a short canyon north of the Alkali, which I have called
Jackson Canyon ... each building consists of an irregular mass of rooms
about 200 feet long, with low towers among them.”
As our studies are morphological, dealing with forms rather than
sites of towers, little attention need be paid to their situation on
bowlders, in cliffs, or at the bottoms of canyons. The majority of the
castellated ruins considered in the following pages are in the proposed
Hovenweep National Monument, but there are others in the main Yellow
Jacket and its other tributaries.
[44] The tower figured by Prudden (Amer. Anthrop., n. s. vol. v, no. 2,
pl. xviii, fig. 2) as a “round tower” is really semicircular, as shown
in the ground plan (fig. 14) here published.
[45] Ibid., pp. 241, 263, 273.
HOVENWEEP DISTRICT
The name Hovenweep (“Deserted Valley”) is an old one in the
nomenclature of the canyons of southwestern Colorado and formerly
(1877) was applied to the canyon now called the Yellow Jacket, but at
present is limited to one of the tributaries. The name is here used to
designate an area situated just over the Colorado State line, in Utah,
part of which it is hoped will later be reserved from the public domain
and made a monument to be called Hovenweep National Monument.
The ruined castles and towers in this district are marvelously well
preserved, considering their age and imperfect masonry. We can
determine their original appearance with no difficulty and use them
in reconstructing the possible forms of more dilapidated ruins, now
piles of débris. The best castles and towers known to the author are
localized in three canyons: (1) Square Tower Canyon, (2) Holly Canyon,
(3) Hackberry Canyon. There are, of course, other castles and towers in
the Yellow Jacket-McElmo region, but there is no locality where so many
different forms appear in equal numbers in a small area.
RUIN CANYON
The Old Bluff Road from Dolores diverges southward from that to
Monticello at Sandstone post office and passes a pile of rocks visible
from the road on the Ruin Canyon long before it reaches Square Tower
Canyon (fig. 6). This large ruin is situated on the east rim and under
it in the side of the cliff are fairly well-preserved cliff-houses.
Other ruins with high standing walls were reported in Ruin Canyon but
were not visited.
The duplication of names of canyons in this district is misleading.
Names like Ruin Canyon are naturally applied to canyons in which
there are ruins. When the author learned at Dolores of Ruin Canyon,
he supposed it was a tributary of the Yellow Jacket or McElmo, but
while the canyon known to cowboys at Dolores by this name has large
ruins on its rim, it is not the “Ruin Canyon” to which attention is
now directed. The duplication of names has led me to retain the name
Ruin Canyon for one and to suggest the name Square Tower Canyon for the
other.
[Illustration: FIG. 6.—Square Tower Canyon.]
After leaving Ruin Canyon the Old Bluff Road takes a southerly course,
passing through the cedars until a sagebrush clearing replaces the
“timber,” where it crosses two well-preserved Indian reservoirs, or
bare surfaces of rock, dipping south, the southern border having as
a retaining wall a low ridge of earth to hold back the water. The
retaining wall of the second reservoir has been built up by stockmen
and, when the author was there, contained considerable water. Crossing
the second reservoir a trail turns east or to the left and follows the
road to Keeley Camp, near which are the “Keeley Towers.”
At present an automobile can approach within a mile of these ruins.
SQUARE TOWER CANYON
To reach the Square Tower Canyon (pls. 11-17) one returns to the
reservoir on the Bluff Road and continues east about 3 miles farther,
where a signboard on the left hand indicates the turn off to Square
Tower Canyon. Following the new direction about southeast the great
buildings are visible a mile away. An automobile can go to the very
head of this canyon and a camp can be made within a few feet of
Hovenweep House. If the visitor approaches Square Tower Canyon from the
McElmo, he passes through Wickyup Canyon, where there are two towers on
the summits of elevated buttes, not far from the junction of the canyon
and the Yellow Jacket.
The castles and towers in Square Tower Canyon have been known for many
years and have been repeatedly photographed.[46]
[46] Among the older photographs seen by the author are those of W.
H. Jackson, prints of which are on exhibition in the State Historical
Museum at Denver, Colo.
Several descriptions of these ruins have been printed, but no
satisfactory studies of their structure have been published. They
are recognized as prehistoric and are generally thought to have been
inhabited contemporaneously with the cliff-dwellers of the Mesa Verde,
being built in the same style of architecture.
CLASSIFICATION OF RUINS IN SQUARE TOWER CANYON
The ruins in Square Tower Canyon are classified for convenience in
description as follows:
(1) Ruins which have indications of inclosed circular kivas, with
mural pilasters and banquettes, and closely approximated surrounding
rooms. To this class belong ruins 1, 2, and 10. Of these, Unit type
Ruin (No. 10) has only one kiva and belongs to the simplest or unit
form of the pure type. Ruins 1 and 2 have two or more kivas and are
formed by a union of several units, combined with towers and great
houses. (2) Ruins, the main feature of which is absence of a circular
kiva. The Twin Towers belong to this second or “great house” type. The
few cliff-dwellings in this canyon are small, generally without kivas,
resembling storage cists rather than domiciles.
HOVENWEEP HOUSE (RUIN 1)
This ruin (fig. 7), the largest in the canyon, is situated at the head
of the South Fork. Although many of its walls have fallen, there still
remains a semicircular great house (_B_, _C_, _D_) with high walls
conspicuous for some distance. The ruin is a pueblo of rectangular form
belonging to the pure type, showing circular depressions identified as
kivas (_K_), embedded in collections of square and rectangular rooms,
and massive walled buildings (_E_) on the south side.
[Illustration: FIG. 7.—Ground plan of Hovenweep House.]
The standing walls of the ruin are remains of a conspicuous D-shaped
tower (_B_, _C_, _D_), which is multichambered. Its straight wall
measures 23 feet, the curved wall 56 feet, and its highest wall, which
is on the northeast corner, is 15 feet high. At the northwest angle of
the ruin (A) there stand remains of high walls which indicate that
corner of a rectangular pueblo. Hovenweep House (pl. 14, _a_) was the
largest building in this canyon, but with the exception of the addition
of a semicircular tower or great house, does not differ greatly from
a pueblo like Far View House on the Mesa Verde. The piles of stone
and earth indicating rooms below justify the conjecture that when the
fallen débris is removed the unfallen walls will still rise several
feet above their rocky foundations. If properly excavated, Hovenweep
House would be an instructive building, but in its present condition,
while very picturesque, its structure is difficult to determine.
[Illustration: FIG. 8.—Ground plan of Hovenweep Castle.]
HOVENWEEP CASTLE
This ruin (pls. 14, _b_, _c_; 18, _b_), like the preceding, has
circular kivas compactly embedded in rectangular rooms arranged
about them, indicating the pure type of pueblos. The massive walled
semicircular towers and great houses are combined with square rooms and
kivas, indicating that it is distinguished by two sections, an eastern
and a western, which, united, impart to the whole the shape of a letter
L (fig. 8).
WESTERN SECTION OF HOVENWEEP CASTLE
The western section (fig. 8, _A-D_, _M_) of Hovenweep Castle is made up
of five rooms, the most western of which, _M_, is semicircular, while
_A_, _B_, _C_, and _D_ are rectangular. Room _A_ is almost square,
one of its walls forming the straight wall of the south side of the
semicircular tower, _M_. At the union its walls are not tied into
the masonry of the circular wall of the tower, as may be seen in the
illustration, plate 14, _b_, implying that it was constructed later.
There is an entrance into _A_ from the south or cliff side, and a
passageway from _A_ to Room _B_, which latter opens by a doorway into
Room _C_. All rectangular rooms of the western section communicate with
each other, but none except A seem to have had an external entrance.
The photograph of the south wall of the west section of the ruin (pl.
14, _c_) shows small portholes in the second story and narrow slits in
the tower walls. The lower courses of masonry are formed of thinner
stones than the rows above, but smaller stones compose the courses at
the top of the wall. A view of the north wall of the western section
(pl. 22, _a_) shows the tower and rooms united to it. There is no kiva
in the western section.
EASTERN SECTION OF HOVENWEEP CASTLE
The longest dimension of the western section (pls. 12, 14, _c_) is
approximately east-west; that of the eastern is nearly north-south. The
eastern section (fig. 8, _E-L_), like the western, has a tower (_L_),
which is situated between two circular depressions or kivas (_K_). On
the north and south ends the eastern section is flanked by rectangular
rooms. Those at the north end were better constructed, and even now
stand as high as the walls of the western tower. The views show that
their corners are not as well preserved as their faces, which is due
to defects in masonry, as lack of bonding. Although much débris has
accumulated around the kivas, especially in their cavities, it is
evident that these ceremonial rooms were formerly one storied, and
practically subterranean on account of the surrounding rooms. Several
fragments of walls projecting above the accumulated débris indicate
rooms at the junction of the eastern and western sections of the ruin,
but their form and arrangement at that point are not evident and can be
determined only by excavation. The inner kiva walls show evidences of
mural pilasters and banquettes like those of cliff-dwellings and other
pure pueblo types.
RUIN 3
The square tower (pl. 11, _a_), standing on a large angular rock in the
canyon below Hovenweep Castle, is a remarkable example of prehistoric
masonry so situated that it is shut in by cliffs, rendering the
outlook limited. Several published photographs of this tower give the
impression that it stands in the open and was an outlook, but that this
is hardly the case will be seen from a general view looking west up the
South Fork.
RUIN 4
This ruin is a small tower situated in a commanding position on the
point of the mesa where the canyon forks. The section of the wall still
standing indicates a circular form, the north side of which has fallen;
the part still intact, or that on the south side, exhibits good masonry
about 8 feet high (pl. 15, _c_).
RUIN 5
The walls of the north segment of a tower stand on a large angular
block of stone rising from a ledge above the arroyo, or bed of the
canyon, below Ruin 4, on the South Fork. What appears to have been a
doorway opens on its north side; this opening is defended by a wall,
remains of a former protected passageway into the tower.
On the perpendicular cliff of the precipice near Ruin 5 and below
the point on which Ruin 4 stands there are several almost illegible
pictographs, below which are rather obscure evidences of a building,
the features of which can be determined only by excavation.
Instructive features of Tower No. 5 are two parallel walls, one
on each side of the doorway, like those of the circular towers on
the promontory at the junction of the Yellow Jacket and McElmo.
Other towers on the canyon rim show defensive walls, as in Ruin 9,
constructed about their entrances from corners of the buildings to
the mesa rim, effectually preventing passage. Morley and Kidder have
suggested that the walled recess in the cliff below Ruin 9 was probably
built to prevent access from below. This feature is found in the floor
entrances of a building near the Great House of the Holly group.
RUIN 6
This ruin is a small tower whose curved walls are so broken down that
the form is not evident. It is situated in the base of the talus at the
head of the South Fork (pl. 26, _a_).
ERODED BOWLDER HOUSE (RUIN 7)
This house, more remarkable from its site than its structure, was
constructed in an eroded cave of a bowlder halfway down the talus of
the cliff. The front walls are somewhat broken down, but others built
in the rear of the cave still remain intact. On the top of the bowlder
is the débris of fallen walls, suggesting a former tower, but not
much remains in place to determine its outlines. Where the walls are
protected the mortar shows impressions of human hands and at one place
there are the indentations of a corncob used by the plasterers to press
the mortar between the layers of stone. There were formerly at least
two rooms in the rear of the cave, the front walls of which have fallen
and are strewn down the talus to the bottom of the canyon.
TWIN TOWERS (RUIN 8)
The so-called Twin Towers, which seen together from certain points
appear as one ruin (pl. 15, _a_, _b_), rank among the most impressive
buildings in Square Tower Canyon. They stand on the south side of the
canyon on a rock isolated by a cleft from the adjoining cliff. The
larger (fig. 9, _A-E_) has an oval ground plan and a doorway in the
southwest corner; the smaller (_F_, _G_, _H_, _I_) is horseshoe shaped
with a doorway in the east wall, which is straight. The arrangement of
rooms is seen in figure 9. Small walled-up caves are found below the
foundation on the northwest base of the larger room.
[Illustration: FIG. 9.—Ground plan of Twin Towers.]
RUIN 9
The ground plan of this ruin is rectangular in form, 19 feet 6 inches
long by 10 feet wide. The standing walls measure 11 feet in altitude.
It is situated on the south rim at the mouth of the South Fork, just
above Ruin 7, a few feet back from the cliff. A doorway opening in the
middle of its north wall was formerly made difficult of entrance by
walls, now fallen, extending from the northeast and northwest angles to
the edge of the cliff. The masonry throughout is rough; projecting ends
of rafters indicate a building two stories high. There are peepholes
with plastered surfaces through the southeast and west walls, which
suggest ports. A short distance east of the building is a circle of
stones reminding the author of a shrine.
UNIT TYPE HOUSE (RUIN 10)
This pueblo (pl. 19, _c_), from a comparative point of view, is one
of the most interesting ruins in the Hovenweep, and is situated on
the very edge of the canyon on the North Fork not far from where it
begins. It is the simplest form of prehistoric pueblo, or the unit[47]
of a pure type, made up of a centrally placed circular ceremonial room
(fig. 10, _K_) embedded in rectangular rooms, six in number (_A-F_).
The resulting or external form is rectangular, oriented about due north
and south; the southern side, which formerly rose from the edge of the
canyon, being much broken down and its masonry precipitated over the
cliff.
[47] The “unit type” was first recognized by Doctor Prudden in his
illuminating studies of the pueblos of the San Juan Basin. The author
was the first to point out its existence in cliff-houses of the same
area.
The central kiva (fig. 10) is made of exceptionally fine masonry and
shows by what remains that it had mural banquettes, and pilasters to
support the roof, with other features like a typical kiva of the Mesa
Verde cliff-houses. A side entrance opens in one corner into a small
room (fig. 10, _G_) in which ceremonial objects may have been formerly
stored (pl. 32, _b_).
The kiva of Unit type House is architecturally the same as those with
vaulted roofs at Spruce-tree House, Cliff Palace, and Far View House on
the Mesa Verde. A similar structure, according to Prudden,[48] occurs
at Mitchell Spring Ruin in the Montezuma Valley, and near the Picket
corral. The same type was found by Morley[49] at the Cannonball Ruin
and by Kidder[50] in a kiva on Montezuma Creek in Utah, where clusters
of mounds would appear to be composed of single or composite ruins of
this type. This small pueblo was probably inhabited by one social unit,
and may be regarded as the first stage of a compound pueblo.
[48] Circular Kivas in San Juan Watershed. Amer. Anthrop., n. s. vol.
16, no. 1, 1914.
[49] Excavation of the Cannonball Ruins in southwestern Colorado. Amer.
Anthrop., n. s. vol. x, no. 4, 1908.
[50] Explorations in southeastern Utah. Amer. Journ. Archæol., 2d ser.,
vol. xiv, no. 3, 1910.
[Illustration: FIG. 10.—Ground plan of Unit type House.]
STRONGHOLD HOUSE (RUIN 11)
Ruin 11 is composed of a cluster of several small buildings, one of
which is situated on the north edge of the mesa somewhat east of Ruin
10 (pl. 25, _b_); another, called by Morley and Kidder Gibraltar
House, formerly of considerable size, was built on the sloping surface
of an angular bowlder (pl. 17, 21, _b_). Although many walls have
fallen, enough remains to render it a picturesque ruin, attractive to
the visitor and instructive to the archeologist, by whom it has been
classed as a tower. This building from the east appears to be a square
tower, but it is in reality composed of several rooms perched on an
inaccessible rock.
RUINS IN HOLLY CANYON
The towers in Holly Canyon (fig. 11) are in about the same condition
of preservation as those in Square Tower Canyon. They cluster about
the head of a small canyon (pl. 18, _a_) and may be approached on foot
along the mesa above Keeley Camp, about a mile distant. Two of the
Holly ruins belong to the tower type and were built on fallen bowlders.
One of these has two rooms on the ground floor. (Pls. 19, _a_, _b_; 20,
_a_, _c_.)
[Illustration: FIG. 11.—Holly Canyon Ruins.]
RUIN A, GREAT HOUSE, HACKBERRY CASTLE
Ruin A (pl. 21, _a_), the largest building of the group, which stands
on the edge of the canyon, is rectangular in form, measuring 31 by
9 feet, and is 20 feet high (fig. 11, _A_). Evidences of two rooms
appear on the ground plan, one of which is 14 feet long, the other 12
feet inside measurement. The partition separating the two rooms is
not tied into the outer walls, an almost constant feature in ancient
masonry. The ends of the rafters are still seen in the wall at a level
12 feet above the base. Fallen stones have accumulated in the rooms to
a considerable depth, and the tops of the remaining wall, where the
mortar is washed out, will tumble in a short time.
Ruin B (pl. 20, _b_), situated a short distance north of Ruin A, also
stands on the canyon rim. The north wall is entire, but the south wall
has fallen. What remains indicates that the ruin was about square, with
corners on the north side rounded, imparting to it a semicircular form.
The entrance into this room may have been through the floor.
TOWERS [C AND D]
These towers (pl. 23, _a_, _b_) show some of the finest masonry known
in this region, being constructed on fallen bowlders which their
foundations almost completely cover. Holly Tower (pl. 23, _b_) measures
16 feet high and 21 feet in diameter. It is 7 feet wide, its top rising
to a height level with that of the mesa on which stand buildings
already considered. One of the two rooms of this tower is narrower
and wider than the other, shown in an offset as if constructed at a
different time. Its foundations are 17 feet long by 8 feet wide, the
highest wall measuring, at the southeast corner, 12 feet 8 inches.
There is a fine doorway, wide above and narrow below, in the north
wall. The approach at present is difficult on account of the height
of the rock on which it stands, but there are evidences of former
footholes.
HOLLY HOUSE
Several broken-down walls, some of which are over 6 feet high, situated
east of Ruin A, appear to belong to a pueblo of considerable size (fig.
11, _E_, _F_), but the large foundation rock on which it is situated
has settled, its top having separated from the edge of the canyon, so
that the corner of the building (_F_) is out of plumb. The walls on the
adjoining cliff are also much broken down, although several sections
of them rise a few feet above the general surface. The cause of this
change in level of the base may have been an earthquake or the settling
or sliding of the bowlder on the talus down the hill. The united
building appears to have been a pueblo of rectangular form. Its walls
are so broken down that it was not possible to determine its exact
dimensions.
RUINS IN HACKBERRY CANYON
HORSESHOE HOUSE
The large building in Hackberry Canyon, one of the terminal spurs of
Bridge Canyon, a mile northeast of the cluster in Holly Canyon, is
particularly instructive from the fact that surrounding the remains of
a circular tower, for two-thirds of its circumference, is a concentric
wall with compartments separated by radial partitions (fig. 12, 1).
[Illustration: FIG. 12.—Horseshoe (Hackberry) Canyon.]
Horseshoe House (pl. 23, _c_) stands on the north edge of the canyon
(fig. 12, 1), having its straight wall on the south side, as is usually
the case, the well-preserved north side being curved. The northeastern
corner still stands several feet high. The southeastern corner formerly
rested on a projecting rock, which recalls the cornerstone of Sun
Temple. The masonry of most of the southern segment of the enclosed
circular room or tower has fallen down the cliff. There does not
appear to have been a doorway on the south side, and there is not space
for rooms on this side on account of the nearness to the edge of the
cliff. While the form (fig. 13) of Horseshoe Ruin recalls that of Sun
Temple, in details of room structure it is widely divergent. The length
of the south wall, or that connecting the two ends of the horseshoe,
is 30 feet, its width 27 feet; the highest wall on the northwest side
is 12 feet. Figure 13 shows the arrangement of the rooms and the
mutilation of the south wall of the ruin. The distance between the
outer and inner concentric walls averages 4 feet; the circular room is
17 feet in diameter.
In the same cluster as Horseshoe Ruin (pl. 24, _a_) there is another
well-made tower (fig. 12, 4), constructed on a point at the entrance
to the canyon, and below it in a cave are well-preserved walls of a
cliff-dwelling.
[Illustration: FIG. 13.—Ground plan of Horseshoe House.]
A short distance due north of Horseshoe House, at the head of a small
canyon, a tributary of Bridge Canyon, there are two large pueblos and a
round tower. The pueblos are mentioned by Prudden, who gives a ground
plan which indicates an extensive settlement.
TOWERS IN THE MAIN YELLOW JACKET CANYON
Of the several towers and great houses of the main Yellow Jacket Canyon
two may suffice to show their resemblance to those in Square Tower
Canyon. The two towers considered belong to the D-shaped variety, the
straight wall, as is almost always the case, being on the south side.
DAVIS TOWER
Mr. C. K. Davis, who lives not far from the Yellow Jacket Spring,
conducted the author to a tower of semicircular ground plan (fig. 14)
near his ranch. This ruin (pl. 26, _b_), is situated on a rocky ridge
on top of the talus halfway down to the bottom of the canyon, on its
right side.
LION (LITTRELL) TOWER[51]
This tower (pl. 29, _b_) is built on a bowlder situated in Yellow
Jacket Canyon a mile from Mr. Littrell’s ranch and about 5 miles south
of the Yellow Jacket post office; approximately 20 miles from Dolores,
Colorado. Its ground plan (fig. 15) is D-shaped, the lower story being
divided by partitions into four rooms. The wall of the middle room
seems to be double, or to have been reenforced. It measures 40 feet on
the straight side, the highest wall being about 25 feet above the base.
The foundations rest on the irregular surface of a bowlder to which it
conforms.
[51] This tower is reputed to be the home of a mountain lion, hence the
name Lion House.
[Illustration: FIG. 14.—Ground plan of Davis Ruin.]
M’LEAN BASIN
McLean Basin is 3 miles from the Old Bluff City Road near Picket
corral, 32 miles from Dolores. It has been a favorite wintering place
for stock and is well known to herdsmen. One can approach the ruin
from the road to Bluff City and the towers here referred to are easily
reached by a trail down the mesa to the highest terrace. There are said
to be several ruins in the McLean Basin, the two towers (pls. 26, _c_,
27, 28, _a_, _b_) visited being placed in an exceptional position in
reference to surrounding rooms. One of these towers is circular, the
other D-shaped or semicircular in ground plan (fig. 16, _A_, _B_).
[Illustration: FIG. 15.-Ground plan of Lion House.]
Previously to the author’s study of the southwestern towers two forms
of these structures were recognized; the square or rectangular, and
the circular or oval. It is now known that several of the towers
previously described as circular are in reality D-shaped, and this form
is probably more common than the circular.
[Illustration: FIG. 16.—Ground plan of ruin with towers in McLean
Basin.]
The rectangular building in the McLean Basin has a circular tower (pl.
28, _b_) on the southwest angle and a D-shaped tower (pl. 28, _a_) on
the northeast. They resemble two turrets rising above the remaining
walls that form the sides of the rectangles. These towers average about
12 feet high, and are well constructed, while low connecting walls
of coarse masonry rise slightly above the surface. It would appear
from the amount of débris that the remaining walls indicate a row
of buildings, one story high, with circular subterranean kivas, but
this can not be accurately determined without excavation of the ruin.
Outside of the rectangle, however, there are at least two circular
areas, possibly kiva pits. The rectangular building measures about 50
feet square. The ground on which the buildings formerly stood slopes
to the south, and back of it on the north rises a low perpendicular
bluff which effectually shelters it in that direction. The union of a
circular and a semicircular tower with, a rectangular ruin is a feature
not common in the McElmo-Yellow Jacket region but appears in Hovenweep
Castle, elsewhere described. Lower down the sides of the basin and near
by are many indications of walls of buildings.
The pottery in the neighborhood belongs to the same black and white
types commonly found in the Hovenweep and Mesa Verde areas.
Except for their peculiar relation to the rectangular building the
McLean towers do not differ essentially from others, which leads to
the inference that they were used contemporaneously and for the same
purpose. There is a well-made doorway (fig. 17) in the Round Tower.
TOWER IN SAND CANYON
Sand Canyon, which opens into McElmo Canyon near Battle Rock, has
several types of prehistoric ruins, viz, towers, cliff-houses, and
large rim-rock pueblos. The tower type of architecture represented by
the example here figured (pl. 5, _a_) is isolated from other forms
of buildings. This tower is figured by Doctor Prudden, who mentions
another in the neighborhood which the author did not visit.
TOWERS IN ROAD (WICKYUP) CANYON
[Illustration: FIG. 17.—Doorway in Round Tower, McLean Basin.]
The nomenclature of the northern canyons of the McElmo has considerably
changed in the last 40 years. What we now call the Yellow Jacket was
formerly known through its entire course as the Hovenweep. A small
canyon opening near its mouth, now known as Road Canyon, was formerly
called the Wickyup. The Old Bluff City Road from Dolores, Colorado, to
Bluff City, Utah, divides into two branches a short distance before
it descends into the McElmo, its left branch passing through Road
Canyon, the right bank of which follows the Yellow Jacket, which the
traveler fords a short distance above its junction with the McElmo.
Wickyup Canyon may be called picturesque, its cliffs being worn into
fantastic shapes by water and sand. It has important antiquities, among
the most striking of which are two towers (pl. 24, _b_), crowning
the tops of low buttes or hills. The walls of these towers are well
constructed, one being a simple structure with a single room, the other
having appended rectangular rooms extending toward the northwest, some
distance along a ridge of rocks. An examination of these two towers,
which are about one-quarter of a mile apart, shows that they belong to
the same type as the simple forms of those above mentioned, and as the
entrance to Square Tower Canyon is not far away, they probably belong
to the same series. The first of the towers, called “Bowlder Castle,”
is situated a few hundred feet east of the road, from which it is
easily seen. This ruin is rectangular in shape and rises from a basal
mass of débris indicating broken-down walls of rooms. At a level with
the top of this débris on its southern side stands a well-constructed
tower with well-made doorway, the threshold and lintel of which are
smooth stones, whose edges project slightly from the surface of the
wall. One remarkable feature of this tower is that the doorway has been
walled up with rude secondary masonry (pl. 25, _a_). The south wall of
this building has tumbled over, as is usually the case, but the north
wall rises several feet above the base. The masonry of the second tower
is also broken down on the south side, but the standing remains of the
north wall, which is circular, are over 10 feet high. The indications
are that the ground plan of this building was oval in shape and that
it inclined inward slightly from foundation to apex. Scattered over
the surface are the remnants of fallen walls, and near it there is a
well-marked depression, not unlike those found in unit type mounds,
indicating kivas.
TOWERS OF THE MANCOS
The author’s examination of the towers in the region considered
embraced likewise a few in the Mancos Canyon and valley. In all
essential features the Mancos towers resemble those of Mesa Verde, the
McElmo, and the Yellow Jacket Canyons, and were evidently built by the
same people who constructed the towers on Navaho Canyon and elsewhere
on the Mesa Verde National Park. A brief reference to two or three
of these Mancos River towers may suffice to point out their general
structure.
HOLMES TOWER
One of the towers figured by Holmes in 1877 is still among the best
preserved in this region and can be visited by following up the Mancos
Canyon from the west about 10 miles from where the Cortez road crosses
the Mancos River before going on to Ship-rock. There is at this point a
bridge and near the crossing an industrial farm of the Ute Reservation
where accommodations were obtained. The Mancos Valley widens after
leaving the canyon, the southern side of Mesa Verde appearing as a
series of high mesas separated by canyons. In the neighborhood of the
western end of Mesa Verde are lofty buttes, one called Chimney Rock,
another the Ute Woman. This valley and the canyons extending into the
Mesa Verde contain numerous piles of stone indicative of buildings of
rectangular shape with numerous circular depressions. No cluster of
mounds like those in Montezuma Valley was seen, but about 40 sites of
buildings were distributed at intervals. None of these have standing
walls above ground.
Following up the Mancos Canyon is a wagon about 9 miles an arroyo was
encountered and from there horses were taken and the river crossed to
its south bank, above which, on the shelving terrace, is the Holmes
Tower, visible many miles down the canyon. This tower (pl. 29, _a_) is
in much the same condition as when sketched by Holmes over 40 years
ago. It is circular in form, about 10 feet in diameter, and about 16
feet high, with a broken window on the north side. The sky line is
irregular. It is one of the best preserved towers, but not as high or
as well constructed as some of the Hovenweep specimens.
Accompanying this tower on the north there are mounds indicative of
rooms and two circular saucer-like depressions. Excavations revealing a
few human bones, including a well-worn human skull, have been made in a
burial place southeast of the tower, where the surface is covered with
fragments of pottery. Except in size Holmes Tower does not differ from
others already described, but, like them, is connected with rectangular
rooms. Farther up the Mancos Canyon there are other towers, one of
which, Great Tower, is mentioned by Holmes in his report.
On the way up the canyon, perhaps two-thirds of the distance from the
bridge to the Holmes Tower, midway in the alluvial plain and on the
right bank of Mancos Creek, stands a circular ruin which conforms to
Holmes’s description of Great Tower but is too poorly preserved to be
positively identified. All that now remains of this building is a large
pile of rocks with a central depression, but no signs of radiating
partitions, although such may have existed when it was constructed and
for many years after it began to fall into ruin.
TOWERS ON THE MANCOS RIVER BELOW THE BRIDGE
TOWER A
There are two towers situated on the south side of the Mancos below the
bridge on the Ship-rock Road, one about 6, the other 7 miles distant.
The walls of the first of these (pl. 30, _b_) are visible for some
distance and are about 6 feet high, evidently very much broken down on
the south and east sides. Its shape is round and there is a pile of
stones indicating rooms on the east side separated from the tower by
a depression. It would be a valuable contribution to our knowledge of
these ruins if some one would determine the nature of these pits, which
can hardly be regarded as reservoirs, but suggest kivas.
TOWER B
The tower (pl. 31, _a_) situated farther down the Mancos River has a
more commanding position than Tower A and is conspicuous because it
stands on a projecting precipice, below the rim of which are walled-up
artificial caves. These caves have apparently never been entered by
white men; the walls of masonry are unbroken and there are square
openings, windows or doorways, which can be made out long before
reaching the place.
This tower (pl. 30, _a_) is almost perfectly round, about 10 feet in
diameter, and stands at least 6 feet high. The south wall has fallen.
In the pile of rocks on that side may be readily seen the top of a
straight wall reaching to the edge of the cliff as if for protection,
but no other fallen walls may now be seen in the neighborhood. The
face of the cliff below this tower (pls. 7, _b_; 31, _b_) is almost
perpendicular, the component strata of soft shale alternating with
harder rocks, the former well fitted for artificial excavations.
The author was not impressed with the idea that any considerable
number of troglodytic inhabitants dwelt in the small cliff rooms (pl.
31, _b_)[52] dug in it. Farther on there are other caves the walls of
the entrance to which are still in sight. It is true the surface of
the cliff may have been eroded and fallen in the time since they were
abandoned. They appeared to be storage cists rather than inhabited
rooms.
[52] A good figure of these cavate rooms is given by Holmes, op.
cit. Comparing the photograph with his figure it appears that their
surrounding shale has worn away somewhat in the last four decades.
Along the valley by the side of the road down the Mancos from the
bridge to the ruins many heaps of stone were noticed in the valley but
none of these were extensive or had walls standing above ground. Nor
were they arranged in clusters as is common in the Montezuma Valley.
On top of these heaps were found large fragments of slag in which was
embedded charred corn, indicating a great fire. Similar slag also with
burnt corn has often been found by the author on the floor of excavated
rooms.
MEGALITHIC AND SLAB HOUSE RUINS AT MCELMO BLUFF
The ruined walls on the bluff situated at the junction of the McElmo
and Yellow Jacket Canyons are archeologically instructive. As the mesa
between the two canyons narrows in a promontory, about 100 feet in
altitude, its configuration reminds one of the East Mesa of the Hopi.
It is inaccessible on three sides, but on the fourth, where the width
of the mesa is contracted, there are remains of a low zigzag wall,
extending from one side to the other. At the western base of this
promontory, on the ledge higher than the river, there are artificial
walls built on bowlders in the sides of which shallow caves are eroded
and near by them circular depressions. There are likewise remains of
a small pueblo with walls much broken down and across the river the
ruins of a community house, one of the largest in the district. The
exceptional character of the ruins on top of this promontory has been
mentioned or described by several visitors, as Holmes, Jackson, and
Morley and Kidder, and various conjectures have been made as to their
character and relation to the other ruins in this neighborhood.
The ruins on this mesa are of two kinds: small inclosures made of
slabs of stone set on edge and semicircular structures (fig. 18), also
constructed of upright stone slabs or megaliths. Three of the latter
have concentric surrounding walls with a “vestibule” entrance (?) at
the south somewhat like rooms at the bases of towers. One of these is
said by Morley and Kidder to have three concentric walls. The small
box-like structures are numerous, and are rudely constructed, united in
an imperfect ring about the circular rooms.
In verification of the various theories that have been suggested to
account for these rectangular structures—their interpretation as
storage bins, burial places, and cremation rooms—we have no proof.
Similar rooms of megaliths exist on Sandstone Canyon and at other
places to the north and in Montezuma Canyon to the west. The rude,
massive character of the masonry leads me to refer them to the slab
house culture of Kidder and the imperfect masonry suggests they were
habitations in a period antedating that of the pure pueblo culture.
Such fragments of pottery as were found were, like the architecture,
rude and archaic, adding weight to the interpretation that they
belonged to a very old epoch.
[Illustration: FIG. 18.—Megalithic stone inclosure, McElmo Bluff.]
The author regards the structures made of stones set on edge as very
old, possibly examples of the most primitive buildings in the McElmo
region, antedating the pueblos with horizontal masonry farther east.
West of the mouth of the Yellow Jacket, especially on the Montezuma
Mesa, these megalithic walls are more pretentious, as if this was the
center of the earlier phase of house buildings. In the eastern ruins
these slabs of stone set on edge sometimes appear as at Far View House
with horizontal masonry, but more as a survival.
Since their discovery and description by Jackson and Holmes 40 years
ago, little has been added to our knowledge of these inclosures,
although similar remains have been reported at various points from
Dolores far into Utah. They are called cemeteries and crematories
by the farmers and stockmen, but skeletons or burnt bones do not
occur in them; the charcoal shows wood fiber, and is not bone ash.
More knowledge must be obtained through excavations before their
significance can be determined. Their association with circular rooms
appears in Jackson’s account[53] of the stone structures on the
promontory at the mouth of the Yellow Jacket. He says:
[53] Tenth Ann. Rept. U. S. Geol. Surv. (Hayden Survey) for 1876, p.
414, 1879.
“The perpendicular scarp of the mesa ran round very regularly, 50
to 100 feet in height, the talus sloping down at a steep angle. On
cave-like benches at the foot of the scarp is a row of rock shelters,
much ruined, in one of which was found a very perfect polished-stone
implement. Gaining the top of the mesa with some difficulty, we found
a perfectly flat surface, 100 yards in width by about 200 in length,
separated from the main plateau by a narrow neck, across which a wall
had been thrown, but which is now nearly leveled. Almost the entire
space fenced in by this wall was covered by an extended series of
small squares, formed by thin slabs of sand-rock set on end. All were
uniform in size, measuring about 3 by 5 feet, and arranged in rows, two
and three deep, adjusted to various points of the compass. There were
also a few circles disposed irregularly about the inclosed area, each
about 20 feet in diameter, their circumferences being formed of similar
rectangular spaces, leaving a circular space of 10 feet diameter in
the center. These rectangles occur mainly in groups, and are found
indiscriminately scattered through the whole region that has come under
our observation upon the mesa tops and in the valleys. They all have
the same general shape and size, and are seldom accompanied by even the
faintest indication of a mound-like character. We have always supposed
them to be graves, but have not as yet found any evidence that would
prove them such. Some that we excavated to the depth of 5 and 6 feet in
a solid earth that had never been disturbed did not reward our search
with the faintest vestige of human remains. In nearly every case,
however, a thin scattered layer of bits of charcoal was found from 6 to
18 inches beneath the surface. In one instance, near the Mesa Verde,
the upright slabs of rock which inclosed one of these rectangles were
sunk 2 feet into the earth and projected 6 inches above it.”
Holmes (op. cit., pp. 385-386) describes similar structures:
“The greater portion of what are supposed to be burial places occur
on the summits of hills or on high, barren promontories that overlook
the valleys and cañons. In these places considerable areas, amounting
in some cases to half an acre or more, are thickly set with rows of
stone slabs, which are set in the ground and arranged in circles or
parallelograms of greatly varying dimensions. At first sight the idea
of a cemetery is suggested, although on examination it is found that
the soil upon the solid rock surfaces is but a few inches deep, or if
deeper, so compact that with the best implements it is very difficult
to penetrate it.
“On the west bank of the Dolores, near the second bend, I came upon a
cluster of these standing stones on the summit of a low, rounded hill,
and in the midst of a dense growth of full-grown piñon pines.”
The rows of stones at this place, according to the same author,
were composed of undressed slabs, many of which had fallen, the
parallelograms averaging 3 by 8 feet in dimensions. Thin layers of bits
of charcoal and pottery occur in the neighborhood. The date these slabs
were placed upright was very early, for trees growing in the inclosures
were estimated to be three or four hundred years old. These stones were
sometimes “embedded in the sides and roots of the trees.” Holmes had
the “impression that these places, if not actually burying grounds,
were at least places used for the performance of funeral rites ... the
remains of the dead being burned or left to decay in the open air.”
The interiors of the inclosures were found on excavation to be filled
to a depth of about a foot with soil mixed with ashes. There were many
fragments of pottery, and some other objects near them, but nothing
to indicate, as suggested by previous observations, that they were
burial cists or even crematories for burying the dead. No charred
human remains occur, but charcoal is abundant. It may have been that
these places were used as ovens for roasting corn or for some culinary
purposes, the neighboring circular rooms being possibly used for the
same purposes as towers by the people who formerly inhabited this
region. They are not large enough for dwellings and the soil in them is
too shallow for burial purposes. They belong to a type which is widely
distributed over the district visited by the author. Especially fine
examples occur north of Sandstone Canyon district.
At the base of the great cliff, on the top of which the remains in
question are found, under the shelter of an overhanging bowlder, may be
seen one of the finest collections of pictographs of animals and human
beings. Not far from the last-mentioned bowlder the walls of a large
pueblo can readily be traced along the banks of the McElmo Canyon.
In his studies of the antiquities of this region the author did not
penetrate west of the mouth of Yellow Jacket Canyon, but he was told
by stockmen and sheep herders of the existence of many other ruins
contiguous to the road all the way from this point to Bluff City. The
most important of these have already been described in a general way.
GRASS MESA CEMETERY
Grass Mesa, a plateau with precipitous sides overlooking the Dolores
River, is about 10 miles down the river from Dolores on the right
bank of the stream. There remain few signs of former buildings at
this place, but very many artifacts, pottery, stone implements, and
fragments of well-worn metates occur at various places, some of which
are among the best ever seen by the author. This bluff seems to have
been the site of a settlement, possibly pre-Puebloan, like that on
McElmo Bluff, with rough walls, resorted to for refuge, and later used
as a cemetery. It is well adapted for these purposes, its top being
almost inaccessible on the river side. There are many other similar
sites of Indian settlements farther down the river, but this is one of
the most typical. The scenery along the road that follows the banks
of the river from Dolores is ever to be remembered on account of high
cliffs on each side.
RESERVOIRS
Many artificial reservoirs dating to prehistoric times were observed in
the area covered by the author’s reconnoissance. These fall into two
well-marked types, one form being a circular depression, apparently
excavated and sometimes walled up with earth or stones. The other
form was not excavated by man, but the sloping surface of rock was
surrounded on the lowest level by a bank of earth, forming a dam or
retaining wall. Both types of reservoirs are commonly formed near some
former center of population, but sometimes occur far from mounds,
wherever the surface of the land has a convenient slope and the water
can be compounded by a retaining wall. The height of the bank that
holds back the water of these prehistoric reservoirs has been increased
in some cases by stockmen; the walls of others still remain practically
the same height they were when constructed by the aborigines. One of
the best examples of the second type of reservoir, the retaining wall
of which is shown in plate 32, _a_, is crossed by the road to Bluff
City near the ruins in Holly Canyon, not far from Picket corral. A few
miles north of this reservoir, at the edge of the cedars, the road
crosses another of these ancient reservoirs, whose retaining bank
has been considerably increased in height by stockmen. The ancient
reservoir at Bug Mesa covers fully 4 acres, and the reservoir near
Goodman Point Ruin is almost as large, and, although somewhat changed
from its aboriginal condition, is still used by farmers dwelling in the
neighborhood. The latter belongs to the first type; the former to the
second. Reservoirs of one or the other type are generally found in the
neighborhood of all large heaps of rocks, the so-called mounds that
indicate the former existence of pueblos. The reservoir of the Mummy
Lake village on the Mesa Verde belongs to the excavated type.
PICTOGRAPHS
At many places covered by this reconnoissance there were found
interesting collections of engraved figures of ancient date cut on
bowlders or vertical cliffs. These are generally situated in the
neighborhood of ruins, but sometimes exist far from human remains. They
generally have geometrical forms, rectangular and spiral predominating.
Associated with these occur also representations of human beings,
birds, and animals, and figures of bird tracks, human hands, and bear
claws. There is a remarkable similarity in all these figures which
sometimes occur on the stones composing the masonry of the buildings
which indicates they were contemporaneous. They were pecked on the
stones with rude stone chisels, but as a rule show no indication of
paint. None of these figures could be regarded, without the wildest
flights of the imagination, as letters or hieroglyphics, and there
is no indication that inscriptions were intended. Their general
character, as shown in a cluster (pl. 33), indicates rather clan
symbols; in some instances spiral forms were probably made to indicate
the presence of water. The incised figures on the walls of buildings
were probably decorative in character, the first efforts of primitive
man to embellish the walls of his dwellings, an art which reached
a very high development in Mexico and Central America. There are,
however, indications that these figures were covered with plaster and
were therefore invisible, so that we might suppose them to be masons’
signs, indicating the clan kinship of those who constructed the walls.
Perhaps the largest group of these pictographs occurs on an eroded
bowlder near the mouth of the Yellow Jacket Canyon, just below the
great promontory separating it from the McElmo, on the surface of which
are the remarkable dwellings composed of slabs of stone set on edge.
Another large cluster, the members of which are of the same general
style as that already mentioned, was seen in Sandstone Canyon, a few
miles south of the road from Dolores to Monticello. There are several
groups of pictographs in the neighborhood of the large towers elsewhere
described. The most noteworthy of these is situated at the head of
the south fork of Square Tower Canyon on a vertical cliff below the
ruined Tower No. 4. The face of the cliff is very much eroded, and the
figures are in places almost illegible. They consist of bird designs,
accompanied with figures of snakes, rain clouds, and other designs,
portions of which are obliterated and impossible of determination. As a
rule, these pictographs resemble very closely those in the cliff-houses
of the Mesa Verde and add their evidence of a uniformity of art design
in these two regions.
In addition to pictographs cut on the surface of the cliff, we also
find in sheltered caves others not incised but with indications of
color, showing the former existence of painted figures. Some of these,
however, are not ascribed to the Indians who built the towers, but to
a later tribe who camped in this region after the house builders had
disappeared. They were probably made by wandering bands of Ute Indians,
and are not significant in a comparison of the different kinds of
buildings described in this article.
MINOR ANTIQUITIES
The preceding pages deal wholly with the immovable antiquities, as
buildings, reservoirs, and the like. In addition to these evidences of
a former population, there should be mentioned likewise the smaller
antiquities, as pottery, stone objects, weapons, baskets, fabrics,
bone and other implements. No excavation was attempted in the course
of the reconnoissance, so that this chapter in the author’s report is
naturally a very brief one. The few statements which follow are mainly
based on local collections, one of which, owned by Mr. Williamson,
of the First National Bank of Dolores, is comprehensive. The most
suggestive of these minor antiquities are objects of burnt clay or
pottery, which occur generally in piles of débris or accompany human
burials. It was the custom of these people, like the cliff-dwellers,
to deposit, near the dead, food in bowls and other household utensils,
varying in shape, technique, decoration, and color. The most important
fact regarding these ceramics is that they belong to the same archaic
type as those from the ruins of the Mesa Verde. The predominating
colors are white or gray with black figures, within and without, almost
universally geometrical in form. There occurs also a relatively large
number of corrugated vessels, and those made by using coils of clay,
the figures on their exterior being indented with some implement, as a
bone, stone, or even with the finger nail. While the majority belong to
the black-and-white group, the red ware decorated with black figures
is found but comparatively rarely, which is also true of the pottery
of the cliff-dwellers. In the large variety of forms of burnt clay
objects, the most remarkable in shape is a double water jar, connected
by a transverse tube, the ends of which project beyond the opening into
the jar, much in the form of an animal with a head at one end, body
elongated, terminating in a short tail, the legs not being represented.
While the number of unbroken mortuary bowls obtained from this region
thus far known is comparatively small, we find in many places large
quantities of broken fragments, all of which belong to the varieties of
ware above enumerated.
None of the bowls, vases, dippers, or other ceramic objects from the
region of the ruins described have that significant feature commonly
called the “life line;” the encircling lines are continuous around
the vessel, and not broken at one point. The broken line never occurs
on archaic pottery like black-and-white ware, and we may accept the
hypothesis that the conception which gave rise to it was foreign to the
people of the Mesa Verde and adjacent areas. It would be instructive
to map out the distribution of this custom which was so prevalent
in pottery from the Gila and Little Colorado and its tributaries,
and absent in that from ruins on the San Juan and Mimbres. It occurs
in ware from certain Rio Grande prehistoric ruins, as if it were a
connecting link with the ancient culture of the Little Colorado.
Of the stone implements found in this region the most characteristic is
the celt called _tcamahia_ which is not found in regions not affected
by the San Juan culture. These objects are found from Mesa Verde to
the Hopi pueblos.[54] A peculiar form of prehistoric chipped chert
implement occurs at Mesa Verde and elsewhere in the area. A flint knife
in the Williamson collection at Dolores was purchased from a Ute woman
who said it was found on a ruin. She wore it attached to her belt by a
buckskin thong fastened to a bead-worked cover.
[54] The use of these objects as heirlooms in the Antelope altar of the
Hopi supports the tradition of the Snake people that their ancestors
brought them from the San Juan.
Bone objects were mainly needles, dirks, and bodkins, presenting
in the main no essential differences from those repeatedly
described, especially by Nordenskiöld in his important memoir on the
cliff-dwellers of the Mesa Verde. Objects made of marine shell are
rare. The presence of flattened slabs of stone or metates showing
on the surface evidences of grinding occur with human bones in many
localities, indicating either that a custom still extant among the
Pueblos of burying the metates with the dead was observed, or that the
burials were made under floors of these long-abandoned houses. It would
seem, on the former hypothesis, that these objects were buried with the
women, but as the condition of the skeletal remains is poor the sex
could not be determined by direct observation.
The unprotected nature of the sites and the condition of the ruins
prevented the preservation of fragile articles like baskets and
fabrics, which frequently occur in caves, in one or two instances
buried under the floors. There is little doubt that excavations in
cemeteries of the open-sky ruins would reveal considerable material
of this nature, which would probably duplicate that which has been
produced from the adjacent cliff-houses. Many parts of wooden beams,
mainly the remains of flooring and roofs, were seen still in the
walls, but these as a rule were fragmentary. The ends of the timbers
still adhering to the walls show that they were cut into shape by
stone implements, aided by live embers. They appear to have been split
by means of wedges made of stone and often rubbed down smooth with
polishing instruments of the same material. The majority of these
wooden beams plainly show the action of fire, but no roof was intact.
From the size of the logs shown in fragments of beams, it is evident
that the roof supports had been brought there from some distance; trees
of the magnitude they imply do not now grow in the neighborhood of some
of the ruins where these beams occur.
HISTORIC REMAINS
The various objects found in the ruins or on the surface of the ground
as a rule are characteristic of a people in the stone-age culture,
ignorant of metals, and therefore prehistoric, but here and there on
the surface have been picked up iron weapons which belonged to the
historic period. The old “Spanish Trail” mentioned in preceding pages
was the early highway from Santa Fe, New Mexico, to the Great Salt
Lake, and followed approximately an old Indian trail that was probably
used by the prehistoric inhabitants or the builders of the towers. Not
far from the head of Yellow Jacket Canyon a ranchman discovered on
his farm a few years ago the blades of two Spanish iron lance heads
or knives, still well preserved, the hilts, however, being destroyed.
These objects, now in Mr. Williamson’s collection at Dolores, may have
belonged to a party of Spanish soldiers who explored this region, but
their form, in addition to the material, is so characteristic that no
one would assign them to aboriginal manufacture. Fragments of a stirrup
of metal, parts of the harness or saddle, also belonging to the Spanish
epoch, have also been found. The indications are that these objects are
historic, but their owners may have been Indians who obtained them from
Europeans. They probably do not antedate the middle of the eighteenth
century, when two Catholic fathers, with an escort of soldiers, made
their trip of discovery from Santa Fe into what is now Utah. They shed
no light on the epoch of the aborigines who constructed the castles and
towers considered in this paper.
CONCLUSIONS
In the preceding pages the author has considered several different
types of buildings, which, notwithstanding their variety in forms, have
much in common and can be interpreted as indicating an identical phase
of pueblo development. A comparative study of their distribution shows
us that they occur in a well-defined geographical area. In comparison
with stone buildings in other parts of the Southwestern States, this
phase shows superior masonry. It is considered as chronologically
antedating the historic epoch and post-dating an earlier, and as yet
not clearly defined, phase out of which it sprung in the natural
evolution from simple to complex forms.
These buildings express the communal thought of the builders, since
they were constructed by groups of people rather than by individuals.
Architecture representing the thoughts of many minds is conservative,
or less liable to innovation or departure from prescribed forms and
methods. These community houses express the thought of men in groups
at different times, and, so far as archeology teaches, are the best
exponents of what we call contemporary social conditions, while
pottery and other small portable objects, being products of individual
endeavor, furnish little on social organization, or general cultural
conditions of communities. Although determination of cultural areas
built on identity of pottery often coincides with those determined
by buildings, this is not always the case. Specialized culture
areas determined by highly conventionalized designs on ceramics are
localized, more numerous, and as a rule more modern. Hence a culture
area determined by architectural features may include several subareas
determined by pottery.
The author has thought it possible to differentiate two distinct epochs
or phases of house building in the upper part of the San Juan drainage,
viz. the early and the middle stages of development. There are included
in the early condition certain crude architectural efforts similar
to the non-Pueblos represented in regions adjoining the Pueblo area.
This early condition, though not clearly defined, is beginning to be
revealed by intensive studies of the so-called slab house dwellings
and isolated brush houses. Evidences of this stage have been found
in several localities, as on McElmo Bluff, or combined with walls of
what may be called true pueblo buildings. The differences between some
of the buildings of the early stage and those of the aborigines in
southern California, or of the Utes and Shoshonean tribes, are slight;
resemblances which point to relations are not considered in detail.
From their advance in house building, it has been commonly stated
that the Pueblo people were either derived from Mexican tribes or, as
was customary in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries to suppose,
their descendants had made their way south and developed into the more
advanced Mexican culture as the Aztecs. These conclusions are not
supported by comparison with available architectural data observed
among these two peoples. The basal error is the mistake in considering
the earth houses of the Gila the same as pueblos. The habitations of
the Gila compounds were structurally different from pueblos, and their
sanctuaries or ceremonial rooms had not the same form or relation to
the dwellings. The Gila compounds are allied to Mexican buildings; but
there is little in common between them and pure pueblos. The same is
true of the type of stone dwellings on the Verde, Tonto, and Little
Colorado. Certain likenesses exist between the Casas Grandes of the
Gila and those of Mexico, although little relationship exists between
the temples or ceremonial buildings of the valley of Mexico and the
Casas Grandes of the Gila. The architecture of the Pueblos and the
Aztecs is very different; the habitations of Mexican tribes resemble
those of the Gila. The forms[55] of ceremonial chambers differ, one
being rectangular mounds or pyramids, the other circular, generally
subterranean.
[55] Temples of Quetzalcoatl, the Plumed Serpent Sun God, are circular
buildings like towers.
Rather than seek the origin of the house builders of the San Juan,
or the parent Pueblos, from Mexican sources, the author believes
the custom of building stone houses in the pueblo region was not
derived from any locality not now included in the pueblo area, but
it developed as an autochthonous growth, the earliest stages as well
as the most complex forms being of local origin. Incoming Indians
may have introduced ideas of foreign birth but they did not bring
in the mason’s craft. That custom developed in the Southwest, where
we find the whole series from a single stone-house or a cave with
walls closing the entrance to the most highly developed architectural
production north of Mexico. There are cliff-dwellings in many other
localities in the world but there are nowhere, except in the region
here considered, cliff-dwellings with circular kivas constructed on
this unique plan. It is generally supposed that a type of room called
“small house” was the predecessor of the multiple community dwelling
throughout the Southwest. This type, defined as a simple four-walled,
one story building with a flat roof, is widely spread in New Mexico
and Arizona. The strongest arguments in favor of its greater antiquity
are possibly its simplicity of form and the character of accompanying
ceramics—corrugated, black-and-white, and red pottery. Characteristic
small houses of the Mesa Verde and McElmo Canyon belong to the same
type of pueblo as the largest extensive villages which are more
complicated than the so-called small house. It is what the author
has called the pure type which is structurally different from the
“small house,” the so-called archaic form of the mixed pueblos of the
Rio Grande. This unit type is likewise unlike the small house of the
Little Colorado, including those of the Zuñi Valley and the Hopi Wash,
although the Hopi kivas show the influence of the Mesa Verde culture
in the persistence of the ceremonial opening in the floor called the
sipapu.
A cluster of small houses or the village such as we find at Mummy
Lake on the Mesa Verde is composed of several scattered members, each
containing for the religious and secular life the “pure type” rooms
constructed on the same plan. In a village like the Aztec Spring House
several unit buildings are united, forming one community house larger
than the rest, which was the dominant one of the village, the remaining
houses being smaller and scattered. Aztec Spring, Mitchell Spring, and
Mud Spring villages show a similar consolidation of units with outlying
smaller houses, and the number of units in such a union is believed
to be indicated by the number of circular rooms, or kivas. Thus, four
kivas might be supposed to indicate four consolidated social units.
The complete concentration of several unit pueblos into one or more
large communal buildings[56] is also found in several cases in the
area we have studied, but we must look to the great ruin at Aztec or
those on the Chaco Canyon for examples of almost complete amalgamation.
Thus these large pueblos where an almost complete consolidation has
occurred have resulted from a fusion or condensation of what might
have formerly been a rambling village composed of several separate
units. This clustering of small separated houses in a village is not
peculiar to the San Juan but exists elsewhere in the Southwest, as in
the Rio Grande region, where, however, the structure of each component
small house is different. These separate mounds do not indicate the
unit type as defined, and the Rio Grande pueblo of modern date has its
kiva separated from the house masses, which have grouped themselves
in rectangular lines or rooms surrounding courts. There are, perhaps,
examples in this region where a circular kiva is found embedded in
house masses, but these are so few in number that they may possibly be
regarded as incorporate survivals due to acculturation.
In the Gila Valley compounds, as Casa Grande, and on the Little
Colorado, the unit type is unknown. Several blocks of buildings on the
Gila are surrounded by a rectangular wall which is wanting in ruins of
the Little Colorado and its tributaries. Here one of the units may be
enlarged, following in some respects the conditions at Aztec Spring
Ruin. A surrounding wall also appears in some of the Pueblo villages
and pueblos, but when we compare one of the units of a Casa Grande
compound with that of a Montezuma Valley village, we find little in
common, the main difference, so far as form is concerned, being the
absence of a circular kiva.[57] There is nothing in a Gila Valley
compound we can structurally call a circular kiva, and no morphological
equivalent of the circular kiva in ruins on the tributaries of the Salt
and Gila. On the horizon of the Gila culture area there are no circular
kivas, due to acculturation. There are rooms analogous to kivas used
for ceremonials at Hopi and Zuñi, but they are not true kivas as
we have interpreted them in the San Juan area. Both Hopi and Zuñi
are composite people and have elements derived from Gila and Pueblo
influences, but neither belong to the pure type in the sense the author
defines it.
[56] The likeness of the Mesa Verde cliff-houses to the pueblos of
Chaco Canyon was long ago suggested by Nordenskiöld. The excavation of
Far View House proved that suggestion to be true.
[57] This subject is treated at length in my report on Casa Grande in
the Twenty-eighth Annual Report of the Bureau of American Ethnology.
The author has attempted to show that the structure of the houses
whose clustering composes villages in the Montezuma Valley is the
same as that of Far View House of the Mummy Lake village on top of
Mesa Verde; and that these architectural resemblances are close enough
to indicate that the villages of the two localities were inhabited by
people of the same general culture. He has proved that the pure type
of such a village as shown in Far View House was constructed on the
same plan as a cliff-dwelling, notwithstanding one is built in the
open, the other in a cave. The geographic extension of this type has
been traced into Utah. Ruined pueblos on the Chaco Canyon or at Aztec
on the Animas, which is geographically nearer the Mesa Verde, are
more concentrated but indicate the same culture. Renewed research is
necessary to determine the southern and western extension of the pure
type; the northern and eastern horizon is fairly well known.
Granting that the great ruins on the Chaco Canyon belong to the same
people as those on Mesa Verde, the question arises, Which buildings
are the most ancient, those on the Mesa Verde or those on the Chaco?
A correct answer to this question should reveal the cradle of the
culture indicated by the pure or prehistoric type of pueblo. The author
believes that the pure pueblo culture originated in the northern part
of the area and migrated southward to the Chaco Valley in prehistoric
times, ultimately affecting the people of the Rio Grande, where
sedentary people no doubt lived before written history of the area
began. The result was a mixture; the mixed population are the modern
Pueblos.
In the great cliff-houses of the Mesa Verde and the extensive pueblos
of the McElmo we find towers combined with pure types of pueblos,
either simple or complex. In the Chaco ruins these towers are not found
in this combination. To this may be added the great house type of the
McElmo, also absent in the Chaco. Here there appears to be an essential
difference on which the author ventures a suggestion, but which future
research must elucidate.
If this pure type originated in the southern tributaries of the San
Juan as the Chaco and migrated to the northern we would expect in the
latter more distinctly southern objects, as shell ornaments, turquoise
mosaics, and a great variety of pottery of a southern type.
The pure or unit type is believed to be autochthonous in the San
Juan Basin and characteristic of a middle phase of architectural
development, the highest north of Mexico. It is self-centered and has
preserved its characteristics over an extensive area, influencing
regions far beyond.
The evolution of this type took place in the region mentioned before
the fifteenth century of the Christian era. Traces of its influence
have persisted into the country of mixed pueblos down to the present
time, but the architectural skill has deteriorated and shows evidence
of acculturation[58] from sources outside the San Juan area where it
originated.
One word in regard to the adjectives, prehistoric and historic,
applied to southwestern ruins. They are relative ones and obtained
from data somewhat diverse in character. Casa Grande on the Gila was
called a ruin when first seen by the European. It was inhabited in
prehistoric times. From documentary evidence the historian learns
that certain other buildings were not inhabited at the advent of the
Spaniards, and if their statements are trustworthy these also are
prehistoric. Legends of modern Pueblos claim that certain other ruins
were inhabited houses of their ancestors before the coming of the white
man. The author sees no good reason to throw this evidence out of court
without investigation because some of the incidents in it betray late
introduction. Many other ruins are classified as prehistoric from the
purely negative, but not decisive, evidence that no objects of European
make have been found in them. The ruin Sun Temple, on the Mesa Verde,
is considered prehistoric from the fact that a tree with over 360
annual rings of growth was found growing on top of its highest wall. We
are justified in calling this a prehistoric ruin.
The evidences that villages, cliff-dwellings, castles and towers,
and other types considered in this article antedate the advent of
the white man are as follows: No historian has recorded an inhabited
building of this form in this or other regions; no objects of European
manufacture have been found in them, and the buildings and pottery
which characterize them are different from those of any inhabited when
the Spanish entered the Southwest.
The complex, which is thought to be the highest form of pueblo
architecture, is composed of the following elements united: (1) Several
“pure types”[59] representing a religio-sociological complexion of
the inhabitants; (2) towers of various forms—round, D-shaped, and
rectangular; (3) the great houses; (4) unit type in cave. In Cliff
Palace these four types occur united in a pueblo built in a natural
cave; in Mud Spring Ruin two and possibly three of these types are
found in one open-air village, more spread out as site permits. In
Aztec Spring and Mitchell Spring pueblos the arrangement is more
defined. In the cluster at the head of South Fork of Square Tower
Canyon we have all the elements united in Hovenweep House and Hovenweep
Castle. Unit type House shows the single-unit type with tower near by;
in Twin Towers we have the great house with cave pueblo and towers
separated. Several other towers isolated from other types also occur.
[58] These acculturation modifications due to Hispanic influences in
modern pueblos are too well marked to need more than a mention.
[59] The author uses the words “pure type” instead of “unit type” as a
general term to denote “one-unit types,” “two-unit types,” “three-unit
types,” etc.
The Holly Canyon group shows the types separated. The great house is
represented by Holly Castle; the towers are situated on huge bowlders.
The unit type of this group is represented by Holly House, the
foundation of part of which has fallen, covering the ruins of another
pueblo of the unit type formerly in the cave below.
The Hackberry group is also composed of three elemental types
separated; the great house is represented by Hackberry House, the unit
type by the cliff-dwelling below and by the pueblo on the opposite side
of the gulch, and the towers by isolated towers.
A similar analysis may be made of other ruins. Sometimes the component
types are united; often one type only occurs, the others being absent.
The union of all is best marked in the northern tributaries of the San
Juan, as at Aztec, and in the southern tributaries, as at Chaco Canyon
and Chelly Canyon. These pueblos, whether in the open or in caves,
belong to the pure or concentrated multiple unit type.
Some light may be shed on the probable process of consolidation of the
individual units of a community house by a comparative study of the
pueblos on the East Mesa of the Hopi. Hano, for instance, was settled
by a group of Tanoan clans about 1710 A. D. The list of Hano clans that
originally came to the East Mesa is known from legends and the present
localization of their survivors has been indicated in the author’s
article on “The Sun’s Influence on the Form of Hopi Pueblos.”[60]
In 1890 Hano was composed of four blocks of rooms, each housing one
or more clans. Earlier there were six, one of which had fallen into
disuse, a few less than the traditional number of clans. When the
colonists arrived, they settled near Coyote Spring, the houses of which
are now covered with drifted sand, but when they constructed their
village on the mesa at the head of the trail each house of a cluster
housed a clan. Increase in population, both internal and external, led
to the union and enlargement of these houses so that they inclosed
a central plaza. A similar growth has taken place in Sichomovi, the
pueblo halfway between Walpi and Hano; first single houses, then rows
of houses with terraces on the south and east sides. Some of the
original houses have been deserted and rebuilt nearer the others. Thus
at Hano the Katcina clan house was north and east of the chief kiva but
is now in the east row.
[60] Amer. Anthrop., n. s. vol. viii, no. 1, 1906.
In the same way we may suppose that in a consolidation of a community
dwelling several units may have drawn together and united. There is
evidence of a union of this kind in many ruins in the Southwest.
The data here published should not be interpreted to mean that the
author regards the builders of the towers and great houses here
described as evidences of a race other than the Indians. Indeed he
believes that in both blood and culture they have left survivals
among the modern Pueblos. He also does not hold that as a whole
they necessarily belonged to a radically different phase of culture,
notwithstanding the buildings they constructed show a greater variety
of form and masonry superior to that of their descendants.
The evidences are cumulative that there existed and disappeared in
a wide geographical area of the Southwest a people whose buildings
differed so much from those of any other area in North America that the
area in which they occur may be designated as a characteristic one.
The variety and type of buildings have a bearing on social
organization. A large building composed of many units is probably but
not necessarily later in time than a single house; an isolated single
house would probably be of earlier construction than a collection of
several single houses of the same character compactly arranged in a
village; a complete consolidation of several houses of such a village
into a community house would naturally be more modern than a group of
isolated single houses.
City blocks postdate hamlets. Between a stage indicated by single
houses and one characterized by consolidated building, there is a
phase in which the buildings are grouped in clusters and are not
united. We may theoretically suppose that the single house was
inhabited by one social unit as a clan or family. As the food quest
became more intensified and defense more urgent, social units, as
indicated by single houses, would be brought together, and as the
population increased the amalgamation would be more complete. This
social organization, in the beginning loose, in the course of time
would become more homogeneous, and as it did so the union of these
separate social units would have been closer; and if we combine with
that tendency the powerful stimulus of protection, we can readily see
how a compact form of architecture characteristic of the buildings here
described was brought about. The element of defense in the villages
with scattered houses does not appear to have been very important,
but might be adduced to explain the consolidation of these into large
community houses.
If the growth of the large pueblos has followed the lines above
indicated, and if each unit type indicates a social unit as well, we
necessarily have in this growth of the community house the story of the
social evolution of the Pueblo people. Clans or social units at first
isolated later joined each other, intermarriage always tending to make
the population more homogeneous. The social result of the amalgamation
of clans seeking common defense would in time be marked. The inevitable
outcome would be a breaking down of clan priesthoods or clan religions
and the formation of fraternities of priesthoods recruited from several
clans. This in turn would lead to a corresponding reduction and
enlargement of ceremonial rooms remaining. Two kivas suffice for the
ceremonies of the majority of the Rio Grande pueblos; but Cliff Palace
with a population of the same size had 23 and Spruce-tree House, a much
smaller cliff pueblo, had 8.
One can not fail to notice a similarity in sites of some of the great
houses of the McElmo to neighboring cliff habitations and a like
relation of Sun Temple to the cliff-dwellings in Fewkes Canyon in the
Mesa Verde. Possibly the purpose of these great houses and Sun Temple
was identical. Some of the great houses were probably granaries and Sun
Temple may have been intended partly for a like use. No indications of
remains of stored corn have been observed in any of these buildings,
but Castañeda[61] speaks of a village of subterranean granaries
(“silos”) in the Rio Grande country, which is instructive in this
connection.
[61] Fourteenth Ann. Rept. Bur. Amer. Ethn., pt. 1, p. 523. This
village is spoken of as “lately destroyed;” in other words it was a
ruin in 1540.
INDEX
ACMEN RUIN, described, 29
ANTIQUITIES, minor, 66
ARCHITECTURE, culture areas determined by, 69
ARCHITECTURE, PUEBLO—
elements of, 73
of local origin, 70
AZTEC ARCHITECTURE, unlike that of Pueblos, 69
AZTEC SPRING, ruins at, 23
described by Holmes, 24
described by Jackson, 24
ground plan of, 26
BEAMS, WOODEN, method of shaping, 67
BLANCHARD RUIN, 23
BONE, objects made of, 67
BOWLDER CASTLE, description of, 57
BOWLS, MORTUARY, 66
BUG MESA RUIN, description of, 19
BUG POINT RUIN, excavation of, showing unit type, 29
BURIAL CUSTOMS, 66, 67
BURIAL PLACES—
mentioned by Morgan, 21
near Holmes Tower, 59
on Grass Mesa, 64
on the Dolores, 11
BURKHARDT RUIN. _See_ MUD SPRING RUIN.
BUTTE RUIN, description of, 32
CANNONBALL RUIN—
description of, 30
structural features of, 42
CASTLES, structural features of, 40
CAVES—
apparently used for storage, 60
walled-up, 59
CEMETERIES. _See_ BURIAL PLACES.
CEREMONIAL ROOMS, Hopi and Zuñi, not true kivas, 71
CHACO CANYON RUINS, comparative age of, 72
CIRCULAR RUINS—
distribution of, 31
structural features of, 31
CLIFF-DWELLERS—
culture of, 9
region occupied by, 9
CLIFF-DWELLINGS—
architectural features of, 37
classification of, 15
double, 38
in Lost Canyon, 40
small, in the McElmo region, 37
COMMUNAL DWELLINGS, 71
preceded by “small house”, 70
social conditions indicated by, 69
CONSOLIDATION OF UNITS, process of, 74
CORN, CHARRED, found embedded in slag, 60
DAVIS TOWER—
ground plan, 55
location of, 55
DEPRESSIONS INDICATING KIVAS, 42
DOVE CREEK RUINS, 28
EIGHT MILE RUIN, masonry in, 41
EMERSON, J. W., description of ruin by, 34
EMERSON RUIN, description of, 33
ENTRANCES—
to kivas, 42
to towers, 42
walled-up, 57
ERODED BOWLDER HOUSE, description of, 49
ESCALANTE AND DOMINGUEZ, manuscript diary of, 36
ESCALANTE RUIN, description of, 36
FAR VIEW HOUSE, a pueblo of pure type, 15, 16
GIBRALTAR HOUSE. _See_ STRONGHOLD HOUSE.
GILA VALLEY COMPOUNDS, 71
allied to Mexican buildings, 67
GOODMAN POINT RUIN, description of, 17
GRASS MESA, cemetery on, 64
GREAT HOUSES—
date of construction undetermined, 43
possible use of, 42, 76
structural features of, 40
HACKBERRY CANYON CLIFF-HOUSE, a “unit type”, 40
HACKBERRY CASTLE, description of, 52
HACKBERRY GROUP, elements composing, 74
HILL CANYON RUINS, 42
masonry of, 42
HOLLY CANYON—
ground plan, 52
ruins of, 52
HOLLY CANYON GROUP, elements composing, 74
HOLLY HOUSE RUINS, description of, 53
HOLMES, W. H.—
on probable use of towers, 42
on tower at Mud Spring, 20
report of, as reference work, 11
report on ruins by, 10, 11
slab inclosures described by, 62
HOLMES TOWER, description of, 58
HOPI CEREMONIAL ROOMS, not true kivas, 71
HORSESHOE HOUSE—
compared with Sun Temple, 54
description of, 53
ground plan, 54
structural features of, 40
HOVENWEEP CASTLE—
description of, 47
ground plan of, 47
HOVENWEEP DISTRICT—
a proposed National Monument, 44
canyons of, containing ruins, 44
ruins of, 44
HOVENWEEP HOUSE, description of, 46
IMPLEMENTS, STONE, 67
INGERSOLL, ERNEST, newspaper article by, 11
JACKSON, WM. H.—
report of, as work of reference, 11
report of, on ruins, 10, 11
slab inclosures described by, 62
JOHNSON RUIN, description of, 18
KEELEY TOWERS, location of, 45
KIDDER, A. V. _See_ MORLEY AND KIDDER.
KIVA OF UNIT TYPE HOUSE, architectural features of, 51
KIVAS—
double-walled, 39
entrances to, 42
indicated by depressions, 42
indicative of social units, 70
structural features of, 37
LION TOWER—
description of, 55
ground plan of, 55
LITTRELL TOWER. _See_ LION TOWER.
LOST CANYON CLIFF-HOUSES, 40
“LOWER HOUSE,” of Aztec Spring Ruin, 25, 27
MCELMO BLUFF, ruins at, 60
MCELMO DISTRICT—
distinctive feature of ruins of, 15
investigations in, of 1917, 10
MCELMO RUINS, latest work on, 14
MCLEAN BASIN—
ground plan of ruins of, 56
pottery found in, 56
ruins of, described, 55
towers of, 56
MANCOS REGION, towers of, 58
MASONRY—
of Hill Canyon Ruins, 42
skill shown in construction, 40
varieties of, 41
MEGALITHIC RUINS, 60
MEGALITHS, circular structures of, 60
MESA VERDE—
cliff-dwellings and villages of, 9
culture of inhabitants of, 9
MESA VERDE RUINS, comparative age of, 72
METATES—
found at Surouaro, 17
with skeletal remains, 67
MEXICAN TRIBES AND THE PUEBLOS, relation between, 69
MITCHELL, H. L., notes contributed by, 11
MITCHELL SPRING RUIN, description of, 19
MITCHELL SPRING VILLAGE, origin of the name, 12
MONOLITHS IN WALLS, 30
MONTEZUMA VALLEY, distinctive feature of ruins in, 15
MOOREHEAD, WARREN K., ruins described by, 12
MORGAN, L. H.—
investigation of ruins by, 10, 11
notes of, on ruins of Mesa Verde, 11
on Mitchell Spring Ruin, 19
on Mud Creek village, 21
MORLEY, S. G.—
excavations conducted by, 30
work of, 13
MORLEY, S. G., and KIDDER, A. V., ruins described by, 14
MOUNDS—
near Mummy Lake, 15
of Mud Spring Ruin, 21
MUD SPRING RUIN, description of, 20
MUMMY LAKE MOUNDS, 15
NELSON, N. C., on Pueblo ruins, 17
NEWBERRY, J. S., on Surouaro, 17
NORDENSKIÖLD, BARON G., work of, 13
OAK SPRING HOUSE, description of, 29
OLD SPANISH TRAIL, route of, 36, 68
OPEN-AIR RUINS OF DOVE CREEK, 28
PARKER, GORDON, assistance of, 40
PICTOGRAPHS—
colored, 65
covered with plaster, 65
incised on stone, 65
near Ruin 5, 49
near slab inclosures, 63
PIERSON LAKE RUIN. _See_ SQUAW POINT RUIN.
PILASTERS LACKING IN TOWERS, 42
PLASTERING, interiors covered with, 41
POTTERY—
culture areas determined by, 69
description of, 66
PRUDDEN, T. MITCHELL—
articles by, on ruins of San Juan watershed, 12
excavations conducted by, 19
on towers as part of composite ruins, 44
PUEBLO ARCHITECTURE—
elements of complex, 73
of local origin, 70
PUEBLO CULTURE, direction of its migration, 72
PUEBLO TRIBES, origin of, 69
“PURE TYPE” defined, 16
RESERVOIR GROUP, named by J. Ward Emerson, 34
RESERVOIRS, INDIAN—
crossed by Old Bluff Road, 45
natural and artificial, 64
ROAD CANYON, formerly called the Wickyup, 57
ROOMS, with megalithic walls, 15
RUIN 3, description of, 48
RUIN 4, description of, 49
RUIN 5, description of, 49
RUIN 6, description of, 49
RUIN 7. _See_ ERODED BOWLDER HOUSE.
RUIN 8. _See_ TWIN TOWERS.
RUIN 9, description of, 50
RUIN 10. _See_ UNIT TYPE HOUSE.
RUIN 11. _See_ STRONGHOLD HOUSE.
RUIN CANYON—
duplication of name misleading, 45
ruin in, 30
unit type houses of, 40
RUINS—
classification of, 14
evidences of age of, 73
SAND CANYON—
cliff-dwellings in, 38
scaffold in, 38
tower in, 57
SCAFFOLD FOR LOOKOUT, 38
SEMICIRCULAR RUINS, description of, 22
SLAB INCLOSURES—
described by Jackson, 62
described by Holmes, 62
SLAB STRUCTURES—
box-like, 60
circular, 60
pottery found near, 61
theories concerning, 61
“SMALL HOUSE” TYPE OF ARCHITECTURE, 70
SOCIAL ORGANIZATION, relation between architecture and, 75
“SPANISH TRAIL.” _See_ OLD SPANISH TRAIL.
SQUARE TOWER CANYON—
classification of ruins in, 46
directions for reaching, 45
map of, 45
new name for Ruin Canyon, 45
SQUAW POINT RUIN, described, 28
STONE ARCH HOUSE, location of, 38
STRONGHOLD HOUSE, description of, 52
SUN DIAL PALACE, named by J. Ward Emerson, 34
SUN TEMPLE—
discovery of, 10
evidence of age of, 73
possible use of, 76
unique ground plan of, 42
SUROUARO—
description of, 16
named by Newberry, 12
signification of name, 17
TOWERS—
D-shaped, 44
date of construction undetermined, 43
entrance to, 42
entrance walled up, 57
forms of, 43
of Holly Canyon, 52
of McLean Basin, 56
of Mancos region, 58
of Sand Canyon, 57
of Wickyup Canyon, 57
possible use of, 42
structural features of, 40
windows absent in, 42
TOWERS AND GREAT HOUSES—
form and construction of, 15
situation of, 15
“TRIPLE-WALLED TOWER”—
at Mud Spring Ruin, 20
condition of, in 1881, 21
visited by Holmes, 11
TWIN TOWERS—
description of, 50
ground plan of, 50
UNIT TYPE—
defined, 16, 39
described by Prudden, 12
origin of, 72
unlike small house of Little Colorado, 70
UNIT TYPE HOUSE—
description of, 50
ground plan of, 51
UNIT TYPE HOUSES—
in cave, 39
in Hackberry Canyon, 40
“UPPER HOUSE” of Aztec Spring Ruin, 25, 26, 27
VILLAGES—
defined, 16
essential features of, 14, 16
WEAPONS, iron, 68
WICKYUP CANYON—
description of, 57
towers in, 57
WOLLEY RANCH RUIN, description of, 22
WOOD CANYON RUINS, description of, 32
YELLOW JACKET CANYON—
formerly known as Hovenweep, 57
investigations in, 10
towers of, 54
ZUÑI CEREMONIAL ROOMS NOT TRUE KIVAS, 71
[Illustration: PLATE 1 a, BUTTE RUIN]
[Illustration: b, AZTEC SPRING RUIN]
[Illustration: c, SUROUARO, YELLOW JACKET SPRING RUIN
(Photographs by Jacob Wirsula)]
[Illustration: PLATE 2 a, BLANCHARD RUIN]
[Illustration: b, BLANCHARD RUIN, MOUND 2]
[Illustration: c, SUROUARO, YELLOW JACKET SPRING RUIN
(Photographs by Jacob Wirsula)]
[Illustration: PLATE 3 a, ACMEN RUIN
(Photograph by T. G. Lemmon)]
[Illustration: b, MUD SPRING RUIN
(Photograph by Jacob Wirsula)]
[Illustration: PLATE 4 a, BUILDING ON ROCK PINNACLE, NEAR STONE ARCH,
SAND CANYON]
[Illustration: b, STONE ARCH, SAND CANYON
(Photographs by J. Walter Fewkes)]
[Illustration: PLATE 5 a, TOWER IN SAND CANYON]
[Illustration: b, UNIT TYPE HOUSE IN SAND CANYON
(Photographs by T. G. Lemmon)]
[Illustration: PLATE 6 a, STONE ARCH HOUSE, SAND CANYON]
[Illustration: b, CLIFF-HOUSE, SHOWING BROKEN CORNER
(Photographs by Jacob Wirsula)]
[Illustration: PLATE 7 a, SCAFFOLD IN SAND CANYON]
[Illustration: b, STORAGE CIST IN MANCOS VALLEY]
[Illustration: c, PICTOGRAPHS NEAR UNIT TYPE HOUSE IN CAVE
(Photographs by T. G. Lemmon)]
[Illustration: PLATE 8 DOUBLE CLIFF-DWELLING, SAND CANYON
(Photograph by T. G. Lemmon)]
[Illustration: PLATE 9 a, CLIFF-DWELLING UNDER HORSESHOE RUIN]
[Illustration: b, CLIFF-DWELLING, RUIN CANYON
(Photographs by Jacob Wirsula)]
[Illustration: PLATE 10 a, KIVA OF CLIFF RUIN, LOST CANYON]
[Illustration: b, CLIFF RUIN, LOST CANYON
(Photographs by Gordon Parker)]
[Illustration: PLATE 11 a, SQUARE TOWER IN SQUARE TOWER CANYON]
[Illustration: b, TOWER IN McLEAN BASIN]
[Illustration: c, RUIN IN HILL CANYON, UTAH
(Photographs by T. G. Lemmon)]
[Illustration: PLATE 12 HEAD OF SOUTH FORK, SQUARE TOWER CANYON
(Photograph by Geo. L. Beam. Courtesy of the Denver & Rio Grande
Railroad)]
[Illustration: PLATE 13 NORTH FORK OF SQUARE TOWER CANYON, LOOKING WEST
a, Hovenweep Castle. b, Hovenweep House. c, Tower No. 9. d, Tower on
point at junction of North and South Forks. e, Twin Towers. f, Unit
type House
(Photograph by Geo. L. Beam. Courtesy of the Denver & Rio Grande
Railroad)]
[Illustration: PLATE 14 a, HOVENWEEP HOUSE AND HOVENWEEP CASTLE, FROM
THE SOUTH]
[Illustration: b, HOVENWEEP CASTLE, FROM THE WEST]
[Illustration: c, HOVENWEEP CASTLE, FROM THE SOUTH
(Photographs by Jacob Wirsula)]
[Illustration: PLATE 15 a, WEST END OF TWIN TOWER, SHOWING SMALL
CLIFF-HOUSE
(Photograph by J. Walter Fewkes)]
[Illustration: b, TWIN TOWERS, SQUARE TOWER CANYON, FROM THE SOUTH
(Photograph by Jacob Wirsula)]
[Illustration: c, TOWER 4, JUNCTION OF NORTH AND SOUTH FORKS, SQUARE
TOWER CANYON
(Photograph by Jacob Wirsula)]
[Illustration: PLATE 16 a, HOVENWEEP CASTLE, WITH SLEEPING UTE MOUNTAIN,
SOUTH FORK, SQUARE TOWER CANYON]
[Illustration: b, ENTRANCE TO SOUTH FORK, SQUARE TOWER CANYON
(Photographs by Geo. L. Beam. Courtesy of the Denver & Rio Grande
Railroad)]
[Illustration: PLATE 17 STRONGHOLD HOUSE, SQUARE TOWER CANYON
(Photograph by Geo. L. Beam. Courtesy of the Denver & Rio Grande
Railroad)]
[Illustration: PLATE 18 a, HEAD OF HOLLY CANYON]
[Illustration: b, SOUTH SIDE OF HOVENWEEP CASTLE, SQUARE TOWER CANYON
(Photographs by Geo. L. Beam. Courtesy of the Denver & Rio Grande
Railroad)]
[Illustration: PLATE 19 a, HOLLY CANYON GROUP, FROM THE EAST
(Photograph by Jacob Wirsula)]
[Illustration: b, GREAT HOUSE AT HEAD OF HOLLY CANYON, FROM THE NORTH
(Photograph by T. G. Lemmon)]
[Illustration: c, UNIT TYPE RUIN, FROM THE EAST
(Photograph by T. G. Lemmon)]
[Illustration: PLATE 20 a, GREAT HOUSE AT HEAD OF HOLLY CANYON, FROM THE
SOUTH]
[Illustration: b, RUIN B AT HEAD OF HOLLY CANYON, FROM THE WEST]
[Illustration: c, GREAT HOUSE AT HEAD OF HOLLY CANYON
(Photographs by Jacob Wirsula)]
[Illustration: PLATE 21 a, GREAT HOUSE, HOLLY CANYON]
[Illustration: b, STRONGHOLD HOUSE AND TWIN TOWERS, SQUARE TOWER CANYON
(Photographs by Geo. L. Beam. Courtesy of the Denver & Rio Grande
Railroad)]
[Illustration: PLATE 22 a, HOVENWEEP CASTLE]
[Illustration: b, SOUTHERN PART OF CANNONBALL RUIN, McELMO CANYON
(Photographs by T. G. Lemmon)]
[Illustration: PLATE 23 a, SQUARE TOWER WITH ROUNDED CORNERS, HOLLY
CANYON
(Photograph by Jacob Wirsula)]
[Illustration: b, HOLLY TOWER IN HOLLY CANYON
(Photograph by Jacob Wirsula)]
[Illustration: c, HORSESHOE HOUSE
(Photograph by T. G. Lemmon)]
[Illustration: PLATE 24 a, HORSESHOE RUIN
(Photograph by Jacob Wirsula)]
[Illustration: b, BOWLDER CASTLE, ROAD (WICKYUP) CANYON
(Photograph by T. G. Lemmon)]
[Illustration: PLATE 25 a, CLOSED DOORWAY IN BOWLDER CASTLE, ROAD
(WICKYUP) CANYON
(Photograph by J. Walter Fewkes)]
[Illustration: b, BROKEN-DOWN ROUND TOWER, SQUARE TOWER CANYON
(Photograph by Jacob Wirsula)]
[Illustration: PLATE 26 a, NORTH SIDE OF TOWER, SQUARE TOWER CANYON
(Photograph by Jacob Wirsula)]
[Illustration: b, D-SHAPED TOWER NEAR DAVIS RANCH, YELLOW JACKET CANYON
(Photograph by Jacob Wirsula)]
[Illustration: c, MODEL OF TOWERS IN McLEAN BASIN
(Photograph by De Lancey Gill)]
[Illustration: PLATE 27 ROUND TOWER AND D-SHAPED TOWER IN McLEAN BASIN
(Photograph by J. Walter Fewkes)]
[Illustration: PLATE 28 a, D-SHAPED TOWER IN McLEAN BASIN, SHOWING CROSS
SECTION OF WALL]
[Illustration: b, ROUND TOWER IN McLEAN BASIN, SHOWING STANDING STONE
SLAB
(Photographs by J. Walter Fewkes)]
[Illustration: PLATE 29 a, HOLMES TOWER, MANCOS CANYON]
[Illustration: b, LION TOWER, YELLOW JACKET CANYON
(Photographs by T. G. Lemmon)]
[Illustration: PLATE 30 a, TOWER ABOVE CAVATE STOREHOUSES, MANCOS CANYON
BELOW BRIDGE]
[Illustration: b, TOWER ON MESA BETWEEN ERODED CLIFFS AND BRIDGE OVER
MANCOS CANYON ON CORTEZ SHIP-ROCK ROAD
(Photographs by T. G. Lemmon)]
[Illustration: PLATE 31 a, TOWER ABOVE CAVATE STOREHOUSES, MANCOS CANYON
BELOW BRIDGE]
[Illustration: b, ERODED SHALE FORMATION IN WHICH ARE SMALL WALLED
CAVATE STOREHOUSES
(Photographs by T. G. Lemmon)]
[Illustration: PLATE 32 a, RESERVOIR NEAR PICKET CORRAL, SHOWING
RETAINING WALL]
[Illustration: b, KIVA, UNIT TYPE HOUSE, SQUARE TOWER CANYON
(Photographs by T. G. Lemmon)]
[Illustration: PLATE 33 PICTOGRAPHS, YELLOW JACKET CANYON]
*** End of this LibraryBlog Digital Book "Prehistoric villages, castles, and towers of southwestern Colorado" ***
Copyright 2023 LibraryBlog. All rights reserved.