This item is only available as the following downloads:
LEAVING THE HOMELAND ON LA JORNADA DEL MUERTO: THE ARCHAEOLOGY OF TIFFANY PUEBLO BY EVAN GIOMI A Thesis Submitted to the Division of Social Sciences New College of Florida In partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree Bachelor of Arts in Anthropology Under the Sponsorship of Tony Andrews Sarasota, Florida December 7 2012
ii PREFACE Throughout my undergraduate studies I have been drawn repeatedly to three main anthropological interests: historical archaeology, colonialism, and the indigenous peoples of the Americas. I consequently wanted to explore these issues in my undergraduate th esis and decided to do so through the lens of research at a single archaeological site. To find such a site I utilized my connection to the Bureau of Reclamation in Albuquerque, New Mexico, where I had previously worked with archaeologist Mark Hungerford. In relation to my interests he suggested work at Tiffany Pueblo, an indigenous town occupi ed in the early colonial period. Subsequent research showed the potential for addressing the aforementioned issues through work at the site and so I moved forward wi th plans to conduct such work. The site is located partially on land managed by the Bureau of Reclamation, but primarily sits on the privately owned Armendaris Ranch After obtaining permission to work at the site from the ranch manager, Mr. Tom Waddel, Mr Hungerford and I located the site with some difficulty and began surface collection. Working through late December of 2011 and early January of 2012, we managed to finish the majority of surface collection. We continued work at the site beginning in June 2012 until early August 2012, excavating with some trouble and occasionally with help by interested individuals affiliated with the Bureau of Reclamation. Following analysis, a selection of the collected artifacts were given to Armendaris Ranch while the re mainder w ere returned to the surface of the site in the approximate lo cation from which they were collected. The results of this project are presented in the following work.
iii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This thesis was only possible thanks to the effort and encouragement of many individuals. Many thanks to Mark Hungerford and the Albuquerque Office of the Bureau of Reclamation, without whose support this project could ne ver have been realized. Mark: your professional encour agement and knowledge have been an invaluable resource for me as a novice archaeologist. Thanks also to Tom Wadell and Armendaris Ranch for allowing me access to the incredible archaeological resources on the ranch property. Thanks to Tony Andrews for generously agreeing to sponsor this project, and from whom I have learned so much. Your seemingly endless knowledge and enthusiasm first inspired anthropologist, and for that I can never thank you enough. Thanks to Gaby Vail as a member of my baccalaureate committee, but more importantly for her constant encouragements and support of my interests and academic development since my first year. So many of the amazing opportuniti es I have had at New College were made possible by the commitment you have shown me and all of your students. From you I have learned so much about how to be a scholar, a professor, and a person. Thanks to Uzi Baram for serving on my committee. My long t ime academic advisor, thank you for always being willing to listen and offer your sagacious advice. Your tireless commitment to showing me the relevance of anthropology has kept me in the field and y ou r confidence in my abilities as an anthropologist and a rchaeologist has built up my own confidence when it was lacking. Many additional thanks to Erin Dean, Maria Vesperi, and my colleagues in the Department of Anthropology who have taught me so much and made the study of anthropology such an important and r ewarding part of my life. T hanks to the New College Council of Academic Affairs for funding part of my research Thanks also to the New College Public Archaeology Lab for allowing me to conduct my research in its facilities. I am very appreciative of Jennifer Dyer, Hayward Franklin, and the other archaeologists at the Maxwell Museum for taking time to teach me important aspects of Southwestern archaeology. Thanks also to the Laboratory o f Anthropology in Santa Fe and l ibrari an Allison Colborne for significantly aiding in my research.
iv To Justin, thanks for always putting up with me and encouraging me to grow as a person in all the right ways. To Rini, thanks for never shying away from an intellectual conversation; your end less curiosity, excitement, and good cheer have been a constant inspiration to me. To Estefan, thanks for indulging in my nerdiest passions, always humoring my bad jokes, and finding my endless bits of trivia interesting. To Kathleen, thanks for your ti reless work ethic and drive for excellence. You have been more a model for me to emulate than you probably know. Additional thanks to my many other friends and colleagues at New College who are too many to list but who made my time here as incredible and enriching as it was. Finally, thanks to my parents whose support has been crucial these past four years and
v TABLE OF CONTENTS Page PREFACE . . . . . . . ii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS . . . . . iii TABLE OF CONTENTS . . . . . v LIST OF FIGURES . . . . . . vi LIST OF TABLES . . . . . . vi i ABSTRACT . . . . . . . vii i CHAPTER I: INTRODUCTION . . . . . 1 CHAPTER II: ARCHAEOLOGY OF THE PIRO PROVINCE . . 8 CHAPTER III: THE HISTORICAL RECOR D OF TIFFANY PUEBLO 21 CHAPTER IV: THE ARCHAEOLOGY OF TIFFANY P UE BLO . 37 CHAPTER V: ANALYSIS . . . . . 59 CHAPTER VI: CONCLUSIONS . . . . . 72 APPENDIX A: CERAMIC TABLES . . . . 77 APPENDIX B: OTHER ARTIFACTS . . . . 80 APPENDIX C: OTHER MAPS AND FIGURES . . . 83 BIBLIOGRAPHY . . . . . . 87
vi LIST OF FIGUR ES Page 1.1 Map of New Mexico . . . . . . 4 3.1 Map of Colonial Period Piro Pueblos . . . . 25 3.2 View of Black Mesa to the South . . . . 28 4.1 Sketch map of Tiffany Pueblo . . . . . 37 4.2 Southern room block, Feature #2 . . . . 42 4.3 Northern room block, Feature #4 . . . . 43 4.4 Eastern room block, Feature #1 . . . . . 46 4.5 Western room block, Feature #3 . . . . 47 4.6 Kiva depression, Feature #5 . . . . . 49 LIST OF APPENDIX FIGURES Appendix C C.1 GIS Map of Tiffany Map C.2 USGS San Marcial Quadrangle C.3 Glazeware Vessel, Feature #3 C.4 Mera Collection Glazeware Vessel Ring Base C.5 Obsidian Projectile Point, Feature #3
vii LIST OF TABLES Pa ge 4.1 Rio Grande Glazeware Sequence . . . . 51 5.1 Glaze Type Percentage of Total Glazeware Rims . . . 62 LIST OF APPENDIX TABLES Appendix A A.1 LA244 Surface Collection Type Frequency by Location A.2 LA244 Surface Collection Type Percentage by Location A.3 LA244 Surface Collection Glazeware Rim Attributes A.4 Mera Surface Collection Appendix B B.1 Total Surface Collection Lithic Frequency Table B.2 Feature #2 Lithic Frequency Table B.3 Feature #3 Lithic Frequency Table B.4 Feature #4 Lithic Frequency Table B.5 Feature #5 Lithic Frequency Table
viii LEAVING THE HOMELAND ON LA JORNADA DEL MUERTO THE ARCHAEOLOGY OF TIFFANY PUEBLO Evan Giomi New College of Florida, 2012 ABSTRACT The history of the late pre contact and early Colonial periods along the lower Rio Grande in New Mexico has been poorly studied archaeologically. Without an indigenous occupation after the 1680 Pueblo Revolt, the region has had little academic attention co mparative to the histories of the Pueblos along the middle and northern Rio Grande many of which maintain an indigenous population into the present Yet a descendent population of the Piro people who lived in the lower Rio Grande does exists in the prese nt day centered mainly in El Paso and Ciudad de Juarez Following developments in indigenous archaeology in the last two decades, this thesis argues that further archaeological study of the Piro region is necessary not only to better understand this signi ficant component of New Mexican history, but also to better recognize the persistence of indigenous cultures This thesis is the result of field work at the Piro site of Tiffany Pueblo over the course of 2012. Survey, extensive surface collection, and expl oratory excavations provided a body of archaeological materials, particularly ceramics. Analysis of these materials aimed to test and further refine existing models of regional demographic and technological stylistic changes as well as guide future archaeological work at the site by
ix identifying key issues and research questions F urther subsurface work is necessary in order to clear up the chronology of occupation at Tiffany Pue blo through analysis of ceramics in a stratigraphic context Such work at other Piro pueblos is also necessary to better define what is clearly a regional variation on the standard Rio Grande ceramic sequence and improve site dating across the region. Fina lly, current archaeological interest in the 1680 Pueblo Revolt will be significantly aided by improved understanding of Piro history as a means to understanding the complex historical moment of the Revolt in its totality. T his thesis represents a plan for future study of Piro archaeology in order to accomplish as much. Anthony Andrews Division of Social Sciences
1 CHAPTER I: INTRODUCTION to Spanish Colonial continuum in the Rio Abajo province represents one of the major remaining gaps in our understanding Although archaeology in the American Southwest has been studied intensively for more than a century, significant geographic areas, historical eras, and subjects of study have been underdeveloped or even entirely neglected. The early colonial period in New Mexico has in many ways been a long contested and well researched topic while also being a site of historical and archaeological neglect. The history of the colonial period has been particularly underdeveloped in terms of the concerns rising out of the twi n strands of indigenous archaeology and post colonial theory: namely, the inclusion of indigenous groups as part of the history making process as well as the adoption of a political stance that is an imperative for archaeologists to work towards dismantlin g colonial histories (Watkins 2001) In line with these concerns it then seems appropriate to initiate fresh archaeological investigation of the currently very poorly researched Piro people, the southernmost Puebloan group during the early colonial period The present research consists of archaeological work at Tiffany Pueblo, a pre contact and colonial period Piro pueblo on the Rio Grande also known by its Laboratory of Anthropology (LA) designation of LA244. The research includes surface collection and l imited excavations, which will help date the site and which will in turn help to determine its possible identity as it appears in historic Spanish documentation. Additionally, the data collected from the site may provide a more
2 robust picture of colonial e ra pueblo life along the Rio Grande among the Piro, in part by helping to test and refine existing, but very speculatory, models of a specific regional manifestation of the Rio Grande glazeware ceramic sequence. It is my hope that the current archaeologica l work wi ll add to the existing research as well as serve as a foundation for further examinations of the Piro in the colonial era ultimately as a component of an inclusive decolonization of the N ew Mexican historical narrative Diaspora and Historical Visibility Indigenous archaeology, as advocated by scholars like Trigger (1980), Ligh tfoot (1995), Rubertone (2000), Watkins (2001), Silliman (2005), and Wilcox (2009) is fundamentally based on a collaborative effort between contemporary indigenous peoples and archaeologists, and indeed the fostering of a group of archaeologists who are themselves indigenous (Trigger 1980: 662, 672 73; Wilcox 2009: 8 11). The emerging trend in this sort of collaborative archaeological e ffort in New Mexico has been to tackle issues of colonialism and resistance, particularly as they relate to the Pueblo Revolt of 1680 (see Chapter II, The Pueblo Revolt and Archaeology of Resistance). Yet, a s is discussed in Chapter III, the Piro people never participated in the 1680 movement for independence from Spanish colonial rule. Rather, they fled New Mexico with the retreating Spanish on a journey now famously known as La Jornada del Muerto or Having left their homeland, the region is bereft of any Puebloan communities to this day Those Piro who left with the Spanish formed two communities near modern day El Paso and Ciudad de Juarez, while those who did not join the retreating Spanish joined with neighboring indigenous groups, whethe r Apache or
3 Pueblo. Regardless, after 1680, and certainly after 1700, the Piro had become a diasporic people. Following the model of post (1982 ) notion of a istence of indigenous people demands not an explanation of their cultural and physical death, but an archaeological and historical explanation for their cultural endurance and continued existence (2009: 11 12). The lack of current and past archaeological a ttention to Piro hi story can be understood as resulting in part from the physical lack of con temporary Piros being diasporic, there is no contemporary Piro presence on the landscape like that of other extant Puebloan groups that demands an explanation of cultural continuity through through an examination of history. This is in many ways a form of the colonial notion of the timeless native tied to the land Without this essentialist link to the land, t he indigenous person no longer exists in a contemporary or historical sense Piro history and archaeology are thus necessary components of a truly inclusive and decolonized historical narrative of New Mexico regardless of a continued Piro presence in the state Furthermore, as e laborated on in Chapter II, the focus of current scholarship on the early colonial period in New Mexico has a particular fixation with the Pueblo Revolt of 1680. This focus is in many ways understandable as part of a program of research focusing on resistance to colonial rule as an antidote to archaeological and historic models of acculturation and accommodation which render indigenous people as passive actors at the whim o f colonial domination and historical part iculars outside their control. Yet, such a
4 fixation on this particular act of open resistance in some ways marginalizes the experiences of the Piro who were not a part of the 1680 revolt and whom indeed continued in a colonial relations hip with the Spanish. This i s not to say that a history of the Piro is one of Figure 1 .1 Map of New Mexico. Bounds of the Piro Region and location of Tiffany Pueblo noted in red by the author. From the University of Texas at Austin Map Collection.
5 perfect collaboration and submission. Indeed, in the middle of the 17 th century several Piro of Senec (Marshall 1984: 252 53), a common charge by the Spanish across the Pueblo world against those practicing non Christian beliefs. Yet the character of Spanish Piro relations clearly differs from that of Spanish relations with other pueblos who did participa te in the 1680 revolt, but this is precisely the merit by which Piro history deserves further study so that the textures of colonial indigenous relations, and indeed indigenous indigenous relations, can be better grasped It is clear that the theoretical concerns of modern archaeology in New Mexico, focusing on resistance as particularly manifested in the 1680 Pueblo Revolt, has in tandem with the lack of contemporary habitation of the New Mexican landscape by Piro people resulted in a serious neglect of a rchaeological research on the Piro people and region in the early colonial era. The current work adds to a foundation for further, sustained archaeological research on Piro history that will ideally broaden the scope of nascent indigenous archaeological ef forts in New Mexico, particularly by refining the archaeological schemes and analytics used to answer broader questions of life under colonialism and response to colonial rule. Organization of the Text Chapter 2 provides a summary of previous archaeologi cal research in the Piro region as well as some important historical archaeology in New Mexico. Of importance is early research in Southwestern historical archaeology that established the late pre contact and colonial period ceramic typologies used in the analysis of the artifacts from Tiffany
6 Pueblo. Previous research, however scant, on the Piro region and Tiffany Pueblo is given some treatment. Additionally important is a discussion of more current research of Colonial period indigenous archaeology, much of which has already been mentioned, and which provides the intellectual basis and impetus for the current research. The identification of an indigenous or Spanish name for Tiffany Pueblo within the historic record for the early colonial period can aid in the analysis of the excavations and artifacts from the site, just as the archaeology of the site may help in identifying the site in the historic record. Chapter III examines the available historic documentation which may refer to Tiffany Pueblo. Some d etail is given to historical context which may be additionally helpful outside of providing an identification of a name for LA244. Following this historic information in Chapter IV is a record of the archaeological work conducted by the author at Tiffany Pueblo. Contextual geographic and environmental information is presented first, followed by a brief discussion of the architectural features of the site and the subsurface work conducted for the present research. The bulk of the chapter relates to the cera mic materials collected from the site, as the most diagnostic chronological feature of the site assemblage and also as the area in which technological changes may be most profitably analyzed in terms of chronology and larger questions of regional demograph y and culture change. Following is a brief discussion of the lithic materials collected from the site, as well as the few faunal remains collected, primarily consisting of local riverine shell. Owing to the limitations of the archaeological work conducted at the site, as discussed in Chapter IV, the archaeological information presented is more than can be or is
7 usefully analyzed. However, the assemblage is presented in its entirety, given the limitations of the archaeological knowledge and expertise of the author, so that further research might make use of the present information in combination with more subsurface work to answer important research questions, such as those detailed in Chapter VI. Chapter V provides an analysis of the assemblage from LA244, primarily concerned with establishing an occupational period for the site on the basis of architectural and ceramic analysis. Additional concerns stem from this original question of dating, testing models of ceramic sequences and technological and stylist ic change built off previous work in the Piro region. Chapter VI identifies the necessary components of future archaeological research in the Piro region and outlines some of the research questions which the author identifies as fundamental to creating a h istory of the region. While Piro archaeology is extremely limited, what work has been done has been extremely useful in the organization and analysis in the present research. An examination of this research follows, with a brief digression into current tr ends in historical archaeological research in New Mexico as it pertains to the goals of the present work in broadening the scope of the current research in other parts of the Southwest.
8 CHAPTER II : ARCHAEOLOGY OF THE PIRO PROVINCE Archaeological investigations of ancestral and colonial Piro pueblos have for the most part been previously limited to cultural resource management projects, primarily regional and site specific archaeological surveys. E xcavations have been restricted to a single field season at each of the sites of Pargas, Qualacu, and Las Huertas (Marshall 1986, 1987; Earls 1987) In contrast, the historical archaeology of pueblos throughout the Rio Grande is considerably more robust. However, these studies are genera lly limited to studies of the Pueblo Revolt period and of post Revolt colonial New Mexico: archaeological study of contact period Pueblos is rarely a focus of academic efforts This summary will begin with the historical archaeology of the Rio Grande pueblos, focusing on contact period archaeology with particular attention paid to research on the Pueblo Revolt The section will conclude with a chronological summation of historical archaeological work in the Piro region and at Piro pueblos on the Rio Grande Early Work Any discussion of archaeology in the American Southwest must invariably begin with the work of Adolph Bandelier, the Swiss archaeologist who compiled a regional survey of Southwestern archaeology based largely on his own travels in the Southwest. Making Investigations in the Southwest Southwest which pays particular attention to the Pueblos of New Mexico, devoting several chapters to different regions of the Rio Grande and the people therein (Bandelier 1892).
9 It is then not surprising that Bandelier is the first to take an archaeological interest in the Piro Pueblos of the lower Rio Grande. In C hapter VI, The Tiguas and the Piros Bandelier examines the southernmost Pueblos on the Rio Grande, grouping together the Tigua and Piro Pueblos both by common geography and language. Bandelier first reviews the environment and geography of the Piro regi on (Bandelier 1892: 236 37) before beginning to match Spanish historical documentation of Piro Pueblos with the archaeological sites known to him in the region, particularly in the whereabouts of the modern town of Socorro, NM (1892: 238 53). Bandelier c oncludes that the geographic feature today known as Black Mesa and the adjoining abandoned town of San Marcial demarcate the southernmost historical extent of the Piro region, as well as the southernmost historical extent of Pueblo architecture and peoples (Bandelier 1892: 251 52). Bandelier then turns the discussions towards the Pueblos off the Rio Grande in the Las Salinas region, of which three of the southernmost Pueblos he identifies as being egion and attempting to clarify some of the historical confusion surrounding the identities and group affiliations of the villages in the reg ion (Bandelier 1892: 268 81). Bandelier then embarks on a lengthy examination of the Pueblo of Gran Quivira, which he positively identifies as the Pueblo of Tabir (Bandelier 1892: 281 91). It should be noted that the identification of Gran Quivira and other Salinas missions pueblos as ethnically and geographically Piro is still disputed, and they are often included in the Tompiro linguistic and cultural group.
10 Especially striking considering the era in which he was writing, Bandelier insists on good archival and ethnographic research in order to fully understand the archaeology of the Piro region, noting: cessity of studying the folk lore of the small remnant of the once numerous stock of the Piros which to day inhabits Senec [outside El Paso, [which has] created a blank which could be partly filled only in Spain, unless the folk lore of the Piros at Senec comes to our rescue (Bandelier 1892: 273 4). While certainly admirable for a commitment to historical and ethnographic research investigatory biases. Most particularly relevant to a consideration of the Piro region is a tendency to cite Apache raids and aggression as the prime cause for the abandonment of Piro settlements in the colonial period rather than a more robust model of abandonment that considers the impact of Spanish colonialism and inter Pueblo relations (Bandelier 1892: 249 50) ranging regional survey, little archaeological research of the Piro region was conducted until the work of H. W. Yeo, beginning in 1908, and subsequent work by Henry P. Mera (1 933; 1940; 1943). Yeo, an engineer for the state of New Mexico, surveyed the region around the current location of Elephant Butte Dam in southern New Mexico in preparation for the construction of the dam (Marshall and Walt 1984: 13). His survey was pri marily concerned with sites between the Valverde and San Marcial area down to the location of the dam, and he took a personal interest in rock art sites of all periods in the region.
11 Mera, on the other hand, was interested primarily in pueblos with an af finity for the glazeware ceramic sequence previously established by the work of Kidder at Pecos Pueblo in northern New Mexico (Kidder 1917; Marshall and Walt 1984: 13; Mera 1940: 2). His extensive surface collections are still housed at the Laboratory of Anthropology in Santa Fe, NM and which provided a point of comparison for the collection presented in the current work (see Chapter IV). More generally in regards to the historical archaeology of the Rio Grande pueblos the extensive archaeological inve stigation by A lfred V. Kidder at Pecos Pueblo from 1915 to 1922 are of paramount importance. Documentary sources from the first Spanish entrada in 1540, by Coronado, describe Pecos Pueblo which was thereafter continuously occupied until abandonment in 18 38 (Kidder 1917: 325) The ceramic sequence revealed prior to contact, which he believes is indicative of the longest continuously occupied Pueblo in the Southwest, with the possible exception of Acoma and Taos (1917: 326) stratigraphic excavations at Pecos can possibly be considered the most extensive work of indigenous historical archaeology in the Southwest to date tion on chronology relegates his work at Pecos to a useful but underdeveloped sort of archaeology, lacking interest in answering larger questions of culture contact and change painted ceramic sequence for the Rio Grande recognized in the present research as a major component of the artifact assemblage at Tiffany Pueblo (see Chapter IV).
12 Archaeological Surveys Some minor archaeological surveys were conducted subsequent to the initial research of Mera and Yeo, but the most comprehensive survey of the Piro region was Rio Abajo to des cribe the Piro region, the term dating to Spanish occupation when New Mexico was divided in the Rio Abajo and Rio Arriba, or the lower river and upper river (1984: 1). In the sense of the term that Marshall and Walt use, it describes only the Piro region below the Pueblo of Sabinal, relegating the areas to the north historically described commission in 1975 by the Bureau of Land Management to review the cultural prope rties in the Socorro district, Marshall independently applied to conduct a comprehensive survey of the properties in the region under the New Mexico Historic Preservation Program (Marshall and Walt 1984: 1, 14). The Rio Abajo study was the result. Marshall and Walt organize the text in chapters corresponding to the different phases of the archaeological sequence in the Rio Abajo [see Chapter IV], beginning each chapter with a summary of the archaeological characteristics of that phase and site descr iptions for each site with a primary occupation in the phase. Marshall and Walt end with several chapters on historical place names and their occurrences in the historic record, mainly those sites of European origin, revealing a concern with the poor stat e of historical archaeological research in the region (Marshall and Walt 1984: 235 86).
13 Relevant to the interests of the present study is a more recent report of more restricted geographic and temporal scope. In 2003 the Statistical Research Inc. condu cted a report for the Albuquerque Bureau of Reclamation on the impact of spreading invasive salt cedar on several archaeological sites in the Valverde San Marcial area, investigating fives archaeological sites including Tiffany Pueblo, the battlefield of V alverde, the town of San Milljour 2003: 1 5). The report ultimately indicated that Tiffany Pueblo was at no risk from the spread of salt cedar in the region nor from looting, indicating that no looting was visible at the site other than that which was already reported by Marshall and Walt in 1984 (2003: 65). In addition, LA244 was recommended as eligible for inclusion in the National ause the subsurface portions of the site could contribute significantly to an understanding of these phases [Ancestral and Colonial Piro, 1300 Scant Excavations In terms of sub surface work, only three excavations of Piro sites in the Rio Grande have ever been conducted prior to the exploratory excavations at Tiffany Pueblo in the present research (see Chapter IV). The first excavation of a Piro Pueblo was the 1981 field school at the site of Teypama, or Las Huertas, conducted as a joint effort between the University of New Mexico (UNM) and the Socorro District Bureau of Land Management (BLM) from June 15 to July 31. As one of the project directors, Amy Earls compiled the results of the project, published in 1987. Th
14 1). Results of ce ramic, lithic, and architectural analysis concluded that there was a very brief occupation of the site during Spanish contact (Earls 1987: 80). Additionally, Earls gives a clear recommendation for further work at Teypama and other locations based on the n on existence of previous archaeological work on Rio Grande Piro sites and the limited, single season field school at Teypama itself (Earls 1987: 1, 81 82). Earls poses several potentially useful questions to guide further research, including: how do archa eologists recognize Piro culture change with only one excavated site and how do non mission Rio Grande Piro Pueblos differ, if at all, from better studied Las Salinas mission sites like Tabir (Earls 1987: 81 82)? Subsequently, the construction of a seg ment of a fiber optics line provided the opportunity for further excavations of a Piro pueblo. In order to mitigate the impact of the fiber optics line, running through the town of San Antonio, New Mexico, Michael Marshall conducted excavations of the imp acted areas at Pargas Pueblo under the auspices of the University of New Mexico Office of Contract Archaeology in March 1986. Excavations and therefore qualified for nomination to the Nation al Register of Historic Places. Furthermore, thanks to the mitigation of the impacted area by the excavations, the construction of the fiber optic line was approved (1986: 1 2). Based on this analysis, Marshall concludes that the excavations at the site, however limited, are significant in regards to the reconstruction of Piro lifeways and chronology due to the general lack
15 archaeological excavations at Piro pueblos (1986: 70). In particular, Marshall notes that of Piro ceramic materials in a stratigraphic context is now limited to three those being Pargas, Qualacu, and Teypama, which are discussed subsequently. I n 1987, Michael Marshall published the results of a single field se ason conducted under the auspices of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service at the Rio Grande Piro site of Qualacu. The investi gation at Qualacu stemmed from previous work by Marshall in the region, as well as the 1983 Rio Abajo Area Conference held in Socorr o, attended by Marshall, and at which: historic and post European contact Piro Indian occupation pointed up fundamental deficiencies in information on architecture and material culture, the regional ceramic sequence, ag ricultural and subsistence practices, ancestral Piro origins, and the subsequent chronology of Piro settlement and population movements. The extent of Spanish Colonial interaction with the Piro in the century prior to abandonment of the province was also s hown to be understood only in roughest outline (Marshall 1987: 7). It was in light of this dearth of work on colonial Piro Pueblos that excavations were planned for Qualacu. The Pueblo was chosen due to the large disturbance through the major room block at the site caused by the construction of a conveyance channel through the east bank of the Rio Grande in the 1950s (1987: 7). This allowed for a large amount of data to be collected in the short, one field season excavations of the site through the use o f the pre existing excavations created by construction of the conveyance channel. The goals of the Qualacu project were to fill gaps in understanding of the colonial Piro, as identified by the Rio Abajo Conference, as well as to consolidate and conserve t he site in light of the anthropogenic disturbance of the conveyance channel (Marshall 1987: 7).
16 Architectural, ceramic, lithic, and archaeobotanical and faunal examinations of collected materials are presented in the report, but due to the focus on conser vation and lack of funding little analysis of those materials was conducted (Marshall 1987: 67). Marshall concludes that more work is necessary in the Piro area to add to the poor knowledge of the region and time period, particularly at Qualacu and especi ally the portions of the site determined in the report to be 17 th century colonial Piro occupations (Marshall 1987: 135). The Pueblo Revolt and Archaeology of Resistance Outside Pecos, little archaeological research has been conducted on the early colonial period among the Rio Grande pueblos. The early colonial period in the Rio Grande among the pueblos extend s from 1540 with the first entrada by Francisco V squez de Coronado up to roughly 1700 After the reconquest of Santa F by Diego de Vargas and the reestablishment of Spa nish rule in New Mexico in 1692 warfare and open rebellion continued until the end of the century This end of open hostilities and the subsequent reorientation of colonial rule away from a the existing mission system t owards more secular administration after 1700 ma kes for a suitable end point of the early colonial period in New Mexico. Because of the unique nature of the Pueblo Revolt an armed, indigenous uprising that successfully expelled established colonial rule rs the events of the Revolt have previously received considerable attention from historians and recently also from archaeologists, in part due to a growing focus in historical archaeology on studies of resistance. attention of anthropologists in recent provides a clear example for archaeological study.
17 marks the beginning of sustained archaeological interest in the Pueblo Revolt In a compilation that explores issues of place, symbolic and mater ial meaning, and social adaptability the groundwork for study of the Pueblo Revolt is laid by identifying key issues that archaeology is well suited to examine Revolt and its aftermath would seem to be well documented. Indeed, it has been the still remain a number of outstanding questions These questions include issues of demographic change i ncluding mobility of indigenous populations as well as the transfiguration of indigenous and European symbolic elements and items as part of dynamic social processes in relation to Spanish colonialism. This sense of dynamism in both populations and meaning is crucial to dismantling previous historical research which alternatively glorifies Spanish conques ts and vilifies Spanish rule, consider indigenous groups as pass ive recipients of colonial rule and rarely as historical a gents even when considering the 1680 Pueblo Revolt. In the Preucel discusses the Revolt is portrayed as a unique occurrence in response to a specific historical moment and does not represent any larger pattern of resistance to hegemonic social relations (Preucel 2002: 22 23). The compi lation also attempts to address traditional anthropological perspectives of acculturation and accommodation that privileges the cultural features and innovations of the colonizer as the dominant partner in an unequal relationship.
18 In a similar line of re search Matthew Liebmann Enduring Conquests presents an archaeological study of Zia pueblo throughout the Pueblo Revolt period in an attempt to explain the initial hostility of the Zia to Spanish rule in 1680, continued resistance in 1682, and final collusion with de Vargas in 1692 (Liebmann 2010: 199 221). In this study, Liebmann sets the goal of breaking out of the binary oppositions of resistance domination and colonizer colonized o ften maintained by archaeological and historical scholarship. The theme of resistance as primarily focused on the Middle and Upper Rio Grande. However, in th e interest o f debunking colonialist dichotomies of resistance and conquest, the chapter on the Zia focuses on internal indigenous social dynamics which produce change outside o f formal colonial power relationships. Highlighting the lack of interest in these processes and relations exterior to the colonialism as necessary to understanding history in the colonial Similarly, Michael Wilcox focuses his work on the Pueblo Revolt around the terminal narratives accounts of Indian histories which explain the absence, cultural death, or I the Mythology of Conquest Wilcox *( 2009 ) lays the theoretical groundwork for the study of the Pueblo Revolt and the necessity of the study of resistance in a post colonial i ndigenous archaeology Wilcox very strongly argues for the study of the Pueblo Revolt from a theoretical position of i ndigenous archaeology, originating from both the concerns
19 raise d by the passage of NAGPRA in 1 990, as well as a body of post c olonial literature (Wilcox 2009: 13 17) In the context of these concerns over i ndigenous archaeology and post colonial studies and with an avowed interest in the persistence of indigenous culture 1680 offer a unique opportunity to reevaluate traditional narratives of conquest, subordination, and Spanish 16). I n response to the 1990 passage of NAGPRA (the Native American Grave Protection and Repatriation Act) and the inven torying of museum storerooms, the Peabody Museum, where the skeletal remains from A.V. last century, created a collaborative bio archaeological research program to examine the Pecos remains with a modern technolog ical and theoretical eye before repatriation (Morgan 2010). Despite the wealth of data collected by Kidder and the theoretical and technological this long standing collaboration is the only extensive academic research undertaken at Pecos since. This research is important as a reminder to examine not only the material and spatial changes wrought through the colonial project, but also the physical and human toll It is clear from this brief survey that the current state of archaeological understanding of pre contact and contact period Piro history and lifeways is very much underdeveloped, especially in comparison to the much more robustly researched Pueblo cultures of the middle and upper Rio Grande. That said, what works already exists sets out both an interesting archaeological and theoretical trajectory for fu rther research in the
20 region focusing on regional technological, demographic, and social developments whi ch differ from the standard archaeological sequence and cultural features of the upper and middle Rio Grande. Furthermore, sustained research on the Pueblo Revolt in the last decade has raised a host of useful issue s, particularly focusing on the historica l reality of indigenous agency and cultural longevity, which may be profitably applied to the study of Piro history and archaeology.
21 CHAPTER III: THE HISTORICAL RECORD OF TIFFANY PUEBLO The history of Tiffany Pueblo, and more g enerally of the Piro pueblos in the Rio Abajo, as presented in the current research ends at the Pueblo Revolt of 1680 with the expulsion of the Spanish from New Mexico and the coinciding abandonment of the Piro pueblos. However, this history is not intend ed to be presented as a terminal narrative of people who left New Mexico in 16 80 are alive today, primarily living on either side of the U.S. Mexico border near El Paso and Ciudad de Juarez at the towns of Ysleta del Sur, formerly Socorro del Sur, and Senec del Sur (Schroeder 1979: 237). The author hopes that the current research does not in any way obscure the continued existence of the Piro as a people nor in some way erase their history since the Pueblo Revolt of 1680, but the constraints of an undergraduate thesis and the limitations of the presently available archaeological, h istorical, and ethnographic information necessitate a less ambitious scope for, and limits the research questions which can be addressed by, the research. Pending the continuation of this research, inclusion of these descendant populations as a source of ethnographic and historical information as well as part of the interpretation and construction of Piro history will be a central component of the project alongside more traditional archaeological and historical investigations. It is understood then that t he limitations of the current research are by circumstance and not design
22 Prefaced in this way, this chapter will concern itself with the historical documentation of the Piro pueblos and particularly Tiffany Pueblo, in order to improve the correlation between a recorded Spanish name with the pueblo itself. While not necessarily superior to the Laboratory of Anthropology system of numbering of the site as LA244 or the Anglo American name of Tiffany Pueblo, the designated Spanish name might reflect an in digenous name for the site, whether self descriptively given by the inhabitants or as known by neighboring peoples, Piro or otherwise. Regardless, an inclination of the Spanish designation or designations, if any, for Tiffany Pueblo may help to better cor relate historical records with the archaeological reality of the pueblo as well as linguistically aid in the return of the site to sphere of indigenous history. Available documentation for the region spans the period from the earliest entrada the Coronado expedition in 1540 up to the flight of the Spanish from New Mexico, along with most of the Piro people, during the Pueblo Revolt of 1680. Some subsequent information concerning remnant populations and concerning the general abandonmen t of the province is available in the immediate post Revolt period from 1680 to about 1700, though it appears that the Rio Abajo is nearly or entirely abandoned after 1680. Spanish colonialism in New Mexico begins with the 1540 entrada of Francisco Coronado, who never travelled with his expedition into the Piro region, advancing through modern day Sinaloa and Arizona before then crossing the width of New Mexico north of the Piro region, arriving at the Rio Grande among the Tiguex (or Ti wa ) pueblos near modern day Albuquerque, and recording his encounters with the indigenous people he did meet, as well as gathering information about those he did not. Venturing slightly
23 southwards he encountered the people of Tutahaco who told him of othe r pueblos to their Tiguex with the same clothing (Flint and Flint 2005: 400). These pueblos of Tutahaco seem to be the pueblos of the Piro. After their return, the Coronado expedition did little to encourage further travels in New Mexico since it had not brought back the gold and silver like that taken through the conquests of Mexico and the Andes, as had been the intent of expedition. Thanks to the failure of Coronado to find Cibola, the famed cit ies of gold, the next expeditions northwards were not until some forty years later with the successive Rodriguez Chamuscado and Espejo expeditions, from 1581 1582 and 1582 1583 respectively. Intent on surveying the lands of New Mexico for mining opportuni ties and potential converts, spoken of in the record of the Coronado expedition, the expeditions entered New Mexico from a different direction by traveling north along the Rio del Norte or the Rio Grande, and recorded their first encounters with sedentary indigenous people: the Piros. Yet, the abandoned pueblo on the southernmost end of the pueblo region known today as rarily abandoned thanks to the approach of the Spaniards, as others further up the river would be, but was abandoned more distantly in the past as was apparent by the crumbling adobe walls and the general disarray of the town. Regional population dynamic s were clearly at play, but the dearth of archaeological work in the region and the infrequent nature of contact, and so historical documentation, in the early colonial period makes it difficult to assess the degree to which population changes
24 in the regio n were the product of Spanish contact, or even what the nature of those demographic changes were. Population decline following contact is much better documented further north along the Rio Grande and on the basis of survey work in the Piro region that dem onstrates reduction in populations at Piro sites and reduction in number of occupied sites, it seems that the severe population decline witnessed upon contact in other parts of the Americas occurred in the Piro region as well (Marshall and Walt 1984: 124 2 5). There is still some debate as to the when European diseases first impacted the Piro region, and only further archaeological work can clarify the issue, but Marshall and Walt believe that epidemics were a major factor in demographic changes in the Pir o region beginning from contact in the 16 th century onwards throughout the 17 th and 18 th centuries (Marshall and Walt 1984: 124 25) Subsequent inhabited pueblos were encountered by the expedition from which a description of Piro goods and architectur e was provided. According to the expedition records the rooms were built at a height of two to four stories with mud walls with whitewashed interiors painted with human and mythological figures and contained rooms in which housed small figurines that were supplicated with food and other offerings (Schroeder 1979: 236). The interior whitewash and painting are not corroborated by the archaeology at Tiffany Pueblo or elsewhere, but a small alabaster bear or buffalo figurine in a private collection, but sourc ed to the bulldozer disturbance at the site prior to excavation, was mentioned as part of the Qualacu report and which matches the Chamuscado description of the idols maintained by the Piros (Marshall 1987: 127 ).
25 Figure 3.1 Map of Colonial Piro Pueblos. From Marshall and Walt (1984: 140)
26 The colonial period and Spanish rule in New Mexico starts with Don Juan de Oate, the first royal governor of the province of Nuevo Mexico Tasked with the missionization of the peoples of New Mexico, previously documented by the Chamuscado and Espejo expeditions, Oate began his conquest in 1598 and following his travels throughout New Mexico a survey of the lands claimed for the Spanish crown he organized the region through the partition of the known pueblos to different friars who had accompanied the conquest: To Father Fray Juan C ar los, the province of also the province of Xala, the province of Mohuqui with its pueblos, the province of Atzigues down the river, with all its pueblos, which in clude Pugeuy [etc.] ... Qualacu, Texa, Amo, on this [east] side of the river; and, on the opposite Penjeacu, Teypama, and, las t ly, Tzenaquel de l a Mesilla, which is the first settlement in this kingdom to ward the south and New Spain (Hammond and Rey 1953 Vol. V: 346) The pueblo of Qualacu should already be familiar, positively matched with a known archaeological site by Marshall in his excavation s ( Marshall 1987 : 127 8). It appears that Qualacu is preceded to the south by two more pueblos, Texa and Amo. The Oate report is contradictory on this count, earlier noting only one pueblo, Amo, as south of Qualacu (Hammond and Rey 1953 Vol. V, 363). This discrepancy is unfortunate but not unique to these pueblos for matching recorded Spanish names for sites with recorded archaeological sites, since many of the Spanish colonists and conquistadors in New Mexico prior to the Pueblo Revolt recorded th e locations of indigenous towns by ascribing them a north south position along the Rio Grande in relation to other pueblos, rarely making use of geographic features, other than the river, or more than estimates of distances. Consequently, discrepancies in regards to
27 relative location complicate the matter of identification, especially in the early colonial period when records of inhabited sites are sparse and population changes over periods of years between reports render comparative research less useful. In the above example, the archaeology only indicates the existence of one pueblo south, or below, Qualacu, that of San Pascual and adjoining settlement of San Pascualito, and Marshall relates the proposition that a scribal error accounts for the inclusion of two pueblos to the south Texa and Amo in the Oate document, which should have been rendered singularly as Texamo (Marshall and Walt 1984: 128). The Identification of Tiffany Pueblo As one of the southernmost pueblos along the Rio Grande, Tiffany Pueblo should be easy to identify even considering potential discrepancies because of its extreme position in relation to all other pueblos. The previous mission list from the Oate expedition is the first possible mention of Tiffany Pueblo in the histori cal record, with the mention of the last pueblo along the western bank of the river, known as Tzenaquel de la Mesilla The appellation of de la Mesilla clearly refers to the geographic landmark known by the modern name of Black Mesa, a name consistent with Spanish accounts: the first contact with Pueblo people in the Oate expedition indicates that: On the 27 th we traveled seven leagues to the marsh of Mesilla de Guinea, so nam ed because it was of black rock. On the 28th, in the morning, mass was said, and we took communion in order to enter the f irst settlements with good luck. We traveled nearly four leagues an d camped for the night across f r o m the s econd pueblo, called Qualacu... (Hammond and Rey 1953, Vol. V: 317 18) From Tiffany Pueblo, Black Mesa is clearly visible in the distance (see Fig. 3.2), and this proximity could merit the inclusion of the mesa in the Spanish title of the pueblo.
28 Althoug h LA244 would seem to match the description as Tzenaquel considering its position as the southernmost pueblo on the West bank of the Rio Grande, aside from expedition prio r to Oate expedition, but contradictory information in the historic record again makes such an identification difficult. Adolph Bandelier provides an alternate possibility for the identification of the site, noting the existence of a glazeware pueblo in a field just north of the town of San Marcial at the base of Black Mesa (Marshall and Walt 1984: 252 253). This site has not been Figure 3. 2 View of Black Mesa. Atchison Topeka railroad and siding in middle ground. T aken from the South side of Tiffany Pueblo.
29 relocated, perhaps due to flooding of the Rio Grande which has buried the site since of this pueblo, it may very well be Tzenaquel since the appellation of de Mesilla would be more fitting for a town located just across the river from the mesa itself. If LA244 is not itself Tzenaquel, it seems likely that the site mentioned by Bandelier is likely both Tzenaquel, as identified in the Oate document, and the town of Senec, which was a well known Piro town later in the colonial period. The linguistic similarity between Tzenaquel and Senec is easy enough to attribute to inconsistent Spani sh orthographic rendering of indigenous languages, especially early when the region had not been so well documented and names standardized by the Spanish. Marshall and Walt make a persuasive case for the identification of Tzenaquel as S enec based on the above Spanish map which marks Black Mesa as Mesa de Senec With an equivalence established between Tzenaquel and Senec, both on the basis of similarity in the na me and the proximity of both to Black Mesa, Tiffany Pueblo most certainly cannot be Tzenaquel since available evidence indicates that LA244 is most certainly not the pueblo of Senec. Missions established at these four pueblos encouraged the coalescence o f the regional population at these centers, and increasing Apache raids in the 17 th century further encouraged outlying settlements to congregate at the mission settlements for better protection by Spanish soldiers. There were fourteen settlements across the town of Socorro) on the West bank, and Alamillo and Sevilleta on the East bank
30 (Schroeder 1979: 237). Missions were established at Sevilleta, Pilab, and Senec, with t he mission of San Antonio, at Senec, having a functioning organ and two church bells by the early part of the 16 th century as well locally produced wine by 1627 (Schroeder 1979: 237; Marshall and Walt 1984: 252). Senec was attacked and burned by Apache s and abandoned in 1675, just like other before final abandonment in 1680 when the last Piros in the region, the inhabitants of Senec, Sevilleta, Pilab, and Alamillo, fled to El Paso del Norte along with the retreating Spaniards lead by the colonial governor Antonio de Otermin, thereby founding the modern Piro towns of Ysleta del Sur and Senec del Sur previously mentioned. Some Piros joined with nearby pueblos that we re still inhabited or even attempted to reoccupy some formerly inhabited Piro sites, but these attempts were short lived and by the reconquest of New Mexico in 1689 the colonial governor Diego de Vargas, leading the expedition to retake the territory, repo rts that the Piro region was no longer occupied, except by Apaches on the frontiers (Schroeder 1979: 237; Marshall and Walt 1984: 252). Vargas additionally mentions that the ruins of Senec can be seen from the ruins of the pueblo of San Pascual across t he river (Marshall and Walt 1984: 251 2). None of the architecture at LA244 (see Chapter IV) is Spanish style or related to any mission activities: one would expect the remains of a church at a mission site. Furthermore, while the bells of the church w ere retrieved by Otermin on his attempted reconquest in 1681, there is no mention of the fate of the organ, likely to o cumbersome to
31 collection at LA244 exhibits no evid ence of any Spanish material culture, except a single sherd in the Laboratory of Anthropology collection from a European imitation, ring based vessel (see Fig. C.4 ), Tiffany Pueblo can in no way be taken as a Spanish mission site and so is not Senec. Las tly, neither inspection of surface remains or any sub surface work indicates that the site was ever subject to burning as was Senec during the Apache attack in 1675 and again in 1681 when the colonial governor Antonio de Otermin burned the remains of the site during his failed reconquest (Schroeder 1979: 237). Gulch Pueblo, south of Black Mesa, but if accounts after 1680 are accurate in indicating that the ruins of Sene c could be seen from the pueblo of San Pascual well documented and identified in modern times as the site LA487. Senec could not then be south of Black 182 3; 252). and so the pueblo reported by Bandelier is the most likely candidate to be the lost pueblo. It is interesting to note that the current New Mexico state site forms for LA244 indicate that the site name is Tiffany Pueblo or Trenaquel, a different orthographic rendering of the Tzenaquel provided in the Oate document (Hammond and Rey 1953 Vol. V, 372). No argument is made for this identification, and so it seems fair to discoun t this reading in light of the previously presented evidence. If that is the case, it seems possible then that Tiffany Pueblo should be the second most southern pueblo in the Oate document, described as Teypama. Originally called the help, in the form of corn, rendered to the Spaniards in the
32 Oate expedition, the title was later transferred to the town of Pilab further upstream (Marshall and Walt 1984: 250). In the Oate document, Teypama is noted as being on the West bank north of Tzenaquel and south of Penjeacu and Pilogue, itself north of Penjeacu (Hammond and Rey 1953, Vol. V: 346 ). Pilogue has been identified as what later documents call the pueblo of Pilab, near the modern town of Socorro. Teypama and Penjeacu should the refore be located between the probable location of Tzenaquel at the foot of Black Mesa near the town of San Marcial and Pilab. Being the southernmost pueblo below Pilab and north of Black Mesa, Teypama thus seems to fit with the location of Tiffany Pueblo and the period of the site with a significant or majority occupation in the colonial period (see Chapter V). On this count, Marshall and Walt provide a contradictory analysis. While he notes that Teypama has been often erroneously reported as be ing some distance north of present day Socorro, and dismisses this as unlikely given the evid ence from the Spanish documents, he then suggests that: Among the documented Piro pueblos of Colonial period affiliation, the second village from the south on the west bank is in the Bosque del Apache area. But this cannot be the site of Teypama, since that village is described as being three leagues north of Qualacu and four leagues south of Sevilleta. This description would place the site in the Luis Lopez to L emitar area (Marshall and Walt 1984: 250) Marshall and Walt base this analysis, presumably since no citation is given, on the description of travel in the Oate document and thereby discounts Tiffany Pueblo, which they likely refer of Qualacu on July 28 th arriving across the river from Teypama on the 14 th of June after
33 tr avelling three leagues from Qualacu, and then moved on an additional four leagues on the 15 th to Sevilleta, or Nueva Sevilla as it was known by Oate (Hammond and Rey 1953, Vol. V: 318). If this description is accurate, Tiffany Pueblo certainly does not f all within the expected geographic range for Teypama as north of Qualacu. There are only a few ways in which this may then be interpreted, if taken in tandem with the previously mentioned description of the pueblos along each bank allocated to Father Fray Juan Carlos. It is possible then that the area between Black Mesa and about seven leagues above it had no inhabited pueblos during the Oate expedition in 1598. If this is true, Tiffany Pueblo would have been abandoned by this time and so would not mer it description by the expedition. However, this seems to contradict the archaeological reality of the site as established in the current research and in previous research (see Chapter II and Chapter IV). The Tiffany Pueblo assemblage exhibits a strong Gl aze F component of the Rio Grande Glazeware sequence, the production of which dates to about the 17 th century (see Chapter IV, Table 4.1). Abandonment prior to the Oate entrada in 1598 would therefore pre date this significant ceramic component of the si te. Consequently, two remaining options which posit the occupation of Tiffany Pueblo during the 1598 expedition seem most plausible. First, that the travelogue of the expedition is in some way flawed; either the names listed during the expedition do not correspond to the names as recorded for the purpose of missionary governance due to scribal errors or were later clarified, or that the record was produced as an a fterthought and so the exact sequence of events was muddied by the time elapsed between event and writing about it. If
34 this is true, Teypama remains a possible designation for Tiffany Pueblo following only the mission listing. However, it also seems high ly possible that the mission listing is itself a flawed record. Furthermore, the mission listing and travelogue are not necessarily internally inconsistent within the Oate document, but are only difficult to reconcile with each other in regards to the ar chaeological existence of a pueblo apparently not noted in the travelogue. With a sufficiently probable alternate hypothesis for the discrepancy between the archaeological record and the two sections of the Oate document, there would then be no reason to assume any internal contradiction in this part of the historic record. Such a hypothesis could be simply that the small size of Tiffany Pueblo, as witnessed by the remaining architecture estimated at about forty ground floor rooms as compared to other population estimates for sites of the period (Marshall and Walt 1984: 140, 207), did not merit in record in the estimation of the Spanish as they travelled along the opposite bank. While this seems the most likely solution, it does beg the question of why, even if Tiffany Pueblo was too small to merit mention as part of the trav elogue, it was not included in the mission list. It seems that the problem of identifying Tiffany Pueblo in the colonial record is entirely intractable given the restriction of currently available archival material. G oing on into the mission period, demo graphic changes and significant changes in village naming seem to render comparison with earlier documents unfeasible. Indeed, the names Teypama and Tzenaquel drop out of the historic record entirely without their inclusion in the Oate document. If iden tification was ever made of the site, it would have to involve
35 further archival research, perhaps in Spain likely Seville, or in Mexico City If Tiffany Pueblo is indeed represented in the current historic documentation, it seems that Teypama is the most likely candidate, but there is a distinct alternate possibility that the site is not represented at all in the presently available historic materials despite the archaeological component which clearly places the occupation of the site within the time fram e of early, and potentially later, documents (see Chapter IV). Piro Diaspora The historic record is further useful in establishing a chronology not only for Tiffany Pueblo itself but the entire Piro region as a whole, providing a terminus ante quem for Pi ro occupation of the region at 1680 with the Pueblo Revolt. As has already been noted, aggression by Apache neighbors increased in the latter half of the 17 th century as did exploitation by the Spanish, conscripting Piro laborers to transport pine nuts a nd salt as well as manufacture textiles without pay (Schroeder 1979: 237). In 1680 the remaining and greatly diminished Piro population of the province abandoned the missions and fled southwards to El Paso del Norte along with the retreating Spanish gover nor, Antonio de Otermin, and other Spanish colonists who were escaping the capture of Santa Fe by the coalition of revolting Pueblos whom had successfully expelled their colonial Spanish rulers. The Revolt was initiated primarily by northern Pueblos and d id not include the Piros and so colonial records indicate that they chose to flee with the Spanish rather than be exposed to further Apache raids without the protection of Spanish soldiers as well as possible retaliation by the other Pueblos for not joinin g the revolt (Schroeder 1979: 237). The journey south across desert and badlands, haphazardly prepared for in their flight from the
36 armed Pueblo Revolt, was dangerous in the extreme and later became known as La Jornada del Muerto the single y of the dead for the toll taken on both natives and Spanish. This established narrative of abandonment and consequent diaspora, based entirely on colonial Spanish documents, has some obviously problematic elements concerning the actual circumstances of the Piro abandonment, as well as their motivations for abandonment, and so inquiry into the actuality of the Pueblo Revolt as it did or did not occur among the Piro promises to be an important contribution of further archaeological work in the region. Despite lingering populations of Piros in the region, as reported by the attempted Spanish reconquest in 1681, it appears that by the end of the 17 th century no Piro people remained in the region, having either joined with other Pueblos or moved to the two communities founded near El Paso previously mentioned as Senec del Sur and Socorro del Sur (Schroeder 1979: 2037). It seems reasonable then to take 1680 as a term inal date in the history of Piro occupation in the Rio Abajo, but also as the beginning of a Piro diaspora that merits further research and investigation.
37 F igure 4.1 Sketch map of Tiffany Pueblo. (Drawing by Evan Giomi) CHAPTER IV: THE ARCHAEOLOGY OF TIFFANY PUEBLO Archaeological field work conducted at LA244 over the course of December 2011 to January 2012 and June to July 2012 consisted of full site surface collection of lithic and ceramic material s, as well as several test units and excavations in some of the primary
38 features of the site. The work was conducted primarily by the author and Mark Hungerford, archaeologist with the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, Albuquerque Office, as well as occasional assistance by other individuals. The scope of the work proved daunting to complete by only two individuals in a short period of time, and so the work presented here represents as much as what was accomplished, if not as much as would have been desirable t o complete. The site was divided into five pick up zones, Features #1 5, based around the main archaeological features of the site (see Fig. 4.1 and Appendix C.1 ) The site consists of four room blocks arranged around a central plaza and kiva depression two room blocks oriented east west and two oriented north south. These five features four room blocks and a kiva where designated beginning with the eastern room block as Feature #1 and moving around the plaza clockwise when facing west such that the southern room block is Feature #2, the western room block is Feature #3, the northern room block is Feature #4, and the kiva is Feature #5. Surface collection was conducted on the basis of these features such that any artifacts within an architectural feature were included alongside the artifacts reasonably associated with that architectural feature, including artifactual material adjacent to the room block structures exterior and interior to the plaza. Material exterior to the kiva depression but closer to the kiva by half the distance between the depression and the room block structures was included in the pickup with the interior kiva mat erial. Material closer to the room blocks than the kiva depression was included in the pickup for the closest room block. No materials were collected from the eastern room block or adjoining areas since
39 the scant artifact scatter on the surface did not amount to a significant size or diagnostic sample. This lack of surface materials is likely due to the greater age of the eastern room block in relation to the rest of the site, the relatively more shallow deposition of sediment on top of the feature, and the apparent re usage of building materials and potentially of other cultural materials from the room block (see Chapter V). Environmental/Geographic Context Tiffany Pueblo is located on the west bank of the Rio Grande on a low bench overlooking the ri ver Tiffany is the furthest southern recorded pueblo along the Rio Grande oth a pueblo near the town of San Marcial mentioned by Adolph Bandelier known as Senec is now missing from the archaeological reco rd but would be south of LA244 if it exists ( Marshall and Walt 1984: 253 ) The region as a whole represents the southernmost of reach of puebloan peoples, architecture, and lifeways. The Atchison Topeka railroad runs nearby the site at a distance of abo ut 50m to the west along the same bench the pueblo is built on. Many historic artifacts related to the railroad and other historic activities are scattered across the site and nearby, such as a variety of cans, glass telegraph and telephone insulators, an d fencing materials. These materials may merit future archaeological investigation, but are outside the scope of the current project and so were excluded from collection or recording. Several historic period sites are located nearby, including the Ameri can army Fort Conrad and the Tiffany railroad siding. The siding and the pueblo are named after Tiffany Ranch, a ranching and agricultural operation located nearby named after the manager
40 (Marshall and Walt 1984: 286). Other notable features in the vici nity are the pueblos of San Pascual and San Pascualito on the opposite side of the river and to the north. San Pascual is the largest documented Piro pueblo, with an estimated 500+ rooms (Marshall and Walt 1984: 182 5). Ecologically, the site is dominate d by creosote scrub sprouting from a coarse gravel slag covering the relatively flat surface of the site. Bioturbation at the site is limited to snake and rodent burrows across the surface, but the general inaccessibility of the site to livestock has limi ted disturbance due to the ranching activity in the valley nearby. A long wash through the side of the bench has developed on the northern edge of the site below and to the east of Feature #4 (see Fig. 4.1), but the integrity of the northern room block ha s yet to be compromised. However, continued expansion may threaten surface materials and/or architecture. Anthropogenic influences on the site are significant. A service road crossing the railroad, now defunct, was cut through the exterior of south and southeast sides of the bench, exposing a significant area which was examined for potential cultural remains. None were found as it appears that the living surface of the site is covered only by a few inches of soil deposition. Most significant is the ex tensive looting activity evident and reported at the site, both recent and historic. Excavation and testing in Feature #1 may indicate historic looting activity by inhabitants of the site utilizing stone from the eastern room block as building materials, as well as removal of ceramic and lithic materials (see Feature #1). More recent looting activities are obvious in the three large room blocks Features #2, #3,
41 and #4 with lootings pits visibly centered in some rooms and corresponding to spoil piles l eft on the interior of the buildings on the plaza floor. Marshall and Walt indicate that there is a bulldozer trench in the southern room block, as well as potholes in each of the southern, western, and northern room blocks (1984: 208). The Valverde rep 2003: 16), but no bulldozer trench was located in the southern room block during the current research at Tiffany. What originally appeared to be a bulldozer trench in Feature #3 is likely the aggre gate material from shovel and pit looting inside the room blocks, and the disturbance in the western room block is consequently much greater than in Feature #2 and Feature #4, and greater than the two small pits indicated by the two previous reports. Sinc e the latest report to survey the site is from 2003, it is very possible that this looting activity occurred sometime between then and the current work at the site. Architecture The architectural components of the site consist of the aforementioned featu re designations, of the four room blocks and kiva depression. The three large room blocks, Features #2 4, represent adobe and cobble architecture consisting of at least three to four courses at the base of the walls, as can be seen from several exterior w all segments exposed by looting activity. The courses may have run much higher, and Marshall and Walt suggest that the room blocks may have reached a height of two stories based on the amount of architectural material present at the site (1984: 207). Th e room blocks rise to a height of about a meter and are entirely filled in with wall fall, melted adobe, and deposited sediments.
42 The western and northern room blocks seem to have a clear association, being separated by a distance of only about a meter at the northwest corner. As Marshall and Walt note, it appears that the remains of a small wall may connect the two buildings (1984: 207). The two are also the largest of the room blocks in terms of rooms with about fifteen to sixteen rooms arranged in a double row in each of the blocks. Some variation in the elevation of these room blocks is present, but is generally consistent and does not dip much below about half a meter at the lowest p oints. The southern room block is slightly set off from the north and west buildings, but is of a comparable if slightly less size at about twelve rooms arranged in a double row. The Figure 4.2 Southern room block, Feature #2. View North.
43 shape of the building differs in that a large rectangular deposition of architectural materials caps the westernmost end of the building, extending lengthwise out past the delineation of the exterior walls in the rest of the building. This room block has seen significant deflation of materials through looting and probably na tural processes such that its building shape is quite eroded. It rises to a maximum height of approximately a meter, but has a significant amount of variation in elevation across the building, dipping down to close to ground surface on the western end. The depression in the center of the plaza seems very likely to be the remains of a kiva based on the cultural affinity of the site and its placement in relation to the other Figure 4.3 Northern room block, Feature #4. View East.
44 buildings, centrally in the plaza. However, no actual architecture is exposed and none was uncovered through a trench placed through the berm surrounding the depression (see Excavations Feature #5). At the lowest point, the depression is approximately 1.5 meters below ground surface with the berm rising to approximately 0.5 meters above ground level. The eastern room block is most unlike the three others in that it exhibits no significant change in elevation in relation to the ground surface of the s ite due to architectural materials. The existence of an architectural feature is only noticeable thanks to rows of single cobbles arrayed along the surface. As later test pits revealed, these scattered surface cobbles are positioned above one or two cour ses of fairly well preserved stone wall just below the surface (see Excavations Feature #1). Mera first proposed that the building was significantly older than the others due to the preponderance of Glaze A materials collected from the feature, an asser tion repeated by Marshall and Walt (1984: 207 208). The current work agrees with this basic premise, but may suggest that the temporal distance between the other room blocks and kiva structure and the eastern room block is considerably less, and that they may not even represent distinct occupations (see Analysis). Excavations Excavations at Tiffany Pueblo consisted of several shovel test pits and two excavation units. A meter by meter unit and several test pits were placed in and around the apparent roo m block in Feature #1. In Feature #5 a small trench was dug through the berm surrounding the kiva depression. Finally, a meter by meter unit was place inside one of the rooms of Feature #3. Plans were made to place a unit inside a room in each of
45 Featur e #2 and Feature #4, but lack of time and labor as well as unexpectedly difficult conditions for excavation did not permit such. Excavations were conducted in arbitrary 10cm increments with measurements from a vertical datum established via GPS coordinate s near each unit. All excavated soil was screened through inch mesh. No stratigraphic sequence was obtained through these excavations, in part due to a lack of diagnostic materials in the Feature #1 and #3 units. A significant portion of a single glaz eware bowl was located on the floor surface of the unit excavated in Feature #3 and a single glazeware rim sherd from the fill above the floor surface of the same feature are the only diagnostic artifacts recovered in our research; charcoal samples were ob tained in context with the floor surface and pot, but funding limitations do not permit the use of carbon 14 dating at this time. Wall fall was mapped and recorded throughout the excavation of the unit in Feature #3. Feature #1 Initially believing the E astern room block to be two rooms wide, we selected a probable location of one room on the east side of the block as the location for a test pit. The pit was excavated down three levels, 30cm, below surface at which point excavation was halted. First of all, no artifacts were located in the unit except one or two small sherds on the surface. Secondly, no floor surface was located in the three levels which seemed unlikely given that the surface of the feature was at the same level as the ground surface of rest of the site, and so the floor was likely not far below the ground surface.
46 Consequently, believing that the unit had been placed outside the wall of the room block, a shovel and trowe l test pit was dug immediately to the west of the unit next to what appeared to be the westernmost wall of the room block. This pit did reveal a packed earth floor surface roughly 20cm below ground level and the base of a coursed cobble wall. Several oth er trowel test pits where placed to the north and south of the unit, both inside the single row of room blocks and on the same side as the unit. These all revealed similar results, with a floor surface discovered roughly 20cm below surface level inside th e single row of rooms. Figure 4.4 Eastern room block, Feature #1. View North.
47 Feature #3 Originally, plans were made to put at least one unit in each of the three main room blocks, Features #2 4, inside what appeared to be a well defined room based on the surface distribution of cobbles. However, the difficulty of conducting excavations in fi ll that consisted primarily of large and small cobbles of wall fall and melted adobe material as well as only having two to three excavators on hand at any one times precluded the possibility of starting or finishing units in all but one of the room blocks Since the largest amount of surface materials were collected from the western room block, which had already been extensively looted, the presence of diagnostic materials in a unit seemed likely and so Figure 4.5 Western room block, Feature #3. View North
48 Feature #3 was selected for the first, and due to th e aforementioned circumstances, only unit. The location of the unit was selected based on the apparent lack of prior looting in the area of the unit as well as the likelihood of the unit being contained within the walls of an individual room. The excav ation proceeded for ten levels to a depth of 85cm below surface level at which point a packed adobe floor was encountered and excavations ceased, both since a floor surface was encountered and since the depth below datum inside the unit approximated the de pth below datum of the ground surface of the area near the room block. A small amount of ceramic materials were excavated from the column of the unit, but a significant enough size and distribution of ceramic materials was not present so no stratigraphic sequence could be established. The results, following the same categorization scheme as the surface collection (see Ceramics, this Chapter) are summarized in Appendix A (see Tables A.1 and A.2). Additionally, as noted above, half a glazeware vessel was f ound on the floor surface of the unit. The column below roughly the first 20cm was filled with large cobbles and small chinking stones embedded in a matrix of melted adobe and dirt fill. Approximately 20cm above the floor surface, the amount of wall fa ll as represented by the cobbles and adobe decreased significantly, replaced with softer, uniform sediment likely deposited after abandonment but prior to architectural collapse. Several vertical wall segments were found in horizontal contexts inside the unit and so it seems that the unit was not cross cutting or abutting any standing walls in the structure.
49 Feature #5 Excavations in Feature #5 consisted entirely of a small trench put through the western exterior and interior of the berm surrounding the kiva depression in an attempt to find the approximate radius of the kiva. The trench was begun on the exterior surface of the berm and continued into the kiva for a length of about two meters at a width of about half a meter and a depth of about three quarters of a meter at the deepest. No ceramic materials were found in the excavation and only a few cobbles and an adobe like material were located which could not be conclusively identified as part of the structure of the kiva wall. It appears that much more extensive excavations will be necessary to determine the Figure 4.6 Kiva depression Feature #5. View North.
50 architectural content and layout of the kiva. Ceramics Ceramic materials at Tiffany Pueblo were collected primarily through surface collections and with a single large section of a glazeware pot found on the floor surface of the unit excavated inside the room block of Feature #3 in addition to other, scant sub surface ceramics collected in that unit. Rio Grande glazewares and gray utility wares are the dominant ceramic types in the collection, as also found in previous surface collections by Mera (1940: 7) and Marshall and Walt ( 1984: 207 ). The majority are l ikely of local manufacture, but some obviously intrusive wares are present at the site. None of the ceramics collected from the site exhibit any Spanish or European influence in manufacture or style, but a single sherd from the Mera collection at the Labo ratory of Anthropology in Santa Fe (see Appendix A.4) is part of a ring based glazeware vessel (see Appendix C.4), a shape not part of the ceramic vocabulary of the American Southwest. Frequency tables of the ceramics from the surface collection were co mpiled (see Appendix A.1 and A.2) using three sorting categories: Rio Grande Glazewares, Rio Grande Plain Utility Ware, and Other, including locally produced white wares and intrusive glazewares and white wares. Subsurface ceramics from the excavation in Feature #3 were sorted using the same categories. A total of 1549 sherds were identified as part of the surf ace collection across the site, less than the 3,232 sherds collected by Marshall at Qualacu (1987: 67), but a large amount considering they exclusi vely represent surface collection. The amount is likely due to prior looting activities exposing quantities of subsurface materials.
51 Rio Grande Glazeware Kidder was the first to develop a chronology for late Puebloan glaze painted ceramics based on his work at Pecos Pueblo (1917: 329 37) and Mera later refined the sequence (1940: 2). A slightly modified modern typology of glazewares (see Table 4.1) was taken for use in the present work from Dyer ( 2008: 181 232). The Rio Grande glazeware sequence repres ents a tradition of glaze painted bichrome and polychrome ceramics, usually bowls, produced throughout the upper, lower, and middle Rio Grande valley in the late pre historic and early historic periods. In the chronology of the Rio Abajo provided by Marsh all (1987: 15), this would correspond to the Ancestral and Colonial Piro, ca. 1300 1680 C.E. The sequence consists of six lettered types, A through F, distinguished primarily by rim shape, as other diagnostic features can at best establish Early (A and B), Middle (C and D), and Late (E and F) horizons (Habicht Mauche, Eckert, and Huntley 2006: 49 ). In particular Glaze F, and to a lesser degree Glaze E, ceramics can be distinguished as contrasted with the sharply paint ed glazes of the Early and Middle glazewares (Mera 1940: 5). This runny glaze can be further distinguished by a tendency towards a greenish yellow tint, as opposed to the blacks and browns of earlier glazes (Dyer 2008: 177 )
52 There appears to be signific ant regional variation within the glaze paint sequence along the Rio Grande. For instance, it is generally accepted that Glaze A style ceramics in the Pre Contact perio d ca. A.D. 1300 1540 but [which] begin to diminish in frequency after Contact and are infrequent in the 17 th lack of the characteristic late horizon runny glaze on any of the Glaze A rims from the surface collec tion at Tiffany Pueblo may preclude a local production of Glaze A ceramics well into the Colonial Piro. An additional regional peculiarity, Mera notes that Glaze B is almost non existent in the Piro region, restricted to the northern Rio Grande (1940: 5), while Marshall and Walt note that Glaze B wares were found at only one site within the Rio Abajo study area of their report, at the northern end (1984: 138). Glaze C ceramics are also particularly scarce in the Rio Abajo, thought not entirely absent like Glaze B. Glaze B and C are then likely the products of regional variation within the glazeware sequence and do not indicate an abandonment of the Rio Abajo during Glaze B and C periods, but rather suggest a continuation of Glaze A ceramic production thro ughout, as already suggested (Marshall and Walt 1984: 138). For analytic purposes, the Rio Grande Glazewares sorting category was subdivided into Glaze A through F rims and various body sherd categories, including glaze on red, glaze on yellow, glaze pol ychrome, indeterminate red to brown body, and runny glaze body. The three glaze on color categories describe body sherds without obvious temporal affinity (i.e. a runny glaze) but distinguishes by means of the color of surface which the glaze paint has be en applied to: reds and oranges under glaze on red, whites, grays, and yellows under
53 glaze on yellow, and polychromatic designs under glaze on polychrome. The indeterminate red to brown sherds category includes sherds without glaze decorations but which l ikely belong to the body of a glazeware vessel, often the lower or bottom parts of vessels which tend to lack decoration unlike areas nearer the rims. Runny glaze body sherds are body sherds with glaze decorations that are runny and discolored, diagnostic of late (E and F) glazewares. These categories were adapted from the site reports from Pargas Pueblos (1986) and Qualacu Pueblo (1987) by Michael Marshall (see Chapter 2) as well as Dyer (2008). Some of the collected rim sherds were so small that ident ification of the rim category which they belong to based on rim shape was difficult, but a best effort was made to correctly categorize each rim sherd. The half pot from the Feature #3 excavation is a bichrome, black on red glazeware bowl exhibiting a Gla ze D rim type with discolored but tightly controlled glaze paint (see Fig. C.3) Utility Ware Utility ware at the site consists entirely of plain gray and black wares. Rio Grande utility ware includes plain or undecorated gray wares in the pre Contact and early colonial as well as plain smudged and polished black ware known by several regional types, including Manzano and Kapo Black, and more generally as Burnished Black Ware, in the late colonial and post Revolt periods ( Dyer 2008: 62 3, 66 7, 70 3). Notably, no textured at the site; the absence of these wares may be a significant temporal indicator of later occupation in Glaze E and F (Marshall 1987: 78, 80 1).
54 Rio Grande Plain Utility Ware was subdivided into Plain Gray and Black Utility Ware and Polished Black an d Gray Utility Ware. As noted previously, polished black wares are known by several regional names, mostly notably Kapo Black originating at Santa Clara Pueblo (Dyer 2008: 62 3 ). The category of Polished Black and Gray Utility Ware is a super category in cluding both polished black wares and polished gray wares. The two types do have different temporal affinities, with polished gray terminating ca. 1720 and with production of polished black ending ca. 1800, but production of both begins ca. 1650 (Dyer 200 8: 62 3). W ith a terminus ad quem for the site esta blished by historical records at 1680 (see Chapter III), the distinction between the two types of polished plain ware on the basis of periods of production then makes little difference to chronolog ical in terpretation of the site, and so the two are therefore not separated in analysis. White W are and Intrusive Ceramics Other ceramics collected at the site consist of intrusive indigenous materials, primarily black on white wares from the Salinas region of w est central New Mexico and a crushed sherd tempered bichrome and polychrome glazeware from the western glazeware traditions of Acoma and Zuni. These types were grouped together under the category of Black on white wares from the collection consist primarily of Tabir Black on White, a type native to the pueblos of the Salinas region to the East and Northeast of the Piro area of the Rio Grande (see Fig. 1.1). Additionally, Tabir Plain ware, an undecorated form of Tabir Black on White, was collected at the site. The size of the Tabir Plain sherds means that they may just be sherds of a Tabir Black on White from an
55 undecorated portion of the vessel. Additionally several pieces of white ware were collected that were not eas ily categorized, but are likely samples of Socorro Black on White or a white ware of similarly local production and similarly derived from Chupadero Black on White ware ( Dyer 2008: 94 7, 132 3). Like the lack of textured utility wares, the near lack of locally produced white wares may be a significant indicator of an occupation later in the contact period (Marshall 1987: 78, 80 1). Likewise, intrusive wares at the site consist entirely of a crushed sherd temper glazeware with dark black paste and dark red, matte surface. The sherd temper and dark matte surface is indicative of the Acoma and Zuni glazeware traditions, and so has been sorted generally as Western Glazeware. The m ost likely typology is either Delta I or Delta II from the Acoma glazeware sequence, or Hawikuh Glaze on Red and Hawikuh Polychrome from the Zuni glazeware sequence (Habicht Muache, Eckert, and Huntley eds. 2006: 40 47). These categorizations bear a tempo ral affinity for the late 16 th and entirety of the 17 th century, contemporary to Glaze E and Glaze F of the Rio Grande Glazeware sequence (40 47). Lithics The entirety of lithic materials at the site, with the exception of a single flake from the excav ation in Feature #3, were obtained through surface collection. These materials were collected based on the same pick up zones, Features #1 5 (see Fig. 4.1), as were the ceramic materials. A summary of the lithic assemblage is provided in Table 5, and su mmaries of the lithic assemblage collected from each Feature are provided in Tables 6 9. No stone artifacts were identified in association with Feature #1, and so no table is
56 provided. A total of 129 lithic objects were part of the surface collection at the site, which is overwhelmingly dominated by debitage, accounting for 90.2% of the total lithic assemblage. Stone artifacts were categorized through a functional and material typology. Objects were classified in eight categories of material: Chalcedo ny, Jasper, Chert, Porphyritic Igneous, Phaneritic Igneous, Aphanitic Igneous, Obsidian, and Other. Chalcedony, Jasper, and Chert include all microcrystalline quartz materials and are distinguished primarily by translucence, and secondarily by color and t exture. The three igneous types are distinguished by their titular textures aphanitic (microcrystalline materials including rhyolites and basalts), phaneritic (macrocrystalline materials, primarily granites), and porphyritic (a microcrystalline matrix w ith macrocrystalline inclusions). Obsidian is a category solely for obsidians volcanic glass material. Other as a category subsumes several types including macro and microcrystalline quartzite materials not included in the Chalcedony, Chert, and Jasp er categories, as well as a type of travertine like material found in small quantities. The assemblage consists primarily of local materials, either from the nearby river or from the surrounding hill region, although some intrusive materials are present. The cherts, jaspers, and chalcedonies appear to primarily consist of local materials found at the site in the form of cobbles as part of the gravel slag covering the surface. The majority of the chalcedony is a milky white color with various amber to bro wn to black inclusions known as Rio Grande Chalcedony and found throughout the Middle Rio Grande, or is a related type. The igneous materials also appear to be indigenous, particularly the basaltic aphanitic materials and a reddish purple porphyritic mate rial. Notable intrusive materials are the
57 obsidians objects which are from only two locations in the region, the volcanic Malpais badlands near Grants, New Mexico or the Valles Caldera of north central New Mexico. The single hammerstone and potential po lishing stone are likely polished river stones acquired from the Rio Grande. Finally, the travertine like material is not present except in artifact form across the site and so may be intrusive, but could be a local material. Lithic materials were grou ped in seven functional types, Debitage, Chipped Stone Tools, Bifaces/Points, Groundstone, Hammerstone, Core, and Other with Debitage and Groundstone each broken down into two sub groups, Flakes and Angular Debris and Mano and Metate. Debitage includes al l waste material from the production of stone tools. Within this category a distinction is made between Angular Debris, debitage which does not exhibit clear dorsal and ventral surfaces, but are clearly the product of knapping activity, and Flakes, which do exhibit clear ventral and dorsal surfaces. Chipped Stone Tools are any knapped items which show use as a tool but which cannot be formally classified as a point or biface. The items in this category are flakes which exhibit a worked edge or a worn edg e indicative of usage as a tool. Bifaces and Points are grouped together and include everything from a small, finely worked obsidian point (see Fig. C.5) to what appear to be discarded attempts at creating projectile points. Groundstone is divided into the two subcategories of Manos and Metates, grinders and grinding stones respectively, identified based on wear patterns of appropriate materials mainly various porphyritic and basaltic igneous stones. Only fragments and no complete tools were recovere d. The Hammerstone and Core categories are mostly self descriptive. Only a single hammerstone was recovered, identified based on wear patterns on opposite
58 ends of the artifact. Core subsumes any parent material which has been clearly knapped but which i tself does not have any apparent functional usage. The Other category includes what appears to be a polishing stone used to smooth and polish ceramic finishes, a smoothed river stone likely obtained from the Rio Grande. Other Materials Of historic indi genous materials outside architectural, ceramic, and lithic artifacts, only a small quantity of manuport and worked shell was collected. Two shards of nacreous freshwater bivalve shell were obtained from surface collections as well as a single round bead of the same material. The fragments are so small as to make species identification member of the Unionidae family common to freshwater in North America and present in the Rio Grande. The bead is about 1.5 cm in diameter and 0.25cm in thickness. Other artifacts at the site include American period historical artifacts related to local ranching activity and construction/maintenance of the nearby railroad, as discussed previously (see Environmental/Geographic Context).
59 CHAPTER V: ANALYSIS Following architectural, ceramic, and lithic analysis of the materials from the surface collection and limited excavations, many of the pre existing notions regarding the site history have been reinforced. The analysis also supports some of the regional models established through the scant previous archaeological work in the region, while the validity of some of the models has been called into question. The most definite conclusion reached from this work is that significantly more archaeological work on Piro archaeological sites is necessary to better flesh out these initial speculatory models and to work with the Piro descendent communities for a greater representational and historical context Chronology More firmly establishing a date for LA244 has been a key concern for this project, both for the sake of better clarifying several regional sequences, particularl y the Rio Grande glazeware sequence as it pertains to Piro sites, and for better locating the site in the historic record. Several lines of evidence contribute to the dating of the site, confirming or running contrary to some of the chronological speculat ion by previous authors such as Marshall and Walt (1984) and Mera (1940). Primarily, Marshall and Walt and Mera identified two occupational components at Tiffany Pueblo: an early or Ancestral Piro component located in Feature #1 and a late or Colonial Piro component that consisted of the rest of the site (Marshall and Walt 1984: 208). Both researchers made small surface collections at the site, and noted a tendency towards Glaze A ceramic materials near Feature #1, and an absence of Glaze A materials
60 a cross the rest of the site which was noted as having an abundance of late Glazeware materials (Glazes E and F) (Marshall and Walt 1984: 208). However, in the surface collection examined in this report a significantly larger sample than the collection o f Marshall (Marshall et. al 1981) and of Mera (see Appendix I, Table Anthropology collection, Santa Fe, New Mexico) Glaze A materials are a prominent component of the late features of the site, with fifteen Glaze A rims recovered from Features #2 5 consisting of 1% of the total ceramic collection and second only in frequency among glaze rims to the twenty seven Glaze F rims recovered, consisting of 1.7% of the total collection (see Appendix I, Table 2). Clearly the distribution of Glaze A materials is not limited to the early component room block of Feature #1, and in fact, the Glaze A materials at 1% of the assemblage are about equivalent in representation to the middle glazewares (C and D) at about 0.9% of the assemblage, although both are overshadowed by the 2.3% of the assemblage represented by late glazeware (E and F). While the larger portion of the site is most strongly associated with the late glazewares, there is signific ant representation of all the glazewares except the absent Glaze B wares and the barely present Glaze C wares. Unfortunately, the lack of collected materials from Feature #1 precludes a proportional comparison to the rest of the features, but information about the occupation of the site and the relation of these features can be determined from the collected glazeware and the existing architecture of Feature #1.
61 Architecture of Feature #1 Thanks to the excavations in this feature it is now obvious that the room block consisted of a single row of rooms running north south, and that the initial excavation in the feature was a few centimeters shy of abutting the easternmost exterior wall of the room block. However, the lack of materials in the exterior uni t was not unique, and with no artifacts collected from any of the test pits it appears that the room block was almost entirely cleared of artifacts prior to or after abandonment. Taken into account with the height of the remaining walls never exceeding two courses the testing in the feature indicates that the room block was constructed in one of two probable ways (Marshall and Walt 1984: 207). First, that it was a jacal or waddle and daub, construction of local Mogollon derivation dissimilar to the adobe and cobble construction of the other room blocks and so the remaining architecture represents the entirety of the cobble base of the walls. Alternatively, it could be that the cobble materials from the room block were taken for use in the other arch itectural features of the site and the current feature represents only the remaining material of the wall bases. All the cobble material used in construction at the site seems to be of the same locally derived material and so analysis of the cobbles in F eature #1 comparative to the cobbles in other features is unlikely to help researchers come to a conclusion regarding the relatively lesser architectural footprint of Feature #1. Nonetheless, the two most plausible options for the difference in architectu re points at a significant temporal difference between the earliest occupation at the site and later and final occupations. Whether this is represents a continuous or punctuated occupation of the site remains to be seen.
62 The Glazeware Sequence of the Pir o Region But allowing for the aforementioned abundance of Glaze A materials across the site taking for granted the prominence of Glaze A ceramics from the Eastern room block as reported by both Mera and Marshall and Walt speaks to the likelihood of con tinuous occupation across the site. First is a model that assumes discrete periods of production for each Glazeware letter style and a consequent correspondence between relative frequency of each Glazeware type with the size of occupation at the site (see Table 5.1) The ceramic record would then correspond to an initial fluorescence at the site with Glaze A at 1% of the total surface collection followed by a demographic slump: a sever drop off corresponding to Glaze C 0.1% of the collection and a sl ight resurgence corresponding to Glaze D and E at 0.8%, and 0.6% of the total surface collection respectively. The occupation then ends with a period of largest occupation corresponding to Glaze F at 1.7% of the ceramic collection.
63 Alternatively, the ass umption can made that the Glazeware sequence is not an absolute predictor of temporality, with certain styles varying in frequency both regionally and chronologically; witness the previously observed lack of Glaze B in the Piro region, or the possible prod uction of Glaze A throughout the Glaze sequence. As previously noted (see Chapter IV), it seems unlikely that Glaze A production continued into the colonial period since changes in the materiality of the glazes used on E and F glazeware were dictated not by stylistic preference but by limited access to resources and changing patterns of control of labor due to colonial Spanish restrictions ( Habicht Mauche 2006: 225 26), and no collected Glaze A material demonstrates these changes. However, that does not preclude the possibility of Glaze A production throughout the Glaze C and D periods: just as Glaze B has been demonstrated as a particular regional style, perhaps a preference for a continuation of Glaze A production over Glaze C production which might explain the near lack of Glaze C materials recovered at the site. Beginning with the assumption that the relative frequency of each glazeware type roughly correspond s to size of the population at the site, the occupational model of the site then becomes a continuation occupation throughout the glaze sequence with a fairly steady population which briefly experimented with Glaze C styles that grew significantly in t he Glaze F period. This model seems most likely given the available evidence from the glazeware rim sherds, but the matter is unlikely to be definitively answered without significant collections of Piro glazeware material in a stratigraphic sequence. In deed, a deeper understanding of Piro demographic changes are necessary before a final assessment can be made.
64 While glazeware rims are the only definite stylistic markers of different glazeware types, an analysis of the larger body of non rim glazeware sherds may be helpful in determining the occupational series of the site. Non rim glazeware sherds were grouped into five categories (see Appendix I, Table 2): three decorated body sherd categories, sorted by type of decoration (on red, on yellow, and pol ychrome), followed by a Runny Glaze Body category, the sherds of which demonstrate the runny or sloppy glaze characteristic of late, E and F, glazewares. Finally, the category indeterminate red to brown body sherds includes any undecorated glazeware sherd s. While the indeterminate sherds could belong to any of the glaze styles, the three decorated sherd categories can be broadly thought of as being representative of Early and Middle glazewares (glazes A, C, and D) while the Runny Glaze Body sherds can be broadly thought of as being representative of Late glazewares (glazes E and F). Consequently, a comparison of the relative frequencies of the decorated body sherds to the runny glaze body sherds might reveal a significant difference between the two that would be indicative of a larger occupation through the glaze periods representative of that sherd type. The sum of the three decorated glaze body groups represents 8% of the sherds in the surface collection while the runny glaze body sherds represent 6.2% of the sherds in the surface collection. This majority of early A D sherds contrast with the majority E F period of rim sherds. There are several possibilities to explain this discrepancy. First, a simple matter of sampling may explain the difference between glazeware rim and body sherds: a surface collection of a heavily looted site may have many sorts of biases
65 compare against. Secondly, the inability to d istinguish between undecorated late and early glazeware body sherds may significantly impact the analysis. Alternatively, the quantity of late body sherds may represent a shorter but more intense occupation of the site, while the early sherds represent a longer but less populous early occupation. Population aggregation at a smaller number of sites throughout the colonial period is documented (see Chapter III), and this fits the above model. This explanation does not however account for the majority of la te rim sherds, and so sampling problems must again be invoked. Instead, there is the possibility that our understanding of the Piro Glazeware sequence is insufficient, and that a runny glaze is not a sufficient temporal indicator, such that the presence o f a runny glaze is sufficient indication of later glaze types, but the absence of a runny glaze is not sufficient evidence to place a sherd in an early or middle glaze category. In this way, some portion of the decorated body sherds may actually represent late E F glazes. Indeed, the presence of the partial Glaze D bowl on the floor surface of Feature #3 as the only significant ceramic artifact from the excavation of that feature indicate s that, at a minimum, a Glaze D vessel was still in use at the time of abandonment or was reused by squatters or returners to the site prior to initial abandonment. With only a square meter of the buildings excavated, it may be coincidental that a Glaze D, and not Glaze E or F, vessel was uncovered. Regardless, the vessel indicates minimally that Glaze D was still in use, if not production, throughout the later occupation of the site, and only the degree of continued use or reuse is unclear from the limits of current excavation.
66 Glazeware Attribute Analysis Following the lead of Marshall in his work at Qualacu and Pargas pueblos (1986: 1987), various attributes of each glazeware rim sherd were recorded (see Appendix, Table 3) in order to potentially correlate stylistic and manufacturing trends with the glazew are periods. The nature of the collection provides a slight challenge, however, in that only two Glaze C rims were recovered whose attributes match exactly. Due to the small sample size and 100% correlation, the Glaze C ceramics will not be considered as part of this analysis. Marshall speculates based on the work at Qualacu that a predominance of sand tempered glazeware is indicative of earlier glazeware periods, while a predominance of crushed igneous stone is indicative of later glaze periods: light colored (white or rhyolitic) igneous rock is most associated with Glaze E and F and nearly absent in other glaze groups while black (dark or basaltic) igneous rock is most prevalent in Glaze D rims, but has a significant presence across the sequence (Marsh all 1987: 74). Like the Qualacu assemblage, the collection from Tiffany Pueblo shows a minor presence of white igneous temper through Glaze A and D, but which increases significantly in Glaze E and even more significantly in Glaze F at 14.8% of the Glaze F sherds, and 16.7% of the combined Glaze E and F rim sherds. However, unlike the Qualacu assemblage, dark basaltic temper appears with a very high frequency across all glaze groups, at the lowest representing only 40.7% of the Glaze E rims, and represe nting nearly half of the glazeware rim sherds at 49.2% of the assemblage, making it the most represented temper type among the glazeware rim sherds. Furthermore, sand tempered rim sherds consistently represent a large portion of each glaze
67 group between 4 0 45% of each glaze group, except Glaze E. Even Glaze E shows a higher proportion of sand tempered wares, at 22.2% of the assemblage, than the greatest proportion of sand tempered wares in Glazes D through F at Qualacu, of which the highest representation of sand tempered rims is only 18% (Marshall 1987: 74). In regards to these discrepancies, an issue of sampling is again relevant since the excavation of sites no t heavily disturbed by looting activity, not from surface collection at a only a small amount of excavation and collection: any model correlating these attributes to specific eras will require a significant amount of further archaeological work in the Piro region to produce any substantive results. In terms of slip color Marshall notes that in the Qualacu collection red slips are present across the glazeware seq uence but most strongly related to Glaze A. Tan slips are most indicative of late glazes, while white slips are present in a significant amount in all but Glaze A and F. Finally, yellow slips are poorly represented in all glaze categories. Like at Qual acu, yellow interior and exterior slips are infrequent in the Tiffany assemblage. Unlike at Qualacu, white slips are evenly represented through all glaze types with the notable exception of Glaze E with only 11.1% of white interior slips and no white exte rior slips. Likewise, Tan slips have a fairly equal distribution among the glaze rim types with the exception of a prominence among Glaze E wares of exterior and interior tan slips. Finally, interior red slips show only a slight correlation with Glaze A rims while exterior red
68 slips are equally distributed except for a prominence again among Glaze E rims at 55.6%, but not among the E F rims at 38.9% of the total late glaze rims. Finally, the decorative scheme on the exterior and interior of each rim she rd was classified as plain, or monochromatic, bichrome, or polychrome. At Qualacu, plain interiors are infrequent across all glaze types, with the exception of Glaze C interiors, while exterior surfaces are predominately plain in decoration (Marshall 1987 : 74 5). At Tiffany bichrome and polychrome exterior designs are represented exclusively on Glaze F rims, with a majority bichrome designs at 59.3% of the Glaze F rims. The exclusively plain designs on all other glaze types is in concordance with the Qu alacu assemblage. All interior design schemes were represented across all types of Glaze rim. Glaze F rims show a bias towards polychromatic interior designs at 44.4% of the F rims, while bichromatic designs are a majority of Glaze A rims at 60%. Glaze E rims are however an exception with plain designs at 77.8% of the total, the only significant divergence from the Qualacu assemblage. Other Ceramic Indicators While the Rio Grande Glazeware sequence is most helpful in understanding the chronology of Tif fany Pueblo, other ceramic types can provide some insight. As previously mentioned (see Chapter IV), the lack of locally produced white wares in the Piro region seems to be an indicator of pre colonial occupations since most of the local white wares are s tylistic and regional variants of Chupadero white ware, in production ca. 1150 1550 (Dyer 2008: 94 5; 132 33 ) and derivative of earlier Elmendorf white wares which previously were predominant over glaze decorated ceramics (Marshall 1987: 78). The very min imal
69 representation of local white wares in the LA244 assemblage at 0.1% of the total ceramic collection seems to correspond to the general chronology established by the glazeware, with a predominance of later glazes, D to E. Additionally, the majority of white wares at the site are intrusive ceramics from the Salinas region, being Tabir Plain and Black on White wares at a total of 0.6% of the collection. With a period of production from the mid 16 th century to the end of the 17 th century, these white wares cover the major period of production for Glaze E and F and so confirm the previously mentioned speculation by Marshall and Walt and Mera that the site has a significant colonial period occupation. It seems that while the glazeware sequence indicates a fairly continuous occupation throughout the ancestral and colonial Piro, with a spike in population in the colonial period, the proportion of locally produced, early white wares to intrusive, colonial period white wares indicates that the most significant occupation of the site occurred in the colonial Piro. Likewise, the utility wares indicate a more significant colonial than pre colonial occupation of the site. Marshall believes that decorated surfaces of utility wares, meaning te xtured decorations, decrease over time in the Piro region and are near to totally gone from the record by the colonial period (Marshall 1987: 78 81). Out of the 904 sherds of utility ware represented in the surface collection form the site, not a single p iece has any textured design elements. Indicating a colonial ceramic chronology holds true, this absence of textured utility wares would tend to make sense in conjunction with the glazeware materials if the significant Glaze A component from the site was in production during Glaze C and D.
70 The occupational model of the site following the previous speculation in this chapter based on analysis of the glazeware materials would then be one of steady occupation beginni ng late in Glaze C and continuing through Glaze E followed by a spike in population during early Glaze F, with concurrent production of Glaze A materials during Glaze C and D as the primary ceramic style, but dropping out during Glaze E and F occupation. The two typological groups which utility wares from the site were divided into represent the evolution of utility wares on the Rio Grande from smoothed and sometimes slipped grey, black, and red wares to polished, often sooted, and more frequently slippe d grey and black utility wares. At 32.0% of the surface collection, the later polished wares represent a more significant component of the site than do the plain gray wares at 26.3% of the site, thereby supporting the hypothesis of later occupation based on lack of utility ware designs. Utility wares in a stratigraphic context may also prove helpful in increasing the number of utility ware typologies to account for transitional forms and thereby increase accuracy in determining periods of production and c onsequently also increasing confidence in the hypothesis of decreasing design. Lithic Analysis There are two primary research questions of interest in the examination of the lithic materials at Tiffany Pueblo. First is a concern for the preferential us age of certain material types across the site as a whole and within tool groups, as well as change over time in the types of materials used. Changing patterns of usage may reflect the political and economic situation of the early colonial period in the re gion as earlier patterns of land and resource
71 ownership shift due to partitioning of land rights such as through the establishment of a mission system and encomienda system, and a reorientation of indigenous labor by Spanish colonists towards the producti on of raw materials and finished goods for use in less peripheral parts of the empire If stone types can be more accurately categorized and located on the landscape, access to regional resources and the political system which allows or denies access to c ertain locations, and thereby the particular stone types found therein, may be reconstructed in part. Secondly, analysis of spatial and temporal distribution of different tool types may also reveal changes in Piro lifeways at Tiffany Pueblo that might c orrelate to wider social and political changes due to colonial contact and rule. For instance, comparing ratios of projectile points to groundstone items like manos and mutates may reveal a shift away from hunting activities to more prominent agricultural subsistence, perhaps due to Spanish extraction of male labor for use in pine nut gathering, salt production, or porter labor However, without a stratigraphic sequence with lithic materials for the site, these questions will prove difficult to answer. T he surface collection of lithic materials may provide for a spatial analysis of these questions, but without the temporal depth provided by a stratigraphic sequence no change over time can be assessed. Consequently, the materials fr om the surface collection have been collated here in Chapter IV and Appendix 2 and are presented for the purpose of future research into these or other questions.
72 CHAPTER VI: CONCLUSIONS The archaeological investigation of Tiffany Pueblo presented in this thesis has in a small way contributed to our further understanding of Piro history in the colonial period of the Rio Abajo. The analysis of the collected artifacts has helped to clarify i ssues of chronology for the site specifically, as well as helped to test some previous models for the particular Piro manifestation of that sequence. While the certainties are largely lacking in the present work, this thesis does in large part confirm Mich beginning of the manuscript (see Chapter I), that the study of the contact period in the Rio Abajo is a poorly understood part of the history and archaeology of New Mexico. If anything definite can be taken from the present research it is that the current state of Piro archaeology demands much more stratigraphic excavation to resolve many outstanding issues, including regional population demography and chronology. The case for future archaeological research in the Piro regi on seems very clear, and both the present thesis and prior archaeological work raise interesting research questions Grande glazeware sequence specific to the Rio Aba jo the complete lack of Glaze B wares confirms as much but the specifics of this variant are not yet worked out. Although s ome aspects of the accepted seriation for the region aspects need much closer scrutiny inc luding the oft repeated continuation of Glaze A production throughout the glazeware sequence in particular
73 In that regard, it seems that the manifestation of the glazeware sequence in the Rio Grande might be sufficiently specific enough that further analysis can establish a set of diagnostic features by which to distinguish the different glaze styles without depending on rim sherds. The analysis of temper types and decorati ve trends in this work and in glazeware identification and seriation: the close, if not complete, correspondence between the analysis in the current work and that of Marshall is encouraging. A simple expansion of the amount of Piro ceramic materials collected in a stratigraphic context could open even more avenues for identifying a set of diagnostic features for Piro glazeware. While chronology is a central and basic concern fo r future Piro archaeology, demographic changes both population change and movement should be of similarly basic concern. Given the lack of in depth subsurface work at any Piro site, any estimation of regional population would be based entirely of grou nd floor room estimates from the much more prolific survey work in the region. While this may prove helpful, a close examination of the architecture and midden debris at several Piro sites could provide a much more exact understanding of regional populatio n. At Tiffany Pueblo the number of ground floor rooms observable from the surface can only be approximated owing to looting activity and the general collapse of the architecture. The observable ground floor rooms at LA244 number about 40 44 rooms and cover s an area of about 1100m 2 without considering the earlier occupation of the small Eastern room block (see Fig. 1, Chapter IV ). As Crown notes, estimates for population size based on number of rooms and floor area for pre historic pueblos in the Southwest vary considerably, even estimates based on
74 ethnographic data (Crown 1991: 308). Crown further cautions that aggregation of rooms over time without increase in population size may occur, and so a detailed construction sequence for a site is necessary before accurate population numbers can be obtained (Crown 1991: 310 11). Furthermore Spanish encomiendas in New Mexico collected a tax based on number of households, and not through a head count prior to 1664 and may therefore have increased the number of fami lies per room in order to lessen demand s for tribute (Preucel 2002: 4). Consequently, population estimate for this period may not be easy to reliably calculate. Ultimately, more archaeological work in the Piro region and at individual sites will be necessa ry to establish a rubric for estimating population size. The current lack of precise chronological measures for the region exacerbates issues facing any demographic study by hindering cross site comparisons and diachronic analysis. With a better refined r egional chronology allowing for better temporal positioning of sites a picture of demographic change in the colonial period can be profitably constructed. Such a picture would additionally allow for a better understanding of the historic record, clarif ying some of the mess and confusion that has hindered analysis in relation to Tiffany Pueblo (see Chapter III). With these fundamental archaeological concerns addressed, possibilities for further analysis open up. For instance, a comparative look at rev olting Pueblos in 1680 to those which did not participate might allow for better understanding of the Pueblo Revolt, and other forms of resistance to the colonial rule in early colonial New Mexico. To understand a phenomena indigenous revolt to colonial rule it makes sense to look at both the
75 phenomena itself and at similar contexts in which that phenomena did not occur, thereby understanding the occurrence through its negation. necessity of studying the folk (1892: 273 74) in order to fill the gaps in historical understanding. As previously mentioned, a central component of future archaeological work in the Piro region should be ethnographic work with contemporary Piros as part of good practice in indigenous archaeology and as a valuable tool in understanding the Piro past. The present research at Tiffany Pueblo adds in a small way to our knowledge of the Piro r egion and early colonial history in New Mexico. Through future work, a more inclusive indigenous archaeology in the American Southwest can be achieved that does not posit resistance, specifically participation in the 1680 Revolt, as a pre requisite for inc lusion in a larger narrative of the indigenous past. Further archaeological research at Tiffany Pueblo specifically -as well as at other Piro sites -will ultimately address both the fundamental concerns of archaeology in the production of more historic al knowledge as well as basic theoretical concerns of anthropology in building an inclusive and collaborative historical counter narrative that embraces the entirety of the indigenous past in New Mexico
76 APPENDIX A: CERAMIC TABLES
80 APPENDIX B: OTHER ARTIFACTS
83 APPENDIX C: OTHER MAPS AND FIGURES Figure C.1 GIS Map of Tiffany Pueblo. Green outlines indicate room blocks and Kiva depression. Red icons indicate areas of significant looting spoil piles. Green icons indicate locus of groundstone tools. Blue icons indicate approximate locus of de nse ar tifact clustering. Map by Matthew Dorsey, Albuquerque Area Office, Bureau of Reclamation.
84 Figure C.2 USGS San Marcial Quadrangle Map Additions by author.
85 Fig. C.3 Glazeware Vessel, Feature #3. Fig. C.4 Mera Collection Glazeware Vessel Ring Base.
86 Fig. C.5 Obsidian Projectile Point, Feature #3.
87 BIBLIOGRAPHY Bandelier, Adolph Francis Alphonse 1892 Final report of the investigations among the Indians of the Southwestern United State, carried on mainly in the years from 1880 1885 Part II. Papers of the Archaeological Institute of America, American Series IV. University Press, Cambridge. Burke, Heather, Claire Smith, and Larry J. Zimmerman 2009 Alta mira Press, Plymouth, United Kingdom. Chardon, Roland 1980 The Elusive Spanish League: A Problem of Measurement in Sixteenth Century New Spain The Hispanic American Historical Review, 60(2): 294 302. Cordell, Linda S. 1989 Dialogue with the Past: Thoughts on some University of New Mexico Field Schools Journal of Anthropological Research 45(1): 29 46. Crown, Patricia L. 1991 Evaluating the Construction Sequence and Population of Pot Creek Pueblo, Northern New Mexico American Antiquity 56(2): 29 1 314. Dyer, Jennifer Boyd 2008 Middle Rio Grande Ceramic Reference Manual. Prepared for the Bureau of Reclamation, Albuquerque, NM. Volume 1: Cochiti Pueblo to Socorro, New Mexico and Volume 2: Elephant Butte to Las Cruces, New Mexico. Earls, Amy C. 1987 Papers of the Maxwell Museum of Anthropology, no. 3. Albuquerque. 1992 Raiding, Trading, and Population Reduction among the Piro Pueblos, A.D. 1540 1680. In Current Research on th e Late Prehistory and Early History of New Mexico (Bradley J. Vierra, ed.): 11 19. New Mexico Archaeological Council Special Publication. Albuquerque Eckert, Suzanne L. 2006 The Production and Distribution of Glaze Painted Pottery in the Pueblo Southwes t: A Synthesis. In The Social Life of Pots: Glaze Wares and Cultural Dynamics in the Southwest, A.D. 1250 1680 ( Judith A. Habicht Mauche, Suzanne L. Eckert, and Deborah L. Huntley, eds.): 34 59, University of Arizona Press, Tucson.
88 Flint, Richard and Shirley Cushing Flint, eds. 2005 Documents of the Coronado Expedition, 1539 Southern Methodist University Press, Dallas. Habicht Mauche Judith A Suzanne L Eckert and Deborah L. Huntley ( eds. ) 2006 The Social Life of Pots: Glaze Wares and Cultural Dynamics in the Southwest, A.D. 1250 1680 University of Arizona Press, Tucson. Hammond, George P. and Agapito Rey 1953 Don Juan de Oate: Colonizer of New Mexic o 1595 1628 Coronado Cuarto Centennial Publications, vols. V and VI, edited by George P. Hammond. University of New Mexico Press, Albuquerque. 1966 The Rediscovery of New Mexico, 1580 1594; The Explorations of Chamuscado, Espejo, Castao de Sosa, Morlete and Leyva de Bonilla and Humaa Coronado Cuarto Centenial Publications, 1540 1940, vol. III, edited by George P. Hammond. University of New Mexico Press, Albuquerque. Hester, Thomas R. 1997 Field Methods in Archaeology Seventh Edition. Mayfield Pub lishing Company, Mountain View, California. Kidder, Alfred Vincent 1924 An introduction to the study of Southwestern archaeology with a preliminary account of the excavations at Pecos Y ale University Press, New Haven ( 1962 revised edition ) 1917 Notes on the Pottery of Pecos American Anthropologist 19(3): 325 60. Levine, Frances, and Joseph Tainter 1982 Historical and Archaeological Cultural Resource Overview of Central New Mexico Ms. On file, USDA Forest Service, Albuquerque, and USDI Bureau o f Land Management, Santa Fe. Liebmann, Matthew and M.S. Murphy ( eds. ) 2011 Enduring Conquests: Rethinking the Archaeology of Resistance to Spanish Colonialism in the Americas SAR Press, Santa Fe Lightfoot, Kent G. 1995 Culture Contact Studies: Redefining the Relationship between Prehistoric and Historical Archaeology American Antiquity 60(2): 199 217.
89 Lycett, Mark 1989 Spanish Contact and Pueblo Organization: Long term Implications of European Colonial Expansion in the Rio Grande Valley, New Mexico. In Columbian Consequences: Archaeological and Historical Perspectives on the Spanish Borderlands West ( David Hurst Thomas ed.): 115 125. Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington, D.C. Marshall, Mi chael P. 1987 Qualacu: Archeological Investigation of a Piro Pueblo U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, University of New Mexico/Office of Contract Archaeology. 1986 Archeological Investigations in a 16 th Early 17 th Century Piro Pueblo in the Village of Sa n Antonio, New Mexico With contributions by Janette Elyea, Betty Garrett, Steven James and Mollie Toll. Office of Contract Archeology, University of New Mexico Albuquerque Marshall, Michael P. and Henry J. Walt 1984 Rio Abajo: Prehistory and History of a Rio Grande Province New Mexico Historic Preservation Program, Santa Fe, New Mexico. Marshall, Michael P., Gosset, Bill J., Gosset, Cye, and Henry Walt 1981 New Mexico Historic Preservation Advance Notes No. 1: Archaeological Investigations in the R io Grande. Laboratory of Anthropology, Santa Fe, NM. Mera, H.P. 1943 An Outline of Ceramic Developments in Southern and Southeastern New Mexico. Laboratory of Anthropology Technical Series Bulletin No. 11 Santa Fe. 1940 Population Changes in the Rio Grande Glaze Paint Area. Laboratory of Anthropology Technical Series Bulletin No. 9 Santa Fe. 1933 A Proposed Revision of the Rio Grande Glaze Paint Sequence. Laboratory of Anthropology Technical Series Bulletin No. 8 San ta Fe. Morgan, Michle E. ( ed. ) 2010 Pecos Pueblo Revisited: The Biological and Social Context Cambridge, MA: Peabody Museum Press. Thomas E. Tolley and Heather J. Miljour 2003 Valverde, San Marcial, and Environs: An Evaluation of Five Archaeological Sites in the Middle Rio Grande Valley, Socorro County, New Mexico Technical Report 03 07. Statistical Research, Inc., Tucson, Arizona.
90 Preucel, Robert W. ( ed. ) 2002 Archaeologies of the Pueblo Revolt: Identity, Meaning, and Renewal in the Pueblo World. The University of New Mexico Press, Albuquerque, NM. Rubertone, Patricia E. 2000 The Historical Archaeology of Native Americans Annual Review of Anthropology Vol. 29: 425 46. Schroeder, Albert H. 1979 Pueblos Abandoned in Historic T imes. In Handbook of North American Indians, Volume 9: Southwest ( Alfonso Ortiz ed.): 236 254. William Sturtevant, general editor. Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C. Silliman, Stephen W. 2005 Culture Contact or Colonialism? Challenges in the Arc haeology of Native North America American Antiquity 70(1): 55 74. Simmons, Marc 1979 History of Pueblo Spanish Relations to 1821. In Handbook of North American Indians, Volume 9: Southwest ( Alfonso Ortiz ed.): 178 193. William Sturtevant, general edito r. Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C. 1991 The Last Conquistador: Ju an de Oate and the Settling of the Far Southwest University of Oklahoma Press, Norman and London. Trigger, Bruce G. 1980 Archaeology and the Image of the Native American American Antiquity 45(4): 662 76. Watkins, Joe 2001 Indigenous Archaeology: American Indian Values and Scientific Principles. AltaMira Press Wilcox, Michael 2009 The Pueblo Revolt and the Mythology of Conquest: An Indigenous Archaeology of Contact Univ. Calif. Press Berkeley. Wolf, Eric 1982 Europe and the People w ithout History Univ. Calif. Press, Berkeley.