In ruin No.4there is a similar series of bars, but in this instance they occur on the cliff wall back of the rooms. They are shown in figure 73.There are four bars or upright bands, done in white paint, and surmounted by four round dots or spots. To the left of the four bars, level with their tops, there is a small triangle, also in white. The bars are 30 inches long and 4 inches wide. The upper dots are nearly 2 feet above, the tops of the bars. It is evident that this figure was designed to be seen from a distance. Figure 74 shows some markings on the cliff wall back of ruin No.37.
markings on cliff wall
Fig. 74—Markings on cliff wall, ruin No. 37.A
Examples almost identical with those shown here are abundant in the Mancos ruins. It was probable they are of ceremonial rather than of decorative origin, and in this connection it may be stated that Mr Frank H. Cushing has observed in Zuñi the ceremony of marking the sides of a kiva hatchway with white bars closely resembling those shown infigure 73. This ceremony occurs once in four years, and the purpose of the marks is said to be to indicate the cardinal directions. In the ceremonials of the Pueblo Indians it is necessary to know where the cardinal points are; a prayer, for instance, is often addressed to the north, west, south, and east, and when such ceremonials were performed in a circular chamber some means by which the direction could be determined was essential.
decorative band on wall
Fig. 75—Decorative band in kiva in Mummy Cave ruin.Larger View
In the principal kiva in Mummy Cave ruin, however, there is a painted band on the front of the bench which appears to be really an attempt at decoration. Over the white there is a band 4 or 5 inches wide, consisting of a meander done in red. This is shown in figure 75, and in detail in figure 76. The design is similar to that used today. Its importance arises not so much from this as from the fact that it is difficult to regard this as other than ornamentation, and the Pueblo architect had not yet reached the stage of ornamented construction. The ruins in the Mancos canyon and the MesaVerdécountry obviously represent a later stage in development than those in De Chelly, yet nowhere in that region do we find the counterpart of the decoration in Mummy Cave kiva. Bands with points occur, sometimes on walls of rectangular rooms. One such is illustrated by Chapin,21who also shows a variety of the meander, treated, however, as a pictograph and without reference to its decorative value. Similar bands are shown also by Nordenskiöld,22but always with three points, instead of four, which were done in red. Figure 77 shows some pictographs somewhat resembling the Mancos examples. These occur at the point marked1on the map, in connection with a small storage cist already described.
No kiva has been found in De Chelly with a roof in place. Nearly all of them are inclosed in rectangular chambers, and it seems more than probable that the roofing of the kiva was simply the roofing of the inclosing chamber. As a rule the inclosing rectangular walls were erected at the same time as the kiva proper, and the outside of the inner circular wall was not finished at all. In a few instances the spacebetween the outer rectangular and inner circular wall was filled in solid, or perhaps was so constructed, but usually the walls are separate and distinct.
pictographs
Fig. 77—Pictographs in Canyon de Chelly.A
There are peculiar structures found in some of the ruins, whose use and object are not clear. Reference has already been made to them in the descriptions of several ruins, and for want of a better name they have been designated chimney-like structures. At the time that they were examined they were supposed to be new, and the first hypothesis formed was that they were abortive chimneys, but further examination showed that this idea was not tenable. Subsequently Nordenskiöld's book on the Cliff Dwellers of the Mesa Verde was published, and it appears therefrom that this feature is very common in the region treated; so common as to constitute the type.
Figure 78 is a plan of one of these structures which occurs in ruin No.15in Canyon de Chelly. This ruin has already been described in detail (page 118). The chimney-like structure is attached to a rectangular room with rounded corners, which is supposed to have been a kiva, and which was two stories high. Excavation revealed the floor level about 7½ feet below where the roof was placed. In the center of the south wall there is an opening 1.5 feet high and eighty-five one-hundredths of a foot (10.2 inches) wide. The south wall is built over a large bowlder, and a tunnel or opening passes under this to a rounded vertical shaft, about a foot in diameter, which opens to the air. This perhaps is better shown in the section (figure 79). At first sight this would appear to be a chimney, but there are several objections to the idea. The interior of the shaft is not blackened by smoke, and while the tunnel is somewhat smoke-stained, the deposit is not so pronounced as on the walls of the room. The front of the tunnel in the room has a lintel composed of a single stick about an inch in diameter, as shown in the section. The roof of the tunnel was the underside of the large bowlder mentioned, and the stick lintel was of no use except to show that no fire could have been built under it. Theroof of the southern end of the tunnel, where it opens into the shaft, is considerably lower than at the other end. The floor of the tunnel and the sides were smoothly plastered, but the plastering does not appear to have been subjected to the action of fire.
section of chimney-like structure
Fig. 79—Section of chimney-like structure in ruin 15.
The interior of the room, like the circular kivas already described, appears to have been plastered with a number of successive coats, all except the last being heavily stained by smoke. If the structure were a chimney, it was a dismal failure. The tunnel was made at the time the wall was erected, and passes under the bowlder over which the wall was built. A little east of the opening, inside the room, the bowlder shows through the wall, projecting slightly beyond its face.
Outside of the room the corner of the bowlder was chipped off, as shown on the plan, to permit the rounding of the shaft, the east, west, and south sides of which were built up with small pieces of stone, a kind of lining of masonry. There was also an outside structure of masonry, but how high above the ground it extended can not now be determined. A small fragment of this masonry is still left on the upper surface of the bowlder and is shown in the section.
Figure 80 is a plan of another example, which is attached to the circular kiva in ruin No.16. This ruin is described onpage 129. The kiva had an interior bench and the floor is 2 feet above its top. On the south side nearest the cliff edge the bench is interrupted to give place to a structure much like that described above. In this case, however, there was no convenient bowlder, and the roof of the tunnel has broken down so that the method of support can not be accurately determined. Probably it consisted of slabs of rock, as the span is small, and a number of large flat stones were removed from the tunnel in excavating.
The top of the tunnel is on the level of the top of the bench, as shown in figure 81, which is a vertical section. An inspection of the plan will show that the circular wall of the kiva is complete and that the inclosing rectangular wall was added later. The shaft was built at a still later period, and the line or junction marking its inner surface shows plainly in the interior of the tunnel. The general view of the ruin (plate LI) shows the exterior of the shaft, and the horizontal timbers on which the masonry is supported are shown inplate LII.
section of chimney-like structure
Fig. 81—Section of chimney-like structure in ruin No. 16
In front of the tunnel a flat piece of stone was placed on the floor, and in front of this again, about 2 feet from the mouth of the tunnel, there was an upright mass of masonry composed of stone and mud, and forming a curtain or screen before the opening. The original height of this structure was the same as that of the interior bench.
The inner surface of the rectangular inclosing wall is marked by a line in the interior of the tunnel. Inside of this line, toward the center of the kiva, the stones composing the wall are large; outside of it they are small. The interior plastering of the kiva is not smoke-blackened, but the coat next the surface is stained, as is also the third coat underneath. The interior of the tunnel is not much smoke-blackened, but it appears probable that part of its roof fell while the structure was still in use, as there are a number of little cavities in the masonry above its roof level filled with soot. A similar effect might result from leaks or cavities between the flat roofing stones. In excavating the tunnel a number of large lumps of clay were found in it, and there is no doubt that they formed part of the roof. Some of these had considerable quantities of grass mixed into them or stuck to the clay on one side. Apparently dry grass was used in the construction. A large fire could not have been built within the tunnel.
ground plan
Fig. 82—Plan of the principal kiva in Mummy Cave ruin.
The principal kiva in Mummy Cave ruin has an elaborate structure of the kind under discussion. Figure 82 shows a plan of this kiva, of which a general view has already been given (figure 75). The benchextended only partly around the interior, which had a continuous surface at the floor level, except on the southwest. At this point it is interrupted to give place to an elaborate chimney-like structure. Figure 83 is a general view.
chimney-like structure
Fig. 83—Chimney-like structure in Mummy Cave ruin.Larger View
The wall surface on the southern side of the kiva has been extended inward, as shown on the plan by a lighter shaded area. This was done at some period subsequent to the completion of the kiva, but whether it had any connection with the chimney-like structure could not be determined. The curtain or screen before the opening, which seems to be an invariable feature, is shown in both figures.
In this example the tunnel does not pass through the masonry as in those previously described, but occurs in the form of a covered trough, shown in the illustration with the covering removed. It occupies the middle third of a large recess in the main wall of the kiva, and is connected at its outer end with a vertical square shaft about a foot wide. This shaft is separated from the recess above the bench level by a wall only a few inches thick, composed of a single layer of stones. That portion of it which is above the tunnel is supported by a single round stick of wood, as shown in figure 83. The south or inner opening of the tunnel is reduced to two-thirds, of the width elsewhere by a framing composed of bundles of sticks bound together with withes and heavily coated with mud mortar. This was not placed flush with the inner face, but a few inches back, and the whole structure gives an effect of unusual neatness and good workmanship.
At various other points in the canyons examples of chimney-like structures occur, none, however, constructed on the elaborate plan of that last described. Two examples were found in the large rooms west of the tower in the central portion of Mummy Cave ruin, and these areespecially worthy of attention because they are attached to rectangular rooms, which there is no reason to suppose were kivas. The first room appears to have had a shaft only, without a niche or recess; the second room west of the tower had a recess and a rounded shaft, while the third-room had neither recess nor shaft.
The usual form of this feature is that shown infigures 80and81, and consists only of a tunnel and shaft. There are not many examples in the canyons: altogether there may be a dozen now visible, but excavations in the village ruins would doubtless reveal others. Except the two in Mummy Cave ruin last mentioned, and some doubtful examples to be described later, they occur always as attachments to kivas, never to houses. Some of them, like the Mummy Cave example, were certainly built at the same time as the kivas, of which they formed a part; others were added to kivas after those structures had been completed and used.
The kiva in Casa Blanca ruin (shown infigure 14) appears to have had an appendage of this sort, not constructed after the usual manner, but added outside the rectangular wall and composed of mud or adobe. At three other places in the lower ruin these structures are found, all constructed of mud or adobe and all attached to adobe walls. It isdoubtful whether these three examples should be classed with the preceding, but as they may have been used in the same manner they should be mentioned here. Another doubtful example occurs in the upper part of the same ruin and has already been described (page 110). It was constructed of stone at some time subsequent to the completion of the wall against which it rests.
Overtwenty agoMr W. H. Holmes found a structure in Mancos canyon which it now appears may be of this type. He illustrates it by a ground plan and thus describes it:
The most striking feature of this structure [ruin] is the round room, which occurs about the middle of the ruin and inside of a large rectangular apartment.... Its walls are not high and not entirely regular, and the inside is curiously fashioned with offsets and box-like projections. It is plastered smoothly and bears considerable evidence of having been used, although I observed no traces of tire. The entrance to this chamber is rather extraordinary, and further attests the peculiar importance attached to it by the builders and their evident desire to secure it from all possibility of intrusion. A walled and covered passageway of solid masonry, 10 feet of which is still intact, leads from an outer chamber through the small intervening apartments into the circular one. It is possible that this originally extended to the outer wall and was entered from the outside. If so, the person desiring to visit the estufa [kiva] would have to enter an aperture about 22 inches high by 30 wide and crawl in the most abject manner possible through a tube-like passageway nearly 20 feet in length. My first impression was that this peculiarly constructed doorway was a precaution against enemies and that it was probably the only means of entrance to the interior of the house, but I am now inclined to think this hardly probable, and conclude that it was rather designed to render a sacred chamber as free as possible from profane intrusion.23
In this example the tunnel was much larger than usual and the vertical shaft, if there were one, has been so much broken down that it is no longer distinguishable. Nordenskiöld mentions a considerable number of kivas with this attachment, and one which is described and figured is said to be a type of all the kivas in that region, but an inspection of his ground plans shows more kivas without this feature than with it. In his description of a small ruin in Cliff canyon he speaks of—
... a circular room still in a fair state of preservation. The wall that lies nearest the precipice is for the most part in ruins; the rest of the room is well preserved. After about half a meter of dust and rubbish had been removed, we were able to ascertain that the walls formed a cylinder 4.3 meters in diameter. The thickness of the wall is throughout considerable, and varies, the spaces between the points where the cylinder touches the walls of adjoining rooms24having been filled up with masonry. The height of the room is 2 meters. The roof has long since fallen in, and only one or two beams are left among the rubbish. To a height of 1.2 meters from the floor the wall is perfectly even and has the form of a cylinder, or rather of a truncate cone, as it leans slightly inward. The upper portion, on the other hand, is divided by six deep niches into the same number of pillars. The floor is of clay,hard, and perfectly even. Near the center is a round depression or hole, five-tenths of a meter deep and eight-tenths of a meter in diameter. This hole was entirely full of white ashes. It was undoubtedly the hearth. Between the hearth and the outer wall stands a narrow, curved wall, eight-tenths of a meter high. Behind this wall, in the same plane as the floor, a rectangular opening, 1 meter high and six-tenths of a meter broad, has been constructed in the outer wall. This opening forms the mouth of a narrow passage or tunnel of rectangular shape, which runs 1.8 meters in a horizontal direction and then goes straight upward, out into the open air. The tunnel lies under one of the six niches, which is somewhat deeper than the others. The walls are built of carefully hewn blocks of sandstone, the inner surface being perfectly smooth and lined with a thin, yellowish plaster. On closer examination of this plaster it is found to consist of several thin layers, each of them black with soot. The plaster has evidently been repeatedly restored as the walls became blackened with smoke. A few smaller niches and holes in the walls, irregularly scattered here and there, have presumably served as places of deposit for different articles; a bundle of pieces of hide, tied with a string, was found in one of them. The lower part of the wall, to a height of four-tenths of a meter, is painted dark red around the whole room. This red paint projects upward in triangular points, arranged in threes, and above them is a row of small round dots of red.... Circular rooms, built and arranged on exactly the same plan as that described above, reappear with exceedingly slight variations in size and structure in every cliff dwelling except the very smallest ones.... The number of estufas [kivas] varies in proportion to the size of the buildings and the number of rooms, ... [The ruin described contained two kivas.] ... The description of the first estufa applies in every respect to the second, with the single exception that the whole wall is coated with yellow plaster without any red painting. The wall between the hearth and the singular passage or tunnel described above is replaced by a large slab of stone set on end. It is difficult to say for what purpose this tunnel has been constructed and the slab of stone or the wall erected in front of it. As I have mentioned above, this arrangement is found in all the estufas.25
The general similarity between the kivas of De Chelly and those of the Mesa Verde region will be apparent from the above description. It should be added that in the section which accompanies it the roof of the tunnel appears to be supported by a series of small cross sticks, although no information on this point is afforded by the test. The examples which occur in De Chelly are apparently much ruder and more primitive than those of the Mancos, and only one of them approaches the latter in finish and elaboration.
In another place26Nordenskiöld mentions an example in which two small sticks were incorporated in the masonry of the upper part of the tunnel in a diagonal position. From this he rejects Holmes' explanation that the passageway was used as an entrance to the kiva, nor does he find the chimney hypothesis satisfactory. He states, further, that the use of this feature as a ventilator seems highly improbable. In one place he found the curtain or screen constructed not of masonry, but—
... of thick stakes, driven into the ground close to each other, and fastened together at the top with osiers. On the side nearest to the hearth this wooden screen was covered with a thick layer of mortar, probably to protect the timber from the heat.27
As stated elsewhere, the first hypothesis formed in the field as to the purpose of these chimney-like structures was that they were abortive chimneys, but this was found untenable. The next hypothesis, formed also in the field, was that they were ceremonial in origin and use, but why they should connect with the open air is not clear. If we could assume that they were ventilators, the problem would be solved, but it is a far cry from pueblo architecture to ventilation; a stride, as it were, over many centuries. Ventilation according to this method—the introduction of fresh air on a low level, striking on a screen a little distance from the inlet and being thereby evenly distributed over the whole chamber—is a development in house architecture reached only by our own civilization within the last few decades.
If the shaft and tunnel were in place, however, the screen might follow as a matter of necessity. Entrance to the kivas is always through the roof, a ceremonial requirement quite as rigidly adhered to today among the Pueblos as it was formerly among their ancestors. The same opening which gives access also provides an exit to the smoke from the fire, which is invariably placed in the center of the kiva below it. This fire is a ceremonial rather than a necessary feature, for in the coldest weather the presence of a dozen men in a small chamber, air-tight except for a small opening in the roof, very soon raises the temperature to an uncomfortable degree, and the air becomes so fetid that a white man, not accustomed to it, is nauseated in half an hour or less. Such are the conditions in the modern kivas of Tusayan. In the smaller structures of De Chelly they must have been worse. The fire is, therefore, made very small and always of very dry wood, so as to diminish as far as possible the output of smoke. Frank H. Cushing states that in certain ceremonials which occur in the kivas it is considered very necessary that the fire should burn brightly and that the flame should rise straight from it. If this requirement prevailed in De Chelly, a screen of some sort would surely follow the construction of a shaft and tunnel.
More or less smoke is generally present in the kivas when a fire is burning, notwithstanding the care taken to prevent it. That a similar condition prevailed in the kivas of De Chelly is shown by the smoke-blackened plaster of the interiors. In some cases there was a room over the kivas which must have increased the difficulty very much. There can be little doubt that the chimney-like structures were not chimneys, and no doubt at all that they did provide an efficient means of ventilation, no matter what the intention of the builders may have been. When we know more of the ceremonials of the Pueblo Indians, and when extensive excavations have developed the various types and varieties of these structures in the ruins, we may be able to determine their object and use.
It has often been stated concerning some given ruin or region that the traditions of the present inhabitants of the country do not reach them. In the case of Canyon de Chelly the same statement might bemade, for more than 99 Navaho in 100, when asked what became of the people who built the old houses in De Chelly, will state that a great wind arose and swept them all away, which is equivalent to saying that they do not know. There is a tradition in the Navaho tribe, however, now very difficult to get, as it is confined to a few of the old priests. It recites the occupancy of the canyon before the Navaho obtained possession of it, but, curiously enough, this period is placed after the Spanish invasion. It is even asserted that there were monks in De Chelly, and Mummy Cave, Casa Blanca, and one other ruin have been pointed out as the places where they were stationed. No version of this tradition definite and complete enough for publication could be obtained by the writer, but Dr. Washington Matthews, U.S.A., whose knowledge of Navaho myths and traditions is so great that it can almost be termed exhaustive, has obtained one and doubtless will publish it.
The Hopi or Moki Indians, whose villages are some three days' journey to the west, have also very definite traditions bearing on the occupancy of De Chelly.28This tribe, like others, is composed of a number of related clans who reached their present location from various directions and at various times; but, with a few exceptions, each of these clans claims to have lived at one time or another in Canyon de Chelly. How much truth there is in these claims can be determined only when the entire region has been examined and thoroughly studied. In the meantime it will probably be safe to assume that some, at least, of the ruins in De Chelly are of Hopi origin.
To understand the ruins so profusely scattered over the ancient pueblo country we must have some knowledge of the conditions under which their inhabitants lived. Were nothing at all known, however, we would be justified in inferring, from the results that have been produced, a similarity of conditions with those prevailing among the pueblo tribes, both formerly and now; and all the evidence so far obtained would support that inference. There is no warrant whatever for the old assumption that the "cliff dwellers" were a separate race, and the cliff dwellings must be regarded as only a phase of pueblo architecture.
More or less speculation regarding the origin of pueblo culture is the usual and perhaps proper accompaniment of nearly all treatises bearing on that subject. Early writers on the Aztec culture, aided by a vague tradition of that tribe that they came from the north, pushed the point of emigration farther and farther and still farther north, until finally the pueblo country was reached. Pueblo ruins are even now known locally as "Aztec ruins." Logically the inhabited villages should be classed as "Aztec colonies," and such classification was not unusual when the country came into the possession of the United States some fifty years ago.
As our knowledge of the pueblo culture increased, a gradual separation between the old and the new took place, and we have as an intermediate hypothesis many "Aztec ruins," but no "Aztec colonies." Finally, as a result of still further knowledge, the ruins and the inhabited pueblos are again brought together; several lines of investigation have combined to show the continuity of the old and the present culture, and the connection may be considered well established. But there is still a disposition to regard the cliff ruins as a thing apart. The old idea of a separate race of cliff dwellers now finds little credence, but the cliff ruins are almost universally explained as the results of extraordinary, primitive, or unusual causes.
The intimate relation between the savage and his physical environment has already been alluded to. Nature, or that part of nature which we term physical environment, enters into and becomes part of the life of the savage in a way and to an extent that we can hardly conceive. A change of physical environment does not produce an immediate change in the man or in his arts, but in time such must inevitably result. Twenty-five years ago the savage of the plains and the savage of the pueblo country were regarded as distinct races, "as different from each other as light is from darkness;" yet the differences which appeared so striking at first have become fewer and fewer as our knowledge of the Indian tribes increased, and those which remain today can almost all be attributed to a difference in physical environment.
Linguistic researches have shown the close connection which exists between the Hopi (Moki) and some of the plains (or so called "wild") Indians. There is no doubt that at the time of the Spanish discovery, some three hundred and fifty years ago, the Hopi were quite as far advanced as the other pueblo tribes, and the conclusion is irresistible that since it may reasonably be inferred that one tribe has made the change from a nomadic to a sedentary life, other tribes also may have done so. We may go even farther than this, and assume that a nomadic tribe driven into the pueblo country, or drifting into it, would remain as before under the direct influence of its physical environment, although the environment would be a new one. Granting this, and the element of time, and we will have no difficulty with the origin of pueblo architecture.
The complete adaptation of pueblo architecture to the country in which it is found has been commented on. Ordinarily such adaptation would imply two things—origin within the country, and a long period of time for development—but there are several factors that must be taken into consideration. If the architecture did not originate in the country where it is found it would almost certainly bear, traces of former conditions. Such survivals are common in all arts, and instances of it are so common in architecture that no examples need be cited. Only one of these survivals has been found in pueblo architecture, but that one is very instructive; it is the presence of circular chambers in groups of rectangular rooms, which occur in certain regions. These chambersare called estufas or kivas and are the council houses and temples of the people, in which the governmental and religious affairs of the tribe are transacted. It is owing to their religious connection that the form has been preserved to the present day, carrying with it the record of the time when the people lived in round chambers or huts,
In opposition to the hypothesis of local origin it might be stated that there is no evidence of forms intermediate in development. The oldest remains of pueblo architecture known are but little different from recent examples. But it must be borne in mind that pueblo architecture is of a very low order, so low that it hardly comes within a definition of architecture as an art, as opposed to a craft. Except for a few examples, some of which have already been mentioned, it was strictly utilitarian in character; the savage had certain needs to supply, and he supplied them in the easiest and most direct manner and with material immediately at hand. The whole pueblo country is covered with the remains of single rooms and groups of rooms, put up to meet some immediate necessity. Some of these may have been built centuries ago, some are only a few years or a few months old, yet the structures do not differ from one another; nor, on the other hand, does the similarity imply that the builder of the oldest example knew less or more than his descendant today—both utilized the material at hand and each accomplished his purpose in the easiest way. In both cases the result is so rude that no sound inference of sequence can be drawn from the study of individual examples, but in the study of large aggregations of rooms we find some clues.
The aggregation of many single rooms into one great structure was produced by causes which have been discussed. It must not be forgotten that the unit of pueblo construction is the single room, even in the large, many-storied villages. This unit is often quite as rude in modern work as in ancient, and both modern and ancient examples are very close to the result which would be produced by any Indian tribe who came into the country and were left free to work out their own ideas. Starting with this unit the whole system of pueblo architecture is a natural product of the country in which it is found and the conditions of life known to have affected the people by whom it was practiced.
Granting the local origin of pueblo architecture it would appear at first sight that a very long period of time must have elapsed between the erection of the first rude rooms and the building of the many-storied pueblos, yet the evidence now available—that derived from the ruins themselves, documentary evidence, and traditions—all suggest that such was not necessarily the case. As a record of events, or rather of a sequence of events, tradition, when unsupported, has practically no value; but as a picture of life and of the conditions under which a people lived it is very instructive and full of suggestions, which, when followed out, often lead to the uncovering of valuable evidence. The traditions of the pueblo tribes record a great number of movements ormigrations from place to place, the statements being more or less obscured by mythologic details and accounts of magic or miraculous occurrences. When numbers of such movements are recorded, it is safe to infer that the conditions dictating the occupancy of sites were unstable or even that the tribes were in a state of slow migration. When this inference is supported by other evidence, it becomes much stronger, and when the supporting evidence becomes more abundant, with no discordant elements, the statement may be accepted as proved until disproved.
The evident inferiority of the modern pueblos to some of the old ruins has been urged as an argument against their connection. While degeneration in culture is yet to be proved, degeneration of some particular art under adverse conditions, such as war, continued famine, or pestilence, is not an uncommon incident in history, and it can be shown that under the peculiar conditions which prevailed in the pueblo country such degeneration would naturally take place. One of the peculiarities of pueblo architecture is that its results were obtained always by the employment of the material immediately at hand. In the whole pueblo region no instance is known where the material (other than timber) was transported to any distance; on the contrary, it was usually obtained within a few feet of the site where it was used. Hence, it comes about that difference in character of masonry is often only a difference in material. Starting with a tribe or several tribes of plains Indians, who came into the pueblo country, we should probably see them at first building houses such as they were accustomed to build—round huts of skin or brush, perhaps partly covered with earth, such as were found all over middle and eastern United States. Supposing the tribe to have been not very warlike in character and subsisting principally by horticulture, these settlements would necessarily be confined to the vicinity of springs and to little valleys where the crops could be grown. The general character of the country is arid in the extreme, and only in favored spots is horticulture possible. In a very short time these people would be forced to the use of stone for buildings, for the whole country is covered with tabular sandstone, often broken up into blocks and flakes ready for immediate use without any preparation whatever. Timber and brush could be procured only with difficulty, and often had to be carried great distances.
It has been suggested that the rectangular form of rooms might have been developed from the circular form by the crowding together upon restricted sites of many circular chambers; but such a supposition seems unnecessary. A structure of masonry designed to be roofed would naturally be rectangular; in fact, the placing of a flat roof upon a circular chamber was a problem whose solution was beyond the ability of these people, as has already been shown. Along with this advance, or perhaps preceding it, the social organization of the tribe, or its division into clans and phratries, would manifest itself, and those who "belong together" would build together. This requirement was a very common one and was closely adhered to even a few years ago.
Although degeneration in arts is common enough, a peculiar condition prevailed in the pueblo region. So far as the architecture was concerned war and a hostile human environment produced not degeneration but development. This came about partly by reason of the peculiarities of the country, and partly through the methods of war. The term war is rather a misnomer in this connection, as it does not express the idea. The result was not brought about by armed bodies of men animated by hostile intentions or bent on extermination, although forays of this kind are too common in later pueblo history, but rather by predatory bands, bent on robbery and not indisposed to incidental killing. The pueblos, with their fixed habitations and their stores of food, were the natural prey of such bands, and they suffered, just as did, at a later period, the Mexican settlements on the Rio Grande, with their immense, flocks of sheep. It was constant annoyance and danger, rather than war and pitched battles.
The pueblo country is exceptionally rich in building material suited to the knowledge and capacity of the pueblo builders. Had suitable material been less abundant, military knowledge would have developed and defensive structures would have been erected; but as such material could be obtained everywhere, and there was no lack of sites, almost if not quite equal to those occupied at any given time, the easiest and most natural thing to do was to move. Owing to the nature of the hostile pressure, such movements were generally gradual, not en masse; although there is no doubt that movements of the latter kind have sometimes taken place.
These conclusions are not based on a study of the ruins in Canyon de Chelly alone, which illustrate only one phase of the subject, but of all the pueblo remains, or rather of the remains so far as they are now known. They imply a rather sparsely settled country, occupied by a comparatively small number of tribes and subtribes, moving from place to place under the influence of various motives, some of which we know, others we can only surmise. It was a slow but practically constant migratory movement with no definite end or direction in view. The course of this movement in a geographical way does not as yet reveal a preponderance in any one direction; tribes and subtribes moved from east to west and from west to east, from north to south and from south to north, and many were irregular in their course, but the movements, so far as they can now be discerned, were all within a circumscribed area.
There is no evidence of any movement from without into the pueblo group, unless the close relation of the Hopi (Moki) language to the other Shoshonean dialects be such evidence, and none of a movement from within this area out of it, although such movements must have taken place, at least in the early history of the region. It must be borne in mind in this discussion that while we can assign approximate boundaries to the ancient pueblo region on the north, east, and west, no limit can as yet be fixed on the south. The arid country southward of Gila river and northward of the Mexican boundary would be a greatobstacle to a movement either north or south, but little as we know about that region we do know that it was not an insurmountable obstacle. The Casas Grandes of Janos, in Chihuahua, closely resemble the type of ruins on the Gila river, in Arizona, of which the best example we now have is the well-known Casa Grande ruin. We know that there are cliff ruins in the Sierra Madre, but beyond this we know little. Concerning the immense region which stretches from Gila river to the valley of Mexico, over 1300 miles in length, we know practically nothing.
In that portion of the pueblo region lying within the United States migratory movements have, as a rule, been confined to very small areas, each linguistic family moving within its own circumscribed region. Some instances of movement away from the home region have taken place even in historic times, as, for example, the migration of a considerable band of Tewas from the Rio Grande to Tusayan, where they now are, and moreover, this movement probably occurred en masse and over a considerable distance; but there is little doubt that the usual procedure was different.
Canyon de Chelly was occupied because it was the best place in that vicinity for the practice of horticulture. The cliff ruins there grew out of the natural conditions, as they have in other places. It is not meant that a type of house structure developed here and was transferred subsequently to other places. When the geological and topographical environment favored their construction, cliff outlooks were built; from a different geological structure in certain regions cavate lodges resulted; in other places there were "watch towers;" in still others single rooms were built, either lone or in clusters, and these results obtained quite as often if not oftener within the historic period as in prehistoric times.
Notwithstanding the possible division of the De Chelly ruins into four well defined types, there is no warrant for the assumption of a large population. The types are interrelated and to a large extent were inhabited not contemporaneously but conjointly. There are about 140 ruins in Canyon de Chelly and its branches, but few of them could accommodate more than a very small population. Settlements large enough to furnish homes for 50 or 60 people were rare. As not all of the sites were occupied at one time, the maximum population of the canyon could hardly have exceeded 400; it is more likely to have been 300.
The character of the site occupied is one of the most important elements to be studied in the examination of ruins in the pueblo country. In De Chelly whatever defensive value the settlements had was due to the character of the sites selected. It is believed, however, that other considerations dictated the selection of the sites, and that the defensive motive, if present at all, exercised very little influence in this region. The sites here are always selected with a view to an outlook over some adjacent area of cultivable land, and the structures erected on them were industrial or horticultural, rather than military or defensive.
The masonry of the ruins and the constructive expedients employed by the builders are an insurmountable obstacle in the way of the hypothesis that the cliff ruins represent a primitive or intermediate stage in the growth of pueblo architecture. The builders were well acquainted with the principles and methods of construction employed in the best work found in other regions; the inferiority of their work is due to special conditions and to the locality. The presence of a number of extraneous features, both in methods and principles employed, is further evidence in the same line. These features are certainly foreign to this region, some of them suggest even Spanish or Mexican origin, which implies comparatively recent occupancy.
The openings—doorways and windows—found in the ruins are of the regular pueblo types. They are arranged as convenience dictated, without any reference to the defensive motive, which, if it existed at all, exercised less influence here than it did in the modern pueblos. There is no evidence of the use of very modern features, such as the paneled wooden doors found in the pueblos; nor, on the other hand, are there any very primitive expedients or methods—none which can not be found today in the modern villages.
The roof, floors, and timber work are also essentially the same as the examples found in the modern pueblos. The notable scarcity of roofing timbers in the ruins can probably be explained by the hypothesis of successive occupancies and subsequent or repeated use of material difficult to obtain. So far as regards the use of timber as an element of masonry construction the results obtained in De Chelly are rude and primitive as compared with the work found in other regions.
The immense number of storage cists found in De Chelly are a natural outgrowth of the conditions there and support the hypothesis that the cliff outlooks were merely farming shelters. The small size of many of the settlements made the construction of storage cists a necessity. The storage of water was very seldom attempted. A large proportion of the cists found in De Chelly were burial places and of Navaho origin. As a rule they are far more difficult of access than the ruins.
There is no evidence of the influence of the defensive motive. Defensive works on the approaches to sites are never found, nor can such influence be detected in the arrangement of openings, in the character of masonry, or in the ground plan. If the cliff ruins were defensive structures, an influence strong enough to bring about the occupancy of such inconvenient and unsuitable sites would certainly be strong enough also to bring about some slight modifications in the architecture, such as would render more suitable sites available. If we assume that the cliff ruins were farming outlooks, occupied only during the farming season, and then only for a few days or weeks at a time, the character of the sites occupied by them, seems natural enough, for the same sites are used by the Navaho today in connection with farming operations.
The distribution of kivas in the ruins of De Chelly affords another indication that the occupancy of that region was quiet and little disturbed,and that the ruins were in no sense defensive structures. Kivas are found only in permanent settlements, and the presence of two or three of them in a small settlement comprising a total of five or six rooms implies, first, that the little village was the home of two or more families, and, second, that there was comparative if not entire immunity from hostile incursions. If the conditions were otherwise, these small settlements would have combined into larger ones, as was done in other regions. Probably these small settlements with several kivas mark a late period in the use of outlying sites. The position of the kivas in some of the settlements on defensive sites, and their arrangement across the front of the cove, suggest that such sites were first used for outlooks, and that their occupancy by regular villages came at a later period.
All of the now available traditions of the Navaho and of the Hopi Indians support the conclusions reached from a study of the intrinsic evidence of the ruins, that they represent a comparatively late period in the history of pueblo architecture. It appears that some at least of the ruins are of Hopi origin. It is certain that the ruins were not occupied at one time, nor by one tribe or band.
As criteria in development or in time the cliff ruins are valueless, except in a certain restricted way. They represent simply a phase of pueblo life, due more to the geological character of the region occupied than to extraordinary conditions, and they pertain partly to the old villages, partly to the more modern. Apparently they reached their greatest (not their highest) development in the period immediately preceding the last well-defined stage in the growth of pueblo architecture, a stage in which most of the pueblos were at the time of their discovery by the Spaniards, and in which some of them are now. Reliance for defense was had on the site occupied, and outlying settlements for horticultural purposes were very numerous, as they must necessarily be also in the last stage—the aggregation of many related villages into one great cluster.
The cliff outlooks in Canyon de Chelly and in other regions, the cavate lodges of New Mexico and Arizona, the "watch towers" of the San Juan and of the Zuñi country, the summer villages attached to many of the pueblos, the single-room remains found everywhere, even the brush shelters or "kisis" of Tusayan, are all functionally analogous, and all are the outgrowth of certain industrial requirements, which were essentially the same throughout the pueblo country, but whose product was modified by geological and topographical conditions. In the cliff ruins of De Chelly we have an interesting and most instructive example of the influence of a peculiar and sometimes adverse environment on a primitive people, who entered the region with preconceived and, as it were, fully developed ideas of house construction, and who left it before those ideas were brought fully in accord with the environment, but not before they were influenced by it.
1.Thirty-first Congress, first session, Senate Ex. Doc. No. 64, Washington, 1850.
2.Western Wilds, and the Men who Redeem Them: Cincinnati, Philadelphia, Chicago, Memphis, 1878.
3.U.S. Geog. Surveys West of the 100th Meridian, Lieutenant George M. Wheeler in charge; reports, vol. VII, Archæology; Washington, 1879, pp. 372-373, pl. xx.
4.Bull. Am. Geog. Soc., 1886, No. 4; Ancient Habitations of the Southwest, by James Stevenson.
5.Century Magazine, October, 1890, vol. XL, No. 6, p. 806 et seq.
6.U.S. Geol. Survey, F. V. Hayden in charge; 10th Ann. Rept. (for 1876), Washington, 1878.
7.The Land of the Cliff Dwellers, by Frederick H. Chapin; Boston, 1892.
8.Bull. Am. Geog. Soc., vol. XXIII, No. 4, 1891; The Cliff Dwellings of the Cañons of the Mesa Verde.
9.The Cliff Dwellers of the Mesa Verde, by G. Nordenskiöld; Stockholm and Chicago, 1894.
10.See Major C. E. Dutton's map of the plateau country in 6th Ann. Rept. U.S. Geol. Survey, pl. xi. His report on "Mount Taylor and the Zuñi plateau," of which this map is a part, presents a vivid picture of the plateau country, and his descriptions are so clear and expressive that any attempt to better them must result in failure. The statement of the geologic and topographic features which is incorporated herein is derived directly from Major Dutton's description, much of it being taken bodily.
11.Arch. Inst. of America, 5th Ann. Rept., p. 55; and Arch. Inst. of America, Papers, American series, IV, p. 27.
12.See a paper by the author on "Aboriginal remains in Verde valley, Arizona," in 13th Ann. Rept. Bureau of Ethnology, p. 179 et seq.
13.The Cliff Dwellers of the Mesa Verde, pp. 9 and 114.
14.Bull. Am. Geog. Soc., vol. xxiii, p. 598.
15.Land of the Cliff Dwellers, pp. 149-150, pl. opp. p. 155.
16.Cliff Dwellers of the Mesa Verde, pp. 52-53, fig. 28.
17.8th Ann. Rept. Bur. Eth., "A study of Pueblo architecture in Tusayan and Cibola," by Victor Mindeleff; Washington, 1891.
18.Wheeler Survey Reports, vol. VII, Archæology, p. 327.
19.Cliff Dwellers of the Mesa Verde, p. 63, fig. 36.
20.Loc. cit., figs. 6 and 7, pp. 15-16.
21.Land of the Cliff Dwellers, illustration, pp. 143, 152.
22.Cliff Dwellers of the Mesa Verde, figs. 6, 7, 76, 77, and 78.
23.10th Ann. Rept. U.S. Geol. and Geog. Survey of the Territories, F. V. Hayden in charge (Washington, 1878); report on the "Ancient ruins of Southwestern Colorado," by W. H. Holmes; p. 395, pl. xxxvii.
24.In the ground plan given there is no point shown where the walls of the kiva touch adjoining rooms.
25.Cliff Dwellers of the Mesa Verde, pp. 15-17, figs. 6 and 7.
26.Loc. cit., p. 32.
27.Loc. cit., p. 70.
28.A résumé of the Hopi traditions was prepared by the writer from material collected by the late A. M. Stephen, and published as chapter iii of "A study of Pueblo architecture," op. cit.