THE VOLCANO VISTA HIGH SCHOOL SITE Excavations at LA 134636 on the West Mesa of Albuquerque,

Bernalillo County, New Mexico

Office of Contract ArcheologyUniversity of New Mexico

Alexander Kurota

THE VOLCANO VISTA HIGH SCHOOL SITE EXCAVATIONS AT LA 134636 ON THE WEST MESA

OF ALBUQUERQUE, BERNALILLO COUNTY, NEW MEXICO

Alexander Kurota

With sections by William T. Brown, Pamela J. McBride, Yuichi Nakazawa, and F. Scott Worman

Other contributions from Rebecca Melsheimer

Graphics by

Ronald L. Stauber and Adrienne T. Actis

Production by Barbara L. Daniels

Prepared for Charles O. Atwood Real Estate Director

Albuquerque Public Schools Lincoln Complex

915 Locust Street SE P.O. Box 25704

Albuquerque, NM 87125-0704 (505) 765-5950, ext. 265

NMCRIS Activity No. 98916

CPRC Archaeological Excavation Permit No. NM-06-117AE

Submitted by Richard C. Chapman, Principal Investigator

Office of Contract Archeology MSC07 4230

1 University of New Mexico 1717 Lomas Blvd. NE

Albuquerque, NM 87131-0001 Tel: 505) 277-5853; Fax: (505) 277-6726

OCA/UNM Report No. OCA-185-871

November 2006

i

ABSTRACT

This report presents the results of archeological investigations at the Volcano Vista High School Site, LA 134636, located on the West Mesa of Albuquerque on land owned by Albuquerque Public Schools encompassing 120 acres bounded by the borders of Section 16, T11N, R2E (Los Griegos 1981 7.5’ USGS Quadrangle) on the east and south, by Town of Alameda Grant boundary on the north, on the west by a line roughly 100 m west of the alignment of Atrisco Road. The proposed project will involve ground disturbance related to construction of a high school facility, including buildings, landscaping, parking areas, and associated access roads, utility corridors, and stormwater runoff facilities within that tract.

Five archeological sites (LA 124474, LA 134634, LA 134635, LA 134636, and LA 134637) are located in the general vicinity of the proposed high school construction. Of these, LA 134636 will be adversely affected by proposed construction. The initial assessment stated that the site was a fieldhouse associated with the Anasazi Pueblo IV. The OCA excavations revealed that the fieldhouse consisted of a ramada structure containing a fire hearth and several associated pit features, a concentration of basalt clasts that probably once formed a dry-laid windbreak wall, and an associated lithic and ceramic artifact scatter. In addition to the Pueblo IV occupation, an earlier component, about 12 m south of the fieldhouse and dating to the late Archaic period, was also discovered during this undertaking.

Archeological excavations were conducted at LA 134636 between February 20 and 24, 2006 with follow-up visits on March 7 and April 11-12, 2006, under Archaeological Excavation Permit No. NM-06-117AE granted by the New Mexico Cultural Properties Review Committee (permit application submitted in January 2006).

It is believed that sufficient data recovery activity has been conducted at the site to adequately retrieve information of importance to the prehistory contained within the physical remains of the site. It is recommended that construction be allowed to proceed at the APS West Side High School facility.

ii

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

The author of this report would like to thank Mr. Charles Atwood and the Albuquerque Public Schools for funding this project. Archeologist George Arms provided us with preliminary reports of Parsons Brinckerhoff’s recent surveys and excavation projects on the West Mesa. These materials provided useful perspectives on the archeology of the region. University of New Mexico anthropology professor, Bruce Huckell, has been instrumental not only as an invaluable resource for the archeology on the West Mesa, but also as a highly experienced field archeologist. Bruce pointed out a feature inside the excavation area, which, without his insight, may have gone unnoticed.

A professional team consisting of OCA field archeologists and staff brought this investigation project into its final reporting phase. In particular, my appreciation goes to the excavation crew (Adrienne Actis, Scott Worman, Yuichi Nakazawa, and Colleen Strange) for their experience, hard work, and good spirit in the field. Special thanks also go to the professional analysts (Yuichi Nakazawa, Pam McBride, Bill Brown, and Scott Worman) for their expertise and enthusiasm during the analysis of recovered materials. Adrienne Actis also digitized sketched feature plan views and profile drawings. Using Adobe Photoshop, Ron Stauber adjusted the artifact illustrations, prepared the cover page, and added final touches to all figures. Rebecca Melsheimer produced artifact tables using OCA’s Microsoft Access database developed by Dorothy Larson. The OCA computer programmer, Adel Saad, recently upgraded our desktops and, whenever needed, provided fast and reliable computer service. Lou Romero, the OCA Laboratory Manager, built new excavation screens and prepared our field supplies. Barbara Daniels provided extensive editing skills and Donna K. Lasusky facilitated the report production. Dick Chapman, the project’s Principal Investigator, offered experienced advice, guidance, and friendly support throughout the project. I also thank the office’s senior staff members Patrick Hogan and Peggy Gerow for their advice and support. The significance of the scientific results presented herein is a testament to the effort provided by the above listed team of professionals. Any errors that may surface in this volume should be attributed to the author.

iii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1 Introduction...................................................................................................................................... 1

2 Environment..................................................................................................................................... 3 Geology and Soils ..................................................................................................................... 3 Climate ...................................................................................................................................... 3 Vegetation ................................................................................................................................. 3 Fauna ......................................................................................................................................... 4

3 Previous Research and Pre-field Records Check............................................................................. 5

4 Cultural History ............................................................................................................................... 7 Paleoindian Period..................................................................................................................... 7 Archaic Period........................................................................................................................... 7 Basketmaker III–Pueblo I (Early Developmental) Period......................................................... 8 Pueblo II (Late Developmental) Period..................................................................................... 8 Pueblo III (Coalition) Period ..................................................................................................... 8 Pueblo IV (Classic) Period ........................................................................................................ 8 Pueblo I (Historic) Period.......................................................................................................... 9

5 Research Goals .............................................................................................................................. 11

6 Methods ......................................................................................................................................... 13

7 Excavation Results......................................................................................................................... 15 Study Unit 1 ............................................................................................................................ 18 SU 1: Distribution of Artifacts......................................................................................... 26 Study Unit 2 ............................................................................................................................ 28 Study Unit 3 ............................................................................................................................ 28

8 Lithic Analysis by Yuichi Hakazawa ............................................................................................. 31 Spatial Distribution of Lithic Artifacts.................................................................................... 31 Attribute Recording................................................................................................................. 31 Lithic Artifacts from Study Unit 1 (Pueblo IV Component)................................................... 32 Classes of Artifacts ........................................................................................................... 32 Lithic Raw Materials ........................................................................................................ 32 Lithic Artifacts from Study Unit 3 (Late Archaic Component) .............................................. 34 Classes of Artifacts ........................................................................................................... 34 Lithic Raw Materials ........................................................................................................ 36 Comparison of Pueblo IV and Late Archaic Lithic Assemblages........................................... 37 Core Reductions................................................................................................................ 37 Raw Material Use ............................................................................................................. 39 Size and Form of Flake Blanks......................................................................................... 39 Edge Damage on Chipped Stone Tools ............................................................................ 40 Discussion and Conclusions.................................................................................................... 41

9 Ceramic Analysis ........................................................................................................................... 43 Analysis Methods .................................................................................................................... 43 Ceramic Typology................................................................................................................... 43 Rio Grande Glazeware...................................................................................................... 43 Utility Ware ...................................................................................................................... 45 Temper Analysis...................................................................................................................... 45 Chronology.............................................................................................................................. 46

iv

TABLE OF CONTENTS (concluded)

Ceramic Assemblage............................................................................................................... 46 Modified Sherds................................................................................................................ 46 Discussion and Summary ........................................................................................................ 47

10 Faunal Analysis by William T. Brown ........................................................................................... 49

11 Farming on Albuquerque’s West Side: Archeobotanical Analysis of Flotation and Macrobotanical Samples by Pamela J. McBride ........................................................................ 51

Introduction ............................................................................................................................. 51 Methods................................................................................................................................... 51 Macrobotanical Sample Analysis ............................................................................................ 51 Flotation Samples .................................................................................................................... 52 Flotation Processing.......................................................................................................... 52 Scan Analysis.................................................................................................................... 52 Quantification ................................................................................................................... 52

Results of Flotation and Macrobotanical Analysis.................................................................. 53 Summary and Conclusions...................................................................................................... 54

12 Soil Description and Interpretation by F. Scott Worman ............................................................... 57 Methods................................................................................................................................... 57

Results ..................................................................................................................................... 57 Discussion ............................................................................................................................... 57 Conclusions ............................................................................................................................. 60

13 Summary and Conclusions ............................................................................................................ 61

References Cited...................................................................................................................................... 63

v

LIST OF FIGURES

1 Project area.......................................................................................................................................... 2 2 LA 134636: Sandia Mountains in background. ................................................................................. 4 3 LA 134636: Map. ............................................................................................................................. 12 4 Feature 1 and SU 1: Prior to excavation; pinflags mark surface artifacts (view to northwest)........ 13 5 OCA archeologists excavating features and collecting soil samples. ............................................... 14 6 SU 1: Excavated features and exposed basalt rocks (Feature 1) ...................................................... 16 7 SU 1: Soil profile–1 x 1 m grid square in southeast corner (view to east)....................................... 18 8 Feature 3: Oxidation stain ................................................................................................................ 19 9 Feature 5: Plan view and profile ...................................................................................................... 20 10 Features 5 and 6: After excavation (view to northwest) .................................................................. 22 11 Feature 6: Plan view and profile ...................................................................................................... 22 12 SU 1: Plan views and cross-sections of excavated postholes (Features 4, 7, 8, and 10)................. .23 13 Feature 9: Trash pit–plan view and profile ...................................................................................... 24 14 Feature 11: Plan view and profile .................................................................................................... 25 15 Feature 11: Excavated hearth (view to north) .................................................................................. 25 16 Ramada-type shelter: Masonry windbreak/activity area on sandy knoll (view to northwest) ......... 28 17 Feature 12: Plan view and profile .................................................................................................... 30 18 SU 3: Distribution of lithic artifacts................................................................................................. 30 19 SU 1: Pueblo IV lithic artifacts: (a) chert side-notched projectile point; (b) obsidian reworked

side-notched projectile point; (c) yellow chalcedony sidescraper; and (d) green quartzite hammerstone showing signs of battering and abrasions on ridges of flake scars ............................. 34

20 SU 3: Late Archaic lithic artifacts: (a) chalcedony side-notched projectile point, black inclusions (probably En Medio); (b) chalcedony scraper; (c) quartzite utilized flake; (d) yellow chalcedony proximal elongated flake or blade; and (e) complete elongated quartzite flake ............ 37

21 SU 3: Unidirectional chert core with three refitting flakes .............................................................. 38 22 SU 1: Examples of ceramics recovered: (a) San Clemente Glaze-polychrome bowl rim

sherd; (b) San Lazaro Glaze-polychrome bowl rim sherd; (c) glaze-on-red disk with ground edge; and (d) glaze-on-red polygon with ground edge...................................................................... 44

23 SU 1: Post-excavation, with old playa and volcanoes in background (view to southwest) ............. 62

vi

LIST OF TABLES

1 Depth of Excavated Auger Tests and Location of Tests from West to East ..................................... 16 2 LA 134636: List of Features Investigated........................................................................................ 17 3 SU 1: Distribution of Lithic Artifacts .............................................................................................. 27 4 SU 1: Distribution of Ceramics........................................................................................................ 27 5 SU 1: Distribution of Faunal Bone................................................................................................... 27 6 SU 1: Frequency of Artifact Classes by Raw Material Types ......................................................... 33 7 SU 1: Frequency of Raw Material Types......................................................................................... 33 8 SU 1: Frequency of Artifacts by Cortex Type ................................................................................. 33 9 SU 3: Frequency of Artifact Classes by Material Types.................................................................. 35 10 SU 3: Frequency of Raw Material Types......................................................................................... 35 11 SU 3: Frequency of Artifacts by Cortex Types................................................................................ 35 12 SU 1 and SU 3: Comparison of Frequency of Artifact Classes ....................................................... 37 13 SU 1 and SU 3: Comparison of Frequency of Raw Material Types ................................................ 39 14 SU 1 and SU 3: Frequency of Different Edge-Damage Observed on Chipped Stone Tools ........... 40 15 Pueblo IV Component: Vessel Forms Identified by Ceramic Type................................................. 43 16 Temper Identified in Individual Ceramic Types ............................................................................... 45 17 Pueblo IV Component: Ceramics Recovered from Archeological Context..................................... 46 18 Pueblo IV Component: Summary of Minimum Number of Individual Vessels .............................. 47 19 LA 134636: Distribution of Animal Bone ....................................................................................... 49 20 LA 134636: Flotation Sample Summary ......................................................................................... 52 21 LA 134636: Flotation Scan Carbonized Plant Remains................................................................... 53 22 LA 134636: Flotation Scan Wood Charcoal by Count and Weight in Grams. ................................ 54 23 LA 134636: Vegetal Sample Wood Charcoal and Plant Remains ................................................... 55 24 LA 134636: Soil Descriptions.......................................................................................................... 58

1

11 INTRODUCTION

This report documents the results of archeological investigations at the Volcano Vista High School Site, LA 134636, which is a small late Archaic/Pueblo IV site located on the West Mesa of Albuquerque. In September 2004 Albuquerque Public Schools (APS) contacted the Office of Contract Archeology, University of New Mexico (OCA/UNM) to perform an assessment of cultural resources located within a tract of land targeted for future construction of Volcano Vista High School facility on Albuquerque’s West Mesa. The parcel was then owned by the New Mexico State Land Office (NMSLO) and encompassed 120 acres bounded on the east and south by the borders of Section 16, T16N, R2E (Los Griegos 1981 7.5’ USGS Quadrangle), on the north by the Town of Alameda Grant boundary, and on the west by a line roughly 100 m west of the alignment of Atrisco Road (Figure 1). The proposed APS project would involve ground disturbance related to construction of the high school facility including buildings, landscaping, parking areas, and associated access roads, utility corridors, and stormwater runoff facilities.

The assessment re-documented five archeological sites (LA 124474, LA 134634, LA 134635, LA 134636, and LA 134637) located in the general vicinity of the proposed school construction (Chapman and Estes 2004). APS proceeded with design of a construction plan incorporating results of this assess-ment, and at the same time continued negotiations to acquire the property from the NMSLO. The final construction plan was developed to avoid impacts to all of the previously recorded sites except LA 134636, which lies in the immediate vicinity of the proposed development. The LA 134636 site area is encompassed by a rectangle within Township 11 north, Range 2 east in Section 16 of Los Griegos (1981) 7.5’ USGS Quadrangle between Zone 13 UTM coordinates of 342010E–342100E and 3893820N and 3893860N.

In anticipation that the site would require excavation to mitigate the adverse effects of construction, a data recovery plan was prepared and submitted in January 2006 (Kurota 2006) to obtain an Archaeological Excavation Easement from the NMSLO. This easement was granted in February 2006 (Archaeological Excavation Easement AE-117). At the same time, the New Mexico Cultural Properties Review Commit-tee authorized the data recovery plan (Archaeological Excavation Permit No. NM-06-117AE). During the time between submittal of the data recovery plan for review and granting of the excavation permits, ownership of the parcel was transferred from the NMSLO to APS; consequently, fieldwork and analysis were conducted under the CPRC permit rather than the NMSLO Excavation Easement.

Archeological excavation fieldwork was conducted at LA 134636 between February 21 and 24, 2006, with additional revisits on March 7 and April 11-12, 2006. The OCA/UNM field crew consisted of archeologists Alexander Kurota, Adrienne Actis, Scott Worman, Yuichi Nakazawa, and Colleen Strange.

This report presents the final results of the field excavations, analyses of artifacts, animal bone, flotation samples, and macrobotanical remains. Our conclusions and interpretations are offered in the Summary section of this volume.

2

Figure 1 Project area. Redacted for public use

3

22 ENVIRONMENT

The project area is located on the West Mesa of Albuquerque in the Middle Rio Grande region of central New Mexico. Elevations range from 5550 feet on the mesa top and 5150 feet below the mesa.

GEOLOGY AND SOILS

The geology of the Rio Grande Rift System, which includes Albuquerque’s West Mesa, is described by Kelley (1952), Joesting et al. (1961), and others. A more detailed description of the local geology is pro-vided by Kelley and Kudo (1978). These authors have provided a baseline reference for the summary of the area’s geology presented below.

Numerous large basins have formed in an approximately north-south axis along the middle Rio Grande basin. The project area is located within the southernmost Albuquerque-Belen basin. The Albuquerque Basin is a large Tertiary sedimentary formation, which is bordered by the Hubbell Springs fault and the Sandia Uplift to the east and the Ignacio Monocline, the Puerco Platform, and the Lucero Uplift to the west (Joestig et al.1961).

West Mesa is a residual sedimentary formation positioned between Rio Grande and Rio Puerco valleys and north of their confluence. Fault lines in the mesa top were associated with considerable volcanic activity. Hence, a large portion of the mesa is covered by relatively impervious volcanic basalt caprock.

Hacker (1977: Sheet Number 9) identified numerous soil units that vary with respect to age and parent material. Of these, four soils (Alameda sandy loam, Madurez loamy fine sand, Madurez-Wink associa-tion, and Bluepoint loamy-fine sand) are predominant in the general vicinity of the project area. These soils correspond with extensive dunes at the western end of the project area, low southeast-northeast dune ridges, the gravelly surface of the Llano, and the sandy or rocky slopes around the volcanoes.

CLIMATE

LA 134636, located in the area of semiarid climate, receives 8-9 inches of annual precipitation (Cordell 1978:11, Map 4; Hacker 1977:96). The growing season averages 180 days in the Albuquerque District for frost-sensitive plants, such as corn (Cordell 1978:146, Map 5). Wind action is strong on West Mesa, particularly at the base of the escarpment where deep dune deposits have formed.

VEGETATION

As a result of residential development on the mesa top, native vegetation is gradually retreating and new, often non-native plants are being introduced in the residential complexes. Of the native plants recorded on the mesa top (Spellenberg 1979), the most common are snakeweed (Gutierrezia sarothrae), grama grass (Boutelou asp.), sand dropseed (Sporobolus spp.) and galleta grass (Hilaria sp.). Less frequently observed plants include Indian rice grass (Oryzopsis hymenoides), sand sage (Artemisia filifolia), feather peabush (Dalea formosa) and vetch (Astragalus sp.). Finally, plants such as prickly pear (Opuntia spp.), yucca (Yucca sp.), Mormon tea (Ephedra viridis), Russian thistle (Salsola kali), desert mallow (Spheralcea sp.), and four-wing saltbush (Atriplex canescens) appear in small quantities (Figure 2).

4

Figure 2 LA 134636: Sandia Mountains in background.

FAUNA

Animal species commonly found on the mesa top include cottontail rabbit (Sylvilagus auduboni), black-tailed jackrabbit (Lepus Californicus), and ground squirrel (Sphermophillus sp.); mule deer (Odocoileus hemionus) and antelope (Antilocapra americana) can be found further northwest. Prairie and diamond-back rattlesnakes (Crotalus viridis and taro) are also very common in the mesa top. Birds include mourning dove (Zenaida macroura), quail (Callipella sp.), and burrowing owl (Athene cunicularia) (Rodgers 1978:9; Schmader 1986:22). Large numbers of banner-tailed kangaroo rat (Dipodomys spectabilis Merriam) and other close but unidentified species of lizards, mice, snakes, and ravens were observed during a recent monitoring project conducted in the area by the author.

5

33 PREVIOUS RESEARCH AND PRE-FIELD RECORDS CHECK

On January 18, 2006, an online search of the New Mexico Cultural Resource Information System (NMCRIS) was performed to evaluate the extent of archeological projects conducted in this part of West Mesa. The search revealed that, due to the extensive urban and housing development in the area, a signi-ficant number of surveys have been performed within the past three decades. Important among these are large block surveys conducted in the immediate vicinity of LA 134636.

In 1978 reconnaissance survey of 2120 acres in “The Volcanoes” area (less than 0.5 miles west of LA 134636) performed by the School of American Research (Whitmore 1978) resulted in the discovery of 16 sites. Most of these were of ancestral Pueblo origin.

During the same year, the Center for Anthropological Studies conducted an intensive survey of 1520 acres of La Boca Negra Park located about 1.3 miles south of LA 134636 (Rodgers 1978). This survey resulted in the discovery of 22 archeological sites and 700 petroglyphs. Most of these loci are affiliated with the Pueblo IV Anasazi period of occupation, although sites with remains of historic sheep corrals were also found. Rogers suggests that all documented sites reflect non-permanent, intermittent use of the region. The Boca Negra Park is located less than 1 km west of Indian Petroglyph State Park.

Schmader (1986) conducted survey of 830 acres of the Piedras Marcadas Arroyo area located about 1 mile east of LA 134636. This inventory resulted in the discovery of 18 sites of which 4 date to the historic and 14 to the prehistoric period. Based on the presence of Rio Grande Glazeware ceramics and occasional rock alignments or petroglyph features, Schmader suggests that at least 9 of the prehistoric sites were occupied during Pueblo IV. The other prehistoric sites are typified by lithic scatters and lithic and ceramic artifact scatters, and some are also associated with collapsed rock walls. The discovery of a handful of isolated Archaic tools and projectile points in the Piedras Marcadas Arroyo region indicates that some of the lithic scatters may date to the Archaic period.

In 1992–1994, Brandi (1999) conducted a survey of 3513 acres of West Mesa’s Petroglyph National Monument. This large block survey resulted in the documentation of 232 archeological sites.

A large portion of the topography on top of West Mesa alternates between ancient gravel terraces and low to moderately pronounced sand dunes. Small lithic scatters and Pueblo IV ceramic artifact scatters have been observed in the area during survey or testing projects (Actis and Chapman 2006; Schmader 1990). Some of these loci consist exclusively of lithic concentrations positioned on top of the gravel bars and terraces. It is possible these loci may represent lithic procurement sites that date to the Archaic period. Actis and Chapman (2006) report on two fire-cracked rock features possibly associated with such artifact scatters. Nevertheless, few studies concerning these artifact concentrations and the associated rock features have so far been performed on top of the West Mesa area. Studies of similar lithic assemblages on top of gravel terraces have been performed elsewhere in the Albuquerque region. Schmader (1985) analyzed such a lithic assemblage on the opposite (east) side of Rio Grande. The author argues that these and similar gravel terraces were a useful source of river-worn cobbles suitable for manufacture of preforms. The lack of a sufficient number of tools at these locales led the author to speculate that some tools were probably manufactured at these gravel terraces but used at other locations. Such locations may have been used for testing different lithic materials and likely were revisited over a long period of time (Schmader 1985:27–28).

In the summer of 2005, Parsons and Brinckerhoff conducted testing and excavations at eight sites along the area proposed for the construction of Paseo del Volcan between Unser Boulevard and Iris Road in Rio Rancho. The preliminary report of this undertaking documents the discovery of charcoal and ash stains and/or fire-cracked rock in buried contexts at five of the eight sites investigated (Raymond 2005).

6

The online search of the NMCRIS records revealed the presence of nine previously documented sites within Section 16, Township 11 north, Range 2 east. Of these, LA 124474 has recently undergone exten-sive archeological and geomorphological investigations by the UNM Maxwell Museum of Anthropology and the University of New Mexico (Huckell 2002a, 2002b, 2003). LA 124474 is a Paleoindian Folsom campsite that was occupied about 11,000–10,000 years ago. Excavations at LA 124474 have recovered over 900 artifacts and numerous fragments of bison tooth enamel. Based on the nature of the stone tool assemblage along with the site’s close proximity to a nearby playa lake bed, the Boca Negra Wash site is interpreted as a bison procurement and butchering locus.

The remaining sites in the area were discovered during a thematic survey of State Trust Lands, which was also conducted by the UNM Maxwell Museum of Anthropology in 2001 (Huckell 2002c). These sites (LA 134634, LA 134635, LA 134636, and LA 134637) are affiliated with the prehistoric Pueblo occupa-tion and are represented by ceramic and lithic scatters and remnants of small masonry structures probably representing agricultural field houses. In 2004, OCA relocated and redocumented the four Pueblo sites (Chapman and Estes 2004).

LA 134634 is a lithic scatter and six basalt stone features. Four of the features are rock alignments of indeterminate origin, and two are rock circles probably from the recent historic period. Based on the presence of a projectile point and glazeware ceramics, the site was originally recorded as having both Archaic and Anasazi Pueblo IV components. The site is thought to represent a small limited use and agricultural locus. It was recommended as eligible for the inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places under Criterion d of 36CFR60.4.

LA 134635 is an Anasazi Pueblo IV field house, a rock enclosure, and a lithic and ceramic artifact scatter. Huckell’s (2002c) in-field artifact analysis suggests the site was occupied during the Glaze I or Glaze II period (which correspond to Glaze A and Glaze B). The subsequent visit to the site by OCA revealed the presence of two Glaze D rims sherds (Chapman and Estes 2004). LA 134635 is probably a small agricultural locus that was occupied on a short-term or a seasonal basis. The site was recommended as eligible for the inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places under Criterion d of 36CFR60.4.

LA 134636 is also an Anasazi Pueblo IV site exhibiting a rock concentration and a sparse lithic and ceramic artifact scatter. The presence of one glazeware sherd and one utility ware sherd points to a Classic period of occupation. LA 134636, an agricultural field house, was probably occupied on a short-term basis. The site was recommended as eligible for the inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places under Criterion d of 36CFR60.4.

LA 134637 consists of a rock alignment, a rock pile, and a sparse lithic artifact scatter. The reduction technology observed on individual flakes indicates an ancestral Puebloan occupation. The site was recommended as eligible for the inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places under Criterion d of 36CFR60.4.

7

44 CULTURAL HISTORY

The prehistory of the southwestern region of the United States is commonly discussed in three basic chronological periods: Paleoindian, Archaic, and Puebloan. Each of these subdivisions represents a different cultural adaptation established during a different time period. Scholars have offered overviews on the prehistory of the region. General discussions of human adaptative strategies in the project area are presented in Cordell (1978), Stuart and Gauthier (1981), and Tainter and Levine (1987). Detailed summaries for the Paleoindian period have been produced by Judge (1973) and for the Archaic period by Irwin-Williams (1973). These synthetic works have provided the basis for the following discussion.

PALEOINDIAN PERIOD

The climatic conditions and the human occupation of this region have been known only from sparse records. This is largely because, until recently, little research attempting to reconstruct the paleoenvironment has been done in or near the project area. The Paleoindian period began during the Late Pleistocene when the local climate was cooler and wetter. Such conditions supported a grassland environment with many species of now extinct megafauna (Raymond et al. 2004). The presence of the Pleistocene megafauna attracted small bands of nomadic hunters and gatherers to this area. Intended to kill and butcher these large mammals, the Paleoindian stone tool technology was typified by finely made spear points, knives, and hide scrapers. In the Southwest, Paleoindian is subdivided into the Clovis (10,000–9000 BC), Folsom (9000–8000 BC), and Plano (8000–55000 BC) complexes (Irwin Williams 1979). Each complex is distinguished by a specific projectile point style and associated artifact assemblages. Although rare in the middle Rio Grande Valley, Clovis sites are commonly interpreted as kill and butchering loci associated with mammoth and other extinct Pleistocene megafauna. Similarly, Folsom sites were probable kill and butchering sites but these are also associated with extinct bison. Sites belonging to the Plano Complex can be further subdivided as follows, based on their artifact assemblages and projectile point styles: Plainview, Firstview, Agate Basin, Hell Gap, Alberta, Cody, and Frederick.

Judge’s (1973) survey of the Middle Rio Grande Valley documented 59 Paleoindian sites representing the human occupation of the area throughout the entire span of the Paleoindian period. Another major work on the Paleoindian adaptive strategies was done at the Rio Rancho Folsom site (Dawson and Judge 1969), the first excavated Paleoindian locus in the middle Rio Grande Valley region.

In recent years, significant knowledge of Paleoindian adaptive strategies has been gained through new research projects in the region. Currently, several Folsom sites are known to exist on the West Mesa of Albuquerque (Brandi 1993; Huckell 2002c, 2002a, 2003). The best known of these is the Boca Negra Wash site (LA 124474) excavated by the University of New Mexico (Huckell 2002a, 2002b). Aside from the Paleoindian stone tools, excavations also revealed a small number of bison tooth enamel fragments. Following the Boca Negra Wash site excavations, Huckell (2002c) performed a survey of 1129 acres of New Mexico State Trust Land in the vicinity of Albuquerque Volcanoes. The survey resulted in the discovery of two Paleoindian sites and two isolated occurrences with Paleoindian projectile points. The locations of the newly discovered sites near playas correspond well with Judge’s assumption (1973) that playas were closely associated with the occupation of the Paleoindian sites.

ARCHAIC PERIOD

The Archaic is marked by the shift from reliance on a predominantly hunting subsistence to an economy in which a wide variety of plant and animal resources were procured. This transition is usually attributed to a large-scale climatic changes and the extinction of megafauna. The change in subsistence strategies is reflected in tool assemblages associated with gradually smaller and smaller projectile points and the intro-duction of ground-stone tools. Archaic sites are typified by more diverse artifact assemblages, which reflect utilization of a greater variety of floral and faunal resources across the landscape.

8

Based on the work in the Arroyo Cuervo area west of Albuquerque, Irwin-Williams (1973:4-12) has defined the temporal framework for the Archaic in northwestern New Mexico as the Oshara Tradition. This tradition consists of six phases: Jay (5500–4800 BC); Bajada (4800–3200 BC); San Jose (3200–1800 BC); Armijo (1800–800 BC); En Medio (800 BC–AD 400); and Trujillo (AD 400–600). These phases reflect successive adaptations by human populations engaged in a hunting and gathering subsistence pattern to fluctuating climatic conditions, gradually increasing regional population sizes, and in the later periods, to an increasing reliance upon agricultural production of foodstuffs. The Oshara Tradition En Medio phase is generally believed to be equivalent to Basketmaker II in the Pecos Classification.

BASKETMAKER III–PUEBLO I (EARLY DEVELOPMENTAL) PERIOD

Two temporal classification schemes have been developed to characterize Southwestern prehistoric cultural developments following the Archaic period. The earliest one is the Pecos Classification (Kidder 1927), which proposes a series of periods termed Basketmaker II, Basketmaker III, and Pueblo I through Pueblo V. Each of these periods is defined both temporally and in terms of the associated technology and architecture believed to characterize the time period. This classification has been widely used throughout the Southwestern US. The second classification relates primarily to the Rio Grande Valley region and was developed by Wendorf (1954) and Wendorf and Reed (1955) to better reflect the sequence of cultural developments in this region. This scheme identifies the Developmental, Coalition, and Classic periods, which roughly correspond with the Pecos Classification time span.

The Basketmaker III-Pueblo I period (AD 1–900), is defined by new innovations, such as the use of ceramics, bow-and-arrow hunting, significant reliance on agricultural production, and construction of year-round habitations (pithouses) and associated storage facilities. The prevalence of cists, pits, and ceramic containers to store surpluses of wild plants and cultigens indicates that agriculture began to play an increasingly more important role between the late Archaic (or Basketmaker II) and Basketmaker III. This change is reflected in more permanent occupation sites typified by pithouse structures (Cordell 1978); the period is generally referred to in the Rio Grande Valley as the Early Developmental.

PUEBLO II (LATE DEVELOPMENTAL) PERIOD

Pueblo II or the Late Developmental period (AD 900–1200) is characterized by increased diversity in architecture and elaboration of styles of ceramic vessel manufacture. In addition to common pit houses with formal floor features, aboveground unit pueblo structures began to be used as residential units. The ever-growing reliance on agricultural plants resulted in moving the settlements closer to the fertile floodplains or near the confluences of major drainages. West of the Rio Grande Valley, aggregation of populations into large settlements emerged at Chaco Canyon and the surrounding area of the San Juan Basin. In the Rio Grande region the size of communities remained relatively small (Cordell 1978).

PUEBLO III (COALITION) PERIOD

A demographic shift to increasingly aggregated settlement took place during Pueblo III (AD 1200–1300) in the regions west of the Rio Grande. This shift seems to have involved the restructuring of economic networks and, near the end of the period, overt evidence of conflict and abandonment of some communi-ties. The middle Rio Grande Valley area experienced an increased use of adobe style roomblock archi-tecture, which began to replace the traditional pit structure residences. Evidence indicates that an influx of population from the western regions began to occupy the Pajarito Plateau region as early as the late 1100s (Biella and Chapman 1977), and in other areas large Pueblo III period pueblos were established on the first terraces above Rio Grande. The presence of trade ware ceramics at Pueblo III sites suggests an increase in trade relations with neighboring or distant regions (Cordell 1978).

PUEBLO IV (CLASSIC) PERIOD

The most dramatic changes of the Anasazi cultural sequence took place during Pueblo IV (AD 1300–1600). At this time, the settlements in the San Juan Basin and the Mesa Verde region experienced a significant decrease in population, which was ultimately followed by the abandonment of the territory and

9

resettling to the Rio Grande Valley and other areas such as Hopi and Zuni. The Classic period in the Rio Grande Valley is marked by new and even larger communities and an elaboration of material culture. Evidence of this elaboration is seen in the glaze-paint pottery, stone effigies, and kiva murals. Additionally, most of the petroglyphs along the escarpment of Albuquerque’s West Mesa are believed to have been made during this period. Schaafsma and Schaafsma (1974) believe that these petroglyphs relate to the introduction of the Katchina cult. Large aggregated settlements were formed in the Ojo Caliente and Chama valleys; the Pajarito Plateau; the La Bajada scarp (Los Aguajes, La Cienega, La Cieneguilla, and La Bajada Pueblo); the Sangre de Cristo Mountains (Arroyo Hondo Pueblo); the Galisteo Basin (San Marcos, Pueblo Blanco, Galisteo Pueblo, Pueblo She, Paa-Ko, San Cristobal and others); in the Sandia and Manzano mountains (Sandia, Tijeras, Abo, Gran Quivira); and in the Middle Rio Grande Valley (Kuaua, Corrales, Santiago, Puaray, Alameda, and Calabacillas Pueblo).

PUEBLO V (HISTORIC) PERIOD

The beginning of the historic period in the Rio Grande Valley is marked by the arrival of the Coronado expedition to the region in AD 1540. At this time, the Pueblo populations were largely aggregated into a few, very large settlements. Spanish contact with the native cultures resulted in a large-scale movement of the indigenous people and the destruction of many pueblos. European diseases were introduced, which contributed to the decimation of numbers in the native population. In 1598, almost a half a century later, a large contingent of Spanish military and administrative settlers established a capital near San Juan pueblo (relocated to Santa Fe in 1602) and began to construct missions to Christianize the local populations. Encomiendas granting rights to native labor and products were given to Spanish colonists, who constructed haciendas near existing Pueblo villages. With the increased number of the Spanish enco-miendas in the region, unrest among the native people grew stronger and culminated in 1680 with the Pueblo Indian Revolt, which resulted in expulsion of all Spanish settlers from the region by the Pueblo people and their allies. The Spanish regained the control of the region in 1692 through an expedition led by Don Diego de Vargas. The reconquest of the territory led to new and even stronger decimation and Christianization of the native tribes (Fugate and Fugate 1989).

The earliest Albuquerque settlements began to grow shortly after the reconquest of the area in 1706, during the Spanish Colonial period. The Spanish administrative policy replaced the encomiendas with a system of land grants given both to Pueblo Indians and Spanish settlers. As a result, numerous small towns were settled by the colonists along the banks of the Rio Grande in Albuquerque’s North Valley between the area known today as the Old Albuquerque to the south and Alameda Boulevard to the north. Towns such as Alameda, Los Ranchos, Los Poblanos, Los Griegos, Los Gallegos, Los Garcias, and Los Candelarias were formed and occupied from the early eighteenth through the early twentieth centuries. The farming advantages of the valley land led to settlement of the areas by Hispanic people in or near the former locations of the native pueblos (Sargeant 1987:45), while the lands of the project area on top of Albuquerque’s West Mesa appear to have had less intensive use.

Industrially manufactured goods from the East began to appear in New Mexico with the advent of the Santa Fe Trail trade beginning in 1820; and the region was linked to the expanding transcontinental railroad network in 1880. In addition to fostering trade in eastern produced manufactured goods, the railroad was integral to the exploitation of the state’s natural resources such as timber, coal, and minerals. The early part of the twentieth century in the New Mexico territory was marked by steadily increasing mercantile and ranching activities. During the later half of the twentieth century, the West Mesa area experienced a booming housing business, primarily in present-day Rio Rancho to the north of the project area. In this vast area, formerly rangeland, many thousands of house lots have been sold to an influx of new migrants from all sectors of the United States (Raymond et al. 2004).

10

11

55 RESEARCH GOALS

Based on the presence of Rio Grande Glazewares and one gray utility sherd, LA 134636 has been ten-tatively dated to Pueblo IV (Classic) period; therefore, research questions guiding the data recovery plan related to the Anasazi period of occupation in this region. Despite the fact that numerous Pueblo IV field house sites are scattered throughout the Albuquerque and middle Rio Grande region, reports on excavated structures are relatively sparse in this geographic zone. This is due to the fact that comprehensive work on Pueblo IV sites has largely been limited to regional surveys and testing projects rather than intensive excavation programs (Brandi 1993; Doleman 1989; Huckell 2002c; Rodgers 1978; Schmader 1986, 1988, 1990); however, more extensive excavations have been conducted in nearby locales.

One such project was conducted during OCA/UNM’s Cochiti Reservoir Project (Biella and Chapman 1977; Chapman and Biella 1979; Biella and Chapman 1979). Survey and excavation conducted for the Cochiti Reservoir Project showed that, during Pueblo IV, a shift from dispersed small Pueblo III communities to aggregation into large residential Pueblo IV (Classic) villages took place throughout the northern Rio Grande region. It is argued that Pueblo IV was characterized by a bimodal residence pattern in which winter occupation took place in the main pueblo villages, while the local populations dispersed during the spring through fall seasons to engage in hunting, gathering, and agricultural pursuits. This notion was supported by documentation of numerous small masonry field house structures, campsites, or open-sided shelter sites scattered throughout the Cochiti Reservoir study area. The constructed rooms were either fully or partially enclosed semisubterranean or aboveground masonry structures typically associated with a fire pit or a slab-lined hearth. Other small sites consisted of open campsites or were sites with one or two masonry wing walls enclosing a habitation area often associated with a hearth.

The interpretive model of seasonal bimodal residence during Pueblo IV has been supported by the 2003–2004 excavations for the Camel Tracks Data Recovery program conducted on top of La Bajada Mesa (Gerow and Hogan 2005; Gerow and Kurota 2004), where 20 masonry field houses and windbreak struc-tures similar to those in the Cochiti Reservoir area were excavated. Some of these temporary residential units were found in association with one or two hearths, while others had no thermal features. Gerow (2005:235) points out that the close proximity of these structures to large Pueblo IV villages (La Ciene-guilla, Los Aguajes, La Cienega, and La Bajada) indicates that La Bajada Mesa field facilities probably were used by residents of one or more of these pueblo villages. Kludt’s (2005) recent survey of the Santa Fe Canyon Ranch revealed that similar Pueblo IV masonry field houses were also used in the area south of La Bajada Mesa.

Based on the previous visits to LA 134636, buried cultural deposits were suspected to be present in the stone rubble (Feature 1) and possibly in the rock concentration (Feature 2) (Figure 3). Excavating these contexts promised to answer the following research questions:

(1) What was the purpose of the occupation of LA 134636; what subsistence activities took place there?

(2) What domesticated and/or non-domesticated food resources were procured at LA 134636?

To address these questions, all charred remains of organic matter (both plant and faunal) found in buried contexts were collected for laboratory analysis and soil samples were collected from feature contexts for flotation processing. Additionally, all recovered stone tools were being examined to identify the range of activities undertaken at LA 134636, with an emphasis placed on determining whether some tools were used in butchering and processing fauna. This analysis is based on the results of experimental use-wear replication studies conducted during the 1975–1977 Cochiti Reservoir Project (Chapman and Schutt 1977:88–93) employing locally available stone materials. Others have demonstrated that different use functions can be identified on stone tools through microscopic examination of utilized edges (Keeley 1980; Tringham et al. 1974). Ceramics recovered from the excavations were being examined to assess the minimum number of individual vessels that may have been used during the occupation of Feature 1.

12

Figure 3 LA 134636: Map.

(3) What was the primary (and perhaps secondary) function of the suspected masonry room at LA 134636? How long was this feature occupied? Is there evidence for repeated use of this dwelling?

Previous excavations of Pueblo IV field houses revealed that various construction techniques were employed to serve different functions or for seasonal use. Dry-laid masonry was the common construc-tion style found at open sites in the Cochiti Reservoir area (Chapman et al. 1977) and on La Bajada Mesa. More substantial structures made of basalt clasts with mud and chinking have also been found on La Bajada Mesa (Gerow 2005:227-9, Table 20.1) and in the Cochiti Reservoir project area. Determinations as to why structures were built on the surface or were constructed as semisubterranean facilities offer clues to the season of intended use. It has been suggested that other structures (e.g., Feature 1 at LA 131812) may have served multiple purposes, e.g., storage and shelter (Gerow 2005:254). Wilcox (1978:30) argues that some field houses may have played a role in maintaining social boundaries. As noted by Ruscavage-Barz (2002:84), only ambiguous evidence for the symbolic role of such structures may be recovered from excavations.

Architectural elements, e.g., amount of rock used for the construction; position of the structure floor in relationship to the occupational surface; presence (or absence) of hearth; presence of ceramic containers; and the remains of agricultural and non-agricultural foodstuffs, were examined in answering this question.

13

66 METHODS

The first step of fieldwork involved flagging all surface artifacts in the vicinity of the site and photo-graphing the two previously identified rock features (Figure 4). A topographic site map was produced using a Topcon GTS-220 Electronic Distance Measurement (EDM) unit and a TDS Ranger data collector. Subsequently, all surface artifacts were piece-plotted, and an excavation grid consisting of 1 x 1 m units (aligned on magnetic north) was laid out over the stone rubble (Feature 1). Prior to the beginning of excavations, all basalt elements visible on the surface or partially buried in the sediment were sketched on graph paper. This master plan map was then used during the excavation process with each archeologist sketching additional rocks upon the completion of work in every 1 x 1 m unit. All units were excavated in arbitrary 10-cm levels. Concurrent with excavations, a north-facing profile of the sediment inside the feature was mapped on graph paper. Any features encountered were first defined in plan, after which one half of the feature fill was removed to obtain a profile view of the fill. These profiles were sketched on graph paper, and the second half of the feature was excavated. In most cases, all feature fill was collected for flotation analysis (Figure 5). A sample of the fill was collected for flotation from larger features (e.g., Features 3 and 9). Cross-sectional drawings were made of features (e.g., postholes) that were too narrow to offer a profile view. Excavated sediments were screened through 1/8-inch mesh. Artifacts, charcoal, faunal, and botanical samples were provenienced by 10-cm levels within each 1 x 1 m square. In addition to scaled drawings, thorough documentation of excavated features and grid units was maintained through narrative description and photographs. A final count of all artifacts and samples collected was made at the OCA laboratory. Subsequently, the artifacts were washed and soil samples were processed through flotation.

Figure 4 Feature 1 and SU 1: Prior to excavation; pinflags mark surface artifacts (view to northwest).

14

Figure 5 OCA archeologists excavating features and collecting soil samples.

15

77 EXCAVATION RESULTS

LA 134636, located in an area of the gently rolling sand dunes of Albuquerque’s West Mesa, consists of two components: a small Pueblo IV field house facility and a deflated late Archaic camp. The site was discovered during a thematic survey focused on locating Paleoindian sites (Huckell 2002c) and was subsequently visited and re-documented by OCA in October 2004. The general physiographic setting of the site is a relatively flat and open area with sandy deposits often mixed with basalt clasts. Natural basalt bedrock intermittently protrudes to the surface at different locations in the immediate vicinity. Shallow playas have formed in areas of sunken bedrock.

The northwest/southeast–running bladed road located about 25 m west of the site boundary originally functioned as a maintenance two-track for a PNM natural gas pipeline, which runs parallel with the road on its eastern side. This road is now a bladed thoroughfare linking Unser Blvd. with the Paradise Hills development to the north. A broad playa about 150 m west of the bladed road was the locus of Paleo-indian bison procurement as represented by the archeological remains at LA 124474. The mesa top has a moderately dense grass or shrub cover, which includes Indian rice grass, sage, saltbush, and wolfberry. The site also has small number of cacti, including prickly pear and cholla, and yucca are scattered throughout the area. Occasional modern trash dumps are found along the bladed road. Isolated junipers are seen in the landscape. LA 134636 is located on the western toe slope of a low dune rising less than one meter above the surrounding terrain.

LA 134636 (now called the Volcano Vista High School Site) was originally characterized as a concentration of stone rubble and a smaller rock feature associated with a sparse distribution of lithic and ceramic artifacts. A concentration of basalt rubble located in the eastern part of the site (Feature 1) was interpreted during survey as the remains of a collapsed masonry field house. A 1 x 1 m grid array designated as SU 1 encompassing 43 sq m was placed over the rubble concentration. Excavation revealed that the basalt rubble comprising Feature 1 was eroded such that no original rock wall or rock alignment could be observed. Instead, most of the rocks were found out of their original context and appeared to have tumbled down the west-facing erosional slope to the west of the excavation area.

In addition to the basalt rubble, nine features were found within the limits of SU 1: Feature 3–an oxidized patch of sand; Feature 5–a probable ash disposal pit; Feature 6–a possible food preparation/processing pit; Feature 9–a trash pit, and Feature 11–a fire pit. Features 4, 7, 8, and 10 were small but relatively deep pits located at the perimeter of the area occupied by the other features. These four smaller pits, roughly rectangular in outline, probably represent postholes for an ephemeral ramada that may have stood above the cluster of pit features (Figure 6). Feature 2, located approximately 35 m west of Feature 1, was a much smaller basalt rock concentration of unknown origin (Chapman and Estes 2004:9–10). A 1 x 1 m grid (SU 2) was excavated within Feature 2. The investigation revealed that the basalt elements originated from a natural bedrock vein protruding to the ground surface and were not cultural in origin.

No artifacts were found on the surface in the 35-m wide area between the two rock features. This part of LA 134636 was auger-tested for possible subsurface cultural deposits that may have been buried in the loose sand. Using a hand-turned auger with a 3-inch diameter bucket, a total of 20 bore holes were excavated in two parallel rows running roughly in an east-west direction about 5 m apart. Each row consisted of 10 auger tests placed at 4-m intervals. No artifacts, charcoal, or other cultural material was recovered during auger testing. In addition to testing for buried cultural deposits, the evenly spaced auger tests also aided in learning more about the depth of sand deposits between Features 1 and 2. Testing revealed that the soil accumulation thins out dramatically toward the west of the remnant sand dune upon which Feature 1 is located. Deposits within 3 m of SU 1 are up to 80 cm deep and overlie basalt bedrock. Auger tests excavated further to the west toward Feature 2 revealed that these deposits thinned out to depths as little as 10 cm (Table 1).

16

Figure 6 SU 1: Excavated features and exposed basalt rocks (Feature 1).

Table 1 Depth of Excavated Auger Tests and Location of Tests from West to East.

West East Auger Test No. 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 Depth, soft deposits 20 cm 30 cm 20 cm 45 cm 45 cm 40 cm 45 cm 60 cm 80 cm 80 cm

Auger Test No. 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Depth, soft deposits 20 cm 10 cm 15 cm 60 cm 30 cm 30 cm 30 cm 45 cm 30 cm 100 cm

During the course of excavation, a small concentration of surface artifacts (SU 3) was found about 20 m south of Feature 1. SU 3 was tested for subsurface deposits in a 1 x 1-m test square. While no evidence of cultural features or subsurface deposits was found, preliminary inspection of the lithics recovered from SU 3 indicated technological attributes that differed from those of the Pueblo IV materials in SU 1. For this reason, an additional 42 m2 of sediment were excavated within SU 3 to look further for possible features or traces of human occupation buried in this area. Although this effort yielded only one small feature of possible cultural origin, more than 250 lithic artifacts were recovered from SU 3 deposits. One

17

late Archaic projectile point collected from this context suggests the locus dates to the late Archaic. The lack of cultural sediments or a meaningful stratum break (which would indicate a possible occupation surface) suggests this locus was in a deflated context. The features excavated are summarized in Table 2.

Table 2 LA 134636: List of Features Investigated.

Dimensions Fea. #

SU #.

Feature Type length

(cm) width (cm)

depth (cm)

Ro-dent Dist.?

Feature Fill Comments

1 1 probable wind-break

Unkn. Unkn. NA yes no fill (feature was deflated) Severely eroded basalt clast rubble feature

2 2 Rock concentr.

100 100 10 NA natural sediments Feature proved to originate from natural bedrock vein

3 1 oxidation stain

300 130 4 yes 7.5YR6/6 (reddish yellow) sand rich in caliche nodules of subangular blocky structure

Feature may be prehistoric burned surface or natural sand lens

4 1 posthole 38 28 26 yes 7.5YR6/6 (reddish yellow) sand

Oxidized fill indicates a post probably burned inside posthole

5 1 ash-disposal pit

65 65 18 yes Stratum I: 7.5YR7/1 (light gray) ash, Stratum II: 7.5YR7/1 (light gray) ash and sand, Stratum III: 7.5YR3/2 (dark gray) charcoal with ash, Stratum IV: 7.5YR6/4 (light brown) sand

Presence of eolian sand (Stratum IV) at bottom of feature indicates period of abandonment after ini-tial use. Reuse of feature dur-ing subsequent occupa-tion is indicated by lens of ash above sand.

6 1 pit feature

55 45 15 yes 7.5YR5/4-6/4 (brown to light brown) loamy sand, the fill contained artifacts, charcoal specks and caliche nodules

Feature probably associated with processing &preparation of food & cooking

7 1 posthole 40 32 12 yes 7.5YR5/4 (brown) sand to loamy sand

Shallow posthole

8 1 posthole 14 14 20 yes 7.5YR6/6 (reddish yellow) loamy sand

Oxidized fill indicates a post may have burned inside posthole

9 1 pit feature

115 65 26 yes 7.5YR5/3 (brown) loamy sand, fill contained numerous lithic & ceramic artifacts, ash, charcoal, burned earth nodules & other small gravels

Feature probably used for trash disposal

10 1 posthole 19 19 18 yes 7.5YR6/6 (reddish yellow) sand

Oxidized fill indicates a post may have burned inside posthole

11 1 hearth 28 28 7 yes Stratum I: 7.5YR4/1 (dark gray) loamy sand, Stratum II: 7.5YR2 .5/1 (black) sand. Fill contained fragments of FCR, charcoal, burned corn cobs; ceramic & lithic artifacts recovered from feature fill

Burned earth nodules found embedded in edges of fire pit

12 3 Posthole/burned root

10 10 8 yes Gray loamy sand mixed with ash, very fine charcoal specks & modern grass seeds

Bottom of deflated fea-ture, may be cultural or natural origin

18

STUDY UNIT 1

SU 1 represented the main excavation locus at LA 134636 and included a basalt rubble concentration (Feature 1). The study unit grid was aligned on magnetic north and was excavated in 1 x 1 m units. The original excavation plan was to expose the wall alignments of the suspected field house by removing fill from the exterior. Following that, the interior space of the presumed field house would be excavated. Excavation was initiated at the southern and eastern portions of SU 1 and continued to the north and west toward the main concentration of rubble. While few artifacts (less than 10) were recovered in the southern grid squares, an unusually large volume of cultural material was found in the units at the top of the small sand dune to the east of the rubble concentration. In particular, several lithic tools (e.g., cores, two projectile points, at least one scraper) and fragments of lithic debitage (e.g., medium-sized flakes, micro flakes, bifacial thinning flakes and angular debris) were found at this part of SU 1. The ceramics also increased in number in this area and originated from at least three painted Rio Grande Glazeware bowls and one gray utility jar. Other cultural material included numerous fragments of charcoal, at least two pieces of burned corn cobs, two burned seeds (possible juniper berries), burned and unburned fragments of rabbit and deer-sized faunal bone and dime to quarter-sized chunks of burned earth.

The sediment in SU 1 consisted of an upper post-occupational lens (Stratum I). This layer could be sub-divided into two superimposed horizons: (a) an unconsolidated 10YR6/4 (light yellowish brown) sand in the upper 2–3 cm (interpreted as an upper A horizon), underlain by (b) a consolidated light yellowish brown loamy sand ranging from 6–25 cm of depth (interpreted as an ABb horizon). This matrix was primarily of eolian origin with a granular and generally smooth structure. Natural material consisting of dry twigs, bug casings, and other decomposing organic matter were found in the upper layers of the stratum. Occasional caliche gravels and isolated sandstone platelets were mixed in the lower levels of Stratum I.

Once the matrix representing Stratum I was removed, a moderately compacted surface was encountered below. This undulating surface tended to follow the topography of the sandy knoll. The presence of numerous caliche nodules and small clusters of caliche grains embedded in the compacted surface indicated Stage I–Stage II CaCO3 development. Several ceramic sherds, stone flakes, and a scraper were found resting flat on top of this surface. Other cultural material, such as charcoal specks, corn cupule fragments and burned daub nodules, were also found on top of this layer. Finally, all cultural pit features had been excavated into this surface, indicating it represented the prehistoric occupation surface. This surface was severely impacted by extensive rodent activity. In fact, every feature was disturbed (to a greater or lesser degree) by rodent burrows.

A 30-cm wide and 90-cm deep test trench was excavated in the southeastern grid square (505N/505E) to test for deeper cultural deposits. The west profile wall of this trench revealed the presence of four natural horizons beneath the cultural stratum, all of which predated the occupation of LA 134636 (Figure 7). Altogether, 43 grid units were excavated in SU 1. Ten cultural features were exposed during this effort. Their descriptions are presented in the following discussion.

Feature 1

Feature 1 was a basalt rubble concentration located on a low (about 0.5 m high) sandy dune in the eastern part of the site. A few lithic and ceramic artifact scatters were found within the rubble distribution, which measured roughly 7 m on a side. Although Feature 1 was originally interpreted as the possible remains of a masonry field house, removal of the eolian sediment in and around the rubble revealed no apparent rock enclosure or alignments. No wall foundations were found within the limits of the feature.

Several observations were made on the nature of the basalt clasts making up the feature. Those rocks, located primarily at the top of the low sandy dune, rested on what is interpreted as an ephemeral prehistoric occupational surface. By contrast, most rocks found on the slope of the dune and further down slope were found “floating” in poorly consolidated sand representing a post-occupational stratum, which suggests that most of these rocks were probably displaced to this location from the top of the dune.

19

Figure 7 SU 1: Soil profile– 1 x 1 m grid square in southeast corner (view to east).

Additionally, the bottom portions of several of the rocks were covered with a thick layer of caliche while their upper portions exhibited a typical black varnish. Clearly, the caliche coating had accumulated on the lower part of the rocks over a long period of time as they rested in the caliche rich B-horizon soils. The black varnish on top is commonly found on basalt elements with a long sun exposure. This is an indication that these rocks had not been moved from their location for an extended period of time. These clasts differed dramatically from the rest of the feature rocks, which commonly had a caliche coating either on the upper portion or on the side. Such rocks had most likely been moved during the occupation of LA 134636; those with black varnish on top are probably not cultural. All “naturally occurring” clasts were found just below the low sand dune starting about 3 m to the south and 3 m to the west of the dune. Consequently, it can be suggested that several of the Feature 1 rocks may have been collected from these two areas and then amassed on top of the dune to form some kind of an ephemeral enclosure. No meaningful stacking of rock was observed during the excavation. The current state of the rubble did not reveal a pattern that would aid in suggesting the original outline of the feature. At least 150 rocks were found scattered on top and below the sand dune of which perhaps half of the total were used for the construction of Feature 1. It is possible the feature was a simple dry laid wall that may have served as a windbreak during the use of the other features located on top of the sand dune.

Feature 3

Feature 3, an irregularly shaped patch of oxidized sand, was located in the extreme northeast corner of SU 1. The patch was discovered flush with the level of the inferred prehistoric occupational surface, whichwas buried about 30 cm below the modern ground surface. Few artifacts were found in the upper eleva-tions of the thick layer of eolian deposits covering this part of SU 1. The upper 25 cm of sand was removed without screening, and about 5 cm of the fill immediately above the oxidized stain was screened through the 1/8-inch mesh. Once fully exposed, the oxidized stain measured 3 m long and 1.30 m wide with its long axis running in a southwest-northeast direction (Figure 8). Feature 3 was excavated by re-moving and screening the southern half of the oxidized stain, then a profile drawing of the exposed north half was made and the north half of the feature was removed. The matrix consisted of a 2–4 cm thick layer of moderately consolidated 7.5YR6/6 (reddish yellow) oxidized sand with a subangular blocky structure and rich in caliche nodules. A few artifacts and specks of charcoal were found mixed in the fea-ture fill. Numerous rodent holes crisscrossed the entire feature. The edge of the oxidized patch of sand

20

was irregular, indicating its incidental origin. The stain could represent a small surface fire, possibly caused by burning debris from a nearby fire pit or as a result of the burning of the ramada structure.

Figure 8 Feature 3: Oxidation stain. Note: Although Feature 3 is thought to be of cultural origin, it could instead be of natural origin because it is similar to reddish patches of sand found elsewhere on West Mesa.

Feature 4

Feature 4, a probable posthole located in the northwest corner of SU 1, was discovered as an oval-shaped patch of oxidized sand on the north-facing slope of the dune. The feature fill consisted of 7.5YR6/6 (reddish yellow) sand, which increased in compaction toward the bottom. Numerous small charcoal specks were found mixed within the feature fill, which was entirely collected for flotation analysis. When fully excavated, the pit was oval-shaped in plan view with straight sides. The pit opening measured 32 cm east/west and 24 cm north/south. The pit bottom was relatively flat and extended 38 cm east/west by 28 cm north/south. Feature 4 probably functioned as a posthole and extended 26 cm below the prehistoric occupational surface. The presence of large volume of oxidized reddish yellow sand indicates that the pit’s original post may have burned inside the feature.

Feature 5

Feature 5, a circular pit probably used for disposal of ash from the fire pit (Feature 11, located just south of Feature 5), was discovered during the shovel scraping of the layer of post-occupational sand deposits in the northern portion of SU 1. A large volume of both lithic and ceramic artifacts as well as numerous fragments of faunal bone and charcoal were found in Feature 5. A thin veneer of cultural material extend-ed from Feature 5 over an irregular area encompassing several square meters. Once this sediment was removed, a circular charcoal and ash stain was revealed at the level of the occupational surface. The pit was excavated by first bisecting it in an east/west direction and collecting the fill in the southern half for flotation processing. The exposed profile of the north half of the pit revealed the presence of four strata, which were then mapped. Stratum I, found primarily in the upper-central part of the feature fill, consisted of a 5-cm thick lens of lightly consolidated 7.5YR7/1 (light gray) ash. Stratum II, the main upper feature fill, was up to 8 cm thick, and consisted of mottled 7.5YR7/1 (light gray) ash and sand. Stratum III, a 4-cm thick lens of 7.5YR3/2 (dark gray) charcoal with ash, was found just below Stratum II. The entire bottom of Feature 5 contained a poorly consolidated 7.5YR6/4 (light brown) sand, which represented Stratum IV. No charcoal specks or ash were found in this 10–12 cm thick lower lens. Upon completing the Feature 5 profile drawing, the north half of the feature fill was collected for flotation analysis.

21

Once fully excavated, Feature 5 appeared circular in plan view and basin-shaped in cross section. The pit measured 65 cm in diameter and reached 18 cm below the inferred prehistoric occupational surface. Numerous rodent burrows intersected the feature, primarily in its southern, western, and northeastern portions (Figure 9). The presence of the sand layer beneath the ash and charcoal-rich strata inside Feature 5 may be an indication of the re-occupation of LA 134636. Because of its lowest position inside the pit, Stratum IV was deposited into the feature first, probably by eolian processes after initial abandonment of the site. The superimposed charcoal and ash layers show that the pit was probably re-used after the return of the site occupants.

Figure 9 Feature 5: Plan view and profile.

Feature 6

Feature 6, a pit of unknown function, was located about 10 cm southeast of Feature 5. Feature 6 was discovered together with Feature 5 during the shovel scraping of the post-occupational eolian sand in the northern part of SU 1. Excavation of Feature 6 started with the collection of the southern half of the fill for flotation analysis; the exposed profile of the feature fill was then sketched. This profile revealed the presence of a single lens inside the pit, which consisted of medium sand to loamy sand of 7.5YR5/4-6/4 (brown to light brown) color representing Stratum I. This stratum was fairly homogeneous, containing only a few charcoal specks (smaller than 2 mm) and caliche nodules. After sketching the profile of the feature fill, the northern half of the fill was also collected for flotation. When all feature fill had been removed, the pit was revealed to be oval in plan view, measuring 55 x 45 cm with its long axis running northwest-southeast. In profile, the pit was basin-shaped with somewhat irregular edges (Figures 10 and 11) and measured 15 cm deep. Feature 6 did not contain a large volume of ash and charcoal comparableto the nearby fire pit (Feature 11), but its close proximity to this fire pit suggests that it may have been used for activities related to food preparation, processing, cooking, or storage. The base of the southern quarter of the pit was slightly elevated, forming a kind of shelf at a level only 4 cm deep.

22

Figure 10 Features 5 and 6: After excavation (view to northwest).

Figure 11 Feature 6: Plan view and profile.

Feature 7

Feature 7, a probable posthole found near the northern edge of SU 1, was a circular patch of eolian sand discovered as the occupation surface was being cleared. Because of its homogeneous nature, the entire feature fill was removed as a single unit and collected for flotation analysis. It consisted of poorly

23

consolidated 7.5YR5/4 (brown) sand to loamy sand. No artifacts, charcoal, or oxidation was noticed in the feature fill or in its pit walls. The pit appeared oval to irregular in plan view, measuring 40 cm east/west by 32 cm north/south. In cross section, the main part of the feature was basin shaped and only 6 cm deep; however a smaller cylindrical pit 12 cm deep was located in the north-central part of the basin. Numerous rodent burrows intersect the caliche surface outside Feature 7, primarily in the area to the north. Although the small pit at the bottom of the feature has been interpreted to represent a possible posthole, it could be simply rodent intrusion.

Feature 8

Another probable posthole (Feature 8) was found about 1.5 m south of Feature 6, approximately in the center of SU 1. Feature 8 was a small circular patch of oxidized sand within the caliche surface. A narrow rodent run intersected it at the northeast edge. Feature 8 fill was compacted 7.5YR6/6 (reddish yellow) loamy sand mixed with fine charcoal specks. The pit was circular, 14 cm in diameter, and 20 cm deep with straight sides (Figure 12), so it is likely that Feature 8 was a small posthole. The presence of oxidized fill and oxidation on the sides of the pit indicate a post probably burned inside the feature.

Figure 12 SU 1: Plan views and cross-sections of excavated postholes (Features 4, 7, 8, and 10).

24

Feature 9

Feature 9, the largest of all pit features found at LA 134636, was discovered as an oval-shaped charcoal and ash stain in the area of high artifact and charcoal density in the central part of SU 1. The southern half of the feature fill was removed first, after which the profile of the feature fill was drawn. The feature fill consisted of a single Stratum I represented by a consolidated 7.5YR5/3 (brown) loamy sand. This stratum contained numerous specks of charcoal, nodules of burned earth 1–3 cm in diameter, patches of ash, and several lithic and ceramic artifacts. In addition, several caliche nodules and small gravels were also found in the feature fill. Feature 9 was oval in plan view and basin-shaped in cross-section (Figure 13). The pit measured 115 cm north/south x 65 cm east/west and was 26 cm deep. Based on the diversity of artifacts, charcoal specks, patches of ash, and gravels in the fill, its likely Feature 9 was a trash disposal pit associated with the use of the fire pit (Feature 5).

Figure 13 Feature 9: Trash pit–plan view and profile

Feature 10

Feature 10, a probable posthole found in the southern part of the Feature 9 trash pit, was discovered as an oval-shaped patch of oxidized sand protruding through the pit wall of Feature 9. The entire fill was removed as a single unit and collected for flotation analysis. It consisted of compacted 7.5YR6/6 (reddish yellow) sand mixed with fine charcoal specks. The posthole was circular in plan view (19 cm in dia-meter, 18 cm deep), and conical in cross-section. The presence of the oxidized sandy fill inside the post-hole indicates that also this feature probably experienced fire.

Feature 11

Feature 11, a medium-sized fire pit positioned about 60 cm southwest of the ash disposal pit (Feature 5), was found in an area of extensive rodent activity, which also caused severe disturbance of the feature. When first exposed, Feature 11 appeared as an ash and charcoal stain truncated by numerous rodent runs. It was excavated by first removing the south half of the feature fill after which the profile was sketched. Subsequently, the north half of the fill was removed. The entire feature fill was collected for flotation analysis. Two main strata were identified inside the pit. The upper layer (Stratum I) was a moderately

25

consolidated 7.5YR4/1 (dark gray) loamy sand of blocky structure. This roughly 3-cm thick matrix con-tained numerous thin lenses of ash and charcoal as well as ceramic and lithic artifacts. A much darker lens (Stratum II) was encountered beneath Stratum I (a 7.5YR2.5/1 [black] consolidated sand of granular to blocky structure). Stratum II contained many charcoal granules, fragments of burned corn cupules, small chunks of burned earth, ceramic and lithic artifacts, and pieces of fire-cracked basalt measuring 3–5 cm in maximum dimension (Figure 14). The pit (28 cm in diameter and 7 cm deep) was circular in plan and basin-shaped in cross section. The walls were slightly oxidized and were embedded with numerous particles of burned earth (Figure 15), a good indication that Feature 11 functioned as a fire pit. Rodent burrows had redeposited the ash, charcoal, and artifacts from Feature 11 into neighboring areas.

Figure 14 Feature 11: Plan view and profile.

Figure 15 Feature 11: Excavated hearth (view to north).

26

SU 1: Distribution of Artifacts

Spatial analysis was performed on the distribution of artifacts and bone fragments within the excavated area of SU 1 using counts for individual material classes derived from both surface and subsurface contexts. Data recovered from eight eastern-most grid squares in SU 1 are not used in the spatial analysis because the overburden in these units was shoveled out without screening. Only the lower part of the sandy stratum was screened. Table 3 shows that the fill in the area with pit features and postholes produced the highest quantities of lithic artifacts, with the largest amount (n=60) collected from grid unit 509N/507E. Most of these items were miniscule flakes, indicating that lithic tool manufacture probably took place at this location. Also, 4 grid squares outlining a 2 x 2 m area located immediately east of the 509N/507E grid square contained 171 lithic artifacts. This area reaches into the eastern portion of the cluster of features suspected to be part of the ramada-like shelter. A large volume of microflakes and a few small core fragments were recovered from these grid squares. One obsidian projectile point or a biface fragment and two obsidian flakes also came from this 2 x 2 m square, possibly indicating that the obsidian biface was reworked in this general location. Table 3 reveals that the grid squares containing more than 9 lithics are all located in the central part of SU 1, which was positioned at the top of the sandy knoll. It could be argued that the small quantities of lithics collected from the southern, northern and western grid squares may have may been redeposited down slope by erosion after the site was abandoned.

As shown in Table 4, the greatest ceramic quantities (7–12 sherds) were recovered from the sediments in the eastern part of SU 1, located at the upper elevations of the sandy knoll. Unlike the distribution of lithic artifacts, relatively larger quantities of sherds are found in the southern and southeastern portions of SU 1. The distribution of bone specimens recovered in SU 1 indicates that the area within the suspected ramada shelter and immediately east-southeast of it was heavily used during the occupation of LA 134636. All grid squares in this segment of SU 1 yielded charred and uncharred bone remains (Table 5).

Ramada Area

The four pit features felt to represent hearths and associated ash and refuse pits (Features 5, 6, 9, and 11) are encompassed by four smaller and deeper pits, which are believed to be postholes. The posthole features form the corners of a roughly rectangular area measuring 2.8 m north/south and 3.0 m east/west. Features 5 and 6 are located in the northeast corner of this area, Feature 9 is in the southwest corner (posthole Feature 10 intersects its southern edge), and the hearth (Feature 11) is located in the very center of the posthole enclosure. This setting of features strongly suggests that some kind of four-post arrangement was used to support a simple roof (perhaps made of brush), which makes the entire area appear to be a ramada-like shelter (Figure 16: artist’s rendering). The scatter of basalt clasts (Feature 1) was too eroded to assess the original shape of the rock feature. We can only speculate that the rocks may have been collected from below the sandy knoll where they occur naturally and were piled up in the area east of the inferred ramada to provide an ephemeral windbreak. This interpretation would be consistent if the occupants of the ramada structure desired protection from the dominant easterly and northeasterly winds common in this region. The ramada and associated dry-laid masonry windbreak may have been used as a short-term residence, primarily during warmer months.

Numerous lithic and ceramic artifacts were found in the cultural fill 2–3 cm above the prehistoric occupation surface in and around the ramada area. Of these, one obsidian projectile point or biface was found in the central part of the ramada between the hearth (Feature 11) and two of the pits (Features 5 and 6). The other projectile point was found roughly 1 m west of the ramada. Additionally, several gray utility sherds and glaze-paint ceramics were found in this space with most of the gray utility sherds originating from the area immediately next to the hearth. The presence of large numbers of microflakes inside and east of the enclosure (indicating the probable location of stone tool manufacture and refurbish-ing) attests to the multipurpose function of the ramada area. Small fragments of burned corn cupules found with the ramada fill suggest that the shelter may also have been an area of food consumption. Three of the postholes were filled with oxidized red-orange sand, indicating that the posts, and possibly the entire ramada shelter, may have burned.

27

Table 3 SU 1: Distribution of Lithic Artifacts.

513N Study Unit 1 512N 2 2 5 ↑ 0–9 lithics 511N 3 5 15 9 MN 510N 1 14 45 40 20 10–19 lithics 509N 1 26 43 43 60508N 10 13 36 18 20–39 lithics

507N 1 6 17 20 21506N 1 5 7 40–60 lithics 505N 3 7

502E

503E

504E

505E

506E

507E

508E

Table 4 SU 1: Distribution of Ceramics.

513N Study Unit 1 512N 1 1 1 ↑ 0–1 ceramics 511N 1 2 MN 510N 1 9 3 2–5 ceramics 509N 2 8 8 4 508N 4 2 7 12 6–10 ceramics 507N 1 7 6 2 506N 2 2 8 11–12 ceramics 505N 5 2 1 1

502E

503E

504E

505E

506E

507E

508E

Table 5 SU 1: Distribution of Faunal Bone.

513N Study Unit 1

512N ↑ presence of faunal bone

511N MN 510N509N508N

507N 506N 505N

502E

503E

504E

505E

506E

507E

508E

28

Figure 16 Ramada-type shelter: Masonry windbreak/activity area on sandy knoll (view to northwest); artist’s rendering based on location of excavated postholes and other pit features.

STUDY UNIT 2

SU 2, a single, 1 x 1 m excavation unit placed over a concentration of basalt clasts designated as (Feature 2), was located in the western part of LA 134636. One 10-cm thick level was excavated within the sandy deposits; neither artifacts nor other cultural material was recovered.

Feature 2

Feature 2 was a concentration of roughly 20 basalt clasts located in the western part of LA 134636, about 35 m west of Feature 1. These rocks appeared as a relatively tight cluster measuring 1 m in diameter and were designated as a possible cultural feature during survey. No artifacts were noted in the vicinity. The sediment around the cobbles was an unconsolidated, 10-cm thick layer of light yellowish brown (10YR6/4) sand with no structure. This eolian sand was removed exposing more naturally occurring basalt cobbles beneath. No artifacts were found inside and outside the excavation area, and no evidence of cultural activity in the form of charcoal or ash was evident. Apparently the clasts comprising Feature 2 derive from a natural bedrock vein protruding to the surface in this part of the site.

STUDY UNIT 3

SU 3 was assigned to a distribution of lithic artifacts including flakes and a ground stone fragment located 20 m south of Feature 1. Initially, a 1 x 1 m excavation unit was placed in the middle of the distribution and fill was screened through 1/8-inch mesh. Eight lithic artifacts were recovered from the upper 10 cm of the eolian sands. This matrix consisted of mostly unconsolidated, 10YR6/4 (light yellowish brown) loamy sand. No charcoal specks or other cultural material was recovered in SU 3, and a large number of

29

caliche nodules were encountered near the bottom of the first level. Since no artifacts were recovered in the second 10-cm level and the amount of caliche increased dramatically, excavation in this area stopped with the presumption that these artifacts had been redeposited here from the Pueblo IV locus to the north.

Preliminary inspection of the items recovered from the surface and the 1 x 1 m unit in SU 3 revealed technological attributes different from those observed on the Pueblo IV lithic artifacts from SU 1. For this reason, more units were excavated to investigate further this southern part of LA 134636. Interest-ingly, the screened sediment in each 1 x 1 m grid square adjacent to the first test pit yielded stone flakes and fragments of ground stone. This finding resulted in the excavation of more grid squares in search of prehistoric features or a possible occupational surface. With the exception of one possible ash and char-coal pit feature, no other features, cultural sediments, or a use surfaces were encountered during this undertaking. More than 250 lithic artifacts and fire-cracked rock were recovered from the entire excava-tion grid of SU 1 (i.e., 39 1 x 1 m units). Artifacts were found mainly in the upper 5–7 cm of deposits, sometime reaching up to 10 cm of depth. This upper matrix was represented by unconsolidated loose sand. In rare instances, an isolated lithic flake was recovered from 20 cm of depth, which is attributed to the extensive rodent disturbance throughout the entire site.

The one En Medio projectile point recovered from SU 3 indicates that this locus probably dates to the late Archaic period of 800 BC–AD 400 (Irwin-Williams 1973:11). However, the presence of artifacts in the upper loose matrix with no associated occupation surface suggests this area has been largely deflated and, thus, redeposited from its original context.

Feature 12

A small pit filled with ash and very fine charcoal filaments (Feature 12) was found in the northeastern part of SU 3 (Figure 17). Feature 12 was discovered during the process of shovel scraping about 14 cm below the modern ground surface. The entire fill was collected for flotation. The excavated feature was circular in plan view and measured 10 cm in diameter. In cross-section, the pit had a cylindrical shape and was at least 8 cm deep beneath the level where it was discovered. No artifacts or other material explicitly to be of cultural origin were found in the fill of the feature; therefore, its origin remains unclear. Perhaps Feature 12 represents the bottom of a posthole or a plant root cavity. In either case, the upper part of the feature has been deflated, which precludes our better understanding of its origin.

To ensure that most of the remains of the LA 134636 Archaic locus have been excavated, several 50 x 50 cm test pits were excavated in a row (1 or 2 m apart) in each cardinal direction away from the excavation grid. This effort revealed that artifact densities gradually tapered out roughly 1–1.5 m outside the excavation area. The artifact density in SU 3 is shown in Figure 18.

30

Figure 17 Feature 12: Plan view and profile.

Figure 18 SU 3: Distribution of lithic artifacts.

31

88 LITHIC ANALYSIS by Yuichi Nakazawa

LA 134636 is a multi-component site dating to Pueblo IV (1315–1425 AD) and Late Archaic (3000–1500 BP), located on an eolian sand dune. Although the two components were buried in the single sand dune, the artifacts were clustered in two separate loci, roughly 12 m apart. A total of 513 lithic artifacts were recovered from the sandy matrix of 43 m2 excavated in Study Unit 1 (SU 1), while 260 artifacts were collected from the deflated, loose sand deposits in the 42 m2 of SU 3. Rio Grande Glazeware ceramics were recovered from SU 1 indicating this locus (along with associated lithic artifacts) dates to Pueblo IV; no ceramics were associated with the lithic assemblage recovered from SU 3. The presence of a side-notched projectile point, which is the only diagnostic stone tool from SU 3, suggests that this lithic assem-blage is of late Archaic affinity, probably the Armijo or En Medio Phase.

SPATIAL DISTRIBUTION OF LITHIC ARTIFACTS

Lithic artifacts were recovered from surface and subsurface contexts in the northern and southern portions of the site (the majority of the surface lithics came from the SU 1 area to the north, and only a small num-ber of lithics were found around SU 3 to the south) (Figure 3). In SU 1, a total of 513 lithics were recovered from the excavated area (Table 3). Most of these items were distributed in the center of SU 1 (ca. 20 m2 area) between 507 N–511 N and 503 E–508 E. The highest lithic density was in a small area (8 m2) just south of the concentration of small pit features (i.e., F5, F6, and F11). In the eastern portion of SU 1 (ca. 8 m2), between 508 N–512 N and 508 E–510 E, four flakes were recovered in association with the oxidized sediment (Feature 3), although no screening was conducted. Because the artifact density rapidly drops in the units on the perimeter of SU 1, it is safe to suggest that the majority of the artifact population has been recovered within the limits of the excavation. Aside from other lithic tools, two projectile points were recovered in SU 1, roughly 2.5 m apart: (1) one from a 1 x 1 m unit just west of the highest lithic density area near the western edge of SU 1; and (2) the other from the area immediately south of Feature 5, which is in the north portion of the high-density distribution of lithics. It should be noted that both points were found in the screen and, hence, their original location is only approximate.

A total of 260 lithic artifacts were recovered from SU 3. The assemblage consists of 8 chipped stone tools, 156 debitage (e.g., flakes and cores), 26 pieces of ground stone, and 62 fragments of fire-cracked rock. Nine of these lithics were recorded on the surface of the area where SU 3 was excavated: 1 utilized flake, 2 fragments of fire-cracked rock, and 6 flakes. The side-notched projectile point was found in the north-central part of the excavated area. Figure 18 shows that two high-density areas (amount of artifacts is 11–15 per square) are present in SU 3: one in the central and one in the southern part of SU 3.

ATTRIBUTE RECORDING

Lithic raw material type, artifact type, blank type, condition, cortex type, dorsal scar pattern, termination, striking platform, and traits of thermal alteration categories were recorded for each lithic artifact. Cortex percentages on dorsal surface and number of dorsal scars were recorded as ordinal scale. To measure the size and form (overall proportion) of a chipped stone artifact, weight, maximum dimension, length, width, thickness, platform thickness, and platform width were recorded as ratio scale. Weights were measured to the nearest 0.1g unit of scale. Small artifacts (less than 150 g of weight) were measured by digital com-pact scale (HJ-150, manufactured by A&D Company, Ltd), while the heavier pieces (more than 150 g) were recorded by an analog scale. Size measurement for chipped stone tools and complete and proximal flakes were made following the “Jelinek system” (Dibble 1995a) to minimize intra-observer errors. For medial and distal fragments of these tools and flakes, and complete and proximal flakes with “collapsed” platforms, length was measured as the longest axis defined by maximum dimension. Width and thickness were measured along lines perpendicular to the length. Measurements were taken to the nearest milli-meter using a caliper. Edge angles were measured to the nearest degree using a goniometer.

32

LITHIC ARTIFACTS FROM STUDY UNIT 1 (PUEBLO IV COMPONENT)

Classes of Artifacts

The chipped stone tool assemblage consists of 2 side-notched projectile points, 1scraper, 6 retouched flakes, and 3 utilized flakes (Table 6). The ground-stone assemblage consists of 1 hammerstone, and 1 core/hammerstone. The debitage includes three angular debris, 490 flakes, 3 bidirectional cores, 2 fire-cracked rocks, and 1 manuport. The first projectile point (Figure 19a, maximum length is 26 mm) is a complete side-notched gray chert point with a concave base. The second projectile point (Figure 19b, maximum length is 34 mm) is made from obsidian (translucent with black bands) and is partially broken; a corner was broken, followed by a loss of basal portion. Therefore, the basal shape, whether being concave or straight, is unknown. Despite the fact that a portion of the haft element is lost, the overall proportion is retained. It is characterized as short and wide in its proportions: ratio of blade width (distance between the shoulders) to blade length (distance between midsection of blade width and the tip) is 1.4. Given the straight edge between the tip and a shoulder, which was made by abrupt retouches, it is suggested that this biface was resharpened after initial tip was broken. The sidescraper (Figure 19c) was made from a yellow chalcedony flake core. A slightly convex edge was located on the dorsal surface of the flake blank. Although the edge is not complete, continuous deep scalar retouches made along the ridge (about 18 mm in length) merit classification of this object as a “simple scraper” (Christenson 1987: 65). This flake core was reused as a scraper, presumably taking advantage of the appropriate angle (edge of scraper is 72 deg) between core platform and core surface of the original flake core.

Of all chipped stone tools (n=15), retouched and utilized flakes are present with the highest frequency (n=9; 60 %). Retouched flakes are defined as flakes with a series of small scars on margins with each scar having more than 2 mm in maximum depth (Parry 1987:208). Utilized flakes were identified as the flakes with a series of small scars on the margins and each scar is less than 2 mm in maximum depth. All retouched and utilized flakes were made from flakes, except for one, which was made from a flake core. A series of deep scalar retouches were identified along the platform margin of a core surface. While all retouched and utilized flakes were made from small flakes (the mean of maximum lengths in retouched and utilized flakes is 34 mm), one retouched schist flake was considerably larger with the maximum length 85 mm. Its convex edge was made by removing several wide bifacial scars, and the morphology of the edge is stepped, presumably due to the platy structure of the raw material.

The hammerstone was made of a medium to coarse grain quartzite cobble. Both ends of the longest axis of the cobble have remarkable battered surface, and some light battering was also observed along the long convex perimeter of the cobble. One side of the cobble has a flat surface that is widely battered; one side of the convex perimeter is blackened. The multiple occurrences of battering indicate that this artifact was heavily used not only for knapping activities but also for a variety of pounding and crushing work. The surfaces of the hammerstone were crazed indicating that the object had been subjected to heat. The core/hammerstone (FS 8), made from gray medium to coarse grain quartzite cobble, probably served for grinding activities (Figure 19d). Some large flake scars were randomly removed without platform pre-paration. The ridges created by flake removals are mostly abraded, with evidence of battering.

Lithic Raw Materials

Twenty-three lithic material types were identified based on color and texture. Table 7 displays counts and percentages of artifacts by 11 raw material types. Approximately half of the lithic artifacts are made from chert (46 %), followed by chalcedony (23 %), fine-grained quartzite (19 %), and medium to coarse grain quartzite (8 %). The other 7 types (i.e., basalt, limestone, obsidian, silicified wood, sandstone, quartzitic sandstone, and schist) were found in low frequencies and are regarded as minor materials in this assemblage. Table 8 shows the variability in cortex types, where 97 % of artifacts with cortex either remained on dorsal surface or platform and they are rolled (water-worn) cortex. This suggests that the lithic materials were procured from a secondary provenance: point bars and bank deposits. Naturally occurring basalt and sandstone are scarce on the West Mesa.

33

Table 6 SU 1: Frequencies of Artifact Classes by Raw Material Types.

Artifact Classes Lithic Material Types

Proj. Pt.

Scrap-er

Flake, Re-touch

Flake, Utiliz-ed

Ham-mer-stone.

Core/Ham-mer-stone.

Angu-lar Debris

Flake Core, Bidirec-tional

FCR

Manu-port Total

Basalt 4 4

Chalcedony, blk incl. 1 1 1 48 51

Chalced, clear 1 1 34 36

Chalced, other 2 2

Chalcedony, yellow 1 2 1 25 1 30

Chert, banded gray 1 1

Chert, brown 1 1 52 1 55

Chert, fossil, gray 1 1

Chert, gray 1 55 56

Chert, pink 6 6

Chert, purple 1 1

Chert, red 5 5

Chert, white 1 19 20

Chert, yellow 91 91

Limestone 4 4

Obsidian 1 3 4

Quartzitic sandstone 1 1

Quartzite, fine grain 97 1 98

Quartzite, med/coarse 1 1 36 2 40

Sandstone 3 3

Schist 1 1

Silicified wood 2 1 3

Total 2 1 6 3 1 1 3 490 3 2 1 513

Table 7 SU 1: Frequency of Raw Material Types Table 8 SU 1: Frequency of Artifacts by Cortex Types. Lithic Material Types Counts %

Chert 236 46Chalcedony 119 23 Quartzite, fine grained 98 19 Quartzite, med/coarse 40 8 Basalt 4 1Limestone 4 1 Obsidian 4 1Silicified wood 3 1 Sandstone 3 1Quartzitic sandstone 1 0 Schist 1 0

Total 513 100

Cortex Type N % Rolled (water-worn) 148 97 Gravel (not-worn) 5 3 Total 153 100

34

Figure 19 SU 1: Pueblo IV lithic artifacts: (a) chert side-notched projectile point; (b) obsidian reworked side-notched projectile point; (c) yellow chalcedony sidescraper; and (d) green quartzite hammerstone showing signs of battering and abrasion on flake scar ridges.

LITHIC ARTIFACTS FROM STUDY UNIT 3 (LATE ARCHAIC COMPONENT)

Classes of Artifacts

A total of 251 lithic artifacts were recovered from SU 3. Table 9 shows the frequencies of lithic artifacts by raw material types. Unlike that of SU 1, the SU 3 chipped stone tool assemblage is small, consisting of 1 projectile point, 1 scraper (Figure 20b), and 7 utilized flakes. The ground-stone assemblage includes 1 hammerstone, 6 mano fragments, and 16 metate fragments. The debitage is represented by 15 angular debris, 145 flakes, 2 hammerstone flakes, 2 unidirectional cores, and 64 FCR fragments.

The projectile point (Figure 20a) is side-notched with a straight base. One of the hafted bases is lost, but the tip is intact. A few very small elongated scars initiated from the tip, identified as “impact fracture” (Barton and Bergman 1982), are visible on both sides of the projectile point. It is likely that these scars were created upon impact with an animal, which suggests that the projectile point was used in hunting. Since the tip is intact, the point would have been brought back to the site. Basal breakage may have been the reason the hunters decided to discard the object. The material type is best labeled as the chalcedony with black inclusions, but the matrix of this chalcedony is yellow, black, and white, with red inclusions. Judging from its overall shape (in comparison with the morphological characteristics described and pictured in Irwin-Williams [1973]), this projectile point is attributable to the Late Archaic period, probably Armijo (1800-800 BC) or En Medio phase (800 BC and AD 400) of the Oshara tradition (Chapman 1979; Irwin-Williams 1973).

35

Table 9 SU 3: Frequencies of Artifact Classes by Material Types.

Artifact Classes Lithic Material Type

ProjPt.

Scrap-er

Flake, Utiliz-ed

Ham-mer-stone

Mano, Un-known

Meta-te,Un-known

Angu-lar Debris

Flake

Ham-mer-stone Flake

Core, Unidi-rec-tional

F C R

Total

Chalcedony, Blk incl. 1 1 2 1 17 22 Chalced, clear 1 2 3 Chalcedony, red incl. 1 1Chalcedony, yellow 3 21 1 25 Chert, banded 3 9 1 13Chert, banded gray 5 5 Chert, banded red 1 1Chert, black 1 2 8 11 Chert, brown 1 9 7 17Chert, gray 1 27 1 29 Chert, pink 1 1Chert, red 1 4 1 6 Chert, white 1 1 2Chert, yellow 3 3 Quartzitic sandstone 1 1Quartzite, fine grained 2 15 16 33 Quartzite, med/coarse 3 2 2 15 2 38 62 Sandstone 1 5 6 Schist 9 3 6 18Silicified wood 1 1 Total 1 1 7 1 6 16 15 145 2 2 64 260

Table 10 SU 3: Frequency of Raw Material Types Table 11 SU 3: Frequency of Artifacts by Cortex Types.

Cortex Type N % Rolled (water-worn) 114 97 Gravel (not-worn) 4 3 Total 118 100

Lithic Material Types Counts % Chert 88 34 Chalcedony 51 20 Quartzite, fine grained 33 13 Quartzite, med/coarse 62 24 Silicified wood 1 0 Sandstone 6 2 Quartzitic sandstone 1 0 Schist 18 7 Total 260 100

36

Figure 20 SU 3: Late Archaic lithic artifacts: (a) chalcedony side-notched projectile point, black inclu-sions (probably En Medio); (b) chalcedony scraper; (c) quartzite utilized flake; (d) yellow chalcedony proximal elongated flake or blade; and (e) complete elongated quartzite flake.

The utilized flakes (Figure 20c) were made from flake blanks, except for one which was made from a blade. Three were made from banded chert of which one refits the unidirectional core found in this study unit. Therefore, all these flake blanks were likely to have originated from the same unidirectional core. One retouched flake, made from black chert with yellow portion, exhibits continuous shallow scalars along the naturally concave edge. The lateral scars on the dorsal surface, which are perpendicular to the flaking axis, suggest that this flake was removed from a core with multiple platforms.

Six mano fragments and 16 metate fragments were identified. Most of them are made from hard and coarse-grained materials including quartzite and sandstone. Nine flat pieces of schist were identified as metate fragments. The refitting conducted for the schist (n=18) consists of fragments of metate, flakes, and angular debris and shows that 10 % of them (a total of 2 out of 18) were refitted. Most ground stone made from quartzite and sandstone retains evidence of the effect of heat (e.g., crazing), although no traits of burning were observed on the fragments of the schist metate.

Lithic Raw Materials

The use of raw materials differs between chipped stone and ground-stone tools. The former (e.g., utilized flake, scraper, projectile point) and most of the flakes are made from chert and chalcedony, while the latter (e.g., hammerstone, mano, metate) are made from quartzite, sandstone, and schist. When chalce-dony and chert are combined, eight classes of lithic materials were found (Table 10). The majority of raw material types are chert (34%), medium–coarse grain quartzite (24%), and chalcedony (20%). The other types listed were found in small percentages. Approximately half of the artifacts retain cortical surface (n=118); 97% of them have water-worn cortex (Table 11). The water-worn cortex suggests that most of the materials were originally procured from river gravels, most likely from the Rio Grande.

37

COMPARISON OF PUEBLO IV AND LATE ARCHAIC LITHIC ASSEMBLAGES

Analysis of lithic artifacts from LA 134636 was directed toward issues regarding the characteristics of human occupation during Pueblo IV and Late Archaic. The size of the SU 1 assemblage (Pueblo IV) is approximately twice that of SU 3 (Late Archaic). In addition to sample size, several differences and similarities were observed in artifact classes and raw material use. Table 12 compares the frequencies of artifact classes between the two study units. While both assemblages are characterized by an abundance of flakes and a small number of cores, several differences were observed, notably in the proportions of chipped-stone and ground-stone tools: SU 1 is composed of more of the former than the latter; however, a greater number of ground-stone fragments than the chipped stone tools came from SU 3. The frequency fire-cracked rock in SU 3 is also higher than that in SU 1. These differences recognized in the composi-tion of artifact classes between SU 1 and SU 3 assemblages indicate that the range of activities and sub-sistence were different between the Pueblo IV and Late Archaic occupations. Since it is plausible that the physical conditions (e.g., lithology, landscape) did not vary significantly between these periods, it is expected that these differences were influenced by differential degrees of socio-economic conditions between the Late Archaic and Pueblo IV societies in the northern Rio Grande. The present lithic analysis addresses the questions of how and to what extent the observed variability in two lithic assemblages is explained by physical conditions (i.e., lithic raw material availability) and socio-economic ones (i.e., mobility, occupational intensity, and subsistence). The effects of these factors on the assemblages’ formation processes will be assessed through a comparison of variability in core reduction, use of raw material, size and form of flake blanks, and edge-damage on chipped-stone tools between SU 1 and SU 3.

Table 12 SU 1 and SU 3: Comparison of Frequency of Artifact Classes.

Artifact Class SU 1 SU 3 Total

Projectile Point 2 1 3 Scraper 1 1 2 Flake, Retouched 6 0 6 Flake, Utilized 3 7 10 Angular Debris 3 15 18 Flake 490 145 635 Core, Bidirectional 3 0 3 Core, Unidirectional 0 2 2 Hammerstone 1 1 2Core/Hammerstone 1 0 1 Flake from hammerstone 0 2 2 Mano, Unknown 0 6 6 Metate, Unknown 0 16 16 Fire-cracked rock 2 64 66 Manuport 1 0 1Total 513 260 773

Core Reductions

Cores recovered from SU 1 (n=3) show that flakes were removed from several platforms. The multi-directional core made from a yellow chert cobble has one large platform of a single plain scar, which was made by percussion from the cortical surface (Figure 21). Most flakes were removed from this wide plat-form, but a few irregular flakes were removed from both the ridges of the core surface and the cortical surface. The pebble core of silicified wood has multiple core surfaces with wide, short scars. The yellow chalcedony core is a bidirectional flake blank core. A few small flake scars were removed from a single ridge platform, followed by the removal of flakes from the opposite direction, which is the ventral surface of the initial flake blank. While the reduction processes observed among these cores are not identical, the process is essentially the removal of short, wide flakes from multiple platforms.

38

Figure 21 SU 3: Unidirectional chert core with three refitting flakes.

In SU 3, a unidirectional core made from banded beige chert was identified. The core’s remaining cortex suggests that it was made from gravel rarely weathered by stream action, or a nodule just out-cropped from a primary source. Two core surfaces were identified. A series of short flake scars with parallel lateral edges remain on the larger core surface. These flakes were removed from the large, flat, single platform. Two flakes, one of which has light edge damage, refit to this core surface. The other core sur-face is characterized by small flake scars with step terminations. One wide flake with step termination refits to this core surface. These flakes were obtained from the flat cortical surface located perpendicular to the flat and large single platform. A large Hertzian cone remains at the opposite end of the cortical platform. This could have been created by hard hammer percussion (Cotterell and Kamminga 1987), probably during an attempt to rejuvenate the core surface when it failed to maintain an appropriate flaking angle. The other core from SU 3 is made from a chalcedony flake. One elongated small scar initiated from a single platform remains along the margin of the flake blank.

These observations on the morphology of cores suggest that various core reduction sequences were used at SU 1 and SU 3. The flakes in SU 1 removed from flake blanks through frequent changes of platforms suggest that core reduction was conducted more randomly than that of SU 3. Whenever there was an appropriate angle, the flakes were removed. In contrast, the flakes of SU 3 were manufactured from large and flat platforms that were well prepared and maintained to continuously making several flakes.

To see whether these core reduction sequences are related to the intensity of core reduction, flake pro-ductivity was compared between the two assemblages. Rough estimations of flake production, i.e., the blank/core ratio (e.g., Kuhn 1995) measured by total number of complete and proximal flakes divided by total number of cores (Dibble 1995b; Nakazawa 2004), were compared between SU 1 and SU 3. The values are 50.5 and 25, respectively, which suggest that the intensity of core reduction performed by occupants of SU 1 was twice as high as that of SU 3. Moreover, it is suggested that the flakes were intensively manufactured from flake cores by the Pueblo IV occupants in SU 1, while the reduction sequences of SU 3 provided a low amount of flakes. This implies that the occupational intensity was higher during the Pueblo IV than that of the Late Archaic at LA 134636. In spite of this difference, these values are within the range of those gained from the seasonally occupied Pueblo IV sites in the Camel Tracks area of the southern Caje del Rio Plateau (11.3–76.8, n=4, [Nakazawa 2004:149]). Thus, a com-parison of the Pueblo IV assemblages from the Camel Track Area shows that the intensities of occupations for both groups were still within the spectrum of seasonal occupations.

39

Raw Material Use

Table 13 compares the frequencies of raw material types recovered in SU 1 and SU 3. Both assemblages share most raw materials types although basalt, limestone, and obsidian are only used for lithic artifacts from SU 1 (Pueblo IV). The identified material types are all locally available as cobbles and pebbles in the Santa Fe Group gravels of the Rio Grande (Church 2000; Warren 1979). Proportion of cortex types among cortical and partially cortical flakes (Tables 8 and 11) indicate that the majority of the raw materials from both assemblages were obtained at secondary sources (i.e., river gravel). However, the proportions of raw material use between the two groups are not correlated (Spearman: r=0.531, p=0.92, n=11). These patterns suggest that while both groups obtained the river cobbles to manufacture stone implements, they may have had different procurement strategies with respect to selective criteria of lithic materials. Since the raw material availability is locally high in northern Rio Grande (Nakazawa 2004), the selective criteria of lithic resources would be the flaking property of raw materials, characterized by (1) flakability, and (2) durability (Nelson 1991). Both characteristics will be relevant to artifact use-lives and functions. For example, when flakability of the material is high, it will be feasible to control to manufacture appropriate blanks to serve for desirable functions. If the material with high durability is selected, the artifact use-lives will be extended. In the assemblage of SU 3, a distinctive use of raw materials between chipped-stone and ground-stone tools was observed: the former were made from chert and chalcedony, while the latter were made from quartzite, sandstone, and schist. This differential use of materials suggests that the selection of raw materials was based on a functional requirement: flakability. The flakable materials (i.e., chalcedony and chert) were selected for making chipped-stone tools such as hunting weapons (i.e., projectile points) and cutting and scraping tools (e.g., scrapers), while the durable materials (e.g., med/coarse-grained quartzite, schist) were chosen for performing heavy duty tasks, such as smashing and pounding. This functionally oriented selection may also have obtained in the formation of the SU 1 lithic assemblage. To explore lithic assemblage formation processes, especially for chipped stone, variation in size and form of flake blanks between the SU 1 and 3 assemblages was examined.

Table 13 SU 1 and SU 3: Comparison of Frequencies of Raw Material Types.

Count Lithic Material Types

SU 1 SU 3 Chert 236 88Chalcedony 119 51 Quartzite, fine grained 98 33 Quartzite, med/coarse 40 62 Sandstone 3 6Schist 1 18 Silicified wood 3 1 Basalt 4 0 Limestone 4 0Obsidian 4 0 Quartzitic sandstone 1 1 Total 513 260

Size and Form of Flake Blanks

Size comparisons of complete flakes from SU 1 and SU 3 were conducted with respect to (1) maximum dimension and (2) weight (log-transformed). The results of the non-parametric analysis show that there is no significant difference in the medians of the maximum flake dimension between the complete flakes from SU 1 and SU 3 at the 5% level (Mann-Whitney: U=1514, p=0.098). In contrast, there is a difference in medians of flake weights between those from SU 1 and SU 3 (Mann-Whitney: U=1346, p=0.015). Since the median of weights in SU 3 (2.5) is larger than that in SU 1 (1.0), the complete flakes

40

of SU 3 are heavier than those of SU 1. In sum, the maximum dimensions of the flakes do not differ between the two groups, while weights of the flakes are different.

The shape of the complete flake blanks from SU 1 (n=109) and SU 3 (n=16) was compared through the indices of (1) length to width ratio (measured by length divided by width) and (2) width to thickness ratio (measured by width divided by thickness). The flakes of SU 3 (median=1.69, s.d.=0.43) show a longer proportion than those from SU 1 (median=1.43, s.d.=0.54). The width-thickness ratios suggest that the flakes from SU 3 (median=2.23, s.d.=1.23) are also thicker than those from SU 1 (median=3.33, s.d.=2.06). There are significant differences both in length to width ratio (Mann-Whitney: U=599.5, p=0.044) and width-thickness ratio (Mann-Whitney: U=554.5, p=0.019). Given the results of the size comparisons, the flakes from SU 3 (Late Archaic) are characterized as long and thick flakes (Figure 20e), while those from SU 1 (Pueblo IV) are portrayed as wide and thin flakes. Thus, the elongated and thick flake blanks were more likely manufactured by the Late Archaic occupants than those of the Pueblo IV.

Edge Damage on Chipped Stone Tools

To evaluate the functional variability of chipped stone tools, patterns of edge damage on the major chipped stone tools (i.e., scrapers, retouched flakes, and utilized flakes) recovered from SU 1 and SU 3 were compared. Table 14 shows the frequency of associations in patterns of edge damage based on the categories developed by Keeley (1980). A total of 18 occurrences of edge damage, which are categorized into deep scalar, shallow scalar, stepped, step/deep scalar, and half-moon breakage, were identified. Although statistical examination in the frequency of associations cannot be conducted because of the small sample size, several trends were observed. First, the number of classes in edge damage is larger in the retouched pieces of SU 1 than those of SU 3. In other words, the flakes from SU 1 have a variety of edge damage, while those from SU 3 are skewed to the shallow scalar retouch. Second, the deep scalar retouch is only associated with the flakes from SU 1, while the half-moon breakage is solely observed on the flakes from SU 3. These differences in the pattern of edge damage between the two groups suggest that the retouched pieces of SU 1 could have served for a variety of activities more than those of SU 3. Moreover, the activities represented in shallow scalar retouch on the retouched pieces from SU 3 (i.e., utilized flakes) indicate that degree of edge-use activities were not intensive during the late Archaic.

Table 14 SU 1 and SU 3: Frequency of Different Edge Damage Observed on Chipped Stone Tools.

Patterns of Edge Damage SU 1 SU 3 Deep Scalar 3 0 Shallow Scalar 4 5 Stepped 2 1 Step/Deep Scalar 1 0 Half-Moon Breakage 0 2 Total 10 8

The degree of tool use intensity was further assessed on the edge length data. Since it is assumed that the edge lengths are correlated to the frequency of utilization, it will be possible to assess the degree of tool use intensity between the SU 1 and SU 3 assemblages. To obtain the standardized value of edge length, total edge lengths in each item was divided by maximum dimension of the item. These standardized values were then compared between the groups of SU 1 and SU 3. It is expected that the closer a value is to 0, the more intensively the tool was used. The median of the standardized edge lengths in SU 3 (0.61, s.d.=0.41) is higher than that of SU 1 (0.55, s.d.=0.23). A comparison of the standardized edge length in retouched pieces (i.e., scrapers, retouched flakes, and utilized flakes) shows that there is a significant difference between the groups of SU 1 and SU 3 (Mann-Whitney: U=25, p=0.203). This suggests that the intensity of utilization of the major chipped-stone tools (i.e., scraper, retouched flakes, and utilized flakes) was not different between the two groups.

41

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS

A series of comparisons in the lithic artifacts from SU 1 and SU 3 exhibited more differences than similarities, for example, in the variation of core reduction, raw material use, size and form of flake blanks, and patterns of edge-damages. In SU 1, the flake blanks were reduced intensively to make flakes suitable for a variety of tasks, while the technology of SU 3 is characterized by an application of core preparation technique to provide more elongated and thicker flakes, and the range of tasks was more limited than that of SU 1. A notable similarity is observed in the low intensity of utilization of the chipped-stone tools and the raw material selections for differential functional requirements: chert and chalcedony were used for the chipped-stone tools; quartzite and sandstone were chosen for ground-stone manufacture. These patterns imply that the range of activities varied between the two occupations, both of which are seasonal. It is plausible that the occupants of Pueblo IV performed a variety of activities, while those of the late Archaic conducted a limited range of activities. Given the assumption that milling technology relates to the use of plant resources (Vierra 1994), the abundance of ground stone (e.g., metate, mano, and hammerstone) in the Late Archaic assemblage suggests that the occupants could have highly relied on the seed-processing activities rather than the acquisition of animal resources. Given the evidence of abundant association in fire-cracked rock, an intensive use of wild plants is suggested. Although no hearths and pits that signify the use of earth ovens (Dering 1999) were recorded in SU 3, plant gathering and processing using heat (e.g., pit-baking) followed by secondary processing of cooked food using ground-stone metates and manos) would have been conducted. Contrary to the gathering activity of the late Archaic occupation of SU 3, activities during the Pueblo IV occupation of SU 1 would have encompassed a wide range including hunting, gathering, cooking, tool maintenance, and agriculture. The relatively low frequency of ground stone at SU 1 indicates that gathering was not highest among the above-mentioned activities during the Pueblo IV occupation (SU 1).

42

43

99 CERAMIC ANALYSIS

Ninety-nine ceramics were recovered during the investigations at LA 134636. These materials came both from the site surface and buried contexts in the northern part of the site, which is affiliated with a Pueblo IV component. Diagnostic ceramics include San Clemente Glaze-polychrome and San Lazaro Glaze-polychrome with the former dating to Glaze A and the latter to Glaze D. The remaining sherds lack attri-butes necessary for their placement in formal diagnostic categories (Table 15). Ceramics were recovered throughout SU 1; the highest densities were found east and southeast of the rubble mound (Feature 1), in the area with the concentration of pit features (Table 4). Several Rio Grande Glazeware rim sherds were found, which provided a basis for assigning a time frame for the occupation of the Pueblo IV component.

Table 15 Pueblo IV Component: Vessel Forms Identified by Ceramic Type.

ANALYSIS METHODS

Prior to the start of the analysis, all ceramics were washed at OCA laboratory. To address the project’s research questions, the following attributes were documented on every sherd: ceramic type, vessel form (e.g., jar, bowl), ceramic unit (such as body, rim), temper type, recycled modification type (e.g., sherd with ground edge), presence of soot, burn marks, and count. All data were entered into a Microsoft Access computer database. In addition, general observations of paste color, temper size, surface finish, and paint quality were made during the recording process and documented in a descriptive form. While most of these attributes were recorded through naked-eye observations, identification of temper was carried out using a 70x microscope. Finally, individual ceramics were counted to produce a total ceramic count that would be a more realistic representation of the total vessels used at this locus. With this in mind, whenever it was possible to refit two sherds, they were counted as “one”. This decreased the original total count of sherds from 109 into 99. Attributes, such as bowl vs. jar form, presence of red and/or white slip on the exterior and interior, and temper, aided in determining that five was the minimum number of individual vessels probably used at LA 134636.

CERAMIC TYPOLOGY

Standard typological criteria (e.g., identifying the type and quality of paint and the rim profile) were employed in typing the Pueblo IV ceramics. Six typological terms were used to classify the entire collec-tion. These types are described in the following discussion.

Rio Grande Glazeware

With 62 identified sherds, Rio Grande Glazewares represented the dominant ceramic group in the collec-tion. All sherds originated from bowl vessel forms.

San Clemente Glaze-polychrome

Seven San Clemente Glaze-polychrome rim sherds were found in the collection. With its diagnostic attri-butes, including direct straight rims on both jar and bowl forms with commonly used simple geometric

Ceramic Type Bowl Indeterminate Jar Total Gray utility, crushed rock -- 7 30 37 Unidentified glaze-on-red 18 -- -- 18 San Clemente Glaze-polychrome 7 -- -- 7 Unidentified glaze-polychrome 22 -- -- 22 San Lazaro Glaze-polychrome 1 -- -- 1 Unidentified Rio Grande glaze 14 -- -- 14 Total 62 7 30 99

44

glaze-paint design motifs (Honea 1968), the type belongs to the Glaze A period of the Rio Grande Glaze-ware sequence. Four subtypes of San Clemente Glaze-polychrome have been identified in the middle and northern Rio Grande Valley region (Morales 1997:596-7). The white-slipped interior and red-slipped exterior indicate that these sherds belong to the first subtype. The interior slip alternates between creamy-white and white. In addition to the 7 rim sherds, 21 glaze-polychrome body sherds were separated from the remainder of the assemblage. All these specimens have a white slip on the interior and red slip on the exterior. The paste is light brown and gradates to orange toward the interior edge. Fine to medium-size fragments of andesite vitrophyre are mixed in the paste. With the same paste color and temper, it is safe to suggest these sherds probably came from the same San Clemente Glaze-polychrome bowl (Figure 22a).

Figure 22 SU 1: Examples of ceramics recovered: (a) San Clemente Glaze-polychrome bowl rim sherd; (b) San Lazaro Glaze-polychrome bowl rim sherd; (c) glaze-on-red disk with ground edge; and (d) glaze-on-red polygon with ground edge.

Based on the observations made on both rim and body sherds, the original design on the interior of the vessel consisted of simple broad and medium thick glaze paint lines. Most of the red-slipped exterior of the bowl was probably unpainted with only a few small glaze-painted elements freely “floating” around the vessel’s perimeter. The cross-sectional view of several rim sherds indicates the vessel had a restricted orifice. Matching several larger rim sherds against a template with concentric circles produced an orifice diameter estimate for the original vessel to range from 27–29 cm. Because of the restricted orifice, the maximum diameter of the bowl was roughly 1 cm greater than its orifice (about 28–30 cm).

Glaze-on-red

Eighteen body sherds were classified under an indeterminate category glaze-on-red. All of these items came from a bowl, although the presence of two different temper components indicates that the sherds came from at least two vessels. The lack of rim sherds precludes safely typing these items; however, 10 of the glaze-on-red sherds have a non-leaky paint and their paste is light gray toward the exterior edge and orange near the interior surface. These sherds have andesite vitrophyre temper. Their overall appearance is comparable to those from the San Clemente Glaze-polychrome bowl. It is possible, therefore, that the 10 glaze-on-red sherds came from a Glaze A period ceramic type, such as Agua Fria Glaze-on-red, Arenal Glaze-polychrome, or Los Padillas Glaze-polychrome. By contrast, the remaining 8 glaze-on-red sherds

45

have surfaces painted with a leaky glaze, a paint type that was commonly used during later period glazeware manufacture. While the first 10 glaze-on-red sherds have 4-mm thick vessel walls, these items have sherd thickness no more than 3 mm. Their paste is brown and soft and contains fine to medium-sized specks of rhyolitic tuff of clear to very light gray color.

San Lazaro Glaze-polychrome

One San Lazaro Glaze-on-red bowl rim sherd was recovered during excavations in the northern portion of SU 1. This Glaze D ceramic type is known for its thick and tall bowl rim, which is an exaggerated ver-sion of its predecessor, Espinoso Glaze-polychrome of the Glaze C period. The slip color on San Lazaro Glaze-polychrome bowls ranges from white, light fawn, tan, pink, and red-orange to red. The designs are a demonstration of commonly non-runny glaze paint bordering a red matte paint (Honea 1968). The San Lazaro rim sherd found in SU 1 (Figure 22b) had a gray and hard paste mixed with fine sand consisting of numerous small particles of minerals and rocks. One body sherd with the same paste and slip color was also found and may have come from the same vessel. The original vessel had an orifice diameter comparable to that of the San Clemente Glaze-polychrome bowl, measuring about 27–29 cm.

Utility Ware

Gray Utility, Crushed Rock

Gray utility ceramics are the only non-glaze paint ceramic type found in the collection. Thirty-seven sherds were recovered from both the surface and the buried contexts in SU 1. This ceramic group con-sists of 2 rim sherds and 35 body sherds, all of which may have come from a single vessel. Based on the rim profile it is likely the vessel was a relatively short, globular jar with wide mouth and a slightly out-flaring rim, an ideal shape of a cooking vessel. Several large body sherds show that the original vessel had a poorly smoothed exterior surface. Wiping and smearing was the primary surface finish technique and, in some cases, unsmoothed coils were visible through wiping marks. Soot marks are present on body sherds that came from the lower part of the vessel, indicating its use as a cooking container. The paste on this ware was very dark gray to almost black. Fine to medium-sized andesite vitrophyre was the primary inclusion in the paste, although round to sub-rounded grains of fine quartz were also found.

TEMPER ANALYSIS

The analysis of temper revealed that three temper groups (andesite vitrophyre, rhyolitic tuff, and stream sand) were present in the paste of all sherds. As shown in Table 16, most sherds are tempered with the volcanic rock with andesite represented in the majority of sherds (n=88), followed by tuff (n=9) and only 2 sherds exhibited sand temper. It is possible that these 2 sherds came from one and the same San Lazaro Glaze-polychrome vessel. Also, the 10 unidentified glaze-on-red sherds and the single unidentified Rio Grande glaze sherd may all have belonged to one container. By contrast, the andesite vitrophyre temper was found in all San Clemente Glaze-polychrome sherds, all gray utility sherds, and about half (n=10) of the glaze-on-red ceramics.

Table 16 Temper Identified in Individual Ceramic Types.

Temper Ceramic Type

Andesite vitrophyre Rhyolitic tuff Sand Total

Unidentified glaze-on-red 10 8 18 San Clemente Glaze-polychrome 7 7 Unidentified glaze-polychrome 21 1 22 San Lazaro Glaze-polychrome 1 1 Unidentified Rio Grande glaze 13 1 14 Gray utility, crushed rock 37 37 Total 88 9 2 99

46

CHRONOLOGY

Standard criteria were used to type diagnostic ceramics using relevant published sources. Mera (1933) first divided Rio Grande Glazewares into six chronological groups (Glazes A–F). Their estimated date ranges were later adjusted by Warren (1977). The following proposed date ranges offer an estimated occupation time frame for the LA 134636 Pueblo IV component.

Agua Fria Glaze-on-red (Glaze A)? AD 1315–1425 San Clemente Glaze-polychrome (Glaze A) AD 1325–1425 San Lazaro Glaze-polychrome (Glaze D) AD 1490–1515 Gray utility, crushed rock (Pueblo IV) AD 1300–1700+

CERAMIC ASSEMBLAGE

The fill of three features in SU 1 had small quantities of ceramics (Table 17). Two glaze-on-red sherds were collected within the oxidized stain (Feature 3). Three sherds (one San Clemente Glaze-polychrome rim and two unidentified glaze-polychrome body sherds) were collected from the suspected trash pit (Feature 9). Four ceramics, including one gray utility, two San Clemente Glaze-polychrome rim sherds, and one unidentified glaze-polychrome body sherd came from the fire pit (Feature 11). The presence of the gray utility sherd inside the fire pit is not surprising as the original utility jar was probably used for cooking (other gray utility body sherds were recovered from 1 x 1 m grid squares in the area around the fire pit). No ceramics were recovered from the posthole features or the two pit features located north of the fire pit.

Table 17 Pueblo IV Component: Ceramics Recovered from Archeological Context.

Feature No. Ceramic Type Non-feature Context

3 9 11 Total

Gray utility, crushed rock 36 -- -- -- 37 Unidentified glaze-on-red 16 2 -- -- 18 San Clemente Glaze-polychrome 4 -- 1 2 7 Unidentified glaze-polychrome 19 -- 2 1 22 San Lazaro Glaze-polychrome 1 -- -- -- 1 Unidentified Rio Grande glaze 14 -- -- -- 14 Total 90 2 3 4 99

Modified Sherds

Edge modification was noticed on three sherds. A closer inspection of these specimens revealed evidence of recycling broken sherds for other (secondary) use. The first object is a glaze-on-red disk with ground edge (Figure 22c). The item is 4 cm in diameter and was made by grinding edges from a probable broken fragment of a glaze-on-red bowl. The function of the object is unclear, but perhaps it was intended to be a pendant pre-form. The second recycled sherd is a fragment of a polygon with a ground edge reworked from a glaze-on-red bowl (Figure 22d). The object has a triangular shape but, due to its missing part, it is difficult to determine its full shape and function. The item may have been used as a pendant. The third recycled item is a small glaze-on-red sherd with a simple ground edge. The object was part of a large piece of a recycled sherd of unknown function. The three recycled sherds came from a closely unidenti-fied glaze-on-red type (possibly Agua Fria Glaze-on-red). Unworked glaze-on-red sherds with the same temper and other similar ceramics attributes were recovered from SU 1. It is possible that a glaze-on-red bowl broke during occupation and, subsequently, some of the sherds were reshaped for secondary use.

Most of the LA 134636 ceramics were recovered from the area primarily on top of the sandy knoll, supporting the inference that this was the main area for the occupation of the Pueblo IV locus. Table 4 shows that the largest ceramic densities are located in the central part of SU 1. These grid squares were

47

excavated on top of the sandy knoll where pit features, and postholes were encountered on the prehistoric occupational surface. This supports the notion that the feature area with a possible ramada shelter was the most frequently used part of the Pueblo IV component.

DISCUSSION AND SUMMARY

The ceramic assemblage revealed that at least five individual vessels may have been used in the SU 1 area (Table 18). Of these, four are glazeware bowls and one is a gray utility jar. The inferred globular shape of the original gray utility vessel and the presence of soot on some of its body sherds from the lower part of the vessel confirm our interpretation that this was a cooking container. Interpreting the function of the glazeware bowls is somewhat ambiguous because little evidence of the use of such containers is typically recovered from short-term occupation field house facilities. It has been suggested that these relatively shallow but wide-open containers may have served multiple purposes at similar field house sites. In 2005, the author analyzed glazeware pottery from numerous Pueblo IV field loci on La Bajada Mesa. These sites revealed ceramic assemblages similar to those of LA 134636. The orifice diameter on all painted bowls from La Bajada Mesa revealed that three size groups existed within the project’s ceramic collection. The smallest group was represented by bowls with orifice ranging from 14–17 cm in diameter. The medium-sized bowls averaged 19–29 cm in orifice diameter; the largest bowls measured from 30–35 cm. The group of the smallest bowls may have been used as eating, scooping, or serving containers. The medium bowls were interpreted as predominantly serving containers while bowls in the largest group may have been used for gathering wild and/or agricultural foodstuffs and for temporary storage of food commodities (Kurota 2005:133, Figure 13.5). The orifice diameter on both the San Clemente Glaze-polychrome and the San Lazaro Glaze-polychrome bowls is estimated to be 27–29 cm. These estimates place the bowls in the upper end of the medium-size group of the above described model. It is, therefore, suggested that the primary function of these two bowls may have been serving food and possibly gather-ing or short-term storage of wild or agricultural plants and perhaps meat products.

Table 18 Pueblo IV Component: Summary of Minimum Number of Individual Vessels.

Ceramic Type Vessel Form

No. of Sherds

Temper Production Date Range

Comments

San Clemente Glaze-polychrome

bowl 7 rim andesite vitrophyre

AD 1325–1425 20 body sherds, probably come from same vessel

Glaze-on-red bowl 10 body andesite vitrophyre

AD 1300–1425? non-leaky paint, may be from Glaze A type

Glaze-on-red bowl 8 body rhyolitic tuff

post-AD 1425? leaky paint, may be from later period glaze type

San Lazaro Glaze-polychrome

bowl 1 rim sand AD 1490–1515 1 body sherd, with similar attributes may also be from same vessel

Gray utility, crush-ed rock

jar 37 rim & body

andesite vitrophyre

AD 1300–1700+ all sherds, probably come from same vessel; exterior soot marks indicate use for cooking

It cannot be claimed with absolute certainty where the LA134636 pottery was manufactured. The temper analysis revealed that at least three of the vessels had andesite vitrophyre in the paste, and one vessel (glaze-on-red) was tempered with rhyolitic tuff. Such lithic inclusions are consistent with those found in the pottery from the Puaray Pueblo (LA 326 [Morales 1997:855, Table 12.1]). This village, located only a few miles northeast of LA 134636 in the Rio Grande floodplain, was occupied from Glaze A-Glaze F. Other large villages contemporaneous with LA 134636 were also present in the valley area, e.g., Los Corrales (LA 288); Kuaua (LA 187) (Habicht-Mauche 1993:2, Figure 4); Alameda Pueblo (its exact location is to this date unknown); the Chamisal Site (LA 22765 [Sargeant 1987]). The closest of all is the “Mann Site” (LA 290), located only little over one mile east of LA 134636. The LA 290 ceramics indi-cate the site was occupied from at least AD 1200–1500. It would have taken less than hour to walk from the Mann Site to LA 134636; therefore, the residents could have practiced dry land farming with frequent maintenance and timely harvest of maize crops.

48

49

1100 FAUNAL ANALYSIS by William T. Brown

A total of 35 bone fragments were recovered during work at LA 134636, including 6 large mammal (deer size and larger), 3 jackrabbit (Lepus sp.), 2 cottontail rabbit (Sylvilagus sp.), 2 medium-size mammal (bigger than a cottontail rabbit but smaller than a deer), 2 very small mammal (mouse size), and 1 indeter-minate mouse. Of the assemblage, 19 fragments could not be identified; 15 proveniences yielded faunal remains at the site. The distribution of animal bone in SU 1 is provided in Table 19 and Table 5. No bone was recovered from SU 3.

For this analysis, relative taxonomic abundance was derived from fragment counts, as minimum numbers of individuals never exceeded “1”. Bones not culturally modified could potentially be recent intruders, and thus not archeological. No signs of butchering were noted, but all of the processed animals were highly fragmentary, suggesting resource maximization by the site inhabitants. Eleven (11) fragments were calcined and 4 were burned, indicating that at least these fragments represent food remains.

Table 19 LA 134636: Distribution of Animal Bone.

Study Unit

Feature #

FS # Taxon Element Side Modification Fragment Count

Unidentified Indet. Calcined 1 1 -- 31 Unidentified Indet. 1

1 -- 38 Unidentified Indet. Burned 1 1 -- 43 Unidentified Indet. 1

Jackrabbit Sternal element NA Burned 1 Jackrabbit Phalanx Indet. Burned 1

Medium mammal Indet. 1 Unidentified Indet. Burned 1

1 -- 46

Unidentified Indet. Calcined 1 1 -- 50 Large mammal Indet. 1

Cottontail rabbit Maxilla Both 1 Cottontail rabbit Central incisor Indet. 1

1 -- 55

Unidentified Indet. 2 1 -- 60 Unidentified Indet. Calcined 5 1 -- 61 Large mammal Indet. 1

Very small mammal Femur head Right Calcined 1 Very small mammal Humerus head Indet. 1

Unidentified Indet. Calcined 1

1 -- 62

Unidentified Indet. 1 1 -- 65 Jackrabbit Humerus, distal

end Left Calcined 1

1 -- 69 Large mammal Indet. 1 Large mammal Indet. 3 1 -- 86

Unidentified Indet. 1 Indeterminate mouse Phalanx Indet. 1 1 11

(hearth) 95

Unidentified Indet. 2 3 -- 111 Medium mammal Indet. Calcined 1 3 -- 121 Unidentified Indet. 1

50

51

1111 FARMING ON ALBUQUERQUE’S WEST SIDE: ARCHEOBOTANICAL ANALYSIS OF FLOTATION AND MACROBOTANICAL SAMPLES by Pamela J. McBride

INTRODUCTION

Chapter 11 reports on archeobotanical analysis results of 13 flotation samples and 13 macrobotanical samples from 7 features and 10 other contexts in SU 1. This part of LA 134636 is a Pueblo IV (early Classic period) activity area surrounded by four postholes, possibly indicating the presence of a ramada-like structure. A rock concentration to the east of the inferred ramada may be the remains of a windbreak that provided some protection from prevailing east/northeast winds. Features sampled for archeobo-tanical remains included a charcoal concentration from above the occupation surface in the ramada; four postholes; hearth (Feature 11); ash/charcoal pit; unburned pit with a shelf; trash pit, and several grid squares. The site also has a late Archaic component that was investigated in SU 3. Because no charred plant remains were found in this context, only materials from SU 1 were subjected to this analysis.

The site is located in an area of gently rolling sand dunes of Albuquerque’s West Mesa. A broad playa is located about 175 m west of the site. Vegetation is typical of Plains Grassland (Brown 1994) that has been overgrazed where snakeweed (Gutierrezia sarothrae) and sand sage (Artemisia filifolia) are the most conspicuous plants on the landscape. Globemallow (Sphaeralcea sp.) is widespread, growing to heights of at least 3 ft. Juniper (Juniperus monosperma), soapweed yucca (Yucca glauca), four-wing saltbush (Atriplex canescens), nightshade (Solanum sp.), Russian thistle (Salsola kali), scorpionweed (Phacelia integrifolia), prickly pear cactus, and cholla (Opuntia sp.) appear sporadically, while the most common grass observed was ricegrass (Achnatherum hymenoides). Localized concentrations of what has been tentatively identified as woolly plantain (Plantago purshii) were also present along with sand dropseed (Sporobolus cryptandrus) and galleta grass (Hilaria jamesii).

Corn agriculture, indicated by the recovery of corn cupules, kernels, shank fragments, and cob fragments, could have taken place in the broad playa to the west of the site or in smaller playas that formed in areas of sunken basalt bedrock. Wild plant taxa identified include three weedy annuals, at least three grasses, and two perennials. Wood charcoal was primarily saltbush along with a small percentage of juniper and a trace of an unknown non-conifer. Maize was the only domesticate recovered.

METHODS

Archeobotanical analysis of material from the project involved macrobotanical sample analysis, flotation processing, scan analysis, and quantification as described below. Identification was aided by the use of a modern comparative collection and comparison to photographs in seed identification manuals (Martin and Barkley 1961; Delorit 1970). Scientific nomenclature and common names followed those presented in Martin and Hutchins (1980). Identifications were made to different taxonomic levels: families (e.g., Gramineae), genus (e.g., Chenopodium), and species (e.g., Zea mays). Plant remains designated as “indeterminate” are unidentifiable due to erosion or fragmentation.

MACROBOTANICAL SAMPLE ANALYSIS

Macrobotanical field samples are fortuitous plant specimens collected as they are encountered in the field either during excavation or the screening of fill and are not associated with an exact provenience. In spite of this, vegetal specimens can offer further insight into the diet and subsistence of prehistoric populations. Vegetal specimens were identified, counted, weighed, and placed in polypropylene vials. The taxon, plant part, confidence of the identification, condition, count, and weight of the specimen were recorded.

52

FLOTATION SAMPLES

Flotation Processing

The Office of Contract Archeology (OCA) uses a standard decant flotation system as described by Hammett and McBride (1993). The 13 flotation samples ranged in volume from 1.65–18.55 liters. Each flotation sample was poured into a bucket of water, agitated gently until the botanical material floated to the surface, and then decanted onto a clean piece of chiffon material to dry. The residue at the bottom of the bucket (called the heavy fraction) was rinsed to eliminate soil matrix, dried, and examined by OCA personnel to recover lithic and bone material.

Scan Analysis

The floated material was passed through a series of graduated screens (US Standard Sieves with 4-, 2- 1-, and 0.5-mm mesh). The material from each screen size was examined using a binocular microscope (7x to 45x). Charred reproductive plant parts like seeds and fruits, as well as non-reproductive plant parts (grass and monocot stems), were identified and quantified as an estimate of abundance/liter. If more than 20 pieces of wood charcoal were present in a sample, then 20 pieces (selected randomly from the 4- and 2-mm screens) were identified, separated by taxon, counted, and weighed. The remainder of each fraction was then scanned to identify any taxa that might have been missed. Otherwise, all identifiable wood charcoal from a sample was analyzed.

All wood and carbonized plant parts identified from each sample were placed in polypropylene capsules or plastic bags and labeled for future reference. Non-cultural remains, such as roots and insect parts observed during flotation analysis, were also recorded. These observations are reported along with sam-ple volumes (before flotation) and sample weights (after flotation) in Table 20.

Table 20 LA 134636: Flotation Sample Summary.

FS No. Sample Volume (liters) Sample Weight (grams) Roots Insects Other 31 4.8 10.6 + + -- 67 3.65 9.1 + + -- 85 N 1/2 13.7 25.1 + + -- 85 S 1/2 18.55 47.9 + + -- 88 4.75 9.1 + + -- 89 N 1/2 12.65 13.5 + + -- 89 S 1/2 2.35 3.6 + + -- 90 1.65 2.2 + + -- 92 N1/2 8.0 16.3 + + -- 92 S1/2 10.0 20.8 + + -- 93 8.35 15.6 + + -- 94 4.4 4.9 + + -- 95 12.0 21.0 + + rodent feces

QUANTIFICATION

Three forms of quantification were used during flotation analysis: abundance, absolute counts, and mini-mum number of individuals (MNI). Each of these is described below.

Abundance: To assess the abundance of charred plant remains in scanned samples, an estimate of the number of these materials per liter of soil is recorded, which allows for an approximate quantification of charred plant remains in scanned samples.

Absolute Count and MNI: During macrobotanical analysis, absolute counts and MNIs were recorded for charred corn parts and grass stems. The absolute count includes fragments as well as whole plant parts. The MNI count was used effectively by Hammett and McBride (1993) on the Transwestern Pipe-line Project. This is a quantification measure borrowed from faunal analysts and osteologists, which

53

allows the archeobotanist to distinguish clearly between the presence of whole or fragmented remains when reporting results. In macrobotanical tables, two numbers are recorded for non-wood specimens: the first number is the total number including fragments encountered in a sample, while the number in parentheses represents the MNI value. An MNI value of 1 was given to a plant part if more than one half of that unit was present.

RESULTS OF FLOTATION AND MACROBOTANICAL ANALYSIS

Three annual seed taxa were identified: goosefoot, bugseed, and winged pigweed, of which the latter was the most common (Table 21). Winged pigweed has the largest seeds of the three taxa and is widespread in sandy ground from altitudes of 3000 to 5000 feet (Martin and Hutchins 1980:362). These three taxa were probably used in a similar way as that described for goosefoot. The leaves provide a welcome source of greens early in the growing season and later, the seeds can be collected, parched, and added to corn meal to make bread, cakes, mush or gruel (Harrington 1967:71).

Table 21 LA 134636: Flotation Scan Carbonized Plant Remains.

FS No. 31 67 85 N ½

85 S ½

90 92 N ½

92 S ½

93 95

Feature No., Type 509N/505E Level 3

Charcoal concen-tration, above occupation surface in ramada

5, Ash/charcoal pit 8, Posthole

6, Pit feature 9, Trash Pit

11, Hearth

Cultural Affiliation Cultural Annuals: Chenopodium Goosefoot

+

+

Corispermum bugseed

+

Cycloloma winged pigweed

+ + + + + +

Cultigens: Zea mays Corn

+ cupule, + cf. shank

+ cupule + cupule

+ cf. cupule

+ cupule, + cf. kernel

Grasses: Gramineae + cf. floret

+ stem

possible Achnatherum hymenoides ricegrass

+

Sporobolus dropseed grass

+ +

Other: Monocot + stem

+ stem

Indeterminate +, + plant part

+, + plant part

+ plantpart

+ plant part

+,+ plant part

Perennials: Atriplex canescens four-wing saltbush

cf. + cf. +, + fruit

+ fruit + fruit + fruit

Sphaeralcea globemallow

+ +

All plant materials are seeds unless indicated otherwise. + 1-10/liter, cf. compares favorably.

Grasses were not as abundant as might be expected in a grassland environment with a variety of choices. Dropseed grass was recovered from the hearth and the Feature 5 ash/charcoal pit, a possible grass floret was found just above the occupation surface in the ramada, and a very eroded specimen that may be a

54

ricegrass seed was identified from the pit. With its large seed size, ricegrass is usually a valuable commodity, especially because it is one of the first resources available in late spring. The focus may have been on the domesticated grass, corn, recovered in five of the seven contexts with carbonized remains. The practice of using spent cobs for fuel was widespread, and the occupants of LA 134636 were no exception. Several fragments and a whole kernel were recovered in the hearth, most likely the result of an accident during food preparation. Corn collected as macrobotanical samples was quite varied and consist-ed of two kernels, numerous cupules, shank fragments, and cupule segments, adding to the total number of specimens from the site.

Perennial taxa were limited to saltbush fruits and possible seeds, found in four contexts, along with globemallow seeds that were recovered from the hearth and the trash pit. Although postholes are often receptacles for debris, three of the four postholes were devoid of burned plant material and the fourth contained only two four-wing saltbush fruit fragments. Unfortunately, no charcoal was present that might have given a clue to the identity of the wood used for posts. The saltbush fruits and seeds could be residue from firewood use or from cooking the ground seeds into a cereal (Dunmire and Tierney 1995:130). Globemallow seeds have been found in archaeological contexts in New Mexico (Chaco Canyon [Toll 1985]; Rio Rancho [McBride 1998], among many more areas) and Arizona (Sanders [McBride 1996]; Navajo [McBride 1997]) suggesting that they were regularly eaten. Monocot and grass stems could have been used for tinder or may represent roofing material.

Flotation wood charcoal was predominately saltbush (88% by weight) with juniper comprising only 12% of the assemblage (Table 22). This suggests that saltbush comprised a higher percentage of the vegetation cover in the early Classic period than it does today. The same pattern is repeated in the macrobotanical wood assemblage where saltbush has an even higher percent presence by weight of 97% (Table 23).

Table 22 LA 134636: Flotation Scan Wood Charcoal by Count and Weight in Grams.

FS No. 31 85 N ½

85 S ½

92 N ½

92 S ½

93 95 Total

Feature 509N/505E Level 3

5, Ash/charcoal pit 6 Pit 9 Trash pit

11 Hearth Weight (g)

%

Conifers: Juniperus Juniper

2/<0.1g

1/<0.1g

3/0.1g

0.1

12

Non-Conifers: Atriplex Saltbush

4/0.1g

5/<0.1g

11/0.1g

2/0.1g

12/0.1g

7/<0.1g

14/0.3g

0.7

88

Unknown Non-Conifer

1/<0.1g 4/<0.1g <0.1 <1

Total 4/0.1g 5/<0.1g 13/0.1g 3/0.1g 7/<0.1g 17/0.4g 0.8 100

SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS

Nine out of 13 samples yielded the remains of bugseed, goosefoot, winged pigweed, corn, globemallow, dropseed grass, possible ricegrass, composite family, and four-wing saltbush. The site structure and archeobotanical remains indicate the LA 134636 was a short-term seasonal camp, occupied from at least late spring when ricegrass seeds begin to mature through the end of the maize harvest. Wood for fuel and possible construction of the ramada was collected from shrubs and trees in the site vicinity.

55

Table 23 LA 134636: Vegetal Sample Wood Charcoal and Plant Remains.

FS No. 24 20 46 23 31 47 49 61 69 62 86 93 95 Totals

Feat

ure

506N

504

E le

vel 1

506N

505

E le

vel 1

508N

505

E le

vel 1

509N

505

E le

vel 2

509N

505

E le

vel 3

509N

506

E le

vel 3

Cha

rcoa

l ric

h fil

l

509N

507

E le

vel 3

509N

508

E le

vel 3

510N

506

E le

vel 3

510N

508

E le

vel 3

F. 9

pos

s. tra

sh p

it,

fill

F. 1

1 he

arth

, fill

Wei

ght (

g)

%

Coni-fers: Juniper

2/ 0.1g

6/ 0.1g

2/ <0.1g

1/ <0.1g

0.2 7

Non-Coni-fers: Atriplex Saltbush

6/ 0.1g

1/ <0.1g

27/ 2.0g

4/ 0.1g

12/ 0.4g

1/ 0.1g

6/ 0.1g

2.8 93

Culti-gens: Zea mays Corn

1(1) ker-nel/ 0.1g

1(1) ker-nel/ <0.1g

18(0) c, 1(1) cs

3(1) c/ <0.1g, 7(7) cs/ 0.4g

5(4) c/ <0.1g, 2(2) cs/0.1g, 7(0) shank/ 0.2g

-

Grasses: Gramin-eae

3(0) stems

Total Wood

2/ 0.1g

6/ 0.1g

6/ 0.1g

3/ <0.1g

28/ 2.0g

- 4/ 0.1g

12/ 0.4g

1/ 0.1g

6/ 0.1g

- - 3/ 0 100

Numbers in ( ) represent minimum number of individuals (MNI).

56

57

1122 SOIL DESCRIPTION AND INTERPRETATION by F. Scott Worman

Geoarcheological investigations are becoming a routine part of archeological research because of their potential to generate important insights into the depositional context of cultural materials, site formation processes, post-depositional disturbance and a plethora of other issues (e.g., Dincauze 2000; Rapp and Hill 1998; Stein and Farrand 2001). At site LA 134636, a soil profile was exposed and recorded during excavation of Study Unit 1 (SU 1). The resulting data are relevant to understanding the context of the archeological materials; the site is located on a stabilized dune surface and, for the most part, it has not been affected by significant erosion or deposition since the prehistoric occupation.

METHODS

After standard excavation of approximately the upper 30 cm of deposits and removal of all archeological materials, the eastern half of unit 505N, 505E in SU1 was excavated to a depth of 40 cm. An additional sounding was excavated to a depth of 87 cm in the northeast quadrant of the unit. The east wall of the unit was cleaned and the soil profile was described. After the soil horizons were identified, a measured drawing of the profile was produced (Figure 7). Characteristics of each soil horizon and stratum were recorded using standard field methods (Birkeland 1999: Appendix 1, 347-359; Buol et al. 1997; Soil Survey Division Staff 1975, 1993). For each pedostratigraphic unit, color, texture, structure, clastic content, hardness, and calcium carbonate and clay film morphology were measured and recorded. Color was estimated using a Munsell Chart (1994) and ped structure and hardness were observed and recorded. A sample of each unit was passed through a 2-mm screen and the clastic content (% gravel) was estimated and described. The texture class of the soil (i.e., sandy silt, clay loam etc.) was estimated by wetting the screened sample and observing characteristics such as consistence, plasticity, stickiness and grittiness. Peds were examined using a 10X loupe to aid in the identification and description of clay films. Calcium carbonate (CaCO3) content was estimated by measuring reactivity to a 10% solution of hydrochloric acid (10% HCl) and by visual inspection of the presence and abundance of CaCO3 filaments, nodules, pendants and whitening of the matrix. These observations were used to estimate the stage of carbonate development (Gile et al. 1966; Machette 1985). Finally, the boundaries between horizons were described and the presence of krotovina (rodent or insect burrows) and any unusual characteristics were noted.

RESULTS

Table 24 summarizes field observations and descriptions of the soil horizons. Soils in the study area are mapped as the Alameda Sandy Loam (Hacker 1977:11 and Plate 10). Deposits at the study location correspond well with the published descriptions, with the exception that gravels are not present and the total thickness of the sediments is greater. These differences are probably due to the initial deposition of materials at the study locus by eolian processes. The straightforward horizonation of the solum suggests a single, protracted period of pedogenesis in relatively undifferentiated parent material.

DISCUSSION

The described profile is located at the eastern margin of SU 1 of LA 134636, south of the crest of a small hill that appears to be a stabilized sand dune. The soil presents six clear horizons that mostly formed due to translocation of materials from at or near the surface to different depths. The depth of translocation and illuviation is related to the mobility of different materials in the soil column. Clays generally are transported as colloids, while soluble chemical salts (e.g., gypsum: CaSO4–2(H2O)) and calcium carbon-ate (CaCO3) are dissolved and re-precipitated; carbonates and salts are therefore generally more mobile and illuviated at a deeper level. The simple horizonation of the soil suggests that the parent materials were deposited relatively rapidly as a single unit and that pedogenesis (soil formation) has been ongoing for a protracted period of time without significant deposition of additional material or removal by erosion.

58

Table 24 LA 134636: Soil Descriptions.

Depth (cm)

Soil Hori-zon.

Mun-sell

Color

Struc-ture*

% Gra-vel

Texture Class

Clay Films Carbon-ates **

Lower Boundary

Comments/ Notes

0-3 A 10YR 6/4

Single grain

0 Sand None Weakly efferves-cent

Abrupt, wavy

Loose, mobile sand, recent depo-sition/redeposition

3-18 ABb 7.5YR 6/4

Weak, medium, granular

0 Loamy sand

None Weakly effervescent

Gradual, smooth

Some organic inclusions (root zone)

18-33 Btk 10YR 7/4

Weak, medium, sub-angular blocky

0 Sandy loam

Upper: very few, faint ped faces. Lower: common, faint, pores

Strongly efferves-cent, Stage II-

Gradual, smooth

Horizon visibly whitened by CaCO3

33-43 Bk 10YR 6/4

Weak, medium, sub-angular blocky

0 Sandy loam

None Strongly effervescent, Stage I+

Gradual, smooth

Sand fraction is very fine

43-75 Bky 10YR 6/4

Weak, medium, sub-angular blocky

0 Loamy sand

None Strongly effervescent

Gradual, smooth

Stratum identified by clear nodules. Nodules are gyp-sum, not efferves-cent; sand coarser than above

75+ (87 at base)

C 10YR 6/6

Weak, very coarse, granular

0 Sand None none Structure probably affected by slight moisture

*structure designation after Birkeland (1999)** carbonates stage designation after Gile et al. (1966) and Machette (1985)

Although soil characteristics do not suggest major erosion or sedimentation, there is some evidence for both processes in the upper part of the soil profile. The lack of characteristics indicating soil development in the upper 3 cm of deposits and the abrupt, wavy, lower boundary indicate recent deposition or rework-ing. This loose, mobile surface layer is widespread on Albuquerque’s west side, and it most likely results from destabilization of large areas of the landscape by recent human activities including construction and development. Soil structure and slight reddening in the subjacent horizon imply that it has been in place for an extended period of time. The abrupt boundary at the base of the A horizon and the lack of stratification within this first buried horizon suggest that an unknown but probably small (~ a few cm) amount of erosion occurred before the recent deposition of surface materials. The designation of this horizon as ABb reflects a previous soil formation that occurred when it was at or near the surface; on-going pedogenesis as altered materials (primarily clays) are currently being illuviated at this depth.

The gradual, smooth lower boundary of the ABb horizon suggests that it is genetically related to the more deeply buried soil horizons. Clay films, structure, and the accumulation of pedogenic CaCO3 in the subjacent Btk stratum imply a long period of pedogenesis and, therefore, great antiquity for these deposits. The Bk and Bky horizons corroborate this interpretation. As noted above, they reflect the movement of water and pedogenically altered materials to different depths in the soil column. Unaltered parent materials are present at the base of the exposure, below the depth of frequent infiltration and evaporation.

59

Because soils form slowly on stable surfaces and follow a more or less predictable trajectory of develop-ment, they can be used to estimate how long a surface has been stable and when the parent materials were deposited (e.g., Harden 1982; Harden and Taylor 1983). The factors affecting soil formation are deter-mined largely by local conditions (Jenny 1941), so chronological inferences ideally should be based on comparisons to dated deposits near a study site. Fortunately, Dr. Bruce Huckell has carried out an extensive program of geoarcheological investigations at the Boca Negra Wash (BNW) site, located a few hundred meters from LA 134636 (Huckell et al. 2001; Holliday et al. 2005). His research has produced 24 radiocarbon dates and 6 optically stimulated luminescence (OSL) dates associated with soils in several settings, and has provided an excellent set of data for comparison.

The degree of soil development at the described profile and particularly the morphology of the pedogenic CaCO3 correspond well with the characteristics recorded by Holliday et al. (2005: 19-20; Table 5) for nearby deposits at the BNW dune trench. They note that their trench exposed sediments typical of a sand sheet that is widespread in the area. Two OSL dates determined that those materials were initially deposited 20,000–23,000 years BP (Holliday et al. (2005: Table 2), or roughly contemporaneous with the last glacial maximum. The similarities between the soils at the dune trench and LA 134636 strongly suggest that initial deposition probably occurred at approximately the same time at both study loci.

Although the degree of pedogenesis is very similar at the two study loci, there are two significant differences between the described soils. First, there is evidence at the BNW dune trench for two episodes of deposition separated by a period of erosion; the temporal separation between depositional events was not sufficient to yield statistically different OSL dates for the two deposits (Holliday et al. (2005). All of the evidence at LA 134636, on the other hand, implies that the parent materials there were emplaced in a single event. It is possible that deeper excavation would have revealed a buried soil correlative with the earlier episode of deposition, but with the current data it is not possible to determine which of the two Pleistocene events recorded at the dune trench locus corresponds to deposition at LA 134636.

The second difference between the loci is that gypsum (CaSO4–2(H2O)) is present at LA 134636, but is not noted in any of the soils described by Holliday et al. (2005). The gypsum is probably related to the position of LA 134636 downwind of the BNW playa, which filled with water and dried out several times during the late Pleistocene and Holocene (Holliday et al. (2005). The repeated desiccation likely resulted in enrichment of surface sediments with chemical salts. Presumably, those salt-rich sediments were subsequently eroded by eolian processes and redeposited downwind, to be incorporated into soils there. It is somewhat surprising that the presence of gypsum was not noted in the playa deposits themselves (Holliday et al. (2005: Table 4A). This is likely due to the far more complicated stratigraphy of the playa deposits relative to LA 134636 and to difficulties in differentiating gypsum from carbonates when both are present in the same stratum. In addition, it is possible that whatever gypsum may have been present when the playa was dry was dissolved and flushed from the soil profile there when standing water was present for extended periods.

CONCLUSIONS

In any case, neither of the differences noted above fundamentally changes the information gained from comparing deposits at LA 134636 to those described during investigations at the BNW site. Sandy parent material was deposited at LA 134636 approximately 20,000–23,000 years BP. The dune surface was subsequently stabilized, and it has been subjected to very little erosion or additional sedimentation prior to the reworking of a few centimeters of surface materials in the twentieth century.

Artifacts and cultural deposits at the site were recovered in approximately the upper 20 cm of deposits, corroborating the impression that the surface has been stable for an extended period of time. Local geo-morphic processes have not significantly affected the site since the Pleistocene and therefore have not altered the locations of cultural materials other than minor reworking of a few centimeters at the surface. Observations in the field suggest, however, that the near-surface strata (upper ~20 cm) have been subject-ed to considerable bioturbation, primarily by rodents. Aside from a few small artifacts that might have

60

been transported deeper into the soil column by bioturbation, it is extremely unlikely that there are any cultural materials buried below the depth of excavations at LA 134636. In addition, the stability of the surface and the widespread evidence of bioturbation in the upper layers make it unlikely that multiple occupations could be differentiated by the stratigraphic position of artifacts.

The long-term stability of the surface reflected by soil development at SU 1 should not be considered evidence for stability of the site as a whole. The decreased thickness of strata that yielded artifacts toward the western edge of the excavated area at SU 1 suggests increased erosion and deflation, as would be expected at the windward edge of a dune. The best preserved portions of SU 1 are probably located east of a line determined approximately by the location of a contour at 100.5m (Figure 3). Similarly, the decreasing total thickness of deposits above the basalt bedrock as revealed by auger holes placed west of SU 1 toward SU 2 suggests that areas west of SU 1 may have been subjected to significant erosion during the Holocene. Therefore, it is not surprising that SU 2 was determined to be a natural bedrock outcrop and not a cultural feature. Finally, site topography and observations of surface characteristics suggests that artifacts recovered from SU 3 were in a deflated context. While the spatial separation of SU 1 and SU 3 implies different occupations, it is likely that erosion has significantly altered meaningful spatial relationships between artifacts within SU 3.

61

1133 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS

Excavations at LA 134636 revealed the presence of two closely positioned prehistoric components asso-ciated with hunting, gathering, camping, and agricultural subsistence strategies. The first component is the previously known Pueblo IV field facility originally identified by Huckell (2002c). The second, considerably older component is a probable camp dating to the late Archaic, which was discovered and fully excavated during the current undertaking. Approximately 12 m of space with few or no artifacts between the two loci supports the inference that the mixing of archeological material is minimal. This is also underlined by the fact that no pottery was recovered from the Archaic locus.

Excavating the two previously identified features revealed that Feature 1 is a collapsed masonry wall that probably functioned as a windbreak. The second rock feature proved to be of natural origin. The pre-sence of numerous pit features and a moderate to high density of artifacts, faunal bone, and macrobo-tanical remains found on top of the sandy knoll east of the windbreak indicate that this part of LA 134636 served as an activity area. Four possible postholes found on the perimeter of the activity area suggest that a ramada-like structure may have stood at this location (Figure 16).

The soil analysis in SU 1 suggests that the parent sand matrix was deposited at LA 134636 approximately 20,000–23,000 years BP. Subsequently, the dune surface became stabilized and has been subjected to very little erosion or additional sedimentation prior to the reworking of a few centimeters of surface materials in the twentieth century.

A minimum of five Pueblo IV containers (four bowls and one jar) represents the ceramic collection from SU 1. The recovery of San Clemente Glaze-polychrome and San Lazaro Glaze-polychrome rim sherds from SU 1 suggests that the suspected ramada area may have been occupied both during Glaze A and D times of Pueblo IV. This is also supported by the excavated fill of the ash-disposal pit (Feature 5), of which the fill indicated the re-use of this pit after a period of abandonment. Temper analysis uncovered lithic inclusions consistent with those found in ceramics from large pueblo villages in the valley, which implies that people from nearby locations camped here for a short period of time. It is possible they came from the Mann Site, the closest large Pueblo IV residential site located about a mile east of LA 134636.

The presence of gray utility wares associated with this locus corresponds well with the similar pattern observed on Pueblo IV field facilities excavated on La Bajada Mesa. This pattern shows that Pueblo IV gray utility wares tend to be present at field house and windbreak sites typically associated with thermal features. The association of gray utility sherds with the masonry windbreak and ramada area supports the inference that this area was used as a field facility. Additional support for this interpretation has been obtained in the recovery of numerous maize fragments, including kernels, cupules, and shanks, from SU 1. It is possible that this cultigen was grown in the flat areas in the vicinity of the site.

Charred and uncharred fragments of wild taxa may have been used as supplemental foodstuffs suitable to be added to corn meal to make bread, cakes, mush, or gruel. These inferences suggest that gathering was one of the important activities during the use of this Pueblo IV field facility. The results of the macrobotanical analysis also support the assessment that the occupation took place from at least the late spring through the end of the maize harvest. Optionally, if the main residential village was located in close proximity, such as the Mann Site, this locus may have been repeatedly visited on a seasonal basis.

In addition to the plant food procurement, hunting is suggested by the recovery of two projectile points and a variety of charred animal bones within the Pueblo IV locus. In fact, the presence of bones from a deer size or large mammal, jackrabbit, cottontail, and medium-size and rodent-size mammals implies that the occupants of this locus utilized a wide range of animal species as a source of protein. These activities from Pueblo IV can be traced by the presence of the fire pit, ash-disposal pit, fragments of fire-cracked rock, and two general pit features in the ramada-windbreak area.

62

The late Archaic component at LA 134636 is represented by 260 lithics from a largely deflated context about 12 m south of the Pueblo IV locus. Numerous pieces of fire-cracked rock and ground-stone fragments from the excavated area of SU 3 are indicative of a short-term camp (Figure 23). One En Medio projectile point recovered from SU 3 suggests the camp’s occupation falls within 3000-1500 BP.

Figure 23 SU 3: Post-excavation, with old playa and volcanoes in background (view to southwest)

The comparative analysis of lithics from the Pueblo IV and Archaic contexts yielded more differences than similarities between the two assemblages. This is apparent in the specific attributes of core reduction, raw material use, size and form of flake blanks, and patterns of edge damage of each of the two lithic assemblages. On the other hand, a notable similarity was observed in the low intensity of utilization of chipped stone tools as well as the material selection for varying functional requirements: both cultural groups preferred cherts and chalcedonies for chipped stone tools; quartzite and sandstone were chosen for ground stone. However, the relatively large volume of fire-cracked rock, much of which had initially been used as incipient manos, indicates the use of thermal feature(s) at the late Archaic locus. The pre-sence of at least one calcined bone from a medium-size mammal indicates that animal meat was cooked or roasted at this location. Animal and plant baking/roasting probably took place in earthen pits filled with rock. Unfortunately, the Archaic locus was found almost entirely in a deflated context that preclud-ed exposure of the buried occupational surface with its associated features. Evidently, the erosional forces were exceptionally strong at LA 134636 prior to the Pueblo IV occupation, a conclusion also confirmed by low sand deposits found during auger testing in the western part of the site. Nevertheless, a small pit feature excavated in SU 3 may represent the bottom of an eroded posthole.

In conclusion, the excavations at LA 134636 confirmed that prehistoric people came to this area to utilize a wide range of food resources as well as materials. In our opinion, the excavation project completed all tasks proposed in the data recovery plan and all research questions have been sufficiently addressed.

63

REFERENCES CITED

Actis, Adrienne, and Richard Chapman 2006 Cultural Resources Survey and Testing Nearby Water Well No. 12, Rio Rancho, New Mexico.

OCA/UNM Report No. 185-885. Office of Contract Archeology, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque.

Barton, R.N.E., and C.A. Bergman 1982 Hunters at Hengistbury: Some Evidence from Experimental Archaeology. World Archaeology

14: 237–248.

Biella, Jan V., and Richard C. Chapman 1977 Archaeological Investigations in Cochiti Reservoir, New Mexico, Vol. 1: A Survey of Regional

Variability. OCA/UNM Report No. 101-82. Office of Contract Archeology, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque.

1979 Archaeological Investigations in Cochiti Reservoir, New Mexico, Vol. 4: Adaptive Change in the Northern Rio Grande Valley. OCA/UNM Report 101-127B. Office of Contract Archeology, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque.

Birkeland, Peter 1999 Soils and Geomorphology. Third edition. Oxford University Press, New York.

Brandi, James M. 1993 An Intensive Archaeological Survey of 1200 Acres in Unit 20 West Phase 1, Rio Rancho, NM.

Rio Grande Consultants, Albuquerque.

1999 Results of the 1992–1994 Archeological Resource Inventory Petroglyph National Monument, New Mexico. Petroglyph National Monument, US National Park Service.

Brown, David E. 1994 Biotic Communities Southwestern United States and Northwestern Mexico. University of Utah

Press, Salt Lake City.

Buol, S., F. Hole, R. McCraken, and R. Southard 1997 Soil Genesis and Classification, fourth edition. Iowa State University Press, Ames, IA.

Chapman, Richard, C. 1979 The Archaic Occupation of White Rock Canyon. In Archaeological Investigations in Cochiti

Reservoir, New Mexico, edited by Jan V. Biella and Richard C. Chapman, pp. 61–73. OCA/UNM Report No. 101-127B. Office of Contract Archaeology, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque.

Chapman, Richard C., and J. Robert Estes 2004 An Assessment of Cultural Resources within a Proposed High School Site on the West Mesa of

Albuquerque, Bernalillo County, New Mexico. OCA/UNM Report No. 185–864. Office of Contract Archeology, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque.

Chapman, Richard C., and Jeanne A. Schutt 1977 Methodology of Lithic Analysis. In Archeological Investigations in Cochiti Reservoir, New

Mexico, Vol. 2: Excavation and Analysis 1975 Season, edited by Richard C. Chapman and Jan V.

64

Biella, pp. 83–96. OCA/UNM Report No. 101-82. Office of Contract Archeology, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque.

Chapman, Richard C., Jan V. Biella, Jeanne A. Schutt, James G. Enloe, Patricia J. Marchiando, A.H. Warren, and John R. Stein 1977 Description of Twenty-five Sites in the Permanent Pool of Cochiti Reservoir. In Archeological

Investigations in Cochiti Reservoir, New Mexico, Vol. 2: Excavation and Analysis 1975 Season, edited by Richard C. Chapman and Jan. V. Biella, pp. 119–377. OCA/UNM Report No. 101-82. Office of Contract Archeology, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque.

Christenson, Andrew L. 1987 The Prehistoric Tool Kit. In Prehistoric Stone Technology on Northern Black Mesa, Arizona,

edited by William J. Parry and Andrew L. Christenson , pp. 43-93. Center for Archaeological Investigations, Occasional Paper No. 12. Southern Illinois University at Carbondale.

Church, Tim 2000 Distribution and Sources of Obsidian in the Rio Grande Gravels of New Mexico.

Geoarchaeology 15:649–678.

Cordell, Linda S. 1978 A Cultural Resources Overview of the Middle Rio Grande Valley, New Mexico. USDA Forest

Service, Southwestern Region, Albuquerque; and Bureau of Land Management, New Mexico State Office, Santa Fe.

Cotterell, Briana, and Johan Kamminga 1987 The Formation of Flakes. American Antiquity 52:657-708.

Dawson, Jerry, and William J. Judge 1969 Paleo-Indian Sites and Topography in the Middle Rio Grande Valley of New Mexico. Plains

Anthropologist 14:149:163.

Delorit, Richard J. 1970 Illustrated Taxonomy Manual of Weed Seeds. Agronomy Publications, River Falls, WI.

Dering, Phil 1999 Earth-Oven Plant Processing in Archaic Period Economies. An Example from a Semi-Arid

Savannah in South-Central North America. American Antiquity 64:659–674.

Dibble, Harold, 1995a Middle Paleolithic Scraper Reduction: Background, Clarification, and Review of Evidence to

Data. Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory 2:299–368.

1995b An Assessment of the Integrity of the Archaeological Assemblages. In The Middle Paleolithic Site of Combe-Capelle Bas (France), edited by Dibble, H. and M. Lenoir, pp. 245–257. University Museum Press, University of Pennsylvania.

Dincauze, Dena 2000 Environmental Archaeology: Principles and Practice. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge,

UK.

65

Doleman, William H. 1989 Island in the Sun: The Mesa Del Sol Sample Survey. OCA/UNM Report No. 185-361. Office of

Contract Archeology, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque. Dunmire, William W., and Gail D. Tierney 1995 Wild Plants of the Pueblo Province. Museum of New Mexico Press, Santa Fe. Fugate, Francis, and Roberta B. Fugate 1989 Roadside History of New Mexico. Mountain Press Publishing Company, Missoula, MT. Gerow, Peggy A. 2005 Summary Discussion. In Across the Caja Del Rio Plateau III: Hunters and Farmers in the

Northern Rio Grande; Archeological Investigations at 10 Sites in the NMARNG Camel Tracks Training Site, Santa Fe County, New Mexico, edited by Peggy A. Gerow and Patrick Hogan, pp. 225–236. OCA/UNM Report No. 185-845. Office of Contract Archeology, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque.

Gerow, Peggy A., and Alexander Kurota 2004 Across the Caja Del Rio Plateau II: Hunters and Farmers in the Northern Rio Grande; Archeolo-

gical Investigations at 15 Sites in the NMARNG Camel Tracks Training Area, Santa Fe County, New Mexico. OCA/UNM Report No. 185-790. Office of Contract Archeology, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque.

Gerow, Peggy A. and Patrick Hogan 2005 Across the Caja Del Rio Plateau III: Hunters and Farmers in the Northern Rio Grande; Archeo-

logical Investigations at 10 Sites in the NMARNG Camel Tracks Training Site, Santa Fe County, New Mexico. OCA/UNM Report No. 185-845. Office of Contract Archeology, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque.

Gile, L. H., F. F. Peterson, and R. B. Grossman 1966 Morphological and Genetic Sequences of Carbonate Accumulation in Desert Soils. Soil Science

101: 347–360. Habicht-Mauche, Judith A. 1993 The Pottery from Arroyo Hondo Pueblo, New Mexico; Tribalization and Trade in the Northern

Rio Grande. Arroyo Hondo Archaeological Series, Vol. 8. School of American Research Press, Santa Fe.

Hacker, Leroy W. 1977 Soil Survey of Bernalillo County and Parts of Sandoval and Valencia Counties, New Mexico. US

Department of Agriculture Soil Conservation Service and Forest Service; and US Department of the Interior, Bureau of Indian Affairs, and Bureau of Land Management.

Hammett, Julia E., and Pamela J. McBride 1993 Macrobotanical Recovery and Sampling Procedures. In Subsistence and Environment, Chapter

18. In Across the Colorado Plateau: Anthropological Studies for the Transwestern Pipeline Expansion Project, Volume XV- Parts 4 and 5, pp. 411–427. Prepared for Transwestern Pipeline Company. OCA/UNM Report No. 185-461B. Office of Contract Archeology and Maxwell Museum of Anthropology, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque.

66

Harden, J. 1982 A Quantitative Index of Soil Development from Field Descriptions: Examples from a

Chronosequence in Central California. Geoderma 28:1–28.

Harden, J. and E. Taylor 1983 A Quantitative Comparison of Soil Development in Four Climatic Regimes. Quaternary

Research 20:342–359.

Harrington, H. D. 1967 Edible Native Plants of the Rocky Mountains. University of New Mexico Press, Albuquerque.

Holliday, Vance, Bruce Huckell, James Mayer, Steven Forman and Leslie McFadden 2005 Geoarchaeology of the Boca Negra Wash Area, Albuquerque Basin, New Mexico. Manuscript on

file, OCA/UNM library, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque.

Honea, K. 1968 Material Culture: Ceramics. In The Cochiti Dam Archaeological Salvage Project, Part 1:

Report on the 1963 Season, edited by C. H. Lange, pp. 111–169. Museum of New Mexico Research Records 6. Santa Fe.

Huckell, Bruce B. 2001 Geoarchaeological Investigations at the Rio Rancho Folsom Site, New Mexico. Current

Research on the Pleistocene 18: 28–30.

2002a Archaeological and Geological Test Investigations at the Boca Negra Wash Folsom Site (LA 124474). Report submitted to the Commissioner of Public Lands, NM State Land Office in fulfillment of Archaeological Excavation Permit Nos. 82 and 88, April 12, 2002. Maxwell Museum of Anthropology, UNM. Manuscript on file, OCA/UNM library, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque.

2002b Archaeological and Geological Investigations at the Boca Negra Wash Folsom Site (LA 124474). Report submitted to the Commissioner of Public Lands, NM State Land Office in fulfillment of Archaeological Excavation Permit No. 094, May 23, 2002. Maxwell Museum of Anthropology, UNM. Manuscript on file, OCA/UNM library, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque.

2002c Paleoindian Land Use in the Vicinity of the Albuquerque Volcanoes. Report submitted to the NM Historic Preservation Division, February 25, 2002. Maxwell Museum of Anthropology, UNM. Manuscript on file, OCA/UNM library, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque.

2003 Archaeological and Geological Investigations at the Boca Negra Wash Folsom Site (LA 124474). Report submitted to the Commissioner of Public Lands, NM State Land Office in fulfillment of Archaeological Excavation Permit No. 101, April 23, 2003. Maxwell Museum of Anthropology, UNM. Manuscript on file, OCA/UNM library, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque.

Irwin-Williams, Cynthia 1973 The Oshara Tradition: Origins of Anasazi Culture. Contributions in Archeology 5(1). Eastern

New Mexico University, Portales.

1979 Post-Pleistocene Archaeology, 7000–2000 BC. In Handbook of North America Indians, South-west, Vol. 9, edited by A. Ortiz, pp. 31–42. Smithsonian Institution, Washington, DC.

67

Jenny, H. 1941 Factors of Soil Formation. McGraw-Hill, New York. Joesting, H.R., J.E. Case, and L.E. Cordell 1961 The Rio Grande Trough Near Albuquerque, New Mexico. In New Mexico Geological Society

Guidebook of the Albuquerque Country, 12th Field Conference, pp.148–150. Socorro. Judge, W. James 1973 The Paleoindian Occupation of the Central Rio Grande Valley, New Mexico. The University of

New Mexico Press, Albuquerque. Keeley, Lawrence H. 1980 Experimental Determination of Stone Tool Uses: A Microwear Analysis. University of Chicago

Press, Chicago. Kelley, Vincent C. 1952 Tectonics of the Rio Grande Depression of Central New Mexico. In New Mexico Geological

Society Guidebook of the Rio Grande Country, 3rd Field Conference, pp. 93–105. Socorro. Kelley, Vincent C. and A. M. Kudo 1978 Volcanoes and Related Basalts of Albuquerque Basin, New Mexico. New Mexico Bureau of

Mines and Mineral Resources, No. 156. Socorro. Kidder, A. V. 1927 An Introduction to the Study of Southwestern Archaeology with a Preliminary Account of the

Excavations at Pecos. Yale University Press, New Haven. Kludt, Trevor 2005 Archaeological Survey of the Santa Fe Canyon Ranch, Santa Fe County, New Mexico.

OCA/UNM Report No. 185-868. Office of Contract Archeology, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque.

Kuhn, Steven L. 1995 Mousterian Lithic Technology: An Ecological Perspective. Princeton University Press,

Princeton. Kurota, Alexander 2005 The Ceramic Assemblages. In Across the Caja Del Rio Plateau III: Hunters and Farmers in the

Northern Rio Grande; Archeological Investigations at 10 Sites in the NMARNG Camel Tracks Training Site, Santa Fe County, New Mexico, edited by Peggy A. Gerow and Patrick Hogan, pp. 119–142. OCA/UNM Report No. 185–845. Office of Contract Archeology, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque.

2006 A Proposed Data Recovery Plan for LA 134636 on the West Mesa of Albuquerque, Bernalillo

County, New Mexico. OCA/UNM Report No. 185-871A. Office of Contract Archeology, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque.

Machette, M.N. 1985 Calcic Soils of the Southwestern United States. Geological Society of America, Special Paper

203, pp. 1–21.

68

Martin, Alexander C., and William D. Barkley 1961 Seed Identification Manual. University of California Press, Berkeley.

Martin, William C., and Charles R. Hutchins 1980 A Flora of New Mexico. Strauss and Cramer, Germany.

McBride, Pamela J. 1996 Archaeobotanical Analysis Results. In Phase I and II Data Recovery at Four Sites near the

Sanders Rural Community High School Sanders, Arizona, by Brian Billman and Patricia Ruppé, pp. 495–519. Zuni Cultural Resource Enterprise Report No. 442. Zuni Cultural Resource Enterprise, Zuni, NM.

1997 Archaeobotanical. In The Puerco Bridge and Road N2007 Realignment Project: Phase I and Phase II Excavations at Sites AZ-P-61-74 and AZ-P-61-212, Apache County, Arizona, by Donald C. Irwin, pp. 281–302. La Plata Archaeological Research Consultants Research Papers No. 2, Dolores, CO.

1998 An Analysis of Flotation Samples from Unit 20 West, Rio Rancho, New Mexico. Ms. on file, Rio Grande Consultants, Inc., Albuquerque, NM.

Mera, H. P. 1933 A Proposed Revision to the Rio Grande Glaze Paint Sequence. Laboratory of Anthropology

Technical Series 5:1–28. Museum of New Mexico, Santa Fe.

Morales, Thomas Michael 1997 Glazeware Pottery Production and Distribution in the Upper-Middle Rio Grande Valley. PhD

dissertation, Department of Anthropology, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque.

Munsell 1994 Munsell Soil Color Charts, revised edition. Macbeth Division of Kollmorgen Instruments

Corporation, New Windsor, New York.

Nakazawa, Yuichi 2004 Lithic Analysis. In Across the Caja Del Rio Plateau II: Hunters and Farmers in the Northern

Rio Grande; Archeological Investigations at 15 Sites in the NMARNG Camel Tracks Training Area, Santa Fe County, New Mexico, edited by Peggy A. Gerow and Alexander Kurota, pp. 135–154. OCA/UNM Report No. 185-790. Office of Contract Archeology, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque.

Nelson, M. 1991 The Study of Technological Organization. In Archaeological Method and Theory 3: 57–100,

edited by Michael Brian Schiffer. University of Arizona Press, Tucson.

Parry, William 1987 Technological Change: Temporal and Functional Variability in Chipped Stone Debitage. In

Prehistoric Stone Technology on Northern Black Mesa, Arizona, edited by William J. Parry and Andrew L. Christenson, pp. 199–256. Center for Archaeological Investigations, Occasional Paper No. 12. Southern Illinois University in Carbondale.

Rapp, George, and Christopher Hill 1998 Geoarchaeology: The Earth-Science Approach to Archaeological Interpretation. Yale

University Press, New Haven.

69

Raymond, Gerry 2005 Letter Report Describing Testing and Data Recovery Activities at Eight Sits along the Paseo del

Volcan Roadway Segment between Unser Boulevard and Iris Road, City of Rio Rancho, Sandoval County, New Mexico. Parsons and Brinckerhoff, Albuquerque.

Raymond, Gerry, George Arms, and Amy Silberberg 2004 Cultural Resources Survey for Proposed Improvements and Widening of a Portion of Unser

Boulevard, Sandoval County, New Mexico. PB Report No. 194, Parsons and Brinkerhoff, Albuquerque.

Rodgers, James B. 1978 La Boca Negra Park Project: An Intensive Archaeological Survey in Bernalillo County, New

Mexico. Center for Anthropological Studies, Albuquerque.

Ruscavage-Barz, Samantha M. 2002 Classic Period Small Structure Function and Variability on the Pajarito Plateau. In Forward into

the Past; Papers in Honor of Teddy Lou and Francis Stickney, edited by Regge N. Wiseman, Thomas C. O’Laughlin, and Cordelia Snow, pp. 81–92. Papers of the Archaeological Society of New Mexico, Albuquerque.

Sargeant, Kathryn 1987 Coping with the River: Settlements in Albuquerque’s North Valley. In Secrets of a City: Papers

on Albuquerque Area Archaeology. Papers in Honor of Richard A. Bice. Archaeological Society of New Mexico Papers No. 13, Albuquerque.

Schaafsma, P., and C. F. Schaafsma 1974 Evidence of the Origin of the Pueblo Katchina Cult as Suggested by Southwestern Rock Art.

American Antiquity 39:535–545.

Schmader, Mathew F. 1985 Prehistoric Utilization of Gravel Terrace in the Martineztown Area of Albuquerque, NM.

OCA/UNM Report No. 276b. Office of Contract Archeology, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque.

1986 Archaeological Resources of the Piedras Marcadas Arroyo Area. Rio Grande Consultants, Albuquerque.

1988 An Archaeological Survey of 107 Acres in Tierra West Estates Along the “Ceja” in Southwest Albuquerque. Rio Grande Consultants, Albuquerque.

1990 An Intensive Archaeological Survey of 915 Acres in Unit 20 Phase 1, Rio Rancho, NM. Rio Grande Consultants, Albuquerque.

Soil Survey Division Staff 1975 Soil Taxonomy. US Department of Agriculture, Agriculture Handbook No. 436.

1993 Soil Survey Manual. US Department of Agriculture, Agriculture Handbook No. 18.

Spellenberg, Richard 1979 The Audubon Society Field Guide to North American Wildflowers. Alfred A. Knopf, New York.

70

Stein, Julie and William Farrand 2001 Sediments in Archaeological Context. University of Utah Press, Salt Lake City.

Stuart, D.E., and R. P. Gauthier 1981 Prehistoric New Mexico: Background for Survey. University of New Mexico, Albuquerque.

Tainter, J. A., and F. Levine 1987 Cultural Resource Overview: Central New Mexico. USDA Forest Service, Southwest Region,

Albuquerque and Santa Fe, State Office of the Bureau of Land Management.

Toll, Mollie S. 1985 An Overview of Chaco Canyon Macrobotanical Materials and Analysis to Date. In Environment

and Subsistence of Chaco Canyon, edited by Frances J. Mathien, pp. 247–277. National Park Service Publications in Archeology 18E, Chaco Canyon Studies, US Department of Interior, Albuquerque.

Tringham, Ruth, Glenn Cooper, George Odell, Barbara Voytek, and Anne Whitman 1974 Experimentation in the Formation of Edge Damage: A New Approach to Lithic Analysis.

Journal of Field Archaeology 1:171–196.

Vierra, Bradley J. 1994 A Brief History of Southwestern Archaic Research. In Across the Colorado Plateau: Anthro-

pological Studies for the Transwestern Pipeline Expansion Project, Volume XIV, edited by Tim W. Burchett, Bradley J. Vierra, and Kenneth L. Brown, pp. 11–15. OCA/UNM Report No.185-461B. Office of Contract Archeology, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque.

Warren, A. H. 1977 Prehistoric and Historic Ceramic Analysis. In Archeological Investigations in Cochiti Reservoir,

New Mexico, Vol. 2: Excavation and Analysis, 1975 Season, edited by R. C. Chapman and J. V. Biella, pp. 97–100. OCA/UNM Report No.101-82. Office of Contract Archeology, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque.

1979 Geological and Mineral Resources of the Cochiti Reservoir Area. In Archaeological Investiga-tions in Cochiti Reservoir, New Mexico: Vol. 4: Adaptive Change in the Northern Rio Grande Valley, edited by Jan V. Biella and Richard C. Chapman, pp.47–58. OCA/UNM Report No.101-127B. Office of Contract Archeology, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque.

Wendorf, F. 1954 A Reconstruction of Northern Rio Grande Prehistory. American Anthropologist 56:200–227.

Wendorf, Fred, and Erik K. Reed 1955 An Alternative Reconstruction of Northern Rio Grande Prehistory. El Palacio 62: 5-6, pp.131-

173.

Whitmore, Jane 1978 An Archaeological Reconnaissance Survey of “The Volcanoes” Area West of Albuquerque, New

Mexico. School of American Research Report No. 68, Santa Fe.

Wilcox, David 1978 The Theoretical Significance of Fieldhouses. In Limited Activity and Occupation Sites, edited by

A.E. Ward, pp. 25–32. Contribution to Anthropological Studies 1. Center for Anthropological Studies, Albuquerque.