CHAPTER 15

SITE STRUCTURE

. '7\ _.~ . ...--...., \ -·A.--:- •. ~ b. I ~~( .L,

~ \ ~.,-J

, '---..//

; ~ . ....... ' , - ~ '--f~. ":1 ~. " ' . -.J \. ; .... ~ ~

The large-scale testing and excavations at Los Morteros provided important new information on the structure of a large Hohokam village in the Tucson Basin. Although the body of evidence concerning Hohokam households and courtyard groups has been building at an impressive rate in recent years (Wilcox et al. 1981; Howard 1985, 1988; Huntington 1986; Elson 1986; Henderson 1986, 1987a; Howard and Cable 1988; Mitchell 1988, 1989), there has been only limited inquiry into the larger building blocks of Hohokam settlement systems. For the first time in the Tucson Basin, the opportunity arose with this project to investigate a large portion of one of the largest villages in the region. The research design for data recovery at the site (Wallace 1987; see Chapter 2) outlined the goals of this investigation. Part of the emphasis of the project was to provide an overview of the feature distribution over a large portion of the site, and to sample a series of the spatially discrete habitation areas encountered. An integral part of this proposal was the testing and definition of the "village segment" concept. In this chapter, an inquiry into the results of the Los Morteros investigations into site structure is presented.

BACKGROUND AND DEFINITIONS

The hierarchical framework within which Tucson Basin Hohokam archaeology has been operating was summarized in Chapter 2 as house, courtyard group, village segment, village, community, northern Tucson Basin, Tucson Basin, and the Hohokam regional system. In addition, it was noted that there may be a structural level between the village segment and the village. This chapter is concerned with the household, courtyard group, village segment, and to some extent village levels of organization to determine the applicability of the concepts and to assess the data from the perspective this offers.

Houses, Households, and Courtyard Groups

Much attention has been focused on the household in Hohokam archaeology. Households are commonly seen as the "basic sodal and economic unit" (Huntington 1986:79) of Hohokam sodety. "Household" as a concept is conceived in sodal anthropology as a meld between morphology and function (Wilk and Netting 1984:2). Morphology refers to structural classifications such as kinship relationships. Household function is perceived by Wilk and Netting (1984:5) as a series of overlapping activity sets including "production, distribution, transmission, reproduction, and coresidence." Consumption is an important activity sphere overlooked by Wilk and Netting that can be added to this list. The Wilk and Netting approach does not require that each household have the same overlapping spheres of activity, but rather that they represent "the smallest grouping with the maximum corporate function" (Hammel 1980:251). This approach is useful for archaeological inquiry because it considers households from a perspective of activities that may be identified in the archaeological record rather than through concepts of kinship relations that are difficult to address directly.

Of particular concern in our investigation that must rely on the spatial unit of the "structure" or "house" is the question of equivalence between the "household" and the coresidence activity set. Going by the Wilk and Netting (1984) approach, one could have households that relate to individual structures or that are composed of complexes of adjacent structures (among other possibilities), and the defining attributes need not be primarily focused on coresidence. Additional criteria SUcll as the "frequency of food sharing and common cooking, separation of sleeping quarters, the presence or absence of common granaries~ and the degree of cooperation in production" (Wilk and Netting 1984:17) may be considered more important

764 Chapter 15

for the definition of households than coresidency if we were able to identify these traits in the archaeological record. Based on the ethnographic data Wilk and Netting (Wilk 1984:226; Wilk and Netting 1984) compile, households should not be assumed to be restricted to a single structure (although they can be).

Relying on the assumptions that households are universal in prehistoric societies, and that they are identifiable in the archaeological record through investigations of architectural morphology and function, many archaeological investigations in the southwestern United States have identified household correlates in the archaeological record (e.g. Ciolek-Torrello 1978, 1984; Dean 1969, 1970; Lightfoot 1992, 1994; Lowell 1991; McGimsey 1980; Montgomery 1992; Rohn 1965, 1971; Wilcox 1975; Wilcox et al. 1981). Hohokam studies initiated with Wilcox et al.'s (1981) reevaluation of the Snaketown data now routinely search for and locate what are thought to be households represented by structures with entries oriented into a common use area. These sets of potentially related structures have been variously labeled courtyard groups, house dusters, and primary groups (Wilcox et al. 1981:11; Howard 1985:311-313; Huntington 1986:79; Henderson 1986:17). The term "courtyard group" is used in this study because it is least ambiguous and has been the most consistently applied. Courtyard groups are defined as the group of features and extramural space occupied by contemporaneous structures and related features that open into a common use space.

Courtyard groups consisting of two or more habitation structures are thought by some Hohokam archaeologists to represent the residences of extended family households (Henderson 1986:196; Howard 1985:314; Sires 1984a:532) or the "domain of a domestic group" (Huntington 1986:79) or "primary group" (Wilcox et al. 1981:11, 154-155). They are viewed here as socially integrated and interrelated units that share specific activities and activity areas and facilities such as courtyard space, cooking facilities, and pOSSibly storage facilities. This is in keeping with Huntington's and Wilcox et al.'s perspectives, which do not necessitate the "extended family" be equivalent to the domestic group. If the multiple houses are shown to be dependant on common facilities and that the core work force in the courtyard group is composed of individuals from each house that perform tasks cooperatively, then it is reasonable to suppose that a dose kinship relationship, either actual or fictive, is involved. We are presently unable to unequivocally demonstrate these relationships.

Ciolek-Torrello (1988:169-170) interprets the concept of the "domestic group" a la Fortes (1971) and Goody (1972) and "household" differently from Huntington (1986) and Henderson (1986). Following Goody (1972:9, cited in Ciolek-Torrello 1988:169), Ciolek-Torello proposes that the domestic group and the household are two overlapping concepts with the domestic group representing a social grouping defined by overlapping activity sets that are similar in definition to those derived by Wilk and Netting (1984). One of these activity sets involves the storage, preparation, and cooking of food, and it is this set of activities that are used by Ciolek-Torrello to define the household. This approach has merit for the archaeolOgist because hearths, cooking pits, and storage facilities are commonly preserved in the archaeological record. It differs from most other Hohokam concepts in that each house with a hearth is perceived as a separate household (and the basic socioeconomic unit of Hohokam society). Courtyard groups with multiple structures containing hearths are viewed in this light by Ciolek-Torrello as multiple households that share some domestic activities. The courtyard group from this perspective, would (in the author's opinion based on Ciolek-Torrello's discussion) represent a cooperative grouping of households tied most likely through some form of actual or fictive kinship bond. This overall perspective is similar to that proposed by Flannery (1976) for early formative Mesoamerican villages.

The bottom line in this discussion is that it does not really matter whether we take Ciolek-Torello's (1988) or Huntington's (1986) and Henderson's (1986) perspective. Both sides of the equation recognize the presence of some form of social unit reSiding in each habitation dwelling and whether multiple dwellings comprise a household in a courtyard group or whether multiple households are present, linked with social ties, is primarily a function of the semantics of household definition. On a practical basis, the distinction will not affect population estimates or the interpretation of floor assemblages because we are already starting from the position in both perspectives that all structures in each courtyard group are

Site Structure 765

socioeconomically related. In this perspective, household, as defined in the rapidly building literature of ethnoarchaeology, would therefore equate with a courtyard group.

The principal difficulty in defining courtyard groups is in establishing contemporaneity between structures and between structures and related facilities. Absolute contemporaneity is rarely demonstrable and sometimes the relationships are less than obvious. It is much easier to establish which features are not contemporaneous than to directly demonstrate those that are. The only case of absolute contemporaneity established during our excavations are two structures, Features 20 and 21, at site AZ AA:12:147 (Locus 147). These features are located some 40 m apart and bear no obvious spatial relationship to one another at the courtyard group level of analysis. Their relationship is based on evidence of contemporaneous abandonment via shared refitting artifacts in floor and fill contexts. The presence of such a case does not jeopardize the courtyard group concept, but the fact that it is the only case where unequivocal contemporaneity can be identified despite intensive investigations that induded excavations of over 85 structures illustrates the difficulties involved in this endeavor. In addition, this case forces the realization that not all social relationships can be documented through spatial analysis. This is certainly no surprise, but it is highlighted because it is easy to lose sight of this fact when delving too deeply into social structural investigations.

For architectural forms with short use-lives, as is expected to be the case here (15-25 years on the average, see Chapter 6), absolute contemporaneity of structures is especially difficult to ascertain with certainty. The refined ceramic chronology established for the Rincon phase helps in this endeavor for Los Morteros, but there are still two to four anticipated rebuilding episodes that may have occurred within some portions of the Rincon phase sequence (such as during MR 1 and MR 2) that cannot be discriminated. On this basis, 150 years and 6 to 10 house replacements could have occurred within the Tanque Verde phase based on the current chronology (perhaps less if adobe or masonry architecture that may have a longer use life is involved). Although we have some grounds for sequencing the Tanque Verde phase ceramics (see Chapter 5), at the present time the resolution is inadequate for a refined seriation. To get around this problem, Howard (1985:313) introduces the concept of "relative contemporaneity" to deal with structures that have overlapping use-lives, recognizing that construction and abandonment will frequently not be concurrent between structures. This concept helps the situation but we still must ultimately rely on inferences based on various dating techniques, stratigraphic evidence, and spatial relationships to establish the contexts that are likely to be "relatively contemporaneous."

Despite the critical tone of the preceding discussion, a strong case can be made for relative contemporaneity, in the sense proposed by Howard (1985:313), for dearcut cases of spatial patterning, particularly if functional data are also considered. The Sacaton phase courtyard groups in the southwest quadrant of Snaketown (Haury 1976; Wilcox et al. 1981; Howard 1985:318) are dearly discerned and not easily confused, even when supplementary dating evidence is unavailable. The contemporaneity problem is minimized as much as possible in this investigation through the refined ceramic seriation and depositional analyses. Although absolute dates are available for some contexts, they are not emphasized or applied using techniques such as that of Henderson (1987a) in an effort to sequence occupation. Such an approach produces the illusion of chronological precision when the dating techniques cannot support such a proposition.

Two other potential difficulties in applying the concept of "household" to the Hohokam data remain for consideration. First, it can be difficult to ascertain functional diversity in structures, leading one to inadvertently count special-use facilities as habitation dwellings. The fact that some structures are used for nondomestic purposes on Hohokam settlements has been aptly demonstrated (Crown 1983, 1985b; Craig and Douglas 1984; Downum et al. 1985; Elson 1986; Henderson 1986, 1987a; Howard 1988; Huntington 1986; Mitchell 1988; this report). Structures built specifically for use in a storage capacity were documented at Los Morteros (Features 3175 and 3248), and a very small structure (Feature 22), thought to be a sweat lodge, was documented at site AZ AA:12:147. Other very small structures at Los Morteros, such as Feature 3211, are almost certainly used differently than the typical sized dwellings (Crown 1985b). Many other structures may have served special nondomestic functions that have gone unidentified in our

766 Chapter 15

investigations. The failure to recognize spedal-function structures may lead to their misclassification as domestic architecture, inflating population figures and group sizes and distorting interpretations of site structure if these possibilities are not taken into account. Furthermore, they may alter our perceptions concerning the organization and interrelationships of households. Storage fadlities may be co-owned and cooperatively utilized by multiple "households." Conversely, they may be fadlities that are restricted in access to particular sodal groups. Either way, their correct interpretation aids in the interpretation of the sodal organization involved.

Also a concern in archaeological investigations is the fact that families and houses may not be related in a one-to-one fashion. Addressed as a potential problem in identifying households within a particular portion of a settlement, the concern here is with possible cases where multiple residences are used for different purposes or if families are seasonally mobile. Multiple residences are most likely involved for agricultural or other subsistence-related pursuits. For example, a structure might be erected near to a floodwater farming plot that is used on an irregular basis as needed for tending the crops. For seasonal residency shifts, nearly complete village transhumance might be involved, as has been documented for the Tohono O'odham (Jones 1969; Underhill 1939). None of these complications are likely to pose a problem for the interpretation of the dense Rincon phase residential zones of Los Morteros with the exception of the possibility that portions of the settlement or settlement population may be seasonally mobile. This possibility does not seriously hinder the interpretation of the site proper, but it affects the manner in which the regional settlement system is perceived. For the Rillito and Tanque Verde phase data sets, seasonal and special function issues may be important and the data for each will be addressed here.

Village Segments

The level of Hohokam settlement structural organization above the courtyard group has been a source of considerable confusion. In order to clarify the record and develop a useful perspective for Los Morteros, it is necessary to delve into the archaeological and cultural anthropolOgical literature from which the terms and models have originated.

Howard's Model

Howard (Howard et al. 1982:2-24) was the first to explidtly consider the possibility of hierarchical levels of community structure between the courtyard group and the village based on his investigations at Los Homos. He adopted the label "residential unit" or "residential prednct" (Howard 1990:86, 109) for the level immediately above the courtyard group, and the label "village segment" for a higher level of the sodal hierarchy. Howard modeled the "village segment" concept after his interpretation of Chang's 1958 article on Neolithic societies. Howard's 1982 article was expanded and made more explidt in later studies (Howard and Cable 1988:856; Howard 1990:87-89, 109-110). His definitions and interpretations are considered in some depth here as they have a direct bearing on interpretation of the Los Morteros data.

Howard defines village segments via the data from the Los Homos site as containing multiple residential precincts (each of which contain multiple courtyard groups). Each residential prednct had its own trash disposal fadlities and cemetery and sets of residential precincts were reportedly oriented around a large communal use area that contains homos. The homos were said to be located in this communal use space close to the residential precincts, and so may be assodated with spedfic predncts (Howard 1990:86-110), or courtyard groups (Howard 1988:198-199). The scale of Howard's village segments is large: the full segment diameters are measured at 200 to 300 m, while the communal-use areas assodated with them average 100 to 200 m (Howard 1990:87). Residential precincts are said to measure 50 to 100 m in diameter following the results of Henderson's analysis of the Los Solares (referred to by Henderson as ''La Ciudad") data (Henderson 1987a). Howard provides maps of the Los Homos site feature distribution and postulated village segments in his latest work. He also provides a schematic map of his village segments (Howard 1990:89, Figure 30), which is reproduced here in Figure 15.1.

.",.-- ..... "Q "

/() cO '\ /01 (>0 9 {) <J I

"0°),66 t!!J1"...- ..... \ .. -"I 00, --..;:- -~ 100

" "',0 0 I " - ..... I 0 0' / D ,,0_,;, •• '\ 00,' , <:3 M I ,/ -..:" 0 ,_

V.I" ,--" \ , \:::) // . \ " (] \

1 Cl0 1/ • \\ Jj\ \ C3 '(. \ dJ ~ \ t:{),/ \' b I \c:3. • \ " '- ... ", . \ .. -

,. Communal- \ ,,_

I Use '" , Area ' 0 0 \ Tralh-Dispolal ......... 0' \ /10 0 r- Unit

, \ I' 0 0 I rOoo \\ IlO 00 I I , •

\ 0 00 I \ I "" -" \ 0 \ / , 0,,' , /. ..... , "- ~ , , . /"

'- •• _~~ cO \ ..... -, """" I

~ N

I

Site Structure 767

tQ \r t:J a ~ ; \\ f'.. tJ I

o Trash Pits Residential __ ---" 'V , " Unit ____ _ • Hornos

6 Pithouse

Figure 15.1. Howard's schematic plan of a ""illage segment," as defined from his research at Los Homos (Howard 1990:89, Figure 30).

Howard is proposing two levels of social hierarchy between the level of the courtyard group and the community in his village segment model. There are the "residential units" or "residential precincts" (Howard 1990:86, 109) that are aggregates of contemporaneous courtyard groups and there are clusters of "residential precincts" around a communal use area that becomes a village segment, the next level of the social hierarchy. Howard explicitly states that the village segment concept, as he sees it, has been confused with the level of the "residential unit" by Huntington (1986) for the West Branch site, by Henderson (1987a) and G. Rice (1987) for Los Solares, and by Wallace (1988) for Los Morteros. Attempting to clarify his position, he states that his perspective "represents a better fit with the segmented village definition presented by Chang (1958). To paraphrase Chang (1958), a village segment should be a complete, and sometimes even a fenced, village" (Howard 1990:110).

It is quite possible that a level of Hohokam social organization between the residential aggregates referred to by Howard as residential "units" or "precincts" and the "village" exists, but it is neither clear in the data presented by Howard, nor is it adequately defined. The Los Homos trench and testing data presented by Howard (1990) and Wilcox et al. (1990) are impressive, but they are insufficient to demonstrate the arguments he presents. The Los Homos feature distribution maps (Wilcox et al. 1990) do appear to indicate portions of the site that are lacking in identifiable features other than homos and that are the key to the spatial patterning of the village segment model. Large portions of the site, induding many of the "communal use spaces" that form the heart of the proposed village segments, were

768 Chapter 15

only tested with trenches spaced between 25 and 35 m apart. Given the average diameter of residential "precincts" (Sires 1984a:523; Wallace 1988:16, see also Chapter 2) of about 60 m, this level of trenching was not expected to elucidate the full pattem of residential precinct distribution. TIlis is illustrated by Figure 3.3, which shows a slightly more intensive trenching strategy (systematic 25 m spaced trenches) for the Phase 1 testing program at Los Morteros South. Although feature concentrations are generally identified witll this level of testing, their configuration is unclear.

Even if the possible open spaces identified by Howard at Los Homos are an accurate reflection of the feature distribution at the site, there is the question of whether these feature lacunae represent "communal­use areas," the focal point of Howard's village segments, or whether they may simply be extramural space used, as necessary, by a variety of residential precincts. In the latter case, though stated by Howard (1990:110) to be a possibility, it would be misleading to postulate a level of structural organization around them. Why would an area left essentially open by proximate residential areas for messy activities such as agave roasting or activities that otherwise required removal from habitation zones, need to be an integrative facility? The Los Homos data are ambiguous in discriminating between the two hypotheses and the inferences are based on test trench data rather than horizontal exposures. This makes it difficult to fully evaluate Howard's conclusions.

A more serious problem with Howard's (Howard et al. 1982; Howard 1990) hierarchical structure model is that it does not account for the structural patteming seen in the Los Solares data presented by Henderson (1986, 1987a). Howard (1990:109) explicitly states that Henderson confuses what she calls a locus or village segment with what Howard calls a residential precinct. On the basis of scale, Howard's assessment seems warranted; none of the Los Solares loci are anywhere near the 200 to 300 m diameter size reported for village segments by Howard. The presence of discrete cemeteries associated with each locus also supports this view. In other respects, there is ample room for confusion. The Los Solares site structure is not a good fit for Howard's model. Instead of multiple residential precincts, each with their own cemeteries clustered around a larger communal space, Los Solares seems to be composed of residential precincts that encircle cemeteries arrayed linearly as discrete units along the main canal. Each courtyard group seems to have its own trash disposal facilities, and homos are associated with each residential precinct. The possibility of a larger structural unit of the sort proposed by Howard cannot be completely ruled out, but the evidence appears weighted against it. This is particularly the case when one considers the distribution of homos, a crucial component of Howard's model; their placement in association with the clusters of courtyard groups he calls residential precincts is notable, and there is no evidence that they demarcate "communal use areas."

Howard's model of Hohokam settlement structure envisions a series of "hierarchically nested sets of socio­economic groups (i.e., nuclear families, extended families, lineage, clan, and community) ... [with] each set contain[ing] a successively wider range of feature types" (Howard 1990:109). On a practical basis, for defined activity sets, the full range of feature types appear to be present for each of Howard's "residential precincts." Unspecified activities that might be shared in communal-use areas and any activities associated with the single ballcourt would be the only exception. Howard bases his perspective on Chang's study, but he does not consider the full range of the village segment concept proposed by Chang, nor does he critically evaluate Chang's propositions. Chang's definition (1958:306-307) is very loose and of questionable utility when applied in the manner he illustrates. Chang states that village segments are:

in effect small, planned sometimes fenced villages l.vith dwelling houses arranged in a pattern, centering on a plaza, a men's house, or other spedal buildings; in many cases each segment is a communal house. The segments are further arranged either regularly or irregularly into a community, which sometimes has an additional common plaza and some community buildings or, occaSionally, a big enclosure. The segmented community pattern seems to indicate the existence of several lineages, each occupying a segment. Variations are numerous (Chang 1958:306-307). [Emphasis added)

Chang (1958:307) goes on to state that there is usually only one segmentation and he notes that in some societies, certain villages may be unsegmented while others, given suitable resources, may be segmented.

Site Structure 769

Chang sees village segments as one form of Neolithic social grouping. He applies the structural correlates of the social groupings he defines to a series of archaeological cases, including the Viru Valley of Peru and the San Juan Anasazi area in the U.S. Southwest. TIle examples cited from these areas for segmented villages tend to consist of spatially discrete residential areas that have their own communal use facilities such as platform mounds and kivas. In the San Juan, Chang views Pueblo I unit pueblos that have associated kivas as representing single village segments (Chang 1958:318). Later, in Pueblo II times, Chang also sees village segments forming in "large compound towns" with "diverse lineages and clan­sectors occupying particular segments" (Chang 1958:322). Taken together, particularly when both Puebloan examples cited here are considered, it can be seen that Chang had something less specific than Howard's interpretation would suggest. The Pueblo I example of unit pueblos representing village segments is a level of social structure more likely to be analogous to the courtyard group in Hohokam society than what Howard calls either residential units or village segments. The Pueblo II example is vaguely described by Chang and is less clear.

Other Researchers

Henderson'S (1986, 1987a) study of site structure at Los Solares-La Ciudad was mentioned earlier. As a comprehensive view of the organization of a mid-sized preclassic Hohokam community, it offers the most complete coverage of any excavated site. Henderson applies the term "village segment" to the aggregates of courtyard groups sharing cemeteries and homos rather than to the larger structural units postulated by Howard. She does not envision a structural unit larger than the loci at Los Solares other than a "community." Glen Rice (1987:150-151) also discusses the site structure at Los Solares, referencing Howard's 1982 paper. When compared to Howard's (1991) recent clarification of his village segment definition, it can be seen that Rice mistakes the Los Solares loci with Howard's concept of a village segment.

Aside from the fact that the "village segment" label has been applied in different ways by different researchers, other terms have also been applied for the intermediate levels of social structure encompassed by the "village segment" label. Sires (1984a:523-524), in an excellent discussion of the Frogtown data on the Salt-Gila project, developed an independent set of terms that were useful in that they bore no cultural connotations. He viewed the terms hierarchically much as the systems of other researchers have. The basic building block in his scheme is the "structural element," meant to correlate to the level of the individual feature. The next level up is the "structural aggregate," a term that correlates with the house cluster or any set of features that can be grouped to form a set or related activities. The "structural complex" is a grouping of spatially proximate "structural aggregates" and the "structural component" includes all contemporaneous structural units within a site. Sires' (1984a:523-524) "structural aggregates" are composed of multiple contemporaneous courtyard groups that share trash disposal facilities and cemetery areas, and they average 66 m in diameter and 2417 m2 in area. He reports that "because the vast majority of structures were located within complexes, they can be considered a primary aspect of the structural organization of settlement at Frogtown" (Sires 1984a:523). Sires goes on to state that the social organizational correlates of these designations are household or house cluster (i.e. courtyard group) for the structural aggregate, the structural complexes are viewed as village segments (referencing Chang again), and the complex is viewed as equating to the village (Sires 1984a:533). He also suggests that, based on comparative data from Zinacantan (Vogt 1968) in Chiapas and the work of Underhill (1939) among the Tohono O'odham, that the village segments represent lineages. He recognizes that Howard's perceptions of the terminology differ structurally, but still considers them comparable interpretations (Sires 1984a:533). In this respect, while citing Howard, Sires is presenting a model that equates on a purely structural standpOint with the Los Morteros and Los Solares data, but not with the interpretations of Howard (Howard et al. 1982; Howard 1990), even though he implies that the cultural implication is the same.

Perhaps responding to the awkward character of the terms proposed in the Frogtown report, Sires (1987:180-181) used the term "house cluster aggregate" instead of "structural aggregate" in a later report. These are the same as Howard's "residential precincts." He does not discuss a larger level of

770 Chapter 15

social integration in his post-Frogtown reports. Mitchell (1990) also applies the village segment label to courtyard group aggregates at the site of La Lomita.

Another researcher that dealt with structural hierarchies is Huntington (1986) with his work at the West Branch site. Huntington (1986:79) concentrated on the courtyard group level of the hierarchy, but commented that multiples households were aggregated into what he called "precincts," which are equated with barrios and village segments. Not enough of the overall settlement was excavated at West Branch to determine whether cemetery areas and other facilities were associated with these "precincts," and whether or not other larger social structural units might be present in the form suggested by Howard.

In a recent synthesis, Doyel (1991:248-251), citing Howard (1982, 1988), presents a site structure model for large Hohokam villages that appears to be a blend of Howard's concept of village segments and the proposals of other researchers who have applied the term to courtyard group aggregates. In it (see his Figure 6.6), he includes Howard's communal use areas, calling them "courtyards" or "plazas," and he moves the homos (a critical part of Howard's model) to the perimeter of the segments. He then organizes these units around a large central plaza. Though presented as a schematic, it appears from the relative scale and discussion that Doyel's village segments are equivalent in size to Howard's residential precincts. If one were to place the cemeteries in Doyel's model within the village segment "plazas," the site structure would be compatible with that seen at Los Solares and Los Morteros.

Discussion

When the mitigation plan for Los Morteros was written early in 1988, the preliminary backhoe testing data were available and the residential aggregates that became what have been termed "loci" in this report were recognized. Each residential area was viewed as being composed of multiple contemporaneous courtyard groups, with possibly discrete burial facilities and homos. In essence, each of these loci were hypothetically perceived as discrete, essentially autonomous units that in some cases might join together into larger social units. The term "village segment" was applied to each of these loci as a concept to be tested, not realizing at that time that Howard had used the term differently. To the author, the term was not necessarily linked to a particular social structural correlate such as lineages or moieties; instead, it was intended to be evaluated from a spatial and artifactual basis to determine whether the loci were essentially duplicative units, or whether distinct differences were present between them. As such, this was more in tune with the idea that they might represent corporate groups in the sense proposed by Doelle and Wallace (1990) following the work of Hayden

_ and Cannon (1982: 134-135).

Howard's studies are very important for the purposes of this investigation because they call attention to the large-scale building blocks of Hohokam settlement structure and they provide hypotheses that can be tested. At the present time, the evidence from the most clear-cut data sets, those from Los Solares, Frogtown, Siphon Draw, and Los Morteros, indicate that there is a replicated structural component of Hohokam settlements that incorporates multiple courtyard groups and that is smaller than a village. Each of these units has a common cemetery, and some have one or more associated homos. Seen from the perspective of Los Morteros, it is illustrated schematically in Figure 15.2. As described earlier, this structural unit is what Howard calls a residential precinct rather than a village segment. Howard's argument that his definition more closely follows Chang's village segment definition can be rejected based on Chang's loose application of the term. Given the abundant evidence for these replicated units and the weak evidence for the larger units Howard suggests for Los Homos, it is proposed that tlte village segment label be applied to tltese well-defined structural units in place of Howard's use of the term. In the remainder of this report, this is how the term, "village segment," will be used.

Some variability is encompassed in the village segment label as applied here. This variability may involve the presence of a single set of courtyard groups, or multiple dusters of courtyard groups. Multiple cemetery areas may also be present in some cases. At first glance, Los Solares looks much more complex tllan Los Morteros South due to the large aggregates of courtyard group that share certain cemeteries.

• Horno

Courtyard Group

./

/

I

I

I

\

"

Trash

" ... "-

Cemetery

.....

.... \

\ I

I

I

I /

Trash

<&IWI0

Cou r t ya rd Group

sh

Figure 15.2. Schematic plan of a Middle Rincon subphase "illage segment at Los Morteros.

Site Structure 771

Trash

But the occupation of Los Solares covers a long span of time and as such, gives the appearance of greater complexity than is actually present. Henderson's reconstructions of how the settlement looked at particular points in time reveal a very similar structure to that seen at Los Morteros.

According to Howard and Sires, the sodal correlate of the "village segment" is the lineage, clan, or moiety (Howard and Cable 1988:856; Howard 1990:106; Sires 1984a:533). G. Rice (1987:158-161) suggests that the village segments at Los Solares represent "segmentary lineages, dting Sahlin's (1968) study of tribal societies. All of these researchers, directly or indirectly indicate that a corporate descent group is involved, and the author concurs. Being less inclined to accept a spedfic kinship label, Doelle and Wallace (1991:296); and Doelle, Wallace, and Craig (1992:124) suggested that village segments be examined in terms of land tenancy, economic interrelationships, and spatial boundaries which combine to indicate the presence of corporate groups. A corporate group is composed of individuals that interact closely and share a common social identity. Hayden and Cannon discuss archaeologically relevant corporate groups as arising "as a result of strong economic or environmental pressures, and which, as a result, exhibit a recognizable degree of residential coherency among two or more nuclear families within the community'· (Hayden and Cannon 1982:134-135).

Three different types of corporate groups are identified by Hayden and Cannon (1982:141-147), two of which are relevant here. The first is composed of a grouping of families that are closely bound by kinship relationships and which build structures that are spatially linked. This would be equivalent to what we have identified as a courtyard group. The second type of corporate group, relevant to the residential aggregate level of analysis, is considered to represent a barrio or neighborhood; what is essentially a very large residential corporate group. Hayden and Cannon (1982:147) report that "where these are strongly developed, as in some Mesoamerican communities, marriage and residence are controlled by barrio

772 Chapter 15

membership." They provide a useful insight into the formation of the large residential corporate groups thought to be indicated by Hohokam village segments:

It is the relative scardty of desired or needed resources, and the improbability of single individuals being able to obtain them for themselves which leads to cooperation among groups of people and their tolerance of each others' differences, and 'which generates mutual redprodty and close personal relationships. The sizes of traditional corporate groups and the strength of their development are most likely to be related to the manpower requirements for optimally retaining (defending) and most effidently exploiting essential or highly desired resources, and to the general availability of the resources (Hayden and Cannon 1982:151-152).

The utility of the corporate group concept as applied to the Hohokam can be seen on this basis to involve the identification of optimal resource procurement strategies and the potential defensive requirements for maintaining these strategies.

The possibility of a strong kin-based character to the village segments is supported by local ethnographic data. Underhill (1939:44) reports "an old village was larger and contained more unrelated families but it was generally segmented into groups of kin who continued to build houses near each other and to unite for work sharing, almost as though they were a separate village." This description, as previously noted by Sires (1984a:532-533), fits very well for what has been observed in the archaeological record. Individual village segments and sometimes several small village segments in the Tucson Basin, when discrete, are often labeled "hamlets," while the "village" label is generally reserved for large settlements of at least two, and often more, village segments (Doelle 1985a:273-274; Doelle and Wallace 1986:88-89; Elson 1986; Sires 1984a, 1984b; Wallace and Holmlund 1984; Wallace 1987:117-124).

There may be other levels of settlement structure between that of the village segment and the village, but there has been little work accomplished in this regard. The large structural unit proposed by Howard (1990) for Los Homos (what he called "village segments") has yet to be fully defined and demonstrated.

The Village and Community

The organizational unit above the village segment is the village. Villages are conceptualized as a discrete group of village segments that share certain types of communal spaces and public architecture such as plazas, platform mounds, and ballcourts. Our knowledge of village structure in the Tucson area is based primarily on surface data and test trench information.

Several villages have been intenSively documented for surface remains including Romero Ruin (Elson and Doelle 1987), Sleeping Snake (Craig and Wallace 1987), Valencia (Doelle 1985a; Elson and Doelle 1986), Punta de Agua (Doelle 1987), and Marana Mound (Fish et al. 1992b), and extensive excavations were conducted at Fastimes (Czaplicki and Ravesloot 1988), Water World (Czaplicki and Ravesloot 1989), Honeybee (Craig 1988), Los Morteros (Lange and Deaver 1989; this volume), and Dakota Wash (Craig 1992). Other large-scale excavations have been undertaken on sites in the Tucson area, such as those at the West Branch site (Huntington 1986; Swartz and Dart 1995; Karen Harry, personal communication 1995), Martinez Hill (Gabel 1931; Wallace and Holmlund 1984), University Ruin (University Ruin 1936; Hayden 1957), and Punta de Agua (Greenleaf 1975), but none of the studies were of sufficient scale to fully elucidate village organization. There are several patterns that have emerged from the data available. First, ballcourts, as an integral form of public architecture, seem not to have been built after Middle Rincon 1 or Middle Rincon 2 times in the Tucson area, and they may not have been built after the Early Rincon subphase. All courts witll reliable dating information (including Dakota Wash, Water World, Boundary Village, Punta de Agua north, AZ BB:13:232, and Hodges) date to either the Canada del Oro or Rillito phases. Therefore, as a form of integrative public architecture, they are only likely to have been functioning from about A.D. 800 to A.D. 1025 in the Tucson area (see Wallace et al. 1995). In terms of site spatial structure, there does seem to be a consistent correlation between open spaces and ballcourts on the settlements where they occur, and there is reasonable evidence to suppose that these large open spaces

Site Structure 773

are often plazas (Doelle and Wallace 1991:317-319; Ravesloot and Czaplicki 1989:43). The structure of villages during the time when ballcourts were in use appears to involve the presence of multiple village segments clustered near to a ballcourt-plaza complex. In some cases, there is evidence for a sizable cemetery in the central plaza that may signify a particular social class or lineage. The composition of village segments is poorly known for the pre-Early Rincon settlements as very little has been excavated in Colonial period settlements. There are hints from Water World (Czaplicki and Ravesloot 1989) and Fastimes (Czaplicki and Ravesloot 1988), that courtyard groups, if present, were small at any given time and probably did not exceed two structures in size. Nevertheless, as seen at Valencia (Doelle and Wallace 1991), these households are arranged in well-demarcated village segments. With the advent of the Early Rincon subphase, the West Branch and Los Morteros data sets (Huntington 1986; this volume) provide ample evidence for the presence of courtyard groups situated in village segments and this settlement structure-that is, a discrete cluster of village segments-carries forward in time.

Canada del Oro, Rillito, and Early Rincon villages have the appearance of being generally compact and focused, with the ballcourt-plaza often being centrally placed. Variability, such as the strung-out character of Sleeping Snake (Craig 1987:88), may be accounted for by founding effects (founding households may or may not be socially "close"), and localized environmental constraints such as those seen at Romero, where the optimal placement of the large ballcourt was upslope from much of the settlement (Holmlund 1987:133). In contrast, Middle Rincon subphase settlements lacked a focused arrangement and tended to be linearly arranged along presumed agricultural fields and water sources. There were no obvious types of public architecture present in the Middle Rincon, Late Rincon, or early Tanque Verde phase settlements in the Tucson area. Ballcourt-plazas may have still been used into the latter part of the Middle Rincon subphase, but the movement in settlement away from them as seen in the Valencia and San Xavier areas (Doelle and Wallace 1986, 1991) indicates they were no longer the focus of attention. In many respects, the Middle Rincon communities seen in the San Xavier (Doelle 1987; Doelle and Wallace 1986, 1991) Valencia (Doelle 1985a; Doelle and Wallace 1991), eastern Tucson Basin (Elson 1986), Romero (Elson and Doelle 1987), and Los Morteros areas, do not fit the definition of villages discussed previously, given their lack of identifiable public architecture and loose-knit spatial character. With the advent of platform mounds in tlle later portion of the Tanque Verde phase, a new, clear-cut form of public architecture is discernible. Very little is known of site structure during this time period. The Marana Mound site (Fish et al. 1992b), is similar to the dispersed Middle Rincon communities that preceded it in that it appears to contain a large series of village segments in a linear array along a possible canal system. Caution in interpretation is warranted, however, given tlle very large compound enclosure documented near the platform mound compound, and the possibility that there may be greater complexity involved. Fish et al. (1992b:21) view settlement hierarchically, with the Marana Mound site seen as the integrative focus for a set of large Tanque Verde phase villages, including Los Morteros and Chicken Ranch. Alternatives are considered later in this chapter and in Chapter 16.

Tucson phase village structure is known to be less expansive and more aggregated than was the case for the Tanque Verde phase (Wallace and Holmlund 1984). One or more platform mounds are present at most villages in the central and southern portions of the Tucson Basin, and along the Coyote Mountains to the west. Little is known of the layout of the large, late, aggregated settlements of this time period which postdate all known settlement in the Los Morteros region.

Communities are viewed in this study as including sets of interrelated villages, hamlets, and farmsteads. Doelle (1987:321-323, 370, 371), building on the underutilized and overlooked ethnographic study by Richard Jones (1969) of Tohono O'odham communities during the period 1900 to 1920, proposes that a hierarchical approach to community definition may help structure our thinking of Hohokam communities and he cautions archaeologists about spatial variability. Jones (1969) had identified a hierarchy of settlement types and social interactions that fit well with the types of data often available to archaeologists. The basal level of the hierarchy consisted of subsistence territories and the social groups that interacted to exploit them. The social groups that worked togetller to exploit subsistence territories were found to be closely integrated, and were largely self-sufficient (Jones 1969). Social and ceremonial activities, including spouse exchange, usually involved relatively intense interaction between several subsistence

774 Chapter 15

communities. A lower level of sodal and ceremonial interaction was also maintained with other soda 1-ceremonial communities. The other important finding of Jones' (1969) study rightly emphasized by Doelle (1987:370-371), is that there was a great deal of spatial variability in Tohono O'odham communities. As this variability resulted from sodal, as well as environmental sources, it is reasonable to suppose that it might be present among Hohokam communities as well.

If one ignores small seasonal settlements, for some portions of the sequence "community" may have been isomorphic with "village" (Wallace 1987:119-120). This may have been the case in some parts of the Tucson area, during the Rillito phase. During other portions of the sequence, communities may have been large and dispersed. Middle Rincon, Late Rincon, and Tanque Verde phase communities all probably incorporated multiple villages, hamlets, and farmsteads. There is a reasonable expectation that some villages, at certain points in time, may have been differentiated in particular settlement systems as preeminent centers (Wilcox 1983), and there is reason to think that this might have been the case for Snaketown, La Ciudad, Casa Grande, Mesa Grande, Las Colinas (Wilcox et al. 1981:135-146), Los Homos (Howard 1990:82-86), and perhaps several other settlements in the Gila and Salt River Valleys such as Chee Nee and Adamsville. This argument is based on complex intrasite variability in public and monumental (or at least conspicuous) architecture that is present at these sites but is not known from other settlements. Some of the large Gila phase settlements in the Tonto Basin would fall into this class, as may several settlements along the Lower San Pedro. The structure of the communities these settlements are part of, and the structure of the villages with public or conspicuous architecture, are not well understood at present and the list of sites and areas presented may encompass a variety of different patterns. No "preeminent centers" have been demonstrated to exist in the Tucson area. On spatial and artifactual grounds, several authors have suggested that the Hodges and Hardy sites might fill this role, perhaps even being ports-of-entry (Layhe 1986:289) or gateway (Elson 1986:452-455) communities in the sense of Hirth (1978). Through an analysis of buffware ceramic distributions, these interpretations have been questioned by the author in a previous study (Wallace 1987:163). If there were such centers in the Tucson area, they most likely include the late Classic period components of Martinez Hill, with its complex set of platform mounds and hilltop structures, as well as University Ruin and the Los Morteros­Huntington site complex.

OVERVIEW OF LAND-USE PATTERNING AT LOS MORTEROS

Ignoring temporal patterning for the moment, our starting point in a consideration of the settlement structure at Los Morteros is a general examination of the site. Figures 1.1 and 1.4 provide an approximation of the extent of settlement within the project area and within the central portion of the site. Taken into account in produdng these maps are data from the residents of the La Puerta del Norte Trailer Park and survey, surface collection data from Arizona State Museum work in the area (Lange and Deaver 1989), and historical data on landforms and artifact distributions (Huntington 1910, 1912, 1913, 1914; Murdock 1927; Soil Conservation Service Aerial Photograph, 1936, see Figure 1.10; ASM site files) . Note that the site boundaries are substantially reduced from that recorded in some previous documents (Wallace 1988; Lange and Deaver 1989). This reflects a more realistic portrayal of the actual habitation portions of the site. Various small and light density sherd scatters are found throughout the fields east of the site as shown here, and it is known that some habitation occurred near to the river based on the Murdock map (Figure 1.14) and the work at the canals (Bernard-Shaw 1989b). These are now considered to be outlying areas clearly separated from the principal concentration of habitation in the illustrated boundaries. The residential zones of the site are situated in four distinctly different geomorphological and ecological environments.

The mountain slopes and peaks are utilized for the hillside Tanque Verde phase village (Linda Vista Hill; also known as the Rattlesnake Pass trincheras) discussed by Downum in Appendix L and in his 1986 article. The steep, rocky slopes are home to at least 80 probable structures that are constructed in various ways depending on the local conditions. Additional structures are found atop Rillito Peak (Wallace 1983), but the density and artifact assemblages present there do not suggest intensive occupation of that locality.

Site Structure 775

The mountain slopes and summits at Linda Vista and Rillito Peak offer advantages for defense, and possibly for certain agricultural and ceremonial pursuits, but must be considered to mandate a relatively steep cost of home construction and high labor drain relative to occupation of the Holocene fan deposits below. If nothing else, this would be the case from the standpoint of water procurement and agricultural pursuits. A masonry wall blocking the most ready access from the west side of the Linda Vista mountain to the habitation areas supports a defensive motivation for the construction of this hillside village.

Also present on the lower mountain slope at Linda Vista is a large rock shelter (see Figure 1.9). Although now completely stripped of its deposits, the shelter once contained cultural fill at least 1.5 m in depth (AZ AA:12:27 site card, ASM). Table 15.1 presents a listing of the ceramics that were recovered by Emil Haury in 1938 at the time the cave deposits were being mined for treasure. Interestingly enough, despite the dense Tanque Verde phase occupation of the mountain slopes adjacent to the cave to the south, the majority of refuse in the cave appears to date to the Rillito through Middle Rincon time period based on Haury's collection. The fact that Haury collected a large number of plainware sherds together with the decorated suggests that the sample may be a relatively unbiased sample.

Table 15.1. Ceramics types and frequencies present in the ASM site survey collection from rock shelter AZ AA:12:27 collected by Emil Haury in 1938.

No. Sherds

Tucson Basin Red-on-brown

2

3 7

4

5

3

2

1

7

13

Tucson Basin Redwares

1

Phoenix Basin Buffwares

6

12

1

3

4

Other Intrusives

1

Mise. Redwares and Plainwares

2

1

1

242

Historic Period

2

Ceramic Type

Rillito Red-on-brown

Rillito or Early Rincon Red-on-brown

Early Rincon Red-on-brm,;-n

Early Rincon or Middle Rincon (MR 1 or 2) Red-on-brmm

Middle Rincon Red-on-brown

Middle Rincon (MR 1 or 2) Red-on-brown

).,fiddle Rincon (MR 2 or 3) or Late Rincon Red-on-brown

Middle Rincon, Late Rincon, or Tanque Verde Red-on-brmm

Preclassic Red-on-bro\m

Indeterminate Red-on-bro\,;-n

Rincon Red

Santa Cruz Red-on-buff

Sacaton Red-on-buff

Santa Cruz or Sacaton Red-on-buff

Indeterminate Red-on-buff

Indeterminate Buff

Trincheras Purple-on-red (specular paint)

Indeterminate Red

Plainware ,dth Gila shoulder

Plainware ,dth Oassic shoulder

Plainware (Hohokam)

Papago Red

776 Chapter 15

A second environment utilized by the Los Morteros inhabitants is that of the Pleistocene terrace remnant in the central portion of the site (Figure 1.12). This alluvial terrace provided a well-drained sizeable section of relatively level ground that was the focus of intensive occupation throughout the sequence of site occupation. Situated well above land that could be potentially flooded, and consisting of sands and gravels that were readily excavated for house pits and other purposes, this is believed to be the single most attractive area for nondefensive habitation. The presence of large trash middens, a very large ballcourt, and a possible Classic period contiguous-walled room block all support the proposition that this area was subject to intensive occupation. The full sequence of occupation documented at the site is represented in this setting and the only Snaketown phase sherd recovered from the site was found on the large mound immediately to the northeast of the ballcourt in this area.

The Holocene alluvial fan deposits that stretch out into and stay just above the floodplain (see Chapter 1) were also the focus of settlement. All of the habitation areas in Los Morteros South are found in this environment, as are sites AZ AA:12:146, AZ AA:12:147, AA:12:148, and the Lonetree and Redtail sites to the southeast. This setting precludes flooding by the Santa Cruz River, although, due to shifting drainage patterns in an active environment of this sort, some risk of flooding from secondary drainages is recognized. The advantages of this setting are proximity to arable land and potentially shorter travel distances to obtain water. Clayey soils, gravel deposits, and caliche hinder pit excavation in some portions of this environment. The clayey soils in Loci 9 and 10 are undoubtedly the most competent and archaeological evidence of long-term residential stability was uncovered here that may relate to this environmental impediment (see description of Feature 3312 in Chapter 4, pp. 186-187).

The fourth environmental setting that was the focus of habitation in the region is the floodplain of the Santa Cruz River. Occupied in limited portions of Los Morteros North, this environment was probably originally characterized, at least in part, by a mesquite bosque prior to human intervention. The soils consist of fine alluvial sandy silts with a moderately well developed caliche-rich clay horizon that proved useful for house construction in the Late Rincon and Tanque Verde phases. This environment would have been prone to riverine flooding during portions of the sequence when the Santa Cruz River channel was not deeply incised and based on the existing topography and pattern of flooding in 1979, 1983, and 1993, even during episodes of deep entrenchment, serious flooding may occur in this zone.

Archaeological evidence for three clearly definable major flooding events could be documented (though many others must have occurred). One event flooded the house pit of Tanque Verde phase Feature 1001 at the far northeast corner of our study area shortly after it had been abandoned. This is the only specific prehistoric flooding "event" that could be definitively documented in the 1987-1988 excavations. Others undoubtedly occurred, but could not be isolated in the bioturbated floodplain silts of the area. At least two flooding events, each depositing from 1 to 10 em of clayey silt, occurred since the north end of the site was plowed in the 1920s. The latter episode is known to have been the 1983 flood, which was observed to have swept through this area (personal observation). The date of the earlier event(s) are unknown, but, based on interviews of the trailer court residents, are thought to predate the construction of the La Puerta del Norte Trailer Court in the late 1960s.

The evidence for occupation between the defined boundaries of Los Morteros and the Santa Cruz River, consisting of a series of small artifact scatters and two possible mounds (if tlle author is interpreting Murdock's 1927 map correctly; see Figure 1.14), could be considered to be in a fifth environmental zone: portions of the Santa Cruz River floodplain subject to potential repeated and frequent flooding events depending on the riverine environment at the time of occupation. Bernard-Shaw (1989b) has documented evidence of meadow deposits and prehistoric wells in this setting. Also documented were two canal systems dating to the Rillito-Early Rincon time period and evidence of prehistoric field systems. It is likely from her research that this zone was intensively explOited for water, fuel wood, and agricultural pursuits during portions of the sequence. The presence of a series of small artifact scatters in the modern fields in this area, which include a full complement of artifact classes, is thought to be an indicator of field houses and perhaps small farmsteads. Most of the floodplain east of the habitation areas was probably farmed and numerous small and moderate-sized canals are likely present in the area.

Site Structure 777

TEMPORAL TRENDS IN SITE STRUCTURE

Our data on settlement structure varies in detail and our ability to interpret it over time. The earliest and latest occupations of the area are least understood when compared to the Rincon phase occupation. This portion of the chapter will address the information available for each portion of the defined Los Morteros sequence.

Pioneer Period Occupation

There are no definite indications of a Pioneer period occupation of Los Morteros and only a single Snaketown incised brownware sherd has been found in the vicinity of the ballcourt. If present, occupation dating to this time period is almost certainly restricted to the Pleistocene terrace in the central portion of the site. Given the rarity of Pioneer period decorated wares in the Tucson Basin on Pioneer period sites, even this single sherd must be taken as a possible indicator of subsurface remains.

Colonial Period Occupation

Although a few Canada del Oro Red-on-brown sherds have been found at Los Morteros, no features have been assigned to the Canada del Oro phase. Rillito Red-on-brown and Santa Cruz Red-on-buff pottery indicative of a late Colonial period occupation has been recovered from surface and subsurface contexts across most of the non-mountainous portion of the site. It was dearly well-represented on the Pleistocene terrace in the central portion of the site near the ballcourt (Lange and Deaver 1989:173). Not enough of the Los Morteros North pre-Late Rincon subphase occupation has been excavated to venture a guess as to the prevalence of Rillito phase features other than to note that all those that could be positively assigned a date based on testing and excavation have been dated to the Early Rincon subphase or later. If there is a significant preserved Rillito phase occupation off the terrace in the northern portion of the site, it would be found just south of the Los Morteros North project boundary where a dense concentration of cultural features has been noted and many subsurface sherds recovered (Lange and Deaver 1989). There was also likely to have been some occupation of the area along the modem canal at N1825 E925, but most of the features in this area have been destroyed by deep plowing.

In Los Morteros South, Rillito phase ceramics were recovered in surface and subsurface contexts in most of the areas where Rincon phase residential aggregates have been located through excavations (Figure 15.3), but there are marked differences in the frequencies of occurrence. Overall, the relative numbers of sherds are small and only two houses, one superimposed atop the other (Features 3155 and 3513), could definitively be assigned to the Rillito phase. These houses occurred in Locus 8 in the midst of the densest concentration of subsurface Rillito sherds (Figures 15.3,4.9). The second densest concentration of Rillito phase ceramics was identified in Locus 5, and it was at this location that pithouse Feature 3044 was identified and excavated. That structure was abandoned during the transition between the Rillito phase and the Early Rincon sub phase. Other Rillito phase structures are likely to have been present in this area that were not excavated or had been destroyed by later occupation in the area based on the distribution of Rillito ceramics in the vicinity (Feature 3037 may be such a structure).

Although notable that Rillito phase ceramics are widely distributed at the site, the evidence hints that the settlement structure was very different at this time period than that which occurred later in the occupation of the area. Although there is no way of knowing whether a substantial Rillito phase village may have been present in the central portion of the site (I suspect that there was), at Los Morteros South, the Rillito occupation may have been very spotty and less substantive than the later Rincon phase occupation. Going solely on the basis of decorated ceramic frequencies and identified features, it seems likely that there may have been a small, perhaps seasonal, Rillito phase settlement within Locus 8, while other portions of the site in Los Morteros North and South may have only contained isolated field houses. It is probable that the field houses were seasonally occupied. Other scenarios can certainly be derived, but the critical factor

778 Chapter 15

-0

181

~

•

+N 150 E BOO

_._, EXPLANA TION ,~~.

isolated Rilli to Phase sherd

2-3 Rillito Phase sherds

>3 Rilli to Phose sherds

Rilli to feature

-

• Transitional Rilli to / Early Rincon

... ~}v--backhoe trenches and archaeological features

LI NDA VISTA

o

K

~ feature

~\

ROAD

o N 600

+ E 1250

drainage channel

Los Morteros South

RILLITO SHERD DISTRIBUTION MAP

AZ AA:12:57 ( ASM)

- . . - - - :. a 100

_ •. J

Computer cartography by GEO- MAP, Inc. 1995

200 m

Figure 15.3. Distribution of Rillito phase sherds recovered from surface collections and testing compared to the distribution of features assigned to the Rillito or Rillito/ Early Rincon transitional subphase at Los Morteros South.

Site Structure 779

is the strong evidence that whatever the settlement pattern, it was very limited in extent and intensity over most of the site and that it was markedly different from other recorded Rillito phase large villages such as Dakota Wash (Craig 1989), Valencia (Doelle 1985a; Elson and Doelle 1986), and Romero (Elson and Doelle 1987). Whether the terrace occupation in the central portion of the site has an occupational intensity similar to the other large villages remains to be determined. No Rillito phase cremations have been identified at Los Morteros and there is no discrete zone within the site where substantial quantities of Rillito phase ceramics and cremated bone have been observed that might indicate such a cemetery.

There are some hints from the decorated ceramic analysis that the Rillito phase ceramics recovered from Features 3155 and 3513 may have dated to the early half of the Rillito phase. If true, it is possible that they were part of an early seasonal adaptation to the region, while Feature 3044 may be part of the initial, more permanent settlement of the area.

Early Rincon Subphase Occupation

Early Rincon subphase ceramics were recovered from surface and subsurface contexts over most of the southern portion of Los Morteros where residential areas have been identified (Figure 15.4). Subsurface features in Los Morteros South attributed to the subphase are found in Loci 1, 2, 3, 5, and 8. At Los Morteros North, Early Rincon ceramics were recovered from Locus 11 and from a plow-disturbed portion of the site at N1825 E925. The only definite subsurface feature attributed to the subphase at Los Morteros North is pithouse Feature 1133, but future excavations in Locus 11 would likely turn up additional features. It is unknown what the level of Early Rincon occupation might be in the central portion of the site due to the lack of excavation and the lack of such a ceramic type category when the ceramics from this area were catalogued in the early 1980s.

Six pit structures, two secondary cremations, one homo, one small pit, and a portion of one borrow pit from the excavated feature sample were assigned an Early Rincon date. In Locus 8, where three structures dated to the subphase were almost completely excavated, there were hints of the presence of a courtyard group. Pithouses 3148 and 3179 were side-by-side, facing into a common space, suggesting contemporaneity. Due to the presence of an historic drainage ditch, it is impossible to say whether additional structures in the same potential courtyard group had been present (artifact densities along the ditch banks suggested other features in this area). Features 3209 and 3669 in Locus 3 may also have been part of a courtyard group in the Early Rincon subphase, but their association is less certain.

It is notable that Early Rincon subphase structures are present within two of the most extensively rebuilt clusters of structures in Loci 3 and 5. Feature 3214 in Locus 3, believed to have been abandoned in the Early Rincon subphase, was dismantled and built over by a succession of four later houses that are all oriented to the east-northeast. This complex lasted to the Late Rincon subphase. In Locus 5, an Early Rincon subphase structure was similarly rebuilt or built over by five to six later structures that extend into the Late Rincon subphase. In each instance, the Early Rincon subphase structures are thought to represent the founding household. In the case of Locus 2, the most extensively excavated portion of Los Morteros South, no Early Rincon subphase dated structures were identified although the presence of Early Rincon refuse at the base of a borrow pit (Feature 3255) indicates that at least one structure must have been present in the vicinity. The complete lack of Rillito phase ceramics here is a dear indication that the initiation of settlement in this village segment did not occur until Early Rincon times.

Early Rincon subphase ceramics were recovered from surface contexts at sites AZ AA:12:146 (Locus 146) and AZ AA:12:147 (Locus 147). At Locus 147, three of the dated structures were assigned an Early Rincon subphase date. At Locus 146, it is likely that the settlement was initiated during this subphase, but continued into the first portions of the Middle Rincon subphase. The settlement structure at Locus 147 was very different from that observed at Los Morteros South: there are no indications that house dusters were present. All structures were oriented east-northeast. Several structures beyond those uncovered in

780 Chapter 15

drainage channel

+N 150 E 800

-=-~, EXPLANATION ,~- -.-

o Isoloted Eorly Rincon sherd

C!?J 2-3 Eorly Rincon sherds

III >3 Eorly Rincon sherds

• Early Rincon feature

o Transitional Early Rincon / MR1 feature

backhoe trenches and orcheoologicol features

LINDA

drainage channel

VISTA

K

ROAD

N 600 + E 1250

Los Morteros South

EARL Y RINCON SHERD DISTRIBUTION MAP

AZ AA: 12: 57 (ASM) -==.=-: a 100

Computer cartography by GEO-MAP, Inc. 1995

200 m

Figure 15.4. Distribution of Early Rincon Red-on-brown sherds recovered from surface collections and testing compared to the distribution of features assigned to the Early Rincon subphase at Los Morteros South.

Site Structure 781

our excavations may have been destroyed when the site was plowed, but the sample excavated suggests they would not have materially changed this interpretation. Locus 147 could be interpreted as a single village segment with three different founding households having established residential spaces. The overall dimensions of the residential area are somewhat large, 68 m in diameter, but not out of line with such an interpretation. If indeed the case, for whatever reason, structures 20 and 21 were intentionally burned and abandoned at the same time and it is not unreasonable to suppose that the locus was completely abandoned at that time.

The distribution of Early Rincon subphase structures and the presence of possible courtyard groups at Los Morteros South (most clearly seen in Locus 8 with structures 3148 and 3179) is an indication that many of the loci at Los Morteros may have been initially settled at this time. Given the postulated Rillito phase field houses and possible farmstead or small hamlet postulated for Los Morteros South, it may be that land ownership or claims had already been established prior to the Early Rincon subphase settlement, thereby influencing the location of what became village segments in the Rincon phase.

The presence of Early Rincon subphase cremations in Cemetery C-1 and in the probable cemetery for Locus 1 is an indication that the formal structure of these portions of the settlement were already in place. They are the earliest dated burials at the site.

Middle Rincon Subphase Occupation

Middle Rincon subphase ceramics were found throughout Los Morteros South, all across the central portion of the site, and in Los Morteros North within Locus 11 and the plow-disturbed area around N1825 E925. Many of the excavated structures that could be dated at the subphase level in Los Morteros South were assigned to this subphase (17 structures). In Los Morteros North, most of the decorated ceramics from structure contexts in Locus 11 also dated to this subphase. The Middle Rincon subphase settlement structure was most dearly identifiable in Los Morteros South and the following discussion focuses on this area.

Middle Rincon subphase courtyard groups were identified in Loci 2,3,5, and 10, and are believed to be present in the other loci as well. At the north end of Locus 2, the most extensively excavated residential area, two, possibly three structures were used contemporaneously in MR 2 with one structure functioning as a dedicated storage facility (Feature 3248). Only a portion of the complex of houses overlapping one another in the vicinity of Features 3274, 3069, and 9009 could be excavated, and some had been partly destroyed by stream channels. At least four, and pOSSibly as many as six house rebuilding episodes occurred in this vicinity, induding Features 3053, 3069, 3078, 3274, 3792, and 9009. Feature 3273 may also be part of tllis unit. The latest structure in this sequence, Feature 3274, dates to the MR 2 or posSibly MR 3 subphase. The earliest is not likely to predate the MR 1 subphase given the lack of Early Rincon subphase ceramics in the vicinity. By inference of continuous occupation, Features 3278, 3614, and 3248 would have been contemporaneous with one or more of the rebuilding episodes of the complex discussed earlier.

Features 3251 and 3136 in Locus 2 are also likely to be contemporaneous and part of a single courtyard group. Features 3253 and 3668 may also be part of this unit. Features 3136 and 3668 are believed to predate the majority of the cremation deposits in Cemetery C-3. This courtyard group appears to have ultimately declined in size by the latter portion of the MR 3 subphase when Feature 3252 was burned, leaving only Feature 3706, which is not known to be related to any other features. The fact that 3706 changes the orientation of the grouping to the north suggests that it is unrelated to the previous organization of the courtyard. The ceramics in the fill of 3706 were only very slightly different from those in 3252, suggesting that 3706 was occupied only briefly before it, too, was abandoned and burned. This portion of the Rincon phase seriation is well-defined and the ceramic changes underway are relatively rapid, enabling one to gauge the dating of these houses very closely with respect to one another.

782 Chapter 15

Sequences of Middle Rincon subphase building and rebuilding were commonplace at Los Morteros South. Some of these have already been mentioned. Other sets include Features 3226 and 3752; Features 3181, 3182,3205,3757, and possibly 3220; and the elaborate three phases of in situ rebuilding of Feature 3312.

A series of at least two and possibly as many as six structures were present in the early portions of the Middle Rincon subphase at Locus 146. Not enough is known of the site's layout to assess structure other than to note that the scale of the residential area is comparable to village segments in the remainder of Los Morteros. The presence of a secondary cremation supports the possibility that this was a distinct village segment rather than a seasonal farmstead if it can be assumed that cremation burials would be expected to be interred at the principle settlement (particularly if that settlement is found nearby). As is the case with Locus 147, it is possible that some structures were destroyed by plowing at this locus.

Included in the Middle Rincon subphase structure assemblage were a series of dedicated and converted storehouses. Features 3175 and 3248 were specially constructed storage facilities. Features 3583 and 3315 appear to have been converted for this purpose and Feature 3181 might also fit into this category based on its artifact contents. Dedicated storage facilities were in place by MR 1, based on the excavated sample, and were an indication that settlement had become relatively permanent and that food surpluses were available. The earliest dated bell-shaped pits (presumably used as storage facilities) also dated to the MR 1 subphase in Locus 10.

Other types of Middle Rincon structures are also present in the excavated sample. Three very small "bathtub" structures were excavated, two in Los Morteros South and one at Locus 147. In the latter case, the feature was believed to be a sweat lodge (see Chapter 4). The two other examples do not offer any strong functional clues. None of these features can presently be related to patterns in settlement structure.

Late Rincon Subphase Occupation

Late Rincon subphase ceramics in surface and testing contexts have been recovered from a smattering of localities across Los Morteros South (Figure 15.5) with the only notable concentration originating from Locus 2 where the majority of excavated Late Rincon features were uncovered. Late Rincon Red-on-brown pottery was present in the central portion of the site, altllOugh relative frequencies are unknown. At the north end of the site, Late Rincon ceramics and features were widely distributed in Loci 12 and 13.

Two patterns in settlement structure are evident in the Late Rincon occupation of Los Morteros South. The first was a continuation of the sequential rebuilding episodes presumably representing residential stability that had been proceeding since Early Rincon times. Features 3220 and 3051 in Loci 5 and 3 respectively, may be parts of such a sequence. Note that neither of these structures was thought to extend late into the Late Rincon subphase. The other pattern represented a complete break from the probable courtyard arrangements of the Early and Middle Rincon subphases. Feature 3706 has already been discussed in this regard and is important due to the precise dating of its construction and abandonment at the MR 3/LR subphase boundary. It indicates that there was not a single clear-cut sequence of events across the site. Other cases representing a break from pre-established residential patterns include Features 3145 and pOSSibly 3236. Feature 3145 was abandoned slightly later than Feature 3706 (though perhaps not more than a decade). Feature 3145 was particularly interesting because it was built atop what had previously been an extramural work space with trash-filled borrow pits, and because it was the largest excavated Preclassic house at the site (37 m~). It appears to be isolated, though unexcavated structure Feature 3238 could be related. The placement of Feature 3145 atop what had previously been an extramural workspace was indicative of changing perspectives on the use of space and the probable disintegration of the courtyard group present at the north end of Locus 2 (see Figure 4.2). This feature will be discussed further later in this chapter.

No Late Rincon subphase cremations were identified and it is unknown whether the cemetery areas were in use at that time. One Late Rincon infant inhumation (and possibly another nearby), Feature 3204, was

+N 150 E 800

--==<. EXPLANATION -=-~ Isolated Lote Rincon sherd

Ll::. Mult iple Late Rincon sherds

... Late Rincan feature

backhoe trenches and -ea- archaeological features

STA

K

~ t

Site Structure 783

ROAD

~

drainage channe l

i .1

-l-N 600 E 1250

Los Morteros South

LATE. RINCON SHE.RD DISTRIBUTION MAP

AZ AA: 12: 57 ( ASM )

-0 100

Computer cartography by GEO-MAP, Inc. 1995

200 m

Figure 15.5. Distribution of Late Rincon Red-on-brown sherds recovered from surface collections and testing compared to the distribution of features assigned to the Late Rincon subphase at Los Morteros South.

784 Chapter 15

uncovered in Locus 5. It was located behind what is likely to have been a Late Rincon subphase structure that was not excavated, Feature 3198.

At Los Morteros North, a series of Late Rincon subphase features were excavated that indicate extreme diversity in architectural expression. Coursed solid adobe-walled pit structures were present based on Feature 1536, and it is believed that the compound, Feature 1522, was partly constructed during the Late Rincon subphase. Pit structures were also present, including a heavily plastered slant-walled true pithouse that was abandoned at the transition from the Late Rincon to Tanque Verde phases. Given the short 50-year duration of the Late Rincon subphase in the current duonology, the fact that multiple structures and extramural features in Locus 13 are thought to date to the subphase (based on testing and excavation data), it is reasonable to suppose contemporaneity and the presence of a potential residential aggregate in this area. Otherwise, with the possible exception of the compound, little in the way of site structural data could be determined for Los Morteros North in the Late Rincon subphase. No special­function structures, bell-shaped pits, or cremation burials were identified.

T anque Verde Phase Occupation

Tanque Verde phase ceramics were recovered in surface contexts from only a few scattered localities in Los Morteros South. Three sherds were found in the vicinity of Loci 4, 5, and 6. Figure 15.6 presents the distribution of Tanque Verde Red-on-brown from our work in Los Morteros South, and a clear picture of their surface distribution overall at Los Morteros is provided from the work of ASM (Figure 15.7). Their concentration in the central and northern part of the site are evident. Tanque Verde phase deposits were also present along the south and west edges of AOOT Materials Pit 6117 north of our study area, within the La Puerta del Norte Trailer Court on the eastern edge of the site, on the slopes and summits of Rillito Peak, and on Linda Vista Hill.

Their subsurface distribution in Los Morteros South is of interest because it is clear that this portion of the site was largely abandoned by the end of the Late Rincon subphase. Eight sherds were recovered from five pit structures. Three are from the very mixed fill of Feature 3284 in Locus 1. Two come from the nearly sterile fill of Feature 3236 in Locus 2, which is believed to have been abandoned in the Late Rincon subphase. Additional sherds came from Features 3051, 3249, and 3252. Both 3051 and 3252 were abandoned late in the sequence (Late Rincon and Middle Rincon 3/Late Rincon, respectively). The only excavated structure actually thought to date to the Tanque Verde phase in Los Morteros South is Feature 3249 in Locus 2. A Tanque Verde Red-on-brown sherd was embedded in its floor plaster, offering convincing evidence for its dating. The fact that it was oriented away from the Rincon phase courtyard group it adjoined and contained a virtually sterile fill supports the idea that it may have been an isolated Tanque Verde phase house. The scattered Tanque Verde phase sherds elsewhere in Los Morteros South could indicate the presence of other such isolated structures or they may indicate sporadic use of the area by the occupants of the Classic period village areas to the north and west.

Settlement structure at Los Morteros North is poorly known due to the constraints on excavation and the destructive impacts of plowing. There was a loose cluster of Tanque Verde phase structures indicated by our testing results in Locus 13, and there are some indications of continuity in spatial orientation from the Late Rincon subphase into the Tanque Verde phase based on structures 1538 and 1555. The fact that the compound, Feature 1522, was apparently constructed in the Late Rincon subphase and utilized and expanded into the Tanque Verde phase, is also evidence of settlement continuity once the area was settled late in the Late Rincon sub phase. The compound was not well enough preserved to assess its full extent, but it is known that it could not have been substantially larger than what is shown in Figures 4.15 and 4.22. The clustering of features evident in Locus 13 is comparable in overall dimensions to what are interpreted as village segments in the Middle Rincon subphase in Los Morteros South (such as Locus 1 or Locus 2); but as addressed here, the appearance is structurally quite different and it is questionable whether a sodal unit is represented.

drainage channel

+N 150 E 800

-==- EXPLANATION -=-0 Isolated Tonque Verde sherd

~ Multiple Tanque Verde sherds

• Tanque Verde Phase feature

backhoe trenches and archaeological features

LINDA

\ \ \! I ! f .IT

K

t

Site Structure 785

VISTA ROAD

N 600 +E 1250

Los Morteros Sou th

TANQ. UE VERDE SHERD DISTRIBUTION MAP

AZ AA: 12: 57 (ASM)

-0 100 200 m

Computer cartography by GEO-MAP, Inc. 1995

Figure 15.6. Distribution of Tanque Verde Red-on-brown sherds recovered from surface collections and testing compared to the distribution of features assigned to the Tanque Verde phase at Los Morteros South.

786 Chapter 15

o o .... UJ

+

---==- EXPLANATION --= .... , .. ~. ~

-, . ..M

@ no Classic Period Ceramics

contour interval = 5. 10. 15. 20. 25. 30. 35. 40. 50 and 60 sherds

o o <Xl

UJ

+

K

~ ,

~

8 N

UJ

+

+

o o <0

UJ

+

+

N 2000

N 1600

TRAILER COURT

+ + N 1200

+ N 800

+ N 400

DISTRIBUTION OF

CLASSIC PERIOD SHERDS

o 200 400 m Computer cortogrophy by

GEO-MAP. Inc. 1995

Figure 15.7. Distribution of Classic period ceramics at Los Morteros (modified from Deaver 1989a:24, Figure 3.6).

Site Structure 787

It is evident from trench data that a large zone south and south-southwest of the compound was reserved primarily for extramural activities. This zone was used extensively for borrowing soil used in the production of adobe, and some of the pits were used for dumping trash. Also found in this zone are secondary cremations and roasting pits. No discrete cemeteries could be identified here, but plow damage may have obscured them. Tanque Verde phase cemeteries were identified southeast of the compound and overlying the preclassic residential area, Locus 11. Mucll variability in the funerary remains was observed, as seen in Chapter 14. The patterning in relationship to residential areas was not as clear-cut as that observed in Los Morteros South but there does appear to be an association of single or small sets of secondary cremations with areas of Tanque Verde habitation. These could easily represent household cemeteries. Cemetery C-4 was larger and the unusual set of mortuary deposits within it suggest a different, though presently unknown pattern.

No special function structures or storage facilities such as bell-shaped pits were located that could be dated to the Tanque Verde phase. It is possible that Feature 1152 in the compound may have been a special function facility during at least a portion of its use-life (see Chapter 4), but the floor was too severely damaged from plowing to be certain.

Some of the trash deposits dated to the Tanque Verde phase contained very high densities of discarded ceramics (and in the case of Feature 1154, extremely high densities of rabbit and bird bones). This was particularly the case for trash-filled borrow pit Feature 1008 and trash mound Feature 27 (Feature 1154 is partly filled with material from this midden). In the case of the borrow pit, based on trench profiles, excavation units, and horizontal stripping, some interpolations of the density and quantities of ceramics in the feature can be drawn. The density was recorded as 1,111 sherds (larger than 5 crn2) per cubic meter, with a total count (of sherds larger than 5 crn2

) being a minimum of 14,350 sherds in the deposit. The trash midden deposit could not be as easily calculated given the feature's size, level of testing within it, and evidence for differential densities. Certainly it would have more than Feature 1008. By any measure, these deposits reflect significant numbers of vessels in use in just a small portion of the Classic period settlement. It is difficult to directly compare these figures with the Preclassic occupation of Los Morteros because the trash mounds likely to have been present had been leveled prior to our investigations.

Tanque Verde phase occupation north of our study area is known to have been dense at the southeast comer of ADOT Materials Pit 6117 where a remnant island of intact deposits was preserved as recently as 1983 around a bedrock spire covered with mortars and cupules (boulder MS-7 in Wallace and Holmlund 1983:175), and ASM site records (site card for AZ AA:12:58) note the presence of a 25-acre Tanque Verde phase village in this area.

Additional Tanque Verde phase habitation areas were present on the terrace in the central portion of the site. In this zone, large trash mounds with both Rincon and Tanque Verde phase ceramics were present and a possible contiguous-room compound or room block may have been present. Surface indications in this respect were limited to a number of probable foundation stones now in disarray from vandalism and it is unclear what the extent of this structure may have been. The Murdock map of this portion of the site (Figure 1.14; Murdock 1927) seems to indicate the presence of several relatively large "pueblos," which in his terminology seems to mean multiroom structures. They are drawn as being much larger than those at the Huntington ruin though the map and scale are certainly not unambiguous. It is likely that whatever was present in this portion of the site, it was not dramatic and obvious because none of the other early observers that discuss the site comment about it (Huntington 1910; Fewkes 1909; Page 1929). Secondary cremations were recovered from this vicinity during testing of a trash mound by ASM (personal observation, 1980). Lange (1989b:154-155) reports on a berm abutting a trash mound with evidence of architectural remains that he suggests may represent a compound enclosure. This is likely, but the feature requires testing.

In the mountainous areas, Tanque Verde phase occupation was limited to Rillito Peak and the Linda Vista trincheras. Downum (1986, Appendix L), Fish et al. (1984), and Wallace (1983) provide data on these

788 Chapter 15

areas. The Linda Vista trincheras are of particular interest in the clues that they can provide for Tanque Verde phase settlement structure. Taken in conjunction with Cerro Prieto (Craig and Douglas 1984; Downum et al. 1993), another hillside village dating to this phase located 32 km to the northwest, clues to settlement structure unavailable through other sources are obtained. Caution must be observed in relating the data from these two sites to the floodplain village of Los Morteros due to possible strictures relating to the mountain slope environments of the sites, and to the potential special function aspect of their construction and occupation, but general observations are useful.

The Linda Vista trincheras, now investigated by a series of excavations, are particularly important from the standpoint that the surface remains document the majority of structural features present. Notable patterning in spatial organization is observed, with 16 readily identifiable structure clusters. Each cluster contains from 2 to 13 structures that may be houses and the remains of linear terraces that are thought to be agricultural fadlities (Downum 1986). When excavated (see Appendix L), some of the enclosures were found to be ramadas or extramural activity surfaces and Downum suggests that a cautious interpretation of the number of actual residences on the site is 80. A wall running vertically up the slope in combination with the natural mountain topography combine to divide the settlement into a northern and southern half with approximately equal numbers of structures on either side.

TIle Cerro Prieto mountainside village is similar in many respects to the Linda Vista trincheras. The site is much larger than Linda Vista, with at least 46 house clusters and potentially as many as 232 residential structures (Downum et al. 1993:69). The actual number may well be somewhat less if some of these structures are special-use nonresidential facilities. A pattern of association of "big" and "small" structures is thought to indicate the use of storage facilities at Cerro Prieto (Craig and Douglas 1989). Similar patterning may be present at the Linda Vista trincheras but poor preservation makes size comparisons more difficult there. A modified natural debris flow corridor down the center of the village divides the Cerro Prieto village in much the same manner that the Linda Vista village is divided. Downum et al. (1993) comments on this phenomenon and notes that such a division is also present at another trincheras village, the Fortified Hill site near Gila Bend. Twelve compound enclosures with substantial rock walls are reported at Cerro Prieto (Downum et al. 1993:74-79), clustered in one area on either side of the debris flow corridor. No such compound enclosures are present at Linda Vista with the exception of one such large enclosure atop the mountain. Downum et al. (1993:77) postulates a "community function, perhaps ceremonial in nature, that involved the periodic accommodation of a number of people." The location, architecture, and recovered artifacts from the Linda Vista example (see Appendix L and Lange and Deaver 1989:314) would suggest something special as well. On Rillito Peak, just north of the Linda Vista mountain, a smaller set of trincheras features is found. Five large enclosures, all of which are found atop tlle mountain, were documented (Wallace 1983:191). No functional clues are available for them at present.

Both Cerro Prieto and Linda Vista have what appear to be agricultural terraces associated with residential areas. Pollen sampling at Linda Vista has produced evidence of yucca and corn (Fish et al. 1984:68).

The evidence from Linda Vista and Cerro Prieto generally supports the settlement model considered for the Rincon phase at Los Morteros. Courtyard groups and residential aggregates are discernible in each instance. There are possible differences, however. In each case, there is a lack of recorded hornos. Although some of these features could lie undetected on the terraces of the sites, the large communal ones evident in the Marana area and at Los Morteros South would surely have been noted. Their absence accords with the lack of these features dating to the Tanque Verde phase elsewhere on Los Morteros. The presence of a possible communal use area partly filled with a cemetery, present in the Rincon phase village segments at Los Morteros, is not uniformly identifiable at the sites, and little is known of mortuary behavior at them. Integrative mechanisms may differ on these settlements from what was present earlier in the sequence.

At Linda Vista and Cerro Prieto (as well as Tumamoc and Fortified Hill), there is evidence for a village­wide division demarcated by an actual rock wall or walls (Downum et al. 1993:89). The presence of a village-wide boundary would be difficult to identify archaeologically without architectural remains so it

Site Structure 789

cannot be determined if such a division might have been present prior to the Tanque Verde phase. Site level ritual activities may be indicated by the hilltop structure ("compound") at Linda Vista. The use of a mountain such as Linda Vista or Cerro Prieto may in some ways be equivalent to the function of a platform mound (Downum et al. 1993:79; Downum et al. 1994:288). The presence of an adobe structure and specialized artifacts at Linda Vista, taken with the presence of a Strombus shell trumpet in a large room adjacent to a plaza or stone-walled compound enclosure on a hillside village in the New River drainage (Ravesloot and Spoerl 1984:90-92) offers some support to this hypothesis. As noted by Downum and others (1993:79) and Nelson (1991:68-70, 81), trumpets are most commonly found associated with platform mounds when present on Classic period settlements. Recent investigations in the lower San Pedro Valley resulted in the discovery of a hilltop site that appears to have had a platform atop it, in addition to a separate compound enclosure. The point to be made here is not that Linda Vista necessarily had a platform mound, but that there may have been site-level integrative facilities and rituals similar to those that may have occurred at platform mounds. Alternatively, as hypothesized by Downum and others (1993), the possible ritual functions of these hillside villages may have complemented the functions of platform mounds, as both Cerro Prieto and Linda Vista are situated near platform mound settlements (Los Robles and Marana, respectively).

There are no current data for the Rincon phase at Los Morteros that would suggest ritual activity in the manner suggested by the hilltop structures at Linda Vista and Rillito Peak. The possibility of the compounds at Cerro Prieto indicating something other than simple residential areas (see Downum et al. 1993:76-79) is likewise difficult to evaluate. The compound uncovered at Los Morteros North contained typical residential structures, but it would be difficult from the data at hand to determine whether it was in some way special or different from other portions of the Tanque Verde occupation at the site. Some degree of social differentiation for Tanque Verde phase occupation of the valley floor is indicated by the mortuary data cited earlier, and this would accord with the greater complexity in architectural forms and arrangements seen at Linda Vista and Cerro Prieto.

The possibility of different defensive adaptations cannot be ruled out for the compound enclosures at Cerro Prieto. The location of these structures at the base of the slope might be what one would expect as this is the least defensible portion of the settlement. Downum et al. (1993:91; 1994) argue that there is little evidence for defense at the site, but this belies the effort involved in constructing a hillside settlement, and without knowing the locations of trails, it is very difficult to rapidly scale the slopes of Cerro Prieto. Furthermore, as reported by Downum and his associates, there are striking similarities to the Fortified Hill site near Gila Bend, a site that surely must be considered to have had a defensive stance. That a defensive posture might be indicated by compound enclosures such as Feature 1522 at Los Morteros North is also a consideration, but our data are, again, insufficient to evaluate this possibility.

Extensive Tanque Verde phase occupation is known from the Huntington Ruin (AZ AA:12:73) on the west side of Rillito Peak (Figure 1.1) and a large number of moderate to large settlements of this time period are present across the river from Los Morteros to the north and northeast. The largest of these is the Marana Mound (also known as Nelson's Desert Ranch) site (AZ AA:12:256). Discussion of the settlement and village organization in this area are provided by Fish et al. (1992b).

Tucson Phase Occupation

No definite indications of Tucson phase settlement in the project area have been identified. During the ASM surface collections at Los Morteros one sherd identified as Gila Polychrome was collected on the terrace in the central portion of the site (Lange and Deaver 1989:173). Had substantive occupation of the site been present during that subphase, a number of Gila Polychrome sherds and other late intrusives would have been anticipated based on frequencies of these wares present in other sites in the Tucson area and on the extensive collections and excavations that have been conducted at the site. If present in the area, the only possible locations for settlement would have been on the central terrace north of the ballcourt. This possibility seems unlikely and it appears that the site had been completely or nearly

790 Chapter 15

completely abandoned prior to the advent of the late intrusive wares, sometime prior to A.D. 1275. The abandonment of Los Morteros at this time mirrors the abandonment of the northern Tucson Basin from a point several kilometers south of Los Morteros, west to Cerro Prieto, north to the Picacho Mountains, and east to the Tortolita Mountains (Downum 1993; Fish et al. 1992b; Wallace and Holmlund 1984).

SETTLEMENT TRENDS AND RESIDENTIAL STABILITY

The general pattern of occupation at Los Morteros in the excavated sample was one of residential stability punctuated by at least three major periods of rapid change. The initial occupation of the site in the Rillito phase is interpreted here as a seasonal farming adaptation with field houses and a possible farmstead in Locus 8 (whether a larger village was present on the central terrace remains unknown, but likely). This pattern gives way to what is likely to have been year-round settlement at the end of the Rillito phase or beginning of the Early Rincon subphase marked by the initiation of the residential areas that are interpreted as village segments. The village segments were at least partly autonomous units; they each have large communal ovens for pit-roasting agave hearts (homos), extramural use spaces, trash disposal areas (as best that can be determined at present), and cemeteries. Figure 15.8 provides an overview of land use patterns during the peak of occupation in the Middle Rincon subphase. Some of what later became village segments may have had no more than a single founding structure present during the Early Rincon subphase. The paucity of Early Rincon Red-on-brown ceramics in Locus 2 may indicate that this was the case. In contrast, in Locus 8, where a Rillito phase farmstead may have been present, each locus may have had anywhere from three to six Early Rincon structures in multiple, contemporaneous courtyard groups. Our data are incomplete on this point, but it does appear that the Early Rincon structures were those that founded the courtyard groups in which they occur, at least for Loci 3 and 5. Because the village segment settlement structure was already in place at this time, and there were presumably shared cemetery areas (based on the lack of outlying cremations and presence of Early Rincon cremations in Cemetery C-l and in the cemetery area adjacent to Locus I), it is reasonable to suppose that the village segments were composed of households bearing strong literal or fictive kinship ties to one another.

A gradual period of growth and expansion of the community is documented for the Middle Rincon subphase, with the site reaching its maximum areal extent at this time in the terrace and fan environments. At least 17 village segments are thought to be present (Figure 15.9) and as many as 21 may actually occur within the confines of the Los Morteros site boundary (not all of which may be fully contemporaneous). A series of cases where what are believed to be individual households were rebuilt as many as eight times, beginning in the Early Rincon subphase and terminating in the Late Rincon subphase indicate long­term residential stability and the presence of probable descent groups during much of the Rincon phase. The process of growth followed a pathway previously reported by Huntington (1986) for the West Branch site during the same span of time. The growth of courtyard groups (i.e., households) involved adding additional residential structures as well as storage structures. The courtyard group in the northern portion of Locus 2 (Figure 15.10) provides a good example of this process. The founding household in this courtyard probably built pit structure 3742 sometime in Middle Rincon 1. Along with the addition of new residential structures in Middle Rincon 2, a dedicated storage facility was constructed, Feature 3248. Because not all structures in this vicinity could be excavated, we do not have the full picture for the courtyard's development, but there is a possibility that it was abandoned in Middle Rincon 2 or perhaps Middle Rincon 3 subphase. If so, there may have been a hiatus in occupation prior to the construction of Late Rincon structure 3145, which was completely unrelated to the structure of the earlier courtyard group.

The recorded cemeteries in Los Morteros South, C-l, C-2, C-3, and unlabeled areas adjacent to Locus 1 and Locus 8 that could not be defined, were definitely in use during the Middle Rincon subphase. It is thought that each village segment had a discrete cemetery, even though we were unable to define them all due to sampling constraints and plow damage. How late in time they extend into the Middle Rincon subphase is unknown. None that could be dated were any later than the Middle Rincon subphase in Los Morteros South. Unlike Los Solares, the Los Morteros South cemeteries were generally located on the

Site Structure 791

0 0 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 N I"l

CD Cl

W W W UJ w l w + N 800

LINDA VISTA RO; .D

He LOCUS 1

+ + + + N 700 ",e, R LOCUS 10

+ 0: + =US\:~ + N 600

\ C? R I

He LOCUS 2

+ "~-\~OCUSJ + H • /R?

C?@ ~ .." C LOCUS , ~ H R p.,. \

+ R J- + j LOCUS 5

r-_R R \

1--- .... f \ \ 1 ,rH?

\ + \ \ e " ..... + \ J \. } + ( \ R?

--" \)' ,_J LOCUS 7 ,-/

LOCUS 6

eH

~" + + LOCUS B . ~ C?

+

+ + + "C:s --- EXPLANATION -=-

C '~/1 va' cemetery

K

t H. horno

,,-...... R r ) residential

...... -r~t9l trash m idden

+ + N 500

+ + N 400

+ + N 300

+ + N 200

+ + N 100

Los Morteros South

MIDDLE RINCON SETTLEMENT STRUCTURE

AZ AA: 12: 57 (ASM)

o -100 Computer cartography by

GEO-MAP. Inc. 1995

200 m

Figure 15.8. Land-use patterns from the peak of occupation during the Middle Rincon subphase in Los Morteros South. Undated features outside the recorded village segments are not shown.

792 Chapter 15

o o ..

_ ,_-, EXPLANA nON r..,~=_

locotion of known village segment

'~/l v~· location of possible village segment

8 N

+

+

ROAD

+

K

contour interval - 100 ft

8 to

w

+ + N 1600

+ N 1200

+

+ N BOO

+

N 400

ROAD

N 0

S 400

Los Morteros Site

MIDDLE RINCON VILLAGE SEGMENTS

AZ AA: 12: 57 (ASM) ~-=-. --:-= ..... .. -----~~ a 250 500 m

Computer cartography by GEO-MAP. Inc. 1995

Figure 15.9. Distribution of kno,",,'l1 and predicted Middle Rincon subphase village segments at Los Morteros.

Site Structure 793

~ ALL STRUCTURES MIDDLE RINCON 1 3614

3278 ' 0 3249

='?i' :::, 0'''' 8) 3610 3742 homo

0 --, "" G I : ..•• '. I

9009: .. :. 3145 \. __ 1 3274 •

32731 +N 600 +N 600 E 930 E 930

MIDDLE RINCON 2a MIDDLE RINCON 2b

"(J "(J 3742

0 r--/ '-

9009/ rJ I / .... _-possible

orientation +N 600

E 930 +N 600

E 930

MIDDLE RINCON 2c MIDDLE RINCON 2d

Cf o 3248 storehouse 0 <)". storehouse?

0.74 0.74

+N 600 E 930

+N 600 E 930

MIDDLE RINCON 3 (early) NORTHERN COURTYARD OF LOCUS 2

<)". CONSTRUCTION SEQUENCE

LOS MORTEROS - AZ AA: 12: 57 (ASM)

K 0 10 20 m storehouse?

t Computer cartography by

0.74

GEO-MAP, Inc. 1995

---=- EXPLANATION -=-~ structure located in trench profile

+N 600 E 930 .......... estimated edge or limit

Figure 15.10. Temporal change in the northern courtyard of Locus 2, Los Morteros South.

794 Chapter 15

margins of the village segments rather than in a central location. Cemetery C-l, surrounded on three sides by Loci 3, 4, and 5, at first glance appears to be a candidate for some sort of central cemetery facility. Given the presence of a discrete cemetery associated with Locus 3 and the hints from cremated bone in the plow zone that there had been a cemetery associated with Locus 4 to the west, it appears that Cemetery C-l was probably established with the initiation of Locus 5. The tight packing of residential areas in the Loci 3, 4, and 5 area is probably a reflection of the selection of the prime land for housing in this area, combined with relatively close social ties among the residents.

TIle strong pattern of assodation between cemeteries and village segments at Los Morteros is contrary to the expectations of Huntington (1986:346-347), who believed that there was a shift from village segment or village level cemeteries to household cemeteries during the Rincon phase. Based on the Los Morteros data, it seems likely that had there been a cemetery associated with the Wyoming Street locus of the West Branch site, it would have been outside of the excavated area, and the few cremations uncovered were probably not indicative of the site structure.

The possibility of their being macrosocial groups composed of multiple village segments at Los Morteros in the Middle Rincon subphase is mentioned here as a pOSSibility. The spatial distribution of village segments is best described as a mixture of discrete and clumped units. As seen in Figure 15.8, Lod 1 and 2 are dearly distinct and spatially separated from other segments. On the other hand, Loci 3, 4, and 5 and Lod 9 and 10 form definite settlement aggregates. Between Locus 1 and the next locus to the north, presumably on the terrace near the ballcourt, there is a notable gap in settlement. Additional village segment aggregates were likely present north of the ballcourt on the terrace and south of and including Locus 11, which is separated by another gap from at least two additional village segments at the northern limits of our study area. The significance, if any, of this spatial distribution is unknown at present. There are no visible communal fadlities that would bind village segments together. Howard's (1990) "village segments," defined at this scale do not fit the Los Morteros data because a communal facility was absent. Had there been a communal use space around which Loci 3, 4, and 5 were situated, we would have antidpated a residential area to the east of Cemetery C-l. TIle possibility remains that there could have been a plaza in this area that was plow-destroyed, but it seems unlikely.

Perhaps the most likely explanation for this irregular distribution of village segments lies in founder effects and the sodal relationships (or lack thereof) of founding households. For two founding households, unrelated by kinship ties, to set up shop in a new area, the choice of where to place their households (assuming unrestricted access) will rest on environmental constraints for suitable building sites, access to critical resources, and on how sodally dose the families are to one another. In localities where some land tenureship already existed, such as the areas of Los Morteros South utilized in the Rillito phase, social relationships would already have been established. This is particularly likely to have been the case for small, perhaps seasonal, farmsteads that would have strong soda I ties to families living elsewhere (SUdl as in the vidnity of the ballcourt or perhaps further afield at Redtail or the Brickyard site [AZ AA:12:51] if there was not a substantial Rillito occupation of the Los Morteros terrace). Initial settlement of the village segments, established by the households that already had gained some landholdings, might have been followed initially by families that were sodally close to the founders. This might explain the association of the densely packed Lod 3,4, and 5, which had been initiated by the Rillito occupation of Locus 5. It is unknown whether this might have occurred for Lod 9 and 10. The late-founded Locus 2, provides some insight into the choices available to a latecomer. This village segment was constructed in an area of active, shifting stream courses that would have been less desirable land for housing than other areas nearby. Vegetation removal, construction of structures into gravel deposits, and the risk of flooding would have been significant concerns. TIle choice of such an area for the establishment of one's household is a sign that only limited land was available and that perhaps the social ties between the Locus 2 founding family and other families living in the area were insufficient to gain access to better land.

Lod 146 and 147 (and presumably the now-destroyed site AZ AA:12:148 situated between them), bear similarities and differences to the remainder of Los Morteros South. All of the structures for which entry

Site Structure 795

orientations could be defined faced to the northeast, the favored orientation at Los Morteros. It is reasonable to suppose that these are either founding structures of a permanent settlement, or they may represent seasonal occupation. Artifact, pollen, and paleobotanical data are inconclusive and seasonality is only measurable by less reliable measures, such as levels of effort placed on house construction. By this token, house construction at the two loci varies in a manner comparable to that seen elsewhere in Los Morteros South and the presence of a secondary cremation at Locus 146 could be grounds for assuming year-round settlement. The spatial relationship of these loci, strung in a continuous line from Locus 8 southeastward, would also support an occupation as permanent as that present elsewhere in Los Morteros South. It is possible that substantial clues to the structure of these loci may have been removed by plOwing. Evidence for destroyed features in the plowzone was observed at both loci. Further support for the proposition of settlement permanency is provided by the evidence that both loci were abandoned early in the sequence before much in the way of village segment development could have occurred. In the larger context of residential stability over time, the abandonment of Loci 146 and 147 sometime early in the Middle Rincon subphase and near the end of the Early Rincon subphase, respectively, may be important clues. Given that the overall trend was for population to move northward, they may be the first indication of a shifting environment or food supply.

At the juncture of MR 3 and Late Rincon subphase, or pOSSibly as early as in MR 3 times, a major settlement restructuring took place in the southern portion of the site with the result being a nearly complete abandonment prior to the end of the Late Rincon subphase, a period of not more than 50 years. As some areas at Los Morteros North were first settled in the Late Rincon subphase, it is logical to assume that the population movement from Los Morteros South was simply a shift to the north. The possibility that abandonment and reoccupation by different populations from neighboring areas cannot be ruled out. There are no cases anywhere on the site of residential stability extending from the Middle Rincon subphase into the Tanque Verde phase. The locality where this might have been most likely to have been discovered, if present, would be Locus 11 in Los Morteros North where an extensive Middle and Early Rincon occupation occurred. Though the residential portions were not excavated, it is clear that continuity was lacking, because a discrete cemetery was established in the Tanque Verde phase that completely disregarded the previous residential patterns dating to the Middle Rincon subphase (Cemetery C-4 over Locus 11). Such a complete shift in residency and property ownership suggests a marked social upheaval.

The virtual abandonment of Los Morteros South in the Late Rincon subphase was marked by a process of change, glimpsed in several sequences of house construction. The clues are spotty and somewhat contradictory. Whatever it was that occurred, it did not happen uniformly across the southern portion of the site. The first hint of a marked shift in residence is seen in Locus 2 with the construction of Feature 3706 over the entry of Feature 3252 in 3252's former courtyard space (Figure 4.2). The abandonment of Feature 3252 occurred at the transition between the Middle Rincon 3 and Late Rincon subphases, and Feature 3706 is thought to have been built and abandoned within a decade after construction due to the similarities in assemblages between the two structures (it is a point of rapid ceramic change). Feature 3252, at the time it was abandoned, opened onto an open· space that separated it from Cemetery C-3. No other structures are thought to have been associated with it, at least in what could be considered a typical courtyard group. Given its unusual contents and the contents of the underlying Feature 3251 (see Chapter 4, pp. 122-127), it is possible that it was serving a special function at the time it was burned. Taking the evidence of feasting behavior in Features 3251 and 3252 together with the spatial relationship to Cemetery C-3, the structures may have played a special role in mortuary rituals. If so, the construction of Feature 3706 may mark the end of the use of the cemetery-at least insofar as they had been conducted prior to that time. Regardless of whether these speculations are borne out, by any measure, Feature 3706 marks a change in the structure of settlement in Locus 2.

Three structures abandoned in the Late Rincon subphase and two others probably abandoned at that time were excavated in Los Morteros South. Two in Locus 2 (Features 3145 and 3236) appear to ignore previous land-use patterns while the others in Loci 3 and 5 (Features 3051, 3220, 3599) are situated within rebuilding sequences or are placed in ambiguous settings. Features 3051 and 3599 may be part of a single courtyard group that was the final stage in the growth of the long-lived courtyard represented earlier on

796 Chapter 15

by Features 3054, 3214, 3215, and 3583. A similar situation may have been present in the southeasternmost courtyard group in Locus 5, but it is less dearly defined. In this area, even though residential stability may be indicated, there was a notable sign of sodal change: inhumation burial Feature 3204, securely dated to the Late Rincon subphase. Another possible interment or pit prepared for interment was situated nearby. The presence of the Feature 3204 interment concurs with the author's speculations concerning the abandonment of Locus 2's cemetery (Cemetery C-3).

The apparent residential stability reflected in the Late Rincon-abandoned structures found in Lod 3 and 5 sharply contrasts with structure 3145 in Locus 2 that lies atop previous courtyard space in the northernmost Middle Rincon subphase courtyard group of the locus. As noted previously, this could be at least partly a function of there being a hiatus in occupation in this area. Feature 3236 in Locus 2 may be isolated, and it may postdate all other features in the Locus with the exception of Tanque Verde phase Feature 3249.

The net result for Los Morteros South is a hint that there may have been significant sodetal change underway during the Late Rincon subphase that started as early as the transition between Middle Rincon 3 and Late Rincon. The data from Lod 3 and 5 suggest that the dlanges were occurring within the settlement and did not involve a replacement of people. TIle possible shift in mortuary practices marked by the construction of Feature 3706 and interment of the infant in Feature 3204 may signal the emigration of the corporate descent groups marked by the Rincon phase village segments in Los Morteros South. As Lod 12 and 13 in Los Morteros North were first settled in the Late Rincon subphase, it is reasonable to suppose that there was a transfer of population from south to north. Whether there was a wholesale movement of this sort cannot be determined from the excavated portions of the site alone. The trailer court and areas along Rillito Peak and within and just south of the ADOT materials pit (Figures 1.3, 1.11) each contained notable concentrations of Tanque Verde phase settlement and may well have been settled at the same time as Lod 12 and 13. As the settlement within tlle excavated portion of Los Morteros North was probably never very substantial, most of the movement from the southern portion of the site would be expected to have been focused on the newly settled areas to the east and north. The low frequency of Late Rincon Red-on-brown ceramics on the Linda Vista trincheras suggests that this hillside village was not settled until sometime in the Tanque Verde phase. Several very large Tanque Verde phase settlements across the river in the Marana area, induding the Chicken Ranch and Marana Mound sites were also settled in the Late Rincon or Tanque Verde phases and may have received some of Los Morteros' emigrants.

Concurrent with the shift in settlement location was a shift in architecture: the construction of compound walls in Locus 12 and the first utilization of adobe in wall construction, both of which were initiated in the Late Rincon subphase prior to A.D. 1150. Based on trends observed in the growth of the compound endosure and the structures in Locus 13, it is believed that another period of residential stability occurred during the early years of the Tanque Verde phase. Occupation during the Tanque Verde phase lasted long enough to deposit large volumes of refuse in midden deposits and in large borrow pits. How long this period lasted is a subject of conjecture. At Los Morteros North, the excavated sample contained no hints that it went even as late as the latter half of the Tanque Verde phase but it is very difficult to be certain because the ceramic chronology is not suffidently refined at the present time. It can be said that no traces of a Tucson phase occupation could be identified in this portion of the site and that none of the excavated or trenched Tanque Verde phase structures in the nortllern portion of Los Morteros exhibited evidence of catastrophic abandonment.

It was noted earlier that the northern portion of Los Morteros in the investigated portions includes dear aggregates of Tanque Verde phase habitation. The compound, with its dense trash deposits and substantial architecture appears to have been occupied year-round, but the evidence may be misleading. The compound was founded in the latter portion of the Late Rincon subphase and may have been occupied for between 75 and 100 years. Such a lengthy span of time, even with seasonal or occasional seasonal occupation, will generate the appearance of permanence and large trash deposits would be expected. Even though we were unable to document the compound's western limits, and additional

Site Structure 797

structures could have been present, the compound would never have held a very large accumulation of people and was probably restricted to no more than one or two households. The possibility that the compound was razed and replaced by adobe-walled structures 1070 and 1152 (and possibly others), adds a level of complexity to the situation, perhaps marking the concluding chapter in the occupation of the village. Regardless of the degree of sedentism involved, the evidence points to fairly limited occupation throughout the Tanque Verde phase in the areas investigated.

The Late Rincon and Tanque Verde phase structures in Locus 13 were scattered across the landscape, and those that have been excavated were all oriented to the northeast or southeast (Figure 4.18). In the case of Feature 1186, no structures were identified that could be assodated in a courtyard group and this is likely to have been the case for Features 1555 and 1177. It is possible that critical parts of the picture had been destroyed by plowing in this vidnity, though the low density of trash in the area suggests not too much had been lost. The fact that clear courtyard groups are present at the Linda Vista and Cerro Prieto hillside villages suggests that, given comparable degrees of sedentism and social structure, they should be antidpated in Los Morteros North as well. The evidence points to possible unsuccessful founding of households or to seasonal occupation. Seasonal occupation was raised as a possibility from the botanical record (Chapters 11 and 12). The data, suggesting an absence during the late spring and early summer, coincides with the time of year when agave harvesting would have been underway across the river at the Marana rockpile fields. This time of year would be poorly suited to anything other than irrigation agriculture in the floodplain, and it is unlikely that the river would have provided suffident water for canal systems during the dry season at the Point of the Mountains. Therefore, alternative subsistence and economic activities would make sense for the occupants of Los Morteros and short-term mobility of this sort may have occurred. These issues are discussed further in Chapter 16.

In the area between Locus 11 and the compound (Figure A8), there were scattered Tanque Verde phase pit structures and adobe walled structures. Additional scattered Tanque Verde phase structures are known to have been present just south of the limits of our excavations in Locus 11 and just south of the southeastern limits of our study area (Lange 1989b). Settlement in these areas may have been similar to what was seen in Locus 13.

More substantive Tanque Verde phase occupation may have been present in two other portions of the site mentioned earlier: on the isolated area of high ground that runs through the western portion of the trailer court, and in and adjacent to the ADOT materials pit. The Page map (Figure 1.18) indicates that there were Tanque Verde phase structures visible on the surface in the trailer court area, and all clues from the residents of the court and extant remains point to a residential aggregation there. The extent of this occupation is unknown, but could have ranged from a density similar to that observed in the excavated portions of Los Morteros North to something more substantial. Clues from extant remains and the ASM site survey card for AZ AA:12:58 indicate a zone of relatively dense Tanque Verde phase trash at the southern and western margins of the AOOT materials pit. The settlement is reported to have been 25 acres in size. This is large enough to have included as many as three to five village segments of the type seen earlier in the sequence. This magnitude of settlement could have been underestimated if the material along the southeastern slopes of Rillito Peak was not included in the estimate. Figure 15.11 presents the author's best estimate of the overall distribution of Tanque Verde phase occupation at Los Morteros, not accounting for issues of contemporaneity.

Sometime in the AD. 1200s, perhaps in the AD. 1230 to 1275 period, a major residential shift occurred, involving emigration. Whether there was a sequence of abandonment within the set of Tanque Verde phase settlements present in the Point of the Mountains-Marana region or whether all or most of these settlements were abandoned concurrently is unknown. Hints suggesting abandonment relatively early in the thirteenth century for our excavated sample (note the lack of de facto assemblages and early dates) together with architectural data (contiguous room adobe architecture at the Huntington Ruin) and a very late absolute radiocarbon date of 600 ±80 B.P. (from Linda Vista trincheras Feature 137, Downum 1986:223), point to sequential abandonment and possible movements of population from one area to another in the region. For example, in one possible scenario Los Morteros North (including the trailer

798 Chapter 15

if' N

I •• IS'

( Rattlesnake

~ j

146°0/ 148

147Q

270 Archaeological site -AZ AA:12:_ (ASM)

/

o

Area of Tanque Verde phase habitation

, , , I I I

KILOMETER

Contour Interval 100 Feet

Figure 15.11. Estimated distribution of Tanque Verde phase habitation at the Los Morteros site.

court) undergoes significant changes relatively early in the A.D. 1200s, with the compound abandoned and razed, replaced by a group of adobe-walled structures that were themselves soon abandoned, and the population subsequently moving and establishing the settlement in the ADOT materials pit area . Ultimately, the population in this area might have moved again to the trincheras village on Linda Vista Hill. Perhaps an early splinter group from Los Morteros established the Marana Mound site. These possibilities are raised as rather simplistic examples of the complex interplay of settlement possibilities that could be occurring in the region. Whatever the actual scenario, it seems reasonable to suppose that one should not assume contemporaneity among the full array of Tanque Verde phase settlements in the region.

Site Structure 799

It is interesting that there is evidence of possible intentional or catastrophic abandonment at the Linda Vista trincheras (Appendix L), Huntington Ruin (Murdock 1927), Chicken Ranch site (AZ AA:12:118; personal observation), and the Marana Mound site (Fish et al. 1992b), perhaps marking the final chapter in the prehistory of the region. All of these settlements were abandoned prior to the introduction of Gila Polychrome pottery. Following abandonment of the site area in the Classic period, the next clue to settlement in the region comes from Manje's record of a settlement in the vicinity in 1694 (Burrus 1971:215). After that, there is no evidence of reoccupation until the 1800s with the advent of Union soldiers and the Butterfield Stage. This ushered in a new era, culminating in this century's Continental Ranch development that, as of the date of this publication, had covered the Lonetree and Redtail sites, and was fast approaching Los Morteros.