Culture and Ecology of Chaco Canyon and the San Juan Basin

190 Chaco Project Synthesisresidences held true for great houses. He acknowledgedthat if lower floor firepits were consideredrepresentative of permanent occupation, the presenceof firepits in multi storied structures could be problematic.He also realized that Hopi populationsmoved seasonally from upper to lower stories toconserve energy (Mindeleff 1891:103). These variablesinfluence the outcome of any estimates. Windes(1984:83) settled on the use of first-story firepits asindications of habitations used by a family of six tosuggest that 2,000 people may have lived in greathouses on a year-round basis. This represents adecrease of 700 to 900 fewer people than estimated byeither Hayes (1981) or Drager (1976b). Reyman(1989:51-52), after reviewing Pepper's field notesfrom Pueblo Bonito, commented that some of Pepper' s(1920) room descriptions were incomplete and did notinclude all floor features, so that Windes's estimatesfor this great house are probably too low. Bernardini(1999) recently provided another low popUlationestimate for great houses.In his initial reanalysis of small site populations,Windes (1982) used the 1972 site survey records, butseparated Pueblo II and Pueblo III into early and latephases. His results (Table 6.7) indicate a fluctuationin popUlation during Late Pueblo II, when a slightdecrease was noted. The drop from 2,736 to 2,505,and then an increase to 2,889, was correlated withchanges in rainfall patterns. Thus, Windes thoughtthat few small-site occupations dated to the LatePueblo II period.Windes (1982b, 1984) also realized that theceramic samples collected during the inventory surveydid not truly represent the occupation periods at anumber of small sites. He attributed part of thedifference to changing patterns of trash depositionthrough time. At sites with long occupations spanningLate Pueblo I and Early Pueblo II, a formal extramuraltrash midden appears, usually to the east orsoutheast of the habitation and work areas. As the siteexpands, this area may be covered by a plaza; latertrash deposits often appear only on house mounds. Atthe large pueblos, trash in the mounds usuallyrepresents construction debris initially consisting of aRed Mesa ceramic assemblage but accrued predominantlyduring the Gallup ceramic assemblage (ca.A.D. 1050 to 1100). At large pueblos constructedafter A.D. 1100, there is usually no midden; but trashwas being deposited in unoccupied rooms in bothsmall and large structures. As a result, the inventorysurvey samples did not always reflect lateroccupations.Resurvey of sample transects on the canyon floorbetween Shabik'eshchee Village and Penasco Blancoin 1985 led Windes (1987[1]:383-405) to furtherreduce his small-site population estimates. Small sitesdated to the Early Pueblo II (Red Mesa ceramicassemblage) period were found along the eastern halfof the canyon floor, but were not visible along thewestern half, possibly because they may be buriedunder a later occupation. Sites with a Gallup ceramicassemblage (Late Pueblo II) also appear in the easternhalf of the canyon. Windes proposed that the drop inpopUlation at small sites between A.D. 1050 and 1100might signify a clustering of people in great houses inthe central canyon. (Yet, as part of his analysis ofgreat house popUlations, above, this is the periodwhen they are least likely to have been strictly habitationsites.) Around A.D. 1100, however, there aremore small sites, and they are now found predominantlyon the western half of the canyon. Basedon approximately two families per kiva and theinference that only about half of the kivas would havebeen contemporary, Windes (1987[1]:392) suggesteda population of less than 1,000 in the small houses,with 300 to 600 people living in great houses for boththe mid-1000s and early 1100s.Mills (1986) noted that Windes's survey (Windesand Doleman 1985) was restricted to habitation sitesof three to four, or more, rooms. In her analysis ofthe proveniences and artifacts documented during theadditional lands survey, Mills (1986:Table 4.14) indicatedthat over 40 percent of both categories wasattributed to the period between A.D. 1030 and 1130.The second highest period was A.D. 890 to 1025, butin both instances there was variability in numbersamong the four survey areas. Sebastian and Altschul(1986:Table 2.32) achieved similar results based onanalysis of habitation structure size.Lekson (1984a 1988a, 1988b:l02-129, 1989)also questioned the use of population estimates basedon room counts; he chose pithouses-kivas as an indexof family counts. Acknowledging that early pit