Culture and Ecology of Chaco Canyon and the San Juan Basin

The Classic Adaptation 209gested by Di Peso (1974) and others, was involved tocreate the large structures that characterize this spectacularexpression in the central San Juan Basin at a timewhen other areas of the Southwest have much smallersite types. Documentation of numerous great housesoutside of Chaco Canyon and their association withChaco Canyon will be discussed in Chapter 8.Porlable ItemsThere is no question that there are differencesbetween great houses and small house sites in terms ofthe recovery of luxury items, most of which wereimported (Mathien 1981a, 1986,1993, 2003a; H. Toll1991). Yet many everyday goods (e.g., ceramics andlithics) were also imported. Such imported itemsduring the Classic period indicate a considerableincreaSe in interaction over Basketmaker III-Pueblo Ilevels between inhabitants of Chaco Canyon and theirneighbors in the San Juan Basin and beyond. Thisincrease is reflected primarily in the ceramic data (H.Toll 1985; Toll and McKenna 1997), but lithicmaterials (Cameron 1997b), including turquoise andshell species (Mathien 1997), as well as wood used inconstruction (Dean and Warren 1983) and fuel (M.Toll 1985), reinforce observations of a widespreadacquisition of goods. With the larger population inChaco Canyon and the San Juan Basin during theBonito period and this increased interaction, evidencefor craft specialization would be likely. In thissection, these databases will be reviewed to suggestthe level of specialization that existed and its implicationsfor social complexity.Ceramic Data. Although there is some evidencefor local production through time, the volumeis considerably less than some investigators mightexpect. H. Toll and McKenna (1997: 156, Table 2.67)tabulated kaolin cakes, balls of clay, unfired claysherds, paint, scrapers, polishers, and other tools tosuggest that earlier sites (Basketmaker III-Pueblo I)had more convincing evidence for local productionthan later ones. When compared with data from thenorthern San Juan (C. Wilson and Blinman 1995:74),Chaco's evidence is limited. This, plus the lack ofpotters' tool kits among the grave goods (Akins 1986)led H. Toll and McKenna (1997:161) to suggest thatceramic manufacture in the canyon was uncommonduring the Classic period. Lack of locally availablefuel was suggested as one possible explanation for thispaucity in ceramic production (H. Toll and McKenna1997:162-164).Clay refiring studies shed light on where ceramicproduction took place, but also led to more questionsthan answers. Previous studies that involved thefiring of clay source samples and the refiring of sherdssuggested that Chaco specimens produced a buff color.H. Toll and McKenna (1997: 114-118, Appendix 2C)collected clay samples from 21 locations in ChacoCanyon, prepared and fired tiles for each areasampled, and recorded their characteristics (e.g.,color, sh..-i.rJcage) for each site. What they learned isthat "1) there is considerable variability in oxidationcolors of clays from a single formation even within asmall area, and 2) apparently usable clays from nearcentral Chaco Canyon can contain considerableoxidation color" (H. Toll and McKenna 1997:117).Because these observations differed from conventionalwisdom that suggested that Cibola white wares andgray wares tended to refire to a buff color, this studyengendered new questions: Do the results indicatearea of manufacture or selectivity for particular resources?Were ceramics being produced by a numberof different potters using particular sources consistently?Or, is the oxidation color insignificantlyrelated to properties that are more important in theproduction of pottery, which allowed acquisition ofclay from a range of resources?Based on tempering materials and wares (Figure6.5), the level and direction of interaction amongneighbors varied through time. Due to difficulties inidentifying sources of some tempering materials, H.Toll and McKenna (1997:132-138) tabulated theirresults in two ways. A minimal or conservativeestimate is based on known sources of temperingmaterials; maximum estimates assume that coarsesandstone temper signifies imports (H. Toll andMcKenna 1997:Tables 2.58 and 2.59). Their resultsare summarized in Table 6.9. Using the conservativeestimate, the overall 16.6 percent for the pre-A.D.800 period increases to a peak of 50.4 percent betweenA.D. 1100 and 1200, and then decreases to 45.7percent during the A.D. 1200 to 1300 period. Incontrast, using the maximum estimates, imports arehighest at 79.4 percent during the pre-A.D. 800s and76.7 percent after the end of the Bonito phase, withthe lowest rate at 45.2 percent during the Red Mesaceramic period from A.D. 940 to 1040. Both es-