Culture and Ecology of Chaco Canyon and the San Juan Basin

218 Chaco Project Synthesisactivities (Saitta 1997; Wilcox 1993:Table1). If these individuals were supposed tohave low visibility to their contemporaries,what chance does an archaeologist have ofidentifying them? By their deeds perhapswe shall know them; it is less likely thatwe will know them by their houses (ortheir burials). (H. Toll in Toll andMcKenna 1997:208-209; emphasis inoriginal)H. Toll concluded that the evidence from ChacoCanyon points to the presence of general specialistswho participate in an exchange network rather thansupply an elite group. They are integral to thehousehold and local economy. The community specialization(e.g., Chuska gray ware producers) providesan integrative mechanism to maintain economicrelationships. Chaco does show participation in thisAnasazi-wide region that shares forms and symbols.H. Toll (1985; and H. Toll and McKenna 1997:211-213) suggested that costumbre, defined as a community'sdefinition of what is done and how it isdone, would be sufficient to account for the degree ofstandardization evident in the ceramic analyses, andwould allow for the slight variations amongcommunities that maintain contact on a periodic basisif they shared a common belief system. Althoughthere would be some part-time specialists and somepeople with some differentiation in roles, there wouldbe no need for an elite, use of force, or exploitation byleaders; pressures of public opinion would besufficient to maintain traditions. Viewed from a largerregional perspective, Chaco was an obviousparticipant, but whether the center served the regionor the region served the center remained unanswered.Evidence for Ritual, Ceremony,and CosmologySeveral lines of evidence in the archaeologicalrecord point toward aspects of historic Pueblo ideologythat may have been present earlier. Thus, whenit proved unlikely that Chaco Canyon functioned as aeconomic redistribution center, Judge (1989) couldpropose that Chaco was a ritual center. The dataindicate some time-depth to historic Pueblo practices,but we cannot make inferences about their earliermeanings or be sure that the meanings of thesepractices did not change through time.Construction and/or Closure OfferingsData relevant to ritual or ceremonial practices,either during initial construction or remodeling events,include goods cached within buildings. The earliestexample of an offering is from the Basketmaker IIIgreat kiva at 29SJ423 (Mathien 1997, 2001b; Windes1975, 2006a). Senter (1939:26) indicates that twoniches in Feature 5-an A.D. 770s pit structure at Be50-also contained offerings (Truell1986:Table 2.6).Truell (1992:90) found an offering in the Kiva Gventilator shaft at the small site of 29SJ627; but theturquoise debris and five Olivella dama shells areconsiderably later (A.D. 1000 to 1050; Mathien 1992:315). Truell was uncertain as to whether this offeringwas made during construction or was included withintentional fill. Similar offerings were uncovered atPueblo Alto (Mathien 1987; Windes 1987) and KinNahasbas (Mathien and Windes 1988, 1989), amongsites attributed to the Classic period. There wereseveral turquoise caches in the great kiva at ChetroKetl (J. Woods 1934a). Both Pepper (1920) and Judd(1954) had called attention to the placement ofturquoise and other items in kiva pilasters at PuebloBonito and Pueblo del Arroyo. Judd (1964: 156)recorded three caches placed in walls of rooms 90,178B, and 186, all falling within the fourth additionto Pueblo Bonito. Chaco Project excavations uncoveredsimilar offerings, one of which occurredearlier and suggests that these practices may have hada long history. Historic Acoma, Hopi, and Zuni placesimilar offerings in some buildings (Parsons 1936:300; Pepper 1920). Whether these practices carry thesame meaning throughout this long period is unknowable,but they do suggest that constructiondeposits have considerable time-depth.Akins (1985) suggested that some birds andmammals may have been acquired for ritual purposes(see also K. Durand 2003; Gordon Vivian andMathews 1965); both Akins (1985) and Truell (1986)remarked on the intentional burial of dogs and turkeyswhen sites were abandoned. Most references to birds,including turkey, indicated they were kept for theirfeathers, which were attached to ceremonial objects(Akins 1985:322-330). Turkeys may also have beenused for food, especially during later occupations inChaco. Carnivores had multiple uses (Akins 1985:349-356). Truell (1986:225-227) reviewed the literatureto document that placement of animals in