Culture and Ecology of Chaco Canyon and the San Juan Basin

Explaining Pueblo Social Organization 277change. Judge considered the later Mesa Verde occupationin the middle A.D. 1200s as one of reuse ratherthan of continued use by a small remnant population.Although Judge (1989) purposefully avoided adetailed discussion ofleadership, his colleagues couldsupport propositions for either an ascribed or anachieved society, depending on the database examinedand their theoretical perspectives. Akins (1986, 2001,2003; Akins and Schelberg 1984) interpreted thewealth found with individuals in the central burialrepository at Pueblo Bonito as indicative of thepresence of an eiite strata. Schelberg (i 982a) thoughta ranked society would have existed as early asBasketmaker III to correlate relationships among theinhabitants of Chaco and the San Juan Basin. Lekson(1984a) thought that although his population estimatesneeded to construct the great houses are small, theyrepresent endeavors well beyond what is present inhistorical Pueblo society. For him, the peak of sociopoliticalcomplexity was reached in the early A.D.1100s, when the largest construction modules (stagesIII and IV) were being erected, both in the canyon andat Aztec and Salmon along the San Juan River. Heviewed the Aztec complex as a second center, and asone that becomes part of a series of central places inthe early Pueblo World (Lekson 1999, 2005).H. W. Toll (1985; H. Toll and McKenna 1997)proposed alternatives to an elite system. Because thereis so little evidence that a few individuals benefitedunequally, he favored community rather than eliteinvolvement in the production and operation of thesystem. Like Marshall et al. (1979), Toll consideredthe large pueblos representative of public buildings,constructed and used by the larger community locatedthroughout the San Juan Basin for periodic gatheringsthat represented commitments to participate in andmaintain the system (H. Toll 1985:507). The rituallysanctioned gatherings in Chaco Canyon would provideopportunities to bring in ceramics, lithics, turquoise,and other materials for consumption, including largemammals. Periods of stress or drought resulted in theinitial intensification of energy investment in interactionamong various groups; their responses varied,depending upon the time period and areas concerned.In Toll's model, the peak period of social integrationwas reached in A.D. 1085 to 1110, when Chaco Canyonrepresents the center of the system that involvedthe entire San Juan Basin.Other investigators would model how eliteleaders could have evolved (Sebastian 1988, 1992b) orhow an egalitarian society might have accomplishedthe construction of great houses (Gwinn Vivian 1990).Agricultural Surplus as theVariableIndependentAlthough Chaco Project investigators consideredthe San Juan Basin a stressful environment in which tobe a horticulturalist (e.g., Schelberg 1982a), Sebastian(1988, 1992b) assumed that because Pueblo farmersdid survive for hundreds of years, they were capableof adapting to the vagaries of precipitation patterns.Initially, she predicted that instead of responding todeficits in production, farmers continued to overproduceduring periods of increased precipitation,leading to surplus capital that could be invested inpublic affairs leading to sociopolitical complexity.Leaders gaining power would want to maintain highproduction levels, and competition between emergingleaders would lead to greater increases in visiblepower; e.g., great houses. Therefore, the initial increasesin complexity should correlate with improvementsin the environment.Using rainfall data generated by analysis of treeringsand inferred storage practices that would providefood during periods of shortfall, Sebastian (1988,1992:Figure 15) charted when major downturns inproduction would have depleted food stores. Whenshe correlated her results with the major constructionperiods for great houses defined by Lekson (1984a)and his labor estimates for unit size of buildingepisodes, three resulting distinct patterns did notmatch her expectations. Pattern 1, from A.D. 900through 1020, indicates that great houses wereconstructed during periods when major downturns inproduction would have depleted food stores and socialsurplus. Pattern 2, from A.D. 1020 or 1040 to 1100,was generally very good for crop production and therewas probably an incomplete depletion of surplus; thisis the period when there is most evidence for greathouse construction. Pattern 3, from A.D. 1100 to1130, has high storage and surplus values, but there isa decline in construction. The drought of A.D. 1130to 1160 depletes stores and there is no evidence ofconstruction of public buildings then or thereafter,even during improved climatic conditions. Thesevariations in pattern needed explanation. Power or