partly dependent on agriculture after about AD 800. Following this period of intensive farming, Jelinek(1967:162) argues that there was a basic shift in the economic from sedentary farming to nomadic bisonhunting between about AD 1250 and 1350.Outside of these two areas, there is little evidence for the adoption of agriculture by Ceramic periodgroups in southeastern New Mexico. In the Santa Rosa area, 12 Puebloan sites have been documentedalong Pintada Arroyo, including one large adobe pueblo. These sites were documented during the 1930sand few other details are available, but there presence suggests that the area was occupied byagriculturalists sometime between AD 1200 and 1450 (Stuart and Gauthier 1981:305). In the Los Esterosarea, however, Mobley (1979) argues that the Ceramic period occupation continued the hunting andgathering lifeway established during the Archaic period.In the Eastern Jornada area, Leslie (1979) also contends that the Ceramic period economy was based onhunting and gathering, with a shinnery oak as the primary vegetable food and a lesser reliance onmesquite and other wild plant resources. Antelope and jackrabbit were the major meat resources, withlesser amounts of cottontail, deer, various rodents, and a small number of bison. Seasonal camps in theshinnery oak area are predominant during the early part of the period, but after about AD 1100–1150,pithouse villages are built in favorable locations suggesting a more sedentary settlement pattern.Archeobotanical data supporting this settlement-subsistence strategy are largely lacking, however, andSebastian and Larralde (1989:82) question whether a nonagricultural sedentary adaptation was feasible insoutheastern New Mexico.Finally, no evidence of agriculture has been found in the Guadalupe Mountains. Applegarth (1976)suggests that a mobile hunting and gathering lifeway persisted during the Ceramic period, with huntingfocused on small game, especially rabbits, while leafy succulents were a major plant resource. The latterhypothesis is supported by the radiocarbon dates on ring middens, which are predominantly datedbetween AD 500 and 1450 (Katz and Katz 2001:Table III-35).More recent research has provided more detailed subsistence data, primarily from sites in the Rio Hondoregion-Sierra Blanca region. As summarized by McBride and Toll (2003), corn has been recovered from10 of the 11 Late Archaic and Ceramic period sites in that region for which botanical data are available.Three of those sites also yielded beans and two others squash, but only three of the sites (Beth Cave, FoxPlace, and Robinson Pueblo) have yielded remains of all three cultigens comprising the triad ofSouthwestern agriculture. The ubiquity of maize at these sites is generally lower than at Formative sitesat Chaco Canyon and in the Rio Grande valley, however. This evidence suggests that populations in theRio Hondo-Sierra Blanca region were less dependent on agriculture than other Southwestern groups,although maize was clearly a dietary staple.Wild plant resources exploited during the Ceramic period typically include a variety of weedy annuals –goosefoot, pigweed, purslane, sunflower, tansy mustard, globe mallow, and seepweed – and diverseperennials – pinyon, juniper, cacti, mesquite, walnut, yucca, wild grape, and oak. The exploitation ofweedy annuals is widely practiced in the Southwest. These annuals are common on disturbed ground andin agricultural fields, and would have been available in the immediate vicinity of the sites. Theprevalence and diversity of perennials, however, appears to be characteristic of human adaptations to theChihuahuan Desert floristic community (McBride and Toll 2003:293).Faunal remains from Ceramic period residential sites in the area of the Pecos and Hondo rivers aretypically diverse, with a variety of rodents, birds, fish, turtles, and mussels. Akins (2002:155) argues thatsedentary groups tend to hunt a variety of species in the immediate vicinity of their settlements, and thatthe diversity of the faunal assemblage reflects the richness of the local environment. Sedentary groupstend to be more selective when hunting at some distance from their settlements, and Akins suggests thatthe higher proportion of artiodactyls at Ceramic period camps like Tintop Cave and Los Molinos mayreflect this tendency (2002:156).4-36
Despite the diversity of the assemblages, hunting of a relatively few species seems to have contributed thebulk of meat to the diet. The small game species most commonly recovered from Ceramic period sitesare rabbits and some of the larger rodents – prairie dogs, woodrats, and pocket gophers. The ratio ofcottontail to jackrabbits varies by site, with the genera most common in the local environment beingpredominant. The most common large game species are deer or antelope, with the predominant generaagain varying with local availability. Bison are often present but, in terms of NISP, it is only a minorcomponent of faunal assemblages dating earlier than about AD 1300.At the Townsend Site, changes in the artiodactyl index (ratio of artiodactyl to rabbits) suggest a sharpdrop in large game hunting during the early Ceramic period and an increasing emphasis on small game,particularly rabbits. That trend is partially reversed in the late Ceramic period (i.e., after AD 1050–1100),and hunting large game again becomes a significant component of the subsistence system. The evidencefrom Henderson Pueblo (Speth 2004) then indicates a dramatic increase in the importance of bisonhunting after about AD 1300, which is probably a response to the increased abundance of bison on theSouthern Plains. However, more data are needed to determine whether these patterns hold for the entireRio Hondo-Sierra Blanca area.Sebastian and Larralde (1989:85–86) interpret the evidence from southeastern New Mexico as indicatingthat the region was occupied by both farmers and hunter-gatherers during the Ceramic period, and thatthese two basic adaptations reflected alternative strategies of intensification. The evidence now availableindicates that this intensification process began by 3000–2500 BP and possibly earlier, at least in theBrantley Reservoir-Guadalupe Mountain area, and that maize cultivation had been adopted by somegroups in the Sierra Blanca area by AD 1–200. Judging from the number of sites, population densitiescontinued to increase during the Ceramic period, so the pressures to intensify resource procurementalmost certainly continued to be a major factor conditioning human adaptations in the region. If currentinterpretations of the subsistence strategy in the Rio Hondo-Sierra Blanca area as a mixedhorticultural/hunting and gathering economy are correct, however, then population packing in the regionmay never have reached the level favoring adoption of a predominantly agricultural subsistence strategy.Assuming that cultivation was an important but not predominant component of the subsistence strategyemployed by horticultural groups in southeastern New Mexico, two critical subsistence questions thatremain to be addressed are:• How were scheduling conflicts between agricultural tasks and wild resource procurementresolved?• Does the continued dependence on wild plant and animal resources result from limiteddemographic pressure to intensify resource procurement, or from some environmental factorlimiting agricultural productivity?Scheduling conflicts affect hunter-gatherers particularly in highly seasonal environments. Among thetactics for minimizing scheduling conflicts are division of labor by gender, age and/or task group tofacilitate the concurrent procurement of multiple resources, and the use of storage to prolong theavailability of some resources. In many cases, though, scheduling conflicts are resolved by choosing toexploit one resource and ignore another. Optimal foraging theory suggests that such decisions will bemade in favor of the subsistence resource that provides the greatest return for the effort.The introduction of cultigens to a hunting and gathering economy could precipitate additional schedulingconflicts depending on the labor devoted to cultivation. Given the growth requirements of maize, it seemslikely that cultivation would minimally require an initial labor investment during the early spring toprepare the fields, plant the crop, and protect the newly emerging seedlings from marauding animals andencroaching weeds. A second labor investment would then be needed during the late summer and earlyfall to protect the ripening ears and harvest the crop. Those labor requirements would inevitably conflict4-37
- Page 3 and 4:
National Register criteria, and dat
- Page 5 and 6:
• What data sets are needed to ad
- Page 7 and 8:
Fields, may be downloaded from the
- Page 9 and 10:
Development of Southeastern New Mex
- Page 12 and 13:
Table of Contents ContinuedRadiocar
- Page 14 and 15:
List of Tables ContinuedTable 3.13T
- Page 16 and 17:
CHAPTER 2PHYSIOGRAPHY, GEOARCHAEOLO
- Page 18 and 19:
The Llano Estacado Section or South
- Page 20 and 21:
Table 2.1 Selected Geologic Referen
- Page 22 and 23:
Portales ValleyThe Portales Valley
- Page 24 and 25:
The thickness of surficial deposits
- Page 26 and 27:
Alluvial Flats. Denudation of bedro
- Page 28 and 29:
Table 2.3 Physiographic Regions and
- Page 30 and 31:
Table 2.4Expected Average Condition
- Page 32 and 33:
Site densities were calculated for
- Page 34 and 35:
Figure 2.6. Area surveyed in square
- Page 36 and 37:
15. Based on the strong direct rela
- Page 38 and 39:
REFERENCES CITEDAltschul, J. H., Se
- Page 40 and 41:
2005 Surficial Geologic Map of New
- Page 42 and 43:
PREVIOUS TYPOLOGIESA number of typo
- Page 44 and 45:
Expectation for quarry sites and to
- Page 46 and 47:
As shown in Table 3.2, artifact sca
- Page 48 and 49:
Table 3.3 Rank ordering of feature
- Page 50 and 51:
Figure 3.2features.Histogram showin
- Page 52 and 53:
Table 3.5Expanded Component Types (
- Page 54 and 55:
11. cave - a natural hollow or open
- Page 56 and 57:
Ring Midden - a general donut-shape
- Page 58 and 59:
Table 3.7Occurrences of Surface and
- Page 60 and 61:
Our next concern was therefore the
- Page 62 and 63:
SITETYPE/GEOARCH LANO SUBSISTENCE R
- Page 64 and 65:
SITETYPE/GEOARCH LANO EFFORT AREA E
- Page 66 and 67:
ecause we don’t know how many sit
- Page 68 and 69:
Table 3.10 Proportional Area, Surve
- Page 70 and 71: Table 3.11 Distribution of Paleoind
- Page 72 and 73: Figure 3.53-32
- Page 74 and 75: Figure 3.63-34
- Page 76 and 77: Figure 3.73-36
- Page 78 and 79: Not surprisingly, the distribution
- Page 80 and 81: Table 3.15 Distribution of Unknown
- Page 82 and 83: Pielou, E. C.1969 An Introduction t
- Page 84 and 85: Wiseman, Regge N.1996 Corn Camp and
- Page 86 and 87: and projectile point chronologies c
- Page 88 and 89: Folsom is also reasonably well date
- Page 90 and 91: The Portales Complex is no longer v
- Page 92 and 93: described by some authors in the lo
- Page 94 and 95: Based on the available evidence, th
- Page 96 and 97: CeramicIn contrast to the Archaic,
- Page 98 and 99: this feature type were observed. On
- Page 100 and 101: Except for Brantley Reservoir, all
- Page 102 and 103: • Did agricultural groups eventua
- Page 104 and 105: The two complexes are distinguished
- Page 106 and 107: the Apaches. Based on their locatio
- Page 108 and 109: PaleoindianFor the Paleoindian peri
- Page 110 and 111: For Sebastian and Larralde, the que
- Page 112 and 113: Bohrer’s interpretation of the Fr
- Page 114 and 115: As Sebastian and Larralde recognize
- Page 116 and 117: In the Brantley Reservoir area of t
- Page 118 and 119: small game. Some rodents may also h
- Page 122 and 123: with the procurement of some wild r
- Page 124 and 125: The last question is fundamental to
- Page 126 and 127: areas, and the simultaneous presenc
- Page 128 and 129: • what subsistence resources othe
- Page 130 and 131: The labor invested in the construct
- Page 132 and 133: Once site types are defined, the se
- Page 134 and 135: PaleoindianAs discussed previously,
- Page 136 and 137: From the above discussion, then, th
- Page 138 and 139: Acquisition of the horse would have
- Page 140 and 141: In using modern environmental data
- Page 142 and 143: Table 4.1 Priority General Question
- Page 144 and 145: Chronology and Culture History Subs
- Page 146 and 147: Table 4.3. General question posed u
- Page 148 and 149: 1983 In Pursuit of the Past. Thames
- Page 150 and 151: Gamble, C. S. and W. A. Boismier (e
- Page 152 and 153: 1997 Analysis of Paleoindian Bonbed
- Page 154 and 155: 1999 Comments on the Prehistory of
- Page 156 and 157: Shelley, Phillip H.1994 A Geoarchae
- Page 158 and 159: 2000 Crosby Draw and River Camp: Co
- Page 160 and 161: NMCRIS data indicate that survey co
- Page 162 and 163: Addressing the Research QuestionsTh
- Page 164 and 165: There are two major shortcomings to
- Page 166 and 167: Artifact assemblages need to be des
- Page 168 and 169: As with the selection of sites, the
- Page 170 and 171:
Architectural Sites(Single Residenc
- Page 172 and 173:
Based on the discussion of regional
- Page 174 and 175:
If Unit 1 deposits are exposed, the
- Page 176 and 177:
few artifacts are recovered and the
- Page 178 and 179:
2. Large artifacts should be tagged
- Page 180 and 181:
h. Subfloor tests will be dug to de
- Page 182 and 183:
. 1 x 1 m grids and/or backhoe tren
- Page 184 and 185:
Geophysical Remote SensingGeophysic
- Page 186 and 187:
1987 Man the Hunted: Determinants o
- Page 188 and 189:
CHRONOLOGICAL SAMPLINGGeneral Guide
- Page 190 and 191:
a. Conversions of Radiocarbon Years
- Page 192 and 193:
f. Samples should not be exposed to
- Page 194 and 195:
LITHIC ARTIFACT ANALYSISThe goals o
- Page 196 and 197:
24Manuport,tabular25 GroundstoneNon
- Page 198 and 199:
Use wear codes, terms and descripti
- Page 200 and 201:
B. Mano1. Type2. Material type3. Or
- Page 202 and 203:
References CitedAcklen, John C., Ma
- Page 204 and 205:
PROPOSED LITHIC MATERIAL CODE SHEET
- Page 206 and 207:
108 light gray with profuse red (26
- Page 208 and 209:
CERAMIC ANALYSISThe goals of the ce
- Page 210 and 211:
Jornada Red TooledJornada Corrugate
- Page 212 and 213:
Santa Fe Black-on-whiteGalisteo Bla
- Page 214 and 215:
VI. Whole Vessels1. Vessel height2.
- Page 216 and 217:
Data NeedsA. Usage of more sophisti
- Page 218 and 219:
5. The determination to wash the fa
- Page 220 and 221:
ARCHEOBOTANICAL STUDIES(from Dean 2
- Page 222 and 223:
V. Sample Size and NumberA. A recom
- Page 224 and 225:
B. Data return is dependent upon pr
- Page 226 and 227:
Or submit the vessel for a pollen w
- Page 228 and 229:
# FlotationSamples Flotation Sample
- Page 230:
might include “quids”, sandals,