Archaic Period (5500-600 BC)

Many archaeologists understand that the succeeding Archaic period (5500-600 BC) in the Four Corners region developed out of the existing Palaeo-Indian adaptation. However, archaeologist Cynthia Irwin-Williams suggested that the Palaeo-Indian occupants abandoned the region when bison herds could no longer be supported and migrated east. In this view, Archaic people of the northern Southwest were immigrants to the area. In another view, archaeologist Jesse Jennings suggested that the Archaic period dates back to 8000 BC in some areas and that

Archaic folks were contemporaneous with the Palaeo-Indians. At this point, sufficient evidence does not exist to prove or refute any of these alternatives. Irwin-Williams’s Archaic sequence is presented below, as it is most specific to the Four Corners region. In addition, other Archaic sequences have been proposed, most notably Alan Schroedl’s for the northern Colorado Plateau, which is briefly discussed below.

In general, the Archaic period is characterized by the replacement of the previous big-game hunting adaptation with a subsistence (food gathering) strategy focused on a mixed utilization of a large variety of plants (wild grasses, seeds, nuts, fruits, roots, or tubers) and animals (including deer, elk, antelope, bison, rabbits, and a variety of rodents). Plant resources were particularly important and a seasonal pattern of exploitation, with groups moving frequently, is inferred. In 1973, archaeologist Cynthia Irwin-Williams developed a cultural sequence for the Archaic occupation of the northern American Southwest based on her work in the Arroyo Cuervo area of northwest New Mexico (Table 1). The sequence is called the Oshara tradition and has five phases (periods of time): Jay phase (5500-4800 BC), Bajada phase (4800-3200 BC), San Jose phase (3200-1800 BC), Armijo phase (1800800 BC), and En Medio phase (800BC-AD400). Figure 3 Illustrates the changes in projectile points and other stone tools through the phases defined as part of the Oshara tradition.

During the Jay phase (5500-4800 BC), people located their habitation sites predominantly at or around canyon or drainage heads. These sites were generally small and seemed to represent a full range of activities: hunting, plant gathering, and stone tool manufacture. A wide variety of stone tools have been found on Jay sites, including well-made projectile points. According to Irwin-Williams, ground stone was absent. However, more recent research in the Four Corners area has documented the presence of ground stone artifacts on Jay phase sites. The basic

Table 1 Cynthia Irwin-Williams’s 1973 Oshara Tradition

Jay adaptation appears to have involved a mix of both hunting and plant gathering activities. Numerous Jay phase sites are known in the Four Corners region.

As envisioned by Irwin-Williams, the following Bajada phase (4800-3200 BC) represents continuous development from the preceding Jay phase. Regional population increased, as indicated by an increase in the number of occupied sites. Sites used by people in the Bajada phase seemed to show task-specific organization; that is, groups of people went on short-term trips from home base camps to gather plants, find suitable raw material for stone tools, hunt, or undertake other activities. Cobble and rock ovens and

Figure 3 Chart showing changes in Oshara Tradition phases. From Irwin-Williams C (1973) The Oshara Tradition: Origins ofAnasazi Culture. Contributions in Anthropology 5(3). Portales: Eastern New Mexico University, Figure 7, with permission.

Roasting pits made their first appearance during this phase and stone tools were more refined, perhaps suggesting a better adaptation to the plants and animals used as food resources. Bajada phase sites are known from across the Four Corners region.

During the San Jose phase (3200-1800 BC), dramatic changes occurred in relation to earlier phases. The number and size of sites, and, thus, people on the landscape, increased dramatically. Larger, more specialized activity sites with numerous fire pit or hearths and underground ovens were used for the first time during the San Juan phase. The tool assemblage was diversified with the appearance of large chopper tools, pounders, and basic grinding stones (i. e., shallow basin metates and one-hand manos). Quite a few San Jose phase projectile points (mounted on darts and throw with an atlatl) were serrated (with jagged edges), suggesting that a sharp cutting edge was important. Figure 4 Illustrates the use of the atlatl in the ancient Southwest. Overall, the distribution of sites and tools suggests that a mixed subsistence strategy was practiced, using both plant and animal foods. Resource exploitation became more systematic, intensive, and inclusive. Numerous San Jose phase sites have been found in the Four Corners region.

During the subsequent Armijo phase (1800800 BC), a critical change in subsistence occurred that was to influence the later course of Archaic and Early Puebloan development across the region: the introduction of maize or corn agriculture. Corn represented a

Figure 4 Figure illustrating use of the atlatl to throw darts. From Fagan, B. (1991) Ancient North America: The Archaeology of a Continent. London: Thames and Hudson, with permission.

Dependable, seasonal resource that provided sufficient food for large numbers of people, and that also had the potential to provide a surplus. Interestingly, although corn was introduced to the Four Corners region by at least 1200 BC (and probably earlier), the basic Archaic period subsistence pattern did not change dramatically (see Puebloan section below for a more thorough discussion of maize agriculture).

Habitation sites during the Armijo phase were very large and the number and density of sites documented indicates substantial population growth across the region. Tools increased in variety and number and ground stone became common. An elaboration of ceremonial items is also apparent. Most important, perhaps, is that a pattern of seasonal aggregation first appeared during the Armijo phase. Groups of people who were normally dispersed across the landscape through the winter months began to aggregate into larger settlements in the summer. Although practiced, maize agriculture was not critical to the subsistence pattern during this phase. In relative terms, Armijo phase sites occur frequently in the San Juan Basin, New Mexico, and across the Four Corners region.

Although the succeeding En Medio phase (800 BC-AD 400) was included in Irwin-Williams’s Oshara tradition, many Southwest archaeologists believe that the latter portion of the phase (c. 600/400 BC-AD 400) represents the Basketmaker II occupation of the Early Puebloans (see discussion below). Irwin-Williams believed that the people of the Oshara tradition evolved into the Early Puebloans but she never identified the precise period for this transformation. During the early portion of the phase (800-100 BC), agriculture became increasingly important and population continued to grow. Use of ground stone tools (basin-shaped metates and one-hand manos) increased proportionately with increasing dependence on agriculture. Also, the presence of a strong seasonal, annual cycle of movement is clear by this time, as groups moved across the landscape to find and exploit different resources (e. g., gathering pifion nuts at higher elevations in the fall and harvesting grasses at lower elevations in the late spring). En Medio phase sites are common across the Four Corners region.

In 1976, Alan Schroedl developed a cultural sequence for the Archaic period on the Colorado Plateau that differed significantly from Irwin-Williams’s formulation. Schroedl’s sequence has four phases: Black Knoll (6300-4200BC), Castle Valley (42002500 BC), Green River (2500-1300 BC), and Dirty Devil (1300 BC-AD 500). The phases are differentiated based on diagnostic projectile points and perceived changes in population. The Black Knoll phase is characterized by Pinto and Northern Side-notched points. During the latter part of the phase (50004200 BC), Schroedl postulated a dramatic increase in population, as evidenced by an increase in the density of artifacts on sites. The subsequent Castle Valley phase saw the widespread occurrence of Rocker, Sudden, and Hawken Side-notched points early in the period. Schroedl suggested that the population increased after 3000 BC, following a slight decrease earlier in the phase. During the latter portion of the phase, Humboldt and McKean projectile points became common. The third phase is the Green River, which is characterized first by San Rafael Side-notched points, and later by Gypsum projectile points. Finally, the Dirty Devil phase witnessed the continuation of Green River point styles. Schroedl postulated a low population during this final phase. Schroedl’s sequence was built largely upon data from several cave sites in southern Utah and northern Arizona: Danger Cave, Hogup Cave, Sudden Shelter, and Cowboy Cave.

Before discussing the ancient Puebloan sequence, a perspective on the Archaic is offered here that differs considerably from both Irwin-Williams and Schroedl. In 1986, archaeologists Mike and Claudia Berry undertook a critical review of the Archaic period in the American Southwest. They made several important points: (1) most of the Archaic models currently used in the Southwest are deficient in one way or another, (2) models currently used are of little utility in understanding change through time, (3) models currently used are not supported by the chronological evidence, and (4) the premise of in situ cultural development is simply not supported by the data. Berry and Berry did not undertake a comprehensive review of Irwin-Williams’s sequence because very little of the relevant data had been published. Berry and Berry were skeptical that the Oshara tradition data would support Irwin Williams’s concept of in situ, gradual evolution from Jay phase hunter-gatherers to Later Puebloan agriculturalists.

With regard to the northern Colorado Plateau Archaic sequence, Berry and Berry noted that a plot of absolute chronological dates produced a pattern that is more indicative of intermittent occupation than gradual increase in occupational intensity through time. Specifically, they highlighted a 1000-year gap in the occupation of the Colorado Plateau from 4000 to 3000 BC. Schroedl also evidently observed this gap but nevertheless chose to define a phase (Castle Valley) to fill the gap. This is a clear example of what Berry and Berry called phase-stacking to achieve the illusion of continuity. Another discontinuity is present in Schroedl’s Dirty Devil phase, from 1000 BC to AD 1. Berry and Berry suggested that Schroedl ignored this gap to allow for continuity.

As an alternative to models of gradual evolution and in situ development for the Archaic period, Berry and Berry offered a punctuated (or intermittent) model. They argued that the Southwest is essentially an arid and inhospitable environment that invited exploration by Archaic hunter-gatherers only during specific periods of increased effective moisture and proportionately greater biotic productivity. Thus, to believe that any area in the Southwest was continuously occupied throughout the period is incorrect. Rather, Archaic groups came and went as conditions allowed. In this view, Archaic peoples are seen as adapting to local environments and making small adjustments in their use of various stone tools and in their seasonal migrations. Also inherent in this view is the belief that, at certain times, large portions of the Southwest were simply not hospitable to human groups. Thus, temporary abandonment of many areas across the Southwest is to be expected.

Berry and Berry constructed a basic summary of the Archaic era using period designations only as organizational devices. Period I, dated from 8000 to 3000 BC, is characterized by sparse population of the entire Southwest. The period is correlated with a general time of decreased moisture, the Altithermal, which limited the productivity of the area. Culturally, the groups that occupied the area are unknown. The culmination of the period was a widespread abandonment from 4000 to 3000 BC.

Period II, dating from 3000 to 1000 BC, saw an intensive occupation across the Southwest. A reversal of effective moisture levels occurred and resource productivity was high. Unprecedented levels of cultural activity were achieved during this period.

Period III lasted from 1000 BC to AD 500. Berry and Berry characterized this period as post-Archaic because of the introduction of maize agriculture. Although agriculture did not have an immediate impact, it set into motion a cycle that completely revolutionized the Archaic way of life and set the stage for Formative (Puebloan) developments. Nevertheless, hunting-gathering continued to be of considerable importance during this period, as well as later in the Puebloan period. In what is perhaps the most significant deviation from conventional southwestern wisdom, Berry and Berry posited a major influx of people during this period, as represented by stylistically diverse projectile points. They suggested that the inception of maize agriculture probably represents an influx of people from some external (and unknown) source area. This suggestion is in sharp contrast to the model of continuous in situ development that has been postulated for the Archaic to Puebloan transition by other Southwestern archaeologists.

The work of Berry and Berry is important, as it adds a new perspective on the Archaic period and encourages archaeologists to examine their data and their preconceived notions of the archaeological record. In a general sense, their work parallels that of other Southwest archaeologists who have expressed dissatisfaction with traditional and gradualistic interpretations of the archaeological record. Given the incomplete nature of the Archaic database, however, alternative interpretations are clearly possible. The gaps that Berry and Berry have identified may represent actual abandonments or discontinuities, or they may merely reflect the differential nature of the data. Similarly, the inception of agriculture is not necessarily attributable to the influx of new people. Indeed, some archaeologists postulate that hunter-gatherers took to agriculture to maintain their lifestyle and remain foragers.

Phil Geib’s recent summary of the radiocarbon record for the central Colorado Plateau evaluated both the traditional view of Archaic occupancy of the area and Berry and Berry’s punctuated model. Geib plotted more than 130 radiocarbon dates from 64 sites and weighted the raw data to produce a bar graph. Geib considered the influence of different factors (including preservation and sampling factors) on the distribution of dates, concluding that although preservation was not a significant factor, sampling bias in the form of lower visibility of certain sites may be responsible for some of the patterning seen in the chronology. Biases aside, Geib’s analysis did not identify the gaps in the record observed by Berry and Berry. The Middle Archaic gap, identified by Berry and Berry between 6000 and 5000 BP is not evident in the record for the central portion of the plateau. The decrease in radiocarbon-dated sites does reflect, in Geib’s view, a change in settlement pattern and lower population density but does not constitute a complete abandonment of the plateau, as suggested by Berry and Berry. A second occupation hiatus described by Berry and Berry, and interpreted as another complete abandonment of the area, occurred between 3000 and 2500 BP. During this period, the number of radiocarbon dates dips but some sites are still occupied. In sum, Geib’s work provided support for a model of long-Term continuity in Archaic occupation of the central Colorado Plateau and he saw no evidence to support the idea that the Archaic period as a sequence of major population abandonments and intrusions on a pan-regional scale (as proposed by Berry and Berry). Nevertheless, he did not discount the importance of migration as a factor influencing changes during the Archaic period, and Geib acknowledged that more data are needed, particularly for the Middle Archaic.