Ituturrsitu keeze' Arizona its

Ituturrsitu keeze' Arizona its
Vol. VI, No. 4
May 15, 1935
Ituturrsitu its Arizona
TninrrsiÌU of Arizona
Intuprs'ttg of Arizona liullptin
May 15, 1935
Vol. VI, No. 4
President of the University
Professor of Archaeology,
Head of the Department
Assistant Professor of Anthropology
Instructor in Archaeology
The University of Arizona Bulletin is issued semi- quarterly.
Entered as second -class mail matter June 18, 1921, at the office at
Tucson, Arizona, under the Act of August 24, 1912. Acceptance for mailing at special rate of postage provided for in Section 1103, Act of Octo-
ber 2, 1917, authorized June 29, 1921.
May 15, 1935
Vol. VI, No. 4
lbtinrrLftltl of Arizona
One Dollar
3hnittrrsitu of Arizona
-- The Southwestern area; geology and climate
- -
The earliest population
Centers of ancient populations in America
Migrations and diffusions from Mexico
Early corners from afar
Similarities which suggest outside contact
Classification of pottery and its chronology
The beginnings of pottery
The origin of patterns__________________ _______________________________
The early pottery of the San Juan area
Chaco canyon
Mesa Verde
Kayenta pottery
Early Pueblo Black -on -White
Lines and triangles
Broad lines
Late Pueblo Black -on -White
___ _____________ __________-
Proto- Kayenta
Negative patterns
Kayenta Black -on -Red
Kayenta Polychrome derived from Black -on -Red
Kayenta Polychromes
Possible origin
Kayenta Polychrome
The pottery of the Little Colorado
Black -on -White (Tularosa)
Black -on -Red
Little Colorado Polychromes
St. Johns type
Pinedale Polychrome
Four Mile Polychrome
Jeddito Yellow
Sikyatki Polychrome _____
The pottery of the Upper Gila
Black -on -White (Tularosa)
Upper Gila Black -on -Red
Early Gila Polychrome
Early Red -on -Buff (Hohokam)
Late Hohokam and its Santa Cruz variants
Black -on -White
Middle Gila Black -on -Red.
Tucson Polychrome.
Late Gila Polychrome
The pottery of the Middle Gila (Hohokam)
Culture areas in New Mexico and in Mexico
Chihuahua ware
Pottery patterns and conclusions therefrom
Summary and conclusion________ Bibliography
Museums visited_____
---------------- - - -- --
----------------------------- - - --
Figure 1. -Map of the Southwest, showing cultural areas
Figure 2. -Map of State of Arizona
Figure 3.- Sketches of figurines of the earth mother
Figure 4.- Tree -ring section
Figure 5. -Map showing dated prehistoric Indian pueblos
Figure 6. -Early Gila Polychrome olla
Figure 7.- Comparative study of design elements
I. -A black and white seed bowl__
IL-A Little Colorado pitcher
III. -A black and white bowl
IV.-Kayenta Black -on -Red
(facing) 60
(facing) 32
V.- Kayenta Black -on -Red
VI.- Kayenta Polychrome
VII. -A Red -on -Buff pitcher
VIII. -- Kayenta Polychrome
IX.- Kayenta Polychrome bowl
X.- Little Colorado Black -on -Red
XI. -St. Johns Polychrome
XII. -A black and white olla
XIII.-A Black -on -White "negative" pitcher
XIV. -A Kayenta olla
XV: A bowl with negative pattern
XVI: A Pinedale bowl
XVII. -Four Mile Polychrome
Plate XVIII. -Upper Gila Black -on -Red
XIX. -Early Gila Polychrome
XX.-Early Hohokam bowl
XXI. -Late Hohokam bowl
XXII. -A Little Colorado olla
Plate XXIII. -A Four Mile olla
Plate XXIV.- -Late Hohokam bowl
XXV.- Middle Gila Black -on -Red
XXVI.- Tucson Polychrome olla
Plate XXVII. -A Late Gila Polychrome bowl
Plate XXVIII.- -Late Gila Polychrome bowl
Plate XXIX.-A Late Gila Polychrome olla
XXX. -A Nogales Polychrome bowl
Plate XXXI: A Chihuahua olla
Plate XXXII.-A Black -on -Gray pot
Plate XXXIII.- Roosevelt Black -on -White
Plate XXXIV. -Bowl from Roosevelt district
(facing) 40
(facing) 48
This paper is an attempt to understand the development
of pottery among the ancient Arizonans; to trace, if possible, to their beginnings the various patterns on bowls and
ollas; to analyze the different elements of which these designs are composed; and to seek in their similarities and
their differences indications of migrations and cultural
This study was accepted as a thesis in partial fulfillment
of the requirements of the Master of Arts degree in Archaeology at the University of Arizona, 1933.
I wish to express my great appreciation of the kindly
guidance and helpful suggestions of Dr. Byron Cummings,
head of the Department of Archaeology of the University
of Arizona, to whom I am deeply indebted. I would like
to thank also the faculty and students of the department for
their cordial interest and cooperation.
For years American archaeologists, busy with the many
phases of civilization in the Old World, did not realize
that here in their own country was a cultural development
of the greatest interest and importance, comparable indeed
to the achievements of Neolithic man anywhere in the
world. Amazingly high levels were reached in the archi-
tecture of the Mayas, and also in their astronomical observations.
Beautiful jewelry of gold, shell, and precious
stones was made in many parts of the New World. Excellent work in pottery, worthy to be compared with the Hel-
ladic, the Mycenean, and the ancient Egyptian, was produced in the central section from Peru to the Southwest.
In a much larger area, practically all over the American Indian area, baskets were made, equal in beauty to those made
anywhere in the world; while in Peru textiles were woven
which rival the famous Coptic fabrics in the beauty of their
complicated patterns and in their wide range of color.
With such a wealth of material at hand it is difficult not
to wander from a chosen field of investigation, that of the
pottery of one relatively small area only, the State of Arizona. A study of the technique of the making of pottery,
of the many varied shapes of the pots, and, above all, of
the painted decoration found on such a large number of
them may be of some use in the attempt to determine the
origin of at least this one trait of the people of the Southwest (and of Arizona in particular). The tracing of these
patterns from the earliest times should show the continuity
of their development, if any such continuity existed; it
should also give an indication of migrations, diffusions, and
of trade relations among the various tribes.
The prehistoric Indian inhabitants of this Southwestern
area stand out as one of the great cultural groups in the
Americas. They have left a record of their occupation for
us to read, not only in their spectacular cliff houses, but
also in the great variety of beautiful pottery vessels for
which we have to dig into the less imposing mounds where
villages of other types once stood.
In modern geographical terms this Southwestern area in-
cludes practically the whole of the states of Arizona and
New Mexico, the greater part of Utah, the southwestern
corner of Colorado, an undetermined area in eastern Nevada,
the Texan triangle south of New Mexico, and the northern
parts of the Mexican states of Sonora and Chihuahua. All
of this region is a "high and arid plateau, sloping away to
the south and west from the Rocky mountains," which
brief description gives no idea of the varied beauty of the
scenery nor of the great range of the climate from the cool,
pine clad mountains, to the hot, dry, cactus covered desert.
Geologically this area is of great general interest. A care-
ful survey of Arizona has been made by the Bureau of
Mines' for the use of those interested in this phase of the
For the archaeologist, however, there
are other deposits of greater interest. Such are the clay
history of Arizona.
beds which are found all over the State in sufficient numbers
so that each village had a supply near by. This clay varies
from the fine white clay (kaolin) to the coarsest kind of clay
which can be used for pottery. Much of it is colored with
iron oxide, giving a yellow to orange tinge in some localities,
and a deep, rich red in others. Impurities of various kinds
give shades of brown and gray as well as a pinkish buff.
Some of the clays contain sand or bits of glittering mica,
whereas others have to have a tempering material added.
Some of the clay is soft and can be scooped up in the hands,
1Roberts, F. H. H., Jr., Shabik'eschee Village, p. 2, 1929.
2Darton, N. H., A Resume of Arizona Geology, 1925.
= ;__-;- =; NEW MÉXICO
Figure 1. -Map of the Southwest, showing cultural areas:
Northern Peripheral
San Juan
Little Colorado
Upper Gila
Middle Gila
Lower Gila
Rio Grande
but a large proportion of it has solidified into shale which
has to be pounded to a powder before it can be used.' Some
kind of common clay was present everywhere in more or less
3Guthe, Carl E., Pueblo Pottery Making, 1925.
large quantities, but the pure white kaolin and the red, yellow, and black sometimes had to be sought far afield. Hematite and limonite were pounded to a powder and used as
paint, as was also manganese, though the bee weed was fre-
quently used in the preparation of black paint, and the
smudged interiors were produced in the firing, as were also
the black firing clouds. The geology of the country thus
influenced to a considerable extent the color and quality of
the pottery of the different districts.
The climatic changes seem to have been relatively slight
since man has been living here, particularly since he has
been building houses. There are, however, some indications that there was more moisture in former times and that
the rivers contained more water. Some of the ancient
villages are in situations far removed from any stream or
spring, which suggests that the ancient source of supply has
either dried up or taken another course. Other villages
had just the opposite difficulty; some ruins gave evidence of
having been flooded, and to have remained under water for
a considerable time. There is also another indication of
some such change; the ancient irrigation ditches are now
high above the water line at the point where they take off
from the river.' Given enough water (and a very small
quantity seems to be all the skillful Indian dry farmer
needs) the soil of the area is sufficiently fertile to produce
fair crops.
Game was never particularly abundant anywhere in the
region, which would in part account for the scanty remains
of the few early nomadic hunters. In the mountains were
"deer, bear, rabbit, wild turkey, grouse, and quail, with an
occasional mountain lion or wildcat. "5 Rabbits, turkeys, and
a number of other birds were common in Arizona, and
mountain sheep were hunted to some extent.
Thus geologic and climatic conditions were such that a
small nomadic population could be supported and a somewhat larger agricultural one. Living conditions were far
from easy, but they were not cruelly hard. They were
'Cummings, Byron, Ancient Canals of the Casa Grande, pp. 9 -11, 1926.
5Roberts, F. H. H., Jr., Shabik'eschee Village, p. 2, 1929.
Modified from map by Arizona Bureau of Mines.
Figure 2. -Map of State of Arizona.
such as to stimulate man to continuous effort, in fact, just
the conditions under which culture and civilization grow
and flourish.
This prehistoric agricultural population naturally concen-
trated in the river drainages of which there are four in
the region; the San Juan in the north, the Little Colorado
to the south of it, the Gila -Salt in the south central part of
Arizona, and the Rio Grande in New Mexico. These agricultural Indians were not, however, the first corners into
the area.
Just who the very first inhabitants of America were is
still an undecided question. It has been an accepted theory
for a long time that man carne to this continent from Asia
rather recently by way of Bering Strait, that is, recently
geologically speaking. Shetrone says, "It is now generally
concluded that the progenitors of the American race came
from Asia, probably by Bering Strait, subsequent to the
most recent glacial invasion, 8,000 or 12,000 years ago. "'
The American Indian is more like the original Mongoloid
than either Mongolians or Malaysians. His culture was
in the hunter -fisher stage with a knowledge of kindling
fire, of shaping stone, and of chipping flint. He possessed
as weapons the harpoon, the spear, and the bow and arrow.
Kidder's opinion is slightly different. "This continent was
peopled many thousands of years ago by the ancestors of
the American Indian. When they arrived in America they
were in a state of savagery little above that of, say, the
later paleolithic men of Europe. "7
This opinion of the relatively recent arrival of man has
been somewhat shaken recently by finds which suggest that
man was here in Pleistocene times, long before the passage
across Bering Strait was open for the passage of Paleolithic
or even of Neolithic man. In Sulphur Spring valley in Arizona, remains of a mammoth were found in close proximity
to hearths and eoliths of a most primitive kind. A short
distance away in Cienega Wash human bones were found
in a similar Pleistocene stratum. In Gypsum Cave in Nevada an atlatl point was found in the layer below that in
which were found the remains of a ground sloth.' At about
6H. C. Shetrone, The Mound Builders, p. 481.
7A. V. Kidder, The Trend of Archaeological Research, p. 223.
'Stock, Chester, Problem of Antiquity Presented by Gypsum Cave, Nevada, 1931.
the same time human bones were found in Ecuador associated with those of a mastodon. Though these finds may
prove that a Pleistocene man existed in the Americas some
twenty or thirty thousand years ago, it might also prove
that the sloth and the mammoth lived on after the glaciers
receded, perhaps up to within fifteen or even ten thousand
years of our own time.' In spite of Hrdlicka's opinion that
"there is not a single American human bone in existence or
on record, the geological antiquity of which can be demonstrated beyond doubt,"" there is a growing conviction of the
possibility of the existence of human beings on the American continents in Pleistocene times. Our prehuman ancestors may have wandered to this continent before they had
articulate speech in that early time when the lower arctic region had a less rigorous climate. The geological conditions
of the Ice age isolated this early man in the Americas for a
long period of time during which he multiplied, prospered,
and developed in much the same way as did his Old World
brethren. "The early American did not differ greatly from
the early Asiatic, the early Egyptian, or even the primitive
European. "11
It is thus possible that long before any Neolithic Mongoloids could have crossed to our shores by way of Bering
Strait, there were some primitive dolicocephalic nomads
wandering about. These people seem to have known fire
and to have hunted both large and small game with primitive stone weapons. They may even have started on the
upward path toward civilization before any stimulus came
to them from outside. These indigenous Americans must
have wandered southward during the Ice age seeking that
part of the country where living conditions were most favor-
And it is in some such favored spot that it seems
reasonable to look for the starting point of man's evolution
9Harrington, M. R., The Mystery of Gypsum Cave, 1930, p. 34.
'°Hrdlicka, Ales, The Origin and Antiquity of the American Indian,
1923, pp. 481 -494.
"Cummings, Byron, The Ruins of Cuicuilco, 1923, p. 219.
in the Americas. Mexico and Central America seem to
have been pleasant and habitable even in Pleistocene times;
therefore, as is to be expected, it is here that the earliest
traces of a dense population are to be found. There was
perhaps a second center in Peru. At least it is in these two
localities that the native American Indian culture reached
its highest stage of development. This culture grew up
on the basis of the cultivation of corn, which may be des-
cended from teocentli, a grass found in a wild state in
Mexico.12 This is the reason given by one school of botan-
ists for assuming that Mexico is the central point from
which culture spread. Another school thinks that Peru
may be the center because here are found the largest number
of different varieties of corn. The theory that the valley
of Mexico was the center of the ancient American Indian
world seems the more reasonable one in the light of other
Here in this valley has been found what is
probably the oldest building in our New World, the Temple of Cuicuilco. This ancient place of worship had not
only been built and used once, but had been twice rebuilt,
and then abandoned, before our era. At about the time
of Christ, or even earlier (geologists disagree as to the date),
the Pedregal lava flow surrounded the base of the structure, which at that time had been abandoned long enough
for a considerable thickness of soil to have accumulated
over it. Here and in the ancient cemetery at Copilco, buried
under the same lava flow, have been found the earliest
pottery and figurines of the archaic horizon. These are
far from primitive and suggest a long period of development. In the lowest layer the pottery was well polished
though perhaps not quite so well made nor so highly polished as in the second period, where the pieces are decorated
with a shadow pattern in black on red, or in red on brown.
Casuelas and bowls were the common shapes. The dark
pottery of the third period is, in contrast, crude and heavy.
Its decoration consists of moulded ornaments and of incised
lines. The casuela is again the most common shape, though
bowls, cups, and a few ollas have been found.
12Morley, S. J., Unearthing America's Ancient History, 1931, pp. 99 -126.
The changes in the type of ware found in the three strata
of this horizon seem to indicate some changes in the population; perhaps a shifting of tribes as volcanic eruptions made
their homes too hot for occupation, perhaps wars between
different groups. That these people wandered a long way
in search of new homes is suggested by the fact that the
culture of corn is spread far and wide. It may have reached
first the Mayan peoples on the coast where conditions were
so favorable for agriculture that life became less strenuous
and man had leisure to develop other cultural traits. The
imperative need of knowing when to plant corn led to the
necessity of an accurate system for measuring time. For
this purpose astronomy, the calendar, and writing were
developed by these Mayans. The earliest recorded date
so far found is on the Tuxtla statuette, 98 B.C. At Uaxac-
tun is the earliest deciphered record on stone, 68 A.D.
Architecture and all other arts and crafts progressed with
amazing rapidity. Among these was of course pottery,
which attained as high a level of excellence as did any
of the other arts. Their beautiful, highly polished, and
elaborately decorated ware is of interest to this discussion
mainly on account of a remarkable resemblance to Hopi pottery in some of the symbols used. The feathered serpent,,
another symbol common in the art of Mexico and Central
America, is also found in the Southwest, even as far north
as Utah, where it is represented on a pictograph in a cave
in Nine Mile canyon, Green river.
This problem of migrations and diffusions from Mexico,
must be considered, since there is without doubt a connection
of some sort between the cultures of Arizona and the older
and more advanced culture of Mexico. This possibility of
contact seems to exist even from archaic times. The Mexican tribes who were driven from their homes by the Pedregal lava flow had to seek new homes somewhere. It is
conceivable that some few groups may have been pushed
farther and farther north by hostile tribes already in possession of the land through which they slowly moved on..
After a long period of wandering, stragglers may have pen-
etrated as far north as the San Juan region, bringing with
them a few precious seeds of corn and the memory of the
making of pottery. Here they must have mingled with
the few nomads who hunted the region, settled down, and
planted their first crops. It is possible that it was not long
before they began to experiment with the making of pottery. Their crude and clumsy first results would indicate
that all knowledge of the technique had been lost en route.
The improvements which soon took place suggest a far
off influence from archaic Mexico, most easily discernable
in the pottery patterns where the interlocked scroll appears in early pottery even as far north as the San Juan
region. Later other infiltrations from Mexico are suggested
by the appearance of other motives. Before this time of
course influences on pottery patterns had come in from the
north and west where basket making had grown into a
flourishing industry long before the first steps in pottery
making were taken. These earlier cave people of Arizona
(basket makers) were dolicocephalic, as were apparently
the first comers from the south. Later came a wave of invaders of brachycephalic type. These people introduced
some cultural changes, such as the bow and arrow, and
the baby board, which is so hard that it flattens the skull of
the child occipitally. These newcomers did not interrupt
the development of pottery, which suggests a peaceful
penetration rather than a conquest. They may even have
given new impetus to the ceramic industry by bringing in
much needed knowledge and skill.
Though our American Indian is remarkably homogeneous in type, there are sufficient differences among the groups
to arouse speculation. Though classed as a Mongoloid
there is no doubt that he is a racial mixture, showing also
some Caucasoid and some Negroid characteristics. Though
there does seem to be some outside influence on the type,
there is apparently very little on the culture. The Mon-
goloid could get into the Americas more easily than any
other race, coming across Bering Strait from Asia; and
there seems to be no doubt that he did come across this
way in late Paleolithic or in early Neolithic times. Thus
the long series of discoveries of America began. For ten
or twelve thousand years these Mongoloids have been wandering back and forth from America to Asia. Some of
them certainly must have wandered south and been absorbed into the native population. It was not until comparatively recent times, however, that a larger wave or drift
of Mongoloids came in. These were the Athapascans whom
nobody seemed to want. They settled more or less in the
west central part of Canada, from whence they sent raiding
parties to the south which, as Navajos and later, Apaches,
menaced until recently the "peaceful ones." Meantime
Malaysians, with perhaps a strain of Negro blood, ventured
across the island bridges of the Pacific, to Central and South
America, a long and difficult but not impossible voyage for
these remarkable navigators. While these peaceful groups
were filtering in from the west quite another type coming
from Europe was gradually discovering our eastern coast.
Cromagnon man and the warlike Vikings landed on our
northern shores, while venturesome Phoenicians (perhaps)
were wrecked on the shores of Colombia. At least one
fair -haired, bearded stranger reached Mexico and became
the culture hero, Quetzalcoatl.
The Mongoloid strain is without doubt the most notice-
able one with the straight black hair and the dark color
of skin and eye. The Caucasoid element is slighter, the
"Armenoid" nose being the most conspicuous trait. The
Negroid strain is also faint; its most marked feature being
the intricate development of the lambdoidal suture (if, as
Dr. Coe asserts, this is really a Negroid feature) . That
Negroes were in Central America long before Columbus
came over is proved by the fact that representations of
them with broad noses and thick lips are found on the wall
frescos of the Temple of the Warriors at Chichen Itza, a
building of the Maya -Toltec period (1190 -1448).3 One
other fact suggests a possible connection with the African
13Morris, Earl H., The Temple of the Warriors at Chichen Itza, 1931.
Congo Negro. He makes pottery in the same way that the
Hopi Indians do, using a pot for a base, and on this building
up his jar by the coiled method. He also uses a smoothing
spoon of gourd shell. Whether the resulting pottery is
at all like that of the Indians would be an interesting side
line of investigation.
The question of the origin of the art of pottery itself is
still undetermined. It is, of course, possible that pottery
was invented only once and that there was only one center
of diffusion. There is, it is true, one great central area
over which wheel -made pottery, the most advanced type, is
continuously distributed. This includes Asia (China, Mes-
opotamia, and Persia), Africa (Egypt and Numidia), and
Europe (Greece). On the periphery of this area pottery is
made by the paddle and anvil or moulded method. Beyond
the ouside fringes of this peripheral area are found those
use a "non paddle"
The inference
this distribution is that Asia is the center of invention."
On the other hand pottery is one of the simpler cultural
traits which might easily be independently invented in a
number of places. All children make mud pies and dry
them in the sun. Why should not primitive man, in many
different centers, have experimented with mud of different
kinds, particularly as he had the incentive of needing a
serviceable container. Both theories seem reasonable enough,
and arguments can be brought to the support of either one.
Certain indications do point, however, to Asia as one
center of ceramic development. Pottery making is a very
old art in China, having been going on continuously since
the Second Millenium B.C., and even at that early time the
art was not in its infancy.15 Another fact to be noted is that
the trail of the early pottery of Greece leads back through
Thessaly and Macedonia, pointing to a possible Asiatic or'Gifford, W., Pottery Making in the Southwest, 1926 -1928, pp. 353373.
15Liang, Sau Yung, New Stone Age Pottery from Prehistoric Sites in
China, 1930.
As this earliest pottery is not unlike that found in
the ancient Chinese graves, it is possible that there may be
some connection. Also, from a center somewhere in Asia
the ancient Sumerians may have passed on the knowledge
of pottery to their contemporaries in Egypt. Trade was
flourishing even at that very early time. By sea the captains
of the tiny crafts took incredible risks, following the coast
or sailing from island to island. There were also trade
routes overland. One such existed about 1200 -1100 B.C.
between the northern part of China and Troy. Thus,
ideas about pottery, if not the actual pieces, could have
travelled far. Could they, however, have reached far -off
and backward America? It seems as if they could not
possibly have done so; and yet there are striking similarities between Old World and New World pottery. These
are, in all probability, wholly accidental as the tribes producing these early wares were in a very primitive stage of
culture, and they were situated so far from each other
that contact of any kind seems hardly possible. There is
also the fact to be considered that the design elements
which are found all over the world are such as might come
either from the technique of pottery itself, or from that
of weaving which frequently preceeded pottery. For instance, the Proto- Elamite pottery (from Susa, Persia) shows
patterns which are almost identical, some with those found
on the Red -on -Buff of the Middle Gila, others with the
design elements on the early Kayenta Black -on- White, or
that of the Rio Puerco. Also from Susa come jars on which
are painted sheep with huge curling horns drawn with a
freedom which calls to mind the curves used on Hopi and
Zuñi ware. In this case it is the general distribution of the
design quite as much as the elements themselves which seems
to come from a similar creative impulse or art ideal. In
Thessaly sherds have been found which might easily be
taken for Red -on -Buff, whereas a predynastic Egyptian
sherd from Nubia was so exactly like a Red -on -Buff sherd
in color, pattern, and texture, that a pottery mender tried,
absent -mindedly to fit the two together. There are in
the Field Museum in Chicago some predynastic Egyptian
pots, slipped red with smudged black interiors which, Fewkes
said, are made in the same way as the smudged bowls of
the Gila region. A black and white olla from the Kayenta
Wash recalls to mind the Minoan jars with the octopus
A pot from the Greek island of Thera is
ornamented with the meander with diagonal hatching so
characteristic of the pottery from Chaco canyon.
boards and stepped designs are common in early Greek
pottery as they are in that of the Southwest. All of which
proves nothing but is interesting to note. The pottery of
this region also shows certain suggestions of similarities
with the wares produced in Mexico in prehistoric times.
this case, however, it seems reasonable that there should
have been contact and that Mexican ideas should have found
their way to the north.
Figure 3.- Sketches of figurines of the earth mother.
Also often of clay are the figurines of the earth mother,
the goddess of fertility, which are found all over the world.
Dr. Cummings has found two such rude statuettes in the
Southwest, the closest parallels to which are to be found
in the stone sculpture of Neolithic times in the south of
France. Here there seems to have been no possibility of
contact. Probably the Southwestern figurines are more
closely related to the archaic figurines of Mexico which
call to mind the primitive goddesses of Thessaly and Crete.
All the statuettes seem to have come from a common Aegean
origin;" the little figures from Arizona seeming to belong to the same divine family.
There is a bewildering variety of painted pottery types
to be found in the State of Arizona. Some of these date
from very early times, that is, from the very first beginnings
of pottery making; and some are being made at the present moment by the many skillful Indian potters who are
carrying on worthily the traditions of their ancestors.
These many kinds of painted pottery may be divided into
four main groups based on color alone. These are, Black on- White, Black -on -Red, Red -on -Buff, and Polychrome.
This classification does not include the corrugated pottery
nor that in which the coil is partially obliterated. On both
of these types is found at times a geometric decoration in
fugitive white. These four (or five if the Brown -on- Yellow
is distinguished from the Black -on -Red) groups, or genera,
are subdivided into smaller classes to which a more specific
name is given; and these are again divided into small local
The art of painting pottery is almost, though not quite,
as old as the art of pottery itself. Crude line decorations,
and even crude animal, human, or plant forms are found
on the clumsy gray fired bowls of very early times, first
attempts both in pottery making and in design. These
16Renaud, (Abel) Etiene Bernardeau, Prehistoric Female Figurines, 1929,
pp. 507-512.
rChaco Canyon
San Juan
Mesa Verde
(_Marsh Pass
Black -on -White
(Black -on -Gray)
Little Colorado (Puerco)
Upper Gila
Prescott (Black -on -Gray)
Black -on -Red
Little Colorado
[Middle and Upper Gila
Red -on -Buff or Hohokam
Brown -on- Yellow, or Old Hopi
[Red and Black on Orange
Red, Black, and White on Orange
Black and White on Red
"Four Mile
St. Johns
Little Colorado
(Ancient Zuñi (Heshotanthla)
Gila Polychrome
Tucson Polychrome
Nogales Polychrome
Pecos (Zuñi)
early fired pots seem to date from the time when the first
permanent houses were built, the round pit houses. Before
that time the aborigines had lived in caves or in the most
perishable type of brush shelter. Even then they were
trying to make pottery and to fire it in the sun. From these
early times it is possible to trace the continuous development
of pottery, and also the development of its 'decoration
through its many stages up to the present day.
There are two systems of classification in use in the Southwest of which variants are constantly suggested. The situation is a complicated one as each archaeologist gives a
new name to his finds if they vary ever so slightly from
those hitherto found. The simpler and more logical system of classification is that of Dr. Cummings, in use at
the University of Arizona. This one is based throughout
on house types. The objection made to it is that pit
houses and community houses were existing at the same
time in different areas. The other classification is that of
the Pecos conference. The two systems may be correlated
Archaic Period
Cave People
About 1,500 B.C.
Basket Maker I
Basket Maker II
Beginning of Christian Era
Early Pueblo Period
Round Pit House
Transitional Pit House
Basket Maker III
A.D. 150 -650
Rectangular Pit House
Late Pueblo Period
Small House Type
650- Present time
650 -900
Unit House Type
Rambling Pueblo
Community House
Pueblo I
Pueblo II
a. 900 -1200 A.D.
Pueblo III
b. 1200 -1350
1350 -1540
1540 -Present time
1700- Present time
Pueblo IV
Pueblo V
The first three periods are based on basket making, and
the others on pottery types. The objection to this is that no
baskets were made in the first Basket Maker period, and that
better baskets were made in Pueblo III than in Basket Maker
III. Also the word "Pueblo" with its accompanying numbers suggests house types without indiçating them. However, there is always some objection to every system.
This chronology from 700 A.D. to the present time is
that of Dr. Douglass of the University of Arizona, who
has discovered a system of dating prehistoric ruins by means
of tree rings.17 This calendar of prehistoric time extends
over a period of about two thousands years.
Figure 4.- Section of a tree showing the climatic cycles that point out
the years of minimum and maximum moisture.
In the San Juan drainage, in the northeastern corner of
Arizona, in Sagie and Nitsie canyons, and in the Canyon
del Muerto, as well as in the contiguous corners of New
Mexico, Utah, and Colorado, it is possible to trace the development of pottery from its earliest crude beginnings.
The pottery making complex almost always accompanies
the beginnings of agriculture, and such appears to be the
case here in the Southwest. It does not seem probable,
however, that corn was evolved from its grassy prototype,
17Douglass, A. E., "The Secret of the Southwest Solved by Talkative Tree
Rings," The National Geographic Magazine, vol. 66, pp. 337 -770.
-- -----NAVAJ
;. 54 o KAYEN
Figure 5.-- Showing prehistoric Indian pueblos that have been dated by
the Douglass Tree Ring Method.18
Mesa Verde, 1073 -1262
Pueblo Bonito, 919 -1130
White House Pueblo,
1060 -1275
Keetssiel, 1203 -1278
Betatakin, 1260 -1277
Turkey Hill, 1203 -1278
Montezuma Castle
Chaves Pass, 1381
Pinedale, 1200 -1320
Showlow, 1174-1383
teocentli, in this area, but rather that it was brought from
the highlands of Mexico. With it, without much doubt,
must have come the memory of the fact that pottery could
be made from clay. It seems fairly evident, however, that
nothing but this idea, or memory, of clay pots reached the
San Juan region, since there are numerous examples of the
very earliest experiments in the making of clay containers,
which show no knowledge whatsoever of how to go to
work to produce a smooth and well fired pot. Some of
these first vessels seem to have been made of a lump of
clay pressed into a shallow bowl- shaped basket. This, when
dry, was removed from its mold without destroying the
basket. The rough exterior surface shows wear, but not
180p. cit.
burning; the interior is plainly marked with fingerprints.19
These early, clumsy, sun -dried dishes are made of a coarse
paste, dark gray or reddish in color, and they are tempered with cedar bark to make them stronger. With the
cultivation of corn came the greater need of fireproof and
water -tight containers.
The earliest attempts at firing resulted in a thick -walled,
half -baked, rough, gray ware. These pots are so crude
and so unevenly baked as to suggest an accidental discovery, or an independent invention of the process. At
this time the bowls, examples of which are in the Arizona
State Museum, seem to have been moulded from a ball
of clay; since these show no trace of a basket mould, but
only of fingerprints, both inside and outside. Perhaps rings
first and then coils were added to the larger bowls to make
ollas and cooking vessels, and to the smaller bowls to make
pitchers and cups. An effort was soon made to make these
pots smoother and of a more symmetrical and beautiful
shape. Very soon after this came the desire to apply a painted decoration, to the bowls in particular.
The only decorative designs, which these primitive people
had had up to this time, seem to have been those used in
weaving, in which art they had become very skillful. Thus
their repertory of patterns, though not small, was necessarily
confined to those geometric or conventional designs which
come naturally in the technique of weaving, and which could
be carried out in the baskets, sandals, and belts which they
made in great numbers.
Of these articles the shallow,
bowl- shaped baskets most closely resembled the newly invented pottery bowls. Thus it would seem reasonable to
look for the prototypes of the patterns on the early bowls in
those of the early baskets. Some of the early pottery designs
have indeed very evidently been inspired by these basketry
patterns, but they are in the main adaptations rather than exact copies. Certain features are, however, the same. The
19Morris, Earl H., The Beginnings of Pottery Making in the San Juan
Area, 1927.
central circle and the rim line are common in baskets, as
are also the radiating zigzags. The division of the field
into two, three, or f our areas and the use of balanced units
are also characteristic of basketry patterns. Some of the
patterns on early bowls would however be difficult, if not
impossible, to carry out in a coiled basket. They have perhaps arisen rather from the technique of pottery itself,
with of course, as a basic idea, the conception of design already developed for baskets. These early pottery patterns
are composed of dots and lines which are the easiest motives
to make with a brush and, in their adaptation from basketry
patterns, show the irregularities and the change of form
which the greater freedom of brushwork and the manipulation of different materials would necessitate.
Plate I. -A black and white seed bowl.
Number 1720 in the Arizona State Museum. Found at Bubbling spring,
a branch of the Sagie canyon, in the Navajo reservation, Arizona, by the
University of Arizona expedition in 1916. Height 67 inches, diameter
9 inches, opening 53 inches.
Though the geometric type of pattern predominates,
there is another type in which the early potter gave full
rein to her powers of invention. This is the realistic type
in which the attempt to portray the living forms of men,
plants, and animals, as they appeared in nature, resulted in
some extraordinary creations. Though these stiff and strange
figures seem far from "natural" according to our point
of view, they seem very realistic when compared with the
conventionalized symbols of life forms which are found
in the later prehistoric art. This phase of art, uncommon
in the San Juan district, was much more highly developed
in the Red -on -Buff (the Hohokam) pottery of the Middle Gila. Here many zoomorphic and anthropomorphic designs were rendered with joy and freedom, though in this
region as well as in the north the geometric type of decoration predominated, and eventually superseded almost en-
tirely the realistic type by the end of the early Pueblo
Before considering the Kayenta pottery in greater detail
some mention should be made of the other two types of pot-
tery which developed in this region, though outside the
boundaries of the State of Arizona. These are the Chaco
canyon type found in New Mexico, and the Mesa Verde
type found in Colorado.
Chaco Canyon
The characteristic decorated pottery from Chaco canyon
The slip is almost as white as
white paper and the black is a true black at the period of
highest development. In early times the slip is not such
is Black -on -White ware.
a good white and the black is often of a brownish tone. The
designs are in the main geometric, fine lines and balanced
patterns of solid black triangles and stepped figures being
of frequent occurrence. Perhaps the most noticeable characteristic is, however, the fine diagonal hatching enclosed
in a broader line. The conventionalized "bird wing" pattern and the interlocked scroll or water symbol, both cur-
vilinear and rectilinear are treated in this way. Zonal patterns are common, particularly on bowls, and these are often
framed by one rather narrow line. The rims of bowls are
very often painted black. Characteristic shapes of the
region are the hemispherical bowls, the long necked pitchers, and the cylindrical pots found at Pueblo Bonito, which
suggest a Mexican prototype.
Mesa Verde
From the Mesa Verde district comes another distinctly individual type of ware which is easily distinguished by the
Plate II. -A Little Colorado pitcher.
Tularosa type. Number 19244 in the Arizona State Museum. From the
Scores collection. Found near Holbrook and presented by Gila Pueblo
in 1930.
Height 5/ inches, diameter 6 inches, opening 3A inches.
slip which is creamy, or even gray, rather than white, and
which has a peculiarly lustrous and slippery appearance. The
geometric zonal patterns on the bowls, though very like
those of Chaco canyon in design, are framed by several
parallel lines, and on the flat rims of the bowls are the black
marks called "ticks." Other bowls show patterns composed
of balanced solid and hatched figures, very similar to the
scrolls and stepped figures which are found so frequently
in the "Tularosa" ware, and in the St. Johns and other
Polychromes of the Little Colorado area. As to shapes, the
mug, or "beer stein," is characteristic, and also the handles
low down on the sides of the ollas.
In this district, as well as in other parts of the San Juan
drainage, it is possible to follow the development of pottery
from its earliest crude beginnings among the cave people.
Each step in this development can be illustrated from a
specimen of pottery in the Arizona State Museum, where
the unfired pottery of the cave people is to be found, as
well as the finest pieces of Late Pueblo times. The history
of decorated pottery begins with that of the earliest house
type, the circular pit house; and its periods of development correspond rather closely to the changes in the house
types. This first early pueblo pottery is poor in finish and
of a coarse paste. Even when it is slipped it is gray rather
than white in color, and the decoration is in a brownish
gray rather than in a good black. This decoration is irregularly and badly spaced and most unskillfully applied. It
is not, however, wholly without merit. There is an evident attempt to arrange the pattern according to a definite
plan, in spite of the haphazard appearance of many of the
The division into two, three, or four fields is
apparent from the very beginning; as is also a definitely
balanced arrangement in which the two opposing elements
are intended to be alike. Lack of skill alone prevented
some of these bowls from being beautiful, since the basic
idea is a sound one.
The elements of design used in this earliest pottery are:
very fine lines either straight, zigzag, or wavy; dots, some
of which are long enough to be called short lines, or fringes;
solid triangles of two shapes, one broad and one long and
narrow, one so common in basketry patterns; and a simple
form of meander. With these few elements the potters
experimented until they had a variety of patterns to bequeath to their immediate descendants who slowly improved
on their inheritance, using the same motives but arranging
them differently. Two or more fine parallel lines were
then used to outline a solid figure such as the rectangle
or the row of triangles which form the solid black part
of the design. Dots were used less frequently to fill areas
but more often to border lines or the side of a triangle.
Plate I shows a seed jar of early times.
Lines and Triangles
Other motives were invented, or adapted, such as the
stepped figures and the checkerboard, which must have been
familiar to the potter for a long time, since these are both
patterns which come easily in the technique of weaving.
The use of a border pattern of wavy lines, however, such
as is found on seed bowls, seems to have come from the
technique of pottery rather than from a textile prototype.
More elaborate arrangements of all these elements resulted
in more complicated patterns toward the end of the period,
when zonal patterns on bowls are of frequent occurrence,
though these bands more often consist of panels separated
by fine vertical lines than of running, or continuous, designs.
At the same time with the improvement in the
design had come, of course, marked progress in all phases
of technique, and the pottery at the end of the period is
much better in every way. The paste is finer; the pieces
are of more regular and beautiful shape; the walls are
thinner; the slip is whiter and the black paint is deeper
in color. The smoother finish, the clearer white and black,
the more pleasing shapes, and the increased skill of the
artists in handling their tools make this period of pottery
a good foundation on which to build the remarkably fine
development of the art in later times.
Broad Lines
During the time when rectangular pit houses were being
built, and continuing on into the early phases of the Late
Pueblo period, is a new type of design. Sudden changes
in styles of all kinds take place, and Kayenta pottery is no
exception to this rule. For some reason fine lines went out
of style almost entirely and broad lines came into favor.
Plate III. -A black and white bowl.
Number 4258 in. the Arizona State Museum. From the Miller collection.
Found at Paoopka.
Property of the Arizona Archmological and Historical
Diameter 7/ inches, depth 3/ inches.
There is no sudden break in the type of design, since the
same elements are used as in the first type, but the use of
broad lines inspired a different arrangement and gives a very
different effect. These long broad lines with here and there
the emphasis of a solid black triangle made an effective
Plate IV.- Kayenta Black -on -Red
Number 18162 in the Arizona State Museum. Found near Kayenta by
the University of Arizona expedition. Height 5/ inches, diameter
85 inches, and opening 4/8 inches.
Plate V.- Kayenta Black -on -Red
A small seed bowl found in Kaycuddy wash near Kayenta by the University of Arizona expedition in 1920. Approximate dimensions: diameter
4% inches, height 3% inches, opening 134 inches.
Plate VI.- Kayenta Polychrome
An olla found by Dr. Cummings in 1928 in Kaycuddy wash, five
7% inches, diameter
from Kayenta. Approximate dimensions: height
8% inches, opening 3% inches.
Plate VII. -A Red -on -Buff pitcher.
Number 2516 in the Arizona State Museum. Found near Kayenta,
Arizona by the University of Arizona expedition in 1919.
5Y8 inches, height 4 1/16 inches.
Plate VIII. -Kayenta Polychrome.
This olla was found in a cave in Nitsie canyon in 1916 by the University
of Arizona expedition.
Approximate dimensions: height 7% inches,
diameter 914 inches.
Plate IX.- Kayenta Polychrome bowl.
Number 3747 in Arizona State Museum. Found at Tachini Point near
Marsh Pass by the University of Arizona expedition in 1923 in the lower
burial ground. Diameter 10 inches, depth 6 inches.
Plate X.- Little Colorado Black -on -Red.
Number 19287 in the Arizona State Museum. From the Scores collection. Presented by Gila Pueblo in 1930. Found near Holbrook. Diameter
inches, depth 5
Plate XI.-St. Johns Polychrome.
Number 17495 in the Arizona State Museum. Found at Turkey Hill
Ruin near Flagstaff by the University of Arizona expedition of 1929.
Diameter of opening 83 inches, greatest diameter 9 inches, depth 4 3/16
decoration for bowls or ollas. Dots were used either to
border the whole line, or only certain sections of it. They
were also used all around a triangle or on one side only,
depending on where they would give the best effect and
relieve any monotony resulting from the use of so few elements. There is, however, a surprising variety of patterns
of this time, though some may consist of lines only and
some of triangles only. Others are varied by the use of
stepped figures. Designs made up of lines alone may be
very complicated and beautiful, particularly when the lines
are bent into triangular or rectangular "scrolls" and are
used as a zonal decoration around a bowl, pitcher, or olla.
A simple and effective new element added during this
period is the hook, or flag, attached to the point of the
triangle. This makes a common, ordinary triangle look
so much like a duck that this name has occasionally been
applied to this pattern. These figures placed in opposing
rows give a simple form of interlocked scroll from which
the more elaborate type may perhaps have been developed.
This type of design lasted into the Late Pueblo period.
"Proto- Kayenta"
From this combination of broad line and triangle, a new
idea seems to have come into being, that is the serrated
line, which is really a broad line bordered with triangles,
and not just a row of triangles as in earlier days. This
new idea swept over the Kayenta area and transformed the
decorative scheme of black and white pottery. This type,
though a logical development of the preceding, is so distinctive that Kidder has given it the name of "Proto -Kay-
Two broad serrated lines, when placed opposite
each other, left between them a narrower zigzag line of
white. This proved to be a most strikingly effective unit
for the building up of rather complicated designs, giving
the effect of a white lightning pattern on a dark ground.
This particular phase of "negative design" seems, however,
to have been of short duration since the possibility of varying
Plate XII. -A black and white olla.
Found near Kayenta by the University of Arizona expedition. Approximate dimensions: height 10 inches, diameter 12 inches, and opening
67 inches.
and elaborating this very beautiful type of design was
soon seen.
Practically contemporary with this type of negative design and perhaps even a little earlier, are those patterns
which are so strongly reminiscent of Chaco -canyon ware
in their diagonal hatching with slightly broader outline.
The design elements treated in this way are a large bird
wing, a rectangular scroll, and the "octopus" type of patterns, as well as others suited to this technique.
Negative Patterns
It is in this later period of Black -on -White that the
negative designs predominate.
These are designs in which
Plate XIII. -A Black -on -White "negative" pitcher.
Number 12274 in the Arizona State Museum. Found in a burial in
Kaycuddy wash, near Kayenta, by the University of Arizona expedition
in 1920. Height 4Y2 inches, diameter 5Y8 inches, opening 3 inches.
the pattern is left in white on a painted background of black.
There are three phases of this kind of ware which may possibly represent three stages of development. Practically the
same elements are used in all three phases; interlocking
scrolls, stepped figures, and triangles being the most common.
Very broad black lines are used to frame the area in which
these motives are grouped. The main difference in the
three types is in the treatment of the white lines and spaces
within these wide bordering lines. In the first phase this
white space is left plain, being merely a narrow white line
of pattern on a black ground (Plate XIV). In the second
phase there is more of this white space and it is hatched longitudinally. This is most effective as the broad black lines now
frame in a panel in which a black pattern stands out on a
Plate XIV. -A Kayenta olla.
Found at Turkey Hill Ruin near Flagstaff and now in the Arizona State
Museum. University of Arizona expedition in 1927.
height 123 inches, diameter 133 inches, opening 5/
hatched ground (Plate XV). The third phase shows a
black pattern on a crosshatched ground, which makes the
pottery of this style resemble a cross word puzzle to some
extent (Plate IV). 011as and bowls of both these types
are in the Arizona State Museum. They were found in Sagie
and Nitsie canyons near Kayenta and at Turkey Hill Ruin
near Flagstaff. In these pieces the longitudinal hatching is
used much oftener than the crosshatching though this type
of background seems to have been quite as popular and well
developed all over the area.
Plate XV. -A bowl with negative pattern.
Found in Sagie canyon near Kayenta by the University of Arizona
expedition in 1916, and now in the Arizona State Museum. Diameter
12/ inches, depth 514 inches.
Though Black -on -White is the ware most commonly
found in the northern part of Arizona, the ancient inhabitants did not confine themselves to this color scheme. Almost as soon as they were able to make really good Black on -White pottery, they also began to make some Black-onRed. The designs on the Black -on -Red pots follow closely
in their development the course of the Black -on- White.
They are, however, relatively rare in the early period, becoming much more common in the late period when Black on -Red and Polychrome wares gradually became popular.
The large seed bowl and the small jar illustrated in Plates
IV and V belong to the earlier period in their type of
design. These two bowls were found in the same region
and Plate IV shows one of the patterns most frequently
used in the Late Pueblo period, the bird wing. The possible place of origin of this design is interesting speculation.
It was one of the patterns in use during the early Toltec
period in Mexico. This is a distinctive pattern and not
a common one except in certain localities and it seems as
if so unique a pattern would not have been invented independently in two localities so near each other. Perhaps
this is one of the connecting links between Mexico and the
Kayenta Polychrome Derived from Black -on -Red
There are two distinct types of this Polychrome ware. A
group of Polychromes was developed from the Black -onRed, first, by the simple process of leaving the lower part
of the bowl unslipped. The orange color of the unslipped
clay gives a third color to the piece, though the upper part
may still be classed in every way a typical Black -on -Red
vessel (Plate IV). A second variation is called a Polychrome also, since a white line is used to outline the hatched
pattern. There is still a third Polychrome type apparently
derived from the Black -on -Red, a late Polychrome type, in
which broader black lines and solid patterns are outlined
in narrow white lines. Different geometric motives are
used, the stepped figure being particularly common. This
type of pattern, which resembles designs used on the Black on -White pottery which it supplanted, is found mainly on
It is possible that the bird wing continued in use
for seed bowls until the end of the period.
Possible Origin
While this type of Polychrome was developing from the
Black -on -Red, another and entirely different kind of Polychrome ware had made its appearance. This, particularly
in its early phases, is very unlike the other wares produced
in the Kayenta district. It suggests the possibility of con-
tact with, and influence from the Hohokam people of the
Middle Gila. Such a contact is also suggested by the finding of a Red -on -Buff pitcher of Kayenta shape with a pattern of realistic birds, a common motive in early Red -onBuff. As this pitcher, or cup, is not like any Red -on -Buff
piece, there is a possibility that some Indian trader or travel-
ler saw something like this piece and tried to have what
he had seen reproduced when he got home. Even these pre-
historic Indians took long journeys when they were in
need of some special "medicine." There is also a Red on -Buff collander ornamented with a broken key which
has a stepped triangle attached to it. This is a pattern very
commonly found in Mexican designs. The color and finish
of this piece are also very similar to a sherd of Toltec
pottery in the Arizona State Museum. The likeness is sufficient to suggest the probable importation of this piece.
Kayenta Polychrome
The early Kayenta Polychrome is characterized by the use
of a broad red line outlined in black on a deep buff or orange
ground. The type of design is bold and simple, consisting
frequently of broad lines with sharply pointed triangles attached. In fact, it seems to be the same serrated line which
is found so commonly in the late Red -on -Buff but which
was also common, though on a smaller scale, in the Kayenta
Black -on- White.
Sometimes this pattern develops into
something very like a bird wing.
These broad serrated lines gradually went out of style,
though for a while they seemed to have been sparingly used
in connection with patterns which are more typical of the
region. The colors used are: first, black and red on orange,
to which white was added later for outlines. Bowls of this
period are frequently divided into four fields, as in the
Black -on -White type, and the geometric patterns are not
unlike those on the Black -on- White, though long parallel
lines with dots attached, and hatched areas are more common
than negative patterns. On the exterior of the bowls there
is always a broad band or two of red slip which is not outlined in black as are the lines on the interior.
Though Kayenta pottery shows to some extent the influence of other wares, it has a continuous local and distinctive
development. Its influence is strongly felt in the pottery
from Turkey Hill Ruin near Flagstaff and also in the pottery
made along the Rio Puerco and in the Roosevelt district.
The Black -on -Gray from Prescott seems also to be an echo
of Kayenta spirit through the medium of Turkey Hill art
This area lies between the San Juan drainage to the north
and the Gil drainage to the south. As a culture area, however, it seems to belong to the northern, rather than to the
southern group. In it is found a great diversity of pottery
types, some of which seem to show influence from the outside, particularly from the north and east, while others seem
to be of local inspiration.
The earliest decorated pottery of the region is the Black-,
on -White which is distributed over the whole area, each section having its own local variation. One phase of the Little
Colorado Black -on -White is that found along the Puerco
river. This, in its earlier stages, is a somewhat crude pottery
with poorly executed designs which recall to some extent
those of Chaco canyon and Kayenta. Common motives are
the pendant triangles, checkerboard designs, and also the
broad serrated line with slanting, sharply pointed teeth. This
early Black -on -White of the Little Colorado area went
through the same stages of development as did its northern
neighbors. Fine lines were succeeded by broad lines, and
these in turn by more complicated arrangements of various
elements derived from the north. Another type of Black-
on-White is that found at Turkey Hill Ruin near Flagstaff, also in the Little Colorado drainage. Here is found
a type of pottery which seems to be more closely related to
the Kayenta ware in the choice of elements of design. The
white lightning zigzag on a black ground is very common, as
Plate XVI. -A Pinedale bowl.
Number 6289 in the Arizona State Museum. Diameter at rim 878 inches,
greatest diameter 9 inches, depth 4Y4 inches.
XVII. -Four Mile Polychrome.
Number 19449 in the Arizona State Museum. Presented by Dr. Cum-
mings, 1930. Found in burial 3, Banning Wash Ruin, Cherry creek,
Pleasant valley, Arizona. Diameter at rim 6Y8 inches, depth 378 inches.
Plate XVIII. -Upper Gila Black -on -Red.
In the Arizona State Museum. Found at Gila Bank Ruin by the University of Arizona expedition in 1927. Approximate dimensions: height
9 inches, diameter 107 inches, opening 5% inches.
Plate XIX. -Early Gila Polychrome.
A bowl from Gila Bank Ruin. Found by the University of Arizona
expedition in 1927. Approximate dimensions: diameter 10 inches,
depth 43/4 inches.
Plate XX. -Early Hohokam bowl.
Number 8170 in the Arizona State Museum. Diameter 7" inches,
depth 2/8 inches.
Plate XXI. -Late Hohokam bowl.
Number 14771 in the Arizona State Museum. Red-on -Buff bowl with
smudged and burnished interior found at Bylas in 1926 by the University of Arizona expedition.
Diameter 7/ inches, depth 4' inches.
Plate XXII. -A Little Colorado olla.
Black -on -White of Tularosa type. Found at Fort Apache by the University of Arizona expedition of 1932. Diameter 19/ inches, height
142 inches.
are also the corn symbol, the checkerboard, and the triangular
water symbol. These motives are arranged in zones around
ollas and bottles in a rather characteristic way. An interesting and different use is also made of the crosshatched background, the resulting pattern being more elaborate than the
conventional checkerboard.
At some time during the Late Pueblo period a different
influence, or a new idea which may perhaps have originated
in the district, came into the Little Colorado area with driving force. This new style of Black -on -White pottery, called
"Tularosa," may have come to the Little Colorado potters
from the Upper Gila drainage to the southeast, and, if so, it
was wholeheartedly adopted by them. It seems, however,
at least equally possible that this new style is a local Little
Plate XXIII. -A Four Mile olla.
Number 6293 in the Arizona State Museum. Found by Mr. Haury,
National Geographic expedition 1927. Diameter 1172 inches, height
9/ inches.
Colorado development and that it was from this center that
the type spread, rather than from the Upper Gila area. The
essential characteristic of this new development in design is
the balancing of solid black and hatched elements, interlocking stepped figures and large scrolls being particularly common. An olla of Tularosa type is shown on Plate XXII,.
and a Four Mile olla, one of its possible Polychrome descendants, on Plate XXIII. By the time this new idea was
well established the Little Colorado potters were ready to
develop another invention of their own, the Little Colorado
Polychrome, a type which proved to be one of the most
beautiful of all the types designed by the Indian potters.
The first step in this direction had been taken when red
Black -on -Red bowls were being made
even when Black -on -White pottery predominated, though it
seems as if by the time the new idea arrived the Black -on -Red
may have begun to supplant the Black -on- White. The large
ware was discovered.
scroll and the balanced solid black and hatched elements
were used on this red ware even more commonly than were
the patterns inherited from Chaco canyon.
St. Johns Type
From this Black -on -Red ware this new type was created
by painting a pattern in clear, brilliant, permanent white on
the outside of the bowl. This is a geometric pattern of broad
straight lines in angular patterns, or of scrolls. A bowl thus
decorated on the exterior is far handsomer than the Black on -Red bowl without such decoration.
The variation in the color of these red bowls is very great,
changing from red -orange to a true deep red. At times this
red has a violet tinge but it is never so markedly purple as
is the pottery from Cholula in Mexico, which must have
been in use about this time.
The types of decoration on these bowls are almost as
varied as the colors of the bowls themselves, though the
influence of the Tularosa type predominates (that is the balanced solid and hatched scrolls, triangles, and stepped fig-
The more usual arrangement of the pattern within
the bowl seems to be in a zone, leaving an undecorated circular area in the bottom. The pattern frequently extends
from this central circle to the rim of the bowl, though on
many pieces border lines of some kind encircle both rim
and central space. A few bowls are divided into four fields,
as are those of the Kayenta region, and some few have negative patterns. According to Dr. Douglass' system of tree -
ring dating, this type of pottery lasted until about 1300,
when a variation in type took place.
Pinedale Polychrome
This new style predominated for about a hundred years.
It is still a Black -on -Red in its general effect, the changes
being mainly in the decoration on the outside of the bowls.
The broad white lines on the exterior of the bowls of the St.
Johns type were gradually replaced by single motives in
black outlined in white, or by separate panels also outlined
in white. This developed into a continuous band divided
into panels in each of which there is a pattern in black and
white. The design on the interior is painted in black on
red and it is very similar to the previous type. If there is
any change, it seems to be in the direction of bolder and, at
times, asymmetric patterns in which a large scroll is a noticeable feature. The range of color of the red slip is still
from a red- orange to a red tinged with purple.
Four Mile Polychrome
About 1400 a new idea occurred to some potter, and this
changed the appearance of the Little Colorado Polychrome
ware sufficiently for it to need a new name. This "Four
Mile" Polychome is often distinguished from the others by
the white lines which outline the designs on the interiors of
the bowls. When this is not done the character of the pattern on the exterior alone serves as a means of identification. This consists of a continuous band enclosed by two
broad black bands outlined in white. Between these lines is
a running pattern in white, which is often of flags or of
flagged triangles. The necks of ollas are also very characteristic of this style. They are painted white with a design
in black composed of large repeated units, crosses, broad
lines, or stepped figures, such as are found on ollas of
"Roosevelt" type. The designs on the interiors of bowls
are similar to those on the Pinedale bowls; that is, balanced
solid black and hatched figures, and giant scrolls either balanced or asymmetric. These patterns cover the entire interior of the bowl.
Jeddito Yellow
Along with these Polychrome wares, another type, equally
characteristic of the Little Colorado area, had been developing. This is the Jadito, or Jeddito Yellow, a brown on orange
in its early stages, and later a brown on yellow. This ware
first appeared before 1300. It is distinguished from the
Black -on -Red ware of the same period by its color which
is a true orange instead of a red -orange. By 1300 the paste
had become more definitely yellow, a dull, soft yellow,
which is at times almost a buff. The finish is a smooth and
almost slippery polish, which is not unlike that of the yellow
Minyan ware of prehistoric Greece. Bowls are decorated
on the interior with geometric patterns in brown. The character and distribution of the patterns seem to follow closely
those of the contemporary Polychrome from 1300 to 1400.
Sikyatki Polychrome
From this fine Jeddito Yellow ware a new type was
evolved by adding a reddish brown to the blackish brown already in use. This new type is named from the type village
of Sikyatki. A shallower bowl with a new curve at the rim
is characteristic as is also the type of decoration which is now
predominantly zoomorphic rather than geometric. A large
bird, conventionalized, or more or less realistic, sweeps
across the field, or there may be a row or a group of human
figures; or a hand from which a finger or two has been sacrificed; or an almost entirely geometric pattern such as had
been in use for years. The paint is not put on as smoothly
as heretofore, giving a shaded effect which may, or may not,
have been intentional. The pattern is also surrounded by a
halo of orange where the brownish paint has "run." Another variation in design is the all -over decoration in spatter work. To produce this effect the potter spatters paint
with a brush over such parts of the bowl as are to be so decor-
ated, the rest of the bowl having been covered.
This type of ware has been revived by the modern Hopi
potters, not that they are copying it exactly, but rather that
they are using it as the basis and inspiration of their present
day design.
The black and white pottery of this area, which is so like
the Little Colorado wares, is that which is known as "Tula -
rosa" from the type site on the river of that name. This
type of pottery belongs almost entirely to the Late Pueblo
period. Very little earlier pottery has been found in this
region, and this is described as being of a generalized Chaco
canyon type." This very distinctive ware thus seems to be
a late comer into the region of the Upper Gila and the Upper
Salt. A near neighbor of somewhat similar character is
the Chupadero ware of the Rio Grande. There is also much
similarity between the designs on the Tularosa ware and the
geometric designs found on Mimbres pottery.
The striking Tularosa patterns are made up of relatively
few elements. These are: large and boldly drawn interlocked
scrolls, one curve of solid black and the other hatched; balanced black and hatched triangular figures and serrated lines;
and balanced solid and hatched interlocking stepped patterns. There is little variation from these figures. (See
Plate II.) Another characteristic, however, by which this
ware is easily recognized is the animal handle on the equally
typical globular pitcher. All these characteristics are so like
those on Little. Colorado Black -on -White that an origin in
that district may be indicated.
Though this Tularosa pottery seems to have few antecedents in its immediate vicinity, it does seem to have some
legitimate successors. One of these is a certain type of Black on -Red which is not unlike that of the Little Colorado, and
the other is the Early Gila Polychrome. The Black -on -Red
is found extensively on bowls and ollas. The ollas which
came from Gila Bank Ruin contained ashes and bones, the
bowls serving as covers to the ollas. These vessels are decorated with the triangular and stepped figures, balanced solid
and hatched, which are so typical of the Black -on -White pot20Hough, Walter, Antiquities of the Upper Gila and Salt Rivers, 1907.
For some reason the scroll is not commonly found in
the Upper Gila region on the Black -on -Red, whereas in the
Little Colorado district it was very popular on both red and
This red ware is of a rather light red
(of a more or less dull orange tone), which serves to distinguish it to some extent from the brighter orange and the
Polychrome wares.
deeper red of the Little Colorado area. In some cases, how-
ever, the difference in color of the wares of the two areas
is slight, or even nonexistent, and the patterns are also very
much alike.
The same type of decoration was carried over from the
Black -on -Red into the early Gila Polychrome. 011as and
bowls of this type, as well as the Black -on -Red, were found
at Gila Bank Ruin, and the patterns on the two types were
Figure 6. -Early Gila Polychrome olla.
An Early Gila Polychrome bowl has on
the interior a design in black on a creamy white. The exterior is undecorated, and is somewhat orange in tone. The
arrangement of the design within the bowl varies considerably. Sometimes there is a zonal pattern which extends
from the rim to an open space in the bottom of the bowl,
with no framing bands or lines, or, encircling the rim on
the inside, there may be a broad black line with a gate in it
for the exit of evil. The design may also be arranged in
four fields around an open central square, or it may cover the
almost identical.
entire interior. The designs consist largely of balanced solid
and hatched motives. Longitudinal hatching, exquisitely
done, is very frequently used; and on this as a background,
interlocking stepped figures are occasionally found. The
designs are in the main rectilinear, though the interlocking
curved hooks on rows of triangles give the effect of a scroll.
Symmetrical shapes, fine finish, and accurate brushwork are
typical of this ware.
The pottery of this area reveals in its patterns quite as
complicated a situation as was found in the Little Colorado
drainage. Perhaps the situation is even more difficult, since
one very large group, seemingly the largest and most important of all, has not yet been satisfactorily accounted for.
This group is the Hohokam people who made the Red -onBuff pottery. Though these people were agriculturists,
built large community houses and villages, and made pottery as distinctly Southwestern Indian in type as any other
in the Southwest, they are sufficiently different in some of
their traits to be, perhaps, a different group of people from
the northern or Pueblo Indians. In their pottery one great
difference is in the method of manufacture, since they more
frequently use the "paddle and anvil" rather than the coiled
method which is more common to other pottery makers of
the Southwest. Even these others, however, frequently
model a small bowl out of a ball of clay, instead of coiling it.
Plate XXIV. -Late Hohokam bowl.
Red -on -Buff exterior, red on gray interior. Found at Martínez Hill
Ruin near Tucson by the University of Arizona expedition of 1931 and
now in the Arizona State Museum. Diameter 872 inches, depth 3
Plate XXV.- Middle Gila Black -on -Red.
Found at University Ruin near Tucson by the University of Arizona
expedition of 1933, and now in the Arizona State Museum. Height 5
inches, diameter 6g. inches, and opening 45 inches.
Plate XXVI.- Tucson Polychrome olla,
Number 5580 in the Arizona State Museum. Found at University Ruin
near Tucson by the University of Arizona expedition of 1932. Diameter
778 inches, height 672 inches, opening 4% inches.
Plate XXVII.--A Late Gila Polychrome bowl.
Found at Hill Top Ruin near Miami, Arizona,
and presented to the Museum by Dr. Cron of Miami. Diameter 6ginches, depth 5% inches.
Museum number 19302.
Plate XXVIII. -Late Gila Polychrome bowl.
Number 8573 in the Arizona State Museum. Found at Kinishba Ruin
near Fort Apache by the University of Arizona expedition, 1932.
Diameter to edge of rim 6/ inches, greatest diameter 7/ inches, depth
3M inches.
Plate XXIX. -A Late Gila Polychrome olla.
Number 17345 in the Arizona State Museum. Found at Roosevelt lake.
Diameter 6 inches, height 54 inches, opening 3/ inches.
Plate XXX. -A Nogales Polychrome bowl.
Number 8513 in the Arizona State Museum. Diameter 11Y8 inches,
depth 4% inches.
Plate XXXI. -A Chihuahua olla.
Found in a ruin near Casas Grandes, Mexico, and now in the Arizona
State Museum. Approximate dimensions: diameter 7r8 inches, height
7% inches, opening 472 inches.
The earliest phase of Hohokam pottery is very widely
distributed, much more so than any of the later phases. The
whole culture, pottery included, is a remarkably homogeneous one, showing almost identical characteristics in widely
separated sites.
Mr. Gladwin has tentatively located the
limits of this culture on the north, east, and west. On the
south Dr. Cummings has found this early type in Nogales
and in sites along the San Pedro and Santa Cruz rivers,
which facts suggest that perhaps this people drifted up from
Northern Mexico by these two routes. This early Hohokam
is a rather crude, but most effectively decorated type of pot-
The ground is a light buff, pinkish to gray in color,
unslipped as a rule, and the design is in reds of all shades
from red to a red -purple. Some of the shapes are unlike
those of the northern tribes and are more like those found
in Mexico; such are the tripod vessels, the incense burners,
and the flaring bowls. In design the interlocked scroll to
which is attached a long fringed triangle recalls the similar
treatment of this motive in use from Mitla to Teotihuacán.
Other patterns consist of various large elements repeated.
These are sometimes arranged in four fields in the interior
of a bowl or shallow plate, but quite as often birds, snakes,
or crosses follow each other around and around from the
center to the rim. On seed bowls and ollas a procession of
birds, or bears (maybe), or even men, walk or dance.
Though the variety of life forms is great, geometric motives
are really more commonly used. These consist of parallel
lines either straight or wavy, of zigzags, and simple mean-
der, of solid triangles with fringed edges, of scrolls either
curvilinear or rectilinear, and of concentric circles and large
dots. This, though by no means a complete list, gives a fair
idea of the type. The painting is boldly done, apparently
with joy and freedom.
Between the early and the late periods of this Red -on -Buff
pottery, there is a decided change, not only in the shapes,
but also in the designs, geometric elements being used almost
to the exclusion of life forms. The motives are smaller in
size and the lines are finer. In fact the whole scheme of
decoration shows the influence of other Late Pueblo types.
It seems to have been inspired to some extent by the pottery
of Kayenta, as the lightning zigzag between broad serrated
lines and the longitudinal hatchings with one line bordered
by dots are very common, as are also the flagged triangles,
so popular in the Little Colorado area. The ground is often
darker and redder at this time and may be slipped but not
Another type of Red -on -Buff seems to be characteristic of
the Santa Cruz valley. The ground color, unslipped, varies
from a light grayish buff to a darker reddish tone. The
pattern is made up of broad lines with interlocking hooks.
Some of these lines are very broad and are filled with crosshatching, others with interlocked scrolls, while others, not
so wide, are plain, solid red, This type of design approximates to a certain extent the patterns used on the Black -onRed of the Middle Gila and the Tucson Polychrome.
At about this same time a slipped and polished Red -onBuff was also being made in this southern area. Bowls are
most numerous, though ollas and pitchers have been found.
The exterior of the bowl is frequently decorated with groups
of parallel lines, the outer one bordered with dots (or short
lines), or with long, narrow, sloping triangles, or else with
fringed triangles and scrolls. The interior is smudged black
and beautifully burnished (Plate XXI) .
Though the
technique of these bowls is frequently somewhat careless, the
impressionistic effect is pleasing. There are variations of
this type of bowl, one of which has not only a decoration on
the exterior but also a band around the rim on the interior
in red on a gray ground which seems to be slightly smudged
(Plate XXIV). Another bowl was smudged black after the
pattern was painted on; this has darkened the red considerably. Sherds have been found on which the red resign is
painted over the smudged black background. Some bowls
and ollas have such large firing clouds that they are half Red on -Buff and half Red -on- Black. A different effect is given
to these Red-on-Buff bowls by the addition of white lines and
dots to the red pattern, which combination perhaps might be
called a Hohokam polychrome.
A curious pitcher (Plate XXXII) has been found at the
University Ruin near Tucson, which may possibly be one of
the missing links between Black -on -White types and the Hohokam. The pitcher is gray and the pattern is in black. It is
not, however, a Black -on -White pattern but on the contrary
one that contains elements typical of the Red -on -Buff wares.
Though the background of Red -on -Buff pieces is often
burned or smudged gray, this does not seem to be the. case
Plate XXXII. -A Black -on -Gray pot.
Number 6287 in the Arizona State Museum. Found at University Ruin
near Tucson by the University of Arizona expedition of 1933. Long
diameter ár8 inches, short diameter 5 3/16 inches, height 5 inches,
opening 378 inches.
here, since the pattern is also gray. When a Red -on -Buff
piece is burned a second time, as when the house burns down,
the pattern still remains red.
Another uncommon Hohokam piece is a Black -on -Buff
olla found at Martínez Hill Ruin. Except for the lack of
red it suggests a Chihuahua pot in its color but is not of such
a fine finish. The pattern is such as might be found on a
Red -on -Buff olla of the late type. The later potters of this
area did not keep so strictly to old customs and color schemes
as had their sisters in earlier times.
The period of time during which this Hohokam culture
existed has not yet been decided by the tree -ring method, but
cross finds suggest that the early Red -on -Buff was contemporary with the Black -on -White of the Early Pueblo period,
and that the type in its different stages existed all through
the great period of Southwestern art. Mr. Woodward of
the Los Angeles Museum found half a bowl of early Black- on -White of northern type at the Grewe Site and Dr. Cum -.
mings has found at Hayden the same juxtaposition of the
two types of ware.
While the Hohokam people were making themselves at
home in the Gila valley, another group was settling itself
in the valley of the Salt river. These people seem to have
come from the northeast, bringing with them an early type
of Black -on -White pottery, which developed into what is
known as the Roosevelt type. This pottery went through the
same stages as did the pottery to the north, the earlier pieces
showing fine lines, dots, and triangles, followed by the broad
lines and triangles. Later both the Kayenta negative patterns and the balanced solid and hatched elements were used.
The Tularosa type of pattern, however, dominated to such
an extent that Roosevelt pottery is frequently classed under
that name. It does, however, have certain individualities
of its own which makes typical pieces easy to recognize. The
small globular pitchers (Plate XXXI I I) though of Tularosa
shape and decorated with a Tularosa pattern do not have the
Plate XXXIII.- Roosevelt Black -on- White.
Globular pitcher found in the Roosevelt district.
animal handles (except rarely), and they do have a characteristic decoration of broad lines or some simple figure on
the neck. The zonal pattern around the body is bounded
above and below by definite lines, whereas the Tularosa design frequently finishes in the form of a star. This detail
shows only if one looks at the bottom of the pitcher or olla.
This later phase of Roosevelt Black -on -White seems to be
identical with the Little Colorado Black -on -White ware of
the same period. The elements of design used may have
come from several places: from Chaco canyon, perhaps
through the medium of the Puerco river ware; from Kay enta, seemingly filtered through the Turkey Hill type; and
Plate XXXIV. -Bowl from Roosevelt district.
Diameter 6Y8 inches, depth 38 inches.
from the Little Colorado where the Tularosa type was found.
The Roosevelt potters welded all these borrowings into a
very presentable Tularosa type of their own.
They had meantime not been neglecting the possibilities
of the Black -on -Red ware and were, it would seem, ready
to make some experiments. Apparently they first tried corn bining the two types in the same piece of pottery. There is,
in the Hawley collection, in Miami, a pitcher with a Black on -Red body and a Black -on -White neck. This is not a
pleasing piece but is an interesting experiment in the combination of the two types. At last they hit upon a better
combination at about the same time apparently as did the
Little Colorado and Upper Gila areas. This very satisfactory solution of the problem produced the beautiful Early
Gila Polychrome which was briefly discussed under the Up-
per Gila types and illustrated in Plate XIX.
This hand-
some ware is found extensively in the eastern and northern
parts of the Middle Gila area where there has been contact
with the Upper Gila and the Little Colorado, in fact with
the Tularosa.
During the time when the Early Gila Polychrome had
been developing in the north and east, other types of Polychrome were in process of evolution in the south. The people in the main Gila river drainage, perhaps the Hohokam
themselves, had not been idle, but had produced a Black on -Red ware unlike that found along the eastern border of
the area where the influence of the Upper Gila types was
so strongly felt. This ware is of a deeper, richer red than
are the wares of the Upper Gila and it is also very different
in its decoration. Instead of the balanced solid and hatched
patterns, these southern Middle Gila potters used only a
very broad line combined with stepped and triangular figures
of various kinds. This type of pattern strongly resembles
the decoration on the Red -on -Buff ware of this region at this
time. A few jars and a number of sherds have been found
at Martínez Hill Ruin and at University Ruin near Tucson.
From these small numbers it is perhaps to be inferred that
this phase of pottery decoration did not last long, but was
soon merged into the type of Late Gila Polychrome known
as Tucson Polychrome.
The only difference between this Polychrome and the
Black -on -Red is that the broad black lines are outlined in
white. Thus, in many cases, it is difficult to be sure of the
type of a given piece, since the white lines are often very
faint and are frequently wholly obliterated. It is possible
even that the pieces of Gila red ware chosen for illustration
may after all be Polychrome pots. There is, however, one
detail which may serve to differentiate the Black -on -Red
from the Polychrome pots even when the white is entirely
gone and that is the fact that the bottom of the Polychrome
pot is sometimes left of the natural clay color below the lower
border line of the design.
This, after the Red -on -Buff, is perhaps the most typical
decorated ware of the Middle Gila area. At Casa Grande
and other sites west of Tucson, this Polychrome ware seems
directly to overlie the Red -on -Buff. Indeed, it seems to be
only in the eastern and northern parts of the area that the
early type of Gila Polychrome has been shown by strati graphic tests to be directly under the later type, and even
here, in some sites the two wares seem to have been found
on the same level.
The difference between these two types of Polychromes is
that of conservatism and impressionism in art. The excellent
brushwork of the early Polychrome shows great care in its
execution, strongly resembling, indeed, both the Mimbres
and the best of the Tularosa ware in this particular. The
patterns used, though beautiful in proportion and arrangement, are of a very conservative geometric type. As a great
contrast to this ware comes the late type with large bold impressionistic patterns splashed on with haste and careless
enthusiasm. Both spirit and execution call to mind the work
of the early Hohokam potter, though by this time the ele-
ments used are largely those from the north.
elements in use are : the bird wing; the curved or rectilinear
scroll with its triangular tail ornamented with a picot or
sawtooth edge; the serrated line which was so commonly
used on the early Kayenta Polychrome; the broad line with
its opening for the exit of evil; the stepped figure which is
a cloud symbol to the Hopi; the corn symbol; and all types
of hatching, very carelessly done, with perhaps a more frequent use of crosshatching than of the others. Black is
used boldly and in large masses. The field of the design
is frequently divided into two parts with the pattern reversed on the opposite side, reflecting it as in a mirror. The
fourfold division also continued in use and asymmetric designs are found which recall the patterns on the Polychrome
wares of the Little Colorado area. The color of the ground
is a deep cream rather than a white, indeed it is almost café
au lait. For some reason this slip shows innumerable fine
The black is a good clear black. The red slip on
the outside is slightly pinkish in tone though there is concrackles.
siderable variation in color.
This popular style seems to have lasted for a long time
and to have been the one in common use all over the Middle
Gila district. As might be expected there are a number of
local variations. One type is called Casa Grande Polychrome by those in charge of Casa Grande, even though it
is as true to type as that which comes from Fort Apache
(Plate XXVIII), and from the Roosevelt district, and is not
nearly so individual as the queer gaudy bowl from Christmas.
Indeed, there seem to be two types of this Late Gila Poly-
chrome, which is brought out more clearly at Casa Grande
than elsewhere, since the excavators report a distinct break
between the two. This second type makes use of red as an
integral part of the pattern (Plate XXIX).
This type of Polychrome shows an even closer relationship
to the Hohokam pottery than does the Late Gila Polychrome. The bowl illustrated has a reddish exterior and a
creamy white slip on the interior. The pattern, in red and
purple, is very similar to one used on Red -on -Buff bowls,
and the color of the paint is also very similar to the purplish
tone used on the early Red -on -Buff found in Nogales, in
the same excavation. With these pieces was found a seed
bowl of brown paste with an interlocked scroll painted in
the same purple (or red -purple) color.
There are three culture areas in the Southwest which are
so intimately connected with the pottery of Arizona that
they cannot be entirely left out of this discussion. These are
the Rio Grande, the Chihuahua, and the Mimbres districts.
In the Rio Grande are the Zuñi people who seem to be
so closely connected with the Hopi that the Little Colorado
is probably ancestral to both of them, though this does not
particularly concern the pottery under consideration. There
are, however, two prehistoric wares from this region which
show some connection with the Black -on -White pottery of
Arizona. The sherds from Forked Lightning suggest contact with the north, while the Chupadero ware more closely
resembles the Tularosa and the Mimbres.
The Mimbres pottery from southern New Mexico is
close to that of the Upper Gila region both in space and
in time. That they resemble each other closely cannot be
denied since both make use of solid black and hatched elements in much the same way. Indeed, it is sometimes difficult to distinguish between the two. However, few Mimbres
sherds have so far been reported from the Tularosa district, though Tularosa sherds were found in the Swarts Ruin
in the Mimbres area. These, as well as the Chupadero
sherds, were found with the later Mimbres ware. Perhaps
Mimbres ware is ancestral to both these types, which would
account for the strong family resemblance. Very superior
technique and an unusually great number of zoomorphic
motives characterize this ware. In color it is usually black
on white though the white has often turned to a deep cream
color and the black to a reddish brown from too intense
firing. Mimbres Polychrome is not unlike the Black -onWhite except for the addition of a yellowish buff color in
certain areas of the design.
Later than the Mimbres ware and about contemporary
with the Late Gila Polychrome is the handsome pottery
from Chihuahua. This is a Polychrome ware with the
pattern in red and blue -black on a buff ground. In the
designs longitudinal hatching and the balanced triangular
and stepped elements suggest the Mimbres ware, only in
this case the balanced figures are in black and red on buff
instead of being black and hatched on white. Another
link is the excellent technique. The buff ground is often
of much the same color as the ground in early Red -on -Buff;
even the red is similar, so that when a sherd shows only
red lines it would be easy to mistake it for Red -on -Buff,
if it were not for the better polish of the Chihuahua sherds.
Though this pottery does not resemble the Late Gila Polychrome in its decoration, it is possible to compare the effigy
vases of the two styles since both made ducks, and also
human effigy vases, which are very much alike in shape.
This Chihuahua pottery is like that of. the Southwest in
its pattern elements but it is unlike it in the use of red
areas to balance black ones, and in the use of one element,
the "leaf" motive.
On the chart, Comparative Study of Design Elements,
fifty elements of design used by the prehistoric Indians of the
Southwest are illustrated. Since every system of grouping
seemed in some way unsatisfactory, this simple one was
decided upon. The elements of design are placed under
the following headings: dots; lines; hatchings; triangles
and stepped figures; meanders and scrolls; bird wings; and
life forms. The names used to describe the individual
units are:
1. Dots used to fill areas.
2. Dots used to border lines or triangles.
3. The corn symbol, a dot in a rectangle or circle.
4. Fine lines used to outline solid figures.
5. Broad lines.
6. Very broad lines outlined in black or color.
7. Wavy lines.
8. Zigzag lines.
9. Fringed lines and ticked edges.
10. Groups of lines in a given area.
11. Picot edge, sometimes called a sawtooth edge.
12. Longitudinal hatching.
13. Diagonal hatching.
14-. Crosshatching.
15. Diagonal crosshatching.
16. Checkerboard; this also may be diagonal.
17. Long, narrow, slanting triangles bordering a line.
18. Right angle and isosceles triangles bording a line or
19. Lightning zigzag between rows of triangles of solid
20. Same white line between solid and hatched triangles.
21. Border of white rectangles (points of triangles meet).
22. Hour glass, butterfly, or double triangle.
23. Solid and . hatched chevrons.
24. Triangle with rectangular hook.
25. Triangle with double (or triple) rectangular hook.
26. Triangle with stepped hook.
27. Triangle with curved hook.
28. Stepped triangle.
29. Interlocked stepped figure.
30. Stepped line.
31. Cloud symbol, stepped.
32. Simple meander, of which there are other forms.
33. Triangular water symbol.
34. Fringed rectangular interlocking figure (rectilinear
scroll) .
35. Rectilinear scroll bordered with dots.
36. Interlocked rectilinear scroll.
37. Rectilinear scroll and triangle with stepped, fringed,
dotted, or picot edge.
38. One form of cross.
39. Scroll, running or interlocked.
40. Interlocked scroll with wing.
41. Winged scroll.
42. Giant scroll, balanced and hatched units.
43: Broad circular line with gate for exit of evil (lifeline).
44. Curved wing.
45. Rectilinear wing.
46. Triangular wing.
47. Bird.
48. Animal: dog, bear, goat, fish, etc.
4-9. Man, either whole or in part.
S 0. Snake.
This chart was made after a study of 220 pieces of pottery in the Arizona State Museum (except for five of the
Mimbres bowls which came from another collection).
II 1=
- r)
ro N)
e) a
"U 0
- --
__ _
NN -
a o-
- tT
-en en
-T ----
- -
a N
M- -
-N N
pieces of pottery of each one of the twenty -two different
types were examined, and the different figures used in the
design listed and counted. This is, of course, a very small
number of pots from which to draw any very definite conclusions. The study of Indian pottery must, however, begin somewhere and these two hundred or more pieces in
the Arizona State Museum serve as the starting point. Certain resemblances which are indicated by this chart will have
to be proved or disproved by further study. It is, indeed,
fully realized that impressions based on the study of this
small group may, or may not, be facts.
In the plates an attempt has been made to illustrate á
piece of pottery typical in design, shape, and color of its
period and area; although in one illustration only, it is almost impossible to convey an adequate idea of local peculiarities, and bring out at all clearly in what essentials one
type differs from another, since the grouping of the units
of design used makes up a design complex which is capable
of great variation.
With this candle lighting the path, the following temporary conclusions are suggested:
On these 220 pieces of pottery the 50 different elements
of design were used 705 times in all.
Six hundred and
seventy of these units were geometric; and thirty -four were
life forms. Of the geometric figures only thirty -three were
made up of curves, unless dots be included, which brings
the number up to ninety -five. Even a casual observation
of Indian pottery would lead to this same conclusion, name-
ly, that straight lines and triangles are more frequently
used than curved lines, and that life forms are rare except
in certain localities.
Some of these units of design are found in almost every
area, and indeed in almost every style. These most com-
monly used 'units ate: narrow and broad lines, triangles,
and stepped figures. Of the remaining motives some are
used in certain localities and not in others, which makes
the separation of local types fairly easy, though there are
always some combinations which are a puzzle. In such cases
it is necessary to depend on paste, color, and shape for identification.
The combination of these different units, as well as the
way in which single units may be arranged to make up an
all over pattern, differs very much in the different areas.
Such, for instance, is the arrangement in four fields so
characteristic of the Kayenta region, or the zonal patterns
found at Mesa Verde, or the large repeated units so common in early Red -on -Buff. Each sub -area of the Southwest, and sometimes it seems as if each village, developed
its own individual type of pottery. Though these Indians
stayed at home enough to work out their own ideas, they
also travelled about enough, and probably also intermarried
enough, to have a certain amount of influence on each other's
pottery patterns.
Though it is more often the case that the different groups
are set off from each other by the way in which they group
the various elements of their designs, rather than by the
use of one single unit, it is none the less true that certain
groups are to be distinguished from others by the frequent
use of one motive alone. Thus, the use of the great scroll,
composed of balanced and hatched parts, sets off the Tula rosa Black -on -White and the Little Colorado Polychromes
from all other groups; and the so- called life line is found
more frequently in the Late Gila Polychrome than elsewhere (except in Hopi or Zuñi) . The use of life forms
also distinguishes some groups from all others. Thus, the
realistic figures of animals and men which the early Hohokam drew so frequently, and with such careless freedom,
are as unlike the carefully executed and somewhat formal
renderings of animal forms by the Mimbres people, as
these figures are unlike the conventionalized life symbols
of the Sikyatki type. Certain units of design occur in
groups which do not seem to be very closely related to each
other; but these patterns may be links in a chain of contacts.
For instance, a frequent use of the hooked triangle, the
one with a single hook, is found in the Kayenta pottery of
the Late Pueblo period, in the late Hohokam, and in the
still later Chihuahua. The serrated black lines used in
such a way as to leave a zigzag line between them are still
another link between the late Kayenta and the Hohokam
of the same period.
Scrolls with triangular tails with
fringed, dotted, scalloped, or picot edge, are found in late
Kayenta, in the late Hohokam, and in Late Gila Polychrome.
Another series of patterns links another group together.
The broad serrated lines, solid black and hatched balancing, are used in Upper Gila ware (including the Black -onRed and the Early Gila Polychrome), in the Little Colorado
Black -on- White, in the Polychrome wares from the Little
Colorado district, in the Mimbres, and in the Chihuahua.
In the Chihuahua ware, however, the balance is between
black and red rather than between black and hatched
In tracing the frequency of the use of the different units
of design, and in looking for similarities in the combination
and general arrangement of such units to make up the entire pattern, it would seem that there are two areas extending from north to south in the Southwest in which the designs used seem to be related. One of these areas includes
the Mimbres and Chupadero wares just over the border in
New Mexico, the Upper Gila wares (Tularosa, Black -on-
Red, and Early Gila Polychrome), the Black -on -White
and Polychrome wares of the Little Colorado, the Roosevelt pottery, and, strange to say, the Mesa Verde pottery in
Colorado. The other area in which the designs on the pottery seem to be to some extent homogeneous includes the
Kayenta region, and possibly that of Chaco canyon; the
Hohokam district of southern Arizona; and the Late Gila.
Polychrome from the same area. This distribution of patterns suggests an infiltration from Mexico by two routes, .
that of the Rio Grande, which led to the Little Colorado,
area as well as to Chaco canyon and north, and that of the
San Pedro and the Santa Cruz, which would lead to the
central part of Arizona, and influence not only the early
Red -on -Buff, but also both the late Red -on -Buff and the
Late Gila Polychrome, even though these two latter types
did mix to some extent with the influences coming from the
northern pueblos.
This question is one which cannot be left out entirely
from any discussion of Indian art. It is important in basketry and pottery as well as in the sacred sand paintings.
Even in Early Pueblo times there is some indication of
symbolic meaning, though many of the patterns are such
as came either from the technique of pottery or weaving.
The idea that artistic representations are magical dates back
some twenty -five or thirty thousand years, and the possibil-
ity of increase by magic is still a part of Indian belief. It
is perhaps possible that the more elaborate system of symbolism came in with the Toltec influence, perhaps in the
Eleventh or Twelfth Century, when rain magic became
so noticeable a trait in the culture of the northern Indians.
Perhaps Mexico had opened the eyes of the Southwest to
"a new philosophy of coercive art. "21 Then triangles came
to symbolize rain clouds, as did also the piled up semi-
circular figures so frequently used by the Hopi. Dots
hanging from lines meant the dripping rain drops, or the
gentle "she" rain, while the hatchings symbolized the "he"
rain. The scroll, in all its variations, is the water symbol,
as is the case with so many other peoples. Other figures
represent mountains, or corn, or butterflies, or the whirling
There is also the very powerful plumed serpent
which winds its zigzag way around so many Indian pots. It
is thus very evident that the need of rain to water the crops
dominates the symbolism of the Southwest.
In spite of a certain amount of evidence of contact with
Mexico, the art of pottery making seems to have been, to
all intents and purposes, invented, developed, and perfected
in the Southwest with very little outside influence. In the
San Juan area, in the Kayenta region as well as in Chaco
canyon over the border in New Mexico, there is a remarkably complete record of the earliest experiments with unfired
21Spinden, H. J., Indian Symbolism, Introduction to American Indian
Art, Santa Fe, 1932, p. 8.
pottery, of the first crude attempts at 'firing, of the first steps
in decoration, and of continued and uninterrupted improvement thereafter.
The beautiful ware of the Kayenta region had consider-
able influence, spreading into the Little Colorado area as
well as into that of the Hohokam people, whose work in
turn may have influenced the Kayenta pottery. The other
type of San Juan design which had come into being in Chaco
canyon, reached the same destination by another route and
both types were assimilated by the Little Colorado potters.
This Little Colorado area is a particularly interesting
one in that it has kept on making pottery all through the
ages of Indian pre- history, and it is still going on. It is
tempting to consider this area as the homeland of the "Tula -
rosa" type of pottery, because this seems to be the logical
step between the earlier Black -on -White and the various
Polychromes which came later. If the creation of this type
can be assigned to this region, the whole history of its patterns seems much more coherent.
Each group in the Southwest seems to have developed
its own individual type of pottery, which changed in color
as well as in design from one period to another without
losing its individuality. The urge to create new types
seems to have come from within quite as often as from without. In Early Pueblo times in particular, though there is
evidence of trading with one another to a small extent, the
influence of one type upon another is not marked. For
instance, the early Black -on -White and the early Hohokam
seemed to have little or no effect at all upon each other,
though trade pieces have been found which prove that they
were contemporary, and aware of the other's existence.
In the region around Tucson the Hohokam tried some
very interesting experiments. One of these was the making
of Black -on -Red pottery which they decorated with very
broad lines, terminating in interlocking stepped figures.
This type of design had already been tried out on a number
of Red -on -Buff pieces, which would seem to indicate that
the same potters were at work. Thus there appears to be
a sequence of types which connects the Red -on -Buff with
the Tucson Polychrome (the local variety of Late Gila
The question of the relation of Early and Late Gila
Polychromes to each other is an interesting and puzzling
one. They do not seem to be particularly closely related
except in the neighborhood of, Globe. In other places they
seem to come from different antecedents, and did not develop one from the other. From Bylas to Gila Bank Ruin,
and near the border of the eastern limit of the Middle Gila
area, the Early Gila Polychrome looks as if it might possibly be a descendant of the Tularosa type, coming through
the Upper Gila Black -on -Red. On the contrary, in the
central part of the Middle Gila area the Late Gila Polychrome seems to be very closely connected with the Hoho.
kam Red -on -Buff, lying as it does directly on top of it with
no early type between.
Toward the end of the Late Pueblo period this Late Gila
Polychrome reached its peak of development, at which
time it was a very varied style and widely distributed in
central and southern Arizona. These later potters made
use of all known elements of design and combined them in
many new ways. They produced some bizarre pots, of
course, but they also made many very beautiful pieces.
Contemporary with this Polychrome, but apparently not
related to it, was another eclectic ware, that of Chihuahua,
a very beautiful ware, usually better finished and more carefully decorated than the Gila ware. The formal patterns
and the relatively few units used contrast with the exhuberant fancy shown in the Gila patterns with their multitude of
different motives.
Fortunately this art of pottery making is not a lost art
among the Indians of today. In the Hopi villages of
Arizona and the Zuñi villages of New Mexico there are
potters whose work equals in skill, and rivals in beauty,
that of their great -great -grandmothers, and their more remote ancestors as well.
Amsden, Monroe.
1928: Archaeological reconnaissance in Sonora.
Papers, L. A., California.
Southwest Museum
Barret, S. A.
1905.-Basket designs of the Pomo Indians. American Anthropologist,
n. s. vol. 7, pp. 648-653.
Bingham, Hiram.
1924. -Machu Picchu, Yale University Press.
Biegen, C. W.
1922. -Excavations in Greece (Zigourdes). Art and Archaeology,
vols. 13, 14, pp. 209-216.
Boas, Franz.
1924. -Evolution or diffusion. American Anthropologist, n. s., vol. 26,
p. 340.
1927.-Primitive art. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Mass.
Breasted, J. H.
1932. -Mayan culture indigenous. El Palacio, vol. 32, nos. 17, 18,
p. 243, May 4.
Carnegie Institution of Washington.
Service Bulletin, vol. 2,
-The Maya of Middle America.
nos. 17, 18, 19, 20.
1932. -Pottery discoveries in ancient Maya grave. News Service Bulletin, vol. 2, no. 36.
Carey, Henry A.
1931. -An analysis of the Northwestern Chihuahua culture. American
Anthropologist, vol. 33, no. 3, pp. 361 -374.
Colton, Harold S.
1932. -A survey of prehistoric sites in the region of Flagstaff, Arizona.
Smithsonian Institution, Bureau of American Ethnology, Bulletin 104.
Chapman, Kenneth M.
1921. -What the potsherds tell. Art and Archaeology, vol. 11, pp.
1922. -Life forms in Pueblo pottery decoration. Art and Archaeology,
vol. 13, pp. 120 -122.
1923. -Casas Grandes pottery. Art and Archaeology, vol. 16, pp.
25 -34.
1927. -Post Spanish Pueblo pottery. Art and Archaeology, vol. 23,
p. 24.
1928. -Bird forms in Zulu pottery decoration. El Palacio, vol. 24,
pp. 23-25.
Corpus Vasorum Antiquorum, Musée du Louvre.
Fascicule I and IV. Printed in Paris.
Cummings, Byron.
1915. -Kivas of the San Juan drainage. American Anthropologist,
n. s., vol. 17, no. 2, pp. 272 -282.
1920. -The national monuments of Arizona.
Art and Archaeology,
vol. 10, pp. 27 -36.
1923. -The ruins of Cuicuilco. National Geographic Magazine, vol.
44, pp. 203 -220.
1923. -Cuicuilco, the oldest temple discovered in North America.
Art and Archaeology, vol. 16, July- August, pp. 51 -58.
Progressive Arizona,
November, 1926.
1932. -Three types of culture in one pueblo. El Palacio, vol. 32, no.
1926.- Ancient canals of the Casa Grande.
9, p. 128, March 2.
1932 -33.- Lecture notes -University of Arizona.
Cushing, Frank Hamilton.
1886. -A study of Pueblo pottery.
4th Annual Report, Bureau of
American Ethnology.
Darton, N. H.
1925. -A Resumé of Arizona geology. University of Arizona, Bulletin
Dixon, Roland B.
1928. -The building of cult ures. Charles Scribner's Sons, New York.
Douglass, A. E.
1929. -The secret of the Southwest solved by talkative tree rings.
The National Geographic Magazine, vol. 66, pp. 337 -770.
Fewkes, J. Walter.
1898.- Archæological expedition to Arizona (Sikyatki). 17th Annual Report of the Bureau of American Ethnol., p. 519.
1904. -Two summers' work in Pueblo ruins (4 Mile, Chaves Pass).
22nd Annual Report of the Bureau of American Ethnology.
1911.- Preliminary report - Navajo National Mounment. Bulletin
no. 50, Bureau of American Ethnology.
1911.- Antiquities of Mesa Verde national park. Bulletin no. 51,
Bureau of American Ethnology.
1914. -Archaeology of the Lower Mimbres valley, New Mexico.
Smithsonian Miscellaneous Collections, vol. 63, no. 10.
1919.- Designs on prehistoric Hopi pottery. 33rd Annual Report of
the Bureau of American Ethnology.
Ancient Zuñi pottery. University of Arizona Library, no.
A 9791, F 4-5 c.
1923.- Additional designs on prehistoric Mimbres pottery.
Smithsonian Miscellaneous Collections, vol. 76, no. 8.
1926. -Archeological field work in Arizona (Elden Pueblo). Smithsonian Miscellaneous Collections, vol. 78, no. 7.
1926. -An archaeological collection from Youngs canyon near Flagstaff. Smithsonian Institution, no. 2833.
Figgins, J. D.
1931. -An additional discovery of the association of a Folsom artifact
and fossil mammal remains. Proceedings of the Colorado Museum of Natural History.
Franchet, L.
1911. -Céramique primitive, Libraire Paul Gauthier, 68 Rue Mazarine.
Gabel, Norman.
1932.- Martínez Hill Ruin. University of Arizona thesis.
Gamio, Manuel.
1922. -La poblacíon del valle de Teotihuacán. Published in Mexico.
1924. -The sequence of cultures in Mexico. American Anthropologist, n. s., vol. 26, p. 307.
1926.- Cultural evolution in Guatemala. Art and Archaeology, vol.
22, pp. 203 -223.
Gidley, James W.
1927. -Evidence of early man in Florida. Smithsonian Miscellaneous
Collections, vol. 78, no. 7.
Gifford, E. W.
1928. -Pottery making in the Southwest. University of California
Publications, vol. 23, no. 8.
Gladwin, H. S.
1927.- Excavations at Casa Grande. Southwest Museum Papers, Los
Angeles, Cal.
Goddard, Pliny Earle.
1931.- Pottery of the Southwestern Indians. Guide Leaflet no. 73 of
the American Museum cf Natural History.
Grahm, David Crokett.
.1932. -The ancient caves of Szechwan province, China. Proceedings
of the U. S. National Museum, vol. 80, Article 16, pp. 1 -13.
Guernsey, Samuel James.
1921.- Basket Maker caves of northeastern Arizona. Papers of the
Peabody Museum, Cambridge, Mass.
1931.- Explorations in northeastern Arizona. Papers of the Peabody
Museum, Cambridge, Mass.
Guthe, Carl E.
1925.- Pueblo pottery making. Yale University Press.
Haeberlin, Herman K.
1919. -Types of ceramic art in the valley of Mexico. American Anthropologist, n. s., vol. 21, p. 61.
Hanna, Murel W.
1931. An archaeological review of Middle Gila culture. University
of Arizona thesis.
Hargrave, I,. C.
1932.-A guide to forty pottery types, Northern Arizona Society of
Science and Art, Flagstaff, Arizona.
Harrington, M. R.
1930.-The mystery of Gypsum cave.
Scientific American.
July, p.
Hartt, Charles Ford.
1875. -On the evolution of ornament. Popular Science Monthly.
Haury, Emil.
1932. -The age of lead glaze decorated pottery of the Southwest.
American Anthropologist, n. s., vol. 34, July- Sept., pp. 418426.
1931. -Recently dated Pueblo ruins in Arizona. Smithsonian Miscellaneous Collections, vol. 82, no. 11.
1932. -Roosevelt 9.6, a Hohokam site. The Medallion, Globe, Arizona.
Hawley, Florence.
1929.- Prehistoric pottery pigments in the Southwest.
thropologist, vol. 31, no. 4, pp. 731 -754.
American An-
1930. -Prehistoric pottery and culture relations in the Middle Gila.
American Anthropologist, vol. 32, no. 3, pp. 522 -536.
1932. -The Bead Mountain pueblos of Southern Arizona.
Art and
Archaeology, vol. 33, no. 5, Sept. -Oct.
Hewett, Edgar L.
1904. -A general view of the archaeology of the Pueblo region. Annual Report of the Smithsonian Institution.
1918. -The Pajaritan culture. American Journal of Archmology, vol.
13, no. 3,p. 341.
1921. -The Chaco canyon and its ancient monuments. Art and Archaeology, vols. 11, 12, January, pp. 3 -28.
1930. -Ancient life in the American Southwest. Bobbs -Merrill Co.
Hodge, F. W.
1921.- Turquoise work of Hawikuh, New Mexico. Heye Foundation, New York, Leaflet no. 2.
1931 -32.- Introduction to American Indian art. Exposition of Indian
tribal arts, Santa Fe.
Holmes, William H.
1886.- Origin and development of form and ornament in ceramics.
4th Annual Report of the Bureau of American Ethnology.
Ancient pottery of the Mississippi valley. 4th Annual Report
of the Bureau of American Ethnology.
Pottery of the ancient pueblos. 4th Annual Report of the
Bureau of American Ethnology.
A study of the textile art in its relation to pottery. 6th Annual Report of the Bureau of American Ethnology.
Hooton, Earnest Albert.
1932. -Up from the ape. Macmillan Co.
1932. -The Indians of Pecos. Yale University Press.
Hough, Walter.
1901.- Archæological field work in northeastern Arizona. Report
of the U. S. National Museum, pp. 279 -358.
1907.- Antiquities of the Upper Gila and Salt River valleys. Bulletin
no. 35 of the Bureau of American Ethnology.
1914.- Cultures of the ancient pueblos of the Upper Gila region.
Bulletin 87 of the U. S. National Museum.
1917. -A revival of the ancient Hopi pottery art. American Anthropologist, vol. 17, pp. 322 -323.
1928.-The lead glaze decorated pottery of the Pueblo region. American Anthropologist, n. s., vol. 30, p. 243.
1931. -Decorative designs on Elden Pueblo pottery, Flagstaff, Arizona.
Proceedings of the U. S. National Museum, vol. 81, art. 7, pp.
1 -11.
1932. -A cache of Basket Maker baskets from New Mexico. Proceedings of the U. S. National Museum, vol. 81, art. 7, pp. 1 -3.
Hrdlicka, Ales.
1923. -The origin and antiquity of the American Indian.
ian Report, pp. 481 -494.
Jeançon, J. A.
1923. -Excavations in the Chama valley, New Mexico.
Bureau of American Ethnology.
Jenks, Albert Ernest.
Bulletin 81,
1931. -The significance of mended bowls in the Mimbres Culture.
El Palacio, vol. 31, nos. 10 -11, p. 153.
Judd, Neil M.
1926. -Archaeological observations north of the Rio Colorado. Bulletin 82 of the Bureau of American Ethnology.
1927. -Investigation in Chaco canyon. Smithsonian Miscellaneous
Collections, vol. 78, no. 7.
Kidder, Alfred Vincent.
1920. -Ruins of the Historic period in the San Juan, N. M. American Anthropologist, vol. 22, pp. 322 -329.
1924. -An introduction to the study of Southwestern archaeology.
Yale University Press.
1 926.-The trend of archaeological research.
Art and Archaeology,
vols. 21, 22, pp. 223 -224.
1932. -The pottery of Pecos. Yale University Press.
Kroeber, A. L.
1923. -Anthropology. Harcourt, Brace and Co.
1926. -Culture stratifications in Peru. American Anthropologist, vol.
28, p. 331.
1927.-The Uhle collection from Chincha. University of Cal. Publications, vol. 21.
1928.- Native culture of the Southwest.
tions, vol. 23, no. 9.
University of Cal. Publica-
1930. -A paper on ancient man in Ecuador.
Read before the Na-
tional Academy of Sciences.
Liang, Ssu Yung.
1930. -New Stone Age pottery from the Prehistoric site at Hsi -yin
Tsun, Shansi, China. Memoirs of American Anthropology
Assn., no. 37.
Lockwood, Frank C.
1932.- Pioneer days in Arizona. Macmillan Co.
Lumholtz, Karl.
1902.- Unknown Mexico. Chas. Scribner's Sons.
1909. -A remarkable ceremonial vessel from Cholula. American Anthropologist, vol. 11, pp. 199-201.
MacCurdy, George Grant.
1916. -The octopus motive in ancient Chriquian art. American An-
thropologist, vol. 18, pp. 366-383.
McGregor, J. C.
1929. -The cotton industry of the ancients. Progressive Arizona, vol.
8, no. 3, p. 13.
1931. -Archaeology of the Little Colorado area. University of Arizona thesis.
Marquina, Ignacio.
1928. -Monumentos arqueológicos.
Maudsley, A. P.
Published by the Mexican Gov-
1928. -The discovery and conquest of Mexico. Translated from the
Spanish of Bernal Diaz del Castillo, 1517 -1521. George Rout Edge and Sons, London.
Mason, Otis T.
1904. -Aboriginal American basketry. Annual Report of the U. S.
National Museum, pp. 185 -548.
Medallion Series, The (Gladwin, H. S.).
1929. -The Red on Buff culture of the Gila basin. Privately printed
for the Medallion, Globe, Ariz.
1929. -The Red on Buff culture of the Papaguería.
1930. -The western range of the Red on Buff culture.
1930.-An archaeological survey of the Verde valley.
1930. -A method for the designation of pottery types.
1931. -Some Southwestern pottery types.
Mera, H. P.
1931. -Chupadero Black on White. Bulletin 1, Archaeological Survey, the Laboratory of Anthropology, Santa Fe.
1932. -Wares ancestral to Tewa Polychrome. Laboratory of Anthropology, Santa Fe.
Merwin, Raymond E. and Valiant, George C.
1932. -The ruins of Holmul, Guatemala. Memoirs of the Peabody
Museum, Cambridge, Mass.
Morris, Earl H.
1915. -The excavation of a ruin near Aztec, N. M. The American
Anthropologist, n. s., vol. 17, no. 4, p. 666.
1917. -The place of coiled ware in Southwestern pottery. The
American Anthropologist, n. s., vol. 19, pp. 24 -29.
1919. - Preliminary account of the antiquities of the region between
the Manos and La Plata rivers in s. w. Colorado. American
Anthropologist, vol. 22, pp. 285 -288.
1925. -Exploring in the Canyon of Death. National Geographic
Magazine, vol. 48, no. 3, pp. 263 -300.
1927. -The beginnings of pottery making in the San Juan area. Anthropological Papers, American Museum of Natural History,
vol. 28.
1931. -The Temple of the Warriors at Chichen Itza, Yucatan. Carnegie Institution of Washington.
Morss, Noel.
1927. -Archaeological explorations on the Middle Chinlee, 1925.
American Anthropological Memoirs, no. 34.
1931. -Notes on the archaeology of the Kaibito and Rainbow plateaus
in Arizona.
Papers of the Peabody Museum, Cambridge,
Morley, S. J.
1931.- Unearthing America's ancient history.
Magazine, vol. 60, pp. 99 -126, July.
National Geographic
Nusbaum, Jesse L.
1922. -A Basket Maker cave in Kane County, Utah.
Heye Foun-
dation, Notes and Monographs, pp. 138 -144.
Pepper, George H.
1902. -The ancient Basket Makers of southeastern Utah. American Museum of Natural History. Supplement to American
Museum Journal, vol. 2, no. 4.
1905.- Ceremonial objects and ornaments from Pueblo Bonito.
American Anthropologist, n. s., vol. 7, no. 2, p. 183.
1920.- Pueblo Bonito. Anthropological Papers of the American
Museum of Natural History, vol. 27.
Prudden, T. Mitchell.
1918. -A further study of Small House Ruins in the San Juan
Memoirs of the American Anthropological Asso-
ciation, vol. 5, p. 3.
Pinkley, Edna Townslev.
1926. -Casa Grande, the greatest Valley Pueblo. Arizona Archæological and Historical Society.
Russell, Frank.
1908. -The Pima Indians.
26th Annual Report of the Bureau of
American Ethnology, pp. 17 -389.
Renaud, (Abel) Etienne Bernardeau.
1926.- Uncovering the First Americans.
Forum, vol. 75, pp. 109-
1929.- Prehistoric female figurines.
Scientific Monthly, vol. 28, pp.
Roberts, Frank H. H., Jr.
1927. -A late Basket Maker village of the Southwest. Explorations
and Field Work of the Smithsonian Institution in 1927.
1929. -Recent archaeological developments in the vicinity of El Paso,
Texas. Smithsonian Misc. Collections, vol. 81, no. 7.
1929.- Shabik'eschee village. Bulletin 92, Bureau of American,
1930. -Early Pueblo ruins in the Piedra district, Colorado.
etin 96, Bureau of American Ethnology.
1931. -The ruins of Kiatuthlan_na, Arizona. Bulletin 100, Bureau
of American Ethnology.
1932. -The village of the Great Kivas, New Mexico. Bulletin I I I,
Bureau of American Ethnology.
Sauer, Carl and Brand, Donald.
1920. -Pueblo sites in southeastern Arizona. University of Cal. Publication in Geography, vol. 3, no. 7.
Shetrone, H. C.
The Mound Builders. A. Appleton and Co.
Schmidt, Erich H.
1928. -Time relations of prehistoric pottery types in southern AriAnth. Papers of American Museum of Natural History,
vol. 30, part 5.
Spier, Leslie.
1918. -Notes on some Little Colorado ruins. Anthropological Papers
of the American Museum of Natural History, vol. 18, part
Spinden, H. J.
1928.- Ancient civilizations of Mexico. Anthropological Handbook
Fund, N. Y.
1932. -Fine art and the First Americans. Introduction to American
Indian art, exposition of Indian tribal arts, Santa Fe.
1932. -Indian symbolism. Introduction to American Indian art, ex
position of Indian tribal arts, Santa Fe.
Stallings, W. S.
193 1.-El Paso Polychrome, Bulletin no. 3, Laboratory of Anthropology, Santa Fe.
1932. -Notes on the Pueblo culture ih south central New Mexico.
American Anthropologist, vol. 34, no.
Stock, Chester.
1931.- Problems of antiquity presented by Gypsum cave, Nevada.
Scientific Monthly, January.
Stevenson, James.
Collections of Southwestern pottery (Zuñi). A. R. 2, Bureau
of American Ethnology.
Steward, Julian H.
1929.- Diffusion and independent invention. American Anthropologist, n. s., vol. 31.
Tozzer, Alfred M.
1907. -A comparative study of the Mayas and Lacandones. Archaeological Institute of America.
Vaillant, George C.
1930.- Excavations at Zacatenco. Anthropological Papers of the
American Museum of Natural History, vol. 32, part 1.
1931.- Excavations at Ticoman. Anthropological Papers of the American Museum of Natural History, vol. 32, part 2.
1932. -Stratigraphical research in Central Mexico. Proceedings of
the National Academy of Sciences, vol. 18, no. 7, pp. 487490.
1932. -Some resemblances in the ceramics of Central and North
America. The Medallion, Globe, Arizona.
Valcanel, Louis E.
1932. -Arte antiguo peruano.
Revista del Museo Nacional, Lima.
Wilson, Mrs. L. L. W.
1918. -Hand sign or Avanu.
American Anthropologist, vol. 20, pp.
311 -313.
Wissler, Clark.
1917. -The American Indian.
Oxford University Press.
Woodward, Arthur.
The Grewe site.
Los Angeles Museum, Occasional Papers, 1.
Though all the illustrations in this paper were made
from pottery in the Arizona State Museum in Tucson, it
was the author's privilege to visit and study other collections, including:
The Los Angeles Museum, Los Angeles, California
The Museum of San Diego, California
The Museum at Casa Grande, Arizona
Gila Pueblo, Globe, Arizona
The Hawley Collection, Miami, Arizona
The Museum at Santa Fe, New Mexico
The Field Museum, Chicago, Illinois
The Museum of the Heye Foundation, New York
The Peabody Museum in Boston, Mass.
The Museum at Sieur de Mont Spring, Bar
iltnturrst#g of Arizona Ihthlirtt#inns
General Bulletins
Technical Bulletins
Annual Reports
Agricultural Extension Circulars
Annual Reports
Abstract of Theses for Higher Degrees
Loan Play Library Announcement
Summer Session Announcement
University Announcement of Courses
Moving Pictures and Slides Announcement
Financial Report of the Board of Regents
Correspondence Courses Announcement
Arizona Bureau of Mines Bulletins
Fine Arts Bulletins
Humanities Bulletins
Social Science Bulletins
Biological Science Bulletins
Physical Science Bulletins
General Bulletins
Published quarterly with the cooperation of Arizona Pioneers Historical Society
Copies of the above publications may be obtained by request to the
Director of the Mailing Bureau, University of Arizona, Tucson, Arizona.
A charge of twenty -five cents is made for the University of Arizona Announcement of Courses, and a nominal charge is made for University of
Arizona Bulletins.
Eleanor Parker Clarke
I -,II
from original copy of thesis used by
printer for University of Arizona
Social Science Bulletin no. 9.
A Kayenta Bowl
Number 15910 in the Arizona State iiuseum. FounL in the
LukPchukai lountains in northern Arizona by the University
of Arizona summer ezpedition, 1927.
Liameter 5 and 1/2 incnes, depth 3 inches.
Plate II
.., '',.
1 ' . .. ,,++^'f
,.w«. r
,,,, Mv
+ {
A x,1ack and
:uabEr 170 in
. -
Arizona State .1,se,111.
2t :ubul in; Spring, a bra.ncLï of tne
Nava_ jo rescrwtion, Lrizona, by the University of
Arizona exJeoition in 1916.
Hei, nt Ganc! 1/6 incnes, aianeter 9, opening 5 ana 3/8..
__Lac i
aaiaber 458 in thE: Arizona State -.useuin
From the
colltction. round at Paoopka. Property of
the Arizona Archaeological and Historical Society.
Diameter 7 and 3/8 inches, depth 3 ana 5/8 inches,
A Black an ';'v hite Kayenta Ulla
Found at Kaycuddy Wash., near Kayenta, deeply buried
in a room in a cave. Found by
University of Arizona
expedition of 1)20. Approximate dimensions; rieiaht 1) ingles,
diameter 17 and 1/2 , opening 7 ¡nd 1/4 inanes.
A -1_-1ack ana
:lite Jlia
found near Kayenta ny the UniVersity of Arizona
expedition. Approximate dimensions are; height 10 ifiches,
diameter 12 inches and opening 6 and 1/2 inches.
Plate VI
A Black on .,nite '..Tegative" .2itcher
Nu.nber 1,274 in trie Arizona State -useum
_..ouna in a burial in líaycuaay x ash, near iayenta, by the
Jniv,.osity or Arizona expedition in 1920.
HeiL-t L &inc., 1/2 inciles, dia-neter 5 and j/8, o)ening
Plate VII
A Kayenta Jila
lound at Turkey .iill Huin near FlaLstaff and no
irizona State .useum. University of i.rizona expedition
in 1.;27. Approximate dimensions; height 12 and 1/2 inches,
diaLeter 1 j and 1/2,ppening 5 and 1/2 inches.
Plate VIII
owl with Ne ga tive pattern
Found i n Sag i e Canyon near Kayenta by the Unive r sity
of .Ar izona. expedit i on i n 1916 and nov. i n the Ar iz ona State
Mus eum . Di ameter 12 ana 3/4 i nches , d8p t n 5 ~no 1/ 2 inches .
Plate IX
E.ayentE Elacic on rted
umber 2511 in the Arizona State Museu.n. A seed jar
found in Kaycuddy i.ash near Kayenta by ti ic Jniversity of
Arizona expedition in 1919. Dimensions; dia.ieter 7 and 5/8,
neiE;Iat 4, ana openin_
Plate X
Kayenta Black on
A s;Lall seed bowl founti in Kaycuddy
ash near Kayenta
by the University of Arizona expedition in 1920. Aproximate
di:nensions, dia:IletE,r 4 and 1/4 inc.hes, heiEht 3 and 1/2,
opening 1 End 3/8 inches.
Plate XI
Kayenta Black on Rea
l\iu:nber 181b2 in trie ilrizonG State -luseum. i'ound
near Kayenta by the University of Arizona expedition.
Height 5a_nd 1/2 inches, diameter 2 Ent 5/8 incues and
openinL .
4 anc 5/8 inches.
Plate XII
rLayenta Polychrome
An olla found by Dr. Cuafmins in 1928 in Kaycuddy
'Wash, five miles from, 1.:ayentaApproximate dimensions are;
height 7 and 1/2 inches, diameter 8 an6 1/2, jpeninE: 3 and 1/2
Pl&t, XIII
'lied on LAlfz
216-in Li;
Ltate ..A.useum. Founa neer
ieyenta, ArizonE, by tiic. University of Arizona Expedition
in 1919. DiaJletr 5 Eric 1/3 inc;_iLs,
ni-iff_,t, 4
J.Lais olle was foana in e cavc in i\itEic Canyon in
1916 by tile University of Arizona 61.2_olition. Approxiihrte
6.i_fitnsions; neLfat 7 and 1/4
uie_aLte_r 9 enQI 1/
Plat'-. XV
Eyenta Polycllroile Bowl no. J747
r'ouna at Tac lini Point near ., arsh Pass Ly tie Jni vers ity of
Arizona Expedition in 1923 in the lot, er burial ground.
.aeter 10 incc s, depth 6 inches.
Plate XVI
Blac i on
rdte ritcaer
From the puerco i fiver in the Little Colorado area.
Diameter 5 1/2 inches, height 6 3/8 inches, opening; 3 1/2.
Obtained in exchange with San iego :,Euseum, 1917.
lumber 2622, Arizona State _.ï_,seum.
Plate XVII
Little Colorado Pitcher
Tularosa type. Number 19244 in the Arizona State
iduseu.a. iorom the Scores qollection. Founb near Holbrook
and presented by Gila Pueblo in 1930.
Height 5 EllCt 1/2 incaes, diameter b
opening 3 and 1/8 inches
n '41,
/' \
\ \\
J/'// .4.t,
. .,
í :..
A Little Colorado 011a
Black on y nite of Tularosa type, i'oun at Fort kpU.che
the University of Arlzona -expedition of 1932..
Diameter 19 Et/ad 1/2 inches, he igh.t 14 and 1/L.
A b'ourm ll e
lumber b293 in the 1a' iz ona. State
found by Jïr. .
National Geographic expedition 1927.
Diameter 11 and 1/2 incites, height 9 and 1/2.
Plate XIX
Little Colorado Black on i-ea
umber 19287 in the .Arizona State -.viuseum. From the Scores
collection. Presented by Gila Pueblo in 1930. Found near
ficlbrook. Diameter 12 an
1/2 inches, depth 5 and 5/8.
St. John's Polycllrome
Number 17495 in the Arizona State +:luseun. Founa et
Turkey Hill Ruin near Flagstaff by the University ofArizona
expedition of 1929. Dia. ale
ter of oppenine, 8 4 nc.
1/2 inches,
greatest dieter 9 inches, depth 4 :tine. V16 inc les.
A Pinedale Bowl
Diameter at rim 8 anc, 1
âiE,__aeter 9 inches,
L;r(IP.t st
depth ;4 al.c 1/4. Number in Idle
Arizona State -.iuseum 628).
P1 ate XXII
.Vour:.,ile Polychrome,,
_Number _19449
in the Arizona Stete Museum
O. Found in burial 3,
Presented by Lr. Cummings,
Banning ' -ash Ruin, Cherry Creek, Pleasant Valley, Ariz.
Lieriteter at .riLia 6 and 5/8 inches, depth 3 and 1/8.-
Old Sikyatki )
Nu:aber 19478 in the Arizona. State Museum. FAQ-4nd at Ry
Creek Ruin in the Tonto Basin. in 1931. Donated by Gila
Pueblo, Diameter 7 and 1/4 inches,depth 3 and 1/8 inches.
Sikyatki Bowl
-umber 1+139 in the Arizona State -1:luseum. From the
LiC:.neter 10 ine_l;: s, depth 3 and 7/ö inches.
Plate XXV
A Tularo`a. Bottle
Number 14757 in the Arizona State .riu s e um
Found near Bylas, Arizona; purchased in 1926.
Length of each, 4.4e49, 3 inches, height 2 and
idth of each duck 4 and 1/2 inches
Upper Gil
Black on.
at Gila Bank Ruin bylti-le Jniversity of Arizona
in 1927.
c.Lnetc.t. 10
In ti
.1e1L-11, 9
1/3, onin, D cau- 1/4 inces.
Arizon.e F,tè,te -Lseu,11.
Early Gila Polycnrome
bol from Gila Bank Ruin, found by te University
Arizona expeditian in 1927. ApJroximate caimensions are;
diameter 10 inc.cies, dcptn 4 and 3/4 incnes.
Early Hohokam Bo*l,
Liamet::.r 7 and 7/8 inches, depth 2 and 7/3 inches.
Number 33.70 in t'fic Atizona State *useum, Tucson.
Platr XXIX
l ..I'
Late Hohokam Pitcher
Found at
2.,rt ine z
i i11 Ruin near Tucson by the Univer-
sity of Arizona expedition of 1931. Now in the Arizona
State Museum. Dia peter 6 ana 3/4 inc iE s, height 6 inches,
and opening 3 and 3/8 inches.
Pi e
Late Hohokam EOwl no. 14771
Rea on bun: bovv1
1tsiuciea ana burnished
intcrior found at Bylas in 1926 by the University of
Arizona expedition.
Liametr 2()
..,'epth 11 c.d.
7 7/8 inches
4 .5/6 inahes
-elate XXXI
Late Hoilo:cLail'o1
ac:&-on-tuff exterior, mL on .8-fy
:dirtinez Hill Ruin near Tucson by thc ',Inivrsity of
:izona exped_ition of 1931 anti nov
in the Arizona State
ZiuseuJI. liameter 8 ana 1/2 inc, deptla 3 and 1/2.
A Black-on ;ray pot
..1zriber 6287 in the Arizona State Museuzi. Found at
University Ruin near Tucson by the University of Arizona
expedition of 1933.Ltia-actcl 5 an.
height 5 inches, opening 3 anc, 1/8.
2) 16 incaes,
O iTi Rooseve;lt
TtìÜ 5/8 1ncie, cti 3 .t'n6.
9q8Ta AXXX
f9,ToJATufi To
707clg u0
2uTuedo t
g 9
70 6T
7/T 6g070uT a?,v7TT7)
'Tucbon'2olyciirole 011a
E'LLilbr 5580 in the Arizona State
ùbeum. Foun& at
University auin near Tucson by tic Univrsity of Arizona
ex-oedition of 1932. Liaaetr 7 ana 1/8 inchcs, height 6 Enci
1/2, opunin
1, 5/8 sinca.,,.
Plate XxXVII
A Late Gila Polychrome Bowl
Found at Hill Top Ruin near Miami, Arizona and
presented to the Museum by Dr. Cron of Miami. Diameter
6 and 3/4 inches, depth 5 and 1/2. museum number 19302.
Eumbt,r b.-3-73 in tri.
Afizona State
useum. Founc
oft apache by t..±. Univrsity or Arizona
oi rim 6 ,nc,_
grcatest,ter 7 cfh, i,/2
c:i..iptn 3 &-nc_ 1/4,
eTqum gt<LT
13uo7TJ7 avaqq.
aeqourvi 9 4sauouT quOT9T1
T'e3ON 9
e/q 4sTjouT
gUq 7:uozTJV
.mnasnr- aagouyata
Plate XLI
A Mimbres B ow 1
Present d by Ir N. D. Osborn of Deming, New
Mexico in 1922, to the Arizona State Museum. Found in
the limbres Valley. Diameter 9 and 1/2 inches, depth
4 and 1/4. Aiuseum number 12412.
Plate XLII
A Chihuahua 011a
Found in a ruin near Casas Grandes,
ilexico and
now in the Arizona State museum, Tucson, Arizona.
Diameter 7 and 7/8 inches, height 7 and 1/4, opening 4 and
1/2 inches (Approximate dimensions )
Was this manual useful for you? yes no
Thank you for your participation!

* Your assessment is very important for improving the work of artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project

Download PDF