12 feet high, and are well constructed, while low connecting walls
of coarse masonry rise slightly above the surface. It would appear
from the amount of débris that the remaining walls indicate a row
of buildings, one story high, with circular subterranean kivas, but
this can not be accurately determined without excavation of the ruin.
Outside of the rectangle, however, there are at least two circular
areas, possibly kiva pits. The rectangular building measures about 50
feet square. The ground on which the buildings formerly stood slopes
to the south, and back of it on the north rises a low perpendicular
bluff which effectually shelters it in that direction. The union of a
circular and a semicircular tower with, a rectangular ruin is a feature
not common in the McElmo-Yellow Jacket region but appears in Hovenweep
Castle, elsewhere described. Lower down the sides of the basin and near
by are many indications of walls of buildings.

The pottery in the neighborhood belongs to the same black and white
types commonly found in the Hovenweep and Mesa Verde areas.

Except for their peculiar relation to the rectangular building the
McLean towers do not differ essentially from others, which leads to
the inference that they were used contemporaneously and for the same
purpose. There is a well-made doorway (fig. 17) in the Round Tower.

TOWER IN SAND CANYON

Sand Canyon, which opens into McElmo Canyon near Battle Rock, has
several types of prehistoric ruins, viz, towers, cliff-houses, and
large rim-rock pueblos. The tower type of architecture represented by
the example here figured (pl. 5, _a_) is isolated from other forms
of buildings. This tower is figured by Doctor Prudden, who mentions
another in the neighborhood which the author did not visit.

TOWERS IN ROAD (WICKYUP) CANYON

[Illustration: FIG. 17.—Doorway in Round Tower, McLean Basin.]

The nomenclature of the northern canyons of the McElmo has considerably
changed in the last 40 years. What we now call the Yellow Jacket was
formerly known through its entire course as the Hovenweep. A small
canyon opening near its mouth, now known as Road Canyon, was formerly
called the Wickyup. The Old Bluff City Road from Dolores, Colorado, to
Bluff City, Utah, divides into two branches a short distance before
it descends into the McElmo, its left branch passing through Road
Canyon, the right bank of which follows the Yellow Jacket, which the
traveler fords a short distance above its junction with the McElmo.
Wickyup Canyon may be called picturesque, its cliffs being worn into
fantastic shapes by water and sand. It has important antiquities, among
the most striking of which are two towers (pl. 24, _b_), crowning
the tops of low buttes or hills. The walls of these towers are well
constructed, one being a simple structure with a single room, the other
having appended rectangular rooms extending toward the northwest, some
distance along a ridge of rocks. An examination of these two towers,
which are about one-quarter of a mile apart, shows that they belong to
the same type as the simple forms of those above mentioned, and as the
entrance to Square Tower Canyon is not far away, they probably belong
to the same series. The first of the towers, called “Bowlder Castle,”
is situated a few hundred feet east of the road, from which it is
easily seen. This ruin is rectangular in shape and rises from a basal
mass of débris indicating broken-down walls of rooms. At a level with
the top of this débris on its southern side stands a well-constructed
tower with well-made doorway, the threshold and lintel of which are
smooth stones, whose edges project slightly from the surface of the
wall. One remarkable feature of this tower is that the doorway has been
walled up with rude secondary masonry (pl. 25, _a_). The south wall of
this building has tumbled over, as is usually the case, but the north
wall rises several feet above the base. The masonry of the second tower
is also broken down on the south side, but the standing remains of the
north wall, which is circular, are over 10 feet high. The indications
are that the ground plan of this building was oval in shape and that
it inclined inward slightly from foundation to apex. Scattered over
the surface are the remnants of fallen walls, and near it there is a
well-marked depression, not unlike those found in unit type mounds,
indicating kivas.

TOWERS OF THE MANCOS

The author’s examination of the towers in the region considered
embraced likewise a few in the Mancos Canyon and valley. In all
essential features the Mancos towers resemble those of Mesa Verde, the
McElmo, and the Yellow Jacket Canyons, and were evidently built by the
same people who constructed the towers on Navaho Canyon and elsewhere
on the Mesa Verde National Park. A brief reference to two or three
of these Mancos River towers may suffice to point out their general
structure.

HOLMES TOWER

One of the towers figured by Holmes in 1877 is still among the best
preserved in this region and can be visited by following up the Mancos
Canyon from the west about 10 miles from where the Cortez road crosses
the Mancos River before going on to Ship-rock. There is at this point a
bridge and near the crossing an industrial farm of the Ute Reservation
where accommodations were obtained. The Mancos Valley widens after
leaving the canyon, the southern side of Mesa Verde appearing as a
series of high mesas separated by canyons. In the neighborhood of the
western end of Mesa Verde are lofty buttes, one called Chimney Rock,
another the Ute Woman. This valley and the canyons extending into the
Mesa Verde contain numerous piles of stone indicative of buildings of
rectangular shape with numerous circular depressions. No cluster of
mounds like those in Montezuma Valley was seen, but about 40 sites of
buildings were distributed at intervals. None of these have standing
walls above ground.

Following up the Mancos Canyon is a wagon about 9 miles an arroyo was
encountered and from there horses were taken and the river crossed to
its south bank, above which, on the shelving terrace, is the Holmes
Tower, visible many miles down the canyon. This tower (pl. 29, _a_) is
in much the same condition as when sketched by Holmes over 40 years
ago. It is circular in form, about 10 feet in diameter, and about 16
feet high, with a broken window on the north side. The sky line is
irregular. It is one of the best preserved towers, but not as high or
as well constructed as some of the Hovenweep specimens.

Accompanying this tower on the north there are mounds indicative of
rooms and two circular saucer-like depressions. Excavations revealing a
few human bones, including a well-worn human skull, have been made in a
burial place southeast of the tower, where the surface is covered with
fragments of pottery. Except in size Holmes Tower does not differ from
others already described, but, like them, is connected with rectangular
rooms. Farther up the Mancos Canyon there are other towers, one of
which, Great Tower, is mentioned by Holmes in his report.

On the way up the canyon, perhaps two-thirds of the distance from the
bridge to the Holmes Tower, midway in the alluvial plain and on the
right bank of Mancos Creek, stands a circular ruin which conforms to
Holmes’s description of Great Tower but is too poorly preserved to be
positively identified. All that now remains of this building is a large
pile of rocks with a central depression, but no signs of radiating
partitions, although such may have existed when it was constructed and
for many years after it began to fall into ruin.

TOWERS ON THE MANCOS RIVER BELOW THE BRIDGE

TOWER A

There are two towers situated on the south side of the Mancos below the
bridge on the Ship-rock Road, one about 6, the other 7 miles distant.
The walls of the first of these (pl. 30, _b_) are visible for some
distance and are about 6 feet high, evidently very much broken down on
the south and east sides. Its shape is round and there is a pile of
stones indicating rooms on the east side separated from the tower by
a depression. It would be a valuable contribution to our knowledge of
these ruins if some one would determine the nature of these pits, which
can hardly be regarded as reservoirs, but suggest kivas.

TOWER B

The tower (pl. 31, _a_) situated farther down the Mancos River has a
more commanding position than Tower A and is conspicuous because it
stands on a projecting precipice, below the rim of which are walled-up
artificial caves. These caves have apparently never been entered by
white men; the walls of masonry are unbroken and there are square
openings, windows or doorways, which can be made out long before
reaching the place.

This tower (pl. 30, _a_) is almost perfectly round, about 10 feet in
diameter, and stands at least 6 feet high. The south wall has fallen.
In the pile of rocks on that side may be readily seen the top of a
straight wall reaching to the edge of the cliff as if for protection,
but no other fallen walls may now be seen in the neighborhood. The
face of the cliff below this tower (pls. 7, _b_; 31, _b_) is almost
perpendicular, the component strata of soft shale alternating with
harder rocks, the former well fitted for artificial excavations.

The author was not impressed with the idea that any considerable
number of troglodytic inhabitants dwelt in the small cliff rooms (pl.
31, _b_)[52] dug in it. Farther on there are other caves the walls of
the entrance to which are still in sight. It is true the surface of
the cliff may have been eroded and fallen in the time since they were
abandoned. They appeared to be storage cists rather than inhabited
rooms.

[52] A good figure of these cavate rooms is given by Holmes, op.
cit. Comparing the photograph with his figure it appears that their
surrounding shale has worn away somewhat in the last four decades.

Along the valley by the side of the road down the Mancos from the
bridge to the ruins many heaps of stone were noticed in the valley but
none of these were extensive or had walls standing above ground. Nor
were they arranged in clusters as is common in the Montezuma Valley.
On top of these heaps were found large fragments of slag in which was
embedded charred corn, indicating a great fire. Similar slag also with
burnt corn has often been found by the author on the floor of excavated
rooms.

MEGALITHIC AND SLAB HOUSE RUINS AT MCELMO BLUFF

The ruined walls on the bluff situated at the junction of the McElmo
and Yellow Jacket Canyons are archeologically instructive. As the mesa
between the two canyons narrows in a promontory, about 100 feet in
altitude, its configuration reminds one of the East Mesa of the Hopi.
It is inaccessible on three sides, but on the fourth, where the width
of the mesa is contracted, there are remains of a low zigzag wall,
extending from one side to the other. At the western base of this
promontory, on the ledge higher than the river, there are artificial
walls built on bowlders in the sides of which shallow caves are eroded
and near by them circular depressions. There are likewise remains of
a small pueblo with walls much broken down and across the river the
ruins of a community house, one of the largest in the district. The
exceptional character of the ruins on top of this promontory has been
mentioned or described by several visitors, as Holmes, Jackson, and
Morley and Kidder, and various conjectures have been made as to their
character and relation to the other ruins in this neighborhood.

The ruins on this mesa are of two kinds: small inclosures made of
slabs of stone set on edge and semicircular structures (fig. 18), also
constructed of upright stone slabs or megaliths. Three of the latter
have concentric surrounding walls with a “vestibule” entrance (?) at
the south somewhat like rooms at the bases of towers. One of these is
said by Morley and Kidder to have three concentric walls. The small
box-like structures are numerous, and are rudely constructed, united in
an imperfect ring about the circular rooms.

In verification of the various theories that have been suggested to
account for these rectangular structures—their interpretation as
storage bins, burial places, and cremation rooms—we have no proof.
Similar rooms of megaliths exist on Sandstone Canyon and at other
places to the north and in Montezuma Canyon to the west. The rude,
massive character of the masonry leads me to refer them to the slab
house culture of Kidder and the imperfect masonry suggests they were
habitations in a period antedating that of the pure pueblo culture.
Such fragments of pottery as were found were, like the architecture,
rude and archaic, adding weight to the interpretation that they
belonged to a very old epoch.

[Illustration: FIG. 18.—Megalithic stone inclosure, McElmo Bluff.]

The author regards the structures made of stones set on edge as very
old, possibly examples of the most primitive buildings in the McElmo
region, antedating the pueblos with horizontal masonry farther east.
West of the mouth of the Yellow Jacket, especially on the Montezuma
Mesa, these megalithic walls are more pretentious, as if this was the
center of the earlier phase of house buildings. In the eastern ruins
these slabs of stone set on edge sometimes appear as at Far View House
with horizontal masonry, but more as a survival.

Since their discovery and description by Jackson and Holmes 40 years
ago, little has been added to our knowledge of these inclosures,
although similar remains have been reported at various points from
Dolores far into Utah. They are called cemeteries and crematories
by the farmers and stockmen, but skeletons or burnt bones do not
occur in them; the charcoal shows wood fiber, and is not bone ash.
More knowledge must be obtained through excavations before their
significance can be determined. Their association with circular rooms
appears in Jackson’s account[53] of the stone structures on the
promontory at the mouth of the Yellow Jacket. He says:

[53] Tenth Ann. Rept. U. S. Geol. Surv. (Hayden Survey) for 1876, p.
414, 1879.

“The perpendicular scarp of the mesa ran round very regularly, 50
to 100 feet in height, the talus sloping down at a steep angle. On
cave-like benches at the foot of the scarp is a row of rock shelters,
much ruined, in one of which was found a very perfect polished-stone
implement. Gaining the top of the mesa with some difficulty, we found
a perfectly flat surface, 100 yards in width by about 200 in length,
separated from the main plateau by a narrow neck, across which a wall
had been thrown, but which is now nearly leveled. Almost the entire
space fenced in by this wall was covered by an extended series of
small squares, formed by thin slabs of sand-rock set on end. All were
uniform in size, measuring about 3 by 5 feet, and arranged in rows, two
and three deep, adjusted to various points of the compass. There were
also a few circles disposed irregularly about the inclosed area, each
about 20 feet in diameter, their circumferences being formed of similar
rectangular spaces, leaving a circular space of 10 feet diameter in
the center. These rectangles occur mainly in groups, and are found
indiscriminately scattered through the whole region that has come under
our observation upon the mesa tops and in the valleys. They all have
the same general shape and size, and are seldom accompanied by even the
faintest indication of a mound-like character. We have always supposed
them to be graves, but have not as yet found any evidence that would
prove them such. Some that we excavated to the depth of 5 and 6 feet in
a solid earth that had never been disturbed did not reward our search
with the faintest vestige of human remains. In nearly every case,
however, a thin scattered layer of bits of charcoal was found from 6 to
18 inches beneath the surface. In one instance, near the Mesa Verde,
the upright slabs of rock which inclosed one of these rectangles were
sunk 2 feet into the earth and projected 6 inches above it.”

Holmes (op. cit., pp. 385-386) describes similar structures:

“The greater portion of what are supposed to be burial places occur
on the summits of hills or on high, barren promontories that overlook
the valleys and cañons. In these places considerable areas, amounting
in some cases to half an acre or more, are thickly set with rows of
stone slabs, which are set in the ground and arranged in circles or
parallelograms of greatly varying dimensions. At first sight the idea
of a cemetery is suggested, although on examination it is found that
the soil upon the solid rock surfaces is but a few inches deep, or if
deeper, so compact that with the best implements it is very difficult
to penetrate it.

“On the west bank of the Dolores, near the second bend, I came upon a
cluster of these standing stones on the summit of a low, rounded hill,
and in the midst of a dense growth of full-grown piñon pines.”

The rows of stones at this place, according to the same author,
were composed of undressed slabs, many of which had fallen, the
parallelograms averaging 3 by 8 feet in dimensions. Thin layers of bits
of charcoal and pottery occur in the neighborhood. The date these slabs
were placed upright was very early, for trees growing in the inclosures
were estimated to be three or four hundred years old. These stones were
sometimes “embedded in the sides and roots of the trees.” Holmes had
the “impression that these places, if not actually burying grounds,
were at least places used for the performance of funeral rites ... the
remains of the dead being burned or left to decay in the open air.”

The interiors of the inclosures were found on excavation to be filled
to a depth of about a foot with soil mixed with ashes. There were many
fragments of pottery, and some other objects near them, but nothing
to indicate, as suggested by previous observations, that they were
burial cists or even crematories for burying the dead. No charred
human remains occur, but charcoal is abundant. It may have been that
these places were used as ovens for roasting corn or for some culinary
purposes, the neighboring circular rooms being possibly used for the
same purposes as towers by the people who formerly inhabited this
region. They are not large enough for dwellings and the soil in them is
too shallow for burial purposes. They belong to a type which is widely
distributed over the district visited by the author. Especially fine
examples occur north of Sandstone Canyon district.

At the base of the great cliff, on the top of which the remains in
question are found, under the shelter of an overhanging bowlder, may be
seen one of the finest collections of pictographs of animals and human
beings. Not far from the last-mentioned bowlder the walls of a large
pueblo can readily be traced along the banks of the McElmo Canyon.
In his studies of the antiquities of this region the author did not
penetrate west of the mouth of Yellow Jacket Canyon, but he was told
by stockmen and sheep herders of the existence of many other ruins
contiguous to the road all the way from this point to Bluff City. The
most important of these have already been described in a general way.

GRASS MESA CEMETERY

Grass Mesa, a plateau with precipitous sides overlooking the Dolores
River, is about 10 miles down the river from Dolores on the right
bank of the stream. There remain few signs of former buildings at
this place, but very many artifacts, pottery, stone implements, and
fragments of well-worn metates occur at various places, some of which
are among the best ever seen by the author. This bluff seems to have
been the site of a settlement, possibly pre-Puebloan, like that on
McElmo Bluff, with rough walls, resorted to for refuge, and later used
as a cemetery. It is well adapted for these purposes, its top being
almost inaccessible on the river side. There are many other similar
sites of Indian settlements farther down the river, but this is one of
the most typical. The scenery along the road that follows the banks
of the river from Dolores is ever to be remembered on account of high
cliffs on each side.

RESERVOIRS

Many artificial reservoirs dating to prehistoric times were observed in
the area covered by the author’s reconnoissance. These fall into two
well-marked types, one form being a circular depression, apparently
excavated and sometimes walled up with earth or stones. The other
form was not excavated by man, but the sloping surface of rock was
surrounded on the lowest level by a bank of earth, forming a dam or
retaining wall. Both types of reservoirs are commonly formed near some
former center of population, but sometimes occur far from mounds,
wherever the surface of the land has a convenient slope and the water
can be compounded by a retaining wall. The height of the bank that
holds back the water of these prehistoric reservoirs has been increased
in some cases by stockmen; the walls of others still remain practically
the same height they were when constructed by the aborigines. One of
the best examples of the second type of reservoir, the retaining wall
of which is shown in plate 32, _a_, is crossed by the road to Bluff
City near the ruins in Holly Canyon, not far from Picket corral. A few
miles north of this reservoir, at the edge of the cedars, the road
crosses another of these ancient reservoirs, whose retaining bank
has been considerably increased in height by stockmen. The ancient
reservoir at Bug Mesa covers fully 4 acres, and the reservoir near
Goodman Point Ruin is almost as large, and, although somewhat changed
from its aboriginal condition, is still used by farmers dwelling in the
neighborhood. The latter belongs to the first type; the former to the
second. Reservoirs of one or the other type are generally found in the
neighborhood of all large heaps of rocks, the so-called mounds that
indicate the former existence of pueblos. The reservoir of the Mummy
Lake village on the Mesa Verde belongs to the excavated type.

PICTOGRAPHS

At many places covered by this reconnoissance there were found
interesting collections of engraved figures of ancient date cut on
bowlders or vertical cliffs. These are generally situated in the
neighborhood of ruins, but sometimes exist far from human remains. They
generally have geometrical forms, rectangular and spiral predominating.
Associated with these occur also representations of human beings,
birds, and animals, and figures of bird tracks, human hands, and bear
claws. There is a remarkable similarity in all these figures which
sometimes occur on the stones composing the masonry of the buildings
which indicates they were contemporaneous. They were pecked on the
stones with rude stone chisels, but as a rule show no indication of
paint. None of these figures could be regarded, without the wildest
flights of the imagination, as letters or hieroglyphics, and there
is no indication that inscriptions were intended. Their general
character, as shown in a cluster (pl. 33), indicates rather clan
symbols; in some instances spiral forms were probably made to indicate
the presence of water. The incised figures on the walls of buildings
were probably decorative in character, the first efforts of primitive
man to embellish the walls of his dwellings, an art which reached
a very high development in Mexico and Central America. There are,
however, indications that these figures were covered with plaster and
were therefore invisible, so that we might suppose them to be masons’
signs, indicating the clan kinship of those who constructed the walls.
Perhaps the largest group of these pictographs occurs on an eroded
bowlder near the mouth of the Yellow Jacket Canyon, just below the
great promontory separating it from the McElmo, on the surface of which
are the remarkable dwellings composed of slabs of stone set on edge.
Another large cluster, the members of which are of the same general
style as that already mentioned, was seen in Sandstone Canyon, a few
miles south of the road from Dolores to Monticello. There are several
groups of pictographs in the neighborhood of the large towers elsewhere
described. The most noteworthy of these is situated at the head of
the south fork of Square Tower Canyon on a vertical cliff below the
ruined Tower No. 4. The face of the cliff is very much eroded, and the
figures are in places almost illegible. They consist of bird designs,
accompanied with figures of snakes, rain clouds, and other designs,
portions of which are obliterated and impossible of determination. As a
rule, these pictographs resemble very closely those in the cliff-houses
of the Mesa Verde and add their evidence of a uniformity of art design
in these two regions.

In addition to pictographs cut on the surface of the cliff, we also
find in sheltered caves others not incised but with indications of
color, showing the former existence of painted figures. Some of these,
however, are not ascribed to the Indians who built the towers, but to
a later tribe who camped in this region after the house builders had
disappeared. They were probably made by wandering bands of Ute Indians,
and are not significant in a comparison of the different kinds of
buildings described in this article.

MINOR ANTIQUITIES

The preceding pages deal wholly with the immovable antiquities, as
buildings, reservoirs, and the like. In addition to these evidences of
a former population, there should be mentioned likewise the smaller
antiquities, as pottery, stone objects, weapons, baskets, fabrics,
bone and other implements. No excavation was attempted in the course
of the reconnoissance, so that this chapter in the author’s report is
naturally a very brief one. The few statements which follow are mainly
based on local collections, one of which, owned by Mr. Williamson,
of the First National Bank of Dolores, is comprehensive. The most
suggestive of these minor antiquities are objects of burnt clay or
pottery, which occur generally in piles of débris or accompany human
burials. It was the custom of these people, like the cliff-dwellers,
to deposit, near the dead, food in bowls and other household utensils,
varying in shape, technique, decoration, and color. The most important
fact regarding these ceramics is that they belong to the same archaic
type as those from the ruins of the Mesa Verde. The predominating
colors are white or gray with black figures, within and without, almost
universally geometrical in form. There occurs also a relatively large
number of corrugated vessels, and those made by using coils of clay,
the figures on their exterior being indented with some implement, as a
bone, stone, or even with the finger nail. While the majority belong to
the black-and-white group, the red ware decorated with black figures
is found but comparatively rarely, which is also true of the pottery
of the cliff-dwellers. In the large variety of forms of burnt clay
objects, the most remarkable in shape is a double water jar, connected
by a transverse tube, the ends of which project beyond the opening into
the jar, much in the form of an animal with a head at one end, body
elongated, terminating in a short tail, the legs not being represented.
While the number of unbroken mortuary bowls obtained from this region
thus far known is comparatively small, we find in many places large
quantities of broken fragments, all of which belong to the varieties of
ware above enumerated.

None of the bowls, vases, dippers, or other ceramic objects from the
region of the ruins described have that significant feature commonly
called the “life line;” the encircling lines are continuous around
the vessel, and not broken at one point. The broken line never occurs
on archaic pottery like black-and-white ware, and we may accept the
hypothesis that the conception which gave rise to it was foreign to the
people of the Mesa Verde and adjacent areas. It would be instructive
to map out the distribution of this custom which was so prevalent
in pottery from the Gila and Little Colorado and its tributaries,
and absent in that from ruins on the San Juan and Mimbres. It occurs
in ware from certain Rio Grande prehistoric ruins, as if it were a
connecting link with the ancient culture of the Little Colorado.

Of the stone implements found in this region the most characteristic is
the celt called _tcamahia_ which is not found in regions not affected
by the San Juan culture. These objects are found from Mesa Verde to
the Hopi pueblos.[54] A peculiar form of prehistoric chipped chert
implement occurs at Mesa Verde and elsewhere in the area. A flint knife
in the Williamson collection at Dolores was purchased from a Ute woman
who said it was found on a ruin. She wore it attached to her belt by a
buckskin thong fastened to a bead-worked cover.

[54] The use of these objects as heirlooms in the Antelope altar of the
Hopi supports the tradition of the Snake people that their ancestors
brought them from the San Juan.

Bone objects were mainly needles, dirks, and bodkins, presenting
in the main no essential differences from those repeatedly
described, especially by Nordenskiöld in his important memoir on the
cliff-dwellers of the Mesa Verde. Objects made of marine shell are
rare. The presence of flattened slabs of stone or metates showing
on the surface evidences of grinding occur with human bones in many
localities, indicating either that a custom still extant among the
Pueblos of burying the metates with the dead was observed, or that the
burials were made under floors of these long-abandoned houses. It would
seem, on the former hypothesis, that these objects were buried with the
women, but as the condition of the skeletal remains is poor the sex
could not be determined by direct observation.

The unprotected nature of the sites and the condition of the ruins
prevented the preservation of fragile articles like baskets and
fabrics, which frequently occur in caves, in one or two instances
buried under the floors. There is little doubt that excavations in
cemeteries of the open-sky ruins would reveal considerable material
of this nature, which would probably duplicate that which has been
produced from the adjacent cliff-houses. Many parts of wooden beams,
mainly the remains of flooring and roofs, were seen still in the
walls, but these as a rule were fragmentary. The ends of the timbers
still adhering to the walls show that they were cut into shape by
stone implements, aided by live embers. They appear to have been split
by means of wedges made of stone and often rubbed down smooth with
polishing instruments of the same material. The majority of these
wooden beams plainly show the action of fire, but no roof was intact.
From the size of the logs shown in fragments of beams, it is evident
that the roof supports had been brought there from some distance; trees
of the magnitude they imply do not now grow in the neighborhood of some
of the ruins where these beams occur.

HISTORIC REMAINS

The various objects found in the ruins or on the surface of the ground
as a rule are characteristic of a people in the stone-age culture,
ignorant of metals, and therefore prehistoric, but here and there on
the surface have been picked up iron weapons which belonged to the
historic period. The old “Spanish Trail” mentioned in preceding pages
was the early highway from Santa Fe, New Mexico, to the Great Salt
Lake, and followed approximately an old Indian trail that was probably
used by the prehistoric inhabitants or the builders of the towers. Not
far from the head of Yellow Jacket Canyon a ranchman discovered on
his farm a few years ago the blades of two Spanish iron lance heads
or knives, still well preserved, the hilts, however, being destroyed.
These objects, now in Mr. Williamson’s collection at Dolores, may have
belonged to a party of Spanish soldiers who explored this region, but
their form, in addition to the material, is so characteristic that no
one would assign them to aboriginal manufacture. Fragments of a stirrup
of metal, parts of the harness or saddle, also belonging to the Spanish
epoch, have also been found. The indications are that these objects are
historic, but their owners may have been Indians who obtained them from
Europeans. They probably do not antedate the middle of the eighteenth
century, when two Catholic fathers, with an escort of soldiers, made
their trip of discovery from Santa Fe into what is now Utah. They shed
no light on the epoch of the aborigines who constructed the castles and
towers considered in this paper.

CONCLUSIONS

In the preceding pages the author has considered several different
types of buildings, which, notwithstanding their variety in forms, have
much in common and can be interpreted as indicating an identical phase
of pueblo development. A comparative study of their distribution shows
us that they occur in a well-defined geographical area. In comparison
with stone buildings in other parts of the Southwestern States, this
phase shows superior masonry. It is considered as chronologically
antedating the historic epoch and post-dating an earlier, and as yet
not clearly defined, phase out of which it sprung in the natural
evolution from simple to complex forms.

These buildings express the communal thought of the builders, since
they were constructed by groups of people rather than by individuals.
Architecture representing the thoughts of many minds is conservative,
or less liable to innovation or departure from prescribed forms and
methods. These community houses express the thought of men in groups
at different times, and, so far as archeology teaches, are the best
exponents of what we call contemporary social conditions, while
pottery and other small portable objects, being products of individual
endeavor, furnish little on social organization, or general cultural
conditions of communities. Although determination of cultural areas
built on identity of pottery often coincides with those determined
by buildings, this is not always the case. Specialized culture
areas determined by highly conventionalized designs on ceramics are
localized, more numerous, and as a rule more modern. Hence a culture
area determined by architectural features may include several subareas
determined by pottery.

The author has thought it possible to differentiate two distinct epochs
or phases of house building in the upper part of the San Juan drainage,
viz. the early and the middle stages of development. There are included
in the early condition certain crude architectural efforts similar
to the non-Pueblos represented in regions adjoining the Pueblo area.
This early condition, though not clearly defined, is beginning to be
revealed by intensive studies of the so-called slab house dwellings
and isolated brush houses. Evidences of this stage have been found
in several localities, as on McElmo Bluff, or combined with walls of
what may be called true pueblo buildings. The differences between some
of the buildings of the early stage and those of the aborigines in
southern California, or of the Utes and Shoshonean tribes, are slight;
resemblances which point to relations are not considered in detail.

From their advance in house building, it has been commonly stated
that the Pueblo people were either derived from Mexican tribes or, as
was customary in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries to suppose,
their descendants had made their way south and developed into the more
advanced Mexican culture as the Aztecs. These conclusions are not
supported by comparison with available architectural data observed
among these two peoples. The basal error is the mistake in considering
the earth houses of the Gila the same as pueblos. The habitations of
the Gila compounds were structurally different from pueblos, and their
sanctuaries or ceremonial rooms had not the same form or relation to
the dwellings. The Gila compounds are allied to Mexican buildings; but
there is little in common between them and pure pueblos. The same is
true of the type of stone dwellings on the Verde, Tonto, and Little
Colorado. Certain likenesses exist between the Casas Grandes of the
Gila and those of Mexico, although little relationship exists between
the temples or ceremonial buildings of the valley of Mexico and the
Casas Grandes of the Gila. The architecture of the Pueblos and the
Aztecs is very different; the habitations of Mexican tribes resemble
those of the Gila. The forms[55] of ceremonial chambers differ, one
being rectangular mounds or pyramids, the other circular, generally
subterranean.

[55] Temples of Quetzalcoatl, the Plumed Serpent Sun God, are circular
buildings like towers.

Rather than seek the origin of the house builders of the San Juan,
or the parent Pueblos, from Mexican sources, the author believes
the custom of building stone houses in the pueblo region was not
derived from any locality not now included in the pueblo area, but
it developed as an autochthonous growth, the earliest stages as well
as the most complex forms being of local origin. Incoming Indians
may have introduced ideas of foreign birth but they did not bring
in the mason’s craft. That custom developed in the Southwest, where
we find the whole series from a single stone-house or a cave with
walls closing the entrance to the most highly developed architectural
production north of Mexico. There are cliff-dwellings in many other
localities in the world but there are nowhere, except in the region
here considered, cliff-dwellings with circular kivas constructed on
this unique plan. It is generally supposed that a type of room called
“small house” was the predecessor of the multiple community dwelling
throughout the Southwest. This type, defined as a simple four-walled,
one story building with a flat roof, is widely spread in New Mexico
and Arizona. The strongest arguments in favor of its greater antiquity
are possibly its simplicity of form and the character of accompanying
ceramics—corrugated, black-and-white, and red pottery. Characteristic
small houses of the Mesa Verde and McElmo Canyon belong to the same
type of pueblo as the largest extensive villages which are more
complicated than the so-called small house. It is what the author
has called the pure type which is structurally different from the
“small house,” the so-called archaic form of the mixed pueblos of the
Rio Grande. This unit type is likewise unlike the small house of the
Little Colorado, including those of the Zuñi Valley and the Hopi Wash,
although the Hopi kivas show the influence of the Mesa Verde culture
in the persistence of the ceremonial opening in the floor called the
sipapu.

A cluster of small houses or the village such as we find at Mummy
Lake on the Mesa Verde is composed of several scattered members, each
containing for the religious and secular life the “pure type” rooms
constructed on the same plan. In a village like the Aztec Spring House
several unit buildings are united, forming one community house larger
than the rest, which was the dominant one of the village, the remaining
houses being smaller and scattered. Aztec Spring, Mitchell Spring, and
Mud Spring villages show a similar consolidation of units with outlying
smaller houses, and the number of units in such a union is believed
to be indicated by the number of circular rooms, or kivas. Thus, four
kivas might be supposed to indicate four consolidated social units.

The complete concentration of several unit pueblos into one or more
large communal buildings[56] is also found in several cases in the
area we have studied, but we must look to the great ruin at Aztec or
those on the Chaco Canyon for examples of almost complete amalgamation.
Thus these large pueblos where an almost complete consolidation has
occurred have resulted from a fusion or condensation of what might
have formerly been a rambling village composed of several separate
units. This clustering of small separated houses in a village is not
peculiar to the San Juan but exists elsewhere in the Southwest, as in
the Rio Grande region, where, however, the structure of each component
small house is different. These separate mounds do not indicate the
unit type as defined, and the Rio Grande pueblo of modern date has its
kiva separated from the house masses, which have grouped themselves
in rectangular lines or rooms surrounding courts. There are, perhaps,
examples in this region where a circular kiva is found embedded in
house masses, but these are so few in number that they may possibly be
regarded as incorporate survivals due to acculturation.

In the Gila Valley compounds, as Casa Grande, and on the Little
Colorado, the unit type is unknown. Several blocks of buildings on the
Gila are surrounded by a rectangular wall which is wanting in ruins of
the Little Colorado and its tributaries. Here one of the units may be
enlarged, following in some respects the conditions at Aztec Spring
Ruin. A surrounding wall also appears in some of the Pueblo villages
and pueblos, but when we compare one of the units of a Casa Grande
compound with that of a Montezuma Valley village, we find little in
common, the main difference, so far as form is concerned, being the
absence of a circular kiva.[57] There is nothing in a Gila Valley
compound we can structurally call a circular kiva, and no morphological
equivalent of the circular kiva in ruins on the tributaries of the Salt
and Gila. On the horizon of the Gila culture area there are no circular
kivas, due to acculturation. There are rooms analogous to kivas used
for ceremonials at Hopi and Zuñi, but they are not true kivas as
we have interpreted them in the San Juan area. Both Hopi and Zuñi
are composite people and have elements derived from Gila and Pueblo
influences, but neither belong to the pure type in the sense the author
defines it.

[56] The likeness of the Mesa Verde cliff-houses to the pueblos of
Chaco Canyon was long ago suggested by Nordenskiöld. The excavation of
Far View House proved that suggestion to be true.

[57] This subject is treated at length in my report on Casa Grande in
the Twenty-eighth Annual Report of the Bureau of American Ethnology.

The author has attempted to show that the structure of the houses
whose clustering composes villages in the Montezuma Valley is the
same as that of Far View House of the Mummy Lake village on top of
Mesa Verde; and that these architectural resemblances are close enough
to indicate that the villages of the two localities were inhabited by
people of the same general culture. He has proved that the pure type
of such a village as shown in Far View House was constructed on the
same plan as a cliff-dwelling, notwithstanding one is built in the
open, the other in a cave. The geographic extension of this type has
been traced into Utah. Ruined pueblos on the Chaco Canyon or at Aztec
on the Animas, which is geographically nearer the Mesa Verde, are
more concentrated but indicate the same culture. Renewed research is
necessary to determine the southern and western extension of the pure
type; the northern and eastern horizon is fairly well known.

Granting that the great ruins on the Chaco Canyon belong to the same
people as those on Mesa Verde, the question arises, Which buildings
are the most ancient, those on the Mesa Verde or those on the Chaco?
A correct answer to this question should reveal the cradle of the
culture indicated by the pure or prehistoric type of pueblo. The author
believes that the pure pueblo culture originated in the northern part
of the area and migrated southward to the Chaco Valley in prehistoric
times, ultimately affecting the people of the Rio Grande, where
sedentary people no doubt lived before written history of the area
began. The result was a mixture; the mixed population are the modern
Pueblos.

In the great cliff-houses of the Mesa Verde and the extensive pueblos
of the McElmo we find towers combined with pure types of pueblos,
either simple or complex. In the Chaco ruins these towers are not found
in this combination. To this may be added the great house type of the
McElmo, also absent in the Chaco. Here there appears to be an essential
difference on which the author ventures a suggestion, but which future
research must elucidate.

If this pure type originated in the southern tributaries of the San
Juan as the Chaco and migrated to the northern we would expect in the
latter more distinctly southern objects, as shell ornaments, turquoise
mosaics, and a great variety of pottery of a southern type.

The pure or unit type is believed to be autochthonous in the San
Juan Basin and characteristic of a middle phase of architectural
development, the highest north of Mexico. It is self-centered and has
preserved its characteristics over an extensive area, influencing
regions far beyond.

The evolution of this type took place in the region mentioned before
the fifteenth century of the Christian era. Traces of its influence
have persisted into the country of mixed pueblos down to the present
time, but the architectural skill has deteriorated and shows evidence
of acculturation[58] from sources outside the San Juan area where it
originated.

One word in regard to the adjectives, prehistoric and historic,
applied to southwestern ruins. They are relative ones and obtained
from data somewhat diverse in character. Casa Grande on the Gila was
called a ruin when first seen by the European. It was inhabited in
prehistoric times. From documentary evidence the historian learns
that certain other buildings were not inhabited at the advent of the
Spaniards, and if their statements are trustworthy these also are
prehistoric. Legends of modern Pueblos claim that certain other ruins
were inhabited houses of their ancestors before the coming of the white
man. The author sees no good reason to throw this evidence out of court
without investigation because some of the incidents in it betray late
introduction. Many other ruins are classified as prehistoric from the
purely negative, but not decisive, evidence that no objects of European
make have been found in them. The ruin Sun Temple, on the Mesa Verde,
is considered prehistoric from the fact that a tree with over 360
annual rings of growth was found growing on top of its highest wall. We
are justified in calling this a prehistoric ruin.

The evidences that villages, cliff-dwellings, castles and towers,
and other types considered in this article antedate the advent of
the white man are as follows: No historian has recorded an inhabited
building of this form in this or other regions; no objects of European
manufacture have been found in them, and the buildings and pottery
which characterize them are different from those of any inhabited when
the Spanish entered the Southwest.

The complex, which is thought to be the highest form of pueblo
architecture, is composed of the following elements united: (1) Several
“pure types”[59] representing a religio-sociological complexion of
the inhabitants; (2) towers of various forms—round, D-shaped, and
rectangular; (3) the great houses; (4) unit type in cave. In Cliff
Palace these four types occur united in a pueblo built in a natural
cave; in Mud Spring Ruin two and possibly three of these types are
found in one open-air village, more spread out as site permits. In
Aztec Spring and Mitchell Spring pueblos the arrangement is more
defined. In the cluster at the head of South Fork of Square Tower
Canyon we have all the elements united in Hovenweep House and Hovenweep
Castle. Unit type House shows the single-unit type with tower near by;
in Twin Towers we have the great house with cave pueblo and towers
separated. Several other towers isolated from other types also occur.

[58] These acculturation modifications due to Hispanic influences in
modern pueblos are too well marked to need more than a mention.

[59] The author uses the words “pure type” instead of “unit type” as a
general term to denote “one-unit types,” “two-unit types,” “three-unit
types,” etc.

The Holly Canyon group shows the types separated. The great house is
represented by Holly Castle; the towers are situated on huge bowlders.
The unit type of this group is represented by Holly House, the
foundation of part of which has fallen, covering the ruins of another
pueblo of the unit type formerly in the cave below.

The Hackberry group is also composed of three elemental types
separated; the great house is represented by Hackberry House, the unit
type by the cliff-dwelling below and by the pueblo on the opposite side
of the gulch, and the towers by isolated towers.

A similar analysis may be made of other ruins. Sometimes the component
types are united; often one type only occurs, the others being absent.
The union of all is best marked in the northern tributaries of the San
Juan, as at Aztec, and in the southern tributaries, as at Chaco Canyon
and Chelly Canyon. These pueblos, whether in the open or in caves,
belong to the pure or concentrated multiple unit type.

Some light may be shed on the probable process of consolidation of the
individual units of a community house by a comparative study of the
pueblos on the East Mesa of the Hopi. Hano, for instance, was settled
by a group of Tanoan clans about 1710 A. D. The list of Hano clans that
originally came to the East Mesa is known from legends and the present
localization of their survivors has been indicated in the author’s
article on “The Sun’s Influence on the Form of Hopi Pueblos.”[60]
In 1890 Hano was composed of four blocks of rooms, each housing one
or more clans. Earlier there were six, one of which had fallen into
disuse, a few less than the traditional number of clans. When the
colonists arrived, they settled near Coyote Spring, the houses of which
are now covered with drifted sand, but when they constructed their
village on the mesa at the head of the trail each house of a cluster
housed a clan. Increase in population, both internal and external, led
to the union and enlargement of these houses so that they inclosed
a central plaza. A similar growth has taken place in Sichomovi, the
pueblo halfway between Walpi and Hano; first single houses, then rows
of houses with terraces on the south and east sides. Some of the
original houses have been deserted and rebuilt nearer the others. Thus
at Hano the Katcina clan house was north and east of the chief kiva but
is now in the east row.

[60] Amer. Anthrop., n. s. vol. viii, no. 1, 1906.

In the same way we may suppose that in a consolidation of a community
dwelling several units may have drawn together and united. There is
evidence of a union of this kind in many ruins in the Southwest.

The data here published should not be interpreted to mean that the
author regards the builders of the towers and great houses here
described as evidences of a race other than the Indians. Indeed he
believes that in both blood and culture they have left survivals
among the modern Pueblos. He also does not hold that as a whole
they necessarily belonged to a radically different phase of culture,
notwithstanding the buildings they constructed show a greater variety
of form and masonry superior to that of their descendants.

The evidences are cumulative that there existed and disappeared in
a wide geographical area of the Southwest a people whose buildings
differed so much from those of any other area in North America that the
area in which they occur may be designated as a characteristic one.

The variety and type of buildings have a bearing on social
organization. A large building composed of many units is probably but
not necessarily later in time than a single house; an isolated single
house would probably be of earlier construction than a collection of
several single houses of the same character compactly arranged in a
village; a complete consolidation of several houses of such a village
into a community house would naturally be more modern than a group of
isolated single houses.

City blocks postdate hamlets. Between a stage indicated by single
houses and one characterized by consolidated building, there is a
phase in which the buildings are grouped in clusters and are not
united. We may theoretically suppose that the single house was
inhabited by one social unit as a clan or family. As the food quest
became more intensified and defense more urgent, social units, as
indicated by single houses, would be brought together, and as the
population increased the amalgamation would be more complete. This
social organization, in the beginning loose, in the course of time
would become more homogeneous, and as it did so the union of these
separate social units would have been closer; and if we combine with
that tendency the powerful stimulus of protection, we can readily see
how a compact form of architecture characteristic of the buildings here
described was brought about. The element of defense in the villages
with scattered houses does not appear to have been very important,
but might be adduced to explain the consolidation of these into large
community houses.

If the growth of the large pueblos has followed the lines above
indicated, and if each unit type indicates a social unit as well, we
necessarily have in this growth of the community house the story of the
social evolution of the Pueblo people. Clans or social units at first
isolated later joined each other, intermarriage always tending to make
the population more homogeneous. The social result of the amalgamation
of clans seeking common defense would in time be marked. The inevitable
outcome would be a breaking down of clan priesthoods or clan religions
and the formation of fraternities of priesthoods recruited from several
clans. This in turn would lead to a corresponding reduction and
enlargement of ceremonial rooms remaining. Two kivas suffice for the
ceremonies of the majority of the Rio Grande pueblos; but Cliff Palace
with a population of the same size had 23 and Spruce-tree House, a much
smaller cliff pueblo, had 8.

One can not fail to notice a similarity in sites of some of the great
houses of the McElmo to neighboring cliff habitations and a like
relation of Sun Temple to the cliff-dwellings in Fewkes Canyon in the
Mesa Verde. Possibly the purpose of these great houses and Sun Temple
was identical. Some of the great houses were probably granaries and Sun
Temple may have been intended partly for a like use. No indications of
remains of stored corn have been observed in any of these buildings,
but Castañeda[61] speaks of a village of subterranean granaries
(“silos”) in the Rio Grande country, which is instructive in this
connection.

[61] Fourteenth Ann. Rept. Bur. Amer. Ethn., pt. 1, p. 523. This
village is spoken of as “lately destroyed;” in other words it was a
ruin in 1540.

INDEX

    ACMEN RUIN, described, 29
    ANTIQUITIES, minor, 66
    ARCHITECTURE, culture areas determined by, 69
    ARCHITECTURE, PUEBLO—
      elements of, 73
      of local origin, 70
    AZTEC ARCHITECTURE, unlike that of Pueblos, 69
    AZTEC SPRING, ruins at, 23
      described by Holmes, 24
      described by Jackson, 24
      ground plan of, 26

    BEAMS, WOODEN, method of shaping, 67
    BLANCHARD RUIN, 23
    BONE, objects made of, 67
    BOWLDER CASTLE, description of, 57
    BOWLS, MORTUARY, 66
    BUG MESA RUIN, description of, 19
    BUG POINT RUIN, excavation of, showing unit type, 29
    BURIAL CUSTOMS, 66, 67
    BURIAL PLACES—
      mentioned by Morgan, 21
      near Holmes Tower, 59
      on Grass Mesa, 64
      on the Dolores, 11
    BURKHARDT RUIN. _See_ MUD SPRING RUIN.
    BUTTE RUIN, description of, 32

    CANNONBALL RUIN—
      description of, 30
      structural features of, 42
    CASTLES, structural features of, 40
    CAVES—
      apparently used for storage, 60
      walled-up, 59
    CEMETERIES. _See_ BURIAL PLACES.
    CEREMONIAL ROOMS, Hopi and Zuñi, not true kivas, 71
    CHACO CANYON RUINS, comparative age of, 72
    CIRCULAR RUINS—
      distribution of, 31
      structural features of, 31
    CLIFF-DWELLERS—
      culture of, 9
      region occupied by, 9
    CLIFF-DWELLINGS—
      architectural features of, 37
      classification of, 15
      double, 38
      in Lost Canyon, 40
      small, in the McElmo region, 37
    COMMUNAL DWELLINGS, 71
      preceded by “small house”, 70
      social conditions indicated by, 69
    CONSOLIDATION OF UNITS, process of, 74
    CORN, CHARRED, found embedded in slag, 60

    DAVIS TOWER—
      ground plan, 55
      location of, 55
    DEPRESSIONS INDICATING KIVAS, 42
    DOVE CREEK RUINS, 28

    EIGHT MILE RUIN, masonry in, 41
    EMERSON, J. W., description of ruin by, 34
    EMERSON RUIN, description of, 33
    ENTRANCES—
      to kivas, 42
      to towers, 42
      walled-up, 57
    ERODED BOWLDER HOUSE, description of, 49
    ESCALANTE AND DOMINGUEZ, manuscript diary of, 36
    ESCALANTE RUIN, description of, 36

    FAR VIEW HOUSE, a pueblo of pure type, 15, 16

    GIBRALTAR HOUSE. _See_ STRONGHOLD HOUSE.
    GILA VALLEY COMPOUNDS, 71
      allied to Mexican buildings, 67
    GOODMAN POINT RUIN, description of, 17
    GRASS MESA, cemetery on, 64
    GREAT HOUSES—
      date of construction undetermined, 43
      possible use of, 42, 76
      structural features of, 40

    HACKBERRY CANYON CLIFF-HOUSE, a “unit type”, 40
    HACKBERRY CASTLE, description of, 52
    HACKBERRY GROUP, elements composing, 74
    HILL CANYON RUINS, 42
      masonry of, 42
    HOLLY CANYON—
      ground plan, 52
      ruins of, 52
    HOLLY CANYON GROUP, elements composing, 74
    HOLLY HOUSE RUINS, description of, 53
    HOLMES, W. H.—
      on probable use of towers, 42
      on tower at Mud Spring, 20
      report of, as reference work, 11
      report on ruins by, 10, 11
      slab inclosures described by, 62
    HOLMES TOWER, description of, 58
    HOPI CEREMONIAL ROOMS, not true kivas, 71
    HORSESHOE HOUSE—
      compared with Sun Temple, 54
      description of, 53
      ground plan, 54
      structural features of, 40
    HOVENWEEP CASTLE—
      description of, 47
      ground plan of, 47
    HOVENWEEP DISTRICT—
      a proposed National Monument, 44
      canyons of, containing ruins, 44
      ruins of, 44
    HOVENWEEP HOUSE, description of, 46

    IMPLEMENTS, STONE, 67
    INGERSOLL, ERNEST, newspaper article by, 11

    JACKSON, WM. H.—
      report of, as work of reference, 11
      report of, on ruins, 10, 11
      slab inclosures described by, 62
    JOHNSON RUIN, description of, 18

    KEELEY TOWERS, location of, 45
    KIDDER, A. V. _See_ MORLEY AND KIDDER.
    KIVA OF UNIT TYPE HOUSE, architectural features of, 51
    KIVAS—
      double-walled, 39
      entrances to, 42
      indicated by depressions, 42
      indicative of social units, 70
      structural features of, 37

    LION TOWER—
      description of, 55
      ground plan of, 55
    LITTRELL TOWER. _See_ LION TOWER.
    LOST CANYON CLIFF-HOUSES, 40
    “LOWER HOUSE,” of Aztec Spring Ruin, 25, 27

    MCELMO BLUFF, ruins at, 60
    MCELMO DISTRICT—
      distinctive feature of ruins of, 15
      investigations in, of 1917, 10
    MCELMO RUINS, latest work on, 14
    MCLEAN BASIN—
      ground plan of ruins of, 56
      pottery found in, 56
      ruins of, described, 55
      towers of, 56
    MANCOS REGION, towers of, 58
    MASONRY—
      of Hill Canyon Ruins, 42
      skill shown in construction, 40
      varieties of, 41
    MEGALITHIC RUINS, 60
    MEGALITHS, circular structures of, 60
    MESA VERDE—
      cliff-dwellings and villages of, 9
      culture of inhabitants of, 9
    MESA VERDE RUINS, comparative age of, 72
    METATES—
      found at Surouaro, 17
      with skeletal remains, 67
    MEXICAN TRIBES AND THE PUEBLOS, relation between, 69
    MITCHELL, H. L., notes contributed by, 11
    MITCHELL SPRING RUIN, description of, 19
    MITCHELL SPRING VILLAGE, origin of the name, 12
    MONOLITHS IN WALLS, 30
    MONTEZUMA VALLEY, distinctive feature of ruins in, 15
    MOOREHEAD, WARREN K., ruins described by, 12
    MORGAN, L. H.—
      investigation of ruins by, 10, 11
      notes of, on ruins of Mesa Verde, 11
      on Mitchell Spring Ruin, 19
      on Mud Creek village, 21
    MORLEY, S. G.—
      excavations conducted by, 30
      work of, 13
    MORLEY, S. G., and KIDDER, A. V., ruins described by, 14
    MOUNDS—
      near Mummy Lake, 15
      of Mud Spring Ruin, 21
    MUD SPRING RUIN, description of, 20
    MUMMY LAKE MOUNDS, 15

    NELSON, N. C., on Pueblo ruins, 17
    NEWBERRY, J. S., on Surouaro, 17
    NORDENSKIÖLD, BARON G., work of, 13

    OAK SPRING HOUSE, description of, 29
    OLD SPANISH TRAIL, route of, 36, 68
    OPEN-AIR RUINS OF DOVE CREEK, 28

    PARKER, GORDON, assistance of, 40
    PICTOGRAPHS—
      colored, 65
      covered with plaster, 65
      incised on stone, 65
      near Ruin 5, 49
      near slab inclosures, 63
    PIERSON LAKE RUIN. _See_ SQUAW POINT RUIN.
    PILASTERS LACKING IN TOWERS, 42
    PLASTERING, interiors covered with, 41
    POTTERY—
      culture areas determined by, 69
      description of, 66
    PRUDDEN, T. MITCHELL—
      articles by, on ruins of San Juan watershed, 12
      excavations conducted by, 19
      on towers as part of composite ruins, 44
    PUEBLO ARCHITECTURE—
      elements of complex, 73
      of local origin, 70
    PUEBLO CULTURE, direction of its migration, 72
    PUEBLO TRIBES, origin of, 69
    “PURE TYPE” defined, 16

    RESERVOIR GROUP, named by J. Ward Emerson, 34
    RESERVOIRS, INDIAN—
      crossed by Old Bluff Road, 45
      natural and artificial, 64
    ROAD CANYON, formerly called the Wickyup, 57
    ROOMS, with megalithic walls, 15
    RUIN 3, description of, 48
    RUIN 4, description of, 49
    RUIN 5, description of, 49
    RUIN 6, description of, 49
    RUIN 7. _See_ ERODED BOWLDER HOUSE.
    RUIN 8. _See_ TWIN TOWERS.
    RUIN 9, description of, 50
    RUIN 10. _See_ UNIT TYPE HOUSE.
    RUIN 11. _See_ STRONGHOLD HOUSE.
    RUIN CANYON—
      duplication of name misleading, 45
      ruin in, 30
      unit type houses of, 40
    RUINS—
      classification of, 14
      evidences of age of, 73

    SAND CANYON—
      cliff-dwellings in, 38
      scaffold in, 38
      tower in, 57
    SCAFFOLD FOR LOOKOUT, 38
    SEMICIRCULAR RUINS, description of, 22
    SLAB INCLOSURES—
      described by Jackson, 62
      described by Holmes, 62
    SLAB STRUCTURES—
      box-like, 60
      circular, 60
      pottery found near, 61
      theories concerning, 61
    “SMALL HOUSE” TYPE OF ARCHITECTURE, 70
    SOCIAL ORGANIZATION, relation between architecture and, 75
    “SPANISH TRAIL.” _See_ OLD SPANISH TRAIL.
    SQUARE TOWER CANYON—
      classification of ruins in, 46
      directions for reaching, 45
      map of, 45
      new name for Ruin Canyon, 45
    SQUAW POINT RUIN, described, 28
    STONE ARCH HOUSE, location of, 38
    STRONGHOLD HOUSE, description of, 52
    SUN DIAL PALACE, named by J. Ward Emerson, 34
    SUN TEMPLE—
      discovery of, 10
      evidence of age of, 73
      possible use of, 76
      unique ground plan of, 42
    SUROUARO—
      description of, 16
      named by Newberry, 12
      signification of name, 17

    TOWERS—
      D-shaped, 44
      date of construction undetermined, 43
      entrance to, 42
      entrance walled up, 57
      forms of, 43
      of Holly Canyon, 52
      of McLean Basin, 56
      of Mancos region, 58
      of Sand Canyon, 57
      of Wickyup Canyon, 57
      possible use of, 42
      structural features of, 40
      windows absent in, 42
    TOWERS AND GREAT HOUSES—
      form and construction of, 15
      situation of, 15
    “TRIPLE-WALLED TOWER”—
      at Mud Spring Ruin, 20
      condition of, in 1881, 21
      visited by Holmes, 11
    TWIN TOWERS—
      description of, 50
      ground plan of, 50

    UNIT TYPE—
      defined, 16, 39
      described by Prudden, 12
      origin of, 72
      unlike small house of Little Colorado, 70
    UNIT TYPE HOUSE—
      description of, 50
      ground plan of, 51
    UNIT TYPE HOUSES—
      in cave, 39
      in Hackberry Canyon, 40
    “UPPER HOUSE” of Aztec Spring Ruin, 25, 26, 27

    VILLAGES—
      defined, 16
      essential features of, 14, 16

    WEAPONS, iron, 68
    WICKYUP CANYON—
      description of, 57
      towers in, 57
    WOLLEY RANCH RUIN, description of, 22
    WOOD CANYON RUINS, description of, 32

    YELLOW JACKET CANYON—
      formerly known as Hovenweep, 57
      investigations in, 10
      towers of, 54

    ZUÑI CEREMONIAL ROOMS NOT TRUE KIVAS, 71

[Illustration: PLATE 1 a, BUTTE RUIN]

[Illustration: b, AZTEC SPRING RUIN]

[Illustration: c, SUROUARO, YELLOW JACKET SPRING RUIN

(Photographs by Jacob Wirsula)]

[Illustration: PLATE 2 a, BLANCHARD RUIN]

[Illustration: b, BLANCHARD RUIN, MOUND 2]

[Illustration: c, SUROUARO, YELLOW JACKET SPRING RUIN

(Photographs by Jacob Wirsula)]

[Illustration: PLATE 3 a, ACMEN RUIN

(Photograph by T. G. Lemmon)]

[Illustration: b, MUD SPRING RUIN

(Photograph by Jacob Wirsula)]

[Illustration: PLATE 4 a, BUILDING ON ROCK PINNACLE, NEAR STONE ARCH,
SAND CANYON]

[Illustration: b, STONE ARCH, SAND CANYON

(Photographs by J. Walter Fewkes)]

[Illustration: PLATE 5 a, TOWER IN SAND CANYON]

[Illustration: b, UNIT TYPE HOUSE IN SAND CANYON

(Photographs by T. G. Lemmon)]

[Illustration: PLATE 6 a, STONE ARCH HOUSE, SAND CANYON]

[Illustration: b, CLIFF-HOUSE, SHOWING BROKEN CORNER

(Photographs by Jacob Wirsula)]

[Illustration: PLATE 7 a, SCAFFOLD IN SAND CANYON]

[Illustration: b, STORAGE CIST IN MANCOS VALLEY]

[Illustration: c, PICTOGRAPHS NEAR UNIT TYPE HOUSE IN CAVE

(Photographs by T. G. Lemmon)]

[Illustration: PLATE 8 DOUBLE CLIFF-DWELLING, SAND CANYON

(Photograph by T. G. Lemmon)]

[Illustration: PLATE 9 a, CLIFF-DWELLING UNDER HORSESHOE RUIN]

[Illustration: b, CLIFF-DWELLING, RUIN CANYON

(Photographs by Jacob Wirsula)]

[Illustration: PLATE 10 a, KIVA OF CLIFF RUIN, LOST CANYON]

[Illustration: b, CLIFF RUIN, LOST CANYON

(Photographs by Gordon Parker)]

[Illustration: PLATE 11 a, SQUARE TOWER IN SQUARE TOWER CANYON]

[Illustration: b, TOWER IN McLEAN BASIN]

[Illustration: c, RUIN IN HILL CANYON, UTAH

(Photographs by T. G. Lemmon)]

[Illustration: PLATE 12 HEAD OF SOUTH FORK, SQUARE TOWER CANYON

(Photograph by Geo. L. Beam. Courtesy of the Denver & Rio Grande
Railroad)]

[Illustration: PLATE 13 NORTH FORK OF SQUARE TOWER CANYON, LOOKING WEST

a, Hovenweep Castle. b, Hovenweep House. c, Tower No. 9. d, Tower on
point at junction of North and South Forks. e, Twin Towers. f, Unit
type House

(Photograph by Geo. L. Beam. Courtesy of the Denver & Rio Grande
Railroad)]

[Illustration: PLATE 14 a, HOVENWEEP HOUSE AND HOVENWEEP CASTLE, FROM
THE SOUTH]

[Illustration: b, HOVENWEEP CASTLE, FROM THE WEST]

[Illustration: c, HOVENWEEP CASTLE, FROM THE SOUTH

(Photographs by Jacob Wirsula)]

[Illustration: PLATE 15 a, WEST END OF TWIN TOWER, SHOWING SMALL
CLIFF-HOUSE

(Photograph by J. Walter Fewkes)]

[Illustration: b, TWIN TOWERS, SQUARE TOWER CANYON, FROM THE SOUTH

(Photograph by Jacob Wirsula)]

[Illustration: c, TOWER 4, JUNCTION OF NORTH AND SOUTH FORKS, SQUARE
TOWER CANYON

(Photograph by Jacob Wirsula)]

[Illustration: PLATE 16 a, HOVENWEEP CASTLE, WITH SLEEPING UTE MOUNTAIN,
SOUTH FORK, SQUARE TOWER CANYON]

[Illustration: b, ENTRANCE TO SOUTH FORK, SQUARE TOWER CANYON

(Photographs by Geo. L. Beam. Courtesy of the Denver & Rio Grande
Railroad)]

[Illustration: PLATE 17 STRONGHOLD HOUSE, SQUARE TOWER CANYON

(Photograph by Geo. L. Beam. Courtesy of the Denver & Rio Grande
Railroad)]

[Illustration: PLATE 18 a, HEAD OF HOLLY CANYON]

[Illustration: b, SOUTH SIDE OF HOVENWEEP CASTLE, SQUARE TOWER CANYON

(Photographs by Geo. L. Beam. Courtesy of the Denver & Rio Grande
Railroad)]

[Illustration: PLATE 19 a, HOLLY CANYON GROUP, FROM THE EAST

(Photograph by Jacob Wirsula)]

[Illustration: b, GREAT HOUSE AT HEAD OF HOLLY CANYON, FROM THE NORTH

(Photograph by T. G. Lemmon)]

[Illustration: c, UNIT TYPE RUIN, FROM THE EAST

(Photograph by T. G. Lemmon)]

[Illustration: PLATE 20 a, GREAT HOUSE AT HEAD OF HOLLY CANYON, FROM THE
SOUTH]

[Illustration: b, RUIN B AT HEAD OF HOLLY CANYON, FROM THE WEST]

[Illustration: c, GREAT HOUSE AT HEAD OF HOLLY CANYON

(Photographs by Jacob Wirsula)]

[Illustration: PLATE 21 a, GREAT HOUSE, HOLLY CANYON]

[Illustration: b, STRONGHOLD HOUSE AND TWIN TOWERS, SQUARE TOWER CANYON

(Photographs by Geo. L. Beam. Courtesy of the Denver & Rio Grande
Railroad)]

[Illustration: PLATE 22 a, HOVENWEEP CASTLE]

[Illustration: b, SOUTHERN PART OF CANNONBALL RUIN, McELMO CANYON

(Photographs by T. G. Lemmon)]

[Illustration: PLATE 23 a, SQUARE TOWER WITH ROUNDED CORNERS, HOLLY
CANYON

(Photograph by Jacob Wirsula)]

[Illustration: b, HOLLY TOWER IN HOLLY CANYON

(Photograph by Jacob Wirsula)]

[Illustration: c, HORSESHOE HOUSE

(Photograph by T. G. Lemmon)]

[Illustration: PLATE 24 a, HORSESHOE RUIN

(Photograph by Jacob Wirsula)]

[Illustration: b, BOWLDER CASTLE, ROAD (WICKYUP) CANYON

(Photograph by T. G. Lemmon)]

[Illustration: PLATE 25 a, CLOSED DOORWAY IN BOWLDER CASTLE, ROAD
(WICKYUP) CANYON

(Photograph by J. Walter Fewkes)]

[Illustration: b, BROKEN-DOWN ROUND TOWER, SQUARE TOWER CANYON

(Photograph by Jacob Wirsula)]

[Illustration: PLATE 26 a, NORTH SIDE OF TOWER, SQUARE TOWER CANYON

(Photograph by Jacob Wirsula)]

[Illustration: b, D-SHAPED TOWER NEAR DAVIS RANCH, YELLOW JACKET CANYON

(Photograph by Jacob Wirsula)]

[Illustration: c, MODEL OF TOWERS IN McLEAN BASIN

(Photograph by De Lancey Gill)]

[Illustration: PLATE 27 ROUND TOWER AND D-SHAPED TOWER IN McLEAN BASIN

(Photograph by J. Walter Fewkes)]

[Illustration: PLATE 28 a, D-SHAPED TOWER IN McLEAN BASIN, SHOWING CROSS
SECTION OF WALL]

[Illustration: b, ROUND TOWER IN McLEAN BASIN, SHOWING STANDING STONE
SLAB

(Photographs by J. Walter Fewkes)]

[Illustration: PLATE 29 a, HOLMES TOWER, MANCOS CANYON]

[Illustration: b, LION TOWER, YELLOW JACKET CANYON

(Photographs by T. G. Lemmon)]

[Illustration: PLATE 30 a, TOWER ABOVE CAVATE STOREHOUSES, MANCOS CANYON
BELOW BRIDGE]

[Illustration: b, TOWER ON MESA BETWEEN ERODED CLIFFS AND BRIDGE OVER
MANCOS CANYON ON CORTEZ SHIP-ROCK ROAD

(Photographs by T. G. Lemmon)]

[Illustration: PLATE 31 a, TOWER ABOVE CAVATE STOREHOUSES, MANCOS CANYON
BELOW BRIDGE]

[Illustration: b, ERODED SHALE FORMATION IN WHICH ARE SMALL WALLED
CAVATE STOREHOUSES

(Photographs by T. G. Lemmon)]

[Illustration: PLATE 32 a, RESERVOIR NEAR PICKET CORRAL, SHOWING
RETAINING WALL]

[Illustration: b, KIVA, UNIT TYPE HOUSE, SQUARE TOWER CANYON

(Photographs by T. G. Lemmon)]

[Illustration: PLATE 33 PICTOGRAPHS, YELLOW JACKET CANYON]