Introduction
TYPE
CHARACTERISTICS FOR
ANCESTRAL
PUEBLOAN POTTERY OF THE MESA VERDE AREA
At its most inclusive period, the Mesa Verde cultural-ceramic area stretches from the Animas River in the east to the confluence of the San Juan and Colorado in the west. It remains on the north side of the San Juan River except for Chaco Canyon, Chinle Wash, Canyon de Chelly, and an extensive dip to the Utah-Arizona line. The northern boundary starts at the La Plata mountains, follows the Dolores Canyon, cuts north of the Abajo mountains, and goes to the Colorado. The distribution of individual ceramic types varies greatly within this area. (For maps, see Breternitz et al 1974, or second printing 1984.)
The making of pottery vessels in this area is believed to have begun around AD 575, in the period known as Basketmaker III. The early pottery attests to the utensil and vessel materials that preceded it. Impressions on pottery exteriors indicate the use of baskets as supportive forms in which to build vessels, and ceramic dippers and jars commonly had gourd-shapes. Over time, the pottery diversified. The initial undecorated Grayware took on a variety of shapes, neckbands, unobliterated coil exteriors, and finally, elaborate and decorative coil corrugation. Simple painted designs appeared on early plain Grayware. Pottery was finished with light polish, then with slip and polish, applied with increasing care over time. The latter, without paint, is called Whiteware; decorated, it is known as Black-on-white. In the western areas of the region, local clay and an oxidizing firing atmosphere produced a series of types called San Juan Redware.
Through the Pueblo I, II, and III periods, in all the wares, there were changes in shape, thickness, rim style, the composition of temper and paint, and decoration. Archaeological study has shown that these changes occur more or less as a group, that the grouped characteristics form identifiable units, called types. They appear in a reliable sequence and can be correlated with radio-carbon-dated proveniences. When the exact provenience is known and type assigned, vessels and potsherds have come to be immensely valuable for dating ancient sites.
Ceramic typing is important for other reasons than to establish time and chronology. Knowledge about the timing and spatial range of ceramic type change can add to our understanding of social change, the parameters of extended communities, in-migration, trade, traditionality, and other subjects. Pottery designs are being studied for insight into the cosmological and esthetic systems. Vessel shape and size frequencies, when related to type, may inform about community and domestic activities at given places and times.
The typology itself is a simply a document that describes standard sets of characteristics. It brings a degree of consistency to the analysis process. Yet consistent typing over time and space is confounded by a number of things. First, there are real differences between sherd collections. For example, Cortez-time sherds can have different design definitions and appearances at different sites. Secondly, some degree of subjectivity is unavoidable. Different people see and emphasize different criteria in their category-making and sherd assignments. Finally, the simple passage of time, with its accrual of fresh insights, separates project from project. A major dilemma of ceramic typing is that while consistency is desirable to make reports and sites comparable, the incorporation of new information may improve typing validity.
Another dilemma, which affects the document itself, is archaeology's classic problem: lumping v. splitting. A typology lumps characteristics into time-diagnostic, describable, readily-recognizable packages. It is a working tool, so brevity and easy-to-read format are desirable. However, lumped descriptions necessarily hide the site-to-site variety that exists within these ‘packages,’ and conceal the exact source of observations.
The Fort Lewis typology is multi-purpose. It is intended not only to inform other archaeologists of typing standards used at the college, but also to give the interested public insight into archaeological method, and to serve as a learning tool for Fort Lewis students. For the latter purposes, it was decided to forego the succinct summary format, which is already available elsewhere (see Breternitz et al; Varien; Wilson and Blinman). This typology has been expanded to include site-specific observations and characteristics from diverse sources. It is hoped that readers will be led to sources they might have missed, and gain a sense of the on-going process of refinement of information that produces the standard ‘type.’ Selected Puzzle House observations are also included.
Primarily, this is a compilation of the type characteristics identified, recorded, and published by numerous others whose work over the years has resulted in a standard description of Mesa Verde area types used by archaeologists across the Four Corners. Clearly, none of these sources bears any responsibility for this merging, but I am much indebted to all of them for their excellent work. Readers are referred to the original sources for their thoughtful, observant texts, the vast array of photographs, the detailed analytic information, and for categories of information not included here. Many other important sources on ceramics are not listed here, including the valuable smaller-site reports of the area.
The six Black-on-white types of the Mesa Verde area, beginning with the earliest, are called Chapin, Piedra, Cortez, Mancos, McElmo, and Mesa Verde. They are often referred to as a group as Mesa Verde ceramics, which should not be confused with final B/w type. Corrugated wares, sometimes referred to Corrugated Gray, are separated into two types, Mancos and Mesa Verde. A third type, Dolores Corrugated, is used by some analyists. It is placed between the others in time, and is represented by the middle of the range of rim eversion angle (Lucius and Wilson:1981; Wilson and Blinman:44). Dolores was not in common use when the Fort Lewis analysis began and has not been adopted. Despite the numerous characteristics listed for corrugated ware, the angle of rim eversion is the main analytic tool in sites where few if any whole jars are recovered. It is imperative to have a generous amount of shoulder attached to the rim to make an accurate determination.
From the start, the field school did not use grouped-type categories. These types include sherds that are broadly identifiable, but cannot be placed closely enough to fit into a type. Using grouped types preserves information, and accuracy in the time distribution that is lost if such sherds go untyped. Although the value of group types came to be acknowledged, it was not possible to revise the entire previous analysis and data base. In the recent reanalysis of selected proveniences, however, the following grouped types were used: "Early Black-on-white" for sherds that could be either Chapin or Piedra; "P II" for sherds that may be Cortez or Mancos; "P III" for sherds that are McElmo or Mesa Verde; "Late Black-on-white" for sherds that are not Chapin or Piedra but fall indeterminately in P II or P III. See Varien:Appendix A(1) for further elaboration of grouped types.