The master data table has been compiled from 12 regional maps and site lists, and that master table has been divided into 12 smaller tables for Web access, one for each region. The site information for each region was presented by participants in the "Pueblo Cultures in Transition" conference in 1990, and in most cases, has been updated for this publication. The primary challenge in compiling the master data table has been to include all of the data pertinent to the regional syntheses without sacrificing the overall utility of the data base.
Although the organizers of the conference provided participants with guidelines for the types of site information to be included in their data summaries, participants were not always able to collect these data. As a result, the data included here include only those variables for which data was nearly always available. Due to publication limitations, a complete bibliography for site-specific references could not be included.
Recognizing that these data may be augmented by continuing research, the authors and archive personnel encourage other scholars to submit additions, revisions, and corrections to either Professor Michael A. Adler, Department of Anthropology, Southern Methodist University Dallas, TX 75275 (e-mail: email@example.com; tel. (214) 768-2940) or CSA Director Harrison Eiteljorg, II, c/o CSA, Box 60, Bryn Mawr, PA 190101 (e-mail firstname.lastname@example.org; tel (610) 526-7925). Corrections, once accepted, will be placed in separate files; the original files will remain, without change, for reference. Accepted corrections will be connected to the prior data tables - by hyper-links for the Web versions and in the text explaining downloading procedures for the ASCII and .dbf files.
The twelve regional data tables are on the web, and the master data table is available for downloading. The master table may be obtained in comma-delimited ASCII format or in DBF format. Both ASCII and DBF files have been compressed into ZIP format for transmission and will have to be uncompressed for use, though your browser may uncompress them automatically. Users will require some explanations, since there are notes regarding the data in some regions. In addition, the ASCII file includes no field names for the data table items. The explanatory file should therefore be downloaded for use along with the data tables, whether the ASCII or DBF versions.
The field names for the data table should be as follows (in order): region, id, district name, government number, number of rooms, number of kivas, beginning date (of occupation), ending date (of occupation), and architectural layout. Please note that the first field - region - was added to the data tables when they were combined to make a single table. The individual tables on the Web and in the paper publication contain no such field. (Note that some database programs, e.g., Microsoft Access, may add a numeric field to be used as a unique identifier when importing data from an ASCII file.)
The numbers of rooms and kivas and the beginning and ending dates normally are simple numbers. However, there may be a question mark (?) instead; there may also be a number with a plus sign (+). The question mark, of course, indicates uncertainty, and the plus sign indicates that the number cited is a threshold. In addition, the number of kivas for the San Juan Basin, New Mexico, Region may have an asterisk (*) or a number symbol (#) appended. The notes explain the meaning of these symbols.
To use the data table more effectively, it is possible to remove the question marks, plus signs, asterisks, and number symbols so that all numeric entries may be treated as such. In that case, some information would be lost, but it is possible to remove the non-numeric characters if the information content is added back elsewhere (in new fields). This has been done in new data tables that may be downloaded instead of the original tables. (See CSA Newsletter article, Vol. X, No. 2, Fall, 1997, "Database Design: It's Never As Easy As It Looks" for a full discussion of this issue.) These modified tables, also available as ZIP-compressed DBF and ASCII files, have four added fields. In addition to and following the field for number of rooms is a field called rooms plus; a plus sign there indicates that the number in the previous field is a threshold; "uncertain" there indicates that the number is uncertain. In addition to and following the field for number of kivas is a field called kivas plus; a plus sign there indicates that the number in the previous field is a threshold; "uncertain" there indicates that the number is uncertain; an asterisk or number symbol with "(see note for region)" indicates to the user that the notes should be checked to explain the symbols. In addition to and following the field for beginning date is a field called beginning date plus; a plus sign there indicates that the date in the previous field is a threshold; "uncertain" there indicates that the date is uncertain. In addition to and following the field for ending date is a field called ending date plus; a plus sign there indicates that the date in the previous field is a threshold; "uncertain" there indicates that the date is uncertain.
One other change was required for the new tables. Some sites had an ending date of "present." In order to keep the data in the ending date field numeric, "present" was changed to "2000." Given the date of publication, this should make it apparent that the site had not been abandoned at the time of the study.
File names: this file is named Prepwinf.txt; the compressed version is called Prepwinf.zip. The ASCII version of the original data table is called Prepw.asc and its compressed version Prepwasc.zip. The DBF version of the original data table is called Prepw.dbf and its compressed version Prepwdbf.zip. The ASCII version of the revised data table is called Prepwrev.asc and its compressed version Prepwras.zip. The DBF version of the revised data table is called Prepwrev.dbf and its compressed version Prepwrdb.zip.
Choose Download general information to get the text file to accompany the data tables (ASCII file in ZIP format).
Choose Download ASCII version to get the comma-delimited ASCII version of the data table, compressed into ZIP format.
Choose Download DBF version to get the DBF version, with 778 records, compressed into ZIP format.
Choose Download ASCII revision to get the comma-delimited ASCII version of the revised data table, compressed into ZIP format.
Choose Download DBF revision to get the DBF version of the revised data table, with 778 records, compressed into ZIP format.
Individual Data Tables on the Web
** Southwestern Utah, Arizona Strip, and Southern Nevada Region **
** Northeast Arizona Region ** Hopi Region **
** Flagstaff Region ** East-central Arizona Region **
** Southwest Colorado, Southeast Utah Region ** San Juan Basin, New Mexico, Region **
** West-central New Mexico Region ** Eastern San Juan Basin, Acoma/Laguna Region **
** Southwestern New Mexico and Southeastern Arizona Region **
** Southern Rio Grande Region ** Northern Rio Grande Region **
Following Lipe and Lekson (1990), the participants in the Pueblo III conference compiled data on big sites, which were arbitrarily designated as those sites containing more than 50 rooms that had significant occupations during the Pueblo III period. Not all the data included here meet the site size or date of occupation criteria. Several contributors to the volume have included sites that fall below the 50-room cutoff, particularly when the sites figure into important explanatory contexts on the regional or district levels. For example, Lyneis (chapter 2), Pilles (chapter 5), and Reid and others (chapter 6), note that few Anasazi sites in their regions ever attained the arbitrary 50-room count, but these smaller sites are still important for understanding the process of population aggregation across those regions during the twelfth and thirteenth centuries. Dean (chapter 3) also includes a number of smaller Kayenta sites to point out the small-scale nature of population aggregation in certain parts of the Kayenta region prior to its abandonment during the thirteenth century.
Users should also be aware that some authors have extended their discussions to include occupations between A.D. 1100 and 1400. The Pueblo III period as defined (A.D. 1150--1350) was intended to serve as a fuzzy boundary to guide the overall scope of the conference proceedings. Inclusion of sites occupied during the 50 years on either side of the Pueblo III period allows more realistic perspectives of the Pueblo II antecedents and protohistoric developments that frame the Pueblo III period.
The first four columns of data are for site identification. The first column contains an alphanumeric code (or numeric, in the case of the Cibola region sites identified by Kintigh) that keys into the site identification labels on each of the regional maps in chapters 2 through 13. Column 2 identifies the subarea or district within which the site is located. Column 3 includes the most commonly used site name. Column 4 lists the most commonly used regional, state, or federal site identification number.
The fifth column contains estimates of room counts. Methods of arriving at the room count are discussed by many of the authors in the regional summary chapter. These counts are, for the most part, approximate, and are presented here only as best guesses of room counts on each site. In those cases where the authors feel the estimates are low or based on incomplete information, a "+"sign follows the estimate. It should be noted that these room counts are not accurate for all components of a multicomponent site, but are an approximation of the maximal extent of the site during the Pueblo III period.
Due to the great interregional variability in settlement patterns in the Southwest during this period, these guidelines make more sense in some regions than in others. As already noted, few of the sites mapped in the Virgin Anasazi (Lyneis), Sinagua (Pilles), and southwestern Mogollon uplands (Reid et al.) regions have more than 50 rooms, particularly when one realizes that "rooms" in these sites might be small storage enclosures appended onto the larger domestic rooms or any of a variety of domestic pit structures. In other words, these data should be handled with care. It is clear that the arbitrary 50-room criterion for "big sites" does limit the broad use of this database for regional population estimates or settlement pattern syntheses. Given that there is a clear trend toward a greater degree of residential aggregation during the Pueblo III and Pueblo IV periods, there is some consolation in the fact that, through time, the "big site" perspective becomes increasingly useful for regional population estimates. At the same time the authors in volume all stress that "big site" data will remain only partially useful without accompanying information on the small sites of the Pueblo III period. Data on site size are not available for all sites in the master data table. In those cases where the site met the size criterion but lacked dependable size estimates, the site was included with the hope that future regional archaeological syntheses would provide the missing data.
Column 6 includes kiva counts in those cases where such structures exist and have been counted or estimated. The overall usefulness of this category is limited at this point due to the fact that subterranean structures are not ubiquitous across the Pueblo world between the eleventh and fourteenth centuries, and where they are present, archaeologists must contend with the difficulties involved in counting unexcavated kivas and the spottiness of kiva counts both within and between regions. These problems should come as no surprise to veterans of southwestern archaeology. The ongoing ambiguity surrounding the identification of kivas is reflected in the regional data compilations. For the Northern Rio Grande, Kayenta, and Mesa Verde regions, kiva counts in the master data table represent all kivas (no matter how great or small). The data for the San Juan Basin include only great kivas, bi-wall structures, and tower kivas. These data are most useful as indications of the presence and relative number of such features on sites across the various Pueblo regions.
Column 7 is the estimated date of initial occupation or reoccupation of the site, and column 8 is the estimated ending date for the site occupation. Participants were asked to use calendar dates instead of, or in addition to, the traditional Pecos Classification. In most cases, these dates correspond to regional chronological phases that are based upon ceramic and architectural criteria. Authors were asked to make an educated guess regarding site occupation dates for all sites, but in some cases, no estimate could be made. In many cases, estimates have been included with some reservation on the part of the author(s). Where a range of dates (e.g. 1100--1300) is given, these dates are used as the beginning and ending dates, respectively. Where only an ending date is given (e.g. --1300), the authors were unable to estimate the initial occupation of the site.
Column 9 includes data on site layout characteristics. The availability of site layout data is variable across the regions, and in many cases this column has been left empty. Site layout is included in the database for sites where obvious features such as plaza, courtyard, great house, great kiva, and cliff dwelling are visible. These terms are explained at more length in the chapters where the data are summarized.
A single map, showing the location and relative densities of large settlements across the Pueblo world between A.D. 1150 and 1350, has been included in the volume, but is not included here. Space limitations prevented the use of site identification labels on this map, but the map still provides the first compilation of its type in the Southwest. This master map, dubbed the "measle map" for obvious reasons, was originally compiled by Steve Lekson at the close of the Pueblo III conference, and was later redrafted by Amber Johnson, Mike Adler, and Staso Forenbaher. The map integrates data from over two dozen smaller maps. It should be noted that the precision with which sites are located on the master map is directly proportional to the precision with which sites are located on each regional map. Although each original regional map was to be drawn at a scale of 1:50,000, some participants were forced to resort to different scales. In addition, parts of some districts were included in two different regional maps. In cases where a site showed up on two overlapping regional maps, the final location of the site on the master map represents the location agreed upon by the compilers of the two original maps.
A primary reason for the Pueblo III conference and this publication is the broader dissemination of regional archaeological interpretations and the supporting settlement data. Limitations on space and resources prevent the publication of all site data, including dating criteria and bibliographic references.
These data are available in an electronic format from the volume editor and Crow Canyon Archaeological Center. Requests for these data must be accompanied by two 1.44 MB floppy disks and sufficient return postage. Given the potential that specific site locational data might be used by those unscrupulous few who wish to illicitly collect or dig on these sites, none of these data sources list specific site location data. Specific locational data for most of the archaeological sites listed in this volume are available to qualified professionals from State Historic Preservation Offices in the Southwest.
About this document: