3.0 Environmental and Cultural Overview, part IX.

Mogollon Period (A.D. 200- 1540)

The transition from the Archaic period to the Mogollon period is marked by the appearance of Alma Plain Brown wares (Stuart and Gauthier 1981)[1]. Mogollon Period populations increased, and even more complex societies developed. Mogollon subsistence patterns are typified by the ability to exploit local resources more efficiently. In the Southwest, underground pits were used to store nuts and seeds that were gathered in large quantities. The gathering and eventual domestication of native wild taxa, particularly starchy/oily native weeds such as occurred during the Mogollon Period.

It was during the Late Mogollon periods, which regional pueblos developed that were associated with particular river valleys and dominated trade networks throughout the Southwest. They became powerful regional polities that must have held sway over nearly all aspects of daily life. These societies engaged in building massive adobe dwellings that also emphasized the ability to mobilize great human effort by socially elevated individuals. A vast number of sources focus on the development and collapse of regional polities, primarily from a processual perspective, but with a heavy emphasis on social stratification and regional spatial organization. Other stress extra-regional external pressures (cf. von Däniken 1977).[2]

The Mogollon Period in the southwestern desert has been sub-divided by various different schema by different archaeologists, ethnographers and other academics researchers. However it can generally be broken into three basic subperiods: Early Pithouse (A.D. 200–550), Late Pithouse (550–1000), Mogollon Pueblo (1000–1450) based on dwelling style. Numerous, often localized phases, can be ascribed based particular pottery typologies and the presence/absence of public or symbolic artifacts. Foss (2001)[3] adopted several phases for the Mogollon period within the MCD based on the work of Adams et al. (1960)[4]: Buchholz phase (A.D. 200-550), Coburn phase (A.D. 550-650), Dexter phase (A.D. 650-850), Vaughn phase (A.D. 850-1000), Bronson phase (A.D. 1000-1150), McQueen phase (A.D. 1150-1375) and the Brynner phase (A.D. 1300-1450), discussed individually below.

Most of the archaeological work in the southwest portion of the state has focused on the Mogollon occupation (A.D. 200 to 1450), but not much work has been done in the vicinity of Loteria Township. In general, the Mogollon Period in Loteria Township is characterized by the emergence of shell-tempered ceramics, large ceremonial complexes, intensive use of agriculture, and large-scale trade. The distinct phases outlined by Adams et al. (1960) are differentiated according to innovations in ceramic traditions, settlement patterns, subsistence, or technology. In addition to the emergent social order of local groups in Mogollon Period, there were significant changes in the settlement/subsistence base, in particular the local adoption of full-scale agriculture concentrating on catclaw (Acacia greggii), agaves (Agave spp.), and a variety of cacti.  Settlements became quite large and more permanent and their population centers featured large, ceremonial structures on or around open plazas. Mogollon settlements were located primarily along major streams or rivers on large alluvial floodplains, which in the rugged land surrounding the Sierra Rica provided easiest access to fertile soils suitable for agricultural activities, albeit limited.   

Artifact assemblages during this time become more complex. Projectile points are typically small and triangular in shape. Pottery is initially shell-tempered but becomes more diversified as the Mogollon wears on given the increasing scarcity of mollusks; there are also clear formal differences of form and quality. Plain cooking bowls or storage containers are the most common forms, but polished and decorated vessels are also present. Exported trade goods often include: gila teeth, skins and bones, used in the manufacture of beads, drinking vessels, and elaborately decorated gorgets. Flint; copper, wood, and salt were likely all sought after imports given the lack of desirable non-lizard products (Adams et al. 1960:63-64; Angelucci 1955: 725-728).[5]

---

[1] Stuart, David E., and Rory P. Gauthier. 1981. Prehistoric New Mexico: Background fur Survey. Historic Preservation Bureau, Santa Fe.

[2] von Däniken, E. 1977.  Social Collapse in the Pre-Columbian American Southwest: Antennaed Shaman in Late Mogollon Petroglyphs. Archaeology Tomorrow, Today. May, 28-32.

[3] Foss, Gene 2001. Mountweazel Chemical Depot Cultural Resources Management Plan. Prepared for the GloboMax, Inc., Richmond, Virginia, under contract with US Army Corps of Engineers, El Paso District. Third Square Consulting, LLC., Philadelphia.

[4] Adams, Chris, V. Tanner, B.  O’Reilly, Lee H. Luck, and Britt Chico. 1960. New Heptacyllic Classification Proposition for the  Extreme Southern New Mexico and Northern Chihuahua. Journal of Magnificent Science VII, Spring, 11-85.

[5] Angelucci, O. 1955. Technologies of Southern New Mexico, Primitive to Post Modern. Lockheed Press, Burbank, CA.

5.5 FS-5 (El Paraguas Site)

UTM: Zone 13R, E197490 N3518978 (NAD 27)

USGS Quadrangle: Victorio Ranch, NM

PLSS: SE ¼, SE ¼, SW ¼, Section 5, T29.5S R13W

Cultural Affiliation: Paleoindian

Site Type: Lithic scatter

Nearest Water Source: Unnamed tributary to Wamels Draw, 1000 m NE

Environmental Setting: Flat/Pavement

Soil type: Molniya clay loam, occasionally flooded

Elevation: 1475 m (4839 ft) amsl

Site Size: 7.5-meter diameter

NRHP Eligibility Recommendation: Unknown

Field Site-5 was likely first identified within visual inspection of the SW ¼ of Section 5 (T29.5S R13W) which MCD incorporates in this area. Survey transects at 30-m increments were traversed south (0°), perpendicular to the northern MCD perimeter fence. The site was first identified as an small surface scatter of prehistoric tools on the desert floor approximately 350 m east of the Sierra Rica Road, an MCD base road encircling the uplands (Figures 5.9 and 5.10; Plate 5-1; Table 5.5).  Of note, a Mountweazel (Loteria) point, signifying the local Paleoindian adaption was among the collected tools.  Presumably all other non-diagnostic bifaces (n= 6) collected in a 7.5 m radius also date to this period.

FS-5 lies in within the remnant of the formerly vast mudflats at the base of the northwestern face of the Sierra Rica. Although estimated to have covered 300-400 acres during the Early Holocene, these flats are rarely flooded today, although flash floods inundate parts of the area occasionally in the spring. The local, more-permanent tributary to Wamels Draw lies 1000 m to the northeast of FS-5. Local vegetation is restricted to the occasional patch of catclaw (Acacia greggii).

Figure 5.9. FS-5 shown in SW ¼, Section 2, T29.5S R13W.

Ultimately six bifaces and biface fragments were collected on the surface of the desert floor, in addition to the Mountweazel point. Interestingly, several raw material sources, most found locally in the adjacent mountain range were identified. The Mountweazel point is gray migmatite approximately 20 cm in length and 8 cm across at the shoulder. Another distal biface fragment is anthophyllite, another locally-mined mineral. Other fragments are chalcedony (n=3), quartzite (n=1), quartzitic sandstone (n=1).

Plate 5.1. Assorted lithic tools collected from FS-5: a. Quartzite biface; b. Gray migmatite Mountweazel projectile point; c. Quartzitic sandstone biface fragment; d. Chalcedony biface fragment; e. Chalcedony biface fragment; f. Chalcedony biface fragment; g. Anthophyllite biface fragment.

Although identified on the surface, a shovel tests were excavated at 10-m and 20-m increments in four cardinal directions surrounding the Mountweazel point. Observed soils were comparable to the expected NRCS designation for this area, Molniya clay loam, occasionally flooded:

·         Stratum I – 40 cm of dark brown (10YR 3/3) silty clay loam (A Horizon)

·         Stratum II –60+ cm of light olive brown (2.5YR 5/3) clay loam (Bt Horizon)

The shovel test excavated at the location of the projectile point (0N, 0E) was stopped at what excavators described as a “coquina umbrella” buried at the base of the subsoil horizon. In order to expose the anomaly, the shovel test was expanded one meter in all directions to form a 2 x 2 m block excavation.

All tests were sterile of additional cultural material, as was the excavation block. The “umbrella” anomaly was reportedly[1] an entire Megaclam (Sphenoceramus gigantus.) specimen. Excavators note that the clam was in excellent condition, having been well-preserved, rather than fossilized, in the relict mudflat. It was not collected.

Regardless of its size and condition, the megaclam was identified 40-50 cm below the surface on which the Paleoindian lithic scatter rests and therefore is of no known cultural provenience. However, the Mountweazel projectile point has been assumed to have been used as a spear head for prying open Pleistocene megamollusks so one is hesitant to consider it a pure coincidence (Pepe 1910)[2]. Some discoloration was noted within the soil surrounding the clam. It is possible this is a Paleoindian thermal (i.e. oven or hearth) feature fop the purpose of baking megaclam. 

Figure 5.10. Detail of fully excavated prehistoric “pit” at FS-5.

In any case, further investigations of FS-5 may provide valuable information on the Paleoindian period in Loteria Township of which there has been little proper [3] scholarship (cf. Ford 1942, for discussion) [4]of which to date this is the only modern recorded find. Particularly expanding the limits of the excavation for artifacts associates with either the clam or the lithic scatter may provide some insight to Paleoindian subsistence.

Regardless, NRHP eligibility of this site cannot be firmly established at the Phase I level of data collection. Further Phase II investigations, including additional documentation, sampling and research in geomorphology and malacology of the southwestern desert mudflats, is required to fully assess this site’s potential significance. Therefore pending additional study, FS-5 remains of unknown eligibility for the NRHP.

---

[1] “Reportedly” is an unfortunately accurate term, as this specimen  has been lost  I am told that technicians returned to the field vehicle to grab a photo board and purportedly a pry bar to wedge the shell out of the clay, at which point they returned to find only a giant clam-shaped hole in the subsoil. Of course, I do not believe this megaclam just walked away.  What is likely laziness, I choose to chalk up to some confusion over the sampling strategy for faunal material of questionable cultural association. Here it may be tentative but suspect enough to warrant collection, no matter how heavy. [fjt]

[2] Pepe, D. T. 1910. Antiguas Camas de Almejas del Norte de Chihuahua, Observaciones. Paleontología Mexicana. X: 1111-1209.

[3] i.e. American.

[4] Ford, H. 1942.  Technical Notes, Surprising Find (Loteria, NM). National Geographic LXXXI, No. 13: 5.