Archaeological Research at the Pinnacle Ruin Site in Southern New Mexico

新墨西哥州南部尖峰遗址的考古研究

• 批准号: 0751890
• 负责人: Stephen Lekson
• 金额: $ 4.19万
• 依托单位: University of Colorado at Boulder
• 依托单位国家: 美国
• 项目类别: Standard Grant
• 财政年份: 2008
• 资助国家: 美国
• 起止时间: 2008-01-01 至 2010-06-30
• 项目状态: 已结题
• 来源: https://www.nsf.gov/awardsearch/showAward?AWD_ID=0751890&HistoricalAwards=false
• 关键词: Archaeological; Research; Pinnacle; Ruin; Site

With National Science Foundation support, Stephen H. Lekson of the University of Colorado Museum of Natural History will direct the excavation and analysis of deposits at the Pinnacle Ruin site, a probable Mesa Verde migration community in southern New Mexico. The U.S. Southwest has much to offer migration studies: fine-grained chronological and environmental information, excellent site distribution data, and Native peoples whose traditional histories center on "migration stories." The 13th century migrations present a classic case: tens of thousands of people left the Mesa Verde and Tusayan-Kayenta regions of the "Four Corners" between AD 1250 and 1300. Archaeological manifestations of this migration range from classic "site unit intrusions" in southeastern Arizona to less certain cases in the northern Rio Grande, where the magnitude and even reality of in-migration are matters of debate. Falling between, both in location and in clarity, is the Magdalena phase (AD 1300 to 1450) of southern New Mexico. Pinnacle Ruin is a Magdalena phase 200-room pueblo near the town of Truth-or-Consequences, NM. It sits atop a sheer-sided, presumably defensive butte. The main decorated pottery type at Pinnacle Ruin (and other Magdalena phase towns) appears to be a late form of Mesa Verde Black-on-white, and masonry at Pinnacle Ruin more closely resembles that of the Four Corners region than local traditions of southern New Mexico. It seems likely that several hundred Mesa Verde migrants founded the Magdalena phase sites. Pinnacle Ruin shares a small, isolated segment of the Rio Alamosa valley with the Victorio site, a 500-room Tularosa phase (AD 1175 to 1300) community. Pinnacle Ruin and the Victorio site are less than 1.25 km apart. Past work indicated that the two sites were sequential, but recent 14C dates suggest that the initial occupation of Pinnacle Ruin was as early as AD 1250, contemporary with the final occupation of the Victorio site. Understanding the chronological relationship of the Victorio site and Pinnacle Ruin is crucial to understanding the social context of Magdalena phase migrations. Did Pinnacle replace or displace Victorio? Did Pinnacle move into Victorio's valley, perhaps explaining its defensive setting? Did Victorio site population adopt new pottery and architecture, and become Pinnacle? These and other scenarios cannot be evaluated without better chronological control. Excavations at Pinnacle Ruin will obtain a larger artifact sample and additional datable materials from its earliest levels; and 14C dates will be obtained from existing collections from the Victorio site. To situate Pinnacle Ruin in the larger body of migration theory, the proposed research will compare the Magdalena phase with 13th and 14th century migrations in southeastern Arizona and the northern Rio Grande. Specific data is required for the Magdalena phase: an accurate map of the very large Gallinas Spring site; clarification of the initial settlement at Pinnacle Ruin; precise dating of Pinnacle Ruin and the earlier and perhaps partially contemporary near-by Victorio site; and ceramic studies of Magdalena Black-on-white, Galisteo Black-on-white (a comparable type in the northern Rio Grande), and McElmo and Mesa Verde black-on-white types. The intellectual merits of the Pinnacle Ruins Project include (1) contributions to the prehistory of Canada Alamosa, a frontier between northern Pueblo ("Anasazi") and southern Pueblo ("Mogollon") regions; (2) evaluation of the Magdalena phase: a major, but curiously overlooked candidate case for 14th century long-distance migration; and (3) contributions to archaeological methodology for the study of migration, with implications for migration theory. The broader impacts of the Pinnacle Ruin Project include (1) training graduate students in the geography and archaeology of the ancient Southwest; (2) collaboration with several local non-academic, non-profit institutions; (3) promotion of historic preservation in the Rio Alamosa community; (4) consultation and information sharing with Pueblo groups; (5) contribution and collaborations with two other on-going research programs in the area; and (6) development of methodologies to explore the interplay of scientific archaeology and humanistic history.

在国家科学基金会的支持下，斯蒂芬·H。科罗拉多大学自然历史博物馆的Lekson将指导对品尼高遗址沉积物的挖掘和分析，品尼高遗址可能是新墨西哥州南部的一个梅萨维德移民社区。 美国西南部有很多可以提供的移民研究：精细的年代和环境信息，优秀的网站分布数据，以及土著民族的传统历史中心的“移民故事”。“13世纪世纪的移民提供了一个经典案例：在公元1250年至1300年期间，成千上万的人离开了“四角”的梅萨维德和图萨扬-卡延塔地区。 这种迁移的考古表现形式从亚利桑那州东南部的经典“遗址单元入侵”到北方格兰德河的不太确定的情况，在那里，移民的规模甚至现实都是有争议的问题。 介于两者之间，无论是在位置和清晰度，是马格达莱纳阶段（公元1300年至1450年）的南部新墨西哥州。 品尼高废墟是一个马格达莱纳阶段200室普韦布洛附近的真理或后果，新墨西哥州的镇。 它坐落在一个陡峭的，大概是防御性的山丘上。 尖峰遗迹（和其他马格达莱纳时期的城镇）的主要装饰陶器类型似乎是梅萨绿黑白色的晚期形式，尖峰遗迹的石工更接近于四角地区，而不是南部新墨西哥州的当地传统。 似乎有数百名梅萨维德移民建立了马格达莱纳阶段遗址。 Pinnacle Ruin与Alamosa山谷的一个小而孤立的部分共享Alamosa遗址，这是一个拥有500个房间的Tularosa阶段（公元1175年至1300年）社区。 Pinnacle Ruin遗址和Albergo遗址相距不到1.25公里。 过去的研究表明，这两个遗址是连续的，但最近的14 C日期表明，顶峰遗址的最初占领是早在公元1250年，与最后占领的阿维尼翁遗址同时代。 了解马格达莱纳遗址和顶峰遗址的年代关系对于了解马格达莱纳阶段迁移的社会背景至关重要。Pinnacle是否取代了或取代了Albergo？ 顶峰是否进入了巴里奥的山谷，也许这解释了它的防御设置？ 古希腊遗址的居民是否采用了新的陶器和建筑，并成为顶峰？ 如果没有更好的时间顺序控制，就无法评估这些和其他情况。 在品尼高遗址的发掘将获得一个更大的人工制品样本和额外的可测年材料，从其最早的水平;和14 C日期将获得从现有的收藏品从阿维尼翁网站。 为了在更大的移民理论体系中解释顶峰遗址，拟议的研究将把马格达莱纳阶段与亚利桑那州东南部和格兰德河北方的世纪移民进行比较。 马格达莱纳阶段需要具体的数据：一张非常大的Gallinas Spring遗址的精确地图;澄清Pinnacle Ruin的最初定居点; Pinnacle Ruin和更早的，也许是部分当代的附近的Albero遗址的精确测年;对马格达莱纳黑底白色、Galisteo黑底白色（格兰德河北方的一种类似类型）以及McElmo和梅萨Verde黑底白色类型的陶瓷研究。 尖塔遗址项目的学术价值包括：（1）对加拿大阿拉莫萨史前史的贡献，阿拉莫萨是北方普韦布洛和（“阿纳萨齐”）和南部普韦布洛（2）评价马格达莱纳阶段：一个主要的，但奇怪的是被忽视的候选人的情况下，为14世纪长途迁移;（3）对移民考古学研究方法的贡献及其对移民理论的启示。 Pinnacle Ruin项目的更广泛影响包括：（1）培训研究生学习古代西南部的地理和考古学;（2）与当地几个非学术、非营利机构合作;（3）促进Rio Alamosa社区的历史保护;（4）与普韦布洛团体进行咨询和信息共享;（5）与该领域其他两个正在进行的研究项目的贡献和合作;（6）开发方法，探索科学考古学和人文历史的相互作用。