2.85 m. x 4.78 m.--9 ft. x 16 ft.--on one side, and 3.71 m.--12 ft-on
the other, with an entering angle; the smallest room adjoining to it
measuring 2.25 m. x 2.70 m.--7 ft. x 9 ft. The entire structure,
therefore, presents the appearance of a honeycomb, or rather of a
bee-hive, and perfectly illustrates, among the lower degrees of culture
of mankind, the prevailing principle of communism in living, which finds
its parallel in the lower classes of animals. Tradition, historical
relation, and analogy, tell us that this house was used as a
dwelling,[105] and that consequently it was, to all intents and
purposes, a communal house.
The height of the various stories it is almost impossible to determine.
I have measured walls which appeared to be perfect, and they gave me an
average of 2.28 m.--7 ft. 6 in.--elevation. Should such be the rule, the
western wall of the building, at its greatest height south, would have
risen about 11 m.--36 ft.
The northern appendix I have ignored in the above computation, because
its whole appearance gives no ground for definitive statements. It seems
really to be an annex, and in fact the whole building seems to have
progressed, in its construction, from south to north, in point of date
and time.
The southern portion of the building--the one which appears to have been
erected on a plane surface--was, in all probability, the one first
built. The northern portions were added to it gradually as occasion
required. This is further shown by the fact that in these northern
sections, along the line _a, b, c_, parts of the third story wall are
patched with regular adobe bricks, about half as large as those in the
church, but still made by the same process.[106] The rest of the
structure is exclusively composed of stone.
It is to all intents and purposes a stone house. Two kinds of rocks
predominate among the material; a slaty, gray and red,
sandstone,--highly tabular, easily broken into plates of any size,--and
a sandstone conglomerate, containing small pebbles from the size of a
pea up to that of a small hazel-nut,--the whole rock of a gray color.
When freshly broken or wetted, this conglomerate becomes very friable,
and so soft that goats have left the impression of their feet on
scattered fragments. When dry it becomes hard, and is always very heavy.
Both kind of rocks are found in the vicinity of the _mesilla_. Besides
these, loose pieces of stone from the bluff itself, boulders from the
creek, of convenient size, enter into the composition of the walls.
Sometimes the latter consist exclusively of slabs of sandstone
superposed; again there are polygonal fragments of rocks piled upon one
another, with courses of tabular sandstone, forming, so to say, the
basis for further piling; the foundations are usually boulders and the
hardest rocks, also of greater width. There are no walls of dressed
stone, but the rocks are broken to a suitable size, as may be done with
any stone maul or sledge, or even by smashing with the hand and another
rock. In fact the whole stone-work must be termed, not masonry, but
simply judicious and careful piling.[107] In performing it, great
attention has been paid to having the vertical surfaces as nearly as
possible vertical; but this end could be reached without the use of the
plumb-line, and with the aid of mere ordinary eyesight, for the rooms
are so small, and the partitions so thin, that anything not "true"
could, and can yet be, "shoved" into position by a mere steady, slow
push; carefully watched on the opposite side. The same applies to the
angles, although they are tolerably accurate. As a general thing, the
transverse walls appear to be continuous, and the longitudinal
partitions to have been added afterwards, but there are also instances
of the contrary. In this respect the sinuosities of the rocky foundation
seem to have determined the mode of action. To fill up the gaps between
the stones, and to coat them with a smooth surface within the chambers
what appears to be earth from the surrounding bottoms has been flung
into the crevices, thus forming a natural mortar, and at the same time a
"first coat" of plaster of varying thickness. This in turn is covered
with a thin white layer (now of course turning into gray, yellow, and
flesh-red) much resembling our plaster, but whose composition I am
unable to determine. (Specimens of the mud, containing small gravel and
minute particles of mica, are sent with the other collections, also
fragments of the white coating for analysis.[108])
The woodwork proper appears not to have had any connection with the
strength or support of the walls, but simply to have been erected within
and among the walls as a scaffold for the ceilings, which are also the
floors of the higher stories. Upright posts of cedar and pine, stripped
of their bark, but not squared, are, as I have already shown, set inside
of the stone wall, at more or less even distances. As far as I could
ascertain, these distances are regulated by the size of the rooms. These
posts are coarsely hacked off at the upper end, and over them other
similar beams are laid longitudinally, sometimes fitted over the posts
with chips wedged in. Such is the case in a room in the northern wing of
the building marked _A_, of which I shall hereafter speak.[109]
On these longitudinal beams other ones rest, laid transversely, and
imbedded in the wall on the opposite side. On these again longitudinal
poles are placed, also at intervals varying according to the dimensions
of the chambers, and on them transversely, a layer of brush, or
splinters of wood, closely overlapping each other; and the whole is
capped by about .20 m.--8 in.--of common clay or soil. Pl. III., Fig. 1,
is a front view of the wooden scaffold in a lower story room, and of the
ceiling which it supports.
_a_, clay and lower seam of brush or splinters.
_b_, transverse poles or beams, in case the beams are lacking.
_c_, longitudinal beam.
_d_, upright posts.
In most cases, however, the beams are transverse and the poles
longitudinal, and this is where the beam (_c_) is lacking, as in the
interior apartments, where the ceiling appears as in Pl. III., Fig. 2:
_a_, clay; _b_, brush or splinters; _c_, poles; _d_, beams; _e_,
wall.[110]
The diameter of the upright posts is, on an average, 0.28 m.--11
in.,--but even sometimes as great as 0.33 m.--13 in.,--the longitudinal
and transverse beams are scarcely less thick, whereas the poles are
about 0.05 m.--2 in.--across. The splinters seem to have been
obtained by splitting a middle-sized tree, and tearing out thin
segments.
[Illustration: PLATE III
SECTIONS OF BUILDING B.]
Pl. III., Fig. 4, is a ground plan of the floor of room marked _I_ on
the diagram. This room is on the eastern row of the third floor,
therefore an outer room.
_c_, longitudinal poles.
_d_, the end of the transverse beams projecting from the other room.
_e_, the transverse beams, resting in the wall on both sides.
On the latter rested a thin layer of brush and a compact mass of clay,
0.20 m.--8 in.--thick. The clay, or rather soil, is very hard and was
probably stamped or pounded.
As far as I have been able to detect, the upright posts are not found
inside of the house, except, perhaps, on the rear wall of the outer
chamber, as in one room of building _A_, to which I shall hereafter
refer. If this is the room, then the skeleton of the wood-work (upright
and transverse posts and beams) would present nearly the appearance
shown in Pl. III., Fig. 3, when viewed from the side, and admitting the
house to be four stories high.
_a_, horizontal beams.
_b_, upright posts, along the western wall, and in the three upper
stories. These posts are hypothetical, and therefore only indicated by
dotted lines. (It may be also that every cell had its front and its rear
posts, but I have not been able to detect any except in the outer
rooms.)
With the exception of one chamber in building _A_, I nowhere met
anything like a roof. This one appears to be nothing else than a
ceiling-floor, but of nearly 0.75 m.--2 ft. 6 in.--in thickness. It is,
as Pl. VIII. shows, much covered by fallen stones, and its original
height may have been increased by _debris_; but at all events it was
thoroughly impermeable, and such as would be required in a climate
where, indeed, it seldom rains, but "whenever it rains it pours."
There is a certain air of sameness cast over the entire structure which
has strongly impressed me with the thought that not only was it used as
a dwelling for a large number (as the reports, indeed, establish), but
also that all its inhabitants lived on an equal footing,--as far as
accommodations for living were concerned. There are no special quarters,
no spacious halls. The few rooms of somewhat larger size are naturally
explained by the mode of construction, adapting the house to the
configuration of the rock, and not conversely as we do. It was,
therefore, a large joint-tenement structure, harboring, perhaps, when
fully occupied, several hundreds of families.
In regard to ingress and egress, not only have I found no doors in any
fragments of exterior walls, but the many persons I have asked have
always assured me that there had been none, that the house was entered
by means of ladders, ascending to the top of each story in succession,
and descending into the rooms also by ladders and through trap-doors in
the roofs. They have also assured me that each room of each story
communicated with the one above and below, also by means of trap-doors
and ladders. It is quite certain that there are no staircases nor steps,
and that consequently ladders were used, in the same manner as they are
still used by the Indians of the pueblos of Zuni, Moqui, Acoma, Taos,
and others. Ingress and egress, therefore, must have taken place, not
horizontally "in and out," but vertically "up and down." I have not been
able to identify any one of the trap-doors referred to, but I should not
be surprised to hear that they have been subsequently found in the
north-west corner of each room. By referring to the diagram of the floor
(Pl. III., Fig. 4), it will be seen that the rectangular spaces between
the beams and overlying poles are almost everywhere large enough, if
the superstructure of splinters (or brush) and clay is removed, to give
passage to any man. The ladders themselves have completely disappeared.
On one and the same floor, I found in the side walls at a few places,
the remains of low and narrow openings through which a man might pass in
a stooping position and "sidling." Nowhere could I see the full height
of these small doorways, so that I do not know whether there was a
lintel, or whether they terminated in an open angle, like the doorways
of Yucatan. I have seen openings showing the peculiar so-called
"aboriginal arch" of Yucatan on a small scale, and I also have seen that
an accidental "knocking-out" of one or two stones from the walls
produced a hole or gap very similar in shape to the doorways at Uxmal
and other pueblos of Southern Mexico, though of course on a small scale.
It is self-evident that, the coincidence being accidental, I do not
place any stress upon it in view of "tracing relationships." The
coincidence is of ethnological, and not of ethnographical, value. As far
as I could ascertain, they were certainly 1 m.--3 ft. 3 in.--high,
whereas their average width may have been 0.45 m.--18 in. (Those I
measured averaged between 0.42 m. and 0.48 m.--16 in. and 19 in.) Their
appearance is shown in Pl. II., Fig. 5.
_a_ is what might be termed a door-sill, a smooth oval stone, evidently
from the drift, probably dioritic, at all events a dark-green hornblende
rock. In the present instance one was not long enough to fill the gap
left between the walls, and two were superposed. I saw no traces of
wooden lintels or sills. These doorways appeared to be generally about
0.50 m.--20 in.--above the floor, but if we deduct 0.20 m.--8 in.--for
the clay (measure having been taken from the timbers), 0.30 m.--12
in.--will remain as their approximate height over the chambers.
The few doors that I could observe are all in the longitudinal walls,
and none of them in the transverse; that is, they all open from east to
west. But not all the longitudinal partitions have doorways. It cannot,
therefore, be admitted that every transverse row was occupied by one
family, still less that the family apartments were arranged
longitudinally. I rather suspect that this arrangement was vertical, or
perhaps vertical and transverse. This surmise is given, however, for
what it may be worth. Windows I could not find, although small apertures
undoubtedly existed in all the outer walls, both for light and for air.
The chambers being all very much ruined, the lower ones filled with the
stones and decayed ruins of the superposed stories,--of these stories
themselves but part of the walls, denuded and often twisted,
remaining,--I have not been able, with one single exception, to secure
or even see any of what we would call the "furniture." Small fragments
of grinding-stones (_metates_) are sparsely scattered over the entire
ruins, otherwise the only object of daily use as articles of furniture
met with by me has been a hearth, which I found or dug out _in situ_, in
room _I_, and which, complete, forms part of the collections sent by me
to Cambridge.
The place where this hearth was situated is marked on the diagram in
room _I_. It stood on the floor against the north wall, and is composed
of three plates of stone, originally ground and polished (as the
specimen found in building A will show, which is a fragment only), and,
judging from new fragments found, of diorite or other hornblende rock.
There are three plates,--a basal one, 40 m.--16 in.--long and 20 m.--8
in.--wide, and two sides, placed vertically east and west of the
base,--all three resting against the north wall of the room. Pl. III.,
Fig. 4, is a diagram of the room, the floor timbers, and the hearth.
The basal plate was covered with 0.10 m.--4 in.--of very white ashes,
which I have also secured, and the rear of the hearth, which is formed
by the original "first coat" of earth daubed over the wall, is
thoroughly baked by the heat produced in front of it, as the samples
sent will show.[111]
Of course, I looked at once for an opening where the smoke arising from
the hearth, etc., could have escaped. I am sorry to say, however, that I
utterly failed in finding anything like a chimney,--not only in _B_, but
in all the other buildings. Still, in the ruined condition of the place,
this is no proof of their non-existence.[112]
I will refer to subsequent pages to such articles of mechanical use and
of wearing apparel which I was fortunate enough to meet. I shall also
return hereafter to the almost omnipresent pieces of painted pottery, of
two distinct kinds, and to the very numerous chips of obsidian,
jet-black on the face, but transparent as smoky glass; of black lava;
and to the flint, jasper, and moss-agates, broken mechanically by man,
and scattered over the premises. These premises have been thoroughly
ransacked by visitors, and every striking object has already been
carried off. I had heard mentioned, among such samples, flint, agate,
and obsidian arrow-heads, stone hatchets and hammers, and copper (not
brass or iron) rings used for ornamental purposes,[113] but my luck it
was not to find any. Therefore the harvest is perhaps slim in that
respect. It is beyond all doubt that judicious digging among the lower
stories of the structures will reveal treasures,--not money, as the tale
current among the inhabitants has it, but things of archaeological and
ethnological value. For such an undertaking I was, as the Institute well
knows, not prepared. I attempted to dig, indeed, though quite alone, but
soon came to the conclusion that the time consumed in excavating one
metre of decayed and crumbling stones and earth would be more
satisfactorily employed in other directions; paving the way for the
exhaustive labors of better situated archaeologists.
I have been very lengthy in my _expose_ of facts and data regarding this
particular house _B_, for the simple reason that, as far as the
principles of architecture, based upon a knowledge and want of "how to
live," are concerned, it is typical of the rest. Many details become
therefore unnecessary in subsequent descriptions.
To return to the structure itself, its general plan and its mode of
construction in detail more and more forcibly remind me of an
extraordinarily large honeycomb. The various walls, a few of the outer
walls excepted, have little strength in themselves (as the rapid decay
shows), but combined altogether they oppose to any outside pressure an
immense amount of "inertia." There is not in the whole building one
single evidence of any great progress in mechanics. Everything done and
built within it can be built and made with the use of a good or fair
eyesight only, and the implements and arts of what was formerly called
the "stone age." This does not exclude the possibility that they had
made a certain advance in mechanical agencies. They may have had the
plummet, or even the square; but such expedients, applied to their
system of building, might at most have hastened the rapidity of
construction. Necessary they were not at all, still less indispensable.
As the bee builds one cell alongside of the other and above the
other,--the norm of one and the "habitat" impelling the norm of those
above and alongside,--so the Indians of Pecos aggregated their cells
according to their wants and the increase of their numbers; their inside
accommodations, the wood-work, bearing the last trace of the frail
"lodge" of a former shifting condition.
Leaving _B_ for the present, I turn to the other ruins on the so-called
"neck" of the _mesilla_.
4 m.--13 ft.--west of the N.W. corner of the northern annex, I struck
stone foundations indicating a structure (whether enclosure or building
I do not venture to tell) 10.21 m.--33 ft.--from E. to W., and 6.60
m.--22 ft.--from N. to S.[114], 49 m.--160 ft.--to the north-west of its
north-easterly angle there is a mound about 2 m. or 6 ft. in diameter,
thence 20 m.--65 ft.--further N.W. or N.N.W. the southern ruins of the
east wing of _A_ are reached.
Parallel to _B_, longitudinally, and at an average distance of 28 m.--90
ft--to the west from it, there is a row of detached buildings or
structures, of which only the foundations and shapeless stone heaps
indicating the corners remain. Pl. I., Fig. 8, conveys an idea of their
position and size. The walls are reduced to mere foundations, or to
heaps in the corners; but these remnants indicate that the rocks used
were similar in kind and shape to those composing the walls of all the
other kinds of construction in the _mesilla_ north of the church.
For what purpose these buildings were erected, and in what relation they
stood to _B_, I am unable to determine. Some of them appeared to have
doors opening to the east.[115] Beyond _f_ the ground rises suddenly.
The floor of those structures is, in some instances, formed of a black
or red loam. I excavated one of those, or, rather, dug into it, to the
depth of one metre. The surface had shown traces of a fire built in the
centre, and I found also, at the depth of nearly two feet, that the dark
soil was traversed by a band of charcoal, fragments of burnt and
blackened pottery, and some splinters of bone. Below it the soil was
dark red. Whether there was a buried hearth at that depth, or whether
the traces of fire were due to an original destruction of woodwork
through combustion, the _debris_ subsequently covering them with clay, I
am unable to judge.[116] In all of them, of course, pottery and obsidian
were found.
I have already stated that the _mesilla_ dips to the south-west; that
there is a depression along the northern end of its "neck;" and that
from _f_ the rocks bulge upwards again. All this contributes to
concentrate the drainage of the entire cliff-top, as far north of the
church as it was inhabited, in the hollow where the gate of the general
enclosure is placed. This gate was therefore not only a passage-way, but
also the water-gap or channel through which the _mesilla_ was finally
drained into the bottoms of the Arroyo de Pecos.
[Illustration: PLATE IV
PLAN OF BUILDING A.]
20 m.--65 ft.--to the N.N.W. of the mound i, there rises before us the
huge pile of ruins which, on the plat as well as on the diagram, I have
designated by _A_. It crowns the highest point of the entire _mesilla_,
and covers the greatest portion of its top. In ruins like _B_, its
general aspect is yet somewhat different Instead of forming, like the
latter, a narrow, solid rectangle of 140 m. x 20 m.--460 ft. x 65 ft.--,
the building _A_ is (taking, of course, the outlines of the entire
_debris_) a broad hollow rectangle of 150 m. x 75 m.--490 ft. x 245 ft.
Its interior is occupied by a vast court or square, containing three
circular depressions, and surrounded on all four sides by the broad
ruined heaps of the former dwellings. On the east side, between the
circumvallation and the eastern line of the structure, there are two
more circular depressions similar to those within the court. The latter
is entered by four passageways,--one on the S.E. corner, 4 m.--13
ft.--wide and about 12 m.--40 ft.--long from S. to N.; one through the
eastern wing, 3.40 m.--11 ft.--wide and about 14 m.--46 ft.--long from
E. to W.; one in the N.W. corner and another from the S.W., both 2 m.--6
ft. 6 in.--across. I have designated these four gateways respectively as
_R_, _E_, _G_, and _N_. _R_ and _E_ enter straight through the wall; _G_
forms a semicircle almost from W. through N. to S.; _N_ describes a
right angle from S. by N. to E. The distribution of decay in this house
is the same as in _B_,--the southern parts are on all sides almost
totally obliterated; the N.W. corner is very nearly perfect; the
northern and western walls are tolerably fairly preserved; but the
eastern outline of the east wing, the southern outline of the south
wing, and the southern ends of both east and west have almost completely
disappeared under hills of rubbish, a few posts alone assisting the
explorer. The path of destruction has in both buildings lain in the same
direction,--from S.S.E. to N.N.W.,--and across both its effects have
decreased from south to north. Still, while the similarity in that
respect is astonishing, and while there are apparently more walls in _A_
standing than in _B_, there is, owing to the very uneven surface of the
rock upon which it is built, much more confusion among the ruins of the
former than among those of the latter. _B_ is built on a gradual slope
or ridge; _A_ caps a generally convex surface, scooped out in the
middle, and sloping eastward.[117] Hence comes the division of the whole
structure into four separate and distinct buildings, and hence, also,
the complicated manner in which the whole or each part is ruined, even
walls still standing being twisted out of shape and out of position.
Actual measurements were much less efficacious here than in _B_; and,
although I have worked with not less zeal and conscientiousness, the
result in neatness and precision is certainly less satisfactory. This
explanation will, I hope, induce subsequent explorers to look up my
inaccuracies and correct them.