CONCLUSIONS.

As before stated, any conclusions drawn from a study of the Casa Grande itself, and not checked by examination of other similar or analogous ruins, can not be considered as firmly established, yet they have a suggestive value.

From the character of the remains it seems probable that the site of the ruins here designated as the Casa Grande group was occupied a long time, not as a whole, but piecemeal as it were, one part being occupied and abandoned while some other part was being built up, and that this ebb and flow of population through many generations reached its final period in the occupation of the structure here termed the Casa Grande ruin. It is probable that this structure did not exist at the time the site was first occupied, and still more probable that all or nearly all the other sites were abandoned for some time before the structure now called the Casa Grande was erected. It is also probable that after the abandonment of the Casa Grande the ground about it was still worked by its former population, who temporarily occupied, during the horticultural season, farming outlooks located near it.

[PLATE LX]

CIRCULAR OPENING IN NORTH ROOM

The methods employed in the construction of the buildings of the Casa Grande were thoroughly aboriginal and characteristically rude in application. A fair degree of adaptability to purpose and environment is seen, indicating that the Casa Grande was one, and not the first, building of a series constructed by the people who erected it and by their ancestors, but the degree of skill exhibited and amount of ingenuity shown in overcoming difficulties do not compare with that found in many northern ruins. As architects, the inhabitants of the Casa Grande did not occupy the first rank among pueblo-builders.

It is probable that the Casa Grande ruin as we see it today shows very nearly the full height of the structure as it stood when it was abandoned. The middle tier of rooms rose to a height of three stories; the others were but two stories high. It is also probable that the building was enlarged after being once completed and occupied. At one time it probably consisted of four rooms on the ground plan, each two stories high. The northern tier, of rooms was added afterward, and probably also the third room in the central tier.

The Casa Grande was undoubtedly built and occupied by a branch of the Pueblo race, or by an allied people. Who these people were it is impossible to determine finally from the examination of one ruin, but all the evidence at hand suggests that they were the ancestors of the present Pima Indians, now found in the vicinity and known to have formerly been a pueblo-building tribe. This conclusion is supported by the Pima traditions, as collected by Mr. Bandelier, who is intimately acquainted with the documentary history of the southwest, and whose knowledge of the Pima traditions is perhaps greater than that of anyone else now living. In his various writings he hints at this connection, and in one place he declares explicitly that the Casa Grande is a Pima structure. None of the internal evidence of the ruin is at variance with this conclusion. On the contrary, the scanty evidence is in accord with the hypothesis that the Casa Grande was erected and occupied by the ancestors of the Pima Indians.

[FOOTNOTES]

[1]. Castañeda in Ternaux-Compans. Voyage de Cibola. French text, p. 1, pp. 41, 161-162. (The original text—Spanish—is in the Lenox Library; no English translation has yet been published.)

[2]. An English translation is given by H. H. Bancroft, Works, iv, p. 622, note. Also by Bartlett, Personal Narrative, 1854, vol. ii, pp. 281-282; another was published by Schoolcraft, Hist. Cond. and Pros. of Am. Ind., vol. iii, 1853, p. 301.

[3]. Quite an extensive list is given by Bancroft (op. cit., pp. 622-625, notes), and by Bandelier in Papers Arch. Inst. of Amer., American series, i, p. 11, note.

[4]. A number of copies of Font's Journal are known. Bancroft gives a partial translation in op. cit., p. 623, note, as does also Bartlett (op. cit., pp. 278-280); and a French translation is given by Ternaux Compans, ix, Voyages de Cibola, appendix.

[5]. Archæological Inst. of Amer., 5th Ann. Rep., 1884.

[6]. Papers Archæol. Inst. of Amer., Amer. ser., iv, Cambridge, 1892, p. 453 et sec.

[7]. Berlin meeting, 1888; Compte-Rendu, Berlin, 1890, p. 150 et seq.

[8]. Jour. of Amer. Ethn. and Arch., Cambridge, 1892, vol. ii, page 179 et seq.

[9]. See pp. 179-261 of this Report, "Aboriginal Remains in Verde Valley."

[10]. A Study of Pueblo Architecture; 8th Ann. Rep. Bur. Eth., 1891, pp. 86, 227, and elsewhere.

[INDEX]

Adobe defined[309]
Age of Casa Grande[299], [318]
Bandelier, A. F., Description of Casa Grande by[297]
Pima Casa-Grande tradition by[319]
Bartlett, J. R., cited[296], [297]
Casa Grande, Masonry of[306]
Chichilticale, Description of[295]
Cushing, F. H., Allusion by, to Casa Grande[297]
southwestern sun-temples[305]
Defensive motive of Casa Grande[307]
Depressions, Artificial, at Casa Grande[303]
Dimensions of Casa Grande[307]
Doorways in Casa Grande[314]
Emory, W. H., Visit of, to Casa Grande[297]
Fewkes, J. W., Description of Casa Grande by[298]
Floors of Casa Grande[311]
Font, Pedro, Account of Casa Grande by[296]
on dimensions of Casa Grande[307]
Humboldt, A. von, on dimensions of Casa Grande[308]
Johnston, Capt., Visit of to Casa Grande[297]
Kino, Eusebio, Visit of, to Casa Grande[296]
Lintels in Casa Grande[317]
Mange, Juan M., on Casa Grande[296]
Masonry of Casa Grande[309]
Mindeleff, V., on pueblo farming outlooks[303]
Mound surrounding Casa Grande[300]
Photographs of Casa Grande compared[300]
Pima, Casa Grande built by the[319]
Population of pueblos[300]
of Casa Grande[300]
Rooms of Casa Grande, Dimensions of[307]
Site of Casa Grande, Character of[306]
Ternaux-Compans, Translation of Castaneda by[296]
Thrashing Floors in Verde valley[305]
Tradition of Pima, of Casa Grande[319]
Walls of Casa Grande[308], [300], [313]
Window-Openings in Casa Grande[314]
Woodwork of Casa Grande[310], [312], [313]