Plate LXII. Navaho Burial Cists
[DEFENSIVE AND CONSTRUCTIVE EXPEDIENTS]
The cliff ruins have always been regarded as defensive structures, sometimes even as fortresses, but in De Chelly whatever value they have in this respect is due solely to the sites they occupy. There are many places here where slight defensive works on the approaches to sites would increase their value a hundredfold, but such works were apparently never constructed. Furthermore, the ruins themselves never show even a suggestion of the influence of the defensive motive, except in the two possible instances already mentioned. The ordinary or dwelling-house plan has not been at all modified, not even to the extent that it has in the modern pueblos. If the cliff ruins were defensive structures it would certainly seem that an influence strong enough to bring about the occupancy of such inconvenient and unsuitable sites would also be strong enough to bring about some modifications in the architecture, modifications which would render more suitable sites available. The influence of the physical environment on pueblo architecture, and the sensitiveness of the latter to such influence, has already been commented on. Moreover, it also has been stated that, so far as known, but one instance occurs in the canyon where provision was made for the storage of water; yet without water the strongest "fortress" in the canyon could not withstand a siege of forty-eight hours. Further, assuming that the structures were defensive, and well prepared to resist attack, if necessary, for several days, only a few such attacks would be required to cause their abandonment, for the crops on the canyon bottom, practically the sole possessions of the dwellers in the canyon, would necessarily be lost.
These are some of the difficulties that stand in the way of the assumption that the cliff ruins were defensive structures or permanent homes. If, however, we adopt the hypothesis that they were farming outlooks
occupied only during the farming season, and then only for a few days or weeks at a time, after the manner that such outlooks are used by the Pueblo Indians at the present time, most of the difficulties vanish.
The apparent inaccessibility of many of the sites disappears on close examination, and we must not forget that places really difficult of access to us would not necessarily be so regarded by a people accustomed to that manner of life. Many locations which could not be surpassed as defensive sites were not occupied, while others much inferior in this respect were built upon. It was very seldom that the natural conditions were modified, even to the extent of selecting a route of access other than that which, would naturally be followed, and, of course, the easiest route for the cliff dwellers would be also the easiest route for their enemies. In many cases the easiest way of access, which was the one used by the cliff dwellers, was not direct. It was not commanded by the immediate site of the dwellings, except in its upper part, and in some cases not at all. Enemies could climb to the very doors of the houses before they could be seen or attacked. The absence of military knowledge and skill, and of any attempt to fortify or strengthen a site, or even to fully utilize its natural defensive advantages, is characteristic of the cliff ruins of De Chelly. If the cliff dwellers were driven to the use of such places by a necessity for defense, this absence is remarkable, especially as there is evidence that the settlements were occupied for a number of, perhaps a great many, years.
Under the head of constructive expedients we have a different result. The difficulties which came from the occupancy of exceptional sites were promptly reflected in the construction, and unusual ways and methods were adopted to overcome them. These methods are the more interesting in that they were not always successful. It sometimes happened that walls had to be placed on a foundation of smooth, sloping rock. In such cases the rock was never cut away, but timbers were employed to hold the wall in place. In some instances the timbers were laid at right angles to the line of front wall, at points where cross walls joined it inside. The front wall thus rested partly on the ends of timbers and partly on rock, while the other ends of the timbers were held in place by the cross walls built upon them. An example of this construction is shown in [plate LII]. In other instances, where the surface was irregular but did not slope much, timbers were laid on the wall lines and the masonry rested partly upon them. An example of this occurs in the Casa Blanca ruin, shown in [plate XLVII]. Still another method of using timber in masonry occurs in a number of ruins. It was seldom effective and apparently was confined to this region. This consists of the incorporation into the masonry of upright logs. Figure 69 shows an example that occurs at the point marked [32] on the map. The site here is an especially difficult one, as the builders were compelled to place walls not only on sloping rock foundations, but also on loose débris, and the vertical timber support is quite common.
The three kivas which are shown on the plan occupied the front of the village, and their front walls have fallen out. Apparently the same accident has happened at least once, if not several times, before, and a fragment of a previous front wall has slipped down 3 or 4 feet, and was left there when the kiva was repaired. The round dots shown on the plan, two in the wall of the central kiva and one on the east, represent vertical timbers incorporated in the masonry. The tops of these logs reach the level of the top of the bench in the kiva, and their lower ends rest in cavities in the rocks. The eastern one was removed and was found to be about 2 feet long. The upper half was charred, although formerly inclosed completely in the masonry, as though it had been burned off to the required length. The lower end was hacked off with some blunt implement, and as nearly squared as it could be done with such means. It was set into a socket or hole pecked in the solid rock and plastered in with clay. In the outer portion of the eastern wall of the central kiva there are many marks of sticks, 3 to 4 inches in diameter and placed vertically.