gard to Tusayan culture before these two widely different stocks came together and mutually influenced each other.

There are many aspects of ancient Tusayan culture on which archeology as yet throws no light. We know, for instance, from reliable historical sources that the cultivation of cotton and the weaving of fabrics from its fiber was a prehistoric industry in Tusayan, and yet no trace of this was found in my excavations at Sikyatki. These gaps in the record may be supplemented by future studies, but in the present discussion of the prehistoric culture of Tusayan I limit myself to one pueblo and the epoch of its habitation.

There are no means of knowing how old the pueblo under consideration was when destroyed, although the existence on the walls of some of the rooms of many layers of plastering with alternate strata of soot shows considerable age. The crowded cemeteries likewise denote antiquity, but time ratios in prehistoric ruins are at the best only approximations.'

The destruction of Sikyatki was one of those feudal tragedies so common in both historic and prehistoric times in our southwest, and the true reason of its overthrow we may never know. There were frequent quarrels, so the modern folktale runs, with the adjacent pueblo of Walpi concerning ownership of the scanty water supply, the boundaries of farms, and other controversies. The Sikyatki people erected in a commanding position on the mesa above them two circular watch-towers, the ruins of which are still visible, to defend themselves from Walpi, and stretched a stone wall, still standing, between there and the hostiles at the western end of East mesa. Sanguinary episodes are hinted at as provocations hastening the tragedy. A disguised Sitkyatki youth is said to have entered Walpi and killed a maiden who was a spectator of some public ceremony, safely escaping to his pueblo and taunting his enemies from his secure position. Whatever may have been the reason why the Walpi warriors fell upon Sikyatki, legends of the details are indistinct, as the date was

1 There is a legend, which needs critical examination before acceptance, that the early settlers at Sikyatki came from Fire-house, a round ruin far to the east, on the periphery of Tusayan. The circular form and architecture of Fire-house is very different from that of Sikyatki, as of all other Tusayan ruins, and if the two pueblos were inhabited by the same phratry they must have changed their ideas of pueblo building when they founded Sikyatki. From a comparison of its size with that of the ruins of Awatobi, which we know contained 800 people when destroyed, I should judge that Sikyatki had not far from 500 inhabitants when it fell.

remote in their annals. The warriors of Walpi entered the doomed town, massacred the defenders, and carried off their women to their own pueblo, where they became mothers of existing phratries. Such other survivors as there were fled to Oraibi and Awatobi, no doubt fermenting in the latter village a trouble of long standing, which ultimately culminated in the destruction of that place, at the close of the year 1700.'

Nothing could have seemed more unpromising for results when we began our work than the site of the ruins of this ancient village. All that was to be seen of the once populous pueblo of Sikyatki was a series of mounds strewn with fragments of pottery and scantily covered with characteristic desert vegetation.

These mounds are situated between two and three miles east of Walpi, among the foothills at the base of the mesa. No fragment of its former walls stood above the mounds, although the observer could readily trace outlines of rooms over the surface of the ground. From an examination of the site it was apparent that the groundplan of this pueblo was of rectangular form, with rows of rooms about a central court. There was an elevation like an acropolis at one corner, crowned by rooms one or more stories high, from the roof of which a wide view could be obtained over the adjacent plain, which stretched from its base to the entrance to Keam's canyon, in which is now situated the Moki school.

It is universally declared by all the most reliable priests conversant with Hopi lore that Sikyatki fell prior to the coming of the Spaniards, who appear in legends as the long-gowned or metal-shirted men. All the stories which I have gathered bearing on this point coincide, and there is no dissent. Again, we have a list of Tusayan towns, which has come down to us from 1583, and we can locate these with accuracy. They correspond with the names of villages still inhabited, and Sikyatki is not found in that enumeration. While this negative evidence alone may not appear decisive, so far as it goes it supports the traditions that Sikyatki was a prehistoric pueblo, destroyed before Spanish records began. If we add to the evidences given that afforded by archeology, which, as it will appear, is likewise nega

1 See "Awatobi, An Archeological Verification of a Tusayan Legend,” Amer. Anthrop., Oct., 1893.

tive, we have strong presumption, if not proof, of our thesis; in all our excavating no sign of any object which showed the influence of Spanish presence was found-no glass, no Spanish glazed pottery, no metal implements, nothing which we could be sure came to that ancient pueblo from the followers of the conquistadores. Tradition, reinforced by the ancient appearance of the mounds, absence of any reference to the town in Spanish documents, and failure to find traces of European influence on buried objects indicate that the town was prehistoric, and certify that studies of these objects will show, so far as they go, the nature of prehistoric culture in Tusayan.

While it is claimed by Hopi traditionists that old Sikyatki was destroyed in prehistoric times by Walpi warriors, they likewise insist that the former inhabitants were of the same blood as themselves, and the best-informed members of certain Walpi phratries say that they are direct descendants of survivors of the ill-starred pueblo. This last claim is important, implying that the former culture has been transmitted, and rendering it safe to apply the principle of interpreting archeology by ethnology, just as the paleontologist determines kinship of fossils by anatomy of living genera. However considerable the innovations are which have crept into Tusayan life in historic times through Spanish and American influences since Sikyatki fell, there runs a thread through the generations connecting historic and prehistoric culture of such a nature that we are justified in using a knowledge of the present in the interpretation of ancient objects which were found.'

So far as architecture is concerned, we need not dwell on the fact that the character of the ruin shows that the prehistoric Sikyatkians were sedentary and agricultural people, with all those words imply. They chose for the site of their pueblo not an inaccessible mesa, for the reason that they had not yet been harassed by Ute, Apache, or Navaho. They lived on the foothills contiguous to their farms. At that time Walpi was likewise. on the lower terrace of the mesa and did not remove to the summit until long after the Spaniards came. The incursions of nomads from the north had not begun, no doubt because they

1 Fortunately the ruin of Awatobi presents us the link between the prehistoric and the historic Tusayan culture. This pueblo was inhabited when Sikyatki was destroyed and continued a populous community well into the historical epoch.

were fully employed or effectually resisted by the cliff people of the San Juan.

Sikyatki in its prime was in places four stories high, with a central court, which is an old architectural feature. From an examination of its groundplan I conclude that this pueblo was much closer architecturally to the Rio Grande villages than are the modern Hopi towns, and this differentiation is as a rule more pronounced in historic than in prehistoric villages.

We shall later see that the ancient culture of all Pueblo stocks of the linguistic divisions-Keresan, Tanoan, Zuñian, and Tusayan-was closer than the existing culture of the several members. The ancient cultus stadium was more uniform than the modern, for the latter has been profoundly modified in divergent lines according to the foreign elements with which it has been brought in contact.1

None of the objects found at Sikyatki give a better idea of the artistic taste of prehistoric Tusayan than the pottery, which embraces a great variety of vessels of many shapes and degrees of excellence. The collection from Sikyatki numbers more than 800 pieces, of which over 500 were decorated with beautifully colored designs. The majority of these were obtained from the cemeteries, which are situated in the sands outside the pueblo in the cardinal directions. It was customary in prehistoric times to deposit with the dead bowls, vases, and ladles or dippers containing votive offerings of food or such objects as were used before death. An examination of these gives us an instructive insight into the mortuary customs of these people, and as the buried objects show evidences of long use before interment, they reveal interesting glimpses of the utensils and paraphernalia which were used by the living.

A careful examination of the beautiful productions of the prehistoric potters of Tusayan leads me to say that for fineness of ware, symmetry of form, and beauty of artistic decoration the Sikyatki pottery is greatly superior to any which is made by modern Hopi potters. This art has at present, as they confess, become greatly inferior to what it was in prehistoric times. So far as the artistic taste goes as indicative of a culture stage, we have data at hand to prove that before the Spaniards entered

1 So far as examined, degeneracy of modern ware as compared with ancient seems to be the rule over the whole Pueblo area.

New Mexico the pottery of Tusayan was far superior to that made today after three centuries of foreign influence.

But this ancient pottery of Tusayan can bear comparison, to its credit, not only with modern Pueblo ware, but also with that of any aboriginal people of America north of Mexico, and I venture the statement that to the extent with which I am familiar with ceramic productions of the aborigines of the United States there are no products of their handiwork which equal that of the potters of this pueblo. While this may seem to be claiming much, it is not more than is deserved, and considering the work of other tribes which adorns our museums it is no mean position to stand near the head of the aboriginal potters of North America but in saying this I would not necessarily claim that the culture of the Pueblos was for that reason higher than that of some other Indians. The fact that a people build stone houses is no sign they are in a culture stage higher than the nomad. A Kiowa or a Comanche tent is no inferior structure. The Pueblo people made marvels of earthenware, since their environment naturally turned their craft in that direction and their sedentary life made it possible for them to develop along this line. In other forms of development they were inferior to many North American Indians. The hunter tribes far excelled them in implements of the chase, while their carving does not equal that of the peoples of the northwest coast.

It is generally conceded by technologists that a knowledge of the potter's wheel was unknown among prehistoric Pueblos, but the symmetry in form of the pottery would be incomprehensible if the rotary principle in fashioning globular vessels were not recognized by the ancient potters. While there is no evidence of the use of the potter's wheel in ancient Tusayan, I believe that the symmetry of old food bowls was brought about by revolving the unfinished object around the hand, and that the principle of the potter's wheel was recognized and made use of in ancient as in modern fashioning of ceramic ware.

I found no trace of a glaze on ancient Sikyatki pottery, and ascribe the polished surfaces so common on it to the pressure of the rubbing stones. In the Awatobi pottery, however, a well marked glaze of the black pigments, such as is found on some similar Zuñi ware, was detected. This glaze occurs on two fragments, but we have no means of deciding that they are prehistoric.