THE RUINS OF SOUTHERN ARIZONA. 49 



that there are no gravel terraces withm a reasonable distance. In the part of southern 

 Arizona and northern Sonora under discussion, I examined the ruins of about twenty-five 

 villages. Not one was located primarily in a position favorable for easy defense; even 

 when sites suitable for this purpose were close at hand they were not utilized for the main 

 village, but only in a secondary fashion as refuges, apparently in troublesome times, 

 perhaps toward the last days of the Hohokam. Water, also, to judge from present con- 

 ditions, was not a prime factor in the choice of sites for villages. Fully half of the ruins that 

 I examined lie from 0.51 to 8 miles from the nearest permanent spring or perennial stream. 

 All the villages were obviously placed where it would be most easy to reach rich alluvial 

 land capable of producing abundant crops if properly irrigated. Fewkes, Mindeleff, Hough, 

 and other anthropologists who have written on the similar ruins farther north and east 

 all emphasize the peaceful, agricultural character of the ancient inhabitants. The mode 

 of life of the Hohokam, whoever they were, clearly had no resemblance to that of such 

 warlike, hunting tribes as the modern Apaches. Agriculture was almost their sole rehance, 

 for domestic animals other than the dog were unknown in pre-Columbian North America. 

 Beasts of the chase were not eaten to any great extent, as appears from the scarcity of their 

 bones in the various old pueblos and cliff-dweUings where ancient scrap-heaps have been 

 found on the upper tributaries of the Gila and Salt rivers and elsewhere. Some bones, 

 to be sure, are found, showing that the Hokoham had no aversion to flesh, but the number 

 is not large. Traces of corn and beans and, to a much less extent, of wild products are 

 found in much greater abundance, showing that the main source of livelihood was 

 agriculture. 



There is still another point on which stress should be laid at the outset. In the absence 

 of any proof to the contrary, we shall assume that the Hohokam were in general the same 

 as the rest of mankind. For instance, if we find ten houses of ordinary size in a village, 

 we shall assume that ten families lived there. This may prove to be a mistake, but the 

 l:)urden of proof is on those who assume that ten houses represent less or more than ten 

 families. Likewise we shall assume that the Hohokam did not leave a good location for a 

 poor one except temporarily under stress of exceptional circumstances. The writings of 

 anthropologists are full of assumptions directly contrary to this. For instance, Mindeleff 

 says that "A band of 500 village-building Indians [by which he means the people whom we 

 have called Hohokam] might leave the ruins of fifty villages in the course of a single cen- 

 tury."* That is, he assumes a degree of mobihty unparalleled among any modern agri- 

 cultural or village-building people. Possibly he is right, but such an assumption can be 

 accepted only after careful proof. Accordingly in the following pages the reader must 

 bear in mind that, when density of population is spoken of, we refer to the density which 

 would have existed if the Hohokam had been like other normal races in the same stage of 

 development. 



One final point deserves to be kept in mind. In comparing the capacity of the country 

 to support population at present with its capacity in the past, allowance must be made 

 for the fact that the ancient inliabitants were handicapped by the lack of many of the 

 accessories which we deem most essential. Cattle-raising, the cultivation of wheat, barley, 

 and oats, the use of iron or metal tools, the industries connected with transportation by rail, 

 wagon, horse, donkey, or any other means except the backs of men and dogs, and finally 

 the many activities connected with mining, were all unknown to the Hohokam. None 

 of these things existed in the America of their day. Not only was the population entirely 

 agricultural, but its agriculture was carried on without any facilities except stone imple- 

 ments, and plants such as corn and beans, indigenous to America. 



* 13th Annual Report of the Bureau of Ethnology, 1891-92, p. 259. 



