556 ETHNOGEOGEAPHY OF THE TEWA INDIANS [eth. ANN. 20 



L'law. This settlement i.s given as. "Una de Gato"' on an official 

 map/ which locates the settlement on the west side of the arroyo 

 [29:70], slightly north of east from Golden [29:75]. The map is, 

 however, not very clear. Tliis settlement appears to give its 

 name to the arroyo [29:70], q. v. 



Valley Ranch. This is a ranch and tourist resort about 3 miles north 

 of Pecos Pueblo ruin [29:33]. 



Span. "Arroyo de la Yuta".^ This apparently means ' arroyo of the 

 Ute Indian woman.' 



The former fields of the pueblo [29:82] cau be traced along the Arroyo del 

 Tejon [29:80], and along the dry Arroyo de la Yuta, in places at a distance of 

 2 and 3 miles from the ruins [29:82]. . . Along the Arroyo de la Yuta the 

 banks are too f^teep [to admit of primitive irrigation] and the water flows 10 to 

 1.5 feet below the Surrounding levels.^ . 



This arroyo is evidently' somewhere near the pueblo ruin [29:82]. 

 Cf. [29:S0], [29:82]. 



Nameless pueblo ruin west of midway between Bajada [29:2(i] and 

 Cochiti [28:77], perhaps identical with [28:82], [28:8.-)J, or [28:90]. 

 Apparently distinct from nameless pueblo ruin midway l)etween 

 Bajada [29:20] and Cochiti [28:77], below; see quotations and ref- 

 erences under the latter heading. 



Third nameless pueblo ruin mentioned by Bandelier as between 

 Bajada [29:20] and Cochiti [28:77], perhaps identical with [28:82], 

 [28:83], or [28:it0]. See quotations from Bandelier under next 

 entry below. 



Nameless pueblo ruin midway between Bajada [29:26] and Cochiti 

 [28:77], perhaps identical with [29:84], [28:l»(i], or [28:!tl]. Bande- 

 lier is not clear, and although he implies that ho visited the ruin, 

 he does not state on which side of Santa Fe Creek [29:8] it lies. 



Tze-nat-ay [29:29] is not the only ruin on the banks of the Rio de Santa Fe 

 [29:8]. Between the Bajada [29:26] and the outlet of the stream opposite 

 Cochiti [28:77], not le.><s than three others are found along its course. One lies 

 about equidistant from the two pfiints named, and was a communal pueblo like 

 Tze-nat-ay; but the houses were smaller, and I saw only a single estufa. 



At the second ruin [nameless pueblo ruin west of midway lietween Bajada 

 [29:26] and Cochiti [28:77]; see above] I did not notice any estufa. The 

 pottery is the same in both, and so are the other objects. Tze-nat-ay appears 

 to have been quite a large pueblo, and it was probably three, if not four stories 

 high. Neither the Tanos nor the Queres [Keresaus] of Cochiti could give me 

 any information concerning the smaller pueblo [which is the smaller pueblo? 

 Bandelier does not state]. Neither of the two tribes claimed it.* 



Since Tze-nat-ay [29:2!;)] is situated on the south side of Santa 

 Fe Creek [29:8] the chances are that the nameless ruins, at least 



'U.S. Geogr. Surveys West of the 100th Meridian, Part of Central X. Mex., atlas sheet No. 77, Exped. 

 of 1873, '74, '75, '76, '77, and '78. 

 2 Bandelier, Final Report, pt. ii, p. Ill, 1S92. 

 3Il)id., pp. 110, 111. 

 > Ibid., J), ac. 



