MINDELEFF] ABSENCE OF DEFENSIVE MOTIVE UNE 
The masonry of the ruins and the constructive expedients employed 
by the builders are an insurmountable obstacle in the way of the 
hypothesis that the cliff ruins represent a primitive or intermediate 
stage in the growth of pueblo architecture. The builders were well 
acquainted with the principles and methods of coustruction employed 
in the best work found in other regions; the inferiority of their work is 
dite to special conditions and to the locality. The presence of a number 
of extraneous features, both in methods and principles employed, is 
further evidence in the same line. These features are certainly foreign 
to this region, some of them suggest even Spanish or Mexican origin, 
which implies comparatively recent occupancy. 
The openings—doorways and windows—found in the ruins are of the 
regular pueblo types. They are arranged as convenience dictated, with- 
out any reference to the defensive motive, which, if it existed at all, 
exercised less influence here than it did in the modern pueblos. There 
is no evidence of the use of very modern features, such as the paneled 
wooden doors found in the pueblos; nor, on the other hand, are there 
any very primitive expedients or methods—none which can not be found 
today in the modern villages. 
The roof, floors, and timber work are also essentially the same as the 
examples found in the modern pueblos. The notable scarcity of roofing 
timbers in the ruins ean probably be explained by the hypothesis of 
successive occupancies and subsequent or repeated use of material 
difficult to obtain. So far as regards the use of timber as an element 
of masonry construction the results obtained in De Chelly are rude and 
primitive as compared with the work found in other regions. 
The immense number of storage cists found in De Chelly are a natu- 
ral outgrowth of the conditions there and support the hypothesis that 
the cliff outlooks were merely farming shelters. The small size of many 
of the settlements made the construction of storage cists a necessity. 
The storage of water was very seldom attempted. A large proportion 
of the cists found in De Chelly were burial places and of Navaho origin. 
As a rule they are far more difficult of access than the ruins. 
There is no evidence of the influence of the defensive motive. Defen- 
sive works on the approaches*to sites are never found, nor can such 
influence be detected in the arrangement of openings, in the character of 
masonry, or in the ground plan. If the cliff ruins were defensive struc- 
tures, an influence strong enough to bring about the occupancy of such 
inconvenient and unsuitable sites would certainly be strong enough also 
to bring about some slight modifications in the architecture, such as 
would render more suitable sites available. If we assume that the cliff 
ruins were farming outlooks, occupied only during the farming season, 
aud then only for a few days or weeks at a time, the character of the 
sites occupied by them seems natural enough, for the same sifes are 
used by the Navaho today in connection with farming operations. 
The distribution of kivas in the ruins of De Chelly affords another in- 
dication that the occupancy of that region was quiet and little disturbed, 
