Talk:Ancient Pueblo Peoples

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	This article is part of WikiProject Indigenous peoples of North America, which collaborates on Native American, First Nations, and related subjects on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
Start	This article has been rated as Start-Class on the assessment scale.
Suggested article edit guidelines: To help us prioritise our workload, and in readiness for Wikipedia:1.0, we need to assess our articles for Quality. If this article is Unassessed, please assess it. See the Article Classification for instructions. If you disagree with a rating, you can change it or discuss it at Article Classification. Before assessing this article, be sure to check the existing Archive of assessments made under the previous system (used until July 2006), and feel free to help in migrating the existing comments besides from adding your own evaluation. After assessing this article's quality, please make sure it to add it to the Lists at Article Classification, following the grading scheme detailed there.
This article has no comments yet. If appropriate, please review the article and leave comments here to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article and what work it needs.

WikiProject Echo has identified Ancient Pueblo Peoples as a foreign language featured article. You may be able to improve this article with information from the French language Wikipedia.

Contents 1 Anasazi not ancient pueblo 2 The "disappearance" of the Anasazi 3 Media References 4 Use of Objectionable Terms 5 Commons category name controversy 6 Cannibalism

[edit] Anasazi not ancient pueblo

Fact: the pueblo and anasazi are DIFFERENT. Although it is widely accepted that the pueblo are the decendants of the anasazi, they are infact vastly different. The article title must be changed back to anasazi.

[edit] The "disappearance" of the Anasazi

I have a problem with the section that follows and immediately discredits the "disappearance" theories without even attempting to discuss them:

"Most modern Pueblo peoples (whether Keresans, Hopi, or Tanoans) and historians like James W. Loewen, in his book Lies Across America, assert these people did not "vanish," as is commonly portrayed, but merged into the various pueblo peoples whose descendants still live in Arizona and New Mexico. This perspective is not new and was also presented in reports from early 20th century anthropologists, including Frank Hamilton Cushing, J. Walter Fewkes and Alfred V. Kidder. Many modern Pueblo tribes trace their lineage from settlements in the Anasazi area and areas inhabited by their cultural neighbors, the Mogollon. For example, the San Ildefonso Pueblo people believe that their ancestors lived in both the Mesa Verde area and the current Bandelier."

The entire discussion is encapsulated in the phrase "as is commonly portrayed." If it's commonly portrayed -- shouldn't the common portrayal be discussed? Shouldn't the theories and theorists be cited?

While I am no expert, I've read plenty of discussion from people who are experts who do believe that there was some sort of disappearance or mass exodus, not explained by theories in the above paragraph. Shouldn't this be included? In fact, the above paragraph seems absolutely incomplete - as if it followed a paragraph on the disappearance, as if its rebutting an argument that was never made.

This whole article seems very non-NPOV to me, focused on ignoring what the article itself calls a "common portrayal" and choosing instead to waste bandwidth on debating the term "Anasazi." 172.191.72.191 16:20, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

So ........., if you would like, go ahead and add some of those "theories". But --the idea of a "vanished" people-- well, that portrayal originated in the media. It makes a better story than a migration to more dependable sources of water, i.e. river valleys and drainage areas with higher rainfall. "Vanished" or "Lost Tribe" also sold more books and lecture tickets for popular writers. But, even with the popular portrayal, I don't think that anyone ever seriously thought they disappeared into midair, or that they all were massacred, or that they all died of a virulent disease or that they were picked up by UFO's.

The biggest questions about the Anasazi were always "Where did they go?" and "Why did they leave?" Since the article is clear on the prevailing opinion on "Where?," perhaps we should add more information on "Why?" The most commonly accepted reasons are summarized briefly above the segment you quote. College classes over the years have discussed many reasons why these people might have chosen to leave their homeland: drought, environmental degradation, de-forestation, hostility from new arrivals, religious change, even influence from MesoAmerican cultures. These ideas ebb and flow, as interests and fashions change. Expansion on those reasons might be a good addition here, and good sources are available. Would a paragraph on those reasons address your concerns? I've added a few of the points above. WBardwin 04:36, 26 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Media References

"*The X-Files tv series has several connections with the Anasazi and Navajo throughout the seasons." -contribution by an anonymous editor 217.208.53.14 moved here for discussion.

Specific X-files information would be helpful. A section on media portrayals (good and bad) might be interesting. I remember a couple of PBS things in the last few years as well. Comments welcome. WBardwin 16:52, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Well... There's an episode called Anasazi... but although I do agree they've been mentioned a couple of times I don't quite remember which ones specifically, nor their place in the story. -- MiG 01:55, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Use of Objectionable Terms

"Today, the Navajo, Theif(sic) in their language, still consider the decendents of the Ancestral Puebloans to be enemies."

Moved anon contribution from the article for discussion. Not true of the Navajo people I know -- unless you are referring to the recent conflict with the Hopi and that was the fault of the US federal governement. Expanded information and sources please. WBardwin 28 June 2005 18:30 (UTC)

IN RESPONSE

As you say in a reminder to yourself: "...Absence of evidence for your hypothesis does not mean that the opposite of the hypothesis is true, nor does it mean that the hypothesis must be false. Likewise, absence of evidence against your hypothesis does not mean that the hypothesis is true, or that the opposite of your hypothesis is false."

It is purposely so that there is an absence of evidence for the reasons why Navajos choose to call Ancestral Puebloans as Anasazi which has a literal translation of "The Enemies of our Ancestors." The reason to use Anasazi is to perpetuate the true feelings of Navajo jealousy and hate toward Puebloans. The Navajo mentality is to take what they can not have through falsehoods and ambiguity, and simultaneously blame the US Federal Government for their wrong doings. To truly understand what is said here is to understand why the Navajos were force by the US Army on the "Long Walk". Please read: Pedro Pino: Governor of Zuni Pueblo, 1830-1878 written by E. Richard Hart. ISBN: 0874215633

The thievery of the Navajo people reported today is a long standing stigma witnessed and expressed by the 19 Pueblos of New Mexico and other bordering tribes in the southwest including Hopi. Moreover, the rest of the 510 federally recognized Native American tribes would testify that the Navajo people are thieves. Shiwi 8 July 2005 05:05 (UTC)

Pejorative terms for their neighbors is a long standing tradition among peoples of the Americas (and probably the world). And, if the meaning of the term is "thief," it would probably make sense that modern Navajo prefer the name Dine. But it would violate Wiki's NPOV to call all Navajo (Dine) people "thieves", and Wiki guidelines encourage us to avoid presenting our personal opinion and emotions as fact. Relationships between the Navajo (and their cousins the Apache) and the Pueblo people have a checkered history. Pre-historically and historically, they often traded with the pueblo's and wintered in their territory. Relationships were not always peaceful, and in some cases real emnity existed between the groups. I'm sure some thievery occurred as well. Some historians believe their trade relationship contributed to the Pueblo attempt cast off the Spanish yoke. But, according to Spanish records, a real and productive trade relationship existed.

Since Anasazi is a historic term used in references, and our readers would be referencing information by that term, it is appropriate to use the term in the encyclopedia's article. I am not certain when or how the use of the Navajo term Anasazi for the ancient pueblo people emerged. I suspect it was simply because the Navajo lived in the areas where the first professional pot hunters began digging. It would be an interesting project to find out, but the sources would probably be obscure. I also suspect that it would be difficult to document any modern Navajo conspiracy to continue using the term. However, if your point is that the term "Anasazi" carries cultural baggage, I would agree with you. That is why it is not formally used by modern archaeologists. If you have some references, a couple of sentences on the origin of the term, its historic use, and modern connotations to the descendants of the ancient people would be a good addition to the article.

It is very interesting to hear your perspective. Does Wiki have an article on modern relationships between Native people of the Southwest? If not, have you considered writing one? That would be great! Comments welcome. WBardwin 8 July 2005 18:16 (UTC)

It is ironic to say that pejorative terms, personal opinions and emotions are discouraged from use as fact, but in the same breadth a reinforcement of the term Anasazi is encouraged for historic purposes. The name Anasazi is of the same effect as "nigger". The word "nigger" is an extremely controversial term and is discouraged in its use. Therefore, it is not at all appropriate to use the term "Anasazi" in the encyclopedia’s article. Modern archeologist prefer to use names derived from the Puebloans, such as Hisatsinom, or others such as Chacoans, etc.

And, for the same reason to not use "Anasazi" or "nigger", Diné is the prefered name for Navajo at their request. With this in mind therefore, it is my request to discourage you from perpetuating the use of "Anasazi" as the preferred historical term.

I ask you to make this request as part of the information you provide in your Wikipedia entry for "Anasazi".

I am relatively new to this forum, but I am working up to the level of discussing relationships between Native People of the Southwest and other special topics; hence my comment to your entry. You should consider my perspective words to be authentic from the Southwest, for I am Shiwi.

Please reference my comments regarding the Zuni language portrayed in the "Zuni Enigma" by Yaw Davis. Her theory is another example of falsehoods perpetuated by mass media through her book. My truth revealing comments were banned from Amazon.com at her request. This shows you to what degree and means are put forth to prohibit perspectives from the indigenous people being written about. So much for her open mindedness in the research.

Nevertheless, you can download RealPlayer [1] and listen online [2] to the rebuttal by the Zuni Councilmen, religious leaders and official representatives on her book and her theory on the Zuni Language. Along with Yaw Davis, they assess her book to answer the following questions: Did a group of thirteenth century Japanese pilgrims come to the American Southwest and merge with the people of Zuni? Did these Asians influence the language and religion of the Zuni people? According to Dr. Nancy Yaw Davis, the answer to both questions is yes. She claims to have uncovered evidence that suggests the Zuni were visited by Japanese travelers some seven hundred years ago. Is it true? Guests include Nancy Yaw Davis, author of "The Zuni Enigma" and Malcolm Bowekety, member of the Zuni Nation. Recordings provided by Native America Calling and American Indian Radio on Satellite (Airos.org) [3] Shiwi 8 July 2005 1:15(GMT-7:00)

I do appreciate your perspective. But, when pejorative terms are used in a historic time/place, they become part of history. You will find "nigger" used in this encyclopedia, both in a historic sense and in modern arguments over correct usage and human rights. It was a historic term, although presently offensive, and so is referenced in the encyclopedia. Other prejorative terms used by one group to describe another are also referenced, but not emphasized. "Anasazi" is not the name of the article, nor is it the preferred term, and is included only so people can find the article from their current frame of reference. Hopefully they will learn to use a more appropriate term, although a more concise name than "Ancient Pueblo Peoples" would be easier to reference and perhaps remember. Unfortunately, there is no native or archaelogical concensus on a new name, to my knowledge. The article currently notes that modern Pueblo people object to the historic and modern usage of the name. If you wanted to make that point more strongly, I would have no objection.

As to your heritage and interest in presenting a native perspective, welcome. We have a very small group of people writing about native peoples here, and most of us seem to be pretty "white." You might talk to User:Kevin Myers. He has done some very good historical work on native issues, mostly dealing with the east coast and with the impact of the Western contact (see Population_history_of_American_indigenous_peoples). Western and Southwestern native peoples have been sadly neglected on Wiki (there are a plethora of techies here!). Good articles, historic and modern, on your people and other relevant areas would be wonderful. WBardwin 8 July 2005 21:32 (UTC)

You are absolutely right about pejorative terms used in a historic time/place, and they become part of history. However, Anasazi is not so historic, but rather an emergence of modern times. The term began its use in historical time reference within the past 10 years, if not less, and therefore does not constitute as historical in the sense it is used. Because there is a consensus among modern day Pueblo people to dismiss Anasazi as the name to use, the current Hopi name, Hisatsinom, is preferred. I will make this point more strongly on your entry. It is okay to leave Anasazi at the very top for reference as you say, but I recommend to eliminate the term, Anasazi and replace it with Hisatsinom in the body of the text. Shiwi 8 July 2005 16:50(GMT-7:00)

Your changes will be ok for now, but I don't believe the general group of Wiki editors will support "Hisatsimon" as the preferred term without a written or internet source which shows concensus either from academics or from the native people descended from the Ancient Pueblos. You imply there is a concensus on the negative side -- so be sure and cite it. Do you have one for the use of the new term? We would need more concensus than just from Hopi speakers, I'm afraid. But I have noticed that Hisatsimon is coming into more frequent use in articles and academic works. So it may win out over time.

As to your time frame -- I must disagree. "Anasazi" was used in academic publications at least as early as the turn of the twentieth century, by ethnologists including J. Walter Fewkes. It has been used academically since that time in history, anthropology and archaeology classes and texts. The term has become culturally controversial within the last twenty years or so, to my knowledge. During the same time period, ironically, it has become more widely used in media and print. Consequently, I would expect the term is much better known to the general public than anything else anyone has proposed. If you want to write a history on the use of the term, that could make an interesting section here or even a separate article. I probably have some of the early ethnologist's, who used the term, on my shelves should we need references for the early date. As I said, I expect it came into use when the local Navajo were asked something like "were these your ancestors?" by early anthropologists. Your perspective may indicate that the usage of the term has changed, over time, into something more negative than it was originally. Again an interesting point. You might look over the very well written "Nigger" article for ways this topic could be addressed. WBardwin 8 July 2005 23:23 (UTC)

Additional notes:

• a quick review of my book shelves finds a reference to the term "Anasazi" in conjunction with the discoverer of Mesa Verde (circa 1888), and many other ruins in the San Juan area, Richard Wetherill. He referred to the ancient people as "Cliff Dwellers" but is reported to have been told by a Ute chief that these were houses of the "Ancient Ones" (no indication of the language the Ute used to make the reference). An online reference said that Wetherill himself was nicknamed "Anasazi" later in life. I would have to come up with firmer data before I put it in the article -- but it does focus the date.
• Also, in about 1859 - 1861, a geologist and photographer began examining ruins in the San Juan basin. I have no information yet about any name he may have attached to the ancient pueblo peoples, but a slightly later photographer named Jackson used a Ute term "Hovenweep" for the area now in the national monument.
• Other materials say that Navajo names were given to cliff dwellings and free standing ruins. So the existing tribes in the area were used as a source of information for naming sites and ruins, and probably the ancient people as well.
• Pecos Classification is a division of all of known Ancient Pueblo Peoples culture into chronological phases. The original classification originated in 1927, at an archæological conference held in Pecos, New Mexico. In the classification, Anasazi seems to have been a common term for people of the later pueblo periods. This system is still widely used by archaeologists.

This is kind of fun -- could be a good section of the article. WBardwin 9 July 2005 07:13 (UTC)

Okay, now that you've found references by non-Pueblo descendents, shift your focus on the name used by Pueblo people. Because, it is more appropriate that way. Look on both sides of the coin. I too will do my research, but need more time. I'm battling 3 fronts as we speak. I will try to get input from the All Indian Pueblo Council of New Mexico, comprised of the 19 Pueblo Governors, to find an agreed name. The All Indian Pueblo Council (AIPC) is a consortium of the nineteen (19) Pueblo Indian tribes of New Mexico. The nineteen (19) Pueblos include the Pueblos of Acoma, Cochiti, Isleta, Jemez, Laguna, Nambe, Picuris, Pojoaque, San Felipe, San Ildefonso, San Juan, Sandia, Santa Ana, Santa Clara, Santo Domingo, Taos, Tesuque, Zia, and Zuni. These Pueblos and their Governors comprise the All Indian Pueblo Council, whose offices are located in Albuquerque, NM. Each of these Pueblos maintain individual sovereign governing bodies which elect their leadership traditionally (by appointment) or through an elective process.

AIPC was first recognized as a sovereign entity by the Spanish government in 1598, and in 1965 adopted a constitution to promote justice and encourage the common welfare, to foster the social and economic advancement of all the Pueblo Indians, to preserve and protect their common interest.

AIPC, Inc. is the non-profit subsidiary of the All Indian Pueblo Council. Its purpose is to provide essential services that would otherwise be inaccessible to the Pueblo people. The scope of their programs include the areas of health, education, job training, economic development, environmental protection, and child welfare.

All Indian Pueblo Council, Inc.

Street Address:

123 Fourth Street SW

Albuquerque, NM 87102

Mailing Address:

P.O. Box 400

Albuquerque, NM 87103

Telephone Numbers (505) 884-3820

Fax (505) 884-1474

Shiwi 9 July 2005 08:20(GMT-7:00)

Great effort -- I hope there is a general concensus or preference from the Pueblo side. That would make objections easier to deal with on all related articles. Do you think there is a history among the various tribes of many different names in different languages? I imagine this organization has written material about the various tribes and their history. That would also be an informative section - showing how the ancient people were viewed by various descendants. Historical Wiki articles, dealing with archaeologists, national parks, and sites will probably continue to use both terms, but we can make it clear that Hisatsinom (or Ancient Pueblo, ...whatever) is the modern preferred term for Pueblo people and push it as a non-academic term. Academic references take forever to change, and Wiki would probably not have much influence. But Wiki's preference would increase the new name's presence on the web.

I know you feel an urgency here, but in my time on the Wiki, I've eased back and learned that preparation and research makes a better product and reduces friction. We have to remember, too, that Wiki policies prohibit "original research." So our material has to be from written sources accessible to other people here. So, if the council has come or does come to a decision on a name, a press release or mention on a web page would give us a reference to cite. Gather what you can, as you can, and I (and hopefully others who notice our discussion) will chime in too. I think we have the beginnings of a really innovation article or section even now. Look forward to working with you. WBardwin 9 July 2005 18:44 (UTC)

From book, "Prehistory of the Southwest," by archaeologist Linda Cordell, discussing the word's etymology and use:

"The name "Anasazi" has come to mean "ancient people," although the word itself is Navajo, meaning "enemy ancestors." It is unfortunate that a non-Pueblo word has come to stand for a tradition that is certainly ancestral Pueblo. The term was first applied to ruins of the Mesa Verde by Richard Wetherill, a rancher and trader who, in 1888-1889, was the first Anglo-American to explore the sites in that area. Wetherill knew and worked with Navajos and understood what the word meant. The name was further sanctioned in archaeology when it was adopted by Alfred V. Kidder, the acknowledged dean of Southwestern Archaeology. Kidder felt that is was less cumbersome than a more technical term he might have used. Subsequently some archaeologists who would try to change the term have worried that because the Pueblos speak different languages, there are different words for "ancestor," and using one might be offensive to people speaking other languages. My own preference is to use Ancient Pueblo or Ancestral Pueblo, where posible, but this too is problematical. Such usage obscures the observation that the Mogollon tradition is also considered by many to be ancestral to Pueblo peoples. Further, archaeologists are themselves tradition bound and would not be dissuaded from continuing to use the term Anasazi, which features so prominently in their professional literature."

Narrowing it down -- Wetherill is probably the origin of the name. See story above. WBardwin 17:12, 31 July 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Commons category name controversy

Hi folks. I am a Commoner (have probably made over 10K edits there), and seldom venture outside of my hole to the outside world of the wikis. There is a dispute on Commons regarding the name for the category corresponding to Hisatsimon/Ancient Pueblo Peoples/Anasazi. We are a multilingual database and I note that most wikis use the term Anasazi. However the country of origin of this term is the United states so it seems a US authority should be used, and en:wiki is the corresponding authority for that country.

I just learned about this naming controversy a few days ago and in deference to what you folks have collectively decided, have taken the position that Ancient Pueblo Peoples should be used. I would like to see the support for the statement that the term is pejorative. The quotes I have seen thus far equivocate. Can someone provide me a strong uniquivocal quote from some authority (preferably an authority from the community of Pueblo peoples) that the term is pejorative and that it is the dominant interpretation amoung pueblo peoples. I find it difficult to believe it is as intense as the use of the term nigger from a white to black person that aren't close friends. Really, in some neighborhoods in the US you could die from using that particular term.

Thanks in advance for any assistance you folks might render. In the meantime, here is a collection of pictures related to this subject. -Mak Thorpe 17:34, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for your interest. But -- as in most "politically correct" debates, I'm afraid your "strong uniquivocal quote" probably doesn't yet exist. Archaeologists, historians and other scholars still strongly prefer "Anasazi" although most of them will occasionally use "Ancient Pueblo People" as an alternate reference. To my knowledge, the governments/councils of modern Pueblo peoples haven't addressed the issue in an official manner. A younger, more militant, subset of the Pueblo peoples (which seem to strongly resent the word "Anasazi") have become quite vocal in the last decade or so. I also suspect the word has become "loaded"" with more modern connotations due to conflicts with the Navajo in the southwest. Until agreement in the real world is reached, I would continue to advocate "Ancient Pueblo People" with both an "Anasazi" redirect and mention in relevant articles for Wikipedia. Best wishes. WBardwin 20:55, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

Ok. I suspected there would not be, but thought I'd ask on the off chance anyway. Unfortunately, this set off an edit war on Commons. I have a few questions on the facts concerning how this article came to be named the way it is.

1. My understanding is the article was originally named Anasazi. Correct?
2. Somewhere in 2004, it was renamed to the present name. (Correct?)
3. Did some sort of discussion precede the renaming, or was the rename done boldly by a single individual?
4. Approximately how may people have joined in the debate on whether this was the correct move?
5. I see no talk pages prior to spring 2005. Was there simply no dicussion prior, or was the data moved to an obsure location/lost?

-Mak Thorpe 06:13, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

I began actively editing in Feb 2005 -- and this article was Ancient Pueblo Peoples at that time. In regards to your questions, I have not yet looked back in history. This has been a generally quiet article during my time, with perhaps three other active editors. The most extensive discussion (that I'm aware of) on the name topic is found above. An editor whose time here was brief wanted to eliminate all reference to Anasazi -- but eventually conceded that the word has some historic context. I expect the topic might become hot and acrimonious at intervals. Sorry that I'm not more help. WBardwin 09:25, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

Thanks very much. I do not want to misrepresent the process on WP and now have a clearer perspective. Regards and thanks for sharing your expertise on this subject. I recall my first trip to Mesa Verde as a boy, and was particularly intrigued by what I saw there. -Mak Thorpe 02:39, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

Has anyone ever heard someone named Anasazi? And if so, what do you think of the name? Should they change their name to Ancient Pueblo Peoples? I understand completely the stress that it is causing, but it is ancient history, so I would advise you all to ask a Navajo person, does the name Anasazi really bother them. If so, use the term Ancient Pueblo Peoples. If not, stick with Anasazi. It's shorter.

I'm afraid you misunderstand. The Navajo are not descendants of the Anasazi, but use the term regularly. The various Pueblo people, including the Zuni, appear to be descendants. It is a subset of the Pueblo that resent the use of the term "Anasazi" which appears to be of Ute origin and may mean "ancient enemy" or "ancient people.". WBardwin 08:54, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

Hi my name is Unity and I am looking up Anasazi for social studies grade it is hard too find stuff about Anasazi.

[edit] Cannibalism

The human remains found in the human coprolites is... fairly conclusive, I fear. 68.228.89.148 04:37, 29 March 2007 (UTC)