Preliminary Results of Testing and
Report of 1997 Excavations at Yellow Jacket Pueblo (Site 5MT5),
Montezuma County, Colorado
Kristin A. Kuckelman
Crow Canyon Archaeological Center, Cortez, CO 81321
Report prepared for
Colorado Historical Society, 1300 Broadway, Denver, CO 80203
The Archaeological Conservancy, 5301 Central Ave. NE, Suite 1218, Albuquerque, NM 87108-1517
25 November 1997
© Crow Canyon Archaeological Center
All Rights Reserved
Preliminary Results of Testing and
Report of 1997 Excavations at Yellow Jacket Pueblo (Site 5MT5),
Montezuma County, Colorado
Crow Canyon Archaeological Center completed its third and final season of research at Yellow Jacket Pueblo (5MT5) in October 1997. This preliminary report summarizes field work completed in 1997, including descriptive and interpretive excavation summaries. The overall results of Crow Canyon's research at Yellow Jacket are also summarized, including mapping, disturbance assessment, site chronology, human remains, and Native American consultation. Descriptive and interpretive papers that include results of this research have been submitted for acceptance to be presented at the 1998 annual meeting of the Society for American Archaeology. The final report on Crow Canyon's research at Yellow Jacket will be produced in an electronic format and is scheduled to be completed in 1999.
Yellow Jacket Pueblo (5MT5) is the largest known ancestral pueblo site in the Mesa Verde region, and was occupied during the late Pueblo II period (AD 1050-1150), and during the Pueblo III period (AD 1150-1300). The site is in the approximate center of a northwest to southeast band of Pueblo III villages reaching from the southeast edge of the Mesa Verde to beyond Montezuma Creek in southeast Utah. Yellow Jacket Pueblo is near the head of Yellow Jacket Canyon, one of the longest and largest canyons in the McElmo drainage. Much of the site is on a relatively flat, sagebrush-covered point (Figure 1) that is bounded on the east by Yellow Jacket Canyon and on the west by Tatum Draw. Both drainages contain reliable springs, making this an attractive settlement location both prehistorically and historically. The name of the site is derived from the yellow jacket wasps that are attracted to these springs.
The size, location and high visibility of Yellow Jacket Pueblo on the landscape have resulted in heavy impacts during the last century by visitors, non-professional excavators, grazing livestock, and by people procuring both modified and unmodified rock from the site. In the mid-1800s, a spring in Yellow Jacket Canyon that is associated with the site served as a watering stop on a well-established wagon route, originally the Spanish Trail. As early as 1900, Prudden (1900) described the site as being "much dug out."
Yellow Jacket Pueblo was first described in print1859 by Newberry (1876), who referred to the site as "Surouaro," a Ute word meaning desolation. Newberry estimated a population for the site of several thousand for several centuries. Holmes (1878), Prudden (1900), and Fewkes (1919:17) also described the site. Yellow Jacket was mapped several times (Lange et al. 1986; Ferguson and Rohn 1987:129); however, only one previous archaeological excavation was undertaken at the site.
In the summer of 1931, C.T. Hurst and V.F. Lotrich from Western State College in Gunnison, Colorado, conducted excavations at a "site" they referred to as "Square Mug House" (Hurst and Lotrich 1932, 1933, 1935b, 1936a, 1937). Eleven kivas and ten rooms were excavated in Square Mug House, and a number of whole vessels were recovered, though little additional information could be found regarding these excavations. Crow Canyon's research showed that the "site" that Hurst and Lotrich called Square Mug House is a Pueblo III roomblock at the eastern edge of Yellow Jacket Pueblo (Figure 2 and Figure 3), which we called the Great Tower Complex.
In the 1950's, the sites in the Yellow Jacket community were the first in Montezuma County to be recorded using the Smithsonian designation system, which is evidence of its high visibility, and probably served to draw even more attention to the site. Also, the site is located along what is now U.S. Highway 666, a heavily-traveled highway. However, impacts to the site appear to have declined in recent years, and non-professional activity has been virtually eliminated on the portion of the site owned by The Archaeological Conservancy.
Professor Joe Ben Wheat and his field school students from the University of Colorado (Lange et al. 1986) conducted extensive excavations for many years at 5MT1 (Stevenson Site and Porter Pueblo) and 5MT3, which are across Tatum Draw to the southwest of 5MT5. These sites contained evidence of Basketmaker III, Pueblo II and Pueblo III occupations.
A sizable portion of Yellow Jacket Pueblo was acquired by The Archaeological Conservancy over a period of several years, beginning in the early 1980's. The Conservancy owns all of the site except for a block in the west-central portion of the site and the portion on the talus slope. Crow Canyon Archaeological Center conducted research at the site from April 1995 to October 1997. The project director of this research was Kristin Kuckelman, and Donna Glowacki assisted.
Crow Canyon's research at Yellow Jacket Pueblo was one part of a large site testing program that was designed to gain better understanding of the pueblo cultural environment in the Mesa Verde region during the Pueblo III period (AD 1150-1300). Crow Canyon's research focused on the Conservancy-owned portion of Yellow Jacket Pueblo, although mapping and some testing also occurred on other portions of the site. The specific goals of this research included producing an accurate map of the site, assessing the extent of damage from non-professional excavations, and establishing site chronology through test excavations. The first two goals were largely accomplished during the first year of research (Glowacki and Kuckelman 1996; Kuckelman and Glowacki 1995). The last goal, which was accomplished with test excavations, required three seasons to complete.
The strategy used to establish site chronology was designed to date the main components at the site, and to assess the scale and intensity of the late Pueblo III occupation. This strategy included excavating a 1-x-2-m test pit along the outside face of the north wall of each roomblock in order to document the architecture and occupation surfaces present without destroying structure floors. The midden associated with each roomblock was tested with two 1-x-1-m excavation pits in order to collect pottery samples of adequate size to establish site chronology.
A slightly different testing approach was used at the Great Tower Complex. Testing was more intensive in this architectural block. It was determined that the block had been almost completely excavated by Western State College in 1931, and dubbed "Square Mug House" (Hurst and Lotrich 1932). Little documentation could be found from that excavation. Seventeen structures and several extramural areas were tested in this block in order to salvage important data regarding the abandonment-period occupation of this late Pueblo III public building.
1997 Field Season
All excavation units were completed by the end of the 1997 field season. This included numerous excavation units that were begun in 1996, and several new excavation units that were opened in 1997. At the close of the the 1997 season, all open excavation units were backfilled. Table 1 summarizes excavation units completed in 1997. In 1997, 13 new test pits were opened, and 21 test pits were continued from the 1996 season (Glowacki 1997, Table 1, erroneously lists completed unit Architectural Area 1200, Segment 1 as "In progress" at the close of the 1996 season). A total of 111 test pits were excavated at the site. In all, 17 2-x-1-m units were excavated to expose north roomblock walls, 57 1-x-1-m and one 1-x-2-m units tested midden areas, 8 1-x-1-m extension units were added to 1-x-2-m units for logistical reasons, 4 1-x-2-m units and one 1-x-1-m unit tested dams and reservoirs, 13 excavation units tested kivas in the Great Tower Complex, 6 1-x-2-m units tested other rooms in the Great Tower Complex, and 4 units tested extramural areas.
A total of 11 test pits were excavated on the talus slope (Figure 4). This was the only testing done on land not owned by The Archaeological Conservancy. Permission to test on this private parcel was generously given by landowners Jack Hawkins, and the late Joe Tipton and his sons, Scott Tipton and Jay Tipton.
The following discussion of 1997 testing is organized by architectural block. An architectural block is defined as a roomblock and its associated kivas, middens and extramural areas. These blocks were numbered sequentially across the site, including blocks located on land not owned by The Archaeological Conservancy. During the 1997 season, ongoing testing in Architectural Blocks 200, 1200, 2400, 2500, 2600 was completed, and new test pits in Architectural Blocks 1200, 3200, 3300 and 3400 were completed (Figure 4 and Figure 5). The number of rooms in each roomblock was estimated using an exposed room in Roomblock 1100 as an indicator of room size.
Architectural Block 200
Architectural Block 200 is a northeast-southwest-oriented roomblock near the south end of the point (Figure 4). The block is approximately 65 m long, and contains ten kivas, two towers and approximately 28 first-story rooms. The northeastern end of this roomblock appears to have been two stories tall originally. The two midden test pits (926N 993E, and 943N 1015E) were completed in 1996. The 2-x-1-m roomblock unit was completed in 1997.
Roomblock 200 (2 x 1 973N 992E/Structure 204): In this excavation unit, the north face of the north roomblock wall was exposed. This wall, as preserved, was 1.19 meters tall, and rested on the south wall of an earlier masonry room, Structure 204. The portion of the masonry exposed in the north roomblock wall is fully coursed, and was constructed of fairly uniform sandstone blocks. This masonry is noticeably more finely executed than that of Structure 204 below. The preserved height of this wall and the amount of rubble in the immediate area suggest that this portion of Roomblock 200 was two stories tall. The strategy of constructing a roomblock on top of an earlier one appears to have been for the purpose of achieving additional height.
Structure 204 is the room on which a section of the Roomblock 200 north wall was built. In the 2-x-1-m excavation unit, portions of the west and south walls, and the southwest corner of the room were exposed. The preserved height of these walls was approximately 85 cm. The masonry is semi-coursed and double stone wide, and was constructed of mostly unshaped sandstone blocks with extruded mortar beds and abundant chinking stones. This masonry is noticeably cruder than the north wall of Roomblock 200. No floor surface was defined in this room. The fill of the room contained no roof fall beams or wall fall, so the structure might have been partly dismantled and intentionally filled to form a foundation for the Roomblock 200 north wall, although the level top of the wall appears too uniform to be a dismantled semi-coursed wall. Structure 204 might be one room in a roomblock, all of which was partly dismantled for the construction of Roomblock 200.
Architectural Block 1200
Architectural Block 1200 is the Great Tower Complex, located at the northeast edge of the site, along the west rim of Yellow Jacket Canyon (Figure 5). Much of this block was excavated in 1931 by students from Western State College, Gunnison, Colorado (Hurst and Lotrich 1932); little documentation has been found from those excavations (Hurst and Lotrich 1932, 1933, 1935a, 1935b, 1936a, 1936b, 1937). Crow Canyon's intensive testing of this architectural block was designed to salvage whatever data possible concerning architectural construction, use and chronology. The intensive testing begun in 1995 was completed in 1997. Fourteeen ongoing excavation units and two new excavation units were completed in 1997 (Table 1).
Segment 2: Segment 2 is a 2-x-1-m test pit east of the main architecture which was designed to expose a section of east-west masonry wall thought to be a dam. This wall is at the west edge of the north-south drainage that bisects the architecture of the Great Tower Complex. The section of wall exposed was 69 cm high and rested on bedrock; the original height is estimated to have been approximately 1.7 m, based on the amount of rubble present in the excavation unit. The masonry was semi-coursed, and might be double-stone-wide-with-core in cross-section, although the full width of the wall was not within the excavation unit, and so was not exposed. The east-west orientation and the location of this wall at the west edge of north-south drainage suggest that it was a dam or other water control device designed to catch or control runoff down the drainage. If the wall originally completely spanned the drainage, it was breached sometime after it was no longer being used. An addtional test unit 1 m to the east (Segment 7) shows that the wall is not present in that area.
Segment 3: Segment 3 is a 2-x-1-m test pit on the east edge of the north-south drainage that bisects the architecture of the Great Tower Complex. This unit was designed to expose the east end of the same wall examined in Segment 2. However, excavation of this unit exposed a section of north-south masonry wall, rather than the east-west wall expected. The preserved height of this wall is 47 cm. It is a semi-coursed, double-stone-wide wall that rests on a layer of reddish sediment 13 to 29 cm thick. This layer of sediment rests on bedrock. The original height of the wall could not be calculated, because any wall fall would have been washed down the drainage. The function of this wall is not clear; it could be the west wall of one or more structures represented by the rubble mound adjacent to the east, or it could be an extramural wall designed to channel or control runoff in the adjacent drainage to the west.
Segment 4/Structures 1224 and 1225: Segment 4 is a 2-x-1-m excavation unit at the south edge of the architectural block. The unit was intended to sample intact midden deposits associated with the Great Tower Complex. However, excavations exposed masonry walls, so excavations in this unit were terminated. Segment 6, adjacent to Segment 4 to the south, was then substituted for Segment 4.
The masonry walls encountered in Segment 4 were exposed approximately 30 cm below modern ground surface. East-west-oriented walls crossed the unit at the north and south ends of the unit, and a north-south wall connected these two walls. The sill of a doorway was documented in the top of the north-south wall as preserved. Portions of two previously undetected rectangular rooms that were mutually accessible were thus documented as Structure 1224 and Structure 1225. Excavation stopped at the tops of the walls. These two rooms were probably not excavated in 1931.
Segment 5/ Structure 1214 and Structure 1222 : Segment 5 is a 1-x-2-m test pit intended to sample the biwall room west of the Great Tower. The biwall room as excavated was designated Structure 1214. Unlike the other structures tested in the Great Tower Complex, this room had not been previously excavated, and the intact stratigraphy greatly enriched our understanding of this structure and the Great Tower.
The biwall rooms are structures that encircle the Great Tower, and were formed by the Great Tower exterior wall and a concentric wall approximately 2 m outside the Great Tower wall. No north or south walls of Structure 1214 were exposed during testing, but the north wall is observable at modern ground surface. The room measures 1.94 m east-west, and greater than 2.5 m north-south. The floor was carefully prepared of several layers of clayey sediment that served to level the uneven bedrock surface. A few small artifacts were incidentally left on the floor. No floor features were encountered, but a small patch of sooting on one area of wall face suggests that a hearth may be present in this room just outside the excavation unit. No other sooting is present on the exposed faces of the east and west structure walls.
The east wall of Structure 1214 (also the west wall of the Great Tower) is preserved to a height of 2.71 m above bedrock. The biwall wall, or the west wall of Structure 1214, is 1.89 m tall. Both of these walls are semi-coursed and are double-stone-with-core in cross-section. The height of the walls and the quantity of rubble in the fill indicates that the walls were originally a minimum of 3.4 m high, which indicates the presence of a second story. Additional evidence of a second story exists in the lower half of the fill in this room, which includes two collapsed roofs, and dozens of building blocks that have one heavily sooted face.
The upper rooffall is interpreted to have been the roof of an upper story room (designated Structure 1222), the lower rooffall was the floor of Structure 1222, which also served as the roof of Structure 1214. The lower layer of rooffall contained a concentration of charcoal, and burned rocks, burned corn and burned nonhuman bone that appeared to be the collapsed remains of a hearth that would have been in the floor of the upper story room. This interpretation is supported by the presence of the building stones with one heavily-sooted face, which are interpreted to be from the upper story walls, sooted by smoke from the hearth. Several partly reconstructible vessels and numerous other tools were also recovered from that layer of rooffall; these items are thought to have been on the floor of the upper story room. The upper story room would have opened onto the roof of the Great Tower kiva if the kiva was only one story tall.
Segment 6: Segment 6 is a 2-x-1-m excavation unit adjacent to Segment 4. After Segment 4 failed to enounter midden, this pit was designed to replace that pit to test intact midden deposits from this architectural block. This unit ranges from 55 cm to 1.28 m deep (on a slope), and ends on a bedrock use surface. The lowermost 15 to 20 cm of fill was undisturbed midden. This assemblage will lead to greater understanding of the use of this architectural block.
Segment 7: Segment 7 is a 1-x-2-m test pit 1 m east of Segment 2. It was designed to expose more of the west section of the dam wall. At a depth of 30 cm below modern ground surface no wall had been encountered. The unit was too saturated during the 1997 season to continue excavation.
Segments 8, 9 and 10: Segment 8 is a 2-x-2-m excavation unit southwest of the Great Tower that was designed to define and expose a north-south oriented wall that appeared from modern ground surface to enclose an extramural use area. The wall as preserved is 39 cm high, is semi-coursed, and is double-stone-with-core in cross-section. The amount of rubble removed from the excavation unit suggests that this wall was originally approximately 1 m tall.
Segment 9 is the portion of the excavation unit east of the wall, and Segment 10 is west of the wall. Below the use surface that the wall rests on, a constructed surface was defined. This surface was formed of 15 to 20 cm of construction fill that served to level the stepped and sloping bedrock surface in this area. The west edge of a large firepit was encountered on this surface in the southeast corner of the 2 2. Thus, although the firepit predates the wall, the presence of these two features confirms that this was an outdoor use area.
Segment 11: This segment is west of and adjacent to Segment 5. It was designed to expose the portion of the west wall (biwall) of Structure 1214 that was outside Segment 5, and to expose and define the area of bedrock adjacent to Structure 1214. The pit was a maximum of 1.6 m deep, and contained abundant wall fall from the west wall of Structure 1214. A thin layer of refuse was resting on the bedrock surface. One small pit had been pecked into this bedrock surface. Approximately 1 m west of this unit, the northern section of the same wall exposed in Segment 8 encloses this area of bedrock. Thus, this area was probably also used for a variety of outdoor activities.
Structure 1201 (includes a 1 x 2, a 1 x 1, and a Segment 1 trench): Structure 1201 is the Great Tower. The three excavation units in this structure form a 1 m wide, east-west trench through the center of the structure. This trench continues west of Structure 1201 through biwall Structure 1214, and Segment 11. The trench continues east through biwall Structure 1213. This structure is actually an oversized tower that contains an oversized kiva. The tower measures 7.8 m, outside wall face to outside wall face. The portion of the tower wall exposed is preserved at 2.4 m tall, 50 cm thick, and is double-stone-wide-with-core in cross-section. The tower walls rest on bedrock. The "tower" is a necessary component of constructing a kiva on bedrock. The tower served the same purpose for this kiva that the rectangular or square rooms did for the normal-sized kivas elsewhere in this architectural block. Because kivas are usually masonry-lined holes in the ground, some sort of containing wall or structure is necessary when kivas are constructed aboveground.
The kiva measures 5.16 m in diameter, bench face to bench face at floor level. It is assumed to be circular, although the two sections of bench face are small enough and straight enough that this could be the large, hexagonal kiva referred to by Hurst and Lotrich (1932:195). The floor is constructed on 40 cm of construction fill that was placed inside the tower. The construction fill resulted in a more level floor, and allowed for the construction of the subfloor features. The masonry-lined floor vault and hearth are both 30 to35 cm deep. A third floor feature east of the hearth is slightly shallower, and consists of a vertical pit with a horizontal tunnel approaching the hearth. The feature appears to be some sort of ventilation arrangement to feed air into the base of the hearth. An east and a west pilaster were also exposed during excavation. The west pilaster occupies the entire width of the trench. Two niches were present in the east bench face.
Although most of the original fill and artifacts in this structure were disturbed during the previous excavation, a discontinuous layer of undisturbed sediment was recorded on the floor at the east and west ends of the test trench, and the fill in the floor features was also undisturbed. In these undisturbed areas a number of unusual artifacts were recovered, including a large fossil shell.
It was not possible to determine the original height of this structure, since it had been previously excavated and the number of rooffall strata and the amount of original wall rubble could not be documented. Excavation in Structure 1214, the west biwall room, indicates that that structure was two stories tall, so the wall the two structures shared, i.e. the tower wall, must have been two stories. The large, deep, heavily used hearth in this kiva indicates that a significant amount of smoke would have been passing through the hatchway of the kiva roof, making it unlikely that the second story above the kiva was roofed. If the second story was roofed, the features and use of that structure are unknown. It is more likely that this kiva was one story, and that the second-story biwall rooms opened out onto its roof.
This structure is thought to have had special use or significance, based on the unusual artifacts on the floor, the floor vault, the large diameter of the kiva, its location on bedrock (which required special construction), and the two-story biwall rooms encircling the kiva. This was probably the first structure, or among the first structures, to be constructed in this architectural block.
Structure 1209: This very small kiva was tested with one 1-x-2-m test pit, which exposed the northeast walls of the kiva. The structure measures approximately 2 m in diameter, and is located near the east end of the architectural block. The exposed portion of the kiva consists of a section of straight cell wall, a section of curved bench face, a portion of a pilaster, and an area of floor surface. The preserved height of the cell wall, which also served as the upper lining wall, rises 2.06 m above bedrock. The floor surface was slightly above bedrock, and had been damaged during the previous excavation. A few of the bench surface artifacts (including a grooved axe) that subsided below the original level of the bench surface are thought to be in situ. This section of roomblock was added to a structure that already existed to the east. That structure was probably a tower, and is within a few meters of the spring that this roomblock encloses.
Structure 1210: Structure 1210 was tested with a 1-x-2-m excavation unit that exposed the west walls of the kiva. This is the northeasternmost structure in this section of the architectural block. This structure is a blocked-in kiva in which the cell walls also serve as upper lining walls. The kiva is approximately 3.5 m in diameter, and the preserved height of the cell wall is 1.57 m. In the excavation unit, a section of straight cell wall, a section of curved bench face, a portion of a pilaster, and an area of floor was exposed. The constructed floor surface was just above bedrock.
Arbitrary Unit 1221: This excavation unit was a small, irregular, linear area that traced a section of extramural wall. The unit is a few meters south of the Segment 8 2-x-2-m unit. This wall tracing was to define the course of the southern end of the extramural wall exposed in Segment 8. At modern ground surface, it appeared that the section of wall in Segment 8 and the section of this same wall as it resurfaces further south were not aligned. The wall tracing confirmed that this is the same wall, but that the wall contais two dramatic turns in the area where the wall was not observable at modern ground surface.
Architectural Block 2400
Architectural Block 2400 is located in the southern portion of the site, south of the main reservoir (Figure 4). This block is approximately 50 m long, and contains 6 kivas and an estimated 17 rooms. An extramural enclosing wall extends from the southwest corner of the architectural block to the northwest corner of the 2500 Roomblock. Four excavation units tested this architectural block. Architectural data and preliminary artifactual assessment suggest that this block dates from the middle or late Pueblo III period, but evidence of Pueblo II use was also documented in this area.
Roomblock 2400 (2 x 1 936N 884E): The exposed section of the north wall of this roomblock is 1.10 m tall, 26 cm wide, and rests on undisturbed native sediment. The quantity of rubble removed from the excavation unit indicates a wall originally less than 2 m tall, which would have been a one-story structure. The exposed section of wall is described as semi-coursed, and double-stone-wide in cross-section. The test pit was a maximum of 1.2 m deep, and contained wind-and-water deposited sediments, wall collapse, some burned structural material, and the use surface that the roomblock wall was constructed on.
Midden (1 x 1 915N 888E): This excavation unit south of the roomblock reached a depth of 58 cm below modern ground surface before undisturbed native sediment was exposed. The stratigraphy included postoccupational deposits above a layer of midden 20 to 30 cm thick.
Midden (1 x 1 916N 886E): Undisturbed native sediment was encountered at a depth of 50 cm below modern ground surface in this unit south of the roomblock. The fill consisted of postoccupational deposits, redeposited native sediments (probably from construction of a subterranean structure nearby), and 10 to 15 cm of midden deposits.
Midden (1 x 1 941N 880E): This unit north of the roomblock reached a depth of 32 cm below modern ground surface before undisturbed native deposits were encountered. Natural, postoccupational deposits and a sparse amount of midden was recorded.
Architectural Block 2600
Architectural Block 2600 is near the southwest edge of the point. The roomblock is 50 m long and contains six kivas and approximately 31 rooms. Extramural walls extend from the northwest corner of the roomblock toward Roomblock 2500, and from the southeast edge of the roomblock toward Roomblock 100. Also associated with this architectural block are monoliths that have been interpreted as solstice alignments (Malville and Putnam 1989). The midden units that tested this architectural block were reported previously (Glowacki 1997).
Roomblock 2600 (2 x 1 871N 911E and extension 1 x 1 873N 911E): These adjacent excavation units contained several features and use surfaces, and portions of three masonry walls in addition to the north roomblock wall. The exposed section of the Roomblock 2600 north wall is 1.27 m tall, 53 cm wide, and rests partly on undisturbed native sediment and partly on cultural fill. The wall is associated with a prepared surface (Nonstructure 2604). Also associated with this surface is a section of curved masonry wall 32 cm high that continues outside the excavation unit to the east. The function of this wall is not known.
Another surface (Nonstructure 2605) was defined just below the first surface. A large, shallow firepit had been excavated into this use surface. Beneath this surface was surface Nonstructure 2606, which is thought to be the prehistoric ground surface at the beginning of site occupation. Two pit features, a complete vessel, and the southeast corner of a masonry structure were associated with this surface. The masonry is double-stone-wide, and the preserved height is 10 cm. The vessel is a Pueblo II Mancos Black-on-white bowl, but all masonry in this excavation unit appears to be Pueblo III, so the vessel might have been an heirloom.
Architectural Block 3200
Architectural Block 3200 is located on the talus slope just below the canyon rim, and is bisected by a north-south fenceline. The roomblock is approximately 60 m long, includes five kivas, an estimated 20 rooms, and a low cliff overhang that has been referred to as the "ash cave." Three test pits were excavated into this architectural block (2 x 1 771N 975E, 1 x 1 769N 942E, 1 x 1 771N 954E). Artifacts dating from the Pueblo II and the Pueblo III periods were recovered from this architectural block; a larger quantity of Pueblo II sherds than expected were recovered.
Roomblock 3200 (2 x 1 771N 975E): This roomblock excavation unit differed from the other roomblock units in that it was not located along the north wall of the roomblock. This unit was designed to expose architecture that from modern ground surface appeared to be a curved row of rooms encircling two kiva depressions. This unit was thus to gather more data on whether this was a biwall structure.
This test pit reached 1.2 m deep before undisturbed native sediment was exposed. Excavation exposed two poorly preserved masonry walls. What has been interpreted as the remains of the south end of a north-south dividing wall between two masonry structures was exposed in the north end of the unit. The remnants of a possible retaining wall were exposed in the south end of the unit. The upper fill in the test pit included postoccupational deposits, and the lower fill, which filled the area between the two walls, was a mixture of midden deposits and intentional construction fill.
The north masonry wall is 80 cm tall and 30 cm wide as preserved, and rests on construction fill. This wall is poorly preserved, but appears to have been double-stone-wide-with-core in cross-section. The south wall was much more roughly constructed, and even more poorly preserved than the north wall. This wall is 50 cm high and 40 cm wide as preserved, and rests on undisturbed native sediment. The construction style could not be assessed.
Excavation of this test pit did not provide a definitive answer to the question of whether this is a biwall structure. It does indicate that there are masonry rooms surrounding at least the western of the two associated kivas, and that these rooms are supported by a downslope retaining wall. The association of this architecture to the ash cave could indicate special significance or use of this block.
Midden 3200 (1 x 1 769N 942E): This test pit is west of the roomblock. Six to ten centimeters of slopewash was excavated before sterile deposits were reached.
Midden 3200 (1 x 1 771N 945E): In this excavation unit, undisturbed native sediment was encountered at a depth of 45 cm below modern ground surface. The deposits consisted of slope wash and culturally deposited refuse.
Architectural Block 3300
Architectural Block 3300 is located at the base of the talus slope south of Architectural Block 3200, and is bisected by the same fenceline that bisects that block. Roomblock 3300 is approximately 35 m long and contains an estimated 12 rooms and 8 kivas. This block was tested by the excavation of four 1-x-1-m test units in order to determine where this block fits into the site chronology. The first two test pits excavated (687N 950E and 705N 936E) contained such shallow cultural deposits that two additional pits were excavated. Material from the Pueblo II and Pueblo III periods was recovered.
Midden 3300 (1 x 1 694N 957E): A total of 30 cm of slopewash and cultural deposits was present above undisturbed native sediment in this test pit.
Midden 3300 (1 x 1 694N 961E): This unit reached a depth of aproximately 40 cm below modern ground surface before undisturbed native sediment was exposed. Slopewash and refuse was encountered during excavation.
Architectural Block 3400
Architectural Block 3400 is on the talus slope just below the canyon rim, west of Architectural Block 3200. It is a very large, amorphous rubble scatter approximately 140 m long and 35 m wide. The original size of the roomblock could not be determined. One kiva depression was detected. Four 1-x-1-m test pits were excavated in this area in order to determine where this block fits into the site chronology. Unfortunately, only shallow slopewash deposits containing limited quantities of artifacts were encountered in these units.
Midden 3400 (1 x 1 765N 908E): A total of 30 cm of slopewash was excavated before reaching undisturbed sediment in this test pit.
Midden 3400 (1 x 1 768 900E): This unit reached a depth of 10 to 15 cm below modern ground surface before undisturbed native sediment was exposed. The atifacts recovered were in slopewash sediment.
Midden 3400 (1 x 1 793N 865E): Sparse artifacts were recovered from ten centimeters of slopewash in this excavation unit. The slopewash rested on undisturbed native sediment.
Midden 3400 (1 x 1 805N 854E): This test pit contained 10 to 15 cm of slopewash containing very few artifacts, that rested on sterile sediment.
This section summarizes the results of the three seasons of Yellow Jacket Pueblo research, including mapping, disturbance assessment, Great Tower Complex, site chronology, human remains, and Native American consultation. These results are preliminary, as analyses are not yet complete.
One research goal was to produce an accurate map of the portion of Yellow Jacket Pueblo owned by The Archaeological Conservancy. The mapping was partly funded by a grant from the Colorado Historical Society. Previous maps of the site (Ferguson and Rohn 1987:129; Lange et al. 1986) are incomplete, and are inaccurate. During Crow Canyon's research, the site was mapped using a total station mapping instrument and computer drafting program (AutoCAD) (Figure 3).
In addition to reaching the original research goal, supplementary data were gathered on portions of the site not owned by The Archaeological Conservancy. With the generous permission from the various landowners--Margory Gai, Jack Hawkins, Clem Honaker, James Honaker, Joe Tipton, and Arthur Wilson--all visible architectural features were mapped on the five additional privately-owned parcels of the site, and test excavations occurred on one of those parcels on the talus slope. The cultural features on four of these parcels had never been mapped. These supplemental data were recovered in order to produce a more complete site map and gain a more complete record of site chronology. These data are critical for making inferences regarding the quantity and variety of architecture present, site layout, population of the site, and the roles of the numerous water control features.
In addition, aerial photographs were employed to produce a 30-cm-contour-interval topographic map, and to establish the presence and location of roads associated with the great kiva. One probable road, defined by a berm and a swale on the northwest edge of the great kiva, linked the great kiva with an architectural block 240 meters to the northwest.
The process of mapping revealed that the site covers a substantially larger area than has ever been reported. The site actually occupies approximately 100 acres of land (cf. Glowacki and Kuckelman 1996). Most of the site is on a point of land bounded on three sides by cliffs cut by Yellow Jacket Creek and Tatum Creek. In addition, a substantial portion of the site is on the talus slopes at the base of the cliffs. Current estimates of the number of architectural features visible at modern ground surface for the entire site include a minimum of 42 roomblocks containing approximately 600 rooms, 192 kivas, one great kiva, 18 towers, one biwall tower kiva, five dams, and one large reservoir. Smaller features such as monoliths, petroglyphs, and isolated extramural walls and checkdams were also mapped.
The northern boundary of the site is defined by the northernmost extent of building rubble and surface artifact scatters. This includes the cluster of artifacts and rubble that was previously recorded in the 1980's as a separate site, 5MT5771 (Figure 3). The northeast boundary roughly follows the upslope portion of a small drainage that bisects the Great Tower Complex. The southeast, south and west edges of the site are defined by the water in the bottom of Yellow Jacket Creek and Tatum Creek. These boundaries are somewhat arbitrary because rubble is also present on the canyon floor and on the talus slopes on the other side of the streams. Defining site boundaries is problematic, as there are other sites in the immediate vicinity (Lange et al. 1986:Figure 12), and it is not clear what the relationship is between the architecture across the stream and that in the core of 5MT5. The boundaries described above also include the features originally recorded as site 5MT7, which is architecture associated with a small cliff overhang just below the southeast canyon rim, north of Architectural Block 3500.
Most visible rubble mounds at the site date from the Pueblo III period, are generally linear, and are oriented east-west. The exceptions to this are architectural blocks 100 and 200 near the south end of the point, which are oriented northeast to southwest. The reasons for this difference in orientation are not clear. Perhaps the difference in orientation took better advantage of a narrow, northeast-southwest ridgeline that would have afforded the most imposing height for the finished building. Exaggerated building height was apparently valued, and was observed in the Architectural Block 200 roomblock test pit, where a Pueblo III masonry wall was constructed directly on top of a well-preserved earlier wall. This construction resulted in the tallest rubble mound at the site. Alternatively, the shift in orientation could have been to effect some sort of astronomical or other significant alignment (Malville and Putnam 1989).
There is a very low room-to-kiva ratio at Yellow Jacket Pueblo, compared to other ancestral Pueblo sites in the region, and even compared to other Pueblo III sites in the region (see Lipe 1989). The overall ratio of rooms to kivas at the site appears to be 3:1, or 600 rooms to approximately 200 kivas. Roomblock by roomblock, the ratio varies from a low of 1:1 at the Great Tower Complex, one of the latest structures at Yellow Jacket, to a high of 4:1 elsewhere on the site. The highest ratio of rooms to kivas may be in Roomblock 1900, which is the roomblock associated with the great kiva. It is difficult to estimate the number of rooms in this block, because it was multistory and because the eastern part of this roomblock was largely destroyed in recent times. However, there were clearly more than four rooms present originally, and only one kiva depression was observed within this roomblock. We believe that this roomblock is a Chaco-style structure that dates to the late Pueblo II period. If this is true, this roomblock may have been among the earliest on the site (see Chronology section below). The room-to-kiva ratio thus appears to be quite low overall at the site, and might have become lower throughout the occupation of the site. It is likely that this shift toward lower room-to-kiva ratios reflects a change in the way kivas and rooms were being used. The significance of this change is not well understood at present (Lipe 1989).
The nature and extent of disturbance on the portion of the site owned by The Archaeological Conservancy was assessed, and was reported on in a site management and protection plan (Kuckelman and Glowacki 1995). Over the past century, there have been several types of disturbances at the site, including livestock grazing, rock collecting, quarrying fill for road construction, farming, and undocumented digging to collect artifacts.
Prior to 1995, livestock grazed on all areas of the site, including that owned by the Conservancy. In 1995 Crow Canyon staff completed a fence that excluded livestock from the Conservancy property.
The north end of the site has been cleared and cultivated, and several wagonloads of rocks were reportedly removed from the field during clearing. A multistory roomblock which was the east wing of Roomblock 1900 is reported to have been removed by a rock crusher to procure material for road maintenance in the mid-1940's (Arthur Wilson, personal communication, 1995).
Crow Canyon's assessment of disturbance to the site included mapping and recording 805 potholes on Conservancy land (Glowacki and Kuckelman 1996). Most of these potholes were likely the result of non-professional excavators digging for human burials that contained whole pots. According to Wilson (1990), Joe Ben Wheat estimated that at least 500 burials have been dug at this site. Masonry wall faces exposed by non-professional excavation were photographed and recorded on standardized, computer coding forms.
The Great Tower Complex (Architectural Block 1200) is located on the west rim of Yellow Jacket Canyon, at the northeast edge of the site. Three seasons of intensive testing in the Great Tower Complex documented the effects of the previous excavation of that roomblock, and resulted in the salvage of an impressive quantity of data on this important architectural block. Several lines of evidence indicate that the previous excavation occurred in 1931 by Western State College (Hurst and Lotrich 1932), including an eye-witness account (Arthur Wilson, personal communication, 1995) of a group of seven to ten men digging in that roomblock during the summer of 1931 or 1932. The men had two or three wagons and horses with them, which stood out in Wilson's memory because most people were driving cars by then.
Great Tower Complex
The Great Tower Complex dates from late Pueblo III, as evidenced by numerous Mesa Verde Black-on-white vessels recovered by Hurst and Lotrich (1932), and by a recently-collected tree-ring sample from the Great Tower that dated 1254 +vv (see Chronology section below). The block wraps around a spring in a squared-off U layout, with the open side to the canyon edge, or south-southeast. The structure contains approximately 12 kivas, 10 rooms, four towers, four dams and an oversized kiva, which is inside a two-story biwall structure. See the "1997 Field Season" section above for descriptions and interpretations of individual structures in this architectural block.
This architectural block was built on bedrock, which necessitated the blocking-in of the kivas inside rectangular or square rooms. The biwall is located at the northwest corner of the U, and the towers are located at the southwest end of the U, the west side of the spring, the east side of the spring, and the southeast end of the U (Figure 5). On the talus slope immediately below this structure is an additional associated blocked-in kiva and a boulder-top structure.
Most of the Great Tower Complex is located west of the spring, and very little testing was done east of the spring. The following discussion refers to the L-shaped portion of the block west of the spring. The towers, which are at the two ends of the L, and the biwall, which is at the corner of the L, appear to have been the first structures built, and the spaces between these structures were then filled in with preplanned blocks of rectangular cells constructed of double-coursed masonry walls. Some of these cells were left rectangular and became rooms, such as Structure 1208, which contains metate bins (Glowacki 1997). However, in most of the cells, curved masonry bench faces were then constructed to simulate traditional kiva architecture. The cells containing kivas nearest the biwall structure were probably two stories tall, considering the preserved height of the walls. In these kivas, curved upper lining walls were also constructed inside the cell walls. In the cells containing kivas that appeared to have been one story tall, the straight cell walls served as upper lining walls above the benches.
The drainage containing the spring bisects the Great Tower Complex had four dams across it, one just above the spring, and three in close succession just below the spring. Each successive dam down the drainage appears to be constructed more crudely and of larger rocks than the one before. These dams were apparently an effort to slow the flow of spring water and of runoff coming down the drainage, and to help control and restrict access to this water. Alignments of small rubble were documented north and east of the architectural block. These alignments might be remnants of larger berms that channeled or diverted water away from the structure walls and toward the dams, where the water could accumulate into usable pools.
As previously mentioned, this architectural block continues down from the canyon rim onto the talus slope nearly to the bottom of theYellow Jacket Canyon drainage. The canyon is very shallow in this location so near its head, so this is not a great distance, horizontally or vertically, but this arrangement of architecture relative to the water sources is significant nonetheless in terms of controlling access to water in the stream.
A great deal of data pertaining to site chronology was amassed during the three years of research at Yellow Jacket Pueblo. These data are in the form of tree-ring dates, architectural style, stratigraphy, pottery recovered during testing, and curated pottery collections.
An insignificant quantity cultural material dating earlier than late Pueblo II (i.e., pre-AD1050) that was recovered during testing at the site, and is not considered to be evidence of habitation. Late Pueblo II (AD1050-1150) construction (primarily non-masonry) occurred at the site. At least two episodes of Pueblo III masonry construction occurred, the later of which occurred in the mid- to late 1200s. It is possible that there was one continuous occupation of the site from late Pueblo II through Pueblo III, but this cannot be confirmed without further analyses.
Few tree-ring samples were recovered during testing, unfortunately. Four samples collected during the 1995 season were successfully dated; no 1996 samples were datable. A few additional samples that were recovered during the 1997 season await analysis.
A tree-ring sample from midden deposits in Structure 704 (a pitstructure of unknown type south of Roomblock 700) yielded a non-cutting date of 974 vv. This indicates only that the sample was deposited into the pitstructure depression an unknown length of time after AD 974. The other three dates are from samples recovered in the Great Tower Complex, from structures that had been previously excavated and backfilled (see Disturbance Assessment section above). A sample recovered from Structure 1206 yielded the only cutting date from the site--1101 B. This is interpreted to be a reused beam from a nearby site or an earlier structure on this site. Two samples from Structure 1213, the east biwall room, were dated to 1095 +vv, and 1235 vv. This indicates that this structure, or more likely, an adjacent structure, was constructed an unknown length of time after AD 1235. A sample from Structure 1201, the Great Tower itself, dated 1254 +vv, suggesting that this or an adjacent structure was built an unknown length of time after AD 1254. All of these results are consistent with the occurrence of Pueblo II and Pueblo III pottery and architecture at the site.
Architectural style was also used to determine site chronology. Pueblo II-style architecture, i.e., earth-walled pitstructure construction with associated late Pueblo II pottery, was recorded in the northern portion of the site beneath Roomblock 900. A posthole originating at a surface beneath the level of the masonry architecture was recorded in this same area of the site. The crudest masonry structure observed during testing was beneath Roomblock 200 near the south end of the site; the fill contained Pueblo II pottery. Light rubble scatters at the far north end of the site in the alfalfa field consisted of small, unshaped stones and were associated with late Pueblo II/early Pueblo III pottery.
Also possibly constructed during the late Pueblo II period are the great kiva and the associated high rubble mound (Roomblock 1900) near the north end of the site. These structures were mapped, but were not tested, as they are not located on Conservancy land. The roomblock has been referred to as "Chacoan" due to the height of the rubble mound, the compact layout of the block, the associated great kiva, and the possible road that extends southward down the ridge from the great kiva. An additional possible road, indicated by a swale and accentuated at its south end by a linear berm extends to the northwest from the great kiva, and links the kiva with the Roomblock 4200 rubble mound 240 meters to the northwest. The height of the Roomblock 1900 rubble mound suggests an original structure of either two or three stories. A rubble mound reported to have been even taller is shown as the east section of Roomblock 1900, which was almost completely removed in the mid-1940's and used for county road material (Arthur Wilson, personal communication, 1995).
Most of the architecture at the site was Pueblo III style and was associated with Pueblo III pottery. Rubble mounds from Pueblo III masonry construction are visible from modern ground surface across much of the site, although the height of the rubble mounds and the preserved height of the masonry walls vary widely. As exposed in test units, the preserved portions of the masonry walls in the northeast area of the site (Architectural Blocks 800, 900, 1000, 1100, and 2100) are, on the whole, shorter than those in the central and southern portions of the site. Some of this variation is no doubt a result of the differences in the original heights of the roomblocks. It is also possible that some blocks, such as the northeastern roomblocks, were constructed earlier than others, such as the central and southern roomblocks, and that the earlier masonry was salvaged for later construction at the site. Perhaps the roomblocks in the northeastern area of the site were largely dismantled to procure material for the nearby construction of the Great Tower Complex, which is one of the latest constructions at the site.
The stratigraphy at the site was consistent with Pueblo II occupation and Pueblo III occupation. Pueblo III use surfaces and deposits were ubiquitous across the tested portions of the site. Evidence of a Pueblo II occupation was found in material deposited prior to the construction of some masonry roomblocks, below the level of the wall bases. Evidence of Pueblo II occupation consisting of: 1) a stratum of pre-roomblock deposits; or 2) a pre-roomblock surface with associated feature; or 3) midden with a predominance of Pueblo II pottery, was documented during testing of architectural blocks 200, 300, 400, 500, 600, 700, 900, 2100, 2400, and 2600, or ten of the seventeen tested mesa top roomblocks.
Testing indicated that Pueblo III pottery is present across the site, and that late Pueblo II pottery (Mancos) is present in most areas. This season's testing below the canyon rim on the talus slope near the south-southwest edge of the site has shown that there was a substantial amount of Pueblo II activity in this area of the site. Although analysis of these artifacts is not complete, initial assessment is that even though Pueblo III pottery is present on the tested area of the talus slope, this area contains much more Pueblo II material than expected. The expectation was that the talus slope would have been one of the last areas occupied, based on the talus slope sites tested as part of the Site Testing Program in the Sand Canyon Locality (Varien 1997). The Yellow Jacket data thus suggest that the talus slope was inhabited earlier in the Yellow Jacket community than it was in the Sand Canyon Community.
Wilshusen's (1996) search of museum collections identified some vessels recovered from this site during non-professional excavations of burials. This documentation associates 115 funerary vessels with specific architectural blocks at the site, including blocks located on untested parcels of the site. The traditional type identifications need verification, but these data show that the vessels recovered from the site were manufactured from late Pueblo II through Pueblo III periods--primarily Mancos, McElmo and Mesa Verde Black-on-white types. The vessels were recovered from burials as far north as Architectural Block 3100, and as far south as Architectural Block 2500, with no discernible spatial clustering of graves by traditional pottery type or time period. There are no records of grave goods from the talus slope. Time of interment is assumed to be the period during which the associated vessel or vessels were produced in the cases where only one traditional type was recovered from a grave. One difficulty with using these data to build site chronology is that time of interment does not necessarily reflect time of construction and occupation of an architectural block. A midden might have been used for interments any time during the occupation of a roomblock, or even long after the associated roomblock was abandoned.
Vessels of more than one traditional type were reportedly recovered from several graves (Wilshusen 1996:Table 2). In those cases, interment is interpreted to have occurred sometime after the latest traditional type had begun to be produced. In other words, a body associated with a Mancos Black-on-white vessel and a Mesa Verde Black-on-white vessel is interpreted to have been interred sometime in the late AD 1100's or the 1200's, when Mesa Verde Black-on-white was produced. The occurrence of graves containing multiple traditional types may indicate uninterrupted occupation of the site beginning during the manufacture of Mancos vessels, and continuing through the advent of Mesa Verde vessels, since one would assume that a minimum number of vessels were transported during habitation relocations.
Human Remains at Yellow Jacket Pueblo
No intact burials or funerary goods were encountered during Crow Canyon's testing at Yellow Jacket Pueblo, though some isolated and scattered bones were encountered. All human remains encountered during testing were handled with care and treated with respect. The few human remains encountered were disarticulated, primarily as a result of non-professional disturbance in historic times. A few concentrations of human bone were documented, but most bones were scattered. Concentrations of bones were exposed, mapped, photographed, analyzed in the field, and then re-covered with sediment in their original locations. Scattered bones were mapped, and then transported to the lab at Crow Canyon to be analyzed. Analysis was performed by physical anthropologists, Dr. Debra Martin and Cynthia Bradley, in compliance with our State of Colorado Historical Permit No. 95-42. All human bones collected during excavations were reinterred into the same excavation units from which they were removed. Although all human bone has now been analyzed, the interpetive report is not yet complete.
Native American Consultation
On 8 May 1995, four Hopi individuals visited Yellow Jacket Pueblo for the express purpose of evaluating Crow Canyon's plans for research there (Glowacki and Kuckelman 1996). The group consisted of the Historic Preservation Office Representative and three members of the Hopi Cultural Advisory Group. The group walked over the portion of the site owned by The Archaeological Conservancy with Kristin Kuckelman (Project Director) and Ricky Lightfoot (Principal Investigator). There were discussions of how human remains are contributing to our understanding of what happened in the past and how human remains might contribute to the identification of genetic/ethnic affiliation. Discussions also included land ownership, history of non-professional excavation, and Crow Canyon's research interests. The group followed the canyon rim from the northwest around to the northeast to look for possible shrines. Two U-shaped features were identified as special features, but the Hopi representatives indicated that these were probably not shrines.
The recommendations made by the Hopi representatives as a result of this pre-excavation consultation were: 1) to work to educate private landowners on the importance of the sites; 2) to find a way to keep livestock off the site; 3) to report any human remains that were encountered to the Hopi, even though NAGPRA does not apply to sites on private land; and 4) to backfill areas of architecture exposed by non-professional excavation.
During the course of excavations at Yellow Jacket, landowners of all privately-owned parcels of the site were contacted for permission to map the architecture on their land. This contact invariably included discussion of why such information was valuable and what could be learned with the results. Landowners were provided with a copy of the site map after their respective parcels were mapped, and are being provided with a copy of this report.
Livestock had caused a noticeable amount of damage to the site prior to the commencement of Crow Canyon's research. In June 1995, Crow Canyon collaborated with The Archaeological Conservancy to fence a 1,000-foot-long unfenced gap at the northeast edge of the site (Figure 3) through which livestock had been gaining access. This fence effectively closed the site against future livestock damage.
Encounters with human remains were reported to Leigh Jenkins, Director of the Cultural Preservation Office of the Hopi tribe, and to Susan Collins, State Archaeologist. As requested, Crow Canyon reburied all human remains in the excavation units in which they were encountered.
All masonry walls that had been exposed prior to Crow Canyon's research at the site were mapped as part of the disturbance assessment research goal. This information, along with recommendations for backfilling, were included in the Yellow Jacket Site Management and Protection Plan (Kuckelman and Glowacki 1995). Although these depressions have not yet been filled, this documentation is available should funding be acquired.
Crow Canyon's three seasons of research at Yellow Jacket Pueblo were immensely successful, and all research goals were fully achieved. Because there had been no prior professional excavation at the site, this mapping and limited testing was designed to recover baseline data for interpretations on site layout and chronology, and to document the historic disturbance at the site. This research produced a wealth of data, but because of the immense size of the site, this work barely scratched the surface of what can be learned at this site. Despite many decades of disturbance, much of the site remains intact. A great deal of the non-professional excavation was localized in midden areas, while most of the architecture appears to be undisturbed. It is hoped that these data will prove useful in their own right, as well as providing a springboard for any future research at the site.
Acknowledgments. I would like to thank everyone who contributed to the success of this project, which includes countless Crow Canyon staff members, seasonals, and interns, and to the many Crow Canyon participants who contributed in many ways to make the project enjoyable as well as successful. Special thanks to Donna Glowacki for her able assistance in mapping, supervising excavations, and writing annual reports. Thanks also to seasonal archaeologists Wes Bernardini, Brian Brownholtz, Mary Futrell and James Potter, field interns Elizabeth Lane, Gina Marucci, Marit Munson, Scott Slessman, Brendan Sullivan, Dana Wickner, and Steve Wolverton, volunteers Carolyn Currie and Martha Koons, and to Mark Varien for filling in for me in the field. Melissa Churchill, Ricky Lightfoot and Mark Varien provided helpful comments on this manuscript.
List of Figures
Figure 1: Full topographic map, Yellow Jacket Pueblo (Site 5MT5)
Figure 2: Cultural features with limited topographic lines, Yellow Jacket Pueblo (Site 5MT5)
Figure 3: Cultural features, Yellow Jacket Pueblo (Site 5MT5)
Figure 4: South end of point and talus slope, Yellow Jacket Pueblo (Site 5MT5)
Figure 5: Great Tower Complex, Yellow Jacket Pueblo (Site 5MT5)
Ferguson William M. and Arthur H. Rohn
1987 Anasazi Ruins of the Southwest in Color. University of New Mexico Press, Albuquerque.
Fewkes, Jesse W.
1919 Prehistoric villages, castles and towers of southwestern Colorado. Bureau of American Ethnology, Bulletin 7, pp. 16-17.
Glowacki, Donna M.
1997 The 1996 Excavations at Yellow Jacket Pueblo (5MT5), Montezuma County, Colorado. Report prepared for the Colorado Historical Society and The Archaeological Conservancy.
Glowacki, Donna M. and Kristin A. Kuckelman
1996 Report of 1995 Research at Yellow Jacket Pueblo (5MT5), Montezuma County, Colorado. Report repared for the Colorado Historical Society and The Archaeological Conservancy.
Holmes, William H.
1878 Report on the ancient ruins of southwestern Colorado, examined during the summers of 1875 and 1876. Tenth Annual Report of the United States Geological and Geographical Survey of the Territories, pp. 383-408.
Hurst, C. T. and Victor F. Lotrich
1932 An Unusual Mug from Yellow Jacket Canyon. El Palacio 33:195-198.
1933 The "Square Mug House" of the Mesa Verde Culture. The Journal of the Colorado- Wyoming Academy of Science 1(5):70-71.
1935a The Gunnison Collection - I. Southwestern Lore 1(2):14-16.
1935b The Gunnison Collection - II. Southwestern Lore 1(3):6-11.
1936a The Gunnison Collection - III. Southwestern Lore 2(1):8-11.
1936b The Gunnison Collection - IV. Southwestern Lore 2(2):26-28.
1937 The Gunnison Collection - V. Southwestern Lore 2(3):62-63.
Kuckelman, Kristin A. and Donna M. Glowacki
1995 Yellow Jacket Site Management and Protection Plan. Report prepared for the Colorado Historical Society and The Archaeological Conservancy.
Lange, Frederick, Nancy Mahaney, Joe Ben Wheat, Mark L. Chenault, and John Cater
1986 Yellow Jacket: A Four Corners Anasazi Ceremonial Center. Johnson Books, Boulder.
Lipe, William D.
1989 Social Scale of Mesa Verde Anasazi Kivas. In The Architecture of Social Integration in Prehistoric Pueblos, edited by W.D. Lipe and Michelle Hegmon, pp. 53-71. Occasional Papers of the Crow Canyon Archaeological Center, No.1. Cortez, Colorado.
Malville, J. McKim and Claudia Putnam
1989 Prehistoric Astronomy in the Southwest, pp. 57-79. Johnson Publishing Company, Boulder.
Newberry, J. S.
1876 Geological Report. In, Report of the Exploring Expedition from Santa Fe, New Mexico, to the Junction of the Grand and Green Rivers of the Great Colorado of the West, in 1859, pp. 88-89. Engineer Department, U.S. Army, Washington: Government Printing Office.
Prudden, T. Mitchell
1900 Field Notes of Reconnaissance, San Juan Watershed. From the T.M. Prudden Collection, Peabody Museum, Yale.
Varien, Mark D. (editor)
1997 The Sand Cayon Locality Project: Site Testing Program. Crow Canyon Archaeological Center, Cortez, Colorado, in press.
Wilshusen, Richard H.
1996 Unraveling a Century of Pot-hunting and Amateur Collecting: Tracing Vessels from the Yellow Jacket Site. Report prepared for the Colorado Historical Society and The Archaeological Conservancy.
Wilson, Diana N.
1990 Twelve burials from Yellow Jacket, Site 5MT-5, Main Yellow Jacket Site, Yellow Jacket, Colorado. Manuscript on file at Crow Canyon Archaeological Center, Cortez, Colorado.