TEN

Introduction

The demographic landscape of the Pimería Alta—the Spanish term for the Northern Pimas, or O’odham, and their collective territory during the sixteenth, seventeenth, and eighteenth centuries—has been widely debated by historians and archaeologists alike. Published histories have primarily focused on the processes and consequences of Spanish colonialism, drawing few conclusions about the relationships among distinct groups outside of the colonial sphere of influence (e.g., Bannon 1955; Bolton 1908, 1919, 1921, 1930, 1936, 1990; Dobyns 1959; Kessell 1970, 1974, 1976; Manje 1954; McCarty 1976, 1997; Nentvig 1951; Pfefferkorn 1949; Polzer 1971, 1976; Smith et al. 1966). Archaeological interpretations have likewise emphasized Spanish installations, such as missions and presidios, and indigenous acculturation rather than native population diversity and interaction (e.g., Barnes 1971, 1983; Barton et al. 1981; Beaubien 1937; Chambers 1955; Cheek 1974; Ciolek-Torrello and Brew 1976; DeLong and Miller 1936; Elson and Doelle 1987; Fratt 1981, 1986; Haury and Fathauer 1974; Horton 1998; Huckell and Huckell 1982; Olson 1985; Pinkley 1936; Robinson 1963; Robinson and Barnes 1976; Shenk et al. 1975; Sugnet and Reid 1994). Compared with most current interpretations of available archaeological data for the Spanish contact and colonial periods, the documentary record paints a much more dynamic picture of populations constituting or bordering the Pimería Alta.

Reports of Jesuit missionaries and Spanish authorities describe ethnically diverse groups with shifting alliances and a far-reaching exchange system, whereas past analyses of archaeological data have provided few indications of population differentiation. To examine the complex relationships among neighboring groups during this volatile period, we have adopted an ethnohistoric approach, wherein multiple lines of evidence are evaluated and compared to construct a regionally specific historical narrative (W. Wood 1990). New research among seventeenth- and eighteenth-century documents, combined with a reanalysis of archaeological data, provides fresh insights into the dynamics of this social landscape during a time when the ancestral boundaries and interrelationships of modern tribes were in constant flux.

The Pimería Alta, Archaeological Traditions, and a History of Early Spanish Contact

The geographic land base of the Pimería Alta, situated mostly within the northern Sonoran Desert, extends across the present-day international border between southern Arizona and northwestern Sonora. Stretching westward from the margins of the Sierra Madre foothills to the Gulf of California, and northward from the Río Magdalena-Concepción drainage to the Gila River (Figure 10.1), it spans multiple biotic subregions, as north-south-trending mountain ranges separated by basins and through-flowing drainages descend and become more widely spaced in the east-west transition from semiarid desert uplands to arid coastal plain. The range in elevation and intermittent nature of river stretches and arroyos create distinct ecological settings with considerable differences in temperature, rainfall, stream flow, soils, plants, and wildlife, offering a remarkable diversity of resources available for food, shelter, medicine, and fiber, with the greatest abundance and widest variety in the higher elevations to the east (Dimmitt 2000). Differential access to these resources shaped patterns of foraging, planting, and settlement among the peoples of the region and influenced their interactions (Brenneman 2004).

Figure 10.1. The Pimería Alta.

Prior to ad 1450, during the fourteenth century and early fifteenth, this geographic expanse was both a borderland and a heartland for several distinct, widespread archaeological traditions, including the Patayan, Trincheras, and Hohokam. The Patayan complex overlapped the western third of the region, with boundaries extending west into the California deserts and north to the Grand Canyon. This complex is primarily defined by a paddle-and-anvil buff ware ceramic tradition with distinctive rim forms (McGuire and Schiffer 1982; Rogers 1928, 1936, 1945; Schroeder 1952, 1957, 1958; Waters 1982). Bordering the Patayan area on the south was the Trincheras tradition, which encompassed the entire Río Concepción-Magdalena drainage and extended to the Río Sonora in the east. It is characterized by decorated Trincheras Purple-on-red specular ceramic types and terraced hillside sites known as cerros de trincheras (Bowen 1976; Downum 2007; Downum et al. 1993; Fish et al. 2007; Gallaga and Newell 2004; McGuire and Villalpando 1993; Villalpando and McGuire 2009). The northern boundary of the Trincheras region overlapped with the Hohokam tradition, which extended east toward New Mexico and north along the Verde River. Red-on-buff and red-on-brown decorated ceramics, irrigation agriculture, and participation in the long-distance exchange of shell and turquoise are indicative of this widespread archaeological tradition (Dean 1991; Downum 1993; Doyel 1987; Doyel et al. 2000; Doyel and Plog 1980; Fish and Fish 2002; Fish et al. 1984; Fish et al. 1992; Harry 2003). The last phase of the Hohokam sequence was punctuated by a shift in mortuary practices, population aggregation into larger settlements, construction of platform mounds, and the introduction of polychrome ceramics classified as Roosevelt redwares. The spread of this ceramic tradition, especially Salado polychromes, occurred throughout the Southwest (Clark 2001; Dean 2000; Loendorf 2001; J. Wood 2000).

European explorers and missionaries during the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries found the region inhabited by scattered groups of O’odham speakers who interacted with each other and with several other linguistic groups living at the region’s margins. Much of our information about the distribution of peoples in and around the Pimería Alta, as well as their interrelationships, derives from accounts of missionaries who took up residence and explored among the O’odham beginning in the late seventeenth century. Earlier encounters between northern O’odham and Spaniards were sporadic and yielded few descriptions. The 1539–42 expeditions of Fray Marcos de Niza and Francisco Vázquez de Coronado brought Spaniards no closer than the southeastern fringes of O’odham territory and produced accounts with ambiguous information regarding ethnic identifications and precise locations (Bolton 1990; Flint 2008; Flint and Flint 1997, 2005; Hartmann 2011; Hartmann and Hartmann 2011; Reff 1991). More useful are the chronicles from the Colorado River explorations of Hernando de Alarcón in 1540 (Flint and Flint 2005) and Juan de Oñate y Salazar in 1604–5 (Hammond and Rey 1953; Sheridan et al. 2015), which provide descriptions of several groups whose names correlate with historically known River Yuman tribes, and possibly an O’odham community living on the Gila River near its confluence with the Colorado. Populations living along this western margin of the Pimería Alta were described in greater detail, as were the complicated political alliances among each group that had resulted in substantial population movements prior to the arrival of these expeditions.

As the northernmost frontier of Sonora, the Pimería Alta was on the periphery of Spanish colonial settlement in the Americas until the end of the seventeenth century. Missionary efforts and Spanish colonization began in northeastern Sonora during the 1640s and involved limited contact with northern O’odham until the 1670s–80s, when mining discoveries drew settlers northward, near the southeastern fringe of O’odham territory. By the mid-1680s, enterprising ranchers were running cattle as far north as the southern slopes of the Huachuca Mountains and as far west as the upper Santa Cruz River. Documents from this period provide our first glimpses of the easternmost O’odham, but it was not until the 1687 arrival of the Jesuit missionary, Father Eusebio Francisco Kino, that a more complete picture of the Pimería Alta began to emerge (Bannon 1955; Burrus 1971; Kessell 1970, 2002). Kino set out to expand the Jesuit mission among the O’odham and by 1700 had systematically traversed the entire region, founding twenty-five mission communities in the south and east and traveling along all major drainages to the Colorado River and Gulf of Mexico (Bolton 1919; Burrus 1971; Manje 1954). For two decades following his death in 1711, however, a shortage of missionaries confined evangelical efforts to the southern portion of the Pimería Alta. Spanish colonial settlement in the region began in the 1720s, with families arriving to occupy the fertile San Luis Valley along the bend of the Santa Cruz. Isolated mining camps were soon established in the uplands to the west, and the extraordinary discovery of silver chunks and slabs southwest of present-day Nogales in 1736 drew many more gente de razón (literally, “people of reason”) with the promise of quick wealth. By the Pima Revolt of 1751, indigenous populations of the broader region had been acquiring European trade goods, encountering ranchers and miners, and exposed to epidemic diseases for some time, with Spaniards residing as far north as Guevavi and Tubac, northwest in the Arivaca Valley, and west along the Río Magdalena and the Río Altar (Hadley and Sheridan 1995; Kessell 1970, Officer 1987).

Kino and his frequent traveling companion, Captain Juan Mateo Manje, identified several groups of O’odham-speakers: Pimas, who inhabited the upland watersheds of the Sonora, San Miguel, Magdalena, Altar, Santa Cruz, and San Pedro Rivers; Sobaipuris, who occupied the middle Santa Cruz and middle to lower San Pedro River Valleys; Gila Pimas (or Gileños), along the Gila River; Sobas, who farmed along the lower Río Altar at Oquitoa and downstream along the Río Asunción, as well as ranging the desert regions to the south, west, and northwest of the Asunción; and Papagos, in the desert interior regions west of the Santa Cruz and south of the Gila (Archivo General de la Nación, Mexico [AGN], Favores Celestiales de Jesús y de María SS.^ma y del Gloriosíssimo Apostol de las Indias San Francisco Xavier, Misiones, legajo 27, ff. 1–433; AGN, Segunda Parte, Luz de Tierra Incógnita . . . desde Fines del Año de 1693 hasta el de 1721, Historia, legajo 393, ff. 47–95v) (Figure 10.2). In addition, numerous other populations inhabited the peripheries of the Pimería Alta, including Ópatas, Janos, Jocomes, and Apaches to the east, and various Yuman groups to the west. The basis upon which chroniclers distinguished among O’odham groups is not clear, though it seems likely that dialect and self-identification were factors. Manner of subsistence apparently was not, as members of the same group might reside in large, permanent or semipermanent settlements and practice agriculture, or range as small, mobile rancherías to forage the region’s diverse plant and animal resources.

Figure 10.2. O’odham distribution in the Pimería Alta as reported by Kino and Manje.

Research Methodology

Examining population interaction and demographic change among the populations in and bordering the Pimería Alta during the sixteenth, seventeenth, and eighteenth centuries requires an ethnohistoric approach from a regional perspective. New research among Spanish colonial documents has centered on texts containing information about the O’odham and their neighbors, with preference given to eyewitness observations penned by individuals possessing firsthand experience of the region. The selection of documents includes histories, letters, reports, maps, and testimonies (Spanish and indigenous) prepared by missionaries, military officers, and civil authorities. Most inform the published secondary works—narrative histories and ethnohistories—also used in this study and several have been published as transcriptions or in English translation, but many others have not yet been published. Care has been taken to work from microfilm or photographic copies of Spanish archival originals whenever possible. Despite the valuable insight into indigenous population dynamics that contemporary colonial documents provide, however, they allow partial views at best, filtered through the often distorted lens of European perspectives.

The archaeological record offers an important, additional source of data to help expand our view. Archaeological remains dating to the sixteenth, seventeenth, and eighteenth centuries were reexamined to identify spheres of interaction between distinct groups. Research primarily focused on attributes associated with projectile point and ceramic manufacture and style, specifically rim construction, rim thickness, and neck height. Absolute dating of sites from this period is imprecise, due to pronounced de Vries effects on the radiocarbon curve beginning around ad 1450. De Vries effects refer to short term, high-frequency variations in radiocarbon activity that are measured in tree rings. These radiocarbon anomalies appear as wiggles on the radiocarbon curve, resulting in multiple possible intercepts and a wider date range. Nevertheless, many sites have been assigned relative dates based on the presence of Spanish trade goods or specific artifact types. A reanalysis of archaeological data demonstrates that groups living in the heart of the Pimería Alta had a lengthy history of interaction with peoples inhabiting the eastern and western peripheries. The following is a summary of the ethnohistorical and archaeological evidence of these interactions.

Pimería Alta: Eastern Sphere

Ethnohistoric Evidence

Documents from the 1640s offer the earliest references to the O’odham of the Pimería Alta, calling them Hímeris—a term derived from the site of Ímuris in the upper Río Magdalena Valley, where Spaniards probably first encountered them (Archivo Histórico de Hacienda, México [AHH], Carta de Cornelio Guillereagh al Padre Visitador Alvara Flores de Sierra, 30 de marzo, 1673, Temporalidades, legajo 278, exp. 13; Biblioteca Nacional de México [BNM], Memorial de Fray Thomás Manso, Año 1646, 05–08). This name was also initially applied to O’odham living near Bacoachi, in the area near the headwaters of the Río Sonora (AGN, Carta Anua de 1653, Misiones, legajo 26, f. 153v) (Figure 10.3). By the 1680s, however, “Hímeris” fell from use and was replaced with “Pimas” with reference to the rancherías of Cananea and Huachuca,¹ near the headwaters of the San Pedro River, as well as those occupying the upper watersheds of the Río Magdalena and the Santa Cruz River as far north as Guevavi (AHH, Certificación de Joseph Romo de Vivar, Temporalidades, legajo 278, exp. 22; Archivo de Hidalgo del Parral, Chihuahua [AHP], Causa Criminal contra un India llamado Canito, microfilm 1686B, exp. 19). Sobaipuris enter the written record as “Pimas of Quíburi,” identified as such in the 1686 criminal trial case against a Pima leader known as Canito. As yet unfamiliar to settlers, these Pimas were regarded as a group apart, more closely associated with the place of Quíburi on the middle San Pedro than with the other Pimas. Four years later, Sonora’s chief magistrate, Captain Blas del Castillo, distinguished Sobaipuris by that name from Pimas and Sobas (AGN, Carta al Gobernador Isidro Pardiñas Villar de Francos, Junio 15, Provincias Internas, vol. 30, ff. 267–75), and in 1692, Kino linked the Sobaipuris with the Río “de Quíburi” (San Pedro River). His reference in 1699 to two of the Gileño villages as Sobaipuri signals a possible connection between the two groups (AGN, Favores Celestiales, Misiones, legajo 27, ff. 14, 33).

Figure 10.3. Pimería Alta sites and landmarks (some sites are plotted according to their locations on historic maps because they have not been relocated).

The ease with which O’odham messengers moved throughout the region as they carried word about Kino’s comings and goings suggests friendly interaction among most groups. For example, Kino was at the Pima village of Tucubavia, on the upper Río Altar, when Sobaipuri and Pima messengers from Bac and Tumacácori, respectively, arrived to invite him to visit their rancherías on the Santa Cruz River in 1691 (AGN, Favores Celestiales, Misiones, legajo 27, f. 9). In 1698, the leader of the Sobas in the Caborca region sent word to Kino at San Andrés, a Gileño village near the confluence of the Gila River with the Santa Cruz, that he would meet him and guide him through all the coastal rancherías (Archivo General de Indias, Seville [AGI], Diario por el Capp.ⁿ Diego Carrazco, Audiencia de Guadalajara, legajo 134, ff. 13–26v). Similarly, while at San Marcelo de Sonoyta (just below the present-day international border) in 1700, Kino received a cross sent by a Gila Pima leader near Casa Grande (AGN, Favores Celestiales, Misiones, legajo 27, f. 59).

Not all interactions were amicable, however. The Sobas were traditional enemies of the eastern Pimas, tenuously reconciling with them only through the efforts of Kino. Several years prior to the priest’s 1687 arrival, some Sobas had killed the leader of Cosari (Dolores), on the upper Río San Miguel (AGN, Favores Celestiales, Misiones, legajo 27, ff. 14–14v). In 1695, a Pima governor from the ranchería of Tucubavia, at the headwaters of the Río Altar, affirmed that the Sobas downstream, though O’odham, had always been enemies (AHP, Testimonio de autos de guerras fechos por los capitanes Juan Fernández de la Fuente, Don Domingo Terán de los Ríos y Don Domingo Jironza Petriz de Cruzate . . . Año de 1695, microfilm 1695, ff. 111v–112). Sobas appear to have been more closely affiliated with Areneños (Sand Papagos, or Hia Ced O’odham) to the north and northwest, and with coastal Pimas Bajos to the south, who, Kino observed, came to help harvest crops at Caborca (AGN, Favores Celestiales, Misiones, legajo 27, ff. 12v, 15, 175–175v). Tensions also appear to have existed among the Sobaipuris, according to Manje, who in 1697 was told by the Sobaipuri leader of Quíburi that his people had recently abandoned several villages a few leagues north because a falling out with their more northerly relatives farther downstream had led to some deaths (Bancroft Library [BL], Photostat of the Linga Manuscript, Bolton Papers I, item 203). There are some indications this rift may have resulted from Spanish colonial influences, however (AHP, Autos de guerra, microfilm 1695, ff. 28–31v).

Relationships between eastern O’odham and Ópatan groups to the south and east, though obscured by Spanish colonial influences, appear to have varied by river valley. The first colonial encounter with Hímeris took place in 1645, in the vicinity of the upper Río Magdalena rather than along the Río San Miguel, where settlers had already taken up residence (BNM, Manso Memorial, 05–08; Yetman 2012). This suggests that the Río Magdalena Pimas, at least, maintained a prudent distance from their Eudeve neighbors until missionaries persuaded a ranchería to relocate to the San Miguel five years later, in 1650 (AGN, Carta Anua, Misiones, legajo 26, f. 134v).² Near the headwaters of the Río Sonora, however, Hímeris were reportedly allied with the northern Ópatas of Bacoachi as they resisted Jesuit entry into that village in 1649 (AHP, Autos fhos en razon de la entrada de Cucuribasca y Buchibacuachi, en la Provincia de Sonora . . ., Microfilm 1649A, exp. 14; Yetman 2012). Four years later, a Hímeris ranchería was settled at Bacoachi, likely drawn southward by the Jesuit mission established there, and the Pima village of Mototícachi was reported as a few leagues north of the Ópata settlement in 1684 (AGN, Carta Anua, Misiones, legajo 26, f. 135v; AHH, Certificación de Joseph Romo de Vivar, Temporalidades, legajo 278, exp. 22). In 1686, a Pima leader nicknamed Canito, from that same general region, confessed to inciting Janos, Jocomes, and Sumas to attack and raid Christian villages, both Ópata and Spanish, in the neighboring Teuricachi Valley to the east, an act pointing toward existing tensions between the easternmost Pimas and Ópatas of that valley and perhaps linked to long-standing hostilities among the Ópata groups themselves (AHP, Canito, microfilm 1686B, exp. 19; Bannon 1955). Two years later, Ópatas stoked Spanish fears of Indian revolt by accusing seven Pimas from Mototícachi of having previously attacked the Teuricachi Valley and planning yet another attack; their allegations led to the destruction of Mototícachi (AHP, Causa criminal contra Nicolás de Higuera por homicidios perpetrado en las personas de algunos indios de Nación Pima, microfilm 1688C, exp. 130). In 1695, Pima resentment of the Ópata overseer at Tubutama and his harsh treatment of the Pima residents resulted in the death of that overseer as well as two other Ópatas, triggering an uprising along the Río Altar-Concepción drainage (BNM, Inocente, Apostólica y Gloriosa Muerte de V. P^e Francisco Xavier Saeta de la Compañía de Jesús, ms. 1118, ff. 155v, 156–157r).

The documentary record suggests an amicable relationship existed between Sobaipuris and several hunter-gatherer groups to their east prior to direct Spanish influence. Canito alleged in his 1686 confession that the Pimas of Quíburi lived in great friendship with the Janos and Jocomes, having relocated to Quíburi from the area of Cuquiárachi, northwest of the Teuricachi Valley (AHP, Canito, Microfilm 1686B, exp. 19). In 1692, Captain Francisco Ramírez de Salazar led a party of settlers to the San Pedro River Valley in pursuit of horses purportedly stolen by Sobaipuris in the company of Janos and Jocomes. He did not find the horses, but ended up taking several Sobaipuris to meet Kino, who visited their valley soon after in response (AHP, Testimonio de Autos que se remite al Gov.^or y Cap.ⁿ gl. del Parral . . . Año de 1692, Microfilm 1692A, no. 1). This episode apparently marked a turning point in the Sobaipuri relationship with their eastern neighbors, for in 1695, General Juan Fernández de la Fuente learned from a Chinarra captive that an alliance of Janos, Jocomes, Sumas, Mansos, and Chinarras was friendly with the Apaches inhabiting the northern side of the Pinaleño Mountains, and that all had become hostile to the Pimas because the Pimas fought against them as auxiliaries of Spanish forces in the Teuricachi Valley. The alliance was also “in a state of hostility” with the Sobaipuris, who had sided with the Pimas (AHP, Autos de guerras, microfilm 1695, ff. 28–31v).

Archaeological Evidence

The suite of diagnostic artifacts associated with Sobaipuris was first formally articulated by Di Peso (1953) in his monograph on excavations at Santa Cruz de Terrenate (AZ EE:4:11[ASM]) and Santa Cruz del Pitaitutgam (AZ EE:8:15[ASM]). Di Peso argued that he had relocated the protohistoric Sobaipuri rancherías of Quíburi (AZ EE:4:11[ASM]) and Santa Cruz de Gaybanipitea (AZ EE:8:15 [ASM]). Subsequent evaluation of his claims has demonstrated that whereas he did locate and excavate the ruins of the presidio of Santa Cruz de Terrenate, it was not the location of the Sobaipuri settlement of Quíburi (Gerald 1968; Lyons 2004; Seymour 1989; Sugnet and Reid 1994). It has also been suggested that Di Peso mistook Santa Cruz del Pitaitutgam for Santa Cruz de Gaybanipitea (Seymour 1989, 2011; Vint 2007).

Di Peso identified two ceramic types that he associated with Sobaipuris (Di Peso 1953). He defined the first, Sobaipuri Plain, as a thick-walled plainware exhibiting a rim coil and a carbon core. Di Peso considered this ware similar to Papago Plain and argued that it was probably manufactured after 1700. Stephanie Whittlesey (1994) has argued that the Sobaipuri Plain vessels identified at Terrenate may have been manufactured by presidial soldiers rather than Sobaipuris. Whetstone Plain, the second type defined by Di Peso, was found in significantly lower quantities than Sobaipuri Plain at both Terrenate and Pitaitutgam. Whetstone Plain ceramics were manufactured with the paddle-and-anvil technique and are characterized by mixed angular and rounded sand inclusions without a carbon core. They exhibit a hand-smoothed surface lacking striation marks or polishing. Di Peso noted that the temper may contain a few mica particles. Whetstone Plain vessel forms are dominated by globular jars with straight or recurved rims, but bowls exhibiting straight or slightly recurved rims are also present. These ceramics lack a rim coil and range in thickness from 0.20 to 1.30 cm, with an average of 0.30 cm.

Subsequent refinements of the Whetstone typology by W. Bruce Masse (1981:37) describe Whetstone Plain as characterized by a bumpy appearance and a sandy finish caused by paddle-and-anvil thinning and hand finishing. The sherds range in color from reddish to grayish brown, and carbon streaks are rare. Vessel walls average from four to six millimeters thick, and common vessel forms include globular or ellipsoidal jars with slightly outflaring rims and vertical necks and small bowls with outflaring rims. Deni Seymour (2011) provides the most recent description of Whetstone Plain, defining it as a fine-pasted ware with minor voids from the unintentional inclusion of minor fragments of vegetable material. These ceramics lack a carbon streak but may have gray cores. Paste color ranges from tan to brown, and sherds are usually not fire clouded. Vessels are often thin walled, though some fragments of storage vessels and jars can be thicker. Jars are the most common vessel form, but bowls are also present. Based upon surface treatment, Seymour suggests that Whetstone Plain can be subdivided into four varieties, including matte, smoothed, wiped, and slightly polished. She has argued that the Whetstone Plain typology is too inclusive and incorporates a wide range of ceramic types (Seymour 2011:216). Whetstone Plain has been identified at numerous sites in the San Pedro and Santa Cruz River Valleys, the traditionally accepted Sobaipuri territory, but it has also been reported as far north as Picacho Peak and as far south as the Altar River Valley, and as such, may not necessarily be a diagnostic Sobaipuri artifact type (e.g., Dart 1989; Heilen and Reid 2006; McGuire and Villalpando 1993; Wallace and Homlund 1986).

In order to establish a baseline for comparisons with other assemblages, eight reconstructed vessels and fifteen rim sherds were reexamined from the Terrenate assemblage, while seven rim sherds were examined from Pitaitutgam (for additional information on the following analyses see Jelinek 2012). Material from Terrenate was predominately sand tempered, but one rim sherd contained a combination of sand and sherd temper. Three sherds contained carbon streaks and one specimen exhibited a rim coil; it is possible these sherds were merely mislabeled, however, because they more closely resembled Sobaipuri Plain. Rim thickness ranged from 0.46 to 0.99 cm, with an average of 0.68 cm. Material from Pitaitutgam was sparse. Of the seven rim sherds present in the assemblage from this site, one was a Roosevelt Redware and two exhibited such a large quantity of micaceous schist that they closely resembled Gila Plain, a Hohokam plainware. The four remaining plainware sherds were sand tempered and lacked a carbon core. One sherd exhibited a rim coil and rim thickness ranged from 0.51 to 0.87 cm, with an average of 0.61 cm.

A survey conducted along the middle Río Altar in Sonora resulted in the identification of several sites associated with O’odham groups during the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries. The ceramic assemblages recorded at these sites fit within the acceptable range of variation to thickness, color, rim morphology, vessel form, and surface treatment associated with Whetstone Plain, though they exhibited a greater degree of mica in the temper than samples from the comparative collections. Randall McGuire and María Elisa Villalpando Canchola (McGuire and Villalpando 1993) suggested that the Altar Valley ceramic assemblages fall within the larger category of Whetstone Plain, the ceramic type largely associated with Sobaipuris, but further analysis may identify different varieties.

An Upper Piman assemblage in the eastern Pimería Alta exhibits some similarities with materials from the Río Sonora, which was occupied primarily by Ópatas. Excavations at England Ranch Ruin (AZ DD:8:129 [ASM]), an Upper Piman site along the middle Santa Cruz River, yielded two types of plainware. The first was identified as Trincheras Plain based on the presence of pronounced incised wiping striations. The second, more common type was a relatively thick plainware with coarse temper and minor wiping striations. David Doyel (1977) concluded that this assemblage cannot be reasonably equated with either Sobaipuri Plain or Whetstone Plain, two types usually associated with Sobaipuris; W. Bruce Masse (1981), however, suggested that both types in this assemblage are similar to sherds found near Mission San José de Baviácora, along the Río Sonora.

Much of the evidence for interaction between Sobaipuris and the nomadic groups that dotted the eastern frontier of the Pimería Alta—including the Jocomes, Janos, Mansos, Sumas, and Apaches—derives from documents. Archaeological evidence of mobile groups is often difficult to identify because of the ephemeral nature of their habitations; however, Seymour (2009) has begun examining these sites in the eastern Southwest. Western Apache material culture is better known and documented in Arizona (Ferg 1987, 1992), though not necessarily at Sobaipuri and Upper Piman sites. Recent research at Santa Cruz de Gaybanipitea, the ranchería where the Sobaipuris defeated the Apaches and their allies in a contest between chosen warriors, may shed more light on this issue (Seymour 2014).

Pimería Alta: Western Sphere

Ethnohistoric Evidence

Kino’s explorations revealed various connections between O’odham and Yuman speakers to the west. Among the Gileños near the Gila–Santa Cruz river confluence, in 1694, he learned of Cocomaricopas and Opas living downstream, and he talked with Pimas who spoke both languages well enough to allow him to construct a vocabulary (AGN, Favores Celestiales, Misiones, legajo 27, f. 13). In subsequent visits to the Gila River, Kino and Manje observed that Cocomaricopas were related by marriage with Pimas, with several rancherías below Gila Bend inhabited by both peoples, many of whom knew both languages (AGN, Favores Celestiales, Misiones, legajo 27, ff. 29, 31, 53; Biblioteca Nacional, Madrid [BN], Relación ytineraria del nuevo descubrimiento . . . a descubrir las nuevas naciones Cocopas, Yumas, y Pimas desde 7 de febrero hasta 14 de marzo deste presente año de 1699, ms. 3165, ff. 182–195v). Pimas may have resided even farther downstream almost 100 years earlier, judging from the Oñate expedition’s encounter with four or five Oseca/Osera/Osara rancherías on the Gila side of the Gila-Colorado River confluence. There, inhabitants spoke a language similar to Tepehuan, part of the Tepiman family of languages that included O’odham (AGI, Relación de Fray Francisco de Escobar, 1605, Audiencia de México, legajo 20). Fashioning mantas of cotton and wearing their hair in the same fashion as the Gila River Pimas described by Russell (1975:158–59) in the early twentieth century, they may have been Gileños, Papagos, or Areneños (Akimel, Tohono, or Hia Ced O’odham, respectively). Population movements in the lower Colorado and Gila River Valleys appear to have been influenced by several factors, including shifts in the Colorado River delta and resulting cycles of water infill and recession of Lake Cahuilla over several centuries, the decline of Hohokam civilization and dispersal of formerly aggregated settlements, and the spread of European diseases (Sheridan et al. 2015:103). These movements probably triggered the hostilities among Yuman speakers remarked upon by Alarcón and Escobar, which continued into the mid-nineteenth century and frequently involved O’odham (Flint and Flint 2005; AGI, Escobar Relación, México, legajo 20). Kino observed that the Pimas and Cocomaricopas had a history of warfare with the Yumas (Quechan) farther downstream (AGN, Favores Celestiales, Misiones, legajo 27, f. 31v).

That the connection between O’odham and Cocomaricopas also extended southward is indicated by Manje’s observation that Pimas at San Marcelo de Sonoyta had detailed information concerning waterholes and the route northward to the Gila River Cocomaricopas (BN, Relación itineraria 1699, Ms. 3165, f. 185v), and Father Juan María Salvatierra commented upon Cocomaricopas “mixed with” the Pimas at Sonoyta when he traveled there with Kino and Manje two years later (AGN, Relación itineraria de Juan María Salvatierra, 1701, Historia, legajo 21, f. 123v). Four Cocomaricopas traveled southward to the O’odham village Kino called San Francisco del Adid, in the Papaguería west of Bac, to see and speak with Kino in 1699 (AGN, Favores Celestiales, Misiones, legajo 27, f. 34v). More than forty years afterward, Father Jacobo Sedelmayr confirmed that Cocomaricopas were related by marriage with Pimas, whom they called Papagos, and that many Pimas lived among the Cocomaricopas, fluent in both languages. By this time, according to Sedelmayr, the Cocomaricopa nation had extended its reach eastward to just beyond the confluence of the Salt and Gila Rivers (AHH, Carta al reverendo padre provincial Mateo Ansaldo, Octubre 25, 1742, Temporalidades, legajo 17, exp. 42).

Another O’odham-Yuman relationship was observed between the Pimas of the westernmost desert—probably Areneños—and Quíquimas (Halyikwamai or possibly Cócopas) of the Colorado delta. Salvatierra reported that the coastal area south of the delta was populated by Pimas mixed with a branch of the Quíquimas, and that the Pimas who lived in that dry desert region just east of the coast were familiar with the Quíquimas and their lands (AGN, Relación itineraria, Historia, legajo 21, f. 128v). This relationship had some longevity, as indicated by Alarcón’s comment that his interpreter—likely a Uto-Aztecan speaker from farther south in Mexico—could understand the language spoken by some people among the “Quicamas” (Flint and Flint 2005:197). The connection did not extend to the Pimas of Sonoyta, who had been at war with the Quíquimas, according to Salvatierra, and who tried to impede Spanish communication with them (AGN, Relación itineraria, Historia, legajo 21, f. 125).

Archaeological Evidence

The western portion of the Pimería Alta has long been considered a borderland between both Patayan and Hohokam archaeological traditions and Yuman and O’odham speakers. Excavations at Ventana Cave (AZ Z:12:5[ASM]), a large rock-shelter situated in the Castle Mountains in the Papaguería (a Papago subregion in the west-central part of the Pimería Alta), yielded one of the longest records of habitation in the Southwest (Haury 1950). Assemblages recovered from the upper levels at Ventana Cave were characterized by triangular projectile points with concave bases; Papago plain and Papago redware manufactured during the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries; and a few nonmicaceous, well-smoothed, thin-walled ceramics manufactured using the paddle-and-anvil technique. These nonmicaceous wares exhibited attributes consistent with both Lowland Patayan and Upper Piman manufacturing strategies, suggesting frequent interaction between these groups. Given this region’s history as a contact zone for Yuman and O’odham speakers, it is not surprising that ceramics from this area would exhibit a mixture of attributes consistent with two different groups.

In the Sierra Pinacate, a volcanic region in northwest Sonora characterized by sparse vegetation and an extremely arid climate, several assemblages dating to the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries exhibit a mix of Lowland Patayan and Upper Piman material culture. Ceramic assemblages are predominately characterized by Lowland Patayan buffwares; however, projectile point styles mirror those used by O’odham speakers, specifically Sobaipuris who occupied territory farther east. Julian Hayden (1967) and Paul Ezell (1955, 1963a) argued that the Pinacate was likely occupied by Areneños who spoke an O’odham dialect, but acquired and used Lowland Patayan ceramics.

A mixture of Lowland Patayan and Upper Piman ceramic attributes was noted in several ceramic concentrations found associated with talus pits in the Tucson Basin (Madsen 1993). Although these ceramic assemblages shared more similarities with Papago plainwares, the long chimney-style necks and partially obliterated rim coils are reminiscent of attributes associated with Lowland Patayan ceramics along the Gila and Colorado Rivers. The lack of carbon streaking and associated European material culture suggests that these ceramics roughly date to 1450–1775.

Ceramic assemblages recovered from lands belonging to the Ak-Chin Indian Community, dating from 1400 to 1850, share similarities with both Lowland Patayan and Upper Piman assemblages. The initial analysis by William Deaver (1990) identified two ceramic complexes: Complex I contained ceramics with folded rims, stucco finish, and Red-on-Buff decoration, whereas Complex II lacked these attributes. A reanalysis of this typology by John Cable (1990) suggests that Complex I, which exhibits folded rims and decorated ceramics, was the earliest to appear. Cable’s findings did not support the stringent division in ceramic complexes proposed by Deaver, however. He encountered folded rims and a stucco finish in both Complex I and II assemblages, implying that the largest qualitative difference between these two types lay in the presence of decorated ceramics. Cable (1990) concluded that the ceramic chronology demonstrated a progression away from Lowland Patayan attributes, characterized by a decrease in folded rims and the discontinued use of painted decoration. After these attributes were discontinued, the ceramics more closely resembled wares found among Sobaipuris and Upper Pimas.

Synthesis and Conclusions

As the above discussion illustrates, different groups inhabiting and bordering the Pimería Alta interacted with each other to a considerable degree. O’odham and Cocomaricopa messengers reportedly traveled widely and freely throughout the Pimería Alta (AGN, Favores Celestiales, Misiones, legajo 27, ff. 1–433). Pima knowledge of travel routes and water-holes in Cocomaricopa territory, the presence of Cocomaricopas among the Pimas of Sonoyta, and the probable presence of Pima rancherías near the Colorado-Gila confluence all serve as testimony to the long-standing relationship between these two peoples (BN, Relación itineraria 1699, Ms. 3165, ff. 182–195v; AGN, Relación itineraria, Historia, legajo 21, f. 123v; AGI, Escobar Relación, México, legajo 20). These interrelationships are also visible in the archaeological record. The presence of ceramic attributes associated with both Lowland Patayan and Upper Piman styles on the same vessel, exemplified in assemblages recovered from both the Tucson Basin (Madsen 1993) and Ventana Cave (Haury 1950), provides additional evidence of these ties. To the south and east, the identification of Whetstone Plain ceramics—a type generally associated with Sobaipuris—at Upper Piman sites in the Altar Valley may indicate that Pimas and Sobaipuris interacted with each other through either the exchange of vessels or intermarriage, wherein spouses introduced distinct ceramic-manufacturing practices to their community (McGuire and Villalpando 1993). Likewise, the similarity between ceramics found at England Ranch Ruin on the Santa Cruz River and those found at sites in the Río Sonora may indicate the movement of populations or trade items between these two regions (Doyel 1977; Masse 1980).

Social alliances between groups inhabiting the Pimería Alta are well established in the documentary record. Pimas living along the Gila River intermarried with the Cocomaricopas, and several rancherías below Gila Bend were multiethnic communities in which inhabitants spoke both O’odham and Yuman languages (AGN, Favores Celestiales, Misiones, legajo 27, ff. 1–433; BN, Relación itineraria 1699, Ms. 3165, ff. 182–195v; AHH, Carta 1742, Temporalidades, legajo 17, exp. 42). The Areneños and Quíqimas engaged in a similarly close and long-standing alliance in the Colorado delta region (AGN, Relación itineraria, Historia, legajo 21, ff. 105–135; Flint and Flint 2005). The mixture of Yuman (ceramics) and O’odham (projectile points) material culture found at archaeological sites in the Sierra Pinacate (Ezell 1955, 1963a, 1963b; Hayden 1967) reinforces the extent and nature of alliances described in the documentary record.

Although colonial chroniclers—especially Kino—generally described the Pimas as peaceful, social conflicts among these groups were remarked upon as well. Hostilities among the populations living along the Colorado River were frequent. Pimas, in their alliance with Cocomaricopas, had a history of warfare with Quechans. The Pimas of Sonoyta had a contentious relationship with the Quíquimas, to whom the Areneños were closely connected, and attempted to impede Spanish contact with them. Sobas, though O’odham speakers, were the traditional enemies of eastern Pimas, and appear to have been more closely linked with Areneños and with coastal Pimas Bajos (AGN, Favores Celestiales, Misiones, legajo 27, ff. 1–433; AGN, Relación itineraria, Historia, legajo 21, ff. 105–135; AHP, Autos de guerra, microfilm 1695, ff. 28–31v).

As with the Sobas discussed above, the conflicts documented between groups in the Pimería Alta were complicated, varied, and rarely clear cut. Relationships between eastern O’odham and Ópatan groups appear to have varied by river valley. Pimas and Ópatas were reportedly involved in an alliance resisting Jesuit entry into Bacoachi in 1649, but Pimas and Ópatas on the Río Magdelena avoided each other until 1650 (AHP, Autos, microfilm 1649A, exp. 14; AGN, Carta Anua, Misiones, legajo 26). Pima raiding of Ópata and Spanish colonial villages in the Teuricachi Valley (AHP, Higuera, microfilm 1688C, exp. 130) was one of several events that increased tensions among these groups, and Pima-Ópata antagonisms contributed to the death of three Ópatas at Tubutama in 1695 (BNM, Muerte de Saeta, ms. 1118, ff. 155v, 156–157r). Relationships between Sobaipuris and the Janos and Jocomes to the east appear to have initially been amicable (AHP, Canito, microfilm 1686B, exp. 19), but were radically altered when Ramírez de Salazar took several southern Sobaipuris to meet Kino (AHP, Autos de guerra, microfilm 1692A, no. 1). The ensuing alliance between Spaniards and southern Sobaipuris may have been the root of tensions with Sobaipuri communities to the north (AHP, Autos de guerra, microfilm 1695, ff. 28–31v; BL, Linga Ms., Bolton Papers I, item 203), as southern rancherías gained easier access to valuable Spanish goods and attracted raids from their former allies.

O’odham-speaking populations commonly interacted among each other and with multiple non-O’odham groups during the sixteenth, seventeenth, and eighteenth centuries. Documentary, archaeological, and oral historical data bear testimony to the dynamic interplay of alliances, conflicts, and interactions among these groups over time. The distribution of ceramic attributes accords with documentary reports that O’odham coresided with Yuman-speaking populations along the northern and western boundaries. There also appears to have been considerable interaction among O’odham groups of the San Pedro, Santa Cruz, and Altar River Valleys given that Whetstone Plain has been found at sites throughout much of the Pimería Alta. Archaeological evidence of possibly amicable interaction between O’odham along the Santa Cruz River and Ópatas near the Río Sonora accords with ethnohistorical evidence for early alliances between easternmost O’odham and Ópatas at the Sonora’s upper reaches, though documents suggest that other interactions between O’odham and Ópatas were often quite hostile. Further ethnohistorical research using multiple lines of evidence to re-create shared historical narratives will help to clarify the variability in relations among these groups over time.