Sobaipuri Archaeology, An Introduction

Debate still surrounds whether the Sobaipuri and other O'odham groups are related to the prehistoric Hohokam (ho-ho-KAHM) who
occupied a portion of the same geographic area and were present until about the 1400s. This question is sometimes phrased as the
Hohokam-Pima or Salado-Pima continuum, phraseology that questions whether there is a connection between the prehistoric Hohokam
and the first historic groups cited in the area. A key piece of the puzzle has recently been found when it was discovered that there were
O'odham/Sobaipuri present in the 1400s (Seymour 2004, 2007a). Absolute dates from multiple sites on the San Pedro and Santa Cruz
rivers have produced evidence of Sobaipuri occupation in the 1400s. The position is no longer defensible that no one was present after
1400 and that there was a substantial population decline in the prehistoric period (Seymour 2007c,d). Hohokam populations may have
been displaced by the intruding O'odham or they may have transformed into them, but there is no substantial time gap between
prehistoric and the arrival of the O'odham. Two other groups were present at this time as well:
the ancestral Apache and non-Apachean mobile groups.

Further Reading on the Hohokam-Pima Continuum:
Seymour, Deni J., 2007, An Archaeological Perspective on the Hohokam-Pima Continuum. Old Pueblo Archaeology Bulletin No. 51
(December 2007):1-7. download here (Note: final sentence is truncated and should read: "One thing is for certain: The way we think
about these issues determines how well we will visualize the data necessary to address the answer and therefore how readily we will
be able to find it."

== Sobaipuri Archaeology and Sobaipuri History==

For years it has beent thought that the Sobaipuri were recent arrivals into the American Southwest. Yet we now know that the
Sobaipuri were present when the first Europeans visited the area in the middle 1500s, thereby playing an important role in European
contact and later the European colonization of Arizona. Marcos de Niza probably encountered this group along the San Pedro River in
southeastern Arizona in 1539, although when Francisco Vázquez de Coronado followed less than a year later his party of explorers
seems to have turned northeast before reaching the Sobaipuri settlements (Seymour 2007, 2008c). As chronometric dates are obtained
they will be plotted on the map below that shows what the Sobaipuri landscape would have looked like on the San Pedro at the time
of Marcos de Niza. Some of the dates are availble now.

When Father Eusebio Kino first arrived in the area in 1691
he was greeted by leaders of this group. Headmen from
San Cayetano del Tumacacori and perhaps other villages
had come to Saric, Mexico from the north to ask that Kino
visit them. Kino traveled north along the Santa Cruz River
to San Cayetano del Tumacacori (later moved to the
modern location of Tumacácori National Historical Park and
renamed), where he found three native-made structures
that had been constructed specially for him: a house, a
kitchen, and one for saying mass (Bolton 1948).

The natives welcomed him with ceremonies, suggesting that earlier missionaries and native converts from Sonora had
prepared the way. If nothing else, the colorful gifts of ribbons and beads, and functionality of the metal knives made
visitation from these strangers attractive, at least initially.

This visit to this first of the Spanish missions in the Sonoran Desert north of the current international border made this
native Sobaipuri settlement the first mission in southern Arizona, or the first Jesuit mission in Arizona, but, contrary to
popular notions, not the first mission in Arizona--a role that goes to the Hopi pueblo of Awatovi. This original native
Sobaipuri settlement of San Cayetano del Tumacacori has been located archaeologically on the east side of the river (as
shown on Kino's historic maps), providing evidence of a densely packed, well-planned, long-occupied village (Seymour
2007a).

Kino then stopped by Guevavi (later referred to as Mission Los Santos Ángeles de Guevavi), which is located to the south
along the Santa Cruz River. Here he later (1701) established a "neat little house and church" which he ordered
whitewashed. The location of this native settlement and this formal church has been identified and excavated (Seymour
1993, 1997, 2008b). This native settlement later became the cabecera or head mission for this region. Its occupation
survived there until the 1770s. The church, however, was catastrophically destroyed by fire (before 1716), probably as part
of a native uprising, and was rebuilt in nearby locations two more times.

The Sobaipuris were initially friendly with their neighbors, including the Apache, Jocome, and Jano (Seymour 2007b,
2008a). They traded with one another and they were cited sometimes raiding together. They even intermarried, probably
creating the unique character of the Sobaipuri or Soba Jipuri, sometimes referred to as Soba y Puri or Soba y Jipuri. Later
they sided with the Europeans which seriously stressed their relationship with the unconverted tribes because they went
into battle against them.

The last Sobaipuri died in 1932 (Hoover 1935), while others had intermixed with other O'odham groups and the Apache
(Seymour 2007b, 2008a).

These 24 sites were recorded by Seymour in the
1980s, as reported in several publications and reports.
She has recorded several more while conducting
continued research in this area.

These 24 sites and those Seymour has recorded on
the Santa Cruz River and adjacent drainages
represent more than 4-times the number of sites
recorded by all other Sobaipuri researchers
combined. This results from a focused research plan
over 25 years, focused specifically on the Sobaipuri
and related groups.

Those sites or loci of sites underlined in red have
been chronometrically dated to the Marcos de Niza
period. More samples have been submitted and all
sites will eventually be dated.

All of these sites have been carefully mapped and
chronometric samples extracted from specific
features. This way it is possible to discern if specific
parts of sites date to different periods than others.