Native Life in the southern Southwest

Native Sobaípuri settlements do contain small amounts of faunal material (Seymour 2007a, 2008b). Because the sites are so close to the surface usually only burned bone is
preserved. Scatterings of burned animal bone are present on most habitation sites, but like the other debris, most trash was tossed over the sides of the ridges and hills on
which the sites are situated. There was very little build-up of trash on settlements themselves which means that artifact density is very low. This has led to a lack of material to
study, which extends to the faunal and botanical remains. Still it is necessary to study what data are available on and near these native settlements rather than focusing on
the Spanish centers where food preparation, disposal, and consumption patterns were very different. A data set of faunal material is available from a number of Sobaípuri
sites. Excavations over the past several years on multiple Sobaípuri sites has resulted in the collection of faunal material from controlled contexts. These are available to
other qualified researchers for study.

With regard to faunal material, evidence from a number of sites indicates that use of small bird and mammal species was important in the Sobaípuri diet. It is likely that
larger bones were discarded further from the place of use, and have since decayed, whereas small bones might have settled into the loose sediment near work areas, staying
in place for archaeological study. Some later sites and also the depressions of substantial features often contain the debris from later occupations, telling us about those who
followed rather than the builders of those features themselves. Other lines of evidence suggest that large-game species were important and that through time the livestock
given them by the missionaries were incorporated into their diet. While this process seems self-evident, the circumstances and timing of this transition are of interest. Data
regarding site structure suggest that changes in site layout did not occur until the late 1700s, long after the first intensive Spanish presence (Seymour 2008). Given this, one
must question how substantially other aspects of Sobaípuri life, including their diet, changed or if perhaps they remained the same until this later period. It is expected that
different aspects of life should change at different rates and so each must be studied independently, removing preconceived notions. The documentary record indicates that
livestock herds proliferated, and mention is made of the missionaries and presidials making use of the animals for food, but there is no direct evidence that the animals were
used by the natives themselves. This is an important question that requires attention.

Prior to the introduction of domesticated livestock (cattle, mares, etc.) the Sobaípuri depended on wild game (mountain sheep, elk, deer, and bison) as well as agricultural
produce. At this time they seem to have been an important player in a inter-regional exchange system that included many of the surrounding mobile groups and some of the
Western Pueblos (such as Hopi and Zuni) (Seymour 2007b, 2008). By way of this network they probably gained access to products, including faunal resources that might not
otherwise have been available to them in such quantities. Their role in the hide trade is important to consider given the abundance of mobile group material culture on their
sites and evidence for mobile group structures on and near Sobaípuri sites. In the past the Canutillo complex mobile-group tool kit has been confused with that used by the
Sobaípuri. This has meant that burials containing these artifacts have potentially been repatriated to the wrong group. This also means that the material culture attributes
archaeologists have used to identify the Sobaípuri are in error because they in fact are diagnostic of another group.

It is expected that tools of these other groups should be present on Sobaípuri sites because the sites were later reoccupied by mobile groups. Also, mobile groups sometimes
visited the Sobaípuri for trade, and they also co-resided in the same settlements and settled in their own rancherías along the same rivers (Seymour 2007b, 2008). Because
Sobaipuri sites are so close to the surface and appear to have been used for such a short period of time (this latter assumption we now know to be false), unconsciously
researchers have assumed that these sites would not show evidence of use by many groups. They have accepted that most Sobaipuri sites are underlain by prehistoric
occupations, but because the signature of the mobile groups was not known, consideration has not been given to the thought that later people might have settled on and left
debris at these Sobaipuri sites, and in the process contributed to and confused the material culture record. More recent research is identifying such evidence and it is more
common than previously thought.

The problem of archaeologists focusing on the Spanish presence rather than the native contingent extends to a number of realms. One particularly visible example is the use
of documentary sources. Researchers who focus on the study of documentary sources (usually called ethnohistorians) tend to prioritize those sources, giving them clout above
all other data sources. The problem with doing this is that native life existed before documentation by outsiders. By focusing on the post-documentary period a very different
impression is gained about native life than if one considers the time before European arrival using archaeological data (Seymour 2007b, 2007c). Researchers know this but
few follow this in practice.

Moreover, only a small slice of the native lifeway was visible to the Spanish. The Europeans interfaced with men who held political roles within their communities.
Archaeological data suggest that the household (which was the core of O'odham society) and women were shielded from Spanish influence until late in time (Seymour 2009,
2010). Also, many incongruities are visible in the documentary record which themselves provide suggestions that the stated scenario was very different from reality. Use of the
archaeological record is one way to access this type of data that informs on the silent majority and the differences between reality and the documentary record left by
interested European parties.

Even when the Spanish had access to native life, they often misconstrued what was taking place. Sometimes this was done intentionally to further their purpose. An example
of this is provided by recent work at Guevavi. The documentary record is silent on what happened to Father Kino's "neat little house and church" as described in Kino's own
journal (Bolton 1948; also see Kessell 1970). No further mention of this construction is made once it was completed and once Kino ordered that it be whitewashed in 1701.
Archaeological data indicate that the church was burned. Arrowheads inside suggest it was probably burned by rebellious O'odham, as is historically recorded for later
constructions of this type during O'odham uprisings. This suggests that these early Upper Pima were not as pacified as Kino indicated, nor were they of one mind about the
Colonial presence. This also suggests that the Spanish military and religious participants kept this fact of native rebellion and what happened to this important symbolic
feature quiet for decades. No mention is made of this event or of the disappearance of this feature indicating that Kino was quite influential in maintaining a unified image of
the progress of conversion on the northwestern frontier (Seymour 2009).

Kino and others of his mindset were successful in conveying this constructed and artificial impression of the Sobaipuri and other O'odham. Even later ethnographers and
ethnohistorians have perpetuated the impression that O'odhams are docile, peaceful, and compliant. Instead of being warlike, as apparently were the Apache, they were
viewed as peace-loving. Instead of being confrontational, the O'odham were cooperative. In reality, the archaeological record indicates that the Upper Pima or O'odham did
rebel; though they chose their battles carefully after considered discussion and planning. Their passive aggressive mode of resistence was partially responsible for why the
O'ohham were able to survive while in such close proximity to European culture. This indirect way of handling the surrounding world likely resulted from their pivotal role in
the larger social arena and their position on the frontier, their role in a widespread trade system, and their placement along key travel and trade trails. They were successful
in many key realms of life and survival because of this diplomacy, but diplomacy does not equate to compliance and docility.

The Spanish knew even less about the other native groups who resided in the region. The Apache and the non-Athapaskan mobile groups, such as the Jano and Jocome,
were far beyond Spanish observation and understanding. The only side the Europeans saw was the raiding and warfare aspects of their lifeway. These mobile groups chose
to stay outside the Spanish world, interfacing with it for economic gain (such as raiding) and political maneuvering. When it came to interaction with the Europeans their
chosen method of inter-cultural interface was aggression and hostility, using fear and intimidation rather than diplomacy. Their position at the periphery of the Spanish world
meant that they were not under as much scrutiny and interference as were the Sobaipuri-O'odham, and were able to attack and disappear, removing to the relative safety of
the interior and mountain heights.

REFERENCES

Bolton, Herbert E., 1948 Kino's Historical Memoir of Pimeria Alta. Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press.

Kessell, John L., 1970 Mission of Sorrow: Jesuit Guevavi and the Pimas, 1691-1767. Tucson, AZ: University of Arizona Press.

Seymour, Deni J., 1997, Finding History in the Archaeological Record; The Upper Piman Settlement of Guevavi. Kiva 62(3):245-260.

Seymour, Deni J., 2007a A Syndetic Approach to Identification of the Historic Mission Site of San Cayetano Del Tumacácori. International Journal of Historical Archaeology,
Vol. 11(3):269-296.

Seymour, Deni J., 2007b Delicate Diplomacy on a Restless Frontier: Seventeenth-Century Sobaipuri Social and Economic Relations in Northwestern New Spain, Part I. New
Mexico Historical Review, Volume 82, No. 4.

Seymour, Deni J., 2007c An Archaeological Perspective on the Hohokam-Pima Continuum. Old Pueblo Archaeology Bulletin No. 51, December 2007, pp. 1-7.

Seymour, Deni J., 2007d Sexually Based War Crimes or Structured Conflict Strategies: An Archaeological Example from the American Southwest. In Texas and Points West:
Papers in Honor of John A. Hedrick and Carol P. Hedrick, edited by Regge N. Wiseman, Thomas C. O'Laughlin, and Cordelia T. Snow, pp. 117-134. Papers of the
Archaeological Society of New Mexico No. 33. Archaeological Society of New Mexico, Albuquerque.

Seymour, Deni J., 2008 Delicate Diplomacy on a Restless Frontier: Seventeenth-Century Sobaipuri Social and Economic Relations in Northwestern New Spain, Part II. New
Mexico Historical Review, Volume 83, No. 2.

Seymour, Deni J., 2009 Father Kino's 'Neat Little House and Church' at Guevavi. Journal of the Southwest 51(2):285-316.

Seymour, Deni J. 2010 Beyond Married, Buried, And Baptized: Exposing Historical Discontinuities In An Engendered Sobaípuri-O'odham Household. Chapter in Engendering
Households in the Prehistoric Southwest, edited by Barbara Roth. Under review by University of Arizona Press, Tucson.