|
Article Excerpt
The massive, sprawling ruins of a six hundred-room Ancestral Pueblo village known since the 1930s as Kinishba sits perched above a now-desiccated spring in a scenic, pine-fringed alluvial valley near the seat of government for the White Mountain Apache Tribe (figure 1). The site has been variously designated as the Fort Apache Ruin; LA 1895 (N.M. Laboratory of Anthropology); Arizona C:4:5 (Gila Pueblo-Arizona); Hough No. 134; AZ V:4:I(ASM), and 46004 (FAIRsite). Kinishba is derived from the Apache term ki datbaa, meaning "brown house." For the last seventy-five years the ruin has served as a proving ground for efforts in what we refer to today as applied archaeology and heritage tourism. By twenty-first-century archaeological standards we know little about the site or its ancient occupants. In contrast, various archives and federal agency offices have preserved a rich documentary record of why and how archaeologists have made use of the site for training, public outreach, and economic and community development. (1)
[FIGURE 1 OMITTED]
This review of successive attempts to integrate research, education, preservation, and enterprise incorporates the results of archival studies as well as my experience from two decades partially spent in creating preservation and stewardship partnerships focused on the site. (2) The discussion reveals a long and ongoing struggle to find a place in modern society for the ancient ruin, thus providing glimpses into the history and future of archaeology and tourism in Arizona's Apache country and of the institutional and governmental dynamics that have so profoundly influenced where, how, why, and by whom research and preservation are carried out. The review concludes with cautionary tales and constructive clues offered as the basis for ongoing management of Kinishba, as guidance for comparable initiatives, and as an endorsement for redefining applied archaeology as a central clement of cultural heritage stewardship.
THE RUINS OF A VILLAGE FARMING COMMUNITY OF THE GREAT PUEBLO PERIOD
This article portrays key episodes in Kinishba's post-1930 history as sequential reflections of important individuals and social trends; nonetheless, because these people and issues all relate to the site's clear regional significance in the 1200s and 1300s, an archaeological summary provides an appropriate point of departure. Kinishba is located at about 5,000 feet above sea level, south of the Mogollon Rim and north of the Salt River, at the eastern foot of Tse Sizin (Rock Standing Up, a.k.a. Sawtooth Mountain), on White Mountain Apache Tribe trust lands (i.e., the Fort Apache Indian Reservation). The site is the most publicly accessible of the twenty or so large (150 or more rooms), Ancestral (Mogollon) Pueblo village ruins that were built and occupied as part of the colonization of the Mogollon Rim region in the AD 1200s and 1300s (Reid and Whittlesey 1997; Welch 1996; Mills, Herr, and Van Keuren 1999; Riggs 2001, 2005). Grasshopper and Point of Pines are the other well-known modern names for these ancient population centers, and much of what we suspect about the lives and works of Kinishba's occupants is based on analogies with knowledge resulting from systematic investigations at these sites from the 1950s through the early 1990s. The largest thirteenthand fourteenth-century ruins along the Mogollon Rim share a suite of architectural elements, ceramic assemblage attributes, and locational characteristics--especially proximity to expanses of land suitable for dry maize farming and ready access to domestic water, tabular sandstone or limestone, and ponderosa pine--indicative of shared origins and lifeways, as well as sustained interactions.
All of these large villages were built up from apartment-style room blocks laid out to define communal courtyards or plazas (Riggs 2001). The site that has become known as Kinishba is comprised of eight major mounds, the collapsed remains of masonry room groups. The village probably grew more from immigrants than from expanding families and appears to have included over six hundred rooms. The main cluster of rooms, Group I, is the ruins of a rectangular arrangement of one, two, and possibly three-story rooms perched along the eastern edge of an ephemeral tributary to the White River. Group I includes a masonry wall separating two open courtyards or plazas and covered-corridor entries from the south and the west (figure 2). Ceremonies likely played important roles in uniting the various groups who came together in this place. The site's other room groups are less fully researched but likely also include plazas and other ceremonial rooms and communal features.
[FIGURE 2 OMITTED]
Tree-ring dates obtained by excavators from charcoal taken from beams in various burned rooms indicate that the pueblo's initial construction and subsequent remodeling spanned about two hundred years, beginning about AD 1160 (Baldwin 1935; Douglass 1938; Bannister and Robinson 1971; Nash 1999). Remains of pit houses and numerous small structures found nearby indicate the Kinishba locality was occupied by AD 800 or 900. There is no clear evidence of ancient Apache occupation of the site, but oral traditions indicate Apache history in the region extending into time immemorial. The presence of Hopi Yellow Wares and Zuni Glaze Wares suggest use of the site by Pueblo or Pueblo-affiliated groups into the early AD 1400s. Consultant recollections of Hopi and Zuni oral traditions, along with the remains of a shrine and associated offerings, reveal Hopi and possibly Zuni use of the site, perhaps after a hiatus, into the latter half of the 1900s. (3) Reid and Whittlesey (1989) suggest the site may have been the Chiciticale referred to in narratives of the 1540-41 expedition of Francisco de Coronado.
A VICTORIAN HUMANIST'S SWAN SONG
In 1931 Byron Cummings--venerable founder of the University of Arizona Department of Archaeology (later Anthropology), director of the Arizona State Museum (ASM), and former University of Arizona (U of A) dean of men and president (Bostwick 2006)--began the largest project of his ambitious career, the excavation, reconstruction, and development of an interpretive center and tourist attraction of and from the ruins of the six hundred-room pueblo known to non-Indians at the time as the Fort Apache Ruin and located less than four miles from that icon of the American West. Adolph Bandelier (1890-92) based a portion of his wide-ranging archaeological reconnaissance surveys out of Fort Apache in the spring of 1883, noting that soldiers dug there frequently in search of relics. The site was also noted by Walter Hough (1907), Leslie Spier (1919), Albert Regan (1930), and Gila Pueblo surveyors (Baldwin 1941) prior to attracting Cummings' attention. Employing university archaeological field schools, various Depression-era works projects, funding from the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA), (4) and his social and political capital, Cummings worked well into the late 1940s--his late eighties--to establish the site as a national monument unit in the National Park Service (NPS) system and as a source of American Indian pride, education, and tourist-related income.
Cummings was a member of the cadre of scholar-entrepreneurs that not only laid the foundations for Southwestern archaeology, but forged the discipline's crucial links to community, institutional, and economic development (Fowler 2000). Known to all close colleagues, students, and friends as "The Dean," Cummings was uniquely qualified for and committed to the pursuit of his Herculean task. He had been taking students on summer archaeological expeditions across the northern Southwest since 1907 and, in 1919, initiated the U of A's ongoing program of field schools (Brace 1986; Mills 2005; Reid and Whittlesey 2005; Mills et al. n.d.). In the later 1920s and earliest 1930s Dean Cummings had completed excavation projects at Cuicuilco, Mexico, and Turkey Hill Pueblo, near Flagstaff; Arizona (Bostwick 2006). Through his astonishing energy, generous and contagiously enthusiastic disposition, U of A positions, social prominence in Tucson, predisposition for visionary institutional development, and previous field investigations, Dean Cummings had developed deep and broad support for his projects, networks in private and government sectors, and a capacity for collaborations with Native Americans grounded in sincere and sustained interest in their economic and social circumstances (Bostwick 2006).
Preparation and capacity, however, must not be confused with interest and motivation. It remains somewhat uncertain why Dean Cummings passed over the hundreds of spectacular and promising sites he visited during decades of far-flung explorations and decided to bind his future to that of the Fort Apache Ruin. Baldwin (1938:11; 1939:323) emphasizes the site's research potential, insisting the intention was to examine the cultural and territorial boundaries between the Anasazi tradition of the Colorado Plateau and the Hohokam tradition of the southern deserts. In a personal interview conducted in February 2006, Jefferson Reid emphasized the impact on Cummings of losing his wife, Isabelle, in 1929, turning seventy in 1930, and during the same period sparking an enduring friendship with Miss Ann Chatham, an Indian Service educator stationed at Fort Apache. Bostwick (2006:246) acknowledges these factors and suggests that Cummings was ready to adopt a more regionally focused, less strenuous and peripatetic mode of fieldwork.
Cumming's emphatically personal approach and clear interest in establishing his legacy probably transcended any specific allure of professional opportunity. Early plans for the new project, like many of his previous initiatives, seem to have been guided less by pressing research questions or scientific rigors than by his unflinching desire to share his zeal for native peoples and their ancient forebears and, thereby, to encourage students, colleagues, and avocational archacologists to help in his endeavors or pursue their own passions. Although integrated research excavations and site-development work at Pecos Pueblo and Chaco Canyon had established New Mexico as a destination for archaeological tourists, Arizona had yet to launch similar projects by the late 1920s (Fowler 2000; Snead 2001). Cummings' zesty competitive streak and "boosterish" interests in Arizona in general and the U of A in particular may have contributed to his decision. It is also likely that Cummings' interest in the site was piqued by the ready availability of an Apache workforce and the prospect of administrative support for site development from the White Mountain Apache Tribe and the Department of Interior via the BIA's Fort Apache Agency.
Early documents offer little assistance in sorting out Cummings' precise initial motives or goals. Writing on June 17, 1931, from Chichen Itza, Mexico--where he was participating in the investigation and development of the site as a tourist destination--Cummings requested from Interior Secretary Ray Lyman Wilbur his first Antiquities Act permit for studies at the Fort Apache Ruin, the "type ruin of the people who once occupied the Upper Salt River area." The letter lists prospective project participants, including Gordon C. Baldwin, Harry Barkdol, Florence Hawley Senter, and Muriel Hanna, stating, "Any material obtained will be preserved in the Arizona State Museum which is always open to the public free of charge." The Interior Department's July 15, 1931, response to the permit application states, in part, "your application has been approved by the Secretary, Smithsonian Institution; the Commissioner of Indian Affairs, and the Department Consulting Archaeologist, Santa Fe, New Mexico. Pursuant, therefore, to the act of June 8, 1906 (38 Stats., 225), and the interdepartmental regulations of December 28, 1906, prescribed there-under, permission is hereby granted.... In this connection, the Office of Indian Affairs has recommended that consideration be given to the desire of the Superintendent, Fort Apache Agency, that Indian laborers be employed upon this work as far as practicable, in which the Department concurs." Similar stipulations were incorporated into the eight subsequent permits Cummings secured to conduct excavations at Kinishba.
Regardless of any specific intent, Cummings moved swiftly and decisively to establish himself as "The Dean of Kinishba" (see Cummings and Cummings n.d.), laying the foundations for a long-term, multifaceted initiative that, seventy-five years later, continues to attract admirers and partners, as well as detractors. By July 20 Cummings had returned to Tucson, gathered his students, and arrived to begin digging on Apache land with the four students listed in the permit application and two others--Luther Hoffman, and Henry Rubenstein. Table 1 summarizes significant on-site activity and management developments, and Bostwick (2006) aptly summarizes the year-by-year progress of Cummings' research and preservation program. Cummings undeniably had in mind a project and a product distinct from his previous undertakings by virtue of duration, extent, and scope. Only at Turkey Hill had he dedicated two consecutive seasons to a Southwestern site. Only at Cuicuilco had he contemplated the excavation of a major portion of a large site. Only at the Fort Apache Ruin did The Dean set the agenda by rechristening the site with an Anglicized version of the Apache name and by envisioning a rebuilt pueblo as a center for education, research, and economic development.
Cummings' energy and optimism in pursuit of his unfolding agenda tax today's imagination. With a half-dozen students and a tiny budget apparently squeezed from Arizona State Museum operating funds, on July 20, 1931, he turned his thirty-something spirit and seventy-year-old body to a project that combined archaeological research and training; intertribal and interagency collaboration; historic preservation; and museum, community, and tourism enterprise development. It was the first project of its kind in the region, and certainly the only such project launched primarily on the basis of will and hope instead of solid financial and administrative backing. During the next ten years, Cummings and his crews of students and Apache laborers excavated at least 220 rooms, rebuilt about 140 of those (probably making Kinishba the largest and most extensively reconstructed pueblo in the Southwest), (5) and worked to create on Arizona's Apache lands what is known today as a heritage tourism destination, including a "living museum." Table 2 lists documented participants in the Kinishba projects. (6)
Undeterred by either the momentous challenges he had assumed or by the minimal state and national support for the early stages of his project, Cummings followed his lifelong pattern of building friendships and loyalty with both local families and impressive arrays of imported students and regional supporters. Cummings and his Apache workers and student underlings excavated a staggering forty-one rooms in the second season (Cummings 1932). In October Cummings and his new colleague in the Archaeology Department, John H. Provinse, presented the summer's excavations to the Arizona Archaeological and Historical Society. (7) The Arizona Daily Star (October 18, 1932) reported that the lecture "drew aside the shadowy curtain of time," and Tucson society embraced the project. In the summer of 1933, with the Depression in full force and funds scarce, Dean Cummings and his twelve students excavated twenty rooms and cleared much of the large plaza in Group 1. The small group also began to rebuild portions of the excavated architecture, apparently starting with Room 3. Squaring off against his funding problems, Cummings engaged the substantial network of friends and benefactors built over his long career to obtain a commitment from the university to conduct for four seasons (1934-1937) what appears to have been the first encampment-based credit-granting field school and what may forever stand as the field school with the most senior director--Cummings was seventy-three during the initial field school season (Gifford and Morris 1985; Mills 2005; Wilcox 2005: note 18).
Although no documentary evidence of The Dean's grand intentions for the site predates 1934, it seems likely that his vision had begun to translate into concrete plans by late 1932. It is probable that the Works Progress Administration's assumption of responsibility for construction of the new Arizona State Museum building on the University of Arizona campus gave The Dean an important clue to use in his search for partners (see Martin 1960:165-66; Haury 2004:142). Cummings' supervision of Emergency Relief Administration laborers assigned to NPS at Tuzigoot in 1933-1934 further contributed to his familiarity with Depressionera funding opportunities and, almost surely, to his emerging plans for Kinishba's public interpretation. Reid and Whittlesey (1989:52) detail the shared elements and parallel development of Tuzigoot and Kinishba, concluding that it is not possible "to determine through archival data which reconstruction-museum complex inspired the other.... It is certain that this type of reconstruction and museum was viewed as desirable and integral to public interpretation of archaeological sites in the 1930s" (see also Officer 1996).
On the basis of letters and personal visits strategically directed at diverse federal officials--especially local BIA Superintendent William Donner and Jesse Nusbaum, the archaeologist charged with the technical evaluation of Antiquities Act permit applications--Cummings built the foundations for subsequent requests for support from Depression-era works programs that would allow him to enlist and compensate an Apache workforce. (8) In his March 8, 1934, reply to Cummings in Tucson--the earliest documented indication of tourism- and education-focused development plans for the site--Fort Apache Agency Superintendent William Donnet evinces a level of support for the project and a personal familiarity with Cummings. (9) He sets a constructive tone for the BIA's prospective involvement, stating, "I would like very much to see this ruin developed and restored to the fullest extent and it seems that it might be well to take this up with the proper department. It might be possible to have a small C.C.C. camp located near there for the summer. A small camp of perhaps 100 men would do a lot of work for you. There are a great many such camps established in this state, most of them down in your section, during the winter months ... am sending your letter on to the Washington Office, asking their cooperation."
In his April 1935 report on the 1934 season, Cummings hints at his intentions, stating, "This pueblo is worthy of being made a perpetual monument to its builders and as a source of information to the young Apaches ... and also to the large number of tourists who visit that part of the reservation every year." In his filth permit application, dated May 23, 1935, The Dean asserts, "The benefits derived also from the work of the students who are fitting themselves for a life work in anthropology are exceedingly great and more than justify the use of the ruin as an outdoor laboratory. We are excavating and repairing as we go and undertaking to make this piece of work of lasting educational benefit to the people as well as the students.... I fled most sincerely that this project can be made an outstanding educational feature on the Apache Reservation and is very worthy of being made a national monument of note." The Cummings-Donner collaboration worked to mutual satisfaction, and by early June Cummings' request for laborers was approved.
But on June 18, 1935, the coordinator of the Emergency Conservation Works program on the reservation, R. B. Hazard, wrote Cummings to report a lack of "success in persuading Apaches to go to work on your project. I believe this is due to the fact that most of these Southwestern Indians are extremely superstitious regarding the dead.... we suggest that you pick up whatever men you can yourself and send them up here for examination before you put them to work." Apache cultural proscriptions include avoidance of inessential contact with the deceased and their possessions, including ruins, and suspicions and misgivings by Apaches not working at Kinishba toward Cummings and his excavators persist in local social memory through the Apache term Bini' dayitsote, meaning 'they blow in their laces' (referring to burial excavators clearing loose sediments with focused exhalations). That Cummings was able to attract a large labor force likely reflects the extreme and prevailing poverty and on-reservation underemployment; that he was able to retain a core group of dedicated, multiseason assistants likely reflects his gifts as a patriarchal benefactor. (10) It is not clear how Cummings enlisted his workers, but 1935 payroll records indicate that between ten and twenty-seven men were paid $1.50 per day for forty-hour work weeks from the Indian Emergency Construction Fund. The laborers, generally working separately from the twenty-six field school students focused on the excavation of rooms and burials, assisted from June 20 to September 6, rebuilding all or part of twenty-eight of the previously excavated rooms (Cosulich 1935). (11) The rebuilding process involved reuse of both the larger wall stones and the smaller "chinks" recovered through the excavations (Cosulich 1935).
Many archaeologists today might suggest that the limited amount of reliable data and well-documented collections produced by Cummings' excavations could not justify the consumptive use and incompletely documented alteration of such a large percentage of the original site. (12) It is nonetheless undeniable that both anthropology and Cummings' students profited significantly from the field school. More than 30 percent of the approximately 120 students that Cummings took to Kinishba either pursued careers in archaeology and closely related fields (e.g., Gordon C. Baldwin, Stanley Boggs, Louis Caywood, Paul Ezell, Florence Hawley (Ellis), Thomas Hinton, Earl Jackson, Neil Judd, William H. Kelly, Jean McWhirt, T. Ed Nichols, Roland Richert, Donald Sayner, Fred Scantling, Albert H. Schroeder, James Shaeffer, Margaret Murry Shaeffer, William N. Smith, Edward Spicer, Cart Tuthill, Irene S. Vickery, Betty Ruth Warner, Ben Wetherill, Carleton S. Wilder, Gordon R. Willey, Arnold Withers, Donald E. Worcester) or maintained lifelong interests in the ancient Southwest and its contemporary native peoples (e.g., Mrs. Hubert d'Autremont, Terry d'Autremont, William A. Duffen, Linda Young Guenther, Gertrude Hill, Frances Holliday, David Jones, Dorothea Kelly, Clay Lockett, Harry Ransier, Courtney Reader, Arthur Soper, Otis L. Splinter, Talbot Smith Jr., Victor R. Stoner). (13)
Beginning in 1935 The Dean established an office and quarters in two of the rebuilt rooms, becoming the place's first known inhabitant in more than five hundred years. According to Murray (1936:36), "On the morning after Doctor Cummings had spent his first night there, John [a quiet prospective Apache worker] broke through his reserve. 'You sleep there?' ... 'You see nothing?' ... 'Well, you see plenty--you hear plenty--sometime.'" But bankers and bureaucrats had not dissuaded Cummings, and neither would ghosts. Cummings was intent on sharing the rich personal rewards of his archaeological experiences by reaching out across cultures and centuries. An essay he composed (Cumming n.d.:l) elaborates on his rationale for engaging Apaches to assist with the project and reveals more of his broadly paternalistic approach: "Both the Indians and white men need a practical and definite demonstration of the life of these ancient people to remove the mass of superstition and romance that has grown up around these ruins of the early population of Arizona and their relationships to the living tribes that still occupy more than one-third of the area of this state." Working at Kinishba, Cummings argued, would foster within the Apaches "greater pride in the Indian race as a whole and greater faith in themselves" (Cummings n.d.:3). Despite this unfortunate conflation of native identities, Cummings treated Apaches and other indigenous people as individuals (Cummings 1952). Well more than one hundred Apache men worked with Cummings, and some, including Chester Holden, David Kane, and Turner Thompson spent more than five seasons at the site, forming close associations with the project and Cummings (figure 3; see also Welch, this volume).
[FIGURE 3 OMITTED]
By the completion of the 1935 season, The Dean's elegant initial plan was well developed. Cummings' November 15, 1935, appeal to Arizona Senator Isabella Greenway references intentions to construct
a small museum, laboratory, and quarters for a custodian. The past summer, through the Indian Bureau, $3,000.00 were allotted us for Apache labor on the project ... Our plan is to uncover Group I entirely, restore about 4/5 of it and leave the balance of the group in ruins but repaired sufficiently to prevent further disintegration, uncover one of the smaller mounds and leave Group II and the other smaller mounds untouched. In this way the story of the pueblo will be an open book that all the people can read and understand, and that students can interpret for themselves without being obliged to accept our translation of it, if they do not agree with our restoration.... The Apache youth in the schools at nearby White River and Fort Apache need this illustration of the life of the ancient people as well as an outlet for the encouragement and sale of their own arts.
Raymond H. Thompson (personal communication, February 2006; see also Thompson 2005) observes that Chichen Itza, where Cummings worked in 1931, was being developed for public interpretation, with some structures left untouched, others cleared of vegetation, and others cleared, excavated, and restored (see Cosulich 1931). It seems that brief participation in the Mexican project may have been a crucial source for Cummings' concept of an outdoor archaeological museum.
Following up on his requests for a seventh annual excavation permit and $2,835 for Emergency Conservation Work program laborers, Cummings' April 10, 1937, letter to Interior Secretary Harold Ickes expands on his intention to use Kinishba as a triptych, illustrating ruins, an archaeological site, and an ancient pueblo community: "If we can carry out our plan of restoring a portion, leaving another portion uncovered but in ruins, and the rest covered with brush grass and rocks as we found it, we think it will make a picture of rare educational value. Especially will this be true if a small museum can be maintained at the ruins to house and display the arts and life of these ancients and beside them the arts and customs of the Apache Indians now occupying the region. We hope that the Department may see its way clear to make this site into a national monument and to preserve it for future generations." The 1936 aerial view of the excavations and rebuilding (figure 4) illustrates some of the contrasts that Cummings believed would, once laid out and interpreted through tour guides or signs, engage visitors' archaeological attentions, imaginations, and support.
[FIGURE 4 OMITTED]
The response from the Interior Department to Cummings' initial official request to consider the site as a national monument emerged as the first serious challenge to The Dean's expansive vision. Although an inveterate supporter of the excavation, public outreach, and Apache employment dimensions of the Kinishba program, Nusbaum recommends against museum construction and sets a high standard for monument designation in his May 18, 1937, letter to Interior's chief clerk, Floyd E. Dotson: "If competent authorities, both within and without the National Park Service, are agreed that its features recommend it above all others of its type and period." Nusbaum was a seasoned administrator of Mesa Verde National Park and other popular heritage destinations and appears swiftly and presciently to have identified the need for significant and sustained funding for the upkeep required to make Kinishba a viable tourism enterprise. He wrote, "I would not recommend the granting of funds for new permanent structures requested by Dr. Cummings until such time as competent custodial service and funds for annual maintenance are secured over a period of years."
Cummings' stated goal of establishing Kinishba as a national monument drew a similar response from Erik K. Reed, a NPS archaeologist dispatched to assess Kinishba in terms of Nusbaum's standard. (14) On the basis of an inspection conducted in the late summer of 1937, Reed concluded that although the ruins represent, "an interesting example of a prehistoric site, they would add nothing to the general pattern of southwestern monuments already under the supervision of the National Park Service." Based on Reed's report, and probably also on the NPS preference for focusing resources on the worthy sites and site clusters most accessible to American motorists and rail travelers, the September 17 letter to Cummings from Assistant Interior Secretary O. L. Chapman deferred for two years any further consideration of the request for monument status.
Another setback on a separate front followed in 1938, when the University of Arizona, facing Depression-era financial shortages, retired several senior faculty members, including Cummings as the State Museum director (Bostwick 2006:257-64). The move provoked controversy in Tucson, a clarification of who Cummings could count upon as supporters, and a "distancing" between Cummings and his colleague and former student Emil W. Haury. (15) The Dean's feelings of disappointment and betrayal persisted as deep currents in his personal and professional circles. Writing of their father's response, Cummings and Cummings (n.d.:196) note, "He could not accept the fact that he was no longer of use to the department of archaeology. He was determined to carry on at Kinishba, though it meant a personal sacrifice."
Many facing similar situations would have withdrawn from their projects and responsibilities, but for Cummings the obstacles seem to have provided additional motivation. The Dean sought new challenges and new sources of backing. Superintendent Donner added Cummings to the BIA payroll as a CCC "foreman, grade 7," thus providing him with a modest annual salary of $1,680. (16) Freed from administrative and teaching responsibilities in Tucson, Cummings began the 1938 season in April and stayed through most of the fall, leading students and Apaches in the excavation of forty rooms, the rebuilding of about twenty rooms (including portions of the controversial second and third stories), and the initial construction of the museum. In 1939, working from March through October, Cummings took advantage of the final season of CCC funding to direct excavation of the remainder of Group I (about twenty rooms), construction of the museum and custodian's quarters, and rebuilding of ninety-two ground floor rooms and forty-eight second-story rooms. He took time out to host visitors, and a May 9, 1939, note signed by U of A Anthropology Department staff and students (Harry T. Getty, Marion Brown, G. Bradley, C. Y. O'Leary, Mrs. Maude Borglum, Ted Smiley, and Tommy Oustolt) states that "prehistoric pueblos had not really meant much to them until they saw Kinishba. In other words, seeing is understanding.... The museum setup is fine.... I am particularly interested in your plan to stimulate, through the museum, the native crafts of the Apache.... we sincerely feel that the restored Kinishba and the museum are and will be a fitting monument to your understanding, industry, and perseverance." To stretch out the welcome surge in...
|
