The Virgin Anasazi
Research on the Virgin Anasazi
The Virgin Anasazi are the best known of Southern Nevada's prehistoric cultures. The Virgin Anasazi are the western most and least studied of the six currently recognized Anasazi subdivisions. There are several reasons for this. One is that major public works projects in the area, such as the flooding of the Hoover Dam reservoir, Lake Mead, occurred in a time before more careful research was done. The original investigator, Mark Harrington, was also put in a compromising position as many details could not be observed due to the continued filling of Lake Mead.

In 1961, Richard Shutler published Harrington's findings in "Lost City Pueblo Grande Nevada". In the early 1970's Claude Warren working for UNLV conducted several field schools at the Steve Perkins site. After 30 years, that material has yet to be published. In 1990, Dan Larson et al, published 'Impacts of Climatic Variability and Population Growth on Virgin Anasazi Cultural Development". Unfortunately this study is based in part on poorly described material and misnamed structures at the Steve Perkins site.

In 1992 Margaret Lyneis published her excellent study, "The Main Ridge Community At Lost City". During the 1980's Lyneis also published several articles of merit an the Virgin Anasazi. Part Lyneis' study at the 'Main Ridge' clarified the nature of 'rooms' and 'houses' as they were described by Harrington. This same approach is currently being applied by myself toward getting accurate information about the Steve Perkins site published.

Virgin Anasazi Conceptual Issues
There are many issues associated with this study area that are common to poorly studied subjects. The first of these is terminology. If we look at just the Moapa Valley and the immediate area of the Main Ridge Community we have to ask ourselves why are they called the "Virgin" Anasazi when most of the known settlements were located on the Muddy River? The answer might be in pre-flood geography as the Muddy River flowed into the Virgin River and appeared to be a tributary of the stream as the Virgin flowed into the Colorado River after the confluence with the Virgin River. Evidence of occupation along the Virgin River is less prevalent but better published.

The importance of recognizing this is that the Virgin River is basically a rain-fed steam whose flow is effected by environmental factors such as drought and more effected by the opposite, flooding. This is in contrast to the Muddy River whose flow is based on artesian springs which are common in the area. Blue Point Spring and Rogers Spring nearby in Lake Mead NRA along the North Shore Road are also examples of local hot spring streams. The Muddy River is reliable in a place where other water sources are not. Another difference between the two streams is the width of their respective floodplains. The floodplain of the Virgin River is usually to narrow for cultivation. In the areas that do lend themselves to cultivation along the Virgin River near Mesquite and along the Arizona Strip, there seem to be fewer habitations recorded so far than are found in the Muddy River valley. The Muddy River, in contrast flows through a arable wide valley.

Knowing this one would think that the bulk of the 'Virgin' Anasazi population would more likely have centered around the Muddy River. This is born out by the evidence. (9) What's in a name? A lot it seems. The 'Muddy' Anasazi might not be as cache, but it is more accurate. The reason that labeling can have an effect is clear when we look at research that has been published in scientific journals about the 'Virgin' Anasazi. In the 1990 study, "Impacts of Climatic Variability and Population Growth on the Virgin Branch Anasazi Cultural Development", published in American Antiquity ( see #9 in the Bibliography), the research is based on descriptions that are misleading. Specifically structures at the Steve Perkins site that are called 'pithouses' are counted as habitations when they are no more than 1 meter in diameter. The other issue with this study is that while it places the majority of the population along the Muddy River, the flow of the Virgin River is what was measured to show the drought effect.

The authors suggest that a more persistent reliance on agriculture by the Virgin Anasazi during the onset of the drought of 1000 to 1015 AD was due to the 'relative reliable water source of the Virgin and Muddy Rivers {which} would have been perceived as less risky'. ( 9 p243) After the drought the Anasazi continued to be agriculturalists, their population increasing over the next 100 to 150 years. When drought conditions returned in 1120 to 1150 AD 'the Virgin Branch Anasazi experienced several consecutive years of crop failure and reduced yields of wild resources. In response to such conditions it is likely that they chose to emigrate to more productive agricultural lands elsewhere ..' (9 p.244)

This is one explanation of why the Moapa Anasazi left the area. It is based on the reasoning that non-irrigated agriculture requires a minimum of 250mm of rainfall per year to be sustainable. The Southwest is notable for its well defined and very accurate dendrochonologic data. Through this data archeologists have been able to determine that several droughts affected the Anasazi at approximately the same time as they abandoned or left certain areas. In their excellent compilation of data and study of flow in the Virgin River throughout the (ca.) last 2 millennia, Larson et al make a case for abandonment in the Virgin River Valley. We would expect that migration would be to more reliable resources such as those found in Moapa Valley and even in the Las Vegas Valley.

Based on the current inventory of known structures, the majority of the 'Virgin Branch Anasazi' lived in the Moapa Valley throughout the history of that cultures occupation in this area. It is not likely that the drought would have impacted the Moapa 'branch' of the 'Virgin Branch Anasazi' quite as much since they had a reliable source for irrigation that was not effected by droughts. The Virgin River valley is too narrow in most of its course to be used for agriculture. The best location for such use is near Mesquite Nevada in the area known as the Big and Little Bends on the Virgin River. The census of structures along most of the Virgin River below Mesquite Nevada show a dramatic decline in the number of structures until the confluence of the Muddy and Virgin Rivers near what Lyneis calls the 'Main Ridge'.

One might consider that the Virgin Branch Anasazi had a Moapa Branch which had different issues relating to their agricultural economy than other nearby groups whose water supply was less dependable. While on a regional level the Anasazi in this area were effected by the droughts which effected groups throughout the Southwest, on a local level, the effect of the drought must have been significantly less because they did have a reliable water supply and that there were others available nearby which had never been fully colonized.

If the great droughts of the past effected the abandonment of the Moapa Valley by the Anasazi people it could only have been indirectly. This suggests several other possibilities for the abandonment of Moapa Valley that are not related, or at least directly related to drought factors. The Moapa Anasazi could no doubt sustain prolonged droughts. It would seem that prior to abandonment of the Moapa Valley there should be some indicator for that abandonment.

Too often when an area is poorly studied, outside influences and factors are often needed to fill in where local research does not exist. This situation influenced how the sites at Casas Grandes were interpreted for years. (10) At Casas Grandes, several theories of development there preceded actual research. Once some of the data was examined, different, locally based theories of change and development emerged. (10 p314-316) It is very likely that this is the case for the Moapa Anasazi. The work which has been done so far is in many instances excellent however it has been limited due to several factors identified by Lyneis in 1992. (7) These include the lack of suitable funding and interest by local archeologists. The valuable research done at the Steve Perkins site has lain dormant for 32 years. The only interest in completing this project was among several dedicated UNLV students and staff throughout the late 1970's, 80's and beyond. So far it has not been completed. I will try to have this project in a state which is publish-able before the end of the year.

My research will focus specifically on the bases of the points found at Steve Perkins, the definition of the structures there, and finally a completed summary of what was found there and description of what might have happened there. Hopefully this will result in a better understanding of the Moapa Anasazi.

Andreas P. Charest

Please Note: This is simply a summary of the research that I have found on the area and some of my viewpoints in this area. It should be taken as such. Opinions between researchers will vary. It is the evidence and logic that is informed by the evidence which should be presented so that the readers can form their own opinions.

I am considering including a feedback forum for discussion, however, time does not permit this yet.