Issue Date
1983-06Keywords
Hohokam culture.Indians of North America -- Games -- Arizona.
Indians of Mexico -- Games.
Culture hohokam.
Antiquities.
Indians of Mexico.
Indians of North America -- Games.
Games.
Arizona.
Arizona -- Antiquities.
Arizona -- Antiquités.
Metadata
Show full item recordOther Titles
Arizona State Museum Archaeological Series No. 160Citation
Wilcox, David R. and Sternberg, Charles. 1983. Hohokam Ballcourts and their Interpretation. Arizona State Museum Archaeological Series No. 160. Arizona State Museum, University of Arizona, Tucson.Description
Hohokam Ballcourts and their Interpretation by David R. Wilcox and Charles Sternberg. Submitted by Cultural Resource Management Division, Arizona State Museum, University of Arizona to Western Archeological Center, National Park Service. Purchase Order No. CX8100-0-0009. June 1983. Archaeological Series No. 160.Abstract
This report is a systematic, comparative study of Hohokam features inferred to be ballcourts. It is designed to contribute to our understanding of the cultural significance of Snaketown, an internationally renowned national historic landmark. The ballcourt hypothesis is carefully reassessed and supporting evidence is adduced. A model of the changing structure of the Hohokam regional system is derived from an analysis of the ballcourts and other data. Connections between the Southwest and Mesoamerica implied by the ballcourts are also briefly examined, and a new hypothesis of Southwest-Mesoamerican contact is presented. The history of Hohokam ballcourt interpretation is reviewed in Chapter 2, and the reliability of early reports is assessed. The original ballcourt hypothesis, as formulated by Emil Haury at Snaketown in 1935, is discussed in Chapter 3. The influence of the Snaketown work on subsequent studies of Hohokam ballcourts is traced in Chapter 4, and the findings of these later studies are critically evaluated. Mesoamerican ballcourts and the Mesoamerican bailgame are examined in Chapter 5. We argue it was the ballgame, not the ballcourt, that diffused to the Hohokam, probably when pottery and figurines were first introduced. The morphological differences between Hohokam and Mesoamerican courts identified by Edwin Ferdon can thus be explained as a consequence of innovation at a time of organizational change in Hohokam society. The data currently available on 193 Hohokam courts at 154 sites are presented and evaluated in Chapter 6. Eight sites in the Phoenix Basin, including Snaketown, are then closely examined in Chapter 7. New information is presented on the excavation of several ballcourts and the site structure in which they occur. Chapters 8, 9, and 10 analyze the architectural, choreographic, locational, and symbolic structure of the ballcourts. A general model of the Hohokam regional system is developed in Chapter 11. Patterns in the ballcourt data are correlated with changes in complexes of ritual paraphernalia, and cemetery structure, at Snaketown. Interactions between the Hohokam regional system and the Chalchihuites culture via a Tepiman connection are briefly assessed. Chapter 12 concludes the report with a summary of the argument. We assess the value of this report to the National Park Service, and urge renewed efforts to create the Hohokam-Pima National Monument.Type
Booktext