This level-5 vital article is ratedC-class on Wikipedia'scontent assessment scale. It is of interest to the followingWikiProjects:

Indigenous peoples of North AmericaHigh‑importance This article is within the scope ofWikiProject Indigenous peoples of North America, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage ofNative Americans,Indigenous peoples in Canada, and relatedindigenous peoples of North America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can jointhe discussion and see a list of open tasks.Indigenous peoples of North AmericaWikipedia:WikiProject Indigenous peoples of North AmericaTemplate:WikiProject Indigenous peoples of North AmericaIndigenous peoples of North America High This article has been rated asHigh-importance on theproject's importance scale. MexicoLow‑importance This article is within the scope ofWikiProject Mexico, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage ofMexico on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can jointhe discussion and see a list of open tasks.MexicoWikipedia:WikiProject MexicoTemplate:WikiProject MexicoMexico Low This article has been rated asLow-importance on theproject's importance scale. ArchaeologyMid‑importance This article is within the scope ofWikiProject Archaeology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage ofArchaeology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can jointhe discussion and see a list of open tasks.ArchaeologyWikipedia:WikiProject ArchaeologyTemplate:WikiProject ArchaeologyArchaeology Mid This article has been rated asMid-importance on theproject's importance scale. Indigenous peoples of the AmericasMid‑importance This article is within the scope ofWikiProject Indigenous peoples of the Americas, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage ofIndigenous peoples of the Americas on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can jointhe discussion and see a list of open tasks.Indigenous peoples of the AmericasWikipedia:WikiProject Indigenous peoples of the AmericasTemplate:WikiProject Indigenous peoples of the AmericasIndigenous peoples of the Americas Mid This article has been rated asMid-importance on theproject's importance scale. United States:Arizona /New MexicoLow‑importance This article is within the scope ofWikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to theUnited States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States Low This article has been rated asLow-importance on theproject's importance scale. This article is supported byWikiProject Arizona (assessed asMid-importance). This article is supported byWikiProject New Mexico (assessed asMid-importance).

Archives

1

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between26 August 2019 and4 December 2019. Further details are availableon the course page. Student editor(s):RoyZPP.

Above undated message substituted fromTemplate:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment byPrimeBOT (talk)04:22, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Various editors, at various times, have used both systems. I personally prefer the more academic BCE/CE system for material on non-Christian archaeology. Shall we take a poll?WBardwin (talk)23:15, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Option 1: AD/BC

Option 2: BCE/CE

Support.WBardwin (talk)23:15, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Support.Bejnar (talk)18:22, 1 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Support.Yuchitown (talk)03:48, 16 November 2015 (UTC)Yuchitown[reply]

Support.Rankedo (talk) 18:41, 21 May 2020 (CTD)

I do realize the difficulty of what I am asking here, as these are murky waters. But I'm working on a related topic and it seems to me that the claim that all Pueblo groups are descended from the Mogollon is over-broad, or, if true, requires supporting material. See for example a similar claim made of theSinagua, which I also found surprising, since I'd been taught that the Pueblo were descended from the Anasazi of Chaco Canyon. I suspect, given the differing language groups, that all of these statements are partly true, or that new findings have shifted the consensus, but ya, a reference (and/or perhaps an edit) seem to be called for. I definitely see a need for a family tree and if that's the link I see above, I may want to use or link to it. thanksElinruby (talk)01:00, 27 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I have yet to meet a Pueblo claim of descent from the Mogollon. The article now saysHowever, the modern Pueblo people in the southwest claim descent from the Mogollon and related cultures,. The use ofrelated cultures may save the sentence, ifChacoan can be considered a related culture. I do know that there were Zuni outliers, at least a ceremonial cave, as far south as theSan Francisco River, but the Zuni ca. 1450 were culturally distinct from the later Mogollon. I will check the Skibo and Kelly references. --Bejnar (talk)18:47, 1 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

What is a good way to phrase Acoma, Hopi, and Zuni being culturally affiliated with Mogollon culture under NAGPRA? I know NAGPRA doesn't always determine exact descendancy but rather a legal relationship between current tribes and precontact/historic peoples based on cultural affiliation. -Uyvsdi (talk)19:13, 1 February 2014 (UTC)Uyvsdi[reply]

There are a bunch of extant Native American Groups that claim patrimony of or interest in Mogollon per NAGPRA. The specific idea that Mogollon may be ancestral to Zuni was first voiced by Paul S. (pottery Paul) Martin. That hypothesis and others was explored in the Zuni Origins conference and subsequent edited volume (in which, one fellow who is a Zuni participated). The conference was somewhere between inconclusive and critical of the hypothesis of specific links between Zuni and Mogollon, in part because as Tainter noted way above, cultural areas are defined on suites of similar traits that are relatively coeval, but not necessarily related to ethnic identity or language. Zuni is a linguistic isolate, and other "puebloan groups" are linguistically diverse. Given the general turbulence in residence throughout the Co Plateau and Mogollon Rim in the 12th-14thC, it's entirely reasonable that everyone in the area has an ancestral link to the Mogollon, simply by means of intermarriage across the region.MikeDiehl01:50, 3 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Right but how would one concisely phrase that NAGPRA reports Mogollon human remains and cultural patrimony to the Acoma, Hopi, and Zuni? -Uyvsdi (talk)01:56, 4 February 2014 (UTC)Uyvsdi[reply]

Perhaps we shouldn't. As I understand things at the moment, NAGPRA reports these things to Acoma, Hopi and Zuni (true) because they claim an interest in things related to Mogollon prehistory (true) because some of them recognize a potential ancestral relationship. The trouble is the last clause. I've heard individuals of those tribes say it, fully admitting that they don't know of specific ancestors from those prehistoric times (fair enough, it was a long time ago even for oral tradition), and out of concern that they need to represent the interests of same. But getting a TRIBE to assert such a claim in anything like a position statement would be a challenging thing to ask of a tribe. To my knowledge specific claims of descent have not been formally expressed, nor does NAGPRA ask for them. Therefore, MAYBE the most neutral pov to take on the matter is to simply leave it ambiguous. But if at some point Hopi, Acoma, or Zuni actually state a direct ancestral relationship, or if the state of the art of archaeology comes up with something more conclusive, then it can be changed as needed. Just my .02. I don't have a strong feeling about the matter.MikeDiehl16:17, 4 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I do not think that the article as written suggests that any of the modern pueblo groups were solely descended from people living within the Mogollon area. At any rate it was not intended to imply that. If you could name a woman living at, for example, the Galaz site in the Mimbres valleu around CE 1000, she might be ancestral to persons living in any or all of the modern pueblos, and yet those modern living persons may also be descendants of people that lived in Chaco area around CE 1000 as well. When you run all your ancestry back 1000 years, you wind up with a lot if potential ancestors. That's my 2 cents anyhow. Hope that clarifies it a bit. Paul Martin originally raised the idea of a direct ancestral connection between Mogollon and Zuni about 40 years ago.Mike Diehl (talk)03:29, 27 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Added citation to Gregory and Willcox edited volume reviewing evidence for direct ancestral connections between Mogollon and Zuni.Mike Diehl (talk)03:31, 27 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This is the place to discuss additions or deletions of references and in-line citations. Thanks in advance.Mike Diehl (talk)16:08, 25 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I would like to move the list of institutions that have conducted excavations on Mogollon sites to a separate section from the Culture History section. I would also like to develop a second section for links to specific other wiki articles such as the one for Nan Ranch. Perhaps someone could assemble a comprehensive list of links to such wiki pages. We also probably should link this article to Wikipedia articles about Paul Martin as well as Emily Haury.Mike Diehl (talk)21:48, 29 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

To learn more about footnotes, please read:Wikipedia:Footnotes#Footnotes_in_action. -Uyvsdi (talk)22:00, 29 January 2014 (UTC)Uyvsdi[reply]

They should be 3.1 and 3.2. Anyone know how to fix that? Thx.MikeDiehl18:08, 1 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Figured it out. Thx.MikeDiehl01:53, 3 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

From the entry: "....textured plainware. Large ceremonial structures (often called "kivas") are dug deep into the ground and often include distinctive ceremonial features such as foot drums and log grooves."

What are plainware and log grooves?

Also, this part: "Classic Mimbres phase (AD 1000-1130) pueblos can be quite large, with some composed of clusters of communities, each containing up to 150 rooms and all grouped around an open plaza." Can you define "quite large" in terms of feet/centimeters or yards/meters? About how many people lived in one group? Were they all related? Thank you.Rissa, copy editor (talk)01:12, 21 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I am a professional copy editor with considerable experience editing encyclopedia entries. I'd like to edit this entry -- I won't change the structure or delete important points and I won't add new text. I know more about the Mimbres than the average person, but I am by no means an expert. Is there anyone here I can ask questions of if I don't understand a term (like plainware and log grooves)? Also, this entry goes back and forth between present and past tense -- which is preferred? I'd like to come back and start on this in about ten days.To repeat -- I won't change the structure, delete important points or add new text. Thank you.Rissa, copy editor (talk)01:04, 21 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@Risssa:, if you are still out there, this article could definitely use some copy editing. I tried to clean it up some but would be happy to help go over it with you.Yuchitown (talk)03:50, 16 November 2015 (UTC)Yuchitown[reply]

Here's some of the "further reading" listings from the main article if anyone wants to access them or restore any of them.Yuchitown (talk)04:26, 16 November 2015 (UTC)Yuchitown[reply]

• Anyon, Roger A., and Steven A. LeBlanc. The Galaz Ruin: A Prehistoric Mimbres Village in Southwestern New Mexico. Maxwell Museum of Anthropology and University of New Mexico Press, Albuquerque. 1984.ISBN 0-8263-0748-5.
• Hegmon, Michelle (2002) "Recent Issues in the Archaeology of the Mimbres Region of the North American Southwest"Journal of Archaeological Research 10(4): 307–357.
• Hegmon, Michelle, Margaret C. Nelson, and Susan M. Ruth (1998) "Abandonment and Reorganization in the Mimbres Region of the American Southwest."American Anthropologist 100(1):148-162.
• LeBlanc, Steven A.The Mimbres People: Ancient Pueblo painters of the American Southwest. Thames and Hudson Ltd, New York, 1983,ISBN 0-500-39017-7
• Nelson, Margaret C. and Michelle Hegmon (2001) "Abandonment is not as it seems: An Approach to the Relationship Between Site and Regional Abandonment."American Antiquity 66(2):213–235.
• Nelson, Margaret C., Michelle Hegmon, Stephanie Kulow, and Karen Gust Schollmeyer (2006) "Archaeological and Ecological Perspectives on Reorganization: a Case Study from the Mimbres Region of the U.S. Southwest."American Antiquity 71(3):403–432.
• Shafer, Harry J. "Architecture and Symbolism in Transitional Pueblo Development in the Mimbres Valley, SW New Mexico." 1995Journal of Field Archaeology 22(1): 23–47.
• Shafer, Harry J, Marianne Marek, and K. J. Reinhard, "A Mimbres Burial with Associated Colon Remains from the NAN Ranch Ruin, New Mexico." 1989.Journal of Field Archaeology 16: 17–30.
• Shafer, Harry J. and Robbie L. Brewington, "Microstylistic Changes in mimbres Black-on-White Pottery: Examples from the NAN Ruin, Grant County, New Mexico" 1995.Kiva 64(3): 5–29.

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link onMogollon culture. Please take a moment to reviewmy edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visitthis simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archivehttps://web.archive.org/web/20101015033736/http://www.cpluhna.nau.edu/People/people.htm tohttp://www.cpluhna.nau.edu/People/people.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018.After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored byInternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other thanregular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editorshave permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see theRfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template{{source check}}(last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them withthis tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them withthis tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot(Report bug)02:44, 28 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link onMogollon culture. Please take a moment to reviewmy edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visitthis simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archivehttps://web.archive.org/web/20071213203337/http://www.cpluhna.nau.edu/Places/mogollon_rim.htm tohttp://www.cpluhna.nau.edu/Places/mogollon_rim.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018.After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored byInternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other thanregular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editorshave permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see theRfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template{{source check}}(last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them withthis tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them withthis tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot(Report bug)04:46, 1 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link onMogollon culture. Please take a moment to reviewmy edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visitthis simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archivehttps://archive.is/20130217110639/http://swvirtualmuseum.nau.edu/gallery3/index.php/an_artifactual_exploration_of_the_southwest/Ceramics/ceramic_identification_guide/Southern-New-Mexico/Mimbres-Ware/Mimbres-Black-on-white tohttp://swvirtualmuseum.nau.edu/gallery3/index.php/an_artifactual_exploration_of_the_southwest/Ceramics/ceramic_identification_guide/Southern-New-Mexico/Mimbres-Ware/Mimbres-Black-on-white

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018.After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored byInternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other thanregular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editorshave permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see theRfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template{{source check}}(last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them withthis tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them withthis tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot(Report bug)17:33, 13 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hey all,

It's come to my attention that throughout this article, the topic of interest (Mogollon) is both referred to as "Mogollon culture" and "the Mogollon.The title, for example, names them as the "Mogollon culture". However, leading into the History section, they're referred to as "the Mogollon" several times over. This narrative contradicts the title, shifting the scope of the article not to strictly towards a so-called "archaeological group" but a defined people.

It seems rational to rename the title to "Mogollon," removing a titular 'the' from the title. This would fall in line with the customary precedent in wikipedia titling articles about native american peoples (as evidenced by, say,Cherokee orMexica), and also avert the whole mess in having to change the wording of the history section to fit the outdated title.

All in all, the path seems clear for this one, but I just wanted to get some feedback before I made any relatively big changes.— Precedingunsigned comment added byRankedo (talk •contribs)06:46, 18 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Just wondering, where is the Grasshopper Pueblo?— Precedingunsigned comment added byGreg.collver (talk •contribs)14:51, 2 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• C-Class level-5 vital articles
• Wikipedia level-5 vital articles in History
• C-Class vital articles in History
• C-Class Indigenous peoples of North America articles
• High-importance Indigenous peoples of North America articles
• WikiProject Indigenous peoples of North America articles
• C-Class Mexico articles
• Low-importance Mexico articles
• WikiProject Mexico articles
• C-Class Archaeology articles
• Mid-importance Archaeology articles
• C-Class Indigenous peoples of the Americas articles
• Mid-importance Indigenous peoples of the Americas articles
• Indigenous peoples of the Americas articles
• C-Class United States articles
• Low-importance United States articles
• C-Class United States articles of Low-importance
• C-Class Arizona articles
• Mid-importance Arizona articles
• WikiProject Arizona articles
• C-Class New Mexico articles
• Mid-importance New Mexico articles
• WikiProject New Mexico articles
• WikiProject United States articles

• All Wikipedia vital articles