(AP3) Chaparrosa Ranch
Hester-1978-cover [SM only]
ZV395-CH85: Looking across the Chaparrosa Ranch landscape from the uplands across
the valley of the parallel drainages, Chaparrosa and Turkey creeks. UTSA-CAR
Archives.
ZV10-excavations-7: Field school director Dr. Thomas R. Hester takes notes while
students look on during 1975 excavations at ZV10. UTSA-CAR Archives.
ZV114-CH60: Slough formed along Turkey Creek. UTSA-CAR Archives.
Chap-Magnum: Upland resources… UTSA-CAR Archives.
ZV64-CH7: Controlled surface collection. UTSA-CAR Archives.
Chap-artifacts: Chaparrosa artifacts. UTSA-CAR Archives.
ZV61-CH3-hearth-2: Plan view and cross-section of a surface hearth at site ZV61.
UTSA-CAR Archives.
ZV10-excavations-7: Block excavations underway in 1975 at ZV10. UTSA-CAR
Archives.
Chap-screeening: Water screening. UTSA-CAR Archives.
Hester-1978a-Fig3: Projectile Points from Chaparrosa Ranch and vicinity. From Hester
1978, Figure 3. Enlarge to see all specimens and identifications.
Hester-1978a-Fig4: Unifaces and distally beveled tools from Chaparrosa Ranch and
vicinity. From Hester 1978, Figure 4. Enlarge to see all specimens and identifications.
Chap-75-crew: 1975 crew. UTSA-CAR Archives.
The first archeological field school by the University of Texas at San Antonio (UTSA)
was held in June and July 1974 at the Chaparrosa Ranch in Zavalla County. The field
school director was an assistant professor who was younger than all but one of the
students enrolled in the course, among whom were four retired Air Force colonels.
Headquarters were established at a hunter’s cabin, watered by a well and with an airconditioned dining area. One of the colonels plugged in his spacious travel home, while
other students put up tents under mesquite trees that provided some shade for at least a
portion of the day. Carefully-crafted, handmade, fortress-level latrines stood in the
2
middle of a clearing downwind. The climate was typically hot and humid, and as also
predictable in June, broken by a ferocious seven-inch rainstorm.
The camp had a number of characters, visitors, and memorable moments. T. C. Hill, Jr.
of Crystal City brought his guitar and thick compilation of Mexican canciones and sang
well into the morning hours. A very aggressive bull “penned up” several latrine
occupants for quite a well, and on another visit, ran one of the colonels up a nearby
windmill. One night, two unexpected visitors arrived late, on foot and very drunk. After
drinking from one of the camp’s water faucets for a good while, they collapsed on the
ground near the cabin, sound asleep. These lost and exhausted “wetbacks” had no idea
that their presence in the camp that night had been monitored in the shadows by Col. Tom
Kelly, holding a loaded pistol. The next morning, when our visitors came to, the students
fed them and sent them on their way, with enhanced provisions and better funding,
courtesy of that same colonel who had followed their every move the night before.
All field schools have their stories and a mythology that grows over the years that follow.
And even though the field school members and their guests celebrated the 4th of July with
one too many vodka-filled watermelons, some memories will always be clear. What is
lost in many field school stories is just how hard the students worked, sweated, and
endured--whether or not the field school taught them much “archaeology,”--or if the sixweek exercise led to new data relating to defined research problems. The students of the
1974 UTSA field school succeeded admirably in their tasks, and their work certainly
added to the director’s research goals formulated four years earlier.
The Chaparrosa Archaeological Project
Chaparrosa Ranch covers 70,000 acres of Zavala County, in the southwestern part of the
South Texas Plains. Drained by two major, parallel tributaries of the Nueces River –
Turkey Creek and Chaparrosa Creek-- a broad valley has been created along a north-south
axis. The two creeks have cut many channels across the valley, creating a braided pattern
of drainages and isolating several landforms. The valley walls on the west and east are
well defined and capped by outcrops of Uvalde gravels, a source of cherts used in ancient
stone-tool making in the region. The streams are lined with heavily vegetated riparian
zones and the floodplains support a variety of plants that were exploited as food
resources. The combination of vegetation zones, scattered specialized ecological niches,
and the presence of sustained water sources have also created conditions for abundant
wildlife. The natural resources, enhanced by documents on the area, its resources, and its
native peoples ranging from the 18th century through the early 20th century, have provided
an excellent “laboratory” for examining the Native American settlement of a contiguous
environment encompassing more than 40 square miles.
In August, 1969, Wayne T. Hamilton, then the business manager for the Ranch (now
Professor of Range Science at Texas A&M University) made arrangements for an initial
visit to the ranch, owned at that time by the late Belton Kleberg Johnson. Accompanied
by T. C. Hill, Jr., and with the encouragement of the late Jack Youngblood (foreman), we
3
drove to several parts of the ranch, looking at and recording several sites. It was soon
clear that there were some buried sites on the ranch, and that the Chaparrosa and Turkey
Creeks had formed a distinctive valley, and that numerous resources had existed – from
chert outcrops on the edges of the valley to the water and vegetation of the stream
courses—that would have favored repeated prehistoric occupations.
Recognizing these opportunities, the Chaparrosa Archaeological Project was initiated by
a survey and testing program in 1970, supported by a grant from the University of
California, Berkeley, and equipment and a vehicle from Texas State Archeologist Curtis
Tunnell and TARL Director, Dee Ann Story. This work was followed by UTSA field
schools in 1974 and 1975, and intermittent survey activities through the early 1980s.
The archeological investigations resulted in major excavations at two sites, testing and
controlled collecting at many others, and the use of systematic survey techniques to
document more than 250 other sites on all landforms. The data from Chaparrosa Ranch
were used for initial studies of settlement systems and in the development of research
plans for fieldwork in the region.
The terrain has the typical vegetation of the South Texas Plains, with mesquite and all of
its thorn-bearing associates, prickly pear cactus and tasajillo, cenizo, guajillo, and
blackbrush, granjeno, and whitebrush, and a myriad of other plants that contribute to the
special smells of the area. Two major streams run through the ranch, from north o south.
The deeper, more densely vegetated is the Chaparrosa Creek, with deep pools in some
areas, dry channel in others, and a major sandstone outcrop on the north part of the ranch
that were once flowing springs. Paralleling the Chaparossa Creek, in its own valley and
separated by the “divide” between the two streams, is Turkey Creek. It is a less
impressive waterway, muddy, with the riparian forest being more brush than anything
else. In aerial photos, its braided channels are clear, indicating the shifts of the primary
channel over the millennia. Below the confluence of the two creeks, Turkey Creek drains
south toward Crystal City, ending in a vast swampland often called “Comanche Lake,” a
Anglicized rendition of what the 18th century Spanish (who were sometimes lost in the
thick brush there) called “the Caramanchel” (the name probably derived from a village
near Madrid). Spanish expeditions who crossed Chaparrosa and Turkey Creeks in the
late 17th and into the 18th centuries gave various names to Chaparrosa Creek, including
“Rio de San Isidro Labrador,” “Arroyo San Luca.,” According to Father Massanet in
1691, the creek was called “Guanapacti” by local Indian groups. It is not known whether
this was the landscape name used by the Pacuache Indians, likely the resident historic
group in the Chaparrosa area, or that of another group.
Research Goals and Attempts to Implement Them
Beginning with the 1970 survey and testing program, the Chaparrosa Archeological
Project had two stated goals:
1. to record and sample sites in varied topographical and ecological locales – to
help reconstruct, on a preliminary basis, the prehistoric settlement-subsistence
systems;
4
2. to locate and test sites with buried deposits, hoping to find those with
sufficient depth to warrant larger excavations, and which would hopefully help
toward establishing a sound cultural sequence.
I (Tom Hester) felt that chronology (Goal 2) was especially important, if the settlementsubsistence system study (Goal 1) was to be meaningful in studying regional prehistory.
These objectives, and the techniques used to implement them, reflected the archaeology
of the early 1970s, at least in the mind of a Berkeley graduate student! Loosely derived
from “systems theory,” the research sought to link settlement patterns (distribution of
sites during known periods of time) with evidence of subsistence strategies (what people
ate and how they exploited food resources). Very generally put, goal was to conjoin data
on the distribution and types of sites with data that would inform us on subsistence,
seasonality, and paleoenvironment. Having been trained initially as a Texas archeologist,
I felt that such patterns and interpretations needed to be grounded with a solid cultural
chronology, else such patterns would be a mish-mash of archaeological evidence from
various time periods.
The techniques or strategies used to pursue these concerns in the Chaparrosa Ranch
region included:
Site recording, some based on surveys of “high probability” areas, and to areas known to
ranch personnel -- but with the use of east-west transects across the stream valley so that
temporary, task-specific, or other types of habitation sites might be discovered. Because
Chaparrosa Ranch was an efficiently organized place, there were ranch roads and
transmission lines nicely spaced, east-west, to facilitate these transects.
Site sampling involved surface collection and, at select sites, test excavations. The
Mariposa site, 41ZV83 (below, the “41” prefix will be dropped for all site numbers), had
been tested in 1970, and so in the 1974, it became the first site to be excavated using an
“open-area” or block approach. Surface collecting approaches were varied: some were
“grab” or opportunistic sampling of diagnostics and other materials judged to be
interpretative value; controlled collecting using grid systems, and even a site or two with
the then-famous Binfordian “dog leash technique” (in reference to archeologist Lewis
Binford).
Site excavation was carried out in hopes of chronological data, subsistence data (faunal
remains, for example), paleoenvironmental samples (pollen columns), and hoped-for
intrasite patterning of hearths and other features that might provide insights as to how site
space was used. Open-area, or blocks of adjacent units, excavations were used,
standardized ¼” screening, and selected 1/8” and water screening.
Unfortunately, faunal remains were very poorly preserved and pollen samples yielded no
environmental data. Efforts to carefully collect charcoal for radiocarbon dating was very
difficult: very little survived and often in associations not worth dating.
5
Some of the Results
A brief summary of the data from Chaparrosa Ranch gives a good idea of what the
research accomplished. A number of publications exist that document much of the work,
especially the excavations at the Mariposa site (ZV83). Texas Tech graduate student
John Montgomery reported that site for his Master’s thesis, which was subsequently
published by UTSA. The archives and collections of the Chaparrosa Archaeological
Project are housed at the Center for Archaeological Research at UTSA. These include
numerous, unpublished graduate student papers, a draft of part of a dissertation are on
file, field notes, photographs,s and other records. While much analysis has been
accomplished, an overall presentation and synthesis of the Chaparrosa Archaeological
Project remains to be done.
A total of 167 sites were formally recorded on Chaparrosa Ranch, ranging in age from
Late Paleoindian to Late Prehistoric. Based on the nature of the archaeological materials
at these various sites and a study of their topographic and environmental contexts, a series
of site definitions were set forth. Major site categories include:
Streamside Villages: These are common along Chaparrosa and Turkey Creeks, often
atop (and buried in) long, low natural levees paralleling the stream channels. Gullies
cutting through them, draining into the creeks, expose burned rock (sandstone, chert),
flakes, mussel shell fragments, and large numbers of Rabdotus land snails. At such sites
where there is less vegetation, sheet erosion also exposes culturalremains. Two such sites
have been excavated at Chaparrosa Ranch: Mariposa and ZV10. Both were that deposits
about 1.40 meters deep, with dark gray-brown midden-stained alluvium, overlying tan
clays. At site Mariposa, small hearths and scattered hearth stones were in the upper 45
cm (midden soils), along with Perdiz, Scallorn, and Zavala points; all excavated materials
were plotted in place as detailed in John Montgomery’s 1975 monograph. Radiocarbon
dates range from 1400 to 400 years ago.
At ZV10, on Turkey Creek downstream from the Mariposa site, the upper alluvial clayloam is midden-stained, with pale brown clays below. After the site was probed with four
test pits in 1974, it was excavated in 1975 with a block of nine 2-meter squares. Most of
the cultural material was concentrated from 14-45 cm, including a dozen concentrations
of fire-cracked sandstone (hearths), a charcoal-baked clay concentration, and two other
baked clay clusters. In a closer look at vertical distribution of artifacts, the Late
Prehistoric (Perdiz, Scallorn, Zavala) occurs from surface to 30 cm. Just below, where
the hearths were concentrated, were Ensor, Zavala, and Montell points. And toward the
bottom of the excavations. between 45-75 cm, fire cracked rock was less frequent, and
diagnostics included a Marcos point and two examples of the heat-treated “Shumla” form
found widely in this section of the South Texas Plains. There were also cores, biface
fragments, a large bifacial perforator, and a section of large antler tine. Faunal remains
were recovered, although in small numbers and mostly from the Late Prehistoric; much of
the recovery was through water-screening. All of the identified fauna is likely not all
6
archaeological. The site had rodent burrowing and vertisol cracks which could have
introduced some species. Briefly, the fauna included frogs, turtle, snakes (7 species),
lizard, alligator gar, raccoon, ringtail, skunk, rats, mice, rabbits, whitetail deer and
pronghorn antelope.
Lithic Procurement Sites: The edges of the valley are topped with outcrops of Uvalde
Gravels, as are some upland remnants isolated by erosion near the floodplain. At the
lithic procurement sites, the Uvalde “Gravels are heavily concentrated, with abundant
flake debris, occasional cores, “tested” cobbles (one or two flakes removed), brownpurple quartzite hammerstones, and, rarely, lithic diagnostics. The exposed occupation
sites on the edge and top of the valley walls often have Paleoindian and Early Archaic
artifacts, including Angostura, Golondrina, and bifacial Clear Fork tools.
Upland Sites: The uplands east and west of the creek valley are marked by red sand and
broad stands of grass (much of this due to thorn-brush removal programs in the 1960s).
There are no water sources, and the sites are small, with meager cultural remains. At
ZV90, there was a hearth with several flakes and a core-chopper around it; at ZV89 was
very similar. These are thought to be temporary, function- specific sites, such as hunting
and/or gathering camps used briefly by a small group. Because of the sand and grass in
much of the uplands, sites have to be located via transects, usually along east-west ranch
roads that are somewhat eroded.
In addition to these kinds of sites, survey crews recorded a variety of features partially
exposed on eroded surfaces or in gullies. These included a cache of manos (41ZV66), a
pit filled with ashes, charcoal and baked clay lumps (41ZV82), and a number of sites with
distinct chipping areas.
Roadrunner “snail kill” localities are found on Chaparrosa Ranch and across the South
Texas Plains. The roadrunner uses an appropriate exposed stone cobble and brings
Rabdotus snails and smashes them on the “anvil.” A litter of broken Rabdotus shell will
be found over an area 1-2 meters in diameter. Such concentrations may be mistaken for
archeological sites, but the latter always contain many whole shells.
Chronological Indicators
Excavated sites yielded artifacts from the Late Prehistoric into the Late Archaic. These
and other artifacts were recovered during surveys and controlled collecting at many
Chaparrosa sites. And some artifacts were shown us by Hamilton and Soil Conservation
Service personnel, collected in the years prior to the survey. Clovis and Folsom points
have been found on the ranch, or on property immediately adjacent. More common are
Angostura, Golondrina, and St. Mary’s Hall, and at two sites near the valley wall east of
Turkey Creek, Golondrina points and a Clear Fork biface (ZV433 and ZV436). Archaic
point types are common, with considerable numbers of stemmed points typical of the
northern part of the South TexasPlain, including Andice, Martindale, Langtry, Pedernales,
Frio and Ensor. Still, unstemmed triangular points dominated: Abasolo, Catan, Tortugas,
7
Matamoras, Kinney, Desmuke, and the basal-notched Carrizo. Late Prehistoric types
include Perdiz, Scallorn, and Zavala. Interestingly, few indicators of the Toyah Horizon
are present at Chaparrosa Ranch, and no bone-tempered pottery has yet been found. In
this regard, the Late Prehistoric assemblage is very similar to the “Mission Indian” tool
kit of the Gateway missions to the west.
Contributed by Dr. Thomas R. Hester, professor emeritus, University of Texas at Austin,
former director of the Texas Archeological Research Laboratory at UT Austin and of the
Center for Archaeological Research at UTSA, where he was a professor for 15 years and
taught many field schools including those at Chaparrosa Ranch. Today Hester is
“retired” and lives on the upper Seco Creek, from whence he regularly ventures forth
southward into the South Texas Plains, his archeological and familial home. Hester
grew up in Crystal City, not far south of the Chaparrosa Ranch.
SOURCES
Hester, Thomas R.
1975 Late Prehistoric Cultural Patterns Along the Lower Rio Grande of Texas.
Bulletin of the Texas Archeological Society 46:107-126.
1978
Background to the Archaeology of Chaparrosa Ranch, Southern
Texas.Special Report 6, Vol. 1. Center for Archaeological Research, The
University of Texas at San Antonio.
1984
Paleo-Indian Artifacts from Chaparrosa Ranch, Southern Texas. La Tierra
14(3):2-4.
2005
An Overview of the Late Archaic in South Texas. In The Late Archaic
Across the Borderlands: From Foraging to Farming, edited by Bradley J.
Vierra, pp. 259-278. University of Texas Press, Austin.
Lovett, Bobbie
2002 Sections of manuscript draft written as part of a potential dissertation. On
file, Center for Archaeological Research, The University of Texas at San
Antonio.
Montgomery, John L.
1978 The Mariposa Site: A Late Prehistoric Site on the Rio Grande Plain of
Texas. Special Report 6, Vol. 2. Center for Archaeological Research, The
University of Texas at San Antonio