Talk:Gallina

Location
Jemez Mountains are not in the northwest corner of New Mexico; the lead needs clarification. --Una Smith (talk) 04:23, 21 October 2008 (UTC)
 * The Jemez aren't in NW NM, but the Gallina Culture sites are (more N than W, to be sure). They're on the NW side of the Jemez.  Clarification coming. -- Bill-on-the-Hill (talk) 22:53, 21 October 2008 (UTC)

Wrong, wrong, and wrong.
I hereby retract my criticisms. I have asked a woman who is studying the remains of the Gallina to re-write the article. --Desertphile (talk) 19:08, 8 July 2015 (UTC)


 * I am curious where your understanding of Gallina migration came from Desertphile. The only connection from the Gallina region to the Mississipian region that has ever been presented was by Frank Hibben when he stated that the Gallina's pointed bottomed pots were reminiscent of Mississipian ceramics. So it is interesting that you would deny the only eastern link. Secondly, the pointed bottom ollas, excavated from Gallina sites have been found nestled within small floor pits. Thirdly, there is indeed a Rosa Phase. http://www.jstor.org/pss/275677 See the link and search for Rosa. Whether Rosa was the predecessor to the Gallina, is an entirely different question, though.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lsborck (talk • contribs) 07:38, 12 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Well, I only read C. W. Ceram's account of Hibben's report in "The First American" (1972) so far, but there it's said that Hibben not only pointed out similarities of the ceramics with those of the Mississippi area, but ALSO that the sort of corn and squash the Gallina people planted came from the Iowa/Missouri vincinity. Now, judging from what I found with googling ("Rio Del Norte: People of Upper Rio Grande from Earliest Times to Pueblo Revolt" by Carroll L. Riley), the "Rosa phase" stuff seems to be based on the occurence of pithouses during early Gallina, which is rather weak, since that building style can be found at many places, and isn't typical for a single culture. Also, the gap between the end of Rosa and the start of Gallina isn't explained at all, and there's no explanation for the other differences and the Missippi/Missouri connection Hibben's found. Imho, regarding the obviously ongoing discussion, it's simply wrong to only bring up the "Rosa phase" as the sole explanation for where the Gallina people came from. But most importantly, that stuff should be sourced! Really, where's the effing problem in adding the references to the statements? Gray62 (talk) 08:16, 5 September 2010 (UTC)