When considering the data from the Cañada Alamosa Project, it may be useful to utilize a world systems approach even though the American Southwest was certainly not a world system in the classic sense. However the basic concept of viewing boundaries as intersections of adjacent core areas and peripheries is generally applicable to the Cañada Alamosa situation. Viewed in the context of world system analysis, the Cañada Alamosa is a frontier as it contains clear evidence of cyclic expansion and contraction from two adjacent centers. Chase-Dunn and Hall clearly state that world systems pulsate, expanding and contracting in cycles and Butzer observes that “the presence of cycles, no matter how crude, is evidence that there is a system.” The cyclic nature of occupation and reoccupation of the canyon not withstanding, it is also clear that the cycles visible in its archaeological record do not reflect master plans or centrist plots to further the ends of empire. Instead we see small groups, perhaps extended families or clans, each trying to survive as horticulturalists and/or gatherers in a harsh and varied environment. At times, environmental conditions must have limited or prevented population in canyon. Even with permanent water in the canyon bottom, the plant and animal data from the sites makes it clear that the villages depended on upland resources that were affected by drought. Another limiting factor was flooding, when water from the upper catchment was channeled into the canyon, scouring arable land on the canyon bottom. These periods of depopulation would have served to provide the local environment time for rejuvenation and left the area open periodically to become a region of refuge from the happenings in the central places. What is also clear is that each group was tethered to their central place by the security offered by trade, kinship and social ties. That this dependence was never really broken is evidenced by the lack of indigenous development of ceramic or architectural style (no Truth or Consequences B/W). Instead, outside central places maintained their hold even when the populations moved away from them, probably because old ties of kinship remained strong. Or perhaps other factors, not observable in the archaeological record, held their allegiance. For example, the availability of salt from the Zuni area provides an example of a single important product that would keep a group connected to a central place.
