Interior Chumash

MADISON S. BEELER KATHRYN A. KLAR

N this article we pubUsh two Chumash study will use material from aU three of these Ivocabularies representing the speech of men in an attempt to clarify the Hnguistic groups who Hved away from the coast together situation in a corner of California as it existed with analysis and commentary; no pubh- perhaps a century ago. cations ofthe Chumash speech of these regions C. Hart Merriam (1855-1942) was in his have hitherto been made. The word-lists wiU earher life a professional biologist and acted considerably change the traditional picture of for many years as chief of the Biological speech distributions in these interior regions. Survey of the United States Department of Although we owe both ofthe vocabularies here Agriculture. Later his interests changed, and in printed to the work of C. Hart Merriam, their 1910 he left government service and came to interpretation requires us to use materials Hve in California, devoting himself to the drawn from the researches of A.L. Kroeber collecting of ethnological and linguistic data and John P. Harrington. All three of these men from elderly survivors ofthe numerous Indian were diUigent tillers of the fecund vineyard of tribes he found aU over the state and in California aboriginal languages, and they were neighboring parts of Nevada and Arizona. aU working contemporaneously, in the first Most of this material assembled in the field and two decades ofthe twentieth century. But there in supplementary work in archives was de­ was practically no communication among posited with the Department of Anthropology, them. Of the three, only Kroeber was a prolific University of California, Berkeley, in 1950. pubHsher, and so it is from him that the picture Two books based on it are (a) Studies of ofthe distributions and structures of the state's California Indians (Merriam 1955); and (b) native languages which dominated the scholar­ Languages, Territories, and Names of Cali­ ly scene during the first half of the century was fornia Indian Tribes (Heizer 1966b). The largely derived. The subject is, however, so vast present study prints two ofthe vocabularies in that no one student could pretend to control aU the Merriam collection; we express our ap­ parts of it. As we shaU see, the lack of preciation for permission to use them. intercommunication among these three in­ The first of these (Vocabulary 1), in vestigators greatly retarded the progress of our Merriam's handwriting, is dated November 11, understanding of the nature and detail of the 1905, at San Emigdio, California, and is signed state's linguistic diversity. What Harrington by him. We shall refer to the language of this pubUshed during his lifetime is only a tiny part document as Emigdiano. There are 61 entries of the material he coUected and recorded; and in this Hst. With each of these we give the Merriam pubhshed but Httle on California corresponding forms from the three other languages before his death in 1942. The present Chumash languages which have been most 288 THE JOURNAL OF CALIFORNIA ANTHROPOLOGY

KAWAIISU

ISLAND O"^^^^^

Fig. 1. Chumash linguistic area (after Kroeber 1925). The present authors would include most or all of the territory marked Alliklik within the Chumash linguistic area. fully described: Barbareiio (from Beeler's One form, identified as Senan, is cited from [n.d.] files), Inesefio (from Applegate's [1970] Beeler (1967); and one, credited to Pinart, from manuscript dictionary), and Ventureiio (from Heizer (1952). Kitanemuk, the Uto-Aztecan the Harrington manuscripts; the material, ex­ language spoken nearest to Emigdiano, lacks cerpted and organized by Applegate, has an adequate published lexicon; words from it kindly been placed at our disposal by him). are drawn from Merriam. Occasional phonetic Yokuts forms with source not indicated are interpretations of the graphemes are ventured. cited from Kroeber (1963); most of them are There is no inhabited place named San from the Buena Vista (B.V.) group, which Emi(g)dio on the present map of California. consists of the two languages Tulamni (Tul.) But one of the high peaks in the Transverse and HometwoH (Horn.). A few, taken from the Range that walls off the southern end of the Harrington manuscripts, are identified by the San Joaquin Valley is called San Emigdio initials JPH. Similarly, the initials CHM Mountain (Gudde 1969:283), and a creek that identify the source of other quoted words as flows northward from the north-facing slopes coming from others of the Merriam papers. of that peak until it loses itself on the dry, level INTERIOR CHUMASH 289

Vocabulary 1

RIOSS EmiRdiano Yokuts Other yit-ta Tul. yit Hoin. yit' JPH Horn, yit' | yit' ) two pung-e [puQi] E.V. puia Ipuqi ] three Slio' p [ SO" p] B.V. coop [so-p] four tah-pahng-e B.V. tapani | t.i paiii] five yet-sing-il Tul. yitsiri Horn, yit-sunul six sho-pon-hut Tul. tsolipi Horn, sop'^onhoc JPH seven num-Csin B.V. numtsin eight mo-nas Tul. munas

Horn, mu ' nas [munas ] nine woo-chahC B.V. unjtcat ten tre-yow Tul. teu Horn, ciyaw JPH Horn, tieu (cf. Inc. ciyaw)

(In Merriam's manuscript there is in the margin, besidt:: these Emigdiano numerals,

the penciled notation: "Strong touch of Yokuts.")

gloss Eitiigd iano Barbareho Other Indian people hool-koo-koo u-l-k ma-kuh-ku The Emigd iano shows the article -1- together with

the obligatory locater; the

other languages are givtn

with their articles. man eh-ho-e ''ih-ty '>ih±y

woman en-nek •'eneq xanwa •^enoq

ray father hoop ko-ko hu-p-koko si-p-koko'' ma-p-koko'' l-/hat CHN obtained was clearly the Emigdiano for 'your

father;' the equivalents of

this in the other languages

are given.

eye tuk -tiq -ttq tix

ear p' too -p-Cu'^ si-p--tu ma-p-tu''

mouth [Vour') pu k -p-4k si-p--ik ma-p-*k

arm ['your' ] p'mah -phu, si-p'^u. ma-p u Uto-Aztecan -ma-,

-p-wacax si-p--wasna*'a l Luis, ma-t

teeth [Vour') p' sah -p-s"a si-p--sa ma-p-sa

heart pos -''ayapis -pos atifek, 'ayapis - 1 house ahp' •'ap •'ap ^apt mam fire nuh ni ni nl

Indian tobacco shaw-hoo-wah sow sow sow salt te' p tip tip tip , >ch bow ah = •'ax 'ax 'ax

arrow yah-ah ya'' ya ya'

stone knife eh-wah ''iwi •'iw 'iw 1 chief wot wot wot wot (Continued) 290 THE JOURNAL OF CALIFORNIA ANTHROPOLOGY

gloss Emigd iano Barbareno Ventureno Ineseno Other water oh' ''o^ ''o ''o'' rock ^h 'up' x4p xip xip big 'hah-ah^ xax xa''ax nox, •'aliyin u 'Ch rain too-hoo- = tuhuy tuhuy tuhuy yes huh hi he Horn. hi JPH no seh' s-e mu-c-'' 11 ''insil

I nob no'' no no'' you (sg.) pe-e pi-' pi pi' bear hoos xus XQS xus bob-cat ahl-hi'££ •'anaqpuw •'alxay 'anaqpuw mule deer wuh=, wooh ' w4 wi wi ch - golden eagle slo, s=lo slow slow, clow slow bald eagle mah-he-wah maxiwo maxiwo ('white-headed e.agle' ) great horned owl moo-hoo muhu muhu muhu valley quail tah-k.3h-kah takak(a) ''iqiy takak

1 •) 1 frog wek-ketch waqaq xwetet waqaq, weqec (different species) valley oak ko-che-let- Cah ta"* ta ta' Tul. ^icileha) JPH sycamore cho-hok xso'' xso (x)sonus Horn. tcoxok 'tree' ALK.

Cottonwood lap-p qwel xweltxwel qweleqwel B.V. lap JPH willow tso-mo-san-ne Stayit ctayit stayit, wak elder ki-yas qayas qayas broad leaf wah-ahs tok (red milkweed) tok (red milkweed), milkweed wa'as milkweed string hoo-wis 'oxponus B.V. xuwis 'string from t century plant' JPH wild sunflower Cah =-ai cf, Luis, pa-'ka-l ?? Indian whiskey mong-ol momoy moraoy momoy wild grapevine noo-net-tah nunit (skak), nunit B.V. nunet noo-net-tah CHM

Baccharis wal-11 mule tat (Munz and Ke viminea 1968) leaf tap-tap qap qap qap General Yokuts dapdap ,. ,ch-ah, (Span, o ^ ) Span, hoja root Cu-uuh-kan 'axpilli ''axpilil 'axpilii B.V. tiwexan JPH acorn u-san 'ixpanls 'ixpanis 'ixpanis General Yakuts ocin ALK Yawel. ''e • sin SN acorn cup poo-ko-yoh fcuKuy > tree cho-hak pon > pon Horn, tcoxok ALK pon bark kah-pahs sxol c^ol s^ol Horn, kapas JPH

floor of the valley is named San Emigdio Merriam interviewed the informant who spoke Creek. Maps from the end of the nineteenth the language of the people he called the Hool- century show a settlement on the banks of the koo-koo. creek called San Emigdio, some forty miles in a Directly to the north of the former settle­ southwesterly direction from the city of ment, and no more than a dozen or fifteen Bakersfield. That settlement, which has since miles away over the flat plains, there existed disappeared, is given as the place where until the end of the nineteenth century two INTERIOR CHUMASH 291 lakes caUed Kern Lake and Buena Vista Lake, /-. -/- is the definite article, found outside of formed by the waters of the Kern River. The Emigdiano only in Barbareflo and contrasting marshes or tulares along these lakes were the with the Inesefio ha- and ma- and with the habitat of the Buena Vista Yokuts bands, the Ventureno si- in the same function. The Tulamni and the Hometwoli, the southern­ segment hu- is one of a class of locational most of that stock (Fig. I). Not many miles to prefixes, one of whose functions is to afford the east, where other streams drained out from support for the articular -/-, which cannot the transverse Techachapis and where is the occur by itself. The same, characteristically route of the present principal highway across Barbareno, morpheme recurs in Emigdiano these mountains, was spoken a third Yokuts hoop ko-ko 'your father' (the gloss 'my father' language, the Yawelmani, whose speakers oc­ derives from a misunderstanding between cupied a narrow band of territory. Just beyond Merriam and his informant). This character­ that band to the east was another major istic structure of the noun phrase is limited to hnguistic boundary: there are encountered, Barbareno; of the other Chumash languages close together, settlements of the Kitanemuk each has its own structure, different from the and the Kawaiisu, two tribes of California Uto- others. Aztecan speakers. Near this boundary was the A second diagnostically significant gram­ place known as Tejon Ranch, or Ranch House, matical construction appears in the Emigdiano or Rancheria, where Indians of many tribes for 'no'. In the Barbareno, Venturefio, and came together in the latter half of the nine­ Ineseno equivalents with this meaning, we find teenth century. (This place, the Tejon Ranch, constructions containing three elements: the on Poso Creek where that stream debouches verb stem -wj/'to exist', the pronominal prefix from the Techachapi Mountains onto the San of the third person singular (s- in Barbareno Joaquin Valley floor, is to be distinguished and Ineseno, c- in Ventureno), and the negative from Ft. Tejon, the United States Army post morpheme, which is ^ini- in Ineseno, mu- in estabhshed in the early 1850's at the top of the Ventureno, and -e- in Barbareno; i.e., Grapevine grade.) This sketch of tribal distri­ Chumash 'no' was a verb phrase meaning 'it butions at the southern end ofthe San Joaquin does not exist'. This morpheme precedes the VaUey is intended to show that the Emigdiano pronoun in Venturefio and Ineseno, but occupied a territory in the immediate foUows it in Barbareno. We thus obtain, with neighborhood of three Yokuts languages and the proper morphophonemic accommoda­ of two Uto-Aztecan languages (and probably tions, the canonical forms Ventureno mu-c-il. of a second Chumash language; see below). Ineseno ^in-s-il, and Barbarefio s-e-wil. This We may now proceed to determine what Barbarefto form is found a time or two before the hnguistic evidence can teU us of the history 1850; thereafter, by deletion of-wii, the dialect of the speakers of Emigdiano. Before looking shows only s-e. The Barbarefio affinity of into intertribal borrowings we ask what this Emigdiano is thus unmistakably marked by -/-, hnguistic evidence teUs us about the sub- hu-, and -e- and its ordering. grouping within Chumash, and here we look The same conclusion can be drawn from first at the grammatical affixes. There are not the word geography of Emigdiano. Most ofthe many, but the story these few tell is quite Chumash items in these lists are shared by all unambiguous. three languages represented, and so are not There is first the NP hooTkoo-koo 'Indian diagnostic. For 'man' and 'woman', however, people'. This consists of the reduphcated stem Ventureno has terms unique within the stock, ku 'person', preceded by the segments hu- and - and Emigdiano here agrees with Barbareno 292 THE JOURNAL OF CALIFORNIA ANTHROPOLOGY and Ineseno. For 'big' Emigdiano appears to (or 'three'?) which has been detected among the agree with Barbareno and Venturefio, and to California Penutian languages? (see Beeler differ from Ineseno. And Emigdiano for'quail' 1961). goes with Barbarefio and Inesefio, against The linguistic evidence, then, shows clearly Venturefio. In the case of 'frog', the two that Emigdiano was basicaUy a type of Inesefio terms are reported to be the names of Barbarefio Chumash, transferred from the different species; the Emigdiano agrees with Pacific coast to the south end of the San one, the Barbareno with the other. It may well Joaquin Valley; and that in its new home it had be that both terms once occurred in aU three been strongly influenced by the neighboring dialects, but were recorded only in Ineseno; the Yokuts, less so by the nearby Uto-Aztecan. Ventureno, in any event, is distinct. An expla­ These conclusions are confirmed by a second nation for 'bob-cat' and 'heart', where record of Emigdiano, even though it is brief. It Emigdiano does not agree with Barbarefio, is has already been published (Beeler 1968), but offered below. was misunderstood and misinterpreted. It de­ The apparent loans consist of one, 'arm', rives from a note sent on January 21,1960, by from some Uto-Aztecan language; one from Kroeber to Beeler, and it is reproduced here in Spanish; and some nineteen from Buena Vista its entirety. Yokuts. For three ('willow', 'wild sunflower', On January 30, 1906, I interviewed and 'Baccharis viminea') no satisfactory paral­ Marinacia, an old Hometwoh woman at lels have yet been found. The Yokuts the rancheria on Tejon Creek. She was borrowings fall into two semantic groups, Hometwoh Yokuts of Buena Vista Lake botanical terms and the numerals. These from her mother; her father was a San Emigdio Chumash. She remembered a few numerals are pure Buena Vista, and in the two words of his speech, which she said was instances, those for 'five' and 'six', where similar to Ventureno. Kroeber shows Tulamni differing from pakees one Hometwoli, Emigdiano agrees with the latter. icgom two The word for 'six' is of particular interest. The masiix three numerical systems of all the Yokuts languages skumu four are remarkably homogeneous; except for axp^ house 'nine', for which Kroeber shows four different o'' water stems distributed among his 21 dialects, aU 21 niix? fire show the same stem for each of the first ten •^xiixp stone numerals. The single exception is the diixk eye Hometwoli for 'six', which Harrington tells us ctuk ear has replaced the otherwise universal Yokuts eneq woman djidjiwun 'muchachitas' colipe y \>y a term seemingly derived from a But her father was part Barbareiio in word which means 'nine' in several Yokuts descent! languages. One of these was Yawelmani, which While las Uvas, Pleito, San Emigdio, as we have seen was spoken a few miles to the La Paleta creeks (and Cuyama) talked the east of Kern Lake, the home ofthe Hometwoh. same Chumash, on Pastoria creek a wholly The motive for the displacement of the in­ different language was spoken. They were herited word for 'six' and for its replacement by aU dead in 1906. Her neighbor Badillo, the word for 'nine' taken from another dialect who was born in Camulos remembered a is obscure; can it have had anything to do with few words of this different language. But the traces of a counting system based upon 'six' BadUlo was away on a trip. INTERIOR CHUMASH 293

Some of these words have occurred in ration or velar fricative, especially before Merriam's list, and do not need to be re­ consonants." The Yokuts examples he gives examined here. Of the others it will suffice to there are paralleled by the Chumash axp^, look at the list which appears below. niix, ^xiip, and diixk; cf. Barbarefio /ap/ = A feature which differentiates Venturefio ['ap^a]^ /ni/, /xip/, and /tiq/. The second from the other Central Chumash languages is striking fact is that there can be no doubt that its lack of the word-final glottal stop where it the same person was also Merriam's in­ occurs in those other languages.' That Kroeber formant. Although his HooTkoo-koo vocabu­ gives Emigdiano for 'water' as o^ shows that it lary, as stated above, was dated at San more closely resembles Barbarefio "^o"^ than it Emigdio, a note found in a second copy^ says does Venturefio ^o. If we interpret the final -k that on November 11, 1905, at the Tejon of ctuk 'ear' as a mishearing of final glottal Rancheria he secured his Chumash material stop, then the same closer relationship of from an informant whom he calls Maria Emigdiano [s-tu'] 'his. her, its ear' to Ignacio (Nancy). Barbarefio evidence shows us Barbarefio -tu"^ than to Venturefio -tu wiU be that the Spanish name Maria Ygnacio (or true. The Emigdiano for 'one' is not identical Ygnacia) normally contracts there to with the word in any of the three languages, Marinacia (Malinasya). The dates show that and obviously is the result of an innovation, less than three months separate Marinacia's perhaps a blend. The upshot is that four of the work with Merriam from that with Kroeber, twelve items in Kroeber's vocabulary ('water', the first in November, 1905, and the second in 'ear', 'woman', 'children') show closer affinities January, 1906. with Barbareno than with Venturefio. This is A number of interesting conclusions can be hardly surprising, since Marinacia's father was drawn from this information. It appears from "part Barbarefio in descent." It is strange the Kroeber list that the woman knew at least indeed that the informant herself characterized the first four Chumash numerals, although to her speech as "similar to Venturefio." That Merriam, who was attempting to elicit judgment can only betray an ignorance on her Emigdiano, she gave only her native Home­ part of Venturefio. twoli forms. This observation immediately More than one remarkable coincidence renders suspect the large number of apparent now emerges. It is plain first that Marinacia, Buena Vista loans in Emigdiano. Kroeber says the Hometwoh Yokuts woman who spoke that Marinacia "remembered a few words of both Hometwoh and (some) Emigdiano, was her father's speech"; did she merely introduce also the source of Kroeber's Hometwoli vo­ her native Yokuts words when she did not cabulary (1963:179). One feature of her know the Chumash asked for? What we seem Hometwoli pronunciation that accounts for to have is a brief record of how much Chumash some of the peculiarities of her Emigdiano this Yokuts Indian knew, rather than a reliable words is thus described by Kroeber (1963:179): description of the extent of Yokuts influence "She tended to follow vowels with an aspi­ on the Barbarefio dialect of the San Joaquin

gloss Emigdiano Barbareiio Venturefio Inesefi one pakees paka pake:t pakas muchachitas djidjiwun ciciwun qunup cicihi' ('little girls' = 'chUdren') 294 THE JOURNAL OF CALIFORNIA ANTHROPOLOGY

Valley. This situation may account for the southeastern San Luis Obispo County. It is generally Yokuts character of her botanical this language of which we have seen two terminology. It is discouraging to have to samples; it was Emigdiano. The circumstantial question the reliability ofthe only brief records evidence available to us seems to mean that the of Emigdiano Chumash that have survived to tongue in these regions was essentiaUy extinct us. by the end of the nineteenth century, if not a Marinacia told Kroeber that her father's generation or more before 1900. speech was spoken over an area including Las There is one more question that lacks an Uvas (now Grapevine) Creek in the east to La answer: how did Santa Barbara Chumash Paleta Creek in the west; this is a stretch of come to be spoken here? There can, we think, territory some thirty or more miles broad, be no doubt that it was imported to these extending from—in modern terms—the region interior regions from the coast of Santa of Ft. Tejon westward to that of Maricopa. Barbara county, where it was first recorded in The Chumash Indians of this district seem to 1769 and where its last known speaker died in have lived in a number of viUages along the 1965. Here is what we think about this streams which drained this part of the problem. Tehachapi Range into the San Joaquin. The Traditions still surviving at the middle of informant's testimony is partiaUy confirmed the twentieth century among the coastal by a mass of scattered data from the Harring­ Barbareno reflect a knowledge of the southern ton documents, of which the foUowing are a San Joaquin more detailed than that of other few examples.3 California areas much nearer to Santa Barbara 1. "Those at San Emigdio talked the same and not separated from it by the steep and as Santa Barbara" (Packet #1, Box 727). complex mountains ofthe Santa Ynez and San 2. "Informant says that the Paleta and Rafael ranges. The great-grandmother of Mrs. Cuyama Indians are caUed xomitwayi"" Mary Yee, the last Barbarefio speaker, who (Packet #1, Box 727). (This seems to mean that was named MaUnasya (cf. Marinacia, above), the Paleta and Cuyama people were one and was said to have been born in the San Emigdio the same, and spoke the same language.) area. Familiarity of the coastal Indians with 3. "Informant heard boys of about the age this interior area may weU be old. The earliest of Clara's boys here [Santa Ines?] talking a record we have found (without an intensive language which informant understood it search) is that the Santa Barbara mission had a sounded almost hke Barbarefio. Informant's "rancho San Emigdio" in 1823 (Gudde 1969). mother told informant that it was the La Paleta The rebeUion of the Chumash Indians at language" (Packet #4, Box 727). the missions of Santa Barbara, Santa Ines and 4. "Joaquin Ajala is from La Paleta and the La Purisima in 1824 is a weU-known oc­ language spoken at La Paleta was almost currence of the Mexican period of California exactly hke the Barbarefio dialect" (Packet #8, history (cf. Bancroft 1884-90, v. 2:527ff). The Box 727). pattern foUowed by rebelhous neophytes ofthe The evidence of the informants both of coastal missions during this period was to flee Kroeber and of Harrington appears to agree: a to the interior, which was never occupied by language much the same as the Chumash of the Spanish or the Mexicans. The fugitives of Santa Barbara was, in the nineteenth century, the 1824 uprising, among whom the Barbarefto spoken across the southern end of the San were the most important contingent, headed Joaquin VaUey and in the neighboring foot­ directly for San Emigdio after leaving the hills, and up into the Cuyama VaUey of coast. The revolt had begun at Santa Ines on INTERIOR CHUMASH 295

February 21; in a letter^ of March 21 from the several thousand dollars in gold and silver, missionary Bias Ordaz to the Mexican gover­ when they retreated to the spot where we nor Argiiello they are reported to be at the San found them—being at least five or six Emigdio ranch. * The usual reaction of the hundred miles distant from the nearest ecclesiastical and poUtical authorities to a Spanish settlement. This tribe are well acquainted with the rules of bartering for flight of this kind was to dispatch soldiers to goods or any thing they wish to buy— chase the fugitives and return them to their much more so than any other tribe we met missions. In this case two such expeditions with. They make regular visits to such were sent out; the first, in April, was un­ posts where they are unknown, and also successful. The second, in June, was able to make appointments with ship-traders to persuade many, but not all, of the Chumash to meet at some designated time and place; return to the coast. The reports of these thus they are enabled to carry on a con­ expeditions regularly refer to the fugitives as siderable degree of commerce. They still Barbarefios. retain several of the images which they The next reference we have come upon to piUered from the church—the greater part these people is the account of the Joseph R. of which is the property of the chiefs.— These people are seven or eight hundred Walker party of American trappers, which strong, their houses are constructed of came to California in 1833, spent the winter of poles and covered with grass, and are 1833-34 at Mission San Juan Bautista, and left tolerably well supplied with house-hold in February to return to their rendezvous at furniture which they brought with them at Great Salt Lake. They proceeded south up the the time they robbed the church. They San Joaquin Valley, looking for a lower pass foUow agricultural pursuits to some ex­ across the Sierra Nevada than that by which tent, raising very good crops of corn, they had entered the vaUey four months earlier, pumpkins, melons, etc. All the out-door near the present Yosemite National Park. We labour is done by the females. They are now introduce Zenas Leonard, the expe­ also in the habit of making regular visits to dition's chronicler. the settlements for the purpose of stealing horses, which they kiU and eat. We at length arrived at an Indian We passed one night with these village, the inhabitants of which seemed to Indians, during which time they informed be greatly alarmed on seeing us, and they us of an accessible passage over the immediately commenced gathering up mountain. In the morning we resumed our their food and gathering in their horses— journey, hiring two of these Indians as but as soon as they discovered that we were pUots, to go with us across the mountain— white people, they became perfectly recon­ continued all day without any inter­ ciled. After we halted here we found that ruption, and in the evening encamped at these people could talk the Spanish langu­ the foot ofthe passover [Leonard 1839:65]. age, which we thought might be of great advantage to the company, and on inquiry It is possible that the name of these people, ascertained that they were a tribe called the Concoas, which tribe some eight or ten given by them as Concoa(s), may be related to years since resided in the Spanish settle­ Takuya-, Tecuya, Tokya, by which the ments at the missionary station near St. Emigdiano were known to the neighboring Barbara, on the coast, where they rebelled Yokuts. We may note that it was Spanish- against the authority of the country, speaking Chumash who guided the Walker robbed the church of all its golden images party through the pass which has since been and candlesticks, and one of the Priests of called after the party's leader. 296 THE JOURNAL OF CALIFORNIA ANTHROPOLOGY

In 1842 the Rancho San Emigdio, four related to, if not identical with, the Venturefio square leagues of land, was given as a coloni­ branch of that family; AUiklik agrees without zation grant to Jos6 Antonio Dominguez, a exception with Venturefio wherever long time resident of California. The Venturefio diverges both from Barbarefio and "Mexican-Indian village"* which grew up here, Inesefio. It shows many borrowings from the called San Emigdio, has been caUed the "first Uto-Aztecan Kitanemuk in its names for flora white settlement in Kern County." The land and fauna. Its term for 'bob-cat, wild-cat', was later bought by the Kern County Land ^alxay, about the native Chumash character of Co., in 1890, and the company's decision was which there can be little or no doubt, appears to aUow it to revert to agricultural purposes; as a loan-word in Emigdiano, at La Paleta, and the adobe structures were unroofed and al­ in Buena Vista Yokuts; and Alhklik also shares lowed to disintegrate. The Indians who stiU its word for 'portable mortar' with the latter lived there, if any, may have moved to the group. We have already observed that the reservation at the Tejon Ranch. The name of Emigdiano used for 'heart' the characteristi­ San Emi(g)dio Ranch was stUl being used in cally Venturefio pos in place of the native 1974, in the spot where the original rancho was Barbarefio ^ayapis. We look then for a terri­ estabhshed 150 years before. The general con­ tory occupied by AUiklik speakers which may clusion then is that Barbarefio was brought be contiguous with the coastal Venturefio, into the southern San Joaquin at some time which may border on Kitanemuk, and in which before 1823, and that it was spoken there for these speakers could interact with the perhaps two generations. Emigdiano and the Buena Vista Yokuts. * * * * * There is an area that meets these specifi­ We come now to the examination of cations. It includes the upper valley of the Merriam's second vocabulary of the Chumash Santa Clara River, the lower course of which of this interior region. It is found in the flows through long-accepted Venturefio lands; Merriam collection of the Department of it includes the territories drained by two Anthropology, University of California, northern tributaries of the river, Piru and Berkeley, as a typed copy of a hand-written Castaic creeks; across Tejon Pass it comprises original, with inked diacritics subsequently Castac Lake and the valley of Pastoria Creek, entered, probably in Merriam's hand. There is which drains the Tehachapi into the southern no indication of when and where it was San Joaquin, into which it debouches in the recorded, or of who the informant was. This vicinity of the old Tejon Rancheria and Reser­ information may have appeared on an initial vation. The whole eastern boundary ofthe area page, now lost; for the list now begins with the thus delimited, as well as part of the southern, word for'ten'. Two Chumash dialects are given was occupied by Uto-Aztecan-speaking tribes. in this hst, and they are called Santa Inez And at its northern end it merged with the Chumash and AUikhk Chumash; we repro­ territories of the Emigdiano and the southern­ duce only the AUikhk. Despite the lack of an most Yokuts. This region, indeed, is assigned authenticating signature, there can be no by Kroeber to the AUikhk. But for Kroeber the doubt that the AUiklik list is the work of Alhklik, though bearing a Chumash name^ Merriam: the speUings are all characteristic of are not Chumash; they are Uto-Aztecan. him (Vocabulary 2). The reasons for such a classification are The classification ofthe speech represented not made convincing. It is said* that only "two by this vocabulary does not pose difficult or three words of their speech" are preserved, problems. It was Chumash, and it was closely but we are not told what these words are. It is INTERIOR CHUMASH 297

Vocabulary 2

gloss Alliklik Ventureno Ineseno Other kali-ahs-kom ka''askom, keieskom ciyaw kaskom people koo (also tribe) ku ku ku man a-tah-haht •)'ataxa I c* 'ihiy 'ih±y woman a-halim-noo-ali xanwa 'eneq 'eneq > (my) mother k'-ta-ta (sDk-tete' (hu)k-xoni (ma)k-tete', -tik old man pah-koo-was pakiwas pakuwas 'anaxt' old woman * kan-oo-wow-wns qanwawas 'enexiwas 'anaqcan (my) head ke-u-wash (si)k-yiwis (he)k-noqs (ma)k-oqwon, -paqs forehead 1 u 'Ch koo-sah = kusax (Pinart) 'ixsi 'i:-;si, 'oqwon nose ch -nuxs noxs noxs no-=s chin x'anax'an (Pinart) xanaxan 'asas * jaw' hah-nah-han mouth (=tooth) -sa -s^a sa sah' knee -istukun 'istukun 'apain is-to-kon bone -se - -c'^e -s^e se tsa ' heart -pos 'ayapis 'atik, ''ayapis posh blood -'an 'axulis 'axulis ahn ' (1 am) hungry ktoloq kmixixin kmixin, kmixixin k'taw-lok (I am) thirsty ksuyaqmil, to' ^oqso'o' k'pa-ke kpekx (Pinart, Mu pu) belt ko-lo-ke -qoloke qalantis qolokin-as 'head-band' stone mah 'ks maqs 'flint' .h. arrowpoint portable pa-yes 'alqap, 'alqap 'alqap B.V. bayic ALK nortar pa-yes CHM pestle (=hand) ts'poo' cun iyliik cuniyik Cf. Obis. Chum, yacpu yaciimu' 'pestle, lit.'the hand of the mortar,' Span, raano 'hand, pestle,' Chum. -pu 'hand' burden basket hel-llk woni baby basket o-te-nah-e ^utinay cradle corncorns coms, sutinay choke-mouth 'hem xim 'large stoi X»• im' I.idJ . 1 xim 'large coil- bowl age basket' weave storage basket' doctor ahl-ahl-loos-tes ''alalaxiye'- 'aialaxiyeps 'alaxiyeps Vent, alustesh (Senan) eps curer (the) ocean si-mo-wah si-muwu he-sxamln ma-sxamin sun ish-show-o ^isaw 'alisaw qsi darkness smah-hoo-wul-ko s-maxuvulkuw 'axiyi' 'to be 'axiyi 'id.' 'it is dark dark,' at night' 'ulkuw 'to be -ulkuw 'id.' night'

(it is) raining sto-ho-e s-tuhuy, c-tuhuy s-tuliu V s-tuhuy mine (=belong- no-kok-hin ing to me)

(Continued) 298 THE JOURNAL OF CALIFORNIA ANTHROPOLOGY

filoss Ventureiio Barbareno Other bear hos xus xus xus mountain lion too-kem tukem tukem tukem bob-ca t ahl-hi 'alxay 'anaqpuw 'anaqpuw B.V. alxai' ALK La Paleta Chum, 'anxay JPH

1 urocyon (gray how kniy kniy fox) skunk tah-hah-mah taxama taxama taxama

Taxidea =badger al-loos-es 'aluses 'aluses 'aluses bat mah-kahr makal makal makal deer wuh wi wi wi antelope too-moo-nat'r qaq kill cili Kitan. too-moo-nats CHM C. beecheyi pis-tok pistuk pistuk soso, 'emet (=squirrel) Thomomys (=

pocket gopher white-footed qolol mouse (=Pero- myscus)

cottontai1 te-ma-o kun kun kun Vent, te-ma-weh CHM jackrabbit mah ma ma' ma' dog ste-un cti'in c tin hucu (its) tail c'h-ta-le -c-teleq -s-teieq -s-teleq (its) horns ts'-hahp -s-hap -s-xap -s-hap ch , h * (its) claws tse=-wi s^ixway s^ixway c ixway eagle t'slo' slow slow slow, clow redtail (hawk koo-e'tch kwic kwic 'falcon sp. kuic sp. )

great horned owl mo-ho muhu muhu

barn owl sha-o sew sew

burrowing owl so-ko-sok kokoK pewyoko' pokoy 'owl sp. ' Kitan, koo-koo-kuts CHM

ah-ah-was 'a' Kitan. a'a ALK Kitan. ah-ah CHM

California pe-vah-nah'tr £ u 1 a ka k pulakak pulakak Kitan. pe-vah-nats CHM woodpecker

kingbird sah-kwe-nas Kitan. tsa-kwe-nats CHM

grasshopper tok tuq tuq tuq

Cottonwood wah-mat xwelexwel qwel qweleqwel Jimson weed mah-nectch momoy momoy momoy Kitan. mah-neech CHM Kitan. pa-manit CHM Emig. mong-oi

vild grapevine nah-trjh-kwe-nas nunit cf. Emig. and B.V., Kitan. nah-tash-kwe-nakt CHM

flower ah-su spe'ey. cpe'ey spey s-pey Kitan. ah-soo CHM root ah-kah-vah -'axpilil -axpilil -'axpilil bark ah-ko-tso c'"'ol sxol s ol Kitan. ah-ko-tso CHM INTERIOR CHUMASH 299

further said (Kroeber 1925:614) that they are drainage along Grapevine Creek—a stretch of known to have occupied "most of Piru Creek, 80 to 100 miles. Castac Creek, and probably Pastoria Creek Our hypothesis provides, we think, a across the mountains in San Joaquin Valley plausible accounting for the linguistic facts we drainage and adjacent to the Yokuts." This encounter in the Merriam vocabulary, particu­ geographic distribution proves nothing, of larly the one that the strongest identifiable course, about the ethnic or the linguistic influence on "AUikhk" is specifically from affinities of the Alliklik. The testimony of Kitanemuk rather than any of the other Uto- toponymy is ambiguous; within the area in Aztecan dialects of the region. Ethnographic question there appear on Kroeber's map some data to confirm the results achieved above may village names clearly of Chumash derivation now be quoted from material assembled by (Kashtuk = Castaic, Kamulus = Camulos, Merriam and published by Heizer (1966a, Kashtu, Kashluk), and others just as clearly of 1966b); concerning tribes of the Tejon Pass Uto-Aztecan origin (Huyang, Etseng, Kiivung, area, these data are not easily compatible with Pi'idhuku = Piru). Are the Chumash names a doctrine, such as Kroeber's, that AUikhk was those used by the villages' inhabitants and the Uto-Aztecan. Uto-Aztecan names those apphed by '*foreign- (a) "8. Kas-tak'. Chumash tribe at Castac ers," or is the reverse true? We see no way to Lake and at mouth of Uvas (or Fort) Canyon. reach a decision when hmited to such evidence. Very closely related to Ventura tribe. At Most of the evidence in question is near or on Castac they called themselves Sa-sa-man-ne the Chumash-Uto-Aztecan linguistic frontier; (Chumash)" [Heizer 1966a:430]. in such a region it is possible that Chumash and (b) "17. Kas-tak (at north side of Castac Uto-Aztecan villages ahernated with each Lake). Tribe, Kas-tak (Chumash). In the Too- other. There does appear to have been a cluster lol-min [also called Yawelmani] language." of Uto-Aztecan village names along the valley The place: Sahs (meaning eyes) [ka-s-tfq= of Piru Creek; perhaps that territory consti­ 'it is an eye, or eyes' in Chumash] tuted a Uto-Aztecan enclave within otherwise The rancheria: Sahs' ah-kah-ke continuous Chumash lands, a solution to The people: Sahs' toi' chah-ke which we lean. Although the "AUiklik" area is The tribe: Kas-tak (almost the same as the one where the linguistic and ethnic affinities of Ventura). In their own language they call the inhabitants are among the most doubtful in themselves Sah-sa-mahn-ne. The Spani­ Cahfornia, we shall have to adopt, as a ards call them Castanos" [Heizer 1966a: working hypothesis based squarely on the 435].9 Merriam vocabulary we have just analyzed, (c) "16. Canada de las Uvas (or Cajon de las the view that "Alliklik," a form of Venturefio Uvas). For Tejon Canyon. Tribe, Kas-tak Chumash much influenced by the contiguous (Chumash). The rancheria was at the mouth of Kitanemuk, was spoken in the area assigned by the canyon and was a large one. In the Too-lol- Kroeber to the Uto-Aztecans. That hypothesis min language: is of course subject to modification when, and The place: La-pew (or La-peu)'" if, further evidence is uncovered. This view The rancheria: Ah-kah-ke La-peu gives Venturefio the greatest territorial ex­ The people: Lap-pe-u-toi' chah-ahtch tension of any form of Chumash, running from The tribe: Kas-tak (Chumash), same as at the coast to the head of the Santa Clara Valley Castac Lake and nearly the same as at and then up Castaic Creek and over Tejon Ventura" [Heizer 1966a:435]. Pass, finally reaching the San Joaquin Valley (d) "18. Tacuya Canyon (two or three miles 300 THE JOURNAL OF CALIFORNIA ANTHROPOLOGY west of Las Uvas or Fort Canyon). Tribe, account of his journey in the spring of 1776 Kastak (Chumash), same as at Castac Lake from San Gabriel through the Tejon Pass to and mouth of Las Uvas Canyon. In the Too- the Bakersfield area and then east over lol-min language: Tehachapi Pass to the Mohave Desert and the The place: Ta-koo-e (or Ta-koo-yu) Colorado River. Somewhere in the mountains The rancheria: Ah-kah-ke Ta-koo-yu before reaching the Tulare country he stayed The people: Ta-koo-yo toi-chah-atch overnight in a rancheria of a people he called In the Emgidio (Chumash) language the the Cuabajai, and noted: people are Hol-koo-koo Ta-koo^." Here I saw baskets, flint knives, shallow (e) "19. San Emigdio. Tribe, Tash-le-poom bowls with inlaid work of mother-of-pearl Koo-koo (Chumash). In their own language: —the knives had it too—and woven shell- The place: Tash-le-poom work, all of which things are to be found The people: Tash-le poom' Koo-koo' also at [Santa Barbara] Channel, since The place name (Tash-le-poom or Tash-la- there is much trading back and forth and poom) has been adopted by the neighboring perhaps these Indians belong to the same tribes, Too-lol-min, Tin-Un-ne", and Ham- nation; from what I hear, they are similar menat'2. In the Too-lol-min language: also in their dress and in the cleanUness of the women [Galvin 1965:46-47]. The rancheria: Ah-kah-ke Tash-le-poom' The people: Tash-le-poon [sic] chah-atch Among the "nations of the mountains of The tribe is closely related to (if not the California between the Colorado River and same as) the Santa Barbara tribe Monterey" he hsts the Cuabajai: "this [nation (Chumash)." borders] on the [Santa Barbara] Channel and, We may note a disagreement between the at the east, on the land of the Cobajis" (Galvin sources of Merriam and Kroeber. For 1965:90). The Cobaji are equated by Kroeber'^ Kroeber's informant (see above) "the same with the Kawaiisu; the Cuabajai, then, are said Chumash" was spoken on "las Uvas, Pleito, to occupy a territory reaching from the ocean San Emigdio, and La Paleta creeks", whereas to the floor of the San Joaquin east of Bakers­ according to Merriam, the people hving on Las field. In the past some investigators (e.g., Uvas creek and at Tacuya Canyon were both Kroeber) have questioned the equation of part ofthe Kastak tribe and "nearly the same as Cuabajai and Chumash; but in the hght of the at Ventura"; he declares that the Emigdiano evidence brought together in this paper, the were, on the other hand, almost the same as the notion that they were one and the same is aU Barbarefio. the more attractive. We have seen reason to think that Unless further relevant testimony is un­ Emigdiano was probably of recent intro­ covered, then, we are in a position to declare duction to its nineteenth century San Joaquin that Chumash, as spoken in the nineteenth locale, and that it may not have been spoken century in the southern San Joaquin Valley there for more than a generation or two. In the and adjoining areas (including, probably, the case of AUikhk Chumash, however, there is Cuyama Valley'*), was essentially undifferenti­ written evidence from the eighteenth century ated from the two already well-known coastal which seems to mean that Chumash people languages Barbarefio and Venturefio. AUiklik were living two hundred years ago in the Chumash and Emigdiano Chumash bordered southeastern extremity ofthe San Joaquin and on each other in the Tejon Pass region, Alhklik in the Tejon Pass region. The Franciscan on the Uto-Aztecan Kitanemuk to the east, explorer-missionary Francisco Garces gave an and Emigdiano on Buena Vista Yokuts on the INTERIOR CHUMASH 301

north (see Fig. 1). All these tribal contacts have Valley .... The Tataviam were bounded on left linguistic precipitate, notably in the se­ the west by various Chumashan groups: to mantic fields of names of flora and fauna. The the northwest, at Castac Lake and Alhklik (Cuabajai) may have occupied their Matapxaw, lived the Castac Chumash; to historic seats for many centuries; the the west, on Sespe Creek, were the sek'spe Chumash; and to the southwest, at Emigdiano presence in the interior was in aU kamulus (a viUage recorded at San hkehhood only a transitory phenomenon. In Fernando Mission under its Chumash effect, the vocabularies studied in this paper name), lived a mixed Chumash-Tataviam add no new form of Chumash to the six population. languages of the stock already known. The new evidence upon which these in­ ADDENDUM terpretations are founded is a series of rather This paper was complete, in the form it has fragmentary field notes, taken down in 1913, above, in the late summer of 1974; and the 1916, and 1917 by John P. Harrington. These research upon which it is based was ac­ are described and analyzed by WUham Bright complished a year or two before that. It is (1975), in this journal. The testimony given by unfortunate that its publication has been de­ Harrington's informants is vague, and in part layed, for in the meantime other evidence has self-contradictory: Bright notes that the come to light which has led to interpretations "sources disagree," and we shall soon see how. conflicting with ours. But it is from the use of these data, as Chester King and Thomas Blackburn, in a interpreted by Bright, that King and Black- contribution written for the California volume bum (n.d.:l) conclude that "Tataviam" is of the new edition of the Handbook of North "Takic (but not apparently Serran or Cupan)." American Indians, assert that our AlUkhk The hypothetical "Tataviam" language is sup­ Chumash, which we have shown to be es­ posed to have become extinct in the nineteenth sentially identical with central Venturefio and century, and to have survived, in the form of a to differ from it only by a massive infusion of tiny number of words and phrases, in the loanwords from Kitanemuk, was separated memory of a few distant descendants. altogether from the coastal language by an­ We have seen what comprises the territory other—Takic or Uto-Aztecan idiom labelled assigned by King and Blackburn to the Tataviam. They admit the evidence for a form Tataviam people. Let us now take a look at the of Chumash spoken in the Tejon Pass region evidence, which any reader who wishes may and along Pastoria Creek; they reject, how­ examine in Bright's article. Harrington's first ever, the name Alliklik, which has been in the informant (1913) was Juan Jose Fustero, who literature for fifty years and which is recorded had also served as Kroeber's source in the by Merriam in the early years of the twentieth preceding year. Fustero was a speaker of century, and replace it by Castac (Castacefio or Kitanemuk, but gave to Harrington (n.d.) two Kashtek), which has no authority based on expressions in a different language which he native testimony. They say (n.d.:2): said his grandparents had spoken, a language used in the area of modern Newhall and which ... the Tataviam lived primarUy on the he (Fustero) said was the "Castec" language upper reaches of the Santa Clara River drainage east of Piru Creek, aUhough their (note that this name has now been given, by territory extended over the Sawmill King and Blackburn, to the Chumash of the Mountains to the north to include at least Tejon Pass region). Other informants, at the southwestern fringes of the Antelope Tejon, introduced the word "Tataviam" as the 302 THE JOURNAL OF CALIFORNIA ANTHROPOLOGY

name of an extinct language. An Indian named though some ofthe informants had so claimed. Eugenia Montes reported that the Tataviam King and Blackburn read the evidence differ­ lived at "La Liebre," a place located by Fustero ently, as shown above. as at "camino Gorman's station by the lake." Our view is still different, although gener­ Gorman's is the present name of a small ally we tend to agree with Bright. Our reading settlement just south of the summit of Tejon of this spotty evidence is stUI, in outUne, what Pass; just to the north of the pass is the present we concluded more than two years ago when "Castac Lake." Montes also "says positively this paper was first written: Ventureno that at kaftak they talked Venturefio but Chumash was spoken although no doubt with somewhat differentiated." As Bright notes, regional variants, throughout the territory "this presumably refers to Castaic in the Santa extending from the Pacific coast at Ventura, Clara Valley." The name is pure Chumash and Hueneme, Mugu, and Malibu to the region of means "what is like a face, or an eye." The Tejon Pass and Pastoria Creek and into the presence of such a name in territory assigned southernmost corner of the San Joaquin by Kroeber to his "Uto-Aztecan" Alhklik was Valley. In the area of Piru Creek and of disconcerting; he says, therefore, that it is a Camulos there appears to have been a mixed Chumash name for a "Shoshonean" village. population of Chumash and Takic speakers, This is, as wiU not have escaped the attentive although one informant assigned that whole reader, the same device adopted by King and district to the Chumash. (It is not clear what Blackburn to explain the Chumash vUlage variety of Takic may have been spoken there, if name kamulus in the territory which they give any was; it did not have to be Tataviam). to Tataviam. StiU other Indians told Harring­ It does seem hkely that, at some time, quite ton that the Tataviam lived not only at La a different language, possibly of Takic af­ Liebre and near Newhall, but also along the finities, was spoken in some part of this southwestern rim of Antelope Valley; the extensive area. Several of the informants agree ^at^aphW^iI, named by Fustero to Kroeber as on the NewhaU region. We propose the the speakers of his "grandparents language" foUowing hypothesis: at the time of the are now stated to have been Fernandenos and Spanish arrival in California there was stiU Gabrielinos, i.e., Shoshoneans. One last quo­ spoken in the Newhall district a remnant tation is relevant to our purpose: "the whole language, used by only a few speakers. NewhaU Piru region was Venturefio territory, the in­ is not far from San Fernando Mission, and formant (Jose Juan, a speaker of Castec experience elsewhere in Cahfornia shows that Chumash) says without any hesitation and villages near a mission may have had their Magd. (his wife) agrees." population all removed to the mission settle­ Bright's "tentative" conclusions from this ment and completely lost their former identity evidence are: "There were probably two types and speech. That the people who Uved in the of speech in the Upper Santa Clara VaUey. One upper Santa Clara Valley and on the south- was a Chumashan dialect, related to facing slopes of the Tehachapis shared a Venturefio; the term 'AUikhk' might be most culture resembling that of their Takic appropriately applied to this dialect. The other neighbors does not necessarily mean that they was 'Tataviam,' a language showing some spoke a Takic language to be labelled Takic affinities" (1975:230). Note that this Tataviam. The notion that they did speak such scholar does not think his evidence warrants a language requires us to assume that two extending Tataviam territory to the region of essentially identical forms of Chumash, the coastal Ventureno and the interior "Casta- the Tejon Pass and of the Antelope Valley, INTERIOR CHUMASH 303 cefio" (King and Blackburn's label, now taining the suffix -n F^'non-possessed'; the forms in canonized by its adoption into the new Hand­ question are -tetehes and -kokohi^. which show the book) were separated from one another by the suffix with initial -«-, which Applegate explains hnguisticaUy totally alien Tataviam. It seems morphophonemically as from final postvocahc weU established that Chumash has been glottal stop plus initial -n-. The preservation of glottal stop in this environment, he thinks, exerted spoken in the Tejon Pass (Cuabajai, in the pressure to prevent its loss in absolute final po­ terminology of Garces) area since at least the sition. late eighteenth century; and Chumash culture and language along the Ventura County coast 2. C. Hart Merriam manuscript N/13f/V55. is ancient. The simplest assumption is that 3. The Harrington papers in the custody ofthe Chumash was spoken in an unbroken stretch Department of Linguistics, University of Cali­ of territory from the coast to the San Joaquin fornia, Berkeley, are bound in numbered packets; Valley; this is the assumption we make. The the packets are kept in numbered boxes. language and the people known to Harring­ 4. Archivo del Arzobispado de San Francisco, ton's informants as the Tataviam may have vol. IV, part 2, in the Bancroft Library, University Uved, before their extinction, in a remote of Cahfornia, Berkeley. The original ms. is in interior valley tributary to this area. Spanish. King and Blackburn do not take notice of 5. Note that San Emigdio is mentioned in the the difficulty created for their hypothesis by Father's letter as a place that is well-known, that the presence of the Chumash place name does not have to be further identified. Castaic in the midst of their Tataviam terri­ 6. Bailey (1967), s.v. San Emidio. tory; if they did, they probably would deal with 7. A note in the Harrington papers tells us that it as did Kroeber, and as they do with Camulos: in the Purisimeno dialect alik means 'northeast'; the there are Chumash names of Tataviam area just delimited is northeast ofthe main body of vUlages. When the identity of populations in a the Ventureiio, and one ofthe most common types given region is in dispute as is the case here, and of ethnic naming among the North American when we have native testimony as we do, that Indians is to name neighboring groups by the the populations of both areas spoke Chumash, direction their lands lie from those of the namers. it is quite unjustified, in our opinion, to explain 8. Kroeber (1925:613-614); and see the map of these Chumash names as King and Blackburn tribal distributions in the back pocket. Kroeber's have done, and as Kroeber did. We think that reasons for assigning Indians of Uto-Aztecan such interpretation does violence to the facts, speech to the area here given to the Chumash and is given because a linguistically unjustified AUiklik appears in his 1915 paper. A Uto-Aztecan- theory demands it. speaking informant, Juan Jos6 Fustero, then living north of Piru, said that his grandparents' people, University of California, Berkeley called by the neighboring Chumash the University of California, Berkeley Ataplili'^ish, spoke a language of which he could remember one phrase and some place names. These NOTES are clearly of Uto-Aztecan affinity, though not immediately assignable to any one language of the I. Some readers may remember that Ventureno region belonging to that stock. The "AtapUli'^ish", for 'mother' and 'father' are given in this paper as then, are the source for the notion that the abo­ -tete"^ and -koko'', with final glottal stop. Applegate riginal people of the region in question were Uto- tells us that he explains its preservation there, in Aztecans; but between 1912 (when Fustero gave his contrast to its usual loss, as follows: From both of information to Kroeber), or 1915 (when it was these kinship terms, there are derived forms con­ printed) and 1925 (the date of his Handbook and 304 THE JOURNAL OF CALIFORNIA ANTHROPOLOGY accompanying map) these Uto-Aztecans have had co IV, part 2:93-113. MS, Bancroft their Chumash name changed into another Library, University of California, Chumash name—the AUikUk. We have found no Berkeley. (CaU no. C-C 3.) reason given for this change. Since in all Ukelihood Bailey, Richard the Alhklik vocabulary of Merriam, showing that 1967 Kern County Place Names. Kern County AUiklik is much like Ventureiio Chumash, had been Historical Society Annual Publication. collected several years before Kroeber's work with Fustero, we have a further instance ofthe confusion Bancroft, Hubert Howe created by the lack of communication between 1884- History of California, 5 vols. Santa these two investigators. In the light of our present 1890 Barbara: Wallace Hebberd. knowledge, we may guess that the language of Beeler, M.S. Fustero's grandparents represented a locaUy differ­ n.d. Unpublished lexical files on Barbarefio entiated form of one or the other Uto-Aztecan Chumash. On file at Department of languages of the region. Linguistics, University of California, 9. cf Yok. sasa-mani 'people of the sky'. Berkeley. 10. cf. Yok. lapiw 'cottonwood place'. 1961 Senary Counting in CaUfornia Penutian. 11. Kroeber (1925:482) gives Tinlinin as a Anthropological Linguistics 3:1-8. synonym of Yawelmani. 1967 The Ventureno Confesionario of Jose 12.For Merriam this is a name of the Serrano Sendn, O.F.M., M.S. Beeler, ed. Uni­ tribe; CHM appears to make no distinction be­ versity of California Publications in tween Ke-tan-a-moo-kum and Ham-me-nat, and Linguistics 47. assigns to the people so named a part of Kroeber's 1968 Review of Languages, Territories, and AUiklik territory. There is no claim by CHM's Names of California Indian Tribes. Inter­ informants that Pastoria Creek drainage was national Journal of American Linguistics Chumash territory; was it then Hammenat = 34:59-62. Kitanemuk, and was the "whoUy different language" spoken there, of which Marinacia's Bright, Wilham neighbor Badillo knew "a few words" Uto-Aztecan 1975 The AlUkUk Mystery. Journal of Cah­ Kitanemuk? fornia Anthropology 2:228-230. 13. Kroeber (1925:602). The western edge of Galvin, John, trans. their range was very close to the Yokuts (Carets' 1965 A Record of Travels in Arizona and CaU­ Noches) and to the Chumash viUages along the fornia, 1775-1776, Fr. Francisco Garc6s. northern border of the Tehachapis. San Francisco: John Howell Books. 14. Kroeber's map sets up the Cuyama as a Gudde, Erwin separate dialect of Chumash; the evidence ac­ 1969 California Place Names. 3rd edition. cessible to us, which aJmittedly is not much, seems Berkeley: University of California Press. to imply that, in the nineteenth century at least, a Harrington, John Peabody form of Barbareno was spoken there. n.d. Unpublished manuscripts in the custody of the Department of Linguistics, Uni­ REFERENCES versity of California, Berkeley. Applegate, Richard B. Heizer, Robert F., ed. 1970 Ineseno Chumash: Vol. 1, Grammar; 1952 The Mission Indian Vocabularies of Vol. 2, Dictionary. Ph.D. dissertation. Alphonse Pinart. University of Cali­ University of CaUfornia, Berkeley. fornia Anthropological Records 15(1). Archivo del Arzobispado de San Francisco 1966a Ethnographic Notes on CaUfornia n.d. Archivo del Arzobispado de San Francis­ Indian Tribes, by C. Hart Merriam. INTERIOR CHUMASH 305

Berkeley: University of California Leonard, Zenas Archaeological Survey Reports No. 68, 1839 Narrative of the Adventures of Zenas Pt. 1. Leonard, Written by Himself Clearfield, 1966 b Languages, Territories, and Names of Pennsylvania: D.W. Moore. California Indian Tribes. Berkeley: Uni­ versity of California Press. Merriam, C. Hart n.d. Unpublished vocabularies with file King, Chester, and Thomas Blackburn numbers as follows: Hool-koo-koo n.d. Tataviam. Unpublished manuscript to (Emigdiano) N/13f/NH54; Hool-koo- appear in Handbook of North American koo (Emigdiano) N/13f/V55; AUiklik Indians, California volume. Washington: Chumash N/13a-g/CL16; Ke-tan-a- Smithsonian Institution (in press). moo-kum (Kitanemuk) X/23aa/NH 119; Kroeber, A.L. Tongva (GabrieUno) Y/24a/NH129. On 1915 A New Shoshonean Tribe in California. file at the Department of Anthropology, American Anthropologist 17:773-775. University of Cahfornia, Berkeley.

1925 Handbook of the Indians of California. 1955 Studies of California Indians. Berkeley: Washington: Smithsonian Institution, University of Cahfornia Press. Bureau of American Ethnology Bulletin 78. Munz, PhUip A., and David D. Keck 1963 Yokuts Dialect Survey. University of 1968 A California Flora. Berkeley: University California Anthropological Records 11 of California Press. (3).