Escholarship Services to Uw University of California and Delivers a Dynamic University of Caiifornia Research Platforrn to Scholars \Vorldvvido
Journal of California and Great Basin Anthropology UC Merced
& Peer Reviewed
Title: Tataviam Geography and Ethnohistory
Journal Issue: )QWD1<31 QfC<31ifQUli? <30cl GJE:?LE3<3s;ir1Anthrnp9l9gy,J2(2}
Author: )QOO§Qll,)QbnR., Santa Barbara Museum of Natural History, California t::?rl@,P@vic;![)., City of Lancaster City Museum/Art Gallery, California
Publication Date: 1990
Publication Info: Journal of California and Great Basin Anthropology, UC Merced Library, UC Merced
Permalink: t1ttp://\/\f\IVW.€:1§9hQl<:lf§t1ip.Qrg/qg/it?fll/9l1:2:3J()pt
Keywords: ethnography, ethnohistory, archaeology, native peoples, Great Basin
Abstract: Basic information about Tataviam linguistics and geography obtained from Fustero and other Kitanemuk speakers has been discussed in previous publications (Kroeber 1915, 1925; Harrington 1935; Bright 1975; King and Blackburn 1978; Hudson 1982). What is not so well known is that Harrington continued his Tataviam investigations among Indians of Yokuts, Tubatulabal, and Serrano descent, who had been associated with Tataviam speakers during the nineteenth century. More information about Tataviam history, territory, and language therefore is available than has previously been summarized. This justifies a new presentation and evaluation of existing evidence. We begin with a review of Tataviam ethnogeographic data.
eScllolarsllip provides open access, scholarly publishing eScholarship services to Uw University of California and delivers a dynamic University of Caiifornia research platforrn to scholars \vorldvvido. foumi:;I of California Tataviam Geography and Ethnol1istory JOHN R. JOHNSON, Santa Barbara tvfoseu.m of N:siun:d HiHory, 2559 h.ie't'' de! So! Rd"' Sant SEVER.AL important articles have appeared words and phrases in the Tataviam language in recent years that have summarized infor have hitherto been published (Bright !975), mation about the Tataviam, or AHikLik, one of Basic information about Tataviam En· the most enigmatic California Indian groups guistics and geography obtained frnn1 fustcro (Brighi 1975; King and Blackburn I 978; and other .Kltanemuk speakers has been d[s, Hudson 1982), So little actually is known cussed in previouspub!ie mav~ have belonged..,.,_, to the Ventureno "'{oku!s, ·rubatulalxd, and Serrano descent, Chumash, Kitanemuk. or Serrano (Van ;vho had been associnted with Tatavi;im Valkenburgh 1935; Beeler and Klar 1977), speakers during the nineteenth century. More Because of the scarcity of data hithertn information about 'Lttaviam history, territory, ava i!able, there has been a need to discover and Lmguage therefore is :naibh!e than has new approaches to the problems of who the previously been summMiz.ed, This justifies a Tarnviam were, '\.vhat their linguistic afliliation ne\v presentation and eva!u~iticn of t-:Xi~;ting was, and what territory they occupied.i i;·vidence. We begin \.vith a review of Tatav \Vhat is known today regarding the inm ethnogeogrnphic data Tarnviam comes prirnarily frorn the ethm1. CORROBORA,TION OF TATAVIAM graphic research of t'NO anthropologists, ETHNIC IDENTlTY Alfred L Kroeber and John p, Harrington. Kroeber's Tataviam data came frnm a ,"irwJe,, Recent statements on ·rata\.·ktm cultural consultant, Juan Jose Fustero, \vhom he inter· geography by King <1 nd Bbckburn ( J97N) ;rnd viev-ied for part of a day in Los Angeles in Hwhon ( !982) identify the Santa Clarita 1912 (K.roeber 1912, 1SH5}, Harrington first B The Sanrn Clarita Basin was first identi Tochonanga, documented in an 1843 landN fied as the home of a distinct Hnguistic and grant disefw (map), appears to have been lo~ ethnic community in an important early cated to the southeast of Newhall (Fig. 2} Sp~inish account This was the expedition We, have identified other villages and camp diary of the Spanish missionary explorer, sites named by Harrington's informants (see Father Francisco Garcct>, ~;vho passed through Fig. 1), They include the following:. akure ''eng, the region in early 177ti He visited the located at the original NevJhaH townsite Cibiaga de Santa Clara before heading spring; apatsitsing, situated on upper Castaic norlhen::;t across theLiehre-SawmilJ mountain Creek near tiktusing and north of Redrock range in the northern reaches of Tataviam Mountain; and naqava'afflng, farther downN territory and into the i\.ntdope Valley (Coues stream and east of Townsend Peak} Several 1900:268; Earle 1990:89-92). rnncherfas also were located on Piru Creek ln travelling northeast from the upper The Piru viUages and several other rancherias Santa Clam region, Garces \Vas guided by located on the northern edge of Tataviam Indians frorn the Antelope Valley who territory are discussed in the next section. "promised to conduct rne to their land." Thi;· TERRITORIAL BOUNDARIES village in the Antelope Valley to which these Indians took hirn (in the Lake ffoghes A delineation of the territorial extent of Elizabeth Lake area) was later identified by Tataviam speech involves the problematic him as being Beneme (the Mojave Desert issue of boundaries_ Two difficulties have branch of the S.;'..1Tano), and its inhabitants presented themselves in analyzingterritoriality '>Vere dearly distinguished from the Indians of among Takic groups. First, the disruptions Santa Clam. In (fr:;cussing boundaries of and population dedine that occurred in indigenous linguistic territories in Southern Mission times often made later recollection c:aiifornia, Garces else\vhere stated that the difficult regarding what may have been former Benem<~ were bounded by the Indians of San physically marked boundaries, Later consul Gabriel and Santa Clara (Coue~• 1900:444). tants were much dearer about core territories Garci§s thus identified an Indian terri.torial than about the locations ·of peripheral borders. and linguistic unit, "Santa Clara." \vhich was, Second, in discussing the "real world" he indicated, distinct from that of San Gabrid significance of territoriality, one must distin (Gabrielino) and that of the Bcneme U"fojavc guish between the formal and substantive Desert Serrano), manifr?.stritions of territorial occupation and use, The boundaries of linguistic/ ethnic units TATAVIAM SETTLEMENTS reflected the organization of society into a King and Blackburn ( 1978:536) have listed series of multi-lineage territorial political units several major Tataviam rnncheria sites on the ("localized clans").. These clan units claimed basis of information frorn the Hanington certain territories as their own, but were not notes and other sources, These indude the the only groups to gather resources in them major village of tsawayung at the site of or establish temporary camps therein. The Rancho San Francisquito (NewhaJ! Ranch), granting ofpennission by one group to anoth near Castaic Junction, tikats:ing on upper er to gather and establish seasonal camps in Castaic Creek, andpi'ing, located at the inter· its erstwhile territory was very common, section of Castaic Creek and Elizabeth Lake Harrington's consultants at the Tejon Ranch Canyon (Fig, 1). The important rancheria of noted this phenomenon .in discussing areas 1ATAVIAM GEOGRAPHY AND ETHNOHlSTORY •• 'Y <... A /~~.:~~·~: ·~~ .::-:t;-:· A;j z k ~:.. < ::-r:··· .t.~~ .-::~~~·&~·/:;>...;/ >r 0 I' /:. // _,--;:"<:.· ./::;i- ;.'~7;~0~~-'''.;$. »l. :d {:-'.f~ 0 ~ ..;{.~ /f:~.-"f '# ·~;./~t l~' >I"'; -.., 0 z/:) > z> tj )_,,..,.,, :;c ~ >-1 w > zf/1 ...:j~ x iO 0 ;.; -0 r 0 0 Fig. 2. The 1843 land~grnnt disdio im.ap) for Ranchn San Frnnt:isco with information on vi!iJ.ge hKatiflns in the upper Sanu Clara River Valky. TI1e ~ site of l<>diom:mga i;; imh:ated by the letter G The Ra11d1ma de Cm:utos h rndicateJ by i.he lener 0 (courtesy of The Htmtington LibrnN. San tvfa ruw l . TATAVI.AJvf GEOGRAPHY AND ETHNOHISTORY 195 shared between the Kitanemuk and the Kitanemuk consultants, Eugenia Mendez, to Kawaiisu, and many other examples could be have spoken a dialect of Ser; Valley just east of Cottonwood Creek and threat of desert Indian raids through the north of the so-called "Sand Hills" in the Soledad Canyon drainage after 1820 and later valley itself (north of the area shown on Fig. intensive mining activities appear to have led I} This suggests that the valley i1oor itself to avoidance of the area by local Indians in north of Liebre Ranch and Neenach, and post-Mission times. This is indicated by the perhaps north of Sawmill Mountain, may have. reminiscences of Harrington's consultants at been considered Tataviam territory, although Tej6n (Manly 1949:251, 475; Perkins 1958a, \Ve have not mapped it that \Vay in Figure I. 1958b, 1958c; Harrington 1986:RL 96, Fr. 219- Further to the east, while the Tataviam 287; Johnson and Johnson 1987:89; Mcintyre held the south-facing slope of SawrnilJ Mounw 1990: 10-13), tain and Sierra Pelona as far east as Soledad The southern boundary of Tataviam Pass,. they do not seem to have held the San territory was situated approximately at the Andreas Fault rift zone between the Pine high elevations of the western arm of the San Canyon-Lake Hughes area and Leona Valley .. Gabriel Mountains north of San Fernando The Rift Zone lies betv.1een the north-facing and ran westward past Fremont or San Fer slopes of these mountains and the southern nando Pass and along the crest of the Santa edge of the Antelope Valley, This area Susana Mountains to..,,vards the northwest included Elizabeth Lake, Here a very approx· The boundary then swung north across the imate boundary appears to foHow the summit Santa Clara River and continued north along of the rnountai.n range, 111.e Three Points the high ground west of lower Pim Creek, vicinity and the western shoulder of Sawmill probably .induding Hopper Canyon. It then 1v1ountain may have been included in the passed across upper Piru Creek below Hungry territory of either the Tatavfam or of lndians Valley and the Canada de los Alamos to turn speaking a Serrano/Kitanemuk dialect northeast into the Antelope VaUey near Oso The eastern and southeastern boundaries Canyon (Johnson 1978). Juan Josi: Fustero of Tataviam territory were not referred to in and several other of Harrington's consultants any detail by Harrington'svarious Kitanemuk, provided information on this western bound~ Serrano, Fernandefio, and other consultants, ary. This included the identification of One is left to i:nfer from its geographic posi· Tataviam vi11age sites and placenames in the tion that "La Soledad:' the upper reaches of Piru Creek drainage., including pi'imkung, the Santa Clara River drainage, was included akavavea,. etseng, huyung, and kivu.ng (Kroeber in Tataviam territory, The canyons lying im· 1915;. Lopez 1974; King and Blackburn 1978: mediately to the northwest of Soledad Canyon 536; Ifarrington 1986:RL 95, Fr. 219-287,. RI. are dearly stated as having been occupied by 98, Fr. 37, 613-614, 673 ), Of these, only the Tataviam. Archaeolocical evidence sug,·. pi'imkung at La Esperanza (Fig, 3) may be ~ , gests that the upper Soledad Canyon-Acton correlated definitely with a rancherfa men~ area contained important settlements during tioned in mission documents. the Late Prehistoric Period (King el aL 1974; 1ne accounts of the l769 Portola expedi Landberg 1980; Wessel and Wessel 1985; tion also give us an indication of the location Mcintyre 1990), The upper Santa Clarita of villages in the Santa Clara River Valley. River drainage provided an important Pedro Fages's account of the expedition sug transportation corridor for travel from the gests that the first Chumash settlement en~ western Mojave Desert to the coast Unfortu* ~mmtered, after travelling through Tataviam nately for the ethnohistoric record, both the territory, was situated well to the west of the TATAVlAM GEOGRAPHY AND ETHNOHISTORY 197 Fig. ~l Site of the Tataviam village of pi'imkung (or piSukungJ at La Esperanza, now lhe kKation Qf Llkt' Plru, photographed hy J. P Harrington about 1917 (courte~y of the National Anthmpoh•gi.c.a! Archives). mouth of Piru Creek (Bolton 1927: 155-157; system. Their lists of Serrano territorial clans Priestly 1937:24-25), The affiliation of km.n sometimes included the Tataviam as a u/us (Camulos), to the east of Pim. Canyon, component unit (Bean et aL 1981:256; bearing a name that is undeniably Chumash, Harrington 1986:RL 101, Fe 344). appears problematical; however, King and Harrington also inlerviewed a Fernandeno Blackburn (1978:535) viewed it as consisting Indian named Setimo in 1915. He apparently of a mixed Chumash-Tataviam population. had worked as a shepherd or vaquero in the This reconstruction of Tataviam cultural Elizabeth Lake area in his younger years. geography is derived primarily from interviews Setimo used the term "Serrano" to identtfy conducted by Kroeber and Harrin,gton with hoth the Tataviam of the Santa Clarita Basin consultants mainly of Kitanemuk ancestry at and the Serrano/\/anyume to the northeast of Tej6n and Pi.ru. Harrington's fieldwork them (Harrington 1986:RL 106, Fr. 89-90, 92), among other groups has, ho\vever, shed some This identification is Interesting because he additional light on the issue of the Linguistic did not in effect distinguish Tataviam and cultural status of the Tataviam. Serrano speakers as radically different in speech from consultants, living mainly at the San Manuel the St~rrano, as he did the Yokum, Chumash, Reservation near San Bernardino, were and Kawaiisu from the Kitanemuk and interviewed by Harrington i.n 1918. They Serrano, He also noted a distant connection were familiar with the Antelope Valley and between what he caUed the "Serrano" Upper Mohave River drainage areas, and in language and Fternandef10, while he said that decades past had visited the Tej6n rancherfa. Fernandeno and Gabriel.ino were closely They considered the Tataviam to have been related (Harrington 1986: RL 106, Fe 90-91 ). closely related in speech lo both the Gabri~ Both Harrington's Serrano and Fernandeno eli.no and the Serrano. They in fact classified data thereby suggest thal Tataviam was a the Tataviam, along with the Gabridino, as Takic language, supporting Bright's tentative groups having both social connections and conclusion based on lfarrington's Kitanemuk historical Linkages with the Serra.no clan data (Bright 1975:230). 198 JOURNAL OF CALlFOR!'-HA AND GREAT BASIN ANTHROPOLOGY GENEALOGICAL Ev1DENCE either, but satisfactory inferences may bi:~ made from the brief comments he recorded: Yet there is even more we can say about the Tataviam than just presenting additional pi&ukung"' La Esperanz-a, place (plafo, hucrto) direct information on geography and linguis three miles below Fustero's place. This is in the Castec Iauguage., Fustero's mother's father tics gleaned from Harrington's consultants. talked that dialect which is much like the one While collecting ethnographic and linguistic that Fustt'rn talks. data, Harrington frequently recorded bio San Fernando [Femandeno Indians] graphical and genealogical details regarding talked different from Castec and from what he other Indians knmvn to his consultants during talks. , , , [There is] no one left who talks !the] Castec language, their lifetimes. Among people mentioned were those said to he of Tataviam descent Newhall talked the Soledad language~ Fustern's father was from Soledad, Soledad is With the names and places of origin men [the J sierra this side of Saugus, tioned in Harrington's notes, it becomes ha-ikwi, "' que hay amigo, in language possible to turn to other ethnographic and of Castet and Soledad. But in Fuste,ro's historiographk sources for information on language say yamei, ''que hay, a1uigo," The old Tataviam descendants, Of greatest importance grandfather used to say Ju;.fkwi h~ Fuslero [Harrington 19S6:RL lSl,. Fr. 10-121,' is genealogical evidence recorded in the San Fernando Mission :rncramenta!. registers that From these selected extracts from lfar« may be used to confirm and augment Har· rington's 1913 interview, it may be deduced rington's data and to trace family ancestry to that what Fustcro termed the "Castec" and villages occupied during the 1V1ission Period,4 "Soledad" languages were the same. These Villages thus identified as ances!rnl villages of t\VO names for the Tatavfam are preserved Tataviam speakers provide an independent today as two canyon names, Castaic and test of direct ethnographic and ethnohistoric Soledad, tributaries of the upper Santa Ciara statements regarding territoriality. Rivcr.8 Fustero explicitly stated that his maternal grandfather spoke the "Castec" Juan Jose Fustenls Ancestry language, Le., ·rataviam, and because his Juan Jose fustero (Fig. 4) was the first father's parents were from Soledad, they and primary source of information about the presumably were Tataviam also, Fustero's Tataviam as a distinct cultural and linguistic opinion was that although the Tataviam entity.5 Fustero W<:1s fluent in both Kitanemuk language was distinctive, it was similar to his and Spanish, but he told both Kroeber and own native speech, Kitanemuk. Harrington that his grandparents had spoken When lfarrington began his fieldwork at a different language, of which he remernbenxl the Tejon Ranch Indian community in 1916, on.ly a few words (Kroeber 1915:773; Bright he obtained more information regarding 1975: Harrington 1986.:RL 181, Fe l0-12). Fustero's ancestry from his Kitanemuk Kroeber did not record which side of consultants. He tvas told that Fu.stern's Fustero's famUy had spoken the different parents were named Jose and Sinforosa. Both language, but did mention that his grandpar had spoken Kitanemuk as their ordinary ents were from "San Francisquito," while his language, but they knew other languages too, mother and father had been raised at Mission because they had been raised in a rnixed San Femando,1-i Harrington's 1913 notes were linguistic community at Mission San Fernando "' not directed towards precisely determining the (Harrington 1986:Rt 98, Fr. 10, 23, 57), linguistic affiliation of Fustero's ancestors Sinfornsa had a brother, Casimiro, who had TATAVIAM GEOGRAPHY AND ETIINOHISTORY 199 western fringe of the Antelope Valley. Eugenia gave further information about Sinforosa 's family: "Casimiro was full brother of Sinforosa. Their father was Narciso and Narciso's \vife (their mother) was Crisanta" (Harrington I 986:RL 98, Fr. 10). Eugenia also reported that Juan Jose Fustero's father, Jose, had a sister named Felipa, whose name she pronounced as xelipa (Harrinl!ton 1986:RL 98, Fr. 10). Both of '· .__.. ·' Harrington's principal Kita nemu k consultants, Eugenia Mendez and Magdalena Olivas, stated that they \.Vere relatives of Juan Jose Fustero in some way, and Magdalena noted that she used to hear her "Aunt Felipa" (like Eugenia, she also pronounced the name xelipa.) speak tbe Tataviam language (Harring ton 1986:RI. 98, Fr. 434). Because the names are identical and the linguistic affiliation is what we would expect based on the evidence given above, there is strong reason to identify Fig. 4. Juan Jose Fustero (courtesy of the Ventura Magdalena's "aunt" and Juan Jose Fustero's County Museum of History and Art). father's sister as the same individual. 'fhe information recorded by Harrington also been known to Harrington's Tej6n makes it possible to identify Fustero 's consultants and who had eventually moved to relatives in the mission registers of San the Tule River Reservation where he died.9 Fernando and San Buenaventura and to Eugenia Mendez, one of Harrington's reconstruct his family tree (see Figs. 5 and 6). most important Kitanemuk consultants, had Fustero's paternal grandparents were Zenon the following to say about the Tataviam Chaamel and Zenona Gerniuna from the language and Fust.em's mother's descent: village of Cuccchao, and as Eugenia Mendez V.lhen I read to Eugenia Fustero's "ha-ihvi," had said, his maternal grandparents were lshe] says ik.wi means "amigo" in that difficult Narciso, \.Vhose village affiliation was Piribit, language that Eugenia was telling me about the and Crisanta, who was frorn Tectuagttt.q·,,uzya other day-that was spoken at La Licbre. This tribe was called tataviam. The deceased javia. These rancherfa names may be further Simforosa [sic] spoke that because it was her identified using Harrington's placename notes, language. Her father, Narciso, was tataw·am Cuecchao was apparently the Spanish spe.lling [Harrington 1986:Rl. 98, Fr. 28]. for A.-ivitsa 'o. a name that Eugenia Mendez Eugenia's information reinforced that given by said was in the ·rataviam language and Fustero. She agreed that his maternal referred to the big range of mountains behind grandfather had spoken the Tataviam La Liebre (Harrington 1986: Rl. 98, Fr. 32; language. Additionally she provided another Earle 1990:94). Piribit referred to a person locality that was considered to have been in from the village ofpi&ukung (Kit. pi'irukung) Tataviam territory:. La Liebre, at the south- on Piru Creek. Tectuaguaguiyajavia may cor- 200 JOURNAL OF CALIFORNIA AND GREAT BASIN ANTHROPOLOGY ,C\ (~ / ••· '1'>. \ \ ~;~) ~~~~' tfa:.~.:1~sj~~ ii :C· 1 ·0~~·=~:·~ {'.l&f_SC•"J~ /M} •.: 36 \'·'''· p&l1!; 3€ \< ~ iHl'1l C1...s{N.". Ch('t.t~ ' ;~---A /':) \ /9:\ b_~:~~.1 I'~~~~\ G.t~nl~$:f'~ i~rmn Zf.::i(Jn~ :G.t~f1 ff .;,.~·fH>: $ C ~'~ f-~~1~i:.1 f~Hpa .h::s..~ t~·l,.'·~t~i{.:l Sin~·ofOSi~ b 161 ! ~~ ~8~5 ~ '6' 3 : y ~:~ n ~11~ b 1$.:34 .• ~>f!f~H'f_<..'J. {}i} M«:;,·s.:-01': S~n F :eP~~n ..b:·;i-) J~.~S·t: f:>o(l'l;:1~l.;?l 1'1;:~~:!'~-~ )O.'.i~ ~}e ..JtP Chi~f :0~ Be o.>.ir ~:n~~t:-3 $(:·:'1~·~nuw P't,,..~(Ji.;,..·.~1 31 y.Q 1."l '/."· i1Ml31 !HlOJl o"el ol A Dm'S$S'.!.1fJ.lt A,\ L~. l4Cj:sJa-~ N,1n.gfwit 15yo. il604l Ct,~5'13(}&.~ll J1:.,~;H'! ~IS N ldf th<: rnh>ion curnmuni.ty ;:md wer<~ living if th~.y liwd ;.,. tlw de><~rL P:rnm okafa'i"g the wi(h ;;pou,,;('f, who lwd nev·u hec-11 baptized. LiebH;::-. M.nmd.ain th.at i~~ ;~(:f'(}$5 [dH; hrn'i:/Oli·] loob big-from th.is [Tchad1api Mon!aln~j ;;ide Th<: bthn of two nf th''·''' childr.oo, Theodora it doe,; Mt 10ok &o hig. Tf1,, '"""e· of !ha!. ,;icrrn ~ind Fr cir«:fon<. w:i;; a man ideritiJirn:l a' p:;wdi; b kwiisa'o. Th"t is tho cmwcl. nsmc. ".A.gw;tin. a widowc-r of fo!ia." Hh new wife, Eug_(':Tti:J. ;;;ay~ k¥i-·'i.J.s.d'ong i>;,(~meth::nr;.-:;, JShl': pnwiik,;j rw <:t}'lrlology [hc~ause. the nam~ i.> 1IK ffB:>!lv;r ,~f the t«vo abwe-rmmed children. from !h~l Pojm.lor bnguag<' [H;ml.~gtM 1986: ''<'its k>plii'.ed on foly .2h, J8J7, ornd given the Rl (Jf\, Fr. l tO- U2] t:.arnt? ··.An;::. .. reodc~r"~ '' Tht=:.'fr m;~niagot' " {: r~~{~~~o .SOJ,.."'WSfl{J{;f? 42 ¥-'' Oll1 ll • Cm>cchsa A\A ~ Gt·M~i~ '\~J«~~b~f' 4n.:~ "fNi,j:.~~-~ PiJ()ir·i~}'~mm 'f ii~;U.P'N~ ~r ,a.-:.._c:;. ~:.1')i,;l ;i:.{ )'. ::~ 2<~v.<~. nei~~f 19, o 1rn11: 0»fi,;;> ..r(!J).1tt,.3$~.( <'b?i T1x:fM·tl.t:.Vi.m~~ Sk1.~}';};.'·~~'1~f}Ni-.~ 20 'f {;: i~81 ~~ ,4(~,~~r>h~> ..~ 5h i·! ~-~.s.-~~t/f··~;<~ ,\ /\ /~:l'\ (:!"'M J; ~&~~\ (H:·~a hfrO~ ~\4;~-v~~:! .'i}i~.S:'>>~'!J{J{tlJ.;1 ':-'' ::J{)f.1/t~~~ ~~~{/V'fl·~M $ :i3 (' l : Eugenia was living al the place b E.tme~i.n Eu:~.!":!bi~ JO¥ Sf.1..iJ}':'>ffU~~t.?t"f~,~rl"JS.:....( i r~~~~!~.?{} 1 ~ '"· {1 lfHJI H 'f 0 oBcu; Ch)d o~ TOth(;ni'"sbit "f(_.t(:h(h"1.tlf;.if Eu5t~W'J f:l>M f:~;~{W><.~ t-/.P.;..i?f8f .M.(s M,)' ftH~1ni;_~ ~·01~·.31f::.:} c~ow~> $;3?,~}"i:~ ( <'?~~~;-·~ il~;J i} H~ ~ 1 y.r>. 1:i8~ C..\.n(. 9 n 6 1 t' {1199) 9miP p'J~Si ;:i Jt~-tir3a: ~si~·~ nB1:: 1(·'t~;1 na~~~ f~<';~ ~H}~'j. ro::..~twn:t>'?{J« f s.':i.:Cfff'.~n<1t~f.i<~ 'f O!l:.":.&>nttn.1.J~ fi!..~.r.,:f";(,mSOf{:j 0.1et:.1'>fi:,--.::o P.Jf;~.. t~/;u-~ r--- ,,, 1<'.>) /\:1:;;\ ,/)\ !..~:::~~:_.\ \..._;;;.) $;:3:h:·a'.jo~ '"'JJ:~:· )~: ~-:<' ~ s~:t:-.:~""S.~nr:a E~;~~v.~-n ~) -~ 62: o H~~,~ ~~ ~$~~$ !) ~ & ~ ~ US, congressional documents (i\1erriam MS), The name La Pastor{a, meaning "the pasture The location wfo:re Estanislao and his land," seerns to be related to the occupations people settled may be identified as Pastorfa of many of the former San Fernando Indians Creek at the southern end of the San Joaquin \vJm settled there, Both Harrington's notes Valley, Their village was callee! 6powhi by the and the testimony of J. .l L6pez indicate that Chumash, .fripowhi by the Yokuts, and pm,vhi Estanislao., Melchor, and other members of by the Kitanemuk '111e etymokitw of this their families were shepherds, The size of the name cannot be analyzed for any of the above settlement is described as consisting of only languages, Eugenia Mendez told Harrington three or four jaca!es by the 1870s, 1t was that the "correct real name [was) po..nvi" and abandoned before 1880 -.vhcn Melchor, Mateo, stated that it might be in the Tatavbm and their families were forced by the Tejon language (Hanington l986:RL 98, Fe 92), Ranch management to relocate their commu~ lpo;nvi was] the name of the bate stony !till nity to Paso Creek just above the ranch which lies to the eaM of the mouth of Paslorra commissary, Melchor and his \Vifo died not canyon, across the canyon frorn the Flying Squirrel Spring place, .. , H was in front of long after their move (Latta 1976:129; this stony knoU that 1here was a ram:he.rfo of Harrington l985:RL 100, Fe 1183), Pujadores, Euge.nia later explained 10 me that 1Vfore is kmwm about Mckhor's descen Sebastiana must have meant that there w.:1s a dants and fami.!y history than for most of the ranche.ria of them there in recent Christian times, because in primitive times the mouth of Tataviam Indians who had settled in the Pastorfa canyon did not belong to !he lcrritory Tej6n region, His first marriage was to of the Pujadores hut their territory wa~, way Angela at Mission San Fernando in 1839 over by La Liebrc [Harrington 1985:RL 89, Fr, 573], . (!\-fac No, 871), A later wife was Felipa, the 206 JOURNAL OF CAUFORNIA AND GREAT BASIN ANTHROPOLOGY paternal aunt of Juan Jos6 Fustero, by whom where he lived for two yearn. His last resi he had a child, born in 1852 (San Buenaven· dence was in Tej6n Canyon (Merriam MS). turn Bap, Bk '.2, No. 1590), This is the same Merriam collected a vocabulary from Badillo Felipa \vhorn Magdalena Olivas called "aunt," that has been shown to be K.itanemuk who spoke Tataviam (see above) (Harrington (Anderton t 988:666-684). 1986:RL 98, Fe 434), Based on an inte.rview at Tej6n with Melchor had two scms who reached l\farfa Ignacia, a Tulamoi Yokuts woman, adulthood, Eusebio and Miguel Elfas, both Y-..roeber made the follmving notes: na n1ed, at least in part, for their grandfather"s tdpowi en la Pasiorfa, creek to we.st of here. brothers (see Fig. 8). The former was [The people there! talked different from San murdered while shepherding on the Tejon Emigdio, rntirdy, [Marb J does not know flheirl language or tribal name; all dead, Ranch (Harrington 19S5:RL 89, Fe 1482). [Thev'! said u u u u for "ves." BaJiHo in next The Litter was once married to Josefa hous~ to Marfa knows "a few words of the Cordero, a '{okuts ~Noman '.vho was to serve language. She thinks Badillo ["vas] horn in as a consultant to l!arrington at Tejon Ranch Cu:nulos [Krochcr 1906:27], in 1916 (llardngton 1986:RL WO, Fr. 180- I-iarrington recorded additional informa 181 ), Miguel EHas later overs-tepped the tion about Badillo from several of his consul bounds of the law and served nearlv four tants at Tej6n in 1916: years at San Quentin Prison,n A.ft~r bis V adivo told rnan who lived . , , in tbe house release, he did not return to the Tejon Ranch just ·~(2:') • ------~~ J<:·~:t~ l:J~"~:e.r V,~:i;::n9.fH': ~/;~l~r~c~·H:r.~ Apnhr~ ;\ /:.$\ ;<:::~)\ /-;,.~, ~\ ~/_;~l<:':·~t::·. t..,b-::·.;i.f:M: h~~;x f>(fm~t(.:i r~gu~:·~:1~~f'·¢)Ni ~~ ~~nJ ~ Hn6 I'!:> )'9 b. ~ 8 'l 'l i B.:11<;~l ..>h~ ne: ~j cm 1>1 ! ~. : e ~ ~i (°{>;{_~;~;/·,.:;~ C>~:d>1.,n.j j f..,~: ,)fi>'iif:~t (() i'.fod:::i'::~-i ~:~ I a:;,kcd Mngdakna if Juan Jos.t L6pez talked above), suggests that an enclave of Tataviam J1m1in:1lc, Akj>mdro Sandoval had wk! me people seems to have settled together in a ytMcrday that Juan Jose L6pe1.. doc;;, l\.fagda, !ena and Jose Juan !OllvaSI say that Juan Jost~ part of their old territory in post-Mission L6pcz talks faminalc but docs not talk it at aH times. iluen!ly. He u.nderi>lands ii ptrfeclly, hut doe,,, Another name of a Tataviam man was not talk it much. provided by Eugenia .Mendez from an event I! i:.; true that he .is si!ly and doesn't want lo talk Indian, but he docs. not know how to talk she witnessed as a girl: it at aU wdl anvwav. And '.' 1804 (Bap, No. 1216), The possibility that the The process of working with genealogical latter village might have been Tataviam gains records abo has produced historical informa support from identification of another former tion regarding the fate of a number of San Fernando Mission Indian, Norberto, who Tataviam families and communities as they lived at Rancho El Tej6n: intermarr.ied, moved, and were absorbed into Old Camilo , , , was neighbor of Mern::hor other Indian settlements in south central [after Melchor moved 10 Faw Creek]- Camilo California during the middle to !ate n.!ne talked lthe] Femandefio language, and some teenth century, Our research indicates that .JaminaL Nolberto, who talked Jaminat, was several farnil.ies of Tataviam descendants also neighbor, and lived near l'denchor, and tnay have been Tattavyam also !Hanington persisted into the twentieth century, indicating 1986:RL 97, Fr. 298]. some degree of genetic survival, although their language l.arge!y to Camilo .and Norberto may be identified 'Was lost posterily, with two individuals who have already NOTES appeared in the reconstrncled genealogies L This article is anticipated to be the first in presented earlier- Camilo was a great-uncle a t\.,'<1-part study of Tdt1wiarn ethnohistory and by marriage to Altamirano Badillo (Fig. 9), linpii~.tks, An ;1n;dysis of some new linguistic data and Norberto was a nephew' of Agustin, a condw:tcd in cnll;;1boration with Parmda Munro and Tataviam chief (Fig, 7} Like Ildefonso Alki: Anderton b In progress, 2< On akure'cnc:, sec H;mington ( 19"'l6:RL 9S, (mentioned above), Norberto tvas a native of Fe 543), KrnclKr '(1925:62J) n~Jkd a rnnrheria the viJJage of Tochaborunga,. called "'Ah.H<:wga" a~ hcJttd at La Prem near Mbsfon San Ghbrid, but the Litter is 11 lOti.tlity CONCLUSlON distinct from the Newhall ;;pring site, notvlithstand lng the simUarity in names. For naqan1'atang, sec Our genealogical reconstructions for Harrington (l986JlL 95, Fe 254, RL 98, Fr. 539- Tataviam descendants have demonstrated re 540); regarding tikamng and apmsitsing, sec markable convergence and consistent)' in an ffoniogton (1986:RL 95, fr, 250·253), We have used ng for H~mfogton\ /ry/ in p!accn:~rncs and village affiliation. prominent in cestral rvtost Tatavfam words throughout this papcc all of the genealogies )$ the viUage of Cuec 3, \Ve have rdcned to the Bti'1ernc of Garces chao, identified with kwitsa 'o, a placename in as Desert Serrano, These were speakers of didkds the Tataviam language that referred to the of the Serrano language who lived in lhc !Vfojavc DcscrL The Kiwncmuk who Jived wcsl. of Chern in Liebre f\ifountains, Gi:~nealogica! rese:::irch also the Tdwd:wpi .Muun!ains also ~,poh a dialed of supports the Tataviam affiliation ;1ttributed to Serrano whkh they called Jaminal (Haminot). Phu and Tochonanga (King and Blackburn 4, Problems in using mi:c;f,ion rcgiMi::r data for 1978), Two additional villages, not hitherto anthropolog.ical purposes have been described by Milliken (1987) and Johnson (l9&S), among ulhers. reco&rnized as Tataviam, have also been For this study, we first consnh(:d a partial lrnnM~ript identified: Siutasegena and Tochaborunga, of the Sari Fernando .registers prq::mn'.'d by ThonMs The correspondence beh\''een ( l ) ancestral Workman Temple (MS) ;:md then supplemen1ed villages traced usinggeneaJogical evidence and Temple's information by working directly with photocopies nf the original rcgincrn at tk (2) independently elicited information regard An.:hdirn::ese Archives of the Chancery of L\l:c, ing Tatavi.am territoriality builds confidence l·\ngeks at Mi&sinn San Fcrw:indn, A useful guide in the reliability of the ethnographic record to village name.~ nmtained in the San Fernando compiled by Krneber and Harrington, The baptismal reghter was prepared for C Har! Merriam by SteUa Clemence (!\kni;iw 196;$)_ distinctiveness of the Tataviam as an ethnic Some nf 0ur lranseriplions of Indian n;nne~- differ entity, separate from the Kitanemuk and In particulars from those copied by Temple m1d Fernandef1o, is supported by our research, Clemence, an understandable sinw.1.km given 210 JOURNAL OF CALIFORNIA AND GREAT BASIN ANTHROPOLOGY difficu.ldes in reading mfasion;,rv handwritltlg and {sic]~ Came originally from Pim Creek and varying degrees of fam.ili;uhy with native languages. Camulus, Lived for some time at Lievra [skj 5. Sec Smith (1969) for a short biogn:1phy of (not an aboriginal rancbcrfa at Lievra). His Juan Jo:>t Ft1stcro, name for people (or tribe) is koo! His name C Kroeher equated San Frandsquilo with the for place is mah?? 1 don't seem to have any Ne1.vhaH Ranch, The n~tme San Frandr;quito was vocabulary from him [Merriam MS]. derived from RaJlcho S1u1 Frnndsco Xavier, an Although the two words Merriam wrote dovtn from outpost of tAission San Fernando, that was Casimiro seem to have been Chumash (one •Vas c~~lahlbhed there during Mission limes (Engelhardt doubtfully re.conled), it Is difficult to draw any 1927: Perkins 1957). Krocber's notes do not make co:rKlusions from these, because of the diversity of it dear whether Fu~.tcrn's grandparents were living languages attributed to' hiln, , al San Fr~1ndsquito only as part of the corrmrnnity 111 Only one other tm.pdsm at San Pem11n Tataviam '? ;" was presented at the, annual meeting of Cones, EWot S, the Society for California Archaeology, Fosler City, 1900 On the Trail of a Spanish Pioneer: The California, April 5, 1990. Diary and hinerary of Francisco Garces, 1775-1776. New York Francis P. REFERENCES Harper. Earle, David D, Anderwn, Alice 1990 New Evidence on the Political Geogra· 198.H The Langi.mge of the Kit:men:mks of phy of the Antelope Valley and Western California, Ph.D. dissertation. Universltv Mojave Sp::uush of California, Los Angeles, . ' Dcse.rt at Contact In: Are.baeology and Ethnohistory of Ant<> Appkg1lte, Richard N, lope Valley and Vicinity, B. Love and W. 1975 An Index of Chumash Placenarnes. ln: H. DeWitt, eds,, pp, 87·104. Antelope Papers on the Chumash, pp, 21-46. San Valley Archaeological Society Occasional Luis Obispo County Archaeological So· Paper No, L ddy (kcash::mal Paper No 9. Engelhardt, Zephyrin Bean, Lowell fohn, Sylvia Brakke Vane, Michael 19'27 Sau Fernando Rey; The Mission of the Lerch, and Jackson Youug Valley, Chicago: Frnndscan Herald 1981 A Glossary of Serrano and Oiher Native Press. American Placenames and 01her Terms Eugstrand, his H. W. from the Ethnographic Notes. of John 1989 California's.Ranchos. Terrn(Naturallfa· PeJbody Harrington. fo: Native Ameri· tory Museum of Los Angeles County) em Places in the San Bernardino 28(2):7-15. National Forest San Bexnardim) and Riverside Counties, L, J. Bean and S. R Gavlc, Laura B, Vane, edi;,, appendix. f..-!S No, 81-45 un '1965 The Laa of the Old West: A Book of file at the San Bernardino i\rchaeo!ogicaJ Sketches about the Calabasas Area. Information CenltT, San Bernardino Woodland Hills, CA; Bar-Kay Enter~ County Museum, Redlands. pnses. Beder, Madison S,, and K,ithrvn A Kfar Giffen, Helen S,, and Arthur Woodward 1977 Interior Chumash, , The Journal of 1942 Tbe Story of El Tejon. Los Angeles: California Anthropology 4:287-305, Dawson's Book Shop. Blackbum, Thomas C Harrington, John P, 1976 CeremoniaJ Integration and Sodal 1935 Fieldwork among the Indians of Califor· Interaction in Aboriginal California, In: nia, ln: Explor~tions and Fieldwork of N Heizer, Robert F. Landberg, Leif CW. 1970 More J, P. Harrington Notes on Ven .. 1980 Relocation of an Aboriginal Steatite tureno Chumash Basketry and Culture. Quarry Reported by Richard E Van Berkeley: University of California Valkenburgh to be in the Sierra Pelona Arcbaeologfo.al Research Facility Contri· Range, Los Angdes County, California. butions No. 9:59-77. ln; Inland Chumash Archaeological Hudson, Travis Investigations, D. S, Whitley, E, L 1979 Breath of the Sun: Life in Early Califor McCann, and C, W, Clewlow, Jr., eds,, nia as Told by a Chumash lndian, pp. U·42. Los Angeles: University of Fernando Librado, to John P. Harring California Institute of Archaeology ton, Banning: Malki .Museum Press. Monograph No. 15, 1982 The Alliklik-Tataviam Problem. Journal Latta, Frank F. ofCalifomia and Great Basin Anthropol 1976 Saga of Raxicho El Tej6u. Santa Cruz: ogy 4:222-232, Bear State Books. Johnson, John R. Lopez, Rober! 1978 The Trail to Kashtiq. The Journal of 1974 The Prehistory of the Ll:•w·er f'nr!ion of California Anthropology 5: 188-198. the Piru Creek Drainage Basin, Ventura 1988 Mission R.::~g:isters as Anthropological County, Ca.liforu.ia. !vLA thesis, Cali.for· Ouestionnaires: Understanding Limila· nia State University, Northridge, tions of the Data. American Indian \\fanly, \ViHiam L Culture and Research Journal 12(2:):9-30. 1949 Death Valley in '49. !Reprint of 1894 Johnson, L<.;roy, and Jean Johnson edition. J Los Angeles: Borden PubH!ihing 1987 Escape From Death Valley, As Told by C'.orupany. \Vi!Ham Lnv:b Manly and Other '49ers. Md ntyre, Michael J. Reno and Las ·vegas: University of 1990 Cultural Resources of the Santa Nevada Press. Upper Clara River Valley, Los Angeles and King, Chester D., and Thomas C Blackburn Ventura Counties, c:atifomia. In: 1978 Tataviam. ln: Handbook of North An::haeoh:i&,ry a.nd Et hnohistory of A.nte ..-\meTican Indians, VoL 8, California, R lope VaHey and Vicinity, B. Love and W, F Hdzcr, e&, pp. 535-537. Washington: R DeWiu, eds,, pp. 1-19, Antelope Smithsonian Institution. VaHey Archatcoiogkal Society Occa~iona.l F•. ing, Chester, Charles Smith, and Thomas Klng Paper No. 2, 1974 A.n::hacologi.cal Report Related to the Merriam, C. Hart Interpretation Archaeological Re of MS Unpublished notes on Tcj6n Indians, sources Present at Vasquez Rocks MS on file at the Bancroft Library, County Parle MS on file at the Depart Berkeley fC, H. Merriam Papers, ment of Parks and Recteation, Los Mfac./CaliL/E'39 and G60j, Angeles County, and Northridge Center for Pub.lie Archaeology. 1905 Ke-tan-a .. mu-kum (Ke-L1h'·-na' -mwits) Krneber, Alfred L Vocabulary [from ,Aho l\:firnndo Vadioj, 1906 Yokuts [;:todJ Shoshoncan, 1906. Kroeber Tejon Ca.nyon, Calif .M.S on fik. at the Notebook 65 on file at the Bancroft Li Bancroft Library, Berkeley [C H. brary. Berke.Icy [A L Kroebcr Papers, Merriam Papen., X/23aa/Vl2J], C-B 925]. 1967 Ethnog:taphic Noles on Catlfomi;J Indian 1912 Dleguefio (andj Shoshonean (Kitanem Tribes HI: Elh.no\ogical Notes on uk). Kroeber Notebook 104 on file at Central California Indi'an Tribes, R. E th~ Bancroft Librarj, Berkeley [A L Heizer, ed. Berkeley: University of Kroeber Papers, C-B 925]. CalifomiaArcbaeo!ogical Survey Reports 1915 A New Shoshonean Tribe in Californfa No. 68(3). Amc.rican Anthropologist 17:773· 775, 196S Village Names in Twelve California 1925 Handbook of the Indians of California, Missi·;:m Records. Berkelev: U niversitv of Washington: Bureau of Amerkan California Archaeological Survey Rept)rts Ethnology Bulletin No. 7K No, 74. 214 JOURNAL OF CAUFORNLt\ AND GREAT BASIN ANTHROPOLOGY l\liUikrn, Randy Priestly, Herbert L l':l87 Ethnohhtory of the RumH:n, Papers in 19j7 A Historical, Political, and Natural Des~ Northern cjlJfornia Anthropology No, 2, criplion of California, by Pedro Fag.es, Berkeley: Northern California Anthrn Soldier of Spain, Berkdcy: lJ niversity polngk