Chapter Heading
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
TRAILS, TRIBELETS, AND TERRITORIES: THE ETHNOGRAPHIC, PREHISTORIC, ARCHAEOLOGICAL, AND MANAGEMENT CONTEXTS OF THE INDIAN VALLEY/ WALKER RIDGE RECREATION AREA by Evan B. Elliott A thesis submitted to Sonoma State University Rohnert Park, California, in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of MASTERS OF ARTS in Cultural Resources Management 1 -/tdMh,fv~~ i -- ahrill .< Adrian Praetzellis, Ph.D. ~- Alexis Boutin, Ph.D. 4h4LChristopher Lloyd, M.A. Date i Copyright 2011 Evan B. Elliott ii AUTHORIZATION FOR REPRODUCTION OF MASTER'S THESIS I grant permission for the reproduction of this thesis in its entirety, without further authorization from me, on the condition that the person or agency requesting reproduction absorbs the cost and provides full and proper acknowledgement of authorship. Date: 11/z3/zoi1. J Signature 592 The Aiameda Street Address Berkeley. CA, 94 707 City, State, Zip iii TRAILS, TRIBELETS, AND TERRITORIES: THE ETHNOGRAPHIC, PREHISTORIC, ARCHAEOLOGICAL, AND MANAGEMENT CONTEXTS OF THE INDIAN VALLEY/ WALKER RIDGE RECREATION AREA Thesis by Evan B. Elliott ABSTRACT Purpose: This thesis synthesizes extant information relating to the prehistory of the upper Cache Creek watershed that helps to contextualize prehistoric cultural resources in the Bureau of Land Management Indian Valley/ Walker Ridge Recreation Area (IV/WRRA), Lake and Colusa Counties, California. The purpose is to create an inventory document that provides cultural resource management practitioners and land managers with an informed basis for understanding the study area in terms of the cultural resources, their environment, land use in the past, and the need for further work. Methods: Archival, literature, and geographical information systems research was conducted to: (1) integrate ethnographies of the Hill Patwin to provide context for interpretation of prehistoric cultural resources; (2) synthesize the regional prehistories of the southern North Coast Ranges and the Sacramento Valley; (3) determine the location and the scope of previous archaeological surveys and archaeological sites within the IV/WRRA and vicinity; and (4) investigate management obligations and create recommendations for the management of cultural resources within the IV/WRRA. Findings: The IV/WRRA and surrounding area was not simply a backwater located between two more populated and culturally elaborate regions. It had a large native population with multiple sociopolitical groups and contained a portion of the extensive exchange network that connected the Pacific coast, the Clear Lake basin, the Central Valley, and the Sierra Nevada. This makes it an excellent locale for the study of cultural transmission between these regions. iv Conclusions: The upper Cache Creek watershed was a locus for cultural exchange between the Clear Lake basin and the Central Valley, and between the Pomo peoples and the River Patwin. The prehistoric inhabitants, the Hill Patwin, were tied culturally and socially to both groups and culture regions. Greater inclusion of the Hill Patwin into the North Coast Ranges cultural region and viewing them as the locus for the movement and transmission of cultural practices and elements between these two regions provides a better basis of analysis of the late prehistoric era of the area. Social boundary studies and material culture studies are two avenues of research that can greatly contribute to the understanding of the social dynamics of the region. Many aspects of material culture can be examined to look at the similarities and differences between these different groups and the ways that these characteristics may have been passed through this region. Chair:~ Signature MA Program: Cultural Resources Management Sonoma State University V This work is dedicated to my father, Lloyd, who not only took me to my first archaeological sites, but also made it possible for me to see so many more. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS No work such as this is completed in a vacuum. Over the course of completing this thesis I have found myself standing on the shoulders of giants. Some of these are giants in our field; the great archaeologists, anthropologists, and linguists whose work made this thesis possible. Others are giants in my life, who helped carry me through difficult times and whose help was invaluable in the process of writing this thesis. I simply cannot thank any of these giants enough. I would like to extend special thanks to my thesis chair, Adrian Praeztellis, for all the help he gave and all the work he did and all the encouragement along the this journey. Above that, I want to thank him for teaching me that simple language is the best language and I want to apologize for not always learning that lesson. I owe so many thanks to my committee members, Alexis Boutin and Christopher Lloyd. Thank you for challenging me and pushing my research and writing in ways that I had not thought of. Thanks to the archaeologists of the Anthropological Studies Center who helped during the entire process. Michael Newland was crucial at every step of the way, suggesting sources, providing layouts, helping me formulate my ideas, and editing and re-editing. Kate Erickson provided constant support, advice, and expertise. This would not have been possible without the support and encouragement of Riva Elliott. Thank you for pushing me when I was stuck and helping maintain momentum when I was moving. Thank you to Jessica Tudor for being the sounding board for all my ideas during those thousands of hours we spent together on the road commuting. I appreciate you so much for driving and talking about everything. I could not have done this without you. Thank you for all the support, and all the meals and favors you gave me. I hope to return them when you are in the same position. Many thanks go to my cohort and fellow graduate students: Alden Neel, Jessica Tudor, Jules Evans-White, Pat Paramoure, and Stacey Zolnoski, as well as Angela Locke, Charlie Mikulik, and Ginny Hagensaiker. All the days and all the beers in the Pub helped me stay sane. Thank you for walking this path with me. Finally, I would like to thank the Bureau of Land Management Ukiah Field Office for generously funding this project and making it possible. vi CONTENTS SECTIONS Abstract ....................................................................................................................................... iv Acknowledgements ................................................................................................................... vi Contents ..................................................................................................................................... vii Sections ................................................................................................................................ vii Figures ................................................................................................................................... ix I. Introduction and Project Background ................................................................................... 1 Introduction ........................................................................................................................... 1 Study Area Location and Description ................................................................................ 3 Geology .................................................................................................................................. 9 Environment ........................................................................................................................ 11 II. Ethnographic context ........................................................................................................... 15 Introduction ......................................................................................................................... 15 Social Organization ............................................................................................................ 17 Political Structure ......................................................................................................... 17 Family Structure ........................................................................................................... 20 Language ............................................................................................................................. 22 External Relations ............................................................................................................... 23 Buildings and Structures ................................................................................................... 24 Subsistence .......................................................................................................................... 29 Material Culture.................................................................................................................. 31 Burial .................................................................................................................................... 34 III. Prehistoric Context .............................................................................................................. 35 Introduction ......................................................................................................................... 35 Cultural Chronologies ........................................................................................................ 36 History of California Archaeological Taxonomies ..................................................