Master Cultural Resources Treatment Plan Santa Clara University 2020 Plan Albion Environmental, Inc

Home , Alum Rock Park, Calabrian black squirrel, Heyday Books, Hospital Creek, Leavey Center, Lithocarpus

DAVIS J. POWERS & ASSOCIATES, INC. MASTER CULTURAL RESOURCES TREATMENT PLAN FOR THE SANTA CLARA UNIVERSITY 2020 PLAN

DRAFT — CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION REDACTED

SANTA CLARA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA

JULY 2015

ALBION ENVIRONMENTAL, INC. DAVIS J. POWERS & ASSOCIATES, INC. MASTER CULTURAL RESOURCES TREATMENT PLAN FOR THE SANTA CLARA UNIVERSITY 2020 PLAN

DRAFT — CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION REDACTED

SANTA CLARA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA

JULY 2015

PREPARED FOR:

SHANNON GEORGE DAVID J. POWERS & ASSOCIATES, INC. 1871 THE ALAMEDA, SUITE 200 SAN JOSE, CALIFORNIA 95126

PREPARED BY:

SARAH PEELO, PH.D THOMAS GARLINGHOUSE, PH.D. STELLA D’ORO, M.A CLINTON BLOUNT, M.A. JOHN ELLISON, B.A.

ALBION ENVIRONMENTAL, INC. 1414 SOQUEL AVENUE, SUITE 205 SANTA CRUZ, CALIFORNIA 95062

AND

LORIE GARCIA BEYOND BUILDINGS P.O. BOX 121 SANTA CLARA, CALIFORNIA 95052

J2015-011.01

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Santa Clara University (SCU) is proposing its 2020 Plan for the enhancement of the University’s education programs and student support. Santa Clara 2020 is an integrated strategic five-year development plan that incorporates overall University goals in education with an Enrollment Plan and Facilities Master Plan. Santa Clara University is planning to create districts of like disciplines on campus, thus enhancing the opportunities for students and staff to work across closely allied fields. The University is also continuing its program of modernizing or replacing facilities.

A significant part of Santa Clara 2020 is the University’s five-year program of capital improvement projects. The major capital projects comprise the Unified Facility for the School of Law, the STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics) Center, and two new residence halls. Other projects include replacement of the Cowell Center; additions to the Pat Malley Fitness Center, Benson Center, and Dunne Hall; and demolition of Kennedy Commons and the Daly Science Center.

Planning, permitting, and construction of these projects is phased over the next five years, with construction of two major projects set for mid-2016, and the last project completed by the end of 2019. The implementation of the Santa Clara 2020 Plan and capital improvements requires an amendment to the University’s Master Use Permit, first granted by the City of Santa Clara in 1997. As part of the application for the amendment and in support of the Environmental Impact Report for the amended Master Use Permit, Albion Environmental, Inc., in cooperation with David J. Powers and Associates, has prepared the present Master Cultural Resources Treatment Plan.

The SCU campus contains some of the most significant archaeological deposits in California. Investigations on campus over the past 40 years have revealed important finds dating from the pre- Colonial (often called prehistoric), Spanish Colonial, Mexican, and Early American periods. Ancestral remains, dating from 1500 to 2000 years ago, have been discovered at many places on the campus. The campus holds the sites of the third, fourth, and fifth locations of Mission Santa Clara de Asís along with the large Indian village or Rancheria that formed around the Mission. Santa Clara is one of California’s earliest post-Colonial towns and archaeological resources related to Mexican and Early American residence, commerce, and industry are located at many places on campus. The number, distribution, and significance of cultural resources require the University to anticipate and plan for discoveries at virtually every development project that includes ground disturbance.

The Master Cultural Resources Treatment Plan contains: 1) a review of existing conditions on campus, including a discussion of known and anticipated resources; 2) contextual information on the pre-Colonial, Mission, Mexican, and American periods, as represented on campus; 3) resource sensitivities for each of the major and secondary capital projects; 4) general protocols for the treatment of resources, including treatment of human remains and resources of significance to Native Americans; and 5) general protocols for analysis, reporting, and public interpretation.

As each major project or secondary projects with resource sensitivities enters the design phase, the University will prepare a project-specific treatment plan tiered from the Master Cultural Resources Treatment Plan. These specific plans will match project designs to the known resource base. They will also provide detailed, site-specific historical and archaeological data. Predictions of anticipated resources and a project-specific approach to resource preservation detailing the desired outcome, or archaeological mitigation will also be included, if necessary.

Cultural Resources Treatment Plan for the 5-Year Development Plan at Santa Clara University — DRAFT Albion Environmental, Inc. David J. Powers and Associates, Inc. July 2015 1 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

This Master Cultural Resources Treatment Plan is in part based on a number of treatment plans prepared for Santa Clara University beginning with the general treatment plan for the Ten Year Capital improvement project prepared by, Past Forward, Jones & Stokes and, Albion in 2004. Project specific plans prepared by Past Forward and Albion addressed several significant capital project on campus, all of which gathered up baseline information, and designed field techniques and research methodologies that were innovative and have found their way into the present plan. Lorie Garcia of Beyond Buildings provided historical information for many of those plans as well as original material for this plan, without which we could not have prepared the historical sections of the Master Plan.

We are grateful to the University, particularly Linda Hylkema of the University’s Archaeology Lab, for sharing information on past projects and archaeological investigations. These have been crucial in developing the campus wide inventory of projects and features. Chris Shay, Assistant Vice President for University Operations, also provided important clarifications on the projects in the University’s proposed 2020 Master Plan.

We are very pleased that Rosemary Cambra, Alan Leventhal, Ann Marie Sayers, and Irene Zwierlein, representing tribes in the broader Ohlone Native American community, were able to tour the project sites and provide comments and recommendations. We trust the Ohlone community will continue to take an active role in resource management as the projects in the 2020 Plan are realized.

Albion Environmental, Inc.

July 2015

Cultural Resources Treatment Plan for the 5-Year Development Plan at Santa Clara University — DRAFT Albion Environmental, Inc. David J. Powers and Associates, Inc. July 2015 2

Cultural Resources Treatment Plan for the 5-Year Development Plan at Santa Clara University — DRAFT Albion Environmental, Inc. David J. Powers and Associates, Inc. July 2015 3

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Executive Summary ...... 1

Acknowledgements ...... 2

List of Figures ...... 7

List of Tables ...... 8

List of Appendices ...... 9

Introduction ...... 10 Project Descriptions ...... 10 Unified Facility for the School of Law ...... 12 STEM Center Phases 1–3 ...... 12 Residence Halls ...... 13 Replacement of Cowell Center ...... 13 Addition to the Pat Malley Fitness Center ...... 13 Addition to Dunne Hall and Modifications to Kennedy Commons ...... 13 Renovation of and Additions to the Benson Center ...... 13 Demolition of the Daly Science Center ...... 13 Regulatory Background ...... 13 Organization of the Master Cultural Resources Treatment Plan ...... 14

Environmental and Geoarchaeological Context ...... 16 Environmental Context of the Santa Clara Valley ...... 16 Paleoenvironmental Conditions ...... 19 Past Climate ...... 19 Landscape Evolution ...... 20 Geology ...... 21 Soil and Sediment Types...... 22 Bay and Estuary Development ...... 23 River and Flooding History ...... 23 Pluvial Lakes ...... 24 Environmental and Geoarchaeological Research Design ...... 25 Previous Geoarchaeological Investigations ...... 25 Research Theme: Past Vegetation Studies ...... 25 Research Theme: Landscape Formation ...... 26

Pre-colonial and Ethnographic Resources ...... 28 San Francisco Bay Area Prehistory ...... 28 Santa Clara Valley Prehistory ...... 33 Ethnographic Context ...... 36 Ohlone ...... 37 Previous Pre-Colonial Archaeological Investigations on Campus ...... 41 Research Theme: Regional Chronology ...... 46 Research Theme: Prehistoric Human-Land Relationships ...... 47 Research Theme: Sociopolitical Organization ...... 48

Cultural Resources Treatment Plan for the 5-Year Development Plan at Santa Clara University — DRAFT Albion Environmental, Inc. David J. Powers and Associates, Inc. July 2015 4 Research Theme: Prehistoric Demography ...... 49 Research Theme: Settlement/Subsistence Adaptations ...... 50 Research Theme: Lithic Technologies ...... 52 Research Theme: Riverine/Wetlands Archaeology ...... 53 Research Theme: Complex Hunter-Gatherer Economies ...... 54

Mission Period Resources ...... 56 Mission Santa Clara (1777–1836) ...... 56 Early Exploration ...... 56 The Indigenous Population ...... 56 Mission Santa Clara Land Use and Previous Archaeological Studies ...... 62 Research Theme: Understanding the Mission Landscape ...... 82 Research Theme: Environmental Change ...... 85 Research Theme: Missionization and Identity ...... 88 Research Theme: Exploring Relationships Between Past and Present ...... 93

Late Mexican Period and American Period Resources ...... 95 Mexican Period Residence (1821–1848) ...... 95 Euroamerican Residence (1841–Present) ...... 99 A New American Immigration ...... 107 Gold Rush Immigration and Land Disputes...... 109 Incorporation ...... 110 The German Immigrants ...... 112 Chinese Immigrants ...... 117 Late American Period Immigration ...... 120 American Period Industry (1848–Present) ...... 121 Eberhard Tannery ...... 121 Enterprise Laundry (Sainte Claire Laundry) ...... 129 Johnson and Clayton Steam Flourmill ...... 132 Pacific Manufacturing Company ...... 132 The Expansion of the Fruit Industry ...... 135 Transportation ...... 136 Santa Clara (College) University (1851–Present) ...... 138 Late Mexican Period and American Period Land Use and Previous Archaeological Studies ...... 152 Late Mexican Period ...... 152 American Period Residential ...... 155 American Period Industry ...... 158 American Period Transportation ...... 158 Santa Clara College ...... 159 Research Theme: Late Mexican–Early American Residential Patterns ...... 160 Research Theme: Victorian Period Land Use and Consumer Behaviors ...... 161 Research Theme: Defining Social Groups ...... 163 Research Theme: Industrialization, Technology, and Labor...... 166 Research Note: Analyzing Household Composition ...... 167

Master Mitigation Plan ...... 169 Phase I: Resource Identification ...... 169 Mechanical Area Exposure ...... 169 Resource Documentation ...... 169 Additional Archival Research ...... 171 Phase II: Evaluation of Significance ...... 171

Cultural Resources Treatment Plan for the 5-Year Development Plan at Santa Clara University — DRAFT Albion Environmental, Inc. David J. Powers and Associates, Inc. July 2015 5 Evaluation of Significance for Historic-Era Resources ...... 171 Evaluation of Significance for Prehistoric Resources ...... 171 Determining Adverse Changes ...... 173 Phase III: Data Recovery...... 173 Resource Preservation ...... 173 Data Recovery of Significant Resources when Impacts are Unavoidable ...... 174 Predicted Pre-Colonial Archaeological Property Types ...... 175 Data Recovery for Historic Era Resources ...... 178 Screening Techniques ...... 180 General Catalog Database ...... 180 Additional Archival Research ...... 181 Laboratory Studies ...... 181 Public Interpretation ...... 185 Native American Consultation ...... 186 Muwekma Ohlone Indian Tribe of the San Francisco Bay Area ...... 187 Indian Canyon Mutsun Band of Costanoan ...... 188 Amah Mutsun Tribal Band of Mission San Juan Bautista ...... 188 Discovery and Treatment of Human Remains ...... 189 Reporting ...... 189

Policies ...... 191 Crew Safety and Security Standards ...... 191 Qualifications and Investigation Standards ...... 191 Safety ...... 191 Security ...... 191 Discard and Deaccession Policy ...... 192 Curation Policy ...... 192

SANTA CLARA 2020 PLAN PROJECTS ...... 193 Unified Facility for the School of Law ...... 194 STEM Center Phases 1–3 ...... 197 Residence Halls ...... 200 Replacement of Cowell Center ...... 202 Additions to the Pat Malley Fitness Center ...... 202 Addition to Dunne Hall and Demolition of Kennedy Commons ...... 205 Renovations and Additions to the Benson Center ...... 205 Demolition of the Daley Science Center ...... 209

References Cited ...... 213

Cultural Resources Treatment Plan for the 5-Year Development Plan at Santa Clara University — DRAFT Albion Environmental, Inc. David J. Powers and Associates, Inc. July 2015 6 LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1. Project location map ...... 11 Figure 2. Missions and linguistic groups represented near Mission Santa Clara ...... 38 Figure 3. CA-SCL-755 burials map ...... 42 Figure 4. Number of Costanoan/Ohlone baptisms at Mission Santa Clara, 1777–1849 (Hackel 2006)...... 57 Figure 5. Costanoan/Ohlone tribes, villages, and rancheria districts associated with Mission Santa Clara...... 59 Figure 6. Northern Yokuts territories associated with Mission Santa Clara ...... 60 Figure 7. Number of Northern Yokuts baptisms at Mission Santa Clara, 1777–1847 (Hackel 2006). 61 Figure 8. Cleal Mission features on campus aerial ...... 67 Figure 9. Mission Period burials ...... 69 Figure 10. Photograph taken in 1897 of abandoned buildings of the third site of Mission Santa Clara (Skowronek et al. 2006:146) ...... 71 Figure 11. The Santa Clara Women’s Adobe as it appears today ...... 72 Figure 12. Aerial photo of Feature 135, discovered in 2013, Adobe Structure within the Indian Rancheria...... 73 Figure 13. Artifacts recovered from Feature 135 in 2013: obsidian projectile point, bone artifact, and bone awl...... 73 Figure 14. Feature 57, Native-style house floor, ca. AD 1800, discovered in 2004...... 74 Figure 15. Refuse Pit Form I (Feature 73, discovered in 2012)...... 77 Figure 16. Refuse Pit Form II (Feature 111, discovered in 2012)...... 77 Figure 17. Refuse Pit Form III and “earth bowl” commonly associated with this pit form (Feature 150 and 157, discovered in 2013)...... 78 Figure 18. Refuse Pit Form IV (Feature 99, discovered in 2012)...... 78 Figure 19. Refuse Pit Form V (Feature 133, discovered in 2012)...... 79 Figure 20. Refuse Pit Form VI (Feature 75, discovered in 2012)...... 79 Figure 21. Refuse Pit Form VII (Feature 202, discovered in 2013)...... 80 Figure 22. Refuse Pit Form VIII (Feature 91, discovered in 2012)...... 81 Figure 23. Refuse Pit Form IX (Feature 183, discovered in 2013)...... 81 Figure 24. Hendry and Bowman 1940 map ...... 98 Figure 25. Plat map of 1847 of the Town of Santa Clara by William Campbell ...... 106 Figure 26. J. J. Bowen survey of 1866 ...... 111 Figure 27. Kuchel & Dresel 1856 lithograph of the Town of Santa Clara ...... 113 Figure 28. Charles Otter early 1850s ...... 114 Figure 29. Wedding photograph of 1857 of Caroline Durmeyer and Frederick Christian Franck ..... 116 Figure 30. Jacob Eberhard, mid-late 1870s ...... 118 Figure 31. Location of Eberhard Tannery on an aerial ...... 122 Figure 32. Eberhard Tannery workers on Grant Street, Santa Clara, ca. 1890. Photo courtesy of Santa Clara City Library...... 123 Figure 33. Sanborn Insurance map of Eberhard Tannery of 1887 ...... 124 Figure 34. Sanborn Insurance map of Eberhard Tannery of 1891 ...... 125 Figure 35. Sanborn Insurance Map of Eberhard Tannery of 1915 ...... 126 Figure 36. Color postcard, Eberhard Tannery at the turn of the 20th century ...... 127 Figure 37. Photo showing the extent of the buildings remaining in 1940 ...... 128 Figure 38. Sanborn Insurance map of 1891 for the Law School site showing the distillery that later became the laundry ...... 130

Cultural Resources Treatment Plan for the 5-Year Development Plan at Santa Clara University — DRAFT Albion Environmental, Inc. David J. Powers and Associates, Inc. July 2015 7 Figure 39. Enterprise Laundry Price List, ca. 1910. Photo courtesy of San Jose Public Library, California Room...... 131 Figure 40. Charles Clayton, 1865–1880 (Library of Congress Prints and Photographs Division). ... 132 Figure 41. Sanborn showing the location of the White Rose Mill on Grant Street in 1887 ...... 133 Figure 42. Pacific Manufacturing Plant, Santa Clara, California, 1898...... 134 Figure 43. Photograph of a San Jose and Santa Clara Railroad Company car run by an underground electrical system in 1888 ...... 137 Figure 44. Photograph of two trolleys passing each other on Franklin Street circa 1920s ...... 139 Figure 45. Photograph of the last trolley to run in Santa Clara on the final day of service, Franklin Street, April 10, 1936 ...... 140 Figure 46. Early classroom and debating hall in the re-purposed California Hotel ...... 141 Figure 47. 1887 Sanborn depicting core campus ...... 144 Figure 48. Bird’s eye view of the College of Santa Clara, 1901, artist unknownFigure 49. Painting of the College of Santa Clara, 1903, artist unknown ...... 145 Figure 50. Photograph of the Father’s Gardens taken from the Science Building, 1905, photographer unknown ...... 148 Figure 51. 1930 aerial ...... 149 Figure 52. Charred chapel entrance to the Mission Santa Clara after the fire of 1926 ...... 150 Figure 53. Construction of the new Mission Santa Clara Church, 1927 ...... 151 Figure 54. Fourth Mission (left) and Santa Clara College (center), n.d...... 153 Figure 55. Largely intact remains of the basement floor of the Eberhard house identified during mitigation for the Graham Residential Complex (discovered in 2011)...... 155 Figure 56. Basement Fill (Feature 186; discovered in 2013)...... 155 Figure 57. Feature 14 from Jesuit Block 402 (discovered in 2004)...... 156 Figure 58. Feature 102 from Leavey Block 437 (discovered in 2007)...... 157 Figure 59. Photograph of Feature 177 (discovered in 2013)...... 159 Figure 60. Treatment of cultural resources under CEQA ...... 170 Figure 61. Proposed School of Law with burials ...... 195 Figure 62. Proposed School of Law with archaeological features ...... 196 Figure 63. Proposed STEM Complex with features ...... 198 Figure 64. Proposed STEM Complex with burials ...... 199 Figure 65. Proposed Residence Hall with features ...... 201 Figure 66. Proposed Cowell Center with features ...... 203 Figure 67. Proposed Pat Malley Center with features ...... 204 Figure 68. Proposed demolition of Kennedy Commons and Dunne Hall additions with features ..... 206 Figure 69. Proposed Benson Center with features ...... 207 Figure 70. Proposed Benson Center with burials ...... 208 Figure 71. Proposed Daly Science demolition with features ...... 210 Figure 72. Proposed Daly Science demolition with burials ...... 211

LIST OF TABLES

Table 1. Geological time scale and significant events...... 17 Table 2. Selected major prehistoric archaeological investigations in the San Francisco Bay area...... 28 Table 3. Mission Period land use chronology...... 63 Table 4. Nine Forms of Mission Period refuse pit forms identified in the Indian Rancheria ...... 76 Table 5. Mexican Period land use chronology ...... 96 Table 6. American Period land use chronology...... 99

Cultural Resources Treatment Plan for the 5-Year Development Plan at Santa Clara University — DRAFT Albion Environmental, Inc. David J. Powers and Associates, Inc. July 2015 8 Table 7. Sample field form for assessing significance of archaeological resources from the Historic Era...... 171 Table 8. Archaeological property types...... 174

LIST OF APPENDICES

Appendix A. Description of Prominent Place Names Recorded in the Baptismal Registries

Appendix B. REDACTED Mission Period Features with Project Areas on Map Grid of Santa Clara University

Appendix C. REDACTED Mexican Period Features with Project Areas on Map Grid of Santa Clara University

Appendix D. REDACTED American Period Features with Project Areas on Map Grid of Santa Clara University

Appendix E. REDACTED Undated Features with Project Areas on Map Grid of Santa Clara University

Cultural Resources Treatment Plan for the 5-Year Development Plan at Santa Clara University — DRAFT Albion Environmental, Inc. David J. Powers and Associates, Inc. July 2015 9 INTRODUCTION

Santa Clara University (SCU) is currently implementing its 2020 Plan for the enhancement of the University’s education programs and student support. Santa Clara 2020 is an integrated strategic five- year plan that incorporates overall University goals in education with an Enrollment Plan and Facilities Master Plan. Santa Clara University is planning to create districts of like disciplines on campus, thus enhancing the opportunities for students to work across closely allied disciplines. The University is also continuing its program of modernizing or replacing facilities. A significant part of Santa Clara 2020 Plan is the University’s five-year program of capital improvement projects. The capital projects include construction of new buildings, replacement of existing buildings, additions to existing buildings, and demolition of obsolete buildings to make room for future development. Planning, permitting, and construction of these projects is phased over the next five years, with construction of two major projects set for mid-2016, and the last project completed by the end of 2019. The implementation of the Santa Clara 2020 Plan and the capital improvements requires an amendment to the University’s Master Use Permit, first granted by the City of Santa Clara in 1997.

The SCU campus contains some of the most significant archaeological deposits in California. Investigations on campus over the past 40 years have revealed important finds dating from the precolonial (often called prehistoric), Spanish Colonial, Mexican, Early American, and Late American periods. Ancestral remains dating from 1500 to 2000 years ago have been discovered at many places on the campus. The campus holds the sites of the third, fourth, and fifth locations of Mission Santa Clara de Asís along with the large Indian village or Rancheria that formed around the Mission. Santa Clara is one of California’s earliest post-Colonial towns, and archaeological resources related to Mexican and Early American residence, commerce, and industry are located at many places on campus.

The number, distribution, and significance of cultural resources on campus require the University to anticipate and plan for discoveries at virtually every development project that includes ground disturbance. For major projects, or projects that have a high likelihood of encountering resources, the University will prepare a treatment plan, which specifies protocols and guidelines for evaluation, preservation, archaeological treatment, and interpretation. Project specific treatment plans are based on or “tiered” from a general treatment plan that takes a campus-wide programmatic approach to resource planning. The present plan is just such a general plan, which will be used to guide not only the capital projects identified in the five-year plan, but also other campus projects that the University will likely propose over the next several years.

Project Descriptions

Santa Clara University’s five-year development plan is divided into the following major and secondary projects, all of which are still in the conceptual stage (Figure 1).

Cultural Resources Treatment Plan for the 5-Year Development Plan at Santa Clara University — DRAFT Albion Environmental, Inc. David J. Powers and Associates, Inc. July 2015 10 CALIFORNIA

Sherman Street

The Alameda A

Benton Street El Camino Real H

Franklin Street

Palm Drive

Alviso Street B Lafayette Street

G D

Market Street C

Legend

Project area

A. Unified Facility for the School of Law B. STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics) Center C. Two Residence Halls D. Replacement of Cowell Center E. Additions to Pat Malley Fitness Center F. Additions to Dunne Residence Hall and modifications to Kennedy Commons G. Renovations and additions to the Benson Center Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, H. Demolition of the Daly Science CNES/Airbus DS, USDA, USGS, AEX, Getmapping, Aerogrid, IGN, IGP, swisstopo, and the GIS User Community

0 100 200 300 400 Meters Figure 1. Project location map. 0 250 500 750 1,000 ± Feet Albion Environmental, Inc. File name: Figure_1.ai, J2015-011.01, Stella D’Oro, 01July2015 File name: Figure_1.ai, J2015-011.01, Major Projects:

 Unified Facility for the School of Law

 STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics) Center

 Two Residence Halls

Major and Secondary Projects:

 Replacement of Cowell Center

 Additions to the Pat Malley Center

Secondary Projects:

 Addition to Dunne Residence Hall

 Modifications to Kennedy Commons

 Renovations and Additions to the Benson Center

 Demolition of the Daly Science Center

Unified Facility for the School of Law

The new law school facility is proposed to be built on the parcel at the corner of Sherman Street and Franklin St., in the northern sector of campus. The building, arranged in one and four story sections will provide approximately 95,000 square feet of space for classrooms, and faculty and staff offices. As presently conceived, the building will be within the perimeter of the current parking lot (known as the Murguia Lot). The law school facility will be east of and directly adjacent to the Leavey School of Business (Lucas Hall, Building 802), such that the business and law school facilities will form the core of the University’s emerging “professional district.” Construction is expected to start in the summer of 2016.

STEM Center Phases 1–3

Development of the STEM Center will occur in three phases over a five-year period. The four buildings that comprise the STEM Center will be located in the central portion of campus and will form the STEM district.

Phase 1 of the project requires the demolition of Bannan Engineering (Building 403) and Murphy Hall (Building 402). The building will be replaced by two contiguous buildings (one three-story and one four-story structure) providing a total of approximately 159,000 square feet of space. STEM Phase 1 is projected to occur between mid-2016 and mid-2017.

Phase 2 will begin with the demolition of the Heafey Law Library (Building 202). The new building, sited slightly west of the Phase 1 and Phase 3 buildings will be a three-story structure providing roughly 67,200 square feet of space. Phase 2 will occur between late-2017 and late-2018.

Cultural Resources Treatment Plan for the 5-Year Development Plan at Santa Clara University — DRAFT Albion Environmental, Inc. David J. Powers and Associates, Inc. July 2015 12 Phase 3 will start with the demolition of Bannan Engineering (Building 404) and Bannan Hall (Building 405). The replacement building will be a combined one and three story structure providing approximately 90,000 square feet of space. Phase 3 will be constructed between the end of 2018 and the end of 2019.

Residence Halls

Two residence halls will be constructed in the southern portion of the campus. The first, a 186-bed facility, will be a four-story addition to the existing Sobrato Hall, located along Market Street. The second, a 4514-bed, four-story facility will be located along Market Street, to the south of Sobrato Hall. Both halls will be in proximity to the University’s Undergraduate Neighborhood district. The 186-bed facility will require demolition of the Fine Arts Building and will be constructed between mid-2016 and mid-2017. The 414-bed residence hall will be built in mid-2018 and 2019.

Replacement of Cowell Center

The existing Cowell Center in the southern-central portion of campus will be demolished and replaced with a 38,000 square foot, two-story, partial subgrade student and athlete support facility. Construction of this building is proposed between 2018 and 2020.

Addition to the Pat Malley Fitness Center

The Pat Malley Fitness Center, located in the south-central portion of campus will be expanded to the north with a 26,000 square foot, two-story addition. Construction is proposed for the period between 2017 and 2019.

Addition to Dunne Hall and Modifications to Kennedy Commons

Dunn Hall is a five-story, L-shaped residence hall on the west side of the campus. The University will add a 5,000 square foot entrance and elevator tower to the interior corner of the building. The elevator will provide “American with Disabilities Act” ADA access to the building. Construction is expected to commence in 2016. The project includes demolition of the Kennedy Commons building located to the southeast of Dunne Hall.

Renovation of and Additions to the Benson Center

The Benson Center in the southern portion of the core historic campus, serves as a Student Union with related student support services. Additions to the west, north, and east of the building will add 49,000 square feet to the facility. These additions are projected to occur in the period between 2016 and 2019.

Demolition of the Daly Science Center

The Daly Science Center, comprising the chemistry, physics, and biology lecture halls and laboratories (Buildings 207, 210, 211) will be demolished in mid-2019. The buildings will not be replaced; however, the site will be held open for possible future development. Each of the buildings has subgrade facilities.

Regulatory Background

This Cultural Resources Treatment Plan has been prepared in support of the City of Santa Clara’s environmental review of the University’s request for an amendment to its 1997 Master Use Permit.

Cultural Resources Treatment Plan for the 5-Year Development Plan at Santa Clara University — DRAFT Albion Environmental, Inc. David J. Powers and Associates, Inc. July 2015 13 Elements of the Treatment Plan will be drawn into the Draft Environmental Impact Report (José P. Grandadeiro) and will serve in place of an Initial Study. The decision to prepare a Treatment Plan at this stage of planning was based on the assumption that significant resources will be found at several of the planned project sites; preparing to manage project impacts to those resources should therefore begin at the earliest possible time. In this way, information about the project areas, although preliminary, will be available during environmental review.

Mission Santa Clara is considered a Historical Resource under the California Environmental Quality Act. All archaeological materials associated with the Mission are therefore part of the environment potentially affected by the proposed projects. This treatment plan is designed to begin the process of developing mitigation measures that will reduce the impact of proposed projects on the historical resources to less than significant. In its capacity as a Certified Local Government (CLG) the City of Santa Clara will review and ultimately implement the recommendations of this, and subsequent project-specific treatment plans, so that impacts are reduced to less than significant. In its role as project proponent, the University will be responsible for implementing the treatment plan and demonstrating to the City that the goal of reducing impacts to less than significant has been met.

The City and the University developed a two-tiered treatment planning process with the 2003 amendment to the Master Use Permit. In this approach, the University sponsors a general or programmatic treatment plan (the present plan) that provides campus-wide contexts for the periods represented by archaeological materials, addresses broadly the sensitivities of the project sites, and defines the range of treatment options. The general treatment plan is necessarily broad because the project design has not been finalized, or in many cases, has not moved beyond the conceptual stage. As projects reach the preliminary design phase, the University sponsors a project-specific treatment plan, tiered from the general plan, that provides refined local contexts, addresses the resource potential of the site, and identifies specific treatment options, including field methods, analysis strategies, and reporting and interpretation protocols. The University and the City will likely use the present general treatment plan as the platform from which to tier specific treatment plans for projects not yet proposed, as was the case for the general treatment plan prepared for the 2003 Master Use Permit Amendment (Allen et al. 2004).

Organization of the Master Cultural Resources Treatment Plan

This Master Cultural Resources Treatment Plan is organized into eight sections. After the introduction, discussion focuses on the environmental and geoarchaeological context of the study area in the Santa Clara Valley. This section investigates such topics as past climate, landscape changes, and geology, among others, and develops a number of themes and questions that guide research in this area. Following this, discussion commences on the pre-colonial and ethnographic resources of the region. This situates the prehistory of the Santa Clara Valley in the larger context of Bay Area prehistory, and summarizes the indigenous societies encountered at the time of the initial Spanish colonialization. This section also includes a pre-colonial and ethnographic research design, which develops a number of themes and questions guiding research in Santa Clara. This section covers a number of different topics significant to prehistoric archaeologists working in the region, including chronology, demography, lithic technologies, and subsistence/settlement organization, among other topics.

Historic resources are addressed in two sections, beginning with a discussion of the Mission Period, a significant time in Santa Clara history. It examines the establishment of the five Santa Clara Missions, their subsequent abandonment, general Mission life, and the fate of the indigenous inhabitants that lived and worked at the Mission. Like the prehistoric section, a number of research themes and questions are derived and presented based on this larger discussion. These topics include the Mission

Cultural Resources Treatment Plan for the 5-Year Development Plan at Santa Clara University — DRAFT Albion Environmental, Inc. David J. Powers and Associates, Inc. July 2015 14 landscape, environmental change, issues of identity, and relationships between the past and present. The next section focuses on the late Mexican and American periods, with subsequent investigation of pertinent research themes and questions.

A master mitigation plan follows the historic sections. The master mitigation plan highlights the basic procedures followed in archaeological resource identification, determination of significance, and data recovery procedures. It also includes a brief discussion of typical laboratory procedures and methods involved in the analysis of prehistoric and historic artifacts and features. This section also includes a discussion of public interpretation, Native American consultation, focusing on the methods involved in the event that human remains are encountered, and reporting. This is followed by a description of standard policies, including crew safety and security measures, discard and deaccession, and curation,

The final section revisits and expands on the eight specific projects (Unified Facility for the School of Law; the STEM [Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics] Center; two new residence halls; Cowell Center; additions to the Pat Malley Fitness Center, Benson Center, and Dunne Hall/demolition of Kennedy Commons; and Daly Science Center) comprising the five-year capital improvement plan. The intent of this section is to provide a general discussion of land-use history, known archaeological resources within and surrounding each specific project, and sensitivity assessments.

This section details the significant environmental and geomorphological changes the San Francisco Bay area, including Santa Clara Valley, has undergone over the last several thousand years. It begins with a discussion of the appearance of the Santa Clara Valley during the Late Prehistoric and Early Colonial Period (the latter half of the 18th century). This is followed by a discussion of the region’s paleoenvironment, with an emphasis on past climate, landscape formation, geology, soil and sediment types, bay and estuary development, river and flooding history, and finally, pluvial lakes. Reconstructions of past environments in central California have relied on a variety of large- and small-scale proxy data, including pollen profiles, paleosediment studies, isotopic studies, and various other measures. The following discussion of the geomorphology and paleoenvironment of the region is taken from several sources, including Meyer (2000, 2007), Atwater et al. (1977, 1979), Moratto et al. (1978), Bickel (1978), Adams et al. (1981), Axelrod (1981), Allen et al. (1999:13–28, sections authored by Jack Meyer), Schoenherr (1992), and Grossinger et al. (2006).

Table 1 presents a general overview of the last 10,000 years of environmental conditions in California, highlighting some of the major events that have affected the development of climate and landforms in the San Francisco Bay area. The last 10,000 years fall under the rubric of the Holocene, a geologic designation, which began at the end of the Pleistocene and continues to the present day. The Holocene is especially important because it encompasses the time since the earliest prehistoric people inhabited the region. Following standard procedure, which is replicated here, the Holocene epoch is segregated into three major divisions, an Early, Middle, and Late.

Environmental Context of the Santa Clara Valley

Geomorphologically, Santa Clara Valley is a structural basin within the Coast Ranges Geomorphic Province. It forms a relatively level flood plain at the southern end of San Francisco Bay and is oriented in a roughly northwest-southeast orientation. The valley runs for a length of approximately 100 kilometers (62 miles) from north to south, eventually terminating near the city of Hollister in San Benito County. It is approximately 20 kilometers (15 miles) in width, and encompasses approximately 1,312 square miles. The northern part of the valley, which forms the southern end of San Francisco Bay, is a complex network of marshes, wetlands, sloughs, and creeks, and ranges in elevation to just above mean sea level (msl). The southern part of the valley, by contrast, is generally a broad and level-to-sloping plain, with an elevation of over 200 feet. The valley is drained by the Guadalupe River and a number of streams, creeks, and tributaries (e.g., Coyote, Los Gatos, Stevens, and Alimitos). Dominant landforms include the northwest-trending Diablo Range to the east and the Santa Cruz Mountains to the west. The Diablo Range is part of the Franciscan Complex and was formed during the Upper Jurassic-Cretaceous. The Santa Cruz Mountains are also part of the Franciscan Complex, but contain later Pliocene sedimentary deposits. Between these ranges, the main habitat types are valley oak savanna, grasslands, and riparian corridors. The two former habitat types often form a single habitat, dominated by an overstory of scattered valley oaks (Quercus lobata) and an understory of bunch grasses, spear grass, needle grass, and forbs. Flora dominating riparian corridors includes California bay laurel, willow, sycamore, cottonwood, and a number of smaller hydrophytic plants. The valley is geologically active with three major faults, including San Andreas, Hayward, and Calaveras, running roughly north-to-south.

Cultural Resources Treatment Plan for the 5-Year Development Plan at Santa Clara University — DRAFT Albion Environmental, Inc. David J. Powers and Associates, Inc. July 2015 16 Table 1. Geological time scale and significant events. Time Period Geological Period 12,000 B.P. Terminal Pleistocene General Description: This period follows the end of the Pleistocene and is marked by the transition from glacial to interglacial climates. Events of Significance A cool/moist climate prevails in much of the North American West; Glacio-eustatic sea-level rise begins with the melting of the ice sheets; many areas of coastal California are inundated by rising sea waters; Many pluvial lakes form in low-lying areas in California. 10,000 B.P. Early Holocene General Description: The Holocene epoch begins around 10,000 years ago and is characterized by a milder, warmer climate than previously prevailed. Events of Significance: In contrast to the Pleistocene, the Holocene reflects a general warming trend, although Early Holocene climates were generally cool/moist. Sea water begins to flood the San Francisco Bay, inundating the former inland floodplain; rising waters also form numerous bays and estuaries as coastal canyons flood along the California coast; Pluvial lakes stabilize. 7,500 B.P. Middle Holocene General Description: The Middle Holocene roughly corresponds to a general trend towards climatic warming in western North America. Events of Significance: The “Altithermal,” a period of extreme warm/dry climatic conditions, prevails; this period seems to have peaked between 7,000 and 5,000 years ago; Xeric plant communities expand their range throughout much of California; Sea level rise begins to decelerate dramatically and stabilize between 8,000 and 6,000 B.P.; Many coastal bays, estuaries, and lagoons fill with sediment; Many pluvial lakes begin to dry up and disappear. 4,000 B.P. Late Holocene General Description: The environmental record of the Late Holocene is characterized by a trend towards stability in landforms and amelioration in climate. Events of Significance: Climatic conditions begin to approximate modern conditions; In contrast to the Middle Holocene, Late Holocene climate is cooler and moister; Landforms approximate modern conditions.

The current climate of Santa Clara Valley is classified as Mediterranean, with generally cool, moist winters and warm, dry summers. This pattern is not unique to Santa Clara Valley, but is typical for most parts of California, excluding mountainous and desert regions. In general, mean average summer temperatures range between 70 and 80 degrees, with temperatures reaching the 90s and 100s during the hottest months of July and August. In winter, temperatures can fall to 30 degrees, but generally hover in the 60s and 70s. Frost is infrequent, but does occasionally occur on the valley floor and upland areas. Prevailing winds generally parallel the valley’s orientation, blowing in a northwest- southeast pattern. Most of the annual rain in California falls during the fall and winter, especially from November to April. Average rainfall for the Santa Clara Valley is 18 inches, though this amount can vary radically from year to year, with drought conditions a common pattern characterizing

Cultural Resources Treatment Plan for the 5-Year Development Plan at Santa Clara University — DRAFT Albion Environmental, Inc. David J. Powers and Associates, Inc. July 2015 17 California. The Santa Cruz Mountains, which rise abruptly to the west, generally experience higher amounts of rainfall during the wet months, up to 50 inches annually.

By the late 18th century, the southern Bay area was made up of a mosaic of different ecological communities, including tidal marshlands, uplands, grassland prairie, oak-grassland savanna, and riparian corridors. The first of these, tidal marshlands, were especially prevalent around the margins of the San Francisco Bay. Freshwater from a multitude of rivers, creeks, and streams met with the saltwater of the Bay, creating a vast, brackish tidal marshland, which was a haven for various fish, waterfowl, marine mammals, and invertebrates. Floral communities consisted of dense perennial grasses in the inter-tidal sand and mud flats just above mean high-water level. The most common species included Tule reeds (Schoenoplectus acutus), eelgrass (Zostera marina), saltgrass (Distichlis spicata), pickleweed (Salicornia sarcocornia), and cordgrass (Spartina spp.). The high productivity of the sloughs attracted a diversity of marine and estuarine creatures, including leopard sharks (Triakis semifasciata), bat rays (Myliobatus californica), Pacific herring (Clupea harengus), Pacific sardine (Sardinops sagax), sturgeon (Acipenser spp.), salmon (Oncorhynchus spp.), among numerous other taxa. Shorebirds common to this area included gulls (Larus spp.), rails (Rallidae), egrets (Ardea spp.), herons (Ardea spp.), cormorants (Phalacrocorax spp.), pelicans (Pelecanus spp.), and a host of ducks (Anatidae), geese (Anser, Branta, Chen spp.), and various other waterfowl. This region also attracted mammals, such as sea otters (Enhydra lutris), harbor seals (Phoca vitulina), and elk (Cervus elaphus nannodes), which waded into the shallows to feed on marsh grasses. Invertebrates common to this habitat included California horn snail (Cerithidea californica), bay mussel (Mytilus edulis), oyster (Ostrea lurida), bent-nosed clam (Macoma nasuta), and Pismo clam (Tivela stultorum).

Surrounding the marshes was extensive grassland prairie, which during pre-European times, would have consisted of tall, perennial bunch grasses and forbs. Prairie grasses included oatgrass (Danthonia californica), red fescue (Festuca rubra), Pacific reedgrass (Calamagrostis nutkaensis), tufted hairgrass (Deschampsia cespitosa), soaproot (Chlorogalum pomeridianum), broadiaea, and iris (Iridaceae), among other taxa. Interspersed within this community was a dense scrub community consisting primarily of evergreen shrubs, vines, and forbs. In the margin between the marshes and grassland, willows (Salix spp.) grew in abundance. The area’s native inhabitants periodically burned the grassland prairie to facilitate the growth of new shoots, and hence increase the abundance of browsing animals. Mammals common to this community included Tule elk (Cervus elaphus nannodes), badger (Taxidea taxus), black-tailed jackrabbit (Lepus californicus), pocket gopher (Thomomys bottae), and California vole (Microtus californicus). A number of raptors were found in this habitat, including northern harrier (Circus cyaneus) and Swainson’s hawk (Buteo swainsonii).

Upland habitats include the Santa Cruz Mountains to the west and Diablo Range to the east. The Santa Cruz Mountains separate the valley from the Pacific Ocean to the west and rise to an elevation of approximately 1,154 meters (3,786 feet) at Loma Prieta Peak. Other prominent peaks in the range include Mount Umunhum at 1,063 meters (3,486 feet) and Bielawski at 985 meters (3,231 feet). These mountains form a rain-shadow effect for regions to the east, diverting the moisture of eastward- moving Pacific storms. Consequently, the floral communities, especially those on west-facing slopes, contain mesic-adapted trees, shrubs, and other plants that are able to tolerate cooler and wetter conditions. Coast redwood (Sequoia sempervirens) and Douglas-fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii) dominate the overstory, but coast live oak (Quercus agrifolia), Pacific madrone (Arbutus menziesii), and big leaf maple (Acer macrophyllum) also occur. At lower elevations, chaparral communities are dominant, with manzanita, California scrub oak, and chamise the predominant taxa. The mountains are a region of high biological diversity, and include a host of animals including black-tailed deer (Odocoileus hemionus), raccoon (Procyon lotor), mountain lion (Puma concolor), coyote (Canis latrans), skunk (Mephitis mephitis), and Western gray squirrel (Sciurus griseus). Occasionally, black bears (Ursus americanus) are sighted, though they are typically rare.

Cultural Resources Treatment Plan for the 5-Year Development Plan at Santa Clara University — DRAFT Albion Environmental, Inc. David J. Powers and Associates, Inc. July 2015 18 The Diablo Range extends from the Carquinez Strait in the north to Orchard Peak in the south, near Cholame. The range is mostly rolling grassland, plateaus, and canyons, punctuated by sudden peaks. Most of these range in elevation around 910 meters (3,000 feet), though the highest peak, Mount San Benito, rises to a height of 1,605 meters (5,267 feet). The dominant floral community is California oak woodland, with coast live oak and blue oak (Quercus douglasii) the most prevalent. California buckeye (Aesculus californica), black oak (Quercus kelloggii), and Coulter pine (Pinus coulteri) are also found in the range. Chaparral communities, also prevalent in this range, provide habitat for bobcat (Lynx rufus) and gray fox (Urocyon cinereoargenteus), as well as numerous rodents. Raptors, such as red-tailed hawk (Buteo jamaicensis) and golden eagle (Aquila chrysaetos), are found in the range. Pronghorn antelope (Antilocapra americana) and grizzly bear (Ursus arctos) were once abundant in this range, along with Tule elk, but have now been extirpated from the region.

Much of the Santa Clara Valley, especially the relatively flat, level ground, is composed of oak- grassland savanna. This community, as its name implies, contains groves of widely spaced, tall valley oak (Quercus lobata), which is the largest oak tree in California. This species can attain heights of 30 meters or more. Its bark is hard and thick and its leaves exhibit a characteristic lobed-shape. Other oak species include blue oak and coast live oak. The earliest Spanish explorers called the Santa Clara Valley Llano de los Robles, or “valley of the oaks” on account of the numerous communities of this tree. The understory is composed of bunch grasses, forbs, and shrubs. Oaks provide food, nesting habitat, and/or shelter for a variety of birds, including acorn woodpecker (Melanerpes formicivorus), western scrub jay (Aphelocoma californica), and yellow-billed magpie (Pica nuttalli), among other taxa. Deer, bobcats, coyotes, and rabbits (both cottontail rabbit (Sylvilagus nuttallii) and brush rabbit (Sylvilagus bachmanii]) are plentiful. Like the grassland prairie, the region’s native inhabitants periodically burned this habitat in order to facilitate the growth of new grasses and shrubs.

A number of riparian corridors, sometimes called riparian woodlands, are found throughout the Santa Clara Valley. These are especially productive habitats (Schoenherr 1992:153), and home to a wide variety of plants and animals. Two taxa of plants especially common to riparian woodlands in California are willows and poplars (Populus spp.). There are two main willow species in Santa Clara lowland habitats; these are yellow willow (Salix lasiandra) and arroyo willow (Salix lasiolepis). The Fremont cottonwood (Populus fremontii) also commonly occurs in this habitat. Mammals frequently encountered in riparian settings are the same that typically inhabit the oak woodland savanna, such as deer, rabbits, hares, coyotes, and rodents; however, a number of additional creatures that were important resources for aboriginal Californians are found in riparian settings. These include Pacific pond turtles (Clemmys marmorata), brackish water crabs (Rhithropanopeus harrisi), fresh water clams and mussels (Anodonta spp. and Margaritifera margaritifera), and, during the spawning season, numerous anadromous fishes, such as steelhead (Oncorhynchos mykiss). However, birds are the most conspicuous animals of riparian woodlands (Schoenherr 1992:163), and include a whole host of different species, including flycatchers, vireos, goldfinches, warblers, and sparrows, among numerous others.

Paleoenvironmental Conditions

Past Climate

A number of researchers have compiled a history of climate change in western North America during post-Pleistocene times (e.g., Antevs 1948, 1952; Adam 1967; Hall 1983; Mehringer 1986; Skinner et al. 1990; Stine 1995; and others). While researchers are not in complete agreement about the causes, timing, duration, and intensity of many of these changes, they generally agree that post-Pleistocene times have been characterized by an overall dramatic period of warming following the last glaciation. This warming period, however, varied in intensity and was punctuated by both cooler and hotter

Cultural Resources Treatment Plan for the 5-Year Development Plan at Santa Clara University — DRAFT Albion Environmental, Inc. David J. Powers and Associates, Inc. July 2015 19 intervals (LaMarche 1973, 1974; Stine 1994). It is generally agreed that immediate post-glacial times were characterized by a cool, dry climate. This was a time when alpine glaciers retreated, lakes shrank, and floral and faunal communities shifted in elevation. Early Holocene climates (ca. 10,500– 7,500 B.P.) continued this trend, though the climate is considered to have been slightly moister than during the preceding era. The Middle Holocene (ca. 7,500–4,500 B.P.), by contrast, exhibited a pronounced warming trend, culminating in what has been called the mid-Holocene climatic optimum (also called the Altithermal or Hypsithermal), which was a period of elevated temperatures. It was during this time that many interior basin lakes and pluvial lakes either dried up or shrank. The Late Holocene (ca. 4,500–200 B.P.) witnessed several periods of alternating cold and warm periods. For example, it is generally thought that a warm/dry climate regime prevailed until about 3400 B.P. After this time, a significant shift toward a cool/moist climate occurred, which led to a brief glacial advance, sometimes referred to as the Recess Peak glacial advance (Hall 1983). Several alternating warm/cool periods followed up to the present time. One of the more dramatic and well-studied of these warm periods is the so-called “Medieval Climatic Anomaly” (MCA), which is posited to have occurred from approximately A.D. 800 to A.D. 1350 (Cook et al. 2004; Graumlich 1993; Stine 1994). This was a time characterized by warm temperatures and prolonged drought. Some archaeologists (e.g., Raab and Larson 1997; Jones et al. 1999) have proposed that significant changes among native populations in southern California especially, such as increased warfare, settlement disruption, malnutrition, and resource intensification, occurred during this time as a result of these climatic fluctuations.1

In coastal and immediately adjacent areas of Central California, pollen analyses indicate that the severity of Holocene environmental fluctuations may not have been as severe as some researchers (e.g., Antevs 1958, 1952) have suggested. As Johnson (1977) and Axelrod (1981:851) have pointed out, the tempering effect of ocean waters most likely ameliorated the severity of these fluctuations. A pollen record taken from the Santa Cruz Mountains, for example, indicates the presence of a pine- dominated coniferous forest during the terminal Pleistocene (Adams et al. 1981). During this time, mean annual temperatures in central California were between 2º C and 3º C cooler than those of today. As the glacial epoch ended, drier climates intruded, allowing more xeric vegetation to enter the San Francisco Bay area (Axelrod 1981). Pine decreased and redwood forests increased, persisting throughout the so-called Altithermal (Adams et al. 1981). Other pollen data reported by West (1988) from the Elkhorn Slough indicate that, in general, wholesale vegetation replacements did not occur during the last 6,500 years on the Central Coast.

Landscape Evolution

The creation of the Santa Clara Valley was a relatively late development in geologic time. It was created during the latter part of the Cenozoic era (65 mya to the present) as the result of mountain formation due to the Pacific Ocean Plate colliding with the North American Plate. This caused uplift in certain areas (which resulted in the Santa Cruz Mountains and Diablo Range, for example) and structural depression in others (the Santa Clara Valley and what is now San Francisco Bay). Prior to the beginning of the Holocene, sea levels were at least 100 meters (300 feet) lower than at present, and today’s San Francisco Bay (known as the “Franciscan Valley”) and Santa Clara Valley were river valleys that ultimately terminated near today’s Farallon Islands (Atwater et al. 1977).

1 D’Oro (2009), by contrast, argues that native populations in central California, especially in the southern Bay Area, were not similarly impacted by the MCA. The prolonged drought did not have major negative effects on the populations in this area.

Cultural Resources Treatment Plan for the 5-Year Development Plan at Santa Clara University — DRAFT Albion Environmental, Inc. David J. Powers and Associates, Inc. July 2015 20 As continental ice sheets began to melt at the end of the Pleistocene, sea levels began to rise rapidly, entering the bay approximately 10,000 BP (Atwater et al. 1977). Sea levels rose by as much as 25–30 meters by 8000 BP, covering most of the Franciscan Valley and creating the present San Francisco Bay. Between 8000 and 6000 BP, the rate of sea-level rise decelerated dramatically, dropping to only 1 to 2 millimeters per year. This in turn encouraged sedimentation around the bay margins, creating tidal flats and marshes that covered the inland valleys (Atwater 1979; Atwater et al. 1977). The baselines of streams and rivers adjusted to higher levels because of rising sea levels, increased sedimentation, and emerging wetlands. Evidence of submerged floodplains has been identified at depths of 9–40 meters below mean sea level and radiocarbon dated from 10,920 to 9760 cal BP (Storey et al. 1966; Atwater et al. 1977). Any archaeological sites associated with these floodplains would likely have been destroyed or obscured by sea-level advance and sedimentation (Bickel 1978; Atwater 1979).

Geologic and geoarchaeologic research shows that Late Pleistocene and Early Holocene land surfaces are overlain by alluvium that is generally less than 6,000 years old (Helley et al. 1979; Meyer and Rosenthal 1997). Buried soil profiles (paleosols) occurring on these old land surfaces are used as stratigraphic markers to indicate depositional history at different locations around the bay and at associated inland valleys (Meyer and Rosenthal 1997). Holocene depositional history of the San Francisco Bay area indicated two to three periods of landform stability (soil formation) alternating with three or four periods of landform instability (erosion and deposition). Archaeological sites occurring in these areas therefore may have been buried and/or eroded by these processes, particularly during the mid-to-late Holocene, and tend to occur at depths of 2–4 meters in valleys, but may also occur up to depths of 10 meters (Meyer and Rosenthal 1997).

Reconstructions of the prehistoric Santa Clara Valley ecosystem just prior to the arrival of the Spanish in the 18th century indicate that the region consisted of a low-lying grass-covered alluvial basin studded by occasional oaks (Mayfield 1978). Riparian vegetation, dominated by willows, was located along the Guadalupe River. Brackish and saline marshes were located to the north and east, as were the shallow waters of the San Francisco Bay. In the floodplain area, the Guadalupe was an embedded, meandering river that shifted over time. The shifting course of the Guadalupe River created a flat but uneven topography, which, combined with high winter groundwater levels and possible sheet flooding, probably created a seasonally soggy environment in the grasslands.

Geology

Numerous geological studies have been conducted in the northern Santa Clara Valley. Little work has been done on the nature and extent of more recent surface and subsurface deposits (Allen et al. 1999). Surface deposits are composed of Holocene-age alluvium, but areas of older or younger deposits within the Holocene-age alluvium have not been identified. Geologic and hydraulic studies have identified subsurface alluvial deposits from cores, wells, and borings, which have been found to extend more than 400 meters below ground surface in some locations (Fio and Leighton 1995).

Pleistocene-age deposits have been discovered in some northern valley locations and include the remains of extinct Pleistocene mammals found at a depth of 7–10 meters below surface in Mountain View (Helley et al. 1979). A piece of redwood, found 22 meters below ground surface on the west side of Coyote Creek, was radiocarbon dated at 17,200 cal BP (Meade 1967), and alluvium of unknown depth produced a radiocarbon date of 14,075 cal BP (Price 1981).

A comparison of 66 radiocarbon dates from subsurface deposits taken from around San Francisco Bay revealed that more than half (63%) of the Pleistocene-age deposits occur at a depth of 5 meters or more below surface. More than three-quarters (76%) of the Early Holocene-age deposits occur

Cultural Resources Treatment Plan for the 5-Year Development Plan at Santa Clara University — DRAFT Albion Environmental, Inc. David J. Powers and Associates, Inc. July 2015 21 between 2.7 and 4.7 meters below ground surface. Eighty percent of Middle Holocene-age deposits occur at a depth of 1–3 meters below surface, and Late Holocene-age deposits are found between depths of 1 and 2.3 meters (Allen et al. 1999). Depths of South Bay Holocene deposits are approximately twice those of other areas; this may either indicate a higher rate of deposition in South Bay locations, or that sampled deposits were located in areas of formerly active channels (Allen et al. 1999).

Soil and Sediment Types

According to Gardner et al. (1958) and Meyer (2000), two primary soil types (basin and alluvial) exist in the area surrounding Santa Clara University. Minor variations in the horizontal distribution of the soil types are based on texture and soil profile development. Differences in the development of the soil types indicate temporal differences that resulted from variations in floodplain stability. Using this criterion, basin soils tend to be more developed, and therefore older, than less developed alluvial soils (Gardner et al. 1958).

Basin soils formed in fine-grained alluvial deposits, are derived primarily from sedimentary rocks and are characterized by thick, dark-colored A horizons; light, calcareous B horizons; and oxidized C horizons, indicating strong soil development (Gardner et al. 1958). These soils are found on level, poorly drained areas occurring at the ends of alluvial fans near the center of the Santa Clara Valley (Allen et al. 1999). Basin soils are found primarily on the west side of the Guadalupe River, although some pockets of basin soils are located to the north of the project area.

Indirect evidence indicates that basin soils are Holocene in age. This conclusion is derived from the presence of hard nodular concretions of calcium carbonate (CaCO3) in basin soils, indicating extended arid conditions. Because the last known arid period in central California occurred more than 5,000 years ago, basin soils are dated to the Middle Holocene, or earlier. Radiocarbon dates from archaeological sites directly associated with basin soils in the Santa Clara Valley have produced Middle Holocene to Late-Early Holocene dates of 5190 cal BP (Sunnyvale skeleton) and 5630 cal BP (CA-SCL-484) (Allen et al. 1999).

Alluvial soils are formed in fine-grained deposits derived from sedimentary and meta-sedimentary rocks. They are characterized by dark-colored A horizons, either no B horizon or weak B horizons of clay or calcium carbonate, and unweathered C horizons. These characteristics represent a range from very weak to strong soil development. These alluvial soils occur along active or recently active stream channels in the northern Santa Clara Valley. Alluvial soils underlie the project area and are considered to be recent Holocene deposits (Helley and Brabb 1971). Variation in soil development between the alluvial soils indicates that they were formed by different depositional episodes over a lengthy period of time. Gardner et al. (1958) named three alluvial soils: Mocho series, Campbell series, and Cropley and Zamora series.

Mocho series alluvial soils are the youngest of the three and are found at the surface along the Guadalupe River, extending to a depth of about 0.3–1 meter, but can extend to 1.8 meters deep in some instances. A lack of soil development characteristics indicates Mocho soils are probably no more than 300 years old and are most likely historical in age (Gardner et al. 1958), although archaeological contexts associated with these soils have been radiocarbon dated up to 1,000 years ago (Allen et al. 1999).

Campbell series soils occur between the Guadalupe River and Coyote Creek and completely underlie the project area. Moderate soil development, as evidenced by accumulated calcium carbonate in the B horizon, attests to an age older than the Mocho series soils. Archaeological sites associated with

Cropley and Zamora series soils cannot be directly dated, but the presence of E horizons and an accumulation of clays and calcium carbonates in the B horizon (representing strong soil development) indicate these soils are Early Holocene, or even late Pleistocene in age. Cropley and Zamora soils are found outside the project area along the lower Guadalupe River (Helley and Brabb 1971).

Bay and Estuary Development

During the mid-to-late Holocene, the bay-estuary expanded as a result of subsidence and compaction of intertidal deposits. High sea levels in the southern San Francisco Bay enabled estuarine environments to migrate southward. Consequently, prehistoric human populations may have had to move farther inland in response to the estuary expansion. Since the 1850s, tidal marshes along the Bay margins have shrunk by 50%, placing the current shoreline where it would have been 5,000 years ago (Atwater 1979). This contraction in the shoreline is the result of land filling, hydraulic mining, levee construction, and other historic-period human activities.

Short-term environmental changes (such as storm activity) affect the fresh water–salt water ratio and sediment load of bay waters, and therefore the day-to-day nutrient supply for estuarine plant and animal communities. Long-term environmental changes, however, have the ability to affect substantial change on these communities, and can cause the disappearance of established species in favor of species better adapted to these new environmental conditions. For example, the presence of extensive oyster beds persisted in much of the South Bay until they died out between 1,300 and 1,800 years ago (Storey et al. 1966). The decline of oyster populations in the South Bay indicates there was rapid environmental change during this period.

Isotopic analysis of shellfish indicates increased episodes of freshwater runoff into the bay, alternating with periods of increased salinity levels, several times in the last 4,000 years (Ingram et al. 1996). These environmental changes caused change in the local aquatic communities. For example, between 1,700 and 2,100 years ago, rates of sedimentation in the South Bay increased significantly; this coincided with increased fresh water runoff as well as an increase in the oyster population in the South Bay. However, salinity levels and water temperatures rose between 900 and 1,400 years ago (McGann 1995), resulting in the decline of oyster and mussel populations and increasing clam populations and other mudflat species (Ingram 1998). These fluctuations may have been the result of long-term extreme drought episodes or simply natural fluctuations. Human response to environmental change is evidenced in many archaeological sites, where the relative abundance of shellfish species changes over time from oyster and mussel to clam (Bickel 1978).

River and Flooding History

The Guadalupe River is the third-largest watershed in the Santa Clara Valley, draining a total of 380 square kilometers (147 square miles) (Fio and Leighton 1995). It originates in the Santa Cruz Mountains and flows generally northward, emptying into San Francisco Bay at Alviso. Although the river channel has migrated extensively throughout the Holocene, the current channel is located about 2.4 kilometers (1.5 miles) northeast of Santa Clara University. The Spanish described the Guadalupe River as having a deep, swift channel with tree-lined, high banks, running through a generally treeless grassy plain. Currently, the river offers a perennial supply of water only north of San Jose, where artesian wells occur on the Guadalupe floodplain (Allen et al. 1999).

Cultural Resources Treatment Plan for the 5-Year Development Plan at Santa Clara University — DRAFT Albion Environmental, Inc. David J. Powers and Associates, Inc. July 2015 23 The earliest settlers of the San Jose Pueblo built the first dam on the Guadalupe River sometime around 1778. The earthen dam was used to irrigate agricultural fields. Within a year, flooding of the river destroyed the dam and largely destroyed the first site of Mission Santa Clara. By 1790, the Mission and Pueblo were moved to higher ground. The dam was rebuilt and remained in use until the 1840s (Rickman 1981). Heavy winter rains caused severe flooding of the Guadalupe in 1850, 1911, and 1955, putting many nearby streets underwater (Hart 1981). Even after a 3,700–acre-foot reservoir was constructed on the upper reaches of the Guadalupe, recurrent flooding of the lower Guadalupe persisted through the 1960s until artificial levees were elevated and the river channel was realigned (Fentress 1979).

Demands for water increased as population and agricultural ventures increased in the Santa Clara Valley. By 1865, almost 500 artesian wells had been placed in the Guadalupe floodplain; by the 1920s, groundwater levels had dropped 40 feet, causing land subsidence along the river. Despite measures to curb subsidence by the Santa Clara Valley Water Conservation District in the 1920s and 1930s (Fish 1981), groundwater levels dropped approximately 190 feet by 1966. This in turn caused the land surface in the general Guadalupe River vicinity to drop between 6 and 13 feet (Poland and Ireland 1988).

Significant changes in the river course have occurred over the last 125 years. The present course of the river lies fairly close to its historic position, although the modern and historic courses of the river may vary in places by as much as a few hundred feet (Allen et al. 1999). An 1899 U.S. Geological Survey map shows the river channel shifted west between 1876 and 1899, from just south of Taylor Street to just south of West Mission Street (U.S. Geological Survey 1899).

These findings indicate that, over the last 235 years, the channel and the banks of the Guadalupe River have experienced dramatic changes, caused by both natural and human events, including flooding, ground subsidence and dam- and levy-building. These events have altered the visibility and preservation of the landscape and any prehistoric and historic archaeological contexts associated with the river.

Pluvial Lakes

In the early 1970s, during a search for commercial deposits of sand and gravel along the stream courses of the Pajaro-San Benito River Basin in the southern Santa Clara Valley, extensive silt deposits were discovered. The presence of two large Late Pleistocene lakes – Lake San Benito and Lake San Juan – was subsequently detected. Lake San Benito, the larger of the two, was formed as the result of fault movement and appears to have existed prior to the deposition of local Pleistocene gravels (Jenkins 1973:152). At its height, the lake occupied a high stand along the 400-foot contour and was supposedly 30 miles in length, extending south from present-day Hollister to the location of Morgan Hill. It appears that at some time after 10,000 B.C., movement of the San Andreas Fault caused a massive break at the western shore of the lake, leaving behind a regime of marshes and seasonal wetlands. Lake San Juan was longer-lived than Lake San Benito and left more prominent deposits, though it was much smaller. It probably represented the end product of Lake San Benito when the latter was drained from its 400-foot to 200-foot level.

Fresh water fossils have been found in silt-filled deposits from the bed of Lake San Benito. Called “blue clay,” this deposit contained tiny gastropod shells identified as Valvata humerosa and Gyraulus parvus, both of which are common in fresh water lakes today.

Cultural Resources Treatment Plan for the 5-Year Development Plan at Santa Clara University — DRAFT Albion Environmental, Inc. David J. Powers and Associates, Inc. July 2015 24 Environmental and Geoarchaeological Research Design

Previous Geoarchaeological Investigations

The most recent and comprehensive geoarchaeological study of the Santa Clara Valley was conducted by Meyer (2000), during the proposed Caltrans Route 87 Guadalupe Parkway Upgrade Project. The area under scrutiny was situated in the northern Santa Clara Valley within a broad, nearly level floodplain that bordered the Guadalupe River, about 2.4 kilometers (1.5 miles) northeast of Santa Clara University.

The purpose of the study was threefold: (1) to identify and document the natural landform deposits; (2) search for potentially buried archaeological materials; and (3) evaluate the potential for buried archaeological sites. In addition to this, the results of stratigraphic, isotopic, and palynological analyses, provided evidence of past environmental conditions in Santa Clara Valley.

Stratigraphic evidence disclosed that the Santa Clara Valley underwent alternating cycles of alluvial deposition and relative landform stability over the last 16,000 years. During the Late Pleistocene, alluvium with high concentrations of charcoal suggested that fires may have been common occurrences. The Early Holocene was a prolonged period of floodplain stability, which may have been the result of lower sea levels. The Middle and Late Holocene, by contrast, were marked by increased channel aggradations, widespread floodplain deposition, and shorter periods of land stability. Meyer (2000:37) suggests that these developments were most likely the result of higher sea levels at the mouth of the Guadalupe River, and possibly the greater environmental variability associated with the Middle Holocene.

Carbon isotopic (C13/C12) analyses, which are often employed to reconstruct past environments (DeNiro 1987), indicated that warm/dry conditions prevailed during the Late Pleistocene. A period of greater environmental variability occurred during the Middle Holocene. During the Late Holocene, carbon isotopes indicate that cool/moist conditions were predominant.

Pollen analyses provided evidence of past vegetation changes. In addition to numerous charcoal fragments, Late Pleistocene alluvium contained a charred seed identified as dock or knotweed (Polyganum). Early Holocene-age soil contained numerous pollen grains from the sunflower (Asteraceae) and pine (Pinus) families. According to West (2000), “The Asteraceae grains are undoubtedly locally derived and the two pine grains could be from upland trees, since pine pollen grains can be readily transported long distances by wind.” Charred plant remains representing California bay laurel nut (Umbellularia californica) and seeds of the Poaceae family were recovered from Late Holocene deposits.

Taken together, these data indicate that the Santa Clara Valley underwent a series of paleoenvironmental changes that altered the landscape, and likely affected human patterns of settlement and subsistence. Prolonged periods of landform stability (soil formation) alternated with major episodes of alluvial deposition.

Some of the major issues relevant to studying Holocene environmental change include past vegetation studies and landscape formation studies. These are discussed in more detail below.

Research Theme: Past Vegetation Studies

Among the main research goals of archaeology must be reconstruction of the environment within which prehistoric populations interacted. Plant remains in archaeological contexts are usually sought after to accomplish this goal. There are two main categories of floral remains that are useful to

Cultural Resources Treatment Plan for the 5-Year Development Plan at Santa Clara University — DRAFT Albion Environmental, Inc. David J. Powers and Associates, Inc. July 2015 25 archaeologists: macrospecimens (seeds, leaves, casts, or impressions) and microspecimens (pollen and phytoliths). Macrospecimens are often identified in a preliminary way in the field, but are usually not preserved well in archaeological contexts, unless they are preserved in extremely cold, dry, or wet conditions.

Pollen analysis, or palynology, has proven to be one of the more successful methods for the study of past vegetation regimes. Occurring in a wide range of depositional environments, if sufficiently preserved and recoverable, fossil pollen can be employed to reconstruct past vegetation – in turn serving as an indicator of paleoclimate. Characterization of earlier plant communities is perhaps the primary goal of such analyses, both because vegetation is at the base of the human food chain and constitutes a source of fiber and fuel. Phytoliths, or microscopic silica bodies formed naturally in plants, are also occasionally used to identify past vegetation.

There have been few stratigraphically-controlled palynological studies conducted in the Santa Clara Valley. Vegetation patterns for the Holocene in the region remain little understood. The work conducted by West (2000) for Meyer’s study resulted in only a few identifiable floral remains.

Data Requirements Microscopic floral remains, such as pollen grains and phytoliths, are highly durable and often remain in the archaeological record. They are usually acquired by flotation methods, and identified by trained specialists (e.g., palynologists, botanists) using microscopic equipment.

Potential Research Questions  What were the major vegetation regimes throughout the last 10,000 years of prehistory in the Santa Clara Valley?

 How did these vegetation regimes change over time, if at all? Do the vegetation regimes correlate with larger paleoenvironmental studies that have been conducted for Central California?

 What does the palynological information say about the past climate of the area?

Research Theme: Landscape Formation

The soil and sediment in an archaeological deposit can potentially illuminate the nature of past environments. There is a fundamental distinction between soils and sediments. Soils represent the alteration of rocks and sediments and are formed in-situ, whereas sediments are particles that have been transported and deposited by geologic processes.

Soils can be analyzed for a number of purposes. For example, soil pH, a measure of alkalinity or acidity, is a critical factor in determining whether organic materials are likely to be preserved. The absence of visible organic remains may result from lack of preservation rather than lack of deposition. Soil resistivity, which measures the amount of moisture present in the soil, is a method that can detect buried features.

The analysis of sediments can help to interpret the natural processes that led to the formation of the matrix surrounding an archaeological site. The deposition of sediment layers can result from human activities or from natural geological processes. One of the more easily identifiable distinctions, for example, is between water-laid silts, which are fine-grained and evenly deposited by alluvial processes.

Cultural Resources Treatment Plan for the 5-Year Development Plan at Santa Clara University — DRAFT Albion Environmental, Inc. David J. Powers and Associates, Inc. July 2015 26 Meyer’s (2000) geoarchaeological study of the Santa Clara Valley is perhaps the most thorough analysis of Santa Clara sediments. His study found:

Two major landform deposits…consisting of a large area of alluvial soils located east of the [Guadalupe] river, and smaller, isolated areas of basin soils located west of the river. Preliminary evidence indicated that the basin soils were at least Middle Holocene in age (~5,000 years old), while the alluvial soils, which were generally less than 1,500 years old. It appears that portions of both landform-deposits have been buried by Historic-age alluvium on either side of the river from about Hedding Street north to US 101, corresponding with an area of natural levee deposits (Meyer 2000:8- 9).

Given the relative proximity of Santa Clara University to the project area of Meyer’s study, it is reasonable to assume that Meyer’s findings can in large measure be applied to the stratigraphy of Santa Clara University. Landforms west of the Guadalupe River are comprised primarily of basin soils with Mocho alluvium located in the immediate vicinity of the river. Meyer (2000:46) noted that the landforms located west of the Guadalupe River (including the parent soils upon which Santa Clara University resides) have generally been more stable than landforms located east of the river.

Data Requirements The determination of past landforms requires a detailed understanding of the natural geomorphic processes responsible for the formation of the present landscape. This is accomplished by identifying and evaluating the age and distribution of soils, sediments, and landforms through the use of various methods.

Potential Research Questions  How were sediments within the APE laid down? By wind, water, or human processes? Can these sediments be radiocarbon-dated and correlated with episodes of paleoenvironmental change?

 What does past sedimentation say about the depositional environment and formation of archaeological sites?

 Can the soils and sediments be used to date the archaeological site?

Cultural Resources Treatment Plan for the 5-Year Development Plan at Santa Clara University — DRAFT Albion Environmental, Inc. David J. Powers and Associates, Inc. July 2015 27 PRE-COLONIAL AND ETHNOGRAPHIC RESOURCES

This section investigates the pre-colonial (or prehistoric) and ethnographic context of the Santa Clara Valley. The first section discusses San Francisco Bay area prehistory from a general perspective, and incorporates some of the earliest archaeological researches carried out in the region. This section also identifies the main temporal chronologies and atemporal cultural patterns currently used by local archaeologists. The second section details some of the major archaeological investigations that have been carried out in the Santa Clara Valley. Finally, the concluding section discusses the ethnographic inhabitants of the region, the Ohlone, as they appeared at the time of the Spanish incursion of the late 18th century.

San Francisco Bay Area Prehistory

Archaeological research in the San Francisco Bay area, including the Santa Clara Valley, began in the early 20th century. Table 2 presents a chronological summary of the major investigators and their archaeological findings. It is not meant to be a comprehensive list of every research effort conducted in the area, but is intended to highlight some of the major developments in San Francisco Bay area archaeology. Each of these investigations has also contributed to the refinement of research questions and themes that are currently being addressed in archaeology today.

Table 2. Selected major prehistoric archaeological investigations in the San Francisco Bay area. Year Description of Investigation Related Excavation Finds/Conclusions 1907 Uhle investigates the Emeryville Uhle recognizes a number of different strata and, based on Shellmound burial complexes, argues that a succession of “cultural stages” was represented in the mound. He proposes that the mound was occupied for “more than a thousand years into the past.” 1910 Nelson investigates Ellis Landing Nelson’s excavations at the Ellis Landing Shellmound Shellmound result in a conclusion contrary to Uhle; he argues that the mound demonstrates little evidence of culture change. Nelson also makes an attempt to date the shellmound using a volumetric calculation based on shell constituents and estimates that the mound might be about 3,500 years old. 1912 Loud investigates the Presidio Loud records a shellmound within the San Francisco Mound Presidio (CA-SFR-6) that was subsequently covered during a dredging project; it was later rediscovered. 1916 Gifford works at several San Gifford analyzes midden samples from 15 sites. Francisco Bay area shellmounds and publishes a summary 1924 Loud investigates the Stege One of the Stege Mounds may have been a specialized Mounds in Richmond fishing village. Loud records that 61% of all the artifacts found were stone net-sinkers. 1925 Kroeber publishes a summary of Based on the work of previous researchers, Kroeber California prehistory concludes that there has been little significant cultural change in the state’s prehistoric past.

Cultural Resources Treatment Plan for the 5-Year Development Plan at Santa Clara University — DRAFT Albion Environmental, Inc. David J. Powers and Associates, Inc. July 2015 28 Year Description of Investigation Related Excavation Finds/Conclusions 1926 Schenck revisits the Emeryville Schenck rescues valuable data from the Emeryville Shellmound Shellmound before it was leveled to accommodate a paint factory. Schenck’s conclusions regarding the site contrast with those of Uhle. 1939 Lillard et al. develops a cultural They divide the prehistory of central California into three chronology for central California periods: “Early,” “Transitional,” and “Late.” It was originally formulated for the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta region. 1939 Heizer and Fenenga argue that the They use Lillard et al.’s chronology for temporally ordering Lillard et al. chronology is sites in the San Francisco Bay region. applicable to the San Francisco Bay area 1948 Beardsley develops a tripartite Like Lillard et al.’s scheme, this chronology was divided chronology for the San Francisco into “Early,” “Middle” and “Late” Horizons. This system Bay region that will later be called proposed a uniform, linear sequence of cultural succession. the Central California Taxonomic Beardsley associated the Santa Clara Valley with patterns System (CCTS) observed with other east bay shore sites of Alameda and Contra Costa counties. 1968 Gerow challenges a number of His work at CA-SMA-77, the University Village site, aspects of the CCTS conflicts with the Early Period of the CCTS. 1972 Ragir argues for an older antiquity Ragir relies on radiocarbon dates to challenge aspects of for the Early Period of the CCTS the CCTS. 1973 King and Hickman conduct the They identified three different site types and correlated first large-scale survey of the Santa these types with five broad classes of environmental areas. Clara Valley 1973 Anderson documents the existence This site, located along the Guadalupe River, contained a of the Narvaez Site (CA-SCL-68) number of burials and features. 1974 Fredrickson proposes a new Many subsequent researchers use Fredrickson’s chronology for central California. chronology. He also proposes the concept of the pattern to define atemporal modes of adaptation 1977 Winter conducts a salvage He finds evidence of a large village site along the excavation at the “Holiday Inn” Guadalupe River, in downtown San Jose, which includes site (CA-SCL-128/H) numerous artifacts, features, and human burials. 1982 Bergthold conducts a She found that the King and Hickman model does not comprehensive test of the King adequately account for settlement patterns in the valley. and Hickman model using site data from the Santa Clara Valley 1983 Hildebrandt excavates CA-SCL- The basal levels at site SCL-178 yields a radiocarbon date 178 as well as four other sites in of approximately 8000 BP. the Santa Clara Valley 1986 Elsasser conducts an overview of He argues for the existence of deeply buried sites in the Santa Clara Valley prehistory valley.

Cultural Resources Treatment Plan for the 5-Year Development Plan at Santa Clara University — DRAFT Albion Environmental, Inc. David J. Powers and Associates, Inc. July 2015 29 Year Description of Investigation Related Excavation Finds/Conclusions 1987 Bennyhoff and Hughes detailed The major periods of this scheme are further sub-divided analyses on shell bead types lead by a number of different phases. This chronology is later to the construction of yet another refined by Milliken and Bennyhoff (1993). central California chronology 1994 M. Hylkema excavates the Tamien This large village site is located in downtown San Jose (2007 Station Site (CA-SCL-690). along the Guadalupe River. It contains numerous burials Report) and features. 2001 Grady et al. conduct excavations at A total of 270 burials were uncovered during the course of the Rubino Site (CA-SCL-674). excavations and analyses were conducted on the human remains. 2002– Wiberg investigates the Skyport This site is located east of San Jose International Airport. present Plaza Site (CA-SCL-478) Many of the burials demonstrate evidence of warfare.

Much of the earliest archaeological research carried out in the San Francisco Bay area was concentrated along the shoreline of San Francisco Bay. This is hardly surprising given the high visibility of shoreline sites, many of which consist of large, heaping shellmounds. The first researcher to conduct formal excavations on these shellmounds was Max Uhle, a German-born archaeologist who had previously conducted excavations in Peru. During the first decade of the 20th century, he investigated the famous Emeryville Shellmound (CA-ALA-309) on the east side of San Francisco Bay. From stratigraphically controlled excavations, Uhle (1907) identified the presence of two developmental stages at the site, which he argued demonstrated “the gradual elaboration and refinement of technical processes.” The early assemblage was characterized by flexed burials, red ocher, knife-like bone implements, and a general lack of flaked stone. The later assemblage was characterized by cremation, flaked stone implements, and polished stones. Uhle concluded that the differences in these two stages represented significant cultural change that had unfolded over perhaps a thousand years.

Nels Nelson, a student of Alfred Kroeber at the University of California, was the next archaeologist to study the area’s prehistory. Like Uhle, Nelson focused his energies on San Francisco shellmounds, identifying over 400 mounds, including several sites along the west bank of the Guadalupe River in the Santa Clara Valley. In 1910, Nelson published the results of excavations carried out at the Ellis Landing Shellmound (CA-CCO-295). His conclusions were much more cautious than Uhle’s. He maintained that in general the site evinced little evidence of cultural change. Although Nelson noticed a change in the exploitation of shellfish, he attributed it to changes in the substrate of the bay rather than to cultural change. Nelson’s view of California prehistory, changing very little until the arrival of Europeans, was highly influential and became the generally accepted interpretation of California and San Francisco Bay area prehistory for the next several years.

A few additional shellmound excavations were conducted during the next 15 years (Gifford 1916; Loud 1912, 1924; Schenck 1926). Gifford (1916) worked at several locations whereas Loud (1924) published the results of excavations carried out at the Stege Mounds (CA-CCO-298, CA-CCO-300). Schenck (1926) revisited the Emeryville Shellmound and posited an interpretation of the site that was at odds with Uhle. He suggested that the site might only be 500–1,000 years old and, building upon Nelson’s ideas of relative stability in California’s prehistoric cultures, that it demonstrated an “extraordinary stability of culture” rather than any developmental change.

Cultural Resources Treatment Plan for the 5-Year Development Plan at Santa Clara University — DRAFT Albion Environmental, Inc. David J. Powers and Associates, Inc. July 2015 30 Based largely on the conclusions of researchers like Nelson and Schenck, Kroeber (1925) published a summary of California prehistory that championed the idea that there had been little significant cultural change in the state’s prehistoric past. He believed that material differences noticed by researchers like Uhle were of degree rather than kind and that the archaeological resources of prehistoric Californians were “in essentials the same as that found in the same region by the more recent explorer and settler” (Kroeber 1908:3). According to Kroeber (1908:16), native Californians observed ethnographically were so primitive as to rule out any possibility for advancements through prehistoric times.

By the 1930s, the view that California prehistory was characterized by cultural stasis was beginning to undergo revision. Increasingly, researchers recognized that California, and San Francisco Bay area, prehistory was demonstrating evidence that suggested cultural evolutionary change. Researchers were beginning to realize that change in artifact types suggested a change in cultural adaptation. Indeed, by the late 1930s, Kroeber himself was revising many of his earlier conclusions (Bickel 1981:7–8). As Bickel (1981) noted, much of this new thinking regarding California prehistory was stimulated by developments in the prehistory of the American southwest, where archaeologists like A.V. Kidder and Emil Haury were demonstrating cultural change as evidenced by the gradual shift in artifact types.

One of the first efforts recognizing significant cultural changes in the prehistory of central California was put forward by Lillard et al. (1939). Based on their work at several sites in the Sacramento Valley and Delta region, including the Windmiller Site (CA-SAC-107), the authors developed a tripartite sequence composed of “Early,” “Transitional,” and “Late” periods. These periods were distinguished by marked changes in settlement, subsistence orientation, grave goods, and artifacts types. The authors were concerned with seeking to organize the variability within and between artifact assemblages into area-based patterns, which were then seen as denoting “cultures” or cultural variants. However, they were not concerned with illuminating the conditions under which cultural change occurred. This sequence was the most comprehensive, detailed, and best documented local sequence to be offered in California up to that time.

Although Lillard et al. (1939) derived their sequence from interior valley sites, other researchers (Heizer and Fenenga 1939) argued that this chronology was applicable to a much wider area in California, including the San Francisco Bay area. During the next decade, Beardsley (1948) made the argument that the chronological sequence for the Marin County coast and the San Francisco Bay were very similar to Lillard et al.’s (1939) three-part sequence. He conducted a reanalysis of published material from the San Francisco Bay area and concluded that archaeological materials from the Early Period were extremely rare but that the two latter periods (Transitional and Late) were well represented. In particular, the shellmounds at Ellis Landing and Emeryville were argued to represent examples of the Transitional (which Beardsley called “Middle”) and Late periods, respectively. Eventually, Beardsley (1954) put forward his own chronological scheme for the area, which came to be known as the Central California Taxonomic System (CCTS) (Gerow 1968). It was very similar to the sequence of Lillard et al. (1939), consisting of an “Early-Middle-Late” nomenclature, but applicable to a wider area.

With the advent of radiocarbon dating in the 1950s, some archaeologists began to reexamine the CCTS with a critical eye. Many aspects of this chronology were found to be inaccurate when compared to newly obtained radiocarbon dates. For example, evidence began to accumulate suggesting that the antiquity of human occupation in central California and elsewhere was much older than anticipated by the CCTS (see, for example, Ragir [1972]). Other problems with the CCTS surfaced, as well. Radiocarbon dates from several sites in California demonstrated that the Early and Middle Horizons, rather than indicative of sequential cultural change, were more accurately viewed as

Cultural Resources Treatment Plan for the 5-Year Development Plan at Santa Clara University — DRAFT Albion Environmental, Inc. David J. Powers and Associates, Inc. July 2015 31 contemporaneous phenomena (Moratto 1984:199). It was also found that many of the traits considered typical of particular horizons in the CCTS were absent in various parts of the Central Valley and the San Francisco Bay region. Based on evidence recovered from the University Village Site (CA-SMA-77), Gerow (1968) maintained that Early Horizon sites in the San Francisco Bay area were much different from the supposed Early Horizon sites in the valley and delta.

As the shortcomings of the CCTS readily became apparent, several researchers began to propose new and different culture chronologies for central California. One of the most comprehensive for the time was Fredrickson’s (1973, 1994) five-part chronology. Recognizing mounting evidence for an earlier than previously conceived antiquity, Fredrickson’s earliest period begins around 10,000 B.C. This initial period, called the Paleoindian Period, persists until about 6000 B.C., when it is succeeded by the Lower Archaic Period (6000 B.C.–3000 B.C.), the Middle Archaic Period (3000 B.C.–1000 B.C.), the Upper Archaic Period (1000 B.C.–A.D. 500), and the Emergent Period (A.D. 500–A.D. 1800). These different periods are distinguished from one another primarily on the basis of perceived adaptations. Fredrickson also made the point that the transition from one culture type to another did not occur uniformly throughout the area, but took place at different times in different regions. Although Fredrickson’s sequence was developed mainly for the North Coast Ranges, it has been used by a number of researchers working in the San Francisco Bay area (Bennyhoff and Hughes 1987; Bennyhoff 1986, 1994; Broughton 1999; Hildebrandt and Jones 1992; Simons 1992).

Within this general temporal framework, Fredrickson also identified six major cultural patterns. A “pattern” is defined not by temporal limits, but represents a general way of life characterizing a region. Patterns are characterized by particular technological skills, economic forms, exchange networks, and ceremonial and mortuary practices. For the San Francisco Bay area, Fredrickson proposed three patterns: Windmiller, Berkeley, and Augustine. The Windmiller Pattern, which roughly corresponds to the Early Horizon of the CCTS, is characterized by extended burials containing thick rectangular and whole Olivella shell beads, rectangular Haliotis beads and ornaments, charmstones, quartz crystals, and red ocher. A relatively wide variety of faunal remains, including large, medium, and small mammals, waterfowl, and fishes, are found at Windmiller sites, indicating a broad-spectrum diet. Abundant ground stone implements, especially mortars and pestles, also indicates that plant foods were important.

The Berkeley Pattern generally corresponds with the Lower and Upper Archaic Period and the Middle Horizon of the CCTS. Unlike the Windmiller Pattern, Berkeley Pattern burials are tightly flexed, and generally contain fewer grave goods. Cremation burials are also sometimes found. Olivella saddle and saucer beads and Haliotis pendants predominate. A well-developed bone tool industry typified by awls, pins, tubes, whistles, and needles are found in Berkeley contexts. High percentages of mortars and pestles generally indicate a greater reliance on vegetal resources, though hunting (of deer, elk, and pronghorn) is also important. Shellfish appear to be important resources as well, with oyster, clam, and mussel species found at Berkeley Pattern sites. Berkeley Pattern burials evince evidence of intergroup violence and possibly warfare. Skeletal material frequently demonstrates cranial fractures, parry fractures on longbones, projectile point wounds, and dismemberment practices, among others (Bard et al. 1986; Wiberg 2002; Grady et al. 2001).

The Augustine Pattern corresponds to the Emergent Period (or Late Horizon of the CCTS) and is characterized by diverse and sophisticated toolkits containing small projectile points (many of which are serrated), harpoon barbs, incised and worked bone, smoking pipes, mortars and pestles, birdbone whistles and tubes, Olivella and clam shell beads, and Haliotis “banjo” style ornaments. Flexed burial posture is the normative mortuary treatment, though cremation occurs as well. Augustine archaeological sites suggest evidence of relatively large, settled populations, extensive trade networks, and possibly status differentiation and social ranking. Floral and faunal remains indicate a

Cultural Resources Treatment Plan for the 5-Year Development Plan at Santa Clara University — DRAFT Albion Environmental, Inc. David J. Powers and Associates, Inc. July 2015 32 varied and intensified diet, in which hunting, gathering, and fishing were important subsistence pursuits.

A number of archaeologists working in the San Francisco Bay area have argued for a fourth, distinct pattern. Called the Meganos Aspect (Bennyhoff 1994; Moratto 1984; Milliken et al. 2007), this cultural pattern may indicate an intrusion of peoples moving into the area from the south and east. Meganos Aspect components combine Windmiller and Berkeley pattern cultural traits, and generally correspond with the Upper Archaic and Emergent periods of Fredrickson’s chronology (or Middle and Late Horizon of the CCTS). Cultural traits associated with the Meganos Aspect are exemplified by ventrally extended burials, no evidence of cremation, and a variable orientation (though Bennyhoff argues for a preference for northerly orientation). Grave goods, like those found at Berkeley Pattern mortuary sites, are characteristically rare. Mortars and pestles suggest a reliance on vegetal resources, especially acorns. Flaked lithic technologies are considered rare at Meganos Aspect sites, though faunal assemblages indicate that the hunting of large mammals (e.g., deer, elk) was important.

In more recent years, Bennyhoff and Hughes’ (1987) detailed analyses on shell beads and ornaments types led to the construction of yet another central California chronological scheme, in which major periods were further sub-divided by a number of different phases. This chronology was later refined by Milliken and Bennyhoff (1993), and has become a sequence used by many contemporary researchers in the San Francisco Bay area (e.g., M. Hylkema 2007). In general, this sequence proposed a division of various traits into four general temporal periods. The first is the Early Period, originating during Middle Holocene times and continuing to approximately 500 B.C., followed by the Middle Period when populations appear to have expanded their resource base and aggregated into semi-sedentary residential communities. The third temporal sequence of the Milliken and Bennyhoff scheme proposes a transition period ensuing after A.D. 700, highlighted by intensified socioeconomic systems and retention of older Middle Period artifact traits. By A.D. 1200, during the Late Period, many Middle Period traits gave way to social characteristics consistent with the ethnographic record (Bennyhoff in Hughes 1994:73).

Santa Clara Valley Prehistory

The region south of San Francisco Bay, including the Santa Clara Valley, received sporadic archaeological investigation throughout the 20th century. However, it was not until the 1960s and 1970s, when a number of academic institutions and archaeological organizations undertook work there, that the area’s prehistoric past was systematically investigated (for a discussion of some early work conducted in the Santa Clara Valley, see King and Hickman [1973], Bergthold [1982], Elsasser [1986], M. Hylkema [1998], and Allen et al. [1999:31]). Cabrillo College, for example, directed excavations at CA-SCL-57 in 1968, while in 1971, members of the Bay Area Archaeological Cooperative (BAAC) conducted salvage operations at CA-SCL-651. Between 1974 and 1978, San Jose State University conducted some of the first systematic surveys of the Santa Clara Valley. King and Hickman (1973) conducted perhaps the most ambitious archaeological project in the Santa Clara Valley. From a 12,000-acre survey of the southern part of the valley (near the Gilroy-Hollister area) the authors recorded fifty prehistoric sites, each of which they organized into one of three site types: (1) large-scale occupation sites; (2) small-scale occupation sites; and (3) special-use sites. Focusing on settlement patterns, they attempted to discover the general distribution of Late Prehistoric sites in the Santa Clara Valley. They delineated five broad classes of environmental areas in which prehistoric sites should occur. These consisted of: upper canyons, canyon mouths, riverbanks, the alluvial plain, and marsh margins. They correlated these two data sets and went on to predict where certain types of sites would most likely be located. From this, King and Hickman concluded that large occupation sites were located at the mouths of canyons, and to a lesser extent along marsh margins and upper canyon settings. Small occupation sites, by contrast, were more variable but were situated

Cultural Resources Treatment Plan for the 5-Year Development Plan at Santa Clara University — DRAFT Albion Environmental, Inc. David J. Powers and Associates, Inc. July 2015 33 most often in upper canyons and marsh settings. Special use sites were found predominantly near large occupation sites in upper canyon contexts.

Bergthold (1982) attempted to apply the King and Hickman model to the northern end of the valley. She identified a total of 179 sites in this portion of the valley, and used these data to argue against many of the conclusions posited by King and Hickman. She argued that large occupation sites in the northern Santa Clara Valley were found predominantly in the center of the valley along perennial streams. Bergthold (1982:223) also concluded that all site types “occur overwhelmingly in the riverine environment and are found in many more environmental classes than King and Hickman originally thought.” She (1982:228) went on to conclude that “(t)he evidence indicates that the King/Hickman model cannot be used to predict where and what types of sites will be found in the Santa Clara Valley.”

Since Bergthold’s work, there have been several archaeological projects conducted in Santa Clara Valley (Bard et al. 1981; Cartier and Pierce 1982; Hildebrandt 1983; Cartier 1983, 1984). One of the most important, at least in terms of chronology, was Hildebrandt’s work at CA-SCL-178, the “Blood Alley Site.” A date of ca. 8,000 B.P. was obtained from the basal levels of the site, potentially extending the Valley’s antiquity to the Early Holocene. In 1986, Elsasser attempted a comprehensive overview of the Valley’s prehistory, and concluded that a more exact chronological scheme would eventually develop as more data accumulated. He also concluded that the possibility of deeply buried sites in the valley was high and that “some of them possibly contain valuable information concerning Milling Stone or other early cultures” (Elsasser 1986:56). More recently, several mitigation projects have been conducted within Santa Clara Valley, including M. Hylkema’s (2007) excavations at the Tamien Station Site (CA-SCL-690), Grady et al.’s (2001) investigations at the Rubino Site (SCL- 674), Hildebrandt and Mikkelsen’s (1993) test excavations at 14 sites in the southern Santa Clara Valley, and Allen et al.’s (1999) work along the Guadalupe River near Route 87 and the San Jose International Airport.

One area of Santa Clara Valley that has proven especially productive in terms of archaeological resources is what has been termed the “Guadalupe Corridor,” the area encompassing the east and west banks of the Guadalupe River (Winter 1978; Cartier 1983, 1984; Hildebrandt 1983; Cartier and Pierce 1982; Bard et al. 1981). Systematic investigations in this area began in the 1970s and are currently ongoing. The Guadalupe River is the third-largest watershed in the Santa Clara Valley, draining a total of 380 square kilometers (147 square miles) (Fio and Leighton 1995). It originates in the Santa Cruz Mountains and flows generally northward, emptying into San Francisco Bay at Alviso. The river channel has migrated extensively throughout the Holocene, and has repeatedly overflowed its banks, depositing numerous alluvial deposits of sand and silt onto the valley floor. It has been speculated that some archaeological sites might be found under these depositions. Indeed, as Elsasser (1986:56) has pointed out, “some of [these deeply buried sites may] possibly contain valuable information concerning Milling Stone or other early cultures.”

The following discussion highlights some of the major archaeological sites that have been investigated along the Guadalupe Corridor since the 1970s, including CA-SCL-128/H, CA-SCL-68, CA-SCL-690, CA-SCL-674, and CA-SCL-478. All of the sites discussed below are relatively large village or residential sites containing rich deposits of artifacts, features, and burials. A few (e.g., CA- SCL-674) have been argued to be wholly cemetery sites, which are assumed to be associated with a nearby village site (these have been classified in the literature as “off-village” or “non-village” cemeteries [Milliken et al. 2007:110-111]). The data from these sites have played especially prominent roles in our understanding of San Francisco Bay area cultures.

Cultural Resources Treatment Plan for the 5-Year Development Plan at Santa Clara University — DRAFT Albion Environmental, Inc. David J. Powers and Associates, Inc. July 2015 34 In 1977, Winter (1978) conducted archaeological excavations at CA-SCL-128/H, the so-called “Holiday Inn” site. This site is located in downtown San Jose, near Almaden Boulevard and San Carlos Street. As Winter (1978:1) points out, however, it is possible that prehistoric materials extend beyond these arbitrarily imposed borders, and in fact, prehistoric materials have been found in nearby contexts. For example, prehistoric materials ostensibly associated with the site have been found at the Civic Auditorium and the Center for Performing Arts. Site materials associated with CA-SCL-128/H have also been found as far away as the confluence of the Guadalupe River with Los Gatos Creek. Discovery of the site occurred as the result of the construction of a garage complex; unfortunately, much of the site was excavated after major construction had already commenced. Consequently, the level of disturbance to the site was high. Winter (1978:1) characterized the site as a “multicomponent and prehistoric and historic complex.” The prehistoric component was typified by human burials, midden, shell beads (including Olivella and Haliotis forms), pendants, worked and decorated bone, chipped stone artifacts, projectile points, and a variety of ground stone, including mortars, pestles, hammerstones, charmstones, and pipes. Excavated features included a number of hearths, or “cooking ovens,” and what was interpreted as a possible house pit. Subsistence items consisted of a wide variety of fauna, including, among other taxa, ground squirrel, gopher, rabbit, jackrabbit, dog, deer, tule elk, grizzly bear, bobcat, skunk, geese, duck, raptors, and quail. A wide range of molluscan taxa were also identified. These included chiefly bay oyster (Ostrea lurida) and horn snail (Cerithidea californica). Based on radiocarbon assays and the presence of diagnostic artifacts (especially beads, pendants, and projectile points), Winter (1978:27) indicates an age of the site extending back over 1,700 years, with the earliest occupation occurring at approximately A.D. 250, a time period corresponding with the Intermediate Phase of the Middle Period (Bennyhoff and Hughes 1987). Occupation of the site occurred from then to the time of European contact in the mid-to-latter 18th century. However, data indicate that the bulk of prehistoric occupation may have occurred during Phases 1 and 2 of the Late Period (Bennyhoff and Hughes 1987).

CA-SCL-68, the Narvaez Site, was originally documented in 1973 (Anderson et al. 1973). Since then it has been investigated by a number of researchers (e.g., Edwards 1978; Chavez 1980; Roop et al. 1982; Bard et al. 1985). The site is apparently a residential locale with a number of burials. Radiocarbon data and diagnostic artifacts indicate the site was occupied during the Early Phase of the Middle Period (approximately 3,000 B.P. to 2,000 B.P.). Grave goods, especially obsidian implements, accompanied many of the burials. Also recovered were California horn snail and Pismo clam (Tivela stultorum).

State Parks archaeologist Mark Hylkema (2007) investigated CA-SCL-690, the Tamien Station site, a large village site located near downtown San Jose between Lick Avenue and Willow Avenue on the east bank of the Guadalupe River. The excavation was conducted in anticipation of the construction of what came to be known as the Tamien Station multi-modal transportation terminal. It is a single component site dating to the Middle/Late Transition of California prehistory, circa A.D. 900 to 1200. A mortuary complex with 125 human burials and residential features, including “rock-cooking” features, was uncovered as a result of Hylkema’s excavations. Most of the burials were accompanied by grave goods, such as shell beads, Haliotis “banjo” pendants, or charmstones, among other items. The distinctive banjo pendants are of a type that has been associated by some researchers (e.g., Gifford 1947) with the Kuksu cult, extant in the San Francisco Bay area during ethnographic times. It is argued that these pendants might represent the first evidence of this ceremonial system. In the forward to the report, Fitzgerald (M. Hylkema 2007:i) discusses the significance of the data from the mortuary complex.

[The mortuary complex] represented a formal, planned cemetery rather than a random planned accretion of individual interments. It thus provided a rare glimpse into a distinct population at a particular point in time. These burials not only provided information on individual age, gender, and

Cultural Resources Treatment Plan for the 5-Year Development Plan at Santa Clara University — DRAFT Albion Environmental, Inc. David J. Powers and Associates, Inc. July 2015 35 evidence of trauma and pathologies, they also allowed us to see patterns at the population level such as status ascription and societal structure.

Also recovered from the site were a wide variety of artifacts, including shell beads and other diagnostic items, and both vertebrate and invertebrate faunal remains. An estimated 269 m3 of deposit was excavated during the project, with soils screened through either 1/8 or 1/16 inch mesh. The age of the site was determined by a combination of obsidian hydration readings, radiocarbon assays, and the examination of diagnostic artifacts, such as projectile points, beads, and pendants. Mammals, birds, and fish were recovered, along with numerous taxa of shellfish, including California horn snail, black abalone (Haliotis cracherodii), Bay mussel (Mytilus edulis), and freshwater clams (Anodonta spp.).

A large number of human burials (n=224) were recovered from the Rubino Site, CA-SCL-674 (Grady et al. 2001). Like CA-SCL-128/H and CA-SCL-690, it is located near downtown San Jose, though in the Hillsdale area. It is situated between the Guadalupe River on the west and Canoas Creek on the east. A number of temporal indicators (e.g., radiocarbon assays and diagnostic artifacts) demonstrate that the site was occupied primarily during the Early/Middle Transition Period. The burials were accompanied by a variety of grave goods, such as beads, chipped stone implements, and ground stone (such as mortars and pestles). Extensive osteological analyses were performed on the skeletal remains; these included studies designed to determine age, sex, stature, health, and diet of the burial population. Analyses also investigated evidence of traumatic injuries among the population, and disclosed the presence of interpersonal violence during the occupation of the site (Grady et al. 2001:60).

Also located in San Jose, but north of downtown, is CA-SCL-478, the Skyport Plaza Site (Wiberg 2002). Located just east of the San Jose International Airport, the site was discovered during the construction of an office, commercial, and parking complex undertaken by Spieker Properties. Like the previous sites mentioned above, CA-SCL-478 contained numerous (n=90) Native American burials and associated grave goods, and a number of significant features, including concentrations of fire-altered rock, hearth and oven features, and deposits of ash and oxidized earth. Artifacts and faunal remains (including bone, shell, and seeds) were also recovered during the excavation. The latter includes of waterfowl (ducks and geese) and numerous mammal taxa (e.g., elk, canids, and rabbits). A suite of radiocarbon assays disclosed evidence of occupation occurring during the time span represented by the Early to Early/Middle Transition Period. Like CA-SCL-674, Wiberg (2002) also found evidence of numerous traumatic injuries on human skeletal remains, suggesting possible warfare. He (2002:ii) writes:

The occupation sequence is marked by evidence of social conflict and unique mortuary treatment—i.e., perimortem dismemberment of skeletons to acquire “trophy” limbs. Warfare provides a foundation for interpreting this localized mortuary treatment. Intrusion of the Meganos culture into northern Santa Clara Valley during the Early/Middle Transition Period may have stimulated cultural conflict, and limb-taking may reflect a ritualized aspect of warfare.

Ethnographic Context

By the time the Spanish began extensively exploring Alta California in the 18th century, a substantial Native American population occupied the Santa Clara Valley. This population, originally called Costanoan but now known as the Ohlone, occupied a relatively large area in north-central California, from the San Francisco Peninsula and the East Bay, south to the Santa Clara Valley down to Monterey, and inland south to San Juan Bautista. This area encompassed a mosaic of different habitat types, including grasslands, woodlands, chaparral, redwood forests, coastal shrub, estuaries, and tidal marshes. Miwok tribelets were to the north and northeast of their Ohlone neighbors. Yokuts tribelets

Cultural Resources Treatment Plan for the 5-Year Development Plan at Santa Clara University — DRAFT Albion Environmental, Inc. David J. Powers and Associates, Inc. July 2015 36 were to the east. Immediate neighbors to the south of the Ohlone included the Hokan-speaking Esselen and Salinan (Figure 2).

Ohlone

The Ohlone spoke a Costanoan language, which belongs to the Utian family of the larger Penutian language stock. Speakers of Penutian inhabited north central California and included tribal groups such as the Maidu, Wintu, Miwok, and Yokuts. Anthropologists have traditionally divided the Costanoan language into eight different dialects, which Levy (1978) characterized as “different from one another as Spanish is to French.” According to Levy (1978:485), the Ohlone inhabitants of the Santa Clara Valley spoke a Costanoan dialect known as “Tamyen” or “Tamien.”

The original name for the Ohlone, Costanoan, is a derivation of the Spanish term “costeños” or “costaños,” which means “coast dwellers.” In the early part of the 20th century, many anthropologists used the term “Costanoan” in reference to native peoples who once occupied the Bay Area. In 1902, C. Hart Merriam (in Heizer 1967) referred to Bay Area languages as “Olhonean,” a term derived from the name of a tribelet located on the coast between San Francisco and Santa Cruz that was spelled variously as “Alchone,” “Olchone,” “Oljon,” or “Olhon” (Heizer 1974; Levy 1978). More recently, modern descendants of Costanoan peoples have identified themselves as “Ohlone” (Bean 1994), a derivation of Olhone, and that is the term that will be used here, except in reference to the language family.

Researchers have hypothesized from linguistic evidence that the Ohlone were relatively late entrants into the area. Anthropologists argue that the ancestors of the Ohlone originally migrated into the San Francisco and Monterey Bay areas from the San Joaquin-Sacramento River system sometime around A.D. 500 (linguistic and archaeological evidence summarized by Levy 1978:486; Bean 1994:xxi). This migration represented movement of several Penutian-speaking peoples westward into areas formerly inhabited by Hokan-speakers. Other researchers have posited a much earlier time for the movement of Penutian-speakers into the area. For example, Whistler (1977) suggests that Penutian- speakers (e.g., Miwok and Ohlone) settled in the area around 3000 B.C. Whenever the migration actually occurred, and indeed if such a migration took place, the ancestors of the ethnohistoric Ohlone were fully ensconced in the area by the Late Holocene.

Estimates of total Ohlone population during the time of European contact are varied. Kroeber (1925) suggested an estimate of 7,000 people, while Cook (1943) posited a total of about 11,000 at the beginning of the Mission Period, and Heizer (1974) and Levy (1978) estimated about 10,000. Based on Mission records, Milliken (1995:25) estimated a population density of about 2.5 people per square mile. In the San Francisco peninsula area, Milliken (1995:19) claimed that the earliest explorers usually encountered native villages every “three to five miles,” and noted that their descriptions suggested village populations numbering from 60 to 90 persons. Elsewhere in Ohlone territory, estimates of village sizes range from 200 to 400 people. Milliken (1995:19) reported that the largest village, near Carquinez Strait, had a population of some 400 people. Other large villages were located on San Francisquito Creek (250 inhabitants), and on the coast at Point Año Nuevo (no estimate given).

Cultural Resources Treatment Plan for the 5-Year Development Plan at Santa Clara University — DRAFT Albion Environmental, Inc. David J. Powers and Associates, Inc. July 2015 37 Legend

Mission

CALIFORNIA Boundary of linguisitc area

Miwok

San Francisco Solano, 1823

Coast Miwok

San Rafael, 1817

San Francisco, 1776

San Jose, 1797

Santa Clara, 1777 Costanoan

Santa Cruz, 1791

San Juan Bautista, 1797

PACIFIC OCEAN San Carlos de Boromeo, 1770 Northern Valley Yokuts

Soledad, 1791

San Antonio, 1771

San Miguel, 1796

San Luis Obispo, 1772 0 50 100 Miles

Figure 2. Missions and linguistic groups represented near Mission Santa Clara.

Albion Environmental, Inc. File name: Feature_2_Linguistics_Map.ai, J2015-011.01, Stella D’Oro, 01July2015 File name: Feature_2_Linguistics_Map.ai, J2015-011.01, According to Milliken (1995:256), Tamien speakers occupied much of what today is the flat Santa Clara Valley, from the Guadalupe River westward to Stevens Creek, near the present-day city of Cupertino. From north to south, this region encompassed the area from present-day Agnews down to modern downtown San Jose. Within a four-mile radius of the Santa Clara Mission site there were three large villages of over 120 inhabitants and two very small hamlets (Milliken 1995:66). Although the native names for these three villages have been lost, the missionaries gave them Spanish designations. The village of San Francisco Solano was located near the mouth of the Guadalupe River, while the village of Santa Ysabel was situated farther east, along the lower Coyote River. The third large village, called San Jose Cupertino, was three miles southwest of the Santa Clara Mission site. One of the small hamlets was located very near the site of the original Santa Clara church, while the second hamlet was approximately one mile upstream on the Guadalupe River.

Ethnographers (Kroeber 1925; Broadbent 1972; Levy 1978; Bean 1994; Milliken 1995) have been able to piece together a generalized picture of traditional Ohlone culture using oral history, archaeological investigations, and 18th century Spanish letters, diaries, and accounts. The Ohlone lived in approximately 50 autonomous villages that Kroeber called tribelets (Levy 1978). The tribelet defined the basic unit of Ohlone political organization. Tribelet chiefs might be either men or women. The office was inherited patrilineally, usually passing from father to son (Levy 1978:487). Each tribelet occupied a permanent primary habitation site, in addition to many smaller resource procurement camps. Each village within the tribelet was probably occupied for several months each year, with groups of families moving between different locations as food resources became seasonally available. Groups of families coalesced during winter, in part to make use of shared food stores but also to engage in annual ceremonial activities. Many Spanish diaries also note that warfare was common between Ohlone groups, normally consisting of small-scale battles resulting from arguments over land rights, or in defense of the honor of some individual or family in a tribelet (Broadbent 1972; Margolin 1978; Milliken 1995).

Early Spanish chroniclers, like Father Juan Crespi, describe the Ohlone as “graceful and well-formed” (Heizer 1974:15). Diaries and ethnographic reports indicate that Ohlone men and boys generally went naked, but covered themselves in mud during chill mornings. They wore necklaces of Olivella shells and abalone pendants, and many had pierced ears and nasal septums, which they adorned with various ornaments. Unlike most native Californians, some Ohlone men did not pluck out their beards but allowed the hair to grow on their chins (Levy 1978:493; Milliken 1995:18). Men with long hair either braided it or tied it on top of their head with a buckskin thong. Women wore skirts of braided plant fiber in the front and sea otter or deerskin rear aprons. Women commonly sported tattooed chins, which consisted largely of lines and rows of dots. Both sexes wore robes in cold weather. These consisted of woven animal skins such as rabbit or sea otter fur. During ritual occasions, ceremonial dances, and warfare, men frequently applied various plant dyes to their body and adorned themselves with feathers and other finery.

The Ohlone were hunters and gatherers who supported themselves largely or entirely by the exploitation of natural plants and animals. They followed a seasonal round of resource availability. Life varied with the seasons, requiring dispersed family groups to move over the tribelet territory during seasons of abundance when a heavy labor effort was required; resources were stored for the lean winter and early spring when the tribelet tended to congregate together (Levy 1978).

Although the Ohlone consumed a variety of different foods, most references to ethnographic subsistence practices indicate that they relied on the acorn as a staple food (Beechey 1968; Bickel 1981; Broadbent 1972; King 1974; Milliken 1995:17). The preferred acorns came from Tanbark oak (Lithocarpus densiflorus), valley oak (Quercus lobata), coast live oak (Quercus agrifolia), and California black oak (Quercus kelloggii). Readying the acorns for consumption was an involved

Cultural Resources Treatment Plan for the 5-Year Development Plan at Santa Clara University — DRAFT Albion Environmental, Inc. David J. Powers and Associates, Inc. July 2015 39 process. Acorns were usually collected in fall and ground into flour using stone pestles in either portable stone or bedrock mortars. The flour was leached in freshwater streams to remove the tannic acid. Acorn meal was consumed during winter as mush or cakes (Broadbent 1972:61). In addition to acorns, other important plant resources were Buckeye (the nuts of which were leached and made into a mush), and the seeds of dock, gray pine, and tarweed, all of which were roasted in baskets with hot coals before eating. Berries gathered by the Ohlone included gooseberries, blackberries, madrone, and wild grapes. Roots were also gathered; these included wild onion, cattail, and wild carrot. For coastal groups, kelp was a common food, which was sun-dried and roasted (Broadbent 1972).

Shell mounds attest to the importance of shellfish in the Ohlone diet, particularly for coastal populations. Indeed, there are many references to shellfish collection and consumption in the diaries of Spanish explorers, indicating that this resource was of significance to Contact-Period diets. Shellfish resources of primary importance included mussels (Mytilus spp.), abalone, (Haliotis spp.), and various clam, oyster, and scallop species. Mussels, clams, and other species were probably collected year-round but primarily during winter, being taken by hand or with prying bars or sticks. Clams were dug from beds within tidal flats, and a variety of fish (salmon, sturgeon, steelhead, and numerous other marine species native to California waters) were captured with spears or nets from riverine or coastal habitats (Broadbent 1972; Levy 1978). In addition, sea lions, seals, and sea otters were taken, generally by clubbing them on the beaches (Baumhoff 1963:17). The meat of beached whales was also occasionally consumed after being roasted in earth ovens. Some Ohlone groups also used small “balsas,” or rafts made from Tule reeds, not only to exploit marine fishes but also to obtain lakeside waterfowl, such as ducks and geese.

Various land animals were also important to Ohlone subsistence. Large terrestrial game mammals such as deer, pronghorn, and tule elk (Baumhoff 1963:17) were key sources of protein. In order to facilitate the hunting of deer, the Ohlone, like many other Californian groups, periodically practiced controlled burning of chaparral-bearing grasslands and woodlands. These fires cleared lands of dense vegetation cover and increased the productivity of grasses and stimulated re-growth of tender shoots that attracted browsing deer. Rabbits were also taken. These were hunted in large, communal drives and snared in nets, where they were summarily clubbed to death. Ohlone hunted other small game as well, such as squirrel, ground squirrel, woodrat, and even mouse and mole (Levy 1978:491). Insects such as caterpillars and grasshoppers were also collected and eaten.

Little is known about Ohlone mythology and cosmology, although ethnographers generally agree that their beliefs were similar to their Yokuts and Salinan neighbors to the east and south (Kroeber 1925:470-473; Levy 1978:489-490). The sun was one of several principal deities; prayers were directed to the sun through offerings of smoke, seeds, tobacco, and shell beads (Broadbent 1972; Levy 1978). Other prominent deities included Coyote, who was reputed to have taught the Ohlone the arts of subsistence. Shamans held prominent places in Ohlone culture. They wielded magical powers and maintained contact with the spirit realm. They were also healers who cured disease and could diagnose ailments through ritual singing and dancing. Shamans could also control the weather and assure an abundant crop of acorns or a successful hunt (Levy 1978:489).

According to ethnographers (Kroeber 1925; Baumhoff 1980; Milliken 1995; Loeb 1933; et al.), it is likely that Ohlone peoples practiced elements of the Kuksu religious cult. This cult was prominent among a number of indigenous northern and central California groups during the period just before and during European contact (e.g., Pomo, Patwin, Maidu, and Miwok). The Kuksu religion involved ceremonial dances, ritual, and specific regalia, such as elaborate headgear made of tule and decorated with sticks to which feathers were attached. Although the purpose of the cult has been debated and speculated upon for decades, it appears that it might have been practiced for the purpose of ensuring productive hunting, fertility, bountiful harvests, good weather, and good health.

Cultural Resources Treatment Plan for the 5-Year Development Plan at Santa Clara University — DRAFT Albion Environmental, Inc. David J. Powers and Associates, Inc. July 2015 40 Previous Pre-Colonial Archaeological Investigations on Campus

The Alameda Native American Burial Site (CA-SCL-755) is the only pre-Mission Period resource identified on campus (Figure 3). It is located roughly in the center of campus, beneath Alameda Mall, and consists of several clusters and individual human burials dating largely from the Middle Period to the Middle/Late Transition Period. There are two main clusters of burials, one centered on the Arts and Sciences Building and the other just west of Heafey Law Library and north of Kenna Hall. Other individual burials are scattered in the area between these two clusters, along The Alameda and beneath the Admission and Enrollments Services Building.2 It is currently unclear whether the site represents a discrete, formalized cemetery or a habitation site, though the former appears to be the more likely interpretation based on available evidence. Thus far, very few prehistoric archaeological materials, beyond the items accompanying the human burials (e.g., shell beads), have been recovered from the site. Indeed, as reported by L. Hylkema (2009:9), only a small handful of Franciscan chert flakes, one pestle, and two mortars – items considered prehistoric, Native American artifacts – have been found on campus. Moreover, no clear midden soils indicative of a prehistoric residential site or occupation layer have ever been identified on campus. In summarizing the site, L. Hylkema (2009:9) has remarked that CA-SCL-755 appears

…to be a single-component site dating to the Terminal Phase of the Middle Period, as suggested by the bead assemblage and confirmed by the 14C dates. It is tentatively suggested ...that this is a formalized cemetery rather than a habitation site, judging by the virtual lack of midden and other habitation debris associated with the burials. In fact, only two isolated mortars, one pestle, and a handful of Franciscan chert flakes have been recovered within the campus. Another possible scenario is that the midden may have been stripped off SCL-755 over the years, and all that remains are the basal layers containing the burials.

This pattern of a formalized, discrete cemetery without accompanying occupation has been noted in the archaeological literature for the Santa Clara Valley. Milliken et al. (2007:110-111), for example, have identified these as “off-village” or “non-village” cemeteries, and characterized them as falling into one of three types: (1) cemeteries in rich midden adjacent to villages; (2) cemeteries away from villages in sterile or near-sterile sediments; and (3) possible dedicated cemetery mounds with formal burials and some dietary residue from feasting. Based on the available evidence, it appears that CA- SCL-755 is best classified as a “Type 2” (or “non-midden”) cemetery site. An immediately adjacent village site has never been discovered and, unless the midden soil has been stripped off, the burials appear to have been interred in non-midden or sterile soils. A small handful of other sites in the valley, including CA-SCL-674 (the Rubino Site) and CA-SCL-131 (the Mazzoni Site), exhibit a similar pattern (Milliken 2007:110-111; Bennyhoff 1994:66). So far, Type 2 cemetery sites appear to date to either the Middle Period or the Middle/Late Transition Period (Milliken 2007:110).

Figure 3 depicts the general configuration of CA-SCL-755 and burials encountered to date. Since the first burials were uncovered in the 1920s, a total of 31 prehistoric human interments have been discovered at CA-SCL-755. Unfortunately, there was little documentation or information on the burials that pre-date the 1990s. Most of the information from these early burials comes from newspaper accounts.

2 XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX REDACTED

Cultural Resources Treatment Plan for the 5-Year Development Plan at Santa Clara University — DRAFT Albion Environmental, Inc. David J. Powers and Associates, Inc. July 2015 41 Figure 3. CA-SCL-755 burials map REDACTED

Cultural Resources Treatment Plan for the 5-Year Development Plan at Santa Clara University — DRAFT Albion Environmental, Inc. David J. Powers and Associates, Inc. July 2015 42 XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX REDACTED

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX REDACTED

Cultural Resources Treatment Plan for the 5-Year Development Plan at Santa Clara University — DRAFT Albion Environmental, Inc. David J. Powers and Associates, Inc. July 2015 43 Upon removal of the burials, remains and associated grave goods were transferred to the Santa Clara University Archaeology Research Lab for analyses and storage. These analyses and their results are documented in Skowronek and Pierce (2006). In brief, each individual burial was subjected to a series of in-depth analyses, including metric and non-metric osteological investigation, determination of age, stature, sex, and examination of pathologies and injury. Additional analyses included radiocarbon dating, dietary evaluation using ratios of carbon (13C to 12C) and nitrogen (15N to 14N) isotopes in human bone collagen, and DNA analysis. Associated grave goods from seven of the ten burials, especially shell beads and ornaments, also were subject to detailed analyses (L. Hylkema 2006) to determine temporal placement and possibly socio-economic status of individuals interred at the site. Shell beads and pendants were classified according to the Bennyhoff and Hughes (1987) typology. Dates were obtained using both conventional 14C techniques and Accelerator Mass Spectrometry (AMS). Collectively, dates suggest that the burials were deposited between 2,400 and 1,200 years ago, placing them within the Middle (500 BC–AD 800) and Middle/Late Transition (AD 800–1200) periods of San Francisco Bay area prehistory.

These analyses indicate a number of interesting trends regarding dietary patterns and pathologies. Six of the burials from the Arts and Sciences Building Project were subjected to detailed stable isotope analysis (δ13 C [-21.15], δ15N [+6.95]). In each case, patterns are suggestive of a diet consisting primarily of terrestrial resources, such as land mammals and plants (L. Hylkema 2009: Skowronek and Pierce 2006). Despite the relative proximity of the San Francisco Bay, terrestrial resources were apparently more important than marine/bay resources. Six individuals were also examined with regard to pathologies or physical ailments. This examination revealed that moderate to severe dental attrition and degenerative joint disease were the most common condition, with all six exhibiting the former and three the latter. Harris lines (indicating malnutrition or stress during formative bone growth) were observed on one specimen, while another exhibited periostitis and hypertrophic bone within the maxillary sinus.

Cultural Resources Treatment Plan for the 5-Year Development Plan at Santa Clara University — DRAFT Albion Environmental, Inc. David J. Powers and Associates, Inc. July 2015 44 XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX REDACTED

L. Hylkema’s (2009) report of CA-SCL-755 summarizes all the pertinent data (e.g., osteometric, chronometric, DNA analyses, stable isotopic analyses, diagnostic mortuary artifacts) from 22 of the 31 burials found on campus. She notes:

Fourteen sets of remains from SCL-755 are female, based upon osteological determination or DNA analysis. With the exception of a few individuals, all are generally healthy. The ages of nine of the 21 individuals could not be determined. Seven were adults, three were children under the age of 12, and two were juveniles between the ages of 12 and 18. Nine of the 21 burials had no associated grave goods. Of the burials that did, the most frequent artifact type was Olivella A1 series beads (a/b/c), with a total of 254. Olivella F3a/b types were the second most common, with a total of 251 beads dispersed between the interments. Haliotis pendants were the third most common grave offering….Although the sample is small and the 14C dates span nearly 1,000 years, the similarity of artifacts found with some of the burials suggest a single component, and the scarcity of midden constituents possibly means that SCL-755 was a formalized cemetery rather than a village area. Radiocarbon dates suggest the remains span the Middle and Middle/Late Transition Periods… and the Olivella bead and Haliotis pendant types appear to confirm this.

Cultural Resources Treatment Plan for the 5-Year Development Plan at Santa Clara University — DRAFT Albion Environmental, Inc. David J. Powers and Associates, Inc. July 2015 45 Research Theme: Regional Chronology

One of the most basic tasks of archaeological investigation involves the determination of time and space parameters. Before most other issues (settlement and subsistence, social organization, etc.) can adequately be addressed, it is necessary to organize archaeological materials into meaningful temporal contexts.

Currently no well-defined, universally agreed-upon chronological sequence exists for the Santa Clara Valley as a whole (Hildebrandt and Mikkelsen 1993:31). Although King and Hickman (1973) developed a chronological scheme for the area, it has been criticized (Hildebrandt 1983; Hildebrandt and Mikkelsen 1993:47) and is not in widespread use; much of it is hypothetical and of limited utility. In general, contemporary researchers have normally subsumed the chronology of the Santa Clara Valley within larger temporal frameworks (Lillard et al. 1939; Heizer 1949; Beardsley 1954; Fredrickson 1974; Bennyhoff and Hughes 1987; M. Hylkema 1998). M. Hylkema (1998), by contrast, has organized Santa Clara prehistory in reference to the temporal scheme developed by Bennyhoff and Hughes (1987).

As previously noted, very little is known about the San Francisco Bay area and environs prior to 5,000 years ago. Evidence for this time period is sparse because a combination of rising sea levels, sediment build-up in valley floors, and marshland infilling along estuary margins has obscured and/or buried evidence of early human occupation. Nonetheless, some of the earliest evidence for occupation of this area comes from the Santa Clara Valley. Hildebrandt (1983) argues that occupation of the Santa Clara Valley began sometime around 8,000 years ago – based on radiocarbon dates for CA- SCL-178. If this date represents a true occupation, it is clear that existing chronological sequences do not adequately reflect the prehistory of Santa Clara Valley.

A further issue for archaeologists concerned with regional culture chronology pertains to the timing of adaptive shifts. Although Santa Clara prehistory is largely interpreted with reference to larger chronological sequences applicable to the Bay Area as a whole, it is increasingly recognized that different regions had different adaptive patterns. These adaptive patterns occurred in different regions at different times. M. Hylkema (1998.:232) notes that whereas a cultural florescence transpired among the people of the southern San Francisco Bay, neighboring people of the Peninsula Coast maintained an older adaptive pattern that did not change until much later. The determination of a fine- scaled chronology exclusive to the Santa Clara Valley would play an important role in resolving issues of why and how adaptive shifts occurred in one region but not another.

Data Requirements: Property Types: burial complex/cemeteries, midden, residential sites, and isolates

Other Data Sources: typological cross-dating, organic materials suitable for radiocarbon assays (e.g. charcoal, ash, bone, or soil humates, etc.), obsidian hydration analysis, and, to a more limited extent, stratigraphic analyses are likely to be the most useful sources of chronological information. In central California, in particular, much success in ordering chronological data has come from the temporal ordering of burial associations, especially bead lot research (Milliken and Bennyhoff 1993).

Potential Research Questions:  Can distinct, single component loci be identified within multicomponent sites? Can these loci be placed in chronological order using available data?

 Is occupation “continuous” or are distinct periods of disuse or abandonment present?

Cultural Resources Treatment Plan for the 5-Year Development Plan at Santa Clara University — DRAFT Albion Environmental, Inc. David J. Powers and Associates, Inc. July 2015 46  What are the temporal placements of sites, and how do any diagnostic artifacts, associations, or cultural assemblages fit with chronological patterns recognized in other areas? Do marker artifacts appear to date within the same time frames as they do in other locations?

 Are there data to suggest that multiple occupation components exist? If so, do these pattern in such a way that discrete vertical or horizontal deposits can be identified and a history of site use defined?

Research Theme: Prehistoric Human-Land Relationships

As nearly all contemporary archaeologists agree, the natural environment is an important part of the overall environment in which a sociocultural system operates. This is especially true for hunter- gatherer systems, such as those that developed in the southern Bay Area. These systems featured a technology that exploited naturally occurring food resources with only a minimum of environmental manipulation. A very direct relationship existed between the subsistence practices of the people and the overall productivity of their environment.

The past environment of the Santa Clara Valley is a topic of interest to many researchers (e.g., paleoecologists, archaeologists, and anthropologists). No comprehensive Holocene paleoenvironmental reconstruction is available for the area, although it is known that large-scale environmental processes (such as eustatic marine transgression, sedimentation, etc.) induced changes in the distribution of plant and animal communities. Yet, little is known about the human responses to such changes. Meyer (2000:7) points out that the influence of large-scale geological processes on regional site-distribution patterns has not been systematically investigated.

Data Requirements: Property Types: Nearly all the predicted property types (midden sites, lithic scatters, burial complexes/cemeteries, and residential sites) have the potential of elucidating aspects of the prehistoric landscape.

Other Data Sources: ideally, data on environmental change should be independent of cultural data so as to eliminate interpretative problems such as the role of cultural selection and to avoid circular reasoning when considering cultural responses to environmental change. Independent environmental data that might be found at archaeological sites include: (1) stratified sites with terminal Pleistocene or Holocene fluvial sediments; and (2) pollen preserved in fossil spring or lake sediments. Indirect evidence for environmental change can sometimes be garnered through analyses of floral and faunal assemblages retrieved from archaeological deposits.

Potential Research Questions:  What were the major environmental changes that affected the project area during the span of human occupation? How did humans react to these changes?

 What type of environment characterized the project site and immediate site catchment during prehistory? What were the major plant and animal communities in the area?

 Was the environment within the project area similar to what was described by the Spanish chroniclers? Was the area situated on or near a wetland/marsh? Is there any evidence of lagoons or ponds within or near the project area?

Cultural Resources Treatment Plan for the 5-Year Development Plan at Santa Clara University — DRAFT Albion Environmental, Inc. David J. Powers and Associates, Inc. July 2015 47 Research Theme: Sociopolitical Organization

Recently, a few researchers have argued that some hunter-gatherer societies in California achieved levels of social and political organization that went beyond band-level political organization (T. King 1974; Arnold 1992; Martz 1992). Increasingly, the presence of chiefdoms or ranked societies among central California aboriginal groups has been posited. King (1974) investigated a Middle Period burial complex at Tiburon Hills along San Francisco Bay and noted differences in grave lot variability and burial placement. He concluded that the findings provided “strong evidence for social ranking.” Similarly, Fredrickson (1974) noted increasing sociotechnic and idiotechnic material inclusions in burials in East Bay sites dating from Middle Period to Late Period times. For the southern San Francisco Bay, in particular, M. Hylkema (1998) notes that A.D. 700 marked a period of increasingly complex social organization that culminated in unequal distributions of wealth and an elaborate social hierarchy.

Early Spanish explorers and missionaries provide some information regarding contact-period sociopolitical organization in central California. For example, Fages (1937:73–74) wrote:

Besides their chiefs of villages, they have in every district another one who commands four or five subordinate villages together, the village chiefs being his subordinates. Each of them collects every day in his village tribute which the Indians pay him in seeds, fruits, game and fish….The subordinate captain is under obligation to give his commander notice of every item of news or occurrence, and to send him all offenders under proper restraint, that he may reprimand them and hold them responsible for their crimes….The villages receive [the paramount chief] ceremoniously, make gifts to him of the best and most valuable things they have, and they assign certain ones to be his followers and accompany him to the place where he resides.

There have been relatively few archaeological projects in the Santa Clara Valley that have investigated prehistoric sociopolitical organization. One, conducted by Hildebrandt and Mikkelsen (1993:195) for several sites in the southern part of the valley, provides some valuable information. The authors note:

Found in various extremes of flexure (tight to loosely flexed) and variable orientations, no differences were noted in treatment based on sex or age. The few decorative and utilitarian items that were found in association were characteristically “everyday” items, including a millingslab and mortar; a pestle; bone bead and seal bone; and Olivella shell bead and perforated canine tooth. The absence of ceremonial items and the lack of any form of status differentiation indicate an egalitarian society. There is no direct evidence from the burial population of ascribed status, even though indications of a more sedentary lifeway, with its associated specialization, trade, and redistribution, would imply some division of labor and socioeconomic inequality.

Data Requirements: Property Types: burial complex/cemetery and residential sites

Other Data Sources: questions regarding the level of sociopolitical complexity achieved by prehistoric groups, especially hunter-gatherer populations, are best addressed through the evaluation of mortuary evidence. Social rank distinctions are often determined by both the contents and the collective arrangements of burials.

Potential Research Questions:  Do the burials and their grave associations exhibit change through time (e.g., position, orientation, grave offerings), which would indicate cultural change rather than a change in genetic or physical type?

Cultural Resources Treatment Plan for the 5-Year Development Plan at Santa Clara University — DRAFT Albion Environmental, Inc. David J. Powers and Associates, Inc. July 2015 48  How were the prehistoric peoples of the Santa Clara Valley organized during different time periods? Did they move from an egalitarian to a ranked society over time? If so, how was the ranked society structured?

 How does the societal organization of Santa Clara compare with other Native American groups in California? What might account for the similarities and differences?

Research Theme: Prehistoric Demography

Human remains from an archaeological context can play a major role in understanding many aspects of a past society, including age/sex ratios, diet, aspects of social/political organization (see above) and health. Collectively, these data can yield potentially important information regarding paleodemography – the study of ancient human populations.

Numerous sites in Santa Clara Valley have yielded human burials (e.g. CA-SCL-6, CA-SCL-128, CA-SCL-300, CA-SCL-302, CA-SCL-288, CA-SC-418, CA-SCL-484, and CA-SCL-674). As noted, one of the most comprehensive analyses of human remains was conducted at the Rubino Site (CA- SCL-674), which dated to the Early/Middle Transition Period (Grady et al. 2001). The authors recovered 270 burials and identified 224 individuals during a multi-year cultural resource management project. In addition to data on mortuary patterns, orientation, and burial associations, analyses were conducted to determine age/sex, stature, skeletal and dental pathologies, and bone modification. The results from these analyses present a significant contribution to the study of central California archaeology, and provide future researchers with several testable hypotheses.

Data Requirements: Property Types: burial complexes/cemeteries, midden sites, residential sites

Other Data Sources: age can be assessed by a variety of means, including eruption sequence and degree of wear on teeth, fusion of the sutures between bones of the skull, and fusion of the ends (epiphyses) on the shafts (diaphyses) of limb bones. Sex differences can be determined with particular skeletal elements, most commonly the pelvis, especially from the form of the sciatic notch. Other elements, including the skull and even the teeth, can also be used. The determination of past diet using skeletal material can be assessed using several different chemical tests (see the subsistence section below for a more detailed discussion). Health data can be gleaned from a variety of different ailments that impact the skeleton. Obvious examples are bone fractures and tooth caries; other maladies, including arthritis, yaws, tuberculosis, and periodontal disease, leave tangible marks.

Potential Research Questions:  What was the age/sex composition of the site’s population? Can inferences on the demographic structure of the site’s occupants be extrapolated? Is there evidence of change through time (i.e., life tables)?

 Is the site solely a burial/cemetery site? Did it function in another capacity as well? Is it associated with a nearby site?

 Does the spatial arrangement of burials suggest that burial placement was done with a deliberate pattern in mind? Are individual burials flexed or extended? Is there evidence of cremation?

 What can associated grave good tell us about the resident population?

Cultural Resources Treatment Plan for the 5-Year Development Plan at Santa Clara University — DRAFT Albion Environmental, Inc. David J. Powers and Associates, Inc. July 2015 49  Does the site’s configuration tell us anything about the nature of the prehistoric inhabitants? How does this site compare with others in the region? How does it fit in with established temporal schemes for central California?

 Can a reasonable estimate of the population of the site and the region through time be derived from the available data?

 Can the population be assigned to a specific physical type? Were they the same “physical type” as the people in other geographical areas? Does the physical type or types change through time?

 What was the relative health of the site’s population, synchronically and diachronically? Do particular physical types have a propensity to certain pathological conditions? Were there periods of time when individuals suffered from pathologies? What was the impact of Euroamerican contact on the relative health of ethnographic populations?

 Is there evidence of intergroup conflict and/or warfare based on an analysis of skeletal remains from the site? Do these analyses demonstrate similar traits as exhibited at CA-SCL- 478, where Wiberg (2002) posited possible warfare? Do skeletal populations demonstrate evidence of “trophy limb” taking?

In the event that burials are discovered during any of the capital projects, a specified set of protocols and procedures will be followed. A later section in this document explains these protocols and procedures in more detail.

Research Theme: Settlement/Subsistence Adaptations

In hunter-gatherer studies, investigations of settlement patterns and subsistence practices are closely related. A basic tenet of such studies is that hunter-gatherers organize their settlement systems primarily in response to the locations of subsistence resources (Jochim 1976). The migrations and/or availability of game, the seasons of vegetable foods, and the availability of permanent water supplies during dry periods of the year vitally affect how hunter-gatherers obtained their food, influenced their technology, and were reflected in their settlement patterns.

There have been a few settlement studies conducted in the Santa Clara Valley. The first was initiated by King and Hickman (1973), who hypothesized that large occupation sites would primarily be found at the mouths of canyons. This was followed nearly ten years later by Bergthold (1982) who tested the hypotheses of King and Hickman. She reached a different conclusion than King and Hickman, arguing instead that sites, of whatever kind, were concentrated in riverine localities.

Hildebrandt and Mikkelsen (1993:31-32) reassessed Bergthold’s data and concluded that the distributional data suggest that:

…large occupation sites are relatively more abundant at the mouths of canyons (comprising 35.5% of all sites recorded in this zone) and, to a lesser extent, along river banks (29.9%) and marsh margins (23.3%). They seem less common in upper canyons (14.8%) and alluvial plain (11.1%) settings.

There have been few studies focusing on diachronic changes in subsistence patterns for the Santa Clara Valley. Hildebrandt and Mikkelsen (1993:182-183) conducted one of the few studies, although much of it is based on the investigation of only a few sites. They maintained that Early Period groups in the Santa Clara Valley region were highly mobile and exploited resources from the coast as well as from inland areas. The use of local resources seems to have intensified during the Middle Period,

Cultural Resources Treatment Plan for the 5-Year Development Plan at Santa Clara University — DRAFT Albion Environmental, Inc. David J. Powers and Associates, Inc. July 2015 50 reflected by a relatively greater dependence on acorn and lacustrine plants and animals. By the Late Period, the use of marine resources seems to have diminished, resulting in a subsistence system focused on the exploitation of local lacustrine resources.

In a more recent study, Milliken et al. (2007), building on the work of previous researchers (e.g., Broughton 1999; Simons 1992; Hildebrandt et al. 1984), argue that diachronic subsistence adaptations in the Bay Area can best be understood in reference to resource intensification. Classically defined, and from an agricultural perspective (Boserup 1965), this model suggests that total productivity per areal unit of land is increased at the expense of overall efficiency. From an archaeological perspective, however, this means that human foragers shift focus from low-cost, high- return resources (e.g., large herbivores) to high-cost, low-return resources (e.g., acorns, small fishes, molluscs). In general, this process can be the result of increasing population density, overexploitation of favored resources, environmental change, or some combination of these and results in a pattern whereby long-term subsistence patterns are characterized by an overall loss of foraging efficiency.

Data Requirements: Property Types: midden sites, residential sites, and burial complexes/cemeteries

Other Data Sources: discerning settlement patterns requires data from several different lines of evidence. Sites type (based on location, constituents, and relevant features), paleoenvironmental setting, floral and faunal remains, and relevant features need to be identified. Palynological analyses can also aid in the determination of settlement patterns, by potentially elucidating whether occupation was seasonal or year-round. If shell is present, oxygen isotope analyses can also aid in this endeavor.

Subsistence issues can be addressed through either direct lines of evidence (e.g., floral and faunal remains) or proxy data (e.g., milling equipment, flaked stone). Stable isotope analysis of human bone is another way of determining subsistence, especially dietary patterns. Stable nitrogen isotope analysis can reveal distinctions between reliance on marine and land-based food resources, while strontium isotope analysis can detect distinctions between meat and plant diets. Other possible sources of information on subsistence include site location and function. The placement of sites near particularly productive resources (e.g., oak groves, drainages, streams, etc.) may offer insights into prehistoric subsistence behavior. Additionally, the presence of functionally diagnostic tools and the potential for blood residue studies of flaked stone tools should be considered.

Potential Research Questions:  What types of sites exist within the project area? What kinds of activities were conducted there? What do the frequencies of sites reveal about occupational intensity? How intensively was this habitat occupied relative to other areas in the Santa Clara Valley?

 How sedentary or how mobile were these populations? Can settlement systems be classified as either “collectors” or “foragers?”

 Did settlement patterns change over time? Do these data imply anything about the kinds of food resources occupants may have targeted?

 What types of resources were exploited by the inhabitants of the project area? What do these resources say about the types of environments exploited? Are faunal/floral remains present, and if not, why?

 What was the subsistence economy at the site and does it change through time?

Cultural Resources Treatment Plan for the 5-Year Development Plan at Santa Clara University — DRAFT Albion Environmental, Inc. David J. Powers and Associates, Inc. July 2015 51  Can a specific season or seasonal round be determined from the range of subsistence activities at sites in the project area?

 What kinds of extractive technologies are evidenced at project sites? Are there particular features or associations that imply the use of specific resources?

Research Theme: Lithic Technologies

The potential for lithic analysis to contribute to our understanding of past sociocultural systems has long been recognized. The debris left by the production and use of flaked and ground stone tools is ubiquitous in prehistoric sites in California.

It is expected that some sites will contribute information about the lithic technologies used by local inhabitants. The forms and materials represented in flaked and ground stone tool assemblages often provide insight into the strategies used to obtain toolstone and the production methods used to manufacture various implements. Lithic debitage can also be quite telling, as it results directly from the process of toolstone reduction. In combination, technological profiles of lithic debris from a number of sites can expose patterns of toolstone use and technology in a given location. Ground stone assemblages can also be indicative of tool manufacture and treatment, revealing the source materials used in their production, whether implements were intentionally trimmed or shaped, and if they were used expediently or intentionally curated for extended use.

Data Requirements: Property Types: midden sites, residential sites, lithic scatters, and isolates

Other Data Sources: sites with adequate amounts of stone tools (flaked stone and ground stone) whose functions can be determined have a good potential to addressing this research question. Sites that contain clear lithic reduction sequences or evidence of special reduction techniques (e.g., bipolar reduction) and that are datable (through, for example, obsidian hydration) are especially good candidates for shedding light on prehistoric lithic technology.

Potential Research Questions:  What kinds of artifact manufacturing and tool use activities occurred at the project site? Do these have implications for subsistence resource use or tasks involving the procurement and manipulation of other raw materials (e.g., toolstone)?

 Do various artifact classes reflect expedient manufacturing and use, while others imply a more prolonged, transported, or “curated” type of pattern? What do these patterns say about site use and function?

 Can lithic sources be traced to nearby or distant locations? If so, what does this imply about the geographic affinity of site occupants?

 Are lithic quarries, workshop/activity areas present and do these change over time?

 Can the lithic assemblage from the site elucidate patterns of settlement? What might the formality (or lack of formality) and/or diversity in prehistoric toolkits imply about patterns of mobility?

Cultural Resources Treatment Plan for the 5-Year Development Plan at Santa Clara University — DRAFT Albion Environmental, Inc. David J. Powers and Associates, Inc. July 2015 52  Are there any exotic toolstone (e.g., obsidian) in the assemblage? If so, what does this say about patterns of trade or exchange? Can formal trade and exchange networks be discerned from data gleaned from the lithic assemblage?

Research Theme: Riverine/Wetlands Archaeology

The earliest Spanish chroniclers describe the southern San Francisco Bay area as a vast mosaic of marshland, streams, rivers, and sloughs that was home to a rich assortment of waterfowl (resident and migratory), terrestrial game (deer and elk), and numerous economically important plants (e.g., edible roots and utilitarian fibers of tule and cattails). They note the location of large villages near lagoons of fresh water, marshes, rivers, and tule patches, and describe individuals hunting ducks from small rafts (Palou 1926:333-334). Juan Crespi’s diaries from the Fages expedition in March 1772, for example, offer a good description of the valley and its inhabitants:

Despite descriptions of this sort, the importance of wetlands/marshland habitat to prehistoric hunter- gatherers in central California has been a topic of considerable debate. Indeed, much has been written about the viability of wetland habitats; however, not everyone agrees that wetlands are favorable for resource acquisition (Hildebrandt 1997). For the Santa Clara Valley, in particular, King and Hickman (1973) maintained that the marshy bottomlands were relatively unimportant to the prehistoric occupants of the valley. By contrast, Deitz (1977) argued that the marshy bottomlands were not only suitable for occupation, but that the system of sloughs, streams, and rivers was an important determinant of site location, and represented a resource base that may have influenced subsistence practices for a longer period of time than did reliance on the acorn. Winter (1975:34) offered a third opinion, arguing that lowland marshes were ephemeral and formed only after periods of heavy rainfall. In assessing the above arguments, Hildebrandt and Mikkelsen (1993:33) speculate that the ethnographic descriptions of the Spanish explorers reflect a Late Period shift to the use of wetland resources/habitats. They argue for the need to study such environments in Santa Clara Valley in order to address such questions. In short, the study of riverine/wetland habitats can elucidate many aspects of human occupation of particular interest to archaeologists working in the Santa Clara Valley.

Data Requirements: Property Types: midden sites and residential sites

Other Data Sources: an analysis of floral and faunal remains, site location, and the determination of whether residential sites were placed adjacent to wetlands and/or rivers are needed to resolve issues of prehistoric marshland occupation. Also critical to this sort of investigation are paleoenvironmental studies that stress landscape evolution.

Potential Research Questions:  How important was the riverine/marshland habitat/resources to prehistoric hunter-gatherers of the Santa Clara Valley? Were aquatic resources from these habitats exploited on a regular or episodic basis?

 Does the occupation of riverine/marshland habitat demonstrate diachronic patterning? If so, what does this imply about the importance of this kind of habitat?

Cultural Resources Treatment Plan for the 5-Year Development Plan at Santa Clara University — DRAFT Albion Environmental, Inc. David J. Powers and Associates, Inc. July 2015 53  How can geoarchaeological studies contribute to an understanding of the importance of riverine/wetland habitats?

Research Theme: Complex Hunter-Gatherer Economies

A number of scholars have posited increasing social complexity and political stratification in central California indigenous populations over the course of the Holocene, but especially prominent, and possibly accelerating, during Late Period times. This trend is believed to have culminated in relatively settled populations with “collector-like” subsistence/settlement systems and complex social arrangements. Characteristic traits of Late Period populations in central California included social structures with elite control, partially monetized exchange systems, more sophisticated technologies, far-flung trade/exchange networks, and an increasing variety of ideotechnic objects reflecting new and different symbolic, ceremonial, wealth, and status emphases. Milliken et al. (2007:116) have summarized this trend.

The lifeways in place at the Spanish entry emerged during the time of the Late Period….Culture moved up a notch in complexity, from that of collectors who buried their dead with diverse, numerous but fairly simple ornaments to collectors who invested large amounts of time in the creation of finely wrought wealth objects. The Late Period was called the Emergent Period by Fredrickson (1973, 1994c:100-101), in recognition of the appearance of a new level of sedentism, status ascription, and ceremonial integration in lowland central California.

M. Hylkema (in Garlinghouse and M. Hylkema 2006:27) argues that this trend may have begun during the Middle/Late Transition Period. He writes:

Within the south Bay, archaeological sites dating to the Middle/Late Transition Period (circa AD 700 to 1200) have produced artifact types in mortuary contexts that identify this time as a period of socioeconomic transformation. By the Late Period (circa AD 1200 to the 1770s) an elaborate social hierarchy had emerged. Certain ideotechnic artifact types found in mortuary contexts (particularly Haliotis banjo pendants, tobacco pipes, and incised bird bone whistles) coincide with an elaboration and refinement of wealth, status, and institutional organization.

Data Requirements: Property Types: midden sites, residential sites, and burial complexes/cemeteries

Other Data Sources: Social and political complexity can be assessed in a variety of ways, though one of the most productive involves an assessment of grave and mortuary offerings accompanying human burials. This is based on the assumption that there is a systematic relationship between the treatment of the dead and social differences that existed among the living. Unfortunately, social complexity is a relative condition and is best analyzed in reference to other similar data sets. Another way is to analyze artifacts based on utilitarian versus non-utilitarian parameters. Can artifacts infused with symbolic or social importance be discerned from those that functioned wholly for utilitarian purposes?

Potential Research Questions:  Can ascribed versus achieved status be discerned in the burial population? Can the burial population be divided into status versus non-status groupings? Are some individuals buried with greater quantities and/or more elaborate offerings than other individuals?

Cultural Resources Treatment Plan for the 5-Year Development Plan at Santa Clara University — DRAFT Albion Environmental, Inc. David J. Powers and Associates, Inc. July 2015 54  Can high status individuals be discerned (this requires identifying individuals buried with artifacts, which according to ethnographic data, were used as money or required high energy expenditure to produce or procure)?

 Can wealth or status objects be discerned in the artifact assemblage? Can exotic or exchange items be discerned?

 Are children and sub-adults buried with wealth and/or prestige privileges?

Cultural Resources Treatment Plan for the 5-Year Development Plan at Santa Clara University — DRAFT Albion Environmental, Inc. David J. Powers and Associates, Inc. July 2015 55 MISSION PERIOD RESOURCES

Mission Santa Clara (1777–1836)

Early Exploration

The Ohlone first came into contact with Europeans in 1602–03 during the voyage of Sebastian Vizcaino, who briefly described the Ohlone inhabitants of Monterey (known as the Rumsen). This contact was brief and it was not until nearly 170 years later that the Spanish again made contact with the Ohlone. In 1769, Gaspar de Portolá, traveling north by land along the Pacific Ocean from San Diego in order to establish a settlement in Monterey, was the first European to sight San Francisco Bay. As he journeyed through Ohlone territory, Portolá gave brief descriptions of the Indians he encountered. Shortly thereafter, in 1770, Lieutenant Pedro Fages led a small expedition inland from Monterey. One of the expedition’s chroniclers, Juan Crespí, made extensive notes on the aboriginal inhabitants of the area. As they traversed the Santa Clara Valley, Crespí made the following remarks:

There is a positive maze of very large freshwater lakes with a great deal of swamp and bulrush patches in this hollow, and I know not how many large running streams, and two or three very large heathen villages. Our captain told me that when they explored here last year, there was a village close to the lakes, some of which we saw from afar off, and they had several Tule-rush floats with oars, with which they fished in the lakes. We saw four heathens running far off at a trot, obviously going to give warning to the other village that was said to be farther up along the route we were following (Crespí [1772] in Brown 1994:9).

In 1777, the first Mission in Santa Clara was established in what would later be known as the Santa Clara Valley, though at the time was called Llano de Los Robles (or “Plain of the Oaks”) by the Spanish (Garcia 1997:5). The valley formed a broad, grassy plain that was dotted with oaks and well- watered by creeks and streams. Numerous Native villages also occupied the region, an important reason the Spanish decided to establish a Mission in the area. The reason for colonization in California was to protect the Spanish-owned, northern Mexico silver mines and other New World investments from Russians encroaching from the north (Archibald 1978:xi; Webb 1952:3). Establishing missions, presidios, and pueblos was seen as an inexpensive way of protecting northern Mexico, while simultaneously attempting to spread Spanish culture and Christian faith. Interactions between Franciscan priests, diverse soldiers of the Crown, and local and non-local indigenous peoples took place under this economic and political regime for nearly sixty years, and under Spanish and later Mexican governments.

The Indigenous Population

Movement of indigenous peoples to the Spanish Missions was one response to the many ways the Spanish and Mexican governments, and their supporters, disrupted local communities. After baptism, indigenous peoples found themselves forging a new community with others who spoke different Indian languages, claimed various tribal territories, and affiliated themselves with dissimilar lineage lines, all the while, interacting with a colonial presence that sought to transform them into "productive citizens" of the colony (Senkewicz 2002:23).

The Spanish policy of reducción greatly affected local communities. M. Hylkema (1995:28) addresses the intent of the Missionaries for bringing Native Americans into the Mission system.

Spain’s goal to colonize California depended entirely on the ability of the missionary priests to reorganize the Native populations into an agrarian work force. At the time of the Spanish explorations

Cultural Resources Treatment Plan for the 5-Year Development Plan at Santa Clara University — DRAFT Albion Environmental, Inc. David J. Powers and Associates, Inc. July 2015 56 the indigenous people within the Ohlonean cultural sphere were organized into over fifty political units, or tribelets, with variations of language, custom and appearance. ...The large populations and their complexity of cultures were generally of little interest to the Spaniards who were intent upon breaking down traditional Indian ways to facilitate their reorganization (redución). Europeans of the 18th century cultivated a perception of moral superiority over non-Christian people, which of course served to justify the management of other cultures to attain their goals….

Franciscan priests reproduced the common Spanish colonial practice of moving Native peoples into mission centers, strategically disassociating them from their homelands and the mythical landscapes, graves of their ancestors, and the named rocks and landmarks contained therein (Lightfoot 2005:65; Margolin 1989:33). The historical record tells us this practice created mission populations composed of peoples from variable ethnolinguistic groups and very distant polities. During several population spikes, more than 1400 Native Americans lived at Mission Santa Clara. Mission Santa Clara’s historic documents indicate a steady influx of Ohlone, Northern Valley Yokuts, and Miwok populations from diverse villages within those ethnolinguistic territories.

The majority of Santa Clara neophytes spoke various dialects of the Costanoan language. Of the 4,972 Costanoan/Ohlone baptized at Mission Santa Clara, most came to this mission between 1777 and 1811 (Figure 4). The first Native converts to the Mission were from nearby Ohlone villages. For example, in 1785, 94.4% of the deaths at Mission Santa Clara were Ohlone (Mayfield et al. 1981:30– 33). People from this ethnolinguistic group were baptized at Mission Santa Clara in three waves, the second wave being the largest. Costanoan/Ohlone peoples baptized at Mission Santa Clara were not homogeneous. Rather, baptisms at Mission Santa Clara represent varying numbers of individuals from different polities and villages in Costanoan/Ohlone territory.

600

Wave 2 500

400

Wave 3 300

Number of Baptisms Wave 1 200

100

8 5 8 801 831 1777 1780 1783 1786 1789 1792 1795 179 1 1804 1807 1810 1813 1816 1819 1822 182 182 1 1834 1837 1840 1843 1846 1849 Year

Figure 4. Number of Costanoan/Ohlone baptisms at Mission Santa Clara, 1777–1849 (Hackel 2006).

Cultural Resources Treatment Plan for the 5-Year Development Plan at Santa Clara University — DRAFT Albion Environmental, Inc. David J. Powers and Associates, Inc. July 2015 57 The Spanish priests at the Mission rarely recorded the Indian name for a particular place of origin. The first baptisms at Mission Santa Clara were of people from Spanish named villages located near the mission (Figure 5). Franciscans gave Spanish names to six villages in close proximity to Mission Santa Clara: Santa Ysabel, San Francisco Solano, San Jose Cupertino, San Juan Bauptista, Santa Clara, and San Francisco (King 1994:205; Milliken 1995:233; Appendix A). These Spanish-named villages were likely in Tamien and Alson tribal territories (Milliken 1995). Individuals from these villages mainly contributed to the first and second waves of baptisms at this mission. In these early years of life at Mission Santa Clara, people lived amongst others from different territories and communities (Alson and Tamien). However, they did not travel very far from their homeland territories, which were important to their identity making prior to Spanish colonization.

The priests at Mission Santa Clara also defined ranchería districts that arbitrarily circumscribed Costanoan/Ohlone territory north, south, east, and west of Mission Santa Clara. These territories included Santa Agueda, San Carlos, San Bernardino, and San Antonio (Appendix A). This redefined nomenclature masks much of the indigenous socio-political diversity at this mission, specifically because ranchería districts grouped many tribes and villages together arbitrarily. Franciscans baptized people from these different ranchería districts mainly during the second wave of baptisms. A few individuals from each ranchería district were baptized between 1777 and 1790. However, after 1790, people frequently came to Mission Santa Clara from more distant villages (Milliken 1995:110). Baptisms from each ranchería district continued until 1802, and baptisms from the San Antonio district, predominantly, continued until 1812. Milliken (2002:51–55) argues that this time within the Mission Period was marked by resistance, radical change, and psychological depression, contributing to the large migrations of Ohlone peoples throughout tribal territory to the Bay Area missions.

The rigors of missionization and especially the introduction of exotic diseases to which Native Californians had no immunity, eventually took their toll on the Ohlone population in the Santa Clara Valley. In 1784 and 1785, for example, a virulent epidemic swept through the Native population at Santa Clara, killing a large number of men, women, and children (Milliken 1995:90–91). During the summer of 1802, another epidemic further ravaged the Native population of the Santa Clara Valley (M. Hylkema 1995:34). By the early part of the 19th century only 50 years after initial contact with Europeans, the Ohlone population in the Santa Clara Valley, and indeed in the larger Bay Area, suffered a decimating decline. Countless Natives succumbed to foreign diseases and the harsh conditions of the Mission system. Mission Santa Clara was only able to sustain and increase the Native population, and thus labor force, through a constant influx of new converts. Disease and a high death rate were common.

With the decimation of coastal populations, Franciscans began searching for new converts in the interior central valleys of California, primarily within Northern Yokuts territory but Miwok were also brought into the Mission, although in smaller numbers (Figure 6). Baptisms of Northern Yokuts and Miwok peoples at Mission Santa Clara de Asís began in 1809, and continued until 1841 (Figure 7). The patterns suggest a constant migration of Northern Yokuts from about 1815–1828, with a sharp decline between the years of 1830 and 1835, possibly influenced by the Estanislao resistance of 1828–1829 (Milliken 2002:60). Fifteen different tribes from this inland region contributed a significant number of people to the population at Mission Santa Clara (Appendix A).

Cultural Resources Treatment Plan for the 5-Year Development Plan at Santa Clara University — DRAFT Albion Environmental, Inc. David J. Powers and Associates, Inc. July 2015 58 Legend

Boundary Spanish-named villages Tribe Rancheria District

Yelamu Souyen Yrgin Urebure Seunen Ssoam Pruristac Pelnen Causen CALIFORNIA Tuibun Luecha Ssalson Santa Agueda Taunan Chiguan Lamchin Alson Asirin Oroysom (San Francisco Solano) Junas Puichon San Francisco Cotegen Santa Clara Santa Ysabel San Antonio San Jose Cupertino Mission Santa Clara Olpen Tamien San Bernardino San Juan Bauptista Tayssen Oljon Partacsi Ritocsi Pala Somontac Matalan Auxentac Quiroste San Carlos Tomoi Achistaca Chaloctaca Pitac Sayanta Cotoni Chitactac Chipuctac Uypi Aptos Unijaima Cajastac Ausaima

Orestac Tiuvta Tamarox PACIFIC OCEAN Motsun

Locuyusta Ochentac Pagsin

Ensen Chabant Rumsen

Chalon 0 5 10 15 20 Miles Sargentaruc

CALIFORNIA

Data from King 1994; Milliken 1994, 1995; Hackel, 2006.

Figure 5. Costanoan/Ohlone tribes, villages, and ranchería ± districts associated with Mission Santa Clara. Albion Environmental, Inc. File name: Figure_5_Ohlone.ai, J2015-011.01, Stella D’Oro, 01July2015 File name: Figure_5_Ohlone.ai, J2015-011.01, Legend

Boundary CALIFORNIA River Tribe

Totote?

Chugeas? Tauhalumnes? Pitemas Laquisemne Tugite Gualansemne Sunomna

Lamane?

Apelamnes? Mayeni Mission Santa Clara

Janalames?

PACIFIC OCEAN

0 5 10 15 20 Miles

Data from Latta 1949; Wallace 1978:462.

CALIFORNIA

Figure 6. Northern Yokuts ± territories associated with Mission Santa Clara.

Albion Environmental, Inc. File name: Figure_6_NorYokuts.ai, J2015-011.01, Stella D’Oro, 01July2015 J2015-011.01, File name: Figure_6_NorYokuts.ai,

140 Northern Yokuts

120 Northern Yokuts/Miwok

100

60 Number of Baptisms

6 9 5 1 5 819 822 1777 1780 1783 178 178 1792 1795 1798 1801 1804 1807 1810 1813 1816 1 1 182 1828 183 183 1838 1841 1844 1847 Year

Figure 7. Number of Northern Yokuts baptisms at Mission Santa Clara, 1777–1847 (Hackel 2006).

On April 15, 1811, a seven year old male from “rancheria de Tugites,” who was given the Spanish name Melitón, was the first individual to come to Mission Santa Clara, speaking the language of those to the east (Hackel 2006; Appendix A). Melitón lived only five years at Mission Santa Clara, before he was buried there on October 27, 1816 (Hackel 2006). Individuals from Tugite, Lamame, and Pitem soon followed Melitón and were the first among the Northern Yokuts baptized at Mission Santa Clara (Appendix A). Franciscans from Mission Santa Clara most likely proselytized in these communities, just to the northeast (Figure 6).

Many individuals from Northern Yokuts communities may have made the decision to come to Mission Santa Clara collectively, suggesting shared decision making, shared behavior, and shared identity. In 1811, Franciscans baptized 96 people from Tugite at this mission. In fact, the majority of these baptisms took place in just five days within this year: 18 May, 6 July, 7 July, 24 August, and 24 September (Hackel 2006). A similar pattern exists in 1812 for the tribal territory of Lamame and in 1815 among people from Pitem.

It is likely that after the baptism of Northern Yokuts from many different communities, Franciscans began moving their proselytizing efforts south along the San Joaquin River towards villages and tribes along and south of the Merced River. Spanish priests may have used Yokuts raids of horses as an excuse to proselytize in new territory. Whether under duress, in resistance, for their own economic gain, or simply because they developed a taste for horse meat, many Northern Yokuts hunted the horses brought to California by colonists supporting the Spanish Crown. As early as 1815, the missions were having trouble with San Joaquin Valley horse raiders (Milliken 2002:59). In fact, in 1815 “a Spanish military expedition under José Pico attempted to chastise Mayem horse raiders” (Milliken 2002:59). Not surprisingly, in 1816, Franciscans baptized 75 people from the community of Mayem at Mission Santa Clara. In 1818 and 1819, Franciscans baptized 61 and 55 members, respectively, from a community that was "the southernmost San Joaquin River group to go to Mission

Cultural Resources Treatment Plan for the 5-Year Development Plan at Santa Clara University — DRAFT Albion Environmental, Inc. David J. Powers and Associates, Inc. July 2015 61 Santa Clara” and was positioned in “the swamp lands between present day Merced and Los Banos” called Janalame (Milliken 2002:57). Catholic priests baptized individuals from another group of tribes from Northern Yokuts territory located generally east of Mission Santa Clara, with numbers peaking between 1820 and 1827. These included Chipeyquis, Tauhalame, Tonul, Atsnil, Tucusuyu, and Chugea (Latta 1949; Milliken 2002; Wallace 1978). Tauhalume is significant because Franciscans recorded the baptism of more people from this community at Mission Santa Clara than from any other Northern Yokuts tribe; 159 people from this community were baptized at Mission Santa Clara, mainly between 1820 and 1827. Between 1826 and 1834, different central valley tribes were baptized at Mission Santa Clara. Tribes new to Mission Santa Clara during this wave of baptisms included Tinelame, Gualensemne, Totote, Sunomna, and Chapaiseme. In some instances during this late period in Mission Santa Clara’s history, Franciscan priests recorded individuals as generally being from “Tular” rather than recording their specific tribe. Baptisms of individuals from “tular” in the mid- 1830s may represent refugees from a devastating malaria epidemic (Milliken 2002:60).

Milliken (2002:60–61) summarizes the mix of Native groups at Mission Santa Clara in 1836, at the end of the Mission Period:

At the beginning of that year there were 1,189 baptized Indians at the Mission and its outlying ranches. About one-third of them, 367 people, were Ohlone-speakers from the original villages of the Santa Clara Valley environs or their descendants (31% of the total). The great majority, 622 people, were Native Yokuts speakers from the San Joaquín Valley, and their children (52% of the total). In addition, 37 young people were descendants of Ohlone-Yokuts Mission marriages (3% of the total). Sierra Miwok-speaking migrants from the Sierra Nevada foothills totaled 104 people (9% of the total). Another 50 people from the “tulares” were either Miwok or Yokuts speakers (5% of the total).

Thus the Indian village at Mission Santa Clara is best viewed as a growing and changing amalgam of indigenous peoples drawn at first from the San Francisco Bay region and later as far away as the San Joaquin Valley and the foothills of the Sierra Nevada. The population represented dozens of formerly autonomous tribelets of no more than a few hundred people, some closely related culturally and linguistically, others from vastly different traditions. The community or perhaps communities within the village were adjusting to both the Spanish Colonial regime and to day-to-day relationships with people with whom they had little or no contact prior to the advent of the Mission. These adjustments and the creation of new personal and community identities are reflected in the archaeological record and therefore form the core of the research questions identified below.

Mission Santa Clara Land Use and Previous Archaeological Studies

In an area prone to flooding and earthquakes, five separate Mission churches were built in Santa Clara, at three distinct locations (Table 3). Three of these churches, in two locations, exist within the modern University campus. In addition to a church and quadrangle, the mission site included industrial complexes (i.e. irrigation canals, agricultural land, animal husbandry, and orchards), and a village housing a large indigenous population. A few above-ground, tangible reminders of the Mission Period continue to exist today. As Skowornek states, these include:

…historical markers at the first, second, and third mission sites; the Peña or Women’s Club Adobe; the “Faculty and Staff Club” or “Adobe Lodge”; a section of the 1825 church’s wall in the Saint Francis Chapel; a portion of the 1825–1851 cemetery; and, an exterior adobe wall (Skowronek 2002).

Despite its urban setting, 19th- and 20th-century land uses, and limited above ground preservation, much of the Mission Period archaeological record remains intact beneath parking lots, streets, landscaped areas, and structures (Appendix B).

Cultural Resources Treatment Plan for the 5-Year Development Plan at Santa Clara University — DRAFT Albion Environmental, Inc. David J. Powers and Associates, Inc. July 2015 62 Table 3. Mission Period land use chronology. Year Event(s) and structures 1769 Spanish exploration parties began to investigate the Santa Clara Valley, and encountered local native peoples in the Santa Clara area several times in 1769, 1770, 1772, 1774, and 1776 (Milliken 2002: 45–46). 1777 January 12. Mission Santa Clara founded, with a temporary shelter. According to Spearman (1963:92), the site was situated on the “Northeast side of Kifer Road at the intersection of De La Cruz Boulevard within the area of the Southwest ramp of the Bayshore Freeway” (quoted in Bone 1975:16).

November 29. “Acting on Neve’s orders, Commander Jose Joaquin Moraga of the San Francisco presidio, took a group of sixty-six settlers and retired soldiers to the Guadalupe River to found California’s first civil establishment, el Pueblo de San José de Guadalupe…” (M. Hylkema 1995:21).

December. Three buildings at the first Mission Santa Clara were built, including a church with sacristy, dwelling house adjacent to the church (including a kitchen), dwelling for the fathers, servants, offices, toilets, and a hen coop (Spearman 1963:18). Jackson (2002:86) indicates that the dwelling rooms numbered 10, and that a granary was also constructed.

No maps of the structures are known to exist (Skowronek and Wizorek 1997:56). 1779 January 29. Guadalupe River floods, destroying most of the structures at Mission Santa Clara and the Pueblo of San Jose (M.Hylkema 1995:21). Pueblo of San Jose relocated upstream of its original location.

The second site of Mission Santa Clara is built near present day Martin Avenue and de la Cruz Boulevard, close to the northwest side of the San Jose Airport (Spearman 1963).

Buildings are again of palisade construction. They include: a church, dwelling house for the fathers and some Indians, and a storeroom (Jackson 2002:86; Lynch 1981:6).

West wing of the Mission quadrangle is built, containing eight rooms. Made of adobe (M. Hylkema 1995:22).

Irrigation ditch constructed (Jackson 2002:86) 1777–1779 An irrigation ditch opened (Jackson 2002:86)

1780s Adobe granary constructed, with thatch roof (M. Hylkema 1995:23). Tannery constructed (Wizorek 1998:18). 1780 An eight-room adobe structure is built, used as a missionary residence, offices, and granary (Jackson 2002:86). 1781 Third site of Mission Santa Clara Church is founded on November 19 (Lynch 1981:6). Buildings intended to be of adobe on stone foundations. Adobe church measured 40 ½ varas in length (Jackson 2002:86)

1809 map of second site of Santa Clara Mission (Jackson 2002:87)

Granary and second structure built, both of adobe (Jackson 2002:86).

Cemetery associated with third Mission church began to be used; in use until approximately 1818 (Wizorek 1996:4). M. Hylkema (1995) discusses burials found associated with this cemetery. Adobe granary and “second structure” built (Jackson 2002:86). 1783 One of the buildings erected in 1780 burns (Jackson 2002:86).

Cultural Resources Treatment Plan for the 5-Year Development Plan at Santa Clara University — DRAFT Albion Environmental, Inc. David J. Powers and Associates, Inc. July 2015 63 Year Event(s) and structures 1784 May 16. Work on third Mission church is completed. This is the first adobe church. 1787 Heavy winds damaged the roofs of the existing structures.

New adobe wing begun and roofs repaired; this adobe wing measured 40 varas long and completed the mission quadrangle. It contained a reception room, four other rooms, and a covered passage way or saguan (Jackson 2002;86; Lynch 1981:6; M. Hylkema 1995:23).

A store room for firewood build (Jackson 2002:86)

First harvesting of fruit noted (Huelsback 1988a:8)

Orchard keeper’s adobe presumably constructed before this date

New irrigation ditch opened (Jackson 2002:86) 1788 Adobe corral built to contain sheep.

Other buildings in the complex are raised in height by about 5 feet (M. Hylkema 1995:24).

In November “four rooms with walls of adobe and thatched with twigs and tules caught fire.” (Lynch 1981:6, quoting informe)

New rooms built (Lynch 1981:6). 1789 Two-story room with balcony built to adjoin sacristy. Other quadrangle residences are heightened (Lynch 1981:6–7, quoting informe). 1790 Roof tiles began to replace thatching on Mission buildings (Wizorek 1998:18).

Majordomo home built; along with another residence with two apartments; cattle corral with adobe walls begun (Lynch 1981:7). 1791 Large adobe storehouse with redwood beam roof completed (Lynch 1981:7).

Constructed tile kiln and made more than 6000 roof tiles (Lynch 1981:7). 1792 Eight adobe houses for neophytes constructed (Huelsbeck 1988a:8; Jackson 2002:86).

Adobe storehouse (granary) with thatch roof built (Lynch 1981:7).

The English Navigator, George Vancouver visits and reports on Mission Santa Clara. Describes quadrangle buildings, weaving and other craft activities in the quadrangle, neophyte quarters, and orchard (Mayfield et al. 1981:33–35).

Mission complex is flooded (Spearman 1963:49). 1793 Adobe wall built around cemetery adjacent to church.

Fourteen (additional) houses built for neophyte families, with adobe walls and thatch roof (Lynch 1981:7, quoting informe; M. Hylkema 1995:24).

Added on to fathers’ residence, and put in a wooden floor (Lynch 1981:7, quoting informe).

Master tanner and shoemaker arrive at Mission Santa Clara 1794 Nine houses for neophytes built (Jackson 2002:86).

1795 Alameda, a tree-lined road that connected Mission Santa Clara to the Pueblo of San Jose, was laid out, and framed by rows of willows. Santa Clara County Heritage Resources Inventory lists The

Cultural Resources Treatment Plan for the 5-Year Development Plan at Santa Clara University — DRAFT Albion Environmental, Inc. David J. Powers and Associates, Inc. July 2015 64 Year Event(s) and structures Alameda as an historic road (Mayfield et al. 1981:6). Declared a National Historic Road in 2000.

Two wings of the quadrangle are roofed with tiles. Mission church lengthened by 21.9 feet (M. Hylkema 1995:24; Jackson 2002:86).

Retaining wall built along one of the planting fields (Jackson 2002:86) 1796 Other buildings of Mission complex are roofed with tiles (Jackson 2002:86).

Permanent rooms for the guard house (soldiers’ barracks) constructed (Mayfield et al. 1981:33). 1797 Four rows of neophyte housing are roofed with tile (Jackson 2002:86). 1798 160 neophyte houses with adobe walls and an enclosed patio built (M. Hylkema 1995:24; Jackson 2002:86).

1799–1810 No annual informes have remained from this period. 1810 “…complex included the Mission quadrangle, corrals, agricultural fields, orchards, granaries and still more adobe house for the Mission Indian population” (M. Hylkema 1995:24). 1812 Earthquake damages the third church (M. Hylkema 1995:24). 1813 New soldiers’ barracks constructed (Jackson 2002:86). 1815 Adobe corral built for cattle (Jackson 2002:86). 1818 A second earthquake damages the third Mission church (M. Hylkema 1995:24).

A temporary church site (the 4th Mission church) is used after 1818 (Webb 1952:125), although parts of the quadrangle associated with the third church may have been used.

A temporary fourth Mission church site was built “between Kenna Hall and the Administration Building – described as East of the present Alviso Street, opposite the south half of the Jesuit Fathers’ residence” (Spearman 1963:53, quoted in Bone 1975:16). Only known photograph of fourth church is owned by Woman’s Club. The fourth church was later used as a neophyte boys’ residence (Wizorek 1998:18).

Hendry and Bowman (1940:717) mistakenly identify fourth church as “squatter’s house.” 1820s Mayordomo building constructed. One story building with seven rooms, located adjacent to north edge of Mission church cemetery. Building formed northern wing of church complex. Dimensions 100 ft. along cemetery wall, and 15 ft. wide (Spearman 1963:77; Wizorek 1998:23,26). 1822–1825 Remnants of third church dismantled and used in the construction of the fifth Mission church. This is the location of the current (sixth) church on Santa Clara University campus (M. Hylkema 1995:24). Fifth church completed in 1825 (Hendry and Bowman 1940:70). Fifth complex included the church, vineyard, close, and cemetery, as well as outlying orchards, outbuildings and abandoned former Mission buildings (Wizorek 1996). Fire destroyed much of the fifth church in 1926. 1823 Two adobe wings and a new soldiers’ barracks built (Jackson 2002:86).

“Santa Clara Jail” adobe identified in Hendry and Bowman map (1940). 1826 “…five rows of buildings had been built to accommodate 1,400 Indian neophytes. These rows of adobe houses extended from The Alameda to the front of the Murguía Mission and each house included two rooms with garrets above them and walled garden plots” (M. Hylkema 1995:24).

Beechey described neophyte residences (Mayfield et al. 1981:35). 1827 Neophyte population at its height of 1428 individuals (Wizorek 1998:27). Population numbered 1462 according to Webb (1952:38). 1828 Neophyte population at 1300 (Wizorek 1998:18). 1835 Jose Peña arrived in Santa Clara, and occupied building known as Peña Adobe, a former

Cultural Resources Treatment Plan for the 5-Year Development Plan at Santa Clara University — DRAFT Albion Environmental, Inc. David J. Powers and Associates, Inc. July 2015 65 Year Event(s) and structures neophyte residence, and now called the Woman’s Club Adobe (Mayfield et al. 1981:34). The Woman’s Club is on the block adjacent to the current project area. 1836 Secularization occurs at Mission Santa Clara (Wizorek 1998:19).

Through documentary and archaeological explorations, scholars have positively identified the architectural elements of the churches and their associated quadrangles, long abandoned and buried. The third Mission site (1781–1818) is well documented historically and archaeologically. In fact, an archaeological preserve has been created at the site of the third Mission, in efforts to prevent further disturbance to archaeological components of the church and its associated cemetery. In 1854, John Cleal produced a map of the third Mission site (Figure 8) that G. Black later copied in 1854 (Bancroft Library, University of California, Berkeley). Archaeological investigations have ground-truthed these early maps. The Third Mission Complex has been encountered during numerous University and City projects. From 1911–1928, trenching to lay water pipes and gas mains continued to encounter evidence of Mission structures associated with the third Mission site (Lynch 1981:12) (Not mapped in Appendix B). Father Spearman conducted informal archaeological investigations looking for the third Mission site in 1934 (Spearman 1958; Lynch 1981:13) (Not mapped in Appendix B). In 1981, architectural and refuse materials associated with the Third Mission were identified during archaeological and historical investigation by Caltrans (Mayfield et al. 1981) (Not mapped in Appendix B). Additional excavations at the third Mission Site were conducted by Mark Lynch in 1982 and David Huelsbeck from 1985 to 1987. These early investigations by Huelsbeck identified many architectural and refuse features associated with the Third Mission Complex (Appendix B, Map Index #94, 96, 97, 101, 115, 135, 141, 146, 147, 148, 149, 150, 151, 153, 154, 157, 158, 161, and 166). Additional monitoring of utility, landscaping, and parking lot projects in 1999, 2000, 2001, 2002, 2006, and 2007 found architectural and refuse features associated with the third Mission including gravel footings, the orchard wall, and architectural refuse (Appendix B, Map Index # 86, 87, 88, 89, 90, 91, 98, 99, 131, 167, 168, 169, 171, 172, 173, 174, 222, 223).

Archaeological evidence associated with the Fourth (1818–1822) and Fifth Mission (1822–1926) compounds is less abundant. Previous campus construction projects have uncovered cobble stone footings and associated architectural and domestic refuse associated with the Fourth Mission Church (1818–1822) (Appendix B, Map Index #10, 11, 208, 213, 216). Similar feature types – architectural and refuse – have been identified and associated with the Fifth Mission Church (Appendix B, Map Index #184, 185, 186, 187, 188, 189, 190, 191, 192, 193, 194, 195, 196, 197, 229, 230, 231).

Cultural Resources Treatment Plan for the 5-Year Development Plan at Santa Clara University — DRAFT Albion Environmental, Inc. David J. Powers and Associates, Inc. July 2015 66 2006 aerial provided by Santa Clara University

0 50 100 150 200 Meters Figure 8. Cleal Mission features on campus aerial. 0 100 200 300 400 ± Feet Albion Environmental, Inc. File name: Figure_8_Cleal.ai, J2015-011.01, Stella D’Oro, 01July2015 The third Mission site is extremely sensitive for the presence of human remains in the area of the cemetery; the mission death registry records over 8,000 burials in the third mission cemetery between 1781 and 1818 (Milliken 2009). These historical records have been corroborated with archaeological evidence (Figure 9). A 1907 excavation of a house basement on Franklin Street uncovered walls and burial sites associated with the third Mission church and associated cemetery. From 1911–1928, during trenching to lay water pipes and gas mains construction crews continued to encounter evidence of Mission structures and evidence of the cemetery associated with the third Mission site (Lynch 1981:12). Father Spearman conducted informal archaeological investigations looking for the third Mission site in 1934 (Spearman 1958; Lynch 1981:13). Crews laying a water main in the 1960s encountered more burials. In 1981, proposed reroute of The Alameda prompted a formal archaeological and historical investigation of the third Mission site by Caltrans (Mayfield et al. 1981). Discoveries during these excavations included foundation stones, adobe brick, roof tiles, floor tiles, ceramics, glass, and human bone. Burials were again encountered in 2008 when PG&E replaced the gas line in the center of Franklin Street and gas hook-ups to houses on the north side of the street. Although historic maps show the northern boundary of the cemetery as being 155 feet (47m) south of the project area, the actual boundaries have yet to be archaeologically verified. And again, over 8,000 people are recorded in the historic records as being buried in the cemetery located just north of the third Mission church.

Other components of any Mission built landscape are sites of industry. These may include features such as orchards and associated adobe walls, livestock corrals, or irrigation canals. Documentary and archaeological data provide evidence for many such sites of industry at Mission Santa Clara. The orchard associated with the third Mission site has been documented archaeologically (Appendix B, Map Index # 155, 156, 225, 226). In addition, archaeological evidence of zanjas and acequias (Appendix B, Map Index #159, 164, 170, 216, 217, 218, 219, 220, 221, 485), tanning vats (Appendix B, Map Index #160, 162), possible animal corals (Appendix B, Map Index #204, 205, 206, 207, 208, 209, 210, 211, 212, 213, 214), and a matanza site (Appendix B, Map Index #224) have be discovered. The documentary record provides evidence of other industrial complexes, not yet identified archaeologically including, for example, a tile kiln (M. Hylkema 1995:23–24; Jackson 2002:86; Lynch 1981:7).

Another major element of the Mission landscape was the Indian Ranchería. To date, there appears to be one large neophyte living complex at Mission Santa Clara, despite the movements and reconstructions of the Mission quadrangle. This living area was located to the north of the third, fourth, and fifth church complexes, and it is likely that it continued to be used throughout the Mission’s existence. This village included adobe houses, Native-style structures, household refuse deposits of varying forms and functions, and large communal refuse deposits. Archaeological and documentary evidence of this village is ample.

Table 3 notes that Native Americans constructed the first adobe houses specifically for family residential use in 1792. According to the yearly informes, neophytes built eight houses in 1792, fourteen in 1793, and nine in 1794. M. Hylkema (1995:25) notes that 160 houses were built in 1798, although the annual informe for that year, and several subsequent years, are missing. This estimate of 18th century housing is surmised from travelers’ accounts, as is the estimate of up to five rows of adobe housing by 1826. As noted in Table 3, M. Hylkema (1995:24) also notes that “…five rows of buildings had been built to accommodate 1,400 Indian neophytes. These rows of adobe houses extended from The Alameda to the front of the Murguía Mission and each house included two rooms with garrets above them and walled garden plots.” This refers to the location of the current alignment of The Alameda, rather than the older alignment.

Cultural Resources Treatment Plan for the 5-Year Development Plan at Santa Clara University — DRAFT Albion Environmental, Inc. David J. Powers and Associates, Inc. July 2015 68 Figure 9. Mission Period burials REDACTED

Cultural Resources Treatment Plan for the 5-Year Development Plan at Santa Clara University — DRAFT Albion Environmental, Inc. David J. Powers and Associates, Inc. July 2015 69 Miss Encarnacion Pinedo gives a short description of residential areas within the Mission complex:

Next to the fathers residence was the barracks for the military guard or escort for the government. The residence of the non-married male Indians was built in front of the barracks. The Monjerio (residence of the unmarried females) was on what is now Alviso Street.

North of [the] cemetery was the quarters for the Mission employees…. In the Mission yard which was enclosed by the adobe walls topped with tiles were the storehouses, the looms, the school and blacksmith shop. Rations were distributed at the storehouses.

The Rancheria occupied a large space, commencing at the house of Comisar Don Jose Peña [Woman’s Adobe], and extending therefore easterly towards where the S.P. tracks now are. Remains may yet be seen on Franklin Street. There was a large yard or square in the Rancheria, and in the center of that were furnaces upon which were placed great caldrons to cook the food which was eaten right there (in Walsh n.d.).

Photographs taken in 1897 show the extant Santa Clara Woman’s Adobe, known to be a neophyte residential building Figure 10. Figure 11 is a recent photograph of the Santa Clara Woman’s Adobe, the last standing remnant of neophyte quarters at Mission Santa Clara. The building is registered as a California Historical Landmark No. 249. Constructed sometime after 1792, the building is recorded as originally being two rooms of a row of adobe rooms that was in turn part of the complex of several rows of Native American adobe housing. Archaeological excavations under a parking lot adjacent to the standing structure revealed a continuation of this adobe row to the south (Panich 2014).

The two extant rooms continued to be occupied as a residence during the Mexican and later American Period. The structure is also known as the Peña Adobe, for the family that lived there in the mid- 1800s. It was remodeled and updated, and is currently in use as a meeting place for the Santa Clara Woman’s Club. The building itself is one of only two surviving neophyte residential adobe structures in California; the other is known as the Santa Cruz Mission Adobe (Allen 1998). Other Missions have fragments of foundations or walls (e.g. Mission San Antonio, Mission San Miguel), but no standing neophyte quarters.

Archaeological investigations have revealed evidence of adobe room blocks west of the Peña Adobe, within the Franklin Block 448. During 2012–2013 excavations, Albion Environmental and the Santa Clara University Curation and Conservation Facility uncovered the positive remains of multiple adobe room block structures (Appendix B, Map Index #13, 78, 79, 80, 81, 143). Of the adobe structures excavated, Feature 135 (Appendix B, Map Index #13), was the most intact and most completely excavated (Figure 12). Albion uncovered the remains of one entire room, and the partial remains of another room. The intact room that Albion exposed was segmented into two areas, one larger than the other. There was an interior wall that divided the larger from the smaller area, extending about 3/4 of the way through the building. Within Feature 135, Albion identified four distinct but variable hearth or hearth clean-out-event features. While Albion has not yet fully analyzed materials from this feature, many unique artifacts were recovered during excavation. For example, Albion recovered obsidian projectile points, a bone awl, and many groundstone artifacts (Figure 13).

Cultural Resources Treatment Plan for the 5-Year Development Plan at Santa Clara University — DRAFT Albion Environmental, Inc. David J. Powers and Associates, Inc. July 2015 70 File name: Figure_10_AbandonedThirdMission.ai, J2015-011.01, Stella D'Oro, 01July2015

Figure 10. 1897 photograph of abandoned buildings of the third site of Mission Santa Clara (Skowronek et al. 2006:146). Albion Environmental, Inc. Photo courtesy: http://www.santaclarawomansclub.org/

Figure 11. The Santa Clara Women’s Adobe as it appears today.

Albion Environmental, Inc. File name: Figure_11_WomansAdobe.ai, J2015-011.01, Stella D'Oro, 01July2015 J2015-011.01, File name: Figure_11_WomansAdobe.ai,

Figure 12. Aerial photo of Feature 135, discovered in 2013, Adobe Structure within the Indian Rancheria.

. Figure 13. Artifacts recovered from Feature 135 in 2013: obsidian projectile point, bone artifact, and bone awl.

Cultural Resources Treatment Plan for the 5-Year Development Plan at Santa Clara University — DRAFT Albion Environmental, Inc. David J. Powers and Associates, Inc. July 2015 73 Connected rooms of adobe on stone foundations were not the only kinds of housing documented for the neophyte population at Mission Santa Clara, and other California Missions. Native American- style housepits are described in the historic literature and have been identified archaeologically (Feature 57 Block 437) (Allen et al. 2010). The Native American-style housepit, recovered by Rebecca Allen and her team in 2004, is one of the most important archaeological finds that dates to the Mission Period (Figure 14) (Appendix B, Map Index #111). Allen et al. (2010:110) have dated this feature to after 1800 and argue it was likely inhabited by Yokuts who were brought to the Mission after 1811. The circular housepit was 9.8 feet in diameter and “shaped like a shallow basin with sloping walls, archaeologically represented by a slightly raised berm, and a flat floor” (2010:110). A centrally placed hearth was present, and flanked by two discrete postholes. Archaeological evidence suggested that the house had been burned after abandonment.

Figure 14. Feature 57, Native-style house floor, ca. AD 1800, discovered in 2004.

Cultural Resources Treatment Plan for the 5-Year Development Plan at Santa Clara University — DRAFT Albion Environmental, Inc. David J. Powers and Associates, Inc. July 2015 74 Construction of Native American houses was a necessity—neophyte converts had to live somewhere and there were never enough adobe style houses for the entire neophyte population. Some historians (Street 2004:33–34) uncritically accept the idea that the adobe houses were an improvement in the lives of the neophytes:

Like their modern counterparts, Mission field hands lived a barracks existence. They were initially quartered in essentially the same tule and brush shelters as those by the campesinos from Baja California. Indian laborers started constructing somewhat better quarters—of willow-pole walls filled in with mud and covered with thatched roofs—in the later 1770s. In the early 1780s, field hands further improved living conditions by constructing communal dormitories and ten-by-ten foot single- family apartments made of thick, sun-dried, adobe bricks. Beginning in the mid-1790s, Mexican artisans began directing native craftsmen to lay out long wings of apartments and dormitories either extending out from the sides of churches or placed close by in neat, parallel rows. …

Mission barracks never housed all field hands, and as late as the 1820s, farm-workers on a half-dozen Missions were still living along with other natives beside the Mission compounds in crowded, flea- infested villages….

However, Native-style houses may have been a more healthy option for the neophyte population, especially in the relatively temperate climate of Santa Clara. These structures were intended as temporary, and were regularly burned when they became too unclean or pest-infected. In contrast, the adobe structures were permanent, and residents could not escape either the pests or the diseases that they carried. Construction of an adobe building is labor intensive, but can be accomplished by a relatively small group of people. Still, neophytes may have preferred to live in their Native-style housing, although their choices were likely constrained by available materials. Much of the Native tule and willow for building Native structures was likely destroyed over the decades for fuel for the Mission, which would have consumed enormous quantities for the cooking fires, tannery, tile and pottery kilns, etc.

Continuation of Native housing styles may have been a preferred cultural choice as demonstrated by construction of traditional houses continued after the Missions were secularized, and Native Americans moved outside of the Mission communities. Hackel (2005:426) notes that although Mission San Carlos had been abandoned, and locals were scavenging materials of brick, wood, and tile, “into the 1850s, several Indian families still made San Carlos their home. Some lived in brush huts near the water and eked out a living taking in laundry from the town’s residents.” Lope Iñigo, neophyte resident of Mission Santa Clara for nearly fifty years, moved to El Posita de las Animas in 1839 (Skowronek et al. 2006:304), a location northwest of Santa Clara. There he petitioned the Mexican government for and was granted more 3,000 acres of land. He “built a tule reed house and planted fruit trees.”

Another important element of the Indian Ranchería is the archaeological signatures that exist in the spaces between the adobe buildings and Native style houses. In these spaces, archaeological investigations have identified refuse deposits of variable forms. While analysis and interpretation of these features within the Franklin Block 448 is currently incomplete, we present here a summary of some general, tentative patterns. In addition, please see Appendix B for more details about the many Indian Rancheria refuse pits previously identified.

In characterizing refuse pits, we focus on two main traits: 1. overall size and shape and 2. preliminary hypotheses about primary and/or secondary function. Albion argues that these pits had multiple functions, in addition to their final use for refuse disposal. Albion has divided the Mission Period refuse pits identified within the project area into nine different pit forms. While not all features can be classified by form due to their unexcavated or partially excavated status, Albion is attempting here to

Cultural Resources Treatment Plan for the 5-Year Development Plan at Santa Clara University — DRAFT Albion Environmental, Inc. David J. Powers and Associates, Inc. July 2015 75 tentatively characterize refuse pit features archaeologically identified within the Indian Village at Mission Santa Clara into one of these form designations (Table 4). In future work, Albion aims to test these proposed hypotheses and typology.

Table 4. Nine Forms of Mission Period refuse pit forms identified in the Indian Rancheria Refuse Pit Description Interpretation of Use Form I Tear drop shaped pit that is deeper on one side with Multiple Uses. Primarily used as a well; multiple steps descending into the deep, narrow circular secondarily used for refuse disposal shaped end. II Two distinct pits located adjacent to one another, Multiple uses. Primarily used as a well; secondarily clearly connected in a “double pit” orientation used for refuse disposal III Tear drop shaped pit that is deeper on one side with a Multiple Uses. Primarily used as a well; single slope or shelf descending into the deep, narrow secondarily used for processing materials, possibly circular shaped end. In some cases associated with acorns; and then finally used for refuse disposal “earthen bowls” on or near the shelf. IV Tear drop shaped pit that is deeper on one side with Multiple Uses. Primarily used as a storage or cache multiple steps descending into the deep, but broad end. pit; secondarily used for refuse disposal V Circular, shallow deposits with concentrations of Hearth burned bone, shell, rocks, and/or soils VI Generally circular deposits of moderate to deep depths Primarily used for refuse disposal VII Large, shallow, generally circular shaped deposits Adobe Borrow Pits VIII Large, generally circular shaped deposit Natural depression used for refuse disposal IX Large, shallow deposit with concentrations of burned Large, communal roasting or cooking feature bone, shell, rock, and/or soils

Refuse Pit Form I is generally tear-drop shaped and exhibits shallow steps descending into a deep, narrow circular pit (Figure 15). Because these pits tend to cluster, are generally excavated to the same depth, and share similarities in form, our current interpretation is that they were primarily excavated to be used as wells. After abandonment, they were then used for the disposal of household refuse. These pits tend to concentrate in the southeast area of the known Indian Village.

Refuse pits classified as Form II are characterized as “double pits.” For example, Feature 111 in Block 448 had a southeast pit and a northwest pit (Appendix B, Map Index #11). The southeast pit had distinct ladrillo steps descending into a narrow circular opening (Figure 16). The northwest pit has dirt steps and a narrow, circular hole at the base, and was characterized by a concentration of cow skulls in the upper context. Both pits were filled in a common episode, leading excavators to infer that the two pits were in fact a single feature. The features that fit this property type appear to be located in between the rows of adobe housing.

Cultural Resources Treatment Plan for the 5-Year Development Plan at Santa Clara University — DRAFT Albion Environmental, Inc. David J. Powers and Associates, Inc. July 2015 76

Figure 15. Refuse Pit Form I (Feature 73, discovered in 2012).

Figure 16. Refuse Pit Form II (Feature 111, discovered in 2012).

Cultural Resources Treatment Plan for the 5-Year Development Plan at Santa Clara University — DRAFT Albion Environmental, Inc. David J. Powers and Associates, Inc. July 2015 77 Form III is also very similar to Form I and likely had very similar functions of water acquisition and refuse disposal. These feature types differ, however, in that instead of steps, Form III exhibits a sloping shelf descending down into the deep pit. In addition, many of these features all contain unique “earth bowls” positioned on or near the shelf or entrance to the deep pit (Figure 17). While our current interpretation of these bowls is incomplete, we argue that these artifacts were used to process materials of some kind. For example, these may have been places where acorns were leached of their tannic acids. Instead of using open streams as was once done prehistorically, native peoples may have used water acquired from excavated wells to perform this traditional food-getting activity. Further investigation is necessary to test this and other possible interpretations. As with Form I, these features concentrate in the southeast area of the known village.

Form IV is also similar in shape to Form I, however the deep pit of the feature in Form IV is wider and less uniform suggesting that is might have been excavated not for the extraction of water, but for the storage of goods. Further, at the base this feature type, archaeologists have identified objects positioned within the pit as if they had been purposefully placed (Figure 18). This feature type appears to lie directly between adobe room blocks.

Figure 17. Refuse Pit Form III and “earth bowl” commonly associated with this pit form (Feature 150 and 157, discovered in 2013).

Figure 18. Refuse Pit Form IV (Feature 99, discovered in 2012).

Cultural Resources Treatment Plan for the 5-Year Development Plan at Santa Clara University — DRAFT Albion Environmental, Inc. David J. Powers and Associates, Inc. July 2015 78 Form V consisted of generally circular shallow deposits filled with concentrations of burned bone, shell, fire affected rock, or oxidized soils, as shown in the image below (Figure 19). Also present within the Indian Rancheria were generally shallow deposits of refuse that did not exhibit signs of burning, and whose form did not indicate previous use, such as a well (Refuse Pit Form VI; Figure 20). Form VII is currently interpreted as a borrow pit based on its shallow dimensions and circular shape (Figure 21).

Figure 19. Refuse Pit Form V (Feature 133, discovered in 2012).

Figure 20. Refuse Pit Form VI (Feature 75, discovered in 2012).

Cultural Resources Treatment Plan for the 5-Year Development Plan at Santa Clara University — DRAFT Albion Environmental, Inc. David J. Powers and Associates, Inc. July 2015 79

Figure 21. Refuse Pit Form VII (Feature 202, discovered in 2013).

On the southern side of the currently defined Indian Ranchería was one unique feature that appeared to take advantage of two distinct natural phenomena: low lying depressions in the landscape and a flood event. Feature 91 (Appendix B, Map Index #30) has been designated Refuse Pit Form VIII, as it is uniquely very large, irregular in shape, and appears to be a natural depression in the landscape, rather than a purposefully excavated pit, that was used for the disposal of refuse (Figure 22). Directly above the refuse deposit in Feature 91 was a thick layer of sterile soil that likely represents a flood event, which covered much of the southwestern portions of the project area.

On top of this flood event Albion identified another refuse feature type (Form IX), described as a large but shallow concentration of burned bones, shell, fire-affected rock, and oxidized soils representing a very large, communal burn or roasting event (Figure 23).

With some exceptions, the large communal refuse deposit, communal burn feature, adobe borrow pit, and wells appear to cluster in the southwestern portion of the known village site (the southwestern area of Block 448, specifically). Also present in this region is evidence of flood event soils, characterized by their thick, homogenous, and sterile nature, deposited within and/or over discrete features. Multiple lines of evidence suggest that this region might have been a low point on the landscape, utilized for trash disposal in naturally excavated “pits,” and yet uninvestigated possible industrial uses.

Cultural Resources Treatment Plan for the 5-Year Development Plan at Santa Clara University — DRAFT Albion Environmental, Inc. David J. Powers and Associates, Inc. July 2015 80

Figure 22. Refuse Pit Form VIII (Feature 91, discovered in 2012).

Figure 23. Refuse Pit Form IX (Feature 183, discovered in 2013).

Cultural Resources Treatment Plan for the 5-Year Development Plan at Santa Clara University — DRAFT Albion Environmental, Inc. David J. Powers and Associates, Inc. July 2015 81 Research Theme: Understanding the Mission Landscape

The mission complexes (churches, quadrangles, and outlying buildings and structures) were intended to bring about a new order on the Native landscape by means of the introduction of European urban planning. While some California Mission scholars have started to explore circumscribed mission landscapes with goals of representing all archaeological components (i.e., Allen et al. 2009), the majority of the research focuses on the buildings. In addition, recent research emphasizes that indigenous peoples who joined the physical community of Missions never really “left” their home villages and territories. Current research broadens the idea of landscape from one confined by the Mission boundaries, to an image of a Native landscape, including physical landmarks, culturally meaningful natural resources, and social relationships that occur within its boundaries (Panich and Schneider 2014; Panich 2010:69). This literature views the Spanish Missions as Native places, as much as they are also considered colonial outposts (i.e., Lightfoot 2005; Newell 2009; Panich 2010; Radding 1997; Schneider 2010).

In the past, California Mission landscape studies have focused on adobe architecture. Archaeology at two of the most extensively excavated Mission sites in California – Mission La Purisima and Mission San Antonio – illustrate this pattern. At Mission La Purisima, work by Woodward and Harrington in 1934 outlined the Mission residences, workshops, outbuildings, and church. In 1962–63, James Deetz further investigated four major features, two of which were adobe buildings—a blacksmith shop and a segment of the Indian barracks. Archaeological research at Mission San Antonio, under the direction of Robert Hoover, has focused on architectural studies for the past 30+ years. Such investigations include the soldier’s barracks, Indian barracks, and shops wings.

One explanation for this focus is illustrated by a quote from Deetz’s 1963 report. He writes that the primary objective of the study was to “aid in the eventual restoration of the excavated structures…” (1963:166). Post-secularization, earthquakes and neglect had left the California Missions in ruins. An observation made in 1861 by geologist William H. Brewer while visiting Mission San Carlos Borromeo describes the scene: “About half of the roof had fallen in, the rest was good. The paintings and inscriptions on the walls were mostly obliterated…A dead pig lay beneath the finely carved font for holy water…The number of ground squirrels burrowing in the old mounds made by the crumbling adobe walls and the deserted adobe houses was incredible” (Farquhar 1930:106–107, In Thomas 1991:122).

The desire to rebuild these dilapidated adobe buildings—specifically the churches—was driven by a cultural movement led by Anglo-American immigrants who began to identify with the region’s earliest settlers, and desired to create a misleading impression that California had long been settled by Europeans (Thomas 1991:130). Helen Hunt Jacksons 1884 popular novel, Ramona, and the subsequent film of the same name, was the fuel behind California’s early interpretations of the Mission past as a romantic time. This myth, which over time came to be accepted without question, prescribed to the idea that,

“The kindhearted industrious Franciscans, led by the saintly Serra, had brought civilization and temporary affluence to the docile and grateful California Indians. The great ranchos soon covered the land; they were lavish in their hospitality and were peopled with brightly dressed caballeros and beautiful fine-tempered senoritas. Everyone took it easy in that Arcadia, and there was nothing of the push and shove of modern commercial life. The adobe houses were cool and comfortable; the tinkling guitars and the lovely Mission bells brought music to a quiet land; and everywhere courtesy, generosity, and lightheartedness reigned supreme” (Walker 1950:121–123; in Thomas 1991:125).

The Mission churches and adjacent adobe buildings became the architectural manifestation of the Ramona myth and the focus of reconstruction (Thomas 1991:119). Unfortunately, many

Cultural Resources Treatment Plan for the 5-Year Development Plan at Santa Clara University — DRAFT Albion Environmental, Inc. David J. Powers and Associates, Inc. July 2015 82 reconstructions were poorly researched and conducted with little understanding of archaeological reality (Thomas 1991:133). These reconstructions persist, as is evident by the elaborate Mission Gardens present at most of the Missions today. Such a setting creates a sense of tranquility and peace in the minds of the tourists visiting these places, although these reconstructions misrepresent the Mission’s history to the visiting public.

Some of the Missions, like La Purisima, did, however, benefit from the knowledge obtained through the archaeological investigations of adobe architecture by scholars such as Woordward, Harrington, and Deetz. Eighteen major buildings and features were investigated and restored, among them the church, convento, workshops, living quarters, water system, warehouse, tallow and soap works, and cemetery. Many scholars praise this work and reconstruction as it allows the modern visitor to not only be exposed to “Hispanic Mission lifeways, but also with the active involvement of Native Americans living at the Mission, their hide processing, candle making, carpentry, cooking, irrigation, and other craft work” (Thomas 1991:141). These words, however, imply that the archaeology of California Missions is an archaeology of “Hispanic lifeways.” In this approach, there is no visibility of indigenous lifeways in the Mission other than through this built Hispanic environment and the static ways indigenous peoples presumably participated in Hispanic lifeways. Reinterpretations of indigenous and Hispanic cultural practices are invisible to the modern tourist.

More recently, studies have looked beyond Mission churches and quadrangles and instead turned the focus towards associated archaeological components that represent agricultural, industrial, and living areas, especially those associated with indigenous peoples (Allen 2010; Thomas 1991:145–146; Panich et al. In Press). Allen (2010:72) notes the importance of understanding the formation of the Mission Period archaeological record, and the ability to interpret findings to better understand overall Mission layout. Specifically, the work Allen has done at Santa Clara University ignited a program of open area cultural resource mitigation aimed at better understanding “Native American living and food-processing areas, found well outside the Mission Santa Clara church and quadrangle areas” (Allen 2010a:72). Allen argues that “such consideration of the archaeological record of everyday life, in the spaces where those activities occurred, is critical to understanding…cultural nuances and transformations” (2010:72). For example, recent interpretation of archaeological remains from adobe and traditional style houses within the Native residential spaces at Mission Santa Clara provide insight into the complexity of Indian populations living at this Mission (Panich et al. 2014). The authors argue that while all indigenous peoples living in the Indian Rancheria at this Mission were considered Indio by the Spanish, economic, social, and ethnic diversity existed within the Indian population. Such investigations are only possible, when archaeological focus shifts away from the church and quadrangle, and towards the true “center” of the Mission landscape, the Indian Village.

Panich (2010), and others (e.g., Newell 2009; Panich and Schneider 2014; Schneider 2010) have recently considered Spanish Missions as unbounded, fluid spaces where indigenous peoples defined the landscape and territory boundaries on their own terms. In his work at Mission Santa Catalina in Baja California, Panich emphasizes how the Spanish Mission became a part of a larger indigenous landscape, rather than a major disruptor of it. Panich (2010b:69, 73) argues that the ethnolinguistically diverse indigenous population at this Mission “maintained strong ties to the surrounding social and physical landscape—a pattern that contrasts sharply with the popular image of Spanish Missions as bounded, colonial communities” and emphasizes that “indigenous peoples were not simply incorporated into the Mission system; in important ways, Spanish Missions were incorporated into the indigenous world.” Another example is Schneider’s (2010) investigation of Native settlements outside the Mission quadrangle and fields, but contemporaneous to them. His examination of shell mounds on the Marin Peninsula that have historic components illustrate that not only did Indians from Mission Dolores use these “places of refuge” during the Colonial Period, but they did so in a way that “mirrors Coast Miwok subsistence routines that predate colonial settlement”

Cultural Resources Treatment Plan for the 5-Year Development Plan at Santa Clara University — DRAFT Albion Environmental, Inc. David J. Powers and Associates, Inc. July 2015 83 (Schneider 2010:1). Further, through the practice of visiting ancestral territories, Indians of Mission Dolores reaffirmed connections to these places, and incorporated them into their envisioned landscape. Through this lens, the view of a “Mission landscape” expands beyond not only the church and quadrangle, but also beyond the Indian village and agricultural fields. Research questions focus on understanding how the Spanish Mission existed within a larger physical as well as social and economic landscape.

Data Requirements Artifacts and Ecofacts: those artifacts and ecofacts that represent external economic and social relationships that indigenous people living at the Mission engaged in during the Colonial Period, e.g. lithic materials, shell beads, faunal remains and shell, locally-made ceramics.

Features: archaeological features that can be corroborated with historic documents, and particular time frames, or attributed to a specific Mission function.

Property Types: architectural (domestic, agricultural, and landscape features), and refuse features.

Other Data Sources: archival references and narrative histories, comparison with other Mission sites in California and other world Spanish Missions as appropriate.

Potential Research Questions  What is the function of this particular feature?

 Is this a previously identified land use?

 Is the entire layout of the feature discernable in the archaeological record?

 Can its presence and/or location add to or refute some or all of our current understanding of Santa Clara’s Mission landscape? Other Mission landscapes?

 Can the feature be closely dated? If so, can it be used to infer the temporality of other features exhibiting similar composition?

 What is the history of the feature including original function and subsequent uses (e.g., reuse/modification for a new purpose, refuse deposit events)?

 Can the feature be related to documentary evidence (such as annual reports, maps, etc.), or other archaeological evidence found at Mission Santa Clara?

 Can architectural features (such as foundations and evidence of floors) provide information on building floor plans, structural elements, and architectural details not available from other sources?

 Are there useful comparisons (or contrasts) to other buildings documented within Mission Santa Clara, as well as other California Missions?

 How did Indians at Mission Santa Clara utilize traditional food resources such as fish, deer, and birds, acquired beyond the Mission walls?

 What changes in the use of the landscape can be discerned through comparison of Mission ecofacts and artifacts with archaeological materials from pre-Mission sites in the region?

Cultural Resources Treatment Plan for the 5-Year Development Plan at Santa Clara University — DRAFT Albion Environmental, Inc. David J. Powers and Associates, Inc. July 2015 84  How were precolonial exchange patterns maintained or transformed, as evident through sourcing of lithic and shell bead artifacts?

 What is the probable location(s)—within or outside the Mission walls—of clay sources utilized for the production of local pottery?

Research Theme: Environmental Change

Many researchers emphasize a rapid alteration of the physical environment in California as a result of colonization (i.e. Allen 1998; Skowronek 1998). This argument maintains that Old World species brought by missionaries, soldiers, and settlers “rapidly overwhelmed, replaced, and displaced many types of Native plants and animals” (Allen 1998:42). Further, scholars argue that the California landscape was so completely transformed that it was “no longer recognizable” to the local indigenous peoples (Allen 1998:42). Archaeological evidence supporting this environmental alteration derives from pollen analysis of adobe blocks. This tradition began with George Hendry in 1931, and has been used at several Missions since then (Allen 1998:42-43). Plant remains recovered from other archaeological contexts also support the argument that exotic plants altered the natural ecosystem (Allen 1993; Allen 1998:43; Skowronek 1998:696).

However, other evidence emphasizes the preservation of traditional landscapes. For example, as part of a Santa Clara research series, Alan Brown (2005) published “Reconstructing Early Historical Landscapes in the Northern Santa Clara Valley.” Brown (2005:25) notes that Mission Santa Clara was built on a slight rise, and that Mission fathers deliberately preserved the oak forest that existed in the area. Brown (2005:9) summarizes early travelers’ impressions of lands and these oak stands near Mission Santa Clara:

The English navigator George Vancouver and his officers, visiting Santa Clara from San Francisco in November, 1792, rode “for about 20 miles” through park-like oaks (some of them later estimated as being over “15 feet in girth and...high in proportion” “with some inconvenience, on account of the fox earths, and burrows of rabbits, squirrels, rats, and other animals” and then, “having passed through this imaginary park, we’d danced a few miles in an open clear meadow, and arrived in the low swampy country...the horses being nearly knee-deep in mud and water for about 6 miles” shortly before reaching the Mission after dark.

Further, studies that emphasize environmental transformation to unrecognizable states perpetuate the view of California Missions as rigidly closed and bounded communities (see above discussion about Mission Landscapes). Researchers who emphasize Missions as open systems (i.e. Schnieder 2010) might argue that investigation is needed to show how far from the Mission center environmental change from introduced plants and animals spread. On the same note, one might argue for an investigation into how indigenous perceptions of territorial boundaries might have changed, even expanded, as traditional resources near Mission centers were impacted by colonization.

Discussions about environmental change are directly tied to those concerning subsistence and culture change. As part of Hispanicizing efforts among the Alta California Missions, Franciscans worked to establish agriculture and animal husbandry in hopes of attracting new converts and maintaining a neophyte, or Christianized Indian, population. Grains such as wheat, corn, and barley were grown as well as a great variety of fruits and vegetables, including peaches and apples. While mission residents were commonly served grain and cereal dishes like atole and pozole, access to mission gardens and the fruits and vegetables therein was generally restricted. However, some records suggest that the neophytes also had their own individual gardens in which they cultivated fruits and vegetables for their own consumption. In addition to grains and fruits, large herds of cattle, sheep, goats, pigs, and horses were raised for hide, tallow, wool, and food. As illustrated by counts recorded by the

Cultural Resources Treatment Plan for the 5-Year Development Plan at Santa Clara University — DRAFT Albion Environmental, Inc. David J. Powers and Associates, Inc. July 2015 85 Franciscan priests from Mission Santa Clara, sheep and cattle were the dominant livestock species at this Mission. Their prevalence at this and other Missions was likely because of the value of their byproducts. However, the faunal assemblages from archaeological deposits do demonstrate that beef and mutton were also consumed.

It is important to emphasize, however, that historical and archaeological evidence points to the reliance on both European and indigenous resources. Local foods specific to the California landscape are also present in Mission Period archaeological assemblages and referenced in historical documents.

For example, priests from Mission Santa Cruz note that:

It may be said that the Indian eats but one meal a day for even when he is at work he is eating. His food consists of beef, which is given him in abundance, venison, rabbit, quails, cranes, geese, ducks, and as many of the land animals and reptiles as nature provides them. Here ordinarily, they also eat salmon and lamprey of which many are caught in the river that flows nearby the Mission. Since the ocean is so close at hand which at points is hardly a league away the Indians fish there also and eat various fish such as codfish. Nor do they consider a seal or whale disgusting to eat when they become stranded on shore which is quite an ordinary event… (Fathers Marquínez and Escudé, 1814, in Geiger and Meighan 1976:87–88).

The archaeological record also provides evidence of the continued use of traditional resources. In discussions of macrobotanical studies from deposits found within a Mission Period housepit from Mission Santa Clara, Allen (2010:74–75) notes:

Study of pollen evidence from these deposits, formed two decades after Vancouver traveled in the area, suggest that oaks continued to dominate the landscape. West (2005) notes that pine (Pinus sp.), conifers (Taxodiaceae, Cupressaceae, and Taxaceae familes), and oak (Quercus sp.) were common arboreal pollen types found in the samples. Oaks dominated the assemblages: “The relative pollen spectra suggest an oak parkland with many weeds growing at the Mission grounds. The presence of dung fungus suggests that domesticated herbivores were nearby.” Identified weeds include Liguliflorae (introduced chicory, sow thistle, and dandelion family) and Asteraceae (Native sunflower family).

Macrofloral evidence from the housepit and other pits (Wogelmuth 2005) confirms that many Native trees were present in the Santa Clara area, primarily oak (Quercus sp.) and California bay (Umbellularia californica), but also hazel and buckeye. There are no nonNative species of trees represented in the samples. The bulb and seed assemblage, that is, the lower-story Native vegetation, tells a different story. Godetia (Clarkia sp.), rush (Juncus sp.), and tarweed (Madia sp.) dominated the recovered California Native seed species. Evidence of brome grass, red maids, goosefoot, hairgrass, bedstraw, wild barley, hare leaf, wild cucumber, maygrass, plaintain, bluegrass, buttercup, tule, clover, and fescue was also found, as well as more indeterminate fragments of sunflower (Asteraceae), bean (Fabaceae), and grass families (Poaceae).

At Mission Santa Clara, missionaries reported harvests of corn, fava beans, wheat, barley, peas, garbanzo beans, lentils, and miscellaneous vegetables and fruits (Skowronek et al. 2006). Of the nonNative domestic species, wheat (Triticum aestivum) and corn (Zea mays), were the most commonly found in the archaeological assemblage, with a small amount of barley (Hordeum vulgare). Evidence of introduced European weeds was also noted, mostly cheeseweed (Malva parviflora) and a few redstem filaree specimens (Erodium circutarium). It should be noted that macrofloral numbers are not directly comparable in terms of seed numbers versus volume floated, and come from four different features. Given these caveats, in terms of raw counts, a picture still emerges of an environment in transformation. From the housepit, approximately 44% of the raw count is from nonNative species: primarily wheat, corn, and cheeseweed, with a trace amount of barley and filaree. The Native vegetation represents about 41% and comes from three families (sunflower, bean, and grass) and 19 other species. Although fewer in number, the non-Native assemblage is more diverse, and represents far more in terms of numbers of species. Approximately 15% of the seeds were unidentifiable.

Cultural Resources Treatment Plan for the 5-Year Development Plan at Santa Clara University — DRAFT Albion Environmental, Inc. David J. Powers and Associates, Inc. July 2015 86 Analysis of seeds recovered archaeologically from Mission Santa Cruz also indicates that neophytes continued to eat California Native plants including hazelnut and California bay. A large quantity and variety of shellfish and fish recovered at Mission Santa Cruz provide testimony to the importance of this resource to the neophyte diet (Allen 1998). In addition, Native species such as rabbit, deer, and turtle were also recovered from the neophyte dormitories at Mission San Antonio de Padua (Hoover and Costello 1985).

The fact that Native peoples in Mission communities relied upon traditional resources is evident from the historic and documentary records. However, the degree to which this was done, compared to the degree to which they relied on domesticated foods, is unknown. Many California scholars continue to view traditional “wild” foods as supplemental to agricultural foods, accessed, for example, only in times of crop failure. Assumptions about the importance of colonial foods rely on uncritical examinations of the colonized-colonizer dichotomy. This dichotomy as a “fundamental axis of identification” not only emphasizes the effects of European contact but obscures the far more complicated conditions that colonial encounters produced. While such categories reflect the extreme ends of a social and political continuum, they inadequately characterize the reality of day-to day social interactions and organization. The colonized become the focus of what needs to be changed while the colonizers are the bearers of civilization and progress.

Moreover, within anthropological and archaeological narratives, agriculture continues to be defined as an active practice of food production in contrast to the passive and marginalized state of hunters and gatherers. One of the preeminent foci of California prehistory has been the question of why populations never adopted agriculture, as if it were a logical outcome of social evolution. As Bean and Lawton (1993) note, the assumptions embedded in how California hunters and gatherers lived ignore how these practices were on par productively with early agricultural populations elsewhere in the United States. Such assumptions define indigenous landscapes as empty and unused while colonial practices are associated with a new and superior way of life. It is important to look beyond the colonial foods/indigenous foods dichotomy. Rather, it may be beneficial to think about all foods on equal grounds as possible resources available to a population. Such an approach may better help predict which indigenous foods may have been chosen over certain colonial foods if the forager was presented with both options, and vice-versa. Instead of assuming superiority and importance of colonial foods over traditional ones, we seek to understand how Native peoples may have incorporated Spanish grains and livestock into existing yet dynamic indigenous foodways.

Data Requirements Identifiable pollen or plant remains, faunal remains. Features containing important pollen, plant, and animal contents gain in significance when they can be corroborated with historic documents, and particular time frames.

Property Types: agricultural and landscape features, refuse features, Mission industrial features (such as milling/threshing floors, butchering and cooking areas.)

Other Data Sources: archival references and narrative histories, comparison with other Mission sites in California and other world Spanish Missions as appropriate.

Potential Research Questions  Can plants and pollen be identified? Which are domestic? Wild? Native? Non-Native?

 What are the makeup and percentages of the plants and pollens?

Cultural Resources Treatment Plan for the 5-Year Development Plan at Santa Clara University — DRAFT Albion Environmental, Inc. David J. Powers and Associates, Inc. July 2015 87  What animals appear in the archaeological record? Which are domestic? Wild? Native? Non- Native?

 Can the seasonality of death be determined for animal species?

 Can the data be used to better understand a seasonal round?

 Can the data be interpreted from an optimal foraging perspective?

 Are there useful comparisons to other California Missions?

 What other environmental conditions can be discerned from this data, such as drought periods noted in the Mission documents? Does the archaeological evidence add to the documentary evidence?

 What evidence is there to help reconstruct with the local environment? How does that compare with Brown’s (2005) characterization of the oak woodlands and nearby lacustrine environment? Specifically, can changes in the relative abundance of plant and animals, particularly fish, waterfowl, and riparian plants contribute to our understanding of pre- Mission and Mission lake, stream, and estuarine resources and habitats.

Research Theme: Missionization and Identity

A dominant, scholarly view of Indian identity formation in the Spanish colonies is reflected in Field’s (1999:196) statement:

“Throughout the empire…the mass of Native peoples found their lives and persons reimagined as indios: a laboring class marked as racially inferior whose work in mines, plantations, ranches, and farms provided sustenance for the colonial population and wealth for the crown and its minions.”

The words “found” and “reimagined” suggest that indigenous lives were created by others, by the Spanish and supporters of the Crown, which they were; but also that Native peoples passively accepted and embodied a colonially defined “Indianness.” While it may be true that, for the colonists, it was advantageous and necessary to set themselves apart from the indigenous peoples living in their Spanish colonies, it should not be assumed that local peoples saw the construction of their identity from the same Spanish colonial perspective. Despite finding themselves living under colonial control, Native peoples still had power to construct their own identities from their own cultural perspective. While it is true that they did so as they worked through the political and social conditions that circumscribed their lives, it is important to study not only how outsiders labeled indigenous peoples, but also how they labeled themselves.

California scholars interpret how colonial entanglements affected identity construction among Native peoples in the Spanish California Missions in disparate ways. For example, ethnohistorian Randy Milliken (1995:219) argues that local peoples left their identity behind when they moved away from their tribal homelands. Historian Lisbeth Haas (2011), on the other hand, argues that people maintained their original tribal identities within the multi-ethnic Mission communities, in addition to taking on colonial identities such as indio and Luiseño. Archaeologist Kent Lightfoot (2005) argues that within the Missions a new social identity emerged, which blended the diverse practices of multiple tribal communities and was especially expressed in the privacy of neophyte homes. While these are not the only scholars ever to investigate this question, they represent the current diversity of opinions. These various interpretations differ in the argument they make about Native identity construction and the theoretical perspectives that inform their interpretations.

Cultural Resources Treatment Plan for the 5-Year Development Plan at Santa Clara University — DRAFT Albion Environmental, Inc. David J. Powers and Associates, Inc. July 2015 88 Essentialist views of social identity have a long history in California Indian ethnography. Indios, neophytes, and gente sin razón (people without reason) were all names colonists supporting the Spanish Crown used to identify the Native peoples living in the California Missions. Indios were characterized as a laboring, peasantry class of peoples, below the European missionaries, and mixed- blood soldiers. As a part of the Spanish colonial system, they dressed in clothing made in the Mission or purchased through trade, attended church and participated in Catholic ceremonies, learned the language of the colonizing force, and had a “transformed world view” (Jackson and Castillo 1995:19). In addition, it is important to recognize other historical identities created by the colonists, such as Juaneño and Luiseño, which from a colonial perspective, described “good Christians” living at particular Missions.

Many scholars have evaluated the construction of these colonial social identities in the California Missions, often portraying the Franciscans as highly destructive of local cultures (e.g. Costello 1989; Deetz 1963; Hoover 1989; Hoover and Costello 1985). Many such scholars have taken the essentialist approach to examine this question, which links material traits to social identity (Field 1999:194). It connects the identification of a particular group to a trait list, which typically includes language, self- presentation such as jewelry and clothing, and religion (Field 1999:194). It emphasizes a static view of identity, one that is only “true” if it maintains traditional cultural practices from an anthropologically defined trait list. For example, Milliken argues that, because Native peoples seemingly adopted Christian ceremony and Mission leadership structures, they had abandoned precolonial ceremonies and leadership organization. They examine the extent to which people accepted or rejected their new lot in life, that of an indio peasant within a colonial system.

By contrast, other scholars have taken a constructivist approach to understanding identity-making in Spanish California (Haas 2011; Lightfoot 2005; Silliman 2009; Voss 2008). They argue that we cannot look at culture change as simply the acceptance of foreign goods or cultural practices at the expense of indigenous ones. Rather, identities are constantly recreated within particular historical moments. Practice theory, as used by Lightfoot (2005), allows us to understand that people do not leave behind, nor do they statically maintain, social identities when faced with new options. The emphasis is placed on the translation that occurs during culture contact situations. In addition, it is possible for an individual to have multiple social identities and mobilize them differently in diverse contexts. Identity, from this perspective, is something that is constantly translated from an indigenous sensibility, often created in syncretic ways under unique culture contact situations, and always situational.

In California, some scholars emphasize the ways indigenous peoples revalued precolonial cultural categories in order to fit new colonial imperatives (e.g., Haas 1995, 2011; Lightfoot 2005; Lightfoot et al. 1998; Silliman 2000, 2004). Rather than stopping at the categorization of artifacts or cultural practices into “foreign” and “traditional” groups, this view emphasizes the translation of foreign cultural practices through an indigenous mindset, such as seen in the use of foreign goods in traditional ways (Quimby and Spohr 1951; Silliman 2000). This approach investigates how Native peoples incorporated colonial cultural material and practices into their new lives, through their own eyes. For example, many culture contact scholars have noted how Native peoples in many different colonial contexts appropriate the symbols and meanings of Christianity, recombine elements with those of their own belief system, and translate colonial religion through their own worldview (e.g., Brown 1996; Burkhart 1989; Comaroff and Comaroff 1986, 1991; Furniss 1995; Graham 1998; McEwen 2001). The Chinigchinich religion of the Gabrieliño, Luiseño, Juaneño, and Diegueño communities is one example of how specific groups of California Indians may have translated Christianity through their own sensibility (Bean and Vane 1978; Boscana 1978; Haas 2011; Jackson and Castillo 1995:37; Sandos 2004:29–31). Further, objects representative of indigenous culture, such as shell beads, may have been produced, exchanged, and used in ways that were “embedded in

Cultural Resources Treatment Plan for the 5-Year Development Plan at Santa Clara University — DRAFT Albion Environmental, Inc. David J. Powers and Associates, Inc. July 2015 89 colonial social relationships” (Panich et al. 2014). Franciscans capitalized on indigenous perceptions of self and status as they appropriated shell beads in their evangelization strategies (Robinson 2013).

Further, recent scholarship urges research to move beyond the colonizer/colonized dichotomy and seek to understand the variability within colonizing and colonized groups (e.g., Voss 2008). For example, archaeological and historical records are being used to assess how traditional social and political identities were reinterpreted by diverse groups of Native peoples living in Missions (e.g., Newell 2009; Peelo 2011). Place defined social and political polities and community identities in precolonial times. The occupation of land for a Mission, pasture, and fields disrupted this association between precolonial polity and territory. Franciscans brought thousands of Mission-owned cattle, sheep, and horses that demanded use of ancient territories, eroding the political autonomy of village communities (Haas 2011). Various groups of peoples from the coast to the central San Joaquin Valley left the territories around which they defined themselves and moved to the northern Missions. Further, European diseases decimated local populations, making the maintenance of lineage ties that defined tribal communities difficult (Lightfoot 2005). In the midst of this tremendous change, how can we look at the social and political communities that emerged from the Mission populations as reconstructions of indigenous tribal organizations?

A common argument is that the lines between tribal communities became blurred in the missions. Lightfoot (2005:198) argues that under the fragmentation of traditional Native polities, local peoples reorganized their social systems, and renegotiated their social identities so that they were “no longer tied to individual polities but more to a specific Mission community.” Lightfoot argues that historic narratives, such as Fernando Librado’s (1979:23, 25–33) account of life at Mission San Buenaventura, highlight the ways various California Indian groups shared in dances, gambling, and meals in order to create important social communities (2005:94). Allen (1998:41, 97) also argues that the similarity in material remains from two different neophyte dormitories suggests that out of pluralistic communities emerged amalgamated groups of neophytes. Based on his analysis of the marriage patterns among indigenous peoples at Mission San Fernando, Johnson (1997:260) argues that a “‘melting pot’ process occurred at the Missions as intermarriage and living in community brought together peoples who had once possessed distinctive cultural differences.” Hurtado (1988:69–71) also argues that at Sutter’s New Helvetia, depopulation and changing marriage patterns weakened traditional tribal affiliations and family ties.

These scholars each describe an important pattern in the historical and archaeological record. That pattern suggests that as variable Native peoples migrated to Mission communities, they created new, shared social identities, which functioned to distinguish them from the colonists (Lightfoot 2005:183). This creation of mission-specific social identities among diverse Native populations may be viewed as the reproduction of Indian sensibilities that structure identity around place (Peelo 2010, 2011).

While significant historical and archaeological evidence does suggest that California Indians living within Mission communities constructed shared local identities, calling themselves, for example, Luiseño, it is important to complicate this singular notion of identity. Haas (1995, 2011) suggests that Native peoples did not necessarily construct new colonial social identities at the expense of other precolonial social identities. She argues, “identities are grounded in the particular relationships formed through histories of race, gender, class, and place. One identity does not replace another” (Haas 1995:9). Specifically, she argues that tribal and village identities within Luiseño ethnolinguistic territory were maintained in the missions, like Mission San Luis Rey, alongside the production of new colonial identities. Others argue neophytes expressed differing social identities in public and private spheres (Allen 1998; Lightfoot 2005; Skowronek 1998). These arguments are grounded in

Cultural Resources Treatment Plan for the 5-Year Development Plan at Santa Clara University — DRAFT Albion Environmental, Inc. David J. Powers and Associates, Inc. July 2015 90 theory that suggests identity is dynamic, multifaceted, and relative to different social contexts (e.g., Barth 1969; Nagata 1974).

Haas (2011) supports her argument for multifaceted identity construction at Mission San Luis Rey with Native sources, such as the written work of one of its neophytes, Pablo Tac. In his writings, Tac defined the Christian population at this Mission simultaneously as indio, Luiseño, and Quechnajuichom, the territorial community located at the site of the Mission. While Tac was born in the Mission community in 1822, 24 years after it had been established, his direct ancestors had lived in the village community upon which the Mission was built. Haas (2011) argues that the Native peoples of this Mission felt the need to “move between the realities established by Spanish dominion and the knowledge and group identities simultaneously alive.”

Lightfoot (2005), Skowronek (1998), and Allen (1998) also suggest that neophytes expressed multiple social identities depending on the audience. Unlike Haas, who argues that people created colonial identities and simultaneously maintained tribal identities, these authors argue that California Indians in the Spanish Missions constructed two different colonial identities, and expressed them situationally. They argue that in the Mission plazas and fields, while they were under the watchful eye of the priests and soldiers, indigenous peoples presented a colonial indio identity; they acted in ways appropriate from a colonial perspective. They attended Catholic services, sang and prayed the Spanish songs and prayers they were taught, worked in the fields using metal tools, wore the appropriate clothing, and acted like Spanish peasants. However, these archaeologists argue that in the privacy of their own homes, variable Native peoples created a shared social identity that combined elements of their different cultures. The at home identity was distinctly indigenous; people cooked and ate wild foods in their houses with their families, they manufactured stone tools and shell beads, and they danced in the “secluded spaces between rows of houses” (Librado 1979:25–33, in Lightfoot 2005:95). These at home practices did not go unnoticed by the padres:

The neophytes in their houses have plenty of fresh and dried meat. In addition in their homes they have quantities of acorns, chia and other seeds, fruits, edible plants and other nutritious plants which they do not forget and of which they are very fond. They also eat fish, mussels, ducks, wild geese, cranes, quail, hares, squirrels, rats, and other animals which exist in abundance (Padres at Mission San Buenaventura; in Geiger and Meighan 1976:86).

But in private, in their own houses they prepare their seeds which are of good quality and in abundance such as acorns, sage, chia, pine nuts and others (Padres at Mission San Antonio; in Geiger and Meighan 1976:87).

However, rather than performing these daily activities in an effort to maintain variable tribal identities, Lightfoot (2005), especially, argues that California Indians were creating a new colonial identity, one that expressed a shared sense of “Indianness,” and acted to make social connections between diverse, but “tradition-minded neophytes” (Lightfoot 2005:96).

It is also important to emphasize that ethnic or cultural identity was not the only sense of personhood negotiated through daily practices. Notions of status, gender, and age were also reproduced from Indigenous mindsets within the colonial setting of the Ranchería (e.g., Voss 2008). In their comparison of archaeological materials from adobe and traditional style houses at Mission Santa Clara, Panich et al. (2014) argue that higher frequencies of colonial artifacts and high-status indigenous goods such as obsidian and shell beads recovered in association with the adobe structure, when compared to the Native-style dwelling, suggest that such items were used to negotiate status among the diverse indigenous community at this Mission. Peelo (2011) argues that variable techniques used to construct ceramic vessels in the Indian village may reflect negotiations of gender identity. Indian men may have had restricted access to wheel technologies, while women may have

Cultural Resources Treatment Plan for the 5-Year Development Plan at Santa Clara University — DRAFT Albion Environmental, Inc. David J. Powers and Associates, Inc. July 2015 91 been participating in female-centered communities of practice where hand-modeled techniques were the tradition.

Another important point that has emerged out of recent scholarship is the importance of viewing Mission communities, from a colonial perspective, as not all being “peas in a pod” (Costello 1992). Idiosyncrasies of different priests, local environmental, economic, and social factors shaped Mission communities in various ways (Skowronek 1998). It is important, however, to acknowledge that multi- layered precolonial identities also differed within and between communities throughout California, each experiencing the Spanish Missions in their own unique ways. Many situational histories defined the divergent experiences of local communities in the California Missions. A number of factors may have influenced the particular ways Native peoples situationally produced and reproduced economic, social, and political aspects of their identity. Specifically, the political organization of tribal communities before colonization, disparate residential patterns, distances people moved away from their homeland territories, death rates, changes in marriage patterns, translation of traditional power systems into the Mission alcalde system, or development of new Native political organizations may have influenced identity construction among neophytes of unique Mission communities.

Data Requirements Artifacts and Features: those that are associated with a particular or general time frame and Mission complex; direct association with a specific function or functions; associated with either Native or Franciscan contexts. Features gain in significance when they can be corroborated with historic documents. Detailed feature, artifact, and landscape recordation efforts are important.

Property Types: architectural features (living areas), agricultural and landscape features, refuse features, industrial features

Other Data Sources: historic maps; archival references and narrative histories, comparison with other Mission sites in California and other Missions as appropriate.

Potential Research Questions  Does the resource increase our understanding of identity construction for Mission Indians? Mexican soldiers? Franciscan?

 How did indigenous peoples incorporate foreign goods (i.e., glass beads) and resources (i.e., foodways) into local economic, social, and political systems of meaning?

 How did indigenous style material culture become integrated into colonial systems?

 Can we identify cultural practices that may indicate the maintenance of Indigenous ethnic identities centered around ancestral homelands, i.e. exchange relationships between Mission Indians and specific ancestral homelands?

 Can we identify specific items or classes of artifacts that indicate a blending of Indigenous material cultures and can these help us understand the possible blending of ceremonial traditions or subsistence practices?

 How can the study of daily practice in the Indian village increase our understanding of the reproduction of traditional economic, social, and political systems?

 How can the multifaceted and situational nature of identity with the Mission be illustrated by study of artifacts in different places, features, and contexts?

Cultural Resources Treatment Plan for the 5-Year Development Plan at Santa Clara University — DRAFT Albion Environmental, Inc. David J. Powers and Associates, Inc. July 2015 92  How can study of the organization of space, refuse deposition, and technological practice across the Indian Rancherίa inform understandings about the pluralistic nature of the Indian community at Mission Santa Clara?

 In concert with the documentary record, is there evidence of changes in Native marriage patterns? with other groups? with soldiers?

 How can interpretations of identity construction at Mission Santa Clara be used to help better understand identity construction and missionization in California and other Spanish colonies? What patterns are likely specific to the environmental, economic, social, and political circumstances of Mission Santa Clara?

Research Theme: Exploring Relationships Between Past and Present

Several articles (Field et al. 1997; Muwekma 2002; Sayers 2002) published within the last two decades emphasize the message that the Ohlone community today has a strong presence in the Bay Area. Many Ohlone-sponsored websites share this message:

The goal of the Ohlone Profiles Project is to document the ongoing lives of Ohlone leaders and organizations. Most people in San Francisco believe the Ohlone no longer exist. Very few realize that there are nine Ohlone organizations applying for tribal recognition, several with more than 500 members (www.ohloneprofiles.org).

Yokuts websites and publications illustrate many similar points (e.g. www.tachi-yokut.com).

The current project site is known to contain Native American resources from the Mission Period, and may contain features or isolated materials representing the pre-Mission Period. An opportunity exists to incorporate Native perspectives, knowledge, and interests in the Native setting of Mission Santa Clara from the outset of the project. Other research projects have illustrated the benefits of involving local communities in the archaeological process.

For example, Panich (2010a) explores the relationship of local Native Americans that joined Mission communities in Baja California in the 18th century to local Native groups that exist today. He discusses the fluctuation of cultural identity, but also the importance of recognizing cultural persistence as discussed below.

That the Paipai comprise a cohesive tribal unit is taken for granted by many outside observers, but the historical circumstances that led to the features that define the Paipai as a group—their location, their group makeup, and their language—are in fact much more complex than is readily apparent…

…recent scholarship has shown that Missions were often pluralistic social and economic centers that had strong economic and ethnic linkages to the rest of the colonial enterprise and to Native peoples living outside direct colonial control.

These analytical frameworks do not posit a static “Indian” identity but rather trace the complex transformations and reinterpretations of culture and ethnicity during the Colonial Period and beyond.

…persistence may be a more useful analytical approach for cases in which the transformations of the Colonial Oeriod, or any other time of crisis, can be seen to fall along a certain trajectory of change that itself is structured by the cultural values of the group in question. In this sense, the ways in which people rearticulate their identities and social worlds may reflect stronger continuities than they do changes.

Cultural Resources Treatment Plan for the 5-Year Development Plan at Santa Clara University — DRAFT Albion Environmental, Inc. David J. Powers and Associates, Inc. July 2015 93 Voss (2005) describes an approach to archaeology that she calls a “community-based approach. In this case, her research emphasizes coordination and consultation with descendants of Bay Area Overseas Chinese sites, but the end goal is much the same. That is, “a community-based approach can provide new perspectives on the archaeology.” This collaborative approach engaged “a university archaeology program (Stanford et al. 2013), a museum (History San José), a community cultural organization (Chinese Historical and Cultural Project), a cultural resource management firm (Past Forward, Inc.) and a government agency (San Jose Redevelopment). The result was a new way of asking questions and investigating the archaeological record, as well as interpreting the past.

Voss (2005:435) notes the reason to incorporate the local community in archaeological projects:

…much archaeological research at Overseas Chinese sites has been limited by false oppositions between Chinese and Western culture, and between tradition and modernity. The prevailing archaeological emphasis on the ethnic boundary between Chinese and non-Chinese has overshadowed other research questions that might shed new light on intra-cultural developments and intercultural exchanges.

Discussions with Native descendant groups have potential to drive new directions for research. Later, in this document, we further describe the consultation process, with the goal of expanding communication, and Native American involvement in projects and treatment of significant findings. It will be important to discuss what research goals may be—or importantly, may not be—important to each group. Examples of new directions that may elicit such responses are given below.

Data Requirements Features: those that are associated with a particular or general time frame and associated with either Native or Franciscan contexts. Detailed feature, artifact, and landscape recordation efforts are important. Photographs and drawings of these features can be used to stimulate discussions with interested parties.

Property Types: architectural features, agricultural and landscape features, refuse features, Native living areas

Other Data Sources: oral histories and forums, interviews, etc. with interested Native American parties, both of Ohlone and Yokuts descent.

Potential Research Questions  Does archaeological study of California Missions address questions important to the current Native American community? Do contemporaneous Native Americans feel that archaeological representation of Native lifeways within the Mission system are distinguished, represented, answered? If not, why not?

 What concepts do descendant groups think are important to know about past Native life after the Missions were founded?

 How else would descendant groups like to see this information about Mission and Native life presented to the general public? How can archaeological findings contribute to this presentation?

Cultural Resources Treatment Plan for the 5-Year Development Plan at Santa Clara University — DRAFT Albion Environmental, Inc. David J. Powers and Associates, Inc. July 2015 94 LATE MEXICAN PERIOD AND AMERICAN PERIOD RESOURCES

Mexican Period Residence (1821–1848)

After the Mexican War of Independence ended in 1822, the secularization of Mission lands began. This involved the confiscation of Mission lands and properties by Mexican civil authorities, and the transfer of these to Mexican citizens. Many Mexican Californians strongly supported the transfer of “landed wealth” from the church to the citizens (Senkewicz 2002:24). The Mexican government carved out and granted large ranches to Mexican citizens, who used the land to graze cattle. These ranchos and herds allowed the Californios to engage in trade with ships visiting the coast, exchanging hides and tallow for manufactured goods. Many ranchos were established around Mission Santa Clara, including Rancho Pastoria de Las Borregas, Rancho Quito, Rancho de los Coches, and Rancho Posolmi (Yñigo). Most of the former 80,000 acres of Mission Santa Clara lands were divided among loyal Mexican subjects (Hall 1871:57–81). For example, Rancho Pastoria de Las Borregas was granted to Francisco Estrada in 1842.

The neophyte population generally scattered away from the mission centers after secularization (1834). However, some mission Indians may have chosen to continue living at Mission Santa Clara. For example, in the diary of a Santa Clara Student, John Brown Jr., the author describes an “old Indian [who] now has a cane, his exact age cannot be determined; some say 120, others only 100” (Giacomini and McKevitt 2000). The few neophytes who chose to remain in their ancestral territory did not have legal ownership of their homelands, although some did petition the Mexican government for land grants. Some mission neophytes were successful in their petition. For example, Luis Yñigo, an Ohlone Indian from the region the priests called “San Bernardino,” was granted 800 acres, the Posolmi Rancho (CL1501) (R. Milliken 2009). In addition, Rancho Ulistac was granted to two California Indians, Marcello (CL1360) and Cristobal, in 1845 (R. Milliken 2009). Some indigenous peoples were given jobs as manual laborers or domestic servants on these Mexican Ranchos, which often were later purchased by American settlers and became American cattle ranches. By 1850, the Native American population in the Santa Clara Valley was estimated at approximately 1,000, divided “between rancherias on the Judson place, the Marvin Murphy ranch [formerly Rancho Pastoria de las Borregas], and the Inigo reservation” (James and McMurray 1933). Others California indigenous peoples lived near one of the pueblos, where work was easier to find as foreign settlers began to pour into the region. Others still migrated to the interior hoping to join kin already there or establish new sociopolitical connections.

After the secularization of the Missions (1834), the many Mexican Californio and recent Mexican immigrant residents who were not granted rancho land often clustered near the former missions, reusing former mission adobe structures and constructing new adobes as well. Squatting in abandoned mission buildings was widely practiced, especially in northern California (Hughes 1975). These squatters may have taken up occupations as farmers, merchants, craftsmen, or campistas (individuals who used their property to grow crops and raise livestock) (Gonzalez 2009). This residential practice left traces within the modern campus of Santa Clara University.

By 1845, a small community, with the surnames Galindo, Peña, Pinedo, Bernal, Miramontes, Bojorquez, Alviso, Pico, and Hernandez, had grown up around the dilapidated mission buildings (Figure 24). Mexican citizens obtained and occupied house lots on land that was in proximity to the Mission church. Most of the Californios established their town homes along Alviso, Santa Clara, and Bellomy Streets because religion played a major role in their lives and the proximity to the Mission church was of prime importance (Garcia 2013:4). The exception was Don Jose Pena's 1839 grant of

Cultural Resources Treatment Plan for the 5-Year Development Plan at Santa Clara University — DRAFT Albion Environmental, Inc. David J. Powers and Associates, Inc. July 2015 95 100 varas and a home, "una casa de los de la Rancheria," located northwest of the Mission compound (between today's Franklin, Benton, Sherman, and Alameda Streets).

In 1845, Alexander Markoff, a Russian visitor, wrote this description of Santa Clara:

The houses are separated from each other by rather long distances, but the intervals are filled up with gardens full of cabbages, turnips, garlic, cucumbers and mustard. There are many vacant parcels of land which have never been cultivated in any way. Behind the village there are gardens with apples, pears, peaches, almond, olives trees and grapevines, also Greek nuts and blackberries, squashes and all kinds of melons. The site of the village [of Santa Clara] is more beautiful than that of any other settlement around San Francisco Bay. All around it are low green hills with small brush and flowers and occasional groves of live oak and pine, while fertile plains extend beyond as far as the eye can reach, to the foot of the blue mountains in the dim distance (Markoff (1845) 1955:45) (Figure 32).

Table 5 provides some chronological information related to the lives of these early Mexican families in Santa Clara.

Table 5. Mexican Period land use chronology Year Event(s) and structures 1839 August 25, Maria del Carmen marries Lorenzo Pinedo at Mission Santa Clara. 1840s Juan Chisóstómo Galindo served as the majordomo of Mission Santa Clara, responsible for complete oversight of the Mission lands and buildings (Garcia 2002:94). The Hendry and Bowman map (Figure 24) identifies a number of adobe structures that were likely constructed around the 1840s. Examples include the Redman Adobe, the McCobb Adobe, the “Zink House”, the Andres Pico Adobe (#51), the Nobili Adobe, and the Dawson Adobe. These could represent Mexican or Early American residences.

Fourth Mission church building occupied by mistress and children of Father Real. She operated a fandango hall well into the 1850s. 1841 Settlers from the United States began to arrive in Santa Clara area (Garcia et al. 2002). 1842 Jose de los Reyes Berryessa y Peralta receives a land grant for the 4,400 acre Rancho San Vicente.

Lorenzo Pinedo receives a land grant to the 11,000 acre Rancho Las Ulvas. 1844 Rancho Posolmi (Yñigo) granted to Lupe Yñigo, an Ohlone (San Bernardino) Indian and alcade from Mission Santa Clara (Baptismal ID CL1501) (R. Milliken 2009). Many neophytes from Mission Santa Clara worked on this ranch (James and McMurray 1933). 1844– Lorenzo Pinedo asks for and receives from Antonio Pico a grant for the land outside the Mission. 1845 Here he builds the first house (the first residence outside of the Mission and Ranchería) in Santa Clara, on the lot bounded by Santa Clara and Market streets and Alviso and Lafayette streets. It was unusual in that it was a wood-frame house made of redwood, although there is some evidence that the house was of adobe. The most prominent resident of the Pinedo house was the daughter, Encarnación Pinedo. 1845 Rancho Ulistac was granted to two California Indians, Marcello (CL1360, Ohlone) and Cristobal (information unknown) (R. Milliken 2009).

April 19, Dolores Pinedo (oldest daughter of Lorenzo and Maria del Carmen) born. 1846 June 28, Jose de los Reyes Berryessa y Peralta murdered by Kit Carson on Major John C. Fremont’s orders.

1848 May 21, Encarnación Pinedo (youngest daughter of Lorenzo and Maria de Carmen) born. 1852 November, Lorenzo dies of cholera while visiting rancho San Vicente.

Cultural Resources Treatment Plan for the 5-Year Development Plan at Santa Clara University — DRAFT Albion Environmental, Inc. David J. Powers and Associates, Inc. July 2015 96 Year Event(s) and structures California State Census (by John Yontz, August 1852) lists the following in Santa Clara:

Name Age Sex Occupation Birthplace Residency Penada, Maria 38 FW - California California Peneda, Jose 8 MW - California California Penada, Dolores 6 FW - California California Penada, Encarnación 4 FW - California California Penada, Alexander 2 FW - California California

1864 Dolores Pinedo marries William Fitts and they move next door to the Pinedo residence. 1866 Survey notes that Carmen Pinedo owns the property block four South, ranges two east, bounded by Market, Alviso, Santa Clara, and Lafayette streets. 1867 June 29, Maria Zacharias Bernal de Berryessa deeds her property rights to her daughter Carmen Pinedo. “…do hereby grant, bargain sell and convey to my said daughter, all my right, title, interest, claim, and demand of, in and to all that certain dwelling house and outhouses, fences, buildings etc. constructed and being situated on that certain lot of land in the town of Santa Clara aforesaid, and known on the official map of said town, as block four South, ranges two east, bounded by Market, Alviso, Santa Clara and Lafayette Streets.” 1869 Maria Zacharias Bernal de Berryessa dies. 1874 Maria del Carmen Pinedo deeds her property to her unmarried daughter, Encarnación.

The 1874 Plat map of Santa Clara shows ownership of this property by Encarnación. 1876 Maria del Carmen Pinedo dies. 1877 Juan Chisóstómo Galindo dies (Garcia 2002:95). 1891 Sanborn Insurance map shows that Encarnación’s wood-frame dwelling occupies the northeast corner of the lot (i.e. the southwest corner of Santa Clara Avenue and Alviso streets), with a shed behind the building. The other northern portion of the block was divided into four properties, including four wood-framed dwellings and a variety of outbuildings. Two other buildings occur on the southern half of the lot. 1898 In San Francisco, Encarnación Pinedo’s cookbook, El Cocinero Español, is published. This is considered a unique and important book as “it was the first recipe specific recording of Californio food, Mexican cuisine as prepared by Spanish-speaking peoples born in California.” It was also the first cookbook written by a Hispanic woman in the United States. This book has recently been translated, edited, and republished. 1901 Sanborn Insurance map shows Encarnación’s house with the same configuration as the 1891 map. The outbuildings in the back have been expanded. A fourth house has been added to the north portion of the block that faces Alviso Street, and outbuildings have been added to the yard area behind the house on the corner of Alviso and Market streets. The corresponding Sanborn Insurance map for the southern half of the block has not been located. 1902 April 9, Encarnación Pinedo dies. 1915 Pinedo adobe possibly demolished (Sanborn Insurance map, 1915).

Cultural Resources Treatment Plan for the 5-Year Development Plan at Santa Clara University — DRAFT Albion Environmental, Inc. David J. Powers and Associates, Inc. July 2015 97 Benton Street

Franklin Street

Santa Clara Street

Figure 24. Hendry and Bowman 1940 map.

Albion Environmental, Inc. File name: Figure_24_HendryBowman.ai, J2015-011.01, Stella D'Oro, 01July2015 File name: Figure_24_HendryBowman.ai, J2015-011.01, Euroamerican Residence (1841–Present)

American settlers began to arrive in the Santa Clara area in 1841. When Americans began moving into California, Californios “experienced a decline in economic status, political power, and social influence” (Hughes 1975). One of the early American individuals who lived near the Mission was the “Widow” Bennet, who lived with her children in a house in the Mission pear orchard (Hylkema and Skowronek 1999). Another was George Bellomy, who had arrived in 1843 and established a tannery to produce shoes and boots (Hylkema and Skowonek 1999). Following patterns of squatting witnessed during the Mexican Period, a group of 175 settlers from Sutter’s Fort temporarily inhabited some of the abandoned Mission Santa Clara buildings in 1846 (Garcia 2002:96). This was a harbinger of events to come, as small adobe buildings to house individual families were constructed or adapted from former Mission buildings. Following trends seen elsewhere in North America, an American system of land law, which imposed artificial but ordered grids over a landscape, was later established. This contradicted with Mexican California systems, which designated boundaries of land grants in more imprecise fashions (Church 2002; Clark 2005; Senkewicz 2002b). Consequently, legal contests led to most Californios loosing most of their land to Americans (Senkewicz 2002b). The first town Plat map, placing streets and blocks within the “Town of Santa Clara” was created in the early 1850s by William Campbell, a member of the Sutter’s Fort American settlers (Figure 25). With minimal change, the blocks and streets as platted by Campbell would be the basis of the town's formal configuration.

Table 6 summarizes historical events to provide a general context for American Period activities in the area. Narrative descriptions below emphasize the residential and industrial evolution of the area, focusing on specific people and ethnicities that have added to the area’s local history and cultural richness.

Table 6. American Period land use chronology. Year Event(s) and structures 1841 Settlers from the United States began to arrive in Santa Clara area (Garcia et al. 2002). 1842 Mary Bennett travels overland with her family to Oregon (George Bellomy is in the same party) (Garcia et al. 2002:34) 1843 George Bellomy arrives in Santa Clara and established a tannery to produce shoes and boots (presumably on or near the site of the old Mission tannery) (Hylkema and Skowronek 1999).

Mary Bennett and her family travel to Sacramento and then to San Francisco (Conrado Family Archives) 1845 January, John Sutter organizes a force comprised of Americans, Indians, and some Mexicans to defend Governor Manual Micheltorena from rebellious inhabitants. No one dies in the struggles, but Bancroft says, at Mission San José, “many” of Sutter’s men “get drunk” (Gonzalez 2009:10).

Don Ramon sold “a tannery in Santa Clara,” the tanning complex constructed during the Mission Period (San Jose Mercery News, February 11, 1953)

Former neophyte population at 130

Mary Bennett arrives in Santa Clara and petitions Father Real for land grants of a Town Lot and Farming Lot. Father Real allows her to move into an adobe west of the Mission church in the Mission gardens, and she receives two grants of Mission land – a farming parcel and house lot (Langum 2014:64, 66). 1846 Approximately 175 American immigrants (members of the first large overland immigration to

Cultural Resources Treatment Plan for the 5-Year Development Plan at Santa Clara University — DRAFT Albion Environmental, Inc. David J. Powers and Associates, Inc. July 2015 99 Year Event(s) and structures California) arrive in Santa Clara to spend the winter at the Mission. When winter is over many squat on the surrounding Mission land, establishing preemptive claims (Garcia 1997:26; Garcia et al. 2002:17). Late 1840s The Hendry and Bowman map identifies the American Period reuse of Mission Period structures as well as a number of adobe structures that were likely constructed around the 1840s. Examples include the Redman Adobe, the McCobb Adobe, the “Zink House”, the Andres Pico Adobe, the Nobili Adobe, and the Dawson Adobe. These could represent Mexican or Early American residences. Alviso and Franklin Adobe. Small one-story building that is listed on 1855 assessment roles. East convento wing occupied by James Forbes family (Garcia 1997: 49–52; Wizorek 1998:30). William Campbell's makes a survey of the Town of Santa Clara (Garcia 1997:33–34). 1847 William Campbell makes survey of “Town of Santa Clara” for Father Real. What will become Sherman Street, he names Orchard St., Harrison is named Guadalupe St., Fremont is named Moultrey St., Benton is names Almado St., and Grant/The Alameda is named San Francisco St. (Garcia 1997:61)

On an 1847 Plat map, the Mission Tannery is noted as “Bellomy’s Tan Yard” 1848 California became a territory of the United States.

Carmen B. Pinedo Adobe constructed 1849 Santa Clara (Adobe) Tannery purchased by Louis Wampach. Sometimes referred to as the Wampach Tannery (Mayfield et al. 1981:18; Wizorek 1998).

Mariano Castro sold 5,000-acre Spanish land grant Rancho Pastoria de las Borregas in the Santa Clara Valley (Sunnyvale) to Martin Murphy Jr., where Murphy established the Bay View Ranch; many neophytes from Mission Santa Clara worked on this ranch (James and McMurray 1933)

Charles Clayton, an Englishman, served as Alcade from 1849–1850, and later established the Johnson and Clayton steam flourmill Late 1840s– Mayordomo building associated with Mission had a second story added. Building becomes the early 1850s California Hotel, used by Californios and European American squatters. 1850 California becomes a state (Mayfield et al. 1981:16).

The Alcalde of Santa Clara, William B. Hennigen, owned the tannery for a short period, and then sold it to Andrew Jacobson (Harris et al. 1995)

Louis Wampach purchased the tannery from Jacobson (Harris et al. 1995)

William Campbell surveyed Santa Clara, and plotted 100-sq-yard lots 1851 Jesuit college of Santa Clara established (Mayfield et al. 1981:16). Roman Catholic church transferred property from Franciscan Order to Jesuits. College formed out of fifth Mission church and quadrangle. Father John Nobili evicted squatters from property. California Hotel used by College as a Seniors Hall (Mayfield et al. 1981; Wizorek 1998; Garcia et al. 2002). Johnson and Clayton steam flourmill established on corner of Bellomy and The Alameda, may have reused Mission gristmill (Garcia et al. 2002:20).

Louis Wampach marries Philip Glein's sister, Charlotte. (Eight years later, Philip purchases the tannery and renames it the Santa Clara Tannery) (Docket Book - Santa Clara Township 1850– 1851).

Cultural Resources Treatment Plan for the 5-Year Development Plan at Santa Clara University — DRAFT Albion Environmental, Inc. David J. Powers and Associates, Inc. July 2015 100 Year Event(s) and structures 1852 Town of Santa Clara officially incorporated. Population around 1500 people (Sweet 1973; Mayfield et al. 1981).

James Alexander Forbes sells his portion of the Mission quadrangle, the east convento to Father Nobili (Garcia 1997:49–51).

Charles Clayton and Samuel Johnson establish the Santa Clara Steam Flour Mill; later known as the White Rose Roller Mill.

William Fitts (age 15) arrives in Santa Clara, with his parents Elijah T. and Emeline E. (Gilmore) Fitts from Massachusetts, via the Isthmus of Panama 1853 Bishop Alemany filed petition for Mission property in California (Weber 1980:92). 1854 Cleal, Black, and others draw map of third and fifth location of Mission Santa Clara. According to Wizorek (1998:19), the location of the third Mission church is off by one chain, or 66 ft. (McKevitt 1979:34; Wizorek 1998). 1855 Board of Land Commissioners rendered confirmation to Catholic church for some Mission lands, including lands associated with Mission Santa Clara. (Weber 1980:92–93).

Isaac Dixon and John Henry Messing purchased the tannery complex from Louis Wampach (San Jose Mercury News, June 1, 1953; quoted in Harris et al. 1995). 1856 Crandall Brothers established a horse-drawn omnibus along The Alameda (Wizorek 1998:44). 1857 Government Land Office issued plats and certificates associated with Missions, including Santa Clara (Weber 1980:94). 1858 Philip Glein bought the tannery from John Henry Messing (San Jose Mercury News, June 1, 1953; quoted in Harris 1995). 1860 Santa Clara College purchased property that contained location of fourth Mission church (Skowronek and Wizorek 1997:73).

San Francisco & San Jose Railroad incorporated (Garcia 1997:69). Early 1860s Cemetery associated with fifth Mission Santa Clara church no longer in use. New site for cemetery chosen, location is at today’s Santa Clara Mission Cemetery (Wizorek 1996:2).

Jacob Eberhard arrived in Santa Clara Valley (Harris et al. 1995) 1861 William Fitts starts an omnibus line he names the Accommodation Line Omnibus. This is the first horse-drawn service between Santa Clara and San Jose. It ran between the Cameron House in Santa Clara and the Auzerais House in San Jose.

Remodeling of the Mission church begins. Wood and brick façade installed on bell tower and front of old adobe church (http://www.scu.edu/missionchurch/history). 1862 City of Santa Clara is chartered and first of a series of Northern California earthquakes occur (Mayfield et al. 1981:16; Garcia et al. 2002:60). 1862–1865 Father Villiger replaced many of the original adobe buildings. Science Building constructed (Wizorek 1998:32). 1863 Santa Clara Brewery established at Benton and Alviso streets (Mayfield et al. 1981:5).

Jacob Eberhard arrived in Santa Clara Valley. He later purchased Santa Clara Tannery (Harris et al. 1995) 1864 San Francisco and San Jose Railroad is completed. Depot constructed east side of tracks at junction with Benton Street. Eventually a railroad spur is built to the Santa Clara College for transport of construction materials (Mayfield et al. 1981:17–18; Garcia 1997:69).

Scientific Building constructed, three-story wood frame structure that housed a dormitory, dining hall, and science classrooms and labs (Demolished in 1929) 1865 Large earthquake (Garcia et al. 2002:60). 1866 Jacob Eberhard purchased Santa Clara Tannery (Mayfield et al. 1981; Hanel 1994:42). Note that Garcia et al. (2002:60) give the year of purchase as 1867.

Plat of the Town of Santa Clara surveyed by J.J. Bowen (Garcia 1997:96–97).

Larder house on Block 448 likely constructed.

The Johnson and Clayton Steam Flour Mill was abandoned and subsequently used as a storage space (Garcia 1997:55, 81). 1867 Santa Clara College demolishes fourth Mission church (Skowronek and Wizorek 1997:73).

Phillip Glein sold his interest in the tannery to his son-in-law Jacob Eberhard (San Jose Mercury News, June 1, 1953; quoted in Harris 1995). 1868 Turn-Verein Club, on corner of Benton and Alviso, established as a German private club or lodge. Used as a gymnasium and social club by local German population.

Railroad using horse-drawn cars is built along The Alameda (Wizorek 1998:44).

Earthquake occurs on October 21. Damaged portion of Mission church and student chapel. Portion of the church is rebuilt with wood (Wizorek 1998:37).

Mary Bennett dies (Garcia et al. 2002:37) 1869 November 3, General Election Poll List for the Santa Clara Election District list shows: No. 194, William Fitts, Age 20, Occupation – Bus driver, Citizenship – Native born, Locality of Residence – Belomey, n. Lafayette

His father is show as: No. 195, Elijah Town Fitts, Age 57, Ocupation – Engineer, Citizenship – Native born, Locality of Residence – Market, n. Lafayette

William Fitts joins the San Jose and Santa Clara Railroad Company as an operator of their horse-cars.

Map shows newly approved sewer running down Fremont empting into the “old ditch” (possibly the Mission zanja) 1870 Home of Jacob Eberhard is constructed about this time at 575 Grant Street. (Occupied until 1950; destroyed in late 1950s to early 1960s). 1874 Enterprise Mill and Lumber Co. moved to Bellomy Street, between Alviso and Lafayette. Later known as Pacific Manufacturing Company (Garcia et al. 2002:80). 1876–1879 William Fitts is the town marshal of Santa Clara 1877 Southern Pacific RR relocates Depot across tracks and attaches it to existing freight shed (Garcia et. al. 2002:63).

Santa Clara College President, Aloysius Brunego, S.J., had constructed a two-story commercial building alongside the Science Hall (Giacomini and McKevitt 2000). 1878 Tanner Hose Company, volunteer fire company, established (Garcia et al. 2002:71).

Cultural Resources Treatment Plan for the 5-Year Development Plan at Santa Clara University — DRAFT Albion Environmental, Inc. David J. Powers and Associates, Inc. July 2015 102 Year Event(s) and structures South Pacific Coast RR (narrow gauge) constructed, Depot located near Sherman and Benton (Garcia et. al. 2002:63).

The Johnson and Clayton Steam Flour Mill (that had been used as a storage space since 1866) burned down (Garcia 1997:55, 81). 1880 Population 2,416 1880s Victorian neighborhood built in area of Franklin Street (Huelsbeck 1987)

Residence at 741 Franklin Street – Nugent Residence – dates to this period. 1883–1890 When the electric trolley cars came in, William Fitts became the superintendent of the railway. After 1890, he became a jailer in San Jose and the Fitts’ moved to that city 1885 New student chapel constructed on site of old, next to Mission church (Wizorek 1998:32). 1886 Block on Franklin, between Jackson and Main streets occupied by Chinese “wash houses” (Garcia et al. 2002:62). 1887 White Rose Roller Mills shown on 1887 Sanborn Fire Insurance map at Franklin and Grant Streets. In 1887 it becomes the Jarvis Winery (Sanborn Insurance map drawn; Garcia n.d.:29).

A large, highly visible, multi-story building colloquially called "The Ship," constructed by the College on the southwest corner of Franklin and Alviso streets. 1889 Electric trolley built along Alameda. Center row of willow trees removed to make room for construction. 1890 “Italian ethnic neighborhood” constructed around Santa Clara University (Huelsbeck 1988a:1).

Population 2,891 1890s Sodality Athletic Association constructed baseball field on location of fourth Mission church (Skowronek and Wizorek 1997:73). 1892 Charles Copeland Morse purchases White Rose Roller Mill/Jarvis Winery property. Warehouse becomes C. C. Morse Seed Warehouse.

Santa Clara Tannery incorporated, becomes the Eberhard Tanning Company (Garcia et al. 2002:63). 1893 Enterprise Laundry constructed, formerly called the Saint Claire Laundry (Mayfield et al. 1981:5; Garcia et al. 2002:75). 1896 City establishes its electric utility and begins selling electricity (Hanel 1990:44). 1900 Population 3,650 1901 Sanborn Fire Insurance map drawn. 1906 Earthquake collapses many buildings, including the California Hotel and smokestack of the Eberhard Tanning Company along with four water tanks. 1907 San Jose Daily Mercury, October 2, notes discovery of bones, beads, and shells during sewer line excavation on Franklin Street for residential neighborhood (M. Hylkema 1995:41).

Pereira Building on Block 448 constructed. According to the architectural evaluation (Mineweaser & Associates 2010): “The property was developed in 1907 for the Pereira family, incorporating manufacturing, retail, and residential uses. The family bottled beer from the Santa Clara Brewery, which stood at the corner of Alviso and Benton Streets, sold it from a storefront fronting Franklin Street, and lived on the second floor above the store. The back of the building facing Alviso Street was the bottling plant.” 1910 Population 4,348

(late 1910) College purchases block between Alviso and Grant (where C. C. Morse warehouse located). Alviso Street closed from Franklin to Santa Clara Street and Liberty & Lexington streets closed from Grant to Alviso (Sunday Mercury & Herald Jan:1911) 1911 Gas main laid along south side of Franklin Street for residential occupants. 1912 “The Ship” moved from the corner of Alviso and Franklin Streets to Franklin and Lafayette streets (Giacomini and McKevitt 2000) 1913 O’Connor Hall constructed. Built in location of former mayordomo dwelling, later the California Hotel (Wizorek 1998:32) Santa Clara Woman’s Club purchased Peña Adobe (Garcia et al. 2002:93). 1915 Eberhard Tanning Company occupied 11 acres of land. (Garcia et al. 2002:71).

Sanborn Insurance map drawn. 1920 Population 5,220

Water pipe trench dug along Franklin and Campbell for residents. 1923 Donahoe Infirmary Constructed (used as an infirmary until 1975) 1924 PG&E laid gas main. Ex-C. C. Morse Seed Warehouse demolished for new College construction (Santa Clara News March 1924). 1926 Student chapel and fifth Mission church are destroyed by fire 1927 New charter, changes name from Town of Santa Clara to City of Santa Clara (Garcia et al. 2002:93). 1928 PG&E laid gas main. 1929 Franklin Street paved. (Presumably others in area also) (Huelsbeck 1985:3).

Science Building and Commercial Building Demolished (Skowronek and Hylkema 2010:191) 1930 Sanborn Fire Insurance map drawn. 1933 Fire destroyed half the buildings of the Eberhard Tannery (Garcia et al. 2002:114). 1934 Father Spearman conducts excavation of third Mission site near houses in Franklin Street. 1938 All Electric trolley service ends; bus service replaces it (Wizorek 1998:44; Garcia 2000:2). 1940 Population 6,650 1940s “Veterans Village” constructed post WWII at what is now Leavey Fitness Center: 112 housing units of Quonset Huts (demolished in 1963) (Baxter et al. 2011). 1941 Trash pick-up begins in Santa Clara (Wizorek 1998:42). 1943 Foundations of third Mission quadrangle encountered during construction of water main on Franklin Street. 1950 Sanborn Insurance map drawn. 1953 Santa Clara University constructs buildings on the 6-acre Eberhard Tannery site it had recently purchased. 1959 Pacific Manufacturing Company is dissolved (Garcia et al. 2002:114). 1960s Water main installed in front of two apartments on north side of Franklin Street. 1965 City of Santa Clara proposed to reroute El Camino Real. El Camino Real then same as a section of The Alameda, a four-lane city street that bisected the University and traveled along a residential neighborhood (Ginn and L. Hylkema 1999).

Cultural Resources Treatment Plan for the 5-Year Development Plan at Santa Clara University — DRAFT Albion Environmental, Inc. David J. Powers and Associates, Inc. July 2015 104 Year Event(s) and structures 1972 Tannery corporation disbanded (SCU purchased land in 1950s) (Mayfield et al. 1981:42). 1981 Construction of monument commemorating third Mission site built along Franklin Street. 1985 El Camino Real realigned from Chapman Court to De la Cruz Boulevard. Realignment rerouted along Campbell Avenue, which paralleled part of old Alameda. New route widened to six lanes. 1987 Demolition of many residences in area of Franklin Street. 1988 Franklin developed into a cul-de-sac (Ginn and L. Hylkema 1999). 1990 Santa Clara Tum-Verein Club building demolished (Wizorek 1998:43). 1994 New Music and Dance Building constructed

Photo courtesy Lorie Garcia Historical Collection Figure 25. 1847 plat map of the Town of Santa Clara by William Campbell.

Albion Environmental, Inc. A New American Immigration

In 1846, members of the first large overland immigration reached Santa Clara. Descriptions of California appearing in eastern newspapers had encouraged Americans to come and settle. The “Great Migration” of 1846 consisted of entire families, a completely different type of American immigrant than had arrived before. Stopping at Sutter’s Fort upon completion of their journey, these newly arrived American immigrants were informed by Fremont and the Californios that they could shelter during the rainy season at a number of mostly unoccupied Missions. Among those Missions was Santa Clara (Garcia 2000).

In a little over a month, from mid-October through November 1846, an estimated 175 adults and children, including William Campbell and his family, arrived at Mission Santa Clara. At the Mission, immigrants would find a place ill-prepared to receive them. Since secularization, theft and neglect had impoverished what was once reputed to be the wealthiest Mission in California.

Despite the Mission’s disrepair, most of the new arrivals stayed on the compound and sought shelter in unused adobe buildings and the Mission granary. The Mission compound's courtyard and its buildings, the church, and the apartments occupied by James Alexander Forbes and his family, were the only spaces not infiltrated by immigrants (Garcia 1997:24–25). Unfortunately, by American standards, all of the Mission quarters were inadequate and they would later describe their situation as living under “deplorable conditions, sharing a large warehouse building with little light [the 112 foot long by 40 foot wide Mission granary]. It was raining and the roof leaked. Food was in short supply.” One immigrant, Olive Isbell, gave the following description of conditions in Santa Clara in a letter home in December 1846:

We found things in great confusion and times very hard. We are in Santa Clara about 150 miles south of Sutter’s fort, and a beautiful place it is. If you can picture yourself a solid mass of houses built of mud with scarcely a window or fireplace; fire in one corner and a hole in the roof for smoke to pass out; almost every one sick, without care; most of the men in the lower country with Fremont; surrounded by Californians, expecting every day to be attacked by them; beef and bread to eat; flour $8 a 100 pound and thankful for that; raining most of the time, you can form some idea how we live (Garcia, 1998:9).

In addition to poor living conditions, fighting in California between Mexicans/Californios and Americans had been occurring since the previous July and by the end of the year, conflict had arisen in Santa Clara itself. Rumors transmitted as facts, had prompted the organization of a militia at Santa Clara. One of the immigrants, Joseph Aram, established his headquarters at the Mission with a force of 31 men assuming leadership in the Mission militia. Ignoring the pleas of the local Californio population, Captain Aram and his men proceeded to cut down several of the willow trees (planted by Father Catalá) along the Alameda to use in barricading the Mission (Garcia 2000). The immigrants then fortified the Mission compound by stacking the logs in the Mission zanja, (Hylkema 2015), as Aram later described:

"...it soon became evident that some kind of barricade was necessary to prevent the enemy from charging immediately on the mission buildings. Being in full command of the place, I set the men immediately to work to fortify the place, by cutting and hauling logs about ten feet in length. They were placed in a ditch about three feet deep, forming a breast work seven feet high. We felt that such a fence was sufficient to prevent the ingress of the enemy" (Langum 2014:86).

This conflict culminated with the Battle of Santa Clara on January 2, 1847; the only campaign in the Northern District of California between Californio and the United States forces during the Mexican- American war. Occurring in the area between today's Lawrence Expressway and De La Cruz

Cultural Resources Treatment Plan for the 5-Year Development Plan at Santa Clara University — DRAFT Albion Environmental, Inc. David J. Powers and Associates, Inc. July 2015 107 overpass, this “battle” was a result of several rancheros rebelling against the Americans taking their livestock and property. It was actually a two-hour skirmish not a battle; no one was killed, and the only casualty was the American military forces’ cannon which continually bogged down in the knee- deep mud. A peaceful treaty was arranged on January 7, 1847. However, the American immigrants who viewed it from the tops of the Mission buildings interpreted it as a tremendous defeat of the “enemy.”

On January 12, 1847, Fremont and two of Pico's officers agreed to terms for a surrender. The following day, Articles of Capitulation were signed by Fremont, Andrés Pico, and six others at a rancho at Cahuenga Pass in Southern California. This treaty marked the end of armed resistance in California. Joseph Aram’s militia company was disbanded on March 1st, and for the American immigrants, the winter spent at Mission Santa Clara was over.

However, during 1847 problems would continue at Santa Clara due to a continuing influx of American immigrants; the non-Indian population of California almost doubled between 1845 and 1848. When the Californios had informed the immigrants they could shelter at the Missions, they had also stated that these “were surrounded by public lands which could be cultivated without infringing on the rights of others.” Americans of that day clearly understood that the Preemption Act of 1841 allowed individuals, "squatters," to acquire unoccupied land belonging to the government and claim it as their property (preempt it) if they wished (Langum 2014:142). It was not necessary that the claimant have actual title to the land; living there and working toward improving it was enough. After the government finally surveyed the land, immigrants had the first opportunity to buy it from the government at low prices.

By the spring of 1847, some immigrants living at the Mission compound were paying rent to Father Real, but many were simply “squatting,” refusing the vacate the premises. They had even set up a school and were holding protestant church services there. Father Real reported to United States Military Governor Mason that $4,000 worth of property had disappeared and that damage to the extent of $15,575 had been done.

In June, Governor Mason ordered the unauthorized occupants to leave and sent Captain (later General) Naglee with a body of soldiers to oust the squatters and return possession to the Mission fathers (The Evening News 1917: May 31). However, Mason also proposed that the immigrants be allowed to stay until harvest time or longer if they paid rent, and Father Real assented to that request (Garcia 1997:34). Also, accustomed to intensive agricultural practices, the Americans were squatting on the surrounding land, which they saw as seemingly unused, and staking out their own claims. This exacerbated the problems at Santa Clara for the previous occupants and land grantees.

For example, Rancho El Potrero de Santa Clara had been granted by Governor Micheltorena to James Alexander Forbes in 1844. The Rancho comprised 1,939.03 acres, and was bounded on the east by the Guadalupe River, on the south and west by the Alameda, and on the north by a line just north of and parallel to Brokaw Road. This property became subject to the impacts of American squatters and in 1847, Forbes sold it to Commodore Robert Stockton (patented to Stockton by the United States in 1861) (Hylkema and Garcia 1996).

Besides her two earlier grants, the town lot and farming lot, Mary Bennett also filed a preemptive claim for 160 acres westward of the adobe house in which she was living. Here she had constructed a new adobe house, partially enclosed the land around it and cultivated the land. However, she had not enclosed the town and farm lot acquired in the earlier grant; squatters soon occupied those parcels. Even though the squatters were removed by Governor Mason's soldiers, once the soldiers left, squatting resumed, and Mary's plans for extending her own acreage into the Mission gardens failed.

On January 24, 1848, nine days prior to the signing of the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo, James Marshall found gold at Coloma. Not many days passed before news of the discovery was “circulated with electrical rapidity through the territory.” In his history of California, General Mariano Guadalupe Vallejo writes:

Gold in the mines! This cry, resounding throughout the length and breadth of California, created a veritable revolution, social and financial. The farmer left his plough in the furrow, the schoolmaster abandoned his books and blackboards, the sailor deserted his ship, the barber flung down his razor and the tailor his shears. Even the lover relinquished the hand of his sweetheart to clutch the pick and shovel and rush forth in search of the longed for metal.

The discovery of gold and the subsequent rush to the gold fields resulted in an exodus of anyone in California who could leave home. The Santa Clara Valley was no exception. Even Father Real joined the many gold seekers (Garcia 1997:37). The Santa Clara/San José area was nearly depopulated. By the end of the year, some returned and found the price of provisions had risen dramatically because crops had not been harvested. In addition to those returning from the gold fields, many newcomers also arrived in the area, further expanding the population.

While immigrants entering the area prior to 1848 had caused problems by squatting on Mission and Rancho lands, these were minor compared to the impacts caused by the onslaught of people entering the area following the discovery of gold. Many newcomers settled on the land to make their fortunes, finding that agriculture was more lucrative than mining. With the influx of people now greater than the outflow, the area looked like a half-military and half-civil settlement with numerous white tents dotting the open areas (Hall 1871:197). As fresh produce became valuable for residents and miners, Santa Clara's Mission pear orchard became of major economic importance (McKevitt 1979:33). Typical of the litigation over land ownership and/or possession in the area, the ensuing fight over possession and ownership of the pear orchard would not be settled until 1855.

While the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo guaranteed honoring Mexican titles, the vast majority of settlers and homesteaders after the Gold Rush simply squatted on every available piece of property. The squatters claimed the land they marked as theirs, in the hope that previous property title could not be proved. The problem then became one of proving ownership in American courts. By mid-1849, the population had become so large and diverse that governing the people of California under the existing conditions was impossible. Accordingly, in June 1849 Governor Riley issued a proclamation for a Constitutional Convention to be held in Monterey. In September and on November 15th, the delegates ratified the constitution and elected a governor. The first session of the Legislature began in San Jose on December 15, 1849. On February 18, 1850 the Legislature passed a resolution dividing the state into counties and establishing "seats of Justice therein."

The following month, the Legislature organized a "Court of Sessions," with the first Court of Sessions of Santa Clara County formed on April 29, 1850. Along with this action, Santa Clara County was divided into five Townships, Washington, San Jose, Santa Clara, and Redwood with a presiding Justice of the Peace appointed. Charles Clayton, a miller and founder of the Santa Clara flour mills, was appointed as Justice of the Peace for Santa Clara Township. This 25-year old immigrant from England had acted as the Alcalde of Santa Clara from 1849–1850. The Docket Book that Clayton kept for 1850–1851 shows that land disputes and unpaid debts were by far the vast majority of the cases that came before him. For example, many suits were brought by Father Real to maintain control of the Mission buildings and grounds from squatters.

Cultural Resources Treatment Plan for the 5-Year Development Plan at Santa Clara University — DRAFT Albion Environmental, Inc. David J. Powers and Associates, Inc. July 2015 109 While disputes over land ownership were ongoing, the use of land itself was undergoing change. Before 1846, little American style agriculture existed in the Santa Clara area. The agricultural products needed for sustenance were provided by crops raised at the Mission and individual family plots. Following the arrival of the early American immigrants, wheat farming had quickly become the dominant crop. Mary Bennett herself raised wheat on her farm lot grant, along with corn, watermelons, vegetables, and horses and milk cows (Langum 2014:81).

By the early 1850s, farmers had begun planting small orchards and vineyards; some experimenting with these crops on their grain farms. The productivity of the Mission’s orchards had impressed the many agricultural entrepreneurs who settled here after the Gold Rush. Their interest in Santa Clara land inspired this area’s earliest development and cultivation of fruit products. Cuttings taken from the Mission pear orchard provided the start of some of the early small orchards. When the Mexican- American War was over, Joseph Aram stayed at Santa Clara and established an orchard/nursery instead of joining those going to the mines. Then, in the early 1850s, the first American orchards in Santa Clara were planted by E. W. Case, consisting of 350 trees – mostly apples purchased from Aram’s nursery – located on property fronting Alviso Road (Harrison 1981:3). In the spring of 1852, Commodore Stockton had apple, peach, pear, plum, nectarine, and apricot rootstock sent from Hovey’s Nursery in Massachusetts for the purpose of establishing a nursery of his own on his land. Following its opening in April 1853, this nursery would serve as the primary source of nursery supplies in the area for some time (Garcia 1997:47).

From this start, fruit orchards and vineyards would be developed at an increasingly rapid rate. Large enterprises formed on the land abutting the developing town of Santa Clara, and small orchards formed in the town proper. Many of the developed town lots would have an orchard and/or vineyard listed as improvements when the Town’s first official survey was conducted in July 1866.

Incorporation

By 1852, a small hamlet of some 200 people living in a cluster of adobes and simple frame houses had grown up around the old Mission buildings. In addition, Santa Clara College was established within and around old Mission buildings in 1851 (San Jose Mercury-News 1972:30 January). On July 5 of that year, the Town of Santa Clara was incorporated with the approval of the State Legislature. The new township comprised some 2000 acres. With minimal change, the blocks and streets as platted by William Campbell in 1847 would be the basis of the town's formal configuration. This was attested to on August 21, 1866, in a document filed with the first official survey of the town conducted by J. J. Bowen in July 1866 that was recorded on August 22 of that same year (Garcia 1997:98) (Figure 26). In this document, Frank Lightston and Henry Bee swore:

Frank Lightston and Henry Bee being duly sworn each for himself deposes and says that he is a citizen of the United States and over the age of twenty one years: that he has resided in the County of Santa Clara during the last twenty years: that he knows the Town of Santa Clara represented by this Map: that it was established in good faith in the year 1847 being prior to the passage of the Act of Congress approved March 3rd 1865 entitled an Act supplemental to the act approved July 1st 1864, for the disposal of Govt. Lands and Town property: and each further deposes and says that to the best of his knowledge this Map correctly represents the blocks streets and squares of the said town as surveyed in the year 1847: and each further deposes and says that the land embraced within the said survey of 1847 has been occupied and used for town purposes ever since.

Cultural Resources Treatment Plan for the 5-Year Development Plan at Santa Clara University — DRAFT Albion Environmental, Inc. David J. Powers and Associates, Inc. July 2015 110 File name: Figure_26_1866JJBowen.ai, J2015-011.01, Stella D’Oro, 01July2015

Photo courtesy Lorie Garcia Historical Collection

Figure 26. 1866 J. J. Bowen survey.

Albion Environmental, Inc. As shown on the survey made for the San Francisco and San Jose Railroad a decade later, the boundaries of the town not only covered the town grid delineated on Campbell's map, but also outlying areas, including Rancho El Potrero de Santa Clara or Stockton's Rancho.

While the layout of the streets and blocks underwent minimal change, the new American settlers would change most of the names given to the streets during the 1847 survey. These new names followed the American practice of naming streets after prominent American historical figures, nearby places, and important property owners. For example, the roadway that Campbell had called San Francisco Street became French Street. The street he identified as Almado Street was renamed Benton Street. Moultrey Street became Fremont Street and Orchard Street was renamed Spanish Street. Between 1862 and 1866, other street names would also change, reflecting the impact of the Civil War. For example, the early township name of French Street was changed to Grant Street (today The Alameda) and Spanish Street was renamed Sherman Street.

The rapid changes that occurred in the town of Santa Clara had drastically altered the landscape surrounding the Mission (Figure 27). These changes were witnessed by Bayard Taylor when he returned in 1859. In his book "New Pictures from California" he (Taylor (1894) 1951:17) describes Santa Clara as follows:

A further drive…brought us to Santa Clara. The old…Mission with its long adobe walls, tiled roof, quaint…church, and orchards hedged with the fruit bearing cactus, were the same as ever; but beyond them, on all sides extended a checkerwork of new streets---brick stores, churches, smiling cottages, in the midst of gardens and orchards, which seemed unnaturally precocious. Here both the Catholics and Methodists have large and flourishing schools. The old avenue of trees still connects Santa Clara with San José, but as we drove along it, I looked in vain for the open plain, covered with its growth of wild mustard.

The German Immigrants

Among the waves of people arriving in Santa Clara during the 1850s, were many immigrants who were originally from Germany, mainly the Electorate of Hessen (also known as Hessen-Kassel, the Grand Duchy of Baden, the Kingdom of Württemberg and the Kingdom of Bavaria (all members of the German Confederation). Some, such as Philip Glein, John Henry Messing, and Charles Otter, had come to California during the Gold Rush. Others left their homeland later and immigrated to the United States because of unrest in the German states.

Like much of Europe during the 19th century, Germany was not a cohesive country. War, starvation, industrialization, ethnic strife, and religious differences created a fluid nation with massive movements in population, rapidly changing alliances, and shifting borders. Varying combinations of these factors led to a massive migration of German speaking peoples to the New World in search of a better life.

Charles Otter and John Henry Messing had both immigrated from Hessen-Kassel, Germany (Figure 28). Both arrived in San Francisco in early 1850 and headed straight for the gold fields. After several successful years in the mines, Otter returned to Germany in 1854. Five years later, however, he returned to California (Henderson 1996:91). He settled in San Jose, but had financial interests in Santa Clara, having acquired a large part of the block between Benton, Franklin, Alviso, and Grant (today's The Alameda), where he owned four frame houses (Garcia 1997:160). Otter also invested in the brewery established by Herman Liebe on the block immediately to the north of his property.

Cultural Resources Treatment Plan for the 5-Year Development Plan at Santa Clara University — DRAFT Albion Environmental, Inc. David J. Powers and Associates, Inc. July 2015 112 File name: Figure_27_1856_Lithograph.ai, J2015-011.01, Stella D’Oro, 01July2015

Lorie Garcia Historical Collection

Figure 27. Kuchel & Dresel 1856 lithograph of the Town of Santa Clara.

Albion Environmental, Inc. Photo courtesy San Jose Historical Museum

Figure 28. Charles Otter early 1850s.

Albion Environmental, Inc. File name: Figure_28_Charles_Otter.ai, J2015-011.01, Stella D'Oro, 01July2015 J2015-011.01, File name: Figure_28_Charles_Otter.ai, After trying his fortune in the southern mines, John Henry Messing and his wife came to Santa Clara County. Here, he was employed in different business enterprises, including the establishment of a harness and saddle business. Once he had accumulated enough money, he partnered with Philip Glein, another immigrant from Hessen-Kassel, Germany, and Frederick Christian Franck to purchase a tannery in Santa Clara. In 1859, Messing sold his interest in the tannery to Philip Glein and his harness and saddle business to F. C. Franck. Messing then moved to San Jose where he established another harness and saddle business (The Evening News 1902: January 21).

Another prominent German immigrant in Santa Clara was Herman Liebe. He was born in Gross- Breitenbach, Thuringia, Germany, and immigrated to America when he was 17 years old, arriving in New York in 1849. He later moved to Boston in 1852. Two years later, he returned to New York where, having saved enough money, he bought a ticket to California. He arrived in San Francisco, ill from the trip across Panama and needing a job. Luck was with him, when a man heard him singing in his room and Herman was hired to sing, first with Madame Anna Bishop's troupe and then with the Italian Opera Troupe. Liebe then went to work in the Gambrinus Brewery and soon saved enough money to buy Artist Hall in San Francisco.

At this time, Louis Krumb, one of Liebe’s companions from the trip across the Isthmus of Panama, arrived in San Francisco. Krumb had a brewery in Alameda and sold his beer in San Jose. Krumb invited Herman Liebe to go to San Jose and go into business with his agent there, F. Kloppinger, another Isthmus friend. Arriving here, Herman Liebe decided Santa Clara was the best place to live. He and Kloppinger built a wooden structure on the block between Benton, Fremont, Alviso, and Grant Streets to house the Pioneer Santa Clara Brewery (The Pioneer 1878: April 13). They succeeded in building up a fine trade and by 1863 the wooden building had been replaced with a large brick structure. By 1866, Liebe had purchased Charles Otter's and F, Krumb's shares and was the sole proprietor of the brewery.

Unlike the others, Frederick Christian Franck, arrived in America prior to the Gold Rush. Born in Waschbascherhof, Bavaria on December 23, 1828, he left school at age 15 to learn the harness and saddle making trade. Two years later, he immigrated to the United States, working in New York City, making saddles for the US government for the Mexican-American War. In 1848 he left New York, finding work in Cleveland, Buffalo, Cincinnati, Louisville, and New Orleans before heading out to California in 1851. He arrived in San Francisco in February 1852 (San Jose Mercury 1902: December 21).

Franck set out for the gold mines, but by the end of the following year, he decided that gold mining was not as fruitful as he had hoped and established a shop in San Francisco for the manufacture of saddles and harnesses. In 1855, at age 27, he moved to Santa Clara where he became a partner in Messing's saddle and harness business, and acquired a partial ownership in the Santa Clara Tannery (Garcia et al. 2002:60). Two years later, he married Caroline Durmeyer, a native of Strasburg, whose family had arrived in Santa Clara in the early 1850s (Figure 29). In 1859, upon the retirement of John Henry Messing, F. C. Franck obtained full ownership of their saddle and harness business, which he would run for the next 30 years. Franck was eminently successful, invested wisely and acquired substantial property holdings early on.

Figure 29. 1857 wedding photograph of Caroline Durmeyer and Frederick Christian Franck. Albion Environmental, Inc. File name: Figure_29_Franck_Durmeyer.ai, J2015-009.01, Stella D'Oro, 01July2015 File name: Figure_29_Franck_Durmeyer.ai, In 1867, German immigrant Jacob Eberhard purchased the Santa Clara Tannery from Philip Glein. Jacob Eberhard was born in Kork, in the Grand Duchy of Baden, Germany, and immigrated with his family to America when he was 15 years old. The family settled in Galena, Illinois, where Jacob learned the trade of tanner and saddle maker. In 1858, Jacob came to Sacramento where he obtained employment as a laborer, gold miner, and harness maker before opening his own harness shop there in 1862 (Figure 30). While in Sacramento, he met Mary Glein, who had emigrated with her parents from Kassel, Germany, and whose father, Philip, owned the Santa Clara Tannery. On November 1, 1864 Jacob and Mary were wed, and shortly thereafter moved to Santa Clara. Three years later, Jacob bought the Tannery from his father-in-law. Under Jacob's ownership, steam-driven machinery was installed and very quickly the payroll went up to 60 men (San Jose Mercury News 1958: October 6).

In the late 1860s, the growing Santa Clara population saw an increasing number of German immigrants. In 1866, the German Confederation had dissolved as a result of the Austro-Prussian War between the Confederation entities of the Austrian Empire and its allies on one side, and the Kingdom of Prussia and its allies on the other. Then, in 1870, France attacked Prussia, and now the south German states of Baden, Württemberg, and Bavaria, who had been allied with Austria, joined the Prussian forces. As a consequence of the resulting political and social turmoil, many left their homelands and came to the United States. From the late 1860s through the 1880s, numerous German immigrants would settle in and around Santa Clara, in areas where their countrymen had previously settled. Eventually those with German backgrounds would make up 20% of the town's population. Here, they created a cohesive German community and would become economically and socially involved in town life (Garcia et. al. 2002:60). Immigrants, attracted by the growing employment opportunities, were so numerous that the neighborhood east of Lafayette, north of Santa Clara College, and south of Harrison Street became known as the German Colony. Several German immigrants, such as Eberhard, Druffel, Roll, and Franck would also become politically involved, serving in prominent positions as Town Trustee, Mayor, County Supervisor, State Assemblyman, and State Senator.

Chinese Immigrants

Garcia et al. (2002:61) describes Santa Clara’s Chinese immigrant population:

A few Chinese had appeared in the Santa Clara area after the Gold Rush, such as Sing Kee, a cook, laundryman and weather prognosticator employed by Dr. Saxe in 1860. It wasn’t until 1863–1864 that the first group of Chinese immigrants arrived, entering Santa Clara Valley as workers on the construction of the San Francisco and San Jose Railroad. While most early Chinese immigrants were employed by the railroad and as land clearers or domestics, many soon found work as farm laborers, working harder for less money than comparable Caucasian help. Despite hostility expressed towards them, the Chinese remained dominant in agricultural field work until the turn of the century…

Santa Clara did not have a Chinatown proper. Laundry service was the most prevalent business opportunity for the Chinese immigrants and by 1886 half the block on Franklin Street, between Jackson and Main Street, was occupied by Chinese “wash houses.” The businesses were located on the ground floor with living space above.

Figure 30. Jacob Eberhard, mid-late 1870s.

Albion Environmental, Inc. File name: Figure_30_JacobEberhard.ai, J2015-011.01, Stella D'Oro, 01July2015 File name: Figure_30_JacobEberhard.ai, J2015-011.01, The Chinese Exclusion Act in 1884 had stated that, "All Chinese laborers that came in after November 17, 1880 were to be deported [and that] all the Chinese that were in the U.S. before this date were [to be] registered and given certificates that had their names, age, occupation, physical markings on their bodies and more” (Garcia nd:20–21, 56). This Act was very popular among the political and business interests. After its passage, Santa Clara's Chinese population came under attack, mostly over the use of Chinese laborers, leading to vigilante acts. However, in 1891, focus shifted to the "downtown" Chinese. After the sale of a building Chinese immigrants had long occupied on Franklin Street near the corner of Jackson Street, they rented a new site, "much closer to the town center" (The Evening News 1891:June 23).

Opposition to their presence grew over the following decade until in January 1903, the Commercial League, who was promoting the town as "Progressive Santa Clara...where health and plenty are the portion of her people," took steps to have them completely removed. In a petition to the Town Board of Trustees (printed in full in the January 12, 1903 issue of The San Jose Mercury) they wrote:

"To the Honorable the Board of Trustees of the Town of Santa Clara. The Santa Clara Commercial League taking into consideration that many complaints made to it against the existence on Franklin Street, the principal street in town, of Chinese wash-houses and joints, consider it a duty to give its support to a popular movement, having for its object the removal of said Chinese establishments from Franklin Street, the relocation of the same to some other locality and their regulation generally as to cleanliness and morality.

"Physically these Chinese establishments are offensive to the eye and nostrils of people passing them, they are a menace to the health of the community; they are an eyesore, a stench and a breeding place for disease-creating germs.

"Morally they are a danger to the community and especially to the youth of the town. It is generally known that such establishments are parts of or more or less connected with gambling joints and places offering opportunities for the use of opium and the practice of unspeakable Oriental vices.

"Gambling of the most demoralizing character is constantly carried on in these places and bad as it is in itself, it is made worse by cheating and the ruffianly conduct of the men who manage these places.

"From a business point of view the existence of these Chinese establishments prevents white merchants and traders from doing business in their vicinity; it is only because of the lowness of the rentals, necessitated by their proximity to these Chinese establishments, that houses and stores in their neighborhood are occupied at all.

"Moreover, were the Chinese establishments removed, there would be some incentive to improve the buildings or to replace them by new houses and stores, thus making first class places of business, worthy of the prominent site which they occupy on the principal street.

"As long as these buildings are occupied by the Chinese there can be no improvement in that quarter, and in this way their presence on Franklin Street interferes with the prosperity of the town.

"Wherefore, the Santa Clara Commercial League respectfully petitions your honorable board to pass an ordinance ordering the removal of all Chinese establishments from Franklin Street to some other part of town or outside its limits isolated from the residences and places of

Cultural Resources Treatment Plan for the 5-Year Development Plan at Santa Clara University — DRAFT Albion Environmental, Inc. David J. Powers and Associates, Inc. July 2015 119 business of white inhabitants and subjecting such establishments to wise and severe as to health, cleanliness and morality.

"Santa Clara Commercial League. R.B. Roll, President, Emil G, Hirsh, Secretary."

After public outcry forced the Chinese from the town proper their presence was mostly confined to the outlying agricultural areas.

Late American Period Immigration

More and more people were attracted to the region as agricultural production expanded and manufacturing enterprises grew during the first decade of the 20th century. The township had 3,650 residents in 1900, 4,000 by 1902, and 5,000 by the end of the first decade. Santa Clara's growth in population included a simultaneous rise in the number of immigrants from Spain, Portugal, and Italy; emigrating from troubled areas of Europe at the end of the 19th century.

In the late 1800s, the King of Hawaii went to the Madera and the Azores Islands, Portugal, making arrangements to contract and transport families to work on the sugarcane and pineapple plantations in Hawaii. Work on these plantations promised a better life than economic conditions at home could give and families made the decision to immigrate. By 1896, there were 4,000 Portuguese living in Honolulu and more living on plantations. From 1900 to 1930, many of these Portuguese (and Spanish families who also immigrated to Hawaii) left Hawaii and came to California and then to Santa Clara. These new arrivals tended to settle in areas where previous family members and those sharing a similar culture had located, finding homes that were relatively inexpensive. These immigrants would settle mostly in the areas west of Monroe Street and north of Clay Street.

Italians were the third group of immigrants coming to Santa Clara during this period, as noted by Marrazzo. Italians came to the Santa Clara Valley from all regions of Italy, including Sicily, Calabria, Basilicata, Tuscany, and Piedmont. Beginning in the 1880s, the Eden of the World beckoned Italian immigrants as farmers, ranchers, orchardists, vegetable growers, and winemakers (Marrazzo 2007). Father Nobili himself was Italian and SCU’s website pages boast of the University as “California's oldest institution of higher learning and the birthplace of Italian Studies in the western United States.” Because so many Italians moved to the Santa Clara Valley, the local historian Marrazzo (2007) published an entire volume of photographs and stories that highlight their story.

The earliest Italian immigrants began to settle in originally German neighborhoods east of Lafayette Street. Here, they resided and established small individual businesses, e.g., candy stores, barber shops, and shoe repair shops. While many would find work in the canneries and the orchards, others were employed at the Eberhard Tannery and Pacific Manufacturing Company. By the 1920s they would supplant most of the previous German population. Later this area of Santa Clara would be known as "Little Italy".

Many other groups came into the Santa Clara region during development of the Late American Period. Settlers of Anglo (English) origin, both men and women, had a decided effect on the local community. Garcia et al. (2002) document many Anglo American names that gained local recognition during the latter half of the 19th century. The stories of James Alexander Forbes, Dr. Henry Warburton, Dr. Arthur Wellesley, Mrs. Mary Judson Saxe, James Monroe Kenyon, Dr. Benjamin Franklin Headen, Mary Bennett, and William Fitts (who married into the locally prominent Pinedo family) are amongst those highlighted in the document. The Spanish and Portuguese immigrants in large part settled in other areas of the town where the earlier arrivals from Spain and Portugal were already established.

Marty Boland, a longtime resident of Santa Clara, summed up the nature of the area during the American Period when he stated “the town lived by [the factory] whistle” (Harris et al. 1995:86–87). The large businesses established by early German immigrants would be a major source of employment for the later arrivals. Immigrants to Santa Clara found work in the nearby tannery and the brewery along with the nearby Enterprise Mill and Lumber Company (later called the Pacific Manufacturing Company), which was located on the corner of Bellomy, Union (Park) Avenue and The Alameda. Other German businesses in the neighborhood included bakeries, a beer bottling plant, saloons, a paint shop, pharmacies, and other businesses essential to the daily lives of the local inhabitants. Santa Clara’s German neighborhood also had facilities for social gathering. Aside from several saloons, the community also established the Santa Clara Turn-Verein in 1868. Descriptions of a selection of industries in and around Santa Clara University are presented below.

Eberhard Tannery

The Eberhard Tannery (formerly the Santa Clara Tannery) was one of the earliest and longest operating industries in the Santa Clara Valley. Located south of the 3rd Mission and east of the 5th Mission Church Complexes, the tannery was in continual use from the 1780s through the 20th century (Figures 31 and 32). From the Mission Period to its eventual ownership by Jacob Eberhard in 1867, the tannery was bought and sold many times (see Table 6). For example, on the 1847 Plat map, the structure is noted as “Bellomy’s Tan Yard” (Figure 25). Once Phillip Glein sold his interest in the tannery to his son-in-law Jacob Eberhard, the tannery became an important institution in Santa Clara, especially among the German community. It providing employment for several hundred people, and supported the large working-class community that grew up around it. The Eberhard Tanning Company owned and operated this tannery for nearly 90 years (1867–1953) (Harris S. 1995).

Under Eberhard’s management, the tannery “took off” (Harris et al. 1995:8). Harris et al. (1995:8–11) give an overview history of the tannery while it was in Jacob Eberhard family’s hands, which is based on newspaper reports, city directories, and historical accounts. Their research demonstrates the Tannery's successes:

New buildings were constructed and it slowly became a very large and respected tannery. Eberhard advertised on his business card as a purveyor of harness leather, shoe leather, goat and sheepskins. The Tannery was well known for its saddle leather….

In the 1890s, the tannery produced 29,000 cow, 3,000 calf and 100,000 sheep hides per year. All told, they shipped 900,000 pounds of hides yearly. At this time Eberhard employed 70 men and had an annual payroll of $50,000 per year in wages….

By the 1920s the Eberhard Tannery was a million dollar per year industry whose 120 employees were said to have been of German ancestry…. Census and city directory information indicate that a large number of Santa Clara’s populace worked for the tannery.

Many are listed as tanners, clerks for the tannery, teamsters etc. On average approximately 25 percent of the community worked for the tannery at one time….

After Jacob’s death in 1909 his son, Oscar Eberhard, took over the Tannery. Oscar stated that the tannery’s best business years were 1924–1925.

Cultural Resources Treatment Plan for the 5-Year Development Plan at Santa Clara University — DRAFT Albion Environmental, Inc. David J. Powers and Associates, Inc. July 2015 121 Sherman Street

Palm Drive

The Alameda

Market Street Legend Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, Tannery structure from CNES/Airbus DS, USDA, USGS, AEX, Getmapping, Aerogrid, 1887 Sanborn IGN, IGP, swisstopo, and the GIS User Community Scale 1:1,901

0 25 50 75 100 Meters Figure 31. Location of Eberhard 0 75 150 225 300 ± Tannery on an aerial. Feet Albion Environmental, Inc. File name: Figure_31_TanneryLocation.ai, J2015-011.01, Stella D’Oro, 01July2015 J2015-011.01, File name: Figure_31_TanneryLocation.ai,

Figure 32. Eberhard Tannery workers on Grant Street, Santa Clara, ca. 1890. Photo courtesy of Santa Clara City Library.

The 1887 Sanborn Insurance map (Figure 33) shows that the main complex consisted of barns, drying houses, the tanning vats themselves, and offices. Structures closest to (north of) the modern Library were storage, finishing, and drying buildings. Map configurations of the tannery in 1891 and 1915 (Figures 34 and 35) show that the complex had grown. Some buildings were still used primarily for storage. Figure 36, taken from the reverse side of the Eberhard Tannery business card, shows the three-dimensional layout of the tanning complex. Figure 37 shows the extent of the buildings remaining in 1940.

Historical research conducted by Harris et al. (1995) illustrates some of the challenges faced by the Eberhard business. A large smoke stack, shown as a centerpiece in photographs and engravings of the tannery, did not survive the 1906 earthquake and its loss changed the look of the tannery forever (Harris et al. 1995:11). By 1930, Oscar Eberhard declared that the “business had basically fallen out” (Harris et al. 1995:11). The development of other industries, such as neolite rubber in shoe soles and the increased use of motor driven vehicles, caused setbacks for the leather industry. A “mysterious fire,” supposedly set by a group of gypsies turned away from work at the Tannery, burned half the buildings in the plant (San Jose Mercury News, June 1, 1953).

In 1953, the Eberhard family sold their lands to Santa Clara University. Shortly thereafter, the University constructed the Enginnering Complex and Bannan Hall atop the Eberhard Tannery.

Figure 33. 1887 Sanborn Insurance Map of Eberhard Tannery.

Albion Environmental, Inc. File name: Figure_33_1887_TannerySanborn.ai, J2015-011.01, Stella D'Oro, 01July2015 J2015-011.01, File name: Figure_33_1887_TannerySanborn.ai, Provided by Lorie Garcia Historical Collection

Figure 34. 1891 Sanborn Insurance Map of Eberhard Tannery.

Albion Environmental, Inc. File name: Figure_34_1891_TannerySanborn.ai, J2015-011.01, Stella D'Oro, 01July2015 J2015-011.01, File name: Figure_34_1891_TannerySanborn.ai, Provided by Lorie Garcia Historical Collection

Figure 35. 1915 Sanborn Insurance Map of Eberhard Tannery.

Albion Environmental, Inc. File name: Figure_35_1915_TannerySanborn.ai, J2015-011.01, Stella D'Oro, 01July2015 J2015-011.01, File name: Figure_35_1915_TannerySanborn.ai, File name: Figure_36_TanneryPostcard.ai, J2015-011.01, Stella D'Oro, 01July2015

Image courtesy of Santa Clara University Archives

Figure 36. Color postcard, Eberhard Tannery at the turn of the 20th century.

Albion Environmental, Inc. File name: Figure_37_1940Aerial.ai, J2015-011.01, Stella D'Oro, 01July2015

Image courtesy of Santa Clara University Archives

Figure 37. Photo showing the extent of buildings remaining in 1940.

Albion Environmental, Inc. Enterprise Laundry (Sainte Claire Laundry)

Located at 867 Sherman Street was the Sainte Claire Laundry, a long-lived area business that spanned nearly 80 years (1894–1970) (Mayfield et al. 1981:5; Garcia et al. 2002:75). Before becoming a laundry, it existed for a brief time (1893-1894) as a whiskey distillery, owned and operated by Charles Harlow (Figure 38). Initially called the Enterprise Laundry, this establishment was founded by Robert Roll and William Werner in 1894. Robert B. Roll, originally from Germany, had come to Santa Clara from Wisconsin in 1878 (Figure 39). He and his brother George were the first of the five Roll brothers to arrive; followed by John, Benjamin, and Felix. This was the second laundry in Santa Clara County. The laundry soon employed an average of 25 people (Garcia et.al. 2002:75). The site is marked by a large bronze plaque and is one of the City's historically significant sites.

Cultural Resources Treatment Plan for the 5-Year Development Plan at Santa Clara University — DRAFT Albion Environmental, Inc. David J. Powers and Associates, Inc. July 2015 129 SHERMAN GRANT

Provided by Lorie Garcia Historical Collection

Figure 38. 1891 Sanborn Insurance Map of the Law School site showing the distillery that later became the laundry. Albion Environmental, Inc. File name: Figure_38_1891_LawSchoolSanborn.ai, J2015-011.01, Stella D'Oro, 01July2015 File name: Figure_38_1891_LawSchoolSanborn.ai, J2015-011.01,

Figure 39. Enterprise Laundry Price List, ca. 1910. Photo courtesy of San Jose Public Library, California Room.

Constructed in 1851, the Johnson and Clayton Steam Flourmill was possibly the first steam-powered mill in California. It also likely re-appropriated the preexisting Mission gristmill (Garcia et al. 2002:20). One of the owners, Charles Clayton, was an Englishman who came to California in 1848, and served as the alcalde of Santa Clara under the Mexican government from 1849–1850, before entering the grain and flour business (Figure 40). The mill was abandoned by 1866 and used as storage space until it burnt down in 1878 (Garcia 1997:55, 81). After the fire, the mill was relocated to Grant Street and renamed White Rose Mill (Figure 41). During the Gold Rush, Santa Clara County produced more wheat than any other county in the state.

Figure 40. Charles Clayton, 1865–1880 (Library of Congress Prints and Photographs Division).

Pacific Manufacturing Company

The Pacific Manufacturing Company was one of many late 19th/early 20th century industrial warehouse companies that once existed on the southeastern region of campus (Guisto 2000) (Figure 42). Others included the J.C. Pierce Company, Pacific Redwood Casket Company, and the Pratt-Low Preserving Company. These businesses existed past the 1940s (Hylkema and Skowronek 1999). The Pacific Manufacturing Company was founded by James Pierronett Pierce and later managed by his son, James Henry Pierce. The company was established in 1875 supplying the town of Santa Clara with lumber, and later grew to supply building materials to all of California, playing a particularly important role in building up San Francisco. Business later even extended into Hawaii and Utah. In addition to lumber, the factory supplied furnishings, sashes, doors, blinds, wind mills, and airplane parts, and is said to have employed between 500 and 600 people (Sawyers 1922).

Provided by Lorie Garcia Historical Collection

Figure 41. 1887 Sanborn Insurance map showing the location of the White Rose Mill on Grant Street. Albion Environmental, Inc. File name: Figure_42_PacificMfgPlant.ai, J2015-011.01, Stella D'Oro, 02July2015

Image courtesy of Santa Clara City Library

Figure 42. Pacific Manufacturing Plant, Santa Clara, California, 1898

Albion Environmental, Inc. The Expansion of the Fruit Industry

By 1900, fruit industry business had started expanding, although the Eberhard Tanning Company and the Pacific Manufacturing Company remained the largest manufacturing employers in town. During the last quarter of the 19th century, agriculture had become the primary industry in the Santa Clara Valley. Grain had given way to orchards, vast seed farms, and vineyards. In Santa Clara, the land east of the railroad tracks, previously planted in wheat, was now used for seed cultivation by James Kimberlin and C. C. Morse. Orchards, mainly pear, lay to the west of the town limits.

Levi Gould planted an extensive pear orchard in 1860 on his 96-acre ranch west of Santa Clara (today this would be west of Scott Boulevard between El Camino and Homestead Road). Just after the completion of the transcontinental railroad in October 1869, his pears would be the first fresh fruit sent to the eastern states from California. Gould's ranch was purchased by Abram Block in 1874, who had immigrated to America in 1844 from Bohemia, arriving in California in 1852. He became known as a pear culturist and developer of the Bartlett pear. Block was one of the largest shippers and packers of green fruit in Santa Clara County and had constructed a large packing house to handle pears and cherries at what was then just west of the town limits (today the corner of Scott and the El Camino Real, Highway 81) (The Pioneer 1899: December 15). By 1907, the A. Block Fruit Packing Company had some 200 acres of orchards. As late as the 1920s, the A. Block Fruit Company's distinctive high racked blue wagons with their red running gear could be seen transporting boxes of fruit from the packing sheds down Clay and Grant Streets to the South Pacific Coast warehouse at Sherman and Benton Streets (Garcia et.al. 2002:72–73).

James P. Pierce's New Park Estate occupied the entire acreage lying between Harrison Street to the north, Lincoln to the east, Lexington Street to the south and Gould Street (today’s Scott Boulevard) to the west. By 1892, New Park had been fully developed with its 95 acres divided into 60 acres of vineyards and 25 acres of orchards planted with Bartlett pears, French prunes, cherries, and apricots. Judge Hiram G. Bond purchased 34 1/4 acres of the 95-acre estate following James Pierce's death in the mid-1890s. Judge Bond became interested in marketing fruit, and in 1900 he joined with other fruit growers to form the California Fruit Growers Association to insure better prices and marketing facilities. Bond was chosen president of the newly formed group, which was renamed the California Cured Fruit Association (Garcia 2011:10–11).

The California Cured Fruit Association constructed a large warehouse and plant between the broad gauge and narrow gauge railroad tracks, northwest of the town's Municipal Plant. The plant was on land close to the broad gauge railroad depot and freight shed. Soon, long lines of horse-drawn wagons could be seen drawn up, waiting to deliver their loads of fruit. By 1914, it would become the largest dried fruit packinghouse in the world, with a capacity of 25,000,000 pounds of fruits of all varieties (Santa Clara Commercial League 1914).

The 1880s and 1890s saw the first development of small and large fruit canning operations in Santa Clara. One of the Santa Clara Commercial League's major accomplishments was attracting the Pratt- Low Preserving Company to open a cannery (Garcia et.al. 2002:90). The Pratt-Low canning facility, located just south of the Southern Pacific depot, started canning fruit in 1905 (Payne 1987:93). Within a decade it would be considered one of Santa Clara's leading industries (Santa Clara Commercial League 1914). By 1922, it would employ 400 to 1000 people during harvesting season, which ran from June to mid-November. Several small preserving companies were later founded, including the Diana Fruit Company and the Granada Fig Company. The workforce at the fruit plants consisted mostly of Portuguese, Spanish, and Italian women. When the tannery declined, many men moved to fruit packing jobs, replacing the female workers.

Cultural Resources Treatment Plan for the 5-Year Development Plan at Santa Clara University — DRAFT Albion Environmental, Inc. David J. Powers and Associates, Inc. July 2015 135 Transportation

Whether for moving people or goods, the development of early adequate transportation systems played a major role in the growth of the town of Santa Clara. Important roadways and railways were located in the area that was mainly occupied by the early German immigrant population. By the mid- 1860s, the main road to San Francisco, which ran up The Alameda and Grant Street to Clay Street (which then connected to the County Road), had considerable traffic with stagecoaches and horseback riders traveling between San Francisco and San Jose. Benton Street also had become an important corridor. Prior to 1864, horse-drawn wagons transported fruit produce from the orchards along this roadway on the way to the port of Alviso for shipment to San Francisco and Oakland.

While it had become easier and quicker for people to travel, the high costs and inefficiency of the Alviso shipping network affected industrial growth (Garcia 1997:67). Construction of a railroad had been discussed off and on during the 1850s. In an effort to reach larger markets and increase their profits, the Santa Clara Tannery allied with the nearby College of Santa Clara to support the construction of this railroad. On August 18, 1860, the San Francisco and San Jose Railroad (S.F. & S.J. R.R. Co) was incorporated (Harrison 1981:5).

In September 1863, Charles McLaughlin, who owned the land east of the Santa Clara Mission, deeded the right-of-way across his property for the construction of the S.F. & S.J. R.R. Co. The railroad depot for Santa Clara was constructed on the east side of the tracks. On January 17, 1864, regular service between San Jose and San Francisco started, with two trains running each way on Sundays and one round-trip on weekdays. Within a month, the railroad had two trains each way daily. Additional service was offered on the freight train, which had passenger cars attached to the rear. The journey took three and one-half hours with a fare of only $2.50 (Garcia 1994:28) and freight charge of $2.00 (Rood 1865).

In the mid-1880s, the old San Jose and Santa Clara trolley was replaced by a new electric cable system. In March, 1888, the first cars were run on the S.J. & S.C. RR's new electrified line (Figure 43). At this point, the new electric line ran only to Santa Clara's city limits and horse cars returned again. The new electrified line proved to be less than satisfactory as the underground electrical system shorted out time and time again, bringing every car between San Jose and Santa Clara to a stop. By 1890, the line was converted to an overhead electrical system. Officially by the mid-1890s, the S.J. & S.C. trolley line was complete in Santa Clara and by then the line itself had been extended to encompass 17 miles of track. In 1892, when the Alum Rock line was incorporated into the system, a picnic-bound Santa Clara group could board a San Jose and Santa Clara trolley car at Jefferson and Franklin Streets (the turntable was located on Franklin and Lincoln Streets) and ride electric all the way to the Alum Rock Park terminal (Figures 34 and 35).

Photo courtesy Lorie Garcia Historical Collection

Figure 43. 1888 photograph of a San Jose and Santa Clara Railroad Company car run by an underground electrical system. Albion Environmental, Inc. During the first decades of the 20th century the trolley system continued to expand. Through several incorporations and consolidation, it grew and prospered until by 1926, there was a total of 126.71 miles of electric line in Santa Clara County (Figure 44). However, by the mid-1930s, it had become obvious that the trolley system was facing serious issues. As Malcolm R. Gaddis (Gaddis 1992:4) described it in a presentation he made in June 1992 to the American Public Transit Association in Los Angeles:

The San Jose Railroad was faced with declining ridership, competition from automobiles and the great depression. A number of steps were taken to try to keep the trolley line in operation. Birney cars were purchased, faster schedules were established, and older cars were converted for one-man operation. Some cars were sold and busses were purchased, much of the rail was badly worn and there were continuous arguments about street maintenance.

On April 10, 1938, the last clanging of the trolley bells was heard in the Santa Clara Valley. The rails on the trolley line were removed and covered with asphalt, and the trolley itself replaced by still newer technology; the gas powered bus (Figure 45).

Santa Clara (College) University (1851–Present)

California became part of the United States in 1848. With the discovery of gold, thousands of non- Indians migrated to northern California. In response, Father John Nobili founded a Jesuit institution known as the Santa Clara College in March 1851 with the hope of educating the children of Gold Rush immigrants in a safe environment close to their families, but away from the vices of the gold fields or the city of San Francisco (Giacomini 2002:119–120; Skowronek and Hylkema 2010:188). By 1853, Santa Clara College had 78 students enrolled, all males between the ages of four and eighteen. The Jesuits were following precedent set by other Roman Catholic institutions of the period, including Georgetown and Notre Dame, and creating a preparatory school (McKevitt 1979:28). The mostly Italian-born Jesuits of the college were teachers, clergy, and parental role models to these student boarders (Skowronek and Hylkema 2010:188). The Jesuits at Santa Clara closely regulated and disciplined the lives and contact with the outside world of its student body.

“August of 1888 found me matriculated at Santa Clara College – the days of the high fence, when we lived in a little world of our own. Everybody knew everybody; we shared each other’s joys and sorrows, even the contents of a mate’s trunk stored with many delicacies that were not found on the College menu” (James J. Nealon, ’92, Monthly Santa Claran, February 1934).

As with the Californio community, the new college campus first emerged out of the structures that remained from the fifth location of the Mission Santa Clara church and quadrangle (Figure 46). Fifteen years after secularization, the church was being used as a parish for the community. Father Nobili successfully evicted squatters from the Mission buildings, and in 1854, Santa Clara College purchased some of the quadrangle buildings from James Forbes (McKevitt 1979:34). Cleal’s map, of the same year (Figure 8) shows the use of the Mission church, buildings, and vineyards to the south, and adjacent cemetery and buildings on the north side of the church. Between 1851 and 1909, The California Hotel, which as described above was used as a granary in the Mission era and an Inn during the Mexican era, was the center of the early Santa Clara College. It housed a dormitory, debating hall, and eight classrooms (Giacomini 2002:122; McKevitt 1979:44–45; Skowronek and Hylkema 2010:190).

Photo courtesy Lorie Garcia Historical Collection Figure 44. Photograph of two trolleys passing each other on Franklin Street circa 1920s.

Albion Environmental, Inc. File name: Figure_45_1936LastTrolley.ai, J2015-011.01, Stella D’Oro, 02July2015

Photo courtesy Lorie Garcia Historical Collection

Figure 45. Photograph of the last trolley to run in Santa Clara on the final day of service, Franklin Street, April 10, 1936. Albion Environmental, Inc. File name: Figure_46DebatingHall.ai, J2015-011.01, Stella D’Oro, 02July2015

Photo courtesy Santa Clara University Library, Archives & Special Collections Department

Figure 46. Early classroom and debating hall in the re-purposed California Hotel.

Albion Environmental, Inc. The old Mission compound began to change rapidly after Father Nobili founded the school in 1851. A description of the campus by Professor Anderson in 1860 includes the following:

We arrived at Santa Clara where, after passing by a number of adobe buildings, we stopped in front of the old Mission Church. This latter is built of adobe bricks, dried in the sun; the roof is of red tiles. There is a wooden tower annexed to the main edifice, surmounted by a vane, and having a clock on the side facing the green (plaza) and a gallery around the tope [sic] of the tower…

The round wall of the front of the church retains traces of having been painted in gaudy colors. High up over the doorway is a rude representation of Sainte Clare, while on each side are roughly painted and half-erased figures of Saint Anthony and Saint Francis. The colors of the decorations are chiefly red and yellow, but the woodwork of the adjacent tower was once painted green…

The buildings forming the college are attached to the adjacent Mission Church, and are in some part portions of the old ecclesiastical edifice, though by far the larger portion is of recent erection.

The college is under the management of the Fathers of the Society of Jesus. I knew that these men made the best tutors in times past, but I knew that those were the times of theology, dialectics, and rhetoric. I did not see how they could adapt themselves to the exigencies of this present age – I was agreeably surprised!

Warmly received by the president, I was carefully conducted through the school premises. I noticed particularly adequate arrangements for the physical welfare of the pupils, consisting of a spacious playground at the ends of which there appeared two excellent gymnasiums.

The study room was extensive and well ventilated; sleeping apartments especially arranged and scrupulously clean. They surpassed in every way the dormitories of Eton College and of Rugby School in England.

The students had access to warm baths in wintertime, and during the warmer seasons of the year they could repair to an elaborate bathing pond, in dimensions one hundred and fifty by one hundred and twenty feet, lined all around with brick, and shaded by a circle of beautiful tall sycamore trees.

An apothecary shop and an infirmary were at hand to which the indisposed might go for treatment, under the care of an excellent infirmarian. A first-class physician was always in attendance.

I noticed that the dining table was well supplied with generous portions of good food.

(Anderson cited in the Henry L. Walsh Papers, n.d. (a) Box 3, Folder 11, p. 55–57).

In 1861 the newly installed University president Buchard Villiger, S.J. began a remodeling program to upgrade the University’s buildings. This included the installment of a wood and brick façade added to the front of the Mission church. In 1885, the Mission church was remodeled again widening the interior and increasing the seating capacity of the church. (L. Hylkema, Personal Communication). In the years that followed, the college continued to expand, incorporating the lands of the third and fourth Missions and adjacent property. A fence was built around the early campus, restricting the movement of students to just a few dormitory and classroom buildings including the Ship (1870– 1962), the Scientific Building (1864–1929), and the Commercial Building (1877–1929). The next detailed depiction of the campus is found in the Sanborn Fire Insurance map of 1887 (Figure 47). Buildings attached to the back of the Mission church began with a wardrobe, an interior hallway, and storeroom. These were connected to a long northwest–southeast–trending adobe building, which contained on the lower floor two dining rooms separated by a kitchen, and an infirmary on the upper floor. The following account provides some information on the transformation of the old Mission quadrangle into campus buildings:

Cultural Resources Treatment Plan for the 5-Year Development Plan at Santa Clara University — DRAFT Albion Environmental, Inc. David J. Powers and Associates, Inc. July 2015 142 Father Villiger was busily occupied working on plans for the improvement of the campus, and on May 1, 1862, the foundations for a residence of the Fathers of the faculty were laid. It extended south from the eastern end of the Mission Church, its lower story coinciding with the dimensions of the former residence of the Franciscans of the historic Mission days, retaining for the most part the same old adobe walls, reinforced with heavy beams and rafters. Over this first floor, as on a solid foundation, two more stories were erected to complete the structure, the central section rising to a fourth story and housing the large college clock with its familiar chimes.

In the façade of this edifice, some two hundred and twenty feet in length, there were three portals opening on the front garden, which extended out about one hundred feet to the sidewalk on Alviso Street, along which ran a fence of stout picketing, ten feet in height. …

The inner patio, referred to as “The Fathers’ garden,” coincided with the limits of the old Mission cloister, the eastern side of the square being formed by the Fathers’ residence, the northern side by the Mission Church and its sacristy, and the western and southern sides by the remains of the old adobe walls. Shortly after the completion of the Fathers’ residence, Father Villiger set about improving other departments of the college. The western side of the patio was reinforced with heavy wooden beams and converted into a two-story structure, the lower floor consisting of dining rooms for the Fathers and the students, and the upper story fitted out as a commodious infirmary, a large library, and apartments for administrative offices. A few rooms on the second story also served as living quarters for the lay professors.

Connecting this western wing with the sacristy on the north was another smaller addition housing the offices of the president and the prefect of discipline on the second floor. Below were a series of store rooms and between them a passageway leading into the hugh [sic] enclosure where the students were confined day in and day out. Access to the Fathers’ garden was forbidden, unless for business transactions with the treasurer’s office. The large vineyard lying to the far side of the adobe wall to the south was also forbidden territory for the all-curious youth.

In his building project Father Villiger did not forget to include another very necessary adjunct to a well-regulated college, namely, commodious and well-lighted study halls. He thought it advisable then to construct an edifice which would be large enough, not only to contain the study halls, but also to provide lecture rooms for the science department and a dormitory for the junior students. This edifice became known as the Science Building, and stood on the west side of the school yard, just where Liberty Street runs into Lafayette. Its topmost story contained the junior dormitory and the middle story contained separate study halls for seniors and juniors. On the ground floor were the junior washroom, the cabinet, museum, chemistry room, and science lecture hall. On the completion of this building, about November 15, [1862] the old study hall was removed from its location just north of the students’ dining room, and placed on the western side of the yard, where the commercial building stood for many years. (Henry L. Walsh Papers, n.d. (a), Box 3, Folder 11, p. 67–69).

Thus, a two-story dining hall attached to the Mission church and the Scientific Building on Lafayette Street were in place by the end of 1862. These buildings appear to have remained essentially unchanged through the latter half of the 19th century and the first quarter of the 20th century. This period at Santa Clara College is well documented in photographs, lithographs, and maps.

Two oblique lithographs provide a detailed view of the core campus in 1901 (Figure 48) and in 1903 (Figure 49). Figure 48, a view to the west northwest, shows the L-shaped buildings attached to the Mission church enclosing the Fathers’ garden and the student yard to the north of the church. The three-story Science Building with its tall tower and U-shaped footprint is visible in the row of buildings along Lafayette Street, which mark the western edge of the campus. Figure 49, a detailed painting, provides an oblique view to the west-southwest. This provides a better view of the Science Building and student yard through which the project passes.

Albion Environmental, Inc. File name: Figure_47_1887_CoreCampus.ai, J2015-011.01, Stella D'Oro, 02July2015 File name: Figure_47_1887_CoreCampus.ai, J2015-011.01, File name: Figure_48.ai, J2015-011.01, Stella D'Oro, 02July2015

Santa Clara University Department of Archives and Special Collections, file name: CV-11-5.jpg.

Figure 48. Birds eye view of the College of Santa Clara, 1901, artist unknown.

Albion Environmental, Inc. File name: Figure_49_1903_Lithograph.ai, J2015-011.01, Stella D'Oro, 02July2015

Santa Clara University Department of Archives and Special Collections, file name: CV-11-6.jpg.

Figure 49. Painting of the College of Santa Clara, 1903, artist unknown.

Albion Environmental, Inc. A photograph, an oblique view to the south-southeast (Figure 50) taken from the Scientific Building in 1905, provides structural detail on the buildings of the early campus. The attachment between the Mission church and the two-story campus building is visible in the left-center portion of the photograph. At this time the covered walkway is visible along the northwestern side of the building. There is also what appears to be a covered walkway that extends to the northwest from the point of connection between the Mission church and the building.

With the removal of the campus fence in 1911, not only were students allowed to leave the campus proper, go on weekend outings, and purchase goods and services from local businesses, but campus construction also expanded (Skowronek and Hylkema 2010:191). Many of the structures built during this phase of post-fence development are still standing, including O’Connor Hall (1912), St. Joseph’s Hall (1911), The Infirmary/Donohoe Alumni Building (1923), Kenna Hall (1924), and Alumni Science (1923) (Figure 51).

In October 1926, a fire broke out in the northeast tower of the Mission church. By the time the fire was extinguished, the Mission church constructed in 1825 and extensively renovated in the late 19th century, was completely destroyed. The fire spread to the Students’ Chapel just to the north of the church and to the buildings to the west of the church in the project area. Damage to the church is well documented in photographs and eye-witness accounts (Figure 52). Two accounts, one from The Western Jesuit, the other from the Annals of Santa Clara College and University, indicate that the fire spread to the upper story of the dining hall and infirmary building, the latter account indicating that only the upper story was destroyed. Presumably portions of the lower story, that is, remnants of the Mission Period adobe structure, were not destroyed by the fire. The accounts are as follows:

On October 15, 1926, the fourth [sic] Mission Church of Santa Clara was destroyed. Four priests were saying Mass in the church when a fire was discovered to be smoking and roaring in the N.E. tower. The flames spread westward and the well-dried frame building became an immense blazing furnace which it was impossible to extinguish. …

To the north of the ruins and between them and the Memorial Chapel, strange to say, there still stands an old wooden cross. The fire blazed on all about it, and even charring it on one side. But it still stands to indicate the multiple grave of a host of Indians. The Memorial Chapel was built in a graveyard, and the bones contained within its area were gathered and placed in one common grave.

A bit of adobe wall marks the west end of the old church and stands all alone, the fire went considerably beyond it and cleared away the other old buildings (The Western Jesuit: Bulletin of the California Province, Volume 1, No. 8, January 1927).

At seven o’clock on Monday morning, October 25, 1926, a fire originating in the old Mission Church of Santa Clara swept rapidly across the campus, and was only stopped after it had partially destroyed the students’ dining room and the floor of rooms above, occupied by the members of the lay faculty. Besides the Mission Church, the buildings burned beyond restoration included the Students’ Memorial Chapel, besides the quarters that had formerly housed the music conservatory along with the law library and the old student library. The conflagration originated in the corner of the Mission church beneath the right tower and was supposed to have been caused by defective electrical wiring (Henry L. Walsh, n.d. (b), pp. 38–39).

Reconstruction of the church began immediately, as seen in Figure 53 from 1927. After 1926, most of the development on campus occurred in the southern, eastern, and most recently northern parts of campus. For example, the University Village, also known as Veterans’ Housing or Veterans’ Village was occupied between 1946 and 1963 by soldier/students and their families, and was located in the current location of Buck Shaw Stadium, Ryan Field, Malley Fitness and Recreation Building, and the Leavey Center (See Skowronek and Hylkema 2010:200–204).

Santa Clara University Department of Archives and Special Collections, file name: CV-4-1.jpg.

Figure 50. Photograph of the Fathers' Gardens taken from the Science Building, 1905, photographer unknown. Albion Environmental, Inc. File name: Figure_51_1930_Aerial.ai, J2015-011.01, Stella D'Oro, 02July2015

Image courtesy of Santa Clara University Department of Archives and Special Collections.

Figure 51. 1930 aerial.

Albion Environmental, Inc. Image available at University of Southern California digital archives

Figure 52. Charred chapel entrance to the Mission Santa Clara after the fire of 1926.

Albion Environmental, Inc. File name: Figure_52_1926FireDamage.ai, J2015-011.01, Stella D'Oro, 02July2015 File name: Figure_52_1926FireDamage.ai, J2015-011.01, File name: Figure_53_1927Reconstruction.ai, J2015-011.01, Stella D'Oro, 02July2015

Santa Clara University Department of Archives and Special Collections

Figure 53. Construction of new Mission Santa Clara Church, 1927.

Albion Environmental, Inc. Late Mexican Period and American Period Land Use and Previous Archaeological Studies

Late Mexican Period

Mission Santa Clara was officially secularized in 1836. Mexicans and mestizos living in the Santa Clara Valley began to transform the lands surrounding what is now the SCU campus for residential uses. Below we summarize the historical and archaeological evidence for land use during the Mexican Period within the modern campus of Santa Clara University. In addition, Appendix C illustrates the archaeological evidence of the Mexican Period previously identified within campus boundaries. This description primarily focuses on the Mexican Period post secularization (1836– 1848).

The Hendry and Bowman map (Figure 24) illustrates Mission Period structures that were reused during the late Mexican Period. The location of Mission Period adobe buildings, such as the church and associated buildings and landscape features, associated with the third Mission site near Franklin and Sherman Streets, are indicated on the Hendry and Bowman map. As the third Mission site was heavily damaged in the 1812 and 1818 earthquakes and subsequently dismantled to construct the fifth Mission, much of these buildings were likely abandoned, and not reused. However, two rooms of the original neophyte housing associated with this third Mission complex (#7 and 8 on Hendry and Bowman map 1940) continued to be occupied as a residence during the Mexican and later American Period. The structure is also known as the Peña Adobe, for the family that lived there, beginning in 1835. It was remodeled and updated, and is currently in use as a meeting place for the Santa Clara Woman’s Club.

The Hendry and Bowman map also shows the continued use of the fifth Mission church and its associated quadrangle. The church itself continued to be used as such. The fifth Mission church, marked with a cross, is the northern portion of a partially enclosed Mission compound. Many Mission Period buildings, such as the priest’s house, shop buildings, store rooms, and Guardhouse/Soldiers Barracks (#39), appear on this 1940s map, suggesting their possible reuse during the Mexican and American periods. In fact, when Santa Clara College was established, Father Nobili evicted squatters from the Mission buildings (McKevitt 1979:34).

The Mayordomo Adobe (#38 on the Hendry and Bowman Map) constructed in the 1820s was also reused. In the 1840s, a second story was added to the structure and it became the California Hotel, used by Californios and European American squatters. A late 19th-century deposit was encountered during mitigations for the construction of an elevator in O’Connor Hall (formerly the location of the Mayordomo building and the California Hotel that was re-purposed by the college). This multicomponent feature contained, at its basal level, a thin layer of Mexican-era materials (1822–1848), including teja, ladrillo, pearlware, and cleaved/hacked animal bone (Appendix C, Map Index #362).

The forth Mission church is also placed on the Hendry and Bowman map (Figure 24, #50). However, the authors incorrectly labeled this structure as dating to the 1840s. The building is the forth Mission adobe church that was constructed in 1818. The mislabeling by Hendry and Bowman may indicate reuse of this building during the Mexican and American periods (Figure 54). For example, in the 1840s, the forth Mission church was reportedly occupied by the mistress and children of Father Real; and said mistress operated a fandango hall well into the 1850s (Skowronek and Wizorek 1997). A few refuse deposits geographically related to the forth Mission church have been identified during previous construction activities and characterized as Mexican Period (Appendix C, Map Index #’s 237, 238). However, it is not clear whether these deposits are associated with the reuse of the forth Mission church during the late Mexican Period, or if these deposits date to the early Mexican Period, prior to Mission secularization.

Fourth Mission

Alviso Street

Photo courtesy Santa Clara University Archives

Figure 54. Fourth Mission (left) and Santa Clara College (center), n.d..

Albion Environmental, Inc. In addition to the reuse of Mission adobes, Californios established new adobe residences in and around the original Mission. Many of these structures are labeled by Hendry and Bowman as adobe buildings, but their function and exact construction and use dates during the Mexican Period are unknown. Several adobe footings and floors of these late Mexican Period adobes have been identified archaeologically on campus (Appendix C, Map Index #235, 236, and 243). Hendry and Bowman placed the construction and use life of all of these structures within the 1840s and 50s.

For example, the Zink House (#49 on Figure 24) is located beneath the south entrance to St. Joseph’s Hall. Hendry and Bowman (1940:717) suggest this was a squatter’s building, dating to the 1840s. After the college was founded, it appears that the building was removed since it is not mentioned in campus descriptions or on campus maps (Wizorek 1998:30). Trash scatters located between St. Joseph’s Hall and Donohoe Alumni House have been sampled many times during trenching activities in this area, and archaeologists argue that this scatter is associated with the Zink House3 (Appendix C, Map Index #239, 240) (Wizorek 1998:31; Wizorek and Skowronek 1996C:6). Cultural materials found, included mid- to late-19th century domestic items. Mid-century materials consisted of shelledge, annularware, transferprint pearlware fragments, and dark green olive glass. The transferprint sherd dates to the Romantic Period (1831–1851) based upon the design motif. Other items in these scatters included architectural debris (industrial porcelain and metal), later century ceramics (decal decorated and European porcelain), and pharmaceutical bottle fragments (clear screw bottle).

The Andres Pico Adobe (#51 on Figure 24) was on the west side of Alviso Street and the north side of Santa Clara Street. Several owners are ascribed to the Pico Adobe. A 1901-article by Encarnacion Pinedo for the Western Magazine, recounts how the author’s father, Lorenzo Pinedo, was the original builder and owner of the adobe in 1844 (Pinedo 1934 in Wizorek 1998:30). According to Spearman, the adobe was owned at one time by the Martinelli family (Spearman 1963:57). Finally, McKevitt states that Andres Pico, a friend of Father Real, the last Franciscan in charge of the Mission, purchased the land from Real, which may explain the name of the adobe (Wizorek 1998:30). In 2014, a trash deposit dating to the Mexican Period was recorded during electrical trenching along Santa Clara Street (Appendix C, Map Index #241). The deposit may be associated with the Pico Adobe or the nearby Pinedo residence. This assemblage has not yet been analyzed or reported.

The Pinedo Adobe is also well recorded in historical documents. It was one of the first Mexican Era residential areas to be settled surrounding the Mission. In 1844, Lorenzo Pinedo asked for a land grant outside Mission boundaries from then Governor Antonio Pico. The grant was given and Pinedo built a wood-framed house that stood on this lot until 1915. Refuse deposits possibly associated with the Pinedo residence have been identified on two separate occasions (Appendix C, Map Index #241 and 242). In addition to the deposit identified in 2014 described above, a large trash deposit likely associated with the historic Pinedo residence was encountered in July 2005 during monitoring for a sewer installation. That resource was further tested and determined to be significant, based on its integrity, quantity, and variety of materials, and relevance to research questions identified in the treatment plans (Allen et al. 2004; Baxter et al. 2005:15–20). However, the assemblage was never analyzed or reported.

3 Other sources for refuse existed from the east wing convent/teachers’ residence, mission barracks, and college buildings such as the infirmary

Archaeological resources associated with American Period residential activities have been identified throughout the Santa Clara campus (Appendix D). Based on our research of campus project reports, approximately 215 archaeological resources dating to the American Period and associated with residential uses through time, have previously been identified on campus. These residential features are either classified as architectural or refuse property types.

Architectural features include building foundations/footings, fence posts, brick architectural features, basement fill, and concentrations of architectural refuse. Images of some of these architectural feature types are provided below in Figures 55 and 56.

Figure 55. Largely intact remains of the basement floor of the Eberhard house identified during mitigation for the Graham Residential Complex (discovered in 2011).

Figure 56. Basement Fill (Feature 186; discovered in 2013).

Cultural Resources Treatment Plan for the 5-Year Development Plan at Santa Clara University — DRAFT Albion Environmental, Inc. David J. Powers and Associates, Inc. July 2015 155 Refuse-related archaeological resources are generally located behind houses associated with parcels on the Sanborn maps. These deposits are generally characterized as belonging to one of two types: square/rectangular privies, or circular, shallow refuse pits. Feature 14 identified with Block 402 is a clear example of American Period square/rectangular privy (Figure 57). This feature is a rectangular- shaped privy, lined with redwood with a brick base. Overall measurements are 5feet 8 inches long by 2 feet 10 inches wide, with straight sides extending down to a depth of 3 feet 10 inches. Filled in two depositional events, this privy contained many American Period artifacts, dominated by alcohol bottles and ceramics, with a TPQ of 1892 (Baxter et al. 2011:182–191). Located behind the house at 829 Franklin Street, this feature is significant as it can be associated with the Emig family. The other refuse deposit type is oval or circular in shape, and appears to be primarily used for refuse disposal. Feature 102, recovered from the 643 Homestead parcel within Block 437 and associated with the Don family, exemplifies this feature type (Figure 58). Feature 102 is a shallow trash pit with an oval shape that measures approximately 4 feet by 4.5 feet, and is 38 inches deep. The pit was filled with dense, variable artifacts in multiple depositional layers (Baxter et al. 2011:102). Refuse deposits such as these contribute to interpretations about use of space and social groups, as defined in the research questions section.

Figure 57. Feature 14 from Jesuit Block 402 (discovered in 2004).

Cultural Resources Treatment Plan for the 5-Year Development Plan at Santa Clara University — DRAFT Albion Environmental, Inc. David J. Powers and Associates, Inc. July 2015 156

Figure 58. Feature 102 from Leavey Block 437 (discovered in 2007).

As Table D-1 indicates, the temporal associations of these archaeologically recovered deposits were reported in variable ways. We attempt here to be as specific as the report data allow. For example, in some cases we were able to associate a feature with the Early American Period (1848–1880), the Late American Period (1880–1930), or Modern times (1930–Present). However, some reports gave more general dates for deposits, such as “the 19th century,” “the 20th century,” or “the American Period” (1848–Present). In the future, analysis of the artifacts recovered from these features may improve the specificity of these temporal designations.

Based on our current research, only five residential archaeological resources dating to the Early American Period (1848–1880) have been identified on the Santa Clara campus (Appendix D, Map Index No. 316, 362, 410, 415; Feature 99 from Leavey Block 437 was not mapped in the report (Baxter et al. 2011: p.68, 121)). These resources have been identified just south of Franklin Street (within Leavey Block 437), in O’Connor Hall, and in the southern region of campus (Kennedy Commons and just south of Kenna Hall). Two of these Early American Period refuse features were determined to be not significant, one was determined possibly significant, one was determined significant, and one was not evaluated for significance. A sixth feature, Feature 65 from Leavey Block 437, was characterized as dating to the 19th century, and may have dated to the Early American Period (we were unable to relocate this feature on a map, see Baxter et al. 2011:68, 71, and 117). To summarize, within the Santa Clara campus, the sample of significant archaeological resources associated with residential activities of the Early American Period is very small.

Archaeological resources related to residential uses during the Late American Period (1880–1930) and Modern Period (1930–Present), however, are ample (Appendix D). Since 1987, archaeologists have identified 29 refuse features, and two architectural features associated with residential activities during the Late American Period. Further, another 145 features have been associated more broadly with the American Period and nine are associated with the 20th century. It is possible that many or all of these resources, if further analyzed, would be associated with the Late American Period. An additional 17 archaeological resources dating to the Modern Period (1930–Present) and associated with residential activities have been identified during campus projects. Unfortunately, most of the materials recovered from these features have not been analyzed or reported, and significance determinations were rarely made. While the University has impacted many Late American Period resources, and has accumulated a large collection of materials representative of this time period, analysis and reporting of these materials has not been prioritized. This is most likely due to lack of

American Period Industry

To date, no significant archaeological resources have been identified relating to the Enterprise Laundry, the Steam Flourmill or the Pacific Manufacturing Company. However, a number of possibly significant archaeological resources were identified during monitoring for construction of the Physical Services Plant Project, and these resources may be associated with industrial activities that occurred in this southern region of campus, such as the Pacific Manufacturing Company (Appendix D).

Archaeological evidence of the Eberhard Tannery has been positively identified during previous campus projects. In 1995, as part of the Santa Clara Campus Lighting Project (1995.2), archaeologists identified redwood flooring possibly associated with the Eberhard Tannery (Wizorek 1998:86–87) (Appendix D, Map Index #381). In 2008, archaeologists again encountered a horizontal alignment of redwood lumber along with a metal holding tank and linked the finds to the Eberhard Tannery (Peterson 2008G:20) (Appendix D, Map Index #418 and 424). And in 2009, three round concrete footings, possibly related to the Eberhard Tannery, were archaeologically identified (Appendix D, Map Index #380). While historical analysis is currently in progress, the recent (2015) discovery of a cistern may also be associated with the Eberhard Tannery (Appendix D, Map Index #393).

In addition, archaeological evidence of the Eberhard House has been identified. During the 1994 construction of an elevator in the old Graham Residence Center, archaeologists identified the Eberhard redwood lined privy or outhouse (Harris et al. 1995) (Appendix D, Map Index #426). Later, in 2013, during construction of the newer Graham Residential Complex, archaeologists identified the largely intact remains of the basement floor of the Eberhard House (Appendix D, Map Index #425).

American Period Transportation

Archaeological evidence of late 19th and early 20th century transportation has been identified on the Santa Clara campus. During the Alameda Mall Project, Wizorek and Skowronek (1996:2) noted findings of a late 19th century trolley line within the bounds of The Alameda (not mapped). Archaeologists saved recovered remnants of the line, including ties and rail plates, for possible future exhibition. In-situ ties and ballast for the railroad along The Alameda was encountered a second time during monitoring for the Leavey School of Business in 2008 (Peterson 2008E:3) (Appendix D, Map Index #313). Redwood planks, possibly associated with trolley lines were also identified along the eastern edge of the Alameda, on the southern end of campus (Peterson 2010) (Appendix D, Map Index #429). While monitoring utilities construction along Franklin Street between Alviso Street and The Alameda in 2013, archaeologists identified two sets of railroad ties and supporting ballasts. This railroad feature, designated Feature 177, was found to be well preserved, lying just below, and occasionally embedded within, the road (Figure 59; Appendix D, Map Index #302). And in 2014, during the Alviso Street Closure Project, archaeologists identified ballast and base of a former trolley line that once ran down Alviso Street (Appendix D, Map Index #370).

Cultural Resources Treatment Plan for the 5-Year Development Plan at Santa Clara University — DRAFT Albion Environmental, Inc. David J. Powers and Associates, Inc. July 2015 158

Figure 59. Photograph of Feature 177 (discovered in 2013).

Santa Clara College

Student campus life during the early years is revealed by a few archaeological assemblages recovered from campus. For example, a late 19th century deposit was encountered during mitigation for the construction of an elevator in O’Connor Hall (Appendix D, Map Index #362). This multi-component feature contained evidence of the first 30 years of the college in the form of ink bottles, crucibles, snuff, cologne, medicine bottles, black glass bottles, wine bottles, and soda bottles (Skowornek and Hylkema 2010:195–197). A similar deposit was identified during the 1994 construction of the Music and Dance Building (Skowronek and Hylkema 2010:195) (Appendix D, Map Index #360). Refuse associated with the University infirmary was discovered in 2003 (Skowronek and Hylkema 2010:198) (Appendix D, Map Index #412). Archaeologists have also identified archaeological evidence of land use in the southeastern portions of campus, where a partial pig skeleton was identified and associated with the barns once maintained by the college (Appendix D, Map Index #398). In addition to the four refuse features described above, archaeologists have identified four architectural features likely associated with early college activities (Appendix D, Map Index #364, 365, 366, and 407). Also, during mitigation for newly constructed buildings for the Pat Malley Fitness Center and for a Campus Lighting Project (1995.2), campus archaeologists uncovered a number of mid-20th-century materials associated with the men/students, women, and children who lived in the Veterans’ Village between 1946 and 1963. Artifacts included decorative ceramics, alcoholic beverages, decorative domestic items, and M69 practice mortar-round were collected (Skowronek and Hylkema 2010:200-204) (Appendix D, Map Index #400).

Mexican land grants and settlement characterized the post-Mission Period in Santa Clara. The community of Hispanic settlers in Santa Clara migrated to the former Mission from other California colonial institutions and were decedents of prominent colonial families in California such as the Berryessa Clan (Sides 2015). Many of these hijos del país, self-identified as Californios, separate from California Indians, lower-class recent immigrants from Mexico, and vulgar Americans (Haas 1995; Monroy 1997; Voss 2008). As described in an earlier section, Californio residents of Santa Clara during the Late Mexican Period reused abandoned Mission buildings and constructed additional adobes. The ways in which Californio residents reused spaces originally inhabited by gente sin razon and constructed new architectural patterns may contribute to our understanding of the ethnogenesis process at Santa Clara during the Late Mexican Period, for “architecture is a technology that gives physical presence to the regionalization of social life” (Voss 2008:173).

The influx of new American immigrants and settlers into the area beginning as early as 1841, resulted in a complex milieu of cultural and economic changes. Following trends seen elsewhere in North America, an American system of land law, which imposed artificial but ordered grids over a landscape, was established. The first town Plat map, placing streets and blocks within the “Town of Santa Clara” was created in the early 1850s by William Campbell, a member of the Sutter’s Fort American settlers. This contradicted with Mexican California systems, which designated boundaries of land grants in more imprecise fashions (Church 2002; Clark 2005; Senkewicz 2002). As Monroy (1997:177) states “All grants were imprecise in the actual terms of the boundaries and of the grantees’ tenure; most included the phrase mas o menos (more or less) in the description of their confines.” Legally, this affected Californios, as most of them ended up losing their land to Americans when contested in court (Senkewicz 2002). Culturally, these reorganizations of space emphasized the assertions made by community members as people established their physical presence on the landscape.

The advent of the Gold Rush forever altered the historic landscape and the rules of interaction between local settlers (Garcia 2002). The large and rapid influx of European Americans brought with them their own ideas of settlement patterns, architectural forms, dietary patterns, and material culture. Despite documentation of dissent and conflict between American and Californio families, and the portrayal of Manifest Destiny as a “Clash of Cultures” (Monroy 1997), people from diverse backgrounds and communities may have engaged in cooperative relationships and negotiations during American colonization of California. Pinedo family history provides an illustration. Dolores Pinedo’s marriage to William Fitts in 1864 shows the blending of Hispanic and Anglo families that occurred in the Early American Period. This negotiation may be represented archaeologically. In 1866, for example, the family’s holdings are described as an adobe house and two wood-frame houses. In addition, we might find evidence that, similar to patterns observed in pockets of southern California (Haas 1995), many Californio families engaged in practices that effectively maintained social and cultural communities well into the 20th century.

Resources relating to Mexican Period and Early American Period residential uses are relatively rare in California, and in the Santa Clara Valley in particular. For that reason, when Mexican and Early American resources are encountered, they are generally archaeologically significant.

Data Requirements Data requirements include datable features that can be associated with a particular time frame; direct association with a family or group. Features gain in significance when they can be corroborated with historic documents. Detailed feature, artifact, and landscape recordation efforts are important.

Other Data Sources: historic maps; archival references and narrative histories, records on town occupancy and local events, historic newspapers, and comparison with other domestic-related sites in early California history.

Potential Research Questions  How does each feature fit within the area’s historical context of land use and modification?

 What are the archaeological features associated with Mexican Period and Early American Period residential land use?

 What are the approximate dates of construction, occupation, and abandonment of each architectural-related feature, if they are encountered? Do the architectural features add to the knowledge of land use?

 Is it possible to determine the function(s) and evolution of the domestic-related features?

 Who was associated with the feature? Is this discernable in the archaeological record?

 How do the architectural forms, patterns, designs, styles, and materials inform understandings about the social relations involved in architectural production and maintenance during the late Mexican Period?

 How do the architectural forms, patterns, designs, styles, and materials inform understandings about the negotiation of identity during the late Mexican Period?

 What is the pattern of refuse disposal for these early domestic sites?

 Assuming refuse features are found, and can be associated with particular families, are there discernible differences within and between Hispanic and European American residential use?

 Can the materials from refuse features expand knowledge of the current understanding of Late Mexican and Early American Period social and economic patterns?

 What were the goals of these early settlers, and how is this reflected in land use patterns and the archaeological record?

Research Theme: Victorian Period Land Use and Consumer Behaviors

The Victorian Period in America is defined as the time between 1876 and 1915 (Schlereth 1991). During this period, Americans were transitioning from rural, agricultural-based communities to urban communities. The Second Industrial Revolution (1840–1870) spurred development of railroads, factories, and other industries as well as housing for workers. Urbanized populations were more mobile, had greater access to consumer goods, and were extremely concerned about cleanliness and orderliness, both on personal and community scales.

Standardization and increasing occupational specialization were by-products of urbanization. Consumer goods of increasing variety became much more available to the urban population. “The ‘good life’ came to mean the ‘goods life,’” according to Schlereth (1991:141). Improved techniques in canning (Rock 1987), glass manufacturing, and bottling (Miller et al. 1991) made it easier for

Cultural Resources Treatment Plan for the 5-Year Development Plan at Santa Clara University — DRAFT Albion Environmental, Inc. David J. Powers and Associates, Inc. July 2015 161 goods to be preserved and transported to the rapidly increasing California population. Goods were advertised through newspapers, magazines, and mail order catalogs. Urban residents had access to canned foodstuffs, patent medicines, personal goods, and more. Refuse pits in California’s archaeological record during the Victorian Period illustrate residential access to this new abundance of goods (Allen 1996; Allen et al. 1999; Costello et al. 1998; McIlroy and Praetzellis 1997).

“Cleanliness is next to Godliness” became a popular quote during the Victorian Period (Rosenburg and Smith-Rosenburg 1985). Cleanliness and orderliness, expressed by Euroamerican organization of space, were markers of Christian morality. The importance of cleanliness was learned through scientific advances in medicine. Household technologies were improved to accommodate the desire for tidiness. Household appliances and tools such as sewing machines, coffee mills, washing machines, improved coal and gas ranges, apple corers, and can openers were all designed to improve efficiency and therefore orderliness, and help maintain a tidy environment where everything had its place. Archaeological evidence from urban refuse deposits reflects these Victorian behaviors and values.

The rapidly-changing economic and social environment of the Victorian Period resulted in psychological stress for many urbanites. Contemporary scholars noted the breakdown of traditional social structures, and the resulting sense of anomie and loss (Durkheim 1951). The Euroamericans’ belief in their special relationship with God was shaken up by the Darwinian and Freudian revolutions. The poor working conditions of the factories, industrialized farms, and offices were documented by writers of the “realist” school. Drug and alcohol abuse became commonplace and resulted in the Temperance Movement and later, Prohibition. This phenomenon is represented in urban archaeological deposits by the abundance of liquor and patent medicine bottles (Costello et al. 1998; Van Wormer and Manley 1994).

Refuse-related property types, especially hollow-filled features such as pits, privies, and wells, are the most useful expressions of trends in Victorian life. Although sheet refuse may be helpful in interpreting the historic past, its association with a specific historic context is usually problematical. Data concerning local purchasing patterns, diet and food consumption, and ethnic and social affiliations may be gleaned from intact refuse deposits with a variety of artifacts. Pattern of urban settlement patterns may be revealed by architectural property types, although historic documentation may be more accessible.

Data Requirements Data requirements include datable features that can be associated with a particular era (Late American Period), and/or direct association with a family or group. Features gain in significance when they can be corroborated with historic documents, photographs, and oral history. Detailed feature, artifact, and landscape recordation efforts may reveal distinct residential patterns; and inter-site comparison of the above data with similar site types in the urban California and the general western United States.

Property types: refuse features, architectural features, urban infrastructure, agricultural and landscape features

Other data sources: historical document research (including historic maps, archival references and narrative histories, records on town occupancy and local events, historic newspapers), urban social science studies, oral histories, and comparison with other domestic-related sites in early California history

 Can we use historical records to connect an archaeological resource to a specific household or family? Is this discernible in the archaeological record?

 Is it possible to determine the function(s) and evolution of the domestic-related features?

 Who was associated with the feature? Is this discernable in the archaeological record?

 How does each resource fit within the historical context of land use and modification in the surrounding area?

 What is the pattern of refuse disposal for Victorian Period resources?

 What were the goals of Victorian Period settlers in San Jose, and how is this reflected in land use patterns and the archaeological record?

 What types of consumer goods were purchased by residents in the project area? What was substituted or adapted? How was this material used?

 Did the quality of goods and supplies flowing into Santa Clara improve as the city continued to expand over time?

 Does this resource add to our knowledge of adaptive behavior in urban settings associated with the organization and use of space and consumer behavior?

 How did consumer behaviors change as the individual or family became more economically successful?  Were most goods procured by national mass-produced items or locally produced goods? What were their ties to the local and national economies?  Does this resource add to our knowledge of the availability of various classes of consumer goods at a specific place and point in time?  Does this resource add to our knowledge of adaptive behavior in urban settings associated with consumer behavior and the organization and use of space?

Research Theme: Defining Social Groups

The early historic neighborhoods surrounding Santa Clara University were composed of Mexican colonists, French and Irish settlers, and Italian immigrants. The archaeological record of this community is created by individuals and groups using material culture to navigate their multifaceted, situational, and interconnected social identities (i.e., gender, class, race, occupation, and ethnicity). As we study the qualities and quantities of artifacts from, for example, household privies and architectural features, we are tasked with the goal of understanding how people’s consumption

Cultural Resources Treatment Plan for the 5-Year Development Plan at Santa Clara University — DRAFT Albion Environmental, Inc. David J. Powers and Associates, Inc. July 2015 163 patterns and organization of space were dynamically guided by their class position, ethnic affiliation, gender identity, or some complex association of multiple social groups.

As noted in the historical context, many groups settled in San Jose, and within the project area, people of Mexican, French, Irish, and Italian ancestry developed a community. While the study of ethnicity in historical archaeological contexts has a long record (Schuyler 1980), the correlation between ethnicity and material culture remains poorly understood. Ethnically-derived objects are not clear markers of preconceived ethnic behavior. For example, the presence of an opium pipe in an archaeological site does not necessarily mean that Chinese people once lived there (Orser 2004). Instead of seeing objects as representative of an identity, it may be useful to see them as a medium for the construction of identities (DiPaolo Loren 2010). For example, foodways may be one avenue for studying reproduction of ethnic identity as taste for certain foods may have been associated with claims to ethnic identities, and rejection of others. As Encarnación Pinedo describes in her cookbook, El Cocinero Español, “There is not a single Englishman who can cook, as their goods and style of seasoning are the most insipid and tasteless that one can imagine.” In this neighborhood composed of Mexican, French, Irish, and Italian settlers, to name a few, we seek to investigate how material culture was actively used to produce and reproduce ethnic identities.

Being extremely class-conscious, the upper class American Victorians asserted a moral superiority over the lower classes, generating a concomitant pressure to conform to the dominant ideal (Howe 1975). The middle classes in the Victorian Period strived to become more like the upper classes; increased accessibility to goods and opportunities helped the middle class grow. Increased status and achievement were symbolized by material items. Archaeological assemblages associated with this neighborhood have the potential to illuminate the construction of class for this community. With the emergence and rapid growth of industrial capitalism in America, groups of people, participated in what has recently been phrased American consumer culture. Participants of American consumer culture negotiated class and social status, in part, through the acquisition and use of material goods. For instance, the social rule of gentility was associated with the well-bred and wealthy in the earlier years of the American colonies. Those who consumed goods representative of gentility (wealth), thought themselves “genteel” and hoped that others would view them in the same ways. For 18th century consumers, being of high class did not simply mean that you had the “correct” material goods, it also meant that you also knew the appropriate ways in which to use those goods.

It is also important to consider women and children in the context of their family and known family events. Gender studies seek to understand men and women interacting, structuring their roles, and negotiating their gender identities. For example, previous studies have investigated how New York women during the 19th century negotiated their families’ position in the class structure through daily practices of “gentility,” exercised through the presentation of meals (diZeraga Wall 2001). Another example is Robertson’s study of early 20th century California Bungalows (Robertson 1991). In her work, she argues that men and women expressed their similar middle-class ideological value of simplicity through different forms of material culture. Men viewed simplicity as relating to nature, and expressed their view through the rustic and combative nature of their dens or smoking rooms. Women, on the other hand, embraced modern conveniences and efficient management as the essence of the simplified life. This belief was expressed through the efficient layout of bungalow houses. Kwolek-Folland, in her gendered study of vernacular architecture, also argues that gender ideologies can have an impact on the meanings attached to objects (Kwolek-Folland 1984). By understanding these gender ideological differences and the ways in which culture and history modify meanings, she argues that the different meanings attached to objects and space can be illuminated.

In addition to disentangling the influences of ethnicity, social class, and gender when interpreting the material record, it is also important to ponder how material culture is not simply a reflection of the

Cultural Resources Treatment Plan for the 5-Year Development Plan at Santa Clara University — DRAFT Albion Environmental, Inc. David J. Powers and Associates, Inc. July 2015 164 ideologies, but rather how much it is an active agent in transforming ideologies. For the most part, people do not directly emulate mainstream culture. Instead, they take into consideration mainstream ideology, but then according to the economic circumstances, gender, ethnicity, class, personal, social, and ideological beliefs, they practice innovation and attach their own construed meanings to material culture, as they use objects to signify something to observers in their community.

Data Requirements Data fruitful for answering the following and related questions include: datable and identifiable sites and features, corroborated with historic documents, photographs, and oral history; detailed site, feature, and artifact distribution mapping that may reveal distinct residential patterns; and inter-site comparison of the above data with similar site types in the urban California and the general western United States.

Property Types: refuse features, architectural features, urban infrastructure

Other Data Sources: historical document research, urban social science studies, oral histories

Potential Research Questions  What kinds of material culture (consumer goods) were available to area residents? What was purchased? What was substituted or adapted? How was this material used?

 How did consumer behaviors change as the individual or family became more economically successful?

 Is the status of area residents discernable from the historic and archaeological record? Did lower income residents attempt to mirror middle- and upper-class elites in terms of material culture and social status?

 Can the archaeological resource be used to describe consumer practices and disposal behavior of a household or business with specific social, occupational, economic, and/or ethnic characteristics?

 Does the archaeological record being studied possess artifacts and/or dietary remains that could be used to reveal the role of objects in defining, maintaining, and/or permeating social, economic, or ethnic boundaries among groups?

 Can this resource help us to understand the dynamics of cultural pluralism and social stratification during the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries?

 Does this resource possess material remains that could illuminate economic distinctions between the material culture of members of distinct ethnic groups?

 Were the living quarters and domestic settlement patterns segregated by ethnicity?

 Do different building construction techniques represent ethnic dwelling characteristics?

 Are gender roles discernible in the archaeological record?

Several industries occur in or near the current project area, including the Eberhard Tannery. Other known industries are the Sainte Claire Laundry, and Santa Clara Brewery. Archaeological and historical studies of these industries potentially contribute to understanding about the development of early modern society, locally and nationally. Such studies not only document engineering and technological feats, they also potentially inform understanding about the “social context of the process of industrialization, expressed through settlement patterns and material culture” (Palmer 2005). The history of these places is about technological development and entrepreneurship, but it is also potentially about worker exploitation (Shackel 2004:53).

Many industrial archaeologists embrace labor as a central research direction (Mrzowski et al 1996; Shackel 2004; Shackel and Palus 2006; Silliman 2006; Walker 2000). Controlled, exploited, unequally distributed labor is a hallmark of the expansion of the European world economy from the 15th through the 21st century (Silliman 2005:147). The built environment and spatial layout of the workplace was structured by such tensions between labor and management. For example, Taska investigates how workers of the Eveleigh railway workshop were able to negotiate management strategies through organized mass meetings in strategic locations on the landscape (Taska 2005). In addition to studies of landscapes, portable artifacts are also useful to labor studies. For example, large quantities of imperfectly manufactured parts have been identified as evidence of discontented workers purposefully breaking machinery (Nassaney and Abel 1993). Accumulations of beer bottles in walls and at the bottom of elevator shafts, have been used as evidence of subversive behaviors on the part of brewery workers, drinking the owners’ profits in protest to their long hours and unsafe health conditions (Shackel 2004). Rather than simply documenting change in technologies, we should address how those technological changes impacted the life and health of workers and their families (Shackel 2004:46). For example, accelerating machinery outputs also increased fatigue and rates of injuries for workers (Schivelbusch 1986). By addressing issues related to labor, archaeologists working in industrial contexts can illuminate the working conditions that people faced, and “lead to a better understanding of life and work in an industrial capitalist system” (Shackel 2004:44).

It should be noted that 19th century and early 20th century industries had different standards for determining the harmfulness of their by-products. Archaeological investigations of industrial areas may encounter potentially toxic substances.

Data Requirements Data fruitful to answering these and related questions include: datable and identifiable industrial features, corroborated with historic documents, photographs, and oral history; and detailed site, feature, and artifact distribution mapping that may reveal distinct industrial patterns.

Potential Research Questions  What equipment was used in each of the various industries? How was it used? How was equipment adapted to new environments? How did the system or process work?

 Does the archaeological record contain evidence of undocumented or poorly documented industrial processes that could significantly add to our knowledge of the development of a specific industry?

 How dependent or independent were local industries on regional and national economic trends? How did they react to economic cycles?

 Does this resource contain evidence of local innovation or technology, as opposed to the adoption of standardized tools and materials?

 Is there evidence for extensive reuse of equipment, sites, buildings, or artifacts?

 Does this resource demonstrate the impact of industrialization on landscape, environment, or public health?

 What is the layout of the industrial features and spaces on the Santa Clara landscape? How are these spaces related to the organization of residential/domestic spaces on the landscape?

 How can the concept of a “cultural landscape” enhance our understanding of the industrial layout of Santa Clara?

 Is it possible to determine how employers manipulated the workplace or industrial settlement to achieve social control?

 What evidence is there for worker resistance to control?

Research Note: Analyzing Household Composition

Many urban archaeological studies assume that archaeological features, especially trash-related, can be attributed to a “family group.” Recent studies have shown that this is not always true. Barbara Voss describes the importance of the definition of a household to urban archaeological studies:

Increasingly, the “household” has become the primary unit of analysis in historical archaeology, especially in studies of 19th- and early-20th-century residential sites. The household is generally taken as the most fundamental locus of social life: the place where social identities are formulated, negotiated, and expressed through practices of consumption and, occasionally, production. (Voss 2008)

Most of California’s urban archaeological literature has implicitly defined households as single- family entities. A recent nearby study within San Francisco (Praetzellis 2004) provides good examples of privy (hollow-filled refuse) deposits that represent the families of Charles Duisenberg, Thomas O’Neil, Anne Mills, Anthony Dean, John Wendt, Andrew Buckley, and William Noonan. These names highlight the German and Irish character of the working-class neighborhood. A recent study using San Francisco and Oakland data from different types of households, found significant differences in health and hygiene from one household to another (Gallagher 2006). This study highlights how strong contextual data (such as from privies) can address a wide range of research questions.

Exactly what composes a household is another topic that has come under recent scrutiny. As Voss points out, the household-family-association approach often does not conform to many ethnic groups. Indeed, the overemphasis on household-family “hazards a reproduction of Victorian-era ideologies that proscribed the home as a private, even sacred, location of family life” (Voss 2008:40). Many of Santa Clara’s residents did not conform to this notion, often because of historical circumstances, race, class, and gender identities. Some ethnic groups, such as the Chinese (Allen et al. 2002; Voss 2008), tended to cluster in single-gender households, and the communities as a whole clustered their waste

Cultural Resources Treatment Plan for the 5-Year Development Plan at Santa Clara University — DRAFT Albion Environmental, Inc. David J. Powers and Associates, Inc. July 2015 167 disposal. For example, in specific situations activities of certain ethnic groups resulted in community- wide refuse features, rather than those related to particular families.

Such was the case with the Woolen Mills Chinatown in San Jose (Allen et al. 2002). That community was segregated from the rest of San Jose, and as a result produced a large community dump. The dump could not be tied to a particular household, but could be directly linked to the local Chinese community. If the same level of association that has generally been required of urban refuse features in the last two decades were applied to this deposit, the material would have been discarded, and all archaeological data pertaining to the community along with it. Instead, it was apparent to the researchers that such deposits become increasingly important when associated with ethnic enclaves, because the historical data pertaining to the occupants frequently are sparse. In this example, it was known that solely Chinese residents occupied the neighborhood, but the vast majority of the individual occupants were anonymous in the historical record. Interpreting the contents of such features required a more generalized level of analysis but in no way reduced its archaeological value.

In such cases, sheet refuse can be directly tied to a specific group of people and a relatively tight dating sequence (Allen et al. 2002:128–130).

As Voss (2008:41) points out in a review of other ethnic disposal patterns, the notions of household, community, and privacy should also be expanded for Hispanic and African-American-associated sites, and possibly others. Given the complexity of Santa Clara’s immigrant populations, caution is warranted.

The Master Cultural Resources Treatment Plan is guided by CEQA and employs a phased approach to archaeological investigations. This process is described in Figure 60, and includes three phases: (1) Phase I – Resource Identification (2) Phase II – Evaluation of Significance, and (3) Phase III – Data Recovery. The goal of the phased archaeological approach is to achieve professionally acceptable archaeological investigations, emphasize preservation of significant resources in place, and conduct mitigation in a cost effective manner. Specific Treatment Plans appended to this general Treatment Plan will determine areas targeted for resources identification (Phase I).

Phase I: Resource Identification

Mechanical Area Exposure

Albion proposes the identification of archaeological resources through mechanical area exposure. This technique requires a trained archaeological monitor to direct mechanical excavation of selected regions within designated project areas, using a flat-bladed bucket and removing over-lying non- cultural soils in very small increments (2–5 inches) to the depth of cultural features, or native subsoil, whichever comes first. The extent of this exploration is dependent on the archaeological sensitivity of the project. Depending on the sensitivity, for some projects we may recommend excavating the entire project area in this fashion; for other projects we may recommend only specific regions within the project area. This monitoring should occur after demolition, but before construction grading. The goal of this research design is to target potentially resource-rich areas and mitigate impacts to significant resources prior to construction, with the hopes of serving in the best interests of the resource and project timelines.

Albion proposes a standardized approach to identifying archaeological resources when encountered. Archaeological monitors will communicate with backhoe operators when a feature is identified. The archaeological monitor will carefully mark the feature, and direct the backhoe operator to remove sterile soils surrounding the feature, effectively placing the defined resource on a pedestal.

Resource Documentation

Next, archaeological technicians will use hand-excavation techniques to clear any over-lying non- cultural soils from the feature to better define its shape. Once the feature is clearly defined, technicians will use a Global Positioning System (GPS) unit to, ideally, acquire a polygon shape or a line (for linear features) documenting the feature’s surface. If the feature is too small to document through a polygon or a line (diameter is less than a meter), a point will suffice. The depth of the feature below an established datum will also be recorded by field technicians. Technicians will also document the feature’s surface using digital photography and video recording. A record form will be maintained for each, detailing date, number, subject description, and view direction. A detailed start drawing will also be completed, accurately depicting the dimensions of the feature, and contexts and artifacts visible from the surface. Each drawing will clearly be labeled with a feature number, date, north arrow, scale, legend, and the technician’s name. Finally, information about each feature will be carefully recorded on standard forms provided to the field crew. A feature form will be completed for each feature, in addition to context forms for distinct cultural soils identified on the surface of each feature. The field director will also take daily field notes, documenting the day’s activities, any communication with Native Americans, University personnel, news media, and the public.

Phase II: Evaluation of Significance

Significant Not Significant Feature Feature

No Adverse Change Adverse Change No Further Action (i.e. Open Space)

Phase III: Mitigate No Further Action Impacts

Avoid Resource?

No Yes (i.e. Unavoidable (i.e. Redesign) Impact)

No Further Action Data Recovery No Further Action

Figure 60. Treatment of cultural resources under CEQA.

Albion Environmental, Inc. File name: Figure_60_FlowChart.ai, J2015-011.01, Stella D’Oro, 02July2015 File name: Figure_60_FlowChart.ai, J2015-011.01, Additional Archival Research

While historic documents are very useful for predicting what kinds of cultural properties may be encountered, it is rare that initial pre-field research covers all land uses within a specific area. Some activities are unreported or under-reported. For this reason, additional archival research may be conducted during and after Phase I to address any unanticipated discoveries.

Phase II: Evaluation of Significance

Evaluation of Significance for Historic-Era Resources

The next step in the process is to assess each resource under CEQA-significance criteria. Albion has developed a worksheet for determining significance, which is specific to the Santa Clara University campus and its potential historic resources (Table 7). This worksheet aims to provide a systematic and informed means to evaluate historic resource significance. We use this ranking scheme as a tool for organizing our thoughts and observations based on an examination of the site’s historical and archaeological record.

Each archaeological resource will be evaluated on a number of criteria. For historic era resources, these criteria include 1) Integrity of the resource, 2) Historic context, in space and time, 3) Data potential of the archaeological resource, and 4) Relevance to proposed research themes. In each category, several subcategories are given a point value. The worksheet has two right-hand columns. The first lists the points associated with each subcategory. The second column is for writing in points assigned to actual archaeological resources. Each archaeological resource is assigned a score within each of these categories. The total points assigned will be a general estimate of the resource significance under CEQA Criteria A, B, and/or D. The higher the score, the more likely a resource is to be determined significant. For example, resources that lack integrity, i.e., they were disturbed through subsequent use of the site, receive 0 points in that category. Resources that contain high archaeological data potential, i.e., discrete domestic refuse deposits, receive 10 points in that category. Resources that are associated with significant historical contexts score high in the historic context (space and time) categories. If a resource has integrity, good archaeological data potential, and can contribute to our research themes, it will likely be determined significant under CEQA Criteria A, B, and D.

Evaluation of Significance for Prehistoric Resources

If no prehistoric archaeological deposits are encountered during Phase I, or are found in disturbed contexts, no further action is required. If intact deposits are encountered, additional archaeological excavation will be required to evaluate the site for significance, assess project impacts, and (if needed), develop mitigation measures. If intact prehistoric-era deposits are encountered during Phase I, then we propose the excavation of 1-2 Surface Transect Units (STUs; 1 x 0.5 m) in each identified site or area of intact deposit to assess the spatial extent and structure of the subsurface deposits. Archaeologists will dry screen all materials using 1/8-inch mesh, identify and map all encountered features, and retain a 2-liter soil sample for flotation and paleobotanical analysis.

Table 7. Sample field form for assessing significance of archaeological resources from the Historic Era. Evaluation Points Feature Measures Evaluation Options Possible Points Integrity of the Resource No observable disturbances 15

Historic Context (Space) Poss. Known Historical Association 25 No significant association 0

Historic Context (Time) Poss. 1769–1821 (Spanish) 20 Poss. 1822–1848 (Mexican) 20 Poss. 1849–1880 (Early American) 20 Poss. 1881–1930 (Late American) 10 Poss. Post 1930 (Modern) 0 Unable to determine 0

Data Potential of the Discrete Refuse Feature with domestic refuse 10 Archaeological Resource Discrete Refuse Feature with architectural refuse 5 Discrete Refuse Feature with mix of D/A Refuse 5 Sheet Refuse, Architectural 5 Sheet Refuse, Domestic 5 Residential Architecture 2 Non-Residential Architecture 2 Agricultural Features 5 Infrastructure Features 5 Industrial Process Feature 2 Ceremonial Feature 10

Relevance to Research Themes Landscape/Residential Patterns 10 (Indicate all that apply) Social Groups/Identity 10 Industry, Technology, Labor 10 Environmental Change 10 None 0 Total Points 100

Significance Recommendations: Comments:

Like the criteria for determining the significance of historical resources, determining the significance of prehistoric resources is guided by CEQA; in the case of prehistoric resources; however, the majority of significance assessments typically falls under Criterion D ([Section 15064.5 (a) (3) of the CEQA Guidelines]), where an archaeological site or resource will be considered significant (a historical resource) if it can be demonstrated that it has the potential to contribute important information pertinent to prehistory or history. In practical terms, this has typically meant assessing archaeological sites and/or resources with reference to a set of research themes, or issues, which typically guide archaeological investigation in a given region. In this Plan, we have delineated what we consider the most important prehistoric research themes in the “Research Themes and Questions for Prehistoric Archaeology” section above. To reiterate, these include eight themes: regional chronology, prehistoric human-land relationships, sociopolitical organization, prehistoric demography, settlement/subsistence adaptations, lithic technologies, riverine/wetlands archaeology, and complex hunter-gatherer economies. Based on previous research in the area, the archaeological resources we are likely to find include the five property types listed above (i.e., midden sites, lithic scatters, burial complexes/cemeteries, residential sites, and isolates).

Cultural Resources Treatment Plan for the 5-Year Development Plan at Santa Clara University — DRAFT Albion Environmental, Inc. David J. Powers and Associates, Inc. July 2015 172 If and when any of these property types are encountered at the project site, they will first be assessed for integrity. While this concept is complex, most archaeologists define it to mean not only whether the resource is physically intact, but also whether its data potential is comparatively undisturbed so that context, associations, and, finally, patterns can be reliably discerned. By context, archaeologists are referring to where resources (e.g., artifacts, bones, shells, features, etc.) were last deposited or left relative to the behavior that caused their deposition. Associations are defined as the relationship between these resources (i.e., were they found with other objects and what this configuration might mean). Finally, an assessment of patterning involves whether context and associations are of sufficient quality to provide pertinent information to address questions of importance to archaeologists. In most cases, once a positive integrity has been established, the prehistoric resource is considered significant, at least for evaluation purposes (evaluation typically occurs as part of Phase II). This does not mean, however, that the resource is necessarily significant under National Register or California Register of Historic Places (that determination is typically made after Phase III). Nor does it mean that one hundred percent of the site or resource will necessarily be sampled. Sampling strategies are typically employed at this juncture. Moreover, these methods need to be agreed upon by the archaeologist, client, and City (and other specified parties).

Determining Adverse Changes

CEQA requires an assessment of whether a project will cause a “substantial adverse change in the significance of an historical resource,” meaning “physical demolition, destruction, relocation, or alteration of the resource or its immediate surroundings such that the significance of an historical resourced would be materially impaired” (CEQA §15064.5). Materially impaired is defined as alteration of those qualities of the resource that make it significant and eligible for inclusion in the California Register of Historic Places, a local register, or as designated by the Lead Agency.

The University projects discussed in this Plan may cause such substantial adverse changes in a number of ways, including complete or partial destruction during grading for building foundations, trenching for on-site utilities, demolition of existing utilities in City easements, and installation of major new utilities in streets surrounding project areas. A determination of a substantial adverse change is based on a comparison of project plans (e.g., breadth and depth of grading or trenching) and the physical characteristics of the archaeological deposit or feature. The determination also considers the integrity of the feature and the aspects of the feature that contribute to its significance. If, for example an archaeological feature is found to lack integrity, and therefore has no potential to contribute meaningful data to address research questions, there will be a finding of no adverse change. Similarly, the project may impact a portion of a significant feature, but only the portion that does not have the potential to contribute meaningful data, thus resulting in a determination of no substantial adverse change. A determination of substantial adverse change leads to consideration of mitigation measures to reduce the impacts to less than significant.

Phase III: Data Recovery

Resource Preservation

CEQA provides straightforward guidance for the development of mitigation measures: Preserving the resource in place and data recovery through archaeological excavation only when it is not feasible to preserve the resource or those portions of the resource that contribute to its significance.

Preservation in place is usually accomplished through redesign of those elements of the project that might cause a substantial adverse change. Redesign may not be possible for some elements of the proposed University projects (e.g., building footers). Other elements such as interior utilities, or

Cultural Resources Treatment Plan for the 5-Year Development Plan at Santa Clara University — DRAFT Albion Environmental, Inc. David J. Powers and Associates, Inc. July 2015 173 landscaping features may be easier to redesign to avoid impacts, In addition to simply moving a project element away from a feature, redesign could include bridging over a feature, raising a utility, or boring under a feature.

Data Recovery of Significant Resources when Impacts are Unavoidable

We have designed treatment approaches specific to distinct property types (Table 8). While each feature may be interesting it its own right, funding limits and time constraints require thoughtful analysis as to how to most effectively mitigate project impacts and maximize a project’s research value. The Secretary of the Interior’s Guidelines for Archaeological Documentation addresses this issue:

“Archaeological investigations seldom are able to collect and record all possible data. It is essential to determine the point at which further data recovery and documentation fail to improve the usefulness of the archaeological information being recovered. One purpose of the research design is to estimate those limits in advance and to suggest at what point information becomes duplicative. Investigation strategies should be selected based on these general principles, considering the following factors: (1) Specific data needs; (2) time and funds available to secure the data; and (3) relative cost efficiency of various strategies [48 CFR 44735].”

Based on a review of the research, it is clear that some of the expected property types (listed in Table 8), are likely to have more data potential and interpretive value than others. Below, we summarize the predicted property types and potential data recovery plans for each type. This should be considered preliminary and is intended only as a general guide. It also assumes the resource meets significance criteria described above in Phase II.

Table 8. Archaeological property types.

Historical Era Property types Feature types American Period Architectural Foundations; Builders trenches; Concrete floors; Evidence of (1848–Present) demolition Infrastructure Sewer pipes; Power, gas, and water lines; Construction Fill Agriculture Orchards and fields; Orchard and corral walls/fences; Gardens (tree pits, decorative elements) Refuse Discrete hollow-filled features (pits, privies, wells); Sheet refuse Industrial Fruit Packing Warehouse; Tannery; Laundry Facilities; Brewery Ceremonial Cemeteries Hispanic Period Architectural Native style structures; Adobe structures; Floors (1821–1848) Agriculture Irrigation Canals; Orchards and fields; Orchard and corral walls/fences; Gardens (tree pits, decorative elements) Refuse Discrete hollow-filled features (pits, hearths, wells) Industrial Kilns; Hornos; Tanning Vats Ceremonial Cemeteries Spanish Period Architectural Native style structures; Adobe structures; Orchard and corral (1769–1822) walls/fences Refuse Discrete hollow-filled features (pits, hearths, wells)

Cultural Resources Treatment Plan for the 5-Year Development Plan at Santa Clara University — DRAFT Albion Environmental, Inc. David J. Powers and Associates, Inc. July 2015 174 Industrial Kilns; Hornos; Tanning Vats Ceremonial Cemeteries Pre-Colonial Architectural Native style structures (Pre 1769) Refuse Middens; Shell mounds; Lithic scatters; Isolates Ceremonial Cemeteries

Predicted Pre-Colonial Archaeological Property Types

Pre-colonially, the Santa Clara Valley was a corridor for human interaction and a region of intense aboriginal occupation for thousands of years. Several different types of sites have been identified in Santa Clara Valley over the course of archaeological investigation (Bergthold 1982; M. Hylkema 1998, 2006; Allen et al. 1999; Winter 1978; Elsasser 1986; Grady et al. 2001; Wiberg 2002). Based on the varied landscapes of the Santa Clara Valley and the results of previous research, it can be anticipated that potential pre-colonial sites located within the project area are: midden sites, lithic scatters, burial complex/cemeteries, residential sites, and isolates. Table 8 summarizes these site types and gives examples of the characteristics most associated with each property type.

Midden Sites Along coasts and rivers, a very common kind of site is the midden, an accumulation of shells, bones, and cultural refuse. Middens can vary greatly in size and are usually distinguished by a high organic content that causes the soil to be noticeably darker. Middens are usually found where people ate shellfish and other invertebrates, fish, birds, and mammals. All these food sources leave a great amount of debris that was customarily piled up where the food was processed and eaten. People sometimes lived on the middens, but more often their shelters were close by, away from the piles of debris. When deaths occurred, the middens were sometimes used as burial sites, perhaps because covering the body with shells made a relatively secure grave. For the most part however, middens should be considered evidence of temporary occupation rather than permanent habitation sites. They were probably used seasonally as people made their annual round, hunting, fishing, and gathering the various food resources throughout their territory. For the San Francisco Bay area, very large shell middens, or “shell mounds,” developed during prehistoric times, many of which were located along the bay margins. It has been argued by a number of scholars that several of these, especially the larger, more prominent ones, served important ceremonial or symbolic purposes.

Given the relative propinquity of Santa Clara University to the Guadalupe River, it is conceivable that sites containing middens will be discovered. This is further bolstered by what is known about the area from ethnographic sources. Several writers noted that the habitat of the area was composed of low- lying marshland and riverine settings. Certainly numerous midden sites have been identified in the Santa Clara Valley, especially along Coyote Creek and the Guadalupe River (Allen et al. 1999:106– 108). During the Route 87 Corridor Project (Allen et al. 1999:106), for example, 27 sites were found to contain some level of midden development. Nearly all of the sites exhibited shell, faunal material, fire-cracked rock (FCR), charcoal, and baked clay. Many also contained flaked stone remains including chert debitage, chert or obsidian bifaces, scrapers, edge-modified flakes, and projectile points. Groundstone artifacts included mortars and pestles, and manos and metates.

Lithic Scatters Lithic scatters are collections of flaked and/or ground stone debris, including tools and debitage that relate to post-quarry reduction and tool manufacturing efforts. They are perceived primarily as daily or overnight task-oriented camps where a limited range of activities was conducted. These sites may

Cultural Resources Treatment Plan for the 5-Year Development Plan at Santa Clara University — DRAFT Albion Environmental, Inc. David J. Powers and Associates, Inc. July 2015 175 or may not contain chronological information depending upon the presence and quantity of diagnostic items (e.g., projectile points) or dateable materials. Lithic scatters can be perceived as simple, containing only flaked stone debitage and tools, or complex, having primarily flaked stone debris, but some ground stone as well.

Several lithic scatter sites have been identified in the Santa Clara Valley. Allen et al. (1999) identified six lithic scatters along Coyote Creek and in the foothills between the Guadalupe River and Coyote Creek. They conclude:

The fact that most of the lithic scatters are above the Guadalupe River floodplain could be related either to geomorphological variables or settlement patterns. Since the rates of alluvium are less in the foothills than on the Santa Clara Valley floor, lithic scatters may simply be more visible in these areas. Any lithic scatters that may exist along the Guadalupe River are likely to have been covered by deposited sediments. This factor, coupled with the relatively sparse nature of this type of site, would make them relatively invisible along the floodplain….On the other hand, the association of lithic scatters with foothill habitats may indicate affiliation with hunting activities away from the main habitation site(s), or relatively short term camps associated with more mobile populations (Allen et al. 1999:113).

As SCU is located along the Guadalupe River, the possibility of encountering a lithic scatter site within the proposed construction area is moderate to low. Nonetheless, the possibility cannot be ruled out. For example, Cartier (1980) recorded a large lithic scatter on low-lying ground near the Guadalupe River. It is possible, for example, that a construction project that excavates down into valley floor sediment may uncover a lithic scatter that has been buried under deposited alluvium.

Burial Complexes/Cemeteries These types of sites are where people intentionally buried their dead. Burial sites range from isolated burials in shallow holes to elaborate interments, such as whole cemeteries that may possess numerous bodies. As noted above, Milliken et al. (2007:110–111) have categorized prehistoric burial sites in the Santa Clara Valley into four major patterns, or “modes.” These include, first, what they call the noncemetery pattern, which is informal and “dispersed.” This may include the burial of individuals within or adjacent to a village or even under the floors of houses. The latter three modes, by contrast, they characterize as “dedicated” and distinguish as interments with some type of formal structure. These include: (1) a cemetery in well-developed midden soil adjacent to a village; (2) a cemetery in weakly developed or non-midden soil away from a village; and (3) a cemetery in a deliberate mortuary mound that may or may not contain other debris, such as faunal remains, which were the result of organized feasts.

At times, certain cemeteries, or sections of a cemetery, may have been reserved for persons of one sex or age or social rank. Data gleaned from burials frequently provide archaeologists with invaluable information on past social organization. For example, both the location of a burial and elaboration of its contents may be taken as indicators wealth, social status and prestige, and sometimes the occupation of the deceased.

Several sites in the Santa Clara Valley have yielded information on burial interments. Among other sites, burials have been found at CA-SCL-484, CA-SCL-68, CA-SCL-690, CA-SCL-674, CA-SCL- 478, CA-SCL-128/H, CA-SCL-4, CA-SCL-674, CA-SCL-755, and CA-SCL-702. A number of these sites are classified as wholly cemeteries (e.g., CA-SCL-674) or residential sites with associated burials (e.g., CA-SCL-128/H; CA-SCL-690; and CA-SCL-478).

Cultural Resources Treatment Plan for the 5-Year Development Plan at Santa Clara University — DRAFT Albion Environmental, Inc. David J. Powers and Associates, Inc. July 2015 176 Residential Sites In simplest terms, residential sites are the places where people lived and carried out their daily activities. Residential sites include large sites, such as villages, or small sites, such as camps of short duration. Villages, which are defined as permanent or semi-permanent residential sites, are assumed to have had full-family units or multiple-family occupations. Cultural deposits usually have full complements of flaked and ground stone debris within organic midden deposits, and may also have features like hearths or dwelling structures. They represent the extreme high end of data potential in terms of chronology, subsistence, exchange, and social organization, as they commonly contain a wide array of artifactual and ecofactual remains, time-sensitive artifacts, hearth and storage features, complex living facilities, such as house floors, and sometimes associated cemeteries.

Short-term camps represent habitations that were visited for short duration, or places that were routinely revisited over several years. Most sites of this type were chosen for pragmatic reasons – the butchering of a large mammal, availability of water or vegetation, or an abundance of tool-making stone. A few important short-term camp sites were occupied again and again, and were often situated in areas of particular richness in game or vegetable foods. Frequently, these types of camps were visited during a particular time of the year for the purpose of harvesting or acquiring a seasonally available resource (such as acorns, hazelnuts, seasonal fowl, etc.). Ethnographic accounts of the Ohlone, for example, discuss acorn harvesting as an activity that occurred during the late summer/fall.

A number of residential sites have been recorded along the Guadalupe River, including CA-SCL- 128/H, CA-SCL-690, and CA-SCL-478. These contained a vast array of artifacts, features (including stone hearths) and ecofacts (bones, shell, seeds, and other organic materials). Spanish accounts also document the presence of numerous villages in the Santa Clara Valley in general and along the Guadalupe River in particular. The Santa Clara Valley, which contained a diverse array of ecological zones (including tidal marshland, grassland prairie, oak woodland, and riparian corridor), supported a relatively large population of indigenous people (Roop et al. 1982). Milliken (1995:66) has remarked on the number of Ohlone villages in the region:

Three large villages of over 120 inhabitants each lay within a four-mile radius of the Santa Clara Mission site; the native names of those villages are not now known. The missionaries at Mission Santa Clara gave each of them a Spanish designation – San Francisco Solano village of the Alson tribe a mile or two downstream at the mouth of the Guadalupe River; Santa Ysabel village of a different unnamed tribe east of San Francisco Solano on the lower Coyote River; and San Joseph Cupertino village of the Tamien tribe in the oak grove about three miles to the southwest of the mission site. Still nearer to the site were two tiny hamlets – Our Mother Santa Clara, within a few hundred yards of the first mission site, and Our Patron San Francisco, perhaps another mile upstream on the Guadalupe River.

The historian Winther (1935), citing Spanish sources, has also written:

Indians were the first settlers on the banks of the Rio Guadalupe. The time of their coming is uncertain, but when Jose Moraga and his pobladores reached the location on the stream were they were to establish themselves, they found the ruins of an ancient Indian village which they called “Pueblo Antiguo.”

Isolates Isolates are single artifacts found without association with any other artifacts or features. Although isolates reflect the past activities of groups or individuals, the lack of spatial clustering or functional patterning largely prevents the archaeologist from making inferences about prehistoric behavior. Sometimes, however, an isolate may be temporally significant especially if it is diagnostic for a particular time period, such as, for example, a Desert side-notched projectile point or an Elko-eared point.

Cultural Resources Treatment Plan for the 5-Year Development Plan at Santa Clara University — DRAFT Albion Environmental, Inc. David J. Powers and Associates, Inc. July 2015 177 Considering the extent of development in the capital project vicinities and the number of known sites in the Santa Clara Valley in general, the discovery of isolated artifacts is to be expected.

Archaeological work at SCU has the potential of addressing several different research themes that are of interest to anthropologists and archaeologist working in central California. In particular, prehistoric sites and resources within capital project boundaries have the potential to yield information relevant to: regional chronology; prehistoric human-land relationships; sociopolitical organization; prehistoric demography; settlement/subsistence adaptations; lithic technologies; riverine/wetlands archaeology; and complex hunter-gather economies.

Data Recovery for Historic Era Resources

Architectural Features Architectural properties include structural remains such as foundations, wall footings, basement walls, and floor remnants. This property type essentially encompasses all buildings and structures, although in the case of Santa Clara history, they primarily relate to residential land uses. Properties relating to industrial land uses have been separated out as a discrete property type. In many cases, architectural remains correlate to structures depicted solely on historical maps, without any accompanying archival or historical documentation. Where that occurs, the ability of those remains to contribute to important research domains may be limited, especially with regard to later 19th and 20th century features. Many research questions are often better suited to other research media such as analysis of primary documents.

Exceptions to this are architectural features related to the Spanish-Mexican Period. This period is not well documented in the archival records; consequently, archaeological analysis of these features may be the only means of investigating research questions relating to building technologies and adaptations to local environments. They may be especially important in tracing the evolution of Mission Santa Clara and Mexican Period residential development around the Mission.

If architectural features are identified, we will record them through photography, drawings, and GPS data. We will not mitigate American Period architectural features with corroborated historical data beyond those documentary efforts. If determined to be of the Spanish-Mexican Period, field documentation will include mapping, feature and context forms, start and end drawings, wall profiles, and photography. We will divide the feature in half or into quadrants, and excavate by natural stratigraphy. The Field Director will assign new context (layer) numbers as each stratigraphic layer and soil type is encountered. Each stratum will be carefully documented; descriptions of each context will include Munsell color descriptions, texture, natural and cultural inclusions, depths below datum, thickness, and contacts between strata.

Infrastructure Features Infrastructure includes those features related to development and maintenance of the city of Santa Clara such as sewer lines, drain pipes, power lines, roads, hydrants, etc. This category also includes roads and known railway and trolley features. Infrastructure features often correlate to utility maps. When infrastructure features are found that are not depicted on maps, one gains a more comprehensive view about how such technologies were actually implemented. Identification of these features is also critical for understanding the impacts of these American Period features to the Prehistoric or Mission Period archaeological record.

If infrastructure features are identified, we will record the feature through photography, drawings, and GPS data. We will not further mitigate infrastructure features with corroborated historical data beyond those documentary efforts. However, we may collect diagnostic artifacts.

Cultural Resources Treatment Plan for the 5-Year Development Plan at Santa Clara University — DRAFT Albion Environmental, Inc. David J. Powers and Associates, Inc. July 2015 178 Agricultural Features Agricultural and landscape property types include irrigation ditches, orchards, fields, fences, and animal husbandry facilities. These remains often correlate to items depicted on historical maps. Ditches, fencepost holes, and tree stump holes may be filled with refuse that may address important research themes (and would then be evaluated as refuse features). By themselves, agricultural features frequently have limited research value, although they may contribute to an overall understanding of landscape use. Some agricultural features though, such as ditches related to the Spanish-Mexican occupation of the land, may retain high significance, as they can be used to help determine the evolution of the Santa Clara Mission, and supply information on early construction techniques.

If agricultural features are identified, we will record the feature through photography, drawings, and GPS data. We will not further mitigate agricultural features that do not also contain a refuse component beyond those documentary efforts. However, we may collect diagnostic artifacts.

Refuse Features Refuse features are the most commonly expected historical property type. Hollow features include pits, privies, and wells. Such property types were created specifically for a functional use. During their use life or upon abandonment, they became receptacles for refuse. These discrete refuse features provide the archaeologist with a "snapshot" picture of the occupants that used the feature. As such, these features frequently have the ability to address important research themes.

Sheet refuse includes broad artifact scatters. Sheet refuse often accumulates on living surfaces over a period of time as people discard refuse in their yards and working areas, a common 19th century practice. Sheet refuse may also be introduced fill to raise low ground. The long accumulation time involved in creation of such property type is problematic for archaeologists, depending on the occupation history of the location under review. It is difficult to make substantive interpretive statements from a sparse sheet refuse layer deposited over many years by several occupants. Sheet refuse layers that are composed of dense concentrations of artifacts and are capped by a layer datable to a specific event, such as fire, retain the potential for strong association with specific occupants, and sufficient quantity and variety may warrant analysis. Where such association is possible, massive sheet refuse has the potential to address important research themes. In some instances, primary sheet refuse deposits may be crucial for addressing research questions involving spatial organization and activity areas. Surface scatters can often be indicative of more extensive archaeological deposits found beneath the surface.

If encountered and determined to be significant, documentation of refuse features will include mapping (GPS), feature and context forms, start and end drawings, wall profiles, and photography. We will divide the feature in half or into quadrants, and excavate by natural stratigraphy. The Field Director will assign new context (layer) numbers as each stratigraphic layer and soil type is encountered. Each stratum will be carefully documented; descriptions of each context will include Munsell color descriptions, texture, natural and cultural inclusions, depths below datum, thickness, and contacts between strata.

Industrial Process Features As with architectural remains, the ability of American Period industrial property types to contribute to important research domains may be limited. Such questions are often better suited to other research media. Evaluations are dependent upon other historical factors such as time period and relevant documentation. In addition, this property type may include contaminated soils that would preclude excavation.

Cultural Resources Treatment Plan for the 5-Year Development Plan at Santa Clara University — DRAFT Albion Environmental, Inc. David J. Powers and Associates, Inc. July 2015 179 Exceptions to this are industrial features related to the Spanish-Mexican Period. As this period is not well-documented in the archival records, the features may be able to address research questions regarding Colonial Period industrial activities and processes.

If industrial features are identified, and they are determined to be toxic, we will collect photography and GPS data, if safe. If determined to be non-toxic, we will record the feature through photography, drawings, and GPS data. Industrial features dating to the American Period will not be mitigated beyond those documentary efforts. However, diagnostic artifacts may be collected. If determined to be of the Spanish-Mexican Period, field documentation will include mapping, feature and context forms, start and end drawings, wall profiles, and photography. We will divide the feature in half or into quadrants, and excavate by natural stratigraphy. The Field Director will assign new context (layer) numbers as each stratigraphic layer and soil type is encountered. Each stratum will be carefully documented; descriptions of each context will include Munsell color descriptions, texture, natural and cultural inclusions, depths below datum, thickness, and contacts between strata.

Ceremonial Features These types of features are found at sites where people intentionally buried their dead. Burial sites range from isolated burials in shallow holes to elaborate interments, such as whole cemeteries that may possess numerous bodies. Where appropriate, and based upon Native American consultation, these features will be hand excavated for complete removal. This effort may include mapping, photography, removal, and packaging pending the decision of the Client and the Most Likely Descendent (MLD) for disposition of the remains.

Screening Techniques

A number of screening techniques can be employed depending on the nature of the property type. Screening usually involves processing excavated dry soils through shaker screens or by washing extracted matrix in screens using a high-pressure water nozzle. The 6-millimeter-selective technique involves processing sediment through 6-millimeter mesh screen, and is used primarily for the collection of targeted materials such as formed artifacts and bone. The 6-millimeter-controlled technique employs 6-millimeter mesh; however, all cultural materials remaining in the screen are collected in the field. Likewise, 3-millimeter-controlled technique uses a 3-millimeter mesh screen, with all cultural materials collected. This smaller-sized mesh facilitates collection of materials that would normally pass through 6-millimeter mesh, such as late stage pressure flaking debris, fish bone, and small shell or glass beads. If it is determined that the smaller (3-millimeter) screen size is required, the materials will be dried, bagged in gallon-sized Ziploc bags, and transported to a laboratory setting for micro-sorting.

General Catalog Database

After initial processing in the field or lab, all recovered materials will be organized into a general catalog database. Individual artifacts such as projectile points, whole ceramic vessels, glass bottles, or identifiable metal artifacts, will each be assigned a specimen number. In other cases, entire lots of certain materials such as flaked stone debitage, non–artifactual bone, shell, ceramic sherds, glass fragments, and undifferentiated metal from a specific provenience, will be grouped together and assigned a single specimen number. Preliminary cataloging data will be entered into a Microsoft Access (2010) database, and objects will then be prepared for formal analyses.

The project area lies in an urban environment that has been relatively well documented. Historical records begin with the establishment of Mission Santa Clara, represented in fragmentary records, through the recent historic period with the full range of property, census, and other civil records we might expect in the Modern Era. Archival research should continue as archaeological resources are discovered and evaluated.

Virtually all of the readily available records for the Spanish Colonial-Mission Period have been assessed for this Treatment Plan. There is, however, a substantial untapped archive of Mission Period documentary materials that may be relevant to findings in the project area. Santa Clara University is currently preparing an inventory of its substantial holdings for Mission Santa Clara and translating the most important of these documents. Research of these documents may be warranted during the analysis of findings in the project area.

Additional research of public records and historical archives may also be warranted if a project contains significant resources representing the American Period, particularly Early American settlement. This would likely include investigation of parcel ownership records, personal histories of significant persons, or further investigation of population trends, such as neighborhood ethnicity, ethnic succession, labor patterns, or economic conditions.

Laboratory Studies

Prehistoric Materials Analysis

General Procedures Archaeological materials recovered during excavations will be delivered to Albion’s laboratory facility in Santa Cruz, California. Initial processing will include washing and sorting artifacts according to location in excavation unit, feature, level, screen size, artifact class, and material. After initial processing, individual artifacts will be assigned a specimen number, while entire lots of flaked stone debitage and non-artifactual bone and shell from a specific provenience will be assigned a single specimen number. Preliminary cataloging data will be entered into a Microsoft Access (2010) database; afterwards objects will be prepared for formal analyses. Albion has in-house specialists to conduct most analyses including flaked and ground stone tools, vertebrate and invertebrate faunal remains, shell bead and ornament analyses, and all classes of historic-era artifacts. Radiocarbon, obsidian, fish bone, and archaeobotanical studies will be sub-contracted to outside specialists. Resulting analytical information will also be entered into a computer database for presentation in the report and catalog. All specimens will be placed in 4.0-millimeter thick plastic bags and labeled with computer generated, acid free/non-stick labels, packaged in cardboard bin-part boxes, and stored in archive boxes for curation at the project.

Chronometric Analysis Chronometric data, including time-sensitive artifacts, obsidian and organic carbons will be employed to define temporal components at each study site. Chronometric controls established at each site will provide a basis from which to monitor changes in subsistence, settlement, site function, and technology.

Flaked Stone The two main objectives for flaked stone analysis will be identification of lithic-reduction activities and identification of discard patterns. Lithic reduction studies involve the identification of key

Cultural Resources Treatment Plan for the 5-Year Development Plan at Santa Clara University — DRAFT Albion Environmental, Inc. David J. Powers and Associates, Inc. July 2015 181 debitage and artifact attributes that provide “signatures” of specific reduction techniques. A sample of flaked stone will be segregated by material type, size grade (to produce an overall characterization of the assemblage composition), and examined for key flake types that reflect specific reduction techniques. Once these debitage types have been identified, an attempt may be made to refine the analysis by examining less salient debitage.

The analysis of discard patterns involves the identification of the parts of the manufacturing sequence (cores, preforms, debitage) and parts of finished implements (distal ends, proximal ends, margin fragments) that are present in the deposit. This analysis recognizes that flaked stone tools were generally transported from place to place through various stages of procurement, manufacture, use, and discard. Interpretation will examine the relationship between flaked stone discard patterns and land-use and settlements patterns. This will focus on culturally and temporally meaningful research issues, such as change through time in residential mobility, or variability in hunting equipment manufacture, use, and retooling residues in relation to changes in hunting logistics. Both chipped stone analyses (i.e., lithic-reduction analysis and identification of discard patterns) will include a selection of attributes, specification of analytical units to sample, and creation of a computer database to file and manipulate these data.

Ground Stone Ground stone artifacts are those that exhibit modification from deliberate shaping or as a by-product of use. Analysis of these tools will emphasize the generation of two fields of attributes, one that represents intentional shaping (stylistic attributes), and another that represents the use-wear (functional attributes). Dependent and independent variation within and between these attribute sets will be used to identify and interpret temporal/functional patterns. This information can be applied to research themes involving settlement and subsistence practices.

Bone Artifacts Modified bone implements will be identified to genus and species, measured, weighed, and if possible, classified according to function. Other attributes may be recorded including tool condition and type of modification.

Shell Artifacts Shell artifacts likely to occur in local archaeological deposits include beads, ornaments, and manufacturing debris. Shell artifacts will be measured and typed using the classification scheme referenced in Bennyhoff and Hughes (1987).

Vertebrate Faunal Faunal analysis involves the identification of skeletal remains from mammal, bird, reptile, and fish species recovered from archaeological contexts and the interpretation of the patterns that result from the identification. The analysis will be made using comparative collections housed at several different zooarchaeology laboratories. The selected faunal samples will be initially segregated into identifiable and unidentifiable specimens. Identifiable specimens are classified in terms of skeletal element, body side, fragment type, age, gender, and taxonomic affinity (species, genus, order, as applicable). Unidentifiable specimens will be segregated into grosser categories (e.g., large mammal, small mammal, bird, fish, and reptile, etc.). All faunal material will also be characterized as burned or unburned, with additional observations regarding cultural modification such as cut marks or polish, and taphonomy such as intrusive elements and degree of weathering. This information can be used to interpret settlement and subsistence practices as applied to the research themes.

Cultural Resources Treatment Plan for the 5-Year Development Plan at Santa Clara University — DRAFT Albion Environmental, Inc. David J. Powers and Associates, Inc. July 2015 182 Invertebrate Faunal All marine and/or freshwater shellfish remains will be identified by species, where possible, weighed, counted, and entered into a catalog by an archaeologist versed in shell analysis. The various shellfish species’ habitats (e.g., riverine, tidal flats, rocky coastline) of the shellfish samples will be determined. Analysis may also include identification of growth-ring age and seasonality of collection. The condition of the remains will be assessed with regard to site formation processes and site integrity. The analysis can also provide information to research themes that involve settlement and subsistence practices.

Archaeobotanical Remains The investigations may locate midden soils and discrete features that contain charred botanical remains. Larger specimens (e.g., wood charcoal and nut hulls) will be sampled through normal sifting of excavated soil and smaller residues (e.g., grass seeds and stems) sampled through the water flotation processing of bulk samples of soil. Samples collected during standard excavation will be processed in much the same manner as other collected items. Soil column samples and feature samples will be processed by the water flotation method in the laboratory. Using a low power binocular microscope, the archaeobotanist will examine the remains and make species and genus level identifications as allowed by the preservation of the remains. This information will then be applied to research themes involving settlement and subsistence practices.

Soil and Sediments Laboratory analysis of soil and sediment samples provides more detailed descriptions and controlled testing than can be performed under field conditions. Such analyses are conducted to: (1) quantify the relative percentages of sand, silt, and clay in a deposit; (2) determine the pH of a deposit; (3) identify depositional environments and site-formation processes; (4) assess the degree of pedogenesis; and, (5) facilitate stratigraphic correlation among depositional units. These results facilitate the interpretation of cultural deposit integrity and landscape evolution.

Other Artifacts Several of the anticipated property types pose the possibility for containing an unusually large and varied artifact inventory. The investigations may encounter a number of artifact finds such as baked clay pottery, daub with basketry impressions, bone ornaments, and ground and polished stone ornaments. The investigations must be prepared to institute appropriate analyses for the data they may contribute to the research themes. For example, if a baked clay assemblage is recovered, chemical or petrographic studies may be necessary to characterize the manufacturing materials and processes.

Historic Era Resources

General Procedures If excavation of intact features is required, archaeologists will catalog and analyze all materials recovered. Initial processing will include washing and sorting artifacts according to location in excavation feature, context, artifact class, and material. After initial processing, individual formal artifacts, such as complete ceramic vessels, will be assigned a specimen number, while entire lots of non-artifactual bone, shell, glass fragments, metal fragments, and ceramic sherds from a specific provenience will be assigned a single specimen number. Preliminary cataloging data will be entered into a Microsoft Access (2010) database; afterwards objects will be prepared for formal analyses.

Albion will analyze materials in a manner appropriate to established procedures regarding historical artifacts. We will catalog all materials following currently accepted functional categories consistent with other relevant projects, in order to facilitate comparisons with the results from other

Cultural Resources Treatment Plan for the 5-Year Development Plan at Santa Clara University — DRAFT Albion Environmental, Inc. David J. Powers and Associates, Inc. July 2015 183 archaeological sites. The classification scheme is designed to determine functional types represented by the artifacts, and recognize overall patterning in artifact use. Analytical methods focus on the following functional categories: commerce, domestic, personal, structural, and transportation. We will also use a number of subfunction categories, such as food preparation and consumption, grooming and health, and medicinal.

We will conduct analysis of materials from each artifact type following generally accepted methods. The following description outlines procedures for analyzing each material type. While we discuss generally accepted “historic” material classes below (i.e., glass, ceramic, and metal), we recognize that artifacts that are considered “prehistoric” such as stone tools and shell beads do occur in Spanish- Mexican Period “historic” archaeological sites, as the indigenous peoples who lived at these historic communities continued to make and use these objects. Further, ecofacts such as bone, shell, and botanical remains are also recovered from historic sites. Rather than replicate the methods for studying those material classes here, we refer to those methodological descriptions as presented elsewhere in this treatment plan, for prehistoric contexts. While each material type is discussed individually, there are complimentary forms of evidence that we will analyze in comparison to each other to recognize their full information potential. We will research all artifacts to determine their ability to be temporally diagnostic.

Glass Glass artifacts recovered from the Historic Period typically include items such as glass bottles, glass beads, and window glass. In addition, glass shards were often reused in the Spanish-Mexican Period and flaked into projectile points or other kinds of tools. In our analysis of glass artifacts, we focus on attributes indicative of production date (e.g., mold seams and color), vessel use (e.g., color and embossed markings), and glass reuse (e.g., flaked glass). Such analysis can be used to investigate research themes such as documenting consumer behaviors, defining social groups, such as those based on ethnicity or economic status, and investigating how indigenous peoples living during the Spanish-Mexican periods reused foreign goods in traditional ways.

Ceramics Ceramic artifacts recovered from the site might include domestic vessels imported into the region, such as Chinese porcelain bowls, locally made architectural ceramics (e.g., bricks), or locally made earthenware domestic ceramics. In our analysis of ceramic artifacts, we focus on attributes indicative of production date (e.g., waretype, decoration), vessel form and function (e.g., shape, rim form), vessel use (e.g., use wear patterns), and ceramic reuse (e.g., flaked porcelain). Important to the analysis of artifacts is the determination of quantity and distribution of materials within a particular feature or across site boundaries. The concept of minimum number of items or vessels (MNI or MNV) is critical to artifact analysis and interpretation. We will determine MNV for glass and ceramic vessels after sorting, cross-mending, and metric data (e.g., rim diameter, thickness) are obtained. As with glass artifacts, our analysis of ceramics can be used to investigate research themes such as documenting economic behaviors, social groups, and indigenous uses of foreign goods.

Metal Metal artifacts by their nature are fragmentary and difficult to identify. However, we potentially can recognize architectural artifacts (e.g. nails and other hardware), domestic artifacts (e.g. sewing pins or cooking wares), or weaponry (e.g. bullet casings). We will sort those artifacts that are identifiable by function, item name, type of metal, alteration, and then count and weigh them. Analysis of artifacts within this material class can inform questions about architectural style and economic behaviors.

The Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Archaeological Documentation encourages public interpretation of archaeological data where merited by the findings. Archaeology has great potential for interesting a community in their local history. The materials thus far identified at Santa Clara University and environs have the potential for expanding the public’s understanding of the establishment of and life in Mission Santa Clara de Asís. The archaeological record documents the transformation of the Mission into an important Mexican settlement, and later, a significant American settlement in the first years of statehood. The important history of this town continues into the second half of the 19th century as it was important to the development of commercial agricultural interests in the Valley. These are all important historical themes that are part of Santa Clara University’s effort to maintain elements of its historic past, as exemplified by the intense interest the University had shown in the preservation of its complex past. Exhibits relating to the history of SCU have been produced for the Archaeology Lab and deSaisset Museum. The Archaeological Lab has sponsored open houses, and the Department of Anthropology and Sociology has sponsored lecture series. Public tours of the archaeological heritage of the SCU campus are a common occurrence. Further, the publication of Telling the Santa Clara Story (Skowronek 2002) was intended to reach a wide SCU and City of Santa Clara audience.

In keeping with this spirit of interpretation, it is recommended that SCU, campus cultural resource management directors, and consultants keep in mind potential avenues of public interpretation.

Examples of public outreach include, but are not limited to:

 portable exhibit displays;

 permanent exhibit displays and/or signage, including in situ preservation of architectural features;

 interpretive displays in interior spaces in the project structures;

 public lecture or lecture series;

 site visits to ongoing archaeological excavations;

 continuation of the Archaeology Lab open house tradition;

 continuation of the campus historical and archaeological tours;

 activities targeted towards primary and secondary school children, such as class visits, tours, and "mock" excavations;

 popular articles, books, or pamphlets describing area prehistory, ethnohistory, and history;

 news releases to local venues;

 narrated documentary videos; and/or

 website updates and "exhibits."

Cultural Resources Treatment Plan for the 5-Year Development Plan at Santa Clara University — DRAFT Albion Environmental, Inc. David J. Powers and Associates, Inc. July 2015 185 SCU campus archaeologists have also shown a commitment to disseminating information concerning campus-archaeological efforts to professional archaeological and historical societies. David Huelsbeck was one of the founding board members of the California Mission Studies Association (CMSA). Russell Skowronek was an active member in professional societies and published many articles and books about historical resources recovered from campus. Recently, Lee Panich and SCU students have given presentations to the CMSA, the Society for California Archaeology, and the Society for American Archaeology. Professor Panich has published several articles and manuscripts on the topic of California Spanish missions, specifically. This tradition of sharing research goals and findings to professional colleagues should be continued. It is critical to the continued interpretation of findings on the SCU campus.

Native American Consultation

The Native American community, made up of tribes and individual representatives of Ohlone, Yokuts, or mixed ancestral heritage have a long-standing interest in the treatment of resources on the campus. Native Americans have been present as monitors on projects that have had the potential to impact ancestral remains. Also, several have served as appointed Most Likely Descendants to advise the University when remains are found. The proper treatment of ancestral remains is of paramount importance to Native Americans and is always a major topic in discussions of resource management.

Native Americans are also beginning to voice an interest in the Colonial Period stating that, for good or ill, that period in their tribal histories was formative and a shaping force in their tribe’s present-day identity. One respondent has repeatedly mentioned the importance of accurately interoperating the Mission experience from the indigenous perspective. Another has remarked on the importance of Mission records in chronicling her tribe’s history.

Consultation with the Native American community is continuously evolving and the University has made the commitment to include tribal opinions and recommendations in the preparation of this Master Cultural Resources Treatment Plan and all project specific treatment plans tiered from the Master Plan. In addition, CEQA requires consultation with the Native American community as part of the environmental review process. Consultation will therefore continue as each capital project reaches the design stage triggering a specific treatment plan. Project specific consultation will address the treatment of materials of traditional importance likely at each project site, the value of Native American monitoring, reporting to the Native American community, and interpretation goals.

The Santa Clara 2020 Plan and the Master Use Agreement amendment application do not trigger the two specific consultation processes: Senate Bill 18 (SB 18) or Assembly Bill 52 (AB 52). Senate Bill 18 is a formal consultation process that is triggered when a project requires a general plan amendment, for example to accommodate a zoning change, creation of open space, or like actions. The 2020 Plan does not require an amendment to the City of Santa Clara General Plan. Recently passed (September 25, 2014), AB 52 for the first time identifies “Tribal Cultural Resources” as part of the environment and is thus subject to identification, review, and planning to mitigate impacts. Assembly Bill 52 is still in its formative stages and lacks guidelines other than general consultation requirements. Assembly Bill 52 became effective for all projects that file Notices of Preparation (NOP) of an EIR on or after July 5, 2015. The Santa Clara 2020 Plan and EIR NOP precede that date, therefore AB 52 is not applicable to the present Master Plan. Of note, the University has generally endorsed a level of consultation that would likely satisfy the requirements of AB 52, when the Office of Planning and Research publishes consultation guidelines. The treatment of ancestral remains and burial associated materials are clearly guided by state law, including specific instructions in the Public Resources Code describing the role of the Most Likely Descendent in finding respectful solutions to the treatment of remains. These procedures are discussed in the section below.

Cultural Resources Treatment Plan for the 5-Year Development Plan at Santa Clara University — DRAFT Albion Environmental, Inc. David J. Powers and Associates, Inc. July 2015 186 The City of Santa Clara had originally chosen to conduct consultation for the Master Plan and Santa Clara 2020 Plan EIR; however, the Planning Department opted for Albion to complete the consultation, based in part on Albion’s familiarity with the capital projects and the tribal representatives. The City provided the following list of respondents, originally provided by the California Native American Heritage Commission.

Amah Mutsun Tribal Band of Mission San Juan Bautista Irene Zwierlein, Chairperson Woodside, California

Amah Mutsun Tribal Band Valentin Lopez, Chairperson Galt, California

Indian Canyon Mutsun Band of Costanoan Ann Marie Sayers, Chairperson Hollister, California

Muwekma Ohlone Indian Tribe of the San Francisco Bay Area Rosemary Cambra, Chairperson Milpitas, California

The Ohlone Indian Tribe Andrew Galvan Fremont, California

Albion prepared a letter with project descriptions and site maps for each potential respondent. These were mailed May 6, 2015. The letter provided contact information for Albion and the University, and asked each respondent if they would participate in an individual tour of the campus and capital project sites. Albion also sent “follow up” emails again asking if respondents wished to visit the campus. The emails also asked the respondents for any comments or recommendations that they might wish to make.

Three respondents did visit the campus with Albion staff. Rosemary Cambia and others from the Muwekma Tribe toured the campus with Albion anthropologist Stella D’Oro. Irene Zwierlein of the Amah Mutsun Band of San Juan Bautista and Ann Marie of the Indian Canyon Band visited the campus with Albion Principal Clinton Blount. Andrew Galvan and Valentin Lopez did not respond, although in the past Mr. Galvan has participated in consultation with the University. All five respondents, and any others identified in the future by the Native American Heritage Commission, will be offered the opportunity to consult on project specific treatment plans under the Santa Clara 2020 Plan. The specific plan for the Unified Facility for the Law School will include an expanded outreach to the present-day Yokuts and Miwok communities, whose ancestors became part of the indigenous population of the Mission Rancheria after 1800. Ancestors of these communities are interred in the Mission cemetery to the north of the Law School site.

Muwekma Ohlone Indian Tribe of the San Francisco Bay Area

On June 8th, 2015, Stella D’Oro met with representatives Rosemary Cambra and Alan Leventhal to discuss the proposed projects on campus. Ms. Cambra is the chairwoman and Mr. Leventhal is the Tribal Ethnohistorian. Ms. D’Oro gave copies of the plans to the representatives and led a tour through the campus discussing each project and known archaeological information of each area.

Cultural Resources Treatment Plan for the 5-Year Development Plan at Santa Clara University — DRAFT Albion Environmental, Inc. David J. Powers and Associates, Inc. July 2015 187 The tour began at the site of the proposed law building within the current Murguia parking lot. Muwekma was engaged by PG&E in 2008 to excavate ancestral remains found during PG&E construction directly north of the project area. Of the project sites toured, all agreed that the STEM Center Project has the most potential to expose human remains from the Alameda Site, CA-SCL-755. The representatives also expressed concern about the Residence Hall Projects since the area is known to be on the edges of a pozo, or estuarine environment, with the potential for prehistoric occupation and/or resource-gathering sites.

During the tour, the Muwekma recommended that they be engaged as sole monitors for archaeological exploration and construction, to the exclusion of others who they feel do not accurately represent the indigenous community in Santa Clara. They then asked about our protocol for discovery of human remains. Albion informed the representatives that the director of cultural resource management for the campus, Linda Hylkema, is the first informed. Ms. Hylkema then contacts the coroner. The coroner examines the remains, determines if they are Native American, and contacts the NHIC, who assigns a Most Likely Descendant (MLD). The University is informed of this MLD assignment.

Indian Canyon Mutsun Band of Costanoan

Clinton Blount met Ann Marie Sayers on the afternoon of June 2, 2015 and preceded the tour with a review of the capital projects in the Santa Clara 2020 Plan. Ms. Sayers is very familiar with the campus resources having served as Most Likely Descendent for removal and reburial of several pre- Colonial interments. She has also served as Native American Monitor on several campus projects, most recently the Admissions and Enrollment Building, the Edward M. Dowd Art and Art History Building, and Parking Structure projects.

Ms. Sayers’s comments focused on the treatment of remains in the area of the STEM Phase 2 project. She cautioned that the area has seen discovery of ancestral remains and that more discoveries are likely with the current configuration of the STEM Phase 2 building. She was also concerned about the potential for ancestral remains in the Mission cemetery north of the Law School site.

Finally, Ms. Sayers reiterated her interest in accurate interpretation of her ancestors experiences at Mission Santa Clara and in the Spanish Colonial system in general. She noted that while changing, the perception that the Missions “brought civilization and religion” to the Native population is still widely held. She encouraged interpretation of the true Native experience, as derived from both Mission records and archaeological evidence, particularly as part of the Law School because of the project’s direct impact on the third Mission site and proximity to the cemetery. Part of the interpretation should be a forceful statement that the Native peoples “are still here”, that is, the Ohlone people were not culturally annihilated by the Missions, nor did they disappear as a people. Ms. Sayers expressed an interest in serving as monitor for archaeological investigation and construction.

Amah Mutsun Tribal Band of Mission San Juan Bautista

Clinton Blount met Irene Zwierlein on the morning of June 2, 2015 and preceded the tour with a review of the capital projects in the Santa Clara 2020 Plan. Ms. Zwierlein is somewhat familiar with the campus resources having served as monitor for the recent Alviso Street pedestrian mall conversion project. As with Ms. Sayers later that same day, Ms. Zwierlein expressed concern about the potential for encountering ancestral remains at the Stem Phase 2 project site. Ms. Zwierlein’s concern was based on the information Albion provided during the description of the resource sensitivities at that project site. She expressed a similar concern about the treatment of any remains

Cultural Resources Treatment Plan for the 5-Year Development Plan at Santa Clara University — DRAFT Albion Environmental, Inc. David J. Powers and Associates, Inc. July 2015 188 associated with the third Mission cemetery. Blount indicated that the University strictly follows the Public Resource Code requirements for the treatment of remains.

Ms. Zwierlein remarked in a follow-up discussion that the records of Mission births, marriages, and deaths housed at the Mission were very important in establishing the Band’s tribal history and had helped them meet some of the requirements for federal recognition as a tribe. Ms. Zwierlein indicated an interest in monitoring archaeological investigations and construction.

Discovery and Treatment of Human Remains

Procedures for the treatment of human remains are well defined in various state and federal laws and codes. The NAHC acts as a central point of contact for notification of Native Americans, and arbitration between the Native American representative and the property owner (who is also the owner of the remains) and any associated archaeological materials. These procedures are set forth in the California Public Resources Code 5097.9, specifically 5097.98 Notification of discovery of Native American human remains, descendants, disposition of human remains and associated grave goods. NAHC guidelines have changed over time and SCU will follow NAHC recommendations and Public Resource Codes current at the time of the discovery.

When human remains are discovered (in either an archaeological or construction context), Santa Clara University will notify the Santa Clara County Coroner who will determine if the remains are or are suspected to be of Native American origin (cf. Section 7050.5c of the Health and Safety Code). This is often done in consultation with the archaeological investigator or on occasion in consultation with a forensic or physical anthropologist. If this determination is made, the Coroner will notify the NAHC.

The NAHC will notify those persons it believes are most likely descended from the deceased Native American. This is usually a single individual, although for a number of reasons, the NAHC may assign more than one MLD. The MLD will likely be on the original consultation list; however, this is not always the case, as some individuals have removed themselves from the general consultation list due to the flood of requests for comments.

The MLD will have 48 hours to inspect the finds and make recommendations to Santa Clara University regarding the disposition of the remains. If the MLD fails to make a recommendation or the MLD and Santa Clara University fail to come to an agreement (with mediation provided by the NAHC) Santa Clara University will respectfully reinter the remains and associated artifacts in a safe place on the project parcel. Since nearly the full extent of the parcel will be used for underground parking, Santa Clara University will likely be required to find a secure parcel in the near vicinity of the project. The intent of the State Codes is to ensure that both the project and the MLD are of like mind concerning the respectful disposition of any ancestral remains.

Reporting

The report will at a minimum meet the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Archaeological Documentation. The report will be submitted to the client and all reviewing agencies, and will ultimately be filed with the Northwest Information Center at Sonoma State University.

The technical report for each project will address the following elements:

 executive summary;

 statement of scope, including project location and setting;

 summary of previous research, historical and archaeological;

 research goals and themes;

 field and laboratory methodologies;

 descriptions of recovered materials;

 findings and interpretations, referencing research goals;

 conclusions;

 references cited; and

 appendices such as artifact catalogs, special studies, and other information relevant to the project and findings.

Cultural Resources Treatment Plan for the 5-Year Development Plan at Santa Clara University — DRAFT Albion Environmental, Inc. David J. Powers and Associates, Inc. July 2015 190 POLICIES

Crew Safety and Security Standards

Qualifications and Investigation Standards

A qualified crew is essential to successful implementation of all project phases. All investigations will be supervised by prehistoric and historical archaeologists who meet or exceed Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualifications Standards (NPS 1983; 48 CFR 44738-44739). All fieldwork will be conducted according to guidelines contained in Treatment of Archaeological Properties: A Handbook (ACHP 1990) and Archaeology and Historic Preservation: The Secretary of the Interior’s Standards and Guidelines (NPS 1983; 48 CFR 44716-44742).

Safety

The potential for contact with hazardous materials is present in most subsurface urban contexts. Prior to any field testing, soils testing should be done by qualified professionals for potentially hazardous materials. A site-specific health and safety plan for fieldwork for each project will be prepared in conjunction with qualified hazardous materials professionals. It is important that hazard mitigation procedures, such as appropriate personal protection equipment and air monitoring, be established before fieldwork starts.

Crew safety is of special concern during any trenching activities. Backhoes will operate with a broad scoop to create trench exposures that are roughly 3–4 feet wide, which is sufficient to allow for the establishment of safety shoring while permitting hand excavations and profile mapping. Should deep trenches be excavated, and access is prohibited for safety reasons, a video camera may be lowered into the trenches to observe the strata. It may also be necessary to prepare trench profiles from the surface of the excavation area to comply with safety requirements.

The project Field Director will be responsible for distributing the safety plan to field personnel. Everyone on site will be required to follow protocol detailed in the safety plan. If the Field Director believes that unexpected hazards exist on a site, the Director has the authority to discontinue all archaeological activities until it can be demonstrated that no hazards exist. Alternately, the Field Director may continue investigations in a limited manner following appropriate safeguards, dependent upon the circumstances.

Security

Archaeological excavations have the potential to create great public interest. The project team feels that public interest is crucial to increasing public knowledge and awareness of archaeology. Concomitant with this heightened awareness of archaeology, however, is a concern for site security. To address these concerns, there may be a need for site fencing and/or a security guard to be on site during non-excavation hours. Site fencing will be placed around the perimeter of excavation areas as determined necessary by the SCU Campus Archaeologists and Principal Investigators. “No Trespassing” signs will be posted on fencing where appropriate. As materials accumulate, they will be removed to the appropriate laboratory facility or stored in a locked pod for more secure storage prior to laboratory processing. In addition, the project team will encourage campus law enforcement officers to visit the site. Such visits provide an opportunity to educate officers regarding archaeological methods, while at the same time informing them about specific penal codes they may use to cite violators.

Cultural Resources Treatment Plan for the 5-Year Development Plan at Santa Clara University — DRAFT Albion Environmental, Inc. David J. Powers and Associates, Inc. July 2015 191 In addition, the Field Director or a designated representative can provide archaeological education sessions on an as-requested basis to ensure campus personnel are aware of their role in site security. Sessions will explain to all project staff the nature of archaeological deposits and materials expected to be encountered, and procedures should soils be disturbed by non-archaeologists.

Discard and Deaccession Policy

Archaeological investigations of 19th and early 20th century sites have the potential to recover quantities of artifacts that are difficult to curate. Government agencies and other researchers have recently recognized this dilemma and promulgated guidelines for the curation and selective discard of materials from their archaeological collections (e.g., State of California 1993; Praetzellis and Costello 1997, 2002). Such guidelines acknowledge the current problem of finding acceptable curation facilities, and offer the premise that not all materials have equal curation value. Considerations for artifact curation and discard principles have recently been developed and used successfully for the Metropolitan Water District in Los Angeles.

More recently, Praetzellis and Costello (1997, 2002) have published discard-policy guidelines for historic materials. Three criteria were used to determine the appropriateness of field and laboratory discards (Praetzellis and Costello 1997; Costello et al. 1998:39–40). The first criterion considers research values; that is, the potential of a class or collection of artifacts to provide information important for understanding the past. This potential should be defined in the project research design. The second criterion relates to practicality: the ease of storing materials and a consideration of the quantity represented. The last criterion deals with educational value, or the potential of artifacts to contribute to public interpretation. The SCU CRM Collections Management Policy abides by these established criteria, adding the need for the object to be relevant to “the CRM FACILITY’S Mission, core values, and goals.” Artifacts may be discarded if they lack long-term research value, or are from a poor archaeological or historical context. Materials that are over-represented, or of which a sample can be kept to represent the whole, are in poor physical condition and may not be feasible for long- term storage, or pose health and safety risks, may be discarded. It is important that the Director of Cultural Resource Management for SCU verify all decisions concerning discard and deaccessioning.

Curation Policy

Recovered artifacts are the property of Santa Clara University. Upon completion of laboratory analysis, materials for curation will be placed in archival quality, long-term storage packing materials, including acid-free boxes, inert polyethylene plastic bags, and acid-free paper labels. Certain materials that do not have long-term research or interpretive value may be discarded after documentation. Santa Clara University will retain possession of curated artifactual materials in perpetuity. All curation methods will meet current professional standards and will follow to the extent feasible the guidelines set forth in 36CFR79, Curation of Federally owned and Administered Collections (a federal code and considered the professional standard for all undertakings). Documentary materials, such as progress reports, photographs, computer disk files, field notes, and other pertinent records will be permanently stored with the artifact collections. Santa Clara University will make every reasonable effort to make the collection available to scholars. Access will be based on a written and accepted request to Santa Clara University.

Collections should be available for long-term study by researchers in an appropriate curation facility. Currently, materials are curated at the Archaeology Research Lab. Lab space is currently at a premium. Large amounts of recovered materials from the proposed expansion outlined in this Treatment Plan are likely to exceed current storage space. It is important that SCU consider the future of curation on campus, in consultation with the Campus Cultural Resources Manager.

The intent of this Master Cultural Resources Treatment Plan is to provide a general background and treatment protocols for all eight of the major and secondary projects identified in the University’s Santa Clara 2020 Plan. This Master Plan is also designed to provide guidance for the treatment of cultural resources at other projects, large and small, not yet planned or identified in the Santa Clara 2020 Plan. As each project advances to the design phase, the University will prepare a specific treatment plan to address impacts of that project. These specific treatment plans will detail land use history on the proposed area, highlight applicable research themes from the general plan, identify previous land disturbances such as utility corridors and previous building activities, and detail management and mitigation options, ranging from preservation to data recovery.

The Santa Clara 2020 Plan outlined a capital improvement plan that calls for several campus building and demolition projects including a new Law School, STEM Center, two new Residence Halls, replacement of Cowell Center, additions to Pat Malley Fitness Center, additions to Dunne Residence Hall, demolition of Kennedy Commons, additions to Benson Center, and demolition of Daly Science. Each of these proposed activities, and any future building activities, will generate a specific treatment plan tiered from this Master Cultural Resources Treatment Plan.

At a minimum, each specific treatment plan will contain the following:

 executive summary;

 project scope, including location and setting;

 land use history;

 SCU land use, including previous building programs and utility disturbances;

 potential prehistoric resources and applicable research themes;

 potential historic resources and applicable research themes;

 specific mitigation plans;

 health and safety plan;

 policies for curation and/or deaccessioning;

 report outline; and,

 options for public interpretation of discoveries.

Based on our current research, the projects proposed in the Santa Clara 2020 Plan are known to or may contain cultural resources from Precolonial, Mission, Mexican, and American Periods. Each project has its own particular sensitivities, as described below. Note: the physical description of each project may be found in the Project Descriptions section of the Introduction.

The site of the new School of Law, now the Murguia Lot is an area with a long history use, extending back to the period before Spanish occupancy. The site is known to contain archaeological resources from the Mission, Mexican, and American Period. The project is located in an area with high cultural resources sensitivity.

The pre-Colonial Period is represented by Native American human burials attributed to the Middle (500 BC–AD 800) and Middle/Late Transition (AD 800–1200) periods of Bay Area prehistory. Collectively, these burials are known as the Alameda Native American Burial Site (CA-SCL-755), which has been interpreted as a deliberate cemetery rather than burials within a habitation site. CA- SCL-755 consists of several clusters and individual human burials centered roughly in the middle of campus.

This area is also particularly sensitive for prehistoric archaeological resources. It lies just northeast of the presently known extent of CA-SCL-755 and very close (approximately 40 meters) to ten burials found during the 1997 construction of the Arts and Sciences Building (Figure 61. The sensitivity of is given even more immediacy by the fact that the boundaries of CA-SCL-755 have never been definitively determined. Consequently, the possibility of encountering prehistoric burials during the construction of the new School of Law facility is moderate to high.

Equally significant are resources dating to the Mission Period at Santa Clara (1777-1836). Specifically, the project area is positioned within the location of the third Mission quadrangle. The third Mission church, quadrangle, and associated cemetery were established in 1781, after flooding of the Guadalupe River forced the movement of the original Mission settlement. After its founding, the third Mission complex continued to expand with the addition of granaries, storerooms, housing for soldiers, priests, and neophytes, and infrastructure such as irrigation canals, livestock corrals, orchard walls, tile kilns, and tanning facilities. This Mission complex also experienced destruction. In 1783, a fire burned some of the adobe buildings; heavy winds damaged the roofs of existing structures in 1787; in November of 1788 an adobe structure thatched with twigs and tule caught fire; and the complex was flooded in 1792 (Jackson 2002:86; Lynch 1981:6; Spearman 1963:49). Two earthquakes, one in 1812 and another in 1818, ultimately destroyed the third Mission complex. A fourth Mission Church and eventually a fifth Mission complex were constructed west of the third Mission in the center of the modern campus.

A number of Mission Period archaeological resources have been identified in the proposed footprint of the building and in the immediate vicinity of the project area (Figure 62). Specifically, a segment of the original wall of the mission itself (Map Index #131) has been identified in the southeastern portion of the footprint. This feature is composed of a cobblestone alignment that has been interpreted as a Mission wall foundation (Allen et al. 2010:333–336). Just outside of the proposed footprint, directly east, is a large clustering of Mission features, including several segments of the south wing of the Mission quad (Index #141, #146, #151), the east wing of the Mission quad (Index # 152), a dense clustering of teja (Index #135), an adobe floor constructed atop a refuse pit (Index #147), and various segments of the Mission foundation (Index #148, 1#49, #150, #153, and #154). Other Mission resources in the immediate vicinity include what has been termed the “Orchard Keeper’s House” (Index #165), a borrow pit (Index #144), adobe block cluster (Index #145), an adobe foundation (Index #94), charred mammal bone pit (Index #95), a refuse pit (Index #166), and, farther to the southeast, portions of the zanja (Index #485).

Cultural Resources Treatment Plan for the 5-Year Development Plan at Santa Clara University — DRAFT Albion Environmental, Inc. David J. Powers and Associates, Inc. July 2015 195 Legend

Project area Mission Period features Mexican Period features Murguia Mission Site American Period features Franklin Street preservation area Undated features 145 # Map index number 144

Sherman Street

165

94 151 152 146

141 150

442 149 95 349 147 154

341 441 148 153 347 235 131

135 350 346 348

345

344 166

485

Palm Drive

476 477 478 Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/Airbus DS, USDA, USGS, AEX, Getmapping, Aerogrid, 475 479 IGN, IGP, swisstopo, and the GIS User Community Scale - 1:898

0 10 20 30 40 Meters Figure 62. Proposed School ± of Law with archaeological 0 25 50 75 100 features. Feet Albion Environmental, Inc. File name: Feature_62_LawSchool_Features.ai, J2015-011.01, Stella D’Oro, 09July2015 File name: Feature_62_LawSchool_Features.ai, J2015-011.01, The project area also contains a Late Mexican Period residential component. After secularization in 1836, most of the former Mission Santa Clara lands were divided among loyal Mexican subjects (Hall 1871:57–81). While many former neophytes and newly arriving Mexican citizens found work on nearby ranchos during the Mexican Period, others remained on lands within and immediately surrounding Mission buildings as squatters. The Hendry and Bowman map (Figure 24) places multiple Mexican Period adobes within the project area.

The known resource associated with the Mexican Period within the Project Area is a segment of an adobe house floor (Index #235) that has been identified along the western side of the proposed footprint. Half of it lies inside the footprint and half lies outside. It was found in 1987 (Hueslbeck 1987) and has been partially excavated. It is interpreted as part of an adobe building dating to the 1850s.

As a result of the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo in 1848, Alta California was ceded to the American government, eventually becoming the 31st state admitted to the Union. The American Period saw a rapid influx of settlers, many seeking to try their hands in the gold fields. For Santa Clara importantly, this period witnessed the development of Santa Clara as a municipal and industrial center. It was during this time that a residential neighborhood and a number of industries and businesses were established, which came to define the character and tenor of the early city of Santa Clara. The American Period history within the project area seems to center around the Late American Period (1880–1930). Historical resources indicate that one of these important businesses, the Enterprise Laundry (Sainte Claire Laundry) was established within the project area (1894–1970). In addition, a Late American Period residential neighborhood existed here until the University bought the property and eventually razed the neighborhood in the late 1980s.

American Period resources have been found in the vicinity of the project area. The sole resource identified within the proposed footprint is an unexcavated brick alignment (Index #350). To the west, just across Sherman Street, there is a clustering of American Period features, most the remains of domestic refuse (Index #341, 344, 345, 347, 348, and 349). A redwood-lined privy (Index #346) was also identified and completely excavated. It contained domestic refuse dating to the turn of the 20th century and associated with the Don family (Baxter et al. 2011).

STEM Center Phases 1–3

Based on our current research, the proposed project area for STEM Phases 1–3 is located within an area of high cultural resource sensitivity, particularly for precolonial Native American burials.

As with the Law School site, human burials associated with CA-SCL-755 have been found within and very near the project area. The STEM Complex projects lie in an area of especially high sensitivity for Native American ancestral remains (Figures 63 and 64). The projects, particularly Phase 2, are in the vicinity of known burials, some of which have been reburied as a consequence of earlier development.

The project may also impact Mission Period resources. The eastern regions of the project area were likely open spaces used for industrial purposes, such as tanning, throughout the lifetime of Santa Clara Mission in this region (from 1781–1836). Phase 2 of the project area also lies within the historically known location of the fourth Mission Church (1818–1825). This temporary church was established after earthquakes destroyed the third Mission complex beyond repair. This church was in use while the fifth Mission complex was being constructed. After the fifth Mission complex was constructed, the fourth church was used as a residence hall for neophyte boys (Wizorek 1998:18).

Cultural Resources Treatment Plan for the 5-Year Development Plan at Santa Clara University — DRAFT Albion Environmental, Inc. David J. Powers and Associates, Inc. July 2015 197 447 476 478 460 461 479 448 475 449 462 474 477 450 474 474 454 205 355 204 474 207 203 206 209 373 Palm Drive 208 211 210 213 474 374 212 481 445 214 215 473 472 482 451 375 463 468 471 465 470 480 466 459 469 439 453 467 457 458 452 456 380 380

380 Sherman Street 224

237 202 199 200 376 238 201

232 418 369

410 424 409Alviso Street 233 234

Legend

Project area 412 Mission Period features Mexican Period features American Period features 241 Undated features

413 # Map index number

242 425

Scale - 1:1,750

0 25 50 75 100 Meters Figure 63. Proposed STEM 0 50 100 150 200 ± Complex with features. Feet Albion Environmental, Inc. File name: Figure_63_STEM_Features.ai, J2015-011.01, Stella D’Oro, 02July2015 File name: Figure_63_STEM_Features.ai, J2015-011.01, Figure 64. Proposed STEM Complex with burials REDACTED

Cultural Resources Treatment Plan for the 5-Year Development Plan at Santa Clara University — DRAFT Albion Environmental, Inc. David J. Powers and Associates, Inc. July 2015 199 Known remains associated with the fourth iteration of Santa Clara Mission include two architectural features (Index #232 and #234) and a refuse pit (Index #233). Phase 1, by contrast, is situated just south of a number of architectural remains associated with the third or fifth Mission; these include primarily architectural remains (Index #, 204, 205, 206, 207, 208, 209, 210, 211, 212, 213, 214, and 215) and one refuse pit (Index #203). To the east of Phase 1, is a Mission-associated ash lens (Index #439) and a very large “Matanza” pit (Burson 1993).

The reuse of the fourth Mission church continued after secularization, and into the late Mexican Period (1836–1848). In the 1840s, the fourth Mission church was reportedly occupied by the mistress and children of Father Real. Father Real’s mistress operated a fandango hall well into the 1850s (Skowronek and Wizorek 1997). The eastern region of the project area also contains a Late Mexican Period residential component, characterized by Mexican citizens squatting on former Mission lands. The Hendry and Bowman map (Figure 24) places multiple Mexican Period adobes within the project area.

The Mexican Period is represented by a small number of features located to the west of the proposed footprints. These include one architectural feature (Index #238), and three refuse features (Index # 237, 241, and 242). The last feature (Index #242) is associated with the adobe of the Pinedo family, a prominent Californio family that lived in the city. The refuse is interpreted as the domestic refuse of Encarnacion Pinedo, who was the youngest daughter of Lorenzo and Maria del Carmen Pinedo.

In 1860, Santa Clara College purchased the property that contained the location of the fourth Mission church (Skowronek and Wizorek 1997:73). The American Period uses of the land on which the fourth Mission church stood are related to the early development of the college. In addition, the eastern regions of the STEM Complex were historically associated with the Eberhard Tannery. Likely evolving from Mission Period tanning facilities, the Eberhard Tannery (1867–1953) provided employment for the working class community that grew up around it, becoming a marker for the German community in Santa Clara.

Phases 1 and 3 are in the vicinity of the Eberhard Tannery complex. Specifically, Index #380 is associated with the Eberhard Tannery and may represent concrete footings from the foundation of a building that once housed tan bark used in the tannery process. These are within the footprint of Phase 3. Other American Period features identified in the vicinity include a privy (Index #474) and refuse pits (Index #374, 375), among others. Index #375 is associated with the Gaspar family, who occupied a residence there in the early 20th century.

Residence Halls

Based on research to date, the historical period of significance within the project area is the Late American Period (1880–1930) (Figure 65). We consider this project to be located within an area of moderate cultural resource sensitivity.

During this period, this southeastern region of campus contained industrial warehouse companies, such as the Pacific Manufacturing Company, as well as the railroad along the Alameda (Guisto 2000). These businesses and transportation improvements are important to Santa Clara’s history as they facilitated the employment of the growing immigrant community that built up around the Santa Clara Mission at the turn of the century.

Cultural Resources Treatment Plan for the 5-Year Development Plan at Santa Clara University — DRAFT Albion Environmental, Inc. David J. Powers and Associates, Inc. July 2015 200 427

429

The Alameda 431 430

432

429 433

434

437

Park Avenue

Legend

Project area Mission Period features Mexican Period features American Period features

Undated features Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, # Map index number CNES/Airbus DS, USDA, USGS, AEX, Getmapping, Aerogrid, IGN, IGP, swisstopo, and the GIS User Community Scale - 1:1,600

0 25 50 75 100 Meters Figure 65. Proposed Residence 0 50 100 150 200 ± Halls with features. Feet Albion Environmental, Inc. File name: Figure_65_ResidenceHalls_Features.ai, J2015-011.01, Stella D’Oro, 02July2015 File name: Figure_65_ResidenceHalls_Features.ai, J2015-011.01, Seven distinct Late American Period archaeological resources were identified south of Sobrato Hall during mitigation for the Physical Services Plant Project (Map Index #427, 430, 431, 432, 433, 434, and 437). These resources are all generally characterized as architectural or industrial refuse deposits. All of these resources were determined possibly significant.

Also important is the development of the railroad along The Alameda, which connected Santa Clara to San Jose. This transportation corridor began in 1868 when Samuel A. Bishop established the San Jose and Santa Clara Horse Railroad, a line that ran on narrow gauge rails from San Jose to Santa Clara. Archaeological evidence of the railroad along The Alameda has been identified near the project area (Map Index #429). In 2010, two areas of horizontally-aligned, milled redwood planks measuring 30 x 6 x 3 inches were identified while monitoring for an AT&T Re-route Project (Peterson 2010B:21). The archaeologist on the project did not determine the significance of this feature.

Earlier land use within the project area is less well documented. During the Mission Period, the land within the project area may have been used for agricultural purposes. Because of the proximity of the project area to Cook’s Pond, it is possible that this region could have been used for water-powered agricultural activities, such as a grist mill. During the late Mexican Period/Early American Period, adobe houses were likely established near this region. The 1866 Santa Clara Plat map indicates adobe structures to the northwest of the current project area.

Replacement of Cowell Center

Based on research to date, there are multiple potential historical periods of significance within the project area, beginning in the Mission Period and extending into modern times. We classify the archaeological sensitivity of this project area as moderate.

The southern-central region of campus contained two of the earliest and longest operating enterprises in the Santa Clara Valley, the tannery and the orchard. The tannery, as discussed above, was in continual use from the 1780s through the 20th century. The Mission orchard, similarly, was established contemporary to the third Mission complex (1781) and continued through the American Period. During the American Period, the land was primarily owned and used by Santa Clara College.

Based on the archaeological record to date, there is no direct evidence for land use within the project area. The Cowell Center is located in an area of moderate sensitivity for historical materials, possibly related to the Eberhard Tannery complex or Santa Clara College (Figure 66). Two American Period features have been previously recorded just north of the proposed Cowell Center Project. The first, (Map Index No. 381) is recorded as redwood flooring possibly associated with the Eberhard Tannery (Wizorek 1998:86). The second, (Map Index No. 398) represents a partial pig skeleton, and has been associated with Santa Clara College animal husbandry during early 20th century (L. Hylkema 1999:10). Both of these archaeological resources were classified as “possibly significant.”

Additions to the Pat Malley Fitness Center

As with the Cowell Center Project, the Pat Malley Fitness Center is located within the southern- central region of campus, which historically was the location of the long-lived tanning industry and orchard. The Fitness Center is in an area of moderate sensitivity for resources (Figure 67).

Cultural Resources Treatment Plan for the 5-Year Development Plan at Santa Clara University — DRAFT Albion Environmental, Inc. David J. Powers and Associates, Inc. July 2015 202 398

381

416

Legend

Project area Mission Period features Mexican Period features American Period features

0 10 20 30 40 Meters Figure 66. Proposed Cowell 0 25 50 75 100 ± Center with features. Feet Albion Environmental, Inc. File name: Figure_66_CowellCenter_Features.ai, J2015-011.01, Stella D’Oro, 02July2015 File name: Figure_66_CowellCenter_Features.ai, J2015-011.01, 399 398

224 381

Sherman Street

Legend

Project area Mission Period features Mexican Period features American Period features

0 25 50 75 100 Meters Figure 67. Proposed Pat 0 50 100 150 200 ± Malley Center with features. Feet Albion Environmental, Inc. File name: Figure_67_MalleyCenter_Features.ai, J2015-011.01, Stella D’Oro, 02July2015 File name: Figure_67_MalleyCenter_Features.ai, J2015-011.01, Significant deposits representing Mission tanning activities lie to the north and may be present in the Fitness Center area (May Index #224). Just to the east of the project area, archaeologists have identified three American Period features. The first, (Map Index No. 381) is recorded as redwood flooring possibly associated with the Eberhard Tannery (Wizorek 1998:86). The second, (Map Index No. 398) represents a partial pig skeleton, and has been associated with the use of this land for barn animals by Santa Clara College during early 20th century (L. Hylkema 1999:10). And the third, (Map Index #399) is characterized as a mid-20th century artesian well, also likely associated with College land use within this area. All of these archaeological resources were classified as “possibly significant.”

Addition to Dunne Hall and Demolition of Kennedy Commons

The period of significance for the Dunne Residence Hall project is the Late American Period, and the project lies in an area of moderate archaeological sensitivity (Figure 68).

The project area lies just south of what is currently the southern extent of CA-SCL-755, the Alameda Native American Burial Site. Although there is a low probability of encountering human remains, the proximity of the Dunne Hall to the core campus area leaves open the possibility of such discoveries.

Although the historic record provides no specific evidence of land use within the project area during the Mission Period, its proximity to the fourth and fifth Mission complexes suggest that this region of campus was likely incorporated into open/shared space Mission activities. An archaeological deposit of floor tiles dating to the Mission Period was identified north of the proposed project area (Map Index #231).

The project area also contains a late Mexican Period residential component. The Hendry and Bowman map (Figure 24) places multiple Mexican Period adobes around the project area. Multiple significant Mexican Period features (Map Index #240, 241, 242) have been found just to the north and within the project area. These resources have been interpreted as residential refuse pits filled with domestic debris associated with the Pinedo family, a prominent Californio family.

The American Period history within the project area seems to center around the Late American Period (1880–1930). Archaeological resources related to the development of a residential neighborhood and a number of industries and businesses established in the early city of Santa Clara may also be encountered. Historical resources indicate that a Late American Period residential neighborhood existed within the project area. Nineteen American Period features, all Late American Period residential and college-related refuse concentrations have also been identified in the vicinity of the project area (Map Index #401, 402, 403, 404, 405, 406, 411, 412, 413, 414, 415, 416, 417, 419, 420, 421, 422, 423, 424).

Renovations and Additions to the Benson Center

The project area contains moderate sensitivity for archaeological resources pertaining to Mission, Mexican, and American periods. There is also the low probability of encountering human remains associated with CA-SCL-755 (Figure 69 and 70).

The project area lies just south of what is currently the southern extent of CA-SCL-755, the Alameda Native American Burial Site. Although there is a low probability of encountering human remains, the proximity of the Benson Center to the core campus area leaves open the possibility of such discoveries.

Cultural Resources Treatment Plan for the 5-Year Development Plan at Santa Clara University — DRAFT Albion Environmental, Inc. David J. Powers and Associates, Inc. July 2015 205 411

240 231 412

241 413 Santa Clara Street

242

Kennedy Commons demolition 414 415 417 401

419 416 420 402 403 421

404 422 424 423 Lafayette Street 405 406

Dunne Hall addition

Market Street

Legend

Project area Mission Period features Mexican Period features American Period features Undated features Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, # Map index number CNES/Airbus DS, USDA, USGS, AEX, Getmapping, Aerogrid, IGN, IGP, swisstopo, and the GIS User Community Scale - 1:1,130

0 10 20 30 40 Meters Figure 68. Proposed demolition of Kennedy Commons and 0 25 50 75 100 ± Dunne Hall additions with Feet features. Albion Environmental, Inc. File name: Figure_68_DunneKennedy_Features.ai, J2015-011.01, Stella D’Oro, 02July2015 File name: Figure_68_DunneKennedy_Features.ai, J2015-011.01, 201

410 424 233

234

Alviso Street

242

415

416 Market Street

Legend

Project area Mission Period features Mexican Period features American Period features Undated features # Map index number

Scale - 1:1,200

0 10 20 30 40 Meters Figure 69. Proposed Benson 0 25 50 75 100 ± Center with features. Feet Albion Environmental, Inc. File name: Figure_69_BensonCenter_Features.ai, J2015-011.01, Stella D’Oro, 02July2015 File name: Figure_69_BensonCenter_Features.ai, J2015-011.01, Figure 70. Proposed Benson Center with burials REDACTED

Cultural Resources Treatment Plan for the 5-Year Development Plan at Santa Clara University — DRAFT Albion Environmental, Inc. David J. Powers and Associates, Inc. July 2015 208 Although the historic record provides no specific evidence of land use within the project area during the Mission Period, its proximity to the fourth and fifth Mission complexes suggest that this region of campus was likely incorporated into open/shared space Mission activities. Deposits dating to the Mission Period have been identified north of the proposed project area. These include two architectural features (Index # 201, 234) associated with the fourth Mission, and a refuse pit (Index #233) composed of artifacts associated with the fourth or fifth Mission.

The project area also contains a late Mexican Period residential component. A significant Mexican Period feature (Index #242) has been found just to the west, near the Kennedy Commons. It has been interpreted as a residential refuse pit filled with domestic debris associated with the Pinedo family, a prominent Californio family.

Four American Period features, including three residential refuse concentrations (Index # 410, 415, and 416) have been identified in the vicinity of the project area. Two of these (index #415, 416) are associated with the either the Sassenroth, Bottini, or Grady households. The final American Period feature (Index #424), which lies to the east of the project area, contains flooring possibly associated with the Eberhard Tannery.

Demolition of the Daley Science Center

Based on research to date, there are two main historical periods of significance represented within the project area. Of particular importance are features associated with the Mission Period at Santa Clara (1777–1836), an era that witnessed the establishment of the five Missions in Ohlone territory and the dissolution of the Native communities of the region as a result of the Spanish policy of reducción. While the current project does not propose development of the area, the archaeological sensitivity is high (Figure 71 and 72).

A number of the Mission Period features are representative of the Indian Rancheria that sprang up around the Missions. At the height of its existence, around the late 18th and early 19th centuries, the Rancheria had a purported population of between 1,400 and 1,500 people. According to historical sources, it was a thriving community and the main hub of indigenous Mission life. It was a place where Indian peoples from diverse tribal polities and lineage lines interacted, all the while interacting with a colonial presence that sought to transform them into “productive” citizens of the colony. Within the current footprint, a Mission era resource (Index #183) was identified, which consists of a cluster of ladrillos associated with the Indian Rancheria. Just outside the footprint, along its northwest side, a number of Mission-era features have been identified. Most of these are related to the Indian Rancheria and have been identified as either refuse pits (Index #175, 177, 178, 180, 444, and 181) or architectural features (Index #176). Index #181 is of particular significance, and consists of a thin but spatially very large scattering of Mission-era materials. There is another cluster of Mission- era features to the northeast of the footprint, many of which are also resources associated with the Indian Rancheria (e.g., Index #102, 103, 104, 105, 106, 107, 109, 110, 111, 112, 113, 114, and 227). Index #115 is also in this area, and consists of a very large spatially-dispersed deposit with materials dating to the third Mission. Finally, remains associated with the fifth Mission have been identified just to the west of the footprint; these include two refuse deposits (Index #184 and 186) and one architectural feature (Index #185).

114 41 115 113 325 40 313 112 111 302 42 277 326 45 313 109 327 110 108 104 107 103 175 106 105 176 328 102 355 178 177 329 179 313

181 444 180

356 357 182

183

358

184

185

363 362

186 Legend Project area Mission Period features Mexican Period features 368 American Period features 189 Undated features 367 188 # Map index number

Scale - 1:1,000

05 10 20 30 40 Meters Figure 71. Proposed Daly Science demolition with 0 25 50 75 100 ± features. Feet Albion Environmental, Inc. File name: Figure_71_DalyScience_Features.ai, J2015-011.01, Stella D’Oro, 02July2015 File name: Figure_71_DalyScience_Features.ai, J2015-011.01, Figure 72. Proposed Daly Science demolition with burials REDACTED

Cultural Resources Treatment Plan for the 5-Year Development Plan at Santa Clara University — DRAFT Albion Environmental, Inc. David J. Powers and Associates, Inc. July 2015 211 The second historical period of significance within the project area is the American Period with most identified features dating to the Late American Period (1880–1930). A number of American Period features have been recognized in the project area. Two of these (Index #182 and 357) are located within the proposed footprint. The former consists of a Late American refuse deposit with materials dating from the period between 1890 and 1910. The latter is an older trash scatter, with materials dating as early as 1848. Just outside the footprint, along its western side are two additional features. Index #356 is a brick and cement feature that dates anywhere from the mid-18th century to the present day. Index # 358 is an object called a “fishbox” and contained items dating possibly as far back as the mid-18th century. Lengths of redwood boardwalk also associated with the American Period have been found south of the project area.

Cultural Resources Treatment Plan for the 5-Year Development Plan at Santa Clara University — DRAFT Albion Environmental, Inc. David J. Powers and Associates, Inc. July 2015 212 1REFERENCES CITED

Adam, D.P. 1967 Late Pleistocene and Recent Palynology in the Central Sierra Nevada, California. In Quaternary Paleoecology, edited by E. J. C. a. H. E. Wright, pp. 275-302. Yale University Press, New Haven.

Adams, D.P., R. Byrne and E. Luther 1981 A Late Pleistocene and Holocene Pollen Record from Laguna de las Trancas, Northern Coastal Santa Cruz County, California. Madroño 28:255-272.

Allen, R. 1993 Analysis of Plant Remains from Mission Santa Cruz. California Mission Studies Association Newsletter 10(2):4-6.

1996 Archaeological Investigation in Downtown San Diego, Horton's Addition Block H.

1998 Native Americans at Mission Santa Cruz, 1791–1834: Interpreting the Archaeological Record. Perspectives in California Archaeology 5. Institute of Archaeology, University of California, Los Angeles.

2010a Alta California Missions and the Pre-1849 Transformation of Coastal Lands. Historical Archaeology 44(3):69-80.

2010b Rethinking Mission Land Use and the Archaeological Record in California: An Example from Santa Clara. Historical Archaeology 44(2):72-96.

Allen, R., R.S. Baxter, S. D'Oro, H. Hicok and C. Blount 2014 Data Recovery Report of Historic Features for the Admissions and Enrollment Services Building, Santa Clara County, California. Prepared for Santa Clara University by Environmental Science Associates and Albion Environmental, Inc.

Allen, R., R.S. Baxter, L. Hylkema, C. Blount and S. D'Oro 2010 Uncovering and Interpreting History and Archaeology at Mission Santa Clara: Report on Archaeological Data Recovery at the Leavey School Business, Murguía Parking Lot, and Jesuit Community Residence Project Areas. Submitted to Santa Clara University by Past Forward, Inc., Santa Clara University Archaeology Research Lab, and Albion Environmental, Inc.

Allen, R., R.S. Baxter, A. Medin, J.G. Costello and C. Young Yu 2002 Excavation of the Woolen Mills Chinatown (CA-SCL-807H), San Jose. . Submitted to California Department of Transportation, District 4, Oakland.

Allen, R., R.S. Baxter, L. Hylkema, C. Blount and S. D’Oro 2009 Uncovering and Interpreting History and Archaeology at Mission Santa Clara; Reporting on Archaeological Data Recovery at the Leavey School of Business, Murguia Parking Lot, and the Jesuit Community Residence Project Areas. Report to Joe Sugg, Assistant Vice President, University Operations, Santa Clara University, Santa Clara, California.

Cultural Resources Treatment Plan for the 5-Year Development Plan at Santa Clara University — DRAFT Albion Environmental, Inc. David J. Powers and Associates, Inc. July 2015 213

Allen, R., T. Garlinghouse, C. Blount, L. Garcia and L. Fryman 2004 Cultural Resources Treatment Plan fr the Jesuit Residential Community. Report to Santa Clara University, under contract with David J. Powers & Associates, Inc. by Past Forward Inc., Garden Valley, Albion Environmental, Inc., Santa Cruz, Beyond Buildings, Santa Clara, and Hones & Stokes, Inc., Sacramento, CA.

Allen, R., T. Garlinghouse, J. Farquhar, C. Blount, L. Fryman and D. McGowan 2004 Cultural Resources Treatment Plan for the Ten Year Capital Plan. Report to Santa Clara University by Albion Environmental, Inc., Santa Cruz, Past Forward, Inc., Garden Valley, and Jones and Stokes, Sacramento, California.

Allen, R., A. Medin, Baxter, R. S. , B. Wickstrom, C. Young Yu, J. G. Costello, G. White, A. Huberland, H.M. Johnson, J. Meyer and M. Hylkema 1999 Upgrade of the Guadalupe Parkway, San Jose Historic Properties Treatment Plan.

Anderson, R. , C. Freeman and L. King 1973 Site Record Form for CA-SCL-68 (Temporary No. WVC-6). On file, California Archaeological Site Inventory.

Antevs, E. 1948 Climatic Changes and Pre-White Man. University of Utah Bulletin 38:168-191.

1952 Climatic History and the Antiquity of Man in California. University of California Archaeological Survey Reports 16:23-31.

1958 Glacial and Pleistocene Geology. American Antiquity 23(4).

Archibald, R. 1978 The Economic Aspects of the California Missions. Academy of American Franciscan History, Washington DC.

Arnold, J.E. 1992 Cultural Disruption and Political Economy in the Channel Islands. In Essays on the Prehistory of Maritime California, edited by T. L. Jones, pp. 129-144. vol. 10. Center for Archaeological Research at Davis, University of California, Davis.

Associates, Mineweaser & 2010 Architectural and Historical Evaluation of Nugent Residence 741 Franklin Street, and Nelson Cottage 743 Franklin Street, and Pereira Building 797 Franklin Street, and Landy-Larder House 1065 Alviso Street, Santa Clara, California, Project 2905. Report to Santa Clara University from Mineweaser & Associates, San Jose.

Atwater, B.F. 1979 Ancient Processes at the Site of Southern San Francisco Bay: Movement of the Crust and Changes in Sea Level. . In San Francisco Bay: The Urbanized Estuary, pp. 31-45, T.J. Conomos, A.E. Leviton and M. Berson, general editor. Pacific Division/American Association for the Advancement of Science, San Francisco. .

Cultural Resources Treatment Plan for the 5-Year Development Plan at Santa Clara University — DRAFT Albion Environmental, Inc. David J. Powers and Associates, Inc. July 2015 214 Atwater, B.F., C.W. Hedel and E.J. Helley 1977 Later Quaternary Depositional History, Holocene Sea Level Changes, and Vertical Crustal Movement, Southern San Francisco Bay, California. . U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper, No. 1014, Washington, DC. .

Axelrod, D.I. 1981 Holocene Climatic Changes in Relation to Vegetation Disjunction and Speciation. American Naturalist 117:847-870.

Bard, J., C. Busby, R.J. Dezzani, D. Garaventi and P.M. Ogrey 1981 Presence/Absence Testing Results for Archaeological Sites CA-SCL-300/302/288 and CA-SCL-418 as Part of the Guadalupe Corridor Compliance with 36 CFR Part 800. A report for the Guadalupe Corridor Joint Powers Board, Santa Clara County Transportatiopn Agency.

Bard, J., C. Busby, R.J. Dezzani and D. Garaventa 1985 Site Testing Report at Archaeological Site CA-SCL-68 as Part of the Guadalupe Transportation Corridor Compliance with 36 CFR Part 800.

1986 Site Testing Report for Archaeological Site CA-SCL-137 as Part of the Guadalupe Corridor Transportation Project Compliance with 36 CFR Part 800.

Barth, F. 1969 Ethnic Groups and Boundaries: The social organization of cultural differences. Little, Brown, Boston.

Basin Research Associates, Inc. 2000 Archaeological Presence/Absence Testing Program 1051 Sherman Street City of Santa Clara, Santa Clara County, California. Prepared for Santa Clara Development Company by Basin Research Associates, Inc.

Baumhoff, M.A. 1963 Ecological Determinants of Aboriginal California Populations. University of California Publications in American Archaeology and Ethnology 49(2):155-236.

Baxter, R. S., R. Allen, C. Blount, and S. D'Oro 2006 Report on Non-Significant Features for the Kennedy Mall Commons Area. Prepared for Santa Clara University by Past Forward, Inc. and Albion Environmental, Inc.

Baxter, R.S., R. Allen, L. Hylkema, C. Blount and S. D'Oro 2011 American Period History and Archaeology, Santa Clara University: Reporting on Archaeological Data Recovery at the Leavey School of Business, and Jesuit Community Project Areas. Prepared for Santa Clara University by Past Forward, Inc., Santa Clara University Archaeology Research Lab, and Albion Environmental, Inc.

Baxter, R.S., R. Allen, C. Blount, S. D'Oro, L. Garcia, and J. Meyer 2005 Report of Cultural Resources Encountered during the Kennedy Mall Commons Area Project. Prepared for Santa Clara University by Past Forward, Inc., Albion Environmental, Inc., Beyond Buildings, and Anthropological Studies Center at Sonoma State University.

Cultural Resources Treatment Plan for the 5-Year Development Plan at Santa Clara University — DRAFT Albion Environmental, Inc. David J. Powers and Associates, Inc. July 2015 215

Bean, L. J. and S.B. Vane 1978 Cults and their Transformations. In Handbook of North American Indians: California, edited by R. F. Heizer, pp. 662-672. vol. 8. Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C.

Bean, L..J. 1994 The Ohlone Past and Present: Native Americans of the San Francisco Bay Region. Ballena Press Anthropological Papers 42.

Bean, L.J. and H. W. Lawton 1993 Some Explanations for the Rise of Cultural Complexity in Native California with Comments on Proto-Agriculture and Agriculture. Before the Wilderness: Environmental Management by Native Californians. Ballena Press, Menlo Park.

Beardsley, R.K. 1954 Temporal and Areal Relationships in Central California Archaeology. University of California Archaeological Survey Reports, University of California, Berkeley 24-24.

Beechey, F.W. 1968 Narrative of a Voyager to the Pacific and Bering Strait [1831]. Da Capo Press, New York.

Bennyhoff, J.A 1986 The Emeryville Site, Viewed 93 Years Later. In Symposium: A New Look at Some Old Sites, edited by G. S. B. a. T. Haversat, pp. 65-75. Archives of California Prehistory, Coyote Press, Salinas, California.

1994 Variation within the Meganos Section. In Toward a New Taxonomic Framework for Central California Archaeology: Essays by James A. Bennyhoff and David A. Fredrickson, edited by R. E. Hughes, pp. 15-24. Contributions to the University of California Archaeological Research Facility 52, Berkeley.

Bennyhoff, J.A and R.E. Hughes 1987 Shell Bead and Ornament Exchange Networks Between California and the Western Great Basin. American Museum of Natural History Anthropological Papers 64:80- 175.

Bergthold, J. 1982 Prehistoric Settlement and Trade Models in the Santa Clara Valley, California, Department of Anthropology, San Francisco State University, San Francisco

Bickel, P. 1978 Changing Sea Levels along the California Coast: Anthropological Implications. Journal of California Anthropology 5(1):6-20.

1981 San Francisco Bay Archaeology: Sites Ala-328, Ala-13 and Ala-12, pp. 1-375. vol. 43. Contributions of the University of California Archaeology Research Facility, Berkeley, California.

Cultural Resources Treatment Plan for the 5-Year Development Plan at Santa Clara University — DRAFT Albion Environmental, Inc. David J. Powers and Associates, Inc. July 2015 216 Blount, C. 2013 Archaeological Monitoring and Data Recovery Sherman Street Storm Drain Replacement Project, Santa Clara University. Prepared by Albion Environmental, Inc.

Blount, C. and S. D'Oro 2013 Graham Residential Complex Cultural Resources Monitoring and Treatment Plan Addendum (Allen et al. 2011). Prepared for Santa Clara University by Albion Environmental, Inc.

Bone, K.J. 1975 A Preliminary Analysis of Beads from Mission Santa Clara de Assis [sic], Santa Clara County, California, SCL-30, the "Third Mission Site" Corner of Franklin and Campbell Streets and the "Fifth Mission Site" – Present Site of the Mission Church. Ms. on file, de Saisset Art Gallery and Museum.

Boscana, G. 1978 Chinigchinich: Historical Account of the Belief, Usage, and Customs and Extravagancies of the Indians of This Mission of San Juan Capistrano Called the Acagchemem Tribe, translated by Alfred Robinson. Malki Museum Press, Banning, California.

Boserup, E. 1965 The Conditions of Agricultural Growth: The Economics of Agrarian Change under Population Pressure. Aldine Press, Chicago.

Broadbent, S.M. 1972 The Rumsen of Monterey, An Ethnography from Historical Sources. In Miscellaneous Papers on Archaeology, pp. 45-93. vol. 14. Contributions of the University of California Archaeology Research Facility, Berkeley, California.

Broughton, J. 1999 Resource Depression and Intensification During the Late Holocene, San Francisco Bay, Evidence from the Emeryville Shellmound Vertebrate Fauna. University of California Publications, Anthropological Records 32.

Brown, A.K. 1994 The European Contact of 1772 and Some Later Documentation. In Ohlone Past and Present, edited by L. L. Bean. Ballena Press, Menlo Park.

2005 Reconstructing Early Historical Landscapes in the Northern Santa Clara Valley. Santa Clara University, Department of Anthropology and Sociology, Research Manuscript Series 11.

Brown, J.S. 1996 Reading beyond the missionaries, dissecting responses. Ethnohistory 43(4):713-719.

Burkhart, L.M. 1989 The Slippery Earth: Nahua-Christian Moral Dialogue in Sixteenth-Century Mexico. University of Arizona Press, Tucson.

Cultural Resources Treatment Plan for the 5-Year Development Plan at Santa Clara University — DRAFT Albion Environmental, Inc. David J. Powers and Associates, Inc. July 2015 217

Burson, E. 1999 Cow Pit - A Probable Matanzas Cattle Bone Deposit on the Santa Clara University Campus. Submitted to the Santa Clara University Archaeology Research Lab.

California, State of 1993 Guidelines for the Curation of Archaeological Collections. State Historic Resources Commission, Office of Historic Preservation, Sacramento.

Cartier, R. 1980 Cultural Resources Evaluation of the Presence or Absence of Historic and Prehistoric Sites for the Guadalupe River Control Project. A report for the Santa Clara Valley Water District. (S-4955).

1983 Archaeological Testing at CA-SCL-6 East on Tasman Drive in the City of San Jose, County of Santa Clara, California. On file at the Northwest Information Center of the California Historical Resources Information System, S-6310. .

1984 Subsurface Archaeological Evaluation of the Benech Property as Part of Santa Teresa Water Treatment Plant Project in the Santa Teresa Hills, City of San Jose, County of Santa Clara. On file at the Northwest Information Center of the California Historical Resources Information System, S-6870. .

Cartier, R. and L. Pierce 1982 Inhumation Recovery at CA-SCL-484, the "Warburton Avenue SIte". On file at the Northwest Information Center of the California Historical Resources Information System, S-6870.

Cartier, R. and E. Reese 1994 Archaeological Site Record, CA-SCL-30/H. Record on file, Northwest Information Center, Sonoma State University, Rohnert Park, CA.

Chavez, D. 1980 Archaeological Resources Assessment for the Guadalupe Corridor Alternatives Analysis Draft Environmental Impact Statement. MS on file, E-893/S-8387, California Archaeological Site Inventory, Rohnert Park.

Church, M.C. 2002 The Grant and the Grid: Homestead Landscapes in the late Nineteenth-Century Borderlands of Southern Colorado. Journal of Social Archaeology 2:220-244.

Clark, B.J. 2005 Lived Ethnicity: Archaeology and Identity in Mexicano America. World Archaeology 37(3):440-452.

Clayton, C. 1850 Docket Book - Charles Clayton, Justice of Peace, Santa Clara Township, Santa Clara County, State of California. Journal on file, City Clerk's Office, City of Santa Clara, CA.

1991 Of Revelation and Revolution: Christianity, Colonialism, and Consciousness in South Africa, Vol. 1. University of Chicago Press, Chicago.

Cook, E., C. Woodhouse, M. Eakin, D.M. Meko and D.S. Stahle 2004 Long-Term Aridity Changes in the Western United States. Science 306(5698):1015- 1018.

Cook, S.F 1943 The Conflict between the California Indian and White Civilzation: Vol. 1, The Indian Versus The Spanish Mission. Ibero-Americana 21.

Corey, C. 2001 Electric Utility Service Improvement Construction Monitoring at CA-SCL-30H, Santa Clara University. Prepared for Santa Clara University by Albion Environmental, Inc.

Costello, J.G. 1989 Santa Ines Mission Excavations: 1986-1988. Coyote Press, Salinas, CA.

1992 Purchasing Patterns of the California Missions in ca. 1805. Historical Archaeology 26(1):59-66.

Costello, J.G., A. Praetzellis, M. Praetzellis, J. Marvin, M.D. Meyer, E.S. Gibson and G.H. Ziesing 1998 Historical Archaeology at the Headquarters Facility Project Site, The Metropolitan Water District of Southern California.

D'Oro, S. 2009 Native Californian Prehistory and Climate in the San Francisco Bay Area, Department of Anthropology, California State University, San Jose.

D'Oro, S., C. Blount and H. Hicok 2011 Cultural Resource Investigation for the Santa Clara Mission Church Restroom Sewer Line Project Santa Clara University.

Deetz, J. 1963, 1991 Archaeological Investigations at La Purisima Mission. In Spanish Borderlands Sourcebooks: The Archaeology of Alta California, edited by J. G. Costello, and Leo R. Barker, pp. 139-200. Garland Publishing, Inc, New York.

DeNiro, M.J. 1987 Stable Isotope and Archaeology. American Scientist 75:182-191.

Dietz, S. 1977 Final Report of Archaeological Test Excavations for Constructions of Freeway 04- SCL-101.

Cultural Resources Treatment Plan for the 5-Year Development Plan at Santa Clara University — DRAFT Albion Environmental, Inc. David J. Powers and Associates, Inc. July 2015 219 DiPaolo Loren, D. 2010 The Archaeology of Clothing and Bodily Adornment in Colonial America. University Press of Florida, Gainsville. diZerega Wall, D. 2001 Afterward: Becoming New York: The Five Points Neighborhood. Historical Archaeology 35(3):133-135.

Durkheim, E. 1951 Suicide. Originally published in 1897 ed. Free Press, New York.

Edwards, R. 1978 Archaeological Reconnaissance of the Hillsdale Venture Property-Northwest Quadrant of Narvais Road and Hillsdale Avenue, San Jose, CA. MS on file, S-4481, California Archaeological Site Inventory, Rohnert Park.

Ellison, J. and C. Spellman 2014 Results of Archaeological Monitoring Conducted for the Smith DCC 7-Eleven Remodel Project, 706 Benton St. Santa Clara, California. Prepared for Smith Construction and Development Co. by Albion Environmental, Inc.

Elsasser, A. 1986 Review of the Prehistory of the Santa Clara Valley Region, California. In Archives of California Prehistory. Coyote Press, Salinas, CA.

Fages, P. 1937 A Historical, Political, and Natural Description of California [1775]. Translated by H. I. Priestly. University of California Press, Berkeley, California.

Farquhar, F.P. 1930 Up and Down California: The Journal of William H. Brewer. University of California Press, Berkeley.

Fentress, M. 1979 Geological and Ecological Perspectives at CA-SCL-300 and CA-SCL-302. On file, Northwest Information Center, Rohnert Park, California (Study S-4805).

Field, L. 1999 CA Forum on Anthropology in Public: Complicities and Collaborations: Anthropologists and the "Unacknowledged Tribes" of California. Current Anthropology 40(2):193-209.

Field, L., A. Leventhal, D. Sanchez and R. Cambra 1997 A Contemporary Ohlone Tribal Revitalization Movement: A Perspective from the Muwekma Costanoan/Ohlone Indians of the San Francisco Bay. California History 71(3):412-422.

Cultural Resources Treatment Plan for the 5-Year Development Plan at Santa Clara University — DRAFT Albion Environmental, Inc. David J. Powers and Associates, Inc. July 2015 220 Fio, J.L. and D.A. Leighton 1995 Geohydrologic Framework, Historical Development of the Ground-Water System, and General Hydrologic and Water-Quality Condition in 1990, South San Francisco Bay and Peninsula Area, California. U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 94- 357.

Fish, K. 1981 Organization for Water—Rise of Economic and Political Interests. In Water in the Santa Clara Valley: A History, Local History Studies pp. 21-44. vol. 27. California History Center, De Anza College, Cupertino, California.

Fredrickson, D. A. 1994 Spatial and Cultural Units in Central California Archaeology. In Toward a New Taxonomic Framework for Central California Archaeology, edited by R. E. Hughes, pp. 25-47. vol. 52. Contributions of the University of California Archaeology Research Facility, Berkeley, California.

Fredrickson, D.A. 1973 Early Cultures of the North Coast Ranges of California. Ph.D. dissertation, University of California, Davis.

1974 Cultural Diversity in Early Central California: A View from the North Coast Ranges. The Journal of California Anthropology 1(1):41-53.

Fryman, L. R. 2006 Encarnación’s Kitchen Revisited: Archaeology at the Pinedo Residence Lot in Santa Clara, California. Paper presented at the 40th Annual Meeting of the Society for California Archaeology, Ventura, California.

Furniss, E. 1995 Resistance, Coercion, and Revitalization: The Shuswap Encounter with Roman Catholic Missionaries, 1860 - 1900. Ethnohistory 42(2):231-263.

Gaddis, M. 1992 Blending Historic Trolleys with Light Rail Vehicles in San Jose, California. Paper presented at the American Public Transit Association, Los Angeles.

Gallagher, M. 2006 The Archaeology of Late Nineteenth-Century Health and Hygiene: A View from San Francisco, Anthropology, Sonoma State University.

Garcia and Associates, Inc. 1998 CPPAE Archaeological Monitoring and Excavation; DRAFT Feature Summaries. GANDA, Inc.

Garcia, L. 1994 Our Special Place, A paper presented at the American Planning Association National Conference. April. San Francisco, CA.

Cultural Resources Treatment Plan for the 5-Year Development Plan at Santa Clara University — DRAFT Albion Environmental, Inc. David J. Powers and Associates, Inc. July 2015 221 1997 Santa Clara: From Mission to Municipality. In Research Manuscript Series on the Cultural and Natural History of Santa Clara. 8 vols, Santa Clara University.

1998 The Winter of 1846 at Mission Santa Clara de Asis: Contact and Conflict, A paper presented at the Fifteenth Annual Conference of the California Mission Studies Association. February 13-15. Santa Clara, CA.

2002 The Immigrants Who Built Santa Clara. Telling the Santa Clara Story: Sesquicentennial Voices, edited by Russell K. Skowronek:pp. 99-100.

2011 New Park 1853 - 2011: The history of Sub-Lot 21, a 95 acre parcel of land in Santa Clara, California Ms on file, City of Santa Clara Central Park Library, Heritage Pavilion.

2013 Secular Life at Mission Santa Clara: The Californio Community, Presentation to the De Saisset annual docent's meeting. April 10. Santa Clara, California.

Garcia, L., G. Giacomini and G. Goodfellow 2002 A Place of Promise: The City of Santa Clara 1852-2002, City of Santa Clara, Santa Clara, California.

Gardner, R.A., F.F. Harradine, G.H. Hargreaves, J.L. Retzer, O.F. Bartholomew, T.W. Glassey, M.H. Lapham and R.C. Roberts 1958 Soil Survey of the Santa Clara Area, California.

Garlinghouse, T. and M. Hylkema 2006 Extended Phase I Study of the Berry Court Archaeological Site. Report prepared for Larry Moore, CTSC, Environmental Division, US Army Reserve Contracting Center, Fort Hunter Liggett, California.

Geddes, J. and J.C. Wizorek 1996 Gas Line Monitoring Report 1995.1. Prepared for Santa Clara University Archaeology Research Lab.

Geiger, M. and C.W. Meighan 1976 As the Padres Saw Them: California Indian Life and Customs as Reported by the Franciscan Missionaries, 1813 - 1815. Santa Barbara Mission Archive-Library, Santa Barbara.

Gerow, B.A. 1968 An Analysis of the University Village Complex with a Re-Appraisal of Central California Archaeology. Stanford University Press, Palo Alto, California.

Giacomini, G. F. Jr. and G. S.J. McKevitt 2000 Serving the Intellect, Touching the Heart: A Portrait of Santa Clara University 1851- 2001. Santa Clara University, Santa Clara, CA.

Cultural Resources Treatment Plan for the 5-Year Development Plan at Santa Clara University — DRAFT Albion Environmental, Inc. David J. Powers and Associates, Inc. July 2015 222 Giacomini, G.F. Jr. 2002 'A Very Happy Group:' 19th-Century Student Life at Santa Clara. In Telling the Santa Clara Story: Sequicentennial Voices, edited by R. K. Skowronek. Santa Clara University and City of Santa Clara.

Gifford, E.W. 1916 Composition of California Shellmounds. University of California Publications in American Archaeology and Ethnology, University of California, Berkeley 12:1-29.

1947 California Shell Artifacts. University of California Anthropological Records, University of California, Berkeley 14(4):261-318.

Ginn, S. 2005 Cultural Resources Evaluation for the Lord John's Excavation Project SCU-ARL Project No. 1996.3. Archaeology Research Lab, Santa Clara University.

Ginn, S. M. and L. Hylkema 1999 Cultural Resources Evaluation for the El Camino Real Right-of-Way Project Santa Clara University, California Project No. 1996.9. Archaeology Research Lab, Santa Clara University.

Gomez-Heitzeberg, Q. 1997 North Campus Parking Lot Project Report 1996.2 and Lord John's Demolition and Tank Removal Report 1994.3. Archaeology Research Lab, Santa Clara University.

Gonzalez, M. 2009 War and the Making of History: The Case of Mexican California, 1821— 1846. California History 86(2):5-68.

Grady, D., K.A. Latham and V. Andrushko 2001 Archaeological Investigations at CA-SCL-674, The Rubino Site, San Jose, Santa Clara County, California: Vol. II, Human Skeletal Biology of CA-SCL-674. Archives of California Prehistory (50).

Graham, E. 1998 Mission Archaeology. Annual Review of Anthropology 27:25-62.

Graumlich, L.J. 1993 A 1000-Year Record of Temperature and Precipitation in the Sierra Nevada. Quaternary Research 39(249-255).

Greenwalt, K., L. Hylkema and R. Skowronek 2006 Excavation Report for 1051 Sherman Street: the Benton and Sherman Lot; Project #2003.02, Santa Clara, California. Archaeology Research Lab, Santa Clara University.

Grossinger, R., R. Askevold, C. Striplen, E. Brewster, S. Pearce, K. Larned and L. McKee 2006 Coyote Creek Watershed Historical Ecology Study: Historical Condition, Landscape Change, and Restoration Potential in the eastern Santa Clara Valley, California San Francisco Estuary Institute.

Cultural Resources Treatment Plan for the 5-Year Development Plan at Santa Clara University — DRAFT Albion Environmental, Inc. David J. Powers and Associates, Inc. July 2015 223

Guisto, B. 2000 Archaeological Monitoring Report for the Physical Services Plant Project, Santa Clara University: A Study of Approximately 2 Acres on the San Jose West, California USGS 7.5 Minute Topographic Quadrangle. Prepared for Santa Clara University by Garcia and Associates.

Haas, L. 1995 Conquests and Historical Identities in California, 1769-1936. University of California Press, Berkeley and Los Angeles.

2011 Pablo Tac, Indigenous Scholar. University of California Press, Berkeley.

Hackel, S. 2005 Children of Coyote, Missionaries of Saint Francis: Indian-Spanish Relations in Colonial California, 1769–1850. University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill.

2006 Early California Population Project. Huntington Library, http://www.huntington.org/Information/ECPPmain.htm.

Hall, F. 1871 The History of San Jose and Surroundings, A.L. Bancroft, San Francisco, California.

Hall, M.C. 1983 Late Holocene Hunter-Gatherers and Volcanism in the Long Valley-Mono Basin Region: Prehistoric Culture Change in the Eastern Sierra Nevada. Unpublished Ph.D. Dissertation, Department of Anthropology, University of California, Riverside.

Harris, S., J. Geddes, K. Hahn, D. Chonette and R. Skowronek 1995 The Eberhard Privy: Archaeological and Historical Insights into Santa Clara History. In Research Manuscript Series on the Cultural and Natural History of Santa Clara, edited by S. C. University. 7 vols, Santa Clara, California.

Harrison, T.O. 1981 A Determination of Eligibility for the Santa Clara Depot of the Southern Pacific Railroad Company, Document on file with the California Department of Transportation, District 4, Oakland, California.

Hart, C.K. 1981 Post-War Problems: Struggle for Authority. In Water in the Santa Clara Valley: A History, Local History Studies pp. 81-96. vol. 27. California History Center, De Anza College, Cupertino, California.

Heizer, R. and F. Fenenga 1939 Archaeological Horizons in California. American Anthropologist 41:378-399.

Heizer, R.F. 1949 The Archaeology of Central California I: The Early Horizon. In University of California Anthropological Records, pp. 1-84. . vol. 12, University of California, Berkeley.

Cultural Resources Treatment Plan for the 5-Year Development Plan at Santa Clara University — DRAFT Albion Environmental, Inc. David J. Powers and Associates, Inc. July 2015 224

1967 Ethnographic Notes on California Indian Tribes. Reports of the University of California Archaeological Survey 68(3).

1974 The Costanoan Indians: An Assemblage of Papers on the Language and Culture of the Costanoan Indians who in Aboriginal Times Occupied San Francisco, San Mateo, Santa Clara, Alameda, and Parts of Contra Costa, Monterey, and San Benito Counties. Local History Studies 18.

Helley, E.J. and E. Brabb 1971 Geological Map of Late Cenozoic Deposits, Santa Clara County, California. U.S. Geological Survey, Miscellaneous Field Studies Map MF-335. .

Helley, E.J., K. Lajoie, W. Spangle and M. Blair 1979 Flatland Deposits of the San Francisco Bay Region, California: Their Geology and Engineering Properties, and Their Importance to Comprehensive Planning. U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 943.

Henderson, J. (editor) 1996 An Anthology of San Jose: Reflections of the Past, Heritage Media Corporation. Encinitas, California.

Hendry, G. and J. Bowman 1940 The Spanish and Mexican Adobe and Other Buildings in the Nine San Francisco Counties, 1776 to about 1850, Part VII, edited by B. Bancroft Library, California.

Hildebrandt, W. 1983 Archaeological Research of the Southern Santa Clara Valley Project. Report on file, California Department of Transportation, San Francisco.

1997 The Relative Importance of Lacustrine and Estuarine Resources to Prehistoric Hunter-Gatherer Populations: A View from Southern Santa Clara Valley, California. Journal of California and Great Basin Anthropology 19(2):197-225.

Hildebrandt, W. and T.L. Jones 1992 Evolution of Marine Mammal Hunting: A View from the California and Oregon Coasts. Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 11:360-401.

Hildebrandt, W. and P. Mikkelsen 1993 Archaeological Text Excavations at Fourteen Sites along Highways 101 and 152, Santa Clara and San Benito Counties, California.

Hoover, R. 1989 Spanish-Native Interaction and Acculturation in the Alta California Missions. In Columbian Consequences: Archaeological and Historical Perspectives of the Spanish Borderlands West, edited by D. H. Thomas, pp. 395-406. vol. 1. Smithsonian Press, Washington.

Cultural Resources Treatment Plan for the 5-Year Development Plan at Santa Clara University — DRAFT Albion Environmental, Inc. David J. Powers and Associates, Inc. July 2015 225 Hoover, R. and J.G. Costello 1985 Excavations at Mission San Antonio, The First Three Seasons, 1976 - 1978. Institute of Archaeology, University of California, Los Angeles.

Howe, D.W. 1975 American Victorianism as a Culture. American Quarterly 27:507-532.

Huelsbeck, D.R.

1985 Spacial Analysis of Materials from the Third Site of Mission Santa Clara, MS on File, Orrade Library Archives, Santa Clara University, Santa Clara.

1987 Archaeological Resources in the Santa Clara University Expansion Area: Monitoring Demolition. Santa Clara University.

1988a Lost and All but Forgotten: Archaeology and History at the Santa Clara Mission Site, Phase I. Archaeology Research Lab, Santa Clara University, Santa Clara, California.

1988b Test Excavations in the Proposed Right-of-Way of SCU's New Entrance Road: A Preliminary Report. Santa Clara University.

1989a Monitoring Construction of SCU's New Entrance Road: A Preliminary Report. Santa Clara University.

1989b Zooarchaeological Measures Revisited. Historical Archaeology 23:113-117.

Hughes, C. 1975 The Decline of the Californios: The Case of San Diego, 1846-1856. The Journal of San Diego History 21(3).

Hurtado, A.L. 1988 Indian Survival on the California Frontier. Yale University Press, New Haven, CT.

Hylkema, L. 1999 Cultural Resources Monitoring Report Leavey Activity Center Mini Plant Upgrade Project No. 1999.2, Phases a-b. Archaeology Research Lab, Santa Clara University.

2006 Summary of Past Projects, Mission Gardens Mini Plant Project. Archaeology Research Lab, Santa Clara University.

2009 Pre-Contact Native American Presence at Santa Clara University. Proceedings of the Society for California Archaeology 21:9-20.

2015 Personal communication with Lorie Garcia. May.

Hylkema, L. and R.K. Skowronek 1999 California Environmental Quality Act Addendum Phase I Archaeological Evaluation for Southeast Campus Development: New Student Resident Hall and Physical

2000 Diving Into the Past. California Mission Studies Association Newsletter 17(2):2-5.

Hylkema, M. 1998 Extended Phase I Archaeological Survey, Report, Subsurface Presence/Absence Testing at the Wollen Mills Chinatown Site (CA-SCL-807H) and Three Storm Water Retention Basins, for the Route 87 Guadalupe Corridor Freeway Project, City of San Jose, Santa Clara County, California. California Department of Transportation.

2007 Santa Clara Valley Prehistory: Archaeological Investigations at CA-SCL-690, The Tamien Station Site, San Jose, California. Center for Archaeological Research at Davis.

Hylkema, M. and L. Garcia 1996 Archaeological Survey Report for the Proposed Relocation of the City Police Station Project City of Santa Clara, Santa Clara County, California. On file, City of Santa Clara Planning Department, Santa Clara, California.

Ingram, B.L. 1998 Differences in Radiocarbon Age between Shell and Charcoal from a Holocene Shellmound in Northern California. Quaternary Research 49:102–110.

Ingram, B.L., J.C. Ingle and M.E. Conrad 1996 Stable Isotope Record of Late Holocene Salinity and River Drainage in San Francisco Bay, California. Earth and Planetary Science Letters 141:237-248.

Jackson, R.H. 2002 Demographic Patterns at Santa Clara Mission, 1777-1840. In Telling the Santa Clara Story: Sesquicentennial Voices, edited by R. K. Skowronek, pp. 84-92.

Jackson, R.H. and E. Castillo 1995 Indians, Franciscans, and Spanish Colonization. University of New Mexico, Albuquerque.

James, W.F. and G. H. McMurray 1933 History of San Jose, California, Narrative and Biographical. A.H. Cawston, San Jose.

Jenkins, I.R., B.M. Lynch and R. Skowronek 1998 The Adobe Lodge: A Review of Archaeological Excavation and Historical Background (1981.1). Archaeology Research Lab, Santa Clara University.

Jenkins, O. 1973 Pleistocene Lake San Benito. Journal of California Geology 26(7):151-163.

Johnson, D. 1977 The California Ice-Age Refugium and the Rancholabrean Extinction Problem. Quaternary Research 8:149-153.

Johnson, J.R. 1997 The Indians of Mission San Fernando. Southern California Quarterly 79(3):249-290.

Jones, T.L. and D.J. Kennett 1999 Late Holocene Sea Temperatures Along the Central California Coast. Quaternary Research 51:74-82.

King, T. 1974 The Evolution of Status Ascription around San Francisco Bay. Antap: California Indian Political and Economic Organization. Ballena Press Anthropological Papers, No. 2, Ramona, California.

King, T. and P. Hickman 1973 The Southern Santa Clara Valley: A General Plan for Archaeology. U.S. Department of the Interior, National Park Service.

Kroeber, A.L. 1908 Mission Records of the California Indians. University of California Publications in American Archeology and Ethnology 8(1):1-27.

1925 Handbook of the Indians of California. Bureau of American Ethnology Bulletin 78.

Kwolek-Folland, A. 1984 The Elegant Dugout: Domesticity and Moveable Culture in the United States, 1870- 1900. American Studies 25(2):21-37.

LaMarche, V.C. 1973 Holocene Climatic Variations Inferred from Treeline Fluctuations in the White Mountains, California. Quaternary Research 3:632-660.

Langum, D.J. 2014 Mary Bennett: The Litigious Life of Mary Bennett Love. Texas Tech University Press, Lubbock, Texas.

Latta, F. 1949 The Handbook of the Yokuts Indians. Bear State Books, Oildale, California.

Levy, R. 1978 Costanoan. In Handbook of North American Indians, edited by R. F. Heizer, pp. 485- 495. vol. 8. Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington D.C.

Cultural Resources Treatment Plan for the 5-Year Development Plan at Santa Clara University — DRAFT Albion Environmental, Inc. David J. Powers and Associates, Inc. July 2015 228 Librado, F. 1979 Breath of the Sun: Life in Early California as told by a Chumash Indian, Fernando Librado to John P. Harrington. Malki Museum Press, Morongo Indian Reservation, Banning, California.

Lightfoot, K. 2005 Indians, Missionaries, and Merchants: the legacy of colonial encounters on the California frontiers. University of California Press, Berkeley.

Lightfoot, K., A. Martinez and A. Schiff 1998 Daily Practice and Material Culture in Pluralistic Social Settings: An Archaeological Study of Culture Change and Persistence from Fort Ross, California. American Antiquity 63(2):199-222.

Lillard, J.R., R.F. Heizer and F. Fenenga 1939 An Introduction to the Archaeology of Central California. Sacramento Junior College Department of Anthropology Bulletin 2.

Loeb, E. 1933 The Eastern Kusu Cult. University of California Publications in American Archaeology and Ethnology 33:139-232.

Loud, L.L. 1912 Presidio Mound No. 417. University of California Archaeological Survey Manuscripts (362).

Lynch, M. 1981 Mission Santa Clara, 1777-1822. Manuscript, Archaeology Research Lab, Santa Clara University, Santa Clara, California.

Margolin, M. 1989 Monterey in 1776: Life in a California Mission. Heyday Books, Berkeley.

Markoff, A. 1955 The Russians on the Pacific Ocean [California 1845]: the Ivan Petroff Translation with a Foreword by Arthur Woodward, Glen Dawson, Los Angeles, California.

Marrazzo, F.K. 2007 Italians in the Santa Clara Valley. Images of America. Arcadia Publishing, Charleston, South Carolina.

Martz, P. 1992 Status Distinctions Reflected in Chumash Mortuary Populations in the Santa Monica Mountains Region. In Essays on the Prehistory of Maritime California, edited by T. L. Jones, pp. 145-156. vol. 10. Center for Archaeological Research at Davis, University of California, Davis.

Mayfield, D.W. 1978 Ecology of the Pre-Spanish San Francisco Bay Area, Department of Geology, San Francisco State University.

Cultural Resources Treatment Plan for the 5-Year Development Plan at Santa Clara University — DRAFT Albion Environmental, Inc. David J. Powers and Associates, Inc. July 2015 229

Mayfield, D.W., M. Buss and J.C. Bingham 1981 Archaeological Survey Report for an Improvement/Realignment of Route 82 in the City of Santa Clara, Santa Clara County. Report by staff of California Department of Transportation.

McEwen, B. 2001 The Spiritual Conquest of La Florida. American Anthropologist 103(3):633-644.

McGann, M. 1995 3500-Year B.P. Record of Climatic change in Estuarine Deposits from South San Francisco Bay, California. Pacific Section of the Society of Economic Paleontologist and Mineralogists 76.

McIlroy, J. and M. editors Praetzellis 1997 Vanished Community - 19th Century San Francisco Neighborhoods: From Fourth Street to Mission Creek and Beyond, Archaeological Research Design and Treatment Plan for the SF-80 Bayshore Viaduct Seismic Retrofit Project.

McKevitt, G.S.J. 1979 The University of Santa Clara: A History 1851-1977, Stanford University Press, Stanford, California.

Meade, R.H. 1967 Petrology of Sediments Underlying Areas of Land Subsidence in Central California. U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 497-C, Washington, DC. .

Mehringer, P.J. 1986 Past Environment. In Great Basin, edited by W. L. D'Azevedo. Handbook of North American Indians, W. C. Sturtevant, general editor. Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C.

Meyer, J. 2000 A Geoarchaeological Study of the Guadalupe Parkway Corridor, State Route 87, San Jose, Santa Clara County, California. Anthropological Studies Center, Sonoma State University Academic Foundation, Inc. Rohnert Park, California.

Meyer, J. and J.S Rosenthal 1997 Archaeological and Geoarchaeological Investigations at Eight Prehistoric Sites in the Los Vaqueros Reservoir Area, Contra Costa County, Los Vaqueros Final Report No. 7.

2007 Geoarchaeological Overview of the Nine Bay Area Counties in Caltrans District 4. Far Western Anthropological Research Group.

Miller, G.L., O.R. Jones, L.A. Rose and T. Majewski 1991 Approaches to Material Culture Research for Historical Archaeologists. Society for Historical Archaeology, Ann Arbor, Michigan.

Cultural Resources Treatment Plan for the 5-Year Development Plan at Santa Clara University — DRAFT Albion Environmental, Inc. David J. Powers and Associates, Inc. July 2015 230 Milliken, R. 1995 A Time of Little Choice: The Disintegration of Tribal Culture in the San Francisco Bay Area, 1769-1810. Ballena Press, Menlo Park, CA.

2002 History of Indian Assimilation into Mission Santa Clara. In Telling the Santa Clara Story: Sesquicentennial Voices, edited by R.K. Skowronek, pp. 45-63. Santa Clara University, Santa Clara, California.

2009 Milliken Database of Central California Mission Records, edited by R. Milliken.

Milliken, R. and J.A. Bennyhoff 1993 Temporal Changes in Beads as Prehistoric California Grave Goods. In There Grows a Green Tree: Papers in Honor of David A. Fredrickson, edited by P. M. G. White, W.R. Hildebrandt, and M.E. Basgall, pp. 381-395. vol. 11. Center for Archaeological Research at Davis, University of California, Davis.

Milliken, R., R.T. Fitzgerald, M. Hylkema, R. Groza, T. Origer, D.G. Bieling, A. Leventhal, R. Wiberg, A. Gottsfield, D. Gillette, V. Bellifemine, E. Strother, R. Cartier and D.A. Fredrickson 2007 Punctuated Culture Change in the San Francisco Bay Area. In California Prehistory: Colonization, Culture, and Complexity, edited by T. L. J. a. K. A. Klar, pp. 99-123. Altamira Press, New York.

Monroy, D. 1997 The Creation and Re-Creation of Californio Society. California History 76(2/3):173- 195.

Moratto, M.J. 1984 California Archaeology. Coyote Press, Salinas, CA.

Moratto, M.J., T.F. King and W.B. Woolfenden 1978 Archaeology and California’s Climate. The Journal of California Anthropology 5:147-161.

Mrozowski, S.A., G.H. Ziesing and M.C. Beaudry 1996 Living on the Boott: Historical Archaeology at the Boott Mills Boardinghouses, Lowell, Massachusetts. University of Massachusetts Press, Amherst.

Nagata, J.A. 1974 What is a Malay? Situational Selection of Ethnic Identity in a Plural Society. American Ethnologist 1(2):331-350.

Nassaney, M.S. and M.R. Abel 1993 The Political and Social Contexts of Cutlery Production in the Connecticut Valley. Dialectical Anthropology 18(3-4):247-289.

Nelson, N. C. 1910 The Ellis Landing Shellmound. University of California Publications in American Archaeology and Ethnology 7(5):357-426.

Cultural Resources Treatment Plan for the 5-Year Development Plan at Santa Clara University — DRAFT Albion Environmental, Inc. David J. Powers and Associates, Inc. July 2015 231 Newell, Q.D. 2009 Constructing Lives at Mission San Francisco: Native Californians and Hispanic Colonists, 1776-1821. University of New Mexico Press, Albuquerque.

No Author. 1958 S.C.'s German Colony Mostly Memories Now, 6 October 1958.

No Author. 1972 Article, 30 January 1972.

No Author. 1902 Honored Pioneer Dies: John H. Messing Succumbs to Pneumonia Early This Morning. 21 January 1902.

No Author. 1917 When San Jose Was Young No. 194. "Secularization of Mission Santa Clara." 31 May 1917.

No Author. 1878 Biographical Sketches: Obituary of Herman Liebe of Santa Clara - Account of his Trip to California and his Business Here. 13 April 1878.

Orser, C. E., Jr. 2004 Historical Archaeology. Prentice Hall, New Jersey.

Palou, F. 1926 Palou's Diary. In Historical Memoirs of New California: Fray Francisco Palou, O.F.M, H. E. Bolton, general editor. University of California Press, Berkeley, California.

Panich, L. 2010a Spanish Missions in the Indigenous Landscape: A View from Mission Santa Catalina, Baja California. Journal of California and Great Basin Anthropology 30(1):69-86.

2010b Missionization and the Persistence of Native Identity on the Colonial Frontier of Baja California. Ethnohistory 57(2):225-262.

2014 Native American Consumption of Shell and Glass Beads at Mission Santa Clara de Asis. American Antiquity 79(4):730-748.

Panich, L., H. Afaghani and N. Mathwich 2014 Assessing the Diversity of Mission Populations through the Comparison of Native American Residences at Mission Santa Clara de Asis. International Journal of Historical Archaeology 18:467-488.

Panich, L. and T.D. Schneider (editors) 2014 Indigenous Landscapes and Spanish Missions: New Perspectives from Archaeology and Ethnohistory. University of Arizona Press, Tucson.

Cultural Resources Treatment Plan for the 5-Year Development Plan at Santa Clara University — DRAFT Albion Environmental, Inc. David J. Powers and Associates, Inc. July 2015 232

Payne, S.M. 1987 Santa Clara County: Harvest of Change. 1st ed, Windsor, Northridge, California.

Peelo, S. 2010 The Creation of a Carmeleño Identity: Marriage Practices in the Indian Village at Mission San Carlos Borromeo del Río Carmel. Journal of California and Great Basin Anthropology 30(2):117-139.

2011 Pottery-Making in Spanish California: Creating Multi-Scalar Social Identity through Daily Practice. American Antiquity 30(2):117-139.

Peterson, C. 2002 Archaeological Monitoring for the Excavation of Drainage Vaults and Irrigation System, Kids on Campus Project. For Santa Clara University by Albion Environmental, Inc.

2006a Archaeological Monitoring of Subsurface Utilities for the Orradre Library Rebuilding Project. Prepared for Santa Clara University by Albion Environmental, Inc.

2006b Archaeological Monitoring of Utilities and Structural Footings for the Jesuit-Benton Project. Prepared for Santa Clara University by Albion Environmental, Inc.

2007 Archaeological Monitoring of Law House Demolition and Testing at 803 Franklin Street. Prepared for Santa Clara University by Albion Environmental, Inc.

2008a Archaeological Monitoring and Report of Findings for the Buck Shaw Stadium Renovation Project. Prepared for Santa Clara University by Albion Environmental Inc.

2008b Archaeological Monitoring Report for the Harrington Learning Center and Orradre Library Sub-surface Construction Projects. Prepared for Santa Clara University by Albion Environmental, Inc.

2008c Archaeological Monitoring Report for the Leavey School of Business Subsurface Construction Activities. Prepared for Santa Clara University by Albion Environmental, Inc.

2009 Archaeological Monitoring and Report of Findings for the Field House Parking Lot Project. Prepared for Santa Clara University by Albion Environmental, Inc.

2010a Archaeological Monitoring Report for the AT&T Re-route Project. Prepared for Santa Clara University by Albion Environmental, Inc.

2010b Archaeological Monitoring Report for the Student Activity Center Construction Project. Prepared for Santa Clara University by Albion Environmental, Inc.

Cultural Resources Treatment Plan for the 5-Year Development Plan at Santa Clara University — DRAFT Albion Environmental, Inc. David J. Powers and Associates, Inc. July 2015 233 Peterson, C. and R. Allen 2009 Archaeological Monitoring and Report of Findings for the Leavey School of Business Landscaping Projects. Prepared for Santa Clara University by Albion Environmental Inc.

Peterson, C., R. Johnson and C. Blount 2002 Extended Archaeological Survey, Leavey School of Business, Santa Clara University. Prepared for Santa Clara University by Albion Environmental, Inc.

Praetzellis, A. and J.G. Costello 1997 Archaeological Curation Managment Policy for the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California Headquarters Facility Project. Report prepared for the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California, Los Angeles.

2002 Don't Keep Everything: Historic Artifacts Discard Policy. Society for California Archaeology News Letter 36(3):30-33.

Praetzellis, M. (editor) 2004 SF-80 Bayshore Viaduct Seismic Retrofit Projects Report on Construction Monitoring, Geoarchaeology, and Technical and Interpretive Studies for Historical Archaeology. Report to California Department of Transportation, District 4, Oakland, from Anthropological Studies Center

Price, C.A. 1981 Maps and Descriptions of Radiocarbon-Dated Samples from Central and Northern California. U.S. Geological Survey, Miscellaneous Field Studies Map MF-1321.

Quimby, G.I. and A. Spohr 1951 Acculturation and Material Culture. Fieldiana: Anthropology 36(6):107 - 147.

Raab, L.M. and D.O. Larson 1997 Medieval Climatic Anomaly and Punctuated Cultural Evolution in Coastal Southern California. American Antiquity 62:319-336.

Radding, C. 1997 Wandering Peoples: Colonialism, Ethnic Spaces, and Ecological Frontiers in Northwestern Mexico, 1700-1850. Duke University Press, Durham.

Ragir, S. 1972 The Early Horizon in Central California Prehistory, pp. 1-329. vol. 15. Contributions of the University of California Archaeology Research Facility, Berkeley, California.

Rickman, D 1981 Farmers Unite for Water Conservation.

Robertson, C. 1991 Male and Female Agendas for Domestic Reform: The Middle-Class Bungalow in Gendered Perspective. Winterthur Portfolio 26(2/3):123-141.

Rock, J. 1987 A Brief Commentary on Cans. Cultural Resources Management, Yreka, California.

Rood, A.N. 1865 Rood's Railroad, Steamboat, and Stage Guide for California, 25 February. San Francisco, California.

Roop, W.C., C. Gerike and M. Duddy 1982 Prehistoric Archaeological Survey Report, Guadalupe Transportation Corridor, Santa Clara County, California Archaeological Site Inventory, Rohnert Park.

Rosenburg, C. E. and C. Smith-Rosenburg 1985 Pietism and the Origins of the American Public Health Movement: A Note on John H. Griscom and Robert M. Hartley. Sickness and Health in America: Readings in the History of Medicine and Public Health Second Edition, revised. University of Wisconsin Press, Madison.

Sandos, J.A. 2004 Converting California: Indians and Franciscans in the Missions. Yale University Press, New Haven and London.

Sawyers, Eugene T. 1922. Historic Record Co.

Sayers, A.M. 2002 Today’s Native Americans in the Santa Clara Area. In Telling the Santa Clara Story, Sesquicentennial Voices, edited by R. K. Skowronek. Santa Clara University and City of Santa Clara, Santa Clara, California.

Schenck, W. 1926 The Emeryville Shellmound Final Report. University of California Publications in American Archaeology and Ethnology, University of California, Berkeley 23(3):147- 282.

Schivelbusch, W. 1986 The Railway Journey: The Industrialization of Time and Space in the Nineteenth Century. University of California Press, Berkeley.

Schlereth, T. 1991 Victorian America: Transformations in Everyday Life, 1876-1915. Harper Perennial, New York.

Schneider, T.D. 2010 Placing Refuge: Shell Mounds and the Archaeology of Colonial Encounters in the San Francisco Bay Area, California. Ph.D Dissertation, Anthropology, University of California, Berkeley, Berkeley, California.

Cultural Resources Treatment Plan for the 5-Year Development Plan at Santa Clara University — DRAFT Albion Environmental, Inc. David J. Powers and Associates, Inc. July 2015 235

Schoenherr, A. 1992 A Natural History of California. University of California Press, Berkeley.

Schuyler, R. L. (editor) 1980 Archaeological Perspectives on Ethnicity in America, Afro-American and Asian American Culture History. Baywood Publishing Company, Inc., Farmingdale, New York.

Senkewicz, R. 2002 The California Context. In Telling the Santa Clara Story: Sesquicentennial Voices, edited by R. Skowronek, pp. 20-27. Santa Clara University, Santa Clara, California.

Shackel, P.A. 2004 Labor's Heritage: Remembering the American Industrial Landscape. Historical Archaeology 38(4):44-58.

Shackel, P.A. and M. Palus 2006 Remembering an Industrial Landscape. International Journal of Historical Archaeology 10(1):49-71.

Sides, J. 2015 Californio Cuisine. California History 92(1):1-3.

Silliman, S. 2000 Colonial worlds, indigenous practices: The archaeology of labor in a 19th century California rancho. PhD Dissertation, Department of Anthropology, University of California, Berkeley, California.

2004 Lost Laborers in Colonial California: Native Americans and the Archaeology of Rancho Petaluma. University of Arizona Press, Tucson.

2005 Culture Contact or Colonialism? Challenges in the Archaeology of Native North America. American Antiquity 70(1):55-74.

2006 Struggling with Labor: Working with Identities. In Historical Archaeology, edited by M. Hall and S. Silliman, pp. 147-166. Blackwell, Oxford.

2009 Change and Continuity, Practice and Memory: Native American Persistence in Colonial New England. American Antiquity 74(2):211-230.

Simons, D.D. 1992 Prehistoric Mammal Exploitation in the San Francisco Bay Area. In Essays on the Prehistory of Maritime California, edited by T. L. Jones, pp. 73-103. Center for Archaeological Research at Davis [CARD] Publications 10.

Cultural Resources Treatment Plan for the 5-Year Development Plan at Santa Clara University — DRAFT Albion Environmental, Inc. David J. Powers and Associates, Inc. July 2015 236 Skinner, E. J., J.A. Onken, J.F. Burton and S.K. Goldberg 1990 Environmental Setting. Susan K. Goldberg, Elizabeth Skinner, and Jeffery F. Burton, Archaeological Excavations at Sites CA-MNO-574, -577, -578, and -833: Stoneworking in Mono County, California.

Skowrenek, R.K. and L. Pierce 2006 Revealing Santa Clara's Prehistoric Past: CA-SCl-755, Evidence from the Arts and Sciences Building Project. In Research manuscript Series on the Cultural and Natural History of Santa Clara, No. 15, edited by S. C. University, Santa Clara, California.

Skowronek, R.K. and M. Graham 2004 Discovering Santa Clara University's Prehistoric Past: CA-SCL-755. In Research Manuscript Series on the Cultural and Natural History of Santa Clara, edited by S. C. University. vol. 12, Santa Clara, California.

Skowronek, R. K. and L. Hylkema 2010 Beyond the Course Catalog: Archaeological Insights into the Life of Santa Clara University. In Beneath the Ivory Tower, edited by R. K. S. a. K. E. Lewis, pp. 182- 207. University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida.

Skowronek, R.K. 1998 Sifting the Evidence: Perceptions of Life at the Ohlone (Costanoan) Missions of Alta California. Ethnohistory 45(4):675-708.

2002a Telling the Mission Santa Clara de Asis Story: A Reconstruction Based on Archaeological and Documentary Evidence. In Telling the Santa Clara Story: Sesquicentennial Voices, edited by R. Skowronek, pp. 64-83. Santa Clara University, Santa Clara, CA.

2002b Telling the Santa Clara Story: Sesquicentennial Voices, Santa Clara University and the City of Santa Clara. Santa Clara, California.

Skowronek, R.K., E. Thompson and V. (Lococo) Johnson 2006 Situating Mission Santa Clara de Asis: 1776 - 1851, Documentary and Material Evidence of Life in the Alta California Frontier: A Timeline. Academy of American Franciscan History, Berkeley, California.

Skowronek, R.K. and J. Wizorek 1997 Archaeology of Santa Clara de Asis: The Slow Rediscovery of a Movable Mission. Pacific Coast Archaeological Society Quarterly 33(3):54-92.

Spearman, A.D. 1958 Sites of Temporary and Permanent Churches and Buildings, Orchard, Gardens, and Corral of Mission Santa Clara de Asis AD 1777-1851-1912-1957. Ms. on file, Santa Clara University.

1963 The Five Franciscan Churches of Mission Santa Clara, 1777-1825. National Press, Palo Alto, California.

Cultural Resources Treatment Plan for the 5-Year Development Plan at Santa Clara University — DRAFT Albion Environmental, Inc. David J. Powers and Associates, Inc. July 2015 237 Stanford, B. , R. Grossinger, J. Beagle, R. Askevold, R. Leidy, E. Beller, M. Salomon, C. Striplen and A. Whipple 2013 Alameda Creek Historical Ecology Study. San Francisco Estuary Institute.

Stine, S. 1995 Appendix F: Late Holocene Fluctuations of Owens Lake, Inyo County, California. Amy J. Gilreath, Archaeological Evaluations of Thirteen SItes for the Ash Creek Project, Inyo County, California.

Stine, S. 1994 Extreme and Persistent Drought in California and Patagonia During Medieval Time. Nature 369:546-549.

Storey, J.A., V.E. Wessels and J.A. Wolfe 1966 Radiocarbon Dating of Recent Sediments in the San Francisco Bay. Mineral Information Service (now California Geology) 19:47-50.

Street, R.S. 2004 Beasts of the Field: A Narrative History of California Farmworkers, 1769-1913. Stanford University Press, Stanford.

Survey, U.S. Geological 1899 San Jose Quadrangle. Scale: 1:62500. Reprinted 1909. . U.S. Geological Survey, Washington, D.C.

Sweet, G. E. 1973 An Index of Historical Sources for the City of Santa Clara, California. Resources Development Internship Program, Western Interstate Commission for Higher Education, uner the sponsorship of the City of Santa Clara.

Taska, L. 2005 The Material Culture of an Industrial Artifact: Interpreting Control, Defiance, and Everyday Resistance at the New South Wales Eveleigh Railway Workshops. Historical Archaeology 39(3):8-27.

Taylor, B. 1894 New Pictures from California, Putnam, New York. Reprinted 1951, Biobooks Oakland 10, California.

The Evening News 1891 June 23, 1891. The Evening News.

The Pioneer 1899 December 15, 1899. The Pioneer.

The San Jose Mercury 1902 December 21, 1902. San Jose Mercury.

1903 January 12, 1903. The San Jose Mercury.

1953b June 1, 1953. San Jose Mercury.

1972. The Western Jesuit: Bulletin of the California Province 1(8).

The Sunday Mercury and Herald 1911 January 1911. Sunday Mercury and Herald.

Thomas, D.H. 1991 Harvesting Ramona’s Garden: Life in California’s Mythical Mission Past. In Columbian Consequences, The Spanish Borderlands in Pan-American Perspective, edited by D. H. Thomas, pp. 119–153. vol. 3. Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C.

Tribe, The Muwekma 2002 Past and Future of the Muwekma Tribe. In Life along the Guadalupe River, edited by Rebecca Allen and Mark G. Hylkema. The Press, San Jose, California.

Uhle, M. 1907 The Emeryville Shellmound. University of California Publications in American Archaeology and Ethnology 7(1).

Van Wormer, S.D. and W.R. Manley 1994 A Sense of Time and Place. SDI-13, 013H Archaeological Mitigation Report, Main Street Redevelopment Project, El Cajon, California.

Voss, B. 2005 The Archaeology of Overseas Chinese Communities. World Archaeology 37(3):424– 439.

2008a Between the Household and the World System: Social Collectivity and Community Agency in Overseas Chinese Archaeology. Historical Archaeology 42(3):37-52.

2008b The Archaeology of Ethnogenesis: Race and sexuality in Colonial San Francisco. University of California Press, Berkeley.

Walker, M. 2000 Labor History at the Ground Level: Colorado Coalfied War Archaeology Project. Labor's Heritage 11(1):58-75.

Wallace, W.J. 1978 Northern Valley Yokuts. In Handbook of North American Indians, edited by R. F. Heizer. vol. 8. Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C.

Walsh, H.J. n.d.-a

Walsh, H.L. n.d.-b

Cultural Resources Treatment Plan for the 5-Year Development Plan at Santa Clara University — DRAFT Albion Environmental, Inc. David J. Powers and Associates, Inc. July 2015 239

Webb, E. 1952 Indian Life at the Old Missions. Warren F. Lewis, Los Angeles.

Weber, Msgr. F.J. 1980 The Laurelwood Mission, A Documentary History of Santa Clara de Asis. Libra Press Limited, Hong Kong.

West, J.G. 1988 Exploratory Pollen Analysis of Sediments from Elkhorn Slough. In Archaeological Investigations at Elkhorn Slough, CA-MNT-229, A Middle Period Site on the California Coast, edited by S. A. Dietz, W. Hildebrandt and T. Jones, pp. 25-56. Papers in California Anthropology No. 3.

2000 Appendix C: Examination of Sediment Samples for Pollen Content, Guadalupe Parkway Project, San Jose, California. In A Geoarchaeological Study of the Guadalupe Parkway Corridor, State Route 87, San Jose, Santa Clara County, California, Anthropological Studies Center, Sonoma State University Academic Foundation, Inc., Rohnert Park, California.

2005 Exploratory Pollen Analysis of Sediments from Leavey School of Business, Santa Clara University, California, Phase I Analysis of Santa Clara Mission Deposits. Report to Albion Environmental, Inc., Santa Cruz, CA, from Brienes, West & Schulz, Davis, CA.

Whall, J. and C. Dore 1999 Archaeological Monitoring for the Technology Station Development, City of Santa Clara, Santa Clara County, California. Prepared for Storm Land Company by Garcia and Associates.

Whistler, K.W. 1977 Wintun Prehistory: An Interpretation Based on Linguistic Reconstruction of Plant and Animal Nomenclature. Proceedings of the Third Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society 157-174.

Wiberg, R.S. 2002 Archaeological Investigations: Skyport Plaza Phase I (CA-SCL-478), San Jose, Santa Clara County, California. Holman and Associates, Archaeological Consultants, 3615 Folsom Street, San Francisco, CA 94110.

Winter, J.C. 1975 Archaeological Resources and Impact of the Gilroy Waste Disposal Project. Northwest Information Center, Sonoma State University.

1978 Archaeological Investigations at CA-SCL-128, The Holiday Inn Site.

Winther, O.O. 1935 The Story of San Jose, 177-1869, California's First Pueblo. California Historical Society Quarterly 14(1):2-27.

Cultural Resources Treatment Plan for the 5-Year Development Plan at Santa Clara University — DRAFT Albion Environmental, Inc. David J. Powers and Associates, Inc. July 2015 240 Wizorek, J.C. 1998 Santa Clara University Campus Lighting Project 1995.2. Archaeology Research Lab, Santa Clara University.

Wizorek, J.C. 1996 You Never Promised Me a Rose Garden: Santa Clara University Rose Garden Burials. Paper presented at the California Mission Studies Association, 13th Annual Meeting, San Francisco.

Wizorek, J.C. and P. Greenwalt 1998 Archaeological Monitoring Report St. Joseph's Hall ADA Upgrade Project 1996. 5. Archaeology Research Lab, Santa Clara University.

Wizorek, J.C. and R.K. Skowronek 1995 Phase I Archaeological Survey Report North Campus Parking and Landscape Improvements. Archaeology Research Lab, Santa Clara University.

1996a Archaeological Monitoring Report: Alameda Mall Project, 1996.6. Archaeology Research Lab, Santa Clara University.

1996b Archaeological Monitoring Report Varsi Hall Replace Potable Waterline Project, 1995.4. Archaeology Research Lab, Santa Clara University.

1996c Archaeological Testing Report Varsi Hall Replace Potable Waterline Project. Archaeology Research Lab, Santa Clara University.

Cultural Resources Treatment Plan for the 5-Year Development Plan at Santa Clara University — DRAFT Albion Environmental, Inc. David J. Powers and Associates, Inc. July 2015 241 APPENDIX A DESCRIPTION OF PROMINENT PLACE NAMES RECORDED IN THE BAPTISMAL REGISTRIES

APPENDIX A

DESCRIPTIONS OF PROMINENT PLACE NAMES RECORDED IN THE BAPTISMAL REGISTRIES

COSTANOAN/OHLONE

Juñas tribe was probably located near the Hospital Creek drainage of the Diablo Range, looking over the San Joaquin Valley (Milliken 1995:246).

Luecha is a tribe in northeastern Costanoan/Ohlone territory located "on Coral Hollow and Arroyo Mocho in the rough lands southeast of the Livermore Valley.” (Milliken 1994:166, 172).

San Antonio was a rancheria district that represented the hills directly east of the Santa Clara Valley, including tribes such as the Tayssen and Juñas (Milliken 1994:168).

San Bernardino is a Spanish rancheria district that referred to those villages and tribes located west of the mission (Milliken 1995:233). Milliken (1995:117) argues that many of those baptized under the district designation “San Bernardino” during the 1790s may have been coming from the tribal community of Quiroste.

San Carlos was a Spanish designation for a large artificial aggregation of villages and tribal groups that represented the cardinal direction of south from the mission as far as Santa Cruz and Gilroy (Milliken 1995:233). In the 1790 baptisms, "…San Carlos people were probably from villages of the Ritocsi tribe or from any number of groups in the Santa Cruz mountains" (Milliken 1995:103), and in the 1802 baptisms, San Carlos people consisted "mainly of Matalans from the Laguna Seca area" (Milliken 1995:171).

Our Patron San Francisco was a tiny hamlet located approximately a mile upstream on the Guadalupe River from the first mission site (Milliken 1995:66).

San Francisco Solano (Oroysom) was a village of the Alson tribe, near the Guadalupe River and was the village upon which Mission San Jose was established in 1797 (Milliken 1995:274).

San Joseph Cupertino was the main “village of the Tamien tribe in the oak grove about three miles to the southwest of the mission site” (Milliken 1995:66, 68).

San Juan Bauptista probably formed the Ritocsi group, together with some San Carlos district people (Milliken 1995:274).

Santa Agueda is a Spanish designated rancheria district composed of a large aggregate of village and tribal groups that represented the cardinal direction north of the mission, and includes tribal communities such as the Tuibun (Milliken 1995:233).

Our Mother Santa Clara was a tiny hamlet located within a few hundred yards of the first mission site (Milliken 1995:66).

Cultural Resources Treatment Plan for the 5-Year Development Plan at SCU— Appendix A Albion Environmental, Inc. David J. Powers and Associates, Inc. July 2015 A-1

Santa Ysabel was a village in an unnamed tribe located in “both the eastern Santa Clara Valley and part of the upper Calaveras Creek drainage in the hills to the east,” modern landmarks being Alum Rock Park and Coyote Creek (Milliken 1995:253).

Tayssen were "a very large group (274 people) that seems to have inhabited a large area of the central and eastern Coast Ranges east and southeast of the Santa Clara Valley…The name Tayssen is probably a cover term used by the missionaries for all people from the Crow Creek, Orestimba Creek, and Garzas Creek drainages. Whether they were a cluster of two or three tribes, or a loose network of nomadic bands, is not known" (Milliken 1995:257).

YOKUTS and MIWOK

Apelamene is a Northern Yokuts tribe composed of many villages (Wallace 1978:470).

Atsnil is a tribe located somewhere in Yokuts territory, but the exact location is unknown at this time (Milliken 2002:58).

Chapaiseme is a tribe located in Yokuts or Miwok territory, but the exact location is unknown at this time (Milliken 2002:58).

Chipeyquis is a tribe located in Yokuts or Miwok territory, but the exact location is unknown at this time (Milliken 2002:58).

Chugea is a tribe in Northern Yokuts territory, possibly situation in “the Riverbank vicinity along the Stanislaus River" (Milliken 2002:59).

Gualensemne may either be a Northern Yokuts tribe or a Miwok tribe. Cook (1961:84) lists the "tribe or group" name Gualacomne and associates this name with the Cosumnes group within Northern Valley Yokuts. However, Levy 1978:399 lists "Gualacomne" as Miwok. Milliken (2002:58) suggests this tribe is in Yokuts territory located on the lower Merced River, south of the Laquisemnes (Milliken 2002:59). However, he also argues that this was a Miwok-speaking group, located in the Oakdale region along the Stanislaus River. At Mission Santa Clara, individuals from this tribe were called the Apelamene but at Mission Santa Cruz, they were identified as the Huocons (Milliken 2002:59).

Janalame is a Northern Yokuts tribe situated in the southern region of this ethnolinguistic territory, in “the swamp lands between present day Merced and Los Banos” (Milliken 2002:57-59).

Lacquisemne was a Northern Yokuts tribe located “on the Stanislaus River in the current Ripon area" (Milliken 2002:59).

Lamame is a tribe in Northern Yokuts territory located "south of Tugites, west of present day Turlock" (Milliken 2002:57, 58).

Mayem, also known as Tejey at Mission Santa Cruz, is a Northern Yokuts tribal community located in the vicinity of Manteca (Wallace 1978) "at the confluence of the San Joaquin and Merced rivers” (Milliken 2002:57).

Cultural Resources Treatment Plan for the 5-Year Development Plan at SCU— Appendix A Albion Environmental, Inc. David J. Powers and Associates, Inc. July 2015 A-2

Pitem (Pitemas) is a tribal community located "upstream from the Tuguites on the San Joaquin River, at the mouth of the Stanilaus River” (Milliken 2002:57).

Sunomna is a Northern Yokuts tribal community situated around the “present Waterford area along the Tuolumne River" (Milliken 2002:59).

Tauhalame is a Northern Yokuts community “from the present Modesto area…east of the San Joaquin River" (Milliken 2002:59).

Timelame is a tribe in Yokuts or Miwok territory, but the exact location is unknown at this time.

Tonul is a tribe in Yokuts or Miwok territory, but the exact location is unknown at this time (Milliken 2002:58).

Totote is a tribe in Yokuts or Miwok territory, but the exact location is unknown at this time (Milliken 2002:58). One possibility is that Totote is an alternative spelling of this tribe "Toltichi" who were the Northern Valley Foothill Yokuts "stream people," farthest up the San Joaquin and neighbors of the Mono (Kroeber 1970:481). Another possibility is the Kings River tribe called "Toihicha", located below the Choinimni but on the oppostite side of the Kings River (Kroeber 1970:480; Latta 1949: Cover).

Tucusuyu is a tribe located in Yokuts territory, but the exact location is unknown at this time (Milliken 2002:58).

Tugite is a tribal community in Yokuts or Miwok territory that "controlled the San Joaquin River at the mouth of the Tuolumne River" (Milliken 2002:57).

Tular is a generic term given to the people of the San Joaquin Valley by the Franciscan priests.

Cultural Resources Treatment Plan for the 5-Year Development Plan at SCU— Appendix A Albion Environmental, Inc. David J. Powers and Associates, Inc. July 2015 A-3 APPENDIX B MISSION PERIOD FEATURES WITH PROJECT AREAS ON MAP GRID OF SANTA CLARA UNIVERSITY REDACTED

APPENDIX C MEXICAN PERIOD FEATURES WITH PROJECT AREAS ON MAP GRID OF SANTA CLARA UNIVERSITY REDACTED

APPENDIX D AMERICAN PERIOD FEATURES WITH PROJECT AREAS ON MAP GRID OF SANTA CLARA UNIVERSITY REDACTED

APPENDIX E UNDATED FEATURES WITH PROJECT AREAS ON MAP GRID OF SANTA CLARA UNIVERSITY REDACTED